ML20214P295
| ML20214P295 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 11/21/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214P281 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8612040146 | |
| Download: ML20214P295 (2) | |
Text
.
~
![
UNITED STATES
+
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%...+ /
SAFETY EVALUATION RY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAD REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.110 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. OPP-32 AN9 AMENnMENT NO.110 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. OPR-37 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWED COMPANY SURRY DOWED STATION, llNIT NOS. 1 ann p DOCKET NOS. 50-280 AND 50-281 INTRODUCTION By letter dated February 14, 1979, as supplemented September 21, 1982, and August 30, 1985, Virginia Electric and Power Company (the licensee), requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for Surry Units 1 and ? to meet the Inservice Inspection and Testing requirements for nuclear power plant components. The staff is currently reviewing the proposed changes. This evaluation covers only one item which is covered by Section 4.2 of Surry TS, Table 4.2-1, Section A, Item No. 1.13 which requires an examination o r reactor vessel closure head cladding. The licensee has proposed to delete this requirement.
DTSCUSSION AND EVALUATION The closure head cladding examination reoufrement referred to above was taken, in confomance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.55afg), from the ASME Section XI (70W70) inservice inspection requirements in effect at the time the TSs were prepared. The examination has subsequently been determined unnecessary and omitted from later versions of Section XI which have been approved by the staff. Omission of this examination requirement from the Surry TSs is consistent with 10 CFR 50.55fa)(c)(4), which provides that inservice insoection requirements conform with the most recent version of the applicable Code provision. Therefore the staff considers the change to be acceptable.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION These amendments involve a change in the installation or use of the facilities components located within the restricted areas as defined in 10 CFR 20 and in a i
surveillance requirement. The staff has determined that these amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in i
the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exonsure.
The Commission has previously issued a proposed findino that these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public coment 8612040146 861121 PDR ADOCK 05000280 p
on such finding. Accordingly, these amendments meet the eligibility criteria for cate Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b)gorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.P2(c)(9).
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
CONCLUSION 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 (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: November 21, 1986 Principal Contributors:
E. H. Girard
,,. _ _ _. _