ML20062E402

Requests Response Concerning Subj Facil Location Adjacent to Proposed Constr of a hydro-electric Dam.Studies Are Being Conducted by Lowell Corp

ML20062E402
Person / Time
Site:	University of Lowell
Issue date:	11/27/1978
From:	Wallace T MASSACHUSETTS, UNIV. OF, LOWELL, MA (FORMERLY LOWELL
To:	Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20062E405	List: ML20062E402
References
NUDOCS 7812070055
Download: ML20062E402 (1)

Text

^

/

o n 8

hM

~

Q ds 0)ffJi O /08Y q he bike /rJth estue Yee$ aJJaClMJeSJ h/c?58

~

NUCLEAR CENTER (e:7: 4s4 7st s -

November 27, 1978 '.'

~

l l_;

Docket No. 0-223 License R-1 (s_^/ ,

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. R. W. Reid Operating Reactors Branch #4 Division of Operating Reactors

Washington, D. C. 20555 l

Dear Mr. Reid:

Boott F1111s, a Lowell Corporation owning the water rights of the Merrimack River, has been conducting an economic feasibility study to determine the viability of building a hydro-electric dam in the river. This dam would be i situated adjacent to the University of Lowell Reactor. Construction of this l

dam.would necessitate extensive blasting at the proposed site.

l 0 .'"r a Tacker e a=rtheoa service co vear tattiatir coat ctea =e oa october 19, 1978 to determine what special requirements would have to be met due to the _.

i proximity of the reactor. Enclosed is a memo outlining that discussion. Mr.

i Tucker called again on November 17 to say that the initial economic study looked favorable and that they were going to start detailed engineering studies and he would like to know what requirements the NRC would impose on the University reactor. Mr. M. Conner of the NRC was notified by telephone on November 22.

He had no immediate response and asked that the attached memo be forwarded to him.

l hhile we realize that we are responsible for containment and reactor structure integrity as the licensee, we would appreciate a response from you l

concerning any reservations or requirements the NRC may wish to impose.

Very truly rs, C /-

/l h hC Thomas Wal Reactor Supervisor Enclosure 78120708Sf k \ \

P

v -

5

- .- [

bYTHE0li) w s

... i s.a > > > is a si . .

• Clos sification D I V I S I O N RAYTHEON SERVICE COMPANY Contre.ct No.

O p a r a t i o n Burlington Dspartment 9319 - Distribution As listed To A. Slater File No.

Fro" R. Tucker Memo No. RT:mm:37 subiee' The Lowell Nuclear Reactor Do'* 19 October 1978 Dr. Beghian referred me to Mr. Tom Wallace, with whom I spoke 10/19 //8.

('

The Lowell reactor is designed to withsta'nd seismic disturbances of levelIV on a mcdified Mercalli scale. (This number can be translated into a particle velocity standard.) This is an operational standazd.

The reactor is also designed to withstand .1G acceleration, an initial design characteristic of the building. This is a substantial disturbance, and doubtless the Nuclear Center at Lowell would not wish to allow such high disturbances, according to Mr. Wallace.

The building is designed as a complete containment building. After blasting, the Center would want to test the building, which entails shutting' down for a week and repressurizing the building.

At the time detailed engineering studies were being made, the Center would want to go to the NRC to see what they would allow.

Mr. Wallace wishes to be kept informed of the study results and any -

major findings during the course of the study which would affect the likelihood of Boott Mills wanting to do extensive blasting. He also wants to be informed of any definitive positive or negative findings of feasibility.

/' lI4 R. Tucker de: H. Bogen D. Knapton -

A. Quaglieri J. Lawrence (ACRES)

M. Lezberg (Boett Mills)

T. Wallace (U of Lowell)/

}

_.