ML20024D311
| ML20024D311 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley, Millstone, Palisades, Saint Lucie, Arkansas Nuclear, Summer, Crystal River, San Onofre, Cook, 05000000, Fort Saint Vrain, Trojan, Crane |
| Issue date: | 06/14/1983 |
| From: | Clark R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20024D312 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8308040524 | |
| Download: ML20024D311 (26) | |
Text
a 7590-01 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION MONTHLY NOTICE AMENDMENTS TO OPERATING LICENSES INVOLVING NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATIONS I.
Background
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 makf 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 perton.
This monthly notice includes all amendments issued or proposed to be issued since the closing date (May 23,1983) of the last monthly notice which was published on June 10,1983 (48 FR 26927-26931), through June 14, 1983.
l 8308040524 830614 PDR ADOCK 05000206 l
P PDR
o o
7590-01
' 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 safaty. The basis for this proposed determination for each amendment request is snown 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 wil1 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.
l Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555, Attn:
Docketing and Service Branch.
l l
7590-01 By July 22,1983, the licensee 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 proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written petition for
< eave to intervene.
Request for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's " Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part 2.
If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or an Atomic S~afety 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 hearin'g or an appropriate 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 proceedina, and how that inter.est 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 specific aspect (s) of the subject matter of the proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene.
Any person who has
/feu-L1 c filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been admit ed as a party may amend the petition without requesting leave of the Board up to fif teen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy the specificity recuirements 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 supolement which satisfies these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene becone parties to the proceeding, subjept 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 hearino 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.
.e
=a 7590-01
. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediateTy effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing.
Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment.
l If the final determination is that the amendment involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before th'e issuance of any amendment.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expir-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 l
period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration.
The final determinatica will consider all public and State canments' received before action is taken.
Should the Commission take this action, it will publish a notice of issuance and provide I
for opportunity for a hearing af ter 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, l
Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention:
Docketing and Service Branch, or may be I
l l
l l
i
4 7590-01 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 Datagram 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 Le' al Director, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, g
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 will 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 will be based upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
t l
l l
l I
m _. _.
2
.m l
7590-01 -
4 For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.'C., and at the local public. document room for the particular facility involved.
4 Duquesr.e Light Company, Docket No. 50-334, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1, Shippingport, Pennsylvania Date of amendment request:
November 23, 1982 i
Description of amendment request:
Application for an amendment to Operating License DPR-66, revising Tables 3.7-4a and 3.7-4b of Appendix A.
The revision consists of the addition of 31 mechanical snubbers and the replacement of 3 hydraulic snubbers with mechanical ones.
These snubbers were*added to enhance safety of the plant - a more conse'rvative design resulting in the increased reliability of the piping system to perform under normal and accident conditions.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
One of the examples of actions involving no significant hazards consideration relates to a change that constitutes an additional limitation, restriction, or control not presently included in the Technical Specifications.
The proposed amendment adds more snubbers to the surveillance list, and matches Example (ii) provided by the Commission on actions involving no significant hazards (48 FR 14871).
Local Public Document Room location:
B. F. Jones Memorial Library, 663 Franklin Avenue, Aliquippa, Pennsylvania 15001.
Attorney for the Licensee:
Gerald Charnoff, Esquire, Jay E. Silberg, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, R,W., Washington, D.C.
20036.
6 7590-01.
liRC Branch Chief:
Steven A. Varga.
Duquesne Light Company, Docket No. 50-334, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1, Shippingport, Pennsylvania Date of amendment request:
November 23, 1982 Description of amendment request:
The current Technical Specifications require two licensed Reactor Operators to be on shift during modes 1, 2, 3 and 4.
This proposed change would require only one licensed Reactor Operator to be on shift.
There is, however, no change to the number of Senior Reactor Operators required for each shift; two Senior Operators are needed for each shift.
With this change, a trained but non-lic,ensed individual under the direct supervision of a licensed Senior Reactor Operator could man.ipulate controls that do not directly affect
' the reac.tivity of the reactor.
The requested change will be temporary; a rule on staffing will be effective on January 1,1984.
At that time, the Technical Specifications will be changed to comply with the rule.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of these standards by providing certain examples (48 FR 14871).
One example under "significant hazards" involves "a significant relaxation in limiting conditions for operation not accompanied by compensatory changes." However, the substitution of a trained but non-licensed individual provides the compensatory action to allow character-izing this request as involving no significant hazards consideration.
Local Public Document Room location:
- 8. F. Jones Memorial Library, 663 Franklin Avenue. Aliquippa, Pennsylvania 15001.
Attorney for the licensee:
Gerald Charnoff, Esq., Jay E. Silberg, Esq.,
Shaw, Pittnan, Potts and Trowbridge,1800 ft Street, N. W., Washington, D. C.
20036.
NRC Branch Chief:
Steven A. Varga.
7590-01.
Florida Power & Light Company, Docket No. 50-335, St. Lucie Plant, Unit No.1, St. Lucie County, Florida Date of amendment request:
September 5, 1978.
Description of amendment request: This amendment would change the technical specifications relating to the surveillance requirements for the diesel gen-erator units used as the onsite AC power source at St. Lucie Plant, Unit No.1.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of these standards by providing certain examples (48 FR 14871).
One of the examples of actions involving no significant hazards considerations relates to additional limitations, restrictions, or control not presently included in the technical specifications (ii).
In the case of this amendment, the staff requested that the technical specifications of St.
Lucie Plant, Unit No.1 be amended to incorporate the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.108, " Periodic Testing of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Systems at Nuclear Power Plants."
The changes will lead to enhanced control with respect to the reliable operation of the diesel generators.
In response to that request the licensee proposed changes to the technical specifications in their letter of September 5, 1978.
The requested changes consist of surveillance requirements con-cerning verification of generator synchronization and loading and verifying that the diesel generator operates for at least 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br />.
These revised surveillance requirements will provide added assurance that the diesel generator units perform as required in the event of an emergency and, thus, enhance the safety considerations for St. Lucie Plant, Unit No.1.
Local Public Document Room location:
Indian River Junior College Library, 3209 l
Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida 33450.
l
6 7590-01 Attorney for licensee:
Harold F. Reis, Esq., Lowenstein, Newman, Reis and Axelrad, 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N. W. Washington, D. C.
20036 NRC Branch Chief:
Robert A. Clark Indiana and Michigan Electric Company, Docket No. 50-315, Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit No.1 Date of application for amendment:
May 11, 1983 Description of amendment request:
This amendment for the Donald C. Cook Plant, Unit No.1 involves a core reload and would permit operation with Westinghouse Optimized Fuel Assemblies with up to 4.0 weight percent U-235 and to extended burnups of 39,000 MWT/ MWD (average region discharge) in addition to Exxon Fuel during Cycle 8.
This requires numerical changes to the Unit 1 Technical Specifications due to use of improved thermal design procedures, annular burnable assemblies and design thermal power of 3411 MWt.
Changes are made to reactor trip system setpoints, enthalpy hot channel factors, shutdown margin, rod drop times, hot channel factors and other power distribution limits and axial power distributor limits.
There is no request to increase the authorized power of the facility.
The changes to the core physics parameters and thermal characteristics are required to account for the increased enrichment and improved neutronic characteristics of the fuel and control assemblies.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination; One of l
the Commission's examples (48 FR 14871) involving no significant hazards relates 1
to fuel reloads amendments involving no fuel assemblies significantly different than those previously found acceptable at the facility in question.
This l
7590-01
, amendment is directly related to that example in that the new fuel is exactly
_like previous W 15 x 15 fuel assemblies except with grid spaces made of a different material with improved neutronics characteristics.
The increased enrichment and possible fuel cycle management changes will extend the fuel burnup but to less average discharge burnup than has been approved for Unit 2 and the common spent fuel pool.
Reactivity will not be increased in the spent fuel pool above levels previously analyzed and approved.
The use of improved thermodynamics calculational procedures and the new annular burnable assemblies will follow NRC approval of the generic reports.
The licensee use of these new procedures and burnable assembliesshould not result in plant operation outside the limits of acceptable margins of criteria.
Local Public Document Room location:
Maude Reston Palenske Memorial Library, 500 Market Street, St. Joseph, Michigan 49085.
Attorney for Licensee:
Gerald Charnoff, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge,1800 M Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20036.
NRC Branch Chief:
Steven A. Varga Indiana and Michigan Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316, Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Date of application for amendment:
March 29,198?
Description of amendment request:
This amendment would made editorial changes to accurately describe reactor trip system instrumentation and would update the organizational charts and current position titles, duties, and committee assignments of plant personnel.
1
7590-01.
Basis for proposed no signigicant hazards consideration determination:
This Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of these standards by providing certain examples (48 FR 14871).
One of the examples of actions involving no significant hazards considerations relates to amendments of a purely administrative change to Technical Specifications.
The proposed amend-ment is directly related to this example with the one exception (with technical implications) of the Operations Superintendent not holding an SR0 license.
The staff has not established the acceptability of this exception to the criteria of TMI Action Plan NUREG-0737, nevertheless, the staff has determined that the application shall not involve a significant hazards since the Superintendent will not control operations of the plant as an SR0 but is expected to understand operations to an equivalent level of an SRO.
The Operations Superintendent has completed the SR0 training and has two qualified managers reporting to him as intermediary managers of the regular plant SR0s.
Therefore the Operations Superintendent's actions should not create accidents not previously analyzed and should not reduce the levels of safety found acceptable for the plant.
Local Public Document Room location:
Maude Reston Palenske Memorial Library, 500 Market ' Street, St. Joseph, Michigan 49085.
Attorney for licensee:
Gerald Charnoff, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge,1800 M Street, N.W., Washington, D. C. 20036.
NRC Branch Chief:
Steven A. Varaa Indiana and Michigan Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316, Dona.ld C.
Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Berrien County, Michigan Date of application for amendment:
August 14, 1981 Description of amendment fequest:
The amendment would change the Technical Specifications to be consistent with the upgraded administrative control,
7590-01.
required by IE Bulletin 80-12 to ensure that redundant methods of decay heat removal are available during all modes of operation.
Redundancy is provided by the license requirements for operability and surveillance requirements of existing systems in all modes.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
The Commission has provided guidance'concerning the application of those standards by providing certain examples (48 FR 14871).
One of these examples of actions involving no significant hazards considerations relates to changes that consti-
~
tute an additional limitation, restriction, or control not presently included in the Technical Specifications.
This amendment specifically adds additional licensing limitations and restrictions to assure redundant methods of decay heat removal in all modes of operation.
The systems to provide the redundahey are existing systems that were previously available but not specifically addressed as redundant systems in the Technical Specifications.
Providing the redundancy does not create accidents not previously analyzed and does not lessen the margins of safety of plant operation; it is intended to provide an additional margin by license requirement for operability.
Local Public Document Room location:
Maude Reston Palenske Memorial Library, 500 Market Street, St. Joseph, Michigan 49085.
Attorney for Licensee:
Gerald Charnoff, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20036.
NRC Branch Chief:
Steven A. Varga
7590-01 _.
Indiana and Michigan Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316, Donald C.
Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos.1 and 2, Berrien County, Michigan Date of application for amendment:
September 29, 1982 Description of amendment request:
The amendment would upgrade the Technical Specifications by requiring redundant (2) containment hydrogen analyzers to satisfy the requirements of TMI Action Item II.F.1.6 of NUREG 0737.
The current Technical Specifications require one hydrogen analyzer and one gas chromatograph.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of these standards by providing certain examples (48 FR 14871).
One of the examples of actions involving no significant hazards considerations relates to a change that con-stitutes an additional limitation, restriction, or control not presently included in the Technical Specification.
This amendment relates directly to the example in that the redundant hydrogen analyzer is an additional limitation for operation.
Local Public Document Room location:
Maude Reston Palenske Memorial Library, l
500 Market Street, St. Joseph, Michigan 49085.
Attorney for licensee:
Gerald Charnoff, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge,1800 M Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20036.
NRC Branch Chief:
Steven A. Varga Omaha Public Power District, Docket No. 50-285, Fort Calhoun Station, Unit i.
Washington County, Nebraska Date of amendment reauest:
March 21, 1978 and March 30, 1979 Description of amendment reauest:
Revises the TSs to provide additional assurance that plant operators conform with dose design objectives of accen-
7590-01 dix I to 10 CFR Part 50 and to provide clarification of certain monitoring and surveillance requirements.
Basis for prooosed no significant hazards consideration determination:
The proposed amendment is an example of an amendment that is considered not likely to involve significant hazards considerations such that the changes constitute additional limitations, restrictions, or controls not presently in the techni-cal specifications (Example (ii), 48 FR 14870, April 6, 1933).
Local Public Document Room location:
W. Dale Clark Library, 215 South 15th Street, Omaha, Nebraska.
Attorney for licensee:
Leboeuf, Lamb, Leiby, and MacRae, 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.
20036 NRC Branch Chief:
Robert A. Clark Omaha Public Power District, Docket No. 50-285, Fort Calhoun Station, Unit 1, Washington County, Nebraska Date of amendment recuest:
January 7, 1983 Description of amendment request:
Revises the TSs to include more formal administrative requirements on limiting overtime and reporting of safety l
valve and relief valve failures and challenges.
Basis for croposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
The two requirements are currently addressed by plant procedures.
The require-ments will now be more formalized in TSs.
The amendment is an example of an amendment that is considered not likely to involve significant hazards consideration such that the change constitutes a purely administrative change to the technical specification (48 FR 14P70, April 6,1983, Exame te t i ti.
7590-01 Local Public Document Room location:
W. Dale Clark Library, 215 South 15th Street, Omaha,r!ebraska.
Attorney for licensee:
LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby, and MacRae, 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.
20036.
NRC Brcnch Chief:
Robert A. Clark.
Portland General Electric Company, Docket No. 50-344, Trojan Nuclear Plant Columbia County, Oregon Date of amendment request:
March 30, 1983 Description of amendment request:
The amendment would add new requirements for cperability, visual inspections. and periodic testing of mechanical snubbers to ensure that these devices are operable.
Snubbers are attached to piping and equipment to provide restraint during a' seismic or other event which initiates dynamic loads, yet allow slow motion such as that produced by thermal expansion.
The amendment would also make minor revisions to the requirements for testing and inspection of hydraulic snubbers, such as including large-capacity snubbers (which can now be tested) in the functional test program, and more clearly de-fining the acceptance criteria for visual inspection and functional testing.
[
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of the standards for determining whether license amendments involve no significant hazards consider-i l
rations by providing certain examples which were published in the FEDERAL REGISTER i
on April 6, 1983 (48 FR 14870).
One of the examples of actions involving no significant hazards consideration is a change that constitutes an additional l
limitation, restriction, or control not presently included in the technical l
i s peci fications : for example, a more stringent surveillance requirement.
1590-811 The amendment request, discussed above, fits this example.
Or this basis, the Commission proposes to determine that the amendment involves no signifi-cant hazards consideration.
Local Public Document Room location:
Multnomah County Library, 801 S.W. 10th Avenue, Portland, Oregon Attorney for licensee:
J. W. Durham, Senior Vice President, Portland General Electric Company,121 S.W. Salmon Street, Portland, Oregon 97204 NRC Branch Chief:
Robert A. Clark Public Service Co. of Colorado, Docket No. 50-267, Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station, Platteville, Colorado Date of ' amendment request:
March 23, 1983 Description of amendment request:
The amendment would revise and update those Technical Specification requirements dealing with radiological effluents.
The application was submitted in response to an NRC request to incorporate present staff positions to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix I.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of these standards by providing certain exasaples (48 FR 14870).
The examples of actions involving no significant hazards include changes that constitute additional limitations not presently included in the Technical Specifications and that make the license conform to changes in the regulations.
Since the
, proposed changes add requirements and ensure compliance with the regulations in accordance with staff positions, the staff proposes to determine that the application does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
. _, - - ~.. -.. - - - - - - _
7500-01
. Local Public Document Room location:
Greeley Public Library, City Complex Building, Greeley, Colorado.
Attorney for licensee:
Bryant O'Donnell, Public Service Co. of Colorado, P. O. Box 840, Denver, Colorado.80201.
NRC Branch Chief:
G. L. Madsen Public Service Co. of Colorado, Docket No. 50-267, Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station, Platteville, Colorado Date of amendment request:
May 20, 1983 Description of amendment request:
The amendment would replace the existing non-radiological Environmental Technical Specifications (Appendix B) with an NRC-approved Environmental Protection Plan (EPP).
The only requirement being changed relates to ecological monitoring; the EPP will require continued vegetation monitoring.
The EPP was submitted at NRC request in accordance with the existing Technical Specification discussion which indicates that the ecological monitoring program is intended to be flexible and subject to revision.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
The amendment would revise the non-radiological, ecological monitoring program but would not change any current limitations related to the operation of the facility.
Since no operational limitations are being changed, the staff proposes to determine that the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, does not create the possibility of a new or different accident
7590-01 from any accident previously evaluated, and does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The staff, therefore, proposes to determine that the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
Local Public Document Room location:
Greeley Public Library, City Complex Building, Greeley, Colorado.
Attorney for licensee:
Bryant O'Donnell, Public Service Co. of Colorado, P. O. Box 840, Denver, Colorado 80201.
NRC Branch Chief:
G. L. Madsen South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, Docket No.60-395, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Jenkinsville, South Carolina Date of application for amendment:
December 1,1982 Description of amendment request:
Correction of an error in wording of a license condition relating to fire suppression to accurately reflect plant design.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
- determination:
The amendment involves a correction of an error in the license.
The present wording of the license condition does not accurately reflect plant design with respect to fire suppression.
The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of these standards by providing certain examples (48 FR 14870).
One of the examples of actions likely to involve no significant hazards considerations relates to a purely administrative change to technical specifications such as correction of an error.
l The correction to the license condition involved in this case is similar.
Accord-ingly, the Commission proposes to determine that this change does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
l
7590-01.
Local Public Document Room location:
Fairfield County Library, Garden &
Washington Streets, Winnsboro, South Carolina 29180.
Attorney for licensee:
Randolph R. Mahan, P. O. Box 764, Columbia, South Carolina 29218 NRC Branch Chief:
Elinor G. Adensam.
Arkansas Power & Light, Docket No. 50-368, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2 Pope County, Arkansas Date of amendment request:
February 23, 1983 and April 18, 1983 Description of amendment request:
Revise the Technical Specifications for administrative corrections and clarification.
Basis. for. proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
The proposed changes are administrative in nature, i.e., corrections of typographical errors, changes to achieve consistency throughout the Technical Specifications, title changes and reference corrections.
The amendment request is similar to example (i) of the examples of amendments that are considered not likely to involve a significant hazards consideration (see example (i) in 48 FR 14870, April 6,1983).
Local Public Document Room location:
Tomlinson Library, Arkansas Tech University, Russellville, Arkansas 72801 Attorney for licensee:
Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq., c/o DeBevoise &
Liberman,1200 Seventeenth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
20036 NRC Branch Chief:
Robert A. Clark
~
7590-01
_ PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED NOTICES OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND GPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING 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 notics in the Federal Register on the day and' p~ age cited.
This notice does not extend the notice period of the original notice.
Consumers Power Company, Docket No. 50-255, Palisades Plant, Van Buren l
County, Michigan Date of snenduent reouest:
May 5, 1983
==
Description:==
The proposed change would potentially slightly increase the interval between ' testing certain components and systems to verify their operability.
Date of publication of individual notice in Federal Register:
June 3, 1983, (48 FR 25026).
Expiration Date of individual notice:
July 6, 1983.
1 7590-01.
Local Public Document Room location:
Kalamazoo Public Library, 315 South Rose Street, Kalamazoo, Michigan 49006 Florida Power Corporation, et al., Docket No. 50-302, Crystal River Unit No. 3 Nuclear Generating Plant, Citrus County, Florida i
Date of amendment request:
March 31, 1983 Brief description of amendment:
The proposed amendment relates to the Cycle 5 reload, which 'has an increased cycle lifetime of 460 effective full power days (EFPD) instead of 350 EFPD in the previous cycle, and involves numerical changes to the regulating rod group insertion limit curves, the axial power shaping rod limit curves, the axial power imbalance envelope, and other related Technical Specification changes.
Date of publication of individual notice in Federal Register: June 6,1983, 48 FR 25292 Expiration date of individual notice:
July 7, 1983 i
Local Public Document Room Location:
Crystal River Public Library, 668 N.W.
First Avenue, Crystal River, Florida l
l Florida Power & Light Company, Docket No. 50-335, St. Lucie Plant, Unit No. 1, St. Lucie County, Florida Date of amendment reauest:
February 8, 1983 Amendment would permit operation of St.
Brief descriotion of amendment:
Lucie Plant, Unit No.1 af ter deletion of the flux augmentation f actor curve from the technical specifications.
7590-01
. Date of publication of individual notice in Federal Register:
June 3, 1983, 48 FR 25029 Expiration date of individual notice:
July 6, 1983 Local Public Document Room location:
Indian River Junior College Library, 3209 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida 33450 Florida Power & Light Comcany, Docket No. 50-335, St. Lucie Plant, Unit No. 1, St. Lucie County, Florida Date of amendment request:
February 16, 1983 Brief description of amendment:
Amendment would permit operation of St.
Lucie Plant, Unit No. 1 after installation of an improved and larger capacity 125 volt DC battery system and making necessary changes to the technical specifications.
Date of publication of individual notice in Federal Register:
June 3, 1983, 48 FR 25027 Expiration date of individual notice:
July 6, 1983 Local Public Document Room location:
Indian River Junior College Library.
3209 Virginia Avenue, Fort Pierce, Florida 33450 Metropolitan Edison Company, Jersey Central Power & Light Company, l
[
Pennsylvania Electric Company, and GPU Nuclear Corporation, Docket No.
50-289, Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania.
Date of amendment request:
May 9,1983.
Brief description of amendment:
The amendment requested would revise the Technical Specifications to recognize steam generator tube repair techniques,
7590-01 other than plugging, prveided such techniques are approved by the Commission.
The licensees' application further requested that the Commission approve, within the provisions of the proposed Technical Specification revision, the kinetic expansion steam generator tube repair technique used at the facility, thus permitting subsequent operation of the facility with the as-repaired steam generators.
Date of publication of individual notice in Federal Register:
tiay 31,1983 (48 FR 24231); Notice of Correction published June 14, 1983 (48 FR 27328).
Expiration date of individual notice:
June 30, 1983 (corrected)
Local Public Document Room location:
Government Publications Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, Education Building, Commonwealth and Walnut Streets, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
Northeast Nuclear Eneroy Company, et al., Docket Nos. 50-245 and 50-336, Millstone Nuclear Power Station Unit Nos. 1 and 2, New London County, Connecticut Date of amendment request:
February 16, 1983 Brief descriotion of amendment:
The amendments would delete superfluous Appendix B environmental technical specifications relative to meteorological monitoring, terrestrial monitoring, and transmission line right-of-way management, in accordance with the licensee's application for amendment dated February 16, 1983.
Date of oublication of individual notice in Federal Reoister:
June 14, 1983 48 FR 27328 Exoiration date of individual notice:
July 14, 1983 Local Public Document Rcom location:
Waterford Public Library, Rope Ferry Road, Route 156, Waterford, Connecticut
7590-01 Portland General Electric Company, Docket No. 50-344, Trojan Nuclear Plant,,
Columbia County, Oregon Date of amendment request:
May 2, 1983 Brief description of the amendment:
The amendment would permit the' continued use of a limited number of fuel assemblies which would have either three stainless steel rods or five stainless steel rods and additional suoporting grid straps in lieu of fuel rods.
Date of publication of individual notice in Federal Register:
June 1, 1983, 48 FR 24490 Expirat' ion date of individual notice:
July 1, 1983 Local Public Document Room location:
Multnomah Public Library, 801 S.'4.
10th Avenue, Portland, Oregon Southern California Edison Company, et al. Docket No. 50-361, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Uni.t 2, San Diego County, California Date of application for amendment:
January 6,1983 Brief Description of amendment request:
Grant temporary exceptions to the
'7acility Technical Specifications (which presently require immediatre corrective action to return at least one reactor coolant loop to operation) to permit natural circulationtests to be performed during the startup test program with no reactor coolant loops in operation in accordance with the licensees' application for amendment dated January 6,1983.
Date of publication of individual notice in Federal Register:
June 7. 1991 Expiration date of individual notice:
Julv 7, 1983 1
l
7590-01 Local Public Document Room location:
San Clemente Library, 242 Avenida Del Mar, San Clemente, California.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 14th day of June 1983.
1 FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION h.I Cv'
']/
Q t
Robert A. Clark, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Licensing i
e a
l 9
e
., -._,-__