ML19309H906
| ML19309H906 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Plum Brook File:National Aeronautics and Space Administration icon.png |
| Issue date: | 05/09/1980 |
| From: | Junod T NATIONAL AERONAUTICS & SPACE ADMINISTRATION |
| To: | Erikson P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8005200642 | |
| Download: ML19309H906 (1) | |
Text
.
National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration Lewis Research Center C eveland. Ohio 44135 8 005 2 00 64.f g acoq to AM or 1001 May 9, 1980 Mr. Peter Erikson Operating Reactor Branch No. 4 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
Dear Mr. Erikson:
This letter is to confirm your telephone conversation on May 7,1980 with Messrs. Benedict, Boitel, and Juned of NASA Lewis Research Center relative to the isolation of buildings 1121, 1142, and structure 1156 from the Plum Brook Reactor Facility (Docket 50-30).
At that time we informed you that NASA has decided to begin the work neces-sary to accomplish that isolation. Upon completion of the isolation, the Lewis Research Center Wind Energy Project Office will establish a structural testing facility--the Wind Turbine Structures Laboratory--in building 1121, the Assembly, Test, and Storage Building. This program will conduct fatigue, buckling, and vibration tests on wind turbine components to determine struc-tural integrity. Building 1142, the Reactor Office Building, may be used later for office space.
In performing the isolation tasks, NASA will comply with all license condi-tions, technical specifications, and procedures described in our application for amendment six of TR-3.
A safety analysis of the new proposed use of building 1121 has been performed, which shows the test operations pose no hazard to PBRF. The Area 8 Safety Committee will review this analysis to determine whether an unreviewed safety question, as defined in Section 50.59 of 10 CFR Part 50, exists. The safety committee will also review the Facility Changes and those changes to End Condition Statements and procedures having saf ety implications.
The Bases and Safety Analysis spd the Supplemental Information submitted to the NRC in support of our request for licensa amendment will be revised and updated to reflect the change in plans for use of building 1121. This docu-mentation will be placed in the PBRF Vital Records.
It is our understanding from our telephone conversation that with the limita-tions and actions described above, no further information need be submitted to your office.
S incerely, Him d M
%g Thomas L. Junod, Associate Chief Office of Environmental Health A