ML20133D618
| ML20133D618 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron  |
| Issue date: | 10/01/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20133D601 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8510090120 | |
| Download: ML20133D618 (3) | |
Text
.
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATig SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-37 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY BYRON STATION, UNIT N0. 1 DOCKET N0. STN 50-454
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated June 26, 1985, Commonwealth Edison Company (the licensee) requested an amendment to the Technical Specifications for Byron Station, Units 1 and 2.
The proposed Technical Specification change relates to the control of access to high radiation areas.
2.0 DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION i
Section 203.C.(2) of the Code of Federal Regulations Title 10, Part 20 provides for control of personnel access to high radiction areas. To assist licensees of nuclear power reactors in meeting the requirements of 10 CFR 203.C.(2) the NRC has established specifications for the control of access to high radiation areas in Section 6.12 of the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) NUREG-0452 Rev. 4.
Byron Station, Units 1 and 2, has basically incorporated the Standard Technical Specifications.
The STS require in part that, prior to entering an area with radiation levels greater than 1000 mR/hr, the dose rates levels for the area be specified on an approved radiation work permit (RWP) without exception.
The licensee's proposed change would allow for continuous surveillance and radiation monitoring of the work area by qualified individuals in
)
lieu of specifying the dose rate on an approved RWP during an emergency involving personnel injury or actions taken to prevent major equipment 8510090120 851001 PDR ADOCK 05000454 P
i damage.
It is the staff's position that the proposed technical speci-fication change for an emergency situ'ation is sufficient to provide positive control over access to high radiation areas as required in 10 CFR Part 20.203.C.(2), and is acceptable to the staff.
1 By letters dated August 14, 1985 and August 27, 1985, Mr. Stanley Campbell, i
Secretary for the Sinnissippi Alliance for the Environment (SAFE), opposed the amendment. Mr. Campbell opposes the amendment because SAFE "cannot l
condone the slackening of the rules for worker protection just to save
{
pieces of machinery." In response to Mr. Campbell's concerns, we' note that l
the occupational dose requirements of 10 CFR Part 20 are not being reduced by this amendment.
Instead, this amendment changes only the means for l
providing positive control for access to high radiation areas, and only
^^
during certain emergencies. Therefore, as previously mentioned, we find this amendment acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONhENTAL CONSIDERATION J
l This amendment allows personnel to enter high radiation areas during certain emergencies without an approved Radiation Work Pennit. The staff I
j has detennined 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 c
I or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previ-ously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding.
i l
Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical l
exclusionsetforthin10CFR51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared i
in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
i
..,.-,--r,-
y
,--v+
-y-
..,-----.~,-,---r-,
mym------,--
w,
,-*-----.-------------+----m--r--w.--3--++-v,---
--*.p-r--me+
4.0 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;' and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common de-fense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
5.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT M. Lamastra and L. Olshan prepared this Safety Evaluation.
1 I
Dated: October 1, 1985 4
I I
l 1
-,, -. _ _ - -,