ML043020488
| ML043020488 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 06/08/2004 |
| From: | Richard Ennis Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Lobel R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2004-0362 | |
| Download: ML043020488 (1) | |
Text
From:
Rick Ennis
\\
To:
Richard Lobel> I" Date:
6/8/04 7:28AM'
Subject:
Overpressure & Appendix J
- Rich, Our current response to Bill Shermans's question 2.e states:
7The VYNPS reactor containment already serves as an engineered safety feature. It serves as a pressure barrier to minimize leakage. Tests are done, as specified In the VYNPS Technical Specifications (TSs), in compliance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 50, Appendix J, to ensure the pressure retaining capability of the containment. These tests verify compliance with a stringent leakage rate limit.
In addition, as discussed in Attachment 1, the containment integrity is continuously monitored in the control room."
Brian said this doesn't answer the question on whether additional containment pressure testing Is required to demonstrate that pressure wil be maintained for the period for which credit Is requested. I propose to add the following:
'Additonal containment pressure testing Is not considered to be required if the maximum TS allowable containment leakage Is assumed in the calcualtion of the available NPSH. This assumption will be verfied as part of the NRC staff's review of the proposed power request.'
Since we didn't specifically ask the question in our RAls, I left a message for my licensing contact at VY to:
(1) verfiy that assumption was used; and (2) have them address it in their response (suggested under response to your question 11 on conservatisms in the analysis).
Any comments?
- Thanks, Rick 415-1420 CC:
Allen Howe; Comelius Holden; Robert Dennig