ML20153E052
| ML20153E052 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 02/14/1986 |
| From: | Reinaldo Rodriguez SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| To: | Miraglia F Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20153E055 | List: |
| References | |
| RJR-86-40, TAC-61490, NUDOCS 8602240354 | |
| Download: ML20153E052 (5) | |
Text
%.
esuu.
~
SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT :^ 6201 S Street, P.o. Box 15830, sacramento CA 95852-1830,(916)452-3211 AN ELECTRIC SYSTEM SERVING THE HEART OF CALIFORNIA RJR 86-40 February 14, 1986 DIRECTOR OF NUCLtAR REACTOR REGULATION ATTENTION FRANK J MIRAGLIA JR CIRECTOR PWR-B DIVISION U S NUCLEAR 75GULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON D C 20555 DOCKET N0. 50-312 LICENSE NO. DPR-54 PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO. 144 In accordance with 10 CFR 50.59, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District proposes to amend its Operating License DPR-54 for Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station Unit No. 1.
Proposed Amendment No. 144 is an administrati've change consisting of the correction of a misleading word in Section 6.17.2 of the Rancho Seco Tech-nical Specifications.
Attachments I, II and III to this submittal consists of the Safety Analysis, "No Significant Hazards" Evaluation and Description of Proposed Changes, respectively.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(b)(1), the Radiological Health Branch of the California State Department of Health Services has been informed of this Proposed Amendment by mailed copy of this st.bmittal.
Enclosed is a check in the amount of $150.00 as required by 10 CFR 170.21,
" Schedule of Fees."
Should you require any further information with respect to this Proposed Amendment, please contact Mr. Ron W. Colombo at Rancho Seco Nuclear Genera-ti ta i Unit No. 1.
/* /a * ',
R. J. R0D GUEZ l gdl '/M* d gM ASSISTANT GENERA
- TANAGER, p/
' /
,, f, yc[/p1 f/$A NUCLEAR l
gjepl$
Attachments (4)
Subscribed and sworn to before me this / # CA-day ofe8 %, 1986.
K 2
Notary Public RANCHO SECO NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION O 14440 Twin Cities Road, Herald, CA 95638-9799;(209) 333-2935
i TOP SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT 6201 S Street, P.o. Bcx 15830 S4Cramento. CA 95813 (916)452 3211
- ADJUSTMENT CODES:
7,..gn t 4 crad.t Memo 2 - s.i.s T.
s a.t nt'Sa 3. o.o.t M.mo e - otn.r 8880267-201 1C49LS INVOICE A DJUSTM ENTS BNVOf C E NO.
DATE GROSS AMOUNT DISCOUN T F2991 01/21/86 150.00 0.00 0.00 150.00 e
NET Am,na A. \\44 i
sov. esto eten DETACM SEFORE DEPOSITING CNECK
- 153.00 r
(
SMUD SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT 104915
'A"""'""*"'C" 6201 S Street,P.o. Box 15830, Sacramento CA 95813
" ' " ' " " ' " ' ' " * * " * " * ' ^
1210/0035 F
REFERENCENO.
'F DATE 8880267-201 01/23/86, PAY EXACTLY
$ *******150.00) a=8 U S NUCLEAR REGULATCRY CONM.
ISBURSING ACCOUNT i
ATTN: ' WILLIAM 0 FILLER CHEIF LICEf1SE FEE MANAGEMENT BRANCH OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION
/
WASHINGTON DC 205 Zb M
VOIO 4 MON THS AF TE R D A TE OF i SUE n' 101. 9 L S a' i: 1210003588: O & t.8 t,a'80 L GOn' line on back of guice to center line on occumeitt guiue u s nie avv.
3.
Close cover and make copies.
p
. ATTACl#ENT I SAFETY ANALYSIS Proposed Amendment No. 144 consists _of wording thanges in Ssction 6.17.2 ~
of the Technical Specifications.. Presently, the introductory paragraph.to Section 6.17.2 states:
" Major changes to the radioactive waste systems-
- (liquid, gaseous, and solid) shall-be made by either of.the following
-methods:" The use of the plural " methods" is misleading since there is'only a single method used in major changes to the radwaste systems.
In this l
Proposed Amendment, the words are changed to:
---by the following method."-
This correction.of an otherwise misleading phrase is judged to.have no~.in-volvement with plant safety or safety to the public.
?
I t
l I,
l l
~T ATTAC K NT II "N0 SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS" EVALUATION Proposed Amendment No. 144 to the Rancho Seco Technical Specifications has been evaluated, and the District has determined that-there are "No Signi--
ficant Hazards Considerations." -The basis for this aetermination is the Connission's guidance concerning the' application of the standards of 10 CFR 50.92 provided in 48 FR 14870 which gives examples of amendments that are judged.not likely to involve significant hazards' considerations.
Included in these examples is Item (i) which states:
"A purely administra-tive change to technical specifications:
for example, a change to achieve consistency throughout the technical specifications, correction of an error, or a change in nomenclature."
~
l Proposed Amendment No. 144 involves the changing of the words "---by either of the following methods" in Specification 6.17 2 to the singular form since t.here is only one method used when major changes are being made to the rad-waste system. The word changes are considered a correction _of an error, and thus judged as not involving a significant safety hazard.
f!,h.,.,:.;
s
+.
ATTAQ9ENT. III -
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED' CHANGES
-1.
~Section 6.17.2, page 6-19; The phrase "by either of the'following methods,"
second line, is changed to by the following method."
_