ML20149G885
| ML20149G885 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 02/09/1988 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20149G883 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8802180449 | |
| Download: ML20149G885 (2) | |
Text
.
b.
/
~%,
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
WASMGTON. D. C. 20H6 g
g*...+,/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION P
SUPPORTING AMEN 0 MENT NO. 29 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-38 LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 00CKET NO. 50-382
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated August 28, 1987, Louisiana Power & Light Company (LP&L or the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (Attachment A to Facility Operating License No. NPF-38) for Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3.
The proposed changes would add Limiting Cond'tions fcc Operation for as-built primary and backup overcurrent protective devices used to protect the polar crane's containment electrical penetration to Technical Specification 3.8-1.
2.0 DISCUSSION Presently, Technical Specification Limiting Condition for Oper.
.i 3.8.4.1 requires all containment penetration conductor overcuri..:.
protection devices shown on Table 3.8-1 to be operable whenever the reactor is in Modes 1, 2, 3, or 4.
With respect to the polar crane, Table 3.8-1 currently states that the primary breaker is locked out in the open position during operation in Modes 1, 2, 3, and 4; hence there is no requirement to list the actual primary or backup protection.
The proposed cnanges will remove the sentence stating that the primary breaker is locked out in the open position during operation in Modes 1, 2, 3, and 4 and insert the as-built overcurrent protective devices that are actually installed.
3.0 EVALUATION As stated in the basis for Technical Specification 3.8.4.1 the requirement for overcurrent protection is to ensure "Containment electrical penetrations and penetration conductors are protected by either deenergizing circuits not required during reactor operation or by deaonstrating the operability of primary and backup overcurrent protection circuit breakers during periodic surveillance".
Presently, for the polar cranes, the licensee takes the former action to ensure adequate protection. However, adequate overcurrent protection devices are part of the as-built configuration of the polar crane electrical system. The proposed changes would impose surveillance requirements similar to those for other electrical penetrations, allowing the licensee to use the polar crane in Modes 1 through 4.
The proposed changes, therefore, remain within the bounds of the bases of the Technical Specification.
8802180449 000209 PDR ADOCK 050003a2 P
?.
2-In addition, when using the polar crane the potential exists for dropping heavy loacs which could impact irradiated fuel in the reactor vessel or equipment necessary for safe shutdown of the reactor.
As a result the NRC in July 1980 published NUREG-0612 "Control of Heavy Loads at Nuclear Power Plants" in addition to the issuance of a Generic Letter in December 1980.
In its response, the licensee stated its requirements for safe load paths, crane operator qualifications, crane inspection and testing.
A review of these submittals indicated that the licensee satisfied all applicable requirements of NUREG-0612.
The proposed changes will not affect the requirements stated in the licensee's submittals.
Therefore, for the reasons stated above, the staff concludes that the proposed changes to Table 3.8-1 of the Technical Specifications pose no safety concern.
4.0 CONTACT WITH STATE OFFICIAL The NRC staff has advised the Administrator, Nuclear Energy Division, Office of Environmental Affairs, State of Louisiana of the proposed determination of no significant hazards consideration.
No comments were
- received, j
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment relates to changes in installation or use of a facility compSnent located within the restricted area.
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.
Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in j
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.
6.0 CONCLUSION
Based upon its evaluation of the proposed changes to the Waterford 3 Technical Specifications, the staff has concluded that:
there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
The staff, therefore, concludes that the proposed changes are acceptable, and are hereby incorporated into the Waterford 3 Technical Specifications.
Dated: February 9,1988 Principal Contributor:
J. Wilson
_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ -