ML20086H093
| ML20086H093 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 11/22/1991 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20086H082 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9112060358 | |
| Download: ML20086H093 (2) | |
Text
.
km MCp
/
UNITED STATES o
g [,j
! " 3.,y//1 NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
W ASWNGT ON, D, C. 20555
/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGutATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 150 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-46 NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT COOPER NUCLEAR STATION DOCKET NO 50-298
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated July 19, 1991, NebraskaPublicPowerDistrict(thelicensee) submitted a request for changes to the Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS) Technical Specifica tions. The requested changes would:
1) provide a new fomat for Figure 2.1.1, Reactor Water Level Indication Correlation; 2) delete the thi-sentence of Paragraph 4.7.C of the Bases addressing the performance of tests to demonstrate secondary containment capacity prior to the time primary containment is opened for refueling; and 3) amend the second sentence of Paragraph 6.1.1, ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS /
ORGANIZATION Responsibility, to designate the Senior Manag?r of Staff Support as en additional alternate te assume responsibility in the absence of the Division Manager of Nuclear Operations.
2.0 EVALUATION The first of these changes involves a modification of the format for the Reactor Vcssel Level Indication Correlation figure. This change is administrative ir, nature.
It does not involve any changes ir numerical vessel level setpoint values and their associated instrumentation, which are controlled elsewhere in the CMS Technical Specification. The proposed change would present the figure in a manner that would more accurately illustrate level transmitter and le'11 indication identification nomenclature numbers.
The second change is proposed to correct the apparent conflict between the Paragraph 4.7.C of the Bases and 4.7.C.I.c Surveillance Requirements. The change is consistent with the recoranendation from the staff dated March 28, 1988, to the licensee. It involves no hardware changes and does not affect operations, including refueling, in any way. This change only corrects a potential scurce of confusion in the CNS Technical Specifications.
9112060358 911122 PDR ADOCK 05000290 P
l
., 2 The final change' addresses administrative changes that have taken place in the CNS organization. This change seeks to designate an additional alternate to assume fulltime site responsibility in the absence of the Division Manager Nuclear Operations.
It would designate the Senior of Staff Support as capable of assuming fulltime site responsibility. This change is consistent with the i
requirement of ANSI N18.1-1971.
It does not change the hierarchy of automatically shifting the Division Manager of Nuclear Operations responsibility to the Senior Manager of Operations or the Senior Manager of Technical Support Services.
On the basis of its review of the above items, the staff concludes that the proposed are acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
in accordar.ce with the Comission's regulations, the Nebraska State official was notified of the proposed issurnce of the amendment. The State official had no comment.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL _ CONSIDERATION The 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 and changes in surveillance requirements. The NRC 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 Comission has previously issued a pro-posed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public coment on such finding (56 FR 47239).
Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR Section 51.22(c)(9). The amendmer,t also involves changes in recordkeeping, reporting or administrative procedures or requirements.
Accordingly, with respect tr these items, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical er iusiton 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 connection with the issuance of the amendment.
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 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 comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: Marvin Sykes Date: November 22, 1991
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -