ML20054K562
| ML20054K562 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 06/25/1982 |
| From: | Morisi A BOSTON EDISON CO. |
| To: | Vassallo D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054K563 | List: |
| References | |
| 82-180, NUDOCS 8207020324 | |
| Download: ML20054K562 (2) | |
Text
%
ab E05 TON EDISON COMPANY osassat arricas eco mortarow seasse Bonfow. MassacMusarTe o2199 A. v. M o Ris s NUCLEAR o PE RATI N SUPPORT DEPARTMENT June 25, 1982 BECo. Ltr. #82-180 Mr. Domenic B. Vassallo, Chief Gperating Reactors Branch #2 Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D. C.
20556 License No. DPR-35 Docket No. 50-293 Boston Edison Response to Appendix R
References:
(a) 10 CFR 50 Appendix R (b) NRC Letter dated May 4, 1982 K. T. Eccleston to A. V. Morisi (BECo)
Dear Sir-In accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Section 50.48(c)(5) and as modified by Reference (b), Boston Edison Company hereby submits its fire protection analyses and recommendations for Pilgrim Station which is attached to this letter.
These attachments consist of three volumes.
Volume 1 contains a detailed overview of Boston Edison Company's fire protection analysis and contains recommended options to fully meet the requirements of the applicable provisions of Reference (a ). Plans and schedules to implement these recommended options are also included in Volume 1 along with certain exemption requests which we believe to be justified by the provisions of 10 CFR 50.48(c)(6). Volume 2 contains the design details of the recomended solutions in a diagramatic fonn. Volume 3 describes the present status of equipment which is to be modified.
Boston Edison Company wishes to emphasize that the scope of these recomended modifications is extensive and reflects our recommended approach to meeting the requirements of Reference (a) modified by Reference (b).
In addition, the con-tent of this submittal is based, in part, on the Staff's positions and perspectives advanced in its discussions with the Nuclear Utility Fire Protection Group during the peri:d December,1981 to March,1982, and reflected in the Nuclear Utility Fire Protection Group's letter of March 16, 1982 to Richard H. Vollmer, Director, Division of Engineering, Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
As evidence of the import-ante we attach to these efforts, we wish to emphasize that the additional cost as-sociated with implementation of these modifications is estimated to be in the range of
$bh N
l12 Sy'gf 3;,,;a
~
n ~m4
~
an
. ccyWN.EO4 CON COMPANY Mr. Domenic B. Vassallo, Chief June 25, 1982 i
fage 2
$11 million.
Furthermore, we have already expended a total of $6 million toward meeting previous fire protection requirements and in performing analyses in support of Appendix R requirements.
BECo will continue to r'eview and analyze the recommended scope of rodifications as we implement the action plans submitted in Volume I.
We also intend to sub-ject the information contained in this submittal to continual re-verification.
Although we are fully committed to performing the scope of modifications as detailed in the attached volumes, we respectfully reserve the right to submit further analyses or justifications which result from the review process should it prove necessary or prudent.
We believe the attached materials are fully resnonsive to all requirements of Appendix R as modified by Reference (b) and other Staff guidance. Nevertheless,
should you have any questions or concerns regarding this submittal, please contact us.
Very truly yours, Attachments l
I e
. - _ _