PY-CEI-NRR-0814, Responds to Generic Ltr 88-02, Isap Ii. Util Decided Not to Participate in Isap Ii,But Intends to Support Objectives Described in Generic Ltr by Other Means

From kanterella
Revision as of 23:44, 22 July 2023 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to Generic Ltr 88-02, Isap Ii. Util Decided Not to Participate in Isap Ii,But Intends to Support Objectives Described in Generic Ltr by Other Means
ML20147H203
Person / Time
Site: Perry FirstEnergy icon.png
Issue date: 02/26/1988
From: Kaplan A
CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO.
To: Miraglia F
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
GL-88-02, GL-88-2, PY-CEI-NRR-0814, PY-CEI-NRR-814, NUDOCS 8803080417
Download: ML20147H203 (2)


Text

(

26 g -

THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMIN ATING COMPANY P.O DOX 97 s PER AY. OHtO 44081 m TELEPHONE (216) 259-3737 e ADDR ESS - 10 CENTER ROAO Serving The Best Location in the Nation PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

{ AI Kaplan Februa ry 26, 1988 vice eResioem PY-CEI/NRR-0814 L NUCLEAR GROUP F

Mr. Frank J. Miraglia Associate Director for Projects U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Perry Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-440 Integrated Safety Assessment Program II (ISAP II) (Generic Letter 88-02)

Dear Mr. Miraglia:

Thank you f or the opportunity to participate in the Integrated Saf ety Assessment Program II (ISAP II) described in your generic letter 88-02. We agree with the stated objectives of ranking licensing and generic issues according to plant-specific safety importance and implementation consistent with each utility's available resources.

However, the ISAP II program is based on performance of a plant-specifit Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA), and Cleveland Electric has no immediate plans to perform such a PRA. In addition, the existing interactive process for resolving Perry-specific licensing issues has been adequate. Regarding generic issues, Cleveland Electric has actively supported the definition and cost-effective resolution of generic safety issues through industry owner's groups established for that purpose and, more recently, NUMARC. The successful resolution of truly generic issues requires this broad-based consensus.

CEI has therefore decided against ISAP II participation, at the present time, with the full intention of supporting the objectives described in generic letter 38-02 by other means. Our response to this letter's questionnaire is accordingly attached.

Please call if you have any questions.

Very truly y urs, J

Al Kaplan Vice President Nucicar Group AK: cab Enclosure gh p

cc: Document Control De sk T. Colburn K. Connaughton l

l 8803080417 880226 PDR ADOCK 05000440 P PDR

j. .

.c u:*

Integrated Safety Assessment Prerram (ISAF) II Response Format to Generic Letter 88-0?

Facility Name: Perry Nuclear Power Plant

/ Utility: Cleve' land Electric Illuminating Company (CEI)

Individual Contact Name: E. M. Buzzelli Phone Number: (216) 259-3737 X-5606 An expression of interest will not be considered a conmitment te particip6te on the part of the utility.

1. Would you be interested in participating in ISAP II? If so, in whist time frame?

CEI is not oresently in.erested in participating in ISAP II.

2. Do you believe that an industry /NRC seminar consisting ;f a brief discussicn by NRC followed by a question and answer period would be beneficial prior to making a decision?

CEI would not oppose discussions of additional information at any time.

3. Would you be interesteo in a one-on-one meeting with the f:PC to discuss your particular facility or facilities?

No,.our frequent opportunities to meet with the NRC nroiect nsnar,er and other staff are considered sufficient to (!) interoret and naintain com9.iance with 1

our operating 1.icense, and (2) address 1.icensin.g and generic .nsues aris NUMARC and Owners Groups as sopropriate.

4. If you remain urdecided regarding participation, what additieral inferaation do you need in order to make a decision?
5. Do you have any potential concerns obout participating in !UP II?

CEI supports the ohiective, however, it is not our present intent to oerform a plant-specific PRA in order to complete our Individual Plant Examination.

l Therefore, the banefit of performing a PRA in order to narticinate in ISAP II i

is not apoarent.

6. Do you have any suggestier.s for progr6n improver'ents or charces?

l CEI will provide such recomnendations through industry organizations l established for this purpose: NUMARC and the BWR 09ners Group.

(

.-.