ML17214A308

Monthly Notice of Amends to OLs Involving NSHC

ML17214A308
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch, Calvert Cliffs, Davis Besse, Saint Lucie, Brunswick, Fort Calhoun, 05000000, Fort Saint Vrain
Issue date:	06/07/1983
From:	Clark R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML17214A309	List: ML17214A308
References
NUDOCS 8307190001
Download: ML17214A308 (16)

Text

7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISS ION MONTHLY NOTICE AMENDMENTS TO OPERATING LICENSES INVOLVING NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATIONS

~BB d

Pursuant to Public Law (P.L.)97-415, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is publishing its regular monthly notice.

P.L.97-415 revised section 189 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), to require the Commission to publish notice of any amendments

issued, or proposed to be

issued, under a

new provision of section 189 of the Act.

This provision grants the Commission the authority to issue and make immediately effective any amendment to an operating license upon a determination by the Commission that such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, notwith-standing the pendency before the Commission of a request for a hearing from any person.

This monthly notice includes all amendments

issued, or proposed to be

issued, since the effective date of the Commission's rules implementing P.L.97-415 (May 6, 1983)>

through May 23, 1983.

8307i9000i 8306i5 PDR ADOCK 05000267 P

PDR

7590-01 2

NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration.

Under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendments would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a.

significant reduction in a margin of safety.

The basis for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown below.

The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination.

Any comments. received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.

The Commission will not normally make a final determination unless it receives a request for a hearing; Comments should be addressed to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

'llashington, D.C.

20555, Attn:

Docketing and Service Branch.

By JUL g g 1983, the licensee or.

a petitioner may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceed-ing and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written petition for leave to intervene.

Requests for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's "Rules of Practice for Oomestic Licensing Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part Z.

If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above

date, the Commission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, designated by the Commission or by the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition and the Secretary or the designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of hearing or an appr opriate order.

As required by 10 CFR

$2.714,

-a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the-interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding.

The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following factors:

(1) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest.

The petition should also identify the speci'fic aspect(s) of the subject matter of the proceeding as to which'etitioner wishes to intervene.

Any person who has

~

~

7590-01

~ o>>

filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been admitted as a party may amend the petition without requesting leave of the Hoard up to fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy the specificity requirements described above.

Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner shall file a supplement to the petition to intervene which must include a list of the contentions which are sought to be litigated in the matter, and the bases for each contention set forth with reasonable specificity.

Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration.

A petitioner who fails to file such a supplement which satisfies these requi rements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.

Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing, including the opportunity to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses.

If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration.

The final determina-tion will serve to decide when the hearing is held.

4

~

7590-01 5-If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no si gnificant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearin'g.

Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment.

If the final determination is that the amendment involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.

Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expi r-ation of the 30-day notice period.

However, should circumstances change during the notice period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility,. the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration.

The final determination will consider all public and State comments received before action is taken.

Should the Commission take this action, it will publish a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a hearing after issuance.

The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.

A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, O.C.

Z0555, Attention:

Docketing and Service Branch, or may be

7590-01

-'6-delivered to the Commission's Public Document

Room, 1717 H Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C.,

by the above date.

Where petitions are filed during the last ten (10) days of the notice period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so inform the Commission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at (800) 325-6000 (in Missouri (800) 342-6700).

The Western Union operator should be given Dataqram Identification Number 3737 and the following message addressed to Branch Chief petitioner's name and telephone number; date petition was mailed; plant name; and publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice.

A copy of the petition should also be sent to the Executive Legal Director, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.

20555, and to the attorney for the, licensee.

Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing wi 1 1 not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding officer or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board designated to rule on the petition and/or request, that the petitioner has made a substantial showing of good cause for the granting of a late petition and/or request.

That determination wi 11 be based upon a balancing of the factors speci fied in 10 CFR 2. 714(a )(1)(i )- (v) and Z. 714(d).

For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment which is availablh for public inspection at the Commission's Public Oocument

Room, 1717 H Street, N.M., irlashington, O. C.,

and at the local public document room for the particular facility involved.

Public Service Com an of Colorado Oocket No.

50-267 Fort St. Vrain Nucl ear Generatin Station Pl attevil 1 e Colorado Oate of amendment re uest:

April 7, 1983 Descri tion of amendment re uest:

The amendment would incorporate provisions on minimum shift crew size, guidelines for working hours, qualifications of technical advisors and revise the membership of the onsite safety review committee.

These proposed changes were made in response to NRC r equests and revise the Administrative Controls provisions to achieve consistency with present NRC staff positions on these subjects.

Basis for ro osed no si nificant hazards consideration determination:

The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of these standards by providing certain examples (48 FR 14870).

The examples of actions involving no significant hazards include actions which are purely administrative changes to the Technical Specifications, are changes to make the licensee conform to changes in the r egulations, or additional limitations or r estric-tions.

The changes proposed in the application are encompassed by these examples as follows:

1) format and editorial changes are purely administra-tive changes,

2) incorporation of provisions on a minimum shift crew size are additional limitations and are in accordance with the guidance provided in NUREG-0737, "Clari'fication of TtlI Action Plan Requirements",

Item I.A.1.3,

3) incorporation of guidelines on working hours and qualifications of technical advisors are additional limitations providing conformance to staff'ositions, and

4) revisions to the onsite r eview committee membership incorporate more restrictive qualifications necessary for committee membership.

Since the application for amendment to the Administrative Controls Technical Specifica'-

tions involves changes to incorporate present NRC regulations and staff posi-

tions, the staff proposes to determine that the application does not involve a significant hazards consideration.

Local Public Oocument Room location:

Greeley Public Library, City Complex Building, Greel ey, Colorado.

Attorne for the Licensee:

Bryant O'Oonnell, Public Service Company of

Colorado, P.

0.

Box 840,

Oenver, Colorado 80201.

HRC Branch Chief:

G. L. Madsen Publ ic Service Com an of Colorado Oocket No. 50-267 Fort St. Vrain Hucl ear Generatin Station Pl attevil1 e, Colorado Oate of amendment re uest:

April 19, 1983 Oescri tion of amendment re uest:

The amendment would revise those Technical Specifications dealing with the actions to be taken when instrumentation is inoperable and specifying acceptable moistur e monitoring instrumentation during less than 5X power operation.

The proposed changes were submitted in response to licensee commitments for clarification that required plant shutdowns cannot be delayed when instruments are inoperable and to clarify the requirements for allowable moistur e monitoring instrumentation at low power by allowing the use of an additional analytical monitor or the protective system dewpoint monitors.

~

~

for ro osed no si nificant hazards consideration determination:

The sion has provided guidance concerning the application of these standards viding certain examples (48 FR 14870).

The examples of actions involving nificant hazards include actions which involve a change that constitutes itional limitation, restriction or control not presently included in the

'cal Specifications.

The changes included in this application add limita-to clarify the intent of the specification.

The change to the allowable re monitoring instrumentation during low power operation clarifies the rement but allows more flexibility through the use of comparable instru-Since the proposed changes clarify existing requirements, the staff ses to determine that the application does not involve a significant ds consider ation.

Public Oocument Room location:

Greeley Public Library, City Complex ing, Greeley, Colorado.

r ne for Licensee:

Bryant O'Oonnel 1, Public Service Company of Colorado, Box 840,

Oenver, Colorado 80201.

Branch Chief:

G. L. Madsen ida Power 5 Li ht Com an

, Oocket No. S0-389, St. Lucie Jnit 2, Lucie Count

, Florida of amendment re uest:

April 20, 1983 ri tion of amendment re uest:

Revise the Technical Specification (4.4.3.3.b) equire that the pressur izer heaters be manually connected to the emergency r source and that the Safety injection Actuation System be reset to oermi",.

ation of the heaters.

10-Basis for r o osed no si nificant'azards consideration determination:

The existing Technical Specification r equires pressur izer heaters to be reconnected to their respective buses normally from the control room.

In order to be able

- to do this, the oper ator must r eset the Engineered Safety Feature Actuation System test signal.

The Technical Specifications do not mention "resetting";

the licensee believes. it should.

The staff concurs that this administrative change to clarify the Technical Specification is justified.

Local Public Document Room location:

Indian River Community College Library, 3209 Virginia Avenue, Ft. Pierce, Florida 33450.

Attor ne for Licensee:

Harold F. Reis, Esq.,

Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, Axelrad 3 Toll, 1025 Connecticut

Avenue, N.M., Washington, Q.

C. 20036.

NRC Branch Chief:

Geor ge M. Knighton.

Baltimore Gas and Electric Com an Docket Nos.

50-317 and 50-318 Calver t Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Unit Nos.

I and Z

Lusb Calvert Count, t1ar land Oate of amendment re uest:

Apr il 27, 1983,.

Oescri tion of amendment re uest:

The April Z7, 1983 application requests the following changes to the Unit I and Unit Z Technical Specifications:

(I ) Revi-sion to the on-site organization, (2) Revised surveillance for sealed

sources, and (3) Deletion of a snubber from the surveillance list, (Unit I only).

Basis for ro osed no si nificant hazards consideration determination:

The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of three standards for conclusions regarding "no significant hazards considerations" by providing exampl es (48 FR 14870).'hese exampl es are not appl icable to the issues addr ssed in the April 27 application.

Qur basis for concluding that the standards are met with respect to the no significant hazards considerations determination is presented below.

11 Organizational changes will occu'r at CalvertCliffs Nuclear Power Plant affecting Section 6.0 of the Technical Specifications in two areas, namely Figure 6.2.2 - Organization Chart, and change the title of two members of the Plant Operations and Safety Review Committee membership as noted in Section 6.5.1.2.

These changes are administrative in nature in that they do not affect the technical or administrative competence of the onsite organization at Calvert Cl iffs.

A proposed change to the Technical Specifications would provide a wording clarification to the surveillance requirements for sealed sources.

The Combus-tion Engineering Standard Technical Specifications in f!UREG-0212 were r evised on November 5,

1980 to reflect. this new wording.

The wording in the current Technical Specifications could lead to misinterpretation of Surveillance Requirement 4.7.9.1.2.c as requiring a test for sealed source leakage each time a reactor startup occurs.

This is clearly not the intent, since these sources are located in the. reactor vessel and would require removal of the reactor vessel head and the detectors for testing.

This is not a requirement of the current CE Standard Technical Specifications and was never intended to be a

r equirement for Calvert Cliffs.

With the r evised wording, it is clear that this test is not required if the detectors have been previously subjected to core flux.

Thus, it is proposed to determine that this, change involves no significant hazards consideration because the change is merely to clarify the intent and avoid misinter pretation of the surveillance requirement.

and does not reduce or change the intended surveillance.

In addition, the proposed change corrects an inadvertent deletion of the words "or installation in the core", making the wording consistent with the Standard Technical Specifications.

A proposed change to the Unit 1 Technical Specifications uoula delete snubber 1-38-4 from the list of'snubbers requiring routine surveillance.

This snubber was removed under an earlier modification which installed the Reactor Coolant System head vent and Pressurizer vent piping.

Reclassification of the system upstream of and including the main solenoid valves as'eismic Class 1

allowed removal of the snubber, since it was no longer required.

Since this change is being made to correct the Technical Specifications to reflect current system configuration, it will not result in any significant effect on any analyzed accident or postulated accident in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report.

Additionally, since the snubber is no longer needed or installed, no reduction in the bases for any Technical Specifications would r esult from this change.

Local Public Document Room location:

Calve t County Library, Prince Frederick, Maryland.

Attor ne for licensee:

George F. Trowbridge, Esq.,

Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge, 1800 fl Street, N. W., Washington, 3.

C.

20036.

NRC Branch Chief:

Robert A. Clark.

AGILITY OPERATING. LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERA-DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED NOTICES OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT To ION The following notices were previously published as separate individual notices.

The notice content was the same as above.

They were published as individual notices because time did not allow the Commission to wait for this regular monthly notice.

They are repeated here because the monthly notice lists all amendments proposed to be issued involving no significant hazards consideration.

For details, see the individual notice in the Federal Regis-er on the day and page cited.

This notice does not extend the no ic oe. 'cd vf

=.".e

7590-Ol The Toledo Edison Com an and The Cleveland Electric Illuminatin Com an Docket No. 50-346, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.

1 Ottawa Count

, Ohio Date of amendment re uest:

May 2, 1983 Brief descri tion of amendment:

This amendment would extend the surveillance test due date from May 17, 1983 to September 17, 1983 for the steam generator outlet steam pressure channels in the Remote Shutdown Instrumentation and Post Accident flonitoring Instrumentation.

Date of ublication of individual notice in Federal Re ister:

May 16, 1983 48 FR 22036.

Ex iration date of individual notice:

June 15, 1983.

Local Public Document Room location:

University of Toledo Library, Documents Department, 2801 Bancroft Avenue, Toledo, Ohio.

Geor ia Power Com an 0 lethor e Power Cor oration, Munici al Electric Authorit of Geor ia, Cit of Dalton, Geor ia Docket No. 50-366 Edwin I.

Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2, A lin Count

, Geor ia.

Date of amendment re uest:

February 23, 1983, as supplemented April 19, 1983 and March 30, 1983.

Brief descri tion of amendment:

The amendment would modify the Technical Specifications to provide additional and revised tri p setpoi nts that reflect design modifications to.r educe containment loads from plant transients.

The Technical Specification changes would (1) lower the opening and closing set-points for subsequent actuation of selected safety relief valves, and. (2) lowe.

the main steam isolation valve water level trip setpoint.

It would also modify the Technical Specifications to reflect changes to the core design for the third fuel reload of Unit No. 2.

Date of ublication of individual notice in Federal Re ister:

May 18, 1983 48 FR 22389.

Ex iration date of individual notice:

June 17, 1983.

Omaha Public Power District Docket No.

50-285 Fort Calhoun Station, Unit I, Washin ton Count Nebraska Date of amendment re uest:

March 7, 1983 Brief descri tion of amendment:

The Reactor Coolant System Heatup and Cool-down Curves must be revised to make them more restrictive in order to maintain the current margins of safety.

The curves will be valid to 7.0 effective full power years.

Date of ublication of individual notice in Federal Re ister:

May 18, 1983 48 FR 22390.

Ex iration date of individual notice:

June 17, 1983.

Local Public Document Room location:

W. Dale Clark Library, 215 South 15th

Street, Omaha, Nebraska.

Carolina Power 8 Li ht Com an Docket No. 50-325, Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit I, Brunswick Count

, North Carolina Date of amendment re uest:

May 2, 1983.

Brief descri tion of amendment:

The amendment would revise the technical specifications to incorporate appropriate limiting conditions for operation or the facility during the four th fuel cycle.

~

~

7590-01 Date of ublication of individual notice in Federal Re ister:

May 19, 1983 (48 FR 22658).

Ex iration date of individual notice:

June 12, 1983.

Local public Document Room location:

Southport-Brunswick County Library, 109 W. Moore Street, Southport, North Carolina 28461.

Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 7th day of June, 1983.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

~W C. C~.c;-~

Robert A. Clark, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No.

3 Division of Licensing