ML18136A071
| ML18136A071 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 10/15/1979 |
| From: | Stallings C VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910190505 | |
| Download: ML18136A071 (2) | |
Text
Vepco VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY October 15,.1979 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attn:
Mr. Albert Schwencer, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 1 Division of Reactor Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555
Dear Mr. Denton:
Serial Number PO/SWB/sj 1 Docket Nos. :
License Nos. :
NRC FIRE PROTECTION SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT SURRY POWER STATION 354D/061478 50-280 50-281 DPR-32 DPR-37 We have received and reviewed Admendment Nos. 54 and 53 to Operating License Nos. DPR-32 and DPR-37 for the Surry Power Station Units 1 and
- 2.
As stated in your transmittal letter dated September 19, 1979, Vepco letters 354B/061478(8-17-79) and 354C/06148(9-7-79), Vepco agreed to the contents of Drafts 1 and 2 of the Safety Evaluation Report.
We agree with license amendments 54 and 53 which require the addition of modifi-cations and additional information identified in paragraph 3.1.1 through 3.1.30 of the Safety Evaluation Report.
We cannot agree to the second paragraph of Section 3.1 Modifications which was not included in Drafts 1 and 2 of the Safety Evaluation Report.
This paragraph appears to require NRC approval of design details prior to implementation of each designated modification.
Design detail approval prior to implementation is not required since design criteria as documented in the Safety Evaluation Report was established after extensive correspon-dence and meetings between Vepco and the NRC.
To meet your review requirements, we will submit the following for your information:
(1)
A monthly report giving status of all modifications.
(2)
Design descriptions of the modifications as they are developed.
The description will c~nsist of an expla-ation of the modification and the design basis.
This explanation will be similar in detail as presently found in a typical Safety Analysis Report.
VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY TO Mr. Harold Denton, Director SHEET No.
2 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation While the above does not provide for :t:lRC approval of detail design prior to implementation, it,does provide pertinent information regarding the design and continual updating of the status.
This is consistent with present procedure for modifications to and construction of nuclear power stations.
The dates of October, 1980 and the next Unit 2 refueling outage following the present steam generator replacement conunitted to in our letter of September 7, 1979 will not support an NRC review of design details prior to implementation. It is our opinion that the methods of implementing modifications and reporting described above provide for timely implementation and adequate information to the Nuclear Regulatory Conunission to assure adequacy of the design.
We trust this meets your requirements and request the Safety Evaluation Report be. changed to reflect the above.
cc:
Mr. James P. O'Reilly., Director Very truly yours, tel{~{)/.t/
C. M. Stall1~gs Vice President - Power Supply and Production Operations Office of Inspection and Enforcement Region II