ML17258A648

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to NRC Re Plans for 820310-12 Integrated Assessment Meeting.Purpose Should Be to Discuss Open Items, Excepting Natural Phenomena Topics,Rather than to Present Final Arguments for SEP Topics
ML17258A648
Person / Time
Site: Ginna Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 03/09/1982
From: Maier J
ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP.
To: Crutchfield D
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
TASK-03-02, TASK-03-03.B, TASK-03-03.C, TASK-03-04.A, TASK-03-06, TASK-03-07.A, TASK-03-07.B, TASK-05-05, TASK-06-04, TASK-06-07.B, TASK-3-2, TASK-3-3.B, TASK-3-3.C, TASK-3-4.A, TASK-3-6, TASK-3-7.A, TASK-3-7.B, TASK-5-5, TASK-6-4, TASK-6-7.B, TASK-RR NUDOCS 8203160422
Download: ML17258A648 (4)


Text

  • ~

REGULATORY ORMATION DISTRIBUTION SY M (RIDS)

ACCESSION NBR:8203160422 DOC ~ DATE: 82/03/09 NOTARIZED:.NO DOCKET FACIL:50-244 Robert Emmet Ginna Nuclear Planti Unit 1E Rochester G

05000240 AUTH'AMP AUTHOR AFFILIATION MAIEREJ ~ F ~

Rochester Gas 8

Fl ectric Cor p.

RECIP ~ NAME, RECIPIENT AFFILIATION CRUTCHF IELD E D ~

Operating Reactors Branch 5

SUBJECT:

Responds to NRC 820309,11tr re plans for 820310, 12 integrated assessment meetingBPurpose shou] d be to discuss open itemsi excepting natural phenomena topicsir ather than to pt esent final arguments for SEP topics.

DI'STRIBUTION 'CODE:

AOO IS, COPIES RECEIVED:LTR J ENCL Q SIZE:

TITLE: General Distribution for af ter Issuance of Operating License NOTES: 1 copy:SEP Sects

Ldr, 05000244 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME ORB 05 BC 01 INTERNALS ELD NRR/DHFS DEPY08 NRR DL/ORAB b

0Q EXTERNAL: ACRS 09 NRC PDR 02 NTIS COPIES LTTR ENCL 13 1

10 1

1 1

RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME IE NRR/DL 0 IR NRR/DSI/RAB RGN1 LPDR NSIC 06 03 05 COPIES LTTR ENCL 3P a

TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED:

LTTR 3

ENCL

f" airs f 4

+,.6 1

'lr 4444kl f fi.

uf

)offull ialu 1'!f44

)

f 47>1

>4')~f fl e

h tu

~

I 44 r II

" a e

4 I 1 f 0

4 fl,h'I'1 1

,f'1,>r '

i,f

!444 1 I) fprf<<4 I

'1 1 1f', ff u

I I

Il u f y I 9 f I l

4 1

, ~'uis,'u f

f s'I)fif

'Ih u

I,u<<"<<,

regis f,,<ff' a<a

~a~~~~aa

)hui,

<<PrP P

'l 1',I!!fuff ~4> g g

1 g 0, 1 fr% 1

<< ~ u,

~ " 'tu

'Ill N "I e.

R

~

k r

I Ifr)lgfr' af'

'i

IZ<~u 'uIII

~l (iiiiiill/llIlizi~~i~iz ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION

~ 89 EAST AVENUE, ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14649 JOHN 6, MA(BR Vice isresident March 9, 1982 TELEPHONE aEE* cocE vid 546-2700 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:

NRR/Licensee Integrated Assessment, Meetin R.

E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-244 MAR15 1982m aS NNax RIlmIIay Cga~ggg lP f&aXKQ"MT8

'IlDC

Dear Mr. Crutchfield:

This letter is in response to your letter, received by telecopy on March 9, 1982, discussing the plans for the Ginna Integrated Assessment meeting of March 10-12, 1982.

In the "purpose of meeting" section, it is stated that this will "...allow the licensee to present final arguments or present new information or differences.

~.".

RGIEE disagrees that this meeting is the time for final arguments for many of the SEP topics.

There are a significant number of topics for which RGRE is still reviewing the NRC's recent draft SERs (e.g.,

IZ3-3.C, V-5), or for which the ERC has not responded to RGRE's draft SER comments (e.g., II-3.B, III-7.A, III-7.B, VI-4, VI-7.B).

Further, the delay of SEP topics III-2 and III-4.A could modify the final RGSE proposals for other completed SEP topics, such as III-6, Seismic Considerations,.
Thus, the purpose of the'meeting should be only to discuss all defined open items, excepting -"natural phenomena" topics.

Further RGSE review and comment on recently completed or soon-to-be completed topics should not be precluded.

It is expected that a number of "open" SEP topics will be determined to be acceptably

resolved, once the NRC completes its review of RGSE information.

RGSE is also not prepared to provide a detailed cost/benefit

analysis, or personnel exposure estimates, resulting from possible corrective actions.

Based on previous discussion with members of the NRC Staff, it was our understanding that this information would not be required at this time.

Estimates of cost-benefit and personnel exposure will be factored into the final backfitting decisions, to be decided at the end of the Integrated Assessment.

--.- --~ saOSQ~

pOR AOOCK pQR

~82Q31'6Q~

Q5QQQQ44 p

l Very truly yours,

~~g ~

J hn E. Maier It3.0>

(/b

(hh I 4>>',vh f

4>>

h

<<h gh.l V 4 h

h4

~

h V

h

),F

>>v<<

4<<hh j)

(h 4

<<h F

14 f >>

I(V

, l I

F.

4 h I

4 h

~4

'h h(

$ "f

'4 i

(,

<<(j (I Ih gh)f(

( 'h

~'1 I

II<< I

'v

~ (

h

,t

<<(

4<<-

h FI I W, ~

W !'Vl'<<

f

<<Q

<< ~

Jh<<