ML15113A238
| ML15113A238 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 08/20/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML15113A237 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8609040298 | |
| Download: ML15113A238 (2) | |
Text
p~kREG~j UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.149 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-38 AMENDMENT NO.149 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-47 AMENDMENT NO.146 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-55 DUKE POWER COMPANY OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS NOS. 1, 2 AND 3 DOCKETS NOS. 50-269, 50-270 AND 50-287 INTRODUCTION By letter dated February 13, 1984, Duke Power Company (the licensee) proposed changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) of Facility Operating Licenses Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55 for the Oconee Nuclear Station, Units Nos. 1, 2 and 3. These amendments would consist of changes to the Station's common TSs.
The amendments would revise the TSs to incorporate the fire hose stations (located in the three Oconee reactor buildings) into the limiting conditions for operation (LCO) and surveillance requirements addressing the fire protection and detection systems. The other two changes requested in your February 13, 1984 application (1) update the TS references to the Oconee Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) to ensure consistency with reference to the updated FSAR and (2) define the terms "accessible/accessibility" to achieve consistency thrcughout the TSs in their usage. Action 1 has been approved by a May 30, 1985 license amendment and Action 2 has been withdrawn by your August 7, 1985 letter.
EVALUATION By "05000270/LER-1981-009-03, /03L-0:on 810415,during Low Pressure Svc Water Pump Periodic Test,Valves 2LPSW-19 & 2LPSW-21 Were Closed Resulting in RB Rbcu Being Out of Svc.Caused by Personnel Error.Valve [[SSC" contains a listed "[" character as part of the property label and has therefore been classified as invalid. Opened & Personnel Counseled|letter dated May 15, 1981]], the licensee proposed an amendment to the TSs associated with the Oconee fire protection program in response to an NRC letter dated October 7, 1980. The NRC staff approved the amendment request by June 9, 1981 amendments. Recently, the licensee determined that Section 3.17 and Section 4.19 did not address the fire hose stations located in each of the three reactor buildings and considered this to be an error of omission. These amendment requests propose to add those fire hose stations to the list in the LCO and surveillance sections.
These hose stations were installed within the reactor buildings as part of the plant modifications to meet NRC fire protection guidelines. The fire hose modifications were reviewed and found acceptable by the NRC staff in the Fire Protection Safety Evaluation Report of August 11, 1978, Sections 3.1.6, 4.3.1.4, and 5.1.6.
9609040298 860820 PDR ADOCK 05000269 P
-2 The proposed revisions to Table 3.17-1 would include all of the fire hose stations installed for protection of safety-related equipment within the plants. The licensee has also provided proposed appropriate operability and surveillance requirements for this equipment. The NRC staff has reviewed these proposed TS changes and determined they are needed to correct the current TSs to assure appropriate operability and surveillance requirements.
Therefore, the staff finds the proposed changes to the TSs to be acceptable.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION These amendments involve a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
We have determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accordingly, these amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
CONCLUSION We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) 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: August 20, 1986 Principal Contributor:
W.H. Miller, Jr.