ML083500478
| ML083500478 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 01/02/2009 |
| From: | Bhalchandra Vaidya Plant Licensing Branch 1 |
| To: | Spence W PPL Corp |
| vaidya B, NRR/Dorl/lpl1-1, 415-3308 | |
| References | |
| TAC MD9301, TAC MD9302 | |
| Download: ML083500478 (18) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 January 2, 2009 Mr. William H. Spence Executive Vice President Chief Operating Officer/Chief Nuclear Officer PPL Corporation Two North Ninth Street, GENTW16 Allentown, PA 18101-1179
SUBJECT:
SUSQUEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT RE: ADOPTION OF TSTF-460-A, REVISION 0, "CONTROL ROD SCRAM TIME TEST FREQUENCY" USING CONSOLIDATED LINE ITEM IMPROVEMENT PROCESS (TAC NOS.
MD9301 AND MD9302)
Dear Mr. Spence:
The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment NO,249to Facility Operating License No. NPF-14 and Amendment N0228 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-22 for the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (SSES), Units 1 and 2. These amendments consist of changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) in response to your application dated July 7, 2008.
The amendments revised the TS testing frequency for the Surveillance Requirement (SR) in TS 3.1.4, "Control Rod Scram Times." The change revised the frequency of SR 3.1.4.2, control rod scram time testing, from "120 days cumulative operation in Mode 1" to "200 days cumulative operation in Mode 1." These changes are based on TS Task Force (TSTF) change traveler TSTF-460 (Revision 0) that has been approved generically for the Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) Standard TS, NUREG-1433 (BWR/4) and NUREG-1434 (BWR/6) by revising the frequency of SR 3.1.4.2, control rod scram time testing, from "120 days cumulative operation in MODE 1" to "200 days cumulative operation in MODE 1."
W. H. Spence -2 A copy of our safety evaluation is also enclosed. Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's next regular Biweekly Federal Register Notice.
Sincerely, Bhalchandra K. Vaidya, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No.249 to License No. NPF-14
- 2. Amendment NO.228 to License No. NPF-22
- 3. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: Distribution via ListServe
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 PPL SUSQUEHANNA, LLC ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
DOCKET NO. 50-387 SUSQUEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 1 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No.249 License No. NPF-14
- 1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or the NRC) having found that:
A. The application for the amendment filed by PPL Susquehanna, LLC, dated July 7, 2008, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B. The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the requlations of the Commission; C. There is reasonable assurance: (i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; D. The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E. The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.
-2
- 2. Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Technical Specifications as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment and paragraph 2.C.(2) of the Facility Operating License No. NPF-14 is hereby amended to read as follows:
(2) Technical Specifications and Environmental Protection Plan The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment No. 249 and the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B, are hereby incorporated in the license. PPL Susquehanna, LLC shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.
- 3. This license amendment is effective as of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Mark G. Kowal, Chief Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Attachment:
Changes to the License and Technical Specifications Date of Issuance: January 2, 2009
ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 249 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-14 DOCKET NO. 50-387 Replace the following page of the Facility Operating License with the attached revised page.
The revised page is identified by amendment number and contains marginal lines indicating the areas of change.
REMOVE INSERT Page 3 Page 3 Replace the following page of the Appendix A Technical Specifications with the attached revised page. The revised page is identified by amendment number and contain marginal lines indicating the areas of change.
REMOVE INSERT 3.1-13 3.1.13
-3 (4) PPL Susquehanna, LLC, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30,40, and 70, to receive, possess, and use in amounts as required any byproduct, source or special nuclear material without restriction to chemical or physical form, for sample analysis or instrument calibration or associated with radioactive apparatus or components; and (5) PPL Susquehanna, LLC, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, and 70, to possess, but not separate, such byproduct and special nuclear materials as may be produced by the operation of the facility.
C. This license shall be deemed to contain and is subject to the conditions specified in the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I and is subject to all applicable provisions of the Act and to the rules, regulations and orders of the Commission now or hereafter in effect; and is subject to the additional conditions specified or incorporated below:
(1) Maximum Power Level PPL Susquehanna, LLC is authorized to operate the facility at reactor core power levels not in excess of 3952 megawatts thermal in accordance with the conditions specified herein. The preoperational tests, startup tests and other items identified in License Conditions 2.C.(36), 2.C.(37), 2.C.(38), and 2.C.(39) to this license shall be completed as specified.
(2) Technical Specifications and Environmental Protection Plan The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment No. 249 and the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B are hereby incorporated in the license. PPL Susquehanna, LLC shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.
For Surveillance Requirements (SRs) that are new in Amendment 178 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-14, the first performance is due at the end of the first surveillance interval that begins at implementation of Amendment 178. For SRs that existed prior to Amendment 178, including SRs with modified acceptance criteria and SRs whose frequency of performance is being extended, the first performance is due at the end of the first surveillance interval that begins on the date the Surveillance was last performed prior to implementation of Amendment 178.
(3) Conduct of Work Activities During Fuel Load and Initial Startup The operating licensee shall review by committee all facility construction, Preoperational Testing, and System Demonstration activities performed concurrently with facility initial fuel loading or with the facility Startup Test Amendment No. s. -MJ, 4-78, 400, ~, 4-94, ua,~, ~, ~, ~, ~, 24-1-, ~, ~, ~, 246, ~,
24+,~, 249
PPL Rev.
Control Rod Scram Times 3.1.4 SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS (continued)
SURVEILLANCE FREQUENCY SR 3.1.4.2 Verify, for a representative sample, each tested 200 days cumulative control rod scram time is within the limits of operation in MODE 1 Table 3.1.4-1 with reactor steam dome pressure
~ 800 psiq.
Prior to declaring control rod SR 3.1.4.3 Verify each affected control rod scram time is OPERABLE after work on within the limits of Table 3.1.4-1 with any reactor control rod or CRD System steam dome pressure.
that could affect scram time SR 3.1.4.4 Verify each affected control rod scram time is Prior to exceeding 40% RTP within the limits of Table 3.1.4-1 with reactor after fuel movement within steam dome pressure ~ 800 psig. the affected core cell Prior to exceeding 40% RTP after work on control rod or CRD System that could affect scram time SUSQUEHANNA - UNIT 1 TS / 3.1-13 Amendment 4+8, 2-J+, 249
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 PPLSUSQUEHANNA,LLC ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
DOCKET NO. 50-388 SUSQUEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 2 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 228 License No. NPF-22
- 1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or the NRC) having found that:
A. The application for the amendment filed by PPL Susquehanna, LLC, dated July 7, 2008, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B. The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the regulations of the Commission; C. There is reasonable assurance: (i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; D. The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E. The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.
-2
- 2. Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Technical Specifications as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment and paragraph 2.C.(2) of the Facility Operating License No. NPF-22 is hereby amended to read as follows:
(2) Technical Specifications and Environmental Protection Plan The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment No. 228 and the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B, are hereby incorporated in the license. PPL Susquehanna, LLC shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.
- 3. This license amendment is effective as of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~vr~
Mark G. Kowal, Chief Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Attachment:
Changes to the License and Technical Specifications Date of Issuance: January 2, 2009
ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 228 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. I\IPF-22 DOCKET NO. 50-388 Replace the following page of the Facility Operating License with the attached revised page.
The revised page is identified by amendment number and contains marginal lines indicating the areas of change.
REMOVE INSERT Page 3 Page 3 Replace the following page of the Appendix A Technical Specifications with the attached revised page. The revised page is identified by amendment number and contain marginal lines indicating the areas of change.
REMOVE INSERT 3.1-13 3.1-13
-3 (4) PPL Susquehanna, LLC, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, and 70, to receive, possess, and use in amounts as required any byproduct, source or special nuclear material without restriction to chemical or physical form, for sample analysis or instrument calibration or associated with radioactive apparatus or components; and (5) PPL Susquehanna, LLC, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, and 70, to possess, but not separate, such byproduct and special nuclear materials as may be produced by the operation of the facility.
C. This license shall be deemed to contain and is subject to the conditions specified in the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I and is subject to all applicable provisions of the Act and to the rules, regulations and orders of the Commission now or hereafter in effect; and is subject to the additional conditions specified or incorporated below:
(1) Maximum Power Level PPL Susquehanna, LLC is authorized to operate the facility at reactor core power levels not in excess of 3952 megawatts thermal in accordance with the conditions specified herein. The preoperational test, startup tests and other items identified in License Conditions 2.C.(20), 2.C.(21), 2.C.(22), and 2.C.(23) to this license shall be completed as specified.
(2) Technical Specifications and Environmental Protection Plan The Technical Speci'flcations contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment NO.228 and the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix 8, are hereby incorporated in the license. PPL Susquehanna, LLC shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.
For Surveillance Requirements (SRs) that are new in Amendment 151 to Facility Operating License No. NPF-22, the first performance is due at the end of the first surveillance interval that begins at implementation of Amendment 151. For SRs that existed prior to Amendment 151, including SRs with modified acceptance criteria and SRs whose frequency of performance is being extended, the first performance is due at the end of the first surveillance interval that begins on the date the Surveillance was last performed prior to implementation of Amendment 151.
2.C.(3) PPL Susquehanna, LLC shall implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the approved fire protection program as described in the Fire Protection Review Report for the facility and as approved in Fire Protection Program, Section 9.5, SER, SSER#1, SSER#2, SSER#3, SSER#4, SSER#6, Safety Evaluation of Fire Protection dated August 9, 1989, Safety Evaluation Amendment No. +, 2, -+W, +w;- +&+, ~, ~, +W, ~, +J, 2+4, ~, ~, 2-+7, 2-+8, 2+9,
~,~,~,~,~,~,~, 22+,228
PPL Rev.
Control Rod Scram Times 3.1.4 SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS (continued)
SURVEILLANCE FREQUENCY SR 3.1.4.2 Verify, for a representative sample, each tested 200 days cumulative control rod scram time is within the limits of operation in MODE 1 Table 3.1.4-1 with reactor steam dome pressure
~ 800 psig.
SR 3.1.4.3 Verify each affected control rod scram time is Prior to declaring control rod within the limits of Table 3.1.4-1 with any reactor OPERABLE after work on steam dome pressure. control rod or CRD System that could affect scram time SR 3.1.4.4 Verify each affected control rod scram time is Prior to exceeding 40% RTP within the limits of Table 3.1.4-1 with reactor after fuel movement within steam dome pressure ~ 800 psig. the affected core cell Prior to exceeding 40% RTP after work on control rod or CRD System that could affect scram time SUSQUEHANNA - UNIT 2 TS /3.1-13 Amendment 4&1-, ~,228
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555*0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 249 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-14 AND AMENDMENT NO.228 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-22 PPL SUSQUEHANNA, LLC ALLEGHENY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
SUSQUEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-387 AND 50-388
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated July 7,2008, (Agencywide Documents Access and Management system (ADAMS) Accession No. ML082040623), PPL Susquehanna, LLC (the licensee),
requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) for Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 (SSES-1 and 2).
The proposed changes would revise TS testing frequency for the surveillance requirement (SR) in TS 3.1.4, "Control Rod Scram Times." These changes are based on TS Task Force (TSTF) change traveler TSTF-460 (Revision 0) that has been approved generically for the Boiling-Water Reactor (BWR) Standard TS, NUREG-1433 (BWR/4) and NUREG-1434 (BWR/6) by revising the frequency of SR 3.1.4.2, control rod scram time testing, from "120 days cumulative operation in MODE 1" to "200 days cumulative operation in MODE 1." A notice announcing the availability of this proposed TS change using the consolidated line item improvement process was published in the Federal Register on August 23, 2004 (69 FR 51864).
2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION
The TS requirement governing the control rod scram time surveillance is intended to assure proper function of control rod insertion. Following each refueling outage, all control rod scram times are verified. In addition, periodically during power operation, a representative sample of control rods is selected to be inserted to verify the insertion speed. A representative sample is defined as a sample containing at least 10 percent of the total number of control rods. The current TS stipulates that no more than 20 percent of the control rods in this representative sample can be "slow" during the post outage testing. With more than 20 percent of the sample declared to be "slow" per the criteria in Table 3.1.4-1, additional control rods are tested until this 20 percent criterion (e.g., 20 percent of the entire sample size) is satisfied, or until the total number of "slow" control rods (throughout the core, from all surveillances) exceeds the Limiting Condition for Operation limit. For planned testing, the control rods selected for the sample should be different for each test. The acceptance criterion for at-power surveillance testing will be redefined from 20 percent to
-2 7.5 percent and will be incorporated into the TS Bases in accordance with its Bases Control Program. This tightened acceptance criterion for at-power surveillance aligns with the TS 3.1.4 requirement for the total control rods allowed to have scram times exceeding the specified limit.
The proposed change does not affect any current operability requirements and the test frequency being revised is not specified in regulations. As a result, no regulatory requirements or criteria are affected.
3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION
3.1 Statement of Proposed Changes NUREG-1433, SR 3.1.4.2 states, "Verify, for a representative sample, each tested control rod scram time is within the limits of Table 3.1.4-1 with reactor steam dome pressure ~[800]
psig." NUREG-1434, SR 3.1.4.2 states, "Verify, for a representative sample, each tested control rod scram time is within the limits of Table 3.1.4-1 with reactor steam dome pressure
~[950] psig." Both SRs have a frequency of "120 days cumulative operation in MODE 1."
The proposed change revises the frequency to "200 days cumulative operation in MODE 1."
The Bases are revised to reference the new frequency and to reduce the percentage of the tested rods which can be "slow" from 20 percent to 7.5 percent.
Per the licensee's letter, the required frequency of SR 3.1.4.2, control rod scram time testing, is changed from "120 days cumulative operation in MODE 1" to "200 days cumulative operation in MODE 1."
3.2 Evaluation of Proposed Change The control rod insertion (scram) time test results at SSES Units 1 and 2 have shown the control rod scram rates to be highly reliable. In its submittal dated July 7, 2008, the licensee stated that it has performed a review of the control rod drive system SCRAM time test results for SSES Units 1 and 2. Per the letter, the licensee's review determined the following:
Scram time testing results from 1993 to early 2008 were reviewed. This data represents at least seven operating cycles for each unit and reflects a combined total of more than 9100 individual control rod scram time tests (>5000 on Unit 1 and >4100 on Unit 2), each measuring the scram time at four insertion positions (Positions 45, 39, 25, and 05). The review determined that three control rods exceeded the "slow" control rod scram time criteria at Position 05 during the evaluated period as a result of control cell interference caused by fuel channel bow. No rods exceeded the criteria at Positions 45, 39, or 25. Further information associated with each failure is provided below:
-3 Control Rod Date "Slow" Scram Time to Position 05 U2 Rod 26- 31 March 8, 2003 3.59 seconds UI Rod 18-35 October 2, 2005 3.45 seconds April 22, 2007 3.52 seconds UI Rod 30-31 June 16, 2007 4.39 seconds Each case exceeded the TS "slow" limit of 3.44 seconds to Position 05 specified in LCO 3.1.4, and each was ultimately corrected by addressing the "bowed" fuel channels that were creating the interference condition. As indicated above, Unit 1 Control Rod 30-31 exceeded the "slow" criterion on two occasions. This rod was initially declared "slow" on April 22, 2007 and remained "slow" when tested again on June 16, 2007. This rod was ultimately inserted to Position 00 and declared inoperable on July 14, 2007 based on a projection that the scram time would potentially exceed 6.0 seconds prior to the next scheduled test. An accelerated scram time testing schedule was implemented to trend control rod performance and to ensure continued operability of control rods that were experiencing excessive friction due to channel bow.
In addition to the three control rods that exceeded the "slow" criterion, between 2005 and 2007 (inclusive), nine rods were declared inoperable based upon operational performance resulting from elevated control cell friction that was not sufficient to cause "slow" scram times (i.e., the rod could not be withdrawn, the rod was extremely difficult to insert, or the rod failed the insert stall test). These rods were declared inoperable, not as a result of exceeding any TS criteria, but as a result of conservative, non-TS criteria established in response to the control cell friction phenomena. These rods were fully inserted to Position 00 and declared inoperable prior to exceeding the "slow" criteria.
During the evaluation period from 1993 to early 2008, no control rod exceeded any scram time testing criteria for a reason other than control cell interference caused by fuel channel bow. Although scram time testing of affected control rods was used to ensure operability in accordance with GE channel bow monitoring recommendations, control cell friction was not identified through the normal scram time surveillance.
PPL understands the control cell friction phenomena, and actions have been implemented to eliminate the susceptibility to fuel channel bow interference (Le., no expected bow of a magnitude that would impact scram times). PPL intentionally delayed the submission of this TS change request until the channel friction corrective actions had been completed. PPL has determined that the three "slow" control rods resulting from channel friction between 2003 and 2007 (inclusive) are not indicative of the current condition of the control cells in the SSES Units 1 and 2 cores, and current and future scram time performance is expected to be consistent with the performance observed prior to the occurrence of fuel channel bow induced control cell interference. The historical database therefore substantiates the highly reliable control rod scram time performance at SSES.
Each performance of TS SR 3.1.4.2 (every 120 days in Mode 1) requires 10 percent of the control rods to be tested. This currently results in five (on the current 24-month
- 4 cycle) mid-cycle tests within an operating cycle. Therefore, half of the control rods are not tested during these mid-cycle tests, but are only tested after refueling during the initial cycle testing of each of the 185 control rods. As such, the historical test data shows that a substantial population of individual rods meets the scram time requirements with up to 24 months between tests and provides a basis to conclude that the more frequent testing does not provide any conditioning necessary for adequate performance of the control rod scram function. Future reliability of the SSES scram time performance is expected to remain, at the historically high levels as a result of implementing the proposed change to the mid-cycle periodic testing frequency. Therefore, an extension from 120 to 200 days in Mode 1, and the associated reduction in the number of rods tested mid-cycle, will not introduce an increased risk of having "slow" control rods."
The licensee's letter further states that PPL is making the following regulatory commitment with the understanding that the NRC will include it as a condition for issuance of the requested amendment:
PPL Susquehanna, LLC will incorporate the revised acceptance criterion value of 7.5 percent into the TS Bases for Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Unit 1 and Unit 2 in accordance with the Bases Control Program described in TS 5.5.10.
The control rod insertion time test results at SSES Units 1 and 2 have shown the control rod scram rates to be highly reliable. During the most recent (1993 to early 2008) years of operation, out of more than 9100 control rod insertion tests for both units, only four control rods have been slower than the insertion time limit. The extensive historical database substantiates the claim of high reliability of the SSES Units 1 and 2 control rod drive system.
The licensee's letter states "each performance of TS SR 3.1.4.2 (every 120 days in Mode 1) requires 10 percent of the control rods to be tested. This currently results in five (on the current 24-month cycle) mid-cycle tests within an operating cycle. Therefore, half of the control rods are not tested during these mid-cycle tests, but are only tested after refueling during the initial cycle testing of each of the 185 control rods. As such, the historical test data shows that a substantial population of individual rods meets the scram time requirements with up to 24 months between tests and provides a basis to conclude that the more frequent testing does not provide any conditioning necessary for adequate performance of the control rod scram function."
The acceptance criterion has been redefined for at-power surveillance testing from 20 percent to 7.5 percent when the surveillance period is extended to 200 cumulative days of operation in Mode 1. This tightened acceptance criterion for at-power surveillance aligns with the TS 3.1.4 requirement for the total control rods allowed to have scram times exceeding the specified limit. As stated in the licensee's letter, the licensee will incorporate the revised acceptance criterion value of 7.5 percent into the TS Bases in accordance with their Bases Control Program and as a condition of this license amendment.
The NRC staff considers the extended surveillance interval to be justified by the demonstrated reliability of the control rod insertion system, based on historical control rod scram time test data, and by the more restrictive acceptance criterion for the number of slow rods allowed during at-power surveillance testing. The NRC staff finds the proposed TS change acceptable.
-5
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Pennsylvania State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (73 FR 58675). Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
6.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: R. Grover Date: January 2. 2009
W. H. Spence -2 A copy of our safety evaluation is also enclosed. Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's next regular Biweekly Federal Register Notice.
Sincerely,
/raj Bhalchandra K. Vaidya, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No. 249 to License No. NPF-14
- 2. Amendment No. 228 to License No. NPF-22
- 3. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: Distribution via ListServe DISTRIBUTION PUBLIC PDI-1 RF RidsNrrDorlLPL 1-1 RidsNrrPMBVaidya(hard copy)
S. Little (hard copy) RidsOGCRp RidsNrr..... RidsNrrDorlDpr RidsAcrsAcnw&mMailCenter RidsRg1MailCenter ADAMS Accession No.: ML083500478
- ) No substantial change in SE Input Memo (**) NR Per OGC Memo, ML072980209 OFFICE LPLI-1/PM LPLI-1/LA NRR/ITSB/BC OGC(**) LPLI-1/BC
(*)
NAME BVaidya SLittie RElliot NR MKowal (DPickett for)
DATE 12/22/08 12/22/08 12/08/08 10/29/07 12/30/08 OFFICIAL RECORD COpy