ML20132C164

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Qualification Review of Plants for Replication Per 741119 Request.Plant Design Acceptable for Replication
ML20132C164
Person / Time
Site: 05000000, Marble Hill
Issue date: 11/03/1975
From: Rusche B
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Caughlin J
PSI ENERGY, INC. A/K/A PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF INDIANA
Shared Package
ML20132B505 List:
References
FOIA-84-293 ZECH, NUDOCS 8105140354
Download: ML20132C164 (5)
v • d • e


Text

e +

Mmutagmyw - ------

eE.=cav519. .;;a.g.%,4dr O

i' 'I

. t.. .r.

NUCLSAA REGULATORY COGAW844088 I106750008 maemies eon. o c. seoes NOV e 3 sts Docket b e. ST18 50-546

_ g and ST1t 50-547 k

E w Lg b '7 W

Dr. James Coughtin Vice President - Nuclear h

  • g
4. Public service Indiana I ,

1000 g. Main Street Plainf1 eld, Indiana 46168 4 Dear Dr. Cough 11nt We have coupleted a qualification review of Commonwealth Edison Coupesy's syron/Braidwood Stations for replication at the Marble t'111 site as

, requested in your letter of November 19, 1974 The Byron /Staidwood

% Safety Evaluation Report was issued on April 4,1975 and we met with your j representatives on May 20, 1975 to discuss the proposed Marble Mill Ihaclear 3 Cenerating Station. Units 1 and 2. We find that the Syron/Braidwood desiga j is acceptable for replication at Marble Hill.

l We have identified six categories of safety issues which must be

< eddressed in the PSAR for the replicate plant. Five of these categottee, together with the types of items we expect you to identify and address,

_ are as follows:

=~

1 A. SITE RE1ATED MAT"rERS

- h

, All safety questions related to the site or to the intet' faces between the site and the plant must be addressed in the PSAR.

For exagle:

(1) A full site investigation program is required including geology-seismology. foundation engineering, hydrology and meteorology matters.

,' (2) Revised accident analyses are required, taking into account the changes ir site characteristics f rom those M of the base plant site.

(3) The effect of rad rave T iesses fro M k aat on the .it. .nvi,o,e u.t .e ,..tigsted.

l

.I g_LdcMb 3N -

W

] -

[37o!

[ .

W ,-- m

4) d h h h fe __ .-

1 Dr. James Coughlin =1= W88M dit

" (4) ne plant deels and layone meet sehe isse esseums seek 4 entteee ee fleed proseetles and eeta-etrecente latetoetsee effects for oefety retened etswetares and esapeesees.

,.{

y-.

' (5) The replicate. plant doetga aset entisfy the ette-related i

  1. design criteria required for the ses este, emah se the y'+ 9..d este shutdown earthquake.

R.

t - .

4

. B. UTILITY OR!tNTED MATTERS _

7 All i.cility oriented oefety related settere aset be spesifiaally 7~ 7) addressed in the PSAR.

M neee metters include the following arose, fet esemples 4

M (1) Quality soeursace for deelen and saastreeties.

~ (2) Conduct of operatione.

(3) Emergency planntag.

(4) Industrial security - encept as related to the layout and design of the base plant.

l (5) Operator training.

! (6) Technical qualifications.

? (7) Financial qualifications.

C. CHANCES FROM BASE PtJuff DESICW Any applicant initiated changes free the docuamated' deste of the base plant susc be addreseed in the PSAR.

  • I Examples might be 7 .I (1) Changes in ulttante heat elak.

(2) Changes in couponent design.

D. OPEN ITEMS REMAINING FROM REVIEW OF BASE FIAir?

All matters identified in the staf f Safety Evaluaties Report for the base plant, or subsequently identified by the A(3S er during l the public hearing on the beoe plant, se requiring * - ;rt resolution must be addressed La the PSAR.

Examples of such setters aret (1) Cvelustion of " Anticipated Treastsate Without Screa" in 25 accordance with MASM-1270.

l

., .. . .. ~ :: :..r .

p. m .

3; k - . .

~~ . r, u :k-rY --

3

(

gy g 3 31 Dr. James (tuthlin (2) secolution of topical reporte referessed Ger the base N

plant but not yet accepted bF the staff se the tiise of preparation of the beee plant Safety Eveheetite Report.

o.4 E. CMAEt3 TO RICUt# IONS _ ,

~4 I h.m i i The PSAA amot address any chaeges to the Comissies's regulattaes SE1.

d which have become etfactive since issuance of the base plaat 4_ r4 N+-?!A * * *} Exemples aret p: .

> - dn 'M Compliance with the requirements of Appendia ! to 10 CFR (1)

- + .g4 4 . Jf Part 50.

u A (2) Compliance with the requiremente of 10 CFR 50.44 and Appendix K to 10 CFR part 30.

(3) Compliance with Section 50.SSa of 10 CFR Fort 30.

' M The stath category. consisting of other eigstficant safety mettere ident atted by the staf'. ist l

' ED BY THE STAFF _

F. 0_THER ITEMS 1DENTI b 1his category of itene includes thsee eisnificant eefety tasses

(

  • identified by the Staf f since issuance of the base plast SEE that mast be considered for the replicate plant to provide reassemble -

M assurance that the replicate plant can be constructed and operated without undue risk to the health and safety of the public.

. -i The significant tesues that have been identified ares (1)

A review of the plant design features that are intended to prevent the occurrence of dazeging fires and to

, minimize the consequences to safety-related equipment a.

emog should a fire occur.

4 (2) A review of the transiset loads on the reester vessel 1

support members that would result from a postulated coolant pipe rupture immediately adjacent to the remeter vessel to aneure that these loadiase have property been taken into account in the design.

It The example given in Categories A through I are est all incluelve.

4 is your responsibility to identify and discuss all each items la theFurth FSAR oubmittal.

constructis,a permit for the replicate plant other Category F type'eefety issues may arise. If each additieaal setters are identif tet, they will

, be discussed with yee saly after full deliberation by the staff as the safety benefits thei esy be achieved.

J' n, ) :((;*,[<f b

e

I . .

.

  • rame M*h k-' .,

s

'l

  • 6 g

ot. -

geesees of the rapitaaeles essespt It istoeer eritically 1steet shnaW epse shore holdias be 9q destge shooges to en steoisse etaisua. fir ao claeges free the bene pleet deety other thee thsest repired ss and to

,1 the demise to the see site, te estisfy the chansce to res at see , estety J ,2 to estisfy any thenges onbeegeantly identified as sipifieast me

<g issees.

Other changes to the base plast desigo will plaea the licaties w.' ,,

replication coecept in peril and could result ta the replicose eyeFurther, it should be und c

  • being subjected to a custom review. throud

.; thet it is out 1steet that the replicatios procese will centless

, =; completies of the operaties license review for base the bese plant sepleet a and that

.,e i t

'~ j

  • 1 eny design or other changes deemed mecaesery i ptable for theresult of th i

'd unless you propose to selve any identified probleme v a sace ,

alternatives.  ;

Sincerely, ever b

M en C. Eusche, Director Office of Muclear Esector Regalstion, cc: See pese 5 a

l t i

l

. . c..

,  :. ,. .; 1 v.... .

Nk. ~

I. %

Dr. James Coughlin -S- WF 8 8 W5 N '

" es: Leonard M. Treeten. Esq.

M.% Lenneet. lash. LeibP a unease 1757 N Street. M. W.

  • 'i Weshington. D. C. 20034

.g-<

  • [ charles W. Campbell. Esq.

My Vice Freefdent and General Conneet

.'j Public Service InJiana

.'. 1000 E. Mein Street

.W Plataf teld. Indiane 44164

%.>a* Mr. William Eartier Atomic Power Distribestise f Westinghouse Electris Corporation F. O. Ses 355 Pittsburgh Peeney1vania 15230

. Mr. R. J. Satelick

= Sergent 6 landy Engineers

. 55 Esst M>nroe Street 6

chicago. 1111 note 60603 1

M m

si t

I i

.a .

i.

^

MA e

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20132C164&oldid=2886036"