ML20127B660
| ML20127B660 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Crane |
| Issue date: | 05/07/1984 |
| From: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20127A737 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-84-794 NUDOCS 8405230117 | |
| Download: ML20127B660 (29) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:* 4 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY JERSEY CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY PEN 1SYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION DOCKET NO. 50-289 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cemission (the Comission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-50, issued to Metropolitan Edison Company, Jersey Central Power ard Light Company, Pennsylvania Electric Company, and GPU Nuclear Corporation (the licensees), for operation of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1, located in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. In accordance with the licensees' application for amendment dated January 26, 1984, the proposed amendment would remove the present limits on receipt, possession, and use of byproduct, source, or special nuclear material 1 for sample analysis and instrument calibration, and would permit receipt, possession, and use of such material in amounts as required for such purposes and for testing and uses associated with radioactive apparatus. ,I(Pl @ 5z3o // 7 g --,-s a w.., ,,,--w -e-.-;y-w -,-,w-----ww---,- - - - - + -- -,,,,,,,,--w,. vs -,e.,e- ,--e----w,------,,-,v*wr,c-m-+-g--,,,9 ,---ny,,-- -,e---
f. . 7590-01 Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Comission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Comission's regulations. The Comission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Comission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with 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 proposed amendment, which is similar to the license requirements already in place at most operating plants, does not affect plant design or operation, and does not involve modifications to plant equipment or changes that would affect plant safety analyses. In addition, the proposed amendment permits receipt, possession, and use, subject to all applicable provisions of 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, and 70, only ~of amounts of radioactive material required for the identified purposes. This amount is not expected to be significantly greater than amounts previously used for the same purposes. Tha radiological protection program at TMI-1 has previously been found acceptable, and the Commission's staff will continue to assure that the 1icensee's procedures regarding such possession, use, and transfer are adequate. Therefore, based on~ all of the above, operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated;
~ e 7590-01 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. Accordingly, the Commission proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards considerations. The Commiss' ion 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. Connents should be addressed to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C. 20555, ATTN: Docketing and Service Branch. By June 11, 1984, the licensees 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 leave 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 Safety and Licensing L 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 appropriate order. l
I \\ - 7590-01 As required by 10 CFR 92.714, 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 pennitted 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 filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been admitted as a party cay amend the petition without requesting leave of the Board up to fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy the specificity reguirements 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 supplemant which satisfies these requirements with rastect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. l l
- 7590-01 1
Those pemitted 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 Comission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If the final detemination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration,'the Comission may issue the amendment and make it effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final detemination is that the amendment involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment. Normally, the Comission will not issue the ame,ndment until the expiration of the 30-day notice period. However, should circumstances change during the notice period such that failure to act in a tinely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Comission may issue the l license amendment before the expiration of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final detemination is that the arrendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final deter:nination will consider all oublic and State coments received. Should the Comission take this action, it will publish a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a hearing after issuance. The Comission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently. r
Y ~ 7590-01 A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Comission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D. C. 20555, Attention: Docketing and Service Branch, or ma'y be delivered to the Comission's Public Documerit 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 Comission by a toll-free tclephone 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 John F. Stolz: 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 Cer:nission, Washington, D.C. -20555, and to G. F. Trowbridge, Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036, attorney for the licensees. Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not be entertained absent a detennination by the Commission, the presiding officer or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board designated to rule on the petition and/or recuest, that the petitioner has made a substantial showing of good cause for the granting of a late petition and/or request. That detennination will be be. sed upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(1)-(v) and 2.714(d).
f . 7590-01 For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment which is available for public inspection at the Comission's Public 1 Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and at the Government Publications Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, Education Building, Comanwealth and Walnut Streets, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17126 Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 7th day of May,1984 FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATCRY COMMISSION L4WAa John F. Stolz, Chiaf Operating Reactors Branch No. 4 Division of Licensing O l I I l t I l l
s m o s 3*,S2 Federal Register / Vol. 48. No.182 / Friday. August 19, 1983 / Notices ~ licinae amendment before the Dated at Bethesda. Maryland this 15th day amendment would not (1) involve a expiration of the 30-day notice period, of August 19e3, significant increase in the probability or provided that its final determination is For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. consequences of an accident previously tnat the amendment' involves no John F. Stols, evaluated: or (2) create the possibility of significant hazarda consideration.ne Chief. OpemtingReactors Bmach 5o. 4. a new or different kind of accident from finn! determination will consider all Division ofucensing. any accident previously evaluated; or (3) public and State comments received. A suon w s-isea mt involve a significant reduction in a Should the Commission take this action. suas coor me es.a margin of safety. it will publish a notice of issuance and The proposed RM-L12 system would provide for opportunity for a he'aring continuously monitor and record the after issuance. The Commission expects [ Docket No. 50-289) th:t the need to take this action will effluent activity prior to being occur very infrequently. Metropolitan Edison Co.; et aL; discharged offsite when either the nVTS A request for a hearing or a petition Consideranon of issuance of or IWFS systems are discharging offsite. ist leave to intervene must be filed with. mendment to Facinty Operating Upon a high activity alarm condition. tha Secretary of the Commission. U.S. Ucense and Pr posed No Significant the IWTS and nVFS pumping would be Haza no on Determination terminated and an IWIS building Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Wcshington. D.C. 20555. Attention: and Opportunity for Hearing trouble alarm would be initiated in the control room. Local low level alert and Docketing and Service Branch, or may ne U.S. Nuclear Regulatory high activity alarms would be provided br delivered to the Commission's Public Commission (the Commission)is by the monitor. Document Room.1717 H Street. NW., consideringissuance of an amendment This monitoring system would not Washir:gton. D.C by the above date. to Facilitate Operating License No. affect the performance of existing Whem petitions are filed during the last DPR-50, issued to Metropolitan Edison industrial waste treatment or industrial tan (10) days of the notice period. it is Company, Jersey Central Power and waste filter systems except to terminate requested that the petitioner promptly so Ught Company. Pennsylvania Electric the discharge pumps in the event of a inform the Commission by a toll. free Company, and GPU Nuclear high radiation condition.This monitor telephone call to Western Union at (800) Corporation (the licensees), for system addition would not increase the 3:5-6000 (in Missouri (800) 342-6700). peration of the Three Mile Island probability of occurrence or the The Western Union operator should be Nuclear Station. Unit No.1 (the facility) consequences of an accident since it is given Datagram Identification Number 1 cated in Dauphin County, not an in.line monitor and if a l'* sample 3737 and the fo!!owing message Pennsylvania. tubing from and back to the discharge addassed to John F. Stolz: petitioner's in accordance with the licensees' line were to break, the amount of water name and telephone number; date application'for amendment dated June released to the operating floor would be petition was mailed; plant name; and 24.1983, the amendment would revise small and it would drain back into the publication date and page number of the Technical Specifications to reference IWTS sump; this sump is then returned this Federal Register notice. A copy of a new liquid efIluent discharge monitor. to the nVTS. His monitor system would the petition should also be sent to the RM-L12. in lieu of the presently rmt increase the malfunction of Executive Legal Director. U.S. Nuclear referenced momtor. RM-L7. The new Important to Safety (ITS) equipment m, Regula tory Commission. Washington. - m nitoris to belocated upstream of the. the area where this mo,nitor ts located. D.C. 20355, and to Gerald Charnoff. Esq., existmg monitor in the same discharge Although this monitor mtcriock system Shaw. Pittman. Potts, and Trowbridge, line in a position to directly monitor and could cause madvertent tripping of the 1800 M Street. N.W Washington. D.C. tenninate undiluted effluent discharge IWTS and IWFS pumps, these pumps 20C35. at orney for the licensees. fr m the Industrial Waste Treatment run on an internu,ttent basis only and Nontimely filings of petitions for leave (IWTS) orIndustrial Waste Filter their stoppage would not mcrease the to mtervene. amended petitions, (IWFS) Systems in the event of high ' probability of occurrence or supplemental petitions and/or requests discharges to ensure that 10 CFR Part 20 consequence of a malfunctionITSwor for hrarmg will not be entertained discharge levels are not exceeded. The nuclear safety related equipment absint a determination by the existing monitor is located such that elsewhere in the plar.t. Commission, the presidmg officer or the flow past the monitor is d;1uted by This monitor additica should increase Atomic Safety and Licensing Board discharge from the mechanical draft the margin of safety for the applicable dzsignated to rule on the petit 2on and/or coolers. This results in reduced discharge Technical Specification since rzquest, that the petitioner has made a detection sensitivity. Additionally, the the sampling point at which this monitor substantial showing of good cause for new monitor willincorporate an is detecting the discharge occurs tefore tha granting of a late petition and/or automatic discharge termination feature. the discharge effluent is d;1uted by the rsqu:st. That determination will be whereas the existing monitor does not mechanical draft cooling water effluent. based upon a balancing of the factors Befcre issuance of the proposed Monitoring capability is thus enhanced specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(iHv) and license amendment, the Commission bevond that cf the current RM-L7. 714(dl-will have made findings required by the in summary. the purpose of the IWTS/ Atomic Energy Act of 1954. as amended IWFS effluent discharge liquid radiation For further details with respect to this (the Act) and the Commission's monitor RM-L12 addition is to provide a action. see the application for regulations. monitor with a sensitivity range suitable I amendment which is available for public The Commission has made a proposed for compliance with 10 CFR 20. This inspection at the Commission's Public determination that the amendment addition would not increase the Document Room.1717 H Street. NW request involves no significant hazards probability of occurrence or the Wcshington. D.C., and at the University consideration. Under the Commission's consequences of an accident. It would of Tcledo Library. Documents regulations in 10 CFR 50.92. this means not create the possibility of a new or Diptrtment. 2801 Bancroft Avenue. that operation of the facility in different kind of accident from any Toltdo. Ohio 43606. accordance with the proposed previously evaluated. It would not L
e Federal Register / Vol. 4E. No.162 / Fricay. August 19, 1983 / Notices 37753 decrease a margin of safety. and should leave to intervene or who has been after issuance. The Commission expects reduce the radiological saiety concern admitted as a party may amend the that the need to take this action will with relation to contaminated effluent petition without requestmg leave of the occur very infrequently. discharge. Therefore, the Commission Board up to fifteen (15) days prior to the A request for a hearing or a petitien proposes to determine that the proposed first prehearing conference scheduled in *for leave to intervene must be filed with amindment does not involve a the proceeding.but such an amended the Secretary of the Commission. U.S. significant hazards consideration. petition must satisfy the specificity Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ) The Commission is seeking public. requirements described above. Washington. D.C. 20555. Attention: ) c,omments on this proposed Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to Docketing and Senice Branch. or may oetermination. Any comments received the first preheanng conference be delivered to the Commission's Public within 30 days after the date of scheduled in the proceeding a petitioner Document Room.1717 H Street. NW., publication of this notice will be shall file a supplement to the petition to Washingtr t.D.C.,by the above date. considered in making any final intervene which must include a list of determinatioh. The Commission will not the contentions which are sought to be Where petitions are filed during the last normally make a final determination litigated in the matter, and the bases for ten (10) days of the notice penod. It is unl:ss it receives a request for a each contention set forth with requested that the petitioner promptly so neanng. reasonable specificity. Contentions shall inform the Commission by a toll-free Comments should be addressed to the be limited to matters within the scope of telephe.wr call to Western Union at (800) Secretary of the Cc= mission. U.S. the amendment under consiceran,on. A 325-600r., (in Missouri (800) 342-6700). Nuclear Regulatory Com=ission. petitioner who fails to file such a The Western Union operator should be ld Wa shington. D.C. 20555. Atta: Docketing supplement which satisfies these h*7 $Q}lo$tifi and Service Branch. regmrements with respect to at least one 8 me sag ddre d to J hn ' l= By September 19.1983, the licensees contention will not be permitted to name d telephone n be ate may file a request for a hean,ng with partic pate as a party. respIct to issuance of the amendment to Those permitted to intervene become petition was mailed: plant name: and the subject facility operatmg license and parties to the proceeding. subject to any puWcation date and page number of any person whose interest may be limitations in the order granting leave to this Federal Register notice. A copy of effected by this proceeding and who intervene, and have the opportunity to the petit 2on should also be sent to the wishes to participate as a party in the participate fullyin the conduct of the Executive Legal Director. U.S. Nuclear proceeding must file a written petition hearing, including the opportunity to gulato Co si Vas on, for leave to intervene. Request for a present evidence and cross-examine he ring and petitions forleave to witnesses. Shaw. Pitt=an. Potts and Trowbrid'ge-intervene shall be filed in accordance If a hearingis requested the 1800 M Street. NW., Washington. D.C. with the Co=missica's " Rules of Com=ission will make a final 20036. attorney for the licensees. Practice for Domestic Licensing determination on the issue of no Nontimely filings of petitions for leave Proceedings"in to CFR Part 2. !f a significant hazards consideration.De to intervene, amended petitions, request for a hearing or petition for final determination will serve to decide supplemental petitions and/or requests leave to intervene !s filed by the above ' when the hearing is held. for hearing will not be entertained date the Commission or an Atomic If the final determination is that the absent a determination by the Safety and Licensing Board, designated amendment request involves no Commission, the presiding officer or the by the Commission or by the Chairman significant hazards consideration. the ' Atomic Safety and Licensing Board of the Atomic Safer 3 and Licensing Commission may issue the amendment designated to rule on the petition and/or Board Panel, will rule on the request and make it effective, notwithstanding request, that the petitioner has made a and/or petition and the Secretary or the the request for a hearing. Any hearing substantial showing of good cause for designated Atomic Safety and Licensing held would take place after issuance of the granting of a late petition and/or Board willissue a notice of hearing or the amendment. request. nat determination will be an appropriate order. If the final determination is that the based upon a balancing of the factors As required by 10 CFR I 2.714. a amendment involves a significant specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i}<v) and pItition for leave to intervene shall set hazards consideration. any hearir.g held 0.714(d). fcrth with particularity the interest of would take place before the issuance of For further details with respect to this the petitioner in the preceeding, and any amendraent. action, see the application for how that interest may be affected by the Norma!!y. the Commission will not amen 6nent which is avr.ilable for public results of the proceeding The petition issue the araentnent until the inspection at the Commission's Public shru d spec'fically explain the reascns expi ation of the 20-day notice period-Document Room.1717 H Street. NW., i why intervention should be permitted However. shcu!d circumstances change Washington. D.C., and at the with particular reference to the dunng the notice period such that failure Covernment Publications Section. State following factors:(1) The nature of the to act in a timel} way would result for Library of Pennsylvania. Education pItitioner's right under the Act to be example,in derating er shutdown of the Building. Commonwealth and Walnut rnade a party to the proceeding:(2) the facility, the Commission may issue the Streets. Harrisburg. Pennsylvania 17126. n;ture and extent of the petitioner's license amendment before the property, financial, or other interest in expiration of the 30-day notice period. Dated at Bethesda. Maryland. this 15th day the proceeding; and (3) the possible provided that its final determination is of August 1983. effIct of any order which may be that the amendment involves no For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. sntered in the proceeding on the significant hazards consideration. The Joho T. Stolz. petitioner's interest. The petition should final determination will consider all c3f,g op,forjog,,cer, gfo,c3 yo,, g also identify the specific aspect (s) of the public and State comments received. Dmhon o/ Licensing. subject matter of the proceeding as to Should the Commission take this action, which petitioner wishes to intervene. It will publish a notice of issuance and l*
- 5' "** * ** * *l Any person who has filed a petition for provide for opportunity for a heanng
"** CODE 75''" ..M
0 Ri3 4 e ladt v id~oJ2-NeLL Swh (ls,,,/g3 Sm NL-Fw DykM 7h/sY '/9 -a 1 V W % clu ~ 7l3lvi 49-22585 7 /2 t, l2 3 y F-337v & Gw 7/27[11 19-ms / 3 / 2i lti 49 to 59f hW ~~ d) n I4dd%wA 7/rzhs vi tve d Yli?Jat <f 9 - 151, o /a/z7/g 3 42-spos / Wl[Luk l 3 /ss/sf y9-pas 71 // /2th 5 v& -s ac / / ba a/zju a 2 so t a y& s/n/g1 y,. m % AA 3h /v'l %,a1 / 7/2 d :. vt-,s>>1 / la
- v.. 3, w.-
c hilo 9 s -,5, / - // / M /t3 V8-537s? / 7 / e fs 5 vsr sei: t. / lo f,2.l 3 5 ss-46vr7 v 6/u /S3 ys-sss77s' 9/a.i)o
- v u su 5
- 3) t lvf M-n11 v'
7 / vs/ SL 49-YM9 v'
- (
4 1 f Federal Register / Vol. 49, No. 42 / Thursday, Mrrch 1.1984 / Notichs 7669 W Fon runTHan pronuaison contact: Patent application 538,063: Apparatus Cure Temperature and Rate: filed ] l National Aeronautics and Space for Ada ting an End Effector Device December 14.1983 F i Administration. John G. Mannix. Remote Controlled Manipulator Patent application 565,482: Process for Director of Patent Licensing. Code GP. Arm: fil September 30,1983 - Preparing Phthalocyanine Polymers: l , Wrshington. D.C. 20548, telephone (202) Patent application 539,230: Mechanical filed December 22,1983 453-2430. Fastener: filed October 7.1983 Patent application 585,481: Simulator i es Pat:nt application 485.383: Medical Clip Patent application 542.232: Laser Scene Display Evaluation Device: $' P: tint application 511.383:Towerand Process: filed February 10,1983 Activated MTOS Microwave Device: filed December 22.1983 p[ e Oct 14, pP 75: Mathod and Dated: February 21,1984. 4 Evaporator: filed July 6,1983
- PatInt application 512,795: Phosphorus.
Apparatus For Mnimizing Convection John E. O'Brien. Containing Imide Resina: filed July 11* During Crystal Crowth From Solution: Deputy Genem/ Counsel. - 1 1983 filed October 31,1983 tra o.c. e**us ra.e sas.4e ses.=t Patint application 522.829 Polymers of Patent application 547,171: Fluidized Bed amo caos rs+ei-u I l{; Phosphonylmethyl.2.4-and -2,6-Cesification of Biomas to Methane: Diamino Benzenes and the Like; filed filed October 31.1983 August 12,1983 Patent application 548.582: Cryogeru,c NUCLEAR REGULATORY flefNove 8 PctInt application 528,770: Thin Film er 1 S in Transducer: filed August 28, Patent application 550,881:Geomatires f Docket No. 50-1551 1 For Roughness Shapes in Laminar [ y Patent application 528,739: Rotary Flow: filed November 10,1983 Consumers Power Co.; Consideration Stipping Device With Memory Metal t Actuator filed August 28.1983 Patent application 551.538: High of issuance of Amendment to Facility n i Patent application 528,740: Fluidized Bed Dynamic Global Positioning System Operating tJcense and Proposed No Receiver: filed November 14.1983 - Cost Liquefaction; filed August 28, Significant Hazards Consideration Patent application 553.339: Vinyl termination and Opportunity For 1983 t$o B smaleimi e Patent application 528.832: Fluidized Bed "I I ri
- ., Liquefaction of Blomass
- filed August Resins: filed November 18,1983 The United States Nuclear Regulatory
? P1 o a plication 528,768: Fluidized Bed Patent application 558,513: Maser Cavity Commission (the Commission) is j Desulfurization: filed August 28,1983 Serv -Tuning Systems; filed considering issuance of an amendment November 30.1983 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-8 I pa ent application 528.750:High Patent application 558.514: Discharge issued to Consumers Power Company - I emperature Acoustic Levitator; filed Cell for Optogalvanic Spectroscopy (the licensee) for operation of the Big PatnIspl liaving rthogonal Relationship Rock Point Plant located in Charlevoix ' J n 528,741: Visual Between the Probe Laser and County, Michigan. Accommoda tion Transfer-Tester: filed Discharge Axis; filed November 30 The amendment would place lower. August 20,1983 tfp ple Va t tin 3 he e oa an ly e e a ystem f ed s2 55I. : '""I PitInt application 528,754: pa en a pl ti r ty Containerless High Purity Pulling Enchanced Acoustic Levitation p ace a limit of 35 microcuries per l e e ProcIss and Apparatus for Class. Method und Apparatus; filed milliliter on the maximum concentration Fibers; filed August 28,1983 December 9,1983 of halogens in the reactor coolant.The 1,. - Patint application 527,813: Memory Patent application 581,433: Vibrating. proposed amendment would institute a m Mital Actuator: filed August 28,1983 Chamber Levitation Systems; filed two. tier limit on the concentration of } ; Patznt application 529.803: Automatic December 14,1983 dose equivalent Iodine-1311n the reactor a. Oscillator Frequency Control System-patent application 581,432: Propulsion c lant.The lower tierlimit would be l ; ' filed September 8,1983 Apparatus and Method Using Boil.Off a2 microcuries per milliliter. 5 Patant application 530,339: Sequentially Gas from a Cryogenic Liquid: filed q y Concentrations above the lower tier j Deployable Maneuverable December 14,1983 limit }vould require increased i Tetrahedral Beam: filed September 8. Patent application 581,702: Amine surveillance (more frequent sampling). 1983 odd be 4.0 Terminated Bisaspartimides Prccess The upper tier limit p!!er. ' h; P4 tint a pplication 530,185: Wide for Preparation Thertof and Polpners microcunes per milhl Dynamic Range Video Camera: flied U ereof: fited December 15.1983 Concentrations la excess of the upper, gp SeptImber 8.1983 patent application 581.431: Che :ical tier limit would require additional action [ Patent ripplicadon 532.312: Dual Towline Approach for Control!ing Nadimide shutdown,the concentration and to reduce Spin. Recovery Device; filed Cure Terrperature and Rate: filed in e matter of hotts if the (j Saptember 15,1983 December 14,1G83 concentration could niat be gl Patent applicatian 537.814: Hybrid Patent application 581,429 Che nical appropriately lowered.The pmposed ,fp"' y Power Semiconductor Switch: filed Approach fcr Controlling Nadiraide amendment is described in the September 30.1983 Cure Temperature and Rate: filed licensee's application dated December [f Pat:nt application 537.815: Corrosion December 14,1983 18.1983. f Rrsistant Coating: filed September 30. Patent application 581.435: Chemical Before issuance of the proposed r,< 1983 Approach for Controlling Nadimide license amendment, the Commission y PatInt application 537,815: A Multistage Cure Temperature and Rate: filed will have made findings required by the 'd Sp:nt Particle Collector and a Method December 14,1983 Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended -,:p for Making Same; filed September 30, Patent application 581,434: Chemical (the Act) and the Commission's l 1983 Approach for Controlling Nadimide regulations. g e em 1d ~
la ~ * ' [, I 7670 Federal Register / Vcl. 49 Nr. 42 / Thursday, M:rch 1.1984 / N;tices The Commission has made a proposed leave to intenene is filed by the above finaldetermmation will serve to dedde determination that the amendment date, the Commission or an Atomic when the hearing is held. request involves no signiRemnt hazards Sa{the.rmmission or by the Chairmansty andIJcensing Board, designa .If the final determination is that the . ]y consideration. Under the rmmission's by amendment request involves no .T l regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means of the Atomic Safety andIJcensing... nignificant hazards consideration, the j that operation of the facility in Board Panel, will rule on the request. Commission may issue the amendment )4 ' accordance with the proposed and/or petition and the Secretary or the and make it effective, notwithstanding amendment would not(1) involve a designated Atomic Safety and f ir-ing the request for a hearmg. Any hearing. , h;; significant increase in the probability or Board willissue a notice of hearing or held would take place after issuance of consequences of an accident previously an appropriate order. evaluated: or (2) create the possibility of As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a ' the amendment. q a new or different kind of accident from petition for leave to intervene shall set amendment involves a significant If the final determination is that the any accident previously evaluated, or (3) forth with particularity the interest of hazards consideration, any bearing held , involve a significant reduction in a the petitioner in the proceeding, and would take place before the issuance of margin of safety. how that interest may be affected by the any amendment. The Cocunission has provided results of the proceeding. The petition-Normally, the Commission will not '~~ guidance concermns the application of should specifically explain the reasons issue the amendment until the these standards by providing certain why intervention should be penuitted expiration of the 30. day notice period. tq examples (48 FR 14671. April 6,1983). with particular reference to the However, should circunstances change One of the examples of actions following factors:(1) The nature of the during the notice period such that failure, involving no significant hazards petitioner's right under the Act to be to act in a timely way would result, for l,: considerations relates to an amendment made a party to the proceeding:(2) the example,in derating or shutdown of the j which constituteian additional a limitation. restriction. or control not nature and extent of the petitioner's facility, the Commission may issue the property, financial, or other interest in license amendment before the (p presently included in the Technical the proceeding: and (3) the possible expiration of the 30-day notice period, SpeciEcations; for example, a more effect of any order which may be provided that its final determination is r; restrictive survedlance requirement.The - iq proposed amendment would place a entered in the proceeding on the that the amendment involves no more restrictive limit (a lower limit than petitioner's interest The petition should signiGeant hazards consideretion.The ,f the present limit) on the maximum also identify the specific aspects of the final determination will consider all allowable conantration of radioactive subject matter of the proceeding as to public and State comments received. modine in the reactor coolant.The lower which petitioner wishes to intervene. Should the Commission take this action, concentration would reduce the amount Any person who has filed a petition for it will publish a notice ofissuance and of radioactive material that could be leave to intervene or who has been provide for opportunity for a hearing admitted as a party may amend the after issuance. The Co'nmission expects s los f coofant. petition without requesting leave of the. that the need tatake this action wi!! efo the 9" I* proposed amendment would constitute first prehearing conference scheduled in A request for a hearing or a petition g*additionaI restriction as described in the proceeding. but such an amended for leave to intervene must be filed with. k
- PI'*
petition must satisfy the specificity the Secretary of the Commission.U.S. P requirements described above. Nuclear Regulatory t'ammission. comme ts t or [ determination. An mments received Not later that fifteen (15) days prior to Washington.D.C.20555. Attentiom within 30 days after the date of the first prehearing conference Docketing and Service Branch.or may publication of this notice will be scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner be delivered to the f'nmminaion's Public g considered in making any final shall file a supplement to the petition to Document Room.1717 H Street NW., )l f' determination. The Commission will not intervene which must include a list of Washington. D.C by the date. Where l normally make a final determination the contentions which are sought to be petitions are filed during the last ten (10) l unless it receives a request for a litigated in the matter, and the bases for days of the notice period.it is requested hearing each contention set forth with that the petitioner promptly so inform a L Comments should be add.essed to the reasonable specificity. Contentions s!all the Commission by a toll. free telephone 9 Secretary cf the Commisa:on U.S. be hmited to matters within the scope 6f call to Western Union at (a00) 325-4000 ilh ( Nuclear Regulatcry Commission, the amendment under consideration. A [in Missouri (800) 342-4700].The Washingten. D.C. 20555. ATTrn petitioner who fails to file such a Wettern Orden operator should be given Docketing and Service Branch. supplement which satisifies these Datagram Identification Number 3737 l l By Apnl 3.1s84, the licensee may file rtquirements with respect to at least one and the following message addressed to i a request for a hearing with res contentica will not be per:nitted to Dennis M_ Crutchf; eld: pedtioner's name I jI issuance of the amendment to thect to particip4te as a party.
- and telephone n :mber-data petition
- L e
l1 suoject facility oparatin8 license and Those permitted to intervene become was mailed! plant name: and publication '9 any person whose interest may be parties to the proceeding. subject to any date and page numberof this Federal i affected by this proceeding and who limitations in the order granting leave to Register nctice. A copy cf the petition i l wishes to participate as a party in the intervene, and have the opportunity to should also be sent to the Executive b proceeding must file a written petition participate fu1ly in the ranrbet of the Legal Dire ctor. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory for leave to intervene. Request for a hearing, including the opportunity to Commission, Washington. D.C. 20555, hearing and petitions for leave to present evidence and croseexamine and to judd I. Bacon. Consumers Power c
- J.
intervene shall be filed in.accordance witnesses. Company. 212 West Mir.higan Avenue. with the Commission *a Rules of If a hearing a requested, the jackson. Michigan 49201, attorney for Practice for Domestic Licensing Commission will make a final the licensee. - i l Proceedings"in 10 CFR Part 2. If a determination on the issue of no Nontimely filings of petitions for lesse / request for a hearing or petition for significant hazards consideration.'Ilie to intervene amended positions. I l? 1 Ip . b
Ii ~. Federal Register / Vol. 49. Ns. 42 / Thursday March 1.1984 / Notices 7871 r supplemental petitions and/or request Before issuance of the proposed. with the C'ommission's " Rules of for hearing willnot be entertained license amendment, the Commission Practice for Domestic Ucensing willl sye made findings required by the Proceedings"in to CFR Part 2. If a absent a determination by the ' m i -Commission, the presiding officer or the ;. Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended request for a hearing or petitlen for Atomic Safety and Ucensing Board (the Act) and the Commission's- - leave to intervene is filed by the above designated to rule on the petition and/or regulations. date, the Commission or an Atomic request. that the petitioner has made a The Commission has made a proposed Safety and Licensing Board. designated subisntial showing of good cause for determination that the amendment by the Commission or by the Chairman the granting of a late petition and/or - request involves no significant hazards of the Atomic Safety and Licensing request.nat determination will be consideration. Under the Commission's Board panel. will rule on the request based upon a balancing of the factors regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means and/or petition and the Secretary or the 7i specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1) (i)-{v) that operation of the facilityin designated Atomic Safety and Licensing accordance with the proposed.... Board willissue a notice of hearing or F. and 2.714(d). u. E For further details with respect to this amendment would not (1) involve a.s -. an appropriate order. i action. see the application for significant increase in the probability or As required by 10 CFR 2.714. a [ amendment which is available for public consequences of an accident previously. petition for leave to intervene shall set j 2 inspection at the Commission's Public evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of forth with particularity the interest of ~ a new or different kind of accident from the petitioner in the proceeding. ar.d l' Document Room.1717 H Street NW L Washington. D.C. and at the Charlevoix any accident previously evaluated; or (3) how that interest may be affected by the [ Public Library.107 Clinton Street, involve a significant reduction in a results of the proceeding.The petition 5 Charlevoix. Michigan 49720. margin of safe $. should specifically explain the reasons $e appl haN'ula f. j at esda. Maryland. this 22 day tion of gui an ce fe e e e i *i .f" l h# ] For the uclest Regulatory' Commission. exa ple 8 7 A ). Dennis M. Cnstchfield. One of the examples of actions th d th I L Chief. Opeinting R,eoctors Becnch No. 5. involving no significant hazards [a*tu e and xt nt of e petit er s Divmon ofLicensing. considerations relates to changes that property, financial, or other interest in in om e+ sen ru.4 5mwems. I constitute an additionallimitation, the proceeding: and (3) the possible r sumo caos times.es. restriction or control not presently effect of any order which may be E.- included in the Technical Specifications. entered in the proceeding on the r The Stack Cas Monitoring System is a petitioner's interest.The petition should IDocket No. 50-1551 new system at Big Rock Point which will also identify the specific aspects of the subject matter of the proceeding as to y onsumers Power Co.; Consideration - mo t ri st e new syste a which petitioner wishes to intervene. of issuance of Amendment to Facility designed to meet the guidance of Any person who has filed a petition for Operating Ucense and Proposed No NUREG 0737 Item il.F.1 (1) and (2). ~ Significant Hazards Consideration which is described above.The proposed.i leave to intervene or who has been admitted as a party may amend the Determination and Opportunity for changes incorporate a description of the-- petition without requesting leave of the eering system and operating requirements for Board up to fifteen (15) days prior to the th k ( [ The United States Nuclear, Regulatory first prehearing conference scheduled in T c ca n and, t
- fore, the proceeding, but such an amended Commission (the Commission)is constitute an additional limitation.
ab.. consideringissuance of an amendment The Commission is seeking public petition must satisfy the specificity requirements described above. , WP: to Facility Operating I.icense No. DpR-8 comments on this proposed .,,s issued to Consumers Power Company determination. Any comments received Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to (the licensee) for operation of the Big within 30 days after the date of the first prehearing conference Rock Point Plant located in Charlevoix
- publication of this notice will be scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner
. County. Michigan. considered in making any final shall file a supplement to the petition to "Ihe amendment would approve determination. The Commission will not intervene which mi.st include a list of Technical Specification changes which normally make a fir.al determination the contentions which am sought to be i t would incorporate a description of and unless it rer.eives a request for a litigated in the matter, ar d the bases for % operating requirements for the new hearing. each contention set forth with ( TechnicalSpecmcations.This systemStack Gas Monitoring Systenainto the Comments should be addressed to the reasohable specificity. Conten.tions shall Secretary of the Commission. U.S. be limited to matters ivithin the secpe of l hos been installed and made cperational Nuclear Regulatory Commission. the amendment under considerati3n. A to meet the guidance of NUREG-0737 Washington. D.C. 20555. Attrr Docketing petitioner who fails to file such a e ' Item II.F.1 (1) and (2). " Additional and Service Branch. supplement which satisfies these Accident Monitoring Instrumentation By April 3.1984 the licensee maylife seguirements with respect to st least one (Noble Gas Efiluent Monitor and a request for a hearing with res'pect to contention will not be permitted to Samp!!ng and Analysis of Plant issuance of the amendment to the participate as a party. ? Efiluents)' This system provides the subject facility operating license and Those permitted to intervene become
- k capability to monitor efiluent release any person whose interest rrey be parties to the proceeding. subitet to any
% retes severalorders of magnitude above effected by this proceeding and who limitations in the order granting leave to normal rates for accident situations. wishes to participate as a party in the intervene. and have the opportunity to 7' These changes are in accordance with proceeding must file a written petition participate fullyin the conduct of the the licensee's application dated for leave to intervene. Request for a hearing.' including the opportunity to December 15.1981, as revised December hearing and petitions for leave to present evidence and cross. examine j 16.1983. Intervene shall be filed in accordance witnesses.
I'ederal Register / Vol. 49. No. 42 / Thursday Much 1,1984 / Matices ~ Michigan 4s201, attorney for the capability based on the experience froen e ' If a hearing is requested. the Commission willmake a final
- licensee, the accident atTMI-it and the official determinatica on the issue of no Nontimely filings of petitions for leave studies and investigations of the
.~ significant hasards consideration.The. to intervens, amended positions. accident.The requirements are set fortit 1 final determination will serve to decide supplemFntal petitions and/or to in NUREG-0737. "f'larifie= tion of TML 2;. when the hearing is held.' for hearing will not be enterta Action Plan Requirementa" andla n. If the final determiantian la that the absent a determination by the Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737. cmendment request favolves no Commission, the presiding officer or the " Requirements for Emergency F=ar=a== significant hasarda consideration. the Atomic Safety and ucensing Board Capability." Among these requirements i - Commission may issue the amendment designated to rule on the petition and / are a number ofitema consisting of A cnd make it effective, notwithetanrfing
- cr request, that the petitioner has made emergency response facility operability.
the request for a hearing. Any hearing a substantial showing of good cause for emergency prncadureimplementation. 3. hs!d would take place after issuance of the granting of a late petition and/or addition ofinstrumentation, possible Tl' i the amendment, request. Hat determination will be control room design modifications, and $i If the finaldeterminationla that the based upon a balancing of the factors specific information to be submittad. cmendment involves a significant specified in 10 CFR 2J14(a)(1) (i)-{v) OnDecember17.1982 a latter hzzards consideration, any hearing held and 2J14(d). (Generic Letter 82-33) was sent to all - would take place before the lasuance of For further details with respect to thia. licensees of operating reactors, 9 m cny amendment. action, see the application far applicants for operating licenses, and I Normally, the Commission willnot amendnsent which is available for public holders of construction permits M (ssue the amendment until the inspection at the Commission's Public enclosing Supplementito NURECA737 'h I cxpiration of the 30. day notice period. Document Room.1717 H Street NW, In this letter operating reactor licensees ~ H: wever, should circumstances change Wa=We= D.C. and at the Charlavoix and holders of construction pennits j during the notice period such that failure Public Ubrary.107 Clinton Street, were requested to furnish the following 7 to act in a timely way would result, for Charlevoix, Michigan 49720. Info'rmation, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f}. i example, in derating or shutdown of the Dated at Betheode. Maryland, this 22 day no later than April 15.1983: facility, the Commission may issue the of February 1964. (1) A proposed schedulo for license amendment before the For the Naclear Regulatory Comminion. completing ear.h of the besic cxpiration of the 30 day notice period. Dennis M. Crutchfleid, requirements for the items identified in p v d tha id nation is chief. Opemdar Reactors BmnchNo, s. Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737, and significant hazarde coneideration. Da anon fl.icensins (2) A description of plans forphased final determination will consider all in D= N"** * *# =t Implementation and intergratio,n of,
- ergency response activities mcludmg oublic and State comments received.
Should the Commission take this action, tra.uung. it will publish a notice ofissuance and IDocket Nos.50-250 and 50-25tl III 4' provide for opportunity for a hearing citer issuance. He Commission expects Florida Power and Ught Co.(Turkey Florida Power and Ught Company i,. i that the need to take this action occur Point Plant, Unit Nos. 3 and 4); Orde, (FPL) responded to Cenanc Letter 82-33 .s 'i vzry infrequently. Confirming Ucensee Commitments on by letter dated Apri! 15.1983. By letters b A request fa= a hearing or a petition Emergency Response Capatnlity dated May 5. May 20. July 25.1983. j J'anuary salm and February 14.196A y I for leave to inmvene must be filed with thi Secretary of the Commission. U.S. E mod 1Eed severaldates as a resh - t I" Nuclear Regula'ory Commission, Florida Power and Ught Company negotiations with the NRC stallIn these ~ Wtshington,D..:.20555. Attentiont (the licenseelis the holder of Facility submittals.FPLmade commitments to i. Docketing and Service Branch, ormay Operating License Nos.DPR-31 and. compiete the besicrequirements.He. ql bs delivered to the f'.mwnission's Public DpR-41 which a'uthorize the operation of attached Table snmmarizing FPils Document Room.1717 H Street NW., the Turkey Point Plant. Unit Nos. 3 and 4 echedular commitments or status was Wtshington. D.C. by the above date. (the facilities) at steady. state power developed by the NRC staff from the 7 Where petiticna are filed durmg the last levels not in excess of 2200 megawatts Generic IAtter and theinformatioO j ten (10) days of the notice period. it is thermalne facilities are prusunzed provided by FFL. J requested that the petitioner prompdy so water reactors (PWRs) located in Dade . FPL's ccemittnents include (1) dares. Inform the Commissien by a toll-free County, Florida. for pro viding required submittale tothe -l l NRC (2) tiates log implementing cartsis - j g ttiephone call tn Western Union at (800) II 325-e900 [in Misscuri (8001343-s00). requirements,and (3) a schedule for Tha Western Union operator should be Following the accident atneee' Mile providirg implementation dates for 4 given Datagram identification Number. Island No. 2 (Dil-2) on Marth 28,1979 other requirements.These tatter q 3737 and the following messege the Nuclear Regulatory Ccrunissica imp!srcentatien dates will be reviewed.. q addressed to Dermts M. Crutchfield: (NRC) staif developed a number o[ negotated and cqnfirmed by a h p:titioner's name and telephone proposed requirements to ba subsequent order.- p number; date petitica was mailed: plant implemented on operating reactorsend ' The NRC staff reviawed FPCs Apra j name: an:1 publication date and paga en plants under constructiersThese 15.1983 letter and entered into y number of this Feder:1Registernotice, requirements!n::!ude Operational negotiations with the ticanseeregarding. J A copy of the petitica should also be Safety. Siting and Design, and schedules for meeting the requirements - .f smt to the Executive LegalDirector. Emergency Preparedness and are of Supplement 1 to NUREC4737. As a a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, e Intended to provida substantial.. result of thesenegotiations,thelicensee-3 Weshinaton D.C.20555, and to judd I. additional protection in the operation of modified certain dates by letters dated ~,, Bacon, Consumers Power Company. 211 nuclear facilities and significant May 5. May 20. July 25,1983. january 30. dl Wcst Michigan Avenue. Jackson, upgrading of emergency response. 1984 and February 14.1984.The NRC j ' 5 \\ ' N'ql .Q ~ a. ,C'. y G ' h] \\ ?
E .k O 0 t UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-155 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment.to Facility Operating License No. DPR-6, issued to Consumers Power Company (the licensee), for operation of the Big Rock Point Plant located in 'Charlevoix County, Michigan. The amendment would revise the present limits in Table 4-1 on reactor vessel pressure versus temperature in the Big Rock Point Technical Specifi-cations. The present limits a.re appropriate for 1.25 Effective Full Power Years (EFPY) from the end of the 1982 refueling outage. This limitation which corresponds to a total of approximately 11.2 EFPY will be reached on-or about January 1,1984. The proposed limits would be appropriate for operation out to 18 EFPY. These changes are in accordance with the licensee's ' application for amendment dated October 24, 1983. Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Comission's regulations. The Commission has made a pr'oposed determination that th,e amendment request involves no significant hazards censideration. Under the Commis' ion's s regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the, facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would*nof (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.
e.' O O The Comission has provided guidance concerning th,e application of these standards by providing certain examples which were published in the Federal Register on April 6, 1983 (48 FR 14870). One of the examples (vi) of actions involving no significant hazards considerations is a change whicn either may result in some increase to the probability or consequences of a previously-analyzed accident or may reduce in some way.a safety margin, but where the results of the change are clearly within all acceptable criteria with respect to the system or component specified in the Standard Review Plan. The revision of the reactor vessel pressure / temperature limits to account for cumulative radiation exposure to the vessel is such a change. The licensee. indicated in th'e October 24, 1983 request that the new limits are consistent with current criteria. The revision of Table 4-1 will be evaluated by the staff to assure that Table 4-1 satisfies the restrictions imposed by Appendices G and H of 10 CFR Part 50. Thus, the staff proposes to determine that the requested action would involve a no significant hazards consideration determination because it would not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident pre.viously evaluated, would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated, and would not involve a significan,t reduction in a margin of safety. The Commission is seeking public commerits 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.
.o n r j/ 7509-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ~ ~ CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50155 ~ NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUAfiCE OF AMENDMENT TO ' FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (th'e Comission) is con'sidering. issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. OPR-6, issued to Consumers Power Company (the licensee), for operation of the Big Rock Point Plant located in Charlevoix County, Michigan The amendment would incorporate Maximum Average Planar Linear Heat Generation Rate (MAPLHGR) limits for fuel assemblies G13 and G14 into the Big Rock Point Technical Specifications. (TS). These two assemblies are currently covered by MAPLHGR limits in the existing TS for reload "G" fuel. The current limits are applicable until these assemblies reach a burnup 'of. 36.29 Gigawatt-Days per Standard Metric Ton-(GWC /STM). These two assemblies were reconstituted from spent "G" design fuel assemblies as part of the Big Rock Point Extended Burnup Program sponsored by the Department of-Energy. The new limits are based on safety analyses performed by Exxon Nuclear Company (the fuel vendor) using calculational methods previously approved fer the "G" fuel design. The new limits would allow a total t burnup of 42.0 GWD/STM for the G13 and G14 fuel assemblies. These changes are in accordance with the licensee's application for ame,ndment dated September 7,1983., Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Comission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Comission 's regulations,. h
f,, The Comission has e a proposed determination t the amendment e recuest involves no significant -hazards consideration. Under the Comissi.ons regulations.in 10.CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in 1 accordance.'with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the 'probabiiity 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 sig- ~ fificant reduction in a margin of safety. The Comission has provided guidance concerning the application of these standards by providing certain examples (48 FR 14870, April 6,1983). One of' the examples of actions involving no significant hazards consideration relates to reload amendments involving no fuel assemblies significantly different from those previously found acceptable at the facility in question. The G13 and G14 fuel assemblies do not constitute' a reload in the normally used sense because the reactor was actually reloaded with H-3 fuel as approved by the NRC. 1 However, the G13 and G14 assemblies were reconstituted from "G" fuel which was previously approvM by the NRC for Big Rock Point. The G13 and G14 fuel has 'already been;vsed in the reactor in previous cycles and, therefore, has already experienced some level of burnup. The G13 and G14 fuel are currently still within the burnup limits approved for "G" fuel. Therefore, the G13 and G14 assemblies are not significantly different from the previously approved "G" fuel. The new burnup limits and MAPLHGR values were calculated using the same methods as were used for the previous "G" fuel reload. The comission is seeking public coments 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 Comission. will not nornially make a final determination unless it receives a request for a hearing. Coments should be addressed to the Secretary of the Comission, U.S. - Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D.C. 20555, ATTN: Docketing and
-t o o ~ r. UN:TED STATES NUCLEAR ~ REGULATORY COMMISSION CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY v. DOCKET NO. 50-155 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT T0 (FACILITYOPERATINGLICENSEANDPROPOSEDNOSIGNIFICANTHAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission-(the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-06, issued to Consumers Power Company (the licensee), for operation > of the Big Rock Point { Plant located in Charlevoix County, Michigan. The' amendment would institute a procedure for use during start-up in the event t.1at neutron source strength is too low to provide the minimum specified count rate on the out-of-core nuclear instrumentation in e accordance with the licensee's application for amendment dated May 27,t1983. Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will u have nede findings required by the Atomic Energy Act 'of 1954, as amended (the I Act) and the Commission's r'egulations. L The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves 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 amendment would not (ll' involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evalu-I - ated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of. accident l from any accident previously evaluated; or (3). involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. t 4 9 -~r ,ww- , -. --,. + - - - ,,,,...,-,-,,-,-----,-,,.w.,-, ,,,,,_,.,..._n-_
O O O ' c, k 2-v. Based on the discussion below the staff-proposes to, determine that the 1, request does not involve a significant hazards consideration. 48 FR 14871 - provides the following example of an amendment that is not likely to involve a significant hazards consideration: "(ii) A change that constitutes an additional limitation, restriction, or control not presently included in i the technical specifications: for example, a more stringent surveillance -requirement." This amendment' constitutes an additional limi.tation, a procedure which r would be required whenever the neutron source strength was too low to give the proper response on the system early-in start-up. l This procedure for meeting the specifications of Section 7.3.2(d) when the neutron source strength is low during start-up was. previously approved for Cycle 16 by the NRC in Amendment No. 29 dated October.18,1979. Since Amendment No. 29 the NRC has approved the Big Rock Point Physics Methodology l which uses the GROK code in a letter dated September 16, 1982. The SER in i i support of Amendment No. 29 stated that-the procedure would have been approved for Cycles beyond Cycle 16 if NRC staff review of the GROK; code had been complete. The Comission is seeking public coments on this pro, posed, determination. g Any comments received within 30 days af ter the date c# publication of this' notice will be considered in making any final determination. T,he Comission t 4 l will not normally make a final determination u'nless it receives a request, for a hearing. F i i w--- +r v3--w -t
- - -v-,
-w r,.e*--+- -w we----r-w-ve.
w-
-w--+-v=-v-- -+--w---s--------w- ---r---w--. -w--,r-v =w r--+-r -.w--+
c3 ^ - o ' o 1 i i UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CONSUt4ERS POWER COMPANY ( DOCKET N0. 50-155 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comission) is consideringx issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-6, issued to t Consumers Power Company (the licensee), for operation of the Big Rock Point Plant located in Charlevoix County Michigan. The amendment would permi,t operation of the Big Rock Point Plant with new Exxon H-3 design fuel assemblies. The new design moves the gadolinia bearing rods closer to the periphery of the assembly and slightly increases 4-the gadolinia (poison for neutron absorption) content of the gadolinia bearing rods. The proposed action would require changes in the limits on i Maximm Average Planar Linear Heat Generation Rate (MAPLHGR). The amendment request is supported by analyses which are almoht identical to those analyses approved by the Comission for the H-2 fuel design currently in 'use at Big Rock Point. These changes are in accordance with the licensee's l application for amendment dated April 20, 1983, as revised April 22, 1983., 4 \\ i. Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Coospission will i have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the ~ [ Act) and the Comission's regulations. The Comission has made a proposed deterniina' tion that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Comission's regulations'in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facil ty in l accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant J
O O i 2-t increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 7. evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a signifi-cant reduction in a margin of safety. The Comission has provided guidance concerning the applicatio'n of these standards by providing certain examples (48 FR 14671, April 6,1983). One of i the examples of actions involving no significant hazards considerations relates to reload amendments involving no fuel assemblies significantly different from those previously found acceptable at the facility in question. The H-3 fuel assemblies are not significantly different from the H-2 design previously approved for Big Rock Point. The H-3 design moves the gadolinia bearing rods closer to the periphery of the assembly and slightly increases the gadolinia (poison for neutron absorption) content of the gadolinia bearing rods. The licensee's analyses, using calculational methods approved by the Comission for the H-2 fuel design, show that these' design changes will not significantly affect the MAPLHGR safety limits. The Comission is seeking public coments on this proposed determination. Any coments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this i i notice will be considered in making any final determination. T,h,e Comission will not normally make a final determination unless it receives a request ~ for a hearing. Comments should be addressed to the Secretary'of the Comission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D.C. 20555, ATTN: Docketing and Service Branch. - -, _ _.. _ _, - - -,.., -,. -,.. _ _, -. _, _. - + -,,,.,... - _
O m. e UNITEE ST*TES C.EA; :.E3ULATORY COMMISSION CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-155 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING The U. S. Nuclear Reguiatory Comission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amenoment to Facility Operating License No. OPR-6, issued to Consumers Power Company (the licensee), for operation of the Big Rock Point Plant located in Charlevoix County, Michigan. Tne amendment would make several cnanges to the Administrative Controls Section of the Technical Specifications. Principally these changes would reflect the institution by Consumers Power Company of the new " Nuclear Activities Plant Organization (NAP 0)." The proposed changes would make Big Rock Point consistent with Palisades and Midland, thereby implementira a coordinated company-wide approach to the ons.ite and offsite safety review The make-up and responsibilities of the Plant Review Committee functions. (PRC) remain essen'tially unchanged. The of fsite review and audit function will be performed by the Nuclear Safety Board (NSB), the new name for the Safety and Audit Review Board (SARB). The board's make-up as, responsibilities d remain essentially unchanged from those of SARB, The new organization, NAP 0, will serve as a technical resource to the NSB. These changes,are in accordance with the licensee's application for amendment da'ted July 20, 1982, as revised September 16 and November 12, 1982. 1
O O + Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Comission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Comission 's regulations. The Comission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration'.' Under the Comission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with 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 signifi-cant reduction in a margin of safety. The Comission nas provided guidance concerning the application of these standards by providing certain examples (48 FR 14671, April 6,1983). One of' the examples of actions involving no significant. hazards considerations relates to purely administrative changes [ Example (i)) to the Technical Specifications. The proposed changes are purely administrative. The Comissio'n is seeking public coments on this proposed detcrmination. Any coments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any' final determination. The Comission
- a will not normally make a final determination unless it receives a request -
for a hearing. Coments 'should be addressed to the Secretarf of the Comission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D.C. 20555, ATTN: Docketing and Service Branch.
e a y. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY v DOCKET NO. 50-155 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING-The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. OPR-6, issued to Consumers Power Company (the licensee), for operation of the Big Rock Point Plant located in Charlevoix County, Michigan. The amendment would authorize the licensee to replace the Minimum Critical Heat Flux Ratio (MCHFR) safety limit with a Minimum Critical Power Ratio (MCPR) safety limit for normal operation conditions in accordance with the licensee's application for amendment dated December 20, 1982. Before issuance of the proposed license amendmen.t, the Comission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Comission's regulations. The Comission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Comission's ' regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) invol.ve 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 signifi-cant reduction in a margin of safety.
e O O u - The new MCPR limit was conservatively calculated using the RETRAN and COBRA. computer programs. These programs were used previously by the licensee for analyses. of accidents and transients in the NRC's Systematic Evaluation Program. The new MCPR limit is le'ss conservative than the old Miinimum " Critical Heat Flux Ratio (MCHFR) limit; therefore, this proposal does reduce the margin of safety. However, the licensee has indicated that the MCPR limit was calculated conservatively and that the reduction in margin of safety is not significant. Several years ago, the NRC staff informed BWR licensees that the Hench-Levy correlation used in transient analyses was no longer acceptable. At that time most BWR's licensees converted to MCPR dropping the Hench-Levy correlation. Big Rock Point did not convert to MCPR at that time.
- Instead, Big Rock Point accepted a MCHFR. penalty, a more conservative MCHFR, to justify continued use of a modified Hench-Levy correlation.
Though review of conversions to MCPR by other BWR's the NRC staff determined that the MCPR method was more accurate that the MCHFR method and that a small ~- reduction in the margin of safety was justified'by use of the more accurate MCPR method. Example (vi) under Examples of Amendments that are Considered Not F Likely to Involve Significant Hazards Considerations in the Comission's guidance on prenoticing amendments (48 FR 14871) reads:
i - h () "(vi) A change which either may result in some increase to the probability or consequences of a previously-analyzed accident or nay reduce in some way a safety margin, but where the results of the change are clearly within all acceptable criteria with' respect, to the system or component specified in the Standard Review Plant: for example, a change resulting from the application of a small refinement of a previously used calculational model or design method." The ' proposed change to the MCPR limit does result in an insignificant recuction in the margin of safety compared to the current MCHFR limit. However, the MCPR limit is based on conservative analysis methods which have already undergone NRC staff review in the Systematic Evaluation Program. 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 Connission, Washington, D.C. 20555, ATTN: Docketing and Service Branch.
- O
W V 0 ~- UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIOR CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-155 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTONITY FOR HEARING The U. S. Nuclear' Regulatory Comission (the Comission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. OPR-6, issued to Consumers' Power Conpany (the licensee), for operation of the Big Rock Point Plant located in Charlevoix County, Michigan. The amendment would make several revisions to the Administrative . Controls Section of the Technical Specifications. One proposed change would incorporate the revised working hour guidelines of NRC Generic Letter 82-12. Another proposed change would add a second auxiliary operator to the minimum shif t crew. The rest of the proposed changes are purely administrative. These changes are in accordance with the licensee's applicat!3on for amendment dated December 20, 1982. Before issuan~ce of the proposed li. cense amendment, the Comission wi_ll have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Comission's regulations. The Comission has made a proposed determination that the amendment - request involves no significant hazards consid' ration. Under the 'Comission's e regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in ~ accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significt.nt
L,1 O o s, 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 signifi-cant reduction in a margin of safety. The Comission has provided guidance concerning 5he application of these standards by-providing 'certain examples.(48 FR '14671, April 6,1983). One of the examples of actions involving no significant hazards considerations relates to purely administrative changes [ Example (i)) to the Technical-Specifications. Most of the proposed changes are purely administrative. Another example of actions involving no significant hazards considerations relates to changes that constitute an _ additional limitation,. restriction, or control' not presently _ included in the Technical Specifications [see Example (ii)]. The incorporation of the 'NRC's working hour guidelines and the addition of a second aux'iliary opr ator to the minimum shift crew constitute such additional controls. The Comission is seeking;public coments on this proposed determination. Any coments received within 30 days af,ter the -date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination. The Comission ~ will not normally make a final determination unless it receives a request for a hearing. Coments should be addressed 'to the Secretary of the Comission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission,-Washington, D.C. 20555, ATTN: Docketing and Service Branch. b w
I i .C E: 5 - ~. EI :,. : E A: : E G. T ' ;.
- C",. S S I C
- ,
2 CONS'JMERS POWER' COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-155 . NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING-The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-6, issued to , Consumers Power Company'(the licensee), for operation of the Big Rock Point Plant located in Charlevoix County, Michigan. l Ratio (MCPR) safety limit for normal operation conditions in accorcance with The amencment would authorize the licensee to replace the Minimum Critical Heat Flux Ratio (MCHFR) safety limit with a Minimum Critical Power the licensee's application for amendment dated December 20, 1982. I have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Be' fore issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Comission will Act) and the Comission's regulations. The Comission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideratiorf. Under the Comission's - regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in a accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant b increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new.or different kind of i accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a signifi-cant reduction in a margin of safety. QQ$$htf
s s- _2 k l COSRA computer programs. The new MCPR limit was conservatively calculated using the RETRAN and These programs were used previously by the licensee ] for analyses of accidents and transients in the NRC's Systematic Evaluation h Program. The new MCPR limit is less conservative than the old Mihimum ~ Critical Heat Flux Ratio (MCHFR) limit; therefore, this proposal does recuce the margin of safety. Konever, the licensee has in.dicatec that the MCPR limit was calculated conservatively and that the reduction in margin of ' safety is not significant. Several years ago, the NRC staff informed BWR licensees that the Hench-Levy correlation used in transient analyses was no longer acceptable. At that time most SWR's licensees converted to MCPR oropping the Hench-Levy correlation. Big Rock Point did not convert to MCPR at that time.
- Instead, Big Rock Point accepted a MCHFR penalty, a more conservative MCHFR, to justify continued use of a modified Hench-Levy correl?. tion.
Though review of conversions to MCPR by other BWR's the NRC staff determined that the MCPR method was more accurate that the MCHFR method and that a small q reduction in the margin of safety was justified by use of the more accurate L MCPR method. n Example (.vi) under Examples of Amendments that are Considered Not Likely to Involve Sicnificant Hazards Considerations in the Commission's guidance on prenoticing amendments (48 FR 14871) reads: 1
h b "(vi) A change which either may result in some increase to the probability or consequences of a previously-analyzed accident or 7[ may reduce in some way a safety margin, but where the results of the change are clearly within all acceptable criteria with respect ~ to the system or component specified in the Standard Review Plant: for example, a cnange resulting from the application of a small refinement of a previously used calculational model or design method." Ine proposed change to the MCPR limit does result in an insignificant reduction in the margin of safety compared to the current MCHFR limit. However, the MCPR limit is Dased on conservative analysis methods which have al' eady undergone NRC staff review in the Systematic Evaluation Program. r The Comission is seeking public coments on this proposed determination. Any coments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination. The Comission will not normally make a final determination unless it receives a request for a hearing. Coments should be addressed to the Secretary of the Comission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D.C. 20555, ATTN: Docketing and Service Branch.
}- .c. By August 5, 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 leave to intervene. Request for a hearing and petitions for ieave to intervene shall De filed in accordance witn tne Comission'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, tne Commission or an Atomic Safety and Licensi.ng Board, designated by the Co=.ission or oy the Cnairman of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition and the Secretary or the designatec Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of hearing or an appropriate order. As required by 10 CFR 52.714, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceed-ing, 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, y ? or other interest in the proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order Hw..-w mm-w-
h which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. The h petition should also identify the specific aspect (s) of the subject matter of 'I tne proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene. Any person who h nas filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been admitted as a 7 party may amend the petition without requesting leave of the Board up to
- 1 fifteen (15) cays prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceedi'ng, but such an amended petition must satisfy the specificity requirements described above.
Not later than fif teen (15) cays prior tc the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner shall file a supplement to the petition to intervene which must incluce a list of the contentions e 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 requirements with respect to at l' east 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. m
-\\N, G a f If a hearing is requested, the Comission will make a final pp determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decice when the hearing is he,ld. h:E If the final determination is that the amendment request inv51ves no is significant hazards consideration, the Comission may issue the amencment and make it effective, notaithstanding tne request for a hearing. Any hearing h' eld would take. place af ter issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment involves a significant hanrds consideration, any hearing held woulc take place Defore the issuance cf any amencment. I Normally, the Comission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 30-day notice period. However, should circumstances change ar M during.the notice period such that failure to act in a timely way would result in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Comission may issue the i license amendment before the expiration of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final detemination is that the amencment involves no significant ~ hazards consideration. The final determination will.. consider all public and ',7 State comments received. Should the Comission take this action, it will .j publish a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a hearing after
- E issuance.
The Comission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently. 1
x T3 ",,N
- , request for a nearing or a petition for leave to intervene must
,p. PM filed with the Secretary of the Comission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 7~2 ccmission, Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention: Docketing and Service [i or may be delivered to the Comission's Public Document Room,1717 H Sti N. n'. Washington, D.C., by the above date. Where petitions are filed oi,, tne last ten (10) cays of the notice period, it is requested that the y petitioner promp.iy so inform the Comission oy a toll-f ree telephone 5 call to. Western Union at (800) 325-6000 (in Missouri (800) 342-6700). h, Western Union operator should De given Datagram Identification Humber 3/. and the following message addressed to Dennis M. Crutchfielo: peti ti ora., name and telephone numcer: date petition was mailed; plant name; and pue. ? cation date and page number of the FEDERAL REGISTER notice. A t.opy of. r k petition should also be sent to tne Executive Legal Director, U.S. Nuch Regulatory Comission, Washington, D.C. 20555, and to Judd L. Bacon, l gg L Consumers Power Company, 212 West Michigan Avenue, Jackson, Michigan C., 1-attorney for the licensee. { Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended pe' supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not be enterte. absent a determination by the Comission, the presiding officer or the. Safety and Licensing Board designated to rule on the petition and/or - f-i' d ,[ that the petitioner has made a substantial showing of good cause for. s n> granting of a late petition and/or request. That determination will - e.- upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(1)-(v h 2.714(d). h L. 3'. W u- - = M1' T' h
.j / TiK.' 1
- u j
-E-3 .g j For further details'with respect to this action,.see the application for ~ i amendment which is.available for public inspection at the Cornission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.V., Washington, D.C., and at the Local Public Document Room in the Charlevoix Public Library,107 Clinton Street, Charl'evoix, { Michigan ai720, 1 Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 29 day of June 19S3. n j FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i Cf t' Dennis M. Crutenfielp Chibf j Operating Reactors Branch e5 Division of Licensing i i 9 o 'h g in ..l e c{ i k b b q d 3 j ._.}}