ML20198C076: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 26: Line 26:


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
Defueling Canister Technical Evaluation Report Your letter dated April 9,1985 (reference 1) was the initial submittal of the Technical Evaluation Report (TER? for the proposed design of the defueling canisters. NRC staff review of the TER resulted in several questions which were sent to you via cur letter of June 10, 1985 (reference 2). These questions were discussed at a meeting between our technical staffs on July 25, 1985. Your letters of August 15 and September 10,1985 (references 3 and 4) forwarded your responses to the questions and a subsequent revision to the TER.
Defueling Canister Technical Evaluation Report Your {{letter dated|date=April 9, 1985|text=letter dated April 9,1985}} (reference 1) was the initial submittal of the Technical Evaluation Report (TER? for the proposed design of the defueling canisters. NRC staff review of the TER resulted in several questions which were sent to you via cur letter of June 10, 1985 (reference 2). These questions were discussed at a meeting between our technical staffs on July 25, 1985. Your letters of August 15 and September 10,1985 (references 3 and 4) forwarded your responses to the questions and a subsequent revision to the TER.
The TER addressed the general structural design of the canisters, their operational interface with other systems, flamable gas control considerations, and a criticality evaluation. This letter transmits our safety evaluation and approval of the design of the defueling canisters. This approval is based on a review of the submitted TER and additional infomation presented in references 5 through 8. 'This review provided reasonable assurance that the canisters, if fabricated in accordance with the design specifications, are capable of perfoming their intended function without posing a significant risk to the health and safety of the occupational work force or the public. Additionally, we have determined that the proposed use of the canisters is within the scope of activities and associated environmental impacts which were considered in the staff's Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement.
The TER addressed the general structural design of the canisters, their operational interface with other systems, flamable gas control considerations, and a criticality evaluation. This letter transmits our safety evaluation and approval of the design of the defueling canisters. This approval is based on a review of the submitted TER and additional infomation presented in references 5 through 8. 'This review provided reasonable assurance that the canisters, if fabricated in accordance with the design specifications, are capable of perfoming their intended function without posing a significant risk to the health and safety of the occupational work force or the public. Additionally, we have determined that the proposed use of the canisters is within the scope of activities and associated environmental impacts which were considered in the staff's Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement.
As you are ~ aware, HRC inspections of one of your canister fabricators as well as your own audits and surveillances of the vendor have identified significant deficiencies in the implementation of the vendor's quality assurance program.
As you are ~ aware, HRC inspections of one of your canister fabricators as well as your own audits and surveillances of the vendor have identified significant deficiencies in the implementation of the vendor's quality assurance program.

Latest revision as of 17:35, 8 December 2021

Forwards Safety Evaluation Re Defueling Canister Design. Revised Design,Per 850815 & 0910 Submittals,Acceptable
ML20198C076
Person / Time
Site: Three Mile Island Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 11/05/1985
From: Travers W
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Standerfer F
GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
Shared Package
ML20198C081 List:
References
CON-NRC-TMI-85-083, CON-NRC-TMI-85-83 NUDOCS 8511110285
Download: ML20198C076 (3)


Text

f. e .

DISTRIBUTION:

DH 50-320 NRC POR Local PDR DCS TMI HQ r/f November 5,1985 TMI Site r/f W0 Travers NRC/T!!I 85-083 Mmasnik AAWeller PJGrant RCook Docket No. 50-320 CCowgill LChandler Mr. F. R. Standerfer IE:

Vice President / Director, THI-2 ACRS GPU Nuclear Corporation P. O. Box 480 N-Town Office Middletown, PA 17057 Service List

Dear Mr. Standerfer:

Subject:

Defueling Canister Technical Evaluation Report Your letter dated April 9,1985 (reference 1) was the initial submittal of the Technical Evaluation Report (TER? for the proposed design of the defueling canisters. NRC staff review of the TER resulted in several questions which were sent to you via cur letter of June 10, 1985 (reference 2). These questions were discussed at a meeting between our technical staffs on July 25, 1985. Your letters of August 15 and September 10,1985 (references 3 and 4) forwarded your responses to the questions and a subsequent revision to the TER.

The TER addressed the general structural design of the canisters, their operational interface with other systems, flamable gas control considerations, and a criticality evaluation. This letter transmits our safety evaluation and approval of the design of the defueling canisters. This approval is based on a review of the submitted TER and additional infomation presented in references 5 through 8. 'This review provided reasonable assurance that the canisters, if fabricated in accordance with the design specifications, are capable of perfoming their intended function without posing a significant risk to the health and safety of the occupational work force or the public. Additionally, we have determined that the proposed use of the canisters is within the scope of activities and associated environmental impacts which were considered in the staff's Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement.

As you are ~ aware, HRC inspections of one of your canister fabricators as well as your own audits and surveillances of the vendor have identified significant deficiencies in the implementation of the vendor's quality assurance program.

These noted deficiencies have cast doubt on whether equipment provided by this vendor meets required design specifications and, accordingly, whether the equipment is suitable for use during defueling. We understand that your staff and others have implemented a program involving an extraordinary level of quality assurance oversight to attempt to correct the deficiencies and to I

.. . 0511110205 95 b20 "" " * * * "- '" '" '"" ' * " "

l ,u s> PDR ADOCK

., p . P.D..R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .~..

cate >

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ..... . ~.. . . . . .. .

.~_...

--.y

( n:c ronu sie cio-sos nacu o24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY I

l ,

,Mr. F. R. Standerfer November 5, 1985 1

verify the canisters conformance to the design specifications. We are i

currently reviewing the results of that program. When we have completed our review and have detennined that there is reasonable assurance that the canisters meet all design specifications we will forward our approval for the i use of the canisters, it should also be noted that use of the canisters for defueling is contingent upon flRC approval of the Early Defueling Safety  !

Evaluation Report and the associated procedures subject to Technical Specification 6.8.2.

$ Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY, William D. Irovers Willian D. Travers Acting Director Till Prograa Office i

Enclosures:

As stated j cc: T. F. Detui tt R. E. Rogan S. Levin W. H. Linton J. J. Byrne '

, A. W. ilfiler i

4 Service Distribution List (seeattached)

{

i l r i

1 l

i
j. -

! i i

i I

"'c"> .oMIPL . . ... ... . . . . Ti.iJ PQ , , , ,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,

?-> . Arliomas:wi . . . . ... ... rs. .............. ............. ............. .............

[ ^"> 1.1/5/85,,, , , , ,1,1( , , , , 5, ,

.. ,,,,,, ,,5,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,, ,,,,,,,,,,

qunc ronu sis tiosoi nncu o24 OFFICIR RECORD. COPY l

P 1

J REFERENCES

1. Letter 4410-85-L-0067, F. Standerfer to B. Snyder, Technical Evaluation Report for Defueling Canisters, dated April 9, 1985'
2. Letter NRC/TMI 85-042, W. Travers to F. Standerfer, Technical Evaluation Report for Defueling Canisters, dated June 10, 1985
3. Letter 4410-85-L-0167. F. Standerfer to B. Snyder, Technical Evaluation Report for Defueling Canisters, dated August 15, 1985
4. Letter 4410-85-L-01183, F. Standerfer to B. Snyder, Defueling Canister Technical Evaluation Report, dated September 10, 1985
5. TMI-2 Defueling Canisters Final Design Technical Report, Document No. 77-1153937-03, April 11, 1985
6. Canister Structural Analysis Report for Cask Transportation Accidents, Document No. 77-1156615-02, May 24, 1985
7. GEND-051, Evaluation of Special Safety Issues Associated with Handling ine Three Mile Island Unit 2 Core Debris, June 1985
8. Memorandum from J. Byrne to W. Travers, Filter Canister Accident Criticality Analysis, September 19, 1985 4

- , - - - - - . - , _~. ., . . , , - -_ . . _ . . _ , , , _ _ _

,- - -