ML20235G767
| ML20235G767 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 09/18/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20235G747 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-60525, TAC-60526, NUDOCS 8709300206 | |
| Download: ML20235G767 (2) | |
Text
-_
f*
- c
[g '
' A, UNITED STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5
E WASHING TON, D. C. 2055L s
s...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT N0. 21 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-80
{
AND AMENDMENT NO. 20 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-82 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT N05. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-275 AND 50-323
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated November 25, 1985, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E or the licensee) requested amendments to the Technical Specifica-tions appended to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-80 and DPR-82 for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2.
The proposed amendments would provide a program for the control of cranes, as I
described below, j
2.0 EVALUATION The proposed amendments would revise the Diablo Canyon combined Technical Specifications for Units 1 and 2 by adding a new program as Technical Specification 6.8.4.f, " Containment Polar and Turbine Building Cranes,"inSection6.8.4,"ProceduresandPrograms"toensurethat(1) the position of the containment polar crane precludes it from becoming a jet impingement target from a postulated pipe rupture and (2) the operation of the turbine building crane is consistent with the restrictions associated with the Hosgri seismic analysis of the turbine building.
The proposed program would include training of personnel and procedures for operation of the polar and turbine building cranes.
Crane operation has been previously reviered by the NRC staff as reported in the Diablo Canyon Safety Evaluation Report, Supplement Nos. 7, 8, and 9.
The staff requested this additional specification as reported in Supplement No. 32, July 1985, as follows:
As a result of its review of the Diablo Canyon Unit 1 and 2 Technical Specifications, the staff determined that specifica-tions should be included for the polar crane in the containment buildings and for the two bridge cranes in the turbine building or appropriate justification should be provided for not including them.
I 9709300206 870918 PDR ADOCK 05000275 P
PDR-
4:
'n By letter dated Jul 26, 1985, PG&E was requested to submit a license amendment request (yor appropriate justification) within 90 days of the issuance of the Unit 2 full-power license regarding these restrictions.
By. letter dated July 30, 1985, PG&E indicated its intent to submit the license amendment request, and did so by letter dated November 25, 1985.
Since the PG&E request is responsive to the staff's request in that it provides for training of personnel and procedures for the operation of the cranes within the limits of the staff-accepted analysis for the cranes, we find the proposed technical specification acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
These amendments involve changes in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
We have determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public' comment on such finding. Accordingly, these amendments meets 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 environ-mental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
4.0 CONCLUSION
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 (3) 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 Contributor: Charles M. Trammell Dated: September 18, 1987 l
_ _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _. _ _ - -.