ML20011E294
| ML20011E294 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 02/05/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20011E293 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9002130130 | |
| Download: ML20011E294 (2) | |
Text
,,
?
{
l is aac
\\
UMTED STATES -
8/
- a NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4-7, p
WASHING TON, D. C. 20666
+
,f:
-i SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE- 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION; RELATED TO AMENDMENT N0'.137 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO.' DPR-32 AND AMENDMENT _ NO.137 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE fl0. DPR-37 VIRGIN 1 A ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY HRRY POWER STATION. UNIT NOS.1 AND 2 DOCKET h05. 50-280 AND 50-281 INTRODUCTION By letter oateo Septerr.ber 1,1989, as supplemented December 28, 1989, the Virginia Electric and Power Company (the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Speifications (TS) for Surry Power Station, Units No. I and 2 regaroing errors associated with reactor-trip breaker testing. The proposed.
action would correct the errors found in Table 4.1-1 of TS 4.1, " Operational Safety Review."
'l The Deceirber 28, 1989 letter corrected a typographical error in Table 4.1-1.
Therefore,.this letter did not change the action noticed in the Federal Register y
on Novarter 1,-1989 and does not alter the the staff's initial no significant hazaros consideration determination.
DISCUSSION AhD EVALUATION The proposed changes to TS 4.1, Table 4.1-1, Jtem 36:
Reactor Trip Bypass Ereaker, correct errors which do not reflect current testing conditions as they apply to the bypass br6akers.
In the Remarks coluno, item (1), the woro
" Local" is being replaced with the ' word " Remote" to describe the location for the initiation of the breaker test prior to placing it in~ service.
In item.
(2), the word " shunt" is being replaced with "undervoltage". These changes L
will accurately reflect modifications made to the Surry reactor tri) brea kers L
in accordance with Generic Letter (GL) 83-28 and GL 85-09. Thus, tie staff
)
finds the proposed TS revision to be acceptable, o
h ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION L
These amendments involve a change to a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in-10 CFR Part 20. We have determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, ano no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be releaseo offsitc, and that there is no significant increase in a
individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Comission has previously issued a proposeo finding that these amenonents involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accordingly, these amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical L
exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no l
environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these arrendments.
9002130130 900205 7
PDR-ADOCK 05000280 1,
p PDC y
. : 7--
,:, : ; +..'
^
j;; :&.
- j
. CONCt.USION 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 Comission's regulations-and the issuance of-tc
~
.these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and_ security or to the health and safety of the public.
h Dated: _ February 5,1990 1
.i Principal Contributor:.
D. Roberts:
R 1
i i
4 d
i 1
[
1 l.
I 1.
Lu