ML102670535
| ML102670535 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/08/2010 |
| From: | Ruland W NRC/NRR/DSS |
| To: | Marion A Nuclear Energy Institute |
| Clifford Paul, 301-415-4043 | |
| References | |
| Download: ML102670535 (4) | |
Text
October 8, 2010 Mr. Alexander Marion, Vice President Nuclear Operations Nuclear Energy Institute 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006-3708
Dear Mr. Marion:
During a public meeting on August 12, 2010, members of the nuclear industry presented a project plan outlining an alternate approach to a proposed generic letter (GL) being pursued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in response to new research findings.
Specifically, the NRC is considering a request for plant-specific information to confirm acceptable emergency core cooling system (ECCS) performance during a postulated loss of coolant accident (LOCA). The industrys proposed approach involves compiling detailed pressurized water reactor and boiling water reactor reports generated by the respective owners groups with joint participation by the Nuclear Energy Institute, Electric Power Research Institute - Regulatory Technical Committee, AREVA, Westinghouse, and General Electric Hitachi. In each report, individual plants would be grouped by key design basis features (e.g.,
NSSS type, fuel design and LOCA analytical methodology) and predicted ECCS performance parameters would be compared with research findings. The plan overview, including a milestone schedule, can be found in the presentation Industry Plan to Assess Clad Performance Margins for LOCA (Accession No. ML102250415).
Based upon the project plan described at the August 12th meeting, the NRC staff believes that the alternate approach has the potential to provide the necessary plant-specific information currently being pursued by the GL information request. This needed information is detailed within the NRC guidance provided at the August 12th meeting (Accession No. ML102220487).
Furthermore, the scheduled March 2011 delivery for these reports is acceptable for resolving this interim safety concern and supporting the development of a comprehensive implementation plan for the ongoing 50.46(b) rulemaking. Please confirm this delivery milestone.
To provide further assurance that the industrys plan will provide the necessary plant-specific information in lieu of a GL, the industry and NRC staff discussed convening a public meeting in late November or early December 2010 to walk through plant grouping and the level of detail being provided to assess individual plant performance. As progress warrants, please recommend a specific date for this meeting.
A Marion Upon receipt, NRC staff will evaluate the scope and content Owners Group report to ensure that necessary plant-specific information has been provided. Licensee and fuel vendor engineering calculations supporting these compilation reports should be available for NRC staff audit.
Within 90 days of receipt of the Owners Group reports, the staff will decide whether further action is required.
Please contact me if there are any questions on this issue.
Sincerely,
/RA/
William H. Ruland, Director Division of Safety Systems Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission cc: See next page
cc:
Don Notigan PSEG BWROG Gordon Clefton NEI John Butler NEI Kathline Parish APS PWROG Ken Yueh EPRI Mel Arey Duke PWROG Michael Iannantuono GE BWROG Mike Crowthers PPL BWROG Ted Schiffley Exelon BWROG Tom Eichenberg TVA EPRI REG-TAC
ML102670535 OFFICE NRR/DSS NRR/DPR NRR/DSS NAME PClifford*
SRosenberg WRuland DATE 09/24/10 09/28/10 10/ 8/10