ML20235W530

Application for Amend to License NPF-1,consisting of License Change Application 155 Re Solid Radwaste Sys

ML20235W530
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	07/14/1987
From:	Cockfield D EUGENE WATER & ELECTRIC BOARD, PACIFICORP (FORMERLY PACIFIC POWER & LIGHT), PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20235W504	List: ML20235W501 ML20235W530 ML20235W557
References
TAC-66095, NUDOCS 8707230594
Download: ML20235W530 (3)

Text

_ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - -

PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY EUGENE WATER & ELECTRIC BOARD AND PACIFIC POWER & LIGHT COMPANY Operating License NPF-1 Docket 50-344 l License Change Application 155 This License Change Application requests an administrative change to the requirements of Section 3/4.11.3 of the Technical Specifications, l Appendix A to Operating License NPF-1, for the Trojan Nuclear Plant.

l PORTLAND CENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY B

D. W. Cockfield Vice President Nuclear Subscribed and sworn to before me this 14th day of July 1987.

4d J L, Notary Public of Oreg/>n Mem7[/

OMyCommission 4/

8707230594 870714 l

PDR ADOCK 05000344 p PDR L _ .

___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ i

e

' LCA 155 page 1 of 2 REASON FOR CHANGE Trojan Technical Specification (TTS) 3/4.11.3, Solid Radioactive Waste, Sec-tion 3.11.3.1.b states that TTS 6.9.1.9.b is not applicable. TTS 6.9.1.9.b does not exist. The Standard Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for pressurized water reactors (PWR-STS-1, September 3, 1982), which were used to develop the TTS, also has a reference in STS 3.11.3.b to STS Section 6.9.1.9.b which is a requirement to report certain generic events to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission within 30 days of the event. The TTS accomplish these Special Report requirements by defining more specifically which TTS are subject to the reporting requirement. Even if a TTS 6.9.1.9.b existed, TTS 3.11.3.1.b would define that it is not applicable. Thus, reference to TTS 6.9.1.9.b is an error which should be corrected for clarity.

DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE Page 3/4 11-17. SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE

. Section 3.11.3.1.b - delete the reference to 6.9.1.9.b.

SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION In accordance with the requirements of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, part 50.92, it is judged that this proposed license amendment involves no Significant Hazards Considerations based on the following:

1. Does the proposed license amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

This change has no effect other than editorial. The operation of the facility, the operating procedures, operating margins, equipment reliability are all unaffected. Therefore, since there is, in effect, no change, the probability or consequences of accidents previously evaluated are not increased.

2. Does the proposed license r4mendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any ;;sluent previously evaluated?

For the same reason as in Item 1 above, this amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety?

For the reasons stated in Item 1 above, this amendment would not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.

j

o LCA 155 Page 2 of 2 In the April 6, 1983 Federal Register, the NRC published a list of examples of amendments that are not likely to involve Significant Hazards Considerations. Example Number 1 of that list applies to this proposed change and states that a change similar to the following would not likely involve a Significant Hazards Consideration:

"A purely administrative change to technical specifications; for example, a change to achieve consistency throughout the technical specifications, correction of an error, or a change in nomenclature."

SAFETY / ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Safety and environmental evaluations were performed as required by Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50 and the TTS. This review determined that the proposed change does not create an unreviewed safety question since it deletes an inapplicability statement to a nonexistent reporting requirement and is strictly an editorial change.

LAH/kal 5992k.787 L---_---- __-_ _-_ _ -_________ ___ ___ ____ _ ______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _