ML19261B743

Requests Action to Expedite Technical Review of CENPD-255, Class IE Qualification.

ML19261B743
Person / Time
Site:	05000471
Issue date:	01/19/1979
From:	Howard E BOSTON EDISON CO.
To:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 7903020400
Download: ML19261B743 (2)

Text

s' .

.(y DOSTON EDIGON C O M PANY 6 N 8 000 UOYLUTON STREET GOSTON, M Ass ACHUSETTs 02199 -

J. EDWARD HOWARD January 19, 1979 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of fluclear Reactor Regulation U. S. fluclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Request for Expedited flRC Staff Review of Topical Report CEflPD-255

" Class lE Qualification"

Dear Mr. Denton:

A Topical Report entitled " Class lE Qualification, CEflPD 255" was submitted during July 1977, so that a review could be conducted by your technical staff. The Report was submitted by Combustion Engineering, Inc. with the expectations that it would be referenced by Utility Applicants during their licensing processes. Combustion Engineering is the designated supplier of the NSSS for Pilgrim Unit #2.

We, along with the other seven applicant groups who are referencing this Report, are becoming very concerned over the fact that a review of the Topical Report has not been conducted. It is our understanding that a date has not been established when the review of the Topical Report will be completed.

The CE flSSS which leads the schedule is the Arizona Public Service, Palo Verde fluclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 (Dockets flos.

STf4 50-528, 529 and 530). In order to meet equipment delivery schedules for Arizona, it is imperative that CE proceed with an Equipment Qualification Program. As this Program will be referenced by us on the Pilgrim 2 project,

. we require your comments to insure that it meets the intent of your require-ments with respect to IEEE 323-1974.

We request that you take the following actions to expedite the Technical

- Review of CE's Topical Report CErlPD-255:

7 f 63 DL 0

Mr. J. Edward Howard ** m the equipment on a plant specific basis. We expect that as a result of our plant specific reviews, we will require modifications to the topical report. When adequate information has been incorporated into WCAP-8587 as a result of these plant reviews, we will issue a safety evaluation.

In concert with the acceptance review of the CESSAR System 80 final design approval submittal, the staff has completed a preliminary review of CEf4PD-25a. The staff has found the discussion of qualification methodology to be much too general to support a detailed review. This matter was discussed with Combustion Engineering in a meeting on the CESSAP, System 80 design on February 12, 1979. We plan to have additional meetings with Combustion Engineering to develop a generic approach to equipment qualification. The approach will include our review of qualification pro-cedures and data from qualification reports in addition to qualification methodology. However, since we are still in the process of developing a suitable approach, we are currently unable to estimate a review schedule for CEtiPD-255.

We will continue to keep you informed by sending you notices of meetings and meeting summaries dealing with this topical report. I trust you will find this information useful.

Sincerely,

~

/

Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclea;- Reactor Regulation

-