ML17250A446

Forwards SEP Review of Pipe Break Outside Containment,Topic III-5.B,for Ginna Nuclear Power Plant. & Five Staff Positions.Requsts Addl Info to Complete Review

ML17250A446
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	06/24/1980
From:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	White L ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP.
Shared Package
ML17250A447	List: ML17250A446 ML17250A448
References
TASK-03-05.B, TASK-3-5.B, TASK-RR NUDOCS 8007280107
Download: ML17250A446 (4)

Text

1 IIUGGIOIING ALP <N'f.

DISTRIBUTION.

'ocket NRC PDR JUNE 2 'L Local PDR TERA NRR Reading Mr. Leon D. White. Jr.

ORB 85 Reading Vice President Electric and Steam Generation Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649 JHeltemes

Dear Nr. Mhite:

OCrutchfield RE:

SEP TOPIC III-5.B - PIPE BREAK OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT n

SNowicki HSmith MFletcher SEP Topic File SEP Plant.File RSchaffstall, KMC OELD ACRS (16)

I5E (3)

Enclosed, is a copy of our evaluation of Systematic Evaluation Program Topic III-S.B Pipe Break Outside Containment.

This assessment compares your facility, as described in Docket No. 50-244 with the criteria currently used by the regulatory staff for licensing new facilities.

Please inform us if your as-built facility differs from the licensing basis assumed in our assessme'nt.

Me have discussed this assessment with your staff and believe the facts concerning your plant are correct.

Also enclosed with the assessment are five staff positions which we have taken in our review of this issue.

Our review of this topic will not be complete until you provide the infor-mation requested in our positions 1 and 5.

Please provide an implementation schedule and submittal dates for the 5 gaff positions within 30 days..

When completed, this evaluation will be a basic unit input to the integrated safety assessment for your facility unless you identify changes needed to reflect the as-built conditions at your facility.

This topic assessment may be revised in the future if your facility design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to this topic are modified before the integrated assess-.

ment is completed.

Sincerely.ig~ signed. by ~

Dennis M. Crutch'ield

Enclosure:

Assessment SEP Tg+$3-$g 1 t)'P cc w/enclosure See next page Dennis H. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch 85 Division of Licensing oFFICE)

.O. t. R..k5 pro sURNAME

..S W.Ck1.~rsr DATE$

lg /80 NRC FORM 318 (9.76) NRCM 0240 I

DL'..OCr.

c

.i.e 1 Pg

/8O 4 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979'289 369

3 I

<<3 Vhr '<<'

t 4

Ih II 4

3 3

I lt I

r

~

I I<<

fh h

• I 3

r C>>

P Uf 4

jf 0

I 4

I

• 'I I I

3 h'4 3

ih 3

i \\ hl ~

~ 3 f

F 3

hh.

vt '

%+~ Rangy (4

P

~

~O

+w*w+

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 June 24, 1980 Docket No. 50-244 Mr. Leon D. Mhite, Jr.

Vice President Electric and Steam Generation Rochester

-Gas and Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649

Dear Mr. Mhite:

RE:

SEP TOPIC III-5.B - PIPE BREAK OUTSIDE CONTAINMENT Enclosed is a copy of our evaluation of Systematic Evaluation Program Topic III-5.B Pipe Break Outside Containment.

This: assessment compares your facility, as described in Docket No. 50-244 with the criteria currently used by the regulatory staff for licensing new facilities.

Please inform us if your as-built facility differs from the licensing ba'sis assumed in our assessment.

Me have discussed this assessment with your staff and believe the facts concerning your plant are correct.

Also enclosed with the assessment are five staff positions which we have taken in our review of this issue.

Our review of this topic will not. be complete until you provide the infor-mation requested in our positions 1

and 5.

Please provide an implementation schedule and submittal dates for the 5 staff positions within 30 days.

When completed,. this evaluation will be a basic unit input to the integrated safety assessment for your facility unless you identify changes-needed to reflect the as-built conditions at 'your facility.

This topic assessment may be revised in the future if your facility design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to this topic are modified before the integrated assess-ment is completed.

Sincere'ly,

Enclosure:

Assessment, SEP. Topic. III-5.B.

cc w/enclosure:

See next page Dennis M. Crutchfield,. Ch f Operating Reactors Branch 85 Division of Licensing

Mr. Leon D. White, Jr. June 24, 1980 cc: w/encl osur e:

Harry H. Voigt, Esquire

LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby 8 MacRae 1757 N Street, N.

W.

Washington, D. C.

20036 Mr. Michael Slade 12 Trailwood Circle Rochester, New York 14618 Rochester Coomittee for Scientific Information Robert E.. Lee, Ph.D.

P. 0.

Box 5236 River Campus Station Rochester, New York 14627 J effrey Cohen New York State Energy Office Swan Street Building Core 1, Second Floor Empire State Plaza

Albany, New York 12223 Director, Technical Development Progr ams State of New York Energy Office Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza

Albany, New York 12223 Rochester Publi c Library 115 South Avenue Rochester, New York 14604 Supervisor of the Town of Ontari o 107 Ridge Road West

Ontario, New York 14519 KMC, Incorporated ATTN:

Richaed E. Schaffstall 1747 Pennsylvania

Avenue, N.

W.

Washington,

0. C.

20006 Director, Technical Assessment Division Office of Radiation Programs (AW-459)

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Crystal Mall f2 Arlington, Virginia 20460 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region II Office ATTN:

E IS COORDINATOR 26 Federal Plaza New York, New York 10007 Herbert Grossman, Esq.,

Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission Washington, D. C.

20555 Dr. Richard F. Cole Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Coomission Washington, D. C.

20555 Dr Emneth A-Luebke Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Coomission Washington,.

D. C..

20555 Mr. Thomas B. Cochran Natural Resources Defense Counci 1, Inc.

1725 I Street, N-W.

Suite 600 Washington, D. C..

20006