ML20210N784
| ML20210N784 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 02/03/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20210N770 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-61783, TAC-61784, NUDOCS 8702130215 | |
| Download: ML20210N784 (2) | |
Text
.
gaMc.o g
UNITE D STATES
[
fg NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
-L b8 E
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATFD TO AMENDYENT NO.112 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. OPR-39 AND AMENDMENT NO.ll2 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-37 VTPC?NTA ELECTPIC AND POWED COMPANY SilDDY POWER STATION, llNIT NOS. 1 AND ?
DOCKET NOS. 50-780 AND 50-781 INTR 0DilCT'ON By letter dated June 16, 1086, Viroinia Electric and Power Company (the licenseei, requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TSi for Surry Units 1 and 7 to make the requirements of the TS consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR 73.40(d) as requested in Generic Letter 8?-?3 issued by the staff on October 30, 1989 DISCUSSION AND EVAlllATION The current Technical Specifications for Surry Units 1 and ? require that the audit frequency of Surry Power's Security Plan be at least once per 24 months.
The Generic Letter 82-23 indicated that all licensees are required to meet the requirements of 10 CFP 73.40(dl, notwithstanding any provision that may have been in their TS prior to the issuance of 10 CFP 73.40(d). The generic letter further requested that if the TS contain a provision that is less frequent than the regulations, the licensees should request the staff to modify the TS to conform to the rule.
The proposed change would revise the audit frecuency of Surry Power Station Security Plan from at least once per 24 months to at least once per 12 months.
This change will make the requirements of TS consistent with the requirements i
of 10 CFR 73.40(d) as requested in Generic Letter 87-23. Therefore, the staff finds the proposed change to be acceptable.
I ENVIRONFENTAL CONSIDEPATION These amendments involve a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted areas as defined in 10 CFR 70. The staff has determined that these amendments involve no sionificant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that mav be released offsite and that there is no sionificant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed findinq that these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public connent on such finding. Accordinolv, g29%%8 ES$P P
I
.?-
these amendnents meet the elioibility criteria for catecorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFP 51.??(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFP 51 ??(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
CONCLl!SION We have 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 (21 such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's reculations and the issuance of these amendments will not be inimical to the common deftnse and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: February 3,1987 Principal Contributor:
C. Patel