ML17202U909
| ML17202U909 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 12/11/1990 |
| From: | Michelson C Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Carr K NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| ACRS-R-1412, NUDOCS 9012180245 | |
| Download: ML17202U909 (2) | |
Text
.... '..
0--J.'
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 The Honorable Kenneth M. Carr Chairman December 11, 1990 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Chairman Carr:
ACRSR-1412
SUBJECT:
FULL-TERM OPERATING LICENSE FOR THE ORES.DEN NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT 2 During the 368th meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactoi::
- safeguards, December 6-8, 1990, we completed our review of. the application by the Commonwealth Edison Company (licensee) for conversion of the provisional operating license (POL) for the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2,
- to a
~ull-term operating license '(FTOL).
During our reyiew, we had the benefit of discus-sions with representatives of the licensee and th~.NRC staff.
We also had the benefit of the documents referenced.
The Committee most* recently *discussed *and *reported on **this plant in a. letter dated December 13, 1982, relating to the Systematic.Evaluation Program. (SEP). review of Dresden, Unit *2.
Dresden, Unit 2, received a POL*in December 1969 and began commer-cia~ operation in July 1970.
The licensee applied for an FTOL in November 1972, but review of this application was deferred by the.
NRC staff in 1975, along with several other FTOL reviews.
In 1978, Dresden, Unit 2, was included in Phase II of the SEP because much of the review needed for the FTOL was similar in scope to that for the SEP.
We call attention to the fact that Dresden, Unit 3, was given an FTOL in January 1971, after a rule change had eliminated the POL as an option.
Units 2 and 3 are essentialiy identical.
The Committee,* in its December 13, 1982 letter reporting on 'the results of the SEP as applied to Dresden, Unit 2, indicated that its review of the FTOL would be deferred until the NRC staff had completed its actions on the SEP issues that were still pending, and on the Unresolved Safety Issues (USis) and TMI Action Plan items.
All but three of.the SEP issues were resolved to the satisfaction of the NRC staff in the manner reported in Supplement 1 to the Integrated Plant Safety Assessment Report for Dresden, Unit 2.
The status of these three issues and of the USI and TMI Action Plan items has*been.discussed by the staff in its Safety Evaluation Report related to the FTOL for Dresden, Unit 2.
We
.. believe that the procedures and schedules that have been agreed to
. I
- *-\\ *\\*.
- =-
~)....
The Honorable Kenneth M. Carr 2
December 11, 1990 for.the resolution of these items are satisfactory, and that the remaining actions to resolve these items would not be accelerated by withholding an FTOL.
We believe that there is reasonable. assurance that the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2, can continue to be operated at power levels up to 2527 MWt under a full-term operating license without undue risk to 'the health and_ safety of the public.
References:
Sincerely, Carlyle Michelson Chairman 1..
U. s. -Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-1403, "Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Full-Term Operating License for Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2," dated October 1990
- 2.
lJ *.S. *-Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-0823, Supplement No.
1,. "Integrated Plant Safety Assessment, -Systematic:
Evaluatio'n Program, Dresden* Nuclear *Power. Station, Unit 2, dated October 1989