ML20087K341: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) StriderTol Bot insert |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) StriderTol Bot change |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ | {{#Wiki_filter:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ | ||
/ | |||
s Commonwealth Edison | |||
{ | |||
) One First National Pina, Ch cago, lihnois g | |||
C 'l Address Reply to: Post Office Box 767 | |||
\\ | |||
/ Chicago. Illinois 60690 March 21, 1984 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
LaSalle County Station Units 1 and 2 Differences Between LaSalle County Station Unit 1 and Unit 2 Technical Specifications NRC Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374 Reference (a): | LaSalle County Station Units 1 and 2 Differences Between LaSalle County Station Unit 1 and Unit 2 Technical Specifications NRC Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374 Reference (a): | ||
C. W. Schroeder letter to H. R. Denton dated January 13, 1984. | |||
==Dear Mr. Denton:== | ==Dear Mr. Denton:== | ||
The differences between the two LaSalle County Tech Specs which were not due to changes in the plant design, were submitted in Reference (a). | |||
The differences between the two LaSalle County Tech Specs which were not due to changes in the plant design, were submitted in Reference (a). These changes reflect CECO requested improvements, changes based on revisions to the STS, generic letters, NRR requirements or suggestions, and grammatical corrections. | These changes reflect CECO requested improvements, changes based on revisions to the STS, generic letters, NRR requirements or suggestions, and grammatical corrections. | ||
The differences between the two Tech specs do not affect the adequacy of the current Unit 1 Tech Spec. These Tech Spec changes were reviewed and approved as part of the licensing process for Unit 2. | The differences between the two Tech specs do not affect the adequacy of the current Unit 1 Tech Spec. | ||
These Tech Spec changes were reviewed and approved as part of the licensing process for Unit 2. | |||
Operation of Unit 1 and Unit 2 is not affected with these differences in place and safe plant operation or the health and safety of the public is not affected. | Operation of Unit 1 and Unit 2 is not affected with these differences in place and safe plant operation or the health and safety of the public is not affected. | ||
These differences are widely known within the station and licensed plant personnel have been trained on the differences during the early part of 1984. All cognizant department heads were also notified of the differences between the Unit's Tech Spec. | These differences are widely known within the station and licensed plant personnel have been trained on the differences during the early part of 1984. | ||
All cognizant department heads were also notified of the differences between the Unit's Tech Spec. | |||
If there are any further questions regarding this matter, please contact this office. | If there are any further questions regarding this matter, please contact this office. | ||
Very truly yours, 2 h C. W. Schroeder Nuclear Licensing Administrator 1m cc: | Very truly yours, 2 h C. W. Schroeder Nuclear Licensing Administrator 1m 0! | ||
NRC Resident Inspector - LSCS 8403260122 840321 | cc: | ||
PDR ADOCK 05000373 8328N | Dr. | ||
A. | |||
Bournia - Telecopy j0 | |||
,ly NRC Resident Inspector - LSCS 8403260122 840321 l | |||
PDR ADOCK 05000373 8328N P | |||
PDR | |||
.}} | |||
Latest revision as of 15:10, 13 December 2024
| ML20087K341 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 03/21/1984 |
| From: | Schroeder C COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 8328N, NUDOCS 8403260122 | |
| Download: ML20087K341 (1) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
/
s Commonwealth Edison
{
) One First National Pina, Ch cago, lihnois g
C 'l Address Reply to: Post Office Box 767
\\
/ Chicago. Illinois 60690 March 21, 1984 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
Subject:
LaSalle County Station Units 1 and 2 Differences Between LaSalle County Station Unit 1 and Unit 2 Technical Specifications NRC Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374 Reference (a):
C. W. Schroeder letter to H. R. Denton dated January 13, 1984.
Dear Mr. Denton:
The differences between the two LaSalle County Tech Specs which were not due to changes in the plant design, were submitted in Reference (a).
These changes reflect CECO requested improvements, changes based on revisions to the STS, generic letters, NRR requirements or suggestions, and grammatical corrections.
The differences between the two Tech specs do not affect the adequacy of the current Unit 1 Tech Spec.
These Tech Spec changes were reviewed and approved as part of the licensing process for Unit 2.
Operation of Unit 1 and Unit 2 is not affected with these differences in place and safe plant operation or the health and safety of the public is not affected.
These differences are widely known within the station and licensed plant personnel have been trained on the differences during the early part of 1984.
All cognizant department heads were also notified of the differences between the Unit's Tech Spec.
If there are any further questions regarding this matter, please contact this office.
Very truly yours, 2 h C. W. Schroeder Nuclear Licensing Administrator 1m 0!
cc:
Dr.
A.
Bournia - Telecopy j0
,ly NRC Resident Inspector - LSCS 8403260122 840321 l
PDR ADOCK 05000373 8328N P
.