RBG-21838, Discusses Review of Final Draft Tech Specs.Certifies That Tech Specs Accurately Reflect Plant Design,Fsar & Other Documented Commitments,Per Tm Novak .Affidavit Encl

Discusses Review of Final Draft Tech Specs.Certifies That Tech Specs Accurately Reflect Plant Design,Fsar & Other Documented Commitments,Per Tm Novak .Affidavit Encl

ML20134G682
Person / Time
Site:	River Bend
Issue date:	08/09/1985
From:	William Cahill GULF STATES UTILITIES CO.
To:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RBG-21838, NUDOCS 8508280028
Download: ML20134G682 (3)

Text

_ . - - .- - - - _ - - . - - - - _ _ _ _ - - - - - _ - _ _ _ _

r GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY P o S T o F F IC E B o x 2 2 O e ST. FAANC1SVtLLE. LoutSIANA70775 AREACoDE 504 635 3237 387-4257 August 9, 1985 RBG-21838

\ File' Code No. G9.5 r (

l j

l i Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 River Bend Station, Unit 1 Docket No. 50-458

\ ,.

Subject:

River Bend Station

. , - Technical Specification Certification In response to the letter of July 25, 1985 from Thomas M. Novak to me...< Gulf States Utilities Company has reviewed a

the final draft'of the River Bend Technt. cal Specifications.

The. .in-depth review included reviews by CSU Technical Staff and* other cognizant GSU personnels Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation, the architect / engineer for " the plants and General Electric Company, the nuclear steam system sup' plier.

Additional reviews were made by an independent consultsnt (QATEL) familiar with , BWR technical specifications. We ,also Jretained ASTA Corporation to conduct a review of Technical Specifications and' Surveillance Test Procedures on a sample basis.- This review compared Surveillance Test Procedures against the -Technical Specifications for consistency, sampled Technical Specifications against the Safety Evaluation . Report '(SER) and Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) for cortsistency and was used to perform walkdowns to compare Surveillance ' Test Procedures. with the actual. as-built plant configuration. The findings of this review we re' factorfd with our fina! Technical Specifications and Surveillance'Tesh Procedures.

s -

f We have cidentified' minor chrages to correct, editorial and/or typographical' errors, whid have already bec.n provided to your staff- by letter dated Augusel2, 1985 (RBG-21773).

Justification for changes b the final draft Technical Specifications, including those matters identified in Enclosure 2 to the July 25, 1985 letter, are contained in letters dated 19 1985 (RBG-21568 and RBG-21573), July 24, 1985 July'21651),

(RBG July 29, 1985 (RBG-21716),- August 1, 1985 (RBG-21752), August 2, 1985 (RBG-21772 and RBG-21773), August 5, gR08280028 850009 0 4 ADOCK 0500o49a 0 PDH 1 \:

________z___ - - - _ - - _ _ - . _ (

. . g:

Mr. Harold R.'Denton From William J. Cahill, Jr.

' August 9, 1985 Page 2 of 2 1985 (RBG-21774 and RBG-21790) and August 7, 1985 (RBC-21815 and RhG-21810). This certification is subject to the NRC incorporating these items in the final Technical Specifications.

_ The July 25, 1985 letter asked GSU to provide a summary description of the long term changes it is currently considering for the Technical Specifications. This information was supplied to your Staff by letter dated August 9, 1985 (RBC-21823). These matters do not affect the ability of GSU to certify the Technical Specifications.

The NRC requested that GSU certify that the draft forwarded by the July 25, 1985 letter accurately reflects, among other things, the Staff's SER. As agreed to with your Staff, CSU will certify the - Technical Specifications with the SER through Supplement 3 at least five working days prior to achieving criticality.

'GSU's certification of the final draft Technical Specifications is based on its review of the FSAR through Amendment -21 .and the FSAR ' changes, other commitments which have been provided to the NRC by docketed correspondence through the date of this letter end the as-built plant reflected in the plant design documents. ,

.. Based upon the foregoing, I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the final draft of the River Bend Station Technical Specifications accurately reflects the plant design, the Final Safety Analysis Report, as amended, and other documented - connaitments made to the NRC Staff by GSU during the course of this review. An affidavit relating to this certification accompanies this letter.

Very truly yours, l -

William J. Cah 11, Jr.

Senior Vice President l River Bend Nuclear Group WJC:sk Enclosure CC: Mr. Robert D. Martin, Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region IV, Office of Inspection and Enforcement 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011 a . .. ..

+ . .

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGUIATORY C(BetlSSION STATE OF LOUISIAEA 5 PARISE OF WEST FELICIAEA I In the Matter of I Docket Nos. 50-458 CULF STATES UTILITIES C(B(FANY l i

(River Bend Station, Unit 1) l I

I AFFIDAVIT l

W. J. Cahill, Jr., being duly sworn, states that he is a Vice

President of Culf States Utilities Company; that he is authorized on 1

the part of said Company to sign and file with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission the documents attached hereto and that all such documents are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.

l l l W.3.$ahill,Jr. /

l l

l Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public in and for the State and Parish above named, this 9th day of Augt se , 19 85 .

y [h / LW JfanW.Middlebroo'ks Ifotary Public in and for est Feliciana Parish, Louisiana My Connaission is for Life.

L. . .