ML20248C357

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Consideration of Severe Accident Mitigation Design Alternatives.Response Requested within 30 Days of Ltr Receipt

ML20248C357
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	07/31/1989
From:	Suh G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Hunger G PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
References
TAC-73082, TAC-73446, NUDOCS 8908090502
Download: ML20248C357 (4)

Text

p y[,

,A

[,i',*,

July 31, 1989

Docket Nos. 50-352/353 DISTRIBUTION: w/ encl.

4 eDocketilTTe"~ RClark DCrutchfield

. Mr. George A.: Hunger, Jr.

NRC PDR/LPDR RMartin FCongel Director-Licensing, MC !-2A-5 PDI-2 Rdng ETrottier AThadani

~ philadelphia Electric Company' SVarga/BBoger GSuh LChandler P

Correspondence Control Desk WButler OGC

.955 Chesterbrook Boulevard H0'Brien-EJordan/BGrimes Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-5691 ACRS(10)

AHodgdon

SUBJECT:

CONSIDERATION OF SEVERE ACCIDENT MITICATION DESIGN ALTERNATIVES (TAC NOS. 73446/73082)

RE:

LIMERICK GENERATING STATION JITS 1 AM ?

References:

1)

Letter from G. Hunger, Philadelphia Electric Company, to NRC Document Control Desk, dated June 23, 19.?9.

2)

. Letter from R. Clark, NRC, to G. Hunger, Philadelphia Electric Company, dated May 23, 1989.

In a July 27, 1989 neeting, NRC staff members met with representatives from the Philadelphia Electric Company to discuss information provided in the licensee's response (Reference 1) to the staff's request for additional information (Reference 2) with regard to the consideration of severe accident mitigation design' alternatives. A meeting summary is in preparation and will be issued. shortly under separate cover.

During the meeting, several follow-up questions were identified. Please

. provide responses to the questions listed in Enclosure 1 within 30 days of receipt of this letter. This request for information is specific to one applicant and thus Office of Management and Budget clearance is not required under P. L. '.'6-511.

Sincerely,

/S/

Gene Y. Suh, Project Manager Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects I/II

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/ enclosure:

Ofc)[

See next nage i t

-[ HUNGER 1]

PDI-2/PM PDI-t' GSuh:tr3 WBut h.r

- 7 /3j /89 '

e

/89 8900090502 890731

~

PDR ADOCK 05000352

-P PNU

x.

N o

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o.

l 7.

E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 L..

July 31, 1980-Docket Nos. 50-352/353 h

Mr. George A. Hunger, Jr.

Director-Licensing, MC 5-2A-5 t

G Philadelpi11a Electric Company Correspondence Control Desk b,~s-955 Chesterbrook Boulevard f

Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-5691

SUBJECT:

CONSIDERATION OF SEVERE ACCIDENT MITIGATION DESIGN ALTERNATIVE $

-(TAC.NOS. 73446/73082)

RE:

LIMERICK GENERATING STATION, UNITS.1 AND 2

References:

1)

Letter from G. Hunger, Philadelphia Electric Company, to NRC Document Control Desk, dated June 23, 1989.

.2) eLetter from R. Clark, NRC, to G. Hunger, Philadelphia Electric company, dated May 23, 1989..

In a July 27,-1989' meeting, NRC staff members met with representati es from the Philadelphia Electric Company to discuss information prov-;ded in the licensee's response (Reference 1) to the staff's request for additional.

Information (Reference 2) with regard to the consideration of severe accident mitigation' design alternatives. A meeting summary is in preparation and will be issued shortly under separate cover.

During the meeting, several follow-up questions ware identified.

Please provide. responses to the questions listed in Enclosure I within 30 days of receipt of this letter. This request for.infctmation is specific to one i

applicant and thus Office of Management and Budget clearance is not required under P. L.96-511.

.l Sincerely,.

j k

1.

Gene Y. Suh, Project Manager Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects I/II

Enclosure:

As stated j

1 cc w/ enclosure:

See ist page C

1

r 8

~

vj Mr. George A. Hunger, Jr.

Limerick Generating Station Philadelphia Electric Company Units 1 & 2 cc:

Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esquf re Mr. Ted' Ullrich Conner and Wetterhahn Manager - Unit 2 Startup 1747 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.

Limerick Generating Station Washington, D. C.

20006 P. O. Box A Sanatoga, Pennsylvania 19464 Mr. P.od Krich $7-1 Philadelphia Electric Company Mr. John Doering 955 Chesterbrook Boulevard Superintendent-Operations Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087-5691 Limerick Generating Station P. O. Box A Mr. Charles W. Elliott Sanatoga, Pennsylvania 19464 Poswistilo, Elliott and Elliott 325 N. 10th Street Thomas Geru::ky, Director Easton, Pennsylvania 18042 Bureau of Radiation Protection PA Dept. of Environmental Rest,urces i

Mr. Graham M. Leitch, Vice President P. O. Box 2063 Limerick Generating Station Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Post Office Box A Sanatoga, Pennsylvania 19464 Single Point of Contact P. O. Box 11880 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108-1880 Mr. James Linville U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Philip J. Duca Region I Superintendent-Technical 475 Allendale Road Limerick Generating Station King of Prussia, PA 19406 P.

0,, Box A Sanatoga, Pennsylvania 19464 Mr. Thomas Kenny Senior Resident Inspector US Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 596 Pottstown, Pennsylvania 19464 Mr. John S. Kemper Senior Vice President-Nuclear Philadelphia Electric Company 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101

p 7

m-Q.;..

j- (.:.

ENCLOSURE I QUESTIONS FROM JULY,27, 1989 NRC MEETING WITH PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY 1.

With regard to tae contribution of fire initiated sequences to core ddmage freos'*%y estimates, do the cables for both trains of safety-r2:ated systems have three hour fire ratings?

2.

For the severe accident mitigation design alternatives considered in the June 23, 1980 submittal, what occupational exposure wculd be incurred in installation and in recurring operation and maintenance? Please provide the bases for the estimates, including work hour estimates, location of the work performed, and applicable radiation dcse rates.

3.

Please provide a reference to drawings for the drywell head assembly and the associated HVAC systems in the innediate area.

4.

In,the consideration of mitigation alternatives, one potential alternative would be leaving Unit 2 idle and prcfiding replacement power from other sources.

If Unit 2 was idle, what would be the source (s) of the replacement power, including a description of the type of power source and whether the source would be from inside or outside the utility's system? What would be the environmental impacts which would result from the use of these other sources?

5.

What capacity factor was assumed for Unit.2 in terms of replacement energy costs and what variability was ass'umed in that factor as a function of plant life?

l i

i i

i i

1

.-.