ML17279A153
| ML17279A153 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 03/27/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17279A152 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-61116, NUDOCS 8704020156 | |
| Download: ML17279A153 (2) | |
Text
gp,S REgy
~4 Cy
~O
+a*++
NUCLt,,
..<Y COMMISSION WA'a>>iia " 'I, L C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NllCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.
37 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-21 WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM WPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT NO.
2 nOCKET NO. 50-397
1.0 INTRODUCTION
License Condition 16, Attachment 2, item 3(a) to the WNP-2 Operating License states that:
"The licensee shall implement (installation or uparade) requirements of R.G. 1.97 Pevision 2 with the exception of flux monitoring prior to startup following the first refueling outage."
In fulfillment of this license condition, during the Sprinq 1986 refuelina
- outage, the Supply System replaced the Hydrogen-Oxygen (H,-O~) Analyzers with a qualified replacement.
The replacement analyzer system is designed so that a specific sample gas concentration is not necessary to ensure proper calibration of the instruments.
Accordingly, by letter dated March 14, 1986, the licensee proposed an amendment to the WNP-2 Technical Specifications which would delete a reference to a specific sample gas concentration from Technical Specification Table 4.3.7.5-1.
2.0 EVALUATION The current Technical Speci,ications require that a specific sample gas concentration be used in performing channel calibration of the H.-O, Ana-lyzers.
The replacement H,-O, Analyzer system uses a micro-processor which automatically compensates for. containment temperature and pressure.
The micro-processor is also used for calibration.
A specific calibration gas concentration is, therefore, not required with the replacement system.
This is because changes.in the H, or 0~ calibration gas concentrations are entered into the micro-processor and are directly compared to the compen-sated output signals of the H, and 0
sensors during calibration.
The deletion of a precisely specified calibration gas concentration in the replacement system does not affect the capability of the H.-O, Analyzer system to meet the instrument range r'equirements.
As a result, the licensee anticipates a siqnificant increase in system operahility.
On the basis of our evaluation, we find that it is acceptable to delete the reference tn a precise sample gas concentration in the WNP-P Technical Specifications (Table 4.3.7.5-ll because a precise gas concentration is not needed f'r the replacement H,-O, Analyzer system.
3.0 ENYIRONMFNTAL CONSIDERATION 8704020l56 PDR ADOCK P
This amendment involves a change in the installation and use of a facility
""-"""""+'" >+o0 within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 870327 050003'V7 PDR
~
~
2 and chanqes in surveillance requirements.
The staff has determined that this 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 nn significant increase in individual or cumula-tive occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no sionificant hazards consideration, and there has been no public cuba ent on such finding.
Accord-ingly, this amendment meets the eligibilitycriteria for cateqorical ex-clusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(h),
no environmental'mpact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amen& ent.
n.o C0NCLuS10H Tj The Commission made a Proposed determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration which was published in the FEDERAL REGISTER (51 FR 32280) on September 10,
- 1986, and consulted with the state of Vashinaton.
No public comments were received, and the state of Washington did not have any comnents.
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 prcposed
- manner, and (2> such activities wi'.1 be conducted in compliance with the Commission's reaula-tions and
+he issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security nr to the health and safety o~ the public.
Principal Contributor:
Frank J. Witt, HRR Dated:
torch 27, l987