ML20151W603
| ML20151W603 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 08/17/1988 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151W602 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8808250051 | |
| Download: ML20151W603 (2) | |
Text
'o UNITED STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e
{
WASHINGTON, D. C 20555
- s+..../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATO 'O AMENDMENT NO. 42 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENS[ NO NPF-38 LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGNT COMPANY WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, UNIT 3 DOCKET NO. 50-382
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated March M 1988, Louisiana Power and Light Company (LP&L or the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (Appendix A to Facility Operating License No. NPF-38) for Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3.
The proposed changes would replace the 31 day Channel Functional Test and 92 day Channel Calibration of the Hydrogen Analyzer with a 31 day channel calibration. The June 2,1980 letter reinstated the sample gas concentration and no change is currently proposed on gas concentration.
2.0 EVALUATION The licensee has replaced the hydrogen analyzers at Waterford, Unit 3 in order to resolve long standing problems with moisture in the sample lines. The new analyzers are qualified to IEEE 323-1974 and IEEE 344-1975.
The system is Class IE and system components are seismically qualified and designed to operate within the environmental cor.ditions expected following a large break loss of coolant accident.
The manufacturer of the new system, however, has recomended a 31 day Channel Calibration which would encompass the current requirement for a 31 day Channel Functional Test and 92 day Calibration. The licensee is not proposing changes to the sample gas concentration to accomplish the calibration. On the basis that the only change proposed is the more restrictive 31 day Channel Calibration and no other change is proposed, we find the change is acceptable.
3.0 CONTACT WITH STATE OFFICIAL The NRC staff has advised the Administrator, Nuclear Energy Division, Office of Environmental Affairs State of Louisiana of the proposed detennination of no significant hazards consideration. No coments were received.
!!0300$ $
2 P
l' 2-4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIO!
The amendment relates to changes in installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFD,Part 2C.
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. The Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been ne public coment on such finding. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eli criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)gibility Pursuant to 10 CFR bl.22(b), no environmental impact statement er environ-rental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
Based upon its evaluation of the proposed changes to the Vaterfcrd 3 Technical Specifications, the staff has concluded that:
there is reason-able 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 complir.nce with the Comission's regulations and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the comen 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: August 17, 1988 Principal Contributor:
D. Wigginton l
l
\\