ML20037A460
| ML20037A460 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 04/02/1976 |
| From: | Purple R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Parker W DUKE POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001310625 | |
| Download: ML20037A460 (3) | |
Text
-
o ae:c DISTRIBUEION Docket No.50-270 f
~
f Docket No. 50-270 O
d j
KR@l SMSheppard GZech cEtn 01&E (2) 6 BScharf (2)
Duke Power Company (16)
ATTN:
Mr. William O. Parker, Jr.
OPA (Clare M ies)
Vice President
- ""E 7 Steam Production uchanan,'NSIC Poet Offica Box 2178 422 South Church Street i
l.
Charlotte, North Carolina 29242 1
i Centlemen:
I The Commission has filed the enclosed " Notice of Proposed Issuance of Ametuiment to Pacility Operating License" with the Office of the Pederal Register for publication. This notice relates to your request dated f
February 25, 1976, for approval to amend License No. DPR-47 for the Oconee Nuclear $ cation. Unit 2 to incorporate operating limits in the Technical Specifications based on analyses conducted for the Unit 2 Cycle 2 reload.
Sincarely, O&;ir.,*cmad by:
Robm. ' re-b Robert A. Purple, Chief Operating Reactors 3 ranch fl Division of Operating Leactors
Enclosure:
Federal Register Notica ec w/ enclosure:
See next page 9 7Op t
ooA m
D 3 Y Aa o
or,ie n
- ORB #1 b
_QE EggM%X,.
WDk%
..... a7
-O uk _usTu o.,. -
Foran AXC.)la (Rev. 533) ABCM 0240 1lr u. s.eovsaweesnt e=mt m e o rics se74.sae. nee r
8001310
1 PRELIMINARYDkTE'"I'ATION
(. ' j, - !!.
I
.s NOTICING OF PROPOSED LICF.'.5T'M.1"ENDMENT LICFN W :
Duke Power Company REQUEST FOR:
Technical Specification changes to reflect the analyses performed for oconee Unit 2 Cycle 2 reload.
REQUEST DATE:
February 25, 1976 PROPOSED ACTICN:
(X)
Pre-notico Recon = ended
( )
Post-notice Recor= ended s
( )
Deterninsti6n siclayed pending conpletion of Safety Evaluation BASIS FOR DECISION:
Changes introduced in the Cycle 2 reload include the following:
1)
A change in the reactor variable low pressure trip,
- 2) The use of =easured pri=ary coolant flow reactor than design flow in the ther=al-hydraulic design analysis,
- 3) The application of the 3/G-2 Critical Heat Flux (CHF)
Correlation rather than the W-3 correlation as used in Cycle 1, and
- 4) Two 17 x 17 Mark C de=enstration fuel asse=blies.
Item 1) above involves a relaxation of a li=iting safety syste.n setting; Items 2) and 3) above involve changes to the bases for the Technical Specifications; and, Ite= 4) above involves the use of two fuel asse=blies significantly different fro = those being replaced.
In view of the above, it is concluded that the proposed a end:ent involves signi-ficant hazards considerations and a Pre-notice is therefore recommended iy*
CONCURRENCES:
DATE:
~
Concurrence in PD constitutes 1,
concurrence in Ltr to Licensee
'W-- Mrp If76 and Federal Register Notice 2.
3.
K. R. Go11er I
MhC OELDh MMd 4.
i
t.
t PROPOSED NEPA ACIION:
( ) EIS Required
,(
) Negative Declaration (ND) and Environmental Impact Appraisal (EIA) Required (I ) No EIS, ND or EIA Required
( )
Determinaciod delayed pending completion of EIA BASIS FOR DECISION: We have determined that the amendment does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and vill not result in any significant environ-mental impact.
Having made this deteunination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from tha erandoc'.at 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.
t l
A
_. _ _ _ _... _ _. _ _ _ _ _. _ _. _. _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _. _ _ _. _ _.