ML17054B467
| ML17054B467 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 03/06/1985 |
| From: | Butcher E NRC - TECH SPEC REVIEW GROUP |
| To: | Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8503130529 | |
| Download: ML17054B467 (8) | |
Text
pR 4E00 (4
0 Cy O0
'.: f
+a*++
Docket No. 50-410 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 March 6, 1985 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Albert Schwencer, Chief Licensing Branch b'2, DL FROM:
SUBJECT:
Edward J. Butcher, Group Leader Technical Specification Review Group, DL NINE MILE POINT UNIT 2 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS The applicants proposal for the Nine Mile Point Unit 2 (NMP-2)Technical Specifications was submitted on November 20, 1984.
In the transmittal letter accompanying the marked up standard BWR/5 technical specfications the applicant states the markup reflects the Unit 2 unique design conditions and operating philosophy.
The intent here is to provide guidance on incorporation of standard BWR/5 technical specifications (STS) in consideration of the TSRG technical speci-fication development milestones which are provided as Enclosure.
During the final stage of technical specifcation development, corresponding to week 54 (see Enclosure) we require the applicant to certify the accuracy of'heir TSs in conformance with the
Changes made at this time and throughout development of the TSs will be reviewed aoainst vendor specific STS.
For requested
- changes, we propose to incorporate only those changes that are:
(I) a departure from the STS but are necessary because of unique design features or unique organization characteristics, or (2) represent a significant improvement over STS which should be included in the next revision to the STS and do not represent a change in generic requirements which must be reviewed prior to implementation by CRGR.
Changes which have merit but are generic and require CRGR review will not be made at this time for Nine Mile Point Unit 2.
Instead TSRG will process the change thru CRGR as a revision to the STS which can later be applied to NMP-2 at the licensee's request or as a backfit by the staff.
Those generic changes involving an immediate safety concern would, of'ourse, not be de-layed for CRGR review.
Any such cases would be highlighted for immediate action by DL and other appropriate NRC Divisions.
CONTACT:
C. Schulten, TSRG (X24570) 8503i30529 85030b PDR ADOCK 050004i0 A
v e
~
f li
Albert Schwencer March 6, 1985 In order to facilitate our review of deviations from the STS proposed by the applicant for NMP-2, we request that the applicant revise his November 20, 1984 submittal to justify each deviation based on the
- FSAR, SER or the as-built plant and to identify which of the above categories each proposed deviation falls under.
Our past experience has shown that this can be effectively accomplished by writing justifications on the blank page facing each specification in the applicant's submittal.
W)
~
Enclosure:
Milestone Chart Edward J. Butcher, Group Leader Technical Specification Review Group Division of Licensing
~
~
Enclosure DEVELOPIVlENTOF TECHNICALSPECIFICATIONS FOR Pre appkest en meeting send STS I0 sppli Cant(2 daysl Applicant mark vp STS v<<th plant sneer(IC re.
qvvCments snd sefKl to NRC NRC pro.
vide s typed vtf
'ion ol the (VSI drah ol TS (a days: 211 wCCk5 typ'ng1 Site viYn by TSRG re<<ewer IO resolve noted rkf (trances arid develop list of utfny end NRC action items (5 days("
1 I
t l
TSAG resolve st(
NRC and vtoly sc lnm ittms hom sne visit snd sny new d tfetences afld plo'osed changes 130 dsysl Region.
NRR technical branChtS.
snd appk CSill Pro wde formal Comments regartkng TS (10 deysl TSRG ItviCWtr resolve Region.
NRA technical braneheS Snd Spp4 cant corn.
fnents 120 daysl Msy
~squire S sne visn by TSRG ICwewef Indepen.
dent con 5ultan( pef lo m aude review ol TS against FSAR and SLR App4cant Fuel Ceni'Iy the IOadr LOw
~ccurscy ol Power the TS, rn License confer issvefl with manes with TS ss Ap FSAR.
Pendra -A" safely analyses.
14 I
I 27 31 50 I 531 55 I
0 1
17 24 28 I
43 I
48 i
52 54
[ 56 I
~ Mstor Maestone OM~
Maestone TSRG Irvre<<ief
~Cvrew ST 4 anrl pirpair list ol S(4 snrl Generic TS items 115 i(ayst TSRG ICViCWCf ICVICW mark up fest dish ol TS: (trnd to app4canl and to lyp
~nq 120 days(
Appkcant prepare IC5PO<<5CS lo ques I'ens and 10 Pro.
possls (oirnd unaccep.
table during NAC inniat Iryrew fdevrkrp.
ment ol fest drattl TSRG ICVICWCf PitPSI C sec vnd drahnl TS 110 iktysf I wrek typ Inql TSRG IevreWCI prepare snd ISsrre I'rOO(
and Review version nl TS (S days.
I week typ ing1 TSRG Irvlrwti panrcrpatr in 4rqrnnat (ask Inlfr lntprehnnS (5 rktys1 TSRG ICVICWtf plepaf C and issue Final
'Cvsh vei snmo( TS 15 days: I week typ.
ing1 PIOICCI Manager tr an srivt Final Qiatt lo apph Cant.
Rrgrnn and SR I TSRG Icvtewcf resolve dit-ferences between TS. FSAR and SLR idrntifird by innrpen denl Cnn svltanl 15 davsl TSAG Ievicwcr prepare Ap pfndir "A" version Ot TS (3 daysl Make ll copies (or ISsvanCC wnh license TS reissued with Full Power License
V
Albert Schwencer, March 6, 1985 I
In order to facilitate'our review'of deviations from the STS proposed by the applicant for 'NMP-2, we request that the applicant revise his
, November 20, 1984 submittal to justify each deviation based on the
- FSAR, SER or the as-built plant and to'dentify which of the above categories each proposed deviation falls under.
Our past experience has shown that, this can be effectively accomplished by writing justifications on the blank page facing each specification in the applicant's submittal.
Enclosure:
Milestone Chart Original signed by Edward J. Butcher, Group Leader Technical Specification Review Group Division of Licensing
.DISTRIBUTION
~t.
TSRG File CSchulten EButcher TNovak DCrutchfield 3/@/85 c
T utcher 3/4 /85
J ld W
y H
r p1 1w lit C'I I
A lit ln tie p,l