ML20064E566
| ML20064E566 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 12/27/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20064E558 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8301060055 | |
| Download: ML20064E566 (2) | |
Text
.
4 4
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 22 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-77
)
AND AMENDMENT NO.12 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-79
]
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY i
INTRODUCTION In an August 16, 1982, transmittal TVA requested Sequoyah Unit 1 and 2 Technical Specification changes concerning flood protection.
The three Technical Specifi-cation changes involved were discussed in a September 14, 1982, telecon between NRC and TVA staffs. One change was accepted as TVA proposed, a second was denied and the final was amended to the agreement of both parties.
EVALUATION The staff agrees with TVA's proposed change to Technical Specification 3.7.6.
The change corrects an error in the winter critical flood level and provides uniformity of 703 ft mean sea level (MSL) for both winter and summer critical flood levels.
The summer elevation of 703 ft MSL had previously been approved for Technical Spec-ifications.
3 i
The proposed change in Technical Specification 4.7.6.2 would decrease the _communica-tion frequency between Sequoyah Nuclear Plant and TVA Division of Water Resources to every 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> rather than every 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />.
The proposal was denied because TVA has not incorporated changes which would warrant the longer communications interval of 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />, l
and the staff feels the 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> period is necessary.
i Additionally, Technical Specification 4.7.6.1 dealing with Surveillance Requirements j
has been amended. The 703 ft MSL has been lowered to 693 ft MSL to allow additional time for the TVA Division of Water Resources to predict the actual arrival time of flood peal. The frequency of water level determination when above this level has heen changed from 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> to 15 minutes to aid in achieving an accurate flood peak 4
arrival time.
The arrival time may then be coordinated with the initiation of Stage II plant modifications to ensure their completion before flooding of the site.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION He have determined that the amendment 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 environmental impact.
.iaving made this determination, we have further con-cluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the stand-point of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR G51.S(d)(4), that an environ-nental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
0301060055 821227 PDR ADOCK 05000327 P
PDR omce>
~. - ~.. -.....
- - ~.~.-
sunme >
........ ~. - ~. ~..
.. - -.. ~. - ~ ~
.. ~. ~. - -
ouep
-.. - ~ ~ ~....
.... - -. - ~. ~.
. ~. - -.. - ~ ~ ~
! unc ronu m oo-evacu ovo OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usceo:ini-sss-om
f 7*
2-CONCLUSI0ft We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) because the anendment does not involve a significant increase in the probabili';y or con-sequences of accidents previously considered, does not create the possibility of an accident of a type different from any evaluated previously, and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendnent does not involve a signifi-cant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that t.ne health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed nanner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Conmission's regu-lations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
l Date: December 27, 1982 Principal Contributors: Iblanie Miller, Licensing Branch flo. 4,0L Carl Stahle Licensing Branch flo. 4, OL Gary Staley, Hydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch, DE i
i l
l l
s a
h l
OFFICE )
..."".....m m""....""."""
""""" ~ " * " * " "
SURNAME)
~""~"-~~"
~ ~ ~ ~ " " " ~ * *
- ocre )
..~.......- -"
~~a--
- - " ~ ~ " " " -
NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 024o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usom mi-sam