ML20206P637

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards C-E Owners Group Action Plan as Result of Davis- Besse Event,June 1986
ML20206P637
Person / Time
Site: Davis Besse Cleveland Electric icon.png
Issue date: 06/12/1986
From: Wells R
C-E OPERATING PLANTS OWNERS GROUP, NORTHEAST UTILITIES
To: Miraglia F
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20206P641 List:
References
RTR-NUREG-1154 RWW-86-44, NUDOCS 8607020177
Download: ML20206P637 (2)


Text

-

N UTRUTIES , c m c,c,,iio, o w netw=,

cenemi On,ce. . seioen streer. Beriin. Conneciicui J sua ..u,.mts ra c w cr==v P.O. BOX 270

.o . ..n. m.ia co*

HARTFORD. CONNECTICUT 06141-0270 k k J $,U, $[N*'.,*' (203) 665-5000 June 12, 1986 RWW-86-44 N

CI)

O O

Mr. Frank Miraglia M Director Licensing PWR-B O Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555

Dear Mr. Miraglia:

Subject:

CE Owners Group Davis-Besse Event Action Plan

Reference:

R. W. Wells letter RWW-85-82 dated November 26, 1985, to

11. R. Denton (NRC)

The subject item is provided as an enclosure to this letter for your information. This action plan was developed by the CE Owners Group Davis-Besse Event Review Group. I informed the NRC of this group in the Reference.

The Review Group considered various information related to the Jure 9, 1985, loss of feedwater event at the Davis-Besse plant including the NRC document NUREG-1154. The Review Group concluded that basic design differences between CEOG plants and the Davis-Besse plant would favorably af fect the CEOG plant response during a loss of feedwater event. These design dif ferences include:

1. Steam Generator Design
2. Reactor Trip on Low Steam Generator Level
3. Auxilisry Feedwater System (AFW) Diversity
4. Smart AFW Control Iogic As discussed in the enclosed report, these design differences ensure that the specific sequence of events that occurred at Davis-Besse could not occur at a CEOC plant.

Although the Review Group concluded that the safety significance of Davis-Besse related issues would be less for CEOG plants, a number of potential generic issues were identified. These issues are summarized in the enclosed action plan. In several cases, specific issues have already been addressed and completed by the Review Group. In othcr cases, activities are unde rway.

0607020177 860612 6 DR ADOCK 0500

\

F. Miraglia June 12, 1986 If you have any questions on the enclosed action plan, please contact either the Review Group Chairman, Tom Cogburn at Arkansas Power & Light, (501) 371-7892, or me at (203) 665-3614.

Sincerely, R. W. Wells, Chairman CE Owners Group RWW/drg cc: L. D. Butterfield (Commonwealth Edison)

J. W. Pfeifer (CE)

H. Tucker (Duke Power)

CEOG Representatives Davis-Besse Event Review Group J. Ford, CPC (Covert)

G. Douglas Phittier, MY (Augusta)

Dewey I. Hulbert, WPPSS (Elma)

CEOG Davis-Besse Event Review Group Peggy Nelson, APS (Phoenix)

Thomas Cogburn, AP&L (Little Rock)

Barry Sullivan, BG&E (Lusby)

Ken Berry, CPC (Jackson)

Joe Price, FP&L (Miami)

Michael Meisner, LP&L (New Orleans)

Jerry Reardon, NU (Berlin)

Randy J. Mueller, OPPD (0maha)

Carlos Olvera, SCE (San Clemente, Mail Stop D3F)

C-E Owners Group Edward Sterling, APS (Phoenix) G. Douglas Whittier, MY (Augusta)

Thomas Cogburn, AP&L (Little Rock) Rik W. Wells, NU (Berlin)

Robert F. Ash, BG&E (Baltimore) Joseph K. Gasper, OPPD (Omaha)

Kenneth Berry, CPC (Jackson) Ralph L. Phelps, SCE (4nsemead)

Donald K. James, Jr., FP&L (Miami) Dewey I. Hulbert, WPPSS (Elma)

Mike Meisner, LP&L (New Orleans)

_M