ML20128P669
| ML20128P669 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Mcguire, McGuire, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 10/21/1983 |
| From: | Adensam E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20127A737 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-84-794 NUDOCS 8506030605 | |
| Download: ML20128P669 (21) | |
Text
t-
't t
A
{
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DUKE POWER COMPANY DOCKET NOS. 50-369 AND 50-370 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTS TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED N0 SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATIONS AND OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING
~
The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issu-ance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-9 and NPF-17, issued to Duke Power Company (the licensee), for operation of the McGuire Nuclear Station, Units' I and '2, located in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
These amendments were requested by the licensee.in a letter dated August 2, 1983.
One amendment would change Technical Specification 4.6.5.3.1 to increase the surveillance interval for verifying that the ice condenser inlet doors can be' opened and closed properly and to increase the size of the sample required to be tested.during each surveillance.
The change would increase the surveillance interval from 6 months to 9 months and at the same time increase the sample size-from 25% to 50%.
A second amendment would change Technical Specification Table 3.3-5, response time for steam line isolation from 5 9 seconds to d 7 seconds.
The change would reflect the response time value used in the safety analysis report.
A third amendment would change Technical Specification Table 3.7-4b to reflect deletion of 1 mechanical snubber on the Unit 2 Diesel Generator Lube Oil System and 1 mechanical snubber on the Unit 2 Safety Injection System.
Deletion of these snubbers is allowed by the terms of the technical specification.
L t
8506030605 841108 PDR FDIA ADATD84-794 PDR
-..n..
~.
o
. 7590-01 A fourth amendment would change Technical Specification 4.6.1.1.a to exempt locked valves, blind flanges and deactivated automatic valves located inside the annulus from monthly surveillance requirements.
A similar exemption applies to com-ponents inside containment.
Surveillance on the aanulus components would be per-
. formed during cold shutdown.
A fif th amendment would change Technical Specificaticn 4.6.1.3.b to require an overall containment airlock leakage test whenever maintenance has been performed on' the air locks that could affect the air locking sealing capability.
This change l
would ' constitute an exemption to Appendix J to' 10 CFR 50.
l l
The sixth amendment would change Technical Specification Table 3.6-1, by adding several secondary containment penetrations 'that were inadvertently omitted from the 1
table.due to admir.istrative errors.
The seventh amendment' would correct several Technical Specification administra-tive and typographical errors..
The eighth amendment would change Technical Specification Table 3.3-1 concerning the action required in the event one of the four instrumentation channels per steam generator is inoperable which actuate reactor trip upon low-low-steam generator water-level.
The change would allow bypassing the inoperable channel for up to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> for surveillance testing of the remaining operable channels.
The ninth amendment wculd change Technical Specification 4.7.10.2.a to.
exclude sprinkler system valves from surveillance requirements which are inacces-sible during plant operation and would add Specification 4.6.10.2.C.4 to require verifying the positions of those valves at least once per 18 months.
- .. 7590-O'.
Tne final amendment would change Technical Specification 3.6.4.3/4.6.4.3 by clarifying that.the Primary Contaicment Distributed Ignition System consists of two recundant trains to assure compatibility with operability as definea on a per
-train oasis.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (tne Act) and the Commission's regulations.
The Commission has made a proposed cetermination that the amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration.
Under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendments would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequ'ences 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.
Because the function of the ice condenser doors is to mitigate the consequences of accidents, the proposed amendment to Technical Specification 4.6.5.3.1 does not involve a significant increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated or a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Because no changes in operating conditions will result from tne change in surveillance test interval, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
Because no changes in any accident analyses will result from the change in the surveillance test interval, the proposed amendment does not involve any increase in the consequences of an accident previously evalauted.
r
~
. s 7590-01 Because the proposed amendment to Technical Specification Table 3.3-5 is more restrictive than the current response time for steamline isolation and because it
~
reflects botn the FSAT Chapter 6 steamline break containment analysis and the Chapter 15 steamline break core analysis, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated or a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Because the proposed amendment is l
more restrictive in operating conditions, the amendment does not create the possi-bility of a new or dif ferent kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
Because no changes in any accident analyses will result from the change in response time, the proposed anendment does not involve any increase in the ccnsequences of an accider.: previously evaluated.
Because the proposed amendment to Technical Specification Table 3.7-4b deleting 2 safety-related mecnanical snubbers is based on meeting ASME code by reanalysis in one case and by installation of a rigid support in the secondary case, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated or a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Because no change in operating condition will result, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
Because no changes in any accident analysis will result, the proposed amendment does not involve any increase in the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Eecause tne proposec amer.dment to Technical Specification 4.6.1.1.a reduces the frequency of surveillance of the status of penetrations in the annulus but meets the acceptable criteria in the Standard Review Plan, Section 6.2.4, and because these penetrations are locked, sealed, or otherwise secured in the closed position, which
, 7593-0; the staff previously approved for Unit 1, the proposed amenoment does not irivolve a significant increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated or a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Becsuse no change in operating con-dition will result, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident.previously evaluated. Because no changes in.any accident analysis will result, the proposed amendment does not involve any increase in the consequences of an accident previously evaluateo.
The proposed amendment regarding the testing of the containment airlock leakage would reduce such testing from testing after each opening of the airlock in the current technical specification to testing when maintenance has been performed on t.,e airlock tnat could affe:t the air locking capability.
Because this change has little significance on Technical Specification 4.6.1.3.a requiring.a seal integrity test prior to establishing containment integrity and once every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />, the proposed amendment to Technical Specification 4.6.1.3.b does not involve a significant increase in the probabilit'y of an accident previously evaluated or a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Because no change in operating con-dition will result, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a.
(3 new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. Because
-no changes in any accident analysis will result, the proposed amendment 'does not involve any increase in the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Because the proposed amendment to Technical Specification Table 3.6-1 adds several additional penetrations to Table 3.6-1 of the Technical Specifications which were inadvertently omitted, the addition being more restrictive than existing requirements, the proposed amendment to Technical Specification Table 3.6-1 does not involve a significant increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated or a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Because no change in I
O 7590-01 operating condition will result, the proposed amendment does not create the possi.
. bility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
Because no enanges in any accident analysis will result, the proposed amendment does not involve any increase in the ccnsequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Because the proposed amendments to 5 Technical Specifications involve only administrative or typographical changes, the proposed amendments do not involve a significant increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated or a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Because no change in operating condi-tion will result, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
Because no changes in any accident analysis will result, the pro, posed amendment does not involve any increase in the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Because the proposed amendment to Technical Specification Table 3.3-1, achieves consistency within the technical specifications for continued operation with one steam generator low-low water level channel inoperable on reactor trip system instru-mentation and because operation with one inoperable channel would be for a limited time period (up to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />) to perform monthly surveillance testing, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated or a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Because the change in operating condition is for a limited period of time, the proposed amend-ment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously cvaluatec.
Eecause no changes in any accicent analysis will result, the prop'osed amendment does not include any increase in the consequences of any accident previously evaluated.
o.
-I-7590-01 Because the proposed amendment relates to surveillance of sprinkler system valves which are inaccessible during plant operation and 'are either locked or elec-trically supervised and meet the guidelines in the Standard Review Plan, extending the surveillance frequency from 31 days to 18 months as proposed in Technical Speci-fication 4.7.10.2.a does not involve a significant increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated or a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Because no change in operating condition will result, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
Because no changes in any accident analysis will result, the proposed amendment does not involve any increase in the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Because the proposed amendment to Technical Specification 3.6.4.3/4.6.4.3 achieves consistency throughout the technical specification by clarifying that these are two redundant trains of igniters in the Primary Containment Distributed Ignition System and because operability is more restrictive when two igniters on the same train 3re inoperable, the proposed technit.a! specification does not involve a signi-ficant increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated or a signiff-cant reduction in a margin of safety.
Because no change in operating condition will result, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident fr'om any accident previously evaluated.
Because no changes in any accident analy' sis will result, the proposed amendment does not involve any increase in the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
. Based on the foregoing, the Commission proposes to determine that each of these proposed lic 1s'e amendments does not involve :ignificant hazards considerations.
I
\\
O
' 7590-01 The Commission is seeking public comments on these proposed determinations.
Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.
The Commission will not normally make a final determination unless it receives a request for a hearing.
Comments should be addressed to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555, Attn:
Docketing and Service-Branch.
By
. hay 28 %
, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendments to the subject facility operating licenses and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to par-ticipate as a party in the proceeding must file a written petition for leave to i nt erv ene.
Requests for hearings 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 requests for hearings or petitions for leave to intervene are filed by the above date, the Commission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, designated by the Commission or by the Chairman of the Atomic
. Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the requests and/or petitions and the Secretary or the designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of hearing or an appropriate order.'
As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a rot.ition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding.
The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following factors:
(1)thenatureofthepetitioner'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
- 0. 7590-0*.
petitioner's interest.
Tne petition should also identify the specific aspect (s) of the subject matter of the procec'ing 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 may amend the petition without requesting leave of the Board up to fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceed-ing, but such an amended petition must satisfy the specificity requirements described above.
Ivot later than fifteen (15) days prior tc 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 liti-gated in the matter, and the bases for each contention set forth with reasonable speci ficity.
Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amend-ment under consideration.
A petitioner wno fails to file such a supplement which satisfies these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any l
limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing, including the opportunity to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration.
The final determination will serve to-cecide when the hearing is held.
If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no signifi-cant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it j
ef fective,. notwithstanding the request for a hearing.
Any hearing held would take i
place after issuance of the amendment.
i_
. 7590-01 If the final determination is that the amendment involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 30-day notice period.
However, should circumstances change during the notice period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, 'in derat-ing or shutdown of the facility, the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determin-ation is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration.
The final determination will consider all public and State comments received.
Should the Com-mission take this action, it will publish a notice of issuance and provide for oppor-tunity for a hearing after issuance.
The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555, Attention: Docketing and Service Branch, or may be delivered to the Commis-sion's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C., by the above date.
Where petitions are filed during the last ten (10) days of the notice period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so inform the Commission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at (800) 325-6000 (in Missouri (800) 342-6700).
The Western Union operator should be given Datagram Identification Number 3737 and the following message addressed to Elinor G. Adensam: petitioner's name and telephone number; date petition was mailed; plant name; and publication date and page' number l
of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice.
A copy of the petition should also be sent to the Executive Legal Director, U.S. flucl2ar Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555, and to Mr. Albert Carr, Duke Power Company, P. O. Box 33189, 422 South Church l
Street, Charlotte, tiorth Carolina 28242, attorney for the licensee, t
- - 7590-01 Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions, supple-mental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not be entertained absent a deter-mination by tne Commission, the presiding officer or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board designated to rule on the petition and/or request, that the petitioner has made a substantial showing of good cause for the granting of a late petition and/or request.
That determination will be based upon a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(1)-(v) and 2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amend-ments which -is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Rcom,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and at the Atkins Library, University of North Carolina, Charlotte (UhCC Station), fiorth Carolina 28242.
st Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 21 day of october 1983.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION L/
1"
,Q.1gs
,d. L
- ^
Elinor G. Adensam Licensing Branch No. 4 Division of Licensing O
4 3
i E
'\\
/.
- b M 4 '4 55356 Federal Register / Vol. 48 No. 239 / Monday, December 12. 1983 / Notices
- pe
~
v.
Recently published in the Federal Registee pendmg twolution of M43-as. Oct i1:M-m-
end for public comments the Recommended aHe Coneum with intent of NUCMAR REQUI.ATORY COMMISSION Fire Safety Practices for Roll Transit recommendation to promulgate regulatione M-Metenale Selection guidehnu addrewing similar to the regu!st one contained in 33 CFR smoke and flammatnhty criterte for tetenor 12Aa01 to be opphcable to berge Deets Applications for Ucensee To EEport matenals used in roll trenett vehicin. Intende moored in au portions of the inland weters of N h F m w h lals 9
to finahme the guidehnes based upon the the UnJted Staies. Will wait for the results of
%.d o tace ogreceipt og an opp icat commente neelved, and pubbsh the final a caeualty review project which te beles Pursuant to 10 CFR 110.70(b) *'Pu version in the Federal Register. Planning g
W
- additional safety research to addrese the conducted and which may help determine the entent of the berge breakaway problem.M-please tah nonce that the Nuclear
,4 2
toucity materials luce. /I-324 and-20 A A147:No action will be taken on this Regulatory Commission has received the rail transit safety program plan is currently being developed and will be coordinated with recommendauon pending resolution of M43-foDowing application for an export 56.
file in the Nuclear Regulatorylice the UMTA consutuency. The plan will include reJ transit neeerch and development Rodeo officers Uruon: Oct it M41-da settethes B-of-st:Conunues to provide Wben a ndao omen is usigned aboard a Commission's Public Document Room 7 technacal assistance to red trans9 operators vnael and be advises the uruon that be is not located at 1717 H Street. N.W.,
in tesung products to be used in nvenue g
,gg g.,
g g.aahingtm D.C.
.?
,4 eernce. R42-12 UMTA and the American uruon directs ham to meet the departing radio A request for a bearing or petition ier Pubhc Transit Anociabor. have agreed to omen for bruk@ matructions. He union conduct jointly safety reviews of planned and open ta e technical schwl which hee leave to intervene may be filed withia a operaung rail transit e) stems. A41-17 Mas installed au types of radio equipment found days after pubbcation of this noticela
- begun a resserch project for fire suppression aboard U.S. Merchant ehtps.
the Federal Reglater, Any request for modehna on rail transit vehicles. A41-Jtt Victory Corriers. Inc.: Ckt 24 M41-a2' hearing or petition for leswe to intervene '
Are developing guidehnee and recommended Jesued lastructions on jun. 211981 to ship shall be served by the requestor or practices to assist transit s) stems an captaas on procedures to be followed wben petitioner upon the applicant. the assessing needs in planning improvements in pumping engine Inises to stop tanka. He Executive Issal Director, U.S. Nuclear safety without preempting local safety instructionswere cancelled when the Regulatory Commission, Washington, responsibthty.
Installation of the new piping was completed.
D.C. 20555 the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear
- Southeastern Pennsylvanio Tmasportation Authority-Oct JR R42-212 Employee S,g54 gm wg gg_.go,, g.
Regulatory Commission, and the newspaper ran an article on the July 13,1983, M-&1-73, whJe not promu!seung any boating Fsecutive Secretary. Department of SEPTA acadent in Southamptor. penn*
educahon course itself, the NSDC does State, Washington. D.C. 205a1 Secretory of the US Department of number among its membership most of the In its review of appbcations for Pub!
national orsema nons involved la boating licenses to export production or I.
^[#
educabon. NSBC has adopted as its tun 4 n
the authority to investigate conditions theme alcohol and boeur4 utilization facilities, special nucleae j,,
materials or source matertal, noticed emociated with any facihty, equipment, or NoWie ceptes of these response berein, the Commission does not 3,
manner of operation that is financed under the Urban Mass Transportation Act of te64.
letters an available on written request to evaluate the bealth, safety or g*,
public Inquiries Section. National environmental effects in the redpient ' J Califamlo Department of Dunsportatione Transportation Sefety Board, Wuhington, nation of the facility or material to be [#
Nov..t. A4He and.41 forwarded relevant D C. 20504. rteese include respondent's name, exported. The table below lista all new '
- portions ofits contret with the Southern PactSc Railroad for commuter services.
date of letter. and ri mmmendation number (s) major applications.
., eL Marine-U.S. Coast Cucid Oct. JJ: M-Ab in your requeet. The photocopies wtD be 4
di Concurs with erudying the colheion billed ae a cost of 30 centa per page IS2 Dated thle tot day of December less et.g.
damage caused by takef bow barges to minimum charg4 Bethude. Maryland.
FL Ray Sahh, Jr, For the Nuclear Regulatory %". "
e ng woul improv v snel fet. The Pedern/Aegisterl.ioison Officer.
James V,2komensaa.
Towing Safety and Advisory Committu will December 7.tosse Assistant Duector. Esport/ Import and determine a course of actJon. M4Na No PW Das skaanse RW t#4e Hs est InternotJona/Sofeguon!s, Office of 7'j action will be taken on this recomrnendanon es w wo coes as
- es.e Interriotionolfregmms NRCEimont Arcucations sam w = ee sre=
4AMew %We rees team I***
0"#"I '8 mouse Emm 8eder Ca. 9th it. 1ss3-
$2r mroere ersees eter, M ado ese Puni emesweems he ouheraream Dessem Pure =&W t.&seems s
Mn SS, f eta Esma020s7 een maknee e og r
. PS D= aumes to.# u4e aos nel anAmeocootroe w s.es
~
I. '.
3 IDocsiM I60s. 50-300 and 50-370) i Amendment No. 27 to Facility Operating Count. North Carolinn.no
Y;;
e wer CMeensence of Ucense No. NPF-e and Amendment No.
amen ents were effective October Me nont k FW Opem a to Facility Operating Ucense No. NPF-tesi 17r issued to Duke Power Company (the The amendments change the
- .(,
licensee), which revloed the Technical Technical Specificauona related to the Specificauona for operadon of the containment lower compartment ne U.S. Nuclear Regulatory McCutre Nuclear Stallon, Unita 1 and 2 temperiture to allow the tempereture Commteolon (Commiselon) has luued (the facilities), located at Mecklenburg l limit to be increased from 120* F to 125*,
h
(
i Federal Register / Vcl. 48, No. 239 / Mond:y, December 12, 1983 / N:tices 553S7 F for up to 90 cumulative days a year result in any significant environmental NUCLEAR REGULATORY provided that the lower compartment impect and that pursuant to 10 CR COMMISSION d *ifl temperature had averaged lue than uo* 51.5(d)(4) an environmentalimpact F over the previous ses days.
statement or negative' declaration and ID'*****88-888I
%e application for the amendmente environmentalimpact appraisal need The Toledo Edison Co. and the i
complies wtth'the standards and not be prepared in connection with Cleveland Electric liluminating Co.;
a requimments of the Atomic Energy Act leauance of the amendmente.
Consideration of laauence of of1954, as amended (the Act), and the For further details with respect to the Amendment to Factitty Operating f,
Commission's rules and regulations. m action see:(1)ne application for Ucense and Proposed no Significant Commiselon has made appropriate amendent dated September 22 and Hazards Conalderation Determination findings as required by tne Act and the supplemented October 28,1983;(2) and Opportunity for Hearing y
Commission's rules and regulations in 10 Amendment No. 27 to Facihty Operating De Nuclear Regulatory Commiselon l
CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the Ucense NPF-st (1) Ameodment No,8 to (the Commission)le considering Ucense amendments.
Facility Operatir.g Uu:na No. NPF-17; Notice of Consideration ofleeuance of and (4) the Conw is:Iun's related Safety issuance of an amendment to Facihty M,
Amendment and Proposed No Evaluation. All o!tNa itema are Operating Ucense No. NPF-3, issued to
,T,
Signincant Hazards Conalderation avadable for pd,lic tr.spection at the h'yg,!*do Edi T
Co d
d Ele cWu r ung
- ( 'e Determination and Opportunity for Cou. mission *a Pub!ic Document Room, Hearing in connection with this action 1717 H Street, N.W. Wuhington, D.C.,
mpany (the ucensmL for opmuon e
E'
"'I was bublished in the Federal Registar on and at the Atkins U9 a y, University of u,I d
I **
Octo t 25,19a3 (44 FR 49394).The North Ce %!ina. Cha.otte (UNCC 1
amendments wm issued before Stanon). North Caml.na 2a:42.
County, Ohim in accMance d ec hemm'
~.,
expiration of the 30-day comment period A cop of itena f 2), (3). and (4) may be becauw fauure to do so would result in obtaine[upon request addressed to theapplication f r amendment dated I
plant shutdown.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comminion, December 26.1980 (Item 1), ee rnodilled Under its regulations, the Commission Washington, D.C. 20555, Attennon:
July 10.1981 (1te o 6), the amendment may leeue and make an smendment Director, Division of Ucenalng.
w uld change the Technical immediately effective, notwithstanding Specifications applicable to the fire the pendency before it of a re uest for a Dated et Betheeds, Maryland thie 2nd der protection systems at the facility.nese of Deceber taas.
hearing from any person,in a vance of changes are in response to the NRC staff the holding and completion of any For the Nuclear Regulatory Commiulon.
request, da tad September 23,1940, for i
required hearing, where it has 321aor C. A" Technical Specification revisions to q
determined that no significant hazards Chiel. ucestg amocA No. 4. Divielen of reflect modifications made to the facility I
consideration is involved.
Ucesig.
fire protection features and to d
%e Commisalon has applied the pDa***P5=8S a M8al incorporate the format and scope of the st ndards of to CR 80J2 and has made
- 18* coos tw.ew curnnt Standard Technical a final determination that the Speci8 cations.& lacility amendments involve no significant modifications were a moult of the stafFe hazarda conalderation. W besta for thle ID'oht see. 46-sost-ast, Astar see 64 fire protection Safety Evaluation Report, i!
determination la contained in the Sefety 496-41teLI dated July 36, tws. W chantes Evaluation mleted to thle action, requated affect Specifications 3.3.3A, k'
Because the increase in lower Meer 48cGee Chemical Corp 4 met Fire Detection Instrumentation: 3.7.s.1, compartment temperature would be Chicego Mare Earthe FoodlNY Fire Suppmeston Water Systems; 3.7J.2, d.
small,less than $4 compared to the December e, tees.
Spray and/or Sprinkler Systems; 3.7J.3, r
}j allowable temaerature of uo* F under Hose Stations; 3.7J.4, Fire Hydrants and l
the current Technical Specification, the coh,*"c. g,Y e,'
g h If dran ose I ouns and 3.7.10 Fire Bad p
R 78129 uth sta !
e det ctor oT b 4.
n e u
d'
Dearbe Stmet,
Chicaga minois 00604, (2) upgraded and clarified accon and significant uction a margin of beginning at e 30 a.m. W purpose of the surveillance requirements appbcable to safe. Because no changes in any afmnce le t e nelder petitions to the operabihty of fire detection A
acci ont analysis will result from the "dw
[u[
c b
a f
n, C88S evaluated nor do they create the opecificauono dealing with fire hydrants I
posolbility of a new or dibrent kind of Bethuda. Maryland. Decesiber sw tess, and hydrant hoes houses, and l5)
A, i
accident. Accordingly, as described
[For the Atomic Safety and IJcenetna upgraded the action and survelliance above, the amendment has bun leeued Board mquimmute for Em banin and made immediate! effective and any joka H. Frye IH, penetrations.
h" hearing will be held after luuance, choleman. Adaurumat/ve/udsa Before lesuance of the proposed h'
The Comm!selon has determined that P 0= '***""" **l Ilc"" arnedmet, the Commlulu j
the leeuance of the amendments wi!J not enamie cosar=>e w wt!! heve made findings required by the
.]
. r-I h
3
,j Federal Registee / Vol. 49. No. 2 / Wednesday, lanuary 4.1984 / Notices 529 April 27.1979 lune 29.1979, March 25.
create the possibility of a new or
. g 1990. November 4.1980. March 15,1982 different kind of accident; however.
discussed shows that the DNB limit of 7
and May 26.1982. (21 A:nendment No. 37 lower RCS flow can have some effect on 1.30 is met (Re: Standard Review Plan to Ucense No. DPR-61, dated February the consequences of accidents Section 4.4. Acceptance Criterion 1) and tr.1981. including the Commission's related transmittal letter, and (3) the previously evaluated.The effects of other design-basis transients would e
Commission's letter and Safety lower RCS flow have been evaluated for remain within their respective hmits, the Evaluation related to the grantsrg of the accidents discussed in the Final above example can be applied to this situation.
,elief dated December 29.19al. All of Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), Chapter these items are available for public 15.nis evaluation shows that adequate ne second part of the amendment inspection at the Commission's Public thermal margin to Departure from involves a requirement to reduce power Document Room.1717 H Street. NW.,
Nucleate Boiling Ratto (DNBR) would be by 1% for each 1% reduction in RCS flow Washington, D C. 20555 and at the maintained (i.e.. DNBR greater than below the minimum flow required for 1.30). Non-DNB-limited transients were 100% power. Thermal.hydrau!sc Russell Ubrary.119 Broad Street NW.,
also evaluated and the results were sensitivity studies have shown that this Middletown. Connecticut 06457. A single determined to be within their respective power / flow tradeoffis conservative copy ofitems (2 and 3) may be obtained upon re) ques (t addressed to the limits. Therefore, operation ::nder this with respect to DNB margin. Therefore, aspect of the proposed amendments this aspect of the amendment would not; U S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, would not involve a sigmficant increase (1) involve a significant increase in the Washington, D.C. 20555. Attention:
in the consequences of accidents probability or consequences of an Director.Davisior of Ucensing.
previously evaluated. Similarly, because accident. (2) create the possibility of a Dated at Bethesda Maryland. this 2mh day the evaluation showed that the eriginal new or different kind of an accident, and of December 1963.
analysis results are valid for the DNB-(3) mvelve a sigruficant reduction in a g.*
' g ****
limited transients, the safety margins safety margin.
Ac ing Chief, rocrw Reactors Branch No.
inherent in the DNBR limit of 1.30 (based ne Commission la seeking public
/"8/#8 8/
'88/"#
On the W-3 correlation) are unaffected.
t il sed lynp o o n s m. W Also, the non.DNB-limited transients e rminat on.
y ommente received ame caos ns ***
remain within their respective limits.
within 30 days after the date of Therefore, this aspect of the proposed publication of this notice will be amendment does not involve a considered in making any final
[pooket geon,30 33g and 50-37el significant reduction in a safety margin.
determination. The Commission will not Ouke Power Co4 Conalderation of This is in response to the licensee's normally make a final determination application for amendtnente dated unless it receives a request for a
{
leeuence of Amendments to Facility November 18,1903.
hearing Operating Ucenses and Proposed no Before issuance of the proposed Comments should be addrused to the Significent Hasardo Consideration license amendments, the Commission Secretary of the Commission. U.S.
Determination and Opportunity foe 3
} Atomic Enewill have made findings required by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission' Hearing Washington, D.C. 30555. Attn.:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Act of 1954, as,' amended Docketing and Service Branch.
I"I "
Cortmission (the Commission)is I ti na By February 3.1984, the licensee may considering issuance of amendmente to The Commisslori has made a proposed file a request for a hearing with respect facility Operating Ucense Nos. NPF-e determination that the amendment 18 I"uance of se amendsnents k &e and NPF-17. Issued to Duke Power request involves no significant harards subject facill operating !! censes and -
Company (the licensee), for operation of consideration. Under the Commission's any puson on intent inay be the McGuire Nuclear Station. Units 1 regulations in to CFR 50.92 this means affected by this proceeding and who and 2. located in Mecklenburg County, that operation of the facility in wishu m part cipate as a party in the North Carolina, accordance with the proposed proceeding must file a written petition The amendments would (t) reduce by amendment would not (1) involve a for leave to intervene. Request for a 2% the reactor coolant system (RCS) significant increase in the probability or hearing and petitions for leave to flow rate required for operation of consequences of an accident previously intervene shall be filed in accordance McGuire Unit 2 at 100% power and a new or differe)nt kind of accident fromevaluated; or (2 create t revise the limits for safety systems Practice for Domestic Ucensing setting to accommodate tne RCS flow any accident previously evaluated; or (3) Proceedingsin to Cm Part 2. !f a reduction and (2) provide for a 1%
involve a significant reduction in a request for a hearing or petition for reduction in power for each 1%
margin of safety.
leave to intervene is filed by the abow reduction in the measured RCS flow The Commission has provided data, the Commission or an Atomic below the flow requirement for 100%
examples of amendments likely to power for McGuire Unit 2.
involve no significant hasards Safety and Ucensing Board, designated De operation of McCu're Unit 2 at considerations (48 FR 14870). One by the Commluton er by the Chairman 904 power, as a par example of actions likely to involve no of the Atomic Safety and ucensing escension program,t of the unit power Board Panel, will rule on the request has identified a low significant hazards considerations is an and/or petition and the Secretary or the reactor coolant flow condition that, amendment which either may result in designated Atomic Safsty and 1.icensing pursuant to the existing technical some increase to the probability or specification requirement, prevents the conwquences of a previously analyzed Board willissue a notice of hearing or an appropriate order.
unit from operst6ng above 80% power.
accident or may reduce a safety margin, As required by to CFR 2.714. a
'The first part of the amendment which but where the results of the change are Petition for leave to intervene shall set reduces reactor coolant system flow clearly within all acceptable criterta forth with particularits *
- interest of with rupect to the system or component the petitioner in the pweding and how would not affect the probebili of accidente previously evaluat specified in the Standard Review Plan.
that interest may be affected by the not Becauw the evaluation previously results of the proceeding.De petition t
\\
. 4 Feder:I Register 't Vd. 49, Na 2 / Wedneed:y,1:nu ry 4,1984 / N:tices should specifically explain the reasons expiration of the 30. day notice period.
Public Document Room,1717 H Street, m
why intervenuon should be permitted However, shou!J circumstances change NW Washington, D.C. and at the with particular reference to the during the notice period such that failure Atkins 1.ibrary, University of North fo!!owing factors:(1) ne nature of the to act in a timely way would result, for Carolina. Charlotte (UNCC Station),
petitioner's right under the Act to be example,in derating or shutdown of the North Carolina 2a242.
made a party to the procuding:(2) the facility, the Commission may issue the nature and extent of the petitioner's license amendment before the Dated at Bethesda. Maryland. thle 27th day of December 19a3.
property, financial, or other interest in expirauon of the 3Gday notice period.
the proceeding and (3) the possible provided that its final determination is For the Nuclest Regulatory Commission.
effect of any order which may be that the amendmentinvolves no Eliace G. Adenessa, I
entered in the proceeding on the significant hazards consideration. He O ' N #'"' N 8"' N ' " 8'#" #l petitioner's interest. The petition should ' final determination will consider all U"####
also identify the specific aspect (s) of the public and State commente received.
In DWum p sea nel subject matter of the proceeding as to Should the Commission take this action.
which petitioner wishes to intervene, it will publish a notice ofissuance and Any person who has filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been provide for opportunity for a hearing cdmitted as a party may amend the after issuance. The Commission expects (Doctet Nos. 50-369 and 50-3701 that the need to take this action will petition without requesting leave of the occur very infrequently.
Duke Power Co.; Cons /Jaration of Board up to fifteen (15) days prior to the A request for a hearing or a petition leauance of Amendments to Focility first prehearing conference scheduled in for leave to intervene must be filed with Operating Ucenses and Opportunity the proceeding. but such an amended the Secretary of the Commission. U.S.
for Pdor Mg petition ruust satisfy the specificity Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
requirements desenbed above.
Washington, D.C. 20555. Attention:
The United States Nuclear Regulatory Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to Docketing and Service Branch, or may Commission (the Commission)is the first prehearing conference
-be delivered to the Commission's Public consideringissuance of amendments to scheduled in the proceeding. a petitioner Document Roorn.1717 H Street. NW.,
Facihty Operating Ucense No. NPF-9 shall file a supplement to the petition to Washington, D.C. by the above date.
and Facility Operating Ucense No. NPF-intervene which must include a list of Where petitions are filed during the last 17, issued to Duke Power Company (the the contentions which are sought to be litigated in the matter, and the bases for ten (10) days of the notice period,it is.
licensee), for operation of the McGuire Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2. located cach contention set forth with requested that the petitioner promptly in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
so inform the Commission by a toll-free reasonable specificity. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of telephone call to Western Union at (800)
The amendments would change the amendment under consideration. A 325-6000 (in Missouri (800) 342-6700.
Technical Specification 3.5.1.2. to allow The Western Union operator should be operation at less than or equal to 46%
petitioner who falle to file such a given Datagram identifiestion Nwnber Rated Thermal Power with the Upper supplemenf'which satisfies these requirements with respect to at least one 3737 and the fo!!owing message Head injection Accumulator System addressed to ElinorG. Adensam:
inoperable.The system performs no contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
petitioner *a name and telephone function during normal operation but Those permitted to intervene become number; date petition was maifed; plant
,,,.ves to midgate accidents after they name: and publication date and page occur.De change would provide arties to the proceeding, subject to any
{ imitations in the order granting leave to number of this Fedacal Register notice, operating flexibi!1ty but would not residt '
A copy of the petition should also be in exceeding operating limits intervene, and'have the opportunity to sent to the Executive legal Director, established by to CFK 50.46. These p:rticipate fully in the conduct of the U S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, amendments were reques'ed in the h:aring. including the opportunity to Washington D.C. 20555, and to Mr.
licensee's application for amendments '
present evidenctand cross examine witnesses.
Albert Carr. Duke Power Company, P.O.
dated August 2.1963' if a hearing is requested, the Box 33189. 422 South Church Street, Prior to issuance of the proposed Commission will make a final Charlotte. North Carolina 28242, lyense amendments, the Cominluimi d: termination on the issue of no attomey for the licensee.
will have made findings required by the significant hazards consideration. De Nontimely filings of petitions for leave Atomic Energy Act of 1954. as,s amended to intervene, amended petitions.
(the Act) and tne Commission final determination will serve to decide supplemental petidons and/or requests regulations, when the hearing is held.
for hearing will not be entertained By February 3,1964, the licensee may if the final determination is that the amendment request involves no absent a determination by the file a request for a hearing with respect significant hazards consideration. the Commission, the presiding officer or the to issuance of the amendments to the Commission may issue the amendment Atomic Safety and ucensing Board subject facility operating licenses and designated to rule on the petition and/or any person whose interest may be and make it effective, notwithstanding request, that the petitioner has made a affected by this proceeding and who the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of substandal showing of good cause for wishes to participate as a party in the th) ernendment.
the granting of late petition and/or proceeding must file a written petition if the finaldetermination is that the request. That determination will be for leave to intervene. Requests for a s
amendment involves a significant based upon a balancing of the factors hearing and petitions for leave to specified in 10 CFR 1.714(a)(1) (1)-(v) intervene shall be filed in accordance hazards consideration. any hearing held and 2.714(d).
with the Commission's " Rules of would take place before the issuance of (ny amendment.
For further details with respect to this Practice for Domestic Ucensing Normally, the Commission will not action. see the application for Proceedings?in to CFR Part 2. If a amendments which la avagable for request for a hearing or petition for issue the amendment until the public inspection at the Commission's leave to intervene is filed by the above f
Fed.iral Register / Vol. 49. No. 43 / I'riday M.us b 7,19nt / Notices
- 'a93 t.icteestt's Cowwif utmts o4 SuentutNT 1 to NUPF G o.'3/
_L l*"*"*"'
'**"'**""'a**d'."_"ft l i. saa i. i.e.a a i %
fo=me i 5.e, r cm, s,.
eseoss _. _
n, seos %
.a w..
.oin.
. p
. on iw.
i o.
e c.~,os a,w. o., e ~ocao 9
- s. s.-. c.o
.a,m. m. =c. _..
. rw im asw.,
co., i. m. e.nc.w n.-..o io, we w.,
i, e.
a,4 on in.
i
.nei-a s a.y.wn, c ier-a ar.
i rn c,n.
$. s
= wc
.a,a
.s on ies.
m a.c i.=tmeoerstn.
. uw.* r
,.ar, cw.
- a. e.ar.ei,.. w on,
.Jh tag.unau.. i. agar hoa e gnp.d.i e.esus ms> s
$(h.uh,s.
I. i.e tsa.
.s.u.e a.a. ae.r.
i.e.
c r
..., na..r e
ont cru.
o
.c,.w.i.w.
....u.,.
o
.h bev.a e ih. upp.o.e tops
, J, eae.i s.een g.w=i=.w eeg rws.ca l
psPedu 9 90 iMr.t a s. Jurio 9 9..
stmeva.ia,a.w s.cm.
- s. f.ows.s sus. con c.ae. twa, n nce a s, iwacm=.e w. i. in e-e.a tee t 04..
% c es.te.1 S epnr. car r h,., swerhoei.i.
, coms :e v
a 9c f m.N a, oi+e. mas F.ce4 '.*g s.whoam.
s u
i.s, %.#Ltuna.i as.. i. b. povo.d e tw a
3
. s.
. in R.a
. sic +e s.a te.sa. s ipse.s Sr. S S.rvt 3SM po..srg a n enestenes ia, thes** 4 ca.v. hun hr...ar a., op e.
c mo e, e-.o ** si. un.ii me ese annne e es.t as w
...nayw ow n.s t p ts ihm s.o.g D,n.i1.t
..s.ml S*Lt8No Coot r$964e.
IDocket Nos. 50-413-OL and 50-414-Ot; Dr. Robert Af. Lazo. Atomic Safety and d.fferences are the use of six AstsP No. 81-463-o4 A 01.1 Licensing Board Panel. U.S. Nuclear inkrmediate (mixing vane) Zirculoy Regulatory Commission. Washington, grids for the OFA fuel versus six Duke Power Co., et al.; Establishment E. 2M intermcdiate (mixing vane) inconel grids cf Atomic Safety and Ucensing Board Dr. Frank F. llooper. Ura,versity of for STD fuel and a reduction in fuel rod Michigan. School of Natural Pursuant to dekgation by the Resources. Ann Arber Michi an diameter. As a result, future core F
Commission dated December 29. In?2.
48109 loadings would range from an approximately % OFA-4s STU published in the Federal Register. 37 FR t*iuca t BethesJa. M ryland, this 2nh d.sy transition core to eventu. ally an all OVA 211710 (1972) and il 2.105,2.700,2.702, of February 1964.
fueled core. The OFA fuct has simthr 2.714. 2.714a. 2.717 and 27'l of the S. Paul Cutter. la Commission's Regulations, all as design features compared to the STD chic /Mnim :mri.e/uda Atomicss/ cry fuel which has had substantial operating cmended, and pursuant to the Statement andLicensing BoardFonet.
ef Policy on Conduct of Licensing experience in a number of nuclear p, n.
vo r. n.s.at..s Proceethngs 13 N.R.C. 452 (1981), and phints. Major advantages for utilizir.g esuno coes new-w the OFA are:(1) Increased efriciency of Ypon consideration of the February 21.
1984 Order of the Atomic Safety and the core by reducing the amount of Ucensing floard already established in
,3,,4,,,n,,g m gy parasitic material and (2) reduced fuel this operating license proceeding, a cycle costs due to an optimization of separate Atomic Safety and Licensing Duke Power Company; Consideration water to uranium ratio.
Board is being established to preside ofissuance of Amendments to Facility Regarding the deletion of boron (ver all emergency planning issues.
Operating Licenses and Proposed No injcction system Technical Specification Significant Hazards ConstJeration
%.5 4 for Urut 1. the propose <l Duke Power Company, et al Determination and Opportunity for amendments would delete the TecFical Hearing Specification requirements related to the Colon bo Nuclear Station. Unit Nos.
and2(Emergency Manning /
The U.S Nuclear Regulatory boron injection system for Unit I as a
,$"o"r'm 'in ect g ns W Commission (the Commission)is
(
PP" Constructi n Permit Nos. CPPR-116 and considering issuance of amendments t k,
o o
CPPR-117 Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-9 bb hW ofrod and NPF-17. issued to Duke Power Umsts Technical Specification This Doard is bem.g constituted pursuant to a notice published by the Company (the licensecl. for operation of
.hange, the proposed amendments Commission on June 25,1961. in the the McGuire Nuclear Station. Units 1 would revise Technical Specification Federal Register (46 FR 32974ff) entitled.
and 2. located in Mecklenburg County, rod insertion limits for Units 1 and 2 as a Notice of Receipt of Application (nr North Carolina.
result of hardware limitations and use of Fmhty Operating Ucenses: Availability The amendments would revise the an appmpriate conversion correlation.
if Applicants' Environmental Report; technical specifica tions including t hese amendments were requested m Consideration ofissuance of Facility changes in operating limits related to the the hcensee,s appucahon for Operating Ucenses; and Notice of transition to the use of optimired fuel nmendments dated December 12.19H3.
Opportunity for f fearing.
assemblies and changes related to the llefore i:s'.ance of the proposed The flourd is r.omprised of the boron injection system and control rod brente amendments. the Comminien I llowing Atlministralite judges:
insertion limits. McGuire Units 1 and 2 will has e made findings required by the Morton D. Margulies. Chairmart. Atomic have been operating with Westinghouse Alo" tic Energy At.t of 1954, as amended 17 x 17 (STDJ' fueled cores. It is proposed (the Act) and the Commission's Safety and Licensing Board Panel.
to refuel both Units 1 and 2 with rexulations.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Westinghouse 17 x 17 Optimized Fuel The Commission has made a proposed W4.shington. D.C. 20555 Assembly (OFA) regmns. The major nietermination that the amendment
6
+ 78M Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 43 / Faislay. March
.!. I9na / Noen.es request involves no significant hazards could potentiall be affected by the furt the Commmion propacs to determine
/
consider.ition. Under the Commission's reload were resiewed for the Unit t that these i.hanges do not involve a regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means Cycle 2 design and conclude that the nigminame hazards cr nsideratism.
that operation of the facility in reload design does not cause the accordance with the proposed previously acceptable safety limits to ho The Commission is secking public comments on this proposed amender ent would not (1) involve a exceeded the above example can be significant incresse ir the probability or applied to this situation.
determination. Any comments rmxived within 30 duys aber the date of consequer ces of an accident previously A previously approved Technical publication of this notice will be evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of Specification change reduced the a new or different kind of accident from required boron concentration in the considered in making any final any accident previously evaluated, or (3) horon injection tank (DIT) to between determination. The Commission will not involve a significant reduction in a 2fX)0 and 4000 ppm. Westinghouse normally rnake a final determinaiion margin of safety.
analysis in support of that change unless it receives a reque=t for a heanng.
The McGuire Unit 1/ Cycle 2 reload concluded that reduction of the DIT's safety evaluation describes all of the boron concentration does not have any Comments shouhl be uddreswd to the accidents comprising the licensing bases adverse effect on safety of plant Secretary of the Commission. U.S.
which could potentially he affected by the fuel reload for the Unit 1 Cycle 2 oper.stion or the health and safety of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, pub! c. The analysis also allows for Washington, D C. 20555. Atto: Docketmg design. The results of evaluation /
complete elimination of the DIT.
and Service Dranch.
analysis conclude that:
Decause the DIT on Unit 1 currently By Aprd 2. t%4. the hcensee may file
- a. The Westinghouse OFA reload fuel performs no safety related function, this a request for a hearing with respect to assemblies for McCulre 1 und 2 are aspect of the proposed amendments issuance of the amendments to the mechanically compatible with the would not:(1) Involve a significant subject facihty operatmg licenses and current STD design, control rods and increase in the probability or any person whose interest may be reactor internals interfaces. Doth fuel assemblies satisfy the current design consequences of an accident. (2) create affected by this proceeding and who the possibility of a new or different kind wishes to participate as a party in the bases for the McGuire units.
of accident,or(3) involve a significant proceeding must file a written patition
- b. Changes in the nuclear characteristics due to the transition from reduction m a safety margin, for leave to intervene. Request for a liardware limitations have resulted in hearing and petitions for leave to STD to OFA fuel will be within the the McGuire control rod overlap being 3"',*[Com is ion's Rules of fded rd range normelly seen from cycle to cycle changed from 50% (114 steps) to 49.0%
,g h due to fuel management effects.
(113 steps). In addition. an inappropriate Practice for Domestic Licensing c.The reload OFAs are hydraulically correlation had been used when control Pr ceedings.. in 10 CFR Part 2. Ig e compatible with the current STD design. rod insertion limits calculated in terms requst I r a hearing or petition for d.The accident analyses for the OFA of fraction inserted were converted to
"[Co dy b
transition core were shown to provide steps withdrawn.
si A
ic acceptable results by meeting the The revised rod insertion limits use Safety and I.icensm.g Doard, designated applicable criteria such as. minimum the correct correlation, resulting in by the Comrnission or by the Chairman DNDR. peak pressure, and peak clad approximately 3 more steps of allowed of the Atomic Safety and IJcensing temperature, as required. The previously D bank insertion. These revised limits Daard Panel, will rule on the request reviewed and licensed safety limits are were used throughout the McGuire and/or petition and the Secretary or the met.
safety analysis.
designated Atomic Safety and 1.icensing
- e. Plant operating limitations given in the Technical Specifications will be The Commission has provided Board willissue a notice of hearing or examples of amendments hkely to en appropriate order.
satisfied with the proposed changes.
involve t.o significant hazards As required by 10 CFR 2.714. a From these evaluations. it is considerations (48 FR 14870). One petition for leave to intervene shall set concluded that the I.fnit 1 Cycle 2 design example of this type is (vi) "A change forth with particularity the interest of does not cause the previously which either may result in some the petitioner in the proceeding and how acceptable safety limits to be exceeded, increase to the probability or that interest may be affected by the The Commission has provided examples of amendments likely to consequences of a previously analyzed results of t'ie proceeding. The petition involve no significant hetards accident or may reduce in son.e way a should spee ifi:a;ly explain the reasons considerations (48 FR 14n70) One safety margin, but where the results of why intervention should be permitted example of this type is (si). "A change the change are clearly within all with particular reference to the which either may result in some acceptable criteria with respect to the following factors:(1) The nature of the increase to the probability or system or enmponent specified in the petitioner's right under the Act to be standard review plan: for example, a made a party to the proceeding: 12) the consequences of a previously analyzed change resulting from the application of nature and extent of the petitioner's accident or may reduce in some way a safety margin, but where results of the a small refinement of a previously used property financial, or other interest in change are clearly within all acceptable calculational model or design method",
the proceeding: and (3) the possible Decause the change from a control rod effect of any order which may be criteria with respect to the system or overlap of 114 steps to 113 steps and entered in the proceeding on the component specified in the standard correction of the correlation error can he petitioner's interest. The petition should review plan: For example, a change considered as a small refinement of a also identify the specific aspect (s) of the resulting from application of a small previously used calculational model, nuhject matter r,f the proceeding as to refinement of a previously used and the change does not create the which petitmnct wishes to intervene.
calculational model or design method".
possibility of a new or different kind of Any person who has fded a petition for llecause the evaluations previously accident fream any accident previously leave to intervene or who has been discussed show that allof the accidents evaluated, the above example can be admitted as a party may amend the comprising the licensing hanen which applied to this situation. Accordingly, petition without requesting leave of the
g Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 4.1 / l' rid.y. Alarch 1 1934 / Notices 709.;
Ilvard up to f.fteen (IS) days poor to the A requnt for a he.4nng or a pesemn IDocW No. 50-302l first prehearnig conference scheduled in for leave to intervene nmst he Ided with the proceeding but such an amended the Secretary of the Commission. U S Monda Power Corp., et at. (Crystal petition must satisfy the specificity Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
River Umt No. 3 Nuclear Genesung requirements described abme.
Washingion. D.C. 20551 Attention:
am Ordu ConHrming Ucensee Not later than hiteen (15) days prior to the fient prehearing conference Dorketing and Service Dranch. or rnay
'"'""**"I"
- "9'"*Y I
scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner be dehvered to the Commistian's Pubin.
shall(de a supplement to the petition to Document Room.1717 il Street N.W..
I mtervene which must include a list of
\\vashington. O C., by the above date.
the cantentions which are sought to be
\\Vhere petitions are filed during the last
- d ".. "'
htigated in the matter, and the bases for ten (10) days of the notice period. it is licensee) and eleven other co. owners e.u h contention set forth with requested that the petitioner prompt!y so are the holders of Facihty Operatmg re..sonub!e specificity. Contentions shall inf rm the Commission by a toll. free License No. UPR-72, whi<.h aulhorMes be bmited to matters within the scope of telephone cati to Western Unicn at (nool the oprration of the Crystal River Und it e a.nondment under consideration. A 3 Moo (in hhssouri (nm) 3426)
No 3 Nuclear Ganerating Plant (the petoioner who fails to file such a The Western Union operatur should be faciht>l st iteady.st, ele power bu els not in cuess o' 2544 megawat:s thermal supp!cment which satisfies these given Datagram identification Mumher The faahty is a pressurized w. iter reqmrements with respect to at least one 3737 and the following messa:;c rnactor (l'WRI hu.ated m Citrus Cmints, um!cntion wdl not be permitteJ to addressed to Ehnur C. Adensam:
Flunda.
partu.ipate as a party.
Pctilmner's name and telephone Those permitted to intervene: become number; date petition was mailed riant i
p.otam to the praccechng. subject to any name; and puhhcation date and page Following the uccident at Three Mde bc itations in the order granting leave to
{
mt.ovene. and have the opportunity to number of this Federal Register notice.
Island Umt No. 2 (TMI-2) on hf ars h 28.
I p 'rt upa'e fully in the conduct of the A cnp} of the petition shou'd also be 1m. the Nuclear Regulatory he.ermg. including the cpportunity to
,,,nt to the E=ecutive Legal Ducctor.
Commission (NRC) staff developed a present evidence and cross-examine U.S. Nucl rar Regula tory Commission.
number of proposed requirements to be Washing *on. D C. 20553. and to Mr.
implemented on ope ating reactors and If a hearing is requested. the Albert Carr. Duke Power Company. P.O.
on plants under constructicn. These Commission will make a final Don 3318:1. 422 South Church Street.
..rquirements include Opera tional determination on the issue of no Charlutte. North Carolina 28242.
Safety. Siting and Design and ugmficant hazards consideration. He 8 " '"') f ' 'h' !IC""8"*-
ES"8""CY PP" redness and are final determination will serve to decide Nontimely filings of petitions for leave additional protection in the oparatiin of intended to provide substantial whrn the hearing is i. eld.
if the f;nal determination is that the tointenene amended petitions.
nuclear facihtics and signif;carit
.nnendment request involves no supplemental petitions and/or requests upgrading of ernergency response yif'ca it hazards consideration, the for hearing will not be entertained capability based on the experience from Lucimusmn may issue the ament!ctent assent a detcrmination by the the accident at TMI-2 and the off..ial
}a u reyaest for a hearing Any hearingnd m ske it effective notwithstanding Commission the presiding officer or the studies and investigations of the Atomic Safeny and Licensing Board accident. The requirements are s.:t farth ould take place after issuance of designated to rule on the petition and/or in NUREG-0737 "Clanfication of nll request, that the petitioner has made a Action Plan Requirernents," and in k'
II t!
n I t. [termin it'on is that the substantial showing of good cause for Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737
.unend.nent involves a significant the granting of a late petition and/or Requirements for Emergency Response huards consideration, any hearing held request. That determina' ion will be Capabihty. Among these requirements g
isoulJ take place before the issuance of based upon a balancing of the factors are a number of items consisti.tg of
>nn.cnandment.
specified in 10 CFR 2.714[ J(1)(i) (v) and emogmy nnp nse facM opetalu!an Normally the Commission w!!I not 2.714(dl.
- "" I E adthimn of instrumentatmn. possd,le
- n. y,. pi
[th SI o [e period.
n ;": a h
(!cta rmers to this contnd to m design modifications. and i
y H"5$cmshould rira.mstances change action, see the application for specific mformatmn to be submitted
- "'. b ' n uit e period such that failure amendments which is ava,!able for Oa 1)ocrmher 17. I-)d2 a letter h ai in he.aly way w,mid result, for public inspection at the Conanission's (Generic 1.etter 82-3J) was sent to..d,
" rn;3. m ileratmg or shutdown of the Public Document Room. t?!? 11 Street.
In:enscen of operatmg reactors.
i I" aty the Cammission may issue the N.W., Washingotn. D.C.. and at the upphcants for operatmg licenses. and i
I" car.nnendrnent before the Atkins 1.ibrary. Universit3 of North holders of constructmn permits "Pr ahon of the 10-day notice period.
Carolina. Charlotte (UNCC Station).
em.losmg Supplement I to NUREGX37.
1""S hled that its final determination is North Carohna 28242.
In this letter, operating reactor ljcense.ui d'd the amendment involves no und holders of construction permits f"Ld determination will(onsider all f" :mt harards tonsiderahon. The Deed at D. ihnda M4rpand, tras ri'i. lay were requested to furnish the followieg 8
u ru*ny N infonnahan, pursu. int to 10 CFR Wel(fl.
!$, j",*, d State co nmenta receised.
i
' Commasion take this artmn.
Foe the Nm 1.n r Nrg.d..tm Cormuninn.
"" l"'"' th"" AE'il is' t0na; f
g g
(1) A proposed scheilule for tudd"$h a notite of issuance amt 4
""a-complermg each of the basic k
'"'" Idf opportumtv for a hearing U""I I" ""*N M "" ^ T'^ # U" '"n of requiremenis for the items identified m
,,,.,",',y'" c~nce. The commission espects "a
'i can"S a io I.it,.tu,ec,,,,, a l Supplenu nt 1 in NilREG#37. and f
,, ' "' '"r n infnnp,enilv-
,,,,,.m.,.,,..,...,.
- A d..,wpti.m or prms r.,e ph.i...a e.tu=a cooe neo-ee as unplenu'ntatmn and integranon of s-
e a
Feder:I Hexister / Vol. 49. No. l 'a / Alonda s. julv.' Ithti / Notun 2720">
Y ll in J and ll.F.1(6) speufied m Defore issuance of the proposed reb id fuct and new foci p of semage of the March 14. tw4 license amendment. the Commission requirements are being r.h er.ged to
" Order Confirming Licensee wdl have made findmgs reqmrrd by the refleii fuel nuembhe in da!!v enriched Commitments on Post.TMI Related Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as amended to 4 ti site 3 5 weight pc*cimt U-231 Issues." should be changed to "End of (the Act) and the Commission's The Commission has prusided certain Refueling Outage ar6."
regulations, cumph s 148 FR 1la'o) of actans hkely This Order shat! become effective The Commission has made a proposed to involve no sigmf cant hanrds upon the licensee's consent or upon determination that the amendrnent considerations. One of the cumples espiration of the time within which the request involves no sigmficant hazards hcensee may request a hearing or. if a consideration. Under the Commission's relates to a rhvige which may reduce m some way a s afety marum, but where hearing 1* requested by the hcensee, on regulations in to CFR 50 92, this means the date specified in an Order issued that operation of the facihty m the results es the charge are clearly woh n aP, arreptable criteria with following further proceedings on this accgrdance with the proposed respec' 'n the system or com;,cnent. The Order.
amendment would not;(1) Involve d charn from a maximum of 3.5 to 4 0 D.ted at Dethesda, Maryland. this 15th dav sigmhcant increase m the probabihty or we,.,ttt percent U-235 for new fuel
,,l lane.1984.
consequences of an accident preuously Wrwe and use is simdar to this For the Nuclear Regulatory Cum,nmon n aluated, t (2) create We ;omisih of Harrell G. Eisenhat, a new or &bnt knd d adnt bm coonple becauve the enrichment of the ccident prnmusly c fuel is increased. but all of the Technical I" a 5 gmkant reduc @ hon m auated. or 91 Specification safety requirements are I' curve. Divis,un off.n,cosmy. &fu e of any L lear neoctur &gularmn ms i n u umu m:.
e n.,
nmpn o safe 4 stdl met Spent fuel pool rcrackmg was specifer. illy exclude >l from the list of
..u o coo,ru w,..
- N d """" "
W I"d ""I P
storaga canw.ts of replacing exist.ng m 1ples cons dered hkely to insolve a
- -]
racks with racks which aHow closer ugmbcant ha:ards consideratmn.
I Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-3101 spacing between stored spent fuel Pending further study of this m tter, the assembhes. The storage expanuon Commission is making a findmg on the Duke Power Co.; Consideration of method does not invols e rod question of no sigmficant hazards issuance of Amendments to Facility consohdation or double tiering. The consideration for each reracking Operating IJcenses and Proposed No storage expansion will create two application such as this on a case.by.
Significant Hazards Consideration regions of storage. Region 1 which will rme Wo giving full consideration to I
Determination and Opportunity for have center.to-unter storage cell the technical circumstances of the case.
Hearing spacing of 10.4 inches will be resented using the standard of I 50.92 (48 FR 14869) 1he U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
'
- E
'"'I '
"8' The licensee's submittal of February Commission (the Commission)is for oYs' n u ! bo e pec f ed
- 17. m. induded a discussion of the L considering issuance of amendments to F acility Operating facense Nos. NPF-9 reactivity levels. Region 2. with 9.125 proposed action with respect to the and NPF-17. Issued to Duke Power inch center.to-center spacing will be issue o no significant hazards,
Company (the licensee), for operation of utibred for storage ofirradiated fuel c nsideration.This discussion has been the McCuire Nudear Station. Units i which falls be!ow specified reactivity resiewed and the Commission fmds it and 2. located in Mecklenburg County, levels. Also, the teracked spent fuel pool acceptable. Specifically, with regard to North Carolina, will allow storage of a maximum of 4.0 the first standard of in CFR 50 92. this The amendments would allow socat weight percent U-235 initially enriched amendment does not involse a i
feel pool storage capacity expansion fuel assemblies. Ilowever, the K.,, of the sigmficant Mcrease in the probability or from 500 to 1.463 spaces for each spent reracked spent fuel pool will be c neequences of an accident presiously i
fuel pool The proposed expansion is to maintained less tha'n or equal to UM.
n aluated. The design requirements of t e achieved by teracking each spent which is the current requirement Tl:,
spent fuel storage remain the same and j
nel pool with two region. poison racks.
additional heat load created by the arr met by the terack design: therefore.
The amendment would change the inorcase in sprat fuel assernblies is the pr babihty of an accident pres tous!)
small and withm the capacity of the es aluated is not sigmficantly increased.
h;u nt fuel pool storage capacity hated in spent fuel pool cooling system such that Accident analyses regardmg criticahty, chn cal Specification 5.0 from 500 fuel membhes to 1.463 fuel assembhes in a the requirement for the irmperature of fuel handbng. scismic nnd loss of forced tw o aegion storage design. 200 spaces in the spent fact poel to be mamlained hng have been performed and the I
Reqian 1 and 1.177 spaces in Region 2
) 3 so F is stdl met. No new technohigy conscquences are acceptable with no i
men a maximum initial enrichment of or unproven trchnology is utihted in '
sign.hcant increases.
i 4 0 weight percent U-235. The nominal edher construction or analvus of the Woh regard to the second standard of i
storage expansion. The structural design to Cl R Sa 92, this amendment dae, not
- ott assembhes usted in Technicalenter.to-center distance between spent margin of the spent fuel pool wdl not be create the possibihty of a new or
- prcification 5.8 would be changed from significantly reduced by the term k.
differrnt kind of accident from any apprnaimately 15 inches to t herefore, the integrit:,'of the spent fuel accident previously evaluated. *lhe opproximately toinches, A new poolis maintained and as a result. no storne expansion just involves' t echnical Specification 3/4.9.12 would new means of losing coohng water, such rephring existing racks w:th racks W added describing the combmetion of that rooling flow can not be maintained.
which allow closer spacing between Willal enrlChment and Cumulative can be postulated beyond those stored spent fuel assembhes: and.
mposure for spent fuel assemblies gddreggpd [n the gf alfg parhpr rn jpgg therrfore apphCab!c arcidents ter"lam
'etessary for storage in Region 2. This that led to the issuance of the operating the son:e. Also, since the integrity of the j
mendment was requested m the license. A discussion nf fuel pool spent fuel poolis maintained. no new integrity is contained in the hcensee's means oflosing cooling water such that o ensee's application for amemiment final Safety Analysis Report and ihn tochng flow cannot be maintained, can
' o< d February 17.1984.
stafra safety Fv,dontion Poport Also.
he postulated and therefere, the 1
E
o 0
l'ederal Revister / Wl. Pl. h 12tl / Monday loly 2.1%I / Nohr.cs 2722fi proposed a<. hon does v.ut e.rew the
..t red m the prm.ced.ng on the Power Hea. tois oil N Miwi tlice ember possihihty of a new orihfierent av ident p..nnoncei mterest. The pention s:iould
- 5. I' mal )
from any accident previously evaluated.
alm idennfy the specihc aspectis) of the Subjett to the above re.pmements.
With regard to the third standard of to u.hicci matter of the proceeding as to and any hmitations in the order granimg CFR 50.92, this ernendment does not u hn h petitioner wishes to intervene, leave to intervene thme permitted to insolve a sigmficant reduction in a Any pers.m who has fded a petition for intervene become parhes to the avg:n of saf ty. Even with more spent lease to intervene or who has been proceedmg. h.ase the opportunity to fuel assemblics and higher enria.hed fuel. a.imitted as a party may amend the partu.ipate fully in the conduct of the srent fuel storage Technical petamn wohoet requenting leave of the hearing, including the opportunity to Spenfications and Standard Ra rc.v Itoard up to fifteen (13} days prior to the present evidence and cross cumine Plan requirements are sh!! met w:th f; st prtheasing confrience scheduled in witnesses.
regatd to K n. srent fuel pool coohr.g th.e proceedmg. but such an amended if a hcanng.is reipmsted. the cape.bdity, and structural strenth pcio.on must mansfy the specificity Comrmssion will make a hn.el The Com:nissian.s seeking publa
,,.quirements desenhed above determination on the usue of no comments on this ps oposed ggi L,ier than fificen (15) days piior to significant heards v.onsideration. The determinahon. Any comments r ;tened the first preheariag conference fmal determinatmn wdl serve to deii.8e wahin 39 d ivs after the dve of
,o;haduled :n the proceeding. a petshoner when the hearmg is held pahhr ahon of this t.otre adi b" t, icy:nred to file a suppl. ment to the if ihe Imal determ.natum n that the considered in makin2 an) fin.il pentmn to micrvene wnich must in.lude amendment request nvolves no de'ermicatmn. t he Cammmion wo.f n"'
a Int of the contentions which are sigmfn. ant hazanis consider.shon the noraially mr.be a final determination s.nid to be bhgated in the matter. and Commission may issue the amendment unlew it reemrs a retest for a g,e baws for each contentmn set forth and rnake it effer.tn e, notwithstandmq
4"'"'"'"""""^"Y or
.m9 sho dd be a.! dressed to the
'"'N"'
"'E" "D P * "
enhons shall be held would take plare after issuance of M
Secretary cf the Commission. U.S limited te matters wohm the scope of the amendment Nuc! car itegulatory Commission.
the amendment under consideration A If the hnal delcrnanahon n that the Wash.ngton. D C. :t353, A1TN.
Docketing and Service Dranch.
p titioner who fai!s to fde such d arrendment involves a ognificant Dylul 30 supplement which s.stesfies these hazards considerahon, any heatmg he!d rupest for a 1984 the licensee trav file a rWaments with rapect to at leant one would take place twfore the issuance of heanng with respert'to issuance of the amendment to the c :nfc.Wn wdl not W p.vmmed to any amendment.
subject facility operating beente acd pamcipate as a party.
Normally, the Commiuion wdl not any person whose interest may be lhe Conanission heraby provides issue the amendo ent untd the cffected by this proceeding and who notice th I this proceeding is on an espirahon of the 30-day not ce period viishes to participate as a party in t 'e d.'pbcation for a license amendment flowever should cirrumstances change proceeding must file a written petition fail.ng within the scope of section 134 of durmg the notice period such that failure for leave to intervene. Request for a the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 to act in a timely way would result. for hearing and petitions for leave to (NWPA). 42 U S.C. totsi Under Section ciample,in deratina or shutdown of the intervene shall be filed in accordance 134 cf the NWPA. the Commin.on at faahty, the Commission may issue the with the Commission's " Rules of the nqmt of any pehtioner or party to license amendment before the Practice for Domestic Licce. sing the proceediag,is requ. red to employ expiration of the 30. day notice period.
Proceedings"in 10 CFR Part 2. If a hybrid hearing procedures with respect provided thatdment involves no its fmal determination is request for a hearing or petition for to "any mitter which the Commission that the amen
! cave to intervene is filed by the abose determines to be in ecntroversy among significant hazards cnnsideration. The d.ite the Commission or an Atomic, the part:es." Section 13 8 procedures final determination will consider all Safety and 1.icensing Board, designated pros:de for oral argureat on those pubhc and State comments raecised.
hs the Commisal.m or by the Chairman i"ne' ".lel"' mined to ha in Should the Cmnmnuun take this m.tmn cf the Atornic Safety and Licensing e oramersy". preceded by discovery it will pubbsh a nostre ofinu4nce and fWrd Pact:!. will ru'e on the request b"d.:r the Hales of Practim, and the provide for opportunity for #s hearing anJ!or pernion and the Secretary or ti.e desination, following argument. of only after inviarte.. The Comm:ssir i espects designated Atomic Safety and Licensing those factualissues that msolve a that the need to take this cct:on will Hoard wdlissue a notice of hearing or genuine and subst mtia' ddpute, occur very mfrequendy.
en appropr#e ordrr.
togethrt nith any rem.oning queshone A request fm a hearma or a pehtion As reqidred by to CFR 2.714, a of how to be regoked $1 an ad;udicatory for Ic.ise to intervene most b. (ded with petition for leave to intersene shad sat h.urm t Attual adjudicatory he irmas the Scartary of tLo Comminion. U S e
forth with p.orticularity t!.e intere ;t of are a be held only on those issues fi.und Nuclear Replatory Commission, the petinoacr in the proceeding and how to meet the critend of section 13t and Washington. D C. 2nm. Attentmn:
that interest rnay he aff.rrted by Ib s9: for hearing after oral argument on Dorkenng and Smice Ilrant.h. or me rnolts of the proceedi*ig The partiu.m the proposed issues. Ilowever. if no be dehvered to the Comminion's Public should specifically explain the reasons pehnoner or party requests the use of Document Roam. I?t711 Street. NW..
why intervention should be permitted Ibc h)hrid hearing procedures. then the Washington. D C., by the above date.
uith particular reference to the usa,d 11 CFR Part 2 procedures apply.
Where petitions are bled dunng the last following factors:(1) The nature of the (At this tone, the Commission does ten (10) days of the nohi.e period. it is p;titioner's right ur.Jer the Act to be not has e effective regulations requested that the petitior.cr promptly so made a party to the proceeding. (2) the implementmg Section 134 of the NWPA inform the Commnaion by a toll. free n:ture and extent of the petitioner's at: hough it has published proposed telephone call to Western Union at (tm) property, financial, or other interest in rules. See f lybrid llearing Procedures 325-6000 (in Missouri (ano) 342-4700).
th; proceeding; and (3) the possible for F.spansion of Onsite Spent Fuel The Western Union operator should be effect of any order which may lie Stor,ge Capacity at Civilian Nuclear given Datagram Ident fication Number m
i edce.il Register / Vol. 03. No. tal / Mumlav. lult.:. Ipna / Noten"i 27 27 i
iTJ7 and the fu; low ma nmage lhe meetmg in for the purpow of icetohon on the Amera an 'iios k addressed to Ehno, G. Adensam.
Committee review discussion.
IM.hange. In' ("Ames")
pensioncr's name and le!rphone
. evaluation and te :ommendahon of U.h I he rea<ums alleged in the apphrahon mimber; date petition was maded. plant Goverrnment plans and programs for withdrawmg this seuinty from n.ime: anJ pubhcation date and page concerning aeronautical research and h> ting and registration mohnte the number of this Federal Registnr notice.
technology development.
follow mg A copy of the pehtion should alsn be The proposed agenda for the mechna
- 1. Energ) Resources Corporatmo sent to the Executive I.egal Director, of the Aeronautical Palicy Review FERC") hv a < orporate merger U S. Nudear Regulatory Commission.
Committee to as fellows:
consummated on May 4. tunt, with E.T.
Washington. D C. 20535. and to Mr.
Albert Carr. Duke Power Company. P.O.
Thunday* luly 12* E84 inc., a subsidiary of Enertec Corporation. became a wholly. owned Hon 31189. 422 South Church Street.
Presentations by thv Office of subsidiary of Enertec Corporation. and Charlotte. North Carohna 2n.'42.
Aeronaunca and Space Technology.
the rommon stock of ERC is no longer attorney for the hcensec NASA. nnd the Defense Advanced pubhdv traded. The FRC 9 % consertdde Nontirnely fihngs of petitions for leavr Rucarch Protects Agency. DoD.
debent'urcs which arc converubbiinto to intervene. amended petshons.
concermng NASA and DoD arron. min al F.RC i omman stock. hLewnc are no supplemental pehonns and/or requests research and technolopy (R811 plan' longer pohdy traded the Ann I.a'i for hearma will not he entert oned absent a deformmahon by the posed no ohpthun to this matter.
Commission. the presnhng offn er or the DXussmos amongst members of the Any mtriested person may, on or Atomic Safety and I.n.cnsmg thard Committee,lho OSIP staff ard M
. R m h h h m r to g9
,,ary of the Secunties and elesignated to rule on the pehtmn and/or represen'ahves of other Federal request. that the pehtmner has madu a agencies concernmg the proposed U F, Esch nge Commiss.on. Washington, aabitanhal showing of good cause for Gosernment acronautical Rh r plam.
1)C. 2um facts bearmg upon whether j
the arantmg of a late petition and/or and acta n!cs N cphcahon has been rnade m requed. That determinahon wdi be in accordance with the determinatw accordance with the rules of the based upon a balancing of the fac. tors of the President's Science Adntor.
Eschange.ind what terms, if any, should specified in 10 CFR 2.M 4(al(1)(il-(v) and portions of thet.e sessions wdl be closed be ungnned by the Commission Iiir the 2.714[d).
to the pubhc pursuant to subsection protehon ol ins estors. '1 he Comnnssion. based on the mformahon For further delads mth respect to this (c)(1) of section 55?b of Title 5. Umted submitted ta v. wdlissue an order achon. see the appbcation for States Code. The rseetmg ordi be open amendment which is available for pubhc to the pubhc on Frid.y. loly 13.1964 grantMg h Wcanon uN Se h
- '" h. ned abose, unless the inspection at the Commission's Public frora 9.30 AM to 10.15 At1. Any rersons Document Room.1717 il Street. NW.,
wishing to attend must nutity thr.
Commission determiaes to order a Washington.D C. and at the Atkins Committee Executive Secreta 3 by hearing on the matter.
Library. University of North Carohns.
Wednesday, luly 11,1984.
For the Commissen, by the Divismn of Charlotte (UNCC Station). North Further information with re'erence to urket ResuMon, pursuant to delesered Carolina 28242.
this meeting can be obtained trom Mr.
- hty-Dated at Deihesda. Maryland thm 25th day Robert Wdliams Commidu Esecutive r;te.cze A. hissiemens.
of lune 1984 Secretary. Offica i f Scient.2 end gecn,fory For the Nuclear Reputatory Commissiort Technology Policy.Wan*cie gton. D C.
p., %,.,wau u.. o.i I;hner G. Adensam.
20500 or call (7PJ) M54.136.
, y, m,,,
Chief Licer nny Rmneh h 4 D<nion of Deted: lune L'.1M4 b""#'"#
jerry D. lenninge.
pa n. ne.cm saa n.5 a """4 l
rgccuan 0, rector, Off,ce o/ Science an</
ire ease No. f d HO,812*5s951 i
eraneo coce nnae.en Tethool,gs FWocy
)
p a s., u esu vad e-ro se s e et investors GNM A Mortgage.Dacked
(
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND
""*" ***8" "
Securities Trust,Inc.; Filing of an Application TECHNOLOGY POLICY lune:5.t9na Notifhation of the July 12-f1,1984 GECURfT;ES AND EXCHANGE Nohce h bereby given that investois Meeting of the Aeronautical Polify Octuaisg y GNMA Mortgage.Dacked Securit es Trust, f ac. (the "Apphcant"). 55 Water Pursuant to sechon 10(u)(2) of the I"' "' # U Street (4tst Floor). New York. New York Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub.
Energy Resources Corp. 9%
10*ll
- real estate investment trust.
- l.92-463). as amended. notice !s hereby Convertible Subordinaterd Debentures Ided an epphcation on November 14.
given that the Acronauticid P4cy Due 1995, Application To Wit'tdraw 1M1 ond amt ndments thereto m june, Review Committee ( APRC) w t.l hold a From Listing and Registraffen -
1%4. for an order pursuant to Section meetmg on Fl.orsday and Friday. july 6(c) of the Investment Company Act of 12-13.1984. The meeting will be held in lane :n.19n4.
1940 ("Act"). exempting Applicant from Room 5104 of the New Esecuhte Office the above named issuer has hied un all prousions of the Act. Allinterested Duilding.17th Street and Pennsylvania ephcation with the SecurHes and persons are referred to the application Avenue. NW., Washinpros D C. The Eschange Commission pursuant to on ide with the Comminsion for a mechna wdl commen.e at 130 PM and Section 12(rff of the Securities Eschunge statement of the representations end at 5 30 PM on luly 12 and will Act of 1934 UAct") and Rule 12d2-2(d) conwined.herein, which are commence al 8 30 AM and end at 12.00 promuf ited thereunder, to withdrnw r9mmar. red below. Such persons are f
noon on July 13.
the sprinfied secunty from listing and ulm referred to the Act for the complcle
~.ar -
t y
,