ML20082N892
| ML20082N892 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 04/21/1995 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20082N889 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9504250432 | |
| Download: ML20082N892 (3) | |
Text
.
i Suog}
A g
UNITED STATES y.-
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20666-0001
\\.....,/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.197 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-32 AND AMEN 0 MENT NO. 197 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-37 i
VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY POWER STATION. UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-280 AND 50-281
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated September 6,1994, as supplemented March 7,1995, Virginia Electric and Power Company requested changes to the. Technical Specifications (TS) for Surry Units 1 & 2 with respect to the review responsibilities.of.
their safety committees and the review of procedures. The licensee's submittal of March 7,1995 provided clarifying infomation within the scope of the September 6, 1994 amendment application and did not change the staff's no significant hazard consideration determination.
Following is an evaluation of the proposed change request.
2.0 EVALUATION l
a) Virginia Electric and Power Company proposes to revise the current requirement (Sections 6.1.C.I.f.1 and 6.4.C) that the Station Nuclear Safety and Operating Committee (SNSOC) review all changes to normal, abnormal, and emergency operating procedures, and all maintenance procedures and changes i
thereto. The proposed change would require the SNSOC to review only new normal, abnormal, and emergency operating procedures and all new maintenance i
procedures, and any procedure changes that require a safety evaluation.
Likewise, only new tests and experiment procedures (Section 6.1.C.I.f.2) would be reviewed by the SNSOC rather than all proposed tests and experiments.
The licensee states that procedures undergo a screening process to determine whether a safety evaluation is required which determines whether a procedure goes to the SNSOC. We have reviewed the screening provisions described in VEPC0 Station Administrative Procedure VPAP-3001 and find them acceptable.
i VEPC0 also stated in their March 7,1995 letter that the screening process would be specified in their Operational Quality Assurance Program Topical Report (0QAPTR) and that procedure changes that do not require a safety evaluation must be approved by cognizant management and a senior reactor operator.
Based on the screening process and procedure change approval by cognizant management and a senior reactor operator we find the proposed change to Section 6.1.C.2.f.1 with respect to the review of procedures acceptable.
9504250432 950421 DR ADOCK 0
. b) Virginia Electric and Power Company proposes to revise the current requirement (Sections 6.1.C.2.g.1 and 6.1.C.2.g.9) that the Management Safety Review Committee (MSRC) shall be responsible for the review of safety evaluations for changes to procedures, equipment or systems and tests or experiments completed under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59, to verify that such actions did not constitute an unreviewed safety question. The proposed change would limit the MSRC review to samples of safety evaluations after 100%
review to select the most safety significant as programatically discussed in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). The licensee will also continue to assess the effectiveness of the safety evaluation program.
The licensee, in their letter dated March 7,1995, stated that they will add to their OQAPTR a statement that the MSRC will screen 100% of all safety evaluations for safety significance; and additionally do in-depth reviews of a sample of safety evaluations based on safety significance and a sampling plan criteria.
Based on the commitment for the MSRC to perform a 100% screening of safety evaluations and the performance of in-depth review of a sample of safety evaluations based on safety significance, the staff finds the requested change with respect to the MSRC review of safety evaluations acceptable.
c) The licensee proposes to delete the special requirements (Sections 6.4.E and 6.4.F) for the review and approval of temporary changes to procedures.
These procedures would then be processed as all other procedures and procedure changes.
The staff finds these changes acceptable as it does not diminish the level of review and approval of temporary procedures.
3.0
SUMMARY
i The staff finds that the licensee's proposed changes meet the appropriate design criteria of Sections 13.4 and 13.5.1 of NUREG 0800, the Standard Review i
Plan, and are, therefore, acceptable.
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Virginia State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official i
i had no comment.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment relates to changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, this amendment meets the ' eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in conection with the issuance of this amendment.
6.0 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 these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and securtty or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
F. A11enspach Date: April 21, 1995 a