ML20040E952
| ML20040E952 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 01/29/1982 |
| From: | Stahle C Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20040E947 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8202080125 | |
| Download: ML20040E952 (2) | |
Text
--
.h.
D SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF HUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AftENDHENT H0.11 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-77 TEHHESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY IHTRODUCTION On Hovember 23, 1981 TVA proposed eight revisions to the Sequoyah Unit 1 operating license. Six of the proposed revisions were implemented in anendment No.10 to the license. Item (2) of the TVA letter on hydrogen control measures is discussed in this safety evaluation. Item (1) will be covered in a separate amendment.
DISCUSSION Interim distributed ignition systems are installed and operable in Sequoyah Units 1 and 2.
The Commission approved their use as an interim measure to mitigate the consequences of any significant releases of hydrogen to containment. Permanent hydrogen control measures were to be installed for both units by January 31, 1982.
TVA provided " good cause" for the delays encountered to c3te that preclude the licensee from meeting the stipulated license installation date of January 31, 1982.
Also, TVA proposed extending the installation until the next refueling to avoid an additional plant outage to make the necessary modifications to the current oper-able interin system.
The basis for the delays and its reasons for selecting the new installation are identical to those that the Commission agreed were acceptable for Unit 1 at the meeting on Septenber 8,1981.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION He have determined that the at.rendment does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any signifi -
cant emironmental impact. Having made this detemination, we have further con-cluded that the amendment imolves an action which is insignificant from the stand-point of emironmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4), that an emiron-mental impact statement or negative declaration and emironmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
8202090125 820129 PDR ADOCK 05000327 P
PDR omer)
SURNAME) oare >
nne ronu aia no-co Nacu oao OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usam. mi-mm
r:
l-CONCLUSION We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or con-sequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the anendment does 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 conpliance with the Cor.uission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety ~of the public.
Dated: January 29, 1982 Principal Contributor: Carl Stahle, Licensing Branch No. 4, DOL omcep eunume) oan >
nac ronu ais oo-m uncu ano OFFICIAL. RECORD COPY usam m-me.o
__-__-____________._-_________________n