ML20245C705

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 87 to License DPR-54

ML20245C705
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	10/27/1987
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20245C693	List: ML20245C690 ML20245C705 ML20245C714
References
NUDOCS 8711030453
Download: ML20245C705 (3)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

[ps na k UNITED STATES uq y'

p, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g.

l WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 Qm.....J SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 87 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-54 SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT RANCHO SEC0 NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION DOCKET N0. 50-312

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letters dated January 29, February 14, March 20, and June 13, 1986, Sacramento Municipal Utility District (the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) for Facility Operating License DPR-54 for Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station. Numerous changes to the TSs and their bases were requested in order to correct typographical errors and punctuation, change nomenclature, number currently unnumbered pages, define a currently undefined time period, update the table of contents, correct inadvertent errors originating from various previously approved license amendments, identify initialisms and to achieve clarity and consistency throughout the TSs.

2.0 DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION By letter dated January 29, 1986, the licensee submitted Proposed Amendment No. 139 to Facility Operating License DPR-54. The proposed amendment is the result of the licensee's review of all sections of the TSs and consists of numerous administrative changes to the TSs and their bases. The proposed changes, which are described in Attachment III to the January 29, 1986 letter, consist of updating the table of contents, correcting typographical errors, correcting punctuation, numbering presently unnumbered pages, changing nomenclature, identifying initialisms, and minor word changes to achieve clarity and consistency throughout the TSs.

The introductory paragraph to Technical Specification 6.17.2 currently gaseous, and solid) ges to the radioactive waste systems (liquid, states:

" Major chan shall be made by either of the following methods:"

The use of the plural " methods" is misleading since there is only one method used in major changes to the radwaste systems. By letter dated February 14, 1986, the licensee submitted Proposed Amendment No. 144.

This proposed amendment requested replacement of "either of the following methods:" in Specification 6.17.2 with "by the following method." to correct the currently misleading phrase.

8711030453 871027 PDR ADOCK 05000312 p

PDR

_ _ _ _ The time period " Fortnightly" is used twice in TS Table 3.22-1, " Radio-logical Environmental Monitoring Program," to specify radiological environmental sampling and collection frequencies. However, " fortnightly" is currently not defined in. Section 1.9, " Time Periods". By letter dated March 20, 1986, the licensee submittea Proposed Amendment No. 136. This proposed amendment would add the word " Fortnightly," with its definition, as Section 1.9.4 to correct this omission, and renumber existing Sections 1.9.4 through 1.9.9 as Sections 1.9.5 through 1.9.10 to accommodate the addition.

This proposed amendment would also replace the word " tests" with " intervals" in the second sentence of the introductory paragraph of Section 1.9.

The word " intervals" is proposed because it more appropriately denotes a time period and clarifies the TSs.

Amendment No. 76 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-54 deleted the requirements in Specification 3.3.3 that a component taken out of service for maintenance have its redundant component (s) tested immediately there-after to prove operability. Through oversight, the Bases for Specifi-cation 3.3.3 were not changed to be consistent with the new Specification 3.3.3.

By letter dated June 13, 1986, the licensee submitted Proposed Amendment No. 135. This proposed amendment deletes two sentences from the Bases for Specification 3.3.3 that were consistent with pre-Amendment 73 Specification 3.3.3, but which should have been deleted at the time of issuance of Amendment 73 to make Specification 3.3.3 and its Bases consistent.

By Proposed Amendment No. 135, the licensee also proposed to replace the words " plant batteries" in Specification 3.7.1E with the specific nuclear service batteries that supply the vital 125 volt DC buses and change the single alphabetic designations of the vital 125 volt DC buses currently identified in Specifications 3.7.1F and 3.7.1G to their actual equipment designations to clarify the TSs.

In addition, the licensee proposed to replace the word " batteries" in Specification 3.7.1F with " batteries identified in Section 3.7.1E" to further clarify the TSs.

The remainder of the proposed changes correct obvious typographical errors and punctuation, number currently unnumbered pages, and update the table of contents to make it consistent with the specifications and bases.

On the basis of its review, the staff has concluded that the changes proposed by the licensee to the plant technical specifications and their bases are administrative in nature, and provide clarity and comprehen-sibility to the technical specifications. The staff finds, therefore, that the changes identified by the licensee's letters dated January 29, February 14, March 20, and June 13, 1986 are acceptable.

A

. _ _ _ _ _ _ 3.0 CONTACT,WITH STATE OFFICIAL The NRC staff has advised the Chief of the Radiological Health Branch, State Department of Health Services, State of California, of the proposed determination of no significant hazards consideration. No comments were received.

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

The ameneent involves only administrative changes to the plant technical specifications. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assess-ment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.

5.0 CONCLUSION

The staff has concluded, on the basis of 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 manner proposed by the licensee, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Coninission'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:

S. West Dated: October 27, 1987 o

v

/+

fm

_ _ - _ _ - _ _ _