_ . _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _..___ __ ' .. . , June 2, 1994 I l IDENTICAL LETTERS SENT T0: (See attached list of addressees) , The Honorable Joseph Lieberman, Chairman Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Regulation Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington, DC 20510 Dear Mr. Chairman: Public Law 97-415, enacted on January 4,1983, amended Section 189 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to authorize the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to issue and make immediately effective any amendment to an operating license I ' upon a determination by the Commission that such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a hearing. | In addition, the legislation requires the Commission to periodically (but not less frequently than once every 30 days) publish notice of any amendments- issued, or proposed to be issued, under the new authority above. Enclosed for your information is a copy of the Commission's Biweekly Notice of Applications and Amendments to Operating Licenses involving no significant hazards considerations, which was published in the Federal Reaister on May 25, 1994 (59 FR 27049). Sincerely, Original signed by , William T. Russell, Director | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ' , Enclosure: Federal Reaister Notice cc: Senator Alan K. Simpson DISTRIBUTION w/o enclosure: N'/Y NRC PDR . . Central: File-' OCA (3) g-z. - g- /, 77; 2 OGC JTaylor WTRussell/FMiraglia SECY Mail Facility RETURN CONCURRENCE PAGE T0: Dorothy Wills, 14-B-21 y - )L LA:PDII-4 D:DRPEg/C g^ DD \D ' 0 lia WRu ell layton SVarga 6'*1 Yf)FMi : /94 4/) /94 $/ A/4 /g/94 g // /94 f94 R TURiiTO REculATORY CENIRAL F ' g)N fe M86"686' Mn * 003070 ' , _. . . .
IDENTICAL LETTERS SENT T0: (See attached list of addressees),
The Honorable Joseph Lieberman, ChairmanSubcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear RegulationCommittee on Environment
and Public WorksUnited States SenateWashington, DC 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Public Law 97-415, enacted on January 4,1983, amended Section 189 of theAtomic Energy Act of 1954 to authorize the Nuclear Regulatory Commission toissue and make immediately effective any amendment to an operating license I
'
upon a determination by the Commission that such amendment involves nosignificant hazards consideration, notwithstanding the pendency before theCommission of a request for a hearing. |
In addition, the legislation requires the Commission to periodically (but notless frequently than once every 30 days) publish notice of any amendments-issued, or proposed to be issued, under the new authority above.
Enclosed for your information is a copy of the Commission's Biweekly Notice ofApplications and Amendments to Operating Licenses involving no significanthazards considerations, which was published in the Federal Reaister onMay 25, 1994 (59 FR 27049).
The' Honorable Richard H. Lehman, Chairman| Subcommittee.on Energy and Mineral Resources! Committee on Natural Resources
United States House of RepresentativesWashington, DC 20515
cc: Representative Barbara Vucanovich
| The Honorable Philip R. Sharp, ChairmanSubcommittee on Energy and PowerCommittee on Energy and CommerceUnited States House of RepresentativesWashington, DC 20515 i
different kind of accident from anyaccident previc=ly evaluated; or (3)involve a significant n duction in amargin of safety. The basis for thisproposed determination for each
- amendment request is shown tmlow.The Commission is seeking public
comments on this proposeddetermination. Any comments receivedwithin 30 days after the date ofpublication of this notice will beconsidered in making any finaldetermination.
Normally, the Commission will notissue the amendment until the
_ _ _ ___. _ .__ _ _ _ _ .. - - expiration of the 30-day notico perind.NUCLEAR REGULATOFlY However, should circumstances changeCOMMISSION during the notice period such that
failure to act in a timely way wouldBiweekly Noticet Applications and result, for example,in derating orAmendments to Faciilty Operating shutdown of the fucility, theLicenses invoMng No Significant Commission may issue the licenseHazards Considerations amendment beforethe expiration of the
30-day notice period, provided that its1. Background fmal determination is that the
Pursuant to Public Law 97-415, the amendment involves no significantU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission hazards consideradon. The final(the Commission or NRC staff)is determination will consider all publicpublishing this regular biweekly notice. and State cmuments received beforePublic Law 97-415 revised section 189 action is taken. Shotdd the Commissionof the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as take this action,it will publish in theamended (the Act), to require the Federal Register a notice of issuanceCommission to publish notice of any and provide for opportunity for aamendments issued, or propesed to be hearing after issuance. The Commissionissued, under a new provision of section expects that the need to take this action189 of the Act. This provision grants the will occur very infn quently.Commission the authority to issue and Written commenes may be submittedmake immediately effective any by mail tothe Rules Review andamendment to an operating license Directives Branch, Division of Freedomupon a determination by the of Information and PublicationsCommission that such amendment Services, Office of Administration, U.S.involves no significant hazards Nuclear Regulatory Commission,consideration, notwithstanding the Washington, DC 20655, and should citependency beinre the Commission of a the publicanon date and page number ofrequest for a hearing from any person. this Federal Register notice. Written 3
This hiwockly notice includes all comments may also be delivered to l
notices of amendments issued. or Room 6D22, Two White Flint North,proposed to be issued from May 2,1994, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,through May 13,1994. The last Maryland from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.biweekly notice was published on May Federal workdays. Copies of written12,1994 (59 FR 24745). comments received may be examined at
. the NRCPublic Document Room, theNotice of Consideration ofissuance of Gelman Building,2120 L Street, NW.,Amendments to Facility Operatmg Washington, DC 20555. The filing ofLicenses, Proposed No Sy;cificant
requests for a hearing and petitions forllazards Consideration Determmation, leave to intervene is discussed below,and Opportanity for arlirering fly June 24,1994, the licensee may
The Commission has made a file a request for a hearing with respectproposed detemination that the to issuance of the amendment to thefollowing amendment requests involve subject facility operating license andno significant hazards consideration. any person whos,e interest may beUnder the Conunission's regulations in affected by this proceeding and who10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation wishes to participata as a party in theof the facihty in accordance with the proceeding must Sie a written requestproposed amendment would not (1) for a hearing and a petition for leave toinvolve a significant increase in the intervene. Requests for a hearing and aprobability or consequemes of an petition for leave to intervene shall beaccident previously evaluated; or 1/1 filed in accordance with theomte the possibility of a new or Commission's " Rales of Practice for
Domrst a La ensmg Pnx cedmgs" in 10 petinoner is aware and on wim h the Counsrl U S. Nutlear Regulatoryt i R Part 2 Interested persons should petitmner intends to reh ta.>tabhsh Commission Washington, DC 20m.t onsu!t a < urrent copy of to Li R 2.714 these fat ts or expert optraon Pemion"r ,md to the attorney for the lic enwewhu h is asailable at the (:ommission's must provide suffn ient : iformatio,i to Nontimely fihng,s of petitions forPubbt Document Room, the Ge! man show that a grnuine dispute c=ists avith 1% e to intenene, amended petitu,oslloilding,2120 L Street. NW., the applit ant on a matenal issue of I nv supp!" mental petitlens aul/or rqu.%tsWashington, DC 20555 and at the h(al or fart. Contentions shall be hmitod ta for a heanng will not be entertaine.1pubhc dor ument room for the partir ular matters within the soope of the absent a determination by thefat ility involved. If a request for a amendment under consideration The Commission, the presiding olfa er or trwhearing or petition for leave to inten enc < ontention must te one which, if Atomic Safety and Licensing Board thatis filed by the above date, the prown, would entitle the petitioner to the petition and/or request should beComnussion or an Atomic Safety and rehef. A petitioner who fails to file suc h granted based upon a balant mg oflau nsmg Boani, designated by the a supplement w hich satnfies those far tors specified in 10 CFRCommissma or by the Chairman of the requirements with respmt to at Inst one J 714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d)Atomic Safety and 1.icensing Ho.trd contention will not be permitted to For f urther details with respe ttothnPanel, will rule on the request and/or participate as a pany, m tion, see the application forpetition; and the Sn retary or the Those pernutted to intervene ber ome amendment whith is available fordesignated Atomic Safety and Laensing parties to the proc eeding, subject to any public inspection at the Cominission'slioard will issue a notice of a hearmg or hmitations in the ord~r granting leave to Public Document Room, the Gelmanan appropriate order. intervene, and havo the opportunity to Huihhng,2120 L Street, NW ,
As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a participate fully in the condut t of the Wishington, DC 20555, and at the lot al |
petition for leave to iatervene shall set hearmg, including the opportunity to pubhc document room for the partic ularforth with particul;rity the interest of present evidence and cross.twamin.' facility invols edthe petitioner in the proceeding, and witnesses. |t.orolmo Pon er & Light Company, et al .how that interest may be affated by the if a hearing is requested, theresults of the pmceeding The petition Commission will make a fmal th Act Nos. S325 and w324,
should srmcifically esphun the reasons determination on the issue of no &un.snicA Steam I'lectric Plant, Umt I
w hy inte'rvention should be permitted sigaificant hazards consideration. The and 2, llrunous A Ccunty, North
with particular refemnce to the final determination will sers e to doc ide Udho
following factors:(1)The nature of the when the hearing is held. Date of amen:iments request En bpetitioner's right under the Act ta be if the final determination is that the 25, i mu.
made a party to the proceeding;(2) the amendment request involves no Descriptwn of amendments requestnatme and extent of the petitioner's significant hazards consideration, the The proposed amendment would mdeproperty, financial, or other interest in Commission may issue the amendment the following admmistryive chsmges tothe proceeding; and (3) the possible and make it immediat,1y cffective, the Tm.hnical Spaificaicus.effect of any order which may be notwithstanding the request for a
" " " " " ' 'entered in t'he proceeding on the hearing. Any hearing held would take
L U"" Sanon 2 21 Remme n4 non e~petitioner's interost. The petition shouhl place after issuance of the amendment.also identify the specific aspect (s) of the If the 'inal detennination is that the to Me Rod Seyn m e Control Systam (RM N)
subject matter of the roceeding as to amendment request involves a * f"* 2 "" Ed" 0which petitioner wi es to intervene. significant hazarde consideration, any [ "I$.,y r for hydrere,Any person who has filed a petition for hearing held would take place Imlore o gg, , hemisery in item 6 on page B 24leave to intervene or who has licen the issuance of any amendment. 3. TS 31.41 Corred typographkal errorsadmitted as a party may' amend the A request for a hearing'or a petition m auion d, nnsspelhng of preset, and .u non
for lease to intervene must be filed with a 1 misspelhng of HPws aronym,on pvpe>tition without requesting leave of thefloard up to 15 days prior to the first the Secretary of the Commission, ILS. v4 1- 14.
prehearing conference sche <juled in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 4. TS I aMe 4 3 4-1. Hen.ove referem es ta
proceeding, but such an amended Washington, DC 20555, Attention. the RSCS in hem g of the %tes on page V
petition must satisfy the specificity Dodeting and Services Branch, or may 4 Q Th 13 m M 1m h e arequirements desenbed above. be dehvered to the Commission's Pubhc pennit identifkanon c onustent with the
Not later than 15 days prior to the first Document Room, the Gelman Itudding. se h duhng system used for wrvedlara epn hearing conference scheduled in the 21201, Street, NW., Washington DC teg on pages v4 uvuproceeding, a petitioner shall file a 20555, by the above date. Where 6 1 S Tabla 4 3 5511.al I e,n h ama tosupplement to the petition to intervene petitions are filed during the last 10 pennit identifaation consistent with thew hich must include a list of the days of the notice period,it is requested sc heduhng system used for surveH! antecontentions w hich are sought to be that the petitioner promptly so inform "'u nn on PdR" 3'4 344'htigated in the matter. Eac h contentmn the Commission by a toll. free telephone I u 4 3 6 L t Coned en >guphical emn
n nw es n me.t M 4 3 61 1 -must consist of a specific statement of call to Western thiion at 1-(300) 248-the issue of law or fact to be raised or 5100 (in Missouri 1-(800)342 4 700). ) [""
" 4
3
i ontroverted. In addition, the petitioner The Western Union operator should be n T S 14 2- Correr t typoguphe.d ermrshall provide a brief explanation of the gnen Datagrarn Identification Nurnber mdir atmg estraneous v r und betnote o:3bases of the r ontention and a < on< ise Nt023 and the following message pc v4 4-4statement of the alleged facts or expert addressed to (Prcyct Dism tor).
,g _ggg,
opmion which support the contentmn petitioner s name and telephone' D I "M" 2 2 " I '"""" D P"#"P " Jh
and on which the petitioner mtends to number, date petition was maded, plantr 'y in proving the contention at the name, and publication date and page [nb ""
"k""n' h
-
hearing The petitioner must also number of this Federal Register notic. 2 Ha s M noa 2 2 L Remme referem , s
proude references to those spm ifir. A wp> of the petition should alm b.- m the Rod S. quem e Lontna snt,4n (Fst :murres and documento of n hn h the ent to the Offn e of the Gererel m o.<m 2 % p.e H 2 - 4
. _ . - _ . . .
.
'
|
,
'
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No.100 / Wednesday, May 25, 1994 / Notices 270.l |"
-.
3 Ilases Section 2.2.1: Remove references amendment request involves no considered a new accident.1 herefore, the
to the Rod Sequente Control System in item significant hazards consideration. Pmiwd changes will not ueate thetu and mvise bases description of the Select Local Public Document Room possibility of a new or different kind of
of the Select Rod Insenion conustent with location: University of North Carolina at an ident fonn any p[enousi evaluated3 ' I" * I " ' ' 5" *" "' '" "" *" I " ".
Wilmington. William Madison flandall margin of safety.rernoval cf the RSCS on pages.
4. TS 3.1.4.1. Conett typographical enor in Library 001 S. College Road. The proposed changes modify SR 4 612.da< tion d.1 to correct misspelhng of UpWS Wilmington, North Carolina 28403~ w ha h. as presently written, indicates thatacronyin on page 3/41-145. TS Table 4.3.1-1: Correct grammanca) 3297. the purge supply and exhaust valves are an
omission of the word "is"in item e of the Attorneyfor licensee: R. E. Jones, eu eption to the 10CFR50 Appendiu I, Type ,
Notes on page 3/4 3-9 General Counsel, Carolina Power & 11 and C test and therefore, no exception is
6. TS Table 4.3.1-1: Remove references to I ight Company, Post Office Box 1551, required. This is supported by current i
the RSCS in item g of the Notes on page 3/ Raleigh, North Carolina 27002. surveillance procedures which include the 4
4 3-52. NIlC Pmject Director: William it. purge supply and exhaust valves as part ofthe Type B and C tests, in addition, the7. TS Table 3.3.5 5-1: Label e,xh nem to Bateman
permit identificahon consistent with the propmed changes are consistent with the
scheduling system used for surveillance Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power FSAR. FSAR Table 7.3-1 "Crmtainment
testing on page 3/4 3-64a. Company, Doclet No. 50-213, lladdam Penetrations," lists the purge supply and
8. TS Table 4.3.5.5-1:121,1each item to Neck Plant, Middlesex County, exhaust valves as requ: red to receive lype Band C tests. Therefere. these proposed
permit identification consistent with the Connecticut c hanges revise SR 4 61.2.d to reflect actualschedulmg system used for surveillance Date of amendment request: January survedlance procedures end offer notesting on page 3/4 344c.
revisions or reduchons to current9 TS 3.3.6.2: Eliminate footnote, revise 28,1994.
applicability statement and correct Description of amendment request: surveillance testing Therefore, these r hanges
i typographical errors in actions d and e that The proposed amendment will remove wdl not result in a significant reduction in
i references non-existent Specification on page an exception for the purge and vent the margin of safety.
3/4 3-93. yalves from surveillance requirement The NRC staff has reviewed the10. Base Section 3/4.14: Correct (SR) 4.6.1.2.d and remove SR 4.6.1.2.f. licensee's analysis and, based on this,
,dentification of Refennce cited to reference Basis forproposed no significant review, it appears that the tbreei;
6 on page B 3/414 hazards consideration determination: standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) areBasis forproposed no sij;mficant As required by IG CFR 50.91(a), the satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
hazards consideration determination: licensee has provided its analysis of the proposes to determine that theAs required by 10 CFR 50 91(a), t'io tssue of rio significant hazards amendment request involves nolicensee has provided its analysis of the consideration, which is presented significant hazards consideration.issue of no significant hazards below: Local Public Document floomconsideration, which is presented The proposed changes do not involve location: Russell Library,173 Ilroadbelow; an (significant hazards consideration) Street, Middletown, Connecticut 06457.
SilC because the changes would not: Attorneyforlicensee: Gerald Garfield,1. The proposed amendment does not
involve a significant increase in the 1. Involve a significant increase in the Esquire, Day Ikrry Ik Howard,probability or consequences of an accident probability or consequences of an accident Counselors at Law. City Place,llattford,previously evaluated because the proposed previously evaluated. Connecticut 06103"J499.t hange Isicl is administrative in nature. The proposed change modifies SR NHC Project Director: John F. Stolz,These changes do not alter the configuration 4 61.2.d. Currently this SR indicates the Consolidated Edison Company of Newor operation of the facility. The Limiting purge supply and exhaust valves has e anSafety Systems Settings and Safety Limits en eption from the 10CFR50 Appendix J. York, Docket No. 50-247, Indian Pointspecified in the current Technical Type B and C tests The proposed technical Nuclear Generating Unit tv'o. 2Specifications remain unchanged. specification change is consist ant with Westchester County, New York
2 The proposed amendment dces not current surveillance procedures and the Dak of amendment request: April 11(reate the possibihty of a new or different Ifinal Safety Analysis Reportl FSAR. The Ekind of accident from any accident second propos,ed change, which removes SRpreviously evaluated.The safety analysis of 4 ft12 f, reflects current containment leakage Description of amendment request
the facility remains complete and accurate. surveillance requirements. The present The proposed amendment requestThere are no physical changes to the faolity locsion of SR 4 6.1.2 f could imply that would revise the Technicaland the plant conditions for which the design c ontah ment leakage surveillance Specifications to amend Sections 3.1Ebasis accidents have been evaluated are still requiremants are met by rforn.ing SR 4 9 9. and 4.13 to allow the repair of steamvahd The operating procedure and However, OR 4 9 9 is applicable only duriUS generator tubes by sleeting as anemergency prrredures are unaffected with core alteratians or movement of irradiated alternative to plugging. Additionally, athe possible exception of resolving speaal fuel and not during the modes when new tube acceptance criteria, P, isnotations that may have recognized the l et hnical Specification 3 61.2 is applicable. IuoImwd which would allow tubes thattvpographical errors that are bemg rorrnied. These changes hve no effed on actual am hgraded in a location not affecting~ 1 The margma of safety are established Appendix J testin3 of valves or the currentthrough the Limiting Conditions of plant accident ana,vsis. Therefore. the structural integrity of the tube to remamOperation, Li niting Safety Systems Settings propmed changes ca,not increase the in service.and Safety Limits specified in the Technical probabdity or tonsequcoces of an acudent Basis for proposed no signifwant3peafications. Since there are no changes to preuoush evaluated. liazards consideration determination:the physical design or operation of the A Create the possibility i f a nea or As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), thefat ihty. these margins w dl not be ( haned different kind of acader,t fna any licensee has provided its analysis of the
"Ihe NRC staff has reviewed the pn u(>ush analped ssue of no significant hazards
f8consider tion, which is presented" ' "*
licensee's analysis and, based on this Tean fi e belomreview, it appears that the three ,obue to operate as designed and thestandards of 10 CFR 50Mc) are sutl b. no change to the testmg of ulves M = In at wrdante wah the requirements of 10satisfied. Therefore, the NRC stuff propowd changes wdl not mod.fy the lar.t O H 50 92. the proposed Ter hnical
pmposes to deternune that the responw to the pomt w here it c an be ipeaf u anon c har.ge is deemed to invols e no
e
-- _ _ - _ _ _ _ . ._.
.
.
2705,! Federal Register / Vol. 59. No.100 / Wednesday, May .'5.1994 / Notices- . ---
...M a i hnm b e onsiderat n::s bernse hm.: w di not have an adverse affo t on the (:nnsumers Power Company finds th it,a of Imban pomt I'mt % .* w oubi thermshsdrauhr perfortnatu e of th" pbmt at inivs amx icted with the February 2.'.
e p,l b o '< <e, !Le margin of safeti is n it IW4 and March it 1W4 Instrument mdr
) i m. o' i vnfi. aat im ren: m the redus nh ( ontrol Technical Specification ( hangen,;mm ini e no sknhant haurds ar fp --! whty or t onyguem es of an at t idera The NRC staff has reviewesi the .a cor4ngiv.s no significant hmrds5 os e, A r. u ? q sn. c the intmnty of 1 " " s' ""diYsi" d"d* h *d "" IL" detennmat' ion m accordam e withthe <temn g.mor tor tubes after slm mg wiD res ie.v. It appecs that the thr"" um,am I a lusufied The .foHownmbe equa,-nt in that of the ongmal tJes
AnuLrds of 50 92(c) are satisfied- r.un mars supports the finding that thel he s he, e . shm e lomt and F * pnt h.mb t n analyud and tested for denn. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to proposed i hange would not.operutm4 and fauhed c ondition luuf mgas in dete rmine that the amendment request i Invoh e a sigmbcont increme an th-m orhnt e with NRC Reguhitors iblaide nvolves no significant hazards proluNhty or consequences of en at rident1 1/1 sc.f. tv fa tors 1 he potent:ai for a tub'' t onsideration. W W@"Edd
Neither the deletion of instrumentrop %ue o, :wt na reased with s;eeung or F " lual Public Document Hoom'"m""Wd* * ""N"""'nts f r the SafeyAt wet ca a tube leak would oo ur. lwuon: White Plains Public Librarv. In on Tank M tn4mnwntahn nor &p f mg m a small pnmary to sc< ondary 100 Martine As enue, White Plains. New addition of aHowance of temporanlym I maarv to w undary leakage oi r,arrmg i.ork 10610.frmn within the slemed or P portions of the returning inoperable equipment to service for
tube is bounde d by the sttam generator tutm MMNNWDPWIbdb rnaintenance or testing would affect therupture sc enario evaluated m the Final Safety Brand"nburg, Esq.,4 Irving PlAe. New probability or consequences of an errident.Anahso, Peport. In addition, the steam York, New York 10003. 1 he S!T instrument c hanneh themselvesener. tot tutm rtmams tapable of performma NiiC Tm/ect Director: Robert A Capra base no ac cident function Their only
purpose is to allow verification that the SITScs requred he.t transfer tun < tion. plating a b, * " * O"" O*PC"U "I N* themselves are operable Surveillancesinne m the sttam generutor tube or leuung 50-255, Polisades Plant, Van Bunn requirements for these instruments werea tube in servke w th a defes t ir a portionof the tut < that pr mdes no funttwn resuhs County, Afichigan purposely deleted frmn STS during them a mow ef5aent cram generator than Date of amendment request; Techn u al Specific ation Irnprovernentplwng an effmtad tuba Thus, the November 15,1991, as supplemented program Their removal from Te< hoical
S;wrifications was suggested in GL O-osof any atrident pmnoush hbruary 22 March 11, and April 7, Returning inoperable equipment to servir ee onsequer 4
culaated ore not increased terause the IW- as allowed by LCO 3 05 is otwessary if fash denn rural integrity and the heat transfer theriptmn of amendment request; ( hannels are to be restored to operable status.
i apAbty of the steam geocrators are notsmmN ontly altered by the proposed thange .I he amendment request, as subnutted The restoration of such channels enhances
(d Create the possibility of a new or Novemler 15,1991, proposed the abihty to monitor for and mitigatod.fferrat imd of r. trident from any au ident tumpletely rewritten requirements for abnonnat operating conditions and auidentspemudy evalua'ed bm ause both the the instrumentation and control ll&C) Therefore, the proposed changes do notsina tur d integrity and the heat transfer sections of the Palisades Tedinical msolve a significant increase in the
e apabihty of the steam ger.eref ors wiu not be Specifications (TS) and was initially probabihty or consequences of an au-ident""5IY " dI"dt"d-ugnifuntly affe< tad by the use of either of noticed in the Federal Register October P"". he Me pasd>4 of a nm mthe sh eving pro < esses or the implementation 2g. FR 48819). S nce that time differrnt lind of accident fmm any ocudentof the F trueria Tesong md previous
npenence indicate that any pnmary to the lyensee has updated its submittal, mWmsy evaluated..
m ondary leakage would be well LJIow provtding (1) changes to pages affected The proposed changes would not alter thein hnmal y ific at on limits in addmon,in by intervening amendments, (2) operating conditions of the plant systems,tSe unhiely ment the defer tive tube faded clanfications suggested by NRC and and would not reduce the rehabihty of anyi ompletely at the defect, the remaining Palisades reviewers (3) addition of two plant safety equipment.deeve end or P iomt would restrain tub" instrument c hann As to the accident Therefore. this changa does not create the
t m ement due to the sleeve end geometry or inonitoring instruments Limiting pombihty of a new or different kind ofIngth of cupanded contatt withm the Condition for Operation (l.CO),(4) au idrnt frmn any anident pnMoudy
evaluated,tube >heet bore.1 h*ciore, there is no threat th'letion of surveillancd requirements , y gg,to adpcent tubes and r o oth r plant mtemsw di he affet ted by this change lhus there for safety tnjection tank (SIT) mrm oNgs no poteenal for a new or diffarent kmd of in.struments, as suggested by Generic Th proposed changes would not afkt then i snt Letter (GL) 93-05. "Line-Item Technical setpomeu apanties, or operating luruts for
hu invae a s:rnifk ant reduc tan m a Specifications improvements to Redure any equipment. Therefore, the propmedmugm of safety The heat transfer Surveillance Requirements for Testing r hanges do not involve a significant< apamins of Ind:an pomt 2 Steam During Power Operation,' r nd (5) redm tion of a margin of safety.Une s win be unproved by ugmng 6" addition of a general"Apid ; ability" The NRC staff has reviewed the
Imt not in the Pahsades TS. Cmdard TSbcensee's analysis and, based on thish appcars in the htf
wr i r rt t e t hanges(4) review, it appears that the threempred tube ple,ing, and subsequent loss
and b) were not addressed in the mitial stamfards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are,
of heat transfer ama The proposed r hangem!1 anow a repaired bleeved) tube or a tube pNposed no significant hazards satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staffw .th a tube end defect below the P di< tant e consideration (NSH) determination. The proposes to determine that theto umam m sen in rather than c ompletelv liernsee's NSH analysis for these two amendment request, as revised,invoh estb ing the tube's flow mth plugt Dm auw t hanges was provided in its April 7. no signifiumt hazards consuleration.de crut tural mtegnty of the tubes will b" 1994 letter to the NRC and is discussed Local Public Document Hoome aered the net eht of cuplementmg th" l"l"W b-@c \'m WSn M% WPprop %i < her. rmer thaa the c or, r,t:v pg,js gy g,q.oserl m. w;oS ma c e Mnnom d w ai m w m,
Nr. 2 ue i pkwig png Nure. w o be ..n mnm n odermmahM Attorney for lit onsee Judd L. Ilacon,,
m the heat tresfer t harac &nsth s ofr<, # M *iuired by 10 CFR 50 91(a), the Ls< pore, Consumers Power Company,m , n a nerator. West:ne,how N du ri u ..an of wim t-d i WA pass i.f b ensee has prosided its analais of the m West Mir hipn Asenue,)x kson,
. ,u +nd und non Lu traw.% i . sue of r.o smnifiumt hazards m lugan 4T01.e .
w use of dreves resultmg .n a i onwderatmn, w htr h is prnenb.d NHC l'rn ert ihrer for:1 edyard !!'+
H m q..t airro , .it t.s t i r ent p! .nt } chin * jarsh,
___..___.__;
- .. .
<,
,
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No.100 / Wednesday, May 25, 1994 / Notices 27053
Consumers Power Company, Dociet No. The proposed (hanges to the TS simply evaluated. The proposed changes to the50-255, Palisades Plant, Van Buren move the values and parameters for cycle. frequency of testing for these components
County, Afichigan Simcific hmits from the Specifications to a will reduce the probability of failure due toCore Operating Limits Report (COLRI. The wear and climinate the possibility of
Date of amendment request: April 7- requirements to maintain the plant within mitiating transients during testing of these1994. appropriate bounds are retained in the TS comprments. Therefore, the proposed
Description of amendment request: The salues of the cyde-specific parameter changes will result in a decrease in theThe proposed amendment would hmits in the COLR are determined using an probability of previously evaluated accidents.
change certain Technical Specifications NRC-approved methodology and remain Further, the proposed changes do not alter
(TS) to relocate fuel cycle-specific consistent with all applicable limits of the the design, function, or operation of the
parameter limits that can generally plant safety analyses that are addressed in components involved and therefore, do not* the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). A affect the consequences of any previously
change with core reIcads to a Core requirement for the COLR and identification evaluated accident.Operating Limits Report (COLR) in c,f the approved methodology documents are 2. The proposed changes do not create the
,
accordance with the guidance of added to the TS. There are no associated Possibility of a new or different kind ofGeneric Letter 88-16. " Removal of changes in p' ant operation. Therefore, accident from any accident previouslyCycle-Specific Parameter Limits from operation of the facility in accordante with evaluated. As stated above the proposed
Technical Specifications." Several of the proposed TS would not involve a changes do not alter the design, function. or
the TS bases would also be revised to sign ficant reduction in a margin of safety. operation of the components involved and
refer to limits relocated to the COLR. In The NRC staff has reviewed the he*,Y " ""* '' # """" *""
each case where TS hmits would be licensee's analysis and, based on this 3. The proposed changes do not involve a,
relocated to the COLR, the limits placed review, it appears that the three significant reduction in a rnargin of safety. Asin the COLR would be unchanged and standards of to CFR 50.92(c) are developed in Reference 3 [NUREG-1366,the appropriate bases would be revised satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff " Improvement to Technical Specificationaccordingly. proposes to determine that the Surveillance Requirements," dated December
19921 and ndorsed in Reference 2 (GL 93-Basis for proposed no significant amendment request involves no 5], the proposed changes to the testinghazards consideration determination: significant hazards consideration. "4"'I * "'"* * **Y " ' 'IAs requirm! by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the Local Public Document Room " P 'licensee has provided its analysis of the location: Van Wylen Library, Hope n$n on oIop o"r un" ies o nduceissue of no sigmficant hazards Colk ge. Holland, Michigan 49423. transients.
sWeration, which is presented Attorneyfor licensee:Judd L Bacon. The NRC staff has reviewed the'
,
acy ' licensee s analysis and, based on thisThe following evaluation supports the $t h ue review, it appears that the threefinding that operation of the facility in Mich 49201 standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) areaccordance with the proposed TS would NR roject D'irector: Ledyard 11. satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staffnot: Marsh ;
Y'*P ***'*0''''*i"*th*I'h*1. Involve a sigrufscant increase in the Detroit Eds. son Com;>any, Docket No. amendment request myolves noprobabihty or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated. 50-341, Ferrni 2, Afonroe County, significant hazards consideration.The proposed changes to the TS simply Afichigan Local Public Document Room
move the values and parameters for fuel Date of amendment request: March 1 e ti n: Monroe County LibrarySystem,3700 South Custer Road,cycle specific limits from the TS to a Core 29,1994, as corrected A >ril 26*1994-
Operating Limits Report iCOLEl. The I Monroe, Michhnn 48161requirements to maintain the plant within Date of amendment request: March Attorneyfodicensee: John Flynn,appropriate bounds are retained in the TS. 29,1994, as corrected April 26,1994. E89., Detroit Edison Company,2000The values of the cycle-specific parameter Description of amendment request: Second Avenue, Detroit, Michiganlimits in the COLR are determined using an The proposed amendment would 48226.NRC-approved methodology and remain modify the surveillance requirements NRUmject Director:Ledyard B. jconsistent with all applicab|e limits of the for scram discharge volume vent and arskplant safety analyses that are addressed in drain valves and isolation actuation
instrumentation and modify the Detroit Edison Company, Doclet No.r quir ents f r e L and it e fra onof the approved methodology documents are required actions and surveillance 50-341 Ferrm 2, Afonroe County,added to the TS. There are no associa'ed requirements for the emergency diesel Afichiganchanges in plant operation. Therefore. generators to reduce testing durinR Date of amendment request: April 26,operation of the facility in accordance with power operation. These changes are in 3994,the proposed TS would not result in a accordance with guidance contained in Description of amendment tegoest;significant increase in the probability or Generic Letter (GL) 93-05 "Line-Item The proposed amendment wouldcmsequences of an accident previously Technical Specifications Improvements rek>cate tables of instrument tesponse
t Reduce Surveillance Requirements time limits from the Technical2. Create the possibihty o/a new ordifferent imd of accident fr'om any for Testing During Power Operation,' Specifications to the Updated Finalpreviously evaluated dated September 27,1993- Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR)in
As discussed above,the proposed (hanges Basis for proposed no significant accordance with the guidance containeddo not remove or alleviate any requirements hazards consideration determination: in Generic letter 93-08 dated Decemberto maintain the plant within the appropriate As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the 29,1993.bounds. There are no associated changes in licensee has provided its analysis of the Basis for pro osed no significantplant operation. Therefore. operanon of the ssue of no significant hazards hazards consi ration determination:
bi iYr$f a nc nsideration, which is prescated As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), thed t crea i below:different kind of accident from any licensee has provided its analysis of the
previously evaluated. 1. The proposed thanges du r cohea issue of no significant harards3. Involve a sigruficant reduc tmn m n significant inc rease in the proh ,,y or consideration, which is presented
margin of safety. < om.equem es of an ,u cident prevmusly be'ow:
L The propmed c hangrs do not involve a or procedures will be evaluated per the impatt upon the ronsequencn of anysignificant itu rene m the probabihty or n quirements of 10 CFR Sn R no reduction nu ident.
consequenws of an ao ident previously in a margin of safety is allowed Therefore, U.""""2evaluated Thr pro;wd changes delete and the t.hange does not involve a sigmfic an:subsequently relm ate the details of Technical raluttion in margin of safety The n quested amendments wdi not i nwe
ile pond ty of a new or diffesent knaf ofFpetilit.aison 'I able 131-2, "REACI OR T.he NRC staff has resiewed th" au Wrnt from any anident previousivPROTECTION SYSTEM RhbPONSE TIMES..Table 3.3 2-3. "lSOLATION ACTUATION licensec's analysis and, based on this evaluated. As stated atwwe, the radiation
SYSTT:M INSTRUMENT ATION RESIONSE review, it appears that the three monitors are not actident initiating
TIME " and Table 3.3.3-3. 'LMERGENCY standards of to CFR 50.92(c) are equipment. No new failure modes can te
CORE COOLING SYSTEM RESIONSE satisfied. Therefore, the NRGstaff created from an auident standpoint.1heTIMFS," consistent with the guidance proposes to determine that the plant wdl not be operated in a differentprovided by Generic Irtter 93-08 dated- amendment request involves no * d " ""f-
DecemLer 29,1993, entitled " Relocation of ggg g g 3gg g jTe<-hnical Specification Tables of Instrument al PuW hument hm The rnluested amendments wdl notResponse Time Limits." Generic Letter 93-08 location: Monroe County Library involve a sigmficant reduction in a margin ofret onunends the removal and subsequentrelounon of various Technical Specification System 3700 South Custer Road, safeiv. plant safety margms will betables which denote instrument and system Monroe, Michigan 48161, unaffetted by the proposed changet No
response time limits. The response time Attorneyfor licensee: John Flynn, safety equipment which is taken credit for inhmits and amociated footnotes are proposed Eso Detroit Edison Company,2000 nu ident analyses wiU 14 affisted by the
to be relcx ated to the Fenm 2 Updated Final Second Avenue, Detroit, Michigan requested amendments The avadability ofthe affet ted radiation monitors will beSafety Analysis Ptport(UFSAR) This allows 48226~ increased as a result of the proposedFermi 2 to administratively control NilC Project Director: Ledyard D. amendments because the monitors will notsubsequent changes to the response time
Marsh have to be made unavailable for testing aslumt tables in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59fmquently. In addition, radiation momtorThe procedures which contam the various Duke Power Company, et al., DocAet UPef 8hnM "P"kn" Supports the proixwedresponse time limits are also subject to the Nos. 50-413 and 544 f 4, Catawba amendments. Fina|ly, the proposedi hange control provisions in the Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2. York amendments are consistent with the NRCAdmtmstrative Controls sertion of the
Technical Specifications The proposed County, South Carolina position and guidame set forth in NUREL-1360 and Generic tetter 93-05.thange only relocates the existing response Date of amendment request: March Had upon Wu preceding analpes Duketime limits. The Surveillante Requirements 30,1994P wer Company c ncludes that the requestedand associated Actions are not affected and Descri ition of amendment te9uest: amendments do not involve a signifiuntIremain in the Technical Specifications.
Relocating this information does not affect The proposed hmendments would allow huards consideration.the init al conditions of a design basis the analog channel operational test , The NRC staff has reviewed thoaccident or transient analpis. Since any interval for radiation monitoringsubsequent changes to the UFSAR or instrumentation to be increased from licensee,s analysts and, based on this
procedures are evaluated in aaordance with monthly to quarterly. The proposed review, it appears that the threestandards of to CFR 50.02(c) areto CFR 50 59, no increase in the probabihty amendments are said by the licensee to satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staffor c onsequences of an accident previously be consistent with NRC staff
naluated is aHowed. Further, the propowd recommendations and guidance proposes to determine that the( banges do not alter the design, function, or contained in NUREG-1366, amendment request involves nooperation of the components invoh ed and significant hazards consideration.therefore, do not affect the consequences of ", Improvements to Tdnical Local Public Document Roomunv prtvinu , evaluated accident. Specifications Surveillance / cation: York County Library,13a East
i The proposed changes do not create the Requirements," and Genenc letter 93- lilack Street, Rock Hill, South Carolinapossibihty of a new or different kind of 05. "Line Item Technical Specifications
29731ai cident from any arrident previously improvements to Reduce Surveillanceevaluated The proposed changes will not Requirements for Testing During Power Au rneyfq licensee: Mr. Albert L,arr,
Duke Power Company,422 houthimpose any different operanonal or Operation / Church 5tteet, Charlotte, North Carchnasurvein m e requirements. The changes h for proposed no sigmficant "4*propow to relocate these response ttme hmit hazards consideration determinatmn:tablos to other plant documents whereby NHC Project Director: David It
.
adequate c ontrol of -nformation i, As required by 10 CFR 50 91(a), the Matt hews.
maintamed. Further, as stated above. the licensee has provided its analpis of thepropmed changes do not alter the drugn, luue of no significant hazards Florida Power and Light Company,tunctmn, or operanon of the components consideration, which is presented DorAct Nos. 50-250 and 50-251, TurAevmvolnd and therefare, no new auident below: Point Plant Units 3 and 4, Dade County.si enarm are created Florida
Crenon I3 The proposed r hanges do not involve awnifn ant redur tion in a margm of safety The requeued amendments wdi not Date of amendment request Aprtl 19.The proposed char.ge wdl not redate a mvolve a sunifn ant increase la the I W4.
maron of safety le ause it has no impar t on probabihty or <onsequences of an anident De.sc ripflon of amendment request:my (alety analysis assumption The previously evaluated Ikcreasing the The licensee proposes to channe Turke)popowd < hange does not alter the sc ope of frrquent v of the radiat on monitor analog Point Units 3 and 4 Technicaln,mpment t urrendy required to be channel operational test from monthly to 9pecifications (TS) 4 0.5 a,(JPERABLE or sub ert to survedlan e teshng quarterly will have no impatt upnn the .Applidility-Surveillantei
nor de the pre}med thango affect any pmhabihty of any .a adent, sme e th" W- irement(" The licensee IiroImsesmstrument - pomts or equipment safety radwhon mun. tors are not ai tident imtiatmg m ete the wonhag , . M eueptfw tams In adrh' ion. the values to be e<pupmrnt Alm. no < redit is taen m a hern specific written relief has beentranspowd from the T< r hnical Spe< ific atione ai r ide nt ana!vws for aun mant ai t .on ,,
m th.. I MR are the same as the cutmg p, tformed by radiation momfors < ontawd panted by the Commission pursuant toh i H . at Sper ific ations Smte any future in Catawh6 'l ei hnic al Spm ibi ations, w the 10 CFR, Sation 50.5sa(g!(610)" in TS5 a3 mo, e ri v." enN m the UFSAR n queued amenip .m r s wm hm e no a,twrw 4 0 5 a. for the inservice insper tien and
evaluatmn to ensun, no Tei hnu al brensee has provided its analpis of thetesting programs. With the revisions tot he Technicai specificattims. upnn N"ifimt;on (henges or untmewed sah tv j,. sue of no significant hazards
'P"''""" '"* N"d"ns opera uw of t h" i onsideration, which is prewntudfinding an ASME Code requirementimpractical becau.se of prolabitive dose ,fju"{;',jj}'{ "{,1"{ g belo wrates or limitations in the dmigu' of a new or ddbm kid of a rient hm h | Operatmn of the L 'in in m i ordmi ei onstruction, or system tonf guralmn- ,m> anidrnt prevmudy evaluated with the propmed amendmJtits would notthe licetuen may impletsent the rebel (1) Operanon of tha facili+v in nei ordavire involvea ugnifh ant i2si rcue in the
rnpmst once it has beett mdunstted tn w ith the pmpowd arnendments watdd< not probability or consequenc es of an art ident
the NRC provi(had it has b*n: (I) na oh e a smmficant nnhn tion in a marxin of pmiously nenhiated.sa fet v The prnponvit anscadments extend the
AcceptabN revieweif pursuant to 10CFR 50.5th (2) appromi by the phnt The < hanes bouig proposed aru sunnUanceinterved requmd for pmforntmg
" 4" I'd"*" ** k ' ' "'' Ih * '"'' "" ' h"~ "h " " ' '' '"* " i" " d'"'" ""d d" ""' d h "' ' '*i ontannuent spray headers. !I his sun willam e!staiIin accordance with the ban for auur m u 04at safign4ated
adantu.strative process descrthel :n 1I:e m tivitms are performed corn,c tly or the baus test is not desigr ed to trm k degrmlabon of.
inservit e inspectlou and tastmg for any TechmcalSpification that n rela'ed equipment by momtoring or trendmgprograms adntirdstratiw procedur"N to the esrahlhhment of or maintenanc e of a perforrnunts The air and smoka flow test isatul(3) reviewed and approved by the safetv margm. Any relieb from the approved a test of the passive design of thePlant Nucisnr Safety Committee. ASME Seetsorr XI code reqmremmes will contairtment spray nozzles,i.e., the testing
Ihisis for prrposed no sigmficunt n quire a 10 CFR 50.50 evaluerion to ensure demonstrates whether or not the nonles are
hozords corinirleration htermmarmn: no TurhnicM Specification chnngssor a logged. A single fadure rendering a
As required by to CFR 50.9thi) the unreviewed safety questions nist. Therefore, signineant nuruber cf nozzies inoperuWe as
ht ensee has provided its analysis of the operation of the facility in acmdante witha result of clogging is considered not
the pmpemi anu odnn nu would not invoNe ( redible. Ibn changus being pwpused do notissue of no significant hazards a smm6 cant rwiuction in a margin of safety. affect assnmptions contained m plant safety|
cons 2deration, which ts presMed amdyses, the physical des'gn and/or.
.e
The NKC staff has reviewed the .. operation of the plant, nor du they arktbelow.licenwe,s analysis and, bur.ed on th" Tm hnical Specinestions that preserve saferv(1) Operation of the facility m an ordanc,
w nh the proposml amendmJnts would not review, it appears that the three analyw assurnprions. Theh op* ration ofstandartis of 50.9Cic) alv sari <fied- the facility in accorduntie with the pmpusedinmhe a sigrufu. ant increase in the
probabdny or was.quent es of an m.i nb nt Therefore, the NRC staff propows tu amendments would trer intoh t significant
preuously evaluated. determine that theramendment trquest increen in the pmbahtbry or consequences
The proposed anumdments remove the involves no significant hazards of an arcident previously analyzud.wordmg ". . . (g), esrept wherr speri6r constderat. inn. (2) Operation of the facWty in auordant.ew reten rehef has tmert granted by th" local 'uMc Docunaut Hoorn with the proposed arnendmerats would notCommissmer pursuant to to CFR. 5*tmn Iwation: Florida International avaie the possibility of a new or different
Lind of accident from any accidentsn ssatgHendr. providad a to CFR SnW g g; pprevmusly evalunted.evaluanon is performed. The lasere I.h*. h 33DE The proposed ametudments estwr.d thwInspet tion and Testing Pre; ram 5are Attorrwyfor hcensee; Haro d F. Rm.. sun eillance merval required for performangdest ritrd in tlur Tec.hmcal Sprofiutou.s
pursuant to in CFE Sassa. In aJdition, the Esquire. Newman and Efolner. P C.- a quahtative smoke or air flow test on theproposed amendments, in anord'anu: with 1615 L Street. NW., Washington. DC a ontainnient spany headers. Thn changesM 'RhG 141t pr.d draft NUREG tanz, provide 20016. heing propowd wW uot change the physiulrehet to the AWE code rerr rarnunt m *he NHC Prrject Director th!rbert N plant or the rnodesol plant operation definednn.ieran t=rween the nme of submital of a Berkow. in the Facility Lit ense. The change does notr. hef rtquest unnt the MC ha issued * intoh e the addition or modificatwn ofsafety evaluanon and granted the ruhet T he Florida Ptm er and I.ight Contpany. equipment nor does it alter ttte design ori hanges bemg propoaed are administranvc in DocAet Nos. SU-2A and 50-251. Tudey operation of plant systenn Wre' ore,nature anJ Jo not affer t assumpnons Point Plant Units .7 nruf 4. Dade County, operanon of the facihty in accordant e withe ontamed ur pknt safety analms. th" Floridu
'
the proposed amendments would not tresthe poambshty cf a new or differest Lnd ofphvsatal dragu and/or operanon 4 the pinnt. IJefe of weentiment request: Apr.l 19. m i dent from any a<.cident pres ivusivinor do th*y afhn.t Techmtal $pecthranons
IM evaluated.that preserve safety atadym assumptwnsAm rehyf hom the approval A.WF Nt ttou Ikscriphon o[omendment request. ( H ()peration of the facilitt in at molam eXI i ode requirements will rtymre a in UR The licenseu propose . to changw Tur. key woh the pro;med amendments would notso w eveluenmi in ensure no Tm hna al point Utlits 3 and 4 Technical mvolve a signi6 cant redu< tion in a maram Mdpri dicanon ( hanys or unreuewed safety Spm ificatious by i'ncreasmg the s *tv .
sune llance interval specified for air or 'I he revised surveillance internd prep edqacsrions emr. Therefrm. operanun of tha i
by this submittal wdl act chtmge orim dity m accordance witti the pnmo5ed smoke flow test throup,h the.. otherwise influrm e the deg:ec of oper.ibihtva:nendments would not advet ti.e probabihtv g g
or i na queaws of an ai ridert pm musb . assumed for the containment sprav gystm mthe phnt safety analyses The t hanm bemg
| m.a4 Led- 10 ws .. The b.censee stated that,the g,p,ned do nm alEr the ham for a emranceu) ()peranon i f the fs ih') m a. i ord.mei
w oh the pn poud amimdwens uoulo not propmed surveillance interval is that safety-n/bwd artwities are performedi rean the powibihty of a nm or dat. mt conustent with both Generic Letter 93- < orm fly or the haMis for any Techmral
~
L md of aer ident frnm arv a. . "id 05. "1.me-Itmu Tecbmcid Specific.atons Speiihration that is related to the|
prevmmly evaluwd improvements to Reduce Sunedl,mce e stabbshment of or mamtemmte of a M ty'
The s hanvrs hen 4 proposed ."" Requ rennb for Testing During Power margm 't herefore. operanon of the tm ihrv inoun:awtranw m natum nd wd1 aot <.n.ume Opetation" and NI'RD;-lW. a'(ordance with the propone.t amendmentsttyphym af plant or the modes of oper.stion .. mTm hial would not involve n significant trauenon inde Imed un the 1.acWty L.kenw ~l ho f. hat *" a margin of safetyibn not mmh e the ad<hnon or mo.hfa nou Spetihcattuns Suncilhm e
Requiretnen ts" The NRC staff he revised theof egnpment nur does o citer the d.- m ori p. anon of pia. t system, 3rv rebots Som UN NT Pf DPO$rd N0 muufn an! la enseis anddysis and, based on tlas
i.:. .. nrw d A WE Sei non M < our hourds consa!erutri < deremunata n review. it appears that the three.
. n*s w til m i .re a m (TR in 5 4 .\'. reipu red hv t o ( .1. in 91! d the entirds of in 9.$ ) are satisfmd.
Therefora, the NRC staff propomes ta T htr< fm. th ma g n of , im a r.ot tam hon ne< ewry for the rea< tot s ewtr
determir." that the ameninent reqmt & ted by tras t hc.m oN. < ore not e ntual undihor..aaJ h jinvoh n no ?.i>;nificant haranh The NRC staff has revvw d the "" "d'b dh"n or pWe al i he to*
, , [[ j'locatmn: Hon [da inh'inat on,dLo< clPph lkcument Roetaroview, it appeas tLt the ire, ,Mandards of 10 CFR M 42h ) * i ond a nm
University, UmverWV i%rk Abmi. satisfied. Therefcre, the NRC < tall : T he reqtmted i Lange da, s not create thrFlorida 33199. proposes to determme that the posubdits of a new or different au ntent
Attarner for hcenser:liarold E Reis. amendment request involves no fmm any ar e ident prmously n ale.ited J,
Erpiire Newman and Holtzer, p C- significaat hazards considerat.on bee w thm hange h) Mertly updatrs atibl5 L Street, NW., Washington, f E lxrcl Pub /sc flecument lioorn 'larifits Tex hnical Specification 3 4 It t to te.
200% location: Ocean County Library. < onyent weh other ciisting Tec hou ,dNRC Prc|n f Dm ctar iferbert N Referent e Dapartment,101 Washington Vrdu ahans M < ontains no duu.
fPrk ow Street, Toms River, New Jersey otW51 ', [f ,"[$",$,'h,f","j'f",'
"7/I n"6Pfl Nudect Corporatwn. e i af ,004 Art not tritital (ondition. and h) over pressuroW 50419. Opfer freeA Nuclear b .
% an IO1 ' protection would (ontmue to be provided hsn N Stnyt, NW., the < ode safety valves when the EMRVGeneratmg Statinn, Os e an County, New ,
Washington, IX,20037. ;nessure rehnf function n bypaised..' NRC Projec. Directer: John F. Stolt. 3 A sigmfu ant reduction in ma gm uiDate of an'endment request: Aptd t 3 safety is not involved because even thouci
G. PU Nuclear Corporation. t t al-. J, oe la t ,n,yyay pres,ar,7,n;cg quac,;o, ;, ila ree Wkar hpedper pressure protatem would 'lkscription of amendment request;
The proposed amendment requests the na tmWmn. Oreon untE , < onunue to be provided by the code safety"5. mmati n Ithis rehef funt tiondeletion of the audit program frequency
j' [,""j"["Q'p'" g"{d"y-requin;ments from Techmcal'
Date of amendment rs;oest A pul 19,Specification (TS) 6 5.3 and to utihm l' M pressure relief function ,the Operational Quality Assurance Descrijition of cmr.-dent reque.st.(OQA) Plan as the controlling The proposed change updates and The NRC staff has reviewed thedocument. This change will introduce t latifies Technical Specification 3 4 B 1 licensee s analysis and, based on this
,
more flexibility into audit sc bedehng to to be consistent with existing review, it appears that the threeansider plant activities and Specifications 1.39 and 4.3 D (ASME standards of 10 FF R 50.92(t ) areperformanc e. In addition, a minor Code Section XI, Article 5009 satisfied. ihermro, the NRC staffeditorial change has been incorporated requirements). proposes to determine that thetorrectng a referen(e in TS 6 51.14 in The requested ( harge woull delete amendment rnquest involves noresponse to a finding in the Operational reference to the ASMr; Code Section XI, sigmficant hazards consideration.Safety Team Inspection report of 1%5000 ten year hydrotest inspection Local Public Document RoomDet einber 23,1993. interval and replace this with references location: Ocean County Library,
Smis for proposed no sigmficant to: (1) The Technical Specification 139 Referent e Department,101 Washingtonhazards consideration determination: definition for Reactor Vessel Pressure Street. Toms River, New Jersey 08753.As required by 10 CFR 50 91(a), the Testing, and (2) the Technical Attorneyforhcensee Ernest L. make,
]fr wlyndge,2300 N Stn et NW.,f, L54tf m. Shaw, Pittman, Potts Ailicensee has provided is .malvsis of thg Specification 3 3 A (i) Feat f or Vessel
issue of no significant huards Pressure Testing limits (PTT and 250 Tconsideration, w hich is presented niaumum test temperature). Washington, DL 20037.below: Tho requested change will clarify that ^8C Pmi"ct Director: John F. Stolt
GPU Nuclear has determmed that this the fwe electromatic relief valves' (lulf States Utahties Company, Cojun(Techn; cal Specification change requesti (EMRV) pressure relief function may b" Electne Power Cooperutive, and Entern'TSCR poses no significant hazard as inoperable or bypassed during sptem Operations, Inc., Doclet No. SNw,defined by the NHC in 10 CFR 50 92. pn ssuni testing required by ASME Code Hwer Hend Station Unit 1, West
Saction XI, Article IWA-5000, including Feliciano Pansh' Louisianat These thanges do not affer t the f mi tion system leakage and hydrostatic test,of ony system or component. Therefoie, theyda not mcreaw the probabihty of o(currenw w th reactor vessel comp etely solid * te of mnendmnt uguM Man.h~ lor t or*quence of an a<.c ident prenously core not critical and Techm. cal 15,1994*
n uw%i m the [%hty m. alps R. ren t Specification 3.2. A (Core Reactiutv g,*C"PI*" "I *"C"d*"D' "V"""MR hmits) satisfied, ,Ihe proposed amendment would revisc
2 Thne thanges do not mvoh e a phph at Ba.sn for proposed i o signifn ont the technical specifications (TS) byi harge to p' ant conf.r,t.: rut cn and they do not hazard.s considemtion determmatien. rernodng D 343 A "Turbinaaf fr< t the perfonnanw of any equipment- As required by 10 CFR 50.9%) the Qnspeed Protection System." fram theTherefore. they do not use the pownshty hcensen has p'rovided its analysis of the n and relor ating it to anof an omdent or malfunctmn of a ibtferrot ssue of no significant hanrds '"inunistratively controlled doc umentn pe than prevmusly idennf;rd
3 the shifting of the aud,t frequ m 4 consideration. which is prewntod N"* / r PmPosed no sigmfacant
rngre:nents from the let h:n a! ~ hatards consideratwn de ternunatwn.
As required by 10 CFR 50 91(al. theSpeuf n attons to the(4\ p6n and the 1 1 he reqantrd t hang w id not inuA" b nsee has provided its analvsis of thentenuon of the mawnum inten ed twta era a smmfb ant mc rease in the prohobihts or me of M ni b nt W M#ebS et wrta:n ceas do r.of c ta:a i t..e i onwquem e of any a t ident prn mudy,
t n u.. ' h2 t+ unted r,or th, u ope of .tabared her auw thn a h.,nge b) Merc v < onwkration. OH1 is pnwented.
i
, An mmd au< hts Furthermore .uiht "W-fo rp.eui n are rmt assor i.,ted with f ne
,.pd its and i lan6es To haii A Spec me enn1411 I to be s on >nn nt w u h on er n ntin,', Does Oe ha:q,e muhe a w.mik o
O 6T 3 Id saft'I) In the t .a i d *'i\ T H .k n it .d Ie*t Sn at ed ,, t Ith h'Jong (hjfW!a!M ::6) tilt f e.n" 11 lb* [libabidy or ( Onae
g.s y .y , ,v. * aam ah e s. r L. g.- m m w 'tv , d a ... i 4 ni pnn ,. , 4 ,, au,.g%
Federal R ister / Vol. 59, No.100 / Wednesday, May 25, 1994 / Notices 27057
Thm hunge twtuest pnmoses detion of The NRC staff ha reviewed the 2. The proposed change does not create the'l et hnical SpmAcation W 18. "Turbin" licenwe4 analysis and, based on this pombihty of a new or d3ff* rent kind ofOu rspeed protntion System" and relocates resiew. it appe'ars that tha three au ident frun any accident presiously
"" I " ''"lthn requir-ment to an eusting Nunt standards of 10 CFR 50Mc) arepn, gram The purpose of overspeed sati3fied. Therefore, the NRC staff a c yanw aaeptaxe entnia ofprotecnca is to trunimue the posr.h 0 50 pu. assigned to the optional 8 hour doorgeneranen of turbme frwment missWe, pmposes to determine that the pneumatic seal system pressure drop test thelhesswe everspeed could potenudly resuit amendrnent request lavolves no capabilityof the door pneumatic seal systemm the generation of massiles which could significant hazards conMeration. to maintam 65 psig to the airlock seals. forimpact and dasnage safety related Local Pubhc Document Hoorn a minimum of 15 days upon a loss oftemponents.equtpment or structt.res. locution: Covernment Docunwnts instrument air, is assured. Lons of plantdependrug on the size and tratectory of th" Department. Louisiana State University, supply air is the acciden' evalua*t in themisades. The preposed deletion of this Haton Rouge, Louisiana 7C603. LTSAR ICpdated Final Safety Analysisspeca6carian is based ca the low prohamlityof thegenerat on of a, damaging turbme -
,g. g Repor11 section 3.8.2.1.2 and planty
misade and other existing performance Wetterbahn, Esq , Wm.ston & Strawn, specifkation 2C26sSSo006. The proposedg g g 9g ,
t enfications of the overspecci protectwn 1400 L Street. NW.. Wash:ngton, D C. new or different Liud of accident from anysystem. 20005. previously evafuated.
The turbine-generator orientation at RBS NHC Project Director: Wtuiam D. 3. The proposed change does not involve|R.ver Dend Stenoulis a " favorable" Deckner. a significant reduction in a margin of safety,orientation Ier reducing the peuhabi.hty of To ensure the pneumatic seal systemdamage to safety.related equipment from Douston Lghting & Pbwer Company, pressure drop test is not compmmised aturbine masiles since ali safety * lated City Pubbc Service Board of San conservative acceptance criteria of t>50 psic omponents and structuras are located m the Antonio, Centml Power and Light will be assigned to the a hour test. With thenial direcion from the turbwe-generator. Cornpann City of Austin. Texas. Docket conservatne acceptance crmeria, the
'
|TurbmeOverspemd Protection System is Nos. 564U arrd 5N94. South Texas proposed change does not involve aPrr fect, Units t and 2 Afatagorda significant reduction in the margia of safety
an ra i na au no upmonew The system is met essential to Cormfy, Te'ra, previously evaluated.
nutigarmg the consequences of an mident. Date of amendment request: April 28, The NRC staff has reviewed thet he system is nur w,v-l m an uutial condation 1994 licensee *s analysis and, based on thisof a design bass auident or transient Description of amendment request rev ew, it appears that the standards of
batUd do 7, The licensee proposes to revise 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore,u e ba
manufacturer's turbine failurs data wa, Technical Specification Surveillance the NRC staff peoposes to determine thatcalculated to be L473.=10 -a per voar and is Requirement 4.6.1.3.e to add an option the request for amendments involves noaueptably low based on the probioiluy of which willallow the personnel airlock significant hazards consideration.turbme failure data of 4.mW ' per year as pneumatic system leak test to be Local Pubhc Document Roomrecomnumdad by NURE(Mesoo Therefom- completed iri 8 hours with a pressure location: Wharton County Juniorttus psepuwd thange does not mvolve a drop of 0.50 psi. The technical College, J. M. Hodges Learning Center,
specificati ns currently require that the 911 Boring Highway, Wharton, Texasa q o n ider te lyevaluated. door seal pneunmttc system be 77488.
Does the chage create the possibihty of a demonstrated operable by verirying that Attorneyfarlicenseerhck R.new or different kind of an ident from any the system prnsure does not decay N,ewman, Esq., Newman & Holtzinger,.u rident previously evaluated? more than L5 psi within 24 hours. The P.C.,1615 L Street, N W., Washington,
The t hange p:nposes to relocate this change to an 8-hour test willexpedite D C. 20036.requirement to an existmg plant program. return e power following an outag,e NHC Project Director: Suzanno C.whereby adequate control of infosmanon is since the test is on the cntical path for Nadmamtained. The proposed change does not restart following outages. North Atlan. tic Encegy Senimnecess tale 5 physical alteration of the plant(no new or ddferent type of equipment wiil h /Ur Propwed no $4m.ficant Corporofion. Dociet No. 50-44J,he mstalled) or changes to parame'en haza.rds consirleration determinatwn: Seabrook Station, Unit No.1goserning normal plant operation The As required by 10 CFR 50.01(a), the floclimtham, New Hampshireproposed chave wH1 eot impw any licensee has provided its analssis of the '
thtferent op=ranonal or surveillmce issue of no significant bzards Date of cmendment request: JanuaryI4' Nrequirements. No new failcre rnodes ar" consideration, which is prewnted
muodurmL Therefore, this ptr.po*cd cbn * below. Description of amendment request:does not t reate the pms.Lihty of a new or The proposed amendment wouldthLrent kind of a tident fmm any auident 1. The propowd change doe * not invel," t h ange the Technical Specifications; revioudy evabated. a sgaifmant inuease in the prebabihty or (TS) io specify the coinposition of the
[be's the chance inv4e a M&c t omeqwnces of an ar.cident prewus.ycdm tmn m a magin of v. fete evalua'ed. Station Operation Review Committee
I'be proposed t harge u di not reduc e a The door pneumatic se.il smem pressure (SORC) based on experience and
r iaten of safsy tu auw it he no impm t on drop test is not a'temd eurp' for prmdinz expertise vice organizational position, toany safety analysis assumpti<,r The an option to utih/c a red.ced test duraton. itnplement a Station Qualified Reviewerprop ed chane.e does not alter the st ope of A consmutive acceptance i ravra of J 50 psi Program (SQRP), to delete the* quipment currently rmpired to be w Cl be amgned to the optier.al shut requiremet t for per odic procedureOPERAHf.E er sabiact to survtN e twmg. dwtico test thus rcem'.atrung the operabib'Y reviews, to revitse the time within which -
nor do, s the prepmed c.wute a!!w t ,my of the pnetrnatic seul sys>ra. I he proposed the Nuclear Safety Audit Reviewsmuncat setpointrar equgownt saferv c hme does not aper equipment or Can'nWee WMD mW %e ge
hat tions.1he f avorab!c orenuimn of the amunpmu made in prevm A M.atri and minutes, and to inco orate aidTlune pro \ adtd a !LarZari(d 5de!\ " Ut h Ib.it att idNs. t herefore ih" t/ F v ('' J+- ,' [ na ruber of editoru, il changes. The
,
u,e pos6bilia of musde duw ra vf. te orevmmly e s aluted .a i i h '
dated ent.gm. at is an eptam iow in4 reawd' The probAbn o ' a , nt , editorial changes would delete certain1 hextore rSe t hange des nu 4num e a e , unaNt md ben a t s e O ce ret a items that are no longer applicable,u,f.. ant rvdui twn m a tren cf ut,% p rel nient mier woubt remove inconsistencies involving,
the names of systems an.t eqmpment or Wrifications. Sinc e the re is no I huse a ugnitu ant increese m thednd NSARC fiinction, composition. and change to the facility or caerotmg probab:hty or consestuentes of an at tuhmi
use of alternates. and would correct the proc edures, there is no chm t upon thr P" Mon ""dw'"d
s alue for the reactor too! ant system probabihty or mn,cqw m es of a. *! ' Y""d ' b d"R"' '" "'m" ' N N IS*d ""P""*""'"'''"*""'r hanges would artident presun. sly analped
volume Other editonal,crniat- fm hn u N,eufu unons wdi not ,atm t tbeto ir.M)e 7or t3o( Ument .. 11 The ( hanges do not t trote trie op..ranun of the HTS and LMAS t)perab. htsc onustent y The propo,ed amend.nent possibihty of a new or mffen nt kind of 4 red wr edian< e n>quirements are sonwould affect the followmg TS Sections erident from any accident pres sously mamf ained m the Tei hnical Spe< ifu,atumsand tabbt 1.31,3J 16,3.4.1.2. 4 6.3 2, evaluated (10 CFR 50 9/(c)(2)) becaus'e ami the re ponse times wdl be m(luoed anit
'
3.7.1.2, 3/410 6,5 4 2,6.3, and 6.4. and they do not affect the manner 'y which nnuntamed m the plant operatmg
, the facihty is operated and do not pnn edares A safety evaluation and PORGTable 4 3-1."' """' """"" ' " " *Bets for proposed no sigm Drant ,41nge any facihty design feature or w di be reqmn d for the hmits to be < hanged.hotants consideration defmninatmn. . a gera@nd wu e the mienn win not be affeurd b ihrequ w.
As required by 10 CFR 50 919). the T8 c5 e pnped < hanges thne a no im;m1 on thehun ,ce has Iirovided its analysis of the proposed changes invoh e performant e of these systems or theissue of no significant hazards duistativior progran :natic < nnseqarno s of an auidora prmooslyconsidaration The NRC staff has repirem nts or m>rHy imdve Maml analyzedresiewed the htensee s analysis agamst ( hanges, corrections, or clarific ations. 1 Geote the possibihty of a new orthe standards of to ClR 50 92(d 1he ddfnent kmd of auident from any
C,. The changes do not involve a previoush es aluairdNRC staff's review is presented below.A. The changes do not mvoh e a significant reduction in a margm of There are no new fadure modes assot wed
significant increase in the probabihty or safety (10 CFR 50.92(c )(3)) because the with the proposed < hanges Since the plantc onsequences of an accident previously pr posed changes do not affet t the will c ontinue to operaie as designed. the
a aluated (10 CFR 50.92(c)(1)). apner by wriich the facility is operated pro;wd t hanges will not modify the pl.mtThe proposed redefinition of the or involve equipment or features which response to the pomt where it < an be
'"de'ed 8 new 8"iden'-composition of the SORC would not affect the operational charactenstics of
n a sign fu ant rnduoion in actmurush the effectiveness of the SORC the facihty. jand would continue to ensure that the Based on this review,it appears that The proposed r hanges do not have anySORC has the desired esperience and the three standards of 10 CFR 50 92(() anerse unpar t on the protre tive boundanesexpertise to advise the Station Manager are su sfied. Therefore, the NRC staff nor do they affe< t the consequenc es of anyon all matters related to nuclear safety. propos s to determine that the au ident previously analyzed. The Ter hnu alThe proposed change would pennit amendment request invohes no speuficadon oprrabihty and surwdlam eoperanonal fleubihtv and eliminate the significant hazards consideration. rgnrements will still ensure that the
**"" d"' '"sted and within the h:mtsneed for an amendment whenever Locul Public Document Ik>omorganizational changs occur. The locatwn: Exeter Pubhc Lbrary,47 i'ront hfg"l[tjn ber! w diproposed SQRI wouhl not reduce the Street, b, eter. New Hampshire 03833- ensure that the in ensing basis is mamt me dlevel of procedure review, sinc e the Attorneyfor hcensee Thromas Dignan. Therefore. the proposed changes will notSOHC continues to retain responsibih.ty Esquire. Ropes & Gray, One nnpatt the margin of safety as defwd m theto review any document requiring an International Place, Boston, hws of ny Tn hnkal Spm ifhat.on
evaluatior| would be hmited tpursuant to 10 CFR 50 59.Massachusetts 02110-2624. The NRC staff has reviewed theThe SQR1 NRC Project Director: John F. Stolz. lic ensee's analysis and, based on thisreviewmg procedures that do not affect " d A,UCle rE""MyC mPany, revu w, it appears that the threenuclear safety' requirement to rt al., D c et No 50-423. Mdistone t tandards of 10 CFR 50 92(c) areDeleting thepermihtally review procedures e ouhl Nuclect I| wer Whon. Umt No 1 Nea
satish d. Therefore, the NRC staffe
not diminish the review process for fondon County, Connecticut propows to determino that the
procedurrs smce other programmatic U"f" Of ""'ndment request: Febr uary amendment request involves norequirements would contmne to assure 10. m2. as supplemented April 14. sigmficant hazards consideratmn
19 % W"I E" O '"*""' N'df"proceJures are reviawed and revisedwhen net essary. DeSCDPtion of amendment request. I'utmn: Leaming Resourm Center.
The proposed extension of time for The proposed amendment would Three Rivers Commumtyclet hmud
preparmg and forwarding NSARC remove two tables from the Tec hnical Collego, Thames Valley Carnpus. 574
meeting mmutes would not affe(t safe Specifications (TS) whu h list rea f or New london Turnpike. Norwich,Connec tic ut 06360.operation of the facility. Significant trip system (RTS) instrumentatmn Anwnev /w hc emee: GeraM M,M
safety concerns or unresiewed safety response times and engineered safetvquire. Day, Derry & Howard. City
q! Id!" Hardord Conne< ticut 00103 -questions would still be brought to t'he features actuation system (ESFAS)attention of the Semor Vice President instrumentatmn responw times. Thesewithout waiting f ar the release of the tables will be placed in t!.e Millstor.e 1 9? . I,I"N WeWr John F Nok
-
#'NSARC meetmg minutes. The change Tec hnical Requirements Manualwould not impede in any manner Basis far proposed no sigmfw.! Northeast Nudvar Energy Co;npany. vrprompt t ornmunicatwn of sigmficant hazards connderotmn deternunatmn- al . O det No 50-33% SIdtstonecon (erns to the Senior Vice Prmident. As required by 10 CFR 50 41(a). the Nuclect Poner Statmn. Umt No / NeuThe proposed chanres do not affe< t the hcensee has proaded its anal:, sis of th. Icndon County Connectit utmanner hy which the fauhty is operated issue of no significant haruds purg of c.mendment request Aput uand do not change any fauhty de-ign considerat:nn. w hh h :s t rewnwl 3 yo t
feature or equipment. The proposed below Devnptmn of amendment request.t hanges ins olve admnustrative or The prapwd < h in do not inv.,h e Th pmposed amendment uookl de!"Ypmgrammatic requiremen's or rrwrely a sigmfic ant h.uds < owd r itm the reqmrements regardmg thew ah e e,htoriali hane. < nm tmns. bm auw the i hres wdd not < onden r m . n.t for winnor km
rc
l
_ _ _ _ _
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No.100 / Wednesday, May 25, 1994 / Notices 27059_ _ ._ _ _
Tables 3.3-12 and 4.3-12 of the stricter hmitatmns on the operat;on of issue of no significant hazardsMillstone Unit 2 Technical Mdistone Umt Na 2 becaoe it requires the consideration, which is presentedSpecifications. use of a sm, gle monnor, the steam generator below:
Basis for proposed no signibcont M wdown monitor, to m7t the requirements NNECO (Northeast Nuclear Energyhazards consideration determination: " " , ' " jn[d Company] has reviewed the proposed
' 'Nc 3 n 3
As required by 10 CFR 50 91(a), the Therefore, this proposed hcense amendment changes in accordance with to CFRlaensee has provided its analysis of the does not create the possibility of c new or 50.90 and has concluded that theissue of no significant hazards ddferent kind of accident form any accidentconsideration, which is presented prenously evaluated
~
r.hanges do not involve a significanthazards consideration (SilC). The basis
below : 3 involve a significant reduction in a for this conclusion is that the threeThe proposed technical specification margin of safety. criteria of to CFR 50.92(c) am not
(.hange has been reviewed against the Deletmg the operability and surveillant e compromised. The proposed changes do(.riteria of 10 CFR 50 92, and it has been requirements for the condenser air ejector not involve an SHC because the changes
m nit r from Tables 3.3-12 and 4.3-12 of thedetermined not to involve a significant would not:Mdistone Unit No. 2 Technical
hazards consideration (SHC). Specifications would leave the steam 1. Involve a significant increase in theSpecifically, the proposed change does generator blowdown monitor as the primary probability or consequences of an accidentnot: method of monitoring and isolating steam ' previously analyzed.
1 involve a significant increase in the generator blowdown. The proposed license NNECO's proposal to eliminate the CPS
probability or consequences of an act ident amendment imposes stricter limitations on scale for the " Wide Range Logarithmic
previously analyzed. the operation of Millstone Unit No. 2, Neutron Flux Monitor * entry in MillstoneDeleting the operability and surveillance because it requires the use of a single Unit No. 2 Techmcal Speutication Table 3.3-
requirements for the condenser air ejector monitor, the steam generator blowdown 9 will not affect the ability of Millstone Unitmonitor from Tables 3 3-12 and 4 3-12 of the momtor, to meet the requirements of No. 2 to meet the intent and purpose of panel
Millstone Unit No. 2 Technical Mdistone Unit No. 2 Technical Specificatior. C-21,s original design.
Specifications would leave the steam 3.3.3.9 (Table 3 3-12). Therefore, this The 10"% to 100% power scale overlapsgenerator blowdown monitor as the primev proposed lic ense amendment does not the CPS scale. The range of to- 8% to 100%
method of monitoring and isolating steam ' impact or reduce the margin of safety. p wer f r the Wide Range LoganthmicNeutr n Flux Monitor is adequate to permitgenerator blowdow n. The proposed liter ,e The NRC staff has reviewed the the rators to bring the unit to hotamendment imposes stricter hmitations on
the operation of Millstone U.nt No 2. licensee's analysis and, based on this shut wn from outside the control room.,
because it requires the use of a single review, it appears that the thren Also, the instruments on C-21 are not usedt provide the start-up rate signal duringmomtor, the steam generator blowdown standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are" P ng t ons Th ssatisfied. Therefore, the NRC staffmonitor, to meet the requirements of
. g ed h , ,Millstone Unit No. 2 Techmcal Specific ation proposes to determine that the impact the performance of any safety-related3 3 3 9 (Table 3.3-12)- arnendment rquest involves no
component, s[the original design drawingsstem, or structure.
% hde NNECO INortheast Nuclear Energy significant hazards consideration. A review o jCompanyl is proposing to delete the Local Public Document Room concluded that this proposed change is '
operability and survei!!ance requirements for location: learning Resource Center, consistent with the original plant design, and"" "
(IIs ne t o hn c Three Rivers Community Technical reflects the actual as-built condition of the
Specifications, there are no plans to c hange College, Thames Valley Campus,574 unit. The original design drawings show that
any of the design features or functions or the New London Turnpike, Norwich, !he wide range loganthmic neutron flux" ' " P "" P
'kn(ondenser air ejector monitor, or any of the Connecticut 06360.s
specified surveillances or frequency for such Attorneyforlicensee: Gerald Carfield, NNECO's proposals to rectify a fewsurveillances. The condenser air ejector Ihuire, Day, Berry & Iloward, City typographical and editorial errors on page Vmonitor will continue to isolate blow down Place, llartford, Connecticut 06103- of the Index for the Millstone Unit No. 2upon a high radiation alarm 3499. Technical Specifications are administratise
Additionally, steam generator blowdownnolation is required to c nsure comphance NRC Project Director: John F Stolz. in nature. They ensure that the Index
accurately reflects the contents of thewith 10 CF R 20 It is not required to ensure Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, et techmcal specifications.tompliance with 10 CFR 100 Therefore, the al., Docket No. 50-336, sillstone Based on the above, the proposed hcensecondenser air ejector monitor does not Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2, New amendment does not involve a significantperform any safet3 onction The condenserfair elector monitor is not safety related. It is London County, Connecticut incre se in the probability or consequences
of an accident previously analyzed.not < reditt J in any radiological consequence Date of ornendment request: April 22. 2 Create the possibihty of a new or(ak plations presented in the Millstone Unit 1994. ddferent kind of accident from anyNo. 2 FSAR | Final Safety Analysis Report |. Description of amendment request. previously analyzed.
!!awd on the above; this proposed brense The poposed amendment would The proposed license amendment does notamendment does not mvolve a s;gmfh ant
6 o M 2 T&id I'P"ct the perf rmance of any safety.relatedim rease in the probabihty or conseque m es . . component, system, or structure Panel C-21of an acudent preuousl3 esa!uated Specification Table 3.3-9 by ch.minating is requin d to permit the operators to bring
2 Create the possibihty of a new or the measurement range of 10- L10' the unit to a hot shutdown condition from ad,ffuent kmd of acudent form any a c ident counts per seamd (CPS) for the entry locanon outside the control room. Deletin"apreuously evaluated rogardmg the " Wide Range Logarithmic the CPS range for the " Wide Range
The preposed hcense amendment does not Neutron Flux Monitor." Also the !.ogarithmic Neutron Flux Monitor" does notn 4e any phystal chayes to plant amendment would correct a few affect the abihty of the operators toequpment or an3 changes to plant tvpographical and editorial errors on au omphsh this function. Also, the proposedprocedures that would be a pmursor to an e V of the Inda for the WilMone c hange is consistent with the original designau ident. NNECO has no pians :o t hangr ans Unit 2 Tec hnical S ecifications. f the plant. The proposed licenseof the sps ified sun edlan, es or f:cquency for P amendment cannot create the possibthty of asu h sunedlances The c ondenser air erstor Baus for proposed no signifm, ant new or different kind of acc.ident form anynenm mil < onnnue to mlee bhowdown hamds mnalerchon determinaDon. prn iously analyzed.upon a hmh radiation alarm. Ako. the As refluired by 10 CFR 50 91(a). the 3 Invohe a sigaficant reduction in apn. posed hc enw anwrdment imposn hr.ensee has provided its analysis of the maren of safety,
||
-- - -- . -- - -. . _ ~ . . . - -
noha Federal Register / Vol 59. Na 101 / W. .mt+dav. WV 3.1994 / Notires_ _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ -
nin rs pro;ma; to elunmate the CPS As n:<tuired hv 10 017 % '81W th" ' i 11 14 L 3 V l- 3443 351 'I?le (or the w Me rutze log etthma neutrun h(,.nw** Ids hrot Died its ani!V'iS Of t h" 44 &44 I4432''4403 '4413Lo
. af'e< t the ahdits of Muc of no si.'d at b O! "d4 ' '' " ! "" P"' d '" ' h" E" " ' "' " "I ' . ., a mon. tors dl ' ''
w t o e weh o mbam e d'e amlabliv ot-
ret the mtent andWh et+' .p . g g<
<Spok,ecfpahe.!(b15 rwinal denn 1h'
{"".I h" I.d"""'"d O M'"' b "" #'' ' Pim d 1 ' N h ' th, Aidan nd Mia
' n '% to totrb low cr t 4 merlaps the "" C w Lug nw. otd owipremn-I #:t ; sale The me.y of 10 '"U ta Inn % ("P"" '"b
po.wr for the "Nde Rawe Logarithrnic; an M L NnAnt haurds I he propo<ed i Emges to Tn hw .dNeatron t ha Monitor is atiequate to Frma t omideratmnj betawe the a hany s bpeti:e ations 31 J 1 and 112 3 w dl ensurethe up.ratum to brmg tl usui to hot would not: onh one (h.nwng pump and one llPSI pempshutdc.wn from outs te of the (us. trol roorn. m" ogn ratde in Wde 5 or ti with the rear for
I I"N" " N'" .""*""*.;,%.o the instrun.tnts on C41 are rmt used * " " " * " " " " " " " " '
4Wi" W "m""Idud''" tto prhide the cart-up rat' signal during Proh "% "a
' than i 8 squam inches 'lbe remaming pumpsit ut u ,or refueling opern'ans This PWo" 8 wdl 6 wured. These pmpr.ed d.anges
ne pmpnsed < hanges adrhe<s th" hae been mMe to ensure Nhlbtone Umt Nopm iused he enw arnendment does notai t the performani e cd ev ufetere!ated "M D N nPY" 2 Jos s not i n a:e an MW tondinon b We
*ur the r Wmg pump llPSI thigh pre"ur" opmhon of too rnany :mmps inyi ting f!an!.i on.ponent sp tem. or strutture.
! sa W m W PumF $W " On1A inrmany pnman* m a be'I hervfert , this propo'.t d la enseamendment does not i'volve a siginfiant pmnps, safety valves. PORT s. hiotk vay- temperature < ond.non These propimi
and the LTOP. bornn ddution and Sit nu.difu ations are tonsistrut with im br.a alred atmn in a margm ogsagrty. hutdnwn roolingi systems These < hanff' Spaihcation 33 3 whu.h has aho beenThe NRC staff has reviewed thc wen, pro;ml to addrns four main i"ucs: modmed and w di decrem the pmsdnhtv ol
lu ensee's analysts imd. twd on this to renn.t the guidance of GL mui6 with an LIOP tuudition from occ. urnsrevww. it appears that the tbrre nqmct to PORV and cold owrpressure; to The propmed change to Techniulstandards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are address boron dilution umrems; to addren sp.cih .nion 3 4 2.1 will ensure tunsistera ywisfied Therefore, the NisC staff shuidown nsk managament lemons lentned; between this technical speofkat on and
""d '" "dd'"*' '""nt informan n cm cold I n huit al Wifkanon 3 43 L The s.d. typroposes to determino that the <werpressure mitigation ron, erns. Generally- uhes M Millstone Unit Nu 2 are not usedamendment request involvus no the t.hanges are more restrictive than present for LTOP mitigation. The PORVs. or RCSsir,nificant hazards consideration. requirernents and are consistent with the |n. actor umfant system! vent at Mdistonelocal Pubhc Ikx umerrt lioom nx ommendattuns of GL 9NE Also, the l' nit Na 2 are used to mitigate sa LTOP
location: learning Kesource Center- < hanget provide the operator with additwnal e ondition Safety valves are n<iuned to lmThree Rivers Commumty-Technical guidance that was not previously availabic. operable durm/, operating conditions toCollege. Thames Valley Campus. 5N Therefore. the changes will not irnpa< t the .noomahraM) rnluc e system pnssures. T!wNew London Turnpike. Norwith, pn'babahty of on rurrence or consequent es of use of the PORV. which allows manualConnecticut 06360. an I. TOP event. boron ddution esent, loss of (outrol, for mitigahon of an LEP event.
Attorney for licensee: Gerald Garfield, shmdow n cochng. or other event rwtuinng n duces th, sovrity and wn.sequrm e of aDquire. Day. Herry & !!oward, City enuwniy wn mling whic h han teen potennal ourpressure event by gmng thePlace,ilartford Connex1icut 0610F P" "" N ""' """"I
"5"'"" **"d s hanges to Tedum.t he pn> pow an3499- PolW l&quirementsS. pet. if.sation 3/4 9 3 prosido enhanedNIfC Profect Director: JohnI, StolL The proposed ( hanges to Tec hnu.a! operanonal fleubdity through the use of a
Nortliecst Nuclear Energy Gunpunt et Spenfu anon 3 4 3 have been made to be PORV or RCS vent. The AITLICAllILn Y' ion %nt w W % en anmn nt carement has been s haged % Ankuionof * Docket No. 50-336, Mdistone has twen mwe to the guidant e coatamed m purpows w dh no change in intent and ufei)Nur lede Power Station. Umt No. 2. New GI.mm and that m to n plate the phrase imphcations The \LTION requiremeats forlendon County, Connecticut g.< ause of ewssive seut leakagn" with the the lif UP sutrm u.. Ldu a 7 day aUow ab!e
IAste of amendment & quest. Apnl 25, phrase "and capable of bemg marically oute tune ( A(TTI to restore an inopaableg a p led." Ahhuugh the PORV may be LTOP i hannel to operable status before otho
Ihscrsplaon of amendment reque.st: designated inoperWe. it may be able to be remeibal meeures would he r to be t Ai n
The I>roIused amendment would '""""U) "P"ned and ( hmi nd in this in addition. new Attmn Statement T st.oes. rnanner tan be used to mitigate transwnH that the prodstons of 5pn riitahun 3 o 4.ae( hango the l,echnical Specifications a m A PORVi rabihty may be due not apph. abh Therefon. the unit may enicone erning four rehted inuee (1) M wat leakage,instrumentatton problems, the Modes for ahk h the ILO app!y,ekru a.
Power operated relief valve OMV) and automata. wntrol prubkms. or other causes a una shut &>wn or pbmeot of the had onblock valve reliability;(2) low that do not prevent manual um and do not the re.e for umet foMowmg refuchng, w!-ntemperature tnerpressure prutemun t reate a possibihty for a small break IIX:A an LTOP < hannelis moperable In tras(LTOP!. ;3) borun ddution; and (4) The wordmg( hangrs am meant to te more situanon. the ? day AUT apphes for re tcu s
shutdr i 1 risk managernent. vn & wW mmmsbr o M LL W N r knM to gn.h mu kb ode rSpei da a!'v. the proposed arm ndment * l b ad'h""dl edd'** .a to a mm o meM maants wq l au to 6 tA r.would revise Tn hnical Spenfications *d"'h h""U""'? 9"."2 proposed to I I"' " 'I" ""# "'am in w h h meE * "I 4 4 *
whereby Mdblone Lnit No A(3 ION 09nr. mer.ts app!) w he n an ! TOP3.4 3 and 3 4 9 3 to addtm the issues.
b m h test the PORVs at a <pahned i hannel is determmed to be innp wbb w m .specifica')y raised in Generic lxiter {GL) gnngn.y under < onditions represent itiw of the pl.e.1 is m a Mtle for wha h !!"!. TOP4m.06 Tm hmrn' Specifications 31.1.3. Mede 1 nr 4 e ondoions m hebeve this 'df u s'em n rniu m 'o be op"robha1 1 2 1. 3 1 2 2. 3.1.13, 3 1.14, 3 1 2.H. sue tmt wdl rmuh m sver pbmf conditions Spn ifi- ma ms t 414 and 14 9 t h we341.4.342.1,34.91,3.53.411.3. than the in sita test p opmed m the g-nern bee n n . to ewss com ena ekrnfif'
4.12.14.1.2.4,44.14,4431.4432. leter The remanung r hanges to Tet tmie al m an W ' hSmmn Nota e tegmimg4.4 4.3.1. 4.413 2, 4.5 3.2 and 4 9 31 w i 1. abon 3 4 3 inte porate the cuidus e pm n:Ce mromHen d pn yre dropswon |d he revel to proude consb. tem y ''t'dawd m M h and do nm a n m % me vor l yw ndM anons to me. .with the proposed < hant e'i in GL ,M6- s c; da .mih nu m.e the pmbahn tv or iso te. hs -d -;w hoons di ew - .t
.
*
, g , g gg , p.g g g,. g,. ,,, , p,,,ca pnm ,, ny gn nm, g, , c y ,,
i.r . ire related to the boron dilution b m g g pgg , , , y 3 gj.g %, ,ngn. u m nr no m, 7g3g m e.,or shutdown tbk m.ingrin mt prohah.lo or < nnwye m m nf the i1t H';jgilov.%1es #'i i 4 f II ' " "*** h d " . . f
Basis for propmni no u :n@ m.t t! vs are home p ope ed to T < We ~. m ed o om c.d iaonn ibac m sup; ef4
!- .mh i onq femtmn lefermmotion s o. .%. enweha'1?1 11 i i 1414 mm f. ( J W 'O mndir / the i 10.'.
__
..
.
Federal Register / Vol. 59. No 100 / Wednesday, May 25, 1994 / Notices 270fil__ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ __ _
yem unavadabibty. NNECo c ont ludes that the shift superusor. The hmitation on the allowed to be operable in a shutdownaddomnal restnctwns on operation with an amount of purnps available is as a direct condition, the now of these pumps isnopeuble LIOP c hannel are warranted result of LTOP concerns This provides consistent with the assumptions of the boronw hen the p<m n!ial for a low temperature aswrarve that the LTCP requirements are ddution analysis. Additional pumpingoverpressure event is the highest, and rnet whde maintaining the niaximuni capabihty is being provided to addressespm iaMy w hen the umt is in a w ater-suhd avadable equipmer.t to rmtige shutdown shutdown risk concerns, howes er, thee ondmon !! is aho com luded that tr.mc risk com erns hmitation on pumping is tied to the ventaddinonal meuures emphasize the 2 Create the poss.bihty of a new or path that is available. This wdl ensure thatimpmtan< e of the LTOP system. espm ia|13 ddferent kmd of acudent from an> the margin of safety is not impacted.w hile operatmg in a water sohd condition as pres iously analy7ed. The combined effects of reducing Sirthe primary surcess path for the mitigation The proposed changes to Tet hnical flow, tagging out a charging pump, andof overpressure transients during low- Speubcations31.13.31.2.1,3.12.2,3124. increasing shutdown margin is that thetempercure openinon Therefore, these 3128.3414.342.1.3491,41.1.3. required operator response times of 15enham en'ents will not involve a samfaant 412 4. and 4 9 81 do not create the minutes in Modes 4 and 5. and 30 minutesinc rease in it'e probabdity or r onserpience of possibility of a new or different kind of in Mode 6 are maintained.on att ent presiousiv enluated au ident from any presiously analyzed. The fly reducing the allowed SDC flow rate to
proposed changes provide clarification or less than that where vortexing can occur, thehen Dduten additional restnctions for plant personnel potential for a loss of SDC esent is being
Charu;es are bmng proposed to Te< hni< al ton (erning the operation of charging pumps, reduced. Therefore, there is no decrease inSpe< if a atien, 31.1.3.3122.3121,3.1.24, llPSI pumps. PORVs, blocking vah es. and the margin of safety for the boron dilution312 8. 41 13. 41.2 3. and 41.2 4 to provide the SDC, boron ddution, and LTOP systems. and shutdown cooling events.added assurant e that the loron ddunon The proposed technical specification changes The proposed changes associated with theanalms rernoms boundmg w hile allowing do not introduce significant changes in the cold overpressure mitigation system willlower flow rates to reduce the potential of a manner in which the plant is being operated. ensure the appropriate margin of safety isiuss of shutdown coohng due to sortesing at Therefore no new failure modes are being maintained by limiting RCP operation inmid |om opercon. introduced. and the potential for an Mode 5 and limit RCS cooldown rates. These
The i hancs to Tec hrocal Spet ifk ations unanalyzed accident is not created. actions will ensure an LTOP condition does31.13.3122.3123.312.4.31.2.8, The proposed changes to Technical not occ'ur.4113,412 3. 4 t 2 4. and 4 9 8 I will not Specifications 3.4.3 do not create thesmnificanth morease the probabdity or possibihty of an accident of a different type The NRC staff has reviewed thec onsequenc es of an acudent. Tagging out of than preuously evaluated, since there is no licensee s analysts and, based on tlu,sa < hargg pump. mcmasing shutdown change to the design of the plant. In addition, review, it appears that the threemaren and reducing SDC Cow willimpact plant operations are only being altered standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) areresults of the baron ddution auident, but enough to allow a block vahe and PORV to satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staffwdi not increase the probabihty of mitiating be placed in conditionr which allow them to proposes to determine that theeunts better perfonn their safety funt tions- amendment request involves noAn mcrease m the shutdown margin The proposed changes to Technicalequirement as was done in l;ec hnic al Speufication 3 4.9 3 do not create the significant hazards consideration
r
Local Public Document RoomSm n atrns 312.2 and 31.2 8 will assure possibility of an accident of a different type< onsntency with the Core Operating Limits than presiously evaluated, since there is no location: Learning Resource Center,
a boron ddunon es ent the plant is operated~ Three Rivers Commumty Technical19por' whic h prmidad additional margin in < hange to the design of the plant and the way
College, Thames Valley Campus,574The proposed changes to Technical New London Turnpike, Norwich,%utdan Rs1 Speufication 3.1.2.3 and 3 5.3 allow for the Connecticut 06360.
The chanes proposed to Tec huical isolation of an inoperable IIPSI pump by the Attornerfor licensee: Gerald Garfield.Speufications 31.13.3121.31.23.35.3. key lock closing of a valve at the dischar8" Esquire, day, flerry & Iloward, City411.3,4.12 3. 4 5 3 2 and 4 9 81 have been of the llPSI pump and the safety tagging in Place. Hartford. Connecticut 06103-eptimired to tame into account shutdown risk the c losed position. This isolation is required
3499'C Project Director: John F. Stolz.t m erns Lower shutdown coohng How rates so that a L10P condition does not o< cur.NR,re allowed to minimize the potential of a This method of isolation is required so that
le of shutdow n coohng due to vorteung a LTOP condition does not occur. This Pennsylvania Power and Lightdur ng lu'S mid-loop operanon methad of isolation is acceptable and will not Company, Doclet Nos. 50-387 and 50-
The asadabihty of mPction sources in the create a new or different kmd of auident368 Sus 9uehanna Steam Electricduidown modes how been optunized while since it is not possible to madvertently open chon, Unifs 1 and ?. Luzerne County.stJi meetmg the iold ourpressuruanon this sahe A debberate action is required by
r wurrnents the operator, with the concurrent e of the Pennsylvam,a'Io address shatdow n roi issues, the shift supervisor, to obtain the key and open Date of amendment request: April 5.' ed to sm are an umperable llPSI pump the vah e. j9gt
h.n been rnadtfiej Preuously, d aconnectmg 3. Insolve a sy;nibcant reduc tion in a Description of amendment request;the motor < :reuit breaker from its etn :rical margin of safethThis amendment will delete thepower c m mt w as tha only at c eptable lhe proposed ( hanges will not have an
memod of isolatmg tha pump Additional adverse irnpat t on the protection boundanes. frequency requirements for a number ofmethods of nolaum; the pump haw been With reprd to the GL 9H6 modificanons, audits listed under Technicaladded w ch the key lu kmg of a dist harge there is no degradation m the operahihty and Specification (TS) 6.5.2.8 for each unitwh e dowr.stre.un of the llPSI pump and the surveillante requirements for the PORVs and The proposed change also includestac g the vse Th< se a tions fmm the bh>ck valves and the LTOP systerns There removing the audit requirements for thec onu : room will aNw the q, rator the will be no c hange in actual practic e for. or Emergency Plan and the Security Planaby to qua kly recore w ater f'ow and resu!nna petfonminc e of, these sptems All from the TS and relocating theseredu e the risk assoua ed w ch having other chaves are proposed mainh to clanfy requirements to each of the respectivemopmed ott of sen u e w hue shuthwn each requirement 1-or Modes 1,2. and 3.
"Inadwrt. at attuanon n prevented by safetv-related overpressure protec' ion is .
reqwnna the operotar to obtain the key to prosided by the pressunter code safety rehef Basis forpmposed no sigmfr. antop. n thn dm hm uhe fn r i the Catt s ahes Ther. fore, there w dl be no adierse hazards consideration determination-
:p.m er The op-nma of t!ns s N w auld, impast on the manen of s.dets as de hned m As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a). thes
qu the a;tmas < 1 tuo the bees ui an3 tei hnaal spd iht ano , licensee has provided its analysis of theta i* ,
ie s' .J' m;' :m < p r.m r, and Althogh any t v.o t harrg in ups are issue of no significant hazards,
< onsuleration, whh h is presented NRC Project Director: Charles L guidan, e wt forth in Gen-no trtter 9t -o9W""The off con < ludrs that the benefit to
below: M dler.ufriv of rednt ing the f equency of testing
i The. prop %1 de not mvoh" d Phshulelphm Flet fric Cornpanr, Ib Aer durow power opranons innte than offwtsmnif;t aint int reawi in thei prol;atuli:y or Nos. 50-352 and 50- 63. Lunm n A iW r4 to safety from n lasing tua ui es 01.m .a a ident preuously Gerremtmg Station, l'mts 1 and 2. sun.. diam e requin'raent to t.wt the F P.h
2ntgonen' Lounty, Pennsytrunm dming power operation?T he propowd Tn hnnat Specifh ,inon b"" e the M WAs am not au ident
< Langes to delete preambed audit Dut,' of amendment recluest: Man.h initiators, and the design and fanttion of thefrequent ses and remove the Emrrgent y 1%n
y' 6c7jPtion of amendment reque3t: equhnuent wiu not be affected by thegm'
and Secunty Plan from Technkal.
pn, posed TS changes,and the rehabdity ofSriifications are administratise in nature pe propwd modification to Technical dm equipment is not e spm ted to degradeand neither directly increar e or derrease theIbhhood that an aa.ident will occur. The Spenfication (TS) Section 4 th4.3 a, durmg thtended at intal, end tMTet hn u al Specification changes w di uut would increase the surveillance interval (buges would redum the probabihty ofunpact the function or method of operation for the functional test of the Reactor unnn essary challencs to the affected umt,of plant systems, struttures, or components. Protection System (RPS). The increase we hne < ont luded that the proposed
Thus, the consequences of a malfun,c tion of would be from every six N months to c hanges do not mvuh e a sigmficant increaseequipment important to safety prevmusly each time the plant is in cold shutdown in the pro 6bihty or consequences of ane aluated in the FSAR,is not increased by the for a period of 24 hours, unh ss the test accident previously evaluated
was performed in the previous six 2. The pmposed TS chanm do not cimte"
pri t iar i t nc tpmlubihty or e onsequences of an accident months. This change is based on t h" P"55ibih'Y "I * "'* or diff"""' k md "I
"' C M*"' I'"* " "Y *" id""' P'""i""'IYpreviously es aluated guidance provided in Generic Letter 91- "8 '"*'# d -
11 This proposal does not create the 09," Modification of Surveillance The dmign and function of the RPS EPAspossibdity of a new or different kind of Interval For The Electrical Protectis o ed W 'he Pmposed TSwWnt aaccident or fmm any accident previously Assemblies In Power SuEE.,ies For The changes. The failure modes of the eiistinglemhiated Reactor Protection System. equipment wul remam unchangul. and no !
1 he ; reposed Tn hnk al Specification Bads forpmposed no significant new arrident types wiD be created The HPS'
thanges to delete prescnled audithazards consideration determmation: elettrical power monitoring channels'frequenacs and rernove the Emergency Plan
and Sec urity Plan from Technical As required by 10 CFR 50.91[a), the functional test methodoingy will not teSpnif cutmns are administrative in nature limnsee has provided its analysis of the affected by the proposed change in testand do not involve changes to the physical issue of no significant hazarda frm;uency. Therefore, the proposed TSplant or operationt The proposed changes do consideration, which is presented changes do not create the possibility of a newnot affect systems. structures, or mmpone nts below: or different kind of saident from any(%Cs) or the operation of these SSCs; and
. . m ident previously evaluated.therefore do not create the possibihty of a L The proposed Tm.hnical Specificatmn 3 The proposed TS changes do not invuh e
! anges do not involve a sigmficant in renseh, g gg, p g7new or dyfferent kind of accident.
!!I This change does not involve a in the probabi,lity or consequences of an of the RPS elatncalaognificant reduction in a margin of safety. anident previously evaluated. tuer m nit ring relays surveillance test
T he proposed Technical S wification The Reactor Protection Systern equiprnent history mmhs we have concluded that theF
< hanges to delete presenbed audit subkt to the proposed Tm.hniad whabahty of the equipment is not capet ted jfrequencies and remove the Emergency Plan Specifications c hanges are not accident degrade during the proposed extends) tmt ;tand Security Plan imm Technical imtiators.Spacifications do not involve any reductions The Elet trical Protective Assemblic, interul. In addition, the benefit to safety by
m the margin of safety. The proposed (EPAs) specified by these proposed change, reducing the inquen<.y of testing dunng
(hanges will enable more etfective resource are not requirmi to actuate in order to Power operation and the attendant pomb:e
utdization through perforn ance based mitigate an orddent. The functional test challenges to safety systems more than off',ers
v heduhng of audits in the effected areas. methodology of the RP4 electrical power any nsk to safety from relaung the
Uur.g performance indicators and other rnonitoring channels will not be ef fected by surveillanc e requirements to test the EP As
measurn of program effediveness. potential the proposed change in test frequency. The Anng wuer operation. Therefore. theproblems can be more readily identifwd and design and fimction of the EPAs will not be pn r ,ed TS changes do not involve oaucht n sources can be opphed to these areas ahered and will perform as originally %nificant redmimn in a margin of safety i
1tu enhance performance. The proposed designed.pMormance based audit process wiH A review of the RPS electrical power The NRC staff has revitwed themamtam or enhante the margm of safety in momtoring relays surveillance test history licenseis analysis and, based on thisthe areas audited. results was performed and supports tha review, it appears that the three
The NRC staff has reviewed the pmpmed 1S c hanges to extend the testmg standards of to CFR 50 42(c) areI"'""" ' M "" M '"" d l ^"' * '"' $ natisfied. Therefore, the NRC staffYlicensWs analysis and, based on this
review, it appears that the thne ca$r" [ proposes to determine that the* '' ""l e hi t i amemhnent request invohes nostandards of to CFR 50 92(c) ar" TS hmits. There were identified defk iencies
utisfied Therefore, the NRC staff in four f4)of the fiftvene tests performed. s gnificant hazardwonsideration
proposes to determine that the howner, these four'deficientles d;d not local Public Document Roomamendment request involves no affect the operabihty of the RPS EPAs llwd location: Pottstown Pubhc Library, $n0signifiennt havirds consideration. on mi historical survedlance test results. liigh Mrr-et, Pottstown, Pennsylvhnia
luol Public Document Room we have concluded that the rehabdity of the
location Osterhout Pree 1.ibrary, "luienwnt is not expe ved to degrade during-
Reference Department,71 South th' P"'Po$"d '' tended int int + rval. A ttornev for heen <,er: LW. Durham,I" '""".e. the pnqW mdund tnting R bguire. Sr V P. and GeneralFrankhn Street, Wilkes llarre,
r"U inanH m asa n e pr" u Gunsel, Philadelphia ElectricPennsylvania 18701. "i m"nt Compann 2m Meet Street," U "* n' 8" u n"i"n PA ttornev for liren<,em pv Silberg PhinMphia, Pennalvania 1T 01" "" "'Eviutre, Shaw. Pittman. Potts and' ' woukt cause an nvand inadvertret trip ofTrowhndre 2300 N Street NW.. it RPS whn h w.xdd unpos.. une. < wrv NIN;15orrt Arn for Charles I.,W nhmgton, DC 20n37 < haihmen on the dra ved umt at pow cr 'Ibe M dler
-_-- = _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ -
. _ . . . _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __
Federal Register / Vol. 59. No.100 / Wednesday, May 25. 1994 / Notices 2 m t"1.-
l'/nladelphia Elertne Corrpmv. Ib iet mnt e the deoy heat lo id from the Shoreham The renwrenm of a Ims of fur! pio!L CO NZ lirnenc A Genemtrnq fuel inventory b e. 5t,0 fuel assembhesl is < ochrs as descrdied in Sectinn ') 13 6 of thestormn. I'mt 7, Montminea (Nunf t une ant me eu tual heat load to the l' nit im i FSAH will not be increawd 1he event
I,vnw y h an nt' 1 Si P w di t e eqanalcat to that p newed described in thn tTSAR assumes that the
+# i .w h osw mhims daared f:w . odm" m the fuel fmm Imst refuebec ,siDore of app /a otion for utneminmnt i L 16 t and 2 whn h is less than the i.cghg.ble, due to the long deray time todme
M.w tn19 n ' :na c ur& nth spe< ified im! the TS U e , e, the maior c ontr butor to thyroid douDesenptmn of amendinent rnjoe_st- 2040 fuel armnbhest Jnr e the iodine in the fuel fiorn past
'I he imendruent wouhl tvvise Unit 1 RHa anng sn (61 of the cetmg l'mt / ref aelmgs is negligible, due to the long, do - .
Te< hnical Specifications. Swtion 5 u 9ent fuel swee m ks to the Urut J KP wW tane, inacasing the spmt fuel storap. be iondarted m auordemce web PILO t apar ity wdl not increase the dose due to the
.. Capacity,.. to perrnit an intrrim g .s W- y loads Program which was releaw of iodine in the SIT water resultingint.rease in the spent fuel storag" M Ho d in order to implem-nt the from boiling und therefore, the consequem . 4i apat ity in the Unit 1 Spent Fuel l'aul gem e delmeated m hommu. am not im reased.(blT) frorn 2040 fuel assemblies to 2500 "Comrol of Heavy kiads at Nuclur Pow er 1:n reasmg the storage capac ity in the Urntfuel assetnhbt% Plantt 'sm h that the hkehhood of a h%vy 1 SF P. on an interian bath, will not int rease
lhi. sis for proposetl no sign 1pt ant load drnp is preclu: led. The Umt 2 spent f ael the probabil.ty of a malfunction of the storedhamn/s consirleration determination: storge riu ks are identical to thme already in spent fuel sira e the existing thermal-As required by 10 Cl3 50.41(a), the uw in the thiit 1 SFP. Prm edu es will be in hydrauhr enalysis confirms that suff;cient
w!mg (apah hty eulsts to accommodate thela enser has p'rovided its analysis of the pl m to ensun that the Una 2 spent fuel i
storege racks are situated in the Unit 1 SFP corne of 2W fuel assembhes m the Unit 1issue of tm signifirant hazzirds, to msure lensurel proper neutron poison 5FP. As for fuel criticality, the ensting
i onsideration, whkh is p:esenh"! J pnt with the existmg Unit I r.ds. The a udvsis also c onfirms that the stored fuelMow eusting spent faal storage rat ks are designed awembbes will remam suhcritical under
t 1 ha proposed heinic al Spec ific.ations for rar Lto rar k ' - during design baus normal and abnormal conditnins.!l'S1( ham does not mvolve a ugmfiunt events without u of erurtural integnty increas:ug the storage capacity in the t'n.tareaw m the probabdity or (aimwnt es The rac ks are als "ted to withstand the 1 sit will not increaw the probabdity of a
of an a adent pmiously evaluatwi. impact from a dropp fuel assembly without malfunt tion of the SFP structure or 5FPf ra reesmg the spent fuel storaco caps ity the lms of struc tural integrity or be damaged imer The costing strutturnl anahsis
m the Umt 1 Spent Fuel Pool thf PI fmm m a way that t.ould adversely alte(t the < o:dirms that the SFP strur_ture has adequatem40 fuel assembhes to 2Ms0 fuel assembbes i rit a ahty anak sis. In reasing the spent fuel ewgm to pre ent overstressing and meetsdoes not increase the probabd:ty of smray impa iry to ac i ommodate the storage the r ude requirements. Int reasing the stora yos c arrem e of an att ident bin: e all foii e12W spent f ael aes+-mbhes will net afMt < apa ity in the t' nit 1 SFP will not im svawh.mdhrg adivities wiu be performed uma tb spent fuel storaar rat ks sinm the rac ks the probabihty of a malfunction of the speutupprmed pn= edures and c.ompaidde are sper ifk aHy degned to safely sto-e spent fuel storam rads dunng design basis eventsrympment, the pmbabihty of a fuel handhr a bl hmed on the custmg sessrmcistrutturaln < ah at < < c urrmg n um hm d 'Il ,s pmposed TS i hany will not pnwnt nua h us.
ha m q the spent fuel sturge i qm ay th- abihty r,f the IMr. system frnm In< reosmg the on site spent fuel storageS i bt 1 SIT to 2500 fuel assembhrs w di performiry its design fun < tion to aderpiately < opm i?v wi:1 not inucase the prohobihty of
6 mwe stonrg 1940 spent fuel anernhhes o.ol the SI-P. The FPCC system will r ontinue a rna!!a a tion of the FPCC system. The FIEha tuam ronnneurs) that ha ce hern to fetion normi!v and be rapable of wsmm wd1 ror.tinue to function as des ymwt
" d,si hcg-d hom le .S. Umts 1 and 2. and Sf,0 ruamtamir g the SFP temperature at nr below The probabihty of a malfunction of fuelW i sposurv f ael assemhhes shipped to LGS 140 'F The tw lup < onlmg and makeap bandhng equipment wdi not be in< twedh. ei the Shoreham Nur irar Power Statmn 'vstems fi e . Fesideal Heat Removal (PHR). sa e int reasme the storace upmty in the1! e do a bmt lomi assot 6ated w ah the Enerenr y herv n Water fESW). and Iint 1 $1 P. as proposed. does not aths t fuel. i me ShurchTm fuel insensory is Residua' Heat Removal Serdre Water Lmd h ng equipment.o a il u ', smce it eqaas to less !% 3 P (FilRSW) system *) wdl mntinua to fun tion ha rmsmg the spent fuel storage t ap w aty
' - h, at bud gener/ed from onc ill a-. designrd to pros ide an alf-rnate soon e of dm s not inc rease the consequent es oi a sp. t'
re .mtly dm t ed fm!: pnuer f-l kn J5 < oohrf and mM eup wnter to ensore St P f el assembh fadure since the fadure of wnI beret >re. the : < mal det av hv f oad to the ml na is mamtained.The RHR ws'em is (1) assembly wdl not result m addaioa dI mt i SFP wel be evivalent to that w hu h dl(apNe of maintaining the SFP spent fuel assembly fauttri s.n eneraw.i from storirm the 1m spent fuel empemture less than 149 'E as descrdied in Inc n ang the spent fuel storam i wai i stw . othes deu h. reed frorn ILN l'm:s 1 and IRS l'pdated Fmal Safety Analysis Report w dl not nu n-ase the c onsequem es of sp ,.t
(I'l'S AR) Increa=ir.g the = pent fuel storne f ai i stotNe r.n L fadure since dar. eustmf;hu rem rt the = pent Let smrr, e t gaarv ( apari'v in the Umt 1 SFP wdi not increase r e is have been desMr.ediquahfied to laut
l'n.t 1 Si ? to at mee .d* t he .aorn,r th ' r.habd:ty of a loss of fael pool coHing the < onsequenc es of a fadure. A in.Lue ( I, or"
oo ! .Ian : b, v.. as prop. wd in ihn ; c!cnt or a6 erselv affet t the Erfurl } icor d.mme to ow (1) sto ap rad, will not r mdt'i
, (l e hwest. is i.oundra by tu 5.r danin wo m m taLm or d,n ge to another stowe r u ke
ai . p t ; rV, rI. ' s t t ir rt; 6'[ l he < E'enwq mnf es Of ;l IS el E j i .t!!!n", IMrTeiW:ng the q'ent Idel SinTW7e rapM l'V~* t ra >,
.i1 . ! e i r T The i u c. g i ,s it; i nt < s de"Mied in thr LGS I TS AR arr w di rot im reaw the conwquenm of de,
i, .L "t: :p.~f: et'rs! n >t im reced sinc a the ne r of feal fa . i i fuel handhng equipment sim e th5 : stord m a SI P is rmt an p p t to no :m i w fed nu:nber of fuel rods
'i: o . . . . , s
L 4. dra n.e u.irne a ' n .: sp.atfori d utud corahrmns of the amdert u.,ed I i a f ict hundhng espapme nt'r
3 As do ma.R m ! e - i1tJ eu d i lbe ebat en :.ars the f. ' o re s evalue d in the U.',i <
tI, h ,. d ( Jag : ( .; p e ppm of 3 aper.t foal as<emb!y and the 1!S\Ra,
,J'..;;. i 11 2 ''l+' . ! an!= a sen'Nv m'n the n a to < ore ! bre' > . . the pro nsed T5 than?+ A',
: p . p. c ; e *tMr,ovt ; , tuch ng opentmne A drop ! m?t of i in mite an m< rease in the prob.d4" -.8. ,
%is e..,h.n g utI4.'id N w U ' s for the spent f ael w-en.Nv and 4 7 f+t .cymm es nf an an ident presim ain
, i . .I L : k t er rr > c t .t i' % | nrm la memH y are aw&l s a bwed$
<> d m ' u d' pn dur e the lane t number ci f, h ! . Ihepmpo e d 1 S t hance d.xs n t i n n' . . .
u , . r. A <s : i J f .. ! ! . k Sir r c 15e mounum posub' p d.ty of a rmw or ddlerent 6.nd at.T: eiu i!< Jtiic . I t. ' ' 3 he! menNv ran he drep; rii .e i &nt f:om .u.5 e t ant pres toi.s!,. .
i ;p ;o,J' 4 i 6 +s - m e u ned r f. et. t h Wl'+q i i
6 e i .!. s j ee le t [pl < ti Of,e i . ,I! .8 ', <t-}^,.|||-. 'il;; ,\ ( ! ! <' I r s o. !
tI;- e . + .' 6 :m n e ed te. 'i! G C''iElPtop motent' ' mi <
tw I assembhes wdl not i reate the posubbrv withdrawn operable control rod from 1 The proposed changes do not insolve aof an ac cident of a different type f he Unit every 24 hours to within 24 hours when significant reduction in a margin of safety1 SFP has been anah zed for i rini,dtty operating above the rod svorth tm acu the proposed changes do not affet t.d tu ts. struc tural ef fec ts. rdActal et to ts. miniser b per vtpoint if there the mannn in whu h the faddy is olvndedut thermal-hydrauhr etM ts I b m' """ hpiai ne mmpan nt m nwm sp< r.t fuel storage capaoh w dl !< are three or more inoIierable control the operatmnal charaderistics of the fat ihtya laewd by rehx ating sa N teng spent rods or if there is one fullv or parti.dly Prmned changes 1 and 2 are admmistrative
.
foci storage rad s from the l' nit 2 SFP to the withdrawn rod which cannot be mosed m nature Proposed change 3 maintams thet'mt 1 SFP. The spent fuel store raks are and for which control rod drne assuram e that w hen a scram is required thsof identic al design and are pmne mec hanism damage has not been ruled at a rmnmuun, the assumptions used in themmponents, therefure. the pmbihty of out,(4) revise TS 4 4.A.2 to allow for the at udent analysis will be met Addinonally. <
a reatmg a new accident does not cust replacement charge on the exphisive if the imtial chec k of control rod insertion isNo new operatmg sc hemes or ai tue al e for the standby liquid c ontrol satisfactory, the subsequent c hecks are not
equqment types w di be requin.d to store system to be from either the same hkly to identify simuar pr blems because (.additional fuel bundles in the N PThe refore the possibihty of a chtferent type nianufactured batch as the one f. ired or operating expenence shows that a {stuckl rod
is rare. Once it has been determined that theof malfunction o< curnng is not c reated. another batch which has bacn certified same problem is not occurring in other
T herefore, the proposed 1s t hange does by having one of the batches wntrol rods the normal survedlanceeot create the possibday of a new or ditrerent successfuHy fired,(5) revise the frequent y is sufficient to verify that uramkmd of auident fmm auy pres;oud frequency in TS 4.4 H 3 to functionally < apabihty is maintained. pro}x> sed t hange 4M u n d. test each standby liquid control system prosides added flexibility for proud:ng
L The proposed TS change does notunohe a sigmfacant redut hon m a margm of- pump loop from inonthly to at least replacement Icharges) from any batch that
r 92 dm has had a charge successfully fired. Proposedea!ct y. c hange 4 adds flexibility while maintainingNm e the eustirg TS lumts for fuel Basis for proposed no signifscant the firing reliabibty in excess of 99 99% for
handhng interlocks, heavy loaJ . restrictions. hazards consideration determination. the explosive valves on the standby liquidu ater r m erage our irradiated f uel. m. core As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the wntrol system. Proposed change 5 does notdway tmm. and fuel sub-cntit ahty w di be licensee has provided its analyGs of the impact any safety analysis assumptionsrdntamed, the margin of ufety will not b" issue of no significant hazards because the frequency of testing is not"
Therefore. the proposed TS t hange does. consideration, which is presented assumed in any safety analysis and standb>
not invoke a reduction in a margm of safety. g}UW' hquid control system operabihty ismamtained. In addition, the test frequency
The NRC staff has reviewed the t The pmpmed changes do not insohe a reduction provides reduced wear and tear'onheensee's analysis and, based on this signa ara incwase in the probabihty or the system and increased system reliabihty.review, it appears that the tbree ""'"4"""' * 5 "I * " *" 'd""' P'"v i u s l y Therefoie, the proposed changes do not
evaluated because the proposed changes do involve a significant reduction m a margin ofstandards of 10 CFR SO 92(c) are not alter tW operation of equipment assumed sa fet y^satisfied. Therefore. the NRC staff to be an imtiator of any analvred event or '
proposes to determine that the assumed to be availabie for the mitigation of The NRC staff has reviewed theamendment request invoh es no auidents or transients. Proposed changes 1 licensee's analysis and, based on thiss:gnificant hazards consideration and 2 are administratise m nature. Propowd revim,it appears that the diree
loc al Public Document Room c hange 3 to reduce the requirement to verify standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) arelocation: Pottstown Public Library,500 insertion capabdity from every 24 hours to a satisfied. Therefore, the NRC stafft hgh Street, Pottstown. Pennsylvania single senfication when one or more mntrol proposes to determme that the
nuls are stuc k is sufficient to senfy that the amendment request involves noggA ttorneyfor hcensee: J. W. Durham, pmMem is n t gennic while providing the significant hazards consideration
h"""I" I"* ""A*'"Y"' """I"'"" "sr .1:v1nire Sr. V P and General Local Public Document Room
. requirernent and pennits hcensed operators localmn:C ve ent PuWeationsCounsel, Philadelphia Liectric to focus on other. rnore safety sigmfic antCompany,2301 Market Street, anions Proposed change 4 wdi continue to Section, State Library of Pennsylvania.Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 provi# the nn essary assurance that (REGIONAL DEPOSITORY) Education
NHC 1 roject Director Charles L replacement c harges on the explosise vah e Building, Walnut Street andM dler. of the standby hquid control system will be (:ommonwealth Avenue, Box 1601,
,
imm a batch fmm which a sample charge hai llarrisburg,. Pennsylvania 17105 (Ph,ladelph. Electric Company, I,uh!,c Wn tested satisfactorily. Proposed change 5 Attornev fer Licensee: 1. W. Durham.a
Service Electric and Gas Company, modifws the aHowable mierval between Sr., Esquini. Sr. V P. and Genertd /Delmarco Power and Light Company, suneillante tests for the standby hqmd Counsel Philadelphia flertricned Atlantic CJty Electric Company, umtrol system without redacing the Company,2301 Market Street,Dockets Nos. 5&277 and 50-N8, Pem h rehahhty of the system w hile prundin,; the g pDottom Atomic Power Station, Umts benefit of redu ed wear and tear on the ggg p g g, gNos. 2 and 3, York County. n sten unekm. thew pmposed de
,9 ,
l' nnsylvania 0"""'***"*Y?* "romequem es of an ao ident pra muA Power Authonty of the State of NeuIMtv of applicatwn for mwne.nents evaluated York. Docket No. 50-333, James AA nrd 15,1994. . The propmed t hanges do not c reate the 3
' Description of amendment rmuest possibihty of a r.ew or ddferent kind of h. t!!,u tnck h,uclect Po s er I,lant.
The proposed amendment would: (1J m udent fmm any a< tident previously ' h " C80 b dNIV. N N I ofErm iw Unit 3 Technical Specification evaluated bm ause imp;ementation of th" Date of amendment request:!I N 11 A2 f to correct a typographical P P"wd c hanys do not mtolve any Dnember 20,1989, as supplemented
#
rrror. (2) revise the hcense and TM to QQ- ["[[, "[,]j[]]',[ lanuary 16,1930. I,muary 3,1992,i sm the licensee s name from m, p;,, open,,mn ,n any moa,1 sat is not unuary 30, tw2. May m 19n May 24l'hdadelphia Electric Company to PECO dmr.m eWua ed T herefore, the po41.tv 1 m end m nh2.I m
Dewnption # nmendinent rc<piestI amn Gmnpany,(3) revise the d a new or ihkett kmd of a c ident : u ,
Tb application for an amendnu nt toinwng hsted m TS 4 3 A 2 a for m a< < ide +p3 a , , : ara m ,
in +d Y Wn A Lit 7Patru Tm hmulog each putmHy < r fMho
Sperifications proposes new Safety / Sm iety of Mn hamcal Ergmeers (ASMEl - />ower Authority of The State of NewRrhef Valve {SRV) performance limits to Gde upt reat tnr vessel pressure hm:t of Tota, lAK Act No. 50-286, Indian Pomt
C 05* I he d"A Cronstrate e"lV"5 'I NLDC-3 3 WPW /cs Generating Unit No. 3,take credit for the currentiv installeJ
at the new SRVSRV raIiacitv. S w.ificalli, throe WMnter County, New York1 pu:onnana lan.t s have no ,ignau amI ham es to the existing SRV mrt on 'hermal hmits. LCLS/IEA 1) ate of amendment mjuest: Apol mpmformant e hmits are proposed Ar e e, IIpCl*CM operabiht v.199)biphon of amendenent Duest-. The first permits continued plant mnmnment n.spon<caontairunent mteenty, D- 'operation with two SR\ s out+fscruce. or 10 CFR ipartJ So Appendn R alternate
Sint e 7 of the 11 SRVs at FitzPatrick are shutdown mpabahty. The analvses also 1.he proposed amendment would
also automatic depressuritation system tonsidered simmer snarma and dow pard relocate the fire protection requirements(ADS) valves, this reduces the number aerpoint drift of Techmail S;3ecifications (TSs) 3.14of ADS valves required to be operable to The fne minHamus c hanf;es danfy angl 4.12, and fire brigade staffing and5. Current specifications permit only tennino% mnect typocaphkal unn nainmg gummmts of TSs 6.2.2(f) and
nme a su ne mqunemm whah 6A2 from the TSs to admimstratively-,
one SRV out.cf. service for 30 days. shou'd base been deleted as part of controlled operational specifications. Secondly, the setpoints for all 11 AmeMment 130, clanfy when SRV manual Specifically, the proposed changesSR\,s are changed to a single nominal actuohon is performed, und delete would add the NRC standard firesetpoint. Current specifications stagger duph< ate sprofiution. Thew changes are,
t he setpoints from 1090 to 1140 psig. purely adminiscative in nature end. as such, pmtedton he codon to the.
. The third change incmases the do not impact previously evaluuted accident, Operating License, update the Final,
maximum permissible setpoint or equipment malfuochons. Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) to
tolerance from one to three pen ent. 2. Ccreate the possibihty of a new or include the Fire Protection Program bydaaent u d f accident fmm those reference aid telocate the fireThe new Limiting Safety System
Settiny f LSSS) for reactor coolant prm usly evaluated. The new SRV protection :equirements from the TSs iop ormacce hmits are primamy the Indian Pomt 3 Operationalsystem overpressurization protection administruuve changes. The only physical Spec ifications Mannah The proposed( TS ,. ,1.H), as a result of these changes. changes invohe rocahbration of SRV..
danga han Ian dmIoped innow requims that 9 of 11 SRVs !w setpomts and operation with 2 SRVs/ ADS ,
operable at a common setpoint of 1110 vahes out-ofervice. The operation and acc rdance with the guidance conttunedpsig plus or minus 3 percent. function of the pressure rehef system and in NRC Generic letter (GL) 410.
Safety analyses were perfornied, using larel unaffisted No new faihtre modes are " Implementation of Fire Protection I
' Mmd m ed. Requirements," and GL 88-12, {a conservative SRV setpoint of 1195pig, which demonstrate that these The pmrmd miscelf aneous changas are " Removal of Fire Protection
purely administrative in natum and, as such, Requirements from the Technica7,
propowl changes are acceptabin. du n u "Other changes, not associated with Specifications." j, n n' 8055 for Proposed no significant jSRV perfonnance,darify selected 3. Involve a signifkant reductmn in the hazards consideration determination |portions of the Technical Specifications mar $n of safety. The new SRV performance
and conect minor typographical and linuts shghtly reduce the custmg margin to As required by to CFR 50.91(a), theeditorial errors. vowl overpressure and the margin to the bcensee has provided its analysis of the
This " Notice of Consideration of 125% mechanical overspeed trip for the issue of no significant hazardslouance of Amendment to facility HPCI and RCIC turbines. Ilowever, the consideration, which is presented
D udma in the upmssure mar @ is bejowO[H' rating License and Opportunit"y forilearingiNotice) supersedes the related iuskru andappmunately 25 tad and the Consistent with the criteria of 10 (TRNotic e which was published in the h,'j,'3"M$"[@,"",d *$ "d 50.92, the enclosed application isgbFederal Repster on May 15,1990155 General Design Criteria (GDC) 15. Standard luds d to mvolve no significant ha2an!>e
I'R 20226 Rmiew plan Swtion 5 2 2, and TSAR Section based on the Iollowing information:Basis for proposed no sipuficant 4 4 The redumon in turb ne avrspeed O) Does the proposal license arnendment
hazards consideration deternunction: margin is neghgible iless than 1%), because involu a sign.fiant increase in meAs requited by 10 CFR 50 91(a). the it is witlun the at:owable tolerant e of the trip pr. bability or cont,rquem es of any an Mrathcensee has pmvided its analysis of the *H NS- prm ioWy evaluated?issue of no significant hazards The pnywd nuswHaneous chanm are g ,I " d * i" iS'''' i"" i" "''"" *"d dt onsideration. which is Iiresented P"'"ito a redut tion in safety margm, " ^"' 1 his thange does not involve a sigmfn ar.t
V
nacI"EW: 'ncrease in the probability or annsequem esOperation of the James A. Fit 2Patriti The NRC staff has reviewed the of an at cident previously evaluated
Nuc. lear Power Plant in accordance with liensee's analysis and, Fased on this This proposed amendment merelythe proposed amendment would not review, it appears that the threo reine ars the fire protection prog aminvolve a significant bazards stand 1rds of 50 92(c) are satisfied. el ,nc nts imm the Te< hnical Specifa atumi onsideration as defmed in to CFR Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to to the Operation =d Specifications and tLe30.92, since it would not: determine that the amendment request FSAR IFinal Safety Analysis Reportl No
t involve a sWaficant ita rease in theinvolves no significant ha7ards r* un in t Pnt b Wa rnae to h
. Technical Spn afication requiremenM tha' mmboLility or c onsequences of an auident f "Ud."rahon. being relocated. Operating limitations w ill
prevreusly evaluated. A boand.r g analyus la of Public fA mtnent Room i onhnur. to br im posed, and niquiredIN! DCmWp. " Updated SRV performam e location; Refaence and Documents survedtam es wdic ontinue to be performedPequirernents for the lames A. Fat #atik k Dep utment, Penfield labrary, $tato m wordarne with wnnen proi edares edNuclear power pLmt") of the inised $?.V Univenity of New York Oswmo. New iratructions eudit A!c by tb- NRC.performarne requirernents wraidered pht Yok 13126. Aehoop futm proposed t hangn to etwweranun with 9 of 11 W spen 1!e nd fire protertmn pmgram elements pres mumg gu ab a wrr. mon v he utuaLun prnsum of
. Im ad m the Technical Spei sficaSons n !!' m pq The andysis demoaStrates that a I[f d'), I bH iirmd 4 av. New 't or k. New w her b weoNd by 10 CFR 50 %a p , margm cum between the maumum M lWM mm -d < hws to the i re pn.t.x tmnJ .poted pressure and the Amenian Nht ' Tmgv t im . tr Robert A Fapra nw i e nts ceh ated to the Op. ra%a .1
-
1
2706G Federal Register / Vol. 59. No.100 / Wednesday. May 25. 1994 / Notices
s m tf a ations will be evaluated by plant Descnption of amendment request: Local Public Document floom |eahurmtrative procedures. This amendment request would revise location Salern Free Public librarv. I t2 '
Th". Programmanc mntrols will r ontinu" the Emergency Diesel Generator hot West Broadway. Salem. New Jersevto are that future proposed fire protet tion dW hR h h 6 R m "' 9pmgrenn changes will not create an h ur endurance run and from the los Attorneyfor hcensee: Mark J.nnreuewed safety questmn
M Ihs the proposed lit ense amendment wquence testing. Wetterhahn. I: squire. Winston andStrawn.1400 L Street, NW.,i nur the possibihty of a new or dift'erent f; asis for proposed no symficant
Lind of actident from any prevmus!v hazards consideration determination Washington. DC 20005-3502.miuated7 E Pm/ect Direct r:Chanes L.As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the M* 'Response licensee has provided its analysis of the
T he possibihty of an auident v issue of no significant hazards Southern California Edison Company, etrnalfunctwn of a different type than consideration, which is presented al.. Doc Aet No. 50-206, San Onofrees aluated previously in the safety analpis klow: Nuclear Generating Station, Unit No. Lreport is not created.
This proposed amendment merely (1) Do not intoh e a signinc ant int rease in S.an Diego County, Caliform.a
reloc ates the fire protection Technic al the probability or ( onsequences of an Date of amendment request: April 18.Spei ificanon requirements from the an ident previously analyzed. 399tlec hnical Specifications to the Operational The proposed changes would revise the Description of amendment request:Specif wations. No reduction to the fire Salem Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) The poposed amendment will reviseprotec tion Technical Speafication suneillance criteria to allow the hot restart ' Sections 2*C and 2.D of the San Onofre'requirements is being made and thus the test to be performed independent of the .
change does not create the possibihty of a Engineered Safety Features (ESF) load NuclearGenerating Station Unit Inew or different acciden* from those sequenung test and the 24. hour endurance (SONGS 1) Operating License. Sectionprn iously evaluated. run. The proposed surveillance requirements 2.C will be revised to modify or delete
As noted above. future changes to the would continue to demonstrate that the several licensing conditions whichrequirements in the Operational objectives of each of these tests are met- either no longer apply or requireSpecific ations will be evaluated by plant Spec ifically the EDG*s are shown to be revision to apply to SONGS 1 in itsadmin stratwe procedures.
,
capable of startmg the ESF loads in the Eermanently sh.utdown and defueled(H Does the proposed amendment invohe required sequent e. operating at full load for c ndition. Section 2.D will be revised to. .
a signincant reduction in a margin of safetv? an extended period of time.and restartingHrsponse; from a full load temperature condition. mmpt Fire Protection reporting from
The margin of safety as defir1ed in the Therefore, the proposed changes would not the reporting requirements of Section
bases Q any technical specification is not adversely affect the EDG's ability to support 2.D
7eg uoq mitigation of the consequences of any Basis for proposed no sigmficant. , ,
T his proposed amendment does not previously evaluated accident. The proposed hazards consideration determination-mvolve a reduction to the approved fire changes to the surveillance requirements do As required by 10 CFR 50 91(a), theprotection program or Fire Protection n t affect the initiation or progression of any licensee has provided its analysis of theTechnical Specification requirements. The accident sequenc e- issue of no significant hazardsTechnical Specification fire protettion (2) Do not create the possibility of a new consideration, which is presentedrequirements are being relocated. with no or different kind of accident from any g,g;g,;reduc tion in content, to the Operational a< cident previously evaluatedSpeafications Since there is no reduction in The proposed change affects surveillance 1 Will operahon of the facihty m cordmgthe requirements, there is no reduction in the test criteria such that increased scheduling to this proposed chang. involve a sigmficant
margin of safety. flexibility is allowed while the test objectises increase in the probabdily or consequencesAs noted above, proposed (hanges to the associated with demonstrating EDG of an accident previously evaluated?
Fire Protection Technical SpeciGcation operability continue to be met. The proposed No. SONGS 1 has been permanently shui
requirements relocated to the Operational Changrs do not allow any plant down and all fuel has been taken out of the
Sprofications will be evaluated by plant configurations that are presently prohib.ted reactor and stored in the SONGS 1 spent fuel
administratne procedures. by the Salem Technical Specifications. pool The proposed change will not modify(H Do not involve a signif; cant reduction any of the existing plant configurations.
'I.he NRC staff has reviewed the in a margin of safety. controls, procedures. or technic allicensee's analysis and, based on this survedlance resting per the proposed specification reprements necessary toreview, it appears that the three khnical Speciik ations would continue to assure the integrity and safe operation of the
standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. demonstrate the ability of the EDG's to spent fuel pool.
Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to parform their intended function of providing The technical basis for deleting the four
determine that the amendment request electric al power to ESF systems needed to lic ense conditions. w hich relate to Integrated
consideration. with the plant safety anal) set The margin of Shield Monitoring Program. PhmtModi % ation to Eliminate S. ingle Failure
Loccl Public Document Room safen demonstrated by the plant safety. analyses is therefore not affected by the Susceptibility of \ ital Bus Automahc
locution: White i,lains Public Library. pr m d change- 1ransfer Funchon. and the NRC's
100 Martine Avenue, White Plains. New TN More. IPdlic Smim Fimm and Gu Confirmatory Order of January 2,1Wo. is thatthese hcense conditions were intended toYork 10601. Companyl PSE&C has com luded that the
Attorney for licensee: Mr. Charles M. < hanges proposed herein do not insolve a anure the continued safe operation ofPratt.10 Columbus Circle. New York, sgnificant IIarards Consideration. SONGS 1 as a power produr ing plant. With
New York 10019. the termanent shutdown of SONGS 1 andNRC Project Director Robert A. Capra The NRC staff has reviewed the the issuance of its Permanently Defueled
licensee's analysis and, based on tins Te< hnic al Specifications (PDTS) onl'ubhc Service Electric & Gas Company, rmiew, it appe'ars that the three Deuunber 2m m the plant modifiunonsDor Act Nos. 50-272 and 50-3H. Salem standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are "w"d safen pr grams ass ciated with the fourenw u>n&%ns are no longn netmaryNuclear Genetutmg Statmn. Umt Nos 1 ga,5gg;ea_ ryc7 ego 7e, ,gg ygg g,,gg T he te< hnical basis fur modifymg thec.nd 2. Salem Countn New Jersey proposes to di.termine that the b ense u ndition on fuel transshipment is
DL'e of amendment rcyarst April 12. amendment request mvolves no that this lit ense condition was intended toIW4 signific ant hads v.onsideration emure the safety of the operating plant b5
Federal Regtster / Vol. W. No. 100 / Witm u:<. WV S. 1994 Notices M09_
_ __ _. _ _ _ .-
< 7 Ca to,as on (pr e en of t* t he Uf N l' .'s 1. 2. i .d 3 Du hb Gd operate w dhin spW O d W CeptW e 4"
,
wr budd.ng gantry < ro I he Spet gir ations (Th) by providmg an w e this n c hange does not phsso+
,
are no lener n u + m m' 'su a s
dterne w pilinsy tma sc hedu!c for '""N" pbnt nppment and tha sna't e p- nwnt eutdow n of MN ! i anc e bel remans " - sama 1N .!j, a ,. g , g y ., . 7gp , ,g: 4 in h o al h m s for r-M.f, ng - ' k any r'cw or de.i H e . inent3 " " *< c ond. tun on pre a al pe i n s n u bter f.n h.re f n mv e t d, '
' N s e. nn "ssary to u pdate f the rec ommendations of NRC (>:Fnc'p .ousiv evaluat"d
Wu on unt nned .n U + , b"&T Y dd M1 h"rn:it Me on h ,'n 1 1 he proposed amemi&nt do, se
1
ReTiirements for Snubber Visual i mhe a nn:Cr ant reda tion h a r J c !T he tr< f n u al bau ; for nemptmg tr e Fce Inspu-tion Intervals and Coner tn e uf*-
Prote hon Program from tr e reporting Actmns" dated December 11,1990. GL 1 he pmp ued charp mi arporates Nreqairen s nts of Sertion 2 D is that th- "* U d " "P "' * "" " I"' "" *" ' " " lit D-m describes a TS hne items
applicable requuements are adequate!' * P' h" '"' **I * I **" E" *'s oured in 10 UR 50 72 and 50 71 as ced improvement acceptable to the NRC PTM id"d m GL 90-09 As stated in t[wm benmc triters W10 and W12 PU j j
rnar c letter. the propowd snubbs-r s n el. Mi operanon of the facihty m rordmg m}wmem is W pmde a means k iwmam interval main'ams the same
' i this proposed < hange create the posubiWy reduung rMouru hamls and < en6dente level as the emting snubb-rof a new or ditferent had of auident hom unnecessary occupational radiolog;ical vm,al inspet rion intenal This sun rdm .any an ident prev:ously evaluatedi exposure attributable to snubber rrquirement does not aber the current
40 No safety-related equipment w ul be inspections while continuing to provide 1.umtmg condaion for operation or tr eunpa. tnl by tha prnposed c hange Thus, an acceptable level of confidence in au mpanWng actions br the snubW TLethere is no t redib!e hkehhorxf that a m w or ubkr operabilitt "* * * I" * N " 'm'd.fferent kmd of acmdent from any an ident
Basis /or PtoPos'ed no 518mWant" " " ' " '"" " ""r hanged and rerw ns
pmvious1y eva1uateri wouId onur as a resu1t the basis for the estab. hed margm of safetyushazards consideration detennination:of this patymed c hange. g,id asses a 95 pen ent conndence MMm ired by 10 CFR 50.91(a) the that 90 en ent to 100 rtent of the e si Nil operanon of the fmh:3 ao ordmgiN *" F d#] #I * fth"to thn proposed change insolve a sigm6< ant V * YEO#U"$ "N * "
redachon in a margin of safety? issue of no significant hazards hmits. Th6s functional testing along w c h th.-No As explained earher, the p ant consideration, which is presented proposed visual inspecom intervals ; murs
modifh anons and safety programs assa mted below. adequate assuran(.e that the snubber pillu ch the htense conditmns tving deleted are- perform its intended function. Therem "
no lancer recessary The cafety-related 1 The propo:ed amendment does not proposed changes do not invok e amvolve a significant increase in th"probabihty or consequences of an auident sigmficant reduction in a margm of sa c.egmprent conc erns that led to restnctims
on operation of the turbine building gantry previously evaluated The NRC staff has reviewed thon u no longer cust.1he modincatmn to th"Implemennng the guidanc e speufied in G b lit enseds analysis and, based on this
hc ense condinon on physu al proter tmn wdl WN wdl not introduce any new fadure resiew, it appears that the threeordse the informanon c omamed m tras mode and wdl not alter any assumpoons standarth of to CFR Sn 02k) areh< ense c ondmoa. preuously made m et aNanng the seisfied. Therefore, the NRC staffT_he revision to Sectmn . D w dl ma, e the< onse<Iuenc es of an ac udent. The ImeIiosed
n portmg requirements regan4.mg cefic wnt ses alternate sc hedule for visual inspec tions wdl I3roI)oses to determine that thei
m the Fue Protection Program c onsistent rnaintam the same operabihty c on&d-nt e ameml ent mjuest .in&s noa ch the NRC's gerwrn gmdam e on th;s Irvel as the existing schedule. Also, the significant hazards consuleratwn.s A it survedlance requirement and schedule for Local Public Document Room
Thus oprranon of the fm day m snubber func tional testmg remams the same location: Athens Public Ubrary. 5xtha< i ordam e weh this proposed change w di pronding a e percent conGdenc e level that Street, Athens, Alabama 35611.
a symfkanuy reduie a margm of saf"tb 40 perr ent to 100 percent of the snutAmrs A ttorney for licensee: GeneralThe NRC staff has rmiewed the "P" rate wahin the speofied acceptance Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authontv.
analnis of the hcensee and, based on hmds. The proposed visual mspe< non 400 West Summit Hill Drive,I;T PH.this 'ruiew, it API > cars that the three a hedh n separate from fum nonM tesung KnowiMe, Tennessee 37902.standards of 50 92(c) are satisfied
and provides addiuonal confidence that the 'gg p q g"" # y j gginstaded snubbers will serve their designTherefore, the NRC staff proposes ta fum non and are being maintained operable. U" ""-
determine that the amendment request rte proposed changes do not affe< t brrutirg Toledo Edison Company. Centenormvoh e3 no signific ant hazards safety system settings or operatmR Service Company, and The C/crelni( onsideration pryeters, and do not mochfy or add any Electric illuminating Company, lh A etLocal Public Document Room m :aent ininatir.g events or parameters.No. 50-346. Doris-Besse Nuclear l'on "r!g atwn| Main L:brary,1]iversity of { fore th
pror s change oes not,
I ahforrua, i O Box 10 sai. Iriino -
('ahfornia 92713 t 9:ve<penc es of an acudent prn iously CIHo"3'
4 ttornov for hce'w lames A-Beule?to. Esquire, Southern Cahfon M . The pmposed nenament drms not . Date of mendment request: Mw hs
' g ".< nate the possib.hty of a new or d& rentEdnon Company, P O. Box 800, Md of an ident from any an ent ""F I * " [ "* ## ""# "W ^ 'Rosemead. Ca hfomia 917m prm o W yeva|ured .T he pmposed amendment would r, ne
YhC Pmut D:nttor Sm mom I h Impkmentmg the r s ommendonons the TS 3/4.1.1.1 (Reactivity Contralh ss. speof.ed m GL 9Ma does r.ot insch e any Systems-Boration Control Syst.n:e
;enic al aheranons to plant eq dpment Boration Control-Ehutdown Mccml,Te meme Vo!b y Author;t' . Do, ir ', Gv s to mpomts or operanna paraneters. TS 3/4.12 8 (Reactivity ContmlNm %239. W260 onel 50-JW. nor does a mvoke any potentnd a< udent Systems-Borated Water Soun ew
Fra ns Ferrv Nuclear Plant. I'm s t. J muat:ng eunt. As stated in the genent. khutdown l ' 3/41D (Rextn ''ml : . Em "stre Cm ntv. Ald ma km urf ab w'e sc hedule for suonb.d aspei nens ma:ntains the same Ntrol Ss smms-Borated Water.i.Dc!< of arm nhnent r"p" ' -
a.. , . level as tha eusting st Wdir h""""s-Operating). Bases 3/4.1 J,,
IH cmber 23. W93 IT53%)- N: ! a1 Nm tmnal test:ng of s unN s mora' ion S. stems). TS 14 31'
De(cnptmn of amen I er t m, sf se a % p , en t onhdente lewl _t (Emep% y Core Fool!r g 5) sn,
ib ', p e!an mfu 'u<' .1 r es:" l aq : "..tMW m bbe hf G 4 kire ( hob ' T cM l R i2u
t*e Wph"ns on in?" a.1 M the T,4.la f.hsnn Cornpany. Cenn rior; USECCS Subwstems). TS .t!1 S AWi.CS-Wisted Wier kram T& h IW*I ' "Y A'*" m 1L e n n ;ce Compary, nnri 1he ClevelarulHw ,3. 4 5 (IECS). and TL n 'O 4 "T"F"d ' *" d " " " '"" ' * "I Mm illumitmting Cmnpanr. IMet
[9""d" ""d ^ 7 ""W " " ' "" #"' m * m * " N " V, wa Jtt IAirirlbse Nucle orl'en ersped Test Eurptions4 hut h,wn
][$. Statmn, I'mt No 1. Otton o Countv.' "Wr- "I Tha mnerJment u ould. WIncree 3 the requirad bcrvion flowntta 3 Not i reate the pombdiec of a @ ;d I '
in the event the rapiired shutdown ad of at rider,t imm any au nh nt IMr of nrnendinent request: April 5margin is not met,(b)incrNse the prm iousiy evaiuated becau.e the ernmea Da4apphtable minimut:1 bcron t haw,n only affect ewtiny romponentt Description of amendment request;cont entration and/or vehmte y stems, and functinns and do not introduce The proposed amendment would resiserequimments. (c) revise the apphcoble any nm requirements that cannot be inct the TS 3/4.7.1.2, Auxiliary peedwaterActir ri statements and Surveillant e wsh the equing components, sycems, and System, TS 3/4J.1.7, Mot'or DrivenIkqmrements, and (d) propose several fantimns. The proposed chann do not aller
m edent u enanos I.""dwater purnp Systern, and theirmiministrative and editorial changes. i Not insob,e a enifam wdm hon m a apphcable liases. This amendment
thisis for proposed no signi6 cant margin of safety. The proposed (hanges to would: (a) Clarify the requirements forhazards considemtion detenmnation: the minirnum required tmron conmntration operation of the Auxiliary Fee twatarAs required by 10 CFR 50 91(a), the and volumes for the llAAS. HWST, and CIT System and Motor Driven feedwaterlitenwe has p'rovided its analysis of the would ensure the margin of safety for ren(tor Pump System,(b) increase the;swe of no significant hwrds subtrint ahty is maintained at all times for surveillance intervals for testing thei onsideration, which is presented antitlpmd future (ore deugns.
. Stram turbine driven auxiliarybelow, indic.ating that the proposed The pmposed change to the TS As tion feedwater puu1ps and the electric motor( ham;es w ougd: statement to incroase the required boratmn
no in b event the SHUTDOWN drivt|n pump, antg (c) rnotgiyy ,la Not involve a significance merease in MARGIN requirement is not met, would requirements relative to stationing an
,
the prcbabdity of an accident p eviously ensure that the boration rate is adequate for individual locally, during asvuatedn ahneed because no accident initiators. restonng the required SillTTDOWN MARGIN surveillance testingc nnditmns or assumptions are sigmf,cantiv for anticipated future core desien Fusis for proposed no significantat!n ted by the proposed changes. The proposed changes to the TS Ac tion hazards considemtion determination:
The preposed d.anges would increase the statements for the UWST and the CFT ensure As required by 10 CFR 50.91(n), ther< quired boration flowrate in the event the that the plant is maneuvered in a timely and licensee has p'rovided its analysis of theapund SiltJTDOWN MARGIN is not met. mnservative manner, without d|allenging issue of no significant hazards Imtn.ase tha minimum required volame for any plant ssstems. while mintmizma the
,
the Boric Acid Addition System iBAAS) and time the plant would be exposed to a LDCA consideration, w gt;c91 is presentetgmorew the minimum nyuired bomn with assumpt ons not being met, below, m, dicating that the proposed
,
c ont entration for the Borated Water Storage The proposed channes to the TS changes would:Taak (BWST) and the Core floodmg Tanks Survrillance Requirements associated with ta Not involve a signdicant increase in the(GT1 The proposed changes would also trisodium phosphate chemistry would darify probability of an accident previouslyrense the Tec hmcal Specification (TS) the requirements, make it easier to perform evaluated'hecause no change is being madeAi non Statements for the BWST and the testmg minimite radwaste gentration, and to any accident initiator. The propow dUT. revise the TS Suiveillance Requirement redum the consequences of a potential changes are clari0 cations and therchamg to boron concentration samphng of rt.dioachve spill. The proposed c hanges incorporations of either thethe CIT and would revise the TS would also make the requirements consistent recommandations nf Generic 1.etter nm orSuneillante Requirements myolving with the DONpS lipdated Safety Analysis the guidance provided by NtIREG141nerkodmm phosphate chemistry. In addinon. Report Therefore. it can be conc luded that thes anous adnunistrauve and eddorial changes. The pm;med r hange to the TS proposed changes do not involve aincludmg changes to the TS Bases, are Surseillance Requirement assonated wph sigm0 cant increase in the probabihty of aaproposed. As stated above, r.one of thuc the borr.n mncentration samy , ng of the Cf"T act ident previously evaluated.preposed changes involve auident imtiators would eliminate an unnecesswy requirement 1b Not involve a significant int rease in the< onda mns, er auumptions. and make the Surveillance Requirement consequences of an accident previously
th Not involve a symf; cant inuence H the mnsistent wDh NURIL141n. es aluated because the pmpowd c hangs doc onsequences of an euident previously None of these changes would adversely not invahdate accident mnditions ornatuated because no accident condinons or #fet t the margin of safety, assumptioas used in evaluatmg theassumphons are affected by the proposcd raihological consequen< es of an accident& rges The NRC stnff has reviewed the 2a Not create the possibihty of a new kind
The proposed d.anges for the mmm:um bcensee's analysis and, based on this of accident frmn any wcident presiouslyreqmred bomn cencentrations and volum"s teview, it appeInts that the three enlu. ted Ircause the proposed c Langes doNr the B AAS. BWST, and CPT comply with standards of to CFR 50 92(c) nre mn change the way the p%t is operated Noowmg requirernents to maintain a 1 b deha satished. Therefore, the NRC staff """ ''P"5 I f ^ d "'" '" d# **"'"ke L shutdown maron (SDM) at all times. and are introduced by the pre osed changes.,,ro t onwtent w uh reload and LOCA pmposes to (getermine that tgm ;,h Not create the possi Ality of a d,fferent. uh us 'Ihezefore, the ac citient t odaion """'ndment request insolves no bd c4 act ident fmm any actidentcnMcption of 1% dMta k!1 SDM at the significant hauds (onsideration prevasiv evaluated because no new failurenunauen of an auident wdl still be met and Local Pubhc Document Room nwh 5 haie been defined for any plant *'
Mr radmtm;ial com:equences wiM b"" imation: University of Toledo Library, P ""' i* P "d"' '" 'd"'Y """" " ("m*q"We Mam Wn ub' Mpnwusly evaluated Documents Department,2801 Dancroft hnany bn. as a result of the proposed changes No'I he pm; mad changes do not aher tu D " U "- " N ' Mferent er cident imtiators or ladure '
.oun e ter n. containment isolation or '
m owsie rel-ases The proposed chanes. Attornwfor hrenser hy K Silborg. m. Anisms are unroduced by the proposed9Wre. will not n. crease the radiolom al Bquire. Shaw. Pittman. Potts a nd ( 4"#s
muemes of a preuoq evhted Tmwbridge,2300 N Strm t. NW " ' "" "h " " W'" 6 ' " ' '' d " " *" i " "',
' "I '#" " O" P"P '"d4 4 nt hhington. DC 200U;i % t r. A % poss.bihty of a r a imd L , o unm ia to enme the acaWay of
cident fiDm ar.y McMt j'Di Wdy *( .t
nif ' 5 i' m } ! ;nnell M b W"" b W NI " IOg; , s u! nw ;rge 9 6 - ow ai t d
||
. __ . J
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ ---- -
Federal hepskr / Vol W Na 100 / Ed: . s :a s . Ey L.19N / Notkes 27069__ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _. _
, pro un tra it fu =v s ,Mn r Y.-ars (i.FPYJ .md U Li Pi f ar ..\-1& 2, previously evaluated The propor.ed'
,
a . r .. ' , pat e v ..f. n t As nsper tis eN. Ar cord:ng to the most kann al Sprofkanons modify prx. /,
DL' rm ent estimates, the barnup tanpcomn? waung lu uts. WPS'
'lNW. t df has to mwed 6 o;% Mtv h:mte wth he e u . +1 hv wynn and enabW Mnpnaturm M.I h e ,.'.\ -
i tepen.-nt operarnuty requavments ,! bn! te d < "A a. , . A --I in the sprmg of t w. .. s . o
m.ned pressurwtemperature operatm,.s . .t a p; . irs t hat t h. 'h o . ' pressure ten.peraf tar operstmn haats hmits, and LTops serpomes and enaN yt u itard , of 10 (JR Tal o2D } .c a and Lil . setpoints rem an 'dul well teruperatures are orJy shghtly ddft rent ' aiatishe.t Th. n fore, the NRL .d: mto the 2002. The propc< d NA- those currently in the Tei.hniual
pri pi.ws to d. tennine that the i f5 ins ludo resised pressur"/ Spenfications. No operatmg hmits cremendinent request :ns on t s w temperature operanng hmits s alal to setpoints are added or deleted by the
-
3 :nfa ant h.uant ; < onsoleratous i nd-of lu ense. Although the NA-2 pmp wd changes. Thereforo. it may t .s
pressure /tmnperature operating hmits c onduded that the operatini; hmits a:albic;l/com. Iim u ment y< s a..i
wtpomt c hanges do not create the pomt u s,lau1 na rmty of .I. ..ymtgu ;- ce not bemg( hanpl, the N.\-2 L.IOPS or , m.w or unu N d mdm. \va.ii.rV.
it a t w nts th;partnmnt. 280! H m r.df -tpomts and asso< t ded reat f or s essel reprd to component operuhthtyA' i ;mr. Tolroo. Ohio 4 mcq'e.
mtegnty p:Wc tion philo.ophv are requirements. restrktions on the nunh r of. U. mer far krnu : hn L le r;; bemg chaMeti. The reat f or vessel charging pumps whic h may be operable, t heww, Pittwn. Potts .untI '
intent:tv proter tion pmlosophy a ha h number of PokVs whah must be ope;_H .Ir a hm!ge. mo N y , t. NW sumis the propmed Pi t twe, and the allowable temperature diffrren. r.ia st.mnton, DC 200 i7 pneles impros eil oporational tietween the steam ganerator pnmary ad
'm' ; f y, ~ ' I y' ., I, . , . ,.
beltibilit y w hile tiiainiurning ali w ondary remala un<. hanged Only tr e'
p- "m 9,"quate margin of so.,cty as wtpoint temperature at whic h these-
resenctions apply have ken modi 0ett Ir..\: ; m.a E!m fra <!a!li aer G , ' d"monst rateil by the Nifety an.d s ..s propowd thonges are entirely consulent..
I,( s . ' h W-33d- d MJ N N orth !bi.s f >r prope d no dw;u unt with the reactor ves<el integrny protoc ?a.i
& , a l'oe . r Matm:7. ( t u t s ?.h ! :g brds (mthrdix hierunntom phdosophy whn h ensures that the de ;n'. lomso f our.tv. Grein;is A rerp; ired by 10 CFR 30 91(a). the basis reac tor vessel flaw wd! not prnp.y s
*
in ensee has p o.ide i its anah sr of the under normal operanon or postulatedo of m:endment te jaes A p n ! t ,>.
> . sue of no signfiunt h;va:J s auident condaions. Further. the proom.dI'$a c onsideration. whu h is pn , nt.-l t hances do not mvahdute . . any; f. r c ,cca ., ,. r. jues..
t.e p oposal ( hance ould rm i e the ', omponent design critona or the asse:,gnon
Sspec ihud. ,s. operu ion of Ie.ath of any (TSAR [ttpdated Haa! Safety... . < h:m al S}m ifg. atmns i l.. ) , e H.e. a ..
.
.
Wre Anna Power N mon t nes N.o 1 -una} Pow"r Shdir n in a(cord.m e with An..lvsis Reportj t.hapter 15 a(.cident-
anah ses. In addition. modificanons tu rx# U,"F' . h d h "' "3P twn'made to the Technial Spetifice > -2 INA-1 A 21 'srn ifu alh. mo*
;: :a r d i h; . .>s w i J m mhfsthe ' mP " M h"'improve os aihihility and rehability of It)iws
po ! :r.st n per.vuri i r it.ng !11 i .ob e a v4 i. <. . re m n and assoc iated bloc k valvi s These r hum' have been made in a. ! d;! MIN <!uring lie Mt.p itud f (o 4.hiw n o' hatni.ty o t o.mi . -s of m # i airnt
;m mudy n liuard 'I he d tv .c.ah m guid nce in G,enen. ce.ardance with NPr .i''
c trtter oMm it may b4. ! 9e ! .ow .T.eraper i'u m (h erpre ssnre1. 'a n t m n 3 .. & . instr ses that ttr p.op.e.ed rr i tm w l mnt lad,,d taat nono of the proposed < h m.. st
v. tem (Ifl.OPN prm e.r":r 'm M WomA a d b m . 4 (me We pmbihty of a new or ddt emt
i7 p onts .ua * m.per tr : for N A- 1 A J p.,s ,,,j t,,,9.r .aurd hr.m s. I.'l ( )is kmd of anident from any pmviouslyAl a t9 p opm ad r hm i "s a lu k ,, d.nis, e d ( ompo- :a opem ., n a!uated.. im! Lmnhng Condmoin for near, mer.ts ensare th.a r ea, f or i- .I 13) involm a Mgmfn unt rwiuc tmn ir. i
(1p. ratwn, At t en Staten,ents, and .'ep'y w .h im wa ne.1 du mm margm of safety. As c'escribed ubase, u..c., isra e Requinum r.ts f..: toe " % Praun ar.d d. ,n bas.s a . e: nt reattor vessel mtegnty prt,tet oon phdo mp:
5 "' J" 3 h * M h"reu ..w ensures that the design basis assumed 0 cvi .a. c (1p-r-m d IMo f L!n . U1)M A 'r ^ '" " P
md M u k . ik n to adhess '' . M" "'"'"'''p. ni p. v el wiH n t prgipe umW naal op. r.,w 1 i -' y vu. opeviu ! .nas ene es that the design basis acrident conditiont Adh. " m et m- r. s f ' s ted m . . If ,. ( ' s .wl dngn bas flaw w di ec.t papap. to the Te< hn cal Speufiuinon pressure /
e '
t. r u tut &tio:d . . tha N. ,y m,rd q en N.!m e . LI OPS temperature operating limits ensures th..t thpmpm ed ( hanes Irw Ide wri ..a a , , g e m p,.ra!..m. o 'una a < .non of margin to vessel fracture prosided by t%*
. . M;a!'idrunNr an e i Lme > . POWS e.%res P.at the ammed d. < .gn ASME Section X1 methoddosv is1 hi %\-112 Rw f r r ( i.o! m M s' na L. n th,w ,J! vit prop. ph unwr e:gn :naintained With regard to LTOPS
T(Sl & p; < w! fn . nat+ r d falur 6 , low t p. mts omprm on e t.on prots tion. the safety analysis demonm.c. ,h .1: nnpo ben of r. a tmns on ' -(r mor.s 1.a p.es o . v '. S that the proposed L10PS design ensu:es
m eN a wi amt i i rel.e e 10 narnins conusteut with these prouded b,a.N e pres e am?'-r.p., n ,
[F. "P'''. *"' O'''"' ' "E' ^M M*" XI ^PPCU'hi G methee- TL:d n heatap w! r. hw n "'
. . -uneituo<ha;g:c, n;n.at % rs .I c endusion is based on inductry cipen, m .i.q,, . w. . s , n. n, um,..,. . _.'
- ad - d'. ^ A GOPS events and engineeringa.' m of r ' ".r.< i rm .; f .vd d m W, C - 4 O pr , - si e.aluation Spr< ifindly, bwh industry.t. . l' .e, rp: / at h.n n perien< e and enginEring evaluatin'n.,,.s,, dr-sth..i . sd... .
er .:s !] ; ' op. rib 1 Mme ,, - 9. w. y n J. ; o ,, y, d,.mor.str.ae that LTOPS design tum e t. r. - 's . c. ; i , u . i t o . . hat wow h:(n S a.as m ara r, mt,.w ) b , may be e spet ted to oaur at ewntodh
. r plo. !h. id.# 'tm- ' og m ..:en N f r PURi ' k i so!hermal ( onddions. Eng.neerings
? 2 h . I. 1un '1!b! l!er p. ?!i' M i' ' "I * . O . Mhr4 - d.I'm'd evaluation demonstrates that any red a. im ..
j,...,, e'. s i e ':..* r - n;<ne s A . ho A :n allowable pressure due tn thermal 5..,. e , , mn|, 9 7
i r d o r. >t . 'oethe r i,' q whn.h may be espnted to ot rur dun g im,, 7, ,,
* *il t ) a - 1 r! If r|* T ijj( M' .;! ' 'i '
.'-'
t a u p. m , ' ou n t . .(n, .-
e!tHS, ; b iu | .- a n.t L. , nud r,) e umpared to margins provided by the 3Mo,.
, , '. A C ertion XI Appendi G me' hods for. p c. o;+rin ". d f9 d ihtv ,
. . - "| pre' airi ' o pi J .y , , , . , . .t h a N of the nuh. r M pressme/.. ; l. : L . al!. tpi > emperatar . hma rur e os the devi i ;,
, ,
P. a..!, 4,6 t..b b s 5 ; low 9 perwre POW. , ,
-________- _. _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
27070 rederal Register / Vol 54, No.100 / Wednesday, May 75. IN / Ni tices
y w., has been ap: md for ot h." .is roeputed by 10 Cl }{ 50 4114), the i in nhe a cemis ant redon tmn m aw : '' ufet y' nes by the NKC i h.s d-sn:n maume hi ensee fun pnivab > lits anahsis of thei
t a oy anng mamm ah m the nummum mne of no signifn ant haanis I u F"P"" d P4" "i h " "> '" ' '"*"a "'L " i i " ol rnds doi s not < h inee fl>e i ontnd. pm .ure for r+me for c oolant pur .p IRCP)"i .ide M om w b h a F eMed< i a opbn.h retpmenwnt or the n,n thev. r o mo. then by mmuinw the ; "* (.oM el Rod ihn e Spli m is o[vrated.pl uluhty of ur.rM red Pt)RY idh d ane
I" "b' "l"T d i"" "I .."' " ' O ^ " " d NI HI G Lita. i um !udnl that m, st stai kH P st etup Thr pnyosed t tans , to P"*'t Stdh"" i" "C'"Hidn' e u it h t he ,m; ,3 an. da m en d durmg pl.mtiddrew the rom ems of Generi< l.etter won ,n
a << . t a issues 70 and %) tr p vve I. TOPS proposed Tedmital Specifnefit ns st ut,.p after o fachng or d inng comnd nanoiabety and rehatuhty by uantutma danes wdl not: dmp intmg 1 herefore, rouHue sun edlant e
" *"A "I On. round nids at the pniposedo .,u,remenn for IUW, tdoi k valve, and 1 Insohe a sigmfa ani more in thei natnd setem tesung and aHowed outer" prebdey of occurrence or c onwymm es of n du nl b mn in v is wnudered adnquaw toidenuv inoperable (stuc id cnntrol n asucs for these compenents A'thotah thew w m Went pn nou dy evahwed< h. tw-s do not m< nye the maron of sc.tets l he pnspowd c hange to the surveillans e h'"2 "P"a""n The reduc ed mn eWam e
vuin nents do not affect the nurgin ofd, me:.straed by the analyus of the L TOPS fn pem v for centrol rods des not mcrease "d' y in mat de opernb4 inpun niena.h i 6.nu. Imass and heat additmn) ik potabdoy of an at udent ouurtenc einmsmnts, the t haw s provide im reced han edanu testmg is a means of ""nou+d um Luged and uw neauy i.afetyn
ur.o c e that pTessure rehev!rit des io s u dl deh rrmning c ontrul rod operabihty and due s anaW. w nu b ominns nu nmt re.n uwp Wm their daig,n fuu bon o! . n ured not of shelf uintribute to wntrol md
i ontn,l n d Wt L out d the ion; dunng3
The NRC staff has res wwed the 'n"P""h'hto Although reduc ed 'estin;,dso 9 ' ident se en.uim n maine lending1 te re forr no umaans of safew er ahch
os ensee s analysis and, based on this ueI>hes a less fre9uent confirmation of. .
nus hani, al opernbihty. operationuls' gy, ,,.d -.
wuew. it appears that the thr"" crient e has estabbshed that the n du ed Tlu NHC staff has rouewed thei-
I herefore, the NRL(t) are t.atisfiad-tandards of 50 92 testny does not decrease plant safety. kenwe's analysis and, based on this
staff pro}w.es to runbermore. reduwd f equency testing ttn.iew. it appears that the three- .-Mermine taat the amerulment request reduc es the probaldity of en inadvenentS
un olves no signif: cant hazards opera'mnal tranuent or misal.gned c ontrol pand.ps of m2M are satisfied.i i :. sideration. rod. There are othe r rarans available (e g . Iher" fore, the NRC staff proposes to
lawll'uhlic Docunrnt lioom Indnidud N Position Indotors flus deternune that the amendment request' dunbutums nnmnahe4 to detect a invalves no significant hanrdsu.'usn Ib Alderman labrarv. Special'
nusabgant mntH n d. Reducing the musideranon.1:olk c tions Department, Unisersity of f requency cf survedlant e testut u di L> cal Pubhc Docunient lloom\,irgini;i. C,harlottesulle* \,irginia dn rease he possipniity of fintiu g an lorotion:The Ahlerman Library, Special2,,0h24% mopenable control rod. ladustry nperien"' Collections Department, Unidrsity of
.itterner for hcensi c:, n.hael W has show n that most inoperable FturW \,irgini , Charlottest ille, \.irginiaA .
Maupin,13q ,Ilunton and Williams, wntrol rods are identif.ed dunng rod drop22903-2498.IM ertront Plau, !:ast Tower,951 E. testmg and unit startup after retachng
ih ni Street, itthmond, Virginia 23219 outages. Therefore, the NEC hu determmed AU"#UCTlDI N""*" El hd"f U,-
NHC l'm/ect Ihrector-lierbert N that a redund freqwmy sumdlano test Maupin, F,up. Hunton and %ilhams,dunng power is acceptnble to deterrnine Iberfront Plaza, East Tower,951 L
q' ,4 w '
,< ontrol rod operatulity Onppable) Ilyrd Street, Richmond, Virginia 2r19
L irania Electnc and Pon er Company, The control rods will continue t s he NiiC l'roject Ihrector. Herbert N.It n Act Nos M-3J8 and 5/b3 M, Nudh geramd m the same manner durmg thr [;rdow.
Arunt Power Station. Units No. I andsurundani e testtng and wdl he avmhHe toshutdown the rear tor if n Hear for Protertmn Finnnia I:,lectric and Power C,omponr,
.. Lawsa County. t.nrytruaM. ,
w* MH .d The lh Let Nos. 50-280 and 50-281 SurryiMte of cmend: rent requnt Aptd l'h oper&d,tv requirc~nts. alignment and run er Station. Unit Nos.1 and 2, Surry
msemon hmits for the control rods remain c,. qtr. Ustginia'
1%1De.scnption of amendment reque:.t um har:7d Sm' e th" can'T"I Tods ?"m nn
.I ho proposed thanges would n vise the as adable pnNmbh ) to Iwrform t! ein Do," of amendment re<junt: April 19,intended saf-tv function. tesHng of the 19 %
.i.p knical Speufmitions (.!,S) for the rontrol rods at the proposed redured Docription of amendment requestNorth Anna Power Statwn, Units No.1 g,,g,,,.r v wid not mcrease the < onsequen vs The proposed thanges will moihfy the.
.unt No. 2 (N A-1&2) Specifically, the ,a m 3, ment pwouw evnlaated- survedlance frequenci of the e ontrolprop-d thanges woubt moihfy the . Cream the p<wbility of a new or rod motion testing fnim monthly tounedhnco frequency ef the < ontrol odcrent kuu! of au Went imm arv a. W""' quarteriv.
n.d motmn teving fmm monthly to p73ioas!y e valuawd la h for pre >pw d no decificanti;u 4rterh in m cc.rda e u itb NRC f te pr-posed reduwd friu u y 'esting of ha..u6 cm.sidt rcen dM rmination
sdo n o* I d wvnenc Letter U 1) f L v3, "Unt-item ',"rti d n As required by 10 CFP. 50.91(ah ther s
to Meduce Surse+dLmce Reou rementsm ns nnpn n e m ents,,,m,,y,.,,,,,,,,,,,_, nmn_. u pmoaca i,mnasm mr. a .i. spec
m M 19. o n'rol n.ds dors not idtrr 0.r i . sue of no sie,nifumnt huards,
far I c .hng Durme Power (1peratwn" opg, ,' : m of 'he Contml Rod Dnw 5vorm or a onu kr ition, whic h is presentedd ved September 2:'. Im1 n. , or. trol rods ahdity to perform thhr bcMu :
'I he pioposed a han ys to the -,emb.d sdery funt non Wretnn . the sp., ibUy, operation of Surry Power *
, m!!.mre rerp n :twnts far the n dm i d fo 9m s instmg of 'ho control rod' moon m a< r ord mre with the proptedi 4 nin,1 md, at N A-1 & 2 are i'ms. stent don not er.cra'r ey new u r idmt L < M d S ecifu atiom t hanc.es willv. .th fl " intera of GL 9 3-0 3, whah is tu P* "N o" h I " L 0"bH? "P"'" U " k ya'
' d U "' "" $ '" " '' 'U " A I"" Yunprose wfel), der rme equq na nt b"}J 1.i umhem nt rm or trips. dropped*
o* 1 I noh e a sQndu au .nw:ase m the4 ry ' dion, ar.J r" ne unnet es%ry * m VM MM- or i on sequem es ofM <bi
n on perwn: elresourte>hy 4, g ,, 9 g, ,j g ,v M a e+r4m nW & Md'
duung testing rs i a ternenN th.d .ur , ., ',,r 6 ". r..H i n d M s i 4 o t h m I; ppiised d m 'r i *be wrveW.au ee
; mal to s.det y g , s ,o %,s Ac.1sno ere * J b'.tbe i , vm ', for co .t e i! rods kes not un reaseRu a e t , ,... m 3 t9 probabihh e i a av c ent u r unem ei4sn for propov I no sn m|u unt , 4 e 5.m . . m e, g
.+ conside ren deternu vonon .e + ,: o A dun, c w usa m, a sot.
determin mg t ur.trul rmi oper.tbiht v .nd does analysn. wbu h assumes the most n actwe Three Rivers Community-Technicalr.ot of m.H f antr:bute to wotrol rod mntrol rod sticks out of the core durtnn College, Thames Valley Campus, 574inoper ibihty. Althowh reduted tes'uq c6 m e Ment venarios. retnatns tuundm+ New London Turnpike, Norwich,imphes a less f:equent c onf'rrnatma of Thefore. no rnargins of safety cc adu rwiv Dr Mut M,Mmer hanu al cperahihty. cperutmnd af fn ted.espeneme nas e abbshmi that the redumd
The NRC staff has renewed the N"h * "I I"'"" " * *d "*testing does nd derraa4e plant *afetylurn analysis and, WW m b. Faulity Operating Licerwes
Furtherrnorv, redumd frequency testagredu< es the protabdity of an tr;adwertent "W, H @PM OM b ** &*R b Fid dxe PP*dm doperational ransient or msahyned r untrol standards of 50.92h) are satisfied. the last hiweekly netice then.d 'I here are other means av olable 4 g . Therefore, tha NRC staff pmposes to Commission has issued the followinginavidual Rod Pounca IndL, tors. Ca determine that the amendment regnest amendments. The Commission hasdntributions anomahesl to detei t a involves no sig tificant hazards determined for each of thesemisabgned control rod. t onsideration. amendments that the applicationRodnt ing the frequency of suned., ant" hl Mlic Documt nt Room comphes with the standards and
iNp rbi th locatmn Swem Librag, Co!!cga of requirements of the Atomic Energy Arte i rnntexpenem e has shown that most mop ru William and Mary, Wilham<:hurg, of 195.t as amended (the Act), and theSim k) mctrol rods are eder.tmed dunag rt.d Virginia 23185. Commissiori's ndes and reguktions.drop tesu,:g at unit startup after refuehng AHomeyfor heensee: Mclwl W. The Commission has made appropriateouwes l herefore, the NRC has dewrnoned Maupin, E3q.,ilunton and Williams, findings as required by the Act and thethat a n duud frequency sunedLince tes' Riverfront PLua. East Tower,95 t E. Commission's rules and regulations indur:rg power n an eptable to deternune Dvid Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219. 10 CFR Chapter 1, which are set forth m(ontrol rod operabihty Ltnppabid 'NHC Profert Director: Iferbert N. the license amendment.The control rods wdl contmue to be ge4 Wopna&d in the wme rnanner dunng the Notice of Consideration ofIssuance ofsunedlance testing and will ba ani!able to Previously Published Notices of Amndment to Facility Operatingshutdown the rertor if a Rem ter Prutm tmn Considerati(m of Issaance of License, Proposed No SignificantS steni tr:p setpoir,t is rem hed. Th" Arnendments to facility Operating flazards Considera: ion Determination,3
operMtv n,quirements, alpmeut et Licenses, Proposed no SignScant and Opportunity for a IIcaring lainsertion luruts for the control mds rema:aunc hanged. Smu the uintrol rnds rer" blazards Consideration Determination, connection with these actions was
a w,m published in the Federal Register ase adAe (tnppable) to perform the ri
in h'd ed.intended safety fum tion. teshng of the The following notices were previously tJuless otherwise indicated, ac. .
t ontrol rods at the proposed reduce,i published as separate indiv4ualfnyent y wdf not increase the consem es notic es. The notice content was the Commission has determined that th~of an a ndem prmously evaluut ammiments 3 tisfy the critma for
same as above. TheY.ther because timwere Eublished as1 Ln ste the pm,ubihty of a new orinh. lual notices ei . categorical exclusion in accordanw.
a.
dMierent kind of acudut from any aa ider.tprm musi) evaluated did not allow the Commission to wait w th 10 CFR 51J2.Therefore, pursuai t
to 10 CFR 51.22fbl, rm envtrunmentalI be pmpom! reduc ed frequenty tesung of for this inweeUy notice or leu the(ye e ontrol rods does not < hane the way rFe at tioa im olved exigent cin.umstances. impact statement or er.vironmentalt
x r trol Rod Drive 5ptein nr the ct;ntrol rods They are repeated here because the nssessment need le pUpued for theseamendments. If the Commission has>re oper.aed. The reduc ed frequency of t n. weekly notico lists all amendments
te.tmg of the twtrol rods does not a!>r the issued or proposed to be issued prepared an environmental assessmentopennon of the Gmtrol Rod Drive 5ptem or involving no significant hazards "" 9 **the wntrol rods abry to perfor:n tLt tr ' ""'I d "'"II""~ provision in no LFR 51.12(b) and hasmiended safety fun < non Thmf<ar. themduced fminency tnnra of the (tmmd rods F ur detads. see the individual notice de a determination based on that
assessment, it is so indnated.m the F. deral Register on the day andde, < not generve any ne , arcic or", e
[ rm ursort In fu t, indmtry epieure has Pd8C Cit"d T.his notice does not extend For further details with respect to th".
shown that this survedlance testua raav the notice period of the original notice. adion see: N The appbrations foranwndment, (2) the amendment, and (3, )msu a n inads er*ent n ador :-ips. drepped . jmost . fear E.g Gmpany, et the Commission's related letter, Safety< m trol nds. or unnecess ry < tG nes to
,dets svveins Thudore. tne peibdav of a cL Dcdct No. 50-336. Mdistone Es aluation and/or Environmentalnew or ddferer.1 loud of acu&nt than ' Nm I"ar Rwer Station Unit No. 2. New Assessment as indicated. All of these: rmou6 cAaed is ra < reamd Ly the f.ondon County, Connecticut Date of items are available for public inspectionprq *d chmes m surudanc e fa gem 3 omendment request: April 14,1994.as at the Commission's Pubbc Documenti" < wrrl rods supp!cmented April 20,1994. Room. the Gelman Building. 2120 L4
1 I:n ope c.J.a nt 4 <t m m aDescription of amendment request: Stiect, NW., Washington. DC 20555, and
I ; reduced freqacrr. int na of The prnposad amendment would revise at the local public document rooms for-N the Technical Specificanons (TS) to thn pata u!ir facihnes mmed.R , onmd reds das nnt chaw t , ,
i op.-rarnhty n.quu mnt or tu wm the < hange the laboratory teeting protowl IMsron Edison Company. LWiu-t No.n
(- M Mod Dove spie is operM for tne charcoal absorlers for the Ww, Puerim Nuclear Peer Static n.'. 'R! } 1 lf+ e n !aded inat r rtenk (batrol Room Fmergency Ventibtion Piyntouth County, mssorhusettso r + b are e m ow . ;d tr aa ; w Msn m (TS 3 7 A1) and the Enclosurei. '
op af r r+ L.r'g er d c., o a d : de . Ihnh!!ng Fi!tration Swtem (TS lf>.51) Ddf" "loPphmtion for amendowtd:. y tesw ' . .i om c sea me g,,,g gg.atN d mdmdual ( ktober 19.1993.tesn m of t. , < t . t A at * ; ,' W,
> m Federal Register: May 4.1904 Brvf description of an+ndnent Thisredu ed frn ww < m,Wm t M q m * > -
amendment removes the low condenwrp -mennh mop nNe h kl e on'nd ro. y cperamn 11. redu M n W!i : e b"i tu n date W mhmkal nNi,w sm m ma and durM b mnermn i ents do t me< t me mar;.a t hu"4.1%4 f,rst ship Mpomt at which it isvers m 1 4 < om a rmu. nents It cl Pubhc Docune n! It a p, r:niMle to bypass the turbine
i a,a . u e i ni.neithe n , s ea i. . 'mn learr N Re oun e Rnn r. < mt: .I s ah e fmt c Mure und th
turbme stop vahe tlosure top (scrant) Date' of issuanct" May 11,1991. Date ofissuance:May 2,1994swnals. EffectJre date:May 11.1994- Effective date: May 2,1994.
Dat of tssuant e May 5.1994 Amendment Nos.: 142 and 1?A. Amendment Nos : 71/50.I tfec tive date May 5. luus Facihty Opemtmu License Nm. NPF- racility Operating License Nos. NPF-Amendment No : 152 9 and NTF-17 Amendments res ised the tw and NPF-al: Amendments revised ,
Focahty Opemting License No DPh- Technical Specifications. the Technical Specifications.S5: Amendment revised the Technical Date ofimtial notice in Federal Date ofinitialnotice in FederalSpecifications. Regist,r: August 4,1993 (58 FR 41503). Register: December 22,1993 (58 FR
Date ofinitial notice in Federal The Commission's related evaluation of 67847).Register: December 8,1993 96 FR the amendments is contained in a Safety The March 31,1994, letter, changed (
64603) The Commission's related Evaluation dated May 11,1994. the initial request to provide increasedevaluation of the amendment is No significant hazards consideration conformance to an associated draft IEEE
comments received: No. Standard 450 maintenance and testing /mntained in a Safety Evaluation datedL> cal Pubhc Document RoomMay 5.1994. prac tice. The revision imposes
No significant hazards consideration location: Atkins Library, University of restrictions on cell replacements for< umments received: No. North Carolina. Charlotte (UNCC degraded batteries that are in late stages
local Public Document Room Station). North Carolina 28223. of service life. These restrictions werelocation: Plymouth Public Library,11 Entergy Operations. Inc., Dodet No. 50-- requested by the NRC staff and do notNorth Street, Plymouth, Massxhusetts 382, ifaterford Steam Electric Station, affect the NRC staff's conclusions of no02360- Umt 3, St. Charles Parish, Louisiana significant hazards consideration
Carolina Power E Light Company, et al., Date of amendment request: 0'f'*h"*'I&g gy myDecket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324 Se tember 16,1993.
Bruaswick Steam Electric Plant. Units 1 rief descri tion of amendment:Theand J. Brunswick County, North amendment c anged the Appendix A No sigmficant hazards considerationCarohna
~
Technical Specifications for the" ' " *'
Date of application for amor,dments: "\# c u c oc n tt Boomgg t gI c ti n: Burke County Library,412Aprd 13.1993. fan cos ers, increased the test interval for fF urth Street, % aynesboro, GeorgiaBrief Description of amendments:The starting the dry and wet tower fans from
amendments change the Technical 7 days to 31 days, increased the wet 30830.Specifications to revise the design bulb temperature to 80 degrees F for Houston Lighting 6 Power Company,
h hNe s er t uel s determining Operability, and made city Public Service Board of San. ,t at age other editorial and clarifymg change: Antonio. Central Power and LightEmot is designed to Prevent inadvertent Date of sssuance: May 9.1994. Company. City of Austin, Texas. Docket.
.
draining. The amendments revise this Effective date: May 9,1994 Nos. 50-498 and 50-499, South Texaselevation from 116 feet 4 inches to 15 Amendment No.:95 Project, Units 1 and 2. Matagordafeet 11 mches based on the actual spent Facility Operating License No. NPF~ County, Texasf uel pool design 38. Amendment revised the Technical
Date ofissuance: May 2,1994 Spectfications. Date of amendment request: MarchEffectwe date May 2.1994. Date of initial notice in Federal 14.1994.Amendment Nos.:170 and 201- Register: October 27,1993 (58 I R Brief description of amendments:TheFacihty Opemting License Nos. DPR- 57851). The Commission's related amendments change the technical
71 and DPH-62. Amendments revise the evaluation of the amendment is specifications by adding a new LimitingTet hnical Specifications. contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Condition for Operation (LCO),3.0 A
Date ofinitial notice m Federal May 9,1994.~ LCO 3.0 6 will allow equipment
Register. March 16.1994 (59 FR 12359). No significant hazards consideration removed from service or declaredThe Commission's related evaluation of comments received: No. inoperable to comply with actions to bethe amendments is contained in a Safety local Public Document Room returned to service, underEvaluation dated May 2.1994. location: University of New Orleans administrative controls, solely to
No significant hazards consideratmn Library Louisiana Colin tion, Lakefront, perform testing. The new LCO will( omments received- No. New Orleans. Louisiana 70122. provido temporary relief from the
leca! Public Document Hoom applicable action statements to performlocatmn: University of North Carchna at Georgi f ner C mpany, Oglethorpe. surveillanm testing required toWdadngton. William Madison Randall Pon er Corporahon. Municipal Electnc dmoete opedy of ee1.ihrcey,601 S. College Road, Authonty of Georgia, City of Dalton, eqmpment being returned to service or
Georgia Docket N s. 50-424 and 50- the operabdity of other equipment.Wdnungton. North Carolina 28403-423. L ogtle Electric Generatmg Plant. Date of issuance: A ,ril 29,1994.3,l'mts 1 and 2, Burke County, Georgia g(je, gjyp gage; Ap7g 29,3994 to 9e
Du w, Pon er L,ampanp Docket h,os. :_>o' Date of a;>phcatmn for amendments. implemented within 31 days of a
M and 50-370. McGu re Nuclear y,gy 7 ,9, 399y , g ygStatmn. Umts 1 and 2 Medlenburg 31.1994. Amendment Nos.: Unit 1-Gunty. Vorth Larahna Hrief dercription of amendments:The Amendment No. 60; Unit 2-
De of apphcatmn 6,r anmndm-nts: amendments revise survedlanco Amendment No. 49.*
May 6.1991 requirements for station batteries based Facihty Operating License Nos. NPF-IWef descnption of amendmer.ts:TL. on draft IEEE Standard 450-1992, m and NPF-bo. The amendments
o::iendments correct an error in " Recommended Pratite for reused the Technical Specifications.re< h: aal specificatmn 'lable 3 M that Mamtenne, lbtm4 anii Replu emc.9 Date of imtial notice in Federala n my!" with License Amendments of lar.y 1. rad Morge Batterms for Register: March 30.1994 i38 FR 14889)' m - ! I 10 Generatun; Shn ms a:nl Satstations ' The Comission's related creduation of
.
i- - __________- __
,-- _ _ _ _ _
|!
,
( .
Federal Register / Vol. 59, No.160 / Wednesday, May 25, 1904 / Notices 27073'
- - -
the .om r.dments is contiuned m a Safety Amendment No.: 31. and 2 from the current 1170 fuelD.aluatmn dated Aptil 29,1o94. FacJhty Openiting bcense No NPF- assemblies to 1632 fuel assembbes.
No sy;mficant hazards consaderation m Amendment reused the Te<.hnical Also, the decay time for refueLug.mrnents r-ccived: No. S pr6 ifica t mas. operations is mtended from 100 hoursLw al Pubhc Document Huom Date of amtral notice in Federal to 1t\8 hours.
locatien Wharton County Junior Registen October 13,1993 (58 FR Date ofissuance. May 4,1994 |1
Collece. J. M llodges Leaming Center. 52991). The Commission's related Effective date: May 4,1994.911 Bohng thghway, Wharton, Texas eva'uation of the amendmeat is Amendment Nos.151 and 131.774HH cnntained in a Salery Evaluation dated Facility Opemting License Nos. DPR-
70 and DPR-75. These amendmentsIowa Dwinc Light and Power Cnmivrnv, M*T 9,1994.% sign:ficant hazards consideration revised the Technical 5pectfications.
| 1hket No SW331.Duane Arnold-
coitunents received: No. Date of smtial nohce m FederalE,nergy, L, enter, Lmn C,ounty, Iowa Public Document Room Register: Mart h 4,1994 (59 FR 1044n)
Date of application for amendment: location: Exeter Public Library,47 Front The Commission's n: lated evaluation ofMart h 21,19n Street, Exeter, New IIampshire 03a33. the amendments is contained in a safety
Unef description of amendment:Tb" Evaluation dated May 4,1994..unendment revised the Technical Power Authoritrof the State of New No significant hazards consideration
WrA. DocArt No. 50486, Inditm Point comments receimi: NaSpacifications by improvmgorpnizatinn and clanty of Sedimt 3.Bf Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3, local Public Docurnent Room4 8. The amendment chmges the testing it'estchester Cearrty, New 1 ork location: Salem Free Public Library,112requirements of the operable emergency Date of application for amendment: West Broadway, Salma.New Jerseydwwl generator in Section 4.5 C.T when March 24,1994, 08079,
the other diesel is inoperable. Also, the Dnef description of amendment The N, u min dutne P wer Company,.
testmg rm;uirements of tha Emergency Technical Sper.ifications amendruent Dociet Nos. S&2mmd 5&J01 PointServire Water pump and loop changed revised the plant staff requirement Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2,when the of har pump or loop is (specified in TS Section 6.2.2.1) to Town of Two Cmis, Mamtoncinoperable. The amendment also makes temporarily allow the Operations County, Msconsmseveral editorial changes- Manager to have held a senior reactor
Dore of issuoure- May 12,1944. operator (SRO) license at a pressurized Date of oppJication for amendrnents:Et/cctive date: May 12,1994. water reactor other than Indian Point 3. February 26,1993,as supplemented on
This temporary allowance is in effect for November 30,1993, and February 8,17t perub cense No. DPN_
! .t9. Amendment revised the Technical the period ending 3 years afterrestart 1994.from the 1993/1994 Per!bemance Frief description of amersimen s:
Specifications. Improvement Outage and is needed to These amendments revise TechrdcalDate ofinitial notice in Federal
Register: July 21,1993 (59 FR 39051) support m,narement changes at the Spa ifications (TS) Sectuur 15.3.7,
The Commission's refated evaluation of facility in an effort to improve overallSection 15.4.6, and Table 15.4.1-2. The
the amendment is contained in a Safety perfonnance. revisions incorporateitetrn thwt were
Evaluation dated May 12,1994. Date ofissuance: May 3,19m. identified during a cr.xnpartson of the
No significant hazards consideration Effective date: As of the deee of accident analyses 1.n time PilNP SaHy
comments received: No. issuance to be implemented withirr 30 Analysi Report (FSAJO and the
Lccal Pabhc Document Room days. Limiti::g Conditions bc Operacann and
locatmn: Cedar Rapids Public Library, Amemhnent No.: 147. surveilkmce secticrre of the PLINP TS.
500 First Streat, $E., Cedar Rapids. Iowa Farihty Operat! g Ureme No. DPS- The t hanpgs add systens or equipment6J: Amendment revised the Ter.lmical reqwd try the accident analyses.33403,Spe< ifications. Testing requirements for the diesel
North AtJuntic Energ Service Date of initialnotice in Federal generators am also revised so ehmmateCorporatwn, Dociet No. 5&+11 Register: April 1,1994 (59 FR 154G4) the daily testing res;uirement whco oneSechmok Stoikm Umf No.1, The Commission's rela *ed evahiation of diesel e,enerator is inoperah)e.Rocimghang New thmpshire the amendment is contained in a Safety Dotlofissuance: May 11.19M.
Date of amendment request: Yvaluation dated May 3,1994. Enactive datt- May 11,19M.September 13,1993. No significant hazards concideration amendnerit Nos.: 143 and 152.
Description of cmendment rectuest; romments received. No. Twihtm OperatingExenseNos DPH-'Ihis amcudment revises the Appendin Local Public Docume:rt Room 21 nnd DPH-27. AmendmeatsinvisedA Technical SpeciScations relating to location: White Plains Public Library, the Tu tudcal Specifications.
I certain sensor errors stated in Table 2.2- 100 Martine Avenue. White Plains. New Dcte cf imtml notice in Federal1. Reactor Trip System lastrumentation York 10610. Registet- August 18,1993 (58 FR 43939)
The Novetnber 30,1+r3, and February|
Tnp Setpoints. The sensor errors PuMNim Electric & Gas Compone. 8. M, submutal pmvided additionalspa ified for the Power Range, Neutmn t Nat 50-272 and 50-311, Saleini
supplemental information that did r.otFlus Ibgh Setpoint (Functional Umt 2. gg g g gg ychane the imtial pmposed no
,
a ) and the Power Range. 9utmn Flux g ., Shin County, New /eney significant hazards considerationInw setpmnt (1 unctwnal Unit 2. b.) are| changed to incorporate the Nuclear Date of applicotwn for amendments d H or i latio n
instrumentatinn System cabinet percent. April 2a.1+n, as supplemented by The Commissmn's related evahration
fulbpowar nwter anuracy and rendnut IHtes dated August 12,1993. Nmember of the amendments is containedin a17.1993. February 2,1994, and April 7, Saf..ty Evaluation dated May 11,19%,rror
| lbte of issoon< c: May 9.1994 19 % No significant bazards cmsidmtionElfec tive date. As of the date of Unef destnplion of amendments: comments received: No.
issuance, to be implemented within 60 These arnendments increa'.e the spent Lo< al Public Occument Room i
d n s of isuuu e. fwl pool capm ttms for Salem. I'mts t im utmn: Joseph P. Mann ljbrary.1 M G
|L
|
!._. _ _ . _ __ _ _ . _ _ ._, _. .
. _
27074 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No.100 / Wednesday, May 25, 1994 / Notices" '
-- -. __ , . _ _ _ _ . _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .
Sixternth Street.Two Rivers. Wisconsin54241.
11 ate.1 at Raw hille. Mary lanil, this 18th day4,f May 1944
For the Nucle.it Regulatory CommnsionSteven A. Varga,Director. Division of iltectur l'rojects-llliOffwe of Nuclearlleactor RegulatwnIFR Doc 94-12614 Filed 5-24-94: a 45 ami '
BILLING CODE 750M1 #%2
4
4
'
.
|
- - - - -
..
|
|
!
-y.
,
'
. - ' ,
,.i'
,., . , ,
h *p;
Printed "k;. ' ?)
y'/ on recycled %,
y paper h'
. , , .m . -y-
.: . a ar
:ecera Recycling 3rogram
,
lI
_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,| ||| || |1|1|:|1 ||||l| t| |||| |
,.
,
NU
WCALP ESE
N H AA I RL N RT G UY O E
F T GNF F O I' OI UTC,NRI L EA ADP LR DTI BV . O SUA C. T
