ML16138A595
| ML16138A595 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 06/08/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16138A594 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8706120319 | |
| Download: ML16138A595 (3) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 159 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-38 AMENDMENT NO. 159 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-47 AMENDMENT NO. 156 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-55 DUKE POWER COMPANY OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1, 2, and 3 DOCKET NOS. 50-269, 50-270 AND 50-287 I. INTRODUCTION By letter dated February 10, 1986 as supplemented on August 20, 1986, Duke Power Company (the licensee) proposed changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) of Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55 for the Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3. These amendments would consist of changes to the Station's common TSs and would authorize these proposed changes (1) to revise TS 3.1.12.1(a), (b) and (d) to indicate that three subcooling margin monitors are now available over the previous two monitors and reflect the actual plant design; and (2) to delete TS 3.1.12.1(c) to no longer require a 30-day report for outages of less than 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> of the Operational Aid Computer. Also TS 3.1.12.1(d) has been redesignated as TS 3.1.12.1(c) because TS 3.1.12.1(c) has been deleted.
II. EVALUATION 2.1 Deletion of TS 3.1.12.1(c)
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission revised the regulations for reactor plant reporting requirements by changes to 10 CFR Part 50.72 "Immediate Notification Requirements for Operating Nuclear Power Reactors" and added a new regulation 10 CFR Part 50.73, "Licensee Event Report System."
These revisions became effective on January 1, 1984. The revisions to the regulations eliminated the necessity for TSs on reporting an event which requires shutdown of the plant because of Limitino Conditions for Operation (LCOs).
This revision to the regulations makes the requirement in the Oconee TSs to report an outage of the subcooling margin monitors redundant, and therefore, TS 3.1.12.1(c) may be deleted. We find deletion of TS 3.1.12.1(c) acceptable.
2.2 Revision of TS 3.1.12.1(d)
As..vcussed in Section 2.1 above, TS 3.1.12.1(c) has been deleted.
of this revision the licensee has proposed to change TS 3
'.1(d) to TS 3.1.12.1(c). We find this editorial change 8706120319 670606 PDR ADOCK 05000269 P
-2 2.3 Revision to TSs 3.1.12.1.(a), (b), and (d) to reflect actual plant design.
Other changes to TS 3.1.12.1 were proposed by the licensee to reflect the actual plant design which includes three subcooling margin monitors instead of two. The monitors consist of reactor coolant loop "A" temperature, reactor coolant loop "B" temperature, and core outlet temperature. Application of the revised TSs will still assure operability of the subcooling margin monitors by "Action Statements" requiring that if only one monitor is operable another must be made operable within seven days, or be in a hot shutdown within 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />. Also, if all subcooling margin monitors are inoperable, then one monitor must be restored to operable status within 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br />, or be in a hot shutdown within 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />. Based upon maintaining the assurance of operability of the subcooling monitors, we find these proposed changes acceptable.
2.4 Summary Therefore, we find acceptable the proposed amendments to delete TS 3.1.12.1(c) which allows inoperability of two subcooling margin monitors because of the Operational Aid Computer being out-of-service for less than four hours without having to prepare a report per TS 6.6.2; to rewrite TSs 3.1.12.1(a), 3.1.12.1(b), and 3.1.12.1(d) to reflect the actual plant design and include three reactor coolant subcooling margin monitors and change TS 3.1.12.1(d) to TS 3.1.12.1(c).
III. 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. Accord ingly, 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.
IV. CONCLUSION The Commission made a proposed determination that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (52 FR 16944 on May 6, 1987, and consulted with the state ofS outh Carolina.
No public comments were received, and the state of South Carolina did not have any comments.
-3 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:
June 8, 1987 Principal Contributors: A. Cappucci H. Pastis