ML20196D680
| ML20196D680 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 12/02/1988 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20196D678 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8812090160 | |
| Download: ML20196D680 (2) | |
Text
a onastg jof UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON,0 C.20666 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.46 TO FACILITY OPE;'ATlNG LICENSE NO. NPF-38 LOUIS 1ANA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY WATERFORDSTEAMELECTRICSTAT10N,,0NJT,3 DOCKET NO. 50-382 1.0 LN,T,RODUCTION By application dated June 7, 1988, Louisiana Power and Light Company (LPlLorthelicensee)requestedchangestotheTechnicalSpecifications
( Appendix A to Facility Operating License No. NPF-38) for Waterford Steara Electric Station, Unit 3.
The proposed changes would allow the operator to bypass the Reactor Coolant Flow-Low trip below 10"4% of Rated Thern1 Power. On August 8,.1988, the licensee provided a clarification of the proposed amendment. The August 8,1988 letter did not add to or change the proposed amendment and the staff's findings of no significant hazards considerations published in the Federal Register on July 3, 1988 (53 FR 26526) remains valid.
2.0 DISCUSSION The Reactor Coolant Flow-Low trip is designed to minimize the aucunt of fuel failure in the event of a sheared shaft of the reactor conlant pur The trip is to assure the departure frco nucleate boiling ratio (DNBR) p.
is r.ot excoeded due to a loss of flow and continued reactor operation.
The licensee presently installs furpers around the trip when it is not needed end this manual attion is subject to unwarranted errors by plant operators. A design change 'n the system will allow a bypass of the trip bistables from the Control Panel and will autorg% of Rated Therrel tically reinstate the trip function when the reactor power exceeds 10" Power. The proposed change in operation requires consideration of the effects of DNBR protection at reactor power levels below the 10"% of Rated Thermal Power.
3.0 EVALUATION The licensees letter dated August 8, 1988 provided the clarification of earlier staterents concerning the protection against exceeding the DNBR limits at very low power. Test data on natural circulation low at 5% of full power in units like Waterford 3 have tended to confirra that DNER is not exceeded and power levels lower or et 10'4% of Rated Thermal g 20 M IO b b
@2 P
e t.
2 Powc. are not of concern for a low primary coolant flow trip bypass.
Asthereactorpowerisincreased,protectionagainstlosso{%.flow is provided when the trip is automatically reinstated above 10" The irprovement in safety occurs with the installation of the bypass since the manual jumpers are no longer required to perform the same function.
The staff agrees with the licensee's assessment of the protection provided by the bypass and finds the proposed license an:endrent acceptable.
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 deterniination of no significant hazards consideration. No coments were received.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment relates to changes in installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
The staff has determined that the eendnent involves no significant increase in the amounts and no significant change in the types of any i
effluents that may be released offsite and that there is no significant increase in individual or curulative occupational radiation exposure. The Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendnent involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)gibility comment on such finding. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eli Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact staten:ent or environ.
nental assessment naed be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendnent.
6.0 CONCLUSl_0N Bssed upon its evaluatiun of the proposed changes to the Waterford 3 Technical Specificatinns, the staff has concluded that: there is reason-able assurance that the health cnd safety of the public will not be endangered by o bration in t?.e proposed manner, and such activities will be conducted in cenpliance with the Consnission's regulations and the issuance of the amendrent will not be inimical to the contren defense and security or to the health and safety of the public. The staff, therefore, concludes that the proposed changes ere acceptable, and are heieby incorporated into the Waterford 3 Technical Specifications.
Dated: Decereber 2,1988 Principal Contributors:
D. Wigginton ar.d C. Liang
.