ML20213D500
| ML20213D500 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/03/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20213D493 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8611120124 | |
| Download: ML20213D500 (2) | |
Text
-
[ cur,%g u
UNITED STATES E
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION E
o
.,E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655
\\...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-36 LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50-322
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated June 26, 1986, Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO, the licensee) requested an amendment to its Operating License No. NPF-36 for
' Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. The amendment request was submitted as
[
proposed changes to the Administrative Controls Section of the Technical Specifications.(TS).
Specifically, the proposed changes requested by the licensee are to correct'a TS internal inconsistency between TS 6.5.1.7a and 6.13.2b, concerning the approval process for the Process Control Program (PCP) and to correct an error in the listing of radioactive waste shipping containers and solidification agents in TS 6.9.1.7.
2.0 EVALUATION 2.1 Review of Operations Committee (ROC) Responsibilitics i
The licensee proposed to change TS 6.5.1.7a by removing Item K. " review of proposed changes to the Process Control Program (PCP)". This would eliminate the need for the ROC to recommend in writing to the Plant Manager approval or disapproval of items considered under the Process Control Program (PCP) prior to their implementation. This change would be consistent with TS 6.13.2b. which states that the licensee-initiated changes to the Process Control Program shall become effective upon review and acceptance by the ROC.
The requested amendment still ensures that a group of individuals with broad expertise and background (i.e., the ROC), will evaluate proposed PCP changes.
In addition, it conforms to the practice in other BWR Technical Specifications which requires approval by a group similar to the ROC. We, therefore, find the proposed amendment acceptable.
2.2 Listing of Radioactive Waste Shipping Containers and Solidification Agents During the development of the Shoreham Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (RETS) which were included as part of the Shoreham Technical Specifications, the licensee used the wording of the NRC staff NR Oy 2
P
guidance in providing examples of types of shipping containers and solidification agents that might be used in solid waste management.
Later perusal of the resulting TS showed that the examples listed are not representative of the licensee's current technology. Since the proposed substitutions describe the licensee's present technology accurately, and since they meet the intent of the NRC staff's model RETS for BWRs, NUREG-0473, Revision 2, February 1,1980, we find the proposal to be acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
S This amendment relates to' changes in administrative procedures or requirements. 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 has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10) and pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
i The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
3 (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 defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributors:
I. Schoenfeld and W. Meinke Dated:
November 3,1986 l
l r
l l
_