ML20072K249
| ML20072K249 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1983 |
| From: | Fiedler P GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19268D810 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8307060008 | |
| Download: ML20072K249 (2) | |
Text
.
y e.
y GPU Nuclear gg g7 P.O. Box 388 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 609-693-6000 Writer's Direct Dial Number:
June 30, 1983 Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Nuclear Reactor Regulation Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Mr. Eisenhut:
Subj ect: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Docket No. 50-219 Core Spray Ef fectiveness On December 11, 1981, GPU Nuclear representatives met with you and several of your staf f members to discuss the postponement of a number of regulatory projects from the current cycle 10 refueling outage. The need for delaying certain projects arose from the large amount of work scheduled during the refueling outage and its potential impact on safety. One of the major work items for which deferral was requested was the replacement of existing ring design core spray spargers with a new overhead grid design.
By letter dated December 31, 1981, we documented our requests for deferral and by letter dated May 21, 1982, a License Change request was submitted to defer the Oyster Creek sparger replacement contingent upon the physical inspection results being satisfactory. The physical inspection of the core spray sparger is complete and the results were discussed with you during our April 28, 1983 meeting. The inspection results were formally presented to you in our submittal dated May 13, 1983. GPU Nuclear considers the physical inspection of the core spray spargers to be satisfactory and the existing core spray spargers acceptable for continued operation.
By letter dated October 12, 1982, Mr. Crutchfield, of your staf f, requested that we provide an additional assessment of the ef fectiveness of the existing core spray system especially in a steam environment. Preliminary findings on this issue were presented during our April 28, 1983 meeting. The attachment to this letter documents these findings and comprises our formal response to the October 12, 1982 request. The attached report provides a determination of the minimum core spray flow to each bundle for various modes of sparger operation.
The report also evaluates the spray cooling mechanism in relation to other fuel cooling mechanisms and demonstrates that the use of existing ECCS spray coef ficients is conservative.
In order to facilitate your review of this matter, we will be glad to answer any questions you may have on an expedited basis.
h O
DR i
GPU Nuclear is a part of the General Public Utilities System
Jbl Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director June 30, 1983 Page 2 It has been determined that the attached report contains General Electric Company proprietary information and an af fidavit certifying the nature of the proprietary information is attached to the report.
If you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. James Knubel of my staf f at (201) 299-2264.
Very truly yours, I
, sdL pr jd yVL P(ter B. Fiedler Vice President and Director Oyster Creek PBF:jal At tachm ent :
General Electric Company Performance Evaluation of the Oyster Creek Core Spray Sparager, NEDE-30010, June 1983 cc: Regional Administrator Region I U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 NRC Resident Inspector Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, NJ 08731