ML20212B564: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older edit
VisualWikitext
StriderTol Bot change
StriderTol Bot change
 
Line 19: Line 19:
{{#Wiki_filter:.
{{#Wiki_filter:.
NOTATION VOTE i
NOTATION VOTE i
RESPONSE SHEET TO:               Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary FROM:             COMMISSIONER MERRIFIELD
RESPONSE SHEET TO:
Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary FROM:
COMMISSIONER MERRIFIELD


==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
SECY-99-192- PROPOSED RULE: REVISION OF PART 50, I APPENDIX K, "ECCS EVALUATION MODELS"             l Approved     ,/     Disapproved           Abstain Not Participating COMMENTS:
SECY-99-192-PROPOSED RULE: REVISION OF PART 50, APPENDIX K, "ECCS EVALUATION MODELS" l
                    $<      .9.dJ       co w .
Approved
I 1
,/
SIGNh'Tl1R5     /"               l r/4.
Disapproved Abstain Not Participating COMMENTS:
.9.dJ co w.
SIGNh'Tl1R5
/"
r/4.
DATE l
DATE l
Entered on "AS" Yes /       No l           P     O     CGt i
Entered on "AS" Yes /
p    CORRESPONDENCE PDR
No l
P O
CGt p
CORRESPONDENCE PDR i


1 l                       COMMISSIONER MERRIFIELD'S COMMENTS ON SECY 99-192 l
1 l
COMMISSIONER MERRIFIELD'S COMMENTS ON SECY 99-192 l
l approve the staff's request to publish the proposed changes to 10 CFR 50, Appendix K as described in SECY 99-192.
l approve the staff's request to publish the proposed changes to 10 CFR 50, Appendix K as described in SECY 99-192.
In reviewing this paper, I have benefitted from the comments provided by the ACRS in its {{letter dated|date=July 22, 1999|text=letter dated July 22,1999}}. I have also reviewed the staff's response dated August 18,1999. I accept the staff's assurance that, as a matter of course during power uprate reviews, it reviews the impact of power level assumptions on all relevant safety analyses, including the non-LOCA analyses which may be limiting at certain plants or types of plants.
In reviewing this paper, I have benefitted from the comments provided by the ACRS in its {{letter dated|date=July 22, 1999|text=letter dated July 22,1999}}. I have also reviewed the staff's response dated August 18,1999. I accept the staff's assurance that, as a matter of course during power uprate reviews, it reviews the impact of power level assumptions on all relevant safety analyses, including the non-LOCA analyses which may be limiting at certain plants or types of plants.
l l
l l
l b
l b


j .
j f'
f'       %                                  UNITED STATES f             ,                  NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
UNITED STATES f
{             l                           WASHINGTON D.C. 20555-0001 September 17, 1999 SECRETARY MEMORANDUM TO:               William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations FROM:                         Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary               ([ g '
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{
l WASHINGTON D.C. 20555-0001 September 17, 1999 SECRETARY MEMORANDUM TO:
William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations FROM:
Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary
([ g '


==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
STAFF REQUIREMENTS - SECY-99-192 - PROPOSED RULE:
STAFF REQUIREMENTS - SECY-99-192 - PROPOSED RULE:
REVISION OF PART 50, APPENDIX K,"ECCS EVALUATION MODELS" The Commission has approved the staff's recommendation to publish the proposed rule that would amend 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K, "ECCS Evaluation Models," to facilitate small, but cost-beneficial power uprates, as described in SECY-99-192, subject to the following comment.
REVISION OF PART 50, APPENDIX K,"ECCS EVALUATION MODELS" The Commission has approved the staff's recommendation to publish the proposed rule that would amend 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K, "ECCS Evaluation Models," to facilitate small, but cost-beneficial power uprates, as described in SECY-99-192, subject to the following comment.
Clarify the last sentence of the proposed rule language (p. 24 of the Federal Reaister notice) as follows: *The selected combination of power distribution shape and peaking factor should be the one that results in the most .
Clarify the last sentence of the proposed rule language (p. 24 of the Federal Reaister notice) as follows: *The selected combination of power distribution shape and peaking factor should be the one that results in the most.
(EDO)                                         (SECY Suspense:           10/15/99) l cc:     Chairman Dieus                                                                             !
(EDO)
Commissioner Diaz                                                                         I Commissioner McGaffigan                                                                   j Commissioner Merrifield OGC ClO CFO OCA OlG OPA Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ACNW, ASLBP (via E-Mail)
(SECY Suspense:
10/15/99) cc:
Chairman Dieus Commissioner Diaz Commissioner McGaffigan j
Commissioner Merrifield OGC ClO CFO OCA OlG OPA Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ACNW, ASLBP (via E-Mail)
PDR DCS Cige:poRJ6/7 Ip}}
PDR DCS Cige:poRJ6/7 Ip}}

Latest revision as of 20:39, 5 December 2024

Notation Vote Approving SECY-99-192 Re Proposed Rule to Revise Part 50,App K, ECCS Evaluation Models
ML20212B564
Person / Time
Issue date: 09/01/1999
From: Merrifield J
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To: Vietticook A
NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
Shared Package
ML20212B481 List:
References
SECY-99-192-C, NUDOCS 9909200143
Download: ML20212B564 (2)
v • d • e


Text

.

NOTATION VOTE i

RESPONSE SHEET TO:

Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary FROM:

COMMISSIONER MERRIFIELD

SUBJECT:

SECY-99-192-PROPOSED RULE: REVISION OF PART 50, APPENDIX K, "ECCS EVALUATION MODELS" l

Approved

,/

Disapproved Abstain Not Participating COMMENTS:

.9.dJ co w.

SIGNh'Tl1R5

/"

r/4.

DATE l

Entered on "AS" Yes /

No l

P O

CGt p

CORRESPONDENCE PDR i

1 l

COMMISSIONER MERRIFIELD'S COMMENTS ON SECY 99-192 l

l approve the staff's request to publish the proposed changes to 10 CFR 50, Appendix K as described in SECY 99-192.

In reviewing this paper, I have benefitted from the comments provided by the ACRS in its letter dated July 22,1999. I have also reviewed the staff's response dated August 18,1999. I accept the staff's assurance that, as a matter of course during power uprate reviews, it reviews the impact of power level assumptions on all relevant safety analyses, including the non-LOCA analyses which may be limiting at certain plants or types of plants.

l b

j f'

UNITED STATES f

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

{

l WASHINGTON D.C. 20555-0001 September 17, 1999 SECRETARY MEMORANDUM TO:

William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations FROM:

Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary

([ g '

SUBJECT:

STAFF REQUIREMENTS - SECY-99-192 - PROPOSED RULE:

REVISION OF PART 50, APPENDIX K,"ECCS EVALUATION MODELS" The Commission has approved the staff's recommendation to publish the proposed rule that would amend 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K, "ECCS Evaluation Models," to facilitate small, but cost-beneficial power uprates, as described in SECY-99-192, subject to the following comment.

Clarify the last sentence of the proposed rule language (p. 24 of the Federal Reaister notice) as follows: *The selected combination of power distribution shape and peaking factor should be the one that results in the most.

(EDO)

(SECY Suspense:

10/15/99) cc:

Chairman Dieus Commissioner Diaz Commissioner McGaffigan j

Commissioner Merrifield OGC ClO CFO OCA OlG OPA Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ACNW, ASLBP (via E-Mail)

PDR DCS Cige:poRJ6/7 Ip

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20212B564&oldid=4001878"