ML19250A323
| ML19250A323 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 10/05/1979 |
| From: | Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Borgmann E CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910230050 | |
| Download: ML19250A323 (3) | |
Text
u ms e ;
- s
- wc G ru'
~
pp8c t
e, UNITED STAT s f4e i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASM NGTON. O. C. 20555 gv...../
OCT o 1979 Docket No: 50-358 Mr. Earl A. Borgmann Vice President - Engineering The Cincinnati Jas & Electric Company P. O. Box 960 Cincinnati, Chio 45201
Dear Mr. Borgmann:
SUBJECT:
MARK II POOL DYNAMIC LOADS PROGRAM - ZIMMER, UNIT 1 The Mark II lead plant program is essentially complete, and we are now olanning our review of the closure program for the Mark II pool dynamic loads. A growing tendency of appl,icants to depend on plant-unique programs, rather than generic programs, during the past year makes it necessary for us to request definition of the pool dynamic loads programs being relied on by each Mark II owner, especially that part which falls outside the scope of the generic Mark II pool dynamic loads program.
We have believed for some time that joint efforts toward resolution of issues on a generic basis results in substantial cost and schedule savings to the NRC, the industry, and thus to the public. We stated this view in April 1976 during the early stages of our review of the Mark II program, and again in September 1978 when the Mark II lead plant acceptance criteria were issued. On July 24, 1979 the staff met with the Mark II owners to disc ss the closure efforts associated with the Mark II Long Term Program. At this meeting, the Mark II owners stated that the generic programs asscciated with SRV and LOCA pool dynamic loads would be completed in 1979 and 1980, respectively. However, the Mark II owners identified a number of plants requesting relief from the generic pool dynamic loads specifi-cations. This resulted in a comparable number of new plant-unique programs.
Little infonnation has been provided to the NRC defining these new plant-unique pool dynamic programs.
Considering the design differences between Mark II plants, and the various licens-ing schedules for plants, we see a limited need for reliance on plant-unique pcol dynamic load programs. The limitations on staff technical resources, however, make it possible for us to complete our licensing activities for these plants in 11"9 530 7910230 0 6 0
i Mr. Earl A. Borgmann OCT 5E tion of pool dynamic load issues to the maximtra extent prac aren where a completely generic approach is not acceptable, we encourage use For those of semi-generic approaches, as in the case of the lead plant owners and the K "T" quencher.
plants with a common architect engineer.Another possible subgrouping woul We ask that you provide a description of those pool dynamic load tasks dynamic loads definition program.the generic Mark II pool dynamic load
, outside information:
Your response should include the following task description rationale for plant unique program task schedule documentation (contents and schedule).
This informaticn should be provided to us by November plan our review efforts.
15, 1979, so that we can early date folicwing the submittal of the letters.We anticipate a meeting to discuss would be to determine the extent to which a generic or semi-generic approach has been pursued, and to obtain information needed the pool dynamic load program on a primarily generic basis.
w non-generic pool dynamic load programs on the basis of available NRC resourcesW with review priorities for these programs established by the licensing schedule for each facility.
Si ncerely, O h. U
.k ga, n ng Assistant Di rector for Ligh
' ter Reactors Division of Project Management cc:
See next page I
9 33l
cc: Troy C. Conner, Jr., Esq.
David B. Fankhauser, PhD Conner, Moore & Corber 3569 Nine Mile Road 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.
Cincinnati, Ohio 45230 Washington, D. C.
20006 Dr. Frank F. Hooner Mr. William J. Moran School of Natural Resources General Counsel University of 'tichigan The Cincinnati c.3s and Electric Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109 Company P. O. Box 960 Mr. Stephen Schumacher
-Cincinnati, Ohio 45201 Miami Valley Power Project P. O. Box 252 Mr. William G. Porter, Jr.
Dayton, OFio 45401 Porter, Stanley, Arthur and Platt lis. Augtsta Prince, Chairperson 37 West Broad Street 601 Stanley Avenue Columbus, Ohio 43215 Cincinnati, Ohio 45226 fir. Steven G. Smith, Manaaer Charles Bechheefer, Esq., Chairman Engineering & Project Control Atomic Safety & Licensing Board The Dayton Power and Light Panel Company U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 1247 Washington, D. C.
20555 Dayton, Ohio 45401 Mr. Glenn 0. Bright J. Robert Newlin, Counsel Atomic Safety and The Dayton Power and Light Board Panel Company U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 1247 Washington, D. C.
20555 Dayton, Ohio 45401 Leah S. Kosik, Esq.
Mr. Jar.es D. Flynn 3454 Cornell Place Manager, Licensing Cincinnati, Ohio 45220 Environmental Affairs The Cincinnati Gas and W. Peter Heile, Esq.
Electric Company Assistant City Solicitor P. O. Box 960 Room 214, City Hall Cincinnati, Ohio 45201 Cincinnati, Ohio 45220 Mr. J. P. Fenstermaker Atemic Safety and Licensing Board Senior Vice President-0perations
?anel Columbus and Southern Ohio V. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Electric Company Washin3tca, D. C.
20555 215 North Front Street Columbus, Ohio 43215 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Pegulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555
!1 9
332