ML17249A373
| ML17249A373 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 11/28/1979 |
| From: | Schwartz M PLG, INC. (FORMERLY PICKARD, LOWE & GARRICK, INC.) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17249A368 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7912280232 | |
| Download: ML17249A373 (70) | |
Text
ADDENDUM TO THE CRITICALITY ANALYSIS FOR.,THE GINNA NUCLEAR PLANT FUEL STORAGE RACI
Pellet Diamete (cm)
CIQd Diameter (cm)
- Clad, Thickness (cn.)
Lattice Pitch (cm)
Critical Buckling 2
Calculated 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 12 12 3.2 13 13 13 13 14 15 16 16 16 16 16 16 2.734 2.734 2.734 2.734 2.734 2.734 2.734 2.734 3.745 3.745 3.745 4.099 4.099 4.099 4.069 4.069 4.069 3.037
'3.037 0.714*
0.714*
0.714*
0.714"'.729" 0.729*
0.729" 0.729+
2.1& '.1S 0.7620 0.8594
- 2. 93
- 10. 18
- 0. 7620
- 3. 80
- 10. 3.8 7.02 10.3.8 0.7620 0.7620
- 0. 8594
- 0. 8594
- 0. 8594 0.8594 10.13 10.18 2.50 10.18 4.51 10.18 2.50 10.37 4.51 10.37 4.51 10.37 2.55 9.46 2.14 9.46 2.59 9.45 3.53 9.45 8.02 9.90
- 2. 64 9.45 9.45 9.28 8.10 9.28 1.68 9.52 2.17 9.52 4.70 9.52 10.76 1.11 3.49 3.49
'.54 9.52
~ 9. 35
- 9. 35 9;35
- 9. 35 0.7620 0.7620 0.7620 0.7544 0.7S44 0.8594 0.8594 0.8594 0.8600 0.8600 0.7544 0.8600 1.1278 3.. 1278 1.1268 1.1268 1.1268 126 1.1268 3.. 2090 1.2090 1.2701 1.2701 1.2701
- 1. 2703.
1.2701 3..1268 1.2701
- 0. 8570 0.8570
'.8570 0.8570 1.2A27 1.2827
- 1. 2827 1.2827
- 0. 9931 0.9931 0.9931 0.9933.
1.4427 1.4427 1.4427 1.4427 8.49, 10.1S 0.7620
- 0. 04085 0.0406 1.2522 1.0617 40.75 53..23 63.28
- 65. 64 60.07 52.92 47.5 68.8 68.3 1.2522 95.1 0.0406 0.0406 1.2522
- 1. 513.3 1.450 1.555 95.68 88.0 79.0 69.25 SS.52 92.84 91.79 50.75 68.81
- 0. 0406 0.0406 0.07163
- 0. 07163
- l. 684 0.07163 2.198 0.07163 2.381 0.07163 1.555 0.07163 2.198
- 0. 0592
- 0. 0592 0.0592 0.0592 hAhg 1-3208 108.8 1.4224 121.5 1-8669 159.6 2-6416 128.4 1~7526 89.1 0.0800 0.0800 0.0800 2.4785
- 2. 4785 1.9050 104.72
- 79. 5 90.0 0.04085 1.0287 0.04085 1.1049 0.04085 1.1938 0.040S5 1.4554 0.0408S 1.5621 0.04085 1.6891 0.04085 1.0617 1.0015 3.. 0052 1.0043 1.0098 1.01'8
- 1. 0072 1.0003 0.9987 1.0010 1.0025 1.0009 0.9889 0.9830 0.9999 0.9958 1.0040 0.9872 0.9946 0.9809 0.9912 1.0029 0.9944 1.0008 0.9902 1.0055 0.9948 0.9878
- Case s are Pu02 in Natura3.
UO2 throuc.h'19 are with stainless steel c',
Cases 20 through 27 are zirca13.oy
~
~e ~
TABLE NESTINGHOUSE UO2 Zr-4 CLAD CYLINDRICAL CORE CRITICAL EXPERIMENTS EXPERIMENT 1
2 3
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 PITCH
= {IN) 0.600 0.690 0.848 0.976 0.600 0.600 0.600
- 0. 600
- 0. 600
- 0. 600
- 0. 600
- 0. 600 0.848 0.848 BORON CON-CONCENTRATION (ppm) 0 0
0 0
306.
536.4 727.7 104.
218.
330.
446.
657.1 104.
218.
MATERIAL BUCKLING
{FOR LEOPARD)
CM-2
.008793
.009725
.008637
.006458
.007177
.006244
.005572
.008165
.007599
.007106
.006661
.005809
.007320
.006073 CRITICAL NO.
OF PINS 489.4 317.0 251.6 293.0 659.9 807.2 950.2 546.3 607.1 669.5 735.3 895.3 321.0 420.5
~
RADIUS OF FUEL REGION (cm) 19.021 17.605 19.276 23.935 22.088 24.429 26.504 20.097 21.186 22.248 23.315 25.727 21.772 24.919 eff (LEOPARD/PDQ-7) 0.9912 0.9941 0.9927 0.9935 0.9927 0.9937'.9940 0.9919 0.9917 0.9916 0.9909 0.9944 0.9938 0.9925 Fuel Region Data Enrichment Fuel Density Pellet Radius Clad IR Clad OR 2.719 w/o U-235 10.41 g/cm3 0.20 in 0.2027 in 0.23415 in (b)
(c)
Thickness of water reflector is that required to attain total radius of 50 cm for model.
2 (PDQ-7)=.000527 cm-2 BZ 0.9928 Mear 0.0012 Std.
TABLE 3 SAXTON Pu02-U02 CRXTXCAL EXPERIMENTS (8)
Boron H20/U02 Pitch Experiment (ppm)
(Volume)
(Xn) kefZ LEOPARD 3
4 5,
0 0
337 0
0
- 1. 68
- 2. 17
- 2. 17 4.70 10.76
.520
.560
.560
.735 1.040
-. 9912
- 1. 0029 1.0084
.9944 1.0008
.9995 Mean
.0068 Std.
Dev.
.0
TABLE 4 ESADA Pu02-U02 CRITICAL EXPERIMENTS (9)
Experiment Boron (ppm)
H20/U02 (Volume)
Pitch (In) keZZ LEOPARD 1
2 3
4 5
6 0
0 526 0
0 526 1.11
- 3. 49
- 3. 49 3.49
- l. 54
- 1. 11
.690
.9758
.9758
.9758
.750
.690
.9902 1.0055
.9949
.9948
.9878
.9945
.9946 Mean
.0061 Std.
Dev.
0
c TABLE 5 MIXED OXIDE FUEL ASSEMBLY DATA FOR THE GXNNA NUCLEAR PLANT Xtem
. Material Dimensions (in.)
Overall Cross Section Overall Length Control Rod Guide Tube Number per Assembly Material OD, Upper Section XD, Upper Section OD, Dashpot XD, Dashpot Dashpot Length Instrumentation 'Tube Number per Assembly Material OD ID Fuel Rod Number per Assembly Active Length, inches Overall Rod Length Rod Pitch Pre-pressurized Claddinq Outside Diameter Nail Thickness Inside Diameter 304 S.S.
304 S.S.
Sire-4 7.784 x 7.784*
160.1 0.5375 0.5075 0.4765 0.4455 26.297 0.422 0.3455 179 141.4 148.6 0.556 Yes 0.422 0.0243 0.3734 h
Fuel Pellets Mater'.al Pellet Diameter Pellet Density Dilutent (U02+Pu02) Sintered Pellets 0.3659 95%
Natural U02 Enrichments (See Figure 1 for assembly fuel rod loading pattern)
High enrichment (115 per assembly)
Medium enrichment
'(44 per assembly)
Low enrichment (20 per assembly)
Note:
Pu fissile/Pu total =.8329
- (14 x.556".)
x (14 x.556")
= 7.784" x 7.784"
- 3. 279
- 3. 090
- 2. 736
- 3. 110
- 2. 883 2.452 w/o (U+Pu) Fis.
w/o Pu. tot
"t L
C f>>
9
FIGURE 1
PDQ CALCULATIONALMODEL FOR THE GINNA SPENT FUEL STORAGE HACK WITH MIXED OXIDE FUEL 8.430" 0 090" SS 0.233"-Water High Enrich.
CHGT Medium Enrich Inst. Tube law Enrich.
- 0. 090" SS 3.892"-Fuel Water 4e125"-Water
- 3. 892"-Fuel
- 4. 125"-Nater
~ 0.090"-SS 0.233"-Water 0.090"-SS Note:
Boundary condition at top of detailed figure is 180 Rotational Symnetry
~ 9.r pt x 0
Radiolo ical Im act of Mixed Oxide Fuel Assemblies
~Summar An assessmen0..is performed which addresses the radiological impact of the use of four mixed oxide fuel assemblies in the Ginna Station reactor core.
Normal operation and accidental effluent releases are evaluated by comparing the relative quantities of radioisotopes generated for uranium-only and mixed oxide fuel.
Method of Evaluation A substantial amount of information pertaining to the use and impact of mixed oxide fuel was developed in NUREG-0002, the Final Generic Environmental Statement on the Use of Rec cle Plutonium zn Mazed Oxide Fuel xn Lx ht, Water Cooled Reactors or GESMO Report.
In that report, a model LWR usa.ng MOX fuel was devised for comparative impact assessment with LWR's fueled only with uranium.
The model MOX-fueled LWR reactor is assumed to be charged with fuel having an average plutonium content of 1.8 weight percent, of the heavy metal (Pu and U) in the charged fuel.
Furthermore, as many as 40 percent of the rods in the model LWR may be MOX rods.
The planned Ginna core reload with 4 MOX fuel assemblies will comprise less than a 0.5 weight percent average Pu content of the total heavy metal being added and less than 4 percent" of the rods in the reactor will be MOX rods.-= Therefore, radiological impacts calculated for the GESMO.amodel reactor will envelop those for the Ginna case.
III.
A radiological assessment was then performed using the radioactive source terms calculated in the GESMO Report for the model MOX-fueled plant and an equivalent-sized reactor unit utilizing UO2 fuel.
Relative inventories and release quantities of key dose-contributing radionuclides could then be directly used in determining the net effect upon resultant whole body and thyroid doses.
Accidental Releases Spent Fuel Assembly Drop:
The radiological impact of a postulated fuel handling accident involving a dropped MOX fuel assembly was derived by comparing the calculated GESMO source terms with the results of an evaluation which considered the potential consequences of a refueling accident inside the Ginna Station containment building (submitted to A. Schwencer, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, March 18, 1977).
The limiting accident dose pathway identified in the March 18, 1977 evaluation was the 0-2 hour thyroid dose from inhala-tion, which was calculated to be 103 rem and within the guidelines of 10 CFR Part -100.
The associated maximum
E r, /~i'i
whole body dose was approximately 2 rads from cloud immersion.
Although containment isolation would occur in the event of such an accident, no credit was taken for isolation.
2.
Table IV C-35 illustrates the results of the GESMO analysis of MOX and uranium fuel source terms for calculating thyroid and whole body dose.
In general, whole body dose due to released quantities of noble gas and iodine from a MOX assembly having a burnup history similar to that assumed in the 1977 Ginna evaluation would not be expected to exceed the dose from a uranium assembly.
For thyroid dose, GESMO showed that the iodine thyroid dose source term may increase 3-14 percent depending upon the Pu characteristics and degree of burnup.
More typically, at high burnups, which is the limiting case for a fuel handling accident, the increase in the thyroid dose source term is at the lower end of the range.
The resulting impact upon the fuel handling accident with a MOX fuel assembly will therefore be a modest increase in the maximum offsite thyroid dose and the thyroid dose remains well within the site boundary dose guidelines of 10 CFR Part 100.
Loss-of-Coolant Accident:
The design basis loss-of-coolant. accident was analyzed by the. Commission Staff in the January 20, 1972
~Safet Evaluation for the R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Increase; in Sects.on 14 of the R. E.
Gz.nna
- FSAR, zn Sects.on 7 of the R. E. Ginna Final Environmental Statement, and in Section 6 of the R. E. Ginna Environmental Report.
In each evaluation the offsite consequences of a postulated accident were shown to be well within the 10 CFR Part 100 guidelines.
The 0-2 hour site boundary thyroid inhalation dose was calculated to be 155 rem in the Commission's 1972 Safety Evaluation, and was more limiting than the associated dose to the whole body.
The total increase in iodine core inventory available for release contrib-uted by the addition of 4 MOX fuel assemblies will necessarily be well below the 3-14 percent mentioned above due to the presence of 117 other uranium fuel assemblies.
- Thus, the potential offsite thyroid dose will increase by only a small amount and will remain below 10 CFR Part 100 by a considerable margin.
t IV.
Routine Releases The June 4,
1976 evaluation entitled Dose Calculations to Conform with A endix I Re uirements Ginna Station demonstrated that calculated effluent releases were well within the Appendix I
~ f'A.(p"
design objectives.
In Tables IV C-18 and IV C-19 of the GESMO
The GESMO tables indicate that differences in the relative quantities of radionuclides releases are.insignificant, except where modest increases result in I-131 and tritium source terms in the MOX case.
The percentage increases are 8 percent and 9 percent, respectively.
The total increase in normal effluents will be less because only 4 MOX assemblies will be loaded.
Therefore the Appendix I objectives will still be met.
Conclusion The radiological impacts caused by the addition of 4 mixed oxide fuel assemblies have been conservatively analyzed for accidents and routine operations.
The incremental radiological doses attributed to the presence of the MOX assemblies have been shown to be small for the most potentially significant dose pathways and all applicable guidelines for routine and accidental radiation exposure continue to be met.
gfQ;j 0'-
UNKY'ED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CONFESSION Before the Atomic Safet and Licens Board In the Natter of CObFQNWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (Dresden Station, Units 2
& 3, and Quad Cities Station, Units 1
& 2)
Docket Nos.:
50-237, 50-249, 50-254, 50-265 Amendments to Facility Operating License Nos;:
DPR-19, DPR-25, DPR-29, DPR-30 TM.s Board, by an Order docket;ed on December 4, 1978, gave notice that a Special Prehearing Conference in the above proceeding would be held on January ll, 1979, in Ch.cago, Illinois. In response to this notice the parties to this proceeding and th persons seeking to inter-vene in this proceed~
(petitioners) jointly arranged and participated in a telephone conference on December 11, 1978, with the Conan of the Board in order to discuss the Special Prehearing Conference.
During.the telephone conference the parties and petitioners stated their belief that the business of the Special Prehearing Conference could be conducted more effectively if the Conference were postponed.
The parties and petitioners requested additional time to discuss possible contentions, and they proposed a schedule for filing and responding to contentions which would enable the Board to have received substantially all argument on the contentions by the date of the Con-ference.
According to the schedule proposed, petitioners'ontentions
shall be filed on December 29, 1978, responses to those contentions
--sM1 be-fBed-on-.january
.12;1979;--and-responses-to
.the responses shall be filed on-January 26, 1979;--Oral-argument at the Conference could be focused on the precise issues'which then remain.
For good cause shown, the Special;Prehearing Conference scheduled for January ll, 1979, is hereby cancelled and notice is hereby given that the Conference will be held at 10:00 a.m.
on Thursday, February 1, 1979, in.Rocm. 2502, United States Courthouse and Federal Building, 219 South
Dearborn Street,
Chicago, Illinois.
In light of the change in the date of the Conference, the parties and petitioners are excused from the requirement that they report to the Board by December 15, 1978, the progress of their negotiations.
FOR THE ATONIC SAFHZY AND LICENSING BOARD DESIGNATED TO RULE ON PETITIONS FOR LEAVE TO INTERVEi~lE lin, Carman Dated at Madison, Wisconsin, December 13, 1978.
UNITED STATES OF A".KRICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO~QtISS ION In the Hatter of
)
)
CO~iKOiV'EALTH EDISON COMPANY
)
~
. (Dresden Nuclear Po:rer Station,
)
Units 2 and 3; Quad Cities.
)
Nuclear Power Station, Units l, )
~ and 2)
I Docket 'No. (s) 50 23/
50-249 50-254 "50-265 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing document(s) upon each person designated on the official service list compiled by the Office of the Secretary of the Commission in this proceeding in accordance with the requirements of Section 2.712 of 10 CFR Part 2-Rules of Practice, of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Rules and Regulations.
L
- ~ II Dated at 4'ashington,
.C. this
/W day of
/
197 6.
0 fic o
the Secretary of th Commission
Docket No.(s)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COK41ISSION In the Hatter of
)
)
COMOKKALTH EDISON COMPANY
)
h
....)-
(Dresden Nuclear Power Station,
)
Units 2 and 3;'Quad Cities'-':,-;)
Nuclear Power Station, Units...l
)
and 2)
)
SERVICE LIST 50-237 50-249 50-254 50-265 Gary E.. Hilhollin, Esq.
1815 Jefferson Street
- Hadison, Wisconsin 53711 Hrs. Elizabeth B. Johnson Union Carbide Corporation Nuclear Division P.O.
Box X Oak Ridge,'ennessee 37830 Dr. Quentin J.
Stober Fisheries Research Institute University of Washington
- Seattle, Washington 98195 Counsel for NRC Staff Office of the Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 John H. Rove, Esq.
Isham, Lincoln & Beale One First National Plaza, 42nd Fl.
Chicago, Illinois 60603 Susan N. Sekuler, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General Environmental Control Division 188 Hest Randolph Street Chicago, Illinois 60601 Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.
Natural Resources Defense Council 917 15th Street, N.H.
Hashington, D.C.
20005
e L
UNITED STATES OF AMFRICA NUCLFAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Hatter of ROCHESTER GAS 5 ELECTRIC CORPORATION
)
)
(R.
E.
Ginna Nuclear Power Plant,'
Unit No. 1)
Docket No. 50-244 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF APPEARANCE Notice is hereby given that effective March 10, 1978, I will withdraw my appearance in the above captioned proceeding.
All mail and service lists should be amended to delete my name after that date.
Respectfully s hmitted,
- 8kcAg Auburn L. Mitchell Counsel for NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 8th day of March, 1978
~ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of ROCHESTER GAS 8 ELECTRIC CORPORATION
)
(R.
E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant,
)
Unit No. 1)
~
)
Docket No. 50-244 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that. copies of "NOTICE OF tJITHDRA!PAL OF APPEARANCE" of Auburn L. Mitchell in the above-caotioned Oroceedinq have been served on the following by deposit in the United States'mail, first class or air mail, or, as indicated by an asterisk, through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, this10th day of
- March, 1978:
Edward Luton, Esq.,
Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cottmission itashington, D.
C.
20555 Or. Franklin C. Daiber College of Marine Studies University of Delaware
- Newark, Delaware 19711 Dr. Ettneth A. Luebke Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Leonard M. Trosten, Esq.
Hope M. Babcock, Esq.
- LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby 8 MacRae 1757 N. Street Washington, D. C.
20006 Mr. Michael Slade 1250 Clown Point Drive
- Webster, New York 14580 Rochester Committee for Scientific Information
. Robert E. Lee, P.H.D.
P. 0.
Box 5236 River Campus Station Rochester, New York 14627
Jeffrey Cohen, Esq.
Hest York State Energy Office SvIan Street Building, Core 1
Second Floor, Empire State Plaza
- Albany, New York 12223 Warren B. Rosenbaum, Esq.
One Main Street East 707 Wilder Building Rochester, Ne'er York 14614 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Docketinq and Service Section Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Auburn L. Mitchell Counsel for HRC Staff
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULAIXEY CCMMISSION BEFORE THE ATlMEC SA1!ZTY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of ROCHESTER GAS AND ELZCIRIC CORPORATION Docket No. 50-244 (R. E. Ginna Nuclear Pawer:
Plant, Unit No. 1)
The Regulatory Staff and Intervenor Michael R. Slade have agreed upon a statement of contentions to be asserted by the Intervenor in this case.
The Applicant opposes the intervention and has moved to strike all of the Intervenor's contentians.
'Jhe agreement between the Staff and Intervenor Slade states the follawing:
"Upon appraval of these stipulated contentions by the Board, all contentions previously subnitted by intervenor shall be deemed withdrawn".
The Applicant carrectly points out that such an attempted reservation by the Intervenor is soaewhat ambiguous.
In the Board's view, however, the only cantentions presently being asserted are those stated in the Intervenor's written agreement with the Regulatory Staff. Allother staterents of contentions are deemed to be withdrawn.
The Applicant's mtion to disarLss the petition is denied.
The Board's ruling on each of the contentions follows.
OOCÃtgq LLSHag MAR28 1S77 p g
CKlke ot the 5eaWay, Doc4tley 5 Senko Secapg
0
Contentions C, G, and H are rejected as issues in controversy because each of them is vague and lackiag in particularity.
The rareixdxq~ contentions are admitted, as follows:
Contention A The Applicant' quality assurance program is inadequate and/or fails to conform to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B criteria because:
a) it has not corrected malfunctions of electric type valve operators; b) the main steamline isolation valves do not meet minimum code requirements for wall thicknesses; and c) criterion X is not met in that there is an inadequate operations program for inspection of activities affecting quality.
Contention B
Applicant has not deaxnstrated conformance with the amended ECCS criteria as determined by the AEC in Docket RM-50-1.
Contention D The Applicant is in violation of applicable Federal and New York State water quality*staxdards in that it does not possess an exemption for the discharge of water at
tenperatures of 23.4'F above ambient as described in the FES, pp. 3-7, sec. 3.4.1.
Contention E The NEPA analysis for the facility is inadequate because it fails to adequately consider the effect of cold shock on lake biota resulting from emergency shutdown of the facility, and because it fails to adequately consider the effect of cold shock on lake biota as a result of recirculation of discharge water into the intake water during the mater when lake ambient tanperature falls below 37'F.
'Contention F The FES is inadequate because it Sails to treat the following energy conservation alternatives:
a) ending special discounts for large volume electrical use; b) increasing electrical pricing in order to decrease demand; c) implementation by the Applicant of mziaazn lighting levels per square foot by its custaners; d) setting insulation standards for new and old customers; e) prating energy efficiency labeling; f) discouraging electric space heating and air conditioning (in climatic conditions that do not require it); and
g) peak or demand load flattening techniques including time of day meterixg charges, load staggering and/or selective load shedding.
I
'Cont'ention I Applicant has failed to submit an adequate site contingency plan because the Applicant has failed to apprise the popu-lation of the existence of t1;e site contingency plan'nd what would be required of the sunnundiag population if the plan had to be implemented.
Contention J Applicant has failed to provide flood protection against mximzn high water levels shown to have occurred or to have been. projected for Lake'Ontario.
Contention K Applicant's radwaste systems management program is inadecIuate because it does not keep releases to a level as law as reasonably achievable.
The. State of New York shall participate in this proceeding as an interested State pursuant to 10 CFR 52.715(c).
SO ORDERED.
I THE AT(MEC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 25th day of March 1977.
Luton~
0
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGlJLATORY CO!'O'IISS ION In the Matter of ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC
'COMPANY (R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No.
1)
)
)
)
Docket No. (s) 5p kg
)
)
)
)
)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing document(s) upon each person designated on the official service'list compiled by the Office of the Secretary of the Commission in this proceeding in accordance with the requirements of Section 2.712 of 10 CFR Part 2-Rules of Practice, of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Rules and regulations.
Dated at 4'ashington, D.C. this day of
'197+
Office of the Secretary of the Commission
L
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO~LlISS ION In the Matter of ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION Docket No. (s) 50244 (R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power
- Plant, Unit No.
1)
SERVICE LIST Edward Luton, Esq.,
Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.
C.
20555 Dr. Franklin C. Daiber Department of Biological Sciences University of Delaware Newark, Delaware 19711 Dr.
Emmeth A. Luebke Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.
C.
20555 William Massar, Esq.
Counsel for NRC Staff U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.
C.
20555 Arvin E.
Upton, Esq.
Leonard Trosten, Esq.
- LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae 1757 N Street, N.
W.
Washington, D. C.
20036 Hope Babcock, Esq.
David Doane, Esq.
- LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby 6 MacRae 1757 N Street, N.
W.
Washington, D.
C.
20036 J.
Bruce MacDonald, Esq.
Deputy Commissioner 6 Counsel New York State Department of Commerce 99 Washington Avenue
. Albany, New York 12210 Carmine J.
- Clemente, Esq.
New York State Atomic Energy Council Department.of Commerce 99 Washington Avenue
- Albany, New York 12210 Robert E. Lee, Ph.D.
P. 0.
Box 5236 River Campus Station Rochester, Ne'w York 14627 Warren B. Rosenbaum, Esq.
1 Main Street East Wilder Building, 707 Rochester, New York 14674 Mr. Michael Slade-1250 Crown Point Drive
- Webster, New York 14580
0 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
" ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION..
In the Matter of ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION (R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1)
)
)
)
Docket No. 50-244 <
)
)
)
ORDER Follow'ing discussion with all parties to this pro-ceeding by conference telephone call on February 15,
- 1974, a "Motion for Postponement of Prehearing Conference" made by Intervenor Michael Slade was granted orally by
'the Board.
That conference had been scheduled to take place on February 20, 1974.
V The prehearing conference in this matter is hereby rescheduled and will take place on March'2, 1974, at 9:30 a.m., local time, in the East Courtroom, 2nd Floor, V.S. District Court, 100 State Street, Rochester, New York.
THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Edward Luton, Chairman DOCrETED LSEC FEEI19 1974~
0,1:.. g.;,. Se~~<
t g
A r<X Issued at Washington, D. C.,
this 19th 'day of February, 1974.
~
~
0
- ~/
t I
)
I' I
Ei I (
I I
r)i",
k.
I I
I I
I
,l)f)
)
L 1,
)
I]
I It
'NXTED STATES,OP AMgEXCA r
ATO>lXC ENERGY 1COHNXSSQON Xi tl)~ Hatt< r of
)
)
ROC)lESTER GAS 6 ELECTRXQ COM?ANY,), Docket No. -50" 2/4 (R.E.
Ginnq Nuclear Power Plant, )
Unit No. l)
)
CERTXPXCATE'F SERVXCE I hereby certify that X have thii day aervcd the fox'cgoing'oqum6nt upon each person'designated, on the official service lpga t compiled by the Office of the Secrotary of the Conzeiaaion in thea proceeding
'n accordance
~sf,th the Zequirce"ntq og Scctibn 2.7l2 of lO,CPR Part 2 - Rulea of Practgcc, oP. the Atonic Energy covsiaaion'al Rulep and Regulations.
L I
J I
IE I
Dated, at Mashington~D',':
hia~W~day of m 2D L
I f
)
t I I I)I'i f
(,
= DD>M
'Office of the Secretary of the issfcn I,
ff I
L.')
I
)
E 11 I
i I
1'! I I
I
,I f
t ltl',
f I
)
I
)
(, I E
(
f I
'I I
t(
I I
1,1 I'
(
I
))j'; r I'
I
'I I'
Lf )',(
I 1
(
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION In the Matter of ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION (R. E.
Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Unit No. 1)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Docket No. 50-244 SERVICE LIST Edward Luton, Esq.,
Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Atomi.c Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545 Dr. Franklin C. Daiber Department of Biological Sciences University of Delaware Newark, Delaware 19711 Dr. Emmeth A. L'uebke Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D.
C.
20545 Dr. A. Dixon Cellihan Union Carbide Corporation P.
O. Box Y Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Thomas W. Reilly, Esq.
Alternate Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545 Arvin E. Upton, Esq.
Len Trosten, Esq.
LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby and MacRae 1757 N Street, N,
W.
Washington, D.'.
20036 Hope Babcock, Esq.
David Doane, Esq.
- LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby and MacRae 1757 N
- Street, N.
W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 J. Bruce MacDonald, Esq.
Deputy Commissioner and Counsel New York State Department of Commerce 99 Washington Avenue
- Albany, New York 12210 Carmine J. Clemente, Esq.
New York State Atomic Energy Council Department of Commerce 99 Wadhington Avenue
- Albany, New York 12210 Joseph Ghllq, Eeq.
R. Rex Renfrow, Esq.
Office of the General";Counsel Regulation U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D.
C.
20545 Howard Wilchins, Esq.
Office of the General Counsel Regulation U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545 Robert E. Lee, Ph.D.
P.
O. Box 5236 River Campus Station Rochester, New York 14627 Warren B. Rosenbauy>Esq.
1 Main Street East Wilder Building, 707 Rochester, New York Mr. Michael Slade 1250 Crown Point Drive
- Webster, New York 14580
y
page 2
Mrs. Lois Dolan, Librarian Lyons Public Library 67 Canal Street
- Lyons, New York 11489 Information co ies mailed to:
Mr. Robert A. Ackerman 762 Oakridge Drive Rockester, New York 14617 Wayne M. Harris, Esq.
~
Harris, Carroll 6 Creary 226 Powers Building Rochester, New York 14614
I 0