ML031210678

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
E-mail, Re. RAI on Changes to Spent Fuel Pool Loading Restrictions
ML031210678
Person / Time
Site: Arkansas Nuclear Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 04/29/2003
From: Michelle Honcharik
NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD4
To: Millar D
Entergy Nuclear Operations
Alexion T W, NRR/DLPM, 415-1326
Shared Package
ML031180049 List:
References
Download: ML031210678 (3)


Text

I C:\\TEMP\\GW)00001.TMP Paoe 1

.. _:TM\\G}O

.TM Pao 1..

MailEnvelopeProperties (3EAEB6EB.1E4: 11:19583)

Subject:

Creation Date:

From:

Created By:

RAI on Changes to Spent Fuel Pool Loading Restrictions 4/29/03 1:31PM Michelle Honcharik MCH3 @nrc.gov Recipients entergy.com DMILLAR (Dana Millar)

Action Transferred Date & Time 04/29/03 01:3 1PM nrc.gov owf4_po.0WFNDO TWA CC (Thomas Alexion)

Delivered Post Office Delivered 04/29/03 01:31PM Route entergy.com nrc.gov owf4.po.OWFNDO 04/29/03 01:3 1PM Files RAISRXB_2_MB7510.wpd MESSAGE Options Auto Delete:

I Expiration Date:

I Notify Recipients:

Priority:

Reply Requested:

D Return Notification:

Send Notification when Opened Concealed

Subject:

I Security:

To Be Delivered:

I Status Tracking:

I

'5ize

~585 705 Date & Time 04/29/03 01:30PM 04/29/03 01:3 1PM NIo None Yes Standard No Standard mmediate

)elivered & Opened

Michelle Honcharik - RAI on Changes to Spent Fuel Pool Loading Restrictions Page 1 From:

Michelle Honcharik To:

Dana Millar Date:

4/29/03 1:31 PM

Subject:

RAI on Changes to Spent Fuel Pool Loading Restrictions

Dana, Please see the attached continued' RAI from the Reactor Systems Branch.

Thank you, Michelle CC:

Thomas Alexion

Michelle Honcharik - RAISRXB_2_MB7510.wpd Page 1 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (CONTINUED)

REACTOR SYSTEMS BRANCH REQUEST FOR CHANGES TO THE SPENT FUEL POOL LOADING RESTRICTIONS ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE, UNIT 2 (ANO-2)

20.

In sections 4.5.1, 4.6.1, 4.7.1, and 4.8.3 of Attachment 4, the licensee repeatedly identifies/misstates the regulatory limit for criticality analysis of the spent fuel pool as

"[less than or equal to] 1.0" when no soluble boron is present. The limit is correctly identified in the technical specification marked up pages. Is this an editorial error in of the amendment request?