ML020850408

Federal Register Notice for January 27, 1985, Notice of Issuance of Amendment 1

ML020850408
Person / Time
Site:	Byron
Issue date:	03/05/1985
From:	Youngblood B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Farrar D Commonwealth Edison Co
References
-RFPFR NUDOCS 8503120094
Download: ML020850408 (49)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:MAR 5 1985 Docket No.: STN 50-454 Mr. Dennis L. Farrar Director of Nuclear Licensing Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690

Subject:

Federal Register Monthly Notices - Byron Station, Unit 1 A copy of the NRC's Monthly Notice for applications and amendments to operating licenses involving no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register on January 27, 1985 is enclosed for your use. Page 8024 of this publication contains the notice of issuance of Amendment No. 1 to License NPF-37. Sincerel, B. X. Youngblood, Chief Licensing Branch No. 1 Division of Licensing

Enclosure:

As stated cc: See next page COVCU RRENCES: B# I L:-LB#1 Iushbrook:es VIFL~lshan BJ8n5 1ood V§*385.358

< focket Fi Local PDR PRC System NSIC LB#1 Rdg MRushbrook LOLshan OELD, Attorney ACRS (16)

JPartl ow BGrimes EJordan PDR 1 0305 - pK 05000454 PDR

$ ,o* "UNITED STATES

          .*NUCLEAR                 REGULATORY COMMISSION

• WASHINGTON, D. C. 20556 MAR5 1985 Docket No.: STN 50-454 Mr. Dennis L. Farrar Director of Nuclear Licensing Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690

Subject:

Federal Register Monthly Notices - Byron Station, Unit 1 A copy of the NRC's Monthly Notice for applications and amendments to operating licenses involving no significant hazards consideration which was publi-5hed in the Federal Register on January 27, 1985 is enclosed for your use. Page 8024 of this publication contains the notice of issuance of Amendment No. 1 to License NPF-37. Sincerely,, ungblo d, Chief'. Licensing Branch No. 1 Division of Licensing

Enclosure:

As stated cc: See next page

BYRON Mr. Dennis L. Farrar Director of Nuclear Licensing Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690 cc: Mr. William Kortier Ms. Diane Chavez Atomic Power Distribution 528 Gregory Street Westinghouse Electric Corporation Rockford, Illinois 61108 Post Office Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Regional Administrator U. S. NRC Region III Michael Miller 799 Roosevelt Road Isham, Lincoln & Beale Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 One First National Plaza 42nd Floor Joseph Gallo, Esq. Chicago, Illinois 60603 Isham, Lincoln & Beale Suite 840 Mrs. Phillip B. Johnson 1120 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. 1907 Stratford Lane Washington, D. C. 20036 Rockford, Illinois 61107 Douglass Cassel, Esq. Dr. Bruce von Zellen 109 N. Dearborn Street Department of Biological Sciences Suite 1300 Northern Illinois University Chicago, Illinois 60602 DeKalb, Illinois 61107 Ms. Pat Morrison Mr. Edward R. Crass 5568 Thunderidge Drive Nuclear Safeguards & Licensing Rockford, Illinois 61107 Sargent & Lundy Engineers 55 East Monroe Street Ms. Lorraine Creek Chicago, Illinois 60603 Rt. 1, Box 182 Manteno, Illinois 60950 Mr. Julian Hinds U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Byron/Resident Inspectors Offices 4448 German Church Road Byron, Illinois 61010 Mr. Gary N. Wright, Manager Nuclear Facility Safety Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety 1035 Outer Park Drive 5th Floor Springfield, Illinois 62704

I Federal Register / Vol. 5P, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27. 1985 / Notices 7flg 7979 Conditions,copies of which may be operating license upon a determination Safety and Licensing Board, designated requested from the NSF Forms and by the Commission that such by the Commission or by the Chairman Publications Unit. amendment involves no significant of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Because of the nature of some hazards consideration, notwithstanding Board Panel, will rule on the request precollege projects, proposers may wish the pendency before the Commission of and/or petition and the Secretary or the to familiarize themselves with NSF a request for a hearing from any person. designated Atomic Safety and Licensing policy in two particular areas: This monthly notice includes all Board will issue a notice of hearing or

• Where educational materials are amendments issued, or proposed to-be an appropriate order.

outcomes, the GSER should be consulted issued, since the date of publication of As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a with respect to inventions, software, and the last monthly notice which was petition for leave to intervene shall set copyrights. published on January 23, 1985 (50 FR forth with particularity the interest of

• Where precollege students are to be 3047) through February 15, 1985. the petitioner in the proceeding, and involved in research or in the how that interest may be affected by the development of materials, awards are NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO results of the proceeding. The petition subject to the provisions of 42 U.S.C. should specifically explain the reasons 1869 (a) and (b) ("Myers Amendment" FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT why intervention should be permitted and "Doman Amendment"). These with particular reference to the provisions of law require appropriate HAZARDS CONSIDERATION grantee coordination with parents, DETERMINATION AND following factors: (1) The nature of the guardians, and school district officials. OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING petitioner's right under the Act to be SThe awardee is wholly responsible for The Commission has made a proposed made a party to the proceeding; (2) the determination that the following nature and extent of the petitioner's the conduct of the project, including the property, financial, or other interest in research and development of materials amendment requests involve no and the preparation of project results for significant hazards consideration. Under the proceeding; and (3) the possible publication. The Foundation does not the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR effect of any order which may be assume responsibility for such findings 50.92, this means that operation of the entered in the proceeding on the facility in accordance with the proposed petitioner's interest. The petition should or their interpretation, but expects an also identify the specific aspect(s) of the acknowledgement of its support in all amendments would not: (1) Involve a published materials resulting from significant increase in the probability or subject matter of the proceeding as to consequences of an accident previously which petitioner wishes to intervene.

funding projects. Any person who has filed a petition for V. Inquiries evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from leave to intervene or who has been Questions not addressed in this any accident previously evaluated; or (3) admitted as a party may amend the publication may be directed to the NSF involve a significant reduction in a petition without requesting leave of the staff by writing to: margin of safety. The basis for this Board up to fifteen (15) days prior to the Division of Materials Development and proposed determination for each first prehearing conference scheduled in Research, Directorate for Science and amendment request is shown below. the proceeding, but such an amended Engineering Education, National The Commission is seeking public petition must satisfy the specificity Science Foundation, Washington, D.C. comments on this proposed requirements described above. 20550. determination. Any comments received Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to Dated: February 22, 1985. within 30 days after the date of the first prehearing conference Alan I. Leshner, publication of this notice will be scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner Acting DivisionDirector,Materials considered in maling any final shall file a supplement to the petition to Development andResearch. determination. The Commission Will not intervene which must include a list of [FR Doc. 85-4751 Filed 2-26-85; 8:45 am] normally make a final determination the contentions which are sought to be unless it receives a request for a litigated in the matter, and the bases for BILuNG CODE 755",01-U each contention set forth with hearing. Comments should be addressed to the reasonable specificity. Contentions shall NUCLEAR REGULATORY Secretary of the Commission, U.S. be limited to matters within the scope of COMMISSION Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the amendment under consideration. A Monthly Notice; Applications and Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention: petitioner who fails to file such a Amendments to Operating Ucensee Docketing and Service Branch. supplement which satisfies these Involving No Significant Hazards By March 29, 1985, the licensee may requirements with respect to at least one Considerations file a request for a hearing with respect contention will not be permitted to to issuance of the amendment to the participate as a party. I. Background subject facility operating license and Those permitted to intervene become Pursuant to Public Law (Pub. L.) 97 any person whose interest may be parties to the proceeding, subject to any 415, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission affected by this proceeding and who limitations in the order granting leave fo (the Commission) is publishing its wishes to participate as a party in the intervene, and have the opportunity to regular monthly notice. Pub. L. 97-415 proceeding must file a written petition participate fully in the conduct of the revised section 189 of the Atomic Energy for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing, including the opportunity to Act of 1954. as amended (the Act), to hearing and petitions for leave to present evidence and cross-examine require the Commission to publish intervene shall be filed in accordance witnesses. notice of any amendments issued, or with the Commission's "Rules of If a hearing is requested, the proposed to be issued, under a new Practice for Domestic Licensing Commission will make a final provision of section 189 of the Act. This Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part 2. If a determination on the issue of no provision grants the Commission the request for a hearing or petition for significant hazards consideration. The authority to issue and make immediately leave to intervene is filed by the above final determination will serve to decide effective any amendment to an date, the Commission or an Atomic when the hearing is held.

7980 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices If the final determination Is that the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is Example (iiI which is a change that amendment request involves no designated to rule on the petition and/or constitutes an additional limitation. significant hazards consideration, the request, that the petitioner has made a restriction, or control not presently Commission may issue the amendment substantial showing of good cause for included in the Technical Specifications: and make it immediately effective, the granting of a late petition and/or For example, a more stringent notwithstanding the request for a request. That determination will be surveillance requirement. The proposed hearing. Any hearing held would take based upon a balancing of the factors change of the Technical Specifications place after issuance of the amendment. specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-{v) and LCO to reduce the allowable oxygen If the final determination is that the 2.714(d). concentration level in primary amendment involves a significant For further details with respect to this containment constitutes an additional hazards consideration, any hearing held action, see the application for limitation on plant operation, that is would take place before the issuance of amendment which is available for public consistent with Example (ii). any amendment. inspection at the Commission's'Public Since the amendment involves a Normally, the .Commission will not Document Room. 1717 H Street, N.W., proposed change that is similar to an issue the amendment until the Washington, D.C., and at the local example for which no significant expiration of the 30-day notice period. public document room for the particular hazards considerations are likely to However, should circumstances change facility involved. exist, the Commission has made a during the notice period such that failure Boston Edison Company, Docket No. SO proposed determination that the to act in a timely way would result, for 293, Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, application for amendment involves no example, in derating or shutdown of the Plymouth, Massachusetts significant hazards considerations. facility, the Commission may issue the LocalPublic Document Room license amendment before the Date of amendment request: location:Plymouth Public Library. North expiration of the 30-day notice period, December 6, 1984. Street.Plymouth, Massachusetts 02380. provided that Its final determination is Descriptionof amendment requesL Attorney for Licensee: W. S. Stowe, that the amendment involves no The proposed amendment would change Esq., Boston Edison Company. 800 significant hazards consideration. The the Technical Specifications to reduce Boylston Street, 36th Floor, Boston, final determination will consider all the permitted oxygen concentration Massachusetts 02199. public and State comments received level in the primary containment from a ArRC Branch Chief.Domenic & before action is taken. Should the maximum of 5% to a maximum of 4%. Vassallo. Commission take this action, it will On May 8, 1984, NRC issued'Generic publish a notice of issuance and provide Letter 84-09 which concluded that Carolina Power and Light Company, for opportunity for a hearing after recombiner capability is not required in Docket No. 50-21 IL B. Robinsen issuance. The Commission expects that BWR plants with Mark I containment Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2, the need to take this action will occur for which notices on the construction Darlington, South Carolina very infrequently. permits were published before Date of amendment request: A request for a hearing or a petition November 5, 1970, if certain criteria September 19, 1984. for leave to intervene must be filed with were met. The criteria enumerated were Descriptionof amendment request: the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. as follows: (1) The plant has Technical The proposed amendment would change Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Specifications (limiting conditions for operation, LCO) requiring that the the Technical Specifications from Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention: requiring the equalizing charge to be Docketing and Service Branch, or may containment atmosphere be less than performed monthly to performing the be delivered to the Commission's Public four percent oxygen when the containment is required to be inerted, change annually. Changing the battery Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., charging requirements is consistent with Washington, D.C., by the above date. and (2) the plant has only nitrogen or recycled containment atmosphere for the manufacturer's recommended Where petitions are filed during the last interval, reduces unnecessary ten (10) days of the notice period, it is use in all pneumatic control systems within containment, and (3) there are no overcharging of cells and does not requested that the petitioner promptly so degrade the overall operation of the inform the Commission by a toll-free potential sources of oxygen in containment other than that resulting batteries. The decreased frequency for telephone call to Western Union at (800) charging of the batteries improves the 325-6000 (in Missouri (800) 342-6700). from radiolysis of the reactor coolant. The present Technical Specifications reliability of voltage sensitive equipment The Western Union operator should be on the same bus in that this equipment given Datagram Identification Number for Pilgrim Station provide that the oxygen concentration level be less than (NBFD relays in reactor protection 3737 and the following message system) will be uubjected to the voltage addressed to (Branch Chief*: Petitioner's 5% oxygen by volume in containment during reactor power operation. In order changes seen during charging leis often. name and telephone number, date The battery parameters will continue petition was mailed; plant name; and to comply with the criteria in the Generic Letter, the LCO for this to be measured on a monthly basis. This publication date and page number of provides adequate indication of battery this Federal Register notice. A copy of Technical Specification must be changed to a maximum of 4% oxygen by status and the ability to identify any the petition should also be sent to the deterioration long before failure, as Executive Legal Director, U.S. Nuclear volume. Regulatory Commission, Washington, Basis for proposedno significant discussed in the current basis. D.C. 20555, and to the attorney for the hazards considerationdetermination: Basis forproposedno significant The Commission has provided guidance hazards considerationdetermination: licensee. The Commission has provided guidance Nontimely filings of petitions for leave concerning the application of standards to intervene, amended petitions. for determining whether license concerning the application of its supplemental petitions and/or requests amendments involve significant hazards standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92 for for hearing will not be entertained considerations by providing certain no significant hazards considerations by absent a determination by the examples (48 FR 14870). One of those providing certain examples published in Commission, the presiding officer or the not likely to involve such considerations the Federal Register on April 6, 1983 (48

Federal Register I VoL 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 1 Notices 7961 FR 14870). One of the examples of an Home and Fifth Avenues, Hartsville, concerning the application of the amendment which will likely be found South Carolina 29535. standards for determining whether a to not involve significant hazards Attorney for'icensee:Shaw. Pittman. significant hazards consideration exists considerations is a change which may Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, by providing certain examples (48 FR reduce in some way a safety margin, but NW., Washington, D.C. 2003M. 14870). These examples of actions where the results of the-change are NRC Branch Chief.Steven A. Varga. involving no significant hazards clearly within all acceptable criteria. consideration include: (1) A purely The attached proposed change falls Commonwealth Edison Company, Docket Nos. 50-2 and 50-265, Quad administrative change to the Technical within the Commission's example (vi) of Specifications, correction of an error or a change pot likely to involve a Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Rock Island County, Illinois a change in nomenclature; (23 a change significant hazards consideration that consititutes an additional because the change is in ascordance Date of amendment request: February limitation, restriction, or control not with the manufacture's 17, 1983. as supplemented August 23, presently included in the Technical recommendations, reduces unnecessary 1984. Specifications; and (3) a change to make overcharging and may improve the Descriptionof amendment requesL" a license conform to changes in the reliability of voltage sensitive equipment This submittal supplements the request regulations, where the license change on the same bus. for amendment dated February 17, 1983 results In very minor changes to facility Therefore, on these bases, the which was noticed in the Federal operations in keeping with the Commission proposes to determine that Register on September 21, 1983 (49 FR regulations. the proposed change involves no 43132). The changes proposed by the The changes proposed in the significant hazards considerations. licensee reflected both organizational changes and changes necessitated by application for amendment are LocalPublicDocument Room encompassed by these examples in the location: Hartsville Memorial Library, revisions to 10 CFR. Sections 50.54 and 50.72 of 10 CFR and a new 1 50.73, following ways: Home and Fifth Avenues, Hartsville, '(1) Changes to the Technical South Carolina 29535. revised the minimum operator otaffing requirements, immediate notification Specifications have been proposed by Attorney for icensee: Shaw, Pittman, the licensee to reflect the current Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street. requirements and the Licensee Event Reporting system, respectively. licensee organization by changing the NW., Washinton. D.C. 20036. ttles for certain positions. These NRCBranch Chief.Steven A. Varga. The proposed amendment 'would incorporate numerous miscellaneous changes do not reflect a significant Carolina Power and Light Company, changes to section 6, Administrative change in the authority of the position. Docket No. 50-261, H. B. Rblinson Controls, of the Technical and are changes in nomenclature and Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2, Specifications. This section of the are similar to example (1) above. Darlington, South Carolina Technical Specifications contains, (2) Another change proposed which among other things, information and reflects the current organization is the Date of amendment requesk definition and desbription of a newly December 10, 1984. descriptions Concerning the licensee's management organization. The licensee created position. Director of Nuclear Descriptionof amendment request. proposed to modify these specifications Safety. This new position has defined The proposed amendment would revise powers and authority that exert Section 6, Administrative Controls, of in several places to reflect the current licensee organizations at corporate additional control not presently in the the Technical Specifications to. (1) headquarters and at the station. These Technical Specifications and is thus Change the position of Manager similar to example (2) above. Operations and Maintenance from a changes are chanSes in title for existing single position to two positions, positions and the addition of a new (3) Another change is proposed that Manager-Operations and Manager position, Director of Nuclear Safety. In defines the qualificatrions and addition, specifications in response to capabilities required for the position of Maintenance; Reporting to the General Manager as prior lo change; and (2) an NRC requests are proposed to require radiation/chemical technician. These procedures for the control of overtime qualifications and capabilities were not reinsert page 05-7 approved by for certain job classifications at the previously defined in the Technical Amendment 84 but inadvertently station. The licensee also deleted by Amendment 85. ofpropsed thep to Specifications, so the change constitutes clarify the applicability an additional limitation, restriction, or Basis for proposedno sgnificant requirement to conduct retraining at control not presently included therein hazards considerationdeteimination.. two-year intervals as a result of a and is thus similar to example (2) above. The Commission has provided guidance concern identified during an informal (4) Other changes are proposed that concerning the application of the licensee audit. The licensee also clarify the requirement to'conduct standards for determining whether a proposed changes to specify that retraining at two-year lntevals, that significant hazards consideration exists emergency procedure drills shall be specify that emergency procedure drills by providing certain examples (April 6, conducted at the frequency specified in shall be conducted at the frequency 1983, 48 FR 14870). The proposed change the Generating Station Emergency Plan, called out in the Generating Station's to station organization and the and to require audits of the Facility Emergency Plan, and that require audits replacement of a previously approved Emergency Plan and Facility Security of the Facility Emergency Plan and organizational change that was deleted Plan at lease once per twelve months. Facility Security Plan at least once per by error during a subsequent These changes are in response to NRC 12 months. These changes const.tute amendment are covered by example (i) requests. Finally, a proposed change additional limitations, restrictions or since they are administrative in nature. would clarify job qualification controls not presently included in the The staff, therefore, proposes to requirements for the position of Technical Specifications, and are determine that this amendment involves radiationlche~iical technician. thereby'similar to example (2) above. no significant hazards consideration. Basis for proposedno significant (5) Changes to requirements for Local Public DocumentRoom hazardsvonsiderationdetermination: minimum operator staffing, and location.: Hartsville Memorial Library, The Commission has provided guidance immediate notification requirements,

7982 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices and changes to the Licensee Event bearing control rods is sufficiently spurious actuation due to instrument Reporting system are similar to example matched to ensure that their safety drift. Deletion of the bi-weekly MSIV (3) above, since these are changes to function (scram reactivity) is not partial closure test requirement would make a license conform to changes in reduced or compromised, nor will the allow the closure to be tested monthly, the regulations, with minor changes to probabilities or consequences of consistent with the Standard Technical facility operations. previously evaluated accidents be Specification requirement. Since each of the changes requested increased. Basis for proposedno significant by the licensee can be shown to be Based on the preceding discussion hazards considerationdetermination: similar to an-example of a kind of and review of similar approved changes The licensee's submittal of November change which will be considered not at another Commonwealth Edison Unit, 27, 1984 contained an evaluation of the likely to involv6 a significant hazards Dresden Unit 3, the licensee concludes proposed action and a basis for a consideration, the staff proposes to that the proposed amendments will not: proposed no significant hazards determine that this proposed (1) Involve a significant increase in consideration determination. The amendment involves no significant the probability or consequences of an licensee's proposed determination is hazards consideration. accident previously evaluated, because based on the following considerations. Local Public Document Room the use of hafnium metal in place of The Commission has provided location:Moline Public Library, 504- boron carbide powder is to reduce the guidance concerning the application of 17th Street, Moline, Illinois 61265. potential for corrosion and mechanical the standards for determining whether a Attorney for licensee: Mr. Robert C. stress that would give rise to such significant hazards consideration exists Fitzgibbons, Jr., Isham, Lincoln, &Beale, accidents. by providing certain examples (48 FR Three First National Plaza, Suite 5200, (2) Create the possibility of a new or 14870). The examples of actions Chicago, Illinois 60602. different kind of accident previously involving no significant hazards NRC Branch Chief.Domenic B. evaluated- the kinds of accidents which consideration include: (vi) A change Vassallo. can result from control rod malfunction which either results in some increase to have instead been reduced by the use of the probability or consequences of a Commonwealth Edison Company, hafnium absorber material in place of Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad previously analyzed accident or may boron carbide powder. reduce in some way a safety margin, but Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 (3) Involve a significant reduction in and 2, Rock Island County, Illinois where the results of the change are the margin of safety; the hafnium clearly within all acceptable criteria Dateof amendment request: October absorber will provide neutron with respect to the system or component 2, 1984. absorption characteristics that do not specified in the Standard Review Plan. Description of amendment request: differ significantly from the provided by This example encompasses both of The submittal requests changes in the the boron carbide powder currently the requested changes. An increase of Technical Specifications for Quad Cities used. the high drywell pressure to 2.5 psig and Units I and 2 to permit the use of The staff has reviewed the licensee's hafnium neutron absorber material in deletion of the bi-weekly MSIV testing is significant hazards consideration a relaxation of the current Technical the control rod assemblies. This change determination. The staff finds that the will allow NRC-approved state-of-the Specification limits and therefore, may criteria for a no significant hazards be considered as a reduction of an art control rod designs, using other than consideration as set forth in 10 CFR boron carbide neutron absorber existing safety margin. However, both 50.90 are met. The staff has, therefore, proposed revisions still comply with the material, to be used in these units. made a proposed determination that the Basisfor proposedno significant staff's general guidance on the drywell proposed amendment involves no pressure set point and MSIV testing as hazardsconsiderationdetermination: significant hazards consideration. The licensee's submittal of October 2, Local Public Document Room described below. 1984 contained an evaluation of the In the case of the proposed 2.5 psig set location: Moline Public Library, 504 point, the increase is requested in order proposed action and a basis for a 17th Street, Illinois 61265. proposed no significant hazards Attorney for licensee:Mr. Robert G. to reduce inadvertent ECCS operation. consideration determination. The Fitzgibbons, Jr., Isham, Lincoln, &Beale, The new operating margin between licensee's proposed determination is Three First National Plaza, Suite 5200, normal drywell pressure and the trip based on the following considerations. Chicago, Illinois 60602. point is still within the original plant The proposed Technical Specification NRC Branch Chief-Domenic B. accident analysis and falls within the changes do not represent significanf Vassallo. staff's guidance on set point margin for changes in acceptance criteria or safety resolution of TMI Item ll.E.4.2.5. margins and all changes have been Commonwealth Edison Company, In the case of the deletion of the bi previously accepted by the NRC for Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad weekly MSIV test, the provisions other similar units, including Dresden 3. Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 remaining in the Technical Previous control blades used at Quad and 2, Rock Island County, Illinois Specifications for testing the MSIVs are Cities and Dresden Unit 2 utilized boron Date of amendment requests; consistent with the BWR Standard carbide as the absorber material. The November 27, 1984. Technical Specification as endorsed by use of hafnium in place of, or in addition Descriptionof amendment request: Chapter 16 of the Standard Review Plan. to, boron is desired to provide The proposed amendment would revise Therefore, although some relaxation in comparable neutron absorption the Technical Specification to: (1) Raise surveillance fiequency will occur, the characteristics while eliminating or the drywell high pressure trip setpoint remaining provisions will meet the reducing the production of helium gas. from 2.0 psig to 2.5 psig and (2) remove staff's guidelines for testing of the This will reduce the source'of internal the requirement for bi-weekly main MSIVs. pressure in the control blade structure, steam line isolation valve (MSIV) partial Since the application for amendment thereby reducing material stresses and closure test. involves a proposed change that is the likelihood of stress corrosion The proposed drywell trip setpoint similar to an example for which no cracking. The reactivity of the hafnium- change would reduce the probability of significant hazards consideration exists,

Federal Register I Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 7983 the licesee proposes a determination modified into analog trip systems. The that the application involves no full power, reduction of primary system significant hazards consideration. use of analog trip units, and the boration is required. The reduction in The staff has reviewed the licensee's acceptable intervals for their calibration boration requires processing of a and testing, has been reviewed and significant amount of primary system no significant hazards consideration accepted by the NRC in their review and determination and, based on this water. The proposed change is expected acceptance of General Electric Topical to alleviate this method of operation. review, the staff has made a proposed Report NEDO-21617-A, "Analog determination that the application for Transmitter/Trip Units Systems for The licensee evaluated the effect of amendment involves no significant Engineered Safeguard Sensor Trip the proposed change on power hazards consideration. Inputs," dated December 1978. The distributions (DNB and LOCA kW/ft LocalPublic DocumentRoom analog sensor transmitter channel limits), shutdown margin, and ejected location:Moline Public Library, 504 calibration interval is less stringent than rod worth. Based on this evaluation the 17th Street Illinois 61265. the current requirements on the existing licensee concluded that all pertinent Attorney for licensee: Mr. Robert G. criteria are met for Cycle 13 with the equipment, but the proposed calibration Fitzgibbons, Jr,, Isham, Lincoln, & Beale, interval falls within the interval revised PDIL. Specifically: (1) The Three First National Plaza, Suite 5200, steady-state minimum DNBRs in the specified in the NRC-approved Topical Chicago, Illinois 60602. Report for this equipment, and is power level range from 1473 to 1825 NRC Branch Chief: Domenic B. MWt are bounded by the results at 1825 Vassallo. consistent with the Standard Technical Specifications as endorsed by Chapter MWt, (2) the axial offset limits are not Commonwealth Edison Company, 16, of the Standard Review Plan. Since affected by the change in the PDIL and Docket Nos. 50-265, Quad Cities Nuclear the requested amendment is continue to limit the allowable peak Power Station, Unit 2, Rock Island encompassed by the example (vi) of the linear heat generation rate, (3) the County, Illinois guidance, for which no significant shutdown margin was verified to be Date of amendment requests:January hazards consideration is likely to exist, greater than 1.9% delta k/k for all points 3, 1985. the licensee has made a proposed along the PDIL, (4) the revised section of Descriptionof amendment request: determination that the proposed the PDIL does not affect 3-loop This amendment would change the amendment involves no significant operation since 3-loop operation is calibration and functional test hazards consideration. restricted to less than 65% power, and frequencies for certain specific The staff has reviewed the licensee's (5) the revised PDIL does not affect the instruments that are being modified into no significant hazards consideration maximum calculated ejected rod worths analog trip systems. These modifications determination and, based on this at hot zero or hot full power. are being made to achieve full review, the staff has made a proposed The Commission has provided compliance with the irequirements of 10 determination that the proposed guidance concerning the application of CFR 50.49 (Ennironmental Qualification application for amendment involves no the standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by of Electrical Equipment). significant hazards consideration. providing certain examples (April 6, Basisfor proposedno significant LocalPublicDocument Room 1983, 48 FR 14870). One of the examples hazardsconsiderationdetermination: location: Moline Public Library, 504 of actions not likely to involve The licensee has evaluated the proposed 17th Street, Maline, Illinois 61265. significant hazards considerations Technical Specification change and has Attorney for licensee: Mr. Robert G. [example (vi)] relates to a change which determined that the change does not Fitzgibbons, Jr., Isham, Lincoln, &Beale, either may result in some increase to the represent a significant hazards Three First National Plaza, Suite 5200, Chicago, Illinois 60602. probability or consequences of a consideration. The licensee's proposed previously analyzed accident or may determination is based on the following NRC Branch Chief.Domenic B. Vassallo. reduce in some way a safety margin, but considerations. where the results of the change are The Commission has provided Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power clearly within all acceptable criteria guidance concerning the application of Company, Docket No. 50-213, Haddam with respect to the system or component standards for making no significant Neck Phmt, Middlesex County, specified in the Standard Review Plan: hazards -consideration determination by Connecticut For example, a change resulting from the providing certain examples (48 FR Date of amendment request: application of a small refinement of a 14870). The examples of actions likely to December previously used calculational model or 6, 1984. involve no significant hazards Description of amendment request: design method. Because the licensee's considerations include: "(vi) A change The proposed request would revise the evaluation shows that all pertinent which either may result in some Technical Specifications (TSs) to modify criteria are met for Cycle 13 with the increase to the probability or the controrrod Power Dependent Rod revised PDIL, the proposed change falls consequences of a previously-analyzed Insertion Limit (PDIL) curves f~or the within the category of example (vi). accident or may reduce in some way a portion from 1473 to 1825 MWt. Therefore, the staff proposes to safety margin, but where the results of Basis for proposedno significant determine that the requested action the change are clearly within all hazards considerationdetermination: would involve a no significant hazards acceptable criteria with respect to the This change would relax slightly the consideration determination in that it: system or component specified in the restrictions on control rod positions. (1) Does not involve a significant Standard Review Plan: for examnple, a This change is being requested to allow increase in the probability or change resulting from the application of greater flexibility of plant operations consequences of a previously evaluated a small refinement of a previously used associated with reducing power level accident; (2) does not create the calculational model or design method." from full power and subsequent possibility of a new or different kind of The licensee's proposed amendment increasing the power level to full power. accident from an accident previously would change the calibration and With the current curve, In particular functional test frequencies for certain evaluated; and (3) does not involve, a towards' the end of core life, reducing significant reduction in a margin of specific instruments that are being power requires horation. In returning to safety.

I'oAawn1

                     'YODA             Daoietmw      I i       ElO. No. 39 1 Weche.dav, FebruarY 37,YOBS / Nqtices

""A

                     ,mgu
                      --  -----.---        all-          ol No- 39 / Wednesday. FeWar-Y 27, M / NQUices Consolidated Edison Company of Now               requested Technical Specification ,(TS)

Local Public Document Boom changes that would incorporate a location:Russell Library, 123 Broad York, Docket No.,50247, Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2, description of and operating Street, Middletown, Connecticut 06547. requirements for the-new Stack Gas

                                                          %%stchester County, New.York Attorney for licensee: Gerald Garfield,.                                                                Monitoring System. This system has Esquire, Day, terry and Howard,                                Date of ameutnenxrequest:                    been installed and made operational to Counselors at Law, City Place, Hartford,                   December 21,1984.                                meet the guidance of NUREG-0737 Item Connecticut,06103-3499.                                        Descriptionof amendment-request:             I1.F.1*(1) "Noble Gas Effluent Monitor" ArRC Branch Chief: John A. Zwolinski.                  The proposed Techiiicdl Specification            and Item II.F.1[2) "Sampling and revision incorporates the requirements           Analysis of Plant Effluents". The system pursuant .to he Commission's *Generic            provides the capability to monitor Consolidated Edison Company of New                        Letter 83-37 dated-November 1, 1983 York, Docket No. 50-247, Indian Point                                                                       effluent release rates several orders of which -requested all pressurized water            magnitude above normal rates for Nuclear Generatig UnitN. 2Z                               reactor licensees to submit-proposed Westchester County, New York                                                                                accident situations. A Proposed No Technical Specifications for NUREG                Significant Hazards Consideration Date of amendment request:                            0737 items-listed in enclosure I of the           Determination for this proposed license letter. Specifically the proposed December 14,     1984.                                                                                      amendment was published in the amendment voild change the 'IP-2                 Federal Register on March 1, 1984 (49 FR Descriptionof amendment request,                       Technical Specificationslto incorporate The proposed Technical Specification                                                                        7671). However, the TSs covered by this new requirements for the following: (1) revision.incorporates the requirements                                                                      notice were not acceptable to the NRC.

Post accident sampling system, (2) noble to perform augmented iaservice On November 8, 1984, the licensee gas effluents monitor, (3) containment inspection of -the IP-2 reactor vessel submitted revised proposed TSs which high range radition monitor, (4) during the secend ten year inspection superseded the earlier submittals. The containment presure monitor, (5) interval..The augmented inspection is revised proposed TS%of November 8, containmentt'ydrogen monitor, (6) required as a result of-a Law indication 1984 are now under consideration by the control room habitability, and (7] NRC. reported on the IP-2 reactor vessel containment samplying and analysis of during the cycle 677 xefueling outage. It plant effluents. Basis for proposedno significant ws determined that the flawsize was Basisforproposedno significant hazards considerationdetermination: within the limits of 9eotion XI of the hazards considerationdetermination: The Commission has made a proposed ASME Code requiring augmented The Commissionlias providedguidance determination that the amendment for determirnig whether a significant request involves no significant hazards inservice inspection. 4herefore, restart of IP-2 following the refueling outrage hazards consideration exists by consideration. Under the Commnissioi's providingexamples of amendments that regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means was conditioned upon Consolidated perform are considered not likely to involve that operation of the facility in Edison's commitment lo signiflcam htazards considerations [48 accordance with the proposed augmented inservice inspection on the amendment would not: (1) Involve a reactor vessel. The inspection will be FR 14870].VSudh examples include changes that conatitute additional significant increase in the probability of performed at a frequency of three times consequences of an accident previously limitations not presently found in over the next -ten years. evaluated; or (2] create the possibility of Teclpical 6lpecifications and that make Basis fojrproposedno sinifioant the license -conform 't changes 'in the a new or different kind of accident from hazards considerationdeterminatdon: regulations. The staff.proposes to any accident previously evaluated; or (3] The Commission has provided guidance determine that thisAchange does not invalve a significant reduction in a conceriingthe application ofthe involve a significant hazards margin of safety. standarts for determining whether a consideration since it consists of The Coinmission has provided significarnt~lazards consideration exists additiomal requirements not in the guidance concerning the application of byproviding exanmes ofoamendments Technical Specifications, and is these standards by providing certain that are zonsidered mot likely to involve submitted to conform Indian Point Unit 2 examples (48 FR 14870, April 6, 1983). sigiificant hazards consilderatiens (48 to current NRC requirements. One of the examples of actions not FR 14BM11). such esamples include LocalPublic Document Room likely.toInvolve significant hazards charnges flat ornmitate additional location: White Plains Public LUbrary, considerations relates to changes that limitfi=n reitriction or control not 100 M*rtine Avenme, White Plains, New constitute an additional limitation, York 10610. restiiction, or control not presently presently imdldledin theTechnical A4tornexy orlicnse*.- Thomas J. The staffproposes to included in-the TSs. The Stack Gas Specifications. Esa. 4 Irving Place. New York, Farrelly. Monitoring System is a new system at determine *hat this change does not New'Yosk lg003. Big'Rook Point which will replace and involve a,sionificantiazards NRCBrasch Chief. Steven A. Varga. upgrade tfhe present effluent monitoring consideratimnscaruse It consitsts of Consumer Power*Company, Docket No. system. The proposed changes additiomA .equirements not currently in incorporate a description of the system the Technical Seoifiuations. 50-156, Big Rock Point Plant, Charlevoix County, Mkcgan and operating cequirements for the Lactif Public.DocumentRoom system into the BigRodk Points TSs and Dart.ofamendmentrequest constitute an additionalUimitation, thus location:Wbfte "dans lPibliclabrary, 100 Martine Avenue, White Plains, New November 8, 1g84, which supersedes they fall within the above example. On previous submoittals dated October 27, this.basis, the staff proposes to conclude 1981,December 15,ý 981, and December that 'flue nequested action would'inwwlve 16, 1983. no saignlantbhaaards consideratiso. Farre, Jkq., 4-k"ig IAwe, 'New 'York, Descrpti"n qf amendmentrequest"In LocalPublic DocumantAoom New uk*I*$S. the submlatls lted above, Consmers location"North Central Mi&iAga NRC vnv'hCh'ef= Stever A. Varga. Power Company IC~o* ,(ihe licensee)

Federal Register i Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, Februar-f27, 1985 / Notices 7985 College, 1515 Howard Street, Petoskey, NRC Branch Chief"John A. Zwolinski, Therefore, the staff proposed to Michigan 49770. Chief. determine that the requested action Attorney for licensee:Judd L Bacon, would involve a no significant hazards Esquire, Consumers Power Company, Consumers Power Company, Docket No. 50-155, Big Rock Point Plant, Charlevoix consideration determination in that it (1) 212 West Michigan Avenue, Jackson, does not involve a significant increase Michigan 49201. county, Michigan in the probability or consequences of a NRC Branch Chief.John A. Zwolinski, Dote of amendments requested: previously evaluated accident, (2) does Chief. January 10,1985, which supersedes not create the-possibility of a new or Consumers Power Company, Docket No. previous submittals dated May 10, 1984 different kind of accident from an W-155, Big Rock Point Plant, Charlevoix and June 20, 1984. accident previously evaluated, and (3) County, Michigan Descriptionof amendment request does not involve a significant reduction Currently, Consumers Power Company in a margin of safety. Date of amendment request: (CPCo.) has a byproduct material November 14, 1984. LocalPublicDocument Room Descriptionof amendment request: license (10 CFR Part 30 license) and a location:North Central Michigan The plant modification to change the facility operating license (10 CFR Part 50 College, 1515 Howard Street, Petoskey, Reactor Enclosure Treated Waste Line license) for Big Rock Point. The Michigan 49770. Valve from a hand-switch operated proposed amendment would incorporate Attorneyfor licensee: Judd L. Bacon, valve to an automatic closure valve was the Big Rock Point Byporduct Material Esquire, Consumers Power Company, made to resolve Systematic Evaluation License into the Big Rock Point Facility 212 West Michigan Avenue, Jackson, Program Topic VI-4, Containment Operating License. Michigan 49201. Isolation System. The change has been The proposed amendment Would also NRC Branch Chief.John A. Zwolinski, evaluated by the NRC staff in the institute sealed source leak test Chief. Intergrated Plant Assessment Report requirements in the Big Rock Point Technical Specifications (TSs). The Duke Power Company, Docket Nos. 50 (NUREC-0828) for Big Rock Point, 369 and 50-370, McGuire Nuclear section 4.20.4, published in May 1984. plant TSs do not-currently include such Station, Units I and 2, Mecklenburg The proposed license amendment would tests. County, North Carolina require that this automatic valve be Consumers Power Company originally periodically tested for proper manual proposed such changes In submittals Date of amendment request: January and automatic operation and leak dated May 10, 1984 and June 20,1984. 11. 1985. tightness. These changes were originally noticed Descriptionof amendment request: Basisfor proposedno significant in the Federal Register on August 22, The proposed amendment would revise hazards considerationdetermination: 1984 (40 FR 33362). Rowever, the Ths Technical Specifications to reflect the The Commission has provided guidance contained in the applications were not second of several refueling stages concerning the application of the acceptable to the NRC. On January 10, involved in the continuing transition to standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing 1985, CPCo. submitted revised proposed the use of optimized fuel assemblies in certain examples (48 FR 14870, April 6, TSs which superseded the eariler McGuire Unit 1. The changes would also 1983). One of the examples (ii) of actions submittals. The revised proposed TSs of reflect a reduced reactor coolant system not likely to involve a significant January 10, 1985 are now under design flow rate. Changes in the Unit 1 hazards consideration relates to a consideration by the NRC. specifications would be made to the change that constitutes an additional Basis for proposedno significant time constants used in the overpower limitation, restriction or control not hazards considerationdetermination: and overtemperature delta T setpoint presently included in the Technical The Commission has provided guidance equations to allow more flexibility in Specifications. The addition of the concerning the Application of the plant operations. Finally, some Unit 2 proposed operability and leak test standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing specifications would be administratively requirements to the Technical certain examples (48 FR 14870, April 6, affected in that they would be combined Specifications constitutes such an 1983). One of the examples (i) of actions into one specification applying to both additional restriction. not likely to involve a significant McGuire Units I and 2, but there would Therefore, the staff proposes to hazards consideration relates to a be no change to the content of Unit 2 determine that the requested action purely administrative change to the TSs. specifications. would involve a no significant hazards The incorporation of the existing Basisfor proposedno significant consideration determination in that it: separate byproduct material license into hazardsconsiderationdetermination: (1) Does not involve a significant the facility operating license is a purely On April 20,1984, the Commission increase in the probability or administrative change. The NRC issued Amendment No. 32 to Facility consequences of apreviously evaluated currently incorporates the byproduct Operating License NPF-9 to change the accident, (2) does not create the license in the facility operating license Technical Specifications to permit possibility of a new or different kind of for new nuclear power plants. Also, the changes in operating limits related to the accident from an accident previously NRC has encout.aged the byproduct transition to the use of optimized fuel evaluated, and (3) does not involve a license incorporation for operating assemblies in McGuire Unit 1. significant reduction in a margin of nuclear power plants. Accordingly, since its first refueling for safety. Another example [ii) of actions not Cyple 2, Unit I has operated with the Local Public DocumentRoom likely to involve a significant hazards first stage of a transition core consisting location:North Central Michigan consideration relates to a change that of approximately %sWestinghouse College, i515 Howard Street, Petoskey, constitutes an additional limitation, 17x17 Optimized Fuel Assemblies Michigan 49770. restriction, or control not presently (OFAs) and % Westinghouse 17x17 low Attorney for licensee: Judd L Bacon, included in the TSs. The addition of the parasitic fuel assemblies (STDs). During Esquire, Consumers Power Company, proposed sealed source leak test the next refueling for Cycle 3 the 212 West Michigan Avenue-, Jackson, requirements to the T~s constitutes- such planned transition would replace Michigan 49201. an additional control. approximately another % of the original

7986 Federal Register /"v'-V. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 207,l95 1 Notices total STDs with OFAs.The transition is mechanically compatible with the STD refinement of a previously used planned to continue until an all OFA design, control rods, and reactor calculational model or design method". fueled core is adhieved. internals interfaces. Both fuel Because the -evaluations previously The major differences between STDs assemblies satisfy the current design discussed show that all of the accidents and OFAs are the use of Zircaloy grids bases for the McGuire units. comprising the licensing bases which for the OFAs versus Inconel grids for b. Changes in the nuclear could potentially be affected by ýhe ,fuel STDs and a reduction in fuel -rod characteristics due to the transition from reload were reviewed for the Unit I diameter. The.OFA fuel has similar STD to OFA fuel will be within the Cycle 3 design and conclude that the design features compared to the STD range normallyseem from cycle to cycle reload design does -nbt cause the fuel, which'has had-substantial due to fuel management effects. previously acceptable 'safety limits to -be operating experience in a number of c. The reload OFAs are hydraulically exceeded, the above example- can be nuclear plants. Major advantages for compatible with the current STD design. applied to this situation. Accordingly, utilizing the OFAs are: (1) Increased d. The accident analyses fUrthe OFA the Commission proposes todetermine efficiency of the core by reducing the transition core were shown to provide that these changes for the Unit I Cycle 3 amount of parasiticmaterial and (2) acceptable results by meeting the reload,.including the changes in axial reduced fuel cycle costs dne to an applicable criteria, such as, minimum flux difference, heat flux hotchannel optimization of water to uranium ratio. UNBR,peak pressure, -andpeak clad factor, design flow, and time constants The proposed amendments would temperature, as required. 'The previously for the overpower and overtemperature provide for plant operation consistent reviewed and licensed safety limits are delta T setpoint equations, do not with the design and safety evaluation met. involve4a significant hazards conclusions in the licensee's McGuire e. Plant operatin :limitations given in consideration. Unit 1 Cycle 3 Reload Safety Evaluation the Technical Specifications will be Another example of actions not 'likely (RSE). The changes to the Technical satisfied with the proposed -changes. to involve a significant hazards Specifications 3/42.1 and 3/4.2.2 would From these evaluations, it is consideration, -examplef(i{, relates to a reflect appropriate adjustments in the concluded that the Unit i Cycle 3 design purely administrative change to limitiM conditions and surveillance does not cause the previously technical specifications to achieve requirements for (1);axial flux difference acceptable -safety limits to be exceeded. consistency -throughout the technical and (2) heat flux hot channel factor, The effect -ofthe time constant spedificationm, correctioll of anerror, or respectively. The thermal hydraulic changes has been evaluated by reanalyzing the limiting events that rely a change in nomenclature. The safety analyses used in the Cycle 3 RSE on overpower and overtemperature Commission proposes to find that the are based on a reduced design flow rate deltaT protection. The limiting Rod changes to Unit 2 specification which (97,200 gpmper loop versus 98,400), but Cluster Control Assembly. Withdrawal do not change the content Tor Unit 2 but the proposed changes result in no at Power cases from the reload analyses which preserve or eliminate the significant variations in thermal margins. Changes to Specification have been rednalyzed with the distinctions between units within the increased time constants in tie common document are administrative Figures 2.1-4a and 3.2-3a and Table 2.2 1 (low reactor coolant flow trip setpoint, overtemperature delta T setpeint and involve no significant hazards md allowable values) would reflect the equation. The results show that the consideration. educed reactor codlant system flow departure from nucleate boiling (DNB) Local Public Document Room i alue. Changes to Specification Tables design basis is met. The overpower locationr Alkins'Lbrary, University of 2.2-1, 3.3-2 and &3-4would reflect the delta T trip Is not relied upon for North Caroina, Chai~ltte (UNCC changes to the time constants used in protection in any of the FSARaccident Station), North'Carollna 2822=. the overpower -nd overtemperature analyses. However, a-spectrum of Attorney for licensee, Mr. Albert Carr, delta T setpoint equations. steamline breaks was analyzed at Duke Power.-mpany,'P.O.VBox 3l189, The Commission proposes to various power levels to determine the 422 South Church Street, Charlotte, determine that the amendment request linfiting cases that -re presented in the North Carolina 28242. involves no significant hazards FSAR. Some of the small steamline NRC lrrmoh-CkeT, linor'G. consideration. Under the Commission's breaks at power that were analyzed rely Adensam. regulations in 10,CFR 50.92, this means on overpower delta T for protection. Duquemn. Ilt'Con"pap,.Docket No. that operation of the facility-in Therefore, "ananalysis was performed 5"K Beaver Valley PowerStatlon, accordance with the proposed that veriles that the DNB design basis is Unlt,No. .1,Shippinport, Pennsylvania amendment would not [1) involve -a met for smafll breaks at full,power with significant increase in the probability or the increased lime constants in-the Date ofamendmentrequest" consequences of-an accident previously overpower delta T aetpoint equation. December 12,1984. evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of The Commission has provided Descriptionof amendment reguet; a new or different -lndof accident from examples of amendments likely to This ip an application'for an amendment any accident previouslyevaluated; or (3) involve no -signfficantliazards to IOperating'UcenselDPR-6, wisiig involve a significant Teduction in a considerations 't4o'FR 14670). One the lmednical Specifications to reduce margin of safely. example of this type ls: {Vi), "A change the pldbabilty and consequences of an The McGuire -nit1T/Cycle 3 RSE which either may result sinmaure overprossurizaflon event. accompanying the licensee's aniendment increaselo 1he probabIlity or The proposed changes are currently in request of January11, I985, describes all consequences of a previously analyzed the form c plant procedures; issuance of of the accidents comp*ising the licensing accii*edt or may reduce in seine way a an ameninent would incorporate these bases whmich could potentiiloy be safetyimargin, lbut where resmto 4Ie procedures Wnto the plantrechnitcal affected by the fuelreloakdfer the Unit 1 change re -learly *4thn e61aooqptable Specifications. The changed Cycle 3 tdesign.The -resutts of the crieria'with respedit'the system or spedfcations womd~provide additional analysis oncdlude fhat componenit specMfied -nte standard protedfon from presisrebransients at

a. The WastinghouseOPA eload fuel review plan: For.ewanile, a dhenge low temperares by reduwcftn'e assemblies for McCufre md 2 are resulting from the apimfion'ofa *mnall probability of initiation ofsa6 a

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 7987 .transient, and by limiting the resultant standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing These revisions were provided in pressure of such a transient to below the certain examples (48 FR 14870). response to Commission requests limits set by 10 CFR 50 Appendix G. The An example of actions involving no stemming from the staff review of the proposed changes would also bring the significant hazards considerations is an earlier submittals and in response to Technical Specifications into amendment involving a purely Generic Letter 84-13, "Technical compliance with General Design Criteria administrative change to the Technical Specifications for Snubbers", dated May 15 and 31, which address operational Specifications (Example (i)). The 3, 1984. requirements of the overpressure expansion of the organization charts Bases for proposedno significant protection system. and the change of position titles are hazards considerationdetermination: Basisfor proposedno significant such changes. hazards considerationdetermination: The Commission has provided guidance Another example of actions involving concerning the standards in 10 CFR The Commission has provided guidance no significant hazards considerations is concerning the application of these 50.92 by providing certain examples (48 an amendment which may reduce in FR 14870). Examples of actions involving standards by providing certain some way a margin of safety, but where examples (48 FR 14870). One of these, no significant hazards consideration are the results of the change are clearly amendments that involve a change that Example (ii), involving no significant within acceptable criteria with respect hazards consideration is "A change that constitutes an additional limitation, to the system or component specified in restriction or control not presently constitutes an additional limitation, the Standard Review Plan (Example restriction, or control not presently included in the Technical Specifications (vi)). Changes in the responsibilities of [Example (ii)] and amendments included in thie technical specifications." senior management in the approval level As described above, the requested involving a purely administrative for procedures and in the Plant Review change to the Technical Specifications amendment matches this example and Board quorum requirements fit this the staff, therefore, proposes to [Example (i)]. The proposed additional example. requirements concerning the sample characterize it as involving no On these bases, the Commission significant hazards consideration. proposes to determine that these actions selection and tests are similar to LocalPublic Document Room involve no significant hazards Example (ii). location:B.F. Jones Memorial Library, considerations. The replacement of the table listing 663 Franklin Avenue, Aliquippa, LocalPublic Document Room snubbers with an LCO describing which Pennsylvania 15001. location:Appling County Public Library, snubbers was made in response to Attorney for licensee: Gerald 301 City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia. Generic Letter 84-13. It will provide a Charnoff, Esquire, Jay E. Silberg, Attorney for licensee: G. F. means of describing all of the snubbers Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts, and Trowbridge, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and required to be operable in general terms, Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, NW., Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, NW., thereby eliminating the need to list each Washington, D.C. 20036. Washington, D.C. 20036. snubber or to request amendments if NRC Branch Chief.Steven A. Varga. NRC Branch Chief.John F. Stolz. snubbers are added or removed. It is an Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe administrative change and is similar to Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe example (i). Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, City of Dalton, Authority of Georgia, City of Dalton, On the basis 9f the above, the Georgia, Dockets Nos. 50-321 and 50 Georgia, Dockets Nos. 50-321 and 50 Commission has made a proposed 366, Edwin L Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 366, Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units determination that the application for Nos. I and 2, Appling County, Georgia Nos. I and 2, Appling County, Georgia amendments involves no significant hazards consideration. Dateof amendment meguest: April 24, Date of amendment request: May 2, Local PublicDocument Room 1984. 1984, as superseded November 19, 1984. Descriptionof amendment requesk" location: Appling County Public Library, Descriptionof amendment request:By 301 City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia. The Technical Specification changes letter dated October 27, 1983, as proposed by this submittal are a partial supplemented December 20, 1983, Attorney for licensee: G.F. revision to the changes requested in the Georgia Power Company requested Trowbridge, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and licensees' July 9, 1982, October 24, 1983, amendments to the operating licenses Trowbridge, 1.800 M Street, NW., and December 20, 1983, amendment for Hatch Units I and 2. Washington, D.C. 20036. requests which are previously noticed in The requested amendments would NRC Branch Chief-John F. Stolz. the Federal Register on January 26, 1984 modify the Technical Specification GPU Nuclear Corporation, Docket No. (49 FR 3347). The additional changes Limiting Conditions for Operation 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear proposed in this April 24, 1984, submittal (LCOs] and surveillance requirements Generating Station, Ocean County, New include: (1) The expansion of for snubbers for these units. These Jersey organizational charts to show more requested amendments were noticed in positions and to reflect organizational the Federal Register on February 24, Dote of amendment request: May 1 changes, (2) changes in titles and 1984 (49 FR 7037). By letter dated May 5, and 25, 1984. responsibilities of senior management, 1984, as superseded by letter dated Description of amendment request: (3) changes that allow approval of November 19, 1984, Georgia Power The proposed amendment requests certain plant procedures at managment Company has revised the previously approval for changes to the Appendix B levels other than that of the Qeneral noticed submittals to provide additional Technical Specifications to reflect the Manager-Plant Hatch, and (4) modify requirements concerning the selection of change in the location for three marine the Plant Review Board quorum the sample for the functional tests, to woodborer exposure panels and for requirements. provide additional functional test revisions to the procedure for Basis for proposedno significant requirements and to replace the table calibration of environmental monitoring hazards considerationdetermination: listing snubbers with an LCO instrumentation. These changes would The Commission has provided guidance description of the snubbers that are be to section 3.0, Special Monitoring and concerning the application of the required to be operable. Study Activities, Woodborer Monitoring

7988 Federal Register / "Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27,<*1985 / Notices Program, of Appendix B of the Oyster section XI indicated that conflicts may NRC Branch Chief-John A Zwolinski. Creek Technical Specifications. occur between the ASME code GPU Nuclear Corporation Docket No. Basis forproposedno significant requirements and the plant Technical 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear hazardsconsiderationdetermination: Specifications. To avoid such conflicts, Generating Station, Ocean County, New The proposed changes to Appendix B, the Commission requested that the Jersey Environmental Technical Specifications, licensee, in accordance with will: (1) Update Table 3.1 of the plant § 50.55a(g)(5)(ii), apply for an Date of amendment request: Technical Specifications which amendment to the plant technical September 18, 1984. describes the locations of the woodborer specifications to replace such conflicting Descriptionof amendment request: exposure panels and (2) decrease the technical specifications with a reference Requests approval of Appendix A frequency of calibration of to 10 CFR 50.55a. The licensee proposed Technical Specification changes to environmental water quality monitoring by an amendment request dated June 8, incorporate conductivity and chloride instrumentation for measuring salinity, 1984 to incorporate the requirements of limits given in Regulatory Guide 1.56 dissolved oxygen, water temperature the revised regulations on inservice into section 3.3.E, Reactor Coolant and pH. inspection and testing in the plant! Quality. These proposed changes may affect technical specifications. Basis forproposedno significant the measurement of the impact of plant The licensee previously, by an hazards considerationdetermination: operation on the environment. They do amendment request dated December 11, During the integrated assessment of not affect the operation of the plant. 1979, proposed to delete nondestructive Oyster Creek in the Nuclear Regulatory Therefore, the staff proposes to examination requirements for the Commission's Systematic Evaluation determine that the requested action reactor coolant system from § 4.3 of the Program (SEP), the Commission involves no significant hazards technical specifications because that reviewed the water purity of BWR consideration in that the proposed requirement was contained in the primary coolant. This is § 4.20, page 4 action does not involve a significant Oyster Creek Inservice Inspection 27, of NUREG-0822, Integrated Plant increase in the probability or Program for the second 10-year interval Safety Assessment Oyster Creek consequences of an accident previously and also proposed to renumber Nuclear Generating Station, dated evaluated, does not create the technical specifications, pages and September 1982, under SEP Topic V possibility of a new or different kind of tables in § 4.3 as needed to 12A, Water Purity of BWR Primary an accident from any previously accommodate the proposed changes. Coolant. 10 CFR Part 50 (Appendix A, evaluated and does not involve a The proposed amendment would: (1) General Design Criterion 14), as significant reduction in a margin of Incorporate into the technical implemented by guidance in Regulatory safety. specifications requirements in the Guide 1.56, requires that the reactor Local Public Document Room revised regulations and (2) delete a coolant pressure boundary have location: Ocean County Library, 101 required inspection from the technical minimal probability of rapidly Washington Street, Toms River, New specifications which is also contained in propagating failure. This includes Jersey 08753. the Oyster Creek Inservice Inspection corrosion-induced failures from Attorney for licensee: G.F. Program. The Commission has provided impurities in the reactor coolant system. Trowbridge, Esquire, Shaw, Pittmaii, examples of license amendments that The licensee, at the request of the Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, are not likely to involve significant Commission, is proposing to revise the NW., Washington, D.C. 20036. hazards considerations (48 FR 14870). technical specifications in section 3.3.E, NRC Branch Chief,John A. Zwolinski. Examples of amendments not likely to Reactor Coolant Quality, in the involve significant hazards Appendix A Technical Specifications for GPU Nuclear Corporation Docket No. considerations include: (vii) Changes to 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear Oyster Creek. The licensee proposes to Generating Station, Ocean County, New conform the license to the regulations increase the requirements on reactor where the license change results in very coolant water quality. Jersey. minor changes to facility operations Date of amendment request:June 8, The licensee is also proposing to add clearly in keeping with the regulations; text to the Bases for section 3.3.E. This is 1984, superseding the December 11, 1979, and [i) purely administrative changes to to: (1) Explain the effect of chlorides in request. the technical specifications. The Descriptionof amendment request: the reactor coolant and the reasons to proposed amendment incorporating into The proposed amendment requests the technical specifications the revised keep chloride levels consistent with approval of administrative revisions to guidelines of Regulatory Guide 1.56, Rev. regulations fall within example (vii). The Inservice Inspection (ISI) and Inservice deletion from the technical 1, and (2) refer to the reactor coolant Testing (IST) requirements in section 4.3, specifications of redundant temperature of 212°F instead of to the Reactor Coolant, of the Oyster Creek requirements falls within example [i). reactor condition, cold shutdown, in the Appendix A Technical Specifications. Because these amendments fall within Bases for measurement of conductivity Basis for proposedno significant examples of actions not likely to involve of the reactor coolant. hazards considerationdetermination: significant hazards considerations, the The proposed changes would On February 27, 1976, the Nuclear staff proposes to determine that the constitute an additional limitation, Regulatory Commission revised the requested action involves no significant restriction, or control not presently inservice inspection testing hazards consideration. included in the Technical Specifications, requirements for ASME Code Class 1, 2, Local Public Document Room that is, a more stringent limiting and 3 components for nuclear power location: Ocean County Library, 101 condition for operation and are, plants in 10 CFR 50.55a. The revised Washington Street, Toms River, New therefore, consistent with example (ii) of regulations require inservice inspection Jersey 08753. the Commission guidance (48 FR 14870, and testing set forth in Section XI of the Attorney for licensee: G.F. April 6, 1983) as a type of action which ASME, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Trowbridge, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, would not involve a significant hazards and Addenda. A review by the Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, consideration. Therefore, the staff Commission of 1974 edition ASME NW., Washington, D.C. 20036. proposes to determine that the

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 I Notices 7989 requested action would not involve a The Commission requested licensees Creek and the Augmented Offgas significant hazards consideration. to propose revisions to the System. Local Public Document Room "Administrative Controls" and location:Ocean County Library, 101 The licensee's proposed changes to "Definitions" sections of their plant's implement Appendix.I in the October 22, Washington Street, Toms River, New technical specifications to implement Jersey 08753. 1984, submittal are the following: (1) To the 50.72 and 50.73 regulation changes. add new definitions; (2] to revise the Attorney for licensee: G.F. The Commission also stated that there protective instrumentation requirements Trowbridge, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, may be other chanes to the technical in Table 3.1.1 on the Offgas system Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, specifications required to reflect the NW. Washington, D.C. 20036. isolation on high radiation; (3) to revise revised reporting requirements (e.g., and expand section 3.6 on radioactive NRC Branch Chief.John A. Zwolinski. technical specifications requiring a effluents, to add new sections and GPU Nuclear Corporation, Docket No. Licensee Event Report instead of a limiting conditions for operation on 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear Special Report). Solid Radioactive Waste, section 3.14, Generating Station, Ocean County, New The licensee's proposed changes and on Radioactive Effluent Monitoring Jersey pertaining to the new reporting Instrumentation, section 3.15; (4) to add requirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73 surveillance requirements in Table 4.1.1 Dateof amendment request'June1, constitute a change to make a license 1979, revisedOctober22, 1984. and 4.1.2 on high radiation isolation on conform to changes in the regulations the air ejector off-gas; (5) to revise and Description of amendment request: where the license change results in very Requests approval of Appendix A expand section 4.6 on Radioactive minor changes to facility operations Effluents; (6) to add new sections and Technical Specification changes clearly in keeping with the regulations. pertaining to definitions listed in section surveillance requirements on Solid These changes are consistent with Radioactive Waste, section 4.14, on I, definitions, that were previously example (vii) of the Commission's approved by the Commission but were Radioactive Effluent Monitoring guidance (48 FR 14870, April 0, 1983) as Instrumentation Applicability, section not and should be listed in the Table of a type of action not likely to involve a Contents; the new reporting 4.15, and on Radiological Environmental significant hazards consideration. Surveillance, section 4.16, and (7) to add requirements of 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73; The licensee has proposed extensive the Radiological Effluent Technical new requirements and to revise section changes to the Appendix A Technical 6.9.3, Unique Reporting Requirements, of Specifications (RETS) required by Specifications to implement the Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50; and the the Administrative Controls. These requirements of Appendix I, Numerical changes constitute an additional radioactivity limits and surveillance on Guides for Design Objectives and the reactor coolant. These are proposed limitation, restriction or control not Limiting Conditions for Operation to presently included in the technical changes to section 1, Definitions; section Meet the Criterion "As Low as is 2, Limiting Conditions for Operations; specifications and revisions to the Reasonably achievable" for Radioactive technical specifications to conform to section 3, Surveillance Requirements; Material. . to 10 CFR Part 50. These and section 8, Administrative Controls

                                                            .,                           changes in the regulations where the technical specifications are definitions,  license change results in very minor of the Oyster Creek Technical                 limiting conditions for operation and Specifications.                                                                          changes to the facility operations clearly surveillance requirements on the Oyster    in keeping with the regulations.

Basisfor proposedno significant Creek radioactive waste system and the hazards considerationdetermination: Therefore, these changes are consistent radioactive effluents from the plant with examples (ii) and (vii) of the The licensee has submitted a new Table including liquid radwaste, gaseous of Contents for the Appendix A Commission's guidance (48 FR 14879, radwaste and solid radwaste. April 8, 1983) as types of actions not Technical Specifications. This page On June 1, 1979, Jersey Central Power includes the definitions 1.26 to 1.29 likely to involve a significant hazards and Light submitted their proposed consideration. which were approved by the Technical Specification Change Request Commission in Amendment 75 dated The licensee also proposed limits on No. 69 to incorporate the requirements the radioactivity in the reactor coolant August 27, 1984 to the license. However, of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50. This in that amendment, the new definitions to revise the existing requirements in submittal was discussed with the staff section 3.6.D and 4.6.C of the technical were not added to the Table of on September 13, 1979, and the licensee Contents. This proposed change is a specifications. During the integarted agreed that revisions to this submittal assessment of Oysler Creek in the purely administrative change to the were needed. The licensee has since technical specifications to correct an Commission's Systematic Evalution then submitted letters dated February Program (SEP), the Commission error. Therefore, the change is 15, 1980, and October 22, 1984, consistent with example (i) of the reviewed the radiological consequences requesting changes to the Technical of the failure of small lines carrying Commission's guidance (48 FR 14870, Specifications pertaining to Appendix I April 6, 1983) as a type of action not reactor coolant outside containment. to 10 CFR Part 50. This is section 4.36, page 4-44, of likely to involve a significant hazards By letter dated February 15, 1980, NUREG-0822, Integrated Plant Safety consideration. Jersey Central Power and Light In Generic Letter 83-43, dated Assessment Oyster Creek Nuclear submitted Technical Specification Generating Station, dated September December 19, 1983, the Commission Change Request No. 79 which stated that § 50.72 of Title 10 of the Code 1982, under SEP Topic XV-16 of the of the Federal Regulations was revised incorporated the 10 CFR Part 50 same title. The Commission stated that Appendix I design objectives for the reactor coolant radioactivity for and a new § 50.73 was added, effective gaseous effluent releases. This submittal January 1, 1984. Section 50.72 revises the Oyster Creek should be maintained was issued as Amendment 49 to the within the limits imposed on new immediate notification requirement for Oyster Creek Technical Specifications operating nuclear power reactors and operating reactors which are the limits and was designed to be a temporary of the Commission's Standard Technical § 50.73 provides for a revised Licensee change, to be replaced after the Event Report System. Specifications on General Electric complete RETS are issued for Oyster Boiling Water Reactors (NTREG-0123).

7990 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 J Notices The licensee has proposed new Technical Specifications and is, consistent with the overall -requirements requirements which are more restrictive therefore, consistent with example (ii) of on the plant Fire Protection Program in than the existing technical specifications the Commission's guidance (48 FR 14870, 10 CFR 5048 and guideline positions in on reactor coolant radioactivity. April 6, 1983] as a type of action which the staff's Branch Technical Positions on Therefore, these changes are consistent would not involve a significant hazards the plant-Fire Protection Program. with example (ii) of the Commission's consideration. Theref~re, the staff The licensee stated in the proposed guidance (48 FE 14870, April 6, 1983) as a proposes to determine that the change to halve the frequency of type of action not likely to involve a requested action would not involve a auditing the activities associated with significant hazards consideration. significant hazards consideration. the plant Operational Quality Assurance Therefore, based on the above, the Local Public Document Room Program that it is based on the staff proposes to determine that all of location: Ocean County Library, 101 guidelines -ofRegulatory Guide 1.33 the requested actions discussed above Washington Street, Toms River, New (February 1978), Quality Assurance do not involve a significant hazards Jersey 08753. Programs Requirements, of draft (issued consideration. Attorney for licensee: G.F. for comment) Regulatory Guide 1.144 Local Public Document room location: Trowbridge, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, (January 1979), Auditing of Quality Ocean County Library, 101 Washington Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, Assurance Programs for Nuclear Power Street, Toms River, New Jersey 08753. NW. Washington, D.C. 20036. Plants, and ANSI/ASME N45.2.12-1977. Attorney for licensee:G.F. NRC Branch Chief John A. Zwolinski. The requirements that are in ANSI/ Trowbridge, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, ASME N45.2.12-1977 for auditing quality GPU Nuclear Corporation, Docket No. Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear assurance programs for nuclear power NW, Washington, D.C. 20036. Generating Stotion. Ocean County, New plants are acceptable to the staff and NRC Branch Chief-John A. Zwolinski. Jersey provide an adequate basis for complying GPU Nuclear Corporation, Docket No. with the pertinent quality assurance Date of amenwdment request: October requirements of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear 24 and December 24, 1984. Generating Station, Ocean County, New Descriptionof amendment request: 50 subject to the guidelines in Jersey Regulatory Guide 1.144. For internal Request approval of Appendix A audits of the operational -phase activities Date of amendment request: October Technical Specification changes of the quality assurance program the 22, 1984. pertaining to Fire Protection and Quality guidelines of Regulatory Guide 1.33 Description of amendment request Assurance which: (1) Will decrease the frequency of required audits on the plant should be followed. The proposed amendment requests approval for changes to the Appendix A Fire Protection Program and Operational In his letter dated December 24, 1984, Technical Specifications realted to the Quality Assurance Plan, and (2) delete thd licensee has proposed to delete Reactor Coolant System Leakage in the reference to sprinkler system #13 as Sprinkler System #13 from Tables 3.12.1 sections 1., 3.3 and 4.3 of the Technical fire detection inshrumentation and as a and 3.12.2 of the Appendix A Technical Specifications by: (1) The addition of spray/sprinkler system. Specifications. The Laundry Room in the reactor coolant leak rate detection Basis forproposedno significant office building on the 35'-0' elevation is requirements and surveillance, (2) the hazards considerationdetermination:In being converted to a count room incorporation of requirements for the licensee's letter dated October 24, containing electronic equipment. identified and unidentified leakage, (3) 1984, the licensee requested a change to Sprinkler System #13 was originally the addition of definitions for identified section 6.5.3.1 of the Appendix A installed to protect cables passing and unidentified leakage, and (4) the Technical Specifications to add the through the laundry area to the Reactor correction of the Bases to section 3.3, requirement that the Oyster Creek Fire Building from the combustible loading Reactor Coolant, to reflect the actual Protection Program, and its due to accumulated clothing in the plant configuration. implementing procedures, and the laundry facility. Basis for proposedno significant activities required by the Oyster Creek With the conversion of the laundry hazards considerationdetermination: Operational Quality Assurance Plan to facility, the combustible loading due to This Technical Specification Change meet Appendix B, 10 CFR Part K0. be accumulated clothing will no longer Request by the licensee will provide audited under -the cognizance of the exist since Sprinkler System #13 was additional requirements in the Technical Vice President Nuclear Assurance at specifically designed to protect from a Specifications on leakage from the least once per 24 months. Currently fire originating in the laundry bins reactor coolant system and additional these programs are audited at least once which are now gone. This removal is surveillance requirements for the reactor per 12 months under the requirement in desired because electronic test coolant leakage detection systems. § 6.5.3.1(a] on audits for conformance of equipment is being brought to the area These changes constitute additional facility operations to provisions and there is the potential of accidently requirements, limitations and controls contained within the Technical wettiug this equipment from inadvertent not presently included in the Oyster Specifications. The licensee proposes to initiation of the sprinkler system. Creek Technical Specifications on decrease the frequency at which audits These changes do not affect plant reactor coolant leakage. are required -on the plant programs to at operation. The changes are minor This change will also incorporate a least once per 24 months. changes to licensee administrative more restrictive Technical Specification The licensee's proposed change to activities clearly in keeping with the requirement for unidentified leakage halve the frequency of auditing the Fire regulations and with changes te the fire and will correct the Bases for section Protection Program is in response to the protection. apeas/zones within the plant. 3.3, Reactor Coolant, of the Technical Commission's Generic Letter 82-21, The staff pwoposes to determine that &he Specifications to :have the Bases reflect dated October 6, 1982, "Technical proposed changes would not Involve a the actual plant configuration. Specifications for Fire Protection significant hazards consideration "Thischange would constitute an Audits." This generic letter provides determination In that 6ey: Cl) Do not additional limitation, restriction, or guidance for a bienniaW audfi Df the Fire involve a significant increase In &a control not presently included in the Protection Program which would be probability or consequences of a

Federal Register I Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 7991 previously evaluated accident; (2) do not longer include mitigation of an operating NRC Branch Chief: John F. Stolz. create the possibility of a new or accident, namely hydrogen purging. different kind of accident from any The proposed revision to the Indiana and Michigan Electric Company, accident previously evaluated; and (3) surveillance of fire hose stations (TS Docket Nos. 50-315 and 0--316, Donald do not involve a significant reduction in 4.18.6) would permit deferring C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and a margin of safety. inspections when the stations are 2, Berrien County, Michigan Local Public Document Room inaccessible because purging is not Date of amendment request: location:Ocean County Library, 101 permitted. December 17, 1984. Washington Street, Toms River, New Basis forproposed no significant Descriptionof amendment request: Jersey 08753. hazards considerationdetermination: The proposed amendment would change Attorney for licensee: G.F. The proposed TS changes on primary the Technical Specifications to update Trowbridge, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, coolant activity and on vent/purge valve the offsite organization chart, and Potts, and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, operability and surveillance are in the organization and responsibilities of the NW., Washington, D.C. 20036. same category as Example (ii), 48 FR Plant Nuclear Safety Review Committee NRC Branch Chief-John A. Zwolinski. 14870, which cites changes that (PNSRC) and the Nuclear Safety and constitute additional limitations, Design Review Committee (NSDRC), to GPU Nuclear Corporation, et al., Docket restrictions or controls not presently No. 50-289, Three Mile Island Nuclear update the reporting requirements included in the TSs as changes not likely addressed by the recent revision to 10 Station, Unit No. 1, Dauphin County, to involve significant hazards Pennsylvania CFR 50.73, to revise the containment consideration. The proposed TSs would isolation valve listing, to correct an error Date of amendment request: be substantially more restrictive on in one reference to the battery November 24, 1983, as revised and primary coolant activity limits and electrolyte temperature for surveillance, supplemented June 5, 1984 and would require more sampling. The limits and to make a number of editorial December 3, 1984. on plant operation with inoperable changes. Descriptionof amendment request: purge/vent valves would be more restrictive and the amount of time Basis for proposedno significant The proposed amendment would hazardsconsiderationdetermination: incorporate Technical Specification (TS) purging would be permitted would be reduced. the Commission has provided guidance changes needed to complete Multiplant concerning the application of the Action (MPA) B-24, containment purge The elimination of the TSs on hydrogen purging and the modification standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing and vent. certain examples (48 FR 14870, April 6, The proposed change on primary of the TSs on reactor building purge air treatment system are proposed because 1983). One of the examples (i) of an coolant activity (TS 3.1.4 and Table 4.1 action not likely to involve a significant

3) was previously noticed in the Federal the available hydrogen recombiners eliminate the need for purging of hazards consideration is a purely Register on May 23, 1984 (49 FR 21830), administrative change to technical and the Commission's staff proposed hydrogen as an accident mitigation function.'These changes are in the same specifications; for example, a change to that the changes on primary coolant achieve consistency throughout the activity do not involve a significant category as Example (vi), 48 FR 14870, i.e., changes which may result in some technical specifications, correction of an hazards consideration. The staff's error, or a change in nomenclature. The position remains unchanged. increase in the probability or consequences of a previously analyzed proposed amendment is directly related The proposed change in vent/purge to this example with the exception of the valve operability and surveillance accident but which are clearly within the acceptance criteria of the Standard change to the reporting requirements requirements (TS 3.6. 4.4.1.2.5, and Review Plan (SRP), because the SRP and the revision to the listing of the 4.4.1.7) would provide operability containment penetration valves.

requirements for large purge valves so permits the use of hydrogen recombiners in lieu of hydrogen purging. Another example (vii) is a change to that if one valve is inoperable, the The proposed change in surveillance make a license confirm to changes in the companion valve in-line would be of the fire hose stations is also regulations. Revisions to 10 CFR 50.73 closed or the reactor shut down. If, considered to be an Example (vi) type of make it necessary to revise the technical however, the problem is seal leakage, action which, again, is clearly within the specifications on reporting requirements both valves in-line would be shut to acceptance criteria of the SRP because and definitions, therefore, the proposed prevent leakage or the reactor would be the change does not alter the SRP change in reporting requirements is shut down. The proposed TSs also surveillance requirements, but only directly related to this example. Another would limit the opening of purge valves extends the surveillance intervals which example (vi) of an action not likely to to 30 degrees during power operation, are not specified in the SRP. involve a significant hazards would identify activities for which Based on the foregoing, the consideration is a change which either purging is permitted and would require Commission's staff proposes to may result in some increase to the instances of purging to be limited. The determine that the proposed amendment probability or consequences of a changes in section 4 would provide involves no significant hazards previously-analyzed accident or may surveillance requirements for purge consideration. reduce in some way a safety margin, but valves. LocalPublicDocument Room where the results of the change are The TSs on surveillance of the location: Government Publications clearly within all acceptable criteria hydrogen purge system (TS 4.4.3) would Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, with respect to the system or component be eliminated because hydrogen Education Building, Commonwealth and specified in the Standard Review Plan. recombiners are available per Walnut Streets, Harrisburg, The proposed change to revise the Amendment 87. Additionally, the Pennsylvania 17126. containment isolation valve list (on Unit reactor building purge air treatment Attorney for licensee: G.F. No. 1) is directly related to this example. system TSs (TSs 3.15.2 and 4.12.2) would Trowbridge, Shaw, Pittman, Potts & However, this change was approved for be revised to be compatible with the Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, NW., Unit 2 by License Amendment No. 64 system's safety function which would no Washington, D.C. 20036. and was established there as not

7992 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 2V, 1985 I Notices involving a significant hazards than 0.38 inch is like this example in that operation was not yet demonstrated. consideration. The Unit 1 changes are the new requirement is less than the 0.38 The proposed removal of the license the same as made for Unit 2 and the inche (% inch is 0.375). Since the condition is directly related to the valve configurations are alike for both measurement techniques are not as example in that the licensee has Units in this regard. On the basis of the precise for accumulation measurement, performed a seismic qualification above, the Commission proposes to the latter change is also like the review, as required, and has fulfilled the conclude that the proposed change to example (i) which is a purely requirements to the criterion previously the Technical Specifications involves a administrative change to technical found acceptable to the NRC. The no significant hazards consideration. specifications. Editorial changes license Amendment No. 0 issued on June Local PublicDocument Room proposed by the licensee are directly 16, 1978, also concluded that the location:Maude Reston Palenske related to example (i). Example (i) also amendment involved no sirnificant Memorial Library, 500 Market Street, St. involves changes to achieve consistency hazards consideration pending the final Joseph, Michigan 49085. throughout the technical specifications. seismic qualification. Thus, if the NRC Attorney for licensee: Gerald This is essentially the reason to regroup staff review confirms the licensee's Charnoff, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts the ice baskets on Unit I to make both conclusions concerning this and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, NW., Units Technical Specifications and the requirement, the amendment involves no Washington, D.C. 20036. Westinghouse Standard Technical significant hazards considerations. On NRC Branch Chief: Steven A. Varga. Specifications more alike. On the above this basis, the staff proposes to basis, the staff proposes to conclude determine that the amendment request Indiana and Michigan Electric Company, that the amendments involve a no does not involve a significant hazards Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316, Donald significant hazards consideration. consideration. C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. I and Local PublicDocument Room Local Public Document Room 2, Berrien County, Michigan location:Maude Reston Palenske location:Maude Reskon Palenske Date of amendment request.: Memorial Library, 500 Market Street, St. Memorial Library, 500 Market Street, St. December 28,1984. Joseph, Michigan 49085. Joseph, Michigan 49085. Descriptionof amendment request. Attorney for licensee: Gerald Attorney for licensee: Gerald The proposed amendments would make Charnoff, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts Charnoff, Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts changes to the Technical Specifications and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, NW., and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, NW., for the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Washington, D.C. 20036. Washington, D.C. 20036. Unit Nos. I and 2, to require ice NRC Branch Chief: Steven A. Varga. NRC Branch Chief.Steven A. Varga. measurements and surveillance on Indiana and Michigan Electric Company, Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, boron concentration and on pH at 25 °C, and to change the restriction on ice Docket No. 50-316, Donald C. Cook Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2, Berrien Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa accumulation on structures from 0.38 inches to % inches. The change to Unit 1 County, Michigan Date of amendment request.May 19, Date of amendment request: Technical Specifications would change December 5, 1984 and January 24, 1985. ice condenser surveillance from 12 to 9 1978, supplemented December 18, 1979, March 28, 1980, July 8, 1983, June I and Descriptionof amendment request: months, regroup the baskets under The proposed amendment request would surveillance to be like Unit 2, require ice December 7, 1984. Descriptionof amendment request: change the Duane Arnold Energy Center condenser doors be demonstrated at (DAEC) Technical Specifications related once per 9 months for 50% of the doors The request for amendment was initially rather than at 6 months for 25% of the noticed on September 21, 1983 (48 FR to the instrumentation for core and 43126). This amendment -for the Donald containment cooling and containment doors, and editorial changes needed'for clarity. C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2, would isolation. The proposed changes consist Basis for proposedno significant remove licensing condition 2C(3)(r) of two groups of changes. Group 1 hazards considerationdetermination: which required a seismic qualification consists of those changes which do not The Commission has provided guidance review of the safety injection system affect physical or operational concerning the application of the front panel, hot shutdown pane?, characteristics of the plant, but clarify standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing auxiliary relay panels and switchboard the testing and limiting conditions for certain examples (48 FR 14870, April 6, and switchgear components, relays and operation for core and containment 1983). One of the examples (ii) of an pressure switches as identified in the cooling instrumentation and action not likely to involve a significant safety evaluation which was issued with surveillance tables, and Group 2 hazards consideration is a change that the licensing condition. Amendment No. consists of changes related to additional constitutes an additional limitation, 6 issued on June 16. 1978, imposed restrictions and limitations imposed in restriction, or control not presently license condition 2C(3)(r). The licensee's the Technical Specifications to assure included in the technical specification. proposal would remove the license that four containment isolation valves The changes to require ice condition on the basis that the seismic converted from power operated valves measurements and surveillance on qualification has been accomplished. to marmal valves will be mairntained in boron concentration and on pH at 258C, The required information has been the closed position. The modification to reduce the ice condenser surveillance submitted to the NRC for review. will therefore result in an increase In from 12 months to 9 months, and to Basis for proposedno significant confidence that the containment will be require ice condenser doors be hazards considerationdetermination: isolated when required. demonstrated at once per 9 months for One of the Commission examples (48 FR Basis forproposedno significant 50% of the doors rather than 6 months 14870) of amendments not likely to hazardsconsiderationdetermination: for 25% of the doors (more doors involve a significant hazards The CommIssion has provided demonstrated more often over a period consideration relates to relief granted standards (10 CFR 50.92(c)) for of time) are all changes directly related upon demonstration of acceptable determining whether a significant to this example. The changes to restrict operation from an operating restriction hazards consideration exists. A the ice accumulation to% inch rather that was imposed because acceptable proposed amendment to an operating

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 7993 license for a facility involves no (DAEC) Technical Specifications changes against the three standards significant hazards consideration if regarding the spent and new fuel storage specified in 10 CFR 50.92(c), as follows: operation of the facility in accordance racks. The proposed revisions are (1) Revising the existing fuel storage with the proposed amendment would intended to clarify the existing rack Technical Specifications to use not: (1) Involve a significant increase in Technical Specifications and the bases bundle reactivity limits (kwn) does not the probability or consequences of an related to Spent and New Fuel Storage. involve a physical plant change or mode accident previously evaluated; or (2) The current fuel storage rack of plant operation. The kuw values create the possibility of a new or Technical Specifications for reactivity being proposed represent fuel reactivity different kind of accident from any control are written in terms of effective limits equivalent-to the existing storage accident previously evaluated; or (3) multiplication factors (Kff). In the past, rack Ke. values. Therefore, since there is involve a significant reduction in a because there has been a substantial no change in the permissible reactivity margin of safety. margin between the maximum limits or any physical characteristics of The licensee has evaluated the permissible reactivity and the fuel the plant, the license concludes that the proposed changes in accordance with bundle reactivity, the compliance based proposed change does not involve any the standards for a no significant on Kr measure has not been of concern. significant increase in the probability or hazards consideration finding in 10 CFR However, as fuel designs are improved consequences of any criticality accident. 50.92(c). The licensee states that the to permit longer fuel cycles, the (2) Since the proposed change is Group 1 changes involve clarifications, available margins are reduced to a point merely an alternative way of calculating corrections of errors, and moving a where a simpler method for determining referenced note to a page where it is compliance with unchanged standards, compliance with the Technical the change Is not expected to introduce cited. Such changes are administrative Specifications (than complex in nature and fully meet the above cited a possibility of a new or different calculations of KY}) Is needed to readily accident or malfunction from any 10 CFR 50.92(c) standards for a finding determine compliance with the of no significant hazards considerations. previously analyzed. Technical Specifications. The proposed (3) Since the existing fuel rack The Group 2 changes involve conversion changes will specify fuel bundle k, of four power operated containment reactivity limits are not changed by the values which correspond to the fuel rack isolation valves to manual valves. proposed revision to the method of Technical Specification Kff limits. by compliance the proposed change is not Because the converted valves will be using kt,, values, which are readily maintained in normally closed position, expected to reduce the margin of safety. available, the process of checking the containment isolation will be compliance with the reactivity Technical The NRC staff has reviewed the above enhanced. The licensee has therefore licensee's evaluation and agrees with Specifications is made simpler. For made the finding that the Group 2 General Electric Company (GE) the licensee's conclusions that the change entails additional limitations designed fuel racks, the equivalent Commission's standards for a no and restrictions in the Technical bundle kwwt, is 1.31 as described in the significant hazards determination are Specifications and meets the 10 CFR GE Standard Application for Reactor met. The staff has, therefore, made a 50.92(c) standards for a no significant Fuels (NEDE-24011-P-A). The following proposed determination that the hazards consideration finding. specific changes are requested in the application involves no significant The NRC staff has reviewed the proposed amendment request: hazards consideration. licensee's evaluation against the three (1) Add bundle kwt=, limit to the new Local PublicDocument Room standards specified in 10 CFR 50.92(c) fuel rack specification; location: Cedar Rapids Public Library, and agrees with the licensee's (2) Replace current axial enrichment 426 Third Avenue, SE., Cedar Rapids, conclusions that the proposed request criteria with an equivalent bundle Iowa 52401. for amendment meets the standards for kimn.t, value in the spent fuel storage Attorney for licensee: Jack Newman, a no significant hazards considerations rack specification; and Esquire, Harold F. Reis, Esquire, finding. (3) Add bases and references Newman and Holtzinger, 1025 The staff has, therefore, made a describing the basis for arriving at the Connecticut Avenue, NW., Washington, proposed determination that the storage rack specifications and methods D.C. 20036. application involves no significant for performing the compliance checks. NRC Branch Chief.Domenic B. hazards consideration. Basis forproposedno significant Vassallo. LocalPublic DocumentRoom hazardsconsiderationdetermination: location:Cedar Rapids Public Library, Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, The Commission has provided Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold 426 Third Avenue, SE., Cedar Rapids, standards (10 CFR 50.92(c)) for Iowa 32401. determining whether a significant Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa Attorney for licensee: Jack Newman, hazards consideration exists. A Date of amendment request. Esquire, Harold F. Reis, Esquire, proposed amendment to an operating December 7, 1984. Newman and Holtzinger, 1025 license for a facility involves no Descriptionof amendmentrequest Connecticut Avenue, NW., Washington, significant hazards consideration if The Iowa Electric Light and Power D.C. 20036. operation of the facility in accordance Company (the licensee) proposes to NRC Branch Chief.Domenic B. with the proposed amendment would change the Technical Specifications for Vassallo. not: (1) Involve a significant increase in Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) to Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, the probability or consequences of an permit loading of the General Electric Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold accident previously evaluated; or (2) Company's (GE) advanced fuel Lead Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa create the possibility of a new or Test Assemblies (LTAs) in the DAEC different kind of accident from any core. Date of amendment request: accident previously evaluated; or (3) The licensee has agreed to participate December 7,1984. involve a significant reduction in a in GE's advanced fuel deyelopment Descriptionof amendment request: margin of safety. program by accepting five LTAs for use The proposed amendment would revise The licensee has evaluated the in DAEC beginning with Cycle 8 the Duane Arnold Energy Center proposed Technical Specification operation. The design of the LTA9 and

7994 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices the demonstration of their conformance not: (1) Involve a significant increase in The NRC staff has reviewed the to all applicable thermal-mechanical the probability or consequences of an licensee's evaluation per 10 CFR 50.92 performance criteria are documented in accident previously evaluated; or (2) and concurs with its conclusions that the GE report, "Generic Licensing of create the possibility of a new or the Commission standards for a no 1984 Lead Test Assemblies (Special different kind of accident from any significant hazards determination are Report MFN-068-84). " The NRC staff's accident previously evaluated; or (3) met. The staff has, therefore, made a conditional acceptance of the GE report involve a significant reduction in a proposed determination that the is documented in our Safety Evaluation margin of safety. application involves no significant Report, "Acceptance of Referencing of In accordance with the requirements hazards consideration. Licensing Special Report MFN-068-84, of 10 CFR 50.92, the licensee has Local PublicDocument Room Lead Test Assembly Licensing." For that provided the following evaluation to location:Cedar Rapids Public Library, report the use of the LTAs was found to determine if the application involves no 426 Third Avenue, SE., Cedar Rapids, be acceptable if the following conditions significant hazards considerations: Iowa 52401. were-satisfied: (1) The licensee states that, for the Attorney for licensee: lack Newman,,

1. The 1984 Lead Test Assemblies will reasons stated below, the proposed Esquire, Harold F. Reis, Esquire, not be the most limiting fuel assemblies amendment does not involve a Newman and Holtzinger, 1025 in the core at any time during their significant increase in the probability or Connecticut Avenue, NW., Washington, residence in the core. the consequences of accidents D.C. 20036.

2. The user of these Lead Test previously evaluated. GE has performed NRC Branch Chief.Domenic B.

Assemblies must verify that the fuel the LOCA analysis in accordance with design criteria and specified fuel design Vassallo. 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix K, to evaluate limits are met for 1984 Lead Test the design basis event for the LTA Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, Assemblies for the specific conditions in bundles being used in Cycle 8. The Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold the reactor chosen for irradiation of Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa results of this analysis show that, with these assemblies. the proposed Maximum Average Planar

3. The user of the Lead Test Date of amendment request:

Assemblies supplies the results of the Linear Heat Generation Rate December 7, 1984. transients and accident analyses for the (MAPLHGR) changes to the Technical Descriptionof amendment request. test assemblies and modifies the plant Specifications, the loading of the LTA This submittal by the Iowa Electric Light Technical Specifications as necessary to bundles in the DAEC core complies with and Power Company (the licensee) reflect the use of the assemblies. the requirements of 10 CFR 50, requests changes to the Duane Arnold Based on the analyses of the DAEC, Appendix K. Energy Center (DAEC] Technical the licensee concludes that: GE has also evaluated the transients Specifications to: (1) Permit reactor (1) The LTAs will be loaded into core for the LTA bundles, for use in Cycle 8, operation with one recirculation loop locations-such that they will not be the in accordance with the methods out of service, (2] to include General most limiting bundles with regard to acceptable to the NRC. The results of Electric Company's (GE) Service operating margin to any fuel thermal the analyses presented in the licensee's Information Letter (SIL) 380, Revision 1 limit when compared to the remaining application show that the LTA recommendations regarding thermal fuel in the core. This has been performance is within the limits hydraulic stability for dual loop and analytically verffied for Cycle 8 specified in the Updated Final Safety single loop operations, and (3) to operation and will be strictly adhered to Analysis Report (UFSAR), when revised incorporate administrative changes in actual operation during Cycle 8. For Minimum Critical Power Ratio (MCPR) dealing with updating references and future cycles, this will be verified during operating limits are incorporated in the deletion of blank pages. Presently, the the design of the core loading Technical Specifications. DAEC operating license requires a unit arrangements; and GE has evaluated the Linear Heat to be in cold shutdown within the (2) The results of the Loss-of-Coolant Generation Rate (LHGR) limits for both succeeding 24 hours if an idle Accident (LOCA] and abnormal LOCA and Rod Withdrawal Error recirculation loop can not be returned to operating transient analyses verify that (RWE) events. The results of the GE service within 24 hours. The licensee all applicable fuel design criteria and analysis show that the LTA performance previously requested authorization for Specified Acceptable Fuel Design Limits is within the limits specified in the unlimited single loop operation of (SAFDL) are met by the LTAs during UFSAR. DAEC. Subsequently, Tennessee Valley Cycle 8 operation in the DAEC. (2) The above summary of the Authority's operation of Browns Ferry As a result of its evaluation, the licensee's evaluation shows that the Unit I ( a boiling water reactor similar in licensee has proposed DAEC Technical thermal-mechanical performance will be design to DAEC) in the single loop mode Specification changes which will permit met by the LTA fuel bundles and all the of operation at 59% power lead to the loading of the GE's LTAs in the fuel design criteria and SAFDLs will be concerns related to thermal-hydraulic DAEC core in compliance of the criteria satisfied (as stated in the introduction). instability. GE, in SIL #380, Revision 1, and SAFDL Therefore, the addition of LTA bundles addressed these concerns by providing Basis for proposedno significant to DAEC will not create the possibility the boiling water reactor licensees hazardsconsiderationdetermination: of a new or different kind of accident. generic guidance to obviate thermal The Commission has provided (3) Since the LTA bundles are being hydraulic stability induced neutron flux standards (10 CFR 50.92(c)) for subjected to proposed additional oscillations. The licensee has proposed determining whether a significant operating limits (to be incorporated in Technical Specifications in accordance hazards consideration exists. A the Technical Specifications), and since with the guidance provided by GE in proposed amendment to an operating thermal-mechanical performance of the SIL-380, Revision 1. license for a facility involves no LTA meets the NRC fuel design criteria Specifically, the proposed changes significant hazards consideration if and SAFDLs, the operation of DAEC requested by the licensee consist of: (1) operation of the facility in accordance with LTA fuel bundles will not reduce Deletion of the license condition with the proposed amendment would any margins of safety. restricting the single loop operation and,

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27,_1985 / Notices i *rdo

                                                                                                                                      /VV0 I UUU for single and dual loop operation.              alleviate the concerns related to the incorporating requirements in the                                                              amendment meets the Commission's Technical Specifications to detect               thermal-hydraulic instability by adding       standards in 10 CFR 50.92(c).

thermal-hydraulic instabilities induced surveillance requirements for detecting Therefore, the staff has made a thermal-hydraulic instabilities and proposed determination that the by neutron oscillations and specifying specifying the remedial operator actions operator response to the detected application involves no significant for responding to them. Such operator hazards consideration. instabilities, (2) revision of the Technical actions will also assure that there will Specifications to provide Average Power LocalPublic Document Room be no significant increase in the location:Cedar Rapids Public Library, Range Monitor (APRM) flux scram trip probability or consequences of an and rod block settings, an increase in 426 Third Avenue, SE., Cedar Rapids, accident. Based on the above Iowa 52401. the safety limit Minimum Critical Power discussion, we find that the proposed Ratio (MCPR) value, and a revision to changes are not expected to Attorney for licensee:Jack Newman, the allowable Average Planar Linear Esquire, Harold F. Reis, Esquire, significantly increase the probability or Newman and Holtzinger, 1025 Heat Generation Rate (APLHGR) values; consequences of previously evaluated and (3) updating of some references and accidents. Connecticut Avenue, NW., Washington, deletion of some blank pages. D.C. 20036. Basis forproposedno significant (2) Consideration of Possibility of a New NRC Branch Chief: Domenic B. hazards considerationdetermination: or Different Kind of Accident Vassallo. The Commission has provided The DAEC operation with one standards (10 CFR 50.92(c) for Mississippi Power &Light Company, recirculation loop is not expected to Middle South Energy, Inc., South determining whether a significant create the possibility of a new or hazards consideration exists. A Mississippi Electric Power Association, different kind of accident from any Docket No. 50-416, Grand Gulf Nuclear proposed amendment to an operating previously analyzed, as all abnormal license for a facility involves no Station, Unit 1, Claiborne County, operating transients which could be Mississippi significant hazards consideration if initiated with single loop operation, such operation of the facility in accordance as an inadvertent startup of an idle Date of amendment request: January with the proposed amendment would recirculation pump or pump trip have 30, 1985. not: (1) Involve a significant increase in already been analyzed in the FSAR, and Descriptionof amendment request: the probability or consequences of an reviewed and accepted by the staff. The amendment would permit a accident previously evaluated; or (2) For single and dual loop operation, the reorganization to make plant quality create the possibility of a new or addition of the surveillance personnel more independent of plant different kind of accident from any requirements and remedial actions for operations personnel. The Technical accident previously evaluated; or (3) thermal-hydraulic instability detection Specification changes would be: (1) involve a significant reduction in a and response involve normal plant Change the title of Manager, Supplier margin of safet. operating practices and, therefore, are QA to Manager, Audits QA, on the We have evaluated the licensee's not expected to create a new or different Offsite Organization chart; (2) delete the request for the proposed Technical kind of accident from any previously Nuclear Plant Quality Superintendent Specifications for compliance with the analyzed in the FSAR. from the Unit Operating Organization above cited standards. chart; (3) change the composition of the (3) Consideration of Reduction in a Plant Safety Review Committee by (1) Consideration of Probability and Margin of Safety Consequences of Accidents substituting the Manager, Nuclear Site The licensee has proposed the revised QA for the Quality Superintendent. Our evaluation of the proposed operating limits, setpoints, and Basis forproposedno significant changes Indicates that the principal procedures for the proposed single and hazards considerationdetermination: accident associated with a single dual loop operation. Our evaluation of recirculation loop operating would be an The Commission has provided certain the licensee's proposal indicates that the examples (48 FR 14870) of actions likely inadvertent startup of the idle proposed changes will ensure that the to involve no signficant hazards recirculation loop pump causing a FSAR margins of safety will not be transient. However, such a transient considerations. One of the examples is a was evaluated in the DAEC Final Safety reduced during normal operation and purely administrative change to Analysis Report (FSAR) and found to with one recirculation pump not Technical Specifications. Change (1) is satisfy the Commission's regulations. In operating. Our conclusions are based on similar to this example since it is simply our review of the evaluations by GE in a change of title to more accurately addition, the licensee has proposed support of the DAEC single loop more restrictive Technical Specification reflect the primary responsibility of the operation presented in the GE report position, while the lines of responsibility changes related to MCPR limits, flow NEDO-24272. biased scram and rod block setpoints, and communication are not changed. In For single and dual loop operation, the Change (2), the Nuclear Plant Quality and reduced MAPLHGR operating additional surveillance requirements limits, to ensure that the probabilities Superintendent will be moved from the and remedial actions required of the Unit Operating Organization and placed and the consequences of accidents with operator for detection of and response single recirculation loop operation will under the Manager Nuclear Site QA in to thermal-hydraulic instability will the Offsite Organization in order to not be significantly increased. We have increase the present margin of safety. also evaluated the implication of minimize possible conflicts of interest in thermal-hydraulic stability for both The updating of several references the management of the plant operation. single and dual loop operations after the and deletion of some blank pages entail The Nuclear Plant Quality administrative changes and clearly Superintendent will spend more time on licensee's proposed Technical satisfy the Commission standards for a Specification changes based on the GE "no significant hazards involved" his primary responsibility of quality recommendations in SIL 380, Revision 1 inspection since the majority of other finding. QA functions he has been performing, are incorporated. Our evaluation shows Based on the above considerations the that the proposed changes would including review of procedures and staff concludes that the proposed procurement documents will be

7996 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices delegated to othe QA positions. This program and provide a plan for and supporting bases for the Emergency achieving compliance with Appendix J. Ventilation System and the Control change is an improvement in the quality Room Air Treatment System and its assurance functions of the plant since Basis for proposedno signficant hazardsconsiderationdetermination: associated instrumentation. The the Unit Operating Organization majority of the proposed changes are the Management will not have line The Commission has provided guidance concerning the application of the result of modifications made to the responsibility for the quality inspection Control Room Air Treatment System to functions. In Change (3), substituting the standards for determining whether a significant hazards consideration exists resolve NUREG-0737, Item II.DS.3.4, Manager, Nuclear Site QA for the "Control Room Habitability". The Quality Superintendent in the Plant by providing certain examples (48 FR 14870). The examples of actions licensee's description of the proposed Safety Review Committee will maintain involving no significant hazards change is as follows: the level of review from a quality Niagara Mohawk submittal dated March consideration include: ". . . (ii) A assurance standpoint, since the Quality 28, 1983, described modifications to the change that constitutes an additional Superintendent reports to the Manager Control Room Air Treatment System which limitation, restriction, or control not Nuclear Site QA. Proposed changes (2) presently included in the technical would establish an acceptable degree of and (3) improve safety in that they allow specifications; for example, a more compliance with General Design Criterion 19. QA activities to focus entirely on quality These modifications included installation of stringent surveillance requirement" and redundant radiation monitors on the air requirements and to be independent of "(vii) A change to make a license plant production activities. Because intake which will automatically initiate the conform to changes in the regulations, emergency train of the system. proposed changes (2) and (3) would not where the license change results in very The changes described below reflect the affect plant equipment design, safety minor changes to facility operations change from the manual to automatic criteria or safety analyses and 'will clearly in keeping with the regulations." initiation of the Control Room Air Treatment result in an improvement in plant safety The changes proposed in the System and add Limiting Conditions for by enhancing the independence of application for amendment are Operation and Surveillance Requirements to quality assurance from plant production, encompassed by the above examples in further increase the system's reliability. these changes do not significantly that: (1) The adding of additional valves The addition of item (j) to page 178a increase the probability or to be local leak rate tested is an requires surveillance testing of the Control consequences of an accident previously Room Air Treatment System at least once additional restriction and is, therefore, every operating cycle. This addition will help evaluated or create the possibility of a similar to example (ii) above, and (2) new or different kind of accident from to ensure the reliability of the system. other changes proposed as necessary Changes to page 178b correct the test to any accident previously evaluated, or do because the licensee is currently reflect changes in the design basis of the they involve a significant reduction in a required by the regulations to limit system. Changes to page 188" indicate the margin of safety. Accordingly, the primary containment leakage and is to additions of Tables 3.6.2m and 4.6.2m which Commission proposes to determine that make the license conform to 10 CFR Part increase the Limiting Conditions for these changes do not involve a 50, Appendix J,are considered minor Operation and Surveillance Requirements of significant hazards consideration. with regard to facility operation thus the Control Room Air Treatment System. The LocalPublic Document Room clearly keeping with the regulation, and, addition of item (13] to page 190 increases location:Hind Junior College, McLendon therefore, are similar to example (vii] Limiting Conditions for Operation of Library, Raymond, Mississippi 39154. above. Protective Instrumentation to include instrumentation which automatically initiates Attorney for licensee: Nicholas S. Therefore, since the application for the emergency train of the Control Room Air Reynolds, Esquire, Bishop, Liberman, amendment involves a proposed change Treatment System. Addition of page 232d Cook, Purcell, and Reynolds, 1200 17th that is similar to an example for which provides the set point, minimum number of Street, NW., Washington, D.C. 20036. no significant hazards consideration trip systems and minimum number of NRC Branch Chie: Elinor G. exists, the staff has made a proposed instrument channels that must be operable Adensam. determination that the application for each position of the reactor mode switch involves no significant hazards except the shutdown position. Addition of Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, consideration. page 232e provides details of the Surveillance Docket No. 50-220, Nine Mile Point Local PublicDocument Room Requirements, including a sensor check, Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1, Oswego instrument channel test and instrument location:State University College at channel calibration. County, New York Oswego, Penfield Library-Documents, In addition, we are requesting that the Date of amendment request: March 3, Oswego, New York 13126. Technical Specifications governing the 1977, as supplemented and clarified by Attorney for licensee: Troy B. Conner, Emergency Ventilation System and the submittals dated November 1, 1983 and Jr., Esquire, Conner & Wetterhahn, Suite Control Room Air Treatment System be August 28, 1984. 1050, 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., updated to reflect the current standards for Description of amendment request: Washington, D.C. 20006. testing the adsorber filiters. Currently, our This proposed action was initially NRC Branch Chief.Domenic V. specifications reference ANSI N.510-1975 for Vassallo. testing the adsorber filters (i.e: charcoal noticed in the Federal Register (48 FR filters). ANSI N.510-1975 is also endorsed by 38408) on August 23, 1983. This Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Regulator Guide 1.52 (Rev. 2), but the current amendment would make changes to the Docket No. 50-220, Nine Mile Point Standard Review Plan endorses ANSI N.510 Technical Specifications to modify the Nuclear Station, Unit NO. 1, Oswego 1980. The salient difference between the two list of Reactor Coolant System Isolation County, New York standards is the environmental conditions for Valves and Primary Containment testing. We believe the newer standard more Isolation Valves as well as other Date of amendment request: October realistically reflects the environmental provisions of the license to achieve 1, 1984. conditions for which the charcoal filters are Descriptionof amendment request: designed. Therefore, the proposed technical conformance with 10 CFR Part 50, specifications submitted herein reference the The proposed amendment changes the Appendix J. The proposed change is in ANSI N.510-1980. response to an NRC request dated section of the Technical Specifications pertaining to Limiting Conditions for The existing Page 173 references ANSI August 7, 1975 that asked the license to N.510-1975 for testing of the operability of the review their containment leakage Operations, surveillance requirements

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 7997 7997 inlet heater at rated power for the Emergency Furthermore, increases in surveillance significant hazards consideration. One Ventilation System. The new standard, ANSI requirementshave been determined to N.510-1980, requires the same testing of the examples (ii], relates to a change involve no significant hazard consideration, that constitutes an additional limitation, procedure. This page is being revised to as indicated in item it of the section regarding consistently reference the new standard examples of amendments that are considered restriction, or control not presently throughout the Control Room Air Treatment not likely to involve significant hazard included in the Technical Specifications. and the Emergency Ventilation Technical considerations (Federal Register;, April 6. The current Technical Specifications do Specifications. 1983, p. 14870). not include requirements for the Remote The qualification requirements for the The proposed changes regarding testing of Shutdown Panels. The proposed change replacement charcoal (replacement is the charcoal filters do not involve a adds the requirements for the Remote necessary when the charcoal fails its Significant Hazards Consideration as defined surveillance test) for the Emergency Shutdown Panels to the Technical in 10 CFR 50.92. This change is similar to item Specifications. Therefore, since this Ventilation System and the Control Room Air vi of amendments that are considered not Treatment System are given on pages 176 and likely to involve significant hazards change adds an additional control to the 177, and 178b and 178c, respectively. The considerations (Federal Register; April 6, current Technical Specification limit, the current nuclear power air cleaning standard, 1983. p. 14870). This change is similar in that change is similar to example (ii). The ANSI 509-1980, will be referenced directly the intent of acceptance criteria are met as staff proposed to determine that the rather than Regulatory Guide 1.52, which specified in the Standard Review Plan section proposed change does not involve a references ANSI 509-1975. Similarly, the 6.5.1 with respect to charcoal filters. significant hazards consideration since statements on these pages for HEPA filter it is similar to the examples of actions design requirements are being updated. The staff has reviewed the licensee's significant hazards consideration involving no significant hazards Note.-Page 188 currently contains a consideration cited by the Commission. typographical error which would be corrected determinations and based on this review with the approval of this submittal, namely, concurs with the licensee's LocalPublic Document Room the first paragraphs of 3.6.1a and 4.6.2a determinations. The staff proposes to location: State University College at should currently read, " *

• Tables 3.6.2a to determine that the proposed change Oswego, Penfield Library-Documents, 3.5.21." and " *
• Tables 4.6.2a to 4.6.21.", does not involve a significant hazards Oswego, New York 13126.

respectively. consideration since it is similar to the Attorney for licensee:Troy B. Conner, Finally, our current Technical examples of actions involving no Jr., Esquire, Conner & Wetterhahn, Suite Specifications call for testing frequency of 18 significant hazards consideration cited 1050, 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., months for both the Emergency Ventilation Washington, D.C. 20006. System and the Control Room Air Treatment by the Commission. System. Since we are now operating on a LocalPublic Document Room NRC Branch Chief"Domenic B. nominal 24 month refueling cycle, we request location:State University College at Vassallo. to have our Technical Specification reflect Oswego, Penfield Library-Documents, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, the current refueling cycle frequency. Oswego, New York 13126. Docket No. 50-220, Nine Mile Point Basisfor proposedno significant Attorney for licensee: Troy B. Conner, Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1, Oswego hazards considerationdetermination: Jr., Esquire, Conner & Wetterhahn, Suite County, New York The licensee has presented its 1050, 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20006. Date of amendment request: June 29, determination of significant hazards 1984 as supplemented and clarified NRC Branch Chief"Domenic B. consideration as follows: December 3, 1984. Vassallo. These proposed Technical Specification Descriptionof amendment request: changes submitted herein involve no Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, The proposed amendment changes the significant hazard considerations. Therefore, Docket No. 50-220, Nine Mile Point section of the Technical Specifications in accordance with the proposed amendment, Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1, Oswego the operation of Nine Mile Point Unit I will pertaining to Limiting Conditions for County, New York Operations, Surveillance Requirements not: (1) Involve a significant increase in the Date of amendment request: May 1, and supporting bases for the Emergency probability or consequences of an accident 1984 as supplemented and clarified Cooling System and Accident previously evaluated; or October 22,1984. Monitoring Instrumentation. The (2) Create the possibility of a new or Descriptionof amendment request: proposed changes to the technical different kind of accident from any accident The proposed amendment changes the specifications are in response to Generic previously evaluated; or section of the Technical Specifications Letter 83-36 "NUREG-0737 Technical (3) Involve a significant reduction in a pertaining to Limiting Conditions for Specifications" which was issued by the margin of safety. Operations, Surveillance Requirements Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Moreover, the changes reflecting the Control Room Ventilation System and supporting bases for the Remote November 1, 1983. The proposed modifications increase the margin of safety at Shutdown Panels. The Remote changes are consistent with the intent of Nine Mile Point Unit 1. First, change from Shutdown Panels were added to the the model technical specifications manual to automatic initiation decreases the plant to facilitate plant shutdown from included as an attachment to Generic response time capability of the system which outside the control room. The Letter 83-36. In addition to the technical will reduce the potential consequences during modification was performed to meet the changes, the proposed technical the event that this system is required. requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, specifications also revise the format of Second, addition of surveillance requirements Appendix A. This amendment includes 3.6.11 "Accident Monitoring will help to ensure the operability of the incorporation of the Remote Shutdown system and therefore, increase its reliablity. Instrumentation" and eliminates In addition, these changes are consistent with Panels into the Technical Specification. paragraph 3.1.3b which was intended to previously stated Nuclear Regulatory Basisfor proposedno significant be a temporary amendment that is no Commission positions. The change from hazards considerationdetermination: longer effective. manual to automatic initiation is consistent The Commission has provided guidance Basis for proposedno significant with Standard Review Plan section 6.4. The concerning the determination of hazards considerationdetermination: additional surveillance requirements to test significant hazards by providing certain The Commission has provided guidance the operability of the system is consistent examples (48 FR 14870) of amendments qoncerning the determination of with Standard Technical Specifications 4.7.2. considered not likely to involve significant hazards by providing certain

7998 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices examples (48 FR 14870) of amendments concerning the application of these (III.D.3.4). These proposed Technical considered not likely to involve standards by providing certain Specification (TS) changes submitted by significant hazards consideration. Two examples (48 FR 14870). One of the the licensee are in response to the NRC of the examples (i) and (ii), relate to examples of actions not likely to involve Generic Letter 83-36 entitled "NUREG changes that are administrative and that a significant hazards consideration 0737 Technical Specifications" which constitute an additional limitation, relates to changes that constitute was issued on November 1, 1983. restriction, or control not presently additional restrictions or controls not In addition, the licensee proposes the included in the Technical Specifications. presently included in the technical addition of a surveillance requirement to The majority of the changes contained specifications. verify the automatic transfer feature of within the amendment request impose The Commission, in a revision to the Reactor Core Isolation Cooling additional restrictions or controls for Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50, required System [RCIC) suction (II.K,3.13 and modifications associated with TMI licensees to improve and modify their ILK.3.22). Also, a temporary amendment related issues. The balance of the radiological effluent systems in a change for Unit 3 regarding continued change is administrative as described manner that would keep releases of power operation with an inoperable above. Therefore, the changes are radioactive material to unrestricted RCIC is proposed for deletion since it is similar to examples (i) and (ii]. The staff areas during normal operations as low now obsolute. This administrative proposes to determine that the proposed as reasonably achievable. In complying it became change was covered in Amendment No. change does not involve a significant with this requirement 102 (July 2, 1984). Two other NUREG hazards consideration since it is similar necessary to add additional restrictions 0737 items were also addressed by this to the examples of actions involving no and controls to the Technical application. Surveillance and operability significant hazards consideration cited Specifications to assure compliance. requirements for Ir.F.2 (addition of two by the Commission. This caused the proposed addition of new reactor water level recorders) were LocalPublic Document Room Technical Specifications described first proposed in a TS application dated location: State University College at above. The staff proposes to determine February 11, 1982. The licensee now Oswego, Penfield Library-Documents, that the applications does not involve a propose to revise its application Oswego, New York 13126. significant hazards consideration since addressing LCO actions for reactor Attorney for licensee:Troy B. Conner, the change constitutes additional water level recorders by adding an LCO Jr., Esquire, Conner & Wetterhahn, Suite restrictions and controls that are not shutdown provision of 30 days for one 1050, 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., currently included in the Technical inoperable channel, and 7 days for two Washington, D.C. 20006. Specifications in order to meet the inoperable channels. This represents a NRC Branch Chief-Domenic B. Commission mandated "as low as change from the current TSs which Vassallo. reasonably achievable" effluent cover only one reactor water level Omaha Public Power District, Docket objectives. indicator where plant shutdown is No. 50-285, Fort Calhoun Station, Unit Local Public Document Room required within 7 days if one channel is No. 1, Washington County, Nebraska location: W. Dale Clark Library, 215 inoperable and shutdown within 48 South 15th Street, Omaha, Nebraska hours if both channels are inoperable. Date of amendment request-October 68102. 18, 1984. This application supersedes an Finally, the licensee requests the Attorney for licensee: Leboeuf, Lamb, earlier application for amendment dated addition of operability requirements for Leiby, and MacRae, 1333 New March 21, 1978 and a supplement dated Hampshire Ave., N.W., Washington, two new reactor pressure recorders as March 30, 1979. part of the requirements of NUREG D.C. 20036. Descriptionof amendment request 0737, Supplement I (SPDS]. NRC Branch Chief.James R. Miller. The amendment would make changes to Basis forproposedno signficant the Radiological Effluent Technical Philadelphia Electric Company, Public hazardsconsiderationdetermination: Specifications that would bring them Service Electric and Gas Company, The Commission has provided examples into compliance with Appendix I of 10 Delmarva Power and Light Company, (48 FR 14870) of types of amendments CFR Part 50. It would provide new and Atlantic City Electric Company, not likely to involve signficant hazards Technical Specification sections Dockets Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach consideration. One of the examples (ii) defining limiting conditions for Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units relates to a change that constitutes an operation and surveillance requirements Nos. 2 and 3, York County, Pennsylvania additional limitation, restriction, or for radioactive liquid and gaseous Date of amendment request: October control not presently included in effluent monitoring; concentration, dose, 9, 1984. Techmical Specifications. The proposed and treatment of liquid, gaseous and Description of amendment request. TS changs involving the addition of solid wastes; total dose; radiological The amendments would add limiting LCO, surveillance and administrative environmental monitoring that consists conditions for operations (LCOs), requirements for the following NUREG of a monitoring program, land use surveillance requirements, and 0737 items fail into this category: Post census, and an interlaboratory administrative requirements for the accident sampling (II.B.2), high range comparison program. The change would following NUREG-0737 required items: noble gas monitors and radioactive also incorporate into the Technical Post-accident sampling (II.B.2), high iodine and particulate sampling systems Specifications the bases that support the range noble gas monitors and (II.F1.1. and II.F.1.2), containment high operation and surveillance radioactive iodine and particulate range drywell radiation monitors requirements. In addition, some changes sampling systems (II.F.1.1 and II.F.1.2), (II.F.1.3), containment pressure monitors would be made in administrative containment high-range drywell (II.F.1.4), containment water level controls, specifically dealing with the radiation monitors (II.F.1.3), monitors (II.F.1.5), containment process control program and the offsite containment pressure monitors ({I.F.1.4), hydrogen monitors (II.F.1.6), control dose calculation manual. containment water level monitors room emergency air filtration systems Basis forproposedno significant (II.F.1.5), containment hydrogen (lII.D.3.4.), automatic transfer of RCIC hazards considerationdetermination: monitors (ILF.1.6) and control room suction (11.K.3.13 and 11.K.3.22). and The Commission has provided guidance emergency air filtration systems reactor pressure recorders proposed for

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday. February 27. 1985 / Notices 7999 79N the Safety Parameter System (SPSD measures for determining inadequate nomenclature to conform with 10 CFR NUREG-0737, Supplement 1). These core cooling; or (2) Create the possibility 50.73. In addition, the requirement to proposed changes fall in the above of a new or different kind of accident report failure of a primary coolant category in that all the proposed previously evaluated because the system safety or relief valve to close is changes involve additional limitations, proposed LCOs covering the three proposed for deletion since the new rule restrictions, or control not presently reactor water level instruments [narrow (10 CFR 50.73) required reporting of included in the TSs. Therefore, the range, wide range (new) and fuel zone relief valve failures if the condition Commission's staff proposes to (new)] require, in effect shutdown could have prevented the fulfillment of a determine that the above proposed action intervals similar to those safety function and redundant changes do not involve a significant currently required in the Peach Botton equipment .was not operable. The hazards consideration. TS; or (3) involve a significant reduction proposal also complies with the The licensee also proposes in a margin of safety because the guidance of GL 83-43 which requests surveillance and operability proposed change would permit deletion of licensee event reporting requirements covering the addition of monitoring of rector water level by three requirement from the license. two new reactor water level recorders diverse instrument systems and the The Commission has provided as part of NUREG-0737 requirements combined surveillance requirements and guidance concerning the application of (II.F.2). The request revises the LCOs meet the requirements currently the standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by licensee's original proposal covering specified in the Peach Bottom TSs. providing certain examples (48 FR these II.F.2 recorders dated February 11, Accordingly, the Commission proposes 14870). One of the examples (vii) of 1982. The licensee's original proposal to determine that this change does not actions not likely to involve a significant was noticed in the Federal Register on involve a slgnficant hazards hazards consideration relates to October 26, 1983 (48 FR 49591) but was consideration. changes that make a license conform to not acted upon by the staff since it Local PublicDocument Room changes in the regulations, where the constituted an outstanding item. The location: Government Publications license change results in very minor licensee's revised request would change Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, changes to facility operations clearly in the present TS requirements for the Education Building, Commonwealth and keeping with the regulations. The narrow range reactor water level guage Walnut Streets, Harrisburg, proposed changes to conform to 10 CFR (Table 3.2.F) by increasing the LCO Pennsylvania. 50.72 and 50.73 affect only reporting shutdown provisions for one inoperable Attorney for licensee: Troy B. Conner, requirements and do not affect facility channel from 7 days to 30 days, and for Jr., 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., operations. two inoperate channels from 48 hours to Washington, D.C. 20006. NRCBranch Chief.John F. Stolz. Therefore, since the changes make the 7 days. However, to compensate for this license conform to changes in the change, the licensee proposed to Philadelphia Electric Compnay, Public regulations and do not affect plant strengthen the LCO action statements Service Electric and Gas Company, operations, the proposed changes are for the wide and fuel range reactor Delmarva Power and Light Company, encompassed by example (vii) of actions water level instruments. The licensee and Atlantic City Electric Company, not likely to involve significant hazards had originally proposed the following Dockets Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach considerations and on that basis the action statements covering the wide and Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units Commission's staff proposes to fuel range monitors in its February 11, Nos. 2 and 3, York County, Pennsylvania determine that the requested changes do 1982 applications: with one channel not involve a significant hazards inoperable, no shutdown required and Date of amendment request.January 4, 1985. consideration. with both channels inoperable, Local PublicDocument Room shutdown would be requird in 30 days. Description of amendment requeskr The amendments would make the location: Government Publications The licensee now proposes to strengthen Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, these LCOs for the new monitors in the reporting requirements in the Technical Specifications (TSs) consistent with 10 education Building, Commonwealth and following ways: For one inoperable CFR 50.72 and 50.73 in response to Walnut Streets, Harrisburg, channel, shutdown would be required in Generic Letter No. 83-43, "Reporting Pennsylvania. 30 days if both narrow range monitors Requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, § § 50.72 Attorney for licensee: Troy B. Conner, are operable and 7 days if one narrow and 50.73 and Standard Technical Jr., 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., range monitor is inoperable; for both Specifications", dated December 19, Washington, D.C. 20006. channels being inoperable, shutdown 1983. NRC Branch Chief: John F. Stolz. would be required in 7 days if both Basis forproposedno significant narrow range monitors are operable and hazardsconsiderationdetermination: Philadelphia Electric Company, Public 48 hours if one narrow range monitor is The licensee states that the proposed Service Electric and Gas Company, inoperable. revisions and deletions to the TS Delmarva Power and Light Company, The Commission's staff has reviewed Reporting Requirements reflect the and Atlantic City Electric Company, the above amendment request revisions to § 50.72 and the addition of Docket No. 50-278, Peach Bottom concerning Il.F.2 and has determined § 50.73 to the Commission's regulations, Atomic Power Station, Unit No. 3, York that should this request be implemented, and these revisions conform to the County, Pennsylvania it would not: (1) Involve a significant Standard Technical Specifications Date of amendment request-January increase in the probability or enclosed in Generic Letter No. 83-43. 7, 1985. consequences of an accident previously The revisions would: (1) Add the Descriptionof amendment request: evaluated because new safety-related definition of Reportable Events to the The requested amendment to the Peach reactor water level recorders will be Definition section 1.0, (2) Delete the Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 3, added to the TS surveillance prompt and 30-day reporting Operating license was submitted in requirements providing additional specification since these requirements support of the upcoming Cycle 7 core indicators of reactor water levels and, have been superseded by 10 CFR 50.72 reload. The proposed changes would therefore, additional surveillance and 50.73, and (3) revise the incorporate the maximum average

8=0 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices planar linear heat generation rate Portland General Electric Company, Portland General Electric Company et. (MAPLHGR) versus planar average Docket No. 50-344, Trojan Nuclear al., Docket No. 50-344, Trojan Nuclear exposure curves for fuel Type Plant, Columbia County, Oregon Plant, Columbia County, Oregon BP8DRB299 and Type BP8DRB299H. The Date of amendment request: January Date of amendment request: licensee states in the accompanying 14, 1985. November 29, 1984. submittal that these new fuel assemblies Descriptionof amendment request: are not significantly different from those Descriptionof amendment request. The application for amendment requests The amendment request was submitted previously found acceptable by the NRC in response to NRC General Letter 83-37 for operation in Unit 3. In addition, a modification of the Technical which was sent to all licensees of review of the licensee's application and Specification contained in Appendix A pressurized water reactors to accompanying evaluation indicates that to Operating License NPF-1 in order to incorporate technical specifications for there are no significant changes being revise the number of reactor coolant equipment added or modified as a result proposed to the acceptance criteria for loops required to be in operation in of post-TMI safety improvements the Technical Specifications (TSs) and Mode 3 (the reactor coolant system hot; approved by the Commission in that the analytical methods used to reactor shut down). Specifically, the NUREG-0737. Specifically, the demonstrate conformance with the TSs Trojan Technical Specifications amendment request provides new and regulations are not significantly currently require that a minimum of one technical specifications for the changed from those previously found reactor coolant loop be in operation containment high-range area radiation acceptable by the NRC for Unit 3. during Mod 3. The amendment would monitors (NUREG-0737 Itein II.F.1.3); Basis for proposedno significant require that an additional loop be in post-accident monitoring systems for hazardsconsiderationdetermination: operation during Mode 3 if any control noble gases and radioiodine for the The Commission has provided guidance rod drive mechanisms are energized. containment, the auxiliary building, and for determining whether a proposed The change would require operation the condenser air ejector, and noble gas amendment involves a significant consistent with the plant safety analysis radioactivity monitors for the main hazards consideration (48 FR 14870). An for bank rod withdrawal from the steam lines (NUREG-0737 Item II.F.1.1); example of amendment that is not likely subcritical condition, which assumes the containment water level monitors to involve a significant hazards that two reactor coolant loops are in (NUREG-0737 Item II.F.1.5); and the new consideration is "(iii) * * *, a change operation. sulfur dioxide detectors for the control resulting from a nuclear reactor core Basisfor proposedno significant room ventilation system (NUREG-0737 reloading, if no fuel assemblies hazards considerationdetermination: Item III.D.3.4). significantly different from those found The Commission has provided guidance The new technical specifications previously acceptable to the NRC for a concerning the application of standards would require this new equipment to be previous core at the facility in question for determining whether a significant operable and to be periodically tested. are involved. This assumes that no hazards consideration exists by Basis forproposedno significant significant changes are made to the providing specific examples. The hazards considerationdetermination: acceptance criteria for the technical The Commission has provided guidance examples of actions involving no concerning the application of the specifications, that the analytical methods used to demonstrate significant hazards consideration standards for making a no significant include: (ii) Changes that constitute an hazards consideration determination by conformance with the technical specifications and regulations are not additional limitation or restriction or providing certain examples (48 FR significantly changed, and the NRC has control not presently within the 14870). One of the examples of an action previously found such methods technical specification e.g., a more not likely to involve a significant acceptable". stringent surveillance requirement. hazards consideration is "(ii) A change The Commission's staff considers the The changes proposed in this that constitutes an additional limitation, proposed TSs change accompanying the application for amendment are restriction, or control not presently Unit 3 reload to be similar to example encompassed by this example because included in the technical specifications: (iii) since the fuel to be inserted into the of the additional limitation and For example a more stringent core for Cycle 7 is similar to that used in restriction that would be added by this surveillance requirement." The proposed previous Unit 3 reloads and that the Technical Specification amendment. technical specifications for the items nuclear design and analysis of the Cycle Therefore, since the application for discussed above match this example 7 reload has been performed with amendment involves a proposed change because they all represent new methods and techniques which have that is similar to an example for which requirements for equipment operability been used in previous reloads and found no significant hazards consideration and testing not currently included in the to be acceptable. Based upon the above, technical specifications. exists, the staff has made a proposed the staff proposes to determine that the .Based on the foregoing, the determination that the application for requested changes involve no significant amendment involves no significant Commission proposes to determife that hazards consideration. hazards considerations. the application for amendment does not Local Public Document Room involve significant hazards Local Public Document Room considerations. location:Government Publications location:Multnomah County Library, Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, Local Public Document Room 801 SW., lath Avenue, Portland, Oregon. location: Multnomah County Library, Education Building, Commonwealth and Attorney for licensee:J. W. Durham, 801 SW. 10th Avenue, Portland, Oregon. Walnut Streets, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Senior Vice President, Portland General Attorney for licensee: J.W. Durham, Electric Company, 121 SW., Salmon Senior Vice President, Portland General Attorney for Licensee: Troy B. Conner, Street, Portland, Oregon 97204. Jr., 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Electric Company, 121 S.W. Salmon Washington, D.C. 20006. NRC Branch Chief.James R. Miller. Street, Portland, Oregon 97204. NRC Branch Chief: John F. Stolz. NRC Branch Chief-James R. Miller.

Federal Register I Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices awl1 Power Authority of the State of New metallurgically bonded to the inside Descriptionof amendment request, York, Docket No. 50-333, James A. surface of the Zircalloy-2 fuel cladding. The amendment request was initially FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, This feature is expected to reduce the noticed on August 23, 1983 (48 FR 38419). Oswego County, New York probability of pellet-clad interaction fuel This notice includes changes requested Dateof amendment request: January failures. The Barrier fuel design has in a subsequent submittal dated August 16, 1985. been incorporated into the current 13, 1984. The amendment would revise Descriptionof amendment request: revision of the General Electric Report, the testing requirements for hydraulic The proposed amendment would revise "General Electric Standard Application shock suppressors. (snubbers). The the Technical Specifications (TS), as for Reactor Fuel," (NEDE-24011-P-A-6, proposed changes were made in reponse necessary,.to support the current Reload April 1983) and has been determined by to an NRC request, dated November 20, 8/Cycle 7 reactor refueling. The table the NRC to be acceptable. The change 1980, to upgrade the testing requirement entitled "MCPR Operating Limit for from one hundred-mil to eighty-mil for all safety-related snubbers to ensure Incremental Cycle Core Average channels represent's a return to initial a higher degree of operability. The Exposure" in section 3.1 of Appendix A, core channel dimensions. This change in changes involve: Clarifying the and Figure 3.1-2, "Operating Limit channel thickness results in a slightly frequency of visual inspections, stating MCPR Versus Tau for all Fuel Types," different fuel bundle response during a the requirements for functional testing of have been revised to reflect the loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) in the snubbers which visually appear transient analyses performed for the high exposure range. Consequently, inoperable, including a formula for the Reload 6/Cycle 7 core. In addition, different MAPLHGR limits are applied selection of representative sample sizes, Figure 3.5-11, "Maximum Average to Reload 6 fuel. clarifying the testing acceptance criteria, Planar Linear Heat Generation Rate Since eighty mil channels have been and revising the method of snubber (MAPLHGR) Versus Planar Average used successfully at FitzPatrick, and listing to incorporate more information. Exposure," has been added to reflect the extensively on other plants similar in Basisfor proposedno significant new fuel currently biing loaded. Figures core and fuel design to FitzPatrick, this hazards considerationdetermination: 3.5-6 through 3.5-8 are no longer does not represent a significant change. The Commission has provided guidance necessary and have been deleted from Additionally, the analytical methods concerning the application of these used to demonstrate conformance with standards by providing certain Appendix A because the fuel types associated with these figures will be the Technical Specifications and examples (48 FR 14870). One of the discharged from the core during the regulations are described in the above examples of actions not likely to involve referenced General Electric Report a significant hazards consideration current reload. which has been reviewed and approved The proposed amendment also relates to changes that constitute includes several administrative changes by the NRC. These methods have not additional limitations or restrictions in relevant to the above-mentioned changed significantly from the methods the Technical Specifications. The revisions. These changes (on pages vii, used for previous reload submittals. The proposed changes revise sections of the changes represented by addition of the Technical Specifications related to 123 and 130) eliminate references to the new fuel assemblies to the core during hydraulic snubbers to clarify deleted figures and add references to the newly included figure. the current reload are therefore requirements, to include additional Basisfor proposedno significant encompassed by example (iii). testing, and to incorporate operability Those changes which eliminate hazards considerationdetermination: references to'deleted figures associated requirements. Since the requested The Commission has provided guidance with fuel types being discharged from changes upgrade the requirements for concerning the application of the the core and add references to the newly hydraulic snubbers, the staff proposes to standards for determining whether a included figure are clearly determine that the application does not significant hazards consideration exists administrative in nature and are involve a significant hazards by providing certain examples (48 FR therefore encompassed by example (i). consideration. 14870). The examples of actions Based on the foregoing, the Local PublicDocument Room involving no significant hazards Commission proposes to determine that location: White Plains Public Library, consideration include: "(i) A purely the proposed license amendment does 100 Martine Avenue, White Plains, New administrative chdnge to Technical not involve a significant hazards York 10001. Specifications: For example, a change to consideration. Attorney for licensee: Mr. Charles M. achieve consistency throughout the Local Public Document Room Pratt, 10 Columbus Circle, New York, Technical Specifications, correction of location:Penfield Library, State New York 10019. an error, or a change in nomenclature," University College of Oswego, Oswego, NRC Branch Chief.Steven A. Varga. and "(iii) for a nuclear power reactor, a New York. change resulting from a nuclear reactor Power Authority of the State of New Attorney for licensee: Mr. Charles M. York, Docket No. 50-286, Indian Point core reloading, if no fuel assemblies Pratt, Assistant General Counsel, Power significantly different from those found Unit No. 3, Westchester County, New Authority of the State of New York, 10 York previously acceptable to the NRC for a Columbus Circle, New York, New York previous core at the facility in question 10019. Date of amendment request: April 13, are involved." NRC Branch Chief.Domenic B. 1982, as supplemented August 31, 1984. Use of a single new type of fuel Vassallo. Descriptionof amendment request (BPDRB299) is planned for the.current The amendment would revise the reload. This fuel differs from the fuel Power Authority of the State of New Technical Specifications related to types presently in use at FitzPatrick in York, Docket No. 50-286, Indian Point degraded grid voltage conditions by: two respects: (1) It is a Barrier type, and Unit No. 3, Westchester County, New Adding relay set points, time delays, (2) it is fitted with eighty-mil thick fuel York testing intervals and calibration channels rather than the one hundred Date of amendment request intervals for the 480V Emergency Buses; mfl channels previously used. The November 24,1981, as supplemented increasing the setting limit for the 480V Barrier fuel design has a zirconium layer August 13, 1984. Bus Undervoltage Relay; and requiring

8002 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices i procedures to prevent an automatic fuse consideration determination by involve a significant hazards transfer of the 6.9 KV Buses. The providing certain examples (48 FR consideration. proposed changes were made in 14870). One of the examples (ii) of Local PublicDocument Room response to an NRC request to provide actions not likely to involve a significant location:White Plains Public Library, protection for the degraded grid voltage hazards consideration relates to a 100 Martine Avenue, White Plains, New condition. change that constitutes an additional York 10601. Basisfor proposedno significant limitation, restriction, or control not Attorney for licensee: Mr. Charles M. hazardsconsiderationdetermination: presently included in the Technical Pratt, 10 Columbus Circle, New York, The Commission has provided guidance Specifications: For example, a more New York 10019. concerning the applications of these stringent surveillance requirement. The NRC Branch Chief.Steven A. Varga. standards by providing examples (48 FR staff proposes to determine that the 14870). One of the examples of actions proposed changes do not involve a Public Service Electric and Gas not likely to involve a significant significant hazards consideration since Company, Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50 hazards consideration relates to they entail additional restrictions 311, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, changes that constitute additional designed to make the Technical Unit Nos. I and 2, Salem County, New limitations or restrictions in the Specifications more stringent. Jersey Technical Specifications. The proposed Local PublicDocument Room changes revise sections of the Technical Date of amendment request: location:White Plains Public Library, September 21, 1984. Specifications that relate to the 100 Martine Avenue, White Plains, New degraded grid voltage condition to Descriptionof amendment request: York 10601. These proposed changes would add clarify existing requirements and Attorney for licensee: Mr. Charles M. include additional requirements and specifications for accident and radiation Pratt, 10 Columbus Circle, New York, monitoring to provide assurance that the testing. Since the requested changes New York 10019. upgrade the requirements for the monitoring equipment installed at the NRC Branch Chief-Steven A. Varga. facility is operated and maintained degraded grid voltage condition, the staff proposes to determine that the Power Authority of the State of New within acceptable limits. This proposed application does not involve a York, Docket No. 50-286, Indian Point change is the result of a review of significant hazards consideration. Unit No. 3, Westchester County, New NUREG-0737 Technical Specifications Local PublicDocumentRoom York guidance provided in NRC Generic location:White Plains Public Library, Date of amendment request:July 6, Letter 83-37 and an additional request 100 Martine Avenue, White Plains, New 1983, as supplemented December 3, 1984. (Varga to Uderitz, dated November 17, York 10601. Descriptionof amendment request: 1983) for Technical Specifications for Attorney for licensee: Mr. Charles M. The amendment proposes changes that ICCI equipment. The Noble Gas Effluent Pratt, 10 Columbus Circle, New York, provide for redundancy in decay heat .Monitors and Containment high range New York 10019. removal capability in all modes of Area Monitors are added to ensure that NRC Branch Chief-Steven A. Varga. operation. The proposed changes were the monitors, installed in compliance made in response to an NRC request with NUREG-0737 requirements, are Power Authority of the the State of New operable in the appropriate MODES and York, Docket No. 50-286, Indian Point that the licensee provide long-term assurance that redundancy be receive proper surveillance attention. Unit No. 3, Westchester County, New maintained. The changes provide that: Specifically the changes would add York Noble Gas Effluent Monitors and At least two decay heat removal paths Date of amendment request. are available when the reactor coolant Containment high range Area Monitors December 29, 1983, as supplemented system Tavg is below 350 'F, at least to Specification 3.3.3.6, Radiation September 7, 1984 one reactor coolant pump or RHR pump Monitoring Instrumentation and Descriptionof amendment request is operating when the reactor coolant Specification 3.3.3.9, Radioactive The amendment request was initially system Tavg is below 350 'F but not in Gaseous Effluent Monitoring noticed on August 22, 1984 (49 FR 33369]. the refueling operation condition, and at Instrumentation tables, as appropriate. This notice Includes changes requested least one reactor coolant pump is Remove from Unit No. 1 only, item 2.a.3 in a subsequent submittal dated operating when the reactor coolant Fixed Filter Iodine Monitor from Tables September 7, 1984, that supplement and, system Tavg is greater than 350 *F. 3.3-6 and 4.3-6 and simplify, by cross in some cases, supersede the changes Basis for proposedno significant references, these tables for both units. initially proposed. The purpose of this hazards considerationdetermination: The format and ACTION amendment is to upgrade the Technical The Commission has provided guidance STATEMENTS of Technical Specifications to make them at least as concerning the application of these Specification 3.3.3.7 Accident stringent as the Standard Technical standards by providing examples (48 FR Monitoring Instrumentation, for Salem Specifications for Westinghouse 14870). One of the examples of actions Unit No. 2 would be modified to agree Pressurized Water Reactors (NUREG not likely to involve a significant with $e format and Action Statements 0452]. This change request is in response hazards consideration relates to used on Unit No. 1. Limiting Conditions to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's changes that constitute additional for Operation and Surveillance letter dated July 7, 1980, which indicated limitations or restrictions in the Requirement for the following accident over thirty (30) sections of the current Technical Specifications. The proposed monitoring instrumentation would be Technical Specifications that need changes revise sections of the Technical included in Tables 3.3-11a, 3.3-11b, and upgrading to be at least as stringent as Specifications related to the redundancy 4.3-11 for both units: Containment the Standard Technical Specifications. of decay heat removal systems to clarify pressure-wide and narrow ranges, Basis for proposedno significant their operating procedures. Since the containment water level-wide range, hazards considerationdetermination: requested changes upgrade the and core exit thermocouples. The Commission has provided guidance requirements for decay heat removal Basis forproposed no significant concerning the application of the procedures, the staff proposes to hazards considerationdetermination: standards for a no significant hazards determine that the application does not The Commission has provided guidance

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices RnflR 8003 concerning the application of the facility operations clearly in keeping conform to referenced examples in 48 standards for a No Significant Hazards with the regulations. FR 14870, we have determined that this determination by providing examples of Based on the above, and since the actions not likely to involve a proposed application for amendment proposed chanlge involves actions that involves no significant hazards Significant Hazards Consideration in the conform to the referenced example in 48 Federal Register (48 FR 14870). One of consideration. FR 14870, we have determined that this the examples (ii) relates to changes that application for amendment involves no LocalPublic Document Room constitute additional limitations, significant hazards consideration. location:Salem Free Library, 122 West restrictions, or controls not presently LocalPublic Document Room Broadway, Salem New Jersey 08079, included in the technical specifications. location: Salem Free Library, 122 West A ttorneyfor licensee: Conner and The new specifications requested Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 08079. Wetterhann, Suite 1050, 1747 constitute such an addition. Attorney for licensee: Conner and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Based on the above, since the Wetterhann, Suite 1050, 1747 Washington, D C. 20006. proposed changes involve actions that Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., NRCBranch Chief. Steven A. Varga. conform to the referenced example in 48 Washington, D.C. 20006. FR 14870, we have determined that this NRC Branch Chief: Steven A. Varga. Public Service Electric and Gas application for amendment involves no Company, Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50 Public Service Electric and Gas 311, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Significant Hazards Consideration. Company, Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50 Local PublicDocument Room Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Salem County, New 311, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, location: Salem Free Library, 122 West Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Salem County, New Jersey Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 08079. Jersey Date of amendment request: A ttorneyfor licensee: Conner and Date of amendment request: October December 7, 1984. Wetterhann, Suite 1050, 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., 26, 1984. Description of amendment request: Washington, D.C. 20006. Descriptionof amendment request: The proposed amendment request would NRC Branch Chief-Steven A. Varga. The proposed amendment would revise add to section 4.6.3.1.2 (Containment section 6.0, Administrative Controls, to Systems), a surveillance requirement to Public Service Electric and Gas incorporate a change in Nuclear reflect the 600 open limitation on the Company, Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50 Department organization, Shift Containment Pressure-Vacuum Relief 311, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Complement clarification, Station valves, VC5 and VC6 for both Salem Unit Nos. I and 2, Salem County, New Operation Review Committee (SORC) Units and remove the footnote added by Jersey membership, quorum requirements, and Amendment 12 to Salem Unit 2, page 3/4 Date of amendment request: responsibilities. Additionally, replace 6-15. the Nuclear Review Board (NRB) with September 21, 1984. Basisfor proposedno significant Descriptionof amendment request: section 6.5.2, Nuclear Safely and Review, and add section 6.5.3, Technical hazardsconsiderationdetermination: The proposed change would revise The proposed amendment request is Review and Control. Technical Specification, section 3.6.4.1, administrative in nature in that it Basis forproposedno significant Hydrogen Analyzers surveillance constitutes an additional limitation or hazards considerationdetermination: requirements. The existing Hydrogen control (Surveillance Requirement) not This proposed change is administrative Analyzers are being replaced with a presently included in the Technical in nature in that it provides an improved type qualified for use in the organization, clarification of shift Specifications. The Commission has containment. The new type requires a coverage, adds a new full-time safety provided guidance concerning the change is surveillance testing per manufacturer's specifications. review concept (which has the effect of application of the standards for a no improving the effectiveness of SORC significant hazards determination by Basis forproposedno significant Reviews and makes more efficient use hazards considerationdetermination: providing examples of actions not likely of technical expertise available). to involve a Significant Hazards The replacement of the existing The Commission has provided Containment Hydrogen Monitoring Consideration in the Federal Register (48 guidance concerning the application of FR 14870). One of the examples (ii) System with one qualified for use in the the standards for a No Significant containment assures the operator of a relates to changes that constitute an Hazards determination by providing additional control not presently continuous indication of the hydrogen examples of actions not likely to involve concentration in the containment as included in the technical specifications. a significant hazards consideration in required by NUREG-0737. The license the Federal Register (48 FR 14870). One Based on the above, and since the change in required to ensure that this of the examples (i) relates to purely proposed change involves an action that equipment, installed to conform with the administrative changes. This proposed conform to a referenced example in 48 latest NRC requirements, is tested change is basically a shifting of FR 14870, we have determined that this properly to demonstrate operability. The administrative responsibilities and proposed application for amendment Commission has provided guidance improves the qualitative and involves no significant hazards concerning the application of the quantitative effectiveness of the review consideration. standards for a No Significant Hazards function. Another example (ii) relates to Local Public DocumentRoom determination by providing examples of changes that constitute an additional location:Salem Free Library, 122 West actions not likely to involve a control not presently included in the Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 08079. Significant Hazards Consideration in the technical specifications. This proposed Federal Register (48 FR 14870). One of Attorney for licensee: Conner and change adds a Technical Review and Wetterhann, Suite 1050, 1747 the examples (vii) relates to changes Controls section that more clearly that make a license conform to changes Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., defines review responsibilities. Washington, D.C. 20006. in the regulations, where the license Based on the above, and since the change results in very minor changes to proposed change involves actions that NRC Branch Chief-Steven A. Varga.

8004 Federal Register I VoL 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices Public Service Electric and Gas amendment; therefore, no increase in Public Service Co. of Colorado, Docket the probability or consequences of any No. 50-267, Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Company, Docket Nos. 50-272 and 5G Generating Station, Platteville, Colorado 311, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, previously evaluated accident, and no Unit Nos. I and 2, Salem County, New possibility of any new accident not Date of amendment request.January Jersey previously evaluated. Based on the 14, 1985. Data of amendments request"Janary above, the staff proposes to determine Description of amendment request: 18, 1985. that this amendment request does not The proposed change to the Descriptionof amendments request: involve a signficant hazards Administrative Controls Technical consideration. Specifications (TS) reflects recent The requirements of the 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I rulemaking were Local Public Document Room organizational changes within the Public implemented in license Amendment location:Salem Free Library, 122 West Service Company of Colorado. The TS Nos. 59 and 28 for Salem Units I and 2, Broadway, Salen, New Jersey 08079. changes involve revising position titles respectively. These amendments Attorney for licensee: Conner and (e.g., "Radiation Protection Manager" to allowed 45 days for full implementation Wetterhann, Suite 1050, 1747 "Support Services Manager" and of the specifications. The 45 day period Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., "Manager, Production, Fuels and was erroneous in that it did not allow Washington, D.C. 20006. Services Division" to "Manager, sufficient time to complete the NRC Branch Chief, Steven A. Varga. Production Services Division") the significant technical, administrative and addition of a new position (Executive training efforts involved in the change Public Service Co. of Colorado, Docket Staff Assistant) to the organizational over of the large number of procedures No. 50-267, Fort St. Vrain Nuclear chart and the corporate safety review related to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I Generating Station, Platteville, Colorado committee membership, and changing requirements. This proposed the position to which the Training Date of amendment request: Supervisor reports. amendment request would revise December 31, 1984. Amendment No. 59 to Facility Operating Basisfor proposedno significant Descriptionof amendment request; hazards considerationdetermination: License DPR-70 and Amendment No. 28 The proposed change to the Technical to Facility Operating License DPR-75 to The Commission has provided guidance Specifications provides clarification that concerning the application of these provide an additional 60 days for implementation such that Item 3 of these only gamma radioactivity is monitored standards by providing certain by the installed activity monitors. This examples (48 FR 14870). The examples amendments is changed to read as clarification consists of inserting the follows: 3. This license amendment is of actions that are considered not likely word "gamma" prior to the words to involve significant hazards effective on issuance and shall be "activity monitors" in Specifications implemented no later than 105 days considerations include a purely after issuance. ELCO 8.1.2, ELCO 8.1.3, and ESR 8.1.2. administrative change to Technical Basis for proposedno significant Basisfor proposedno significant Specifications: For example, a change to hazardsconsiderationdetermination: hazards considerationdetermination.: achieve consistency throughout the The staff proposes to make a The Commission has provided guidance Technical Specifications, correction of determination that the amendments concerning the application of these an error, or a change in nomenclature. request involves no significant hazards standards by providing certain Based on an initial review of the consideration. Under the Commission's examples (48 FR 14670). The examples application, the staff considers the regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means of actions that are considered not likely proposed changes to be administrative that operation of the facility in to involve significant hazards changes of the type referred to above. accordance with the proposed considerations include a purely Therefore, we propose to determine that amendments would not- (1) Involve a administrative change to Technical this is an action which would involve no significant increase in the probability or Specifications: for example, a change to significant hazards considerations. consequences of an accident previously achieve consistency throughout the Local Public Document Room evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of Technical Specifications, a correction of location: Greeley Public Library, City a new or different kind of accident from an error, or a change in nomenclature. Complex Building, Greeley, Colorado. any accident previously evaluated; or (3) The proposed changes to the Attorney for licensee: Bryant involve a significant reduction in a Technical Specifications will not alter O'Donnell, Public Service Company of margin of safety. the equipment being used nor the Colorado, P.O. Box 840, Denver, The 10 CFR 50, Appendix I rulemaking operation of that equipment, and only Colorado 80201. specifically addressed the definition of a serves to clarify the requirement for NRC Branch Chieft Eric H. Johnson. criterion'of "As Low As Reasonably continuously monitoring the Achievable" (ALARA) and set effluent radioactivity of liquid effluent releases. Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation, limits based on doses to the population Since the actual operations will not be Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear surrounding nuclear power plants. Since affected by this change,.the staff Power Plant, Wayne County, New York the existing radiological technical proposes to determine that this action Date of amendment request: specifications are at least as involves no significant hazards December 5, 1984. conservative, or more conservative than considerations. Description of amendment request: the Appendix I specifications contained Local PublicDocument Room The proposed amendment to the in Amendment 59 Facility Operating location: Greeley Public Library, City Technical Specifications would delete License DPR-70 and Amendment 28 to Complex Building, Greeley, Colorado. the description of the battery charger Facility Operating License DPR-75. Attorney for licensee: Bryant configuration, because it superfluously deferral of the implementation of these O'Donnell, Public Service Company of describes originally installed equipment. amendments would not involve a Colorado, P.O. Box 840, Denver, Requirements for battery charging reduction in a margin of safety. Further. Colorado 80201. capacity and operability remain there are no procedural or physical plant unchanged. changes involved in this proposed NRC Branbh Chief. Eric H. Johnson.

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 8005 Basis forproposedno significant accounting and nuclear material control. hazardsconsiderationdetermination: removal schedule for the Rancho Seco The amendment would not alter in any material surveillance capsules from the By letter dated December 5, 1984, the way the Rancho Seco safeguards licensee requested changes to the Ginna Davis-Besse reactor vessel. TS Table provisions required by NRC regulations. 4.2.1 containing the current capsule Technical Specifications to eliminate The termination provision of License specific charging capacity values for removal schedule will be deleted. The Condition 2.C. (10) provides that the amendment would also delete section individual chargers while retaining the IAEA program be terminated as of the 150-amp charging capacity for each date of such a notice from the NRC. That 4.7.8 and revise the Bases section to battery to maintain the batteries in the notice was provided to the licensee in a delete redundant information and to full charged condition. The planned letter dated June 1, 1984, and provide a better description of the upgrading of the battery charging units accordingly, the IAEA insepction Reactor Vessel Surveilliance Program. during the 1985 Spring refueling outage program was terminated at that time. Basis forproposedno significant provided an opportunity to delete the Therefore, the proposed amendment hazards considerationdetermination: unwarranted description of the would delete a license condition that is The withdrawal schedule in the originally installed units rather than no longer in effect. proposed amendment was developed in substitute similar arbitrary descriptive Basis forproposedno significant accordance with the 1982 edition of information for the new units. This is an hazards considerationdetermination: ASTM E 185 and provides a better administrative change to the Technical The proposed amendment would only defined removal schedule for the Specifications. delete a license condition that is no surveillance capsules based on The Commission has provided longer in effect and Would not affect guidance concerning the application of accumulated neutron fluence rather than plant operation or design. Therefore, the on the basis of refueling cycle. Thus, any the standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by proposed amendment would not: providing certain examples (48 FR 14870', change in the nominal cycle time will Involve a significant increase in the not greatly influence the April 6, 1983). One of the examples (i) of probability or consequences of an actions not likely to involve a significant accident previously evaluated; or (2) characterization of reactor vessel hazards consideration is a purely create the possibility of a new or material condition as a function of administrative change to technical different kind of accident from any accumulated neutron fluence. The specifications: For example, a change to accident previously evaluated; or (3) original removal schedule was achieve consistency throughout the involve a significant reduction in a developed in accordance with the 1973 technical specifications, correction of an margin of safety. Based on the foregoing, edition of ASTM E 185. Appendix H to error, or a change in nomenclature. the NRC staff proposes to determine 10 CFR Part 50 provides for the use of Because the change proposed here that the proposed amendment does not ASTM E 185-82 in the material would merely delete unnecessary involve a significant hazards surveillance program. The revised descriptive material and would not consideration. removal schedule will not reduce the effect battery charging and operability Local PublicDocument Room effectiveness of the Reactor Vessel requirements, the proposed change is location: Sacramento City-County Surveillance Program. administrative in nature and falls within Library, 828 1 Street, Sacramento, example (i) of actions not likely to The Commission has provided California. guidance concerning the application of involve significant hazards Attorney for licensee: Daivd S. considerations. On that basis, the staff the standards of 10 CFR 50.92 by Kaplan, Sacramento Municipal Utility providing certain examples (48 FR proposes to determine that the request District, 6201 S Street, P.O. Box 15830, involves no significant hazards 14870). None of these examples are Sacramento, California 95813. considerations. NRC Branch Chief.John F. Stolz. applicable to the proposed amendment. Local Public Document Room The proposed amendment relates only location:Rochester Public Library, 115 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, to a materials surveillance program and South Avenue, Rochester, New York Docket No. 50-312, Rancho Seco does not involve any change in the 14604. Nuclear Generating Station, Sacramento facility or its operation. Furthermore, Attorney for licensee: Harry H. Voigt, County, California neither the quantity nor the quality of Esquire, LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby and Date of amendment request: June 27, the information obtained from the MacRae, 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, 1984, amended on December 24, 1984. surveillance program is reduced. The NW., Suite 1100, Washington, D.C. Descriptionof amendment request: In change also is within all acceptable 20036. 1976, as a result of damage to reactor criteria with respect to the program NRC Branch Chief,John A Zwolinski, vessel surveillance capsule holder tubes specified in the Standard Review Plan. Chief. near the reactor vessel wall at the The proposed amendment, therefore, Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Rancho Seco Nuclear Generation meets the requirements specified in 10 Docket No. 50-312, Rancho Seco Station, the Rancho Seco reactor vessel CFR 50.92(c) for an amendment which Nuclear Generating Station, Sacramento surveillance capsules were installed in does not involve a significant hazards County, California the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, consideraiton. Unit 1, surveillance capsule holders. Date of amendment request: October Since the Davis-Besse reactor design is Local PublicDocumentRoom 9, 1984. similar to the Rancho Seco reactor location: Sacramento City-County Description of amendment request: design, radiation damage to the Rancho Library, 8281 Street, Sacramento, The amendment would delete Facility California. Seco reactor vessel materials installed Operating License Condition 2.C. (10) in the Davis-Besse reactor can be used Attorney for licensee: David S. relating to the U.S./International Atomic Kaplan, Sacramento Municipal Utility to provide radiation damage information Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards for the Rancho Seco reactor vessel. District, 6201 S Street, P.O. Box 15830, program. Under this program, the Sacramento, California 95813. The proposed amendment would Rancho Seco facility was subject to modify the Rancho Seco Technical IAEA inspection of nuclear material NRC Branch Chief.John F. Stolz. Specifications (TSs] by adding a revised

R*flR JI~fAFp~deral Register I Vol. 50. No. 39 I W'ednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices sinna Federal Register I Vol. 50 No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices , South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, open flow paths out of containment requirements are most properly outlined South Carolina Public Service Authority, remains a requirement and the design by Regulatory Guide 1.140, "Design, Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer basis continues to be met, or (2) create Testing, and Maintenance Criteria for Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Fairfield County, the possibility of a new or different kind Normal Ventilation Exhaust System Air South Carolina of accident from any accident previously Filtration and Adsorption Units of Light evaluated because the physical plant Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants." Date of amendment request: design is not being changed and the The requested revision to the Technical November 29, 1984. amendment still allows for purge and Specifications does not decrease the Descriptionof amendment request: exhaust isolation on high containment protection of the public in the event of a The amendment would add a note to the radioactivity in Modes 1 through 4. Also, design basis fuel handling accident high containment radioactivity signal for it will not (3) involve a significant because the Technical Specifications containment purge and exhaust isolation reduction in a margin of safety because continue to ensure that the rigorous in Technical Specification Table 3.3-3, of the minimal time required for testing requirements of Regulatory "Engineered Safety Feature Actuation containment pressurization during Guide 1.52, Revision 2, March 1978, System Instrumentation." The note which the exhaust lines are closed and "Design, Testing and Maintenance would state that "purge exhaust monitor an alternate channel sensing high not required when purge exhaust is Criteria for Post Accident Engineered radiation inside containment which closed." exists to provide a purge exhaust Safety-Feature Atmosphere Cleanup Basis for proposedno significant isolation signal. Accordingly, the System Air Filtration and Adsorption hazards considerationdetermination: Units of Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Commission proposes to determine that When the plant is operating in Modes 1 this change does not involve a Power Plants," are completed prior to through 4, the six-inch mini-purge significant hazards consideration. and during use of the system for its ESF system is needed at times to increase Local Public Document Room function. containment pressure to comply with location: Fairfield County Library, Technical Specification limits. This The Commission has provided certain Garden and Washington Streets, examples (48 FR 14870) of actions likely pressurization is accomplished by Winnsboro, South Carolina 29180. keeping closed the values in the mini Attorney for licensee: Randolph R. to involve no significant hazards purge exhaust line and pumping air into Mahan, South Carolina Electric and Gas considerations. The request involved in containment through the mini-purge Company, P.O. Box 764, Columbia, this case does not match any of those supply line. (Technical Specifications South Carolina 29218. examples. However, the staff has limit the total amount of time the NRC Branch Chief." Elinor G. reviewed the licensee's request for the isolation valves in the mini-purge Adensam. above amendment and has determined system may be opened to less than 1000 that should this request be implemented, hours per 365 days.) While in this South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, it will not: (1) Involve a significant pressurization mode, no open exhaust South Carolina Public Service Authority, increase in the probability or line leads out of containment to the Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Fairfield County, consequences of an accident previously outside environment. Because all evaluated because the system design exhaust lines are closed, one of the South Carolina will not change and will continue to be radiation monitors used to sample Date of amendment request: tested for operability before it is relied containment radiation is isolated. December 14, 1984. upon as an ESF system, (2) create the The radiation monitor in question Description of amendment request: possibility of a new or differet kind of provides one of two (2) isolation signals The amendment would revise Technical to the mini-purge lines upon detection of accident from any accident previously Specification 3/4.9.11 "Spent Fuel Pool high containment radioactivity. In the Ventilation System." The revision would evaluated because the system will be plant configuration described above, the change the Technical Specification to tested to ensure that it continues to valves in the exhaust line are closed. If require certain surveillance testing only perform its ESF functions as originally during pressurization, leakage occurs when the system is being used in an intended, or (3) involve a significant through the closed valves, the radiation engineered safety features function. reduction in a margin of safety because monitor~could detect radioactivity and Basis forproposed no significant the licensee will continue to provide an isolation signal. Diversity in hazards considerationdetermination: demonstrate operability of the system the parameters sensed for containment The spent fuel pool ventilation system at by performing the required surveillance isolation continues to exist, including the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station activities before allowing it to serve as high containment pressure and the has two (2) distinct functions. These an ESF system. Accordingly, the various other parameters sensed for functions consist of being an engineered Commission proposes to determine that safety injection system actuation. safety feature (ESF) system to mitigate this change does not involve a The Commission has provided certain the offsite radiological consequences of significant hazards consideration. examples (48 FR 14870) of actions likely a fuel handling accident and providing a to involve no significant hazards filtration/ventilation system for the fuel Local Public Document Room considerations. The request involved in handling building, hot machine shop and location:Fairfield County Library, this case does not match any of those excess liquid radwaste area during Garden and Washington Streets, examples. However, the staff has normal plant operation. Th6 usual Winnsboro, South Carolina 29180. reviewed the licensee's request for the operating function of providing filtration above amendment and has determined for the above listed areas represents a Attorney for licensee: Randolph R. that should this request be implemented, portion of the licensee's commitment to Mahan, South Carolina Electric &Gas it will not: (1) Involve'a significant ALARA, and is not required to meet 10 Company, P.O. Box 764, Columbia, increase in the probability or CFR Part 100 criteria. The proposed South Carolina 29218. consequences of an accident previously change recognizes that during periods of NRC Branch Chief.Elinor G. evaluated because the monitoring of normal plant operation, the testing Adensam.

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 8007 South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, accident previously evaluated because Attorney for licensee: Randolph R. South Carolina Public Service Authority, the physical plant design is not being Mahan, South Carolina ElectricA&Gas Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer changed. Also, it will not (3) involve a Company, P.O. Box 764, Columbia, Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Fairfield County, significant reduction in a margin of South Carolina 29218. South Carolina safety because all snubbers on systems NRC Branch Chief,Elinor G. Date of amendment request: required for safe shutdown/accident Adensam. November 16, 1983, as amended mitigation will be operable including safety and non-safety related snubbers Southern California Edison Company, et December 14, 1984, al., Docket Nos. 50-361 and 50-362, San Descriptionof amendment request: on systems used to protect the code boundary and to ensure the structural Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, The amendment would revise Technical integrity of these systems under Units 2 and 3, San Diego County, Specification 3/4.7.7 "Snubbers," and its dynamic loads. Accordingly, the California bases to indicate that all snubbers on systems required for safe shutdown/ Commission proposes to determine that Date of Amendment Request: March 2 accident mitigation shall be operable. this change does not involve a and April 2, (Reference PCN 131). The amendment would then delete significant hazards consideration. Descriptionof Amendment Request: Technical Specification Tables 3.7-4a, Local PublicDocument Room The proposed change revises Technical "Safety-Related Hydraulic Snubbers," location:Fairfield County Library, Specification 3/4.3.3.8 "Radioactive and 3.7-4b, "Safety-Related Mechanical Garden and Washington Streets, Liquid Effluent Monitoring Snubbers." Winnsboro, South Carlina 29180. Instrumentation." Technical Basis for proposedno significant Attorney for licensee: Randolph R. Specification (T.S.) 3/4.3.3.8 defines hazards considerationdetermination: Mahan, South Carolina Electric & Gas operability requirements for The original request of November 16, Company, P.O. Box 764, Columbia, instrumentation used to monitor 1983, was noticed in the Federal Register South Carolina 29218. releases of radioactive liquids, periodic (49 FR 7042) on February 24, 1984. NRC Branch Chief-Elinor G. testing required to verify operability and Responding to Generic Letter 84-13, Adensam. actions to be taken in the event that the "Technical Specifications for Snubbers," minimum operability requirements the licensee revised its original request South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, cannot be met. by letter dated December 14, 1984. This South Carolina Public Service Authority, The proposed change revises T.S. 3/ revision was substantial enough to Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer 4.3.3.8 to: Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Fairfield County, require renoticing the requested 1. Allow the use of pumps other than South Carolina amendment. the circulating water pumps to provide As stated in Generic Letter 84-13, the Date of amendment request: dilution of radioactive liquid effluents. snubber listing currently found in November 29, 1984, and supplemented 2. Allow liquid effluents from certain Technical Specifications is not January 8, 1985. release paiths to be diverted to other necessary, provided Technical Description of amendment request: portions of the liquid radwaste system Specification 3/4.7.7 specifies which The amendment would add a new when the associated liquid effluent snubbers are required to be operable. Technical Specification 3/4.8.4.3 monitor is inoperable as an alternative Technical Specification 3/4.7.7 is, regarding requirements for circuit to the current requirement to analyze therefore, being revised to indicate that breakers for non-Class 1E cable. grab samples if releases are to continue. all snubbers on systems requred for safe Basis for proposedno significant 3. Delete the current limitations on the shutdown/accident mitigation shall be hazardsconsiderationdetermination: period for which compensatory operable. This includes safety and non Operability and surveillance measures can be taken when safety related snubbers on systems used requirements for circuit breakers for radioactive liquid effluent monitoring to protect the code boundary and to non-Class 1E cables located in cable instrumentation is inoperable, to ensure the structural integrity of these trays which do not have covers and eliminate an inconsistency in the systems under dynamic loads. which provide protection for cables that technical specifications. Therefore, the requirement regarding if faulted could cause failure in two or Basisfor ProposedNo Significant snubbers found in Technical more adjacent, redundant Class 1E HazardsConsiderationDetermination: Specifications is not being changed and cables are being added to Technical The Commission has provided guidance is consistent with the NRC guidance Specifications. The Commission has concerning the application of standards stated in Generic Letter 84-13. provided certain examples (48 FR 14870) for determining whether a proposed The Commission has provided certain of actions likely to involve no significant license amendment involves a exampies (48 FR 14870) of actions likely hazards considerations. One of the significant hazards consideration by to involve no significant hazards examples (ii) relates to a change that providing certain examples (48 FR considerations. The request involved in constitutes an additional limitation, 14870) of amendments that are this case does not match any of those restriction, or control not presently considered not likely to involve examples. However, the staff has included in Technical Specifications. significant hazards considerations. reviewed the licensee's request for the The amendment involved here is similar Example (i) relates to a purely above amendment and has determined to this example in that it adds administrative change to the technical that should this request be implemented, requirements for some non-Class 1E specifications: For example a change to it will not: (1) InvolVe a significant cable circuit breakers. Accordingly, the achieve consistency throughout the increase in the probability or Commission proposes to determine that technical specifications, correction of an consequences of an accident previously this change does not involve a error, or a change in nomenclature. evaluated because the Technical significant hazards consideration. Example (vi) relates to a change which Specification requirements regarding LocalPublic Document Room either may result in some increase to the snubbers remain unchanged, or (2) location: Fairfield County Library, probability or consequences of a create the possibility of a new or Garden and Washington Streets, previously-analysed accident or may different kind of accident from any Winnsboro, South Carolina 29180. reduce in some way a safety margin, but

8008 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notithes where the results of the change are effluent release path and the required staff proposes to determine that the clearly within all acceptable criteria radioactive liquid effluent monitors are change does not involve a significant with respect to the system or component inoperable. Both Actions 29 and 30 hazards consideration. specified in the SRP. The changes currently state that the release of Local PublicDocument Room itemized above are similar to example radioactive effluents via a pathway with location: Sam Clemente Library, 242 (i) or example (vi) of (48 FR 14870) and inoperable monitors may continue Avenida Del Mar, San Clemente, thus it is proposed that the changes do provided that grab samples are analyzed California.. not involve a significant hazards periodically for gross radioactivity. Attorney for licensee: Charles R. consideration. The following is a more The proposed change would revise Kocher, Esq., Southern California Edison detailed description of each of the three Actions 29 and 30 of T.S. 3/4.3.3.8. to Company, 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue, items listed above and a description of explicitly allow isolating the release P.O. Box 800, Rosemead, California how each is similar to the examples of pathway and diverting the radioactive 91770 and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, (48 FR 14870). effluent flow to the liquid radwaste Attn: David R. Pigott, Esq., 600 Specific Changes Requested and treatment system for processing as Montgomery Street, San Francisco, Bases for ProposedNo Significant liquid radwaste. This proposed change California 94111. HtazardsDeterminationfor each: would explicity allow the steam NRC Branch Chief: George W.

1. Allow use of pumps other than the generator blowdown and the turbine Knighton.

circulating water pumps to liquid building sumps radioactive liquid effluent dilution. effluents to be processed in the same Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket T.S. 3/4.3.3.8 currently requires that at way as liquid radwaste from other Nos. 50-259, 50-260 and 50-296, Browns least one circulating water pump must sources. The existing Actions 29 and 30 Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 and 3, be operating and providing dilution to require grab samples if releases are Limestone County, Alabama the circulating water system discharge continued. If releases are not continued, Date of amendment request: structure whenever dilution is required grab samples are not required. No November 19, 1984. to meet site radioactive effluent releases are made via the affected Descriptionof amendment request: concentration. Liquid effluent pathways if radioactive effluent flow is The amendment would modify the concentration limits are specified by diverted to the liquid radwaste system, Technical Specifications to delete the T.S. 3.11.1.1, "Liquid Effluents so in this case grab samples would not requirement for the condenser low Concentration." In addition to the be required. Since this action could be vacuum scram function. Approval of the circulating water pumps, which provide taken within the bounds of the existing proposed amendment would eliminate cooling water for the condenser when Actions 29 and 30, the proposed change the need to reduce power during periods the plant is operating, there are other merely formalizes this alterntive in the of high river water temperature. pumps (e.g,, the saltwater cooling technical specifications. Therefore, the Basisfor proposedno significant pumps) which are also capable of proposed change is editorial and is hazards considerationdetermination: providing dilution of liquid effluents. similar to Example (i). The proposed change replaces the The Commission has provided guidance

3. Deletion of Time Limits in Effluent specific reference to circulating water concerning the application of standards Monitoring Action Statements.

pumps with "all pumps required to be The applicability of actions to be by providing examples of actions that are not likely to involve a significant providing dilution in order to meet site taken when radioactive liquid effluent radioactive effluent concentration monitoring instrumentation is hazards consideration (48 FR 14870). limits." This non-specific reference to all inoperable is limited to a specified One examnple of actions not likely to pumps will allow use of pumps other period (e.g., 30 days). If effluent release involve a significant hazards than the circulating water pumps (e.g., continues beyond this period, even consideration is a change which either the saltwater cooling pumps) as long as while continuing to implement the may result in some increase in the the site effluent concentration limits compensatory measures specified by the probability or consequences of a specified by T.S. 3.11.1.1 are met. action, because of the time limit, this previously analyzed accident or may This change is similar to example (vi) action would be outside of the bounds of reduce in some way a safety margin, but of (48 FR 14870) in that although it the T.S. and would therefore invoke where the results of the change are allows the use of pumps other'than the Specification 3.0.3. T.S. 3.0.3. would clearly within all acceptance criteria circulating water pumps to provide require that action be taken to initiate a with respect to the system or component liquid effluent dilution and this may plant shutdown. T.S. 3/4.3.3.8 has an specified in the Standard Review Plan result in an increase in the probability of exception to Specification 3.0.3 in (SRP). a previously analysed accident, it accordance with which, at the end of the The basis for the turbine condenser nevertheless is still within all acceptable existing action time limit, it would be low vacuum scram is to provide an criteria in that the facility will still meet interpreted that no additional action is anticipatory scram to reduce peak the requirements of 10 CFR 20, which required. The 3.0.3 exception conflicts pressure in the reactor vessel caused are specified in T.S. 3.11.1.1. with the time limits in the actions. The only by a turbine trip on low condenser

2. Diversion of effluents to the liquid proposed change removes the time limits vacuum. Without the anticipatory scram radwaste system in lieu of grab thereby eliminating the existing conflict. at 23 inches of mercury vacuum on sampling. The proposed change will continue to decreasing condenser vacuum, the main Acting 29 of T.S. 3/4.3.3.8 specifies the require reporting of effluent monitoring turbine would receive a trip at 21.8 actions to be taken if effluents are being instrumentation inoperabilities of inches of mercury vacuum. This trip released via the steam generator greater than 30 days duration and signal would cause the turbine stop blowdown effluent release path or either continued implementation of the valves and control valves to close, of its bypass lines and the required specified compensatory measures. initiating a scram in less than one radioactive liquid effluent monitors are Because this change achieves second. While the reactor was inoperable. Action 30 provides the consistency within the technical scramming, there would also be an actions to be taken if effluents are being specifications, it is similar to example (i) increase in reactor vessel pressure released via the turbine building sump of (48 FR 14870). On this basis, the NRC because of isolation of the main

Fedleral Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, Februayi 27, 1985 / Notices 8009 condenser from the reactor. This The Commission has provided guidance action statement requires immediate pressure rise would normally be limited for the applitation of the standards in 10 suspension of waste gas additions to the by automatic opening of the turbine CFR 50.92 by providing certain examples system and restoration of oxygen bypass valves. For the purposes of (48 FR 14870) of actions likely to involve concentrations to within the limiting conseratively analyzing turbine trip no significant hazards considerations. condition for operation. Action b is transients (ref: FSAR Chapter 13, "Plant One of the examples relates to: "(i) A required whenever gas concentrations Safety Analyses"), no credit was taken purely administrative change to exceed both the limiting condition for for either the condenser low vacuum Technical Specifications: For example, a operation and the concentrations scram or operation of the turbine bypass change to achieve consistency through applicable for Action a. Previously, the valves. Deletion or nonoperation of the out the Technical Specifications, concentrations given for applicability for condenser low vacuum switches may correction of an error, or a change in Action b were inconsistent with the increase the reactor vessel peak nomenclature." Another example (ii) of limiting condition for operation. pressure resulting from a turbine trip actions involving no significant hazards The licensee's letter of November 1, and thereby reduce a margin of safety. consideration is a change that 1984, does not affect any other part of However, since no credit is taken for constitutes an additional limitation, the proposed amendment and does not that scram function this change would restriction, or control not presently change any of the description of the meet the acceptance criteria of SRP included in the Technical Specifications. amendment published in the November section 7.2, "Reactor Trip System." Changes (1) and (2] correct 22, 1983, or May 23, 1984 notices. Therefore the proposbd amendment is typographical and editorial errors and Basis for proposedno significant encompassed by an example for which are thus encompassed by example (i). no significant hazards are likely to exist, hazards considerationdetermination: Change 3 is an additional control and is The previous basis for the proposed the staff proposes to determine that the thus encompassed by example (ii). proposed amendment does not involve a amendment as corrected still applies (48 Since all of the changes to the FR 52836 and 49 FR 21847). significant hazards consideration. Technical Specifications given in the Local Public Document Room Local Public Document Room three areas above are ecompassed by an location:Athens Public Library, South location:University of Toledo Library, example in the guidance provided by the and Forrest, Athens, Alabama 35611. Documents Department, 2801 Bancroft Commisson of actions not likely to Attorney for licensee: H.S. Sanger, Jr., Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43606. involve a significant hazards Esquire, General Counsel, Tennessee consideration, the staff has made a Attorney for licensee: Gerald Valley Authority, 400 Commerce proposed determination that the Chamoff, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts, Avenue, E 11B 33C, Knoxville, application for amendment involves no and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, N.W., Tennessee 37902. significant hazards consideration. Washington, D.C. 20036. NRC Branch Chief: Domenic B. Local Public Document Room NRCBranch Chief"John F. Stolz. Vassallo. location:Athens Public Library, South The Toledo Edison Company and the Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket and Forrest, Athens, Alabama 35611. Cleveland Electric Illuminating Nos. 50-259, 50-260 and 50-296, Browns Attorney for licensee: H.S. Sanger, Jr., Company, Docket No. 50-346, Davis Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 and 3, Esquire, General Counsel, Tennessee Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1, Limestone County, Alabama Valley Authority, 400 Commerce Ottawa County, Ohio Avenue, E 11B 33C, Knoxville, Date of amendment request: Tennessee 37902. Date of amendment request: December 21, 1984, NRC Branch Chief.Domenic B. November 20, 1984. Description of amendment request: Vassallo. Descriptionof amendment request: The proposed amendment would modify The proposed amendment would add a the Technical Specifications as follows: The Toledo Edison Company and the requirement for operability of a reactor (1) The basis for Secifications 3.7.A Cleveland Electric Illuminating coolant system vent path from each and 4.7.A would be changed to indicate Company, Docket No. 50-346, Davis reactor coolant system loop and from that the green position indicating lights Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1, the pressurizer. In the event one or more for the drywell-suppression chamber Ottawa County, Ohio of these paths become inoperable, the vacuum breakers are lit when the valves Date of amendment request: March 16, inoperable paths must be restored to are "leis than 80 degrees" open. The 1979 revised by letters dated December operability or the unit shutdown existing figure of 30 degrees is a 23, 1982, July 13, 1983 (Item 2), August 18. specified time intervals. The proposed typographical error (Units 1 and 2 only). 1983 (Item 6), March 15, 1984, and amendment includes a required (2) Specifications 3.8.C (LCO and November 1, 1984. surveillance at least once each 18 basis) and 4.8.C would be revised to Description of amendment request: months. The proposed Technical indicate that there is more than one The proposed amendment regarding Specifications would be applicable mechanical vacuum pump; "pump" Radiological Effluent Technical when the plant is in operational modes would be changed to "pumps", and Specifications was the subject of 1, 2, or 3. The application is in response "line" to "lines". (There are two half previous notices published in the to NRC Generic Letter 83-37 which size mechanical vacuum pumps for each Federal Register November 22, 1983, at requested that such Technical unit as described in the FSAR section 48 FR 52836 and May 23, 1984, at 49 FR Specifications be proposed by all 11.4.) This change corrects an editorial 21847. Subsequent to those notices, an operators of pressurized water reactors. error. error was noted in the proposed Basis forproposed no significant (3) Specification 6.3 would be Technical Specifications relating to the hazards considerationdetermination: expanded to include a new requirement action statement associated with the The reactor coolant system high point for preparation of written procedures to limiting condition for operation for vents have been installed in accordance limit shift overtime. This change would explosive gas mixtures in the waste gas with Item 11.B.1 of NUREG-0737, implement NUREG-0737 Item I.A.1.3. system. The licensee s letter of "Clarification of TMI Action Plan Basisfor proposedno significant November 1, 1984, corrects proposed Act Requirements" and as required by hazards considerationdetermination: b in Specification 3.11.2.5. The corrected Commission regulation 10 CFR

8010 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, Februart 27, 1985 / Notices 50.44(c)(3)(iii). These high point vents restrictions would be added pertaining when these operational limits are not are installed to vent any noncondensible to degraded grid voltage, and such met. gas which might accumulate and inhibit restrictions are presently not addressed (b) II.F.1.4--Containment Pressure core cooling under natural circulation or in the Vermont Yankee Technical Monitor-The proposed changes define reactor coolant. Specifications. the instrumentation and calibration The Commission has provided Therefore, since the application for requirements for the containment guidance concerning the application of amendment involves proposed changes pressure monitor and also actions the standards of 10 CFR 50.92 by similar to an example for which no required when these operational limits providing certain examples (48 FR significant hazards consideration exists, are not met. 14870). One of the examples of actions the staff has made a proposed (c) ILF.1.5--Containment Water Level involving no significant hazards determination that the application Monitor-The proposed changes define consideration relates to a change that involves no significant hazards the instrumentation and calibration constitutes an additional limitation, consideration. requirements for the containment water restriction, or control not presently Local Public DocumentRoom level monitor and also actions required included in the technical specifications. location:Brooks Memorial Library, 224 when these operational limits are not The high point vents are required to be Main Street, Brattleboro, Vermont 05301. met. installed by Commission regulation; Attorney for licensee: John A. (d) II.F.1.6--Containment Hydrogen therefore incorporation of the proposed Ritscher, Esquire, Ropes and Gray, 225 Monitor-'The proposed changes provide technical specification requirements Franklin Street, Boston, Massachusetts limiting conditions for operation (LCO) represent additional controls not and surveillance requirements for the presently included, and thus the 02110. NRC Branch Chief.Domenic B. Hydrogen/Oxygen Monitor. proposed amendment fits this example. (e) ll.D.3.4-Control Room Accordingly, the Commission proposes Vassallo. Habitability Requirements-The to determine that the requested Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power proposed changes provide limiting amendment involves no significant Corporation, Docket No. 50-271, conditions for operation and hazards consideration. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, surveillance requirements for the Local Public DocumentRoom Vernon, Vermont location:University of Toledo Library, Control Room Toxic Gas Monitoring Documents Department, 2801 Bancroft Date of applicationfor amendment: System. Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43606. December 14, 1984. The modifications to Technical Attorney for licensee: Gerald Description of amendment request Specifications in response to the above Charnoff, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts, The proposed amendment requests a TMI Action Items requirements and Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, NW., revision to the Technical Specifications constitute additional limitations, Washington, D.C. 20036. pertaining to the following TMI Action restrictions or controls not presently NRC Branch Chief-John F. Stolz. Plan Items set forth in NUREG-0737, included in the Vermont Yankee "Clarification of 'MI Action Plan Technical Specifications. Therefore, the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Requirements" and as requested by the proposed changes are similar to the Corporation, Docket No. 50-271, staff's Generic Letter 83-36: Commission's example (ii) above. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Therefore, we propose to determine that Vernon, Vermont lI.F.1.3-Containment High-Range Monitor the requested changes will not involve Date of applicationfor amendment: II.F.1.4-Containment Pressure Monitor significant hazards considerations. November 2, 1984. II.F.1.5-Containment Water Level LocalPublic DocumentRoom Descriptionof amendment request: Monitor location:Brooks Memorial Library, 224 The proposed amendment would add Main Street, Brattleboro, Vermont 05301. Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCO) II.F.1.6--Containment Hydrogen Monitor Attorney for licensee: John A. and Surveillance Requirements II.D.3.4--Control Room Habitability Ritscher, Esquire, Ropes and Gray, 225 pertaining to degraded grid voltage Requirements Franklin Street, Boston, Massachusetts protection to the Technical Basis forproposed no significant 02110. Specifications. Such restrictions do not hazardsconsiderationdetermination: NRC Branch Chief. Domenic B. now exist in the Technical The Commission has provided guidance Vassallo. Specifications. for the application of the standards in 10 Basis for proposedno significant CFR 50.92 by providing certain examples Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power hazardsconsiderationdetermination: (48 FR 14870) of actions likely to involve Corporation, Docket No. 50-271, The Commission has provided guidance no significant hazards considerations. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, concerning the application of the One of the examples relates to: "(ii) A Vernon, Vermont standards for determining whether a change that constitutes an additional Dateof applicationfor amendment: significant hazards consideration exists limitation, restriction, or control not January 15, 1985. by providing certain examples (48 FR presently included in the Technical Descriptionof amendment request: 14870). The examples of actions which Specifications: For example, a more The proposed amendment requests a involve no significant hazards stringent surveillance requirement." change to the Administrative Controls consideration include a change that Technical Specification changes section of the Technical Specifications constitutes an additional limitation, proposed in response to TMI Action to provide alternative requirements restriction, or control not presently Plan Items TI.F.1.3, II.F.1.4, II.F.1.4, should the Operations Supervisor not included in the Technical Specifications: II.F.1.6 and II.D.3.4 are as follows: possess a Senior Operator License for For example, a more stringent (a) II.F.1.3--Containment High-Range an interim time period. surveillance requirement. Monitor-The proposed changes define Basis for proposedno significant The changes proposed in this. the instrumentation and calibration hazardsconsiderationdetermination: application for amendment are requirements for the containment high The Commission has provided guidance encompassed by this example because range monitor and actions required for the application of the standards in 10

F,deral Reiister I Vol. 50. Mn. q I Wr1,',or1,!7 Pal-,,',,n,.,,

• O'7 LUJ 1OQ I M,..4J,..,,.

INUL1U OULI eral Reeister I Vol. 50 No 39 -. 1y LV00 I AT ot ces DUJLJL CFR 50.92 by providing certain examples for NRC review and approval which (48 FR 14870) of actions likely to involve been added to the present sampling reflects changes to reporting locations. Additional managerial review no significant hazards considerations. requirements. In addition, minor One of the examples is "(i) a purely responsibilities and reporting editorial and typograhical errors are requirements would be added relating to administrative change to Technical corrected. Specifications: For example, a change to radioactive releases. Basis forproposedno significant The NRC staff has issued previously achieve consistency throughout the hazards considerationdetermination: its proposed determination that the Technical Specifications, correction of The Commission has provided guidance an error, or a change in nomenclature." earlier versions of these amendment concerning the application of the requests did not involve a significant The proposed chfnge would maintain standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing the organization shown in Figure 6.1.2. hazards consideration (48 FR 38382 at certain examples (48 FR 14870). One of 38430, August 23, 1983 and 48 FR 52804 The proposed change would allow the the examples (ii) of actions not likely to flexibility to permit the Assistant at 52840, November 22, 1983). involve a significant hazards Operations Supervisor to provide This newest version of the proposed consideration is a change to make the instructions to the shift crews involving amendments addresses NRC staff licenses conform to changes in the licensing activities should the comments on previous submittals. The regulations where the change results in Operations Supervisor not have a Senior staff's comments were transmitted to the very minor changes to facility Operator License. In this case, the licensee by letter dated July 18, 1984. operations clearly in keeping with the Assistant Operations Supervisor would regulations. The NRC initial review of The newest version of these proposed be a licensed Senior Operator and have amendments submits the proposed the licensee's submittal related to qualification in accordance with ANSI reporting indicates that this is the case. Technical Specifications as a completely N18.1-1971, "Selection and Training of new section, adds several new Another example (i) of actions not likely Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants." to involve a significant hazards specifications such as total dose and Since the level of training and the consideration is a purely administrative explosive gas mixture specifications and requirement for a Senior Operator change to Technical Specifications; for makes several other additions and License for the Operations Supervisor example, a change to achieve revisions to address staff comments. function is fulfilled as described by the consistency throughout the Technical Basis forproposedno significant Assistant Operations Supervisor, the Specification, correction of an error, or a hazards considerationdetermination: change is administrative since there is change in nomenclature. The remaining The Commission has provided guidance only a change in nomenclature when the changes fall into this category. concerning the application of the Assistant Operations Supervisor Accordingly, the Commission proposes standards by providing certain assumes the Operations Supervisor to determine that this amendment does examples (48 FR 14870). One of the fucntion in the Technical Specifications not involve a significant hazards examples of actions involving no and, therefore, the change is similar to significant hazards considerations consideration. example (i). Therefore, we propose to Local Public Document Room relates to additional limitations, determine that the requested changes location:Swem Library, College of restrictions or controls not presently will not involve significant hazards William and Mary, Williamsburg, included in the techncial specifications considerations. Virginia 23185. (ii). In the case of the proposed technical LocalPublic Document Room Attorney for licensee: Mr. Michael W. specifications, they constitute an location:Brooks Memorial Library, 224 Maupin, Hunton and Williams, Post additional requirement for monitoring Main Street, Brattleboro, Vermont 05301. Office Box 1535, Richmond, Virginia and control of radioactive effluents not Attorney for licensee: John A. 23213. presently in the technical specifications Ritscher, Esquire, Ropes and Gray, 225 and are intended to meet the intent of NRC Branch Chief.Steven A. Varga. Franklin Street, Boston, Massachusetts the Commission's regulations (10 CFR 02110. Wisconsin Electric Power Company, Part 50 Appendix I, 10 CFR 50.34a, and NRC Branch Chief.Domenic B. Docket Nos. 50-266 and 50-301, Point 10 CFR 50.36a) and related staff Vassallo. Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2, guidance (NUREG-0472). Therefore, the Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc staff proposes to determine that the Virginia Electric and Power Company, County, Wisconsin Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281, Surry proposed amendments do not involve a Power Station, Unit Nos. I and 2, Surry Date of amendmentrequest: June 4, significant hazards consideration. County, Virginia 1976 as modified January 28, 1980 Local Public Document Room October 7, 1983 and December 20, 1984. location:Joseph P. Mann Public Library, Date of amendment requests: Descriptionof amendment request: 1515 16th Street, Two Rivers, Wisconsin. November 30, 1984. The proposed amendments would Descriptionof amendment requests: Attorney for licensee: Gerald permit operation after approval of Charnoff, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts and By NRC Generic Letter 83-43 to all changes to the plant's Technical licensees, model Technical Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, N.W., Specifications (TS) that would bring Washington, D.C. 20036. Specifications were forwarded which them into compliance with Appendix I, showed the revisions to reporting NRC Branch Chief-James R. Miller. 10 CFR Part 50, and 10 CFR 50.36a and requirements as necessitated by 50.34a. These proposed TS are intended Wisconsin Electric Power Company, § § 50.72 and 50.73 of Title 10 of the Code to ensure that releases of radioactive Docket Nos. 50-266 and 50-301, Point of Federal Regulations. Section 50.72 material to unrestricted areas during Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2, revises the immediate notification normal operation remain as low as is Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc requirements for operating nuclear reasonably achievable. Specifically, the County, Wisconsin power plants. Section 50.73 provides for proposed TS define limiting conditions a reviged Licensee Event Report System. Date of amendment requestY October for operation and surveillance 26, 1984. By letter dated November 30, 1984, requirements for radioactive liquid and Virginia Electric and Power Company Descriptionof amendment request: gaseous effluent monitoring. Additional The amendment request would delete a submitted proposed license amendments environment sampling locations have limiting condition for operation

~NU"9 Federal Raeister / Vol. 50. No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / 1Nbtices . generator for inspection is permissible. 1. Low Steam Generation Pressure concerning the auxiliary feedwater (Steam Line Rupture Matrix) system. Specifically, the limiting This specification has been rewritten to acknowledge that strict compliance with 2. Pressurizer Level (Remote Shutdown) condition for operation which allows temporarily shutting discharge valves of Appendix IV to section XI of the ASME 3. Steam Generator Pressure (Remote shared auxiliary feedwater pumps to a Code would prohibit utilization of state Shutdown) unit when necessary to supply auxiliary of-the-art inspection techniques not yet 4. Pressurizer Level (Post-Accident) feedwater to the other unit for purposes recognized by the Code. The 5. Steam Generator Outlet Pressure of startup, shutdown or surveillance specification has also been revised to (Post-Accident) testing (provided that the other unit's acknowledge that reporting be in accordance with 10 CFR 50.73.ii rather 6. Startup Feedwater Flow turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump 7. Power Operated Relief Valve was operable) would be deleted. than the superseded LER reporting specification. The basis for this section Date of publication of individual The amendment also would modify been rewritten to make it have also notice in Federal Register. January 14, steam generator inservice inspection consistent with the specifications and requirements under specification 1985, 50 FR 1949. our current practices. Item 3 of page Expiration date of individualnotice: 15.4.2.A, "Steam Generator Tube 15.6.10-1 has also been changed to Inspection Requirements". Item 2.a of conform to present terminology. Based February 13, 1985. this specification would be charged to on the above, the staff proposes to Local Public Document Room indicate that selection of one steam determine that the amendments involve location: Crystal River Public Library, generator for inspection is permissible. no significant hazards considerations. 668 N.W. First Avenue, Crystal River, Item 3 of this specification would be Local PublicDocument Room Florida. rewritten to acknowledge that strict location: Joseph P. Mann Public Library, compliance with Appendix IV to section 1516 Sixteenth Street, Two Rivers, Power Authority of the State of New IX of the ASME Code would prohibit Wisconsin. York, Docket No. 50-333, James A. utilization of state-of-the-art inspection Attorney for licensee: Gerald FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, techniques not yet recongized by the Pittman, Potts and Oswego County, New York Charnoff, Esq., Shaw, Code. Item 7 of the specification would Trowbridge, 1800 M Street NW., Date of amendment request: be revised to acknowledge that Washington, D.C. 20036. 6, 1984, as supplemented December reporting be in accordance with 10 CFR NRC Branch Chief.James R. Miller. January 10, 1985. 50.73.ii rather than the superseded LER reporting specification. The basis for PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED NOTICES Brief description of amendment: this section would also be changed to OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE These revisions would permit refueling make it consistent with the OF AMENDMENTS TO OPERATING operations to proceed with the Reactor specifications. LICENSES AND PROPOSED NO Protection System inoperable to Basis for proposed no significant SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS facilitate installation of Analog Trip hazards considerationdetermination: CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION Transmitter System components during The Commission has provided guidance AND OPPORTUNITY'FOR HEARING the upcoming 1985 refueling outage. concerning the application of these The following notices were previously Date of publicationof individual standards by providing certain published as separate individual notice in Federal Register. February 4, examples (48 FR 14870). One of the notices. The notice content was the 1985 50 FR 4929. examples of actions involving no same as above. They were published as Expiration date of individualnotice: significant hazards considerations is individual notices because time did not March 6, 1985. example (v): "Upon satisfactory allow the Commission to wait for this Local Public Document Room completion of construction in connection regular monthly notice. They are location: Penfield Library, State with an operating facility, a relief repeated here because the monthly University College of Oswego, New granted from an operating restriction notice lists all amendments proposed to that was imposed because the be issued involving no significant York. construction was not yet completed hazards consideration. Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation, satisfactorily." The proposed For details, see the individual notice Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear amendment involving deleting a limiting in the Federal Register on the day and Power Plant, Wayne County, New York condition for operation (LCO) page cited. This notice does not extend concerning the auxiliary feedwater the notice period of the original notice. Date of amendment request:January system meets this example. The LCO 25, 1985. Florida Power Corporation, et aL, had been imposed as an interim safety Docket No. 50-302, Crystal River Unit Descriptionof amendment request: measure until valve actuation No. 3 Nuclear Generating Plant, Citrus The proposed amendment would allow modifications (automatic alignment County, Florida use of temporary closure plate in place upon receipt of a signal to start the of the equipment door (hatch). auxiliary feedwater pumps) were Date of amendment request: Date of publication of individual completed. The valve actuation D.ecember 14, 1984. notice in Federal Register. February 5, modifications have been completed and Briefdescription of amendment: The amendment would modify Technical 1985 (50 FR 5020). tested and the LCO is no longer needed. Expirationdate of individualnotice: Another example of actions involving Specification Tables 4.3.2, 4.3.6, and 4.3.7, and Technical Specification March 7, 1985. no significant hazards considerations is example (i) a purely administrative 4.4.3.Z.2 to permit waiver of certain 18 Local PublicDocument Room change to the technical specifications. month calibration frequency location: Rochester Public Library, 115 The changes involving steam generator requirements for Cycle V provided the South Avenue, Rochester, New York meet this example. surveillance is performed during Refuel 14604. inservice inspections This specification has been clarified to V. The specific equipment covered by indicate that selection of one steam this request Is as follows:

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27. 1985 / Notices P*13 III1 Southern California Edison Company, et petition for leave to intervene was filed Library, 212 W. Burdeshaw Street, al., 50-361 and 50-362, San Onofre following this notice. Dothan, Alabama 36303. Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and Unless otherwise indicated, the 3 Commission has determined that these Arkansas Power & Light Company, amendments satisfy the criteria for Docket No. 50-368, Arkansas Nuclear Date of amendment request: July 2, One, Unit 2, Pope County, Arkansas August 7 and October 3, 1984. categorical exclusion in accordance Brief descriptionof amendments: with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant Date of applicationfor amendment: Changes to Technical Specifications 3/ to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental June 30, 1983, as superseded by letter 4.2.4, "DNBR Margin" and 3/4.3.1, impact statement or environmental dated May 19, 1984.

"Reactor Protection Instrumentation,"      assessment need be prepared for these          Briefdescription of amendment: The and their bases.                           amendments. If the Commisison has           amendment revised the Technical Date of publication of individual       prepared an environmental assesment         Specifications pertaining to hydraulic notice in Federal Register: December 31,   under the special circumstances             snubbers and added new requirements 1984 (49 FR 50845).                        provision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and has        for mechanical snubbers operability and Expiration date of individualnotice:    made a determination based on that          testing.

January 30, 1985. assessment, it is so indicated. Date of issuance:January 29, 1985. Local PublicDocument Room For further details with respect to the Effective date: January 29, 1985 location:San Clemente Library, 242 action see (1) the applications for Amendment No.: 62 Avenida Del Mar, San Clemente, amendments, (2) the amendments, and FacilityOperatingLicense No. NPF-6. California 92612. (3) the Commission's related letters, Amendment revised the Technical Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Specifications. Southern California Edison Company, et Assessments as indicated. All of these al., 50-361 and 50-362, San Onofrg Date of initialnotice in Federal items are available for public inspection Register: August 22, 1984 (48 FR 33353 at Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and at the Commission's Public Document 3 33356). Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, The Commission's related evaluation Date of amendment request: February D.C., and at the local public document of the amendment is contained in a 29, April 2, September 11, October 1 and rooms for the particular facilities Safety Evaluation dated January 29, 3, 1984. involved. A copy of items (2) and (3) 1985. Brief descriptionof amendment: may be obtained upon request No significant hazards consideration Technical Specification changes relating addressed to the U.S. Nuclear comments received. No. to reactor protection instrumentation Regulatory Commission, Washington, LocalPublic Document Room and electrical power sources. D.C. 20555, Attention: Director, Division location: Tomlinson Library, Arkansas Date of publication of individual of Licensing. Tech University, Russellville, Arkansas notice in Federal Register: December 31, Alabama Power Company, Docket No. 72801 1984 (49 FR 50843). 50-348, Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Arkansas Power &Light Company, Expirationdate of individualnotice: Unit No. 1, Houston County, Alabama Dockets Nos. 50-313 and 50-368, January 30, 1985. LocalPublic Document Room Date of applicationfor amendment: Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit Nos. 1 and location:San Clemente Library, 242 February 10, 1984, supplemented June 18, Unit 2, Pope County, Arkansas Avenida Del Mar, San Clemente, 1984. Date of applicationfor amendments: California 92612. Brief descriptionof amendment: Table March 16, 1984, supplemented August 4.4-5, Reactor Vessel Material 22, 1984. NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF Surveillance Program-Withdrawal AMENDMENT TO FACILITY Brief description of amendments: The Schedule is revised to show a different OPERATING LICENSE withdrawal time schedule for the amendments provided Technical During the 30-day period since remaining capsules. The change is Specifications related to the following publication of the last monthly notice, administrative in nature and conforms NUREG-0737 Items: the Commission has issued the following to the requirements in Appendix H to 10 1. Reactor Coolant System Vents (II.B.1) amendments. The Commission has CFR Part 50, which became effective 2. Postaccident Sampling (II.B.3) determined for each of these July 26, 1983 (48 FR 24008 May 31, 1983). 3. Sampling and Analysis of Plant amendments that the application Other changes proposed to Tables 3.4-2 Effluents (II.F.1.2) complies with the standards and and 3.4-3 are not acted upon at this 4. Containment High-Range Radiation requirements of the Atomic Energy Act time. Monitor (II.F.1.3) of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Date of issuance:January 22, 1985. 5. Containment Pressure Monitor Commission's rules and regulations. The Effective date: January 22, 1985. (II.F.1.4) Commission has made appropriate Amendment No.: 48. 6. Containment Water Level Monitor findings as required by the Act and the FacilityOperatingLicense No. NPF-2. (II.F.1.5) Commission's rules and regulations in 10 Amendment revised the Technical Date of issuance:January 31, 1985. CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the Specifications. Effective date: January 31, 1985. license amendment. Date of initialnotice in Federal Amendment Nos.: 94 and 63. Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Register: April 25, 1984 (49 FR 17851) FacilityOperatingLicense Nos. DPR Amendment to Facility Operating The Commission's related evaluation of 51 and NPF-6. Amendments revised the License and Proposed No Significant the amendment is contained in a Safety Technical Specifications. Hazards Consideration Determination Evaluation dated January 22, 1985. Date of initialnotice in Federal and Opportunity for Hearing in No significant hazards consideration Register: November 21, 1984 (49 FR connection with these actions was comments were received. 45941 at 45942). published in the Federal Register as LocalPublic Document Room The Commission's related evaluation indicated. No request for a hearing or location: George S. Houston Memorial of the amendnients is contained in a

8014 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices Safety Evaluation dated January 31, Effective date: February 7, 1985. Commonwealth Edison Company, 1985. Amendment Nos.: 81 and 107. Docket Nos. 50-295 and 50-304, Zion No significant hazards consideration Facility OperatingLicense Nos. DPR Nuclear Power Station, Unit Nos. I and comments received. No. 71 andDPR-62. Amendments revised 2, Benton County, Illinois LocalPublic Document Room the Technical Specifications. location: Tomlinson Library, Arkansas Date of applicationfor amendments: Date of initialnotice in Federal October 29, 1984. Tech University, Russellville, Arkansas Register: November 21, 1984 49 FR 45943 72801 Brief descriptionof amendments: The Commission's related evaluation These amendments add a specification Baltimore Gas & Electric Company, of the amendment is contained in a for reactor coolant system vents and are Dockets Nos. 50-317 and 50-318, Calvert Safety Evaluation dated February 7, consistent with the guidance provided in Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 1985. NRC Generic Letter 83-37. and 2, Calvert County, Maryland No significant hazards consideration Date of Issuance: February 5, 1985. comments received. No: Date of applicationfor amendments: Local PublicDocument Room Effective Date: February 5, 1985. October 11, 1984. location: Southport, Brunswick County Amendment Nos. 86 and 86. Brief description of amendments: The Library, 109 W. Moore Street, Southport, FacilityOperatingLicense Nos. DPR amendments revised the Unit I and Unit North Carolina 28461. 39 and DPR-48.Amendments revised 2 Technical Specifications 4.6.1.2a to the Technical Specifications. allow completion of the third Commonwealth Edison Company, Date of initialNotices in Federal containment Integrated Leak Rate Test Docket No. 50-237, Dresden Nuclear Register: December 31, 1984 (49 FlA (ILRT) prior to the 10-year Inservice Power Station, Unit No. 2, Grundy 50801) The Commission's related Inspection (ISI) outage. This TS change County, Illinois evaluation of the amendments is would provide for a "one time only" Date of applicationfor amendment: contained in a Safety Evaluation dated schedule change for the third (10-year September 11, 27 and 28, 1984 and February 5, 1985. service interval) ILRT. October 2, 1984. No significant hazards consideration Date of issuance:February 14, 1985. Brief description of amendment: The comments received: No Effective date: February 14, 1985. amendment authorizes changes to the Local PublicDocument Room Amendment Nos.: 98 and 80. location: Zion Benton Library District, FacilityOperatirgLicense Nos. DPR Technical Specifications to support Cycle 10 operation of Dresden 2 with 2600 Emmaus Avenue, Zion, Illinois 53 and DPR-69.Amendments revised 60099. the Technical Specifications. reload fuel supplied by and the Date of initialnotice in Federal associated analyses performed by Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Register. December 31, 1984 (49 FR 50794 Exxon Nuclear Company. The Company, Docket No. 50-213, Haddam at 50798]. amendment also authorizes Dresden 2 to Neck Plant, Middlesex County, The Commission's related evaluation use General Electric hybrid design Connecticut of the amendments is contained in a hafnium control rod assemblies, Safety Evaluation dated February 14, provides new limiting conditions for Date of applicationfor amendment: operation and surveillance requirements October 24, 1983. 1985. No significant hazards consideration for a newly modified scram system Brief description of amendment: The comments received. No. having improved reliability and changes amendment revises the Technical Local Public Document Room the calibration and functional test Specifications to specify that the location:Calvert County Library, Prince frequencies for certain specific minimum shift crew composition for Frederick, Maryland. instruments that are being modified into Normal Operating Conditions except analog trip systems. Specifically related cold shutdown includes two individuals Carolina Power & Light Company, to the operation with the reload fuel, the holding a senior reactor operator Dockets Nos. 50-325 and 50-324, amendment authorizes extension of the license. Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 MAPLHGR curves for 8X8 and 9X9 Date of Issuance: January 15, 1985. and 2, Brunswick County, North (LTA) fuel types and for GE P8DRB265H Effective Date: January 15, 1985. Carolina fuel type and deletes the MAPLHGR Amendment No. 61. Date of applicationfor amendments: curve for GE fuel type P8DRB239 which FacilityOperatingLicense No. DPR October 2, 1984. has never been used at Dresden and is 61 Amendment revised the Technical Brief descriptionof amendments: The not expected to be in the future. Specifications. amendments change the Technical Date of Issuance:January 17, 1985. Date of initialNotices in the Federal Specifications by revising Table 4.3.5.9 Effective Date: January 17, 1981. Register. December 27, 1983 (48 FR 1 to remove the requirement for control Amendment No. 84. 57031). The Commission's related room alarm annunciation when the ProvisionalOperatingLicense No. evaluation of the amendment is noble gas activity monitors of the main DPR-19.The amendment revised the contained in a letter dated January 15, stack monitoring system, the reactor Technical Specifications. 1985. No significant hazards building ventilation monitoring system, Date of initialNotices in Federal consideration comments received: No. or the turbine building ventilation Register: October 24, 1984 (49 FR 42815) Locadl Public Document Room monitoring system experience a high and November 21, 1984 (49 FR 45944 and location: Russell Library, 124 Broad voltage circuit failure. In addition, the 45945). The Commission's related Street, Middletown, Connecticut 06457. requirement for control rTom alarm evaluation of the amendment is annunciation is removed for the contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Duke Power Company, Docket Nos. 50 condition when the noble gas activity January 17, 1985. No significant hazards 369 and 50-370, McGuire Nuclear monitor of the reactor building consideration comments received. No. Station, Units I and 2, Mecklenburg ventilation system is not set in the LocalPublic Document Room County, North Carolina "operate mode." location: Morris Public Library, 604 Date of applicationfor amendments: Date of issuance:February 7, 1985. Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60451. August 31, 1984.

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 8015 Brief description of amendments: The Date of issuance:January 9, 1985. Reactor Containment Leakage Testing amendments change the Technical Effective date: January 9, 1985. For Water-Cooled Power Reactors". Specifications to implement the use of Amendment Nos. 133, 133 and 130. Date of issuance:February 11, 1985. time overcurrent trips of the circuit FacilityOperatingLicense Nos. DPR breakers for emergency diesel Effective date: February 11, 1985. 38, DPR-47andDPR-55. Amendments generators. Amendments Nos.: 135, 135, and 132. revised the Technical Specifications. Date of Issuance:February 1, 1985. Date of initialnotice in the Federal FacilityOperatingLicenses Nos. Effective, date: February 1, 1985. Register August 22, 1984, 49 FR 33363 DPR-38,DPR-47 andDPR-55. Amendment Nos. 38 and 19. Amendments revised the Technical The Commission's related evaluation of Facility OperatingLicense Nos. NPF Specifications. the amendments is contained in a Safety 9 and NPF-17.Amendments revised the Date of initialnotice in Federal Evaluation dated January 9, 1985. Technical Specifications. Register- October 24, 1984, 49 FR 42817. Date of initialnotice in the Federal No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. The Commission's related evaluation Register. December 31, 1984 (49 FR Local Public DocumentRoom of the amendments is contained in a 50801) The Commission's related Safety Evaluation dated February' 11, evaluation of the amendments is location:Oconee County Library, 501 West Southbroad Street, Walhalla, 1985. contained in a Safety Evaluation dated February 1, 1985. South Carolina. No significant hazards consideration No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Duke Power Company, Dockets Nos. 50 comments received: No. 269, 50-270, 50-287, Oconee Nuclear Local Public Document Room Local PublicDocument Room Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Oconee location: Oconee County Library, 501 location:Atkins Library, University of County, South Carolina West Southbroad Street, Walhalla, North Carolina, Charlotte (UNCC South Carolina. Station), North Carolina 28223. Date of applicationfor amendments: November 9, 1984. Duquesne Light Company, Docket No. Duke Power Company, Docket Nos. 50 Brief description of amendments: 50-334, Beaver Valley Power Station, 369 and 50-370, McGuire Nuclear These amendments revise the common Unit No. 1, Shippingport, Pennsylvania Station, Units 1 and 2, Mecklenburg Technical Specifications (TSs) to permit Dateof Application for amendment: County, North Carolina Oconee Unit 2 a one-time extension of June 28, 1984. Date of applicationfor amendments: the interval for inspecting inaccessible Briefdescription of amendment: The November 16, 1984. hydraulic snubbers such that the amendment changes the Technical Brief descriptionof amendments: The inspection be performed during the 1985 Specifications for Beaver Valley Unit amendments change the Technical Unit 2 refueling outage, provided that No. I as follows: Specifications to delete the provision such outage begins no later than March 15, 1985. The inspection is currently (1) Table 4.3-13 has been revised to which allows the upper head injection indicate that the Noble Gas Activity accumulator system to be inoperable at required to be performed before February 14, 1985. Monitor and Radiation Monitor provide less than or equal to 46% rated thermal control room alarm communication only; power. Date of issuance:February 6, 1985. Effective date: February 6, 1985. they do not initiate any automatic Date of issuance:February 6, 1985. actuation. Effective date: February 6, 1985. Amendments Nos. 134, 134, and 131. Amendment Nos. 39 and 20. FacilityOperatingLicense Nos. DPR [2) Table 3.4-4 has been revised to Facility OperatingLicense Nos. NPF 38, DPR-47 and DPR-55.Amendments specify the applicable time constant for 9 and NPF-17.Amendments revised the revised the Technical Specifications. the functional unit High Negative Steam Technical Specifications. Date of initialnotice in the Federal Pressure Rate to be greater than or equal Date of initialnotice in the Federal Register: December 31, 1984, 49 FR to 50 seconds. Register. December 31, 1984 (49 FR 50803. (3) Tables 3.3-3, 3.3-4, 3.3-5 and 4.3-2 50802) The Commission's related The Commission's related evaluation have been revised to add a list of signals evaluation of the amendments is of the amendments is contained in a that initiate the start of the Auxiliary contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Safety Evaluation dated February 6, Feedwater System. February 6, 1985. 1985. Date of issuance:January 25, 1985. No significant hazards consideration No significant hazards consideration Effective date:January 25, 1985. comments received: No. comments received: No. Amendment No. 90. Local Public Document Room Local Public DocumentRoom location: Atkins Library, University of FacilityOperatingLicense No. DPR location:Oconee County Library, 501 66. Amendment revised the Technical North Carolina, Charlotte (UNCC West Southbroad Street, Walhalla, Station), North Carolina 28223. Specifications. South Carolina Date of initialnotice in Federal Duke Power Company, Dockets Nos. 50 Duke Power Company, Dockets Nos. 50 Register: September 28, 1984 (49 FR 269, 50-270 and 50-287, Oconee Nuclear 269, 50-270, and 50-287, Oconee Nuclear 38398). Station, Unites Nos. 1, 2 and 3, Oconee Station, Units Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Oconee The Commission's related evaluation County, South Carolina County, South Carolina of the amendment is contained in a Date of applicationfor amendments: Date of applicationfor amendments: Safety Evaluation dated January 25, April 30, 1984. August 8, 1984. 1985. Brief description of amendment: Brief descriptionof amendment: No significant hazards consideration These amendments revise the These amendments revise the Technical comments received: None. Administrative Controls Section of the Specifications to change the air lock Local Public DocumentRoom TSs to reflect the current regulations testing frequency from quarterly to location:B. F. Jones Memorial Library, governing licensee event reports as semiannually-in conformance with 10 663 Franklin Avenue, Aliquippa, required by the Commission. CFR Part 50, Appendix J, "Primary Pennsylvania 15001.

8016 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices II Florida Power Corporation, et al., Local PublicDocument Room analysis, (9) make editorial changes, and Docket No. 50-302, Crystal River Unit location:Appling County Public Library, (10) add a reporting requirement. No. 3 Nuclear Generating Plant, Citrus 301 City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia. Date of issuance: February 4, 1985. County, Florida Effective date: February 4, 1985. Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe Amendments Nos.: 106 and 44. Date of Application for amendment: Power Corporation, Municipal Electric FacilityOperatingLicenses Nos. December 14, 1984, as supplemented on Authority of Georgia, City of Dalton, DPR-57and NPF-5. Amendments January 31, 1985. Georgia, Docket No. 50-366, Edwin I. revised the Technical Specifications. Brief descriptionof amendment: This Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2, Appling Date of initialnotice in Federal amendment permits waiver of certain County, Georgia Register: February 24, 1984 (49 FR 7036). 18-month calibration frequency Date of amendment request: The Commission's related evaluation requirements for Cycle V provided the December 21, 1983, as supplemented of the amendments is contained in a surveillance is performed during Refuel April 16 and May 2, 1984. Safety Evaluation dated February 4, V. Brief description of amendment: The 1985. Date of issuance: February 14, 1985. amendment revises the TSs for Hatch No significant hazards consideration Effectiie date: February 14, 1985. Unit 2 to: (1) Increase the number of comments received: No. Amendment No.: 73. traveling incore probe (TIP) system Local Public Document Room Facility OperatingLicense No. DPR detectors that are required to be location: Appling County Public Library,

72. Amendment revised the Technical operable from three to four, and (2) 301 City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia.

Specifications. allow operation of the TIP system with Date of initialnotice in Federal GPU Nuclear Corporation, Docket No. one or more inoperable detectors. Register: January 14, 1985, (50 FR 1949) 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear Date of issuance: January 31, 1985. Subsequent to this initial notice, by Generating Station, Ocean County, New Effective date:January 31, 1985. letter of January 31, 1985, the licensee Jersey Amendment No.: 43. submitted additional information Facility OperatingLicense No. NPF-5. Date of applicationfor amendment. relating to its application for amendment Amendment revised the Technical August 11, 1980 and supplemented which did not alter the substance of the Specifications. October 18, 1982, December 5, 1983, licensee's request. Date of initialnotice in Federal February 9 and March 23, 1984. The Commission's related evaluation Register. September 28, 1984 (49 FR Brief description of amendment."The of the amendment is contained in a 38399). The Commission's related amendment authorized changes to the Safety Evaluation dated February 14, evaluation of the amendment is Appendix A Technical Specifications 1985. contained in a Safety Evaluation dated relating to station electric distribution No significant hazards consideration January 31, 1985. system voltages. comments received: No. No significant hazards consideration Date of Issuance: February 11, 1985. Local Public Document Room comments received: No. Effective date: February 11, 1985. Location: Crystal River Public Library, Local Public Document Room Amendment No.: 80. 668 N.W. First Avenue, Crystal River, location:Appling County Public Library, ProvisionalOperatingLicense No. Florida. 301 City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia. DPR-16.Amendment revised the Technical Specifications: Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe Date of initialnotice in Federal Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Register. November 21, 1984 (49 FR Authority of Georgia, City of Dalton, Authority of Georgia, City of Dalton, 45952). The Commission's related Georgia, Docket No. 50-366, Edwin I. Georgia, Dockets Nos. 50-321 and 50 evaluation of this amendment is Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2, Appling 366, Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units contained in a Safety Evaluation dated County, Georgia Nos. I and 2, Appling County, Georgia February 11, 1985. No significant Date of amendment request: July 12, Date of applicationsfor amendments: hazards consideration comments 1984. May 31, 1983, as supplemented received: No. Brief description of amendment: The September 1 and November 22, 1983. Local Public DocumentRoom: Odean amendment revises the TSs for Hatch Brief description of amendment: The County Library, 101 Washingtdn Street, Unit 2 t4 add a requirement to reduce amendments revise the TSs for Hatch Toms River, New Jersey 08753. the power below a specified limit Unit 1 to: (1) Reduce the equilibrium GPU Nuclear Corporation, et al., Docket whenever the plant is temporarily activity concentration limit for reactor No. 50-289, Three Mile Island Nuclear operating with only one recirculation coolant, (2) increase time per year that Station, Unit No. 1, Dauphin County, loop. reactor coolant activity is allowed to Pennsylvania Date of issuance:January 24, 1985. exceed the equilibrium value, (3) Effective date: January 24, 1985. increase the time allowed for isolating Date of amendment request: June 1, Amendment No.: 42. steam valves when an activity limit is July 11, August 2, and September 11, Facility OperatingLicense No. NPF-5. exceeded, (4) increase the dose 1984. Amendment revised the Technical equivalent iodine concentration above Brief description of amendment: This Specifications. which additional samples are required, amendment revises the TSs related to Date of initialnotice in Federal (5) increase the rate of increase in offgas the allowable concentration of hydrogen Register: October 24, 1984 (49 FR 42822). activity at which reactor coolant and oxygen in the waste gas holdup The Commission's related evaluation samples are required, (6) reduce the system and the associated hydrogen/ of the amendment is contained in a dose equivalent 1-131 concentration at oxygen monitoring instrumentation. The Safety Evaluation dated January 24, which reactor coolant samples are amendment permits unlimited oxygen 1985. required to be taken, (7) require content provided that hydrogen content No significant hazards consideration additional coolant samples, (8) relax the is below 4% and permits unlimited requirement for equivalent 1-131 hydrogen content provided that the comments received: No.

Federal Register/ Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 /'Notices 8017 8017 oxygen limit is below 2%. The TSs Brief description of amendment: The Containment Leak Testing to conform require two hydrogen monitors and two amendment revises the Technical with 10 CFR Part 50 Apeendix J. oxygen monitors to assure compliance Specifications to incorporate the revised Date of issuance: February 4, 1985. with the above limits. Limiting setpoint for bypass of reactor scrams Effective date: February 4, 1985. conditions for operation are also during turbine trips and generator load Amendment No.: 82. included. rejection at low power levels. FacilityOperating License No. DPR Date of issuance:February 4, 1985. Date of issuance:February 5,,1985. 36. Amendment revised the Technical Effective date: February 4, 1985. Effective date: February 5, 1985. Specifications. Amendment No.: 104. Amendment No.: 111. Date of initialnotice in Federal FacilityOperatingLicense No. DPR FacilityOperatingLicense No. DPR Register. July 20, 1983 (48 FR 33076 at

50. Amendment revised the Technical 49. Amendment revised the Technical 33082) and June 20, 1984 (49 FR 25350 at Specifications. Specifications. 25363).

Date of initialnotice in Federal Date of initialnotice in Federal The Commission's related evaluation Register: November 21, 1984, (49 FR Register. September 28, 1984 (49 FR of the amendment is contained in a 45953). 38401). Safety Evaluation dated February 4, The Commission's related evaluation The Commission's related evaluation 1985. of the amendment is contained in a of the amendment is contained in a No significant hazards consideration Safety Evaluation dated February 4, Safety Evaluation dated February 5, comments received: No. 1985. 1985. Local Public Document Room No sugnificant hazards consideration No significant hazards consideration location: Wiscasset Public Libray, High comments received: No. comments received: No. Street, Wiscasset, Maine. Local Public DocumentRoom Local PublicDocument Room location:Government Publications location: Cedar Rapids Public Library, Mississippi Power & Light Company, Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, 426 Third Avenue, S.E., Cedar Rapids, Middle South Energy, Inc., South Education Building, Commonwealth and Iowa 52401. Mississippi Electric Power Association, Walnut Streets, Harrisburg, Docket No. 50-416, Grand Gulf Nuclear Pennsylvania 17128. Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company, Station, Unit 1, Clairborne County, Docket No. 50-309, Maine Yankee Mississippi Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, Atomic Power Station, Lincoln County, Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold Date of applicationfor amendment: Maine Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa October 9, 1984. Date of applicationfor amendment: Brief description of amendment: The Date of applicationfor amendment: April 13, 1984. amendment modifies the Technical October 5, 1984. Brief descriptionof amendment: This Specifications to implement a change of Brief description of amendment: The amendment modified the Maine Yankee position title in the offsite organization amendment revises the Technical Technical Specifications concerning for management of the facility, Specifications to incorporate the operability and surveillance of various Date of issuance:February 1, 1985. requirements of automatic actuation of monitoring equipment required by Effective date: February 1, 1985. the automatic depressurization system NUREG-0737. Amendment No.: 1. (ADS) valves in accidents which do not Date of issuance:January 29, 1985. Facility OperatingLicense No. NPF involve a high containment pressure, Effective date: January 29, 1985. 29.: Amendment revised the Technical and provides for surveillance Amendment No.: 81. Specifications. requirements of manual override FacilityOperatingLicense No. DPR Date of initialnotice in Federal switches. 36: Amendment revised the Technical Register: November 21, 1984 (49 FR Date of issuanceFebruary 1, 1985. Specifications. 45955). Effective date: February 1, 1985. Date of initialnotice in Federal The Commission's related evaluation Amendment No.: 110. Register: June 20, 1984 (49 FR 25350 at of the amendment is contained in a Facility OperatingLicense No. DPR 25363). Safety Evaluation dated February 1,

49. Amendment revised the Technical The Commission's related evaluation 1985.

Specifications. of the amendment is contained in a No significant hazards consideration Date of initialnotice in Federal Safety Evaluation dated January 29, comments received: No. Register. December 31, 1984 (49 FR 1985. Local Public DocumentRoom 50805). No significant hazards consideration location: Hinds Junior College, George The Commission's related evaluation comments received: No comments M. McLendon Library, Raymond, of the amendment is contained in a received. Mississippi 39154. Safety Evaluation dated February 1, Local PublicDocument Room 1985. location:Wiscasset Public Library, High Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, et No significant hazards consideration Street, Wiscasset, Maine. al., Docket No. 50-336, Millstone comments received: No. Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2, Town Local Public Document Room Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company, of Waterford, Connecticut location;Cedar Rapids Public Library, Docket No. 50-309, Maine Yankee Date of applicationfor amendment: 426 Third Avenue, S.E., Cedar Rapids, Atomic Power Station, Lincoln County, December 10, 1984. Iowa 52401. Maine Brief description of amendment: This Iowa Electric Light and Power Company, Date of applicationfor amendment: amendment modified the Technical Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold March 1, 1976 as supplemented April 11, Specifications authorizing the use of an Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa 1984. outage equipment door in place of the Brief description of amendment: This equipment hatch door during refueling Date of applicationfor amendment: amendment modified the Maine Yankee operations. August 17, 1984. Technical Specifications concerning Date of issuance: February 12, 1985.

8018 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 1 Notices Effective date: February 12, 1985. Technical Specifications. These changes Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Amendment No,: 98. are administrative in nature. Pennsylvania 18701. Facility OperatingLicense No. DPR Date of issuance:February 6, 1985. Pennsylvania Power & Light Company, 65: Amendment revised the Technical Effective date: As of date of issuance. Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388, Specifications. Amendment No.: 29. Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Date of initialnotice in Federal FacilityOperatingLicense No. NPF Units I and 2, Luzerne County, Register: December 31, 1984 (49 FR 50794 14: Amendment revised the Technical Pennsylvania at 50808). Specifications. The Commission's related evaluation Date of initialnotices in Federal Date of applicationfor amendments: of the amendment is contained in a Register. November 21, 1984 (49 FR December 6, 1984. Safety Evaluation-dated February 12, 45958]. The Commission's related Brief descriptionof amendments: 1985. evaluation of the amendment is These amendments revise the No significant hazards consideration contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, comments received: No. February 6, 1985. No comments on the Unit 1 and Unit 2 Technical Local PublicDocument Room proposed no significant hazards Specifications to allow common DC 125 location: Waterford Public Library, Rope consideration finding were received. volt battery loads to be supported by the Ferry Road, Waterford, Connecticut. Local Public Document Room Unit I or Unit 2 batteries. Previously, Pennsylvania Power &Light Company, Location: Osterhout Free Library, only the Unit 1, 125-volt batteries were Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388, Reference Department, 71 South able to support these common loads. Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Date of issuance: February 8, 1985. Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units I and 2, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania 18701. Effective date: February 8, 1985. Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Power & Light Company, Amendment Nos.: 31 and 7. Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388, FacilityOperatingLicense Nos. NPF Date of applicationfor amendments: 14 andNPF-22: Amendments revised September 19, 1984. Susquehanna Steam Electric Station,, Units I and 2, Luzerne County, the Technical Specifications. Briefdescriptionof amendment: This amendment revises License Condition Pennsylvania Date of initialnotice in Federal 2.C.(23)(b) of Facility Operating No. Date of applicationfor amendments: Register. Individual notice dated NPF-14 and License Condition 2.C.(8)(b) September 19, 1984 with supplemental January 7, 1985 (50 FR 904). The of Facility Operating License No. NPF information January 3, 1985. Commission's related evaluation of

22. The license condition previously Brief description of amendments: The these amendments is contained in a required seismic qualification of the in purpose of these amendments is to Safety Evaluation dated February 8, vessel fuel racks prior to commencement change Susquehanna Unit 1 and Unit 2 1985. No significant hazards of the first refueling outage. Since the Technical Specification Table 3.8.4.2-1 consideration comments were received.

licensee has no need for the in-vessel by revising the list of motor-operated Local PublicDocument Room fuel rack during the first refueling outage valves in the Emergency Service Water Location: Osterhout Free Library, the NRC staff will require the licensee to (ESW) system to support the corrective Reference Department, 71 South seismically qualify the in-vessel fuel action described in the licensee's final Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, rack prior to use. report dated September 22, 1983, Pennsylvania 18701. Date of issuance:January 15, 1985. regarding a deficiency involving water Pennsylvania Power &Light Company Effective date: January 15, 1985. hammer in the ESW system. Docket Nos. 50-387, Susquehanna Steam Amendment Nos.: 28 and 5. Specifically, ESW valves HV-08693 A Electric Station, Unit 1, Luzeme County, FacilityOperatingLicense Nos. NPF and B would be added to Technical Pennsylvania 14 and NPF-22: Amendment revises the Specification Table 3.8.4.2-1 for Unit 1 license. and Unit 2. Additionally, in the Unit 2 Date of applicationfor amendment. Date of initialnotices in Federal Technical Specifications ESW pump September 7, 1984. Register. November 21, 1984 (49 FR discharge valves HV-01101 A, B, C and Brief descriptionof amendment-This 45961). The Commission's related D would be deleted from Technical amendment supports modifications evaluation of the amendment is Specification Table 3.8.4.2-1. involving the installation of overcurrent contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Date of issuance: February 7, 1985. relays on each reactor recirculation January 15, 1985. So significant hazards Effective date: Prior to start-up pump circuit breaker in order to provide consideration comments were received. fgllowing the Unit I first refueling redundant overcurrent protection for the Local Public Document Room outage. primary containment penetration Location: Osterhout Free Library, Amendment Nos.: 30 and 6. conductors. Reference Department, 71 South Facility OperatingLicense Nos. NPF Date of issuance:February 15, 1985. Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, 14 and NPF-22:Amendment revised the Effective date: Upon start-up Pennsylvania 18701. Technical Specifications. following the first refueling outage. Date of initialnotices in Federal Amendment No.: 32. Pennsylvania Power & Light Company, Docket No. 50-387, Susquehanna Steam Register. December 31, 1984 (49 FR Facility OperatingLicense No. NPF Electric Station, Unit 1, Luzerne County, 50817). The Commission's related 14: Amendment revised the Technical Pennsylvania evaluation of the amendment is Specifications. contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Date of initialnotice in Federal Date of applicationfor amendments: February 7, 1985. No comments were Register: December 31, 1984 (49 FR May 18, 1984 and September 20, 1984. received on the proposed no significant 50815). The Commission's related Descriptionof amendment request: hazards consideration finding. evaluation of the amendment is This amendment revises the Unit 1. Local Public Document Room contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Technical Specifications to reflect Location: Osterhout Free Library, February 15, 1985. No comments on the changes incorporated into the Unit 2 Reference Department, 71 South proposed no significant hazards

Federol RegisterŽ Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, Februaryi27, 1985 / Notices P.fllQ Rnla consideration determination were FacilityOperatingLicense No. NPF Philadelphia Electric Company, Public received. 14: Amendment revises the Technical Service Electric and Gas Company, Local PublicDocument Room Specifications. Delmarva Power and Light Company, Location: Osterhout Free Library, SDates of initialnotices in Federal and Atlantic City Electric Company, Reference Department, 71 South Register. December 31, 1984 (49 FR Dockets Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, 50817). The Commission's related Pennsylvania 18701. Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units evaluation of the amendment is Nos. 2 and 3, York County, Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Power & Light Company, contained in a Safety Evaluation dated February 15, 1985. No significant Date of applicationfor amendments: Docket No. 50-387, Susquehanna Steam November 10, 1983. Electric Station, Unit 1, Luzerne County, hazards consideration comments were Pennsylvania received. Brief descriptionof amendments: Local Public DocumentRoom These amendments revise the Technical Date of applicationfor amendment: Location: Osterhout Free Library, Specifications (TSs) to permit continued September 24, 1984. Reference Department, 71 South operation of the Reactor Water Cleanup Brief descriptionof amendment: This Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, System (RWCU) with isolation of the amendment reflects the installation of a Pennsylvania 18701. filter-demineralizer, and permit permanent radiation monitoring system overriding of an isolation signal for up to in the new fuel storage vault and spent Pennsylvania Power and Light Company 48 hours when the high temperature fuel storage pool areas. Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388, sensor is inoperable, provided the water Date of issuance: February 15, 1985. Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, temperature is verified to be less than Effective date: Thirty (30) days from Units 1 and 2, Luzerne County 180* once per hour. These changes also the date of issuance. Pennsylvania involve the clarification of TS lanaguage Amendment No.: 33. Date of applicationfor amendments: related to the scram discharge volume FacilityOperatingLicense No. NPF September 28, 1984. and the deletion of obsolete references 14: Amendment revised the Technical to completed modifications. Specifications. Brief descriptionof amendment: The amendment request changes the Date of issuance:February 7, 1985. Date ofinitialnotice in Federal Effective date: February 7, 1985. Register: December 31, 1984 (49 FR Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, 50816). The Commission's related Unit 1 and Unit 2 Technical Amendments Nos.: 104 and 108. evaluation of this amendment is Specifications 4.6.5.3 and 4.7.2 with FacilityOperatingLicenses Nos. contained in a Safety Evaluation dated regard to HEPA filters and charcoal DPR-44 and DPR-56. Amendments February 15, 1985. No comments on the adsorber units to incorporate revised the Technical Specifications. proposed no significant hazards clarifications discussed in NRC Generic Date of initialnotice in Federal consideration determination comments Letter No. 83-13, dated March 2, 1983. Register. April 25, 1984, (49 FR. 17869). were received. The clarification to the Technical The Commission's related evaluation of Local Public DocumentRoom Specifications were provided to clearly the amendment is contained in a Safety Location: Osterhout Free Library, reflect the required relationship between Evaluation dated February 7, 1985. Reference Department, 71 South the guidance in Regulatory Guide 1.52, No significant hazard consideration Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Revision 2, and ANSI N510-1975; the comments received: No. Pennsylvania 18701. testing requirements of the HEPA filters Local Public Document Room location and charcoal adsorber units; and the Government Publications Section, State Pennsylvania Power and Light Company NRC staff assumptions used in its safety Docket No. 50-387, Susquehanna Steam Library of Pennsylvania, Education evaluatioris for the ESF atmospheric Electric Station, Unit 1, Luzerne County Building, Commonwealth and Walnut cleanup systems. Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Date of issuance:February 15, 1985. Date of applicationfor amendment: Effective date: February 15, 1985. Portland General Electric Company, et September19, 1984. Amendment Nos.: 35 and 8. al., Docket No. 50-344, Trojan Nuclear Brief description of amendments: This Plant, Columbia County, Oregon FacilityOperatingLicense Nos. NPF amendment revises Technical 14 and NPF-22:Amendments revised Brief description of amendment: The Specification 4.6.1.7 parts "C" and "d" to the Technical Specifications. amendment deleted license condition support plant modifications that will be Date of initialnotice in Federal 2.C(10] pertaining to the US/IAEA made during the first refueling outage Register.November 21, 1984 (49 FR Safeguards Agreement. for Unit 1. The plant modifications involve the relocation of two 45961). Date of issuance:February 5, 1985. temperature elements used to monitor The Commission's related evaluation Effective date: February 5, 1985. drywell atmosphere temperature in the of these amendments is contained in a Amendment No.: 101 area of the recirculation pumps. The Safety Evaluation dated February 15, Facility OperatingLicense No. NPF-1. change to part "c" includes revised 1985. No comments on the proposed no Amendment revised the license. elevation and azimuth valves of the significant hazards consideration Date of initialnotice in Federal relocated temperature elements and the determination were received. Register. The Commission's related change to part "d" is editorial in nature. Local Public Document Room evaluation of the amendment is Date of issuance: February 15, 1985. Location: Osterhout Free Library, contained in a letter transmitting the Effective date: Upon start-up Reference Department, 71 South amendment dated February 5, 1985. following the first refueling outage. Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Local PublicDocument Room location Amendment No.: 34 Pennsylvania 18701. Multnomah County Library, 801 S.W. 10th Avenue, Portland, Oregon.

sm Federal Register IVol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices Portland General Electric Company, et Public Service Electric and Gas South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, al., Docket No. 50-344, Trojan Nuclear Company, Docket No. 50-311, Salem South Carolina Public Service Authority, Plant, Columbia County, Oregon Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2, Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer Salem County, New Jersey Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Fairfield County, Date of applicationfor amendment. South Carolina October 1, 1984. Date of applicationfor amendment: September 29, 1983. Date of applicationfor amendment: Brief description of amendment-The Brief description of amendment: The July 19, 1984, and supplemented amendment adds requirements for operability, visual inspections and amendment removes a license condition November 29, 1984. periodic testing of mechanical snubbers requiring the installation of upper Brief description of amendment: The and adds similar improved requirements inspection ports on the Salem Unit No. 2 amendment modifies the Technical for hydraulic snubbers. steam generators. Specifications to clarify educational Dateof issuance:February 6, 1985. Date of issuance:February 7, 1985. requirements of candidates for Senior Effective date: February 7, 1985. Reactor Operator's Licenses. Effective date: February 6, 1985. Amendment No.: 29 Date of issuance: January 24, 1985. Amendment No.: 102. FacilityOperatingLicense No. DPR Effective doate: January 24, 1985. FacilityOperatingLicense No. NPF-1. 75: Amendment revised the License. Amendment No.: 36. Amendment revised the Technical Specifications. Date of initialnotice in Federal FacilityOperatingLicense No. NPF Date of initialnotice in Federal Register. December 31, 1984 (49 FR 12. Amendment revised the Technical Register. December 31, 1984 (49 FR 50794 50821). Specifications. at 50819). The Commission's related evaluation Date of initialnotice in Federal of the amendment is contained in a Register: September 28, 1984 (49 FR The Commission's related evaluation Safety Evaluation dated February 7, 38408) The Commission's related of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated February 6, 1985. evaluation of the amendment is 1985. No significant hazards consideration contained in a Safety Evaluation dated comments have been received. January 24, 1985. No significant hazards consideration LocalPublic Document Room Local Public Document Room comments received: No. location: Salem Free Library, 112 West location: Fairfield County Library, Location of Local PublicDocument Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 08079. Garden and Washington Street, Room Multnomah County Library, 801 Winnsboro, South Carolina 29180. S.W. 10th Avenue, Portland, Oregon. Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Docket No. 50-312, Rancho Seco South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, Power Authority of the State of New South Carolina Public Service Authority, York, Docket No. 50-333, James A. Nuclear Generating Station, Sacramento County, California Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Fairfield County, Oswego County, New York Date of applicationfor amendment: South Carolina Date of applicationfor amendment: October 16, 1984, as revised November 8, 1984. Date of applicationfor amendment: October 9, 1984. June 19, 1984, as revised November 29, Brief description of amendment-The Brief description of amendment: The 1984. amendment revises the Technical amendment temporarily changes TS Section 1.2.8, definition of refueling Brief descriptionof amendment: The Specifications by changing the high amendment modifies the Technical reactor pressure setpoint for interval, from 18 months to 24.5 months Specifications to define allowable recirculation pump trip from "greater for surveillance testing of the Reactor Internals Vent Valves. Upon startup power levels for reactor coolant system than or equal to 1120 psig" to the from the next refueling outage, this flow rates less than 100% of thermal corrected value of "less than or equal to design flow. 1120 psi8 ." temporary definition will expire. Date of issuance:January 22, 1985. Date of issuance: January 31, 1985. Date of issuance: January 30, 1985. Effective date: January 31, 1985. Effective date: January 30, 1985. Effective date: January 22, 1985 Amendment No.: 59. Amendment No.: 37. Amendment No.: 88 FacilityOperatingLicense No. DPR Facility OperatingLicense No. NPF FacilityOperatingLicense No. NDR 12. Amendment revised the Technical 59 Amendment revised the Technical 54. Amendment revised the Technical Specifications. Specifications. Specifications. Date of initialnotice in Federal Date of initialnotice in Federal Date of initialnotice in Federal Register. October 24, 1984 (49 FR 42830). Register. November 21, 1984 (49 FR Register. December 20, 1984, 49 FR 49528. The Commission's related evaluation 45963). The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a The Commission's related evaluation Safety Evaluation dated January 31, of the amendment is contained in a of the amendment is contained in a 1985. Safety Evaulation dated January 30. Safety Evaluation dated January 22, 1985. No significant hazards consideration 1985. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. No significant hazards consideration commenti received: No. Local Public Document Room comments received: No. location:Fairfield County Library, Local Public Document Room Local PublicDocument Room location:Sacramento City-County Garden and Washington, Streets, location. Penfield Library, State Winnsboro, South Carolina 29180. University College of Oswego, Oswego. Library, 828 1 Street, Sacramento, New York. California.

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 8021 Southern California Edison Company, Dates of initialnotices in Federal Safety Evaluation dated January 24, Docket No. 50-206, San Onofre Nuclear Register. October 24, 1984 (49 FR 42832 1985. Generating Station, Unit No. 1, San and 49 FR 42833). The Commission's No significant hazards consideration Diego County, California related evaluation of the amendment is comments received: No. Date of applicationfor amendment: contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Local Public Document Room September 9, 1983 as modified April 12, December 19,1984. No significant location: Chattanooga-Hamilton County 1984 and supplemented November 14, hazards consideration comments were Bicentennial Library, 1001 Broad Street, 1984. received. Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401. Brief descriptionof amendment: The Local Public DocumentBoom Location: San Clemente Library, 242 Union Electric Company, Docket No. 50 amendment approves changes to 483, Callaway Plant, Unit 1, Callaway Appendix A Technical Specifications Avenida Del Mar, San Clemente, California. County Missouri which incorporate containment leakage testing requirements to conform with 10 Tennessee Vally Authority, Docket Nos. Date of applicationfor amendment: CFR Part 50 Appendix 1. October 3, 1984 and supplemented on 50-260 and 50-296, Browns Ferry Date of issuance: February 8, 1985. Nuclear Plant, Units 2 and 3, Limestone December 6, 1984. Effective date: February 8, 1985. County, Alabama Brief description of amendment. The Amendment No.: 87. amendment requested the addition of ProvisionalOperatingLicense No. .Date of applicationfor amendments: two 100,000 gallon tanks in order to DPR-13. Amendment revised the December 13, 1984. provide sufficient storage time for Technical Specifications. Brief Descriptionof amendments: The secondary effluent to allow sample Date of initialnotice in Federal amendments modify Commission Orders analysis and to show acceptability of Register. June 20,1984 (49 FR 25374). dated March 25, 1983 to extend the the water prior to release to the The Commission's related evaluation deadline for installation of NUREG-0737 environment. of the amendment is contained in a items II.F.I.1 and II.F.1.2 instrumentation Date of issuance:February 4,1985. Safety Evaluation dated February 8, having local readout capability. Effective date: February 4,1985. 1985. No significant hazards Date of issuance: February 12, 1985. Amendment No.: 2. consideration comments received: No. Effective date: February 12, 1985. Facility OperatingLicense No. NPF Local Public Document Room Amendment Nos.: 110 and 85. 30. Amendment revised the Technical Location: San Clemente Branch Library, FacilityOperatingLicense No. DPR Specifications. 242 Avendia Del Mar, San Clemente, 52 andDPR--68: Amendment revised the Date ofinitialnotice in Federal California 92672. licenses. Register. November 21, 1984 (49 FR Dates of initialnotices in Federal Southern California Edison Company, et Register December 3a, 1984 (49 FR 45979). al. Docket Nos. 50-361 and 50 - 3 62 . San 50825). The Commission's related evaluation Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Units.2 and 3, San Diego County, of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated February 4, California Safety Evaluation dated February 12, 1985. No significant hazards Dates of applicationfor amendments: 1985. consideration comments received: No April 24, April 27, July 9, August 7, No significant hazards consideration comments received. August 21, August 27, and September 12, comments recieved: No. LocalPublicDocument Room 1984. Local Public Document Room Locations:Fulton City Library, 709 BriefDescriptionof amendments: The Location: Athens Public Library, South Market Street, Fulton, Missouri 65251 amendments change Technical and Forrest, Athens, Alabama 35611. and the Olin Library, Skinker and Specifications to (1) provide consistency Lindell Boulevards, St. Louis, Missouri with the modified plant design for ECCS Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket 63130. Subsystems, (2) add a new specification, Nos. 50-237 and 50-328, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units I and 2, Hamilton Union Electric Company, Docket No. 50 Emergency Chilled Water System, (3) 483, Callaway Plant Unit 1, Callaway increase the reuired shutdown margin County, Tennessee County, Missouri required when the core average Dates of applicationfor amendments: moderator temperature is less than or July 21, 1983, and August 20, 27, and 28, Date of applicationfor amendment: equal to ZWF, (4) add a new 1984. October 8, 1984. surveillance requirement which verifies Brief description of amendments: The The amendment revises the that only one charging pump is operable amendments change the Technical Administrative Controls Section of the in Mode 5, when the reactor coolant Specifications related to containment Technical Specifications. Figure 6.2-2 system is drained below the hot leg isolation valves, vital batteries, fire has been revised to include two centerline, and (5) change the boric acid detectors, and the basis statement for additional managerial positions in the storage tank volume/concentration. the steam generator low-low level plant organization; section 6.5.1.2 has Date of issuance: December 19, 1984. instrumentation. been revised to include an additional Effective date: Amendment No. 28 is Date of issuance:January 24,1985. member of the On-Site Review effective December 19, 1984. Certain Effective date: January 24, 1985. Committee. portions of Amendment 17 are effective Amendment Nos. 37 and 29. Date of issuance:January 30, 1985. December 19, 1984; the remainder of FacilityOpleratingLicense No. DPR Effective date: January 30,1985. Amendment 17 is effective prior to 77 and DPR-79.Amendments revised Amendment No,: 3. initial entry into Mode 5 following first the Technical Specifications. FacilityOperatingLicense No. NPF refueling. Dates of initialnotices in Federal 30. Amendment revised the Technical. Amendment Nos.: 28 and 17. Register. October 12, 1983*(48 FR 464M0) Specifications. Date of initial notice in FacilityOperatingLicense No. NPF and November 21, 1984 (49 FR 45979). Federal Register. November 21, 1984 (49 10 and NPF-15:Amendments revised The Commission's related evaluation FR 45070). The Commission's related the Technical Specifications. of the amendments is contained in a evaluation of the amendment is

8022 Federal Register '-Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices contained in a Safety Evaluation dated allowed for placing a unit in Hot University of Virginia, Charlottesville, January 30, 1985. No significant hazards Standby, Hot Shutdown and Cold Virginia 22901. consideration comments received: No Shutdown in the event a Limiting comments received. Condition of Operation and/or Virginia Electric and Power Company, Local Public DocumentRoom associated Action Statement cannot be Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281, Surry locations:Fulton City Library, 709 satisfied because of circumstances in Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Surry Market Street, Fulton, Missouri 65251 excess of those addressed in a county, Virginia and the Olin Library of Washington specification. Date of applicationfor amendments: University, Skinker and Lindell Date of issuance: February 1, 1985. September 19, 1984. Boulevards, St. Louis, Missouri 63130. Effective date: February 1, 1985. Brief descriptionof amendments: Amendment Nos.: 62 and 46. These amendments will revise Technical Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Facility OperatingLicense Nos. NPF Corporation, Docket No. 50-271, Specification Table 4.1-2A to delete the 4 and NPF-7.: Amendments revised the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, requirement to test the control rod drop Technical Specifications. Vernon, Vermont Date of initialnotice in Federal times at cold conditions after a refueling Date of applicationfor amendment Register. February 24, 1984 (49 FR 7048) shutdown or after maintenance requiring the breach of the Reactor February 7, 1984 as supplemented May and December 31, 1984 (49 FR 50794 at 18, 1984. 50827). Coolant System. Brief descriptionof amendment: The The Commission's related evaluation Date of issuance: January 22, 1985. amendment revises the Technical of the amendments is contained in a Effective date: January 22, 1985. Specifications related to the limiting Safety Evaluation dated February 1, Amendment Nos. 101 and 100. conditions for operation and 1985. FacilityOperatingLicense Nos. DPR surveillance requirements to delete the No significant hazards consideration 32 andDPR-37: Amendment revised the requirements for the design feature that comments received: No. Technical Specifications. automatically transfers high pressure Local Public Document Room Date of initialnotice in Federal coolant injection (HPCI) suction to the location:Board of Supervisors Office, Register. November 21, 1984 (49 FR suppression pool from the condensate Louisa County Courthouse, Louisa, Virginia 23093, and the Alderman 45980). storage tank, upon high water level in the suppression pool. Library, Manuscripts Department, Significant hazards consideration Dateof issuance:January 23, 1985. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, comments received: No. Effective date: January 23, 1985. Virginia 22901. Local PublicRoom location:Swem Amendment No.: 85. Library, College of William and Mary, FacilityOperatingLicense No. DPR Virginia Electric and Power Company, et Williamsburg, Virginia 23185. 28: Amendment revised the Technical al., Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339, North Anna Power Station, Units No. 1 Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Specifications. Date of initialnotice in Federal and No. 2, Louisa County, Virginia Docket No. 50-305, Kewaunee Nuclear Register. April 25, 1984 49 FR 17876. Date of applicationfor amendments: Power Plant, Kewaunee County, Subsequent to the initial notice in the March 16, 1984, revised November 21, Wisconsin Federal Register, the licensee provided 1984. Date of applicationfor amendment: NRC-requested documenitation by letter Brief description of amendments: The June 4,1984, as revised August 21, 1984. dated May 18, 1984. This documentary amendments revise the NA-1&2 TS to Briefdescription of amendment: The information does not affect the be in conformance with the new amendment consists of changes to discussio* or conclusions of the initial Licensee Event Report System as position titles and includes minor notice of our proposed determination in stipulated in 10 CFR Part 50.73 and the organizational changes. In addition, it any way. immediate notification requirements for concludes additional Senior Reactor The Commission's related evaluation operating nuclear power reactors as Operator requirements, clarification of of the amendment is contained in a provided in 10 CFR Part 50.72 which environmental sample locations and Safety Evaluation dated Janaury 23, became effective January 1, 1984. corrections of minor errors. 1985. Date of issuance:February 1, 1985. Effective date: Within 7 days after Date of issuance:January 22, 1985. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. date of issuance. Effective date: January 22, 1985. Local PublicDocumentRoom Amendment Nos.: 63 and 47. Amendment No. 60. Location:Brooks Memorial Library, 224 FacilityOperatingLicense Nos. NPF FacilityOperatingLicense No. DPR Main Street, Brattleboro, Vermont 05301. 4 and NPF-7.Amendments revised the 43: Amendment ievised the Technical Technical Specifications. Specifications. Virginia Electric and Power Company, et Date of initialnotice in Federal al., Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339, Date of initialiotice in Federal Register. April 25, 1984, (49 FR 17850) Register. July 24, 1984 (49 FR 29924) and North Anna Power Station, Units No. 1 and December 31, 1984 (49 FR 50794 at and No. 2, Louisa County, Virginia renoticed October 24, 1984 (49 FR 42835). 50827). The Commission's related The Commission's related evaluation Date of applicationfor amendment: evaluation of the amendments is of the amendment is contained in a December 15, 1983 and August 1, 1984. contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Safety Evaluation dated January 22. Brief description of amendment: The February 1, 1985. 1985. amendments revise the NA-1&2 TS 3.0.3 No significant hazards consideration to provide consistency with the time comments received: No. Significant hazards consideration requirements and wording specified in Local Public Document Room comments received: None. the NRC approved standardized location: Board of Supervisors Office, Local Public Document Room Westinghouse TS which are Louisa County Courthouse, Louisa, location.University of Wisconsin, appropriately applied to NA-1&2. The Virginia 23093, and the Alderman Library Learning Center, 2420 Nicolet time requirements state the time Library, Manuscripts Department, Drive, Green Bay, Wisconsin 54301.

Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices 8023 NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant the proceeding; and (3) the possible AMENDMENT TO FACILITY to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental effect of any order which may be OPERATING LICENSE AND FINAL impact statement or environmental entered in the proceeding on the DETERMINATION OF NO assessment need be prepared for these petitioner's interest. The petition should SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS amendments. If the Commission has also identify the specific aspect(s) of the CONSIDERATION AND prepared an environmental assessment subject matter of the proceeding as to OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING under the special circumstances which petitioner wishes to intervene. (EXIGENT OR EMERGENCY provision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and has Any person who has filed a petition for CIRCUMSTANCES) made a determination based on that leave to intervene or who has been During the 30-day period since assessment, it is so indicated. admitted as a party may amend the For further details with respect to the petition without requesting leave of the publication of the last monthly notice, action see: (1) The application for Board up to fifteen (15) days prior to the the Commission has issued the following amendment, (2) the amendment to first prehearing conference scheduled in amendments. The Commission has Facility Operating License, and (3) the the proceeding, but such an amended determined for each of these Commission's related letter, Safety petition must satisfy the specificity amendments that the application for the Evaluation and/or Environmental requirements described above. amendment complies with the standards Assessment, as indicated. All of these Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to and requirements of the Atomic Energy items are available for public inspection Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the first prehearing conference at the Commission's Public Document scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner the Commission's rules and regulations. Room, 1717 H Street, NW., Washington, The Commission has made appropriate shall file a supplement to the petition to D.C., and at the local public document intervene which must include a list of findings as required by the Act and the room for the particular facility involved. Commission's rules and regulations in 10 the contentions which are sought to be A copy of items (2) and (3) may be litigated in the matter, and the bases for CFR Chapter 1,which are set forth in the obtained upon request addressed to the license amendment. each contention set forth with U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, reasonable specificity. Contentions shall Because of exigent or emergency Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention: circumstances assbciated with the date be limited to matters within the scope of Dirctor, Division of Licensing. the amendment under consideration. A the amendment was needed, there was The Commission is also offering an not time for the Commission to publish, petitioner who fails to file such a opportunity for a hearing with respect to supplement which satisfies these for public comment before issuance, its the issuance of the amendments. By usual 30-day Notice of Consideration of requirements with respect to at least one March 29,1985, the licensee may file a contention will not be permitted to Issuance of Amendment and Proposed request for a hearing with respect to No Significant Hazards Consideration participate as a party. issuance of the amendment to the Determination and Opportunity for Those permitted to intervene become subject facility operating license and Hearing. For exigent circumstances, a any person whose interest may be parties to the proceeding, subject to any press release seeking public comment as limitations in the order granting leave to affected by this proceeding and who to the proposed no significant hazards wishes to participate as a party in the intervene, and have the opportunity to consideration determination was used, proceeding must file a written petition participate fully in the conduct of the and the State was consulted by for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing, including the opportunity to telephone. In circumstances where hearing and petitions for leave to present evidence and cross-examine failure to act in a timely way would intervene shall be filed in accordance witnesses. have resulted, for example, in derating with the Commisgion's "Rules of Since the Commission has made a or shutdown of a nuclear power plant, a Practice for Domestic Licensing final determination that the amendment shorter public comment period (less Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part 2. If a involves no significant hazards than 30 days) has been offered and the request for a hearing or petition for consideration, if a hearing is requested, State consulted by telephone whenever leave to intervene is filed by the above it will not stay the effectiveness of the possible. date, the Commission or an Atomic amendment. Any hearing held would Under its regulations, the Commission Safety and Licensing Board, disignated take place while the amendment is in may issue and make an amendment by the Commission or by the Chairman effect. immediately effective, notwithstanding of the Atomic Safety and Licensing A request for a hearing or a petition the pendency before it of a request for a Board Panel, will rule on the request for leave to intervene must be filed with hearing from any person, in advance of and/or petition and the Secretary or the the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. the holding and completion of any designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Nuclear Regulatory Commission, required hearing, where it has Board will issue a notice of hearing or Washington, D.C. 20555, Attention: determined that no'significant hazards an approrpriate order. Docketing and Service Branch, or may consideration is involved. As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a be delivered to the Commission's Public The Commission has applied the petition for leave to intervene shall set Document Room, 1717 H Street, NW., standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has made forth with particularity the interest of Washington, D.C., by the above data. a final determination that the the petitioner in the proceeding and how Where petitions are filed during the last amendment involves no significant that interest may be affected by the ten (10) days of the notice period, it is hazards consideration. The basis for this results of the proceeding. The petition requested that the petitioner promptly so determination is contained in the should specifically explain the reasons inform the Commission by a toll-free documents related to this action. why intervention should be permitted telephone call to Western Union at (800) Accordingly, the amendments have been with particular reference to the 325-6000 (in Missouri (800) 342-6700). issued and made effective as indicated. following factors: (1) The nature of the The Western Union operator should be Unless otherwise indicated, the petitioner's right under the Act to be given Datagram Identification Number Commission has determined that these made a party to the proceeding; (2) the 3737 and the following message amendments satisfy the criteria for nature and extent of the petitioner's addressed to (BranchChief): Petitioner's categorical exclusion in accordance property, financial, or other interest in name and telephone number; date

8024 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No 39 / Wednesday, February 27, 1985 / Notices petition was mailed; plant name; and Amendments Nos.: 72 and 65. [Docket Nos. 50-400-OLI publication date and page number of Facility OperatingLicense Nos. DPR this Federal Register notice. A copy of 42 and DPR-60: Amendments revised Carolina Power & Light Co., North the petition should also be sent to the the Technical Specifications. Carolina Eastern Municipal Power Executive Legal Director, U.S. Nuclear Agency (Shearon Harris Nuclear Public comments requested as to Regulatory Commission, Washington, Power Plant) Assignment of Atomic proposed no significant hazards D.C. 20555, and to the attorney for the Safety and Ucensing Appeal Board consideration: Yes. Federal Register licensee. notice January 30, 1985 (50 FR 4285). Nontimely filings of petitions for leave Notice is hereby given that, in to intervene, amended petitions, The Commission's related evaluation accordance with the authority conferred supplemental petitions and/or requests of the amendment is contained in a by 10 CFR 2.787(a), the Chairman of the for hearing will not be entertained Safety Evaluation dated February 15, Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal absent a determination by the 1985. Panel has assigned the following panel Commission, the presiding officer or the No significant hazards consideration members to serve as the Atomic Safety Atomic Safety and Licensing Board comments received: No. and Licensing Appeal Board for this designated to rule on the petition and/or Attorney for the licensee: Gerald operating License proceeding: request, that the petitioner has made a Charnoff, Esq., Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Thomas S. Moore, Chairman substantial showing of good cause for Trowbridge, 1800 M Street, NW., Dr. Reginald L. Gotchy the granting of a late petition and/or Washington, D.C. 20036. Howard A. Wilber. request. That determination will be Local PublicDocument Room Dated: February 21, 1985. based upon a balancing of the factors location: Environmental Conservation C. Jean Shoemaker, specified in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and Library, Minneapolis Public Library, 300 Secretaryto the Appeal Board. 2.714(d). Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota. [FR Doc. 85-4814 Filed 2-26-85; 8:45 am] Commonwealth Edison Company, Virginia Electric and Power Company, BILLING COOE 7590-01-M Docket No. STN 50-454, Byron Station, Docket No. 50-281, Surry Power Station, Unit 1, Ogle County, Illinois Unit No. 2, Surry County, Virginia. [Docket No. 50-483] Date of Applicationfor amendment: January 18,1985. Date of applicationfor amendment: Union Electric Co.; Consideration of Briefdescriptionof amendment: Adds January 4, 1985, as supplemented Issuance of Amendment to Facility a footnote to table of Containment January 9, and January 28, 1985. Operating Ucense and Proposed No Isolation Valves to allow certain valves Briefdescription of amendment: The Significant Hazards; Consideration to be opened intermittently under amendment revises Technical Determination and Opportunity for administrative controls. Specification 4.17.A to extend the Hearing Date of issuance:January 18, 1985. snubber inspection interval from 62 days Effective date: January 18, 1985. + 25% until the 1985 refueling outage. The United States Nuclear Regulatory Amendment No.: 1. Date of issuance:February 1, 1985. Commission (the Commission) is FacilityOperatingLicense No. NPF considering issuance of an amendment Effective date: February 1, 1985. to Facility Operating License No. NPF 23: Amendment revised the Technical Amendment No.: 101. 30, issued to Union Electric Company, Specifications. Public comments requested as to Facility OperatingLicense No. DPR for operation of the Callaway Plant, Unit proposed no significant hazards 37. I located in Callaway County, Missouri. consideration: No. Amendment revised the Technical This amendment would revise the Comments received: No. Specifications. time period associated with Technical The Commission's related evaluation Public comments requested as to Specification Surveillance 4.6.1.6.1 by is contained in a Safety Evaluation proposed no significant hazards extending each of the three scheduled dated January 28, 1985. consideration: Yes. January 17, 1985 (50 containment vessel tendon surveillances Attorney for licensee: Isham, Lincoln FR 2635). six (6) months, in accordance with the and Beale, One First National Plaza, Comments received: No. licensee's request dated February 12, Chicago, Illinois. 1985. This extension is requested The Commission's related evaluation Local Public Document Room because the services of INRYCO, the location:Rockford Public Library, 215 N. is contained in a Safety Evaluation inspection contractor for Union Electric Wyman Street, Rockford, Illinois 61103. dated February 1, 1985. and Alabama Power Co., are needed to Attorney for licensee. Michael W. evaluate anomalies recently found at the Northern States Power Company, Maupin, Hunton and Williams, Post Farley Unit 2 plant. Union Electric Docket Nos. 50-282 and 50-306, Prairie Office Box 1535, Richmond, Virginia Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit Company released INRYCO to Alabama 23213. Power Company so that the outage Nos. 1 and 2, Goodhue County, LocalPublic Room location:Swem associated with the Farrey problem is Minnesota not unnecessarily extended. Library, College of William and Mary, Date of applicationfor amendment: Williamsburg, Virginia 23185. Before issuance of the proposed January 18, 1985. license amendment, the Commission Descriptionof amendments:These Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 20th day will have made findings required by the amendments change the Technical of February 1985. Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended Specificiation section 3.3.D.2c dealing For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (the Act) and the Commission's with the allowable inoperable period of E.G. Tourigny, regulations. the cooling water headers of the service Acting Chief. OperatingReactors Branch No. The Commission has made a proposed water system. 3, Division of Licensing. determination that the amendment Date of Issuance: February-15, 1985. [FR Doc. 85-4674 Filed 2-26-85; 8:45 am] request involves no significant hazards Effective date: February 15, 1985. BILLING CODE 7590-01-M consideration. Under the Commission's}}