ML20092J009
| ML20092J009 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 09/14/1995 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20092J007 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9509210280 | |
| Download: ML20092J009 (3) | |
Text
.
pMeto UNITED STATES p-
')
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 30086 4001
\\*****
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.101 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-62 ILLIN0IS POWER COMPANY. ET AL.
i CLINTON POWER STATION. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-461
1.0 INTRODUCTION
On. December 2,1994, the staff issued Amendment No. 95 to the Clinton Power Station Technical Specifications. Amendment No. 95 represented the licensee's full conversion to NUREG-1434, " Standard Te*hnical Specifications,- General Electric Plants, BWR/6," also known as the improved Technical Specifications (ITS). Part of the conversion to the ITS included removing selected items J
from the technical specifications and relecating them to licensee controlled l
documents.
Prior to issuance of Amendment No. 95, existing Technical Specification (TS)
Section 5.1, ' Site," included three separate subsections.
These consisted of Section 5.1.1, " Exclusion Area," Section 5.1.2, " Low Population Zone," and Section 5.1.3, " Hap Defining Unrestricted Areas and Site Boundary for Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Efluents." Each of these subsections included l
a figure that identified their respective boundaries.
However, in the conversion to the ITS, these figures were removed from the technical specifications and relocated to the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report. New TS Section 4.1, " Site Location," represents former Section 5.1 and only contains a single sentence that reads:
4 L
"The site for Clinton Power Station is located in Harp Township, i
DeWitt County, approximately six miles east of the city of Clinton in east-central Illinois."
Subsequent to the issuance of Amendment No. 95, the staff determined that the Clinton Power Station TSs did not adequately address the Exclusion Area Boundary (EAB).
Citing Section 182 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, the i
staff requested the licensee to submit an amendment request to modify TS Section 4.1 to include a description of the EAB.
By letter dated June 9, 1
1995,-the licensee submitted the requested modification.
[
~ 2.0 EVALUATION i
.A recent review examined the type of information necessary to be included in.
1 the design features section of the technical specifications.
By letter dated March 14,_1995,-the staff issued a license amendment and Safety Evaluation for i
9509210200 950914 PDR ADOCK 05000461 P
PDR n
w
?
O
! the Calvert Cliffs dockets (50-317 and 50-318). This letter provided the staff's position regarding which information was necessary to be included in the technical specifications and which information could be relocated to other
-licensee controlled documents.
Section 182.a of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) " License Applications," states, in part:
x In connection with applications for licenses to operate production or utilization facilities, the applicant shall state such technical specifications, including information of the amount, kind and source of special nuclear materials required, the place of the use, the specific characteristics of the facility, and such other information as the Commission may, by rule or regulation, deem necessary in order to enable it to find that utilization or production of special nuclear material will be in accord with common defense and security of the public.
Such technical specifications shall be a part of any license issued.
During the Calvert Cliffs review, the staff concluded that Section 182.a of -
the Act requires that the place of use of the special nuclear material be specified in the technical specifications.
In addition, the staff concluded that (1) the maps that were previously included in the Calvert Cliffs Technical Specifications could be relocated to the Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR), and (2) a sentence describing the EAB in the technical specifications is sufficient to meet regulatory requirements.
This staff position is also reflected in the staff's review of the Grand Gulf conversion to the ITS. The Safety Evaluation supporting the Grand Gulf conversion is documented in a letter dated February 21, 1995.
4 i
The Clinton licensee's letter of June 9,1995, proposed to add the following
]
. sentence to Technical Specification 4.1, "She Location,"
The exclusion area boundary shall have a radius of 975 meters from the
]
Standby Gas Treatment vent.
i As previously stated, the staff has determined that the Atomic Energy Act of
.i 1954 requires that a description of the EAB be included in the technical specifications. While the proposed modification does not alter the physical location or configuration of the EAB, inclusion in the technical specifications places additional controls on future changes to the EAB.
Future changes to the EAB will now be subject to prior review and approval by the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.90.
The staff has reviewed the proposed change and concludes that it is in accordance with the requirements of Section 182 of the Atomic Energy Act of
~
1954. Therefore, the staff finds the proposed modifications acceptable.
4
. c
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Illinois state official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The state official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment changes recordkeesing, reporting, or administrative procedures or. requirements. Accordingly, tie 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 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 i
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, i
and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: Douglas V. Pickett Date:
September 14, 1995 j
1 l
l 4
i l
4 d
t 4
d 6
\\