ML20102A925

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Provides Results of Review of NSHC Package.Proposed Amend Would Change Deadline for Environ Qualification of Certain Equipment.Question Arises as to Whether Proposed Deadline Consistent w/10CFR50.49(g).Related Info Encl
ML20102A925
Person / Time
Site: 05000000, Susquehanna
Issue date: 11/23/1983
From: Wagner M
NRC
To: Scinto J
NRC
Shared Package
ML20102A920 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-84-166 NUDOCS 8502090003
Download: ML20102A925 (3)


Text

..

November 23, 1983 s

i Note to: Joe Scinto MaryE.Wagnerf From:

q r

SUBJECT:

SUSQUEHANNA l

This proposed amendment would change the deadline for en'/iro nental qualification of certain equipment at Susquehanna-1.'

T'.e r.oposed deadline l

would require environmental qualification of this equirw.it in two years or by the end of the first refueling outage after the NRC '.rriving at a position on how to qualify the equipment, whichever is later.

.hus, the question arises as to whether the proposed deadline is consie

..with10CFR550.$3(g).

l The particular equipment qualifications here relate,o an SDV pipe break i

environment.

It appears that an.iDV pipe break environment is beyond design basis for Susquehanna-1, and thus would not have to be environmentally-qualified in accordance with the deadlines in i 50.49.

Rick Lobel, the staff reviewer, has confirmed to me that an SDV pipe break is not defined as a design-basis event.

As best as I can piece together the history of the existing license condition, it arose out of NUREG-0803, " General Safety Evaluation Report c

Regarding Integrity of BWR Scram System Piping." NUREG-0803 in a sense skirted the issue, by not saying that SDV pipe breaks were design basis but saying at the same time that they were of a sufficiently high degree of probability such that some equipment might have to be changed.

On July 1,1982 the Staff informed PP&L that equipment essential to shutdown of the plant and mitigation of SDV pipe break should be i

included in the equipment qualification program.

(SeeSSER,Supp.3 p.4-11). PP&L agreed to do this (Id_.; see also PP&L letter to Staff of September 17, 1981 and PP&L letter to Staff of December 29, 1983 This commitment was then incorporated as a license,for your reference.

(1 12)).. These documents are attached to my note L

condition. The basis for the present deadline probably is that the qualification was to be accomplished as part of PP&L's equipment qualification program.

j By way of further background, PP&L, as a member of the BWR owners group.

-has submitted a report to the Staff on the probability of an SDV break (which the Staff has not found adequate in and of itself to show that the

[

equipment does not have to be environmentally qualified) and is doing further study in an attempt to remove this license condition entirely.

Under these circumstances, as long as the Staff maintains that an SDV break is not a design basis accident, an extension of the environmental qualification date would seem to fall outside the restrictions of 550.49(g).

_I concur,with noted changes to the package.

1 I

8502090003 840518-N PDR FOIA Mary E. Wagner ADATO84-166 PDR 3

lk m:;

.y...-

, m.

_._,...,.._.,m.,,._,.,__..y...;..y_y,_,.

.[k. ' ' }

NUCLEAR FIEGULATORY COMMISSION

'L

~ !

C'AsMINGTON. D. C. 20656

\\

%.....O

..- n E.ut.ui.i-r,, i DATF:

D/,TF RT.f:E IVtD TASI: li: ASIS NO:

t-1.1,../ 63

3..9e t.2

,J.

t-S evn i lvi. 14 '. i ORE :

C.. t (,:

-e.1-i-v.i:.I1.iIY i 05..:0938/) 5.1 thOlli- ) ifil4N A )

0k -

I

  • "
  • j'g gl*

l k,h

)

g

~

i.o:w!: 7 i i i ti (.:, I,wn,i i.e.,, i%M

,4 : - : i a....c m e....,.. a. 4 ; om o. i. on, i :.,,,s,

(A,~

.,,,c.3,s 3

.i.

f.

' E.

'i clif ( l.

b lV'.- } l.l 194 s...' ' t I

i r <

r.

n b 1% i t f IJ.

)

}

},}

's

}) li 'l f. (1\\ *h Ill.": 'W.

i.

s

+. pwu aa ec.a u,a n9 s

c.c..

" [d M

y, je su& Aua'is Aa7Ae ""t "Q"

<fc,g fsa v7(). AaLa - w g A > g A > m h jL A

yq diasuCu OK.

Aid J7 a s u a a t fra p i A w weu m). pd3rp'y/d >urf- /w W s

(g;de eb a yy 2 wha w aim ayaasa y & A /h-

'f j

1 % fW i e dro s j'

0 d

_,yps As enead2-co o f.) &

,,,i/-Jeh~V2aA/fu/

/

uf

"*" S -

m,w m

a a eajA 7 m.

Fad e

h A / d W N h &y &%fy A r

_--m,'._y___.

.y,.,_..__,._

p_.._--._,..._.-_......

4".

(

pe e s 8

I['i.z,(

- 'j UNITED STATES f

MUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION J;

%,;,.', /

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 E

l s m w w a ra p n a s y_U i;

..n u x.76 u b m a lo 'e L

9. 6 ( f 7

f)*

N

,* h. }dc fSW" i

x,1 A.muu. M+1 Glas A w a'qAu/<K m{p,ww(r/hJ4kawrr7-Jh.n'/"I' ai an u. m<>a e 02. i e A &

t e, ~a ;r-y ~.u g g x r

su-g'

{ l,y.l a,'1 h, W w i E h -,

/

9

,fs'..N 6

p

/d h&ll

?Wd

~

de}hy{-

,5, ften l{. anal ^

k-I

)V"h

& exfoi t 1 f ??it &M

/g at itAdo-rd tel 15.0 c l add adt fYl1 Ps't 5

A

)

1 el.

]

,3 J

n

?)

/

/\\e l

i

'h...

s y.,..