ML20041B617
| ML20041B617 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 02/05/1982 |
| From: | Vassallo D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Boston Edison Co |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20041B618 | List: |
| References | |
| DPR-35-A-052 NUDOCS 8202240368 | |
| Download: ML20041B617 (8) | |
Text
i
+$paaeogk UNITED STATES 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g.%)3(
g L
-l WASHINGTON. D. C. 20$MM 8
\\**,W p
BOSTON EDISON COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-293 PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWEx 5.ATION AMENDftENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 52 License No. DPR-35 1.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:
A.
The application for amendment by the Boston Edison Company (the licensee) dated January 21, 1982 complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act),
and the Commission's rules and regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B.
The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C.
There is reasonable assurance (i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations; D.
The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E.
The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.
2.
Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Technical Spec-ifications as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment and paragraph 3.B of Facility Operating License No. DPR-35 is hereby amended to read as follows:
B.
Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendices A and B, as revised through Amendment No. 52, are hereby incorporated in the license. The licensee shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.
l 8202240368 820205 PDR ADOCK 05000293 i
P PDR l
_ _. - -. -.. ~.
2 4
3.
This license amendment is effective as' of the date of its issuance.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
Domenic B. Vassallo, Chief j
Operating Reactors Branch #2 j
Division of Licensing
Attachment:
Changes to the Technical Specifications -
Date of Issuance:
February 5,1982 i
1
)
i I
s
}
i l
l l
l L
i I
. _ - -, _,.. ~.,
. -. -.. - + - - - -., - - -,,.-
t ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 52 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR_3_5_5 DOCKET N0. 50-293 Revise Appendix A as follows:
Remove the following pages and insert identically numbered pages:
158 158B
8 3.7,B Standby Gas Treatnent(
tem and 4.7.B Standby is Treatment System and Controld.com Hich Efficiency Air Control Room With Effiuency Air Filtration System Filtration System 1.
Standby Gas Treatment Sys' tem 1.
- a. (1.) At least once every 18 4 a.
Except as specified in months, it shall be 3.7.B.1.c below, both trains demonstrated that pressure of the standby gas treatment drop across the combined system and the diesel genera-high efficiency filters tors required for operation of and charcoal adsorber banks such trains shall be operable is less than 8 inches of at all times when secondary water at 4000 cfm.
containment integrity is required or the reactor shall (2.) At least once every 18 be shutdown.in 36 hours4.166667e-4 days <br />0.01 hours <br />5.952381e-5 weeks <br />1.3698e-5 months <br />.
months, demonstrate that the inlet heaters b.
(1.) The results of the in-on each train are place cold DOP tests on operable and are capable HEPA filters shall show of an output of at least
>99% 00P removal. The 14 kW. Perform an results of halogenated instrument functional hydrocarbon tests on test on the humidistats charcoal adsorber banks controlling the heaters.
shall show > 99% halogenat-ed hydrocarbon removal.
(3.)Thetestsandanalysisof Specification 3.7.B.1.b.2 (2.) The results of the shall be perforned at least laboratory carbon sample once every 18 months or analysis shall show >95%
following painting, fire methyl icdide removaT at or chemical release in any a velocity within 10% of ventilation zone communicat-system design, 0.5 to ing with the system while.
1.5 mg/m3 inlet methyl
[ the system is operating that iodide concentration,
' could contaminate the HEPA
>70% R.H. and >l900F.
fifters or charcoal adsorbera.
~
% c.
From and after the date that (4.) At least once every 18 one train of the Standby Gas months, automatic l
Treatment System is made or initiation of each branch found to be inoperable for of the standby gas I
any reason, continued treatment system shall reactor operation or fuel be demonstrated, with handling is permissible only Specification 3.7.B.1.d i
during the succeeding seven satisfied.
days providing that within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and daily thereafter, (5.)Eachtrainofthestandby all active components of the gas treatment system shall other standby gas treatment be operated for at least train shall be demonstrated 15 minutes per month, to be operable.
(6.) The tests and analysis of d.
Fans shall operate within Specification 3.7.B.1.b.(2)
+10% of 4000 cfm.
shall be performed after every 720 hours0.00833 days <br />0.2 hours <br />0.00119 weeks <br />2.7396e-4 months <br /> of system operation.
- Conditional Relief granted from this LCO for the period February 5,1982 to startup for cycle 6.
158 Amendment No. f(f,31', 52
\\
3.i.Il (Continued) 4.7.B (Con, turd)
G.
2.
Control Room High Efficiency Air 2.
Control Room High Efficiency Air
~
Filtration System Filtration System y a.
Except as specified in a.
At least once every 18 Specification 3.7.B.2.c months the pressure drop below, both trains of the -
across each combined filter Control Room High Efficiency train shall be demonstrated Air Filtration System used to be less than 3 inches of water at 1000 cfm.
for the processing of inlet air to the control room under accident conditions and the b.
(1.) The tests and analysis of.
diesel generator (s) required Specification 3.7.B.2.b for operation of each shall be performed once train of the system shall every -18 months or be operable whenever secondary following painting, fire or chemical release in containment integrity is required and during fuel any ventilation zone communicating with the
~
handling operations.
sys_ ten while the system is operating..
b.
(1.) The rasults of the in-place cold DOP tests on HEPA filters shall show (2.) Inplace cold DOP testing
,,99% DOP removal. The shall be performed after
>results of the halogenat-each complete or partial ed hydrocarbon tests on replacement of the HEPA charcoal adsorber banks filter bank or after any shall show >99% halogenat-structural maintenance ed hydrocarFon removal on the system ousing when test results are which could affect the extrapolated to the HEPA filter bank bypass initiation of the test.
leakage.
(*
he (3.) Halogenated hydrocarbon
(
fao bon sample testing shall be performed o
c I
analysis shall show >95%
after each complete or methyl iodide removaT at partial replacement of a velocity within 10% of the charcoal adsorber system design, 0.05 to bank or after any 0.15 mg/m3 inlet methyl structural maintenance iodide concentration, on the system housing l
>70% R.H., and >1250F.
which could affect the charcoal adsorber bank
+
c.
From and after the date that bypass leakage.
one train of the Control Room High Efficiency Air Filtration (4.) Each train shall be System is made or found to be operated with the heaters incapable of supplying filtered h wh fu at le air to the control room for any 15 minutes every month-reason, reactor operation or i
l refueling operations are (5.) The test and analysis of permissible only during the S ecification 3.7.B.2.b. (2 succeeding 7 days.
If the shall be performed after i
system is not made fully oper-every 720 hours0.00833 days <br />0.2 hours <br />0.00119 weeks <br />2.7396e-4 months <br /> of system able within 7 days, reactor operation.
- Conditional Relief granted from this LCO for the period February 5, 1982 to startup for cycle 6.
AmendmentNo.J(I,ff,52
l UNITED STATES
/$,
3e NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
,, j WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555
'E o
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 52 TO LICENSE NO. DPR-35 BOSTON EDISON COMPANY DOCKET N0. 50-293 PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Author.
Kenneth T. Eccleston 1.0 Introduction By letter dated January 21, 1982 (BECo ltr. #82-19), the Boston Edison Company (the licensee) requiested interim relief from the requirements of Technical Specifications (Sections 3.7.B.l.a, 3.7.B.l.c, 3.7.B.2.a and 3.7.B.2.c) regarding the operability requirements for the Standby Gas Greatment System (SGTS) and the Control Room High Efficiency Air Filtration System (CRHEAFS).
2.0 Background
Engineering analyses, performed in response to IE Bulletin 80-11, " Masonry Wall Design," have identified several masonry walls that will not retain their structural integrity following certain design basis events:
High Energy Pipe Break Outside Containment, Tornado Depressurization, and Seismic. The 4
licensee has committe/ to make permanent modifications to these walls prior to startup for Cycle 6 operation. However, prior to this time a failure of these walls, if one of the design basis events occurred during certain testing, would adversely impact certain safety systems required to be operable during three tests required to be conducted before startup. These tests are:
(1) integrated leak rate test, (2) primary startup hydrostatic test, and (3) scram time testing.
The licensee has identified the safety related equipment which would be impacted by failure of the block walls and the design basis events which would cause these wall failures.
i 3.0 Evaluation Of the design basis events of concern, high energy line breaks outside con-tainment were judged to be not relevant because of the plant's shutdown condition. With regard to Tornado Depressurization events, the licensee will have in place a procedure which requires the termination of testing in the event that a Tornado Watch is issued by the National Weather Service in the area of the plant.
1
2 In view of these considerations, the licensee has stated that only masonry walls 65.19 and 196.0 are of concern. These walls could be impacted by a seismic event or tornado depressurization event.
The safety related systems affected by failures of these two walls include:
(1) Control Room Ventilation (Train "A"), (2) Standby Gas Treatment System (SGTS)
(Train "A"), (3) Standby Liquid Control System (SLCS) tank heater, and (4) SGTS damper M0-N-ll3 (Train "B").
The loss of the Standby Liquid Control System tank heater was judged to not be of significance because the heat loss across the insulated tank wall is not sufficient to incapacitate the system within the time frame required for the SLCS after an initiating event.
Likewise, the loss of actuation capability of SGTS damper M0-N-ll3 (Train "B")
is not significant because this damper is deenergized in the open (fail-safe) position to assure the operability of SGTS Train "B".
Consequently, the only safety related systems which necessitate Technical Specification relief are the CRHEAFS (Train "A") and the SGTS (Train "A").
The licensee will implement the following compensator.y measures to address the inoperability of these two systems in addition to the termination of testing upon Tornado Watch conditions noted above:
1.
The nonimpacted trains (Train "B") of the Standby Gas Treatment Systems and Control Room High Efficiency Air Filtration System will be continuously operated.
2.
Testing will cease if either of the continuously running systems are made or found to be inoperable.
The BECo request seeks relief only for that period of time prior to startup and provides for compensatory measures which provide reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered.
We have reviewed the licensee's proposed Technical Specification (TS) changes to provide for interim conditional relief from the requirements of T.S.
3.7.B.l.a, 3.7.B.l.c, 3.7.B.2.a and 3.7.B.2.c and have detennined that the proposed Technical Specification changes are acceptable for the period prior to startup for Cycle 6 operation.
4.0 Environmental Considerations We have determined that the amendment does not involve a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this detennination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and pursuant to 10 CFR Section 51.5(d)(4) that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
t 5.0 Conclusions We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) 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.
Dated: February 5,1982 i
I