ML20135F794

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Advises That Several Changes Requested in 841212 Proposed Tech Spec Amend 102 Not Supported by Safety Evaluation. Safety Evaluation or Other Basis for Listed Proposed Mods Requested
ML20135F794
Person / Time
Site: Rancho Seco
Issue date: 09/11/1985
From: Stolz J
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Reinaldo Rodriguez
SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
References
NUDOCS 8509170405
Download: ML20135F794 (2)


Text

.

=_

h C bo September 11, 1985 Docket No. 50-312 DISTRIBUTION EBrach docket e)

BGrimes DR JPartlow L PDR ACRS-10 Mr. Ronald J. Rodriguez ORB #4 Rdg Ringram Assistant General Manager, Nuclear HThompson GKalman Sacramento Municipal Utility District OELD SMiner 6201 S Street EJordan Gray File P. O. Box 15830 H0rnstein WPaulson Sacramento, California 95813 GEdison

Dear Mr. Rodriguez:

Reference:

Proposed Amendment 102, Letter from R. J. Rodriguez to D. G. Eisenhut, dated December 12, 1984 In our review of your proposed Technical Specification Amendment 102 (Ref a),

we identified several proposed changes which were not supported by a safety evaluation nar was there any other justification given to support relaxation of the existing Technical Specifications.

Please provide a safety evaluation or some other basis for the proposed modifications listed below:

(1) Appendix B, Administrative Controls, deletion of Sections 5.3.A.2 and 5.3.B.2, requirements to review onsite tests and experiments and results thereof, when such tests have environmental significance.

l (2) Appendix B, Administrative Controls, deletion of Section 5.6.3, reporting requirements and evaluation of plant design changes when the changes may i

adversely impact the environment.

(3) Appendix B, Administrative Controls, deletion of Section 5.7, requirement to maintain environmental records.

Within 7 days of receiving this. letter, please provide us with your schedule for responding to the items addressed herein.

The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter 4

l affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.

Sincerely,

" G U G1 m L sIare:D 2r m 1. cxq.,,

John F. Stolz, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #4 Division of Licensing cc: See next page ORBf4:DL ORB #4:D OR614:DL GKalman;cf SMiner/

JStolz 9///85 9/p)/85 9/so/85 f

8 8509170405 850911 PDR ADOCK 05000312 P

PDR s

,y.

y m

,w---

\\.

Mr. R. J. Rodriguez Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Sacramento Municipal Utility District Station cc:

Mr. David S. Kaplan, Secretary Sacramento County and General Counsel Board of Supervisors Sacramento Municipal Utility 827 7th Street, Room 424 District Sacramento, California 95814 6201 S Street P. O. Box 15830 Ms. Helen Hubbard Sacramento, California 95813 P. O. Box 63 Sunol, California 94586 Thomas Baxter, Esq.

Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C.

20036 Mr. Robert B. Borsum Babcock & Wilcox a

Nuclear Power Generation Division Suite 220, 7910 Woodmont Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Resident Inspector / Rancho Seco c/o U. S. N. R. C.

14410 Twin Cities Road Herald, California 95638 Regional Administrator, Region V U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596 Director Energy Facilities Siting Division Energy Resources Conservation &

Development Commission 1516 - 9th Street Sacramento, California 95814 Mr. Joseph 0. Ward, Chief Radiological Health Branch State Department of Health Services 714 P Street, Office Building #8 Sacramento, California 95814

-_