ML20066B160

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 3 to License NPF-12

ML20066B160
Person / Time
Site:	Summer
Issue date:	10/20/1982
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20066B156	List: ML20066B155 ML20066B160 ML20066B161
References
NUDOCS 8211060441
Download: ML20066B160 (2)

Text

r-P SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDitENT fi0. 3 TO LICENSE HPF-12 SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC A GAS C0ftPAtY SOUTH CAROLINA PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY INTRODlICTION Ry 1ctter, dated October 19, 1982, the South Carolina Electric & Gas Company (SCE8G) requested a change to the Technical Specifications to provide for a tolerance on the hydrogen content of the sample gas used in the calibration of the containment hydrogen monitors.

EVALUATION The surveillance requirements for containment hydrogen nonitors on page 3/4 6-21 require in part the conduct of a periodic channel calibration of the containnent hydrogen roonitors using sample gas containing 19.8 volume percent hydrog(.9 with the balance nitrogen. The licensee in its letter of October 19, 1982 requested that this surveillance requirement be changed to 19.8 + 0.1 volume percent hydrogen, balance nitrogen to provide acceptable tolerances to be used in the procurement of the sample gases used for calibration of the instruments.

We have reviewed the above change and conclude that it is administrative in nature and consistent with the basis for our approval of the design of the containment hydrogen monitors during the operating license stage of re, view.

ENVIR0miENTAL CONSIDERATION We have determined that the anendment does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environrental inpact. Having nade this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant fron the standpoint of environmental frpact and, pursuant to 10 CFR Section 51.S(d)(4), that an environmental impact statermnt or negative declaration and environnental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.

CONCLUSI0H

&!c have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:

(1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant' decrease in a safety nargin, the amendment does not involve a omce)

""CE '

~ " " ' ' " " * " " "

8211060441 821020 PDR ADOCK 05000395 one P

PDR NRC FORM 318 00-80) NRCM ONO UrrICIAL RECORD COPY usem ini-m*o

2-t significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed nanner, and (3) such activities will be 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.

DATE:

OCT 2 01982

./

l

.....vl, b/

DL:

1. 1 DL'-

,L.......

omcep...f

97..'h........

.B..J...

..l..o..o..c W K.

suRNAMEh

..13 82 10 82 om>

NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usam mi.-m.no

_