ML20127C413

Responds to 910322 Memo Requesting Assistance on Whether 10CFR50.59 Review Should Have Been Performed for Broken Pipe in Station Drainage & Discharge Sys Releasing low-level Radioactivity Onsite

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: IA-92-542, Final Response to FOIA Request for Documents.Forwards App a Documents Which Are Being Made Available in PDR ML20127C413 ML20128N733
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 FROM:

John A, Zwolinski, Assistant Director for Region 111 Reactors Division of Reactor Projects Ill/lV/V 11 A - D',VIS-BESSE LOW LEVEL RA010AC11V11Y SUBJEC1:

REL(/,SE (TAC fl0. MP0324)

Reference:

Memorandam from L. Greger, Region 111 to J. Hall, 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 onsite. A regional inspection discovered that the plant had been operating L with this broken pipe without performing an evaluation regarding the possible We note thht the licensee found i existence of an unreviewed the condition on May 11, 1990, safety question. performed a Safety Review and Evaluation on May 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if the licensee proposes to operate permanently in this configuration," the licensee While determined current that afor draft guidance 50.59 safety evaluation was not required.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 theconcludes This event, we believe it is not worthwhile to pursue this issue any further. l 3.

our review of TAC tio. M80324.

' d #

John A. Zwolinski, Assistant Director

,iar for Region til Reactors (PTy b" ( ",:. Division of Reactor Projests !!!/IV/V cc: C. lichl, RI L. Reyes, Rll DISTRIBUTION Docket File BBoger A. Davis, Rlll ,-n.,

Lfunningham A. Beach, RIV UUUV A JZwolinski JHannon JHopkins X. Perkins, RV LGreger, Rill PXreutzer RPaul, Rll! IJacki , Rill

• See Previous Concurrence 0:P0111

/ ADill PN P 1,M-3

• PRPB:llRR L A:f,0!!! (Cunningham JHanno JZwo'inski (ns:sw

• PXfebt2er Y **'l92

/ 7l9192 ] ig! ? 1lh92 ,

im49 d1*

208030044 920724s

c,ODC 0300034b

- _