ML20215D640
| ML20215D640 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 10/02/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215D635 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8610140240 | |
| Download: ML20215D640 (2) | |
Text
'.
!e mu o
UNITED STATES 8
~,i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.48TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-77 AND AMENDMENT NO.40TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-7_99 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY INTRODUCTION theTennesseeValley(TS)
E>y letters dated May 25, 1984 and July 11, 1986, Authority (TVA) requested amendments to the Technical Specifications for the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.
EVALUATION The proposed change would delete the requirement in TS 4.6.1.3.a to perform the airlock door seal leakage test by the pressure decay method for 15 min-utes and add a requirement that the seal leakage be determined by precision flow methods for at least two minutes. The licensee submitted test data to show that the pressure decay method yields leakage results in the order of 10 to 50 times less conservative than the make-up flow method. The staff agrees that due to the small test volume involved (about 0.067 SCF) the pressure drop in the volume can occur too fast for accurate measurement.
Further, the proposed TS change is consistent with the revised NRC position on testing airlock door seals in accordance with NUREG-0452 Revision 5 (Draft), and with the requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR 50.
Based on the above infonnation, the staff finds the proposed amendments to Sequoyah Units 1 and 2 TS acceptable.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION I
l These amendments involve changes in the use of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may l
be released offsite and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Consnission has previously issued a proposed finding that these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public conenent on such finding.
Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
8610140240 061002 PDR ADOCK 00000327 P
PDR 2
~,.
-,.-.,..v--
CONCLUSION The Commission made a proposed determination that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register on September 28, 1984 (49 FR 38410) and consulted with the state of Tennessee.
No public connents were received, and the state of Tennessee did not have any comments.
We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1)there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributors: Carl R. Stahle, PWR#4, DPWR-A Joe Holonich, PWR#4, DPWR-A H. Whitener, Region 2 Dated:
October 2, 1986 l
i 5-t
.--