ML20127C413
| ML20127C413 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 07/24/1992 |
| From: | Zwolinski J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Greenman E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20127C417 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-92-542 TAC-M80324, NUDOCS 9208030044 | |
| Download: ML20127C413 (1) | |
Text
- - _ _ - _ _ _ - - __
'o o.iocket flo. 50-346 MEMORAtlDUM FOR: Edward G. Greenman, Director Division of Reactor Projects Region 111 John A, Zwolinski, Assistant Director FROM:
for Region 111 Reactors Division of Reactor Projects Ill/lV/V 11 A - D',VIS-BESSE LOW LEVEL RA010AC11V11Y SUBJEC1:
Memorandam from L. Greger, Region 111 to J. Hall,
Reference:
NRR, dated March 22, 1991.
We have reviewed the referenced memorandum requesting assistance as to whether a 10 CFR 50.59 review should have been performed for a broken pipe in the Station Drainage and Discharge System which released low level radioactivity A regional inspection discovered that the plant had been operating L
with this broken pipe without performing an evaluation regarding the possible onsite.
We note thht the licensee found existence of an unreviewed safety question. performed a Safety Review and Evaluation on May i
the condition on May 11, 1990, 31, 1990, and completed pipe repairs on September 12, 1990.
Utilizing flSAC-125, "Guidelinc-for 10 CFR 50.59 Safety Evaluations," that states, in pt.rt that, " Changes include previously undiscovered conditions that deviate from those described in the SAR if the licensee proposes to operate permanently in this configuration," the licensee determined that a 50.59 While current draft guidance for safety evaluation was not required.
inspecting 10 CFR 50.59 safety evaluation programs will require that a 50.59 review be conducted for " temporary changes to conditions described in the i
SAR, this guidance was not in effect at the time of this particular event.
i Once formally endorsed by the fiRC, the guidance of f4 SAC-125, including supplements, should be followed during further inspections of the licensee's 50.59 safety evaluation program.
Therefore, considering the low safety significance of this event, and since l
supplementary guidance to flSAC-125 was not issued at the time of the event, we This concludes l
believe it is not worthwhile to pursue this issue any further.
3.
our review of TAC tio. M80324.
d #
John A. Zwolinski, Assistant Director
,iar y b" ( ",:.
for Region til Reactors (PT Division of Reactor Projests !!!/IV/V cc:
C. lichl, RI DISTRIBUTION L. Reyes, Rll Docket File BBoger A. Davis, Rlll
,-n.,
A. Beach, RIV UUUV A JZwolinski Lfunningham JHannon JHopkins X. Perkins, RV PXreutzer LGreger, Rill RPaul, Rll!
IJacki, Rill 0:P0111
/
- See Previous Concurrence ADill L A:f,0!!!
PN P 1,M-3
- PRPB:llRR PXfebt2er (ns:sw (Cunningham JHanno JZwo'inski Y **'l92 7l9192
] ig! ?
1lh92
/
d1*
im49 208030044 920724s c,ODC 0300034b
_