ML20101T519
| ML20101T519 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 07/15/1992 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20101T516 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9207210177 | |
| Download: ML20101T519 (2) | |
Text
$ Al G(,g f, $
Cy
?'
5
' '" < %E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION UNITED STATES a
- k
^ j WASHWG10N. O C. ?MS g..
y
.+
SAFETY EVALVATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGUIATION Sj)PPORTING AMENDMENT NO.142 TJ FAtiLITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. OPR-35 i
EOSTOILEDISON COMPANY l
l EllGBIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50-293 1.0 E!!DQDUCT10fj By [[letter::BECO-92-039, Application for Amend to License DPR-35,changing TS Section 4.7 Re Primary Containment Integrity to Remove Words Each Operating Cycle for MSIV & Personnel Airlock Door Testing|letter dated April 8, 1992]], Boston Edison Company (the licensee) requested an amendment to the Technical Specifications (TS) appended to facility Operatfog License No. DPR-35 for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station.
The amendment would remove the words "each operating cycle" from TS sections 4.7.A.2.a(1) and 4.7.A.2.a(2) regarding reduced pressure local leak rate tests of main steam isolation valves (MSIVs) and personnel air lock door seals.
Pilgrim TS Section 1.V defines " operating cycle" for the purposes of determining surveillance intervals as 18 months with a 25% margin. The licensee's operating cycle is currently scheduled for 24 months.
The licensee has requested, therefore, to remove the words "each operating cycle" from the specified TS to allow testing at intervals corresponding to those specified in Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50.
A discussion of the proposed changes and the NRC staff evaluation and findir ;
relative to each are addresssed in Sect. ion 2 of this Safety Evaluation.
2.0 EVAlVATION 2.1 lia..in Steam Isolation Valvn The licensee requested to remove the words "each operating cycle" from TS Section 4.7.A.2.a(1).
As currently written, this TS, in conjunction with the definition in TS Section 1.V, would require local leak rate testing of the MSIVs at least once every 22.5 months.
Following removal of the words as requested, the TS would require that the test be performed "during each reactor shutdown for refueling but in no case at intervals greater than 2 years" pursuant to 10 CFR 50, Appendix J.
The staff concludes that this change is acceptable because the surveillance is required to be performed in accordance with 10 CFR 50 Appendix J with the exception that the test pressure will be less than Pa.
This exception was previously approved by the staff in an exemption issued on July 2, 1984.
9207210177 920715 ppR ADOCK 05000293 A.
p PDR
' 2.2 Personnel Air Lock Door Seals The licensee requested to remove the words "each operating cycle" from TS Section 4.7.A.2.a(2). As currently written, this TS, in conjunction with the definition in TS Section 1.V, would require local leak rate testing of the personnel air lock door seals at least once every 22.5 months.
Following removal of the words as requested, the TS would require that the test be performed "at least once every 3 days during... period [s) of frequent openings" when containment integrity is required.
Conduct of the test at reduced pressure is authorized by Appendix J provived that the test pressure is specified in the TS.
The staff concludes that this changs is acceptable because the surveillance is required to be performed in accordance with 10 CFR 50 Appendix J.
The reduced test pressure is specified in the TS as required by Appendix J.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Massachusetts State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.
The stati!
official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements.
The NRC 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 propcsed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (57 FR 20509). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental in' pact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The staff has 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, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and ' safety of the peblic.
Principal Contr;butor:
D.
Dorman Date:
July 15, 1992 a