ML20137G610

Forwards 850814 Biweekly Fr Notice Re Applications & Amends to OLs Involving NSHC

ML20137G610
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	08/22/1985
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Leddick R LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT CO.
References
NUDOCS 8508270349
Download: ML20137G610 (28)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:( ~ i' WG P,2 N ' Distribution w DecketuFH e - PRC LPDR LB3 Reading JLee DOCKET NO(S). 50-382 Mr. R. S. Leddick Vice President - Nuclear Operation Louisiana Power & Light Company 142 Delarende Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70174

SUBJECT:

LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY - WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 The following documents concerning our review of the subject facility are transmitted for your information. O Notice of Receipt of Application, dated O Draf t/ Final Environmental Statment, dated O Notice of Availability of Draft / Final Environmental Statement, dated O Safety Evaluation Report, or Supplement No. , dated O Notice of Hearing on Application for Construction Permit, dated O Notice of Consideration of issuance of Facility Operating License, dated O Monthly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Operating Licenses involving no Significant Hazards Considerations, dated O Application and Safety Analysi~s Report, Volume O Amendment No. to Application /SAR dated O Construction Permit No. CPPR- , Amendment No._ dated O Facility Operating License No. , Amendment No. , dated O Order Extending Construction Completion Date, dated {J Other(Specify) gggjy_yggggg, Applicationbdhts to Operating 11censen -Involving No41gnificantJiazards Considerationsrdatmd R/14/35 (Seepage 32796) Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

As stated cc:See next page 8508270349 850822 PDR ADOCK 05000382 P PDR Bf 3... .8/A /85.... NMC FORM 318 (1/04) NRCM O240

T^ 1 .4 J 4 Mr. R. S. Leddick Louisiana Power & Light Company Waterford 3 cc: W. Malcolm Stevensca, Esq. Regional Administrator, Region IV Monroe & leman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1432 Whitney Building Office of Executive Director New Orleans, Louisiana 70103 for Operations 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Mr. E. Blake Arlington, Texas 76011 Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 1800 M Street, NW Carole H. Burstein, Esq. Washington, D.C. 20036 445 Walnut Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70118 Mr. Gary L. Groesch P. O. Box 791169 Mr. Charles B. Brinkman, Manager New Orleans, Louisiana 70179-1169 Washington Nuclear Operations Combustion Engineering, Inc. Mr. F. J. Drummond 7910 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 1310 Project Manager - Nuclear Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Louisiana Power and Light Company 142 Delaronde Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70174 Mr. K. W. Cook Nuclear Support and Licensing Manager Louisiana Power and Light Company 142 Delaronde Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70174 Resident Inspector /Waterford NPS P. O. Box 822 Killona, Louisiana 70066 Mr. Jack Fager Middle Soeth Services, Inc. P. O. Box 61000 New Orleans, Louisiana 70161 Chairman Louisiana Public Service Commission One American Place, Suite 1630 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804

o 'l. -2, Office of Environmental Affairs . ATTN: Administrator Nuclear Energy Division P. O. Box 14690 Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804 Hr. William H. Spell, Administrator Nuclear Energy Division Office of Environmental Affairs P. O. Box 14690 Baton Route, Louisiana 70898 President, Police Jury St. Charles Parrish Hahnville, Louisiana 70057 O 9 6 l' l i t I t I'.g

Federal Register / Vol. 50. No.137 / Wednesday. August 14, 1985 / Notices 32787 This bi-weekly notice includes all amendments issued, or proposed to be issued, since the date of publication of the last bi-weekly notice which was published on July 31,1985 (50 FR 31061), through August 5,1985. NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND e PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT IIAZARDS CONSIDERATION 3 DETERMINATION AND 4 OPPORTUNITY FOR llEARING The Commission has made a proposed determination that 'he following amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendments would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the pos ibility of a new or different kind of accijent from any accident previously evaluated; or'(3) involve a significant reduction in a marl;in of safety. The basis for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown below. The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments recaived within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be ~ considered in making any final determination. The Commisalon 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. Bi Weekly Notice; Apphcations and Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention: Amendments To Operating Licenses Docketing and Service Branch. Inyciving No Significant Hazards By September 13,1985, the licensee Considerations may file a request for a hearing with respcct to issuance of the amendment to I. Dadground the subject facility operating license and Pursuant to Pub. L. 97-415. the Nuclear any person whose interest may be Regulatory Commission (the affected by this proceeding and who Commission) is publishing this regular wishes to participate as a party in the bl. wee kly notice. Pub. L 97-415 revised proceeding must file a written petition section 1,49 of the Atomic Energy Act of for leave to intervene. Requests for a a 1938. as amended (the Act). to require hearing and petitions for leave to the Commission to pubbsh notice of any Intervene shall be filed in accordance ammnfments issued. or proposed to be with the Ccmmission's " Rules of 8 issued. under a new prouston of section Practice for Dortiestic Licensing 169 of the Act.This provision grants the Proceedings"in to CFR Part 2. If a Commission the authority to issue and request for a hearing or petition for make immediately effective any lease to intervene is filed by the above anicadment to an operating license upon date, the Commission or an Atomic a determhation by the Commission that Safety and Licensing Doard, dest;:nated such amandment involves no sigmficant by the Commission or by the Chairman haards consideratien. notwithstanding of the Atomic Safety and Licensing the pendency before the Commission of board Panel. will rule on the request a request for a hearing from uny person. and/or petiHon and the Secretary or the

l 32788 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No.157 / Wednesday. August 14. 1985 / Notices designated Atomic Safety and Licensing hearing. Any hearing held would take based upon a balancing of the factors Board willissue a notice of hearing or place afterissuance of the amendment. spec.ified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(a)(1)-{v) an appropriate order. If the final determination is that the and 2.714'd). As required by 10 CFR 2.714. a amendment involves a significant For further details with respect to this petition for leave to intervene shall set hazards consideration, any hearing held action. see the application for forth with particularity the interest of would take place before the issuance of amendment which is available for pub!ic the petitioner in the proceeding. and any amendment. inspection at the Commission's Public how that interest may be affected by the Normally, the Commission will not Document Room. 171711 Street NW.. results of the proceeding. The petition issue the amandment until the Washington, D.C. and at the local should specifically explain the reasons expiration of the 30-day notice period. public document room for the particular why intervention should be permitted flowever, should circumstances change facility involved. with particular reference to the during the notice period such that failure following factors:(1)The nature of the to act in a timely way would result, for Boston Edison Company, Docket No. 50-petitioner's right under the Act to be example,in derating or shutdown of the 293, Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, made a party to the proceeding;(2) the facility, the Commission may issue the Plymouth, Massachusetts nature and extent of the petitioner's license amendment before the Date of amendment request:[une 18. property, financial, or other interest in expiration of the 3J-day notice period. 1985 the proceeding: and (3) the possible provided that its final determination is Description of amendment request effect of any order which may be that the amendment involves no The amendment would revise the entered in the proceeding on the significant hazards consideration. The Technical Specifications by changing petitioner's interest. The petition should final determination will consider all Reactor Low Water Level (inside also identify the specific aspects {s) of pubh,c and State comments received shroud) trip requirement from " greater the subject matter of the proceeding as before action is taken. Should the than or equal to 302 inches above vessel to which petitioner wishes to intervene. Commission take this action,it will zero (% core height)" to " greater than or Any person who has filed a petition for publish a notice ofissuance and provide equal to 307 inches above vessel zero leave to intervene or who has been for opportunity for a hearing after (approximntely % core height)." The admitted as a party may amend the issuance. The Commission expects that licensee stated that either 302 inches or petition without requestingleave of the the need to take this action will occur 307 inches above vessel zero as a Board up to fifteen (15) days prior to the very infrequently, minimum requirement fulfills the intent first prehearing conference scheduled in A request for a hearing or a petition of the trip setting; however, this change the proceeding, but such an amended for leave to intervene must be filed with is proposed because 307 inches more petition must satisfy the specificity the Secretary of the Commission. U.S. requirements described above. Nuclear Regulatory Co nmission, accurately characterizes % core height. h' p ih Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to Washington, D.C. 205n. Attention: ,d rtent opera i n o the the first prehearing conference Docket;ng and Service Branch, or may containment spray when the residual scheduled in the preceeding, a petitioner be delivered to the Commission a Pubh.c heat remeval(RIIR) system is nuded in shall file a supplement to the petition to Document Room.1717 H Street, NW., the low pressure coolant injection (LPCI) intervene which must include a list of Washington D.C., by the above date. the contentions which are sought to be Where petitions are filed during the last mode to maintain an adequate water level in the reactor core. litigated in the matter, and the bases for ten (to) days of the notice period. It is each contention set forth with requested that the petitioner promptly a ha a hs conse on de e not one reasonable specificity. Contentions shall inform the Commission by a toll-free be limited to matters within the scope of telephone call to % estern Union at (8001 The Commission has provided guidance the amendment under consideration. A 3:.5-6000 (in hiissouri (rino) 342-0700). c neerning the application of standards petitioner who fails to file such a The Western Union operator should be f r determming whetherlicense supplement which satisfies these given Datagram Identification Number amendments involve sigruficant horards requirements with respect to at least one 3737 and the following message c nsiderations by providing certain contention will not be permitted to addressed to (Branch Chief): petitioner's examples (48 FR 14870L One nample of an amendment that is considered r.ot participate as a party, name and telephone number; date Those permitted to intervene become petition was mailed; plant name: and likely to nvolve a significant hazards parties to the proceeding. subject to any publication date and page number of consMnation is:',(ii) A change that c nstitu'es an additionallimitation. limitations in the order granting leave to this Federal Register notice. A copy of intervene, and have the opportunity to the petition should also be sent to the restriction, or control not presently participate fully in the conduct of the Executive Legal Directer. U.S. Nuclear includd ;n the techmcal specifications; hearing, including the opportunity to Regulatory Commission. Washington. For example, a more stringent present evidence and cross-exarnine D C. 20535, and to the attorney for the sun cillance requirement. witnesses. licensee. The revised specification would bc if a hearing is requested, the Nontimely filings of petitions for leave rnore restrictive than the present Commission will make a final to intervene. amended petitions, requirement since a slightly higher level determination on the issue of no supplemental petitions and/or requests of water above vessel zero would have significant hazards consideration.The for hearing will not be entertained to be rnaintained to permit operation of final determination will serve to decide absent a determination by the the containment spray system, in this when the hearing is held. Commission, the presiding officer or the respect, the change is similar to example if the final determination is that the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ii). amendment request invohes no designated to rule on the petition and/or flavmg found that the preposed significant hazards consideration. the request, that the petitioner has made a chans;e is similar to an example that in Commission may issue the amendment substantial showing of good cause for not hkely to invohe a significant and make it immediately effectise. the granting of a late petition and/or ha. ards consideration, the staff has notwithstandmg the request for a request. That determination will be m ide a proposed determination that the

Federal Register / Vol. 50. No.157 / Wednesday, August 14. 1985 / Notices 32769 amendment request involbes no allowed outage time requirements. Description of amendment request; symficant hazards consideration. These changes in!cude the The proposed change deletes the Service I.ocalPublic Document Room establishment of a 7-day sersus 3-day Water Effluent From Augmented Off-location: Plymouth Public Library. North allowed outage period for one diesel Gas Precooler Radioactivity Afonitor Street, plymouth, Ntassachusetts 02360. generator or or.e off-site circuit being from Tables 3.3.5.8-1 and 4.3.5.8-1. The Attorney for licensee: W S. Stowe. out of. service, and a 72. hour versus 12 monitors are no longer necessary as Est. Boston Edison Company,600 hour frequency for performing these precoolers have been bypassed. Boylston Street. 36th Floor, Boston, Suneillance Requirement 4 8.1.1.2.a.4 la the absence of the final off. gas Massachusetts 02199. (diesel fast start) commencing 24 hours design, the augmented off-gas (AOG) NRC Branch Chief: Domenic B. rather than 2 hours after entering the system was conservatively designed Ya SSdll ljmiting Condition for operation with an assuming an inlet temperature of 165 *F. Carolina Power & Light Ccmpany, ' offsite circuit or diesel generator The cooler condensers are designed to Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-321, inoperable. In addition. performance of process gas with an inlet temperature up Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 Surveillance Requirement 4.8.1.1.2.a.5 to 110 'F at the maximum flow rate of and 2, Brunswick County, North (diesel loading) is now required each 150 SCFht. These parameters indicated Carolina time Surveillance Requirement a need for precoolers in the AOG system Date of application for an'endment: ' ".*'forproposedno s!gmficant to reduce the temperature of the off gas ^ E * ""' O ' Basis using service water as a cooling June 281985 Description of amendment request: hazards consideration deterrnination: medium. Final evaluation of the syatem. The proposed amendment would change The proposed revisions to TS section however, has indicated that off-gas inlet the Technical Specifications (TS) to 3.8.1.1 are designed to increase the temperatures to the AOG system will revise the action statements of TS 3.8.1.1 verall reliability of the diesel normally be approximately 100 *F at 150 relative to diesel generator nutveillance generators. Reducing the number of SCFht during the summer; temperatures d'esel generator fast starts and will be less at lower flow rates or during testing'ly 1619M the NRC issued extending the allowed outage period for the winter. Therefore, based on the final On Ju Generic Letter No. 84-15 entitled n diesel or one off-site circuit does not AOG and off-gas design parameters and " Proposed Staff Actions to improve and necessitate physical alteration of the the actual operating experience CP&L Maintain Diesel Generator Reliability". plant or changes in parameters concluded that the precoolers were not The generic letter requested licensees to g verning n rmal plant operation. Based necessary and decided to isolate them review the reliability of their diesel on the above discussion, the proposed from the AOG system.The service generators based on surveillance test amendments do not create the water supply and return lines that are data, to review their programs p ssibihty of a new accident nor associated with the precoolers were cut concerning diesel generator surveillance increase the probability or and blind flanged inside the AOG testing, and to desenbe their plans for c nsequences of a previously evaluated Building. Since the service water was attaining and maintaining certain diesel accident.The results of the Drunswick eliminated from the AOG process, the generator reliability goals. By letter diesel generator study demonstrate that requirements of the AOG precooling dated October 5,19% Carolina Power 4 there is no significant reduction in a radioactivity monitors base been Light Company (CPAL1 responded to the margin of safety.Therefore the staff has eliminated. ~ Generic Letter by providing the determined that operation of the facility Bcsisforproposedno significant requested information. CPAL evaluated in accordance with the proposed hazards consideration determination ene topic of the generic letter. the revision does not:(1) Involve a We have reviewed the CPAL application reduction of diesel generator fast starts. significant increase in the pobabibly or and find that the proposed amendment: and determined that TS resisions to consequences of an accident previously (1) Does not involve a significant address the issue were desirable. evaluated;(2) create the possibility of a increase in the probability or The TS changes proposed on June 28 new or different kind of accident from consequences of an accident previously 1985 are the result of a probalillistic risk an accident previously evaluated; or (3) evaluated because removalof the AOG assenment IPRA) of the Brunswick involve a significant reduction in a preenoler radioactivity monitor from the diesel generator system. The purpose of margin of safety. Accordingly, the plant does not change any operating the PRA study was to investigate the Commission proposed to determine that parameters or setpomts for either the impact of estending the allowed diesel the amendments do not involve a AOG or service water systems. 'Ihe generator out of senice time from three s:gnificant hazards consideration. radioactivity monitors are only required i'as a to seven days and the impact of Loca/ /tb!/c Doroment Reoen when the precoolers are in service; with ester.dmg the interval between diesel locolion: Southport. Drunaw d County the precooler permanently isclated frcm generator fast starts from 12 hours to 72 I.ibrary.109 W. Moore $'icet. Southport, both the AOG and service water houa In ad:htion, the study allows for North Carolina 2M01, systems. the radioactivity monitors are an increase from 2 to 24 hours to Atierney for licensect George F. no lenger required. < ommente diesel fast starting and Trowbridge Esquire. Shaw. Pittman. (2) Does not create the possibility of a loathng with either en inoperr ble diesel Potts and Trowltidge.1800 M Street. new or different kind of accident than gener.itor or an inoperable o fsite NW., Wa shington. D C. :oo36. previously evaluated because the sourre. This is consister.t we h raidance NRC nmnch Chic / Domenic D radioactivity monitors do not provide p'osided in Generic Le tter M-15. Wnallo. control function for any plant system: The proposed is r harges.-re bwd theref tre, the rernovel of the monitors en the model Standard Tet hnit il Carolina Power A Light Company' could net create the potential for a Sperifications prouded as Appevhs A Dodet Nos. 50-325 and 50-324', t! nits 1 different type of accident than to Genenc Letter 84-15. but h.n e bn.i Drunswid Steam Electric Plant prestously identified or evaluated. resiu d to reflect the contiusions of the and 2. flrunswick County, North (3) Does not involse a sign ficant Cat tina lirunswie k diesel generator FRA sludy reduction in a margin of safety.The ajathe to diesel generater fast start and Duc of c;7plicationt luly 8. IWn. purpose of the radioactivity monitors i

32790 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No.157 / Wednesday, August 14, 1985 / Notices was to monitor for radioactive effluents testing diesel generators while maintained, but with the elimination of being discharged into the service water emergency core cooling equipment is unnecessary testing. Therefore, overall system from the AOG system.Thus, the inoperable should be deleted from performance of the diesel generator potential for contaminating the service Technical Specifications (TS). would be maintained,if not improved. water system from the AOG system has Accordingly, the licensee proposed to Since the application for amendment been eliminated with the isolation of the delete from Quad Cities Station TS involves a proposed change that meets precoolers. Also, the radioactivity requirements for diesel generator testing the standards provided in 10 CFR rronitors are not required for any safety when it is determined that a core spray 50.92(c) for determining whether a function for either the AOG or the subsystem, residual heat removal (RilR) significant hazards consideration exists. service water systems; therefore, the pump, low pressure coolant injection Commonwealth Edison has made a margin of safety is maintained. (LPCI) subsystem, or containment proposed determination that the The Commission has provided cooling subsystem is inoperable. The amendment involves no significant { standards for determining whetl er a Bases sections for the core spray and hazards consideraiton. significant hazards consideratie i exists containment spray system would also be Based on the above evaluation, the (19 CFR 50.92(c)). A proposed modified to reflect the above proposed staff finds that the criteria for a no emendment to en operatinglicense for a TS changes. significant hazards consideration, as set facility involves no significant hazards In addition, the licensee has proposed forth in to CFR 50.92(c), are met. The consideration if operation of the facility to reduce the number of required diesel staff has, therefore, made a proposed in accordance with the proposed generator tests when a diesel generator determination that the proposed emendment would not:(1) Involve a is determined to be inoperable. At amendment involves no significant significant increase in the probability or present, the Technical Specifications hazards consideration. consequences of an accident previously require a diesel generator to be tested LocalPublic Document Room cvaluated:(2) creates the possibility of a immediately and daily thereafter when location: Moline Public Library,5h new or different kind of accident from the other diesel generator is determined 17th Street. Moline. Illinois 61265. any accident previously evaluated; or (3) to be inoperable. The licensee proposes Attorneyforlicensee: Mr. Robert G. involve a significant reduction in a to delete the requirement for an Fitzg bbons. Jr.. Isham I.incoln. A Beale, margin of safety. Immediate test and for subsequent daily Three First National Plaza. Suite 5200. Based on the above discussion the test starts. Chicago, Illinois 60002. Commission proposes to determine that Basisforpro osednosignificant NRC Branch Chief: Domenic B. the amendment does not involve a hazards const erotton determination: Vassallo. significant hazards consideration. The Commission has provided Loca/Public Document Room standards for determining whether a Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power location: Southport, Brunswick County significant hazards consideration is Company, Docket No. 50-213, lladdam Library,109 W. Moore Street, Southport, associated with a proposed license Neck Plant, Middlesex County, North Carolina 28461. amendment. According to 10 CFR Connecticut Attorneyforlicensee: George F. 50.92(c), a proposed amendment Date of amendment request june 11. Trowbridge, Esquire. Shaw, Pittman. Involves no significant hazards 1985 as revised June 27,1985. Potts and Trowbridge.1800 M Street, consideration if operation of the facility De8Cr/ tion of amendment request: P NW., Washington D.C. 20036. In accordance with the proposed The proposed amendment would revise NRCBranch Chiep Domenic B. amendment would not: the technical specifications to update Vassallo. (1) Involve a significant increase in the pressure / temperature limit curves Commonwealth Edison Company, the probabili or consequen es of an for hydrostatic and leak rate testing and acc Docket Nos. 56-254 and 50-265 Quad for heatup and cooldown rates. All of Cities Nuclear Power Station. Units 1 (2) reste the possil 11 of new or different kind of accident from any these curves are being updated to shw and 2 Rock Island County, Illinois accident previously evaluated; or the required limitations out to 22.0 Date of amendment request: June 28, (3) Involve a significant reduction in a effective full power years. This 1985. margin of safety, amendment request was originally Description of amendment request: With regard to the first standard, the noticed in the Federal Register on June The amendment proposed would delete proposed change eliminates to,1985 (50 FR 25364). the requirement for both initial and unnecessary diesel generator testing During the review, the staff subsequent daily operability testing of which could only contribute to determined that the lune 11,1985 the diesel generators when emergency accelerated wear which in turn may application did not consider limitations core cooling systems equipment or a degrade diesel generator reliability and to material in the reactor vessel closure diesel generator is inoperable. availability. Therefore, tha change does flange region. By letter dated lune 27 This proposed change was submitted not involve a significant increase in the 1985, the licensee provided responses to e in response to NRC Generic Letter [GL) probability or consequences of an staff requests for additionalinformation M-15. " Proposed Staff Actions to accident previously analyzed. and revised the pressure / temperature Improve and Maintain Diesel Generator As for the second standard, the limit and heatup/cooldown rate curses Reliability," dated July 2.1984. In this change would not create the possibility to reflect the licensee's resised analyses. generic letter. the NRC staff identified of a new or different kind of accident in the notice of the June 11,1985 cold fast starts of diesel generator sets from any previously evaluated, as no application, the staff did not identify as contributing to premature diesel physical change will be required at the that the licensee also wanted to delete engine degradallon due to unnecessary facility. Only a reduction in the ihn two individual curves on Figures s 4-wear. The NRC has concluded that the frequency of testing is invol ed.

1. 31-6 and 3 4-7 that describe the ficquency of diesel generator fast start Finally, the proposed change would molmum pressure of the residual heat te sts from ambient conditions t.hould be not involve a significant reduction in a removal (RiiR) system and min mum rrduced. Specifically, CL M-15 states morgin of safety, because demonstratwn pressure for operation of a single reactor tl.e NRC position that requirements for of diesel generator operabihty will be coolant pump.These curves provide L

f Federal Register / Vol. 50 No.157 / Wednesday, August 14, 1985 / Notices 32791 operational guidance to plant operators Locn/ Public Document Room Connecticut 06365 (Millstone Units 1 and are not app!icable to nor affected by locotion: Russell Library,123 Broad and 2). Appendix G compliance. Street, h!iddletown, Connecticut 06457. Attorneyforlicensee Gerald Garfield, Basis forproposedno significant A ttorney for licensee: Gerald Garfield, Esquire, Day, Derry and floward, hazards consideration determination: Esquire. Day, Derry and floward, Counselors at Law, City Place, llattford, The Commission has provided guidance Counselors at Law, City Place, flattford, Connecticut 06103-3499. concerning the application of the Connecticut 06103-3499. NRCBranch Chiefs:JohnA. standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing NRCBranch Chief: John A.Zwolinski. Zwolinski (Itaddam Neck and Millstone certain e'xamples (April 6,1983,48 FR Connecticut Yankee Atom!c Power Unit 1); Edward J. Butcher, Acting 14870). One of the examples of actions Company, Docket No. 50-213,lladdam (hiillstone Unit 2). not lik ely to involve significant hazards Neck Plant, hiiddlesex County, Consolidated Edison Company of New considerations is example (ii) which is a Connecticut, and Northeast Nuclear York, Docket No. 50-247, Indian Point change that constitutes an additional Energy Company, et al., Docket Nos. 50-Nuclear Generating Unit No.2 limitation, restriction or control not 245/336, Millstone Nuclear Power Westchester County, New York presently included in the technical Station, Units Nos 1 and 2, New London specifications. County, Connecticut Date of amendment request June 7 The staff has reviewed the licensee's Date of amendment requests: July 9. amendment request to revise the 1963. Desuipuon of amendment requestr pressure / temperature curves and Description of amendment request: The proposed changes would amend the concluded that it falls within the These proposed license amendments Technical Specifications to revise the envelope of example (ii) because the would modify the plant Technical limiting c nditions for operation (LCOs) revised heatup and cooldown curves are Specifications by changing the definition f r Containment Cooling and lodine " " ' 8 st s and assoclat more restrictive than the curves of " Reportable Events" and by altering n l t g p9,n previously submitted. For the same the reporting requirements as a result of reactor prcssure, the revised curves changes to 10 CFR 50.72 and CFR 50.73. proposed changes also contain editorial require a higher reactor coolant The proposed changes delete the term changes for consistency with the temperature than the existing curves. " Reportable Occurrence", and add the language used in other areas of the The additional restrictions are term " Reportable Event", that is defined Indian Point Unit No. 2 Technical necessary to assure conformance with as any of those conditions specified in Specifications. In addition to the to CFR Part 50. Appendix G, and to i 50.73 to 10 CFR Part 50. The proposed proposed change eliminates the ensure continued reactor pressure vessel changes will clarify the list of reportable requirement to test redundant integrity. Additionally, this change has events and provide the NRC with more components daily when a component is no effect on the assumption or useful reports regarding the safety nf in perable. consequences of any previously operating nuc! car power plants. Basisforproposedno sigm,icant f, evaluated accident; st does not af(cct the Basis forproposedno significant hazards consideratwn determination: operability of any control system, hazards consideration determination: Consistent with the Commission a protection system, safeguards system, or 'l he Commission has provided guidance criteria for determining whether a support system and the basis of the new c ncerning the application of the Proposed amendment to an operating curves is the name as the basis of the standards in to CFR 50.92 by providing license involves no significant hazards current curves, merely updated ta reflect certain examples (April 6,1983,48 FR considerations, to CFR 50.92 (48 FR an interval of time later in the service 14870). One of the examples of actions .4871), the proposed revisions to the hfe of the reactor pressure vessel.The n t likely to involve significant hazards Technical Specifications will not involve c ns eraHons is example (vii) which is a significant increase in the probability licensee has also reviewed its request to delete the individual curves for the a change to make a Hoense conform to or consequences of an accident residual heat removal system and the ghanges in the regulations, where the previously evaluated; or create the reactor coolant pumps from Figures 4-license change results in very minor possibilit of a new or different kind of 1,3 4-0 and 3 4-7 and determined thi W N bc% perad ne ckady in WM m ap@t reduction in@MM (t) it would not create the possibdity of kce ing with the regulations. or involve a significan a new or different kind of accident from 'l e staff has reviewed the licensees' margin of safety. The licensee s amendment requests to change the submittal contains an evaluation of the definition of " Reportable Events" and to effects of revising the Technical in 1 is fi t ncre s in t e proballity or consequences of an alter the reporting requirements as a Specifications to changing the limit of result of changes to to CFR 50.72 and continued power operation to seven 50.73 and concluded that they fall within days if fan coolers 23,24 or 25 are out of ' n Ie si cant e uc in the margin of safety.'lhe basis for the envelope of example (vii) because service.The current Technical these changes are administrative in Specifications limit operation to twenty. this determination is that (t) the present rurs es were initially prosided only for nature and modify the plant specific four hours for the units discussed above technical specifications to conform to and seven days for the two remaining operatmnal guid in e to the plant thanges in to CFR 50 72 and 50 ?3. units. The evaluation indicates that for operatort and (2) the operattonallimits Hased on the above, the staff therefore the limiting case, the peak calculated are shlt contained in the plant operating proposes to determine that the hcense containment pressure reached under procedurm and, therefore, the plant will amendment requests involve no Design Hasis Accident Conditions will continue to be operated ueng th" signihcant hazards considerations. be kept below the containment design rurrent restrktions-I. oral /thhc Document Room pressure of 47 psig. It is expected that liased on the ahose, the staff therefore localmns: Russell Library.123 Ilroad our final evaluation will agree with the proposes to determine that the revised Street, Middletown, Connecticut OW7 hcrnsee's conclusion, amendment request also imohes no (lladdam Neck) and Waterford Pubhc 't he licensee's submittel also contains Mgnificant hatards consderation. 1.ibrar). 49 Rope Ferry R%d. Waterford. an evaluation indicating the levision to

32792 Federal Register / Vol. 50. No.157 / Wednesday. August 14, 1985 / Notices the isolation valve provisions will procedures. Group D issues are Bae:s torprepased no significant terr-it greater operational ficxibility for ccmprised of: hacm/sionsiderution determit,ation: comp!ying with containment isolation C) Regulatory issues (of either a The Commission has provided guidam.c reqwiernents and effecting isolation of gt neric or plant specific nature) concerning the application of standards fan coolers if required.The evaluation ide ntified by the NRC, which have for a no significant hazards indicates that applicable containment resolutions and/or completion dates determination by providing certain isolation requirements will continue to requested by the NRC and/or committed cumples (48 FR 14870, April 6,1983). be satisfied under proposed changes. It to b3 the licensee, and which would One of the cxamples (ii)is a change that is expected that our final esaluation will result in either (a) plant modifications. constitutes an additionallimitation. agree with the hcent.ee's conclusions. (b) procedure revisions, or (c) chunges in restriction, or control not presently The proposed revision to the facility staffing requirements, and, included in the technical specifications Technical Spacifications to eliminate the (ii) All ott.cr issues identified by 'I he entire proposed program plan requirement to test redundant Consumers Power Cornpany or other pkces additionallimitations and components daily when a component is agercies. controls on activities to be performed inoperable appears to be consistent with Specif cally. changes to the Plan and its for and at the facility. It should also be NPC concerns that excessive testing inue resolutions and scheduin sl al! be noted that the proposed plan is designed may have the potential for impacting in accordance with the provisions o! the to facihtate the licensee's actions in antsa W Plan, and are summarized below; satisfying regulatory requirements more (1) Changes to issue resolutions and/ efficiently and effectively. Any revision i or schecules for completion of issues to the proposed plan must rece,ve prior co airs ed for a ha a c are imposed by rule, order, or license NRC apr roval. Any activities or issues g,3,g 7 Local e e me t Ro m location anM n Ussue Gmup A issues) will listed in Group A, as defmed above. c Mnue t be sought through the which are to be revised or deleted. must White Plains Public Library.100 Martine Avenue, White Plains, New York. 20010. license amendment, exemption or also receive prior NRC approval. Attorneyforlicensee: Drent L Order.date extension process. 'I.herefore, since implementation of the Drandenburg, Esq.,4 Irving Place, New (2) Issue resolutions and/or schedules proposed plan involves changes similar f r c mpletion of otherissues (Issue to those encompassed by example (ii), York, New York 10003. NRC Branch Chief: Steven A. Varga. Group B issues) are identified and the staff proposes to determination that Consumers Power Company Docket No. provisions are made in the Plan to this application does not involse a 50-155, Big Rock Point Plant, Charlevol* seguire Consumers Power Company to significant hazards consideration. County, Michigan provide the NRC with prior notification Loco / Pub //c Document Room Date of amendment requeste lune 7, of changes to Issue Group D to enable location: North Central Michigan further explanation or discussion of College.1515 floward Street Petoskey, 1985. Description of amendment request: such changes. Michigan 49770. The proposed addition to the Dig Rgck (3) Provisions are made in the Plan for Attorneyforlicensee ludd. L Dacon. Point OperatingIJcense DPR-e. incorporating new regulatory issues into Esquire, Consumers Power Company. provides for the incorporation of the issue Groups A and B as these issues 212 West Michigan Avenue, Jackson, requirement to adhere to the " Plan for are identified by the NRC and/or Michigan 49201, the Dig Rock Point Integrated formalized by rule, order or license NRC Branch Chief: John A. Zwolinskt. Assessment",(the plan). As committed condition.

Chief, to the NRC by letter, da'ed March 18.

The objective of this program is t Consumers Power Company, Docket No. 1983, Consumers Power Company (the erable the lice nace to obtain improsed 50-255, Palisades Plant Van Buren rehensive control of avadable resources and to licensee) conducted a comft open issues, per form required activities in a manner 'hi '" "D' 8 integrated assessment of a both regulatory and non. regulatory and which would enhance plant safety. Date of amendment request: August 7 developed a "living schedule" fore Concurrently, this program provides a IE nesolution of the issues included in the me thod to assess, coordinate and D,scription of amendment request: mtegrated assessment.The plan schedule all necessary work at the Change Technical Specification 41.1.c. describes the responsibilities and facihty incluthng the performance of to make the (sequency of performing the requirements associated with the regulatory requirements. Periodic vendor recommended inspections and pror.ess of incorporating the issues. updating of the Integrated Plan for both presentive maintenance each refueling mitiated by the NRC or the hcensee, into Groupe A and B shall occur semi-outane rather than every eighteen the Integrated Assessment. The "living annually, beginning a months followmg

months, schedule" refers to the actual schedule NRC appros al of this phm.The revised Ilasis for proposed nu signt/icant of tasks / issues to be performed in the In'tmated Plan willinclude a progress bozoids consideration determination:

future for the Big Rock Point Plant (the summary for resolutions, the The diesel generator vendor facihty) The proposed brense condition identihcation of changes since the last recommends that preventalise specifies that the plan shall be followed update report, and a summary of the mmntenance inspections be performed by the hcensee from and after the reasons for lisen resolution and/or e.n a basis which considers both effetlige date of this proposed schedole r hangen associated with a< q. sired hours of engme service rind amendment, and that changes to the reuulatory requ,rements. time intervals between activities The dates for completion of issues may The htensee inthcates that this current vendor recommended reymre a license amendn:ent. In prosision plan rnay require future sursedlance schedule for the Palisades particular, all Group A issues, that is, mraficatmns Accordingly, for revisions llant diesel generators includes issues estabbshed by esisting rule. which are determmed to be substantial, monthly, annual. 3. year,63 car. and 12-order. hcerse condition, or technical the brensee sh ll submit these changes year mspections. A change to a refuehng specificatmn. shall be chanued only in to tae NRC as amendment change y r.le frtquency from an 18. month accordance with spg Ucable NRC requests frequency will not affect meetmg the

r i l Federal Register / Vol. 50. No.157 / Wednesday, August 14. 1985 / Notices 32793 i undor recommendations. Monthly and (words t.nderlined would be added). The regards to Administrative Controls annual inspections do not require plant associated Bases 3/4 6.5.3 would be (section 6.0) and in regard to shutdowns to remove the diesel clarified by addition of a paragraph to reportability requirements associated generators from service and they will read:"If an ice condenser door is not with the revision of the regulatory continue to be performed at that capable of opening automatically, then requirements of 10 CFR 50.72 and 5053 i frequency.Thus the extension of this system function is seriously degraded as presented in Generic Letter 83-43 f surveillance frequency will not and immediate action must be taken to d.ted December 29.1983. The l significantly increase the probability of restcre the opening capability of the amendments would also correct a . occurrence or consequences of an door. Not capable of opening typographical error in Table 4.11-1 in accident previously evalt.ated, as diesel automatically is definnd as those which the word " inlet" has been used generator reliability should not be conditions in which a doct is physically inadvertently instead of " outlet". substantially affected,if at all, by the blocked ftom opening by installation of The current Technical Specification proposed change. plant operation and a b!ocking device or by obstruction from ti.1.2 requires that a management plant systems are unchanged so that the temporary or permanent installed directive be reissued annually to all change in frequency has no effect on equipment." station personnel stating that the Shift creating an accident or rr.alfunction of a Hosis ferpropmedno significant Supersisor (ar during his absence from j different type from any previously haA:re consideration determination: the control room, a designated evaluated. And finallj the margin or The propcsed amendment would individual)is responsible for the control l nafety as defined !n the Technical climmee a concern under the present room command function.The proposed Specificatians bases will not be reduced Technical Specification 3/4 6.5.3 that ice change to Specification 6.1.2 would (no basis for this survei; lance frequency condenser doors which are required to clarify that the intended recipients of is given by the current Technic il be closed but capable of opemng during the directive are only Nuclear Specifications bases) because sendor power operation could be blocked in a production Department Station recommended surveillnnce schedules closed position for an inordinate amount personnel, not sendor, contractor, or will be satisfied. Therefore, the staff of time. other personnel. proposes to de!ctmine that the proposed The Ccmmission has provided The proposed amendment of the change would not involve a significant guidance concerning the arplication of Technical Specifications seek to correct hazards considerstion, its standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92 ,l LocalPuMic Document Room for no significant hazards consideration certain job titles: The title of " Manager of Nuclear Production", and the title of /vrotion: Van Zocren Library. Ifope by providing certain examples published .'Vice President. Steam Production," Colleoc, llelland. Mit.hipin 49423. la Federal Register on April 6.1983 (48 w ould be changed to "Vice President. Atrarrey forhccescot Judd. L Ilacon. FR 14870). One of the examples of an Nuclear Production," Similarly, the title ,isq ilic, Corsumera Power Company, amend.nent likely to involve no r " Executive Vice President. Power 212 West Michigan Avenue. Jackson, significant hazards consideration relates Michigrin 49201. to changes (ii) that constitute additional Operations." would be changed to l NRC Revnt h Chiefilohn A. Zwolinski. limitations. restrictions, cr controls not .. Executive Vice President. Engineering'. Constructicn and Production." The Duke Power Company, Docket No. 30 presently included in the Technical 413. Catawba Nuclear Station. Unit 1, Specifications. The proposed proposed amendments also seek to l delete Figure 6.2-1, "Offsite York County, South Carolina {c [,'g(3,,tt[es e example Organization (',and Figure 6.2-2," Station '{ Date ofomendment requesf May 7. because it would impose addDional h 8 8,S" *a o"br ,j n in m e pec, nd 10tkS. II:nDat!ons for operation and addHlonal their inc[uslon in the Technical i Description ofomendment tuqarst suryc;"ance requiremer:ts for ice The proposed amendment would revise condenser ducts not present! in Specifications is redundant because l; Technical Specification 3/4 a 5 3, Ice Snedf;r ution 3/4 6.5.3. Therefore:. the they are contained in Chapter 13 of the Condenser Donts" and its associ sted Conmicalon proposes to determine that hfcGuire Nuclear Station Final Safety buses to lim t the al! owed time of power the propmed emendment does not Analysis Report. and are maintained there in accordance with annual <,peration wah the !ce cendenser inlet invoh e a significant hazards doors in a ch-ed and inoperable con /dcration updallug requirements of 10 CFR 50.71. condition. und to clarify the def.rition of I.uco/ Puh!/c Decument Rcom Prae XXI of the Index would be modified to indicate these deletions. "im ocrable" to mean "not capha of location: York County Library,13a East oper.:ng automatically," 'Ihe limit is gjiack f; treat. Rech liill, South Carolin's The proposed amendments would add the Superintendent of Integrated imph mented by adding to the action 49733 ~ du.,,ne; for hi et' sect Mr. Willi tm L Scheduling to Specifications 6.5.1.3. statement for Specificatlan 3.0.5.3 a 'i requilt n.cnt Ihat w!th one or more h " Pat ter. Taq.. DA n Power Company, P.O. 0.5.1.5. 6.6.lb. 6.8.2, and 6 8.3c. This umde nser doors inoperable (not IM 33189. 422 Seuth Church Str tet, change would allow the Superintendent ll (opo! le eff opening autornattri.l> ), ali Charlottst. 'A'rth Ca;ol.rta "6242. ofIntegrated Scheduling to rey!rw and/ lt

1. 9ars sh.nl be rotored (1 ererable NRCB. cert Ch'sf' Fliror C.

or approse modifications of safety-( vatus within 1 hma or the facility shall AJcns im. re:oted structures, systems or ho in hot standhv whhin a haurs and in components (6.5.1.3), preposed tests and l h st shutdawn whhn the fa!! awing 6 Duke Power Company. Unck et Nos. 50* experiments which affect nuclear safety hours and in told shutdann w!il.h the 3G9 and 53-370 Mattro Nuclear and are not addressed in the FSAR or i fallnwing 10 hours Surveillanu S'C'i"" L' nits 1 and 2. Medlenburg Technical Specifications (6.5.1.5). Spanfication 4 6 3 31 b1?) w0913 he Cm.nt), North Carolina Reportable Events (0.6. Ib), and I orniiarly chanpd to requ4rc that t!st D..te cf merdret request: Apnl 25. procedures specified under Specification periodir. surwillenrm unfy that exh ice 19n u.8.1 und changes thereto (e a 2 and i e oridene dNr is canAle of cpern Drnri pten v/un endment txmest; 6 9 t). If designated to do so by the J .atematically in thntit in no'.mpaire l The pr:powd amendmants wouId Statian Manager. in each of these cases. l b) ti.e, front, dabrie or vNr rbstrv%vt t h enge tha Technkal S;'edft Winns in N Operating Superintendent, the I i I..-~.--,-----.m

32794 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No.157 / Wednesday, August 14. 1985 / Notices Technical Services Superintendent, and McGuire and Catawba High Radiation Duke Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-the Maintenance Superintendent each Area Technical Specifications, and 369 and 50-370, McGuire Nuclear have the same authority as would be reflects the wording of the current draft Station. Unita l and 2. Mecklenburg tilowed to the Superintendent of of Revision 5 to the Standard Technical County, North Caralina Ir.tegrated Scheduling. Since the Specifications. The change would not Date of amendment request: May 7. buperintendent ofIntegrated Scheduling significantly affect current radiation 1985* is required to meet the same protection practices at McGuire, but is quahfications as each of these largely sematic and is intended to Uc8Cription of amendment request: Superintendents, no loss of Technical clarify the requirements relative to The proposed amendments would revise Review Capabihty would occur. definition of and access to high Technical Specification 3/4.6.5.3, " Ice Condenser Doors" and its associated therefore there would be no adverse radiation areas. bases to limit the allowed time of power impact on safety. The issuance of McGuire pcration with the ice condenser inlet Proposed changes to Technical Amendments 32 (Unit 1) and 13 (Unit 2) doors in a closed and inoperable Specifications 6.5.1.8 and 6.8.1 would g og uag ,'" *f tion 6 o condition, and to clarify the definition of allow the Station Services pg i ee } "in perable to mean not capable of Superintendent or the Station Manager Specifications.This resulted in opening automatically., The limit is to review and approve modifications duplication when pages 6-27 and 6-28 implemented by adding to the action r21 sting to the Station Security Program end associated procedures. Currently {upl statement for Specification 3.6.5.3 a te , an 2 dup cates S-requirement that with one or more ice the tcsponsibdity is discharged only by 26, the proposed amendments would condenser doors inoperable (not the Station Manager.The proposed delete pages S-27 and 6-28 from the capable of opening automatically), all change would facilitate efficient resolution of security related matters. Techmcal Specifications. doors shall be restored to operable "Ihe modifications approved by the Basis forpioposedno sigm.ficant status within 1 hour or the facility shall Station Services Superintendent would hazards consideration determinationi be in hot standby within a hours and in be transmitted to the Vice President, The Commission has provided guidance hot shutdown within the following 6 Nucitar Production and the Director of concerning the application of these hours and in cold shutdown within the the Nuclear Safety Review Board. Also, str.adards by providing examples of following 30 hours. Surveillance two typographical errors (one each in amendments considered likely, and not Specification 4.6.5.3.1.b.(2) would be G11.8 and 6.5.1.9) would be corrected by likely, to involve a significant hazards similarly changed to require that the inwrting "12" for "!2". consideration. These were published in periodic surveillance verify that each ice The Semiannual Radioactive Effluent the Federal Register on April 6,1983 (48 condenser door is capable of opening Releas e requirements listed in Technical FR 14870). One of the examples of automatically in that it is not impaired Specification 6.9.1.7 (pg. 6-20) would actions involving no significant hazards by ice, frost, debris or other obstruction receive minor w ord changes to make. consideration (1) relates to amendments (words undelined woull be added). The these requirements consistent with to of a purely administrative change to associated Bases 3/4.643 would be CFR Part 61. A footnote on this page Technical Specifications, correction of clarified by addition of a paragraph to (w hich excluded requirements for an error, or a change in nomenclature, or read "If an ice condenser door is not r crtain waste shipments before lanuary a change to achieve consistency capable of opening automatically, then 1 19M)is outdated and would therefore throughout the Technical Specifications. system function is seriously degraded be delated. The above changes to the Tech tical and immediate action must be taker to The proposed amendments would l Specifications by the proposed restore the opening capability of the tipdate and clarify Section 6.9 of the,a so amendments are of an administrative door. Not capable of opening Mc Guire Technical Specifications, nature intended to update, clarify and automatically is defined as those which relate to reportability correct the Technical Specifications-conditions in which a door is physically requirements. As presented in Generic These proposed changes would not blocked from opening by installation of lette No. 83-43 dated December 19, affect any equipment or plant a blocking device or by obstruction from tSt. the regulations regarding reportmg operational procedures and would have temporary or permanent installed of events (to CFR 50.72 and 50.73) were no adverse effect on safety. Dased on eq uipmen't." thang=d. Subsequently. Section 6.9 of the above, the staff proposes to [. (([#' [ / a on: McGuire's Technical Specifications was determine that these proposed changes arrended to reflect the new reporting do not involve an significant hazards lhe proposed amendments would requ rements. % hen this section was consideration. t liminate a concern under the present amended, how ever, the references in The licensee's submittal alsu requests 3,, hnical Specification 3/4 6 5 3 that ice other ports of the Specifications wer" changes to Technical Specifications 6 to con,lenser doors which are required to not updated. The proposed amendments .. Record Retention." This part of p.m er operation could be bening durin be rtoned but capable of o ((,',"n) to pNifiewnm brensee's submittal is not included F [r locked in n within the scope of this notice. cened position for an inordinate cmount (m 1.11b would be deleted because locwto.o/ I'ubhc Document Roomn: Atkins I.ibrary. Unhers;ty of The Commission has prouded I" nf time. Specification 0.9.1 has bten so changed that refetences to it are virtualb Mrth Carolina. Charlotte (UNCC suidance concerning the application of meumagleris. The se referencos te Sprofa tmn n 9.1 wuntd be mmbhed un StaHon). North Carolina 28223. on standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92 an indnidual basis to preserse preseni Atlancyfuhcensee Mr. Albert Curt. for no significant hazards consideration te endmg requirements, but to clcrify Dulie power Company. P.O. Dos 33184 b) pronding certain examples pubbshed u.cw requacments and temose 422 South Church Street. Charlotte, m Federal Reghter on April 6,1983 (4H n dundantire in the requiremento, hrth Carolina 28242. I R latCO). One of the txmnplu of an I he proposed change to Speufaation NHC Beccch Chief-Ehnur G mner.dment hkely to intohe no b t ! would proside consistem y belwren Adenum ouubrant barards c o.wideration rolste.

\\ Federal Register / Vol. 50, No.157 / Wednesday, August 14, 1985 / Notices 32795 to changes (ii) that constitute additional encompased by the Commission's maximum acceptable leakage rate of 25 limitations, restrictions, or controls not example (ii). sec/ minute. presently included in the Technical Since the application for amendment Basisforproposedno signipcant Specifications.The proposed involves a proposed change that is hozords considemtion determination amendments of the Technical similar to an example for which no The Commission has provided Specifications match the example significant hazards consideration exists, standards (10 CFR 50.92(c)) for because they would impose additional the Commission's staff has made a determining whether a significant hmitations for operation and additional proposed determination that the hazards consideration exists. A surveillance requirements for ice application for amendment involves no proposed amendment to an operating condenser doors not presently in significant hazards consideration. license for a facility involves no Specification 3/4.6.5.3. Therefore, the LocalPublic Document Room significant hazards consideration if Commission proposes to determine that location: Oconee County Library. 501 operation of the facility in accordance the proposed amendments do not n esi ovuihbroad Street. Walhalla. with the propen.J :rendent would involve a significant hazards South Carolina. not.[1) involve a significant tacrease in consideration. Attorneyforlicensee J. Michael the probability or consequences of an Loco /Public Document Room McGarry, HI, Bishop. Liberman, Cook. accident previously evaluated; or (2) location: Atkins Library, University of Purcell and Reynolds.120017th Street. create the possibility of a new or North Carolina, Charlotte (UNCC NW., Washington, D.C. 20036. different kind of accident from any Station). North Carolina 28223. NRC Bmnch Chief: John F. Stolz. accident previously evaluated; or (3) Attorneyforhcensee:Mr Albert Carr, involve a significant reduction in a Duke Power Company P.O. Box 33189, Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, ma#8 # of safety' I 422 South Church Street. Charlotte. Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold We have reviewed the bcensee's North Carolina 28242. Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa request for amendment and find that the NRCBranch Chief: Elinor G'

1. 1. 1. #I#### "### ##9"#8## I"IY '

proposed. mendment: Adensam. IM (1) Does not involve a significant Duke Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-Description of amendment request increase in the probability or 269,50-270 and 50-?.47 Oconee Nuclear The proposed amendment would revise consequences of an accident previously Station, Units Nos.1,2 and 3. Oconee the Duane Arnold Energy Center evaluated, because (a) addition of County, South Carolina (DAEC) Technical Specifications (TS) surveillance requirements for ADS rc:::rdi~' the Automatic check valves wil! a: --- that the ADS is Date of amendment request May 29.

3933, Depressurization System (ADS) capable of five actuations too days after Descriptiorr of amendment request:

survei!!ance requirements and a LOCA and (b) addition of the ADS The proposed amendments would revise incorporate leak testing of the ADS nitrogen supply system description to the Station's common Technical mtrogen accumulator check valves the Bases section and correction of a Specification (TSI Table 6.1-1 to reflect during each refueling outage. The tests typographic error in Table 3.2-D do not the correct number of nuclear equipment will ensure that the maximum affect the probabilities or consequences operators as provided b) NUREC-0737 acceptable system leakage rate of 25 of any accidents: Item I.A.1.3. scc / minute is not exceeded.The (2) Does not create the possibility of a By letter dated April 1.1985 the NRC proposed change would also correct a new or different kind of accident noted, that for some situations. the typographic error in Table 3.2-B. and because (a) the surveillance testing must number of nuclear equipment operators add the ADS nitrogen supply system t be performed during a plant outage and required by TS Table 0.1-1 is less than the Bases section. will not affect the operability of any the number of nuclear equipment The changes to the TS regarding the safety systems needed during an outage operators required by TS Table 6.1-t is ADS surveillance requirements arise as and (b) the addition of the ADS nitrogen less than the number specified in a result of the hcensee a compliance suppIy sy he B d NURECM1737. Item I.A.1.3. The NRC with the NRC requirements of NUREG-c9neegon of a t ographi e r i requested that the licensee propose 0737, Item 11 K 3.28. related t Table 3.2-B have no bearing on creation changes to the TSs to incorporate the qual.fkatam of ADS accumulators. As a of a possibility of any accident; and < orrect number of equmment operators. part of implementing the requirements of Basis forrnip<ne rino sign!/icant item 11 K.3.28 the licensee is replacing (3) Does not involve a significant linzatv/s ronrideration deterrnination: the hard seated check valves in the reduction in'a margin of safety because %e Commission has provided guidante mtrogen supply line to the accumulators (a) tbc addition of the surveillance oncerning the application of the with soft seated check valves, which testing would enhance assurance of five standatds in 10 CFR 50 92 by prouding a dl ensure that the AUS is capable of AUS actuations 100 days after a LOCA tettain esamples (48 FR 148 01. Eumple fn e actuations after 100 days following and (b) the addition of the ADS nitrogen (iilof the types of amendments not a loss-of. coolant accident (LOCA). The supply system to the Bases section and hkcly to inkoh e significant harards nitrogen supply to the ADS utilizes correction of a typographic error in cons'deration is an amendment that accumulators and inlet chec k valves to Table 3.2-D have no bearing on margins constitutes an additional limitahon. ensure the operability of the ADS in the of safety, restriction or cottrol not pn sentiv es ent that a break occurs in the LocalPublic Ducument Room im tuded 6e ').e Tec hntcel Spnthention, nonaismic portion of the nitrogen / oration: Cedar Rapids Public IJbrary, he proposed amendments wmdd supply piping The accumulators are 500 First Street S E., Cedar Rapids, Iowa change the TSs to add additional med to allow the ADS to operate at $2401. nalt ar equipment operators in least five times after a panod of 100 Attorney forlicensee: lack Newman, e onformante with NL'RECAr37. Item day following a LOCA with a Esquire liarold F. Reis. Esquire, 1 A 1..I Since t!.a requested chaage n ia ma simum sptem leakase rate of la soc / Newraan and flottzinger,1025

k. ep:ng with NUNEG-C.17. Item i A.1.3.

rninute To provide an additional margin Connecticut Avenue, NW., Washington, und add

• a nator t;nn. it n then fore of safety, the leakage test allows for a D C 20m6

32796 Fcderal Regist;r / Vol. 50 No.157 / Wednesday, August 14. 1985 / Notices NRCBmnch Chief: Domenic B. Vassailo. The Waterfctd 3 Fire Protection Program flame detectors in Table 3.3.7.9-1 " Fire is consistent with Appendix A to Branch Louisiana Power and Light Company. Technical Position APCSD 9.5-1 Detection Instrumentation;" (4) change the localleak rate test method from Docket No. 50-382, Waterford Steam Revision 0. In order to implement the pneumatic to hydrostatic for test return Electric Station, Unit 3 St. Charles results of the Fire Protection Program,s lines m the residual heat removal IRilR) Parish, Louisiana. fire hazards analysis for fire zone RAB loop "C" and the low pressure core 27C it is necessary to increase the Date ofAmendment Request: June 6 1985. Function B detection, which constitutes spray system by adding footnotes for Description ofAmendment Request / an additional not presently included in applicable Valves in Table 3.6.4-1, 'ths proposed change would revise the the Technical Specifications. Therefore, " Containment and Drywell isolation the proposed change to Table 3.3-11 is Valves;" and, (5) provide a temporary Appendix A Techmcal Specifications by similar to example (ii). exception to the boundary integt;ty adding four smoke detectors in the Reactor Auxiliary Building and by Example (i) relates to a purely requirements in Technical Specification correcting the identifying numbers of administrative change to technical 3/4.6.6 " Secondary Contaire. ant" to three containment isolation valves. specification, (i.e., a change to achieve facilitate installation of high nsity Technical Specification 3.3.3.8 consistency throughout the techmcal spent fuel racks in the auxilicy addresses the operability requirements specifications, correction of an error, or buildI"8' for fire detection instrumentation a change in nomenclature).The purpose Basis forpmposedno sq.;nificant provided ta ensure adequate warning of the proposed change to Table 3.6.2 is hazards consideration determination: and prompt fire detection. Table 3.3-11 to correct the identifying numbers for Two of the proposed changes m lists the instrumentation necessary to three containment isolation valves and Technical Specifications (changes (1) ensure this function.Of that list, bring the Technical Specification into and (2)) are needed because of design Function D instruments provide conformance with other plant changes being made to enhance safety actuation of fire suppression systems as docurnents. Therefore, the proposed of operation. The design change for well as early warning and notification. change is similar to example (i). Technical Specification change (1) As both changes requested by the would add fire detection The proposed change will revise the hcensee's b.ne 6,1983 submittal fit the instrumentation in an area containing number of Function B smoke detectars examples prosided, it is concluded that: eafety related electrical cables where in the Reactor Auxiliary Building Zone 27C of Technical Specification Table (1) The preposed charges do not there are now no detectors. The design constitute a significant hazards change for Technical Specification 3.3-11. The number of detectors will be increased from 2 to 6 as the result uf cunsideration as defined by 10 CFR change (2) would add an overcurrent 50.91: and (2) there is a reasonable recent station modifications. protection circuit breaker in a new 480 Table 3.6-2 3sts those containment assurance that the hccith and safety of volt power circuit running from the isolation 'vahes required operable by the public will not be endangered by the horizontal fuel transfer system (flFTS) proposed change; and (3) this action will Technical Specification 3.6.3. In listing not result in a condition which main console outside containment to a the valves, two unique valve numbers are supplied for each. The first number significantly alters the impact of the revised design LIFTS inside station on the environment as described containment. The revised design LIFTS is the unique identifier assigned by the Architect Engineer while the second in the NRC Final Environmental uses hydraulic servo mechanisms to Statement, upend fuel assemblies instead of the number in parentheses is the unique Loca/Public Document Room current design LIFTS which uses identifier assigned by if&L. Location: University of New Orlaans mechanical mechanisms. The new The proposed change involvea Library, Louisiana Collection, Lakefront, mechanisms will enhance safe handling correcting typographical errors m the New Orleans, Louisiana 70122. of fuel assemblies by increasing the three LP&Lidentifiere for manual / Attorneyforlicensee! Mr. Bruce W. stability and reliabihty of the upending remote manual valves in Table 3 6-2. Churchill, Esq., Shaw, Pittman. Potts and assembly. Because these two design These changes are: For penetration Trowbridge,1800 M St., NW., changes will enharce safe operation of number 53-change existing valve Washington, D.C. 20030. the faci!ity, the associated Technical number 2CA-V000 (CVR 301B) to 2CA-NRCBranch Chief George W. f;P" h d d V600 (CVR 301 A): and for penetrat!on Knighton. gn antlyincrease th p oba ili number 63-change existing valve ccnsequence of an accident previously Mississippi Power & Li ht Company, evahtated or create the possibility of a number 2SA-V114 (LRT 101) to 2SA.- V114 (LRT 109) and exist!ng valve Afiddle South Energy, Inc., South new or different kind of eccident from number 2SA-V604 (LRT 102) to 2SA-Mississippi Electric Power Association, any accident previously evaluated. The Docket No. 56-416, Grand Gulf Nuclear new equipment is designed and installed frr oseJNo Significant Station. Unit 1, Claiborne County, Hazards Considerations Determination Mississippi in accordance with applicable regulatory requirtments, industry codes The Commission has provided guidance Date of am ?ndinent request-luly 3, and standards, the Grand Gulf Nuclear concerning the op bcation of standards 1985. Station (GGNS) Quality Assurance for determining w ether a significant Description of amendment request: Program and the GGNS Final Safety hazards consideration exists by The amendment would make five Analysis Report (FSAR). Therefore, the providmg certain examples (48 FR changes in the Technical Specifications: designs are included in the current 14ro) of amendments that are (1) Add four smoke detec' ors in Table licensing bases and are bounded by considered not likely to involve 3.37.9-1, " Fire Detection existing safety analyses in the FSAR. Significant hazards considerations. Ics tumentation;"(2) add a circuit Accordmfy, the r.cw designs and the Example (ii) relates to a change that breaker in Table 3 8.4.1-1 " Primary associated 'lechnical Specification constitute an additional limitation. Containtrent Penttration Conductor charges (1) and (2) do not mvolve a reseriction or control not presently Overcurrent Protective Devitess'(3) signifunt reduction in a margin of included in the Technicd @cification, replace three smoke detectors with three sa fe ty.

Federal Register / Vol. 50. No.157 / Wednesday, August 14, 1985 / Notices 32797 Technical Specification chance (3) is design change and test method does not auxiliary building, does not involve a proposed because of a design change involve new technology. Accordingly. significant hazards consideration since being made to substitute flame detectors Technical Specification change (4) does temporary movement of the secondary for smoke detectors in the corridor not mvohe a significant increase in the containment boundary involves no between the diesel generator building probability or consequences of an significant change in accident mitigation . nd the auxihary buildmg. Plant accident previously evaluated or create capabilities. First, change (5) does not ~ operation has demonstrated that diesel the possibility of a new or different kind involve a significant increase in the generator exhaust fumes get into the of accirknt from any accident previously probability or consequences of an corridor causing false alarms on the evaluated. nor does it involve a accident previously evaluated because smoke detectors. Flame detectors are reduction in a margin of safety. the loss of coolant and fuel handling adequate to detect a hre, and they will Proposed change (5) would p ovide a accidents which the secondary lessen the frequency of false fire alarms. tm..wsy cxceptica to accendary centcin:ncnt M NWA en mitigate are l he design change will be performed in containment boundary integrity not affected. The reactor coolant accordance with applicable regulatory requirements to facilitate movement of systems are not located in the bay area requirements, industry codes and the new high density spent fuel storage nor will spent fuel be handled in the standards. the GGNS Quality Assurance raclis and the new horizontal fuel auxiliary building during the time perio-l Program and the GGNS FSAR.The transfer mechanism into the auxiliary for change (5). In addition, the bay door design change is consistent with the building. Technical Specification will be tested and operated in licensing basis and safety analyses. changes associated with the use of the accordance with Technical Accodingly. 'l echnical Specification new high density spent fuel storage Specifications (TSs) for secondary change (3) does not involve a significant tacks are considered in a separate containment integrity. With regard to increase in the probability or Federal Register notice. Change (5) hazards from earthquake, emergency consequences of an accident previously would include the railroad bay within procedures will be in place for esaluated or create the possibility of a secondary containment, thus making the reinstalling the equipment hatch to new or different kind of accident from bay exterior door a secondary restore the secondary containment any accident previously evaluated. nor containment barrier instead of the boundary within eight hours and fire do(s it involve a reduction in a margin equipment hatch in the wall separating watch will be stationed in the railroad cf safety Technical Specification the bay from the auxiliary building. An bay area in the unlikely event a fire change (4) requiring a hydrostatic test equipment hatch between the auxiliary occurs due to an earthquake. Second, instead of a pneumatic test for certain building and the railroad bay would be change (5) does not create the Co itainment isolation valves is also the opened and remain open for an possibility of a new or different kind of result of design change.The test lines estimated 144 hours required to move-accident from any accident previously for the residual heat removalIRHR) and new equipment in and old equipment evaluated. Neither the staff nor the low pressure core spray (l.PCS) systems cut of the auxiliary building.The licensee could identify any new means return water from the RilR and LPCS existing Limiting Condition for of releasing radioactivity from the pumps to the supression pool. The Operation Action Statements and auxiliary building since there are no current design of the test return lines is Surveillance Requirements in Technical radioactive racks in the spent fuel pool such that the line terminates above the Specification 3/4.6.6. would be because the plant is in its first fuel cycle. minimum suppression pool water level applicable to the exterior rai' road bay in addition, handling activities, analped for accident conditions. Thus, door, including a draw-down test to including the emergency closing of the the contamment isolation valves in the demonstrate leak tightness.The railroad railroad bay door and equipment hatch, test return lines must be designed and e sterior bay door is not seismic if necessary, will be conducted with tested Ior pneumatic sealing. in the Category 1: however, analyses have previously approved procedures. Third, esent the end of the line would be above shown that the equipment hatch can be change (5) does not involve a significant the suppression poollevel during a loss. reclosed within eight hours. Should the reduction in a margin of safety because of coolant accident. The design chango hay door fail to perform the secondary the TSs for secondary containment is to estend the test return lines containment function for any reason. the integrity are enhanced by using one hour downward sufficientiv that the ends of Action Statements of Technical instead of the four hours in the action the imes would remain cosered with Specification 3 6.6.1 would require statement requiring restoration of nater during a postulatcd accident. The reactor shutdown and cochlown to an intergrity after an opening. Also, the resised design forms a water sealin operational condition where secondary leakage surveillance test required by the conjunction with the containment i ontainment integrity is not required. TSs for the secondary boundary will be iseNtion valves. therefore. the Furthermore, the probability of an run fer the railroad bay area after the h drostaticleakage test of the valses is accident including a seismic event equipment hatch is opened. 3 appropriate for the revised design.The during the 144 accumulative hours for Accordingly, for the reasons cited water sealin the test return lines which the esception is requested is low. above, ti.e Commission proposes to enhances the leakage prevention The normal fire protection for the bay determine that these five changes do not characteristics and testing for the area is provisied by a 6-inch water line involve significant hazards associated s alves. The re.ised design that does nat conform to secondary considerations. and pmposed hydrostatic leakage tests ( catainment isolation design f.eca/ Public Document hoom ,, ate m accordance with applicable .ven:ents, therefore, the line will be locatione llinds junior College. ree.1 itory requuement:,. and mdustr> isated during the period of the McLendon Library. Raymond, codes and standards. includmg 10 CFR exception and a fire watch will be Mississippi 39154. Part 50 Appendis I and Section XI of the estabtished. Attorneyforlicensee Nicholas S. ASME Ikuler and Pressure Vessel Code. Proposed change (5), use of the Reynolds. Esquire. Bishop. Liberman. Cmoocment isolatmn valses m other. railroad bay as secondary containment Cook. Purcell, and Reynolds.120017th l sam!ar uater Idled imes are included m for the short time period required to Street. NW. Washington. D.C. 20036. th> lei Snu al Specifa ations so ths rm e equipment in and out of the NRCBranch Chief: Elinor Adensam. I

32798 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No.157 / Wednesday, August 14, 1985 / Notices N5gara htohawk Power Corporation. Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, et important to ensure safe plant operation. Dockst No. 30-220, Nine ht;Ie Point al. Docket Nos. 50-245 and 50-336 This concept is in accordance with that Nuclear Station. Unit No.1. Oswego Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units outlined in the Corr. mission's proposed County, New York No.1 and 2, New London County, rule (47 FR 13369) and more recent Connecticut ' Date of onendment request: Afarch 13, initiatives to improve the, quality of the 1385 supplemented hiay 6.1985 Date ofamendment request hfay 29, Standard Technical Specifications. superseding submittals of October 5 1985 as supplemented on June 19,1985. Bo818/orProposedno significont 1983, ktarch 20* 1981 and April 18,1b80' Description of amendment request: hazards consideration determmation. Descn. tion of amendment request The proposed amendments would revise The Commission,in a revision to p. This amendment request was originally the Radiological Effluent Technical Appendix I of 10 CFR Part 50, required noticed on August 23,1983 (48 FR 38410). Specifications (RETS) to assure licensees to improve and modify their continuing compliance with Appendix I radiological effluent systems in a This amendment would make changes to of 10 CFR Part 50.They would provide manner that would keep releases of the Technical Specification by de'etin8 new Technical Specification sections radioactive material to unrestricted the list of required snubbers, providing defining limiting conditions for areas during normal operation as low as r,urveillance requirements includin8 operation and surveillance requirements is reasonably achievable. In complying frequency and acceptance criteria, and for radioactive liquid and gaseous with this requirement, it is necessary to providing limiting conditions for effluent monitoring; concentration, dose provide additional restrictions and i operation for the facility should and treatment ofliquid, and gaseous controls in the Technical Specifications anubbers be inoperable.This change wastes: and total dose. The procedures to assure compliance.The proposed was proposed to incorporate the to be followed and the bases that amendments would meet this objective provisions for snubber Technical support the operation and surveillance by adding the Technical Specification Specifications transmitted to all power requirements would be stated in the sections described above. + reactor licensee's by Generic Letter 84-licensee's Radiological Effluent The Commission has provided 13 dated Afay 3,1981. hionitoring and Offsite Dose Calculation guidance in the form of examples of Basisforproposedno significant hfanual (REh!ODChi). The hiay 29,1985 amendments that are considered not hozords consideration determination: submittal contained the REhf0DChi likely to involve significant hazards The Commission has provided guidance which has subsequently been corrected considerations (48 FR 14870). Example concerning the application of the for typographical errors per the June 19, (ii) regarding a change that constitutes standards for determining whether a 1985 submittal.The proposed an additional limitation, restriction or significant hazards consideration exists REhf0DChi would also contain the control not presently included in the by providing certain examples (48 FR radiological environmen tal monitoring technical specifications is clearly 14870).The examples of actions that consists of a monitoring program, a applicable to these proposed involving no significant hazards land use census, and an interlaboratory amendments.The NRC staff therefore consideration include * "* * * (ii) A comparison program.The amendments proposes to determine that this change that constitutes an additional would incorporate the revised RETS into application does not involve a limitation, restriction, or control not the Technical Specifications, and thus significant hazards consideration. presently included in the technical eliminate the need for a separate Loco /Public Document Room specifications; for example, a more Appendix D to the licenses. location: Waterford Public Library, Rope stringent surveillance requirement." The This amendment request is similar to Ferry Road, Route 150, Waterford, changes proposed in the application for the amendment request of November 22, Connecticut. 1982 and subsequently published in the Attorneyforlicensee: Gerald Garfield, amendment are encon passed by this Federal Register on August 23,1983 (48 Esq., Day, Berry and Ifoward One sxample in that the proposed change FR 38322 at 38411).These proposed Constitution Plaza,IL.tford, would add Limiting Conditions for Operation and surveillance changes to the Technical Specifications Connecticut 00103. requirements on existing and newly were never made. A series of meetings NRCBronch Chiefs: John Zwolin ki between the licensee and NRC staff (Unit 1), Edward J. Butcher, Acting (Unit installed snubbers, and is thus similar to followed, resulting in the hfay 29,1985 2). the exarr.ple described above. amendment request. The proposed Therefore, since the application for changes to the Technical Specifications Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, et amendment invoh es a proposed change contain only those Radiological Effluent al., Docket No. 50-336, hiillstone that is similar to an example for which Technical Specification (RITS) items Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2, New no significant hazards consideration which are considered truly relevant to London County, Connecticut exists, the staff has made a proposed safety and under the cognizance of the Date of amendment requeste luly to, dctermination that the application plant operating staff. The remaining 1985. involves no significant hazards requirements previously proposed in the Descr@ tion of amendment request consideration. November 22,1982 amendment request The proposed change to the Technical Loco /Public Document Room have been incorporated !ntothe Specifications would correct a location: State University College at REhf0DChf. typographical error on Figure 3.2-2a. t I Oswego, renfieId Library-Documents, The proposed RETS together with the One coordinate of this figure was Oswego, New York 13120. REhf 0DCM include all the requirements erroneously specified as (-0.08.1.0) l A ttorney for licensee: Troy B. Conner, necessary to ensure that offsite releases versus the intended coordinate of(- fr.. Esquire, Conner & Wetterhahn, Suite of radioactive effluents are maintained 0.06.1.0). Because the currently approved as low as reasonably achievable. The Figure 3.2-2a would allow operation 1050,1747 penns)lvania Avenue N.W., i Washington, D.C. 20006-requirements for which the plant with a core power distribution in an operating staff is responsible are located unacceptable operating region, l NRC Branch Chief: Domenic B. within the Technical Specifications. administrative actions have been taken i Vassallo. These provisions are considered to ensure that the core power

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No.157 / Wednesday, August 14, 1985 / Notices 32799 distribution is limited to the proposed consequences of a previously. analyzed (4) Rod Block hionitor (RBht). In Table figure. Operation within the accident or may reduce in some way a 4.2.1, increase the RBM surveillance test unacceptable region did not occur, since safey margin, but where the results of frequency to once per month from once the typographical error was discovered the change are clearly within all per 3 months for exposure hours (ht) prior to startup from the Cycle 7 acceptable criteria with respect to the greater than 2.0x105. The licensee had refueling outage. system or component specified in the committed to this change in its letter of Casis forproposedno significant Standard Review Plan." The licensee October 17,1984. hazards consideration determination: stated in its application that the (5) Section 4.16. Radiation The Commission has provided guidance proposed changes to the TS would Environmental hionitoring Program. In for making a no significant hazards guarantee a K-effective equal to or less Table 4.10.1 (page 5 of 5), delete the consideration determination (48 FR than 0 95 when the spent or new fuelis requirement for potato and corn 14870). Example (i) of this guidance is a stored in the fuel assemblies. " Itis limit environmental radiation sampling. purely administrative change to is compatible with NRC acceptable (6) hiiscellaneous Administrative technical specifications: for example, a criteria. The NRC staff, therefore, Changes. change to achieve consistency concluded that the changes are (a) Page 229h. Correct references in TS throughout the technical specifications, compatible with example (vi) and has 4.10.A.4. correction of an error, or a change in made a proposed determination that the (b) Pages 229p and 229q. Clarify notes nomenclature. The proposed change application for amendment involves no "d" and "e" to specify the corrects a typographical error and is significant hazards consideration. radionuclide(s) to which the kw level clearly enveloped by example (i) as LocalPublic Document Room doses (11Ds) are acceptable. dis ussed abose. location: Environmental Conservation (c) Page 244. Correct drill frequency Based on the above considerations-1.ibrary, hiinneapolis Public 1.ibrary,300 referenced in procedures fro:n A.6 to the staff proposes to detertmine that the Nicollet hfall, hiinneapolis, hiinnesota. A.5. proposed changes do not involve a Attorneyforlicensee: Gerald (d) Page 244a. Correct typographical significant hazards consideration. Charnoff Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts and errors. LocalPublic Document Room Ttowbridge,1800 M Street NW., Basisforproposedno significant location: Waterford Public 1.ibrary,49 Washington, D.C. 20036. hazards consideration determination: Rope Ferry Road, Waterford. NRCBranch Chief: Domenic B. The Commission has provided guidance Vassallo. concerning the application of these Atto e forlicensee: Gerald Garfield' Esq., Day, Berry and floward, One Northern States Power Company, standards by providing certain exmples 8 8 O ple (i), Constitution Plaza, flattford, Docket No. 50-263, Monticello Nuclear yg gnifi habjs Connecticut 06103. Generating Plant, Wright County

• ARCBranch Chief Edward J. Butcher, Minnesota consideration is "A purely

^'""8' administrative change to technical Date of applicationforamendment: specifications: for example, a change to Northern States Power Company, April 26,1985. achieve consistency throughout the Docket No. 50-263, Monticello Nuclear Description of amendment request: technical specifications, correction of an Generating Plant, Wright County, The proposed amendment will change error, or a change in nomenclature." Minnesota the Technical Specifications (TS) to Change Nos,3 and 6, except 6(b), above Date of application for amendment: incorporate the recommendations of match this example and the staff April 10, and June 14,1985. Generic 1.etter 84-13, to satisfy a therefore proposes to characterize them Description of amendment request: previous commitment and to incorporate as involving no significant hazards The proposed amendment would change miscellaneous admir.istrative changes. consideration. the Technical Specifications (TS) by The changes are as fallows: Example (ii) states "A change that raising the K-effective limit on the spent (1) Snubber Table. Delete Tcble 3 61 constitutes an additonal limitation, fuel storage pool from 0.90 to 0.95. The and all references to 'lable 3.6.1 from restriction or control not presently proposed amendment would also add pages vi,129,130.131 and 132. Delete included in the technical specifications: that the infinite multiplication factor be paragraph 3.6.11.3. The proposed For example, a more stringent less than or equal to 1.31 for the new changes implement the surveillance requirement." Change No. 4 fuel assemblies and 1.33 for the spent recommendations of Generic Letter 84-falls in this category and the staff fuel assemblies. The additional 13 dated May 3,1984. In Paragraph therefore ' proposes to characterize this requirement proposes a limit on the 4 6.11.2, change "impared" to " impaired." as involving no significant hazards assembly reactivity rather than limiting (2) Section 6.5.G Plant Operating consideration. the grams of Uranium 235 per Procedures-Temporary Changes to item No.1 above implements the centimeter. This allows the poison to be Procedures. Delete the requirements for recommendations of Generic Letter 84-accounted for in the fresh fule, the Operation Committee to review the 13 dated May 3,1984. It provides an

1. csis forproposedno significant temporary changes to non-safety-related option to eliminate snubber listings bozords consideration determination:

health physics and security procedures. within the TS provided the snubber TS The NRC has provided guidance (3) Section 6.5.B. Plant Operating are modified to specify which snubbers concerning the vplication of standards Procedures-Radiological. Delete are required to be operable. The for determining whether license reference to Radiation Protection Plan, recordkeeping requirements of snubber amendments involve significant hazards The Monticello Radiation Protection TS are not altered by this consideration by providing certain Program and policy is defined in the recommendation. The change requested examples (48 FR 14870). One example Plant Administrative ControlDirectives in Item No.1 does not alter any TS which does not invoh e significant (ACDs), consistent with the requirements such a snubber quantitles, hazards consideration is "[vi) a t.hange requirements of to CFR 20. TFe types, or locations. It only eliminates which either may result in some Radiation Protection Plan is a redundant Table 3.6.1 and all references to this increase to the probability or document. table. For these reasons, the staff

\\ 32800 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No.157 / Wednesday August 14. 1985 / Notices concludes that the proposed change item No. 5 above would not: (1) Involve acceptance criteria. Several thousand would not:(1)Invol.re a significant a significant increase in the possibility steam generator tubes at many facilities increase in the possibility or or consequences of an accident throughout the world have been consequences of an accident previoulaly previously evaluated; or (2) create the successfully repaired by using the evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of possibility of a new or different kind of sleeving techniques. In addition, the a new or different kind of accident from accident from any accident previously licensee has proposed to use only those any accident previously evaluated; or (3) evaluated; or (3) involve a significant sleeve techniques thet were proven to involve a sigmficant reduction in the reduction in the margin of safety. be successful at other facilities and no margin of safety. In Item No. 6(b) above. notes "d" and novel or unproven methods will be used. In letters dated September 24,1982 e" clarify the notations in Table 4.16.2 For these reasons, we conclude that the and March 30.1984. the licensee and do not change any requirements and proposed tecnical specification change requested elimination of Operations for this reason the staff proposes that to permit sleeving of steam generator Committee review of non. safety-related the change would not:(1) Involve a tubes at Prairie Island will not:(1) procedures performed by health physics significant increase in the possibility or involve a significant increase in the and guard force personnel This was consequences of an accident previously probability of an accident previously approved by the staffin Amendment No. evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of 25 dated August 15.1984. Technical a new or different kind of accident from a new or different kind of accident from Specification 6.5.G requires Operations any accident previously evaluated, or (3) any accident previously evaluated; or (3) Committee review of the temporary involve a sigmficant reduction in the involve a significant reduction in the changes to procedures. The Operations margm of safety. margin of safety.Therefore on this Therefore, based on the reasons as basis, the staff proposes that changes Committee should not be required to described above, the staff has made a dealing with steam generator tube review temporary changes to procedures covering health physics or guard force proposed de, termination that the sleeving do not involve a significant f anctions that did not require application mvolves no sigmficant hazards consideration. hazards consideration. In regard to the proposed change Operation's Committee review when Loca/Public Document Room issued. This review procedure will be dealing with the reporting requirements, location: Environmental Conservation one of the examples,(ii), of actions not omitted only for non. safety-related Library, Minneapolis Public Library,300 likely to involve a significant hazards procedures associated with the Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota. consideration involves a change that activities performed exclusively by Attorneyforhcensee Gerald constitutes an additional. imitation, health physics or security personnel. For Charnoff, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts and restriction or control not presently these reasons, the staff concludes that 'l h1 S reet, NW., the proposed change in Item No. 2 above ({ included in the technical specifications. gn, 2 The proposed reporting requirements would not:(1) Involve a significant NRC Branch Chief: Domenic B. would include an additional controlin increase m, the possibility or Vassa;;o. consequences of an accident previously that tubc sleeving would be added to the evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of Northern States Power Company. reporting requirements as a method for a new or different kind of accident from Docket Nos. 50-282 and 50-306, Prairie steam generator repairs similar to tube any accident previously evaluated; or (3) Island Nuclear Generating Plant Unit plugging that is in existing technical involve a significant reduction in the Nos.1 and 2, Goodhue County. specifications.Therefore the staff margin of safety. Minnesota proposes to determine that the proposed item No. 5 above requests elimination Date of an'endment request: May 17, change involving reporting does not involve a significant hazards of the requirement for potato and corn 1985. consideration since it meets example environmental radiation sampling. Over Description of amendment request the period of several years, a uniform The licensee has proposed two technical (iij. process of deep wellirrigation has been specification changes-the first would Loca/ Public Document Room developed in the area and the use of permit steam generator tube repairs by location: Environmental Conservation river water for irrigating potato and corn tube sleeving. the second would modify Library, Minneapolis Public Library,300 fields has been discontinued. The steam generator tube inservice Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota. collection of potato and corn samples is inspection reporting requirements to Attorneyforlicensee: Jay Silberg, no longer a valid monitor to determine reflect tube sleeving as a repair method Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts, and the impact of liquid release of far the steam generators. Trowbridge,1800 M Street NW., radioactivity into the river. The land use Basis forproposed no significant Washington, D.C. 20036. cenw spocnfied in the TS does not hazan) consideration de tennination: NRC Branch Chief: Edward 1. Dutcher, identity high D/Q corn and potato The licensee submittee technical reports Acting. locations. Leafy green vegetable providing support for steam generator Portland General Electric Company, at samples from a garden in the highest D/ tube sleeving at Praine Island by means al., Docket No. 50-344. Trojan Nuclear Q sector are used to determine of brazing. welding and mechanical Plant, Columbia County, Oregon radimsotope buildup due to air release compression. These reports provide a from the plant. description of the analysis and testing Date of amendment mquest: April 4 The removal of the corn and potato performed that demonstrates the 1985. radiation sampling requirement will not acceptability of these techniques (i e. Description of amendment request: affect the ability of the Radiation brazing, welding and mechanical The proposed amendment would make Environmental Monitonng Program to compressior.t. l'hese reports, corrently administrative organizational changes to assess the impact of the plant on its under detailed review by staff, cover three areas of Appendix A of Facility surroundmgs.This change is due to a mechanical strength, corrosion Operating License NpF-1. Figure 6.2-1, t e offsite crganizational chart, would h shift in land use in the viomity of the resistance. iNallation methods and plant. For these reasons, the staff inservice inspection techniques which be revised to reflect changes in the cory ludes that the proposed change m appear to meet all of our expected corporate structure, such as the creation ~~ -

Fed-1 Register / Vol. 50, No.157 / Wednesday, August 14, 1985 / Notices 32801 of a Senior Vice President of Electric functions; or (2) create the possibility of develop a revised LTOPS PORV setpoint Operations under the President. a new or different kind of accident limit curve and impose additional Changes to this chart would also include because the changes are only meant to operating restrictions to improve safety updating various position titles, such as be administrative in nature and improve at Indian Point No. 3. Therefore the staff the Vice Chairman of the Board being operations by adding personnel, proposes to determine that the retitled as the Senior Vice President. increasing management involvement, or amendment does not involve a General Counsel and Secretary. providing an cutsider's point of view, or significant hazards consideration. The second requested revision (3) involve a significant reduction in a Local Public Documen.' Room concerns Figure 6.2-2. the facihty margin of safety because the changes location: White Plains Public Library, organizational chart. The proposed are meant to improve safe operations 100 Martine Avenue White Plains, New change would establish an Ass,stant and appear to be consistent with York 10601. i Operations Supervisor to concentrate established and existing regulations and A ttorney for licensee: Mr. Charles M. solely on superv, sing and directing the commitments. Accordingly, the NRC Pratt.10 Columbus Circle, New York, activities of the shift supervisors and staff proposes to determine that the New York 10019. operatm, g crews. proposed amendment does not involve a ,VRC Branch Chief: Steven A. Varga. Finally the third set of requested significant hazards consideration. changes concerns the Trojan Nuclear LocalPublic Document Room Public Service Co. of Colorado, Docket Operations Board (TNOB). The revisions location: Multnomah County Library, No. 50-267. Fort St. Vrain Nuclear to the Technical Specifications (6.5.2.2. 801 S.W.10th Avenue. Portland, Oregon. Generating Station, Platteville, Colorado 6.5.2.3. and 6.5.2.6) would delete the Attorneyforlicensee: J.W. Durham, Date of amendment request: June 21, requirement for designated engineers Semor Vice President, Portland General 1985 and scientists as members cf the TNOB Electric Company,121 S.W. Salmon Description of amendment request: and clarify the TNOB quorum Street. Portland. Ore on 97204. The proposed changes to the Techm. cal requirements. NRCBranch Chie Edward J. Butcher, Specifications incorporate the standard Basis forproposed no significant Acting. 8"iO D'* I*' I" ** ** *' '5 0" P* * hazards consideration determination: Power Authority of The State of New and allowable values. The proposal The proposed changes to Figure 6.2-1 York, Docket No. 50-286, Indian Point would provide for new definitions and are administrative changes to the PGE Unit No. 3. Westchester County, New new formatting for plant protective corporate structure. The changes reflect Y rk system instrumentation. In most cases, updated position titles and the establishment of different positions. Date of amendment request: July 1, the actual trip setpoints are the same or more conservative than the existing Positions have only been added; none 1985. have been eliminated. Description of amendment request setpoint. In those cases where the new The proposed revision to l'igure 6.2-2 This application seeks to amend setpoint is less conservative, new, is being made to reflect the creation of Sections 3.1.A. 3.3.A. 3.5. 4.1 and 6.9.2 of supporting safety ana'yses have been the new Assistant Operations the Technical Specifications concerning provided. Supervisor position. This position was the Low Temperature Overpressure Basis forproposed no significant created to improve the efficiency of line Protection System (LTOPS). hazards consideration determination: operations. With an Assistant By letters dated November 3.1978 and The Commission has provided guidance Operations Supervisor to concentrate on August 24.1979, the licensee respoaded concerning the application of these the activities of the Shift Supervisors to the staff's August 28,1978 request to standards by providing certain and operating crews, the Operations provide Technical Specifications for the examples (48 FR 14870). The examples Supervisor is afforded more freedom to LTOPS. This amendment request of actions that are considered not hkely manage the entire activities of the provides the results of a reanalysis of to involve significant hazards Operations Department; operations the LTOPS in response to the staff's considerations include:"(i) A purely planning and scheduling and operations September 7,1982 letter concerning administrative change to technical engineering. as well as plant operations possible scenarios (i.e., the heat input specifications: for example, a change to itstlf. case of an RCP start with a hotter steam achieve consistency throughout the The proposed changes to technical generator, and the loss of one D.C. bus technical specifications, correction of an specifications 6.5.2.2. and 6.5.2.3 allow as the inititating event resulting in loss error, or a change in nomenclature; "(ii) more flexibility in the appointrnent of ofletdown and the subsequent single A change that constitutes an additional members to the TNOB. The flexibility failure of PORV rowered by another limitation, restriction, or control not allows the board to benefit from D C. bus) and supersedes in its entirety presently included in the technical increased management involvement as the licensee's Auust 24,1979 submittal. specifications; for example, a more well as an increased level of Basis forproposed no sigmficant stringent surveillance requirement; and independence and different points of hazards consideration determination: "(vil A change which either may result view provided by TNOB members from The Commission has prosided guidance in some increase to the probability or outside PGE. Finally, the proposed concerning the application of these consequences of a previously-analyzed change to technical specification 6.5.2.6 standards by providing certain accident or may reduce in some way a clarifies, without degrading. the board's examples (48 FR 14870). One of the safety margin, but where the results of quorum requirements. examples of actions not likely to involve the change are clearly within all Therefore operation of the facility in a significant hazards consideration acceptable criteria with respect to the accordance with the proposed changes relates to a change that constitutes an system or component specified in the would not (1) involve a significant additional limitation, restriction, or Standard Review Plan: For example, a increase in the probability or control not presently included in the change resulting from the application of consequences of an accidcnt previously Technical Specifications (Example 11). a small refinement of a previously used evaluated because the organizations The proposed changes to the calculational modcl or design method." affected by the personnel changes Technical Specifications do not change Dased on an initial review of the continue to perform their intended any system or subsystem but rather preposal, the various portions appear to

32802 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No.157 / Wednesday, August 14. 1985 / Notices be representative on one or more of the change would revise the action in the Specifications will be considered to be above examples: (1) The new definitions event of one of the two filter systems acceptable if they are consistent with and revised format for the instrument becoming inoperable to require that the the regulatory guidance contained in the setpoints are representative of examples remaining filter system be placed in Standard Technical Specifications (i) and (iilin that they pmside operation and be discharging through at (NUREG-0212). Proposed Change NPF-administrative changes to achieve least one train of IIEPA filters and 10/15-193 makes the Technical consistency through a change in charcoal absorbers. The proposed Specification 3/4.9.12 action statements nomenclature and also constitute an change would allow fuel handling consistent with Standard Technical additionallimitation in the form of operations to continue indefinitely while Specification 3/4.9.12, Storage Pool Air expretising two sets oflimits (Trip complying with these action Cleanup System and are therefore Setpoint and Allowable Value);(2) new requirements. acceptable. Therefore, the proposed limits and associated action statements Basis For ProposedNo Significant change is similar to example (vi) and which retain the present setpoint values 1/azards Consideration Determination does not involve significant hazards are elso administrative changes which The Commission has provided guidance consideration. are proposed to achieve consistency concerning the application of standards LocalPublic Document Room through the use of a standard for determining whether a significant location: San Clemente 1.ibrary, 242 nomenclature; and (3) the new hazards consideration exists by Avenida Del hlar, San Clemente, limitations and those limits for which providing certain examples (48 FR California 92672. the setpoint values have been revised 14870) of amendments that are AttorneyforLicensee: Charles R. ere representative of example (vi)in considered not likely to involve Kocher, Esq., Southern California Edison that the affected accident or transient significant hazards considerations. Company,2244 Walnut Grove Avenue, his been re-analyzed to better define Example (vi) relates to a change which P.O. Box 800, Rosemead, California tha operational conditions which are either may result in some increased 91770 and Orrick,lierrington & Sutcliffe, allowable while retaining the probability or consequences of a Attn.: David R. Pigott, Esq.,600 acceptance criteria previously previously analyzed accident or may hiontgomery Street, San Francisco, eMablished. Therefore, the staff reduce la some way a safety margin but California 94111 proposed to find that the above where the results of the change are NRC Branch Chief: George W. upplication represents an action which clearly withm all acceptable criteria Knighton-involves no significant hazards with respect to the system or component considerations. specified in the Standard Review Plan Tennessee Valley Authodty, Docket Loco / Public Document Room (SRP). SRP Section 9.4.2, " Spent Fuel Nos. 50-259,50-280 and 50-296, Browns locotion: Greeley Public Library, City Pool Area Ventilation System" defines Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1,2 and 3, Complex Duilding. Greeley, Colorado. acceptance criteria for the FIIBPACFS. Limestone County, Alabama Attorney forlicensee: Bryant The purpose of the FilBPACFS is to Date of amendment request: O Donnell, Public Service Company of reduce the offsite dose consequences of p e 'p ded N Colorado P.O. Box 840, Denver, a postulated fuel handling accident. In 21 up d d S 'p er 22 Colorado 80201. part, SRP 9.4.2 requires that a single 1983, as superseded hfarch 20,1985. NRC Bronch Chief: Dorwin R. Ilunter. active failure should not result in loss of Descriphon of amendme& quest: sWem funcdona1 performance The proposed amendment changes the Southern Californis Edison Company, et eapabilit ' a Technical Specifications (TS) to revise al. Docket Nos. 50-361 and 50-3,G2 San f n p ndentI11 FS t si s the curves of reactor pressure versus Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, both of which are required by the TS to minimum temperature for AShiE Section 3, an go County, be operable whenever spent fuelis in XI hydrostatic pressure testing, heatup ""f;I* *[n

• g the fuel storage pool. As a compensatory and cooldown following shutdown of a Date of Amendment Request; h!ay 30 measure when one train is out of service unit, and core criticality. These curves 1985 and June 21,1985 (Reference PCN-for maintenance the TS currently 193) prohibits fuel handling operation if the are in TS Figure 3&1,The curves were revised to reflect more realistic, yet Description of Amendment Request inoperable train is not returned to conservative, values of vessel beltline The proposed change would revise service within seven days. The proposed Technical Specifica tion (TS) 3/4.9.12 change would allow fuel handling RTm based on material analyses and

' Fuel llandimg Huilding Post. Accident operation to continue beyond the seven testing. The shift in RTmand revision of the curves is done to account for loss i C!eanap Filter S3 -tem." TS 3/4 9.12 days if the inoperable train is not of reactor vessel material toughness as a requires the operability of two returned to service provided that the rcsult of accumulated radiation independent fuel handling building post. remaining operable train is placed in accident cleanup filter system operation and is discharging thromh at exposure to the vessel.The proposed, (FIIBPACFS) trains.The purpose of the least one train of flEPA filters ar's amendment also updates a statement to t ilBPACFS is to ensure that radioactive charcoal absorbers. Otherwise, de reflect that neutron flux wires, used as material released from an irradiated fuel proposed change would require that fuel specimens for verification of calculated auembly after a fuel handling accident handling operation be suspended. The values of accumulated exposure, were will be fdtered through the llEPA filter proposed change will allow SCE to take removed during the first refueling outage and charcoal absorbers. The action credit for the less restrictive action and tested. Fig':re 3 8-2, " Change in required by TS 3/4.9.12 if one of the two statements associated with operability Charpy V Transition Temperature hiter systems becomes inoperable is to of this sys'em. Standard Neview Plan versus Neutron Exposure"is proposed imtore the inoperable system to (SRP) Section 9.4.2 Spent Fuel Pool for deletion. This figure is not consistent opmble status within seven days or Area Ventdation S) stem, provides the with USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.99 and suspend operation invo!ving movement pertinent technical acceptance criteria. should be removed from the TS. The of fuel withm the storege pool or As stated in the SRP, the Technical proposed amendment would also update operation of the fuel handimg machine Sperification acceptance criteria the bases to reflect current status of ovcr the storage pool. The proposed spnifies that the proposed Technical neutron flux wire specimens and plans

T Federal Register / Vol. 50 No.157 / Wednesday August 14, 1985 / Notices 32803 for revising Figure 3.6-1 based on tests containing the failure is tripped. The trip previously-analyzed accident may or of the specimens. system may be in the untripped position may not in some way be increased. Basisforproposedno significant for up to eight hours to perform the liowever, the proposed change is hoeards consideration determination: functional test. consistent with section 3.3.1 of the BWR The proposed revision to the figure of The proposed revision is to delete the Standard Technical Specifications pressure versus temperature is a immediate functional test requirement which serve as a basis for assessing revision in a less restrictive direction for the remaining channels and replace conformance to the Standard Review and would thus appear to reduce a it with a requirement to trip a failed Plan of BWR Reactor Protection System safety margin. llowever, in its submittal. channel within one hour (unless that Instrumentation Technical the licensee has addressed the action would cause a scram). Specifications. The proposed significant hazards consideration Associated with this change are amendment is therefore, encompassed determination required by to CFR 50.92.. additional words that would (1) clarify by an example for which no significant In its determination, the licensee the fact that, as an alternative to the hazards consideration is likely to exist. concludes that the proposed amendment action statement which applies when The staff has, therefore, made a will not involve a significant increase in one trip system is affected, the licensee proposed determination that the probability or consequences of a may select the action statement proposed amendments involve no previously analyzed accident, that it will applicable when both trip systems are significant hazards consideration. not create the possibility of a new or affected, and (2) place a two-hour time LocalPublic Document Room different kind of accident, and that it limit on leaving an inoperable channel location: Athens Public Library South will not involve a reduction in a margin untripped when it would cause a scram. and Forrest Athens, Alabama 35611. of safety. The licensee states that the The June 6,1985 amendment request Attorney for licensee ll.S. Sanger, Jr., proposed revision reflects conservative r"persedes an earlier September 21' Enuire General Counsel, Tennessee values of RT,an for the reactor vessel U4 request (49 FR 47835). VMley Authority,400 Commerce beltline region, and that the re rision Basis forproposedao sigm..ficant provides a margin of safety wriich hazards consideration determmation: Avenue E11B 33C Knoxville, Tennessee 37902. complies with the fracture toughness The Commission has provided guidance requirements 6f 10 CFR Part 50 concerning the application of the A'RCBranch Chief: Domenic B. Vassa3o. Appendix G. We have reviewed the standards for making a "no significant licensee's submittal. Based on our hazards consideration" determination Virginia Electric Power Company, review of the licensee's submittal and by providing certain examples (48 FR Docket Nos. 50-338 and 56-339, North our evaluation of the proposed action, 14870). On of the examples of an Anna Power Station, Units No.1 and No. the staff finds that the three critcria amendment not likely to involve a

2. Louisa County, Virginia specified in 10 CFR 50.92(c) have been significant hazards consideration is:

met.Therefore, the staff has made a ,(vi) A change which either may result Date of amendment mquest: Aprill, 1935 proposed determination that the in some increase to the probability or Dbeription of amendment request application for amendment invohes no consequences of a previously-analyzed significant hazards consideration. accident or ma reduce in some way a The proposed changes would revise the LocalPublic Document Room safety margin, ut where the results of Technical Specification (TS) by reducing. location: Athens Public 1.ibrary, South the change are clearly within all the required minimum number of monitored detector thimbles from 38 to l and Forrest. Athens, Alabama 35611. acceptable criteria with respect to the

26. These thimbles are used to obtain a l

Attorneyforlicenseer il.S. Sanger, Jr., system or component specified in the l Esquire, General Counsel. Tennessee Standard Review Plan: for example, a flux map for the routine monthly Valley Authority,400 Commerce change resulting from the application of surveillance of hot channel factors.The As enue. E 11D 33C, Knoxville, a small refinemant of a previously used proposed use of 26 thimbles for flux Tennessee 37902. calculation model or design method." mapping would only be allowed when NRC Branch Chief: Dcmenic H. In developiM re nedial action 38 thimbles were unavailable due to Vassallo. requirements. consideration is given to: thimble blockage or inoperable movable Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket The operability of redundant or diverse incore detector equipment. The Nom. 50.-259. 54-260 and SG-296. Brow ns n stems; the prcbobility of an event proposed change (26 thimbles) for I erry Nuclear Plant. Units 1. 2 and 3. taking place during the condition venfying hot channel factors would restaration time which would be require that additional uncertainty Limestone County, Alabama influenced by the limiting condition for factors be applied to the measured hot Date of amendment rec;uest: June 6. operation: the reliability of the channel factors in order to ensure 1985. redundant or diverse systems: and the compliance with TS requirements. Description of umendment reque:J nsk of inducing an undesirable incident plant conditions can occur where the l 'lhe amendment would modify the while perforrr M the remedial action normal monthly surveillance of hot I Technical Specifica ans to resise the (for esample, the thermal transients channel factors cannot be completed r remedial action requircment for action ir duced by a shutdown and cooldown). due to the unavailability of the required to be taken in evee' a reactor rotection The proposed amendment would number (38 thimbles) and plant system instrurrent channelis ailed in de lee an existing regairement that, shutdown is required even though there an unsafe condition. when one instrument channelis found to is no actual violation of the hot channel 'lechnical Specifications section 4.1 C be moperable, the remaining channels factors. In order to avoid a forced e omains a requirement that upon the monitormg the same parumeter are to be reactor outage, the proposed change is f.ulure of a rcactor protection system immediately tested. This change may justified by analysis which WPS) channel in the unsafe condition all reduce the safety margin Ilowever, demonstrates that all hot channel RPS channels monitoring the same tripping the failed channel withm one factors can be accurately monitored if variable must be functionalty testod hourinstead of ei ht hours should additional proposed uncertainties are g This testing must be performed ircre ese the safety margin. 't he net mlded to the mcasured hot channel en+diately before the trip s3 cem ewlts are that the pro %bility of a farf or salues. Based on the analysis.

) 32804 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No.157 / Wednesday, August 14, 1985 / Notices unc rtainty values were derived whic the possibility of a new or different Review Plan; for example, a change must be applied to channel peaking accident from any evaluated previously, resulting from the application of a small frctor measurements in addition to the and will not significantly reduce a safety refinement of a previously used present measurement and margin. Therefore, the NRC staff calculational model or design method. manufacturing uncertainty values. The proposes to detemine that the standards Example (ii) involves a change that cdditional uncertainty factors are 1% for for determining that a license involves constitutes an additional limitation. F",u. u (nuclear enthalpy rise hot no significant hazards consideration are restriction, or control not presently chinnel factor),2% for Fa (heat flux hot met, and that operation of the facility in included in the TS. ch:nnel factor), and 1% for F o (radial accordance with the proposed The proposed change for revising the hist flux hot channel factor).These amendments would not involve a time limitation for decay of spent fuel factors are valid for 26 thimbles significant hazards consideration. before allowing the movement of, provided there are at least four thimbles LocalPub/!c Document Room per core quadrant as opposed to the locations: Board of Supervisors Office, hatches gates, and panels is consistant presently required 38 thimbles with at Louisa County Courthouse, Louisa, with eyample (vi). The current limitations in the TS were based on Inst two thimbles per core quadrant. Virginia 23093 and the Alderman Finally,it is noted that use of the Library, hianuscripts Department, assmptions and models that are more proposed minimum of 26 thimbles will University of Virginia, Charlottesville, conservative than current NRC criteria. reduce the station man-rem exposure by Virginia 22901. The assumptions and models used in the reducing the number of at. power Attorneyforlicensee hiichael W. analysis of the proposed change are the containment entries for repairing the hiaupin, Esq., Ilunton, Williams, Gay NRC accepted assumptions and models movable incore detector system. and Gibson, P.O. Box 1535. Richmond, of NUREG-n612. (Control of l{eavy Basis forproposedno significant Virginia 23212. Loads at Nuclear Power Plants) and hazanis consideration determination: NRCBranch Chief: Edward 1. Butcher, Standard Review Plan Section 15-7.4. Tha Commission has Provided Acting. " Radiological Consequences of Fuct standards for determining whether a Yankee Atomic Electric Company llandling Accidents."The proposed Docket No. 50-29, Yankee Nuclear change for restricting movement of the a tated in to C 2(c)' p opos d e mendment to an operating license for a Power Station, Franklin County, cask hatch cover is consistent with hiassachusetts example (ii),in that it provides an ficilitferations if operation of the facility involves no significant hazards c:nsi Date of amendment requeste hf arch 28, additional restriction not presently m, the TS. in recordance with the proposed 1984, with additional information May 3, tmendment would not:(1) Involve a 1984, and supplemented May 7,1985. Therefore, the staff proposes to significant increase in the probability or Description of amendment request; determine that the requested actions conseuences of an accident previously The proposed Technical Specification would not involve a significant hazards cveluated; or (2) Create the possibility of (TS) change would revise the limitation consideration. e new or different kind of accident frcm on the minimum amount of time spent Loca/Public Document Rocm eny accident previously evaluated: or (3) fuel must be allowed to decay before the /ccation: Greenfield Community College. Involve a significant reduction in a spent fuel pit roof hatches, temporary 1 College Drive, Greenfield, mirgin of safety. gate and shiciding panels can be move. Massachusetts 01301. Based on the discussion above, the Current TS require spent fuel to decay at .4ttorneyforlicensee: Thomas Dirun. probability of occurrence or the least 90 days before these hatches' Esquire, Ropes and Gray,225 FranHin consequences of a malfunction of panels and gates are allowed to be Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02110. equipment important to safety moved. The proposed change would previously evaluated in the NA-142 permit movement of this equipment over NRC Branch Chief: John A.Zwolinsb.. Updated Final Safety Analysis Report the spent fuel pit with less radioactive PREVIOUSLY PUBt.lSilED NOTICES (UFSAR)is not increased. Also, the decay, and base the required amount of OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE possibility of a new or different kind of radioactive decay on the number and OF AMENDMENTS TO OPERATING accident from that which was previously location of newly discharged spent fuel LICENSES AND PROPOSED NO evaluated in the NA-182 UFSAR has assemblics. SIGNIFICANT llAZARDS not been created because the proposed The proposed TS change would als CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION change only modifies a surveillance restrict movement of the cask hatch AND OPPORTUNITY FOR llEARING hardware reuquirement without cover from traveling over spent fuel. reducing the capability of the hardware Basis forproposedno significant The following notices were presiously to perform its intended function. Finally, hazards consideration determination: published as separate individual the margin of safety as described in the The Commission has provided guidance notices. The notice content was the Bases section for any part of the NA-concerning the application of standards same as above. They were published as 1 A2 TS is not reduced since the for mak;ng a no significant hazards individual notices because time did not additional uncertainty values that are consideration determination by allow the Commission to wait for this bi-applied to the measured hot channel, providmg certam examples (April 6, weekly notice. They are repeated here peaking factors provide a result that is 1983. 48 FR 14870). Example (vi)is a because the bi-weekly notice lists all equivalent or conservative to flux map change which may either result in some amendments proposed to be issued analyses results obtained in accordance increase in the probability or with the current NA-1 A2 TS. tonsequences of a previously analyzed involvin8 no significant hazards consideration determination. Therefore, based on the above. the accident. or reduce in some way a safety proposed amendments will not result in margm, bat where the results of the For details. see the individual notice a significant increase in the probability rhange are clearly within all acceptable in the Federal Register on the day and or consequences of an accident enteria with respect to the system or p ige cited.This notice does net extend previously considered, will not create component specified in the Standard the notice period of the original nctice.

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No.157 / Wednesday August 14, 1985 / Notices 32805 Pacific Cas and Electric Company. Loca/ Pubhc Document Room Arkansas Power & Light Company. Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant. Location: California Polytechnic State Docket No. 50-313, Arkansas Nuclear Unit 1, San Luis Obispo California University Library, Documents and One, Unit No.1, Pope County, Arksenas Date of amendment requests: h1ay 14. h1aps Department San Luis Obispo Date of application for amendment: 1985. which encopasses requests dated California 93407. March 1,1985. january 30. April 12 and April 24.1985. NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF Briefdescription of amendment:The Brief description of amendment: The amendment would revise the Tecnmcal AMENDMENT TO FACILITY amendment revises the Technical Specifications to incorporate new and OPERATING LICENSE Specifications to reflect specific time intervals in terms of Effective Full ndditional Radio!ogical Effluent During the period since publication of Power days for Axial Power Shaping Technical Specifications. the last bl. weekly notice, the Rod insertion limits. Date ofpublication ofindividual Commission has issued the Iollowing Date ofissuance:luly 25,1985. votice m Federal Register: June 11,1985 amendments. The Commission has Effective date: July 25,1985. (50 FR 24603). determined for each of these Amendment No. 97. Expiration date ofindividual notice: amendments that the application Facility Operating License No. DPR-c mplies with the standards and

51. Amendment revised the Technical ocal u ic Document Room y i en s o 8h o n7tialnoticein Federal r q[g Location: California Polytechnic State d

e a i nis ersity Library, Documents and Maps Department. San Luis Obisps Commission a rules and regulations. The Register: April 23,1985 (50 FR 15998)' Cahfornia 93407. Commission has made appropriate The Commission's related evaluation findmgs as required by the Act and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Commission's rules and regulations in 10 Safety Evaluation dated Jul; 4,1985. Diablo Canyon Nucle Power Plant, CFR Chapter I. which are set forth in the No significant hazards consideration Unit 1. San Luis Obispo, California license amendment. c mments received:No. LocalPublic Document Room Date o,f amendment requests: May 14. Notice of Consideration ofissuance of 1% location:Tomlinson Library, Arkansas Amendment to Facility Operating Tech University Russellville. Arkansas Brief description of amendment: The L cense and Proposed No Significant - 72801' amendment would revise the Technical llazards Consideration Determination Specification on " Electrical Power Systems. Surveillance Requirements. and Opportunity for Hearing in Baltimore Gas & Electric Company. connection with these actions was Docket Nos.5N17 and 5M18 Calvert concerning surveillance test Cliffs Nuclear Power Pl ant, Unit Nos.1 M n c d a req s oa ea ng or e e e cy ie elgenerator. Date ofpublication ofindnidual petition for leave to intervene was filed Date ofopplication for amendments: notice in Federal Register: June 17,1985 following this notice. Afay 10,1985 as supplemented by letter (50FR25136). Unless otherwise indicated, the dated Afoy JL 1985. Evpiration date ofindividual not ce: Commission has determined that these Brief description of amendments: The i July 17,1985. amendments satisfy the criteria for amendments changed the Unit 1 and LocalPublic Document Room categorical exclusion in accordance Unit 2 Technical Specifications to reflect Location: California Polytechnic State with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant "II'* ate qua%cadons fode sE techm. cal advisor (STA) as described in University Library. Documents and to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental off,",'u .1 D partment. San Luis Obispo. impact statement or environmental p e ugust 1,1985. assessment need be prepared for these Effective date: August 1,1985. Pacific Gas and Electric Company, amendments. If the Comm.ssion has Amendment Nos. 106 and 87. Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, prepared an environmental assessment Pacility Ope. ating License Nos. DPR-Unit 1, San Luis Obispo, California under the special circumstances 5J andDPR49. Amendments revised Date of amendment requests: May 14. provision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and has the Technical Specifications. May 20 and May 30.1985. made a determination based on that Date ofinitia/ notice in Federal Bri f description of amendment:The assessment, if is so indicated. Register: June 19,1985 (50 25480 at e ,unendment would revise the Technical For further details with respect to the 25482)- Specifications to ehminate action see (1) the applications for The Commission's related evaluation typectaphical errors, pros ide additional omendments. (2) the amendments, and of the amendments is contained in a clarihcation, improve consistenry. (3) the Commission's related letters. Safety Evaluation dated August 1,1985 4 Jiust nomenclature. modify the Safety Evaluations and/or No significant hazards considerntion reporting requirements to bring them Environmental Assessments as comments received. No. leto conformance with the guidance in indicated. Allof these items nre Loco / Public Document Room G,ua ric Letter 83-43. bring portions of avoilable for public inspection at the location: Calvert County Library. Prince the spenfications into conformance Commission's Pul'1 c Document Room. Fre lerick. Maryland. n th current NRC staff positions. 1717 11 Street. N.W. Washington. D C.. Carolina Power & Light Company, incorporate Unit 2 informat:on where and at the local puYic documen' rooms Docket No. 50-325, Brunswick Steam appropnate, and make other nanor M Se particular facilities involved. A Electric Plant, Unit 1. Brunswick County, o/ pub // cation of indira/un! copy of Hems (2).and W may be North Carolina imn. c m Federal Register June la 1m uManW upon request addressed to the j;cte of application foramendmcnt-Do FR 3352) I' S Na:Irar Regulatory Cvrmisson. .\\ torch in.19M. Ihpiration date ofindis idrmt wvv Wanmyton. D C. 2C555 Attentiow y 3 f dwription of amendment:The luh 1H.1FR"L Wrrrtor. bviuon of im ensM amendment changes the Technical

32806 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No.157 / Wednesday, August 14, 1985 / Notices Specification Tables 3.3.3-1,3.3.3-2, and LocalPublic Document Room Brief description of amendments: The 4.5.5-1 to reflect modificatiors to the location: Southport, Brunswick County amendments incorporate into the Unit 2 Automatic Depressurization System by Library,109 W. Moore Street Southport, ficense authority to receive, possess. removing the high pressure trip from the North Carolina 28401. and store irradiated fuel assemblies logic sequence and adding a manual fr m the Oconee Nuclear Station under inhibit switch thus ehmmating the need Carolina Power & Light Company, the same conditions as authonzed by for manual actuation to ensure core Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324, the Unit 11icense. The Unit 11icense is Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 amended to reflect the granting of this coverage. Date ofissuance: July 30,1985. and 2. Brunswick County, North Carohna authority to Unit 2. Effective date: July 30,1985. Date ofissuance: July 26,1985. Amendment No.: 87., Date of application for amendment: Effective date: July 26,1985. Facility Opemting Lice 7se No. DRP-September 7,1985, as supplemented e n s. ad E 7L Amendment revised the Technical April 13,1984. May 7, and July 2,1985. Specifications. Briefdescription of amendment: The F cility Opewting License Nos. NPF-9 andNPF-17. Amendments revised the Date ofinitialnotice in the Federal amendments change the Technical licenses. Register: April 23,1985 (50 FR 16000). Specifications by rev; sing Section 3/ l The Commission's related evaluation 4.6.1 to revise the surveillance Date ofinitialnotice in Federal of tha amendment is contained in a requirements and the associated Register: May 22.1985 (50 FR 21152). i Safity Evaluation dated July 30,1985. footnote relative to the 31-day interval The Commission's related evaluation l No significant hazards consideration for primary containment integrity of the amendments is contained in a I comments received: No. demonstration. Safety Evaluation dated July 26,1985 l LocalPublic Document Room Date ofissuance: July 30,1985. and an Environmental Assessment location: Southport, Brunswick County Effective date: July 30,1985. dated June 18,1985 (50 FR 25804). Librrry, la3 W. Moore Street. Southport, Amendment No.:88 and 113. No significant hazards consideration North Carolina 28461. Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-comments received: No. Carolina Power & Light Company, 71 andDPR-62. Amendments revised LocalPublic Document Room Docket No. 50-325, Brunswick Steam the Technical Specifications. Location: Atkins Library, University of Electric Plant. Unit 1, Brunswick County, Date ofinitialnoticein Federal North Carolina, Charlotte (UNCC North Carolina Register: June 20,1984 (49 FR 25354). Station), North Carolina 28223. Date of application for amendment The May 7,1985 letter transmitted Florida Power Corporation, et al., April 26,1985, as supplemented July 2, Technical Specifications that delineated Docket No. 50-302. Crystal River Unit 1985. the areas which were secured in a No. 3 Nuclear Generating Plant, Citrus Briefdescription of amendment:The closed position.This was not new County, Florida - rm:ndment changes the Technical information but it had not previously Specifications to incorporate revised been explicitly identified in the Date of applicationforamendment minimum critical power ratio (MCPR) Technical Specifications. In addition, February 14,1785. as supplemented June V:luis, revised maximum average two administrative corrections were 19.1985. pl:nir linear heat generation rate made, one to make wording of the Briefdescription of amendment:The (MAPLHGR) values for the new footnote consistent with the BWR-4 amendment deletes from the TSs the BP8DRB299 fuel type, additional Standard Technical Specifications and surveillance requirements for reactor MAPLHGR values for fuel types one to correct an error in a Specification vessel irradiation speciments. as P8DRB285, P8DRB265H and P8DRB299, number referenced in TS 4.6.1.1.c. On suggested in NRC's letter to the Babcock and the deletion of references to the old July 2,1985, the licensee noted that the & Wilcox Owners Group dated May 8. 8 X 8 fuel type which has been removed RWCU room should more properly be 1985. Instead, the licensee has from the core.The amendment permits identified as the RWCU penetration committed to conform to the Integrated reloid and operation for Cycle 5. triangle room to avoid any confusion. Materials Vessel Surveillance Program Date ofissuance: July 30,1985. The information in the May 7, and July 2, (BAW 1543, Rev. 2) approved in that Effective date: July 30.1985. 1985 submittals was not considered to NRCletter. Any changes to that program Amendment No.:86. be a significant change in the content of would require NRC approval. Facility Operating License No. DPR-the amendmer t and therefore a Date ofissuance: July 29,1985.

71. Amendment revised the Technical supplemental notice was not issued..

Effective date: July 29,1385. Sp;cifications. The Commission's related evaluation Amendment No.:80* Date ofinitialnoticein Federal of the amendment is contained in a Register: June 19,1985 (50 FR 25482). Safety Evaluation dated July 30,1985. Facility Operatbg License No. DPR-72. The supplement dated July 2,1985 No significant hazards consideration Amendment revised the Technical corrects an editorial error of page 5-1 comments received: No. Specifications. thit omitted Sdction 5.1.3. Section 5.1.3 LocalPublic Document Room wIs inserted by Amendment No. 62 location: Southport. Brunswick County Date ofinitialnotice in Federal Register: June 28.1985 (50 FR 26420). dited December 27,1983 but Library 109 W. Moore Street. Southport, crroneously omitted from this North Carolina 28481. The Commission ls related evaluation d of the amendment is conta, ed m a m h sfs a ad ni trative change that Duke Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-Safety Evaluation dated July 29,1985. 309 and 50-370, McGuire Nuclear No significant hazards consideration his no significance for this amendment. Ths Commission's related evaluation Stati n. Units 1 and 2 Mecklenbur8 comments received: No. of tha amendment is contained in t. County, North Carolina Loco / Public Document Room Safzty Evaulation dated July 30,1985. Date of application for amendments: Location: Cryrtal River Public Library. No significant hazards consideration April 3,1985, as supplemented May 14 668 N.W. First Avenue, Crystal River. comments received: No. and June 12,1985. Florida.

Federal Register / Vol. So, No.157 / Wednesday, August 14, 1985-/ Notices 32807 Florida Power Corproation, et al., facility Operating License No. DPR-Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation. Docket No. 50-302, Crystal River Unit

50. Amendment revised the Technical Docket NO. 50-244. R. E. Ginna Nuclear No. 3 Nuclear Generating Plant, Citrus Specifications.

Power Plant, Wayne County, New York County, Florida Date ofinitialnotice in Federal Date of application foramendment: Date of applicationfor amendment: Register: April 23,1985 (50 FR 16005)- September 13,1982. May 1,1985, as supplemented June 14 The Commission's related evaluation Briefdescription ofamendment 'Ihe and 19,1985, and July 8.1985. of the amendment is contained in a amendment allows low power physics Brief description of amerdment: This safety Evaluation dated July 30,1985. testing prior to or during certain valve cmendment allows for: No significant hazards consideration testing. (1) Actuation testing of theliigh comments received: No. Date ofissuance: July 25,1985. Pressure Injection pumps and valves localPublicDocument Room Effective date: July 25,1985. (IIPI)in Mode 6 (Refueling): location: Government Publication Amendment No. 9 (2) Performance of IIPI Flow Balance Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, Facility Opemting License No. DPR-Test during Mode 3 (flot Standby). Education Building, Commonwealth and

18. Amendment revised the Technical (3) Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) Walnut Streets, liarrisburg, Specifications.

Load Test during Mode 3; and Pennsylvania 17126. Date ofinitialnoticein Federal (4) A one. time waiver of the 18-month Register: September 21,1983 (48 FR requirement for certain EDG Load Tests Indiana and Michigan Electric Company, 43143). until Mode 3 during startup for Cycle 6. Docket No. 50-316, Donald C. Cook The Commission's related evaluation Date ofissuance: July 23,1985. Nuclear Plant, Unit No.2, Berrien of the amendment is contained in a Effect/ve date: July 23,1985. County, Michigan. Safety Evaluation dated July 25,1985. Amendment No.:79. Date of applicationforamendments: No significant hazards consideration Facility Operating License No. DPR-June 2,197P supplemented by letters comments received: No.

72. Amendment revised the Technical dated July 21,1978, August 18,1978, LocalPublic Document Room Specifications.

October 5,1978, and September 22,1980. location: Rochester Public Library,115, Date ofinitialnotice in Fedetal Brief description of amendments: This South Avenue. Rochester, New York Register: lune 21,1985 (50 FR 25802). amendment for the Donald C. Cook 1461a Since the initial notice, the licensee Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2 removes Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation, supplemented the application by letters License Condition 4 of Amendment No. Docket No. 50-244. R. E. Ginna Nuclear dated June 19 and July 8.1985. The 6 issued June 16,1978, when required the Power Plant, Wayne County, New York submittal of June 19,1985, is simply j };gy clarification regarding the mode in 0"## #I### ##"#"I## ###" which the flPI flow balance test is to be t ansmitters u edin safe y-lated circuits inside containment and to August 1. m, performed, and does not affect the Briefdescription of amendment:The replace all Foxboro E13DM and E11GM initial no significant hazards amendment approves Technical detetmination or the substance of the transmitters in safety-related circuits Specification changes relating to amendment. The submittal of July 8, inside containment with qualified overpressure protection system 1985, deals with the effective date for a tr nstmtters. The initialletter from the operability, refueling water storage tank portion of the amendment and does not licensee is supplemented by letters volume, process-to-actuator response affect the substance of the amendment. dated July 21,1978, August 18,1978' time testing and service water pump Therefore, renoticing of the proposed October 5,1978, and September 22,198a power supply. amendment is not warranted.The The licensee has completed the Date ofissuance: July 30,1985. Commission's related evaluation of the Replacement of the Foxboro Effective date: July 30,1985. amendment is contained in a Safety transmitters as required, and has Amendment No.11. Evaluation dated July 23,1985. submitted thr. information to document Facility Operating License No. DPR-No significant hazards consideration the qualificatan of the Barton

18. Amendment revised the Technical comments received: No.

transmitters. Specifications. LocalPublic Document Room Date of :.is sance: July 22,1985. Date ofinitialnoticein Federal Location: Crystal River Public Library, Effective cate: July 22,1985. Register: November 22,1983 (49 FR 668 N.W. First Avenue Crystal River, Amendme~t No.:70. 52824). Florida. Facilities Operating License No. The Commission's related evaluation GPU Nuclear Corporation, et al., Docket DPR-74. Amendment deletes License of the amendment is contained in a No. 50-289, Three Mile Island Nuclear Condition 4 of Amendment No. 6 issued Safety Evaluation dated July 30,1985. Station, Unit No.1, Dauphin County, June 16,1978.' No sigmficant hazards consideration Pennsylvania ~ Date ofinitialnotice in Federal comments received: No. Date of application for amendment: Register: September 21,1983 (48 FR LocalPublic Document Room March 5.1985. 43138)' locadon: Rochester Public Library,115 South Avenue, Rochester, New York Brief description of umendment: This The Commission,s related evaluation 14610. amendment incoiperates into the of the amendment is contained in a Technical Specificatior.s the licensee's Safety Evaluation dated July 22,1985. Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation, commitments regarding the control of No significant hazards consideration Docket No. 54244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear heavy loads and specifically the comments received: None. Power Plant, Wayne County, New York pt,tential drop of a fuel cask. LocalPublic Document Room Date of applicantfor amendment: Date ofissuance: July 30,1985. location: Maude Reston Palenske January 18,1984. as supported by letters Effective date: July 30.1985. Memorial Library,500 Market Street St. dated July 31,1984,1984, September 7, Amendment No.109. Joseph. Michigan 49085. 1984. and July 30,1985.

i ~ 32808 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No.157 / Wednesday, August 14, 1985 / Notices Brief description of amendment:The Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Briefdescription ofamendments:The e mendment modifies the Technical Docket No. 50-312 Rancho Seco amendments incorporated limiting Specifications by removal of the Nuclear Generating Station, Sacramento conditions for operation (LCOs) for the restriction on the movement of spent County, California Reactor Coolant Vents system for Point fuel casks with the Auxiliary Building Date of applicationforamendment: Beach Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2. Crane. June 201984, as revised February 25. Date ofissuance: July 22,1985. Date ofIssuance July 30,1985. 1985. Effective date:20 days from the date Effective date: July 30.1985. Briefdescription of amendment:The ofissuance. Amendment No.10. amendment revises the Technical Amendment Nos.:93 and 97. Operating License No. DPR-18. Specifications to (1) change the cloeure Amendment revised the Technical times of several containment isolation Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-Specifications valves m 34-1 and (2) require that leak 24 and DPR-27. Amendments revised Date ofinitia/ notice in Federal rate testing of the equipment hatch and the Technical Specifications. fuel transfer tube seals after each Date ofinitialnoticein Federal Register: April 25,1984 (49 FR 17871). pening be performed prior to when Register: June 20,1964 (49 FR 25350 at The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a [p 5 1}' cati 3 6. Safety Evaluation dated December 31. Date ofIssuance: July 30,1985. Renoticed September 28,1984 (49 19M and a letter dated July 30,1985. Effective date: July 30,1985. 38390 at 38413). No significant hazards consideration Amendment No. 72. The Commission's related evaluation comments received: No. Facility Operating License No. DPR-of the amendments is contained in a LocalPub//c Document Room S4. Amendment revised the Techmcal Safety Evaluation dated July 22,1985. location: Rochester Public Library,115 Specifications. South Avenue. Rochester. New York Date ofinitialnoticein Federal No significant hazards consideration 14G10. Register: June 24,1985 (50 FR 23550). comments received: No. LocalPublic DocumentRoom Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation

• faf ty Eva d Jjv 30,1 15.

loc t on: J seph P. Mann Library,1518 d Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear ation Sixteenth Street, Two Rivers, Power Plant Wayne County, New York No significant hazards co'nsideration Wisconsin. Date of applicationforamendment comments received: No. September 14,1984, as superseded LocalPublic Document Room Wisconsin Electric Power Company, February 21,1985. location: Saramento City-County Docket Nos. 50-266 and 56-301, Point Brief description of amendment The Library,828I Street Sacramento, Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos.1 and 2, Cahform,a. amendment adds limiting conditions for Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc operation and surveillance requirements Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket County, Wisconsin to the Technical Specifications for Nos. 50-259,50-280 and 50-296, Browns various plant modifications required by Jerry Nuclear Plant, Units,1,2 and 3, Date of applicationfor amendments: TMI Action Plan Items covered by Limestone County, Alabama October 28,1984. Cneric Letter 83-37. These modifications are: (2) Reactor coolant system vents Date of applicationfor amendment: Brief description of amendments: The (11 B.1): (2) Noble Gas Effluent Monitors B\\'e f anvendment:The inservice inspection requirements under amendments modified steam generator es IILF.1.1); (3) Containment High-Range th h I Radiation Monitor (11 F.1.3); (4) {,'c ns o de$ete r quire ents Technical Specification 15.4.2.A. deleted at Contamment Pressure Monitor (Il F.1.4); associated with the condenser low a limiting condition for operation for the t (5) Containment Water Level Moni'or vacuum function. Auxiliary Feedwater System and (ll.F.1.5): (6) Containment Hydrogen Date ofissuance: July 8,1985. modified reporting requirements to be Monitor (II F.1.6): (7) Instrumentation for Effective date: Within 90 days of the consistent with to CFR 50.73. I DPection of Inadequate Core Cooling date of issuance. Date ofissuance July 28,1985. (ll.F.2h and (8) Control Room Amendment Nos.:118,113 and 89. Effective date:20 days from the date liabitability Requirements (IILD.3.4). Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-of issuance. Dcte ofIssuance: July 30.1985. 33 DPR-52andDPR-68. Amendments Amendment Nos.:95 and 99. Effective date: July 30,1985. revised to Technical, Specifications. Facility Opemting License Nos. DPR-Amwd:::ent No. 9 Date ofinitialnotice m Federal 24 an P 7 dments revised Facihtr Operating License No. DPR-Register: February 27,1985 (50 FR 8008).

18. Amendment rev; sed the Technical The Commission a related evaluation P

S ecifications f the amendment is contained in a Date ofinitialnotice m Federal Date c / init.c/ notice m Federal 8",fety Evalualtion dated July 8.1985. Register: February 27.1985 (50 FR 7979 significant hazards consideration at 8011). I exister May 21,1984 (59 FR 209871 c mments received: No. The Commission's related evaluation The Commission's reh ted evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Wisconsin Electric Power Company, of the amendments is contamed in a l Safety Evaluation dated July 30.1985. Docket Nos. 50-266 and 50-301 Point Safety Evaluation dated July 26,1985. No significant hazards consideration Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos.1 and 2, No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc comments received: No. Iocal Public Document Room County Wisconsin localPublic Document Room lar orion: Rochester Pubhc Librury,115 Date of application for amend::wnt: lo:stion:loseph P. Mann Library.1516 l South Avenue, Rochester. New York Ftbruary 29.19M as modified June 7 Six teen:h Sn ect. Two Rivers. l unt e. 1 %4. Wiwnnsia L

Federal Register / Vol. 50 No.157 / Wednesday, August 14. 1985 / Notices 32809 Wisconsin Electric Power Company, NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant Docket Nos. 50-266 and 56-301. Point AMENDMENT TO FACILITY to 10 CFR 51.22(b). no environmental Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos.1 and 2. OPERATING LICENSE AND FINAL impac' statement or environmental Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc DETERMINATION OF NO assessment need be prepared for these County, Wisconsin SIGNIFICANT IIAZARDS amendments. If the Commission has CONSIDERATION AND prepared an environmental assessment Date of application for amendments: OPPORTUNITY FOR IIEARING under the special circumstances jant.ary 30,1985. (EXIGENT OR EMERGENCY provision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and has Brief description of amendments: The CIRCUMSTANCES) made a determination based on that aroendments changed the During the period since publication of assessment,it is so indicated. underfrequency trip setpoint for reactor the last bi-weekly notice, the For further details with respect to the coolant pumps, changed the related Commission has issued the following action see (1) the application for basis and corrected a typographical . amendments. The Commission has amendment,(2) the amendment to error concerning reference to to another determined for each of these Facility Operating License, and (3) the section in the Technical Specifications. amendments that the application for the ]ommission's related letter, Safety Date ofissuance: July 22,1985. amendment complies with the standards

r. valuation and/or Environmental Effectne date:20 days from the date and requirerrents of the Atomic Energy Assessment, and indicated. All of these

Hssuance, Act of 1954. as amended (the Act), and items are available for public inspection the Commission's rules and regulations.

at the Commission's Public Document Amendment Nos.194 and 98. The Commission has made appropriate Room.171711 Street, NW., Washington. Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-findings as required by the Act and the D.C., and at the local public document 24 andDPR-27. Amendments revised Commission's rules and regulations in to room for the particular facility involved. the Technical Specifications. CFR Chapter L which are set forth in the A copy ofitems (2) and (3) may be Date ofinitiolnotice in Federal license amendment, obtained upon request addressed to the Register March 27.1985 (50 FR 12132 at Because of exigent or emergency U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 12167). circumstances associated with the date Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention: The Commission's related evaluation the amendment was needed, there was Director, Division of Licensing. of the amendments is contained in a n t time f r the Commission to publish. The Commission is also offering an Safety Evaluation dated July 22,1985. for public comment before issuance, its opportunity for a hearing with respect to usual 30-day Notice of Consideration of the issuance of the amendments. By No signif.icant hazards consideration Issuance of Amendment and Proposed September 13,1985, the licensee may file comments received: No. No Significant Hazards Consideration a request for a hearing with respect to LocalPublic Document Room Determination and Opportunity for issuance of the amendment to the location: Joseph P. Mann Library,1516 IIearing. For exigent circumstances. a subject facility operating license and Sixteenth Street. Two Rivers. press release seeking public comment as any person whose interest may be Wisconsin. to the proposed no significant hazards affected by this proceeding and who consideration determination was used, wishes to participate as a party in the Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, and the State was consulted by proceeding must file a written petition Docket No. 50-305, Kewaunee Nuclear telephone. In circumstances where for leave to intervene. Requests for a Power Plant, Kewaunee County, failure to act in a timely way would hearing and petitions for leave to Wisconsin have resulted, for example, in deratisg intervene shall be filed in accordance or shutdown of a nuclear power p'. ant, a with the Commission's " Rules of Date of application of amendment: shorter public comment period (less Practice for Dometic Licensing March 29,1985. than 30 days) has been offered and the Proceedings"in 10 CFR Part 2. If a Briefdescription of amendment: State consulted by telephene whenever request for a hearing or petition for Amendment provides Radiological possible. leave to intervene is filed by the above Effluent Technical Specifications for the Under its regulations, the Commission date, the Commission or an Atomic Kewaunee Plant. may issue and make an amendment Safety and Licensing Board. designated Date ofissuance: July 29,1985. immediately effective, notwithvanding by the Commission or by the Chairman Effective date: Upon issuance. to be the pendency before it of a request for a of the Atomic Safety and Licensing hearing from any person, m advance of Board Panel, will rule on the request implemented by January 1.1985. the holding and completion of any and/or petition and the Secretary or the Amendment No. 64. required hearing, where it has designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Facility Operating License No. DPR-determined that no significnt hazards Board willissue a notice of hearing or 43: Amendment revised the Technical consideration is involved. an appropriate order. Specifications. The Commission has applied the As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a Date o/initialnotice in Federal standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has made petition for leave to intervene shall set Register: june 4.1985 (50 FR 23558). a final determination that the forth with particularity the interest of The Commission's related evaluation amendment involves no significant the petitioner in the proceeding and how of the amendment is contained in a hazards consideration. The basis for this that interest may be affected by the determination is contained in the results of the proceeding.The petition Safety Evaluation dated July 29,1985, documents related to this action. should specifically explam the reasons N.o significant hazaids consideration Accordmgly, the amendments have been why intervention should be permitted comments received: No. issued and made effective as indicated. with particular reference to the loca/ Public Document Room Unless otherwise indicated. the following factors: (1) The nature of the location: University of Wisconsin. Commission has determined that these petitioner's right under the Act to be 1.ibrary Learning Center. 2420 Nicolet amendments satisfy the criteria for made a party to the proceeding;(2) the Drive. Green Day. Wisconsin 54301. categorical exclusion in accordance nature and extent of the petitioner's

32810 Federal Register / Vol. 50 No.157 / Wednesday. August 14, 1985 / Notices property, financial, or other interest in petition was mailed; plant name; and Technical specifications, Emergency th> proceeding; and (3) the possible publication date and page number of Core Cooling System Actuation 6ffect of any order which may be this Federal Register notice. A copy of Instrumentation. Tables 3.3.3-1,3.3.3-2 ent; red in the proceeding on the the petition should also be sent to the and 4.3.3.1-1 to permit replacemet of 'he petitioner's interest. The petition should Executive Legal Director, U.S. Nuclear liigh Pressure Coolant System pump elso identify the specific aspect (s) of the Regulatory Commission, Washington, discharge pressure signal with a " pump subject matter of the proceedings as to D.C. 20555, and to the attorney for the running" signal taken directly from the which petitioner wishes to intervene. licensee. pump breaker. Any person who has filed a petition for Nontimely filings of petitions for leave Date ofissuance: June 25,1985. leave to intervene or who has been to intervene. amended petitions, Effective date: June 25,1985. admitted as a party may amend the supplemental petitions and/or requests Amendment No.:13. p:tition without requesting leave of the for hearing will not be entertained Facilities Operating License No. NPF-Boird up to fifteen (15) days prior to the absent a determination by the 21: Amendment revised the Technical first prehearing conference scheduled in Commission, the presiding officer or the Specifications. the proceeding, but such an amended Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Public comments requested as to petition must satisfy the specificity designated to rule on the petition and/or proposed no significant hazards rIquirements described above. request, that the petitioner has made a consideration: No Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to substantial showing of good cause for The Commission's related evaluation the first prehearing conference the granting of a late petition and/or scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner request.That determination will be is contianed in a Safety Evaluation shril file a supplement to the petition to based upon a balancing of the factors dated June 25,1985. inttrvene which must include a list of specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and A ttorney for licensee: Bishop, Cook, tha contentions which are sought to be 2.714(d)' Liberman, Purcell and Reynolds,1200 Seventeenth Street NW., Washington, litigated in the matter, and the bases for each contention set forth with Consolidated Edison Company of New D.C. 20036. reasonable specificity. Contentions shall York, Docket No. 50-247, Indian Point LocalPublic Document Room be limited to matters within the scope of Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2, location:Richland Public Library Swift the amendment under consideration. A Westchester County, New York and Northgate Streets Richland. petitioner who fails to file such a ' Date of applicationfor amendment: Washingtcn 99352. supplememt which satisfies these February 28,1985, as supplemented July Washington Public Power Supply requirements with respect to at least one 5,1985. System, Docket No. 58-397, WNP-2, contention will not be permitted to Briefdescription of amendment:The Richland, Washington participate as a party. amendment revises the Technical 'Those permitted to intervene become Specifications to reflect revised pressure Date of amendment request: March 13, parties to the proceeding, subject to any temperatures limitations for reactor 1985. limitations in the order granting leave to coolant system heat up, cooldown and Briefdescription of amendment intervene, and have the opportunity to hydrostatic test through fifteen effective request:This amendment revises the participate fully in the conduct of the full power years. WNP-2 license by modifying the hearing, including the opportunity to Date ofissuance: July 22,1985. Technical Specifications Isolatin present evidence and cross-examine Effective dote: July 22,1985. Actuation Instrumentation. Tables 3.3.2-witnesses. Amendment No.:90. 1,3.3.2-2,3.3.2-3 and 4.3.2.1-1 to change Since the Commission has made a Focilities Operating License No. DPR-some of theIsolation Actuation final determination that the amendment 26: Amendment revised the Technical. Instrumentation, their trip setpoints and involves no significant hazards Specifications. their allowable values. These changes cnnsideration,if a hearing is rcquested, Public comments requested as to are made to reflect more realistic values it will not stay the effectiveness of the proposed no significant hazards as determined by actual plant operation amendment. Any hearing held would consideration: Yes. April 23, %85 (50 FR and as required by the Technical take place while the amendment is in 16002) and reissued July 10.1985 (50 FR Specifications themselves. In addition cIfect. 28131). this amendment will change the delta A request for a hearing or a petition Comments received: No. temperature-high signal to a for leave to intervene must be filed with The Commission's related evaluation temptrature-high signal for isolation the Secretary cf the Commission. U.S. is contianed in a Safety Evaluation actuation from the Residuallleat Nuclear Regulatory Commission, dated July 22,1985. Removal (RIIR) heat excharge area and Washington, D C. 20555 Attention: Attorneyforlicensee: Drent L correct an inconsistency in the quality Dod cting and Service Branch, or may Brandenburg, Esq.,4 Irving Place New assurance record retention ha delivered to the Comn'ission's Public York, New York 10003. requirements. Document Room.17171E Street. N.W.. LocoIPublic Document Raom Date ofissuance: lune 25,1965. Washing!cn, D.C.. by tne above date. location: White Plains Public Library' Effective date: June 25,1985. Where petdions aie filed during the last 100 Martine Avenue, White Plains. New Amendment No.:12. ten (19) days of the notice period, it is York 10610. re ;uested that the petitioner pmmptly a Facilities Operating License No. NFP-Washington Public Power Supply 21: Amendment revised the Technical t e oneca1 o V tern I nio at 800) System, Docket No. 50-397, WNP-2. Specifications. 325-6000 (in Missouri (800) 342-67t))). Richland. Washington Public comments requested as to The Western Union operator should be Date of amendment request: Februcy proposed no significant hazards given Datagram Identification Number 27.1985. consideration: No. r37 and the following message Brief description of amendme.d The Commission's related evaluation eddressed to (Br:mch Chief): petitioner's irq:wSt:Thu amer.dr ert rev%d the h cont;aned in a Safety Evaluation narre and tebph me numben date WNP-2 lissase by mcdtising the datei jone 25.1985.

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No.157 / Wednesday, August 14, 1985 / Notices 3311 A ttorney for licensee: Bishop, Cook, The Commission's related evaluation Liberman, Purcell and Reynolds,1200 is contained in a Safety Evaluation Seventeenth Street, NW., Washington, dated June 25,1985. D.C. 20036. Attorneyfor the licensee: Dishop, LocalPublic Document Room Cook, Liberman, Purcell & Reynolds location: Richland Public Libray, Swift 1200 Seventeenth Street NW, and Northgate Streets, Richland Washington, D.C. 20036. Washington 99352. LocalPublic Document Room Location: Richland Public Library, Swift Washington Public Power Supply and Northgate Streets, Richland, System, Docket No. 504397. WNP-2, Washington 99352. Richland, Washington Dated at Bethesda. Maryland this 8th day Date of amendment request: May 16, of August 1985. 1985. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Briefdescription of amendment Dominic C. Di lanni. request:This amendment revises the ,,,j,, gyj,y, op,,,,,,, g,,,,,,, g,,,,3 g,_ WNP-2 license by modifying the 3, gjyj,j,,,fgj,,,, jog, Technical Specifications. Emergency IFR Doc. 85-19328 Filed 8-1M5: 8 45 am] Core Coding System Actuation Instrumentation. Table 3.3.3-1,3.3.2-2 and 4.3.3.1-1 to remove the Automatic Depressurization System's (ADS) high drywell pressure instrumentation and add inhibit switches to the ADS logic. Date ofissuance: June 25,1985. Effective date: June 25,1985 Amendment No.11. Facility Operating License No. NPF-21 Amendment revised the Technical Specifications. Public comments requested as to proposed no significant hazards consideration: No. The Commission's related evaluation is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 25,1985. A ttorney for Licensee: Bishop, Cook, Liberman, Purcell & Reynolds 1200 Seventeenth Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20036. LocalPublic Document Room Location: Richland Public Library, Swift and Northgate Streets. Richland, Washington 99352. Washington Public Power Supply System Docket No. 50-397, WNP-2, Richland, Washington Date of amendment request: June 18, 1985. Briefdescription of amendmcnt request:This amendment revises the WNP-2 license by modifying the Technical Specifications to change several of the Primary Containment Penetration Conductor Overcurrent Protective Fuses to provide consistency with fuses actually installed for overcurrent protection as a result of previous design changes. Date ofissuance lune 25.1985. Effective date: June 25,1985. Amendment No.14. Facility Opemting License No. NPF-2t Amendment revised the Technical Specifications. INblic comments requested as to proposed no significant hazards consideration: No. .}}