ML17258B183

Forwards NUS Corp Ginna Station Design Basis Flooding Study for Rochester Gas & Electric Corp, in Response to NRC Evaluation of SEP Topics II-3.A,II-3.B,II-3.B.1 & III-3.A Re Potential of Local Flooding

ML17258B183
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	08/18/1981
From:	Maier J ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP.
To:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML17258B184	List: ML17258B183 ML17309A179
References
TASK-02-03.A, TASK-02-03.B, TASK-02-03.B1, TASK-03-03.A, TASK-2-3.A, TASK-2-3.B, TASK-2-3.B1, TASK-3-3.A, TASK-RR NUDOCS 8108240056
Download: ML17258B183 (6)

Text

I!

RESUL'ATOiINFORMATION DISTRIBUTION +TEN (RIDE)

ACCESSIOQ'SR ~ 810824005b DOC ~ DATE'1/08/18 NOTARIZED!* NO DOCKEiT FACIL050~244 Robert Emmet Ginna Nuclear PlantF, Unit 1F Rochester G 05090244 AUTH INANE! AUTHOR AFFIl 'IATION MAIKRpJ ~ E>>, Rochester Gas 8 Electric RECXPIENT AFFILIATION Corp'ECIP

~ NAME)

CRVTCHFIELOFD ~ Operating, Reactors Branch 5 SUBJECT>I Forwards" NUS Corp- "Ginna Station Des)gn Basis" Flooding, Study for Rochester" Gas 8 Electric. Corp'" in response to NRC) evaluation of SEP Topics IIM3~ A, II 3 ~ BF II 3 ~ B ~ 1 8 III. 3,A rel potential of local flooding, UPS>>(>>>> SwqiPC>> S~

DISTRIBUTI N CODE;:" A035S COPIES RECEX VED: LTR 'NCL' SIZE":

SEP. Topics "Q'ITLEl::

NOTES::1 copy:SEP Sect; Ldr. 05000244 REC I PI EN T'D RECIPIENT COPIES CODE/l4AMK< LTTR ENCL>> ID L>>TTR>> ENCL<

ACTlION I ORB 05 BC 04 7 7 12'OPIES CODE/NAMK'ONT INTERNALS A/D i4IATL8GUAL>>13 1 SYS" A 07 1 1>>

HYD/GEO BR 10. 2 2 06"' 2 2' OR ASSESS BR 11 1 1 FII >

01 SEP BR 3 1'XTERNALs ACRS 14 1e LPDR 03 1 1 NRCi PDR>> 02>> 1 1 NSIC 05. 1 1 NTIS 1

/

~q TOiTAL NUi>>BER DF COPIES'EQUIRED>>'iTTR P8 ENCL

II hh Ih n I j I 4

n I~

"~

'4

i',

iÃ,'OCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION o 89 EAST AVENUE, ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14649 JOHN E. MA IER TELEPHONE VICE PRESIOEIIT AREA COOS lls 546.2700 August 18, 1~9~! i I=,l Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

(-'%>,

8-Attention: Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief ~ gG 'p l~~

Operating Reactors Branch No. S

, ~~asoep'2 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nashington, P.C. 20555 p.

Subject,: SEP Topics II 3,A, II-.3.B, II-3.B.1, ~N-I3.

R. E. Ginna Nuc3,ear Power Plant Docket No. 50-.244

Dear Mr. Crutchfield:

This letter is in response to the NRC Staff's evaluation of the potential for local flooding which was provided by your letter dated April 10, 1981 and to the Staff's evaluation of the effects of high water levels on plant structures which was pro-vided by your letter dated Maxch 24, 1981. The Staff's evalu-.

ations concluded that a ".Probable Maximum Flood" (PMF) of 37,000 cfs would. pxoduce a water surface elevation of about. 275 ft msl.

In response to the Staff,'s assessment, 'RG&E,requested a contractor, NUS Corporation, to analyze the potential for local-flooding as a result of storms varying from the 100 year precipitation to the Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) which would cause the pMFC Following field reconnaissance, analyses were performed, and the enclosed'report has been prepared.

shown that the Deer Creek channel is capable of carrying a It is 12-inch rainfall event, with an associated peer Creek flow of 13,700 cfs, without exceeding a flood leyel of 270 ft ms). The estimated return period of this event is in excess of 10 years.

Since plant grade in the area of Deer Creek is about 270 conclude that the present Ginna design is adequate to ft msl, we preclude flooding of safety-related structures, systems and components, and that no corrective actions are required. Further, we conclude that the referenced SEP topics should be considered resolved 'with no open items to be assessed during the integrated assessment;.

,810824005b 810818 PDR ADOCK 05000244 ~

P PDR

I \

~ '1 I 1

I I

V

~, 4 ~

ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTR~ORP. SHEET NO.

DATE To August 18, 1981 Mr. Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief The basis for our conclusion regarding closure of the curxently open items of local flooding is well founded in NRC documentation of the purpose of SEP. On November 17, 1977, the NRC Staff met with SEP utility representatiVes to describe SEP.

(See a memo dated November 22, 1977 from R. D. Silver to D. Eisenhut.) The NRC Staff stated that an acceptable alter-.,

native to current criteria was that the "probability of event is sufficiently low" and/or the "consequences (more realistic) are sufficiently low,'~ These alternative approaches were further documented in a letter dated December 1, 1977 from Victor Stello, Director, Division of Operating Reactors, to L. D. White, Jr.,

RG&E, and have been reiterated verbally by the NRC since then.

Since the conclusions provided here are well within the scope enunciated by the NRC, the referenced SEP topics should be considered complete.

Very truly yours, Enclosure

Ca II ll f' t

~ 4