ML20211A813
| ML20211A813 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron  |
| Issue date: | 08/10/1999 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20211A811 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9908240146 | |
| Download: ML20211A813 (10) | |
Text
.,
8 i
g
@ Ct00 y
t UNITED STATES
{
j j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
WASHINGTON, D.C. - =1
\\)****l SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.110 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-37 AND AMENDMENT NO.110 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-66 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY BYRON STATION. UNIT NOS.1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. STN 50454 AND STN 50-455
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated March 14,1997, Commonwealth Edison Company (Comed, the licensee) requested license amendments for Byron Station, Units 1 and 2. The intent of these requests was to delete license conditions which have been satisfied, revise others to delete parts which are no longer applicable, revise references, and make editorial changes.
2.0 EVALUATION An evaluation of each of the proposed changes follows.
The licensee proposed to modify Unit i license condition 2.C.(1), ' Maximum Power Level," to delete references to Attachment 1 to the Unit 1 operating license. Attachment 1 describes preoperational tests, stertup tests and other items that shall be completed as specified as a condition of the license. NRC inspection report number 50-454/85024(DRS) dated July 10, 1985, documented the NRC inspectors' review of the three items delineated in Attachment 1., item A., required that preoperational test VA 84.11 (auxiliary building ventilation) shall be completed, including the resolution of any retest deficiencies, prior to July 1,1985. The inspection report documented the completion of this item on June 17,1985. Attachment 1, item B., required that procedures for initial startup test program tests in the 50 peicent,75 percent,90 percent and 100 percent power sequences, which have been approved by both the Station and Plant Engineering Department (PED), shall be provided to Region lil at least 30 calendar days before the start date of the applicable sequence. The inspection report documented that this item had been satisfactorily accomplished and that all procedures had been provided for review. Attachment 1, item C., required that, prior to July 1,1985, the licensee complete integrated testing of the control room, auxiliary building, miscellaneous electric equipment room, and Engineered Safety Features switchgear room ventilation systems in all modes of operation f: demonstrate that the control room envelope can be maintained at a positive 1/8 inch water gauge differential pressure with respect to adjacent areas. The inspection report doctrwnwd that the testing to verify that the control room envelope will be maintained at the required pressure was completed and approved by June 17,1985. Based on the prior inspection and closure of the items in the Attachment, the proposed deletion of the Attachment and the references to the Attachment in License Condition 2.C. (1) is acceptable.
9908240146 990810 PDR ADOCK 05000454 P
pg
. The licensee proposed to delete Unit i license condition 2.C.(3),
- Post-Fuel-Loading Initial Test Program (Section 14, SER [ Safety Evaluation Report])," which states: *Any changes to the Initial Test Program described in Section 14 of the FSAR [ Final Safety Analysis Report] made in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59 shall be reported in accordance with 50.59(b) within one month of such change." Section 14 of the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) discusses the initial test program which was completed with the initial commercial operation of the unit. Based on the completion of the initial test program, there is no further need for this license condition. Therefore the proposed deletion is acceptable.
The licensee proposed to delete Unit 1 license condition 2.C.(4),
- Seismic and Dynamic Qualification (Section 3.10, SSER [ Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report) #5)*," which states:
" Prior to startup following tNa first refueling outage, the licensee shall completely qualify the Westinghouse 7300 Procm Protection System (ESE-13), for both Nuclear Steam Supply System and Balance of Plant applications, including any hardware changes, if found necessary." By letter dated April 20,1987, the licensee documented the completion of the seismic qualification of the Westinghouse 7300 process protection system circuit cards.
Among other actions, the licensee replaced certain circuit cards to demonstrate seismic qualification. Subsequently, NRC inspection report number 50-454/87020(DRP) dated June 12, 1987, documented the NRC inspectors' review of the actions taken by the licensee to meet the conditions of the Unit i license which were required to be completed prior to startup of Unit 1 after its first refueling. In that report, license condition 2.C.(4) was considered closed. Based on this prior review, license condition 2.C.(4) is no longer required and the proposed deletion is acceptable. The licensee also proposed to delete a related item from license condition 2.D.
License condition 2.D. lists exemptions from 10 CFR Part 50 that were granted with the initial licensing. License condition 2.D.(b) identifies an exemption to General Design Criterion-2 (GDC-2) of Appendix A, which was granted to allow operation with license condition 2.C.(4).
With the deletion of license condition 2.C.(4), license condition 2.D.(b) is no longer required.
Therefore, the deletion is also acceptable. Finally, the deletion of license condition 2.C.(4) also includes the deletion of a footnote which refers to item 2.D.(b).
The licensee proposed to delete Unit 1 license condition 2.C.(5), " Equipment Qualification (Section 3.11, SSER #5, SSER #6)," which states: "All electrical equipment within the senpe'of 10 CFR 50.49 must be environmentally qualified by November 30,1985 " By letter dated October 15,1986, the licensee documented that all equipment within the scope of 10 CFR 50.49 was qualified. Subsequently, in supplement 2 to the Braidwood SER (NUREG-1002), the staff documented its review and evaluation of the Byron station program for the environmental qualification of electrical and mechanical equipment. This review concluded that equipment within the scope of 10 CFR 50.49 at both Byron and Braidwood was environmentally qualified.
Based on this documented staff review, license condition 2.C.(5)is no longer required and the proposed deletion is acceptable.
The licensee proposed to delete Unit i license condition 2.C.(7), " Control Room Human Factors (Section 18.2, SSER #4)," which states: "Unless the staff determines that the test results do not support the change, the licensee shall, prior to startup following the first refueling outage, move the range and volume controls for the SOURCE RANGE nuclear instrument on Unit i from the nuclear instrumentation cabinet 1PM07J to the main control board 1PM05)." By letter dated
.. y September 26,1986, the licensee committed to perform the modification. Subsequently, NRC inspection report number 50-454/87020(DRP) dated June 12,1987, documented the NRC inspectors' review of the modification. The inspectors observed satisfactory operation of the relocated controls by the reactor operators (RO) and, therefore, considered license condition 2.C.(7) to be closed. Based on this satisfactory review, license condition 2.C.(7) is no longer required and the proposed deletion is considered acceptable.
The licensee proposed to delete Unit 1 license condition 2.C.(8), *TMI ltem II.F.1, lodine /
Particulate Sampling (Section 11.5, SSER #5)," which states: " Prior to startup following the first refueling outage, the licensee shall demonstrate that the operating iodine / particulate sampling
- system will perform its intended function." By letter dated November 5,1986, the licensee documented the modification they intended to implement to address this issue. By letter dated January 8,1987, the staff documented the acceptability of the proposed modification and stated
- "When the modifications are completed, we consider the Condition 2.C(8) in the Unit i license, dated February 14,1985, will have been satisfied. NRC inspection report number 4
50-454/87020(DRP) dated June 12,1987, documented the NRC inspectors' review of the i
modification and concluded that the license condition was closed. Based on these satisfactory design and implementation reviews, license condition 2.C.(8) is no longer required and the proposed deletion is considered acceptable.
The licensee proposed to delete Unit 1 license condition 2.C.(9), " Emergency Response Capability (NUREG-0737, Supplement #1)," which states: "The licensee shall complete the emergency response capabilities as required by Attachment 2 to this license, which is incorporated into this license." Attachment 2 lists 5 separate emergency response issues which will be discussed individually.
Number 1, " Detailed Control Room Design Review (DCRDR)," states: "The license shall I
submit the final summary report for the DCRDR by December 1,1986." By letter dated November 26,1986, the licensee submitted their final DCRDR report. By letter dated July 25,1989, the staff provided an evaluation of the DCRDR for Byron Station. Based on both a documentation review anu an onsite audit, the staff concluded that Byron met the DCRDR requirements.
Number 2. " Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2 Compliance," states: "The licensee shall submit by March 1,1987, a preliminary report describing how the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2 have been or will be met. The licensee shall submit by September 1,1987, the final report and a schedule for implementation (assuming the NRC approves the DCRDR by March 1,1987)." AP. hough the NRC review of DCRDR was not completed, the licensee, by letter dated September 1,1987, submitted the Regulatory Guide 1.97 Final Report.
l Number 3, " Upgrade Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs)," states: "The licensee i
shall submit a Procedures Generation Package within 3 months of NRC approval of Westinghouse Owners Group (WOG) Emergency Procedure Guidelines (EPG)
Revision 1. The licensee shallimplement the upgraded EOPs based on WOG EOPs
- Revision 1 within 12 months of NRC approval of WOG EPG Revision 1." The licensee
p 1
- 4~
(.
j.
I 4
l
, stated in their March 14,1997, submittai tha the EOPs based on Revision 1 of the Westinghouse Owners Group EOPs were implemented in December 1985.
. Number 4,." Emergency Response Facilities," states: "The licensee shall implement the j.
Emergency Response Facility meteorological A-model by January 1,1986." _ The licensee stated in their March 14,1997, submittal that the A-model has been in use l
since December 1985.
Number 5, " Safety Parameter Display System (SPDS)," states: "The licensee shall have SPDS operational by March 30,1985." The licensee stated in their March 14,1997, submittal that the SPDS has been operational since March 29,1985.
Based on the satisfactory completion of the items required by license condition 2.C.(9), license condition 2.C.(9) is no longer required and the proposed deletion is acceptable. In addition, the deletion of Attachment 2, which lists the specific item to be completed for license condition 2.C.(9), is also acceptable.
The licensee proposed to delete Unit i license condition 2.C.(10),
- Reliability of Diesel-Generators (Section 9.5.4.1, SER, SSER #5)*," which states: " Prior to startup following the first refueling outage, the controls and monitoring instrumentation on the local control panels shall be dynamically qualified for their location or shall be installed on a free standing floor mounted panel in such a manner (including the use of vibration isolation mounts as necessary) that there is reasonable assurance that any induced vibrations will not result in cyclic fatigue for the expected life of the instrument." In regard to this issue, the staff, in Supplement 8 to the Byron Safety Evaluation Report (NUREG-0876), stated: "...the staff concludes that the investigation conducted by the licensee on the dynamic qualifications of its diesel generator control panels, including the instrumentation and control devices, is satisfactory, and there is reasonable assurance that the subject equipment should perform its safety function adequately. Therefore, -
the applicable license conditions have been satisfied." Based on this prior review and determination of adequacy the license condition is no longer required and the proposed deletion is acceptable.
.i The licensee proposed to delete Unit 1 license candition 2.C.(11), " Generic Letter 83-28
. (Required Actions Based on Generic implications of Salem ATWS [ anticipated transient without scram] Events)," which states: "The licensee shall submit responses to and imphment the l
requirements of Generic Letter 83-28 on a schedule which is consistent with that given in its letters dated November 5,1983, February 29,1984, June 1,1984 and October 10,1984."
. Supplement 7 to the Byron Safety Evaluation Report (NUREG-0876), dated November 1986, l
discussed the GL 83-28 requirements and referenced the closure documentation for most of the GL 83-28 requirements for Byron. The items which remained open were 2.1,2.2.1,4.2.3, 4.2.4,'4.5.2, 4.5.3, and technical specifications for 4.3. Items 2.1,4.5.2,4.5.3, and 2.2.1 were subsequently closed out by the NRC staff in Safety Evaluations issued on January 14,1987, January 23,1987, June 16,1989, and March 26,1990, respectively. In Supplement 1 to
. Generic Letter (GL) 83-28, dated October 7,1992, the staff concluded that licensee's actions in response to items 4.2.3 and 4.2.4 of GL 83-28 were not necessary. Finally, item 4.3 was l
. closed out with the issuance of a license amendment revising the testing requirements in the technical specifications for the shunt and undervoltage trio devices on May 22,1989. Based on the prior documentation'of the satisfactory completion of the requirement of GL 83-28, this license condition is no longer required and the proposed deletion is acceptable.
The licensee proposed to delete Unit 1 license condition 2.C.(12), " Formal Federal Emergency Management Agency Finding," which states: "In the event that the NRC finds that the lack of progress in completion of the procedures in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's final rule,44 CFR Part 350, is an indication that a major substantive problem exists in achieving or maintaining an adequate state of emergency preparedness, the provisions of 10 CFR Sections 50.54(s)(2) will apply," By letters dated September 12,1984, and June 3,1986, from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to the NRC, FEMA determined that Byron satisfied the requirements of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Revision 1 and FEMA-43 and, therefore, was approved pursuant to 44 CFR 350. Based on the documented prior approval, this license condition is no longer required and the proposed deletion is acceptable.
The licensee proposed to delete Unit i license condition 2.C.(13),
- Control Room Ventilation System (Section 6.5.1, SSER #5, SSER #6)*," which states: " Prior to July 1,1985, the licensee shallincorporate modifications, as necessary, to ensure that the control room ventilation system may be used during an accident to protect operators within the criteria specified in 10 CFR 50, Appendix A, General Design Criteria 19." in regard to this issue, the staff, in Supplement 6 to the Byron Safety Evaluation Report (NUREG-0876), stated: "The staff has reviewed the system modification and concludes that they are acceptable and will assure compliance with GDC 19 when completed". Further, the staff concluded that an interim exemption from GDC 19 to extend the completion date of the proposed modification was acceptable. The licensee stated in their March 14,1997, submittal that modification M6-0-85-003, which implemented the changes that the NRC reviewed, was completed on December 2,1987. Based on the completion of the required modification this license condition is no longer required and the proposed deletion is acceptable. With the completion of the modification, the related exemption is also no longer required. Therefore, the proposed deletion of the footnote to license condition 2.C.(13) referring to section 2.D., and the proposed deletion of the exemption identified in 2.D.(d) are also acceptable.
The licensee proposed to delete Unit i license condition 2.C.(14), " Turbine Missiles (Section 3.5.1.3, SSER #5)," which states: "The licensee shall volumetrically inspect all three low pressure turbine rotors by every third refueling outage, until a turbine system maintenance program based on the manufacturer's calculations of missile generation probabilities is approved by the staff." By letter dated May 20,1985, the staff noted that the Westinghouse generic turbine integrity methodology, providing procedures for estimating crack growth, missile
. generation probability, and volumetric inspection intervals, had been approved. The staff also noted that Byron had committed to a turbine inspection program based on the Westinghouse methodology. Based on that commitment, the staff determined that License Condition 2.C.(14) had been satisfied. Based on the documented prior approval, this license condition is no longer required and the proposed deletion is acceptable.
. The licensee proposed to delete Unit i license condition 2.C.(15), " Operating Staff Experience Requirements (Section 13.1.2.1, SSER #5)," which states: "The licensee shall have a licensed senior operator on each shift who has had at least six months of hot operating experience on a similar type plant, including at least six weeks at power levels greater than 20 percent of full power, and who has had start-up and shutdown experience, except as fe' oys. For those shifts where such an individual is not available on the plant staff, an advisor shall be provided who
' has had at least four years of power plant experience, including two years of nuclear plant experience, and who has had at least one year of experience on shift as a licensed senior operator at a similar type facility. Use of advisors who were licensed only at the RO level will be.
evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Advisors shall be trained on plant procedures, technical specifications and plant systems, and shall be examined on these topics at a level sufficient to assure familiarity with the plant. For each shift, the remainder of the shift crew shall be trained as to the role of the advisors. ' These advisors'shall be retained until the experience levels identified in the first sentence above have been achieved. The NRC shall be notified at least 30 days prior to the date that the licensee proposes to release the advisors from further service", in regard to this issue, the staff, in Supplement 7 to the Byron Safety Evaluation Report (NUREG-0876),. stated: "The staff finds that the licensee has satisfied the license condition and agrees that shift advisors are no longer necessary". Based on the documented prior approval, this license condition is no longer required and the proposed deletion is acceptable.
The licensee proposed to revise Unit 1 license condition 2.D. to delete the list of exemptions from 10 CFR Part 50 and replace it with a stamment that no exemptions from 10 CFR Part 50
. are required.' Item 2.D.(a) noted an exemption from Appendix J, conceming the testing of containment air locks. This exemption was rendered moot by license amendment No. 81, dated April 4,1996, which approved the use of Appendix J, Option B.- Based on the issuance of this amendment the deletion of item 2.D.(a) is acceptable, item 2.D.(b) noted an exemption from GDC-2 of Appendix A regarding strui:tures ability to withstand earthquakes. This item was.
previously discussed above in association with license condition' 2.C.(4) and the proposed deletion was determined to be acceptable. Item 2.D.(c) noted an exemption from GDC-13 and GDC-17 of Appendix A related to instrumentation and electric power. This item was previously discussed in association with license condition 2.C.(10) and the proposed deletion was determined to be acceptable. Item 2.D.(d) noted an exemption from GDC-19 of Appendix A related to control room habitability. This item was previously discussed in association with license condition 2.C.(13) and the proposed deletion was determined to be acceptable. Item 2.D.(e) noted an exemption from Section IV.F of Appendix E related to the performance of an
. emergency planning exercise. The required full participation emergency planning exercise was conducted on November 15,1983. Exercises are now conducted at a frequency in accordance with applicable regulations.- The license stated in the submittal dated March 14,1997, that an exemption to Appendix E is no longer required. Based on the obviated need for the exemption the proposed deletion is acceptable. Based on the elimination of all the exemptions listed in License Condition 2.D., the revision to state that no exemptions from the requirements of
-10 CFR Part 50 are required, is acceptable.
E
+
I The licensee proposed to modify Unit 2 license condition 2.C.(1),
- Maximum Power Level," to delete references to Attachment 1 to the Unit 1 operating license. Attachment i describes preoperational tests, ventilation tests and fire barrier sealing that shall be completed as specified as a condition of the license. Attachment 1, item A., required that preoperational tests and test deficiencies documented in licensee letters dated November 3,1986, and January 14, 1987, be completed in accordance with the licensee's schedule commitments. NRC inspection report number 50-455/87003 (DRS) dated March 10,1987, and NRC inspection report number 50-455/88004 (DRS) dated March 29,1988, reviewed the required preoperational tests and correction of test deficiencies and determined that all were completed satisfactorily. Based on the prior review and acceptance, the proposed deletion of item A. is acceptable. Attachment 1, item B., required completion of auxiliary building ventilation system tests, including post test review and approval by the Plant Engineering Department. Interim power level limits were provided based on Auxiliary Building emergency core cooling system (ECCS) leakage. A specified test schedule was also provided. NRC inspection report number 50-455/88004 (DRS)
~ dated March 29,1988, reviewed the required ventilation test and verified the item as completed.
1 Based on the prior review and acceptance, the proposed deletion of item B. is acceptable.
I
, Attachment 1, item C., required that, prior to exceeding 5 percent power, the licensee shall seal-all construction design penetration openings in designated fire barriers or provide compensatory measures. By letter dated March 14,1997, the licensee stated that all nine seals were installed or repaired under nuclear work requests in March 1987, during refueling outage B1R01. Based on the completion of the required action the license condition is no longer required and the proposed deletion of item C., is acceptable. With the deletion of all three items in, reference to the attachment is no longer required. Therefore, the proposed deletion of references to Attachment 1 is acceptable, The licensee proposed to revise Unit 2 license condition 2.C.(2), " Technical Specifications and Environmental Protection Plan," to delete references to Attachment 2. The original was the revised Technical Specifications issued with the original license. With the deletion of Attachment 1 in the previously discussed item, the Technical Specifications are the only remaining attachment to the Unit 2 license. Therefore, the licensee is proposing to delete references to Attachment 2 as containing a revision to Appendix A which contains the Technical Specifications and retain only a direct reference to Appendix A. Since there is now only the one attachment to the Unit 2 license, the staff considers the proposed changes to be acceptable.
The licensee proposed to delete Unit 2 license condition 2.C.(3), " Initial Test Program," which j
states: "Any changes to the Initial Startup Test Program described in Chapter 14 of the FSAR made in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59 shall be reported in accordance with 50.59(b) within one month of such change." Section 14 of the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) discusses the initial test program which was completed with the initial
. commercial operation of the unit. Based on the completion of the initial test program there is no l
further need for this license condition. Therefore, the proposed deletion is acceptable.
The licensee proposed to delete Unit 2 license condition 2.C.(4),
- Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2 Compliance," which states: "The licensee shall submit by March 1,1987, a preliminary report describing how the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2 have been or will be met. The licensee shall submit by September 1,1987, the final report and a l
l schedule for implementation (assuming the NRC approves the DCRDR by March 1,1987)." By letter dated September 1,1987, the licensee submitted the final report describing how the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.97, as specified in Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737, have been or will be met, along with a schedule for implementation. Based on the submittal of the required report, the license condition is no longer required. Therefore, the proposed deletion is acceptable.
The licensee proposed to revise Unit 2 license condition 2.D. to delete the list of exemptions i
from 10 CFR Part 50 and replace it with a statement that no exemptions from 10 CFR Part 50 are required. The listed exemption from 10 CFR 70.24 is retained unchanged. - The only exemption to be deleted is from Appendix J, conceming the testing of containment air locks.
This exemption was rendered moot by license amendment No. 81, dated April 4,1996, which approved the use of Appendix J, Option B. Based on the issuance of this amendment, the deletion of the exemption is acceptable. Based on the elimination the exemption from 10 CFR Part 50 listed in License Condition 2.D., the revision to state that no exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 are required, is acceptable.
The licensee also proposed certain editorial changes as follows.
The licensee proposed to delete the reference to the specific amendment, " Amendment 8," of the Fire Protection Report from Unit 1 License Condition 2.C.(S) and Unit 2 License Condition 2.E. Although Amendment 8 was the current version when the License Conditions were added, the Fire Protection Report has been revised since then. The report is incorporated into the UFSAR by reference and is updated at a frequency consistent with 10 CFR 50.71(e). Revising the License Condition each time the report is updated would be impractical and unnecessary since, lacking a specific revision listing, the most recent revision would be implied. Since the proposed change would delete an obsolete reference and incorporate the most recent reference, the staff considers the change acceptable.
1
' The licensee proposed to delete references to specific dates of various security documents referred to in Unit 1 License Condition 2.E. and Unit 2 License Condition 2.F. When the license condition was added, to incorporate revisions to 10 CFR 73.55, the revision dates of the referenced security documents were included. The licensee has stated that since that time the documents have been revised in accordance with 10 CFR 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p) and will likely be revised again in the future.10 CFR 50.54(p)(2) limits the changes the licensee may make to the security plans without Commission approval to those which do not decrease the safeguards effectiveness. Based on the above, the licensee proposed to delete the reference dates leaving the most recent revision as the implied reference.
Although the reference dates currently provided in the license may not represent the current revision, due to licensee changes made pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(p)(2), they do record the last revision reviewed and approved by the NRC. As such, they document the revision against which license changes made without staff approval will be evaluated. Further,10 CFR
- 50.54(p)(1) states that a licensee may make no change which would decrease the effectiveness of the security plan, or guard training and security plan without prior approval of the Commission. A licensee desiring to make such a change shall submit an application for an amendment to the license pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90. Deletion of the reference dates do not
e 4 -
, 9
.g.
reduce the licensee's regulatory burden for Commission approved revisions because a license amendment is required, and since the current wording of the license conditions recognizes amendments pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(p), deletion of the reference dates is not necessary for
- the licensee to revise the plans as otherwise allowed by the regulations. Based on the above, l
the sts# has concluded that the reference dates provide the staff with an easily identifiable benchmark for NRC approved revisions to the plans and do not impose an unnecessary regulatory burden on the license. Therefore the proposed changes to Unit 1 License Condition 2.E and Unit 2 License Condition 2.F are not approved.
The licensee proposed to delete the statement regarding the schedule of implementation of the changes made in accordance with 10 CFR 73.55. Since this requirement is redundant to the rule and these changes have been completely implemented the deletion of this statement is acceptable.
l
' An additional proposed change affected a page note conceming Unit 1 License Condition 2.E.
Asterisks were added to the license condition to indicate where the note applies. This change is acceptable. All references to the Final Safety Analysis Report in the Unit 1 and Unit 2
. licenses are proposed to be changed to the current name, the Updated Final Safety Analysis
- Report. -This change is acceptable. In the Unit 2 license, the reference to
- Byron /Braidwood" is changed to " Licensee", consistent with Unit 1. This change is acceptable. The format of Unit 2 License Condition 2.B. is proposed to be changed consistent with Unit 1 such that
" Commonwealth Edison" is only stated in the opening sentence rather that with each item. This change is acceptable. Finally, at various locations in the licenses, the old abbreviation for the company name, CECO, is changed to the new abbreviation, Comed. This change is acceptable.
1
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
4 In accordance with the Commission's regulations,.the Illinois State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21,51.32 and 51.35, an environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact has been prepared and published in the Federal Begigiar on July 7,1999 (64 FR 36722).
Accordingly, based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission has determined that the issuance of this amendment will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
l
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurano.1 that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: John B. Hickman, NRR Date: August 10,' 1999
.