ML19312C543
| ML19312C543 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 07/05/1977 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19312C539 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7912160101 | |
| Download: ML19312C543 (3) | |
Text
^< s p
UNITED STATES 4
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION b'
rJASHINGTON, D. C. 20666
...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REALTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 43 TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. DPR-38 SUPPORTING.UENDMENT NO. 43 TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. DPR-47 SUPPORTING AMENDhENT NO. 40 TO FACILITY 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 5,1976, Duke Power Company (the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications appended to Facility Operating Licenses DPR-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55 for the Oconee Nuclear Station, Units Nos. 1, 2 and 3.
The proposed changes would revise the applicability and objective statements of Section 3.6 pertaining to the Reactor Building containment integrity such that it would apply in all modes of system operation except refueling shutdown.
Dis cussion The Oconee Technical Specifications contain the definition for Refueling Shutdown (specification 1.2.6) and several requirements to be met to assure that fuel loading and refueling operations are performed in a responsible manner (specification 3.8). The Technical Specifications also include reactor building containment integrity requirements that are to be met when the reactor is suberitical by less than l's ak/k. (specifi-cation 3.6).
One of these latter requirements is that containment integrity shall be maintained when the reactor coolant system is open to the con-tainment atmosphere and the requirements for a refueling shutdown are not met (specification 3.6.2).
In its proposal, the licensee points out that specifications 1.2.6 and 3.8.4 address the reactor conditions, in lieu of containment integrity conditions, which must be maintained during a refueling condition.
In addition, since the reactor is never suberitical by less than 1*6 ak/k during a refueling shutdown ambiguity exists as to the applicability of specification 3.6.2.
The licensee also indicates that routine maintenance which requires opening of the reactor coolant system to the containment atmosphere, such as instrument replacements, reactor coolant pump maintenance, etc., do not involve the possibility of reactivity insertion 7912160]Ol
m
. accidents and therefore containment integrity should not be necessary at all times when the reactor coolant system is open.
The licensee is therefore proposing that specification 3.6.2 be deleted and that the applicability of specification 3.6 be changed to apply to the containment when the reactor is in conditionsother than refueling shutdown.
Evaluation Specification 3.6 of the Oconee Technical Specifications presently applies to the Reactor Building containment when the reactor is suberitical by less than 1% ak/k.
Three requirements are identified.
The first is that the containment integrity be maintained whenever positive reactivity insertions which could result in the reactor being suberitical by less than 1% ak/k are made by control rod motion or boron dilution.
The second requires that containment integrity be maintained whenever all three of the following conditions exist: (1) Reactor coolant pressure is greater than 300 psig; (2) Reactor coolant temperature is 2000F or greater; and (3) Nuclear fuel is in the core. The third is that containment integrity be maintained when the reactor coolant system is open to the containment atmosphere and the requirements for a refueling shutdown are not met.
The first two requirements are to insure that containment integrity is in effect whenever the reactor is critical and to insure that the personnel radiation exposure limits of 10 CFR Part 100 are not exceeded in the event of a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA).
Regarding the third requirement (specification 3.6.2), we agree with the licensee that it is not consistent with the applicability of specification 3.6 in that during a refueling shutdown, the reactor is never suberitical by less than 1% ak/k.
In reaching this conclusion we considered the following:
1)
Prior to commencing refueling operations, the reactor is placed in Cold Shutdown conditions which are defined in specification 1.2.1 to be when the reactor is suberitical by at least 1% ak/k and T average is no more than 2000F, 2)
As defined in specification 1.2.6, the reactor is in a Refueling Shutdown condition when, even with all rods removed, the reactor would'be suberitical by at least 1% ak/k and the coolant temperature at the low pressure injection pump suction is no more than 140 F, and
- 3) Specification 3.8.4 requires that during reactor vessel head removal and while loading and unloading fuel from the reactor, the boron concentration shall be maintained at not less than that required to shutdown the core to a k effective <.99 (shutdown by at least 1% ak/k) if all control rods were removed.
q Specifications 1.2.1,1.2.6 and 3.8.4 therefore identify the reactor conditions that must exist during refueling operation. Specification 3.6.2 refers to a situation which cannot exist, ie, the reactor coolant l
system open to the containment atmosphere (reactor vessel head off) and the requirements for a refueling shutdown not met, without being in conflict with the above specifications.
We also agree with the licensee that routine maintenance which requires opening of the reactor coolant system to the containment atmosphere, such as instrument replacements, reactor coolant pump maintenance, etc.,
do not involve the possibility of reactivity insertion accidents.
In addition, since this maintenance is done during cold shutdown conditions, i
there is no need for containment integrity to be maintained.
In view of the above, we conclude that specification 3.6.2 can be deleted and that specification 3.6 can therefore be changed to apply to the con-tainment when the reactor is in conditions other than refueling shutdown.
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 any significant environmental impact.
Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and pursuant to 10 CFR 5 51.5(d)(4) that an environmental statement, negative declaration, or 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 change does not involve a significant increase in the probability of consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the change does 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.
Date: July 5, I977 l
i
n)
^
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY C05NISSION DOCKETS NOS. 50-269, 50-270 AND 50-287 DUKE POWER COMPANY NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTS TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES Notice is hereby given that the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has issued Amendments Nor. 43, 43 and 40 to Facility Operating Licenses Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55, respectively, issued to Duke Power Company which revised Technical Specifications for operation of the Oconee Nuclear Station Units Nos.1, 2 and 3, located in Oconee County, South Carolina. The amendments are effective as of the date of issuance.
These amendments delete the requirement that containment integrity be maintained when the reactor coolant system is open to the containment atmosphere and the requirements for a refueling shutdown are not met.
The application for these amendments complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendments.
Prior public notice of these amendments was not required since the amendments do not involve a significant hazards consideration.
L*
7 7 //2%sy
r
, J The Commission has determined that the issuance of these amendments will not result in any significant environmental i= pact and that pursua.t to 10 CFR 5 51.5(d)(4) an environmental statement, negative declaration, or environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with issuance of these amendments.
For further details with respect to this action, see (1) the application for amendments dated February 5,1976, (2) Amendments Nos. 43,
and 40 to Licenses Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55, respectively, and 43 (3) the Commission's related Safety Evaluation.
All of these items are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street,. N.W., Washington, D.C.
20555 and at the Oconee County Library, 201 South Spring, Walhalla, South Carolina 29691.
A copy of items (2) and (3) may be obtained upon request addressed to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Cor.nission, Washington, D. C.
- 20555, Attention:
Director, Division cf Operating Reactors.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 5th day of July 1977.
FOR THE NUCIIAR REGULATORY COSMISSION au'd66 A. Schwencer, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #1 Division of Operating Reactors