ML19309D007

Forwards Proposed Changes to App a of Tech Specs & Suppl 1 to Supplemental Reload Licensing Submittal for Reload 4.

ML19309D007
Person / Time
Site:	Pilgrim
Issue date:	04/03/1980
From:	Howard J BOSTON EDISON CO.
To:	Ippolito T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML19309D008	List: ML19309D007 ML19309D011 ML19309D014
References
NUDOCS 8004090470
Download: ML19309D007 (3)

Text

. ~ -

e a BDETON EDISDN COMPANY

, 800 BOYLETON STREET BOSTON. MASSACHusn7s 02199 J. EDWARO HoWARD was pose oaset u u.

April 3, 1980 BECo. Ltr. #80-56 Mr. Thomas A. Ippolito, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Operating Reactors Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 License No. DPR-35 Docket No. 50-293 Supplement 1 to Reload 4 Submittal and Request for Technical Specification Change

Reference:

a. " Generic Reload Fuel Application" NEDE-24011-P-A July 1979.

b. " Supplemental Reload Licensing Submittal for Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Reload 4" NED0-24224, November 1979

c. Reload 4 Submittal and Technical Specification Changes BECo. Ltr. #79-269 December 12, 1979.

d. " Supplement 1 to Supplemental Reload Licensing Submittal for Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Reload 4" NEDo 24224-1 March 1980.

Dear Sir:

On February 29 and March 13, 1980, representa,tives of Boston Edison Company (BECo) and General Electric (GE) met with members of the NRC staff to describe the in-dications visually observed on the core spray spargers, to describe the intended course of action and to present the technical justification.to support the proposed startup plan.

Analysis (Reference d.) documents the information prese'nted at the above meetings l to support operation of the plant with the reported core spray sparger indications.

These analyses are submitted for your review in order to: 1) establish continued structural integrity of the core spray spargers for all modes of operation, 2) present the results of the LOCA analyses assuming no credit for core spray heat transfer credit and 3) describe the possible consequences of a potential loose part.

6, i 8004090 h d

CdQN E2 CON COMPANY Mr. Thomas A. Ippolito, Chief April 3, 1980 Page 2 Applicable changes to Appendix A (Technical Specifications) to Facility Operating ,

License (Nc. DPR-35) are also submitted for your review, approval and issuance '

pursuant to Section 50 of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations.

Proposed Charge Reference is made to PNPS Technical Specification 3.11A in which individual curves of limiting APLHCR values are proposed for each fuel type in the Cycle 5 core.

Reason for the Change Recently discovered indications in the core spray spargers may prevent proper distribution of core spray. The operating limit !!APLHGRs have been revised to ensure LOCA limits will not be exceeded.

Safety Considerations The LOCA analysis have been previously performed for each fuel type in the ' Cycle 5 core. These values are contained in NEDO-24224 (Submitted as part of the Reload 4 submittal). The present values were obtained by multiplying the previous MAPLHGRs by factors given in NEDO-24224-1 which were derived from LOCA analyses with no credit for core spray heat transfer. The calculations were performed using approved versions of the GE LOCA codes. Based on these calculations, operations within the proposed liAPLHCRs will not exceed 10CFR50 Appendix K limits.

Conclusions Based on the evaluation presented herein and the contents and analyses presented in Reference a., b., c., and d., it can be concluded that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be. endangered by operation of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Unit #1 following Reload No. 4.

This proposed amendment has been reviewed and approved by the Operations Review Committee and reviewed by the Nuclear Safety Review and Audit Committee.

Schedule The Boston Edison Company tentatively plans to conclude the refueling outage for Pilgrim I on or about May 1, 1980. Therefore, an expeditious review and approval of this submittal is requested.

Fee Consideration No further license fee amendment classification is proposed, as this application serves as a supplement to a previous License Amendment request still under review by the Commission.

%rgg*. '- eH g y W 6*y 4 $" '@ 'y -h egg _

_- - _ Qqpp - h p ak n amp 9 gg 994 g 3: .g pg g m, y .g e4 g_.

C:::dT N EDCON COMPANY Mr. Thomas A. Ippolito, Chief April 3, 1980 Page 3 Should there be any questions regarding this submittal, please contact us.

Very truly yours, CC 1

3 signed originals and 40 copies Attachments - (1) Proposed Changes to Appendix A (Technical Specifications)

(2) NEDO 24224-1, March, 1980 Commonwealth of Massachusetts)

County of Suffolk )

Then personally appeared before me J. Edward Howard, who, being duly sworn, old state that he is Vice President - Nuclear of Boston Edison Company, the applicant herein, and that he is duly authorized to execute and file the submittal contained herein in the name and on behalf of Boston Edison Company and that the statements in said submittal are true to the best of his knowledge and belief.

I My Commission expires: [v/g 6,//fy

/

Alah hf/,(

Notfry Public a fM

/

--,,_____:_-..