ML19319C228
| ML19319C228 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 01/05/1977 |
| From: | Roe L TOLEDO EDISON CO. |
| To: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 182, TAC-11005, NUDOCS 8002060792 | |
| Download: ML19319C228 (3) | |
Text
U.s. NUCLE AM REGULATORY (**MMISSION OCCKET NUMZE A NRC acRu 195 40-34/6 tz.7s NRC,dlSTRIBUTION FOR PART 50 DOCKET MATERIAL FROM: Tole,3o E,ison DATE OF DOCUMENT TO:
Mr. Stel:
Tole 2o Ohio 43652 1-5-77 Lowell E. Roe DATE RECEIVED l-5-77 2 LETTER O NOTORIZ E D PROP INPUT FORM NUMBER OF COPIES RECEIVED 2 CRIGIN AL EUNCLASSIFIED 1 Signea org.
_ QCOP_v 11 eepies DESCRIPTION ENCLOSURE Ltr. Ref our 12-15-T6 ltr...Requestin g
a441tional h5 asys to a44ress the issue of Reactor Coolant Flow Monitoring nesign Mod" ification for Lavis Besse Unit No.l...
ACKNOWLEDGED
( 2 Pases )
DO NOT REMOVE PLANT NAME:
AVIS EESSE D
SAFETY
_ FOR ACTION /INFORMATION rwTun JCM l-7-77
/ ASSIGNED AD:
Va334//o AngTt*Nvn An.
/
BRANCH CMTEFr S to /t.-
M ANf*M t'MT77
/
PROJECT MANAGER!
8^t/c.
PROJECT MANAGER:-
Mj//co LIC. ASST. ;
/ LIC. ASST. :
INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION I
M.EEG FIIE/
SYSTEMS SAFETY PLANT SYSTEMS SITE SAFETT &
I MRG YDR HEINEMAN TEDESCO ENVIRO ANALYSTS Z./ I & E /F )
SCHROEDER BENAROYA DENTON & MtfT.T pu
/ OELD TATNAR
/ GOSSICK & STAFF EEGINEERING IPPOLITO ENVIRO TECH. -
MIPC MACARRY KTRKWOOD ERNST CASE KNICHT BALLARD HANAUER SIHWEIL OPERATING REACTORS SPANGLER HARLESS PAWLICKI STELLO SITE TECH.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT REACTOR SAFETY OPERATING TECH, GAMMILL BOYD ROSS
/
EISENHUT STEPP P. COLLINS NOVAK
/
SHA0 HULMAN HOUSTON ROSZTOCZY
/
EAER PETERSON CHECK
/
BITTLER SITE ANALYSIS MELTZ
/ CRIMES VOLLMER HELTEMES AT & I BUNCH SKOVHOLT SALTZMAN J. COLLINS RUTBERG KREGER EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION
- CONTROL NUMBER
/ LPDR: V4-C-lf n An 0 W NAT. LAB:
BROOKHAVEN MAT. T.AR.
/ TIC:
[1 g(,N_ SIC :
.j ASLB:
CONSULTANTS :
c-
/ ACRS //oCYS HOLB91G/ sEbT A S C6-T '/f
/- 6-76 fp/ 4 yc scRM tos (2 7s' 8002000 77
Regulatory Docht R
/Q TOLEDO d
%ms EDISON Docket No.
50-346
'b
//
LOWELL E. RCE January 5, 1977 y,,, m,,,,,,
r.,p Serial No. 182 mit
,W; O
h 5""
//
\\9
/
h/
N// *' f /, 2
- E'I,
.bsj q f2' Director of Nuclear Regulation CN Attn:
Mr. John F. Stolz
]
N/,
Chief Light Water Reactors Branch No. 1 Division of Project Management
-O b'
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
!A' Washington, D. C.
20555 t -Rs %*
Dear Mr. Stol:
On December 21, 1976 we received your letter of December 15, 1976 identifying an NRC Staff position regarding Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. I reactor coolant flow monitoring requiring our re-sponse within 15 days of letter receipt. Our response was to include n tion the details of the design modification and a schedule for the com e
of its installation.
We were, of course, apprised of the Staff's general concern in this area during the October, 1976 site visit, althcugh the particular Staff position was not identified until your December 15 letter. Your Licens-ing Project Manager has indicated that similar positions are being issued to at least two other Babcock & Wilcox NSSS licensees, and all B&W licensees may ultimately be impacted.
Subsequent to the site visit, we identified to the Licensing Project Manager where this matter had been addressed on the Oconee 1 docket, and that the Davis-Besse design was not atypical from licensed B&W designs, although other Davis-Besse reactor protection system parameters, namely the reactor coolant pump monitor system design, contained features improved over those found on a number of earlier B&W licensee designs. No objections to the standard B&W approach to reactor coolant flow monitoring had been received earlier on our docket.
In attempting to address the Staff position, we have enlisted the assistance of our architect-engineer, and of course, the B&W Company.
We have looked at feasible sensing line desit t modifications, but have found that such may in fact increase failura exposure rather than reduce it.
Because the issue really is generic to B&W systems, we are con-tinuing to pursue the matter with B&W, anc' feel further, that it would be prudent for us to involve other licensees who have received the Staff position letter.
THE TOLECO ECISCN COMPANY EDISCN PLAZA 300 MACISON AVENUE TCLECO. CHlO 43652
~
127
In the 15 days (seven working days) since receiving the Staff position, we have been unable to develop a viable approach to the concern.
Con-sidering the nature of this position regarding not only the Davis-Besse project but other B&W licensee systems, we hereby request an additional 45 days in order to address the issue. We further feel that it would be highly desirable for Toledo Edison and its representatives to meet directly with the NRC Staff to assesa the scope of the issue, and to assure understanding of any other limitations the Staff may have in assessing proposed approaches. Perhaps other licensee recipients of the Staff position could be invited to the meeting also. May we have your response to our request for an additional.45 days to respond, and for an early meeting on this subject?
Should modifications to the present installation be required as a result of this review, it is highly unlikely that any significant modification could be completed prior to initial operation, and such modifications may not be attainable until the beginning of the second fuel cycle.
c Sincerely, b
bt b/1-2 l