ML20214J535
| ML20214J535 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 11/21/1986 |
| From: | Agosti F DETROIT EDISON CO. |
| To: | Adensam E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| VP-86-0166, VP-86-166, NUDOCS 8612010341 | |
| Download: ML20214J535 (3) | |
Text
Frank E. Agosti Vics Prasdent Nuclear Operatens Detroit r.-nu 6400 North Ome Highway ISOn (Newport, Michigan 48166 Nuclear 313) m a t50 oprations Movember 21, 1986 VP-35-0166 Office of Uuclear Reactor Regulation Ms. Elinor G. Adensan, Director Project Directorate No. 3 Division of BUR Licensing 4
U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555
Dear Ms. Adensam:
Referencec: 1)
Fermi 2 NRC Dochet No.~50-341 URC License No. NPF-43 2)
Detroit Edison to URC Letter, " Submittal of Procedures Generation Package and Modified Licence Amendment Request",
VP-86-0093, dated July 31, 1906.
3)
NRC " Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Operation of Fermi-2", Sec tion 22.2, I.D.I.,
NUREG-0790, Supplement 6, July, 1985.
t)
Letter R. M. Dernero to BWR Owners Group Chairtan trancnitting "URC Staff Ascencment of *.he IDCOR August, 1906 Evaluation of BUR Accident Mitigation Capability Relative to Proposed NRC Changec", dated Novenber 3, 1906.
Subject:
Recuent for Annroval of License Amend _cgE1 Cn July 31, 1986, (Ref erence 2) Detroit Edicon submitted a requect for an anendment to.the Fermi 2 operating licence to reflect a Detailed Control Room Design Revicu (DCRDR) incorporating experience with the RUR Cuners Group Emergency Procedures Guidelinen, Revision 4.
The purpose of this letter in to requect an URC determination with recpect to thin amendment prior to the current schedule requirement of November 30, 1986.
The technical bacon is detailed in the Safety Evaluation Report, Supplement 6 (SSER-6, Reference 3) uhore the staff ntaten:
)O 8612010341 861121 PDR ADOCK 05000341 P
Ms. Elinor G. Adensam November 21, 1986 VP-86-0166 Page 2 l
3....we require the DCRDR to be performed based on approved Emergency Procedure Cuidelines (EPGs) which in turn are related tc a function analysis used to identify information and control needs....An approved set of EPGs will not-be available until about fall of 1985.
- 4. A DCRDR performed at the Fermi 2 facility prior to the development of an approved set of EPGs would have to be repeated later, thereby significantly increasing the licensee's effort and our review with very little advantage since we have conducted a preliminary review of the Fermi 2 design which we found supported the issuance of a full power license.
In addition, correspondence f rom Mr. Robert Bernero (Reference 4) reaffirms the MRC position that Revision 4 of the BUR EPGs should be used.
The staff assessment attached to the above letter states:
we conclude that implementation of Revision 4 to the EPGs should be expedited....A staff review of Revision 4 to EUR Emergency Procedure Guidelines is underway.
The staff expectation is that substantial improvements in Revision 4 will result in several areas.
Detroit Edison agrees with the staff position of Movember 3, 1986, that Revision 4 of the BWR EPGs will provide substantial improvements and with the staff position established in SSER-6 (Reference 3) that very little advantage would accrue from performing a DCRDR prior to approval of the EPGs.
The critical elements of the staff position are:
1.
The final DCRDR must be haced on approved EPGs related to functional analysin (Revision 4),
2.
Preliminary review of the Fermi 2 procedures and control room design supported issuance of a full power license and, 3.
The advantage of performing a preliminary DCRDR to Revision 3 EPGs does not justify the required licensee or staff level of effort.
1 e
Ms. Elinor G. Adensan November 21, 1986 VP-86-0166 Page 3 The goa is to achieve the desired results, and not necesr - ily adherence to previously established calendar dates.
Therefore, Detroit Edison believes that the staf f should expedite the approval of Revision 4 of the EPGs and Detroit Edison will encourage the BUR Owners Group support of this effort.
During this approval period, Detroit Edison will continue pursuing the completion of the DCRDR based on Revision 4AC (Reference
- 2) of the EPGs to maximize use of the available time.
Since both the staf f's and Detroit Edison's goals will be achieved by the above course of action, the modified license amendment request of July 31, 1986, should be approved to maintain administrative accuracy.
Should you have any questions concerning this subject, please contact Mr.
R.
L. Uoolley at extension (313) 586-4211.
Sincerely, E
W cc:
Mr. J. J.
Stefano Mr. W.
G.
Rogers Mr. G. C. Wright Mr.
R. M.
Bernero USNRC Document Document Control Desk Uashington, D. C.
20555 l
!