ML20071J352
| ML20071J352 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 05/19/1983 |
| From: | Crouse R TOLEDO EDISON CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20071J336 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-82-17, GL-82-23, NUDOCS 8305260245 | |
| Download: ML20071J352 (3) | |
Text
1 APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-3 FOR DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT NO. 1.
Enclosed are forty-three (43) copies of the requested changes to the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1 Facility Operating License No. NPF-3, together with the Safety Evaluation for the requested change.
The proposed changes include:
1.
Sections 6.5.2.8.e, 6.5.2.8.f s/ R. P. Crouse By Vice President, Nuclear Sworn and subscribed before me this day of May, 1983.
/s/ Nora Lynn Flood Notary Public My commission expires September 1, 1987.
SEAL 8305260245 830519 PDR ADOCK 05000346 P
Docket No. 50-346 License No. NPF-3 Serial No. 947 May 19, 1983 Attachment I I.
Changes to Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Appendix A Technical Specification Sections 6.5.2.8.e. 6.5.2.8.f.
A.
Tine required to Implement. This change is to be effective upon NRC approval.
B.
Reason for Change (Facility Change Request 82-162).
This is to comply with Mr. D. G. Eisenhut's letters of Octo'oer 1, 1982 and October 30, 1982 (Generic Letters 82-17 and 82-23, Log Nos. 1103 and 1125).
C.
Safety Evaluation (See attached)
~
D.
Significant Hazards Considerations Toledo Edison has reviewed the above Amendment Request in accordance with 10 CFR 50.92(c) and has determined the proposed amendment 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 above determination is based on the attached Safety Evaluation.
J e
e i
y, M;.- "
y e-
)
5%
SAFETY EVALUATION he e
,1-This amendment requests a change to kis[)40u'ast d in two letters from Mr.thg Davfa p[ M Unit No. 1 Technical Specifications f
- ' w;T D. G. Eisenhut (Generic Letter Nos. E,2-17'ai<d $h23, Log Nos. 1103 and 1125) to comply with the requirementa of10CFR50.54(t) and 10CFR73.40(d)
/ _A r(
respectively.
pqh y'
A x0 s
.The safety function of the Emergency Plan audit f v to encure th'atsthe Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures are evaluated for adequacy of interfaces with State and Local governments and cfN icensee drills, u
exercises, capabilities, and procedures.
' \\
The safety function of the Security Plan audit is tobasure that the I.
i
\\
Security Plan and Implementing Procedures perform its design function and r*'
\\-
that it comply with regulations.
l T.S. 6.5.2.8.e provides for an audit of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power l
Station Emergency Plan and Implementing Procedures to be performed 0
l under the cognizance of the Company Nuclear Review Board (CNRB) at
'K,j~.
least every 24 months. This request will change that period to at
,v least every 12 months.
4'
+
1 T.S. 6.5.2.8.f provides,for an audit of the, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power k
Station Security Plan and Implementing Pracpdured t'a be performed k
under the cognizance of the Company' Nuclear Review Board -(CNRB) at yp least every 24 months. This request will change that period to at f
least every 12 months.
Bydecreasingtheauditfrequencyperiod.toananni,lal'requirementforQhe above requested change, the safety function of. the' Audit will not be
^
i affected.
' [f d '
h Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed, changes are not an unreviewed safety question, g
a 1
1 y
1
- g
.(,,
g g
Y.
v y
4 N
\\
t 1
4 6
i 4
0
-(
s.
-g 4
3 s
s \\.
-. __~,.. _ -, _ _. _ -.. -. _ _,. _...
. m..
.., -. _.. -. -., ~ _
, _.