ML20235C245

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Advises That Proposed Inservice Insp Program for Primary Coolant Sys Acceptable,Per .Review of Proposed Reduction in Containment Design Pressure in Progress.Util Should Consider 62 Psig as Value Until Review Complete
ML20235C245
Person / Time
Site: Brunswick, 05000000
Issue date: 04/27/1970
From: Morris P
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To: Colby P
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO.
Shared Package
ML20235B311 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-87-111 NUDOCS 8709240396
Download: ML20235C245 (1)


Text

,

1

  • . . . ..... . ..c..

'l 1

. Distribution-

. Docket (2)v AEC PDR OGC DR Reading ACRS (18) i DRL Reading WNyer (2)  !

BWR-1 File APR 2 71970 CKBeck Docket Nos. 50-324 MMMann and 50-325 . FSchroeder RSBoyd RDeYoung DSkovholt Mr. P. S. Colby 'T. R. Wilson Senior Vice President E. G. Case, DRS Operating & Engineering Group RRMaccary, DRS ~

Carolina Power & Light Company - PHowe

'336 Fayetteville Street BGrimes

-Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 DRS/DRL Br. Chiefs WButler

Dear Mr. Colby:

SMKari 4

With your letter of March 9,.1970, you provided a description of the proposed' inservice inspection program for the primary coolant system of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant and a proposal for reduction of l the design pressure from 62 psig to 53 peig for the drywell and torus ]

of the Brunswick containments.

We have completed our review of the proposed inservice inspection program <

and find it to be acceptable. We request that we be kept informed on j your progress in developing a device for performing remote examinations i of the reactor vessel and that you incorporate the proposed inservice

-inspection program in your proposed Technical Specifications for the )

Brunswick Plant.

l J

Our review of the proposed reduction in containment design pressure is J in progress. We expect to complete our evaluation of this item by about mid-June. However, until we complete our review and can conclude that the proposed change in containment design pressure is acceptable, we believe that 62 psig should be considered as the design value for the Brunswick Plant.

Sincerely, PDR8709p403 6 870921 #rlti aal It'ed by poiw a.'merris FO MENZ87-111 pon Peter A. Morris, Director Division'of Reactor Licensing ec: George F. Trowbridge, Esq. l Shaw, Pittman, Potts, Trowbridge, & Madden 9g/

916 17th Street, N. W. q ( 2 l./.'h ,O f D Washington, D. C. 20006 e

_ .O omer > DRL/BWR-1 _ , , ,

DRL/BWR-1_ ,_,,

D /AD: R DRL DRL DRS },,

--c >

,5I"*d" .? ' !".'I. ...

h.k.k~r$Q{/70 . . -. .5. f/70I.5'.'...

our>4/24/70h.

4 y /70 - -4/g70 4 71 4/2'7/70  ;.

I