ML20113H341
| ML20113H341 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Duane Arnold  |
| Issue date: | 07/22/1992 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20113H339 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9207290239 | |
| Download: ML20113H341 (3) | |
Text
..
- =
e
.gE (yk
+
5 D -
o UNITED STATES
[i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20%5 SAFELY r ALUAT]GN BY THE OFFICE QF NEG.LLA_P REACT 0jlBf_GJ1LAT10N u
RE; ATED TO AMENDMENT NO.184 T0. FACILITY OPEEAllf1G_LLGENSE NO. DPR-42 IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWERl 0MPANY.
CENTRAL.10WA POWER C00PERATlh CORtLSELT F0WI.R C_Q'RE&T1YL pj!ANE /,RNOLD ENERGY CENTfB DOCK.ET N0. 50-3H 1.0 INTR 00.QCT103 By letter dated December 20, 1991, Iowa Electric Light and Prwer Company (IELP, the licensee) requested changes to the Duane Arnold Technical Specifications (TS) which implement alternatives to the Radiological Effluent Technical Specifi-cations (RETS), including the relocation from the TS to the Offsite Dose Assessment Manual (0 DAM) and the Pracess Control Program (PCP) of procedural details on radioactive effluents, solid radioactive wastes, environmental monitoring and associated reporting requirements.
The proposed license amendment was prepared in accordance with the guidance provided in Gener k letter (GL) 89-01 and its Enclosures.
Accordingly, the proposed amendment (1) incorporates programmatic controls in the Administrati),e Controls section of the TS that satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 20.106, 40 CFR Part 190,10 CFR 50.36a, and Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50; (2) relocates to the ODAM procedural details or specific requirements involving radinactive effluent monitoring instrumentation, the control of liquid and gaseous _ effluents, equip-ment requirements for liquid and gaseous ef fitents, radiological environmental monitoring and radiological reporting details; (3) relocates to the PCP existing procedural details or specific requirements in the a:rrent iS on solid radio-active wastes; (4) simplifies the associated reporting requirements; (5) simpil-fies the administrative controls for changes to the ODAM and PCP; (6) adds record retention requirements for changes to the ODAM and PCP; and (7) updates the definitions of the ODAM and PCP consistent with these changes.
2.0 EVALUATION g
The licensee incorporated the model specifications in Enclosure 3 to GL 89-01 into the TS to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 20.106, 40 CFR Part 190, 10 CFR 50.36a, and Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50.
Only changes necessary to be consis-tent with Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) specific terminology and DAEC RETS were made.
The definitions of the ODAM and PCF were updated to reflect these changas.
The ;cagrammatic and reporting requirements in the Administrative Controls section of the TS were changej in accordance with GL 89-01 with no substantive modifications.
The programmatic controls assure that programs are established, implemented, and maintained to assure that operating procedures are 9207290239 920722 PDR ADOCK 05000331 p
o-t 2
.provided to control radioactive effluents consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR 20.106, 40 CFR Part 190, 10 CFR 50.30a, and Appendix I to 10 CFi, Part 50.
The current TS include requirements for explosive gas monitoring instrumentation.
limitations on the quantity of radioactivity in the liquid hold-up tanks and condenser exhaust, and limitations on explosive gas mixtures in the offgas treatment system.
Consistent with the requirements of GL 89-01, these items were retained in the TS.
As required by GL 89-01, the licensee confirmed that changes to the ODAM or PCP involving the detailed procedural requirements currently covered in the RETS, consisting of the_ limiting conditions for operation, remedial actions, surveil-lance requirements, reporting requirements and the Bases section of the TS have been prepared to implement the relocation of these procedural details to the ODAM or PCP.
These changes have been prepared in accordance with the aew Adminis-trative Controls in the TS on changes to the ODAM or PCP so that they will be implemented in the ODAM or PCP when this amendment is issued.
On the basis of our review, the NRC staff has concludad that the changes included in the proposed TS amendment request are consistent with the gtidance provided in l
UL 89-01.
Since the control of radioactive effluents continues to be limited in 1
accordance witF operating procedures that must satisfy regulatory requirements, i
the stiff has woncluded that this amendment request is administrative in nature and that there is no impact on plant safety as a consequence.
Therefore, the l
proposed changes are acceptable.
3.0 STAT [_ CON 30LTATION In accordance with the Cou. uion's regulations, the Iowa State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The State official had no comments.
l 4.0 [NVIRONMENTAL CONS 0DERATIONS This amendment involves a change to-a requirement with rerpect to the instal-lation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as-defined in 10 CFR Part 20_ or a change to 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 ha previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards cors.d-eration and there has-been no public comment-on such finding (57 FR 4488).
Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical l
L exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). This amendment also involves changes in recordkeeping, reporting or administrativs procedures or requirements.
Accordingly, with respect to these items, the amendments meet the eligibility l
criteria for_ categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 551.22(c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR SI.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment l
need be prepared-in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
t 1
- =
a ---
v c
s r
' 4 :.
t O
3 5.0 'CDNCLUSION The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discus'.,ad above, that: (1) th?re is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will net 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 common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
C. Y. Shiraki j
Date: Jttly 22,1992 i
W
..