ML19339B360
| ML19339B360 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 08/21/1961 |
| From: | Case E US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19339B359 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8011060815 | |
| Download: ML19339B360 (2) | |
Text
I I
y.;
O DOCKET No. 50-29 HAZARDS ANALYSIS BY DIE RESEARCH AND POWER REACTOR SAFETY PRANCH DIVISION OP LICENSIEG AND REGULATION IN THE MATTER OF YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY PROPOSED CHANGE NO. 9 Pursuant to the provision of Paragraph 3.A. of License DPR-3, as
~
amended, Yankee Atomic Electric Company has submitted Proposed Change No. 9, dated July 21, 1961, which requests authorization for personnel entry into the vapor _ container when the reactor is in operation. Such
,=
entry was requested by Yankee to permit inspection of she main coolant system equipment and the performance of minor repairs and inspections in the vapor container at more frequent intervals than is presently
==:
provided for during reactor shutdown periods. With the proposed change, Yankee also submitted a list of Conditions & Precautions which would be in effect for entry into the vapor centainer.
Entry into the vapor container with the reactor at power involves some risk to personnel due to the possibility of a reactor accident while these persons are present within the containment. However, we believe that this risk is more than compensated for by the potential increase in plant safety which will be brought about by more frequent performance of inspections and minor repairs. Accordingly, we believe that such entry should be permitted, provided that proper procedures are followed prior to and during these inspections and repairs.
Yankee has proposed the list of Ccnditions & Precautions to govern entry into the vapor container in order to minimize the risk to person-nel who enter the containment. Provided that these proposed precautions are augmented as indicated below, we believe that the risks of such entry will be minimized to an acceptable degree. Discussions with Yankee personnel have indicated their general agrecment with these changes. Accordingly,Section II.A of the Conditions & Precautions proposea oy Yankee to cover these inspections and repairs should be changed to the following:
"II.
Conditions A.
For Inspection or Minor Repairs at at:y Reactor Load (Requir-ing only a short interval of time) 1.
Airborne activity has been reduced to tolerance by internal filtrstion and external purging t s per 0.I. No. 50LQ, VAPOR CONTAINER ATMOSPHERE CONTROL SYSTEMS.
~ 8 0 1 1 0 6'0 8 / f
=
2.
Lights in the vapor container have been switched on.
3 The vapor container has been approved for personnel access by Health Physics.
h.
Persons in the vapor container are at all tir.es accompanied
=
by an individual trained in health physics."
' 3.
.=g.
In addition, paragraph II.B.h of the Conditions & Precautions for
?-
a scheduled reactor shutdown should be changed to the follcwing:
"The
....~'
vapor container has been approved for personnel access by Health Physics."
With these modifications of the Conditions & Precautions proposed by Yankee, we have concluded that authorizaticn of Change ho. 9 shou?d
~
contribute to safer operation of the facility, and that this change does not present significant hazards considerations not described or implicit in the license application, as amended to June 23, 1961. We have further
- 4F+
concluded that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation of the facility as 1.'_... '
herein described.
47!lj Original Signed by L G. Case Edson G. Case, Chief
="
Research and Power Reactor Safety Branch Division of Licensing and Regulation
.-s,.
l
.