ML103210395: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| issue date = 10/29/2010 | | issue date = 10/29/2010 | ||
| title = E-mail string-10/8/10 Thru 10/29/10 - Paul Blanch W/Richard Barkley Regarding Indian Point Gas Lines | | title = E-mail string-10/8/10 Thru 10/29/10 - Paul Blanch W/Richard Barkley Regarding Indian Point Gas Lines | ||
| author name = Blanch P | | author name = Blanch P | ||
| author affiliation = Comcast | | author affiliation = Comcast | ||
| addressee name = Barkley R | | addressee name = Barkley R | ||
| addressee affiliation = NRC/EDO | | addressee affiliation = NRC/EDO | ||
| docket = 05000247, 05000286 | | docket = 05000247, 05000286 | ||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:From: Paul Blanch [mailto:pmblanch@comcast.net] | {{#Wiki_filter:From: Paul Blanch [mailto:pmblanch@comcast.net] | ||
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 2:21 PM To: Barkley, Richard Cc: Dave Lochbaum | Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 2:21 PM To: Barkley, Richard Cc: Dave Lochbaum | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Re: Indian Point Gas Lines Rich: | Re: Indian Point Gas Lines Rich: | ||
Paul M. Blanch Energy Consultant 135 Hyde Rd. West Hartford CT 06117 860-236-0326 | I agree, that is fine with me. | ||
Paul M. Blanch Energy Consultant 135 Hyde Rd. West Hartford CT 06117 860-236-0326 On 10/29/2010 12:35 PM, Barkley, Richard wrote: | |||
On 10/29/2010 12:35 PM, Barkley, Richard wrote: | : Paul, Im writing in response to the October 8, 2010, email you sent to me regarding the natural gas pipelines that cross the Indian Point site. In your email you asked if I could confirm the presence of automatic shutoff valves in these lines, and indicate the testing frequency for these valves. | ||
Paul, | As I discussed with you on the phone on October 29, 2010, I recently became aware of a 10 CFR 2.206 petition that you submitted to Bill Borchardt, U.S. NRC Executive Director of Operations, on October 25, 2010. The petition centers on the natural gas pipeline at Indian Point. You confirmed during our phone call that all of the points raised in the October 8 email are also included in the 2.206 petition. As a result, in order to not interfere with the 10 CFR 2.206 process, I do not plan to respond to the questions in your October 8 email. | ||
If you have any concerns regarding this response, please let me know (or my actor in Region I, Nicole Sieller). | If you have any concerns regarding this response, please let me know (or my actor in Region I, Nicole Sieller). | ||
Sincerely, | Sincerely, Richard Barkley, PE Nuclear and Environmental Engineer OEDO Communication Assistant (Acting) | ||
(301) 415 - 8495 (OWFN 16 E21) | |||
(610) 337-5065 (Region I) | |||
(610) 608-1517 (Cell) | |||
From: Paul Blanch [mailto:pmblanch@comcast.net | From: Paul Blanch [mailto:pmblanch@comcast.net] | ||
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 10:04 AM To: Barkley, Richard | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Indian Point Gas Lines | Indian Point Gas Lines | ||
Rich: | Rich: | ||
The two gas pipelines traverse the owner controlled area and are physically located closer to Indian Point Unit 3 (IP3) than Indian Point Unit 2 (IP2). The initial licensee | In Mr. Lew's letter to me dated April 12, 2010 the following statement was made about the design and testing of the Algonquin gas line crossing the Indian Point site. | ||
The two gas pipelines traverse the owner controlled area and are physically located closer to Indian Point Unit 3 (IP3) than Indian Point Unit 2 (IP2). The initial licensee and the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), predecessor to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), | |||
considered the hazards posed by these pipelines during the initial licensing process of IP3, and determined that the presence of the gas pipelines did not endanger the safe operation of IP3. | |||
The licensing documentation for IP3 provides information to address your questions. In this regard, you may wish to review (a) item | |||
and the | 7, Gas Pipeline Fire, in the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR) for IP3, filed by Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, dated August 30, 1968, which can be accessed from the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), using Accession No. ML093480204. This document describes the design and construction of the gas lines, operation and maintenance practices, postulated failure modes, and standoff distances provided to determine safety-related structures would not be affected. The AECs safety evaluation report (SER) for IP3, Section 2.2, describes the staffs conclusions regarding this analysis that the failure of these gas pipelines would not impair the | ||
safe operation of IP3. The SER is dated September 21, 1973, and can be accessed in ADAMS using Accession No. ML072260465. | |||
safe operation of IP3. The SER is dated September 21, 1973, and can be | |||
accessed in ADAMS using Accession No. ML072260465. | |||
I attempted to download ML093480204 from ADAMS but the file was damaged however I was able to obtain a copy of the OCR text that states: | I attempted to download ML093480204 from ADAMS but the file was damaged however I was able to obtain a copy of the OCR text that states: | ||
The primary fire would be of short duration since automatic shut off valves would isolate the ruptured section of the main within 4 | The primary fire would be of short duration since automatic shut off valves would isolate the ruptured section of the main within 4 minutes. Those valves are located at both banks of the Hudson River and at Gomer Street in Yorktown, 10.4 miles from the plant. The secondary fire would be set in the trees surrounding the gas mains. | ||
minutes. Those valves are located at both banks | |||
of the Hudson River and at | |||
Gomer Street in Yorktown, 10.4 miles from the | |||
plant. The secondary fire would be set in the trees surrounding | |||
the gas mains. | |||
I was not aware there were automatic shutoff valves for these lines. Could you please confirm that the above statement from the PSAR is still an accurate statement and if so, please indicate the frequency of the testing of these automatic shut off valves. | I was not aware there were automatic shutoff valves for these lines. Could you please confirm that the above statement from the PSAR is still an accurate statement and if so, please indicate the frequency of the testing of these automatic shut off valves. | ||
Please give me a call ASAP. | Please give me a call ASAP. | ||
Paul M. Blanch Energy Consultant 135 Hyde Rd. West Hartford CT 06117 860-236-0326}} | Paul M. Blanch Energy Consultant 135 Hyde Rd. West Hartford CT 06117 860-236-0326}} |
Latest revision as of 12:02, 11 March 2020
ML103210395 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Indian Point ![]() |
Issue date: | 10/29/2010 |
From: | Blanch P Comcast |
To: | Barkley R NRC/EDO |
References | |
Download: ML103210395 (5) | |
Text
From: Paul Blanch [1]
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 2:21 PM To: Barkley, Richard Cc: Dave Lochbaum
Subject:
Re: Indian Point Gas Lines Rich:
I agree, that is fine with me.
Paul M. Blanch Energy Consultant 135 Hyde Rd. West Hartford CT 06117 860-236-0326 On 10/29/2010 12:35 PM, Barkley, Richard wrote:
- Paul, Im writing in response to the October 8, 2010, email you sent to me regarding the natural gas pipelines that cross the Indian Point site. In your email you asked if I could confirm the presence of automatic shutoff valves in these lines, and indicate the testing frequency for these valves.
As I discussed with you on the phone on October 29, 2010, I recently became aware of a 10 CFR 2.206 petition that you submitted to Bill Borchardt, U.S. NRC Executive Director of Operations, on October 25, 2010. The petition centers on the natural gas pipeline at Indian Point. You confirmed during our phone call that all of the points raised in the October 8 email are also included in the 2.206 petition. As a result, in order to not interfere with the 10 CFR 2.206 process, I do not plan to respond to the questions in your October 8 email.
If you have any concerns regarding this response, please let me know (or my actor in Region I, Nicole Sieller).
Sincerely, Richard Barkley, PE Nuclear and Environmental Engineer OEDO Communication Assistant (Acting)
(301) 415 - 8495 (OWFN 16 E21)
(610) 337-5065 (Region I)
(610) 608-1517 (Cell)
From: Paul Blanch [2]
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 10:04 AM To: Barkley, Richard
Subject:
Indian Point Gas Lines
Rich:
In Mr. Lew's letter to me dated April 12, 2010 the following statement was made about the design and testing of the Algonquin gas line crossing the Indian Point site.
The two gas pipelines traverse the owner controlled area and are physically located closer to Indian Point Unit 3 (IP3) than Indian Point Unit 2 (IP2). The initial licensee and the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), predecessor to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC),
considered the hazards posed by these pipelines during the initial licensing process of IP3, and determined that the presence of the gas pipelines did not endanger the safe operation of IP3.
The licensing documentation for IP3 provides information to address your questions. In this regard, you may wish to review (a) item
7, Gas Pipeline Fire, in the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR) for IP3, filed by Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, dated August 30, 1968, which can be accessed from the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), using Accession No. ML093480204. This document describes the design and construction of the gas lines, operation and maintenance practices, postulated failure modes, and standoff distances provided to determine safety-related structures would not be affected. The AECs safety evaluation report (SER) for IP3, Section 2.2, describes the staffs conclusions regarding this analysis that the failure of these gas pipelines would not impair the
safe operation of IP3. The SER is dated September 21, 1973, and can be accessed in ADAMS using Accession No. ML072260465.
I attempted to download ML093480204 from ADAMS but the file was damaged however I was able to obtain a copy of the OCR text that states:
The primary fire would be of short duration since automatic shut off valves would isolate the ruptured section of the main within 4 minutes. Those valves are located at both banks of the Hudson River and at Gomer Street in Yorktown, 10.4 miles from the plant. The secondary fire would be set in the trees surrounding the gas mains.
I was not aware there were automatic shutoff valves for these lines. Could you please confirm that the above statement from the PSAR is still an accurate statement and if so, please indicate the frequency of the testing of these automatic shut off valves.
Please give me a call ASAP.
Paul M. Blanch Energy Consultant 135 Hyde Rd. West Hartford CT 06117 860-236-0326