ML19031C891

Issuance of Amendment Nos. 288 and 282 Regarding Revised Reactor Core Safety Limit to Reflect WCAP-17642-PA Revision 1

ML19031C891
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	08/15/2019
From:	Perry Buckberg Plant Licensing Branch II
To:	Nazar M Florida Power & Light Co
Buckberg P, NRR/DORL LPL2-2 415-1383
References
EPID L-2018-LLA-0120, WCAP-17642-PA, Rev 1
Download: ML19031C891 (15)

Text

UNITED STATES WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 August 15, 2019 Mr. Mano Nazar President, Nuclear Division and Chief Nuclear Officer Florida Power & Light Company 700 Universe Blvd., Mail Stop EX/JB Juno Beach, FL 33408

SUBJECT:

TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 3 AND 4 - ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT NOS. 288 AND 282 REGARDING REVISED REACTOR CORE SAFETY LIMIT TO REFLECT TOPICAL REPORT WCAP-17642-P-A, REVISION 1 (EPID L-2018-LLA-0120)

Dear Mr. Nazar:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 288 to Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-31 and Amendment No. 282 to Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-41 for Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4, respectively. The amendments change the technical specifications in response to the application from Florida Power & Light Company dated May 3, 2018, as supplemented by letter August 14, 2019.

The amendments revise the technical specifications by revising the Reactor Core Safety Limit 2.1.1.b peak fuel centerline temperature to reflect the fuel centerline melt temperature

• specified in Topical Report WCAP-17642-P-A, Revision 1, "Westinghouse Performance Analysis and Design Model (PADS)."

A copy of the related safety evaluation is also enclosed. Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's biweekly Federal Register notice.

Perry H. ckberg, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 11-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251

Enclosures:

1. Amendment No. 288 to DPR-31

2. Amendment No. 282 to DPR-41

3. Safety Evaluation cc: Listserv

UNITED STATES WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555.0001 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-250 TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NO. 3 AMENDMENT TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 288 Renewed License No. DPR-31

1. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:

A. The application for amendment by Florida Power & Light Company (the licensee) dated May 3, 2018, as supplemented by a letter August 14, 2019, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and 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 rules and 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 compljance with the Commission's regulations; 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.

Enclosure 1

2. Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment, and paragraph 3.B. of Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-31 is hereby amended to read as follows:

B. Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment No. 288, are hereby incorporated into this renewed license.

The Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B is hereby incorporated into this renewed license. The licensee 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 for the Unit 3 Cycle 32 reload campaign, currently scheduled for fall 2021.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Undine Shoop, Chief Plant Licensing Branch 11-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Changes to the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications Date of Issuance: August 15, 2019

UNITED STATES WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555J.1001 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-251 TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NO. 4 AMENDMENT TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 282 Renewed License No. DPR-41

1. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:

A The application for amendment by Florida Power & Light Company (the licensee) dated May 3, 2018, as supplemented by a letter August 14, 2019, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and 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 rules and 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; 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.

Enclosure 2

2. Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment, and paragraph 3.B. of Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-41 is hereby amended to read as follows:

B. Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment No. 282, are hereby incorporated into this renewed license.

The Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B is hereby incorporated into this renewed license. The licensee 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 for the Unit 4 Cycle 32 reload campaign, currently scheduled in fall of 2020.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

~~

Undine Shoop, Chief Plant Licensing Branch 11-2 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nucl~ar Reactor Regulation

Attachment:

Changes to the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications Date of Issuance: August 1 5, 201 9

ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENTS AMENDMENT NO. 288 TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-31 AMENDMENT NO. 282 TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-41 TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 3 AND 4 DOCKET NOS. 50-250 AND 50-251 Replace page 3 of Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-31 with the attached revised page 3. The revised page is identified by amendment number and contains a marginal line indicating the area of change.

Replace page 3 of Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-41 with the attached revised page 3. The revised page is identified by amendment number and contains a marginal line indicating the area of change.

Replace the following page of the Appendix A Technical Specifications with the attached revised page. The revised page is identified by amendment number and contains a marginal line indicating the area of change.

Remove 2-1

3 E. Pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 40 and 70 to receive, possess, and use at any time 100 milligrams each of any source or special nuclear material without restriction to chemical or physical form, for sample analysis or instrument calibration or associated with radioactively contaminated apparatus; F. Pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30 and 70, to possess, but not separate, such byproduct and special nuclear materials as may be produced by the operation of Turkey Point Units Nos. 3 and 4.

3. This renewed operating license shall be deemed to contain and is subject to the conditions specified in the following Commission regulations: 10 CFR Part 20, Section 30.34 of 10 CFR Part 30, Section 40.41 of 10 CFR Part 40, Sections 50.54 and 50.59 of 10 CFR Part 50, and Section 70.32 of 10 CFR Part 70; 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 below:

A. Maximum Power Level The applicant is authorized to operate the facility at reactor core power levels not in excess of 2644 megawatts (thermal).

B. Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment No. 288, are hereby incorporated into this renewed license. The Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B is hereby incorporated into this renewed license. The licensee shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.

C. Final Safety Analysis Report The licensee's Final Safety Analysis Report supplement submitted pursuant to 10 CFR 54.21 (d ), as revised on November 1, 2001, describes certain future inspection activities to be completed before the period of extended operation.

The licensee shall complete these activities no later than July 19, 2012.

The Final Safety Analysis Report supplement as revised on November 1, 2001, described above, shall be included in the next scheduled update to the Final Safety Analysis Report required by 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4), following the issuance of this renewed license. Until that update is complete, the licensee may make changes to the programs described in such supplement without prior Commission approval, provided that the licensee evaluates each such change pursuant to the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 50.59 and otherwise complies with the requirements in that section.

Unit 3 Renewed License No. DPR-31 Amendment No. 288

3 E. Pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 40 and 70 to receive, possess, and use at any time 100 milligrams each of any source or special nuclear material without restriction to chemical or physical form, for sample analysis or instrument calibration or associated with radioactively contaminated apparatus; F. Pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Parts 30 and 70, to possess, but not separate, such byproduct and special nuclear materials as may be produced by the operation of Turkey Point Units Nos. 3 and 4.

3. This renewed operating license shall be deemed to contain and is subject to the conditions specified in the following Commission regulations: 10 CFR Part 20, Section 30.34 of 10 CFR Part 30, Section 40.41 of 10 CFR Part 40, Sections 50.54 and 50.59 of 10 CFR Part 50, and Section 70.32 of 10 CFR Part 70; 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 below:

A. Maximum Power Level The applicant is authorized to operate the facility at reactor core power levels not in excess of 2644 megawatts (thermal).

B. Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment No. 282, are hereby incorporated into this renewed license. The Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B is hereby incorporated into this renewed license. The licensee shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.

C. Final Safety Analysis Report The licensee's Final Safety Analysis Report supplement submitted pursuant to 10 CFR 54.21 (d), as revised on November 1, 2001, describes certain future inspection activities to be completed before the period of extended operation.

The licensee shall complete these activities no later than April 10, 2013.

The Final Safety Analysis Report supplement as revised on November 1, 2001, described above, shall be included in the next scheduled update to the Final Safety Analysis Report required by 10 CFR 50. 71 (e )( 4), following the issuance of this renewed license. Until that update is complete, the licensee may make changes to the programs described in such supplement without prior Commission approval, provided that the licensee evaluates each such change pursuant to the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 50.59 and otherwise complies with the requirements in that section.

Unit 4 Renewed License No. DPR-41 Amendment No. 282

2.1 SAFETY LIMITS REACTOR CORE 2.1.1 The combination of THERMAL POWER, pressurizer pressure, and the highest operating loop coolant temperature (T avg) shall not exceed the limits specified in the COLR, for 3 loop operation; and the following Safety Limits shall not be exceeded:

a. The departure from nucleate boiling ratio (DNBR) shall be maintained 2: 1.17 for the WRB-1 DNB correlation.

b. The peak fuel centerline temperature shall be maintained < 5080°F, decreasing by 9°F per 10,000 MWD/MTU of burnup.

APPLICABILITY: MODES 1 and 2.

ACTION:

Whenever the point defined by the combination of the highest operating loop average temperature and THERMAL POWER has exceeded the appropriate pressurizer pressure line, be in HOT STANDBY within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />.

REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM PRESSURE 2.1.2 The Reactor Coolant System pressure shall not exceed 2735 psig.

APPLICABILITY: MODES 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.

ACTION:

MODES 1 and 2:

Whenever the Reactor Coolant System pressure has exceeded 2735 psig, be in HOT STANDBY with the Reactor Coolant System pressure within its limit within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />.

MODES 3, 4 and 5:

Whenever the Reactor Coolant System pressure has exceeded 2735 psig, reduce the Reactor Coolant System pressure to within its limit within 5 minutes.

TURKEY POINT - UNITS 3 & 4 2-1 AMENDMENT NOS. 288 AND 282

UNITED STATES WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION AMENDMENT NO. 288 TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-31 AMENDMENT NO. 282 TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-41 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY TURKEY POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NOS. 3 AND 4 DOCKET NOS. 50-250 AND 50-251

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By application dated May 3, 2018, as supplemented by letter dated August 14, 2019 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession Nos. ML181278714 and ML19226A366, respecitvely), Florida Power & Light Company (the licensee) submitted a license amendment request (LAR) for Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4 (Turkey Point). The proposed amendments would revise the Turkey Point Technical Specification (TS) reactor core safety limit (SL) 2.1.1.b peak fuel centerline temperature to reflect the fuel centerline melt temperature specified in Topical Report (TR)

WCAP-17642-P-A, Revision 1, "Westinghouse Performance Analysis and Design Model (PADS)," dated November 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17338A396 (non-proprietary version)).

The supplemental letter dated August 14, 2019, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register on July 3, 2018, (83 FR 31185). 1

2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION

2.1 System Description The proposed amendments are related to the Turkey Point nuclear fuel. Reactor core SL 2.1.1.b protects against overheating of the nuclear fuel and fuel cladding, which would lead to the fuel centerline temperature rising above the fuel melting point. The consequences of fuel and cladding overheating include fuel clad perforation, which leads to nuclear fission product 1

A corrected notice was published on July 10, 2018 (83 FR 31981 ), which changed the deadline for filing requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene from September 3, 2018, to September 4, 2018, because of the Federal holiday.

Enclosure 3

release to the reactor coolant. Clad perforation can occur when the fuel centerline temperature reaches the melting point for the fuel and the fuel pellet expands. Reactor core SL 2.1.1.b is dependent on burnup and is applicable when the reactor is critical in MODES 1 and 2.

2.2 Regulations and Guidance Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 were licensed prior to the 1971 publication of Appendix A, "General Design Criteria [GDC] for Nuclear Power Plants," to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities." As such, Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 are not licensed to the GDC of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A. Section 1.3 of the Turkey Point Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (ADAMS Accession No. ML18117A088) provides a summary of the 1967 draft GDC proposed by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, as amended by the Atomic Industrial Forum (circa October 2, 1967). The NRC staff considered the following proposed draft GDC as being applicable to the review of the proposed Turkey Point TS SL 2.1.1.b change:

• 1967 Proposed Draft GDC 6, which requires that the reactor core, with its related controls and protection systems, be designed to function throughout its design lifetime without exceeding acceptable fuel limits specified to preclude damage.

Additional statutes and regulations that are applicable to the proposed TS SL 2.1.1.b change include:

• Section 182a of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, which requires applicants for nuclear power plant operating licenses to include TSs as part of the license to enable the Commission to find that the utilization of special nuclear material will be in accord with the common defense and security and will provide adequate protection to the health and safety of the public.

• 10 CFR 50.36, which requires that TSs include items in the following categories:

( 1) safety limits, limiting safety system settings, and limiting control settings; (2) limiting conditions for operation; (3) surveillance requirements; (4) design features; (5) administrative controls; (6) decommissioning; (7) initial notification; and (8) written reports.

• 10 CFR 50.90, which requires NRC approval for any modification to, addition to, or deletion from the TSs.

2.3 Licensee's Proposed Changes The licensee proposes to revise the TS reactor core SL 2.1.1.b peak fuel centerline temperature to reflect the fuel centerline melt temperature specified in TR WCAP-17642-P-A, Revision 1.

The current Turkey Point TS SL 2.1.1.b states:

The peak fuel centerline temperature shall be maintained < 5080°F, decreasing by 58°F per 10,000 MWD/MTU of burnup. .

The licensee requests that Turkey Point TS SL 2.1.1.b be revised to state:

The peak fuel centerline temperature shall be maintained< S080°F, decreasing by 9°F per 10,000 MWD/MTU of burnup.

3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

The scope of the NRC staff's review is limited to the proposed change related to the SL for peak fuel centerline temperature. The proposed limit reflects the limit in TR WCAP-17642-P-A, Revision 1 (PADS methodology). Additionally, the licensee provided a description of the PADS methodology, which the licensee stated that it intends to implement in the future. The change in the SL is not dependent on the implementation of the PADS methodology since the SL can be used independently of the methodology, as described in the following paragraph.

The empirically derived fuel centerline melt temperature described in the PADS methodology is based on fuel properties described in open literature. The description of the fuel properties can be found in (1) S.G. Popov; J.J. Carbajo; V.K. Ivanov; and G.L. Yoder, 'Thermophysical Properties of MOX and U02 Fuels Including the Effects of Irradiation," ORNL/TM-2000/3S1 (2000) and (2) J.J. Carbajo; G.L. Yoder; S.G. Popov; and V.K. Ivanov, "A Review of the Thermophysical Properties of MOX and U02 Fuels," Journal of Nuclear Materials, 299, 181 (2001 ). Since the fuel centerline melt temperature is based on inherent fuel properties, it is not dependent on any specific calculational methodology and is, therefore, acceptable as a standalone limit. 2 3.1 TS SL 2.1.1.b Change Evaluation In the LAR, the licensee requests to change Turkey Point TS SL 2.1.1.b to reflect the fuel centerline melt temperature found in the PADS methodology. Turkey Point TS SL 2.1.1.b limits the peak fuel centerline temperature. For Conditions I and II events (i.e., normal operation and anticipated operational occurrences), the reactor protection system is designed to ensure that the peak fuel centerline temperature does not exceed the fuel melt temperature criterion. The intent of this criterion is to avoid gross fuel melting.

The NRC staff determined that the peak fuel centerline temperature is not dependent on the PADS methodology, as discussed in the previous section. The staff evaluated the peak fuel centerline temperature and determined that is it applicable to Turkey Point, since the properties of the fuel design in use at Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 are consistent with the property data used to generate the proposed SL.

The proposed SL was empirically derived and covers the lower bound of the fuel property data, which is conservative. Additionally, during the review of the PADS methodology, the NRC staff compared the fuel centerline melting temperatures in PADS to the fuel centerline melting temperature in the NRC's confirmatory calculation code, "FRAPCON." The PADS fuel centerline melting temperature is less than that in FRAPCON, which is conservative. The staff determined that its analysis and technical justification in the safety evaluation of the PADS fuel centerline melting temperature is directly applicable to Turkey Point since the SL in the PADS 2

The two identified references provide the data describing the fuel properties. The specific burnup dependence is provided in Section 6.1.5 of TR WCAP-17642-P-A based on an assessment of these data. The NRC staff determined that this burnup dependence was acceptable as described in Section 3. 7.12 of the staffs safety evaluation approving TR WCAP-17642-P-A

methodology is applicable to Turkey Point (as described in the previous paragraph). Therefore, the NRC staff determined that the proposed SL is conservative for Turkey Point.

As previously discussed, the peak fuel centerline temperature SL is independent of the PADS methodology. Therefore, the NRC staff reviewed the proposed SL to ensure that it is supported by the current licensing basis safety analyses. The current licensing basis safety analyses use the existing SL 2.1.1.b for fuel melt as an acceptance criterion as required by the current methodology. Thus, the licensee will continue to be required to meet the existing SL when using its current licensing basis safety analyses even with the implementation of the proposed SL. Since the existing SL for peak fuel centerline temperature is more restrictive than the proposed limit, the current licensing basis safety analyses will remain conservative to the proposed SL Thus, the staff determined that the proposed limit is acceptable with the Turkey Point current licensing basis.

• The licensee's requested change meets the requirements of the 1967 Proposed Draft GDC 6, Section 182a of the Atomic Energy Act; 10 CFR 50.36; and 10 CFR 50.90, since the peak fuel centerline temperature is based on a conservative evaluation of test data that is applicable to the fuel design used at Turkey Point, and since the proposed limit will ensure that fuel melt is precluded during conditions of normal operations and under anticipated operational occurrences. Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that this change is acceptable.

3.2 Consideration of WCAP-17642-P-A Limitations and Conditions The licensee stated that it intends to implement the PADS methodology and described how applicable limitations and conditions in the NRC staffs safety evaluation of the methodology would be addressed. While the proposed change to the SL is independent of the implementation of the PADS methodology, the staff reviewed this section of the LAR to ensure that the licensee's approach would support the proposed SL The staff notes that there are other limitations and conditions in the PADS safety evaluation that were not addressed in the LAR Since the licensee is not requesting in the LAR to implement the PADS methodology, its failure to address all of the limitations and conditions in the LAR is not material to the staff's

. review.

The Turkey Point LAR addressed limitations and conditions (a) and (b) in Section 4.1 of the NRC staff safety evaluation of the PADS SE. Adherence to limitation and condition (a) ensures that the proposed SL applies to Turkey Point. If limitation and condition (a) is not satisfied, then a different SL for fuel melting would be needed. In addition, limitation and condition (b) requires that, should PADS be implemented at any point, the Turkey Point specific analyses are not to be used to predict fuel conditions beyond the melting point.

Limitation and condition (a) states, in part:

The NRC staff limits the applicability of the PADS code and methodology for cladding, fuel types and reactor for the ranges that are listed ....

The NRC staff confirmed that Turkey Point uses Westinghouse fuel that meets the constraints identified in limitation and condition (a). As such, the staff is assured that the proposed SL is applicable to Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 in that it reflects an acceptable limit on the peak fuel centerline temperature that would preclude fuel melting. Based on the confirmation provided by the licensee, the staff determined that this approach to address limitation and condition (a) is acceptable to change TS SL 2.1.1.b for Turkey Point.

Limitation and condition (b) states:

The application of PADS should at no time exceed the fuel melting temperature as calculated by PADS due to the lack of properties for molten fuel in PADS and other properties such as thermal conductivity and FGR [fission gas release].

In the LAR, the licensee stated that it "will limit the peak fuel centerline temperature per this amendment request." The NRC staff determined that the licensee's statement is acceptable because the LAR specifically proposes to change the peak fuel centerline temperature SL to ensure that fuel melt is precluded during conditions for normal operation and anticipated operational occurrences, consistent with the requirements of the 1967 Proposed Draft GDC 6.

4.0 STATE CONSULTATION

In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the NRC staff notified the State of Florida official (Ms. Cynthia Becker, M.P.H., Chief of the Bureau of Radiation Control, Florida Department of Health) on January 30, 2019 (ADAMS Accession No. ML190308869), of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

The amendments change requirements with respect to the installation or use of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. 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, which was published in the Federal Register on July 3, 2018 (83 FR 31185) (corrected July 10, 2018 (83 FR 31981 )), that the amendments involve no significant hazar:ds consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding. 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) th~re is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) there is reasonable assurance that 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: Diana Woodyatt Date: August 15, 2019

ML19031C891 *b memorandum **b e-mail OFFICE NRR/DORL/LPL2-2/PM NRR/DORL/LPL2-2/LA NRR/DSS/SRXB/BC*

NAME PBuckberg BClayton; LRonewicz JBorromeo DATE 2/11/19 2/7 /19; 8/15/19 OFFICE NRR/DSS/STSB/BC** NRR/DSS/S NPB/BC**

NAME PSnyder RLukes DATE 7/29/19 7/29/19 OFFICE NRR/DORL/LPL2-2/BC NRR/DORULPL2-2/PM NAME UShoop PBuckberg DATE 8/15 /19 8/15/19