ML20084T323
| ML20084T323 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 01/03/1978 |
| From: | Darling J TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | Case E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20084T280 | List: |
| References | |
| TVA-BFNP-TS-100, NUDOCS 8306230122 | |
| Download: ML20084T323 (2) | |
Text
. Wl
. y
^
~
TEhlNESSEE V.ALLZY.-\\UTHCRITY v
CHATTANCOGA. TINNts3It 07 8o1 830 Power Building l
January 3, 1978 l
TVA BFNP TS 100 Mr. Edson G. Case, Acting Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co= mission Washington, DC 20555
Dear Mr. Case:
In the Matter of the
)
Docket No. 50-259 Tennessee Valley Authority
)
As has been discussed on numerous occasions with members of your staff, during the refu, cling outage for Browns Ferry unit 1 a shoe cover was accidently dropped into the reactor vessel and subsequent search attempts have failed to locate it.
Concurrent with the search activities, TVA contracted General Electric Company (GE) to. perform a safety analysis for operation of-the unit with the shoe cover in the vessel. This analysis and an extensive test program have been ccmpleted and were discussed in a December 29, 1977, meeting with the NRC staff. TVA also 4
performed a safety evaluation based on the test results received from GE and concluded that the reactor could be operated at full power without a
. compromise in safety if an initial program was followed in order to disintegrate the shoe cover. Our evaluation of the safety analysis indicated that an unreviewed safety question would not exist' if the reactor was kept at tecperature of 500*F with core flow of not less than 30 percent for an accumulated period of 60 hours6.944444e-4 days <br />0.0167 hours <br />9.920635e-5 weeks <br />2.283e-5 months <br />. Since by our own
' determination this restriction exists, we are submitting herewith 45 copies of a license amendment which would tc=porarily i= pose the conditions outlined above by revising the technical specification for unit 1. The d
justification for this revision is cutlined in the enclosed report entitled " Core Component Operational Safety Evaluation, BF'CCOSE-01."
This report contains three attach =ents:
attachment 1 outlines the
- search activities conducted, attachment 2 is GE's detailed analysis and test' report, and attachcent 3 addresses the questions raised by the NRC staff in the' December 29, 1977, meeting. Should the NRC determine that an unreviewed safety question does exist, the enclosed technical specifi.
- caticn revision and the supporting justificatica should be censidered as an-application for amend =ent to the license in accordance with the
- instructions.in 10 CFR 50.59(c).
8306230122 780110
~
PDR ADOCK 05000259 l
+ p PDR
~
O 2
Mr. Edson G. Case January 3, 1978 In order to maintain our present schedule, we would appreciate this technical specification revision being granted by Friday, January 6, 1978.
Very truly yours, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Sm James P. Darling, Director Division of Power Resource Planning Subscribed and sworn to before me this 3
day of J. ~ 1978.
[.- /5 Y'..t L Notary Public My Commission Expires /4 d *dC Enclosures cc (Enclosures):
Mr. Charles R. Christopher Chairman, Limestone County Commission P.O. Box 188 Athens, Alabama 35611 Dr. Ira L. Myers State Health Officer State Depart =ent of Public Health State Office Building Montgomery, Alabama 36104 O
?
I c
>