ML20102B331
| ML20102B331 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Mcguire, McGuire, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 11/16/1983 |
| From: | Rawson R NRC |
| To: | Scinto J NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20102A920 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-84-166 NUDOCS 8502090192 | |
| Download: ML20102B331 (3) | |
Text
s
. - 1%
/;
e
[x,
flovember 16, 1983 Note to:
J. Scinto
'From:
R. Rawson I
83
~~
SUBJECT:
ticGUIRE AliENDitENT PACKAGE (838988) RELATING TO
" DENIAL" 0F AMENDt1ENT ON DIESEL GENERATOR SURVEILLANCE On August 1, 1983, Duke submitted a request for separate amendments to McGuire 1 and 2 licenses. This request was supplemented on September 7, 1983. For Unit 1, Duke requested a change in its schedule for surveillance testing of turbine overspeed protection system valves from once every
- 7 days to once every 31 days.
For Unit 2. Duke requested a change in the surveillance interval for certain diesel generator tests from 18 months to each refueling outage. These amendment requests were both
'7 noticed on September 15, 1983 with proposed no significant hazards consideration determinations. No consnents or requests for hearing were received.
On October 26, the Staff issued the amendment for Unit 1.
The Staff also denied Duke's request for a change in the surveillance interval for Unit 2, but granted a one-time extension to no later than March 31, (J
1984 for the next set of tests. Duke's application did specifically
- request this alternative relief in the event that the primary request was not authorized.
Failure to have granted this relief would have required shutdown on October 27, 1983 to perform the tests. Thus, both amendments' have already been issued by the Staff.
OELD has now been asked to. concur in a package regarding the issuance of these amendments. A single FRN is framed as a " Notice of Denial of
~
Amendments." 'I understand that this was done in response to an earlier consnent by you.
It addresses only the amendment for Unit 2 and discusses the one-time extension.
(Iunderstandthattheissuanceoftheamendmentfor Unit 1 is not intended to be covered by this FRN and has been or will be
<the subject of a separate monthly or individual FRN.) The FRN for the Unit 2 amendment also states that the required findings will have been
< made before' issuance of the proposed amendments. No finTiWs are TncTuded i
Tn"The notice. The October 26 letter issuing the amendments encloses the amendments themselves; these contain the appropriate findings. The basis for these findings is contained in the SER.
~
As to the Unit'l turbine overspeed protection system valves, the Staff relies on " preliminary indications" of turbine valve operability and
-reliability presented by Westinghouse, together with licensee's maintenance, inspection and turbine valve test program and licensee's "all volatile treatment program for maintaining water chemistry." The 7
Staff approves the change to 31 day testing as an interim condition, i
I!R&c:n; y
a
F
,y 3
-2
~
/'
subject to review and confirmation of a Westinghouse turbine missile
\\
generation probability analysis. Licensee agrees to this condition.
As to Unit 2, the Staff provides ample justification for denying Duke's request to lengthen the surveillance interval. The Staff goes on, however, to approve a one-time extension of up to five months " based o,n previously performed successful tests and other system and component testing performed at more frequent intervals at licGuire."
To sumarize, then:
- both amendment requests were noticed
- the amendment for Unit I has been issued as requested but the postnotice of issuance is not made as part of this package
- the amendment for Unit 2 has been denied as requested but a lesser alternative request was granted and is the subject of the FRN in this package.
I cannot recomend OELD concurrence on this package for the following reasons:
1.
The FRN title should clearly reflect that it is notice of issuance of amendment and denial of amendments.
It is misleading to the public to call this only a notice of denial when an
(
amendment is in fact being issued.
2.
The FRN should state clearly that it does not encompass the amendment for Unit 1. We should be sure that the Unit I amendment has been or gets final notice and does not slip between the cracks.
3.
The FRN is inadequate in that it fails to state that the NRC has made appropriate findings that the amendment granted comply wit 1 the requirements of the Atomic Energy Act and the Comission's regulations (the statement on the first page that the Comission will have made the findings is obviously inapplicable here);
4.
The FRN should state clearly that Duke specifically requested the one-time extension on diesel generator surveillance as an alternative to its primary request to lengthen the surveillance interval; 5.
The SER does not adequately explain the basis for granting the one-time extension to the Unit 2 diesel generator surveillance testinginterval(seeSERpage2). The statement that approval of the amendment,is " based on previously performed successful tests and other system and component testing performed at more frequent intervals" provides a good starting
C
,.v l
3-(
point but is not enough to support issuance of the amendment without:
(1) some s relied upon; and (2)pecificity as to the nature of the tests some statement as to why those successful tests support the extension. Too much is left unsaid by the
. present language.
(I recognize that the SER has already been issued without 0 ELD concurrence and note this comment primarlly for the purpose of facilitating future amendment packages.)
Richard J. Rawson cc:
J. Gray
\\
4 Y
- P n
f i
,A'"
m#
htW b 3'%ghggt$$wt+MW e W#d _S h M "' ^
Lan g
@ d m$,9
.g h e gggg M
h@@p p
_ gp ug @apq -
qqgg g, gyp s,
9
,3%
y g
g
/
[
bb I
i gguiuaAmu.amra%uen /tu a M7.'
if /uw kct bl daalde j2+/-
/)iA7ew hasue,ow&waF1p- / /av al'sd A bhjbdsu% Bkn calcddik AluauIn.is:
- a mk tuuur gwumamud; O
ritG u Bu u 2 g w ees J m d he d assa stehec yflauusnfnr 140174det<f2alliS
{
y
- isapas, x.t 4e totas r a di a uch k b n
5n.gaz w rdv4 m L subme. E 2
3 as 7tidauohta eau &
a.y yn q4. u 9 p1 % mitt kaemuk zia gt&y/
6L
[
a. fad n u.
d(uda buyd z..twbda l
h kk ' Iphoc ^Sub pd cohe w,% cemisme
.A incjvaAiA (
cttalk))
- $&6 ca n a s 4 sid a i A r u f 4 f3 f
lu+5 ut w 0*' m n
- l sa.
g
%uhu.ita, px y
k-da Aew A
duk n mt) AM2 ep%
Riffj'(T W I^"""l
{
s f f W Cd71291% k 641 W
$$$ M %
- 1/tii4 #0$04 /ut4 /,2e,
jfL/
,},
/
3
~:
7 r
.v
- .?
a fd y 3/desusJ L
s / e d s r # M, v
$iehi nu.w befi aussiwa iaeapadrid p, d I &v'I kk a>& d d Ln & ij M (7) c
/
. k,l
. ft 3 N a/wdnutf ttidz-f hu e/ % & yss My, edged yq fM.
@ W/uVexud u/L Q rn du ? //as A j
6/g whaA n umra&nedn /tu a
//w7.?
if /urs fa b/ urauAft p/-
/)t&k hecue,a,ouanewl.'rp/ tav giel'td A h)bd4& Blui elutikh s/uuu he_. 4 :
- & m hen tuuaso yenuxAmud; ritGa.a Lbue g sexuduwd41 O*
y, ana Mohet e ytM t1 4 au<.t 2 e 6 4
- ym w-p
, subaap<em4 du t0lw& /
a, Au/ian ALGAx' do /p--
o
& IA % n.y ee c q u a s %
subm. E s ofg a y
7tuhtiEPda asa d qd. uA'l ni " den /m will kawuk & paLys'
- a. p<
si d d na h.L 2 bAwc juaebpu,qa44g_jiohda A
dub pa adteo a % cenusned
- i (Q 'Aak0 1...
- e bv cum u 4sda.gAsur4 f
' &gwluei f
ut tL oss m U
And. -
O h.ach d A eaa, p Ak du A%d I
J n,a g 4 y %p&k dukisgm&J slauk2s
~~
wth.u xA