ML20203M416
| ML20203M416 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 02/03/1998 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20203M399 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9803060385 | |
| Download: ML20203M416 (4) | |
Text
- _ - -
[pmeg 4
UNITED STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
a WASHINGTON, D.C. 30666 0001
'4,e....
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDNENT NO.184 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO DPR 40 OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-285
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated November 20, 1996, as supplemented by letter dated February 20. 1997, and submittal dated March 25. 1997 Omaha Public Power District (OPPD) requested administrative changes to the Technical S)ecifications (TS) (Appandix A to Facility Operating License No. DPR-40) for 11e Fort Calhoun Statlo1, Unit No. 1.
The changes involve revisions to Paragraph 3.D of Facility Operating License No. DPR-40. TS 2.15. 5.3. 5.5.
5.6. 5.7. 5.11. and the Table of Contents.
The revisions reflect organizational changes and correct editorial and typographical inaccuracies.
The March 25. 1997. submittal did not change the initial no significant hazards consideration that was published in the Federal Reaister on April 9, 1997 (62 FR 17238).
2.0 EVALUATION Paracraoh 3.0. Soent Fuel Pool Modification Faragraph 3.D of Facility Operating License No. DPR-40, is proposed for deletion. This paragraph describes the modification that increased the spent fuel pool storage capacity.
It states that the ap be effective when the last new rack is installed. plicable specifications will The last new rack was installed on August P 1994, as stated in OPPD's letter dated August 12. 1994 (LIC-94-0167).
Since the applicable specifications have been effective since then.-Paragraph 3.D 1s no longer necessary. The removal of Paragraph 3.0 from the o)erating license and the respective renumbering of Paragraphs 3.E and 3.F to 3.) and 3.E are acceptable to the staff.
Deletion of Paragraph 3.0 would not alter the limiting conditions for operation surveillance requirements, or action statements of the TS associated with the spent fuel pool.
Therefore, the four criteria for retention in TS. as defined by 10 CFR 50.36, are not met.
i 9003060305 990203 PDR ADOCK 05000285 l
l P
c.
- 1
,p, Table of Contents Table of Contents. Sect' ion 6.0. " Interim Special lechnical Specifications."
Subsections 6.1 through 6.4 are proposed for deletion.
All of the interim specifications have been deleted by previou:; amendments.
The revision to remove these interim specifications will update the Table of Contents appropriately.
The staff finds this change acceptable.
15 2.15. Tables 2-3 and 2-4
~ltem 2C of Table 2-3 and item IC of. Table 2-4 w rently list the description of the Functional Unit as " Pressurizer. Low / Low " The proposal to correct the description to the proper terminology " Pressurizer Low / Low' Pressure." is appropriate.
The staff finds this editorial change to be acceptable.
TS 5 5. Comoosition of the Safety Audit and Review Committee
-TS 5.5.2.2 states that the Senior V1ce President would serve as the Chairperson of the Safety Audit and Review Committee.
The revision for TS 5.5.2.2 proposes th&t the Chairperson of the Safety Audit and Review Committee is a " Member as appointed by the Vice President." This will allow the flexibility to select a chairperson of the committee from amongst the members.
This change is administrative in nature, does not impact the committee's review and audit scope or its authority, and does not result in a reduction of safety. =The staff finds this change = acceptable.
TS 5.3. Facility Staff Qualification TS 5.5. Review and Audit TS 5 6. Reoortable Event Actions TS 5.7. Safety Limit Violation
'TS 5.11. Radiation Protection Proaram
-During a reorganization of OPPD's Nuclear Operations-Division. several aositions were renamed and one-was deleted.
The position of Division Manager.
Nuclear Operations was deleted.
The following positions were renamed:
Former Position Title New Position Title Supervisor-Radiation Protection Manager-Radiation Protection Division Manager-Production Division-Manager-Engineering &
Engineering Operations Support.
Division Manager-Nuclear Services Division Manager-Nuclear Assessments As a result, references in TS 5.3.1. 5.11. 5.5. 5.6. and 5.7 to these former position titles will be changed to reflect the new titles.
o_.
q 3-The renaming of-the positions did not change any of the qualification requirements in the TS.
The Fort Calhoun staff will continue to meet the requirements of ANLl/ANS N18.1-1971 as endorsed by Regulatory Guide 1.8.
Rev. 1. " Personnel Selection and Training." as required by Sections 5.3.1 and 5.4.) of the TS.
Therefore, the duties assigned in the-TS are being carried out-at an appropriate level within the organization. Also, the qualification requirements, as specified in the TS, have not been changed.
In addition, an editorial change to add an apostrophe to " bachelor's" degree is proposed for TS 5.3.1, and a typographical correction to revise the word "end" to "and" c:atained in TS 5.11.1 is 3roposed.
These changes are editorial in nature and the staff finds t1em acceptable.
TS-5.10. Record Retention The revision to TS 5.10 conc'rning retention of records of radioactive shipments will update the TS to current 10 CFR Part 20 requirements.
TS 5.10.1g deletes the requirement to retain radioactive shipment records f2 at least five years and TS 5.10.2p adds the requirement to retain records of radioactive shipments for the duration of the Facility Operating License.
This is an increase in TS commitment to conform with the current regulatory requirements and is acceptable.
The acdtt' ion of the Section 5.0 title corrects a minor format discrepancy which is administrative in nature and acceptable, The NRC has reviewed the' November 20, 1996. February 20. 1997 and March 25, 1997, submittals in accordance with NUREG-0800. " Standard Review Plan for the-Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants" Chapters 13.4, 17.1.17.2-and determined that the changes continue to satisfy the criteria of A>pendix 8 of 10 CFR Part 50.
The staff finds that the proposed changes to-
.tle TS for the Fort Calhoun Station are changes that do not alter the requirements set forth in the existing TS.
Therefore, the staff finds that the proposed TS changes are-acceptable.
3.0- STATE CONSULTATION
-In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Nebraska State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
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.
The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types.
1 of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. -The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (62 FR 131 and 62 FR 17238).
Accordingly, the I
w
0
-4 amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). This amendment also involves changes in recordkee)ing.
reporting or administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, wit 1 respect to these items, the 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 Commission hes concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurar.ce 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 common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributors:
Michael T. Bugg Margie Kotzalas Date:
February 3,1998
.