ML19309B033
| ML19309B033 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 01/17/1977 |
| From: | Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Mattimoe J SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19309B034 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-8593, NUDOCS 8004020509 | |
| Download: ML19309B033 (3) | |
Text
(
b 'y d
7 5.:
E DISTRIBUTION:
@C'PDR CKET)
January 17, 1977 HR Local PDR Doci,et tio.40-312 ORB!4 Rdg.
T. J. Carter ze:
R. Reid
- =
R. Ingram
-=
V. Rooney (2)
ATTH: f1r. J. J. l'attinoe OI&E(3)
~~ T Sacranento Municipal Utility District Attorney, OELD
~-
D. Eisenhut Assistant General llanacer and Chief Engineer T. B. Abernathy J. R. Buchanan 6201 S Street P. O. Box 15830 ACRS (16)
Sacrriento, California 95013 Gray File rentlenen:
PE:
?.Ai'C'r:0 SECO tmCLEA7 GE!!EMT!"3 STATIN:
Enclosed for your infornation is a copy of a letter dated January 3,
=
1977 f ro*.1 Pebert D. Pollard, dich is neino considered as a Pemiest for EL "ction nursuant to 10 CFR 2.206, reoarding your License ko. GPP-St. and others.
A copy of the Motice ve are filino with the office of the Federal Pecister relating to this request is also erclased fcr your infor..iatien.
The letter frna Mr. Pollord, among other things, states th t c refuelinq cccident inside the contcinnent building nay not have been adenuately considerec cucint.t the licensirg review of your facilitv.
As yeu are cuare, we rccently contceted rvScrs of your staff tn entr.in infor"ation for an inderen: lent assessnent of such a postolated accident at your facility. 'Msed on our prelininary reviev, potential site bounceirv radiation ex;.osures cue to sucP an accid?nt at your facility unuld be citnin the excesure <!uicelines of 1" Cn Part 100 cven crsuninq no isolation cf contairr+nt or ef fluent fil tenior..
In craer to confir; tnese resiits On.i to recum nt tle tccters involvei in t! e mraluation, vo request t"at yo:: provi1c a detrifled evaluatio.
ci the p9tential cor.senuences cf e'c, en accident it vcur facility
.i t >in r,0 iW s of recoint of. ;i n letter.
Yrne en31yric rnooit utii1:n ass"mtions cumarAl' to ' unse "i'/"- in kanirarvf,uiae
- 1. di, "/ sse: atiers Usec, fer '.vric-ina tho Octatic1 na.:i ni onical C'T.SC0400C05 a; A IUel D r.dli v ' c f ~.'" *' I. i " ti ' IHOI ;StMlinn a'Hi D : f* O '18* f aCi i i t'.' ' f e r CO il i n
a '
'I*' W !ri2Pi dler ICOCtGes" and e
"Mi eper, I fr & renservatiV9
.2" M ", : n," ' > i f i ' b"' in the cnnt?.iF e'it j
atvS :here Unich 1:0U1 ' hela * "el m M Catt rial, any filtra tion 'if effluent ':ic9 ocul d rNece r4 e :ec a,1 on > cuto'atic i sol a.in, of
,. R f *iQ r 4
- 1 Q
O I --
"~.
.... _f.,.0.0 4.0 2 0.9 N da 4,
_-j
'~
=
== M
-=
.+
Sacranento Municipal t!:ility 5
District. T'
==
tihe containnent which would 1; nit releases.
Your evaluation-sitould
=4s consist of two parts: '(1) a conservative analysis usinc param.eters E
(e.a., naxinurt c11ortable valve closure tines) as linited by the technical specifications cod (2) an analysis using parareters-
"Mr!
associated with current known facility operating conditions (e.c.,
"=5
=
actual valve closure tines). - Clearly indicate th? envirorv.,ent for unich the equipment is qualified, including seisnic, and whether t!.c
~~x equipnent can vithstand c.sincio fcilure.
You should revice your technical specifications related to this postulated accicent and, as approcriate, propose changes (e.g.,
valve closure tines, filter-testino) rhich will provide assurance that parancters irmortant in the evaluation are naintained at levels which will assure that conservatively calculated offsite consequences are veil siithin the ex:>osure guidelines of 10 CFR Part 100 cver the facility d'f" 11 fe tic.c.
In addition, provide a list of those channes to facility ent to :ent which would provide aMed assurance that rotentici offsite exposures are lou (e.g., relocation of radiation nonitors or modification w
of the_ containtzent isolation logic). For each such natantial inr. rove 9ent, you should provide cn assessnent of the impact of the change on facility
-m operations and discuss the extent to which it would provide added assurcnce of reducing the potential consaquences.
Sincerely, Robert !!. Reid, Chicf Ooerating Peactors Cranch v4 Division of pperatinq Reactors Erc10 wrm:
1.
Letter did.1/3/77 f ro ) 9. O. Pollart D@@p 2.
Federal '<ctister votico ggg O
du[l [M
'@ n y d cc e/ enclosures:
9
{g he n.n: p r:e
=
DORP.--- _.Ex9RRAARdpx._..Cp8d:00R o d = *- 1 ORBf4 R..
- u. ~. 4
- VRood
.TdCarterL Meid.
OATe >
. For cc.3:s (Rev. P.53) IIC2t 020 t u. s. eovsm<tur enantime orrient iev..exe.ise
~
2 ::
-=
=::
. 7...y.
.3_._.
';a..;; a:, '; U C..
.;A; 2A;
. ;.../~;...;..
44 G
i i
mi
)
Sacramento Municipal Utility District o
- h cc w/ enclosure (s)-
David S. Kaplan, Secretary and cc w/ enclosure (s) and cy of
~
General Counsel incoming dated:
California Department of 'dealth a
6201 S Street Post Office Box 15830 ATTN:
Chief.. Environmental e
Sacramento, California 95813 Radiation Contro's Unit wh=
Radiological Health Se' tion Business and Municipal Department 714 P Street, Room 493
=#
Sacramento City-County Library Sacramento, California 94814 828 I Street Sacramento, California 95814 Mr. Patrick McLarkey, Chairman Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Sacramento County Courthouse Sacramento, California 95814 Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission ATIN: Librarian 1111 Howe Avenue Sacramento, California 95825 Chief. Energy Systems Analyses Branch (AW-459)
Office of Radiation Programs U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Room 645, East Tower 401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C.
20460 U. S. Envircncental Protectici Agency Region IX Office ATTN: EIS COORDINATOR 100 California Street San Francisco, California 94111
.....