ML20149E414: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 13: Line 13:
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, NRC TO UTILITY, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, NRC TO UTILITY, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| page count = 2
| page count = 2
| project =  
| project = TAC:66671
| stage = Other
| stage = Other
}}
}}
Line 28: Line 28:
==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, LA CROSSE BOILING WATER REACTOR (TAC-66671)
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, LA CROSSE BOILING WATER REACTOR (TAC-66671)
By letter dated November 12, 1987 you requested an amendment to the Technical
By {{letter dated|date=November 12, 1987|text=letter dated November 12, 1987}} you requested an amendment to the Technical
..          Specification (TS) for the La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor (LACBWR) to reduce the shift crew requirements.
..          Specification (TS) for the La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor (LACBWR) to reduce the shift crew requirements.
One of your proposed changes would delete the requirement for an individual          .
One of your proposed changes would delete the requirement for an individual          .
Line 52: Line 52:
==SUBJECT:==
==SUBJECT:==
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, LA CROSSE BOILING WATER REACTOR (TAC 66671)
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, LA CROSSE BOILING WATER REACTOR (TAC 66671)
By letter dated November 12, 1987 you requested an amendment to the Technical Specification (TS) for the La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor (LACBWR) to reduce the shift crew requireu nts.
By {{letter dated|date=November 12, 1987|text=letter dated November 12, 1987}} you requested an amendment to the Technical Specification (TS) for the La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor (LACBWR) to reduce the shift crew requireu nts.
One of your proposed changes would delete the requirement for an individual                                            l qualified in radiation protection except when spent fuel or a spent fuel cask                                          l is being handled or when non-routine evolutions are being conducted in the                                            1 Spent Fuel Storage Well. We have, however, determined that a specification should be proposed that would require an individual qualified in radiatior protection procedures to be on site when there is fuel on-site or there is a potential for release of radioactive materials. We will complete our review following receipt of a proposed TS as indicated. We request your response within 30 days of the date of this letter.
One of your proposed changes would delete the requirement for an individual                                            l qualified in radiation protection except when spent fuel or a spent fuel cask                                          l is being handled or when non-routine evolutions are being conducted in the                                            1 Spent Fuel Storage Well. We have, however, determined that a specification should be proposed that would require an individual qualified in radiatior protection procedures to be on site when there is fuel on-site or there is a potential for release of radioactive materials. We will complete our review following receipt of a proposed TS as indicated. We request your response within 30 days of the date of this letter.
Sincerely, l
Sincerely, l

Latest revision as of 15:58, 11 December 2021

Requests Addl Info Re 871112 Application for Amend to License DPR-45 Reducing Shift Crew Requirements.Spec Should Be Proposed to Require Individual Qualified in Radiation Protection on Site When Potential for Release Exists
ML20149E414
Person / Time
Site: La Crosse File:Dairyland Power Cooperative icon.png
Issue date: 01/11/1988
From: Erickson P
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Taylor J
DAIRYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE
References
TAC-66671, NUDOCS 8801130335
Download: ML20149E414 (2)


Text

. ..

-'n

, January 11, 1988 l

Docket No. 50-409 Mr. James W. Taylor )

General Manager Dairyland Power Cooperative 2615 East Avenue South La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601

Dear Mr. Taylor:

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, LA CROSSE BOILING WATER REACTOR (TAC-66671)

By letter dated November 12, 1987 you requested an amendment to the Technical

.. Specification (TS) for the La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor (LACBWR) to reduce the shift crew requirements.

One of your proposed changes would delete the requirement for an individual .

qualified in radiation protection except when spent fuel or a spent fuel cask is being handled or when non-routine evolutions are being conducted in the Spent Fuel Storage Well. We have, however, determined that a specification should be proposed that would require an individual qualified in radiation protection procedures to be on site when there is fuel on-site or there is a potential for release of radioactive materials. We will complete our review following receipt of a proposed TS as indicated. We request your response within 30 days of the date of this letter.

Sincerely, b ,2 & f %

Peter B. Erickson, Project Manager Standardization and Non-Power Reactor Project Directorate Division of Reactor Projects III, IV, Y and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

. DISTRIBUTION:

( Docket File-NRC'& Local PDRs PDSNP Reading EHylton PErickson 8801130335BBy0jo, LRubenstein PDR ADOCK O PDR EJordan P JPartlow OGC-White Flint ACRS (10) t l .:

PDSNP ($d PD P P, S PErickson:cw EM on LRu stein 01/1 /88 01/ _/88 01//j 88

]

g@ RICO

  1. 'o UNITED STATES

~,,

l )

{

n

,E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTO N, D. C. 20555

% .v / January 11, 1988 Docket No. 50-409 Mr. James W. Taylor General Manager Dairyland Power Cooperative 2615 East Avenue South La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601

Dear Mr. Taylor:

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, LA CROSSE BOILING WATER REACTOR (TAC 66671)

By letter dated November 12, 1987 you requested an amendment to the Technical Specification (TS) for the La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor (LACBWR) to reduce the shift crew requireu nts.

One of your proposed changes would delete the requirement for an individual l qualified in radiation protection except when spent fuel or a spent fuel cask l is being handled or when non-routine evolutions are being conducted in the 1 Spent Fuel Storage Well. We have, however, determined that a specification should be proposed that would require an individual qualified in radiatior protection procedures to be on site when there is fuel on-site or there is a potential for release of radioactive materials. We will complete our review following receipt of a proposed TS as indicated. We request your response within 30 days of the date of this letter.

Sincerely, l

/

c m^

Peter B. Erickson, Project Manager Standardization and Non-Power Reactor Project Directorate Division of Reactor Projects III, IV, Y and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

- _____________ _=_ _ - _._ ___