ML20082U391
| ML20082U391 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Duane Arnold  |
| Issue date: | 09/13/1991 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20082U380 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9109200141 | |
| Download: ML20082U391 (3) | |
Text
m _. _
/p atag%,
i
~
f' g'n UNITED STATES
?.
,f i N' 1 LEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
)
kg wQ f WASHINGTON. D.C. 20E65 f
e...+
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.176 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-49 IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY CENTRAL 10WA POWER C00PERAllVE CORN BELT POWER COOPERATIVE DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER DOCKET NO. 50-331
- 1. 0 INTRODUCTION By letter dated April 1, 1991, Iowa Electric Light and Power Company (IELP), the licensee, submitted an amendment request for facility Operating License No. OPR-49, which revised the numerical limits for special nuclear material, source, and byproduct material by replacing them with a more generalized description.
2.0 EVALUATION In a letter from the Atomic Energy Commission to Iva Electric Light and Power Company dated December 16, 1974, the Commission recommended changes to existing Operating Licenses.
Specifically, the Commission noted '. hat a more generalized license provision regarding the possession of source, byproduct and special nuclear material rather than a separate listing of each item, would eliminate frequent license amendments for any change in licensed materials.
Amendment 9 to Facility Operating License DPR-49, issued June 3, 1975, incorporated this more generalized approach.
Subsequent to the issuance of Amendment L, the Commission recommended an even more generalized approach to license provisions concerning the possession of source, byproduct, and special nuclear materials.
This new approach eliminated altogether the numerical possession limits contained in the license and remains the standard for possession license provision.
The proposed change to DAEC's operating license would incorporate the now-t l
standard wording regarding the receipt, possession and use of byproduct, source and special nuclear materials.
L In their submittal dated April 1, 1991, Iowa Electric Light and Power Company proposed replacing sections 2.B(4) and 2.B(5) of the DAEC operating license with the now-standard wording regarding the possession of byproduct, source and special nuclear material.
Currently, section 2.B(4) limits the 9109200141 910913 ADOCK O'JOO{gi PDR P
,o amount of byproduct material which may be possessed for use in sample analysis or instrument calibration or associated with radioactively contaminated apparatus to 100 millicuries of each material.
Section 2.B(5) currently limits the amount of source or special nuclear material which may be possessed
'or use in sample analysis or instrument calibration or associated with radioactively contaminated apparatus to 100 milligrams of each material.
The requested change would delete these two requirements and replace them with one section which allows the receipt, possession and use of byproduct, source and special nuclear material in amounts as required.
This revised wording is identical to that used for licenses issued after approximately 1975.
The staff has reviewed the revised license language and finds that it provides the degree of specificity necessary to assure that plant activities can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public.
The changes simplify the language and help to avoid unnecessary license amendments in the future.
The staff concludes that the revised wording provides reasonable assurance that radioactive material will be received, stored and used in a manner necessary to meet the applicable provisions of 10 CFR Parts 30, 40 and 70.
Therefore, the staff finds the proposed amendment to be acceptable.
- 3. 0 ST_ ATE CONSULTATION In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Iowa State of ficial was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The Statt official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
S This amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 or changes a surveillance requirement.
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 the anendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding (56 FR 37586).
Accordingly, the amendment meets the 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 the amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The staff 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 l
e*
3-r 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 hec th and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
Clyde Y. Shiraki f
Date: September 13, 1991 r
i e
i I
i e
t 1
1
-- e r ;
-rm-me.--wr--
-eew--
r'e-E r
- w w a-wi.-
-e
-ere ws--+w=
w w-.--er--
w-m,<--
c-y--e er + - -
sw -r..e e
e
++-v-m--
h---~-w
.r i
'