ML20214E245
| ML20214E245 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 05/11/1987 |
| From: | Carey J DUQUESNE LIGHT CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214E247 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0133, RTR-NUREG-133 TAC-63996, NUDOCS 8705220016 | |
| Download: ML20214E245 (2) | |
Text
.
hVs v
Telephone (412) 393-6000 aG;me May 11, 1987 Nu Shippingport, PA 15077-0004 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn:
Document Control Desk washington, DC 20555
Reference:
Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 and No. 2 BV-1 Docket No. 50-334, License No. DPR-66 BV-2 Docket No. 50-412 ODCM "T" Factor Justification Gentlemen:
This letter is in response to a question raised by Mr. R. Fell during a
conference call on April 2, 1987 and during a site visit by Mr.
R. Pederson on May 1, 1987.
The question is regarding use of the "T"
Factor as shown in the Reactor Containment Purge' maximum flowrate determinations of the BVPS-2 ODCM.
Attached to this letter is DLC Calculation Package No.
ERS-ATL-87-026.
This document provides our justification for use of the "T" Factor in the BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 ODCMs.
Per the
- attached, DLC is requesting formal approval of this departure from the standard NRC interpretation of " instantaneous" as described in NUREG-0133;
" Preparation of Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants".
Operational flexibility is permitted by various parts of 10 CFR and it is considered an essential element of operating procedures and calculational methodology for Reactor Valley Units 1 and 2.
Containment Purges at Beaver The full imposition of the NUREG equation is in excess of that required by the regulations.
It would also act to increase the radiation exposure of site personnel, outa time and costs significantly on both units.
For these reasons, ge-if we cannot reach a mutually acceptable resolution of this matter, we are requesting an appeal meeting to discuss this as a backfit claim.
The direct and indirect ~ costs of implementation do not appear justifiable for our facility.
We are also requesting, pursuant to 50.109(d), that the BV-2 license not be withheld pending resolution of this issue.
Very truly yours, g6 il
. Carey V
8705220016 870511 Senior Vice President PDR ADOCK 05000334 Nuclear P
PDR 3
Bepvar Vollty Power Station,-Unit No. 1 End No. 21
- BV-l-Dock 3t'No. 50-334, Lic: inca No. DPR-66 2*';BV-2 Docket No.!50-412 ODCM-"T" Factor, Justification
- Page:2 cc: Mr.' Stephen M. Pindale,--Resident Inspector ~
U. S. Nuclear. Regulatory Commission Beaver-Valley Power' Station-ShippingportiePA-15077:
U.
S.' Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regional Administrator Region 1.
631 Park Avenue-King of Prussia, PA 19406 Mr. Peter S. Tam U. - S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Project Directorate -No. 2 Division of PWR Licensing - A~
Washington,.DC 20555
'- Mail..Stop1340 Addressee only Director,LSafety Evaluation & Control
, Virginia. Electric & Power Company
-P.O. Box 26666 One James River Plaza-Richmond, VA ' 23261-t i
]
f.
l.
f
,9-
,--.y-.ev.._,,.-.mm.,-.,,,.-r
-,-.,-.,,,..-ry_c-..w-.,w---------m--c--
,,w,.
-w
,,,,,.--.,,,,,a e---+-
.=n-*.s
-ia---a*
v*evt---em-
.