ML20148L895

Notifies That Mods Proposed in ,Enhancing Capability to Detect Reactor Coolant Leakage in Reactor Bldg Through Radiation Monitor Use,Acceptable in Concept.Mods to Be Functionally Acceptable,Upon Approval of Equipment

ML20148L895
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	11/04/1978
From:	Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Mattimoe J SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
References
NUDOCS 7811200404
Download: ML20148L895 (2)

Text

__ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . -_ __

a

'\' * /i f

[g* Mcok UNITED STATES l

3"- '1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMiss ON <

f ,

,. WASHING TON, 0. C. 20555 - fg

%,.~....j Docket No. 50-312 fioVEteER 94 gg Mr. J. J. Mattimoe Assistant General Manager and Chief Engineer Sacramento Municipal Utility District 6201 S Street P. O. Box 15830 Sacramento, California 95813

Dear Mr. Mattimoe:

By letter dated September 27, 1978, you informed us of the modifications you proposed to make at Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station to enhance the capability to detect reactor coolant leakage in the Reactor Building through the use of radiation monitors. Your submittal was made in response to our letter of August 7,1978, wherein we took note of the deficiencies of tf.e present system and described appropriate performance crite l'a for an upgraded system.

This is to advise you that the modifications proposed in your letter of September 27, 1978, are acceptable in oncept and that if the new equipment meets the performance criteria described in our letter of August 7,1978, the modifications will be functionally acceptable.

l This is not to say, however, that these modifications would or would l not adversely affect the safety of operations or degrade existing i systems. This determination initially should be made by your on-site l and off-site review conmittees, as appropriate.

l If your review of the proposed modification determines that it does constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined in 10 CFR 50.59, a comprehensive safety evaluation should be prepared and submitted for our review and approval prior to in"-'ementation of the modification.

Conversely, if your review does not int.cate that an unreviewed safety question is involved, you should proceed to implement the proposed modification in a form corsistent with our stated performance criteria as soon as practicable.

Sincerely, g' ' hl. , l Robert W. Reid, Chief {

Operating Reactors Branch #4 j 7811200qM Division of Operating Reactors cc: See next page

e

$ E .

Sacramento Municipal Utility District cc: David S. Kaplan, Secretary and General Counsel 6201 S Street , 3.

Post Of fice Box 15830 ' '

Sacramento, California 95813 Business and tiunicipal Department ,

Sacramento City-County Library l 828 I Street i Sacramento, California 95814 O

O 4

5 6

O O e s

e b_._____________.___________________