ML20023C902
| ML20023C902 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 05/04/1983 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20023C892 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8305180248 | |
| Download: ML20023C902 (3) | |
Text
-
... M ***m UNITED STATES
[ Y:
[\\
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- gy~",;%f,f%' ' f
- r wAswtNo ton, 0. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT
- FOR SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT NOS. 1 and 2 l
AMENDMENT NOS. 30 AND 19 DOCKET HOS. 50-237 and 50-238 Introduction Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant a' revised edition of their approved physical security plan entitled:
"Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Physical Security Plan Parts I and II" dated-May 15,1982 (submitted by letter of June 23, 1982).
Based on our review of their revised security plan, the staff has concluded that the protection provided by the TVA against radiological sabotage at the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant meets the requirements of 10 CFR Part 73.
Discussion and Findings In the latest version of their security plan the licensee made three si,gnificant changes, one administrative in nature and two regarding sub-stantial technical matters.
~ '
l l
The first was a broad change involving format and administrative aspects of the physical security plan. The plan now consists of two parts, a i
generic plan (Part I) which will also be applied at other TVA nuclear
~
power plants, and a site specific plan (Part II), which describes unique site specific features at the Sequoyah site. The administrative changes do not alter the level of or the basic nature of the security at the site, but provide for a more comprehensive security plan which is easier to inspect and to implement.
The second change modified the number of armed responders immediately available for response at the site. An analysis of the response force 4
size perfonned in accordance with the criteria contained in NUREG-0907,-
indicates that the proposed number of anned responders is within the acceptable limits established by this guidance document.
e30518024s 830504 PDR ADOCK 05000327 P
PDR e
,,.-,yn
,y,-
-.~--ow,,
e-
-,w---,,---,e<a e
m
+, -
a n-e---+-
= =,--~e
~"9-m--r~-w---*~*n
- ~
e
- - - - - ^ - - - - -
s The third change eliminated cont' ol of access to containment during periods r
of refueling er major maintenance. This proposed change is contrary to the regulatory requirements set forth 'in 10 CFR 73.55(h)(8), and accordingly is 4
not acceptable. A condition is being added to the license which s~tates:
Notwithstanding the statement in Section 9.1 of the phys.ical security plan, the licensee shall maintain positive access control over containment in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55(d)(8).
Summary and Conclusion The following sunmarizes the proposed changes:
- The fonnat changes improve the inspectability of the security plan and make the plan easier to use for those charged with its implementation.
- The proposed number of armed responders, while a reduction in plan effectiveness, is within the accept-able limits of the guidance.
- The elimination of access controls at containment conflicts with regulations and is not acceptable.
The staff has determined that the changes presented in the "Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Physical Security Plan Parts I and II" dated May 15, 1982 as submitted June 23,1982, with revision dated August 17,1982 (letter dated January 6, 1983, are acceptable with the exception of the statements regarding access to containment during refueling and major maintenance..
The changes do not involve a significant increase in the ' probability or con-sequences of an accident previcusly evaluated, do not' create the possibility of an accident of a type different from any evaluated previously, do not involve a significant reduction in.a margin of safety, and therefore, do not involve a significant hazards consideration. We have also concluded that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by this action and that the issuance of these amendments will not
~
be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
e e
e e
~. :-
l p
4
~ -
p y
n
,v-
-y---
Environmental Consideration The staff has determined that the amendments do not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an' increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact.
Having made this determination, the staff has concluded that the amendments involve an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4),
that an environmental impact statement, negative declaration, or environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared. in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
Date:
MAY 0 51983 Principal Contributors:
C. Gaskin, Power Reactor Safeguaros Licensing Branch, NMSS E. licPeek, Standardization & Special Projects Branch, NRR 4
l..
l l
l l
l l.-
en e
em
.