ML20102B409
| ML20102B409 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, FitzPatrick |
| Issue date: | 08/23/1983 |
| From: | Scinto J NRC |
| To: | Hegner J NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20102A920 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-84-166 NUDOCS 8502090234 | |
| Download: ML20102B409 (2) | |
Text
,
, 3.,14
+
d_
I August 23, 1983 Note to J. Hegner
SUBJECT:
_FITZPATRICK - CYCLE 6 RELOAD (0 ELD # 836 264)
The descHption of the amendment in the first paragraph of the SER and the description of the amendment to _be put in the monthly notice should sound a little like the notice of proposed action published in connection with
.this amendment on June 20. I am attaching a xeroxed copy of the page from the Federal Register. Please have the description of the amendment in the as-issued package look somewhat closer to the_ description of the amendment as it was put out in the as-proposed packige on June 20. You can add the additional information that you have in the description of the amendment and the SER and in the package attached. That information can be added to the informaticn contained in the description of the amendment and the notice you propsed. But it shouldn't sound quite so far apart.
If you and Mr. Goddard 'an agree by phone on the language of the change, the package does not need to come back to ELD. However, immediately before the amend-C' If so, come back to ELD before the amendment is issued.
ment is issued, check to see whether any petitions or comments were received.
D5 Joe Scinto
-; g Attachment b
cc w/ attachment:
R. Goddard p-I 8502090234 840518 PDR FOIA ADATO84-166 PDR L
J3 a -. -. -~..
?.}
33086 rederal Register / Vol. 48. No.140 / Wednesday July 10, 1983 / Notices Power Authority of the State of New staff has made a proposed the licensee to demonstrate stk. Docket No. 50-333. James A.
determination that the application conformance to the technical
- f zPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, involves no significant hazards specifications have been previously sswego County, New York consideration.
approved by the staff. In addition, no
- LocalPublic DocumentRoom changes have been made to the Date of amendment request:}snuary location: Penfield I.ibrary, State acceptance criteria for the technical 6.1981.
University College of Oswego, Osweso, specification changes involved.Thus, Description of amendment sequest:
the proposed change is similar to the.'
l An amendment to modify the Technical \\ Attorneyforh.censee:Mr. Charles M.
example cited above.
~ '
. Specifications pertaining to four Pratt. AssistaMennst Counsel, Power - Derefore. since the application for.
miscellaneous matters: the first change Aut), rity of the State of New York.10 amendment involves a proppsed change
[
proposes to delete from the Bases, the.
Columbus Circle. New York. NY 10019.
that is similar to an example for which pressure setpoint for permissible entry A'RCBmnch Chief Domend.. -
into the Run mode, and to correct that Vassallo.
. no significant hazards consideration exists, the staff has made a proposed.,
sitpoint in the Definitions to be c nsistent with the same setpointin the Power Authority of the State of New determination that the application
~
corresponding 1.imiting Conditions for York Docket No.50-333, James A. -
involves no significant hazards Operation; the second change proposes FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, consideration.
to correct.an apparent error in the list of Oswego County, New York LocoIPublic Document Room.;.
location: Penfield L:*arary. State valve isolation groups which isolate on Date of amendment nyuest:May 25.
University College of Oswego. Oswego, a high drywell pressure signal; the third 1983.
~
change proposes to correct an error in Description ofamendment requests:
A ttorneyfor h,eensee: Mr. Charles M.;.
the list ofinputs to the Rod Worth An amendment to the license supporung Pratt. Assistant General Counsel. Power Minimizer: and the fourth change the forthcoming Cycle 6 core reload.He Authority of the State of New York.10 proposes to correct specifications reload involves removing depleted fuel Columbus Circle, New York, NY 10019.
pertaining to the low Pressure Coolant assemblies in about one-third of the _
Injection (1.PCI) system that should have nuclear reactor core and replacing them NRCBmnch Chief: Domenic B.
Vassallo.
been modified as a result of a previously with new fuel of the same type cpproved amendment involving the 1.PCI previously loaded in the core.
Power Authority of the State of New Basis forproposedno significant York. Docket No. 50-333,1ames A.
system.
Bastsforproposedno signifs.
hozords considemtion determination:In FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, hozords considemtion determm,can,t otioni accordance with the rule, the licensee Oswego County, Now York g-The Commission has provided guidance made a determination that no significant oncerning the application of the hazards consideration was involved in Dofe ofomendment request:
7 mdards for determining whether a this application for amendment.De November 18,1961.
dnificant hazards consideration exists staffinformed the licensee that,in Description ofomendmentirquest:
y by providing certain examples (48 FR adultion to the determination, the.
An amendment to the Technical 14870).The examples of actions supporting bases for such determination' Specifications pertaining to the involving no significant hazards should be included in the submittal.The surveillance frequency of the Control considerationinclude:"' * * (1) A bases cited by thelicensee during Rod Drives (CRDs).%e proposed purely administrative change to the subsequent discussion was one of the change would restore the CRD Technical Specifications; for example, a examples in the guidance provided by surveillance frequency from the current change to achieve consistency NRC concerning application of the 15 percent of operable drives,at 8 week throughout the Technical Specifications.' standards for determining whether a intervais back to the original nomenclature.
significant hazards consideration exists, surveillance frequency of to percent of.
correction of an enor, or a change in (48 FR 14870):"* * * (iii) For a nuclear the operable drives at 16 week intervals.
The changes proposed in the power reactor, a change resulting from a
- Basis forproposedno significon!
nuclear core reloading,1f no fuel hozords considemtion determination:
I, cpplication for amendment are sncompassed by this example in that:
assemblies significantly different from An operating restriction had previously
' the first proposed change regarding those found previously accepable to the been imposed by the staff (see pressure setpoint for' entering the Run NRC for a previous core at the facility in Amendment No. 30 to I.lenese No. DPR-.
mode is intended to achieve consistency question are involved.nis assumes that 59) that increased the surveillance
~
frequency of the CRDs as a result of throughout the specifications; the no significant changes are made to the second change proposes to correct a acceptance criteria for the technical, staff concerns regarding the effects of -
typographical error; the third change specifications, that the analytical increased reverse flow on scram proposes to correct an incorrectly methods used to demonstrate reliability. In its Safety Evaluation dated September 18,1977 the staff states that specified input to the Rod Worth conformance +vith the technical Minimizer; and the fourth change specifications and regulations are not,
it believed that these conditions would - ~
proposes to delete specifications no significant changes, and that NRChas increase thelikelihood of foreign 4
materials to collect in'the drive.. J:
longer applicable and modify certain
. previously found such methods.
mechanisms over a period of time. This 3.
narrative descriptions as a result of a acceptable "
previously approved change.%us, the The change proposed in the -
material could potentially adversely f; proposed changes are similar to the application for amendmentis affect the operation of the CRDs, and +,
example sited above in that ths y are encompassed by this example in that the also cause accelerated wear.To proposed reload involves fuel compensate for this apparent reduced '
( Intenoed to either achieve consistency the specifications or correct errors.
assembiles of the same type as reliability of the CRDs, the licensee nerefore, since the application for previously found acceptable by the staff proposed to increase the surveillance -
cmendment involves proposed changes and loaded in the core in previous requirements.nis increase in that that are purely administrative, the cycles.The analytical methods used by surveillance would continue until the 9
e e
- g 3
--,,, -, +..