ML19347G048

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Requests Util Review of Reactor Safety Study Conclusions Which May Be Applicable to Ice Condenser Containment Plants.Comments & Plan for Corrective Action,If Indicated, Requested within 45 Days
ML19347G048
Person / Time
Site: Catawba  Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 05/26/1981
From: Tedesco R
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Parker W
DUKE POWER CO.
References
NUDOCS 8105280205
Download: ML19347G048 (3)


Text

[hk

[(fwouqk UNITED STATES h

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5

'; y WASHINGTON, D. C. 20S55

/

gy 2 01931

.Q/-%_i [$[ 4 Docket Nos. 50-413 f

and 50-414

/e h$

(9 Y

u, E T198% O Mr. William O. Parker Id@l43 car Vice President --Steam Production Duke Power Company 4

/

P.O. Box 33189 e

to Charlotte, North Carolina 28242

Dear Mr. Parker:

The Reactor Safety Study (RSS) developed a methodology for evaluating nuclear reactor safety to determine the public risk due to accidents in light water reactors. To utilize the methodology for the analysis of additional reactor systems and to examine ways in which it may be used as a contributing element in the regulatory safety review process, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is conducting the Reactor Safety Study Methodology Applications Program (RSSMAF,.

As a basis for applying the RSS methodology more broadly, the program will determine the accident sequences which dominate accident risk for a variety of nuclear power plants representative of the current nuclear power industry.

The RSSMAP includes one boiling water reactor (BWR) and three pressurized water reactor (PWR) power plant designs. The plants differ from the two plants

~~~

studied in the RSS. Results of the analysis of the first plant selected, Sequoyah Unit 1, an ice-condenser-containment PWR plant,.are enclosed.

The conclusions of the analysis of this plant are listed on pages 4-8, 9.

These conclusions may be applicable to all plants with an ice condenser containment.

Accordingly, it is requested that you review the conclusions of the study for applicability to your plant and provide your coments and a plan for appropriate corrective action if any is indicated.

Your response should be provided within 45 days after the receipt of this letter.

h'bE.0 Mec Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licensing

]

Division of Licensing cc: See next page 1

Enclosure:

As stated 8105280 W f\\

ca

-a Mr. William 0. Parker Vice President - Steam Production Duke Power Company P.O. Box 33189 Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 cc: William L. Porter, Esq.

Duke Power Company P. O. Box 33189 Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.

Debevoise & Liberman 1200 Seventeenth Street, N. W.

Washington, D. C.

20036 North Carolina MPA-1 Suite 208 4

222 North Person Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27601 Mr. R. S. Howard Power Systems Division Westinghouse Electric Corporation

~nt P. O. Box 355 Pittsburh, Pennsylvania 15230 Mr. J. C. Plunkett, Jr.

NUS Corporation 2536 Countryide Boulevard Clearwater, Florida 33515

~~

Mr. Jesse L. Riley, President Carolina Environmental Study Group 854 Henley Place Charlotte, North Carolina 28208 Richard P. Wilson, Esq.

Assistant Attorney General S. C. Attorney General's Office P. O. Box 11549 Columbia, South Carolina 29211 Walton J. McLeod, Jr., Esq.

General Counsel South Carolina State Board of Health i

J. Marion Sims Building 2600 Bull Street Columbia, South Carolina 29201

.r

.,,y-

. Mr. William 0. Parker.

cc:. James W. Burch, Director Nuclear Advisory Counsel 2600 Bull Street Columbia, South Carolina 29201 l

Mr. Peter K. VanDoorn, Resident Inspector

.c/o U. S. Nuclear RegulatoryLCommission P.~0. Box 11695 Rock Hill,. South Carolina 29730 4

4 4

1

~

I

.m-3 4

i i

4 i

t i

j

%+

..... ~.

- _,...., -. -,, _ - - -. -..... _ _. _, -...,_ _, _..., -,. _. - -.... -,.. -..