ML20236L793
| ML20236L793 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 11/06/1987 |
| From: | Shoemaker C NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE |
| References | |
| CON-#487-4783 OL-1, NUDOCS 8711110066 | |
| Download: ML20236L793 (2) | |
Text
,
)$U,
S 00CKETED UNITED STA'0ES OF AMERICA USHRC NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 87 IDI -9 N0 i37 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD 1
Administrative Judges:
OFFICE 0F SECHETANY OCCKEilNG & SERVICE Alan.S. Rosenthal, Chairman November 6, '1pg$NCH Howard A. Wilber In the Matter of N N "9 N
)
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF
)'
Docket Nos. 50-443-OL-1 NEW HAMPSHIRE, ET AL.
)
50-444-OL-1
)
l (Seabrook Station, Units 1
)
(Onsite Emergency Planning 1
and 2)
)
and. Safety Issues)
)
l ORDER We will expect both the applicants and the NRC staff to respond, within the time period specified in our Octcher 20, 1987 order, to the November 4, 1987 supplemental memorandum of the New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution with-regard to the environmental qualification of RG58 coaxial cable.
The responses should' address'each of the points made by the Coalition.
In this connection, in addressing the.
l Coalition's assertions in the full paragraph on page 6 of 1
its supplemental memorandum, the responses should set forth the mathematical expression describing the relationship of insulation resistance to cable-length.
In addition to addressing the Coalition's assertions,.
the applicants and the staff should discuss'whether, in view I
of the specification that coaxial cable must pass an "AC 8711110066 871106 PDR ADOCK 05000443 Q
PDR (Jso2
d 2
Voltage Withstand" test at 5000 volts,1 the Licensing Board erroneously relied upon the value of 80 volts per mil of insulation.2 It is so ORDERED.
l FOR THE APPEAL BOARD b
dbd C. g an 956emaker Secretary to the l
Appeal Board l
i 1
'l i
I l
l 1 See Coalition Exhibit No. 4, Electrical Equipment Qualification File No. 113-19-01, Reference 1 at 13.
2 Our October 20 order established a ten-page limit ora responses.
Although the applicants and staff should make an effort to observe that limit, if necessary'in order to insure full responses on the various questions'those submissions may extend to fif teen pages in length.
l