ML20116M561

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 143 to License DPR-35
ML20116M561
Person / Time
Site: Pilgrim
Issue date: 11/16/1992
From:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20116M559 List:
References
GL-86-10, GL-88-12, NUDOCS 9211200380
Download: ML20116M561 (3)


Text

- - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _.

e

+

,\\

UNITED STATES j

8, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g

8 W ASHING TON, D. C. 20665

(.....)

q

I SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TQ AMENDMENT NO.143 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-35 BOSTON EDISON COMPANY E11,LRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50-293

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Safety Evaluation (SE) documents an independent review of a Request for.

License Amendment of the Fire Protection License Condition and Technical ~

S)ecifications submitted for Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station by Boston Edison, tie licensee.

The request was submitted to the NRC by letters dated October 7, 1991 and October 26, 1992.

The October 26, 1992 submittal mad:

only a page-reformatting change and does not change the no significant hazards -

consideration determination. This SE contains information resulting from a review of the submittal and from a plant visit made on June 23, 1992..

2.0- DISCUSSION The licensee has requested an amendment to their Operating License which would revise the fire protection license condition and relocate fire protection technical specifications to the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). This amendment was recuested in accordance with guidance provided in NRC Generic-Letters 85-10 anc 88-12.

1 The proposed changes to the Technical Specifications are as follows:

g 1.

Deleting section 3.12. " Fire Protection System Limiting Conditions for Operation" (LCOs) and 4.12 " Fire Protection System Surveillance Requirements _" and relocating.the requirements into a fire Protection i

Program by referencing it in the FSAR.

-l 2.-

Relocating-_.section 6.2.B.6,-dealing-with the composition of-the F.i_re Brigade, to the Fire Protection Program.

3.

Relocating the'part of section 6.4 specifying Fire Brigade training requirements to the Fire Protection Program.

4.

Modifying section 6.5.A.6.j to require the Operations Review Committee (ORC) to review the Fire Protection' Program.

5.

Removing.an obsolete reference to Appendix A of 10 CFR Part 55 in section 6.4.

The proposed license condition.for Pilgrim reads as.follows:

!:S 9211200300 921116 i

POR.ADOCK 05000293

.F:

PDR~

}

4 Boston Edison shall implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the approved fire protection program as describei in the final Safety Analysis Report for the facility and as approved in the SER dated December 21, 1978 as supplemented subject to the following provisions:

Boston Editon may make changes to the approved fire protection program without prior approval of the Commission only if those changes would not adversely affect the ability to achieve and maintain safe shutdown in the event of a fire.

3.0 EVALUATION The license amendment request for Pilgrim was reviewed against guidance provided in NRC Generic Letters 86-10 and 88-12.

A site visit was made on June 23, 1992 to review current and proposed plant implemention procedures.

In addition, an assessment was made against the guidance in Generic Letter 81-12 which establishes the need to provide technical specification requirements for alternate shutdown equipment which was not previously contained in plant technical specifications.

The licensee incorporated fire protection system surveillance and operability requirements into Revision 13 of the FSAR.

Fire Brigade staffing requirements were also included in this revision.

Revision 13 was submitted to the NRC on June 28, 1991 in accordance with 10 CFR 50.71(e).

The contents of this revision were reviewed during this evaluation to ensure that an equivalent level of protection was maintained.

Based on this review, it was determined that Revision 13 to the."SAR contains the same surveillance and operability requirements as currently exist in the plant's technical specifications.

It was noted that no reference to the Updated fire Hazards Analysis (UFHA) was included in this revision.

However, the licensee stated that they had identified this oversight and included the appropriate reference in the June 1992 submittal of the FSAR.

It was verified that this submittal does contain the appropriate reference.

Based on discussions with the licensee during the June 23rd plant visit. the UFHA at Pilgrim is considered the top level fire protection document, fire protection programmatic jolicies and precedures are subtler documents of the of the UFHA or are cited within the UFHA.

It was noted however,-that the procedures which will implement requirements of the existing technical specifications are not referenced in the UFHA.

The licensee agreed that this was necessary to ensure the fire protection program was fully captured by the references in the FSAR and agreed to reference the appropriate fire protection implementing procedures in the UFHA prior to the license chance becoming effective.

Draft Procedure No. 8.B.14 " Fire Protection Limiting Conditions for Operation and Compensatory Measure fire Watch Requirements" was reviewed and found to capture fire protection requirements currently existing in the technical specifications and also now existing in the FSAR.

The proposed license condition was also found to be consistent with tha license condition provided in Generic Letter 86-10 and is considered acceptable.

s y

During the plant visit, the licensee was asked if all eculpment necessary to achieve alternate shutdown following a fire was includet in the technical specifications.

The licensee responded that the alternate shutdown panels were included within the technical specifications and operability requirements were consistent with other safe shutdown equipment. After discussion with plant Operations personnel, it was concluded that the plant had met the i

guidance specified in Generic Letter 81-12 relating to inclusion of new alternate shutdown equipment into technical specifications.

4.0 STATECONSULTATION In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Massachusetts State Official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment.

The State official had no comments.

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

The amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use-of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.

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 offsi'e, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational _ radiation exposure.

The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that 'the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration..and there has been no public comment on such finding (56 FR 57691).

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 impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of-the amendment.

6.0 CONCllRION The Commission 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 (3i the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

~

Based on the review of the der 7,1991 request for changes to the license-and fire protection portions.of the technical' specifications for Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, it is concluded that Boston Edison ~has followed guidance provided by the NRC-in Generic Letters 86-10 and 88-12 and the amendment should be approved.

1 Principal Contributor:

A. Singh i

Date: November 16._ 1992

, -.