ML20073B519
| ML20073B519 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 09/06/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20073B515 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9409220074 | |
| Download: ML20073B519 (4) | |
Text
s.*
f no h.
uq}t s
UNITED STATES j.i j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 s..v /
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION BELATED TO AMENDMENT N0.I17 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0, NPF-12 SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY SOUTH CAROLINA PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION. UNIT N0. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-395
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated February 25, 1994, South Carolina Electric & Gas Company (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit No.1 (Summer Station), Technical Specifications (TS). The proposed changes would permit the submittal of the Radioactive Effluent Release Report on an annual rather than a semiannual basis; allow changes to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (0DCM) to be submitted in the Radioactive Effluent Release Report rather than in the monthly operating report; remove the title of Executive Vice President Operations from the TS; remove the list of audit frequencies from the TS and place them under Quality Systems management; change the title of Associate Manager, Health Physics to Radiation Protection Manager; remove references to specific letters; remove TS 6.4 on training; and correct various typographical errors and omissions.
2.0 EVALUATION The Summer Station TS require the licensee to submit a Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Report. The proposed amendment would replace this with a requirement to submit an Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report. Section 50.36a(a)(9)(2) of 10 CFR requires a licensee to report on effluent releases.
annually; therefore, the staff finds this change to be acceptable.
Section 6.14.2.c of the TS, as revised through Amendment 104, requires that the licensee submit changes to the ODCM as a part of the Semiannual Effluent Release Report. Section 6.9.1.10 of the TS requires that changes to the ODCM be submitted as a part of.the Monthly Operating Report. The proposed change would remove the requirement for a monthly submittal from TS 6.9.1.10 and require that changes to the ODCM be submitted with the Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report.
This change is in cunsistent with the revised Standard Technical Specifications and the staff finds it acceptable.
The proposed amendment would modify TS Section 6.3, " Unit Staff Qualifications," to replace a reference to the Associate Manager, Health Physics, with a reference to the Radiation Protection Manager. The position of Associate Manager, Health Physics, no longer exists. The proposed change would make the qualifications for Radiation Protection Manager equivalent to the current qualifi ations for Associate Manager, Health Physics. The staff 9409220074 94o906 PDR ADOCK 05000395 p
a '.
s
. finds that this change is administrative and does not relax any qualification standard. The change is, therefore, acceptable.
The proposed amendment would revise TS Section 6.3 by removing references to two letters that provide guidance on staff qualifications; the amendment would also remove TS section 6.4, " Training."
In 1993, the Commission issued 10 CFR 50.120, " Training and qualification of nuclear power plant personnel." Since 10 CFR 50.120 envelops the training and qualification requirements contained in sections 6.3 and 6.4, the staff finds the proposed changes to these sections to be acceptable.
The proposed amendment would remove the frequencies specified for audits described in Section 6.5.2.8 of the TS. The audits shall remain in the TS and shall remain under the control of the Nuclear Safety Review Committee; details of the audits would be relocated to the QA Plan. The effect of the change would be to allow plant management more flexibility in scheduling audits using the guidance of Standard Review Plan 17.2.
This is in accordance with current regulatory positions and is acceptable.
The proposed amendment would correct typographical errors and omissions from previous amendments. These corrections are described in the following table:
PJgg Soecification Description of Chance 1-4 Title Title was omitted with issuance of Amendment No.104, 1.17, 4th line Remove the "s" from " effluents."
This was a typographical error in Amendment No. 104.
1-5 Title Title was omitted with issuance of Amendment No. 104.
1.23 Repagination change only (previously on page 1-4).
3/4 3-26 Footnote Change " Specification 3.11.2.1" to "0DCM Section 1.2.2.1."
Amendment No.104 did not reflect this change.
3/4 3-30 Table 3.3-5 Insert "1" before 71.4 and 76.5.
(2.g, 2.h, This was inadvertently omitted 3.g,3.h) in Amendment No. 108.
3/4 3-34 Table 3.3-5 Underline the word "not" in Table Notation (2), first sentence.
a *.
t.
o* Eggg Specification Description of Chance 3/4 3-67 3.3.3.9 Change "3.11.2.1" to "3.11.2.5" and remove the last sentence.
Specification 3.11.2.1 was deleted by Amendment No. 104.
3/4 3-67 Action a.
First line: change "a" to "an."
Third line:
insert the word "the" between "take" and
" Action." These were typographical errors made in Amendment No. 104.
Action b.
Delete the last sentence.
Action c.
Remove "6.9.1.12.b."
Step 6.9.1.12.b was deleted by Amendment No. 88.
4.3.3.9 Remove " SOURCE CHECK." This should have been removed by Amendment No. 104.
3/4 3-70 Channel Change Q(4) to Q(1) and change Calibration Q(5) to Q(2). Amendment No. 104 Column paginated the Table Notations and page 3/4 3-70 did not reflect this change.
6.4 Training Deleted. Add words "NOT USED."
6-11 6.8.3 Add "6.8.3 NOT USED" to eliminate confusion.
6-12 6.8.4.e Fourth line:
insert "the" between "in" and "0DCM."
6.8.4.e.2 Second line:
insert "to" between
" conforming" and "10."
6-12a 6.8.4.f Third line:
change "or" to "of."
Seventh line:
add "the" between "in" and "0DCM."
6-12b 6.8.4.f
Title:
Change " Radioactive i
Effluent Controls" to
" Radiological Environmental Monitoring."
l
I'~g..
t I
hgg Soecification Descriotion of Chance 6-15 6.9.1.8 This page left blank intentionally due to repagination on page 6-14.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
l In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the State of South Carolina official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment changes recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements. fccordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclesion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 i
CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
l 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. Wunder Date: September 6, 1994
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _