ML17263A417
| ML17263A417 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 10/12/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17263A416 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9310180049 | |
| Download: ML17263A417 (2) | |
Text
<p,8 RE0y<
Wp
+
0 Cy OO (N
/p ~w*w~
~
~
-uNlvEo SVATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMlSSlON WASHINGTON. D.C. 20555-0001 S
Y VALUA ION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED 0
AM NOMEN NO. 55 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.
DPR-18 ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION R.
E.
GINNA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-244
- 1. 0 INTRODUCTION By letters dated March 20,
- 1992, and August 20,
- 1993, superseding the letter of October 25,
- 1991, Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation (the licensee) submitted a license amendment request for changes to the R.
E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, Technical Specifications (TS).
The requested'changes would revise TS 5. 1 and Figure 5. 1-1 to define, rather than depict, the site boundary.
This proposed change maintains the Ginna Station TS consistent with 10 CFR 50.36(c)(4),
in that it depicts the existing exclusion area boundary<
coincident with the Unrestricted Area Boundary, and it would eliminate the indication of the Site Area Boundary from Figure 5. 1-1, This proposed change also has no effect on the RG&E security or emergency plans.
- 2. 0 EVALUATION The proposed TS in the March 20, 1992, license amendment request consists of sections
- 5. 1, 5. 1. 1, and 5. 1.2.
Sections
- 5. 1 and 5. 1. 1 contain the exact same wording as the current TS, except in Section
- 5. 1.2, it adds a definition of the site boundary.
The staff finds that the repetition of the wording in the proposed TS 5. 1. 1 as in the current TS 5.1, such as:
for the purposes of implementing Ginna Radiological Technical Specifications, and for evaluating radiological releases to Unrestricted Area, the Unrestricted Area Boundary is assumed to coincide with the Exclusion Area Boundary clarifies that there is no change in the radiological releases to the Unrestricted Area for this license amendment.
Therefore, this proposed TS change can be considered as administrative in nature.
- Further, in the proposed TS Figure 5. 1-1, the indication of site boundary has been erased, but the figure depicts the location of Ginna Exclusion Area Boundary as unchanged.
And TS 5. 1. 1 clearly described that:
the Ginna Exclusion Area Boundary (also called Unrestricted Area Boundary) 9axoi80049
~3~o~a PDR ADOCK 05000244 P
By definition of 10CFR20.3(17),
"Unrestricted area means any area access to which is not controlled by the licensee for purposes of protection of individuals from exposure to radiation and radioactive materials, and any area used for residential quarters."
The staff noted that the current TS,5. 1 and the proposed TS 5. 1. 1 contain the same wording that "the Unrestricted Area Boundary is assumed to coincide with the Exclusion Area Boundary."
Therefore, there is no increased public exposure to radiation and radioactive materials due to the proposed license amendment.
The staff concludes that the proposed license amendment is acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New York State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
- 4. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONS IDERATION The amendment.changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a.
facility component within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the'mounts, 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 amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (58 FR 36444).
Accordingly, the amendment meets 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 amendment.
- 5. 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:
Angela T.
Chu Lemoine (Jay)
Cunningham Date:
October 12, 1993