ML20247E059
| ML20247E059 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 03/23/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247E055 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8903310287 | |
| Download: ML20247E059 (2) | |
Text
,
a,.
4*
a.
/
UNITED STATES I
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
7, t
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20866
.....,o SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 51' TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-38 i
LOUISIANA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY WATERFORD STEAM ELECTRIC STATION. UNIT.3 DOCKET NO. 50-382
1.0 INTRODUCTION
I l
Waterford Licensee Event Report (LER) 88-19 documented how Technical Specification 4.8.4.1.a.1.(b) led to unclear definition of voltage levels which required functional testing of the electrical pentration protective devices. Table 3.8-1 which contained Specification 4.8.4.1.a.1.(b) had the surveillance requirements only for 6.9kV breakers' The specification did not implement the surveillance requirements for 4.16kV breakers and molded case breakers of the motor control centers. By letter dated October 31, 1988 Louisiana Power and
. Light Company requested a revision to Technical Specification Table 3.8-1 to include the surveillance requirements for 4.16kV breakers and molded case bre6kers.
2.0 EVALUATION Louisiana Power and Light Company has proposed changes to Technical Specification Table 3.8-1 to include the integrated system functional test surveillance requirements for 4.16kV and molded case breakers in Technica! Specification 4.8.4.1.
The existing integrated system functional test surveillance requirements fnclude only four primary 6.9kV breakers associated with reactor coolant pump motors. The licensee has proposed changes to Technical Specification Table 3.8-1 to include integrated functional tests for 4.16kV breakers which provide backup overcurrent protection via transfer trip relays and the 480V switchgear breaker similar to the 6.9kV breaker design. 4.16kV backup breakers prov'de seconoary containment penetration overcurrent protection for the control element drive mechanism (CEDM) cooling units, the polar crane and the pressurizer heaters.
We have reviewed the licensee's submittal and have found that the surveillance applied to the primary 6.9kV breakers has been extended to the backup 4.16kV breakers and the n>olded case breakers. The reformatting of Table 3.8-1 did not delete any items from the old list, or delete any surveillance requirements.
The reformatting is in accordance with Combustion Engineering Standard Technical Specification and is, therefore acceptable. During our review a number of errors w::re identified in the proposed table. These have been corrected for accurate identification of equipment.
8903310287 890323 PDR ADOCK 05000302 P
m!
J y
1.
3.0
SUMMARY
We have reviewed the licensee's submittal and have concluded that the proposed change to Technical Specification Table 3.8-1 includes the surveillance require-i I
ments for 4.16kV and molded case breakers and is in accordance with Standard l
Technical Specifications and is, therefore, acceptable.
l 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 determination of no significant hazards consideration. No comments were rec.eived.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment relates to changes in installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area es 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 Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eli criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)gibility Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environ-mental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
6.0 CONCLUSION
Based upon its evaluation of the proposed changes to the Waterford 3 Technical Specifications, the staff has concluded that: there is reason.
able assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and 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 security or to the health and safety of the public. The staff, therefore, concludes that the proposed changes are acceptable, and are hereby incorporated into the Waterford 3 Technical Specifications.
Dated:
March 23, 1989 Principal Contributor:
N. Trehan
_.