ML20195C645
| ML20195C645 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 11/10/1998 |
| From: | Roche M GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20195C648 | List: |
| References | |
| 1940-98-20560, NUDOCS 9811170188 | |
| Download: ML20195C645 (12) | |
Text
_ -. - . . .. .
l
{ GPU Nuclear,inc.
( U.S. Route #9 South NUCLEAR Pot 0 e Bo 388 9,
,,, , , 9m Tel 609-9714000 November 10,1998 1940-98-20560 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen:
Subject:
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Docket No. 50-219 Technical Specificatior. Change Request No. 264 Change to Control of Property Within Exclusion Boundary In accordance with 10 CFR 50.4(b)(1), enclosed is Oyster Creek Technical Specification Change Request (TSCR) No. 264. The purpose of this technical specification change is to remove the restriction on sale or lease of property within the " exclusion area" and replace the restriction with a requirement to retain complete authority to determine and maintain sufficient control of all
~
activities including the authority to exclude or remove personnel and property within the minimum exclusion distance. This action requires a change to Technical Specification 5.1.A (TS 5.1.A). A Technical Specification Bases page for the proposed change is also included.
Also included are Clarification and Administrative changes which (1) clarify TS Definition 1.38 to become " Site Boundary" from the current term " Exclusion Area" to be consistent with the 10 CFR 20.1003 def'mition for " Site Boundary" and the 10 CFR 100.3 definition for " Exclusion Area", (2) convert the one occurrence of the use of TS Definition 1.38 from " Exclusion Area" to
" Site Boundary" in TS 6.8.4(a)(9) and (3) revise and update the Table of Contents for "Section I -
Definitions". The 10 CFR 100.3 definition for " Exclusion Area" is part of the proposed new TS Basis page for TS 5.1.A.
981117018e 981110 PDR ADOCK 05000219-
~
Cf I P pop- .
3 { ;, . ,
s
4 1940-98-20560
. . Page 2 Using the standards in 10 CFR 50.92, GPU Nuclear, Inc. has concluded that the proposed changes do not constitute a significant hazards consideration, as described in the enclosed analysis performed in accordance with 10 CFR 50.91(a)(1).
Also enclosed is a Certificate of Service for this request, certifying service to the chief executives l of the township and county in which the facility is located, as well as the designated official of I the state of New Jersey, Bureau of Nuclear Engineering.
If you have any questions or comments on this matter, please contact Ron Zak, Corporate Regulatory Affaits at (973) 316-7035.
Sincerely, b
Michael B. Roche Vice President and Director Oyster Creek l
l Enclosure cc: NRC Administrator, Region I NRC Project Manager NRC Senior Resident Inspector l
L i'
i
I l
I
{ GPU Nuclear. Inc
(. U.S. Route #9 South post att c. Boa 388 NUCLEAR Forked River, NJ 08731-0388 ;
Tel 609 9714000 November 10, 1998 !
1940-98-20560 l I
. Mr. Kent Tosch, Director Bureau of Nuclear Engineering Department of Environmental Protection
- CN 415 Trenton, NJ 08628
Dear Mr. Tosch:
l
Subject:
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station -
Operating License No DPR-16 Technical Speciucation Change Request No. 264 Enclosed is one copy of Technical Speci6 cation Change Request No. 264 for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Operating License.
This document was filed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on November 10, 1998. :
Very truly yours,
)' h Michael B. Roche Vice President and Director Oyster Creek Enclosure q
f.
L
. . . . = . . . . . . . . . . . .
l
{ GPU Nuclear, Inc.
(' U.S. floute a9 South NUCLEAR P U'e so. 388 Forked Ibver, NJ 08731-0 :88 Tel 609 9714000 November 10, 1998 1940-98-20560 The lionorable Louis A. Amato Mayor of Lacey Township 818 West Lacey Road Foiked River, NJ 08731
Dear Mayor:
Subject:
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Operating License No. DPR-16 Technical Specification Change Request No. 264 Enclosed is one copy of Technical Specification Change Request No. 264 for the Oyster Creek
- Nuclear Generating Station Operating License.
This document was filed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on November 10, 1998.
Very truly yours, Michael B. Roche Vice President and Director Oyster Creek Enclosure
- l. .
1' e
OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION l
)
' ' I OPERATING LICENSE !
NO. DPR-16 l l
l TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST NO. 264 I DOCKET NO. 50-219 l i
i l
1 Applicant submits by this Technical Specification Change Request No. 264 to the Oyster Creek . )
Nuclear Generating Station Technical Specifications, modified pages i, 1.0-7,5.1-1 and 6-12. l Also included is a new Technical Specification Bases page 5.1-2. 1 l
By:
b l Michael B. Roche
^ '
Vice President and Director ,
l Oyster Creek ,, , ~ . I Sworn to and Subscribed before me this /0 (4 . day of M , / 9 ?? I I
{h Geraldine E. Levin l A Notary Public ofNew Jersey l
. . - = .-. - _- .-.- .-.- .
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j i
j IN THE MATTER OF )
DOCKET NO. 50-219 GPU N'UCLEAR, INC. ) j l
l l
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE i
This is to certify that a copy of Technical Specification Change Request No. 264 for the Oyster Creek 1
, Nuclear Generating Station Technical Specifications, filed with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory l Commission on November 10. 194R . has this day of November 10. 1999 ,
been served on the Mayor of Lacey Township, Ocean County, New Jersey by deposit in the U.S. mail, addressed as follows: i i
l The Honorable Louis A. Amato l Mayor ofLacey Township l 818 West Lacey Road l Forked River, NJ 08731 -
, I 1
By:
b Michael B. Roche ]
Vice President & Director i Oyster Creek i
r' 1
t l
4 I. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST (TSCR) NO. 264 GPU Nuclear, Inc. requests that the following four (4) replacement pages and one (1) new ;
page be inserted into the existing Technical Specifications -
i Replace existing pages i, 1.0-7,5.1-1 and 6-12 with the attached revised replacement pages i, 1.0-7, 5.1-1 and 6-12. l Add new attached Technical Specification Bases page 5.1-2. !
1 l
II. REASON FOR CHANGE !
The reason for this technical specification change is to remove the restriction on sale or )
lease of property within the " exclusion area" and replace the restriction with a requirement for the licensee to retain complete authority to determine and maintain suflicient control of i
. all activities including the authority to exclude or remove personnel and property within i the minimum exclusion distance. This action requires a change to Technical Specification j 5.1. A (TS 5.1.A). A Technical Specification Bases page for the proposed change is also included.
In addition, Clarification and Administrative changes are being made which (1) clarify TS Definition 1.38 to become " Site Boundary" from the current term " Exclusion Area" to be consistent with the 10 CFR 20.1003 definition for " Site Boundary" and the 10 CFR 100.3 definition for " Exclusion Area", (2) convert the one occurrence of the use of TS Definition 1.38 from " Exclusion Area" to " Site Boundary" in TS 6.8.4(a)(9) and (3) revise and update and the Table of Contents for "Section I - Definitions". The 10 CFR 100.3 definition for " Exclusion Area" is part of the proposed new TS Basis page for TS 5.1. A.
Oyster Creek TS 5.1. A currently states:
"1 icactor (center line) is located 1,358 feet west of the east boundary of New Jersey State Highway Route 9 which is the minimum exclusion distance as defined in 10 CFR 100.3. No part of the property which is closer to the reactor (center line) than 1,358 feet shall be sold or leased."
l- TSCR 264 proposes to change TS 5.1.A to read as follows:
"The reactor (center line) is located 1,358 feet west of the east boundary of New Jersey State Highway Route 9 which is the minimum exclusion distance as defined l in 10 CFR 100.3. The licensee will at all times retain the complete authority to determine and maintain sufficient control of all activities through ownership, easement, contract amVor other legalinstruments on property which is closer to the reactor (center line) than 1,358 feet. This includes the authority to exclude or removepersonnelandpropero within the minimum esclusion distance."
l
. l l
111. SAFETY EVALUATION JUSTIFYING CHANGE The safety function for the exclusion area consists of(l) maintaining 10 CFR Part 100 radiological limits for the exclusion area, including evacuation when necessary, and (2) ensuring any activities, now or in the future, in the exclusion area do not negatively affect i nuclear safety, safe plant operations or violate current plant design or licensing basis. l TSCR 264 does not change the size or location of the exclusion area but rather only removes the restriction on sale or lease of property in the exclusion area. Since the exclusion area size and location are not being changed and no physical or procedural changes are being made to the plant, radiological consequences in the exclusion area are not affected by this TSCR. To ensure compliance with 10 CFR Part 100 limits under evacuation scenarios and in order to maintain sufficient control of all current and future activities in the exclusion area, including potential radiation exposures to persons within the exclusion area, the licensee would either maintain ownership or, for propeny released from licensee ownership, include, as part cf any property agreement, requirements which retain the complete authority to determine and naintain sufficient licensee control through easement, contract and/or other legal instruments. This would include the authority to exclude or remove personnel and propeny within the minimum exclusion distance.
The following is a sample of contract provisions typical of those to be incorporated into any future property agreement in the exclusion area.
" Purchaser shall grant GPU Nuclear, Inc., as operator of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Oyster Creek), and its successors and assigns in such capacity, an easement over all portions of the property within the Oyster Creek Exclusion Area. The deed by which Seller conveys the . .(property description). . to Purchaser shall contain the terms of the easement, as follows:
The operator (hereinafter referred to as the " Licensee") of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (Oyster Creek) shall have the right and authority to determine all activities within the Oyster Creek Exclusion Area, as defined in the facility operating license issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for Oyster Creek and depicted in the attached plat. Where reasonably necessary or desirable to protect the public health or safety, the Licensee shall have the authority to exclude or remove any or all persons or property from the Exclusion Area. All persons, property, or activities conducted in the Exclusion Area shall be subject to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (as amended), NRC regulations and orders, and all relevant conditions of the NRC facility operating license for Oyster Creek.
The Landowner shall notify the Licensee in advance of 1) any activity that will be undertaken within the Exclusion Area, and 2) the entry upon the land within the Exclusion Area by the Landowner or his agents or employees. No residences or permanent buildings (besides those already present) shall be constructed within
the Exclusion Area. Temporary structures or facilities may be constructed only to
.. . the extent necessary to . .(description). Plans and specifications for such temporary structures shall be submitted to the Licensee for review and approval before any structures are built. The Landowner shall own the mineral rights to the relevant land within the Exclusion Area, but mineral exploration and mining '
activities within the Exclusion Area shall be prohibited."
By incorporating such contract provisions, the licensee retains suflicient control of all activities in the exclusion area including the authority to exclude or remove personnel and property, thereby (1) maintaining compliance with 10 CFR Part 100 radiological limits for the exclusion area, including evacuation when necessary, and (2) ensuring that any l activities, now or in the future, in the exclusion area would not negatively affect nuclear !
safety, safe plat operations or violate current plant design or licensing bases. !
Any future (post-TSCR 264 approval) property transactions in the " exclusion area", as is l the case for any activity which has the potential to adversely affect nuclear safety or safe plant operations, will require evaluation under a separate and specific safety evaluation and 50.59 review.
The changes which (1) clarify TS Definition 1.38 to become " Site Boundary" from the current term " Exclusion Area" to be consistent with the 10 CFR 20.1003 definition for
" Site Boundary" and the 10 CFR 100.3 definition for " Exclusion Area", (2) convert the one occurrence of the use of TS Definition 1.38 from " Exclusion Area" to " Site Boundary" in TS 6.8.4(a)(9) and (3) revise and update and the Table of Contents for "Section I - Definitions" are Clarification and Administrative changes being made to enhance clarity and update the Table of Contents. As such, they have no efTect on safety.
IV. NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION GPU Nuclear has determined that this TSCR poses no significant hazard as defined by 10 CFR 50.92.
l
- 1. Would operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed change involve a i significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
! The proposed change is administrative in nature and does not affect the
' purpose, function, performance, operability or testing of and does not make any physical or procedural changes to plant systems, structures or components. Also, all existing technical specification limiting conditions for operation and surveillance requirements are retained.
TSCR 264 does not change the size or location of the exclusion area.
Since the exclusion area size and location are not being changed and no physical or procedural changes are being made to the plant, radiological consequences in the exclusion area are not afTected by this TSCR.
This change addresses the existing technical specification restriction on the
. . sale or lease of property within the " exclusion area" by ensuring that the licensee will retain at all times the complete authority to determine and l
maintain sufficient control of all activities through ownership, easement, contract and/or other legal instruments on property within the minimum exclusion distance including the authority to exclude or remove personnel .
and property within the minimum exclusion distance.
1 Therefore, since no physical or procedural changes are being made to q
existing plant systems, structures or components and since the proposed <
change requires the licensee to retain complete authority and suflicicnt ,
control of all activities in the exclusion area, operation of the facility in ,
accordance with the proposed amendment would not involve a significant l increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously !
evaluated, i
- 2. Would operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
l The proposed change is administrative in nature and does not affect the purpose, function, performance, operability or testing of and does not make any physical or procedural changes to plant systems, structures or
!- components. Also, all existing technical specification limiting conditions for operation and surveillance requirements are retained.
1 This change addresses the existing technical specification restriction on the sale or lease of property within the " exclusion area" by ensuring that the .
l licensee will retain at all times the complete authority to determine and maintain sufficient control of all activities through ownership, easement, contract and/or other legal instruments on property within the minimum exclusion distance including the authority to exclude or remove personnel j and property within the minimum exclusion distance.
Therefore, since no physical or procedural changes are being made to existing plant systems, structures or components and since the proposed change requires the licensee to retain complete authority and suflicient control of all activities in the exclusion area, operation of the facility in l
accordance with the proposed amendment would not create the possibility F of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
$ 3. Would operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin ot :,#ety?
I-i
1 t
. This change addresses the existing technical specification restriction on the sale or lease ofproperty within the " exclusion area" by ensuring that the licensee will retain at all times the complete authority to determine and ;
maintain sufficient control of all activities through ownership, easement, contract and/or other legal instruments on property within the minimum exclusion distance including the authority to exclude or remove personnel ;
and property within the minimum exclusion distance.
)
I l
Therefore, since no physical or procedural changes are being made to j existing plant systems, structures or components and since the proposed l
] change requires the licensee to retain complete authority and sufficient
- control of all activities in the exclusion area, operation of the facility in {i accordance with the proposed amendment would not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously j evaluated. l
! 2. Would operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed change create the i
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
~
The purposed change is administrative in nature and does not affect the purpose, function, performance, operability or testing of and does not make any physical or procedural changes to plant systems, structures or
[ components. Also, all existing technical specification limiting conditions for operation and surveillance requirements are retained.
This change addresses the existing technical specification restriction on the sale or lease of property within the " exclusion area" by ensuring that the licensee will retain at all times the complete authority to determine and maintain sufficient control of all activities through ownership, easement, ;
contract and/or other legal instruments on property within the minimum exclusion distance including the authority to exclude or remove personnel and property within the minimum exclusion distance.
Therefore, since no physical or procedural changes are being made to existing plant systems, structures or components and since the proposed change requires the licensee to retain complete authority and sufficient control of all activities in the exclusion area, operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
- 3. Would operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
l l
}. '
The purposed change is administrative in nature and does not affect the L -. '. purpose, function, performance, operability or testing of and does not make any physical or procedural changes to plant systems, structures or components. Also, all existing technical specification limiting conditions for operation and surveillance requirements are retained.
This change addresses the existing technical specification restriction on the sale or lease of property within the " exclusion area" by ensuring that the licensee will retain at all times the complete authority to determine and maintain sufficient control of all activities through ownership, easement, I contract and/or other legal instruments on property within the minimum l
. exclusion distance including the authority to exclude or remove personnel and property within the minimum exclusion distance.
Therefore, since no physical or procedural changes are being made to I existing plant systems, structures or components and since the proposed change requires the licensee to retain complete authority and sufficient control of all activities in the exclusion area, operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment will not involve a significant reduction in margin of safety.
V. IMPLEMENTATION GPU Nuclear requests that the amendment authorizing this change be effective upon issuance.
A j f-I-
i l.
l l
__