ML17146A235
| ML17146A235 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 01/09/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17146A234 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8601160386 | |
| Download: ML17146A235 (4) | |
Text
~gg AEVI
+
nO DQ g
+~
gO
++*++
~
UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION AMENDMENT NO.
21 TO NPF-22 SUS UEHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION UNIT 2 DOCKET NO. 50-388 Introduction By letter dated September 30, 1985, Pennsylvania Power and Light Company (PP8L), the licensee for Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Unit 2 requested deletion of License Condition 2.C.(14) concerning compliance with NUREG-0612, "Control of Heavy Loads at Nuclear Power Plants."
The above license condition was initially imposed in the Susquehanna Unit 2 safety evaluation report and required that the licensee make commitments as necessary to satisfy the criteria of Phase II (Sections
- 5. 1.2 through 5. 1.6) of NUREG-0612 prior to startup from the first refueling outage.
Evaluation Subsequent to the issuance of the Unit 2 license, the staff eliminated the need for further effort regarding compliance with the criteria of Phase II of NUREG-0612 on the basis of Phase I (Section 5.1.1) compliance and Phase II reviews to date.
These Phase II reviews consisted of an evaluation of the responses for twelve randomly selected operating plants which formed a pilot program.
The staff determined from these reviews that the IIIajority of risk associated with heavy loads handling has been resolved'y implementation of Phase I, and in addition, no further heavy loads handling concerns were identified from the Phase II pilot program reviews.
It is, therefore, concluded that the objective identified in NUREG-0612 for providing "maximum practical defense in depth" is satisfied without the need for further action regarding Phase II.
Therefore, the staff finds it acceptable to delete License Condition 2.C.(14) from License NPF-22.
The above determination has been documented on a generic basis for all applicable plants in NRC Generic Letter 85-11.
Environmental Consideration This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and a change in reporting requirements.
The staff has determined that the amendment involves 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 gccupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant'hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accordingly; this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) and (c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51;22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
860iib038b 860i09 PDR
@DOCK 0500D388'~
P PDR
Conclusion We have 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and
'ecurity or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: January 9, 1986
DISTRIBUTION Docket file NRC PDR Local PDR PD83 Reading EAdensam EMylton MCampagnone
- Goldberg, OELD LMarmon BGrimes JPartlow TBarnhart (4)
WJones ACRS (10)
't' III
'I