ML19316A246
| ML19316A246 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 08/16/1976 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19316A239 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7912030363 | |
| Download: ML19316A246 (4) | |
Text
.
j k
UNITED $TATES 4
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION p'
/,
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20565 g
,j e#
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION g
SUPPORTING AENDENT NO. 30 TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. DPR-38 AENDENT NO. 30 TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. DPR-47 AMENDENT N0. 27 TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. DPR-55 DUKE POWER COEANY OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS NOS.1, 2, AND 3 DOCKETS NOS. 50-269, 50-270, AND 50-287 Introduction By letter dated August 6,1976, Duke Power Company (the licensee) requested a change to the Technical Specifications appended to Licenses No. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55 for the Oconee Nuclear Station, Units Nos.1, 2, and 3.
The proposed change would revise the restriction which presently limits the operation of Oconee Unit No. 3 Cycle 1 only until September 1,1976 such that operation would be permitted to September 18, 1976. The operatian of Units Nos.1 and 2 would not be affected by the proposed change.
Discussion On April 16, 1976, we issued an exemption to 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix H which permitted the licensee to operate the remainder of Oconee Unit No. 3 Cycle 1 with the reactor vessel surveillance specimens removed. This exemption was granted following our review of information provided by the licensee which showed that flow-induced relative motion between each of the three surveillance capsule holder tubes and components of the surveillance capsule holddown assemblies had resulted in wear damage to the holder tubes.
In addition, flow-induced motion between the shroud tube, which surrounds the upper portion of each holder tube, and the shroud tube journal bearing had caused some wear damage to the shroud tube. The latter problem was essentially corrected by the licensee by expanding each holder tube in the journal bearing area to restore adequate journal bearing support.
19120S h h
To preclude further degradation of the holder tubes which are to remain licensee's request to remove the surveillance capsules an assemblies for the remainder of Cycle 1 operation.
To minimize additional wear due to flow-induced motion between the shroud tube and journal bearing, additional Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCO's) for operation of Oconee 3 during Cycle 1 were included in the Technical Specifications issued with the exemption to 10 CFR 50, Appendix H.
additional LCO's was the restriction which limited the operation ofIncluded in these Oconee 3, Cycle 1 only until September 1, 1976.
This restriction was established to approximately coincide with the projected end of Cycle 1 and to limit the total amount of time that the holder tubes would be subjected to the flow forces from the reactor coolant pumps.
maintenance outages since AprilIn its letter of August 6,1976, the lice 16, 1976 off line 20 days and in a condition where reactor coolant pumps have noth been in operation for 12 days.
In order to permit fuller utilization of for the impending refueling outage, the licensee is requi restriction limiting Cycle 1 operation only until September 1,1976 be revised to allow operation to September 18, 1976.
Evaluation and corresponding Technical Specification changes iss we concluded that there was reasonable assurance that the surveillanc 16, 1976, i
of Cycle 1 operation without experiencing significant a However, to minimize the possibility of further damage occurring to the
)
Cycle 1 were issued. holder tubes, additional LCO's for the operation of Oconee Those additional LCO's are as follows:
1)
The Loose Parts Monitoring (LPM) must be in operation when any reactor coolant pumps are operating and shall have as a minimum channel on the incore guide tubes.two channels on the reactor vess I
2)
Any abnormal indication on the LPM system must be promptly investi-gated and evaluated.
uh b
e '
- 3) A reactor coolant system gross ganma analysis must be performed daily and if it exceeds 1.0 microcurie per millimeter whenever i
reactor coolant pumps are operating, a gross alpha analysis must i
be initiated within four hours and continued daily until the gross gamma activity is less than 1.0 microcuries per millimeter. Alpha concentration shall not exceed 5 x 10-5 microcuries per millimeter.
l
- 4) With the ex;eption of startup and shutdown, operation is restricted I
to four pritiary coolant pumps.
3
- 5) Operation of Oconee 3 Cycle 1 shall be permitted only until
{
September 1, 1976.
I
- 6) If the conditions of Specifications 1), 3) or 4) above are not met or if any abnonnal indication of a loose part in the reactor vessel occurs, a reactor shutdown shall be initiated immediately and within 36 hours4.166667e-4 days <br />0.01 hours <br />5.952381e-5 weeks <br />1.3698e-5 months <br /> the reactor shall be in a condition in which no reactor coolant pumps are operating.
The licansee's request would extend Oconee Unit No. 3 Cycle 1 operation by 17 days to September 18, 1976. This extension would offset the tctal of 20 days of outage time experienced since April 16, 1976 and would allow for fuller utilization of the energy capacity of the Cycle 1 Core.
The additional 17 days would be somewhat greater than the 12 days in which the i
reactor coolant system pumps have not operated since April 16, 1976, however i
the difference of 5 days is not significant and the additional flow induced j
wear on the holder tubes would not be great. As indicated by the licensee, j
there has been no abnormal LPM system indication or reactor coolant system I
chemistry analysis which would cause concern that the holder tube material condition has deteriorated since last inspected.
In addition, the other 1
3 LCO's listed above would continue to apply until the end of Cycle 1 1
operation and would provide assurance that the operation of Oconee Unit No. 3 will be in such a manner as to minimize the stress on the holder tubes and respond to the failure of a holder tube, should it occur.
i In view of the above, we conclude that the operation of Oconee Unit No. 3 to September 18, 1976 is acceptable.
We have detormined that the amendment does not authorize a change in i
effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level 'and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determinatica, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4) that an environmental statement, negative declaration, or environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
e r
V
i.
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or 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 t
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 ccmpliance 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: August 16, 1976 W
i (MITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKETS NOS. 50-269, 50-270 AND 50-287 DUKE POWER C0ffANY NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF ~ AMENDMENTS 'TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has issued Amendments Nos. 30, 30, ar.d 27 to Facility Operating Licenses Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55, respectively, issued to Duke Power Company which revised the licenses 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.
The amendments revise the restriction governing the duration of Cycle 1 for Unit No. 3 to allow operation to September 18, 1976.
The application for the amendments complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Comission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Connission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendments.
Prior public notice of the amendments v:as not required since the amendments do not involve a significant hazards consideration.
The Conmission has detennined that the issuance of these amendments will not result in any significant environmental impact and that pursuant to 10 CFR s51.5(d)(4) an environmental inpact statement, negative 7 9HMoSM
declaration or environmental impact appraisal need not b repared in connection with issuance of these amendments.
For further details with respect to this action, see (1) the application for amendment dated August 6,1976,(2) Amendments No 30, 30 and s.
27to Licen~se Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55 and (3) the Commission's related Safety Evaluation.
, respectively, All of these items are available for public inspection at the Comission's Public Room.1717 H Street, NW., Washington, D.C and at the Oc ument Library, 201 South Spring Street, Walhalla South Carolina ounty 29691. A copy of items (2) and (3) may be obtained upon request add the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington ressed to
, D. C,
- 20555,
-Attention:
Director, Division of Operating Reactors, Dsted at Bethesda, Maryland, this 16th day of August 1976.
FOR THE huC1. EAR REGULATORY COM i
L.
' GM'4fOU A,'Schwencer, Chief Operating Reactors Branch kl i
Division of Operating Reactors i
h f
l I
l