ML15112A889
| ML15112A889 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 07/06/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML15112A888 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7908080362 | |
| Download: ML15112A889 (2) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20556 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 76 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-38 AMENDMENT NO. 76 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-47 AMENDMENT NO. 73 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. OPR-55 DUKE POWER COMPANY OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS NOS. 1, 2 AND 3 DOCKETS NOS. 50-269, 50-270 AND 50-287 Introduction By letters dated October 1, 1976 and June 12, 1978, the Duke Power Company (the licensee) proposed changes to Section 4.4.2, "Structural Integrity",
of the Technical Specifications (TS) for Oconee Nuclear Station, Units Nos. 1, 2 and 3. The applicable portion of the request of October 1, 1976, would delete Reactor Building (Containment) surveillance requirements for concrete end anchorages of tendons and the liner plate. The applicable portion of the June 12, 1978, request concerned a damaged surveillance tendon in the Oconee Unit No. 2 containment dome.
Evaluation Technical Specification 4.4.2.3, "End Anchorage Concrete Surveillance",
and Technical Specification 4.4.2.4, "Liner Plate Surveillance", both applied only to the first year of operation. These two surveillance programs were completed, thus we conclude the two TS should be deleted as they are obsolete. Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50, in Section V, provides very general guidance for future containment liner surveillance.
Therefore, we are requesting the licensee to submit TS for future end anchorage and liner surveillance.
7908080 i0K
-2 During a tendon test on dome tendon 2D28 in Oconee Unit No. 2, the tendon was damaged. The licensee requested by letter dated June 12, 1978, that the damaged tendon be left in place but not under stress. The licensee suggested
- tha another tendon need not be designated to replace 2D28. We evaluated this request and found it unacceptable as it would remove a surveillance tendon from the designated program and result in a smaller number of tendons to be tested than prescribed in Regulatory Guide 1.35. After additional discussions, the licensee agreed to substitute tendon 2D29, a tendon adjacent to the damaged 2D28, in the surveillance program. The containment design has sufficient margin to sustain the loss of tendon 2D28. Based on the above, we conclude that the loss of tendon 2D28 with the substitution of tendon 2D29 in the surveillance program is acceptable.
Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendments do not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in
- ny significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we
- e further concluded that.the amendments involve an action which is insignificant fromn the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR Section 51.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement, or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) because the amendments do not involve a significant increase in the probability or ccnsequences of accidents previously considered and do not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendments do not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: July 16, 1979