ML20127K350: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 2: Line 2:
| number = ML20127K350
| number = ML20127K350
| issue date = 03/11/1968
| issue date = 03/11/1968
| title = Submits Results of Consideration of Recommendations Made in ACRS 670413 Ltr
| title = Submits Results of Consideration of Recommendations Made in ACRS
| author name = Morris P
| author name = Morris P
| author affiliation = US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
| author affiliation = US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Line 11: Line 11:
| contact person =  
| contact person =  
| document report number = NUDOCS 9211200382
| document report number = NUDOCS 9211200382
| title reference date = 04-13-1967
| document type = INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL MEMORANDUM, MEMORANDUMS-CORRESPONDENCE
| document type = INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL MEMORANDUM, MEMORANDUMS-CORRESPONDENCE
| page count = 1
| page count = 1
Line 24: Line 25:
J. Shea MONTICELIA NUCLEAR GENERATING PIANT                                                              N              nt DOCKET NO. 50-263
J. Shea MONTICELIA NUCLEAR GENERATING PIANT                                                              N              nt DOCKET NO. 50-263
                                                                                                                                                             ~
                                                                                                                                                             ~
The ACES in its April 13, 1967 letter eencerning the subject plant made three recesssendations which have besa discussed with Mertherm <<
The ACES in its {{letter dated|date=April 13, 1967|text=April 13, 1967 letter}} eencerning the subject plant made three recesssendations which have besa discussed with Mertherm <<
States Power Compnuy (NSP). Following are the resulta to date of our consideration of those recon:mendations.                                                                                                  ,
States Power Compnuy (NSP). Following are the resulta to date of our consideration of those recon:mendations.                                                                                                  ,
The Coimnittee recommended that the stress analysis report for the reactor vessel be reviewed by independent consultants. In this regard, one of the following three companies will be selected to review the report:
The Coimnittee recommended that the stress analysis report for the reactor vessel be reviewed by independent consultants. In this regard, one of the following three companies will be selected to review the report:

Latest revision as of 03:48, 22 August 2022

Submits Results of Consideration of Recommendations Made in ACRS
ML20127K350
Person / Time
Site: Monticello Xcel Energy icon.png
Issue date: 03/11/1968
From: Morris P
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To: Fraley R
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
NUDOCS 9211200382
Download: ML20127K350 (1)


Text

_ _ _ _ . - . _ _ _ . _ -

.] h$ \

s Distribution:

L,,u.11 B60 Supply va" DRL Reading '

R. F. Fraley, Eaecutive Secretary REG Reading Advisory Committce on Esactor Safeguards RPB-1 Reading i R. S. Boyd l F. A. Morris, Director '

D. R. Huller l DivisionofRaaetorLicensingtp#'y?'}3 r as)

J. Shea MONTICELIA NUCLEAR GENERATING PIANT N nt DOCKET NO. 50-263

~

The ACES in its April 13, 1967 letter eencerning the subject plant made three recesssendations which have besa discussed with Mertherm <<

States Power Compnuy (NSP). Following are the resulta to date of our consideration of those recon:mendations. ,

The Coimnittee recommended that the stress analysis report for the reactor vessel be reviewed by independent consultants. In this regard, one of the following three companies will be selected to review the report:

1. Telodyne, Inc.
2. Franklin Instituto i
3. Illinois Institute of Technology Research Center. I 1:

We will evaluate the results of thin independent review during our Operating Licensa review.

The Committee recomended that the regulatory staff satisfy itacif with respect to the adequacy of the isolation valve test program and follow the developinent of the detailed design of the above systems. The test- (

ing program proposed by UDP will be the same as that being conducted for the Jersey Central, Oyster Creek plaut.- The isolation valves to be incorporated in the Monticello plant will be of identical design by the same manufacturer as those tested for Jersey Central. The only dif ference will be a slight difference in size. The results of our review of the Jersey Central test program will apply directly to Monticello.

Finally, the Comittee recommended that the !bnticello plant includo.-

a second diesel generator of the amme espacity as the one proposed.= The applicant has agreed to supply a second diesel generator as _ recommended.

DRL:RPB-1 D -

DRL DRL RPB-1 ~~""

omer, TfcFIsEhsF/EF ~BieT6'ger k_Bg~""~ PgIs"""

.u - ..ygg. ........g.yg yg.g. .. .. .y..g.y.. .. '

om ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Form AEC=818 (Rev, H3) Et w wmmutvis m i e W 9211200382 680311 PDR ADOCK 05000263 0: PDR _

' ' ~ ' 'p. --- _ , , ,