ML20035B446
| ML20035B446 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Duane Arnold  |
| Issue date: | 03/29/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20035B444 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9304010378 | |
| Download: ML20035B446 (2) | |
Text
.*
>3 EtC o
UNITED STATES
!~~,
~,j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,y WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.192 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-49 IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY CENTRAL IOWA POWER COOPERATIVE CORN BELT POWER COOPERATIVE DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER DOCKET NO. 50-331
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Amendment No. 186 issued August 25, 1992, to the Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC)
Technical Specifications (TS) revised Section 3/4.9 Core Alterations. That amendment inadvertently made the Source Range Monitor (SRM) functional test interval daily. This amendment changes the functional test interval for the SRMs to weekly.
2.0 EVALUATION i
Surveillance Requirement 4.9.B.1 was revised in Amendment No. 186 to improve the clarity of the TS. The SRM response check and functional test were addressed in the same Surveillance Requirement. The response check did have a daily require-ment while the functional test did not have an interval specified.
k' hen the response check was separated from the functional test requirement in Amendment No.
186, the daily requirement was inadvertently carried to the functional test.
l A weekly interval is consistent with DAEC practice in accordance with doing their Surveillance Testing Program while accomplishing core alterations.
This weekly interval is also consistent with the DAEC TS Bases as well as NUREG-1433, Standard Technical Specifications.
The staff has reviewed the licensee's submittal which requests a revision to the TS to change the SRM functional test interval from daily to weekly. Based on its review, the staff concludes that the requested change is acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Iowa State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
i 9304010378 930329 PDR ADDCK 0500 1
P
i
.o
[
. l
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
S This amendment changes a surveillance requirement. 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 occupational radiation i
exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the i
amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (58 FR 12264). Accordingly, the amendment meets l
the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR i
51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or j
environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of th.
amendment.
50 CONCLUSION The staff 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 j
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 ano safety of the public.
r Principal Contributor:
Robert Pulsifer Date: March 29, 1993 i
l i
l l
5
,