ML20245J693
| ML20245J693 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 06/26/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20245J690 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8907030125 | |
| Download: ML20245J693 (2) | |
Text
F' H
'o
-2"
'g UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
g l.
WASHING TON, D. C. 20555
+,..... p$
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.134 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-71 AND AMENDMENT N0. 164 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-62 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, et al.
BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-325 AND 50-324
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By "L-87-033, Application for Amends to Licenses DPR-71 & DPR-62,revising Tech Spec Section 3.11.2.3 to Allow Incineration of Radwaste Oil & Table 4.11.2-1 to Require [[Topic" contains a listed "[" character as part of the property label and has therefore been classified as invalid. Analysis of Each Batch Per 10CFR50,App I.Fee Paid|letter dated June 23, 1987]], as revised March 29, 1987, Carolina Power
& Light Company submitted a request for changes to the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Brunswick).
The proposed amendments would augment the Brunswick Radiological Environment Technical Specifications (RETS) by incorporating commitments to the gaseous effluent Technical Specifications relative to the burning of contaminated oil.
The radioactive effluent releases and procedures for review and analysis l
were previously approved under the RETS program for Brunswick Units 1 and 2.
The implementation of the Technical Specifications for the RETS program overlooked the release pathway through the Auxiliary Boiler System although the releases have been accounted for and reported, as appropriate.
The proposed amendment would correct the oversight by adding the limits and test requirements to the Technical Specifications.
2.0 EVALUATION We have evaluated the proposed changes and find that the licensee is formalizing procedure comitments that have been used by the licensee before the implementation of the RETS.
No new pathways for gaseous effluents are proposed beyond those already considered in the RETS. The licensee's commitments in the RETS for radioactive effluent monitoring remain the same; and the dose limits to members of the public from the effluents remain the same. The amendments proposed by the licensee would add to the Brunswick RETS commitments regarding the burning of contaminated oil previously approved by the NRC staff and implemented in the RETS of a number of other operating plants such as Calvert Cliffs, Fitzpatrick and l
Maine Yankee.
L The NRC staff considers that the safety and environmental effects of the Technical Specification changes proposed by the licensee fall within the envelope of effluent impacts already considered in the RETS Safety Evaluation for Brunswick dated December 27, 1983. We therefore, find the changes l
acceptable.
8907030125 890626 DR ADOCK 0500 24
]
g j
i'
- q j
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
S 1
These amendments change a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted areas as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes to the surveillance require-ments. The staff has determined that these amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released off site; and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that these amendments involve no significant hazards consider-ation, and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accord-i ingly, these amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical
{
exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b),
1 no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be 1
prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission made a proposed determination that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (54 FR 21299
) on May 17,1989
, and consulted with the State of North Carolina.
No public comments or requests for hearing were received, and the State of North Carolina did not have any comments.
The staff has 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 Com-c mission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the connon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
W. Meinke N. Le Dated: June 26,1989
,