ML20128G350

Application for Amend to License DPR-54,consisting of Rev 1 to Proposed Amend 122,revising once-through Steam Generator Tech Specs by Incorporating Requirements of Proposed Amend 63,Rev 2

ML20128G350
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	06/17/1985
From:	Reinaldo Rodriguez SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
To:	Thompson H Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20128G353	List: ML20128G350 ML20128G361
References
RJR-85-292, NUDOCS 8507090159
Download: ML20128G350 (4)

Text

_ _ .

1 i . ,

e suu.

SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT C 6201 S Street, P.O. Box 15830, Sacramento CA 95852-1830,(916) 452-3211 AN ELECTRIC SYSTEM SERVING THE HEART OF CALIFORNIA RJR 85-292 June 17,1985 DIRECTOR OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION ATTN: HUGH L. THOMPSON, JR., DIRECTOR DIVISION OF LICENSING U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON DC 20555 DOCKET N0. 50-312 LICENSE NO. DPR-54

SUBJECT:

PROPOSED AMENDMENT 122, REVISION 1 In accordance with 10 CFR 50.59, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District hereby proposes to amend its Operating License DPR-54 for Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station Unit No. 1. Per the requirements of 10 CFR 50.92, this Proposed Amendment 122, Revision 1, has been evaluated by a No Significant Hazards Consideration in Attachment 1.

This proposal incorporates the Once Through Steam Generator Inservice Inspec-tion requirements from Proposed Amendment 63, Revision 2, dated February 19, 1985.

Attachment II to this submittal is a description of the proposed changes for Amendment 122, Revision 1.

Since this is a revision to Proposed Amendment No. 122, no additional license fees are required.

If you have any questions concerning this proposal, please contact Mr. Ron mbo Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station.

R. J. 00R EZ

, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, NUCLEAR Enclosure Subscribed and sworn to before me day of U.. .- - 1985, tamanmumman. rm... .rmm.....

this 2/sr ,

U .

, MARY ALICE BAY l ( *,.7 ' NOTAny rt'nLic-CALIFORNIA

-' ratscrrAL orricE IN W! -

My dommission b es anu ry 91 9

+4=mm==u==uruarmumamm.nmj Notary (b1ic 00l 8507090159 850617 L' i i

PDR ADOCK 05000312 g p PDR . i t J

o o

ATTACHMENT I NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS EVALUATION FOR PROPOSED AMENDMENT NUMBER 122, REVISION 1 BASIS FOR NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION Description of Amendment Request This Proposed Amendment 122, Revision 1, revises the Once Through Steam Generator Technical Specification by incorporating the OTSG requirements of Proposed Amend-ment 63, Revision 2. This proposal also follows up on the commitments made at the November 20, 1984 NRC meeting. The meeting minutes are included as supplemental information.

This amendment now contains two areas where the surveillance requirements have become more restrictive. First, the intent of NRC Regulatory Guide 1.83, Revision 1 has been met by including the Inservice Inspection requirements. The specific limited areas which are distinguished by unique operating conditions and/or physi-cal construction will not be inspected for the purposes of meeting the random sample size requirements. Secondly, in the event of primary-to secondary tube leakage in excess of the limits of Specification 3.1.6.9, an inspection of the affected steam generator will be performed in accordance with more rigid standards. If the leaking tube falls within one of the Special Area groups designated in either Table 4.17-3 or Table 4.17-4, all of the tubes in this group in this steam generator will be inspected. If the leaking tube does not fall within one of the Special Area Groups, an inspection will be performed on the affected steam generator in accordance with Table 4.17-2A with an initial inspection sample size of 6% of the tubes in the affected steam generator.

The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of the standards for making a "No Significant Hazards Consideration" determination by providing certain examples (48FR14870). The district has reviewed these proposed changes with respect to the examples given and finds that the requested changes fall in the category of Commission examples.

(i) "A purely administrative change to technical specifications: for example, a change to achieve consistency throughout the technical specifications, correction of an error, or a change in nomenclature."

(ii) "A change that constitutes an additional limitation, restriction, or control not presently included in the technical specifications: for example, a more stringent surveillance requirement."

(vii) "A change to make a license conform to changes in the regulations, where the license change results in very minor changes to facility operations clearly in keeping with the regulations."

Example (i) is correct since Proposed Amendment 122 editorially incorporates the Once Through Steam Generator Inservice Inspection requirements from Proposed Amendment 63, Revision 2. Example (ii) applies since the inspection sample size after a primary-to-secondary tube leak has been increased from 3% to 6% in Specification 4.17.3d2. Example (vii) also applies since the ISI requirements originated from NRC Regulatory Guide 1.83, Revision 1.

.J

0 ATTACHMENT II DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CHANGES The following list describes changes between the original Proposed Amendment 122 and Revision 1.

1. List of Tables, page ix, Tables 4.17-2A, 28; The original Table 4.17-2 has been expanded to include two tube inspection groups.

2. List of Tables, page ix, Tables 4.17-3, 4; These tables have been dis-placed back a page to account for the new Table 4.17-28.

3. Page 4-51, Section 4.17.2: A statement has been added which describes the inspection result classification and the corresponding action required for the inspection of specific limited ar eas.

4. Page 4-52, Paragraph 4.17.2e; This is a new paragraph that deals with inspection requirements for tubes in specific limited areas.

5. Page 4-53, Paragraph 4.17.3b; Inservice Inspection frequency requirements are provided for Table 4.17-2A and Table 4.17-28.

6. Page 4-53, Paragraph 4.17.3c; Table 4.17-2 has been changed to Table 4.17-2A.

7. Page 4-54, Paragraph 4.17.3d2; A sample size of 6% has been prescribed for inspections performed on the affected steam generator in accordance with Table 4.17-2A, given the leaking tube does not fall within one of the special area groups.

8. Page 4-54, Paragraph 4.17.4b; Table 4.17-28 and the provisions of Paragraph 4.17.2e have been incorporated into the definition of steam generator opera-bility.

9. Page 4-55, Paragraph 4.17.5c: Specification 6.9 has been changed to Specifi-cation 6.9.5P.

1

10. Page 4-55, 1st Paragraph of the Bases; Included is a statement that the surveillance requirements are based on B&W - Standard Technical Specifications.

11. Page 4-55a, Last Paragraph of the Bases; Specification 6.9 has been changed to Specification 6.9.5P.

i l 12. Page 4-57, Table 4.17.2A; This was formerly Table 4.17-2. In the Result l

Section C-3, Table 4.17-2 has been changed to Table 4.17-2A and Specifica-tion 6.9 has been revised to Specification 6.9.5P. Also, note (2) has been deleted.

13. Page 4-57a, Table 4.17-2B; This is a new table that provides the inspection result classification and the corresponding action required for inspection of special area tubes.

O

14. Table 4.17-3, Pages 4-57b, 57c, 57d, 57e; Previously this table occupied pages 4-57a, 57b, 57c, 57d.

15. Table 4.17-4, Page 4-57f; Page 4-57e was changed to Page 4-57f.

16. Page 6-12f, Specification 6.9.5P; Results of steam generator tube inspec-tions which require notification of the Commission shall be reported pur-suant to this Specification.

L