ML19319A757
| ML19319A757 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 10/23/1976 |
| From: | Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19319A750 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7912030400 | |
| Download: ML19319A757 (5) | |
Text
_ _ _ _.. _
Q -c e
v.
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
6 50-2'9.'50-270'AND 50-287 \\
DOCKETS NOS.
4
.=
<l,';jf
- /.. -
? : 2
, :s
.C; ws.
- M d > 4 9 g, ~.' ~ -
y
. DUKE POWER COWANY A,e r
-~
g.
.. w'
~
3 r.,
s
<v x w..
- y._',
~ '_
n n
ec
~.. z -t s -3,% ~,
K*,
.f,
p*; - zp
~
i
- NOTICE OF ISSUAuCE OF AMENDENTS TO FACILITYOP;y,f g ; g d OPERATING LICENSE 5 17 V/ RWW 6"-
L
.;2,Z j &, f.. :. ? $ ? V T ;. N + i m '
.e, -
-g v
y.
The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (th,e Commissihn) has iss'ved! o y
Antadsents Nos. 3f, 3.fand Dto Facility Operating Licenses Nos. DPR-38,1
-, ~,
,-).
.k n.
f w.
~
DPR-47 and DPR-55 issued to Duke Power Company (the ifceisee) which~ revisedy c 1
z _ s.
~..-
... e n..s-
. ~,
.x.
.,~ ~.. v 4...~ ;+: w; MsU
~
T. %..
. :;~ (
n;,.
Technical Speci.fications for operation.of the Oconee Nuc, lear Sta M
. A %,1 r
. m i ?.
~1.-
%.~
.a ~, -
_. y,., ;3. a u
q']<p,?w.
- 6...
.. w rm w,
.wk,.,3:.Q r y?.Nes.'.li'2 and 3 (the facility) located in Oconee County, South Carolin
-i w y 9 s.s
- r.
o~ >
,7.~
s The amendments areeffective as of its date of issuance.',
' y.
'A.J
~
.. +
4- ^
These asendments result from an Oconee Unit 3 exemption'gra E.
.c.
. l 2. ~ 5 * :.
nted 7, nM~.- r j
e
.;.g
~ - "'
from the requirements of 10 CFR Part '50,; Appendix H.," Reactor Yessel,
+
d@; ym,.s a.
n
'1 Material Surveillance Program Requirements." and proffde for the':.
.[FN..
l
_; 3
.<AN x = V ' yi;. -
- removal of the reactor vessel surveillance capsules for Unit 3. CycleuGM.
+
^
y # m..p. o m.
2 operation and require that the Unit 3 capsule withdrawal schedule sel%.gQQj pff m:
M
- @Gw.~ n ~.
. revised prior to Unit 3 Cycle 3 operation..
e.
- 4.NW:r
... wcwe -
a s
r
,,,a
- b. y,,Q Q% ' pr The application for these amendments complies with the standards and s.Me.' @
.way.ww
+
. =w w m.a.
requirements of the' Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended'(the Act) 'anG&q%w@cw%
n
-Tc,m. %w.m; m :e
.w the Comnission's ruiss and regulations. The Cocoission has made' appropriate 7ps;.;s,_~1 J.
+ f q
+
findings as required by the~'Act and the Consission's rules a
. =m taOSQk i.'
L
~
L-L..
. f.
10 CFR Chspter If which are set forth in'the license ~ am& c -b n % & fl W Q Q '
endmentsk Prist pebitcMN :
N.
zw
. (. %m g.m -. n%a n.c... c a..QNyh m y ': - N s
- 7..
f..,p. ' M e M.,
,gy f.-; notice of_these amendments was not required since the~amenene;nts.de netid@ii4467 x
+
4 m.gxy mwye pw*f t,g 3
&y)7. u. involve, a sigaf ficant hazards conside ation. ' nW W M;Ab.AQs1 m.
q.,
w
..7
-4, w.
.#7At wy g g
^
r
- +
- 7
- L q L.*
u
- n~..
p
- , t'
- l'Q-6 (f:y W. > v * =
a, 2 ~. ?
.m
~
l u
+f'?,' ~' q @7p%E-Q '% f *D' 7s- (
. ;f.%n ; ' M',
~
)Q' % :
r w,
_' ;7. ;;.; x.
-q, l
- b @* " ', / pq~ ~ -
q:
4,A '~'
,, ' {:# ^ *
~,s v
T*'
[
~"
" ' V"
A!'""**
m.-
- s
e y.
- cf r r.%
v6
% ~.g V g{
M yy..
+ g,
"-e yg gg
&k
$b s O. Gf:&
h.'iUNW~- $$b b$
h Y$$$$
WWf.
Y,
. r
- PN[W y*%: 3*k. ;p
&.= Jh:q M CQ Q"~$fQ*Aj*a,F-Q5 f
g"W - @"y lW~
peind MTS2
" " *~ "
f
~'
{
D yem ABC 31, (Rev. 9.$3) ABCM 0240 % w
. W u. S. eovsRumaNT PRINTING OFFECBs1974 5869SG E, fI h3.
[
\\.,
y - s. _;:., w l ; ;?.
- HL. '_.' 7 n M.Larze: wc m v9 0 g %o' W
-a
~
~
79120
\\
.~
t w
.a 4
'a.,
. 3 s.
y.
.3, < z%s.,
<Ql;
^ e.
pwv.
..;f 4; 4 -- :
2 c.ap
. determined,that the issuance of. these amendments -. m,-,
p w
A p.. m n g..ission has 4WA
'The Comm..
.a:.
n z,
w x.n, 1n any. significant environmental impact and that pursuant;.Mh. 3:
u
~.m.._.,..
-~
cE;willinotfresult
- w. m."
m to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4) an enviromental impact statement or negative dec a
.s.,
- x
.-u a
m..
n m
ga,n...
.: w..i-t
' W.;
.c.
.m e.an,d environmental impact appraisal need not be prepa a
~o
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
r
~
u.
=1-with issuance of these agendments.
~
W _
.~
For further details with respect to this action,~ see (1) the' Vp a
c
.~
V.HZ
'g~
. m,,
n.
l ' -i., a.t
. c n, d '.,
+ :..
+
.yw-24, ^1976; (2) Amendments m '.,3.:.
.s
- 4- -,..
.:m$Japp11 cation for amendments dated September x
nc x
0 a s ;w.a =
m.,.
eymw me m.
.w.
w.~. a u w. m.. m a. s p. a,. s _-'Lto ticonses Nos. DPR-38, DPR and D vw 1 n.
_.I W
a.
] w, M Nos. T T and %2. m w e. %. w-e. m,. :we. w..,.%. g x. :,.y%.;;/ L x.
c.. g:.
n.s..
n a+ +
am.<.,.e,.+w.. o. u.y
- ..a y
- .y.
.-C: sthe Commission's related Safety Devaluation. ~ A11Lof these items are f7 M
~,.
~...
i 7.u
,.av. ~
w.
m
.m_
~
.o
. s m 2
..C' ~ available, for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document.
e g ;,
u u
- ', ~
.x l^
Room,1717 H Street, N. W..
Washington, D. C.'and st-the Oconee County ; -::
x
. ~ ~,,
g
' Library,3013outh Spring Streets, Walhalla, Soutichrolina 29691. I J L m
.~., ~
~. =
.; y,2 M
^ ;..
~
~S 1
9 copy of items (2) and (3) may be obtained upon request addressed. to the:.
~
[
- U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Consission, Washington, D. C.
20555, Atten.tions :
v.
/
s.
13 ^
Director, Division.of Operating Reactors.
=
=g
.nz
- z.. w. Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this M* day of dkW 19% y ' ;yp
.w--
~ -
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO MISSION.,s'
- 7. U l % g ~ h tJ-y
_ 4,;; y,:;.g.g
. cy
- y-
,- zm.
a.
.c y;.
u;7, gg ny p
yw 3, ;3 y,
a: m.
n :
,m.,.e.
".3%-
2.
Anw x
.e sM Operating Reactors B. ranch.fl 8.hh.weMS A.'Schwencer, Chief?
P
%%. x: L,4 nq e.i
,.3 73 M Q.s E#
g+ a[p. wpm g -.
e.-- J '.. 3 s*-
4, x+[y:
Division of Operating ReactorsS --" @s..
s.
y4 MW
- ?r '..' /- W *
- r
- A km y Q:is q.^*y*'=.'.
8,n V 2"
.s.
.q,
b
~
WQ..A ;~ '
'r..
,J
[.
4,
-,~
f 4
~
O.Z
.. */, ;
7
[-
., f
&.*Q smk
.j.
L
(",
H,. x R' os :
)
'i,p}?iN "YTjg.32a. ?';L
' D l }.*, a.:.
v
-L
.% '.p% -L v'-
t,'
L.
+ *
^ ^
~
yVgd, lM Q ^,'.w,
~
- y'. '. gy:M
- , ; 3 :t;m,.
,i..
.y.
~~ ?-
. 'G
'(
~
..(..7,..-.'" &
^
y.c
.tr. m y y:
MG.
Q; -
u.: ? u, --
,x i C.< - i.'- ? k. >. % Q ". l W; V,.
.<i-
- ?"eQ*, A. e j',. $, N::
Fy
. ;9
L L. l ' "- $
.Q
- .p !
'\\
- j$ 'h
- l[d Q g-A.F 5'tO'-W.% ^h, :2 +-' ~ :W
<\\c N
L Y Q ', lb 'Pi **
p 5
2
+s
- Nw 1 ;
w.
,7 N fi W Q.
Q. %., y *'E,.
s*-
h'.h'?sbhlf "
'"WC
~.
- 44[".<Q,g w[g, s TF"W 'D y
' # M **
m+
l' O* ;- C * * -* 'u \\#?&* *h N
[',orrile "h$&'^
'I 4 @N$
$'.7., y r y -- y,(*.Q$.%!"-
s h:
k hlf* *'f$((l, 55hf'E
-'t b fd,"N, 'M U.
'2"
~*
.c c - t.j~..
7u A - '%& 3
,.. q-w 3g
'~ ~
\\
MN DNN-Y
- W i suomausW i
& gj.. % -e 6 g@.*i t%^f g
W.s 4,,
Ofb b " N-bNN hbd W
z
~h" h.s.,i,_--
4 % N' i
'W*3i M
- *, $u. s. oovunmusur resuvim. orricas se74.sa.-t
% : " * (J.E
,~'%4:
n.- ~
~.L-
,;'vQ 3.n's. -
i
~ Derum N)18 (Rev. 9-53) ABOE 0240
- I s-r c
, % - R_y +n,s:;".r-r ' Q,1 w. L :... m.-?~. ~\\s%. : -*.:-, u-.
.w l
h m
h.14 i
1 F
PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION NOTICING OF PROPOSED LICENSING AMENDMENT _
i Duke Power Company (0conee Unit 3,50-2871 ZICENSEE:
Exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix H, Section II.C.2 I
REQUEST FOR: to permit operation of Oconee Unit 3 during cycle 2 with the reactor vessel material surveillance specimens removed from the reactor vessel.
In addition, technical specification changes are requested to reflect the removal of the surveillance specimens for cycle 2 operation.
REQUEST DATE:
Septmeber 24, 1976 PROPOSED ACTION:
( )
Pre-notice Recommended w
(XXK Post-notice Recommended
( )
Determination delayed pending completion of Safety Evaluation
' BASIS FOR DECISION:
In previous licensing actions, exemptions to 10 CFR 50, Appendix H 16, 1976, were granted for Oconee Unit 1, 2 and 3 on March 26, June 25, and A respectively.
were involved which reflected the removal of the surveillance specimens from the reactor vessel and which required that a revised surveillance capsule withdrawal In each of the earlier schedule be established prior to the next cycle of operation.
actions, the exemption to Appendix H was not noticed in the Federal Register (pre or post) and the technical specification changes were post-noticed as it was determined that no significant hazards were. involved.
The basis for granting the earlier exemptions was that the surveilbnce specimens, due to their placement in the reactor vessel, had received a higher neutron flux than the reactor vessel-beltline region, and that they therefore led the reactor vessel in the total integrated neutron flux recieved and would continue to lead the vessel at the termination of the exemption. The fracture toughness properties of the vessel would continue to be known and operation would therefore be with adequate safety margins.
One surveillance capsule has been removed form Oconee Unit 3 with an equiv exposure of 2.29 EFPY (Effective Full Power Years). vessel surveillance pro as part of the reactor At the conclusion of Oconee 3 establishing the revised withdrawal schedule for Unit 3.
cycle 2 operation, the reactor vessel exposure will be 2.03 EFPY and, therefore, significant margin will continue to exist between'the present capsule irradiation The exemption request of and the maximum achievable exposure of the reactor vessel.and associate 24, 1976, September a set of circumstances essentially the same as those previously considered by the
[O staff for the Oconee Units.
Damew
2-a
~
It is therefore concluded that, as in the earlier cases, the proposed change does not involve any significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident nor does it involve any significant decrease in a safety margin.
In view of the above, it is concluded that the proposed technical specification changes do not involve a significant hazards consideration and a post-n6tice is therefore recommended. With regard to the exemption request to Appendix H, it is recommended that neither a pre-notice or post-notice be issued in the exemptions previously granted for Oconee Units 1, 2 and 3.
b 4
9 e
e e
A
..y-y..
'.O
o 4
o 3-Proposed NEPA Action:
( ) EIS Required
( )
Negative Declaration (ND) and Environmental Impact Appraisal (EIA) Required (X) No EIS, ND or EIA Required
( ) Determination delayed pending completion of EIA BASIS FOR DECISION:
in effluent We have determined that the amendment does not authorize result in any significant environmental impact. types or total amounts nor a i
Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and pursuant to 10 CFR !i51.5(d)(4) that an environmental statement, negative declaration, or environmental impact appraisal need not be, prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
i CONCURRENCE { V p [
DATE:
1.- G.G.1 7u cf/y,/
- 2. A. Schwencer 7fGhgh ho4
- 3. K. R. Goller M[-
f/JO//g
& LD fff h f h Q -
)o n
N MS 311 # cve%W l