ML20070N032
| ML20070N032 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 04/26/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20070N029 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9405040347 | |
| Download: ML20070N032 (2) | |
Text
.
[
i UNITED STATES
/'
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g.
j WASHINGTON, D.C. 2055M001 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.171 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-51 i
ENTERGY OPERATIONS. INC.
ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-313
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By -letter dated February 24, 1993, Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit No. 1 (ANO-1) Technical Specifications (TSs). The requested changes correct a number of typographical, grammatical and format errors in various sections of the TSs.
In the course of reviewing the errors identified by the licensee, the NRC staff found several discrepancies in the revised pages of the proposed TSs submitted by the licensee.
Following discussion with the licensee these discrepancies were resolved and the proposed TSs were revised accordingly.
In all cases the revisions were admini.etrative in nature and did not change the meaning or intent of the TSs.
2.0 EVALUATION The administrative errors identified by the licensee were reviewed by the-NRC staff to ensure that the proposed changes do not change the meaning or intent of the TSs.
The proposed revisions were reviewed for clarity and i
thoroughness. Minor changes recommended by the NRC staff to resolve discrepancies in the licensee submittal were adopted and included in the revised TSs.
' i changes do not provide any relief from or add requirements to the TSs, or t ange the intended operation or administrative requirements of the plant or its design basis. Based on the above considerations, the staff finds that the changes are appropriate, and the proposed amendment is acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Arkansas State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
940b040347 940426 PDR ADOCK 05000313 p
... _. _ _..,,. _.. - ~
22 a.
e,
_m._
a
_.r m.-
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATI0R The amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a l
facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements.
The NRC 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 j
occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a i
proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (58 FR 67843). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFf6 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be i
prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission 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 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 and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
G. Kalman i
Date: April 26, 1994
-,.,.,-,- -