ML20105C162
| ML20105C162 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Crane |
| Issue date: | 11/10/1983 |
| From: | Rawson R NRC |
| To: | Silver H NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20102A920 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-84-166 NUDOCS 8502090330 | |
| Download: ML20105C162 (2) | |
Text
p% e,
l November 10, 1983 h'
Iju
- Note to:
H. Silver
-From:
R._Ra'wson 2
SUBJECT:
THI-1 STEAM GENERATOR REPAIR LICENSE AMENDMENT PACKAGE We ~have reviewed the THI-1 steam generator repair license amendment
- package and have a number of coments. The most significant of these
.coments are summarized below; other coments of an editorial nature are
- marked on the attached copies of the amendment package. We are not withholding ELD concurrence-on the basis of these coments. Our concur-rence, however, is conditioned on the following:
(1) appropriate revisions being made based on the' comments enclosed herewith; and (2) ELD review and approval of the State Consultation section of the' final determination-(not a part of the present package).
Our principal coments' are as follows:
1.
-Comtssion paper a.
_The. description of the amendment request in the
' Background section should be revised to clarify the two aspects of this amendment that are involved.
b..
The Discussion section does little' more than refer the reader back to the appropriate supporting documentation.
We-believe it'would be -prudent-to give the Comission a brief discussion of the substance of and the. basis :for
~
the action the Staff is recomending.
'2.-
Letter to licensee --.no comments 3.
-Amendment
.=
a..
In 2.B.4, reference is made'to' Table 3.3-1'without specifying,what document that table is a part of. This should-be. clarified.
4.
' Federal Register Notice.
On page 2, the last sentence of the last full paragraph c a.-
refers to " timely" coments in a way that leaves open whether untimely coments were also. received and whether we have not-addressed any such comments. This should be
~
clarified or the reference eliminated.
W G
B502090330 840518 PDR FOIA n el i
ADAT084-166 PDR
//
s
'n
>+c-,
T
^
( ~)-
b.
On page 3, the second full paragraph addresses 10 CFR 50.92 but fails to specify the criteria. A new second sentence should be inserted stating that "the Comission has concluded that~the amendment (1) would not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; (2) would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 1
previously evaluated; and (3) would not involve a signi cant reduction in a margin of safety."
5.
Safety Evaluation Supplement -- minor comments as indicated 6.
Final Significant Hazards Consideration Determination a.
We need to review and approve the section on State Consultation.
b..
In Section 3.1, Comment 2 response, it is not enough to refer the reader to NUREG-1019 and Topical Report 008
'without specifying the section of at least the SER and sumarizing the reference as you have for all other comments.
c.
The response to Pennsylvania's first comment is not fully responsive in that..it fails to address monitoring capabilities.
d.
The response to Pennsylvania's second comment is not fully responsive in that it does not address whether the
.oth'er leakage detection methods are " timely and sensitive."
.Please cal 1 ~with any questions.
[. N.
Richard J. Rawson cc:
J. Scinto J.-Gray mws.
-e 4
_.j#W's L
L:.
1