ML20092N486
| ML20092N486 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 06/25/1984 |
| From: | Rybak B COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 8860N, NUDOCS 8407030196 | |
| Download: ML20092N486 (2) | |
Text
-. -
k Commonwrith Edison One First National Plaza. Chicago, l!hnois
~
Address Reply to: Post Office Box 767 Chicago. Illinois 60690 June 25, 1984 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director l
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
Washington, DC 20555 1
Subject:
Quad Cities Station Unit 1 Environmental Qualification of Electrical Equipment NRC Docket No. 50-254 References (a):
October 29,1980 letter from J. S.
Abel to J. G. Keppler.
(b):
January 18, 1983 letter from D. B.
Vassallo to L. O. DelGeorge.
(c):
January 25, 1983 letter from T. J.
Rausch to H. R. Denton.
(d):
May 25, 1984 letter from B. Rybak to H. R. Denton.
Dear Mr. Denton:
Commonwealth Edison Company hereby requests an extension of the schedular requirements of 10 CFR 50.49(g) for replacement / modification of specific equipment subject to the environmental qualification (EQ) rule.
Quad Cities Unit 1 began the second refueling outage after March 31, 1982 on March 6, 1984 and is now scheduled to return to service to return to service July 30, 1984.
In Reference (c), Commonwealth Edison submitted plant specific containment temperature profiles for the main steam line break for both Dresden Unit 2 and 3 and Quad Cities Station Units 1 and 2.
Only recently the NRC has raised questions concerning our model and specific operator actions associated with that model.
Although Commonwealth Edison believes it can demonstrate the adequacy of our containment temperature profiles,
-we agree with the Staff that additional information should be submitted for the Staff's review.
This information will be submitted by July 3, 1984.
In recognition of the fact that the Unit 1 is scheduled for a return.to service in late July we are requesting a schedular extension to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.49(g) for all equipment subject to the equipment qualification rule located inside the containment.
If any modifications must be made or additional equipment be qualified then this equipment also falls under this extension request.
Again, we feel that the adequacy of the model can be demonstrated.
However, because of the uncertainty as to whether this issue can be properly resolved prior to the scheduled return to service we are making this timely application for this extension request.
8407030196 840625 DR ADOCK 05000 pk4 kg
d' I
t H. R. Denton. June 25, 1984 The previously submitted justifications for continued operation for the equipment within the containment are still applicable.
If.there are any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office.
l Oneisigned original and forty (40) copies of this letter is provided for your use.
Very truly yours, h.
l B. R Nuclear Licensing Administrator 1m i
I cc:.
R. Bevan - NRR
.R.' Gilbert - NRR NRC. Resident Inspector - Quad Cities s
I i
e 8860N
..... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.