ML20211N592

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 4 to License NPF-36

ML20211N592
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	12/09/1986
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20211N581	List: ML20211N574 ML20211N583 ML20211N592
References
NUDOCS 8612180261
Download: ML20211N592 (2)

Text

,0

[$3 KEcq#'o UNITED STATES E" ,7 'I,h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 g ,j

\, l v .....

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION ,

i SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-36 LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMFANY SH0REHAM NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50-322

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated January 20, 1986, Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO, the licensee) requested changes to the Shoreham Radiolooical Effluent Technical Sepcifications (RETS) as incorporated in Facility Operating License NPF-36, 2.0 EVALUATION Technical Specifications (TS) for Operating License NPF-36 for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station were issued in July 1985. The RETS were included as part of the Shoreham TS ard were implemented by the licensee

/

g\ upon issuance of the TS. The proposed chances to the RETS are consistent

() with NUREG-0473, " Standard Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for BWRs", Revision 2, February 1, 1980 (model RETS) and would refine the wording in two tables (Section 4.11.1.1.1, Table 4.11.1.1.1-1 and Section 3.12.1, Toole 3.12.1-1) in the present TS. Specifically, the proposed changes would 1) eliminate the need for performing a monthly samplino and an analysis for dissolved and entrained gases if no waste batch of liquid effluents is released during the month, and 2) correct an error in the basis for the location of the control milk sample in the radiological environmental monitoring program.

With respect to the first change, we note the following. The model RETS guidance has been developed on the assumption that plants will make a number of discharges of liquid wastes during a month. Thus, the guidance provides for sampling and analysis, prior to release, for principal gamma emitters and I-131 within each batch of liquid waste. However, the guidance calls for only a once-a-month sampling and analysis for dissolved and entrained gases. Since the proposed modification meets the intent of the NRC staff's model RETS for BWRs, NUREG-0473, Revision 2, February 1, 1980, we find it to be acceptable.

The second proposed change corrects a typographical error involving the basis for the location of the control milk sample in the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program. In assembling the present TS table for this program, a typographical error was made that presents an inconsistent statement in the TS. Since the proposed substitution corrects this error v/ and meets the intent of the NRC staff's model RETS for BWRs, NUREG-0473, Revision 2, February 1,1980, we find it to be acceptable.

8612180261 G61209 PDR ADOCK 05000322 P PDR

T.... .

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

This amendment involves a change to a reouirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes to the surveillance require-ments. The staff has determined that the amendment involves no signifi-cant 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 Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public coment on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for cateaorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to10CFR51.22(b),noenvironmentalimpactstatementnorenvironmental assecsment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.

4.0 CONCLUSION

The staff has 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 Comission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the

- common defense and the security nor to the health and safety of the public.

f%

\

V) Prinicipal Contributor:

Dated: becember 9,1986 W. Meinke