ML20079A629
| ML20079A629 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 12/19/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20079A617 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9501030171 | |
| Download: ML20079A629 (2) | |
Text
-
's 10 40%
UNITED STATES 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'f WASHINGTON. D.C. 2006H001 f
SAFETY EVALVATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NOS. 83 AND 44 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. NPF-39 AND NPF-85 PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY LIMERICK GENERATING STATION. UNITS 1 AND 2 j
DOCKET NOS. 50-352 AND 50-353
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated July 22, 1994, the Philadelphia Electric Company (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, Technical Specification (TS).
The requested changes would remove the surveillance frequency details regarding 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix' J, Types B and C testing from the TS.
2.0 EVALVATION The licensee has proposed to remove the containment systems surveillance i
details regarding 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, Type B and Type C tests described in TS Sections 4.6.1.2.d and 4.6.1.2.f, and replace them by referring to the provisions in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J.
Sections III.D.2(a) and 111.0.3 of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, provide information on the surveillance frequency for the Type B and the Type C tests. TS 4.6.1.2.h
{
is also being modified to reflect the change by including 4.6.1.2.f where the provisions of specification 4.0.2 are not applicable.
The proposed changes which involve rewording the TS surveillance requirements are administrative in nature.
Furthermore, these TS changes are in accordance with NUREG-1433, " Standard Technical Specifications." Based on the above, the j
staff finds the proposed changes acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Pennsylvania State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments.
The State
~
official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, 9501030171 941219 PDR ADOCK 05000352 P
a.
. of any effluents 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 the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (59 FR 47180). Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR j
51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
\\
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 j
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 amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
T. Liu Date: December 19, 1994 l
1
_.