ML20209B871

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 130 to License NPF-1

ML20209B871
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	04/22/1987
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20209B779	List: ML20209B775 ML20209B822 ML20209B871
References
NUDOCS 8704280531
Download: ML20209B871 (2)

Text

- _ - _ _

1. cpD" "'CW,[o, UNITED STATES

!\ ) ,. c ' ,g - NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g .l WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 p

%; '..... f, SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDPENT N0.130 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-1 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY THE CITY OF EUGENE, OREGON PACIFIC POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY TROJAN NUCLEAR PLANT DOCKET N0. 50-344 INTRODUCTION Dy letters dated October 29, 1985, as supplemented January 9, 1987, Portland General Electric Company (PGE) proposed a change to Technical Specification (TS) Section 3.7.1.4 by increasing the minimum water level required to be maintained in the condensate storage tank (CST) from 196,000 gallons to 239,000 gallons.

DISCUSSION AND EVALUATION PGE's proposed gross minimum water volume requirement of 239,000 gallons for the condensate storage tank accounts for instrument error (14,400 gallons) and unusable volume (27,700 gallons), and thus provides greater assurance that l

- the minimum amount of water (196,000 gallons) as assumed in the safety .!

analysis, is available for plant cooldown. The unusable volume is that which l corresponds to the minimum vortex level of the CST. We find that PGE's ]

proposed change to TS Section 3.7.1.4 to increase the minimum water volume '

requirement for the CST to 239,000 gallons is acceptable.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION This amendment involves a change in the 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 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 1

l 1

8704280531 870422 PDR ADOCK 05000344 p PDR

.p.

or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously published a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards censideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 551.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 651.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the

, issuance of the amendment.

CONCLUSION 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 proposed manner, and (2) 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 secusity or to the health and safety of the public.

Dated: April 22, 1987 i

PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTOR:

T. Chan 3

5