ML20212A157: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot change)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 15: Line 15:
| document type = SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT--LICENSING & RELATED ISSUES, TEXT-SAFETY REPORT
| document type = SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT--LICENSING & RELATED ISSUES, TEXT-SAFETY REPORT
| page count = 1
| page count = 1
| project =
| stage = Other
}}
}}



Latest revision as of 16:08, 7 October 2021

Safeguards Evaluation Rept Accepting W Application to Amend International Safeguards Condition,
ML20212A157
Person / Time
Site: Westinghouse
Issue date: 10/16/1997
From: Weber M
NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:
Shared Package
ML20212A128 List:
References
NUDOCS 9710230172
Download: ML20212A157 (1)


Text

.

> s s. s anotiq y+ k UNITED STATES j

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. Po6MW001 k...../ October 16, 1997 DOCKET NO: 70 1151 LICENSEE: Westinghouse Electric Corporation (WES)

Colunbia, South Carolina

SUBJECT:

SAFEGUARDS EVALUATION REPORT: WESTINGHOUSE APPLICATION TO AMEND INTERNATIONAL SAFEGUARDS CONDITION, JULY 25, 1997 BACKGROUND WES requested an amendment to international safeguards license condition SG 3.1.2 to add the recuirement to notify the DOE /NRC by Concise Note (Form DOE /NRC 740M) with 30 cays of receiving notification from the NRC that the facility has been identified under Article 39(b) of the US/IAEA Safeguards Agreement. This was discussed with the NRC prior to the request for amendment.

QlSCUSSION In a discussion between WES and NRC, it was decided that WES should notify, by

" Concise Note" (Form DOE /NRC-740M), within 30 days, instead of in the quarterly update of the Design Information Questionnaire (D10) changes that are non substantive relative to the Transitional Facility Attachment. WES was essentially over-reporting this information. This change will make the WES reporting 9quirements consistent with the rest of industry.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The staff has determined that the proposed activities involved safeguards and material accountability, which are categorically excluded from the require-ments of prepare a site specific environmental assessment. Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is warranted for this action.

CONCLUSION The Region 11 Principal Ins)ector has no objection to this proposed action.

In addition, the Chief of tie International Safeguards Section FRIB, has no objection to the amendment.

Principal Contributor:

Charles E. Gaskin Afp-h

/7,,34 oc W Eu *R8an M &8i b C PDR