ML20247K009

Forwards Supplemental Changes to Proposed Amend to Remove cycle-specific Core Limits from Facility Tech Spec 3/4.2,per Generic Ltr 88-16 Guidance.Proposed Changes Retain Refs to Flow Dependency of Kf Factor & to Design Aspects of MAPLHGR

ML20247K009
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	09/13/1989
From:	Silady J COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:	Murley T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20247K014	List: ML20247K009 ML20247K027
References
0284T:1, 284T:1, GL-88-16, NUDOCS 8909210048
Download: ML20247K009 (2)

Text

, _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.. p-

/

/. * - .

Z

_ ~ Common =rith Edison 72 West Adams Street, Chicago, filinois V

Address Reply to: Post Off ce Box 767 Chicago, filinois 60690 0767 September 13, 1989 Dr. Thomas.E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-

Subject:

LaSalle County Station Units 1 and 2 Supplement to Proposed Amendment to Remove Cycle-Specific Core Limits-NRC Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50--374 References (a): Letter from J.A. Silady to T.E. Murley dated August 18, 1989.

(b): Generic Letter 88-16 dated October 4, 1988.

Dr. Hurley:

In Reference (a), Commonwealth Edison (CECO) submitted a proposed amendment to remove cycle-specific core limits from the LaSalle County Technical Specifications with the Reference (b) generic letter guidance for.

such requests. After review by your staff, it was concluded that some of the proposed changes to the Section 3/4.2 Bases discussions on the MCPR and MALPHGR limits delete more information than necessary, even though the operating limits themselves will now be located in the Core Operating Limits Report.

It was agreed to retain references to the flow dependency of MCPR (Kf factor) and to the mechanical fuel design aspects of MAPLHGR. Also proposed is the correction of a word processing omission in Section 6, Provision 6C on Insert B of Reference (a).

The proposed changes are shown in Attachments A and B for Units 1 and 2, respectively. There is no impact on the previously submitted No Significant Hazards Consideration since these supplemental changes are administrative in nature. They result in retention of more information in the Technical Specification Bases and correction of a word processing omission in Reference (a).

fp2g,p,pj ha ggg f

, i 0284T:1

Dr. T.E. Murley September 13, 1989 These supplemental changes have the concurrence of CECO On-Site and Off-Site Reviews.

Please contact this office should further information be required.

Very truly yours,

-k -

J.A. Silady  !

Nuclear Licensing Administrator 1m Attachments A: Unit 1 Supplemental Change B: Unit 2 Supplemental Changes cc: A.B. Davis - Regional Administrator, RIII R.D. Lanksbury - Senior Resident Inspector, LaSalle P.C. Shemanski - Project Manager, NRR Office of Nuclear Facility Services - IDNS 0284T:2