ML19317G830
| ML19317G830 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 10/22/1975 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19317G822 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8004010658 | |
| Download: ML19317G830 (2) | |
Text
,
~
OrJITED STATES nlUCLEAR REGULATOHY COf,1f.1tSSION WASHING ton. D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING A>ENDMENT NO. 1~TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-54 (CHANGE NO. 1 TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS)
SACRAMEm'O MUNICIPAL UTILITY' DISTRICT RANCHO SECO NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT 1 DOCKET NO.'50-312 Introduction By letter dated October 2,19J5, Sacramchto hfunicipal Utility District (the licensee) requested a change of the quarterly surveillance require-ments contained in Technical Specification 4.8, for the third quarter of 1975. These surveillance requirements require testing of the auxiliary feedwater pumps.
Evaluation The intention of Technical Specification 4.8 is to assure operability of the auxiliary feedwater system when needed. The auxiliary feedwater system may be required to function in the event of an accident at either operating conditions or during the early stages of cooldown.
During the later stages of cooldown the auxiliary feedwater system is not required because the decay heat removal system is capabic of dissi-pating the heat load. Ne have. changed Technical Specification 4.8 to require surveillance testing of the auxiliary feedwater pumps only when the reactor coolant system average temperature is >3050F, which brings Rancho Seco into agreement with current licensing practice with re pect to surveillance requirements for equipment when not required to be operable, and climinates a requirement for unnecessary testing.
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 deercase in a safety margin, the change does not. involve a significant ha:ards consideration, (2) there is reasonabic assurance that the health.and safety of the public will not be endangered k
80040 $ [bi m
O.
e 2-
~
i by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activitics will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defcase and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date: October 22, 1975 I
e O
l e
h 9
0 f.
e S
e 1
e 4
- e 9
k e
e
' 9 e
n e
o reess
-