ML19254B063: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 18: Line 18:
=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:.
{{#Wiki_filter:.
              -'                  .
      , .
      *
                        .
  '
                                                                  .
COMA!;CllE PEAK STEA?! ELECTRIC STAT 10'' (CPSES)
COMA!;CllE PEAK STEA?! ELECTRIC STAT 10'' (CPSES)
Citizens for Fair Utility Refyilation (CFUP.) Cont entions
Citizens for Fair Utility Refyilation (CFUP.) Cont entions Contention I                                    .
          .
Applicants have not demonstrated t.echnical quali fications to operate CPSES in accordance with 10 Crn fiS0.59(a)(4) in that they have relied upon West ing-house to pre pare a portion of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
Contention I                                    .
Applicants have not demonstrated t.echnical quali fications to operate CPSES in accordance with 10 Crn fiS0.59(a)(4) in that they have relied upon West ing-
                    .
house to pre pare a portion of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
Position
Position
* TU (Applicants)            S (Staff)      1 (Intervenor)
* TU (Applicants)            S (Staff)      1 (Intervenor)
A (W)                      A                A                                '
A (W)                      A                A                                '
                -
t Contention II.A One or more of the reports us(d in the construction of couputer codes for the CPSES/FSAR have not been verified and fornally accepted; thus conclusions based upon these conputer codes are invalid.
t Contention II.A One or more of the reports us(d in the construction of couputer codes for the CPSES/FSAR have not been verified and fornally accepted; thus conclusions based upon these conputer codes are invalid.
                     ,1losi t i on TU                    S              I
                     ,1losi t i on TU                    S              I
Line 40: Line 29:
EmlEnti_on 11. B_
EmlEnti_on 11. B_
11e f e r r ed                                                                        .
11e f e r r ed                                                                        .
Contention III.A Some accident sequences heretofore considered to have probabilities so low a r. to be considered incredible based upon the findings of WAsil--1400, are in
Contention III.A Some accident sequences heretofore considered to have probabilities so low a r. to be considered incredible based upon the findings of WAsil--1400, are in A
_ _ -                __          _.
Key:
A Key:
* A = Admissible as to wording,and substance
* A = Admissible as to wording,and substance
     .              A (U) = Admissible as to wording only 7909240o %(z      ,_
     .              A (U) = Admissible as to wording only 7909240o %(z      ,_
is
is


.
      .
        .
  -
                                                   - 2 fact core    probable in light of the findfug< of the Lewis Con ::it t ee and should In order to insure conservatisn, be evaluated as credible accidents for CPSES.
                                                   - 2 fact core    probable in light of the findfug< of the Lewis Con ::it t ee and should In order to insure conservatisn, be evaluated as credible accidents for CPSES.
the probabilities associated with such accident sequences should be the highest prohr:hilities within the speelfied confidence band.
the probabilities associated with such accident sequences should be the highest prohr:hilities within the speelfied confidence band.
Position
Position TU                    S              I A (k')                  A (W)            A C,on ty n_t i on llI . li Deferred.
* TU                    S              I
            .
A (k')                  A (W)            A C,on ty n_t i on llI . li Deferred.
              .
Cont ention IV The Applicants have failed to entnblish and execute a quality assurance / quality control program which adheres to the criteria in 10 CFit 50, Appendi:.            U. Appli-cants have f a i.l ed t o den.onst ra te sufficient uanagerial and administ rat ive control      to assure safe operation as required in 10 CPR Pai t 50, Appendix E.
Cont ention IV The Applicants have failed to entnblish and execute a quality assurance / quality control program which adheres to the criteria in 10 CFit 50, Appendi:.            U. Appli-cants have f a i.l ed t o den.onst ra te sufficient uanagerial and administ rat ive control      to assure safe operation as required in 10 CPR Pai t 50, Appendix E.
Therefore, special operating conditionu nhould be required.
Therefore, special operating conditionu nhould be required.
Line 63: Line 43:
Contention V There is no assurance that the Spent Fuel Pool area can withstand the effects of t ornadoes, ar      required by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, Criterion 2 becaune:          .
Contention V There is no assurance that the Spent Fuel Pool area can withstand the effects of t ornadoes, ar      required by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, Criterion 2 becaune:          .
: a. The analyces upon which the Design Basis Tornado (DP,T) is based are perfunctory, outdated and unreliable;
: a. The analyces upon which the Design Basis Tornado (DP,T) is based are perfunctory, outdated and unreliable;
    ,
: b. The loading analyses based on t he Den i p,n Eas i s Tor nado (DBT) are inappropriate because they fall to consider                      ,n, a
: b. The loading analyses based on t he Den i p,n Eas i s Tor nado (DBT) are inappropriate because they fall to consider                      ,n,
                                                  ,
a
                                                                                           'k)n[
                                                                                           'k)n[
                                                                                          '
fa k
fa k
_


        .
,    .
    ,
  .                                                                                                    .
the potential loading conbination of the DBT and a tornado-generated missile.
the potential loading conbination of the DBT and a tornado-generated missile.
: c.      The assignment of a loading factor of 1.0 for load cou-bination equationa incorporat ing t ornado loadings in corbination with "nornal and accident conditionn" in                            .
: c.      The assignment of a loading factor of 1.0 for load cou-bination equationa incorporat ing t ornado loadings in corbination with "nornal and accident conditionn" in                            .
Line 84: Line 55:
Centention VI App [icantshave failed to adequately evaluate whether the rock "overbreak" and subsequent fissure repair using concrete grout have impaired the ability of Category I structuren to withstand seisnic disturbances.
Centention VI App [icantshave failed to adequately evaluate whether the rock "overbreak" and subsequent fissure repair using concrete grout have impaired the ability of Category I structuren to withstand seisnic disturbances.
P_o n i t i on.
P_o n i t i on.
TU                    S              1 A (U)                  A (U)          A
TU                    S              1 A (U)                  A (U)          A Coatont_fon VII_
                                                                                                .
Coatont_fon VII_
Uithdrawn.
Uithdrawn.
Contention Vill (former IV.D.)
Contention Vill (former IV.D.)
Applicants have failed to adequately evaluate the impacts of the drawdown of the groundwater under CPSES during and as a result of plant operation.
Applicants have failed to adequately evaluate the impacts of the drawdown of the groundwater under CPSES during and as a result of plant operation.
fSS.i t ion
fSS.i t ion
                                                                                               ' 'L
                                                                                               ' 'L TU                    S              1 t  .ri ,
                                                                                            '
TU                    S              1 t  .ri ,
L 1 :l '.'
L 1 :l '.'
                                                                                    '
A (U)                A (U)              A}}
A (U)                A (U)              A}}

Revision as of 00:23, 2 February 2020

Revised Contentions of Intervenor Citizens for Fair Util Regulation.Submits Revised Contentions I,Iia & B,Iiia & B, & IV-VIII
ML19254B063
Person / Time
Site: Comanche Peak  Luminant icon.png
Issue date: 08/21/1979
From:
CITIZENS FOR FAIR UTILITY REGULATION
To:
Shared Package
ML19254B062 List:
References
NUDOCS 7909240022
Download: ML19254B063 (3)
v • d • e


Text

.

COMA!;CllE PEAK STEA?! ELECTRIC STAT 10 (CPSES)

Citizens for Fair Utility Refyilation (CFUP.) Cont entions Contention I .

Applicants have not demonstrated t.echnical quali fications to operate CPSES in accordance with 10 Crn fiS0.59(a)(4) in that they have relied upon West ing-house to pre pare a portion of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).

Position

  • TU (Applicants) S (Staff) 1 (Intervenor)

A (W) A A '

t Contention II.A One or more of the reports us(d in the construction of couputer codes for the CPSES/FSAR have not been verified and fornally accepted; thus conclusions based upon these conputer codes are invalid.

,1losi t i on TU S I

[

EmlEnti_on 11. B_

11e f e r r ed .

Contention III.A Some accident sequences heretofore considered to have probabilities so low a r. to be considered incredible based upon the findings of WAsil--1400, are in A

Key:

  • A = Admissible as to wording,and substance

. A (U) = Admissible as to wording only 7909240o %(z ,_

is

- 2 fact core probable in light of the findfug< of the Lewis Con ::it t ee and should In order to insure conservatisn, be evaluated as credible accidents for CPSES.

the probabilities associated with such accident sequences should be the highest prohr:hilities within the speelfied confidence band.

Position TU S I A (k') A (W) A C,on ty n_t i on llI . li Deferred.

Cont ention IV The Applicants have failed to entnblish and execute a quality assurance / quality control program which adheres to the criteria in 10 CFit 50, Appendi:. U. Appli-cants have f a i.l ed t o den.onst ra te sufficient uanagerial and administ rat ive control to assure safe operation as required in 10 CPR Pai t 50, Appendix E.

Therefore, special operating conditionu nhould be required.

Position k

Contention V There is no assurance that the Spent Fuel Pool area can withstand the effects of t ornadoes, ar required by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, Criterion 2 becaune: .

a. The analyces upon which the Design Basis Tornado (DP,T) is based are perfunctory, outdated and unreliable;
b. The loading analyses based on t he Den i p,n Eas i s Tor nado (DBT) are inappropriate because they fall to consider ,n, a

'k)n[

fa k

the potential loading conbination of the DBT and a tornado-generated missile.

c. The assignment of a loading factor of 1.0 for load cou-bination equationa incorporat ing t ornado loadings in corbination with "nornal and accident conditionn" in .

unacceptable,

d. The DST parawters used in FSAR Section 3.3.2.1 are less connervative than the paraneters found in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.76 c.2.

Position

. A (l') /

Centention VI App [icantshave failed to adequately evaluate whether the rock "overbreak" and subsequent fissure repair using concrete grout have impaired the ability of Category I structuren to withstand seisnic disturbances.

P_o n i t i on.

TU S 1 A (U) A (U) A Coatont_fon VII_

Uithdrawn.

Contention Vill (former IV.D.)

Applicants have failed to adequately evaluate the impacts of the drawdown of the groundwater under CPSES during and as a result of plant operation.

fSS.i t ion

' 'L TU S 1 t .ri ,

L 1 :l '.'

A (U) A (U) A

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19254B063&oldid=2386669"