ML20244A701

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Comments on Draft Risk Based Insp Guide for Plant Forwarded to Util on 890323.Util Determination That Rept Not Proprietary Noted
ML20244A701
Person / Time
Site: Brunswick  Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 06/07/1989
From: Loflin L
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NLS-89-157, NUDOCS 8906120117
Download: ML20244A701 (2)


Text

e j an

. W.-. ' '

Carolina Power & Light Company SERIAL: NLS-89-157 JUN 0 71989 United States' Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTENTION: Document Control Desk Washington, DC -20555 BRUNSWICK.' STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT,'. UNIT NOS.1 AND 2 DOCKET;NOS. 50-325 & 50-324/ LICENSE NOS. DPR-71 & DPR-62 REVIEW OF DRAFT BRUNSWICK RISK-BASED INSPECTION GUIDE Gentlemen:

By letter dated March 23, 1989, the NRC forwarded to Carolina Power & Light Company (CP&L) a draft. Risk-Based Inspection Guide (RIG) for the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant. The NRC letter requested our review and comment of its content. On May 3, 1989, a conference call was held with the RIG Project Engineer, Mr. Steve Long, and-the NRR Project Manager, Mr. Ed Tourigny, to discuss the results of CP&L's review of this RIG. A summary of the Company's comments'is enclosed.

The NRC lett'er.also' requested the Company review the contents of the RIG to determine whether it contains any proprietary information. Carolina Power &

Light' Company has reviewed the document and determined the RIG does not contain any information proprietary to the Company.

Please refer any questions regarding this submittal to Mr. Stephen D. Floyd at (919) 546-6901.

Yours very truly,

/3 9 J

(h.Manag L Lor lin Nuclear Licen ing Eection WRM/lah (342CRS)

Enclosure cc: Mr. S. D. Ebneter Mr. W. H. Ru3and Mr. E. G. Tourigny 8906120117 890607 PDR Q ADOCK 05000324 PDC 411 Fayetteville Street

  • P. O. Box 1551
  • Raleigh. N C 27602 9

\

p

?

J,

~'

' l' .

ENCLOSURE BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2-DOCKET NOS. 50-325 & 50-324/ LICENSE NOS. DPR-71 & DPR-62 REVIEW COMMENTS CONCERNING DRAFT BRUNSWICK' RISK-BASED INSPECTION GUIDE 1.- In general, the' RIG appears to be a useful document based on a thorough review of the Brunswick Plant PRA. A number of-specific comments

-c (discussed on May 3) are summarized below.

2. Page 7, Table 3:- Priority marking'by risk significance of reduced availability (in addition to unavailability) should also be _

considered.

3;- Page 9, Section 5.3: Recovery of off-site power also appears to be an -

important post-accident recovery action.

4. Page A-7, Item 8: The Brunswick Plant does not have General Motors diesel generators.
5. Page A-57: Though the shutdown cooling (SDC) mode of RHR was discussed in the PRA report, components specific to this mode of operation did not appear to be.significant contributors to core damage frequency.
6. Page B-1: Failure to inhibit ADS and failure to control water level during an ATWS also appear to be significant human deficiencies noted in the PRA.
7. General: Components which are insignificant contributors to core damage frequency should be deleted from Appendix A.
18. General: It shoulc be recogniz3d that the ccrrent plant configuration has changed somewhat from that reflected in the PRA document.

l (342CRS/lah)

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - _ - - _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _