ML20207B012

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Forwards SER Re Util Request for Exemption from Specific Technical Requirements of Section Iii.G of App R to 10CFR50. Exemption Should Be Granted.Salp Input Also Encl
ML20207B012
Person / Time
Site: 05000000, Pilgrim
Issue date: 06/03/1988
From: Mccracken C
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Wessman R
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20204C423 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-88-198 TAC-65962, NUDOCS 8806140187
Download: ML20207B012 (2)


Text

'

T 0

/

jo UNITED STATES g

[

g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

% **"' /

JUN 0 31988 Docket No. 50-293 MEMORANDUM FOP: Richard H. Wessman, Project Director Project Directorate I 1 Division of Reactor Pt ojects I/II Office of Nuclear Rc3ctor Regulation FROM:

Conrad E. McCracken, Chief Chemical Engineering Branch Division of r.igineering and Systems Technology Office of Nuolear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT CONCERNING REQUESTS FOR EXEMPTION FROM PROVISIONS OF SECTION III.G.2 0F APPENDIX R TO 10 CFR PART 50 IN CERTAIN AREAS OF THE PLANT (REQUEST N05. 15, 18 AND 22) - PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION (TAC NO. 65962) 1 Plant Name:

Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Licensee: Boston Edison Company Docket No.:

50-293 Review Basis:

Exemption Requests - Section III.G of Appendix R to 10 CFR Part :50 Review Status: Complete Our Safety Evaluation.' aport of the licensee's requests for exemption from specific technical requirements c.1 Section III.G of Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50 (Exemption Request Nos. 15, D and 22) in several different areas of the plant is enclosed (Enclosure 1). Our conclusion as contained in the enclosed SER is that all their requests for exemption should be granted.

After we had reviewed, and accepted, these three requests for exemption, we realized that all three could have been processed under the provisions of Generic Letter 86-10. The licensee's submittal would have satisfied the requirement to perform and maintain for later NRC review, a technical evaluation justifying the deviation from the specific requirements. You may wish to advise the licensee of this in the event they have similar deviations in the future.

6-i CONTACT:

j' O. P. Notley, DEST Ext. 20 47 -

l'

(,,njoIK7's,'\\

i

.g 7 s er, Os

t' Richard H. Wessman l Our SALP input for this SER is provided in Enclosure 2.

We consider our efforts on TAC No. 65962 to be complete.

onrad E. McCracken, Chief Chemical Engiileering Branch Division of Engineering and Systems Techno.ogy-Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

- 1.

Safety Evaluation Report 2.

SALP Input j

cc w/ enclosures:

j L. Shao J. Richardson S. Yarga B. Boger D. Mcdonald 4

i i

i i

+

1 i

l I