ML20247D028

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 28 to License NPF-57

ML20247D028
Person / Time
Site:	Hope Creek
Issue date:	07/10/1989
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20247D026	List: ML20247D028
References
NUDOCS 8907250009
Download: ML20247D028 (2)

Text

.j%

M%q

'k, UNITED STATES '

[.

a:

, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20656 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 28 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NC. NPF-57 PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC & Gr.S COMPANY ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION DOCKET NO. 50-354

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated April 12, 1989, Public Service Electric & Gas Company (PSE&G) requested an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-57 for the Hope Creek Generating' Station. The proposed amendment would require that' samples for tritium be taken at the spent fuel pool area rather than from the ventilation exhaust from that area.

2.0 EVALUATION.

The staff evaluation is based on a PSE8G 1etter of April 12, 1989. Table.

4.11.2.1.2-1, TABLE NOTATION (d) currently requires that tritium grab samples.be.taken at least once per 7 ' days from the ventilation exhaust from the spent fuel. pool area. Sampling for tritium at the spent pool area instead of from the ventilation exhaust from that. area would provide a more representative sample and irore accurate methodology for l

the assessment of tritium release from the spent fuel. The proposed change will provide more accurate samples.because it will provide only the atmospheric content from the spent fuel pool aree for assessment rather than being diluted by the additional ventilation flow of the South

. Plant Vent of up to 423,900 cfm.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

-]

I This amendment involves a change to a requirement with respect to the I

installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted I

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 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 no pubile comment on such finding.

Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical' exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.?2(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b),

no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.

i 8907250009 890710 PDR ADOCK 05ooo354 P

PDC

)

= -

4.0 CONCLUSION

The Commission made a proposed determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (54 FR 23322) on May 31, 1989 and consulted with the State of New Jersey. No public comments were received and the State of New Jersey did not have any conments.

The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health.and safety of the p(ublic 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 this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security nor to the health and safety of the public.

Principal Contributor:

C. Y. Shiraki Dated: July 10, 1989 O

e i

l 1

u--

- - A