ML19327C046
| ML19327C046 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 11/09/1989 |
| From: | Tucker H DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8911150151 | |
| Download: ML19327C046 (2) | |
Text
'
d ll-I s.,
,)
DukeIbuer Company liat B kne 1>
PO Box 33198 fice President
?
Charlotte, N C 28242 Nuclear l'rodution l
(104)373453)
~
e i
DUKEPOWER
- November 9, 1989 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn Document Control Desk Washington, D.C.
20555
.3ubject: McGuire Nuclear Station Docket Nos.59-369 and 50-370 Proposed Technical Specifications Changes Unit 1 Cycle 6 Moveable incore Detcetor Thimble Reduction
'(T.S.'s 3/4.2.2, 3/4.2.3, 3/4.2.4, 3/4.3.1, and 3/4.3.3.2)
Gentlemen:
In a letter dated August 3, 1989 I requested a one time change to the McGuire Nuclear Station Technical Specifications. This change reduced the number of available incore detector thimbles required for the Moveable Incore Detection System to be operable. The reduction in the number of thimbles was from 75% to 50% and applies only to the remainder of Unit 1 Cycle 6.
In-order to facilitate the NRC staff review and approval of this technical specification change, I am hereby committing Duke Power to the following provision. We will reduce unit power to 75% or less within four hours upon the inoperability of one excore power range datector occurring when the number of available thimbles is less.tban 75%. We will maintain this reduced power level until either tha excore detector is returned to an operabic condition or the number of available thimble locations is restored to at least 75%. I will ensure proper administrative implementation of these provisions at McGuire. Timely NRC action on the approval and issuance of this change is requested since we continue to experience difficulty in i
obtaining thimble locations to complete the current flux map.
We remain interested in obtaining the approval of this technical specification as originally proposed, i.e, without the above described power reduction We feel this position is technically justified, but understand the longer time to review this due to the generic implications and NRC resource limitations. We plan to pursue this approach in an appropriate manner with the NRC staff in the near future.
Very truly yours, C
?
Hal B. Tucker JSW368/lcs hoof
\\
P i.
q r, y~'
1 2 I
..u
. =a
':
- r
.U. S. Nuc12 r R:gulctory Commiosion
~
Page 2-
''. November 9,'1989-f
2 xc:
Mr. S..D. Ebneter-a h
Regional Administrator l
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta St., NW, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30329 1
I.1 bayne Brown, Chief
. Radiation Protection Branch l
Division of. Facility Services t
Department of Human Services 701 Barbour Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-2008 i
Mr. Darl S. Hood =
.l Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation j
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 2
Mr. P. K.'VanDoorn NRC Resident Inspector
]
McGuire Nuclear Station i
s t
I i
4 1
.]
t qi t
b f
A i
+
1