ML20065T039
| ML20065T039 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 12/17/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20065T034 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9012260294 | |
| Download: ML20065T039 (2) | |
Text
I r,s, UNITED sT AT[s 3
[^
.[
NUCLE AR REGUL ATORY COMMISSION
- % % / le
,usm% roN o c, mas a
s.,,, (, <
ENCLOSt'RE 2 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDHENT NO.134 TO FAcIllTY OIERATING LICENSE NO. DPR M TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITJ SE0VOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT 2 DOCKET NO. 50-328
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By a letter dated August 27, 1990, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) pro-posed changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for Sequoyah Unit 2.
These changes would delete (1) Table 4.4-5
" Reactor Vessel Material Surveillarice Program-WithdrawalSchedule,"and(2)allreferencestotheTable4.4-5 in the Surveillance Requirement (SR) 4.4.9.1.2.
This is TVA TS Change Request Number 90-17.
These changes were issued as Amendment 87 to the Unit 1 TSs in the staff's letter dated October 14, 1988.
In that letter, the staff requested that TVA propose the same changes for the Unit 2 TSs.
This was done in the above application dated August 27, 1990.
2.0 EVALUATION TVA is required to comply with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix H. " Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Program Requirements." The requirements of Appendix H provide for NRC approval of a proposed withdrawal schedule for the reactor vessel material irradiation surveillance specimens.
Thus, the inclusion of Table 4.4-5 in SR 4.4.9.1.2 is redundant since this table is provided to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix H.
The deletion of Table 4.4-5 is consistent with an improvement of the TS by renoving specifi-cations that are redundant to regulations, as recommended by the NRC Technical Specification improvement Project and the Atomic Industrial Forum Subcommittee on TS Improvements.
The regulation is Appendix 4 to 10 CFR Part 50 in this Case.
The data of Table 4.4 5 is in Section 5.4.3.7, " Reactor Vessel Material Sur-veillance Program Requirements" of the Sequoyah Final Safety Analysis Peport.
Thus, the surveillance schedule would be available to NRC in an adminis-tratively controlled docunent that is reviewed and revised on a regular basis.
TVA has proposed to delete Table 4.4-5, " Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Program - Withdrawal Schedule" and references to the Table in SR 4.4.9.1.? due to the redundancy of the table with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix H.
The staff has reviewed the proposed TS amendment and finds the changes acceptable.
1 P
0
. 3.0 EjN,VIRONMENTAL CONS 10 ERAT!0N This amendment involves a change to a requirenerc with respect to the installation or use of a f acility component 10 ated within the restricted crea as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes to Lhe surveillance requirements.
The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any ef fluents 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 this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.
Accord-ingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for catcgorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 rrR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement nor environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission made a proposed determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (55 FR 38605) on September 19, 1990 and consulted with the State oT~ Tennessee.
~
No public comments were received and the State of Tennessee did not have any connent s.
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 conducted in cumpliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security nor to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contrib" tor:
J. Donuhew Dated: December 17, 1990 1
1
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _