ML20196D144
| ML20196D144 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 01/27/1988 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20196D130 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8802170029 | |
| Download: ML20196D144 (2) | |
Text
[. pa % h UNITED STATES 9
h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
g wAssiNoroN, D. C. 20666
%.'..../
SAFETY EVALUATION St THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENChENT NO. 31 TO FACILITY OPEITATING LICENSE NO. NPF-30 UNION ELECTRIC COMpAN_Y CALLAWAY PLANT, UNIT I DOCKET NO. STN 50-483
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated September 10, 1987, Union Electric Company submitted a request for changes to the Technical Specifications (TS).
The change would delete Item 1.a from Table 4.3-3 of the TS that was inadver-tently omitted in the licensee's December 30, 1986 amendment request, and it would revise specification 4.11.2.5 of the TS to correct an administrative oversight that references the wrong specification for Table 3.1-13.
2.0 EVALUATION On April 10, 1987, the staff issued Amendment ho. 20 in response to the licensee's application dated December 30, 1986. Amendment No. 20 deleted the trip functions of the containment atmospheric radiation monitors associated with containment purge isolation and control room ventilation, by deleting the limiting condition for operation and operability requirements associated with TS Table 3.3-6, Item 1.a. Amendment No. 20 should have also deleted the corresponding surveillance requirement in Table 4.3-3 (Item 1.a).
The safety evaluation for Amendment No. 20 applies for this part of the amendment.
Regarding the other part, Section 4.11.2.5 of the TS, associated with explosive gas mixtures, incorrectly identifies Table 3.3-13 as being part of 1
Section 3.3.3.11.
However, Table 3.3-13 is actually located in Section 3.3.3.10.
In addition, Section 3.3.3.11 doesn't exist. Accordingly, the staff finds this change acceptable as well.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 or changes an inspection or surveillance requirement.
The staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amount, 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 occupa-tional radiation exposure. The Cornission has previously published a proposed finding that these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, this amendnent meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 151.22(c)(9). Pursuantto10CFR51.22(b),noenvironmentalimpactstatement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance i
of this amendrent.
G802170029 880127 PDR ADOCK 05000403 P
i o
.g.
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 j
will not be endangered by operation in the prososed manner; and (2) public I
such activities will be conducted in compliance wit 1 the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense ano security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
Thomas W. Alexion, PDIII-3 Dated: January 27, 1988 i
l l
i i
e l
i l