ML20102A942

Provides Results of Review of NSHC Package Re Reduced Ventilation Sys Air Flow.Deficiencies in Fr Notice Corrected Before Recommending Oeld Approval of NSHC Determination or Concurrence in Fr Notice

ML20102A942
Person / Time
Site:	05000000, Crane
Issue date:	06/23/1983
From:	Cutchin M NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
To:	Van Vliet J NRC
Shared Package
ML20102A920	List: ML20102A922 ML20102A925 ML20102A929 ML20102A931 ML20102A933 ML20102A934 ML20102A937 ML20102A939 ML20102A942 ML20102A944 ML20102A946 ML20102A948 ML20102A959 ML20102A961 ML20102A969 ML20102A974 ML20102A981 ML20102A984 ML20102A999 ML20102B001 ML20102B008 ML20102B010 ML20102B032 ML20102B045 ML20102B058 ML20102B060 ML20102B063 ML20102B068 ML20102B080 ML20102B085 ML20102B106 ML20102B112 ML20102B114 ML20102B120 ML20102B122 ML20102B125 ML20102B127 ML20102B139 ML20102B142 ML20102B147 ML20102B156 ML20102B159 ML20102B167 ML20102B177 ML20102B185 ML20102B194 ML20102B196 ML20102B200 ML20102B206 ML20102B211 ... further results
References
FOIA-84-166 NUDOCS 8502090011
Download: ML20102A942 (1)

Text

-

. - - ~_.

1 _.; E -

a:

dne 23,1963

=

-Note to: ' Jim Van Vliet, Pro ect Manager, TMI-1 From:

-Mack Cut n Attorney, OELD

?SUBJEC1:

PROPOSED NSHC DETERMINATION ON REDUCED VENTILATION SYSTEM AIR FLOW On June 22nd NRR fonvarded to OELD a " standard-individual" notice of consideration of issuance, proposed NSHC determination and opportunity for hearing on an OL amendment that would approve TS changes to permit operation of TMI-1 with reduced flow in the auxiliary and fuel handling exhaust air treatment system.

lAs a basis for the-NSHC determination the FR notice says simply that:

The reduced flows will increase somewhat the airborne concentration

-of. radioactivity in the Auxiliary Building and fuel handling. areas, but will.not influence substantially the radioactivity released from the facility.during normal operation or during an accident involving fuel handling.. The. original design bases for the system as identified in the FSAR are likely to be met with the reduced flaws.

Nowhere inithe~ package, which includes GPUN's application, is there any

apparent factual basis for these' assertions.. GPUN is asking that the TS climits en air flow be changed from 118,000cR4t.10% (i.e.,106,200 {FM to 129,800CFM)to90,400CFMto129,800 CFM, (i.e., IIB U0O CFM! n gs).

-Moreover,'.the FR notice does not specifically address each of the three prongs of the test for whether NSHC is involved.

It should provide the-

~

Staff's-basis for preliminarily concluding that-the amendment does not:

1) involve a'significant increase in the probability or:

consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or-

2) createithe possibility of a new'or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or

~

3)' involve a significant reduction in a margin-of safety iThe portions of the test that are underlined above appear particularly

'"important to the determination on this amendment package.

' Until these ' deficiencies in the FR notice are cured, I cannot recommend OELD approval of;the NSHC determination or concurrence in-the FR notice.

cc: A.:DeAgazio.

J. Scinto

-J. Stolz r,JPGra)#

'D. Wigginton

- 8502090011.840518 hTO

-166 PDR 0

- 4

~

p j