ML20116M210
| ML20116M210 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 04/22/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20116M202 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8505060147 | |
| Download: ML20116M210 (2) | |
Text
7
[f[t%qk UNITED STATES g
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5
-j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 87 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-35 BOSTON EDISON COMPANY PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50-293 1.0 Introduction By letter dated December 6, 1984, the Boston Edison Company (BEco/ licensee) proposed a change in the Technical Specifications (Section 3.7.5.a and b) to reduce the limit on oxygen concentration in the containment from 5% to 4% by volume during reactor power operation with the reactor coolant pressure above 100 psig. The modified Technical Specifications would allow up to 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, subsequent to placing the reactor in the RUN mode following a shutdown, to reduce the oxygen concentration to less than 4% by volume and would continue to allow de-inerting the containment to commence 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> prior to shutdown.
P.0 Evaluation The licensee's purpose in proposing the 4% limitation on oxygen concentration in the containment during normal reactor operation is to meet one of the criterion in NRC Generic Letter 84-09 issued on May 8, 1984 That generic letter listed certain criteria to be met in determining whether a BWR plant with a Mark I containment should provide hydrogen recombiner capability. One of those criteria is that "the plant has technical specifications (limiting conditions for operation) requiring that, when the containment is required to be l'
inerted, the containment atmosphere be less than four percent oxygen."
By maintaining the oxygen concentration below 4%, the possibility l
of hydrogen combustion or detonation is precluded. This is a more l
stringent limitation than the present Technical Specification limit of 5% oxygen by volume. Therefore, this proposed change is acceptable l
since it meets the criteria contained in Generic Letter 84-09.
3.0 Environmental Consideration This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as 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 I
individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no 8505060147 950422 ADOCK 05 23 gDR
r
+
.. significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibilit criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)y Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need 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 activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
P. H. Leech Dated: April 22, 1985
<