ML20198A250
| ML20198A250 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 12/16/1997 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20198A238 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9801050321 | |
| Download: ML20198A250 (3) | |
Text
_--______ _ _ -
l p* (tc%
\\
UNITED STATES p
s j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
WASHINGTON. D C. So66Mo01 py....j SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.138 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-10 AND AMENDMrNT NO.130 T0 f ACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-15 SOUTHERN CAllFORNIA EDISON COMPANY SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY THE CITY OF RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA THE CITY OF ANAHEIM. CALIFORNIA SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. UNITS 2 AND 3 DOCKET NDS. 50 361 AND 50-362
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated December 22. 1995, as supplemented by letter dated November 25, 1997. Southern California Edison Company (SCE or the licensee) requested changes to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-10 and NPF-15 for San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. Unit Nos. 2 and 3. respectively.
The proposed changes would delete the physical protection arogram reporting requirement from License Condition 2.G and clarify in _icense Condition 2.E that not all documents composing the physical protection program plans necessarily centain safeguards information.
The November 25, 1997 suo)lemental letter provided additional clarifying information and did not clange the initial no significant hazards consideration determination, which was published 1n the Federal Reaister on November 5, 1997 (62 FR 59921).
2.0 DISCUSSION The changes 3roposed by the licensee will clarify the meaning of License Condition 2.E and modify License Condition 2.G to remove the burden of duplicate reporting requirements.
Specifically, this pro)osed request will add the word "may" to License Condition 2.E to indicate tie physical protection program plans may contain safeguards information and will delete the reference to License Condition 2.E from License Condition 2.G.
License Condition 2.E identifies the plans which describe the NRC approved program for physical protection of San Onofre Units 2 and 3.
They are the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. Units 1. 2. and 3 Physical Security Plan, the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. Units 1. 2. an.d 3 Security Force 9801050321 971216 DR ADOCK 0500 1
Training and Qualificvtion Plan, and the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. Units 1. 2. and 3 Safeguards Contingency Plan.
License Condition 2.E further indicates the plans contain safeguards information protected under 10 CFR 73.21.
All safeguards information was removed (over a period of time) from the Security Force Training and Qualification Plan and was transferred to.
the Physical Security Flan and the Safeguards Contingency Plan. The proposed addition of the word "may" to the second sentence of this license condition will clarify that all the plans do not necessarily contain sjfeguards information.
Included in License Cor.dition 2.G is the requirement to report violations of the requirements contained in License Condition 2.E. the license condition for the physical protection program. The abysical protection program has specific reporting requirements located in 10 C;R 73.71 and Appendix G of 10 CFR Part
- 73. The reporting under License Condition 2.G is duplicative and not specific to the physical protection orogram.
To remove this duplicate reporting requirement, the proposed clange deletes the referral to License Condition 2.E from License Condition 2.G.
3.0 EVALUATION The addition of the word "may" to the second sentence of License Condition 2.E makes it clear that not all documents composing the physical protection program plant necessarily contain safeguards information.
This change is purely admiristrative and does not alter any regulatory requirements or commitments made by the licensee. Therefore, the staff finds this proposed change to License Condition 2.E acceptable.
Deleting the reference to License Condition 2.E from License Condition 2.G eliminates the reporting requirement under ticense Condition 2.G for violations of the physical protection program plans. The phytical protection program has specific reporting requirements located in 10 CFR 73.71 and Appendix G of 10 CFR Part 73. The repor,.ing of violations of the physical protection program plans under License Condition 2.G is duplicatise, and consequently, unnecessary.
The deletion of this reporting requirement will not affect the requirements for maintaining the physical protection program in accordance with the NRC approved physical security security force training and qualification, and safeguards contingency plans. Therefore the staff finds the proposed change acceptable.
In its letter dated November 25, 1997, the licensee requested an administrative change to License Condition 2.G. correcting the reference to Region V.
Currently. License Condition 2.G states that reports be directed to the NRC Reoional Administrator. Region V.
Since the San Onofre site was re-assigned to Region IV when the NRC reorganized from five to four regions, the ap priate official is the NRC Regional Administrator. Region IV.
The staff fi this correction acceptable
I
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the regulations of the Comission, the California State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no coments.
~
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
These amendments relate to changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements. The amendments also change requirements related to safeguard matters or procedural matters regarding an approved safeguards plan and does not involve any significant construction impacts. Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10) and (c)(12).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
6.0 CONCLUSION
The Comission has concluded, based on the considere. ions discussed above.
that (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner. (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the regulations of the Comission. and (3) the issuance of the amendments vill not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
M. Fields Date:
December 16, 1997 nu-
. ~ ~.
-- - ~-
~ - - - - " - - - ^ - - ' -
~
~