ML13309B520

Forwards Monthly Fr Notice Re Applications & Amends to OLs Involving Nshc,

ML13309B520
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	03/13/1985
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Baskin K Southern California Edison Co
References
NUDOCS 8503270555
Download: ML13309B520 (49)

Text

-

DISTRIBU1I0N 1.3 1985enontrol (50-361/362 NRC PDR L PDR NSIC LB#3 Reading HRood DOCKET NO(S). 50/361/362 JLee Mr. Kenneth P. Baskin Vice President Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue R.0. Box 800 Rosemead, California 91770

SUBJECT:

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, ET AL-SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3 The following documents concerning our review of the subject facility are transmitted for your information.

O. Notice of Receipt of Application, dated O Draft/Final Environmental Statment, dated_.

O Notice of Availability of Draft/Final Environmental Statement, dated E

Safety Evaluation Report, or Supplement No.

, dated Oi Notice of Hearing on Application for Construction Permit, dated_.

l Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Facility Operating License, dated l

Monthly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Operating Licenses Involving no Significant Hazards Considerations, dated OD Application and Safety Analysis Report, Volume E

Amendment No.

to Application/SAR dated O Construction Permit No. CPPR-

, Amendment No.

dated_.

O Facility Operating License No.

, Amendment No.

, dated_.

X Order Extending Construction Completion Date, dated U Other (Specify)Monthly Notice - Applications and Amendments to Operating Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations, dtd 2/27/85 (See page 8007)

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

8503270555 850313 As stated PDR ADOCK 05000361 P

PDR cc: See next page OFFICEIP DL:LB#3 SURNAME U

OLee/es DATE)0 3

85 NRC FORM 318 (1/84) NRCM 0240................

San Onofre Mr. Kenneth P. Baskin Vice President Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue P. 0. Box 800 Rosemead, California 91770 Mr. James C. Holcombe Vice President - Power Supply San Diego Gas & Electric Company 101 Ash Street Post Office Box 1831 San Diego, California 92112 Charles R. Kocher, Esq.

Mr. Mark Medford James A. Beoletto, Esq.

Southern California Edison Company Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue P. 0. Box 800 P. 0. Box 800 Rosemead, California 91770 Rosemead, California 91770 Dr. L. Bernath Manager, Nuclear Department Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe San Diego Gas & Electric Company ATTN: David R. Pigott, Esq.

P. 0. Box 1831 600 Montgomery Street San Diego, California 92112 San Francisco, California 94111 Richard J. Wharton, Esa.

University of San Diego School of Alan R. Watts, Esq.

Law Rourke & Woodruff Environmental Law Clinic Suite 1020 San Diego, California 92110 1055 North Main Street Santa Ana, California, 92701 Charles E. McClung, Jr., Esq.

Attorney at Law Mr. V. C. Hall 24012 Calle de la Plaza/Suite 330 Combustion Engineering, Inc.

Laguna Hills, California 92653 1000 Prospect Hill Road Windsor, Connecticut 06095 Region Administrator-Region V/NRC 1450 Maria Lan/Suite 210 Mr. S. McClusky Walnut Creek, California 92672 Bechtel Power Corporation P. 0. Box 60860, Terminal Annex Los Angeles, California 90060 Resident Inspector, San Onofre NPS c/o U. S. NRC Mr. C. B. Brinkman Post Office Box 4329 Combustion Engineering, Inc.

San Clemente, California 9267?

7910 Woodmont Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Mr. Dennis F. Kirsh U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission CRegion V

1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596

-2 California State Library Government Publications Section Library & Courts Building Sacramento, CA 95841 ATTN:

Ms. Mary Schnell Mayor, City of San Clemente San Clemente, CA 92672 Chairman, Board Supervisors San Diego County 1600 Pacific Highway, Room 335 San Diego, CA 92101 California Department of Health ATTN:

Chief, Environmental Radiation Control Unit Radiological Health Section 714 P Street, Room 498 Sacramento, CA 95814 Mr. Joseph 0. Ward, Chief Radiological Health Branch State Department of Health Services 714 P Street, Building #8 Sacramento, California 95814

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No: 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 7979 Conditions, copies of which may be operating license upon a determination Safety and Licensing Board, designated requested from the NSF Forms and by the Commission that such by the Commission or by the Chairman Publications Unit.

amendment involves no significant of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Because of the nature of some hazards consideration, notwithstanding Board Panel, will rule on the request precollege projects, proposers may wish the pendency before the Commission of and/or petition and the Secretary orthe to familiarize themselves with NSF a request for a hearing from any person.

designated Atomic Safety and Licensing policy in two particular areas:

This monthly notice includes all Board will issue a notice of hearing or

• Where educational materials are amendments issued, or proposed to-be an appropriate order.

outcomes, the GSER should be consulted issued, since the date of publication of As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a with respect to inventions, software, and the last monthly notice which was petition for leave to intervene shall set copyrights.

published on January 23, 1985 (50 FR forth with particularity the interest of

• Where precollege students are to be 3047) through February 15,1985.

the petitioner in the proceeding, and involved in research or in the NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF how that interest may be affected by the development of materials, awards are ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO results of the proceeding. The petition subject to the provisions of 42 U.S.C.

FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND should specifically explain the reasons 1869 (a) and (b) ("Myers Amendment" PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT why intervention should be permitted and "Dornan Amendment"). These HAZARDS CONSIDERATION with particular reference to the provisions of law require appropriate DETERMINATIONAND following factors: (1) The nature of the grantee coordination with parents, OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING petitioner's right under the Act to be guardians, and school district officials.

made a party to the proceeding; (2] the The awardee is wholly responsible for The Commission has made a proposed nature and extent of the petitioner's the conduct of the project, including the determination that the following research and development of materials amendment requests involve no proeinan or the ie and the preparation of project results for significant hazards consideration. Under t

oc and (3]ch possbe publication. The Foundation does not the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR effe on oder which e

assume responsibility for such findings 50.92, this means that operation of the ener in he pei on h or their interpretation, but expects an facility in accordance with the proposed acknowledgement of its support in all amendments would not: (1) Involve a so idefthe pcii as to published materials resulting from which petitioner wishes to intervene.

fundingconsequences of an accident previously VI.uires evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of u ieerson who has d en VI. nnuiesa new or different kind of accident from lavetinte vn osapr who asen h Questions not addressed in thismitdaap Quesionsnotaddrsse in hisany accident previously evaluated; or (3) adito aihotreqty n ayae the publication may be directed to the NSF involve a significant reduction in a staff by writing to:

margin of safety. The basis for this Board up to fifteen (15) days prior to the Division of Materials Development and proposed determination for each first prehearing conference scheduled in Research, Directorate for Science and amendment request is shown below, the proceeding, but such an amended Engineering Education, National The Commission is seeking public petition must satisfy the specificity Science Foundation, Washington, D.C.

comments on this proposed requirements describedabove.

20550.

determination. Any comments received Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to Dated: February 22, 1985.

within 30 days after the date of the first prehearing conference Alan I. Leshner, publication of this notice will be scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner Acting Division Director, Materials considered in making any final shall file a supplement to the petition to Development and Research.

determination. The Commission Will not intervene which must include a list of normally make a final determination the contentions which are sought to be

[FR Doc. 85-4751 Filed 2-2"-5; 8:45 am]

unless it receives a request for a litigated in the matter, and the bases for BILLING CODE 7555 hearing each contention set forth with Comments should be addressed to the reasonable specificity. Contentions shall NUCLEAR REGULATORY Secretary of the Commission, U.S.

be limited to matters within the scope of COMMISSION Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the amendment under consideration. A Monthly Notice; Applications and Washington, D.C. 20555. Attention:

petitioner who fails to file such a Amendments to Operating Licenses Docketing and Service Branch.

supplement which satisfies these InvolvingBy March 29,1985 the licensee may requirements with respect to at east one CnsoingraNoSn fcn aad file a request for a hearing with respect contention will not be permitted to Considerations to issuance of the amendment to the participate as a party.

I. Background subject facility operating license and Those permitted to intervene become Pursuant to Public Law (Pub. L.) 97-any person whose interest may be parties to the proceeding, subject to any 415, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission affected by this proceeding and who limitations in the order granting leave fo (the Commission) is publishing its wishes to participate as a party in the intervene, and have the opportunity to regular monthly notice. Pub. L.97-415 proceeding must file a written petition participate fully in the conduct of the revised section 189 of the Atomic Energy for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing. including the opportunity to Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), to hearing and petitions for leave to present evidence and cross-examine require the Commission to publish intervene shall be filed in accordance witnesses.

notice of any amendments issued, or with the Commission's "Rules of If a hearing is requested, the proposed to be issued, under a new Practice for Domestic Licensing Commission will make a final provision of section 189 of the Act. This Proceedings'.'in 10 CFR Part 2. If a determination on the issue of no provision grants the Commission the request for a hearing or petition for significant hazards consideration. The authority to issue and make immediately leave to intervene is filed by the above final determination will serve to decide effective any amendment to an date, the Commission or an Atomic when the hearing is held.

7980 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27 1985 /.Notices If the final determination is that the Atomic Safety and licensing Board is Example (ii) which is a change that amendment request involves no designated to rule on the petition and/or constitutes an additional limitation.

significant hazards consideration, the request, that the petitioner has made a restriction, or control not presently Commission may issue the amendment substantial showing of good cause for included in the Technical Specifications:

and make it immediately effective, the panting of a late petition and/or For example, a more stringent notwithstanding the request for a request. That determination will be surveillance requirement. The proposed hearing. Any hearing held would take based upon a balancing of the factors change of the Technical Specifications place after issuance of the amendment.

specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(l)i)-[vi and LCO to reduce the allowable oxygen If the final determination is that the 2.714(d).

concentration level-in primary amendment involves a significant For further details with respect to this containment constitutes an additional hazards consideration, any hearing held action, see the application for limitation on plant operation, that is would take place before the issuance of amendment which is available for public consistent with Example (ii).

any amendment.

inspection at the Commission'sPublic Since the amendment involves a Normally, the Commission will not Document Room. 1717 H Street. N.W.,

proposed change that is similar to an issue the amendment until the Washington, D.C., and at the local example for which no significant expiration of the 30-day notice period.

public document room for the particular hazards considerations are likely to However, should circumstances change facility involved, exist, the Commission has made a during the notice period such that failure Boston Edison Company, Docket No. 50-proposed determination that the to act in a timely way would result, for 293, Pilin Nuclear Power Station, application for amendment involves no example. indrtn rsudw fte Pymouth, Masahset significant'hazards considerations.

exmlin derating or shutdown of the LclPbi ouetRo facility, the Commission may issue the license amendment before the Date of amendment request:

location: Plymouth Public Library. North expiration of the 30-day notice period, December 6, 1984.

Street. Plymouth. Massachusetts 02360 provided that its final determination is Description of amendment request:

Attorney for licensee: W. S. Stowe, that the amendment involves no The proposed amendment would change Esq., Boston Edison Company. 80 significant hazards consideration. The the Technical Specifications to reduce Boylston Street, 36th Floor, Boston, final determination will consider all the permitted oxygen concentration Massachusetts 02199.

public and State comments received level in the primary containment from a NRC Branch Chief Domenic B.

before action is taken. Should the maximum of 5% to a maximum of 4%.

Commission take this action, it will On May 8, 1984, NRC issuedGeneric publish a notice of issuance and provide Letter 84-09 which concluded that Carolina Power and Light Company, for opportunity for a hearing after recombiner capability is not required in Docket No. 50-M8, H B. Robinson issuance. The Commission expects that BWR plants with Mark I containment Steam Electric Plant, Unit No.2, the need to take this action will occur for which notices on the construction Darlington, South Carolina very infrequently.

permits were pblished before A request for a hearing or a petition November 5, 1970. if certain criteria Dtem e

n request4 for leave to intervene must be filed with were met. The criteria enumerated were the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.

as follows: (1) The plant has Technical Description of amendment request Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Specifications (limiting conditions f The proposed amendment would change Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention:

operation, LCO) requiring that the the Technical Specifications from Docketing and Service Branch, or may containment atmosphere be less than requiring the equalizing charge to be be delivered to the Commission's Public four percent oxygen when the performed Monthly to performing the Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W.,

containment is required to be inerted, Washington, D.C., by the above date.

and (2) the plant has only nitrogen or charging requirements is consistent with Where petitions are filed during the last recycled containment atmosphere for the manufacturers recommended ten (10) days of the notice period, it is use in all pneumatic control systems interval, reduces unnecessary requested that the petitioner promptly so within containment, and (3) there are no overcharging of cells and does not inform the Commission by a toll-free Potential sources of oxygen in degrade the overall operation of the telephone call to Western Union at (800) containment other than that resulting batteries. The decreased frequency for 325-6000 (in Missouri (800) 342-8700).

from radiolysis of the reactor coolant.

charging of the batteries improves the The Western Union operator should be The present Technical Specifications reliability of voltage sensitive equipment given Datagram Identification Number for Pilgrim Station provide that the on the same bus in that this equipment 3737 and the following message oxygen concentration level be less than (NBFD relays in reactor protection addressed to (Branch Chief): Petitioner's 5% oxygen by volume in containment system) will be tubjected to the voltage name and telephone number, date during reactor power operation, In order changes seenduring charging lesften.

petition was mailed; plant name; and to comply with the criteria in the The battery parameters will continue publication date and page number of Generic Letter, the LCO for this to be measured on a monthly basis. This this Federal Register notice. A copy of Technical Specification must be provides adequate indication of battery the petition should also be sent to the changed to a maximum of 4% oxygen by status and the ability to identify any Executive Legal Director, U.S. Nuclear

volume, deterioration long before failure, as Regulatory Commission, Washington, Basis for proposed no significant discussed in the current basis.

D.C. 20555, and to the attorney for the hazards consideration determination:

Basis for proposed no significant licensee.

The Commission has provided guidance hazards consideration determination:

Nontimely filings of petitions for leave concerning the application of standards The Commission has provided guidance to intervene, amended petitions, for determining whether license concerning the application of its supplemental petitions and/or requests amendments involve significant hazards standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92 for for hearing will not be entertained considerations by providing certain no significant hazards considerations by absent a determination by the examples (48 FR 14870). One of those providing certain examples pblished in Commission, the presiding officer or the not likely to involve such considerations the Federal Register on April 6, 1983 (48

Federal, Register / Vol. 0, No. 39,/ Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 7061 FR 14870). One of the examples of an Home and Fifth Avenues, Hartsville, concerning the application of the amendment which will likely be found South Carolina 29535.

standards for determining whether a to not involve significant hazards Attorney for licensee: Shaw. Pitian.

significant hazards consideration exists considerations is a change which may Potts, and Trowbridge. 180 M Street.

by providing certain examples (48 FR reduce in some' way a safety margin, but NW., Washington, D.C. 20036.

14870). These examples of actions where the results of the-change are NRC Brnch Chief. Steven A. Varga.

involving no significant hazards clearly within all acceptable criteria.

Commonwealth Edison Company, consideration include: (1) A purely The attached proposed change falls Docket Nos.

-254 and 50-26, Quad administrative change to the Technical within the Commission's example (vi) of Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 Specifications, correction of an error or a change pot likely to involve a sigfcanept hazards coinsideao and 2, Rock Island County, Illinois a change in nomenclature; (2) a change significant hazards considerationan additional because the change is in aecordance Date of amendment request: February mitation, restriction, or control not with the manufacture's 17,1983, as supplemented August 23 presently included in the Technical recommendations, reduces unnecessary 1984.

overcharging and may improve the Description of amendment request Seications; a

( change totke reliability of voltage sensitive equipment This submittal supplements the request regulations, where the license change on the same bus.

for amendment dated February 17,1983 results in very minor changes to facility Therefore, on these bases, the which was noticed in the Federal Commission proposes to determine that Register on September 21, 1 (49 FR oerationsi the proposed change involves no 43132). The changes proposed by the relans significant hazards considerations.

application for amendment are

. Local Public Document Room changes and changes necessitated by encompassed by these examples in the location: Hartsville Memorial Library revisions to 10 CF Sections 5054 following ways:

Home and Fifth Avenues, Hartsville, revse th min a

ne a1fing (1) Changes to the Technical South Carolina 20535.

requirements, immediate notification pecifications have been proposed by Attorney for lcensee: Shaw, Pittman.

requirements and the licensee Event the licensee to reflect the current Potts, and Trowbridge, 180 M Street, Reporting system, respectively licensee organization by changing the NW., Washington, D.C. 206.

The proposed amendment'w titles for certain positions. These NRCBmnch Chief. Steven A. Varga.

incorporate numerous miscellaneous changes do not reflect a significant Carolina Power and UIght Company, changes to section 6, Administrative change in the authority of the position.

Docket No. 50-261, H. B. Robinson Controls, of the Technical and are changes in nomenclature and Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2, Specifications. This section of the Darlington, South Carolina Technical Specifications contains,

2) Another change proposed which among other things, information and reflects the current organization is the Date of amendment request-descriptions concerning the licensee's definition and desiription of a newly December 10, 1984.

management organization. The licensee created position. Director of Nuclear Description of amendment request proposed to modify these specifications Safety. This new position has defined The proposed amendment would revise in several places to reflect the current powers and authority that exert Section 6, Administrative Controls, of licensee organizationa at corporate additional control not presently in the the Technical Specifications to: (1) headquarters and at the station. These Technical Specifications and is thus Change the position of Manager-changes are changes in title for existing similar to example (2) above.

Operations and Maintenance from a positions and the addition of a new (3) Another change is proposed that single position to two positions, position, Director of Nuclear Safety.

defines the qualificatrions and Manager-Operations and Manager-addition, specifications in response to capabilities required for the position of Maintenance; Reporting to the General an NRC requests are proposed to require radiation/diemical technician. These Manager as prior io change; and (2) procedures for the control of overtime qualifications and capabilities were not reinsert page 6.5-7 approved by for certain job classifications at the previously defined in the Technical Amendment 84 but inadvertently station. The licensee also proposed to Specifications, so the change constitutes deleted by Amendment a5.

clarify the applicability of the an additional limitation, restriction, or Basis for proposed no aignificant requirement to conduct retraining at control not presently included therein hazards consideration determination two-year intervals as a result of a and is'thus similar to example (2) above.

The Commission has provided guidance concern identified during an informal (4) Other changes are proposed that concernin the application of the cocrIgteapSaino h licensee audit. The licensee also clarify the requirement to conduct standards for determining whether a proposed changes to specify that retraining at two-year intevals, that significant hazards consideration exists emergency procedure drills shall be specify that emergency procedure drills by providing certain examples (April 6, conducted at the frequency specified in shall be conducted at the frequency 1983, 48 FR14870). The proposed change the Generating Station Emergency Plan, called out in the Generating Station's to station organization and the and to require audits of the Facility Emergency Plan, and that require audits replacement of a previously approved Emergency Plan and Facility Security of the Facility Emergency Plan and organizational change that was deleted Plan at lease once per twelve months.

Facility Security Plan at least once per by error during a subsequent These changes are in response to NRC 12 months. These changes constitute amendment are covered by example (i) requests. Finally, a proposed change additional limitations, restrictions or since they are administrative in nature.

would clarify job qualification controls not presently included in the The staff, therefore, proposes to requirements for the position of Technical Specifications, and are determine that this amendment involves radiation/chepiial technician, thereby similar to example (2) above.

no significant hazards consideration.

Basis for proposed no significant (5) Changes to requirements for Local Public Document Room hazardsconsidelution deterination:

minimum operator staffing, and locationP Hartsville Memorial Library, The Commission has provided guidance immediate notification requirements,

0 0

7982

-Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 ] Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices and changes to.the Licensee Event bearing control rods is sufficiently spurious actuation due to instrument Reporting system are similar to example matched to ensure that theirsafety drift. Deletion of the bi-weekly MSIV (3) above, since these are changes to function (scram reactivity) is not partial closure test requirement would make a license conform to changes in reduced orcompromised, nor will the allow the closure to be tested monthly, the regulations, with minor changes to probabilities or consequences of consistent with the Standard Technical facility operations.

previously evaluated accidents be Specification requirement.

Since each ofthe changes requested increased.

Basis for Proposed no significant by the licensee can be shown to be Based on thepreceding discussion hazards consideration determination:

similar to ariexample of a kind of and review of similar approved changes The licensee's submittal of November change which will be considered not at another Commonwealth Edison Unit, 27, 1984 contained an evaluation of the likely to involv6 a significant hazards Dresden Unit 3, the licensee concludes proposed action and a basis for a consideration, the stafftproposes to that the proposed, amendments will not:

proposed no significant hazards determine that this proposed (1) Involve a significant increase in' consideration determination. The amendmeiit involves no significant the probability or consequences of an licensee's proposed determination is hazards consideration.

accident previously evaluated, because based on the following considerations.

Local Public Document Room the use of hafnium metal in place of The Commission has provided location: Moline Public Library, 504 -

boron carbidepowder is to reduce the guidance concerning the application of 17th Street, Moline, Illinois 61265.

potential for corrosion and mechanical the standards for determining whether a Attorney for licensee: Mr Robert G stress that would give rise to such significant hazards Consideration exists Fitzgibbons, Jr., Isham, Lincoln, & Beale, accidents.

Three First National Plaza, Suite 5200, (2] Create the possibility of a new or 14870). The examples of actions Chicago, Illinois 60602.. -

different kind of accident previously.

involving nosignificanthazards NRC Branch Chief: Domenic B.

evaluated; the kinds of accidents which consideration include: (vi] A change Vassallo.

can result from control rod malfunction which either results in some increase to Commonwealth Edison Company, have instead been reduced by the use of the probability or consequences of a Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad hafnium absorber material in place of previously analyzed accident or may Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 boron carbide powder.

reduce in some way a safety margin, but and 2, Rock Island County, Illinois

(

where the results of the change are Date of amendment-request: October the margin of safety; the hafnium clearly within all acceptable criteria 2,Da absorber will provide neutron with respect to the system or component 2, 194.

.absorption characteristics that do not seified in the Standard Review Plan.

Description of amendment request:

differ significantly from the provided by sexa The submittal requests changes in the the boron carbide powder currently Th euestecng s

se of Technical Specifications for Quad Cities used.

Units 1 and 2 to permit the use of The staff has reviewed the licensee's the high drywell pressure to 2.5 psig and hafnium neutron absorber material in significant hazards consideration deletion of the bi-weely MSIV testing is the control rod assemblies. This change determination. The staff finds that the a relaxation of the current Technical will allow NRC-approved state-of-the-criteria for a no significant hazards Specification limits and therefore, may art control rod designs, using other than consideration as set forth in 10 CFR be considered as a reduction of an boron carbide neutron absorber 50.90 are met. The staff has, therefore, existing safety margin. However, both material, to be used i these units.

that the proposed revisions still comply with the Basis for proposed no significant proposed amendment involves no staffs general guidance on the drywell hazards consideration determination:

significant hazards consideration, pressure set point and MSIV testing as The licensee's submittal of October 2, Local Public Document Room described below.

1984 contaihed an evaluation of the location: Moline Public Lbrar, 5 In the case of the proposed 2.5 psig set proposed action and a basispoint, the increase is requested in order proposeda i

or attret Illins 61265 to reduce inadvertent ECCS operation.

consideration determination. The g margin between consieratin dee'rmiation TheFitzgibbons, Jr.. Isham, Lincoln,.&.Beale, Th noraew presur adthti licensee's proposed determination is Three First National Plaza, Suite 5200, point is stll ithnute originl plan based on the following considerations.

Chicago, Illinois 60602.

poaccidenttanalysisiandhfalligwithinlthe The proposed Technical Specification NRC Branch Chief-Domenic B.

aff'sentiancs on set p itmin for changes do not represent significan' Vassallo.

resuin o

Itm margintfor changes in acceptance criteria or safety margins and all changes have been Commonwealth Edison Company, in the case of the deletion of the bi previously accepted by the NRC for Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad weeklyMSIV test, the provisions other similar units, including Dresden 3.

Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 remaining in the Technical Previous control blades used at Quad and 2, Rock Island County, Illinois.

Specifications for testing the MSIVs are Cities and Dresden Unit 2 utilized boron Date of amendment requests:

consistent with the BWR Standard carbide as the absorber material. The November 27,1984.

Technical Specification as endorsed by use of hafnium in place of, or in addition

'Description of amendment request:

Chapter 16 of the Standard Review Plan.

to, boron is desired to provide The proposed amendment would revise Therefore, although somerelaxation in comparable neutron absorption the Technical Specification to: [1) Raise surveillance frequency will occur, the characteristics while eliminating or the drywell high pressure trip setpoint remaining provisions will'meet the reducing the production of helium gas.

from 2.0 psig to 2.5 psig and (2) remove staffs guidelines for testing of'the This will reduce the source of internal the requirement for bi-weekly main MSIVs.

pressure in the control blade structure, steam line isolation valve (MSIV) partial

'Since the application for amendnent thereby reducing material stresses and closure test.

involves a proposed change that is the likelihood of stress corrosion The proposed drywell trip setpoint similar to an example for whichno.

cracking. The reactivity of the hafnium-change would reduce the probability of significant hazards conideratio exists,

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 7983 the licesee proposes a determination modified into analog trip systems. The full power, reduction of primary system that the application involves no use of analog trip units, and the boration is required. The reduction in sigriificant hazards consideration.

acceptable intervals for their calibration boration requires processing of a The staff has reviewed the licensee's and testing, has been reviewed and significant amount of primary system no significant hazards consideration accepted by the NRC in their review and water. The proposed change is expected determination and, based on this acceptance of General Electric.Topica review, the staff has made a proposed Report NEDQ-21617-A, "Analog The licensee evaluated the effect of determination that the application for Transmitter/Trip Units Systems for amendment involves no significant Engineered Safeguard Sensor Trip tributios Dhand oC w f

hazards consideration.

Inputs," dated December 1978. The limi uton mag and eject Local Public Document Room analog sensor transmitter channel romth. sdon this aluationte location: Moline Public Library, 504-calibration interval is less stringent than lcs onclued tht alptinnt 17th Street Illinois 61265.

the current requirements on the existing cerae met or C ernwit Attorney for licensee: Mr. Robert G.

equipment, but the proposed calibration Fitzgibbons, Jr,, Isham, Lincoln, & Beale, interval falls within-the interval revised PDIL. Specifically: (1) The Three First National Plaza, Suite 5200, specified in the NRC-approved Topical steady-state minimum DNBRs in the Chicago, Illinois 60602.

Report for this equipment, and is power level range from 1473 to 1825 NRC Branch Chief* Domenic B.

consistent with the Standard Technical MWt are bounded by the results at 1825 Vassallo.

Specifications as endorsed by Chapter MWt. (2) the axial offset limits are not Commonwealth Edison Company,

16. of the Standard Review Plan. Since affected by the change in the PDIL and Docket Nos. 50-265, Quad Cities Nuclear the requested amendment is continue to limit the allowable peak Power Station, Unit 2, Rock Island encompassed by the example (vi) of the linear heat generation rate, (3) the County, Illinois guidance, for which no significant shutdown margin was verified to be hazards consideration is likely to exist, greater than 1.9% delta k/k for all points Date of amendment requests: January the licensee has made a proposed along the PDIL, (4) the revised section of 3, 1985.

determination that the proposed the PDIL does not affect 3-loop Description of amendment request:

amendment involves no significant operation since 3-loo operation is This amendment would change the hazar consideration.

restricted to less than 65% power, and calibration and functional test The staff has reviewed the licensee's (5) the revised PDIL does not affect the frequencies for certain specific no significant hazards consideration maximumcalculated ejected rod worths instruments that are being modified into determination and, based on this at hot zero or hot full power.

analog trip systems. These modifications review, the staff has made a proposed The Commission has provided are being made to achieve full determination that the proposed guidance concerning the application of compliance with the requirements of 10 application for amendment involves no the standards in 10 CFR.50.92 by CFR 50.49 (Ennironmental Qualification significant hazards consideration.

providing certain examples (April 6, of Electrical Equipment).

Local Public Document Room 1983,48 FR 14870). One of the examples Basis for proposed no significant locatin. Moline Public Library, 504-of actions not likely to involve hazards consideration determination:

17th Street Moline, Illinois 61265 significant hazards considerations The licensee has evaluated the proposed Attorne f Technical Specification change and has F

or ism Linco, & B e

xaeite (vi)] relates to. a change which determined that the change does not Firs Ntoa la,

itea0, may result in some increase to the represent a significant hazards Chicago, Illinois 602.

probability or consequences of a consideration. The licensee's proposed NRC Branch Chief. Domenic B.

previously analyzed accident or may determination is based on the following Vassallo.

reduce in'some way a safety margin, but considerations.

where the results of the change are The Commission has provided Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power clearly within all acceptable criteria guidance concerning the application of Company, Docket No. 50-213, Haddam with respect to the system or component standards for making no significant Neck Plant, Middlesex County, specified in the Standard Review Plan:

hazards consideration determination by Connecticut For example, a change resulting from the providing certain examples (48 FR Date of amendment request, application of a small refinement of a 14870). The examples of actions likely to December 6, 1984.

previously used calculational model or involve no significant hazards Description of amendment request:

design method. Because the licensee's considerations include: "(vi) A chanae The proposed request would revise the evaluation shows that all pertinent which either may result in some Technical Specifications (TSs) to modify criteria are met for Cycle 13 with the increase to the probability or the contror rod Power Debendent Rod revised PDIL, the proposed change falls consequences of a previously-analyzed Insertion Limit (PDIL) curves for the within the category of example (vi).,

accident or may reduce in some way a portion from 1473 to 1825 MWt.

Therefore, the staff proposes to safety margin, but where the results of Basis for proposed no significant determine that the requested action the change are clearly within all hazards consideration determination:

would involve a no significant hazards acceptable criteria with respect to the This change would relax slightly the consideration determination in that it:

system or component specified in the restrictions on control rod positions.

(1) Does not involve a significant Standard Review Plan: for example, a This change Is being requestedto allow increase in the probability or change resulting from the application of greater flexibility of plant operations consequences of a previously evaluated a small refinement of a previously used associated with reducing power level accident; (2) does not create the calculational model or design method."

from full power and subsequent possibility ofa new or different kind of The licensee's proposed amendment increasing the power level to full power.

accident from an accident previously would change the calibration and With the current curve, in particular.

evaluated; and (3) does not involve, a functional test frequencies for certain towardathe end of core life, reducing significant reduction in a margin of specific instruments thataare being power requires boratlon. In returning to safety.

7984 Federal Registe Vol. 50, No. 39 1 Wednesday, Februa 7, 185 / Notices Local Public Document Boom Consolidated EdisonCempany of Now requested Technical Specification TS location: Russell Library, 123 Broad Yok, Docket Na. 50-47, Indian Point changes that would incorporatea Street, Middletown, Connecticut 06547.

Nuclear Generatig Unit No.2, description of and operating Attorney for licensee: Gerald Garfield.

'WestchesterCouny,.New.York requirements for the new Stack Gas Esquire, Day, terry and Howard, Date of ameidmentrequest.

Monitoring System. This system has Counselors at Law, City Place, Hartford.

December 1,:9 been installed and made operational to Connecticut06103-3499.

Description of amendment requev&

meet the guidance of NUREC737Item NRC Branch Chief-John A. Zwolinski.

The proposed Techrficl Specification ll.F.1f1) "Noble Gas Effluent Monitor" revision incorporates-the requirements and Item LF.1(2) "Sampling and Consolidated Edison Company of New pursuant theCommission's Generic Analysis of Plant Effluents". The system York, Docket No. 50247, Indian Point Letter 83-37.dated-November 1, 1983 provides the capability to monitor Nuclear Generating Unit No4..

whichTequested all pressurized water effluent release rates several orders of Westchester County, New York reactor licensees to submitproposed magnitude abovenormal ratesfor Technical Specifications fo NijREG-.

accident situations. A Proposed No Date of amendment request.

0737 itemiatedin enclosurel of the Significant Hazards Consideration December 14, 1984.

letter. Specifically the proposed Determination for this proposed license Description of amendment request amendment wod change theIP-2 amendment was published in the The proposed Technical Specification Terhnical:Specificationsto incorporate Federal Register on March 1, 1984 (49 FR revision incorporates the requirements new requirements for the following: (1) 7671). However, the TSs covered by this to perform augmented iservice Post acdidentsampling system,(2) noble notice were not acceptable to the NRC.

inspection of the IP-2 reactor vessel gas effluents monitor, (3) containment On November 8,1984, the licensee during the second ten year inspection highrange radion monitor, (4) submitted revisedproposed TSs which interval. The augmented inspection is containneat presure monitor, -(5) superseded the earlier submittas. t required as a result of a flaw indoation coatainmettydrogen monitor,:(6) revised proposed TSb of November 8, reported on the IP-2 reactor vessel con itability, and (7) 19B4 are now under consideration by the duringcotainment samlying and analysis of NRC duin te yce /7.rfnlig-utge ~

plant effluents.

Basis. for proposed no significant ws determined that the flaw'iize was BasJ&forproposedno significant hazards consideration determination:

within the limits of 9eotion KI of the hazards consideration determination:

The Commission has made aproposed ASME Code requiring augmented The Comisionbas provided idance determination that the amendment inservice inspection. Therefore, restart for determining whether a significant request involves no significant hazards of IP-2 following the refueling outrage hazards consideration exists'by consideratian.Under the:Comnissionfs was conditioned upon Consolidated providingexamplee of amendments that regulations in 10 CFR 60.92, this means Edison's commitment lo perform are considerednot li1y to involve that operation of the facility in augmented inservice inspection on the significant hazards considerations t48 accordance with the proposed reactor vessel. The inqpection will be FR 14870). Sudh examplesinclude amendment would not: (1) Involve a performed at a frequency of three times changes thatconstituteadditional significant increase in the probability of over the next ten years.

limitations not presently found in consequences of an accident previously f

rsnsTechicel cifications andthat make evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of Bal o rpsd o inf the license conform tto changes 'in the a new or different kind of accident from hazards consideration determination:

regulations. The staff proposes -I any accident-previously evaluated; or (3)

The Commission has provided guidance determine that thisciange does not involve a significant reduotion in a concerning the aPllication ofthe

'v standardsfor deterping wh o hee inrvo significan hazards margin of safety.

standrds or d~termningwheter a consideration since it consists of TeChnsinhspoie significant hazards consideration exists additional requrenentanot in gie Concin ion of byproviding examples ofamendments Technicil fpeciflcations-andis these tnardsnbytrovipingcetin that are zonsidered Bot likely to involve submitted to conforminaian PointUnit 2 e

s (48 prin 1983).

significant hamards cnsiderations (48 to current NRC requirements.

eaY te exmpe of actions not FR 1489). Such esanples include Local Public Document Room Oiely t envole ignifin hzr changes fhatconstitute additional location: White Plains Public library, cieatioles t hages limitAfiA, restriotion or control not 100 Martine Avene White Plains, New consiea tional tation presentlyin deda theTechnicalresttion, or control not presently Specifications. The staffproposes to Attornevlorlicanse: Thomasj-included intheTs. The Stack Gas determine that this change does not Farrelly, Esq. 4 rving Plaoe, New York, Monitgring System is a new system at involve -asignificant hazards NewYok 1903.

consideration'hecause ft consists -of NRC Braach Chief. Steven A. Varga.

BigRoak Point which will replace and additiomaequiremens -not currently in Consumers Power Company, Docket No.

upsae The prepse efflue the Technical Specifications.

50-a, Big Rock Point Plaht, Charlevoix incorporate a desciiton of the syatem Locaf PablicDocument Room County, Mlohgan and operating requirements for The location: White Plake, Pdblic Library, Patsofamendmantjreq t

system into the Big-ockPointsTSs and 100 Martine Avenue, White Plains, New November 8, 1984, vhikh supersedes consfitute an additionilliritation. thus Yoi'k, 1WS10.

previous aubnttalsdated October 27.

they fall within the above example. On 1981,-a eceiberan5:Thms. and December this asis, the staff proposes to conclude ATh~arcn e % msj.

16,1983.

that'fthe nequested action would ~nvolve Farrelt. Esq.,;kkding Place, W

York, DescriVn Qf wnend n

e no significant hawdaconsideratio.

New Yodt?0UD.

the subitlals listed abov, Conu rs Low]lAabhcDocumentAoow NBRC rCh Coiefi dteven A. Varga.

Power Company oCPCojf(he licensee) location North Control Michigan

Federal Register /

.50, No..39 /,,Wednesday, February 2*985 / Notices 7985 College, 1515 Howard Street, Petoskey, NRC Branch Chief-John A. Zwolinski, Therefore, the staff proposed to Michigan 49770.

Chief.

determine that the requested action Attorney for licensee: Judd L. Bacon, Consumers Power Company, Docket NO.

would involve A no significant hazards Esquire, Consumers Power Company, consideration determination in that it (1) 212 West Michigan Avenue, Jackson, 50-155, Bi Rock Point Plant, Carevoix Michigan 49201.

County, Michigan in the probability.or consequences ofa NRC Branch Chief-John A. Zwolinski, Date of amendments requested previously evaluated accident, (2) does Chief.

January 10, 1985, which supersedes not create thepossibility of a new or Consumers Power Company, Docket No.

previou submittals dated May 10, 1984 different kind of accident from an 50-55,Di Rok Pin PlntChrieoi and June 20, 1984.

accident previously evaluated, and (3) 50-155, Big Rock Point Plant, Charlevoix County, Michigan Description of amendment request-does not involve a significant reduction Currently, Consumers Power Company in a margin of safety.

Date of amendment request-(CPCo.) has a byproduct material Local Public Document Room November 14, 1984.

license (10 CFR Part 30 license) and a location: North Central Michigan Description of amendment request*

facility operating license (10 CFR Part 50 College, 1515 Howard Street; Petoskey, The plant modification to change the license) for Big Rock Point. The Michigan 49770.

Reactor Enclosure Treated Waste Line proposed amendment would incorporate Attorneyfor licensee: Judd L. Bacon, Valve from a hand-switch operated the Big Rock Point Byporduct Material Esquire, Consumers Power Company, valve to an automatic closure valve was license into the Big Rock Point Facility 212 West Michigan Avenue, Jackson, made to resolve Systematic Evaluation Operating License.

Michigan 49201.

Program Topic VI-4, Containment Isolation System. The change has been T

evaluated by the NRC staff in the institute sealed source leak test Chief.

Intergrated Plant Assessment Report requirements in the Big Roc Point (NUREG-0828) for Big Rock Point, Technical Speifications (TSs). The Duk Poe Company Dke N oslear section 4.20.4, published in May 1984.

plant TSs do not-currently Include such 389 and M

Nclear The proposed license amendment would tests.

Staion, Nits Can require that this automatic valve be Consumers Power Company originally periodically tested for proper manual proposed such changes In submittals Date of amendment request: January and automatic operation and leak dated May 10, 1984 and June 20'1984.

11,1985.

tightness.

These changes were originally noticed Description of amendment request Basis for proposed no significant in the Federal Register on Augst 22, The proposed amendment would revise hazards consideration determination:

1984 (49 FR 33362). However, the The Technical Specifications to reflect the The Commission ha's provided guidance contained in the applications were not second of several refueling stages concerning the application of the acceptable to the NRC. On January 10, involved in the continuing transition to standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing 1985, CPCo. submitted revised proposed the use of optimized fuel assemblies in certain examples (48 FR 14870, April 6, TSs which superseded the eariler McGuire Unit 1. The changeswould also 1983). One of the examples (ii) of actions submittals. The revised proposed TSs of reflect a reduced reactor coolant system not likely to involve a significant January 10, 1985 are now under design fow rate. Changes in the Unit 1 hazards consideration relates to a consideration by the NRC.

specifications would be made to the change that constitutes an additional Basisforproposed no significant time constants usedin the overpower limitation, restriction or control not hazards consideration determination:

and overtemperature delta T setpoint presently included in the Technical The Commission has provided guidance equations to allow more flexibility in Specifications. The addition of the concerning the Application of the plant operations. Finally, some Unit 2 proposed operability and leak test standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing specifications would be administratively requirements to the Technical certain examples (48 FR 14870, April 6, affected in that they would be combined Specifications constitutes such an 1983). One of the examples (i) of actions into one specification applying to both additional restriction.

not likely to involve a significant McGuire Units 1 and 2, but there would Therefore, the staff proposes to hazards consideration relates to a be no change to the content of Unit 2 determine that the requested action purely admiistrative change to the TSs.

specifications.

would involve a no significant hazards The incorporation of the existing Basis for proposedno significant consideration determination in that it:

separate byproduct material license into hazards consideration detorrination:

(1) Does not involve a significant the facility opera e is a purely On April 20,1984, the Commission increase in the probability or adminsttive

e. The NRC issued Amendment No. 32 to Facility consequences of a previously evaluated currently incorporates the byproduct Operating License NPF-9 to change the accident, (2) does not create the license in the facility operating license Technical Specifications topermit possibility of a new or different kind of for new nuclear power plants. Also, the changes in operating limits related to the accident from an accident previously NRC has ncouraged the byproduct transition to the use of optimized fuel evaluated, and (3) does not involve a license incorporation for operating assemblies in McGuire Unit 1.

significant reduction in a margin of nuclear power plants.

Accordingly, since its first refueling for safety.

Another example (ii) of actions not Cyle 2, Unit 1 has operated with the Local Public Document Room likelyto involve a significant hazards first stage of a transition core consisting location: North Central Michigan consideration relates to a change that of approximately % Westinghouse College, 1515 Howard Street, Petoskey, constitutes an additional limitation, 17x17 Optimized Fuel Assemblies Michigan 49770.

restriction, or control not presently (OFAs) and % Westinghouse 1 x Attorney for licensee: Judd L Bacon, included in the TSs. Theaddition of the parasitic fuel assemblies (STDs). During Esquire, Consumers Power Company, proposed sealed source leak test the next refueling for Cycle 3 the 212 West Michigan Avenue, Jackson, requirements to the The constitutes-such planned transition would replace Michigan 49201.

an additional control.

approximately another %s of the original

7986 Federal Regist

/ Vol. 50, No. 89 / Wednesday, FebruaP27 1985 Notices total STDs with OFAs.'The transition is mechanically compatible -with the STD refinement'of a previouslyuned planned to continue until -an all OFA design, control rods, and reactor calculational model or design-method".

fueled core is adhieved.

internals interfaces. Both fuel Because the 'evaluations previously The major differences between STDs assemblies satisfy &e current design discussed show thatall ofthe accidents andOFAs 'are the use of Zircaloy grids bases for the McGuire units.

comprising the licensing bases which for the OFAs versus Inconel grids for

b. Changes in the nuclear could potentially be affected byihe'fuel STDs and a reduction in fuel rod characteristics due to the transition from reload were reviewed for' the Unit I diameter. The OFA fuel has similar STD to OFA fuel will be withinthe Cycle 3 design and conclude that the design features compared to the STD range normally seem from cycle to cycle reload designdoesadt cause the fuel, which'has had substantial due to fuel managementeffects.

previously acceptablesafetylimitstobe operating experience in a number of

c. The reload OFAs are hydraulically exceeded, the above example' can 'be nuclear plants. Major advantages for compatible with the current STD design.

applied to this situation. Accordingly, utilizing the OFAs.are: (1) Increased

d. The a00ldentanalyses fdrthe OFA the Commission proposes to determine efficiency of the core by reducing the transition core-were shown to provide that these changesfor the Unit 1.Cycle 3 amount of parasitic material and (2) acceptable results by meeting the reload,;including the'changes iniaxial reduced fuel cycle costs due to an applicable criteria, such as, minimum flux difference, heatflux hotchannel' optimization of water to uranium ratio.

l3Rpeak pressureiad peak clad factor, design flow, and time-constants Theproposed amendments would tepruearqie The prpoe aedetwud teprawsrqied.

The previously for the overpower and overtenaperature provide for plant operation consistent delta T etpoi equations, do not with the design and safety evaluation met.

involvea significant hazards conclusions in the licensee's McGuire

e. Plant operatinj limitations givenin consideration.

Unit 1 Cycle 3 Reload Safety Evaluation the Technical Specificationswill be (RSE). The changes to the Technical satisfied with the proposed changes.

to involve a sigificantazards Specifications.3/42.1 and 3/4.2.2 would From these evaluations, it i considerationexample (i),-relates toa reflect appropriate adjustments in the concluded that the UnitiCycle 3 design purely adinistrative change to limiting conditions and surveillance does not cause the previously requirements for (1) axial flux difference acceptable safety limits to be exceeded.

and (2) heat flux hot channel factor, The effect lof ibe -im constant consistency throughout the technical respectively. The thermal hydraulic changeshas been evaluatedhy specification, correctioli of awerror, or safety analyses used in the Cycle 3 RSE reanalyzing thelimiting events thatrely a change in nomenclture. The are based on a reduced design flow rate on overpowerand overtemperau Commission proposes to find that the (97,200 gpm per'loop versus 98,400), but delta17protection, me limiting.Rod changesto nit 2 specification which the proposed changes result in no Cluster Control Assembly Withdrawal do notchange the contentfor Uni significant variations in thermal at Power casesfromthe reload andlyses margins. Changes to Specification have been rednalyzed with the Figures 2.1-4a and '32-3a and Table 2.2-increasedtime constants I f cm d

1 (low reactor coolant flow trip setpoint overtemperature delta T setpeint ad allowable values) would reflect the equation. The results showthat the i educed reactor coolant system flow departure from nucleate biling (DNB)

Local Public Document Room alue. Changes to Specification Tables design basis is net.7he overpower locatiom Atkins Libary, University of 2.2-1, 3.3-2 and 33-4 would reflect the delta Ttrip is not relied upon for North Carolina Chailotte(UNCC changes to the time constants used in protectionin axy of the FSARaccident Statiol), North Carolina 28 the overpower and overtemperature analyses. However, a-spectrum of Attcneyforicesee. Mr. Albert Carr, delta T selpoint equations.

steamline breaks-was anayzed at Duke PowerCompany, P.O. Box 53188, The Commission proposes to vanouspower levels to determine the 422 Souh:Church Street, Chaflette, determine that the amendment request limtting cases'that are presented in the North Carolna 28242.

involves no significant hazards FSAR. Some of the small ateamline lRC-Moh-hieFfElinor'G.

consideration. Under the Commission's breaks at power that were analyzed rely Adensam.

regulations in t0CFR 50.92, this means on overpower delaT for protection.

CoapNy, Docket No.

that operation of the facility-n Therefore, an 4nalysis was performed inK B

Vail" P

Station, accordance with the proposed that vers that the DNB design'basis is UnitNo.1, ShIpplngpor. pensylvana amendment would not (1) involve a met for small breaks at fupower with significant increase in the probability or the increased time condtants ie Date of amendment request.

consequences of-an accident previously overpower'delta T sevpoffit tion.

December 12,1984.

evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of The:Commission has-provided Descrption of-mendmnt regueat a new or different kind of accident from examples of amen ets lie to This ip an-application'fr anamendment any accident previously evainated; or (3) involve nosigiioanthzards to Operating'license DJM-66, tevshtg involve a significant Teduction ina considerationsf45R 147) One the '1echnical Specifications to reduce margin of safety.

exampieofthis1te is {Vl),j"A 6inge the prcbabillty and consequences of an The McGuire Uilt1/Cycle 3RSE which either may resdltin-some overprssuimllon event.

accompanying the licensee's amendment incrasetothe probabllty or The proposed changesare currently in request of January 11, IM8S, describes all consequence.

f apreviuuly analyzed the form filant procedures; Issuance of of the accidents comprising the licensing accidedt o may reduce ln' some *ay a an amendment-womdd incorporate these bases which couldpotentiolybe safetyanargln, but Whereresdits 4i-he procedu es bdo-the *ant~edmical affectedby theduel-rdload'for the Unit 1 changeare tlearly *Ahn.11 aooqpdble Specifications. The changed Cycle 3slesign.The resutts of the crteria'wth rsoditeesystem ir specificatlonswould provide additional analysis condludeihat:

componerit apecfiedin-1be standad protetionfrom'pres'trn-dentsat

a. The Westinghouse OFA reload fuel reiew plan: Forvamoe, a ange' low

• aties byreduc*het assemblies for Mc~atre '1a=d 2 ame resulting from the aplulont a small probability of initiation ofdsesi a

Federal Register ol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February W 1985 / Notices 7987 transient, and by limiting the resultant standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing These revisions were provided in pressure of such a transient to below the certain examples (48 FR 14870).

response to Commission requests limits set by 10 CFR 50 Appendix G. The An example of actions involving no stemming from the staff review of the proposed changes would also bring the significant hazards considerations is an earlier submittals and in response to Technical Specifications into amendment involving a purely Generic Letter 84-13, "Technical compliance with General Design Criteria administrative change to the Technical Specifications for Snubbers", dated May 15 and 31, which address operational Specifications (Example (i)). The 3,1984.

requirements of the overpressure expansion of the organization charts protection system.

and the change of position titles are haards sigiosdfico deteriacta Basis for proposed no significant such changes.

hi:

comi ion deduianc Thee Commission hapovde guidanceuianc hazards consideration determination:

Another example of actions involving concerning the standards in 10 CFR The Commidssion has.provided guidance no significant hazards considerations is 50.92 by providing certain examples (48 concerning the application of these an amendment which may reduce in FR 14870). Examples of actions involving standards by providing certain some way a margin of safety, but where no significant hazards consideration are examples (48 FR 14870). One of these, the results of the change are clearly amendments that involve a change that Example (ii), involving no significant within acceptable criteria with respect constitutes an additional limitation, hazards consideration is "A change that to the system or component specified in restriction or control not presently constitutes an additional limitation, the Standard Review Plan (Example included in the Technical Specifications restriction, or control not presently (vi)). Changes in the responsibilities of included in the technical specifications."

senior management in the approval level Exali and admnts As described above, the requested for procedures and in the Plant Review ivlng a pe aminiati amendment matches this example and Board quorum requirements fit

[Example (i)J. The proposed additional the staff, therefore, proposes to example.

characterize it as involving no On these bases, the Commission requirements concerning the sample significant hazards consideration.

proposes to determine that these actions Elei s

i Local Public Document Room involve no significant hazards location: B.F. Jones Memorial Library, considerations.

The replacement of the table listing 663 Franklin Avenue, Aliquippa, Local Public Document Boom snubbers with an LCO describing which Pennsylvania 15001.

location: Appling County Public Library, snubbers was made in response to Attorney for licensee: Gerald 301 City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia.

Generic Letter 84-13. It will provide a Charnoff, Esquire, Jay E. Silberg, Attorney for licensee: G. F.

means of describing all of the snubbers Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts, and Trowbridge, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and required to be operable in general terms, Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, NW.,

Trowbridge, 180 M Street N.,

thereby eliminating the need to list each Washington, D.C. 20036.

Washington, D.C. 20036.

snubber or to request amendments if NRC Branch Chief. Steven A. Varga.

NRC Branch Chief John F. Stolz.

snubbers are added or removed. It is an, Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe Georgia Power Company, administraive c

a s

r Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Power Corporation, M iletric exampe (is a

Authority of Georgia, City of Dalton, Authority of MuriCipaltrbo Georgia, Dockets Nos. 50-321 and 50-Georgia, Dockets Nos. 50-1 and S Commission has made a proposed 366, Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 366, Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units determination that the application for Nos. 1 and 2, Appling County, Georgia Nos. 1 and 2, Appling County, Georgia amendments involves no significant hazards consideration.

Date of amendment eguest: April 24, Date of amendment request: May 2, Local Public Document Room 1984.

19M, as superseded November 19, 1984.

location: Appling County Public Library, Description of amendment request.

Description of amendment request: By 301 City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia.

The Technical Specification changes letter dated October 27, 1983, as proposed by this submittal are a partial supplemented December 20,1983, Attorney for licensee: G.F.

revision to the changes requested in the Georgia Power Company requested Trowbridge, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and licensees' July 9, 1982, October 24, 1983, amendments to the operating licenses Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, NW.,

and December 20, 1983, amendment for Hatch Units 1 and 2.

requests which are previously noticed in The requested amendments would NRCBranch Chief John F. Stolz.

the Federal Register on January 26, 1984 modify the Technical Specification GPU Nuclear Corporation, Docket No.

(49 FR 3347). The additional changes Limiting Conditions for Operation 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear proposed in this April 24, 1984, submittal (LCOs) and surveillance requirements Generating Station, Ocean County, New include: (1) The expansion of for snubbers for these units. These Jersey organizational charts to show more requested amendments were noticed in positions and to reflect organizational the Federal Register on February 24, Date of amendment request: May 1 changes, (2) changes in titles and 1984 (49 FR 7037). By letter dated-May 5, and 25, 1984.

responsibilities of senior management, 1984, as superseded by letter dated Description of amendment request:

(3) changes that allow approval of November 19,1984, Georgia Power The proposed amendment requests certain plant procedures at managment Company has revised the previously approval for changes to the Appendix B levels other than that of the General noticed submittals to provide additional Technical Specifications to reflect the Manager-Plant Hatch, and (4) modify requirements concerning the selection of change in the location for three marine the Plant Review Board quorum the sample for the functional tests, to woodborer exposure panels and for requirements.

provide additional functional test revisions to the procedure for Basis for proposed no significant requirements and to replace the table calibration of environmental monitoring hazards consideration determination:

listing snubbers with an LCO instrumentation. These changes would The Commission has provided guidance description of the snubbers that are be to section 3.0, Special Monitoring and concerning the application of the required to be operable.

Study Activities, Woodborer Monitoring

7988 Federal Registe Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, Februa*

7, 1985 / Notices Program, of Appendix B of the Oyster section XI indicated that conflicts may NRC Branch Chief John A Zwolinski.

Creek Technical Specifications.

occur between the ASME code Basis for proposed no significant requirements and the plant Technical GP1 Nucler Crori N

cetN hazards consideration determination:

Specifications. To avoid such conflicts,

G0n219, St C cear The proposed changes to Appendix B, the Commission requested that the ener Environmental Technical Specifications, licensee, in accordance with will: (1) Update Table 3.1 of the plant

§ 50.55a(g)(5)(ii), appiy for an Date of amendment request:

Technical Specifications which amendment to the plant technical September 18, 1984.

describes the locations of the woodborer specifications to replace such conflicting Description of amendmentrequest:

exposure panels and (2) decrease the technical specifications with a reference Requests approval of Appendix A frequency of calibration of to 10 CFR 50.55a. The licensee proposed Technical Specification changes to environmental water quality monitoring by an amendment request dated June 8, incorporate conductivity and chloride instrumentation for measuring salinity, 1984 to incorporate the requirements of limits given in Regulatory Guide 1.56 dissolved oxygen, water temperature the revised regulations on inservice into section 3.3.E, Reactor Coolant and pH.

inspection and testing in the plant Quality.

These proposed changes may affect technical specifications.

Basis for proposed no significant the measurement of the impact of plant The licensee previously, by an hazards consideration determination:

operation on the environment. They do amendment request dated December 11, During the integrated assessment of not affect the operation of the plant.

1979, proposed to delete nondestructive Oyster Creek in the Nuclear Regulatory Therefore, the staff proposes to examination requirements for the Commission's Systematic Evaluation determine that the requested action reactor coolant system from § 4.3 of the Program (SEP), the Commission involves no significant hazards technical specifications because that reviewed the water purity of BWR consideration in that the proposed requirement was contained in the primary coolant. This is § 4.20, page 4 action does not involve a significant Oyster Creek Inservice Inspection 27, of NUREG-0822, Integrated Plant increase in the probability or Program for the second 10-year interval Safety Assessment Oyster Creek consequences of an accident previously and also proposed to renumber Nuclear Generating Station, dated evaluated, does not create the technical specifications, pages and September 1982, under SEP Topic V possibility of a new or different kind of tables in § 4.3 as needed to 12A, Water Purity of BWR Primary an accident from any previously accommodate the proposed changes.

Coolant. 10 CFR Part 50 (Appendix A.

evaluated and does not involve a The proposed amendment would: (1)

General Design Criterion 14), as significant reduction in a margin of Incorporate into the technical implemented by guidance in Regulatory safety.

specifications requirements in the Guide 1.56, requires that the reactor Local Public Document Room revised regulations and (2) delete a coolant pressure boundary have location: Ocean County Library, 101 required inspection from the technical inimal probability of rapidly Washington Street, Toms River, New specifications which is also contained in p

Jersey 08753.

the Oyster Creek Inservice Inspection Attorney for licensee: G.F.

Program. The Commission has provided impritisindthe ractor co Trowbridge, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, examples of license amendments that The licensee, at the request of the Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, are not likely to involve significant Commission, is proposing to revise the NW., Washington, D.C. 20036.

hazards considerations (48 FR 14870).

technical specifications in section 3.3E, NRC Branch Chief: John A. Zwolinski.

Examples of amendments not likely to Reactor Coolant Quality, in the GPU Nuclear Corporation Docket No.

involve significant hazards Appendix A Technical Specifications for 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear considerations include: (vii) Changes to Oyster Creek. The licensee proposes to Generating Station, Ocean County, New conform the license to the regulations increase the requirements on reactor Jersey where the license change results in very coolant water quality.

Date of amendment request: June 8, c

in keng wit therations The licensee is also proposing to add 1984, superseding the December 11, 1979, a

rly adinitrtie chanst text to the Bases for section 3.3.E. This is request.

the technical specifications. The Description of amendment request:

proposed amendment incorporating into the reactor coolant and the reasons to The proposed amendment requests the technical specifications the revised approval of administrative revisions to regulations fall within example (vii). The guidelines of Regulatory Guide 1.56, Rev.

Inservice Inspection (ISI) and Inservice deletion from the technical 1, and (2) refer to the reactor coolant Testing (IST) requirements in section 4.3, specifications of redundant temperature of 212*F instead of to the Reactor Coolant, of the Oyster Creek requirements falls within example (i) reactor condition, cold shutdown, in the Appendix A Technical Specifications.

Because these amendments fall within Bases for measurement of conductivity Basis for proposed no significant examples of actions not likely to involve of the reactor coolant.

hazards consideration determination:

significant hazards considerations, the The proposed changes would On February 27, 1976, the Nuclear staff proposes to determine that the constitute an additional limitation, Regulatory Commission revised the requested action involves no significant restriction, or control not presently inservice inspection testing hazards consideration.

included in the Technical Specifications, requirements for ASME Code Class 1, 2, Local Public Document Room that is, a more stringent limiting and 3 components for nuclear power location: Ocean County Library, 101 condition for operation and are, plants in 10 CFR 50.55a. The revised Washington Street, Toms River, New therefore, consistent with example (ii) of regulations require inservice inspection Jersey 08753.

the Commission guidance (48 FR 14870, and testing set forth in Section XI of the Attorneyfor licensee: G.F.

April 6,1983) as a type of action which ASME, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Trowbridge, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, would not involve a significant hazards and Addenda. A review by the Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, consideration. Therefore, the staff Commissiotn of 1974 edition ASME NW., Washington, D.C. 20036.

proposes to determine that the

Federal Register

1.

50, No., 39 / Wednesday, February 2 1985 / Notices 7989 requested action would not involve a The Commission requested licensees Creek and the Augmented Offgas significant hazards consideration.

to propose revisions to the System.

Local Public Document Room "Administrative Controls" and The licensee's proposed changes to location: Ocean County Library, 101 "Definitions" sections of their plant's implement Appendix.I in the October 22, Washington Street, Toms River, New technical specifications to implement 1984, submittalare the following: (1) To Jersey 08753.

the 50.72 and 50.73 regulation changes.

add new definitions; (2) to revise the Attorney for licensee: G.F.

The Commission also stated that there protective instrumentation requirements Trowbridge, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, may be other chanes to the technical in Table 3.1:1 on the Offgas system Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, specifications required to reflect the isolation on high radiation; (3) to revise NW. Washington, D.C. 20036.

revised reporting requirements (e.g.,

and expand section 3.6 on radioactive NRC Branch Chief-John A. Zwolinski.

technical specifications requiring a effluents, to add new sections and GPUNuler Crpraio, Dckt o.

Licensee Event Report instead of a limiting conditions for operation on GPU Nuclear Corporation,ce Special Report).

Solid Radioactive Waste, section 3.14, 5-219, St C cear The licensee's proposed changes and on Radioactive Effluent Monitoring Generating Station, Ocean County, pertaining to the new reporting Instrumentation, section 3.15; (4) to add Jerseyrequirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73 surveillance requirements in Table 4.1.1 Date of amendment request: June 1, constitute a change to make a license and 4.1.2 on high radiation isolation on 1979, revised October 22 1984.

conform to changes in the regulations the air ejector off-gas; (5) to revise and Description of amendment request:

where the license change results in very expand section 4.6 on Radioactive Requests approval of Appendix A minor changes to facility operations Effluents; (6) to add new sections and Technical Specification changes clearly in keeping with the regulations.

surveillance requirements on Solid pertaining to definitions listed in section These changes are consistent with Radioactive Waste, section 4.14, on I, definitions, that were previously example (vii) of the Commission's Radioactive Effluent Monitoring approved by the Commission but were guidance (48 FR 14870, April 6,1983) as Instrumentation Applicability, section not and should be listed in the Table of a type of action not likely to involve a 4.15, and on Radiological Environmental Contents; the new reporting significant hazards consideration.

Surveillance, section 4.16, and (7) to add requirements of 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73; The licensee has proposed extensive new requirements and to revise section the Radiological Effluent Technical changes to the Appendix A Technical 6.9.3, Unique Reporting Requirements, of Specifications (RETS) required by Specifications to implement the the Administrative Controls. These Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50; and the requirements of Appendix I, Numerical changes constitute an additional radioactivity limits and surveillance on Guides for Design Objectives and limitation, restriction or control not the reactor coolant. These are proposed Limiting Conditions for Operation to presently included in the technical changes to section 1, Definitions; section Meet the Criterion "As Low as is specifications and revisions to the 2, Limiting Conditions for Operations; Reasonably achievable" for Radioactive technical specifications to conform to section 3, Surveillance Requirements; Material..., to 10 CFR Part 50. These changes In the regulations where the and section 6, Administrative Controls technical specifications are definitions, license change results in very minor of the Oyster Creek Technical limiting conditions for operation and changes to the facility operations clearly Specifications.

surveillance requirements on the Oyster in keeping with the regulations.

Basis for proposed no significant Creek radioactive waste system and the Therefore, these changes are consistent hazards consideration determination:

radioactive effluents from the plant with examples (ii) and (vii) of the The licensee has submitted a new Table including liquid radwaste, gaseous Commission's guidance (48 FR 14879, of Contents for the Appendix A radwaste and solid radwaste.

April 6, 1983) as types of actions not Technical Specifications. This page On June 1, 1979, Jersey Central Power likely to involve a significant hazards includes the definitions 1.26 to 1.29 and Light submitted their proposed consideration.

which were approved by the Technical Specification Change Request The licensee also proposed limits on Commission in Amendment 75 dated No. 69 to incorporate the requirements the radioactivity in the reactor coolant August 27, 1984 to the license. However, of Appendix Ito 10 CFR Part 50. This to revise the existing requirements in in that amendment, the new definitions submittal was discussed with the staff section 3.6.D and 4.6.C of the technical were not added to the Table of on September 13, 1979, and the licensee specifications. During the integarted Contents. This proposed change is a agreed that revisions to this submittal assessment of Oysler Creek in the purely administrative change to the were needed. The licensee has since Commission's Systematic Evalution technical specifications to correct an then submitted letters dated February Program (SEP), the Commission error. Therefore, the change is 15, 1980, and October 22, 1984, reviewed the radiological consequences consistent with example (i) of the requesting changes to the Technical of the failure of small lines carrying Commission's guidance (48 FR 14870, Specificationspertaining to Appendix I reactor coolant outside containment.

April 6, 1983) as a type of action not to 10 CFR Part 50.

This is section 4.36, page 4-44, of likely to involve a significant hazards By letter dated February 15, 1980, NUREG-0822, Integrated Plant Safety consideration.

Jersey Central Power and Light Assessment Oyster Creek Nuclear In Generic Letter 83-43, dated submitted Technical Specification Generating Station, dated September December 19, 1983, the Commission Change Request No. 79 which 1982, under SEP Topic XV-16 of the stated that § 50.72 of Title 10 of the Code incorporated the 10-CFR Part 50 same title. The Commission stated that of the Federal Regulations was revised Appendix I design objectives for the reactor coolant radioactivity for and a new § 50.73 was added, effective gaseous effluent releases. This submittal Oyster Creek should be maintained January 1, 1984. Section 50.72 revises the was issued as Amendment 49 to the within the limits imposed on new immediate notification requirement for Oyster Creek Technical Specifications operating reactors which are the limits operating nuclear power reactors and and was designed to be a temporary of the Commission's Standard Technical

§ 50.73 provides for a revised Licensee change, to be replaced after the Specifications on General Electric Event Report System, complete RETS are issued for Oyster Boiling Water Reactors (esEG-o123).

7990 Federal Registi Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, Februa*

7, 1985 / Notices The licensee has proposed new Technical Specifications and is.

consistent with the overallrequirements requirements which are more restrictive therefore, consistent with example (ii) of on the plant Fire Protection Program in than the existing technical specifications the Commission's guidance (48 FR 14870, 10 CFR 50.8 aid guideline positions in on reactor coolant radioactivity.

April 6, 1983) as a type of action which the staff's Branch Technical Positions on Therefore, these changes are consistent would not involve a significanthazards the plantFire Protection Program.

with example (ii) of the Commission's consideration. Therere, the staff The licensee stated in the proposed guidance (48 FE 14870, April 6, 1983) as a proposes to determine that the change to halve the frequency of type of action not likely to involve a requested acion would not involve a auditing the activities associated with significant hazards consideration.

significant hazards consideration.

the plant Operational Quality Assurance Therefore, based on the above, the Local Public Document Room Program that it is based on the staff proposes to determine that all of location: Ocean County Library, 101 guidelines of Regulatory Guide 1.33 the requested actions discussed above Washington Street, Toms River, New (February 1978), Quality Assurance do not involve a significant hazards Jersey 08753.

Programs Requirements, of draft (issued consideration.

Attorney for licensee: G.F.

for comment) Regulatory Guide 1.144 Local Public Document room location:

Trowbridge, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, (January 1979), Auditing of Quality Ocean County Library, 101 Washington Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, Assurance Programs for Nuclear Power Street, Toms River, New Jersey 08753.

NW. Washington, D.C. 20036.

Plants, and ANSI/ASME N45.2.12-1977.

Attorney for licensee: G.F.

NRC Branch Chief. John A. Zwolinski.

The requirements that are in ANSI/

Trowbridge, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, GPU Nuclear Corporation, Docket NO.

ASME N45.2.12-1977 for auditing quality Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear assurance programs for nuclear power NW.. Washington, D.C. 20036.

NRC Bahnnc Chi.John3A. woiki Generating St.otion. O0cean County, New plants are acceptable to the staff and NRCBranchJersey provide an adequate basis for complying GPU Nuclear Corporation, Docket No.

Date of amendment request: October with the pertinent quality assurance 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear 24 and December24, 1 requirements of Appendix B to 10 CFR Generating Station, Ocean County, New Descriptionof amendment request:

50 subject to the guidelnes i Jersey Request approval of Appendix A Regulatory Guide 1.144. For internal Date of amendment request: October Technical Specification changes audits of the operational phase activities 22, 1984.

pertaining to Fire Protection and Quality of the quality assurance program the Description of amendment request:

Assurance which: (1) Will decrease the guidelines of Regulatory Guide 1.33 The proposed amendment requests frequency of required audits on the plant should be followed.

approval for changes to the Appendix A Fire Protection Program and Operational In his letter dated December 24, 1984, Technical Specifications realted to the Quality Assurance Plan, and (2) delete thd licensee has proposed to delete Reactor Coolant System Leakage in the reference to sprinkler system #13 as Sprinkler System #13 from Tables 3.12.1 sections 1., 3.3 and 4.3 of the Technical fire detection instrumentation and as a and 3.12.2 of the Appendix A Technical Specifications by: (1) The addition of spray/sprinkler system.

Specifications. The Laundry Room in the reactor coolant leak rate detection Basis for proposed no significant office building on the 35'-0 elevation is requirements and surveillance, (2) the hazards consideration determination: In being converted to a count room incorporation of requirements for the licensee's letter dated October 9A4 containing electronic equipment.

identified and unidentified leakage, (3) 1984, the licensee requested a change to Sprinkler System #13 was originally the addition of definitions for identified section 6.5.3.1 ofthe Appendix A installed to protect cables passing and unidentified leakage, and (4) the Technical Specifications to add the through the laundry area to the Reactor correction of the Bases to section 3.3, requirement thatthe Oyster Creek Fire Building from the combustible loading Reactor Coolant, to reflect the actual Protection Program, and its due to accumulated clothing in the plant configuration.

implementin procedures, and the laundry facility.

Basis for proposed no significant activities required bythe Oyster Creek With the conversion of the laundry hazards consideration determination:

Operational Quality Assurance Plan to facility, the combustible loading due to This Technical Specification Change meet Appendix B, 10 CFR Pa X -b accumulated clothing will no longer Request by the licensee will provide audited under the cognizance of the exist since Sprinkler System #13 was additional requirements in the Technical Vice President Nuclear Assurance -t specifically designed toprotect from a Specifications on leakage from the least once per 24 months. Currentiy fire originating in the laundry bins reactor coolant system and additional these programs are audited at least once which are now gone. This removal is surveillance requirements for the reactor per 12 months under the requirement in desired becauseelectronic test coolant leakage detection systems.

J 6.5.3.1(a) on audits for conformance of equipment isbeing brouht to the area These changes constitute additional facility operationsto provisions and there is thepotential of accidently requirements, limitations and controls contained within the Technical wettig this equipment from inadvertent not presently included in the Oyster Specifications. The licensee proposes to initiation of the sprinkler system, Creek Technical Specifications on decrease the frequency at which audits These changes do not affect plant reactor coolant leakage.

are requiredon the plant programs to at operation. The changes are minor This change will also incorporate a least once per 24 months.

changes to licensee administrative more restrictive Technical Specification The licensee's proposd change to activitiee clearly in keeping with the requirement for unidentified leakage halve the frequeacy of auditing the Fire regulations and with changes to the fire and will correct the Bases for section ProtectionProgram is in response to the protection areas/zones within the plant.

3.3, Reactor Coolant, of the Technical Commission's Generic Letter 82-21, The staff poposes todetermine that the Specifications to have the Bases reflect dated October 8, 1982, "Technical proposed changes would not involvea the actual plant configuration.

Specifications for Fire Protection significant hazards consideration This change would constitute an Audits." Ths generc letterprovides determination In that 4hey: fl) Do not additional limitation, restriction, or guidance for a bienaW audft of the Fire involve a significant increase in &e control notpreentlyIncludedAin the Protection Program which would be probability or consequences of a

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 7991 previously evaluated accident; (2) do not longer include mitigation of an operating NRC Branch Chief. John F. Stolz.

create the possibility of a new or accident, namely hydrogen purging.

Iana and Michigan Electric Company, different kind of accident from any The proposed revision to the accident previously evaluated; and (3) surveillance of fire hose stations (TS Dok Nl.

P5and 50it onald do not involve a significant reduction in 4.18.6) would permit deferring C. Co ou nt, Un a margin of safety.

inspections when the stations are Local Public Document Room inaccessible because purging is not Date of amendment request*

location: Ocean County Library, 101 permitted.

December 17,1984.

Washington Street, Toms River, New Basis for proposed no significant Jersey 08753.

hazards consideration determination:

esriponeo amendment reuest:

Attorney for licensee: G.F.

The proposed TS changes on primary the Technical Specifications to update Trowbridge, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, coolant activity and on vent/purge valve the faite organization chart, and Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, operability and surveillance are in the organization and responsibilities of the NW., Washington, D.C. 20036.

same category as Example (ii), 48 FR Plant Nuclear Safety Review Committee NRC Branch Chief. John A. Zwolinski.

14870, which cites changes that (PNSRC) and the Nuclear Safety and GPUconstitute additional limitations, Design Review Committee (NSDRC), to No.u50-a89,oThreeiMile a Nuce restrictions or controls not presently update the reporting requirements No. 0-=,

TreeMil IsandNucear included in the TSs as changes not likely addressed by the recent revision to 10 Station, Unit No.1, Dauphin County, to involve significant hazards CFR 50.73, to revise the containment Pennsylvania consideration. The proposed TSs would isolation valve listing, tocorrect an error Date of amendment request:

be substantially more restrictive on in one reference to the battery November 24, 1983, as revised and primary coolant activity limits and electrolyte temperature for surveillance, supplemented June 5, 1984 and would require more sampling. The limits and to make a number of editorial December 3,18 on plant operation with inoperable changes.

Description of amendment request.

purge/vent valves would be more Basis forproposed no significant The proposed amendment would restrictive and the amount of time incorporate Technical Specification (TS) purging would be permitted would be the Consiion dermian changes needed to -complete Multiplant reduced.

TheC mio haprovidednguidanc Action (MPA) B-24, containment purge he puginand the mof standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing and vent.

ofdtheen suogreactod builingipurgeiai certain examples (48 FR 14870, April 6, The proposed change on primary t

e sste re propose as 1983). One of the examples (i) of an coolant activity (TS 3.1.4 and Table 4.1-theavle ydre rebers action not likely to involve a significant

3) was previously noticed in the Federal eminae h dfor rgin o hazards consideration is a purely Register on May 23, 1984 (49 FR 21830),

hydrogen as an accident mitigation administrative change to technical and the Commission's staff proposed function.'These changes are in the same specifications; for example, a change to that the changes on primary coolant activity do not involve a significant category as Example (vi), 4 F 14870, achieve consistency throughout the actvit donotinolv a ignficnt i.e., changes which may result in some technical specifications, correction of an hazards consideration. The staff's increase in the probability or error, or a change in nomenclature. The position remains unchanged.

consequences of a previously analyzed proposed amendment is directly related The proposed change in vent/purge accident but which are clearly within to this example with the exception of the valve operability and surveillance theAcceptance criteria of the Standard change to the reporting requirements requirements (TS 3.6, 4.4.1.2.5, and Review Plan (SRP), because the SRI and the revision to the listing of the 4.4.1.7) would provide operability permits the use of hydrogen recombiners containment penetration valves.

requirements for large purge valves so in lieu of hydrogen purging.

Another example (vii) is a change to that if one valve is inoperable, the The proposed change in surveillance make a license-confirm to changes in the companion valve in-line would be of the fire hose stations is also regulations. Revisions to 10 CFR 50.73 closed or the reactor shut down. If, considered to be an Example (vi) type of make it necessary to revise the technical however, the problem is seal leakage, action which, again, is clearly within the specifications on reporting requirements both valves in-line would be shut to acceptance criteria of the SRP because and definitions, therefore, the proposed prevent leakage or the reactor would be the change does not alter the SRP change in reporting requirements is shut down. The proposed TSs also surveillance requirements, but only directly related to this example. Another would limit the opening of purge valves extends the surveillance intervals which example (vi) of an action not likely to to 30 degrees during power operation, are not specified in the SRP.

involve a significant hazards would identify activities for which Based on the foregoing, the consideration is a change which either purging is permitted and would require Commission's staff proposes to may result in some increase to the instances of purging to be limited. The determine that the proposed amendment probability or consequences of a changes in section 4 would provide involves no significant hazards previously-analyzed accident or may surveillance requirements for purge consideration.

reduce in some way a safety margin, but valves.

Local Public Document Room where the results of the change are The TSs on surveillance of the location: Government Publications clearly within all acceptable criteria hydrogen purge system (TS 4.4.3) would Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, with respect to the system or component be eliminated because hydrogen Education Building, Commonwealth and specified in the Standard Review Plan.

recombiners are available per Walnut Streets, Harrisburg, The proposed change to revise the Amendment 87. Additionally, the Pennsylvania 17128.

containment isolation valve list (on Unit reactor building purge air treatment Attorney for licensee: G.F.

No. 1) is directly related to this example.

system TSs (TSs 3.15.2 and 4.12.2) would Trowbridge, Shaw, Pittman, Potts &

However, this change was approved for be revised to be compatible with the Trowbridge, 180 M Street, NW.,

Unit 2 by License Amendment No. 84 system's safety function which would no Washington, D.C. 20038.

and was established there as not

7992 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February Z, 1985 / Notices involving a significant hazards than 0.38 inch is like this example in that operation was not yet demonstrated.

consideration. The Unit 1 changes are the new requirement is less than the 0.38 The proposed removal of the license the same as made for Unit 2 and the inche (% inch is 0.375). Since the condition is directly related to the valve configurations are alike for both measurement techniques are not as example in that the licensee has Units in this regard. On the basis of the precise for accumulation measurement, performed a seismic qualification above, the Commission proposes to the latter change is alsolike the review, as required, and has fulfilled the conclude that the proposed change to example (i) which is a purely requirements to the criterion previously the Technical Specifications involves a administrative change to technical found acceptable to the NRC. The no significant hazards consideration.

specifications. Editorial changes icense Amendment No. 8 issued on June Local Public Document Room proposed by the licensee are directly 16,\\1978, also concluded that the location: Maude Reston Palenske related to example (I). Example (i) also amendment involved no sinificant Memorial Library, 500 Market Street, St.

involves changes to achieve consistency hazards consideration pending the final Joseph, Michigan 49085.

throughout the technical specifications.

seismic qualification. Thus, if the NRC Attorney for licensee: Gerald This is essentially the reason to regroup staff review confirms the licensee's Charnoff, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts the ice baskets on Unit 1 to make both conclusions concerning this and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, NW.,

Units Technical Specifications and the requirement, the amendment involves no Washington. D.C. 20036.

Westinghouse Standard Technical significant hazards considerations. On NRC Branch Chief: Steven A. Varga.

Specifications more alike. On the above this basis, the staff proposes to IndanaandMiciga Elctrc cmpaybasis, the staff proposes to conclude determine that the amendment request Indiana and Michigan Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316, Donald that the amendments involve a no does not involve a significant hazards C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and significant hazards consideration.

consideration.

2, Berrien County, Michigan Local Public Document Room Local Public Document Room location: Maude Reston Palenake location: Maude Reston Palenske Date of amendment request:

Memorial Library, 500 Market Street, St.

Memorial Library, 500 Market Street, St.

December 28, 1984.

Joseph, Michigan 49M.

Description of amendment request*

At licensee: Gerald Attorney for licensee: Gerald The proposed amendments would make Charnoff, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts Charnoff, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts changes to the Technical Specifications and Trowbridge, 180 M Street, NW.,

and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, NW.,

for the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Washington, D.C. 20036 Washington, D.C. 20038.

Unit Nos. 1 and 2, to require ice NRC Branch Chief Steven A. Varga.

measurements and surveillance on boron concentration and on pH at 25 *C, Indiana and Michigan Electric Company, Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, and to change the restriction on ice Docket No.50-316, Donald C. Cook Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold accumulation on structures from 0.38 Nuclear Plant. Unit No.2, Berrien Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa inches to % inches. The change to Unit 1 County, Michigan Technical Specifications would change Date of amendment request May 19, Date of amendment request:

ice condenser surveillance from 12 to9 1978, supplementedDecember 18,1979 December 5, 1984 and January 24, 1985.

months, regroup the baskets under March 2 1980, July 8, 1983, June 1 and Description of amendment request:

surveillance to be like Unit 2, require ice December 7, 1984 The proposed amendment request would condenser doors be demonstrated at Description of amendment request:

change the Duane Arnold Energy Center once per 9 months for 50% of the doors The request for amendment was initially (DAEC) Technical Specifications related rather than at 6 months for 25% of the noticed on September 21, 1983 (48 F to the instrumentation for core and doors, and editorial changes needed for 43126). This amendment for the Donald contaiment cooling and containment clarity.

C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit No.,

would isolation. The proposed changes consist Basis for proposed no significant remove licensing condition 2C(3)(r) of two groups of changes. Group 1 hazards consideration determination:

which required a seismic qualification consists of those changes which do not The Commission has provided guidance review of the safety injection system affect physical or operational concerning the application of the front panel, hot shutdown panet characteristics of the plant, but clarify standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing auxiliary relay panels and switchboard the testing and limiting conditions for certain examples (48 FR 14870, April 6, and switchgear components, relays and operation for core and containment 1983). One of the examples (ii) of an pressure switches as identified in the cooling instrumentation and action not likely to involve a significant safety evaluation which was issued with surveillance tables, and Group 2 hazards consideration is a change that the licensing condition. Amendment No.

consists of changes related to additional constitutes an additional limitation, 6 issued on June 16,1978, imposed restrictions and limitations imposed in restriction, or control not presently license condition 2C(3)(r). The licensee's the Technical Specifications to assure included in the technical specification.

proposal would remove the license that four containment isolation valves The changes to require ice condition on the basis that the seismic converted from power operated valves measurements and surveillance on qualification has been accomplished, to manual valves will be mairitained in boron concentration and on pH at 25*C, The required information has been the closed position. The modification to reduce the ice condenser surveillance submitted to the NRC for review, will therefore result in an increase in from 12 months to 9 months, and to Basis for proposed no significant confidence that the containment will be reqnire ice condenser doors be hazards consideration determination:

isolated when required.

demonstrated at once per 9 months for One of the Commission examples (48 FR Basis for proposed no significant 50% of the doors rather than 6 months 14870) of amendments not likely to hazards consideration determination:

for 25% of the doors (more doors involve a significant hazards The Commission has provided demonstrated more often over a period consideration relates to relief granted standards (10 CFR 50.92(c)) for of time) are all changes directly related upon demonstration of acceptable determining whether a significant to this exmiple. The changes to restrict operation from an operating restriction hazards consideration exists. A the ice accumulation top% inch rather that was imposed because acceptable proposed amendment to an operating

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 7993 license for a facility involves no (DAEC) Technical Specifications changes against the three standards significant hazards consideration if regarding the spent and new fuel storage specified in 10 CFR 50.92(c). as follows:

operation of the facility in accordance racks. The proposed revisions are (1) Revising the existing fuel storage with the proposed amendment would intended to clarify the existing rack Technical Specifications to use not: (1) Involve a significant increase in Technical Specifications and the bases bundle reactivity limits (k1.it) does not the probability or consequences of an related to Spent and New Fuel Storage.

involve a physical plant change or mode accident previously evaluated; or (2)

The current fuel storage rack of plant operation. The k values create the possibility of a new or Technical Specifications for reactivity being proposed represent fuel reactivity different kind of-accident from any control are written in terms of effective limits equivalentto the existing storage accident previously evaluated; or (3) multiplication factors (Ifd. In the past, rack Kff values. Therefore, since there is involve a significant reduction in a because there has been a substantial no change in the permissible reactivity margin of safety.

margin between the maximum limits or any physical characteristics of The licensee has evaluated the permissible reactivity and the fuel the plant, the license concludes that the proposed changes in accordance with bundle reactivity, the compliance based proposed change does not involve any the standards for a no significant on YC.ff measure has not been of concern.

significant increase in the probability or hazards consideration finding in 10 CFR However, as fuel designs are improved consequences of any criticality accident.

50.92(c). The licensee states that the to permit longer fuel cycles, the (2) Since the proposed change is Group 1 changes involve clarifications, available margins are reduced to a point merely an alternative way of calculating corrections of errors, and moving a where a simpler method for determining compliance with unchanged standards, referenced note to a page where it is compliance with the Technical the change Is not expected to introduce cited. Such changes are administrative Specifications (than complex a possibility of a new or different in nature and fully meet the above cited calculations of IQ) is needed to readily accident or malfunction from any 10 CFR 50.92(c) standards for a finding determine compliance with the previously analyzed.

of no significant hazards considerations.

Technical Specifications. The proposed (3) Since the existing fuel rack The Group 2 changes involve conversion changes will specify fuel bundle k,.ft. 1t, reactivity limits are not changed by the of four power operated containment values which correspond to the fuel rack proposed revision to the method of isolation valves to manual valves.

Technical Specification KQ, limits, by compliance the proposed change is not

.Because the converted valves will be using k values, which are readily expected to reduce the margin of safety.

maintained in normally closed position, available, the process of checking The NRC staff has reviewed the above the containment isolation will be compliance with the reactivity Technical licensee's evaluation and agrees with enhanced. The licensee has therefore Specifications is made simpler. For the licensee's conclusions that the made the finding that the Group 2 General Electric Company (GE) change entails additional limitations designed fuel racks, the equivalent si n' aards fo ar and restrictions in the Technical bundle k is 1.31 as described in the Specifications and meets the 10 CFR GE Standard Application for Reactor met. The staff has, therefore, made a 50.92(c) standards for a no significant Fuels (NEDE-24011-P-A). The following proposed determination that the hazards consideration finding.

specific chanles are requested in the application involves no significant The NRC staff has reviewed the proposed amendment request:

hazards consideration.

licensee's evaluation against the three (1) Add bundle k limit to the new Local Public Document Room standards specified in 10 CFR 50.92(c) fuel rack specification; location: Cedar Rapids Public Library, and agrees with the licensee's (2) Replace current axial enrichment 426 Third Avenue, SE., Cedar Rapids, conclusions that the proposed request criteria with an equivalent bundle Iowa 52401.

for amendment meets the standards for k

value in the spent fuel storage Attorney for licensee: Jack Newman, a no significant hazards considerations rack specification; and Esquire, Harold F. Reis, Esquire, finding.

(3] Add bases and references Newman and Holtzinger, 1025 The staff has, therefore, made a describing the basis for arriving at the Connecticut Avenue, NW., Washington, proposed determination that the storage rack specifications and methods D.C. 20036.

application involves no significant for performing the compliance checks.

NRC Branch Chief Domenic B.

hazards consideration.

Basis for proposed no significant Vassallo.

Local Public Document Room hazards consideration determination:

Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, location: Cedar Rapids Public Library, The Commission has provided Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold 426 Third Avenue, SE., Cedar Rapids, standards (10 CFR 50.92(c)) for Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa Iowa 52401.

determining whether a significant Attorney for licensee: Jack Newman, hazards consideration exists. A Esquire, Harold F. Reis, Esquire, proposed amendment to an operating December 7,1984.

Newman and Holtzinger, 1025 license for a facility involves no Description of amendment requesLr Connecticut Avenue, NW., Washington, significant hazards consideration if The Iowa Electric Light and Power D.C. 20036.

operation of the facility in accordance Company (the licensee) proposes to NRC Branch Chief: Domenic B.

with the proposed amendment would change the Technical Specifications for Vassallo.

not: (1) Involve a significant increase in Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) to the probability or consequences of an permit loading of the General Electric Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, accident previously evaluated; or (2)

Company's (GE) advanced fuel Lead Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa create the possibility of a new or Test Assemblies (LTAs) in the DAEC different kind of accident from any core.

Date of amendment request:

accident previously evaluated; or (3)

The licensee has agreed to participate December 7, 1984.

involve a significant reduction in a in GE's advanced fuel development Description of amendment request:

margin of safety.

program by accepting five LTAe for use The proposed amendment would revise The licensee has evaluated the in DAEC beginning with Cycle 8 the Duane Arnold Energy Center proposed Technical Specification operation. The design of the LTA and

7994 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices the demonstration of their conformance not: (1) Involve a significant increase in The NRC staff has reviewed the to all applicable thermal-mechanical the probability or consequences of an licensee's evaluation per 10 CFR 50.92 performance criteria are documented in accident previously evaluated; or (2) and concurs with its conclusions that the GE report, "Generic Licensing of create the possibility of a new or the Commission standards for a no 1984 Lead Test Assemblies (Special different kind of accident from any significant hazards determination are Report MFN-068-84). " The NRC staff's accident previously evaluated; or (3) met. The staff has, therefore, made a conditional acceptance of the GE report involve a significant reduction in a proposed determination that the is documented in our Safety Evaluation margin of safety.

application involves no significant Report, "Acceptance of Referencing of In accordance with the requirements hazards consideration.

Licensing Special Report MFN-068-84, of 10 CFR 50.92, the licensee has Local Public Document Room Lead Test Assembly Licensing." For that provided the following evaluation to location: Cedar Rapids Public Library, report the use of the LTAs was found to determine if the application involves no 426 Third Avenue, SE., Cedar Rapids, be acceptable if the following conditions significant hazards considerations:

Iowa 52401.

were4atisfied:

(1) The licensee states that, for the Attorneyfor licensee: Jack Newman,

1. The 1984 Lead Test Assemblies will reasons stated below, the proposed Esquire, Harold F. Reis, Esquire, not be the most limiting fuel assemblies amendment does not involve a Newman and Holtzinger, 1025 in the core at any time during their significant increase in the probability or Connecticut Avenue, NW., Washington, residence in the core.

the consequences of accidents D.C. 20036.

2. The user of these Lead Test previously evaluated. GE has performed NRC Branch Chief Domenic B.

Assemblies must verify that the fuel the LOCA analysis in accordance with Vassallo.

design criteria and specified fuel design 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix K, to evaluate limits are met for 1984 Lead Test I

the desig bai event fortheLT Assemblies for the specific conditions in bundles being used in Cycle 8. The DoCet 0,

Dun Aold the reactor chosen for irradiation of results of this analysis show that, with these assemblies.

3. The useroleL the proposed Maximum Average Planar Date of amendment reques Assemblies supplies the results of the Linear Heat Generation Rate December 7,1984.

transients and accident analyses for the (MAPLHGR) changes to the Technical Description of amendment request:

test assemblies and modifies thefpat Specifications, the loading of the LTA This submittal by the Iowa Electric Light Technical Specifications as necessaryt bundles in the DAEC core complies with and Power Company (the licensee) reflect'the use of the assemblies.

the requirements of 10 CFR 50, requests changes to the Duane Arnold Based on the analyses of the DAEC, Appendix K.

Energy Center (DAEC) Technical thed ne onldes fth:

EC GE has also evaluated the transients Specifications to: (1) Permit reactor the licensee concludes that:

(1) The LTAs will be loaded into core for the LTA bundles, for use in Cycle 8, operation with one recirculation loop locations such that they will not be the in accordance with the methods out of service, (2) to include General most limiting bundles with regard to acceptable to the NRC. The results of Electric Company's (GE) Service operating margin to any fuel thermal the analyses presented in the licensee's Information Letter (SIL) 380, Revision 1 limit when compared to the remaining application show that the LTA recommendations regarding thermal fuel in the core. This has been performance is within the limits hydraulic stability for dual loop and analytically verified for Cycle 8 specified in the Updated Final Safety single loop operations, and (3) to operation and will be strictly adhered to Analysis Report (UFSAR), when revised incorporate administrative changes in actual operation during Cycle 8. For Minimum Critical Power Ratio (MCPR) dealing with updating references and future cycles, this will be verified during operating limits are incorporated in the deletion of blank pages. Presently, the the design of the core loading Technical Specifications.

DAEC operating license requires a unit arrangements; and GE has evaluated the Linear Heat to be in cold shutdown within the (2) The results of the Loss-of-Coolant Generation Rate (LHGR) limits for both succeeding 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> if an idle Accident (LOCA) and abnormal LOCA and Rod Withdrawal Error recirculation loop can not be returned to operating transient analyses verify that (RWE) events. The results of the GE service within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. The licensee all applicable fuel design criteria and analysis show that the LTA performance previously requested authorization for Specified Acceptable Fuel Design Limits is within the limits specified in the unlimited single loop operation of (SAFDL) are imet by the LTAs during UFSAR.

DAEC. Subsequently, Tennessee Valley Cycle 8 operation in the DAEC.

(2) The above summary of the Authority's operation of Browns Ferry As a result of its evaluation, the licensee's evaluation shows that the Unit I (a boiling water reactorsimilar in licensee has proposed DAEC Technical thermal-mechanical performance will be design to DAEC) in the single loop mode Specification changes which will permit met by the LTA fuel bundles and All the of operation at 59% power lead to the loading of the GE's LTAs in the fuel design criteria and SAFDLs will be concerns related to thermal-hydraulic DAEC core in compliance of the criteria satisfied (as stated in the introduction),

instability. GE, in SIL *380, Revision 1, and SAFDL.

Therefore, the addition of LTA bundles addressed thse concerns by providing Basis for proposed no significant to DAEC will not create the possibility the boiling water reactor licensees hazards consideration determination:

of a new or different kind of accident.

generic guidance to obviate thermal The Commission has provided (3) Since the LTA bundles are being hydraulic stability induced neutron flux standards (10 CFR 50.92(c)) for subjected to proposed additional oscillations. The licensee has proposed determining whether a significant operating limits (to be incorporated in Technical Specifications in accordance hazards consideration exists. A the Technical Specifications), and since with the guidance provided by GE in proposed amendment to an operating thermal-mechanical performance of the SIL-380, Revision 1.

license for a facility involves no LTA meets the NRC fuel design criteria Specifically, the proposed changes significant hazards consideration if and SAFDLs, the operation of DAEC requested by the licensee consist of: (1) operation of the facility in accordance with LTA fuel bundles will not reduce Deletion of the license condition with the proposed amendment would any margins of safety.

restricting the single loop operation and,

Federal Register ?

ol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 7995 for single and dual loop operation, alleviate the concerns related to the amendment meets the Commission's incorporating requirements in the thermal-hydraulic instability by adding standards In 10 CFR 50.92(c).

Technical Specifications to detect surveillance requirements for detecting Therefore, the staff has made a thermal-hydraulic instabilities induced thermal-hydraulic instabilities and proposed determination that the by neutron oscillations and specifying specifying the remedial operator actions application involves no significant operator response to the detected for responding to them. Such operator hazards consideration.

instabilities, (2) revision of the Technical actions will also assure that there will Local Public Document Room Specifications to provide Average Power be no significant increase in the location: Cedar Rapids Public Library, Range Monitor (APRM) flux scram trip probability or consequences of an 426 Third Avenue, SE., Cedar Rapids, and rod block settings, an increase in Accident. Based on the above Iowa 52401.

the safety limit Minimum Critical Power discussion, we find that the proposed Attorney for licensee: Jack Newman, Ratio (MCPR) value, and a revision to changes are not expected to Esquire, Harold F. Reis. Esquire, the allowable Average Planar Linear significantly increase the probability or Newman and Holtzinger, 1025 Heat Generation Rate (APLHGR) values, consequences of previously evaluated Connecticut Avenue, NW., Washington, and (3) updating of some references and accidents.

D.C. 20036.

deletion of some blank pages.

Basis for proposed no significant (2 Ciertin of Psit ran h

D i

hazards consideration determination:

The Commission has provided The DAEC operation with one Mississippi Power & Light Company, standards (10 CFR 50.92(c) for recirculation loop is not expected to Middle South Energy, Inc., South determining whether a significant create the possibility of a new or Mississippl Electric Power Association, hazards consideration exists. A different kind of accident from any Docket No. 50-416, Grand Gulf Nuclear proposed amendment to an operating previously analyzed, as all abnormal Station, Unit 1, Claiborne County, license for a facility involves no operating transients which could be Mississippi significant hazards consideration if initiated with single loop operation, such Date o amendment request: January operation of the facility in accordance as an inadvertent startup of an idle with the proposed amendment would recirculation pump or pump trip have 30, 1985.

not: (1) Involve a significant increase in already been analyzed in the FSAR, and e

amendment qest:

the probability or consequences of an reviewed and accepted by the staff.

accident previously evaluated; or (2)

For single and dual loop operation, the reorganization to make plant quality create the possibility of a new or addition of the surveillance personnel more independent of plant different kind of accident from any requirements and rimedial actions for operations personnel. The Technical accident previously evaluated: or (3) thermal-hydraulic instability detection Specification changes would be: (1) involve a significant reduction in a and response involve normal plant Change the title of Manager, Supplier margin of safety.

operating practices and, therefore, are QA to Manager, Audits QA, on the We have evaluated the licensee's not expected to create a new or different Offsite Organization chart; (2) delete the request for the proposed Technical kind of accident from any previously Nuclear Plant Quality Superintendent Specifications for compliance with the analyzed in the FSAR.

from the Unit Operating Organization above cited standards.

chart; (3) change the composition of the (3) Consideration of Reduction in a Plant Safety Review Committee by (1) Consideration of Probability and Margin of Safety substituting the Manager, Nuclear Site Consequences of Accidents The licensee has proposed the revised QA for the Quality Superintendent.

Our evaluation of the proposed operating limits, setpoints, and Basis for proposed no significant changes indicates that the principal procedures for the proposed single and hazards consideration determination:

accident associated with a single dual loop operation. Our evaluation of The Commission has provided certain recirculation loop operating would be an the licensee's proposal indicates that the examples (48 FR 14870) of actions likely inadvertent startup of the idle proposed changes will ensure that the to involve no signficant hazards recirculation loop pump causing a FSAR margins of safety will not be considerations. One of the examples is a transient. However, such a transient reduced during normal operation and purely administrative change to was evaluated in the DAEC Final Safety with one recirculation pump not Technical Specifications. Change (1) is Analysis Report (FSAR) and found to operating. Our conclusions are based on similar to this example since it is simply satisfy the Commission's regulations. In our review of the evaluations by GE in a change of title to more accurately addition, the licensee has proposed support of the DAEC single loop reflect the primary responsibility of the more restrictive Technical Specification operation presented in the GE report position, while the lines of responsibility changes related to MCPR limits, flow-NEDO-24272.

and communication are not changed. In biased scram and rod block setpoints, For single and dual loop operation, the Change (2), the Nuclear Plant Quality and reduced MAPLHGR operating additional surveillance requirements Superintendent will be moved from the limits, to ensure that the probabilities and remedial actions required of the Unit Operating Organization and placed and the consequences of accidents with operator for detection of and response under the Manager Nuclear Site QA in single recirculation loop operation will to thermal-hydraulic instability will the Offeite Organization in order to not be significantly increased. We have increase the present margn of safety.

minimize possible conflicts of interest in also evaluated the implication of The updating of sevealreferences the management of the plant operation.

thermal-hydraulic stability for both and deletion of some blank pages entail The Nuclear Plant Quality single and dual loop operations after the administrative changes and clearly Superintendent will spend more time on licensee's proposed Technical satisfy the Commission standards for a his primary responsibility of quality Specification changes based on the GE "no sinfcant hazards involved" inspection since the majority of other recommendations in S1L 380, Revision 1 finding.

QA functions he has been performing, are incorporated. Our evaluation shows Based on the above considerations the including review of procedures and that the proposed changes would staff concludes that the proposed procurement documents will be

7996 Federal RegisteI Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, Februa 7, 1985 / Notices delegated to othe QA positions. This program and provide a plan for and supporting bases for the Emergency change is an improvement in the quality achieving compliance with Appendix J.

Ventilation System and the Control assurance functions of the plant since Basis for proposed no signficant Room Air Treatment System and its the Unit Operating Organization hazards consideration determination:

associated instrumentation. The Management will not have line The Commission has provided guidance majority of the proposed changes are the responsibility for the quality inspection concerning the application of the result of modifications made to the functions. In Change (3), substituting the standards for determining whether a Control Room Air Treatment System to Manager, Nuclear Site QA for the significant hazards consideration exists resolve NUREG-0737, Item IIDS.3.4, Quality Superintendent in the Plant by providing certain examples (48 FR "Control Room Habitability". The Safety Review Committee will maintain 14870]. The examples of actions licensee's description of the proposed the level of review from a quality involving no significant hazards change is as follows:

assurance standpoint, since the Quality consideration include;"... (ii) A Niagara Mohawk submittal dated March Superintendent reports to the Manager change that constitutes an additional 28,1983, described modifications to the Nuclear Site QA. Proposed changes (2) limitation, restriction, or control not Control Roam Air Treatment System which and (3) improve safety in that they allow presently included in the technical would establish an acceptable degree of QA activities to focus entirely on quality specifications; for example, a more compliance with General Design Criterion 19.

requirements and to be independent of stringent surveillance requirement" and These modifications included installation of plant production activities. Because

"(vii) A change to make a license redundant radiation monitors on the air proposed changes (2) and (3) would not conform to changes in the regulations, intake which will automatically initiate the affect plant equipment design, safety where the license change results in very emergency train of the system.

T he changes described below reflect the criteria or safety analyses and will minor changes to facility operations change from the manual to automatic result in an improvement in plant safety clearly in keeping with the regulations.

initietion of the Control Room Air Treatment by enhancing the independence of The changes proposed in the System and add Limiting Conditions for quality assurance from plant production, application foramendment are Operation and Surveillance Requirements to these changes do not significantly encompassed by the above examples in further increase the system's reliability.

increase the probability or that: (1) The adding of additional valves The addition of item (j) to page 178a consequences of an accident previously to be local leak rate tested is an requires surveillance testing of the Control evaluated or create the possibility of a additional restriction and is, therefore, Room Air Treatment System at least once new or different kind of accident from similar to example (ii) above, and (2]

every operating cycle. This addition will help any accident previously evaluated, or do other changes proposed as necessary to ensure the reliability of the system.

they involve a significant reduction in a because the licensee is currently r Changes in he desincbaic o

the margin of safety. Accordingly, the required by the regulations to limit syst changes t pesinicate the Commission proposes to determine that mary conainena d

to additions of Tables 3.6.Zn and 4.6.2m which these changes do not involve a increase the Limiting Conditions for significant hazards consideration.

50, Appendix J, are'considered minor Operation and Surveillance Requirements of Local Public Document Room with regard to facility operation thus the Control Room Air Treatment System. The location: Hind Junior College, McLendon clearly keeping with the regulation, and, addition of item (13) to page 190 increases Library, Raymond, Mississippi 39154.

therefore, are similar to example (vii)

Limiting Conditions for Operation of Attorneyabove.

Protective Instrumentationto include Attrny fr icese: NchlasS.Therefore, since the application for -

instrumentation which automatically initiates Reynolds, Esquire, Bishop, Liberman, amendment involves a proposed change the emergency train of the Control Room Air Cook, Purcell, and Reynolds, 1200 17th that is similar to an example for Which Treatment System. Addition ofpage 232d Street, NW., Washington, D.C. 20036.

no significant hazards consideration provides the set point, minimum number of NRC Branch Chief: Elinor G.

trip systems and minimum number of Adensam.

instrument chainels that must be operable determination that the application for each position of the reactor mode switch Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, involves no significant hazards except the shutdown position. Addition of Docket No. 50-220, Nine Mile Point consideration.

page 232e provides details of the Surveillance Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1, Oswego Local Public Document Room Requirements, including a sensor check, County, New York location: State University College at instrument channel test and instrument Oswego, Penfield Library-Documents, channel calibration.

Date of amendment request: March 3, Oswego, New York 13126.

In addition, we are requesting that the 1977, as supplemented and clarified by Attorney for licensee: Troy B. Conner, Technical Specifications governing the submittals dated November 1, 1983 and Jr., Esquire, Conner & Wetterhahn, Suite Emergency Ventilation System and the August 28, 1984.

Control Room Air Treatment System be Description oa n nr e:s g

n, D.C. 2006 updated to reflect the current standards for Descipton o amndmet rques:

Wshinton D.C 2006.testing the adsorber filiters. Cuffrently, our This proposed action was initially NRC Branch Chief. Domenic V.

specifications reference ANSI N.510-1975 for noticed in the Federal Register (48 FR Vassallo.

testing the adsorber filters'(i.e; charcoal 38408) on August 23, 1983. This amendment would make changes to theRegulator Guide 1.52 (Rev. 2) but the current Technical Specifications to modify the Standard Review Plan endorses ANSI N.510 list of Reactor Coolant System Isolation Nuclear Station, Unit NO. 1, Oswego 1980. The salient difference between the two Valves and Primary Containment County, Now York standards is the environmental conditions for Isolation Valves as well as other Date of amendment request: October testing. We believe the newer standard more provisions of the license to achieve 1,1984.

realistically reflects the environmental conditions for which the charcoal filters'are~

conformance with 10 CFR Part 50.

Description of amendment request designed. Therefore, the proposed technical Appendix J. The proposed change is in The proposed amendment changes the specifications submitted herein reference the response to an NRC request dated section of the Technical Specifications ANSI N.510-1980.

August 7.1975 that asked the license to h pertaining to Limiting Conditions for The existing Page 173 references ANSI review their containment leakage Operations, surveillance requirements N.510-1975 for testing of the operability of the

Federal Register ol. 50, No. 39 Wednesday, February 1985 / Notices 7997 inlet heater at rated power for the Emergency Furthermore, increases in surveillance significant hazards consideration. One Ventilation System. The new standard, ANSI requirements have been determined to of the examples (ii), relates to a change N.510-1980, requires the same testing involve no significant hazard consideration, that constitutes an additional limitation, procedure. This page is being revised to as indicated in item ii of the section regarding restriction, or control not presently consistently reference the new standard examples of amendments that are considered included in the Technical Specifications.

throughout the Control Room Air Treatment not likely to involve significant hazard and the Emergency Ventilation Technical considerations (Federal Register-, April 6.

peciications o Specifications.

1983, p. 14870).

not include requirements for the Remote The qualification requirements for the The proposed changes regarding testing of*

Shutdown Panels. The proposed change replacement charcoal (replacement is the charcoal filters do not involve a adds the requirements for the Remote necessary when the charcoal fails its Significant Hazards Consideration as defined Shutdown Panels to the Technical surveillance test) for the Emergency in 10 CFR 50.92. This changeis similar to item Specifications. Therefore, since this Ventilation System and the Control Room Air vi of amendments that are considered not change adds an additional control to the Treatment System are given on pages 176 and likely to involve significant hazards 177, and 178b and 178c, respectively. The considerations (Federal Register; April 0, curre Technical Specation ii, The current nuclear power air cleaning standard, 1983. p. 14870). This change is similar in that ANSI 509-1980, will be referenced directly the intent of acceptance criteria are met as staff proposed to determine that the rather than Regulatory Guide 1.52, which specified in the Standard Review Plan section proposed change does not involve a references ANSI 509-1975. Similarly, the 6.5.1 with respectto charcoal filters, significant hazards consideration since statements on these pages for HEPA filter it is similar to the examples of actions design requirements are being updated.

involving no significant hazards Note.-Page 188 currently contains a consideration cited by the Commission.

typographical error which would be corrected determinations and based on this review Local Public Document Room with the approval of this submittal, namely, concurs with the licensees s the first paragraphs of 3.6.1a afid 4.6.2a determinations. The staff proposes to Ocatio Senie ry-Coleges should currently read.

• *

• Tables 3.6.2a to determine that the proposed change Oswego, Pen Lrar-o1mns 3.5.21." and " *

• Tables 4.6.2a to 4.6.21.",

does not involve a significant hazards OseoNeYor 13126 respectively.

consideration since it is similar to the Finally, our current Technical examples of actions involving no Jr., Esquire, Conner & Wetterhahn, Suite Specifications call for testing frequency of 18 significant hazards consideration cited 1050,1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

months for both the Emergency Ventilation by the Commission.

Washington, D.C. 20006.

System and the Control Room Air Treatment Local Public Document Room NRC Branch Chief. Domenic B.

System. Since we are now operating on a location: State University College at Vassallo.

nominal 24 month refueling cycle, we request to have our Technical Specification reflect Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, the current refueling cycle frequency.

Oswego, New York 13126.

Docket No. 50-M, Nine Mile Point Attorney for hicensee: Troy B. Conner, Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1, Oswego Basis for proposed no significant Jr., Esquire, Conner & Wetterhahn, Suite County, New York hazards consideration determination:

1050,1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

The licensee has presented its Washington, DC 20006.

determination of significant hazards NRC Branch Chief: Domenic B.

1984 as supplemented and clarified consideration as follows:

Vassallo.

December 3,1984.

These proposed Technical Specification Description of amendment request.

changes submitted herein involve no Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, The proposed amendment changes the significant hazard considerations. Therefore Docket No. 50-220, Nine Mile Point section of the Technical Specifications in accordance with the proposed-amendment, Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1, Oswego pertaining to Limiting Conditions for the operation of Nine Mile Point Unit 1 will County, New York Operations. Surveillance Requirements not:

Date of amendment request: May 1, and supporting bases for the Emergency (1) Involve a significant increase.in the 1984 as supplemented and clarified Cooling System and Accident probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) Create the possibility of a new or Description of amendment request:

proposed changes to the technical different kind of -accident from any accident The proposed amendment changes the specifications are in response to Generic previously evaluated; or section of the Technical Specifications Letter 83-30 "NUREG-0737 Technical (3) Involve a significant reduction in a pertaining to Limiting Conditions for Specifications" which was issued by the margin of safety.

Operations, Surveillance Requirements Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Moreover, the changes reflecting the and supporting bases for the Remote November 1. 1983. The proposed Control Room Ventilation System Shutdown Panels. The Remote changes are consistent with the intent of modifications increase the margin of safety at Shutdown Panels were added to the the model technical specifications Nine Mile Point Unit 1. First, change from manual to automatic initiation decreases the plant to facilitate plant shutdown from included as an attachment to Generic response time capability of the system which outside the control room. The Letter 83-36. In addition to the technical will reduce the potential consequences during modification was performed to meet the changes, the proposed technical the event that this system is required. -

requirements of-1 CFR Part 50, specifications also revise the format of Second, addition of surveillance requirements Appendix A. This amendment includes 3.6.11 "Accident Monitoring will help to ensure the operability of the incorporation of the Remote Shutdown Instrumentation" and eliminates system and therefore, increase its reliablity.

Panels into the Technical Specification, paragraph 3.1.3b which was intended to In addition, these changes are consistent with Basis proposed no significant be a temporary amendment that is no previously stated Nuclear Regulatory h

or Commission positions; The change from he co sion deduianc Basis forpoed manual to automatic initiation is consistent with Standard Review Plan section 6.4. The concerning the determination of hazards consideration determination:

additional-surveillance requirements to test significant hazards by providing certain The Commission has provided guidance the operability of the system is consistent examples (48 FR 14870) of amendments concerning the determination of with Standard-Technical Specifications 4.7.2.

considered not likely to involve significant hazards by providing certain

7998 Federal Register Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February7, 1985 / Notices examples (48 FR 14870) of amendments concerning the application ofthese (III.D.3.4). These proposed Technical considered not likely to involve standards by providing certain Specification (TS) changes submitted by significant hazards consideration. Two examples (48 FR 14870]. One of the the licensee are in response to the NRC of the examples (i) and (ii), relate to examples of actions not likely to involve Generic Letter 83-36 entitled "NUREG changes that are administrative and that a significant hazards consideration 0737 Technical Specifications" which constitute an additional limitation, relates to changes that constitute was issued on November 1, 1983.

restriction, or control not presently additional restrictions or controls not In addition, the licensee proposes the included in the Technical Specifications.

presently included in the technical addition of a surveillance requirement to The majority of the changes contained specifications.

verify the automatic transfer feature of within the amendment request impose The Commission, in a revision to the Reactor Core Isolation Cooling additional restrictions or controls for Appendix Ito 10 CFR Part 50, required System (RCIC) suction (II.K.3.13 and modifications associated with TMI licensees to improve and modify their ILK.3.22). Also, a temporary amendment related issues. The balance of the radiological effluent systems in a change for.Unit 3 regarding continued change is administrative as described manner that would keep releases of power operation with an inoperable above. Therefore, the changes are radioactive material to unrestricted RCIC is proposed for deletion since it is similar to examples (i) and (ii). The staff areas during normal operations as low now obsolute. This administrative proposes to determine that the proposed as reasonably achievable. In complying change was covered in Amendment No.

change does not involve a significant with this requirement it became 102 (July 2,1984). Two other NUREG hazards consideration since it is similar necessary to add additional restrictions 0737 items were also addressed by this to the examples of actions involving no and controls to the Technical application. Surveillance and operability significant hazards consideration cited Specifications to-assure compliance requirements for II.F.2 (addition of two by the Commission.

This caused the proposed addition of new reactor water level recorders) were Local Public Document Room Technical Specifications described first proposed in a TS application dated location: State University College at above. The staff proposes to determine February 11,1982. The licensee now Oswego, Penfield Library-Documents, that the applications does not involve a propose to revise its application Oswego, New York 13126.

significant hazards consideration since addressing LCO actions for reactor Attorney for licensee: Troy B. Conner, the change constitutes additional water level recorders by adding an LCO Jr., Esquire, Conner & Wetterhahn, Suite restrictions and controls that are not shutdown provision of 30 days for one 1050, 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW..

currently included in the Technical inoperable channel, and 7 days for two Washington, D.C. 20006.

Specifications in order to meet the NRC Branch Chief Domenic B.

Commission mandated "as low as cnerome curen Ts which Vassallo.

reasonably achievable" effluent covero one ret wlv Omaha Public Power District, Docket objectives No. 50485, Fort Calhoun Station, Unit Local Public Document Room indicator where plant shutdown is No.1S-, asinto ClounSty, n

Nebask location: W. Dale Clark Library, 215 required within 7 days if one channel is No.1,South 5th Street, Omaha Nebraska inoperable and shutdown within 48 Date of amendment request: October 68102 hours if both channels are inoperable.

18, 1984. This application supersedes an Attorey for licensee: Leboeuf, Lamb, Finally, the licensee requests the earlier application for amendment dated Leiby, and MacRae, 1333 New addition of operability requirements for March 21, 1978 and a supplement dated Hampshire Ave., N.W., Washington, two new reactor pressure recorders as March 30.1979.

D.C. 20036.

part of the requirements of NUREG Description of amendment request:

NRC Branch Chief James R. Miller.

0737, Supplement I (SPDS).

The amendment would make changes to Basis for proposed no signficant the Radiological Effluent Technical Philadelphia Electric Company, Public hazards consideration determination.

Specifications that would bring them Service Electric and Gas Company, The Commission has provided examples into compliance with Appendix I of 10 Delnarva Power and Light Company, (48 FR 14870) of types of amendments CFR Part 50. It would provide new ad Atlantic City Electric Company, not likely to involve signflcant hazards Technical Specification sections Dockets Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach consideration. One of the examples (ii) defining limiting conditions for Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units relates to a change that constitutes an operation and surveillance requirements Nos. 2 and 3, York County, Pennsylvania additional limitation, restriction, or for radioactive liquid and gaseous Date of amendment request October control not presently included in effluent monitoring; concentration, dose.

9,1984.

Technical Specifications. The proposed and treatment of liquid, gaseous and Description of amendment request.

TS changs involving the addition of solid wastes; total dose; radiological The amendments would add limiting LCO, surveillance and administrative environmental monitoring that consists conditions for operations (LCOs),

requirements for the following NJREG of a monitoring program, land use surveillance requirements, and 0737 items fail into this category: Post census, and an interlaboratory administrative requirements for the accident sampling (II.B.2), high range comparison program. The change would following NUREG-0737 required items:

noble gas monitors and radioactive also incorporate into the Technical Post-accident sampling (1I.1.2), high iodine and particulate sampling systems Specifications the bases that support the range noble gas monitors and (II.F1.1. and II.F.1.2), containment high operation and surveillance radioactive iodine and particulate range drywell radiation monitors requirements. In addition, some changes sampling systems (ll.F.1.1 and Il.F.1.2),

(II.1.1.3), containment pressure monitors would be.made in administrative containment high-range drywell (II.F.1.4), containment water level controls, specifically dealing with the radiation monitors (Il.F.1.3),

monitors (II.F.1.5), containment process control program and the offsite containment pressure monitors (ILF.1.4),

hydrogen monitors (II.F.1.6). control dose calculation manual.

containment water level monitors room emergency air filtration systems Basis for proposed no significant (II.F.1.5), containment hydrogen (III.D.3.4.), automatic transfer of RCIC hazards consideration determination:

monitors (ILF.1.6) and control room suction (l.K3.13 and R.K.3.22), and The Commission has provided guidance emergency air filtration systems reactor pressure recorders proposed for

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 7999 the Safety Parameter System (SPSD-measures for determining inadequate nomenclature to conform with 10 CFR NUREG-0737, Supplement 1). These core cooling; or (2) create the possibility 50.73. In addition, the requirement to proposed changes fall in the above of a new or different kind of accident report failure of a primary coolant category in that all the proposed previously evaluated because the system 1afety or relief valve to close is changes involve additional limitations, proposed LCOs covering the three proposed for deletion since the new rule restrictions, or control not presently reactor water level instruments [narrow (10 CFR 50.73) required reporting of included in the TSs. Therefore, the range, wide range (new] and fuel zone relief valve failures if the condition Commission's staff proposes to (new)] require, in effect shutdown could have prevented the fulfillment of a determine that the above proposed action intervals similar to those safety function and redundant changes do not involve a significant currently required in the Peach Botton equipientwas not operable. The hazards consideration.

TS; or (3) involve a significant reduction proposal also complies with the The licensee also proposes in a margin of safety because the guidance of GL 83-43 whichrequests surveillance and operability proposed change would permit deletion of licensee event reporting requirements covering the addition of monitoring of rector water level by three requirement from the license.

two new reactor water level recorders diverse instrument systems and the The Commission has provided as part of NUREG-0737 requirements combined surveillance requirements and guidance concerning the application of (II.F.2). The request revises the LCOs meet the requirements currently the standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by licensee's original proposal covering specified in the Peach Bottom TSs.

providing certain examples (48 FR these II.F.2 recorders dated February 11, Accordingly, the Commission proposes 14870. One of the examples (vii) of 1982. The licensee's original proposal to determine that this change does not actions not likely to involve a significant was noticed in the Federal Register on involve a signficant hazards hazards consideration relates to October 26, 1983 (48 FR 49591) but was consideration.

changes that make a license conform to not acted upon by the staff since it Local Public Document Room changes in the regulations, where the constituted an outstanding item. The location. Government Publications license change results in very minor licensee's revised request would change Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, changes to facility operations clearly in the present TS requirements for the Education Building, Commonwealth and keeping with the regulations. The narrow range reactor water level guage Walnut Streets, Harrisburg, proposed changes to conform to 10 CFR (Table 3.2.F) by increasing the LCO Pennsylva.

50.72 and 50.73 affect only reporting shutdown provisions for one inoperable Attorney for licensee: Troy B. Conner, requirements and do not affect facility channel from 7 days to 30 days, and for Jr.. 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, operations; two inoperate channels from 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> to Washington. D.C. 20006.

Therefore, since the changes make the 7 days. However, to compensate for this NRC Branch Chief. John F. Stolz.

license conform to changes in the change, the licensee proposed to Philadelphia Electric Compnay, Public regulations and do not affect plant strengthen the LCO action statements Service Electric and Gas Company, operations, the proposed changes are for the wide and fuel range reactor Delmarva Power and Light Company, encompassed by example (vii) of actions water level instruments. The licensee and Atlantic City Electric Company, not likely to involve significant hazards had originally proposed the following Dockets Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach considerations and on that basis the action statements covering the wide and Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units Commission's staff proposes to fuel range monitors in its February 11, Nos. 2 and 3, York County, Pennsylvania determine that the requested changes do 1982 applications: with one channel Date of amendment request. January not involve a significant hazards inoperable, no shutdown required and 4,8 consideration.

with both channels inoperable, Description of amendment requesL Local Public Document Room shutdown would be requird in 30 days.

The amendments would make the location: Government Publications The licensee now proposes to strengthen reporting requirements in the Technical Section, State Library of Pensylvania, these LCOs for the new monitors in the Specifications (TSs) consistent with 10 education Building, Commonwealth and following ways: For one inoperable CFR 50.72 and 50.73 in response to Walnut Streets, Harrisburg channel, shutdown would be required in Generic Letter No. 8343, "Reporting Pennsylvania.

30 days if both narrow range monitors Requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, § § 50.72 Attorney for licensee: Troy B. Conner.

are operable and 7 days if one narrow and 50.73 and Standard Technical Jr., 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue. NW.,

range monitor is inoperable; for both Specifications", dated December 19, Washington, D.C. 20006.

channels being inoperable, shutdown 1983.

NRC Branch Chief: John F. Stolz.

would be required in 7 days if both Basis forproposed no significant narrow range monitors are operable and hazards consideration determination:

48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> if one narrow range monitor is The licensee states that the proposed Service Electric and Gas Company, inoperable.

revisions and deletions to the TS Delmarva Power and Light Company, The Commission's staff has reviewed Reporting Requirements reflect the and Atlantic City Electric Company, the above amendment request revisions to § 50.72 and the addition of Doct No.

o concerning II.F.2 and has determined

§ 50.73 to the Commission's regulations, Ati Pernstai that should this request be implemented, and these revisions conform to the it would not: (1) Involve a significant Standard Technical Specifications Date of amendment request-January increase in the probability or enclosed in Generic Letter No. 83-43.

7,1985.

consequences of an accident previously The revisions would: (1] Add the Description of amendment request evaluated because new safety-related definition of Reportable Events to the The requested amendment to the Peach reactor water level recorders will be Definition section 1.0, (2) Delete the Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 3, added to the TS surveillance prompt and 30-day reporting Operating license was submitted in requirements providing additional specification since these requirements support of the upcoming Cycle 7 core indicators of reactor water levels and, have been superseded by 10 CFR 50.72 reload. The proposed changes would therefore, additional surveillance and 50.73, and (3) revise the incorporate the maximum average

8000 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices planar linear heat generation rate Portland General Electric Company, Portland General Electric Company et.

(MAPLHGR) versus planar average Docket No. 50-3, Trojan Nuclear al., Docket No. 50-344, Trojan Nuclear exposure curves for fuel Type Plant, Columbia County, Oregon Plant, Columbia County, Oregon BP8DRB299 and Type BP8DRB299H. The licensee states in the accompanying submittal that these new fuel assemblies November 29,984.

14,1985.

are not significantly different from those Description of amendment request:

Description of amendment request:

previously found acceptable by the NRC The application for amendment requests The amendment request was submitted for operation in Unit 3. In addition, a modification of the Technical in response to NRC General Letter 83-37 review, of the licensee's application and-Specification contained in Appendix A which was sent to all licensees of accompanying evaluation indicates that to Operating License NPF-1 in order to pru e ter rec to there are no significant changes being revise the number of reactor coolant iporat te speificas or proposed to the acceptance criteria for loops required to be in operation in the Technical Specifications (TSs) and Mode 3 (the reactor coolant system hot; of post-Thf safety improvements, that the analytical methods used to reactor shut down). Specifically, the NUred SeCii th demonstrate conformance with the TSs Trojan Technical Specifications ndent rqesprides e and regulations are not significantly currently require that a minimum of one t

en speications e

changed from those previously found reactor coolant loop be in operation containment high-range area radiation acceptable by the NRC for Unit 3.

during Mod 3. The amendment would monitors (NUREG-0737 Item II.F.1.3);

Basis for proposed no significant require that an additional loop be in post-accident monitoring systems for hazards consideration determination:

operation during Mode 3 if any control noble gases and radioiodine for the The Commission has provided guidance rod drive mechanisms are energized.

containment, the auxiliary building, and for determining whether a proposed The change would require operation the condenser air ejector, and noble gas amendment involves a significant consistent with the plant safety analysis radioactivity monitors for the main hazards consideration (48 FR 14870). An for bank rod withdrawal from the steam lines (NUREG-0737 Item II.F.1.1);

example of amendment that is not likely subcritical condition, which assumes the containment water level monitors to involve a significant hazards that two reactor coolant loops arein (NUREG-0737 Item II.F.1.5); and the new consideration is "(iii) * * *, a change operation.

sulfur dioxide detectors for the control resulting from a nuclear reactor core Basis for proposed no significant room ventilation system (NUREG-0737 reloading, if no fuel assemblies significantly different frombthos hazards consideration determination:

Item III.D.3.4).

sigifianty iffren frm hos fond The Commission has provided guidance The new technical specifications previously acceptable to the NRC for a concerning the application of standards would require this new equipment to be previous core at the facility in question for determining whether a significant operable and to be periodically tested.

are involved. This assumes that no significant changes areme the hazards consideration exists by Basis for proposed no significant acceptance criteria for the technical providing specific examples. The hazards consideration determination:

spcfcatns, crthrafo the nalytical examples of actions involving no

'The Commission has provided guidance, specifications, sed t

nta concerning the application of the methodsstandards for making a no significant conformance with the technical include: (ii) Changes that constitute an hazards consideration determination.by specifications and regulations are not additional limitation or restriction or providing certain examples (48 FR significantly changed, and the NRC has control not presently within the 14870). One of the examples of an action previously found such methods technical specification e.g., a more not likely to involve a significant acceptable".

stringent surveillance requirement.

hazards consideration is "(ii) A change The Commission's staff considers the The changes proposed in this that constitutes an additional limitation, proposed TSs change accompanying the application for amendment are restriction, or control not presently Unit 3 reload to be similar to example encompassed by this example because included in the technical specifications:

(iii) since the fuel to be inserted into the of the additional limitation and For example a more stringent core for Cycle 7 is similar to that used in restriction that would be added by this surveillance requirement." The proposed previous Unit 3 reloads and that the Technical Specification amendment.

technical specifications for the items nuclear design and analysis of the Cycle Therefore, since the application for discussed above match this example 7 reload has been performed with amendment involves a proposed change because they all represent new methods and techniques which have that is similar to an example for which requirements for equipment operability been used in previous reloads and found no significant hazards consideration and testing not currently included in the to be acceptable. Based upon the above, exists, the staff has made a proposed technical specifications.

the staff proposes to determine that the determination that the application for Based on the foregoing, the hreetds cns iato.

osgnfcn amendmn ynoles no significant Commission proposes to determine that requested changesiono siniicn dmninvon the application for amendment does not hazrdscosidratonnivoledignficnthazrd Local Public Document Room location: Government Publications considerations.

Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, 801 S

utnue, ortLa, Local Public Document Room Education Building. Commonwealth and location: Multnomah County Library, Walnut Streets, Harrisburg, Attorney for licensee: J. W. Durham, 801 SW. lothAvenue, Portland, Oregon.

Pennsylvania.

Senior Vice President. Portland General Attorney for licensee: J.W.Durham, Attorney for Licensee: Troy B. Conner, Electric Company, 121 SW., Salmon Senior Vice President, Portland General Jr., 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

Street, Portland, Oregon 97204.

Electric Company, 121 S.W. Salmon Washington, D.C. 20006.

NRC Branch Chief James R. Miller.

Street, Portland, Oregon 97204.

NRC Branch ChiefP John F. Stolz.

NRC Branch Chief. James R. Miller.

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 8001 Power Authority of the State of New metallurgically bonded to the inside Description of amendment request:

York, Docket No. 50-333, James A.

surface of the Zircalloy-2 fuel cladding.

The amendment request was initially FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, This feature is expected to reduce the noticed on August 23, 1983 (48 FR 38419).

Oswego County, New York probability of pellet-clad interaction fuel This notice includes changes requested Date of amendment request: January failures. The Barrier fuel design has in a subsequent submittal dated August 16, 1985.

been incorporated into the current 13,1984. The amendment would revise Description of amendment request:

revision of the General Electric Report, the testing requirements for hydraulic The proposed amendment would revise "General Electric Standard Application, shock suppressors (snubbers). The the Technical Specifications (TS), as for Reactor Fuel," (NEDE-24011-P-A-6, proposed changes were made in reponse necessary,.to support the current Reload April 1983) and has been determined by to an NRC request, dated November 20, 6/Cycle 7 reactor refueling. The table the NRC to be acceptable. The change 1980, to upgrade the testing requirement entitled "MCPR Operating Limit for from one hundred-mil to eighty-mil for all safety-related snubbers to ensure Incremental Cycle Core Average channels represent' a return to initial a higher degree of operability. The Exposure" in section 3.1 of Appendix A, core channel dimensions. This change in changes involve: Clarifying the and Figure 3.1-2, "Operating Limit channel thickness results in a slightly frequency of visual inspections, stating MCPR Versus Tau for all Fuel Types,"

different fuel bundle response during a the requirements for functional testing of have been revised to reflect the loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) n the snubbers which visually appear transient analyses performed for the high exposure range. Consequently, inoperable, including a formula for the Reload 6/Cycle 7 core. In addition, different MAPLHGR limits are applied selection of representative sample sizes, Figure 3.5-11, "Maximum Average to Reload 6 fuel.

clarifying the testing acceptance criteria, Planar Linear Heat Generation Rate Since eighty mil channels have been and revising the method of snubber (MAPLHGR) Versus Planar Average used successfully at Fitzpatrick, and listing to incorporate moreinformation.

Exposure" has been added to reflect th extensively on other plants similar in Basis for proposed no significant Expoure" hs ben dde torefectthe core and fuel design to FitzPatrick, this hazards consideration determination:

new fuel currently being loaded. Figures does not represent a significant change.

3.5-6 through 3.5-8 are no longer Additionally, the analytical methods Coe i

aion of these necessary and have been deleted fromcoerigteapctonfths Appendix Abecause the fueleter used to-demonstrateconformance with standards byproviding certain Appndi A ecasethefue tyes the Technical Specifications and examples (48 FR 14870). One of the associated with these figures will be regulations are described in the above discharged from the core during the referenced General Electric Report amignifictars conieratio current reload.

The proposed amendment also wi ha bee rewd a

ved relates to changes that constitute includes several administrative changes byathe NC hes th e no additional limitations or restrictions in.

relevant to the above-mentioned u

the Technical Specifications. The revisions. These changes (on pages vii, caes rpreseed b itn The proposed changes revise sections of the 123 and 130). eliminate references to the Technical Specifications related to deltedfigresandad reerecesto he new fuel assemblies to the core during hydraulic snubbers to clarify.

delete iguded add references to the current reload are therefore newlyencompassed by example (iii).

Basis for proposed no significant testing, and to incorporate operability hazards consideration determination:

references todeleted figures associated The Commission has provided guidance with fuel types being discharged from changes upgrade the requirements for concerning the application of the the core and add references to the newly hydraulic snubbers, the staff proposes to standards for determining whether a included figure are clearly determine that the application does not significant hazards consideration exists administrative in nature and are involve a significant hazards by providing certain examples (48 FR therefore encompassed by example (i) consideration.

14870). The examples of actions Based on the foregoing, the Local Public Document Room involving no significant hazards Commission proposes to determine that location: White Plains Public Library, consideration include: "(i) A purely the proposed license amendment does 100 Martine Avenue, White Plains, New administrative change to Technical not involve a significant hazards York 10601.

Specifications: For example, a change to consideration.

Attorney for licensee: Mr. Charles M.

achieve consistency throughout the Local Public Document Room Pratt, 10 Columbus Circle, New York, Technical Specifications, correction of location: Penfield Library, State New York 10019.

an error, or a change in nomenclature,"

University College of Oswego, Oswego, NRC Branch Chief. Steven A. Varga.

and "(iii) for a nuclear power reactor, a New York.

Power Authority of the State of New change resulting from a nuclear reactor Attorney for licensee: Mr. Charles M.

York, Docket No. 50-286, Indian Point core reloading, if no fiel assemblies Pratt, Assistant General Counsel, Power Unit No. 3, Westchester County, New significantly different from those found Authority of the State of New York, 10 York previously acceptable to the NRC for a Columbus Circle, New York, New York previous core at the facility in question 109.

Date of amendment request: April 13, are involved."

NRC Branch ChiefDomenic B.

1982, as supplemented August 31, 1084.

Use of a single new type of fuel Vassallo.

Description of amendment request:

(BPDRB299) is planned for the current The amendment would revise the reload. This fuel differs from the fuel Power Authority of the State of New Technical Specifications related to types presently in use at FitzPatrick in York, Docket No.50-286, Indian Point degraded grid voltage conditions by:

two respects: (1) It is a Barrier type, and Unit No.3, Westchester County, New Adding relay set points, time delays, (2) it is fitted with eighty-mil thick fuel York testing intervals and calibration channels rather than the one hundred-Date of amendment request-intervals for the 480V Emergency Buses; mil channels previously used. The November 24,1981, as supplemented increasing the setting limit for the 480V Barrier fuel design has a zirconium layer August 13,1984.

Bus Undervoltage Relay; and requiring

8002 Federal Registe Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices procedures to prevent an automatic fuse consideration determination by involve a significant hazards transfer of the 6.9 KV Buses. The providing certain examples (48 FR consideration.

proposed changes were made in 14870). One of the examples (ii) of Local Public Document Room response to an NRC request to provide actions not likely to involve a significant.

location: White Plains Public Library, protection for the degraded grid voltage hazards consideration relates to a 100 Martine Avenue, White Plains, New condition.

change that constitutes an additional York 10601.

Basis for proposed no significant limitation, restriction, or control not Attorney for licensee: Mr. Charles M.

hazards consideration determination:

presently included in the Technical Pratt, 10 Columbus Circle, New York, The Commission has provided guidance Specifications: For example, a more New York 10019.

concerning the applications of these stringent surveillance requirement. The NRC Branch Chief-Steven A. Varga.

standards by providing examples (48 FR staff proposes to determine that the 14870). One of the examples of actions proposed changes do not involve a Public Service Electric and Gas not likely to involve a significant significant hazards consideration since Company, Docket Nos. 50-272 and So hazards consideration relates to they entail additional restrictions 311, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, changes that constitute additional designed to make the Technical Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Salem County, New limitations or restrictions in the Specifications more stringent.

Jery Technical Specifications. The proposed Local Public Document Room Date of amendment request:

changes revise sections of the Technical location: White Plains Public Library, September 21, 1984.

Specifications that relate to the 100 Martine Avenue, White Plains, New Description of amendment request:

degraded grid voltage condition to York 10601.

These proposed changes would add clarify existing requirements and Attorney for licensee: Mr. Charles M.

specifications for accident and radiation include additional requirements and Pratt, 10 Columbus Circle, New York, monitoring to provide assurance that the testing. Since the requested changes New York 10019.

monitoring equipment installed at the upgrade the requirements for the NRC Branch Chief: Steven A. Varga, facility is operated and maintained degraded grid voltage condition, the Power Authority of the State of New Within acceptable limits. This proposed staff proposes to determine that the York, Docket No. 50-28, Indian Point change is the result of a review of application does not involve a Unit No. 3, Westchester County, New NUREG-0737 Technical Specifications significant hazards consideration.

York guidance provided in NRC Generic Local Public Document Room location: White Plains Public Library, Date of amendment request: July 6, 100 Martine Avenue, White Plains, New 1983, as supplemented December 3,18 (Varga to Uderitz, dated November 17, York 10601.

Description of amendmentrequest:

1983) for Technical Specifications for Attorney for licensee: Mr. Charles M.

The amendment proposes changes that ICCI equipment. The Noble Gas Effluent Pratt, 10 Columbus Circle, New York, provide for redundancy in decay heat Monitors and Containment high range New York 10019.

removal capability in all modes of Area Monitors are added to ensure that NRC Branch Chief-Steven A. Varga.

operation. The proposed changes were the monitors, installed in compliance made in response to an NRC request with NUREG-0737 requirements, are Power Authority of the the State of New that the licensee provide long-term operable in the appropriate MODES and York, Docket No. 50-286, Indian Point assurance that redundancy be receive proper surveillance attention.

Unit No. 3, Westchester County, New maintained. The changes provide that:

Specifically the changes would add York At least two decay heat removal paths Noble Gas Effluent Monitors and Date of amendment request:

are available when the reactor coolant Containment high range Area Monitors December 29, 1983, as supplemented system Tavg is below 350 F, at least to Specification 3.3.3.6, Radiation September 7, 1984 one reactor coolant pump or R-R pump Monitoring Instrumentation and Description of amendment request:

is operating when the reactor coolant Specification 3.3.3.9, Radioactive The amendment request was initially system Tavg is below 350 F but not in Gaseous Effluent Monitoring noticed on August 22, 1984 (49 FR 33369).

the refueling operation condition, and at Instrumentation tables, as appropriate.

This notice includes changes requested least one reactor coolant pump is Remove from Unit No. 1 only, item 2.a.3 in a subsequent submittal dated operating when the reactor coolant Fixed Filter Iodine Monitor from Tables September 7, 1984, that supplement and, system Tavg is greater than 350 F.

3.3-6 and 4.3-6 and simplify, by cross in some cases, supersede the changes Basis forproposed no significant references, these tables for both units.

initially proposed. The purpose of this hazards consideration determination:

The format and ACTION amendment is to upgrade the Technical The Commission has provided guidance STATEMENTS of Technical Specifications to make them at least as concerning the application of these Specification 3.3.3.7 Accident stringent as the Standard Technical standards by providing examples (48 FR Monitoring Instrumentation, for Salem Specifications for Westinghouse 14870). One of the examples of actions Unit No. 2 would be modified to agree Pressurized Water Reactors (NUREG-not likely to involve a significant with the format and Action Statements 0452). This change request is in response hazards consideration relates to used on Unit No. 1. Limiting Conditions to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's changes that constitute additional for Operation and Surveillance letter dated July 7, 1980, which indicated limitations or restrictions in the Requirement for the following accident over thirty (30) sections of the current Technical Specifications. The proposed monitoring instrumentation would be Technical Specifications that need changes revise sections of the Technical included in Tables 3.3-1a, 3.3-l1b, and upgrading to be at least as stringent as Specifications related to the redundancy 4.3-11 for both units: Containment the Standard Technical Specifications.

of decay heat removal systems to clarify pressure-wide and narrow ranges, Basis for proposed no significant their operating procedures. Since the containment water level-wide range, hazards consideration determination:

requested changes upgrade the and core exit thermocouples.

The Commission has provided guidance requirements for decay heat removal Basis for proposed no significant concerning the application of the procedures, the staff proposes to hazards consideration determination:

standards for a no significant hazards determine that the application does not The Commission has provided guidance

Federal Register /Vol.

50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 8003 concerning the application of the facility operations clearly in keeping conform to referenced examples in 48 standards for a No Significant Hazards with the regulations.

FR 14870, we have determined that this determination by providing examples of Based on the above, and since the proposed application for amendment actions not likely to involve a proposed change involves actions that involves no significant hazards Significant Hazards Consideration in the conform to the referenced example in 48 consideration.

Federal Register (48 FR 14870). One of FR 14870, we have determined that this Local Public Document Room the examples (ii) relates to changes that application for amendment involves no location: Salem Free Library, 122 West constitute additional limitations, significant hazards consideration.

Broadway, Salem New Jersey 08079, restrictions, or controls not presently Local Public Document Room included in the technical specifications.

location: Salem Free Library, 122 West Attorney for licensee: Conner and The new specifications requested Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 08079.

Wetterhann, Suite 1050, 1747 constitute such an addition.

Attorney for licensee: Conner and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

Based on the above, since the Wetterhann, Suite 1050,1747 Washington, D C. 20006.

proposed changes involve actions that Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

NRC Branch Chief Steven A. Varga.

conform to the referenced example in 48 Washington, D.C. 20006.

FR 14870, we have determined that this NRC Branch Chief-Steven A. Varga.

pli Srce lectric and as application for amendment involves no Public Service Electric and Gas Cm, Docket Noserating2an Significant Hazards Consideration.

Company, Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311

, Salem a

tntaN, Local Public Document Room 311, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Jersey location: Salem Free Library, 122 West Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Salem County, New Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 08079.

Jersey Date of amendment request:

Attorney for licensee: Conner and Date of amendment request: October December 7.1984.

Wetterhann, Suite 1050, 1747 26,1984.

Description ofamendment request:

Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,

Description of amendment request:

The proposed amendment request would Washington, D.C. 20006.

The proposed amendment would revise add to section 4.6A1.2 (Containment NRC Branch Chief Steven A. Varga.

section 6.0, Administrative Controls, to Systems), a surveillance requirement to Public Service Electric and Gas incorporate a change in Nuclear reflect the 60 open limitation on the Company, Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-Department organization, Shift Containment Pressure-Vacuum Relief 311, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Complement clarification, Station valves, VC5 and VC6 for both Salem Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Salem County, New Operation Review Committee (SORC)

Units and remove the footnote added by Jersey membership, quorum requirements, and Amendment 12 to Salem Unit 2, page 3/4 responsibilities. Additionally, replace 61 Date of amendment request:

the Nuclear Review Board (NRB) with September 21, 1984.

section 6.5.2, Nuclear Safety and hars c

osdo determinat Description of amendment request:

Review, and add section 6.5.3, Technical he poseaendeterequetis The proposed change would revise Review and Control.

Technical Specification, section 3.6.4.1, Basis for proposed no significant administrative in nature in that it Hydrogen Analyzers surveillance hazards consideration determination:

constitutes an additional limitation or requirements. The existing Hydrogen This proposed change is administrative control (Surveillance Requirement) not Analyzers are being replaced with a in nature in that it provides an improved presently included in the Technical type qualified for use in the organization, clarification of shift Specifications. The Commission has containment. The new type requires a coverage, adds a new full-time safety provided guidance concerning the change is surveillance testing per review concept (which has the effect of application of the standards for a no manufacturer's specifications.

improving the effectiveness of SORC significant hazards determination by Basis for proposed no significant Reviews and makes more efficient use providing examples of actions not likely hazards consideration determination:

of technical expertise available),

to involve a Significant Hazards The replacement of the existing The Commission has provided Consideration in the Federal Register (48 Containment Hydrogen Monitoring guidance concerning the application of FR 14870). One of the examples (ii)

System with one qualified for use in the the standards for a No Significant relates to changes that constitute an containment assures the operator of a Hazards determination by providing additional control not presently continuous indication of the hydrogen examples of actions not likely to involve included in the technical specifications.

concentration in the containment as a significant hazards consideration in required by NUREG-0737. The license the Federal Register (48 FR 14870). One Based one above an sin th change in required to ensure that this of the examples (i) relates to purely p

c hane eanpactin ta equipment, installed to conform with the administrative changes. This proposed latest NRC requirements, is tested change is basically a shifting of FR 14870, we have determined that this properly to demonstrate operability. The administrative responsibilities and proposed application for amendment Commission has provided guidance improves the qualitative and involves no significant hazards concerning the application of the quantitative effectiveness of the review consideration.

standards for a No Significant Hazards function. Another example (ii) relates to Local Public Document Room determination by providing examples of changes that constitute an additional location: Salem Free Library, 122 West actions not likely to involve a control not presently included in the Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 08079.

Significant Hazards Consideration in the technical specifications. This proposed Attorney for licensee: Conner and Federal Register (48 FR 14870). One of change adds a Technical Review and Wetterhann, Suite 1050,1747 the examples (vii) relates to changes Controls section that more clearly Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

that make a license conform to changes defines review responsibilities.

in the regulations, where the license Based on the above, and since the Washngtnc C 20006.

change results in very minor changes to proposed change involves actions that

8004 Federal Register / VoL. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notiles Public Service Electric and Gas amendment; therefore, no increase in Public Service Co; of Colorado, Docket' Company, Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-the probability or consequences of any No. 50-287, Fort St. Vram Nuclear 311. Salem Nuclear Generating Station, previously evaluated accident, and no Generating Station, Platteville, Colorado Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Salem County, New possibility of any new accident not Jersey previously evaluated. Based on the Data of amendments request: January above, the staff proposes to determine 1985.

f 18, 1985.

that this amendment request does not hesprpo anet e

Description of amendments request:

involve a signficant hazards Adminise conto te The requirements of the 10 CFR Part 50, cons'deration.

Appendix I rulemaking wererecent impleend i licene Aenen Locan Sablem Frcuee t

LiRoo2mWs organizational changes within the Public implementedService Company of Colorado. The TS Nos. 59 and 28 for Salem Units 1 and 2, Broadway, Salen, New Jersey 0 changes involve revising position titles respectively. These amendments Attorneyfor licensee: Conner and (e.g., "Radiation Protection Manager" to allowed 45 days for full implementation Wetterhann, Suite 1050,1747 "Support Services Manager" and of the specifications. The 45 day period Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

"Manager, Production, Fuels and was erroneous in that it did not allow Washington, D.C. 20006.

Services Division" to "Manager, sufficient time to complete the signficnt tetchnicl t

diitrae an NRC Branch Chief Steven A.. Varga.

Production Services Division") the significant technical, administrative andof a new position (Executive training efforts involved in the change-Public Service Co. of Colorado, Docket Staff Assistant) to the organizational over of the large number of procedures No. 50-267, Fort St.

rain Nuclear hart and the corporate safety review related to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I Generating Station, Platteville, Colorado committee membership, and changing requirements. Thisthe position to which the Training amendment request would revise December 31,1984.

Amendment No. 59 to Facility Operating License DPR-70 and Amendment No. 28 Description of amendment request to Facility Operating License DPR-75 to The proposed change to the Technical hazards consideration determination.

provide an additional 60 days for Specifications provides clarification that The Commission has provided guidance implementation such that Item 3 of these only gamma radioactivity is monitored concerning the application of these amendments is changed to read as by the installed activity monitors. This standards by providing certain follows: 3. This license amendment is clarification consists of inserting t examples (48 FR 14870). The examples effective on issuance and shall e word "gamma" prior to the words of actions that are considered not likely implemented no later than 105 days "activity monitors" in Specifications to involve significant hazards after issuance.

ELCO 8L4 ELCO 8.1.3, and ESR 8.1.2.

considerations include a purely Basis forproposed no significant Basis for proposed no significant administrative change to Technical hazards consideration determination:

hazars oonsideraion determination:

Specifications: For example, a change to The staff proposes to make a The Commission has provided guidanc achieve consistency throughout the determination that the amendments concerning the application of these Technical Specifications, correction of request Involves no significant hazards standards by providing certain aer o an in nocte consideration. Under the Commission's examples (48 FR 14870). The examples asedton an ita revieo the regulations in 10 CFR 5092, this means of actions that are considered not likely ppica t sa aonirte that operation of the facility in to involve significant hazards changes to refadmintatve accordance with the proposed considerations include a purely chanesof te pe eer tabv amendments would not (1) Involve a administrative change to Technical significant increase in the probability or Specifications: for example, a change to thisiiscan act s coldiono consequences of an accident previously achieve consistency throughout the sncan hazard con tom evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of Technical Spi ications, a corcton of local Public unt Room a new or different kind of accident from an error, or a change in nomenclature.

Complex Building Greeley, Colorado.

any accident previously evaluated. or (3)

The proposed changes to the Attorney for licensee Bryant involve a significant reduction in a Technical Specifications will not alter O'Donnell, Public Service Company of margin of safety.

the equipment being used nor the Colorado, P.O. Box 4, Denver, The 10 CFR 50, Appendix I rulemaking operation of that equipment, and only Colorado 80201.

specifically addressed the definition of a serves to clarify the requirement for NRC Branch Chief Eric H. Johnson.

criterion of "As Low As Reasonably continuously monitoring the Achievable" (ALARA) and set effluent radioactivity of liquid effluent releases.

Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation, limits based on doses to the population Since the actual operations will not be Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear surrounding nuclear power plants. Since affected by this change,.the staff Power Plant, Wayne County, New York the existing radiological technical proposes to determine that this action specifications are at least as Deember 5,ques4.

conservative, or more conservative than deratin the Appendix I specifications contained consi Description of amendment request:

in Amendment 59 Facility Operating Local Public Document Room The proposed amendment to the License DPR-70 and Amendment 28 to locatiom Greeley Public Library, City Technical Specifications would delete Facility Operating License DPR-75, Complex Building, Greeley, Colorado.

the description of the battery charger deferral of the implementation of these Attorney for licenseeBryant configuration, because it superfluously amendments would not involve a O'Donnell, Public Service Company of describes originally installed equipment.

reduction in a margin of safety. Further, Colorado, P.O. Box 840, Denver, Requirements for battery charging there are no procedural or physical plant Colorado 801.

capacity and operability remain changes involved in this proposed NRC Banh Chief Eric H. Johnson.

unchanged,

Federal Register Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 8005 Basis for proposed no significant accounting and nuclear material control.

removal schedule for the Rancho Seco hazards consideration determination:

The amendment would not alter in any material surveillance capsules from the By letter dated December 5, 1984, the way the Rancho Seco safeguards Davis-Besse reactor vessel. TS Table licensee requested changes to the Ginna provisions required by NRC regulations.

4.2.1 containing the current capsule Technical Specifications to eliminate The termination provision of License removal schedule will be deleted. The specific charging capacity values for Condition 2.C. (10) provides that the amendment would also delete section individual chargers while retaining the IAEA program be terminated as of the 4.7.8 and revise the Bases section to 150-amp charging capacity for each date of such a notice from the NRC. That battery to maintain the batteries in the notice -was provided to the licensee in a provide a better description of the full charged condition. The planned letter dated June 1, 1984, and upgrading of the battery charging units accordingly, the IAEA insepction during the 1985 Spring refueling outage program was terminated at that time.

Basis for proposed no significant provided an opportunity to delete the Therefore, the proposed amendment hazards consideration determination:

unwarranted description of the would delete a license condition that is The withdrawal schedule in the originally installed units rather than no longer in effect.

proposed amendment was developed in substitute similar arbitrary descriptive Basis for proposed no significant accordance with the 1982 edition of information for the new units. This is an hazards consideration determination:

ASTM E 185 and provides a better administrative change to the Technical The proposed amendment would only defined removal schedule for the Specifications.

delete a license condition that is no surveillance capsules based on The Commission has provided longer in effect and would not affect accumulated neutron fluence rather than guidance concerning the application of plant operation or design. Therefore, the on the basis. of refueling cycle. Thus, any the standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by proposed amendment would not:

change in the nominal cycle time will providing certain examples (48 FR 14870, Involve a significant increase in the not greatly influence the April 6, 1983). One of the examples (i) of probability or consequences of an characterization of reactor vessel actions not likely to involve a significant accident previously evaluated; or (2) material condition as a function of hazards consideration is a purely create the possibility of a new or accumulated neutron fluence. The administrative change to technical different kind of accident from any original removal schedule was specifications: For example, a change to accident previously evaluated; or (3) developed in accordance with the 1973 achieve consistency throughout the involve a significant reduction in a edition of ASTM E 185. Appendix H to technical specifications, correction of an margin of safety. Based on the foregoing, error, or a change in nomenclature.

the NRC staff proposes to determine ASTM E 58 i

the aterial Because the change proposed here that the proposed amendment does not s

l program The reeise would merely delete unnecessary involve a significant hazards descriptive material and would not consideration.

removal schedulewill not reduce the effect battery charging and operability Local Public Document Room effectiveness of the Reactor Vessel requirements, the proposed change is location: Sacramento City-County Surveillance Program.

administrative in nature and falls within Library 828 1 Street, Sacramento, The Commission has provided example (i) of actions not likely to Califora.

guidance concerning the application of involve significant hazards Attorney for licensee: Daivd S.

the standards of 10 CFR 50.92 by considerations. On that basis, the staff Kaplan, Sacramento Municipal Utility providing certain examples (48 FR proposes to determine that the request District, 6201 S Street, P.O. Box 15830, 14870). None of these examples are involves no significant hazards Sacramento, California 95813.

applicable to the proposed amendment.

considerations.

NRC Branch Chief. John F. Stolz.

The proposed amendment relates only Local Public Document Room localn ose Public Document Room Sacramento Municipal Utility District, to a materials surveillance program and location: Rochester Pbi Lir Docket No. 50-312, Rancho Seco does not involve any change in the SouthAn Nuclear Generating Station, Sacramento facility or its operation. Furthermore, 14604.

Attorney for licensee: Harry H. Voigt, County, California neither the quantity nor the quality of Esquire, LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby and Date of amendment request: June 27.

the information obtained from the MacRae, 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, 1984, amended on December 24,1984.

surveillance program is reduced. The NW., Suite 1100, Washington, D.C.

Description of amendment request. In change also is within all acceptable 20036.

1976, as a result of damage to reactor criteria with respect to the program NRC Branch Chief-John A Zwolinski, vessel surveillance capsule holder tubes specified in the Standard Review Plan.

Chief.

near the reactor vessel wall at the The proposed amendment, therefore, Rancho Seco Nuclear Generation meets the requirements specified in 10 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Station, the Rancho Seco reactor vessel CFR 50.92(c) for an amendment which Docket No. 50-il2, Rancho Seco Docet o.

0-32, anco Scosurveillance capsules were installed in does not -involve a significant hazards Nuclear Generating Station, Sacramento the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, consideraiton.

County, California Unit 1, surveillance capsule holders.

Local Public Document Room Date of amendment request: October Since the Davis-Besse reactor designis location: Sacramento City-County 9, 1984.

similar to the Rancho Seco reactor Library, 828 1 Street, Sacramento, Description of amendment request:

design, radiation damage to the Rancho The amendment would delete Facility Seco reactor vessel materials installed Operating License Condition 2.C. (10) in the Davis-Besse reactor can be used Attorney for licensee: David S.

relating to the U.S./International Atomic to provide radiation damage information Kaplan. Sacramento Municipal Utility Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards for the Rancho Seco reactor vessel.

District, 62015 Street, P.O. Box 15830, program. Under this program, the The proposed amendment would Sacramento, California 95813.

Rancho Seco facility was subject to modify-the Rancho Seco Technical NRC Branch Chief. John F. Stolz.

IAEA inspection of nuclear material Specifications (TSs by adding a revised

8006 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, open flow paths out of containment requirements are most properly outlined South Carolina Public Service Authority, remains a requirement and the design by Regulatory Guide 1.140, "Design, Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer basis continues to be met, or (2) create Testing, and Maintenance Criteria for Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Fairfield County, the possibility of a new or different kind Normal Ventilation Exhaust System Air South Carolina of accident from any accident previously Filtration and Adsorption Units of Light Date of amendment request:

evaluated because the physical plant Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants."

November 29, 1984.

design is not being changed and the The requested revision to the Technical Description of amendment request:

amendment still allows for purge and Specifications does not decrease the The amendment would add a note to the exhaust isolation on high containment protection of-the public in the event of a high containment radioactivity signal for radioactivity in Modes 1 through 4. Also, design basis fuel handling accident containment purge and exhaust isolation it will not (3) involve a significant because the Technical Specifications in Technical Specification Table 3.3-3 reduction in a margin of safety because continue to ensure that the rigorous "Engineered Safety Feature Actuation of the minimal time required for testing requirements of Regulatory System Instrumentation." The note containment pressurization during Guide 1.52, Revision 2, March 1978, would state that "purge exhaust monitor alte channe se hi h "Design, Testing and Maintenance not required when purge exhaust is adiationie g g closed."

r containment which Basisexists to provide a purge exhaust Safety-Feature Atmosphere Cleanup hazards consideration determination:

isolation signal. Accordingly, the System Air Filtration and Adsorption henrd theplniserating trinatMoes Commission proposes to determine that Units of Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear When the plant is operatinin e

this change does not involve a Power Plants," are completed prior to through 4, the six-inch mini-purge significant hazards consideration.

and during use of the system for its ESF system is needed at times to increasePublic Document Room function.

containment pressure to comply with location: Fairfield County Library, Technical Specification limits. This Garden and.Washington Streets, pressurization is accomplished by examples (48 FR 14870) of actions likely keeping closed the values in the mini-Attore fo C

andolph8.

to involve no significant hazards purge exhaust line and pumping air into Mahan, South Carolina Electric and Gas considerations. The request involved in containment through the mini-purge Company, P.O. Box 764, Columbia, this case does not match any of those supply line. (Technical Specifications South Carolina 29218.

examples. However, the staff has limit the total amount of time the NRC Branch Chief: Elinor G.

reviewed the licensee's request for the isolation valves in the mini-purge Adensam.

above amendment and has determined system may be opened to less than 1000 that should this request be implemented, hours per 365 days.) While in this South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, it will not: (1) Involve a significant pressurization mode, no open exhaust South Carolina Public Service Authority, increase in the probability or line leads out of containment to the Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer outside environment. Because all Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Fairfield County, consequences of an accident previously exhaust lines are closed, one of the South Carolina evaluated because the system design radiation monitors used to sample Date of amendment request:

tete for opeail boe t

e containment radiation is isolated.

December 14,1984.

The radiation monitor in question Description of amendment request:

upon as an ESF system, (2) create the provides one of two (2) isolation signals The amendment would revise Technical possibility of a new or differet kind of to the mini-purge lines upon detection of Specification 3/4.9.11 "Spent Fuel Pool accident from any accident previously high containment radioactivity. In the Ventilation System." Therevision would evaluated because the system will be plant configuration described above, the change the Technical Specification to tested to ensure that it continues to valves in the exhaust line are closed. If require certain'surveillance testing only perform its ESF functions as originally during pressurization, leakage occurs when the system is being used in an intended, or (3) involve a significant through the closed valves, the radiation engineered safety features function.

reduction in a margin of safety because monitor'could detect radioactivity and Basis for proposed no significant the licensee will continue to provide an isolation signal. Diversity in hazards consideration determination:

demonstrate operability of the system the parameters sensed for containment The spent fuel pool ventilation system at by performing the required surveillance isolation continues to exist, including the Virgil C Summer Nuclear Station activities before allowing it to serve as high containment pressure and the has two (2) distinct functions. These an ESF system. Accordingly, the various other parameters sensed for functions consist of being an engineered Commission proposes to determine that safety injection system actuation.

safety feature (ESF] system to mitigate this change does not involve a The Commission has provided certain the offsite radiological consequences of significant hazards consideration.

examples (48 FR 14870) of actions likely a fuel handling accident and providing a to involve no significant hazards filtration/ventilation system for the fuel Local Public Document Room considerations. The request involved in handling building, hot machine shop and location: Fairfield County Library, this case does not match any of those excess liquid radwaste area during Garden and Washington Streets, examples. However, the staff has normal plant operation. Th6 usual Winnsboro, South Carolina 29180.

reviewed the licensee's request for the operating function of providing filtration above amendment and has determined for the above listed areas represents a Attorney for licensee: Randolph R.

that should this request be implemented, portion of the licensee's commitment to Mahan, South Carolina Electric & Gas it will not: (1) Involve'a significant ALARA, and is not required to meet 10 Company, P.O. Box 764, Columbia, increase in the probability or CFR Part 100 criteria. The proposed South Carolina 29218.

consequences of an accident previously change recognizes that during periods of NRC Branch Chief Elinor G.

evaluated because the monitoring of normal plant operation, the testing Adensam.

Federal Registereol. 50, No. 39 Wednesday, Februaryl, 1985 / Notices 8007 South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, accident previously evaluated because Attorneyfor licensee: Randolph R.

South Carolina Public Service Authority, the physical plant design is not being Mahan, South Carolina Electric & Gas Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer changed. Also, itwill not (3) involve a Company, P.O. Box 764, Columbia, Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Fairfield County, significant reduction in a margin of South Carolina 29218.

South Carolina safety because all snubbers on systems NRC Branch Chief-Elinor G.

Date of amendment request:

required for safe shutdown/accident Adensam.

November 16, 1983, as amended mitigation will be operable including Southern California Edison Company, et December 14, 1984.

safety and non-safety related snubbers Description of amendment request:

on systems used to protect the code aoe Nos. 5en61and 50-36o, The amendment would revise Technical boundary and to ensure the structural Units 2 and 3, San Diego County, Specification 3/4.7.7 "Snubbers," and its integrity of these systems under bases to indicate that all snubbers on dynamic loads. Accordingly, the systems required for safe shutdown/

Commission proposes to determine that Dote of Amendment Request: March 2 accident mitigation shall be operable.

this change does not involve a and April 2, (Reference PCN 131).

The amendment would then delete significant hazards consideration.

Description of Amendment Request:

Technical Specification Tables 3.7-4a, Local Public Document Room The proposed change revises Technical "Safety-Related Hydraulic Snubbers,"

location: Fairfield County Library, Specification 3/4.3.3.8 "Radioactive and 3.7-4b, "Safety-Related Mechanical Garden and Washington Streets.

Liquid Effluent Monitoring Snubbers."

Winnsboro, South Carlina 29180.

Instrumentation." Technical Basis for proposed no significant Attorney for licensee: Randolph R.

Specification (T.S.) 3/4.3.3.8 defines hazards consideration determination:

Mahan, South Carolina Electric & Gas operability requirements for The original request of November 16, Company, P.O. Box 764, Columbia, instrumentation used to monitor 1983, was noticed in the Federal Register South Carolina 29218.

releases of radioactive liquids, periodic (49 FR 7042) on February 24, 1984.

NRC Branch Chief Elinor G.

testing required to verify operability and Responding to Generic Letter 84-13, Adensam.

actions to be taken in the event that the "Technical Specifications for Snubbers,"

South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, minimum operability requirements the licensee revised its original request South Carolina Public Service Authority, cannot be met.

by letter dated December 14, 1984. This Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer The proposed change revises T.S. 3/

revision was substantial enough to Fairfield County, 4.3.3.8 to:

require renoticing the requested NudearStin,

1. Allow the use of pumps other than Southdamelin the circulating water pumps to provide amendment.

As stated in Generic Letter 84-13, the Date of amendment request:

dilution of radioactive liquid effluents.

snubber listing currently found in November 29,1984, and supplemented

2. Allow liquid effluents from certain Technical Specifications is not January 8, 1985.

release piiths to be diverted to other necessary, provided Technical Description of amendmentrequest:

portions of the liquid radwaste system Specification 3/4.7.7 specifies which The amendment would add a new when the associated liquid effluent snubbers are required to be operable.

Technical Specification 3/4.8.4.3 monitor is inoperable as an alternative Technical Specification 3/4.7.7 is, regarding requirements for circuit to the current requirement to analyze therefore, being revised to indicate that breakers for non-Class 1E cable.

grab samples if releases are to continue.

all snubbers on systems requred for safe Basis forproposedno sgnficant

3. Delete the current limitations on the shutdown/accident mitigation shall be hazards consideration determination:

period for which compensatory operable. This includes safety and non-Operability and surveillance measures can be taken when safety related snubbers on systems used requirements for circuit breakers for radioactive liquid effluent monitoring to protect the code boundary and to non-Class 1E cables located in cable instrumentation is inonerable, to ensure the structural integrity of these trays which do not have covers and eliminate an inconsistency in the systems under dynamic loads.

which provide protection for cables that technical specifications.

Therefore, the requirement regarding if faulted could cause failure in two or Basis for Proposed No Significant snubbers found in Technical more adjacent, redundant Class 1E Hazards Consideration Determination:

Specifications is not being changed and cables are being added to Technical The Commission has providedguidance is consistent with the NRC guidance Specifications. The Commission has concerning the application of standards stated in Generic Letter 84-13.

provided certain examples (48 FR 14870) for determining whether a proposed The Commission has provided certain of actions likely to involve no significant license amendment involves a examples (48 FR 14870) of actions likely hazards considerations. One of the significant hazards consideration by to involve no significant hazards examples (ii) relates to a change that providing certain examples (48 FR considerations. The request involved in constitutes an additional limitation, 14870) of amendments that are this case does not match any of those restriction, or control not presently considered not likely to involve examples. However, the staff has included in Technical Specifications.

significant hazards considerations.

reviewed the licensee's request for the The amendment involved here is similar Example (i) relates to a purely above amendment and has determined to this example in that it adds administrative change to the technical that should this request be implemented, requirements for some non-Class 1E specifications: For example a change to it will not: (1) Involve a significant cable circuit breakers. Accordingly, the achieve consistency throughout the increase in the probability or Commission proposes to determine that technical specifications, correction of an consequences of an accident previously this change does not involve a error, or a change in nomenclature.

evaluated because the Technical significant hazards consideration.

Example (vi) relates to a change which Specification requirements regarding Local Public Document Room either may result in some increase to the snubbers remain unchanged, or (2) location: Fairfield County Library, probability or consequences of a create the possibility of a new or Garden and Washington Streets, previously-analysed accident or may different kind of accident from any Winnisboro, South Carolina 29180.

reduce in some way a safety margin, but

8008 Federal Register Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, Februar 7, 1985 / Notices where the results of the change are effluent release path and the required staff proposes to determine that the clearly within all acceptable criteria radioactive liquid effluent monitors are change does not involve a significant with respect to the system or component inoperable. Both Actions 29 and 30 hazards consideration.

specified in the SRP. The changes currently state that the release of Local Public Document Room itemized above are similar to example radioactive effluents via a pathway with location: Sam Clemente Library, 242 (i) or example (vi) of (48 FR 14870) and inoperable monitors may continue Avenida Del Mar, San Clemente, thus it is proposed that the changes do provided that grab samples are analyzed California.

not involve a significant hazards periodically for gross radioactivity.

Attorney for licensee: Charles R.

consideration. The following is a more The proposed change would revise Kocher, Esq., Southern California Edison detailed description of each of the three Actions 29 and 30 of T.S. 3/4.3.3.8. to Company, 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue, items listed above and a description of explicitly allow isolating the release P.O. Box 800, Rosemead, California how each is similar to the examples of pathway and diverting the radioactive 91770 and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, (48 FR 14870).

effluent flow to the liquid radwaste Attn: David R. Pigott, Esq., 600 Specific Changes Requested and treatment system for processing as Montgomery Street, San Francisco, Bases for Proposed No Significant liquid radwaste. This proposed change California 94111.

Hazards Determination for each:

would explicity allow the steam NRC Branch Chief: George W.

1. Allow use of pumps other than the generator blowdown and the turbine Knighton.

circulating water pumps to liquid building sumps radioactive liquid effluent dilution.

effluents to be processed in the same Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket T.S. 3/4.3.3.8 currently requires that at way as liquid radwaste from other Nos. 50-259, 50-260 and 50-296, Browns least one circulating water pump must sources. The existing Actions 29 and 30 Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 and 3, be operating and providing dilution to require grab samples if releases are Limestone County, Alabama the circulating water system discharge continued. Ifreleases are not continued, Date of amendment request:

structure whenever dilution is required grab samples are not required. No November,19,1984.

to meet site radioactive effluent releases are made via the affected Description of amendment request:

concentration. Liquid effluent pathways if radioactive effluent ow is The amendment would modify the concentration limits are specified by diverted to the liquid radwaste system, Technical Specifications to delete the T.S. 3.11.1.1, "Liquid Effluents-so in this case grab samples would not requirement for the condenser low Concentration." In addition to the be required. Since this action could be vacuum scram function. Approval of the circulating water pumps, which provide taken within thebounds of the existing proposed amendment would eliminate cooling water for 'the condenser when Actions 29 and 30, the proposed change the need to reduce power during periods the plant is operating, there are other merely formalizes this alterntive in the pumps (e.g., the saltwater cooling technical specifications. Therefore, the ofi rrowate temperatr pumps) which are also capable of proposed change is editorial and is hasis fora on sinin providing dilution of liquid effluents.

similar to Example (i]

h Consiion dermian The proposed change replaces the

3. Deletion of Time Limits in Effluent The Commiss ion o

guidance specific reference to circulating water Monitoring Action Statements.

co ing exapplo of sta pumps with "all pumps required to be The applicability of actions to be by poviing example o ainsftat providing dilution in order to meet site taken when radioactive liquid effluent ar noie ton a significan radioactive effluent concentration monitoring instrumentation is h

azards odation (48 FR 17 limits." This non-specific reference to all inoperable is limited to a specified pumps will allow use of pumps other period (e.g., 30 days). If effluent release involve a significant hazards than the circulating water pumps (e.g.,

continues beyond this, period, even consideration is a change which either the saltwater cooling pumps) as long as while continuing to implement the the site effluent concentration limits compensatory measures specified by the probability or consequences of a specified by T.S. 3.11.1.1 are met.

action, because of the time limit, this previously analyzed accident or may This change is similar to example (vi) action would be outside of the bounds of reduce in some way a safety margin, but of (48 FR 14870) in that although it the T.S. and would therefore invoke where the results of the change are allows the use of pumps otherthan the Specification 3.0.3. T.S. 3.0.3. would clearly within all acceptance criteria circulating water pumps to provide require that action be taken to initiate a with respect to the system or component liquid effluent dilution and this may plant shutdown. T.S. 3/4.3.3.8 has an specified in the Standard Review Plan result in an increase in the probability of exception to Specification 3.0.3 in (SRP).

a previously analysed accident, it accordance with which, at the end of the The basis for the turbine condenser nevertheless is still within all acceptable existing action time limit, it would be low vacuum scram is to provide an criteria in that the facility will still meet interpreted that no additional action is anticipatory scram to reduce peak the requirements of 10 CFR 20, which required. The 3.0.3 exception conflicts pressure in the reactor vessel caused are specified in T.S. 3.11.1.1.

with the time limits in the actions. The only by a turbine trip on low condenser

2. Diversion of effluents to the liquid, proposed change removes the time limits vacuum. Without the anticipatory scram radwaste system in lieu of grab thereby eliminating the existing conflict, at 23 inches of mercury vacuum on sampling.

The proposed change will continue to decreasing condenser vacuum, the main Acting 29 of T.S. 3/4.3.3.8 specifies the require reportingof effluent monitoring turbine would receive a trip at 21.8 actions to be taken if effluents are being instrumentation inoperabilities of inches of mercury vacuum. This trip released via the steam generator greater than 30 days duration and signal would cause the turbine stop blowdown effluent release path or either continued implementation of the valves and control valves to close, of its bypass lines and the required specified compensatory measures.

ini a scram in less than one radioactive liquid effluent monitors are Because this change achieves second. While the reactor was inoperable. Action 30 provides the consistency within the technical scramming, there would also be an actions to be taken if effluents are being specifications, it is similar to example (i) increase in reactor vessel pressure released via the turbine building sump e of [48 FR 14870). On this basis, the NRC because of isolation of the main

Fetderal Register ol.

50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 9 1985 / Notices 8009 condenser from the reactor. This The Commission has provided guidance action statement requires immediate pressure rise would normally be limited for the applitation of the standards in 10 suspension of waste gas additions to the by automatic opening of the turbine CFR 50.92 by providing certain examples system and restoration of oxygen bypass valves. For the purposes of (48 FR 14870) of actions likely to involve concentrations to within the limiting conseratively analyzing turbine trip no significant hazards considerations.

condition for operation. Action b is transients (ref: FSAR Chapter 13, "Plant One of the examples relates to: "(i) A required whenever gas concentrations Safety Analyses"), no credit was taken purely administrative change to exceed both the limiting condition for for either the condenser low vacuum Technical Specifications: For example, a operation and the concentrations scram or operation of the turbine bypass change to achieve consistency through-applicable for Action a. Previously, the valves. Deletion or nonoperation of the out the Technical Specifications, concentrations given for applicability for condenser low vacuum switches may correction of an error, or a change in Action b were inconsistent with the increase the reactor vessel peak nomenclature." Another example (ii) of limiting condition for operation.

pressure resulting from a turbine trip actions involving no significant hazards The licensee's letter of November 1, and thereby reduce a margin of safety.

consideration is a change that 1984, does not affect any other part of However, since no credit is taken for constitutes an additional limitation, the proposed amendment and does not that scram function this change would restriction, or control not presently change any of the description of the meet the acceptance criteria of SRP included in the Technical Specifications.

amendment ublished in the November section 7.2, "Reactor Trip System."

Changes (1) and (2) correct 22, 1983, or Therefore the proposed amendment is typographical and editorial errors and Basis May 23,p198 notics.

encompassed by an example for which are thus encompassed by example (i.

hazards consideration determination:

no significant hazards are likely to exist, Change 3 is an additional control and is The previou's basis for the proposed the staff proposes to determine that the thus encompassed by example (ia proposed amendment does not involve a Since all of the changes to the FR 52836 and 49 FR 21847).

significant hazards consideration.

Technical Specifications given in the Local Public Document Room Local Public Document Room three areas above are ecompassed by an location: University of Toledo Library, location: Athens Public Library, South example in the guidance provided by the Documents Department, 2801 Bancroft, and Forrest, Athens, Alabama 35611.

Comnisson of actions not likely to Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43606.

Attorney for licensee: H.S. Sanger, Jr.,

involve a significant hazards Attorney for licensee: Gerald Esquire, General Counsel, Tennessee consideration, the staff has made a Charnoff, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts, Valley Authority, 400 Commerce proposed determination that the and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, N.W.,

Avenue, E 11B 33C, Knoxville, application for amendment involves no Washington, D.C. 20036.

Tennessee 37902.

significant hazards consideration.

NRC BranchChief John F. Stolz.

NRC Branch Chief-Domenic B.

Local Public Document Room Vassallo.

location: Athens Public Library, South The Toledo Edison Company and the Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket and Forrest, Athens, Alabama 35611.

Cleveland Electric Illuminating Nos 50259 50260and50-96,Bions Attorney for licensee: H.S. Sanger, Jr.,

Company, Docket No. 50-346, Davis Nos. 50-259, 50--260 and 50-296, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 and 3, Esquire, General Counsel, Tennessee Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1, Limestone County, Alabama Valley Authority, 400 Commerce Ottawa County, Ohio Date of mendmentrequest:Avenue, E 11B 33C, Knoxville, Dt faedetrqet Date of amendment request37902.

December 21, 1984, NRC Branch Chief Domenic B.

November 20,1984.

Description of amendment request:

Vassallo.

Description of amendment request:

The proposed amendment would modify The proposed amendment would add a the Technical Specifications as follows:

The Toledo Edison Company and the requirement for operability of a reactor (1) The basis for Secifications 3.7.A Cleveland Electric Illuminating coolant system vent path from each and 4.7.A would be changed to indicate Company, Docket No. 50-346, Davis-reactor coolant system loop and from that the green position indicating lights Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1, the pressurizer. In the event one or more for the drywell-suppression chamber Ottawa County, Ohio of these paths become inoperable, the vacuum breakers are lit when the valves Date of amendment request: March 16, inoperable paths must be restored to are "less than 80 degrees" open. The 1979 revised byletters dated December operability or the unit shutdown existing figure of 30 degrees is a 23, 1982, July 13, 1983 (Item 2), August 18.

specified time intervals. The proposed typographical error (Units 1 and 2 only).

1983 (Item 6), March 15-1984, and amendment includes a required (2) Specifications 3.8.C (LCO and November 1, 1984.

surveillance at least once each 18 basis) and 4.8.C would be revised to Description of amendment request:

months. The proposed Technical indicate that there is more than one The proposed amendment regarding Specifications would be applicable mechanical vacuum pump; "pump" Radiological Effluent Technical when the plant is in operational modes would be changed to "pumps", and Specifications was the subject of 1, 2, or 3. The application is in response "line" to "lines". (There are two half-previous notices published in the to NRC Generic Letter 83-37 which size mechanical vacuum pumps for each Federal Register November 22, 1983, at requested that such Technical unit as described in the FSAR section 48 FR 52836 and May 23,1984, at 49 FR Specifications be proposed by all 11.4.) This change corrects an editorial Subsequent to those notices, an operators of pressurized water reactors.

error.

error was noted in the proposed Basis for proposed no significant (3) Specification 6.3 would be Technical Specifications relating to the hazards consideration determination:

expanded to include.a new requirement action statement associated with the The reactor coolant system high point for preparation of written procedures to limiting condition for operation for vents have been installed in accordance limit shift overtime. This change would explosive gas mixtures in the waste gas with Item 11.B.1 of NUREG-0737, implement NUREG-0737 Item I.A.1.3.

system. The licensee s letter of "Clarification of TMI Action Plan Basis for proposed no significant November 1, 1984, corrects proposed Act Requirements" and as required by

'hazardsconsideration determination:

b in Specification 3.11.2.5. The corrected Commission regulation 10 CFR

8010 Federal Register Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, Februaf 7, 1985 / Notices 50.44(c)(3)(iii). These high point vents restrictions would be added pertaining when these operational limits are not are installed to vent any noncondensible to degraded grid voltage, and such met.

gas which might accumulate and inhibit restrictions are presently not addressed (b) l.F.1.4-Containment Pressure core cooling under natural circulation or in the Vermont Yankee Technical Monitor-The proposed changes define reactor coolant.

Specifications.

the instrumentation and calibration The Commission has provided Therefore, since the application for requirements for the containment guidance concerning the application of amendment involves proposed changes pressure monitor and also actions the standards of 10 CFR 50.92 by similar to an example for which no required when these operational limits providing certain examples (48 FR significant hazards consideration exists, are not met.

14870). One of the examples of actions the staff has made a proposed (c) II.F..5-Containment Water Level involving no significant hazards determination that the application Monitor-The proposed changes define consideration relates to a change that involves no significant hazards the instrumentation and calibration constitutes an additional limitation, consideration.

requirements for the containment water restriction, or control not presently Local Public Document Room level monitor and also actions required included in the technical specifications.

location: Brooks Memorial Library, 224 when these operational limits, are not The high point vents are required to be Main Street, Brattleboro, Vermont 05301.

met.

installed by Commission regulation; Attorney for licensee: John A.

(d) I.F.I.B-Containment Hydrogen therefore incorporation of the proposed Ritscher, Esquire, Ropes and Gray 225 Monitor-rhe proposed changes provide technical specification requirements Franklin Street, Boston, Massachusetts limiting conditions for operation (LCO) represent additional controls not 02110.

and surveillance requirements for the presently included, and thus the NRC Branch Chief Domenic B.

Hydrogen/Oxygen Monitor.

proposed amendment fits this example.

Vassallo.

(e) ll.D.3.4-Control Room Accordingly, the Commission proposes to determine that the requested Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Haitbiit Reuients-h amendment involves no significant Corporation, Docket No. 50-271, conditions for operation and hazards consideration.

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, surveillance requirements for the Local Public Document Room Vernoa, Vermont Control Room Toxic Gas Monitoring location: University of Toledo Library, Dote of application for amendment:

System.

Documents Department, 2801 Bancroft December 14, 1984.

The modifications to Technical Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43606.

Attorney for licensee: Gerald esrponeo amendment request:

Spections n reo nt Charnoff, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, NW.,

revision to the Technical Specifications constitute additional limitations, Washington, D.C. 20036.

pertaining to the following TMI Action restrictions or controls not presently NRC Branch Chief: John F. Stolz.

Plan Items set forth in NUREG-0737, included in the Vermont Yankee "Clarification of TMI Action Plan Technical Specifications. Therefore, the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Requirements" and as requested by the proposed changes are similar to the Corporation, Docket No. 50-271, staff's Generic Letter 83-36:

Commission's example (ii) above.

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, l.F.1.3-Containent High-Range Therefore, we propose to determine that Vernon, Vermont Monitor the requested changes will not involve Date of application for amendment:

II.F.1.4-Containment Pressure Monitor significantlhazards considerations.

November 2, 1984.

II.F.1.5-Containment Water Level Local Public Document Room Description of amendment request:

Monitor location: Brooks Memorial Library, 224 The proposed amendment would add I.F.1.-ontamment Hydrogen Monitor Main Street, Brattleboro, Vermont 05301.

Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCO)

Room Habitabilit Attorney for licensee: John A.

and Surveillance Requirements Requiremnts Ritscher, Esquire, Ropes and Gray, 225 pertaining to degraded grid voltage Franklin Street, Boston, Massachusetts protection to the Technical Basis for proposed no significant 02110.

Specifications. Such restrictions do not hazards consideration determination:

NRC Branch Chief Domenic B.

now exist in the Technical The Commission has provided guidance Vassallo.

Specifications.

for the application of the standards in 10 Basis for proposed no significant CFR 50.92 by providing certain examples hazards consideration determination:

(48 FR 14870) of actions likely to involve Corporation, Docket No. 50-271, The Commission has provided guidance no significant hazards considerations.

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, concerning the application of the One of the examples relates to: "(ii) A Vernon, Vermont standards for determining whether a change that constitutes an additional Date of application for amendment:

significant hazards consideration exists limitation, restriction, or control not January 15, 1985.

by providing certain examples (48 FR presently included in the Technical Description of amendment request:

14870). The examples of actions which Specifications: For example, a more The proposed amendment requests a involve no significant hazards stringent surveillance requirement."

change to the Administrative Controls consideration include a change that Technical Specification changes section of the Technical Specifications constitutes an additional limitation, proposed in response to TMI Action to provide alternative requirements restriction, or control not presently Plan Items II.F.1.3, II.F.1.4,.II.F.1.4, should the Operations Supervisor not included in the Technical Specifications:

II.F.1.6 and II.D.3.4 are as follows:

possess a Senior Operator License for For example, a more stringent (a) II.F.1.3-Containment High-Range an interim time period.

surveillance requirement.

Monitor-The proposed changes define Basis for proposed no significant The changes proposed in this the instrumentation and calibration hazards consideration determination:

application for amendment are requirements for the containment high The Commission has provided guidance encompassed by this example because range monitor and actions reqired for the application of the standards in 10

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 8011 CFR 50.92 by providing certain examples for NRC review and approval which been added to the present sampling (48 FR 14870) of actions likely to involve reflects changes to reporting locations. Additional managerial review no significant hazards considerations.

requirements. In addition, minor responsibilities and reporting One of the examples is "(i) a purely editorial and typograhical errors are requirements would be added relating to administrative change to Technical corrected.

radioactive releases.

Specifications: For.example, a change to Basis forproposed no significant The NRC staff has issued previously achieve consistency throughout the hazards consideration determination:

its proposed determination that the Technical Specifications, correction of The Commission has provided guidance earlier versions of these amendment an error, or a change in nomenclature."

concerning the application of the requests did not involve a significant The proposed change would maintain standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing hazards consideration (48 FR 38382 at the organization shown in Figure 6.1.2.

certain examples (48 FR 14870). One of 38430, August 23, 1983 and 48 FR 52804 The proposed change would allow the the examples (ii) of actions not likely to at 52840, November 22,1983).

flexibility to permit the Assistant involve a significant hazards This newest version of the proposed Operations Supervisor to provide consideration is a change to make the amendments addresses NRC staff instructions to the shift crews involving licenses conform to changes in the comments on previous submittals. The licensing activities should the regulations where the change results in staffs comments were transmitted to the Operations Supervisor not have a Senior very minor changes to facility licensee by letter dated July 18, 1984.

Operator License. In this case, the operations clearly in keeping with the The newest version of these proposed Assistant Operations Supervisor would regulations. The NRC initial review of amendments submits the proposed be a licensed Senior Operator and have the licensee's submittal related to Technical Specifications as a completely qualification in accordance with ANSI reporting indicates that this is the case.

new section, adds several new N18.1-1971, "Selection and Training of Another example (i) of actions not likely specifications such as total dose and Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants."

to involve a significant hazards explosive gas mixture specifications and Since the level of training and the consideration is a purely administrative makes several other additions and requirement for a Senior Operator change to Technical Specifications; for revisions to address staff comments.

License for the Operations Supervisor example, a change to achieve function is fulfilled as described by the consistency throughout the Technical asis fora on strnin Assistant Operations Supervisor, the Specification, correction of an error, or a The Commission has provided guidance change is administrative since there is change in nomenclature. The remaining concerning the application of the only a change in nomenclature when the changes fall into this category.

standards by providing certain Assistant Operations Supervisor Accordingly, the Commission proposes examples (48 FR 14870). One of the assumes the Operations Supervisor to determine that this amendment does examples of actions involving no fucntion in the Technical Specifications not involve a significant hazards significant hazards considerations and, therefore, the change is similar to consideration.

example (i). Therefore, we propose to Local Public Document Room restodtion al lmttion determine that the requested changes location: Swem Library, College of ictin or cnolspesen will not involve significant hazards William and Mary, Williamsburgi considerations.

Virginia 23185.

(ii). In the case of the proposed technical Local Public Document Room Attorney for licensee: Mr. Michael W.

specifications, they constitute an location: Brooks Memorial Library, 224 Maupin, Hunton and Williams, Post additional requirement for monitoring Main Street, Brattleboro, Vermont 05301.

Office Box 1535. Richmond, Virginia and control of radioactive effluents not Attorney for licensee: John A.

23213.

presently in the technical specifications Ritscher, Esquire, Ropes and Gray, 225 NRC Branch Chief-Steven A. Varga.

and are intended to meet the intent of Franklin Street, Boston, Massachusetts the Commission's regulations (10 CFR 02110.

Wisconsin Electric Power Company, Part 50 Appendix 1, 10 CFR 50.34a, and NRC Branch Chief: Domenic B.

Docket Nos. 50-266 and 50-301, Point 10 CFR 50.36a) and related staff Vassallo.

Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, guidance (NUREG-0472). Therefore, the Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc staff proposes to determine that the Virginia Electric and Power Company, County, Wisconsin proposed amendments do not involve a Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281, Surry Date of amendment request: June 4, significant hazards consideration.

Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Suirry 1976 as modified January 28, 198 Local Public Document Room County, Viria October 7, 1983 and December 20, 1984.

location: Joseph P. Mann Public Library, Date of amendment requests:

Description of amendment request:

1515 16th Street, Two Rivers, Wisconsin.

November 30, 1984.

The proposed amendments would Attorneyfor licensee: Gerald Description of amendment requests:

permit operation after approval of Charnoff, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts and By NRC Generic Letter 83-43 to all changes to the plant's Technical Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, N.W.,

licensees, model Technical Specifications (TS) that would bring Washington, D.C. 20036.

Specifications were forwarded which them into compliance with Appendix 1, NRC Branch Chief-James R. Miller.

showed the revisions to reporting 10 CFR Part 50, and 10 CFR 50.36a and Wisconsin Electric Power Company, requirements as necessitated by 50.34a. These proposed TS are intended

§ § 50.72 and 50.73 of Title 10 of the Code to ensure that releases of radioactive Dock Nos. 50-266 and,

of Federal Regulations. Section 50.72 material to unrestricted areas Beach CePn, Unitos1d revises the immediate notification normal operation remain as duri Town ofsToCs, i

requirements for operating nuclear reasonably achievable. Specifically, the power plants. Section 50.73 provides for proposed TS define limiting conditions Date of amendment request: October a revised Licensee Event Report System.

for operation and surveillance 26, 1984.

By letter dated November 30, 1984, requirements for radioactive liquid and Description of amendment request:

Virginia Electric and Power Company gaseous effluent monitoring. Additional The amendment request would delete a submitted proposed license amendments environment sampling locations have limiting condition for operation

8012 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices concerning the auxiliary feedwater generator for inspection is permissible.

1. Low Steam Generation Pressure system. Specifically, the limiting This specification has been rewritten to (Steam Line Rupture Matrix) condition for operation which allows acknowledge that strict compliance with

2. Pressurizer Level (Remote Shutdown) temporarily shutting discharge valves of Appendix IV to section XI of the ASME

3. Steam Generator Pressure (Remote shared auxiliary feedwater pumps to a Code would prohibit utilization of state-Shutdown) unit when necessary to supply auxiliary of-the-art inspection techniques not yet

4. Pressurizer Level (Post-Accident) feedwater to the other unit for purposes recognized by the Code. The of startup, shutdown or surveillance specification has also been revised to

5. Steam Generator Outlet Pressure testing (provided that the other unit's acknowledge that reporting be in (Post-Accident) turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump accordance with 10 CFR 50.731i rather

6. Startup Feedwater Flow was operable) would be deleted.

than the superseded LER reporting

7. Power Operated Relief Valve The amendment also would modify specification. The basis for this section Date of publication of individual steam generator inservice inspection have also been rewritten to make it requirements under specification consistent with the specifications and notice in Federal Register January 14, 15.4.2.A, "Steam Generator Tube our current practices. Item 3 of page 1985, 50 FR 1949.

Inspection Requirements". Item 2.a of 15.6.10-1 has also been changed to Expiration date of individual notice:

this specification would be charged to conform to present terminology. Based February 13, 1985.

indicate that selection of one steam on the above, the staff proposes to Local Public Document Room generator for inspection is permissible.

determine that the amendments involve location: Crystal River Public Library, Item 3 of this specification would be no significant hazards considerations.

668 N.W. First Avenue, Crystal River, rewritten to acknowledge that strict Local Public Document Room Florida.

compliance with Appendix IV to section location: Joseph P. Mann Public Library, IX of the ASME Code would prohibit 1516 Sixteenth Street, Two Rivers, Power Authority of the State of New utilization of state-of-the-art inspection Wisconsin.

York, Docket No. 50-333, James A.

techniques not yet recongized by the Attorney for licensee: Gerald FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Code. Item 7 of the specification would Charnoff, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Oswego County, New York be revised to acknowledge that Trowbridge, 1800 M Street NW.,

Date of amendment request:

reporting be in accordance with 10 CFR Washington, D.C. 20036.

December 6,1984, as supplemented 50.73.ii rather than the superseded LER NRC Branch Chief: James R. Miller.

January 10, 1985.

reporting specification. The basis for PREVIOUSLY PUBLSHED NOTICES Brief description of amendment:

this section would also be changed to OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE These revisions would permit refueling make it consistent with the OF AMENDMENTS TO OPERATING operations to proceed with the Reactor specifications.

LCENSES AND PROPOSED NO Protection System inoperable to Basis for proposed no significant SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS facilitate installation of Analog Trip hazards consideration determination:

CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION Transmitter System components during The Commission has provided guidance AND OPPORTUNITY-FOR HEARING concerning the application of these The following notices were previously te ofipublicationuofindiiual standards by providing certain published as separate individual note iFedera RegiftendFebruar examples (48 FR 14870). One of the notices. The notice content was the 1985 50 Fr 929.

examples of actions involving no same as above. They were published as significant hazards considerations is individual notices because time did not Expiration date of individual notice:

example (v): "Upon satisfactory allow the Commission to wait for this March 6,1985.

completion of construction in connection regular monthly notice. They are Local Public Document Room with an operating facility, a relief repeated here because the monthly location: Penfield Library, State granted from an operating restriction notice lists all amendments proposed to University College of Oswego, New that was imposed because the be issued involving no significant York.

construction was not yet completed hazards consideration.

satisfactorily." The propl ohsosedan lcti opoain satsfctril."Th posed For details, see the individual notice amendment involving deleting a limiting in the Federal Register on the. day and Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear condition for operation (LCO) page cited. This notice does not extend Power Plant, Wayne County, New York concerning the auxiliary feedwater the notice period of the original notice.

Date of amendment request: January system meets this example. The LCO had been imposed as an interim safety Florida Power Corporation, et al.,

25,1985.

measure until valve actuation Docket No. 50-3a Crystal River Unit Description of amendment request modifications (automatic alignment No. 3 Nuclear Generating Plant, Citrus The proposed amendment would allow upon receipt of a signal to start the County, Florida use of temporary closure plate in place auxiliary feedwater pumps) were Date of amendment request:

of the equipment door (hatch).

completed. The valve actuation December 14,1984.

Date of publication of individual modifications have been completed and Brief description of amendment: The notice in Federal Register February 5, tested and the LCO is no longer needed.

amendment would modify Technical 1985 (50 FR 5020).

Another example of actions involving Specification Tables 4.3.2, 4.3.8, and Expiration date of individual notice:

no significant hazards considerations is 4.17, and Technical Specification March 7,1985.

example (i) a purely administrative 4.4.3.Z.2 to permit waiver of certain 1S-Local Public Document Room change to the technical specifications.

month calibration frequency location. Rochester Public Library, 115 The changes involving steam generator requirements for Cycle V provided the South Avenue, Rochester, New York inservice inspections meet this example.

surveillance is performed during Refuel 14604.

This specification has been clarified to V. The specific equipment covered by indicate that selection of one steam this request is as follows:

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 8013 Southern California Edison Company, et petition for leave to intervene was filed Library, 212 W. Burdeshaw Street, al., 50-361 and 50-362, San Onofre following this notice.

Dothan, Alabama 36303.

Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and Unless otherwise indicated, the Arkansas Power & Light Company, 3

Commssio ha detrmind tat tese Docket No. 50-368, Arkansas Nuclear Date of amendment request: July 2, amendments satisfy the criteria for August 7 and October 3, 1984.

categorical exclusion in accordance Brief description of amendments:

with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant Date of application for amendment:

Changes to Technical Specifications 3/

to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental June 30, 1983, as superseded by letter 4.2.4, "DNBR Margin" and 3/4.3.1, impact statement or environmental dated May 19,1984.

"Reactor Protection Instrumentation,"

assessment need be prepared for these Brief description of amendment: The and their bases.

amendments. If the Commisison has amendment revised the Technical Date of publication of individual prepared an environmental assesment Specifications pertaining to hydraulic notice in Federal Register: December 31, under the special circumstances snubbers and added new requirements 1984 (49 FR 50845).

provision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and has for mechanical snubbers operability and Expiration date of individual notice:

made a determination based on that testing.

January 30, 1985.

assessment, it is so indicated.

Date of issuance: January 29, 1985.

Local Public Document Room For further details with respect to the Effective date: January 29, 1985 location: San Clemente Library, 242 action see (1) the applications for Amendment No.: 62 Avenida Del Mar, San Clemente, amendments, (2) the amendments, and Facility Operating License No. NPF-8.

California 92612.

(3) the Commission's related letters, Amendment revised the Technical Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Specifications.

Southern California Edison Company, et Assessments as indicated. All Of these Date of initial notice in Federal al., 50-361 and 50-362,-San Onofre items are available for public inspection Register: August 22, 1984 (48 FR 33353 at Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and at the Commission's Public Document 33356).

3 Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, The Commission's related evaluation Date of amendment request: February D.C., and at the local public document of the amendment is contained in a 29, April 2, September 11, October 1 and rooms for the particular facilities Safety Evaluation dated January 29, 3, 1984.

involved. A copy of items (2) and (3) 1985.

Brief description of amendment:

may be obtained upon request No significant hazards consideration Technical Specification changes relating addressed to the U.S. Nuclear comments received. No.

to reactor protection instrumentation Regulatory Commission, Washington, Local Public Document Room and electrical power sources.

D.C. 20555, Attention: Director, Division location: Tomlinson Library, Arkansas Date of publication of individual of Licensing.

Tech University, Russellville, Arkansas notice in Federal Register: December 31, Alabama Power Company, Docket No.

72801 1984 (49 FR 50843).

50-348, Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Arkansas Power & Light Company, Expiration date of individual notice:

Unit No. 1, Houston County, Alabama Dockets Nos. 50-313 and 50-368, January 30, 1985.

Local Public Document Room Date of application for amendment:

Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit Nos. 1 and location: San Clemente Library, 242 February 10,1984, supplemented June 18, Unit 2, Pope County, Arkansas Avenida Del Mar, San Clemente, 1984.

Date of application for amendments:

California 92612.

Brief description of amendment: Table March 16,1984, supplemented August NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF4.4-5 Reactor Vessel Material NOTICE OF SSUANCE OFSurveillance Piogram-Withdrawal 22,e 1984.

.tono medets h AMENDMENT TO FACILITY Schedule is revised to show a different Brefdesrio o enesT OPERATING LICENSEwihrwltmscdueoamnmnspvddTcncl OPEATNG ICNS wihdawl tmescedue orthe Specifications related to the following During the 30-day period since remaining capsules. The change is NUREG-0737 Items:

publication of the last monthly notice, administrative in nature and conforms the Commission has issued the following to the requirements in Appendix H to 10

1. Reactor Coolant System Vents. (II.B.1) amendments. The Commission has CFR Part 50, which became effective

2. Postaccident Sampling (II.1.3) determined for each of these July 26, 1983 (48 FR 24008 May 31, 1983).

3. Sampling and Analysis of Plant amendments that the application Other changes proposed to-Tables 3.4-2 Effluents (II.F.1.2) complies with the standards and and 3.4-3 are not acted upon at this

4. Containment High-Range Radiation requirements of the Atomic Energy Act time.

Monitor (II.F.1.3) of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Date of issuance: January 22i1985.

5. Containment Pessure Monitor Commission's rules and regulations. The Effective date: January 22, 1985.

(II.F.1.4)

Commission has made appropriate Amendment No.: 48.

6. Containment Water Level Monitor findings as required by the Act and the Facility Operating License No. NPF-2.

(II.F.1.5)

Commission's rules and regulations in 10 Amendment revised the Technical Date of issuance: January 31, 1985.

CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the Specifications.

Effective date: January31, 1985.

license amendment.

Date of initial notice in Federal Amendment Nos.: 94 and 63.

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Register: April 25, 1984 (49 FR 17851)

Facility Operating License Nos. DPR Amendment to Facility Operating The Commission's related evaluation of 51 and NPF-6. Amendments revised the License and Proposed No Significant the amendment is contained in a Safety Technical Specifications.

Hazards Consideration Determination Evaluation dated January 22, 1985.

Date of initial notice in Federal and Opportunity for Hearing in No significant hazards consideration Register: November 21, 1984 (49 FR connection with these actions was comments were received.

45941 at 45942).

published in the Federal Register as Local Public Document Room The Commission's related evaluation indicated. No request for a hearing or location: George S. Houston Memorial of the amendents is contained in a

8014 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices Safety Evaluation dated January 31, Effective date: February 7, 1985.

Commonwealth Edison Company, 1985.

Amendment Nos.: 81 and 107.

Docket Nos. 5295 and 50-304, Zion No significant hazards consideration Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-Nuclear Power Station, UnitNos. 1 and comments received. No.

71 -ndDPR-62. Amendments revised 2, Benton County, Illinois Local Public Document Room the Technical Specifications.

Date of application far amendments:

location: Tomlinson Library, Arkansas Date of initial notice in Federal October 29, 1984.

Tech University, Russellville, Arkansas Register: November 21,1984 49 F Be c

on n

72801 The Commission's related evaluation Thee amendments Baltimore Gas & Electric Company, of the amendment is contained in a f reatrcoentsyseiventsn Dockets Nos. 50-317 and 50-318, Calvert Safety Evaluation dated February 7, coniew t he i

n provide Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 1985.

and 2, Calvert County, Maryland No significant hazards consideration NRC GeeIc er 5,-375

, Date of application for amendments:

comments received. No.

Effective Date: February 5, 1985.

OctoberLocal Public Document Room Amendment Nos. 86 and 86.

Brief description of amendments: The location: Southport, Brunswick County Brie decritio ofamedmets:The Library, 109 W. Moore Street, Southport, F9acility 48 OpertndLiensevosdR amendments revised. the Unit 1 and Unit North Carolina 28461.

2 Technical Specifications 4.6.1.2a to the Technical Specifications.

allow completion of the third Commonwealth Edison Company, Date of initial Notices in Federal containment Integrated Leak Rate Test Docket No. 50-237, Dresden Nuclear Register: December 31,1984 (49 Flk (ILRT) prior to the 10-year Inservice Power Station, Unit No. 2, Grundy 50801) The Commission's related Inspection (ISI) outage. This TS change County, llinois evaluation of the amendments is would provide for a "one time only" Date of application for amendment:

contained in a Safety Evaluation dated schedule change for the third (10-year September 11, 27 and 28, 1984 and February 5, 1985.

service interval ILRT.

October 2, 1984.

No significant hazards consideration Date of issuance: February 14, 1985.

Brief description of amendment: The comments received: No Effective date: February 14, 1985.

amendment authorizes changes to the Local Public Document Room Amendment Nos.: 98 and 80.

AciliydmeatiLns Nos.:

D8Rd80 Technical Specifications to support location: Zion Benton Library District, Facility Operati g Licens evise d Cycle 10 operation of Dresden 2 With 2600 Emmaus Avenue, Zion, Illinois 53 and DPR-69. Amendments revised the Technical Specifications.

reload fuel supplied by and the 60099.

Date of initial notice in Federal associated analyses performed by Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Register December 31, 1984 (49 FR 50794 Exxon Nuclear Company. The Company, Docket No.50-213, Haddam at 50798).

amendment also authorizes Dresden 2 to Neck Plant, Middlesex County, The Commission's related evaluation use General Electric hybrid design Connecticut of the amendments is contained in a hafnium control rod assemblies,

.Safety Evaluation dated February 14, provides new limiting conditions for Date of application for amendment:

1985.

operation and surveillance requirements October 24, 1983.

No significant hazards consideration for a newly modified scram system Brief description of amendment: The comments received. No.

having improved reliability and changes amendment revises the Technical Local Public Document Room the calibration and functional test Specifications to specify that the location: Calvert County Library, Prince frequencies for certain specific minimum shift crew composition for Frederick, Maryland.

instruments that are being modified into Normal Operating Conditions except analog trip systems. Specifically related cold shutdown includes two individuals Carolina Power & Light Company, to the operation with the reload fuel, the holding a senior reactor operator Dockets Nos. 50-325 and 50-324, amendment authorizes extension of the license.

Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 MAPLHGR curves for 8 X 8 and 9 X 9 Date of Issuance: January 15,1985.

and 2, Brunswick County, North (LTA) fuel types and for GE P8DRB265H Effective Date: January 15, 1985.

Carolina fuel type and deletes the MAPLHGR Amendment No. 61.

Date of application for amendments:

curve for GE fuel type P8DRB239 which Facility Operating License No DPR October 2, 1984.

has never been used at Dresden and is 61 Amendment revised the Technical Brief description of amendments: The not expected to be in the future.

Specifications.

amendments change the Technical Date of Issuance: January 17,1985.

Date of initial Notices in the Federal Specifications by revising Table 4.3.5.9-Effective Date: January 17, 1981 Register December 27,.1983 (48 FR I to remove the requirement for control Amendment No. 84..

57031). The Commission's related room alarm annunciation when the Provisional Operating License No.

evaluation of the amendment is noble gas activity monitors of the main DPR-19. The amendment revised the contained in a letter dated January 15, stack monitoring system, the reactor

.Technical Specifications.

1985. No significant hazards building ventilation monitoring system, Date. of initial Notices in Federal consideration comments received: No.

or the turbine building ventilation Register. October 24, 1984 (49 FR 42815]

Local Public Document Room monitoring system experience a high-and November 21, 1984 (49 FR 45944 and location: Russell Library, 124 Broad voltage circuit failure. In addition, the 45945). The Commission's related Street, Middletown, Connecticut 06457.

requirement for control rTom alarm evaluation of the amendment is Duke Power Coman Docket Nos 50 annunciation is removed for the contained in a Safety Evaluation dated pyi condition when the noble gas activity January 17, 198 No significant hazards monitor of the reactor building consideration comments received. NO.

Station, Units 1 and 2, Meclenburg ventilation system is not set in the Local Public Document Room County, North Carolina "operate mode."

location: Morris Public Library, 604 Date of application for amendments:

Date of issuance: February 7,1985.

Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60451.

August 31, 1984.

Federal Register ol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 0 1985 / Notices 8015 Brief description of amendments: The Date of issuance: January 9, 1985.

Reactor Containment Leakage Testing amendments change the Technical Effective date: January 9, 1985.

For Water-Cooled Power Reactors".

Specifications to implement the use of Amendment Nos. 133,133 and 130.

Date of issuance: February 11, 1985.

time overcurrent trips of the circuit Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-Effective date: February 11. 1985.

breakers for emergency diesel 38, DPR-47 and DPR-55. Amendments Amendments Nos.: 135,135, and 132.

generators.

revised the Technical Specifications.

Date of Issuance: February 1, 1985.

Date of initial notice in the Federal Effective date: February 1, 1985.

Register August 22, 1984, 49 FR 33363 DPR-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55.

Amendment Nos. 38 and 19.

The Commission's related evaluation of Amendments revised the Technical Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-the amendments is contained in a Safety Specifications.

9 and NPF-17. Amendments revised the Evaluation dated January 9, 1985.

Date of initial notice in Federal Technical Specifications.

No significant hazards consideration Register: October 24, 1984, 49 FR 42817.

Date of initial notice in the Federal comments received: No.

The Commission's related evaluation Register: December 31, 1984 (49 FR Local Public Document Roam of the amendments is contained in a 50801) The Commission's related location: Oconee County Library, 501 Safety Evaluation dated February 11, evaluation of the amendments is West Southbroad Street, Walhalla, 1985.

contained in a Safety Evaluation dated South Carolina.

No sigificant hazards consideration February 1, 1985.

comments received: No.

No significant hazards consideration Duke Power Company, Dockets Nos. 5G-Local Public Document Room comments received: No.

269, 50-270, 50-287, Oconee Nuclear Local Public Document Room Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Oconee West o

eet, Waral5a1 location: Atkins Library, University of County, South Carolina South roa North Carolina, Charlotte (UNCC Date of aplication or amendments.

Station), North Carolina 28223.

November 9, 198 Duquesne Light Company, Docket No.

Duke Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-Brief description of amendments:

50-334, Beaver Valley Power Station, 369 and 50-370, McGuire Nuclear These amendments revise the common-Unit No.1, Sbippingport, Pennsylvania Station, Units 1 and 2, Mecklenburg Technical Specifications (TSs) to permit Date of Application for amendment:

County, North Carolina Oconee Unit 2 a one-time extension of June 28, 1984.

Date of application for amendments:

the interval for inspecting inaccessible Brief description of amendment: The November 16, 1984.

hydraulic snubbers such that the amendment changes the Technical Brief description of amendments: The Specifications for Beaver Valley Unit amendments change the Technical Unit 2 refueling outage, provided that No. 1 as follows:

Specifications to delete the provision such outage begins no later than March which allows the upper head injection 15, 1985. The inspection is currently (1)iae 4ha s be revito accuulaor ystm tobe noprabe a required to be performed before idct htteNbeGsAtvt accumulator system to be inoperablea February 14, 1985.

Monitor and Radiation Monitor provide less than or equal to 46% rated thermalonly; power.

Date of issuance: February 6,1985.

they do not initiate any automatic Date of issuance: February 6, 1985.

Effective date: February 6, 1985.

Effective date: February 6, 1985.

Amendments Nos. 134,134, and 131.

acTaon.

Amendment Nos. 39 and 20.

Facty Operating License Nos. DPR Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55. Amendments specify the applicable time constant for 9 and NPF-17. Amendments revised the revised the Technical Specifications.

the functional unit High Negative Steam Technical Specifications.

Date of initial notice in the Federal Pressure Rate to be greater than or equal Date of initial notice in the Federal Register: December 31, 1984, 49 FR to 50 seconds.

Register December 31, 1984 (49 FR 50803.

(3] Tables 3.3-3, 3.3-4, 3.3-5 and 4.3-2 50802) The Commission's related The Commission's related evaluation have been revised to add a list of signals evaluation of the amendments is of the amendments is contained in a that initiate the start of the Auxiliary contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Safety Evaluation dated February S, Feedwater System.

February 6, 1985.

1986.

Date of issuance: January 25,1985.

No significant hazards consideration No significant hazards consideration Effective date: January 25, 1985.

comments received: No.

comments received: No.

Amendment No. 90.

Local Public Document Room Local Public Document Room Facility Operating License No. DPR location: Atkins Library, University of location. Oconee County Library, 501

66. Anendment revised the Technical North Carolina, Charlotte (UNCC West Southbroad Street, Walhalla, Specifications.

Station), North Carolina 28223.

South Carolina Date of initial notice in Federal Duke Power Company, Dockets Nos. 50-Duke Power Company, Dockets Nos. 50-Register: September 28, 1984 (49 FR 269, 50-270 and 50-287, Oconee Nuclear 269, 50-270, and 50-287, Oconee Nuclear 38398).

Station, Unites Nos. 1, 2 and 3, Oconee Station, Units Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Oconee The Commission's related evaluation County, South Carolina County, South Carolina of the amendment is contained in a Date of application for amendments:

Date of application for amendments:

Safety Evaluation dated January 25, April 30, 1984.

August 8,1984.

1985.

Brief description of amendment:

Brief description of amendment:

No significant hazards consideration These amendments revise the These amendments revise the Technical comments received: None.

Administrative Controls Section of the Specifications to change the air lock Local Public Document Room TSs to reflect the current regulations testing frequency from quarterly to location: B. F. Jones Memorial Library, governing licensee event reports as semiannuallyin conformance with 10 663 Franklin Avenue, Aliquippa.

required by the Commission.

CFR Part 50, Appendix J, "Primary Pennsylvania 15001.

8016 Federal Registo Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, Februa*

7, 1985 / Notices Florida Power Corporation, et al.,

Local Public Document Room analysis, (9) make editorial changes, and Docket No. 504-302, Crystal River Unit location: Appling County Public Library, (10) add a reporting requirement.

No. 3 Nuclear Generating Plant, Citrus 301 City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia.

Date of issuance: February 4,1985.

County, Florida Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe Effective date: February 4, 1985.

Date of Application for amendment:

Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Amendments Nos.: 106 and 44.

December 14, 1984, as supplemented on Authority of Georgia, City of Dalton, Facility Operating Licenses Nos.

January 31, 1985.

Georgia, Docket No. 50-366, Edwin 1.

DPR-57 and NPF-5. Amendments Brief description of amendment: This Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2, Appling revised the Technical Specifications.

amendment permits waiver of certain County, Georgia Date of initial notice in Federal 18-month calibration frequencyRegister:

February 24, 1984 (49 FR 7036).

requirements for Cycle V provided the.request The Commission's related evaluation sreilemens pformceVpied thin eue December 21, 1983, as supplemented of the amendments is contained in a surveillance is performed during RefuelMay 2,1984.

Safety Evaluation dated February 4, V.

Date of issuance: February 14, 1985.

Brief description of amendment: The 1985.

Effctie dte:Febuar 14 195.

amendment revises the TSs for Hatch No significant hazards consideration Effectiie date: FebruaryUnit 2 to: (1) Increase the number of comments received: No.

Facility o t L

e D

traveling incore probe (TIP) system Local Public Document Room Facliy pertig icnseNo DR-detectors that are required to be location: Appling County Public Library,

72. Amendment revised the Technical operable from three to four, and (2) 301 City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia.

Specifications.

allow operation of theTIP system with Date of initial notice in Federal one or more inoperable detectors.

GPU Nuclear Corporation, Docket No.

Register: January 14, 1985, (50 FR 1949)

Date of issuance: January 31, 1985.

50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear Subsequent to this initial notice, by Effective dote: January 31, 1985.

Generating Station, Ocean County, New letter of January 31, 1985, the licensee Amendment No.: 43 Jersey submitted additional information Facility Operating License No. NPF-5.

Date of application for amendment.

relating to its application for amendment Amendment revised the Technical August 11, 1980 and supplemented' which did not alter the substance of the Specifications.

October 18, 1982, December 5, 1983, licensee's request.

Dote of initial notice in Federal February 9 and March 23,1984.

The Commission's related evaluation Register: September 28, 1984 (49 FR Brief description of amendment: The of the amendment is contained in a 38399). The Commission's related amendment authorized changes to the Safety Evaluation dated February 14, evaluation of the amendment is Appendix A Technical Specifications 1985.

contained in a Safety Evaluation dated relating to station electric distribution No significant hazards consideration January 31, 1985.

system voltages.

comments received: No.

No significant hazards consideration Date of Issuance: February 11, 1985.

Local Public Document Room comments received: No.

Effective date: February 11, 1985.

Location: Crystal River Public Library, Local Public Document Room Amendment No.: 80.

668 N.W. First Avenue, Crystal River, location: Appling County Public Library, Provisional Operating License No.

Florida.

301 City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia.

DPR-16. Amendment revised the Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe Technical Specifications:

Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Date of initial notice in Federal Authority of Georgia, City of Dalton, Authority of Georgia City of Dalton Register November 21, 1984 (49 FR Georgia, Docket No. 50-366, Edwin I.

Georgia, Docket. Nos. 50-321 and 5-45952). The Commission's related Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2, Appling 366, Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit evaluation of this amendment is County, Georgia No.. 1 and 2, Appg County, Geo contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Date of amendment request: July 12, Date of applications for amendments:

Ferary c1,s1985.tNo sinfcnt 1984.

May 31,1983, as supplemented received: No.

Brief description of amendment: The September 1 and November 22,1983.

Local Public Document Room: OCean amendment revises the TSs for Hatch Brief description of amendment: The County Library, 101 Washingtdn Street, Unit 2 t; add a requirement to reduce amendments revise the TSs for Hatch Tom. River, New Jersey 08753.

the power below a specified limit Unit 1 to: (1) Reduce the equilibrium GPU Nuclear Corporation, et al., Docket whenever the plant is temporarily activity concentration limit for reactor operating with only one recirculation cln 2

r m

eS

, nit No.

slan Cunty, loop.

reactor coolant activity is allowed to PenyUnit Date of issuance: January 24, 1985.

exceed the equilibrium value, (3)

Effective date:.January 24, 1985.

increase the time allowed for isolating Date of amendment request: June 1, Amendment No.: 42.

steam valves when an activity limit is July 11, August 2, and September 11, Facility Operating License No. NPF-5 exceeded, (4) increase the dose 1984.

Amendment revised the Technical equivalent iodine concentration above Brief description of amendment: This Specifications.

which additional samples are required, amendment revises the TSs related to Date of initial notice in Federal (5) increase the rate of increase in offgas the allowable concentration of hydrogen Register: October 24, 1984 (49 FR 42822).

activity at which reactor coolant and oxygen in the waste gas holdup The Commission's related evaluation samples are required, (6) reduce the system and the associated hydrogen/

of the amendment is contained in a dose equivalent 1-131 concentration at oxygen monitoring instrumentation. The Safety Evaluation dated January 24, which reactor coolant samples are amendment permits unlimited oxygen 1985.

required to be taken, (7) require content provided that hydrogen content No significant hazards consideration additional coolant samples, (8) relax the is below 4% and permits unlimited comments received: No.

requirement for equivalent 1-131 hydrogen content provided that the

Federal Register Wol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 1985 [ Notices 8017 oxygen limit is below 2%. The TSs Brief description of amendment: The Containment Leak Testing to conform require two hydrogen monitors and two amendment revises the Technical with 10CFR Part 50 Appendix 1.

oxygen monitors to assure compliance Specifications to incorporate the revised Date of issuance: February 4, 1985.

with the above limits. Limiting setpoint for bypass of reactor scrams Effective date: February 4, 1985.

conditions for operation are also during turbine trips and generator load Amendment No.* 82.

included.

rejection at low power levels.

Facility Operatinj License No. DPR Date of issuance: February 4, 1985.

Date of issuance: February 5,1985.

36: Amendment revised the Technical Effective date: February 4, 1985.

Effective date: February 5,1985.

Specifications.

Amendment No.: 104.

Amendment No.: 111.

Date of initial notice in Federal Facility Operating License No. DPR-Facility Operating License No. DPR-Register: July 20,1983 (48 FR 33076 at

50. Amendment revised the Technical

49. Amendment revised the Technical 33082) and June 20,1984 (49 FR 25350 at Specifications.

Specifications.

25363).

Date of initial notice in Federal Date of initial notice in Federal The Commission's related evaluation Register: November 21, 1984, (49 FR Register September 28,1984 (49 FR of the amendment is contained in a 45953).

38401).

Safety Evaluation dated February 4, The Commission's related evaluation The Commission's related evaluation 1985.

of the amendment is contained in a of the amendment is contained in a No significant hazards consideration Safety Evaluation dated February 4, Safety Evaluation dated February 5, comments received: No.

1985.

1985.

Local Public Document Room No sugnificant hazards consideration No significant hazards consideration location: Wiscasset Public Libray, High comments received: No.

comments received: No.

Street, Wiscasset, Maine.

Local Public Document Room Local Public Document Boon?

location: Government Publications location: Cedar Rapids Public Library, Mississippi Power & Light Company, Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, 426 Third Avenue, S.E., Cedar Rapids, Middle South Energy, Inc., South Education Building, Commonwealth and Iowa 52401.

Mississippi Electric Power Association, Walnut Streets, Harrisburg, Y

Docket No. 50-416, Grand Gulf Nuclear Pennsylvania 17126.

Maine Station, Unit 1, Clairborne County, Docket No. 50-309, Maine Yankee Mississippi Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, Atomic Power Station, Lincoln County, Date of application for amendment:

Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold Maine October 9, 1984.

Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa Date of application for amendment:

Brief description of amendment: The Date of application for amendment:

April 13,1984.

amendment modifies the Technical October 5, 1984.

Brief description of amendment: This Specifications to implement a change of Brief description of amendment: The amendment modified the Maine Yankee position title in the offsite organization amendment revises the Technical Technical Specifications concerning for management of the facility, Specifications to incorporate the operability and surveillance of various Date of issuance: February 1, 1985.

requirements of automatic actuation of monitoring equipment required by Effective date: February 1, 1985.

the automatic depressurization system NUREG-0737.

Amendment No.: 1.

(ADS) valves in accidents which do not Date of issuance: January 29, 1985.

Facility Operating Licene No. NPF involve a high containment pressure, Effective date: January 29, 1985.

29: Amendment revised the Technical and provides for surveillance Amendment No.: 81.

Specifications.

requirements of manual override Facility Operating License No. DPR-Date of initial notice in Federal switches.

36: Amendment revised the Technical Register: November 21,1984 (49 FR Date of issuance February 1, 1985.

Specifications.

45955).

Effective date: February 1, 1985.

Date of initial notice in Federal The Commission's related evaluation Amendment No.: 110.

Register: June 20, 1984 (49 FR 25350 at of the amendment is contained in a Facility Operating License No. DPR-25363).

Safety Evaluation dated February 1,

49. Amendment revised the Technical The Commission's related evaluation 1985.

Specifications.

of the amendment is contained in a No significant hazards consideration Date of initial notice in Federal Safety Evaluation dated January 29, comments received: No.

Register December 31, 1984 (49 FR 1985.

Local Public Document Room 50805).

No significant hazards consideration location: Hinds junior College, George The Commission's related evaluation comments received: No comments M. McLendon Library, Raymond, of the amendment is contained in a

received, Mississippi 39154.

Safety Evaluation dated February 1, Local Public Document Room Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, et 1985.

location: Wiscasset Public Library, High al., Docket No. 50-336, Millstone No significant hazards consideration Street, Wiscasset, Maine.

Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2, Town comments received: No.

Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company, of Waterford, Connecticut Local Public Document Room Docket No. 50-309, Maine Yankee location; Cedar Rapids Public Library, Atomic Power Station, Lincoln County, Dme 10 1984.

426 Third Avenue, S.E., Cedar Rapids, Maine Iowa 52401.

Brief description of amendment: This Date of application for amen dment.-

amendment modified the Technical Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, March 1, 19764s supplemented April 11, Specifications authorizing the use of an Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold outage equipment door in place of the Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa194 Brief description of amendment: This equipment hatch door during refueling Date of application for amendment:

amendment modified the Maine Yankee operations.

August 17, 1984.

Technical Specifications concerning Date of issuance: February 12, 1985.

8018 Federal Registel Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, Februa 7, 1985 / Notices Effective date: February 12, 1985.

Technical Specifications. These changes Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Amendment No.: 98.

are administrative in nature.

Pennsylvania 18701.

Facility Operating License No. DPR-Date of issuance: February 6, 1985.

Pennsylvania Power & light Company, 65: Amendment revised the Technical Effective date: As of date of issuance.

Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-M, Specifications.

Amendment No.: 29.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Date of initial notice in Federal Facility Operating License No. NPF-Units 1 and 2, Luzorno County, Register December 31, 1984 (49 FR 50794 14: Amendment revised the Technical Pennsylvania at 50808).

Specifications.

The Commission's related evaluation Date of initial notices in Federal Date of application for amendments.

of the amendment is contained in a Register: November 21, 1984 (49 FR December 8,1984.

Safety Evaluation-dated February 12, 45958]. The Commission's related Brief description of amendments:

1985.

evaluation of the amendment is These amendments revise the No significant hazards consideration contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, comments received: No.

February 6,1985. No comments on the Unit 1 and Unit 2 Technical Local Public Document Room proposed no significant hazards Specifications to allow common DC 125 location: Waterford Public Library, Rope consideration finding were received, volt battery loads to be supported by the Ferry Road, Waterford, Connecticut.

Local Public Document Room Unit 1 or Unit 2 batteries. Previously, Pensylani Poer Liht ompny, Location: Osterhout Free Library, only the Unit 1, 125-volt batteries were Pennsylvania 0-38 a L Reference Department, 71 South able to support these common loads.

Docket Nos. 5 Eer87 and 50-388, Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Date of issuance: February 8, 1985.

Susquehanna, Lu ec Cou t,

Pennsylvania 18701.

Effective date: February 8,1985.

Units 1 and 2, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Power & light Company, Amendment Nos.: 31 and 7.

Date of application for amendments:

Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388, Facility Operating License No. NPF September 19, 1984.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, 14 and NPF-22 Amendments revised Brief description of amendment: This Units I and 2, Luzeme County, the Technical Specifications.

amendment revises License Condition Pennsylvania Date of initial notice in Federal 2.C.(23)(b) of Facility Operating No.

Date of application for amendments:

Register Individual notice dated NPF-14 and License Condition 2.C.(8)(b)

September 19, 1984 with supplemental January 7,1985 (50 FR 904). The of Facility Operating License No. NPF-information January 3, 1985.

Commission's related evaluation of

22. The license condition previously Brief description of amendments: The these amendments is contained in a required seismic qualification of the in-purpose of these amendments is to Safety Evaluation dated February 8, vessel fuel racks prior to commencement change Susquehanna Unit 1 and Unit 2 1985. No significant hazards of the first refueling outage. Since the Technical Specification Table 3.8.4.2-1 oca cocment rom licensee has no need for the in-vessel by revising the list of motor-operated fuel rack during the first refueling outage valves in the Emergency Service Water Location: Osterhout Free Library, the NRC staff will require the licensee to (ESW) system to support the corrective Reference Department, 71 South seismically qualify the in-vessel fuel action described in the licensee's.final Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, rack prior to use.

report dated September 22, 1 Pennsylvania 1870.

Date of issuance: January 15, 1985.

regarding a deficiency involving water Pennsylvania Power & Light Company Effective date: January 15, 1985.

hammer in the ESW system.

Docket Nos. 50-87, Susquehanna Steam Amendment Nos.: 28 and 5.

Specifically, ESW valves HV-08893 A Electric Station, Unit 1, Luzene County, Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-and B would be added to Technical Pennsylvania 14 andNPF-22: Amendment revises the Specification Table 3.8.4'2-1 for Unit 1 Date of application for amendment license.

and Unit 2. Additionally, in the Unit 2 September 7. 1984.

Date of initial notices in Federal Technical Specifications ESW pump Register: November 21, 1984 (49 FR discharge valves HV-01101 A, B, C and Brefdes rt ofindmns 45961). The Commission's related D would be deleted from Technical evaluation of the amendment is Specification Table 3.8.4.2-1.

involving the installation of overcurrent contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Date of issuance: February 7,18 relays on each reactor recirculation January 15, 1985. So significant hazards Effective date.Prior to start-up pump circuit breaker in order to provide consideration comments were received.

fgllowing the Unit I first refueling redundant overcurrent protection for the Local Public Document Room outage.

primary containment penetration Location: Osterhout Free Library, Amendment Nos.: 30 and 6.

conductors.

Reference Department, 71 South Facility Operating License Nos. N Date of issuance: February 15,198.

Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, 14 and NPF-42. Amendment revised the Effective date: Upon start-up Pennsylvania 18701.

Technical Specifications.

following the first refueling outage.

PennsylvaniaDate of initial notices in Federal Amendment No.: 32.

Poeyvat o

we &7 Susquhnn Co my Register-December 31, 1984 (49 FR Facility Operating License No. NPF Docket No Uni81,uuenn Se 50817). The Commission's related 14 Amendment revised the Technical Electric Station, Unit 1, Luzerne County, evaluation of the amendment is Specifications.

Pennsylvaniacontained in a Safety Evaluation dated Date of initial notice in Federal Date of application for amendments:

February 7,1985. No comments were Register: December 31, 1984 (49 FR May 18, 1984 and September 20, 1984.

received on the proposed no significant 50815). The Commission's related Description of amendment request:

hazards consideration finding.

evaluation of the amendment is This amendment revises the Unit 1.

Local Public Document Room contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Technical Specifications to reflect Location: Osterhout Free Library, February 15, 1985. No comments on the changes incorporated into the Unit 2 Reference Department, 71 South proposed no significant hazards

Federal Register /

ol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 8019 consideration determination were Facility Operating License No. NPF-Philadelphia Electric Company, Public received.

14: Amendment revises the Technical Service Electric and Gas Company, Local Public Document Room Specifications.

Delmarva Power and Light Company, Location: Osterhout Free Library, Dates of initial notices in Federal and Atlantic City Electric Company, Reference Department, 71 South Register December 31,1984 (49 FR Dockets Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, 50817). The Commission's related Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units Pennsylvania 18701.

evaluation of the amendment is Nos. 2 and 3, York County, Pennsylvania Pennylvaia ower& Liht o. pan contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Daeoaplctnframdets Pennsylvania Power & Light Company,No significant Docket No. 50-387, Susquehanna Steam hazards consideration comments were November 10, 1983.

Electric Station, Uhit 1, Luzerne County, received.

Brief description of amendments:

Pennsylvania Local Public Document Room These amendments revise the Technical Date of application for amendment:

Location: Osterhout Free Library Specifications (TSs) to permit continued September 24, 1984.

Reference Department, 71 South operation of the Reactor Water Cleanup Brief description of amendment: This Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, System (RWCU) with isolation of the amendment reflects the installation of a Pennsylvania 18701.

filter-demineralizer, and permit permanent radiation monitoring system overriding of an isolation signal for up to in the new fuel storage vault and spent Pennsylvania Power and Light Company

.48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> when the high temperature fuel storage pool areas..

Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388, sensor is inoperable, provided the water Date of issuance: February 15, 1985.

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, temperature is verified to be less than Effctie dte:Thrty(30 das fom Units 1 and 2, Luzerne County 180* once per hour. These changes also Effective date: Thirty (30) days from the date of issuance.

Pennsylvania involve the clarification of TS lanaguage Amendment No.: 33.

Date of application for amendments:

related to the scram discharge volume Facility Operating License No. NPF-September 28, 1984.

and the deletion of obsolete references 14: Amendment revised the Technical Brief description of amendment: The to completed modifications.

Specifications.

Date of initial notice in Federalrequest changesthe Date of issuance: February 7, 1985.

Dat o intil otie n FdealSusquehanna Steam Electric Station, Effective date: February 7, 1985.

Register: December 31, 1984 (49 FR Unit 1 and Unit 2 Technical Amendments Nos.: 104 and 108.

50816). The Commission's related Specifications 4.6.5.3 and 4.7.2 with Facility Operating Licenses Nos.

evaluation of this amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated regard to HEPA filters and charcoal DPR-44 and DPR--56. Amendments February 15, 1985. No comments on the adsorber units to incorporate revised the Technical Specifications.

peuroposed 85 no sin cntmazars onte clarifications discussed in NRC Generic Date of initial notice in Federal proposed no significant hazards consideration determination comments Letter No. 83-13, dated March 2,1983.

Register April 25, 1984, (49 FR 17869).

were received.

The clarification to the Technical The Commission's related evaluation of Local Public Document Room Specifications were provided to clearly the amendment is contained in a Safety Location: Osterhout Free Library, reflect the required relationship between Evaluation dated February 7,1985.

Reference Department, 71 South the guidance in Regulatory Guide 1.52, No significant hazard consideration Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Revision 2, and ANSI N510-1975; the comments received: No.

Pennsylvania 18701.

testing requirements of the HEPA filters Local Public Document Room location and charcoal adsorber units; and the Government Publications Section, State Pennsylvania Power and Light Company NRC staff assumptions used in its safety Library of Pennsylvania, Education Docket No. 50-387, Susquehanna Steam evaluations for the ESF atmospheric Building, Commonwealth and Walnut Electric Station, Unit 1, Luzerne County cleanup systems.

Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

Pennsylvania Date of issuance: February 15, 1985.

Date of application for amendment:

Effective date: February 15, 1985.

Portland General Electric Company, et September 19, 1984 Amendment Nos.: 35 and 8.

al., Docket No. 50-344, Trojan Nuclear Brief description of amendments: This Facility Operating License Nos. NPF amendment revises Technical 14 and NPF-22. Amendments revised Brief description of amendment: The Specification 4.6.1.7 parts "C" and 'd" to the Technical Specifications.

amendment deleted license condition support plant modifications that will be Date of initial notice in Federal 2.C(10) pertaining to the US/IAEA made during the first refueling outage Register: November 21, 1984 (49 FR Safeguards Agreement.

for Unit 1. The plant modifications.

45961).

Date of issuance: February 5, 1985.

involve the relocation of two temperature elements used to monitor drywell atmosphere temperature in the of these amendments is contained in a Amendment No.: 101 area of the recirculation pumps. The Safety Evaluation dated February 15, Facility Operating License No. NPF-1.

change to part "c" includes revised 1985. No comments on the proposed no Amendment revised the license.

elevation and azimuth valves of the significant hazards consideration Date of initial notice in Federal relocated temperature elements and the determination were received.

Register: The Commission's related change to part "d" is editorial in nature.

Local Public Document Room evaluation of the amendment is Date of issuance: February 15, 1985.

Location: Osterhout Free Library, contained in a letter transmitting the Effective date: Upon start-up Reference Department, 71 South amendment dated February 5, 1985.

following the first refueling outage.

Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Local Public Document Room location Amendment No.: 34 Pennsylvania 18701.

Multnomah County Library, 801 S.W.

1cth Avenue, Portland, Oregon.

8020 Federal Registe/

Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, Februa 7, 1985 / Notices Portland General Electric Company, et Public Service Electric and Gas South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, al., Docket No. 50444, Trojan Nuclear Company, Docket No. 50-311, Salem South Carolina Public Service Authority, Plant, Columbia County, Oregon Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2, Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer Dat ofappicaionforamedmefr Salem County, New Jersey Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Fairfield County, Date of application for amendment:

South Carolina October 1, 1984.

Dt fapiainfraedet Brief description of amendment The September 29, 1983.

Date of application for amendment:

amendment adds requirements for Brief descrption of amendment: The July 19, 1984, and supplemented operability, visual inspections and amendment removes a license condition November 29,1984.

periodic testing of mechanical snubbers requiring the installation of upper Brief description of amendment. The and adds similar improved requirements inspection ports on the Salem Unit No. 2 amendment modifies the Technical for hydraulic snubbers.

steam generators.

Specifications to clarify educational Date of issuance: February 6, 1985.

Date of issuance: February 7,1985.

requirements of candidates for Senior Effective date: February 6, 1985.

Effective date: February 7, 1985.

Reactor Operator's Licenses.

Amendment No.: 102.

Amendment No.: 29 Date of issuance: January 24, 1985.

Facility Operating License No. NPF-1.

Facility Operating License No. DPI-Effective date: January 24, 1985.

Amendment revised the Technical 75: Amendment revised the License.

Amendment No.: 36.

Specifications.

Date of initial notice in Federal Facility Operating License No. NPF Date of initial notice in Federal Register December 31,1984 (49 FR

12. Amendment revised the Technical Register. December 31, 1984 (49 FR 50794 50821].

Specifications.

at 50819).

The Commission's related evaluation Date of initial notice in Federal The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Register: September 28, 1984 (49 FR of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated February 7.

38408) The Commission's related Safety Evaluation dated February 6, 1985.

evaluation of the amendment is 1985.

No significant hazards consideration contained in a Safety Evaluation dated No significant hazards consideration comments have been received.

January 24, 1985.

comments received: No.

Local Public Document Room Local Public Document Room Location of Local Public Document location: Salem Free Library, 112 West location: Fairfield County Library, Room Multnomah County Library,'80 Broadway Salem, New Jersey 08079.

Garden and Washington Street, S.W. 10th Avenue, Portland, Oregon.

Winnsboro, South Carolina 29180.

Power Authority of the State of New Docket No. 50-312, Rancho Seco South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, York, Docket No. 50-33, James A.

Nuclear Generating Station, Sacramento South Carolina Public Service Authority, FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, County, California Docket No.50-395, Virgil C. Summer Oswego County, New York Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Fairfield County, Date of application for amendment:

South Carolina Date of application for amendment:

October 16, 1984, as revised November October 9, 1984.

8,1984.

Date of application for amendment:

Brief description of amendment: The Brief description of amendment: The June 19, 1984, as revised November 29, amendment revises the Technical amendment temporarily changes TS 1984.

Specifications by changing the high Section 1.2.8, definition of refueling Brief description of amendment: The reactor pressure setpoint for interval, from 18 months to 24.5 months amendment modifies the Technical recirculation pump trip from "greater for surveillance testing of the Reactor Specifications to define allowable than or equal to 1120 psig" to the Internals Vent Valves. Upon startup power levels for reactor coolant system corrected value of "less than or equal to from the next refueling outage, this flow rates less than 100% of thermal 1120 psig."

temporary definition will expire.

design flow.

Date of issuance: January 30,1985.

Date of issuance: January 22, 1985.

Date of issuance: January 31, 1985.

Effective date: January 30, 1985.

Effective date: January 22, 1985 Effective date: January 31, 1985.

Amendment No.: 86 Amendment No.: 59.

Amendment No.: 37.

Facility Operating License No. NDR-Facility Operating License No. DPR-Facility Operating License No. NPF 59 Amendment revised the Technical

54. Amendment revised the Technical

12. Amendment revised the Technical Specifications.

Specifications.

Specifications.

Date of initial notice in Federal Date of initial notice in Federal Date of initial notice in Federal Register. November 21, 1984 (49 FR Register eebr2, 94 9F Register. October 24, 1984 (49 FR 42830).

Register November 21, 1984, (49 FR 45963 49528.

The Commission's related evaluation The Commission's related evaluation The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a of the amendment is contained in a of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation. dated January 31, Safety Evaulation dated January 30.

Safety Evaluation dated January 22, 1985.

1985.

1985.

No significant hazards consideration No significant hazards consideration No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

comments received: No.

comments received No.

Local Public Document Room Local Public Document Room Local Publi Document Room location: Fairfield County Library.

location: Penfield Library, State location: Sacramento City-County Garden and Washington, Streets, University College of Oswego. Oswego.

Library, 828 1 Street, Sacramento, Winnsboro, South Carolina 29180.

New York.

California.

Federal Register P ol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 0 1985 / Notices 8021 Southern California Edison Company, Dates of initialnotices in Federal Safety Evaluation dated January 24, Docket No. 50-206, San Onofre Nuclear Register: October 24, 1984 (49 FR 42832 1985.

Generating Station, Unit No. 1, San and 49 FR 42833). The Commission's No significant hazards consideration Diego County, California related evaluation of the amendment is comments received: No.

Dat ofappicaionforamedmet:.

contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Local Public Document Room Date of application for amendment:

September 9, 1983 as modified April 12, December 19,1984. No significant location: Chattanooga-Hamilton County 1984 and supplemented November 14, hazards consideration comments were Bicentennial Library, 1001 Broad.Street, 1984.

received.

Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401.

Brief description of amendment: The Local Public Document Room amendment approves changes to Location: San Cemente Library, 242 Unio Elecri

Pan, Doke No 50 Appendix A Technical Specifications County Missouri which incorporate containment leakage California.

testing requirements to conform with 10 Tennessee Vally Authority, Docket Nos.

D CFR Part 50 Appendix J.

50-260 and 50-296, Browns Ferry October 3,1984 and supplemented on Date of issuance: February 8, 1985.

Nuclear Pl Units 2 and 3, Limestone December 6,1984.

Effective date: February 8, 1985.

County, Alabama Brief description of amendment: The Amendment No.: 87.

amendment requested the addition of Provisional Operating License No.

Date of application for amendments:

two 100,000 gallon tanks in order to DPR-13. Amendment revised the December 13, 1984.

provide sufficient storage time for Technical Specifications.

Brief Description of amendments: The secondary effluent to allow sample Date of initial notice in Federal amendments modify Commission Orders analysis and to show acceptability of Register June 20, 1984 (49 FR 25374).

dated March 25, 1983 to extend the the water prior to release to the The Commission's related evaluation deadline for installation of NUREG-0737 environment of the amendment is contained in a items II.F.1.1 and II.F.1.2 instrumentation Date of issuance: February 4,1985.

Safety Evaluation dated February 8, having local readout capability.

Effective date.'February 4,1985.

1985. No significant hazards Date of issuance: February 12, 1985.

Amendment No.: 2.

consideration comments received: No.

Effective date: February 12, 1985.

Facility Operating License No. NPF Local Public Document Room Amendment Nos.: 110 and 85.

30. Amendment revised the Technical Location: San Clemente Branch Library, Facility Operating License Mo. DPR 242 Avendia Del Mar, San Clemente, 52 and DPR-8 Amendment revised the pefitin California 92672.

licenses.

Date o ta noic in FR

mpn, Dates of initial notices in Federal 45ise9 Nvmbr21998)49F Southern California Edison Company, t Registe December

, 1984 (49 FR al. Docket Nos. 50-361 and 50-362, San 50825)

The Commission's related evaluation Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Units 2 and 3, San Diego County, of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated February 4, California Safety Evaluation dated February 12, 1985. No significant hazards Dates of application for amendments:

1985.

consideration comments received: No April 24, April 27, July 9, August 7, No significant hazards consideration comments received.

August 21, August 27, and September 12, comments recieved: No.

Local Public Document Room 1984.

Local Public Document Room Locations: Fulton City Library, 709 Brief Description of amendments: The Location: Athens Public Library South Market Street, Fulton, Missouri 65251 amendments change Technical and Forrest, Athens, Alabama 35611.

and the Olin Library, Skinker and Specifications to (1) provide consistency Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Lindell Boulevards, St. Louis, Missouri with the modified plant design for ECCS Nos. 50-237 and 50-328, Sequoyah 63130.

Subsystems, (2) add a new specification, Nuclear Plant, Units I and 2, Hamilton Union Electric Company, Docket No. 50 Emergency Chilled Water System, (3) increase the reuired shutdown margin

'County, Tennessee 483, Callaway Plant Unit 1, Callaway required when the core average Dates of application for amendments:

moderator temperature is less than or July 21, 1983. and August 20, 27, and 28, Date of application for amendment:

equal to 20Q"F, (4) add a new 1984.

October 8,1984.

surveillance requirement which verifies Brief description of amendments: The The amendment revises the that only one charging pump is operable amendments change the Technical Administrative Controls Section of the in Mode 5, when the reactor coolant Specifications related to containment Technical Specifications. Figure 6.2-2 system is drained below the hot leg isolation valves, vital batteries, fire has been revised to include two centerline, and (5) change the boric acid detectors, and the basis statement for additional managerial positions in the storage tank volume/concentration.

the steam generator low-low level plant organization; section 6.5.1.2 has Date of issuance: December 19, 1984.

instrumentation, been revised to include an additional Effective date: Amendment No. 28 is Date of issuance: January 24,1985.

member of the On-Site Review effective December 19, 1984. Certain Effective date: January 24, 1985.

Committee.

portions of Amendment 17 are effective Amendment Nos. 37 and 29.

Date of issuance: January 30, 1985.

December 19, 1984: the remainder of Facility Ogerating License No. DPR-Effective date: January 30,1985.

Amendment 17 is effective prior to 77 and DPR-79. Amendments revised Amendment N&: 3.

initial entry into Mode 5 following first the Technical Specifications.

Facility Operating License No. NPF refueling.

Dates of initial notices in Federal 31 Amendment revised the Technical Amendment Nos.: 28 and 17.

Register October 12 1983 (48 FR 46460)

Specifications. Date of initial notice in Facility Opermting License No. NPF-and November 21, 1984 (49 FR 45979).

Federal Register November 21, 1984 (49 10 and NPF-15: Amendments revised The Commission's related evaluation FR 4500). The Commission's related the Technical Specifications.

of the amendments is contained in a evaluation of the amendment is

8022 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices contained in a Safety Evaluation dated allowed for placing a unit in Hot University of Virginia, Charlottesville, January 30, 1985. No significant hazards Standby, Hot Shutdown and Cold Virginia 22901.

consideration comments received: No Shutdown in the event a Limiting comments received.

Condition of Operation and/or Voretnos El

-2r and 50-er Sopay Local Public Document Room associated Action Statement cannot be Powe t Nos.

and 2, Surry locations: Fulton City Library, 709 satisfied because of circumstances in Market Street, Fulton, Missouri 65251 excess of those addressed in a county, Virginia and the Olin Library of Washington specification.

Date of application for amendments:

University, Skinker and Lindell Date of issuance: February 1, 1985.

September 19, 1984.

Boulevards, St. Louis, Missouri 63130.

Effective date: February 1, 1985.

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power62 and 46.

Corport atinke Ncl5ar-Po1, Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-These amendments will revise Technical Corporation, Docket No. 50-271, SeiiainTbe412 odlt h

4-and NPF-7.: Amendments revised the SeiiainTbe412 odlt h Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Technical Specifications.

requirement to test the control rod drop Vernon, Vermont Date of initial notice in Federal times at cold conditions after a refueling Date of application for amendment:

Register February 24, 1984 (49 FR 7048) shutdown or after maintenance February 7,1984 as supplemented May and December 31,1984 (49 FR 50794 at requiring the breach of the Reactor 18, 1984.

50827).

Coolant System.

Brief description of amendment: The The Commission's related evaluation Date of issuance: January 22, 1985.

amendment revises the Technical of the amendments is contained in a Effective date: January 22, 1985.

Specifications related to the limiting Safety Evaluation dated February 1, Amendment Nos. 101 and 100.

conditions for operation and 1985.

Facility Operating License Nos. DPR surveillance requirements to delete the No significant hazards consideration 32 and DPR-37: Amendment revised the requirements for the design feature that comments received: No.

automatically transfers high pressure Local Public Document Room coolant injection (HPCI) suction to the location: Board of Supervisors Office, Date o nta noic in FR suppression pool from the condensate Louisa County Courthouse, Louisa, R5 N

m 2

9 4

storage tank, upon high water level in Virginia 23093, and the Alderman 45980).

the suppression pool.

Library, Manuscripts Department, Date of issuance: January 23, 1985.

University of Virginia, Charlottesville, comments received: No.

Effective date: January 23, 1985.

Virginia 22901.

Local Public Room Jocation: Swem Amendment No.: 85.

Library, College of William and Mary, Facility Operating License No. DPR-Virginia Electric and Power Company, et Williamsb, Virginia 23185.

28: Amendment revised the Technical al., Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339, Specifications.

North Anna Power Station, Units No.1 Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Date of initial notice in Federal and No.2, Louisa County, Virginia Docket No. 50-305, Kewaunee Nuclear Register: April 25, 1984 49 FR 17876.

Date of application for amendments:

Power Plant, Kewaunee County, Subsequent to the initial notice in the March 16,1984, revised November 21, Wisconsin Federal Register, the licensee provided 1984.

Date of application for amendment:

NRC-requested documeritation by letter Brief description of amendments: The June 4, 1984, as revised August 21,1984.

dated May 18, 1984. This documentary amendments revise the NA4&2 TS to Brief description of amendment: The information does not affect the be in conformance with the new amendment consists of changes to discussion or conclusions of the initial Licensee Event Report System as position titles and includes minor notice of our proposed determination in stipulated in 10 CFR Part 50.73 and the any way.

immediate notification requirements for organizatonalithanes.Seniaditionoi The Commission's related evaluation operating nuclear power reactors as coueaitolenior actor of the amendment is contained in a provided in 10 CFR Part 50.72 which erator ru me lacation of Safety Evaluation dated Janaury 23, became effective January 1, 1984.

eione nta erlocs a

1985.

Date of issuance: February 1, 1985i corre of inor errors.

No significant hazards consideration Effective date: Within 7 days after comments received: No.

date of issuance.

Effective date: January 22,1985.

LocalPublic Document Room Amendment Nos.: 63 and 47.

Amendment No. 60.

Location: Brooks Memorial Library, 224 Facility Operating License Nos. APF-Facility Operating License No. DPR Main Street, Brattleboro, Vermont 05301.

4 and NPF-7. Amendments revised the 43: Amendment revised the Technical Virginia Electric and Power Company, et Technical Specifications.

al., Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339, Date of initial hotice in Federal North Anna Power Station, Units No. 117850)

Register July 24, 1984 (49 FR 29924) and aNo.

2,n oiStaoun, ViUnisNo and December 31, 1984 (49 FR 50794 at renoticed October 24, 1984 (49 FR 42835).

and No. 2, Louisa County, VirginiaCommission's related Date of application for amendment:

evaluation of the amendments is December 15, 1983 and August 1, 1984.

contained in a Safety Evaluation dated oft an tis ctaned in.

Brief description of amendment: The February 1, 1985.

amendments revise the NA-1&2 TS 3.0.3 No significant hazards consideration 1985.

to provide consistency with the time comments received: No.

Significant hazards consideration requirements and wording specified in Local Public Document Room comments received: None.

the NRC approved standardized location: Board of Supervisors Office, Local Publc Document Room Westinghouse TS which are Louisa County Courthouse, Louisa, location. University of Wisconsin, appropriately applied to NA-1&2. The Virginia 23093, and the Alderman Library Learing Center, 2420 Nicolet time requirements state the time Library, Manuscripts Department, Drive, Green Bay, Wisconsin 54301.

Federal Register Po1. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February f 1985 / Notices 8023 NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant the proceeding; and (3) the possible AMENDMENT TO FACILITY to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental effect of any order which may be OPERATING LICENSE AND FINAL impact statement or environmental entered in the proceeding on the DETERMINATION OF NO assessment need be prepared for these petitioner"s interest. The petition should SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS amendments. If the Commission has also identify the specific aspect(s) of the CONSIDERATION AND prepared an environmental assessment subject matter of the proceeding as to OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING under thespecial circumstances which petitioner wishes to intervene.

(EXIGENT OR EMERGENCY provision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and has Any person who has filed a petition for CIRCUMSTANCES) made a determination based on that leave to intervene or who has been During the 30-day periodassessment, it is so indicated.

admitted as a party may amend the publication of the last ice For further details with respect to the petition without requesting leave of the the Commission has issued the following action see: (1) The application for Board up to fifteen (15) days prior to the amendments. The Commission has amendment, (2] the amendment to first prehearing conference scheduled in determined for each of these Facility Operating License, and.(3) the the proceeding, but such an amended amendments that the application for the Commission's related letter, Safety petition must satisfy the specificity amendment complies with the standards Evaluation and/or Environmental requirements described above.

and requirements of the Atomic Energy Assessment, as indicated. All of these Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to Act of 1954, as amended (the Act),

items are available for public inspection the first prehearing conference the Commission's rules and regulations.

at the Commission's Public Document scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner the Commission hals mad apropiates Room, 1717 H Street, NW., Washington, shall file a supplement to the petition to The Commission has made appropriate D.., adtthlolpuicoumn findings as required by the Act and the intervene which must include a list of Commission's rules and regulations in 10 room for the particular facility involved, the contentions which are sought to be CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the A copy of items (2) and (3) may be litigated in the matter, and the bases for license amendment.,

obtained upon request addressed to the each contention set forth with Because of exigent or emergency U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, reasonable specificity. Contentions shall circumstances assbciated with the date Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention:

be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment was needed, there was Dirctor, Division of Licensing.

the amendment under consideration. A nottim fo th Comisionto ublsh, The Commission is also offering an petitioner who fails to file such a not time for the Commission to publish, opportunity for a hearing with respect to for public comment before issuance, its thisuneothamnmn.Byupletwicstsfstee usual 30-day Notice of Consideration of teisac fteaedet.B usul 3-da Noiceof onsdertio of March 29, 1985, the licensee may file a requirements with respect to at least one Issuance of Amendment and Proposed request for a hearing with respect to contention will not be permitted to No Significant Hazards Consideration issuance of the amendment to the participate as a party.

Determination and Opportunity for subject facility operating license and Those permitted to intervene become Hearing. For exigent circumstances, a any person whose interest may be parties to the proceeding, subject to any press release seeking public comment as

-affected by this proceeding and who limitations in the order granting leave to to the proposed no significant hazards wishes to participate as a party in the intervene, and have the opportunity to consideration determination was used, proceeding must file a written petition participate fully in the conduct of the and the State was consulted by for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing, including the opportunity to telephone. In-circumstances where hearing and petitions for leave to present evidence and cross-examine failure to act in a timely way would intervene shall be filed in accordance witnesses.

have resulted, for example, in derating with the Commisgion's "Rules of Since the Commission has made a or shutdown of a nuclear power plant, a Practice for Domestic Licensing final determination that the amendment shorter public comment period (less Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part 2. If a involves no significant hazards than 30 days) has been offered and the request for a hearing or petition for consideration, if a hearing is requested, State consulted by telephone whenever leave to intervene is filed by the above it will not stay the effectiveness of the possible.

date, the Commission or an Atomic amendment. Any hearing held would Under its regulations, the Commission Safety and Licensing Board, disignated take place while the amendment is in may issue and make an amendment by the Commission or by the Chairman effect.

immediately effective, notwithstanding of the Atomic Safety and Licensing A request for a hearing or a petition the pendency before it of a request for a Board Panel, will rule on the request for leave to intervene must be filedwith hearing from any person, in advance of and/or petition and the Secretary or the the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.

the holding and completion of any designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Nuclear Regulatory Commission, required hearing, where it has Board will issue a notice of hearing or Washington. D.C. 20555, Attention:

determined that no'significant hazards an approrpriate order.

Docketing and Service Branch, or may consideration is involved.

As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a be delivered to the Commission's Public The Commission has applied the petition for leave to intervene shall set Document Room, 1717 H Street, NW.,

standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has made forth with particularity the interest of Washington, D.C., by the above data.

a final determination that the the petitioner in the proceeding and how Where petitions are filed during the last amendment involves no significant that interest may be affected by the ten (10) days of the notice period, it is hazards consideration. The basis for this results of the proceeding. The petition requested that the petitioner promptly so determination is contained in the should specifically explain the reasons inform the Commission by a toll-free documents related to this action.

why intervention should be permitted telephone call to Western Union at (800)

Accordingly, the amendments have been with particular reference to the 325-6000 (in Missouri (800) 342-6700).

issued and made effective as indicated.

following factors: (1) The nature of the The Western Union operator should be Unless otherwise indicated, the petitioner's right under the Act to be given Datagram Identification Number Commission has determined that these.made a party to the proceeding; (2) the 3737 and the following message amendments satisfy the criteria for nature and extent of the petitioner's addressed to (Branch Chief) Petitioner's categorical exclusiona in accordance property,financial, or other interest in name and telephone number; date

8024 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices petition was mailed; plant name; and Amendments Nos.: 72 and 65.

[Docket Nos. 50-400OL]

publication date and page number of Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-Carolina Power & Light Co., North this Federal Register notice. A copy of 42 and DPR-60: Amendments revised Carolina Eastern Municipal Power the. petition should also be sent to the the Technical Specifications.

Executive Legal Director, U.S. Nuclear Public comments requested as to Agency (Shearon Harris Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, proposedno significant hazards Power Plant) Assignment of Atomic D.C. 20555, and to the attorney for the consideration: Yes. Federal Register Safety and Licensing Appeal Board licensee.

notice January 30, 1985 (50 FR 4285).

Notice is hereby given that, in Nontimely filings of petitions for leave The Commission's related evaluation accordance with the authority conferred to intervene, amended petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests of the amendment is contained in a by 10 CFR 2.787(a), the Chairman of the forplheail peinot bedentertained s

Safety Evaluation dated February 15, Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal forPanel has assigned the following panel absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding officer or the No significanthazards consideration y

Atoic afey ad icesin Bord comments received: No.

and Licensing Appeal Board for this Atomic Safety and Licensing BoardoprtnLiespocdng designated to rule on the petition and/or Attorneyfor the licensee: Gerald request, that the petitioner has made a Charnoff, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts &

Thomas S. Moore, Chairman substantial showing of good cause for Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, W.

Dr. Reginald L. Gotchy the granting of a late petition and/or Washington, D.C. 20036.

Howard A. Wilber.

request. That determination will be Local Public Document Room Dated: February 21, 1985.

based upon a balancing of the factors location: Environmental Conservation C. jean Shoemaker, specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and Library, Minneapolis Public Library, 300 Secretary to the Appeal Board.

2.714(d).

Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

[FR Doc. 85-4814 Filed 2-265; 8:45 am]

Commonwealth Edison Company, Virginia Electric and Power Company, BILLING CODE 7590-1-A Docket No. STN 50-454, Byron Station, Docket No. 50-281, Surry Power Station, Unit 1, Ogle County, Illinois Unit No.2, Surry County, Virginia.

[Docket No. 50-4831 Date of Application for amendment:

Date of application for amendment:

Union Electric Co.; Consideration of January 18, 1985.

Brief description of amendment: Adds January 4, 1985, as supplemented Issuance of Amendment to Facility a footnote to table of Containment January 9, and January 28, 1985.

Operating License and Proposed No Isolation Valves to allow certain valves Brief description of amendment: The Significant Hazards; Consideration to be opened intermittently under amendment revises Technical Determination and Opportunity for administrative controls.

Specification 4.17.A to extend the Hearing Date of issuance: January 18, 1985.

snubber inspection interval from 62 days The United States Nuclear Regulatory Effective date: January 18, 1985.

+/- 25% until the 1985 refueling outage.

Commission (the Commission) is Amendment No.: 1.

Date of issuance: February 1, 1985.

considering issuance of an amendment Facility Operating License No. NPF-Effective date: February 1, 1985.

to Facility Operating License No. NPF 23: Amendment revised the Technical Amendment No.: 101.

30, issued to Union Electric Company, Specifications.

Facility Operating License No. DPR-for operation of the Callaway Plant, Unit Public comments requested as to 1 located in Callaway County, Missouri.

proposed no significant hazards consideration: No.

Amendment revised the Technical This amendment would revise the Comments received: No.

Specifications.

time period associated with Technical The Commission's related evaluation Public comments requested as to Specification Surveillance 4.6.1.6.1 by is contained in a Safety Evaluation proposed no significant hazards extending each of the three scheduled dated January 28, 1985.

consideration: Yes. January 17, 1985 (50 containment vessel tendon surveillances Attorney for licensee: Isham, Lincoln FR 2635).

six (6) months, in accordance with the and Beale, One First National Plaza, Comments received: No.

licensee's request dated February 12, Chicago, Illinois.

1985. This extension is requested Local Public Document Room because the services of INRYCO, the location: Rockford Public Library, 215 N.

is contained in a Safety Evaluation inspection contractor for Union Electric Wyman Street, Rockford, Illinois 61103.

dated February 1, 1985.

and Alabama Power Co., are needed to Attorney for licensee: Michael W.

evaluate anomalies recently found at the Northern States Power Company, Maupin, Hunton and Williams, Post Farley Unit 2 plant. Union Electric Docket Nos. 50-282 and 50-306, Prairie Office Box 1535, Richmond, Virginia Company released INRYCO to Alabama Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 23213.

Power Company so that the outage Nos. 1 and 2, Goodhue County, Local Public Room location: Swem associated with the Farrey problem is Minnesota Library, College of William and Mary, not unnecessarily extended.

Date of application for amendment:

Williamsburg, Virginia 23185.

Before issuance of the proposed January 18, 1985.

Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 20th day license amendment, the Commission Description of amendments: These of February 1985.

will have made findings required by the amendments change the Technical Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended Specificiation section 3.3.D.2c dealing (the Act) and the Commission's with the allowable inoperable period of E.G. Touriny, regulations.

the cooling water headers of the service Acting Chief, Operating Reactors Branch No.

The Commission has made a proposed water system.

3, Division of Licensing.

determination that the amendment Date of Issuance: February 15, 1985.

[FR Doc. 85-4674 Filed 2-26-85; 8:45 am]

request involves no significant hazards Effective date: February 15, 1985.

BILLING CODE 759001-consideration. Under the Commission's