ML20059C020
| ML20059C020 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07001113 |
| Issue date: | 10/28/1993 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059C014 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9310290204 | |
| Download: ML20059C020 (1) | |
Text
'
paojvy t
UNITED STATES p'*
.j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
s WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001
,<< /
OCT 2 81993 DOCKET:
70-1113 LICENSEE: General Electric Company Wilmington, North Carolina
SUBJECT:
SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT: APPLICATION DATED SEPTEMBER 10, 1993, REVISION 11 TO RADIOLOGICAL CONTINGENCY AND EMERGENCY PLAN Backaround General Electric (GE) is authorized by Chapter 8 of its license application to revise its Radiological Contingency and Emergency Plan (RC&EP) provided that the revision does not reduce the effectiveness of the RC&EP.
By letter dated September 10, 1993, GE submitted an amendment application requesting a revision to its RC&EP.
Discussion In Amendment 30, GE made several changes to their RC&EP. One of the i.hanges was deletion of the offsite transportation category for transportation accidents from the RC&EP.
In the present requested revision, GE requerts deletion of a section entitled "Offsite Transportation Accident" which should have been deleted in Amendment 30.
In addition, GE requests: (1) changing the word " exercise" to " drill" in accordance with the RC&EP text which differentiates between annual drill and biannual Nuclear Regulatory Commission observed exercise, and (2) updating Appendix B " Radiological Contingency &
Emergency Plan / Procedures Main Index."
Cateaorical Exclusion Based on the information subnitted by GE, the staff has determined that this revision is an administrative change and as such, will not adversely affect the public health and safety or the environment. Accordingly, the staff has determined that the criteria in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(ll) for categorically excluding an action from an environmental review have been met. Therefore, neither an Environmental Assessment nor an Environmental Impact Statement is necessary for this proposed action.
Conclusion / Recommendation The staff concludes that the proposed changes should have no adverse affect on the public health and safety or the environment and that the changes do not reduce the effectiveness of the RC&EP.
The Region II Principal Inspector has no objection to this proposed action.
Principal Contributors Edwin D. Flack Elaine M. Keegan
^
9310290204 931029 ADOCK 0700 3
{DR