ML19340B001

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Decision Granting Extension of Time for Submittal of Evaluations Required by Acceptance Criteria for ECCS
ML19340B001
Person / Time
Site: Dresden Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 04/03/1975
From: Case E
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML19340B000 List:
References
NUDOCS 8010170702
Download: ML19340B001 (9)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:, , yF?? . a. 2 e UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0hNISSION =M 5 .== In the Matter of ) )

=

COFNONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-10 ~ ~ ') ail: (Dresden Nuclear Power ' Station ) Unit 1) .f DETERMINATI0 0F REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR SUBMITTAL OF EVALUATIONS REQUIRED BY ACCEPTANCE

2=

CRITERIA FOR EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEMS [ w In accordance with 10 CFR 50.46(a)(2)(iii), a Notice was published E in the Federal. Register on March 14,1975 (40 FR 11949), that the E 1:5= Nuclear Regulatory Commission had received and was considering granting a request dated February 18, 1975, from the Commonwealth Edison Company (the licensee) for an extension of time from April 4,1975 to August 2, 1975, for the submittal of an evaluation consistent with the requirements

e

of Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50 Acceptance Criteria for Emergency Core m Cooling Systems (ECCS) for the Dresden Nuclear Power Station Unit I reactor and for an exemption from the " requirements of 10 CFR 550.46 ~ g = and any underlying requirement with respect to the diversity of emergency systems or the diversity and redundancy of power sources, which would b relieve Commonwealth Edison of the obligation to file a complete analysis. = prior to August 2, 1975, and continue in effect the variance previously grantad from the Interim Acceptance Criteria." The Notice invited the rt;. submission of views and comments by any interested persons on the licensee's = request. Comments have not been received. 8010170 2C)M ~ .e

.m.

== ==i , Nu=

... ~..i=;

' An extension of tir.e for submittal of the required evaluations [({ _.. c== has previously been granted from August 6, 1974 until April 4, 1975, ar by the Comission in its " Determination With Respect to Variance From i.:.t. ~ 5. The Interim Acceptance Criteria and Extension In Submitting Evaluations From the Acceptance Criteria For Emergency Core Cooling System"(10 CFR 550.46(a)(2)(iii))," dated ugust 5,1974, (39 FR 29611). Tne basis for the licensce's request for a further extension of )... : time is the unavailability of the necessary evaluation models and .i analyses from GE. In~ support of its request, the licensee states that h ~ 1:; it does-not expect to receive the ECCS evaluation rodel and analyses ~ t er from the General Electric Corapany (CE) for Dresden Unit I before Qg= 1 June 28, 1975. Tne licensee requests an extension that will: allow c35: days n. ..e..

p. -

a'f t e'r the receipt of the ECCS evaluation from GE in order for the licensee. E V, to' review the results of the analyscs and develop appropriate Technieni-h;. Er Specification changes. b +i; k Since the original c.itensign of,t,ime was granted, substantial '.:i=, nodifications and revis' ions.nfvthe, evaluation:raodels baye,been required p f .as"asresult. of.:thtNRC's rev.ipw gfathe$Ef modelsdor;ngwer plarlts3 such as v a Dresden Unit 2 and 3. See, for these units, Order for Modification [ p of License, published in the. Federal Register on January 9,1975 ((EI (40 FR 1790)..The additional time involved in these modifications in-h-;k j the basic vendor evaluation nodels,has delayed the development of [ll appropriate modifications required to provide models and analyses h)) {?? -?i::: e n d t -ih i n +n '] vee r8 r n 1 ukirk ir i pl3nt Of c1 6 - 60 g, [.:

== oreses

  • ev=a aws
  • mars >

Torm AEC 318 (Rev. 9 53) AECM 0240

  1. u. s. novannasswr paintine orrscas tera.see-t ee

["~ e

TE t

=. z 2.~;

b"-*^." 3-C=E ~1=. [.+d+1 Based upon the 1:edRCatorystaff's experience and its knowledge p.4====+

=.==

of the effort on the part of GE to develop adequate evaluation models $5==~ and analyses for a number of different reactor facilities, the i. ac;NRCtr.sry staff believes that the delay by GE in completing the necessazy evaluation models and submitting the required analyses constitutes good cause for a further extension of the current April 4,1975 deadline for the submittal of the information required by 10 CFR Section 50.46. The schedule for completing the necessary sendor analyses set =: forth in the licensee's request is reasonable. Although the licensee h did not provide adequate justification for the length of time for its I? internal review of the GE evaluation before submitting its proposed technical specification changes to the NRC, the licensee has requested 35 days which corresponds to the amount of time which the,RC.yan ;y' g =; N staff established as a reaennable scheduleiin its prior Determination of August 5,197N. 'Ihe staff believes that this is a reasonable hI=, ~ = - = - time, llowever, a number of subsidiary portions of the evaluations which L. [= tiake upthe required evaluations, are to be completed by GE and provided [.; } to the licensee before the licensee's submittal to the Comission. In

    • .=.e-order to assure that the Commission is provided relevant information

=::. at the earliest possible opportunity, the licensee shall subnit to the Commission copies of the various portions of the evaluation as soon as ..l these are received from GE for review Ey the staff concurrent with the .gg,, lica:cc' rcvica orric =

  • eunwaua >

Oe?E F Forsa ALC 318 (Rev. 9 $3) AICM 0240

  1. u. s. oovsanu swr ensursue orrics: tera.sas-see

rz:E= = r. b.. 4-h- ..i _ ' In connection with the August 5, 1974 Determination, the Commission concluded that there was reasonable assurance that the variance from the

.!Ld requirements of the Commission's Interim Acceptance Criteria (IAC) concerning

~ =" the schedule for installation of certain equipment, would not adversely r-affect the health and safety of the public. With respect to the extension p: of tine to file an evaluation of ECCS performance in accordanco with (E:- r 10 CFR 50.46, from August il'1974 unt!.1 April 4,1975, grr.nted by the b q

=3 August 5,1974 Determination,. the licensee was required to submit a h

~ i ;=. pre 11cinary evaluation which pIovided a conservative assessment of ECCS ~ tr il perfor ance under the Commission's Aedeptance Criteria. Upon subnission the licensee was required to operate in conformity with such preliminary .z!. evaluation and all limitations previously imposed. Com:conwealth Edison submitted a preliminary evaluation of ECCS [:= performance on Nove=ber 1, 1974, djfurther supplemented that evaluation on Nove:ber 13, 1974. The preliminary evaluation concluded that with present operating limitations the calculated peak clad temperature using the Appendix K 1:odels would be below 2200*F and that no additional operating li-dts are required. 'Ihe considerations set forth in the August 5,1974 Determination with respect to the variante from the IAC, are still applicable and provide the bases for continued facilty operation. The additional ~.; analyses perfomed for the preliminary evaluationjrovide further assurance

=7 that the extension granted by this Determination w111 not adversely affect the health and safety of the public.

orrocE > SU R 4 & 88 5 > cars e Form AEC.313 (En. 9-53) AECM O240 TT u. S. oovrRNedENT PRINTING OFFicEt 1974 8241SS

=::., ~ (2~~.*.'"'

==:~ f. 'Ihe licensee also requested an exe:sption from the " requirements of g{!= =::..... 10 CFR 550.46 and any underlying requirement with respect to the diversity y;;;g.j;;~ P?f of energency systems or the diversity and redundancy of powr' tources, which , =. e.. 7 would relieve Commonwealth Edison of the obligation to file a complete analysis prior to August 2,1975, and continue in effect the variance previously gr:nted from the Interim Acceptance Criteria." In our August 5, [ s 1974 Detemination. a variance from the requirements of the Interim Acceptance .e~ Criteria was granted until September 1,1976 provided that the licensec makes additional t:odifications by September 1,1976, to reduce the '.'!-E "= vulnerability of the Dresden Unit 1 ECCS to failure of a single onsite power source, continues inservice inspection at triple the frequency required g by the Technical Specifications, and diligently pursues compliance with the h IAC. 'Ihis variance continues in effect as long as these provisions are ~ conplied with, and the licensee's request for continuance is unnecessary. However, the licensee is also subject to the requirencnts of the Coumission's ~ Acceptance Criteria set forth in 10 CFR 50.46, and the Detemination granting the IAC variance extends that variance only until operation in confomity with the acceptance criteria of 10 CFR 850'.46 is required. The authorization pmvided by this Deteruination, extending the time for submittal of the analyscs of ECCS cooling performance required by 10 CFR 50.46, until August 2,1975, extends the time at which any additional restrictions based on the required 77 cvaluations must be submitted and become applicable as operating limitations. (See 10 CFR 50.46(a)(2)(iv)). Consequently, no further action is required with respect to the, applicant 'A;','reques.t for..ex.eraption." .I h... orrsc E 7 'Z gy e es A to E W DATE > Foran AEC.)ls (Rev 9 53) AECM 0" da

  1. u. s. novEnNaf ENT PRINTING OFFICE 8 9974 526-980

^ = ' ' '...... pp.E==- ("!. =bbb{ If the licensee determines that an exemption from certain [::,. =;;;,. r=

== operating limitations will be required for operation after August 2, isi?] 1975, he may request such an exemption in accordance with 10 CFR % :s:. iii 50.46(a) (2)(vi). b.i = ?li: Accordingly, based on the foregoing considerations and for ljf["" : good cause sho n, the Cocunission hereby grants an extension of time to the licensee which extends the date for cocpliance with the f5 :=:[

=

requirements of 10 CFR subsection 50.46(a)(2)(ii) to August 2,1975, [.f n={; provided that the licensee shall submit to the Co!=nission copies h.. I:3 p. of the ECCS analyses from GE icmodiately upon its receipt of these p analyses. L- -4 Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, t'his 3rc0 c(cq f h%p /Of FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULA1 DRY COR4ISSION [ Cepd si vel y [; YD ~ DW Edson G. Case, Acting Directo. f:. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i '.'. -l :::':._' i :== - ii2$

=

-i'ii. V omc E p-l 9UR4AMED* o ave D- (('.' Terra AEC.)la (Rn. 9 53) AECM O240 W u. s. oovtRNMENT PRINTING OFFICEI l974 5,0184 e

L H...E...:.. 2.5 =-

== UNITED STATES OF AMERICA kh NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0!NISSION

=::

..:.~.. In the Matter of ) ..[] ) Ei5:i=r-C0!40NWEALTH EDISON COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-10 E ) a= (Dresden Nuclear Power Station )

    • ==

Unit 1) sE-DETERMINATION OF REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME- [.55.... FOR SUBMITTAL OF EVALUATIONS REQUIRED BY ACCEPTANCE fe::.:.. ' ' CRITERIA FOR EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEMS (-10-GFR I5= -SlJRQFFTTONS SQ,Q 2nd SA 17) ~ = In accordance with 10 CFR 50.46(a)(2)(iii), a Notice was published I in the Federal Register on March 14,1975 (40 FR 11949), that the

== Nuclear Regulatory Commission had received and was considering granting =y . ::= r Tequest dated February 18, 1975, from the C6mmonwealth Edison Company (the licensee) for an extension of time from April 4,1975 to August 2, i L.: 1975, for the submittal of an evaluation consistent with the requirements of Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50 Acceptance Criteria for Emergency Core Cooling Systems (ECCS) for the Dresden Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 reactor and for an exemption from the " requirements of 10 CFR 550.46 and any underlying requirement with respect to the diversity of emergency F4 systems or the diversity and redundancy of power sources, which would

==: relieve Commonwealth Edison of the obligation to file a complete analysis prior to August 2,1975, and continue in effect the variance previously granted from the Interim Acceptance Criteria." The Notice invited the s submission of views and comments by any interested persons on the licensee's .J request. Comments have not been received. H n:....

i..

O

k i I l In connection with the August 5,1974 Determination, the Cc:xsission concluded that there was reasonable assurance that the variance from the requirements of the Commission's Interim Acceptance Criteria (IAC) concerning l. I the schedule for installation of certain equipment, would not adversely affect the health and safety of the public. With respect to the extension of time to file an evaluatwn of ECCS performance in accordance with ,i (LyHl d-10 CFR 50.46, from August 5,1974 until MrfttiJr,,1975, granted by the [ August 5,1974 Determination, the licensee was required to stibnit a ,g f preliminary evaluation which provided a cons ~ervative assessment of ECCS l performance under the Com:nission's Acceptance Criteria. Upon submission i i f the licensee was required to operate in conformity with such preliminary I evaluation and all limitations previously iny, sed. l,- I .y Con:monwealth Edison submitted a preliminary evaluation o@b L W c= %gr. - -{ ' ^ : C.% on November 1, 1974, and further i u-supplemented that evaluation on November 13, 1974. T..u ; :; + +i s"%i";; la mumme 1 -. ; _ r. ;. 2 4,+. u _._, -p ~"i M r = n : - ~ we p '__- T - kased em e m a e +4ve c. y.. ~ i _: g. r-,..n i D* concluded tha clad temperature using the Appendix K Models W below 2200* 1 and that no additional operating limits are requireA *- --- .n. 7.. ' he considerations T ~ ~~ -r---* i tion with respect to the variance .,,....o.. set forth in the August 5, 1974 De+erm na bases for continued h from the 1AC, are still applicable and provide t e .b [3b + A tid ** b facility operation./. The additional ilm mired eval _u_aI; f is pic@dfor-tA.-peried v ^ I ide further assurance that the enh=itt&degg2mmd-by tWKRC~ stir $f nrov extension granted by this Determination s 11 not adversely affect the health and safety of the public.

I (: =

Esii::11
  • i g

'Ihe li censee also requested an exemption from the " requirements [.j of 10 CFR 550.46 and any underlying requirement with respect to the I diversity of emergency systems or the diversity and reduddancy of powe sources, which would relieve Commonwealth Edison of the obligation l f to ;,le a complete analysis prior to August 2,1975, and continue in

~

effect the variance previously granted from the interim Acceptance = Criteria." In our August 5,1974 Determination, a variance from the { requirements of the Interim Acceptance Criteria was granted until sir s September 1,1976 provided that the licensee makes additional =;; modifications, by September 1,1976, to reduce the vulnerability of the Dresden Unit 1 ECCS to failure of a single onsite power source

i

..n - - - - - = - - g..;

.==

- ~ m-e. ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ ' ' - ~ ~- ~ ~ h!b: ' ' ~ ~~ ~ '.^:::.' s --- - ~ ~ 1.; ,,,,,-.ww" h: ~ ~ ~~ ' __ _.~ ^~ ' ~ ~ ~ nW* M** _, _. _ ~ " ' " - " ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' ' ~ = :'- = w .= = : _,j NNi:. ' _ ' _ ^ .}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19340B001&oldid=4728397"