ML20148H944

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 15 to License DPR-3

ML20148H944
Person / Time
Site:	Yankee Rowe
Issue date:	07/31/1975
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20148H908	List: ML20148H901 ML20148H918 ML20148H944 ML20148H950
References
NUDOCS 8011200184
Download: ML20148H944 (2)

Text

"

. l

. UNITED STATES ._...;

. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.

W AS HIN STO N, D. C.' 2 0 0 S S f5-N5 Enj e  ::EEj

=

, k.==q SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION [E.d

- :::::.1 SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 15 TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. DPR-3 E 5.fi 5d CHANGE NO. 120 TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS tmsEg

{

YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY = == =

=:iE YANKEE NUCIEAR PONER STATION F~ ~" 1 (Yankee-Rowe) EEy.)

pu

~;sg DOCKET NO. 50-29 g...= .,j

..j E53 Introduction ,: ..... 3 Ef.

By Ictter dated January 3,1974, Yankee Atomic Electric Company (the C;J:

licensee) requested an amendment to the operating license for Yankee- [ .".4; Rowe that would incorporate a complete revision to the existing Technical t ,,j Specifications to utilize present day format and content. Part of these '"E{

new Technical Specifications would be an inservice inspection program "i for reactor coolant system surveillance. We have considered this @E particular part of the licensee's submittal at this time because of the need to incorporate a required inservice inspection program in ITH the existing Technical Specifications.

b =.l.

2; Description .a Presently, the Technical Specifications do not include requirement for  ?!

a reactor coolant system surveillance although such surveillance has been i carried out at the facility. In .the January 3,1974 request, the licensee d7 proposed an inservice inspection program for the structural surveillance of the reactor vessel and other important reactor coolant system com-ponents. The program involves periodic inspections of critical areas -

in the reactor vessel and closure head; the pressurizer; the steam ~

generators; and the piping, pump, and valve. pressure boundaries. E Evaluation _

We have evaluated the proposed inservice inspection program by comparing E

'the tabulated examination categories, methods of inspections, and the percent of welds and components to be examined with the requirements of ;t:;; :

Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. We have determined .. .

e

. i

+

8011SO'O/8 -

ua!E iii  ::=:: +E .;;;::  ::.:;;;..

^ ' ~

.jc ~ '

.. - ' s

(

3~

- (.. ' '

t .. . . , C . i >

, ..g.gg)

, , u ; - K 4.. . y aji- Q , ~ , l & . . :

_,l f[.V W ~ .,.' fT. & Q ry;.& spy

.  :. .l* - ~ -. a, ;j.;, "

}

v '

a. . f ..

, ,:4 g. . - , ,

, ,  ;. 3 'fe?

that. it conforms as far asl practical to the code' requirementsl. j7his ~ l ,m 28 conformance constitutes an acceptable basis for satisfying tho' require- gM

~

ments of General Design Criterion.32'in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix .A.. _ .- , = :!:

We have concluded that the proposed periodic inspections ~ of the selected e  :::=

welds, heat affected zones, and critical components provide a high degree .l.T

. of confidence that deleterious defects ti.at might impair the integrity ..

=

of the reactor coolant system pressure boundaiy will not develop during _ k: "=

service. Therefore, we find the inservice inspection program acceptable- ' -

as proposed. This change will~ improve the effectiveness of the present Yankee-Rowe Technical Specifications. The change.does not affect the probability and consequences of accidents previously analyzed for Yankee- . ..

Rowe and does not decrease any margins of safety.' == U

^ ' ,' -.'

r_.)l=l:_ ,j concluston .-

J

>c .  :

We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that -#; 5 (1) because the change does not involve a significant increase in the J f' 3.n.... .i?

probability or consequences of' accidents previously considered and does O r;;;; c.a not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the change does . '

. p.L. ' i not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable '

assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be . _ .,

conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance == n of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security ,

or to the health and safety of the public.

?

1 71 4

.6 0

d.,.

k i'

a f h[

=

E onte: jut 311975 [

o,ric * -

f_

g y a se & M g 5 , , , , , . . . , , . , . . , . . ,,..

O AYE > .

• u. s. eoVE R NM ENT PRINTtNe OP PIC EO $ $ T4 336.j SG f orm Af.C.31s (Rev. 9 5)) AFCM 0243