ML20082G457
| ML20082G457 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 04/05/1995 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20082G454 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9504130262 | |
| Download: ML20082G457 (2) | |
Text
,
3 ff* *t00 g
UNITED STATES j
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20686 4001 49.....
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 98 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. NPF-30 UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY CALLAWAY PLANT. UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-483
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated December 9, 1994, as supplemented on January 27, 1995, Union Electric Company (UE) requested an amendment to Operating License NPF-30, which would revise the Callaway Plant Technical Specifications' (TS) Surveillance Requirement (SR) 4.6.1.2.a and the associated Bases.
Specifically, the proposed changes would defer the performance of the Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (CILRT), until the next scheduled outage, Refuel 8.
2.0 [yALUATIQR The current SR 4.6.1.2.a references 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, for the required frequency of the CILRT. The proposed change would revise TS 4.6.1.2.a, as modified by approved exemptions to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, to require the performance of Type A CILRT prior to the restart following Refuel 8.
The change is administrative in nature, since it references the controlling regulations-directly and recognizes approved exemptions.
Therefore, the NRC staff finds the proposed changes to be acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Missouri State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes 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 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 this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (60 FR 11141). Accordingly, this amendment meets the 9504130262 950405'
~
PDR ADOCK 05000483 P
eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in.10.CFR 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 this amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The staff has cancluded, 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 ccmpliance.with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: L. R. Wharton Date:
April 5, 1995
)
j l
i i
.1