ML20244E095

From kanterella
Revision as of 18:41, 22 January 2021 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to 860708 Request for Interpretation of 10CFR50, App J,Section III.A.3(a),requiring Containment Integrated Leak Rate Tests to Be Conducted Per ANSI N45.4-1972.Mass Point Method May Be Used Only When Exemption Granted
ML20244E095
Person / Time
Issue date: 07/16/1986
From: Olmstead W
NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
To: Arlotto G
NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES)
Shared Package
ML20244D710 List:
References
TAC-52665, NUDOCS 8607240387
Download: ML20244E095 (1)


Text

.. 3

/

Ref. 4 7- ,p as, UNITED ST ATES

.Y NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N gvAs,4tucToN,D.C.20555

'[g "' '

  • c . ,

s.

~

mgju

..... 4126 566 .

4 G. A. Arlotto Director MEMORANDUM FOR: Division of Engineering, RES William J. Olmstead FROM: Assistant General Counsel

. Rulemaking and Fuel Cycle G

SUBJECT:

CONTAINMENT INTEGRATED LEAK RAT

~

ted an interpretation all of which states that

  • In your memorandum 50, . Appendix J.to me dated July 8, you requesSection 1 10 CFR' Part Standard (ANSI) N45.4-7972...'.

containment integrated leak rate tests "...sha

' mass point" method of test erith the provisions of the American National d section of the regulations.

The speciSc issue presented is whether to 10 CFR 50.12. th

.Our position is that the mass to the po nutility pursuant which allows only ' two exemption is grantedspect$cally refers to N45.4-1972i t and total time method S 56.8 (1981), accepts the Section !!I. A.3(a) methods of test computation, cine reference.viz., the point-to-p The fact that a revised national standard, ANSI /AN -

mass paint method is of no4elp in the face of this spesent to th The proposed revision to Appendixhf updated J,revision which national standards of has been Appendix J is is less prescriptiveis and would the applica ble regulatory tl allow the use osuch requirement. Th complete, however, N45.4-1972 I memorandum faulty assumption and from Darrell should not beEisenhut followed. to James III. A.3(a), the staff willPar ow i mo appears to suggest ,

In attempting to justify an exemption The Partlow memo of February 26 vides more accurate results from Sect

(...*the mass point method has merit. . .').

states that the mass point method Econsees" " generally i ea are maing this method.

haspro faDen seriously that the ' total time' method,' and that 'mostIf this behind the technology.

William J. Olmstead Assistant Genere. Counsel Rulemaking and Fuel Cycle '

-