ML19250A687
| ML19250A687 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 10/08/1979 |
| From: | Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Bauer E PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910240231 | |
| Download: ML19250A687 (3) | |
Text
0j }
/N UNITED STATES
/%)
i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i.h;(,X[O.,
g VV ASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 t
e Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353 Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr., Esq.
Vice President and General Counsel Philadelphia Electri Company 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101
SUBJECT:
MARK II POOL DYNAMIC LOADS PROGRAM (Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2)
Dear Mr. Bauer:
The Mark II lead plant program is essentially complete, and we are now planning our review of the closure program for the Mark Il pool dynamic loads. A growing tendency of applicants to depend on plant-unique pro-grams, rather than generic programs, during the past year makes it nec-essary for.us to request definition of the pool dynamic loads programs being relied on by each Mark II owner, esaecially 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 71 ant acceptance criteria were issued. On July 24, 1979 the staff met w:th the Mark II owners to discuss the closure efforts associated with the Mark II Long Term Program. At this meeting, the Mark II owners stated that the generic programs associated 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 specifications. This resulted in a comparable number of new plant-unique programs. Little information has been pro-vided to the NRC defining these new plant-unique pool dynamic programs.
Considering the design differences between Park II plants, and the varias licensing schedules for plants, we see a limited need for re-liance on plant-unique pool dynamic load programs. The limitations on staff technical resources, however, make it possible for us to complete 1204 012 291 940 N rk
\\
Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr. our licensing activities for these plants in a timely maaner only if the Mark 11 owners pursue a generic approach to resolution cf pool dynamic load f ssues to the maximum extent practicable. For those areas where a completely generic approach is not acceptable, we encourage use of semi-generic approaches, as in the rase of the lead plant owners and the KTG "T" quencher. Another possible sub-grouping would be to combine analyses for plants with a common architect engineer.
We ask that you provide a description of those pool dynamic load tasks, outside the generic Mark II pool dynamic loads program, that are a part of your pool dynamic loads definition program. Your response should in-clude the following inforra. tion:
task description rationale for plant unique program task achedule documentation (contents and schedul e).
This information should be provided to us by November 15, 1979, so that we can plan our review efforts. We anticipate a meeting to discuss these items at an early Jate following the submittal of the letters. The pu r-pose of this meeting would be to determine the extent to which a generic or semi-generic approach has been pursued, and to obtain information needed by us to establish priorities for the review of the various plants. Until that time, we will continue to review the pool dynamic load program on a primarily generic basis. We intend to review non-generic pool dynamic load prcgrams on the basis of available NRC resources, with review priorities for these programs established by the licensing schedule for each' facility.
Sincerely, O
$. A. Varg, A ting Assistant Director for Ligh Water Reactors Division of Project Management cc: See next page 1204 013
Mr'. Edsard G. Bauer, Jr.
Vice ' President & General Counsel OCTg g Philadelphia Electric Company 2301 'arket Street Philadel phia, Pennsylvania 19101 cc:
Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esq.
Conner, Moore & Corber 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.
uashington, D. C.
20006 Deputy Attorney C+neral Room 512, Main Capitol Building Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17123 Frank R. Clokey, Esq.
Special Assistant Attorney General Room 218, Towne House Apartments P. O. Box 2063 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105 Honorable Lawrence Coughlin House of Representatives Congress of the United States Washington, D. C.
20515 Roger B. Reynolds, Jr., Esq.
324 Swede Street Norristown, Pennsylvania 19401 Lawrence Sager, Esq.
Sager & Sager Associates 45 High Street Pottstom, Pennsylvania 19464 Joseph A. Smyth Assistant County Solicitor County of i%ntgomery Courthouse Norristom, Pennsylvania 19404 Eugene J. Bradley Philadelphia Electric Company Associate General Counsel 2301 Parket Street Philadelpnia, Pennsylvania 19101 1204 014