ML17258A284
| ML17258A284 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 10/29/1981 |
| From: | Maier J ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP. |
| To: | Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| TASK-15-19, TASK-RR NUDOCS 8111040165 | |
| Download: ML17258A284 (6) | |
Text
REGULA<TORY I NORMA'TION DISTRIBUTION SYST M", (RIDS)
ACCESSIOV NBR:8111040165 DOC ~ DATEl: 81/10/29 NOTARIZED:: NO DOCKER" 0 FACILE:50-2'04 Robert'jnmIet Ginnai Nucl ear>> Plant~
Uni t 1i Rochester G.
05090244 AUT'rlt NAMEl AUTHOR AFFILI'ATIION RA IER'i J ~ E~,
Rochester Gas L Electric Corp'EC IP, 'VAMKI RECK PZENT AFFILIATION CRUTCHFIELO'gD, 0~crating Re'actors 8'ranch 5
SUBJKCiT:: Re'sponds" to NRC draf t evaluati oni for radiol ogicail poritiion>> of SKP Topic XV"19ire LOCA doses<peri 810929 1 tr.Final>>
assessment" shou-ld include details of analysis assumptions; DISTRiIBUTI N CODKi! A035S COPIES RECEIVED':L4 R
$'NCL( D'IZE'o" 4'X TLKh'-
S EP" Top i c s'OTES':
1 copy:SKP Sect; LUr.
05090244 RECIPIENT" ID>> CODE/LVAMKl ACT%ON i
ORB" 05 BCi 01~
INTERNALc CONT SYS A
07 iVR R ~/ D E'/ A D M9 E 1 3i R'AB.
11~
RES F ILE 04 COPIES LiTTR ENC L!
1 1
1 1
RECIPIENT ID CODE'/NAME)
IllEl 06'RR'/DE'/HGKB 1 0
'VRR/DL/SEPB 12'OPIES LfIl"Rt KNCLt EXTERNALi:- ACR8 NRCI PORE NT'Zs 14'2!
16" 1
1 1
I.PDRi
<<VSI Ct 03 05~
NW lo@~
3l o
TOfl'AL NUBBER'F COPIES" REQUIRED '(TTR ENCLt
F'
t zrztsul zzziztsz Ltl1 01 Isa
>'iz 'i iiiiiiiiiiiii ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION
~ 89 EAST AVENUE, ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14649 YORK JOHN C. MAIER Vice President TELEPHONE, AREA COOK 716 546-2700 October 29, 1981 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention:
Mr. Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No.
5 U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Subject:
SEP Topic XV-19, LOCA Doses R.
E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-244
Dear Mr. Crutchfield:
This letter is in response to the NRC draft evaluation for the radiological portion of SEP Topic XV-19, which was provided by your letter dated September 29, 1981.
We recommend that the final topic assessment include additional details concerning analysis assumptions.
- Also, we have identified one error in the draft evaluation, which does not affect the conclusions of the evaluation.
The evaluation states that we committed to purge less than 90 hours0.00104 days <br />0.025 hours <br />1.488095e-4 weeks <br />3.4245e-5 months <br /> per year.
At the NRC's request, an earlier commitment to this effect was superseded by our letter dated May 29, 1980 which included the commitment that "all purging and venting times
[will be limited] to as low as achievable."
Based on this current commitment, we believe that the assumption of closed purge valves is still appropriate.
Additional detail should be provided in the assessment.
Spray flow rate and its effectiveness should be identified separately from recirculation ventilation filtration system flow rate and effectiveness.
In this regard, it appears that no credit, has been permitted for removal of organic iodine.
This should be clarified.
A reference for the 78% of containment which is assumed to be affected by iodine removal systems should be provided.
The basis for' 50 gal/min seal leakage should also be provided.
Sii<0~0<SS 8<<029 PDR ADQCK 05000244 P
'DR
(<0
1 >
1 n',
'q a~
'k 5 ~
h Sr gl q=-'
g H
<l
~ g ~
V
'1 41
~
ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORP.
oATE October 29, 1981 To Mr. Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief SHEET NO.
With regard to removing the delay from the NaOH addition, we note that doses are acceptable even with the delay.
Although the delay timer does exist, all reference to it and any suggestions regarding its use have been deleted from the Ginna Emergency Procedures.
Further, operator training is based on not overriding NaOH addition.
Since the delay timer is adjustable down to 10
- seconds, an alternative to removing the delay would be to adjust it to a short enough time to provide adequate assurance that the NaOH will not be overridden.
- However, as noted in the assessment, there is no safety reason why such an adjustment would be required.
The decisions to make the adjustment will be discussed during the, Ginna Integrated Assessment.
Very truly yours, J
E. Maier
t
'h E /
I~
C