ML083530317: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 5: Line 5:
| author name = Mulligan M
| author name = Mulligan M
| author affiliation = - No Known Affiliation
| author affiliation = - No Known Affiliation
| addressee name = Kim J S
| addressee name = Kim J
| addressee affiliation = NRC/NRR/DORL
| addressee affiliation = NRC/NRR/DORL
| docket = 05000271
| docket = 05000271

Revision as of 04:05, 12 July 2019

Vermont Yankee 2.206 Petition from M. Mulligan
ML083530317
Person / Time
Site: Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date: 12/08/2008
From: Mulligan M
- No Known Affiliation
To: James Kim
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing
Kim J, NRR/DORL, 415-4125
References
2.206, RG-1.009
Download: ML083530317 (3)


Text

From: Michael Mulligan [steamshovel2002@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 2:39 PM To: James Kim

Subject:

Re: Vermont Yankee 2.206 Petition - PRB Teleconference (11/25-Tuesday at 10:00am)(2)

James, This might better explain why i think the VY Diesel Generators

are to small.

I additionally have broader concerns that Fairbanks Morse is a unreliable service provider...the nuclear plant emergency Diesel

Generator. I am thinking about recent part 21 issues.

What I get out of reg guide 1.9 is that nuclear power plants are

suppose to stay within their continuous rating under

all conceivable design accident load conditions...all the loads based on normal and emergency procedures are supposed to be below the continuous rating. Further, the DBA load

is supposed to be 5% to 15% below the continuous rating. It is noted that many plant's operated by procedure higher than the continuous rating which is very troublesome.

VY and the NRC are just not operating conservatively.

This raises issues with what size Diesel Generator capacity

would be necessary with the new plants. I am thinking the design accident bus load should be 25% to 40% below the continuous rating of the DG when purchasing it.

I futher think we need a IG investigation...a case study with how not to purchase DGs...how a plant(s) would be forced to live with inadiquate DG's for the whole life time of operation.

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH REGULATORY GUIDE 1.9 APPLICATION AND TESTING OF SAFETY-RELATED DIESEL GENERATORS IN NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

The below conversation thoroughly cover my issues. It occurs on page 9 and 10 ...the whole conversation discusses what we

thought about the recent component inspection at VY.

http://www.topix.net/forum/source/brattleboro-reformer/T0TIINT9ROEGUN6D0 Thanks, mike mulligan Hinsdale, NH

E-mail Properties Mail Envelope Properties (376406.15656.qm)

Subject:

Re: Vermont Yankee 2.206 Petition - PRB Teleconference (11/25-Tuesday at 10:00am)(2)

Sent Date: 12/08/2008 2:39:33 PM Received Date: 12/08/2008 2:39:33 PM From: Michael Mulligan

Created By: steamshovel2002@yahoo.com

Recipients:

James.Kim@nrc.gov (James Kim)

Tracking Status: None

Post Office: web58703.mail.re1.yahoo.com

Files Size Date & Time

MESSAGE 11547 12/08/2008

Options Expiration Date:

Priority: olImportanceNormal ReplyRequested: False Return Notification: False

Sensitivity: olNormal Recipients received: