ML20034A058
| ML20034A058 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 04/11/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20034A057 | List: |
| References | |
| A, NUDOCS 9004190243 | |
| Download: ML20034A058 (2) | |
Text
.
.j E{jpaCao
.,0,j UNITED STATES
+
,,' e g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 in 4
Q....+f SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAP, REACTOR RECULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. '30 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-68 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY. ET AL.
DOCKET NO. 50-424-V0GTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT. UNIT 1 i
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated July 31, 1989,- Georgia Power Company, et al., (the licensee) requested a change to the operating, license for Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Unit 1.
The proposed change would add two phrases to the Unit 1 Antitrust -License Conditions which were incorrectly omitted.
2.0- EVALUATION Paragraph (1)(a) of Appendix C, " Antitrust Conditions,"' to the operating license defines the term 'f Entity" as used therein. The proposed changes would-
. revise paragraph (1)(a) of Appendix C to Facility Operating License NPF-68 as 1
follows:
insert " owning, operating or proposing to own or operate equipment" in line 3. before the phrase "or facilities within the State;..";.and insert "or rate schedule on file with and subject to the regulation" in line'10 before t he p hra se " of t he Pub li c... ".
These phrases were contained in the Construction Permit Antitrust Conditions; l!
for both Vogtle Units 1 and 2.
They are also contained in the Vogtle Unit 2 Facility Operating License No. NPF-81. - The.NRC staff-finds that the proposed
.' l
~ changes ske.the Vogtle Unit 1 Facility Operating: License Antitrust Conditions consistent with Vogtle Unit 2 and in accord with the Construction Permit o
Antitrust Conditions.
Themfore, the requested amendment is acceptable.
I
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the Connission has determined that the issuance of this amendment will have no significant effect on the quality of the human:
enyironment-(55 FR 13340 ).
-l 900419024390o43k24
~
h DR ADOCK 05000 Le p
PDC s
y :.-
2.
i I
L 4.0 QNCLUSION j
L The Connission made a proposed determination that the amendnent involves no significant hazards consideration which was published in.the. Federal Register
- on November 1,1989,(54 FR 46150), and consulted with the State of Georgia.
No-l public comments were received, and the State of Georgia did not have any comnents.
t The staff has concluoed based on the' considerations discussed above,' that:-(1)
I -
endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2)y of the public will.not b thers-is reasonable assurance that the health and safet. such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations, and the. issuance of this amendment will: not be inimical. to the connon defense and security. or to the health and safety of. the public.
Principal Contributor: Jon B. Hopkins, PDII-3/DRP-I/II Dated: April 11, 1990 4
6 e
h J
i
.j -
y.
p r