ML20054M843
| ML20054M843 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire  |
| Issue date: | 07/01/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054M841 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8207150035 | |
| Download: ML20054M843 (2) | |
Text
.
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDHENT NO. 14 TO LICENSE HPF-9 DUKE POWER COMPANY INTRODUCTION On June 9,1982, the licensee, Duke Power Company (Duke) telecopied a letter request-ing an emergency technical specification (TS) change that would allow continued operation of the McGuire Unit 1 for a period of three days pursuant to a temporary waiver f rom the requirements of TS 3.5.2.c.
This waiver would allow the seismic support system associated with the residual heat exchangers to be inoperable for a three day period commencing on June 9,1982, and running through 9:00 a.m. June 12, 1982.
DISCUSSION An inspection and observation of bott. residual heat removal (RHR) heat exchangers on June 9,1982, revealed that two bolts were missing f rom a vertical bracket on each heat exchanger.
It was detennined by the licensee that installation of these bolts was necessary to assure the integrity of the heat exchanger during a seismic event.
l This was due to the additional novement according to the licensee, that could take place which then results in calculated loads exceeding design values. This defi-ciency violated the provisions of TS 3.5.2 and thus TS 3.0.3 requires that action be initiated to place the plant in a mode where TS 3.5.2 does not apply.
EVALUATION The staf f has reviewed and evaluated the principal considerations presented by the licensee to support a temporary waiver from the requirements of TS 3.5.2.c.
Their considerations include (1) the probability of a seismic event occurring during the repair period (naxirum 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />), (2) ALARA considerations and (3) personnel safety.
We agree with the licensee that the probability of an earthquake occurring during the next 3 days with sufficient intensity to adversely affect the RHR heat exchanger is extremely and acceptably small.
When considering ALARA as related to the maintenance, i.e. installation of the missing bolts, of each heat exchanger, it is immediately recognized that the radia-tion levels in the area of the heat exchangers will be subsequently higher when the plant is placed in a cold shutdown condition with the RHR in operation than during normal operation. Personnel industrial safety in addition to the radiological safety involved in performing the repair during a shutdown condition versus during plant operation will also be adversely affected.
8207'150035 8207'01
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. - -
~ ~ ~ ~. - - ~ ~ ~ ~ -
- ~~---~~~~~.
- - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -
PDR ADOCK 05000369 s, P PDR om) unc ronu sia oo-son uncu 024o OFFiClAL RECORD COPY usom mi-mm
. The staff concludes, based on the information provided by the licensee and our review and assessment, that the proposed temporary waiver to TS 3.5.2.c will not result in an undue risk to the health and safety of the public. The proposed change is there-fore acceptable.
EllVIR0!4ftENTAL C0ftSIDERATI0tl We have determined that the amendnent does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any signif-icant environnental impact. Having made this determination, we have further con-cluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the stand-point of environnental l@act and, pursuant to 10 CFR Section Sl.5(d)(4), that an environne. ital irpact statement or negative declaration and environnental inpact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
C0tiCLUSION We have concluded, based on the consideration discussed above, that: (1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safoty nargin, the af.'.endment 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 cocpliance with the Conaission's regulations and the issuarice of this amendment will not be inimical to the cortaon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date: July 1, 1982 Principal Contributors:
D. Brinknan, Licensing Guidance Branch, DST H. BranTier, Mechanical Engineering Branca, UE H. Hartzman, Mechanical Engineering Branch, DE R. Birkel, L icensing Branch ho. 4, DL
(
i l
omcn >
............ ~.....
~.............. ~...
. - - - - -.. - ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
-.. ~.... - -. - -
suasAme>
............. ~........
~ ~ ~ - - - - - -
............. ~. ~....
.. -.. ~. -..... -.
~ ~. -.. - ~ ~ -
one>
nac ronu ais oo-so) Nacu oua OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usceo: mi-ms-em J