ML20082D967
| ML20082D967 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 11/09/1983 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20082D966 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8311230244 | |
| Download: ML20082D967 (2) | |
Text
,
/j/ '
ei NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION UNITED STATES i
0 5 Szd/ I WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 g *... /
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 71 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-35 BOSTON EDIS0N COMPANY PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50-293 1.0 Introduction By letter dated February 25, 1983, Boston Edison Company (the licensee) requested changes to the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station (PNPS) Technical Specifications (TSs) to incorporate an action statement in the event a limiting condition for operation regarding jet pump flow mismatch is exceeded.
2.0 Evaluation The proposed change to Specification 3.6.F would add an action statement which requires that immediate corrective action be taken whenever recirculation pump speeds are not within 10% of each other at power levels greater than 80% of rated power and within 15% of each other when power is less than or equal to 80%. The proposed change also reauires that if such a recirculation pump speed mismatch is not corrected within 30 minutes an orderly shutdown shall be. initiated and that the reactor shall be in Cold Shutdown within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> if the mismatch is not corrected within that time.
In reviewing the licensee's application, the BWR Standard Technical Specifications, NUREG-0123, Revision 3, served as the basis in assessing the acceptability of the proposed changes. The Standard Technical Specifications, page 3/4 4-3 pertaining to recirculation pumps (and their asociated bases) are recognized by the staff as an acceptable implementation of requirements applicable when recirculation pump speed mismatch occurs. We have reviewed the Boston Edison's February 25, 1983 application and find the proposed Technical Specification changes to be consistent with the BWR Standard Technical Specifications; therefore, we conclude that these changes are acceptable.
3.0 Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendment does not authorize 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 deter-mination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental inpact and, 8311230244 831109 DR ADOCK 05000293 PDR
4
/ '
pursuant to 10 CFR 951.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement, or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activ-ities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
K. Eccleston Dated: November 9,1983 e
O