ML20028D054
| ML20028D054 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 01/10/1983 |
| From: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Mattimoe J SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028D055 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-48760, NUDOCS 8301140451 | |
| Download: ML20028D054 (4) | |
Text
'
JAll 101983 l
DISTRIBUTION:
ORB #4 Rdg TIppolito Docket File Gray File +4 ELJordan NRC PDR DEisenhut TBarnhart-4 LPM RIngram ACRS-10 Docket No. 50-312 Sfliner Cliiles OELD SECY w/HRC 102 AE0D RDiggs IE-JTaylor BElliot Mr. J. J. Mattinoe Assistant General Manaoer and Chief Engineer Sacranento Municipal Utility District 6201 S Street P. O. Box 15830 Sacranento, California 95813
Dear Mr. Mattinoe:
SU1dECT: RANCHO SECO NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION - EXEMPTION TO APPENDIX H,10 CFR PART 50 REQUIREMENTS By letter dated August 2, 1982, you requested an extension to an exenption from Appendix H,10 CFR Part 50 requirements for an in-vessel naterial surveillance progran for the Ran'cho Seca Nuclear Generatinq Station (Rancho Seco). An exenstion to these require-nents was granted by the Of fice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation for a period of five years which began on October 20, 1977. The exenp-tion permitted the operation of Rancho Seco while irradiating the reactor vessel surveillance capsules at Davis-Besse, Unit No.1.
These capsules are part of a Babcock and Wilcox (B&W) Owners Group Integrated Reactor Vessel Surveillance Progran (IRVSP).
You have concluded that the objective and technical description of the IRVSP has not changed from that described in the Safety Evaluation supporting Amendnent No.15 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-54 and the initial exenption to the provisions of Appendix H.
You state that theflRVSP continues to provide material data that leads the Rancho Seco reactor vessel and has demonstrated that the material behavior prediction techniques are conservative. Further, you state that no operati,onal or fuel nananecent nodifications that will adversely affect the IRVSP are expected.
I The staff concluded in the Safety Evaluation supporting Amendnent No.15, that the infornation derived from the surveillance specinens in the host vessels relevant to the Rancho Seco reactor vessel, would be sufficient to provide assurance of safety nargins that conply with Appendix G,10 CFR Part 50.
This conclusion still applies.
omce>
8301140451 B30110
~~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -
- ~ ~ ~ * " ' ~ ' ~ ~
~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~
'~"~~~~~~
- =j== *O*jg Nac ronu m oo-somacu oua OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usam
-mm i
- -. ~
-~
!'r. J. J.- Mattinoe i J
1 It was also stated in the Safety Evaluation supporting Anendnent tio.
15 that, until data becone available fron the surveillance progran, i
the prediction of radiation damage could be based on the trend curves in Regulatory Guide 1.99 for at least the next 5 years. We have j
had occasion to review those trend curves in connection with the pressurized thennal shock problem and have concluded that they are conservative in the region of data pertinent to Rancho Seco. With regard to future capsule withdrawals, there are samples of limiting Rancho Seco reactor vessel beltline weld netal in Davis-Besse 1 and Crystal River 3.
One of these sanples was removed this year and is currently beinq analyzed.
If for sone reason the results of the analysis are not available on schedule, the properties of the liniting Rancho Seco reactor vessel beltline weld will be evaluated on a nore conservative basis by predictions based on Reculatory Guide 1.99.
In addition, dosimetry results have shown that fluences can be estimated fran power histories with reasonable accuracy. This relationship is documented in BAW-1485, June 1978 On the basis of our evaluation of your justification for extension of exemption and the above assessment, e
we conclude that the proposed integrated surveillance progran is ac-ceptable for at least five (5) nore years. Therefore, we hereby grant an exenstion for Rancho Seco from the requirenent for a continuing l
in-vessel naterial surveillance progran as set forth in Appendix H to l
10 CFR 50 for an additional five years.
In accordance with 10 CFR 50.12, we have determined that this exemption is authorized by law and 9111 not endanger life or property or the common defenso and security and is otherwise in the public interest. We have
+
also deternined that this exenotion does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environnental inpact. Having made this l
deternination, we have further concluded that the exenption involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environnental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statenent, or negative declaration and environmental inpact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with this action.
1 2
i 1
1 OFFICE) suxn met j
j eur>
l nne ronu sia 00% nacu ouo OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usceo: mi-asm
1 l
t 1
s 4
1 s
l 1
p#
,/'
- ys pf
.E 1
/
..r g '{.! ',e--
<,f i y l'. ~
7
- (c.v. -.c
,ug >ge.s T,c,,
4, i.
.a-
- e 1
L
_.a
_a A
1 I A1 m
I )
4
- m--
Mr. J. J.14ttinoe A ?!otice of Exenstion, which is being forwarded to the Office of the federal Register for publication, is enclosed.
Sincerely, a inal signedby}
uurrc11G. Eisenhus Darrell G. Eisenhut Director Division of Licensing Office of fluclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
flotice of Exenotion cc w/ enclosure:
See next pace I
.v V 1,
&Li rf k Wu,,6 J _,
n
(.U. ED:... '... '
D ORB #4:D -
ORB #4:
C ORB #4:DL A
- DL
.. o h
OFFICE ).""9"?
,,, k...........
...l............
suin c8 J
..c.t.4.......s.....
... B E l,,, t,,,,,,,
tut _
.o -..
......M..........
.... 57...........
... 4..g. 82 lif/ /
,,,12,/,),, D2
.. 'f..,......g 12
...../..L.... 2 12
....../..... 8 2 12 12 32
..q.....
..... 7..
oars >
mc ronu sia oo.aomacu ouo OFFICIAL RECORD COPY I
uso,o:i i_ m-seo
l Sacramento Municipal Utility Rancho Seco, Docket No. 50-312 District cc w/ enclosure (s):
David S. Kaplan, Secretary and Christopher Ellison, Esq.
General Counsel Dian Grueuich, Esq.
Sacramento Municipal Utility California Energy Comission District 1111 Howe Avenue 6201 S Street Sacramento, California 95825 P. O. Box 15830 Sacramento, California 95813 Ms. Eleanor Schwartz California State Office 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E., Rm. 201 Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Washington, D. C.
20003 827 7th Street, Room 424 Sacramento, California 95814 Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary Mr. Robert H. Engelken, Regional Administrator U.S., Nuclear Regulatory Commission U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region V Washington, D. C.
20555 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Resident Inspector / Rancho Seco Walnut Creek, California 94596 c/o U. S. N. R. C.
14410 Twin Cities Road Herald, CA 95638 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D. C.
20555 Regional Radiation f.epresentative EPA Reaion IX Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman 215 Fremont Street Atomic Safety and Licensing San Francisco, California 94111 Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission Mr. Robert B. Borsum Washington, D. C.
20555 Babcock & Wilcox Nuclear Power Generation Division Dr. John H. Buck Suite 220, 7910 Woodmont Avenue Atonic Safety and Licensing j
Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Thomas Baxter, Esq.
Washington, D. C.
20555 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N.W.
Christine H. Kohl Washington, D. C.
20036 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Herbert H. Brown, Esq.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq.
Washington, D. C.
20555 Hill, Christopher and Phillips, P.C.
1900 M Street, N.W.
California Department of Health Washington, D. C.
20036 ATTN: Chief. Environmental Radiation Control Unit Helen Hubbard Radiological Health Section P. O. Box 63 714 P Street, Room 498 Sunol, California 94586 Sacramento, California 95814
..