ML20235M161
| ML20235M161 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 09/30/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20235M130 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8710060083 | |
| Download: ML20235M161 (4) | |
Text
--___ __ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ - - - -
-- =.=-
0e Safety Evaluation By The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Related to Amendment No.
To Facility Operating License No. DPR-35 Boston Edison Company Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station s
Docket No. 50-293 Introduction By letter dated July 8,1987, Boston Edison Company (the licensee) submitted Change Request No. 87-12 to facility operating license DPR-35, requesting that Technical Specification (TS) section 4.5.A.3.d, Low Pressure Core Injection (LPCI) Subsystem Testing, be amended to specify the performance necessary to comply with the current Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) analysis for the Pilgrim Station.
Proposed Change The proposed change consists of modifying TS surveillance requirement 4.5.A.3.d to specify single LPCI pump performance.
The current TS specifies pump performance based on three LPCI pumps.
Review Criteria / Requirements (1) NUREG-0123, Standard Technical Specifications for General Electric Boiling Water Reactors, Revision 3.
(2) Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, i
Chapters 6 and 14.
1 (3) NEDO-30767,
" Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) Analysis Update", September 1984.
Discussion and Evaluation l
The proposal would change TS surveillance requirement 4.5.A.3.d from "Three LPCI pumps shall deliver 14,400 gpm against a system head corresponding to a vessel pressure of 20 psig" to "Each LPCI pump shall pump 4800 gpm at a head across the pump of at least 380 ft".
The licensee states that the current TS requirement is based on the original core LOCA analysis in which flow from 3 pumps was a limiting case.
In the current LOCA analysis, however, the 3 pump case is no longer limiting.
Instead, two pump and four pump configurations are used.
By specifying pump performance for a single pump, pump capacity 8710060083 870930 PDR ADOCK 05000293 p
PDR OFFICIAL RECORD COPY OL TAC 65787 - 0003.0.0 08/31/87
2 requirements are stated in terms which do not need to be translated by intermediate calculations to be used in surveillance procedures.
This is presently the case because the three pump configuration is not directly tested.
The staff finds that this change does not conflict with current guidance for specifying pump performance provided in NUREG-0123 Standard Technical Specifications for General Electric Boiling Water Reactors.
In addition, the staff determined that the proposed change does not reduce the pump performance requirements.
Therefore, the proposed change to TS 4.5. A.3.d is acceptable.
Environmental Consideration This amendment involves a change in the Technical Specifications of facility components 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 individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accord-ingly, this 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 this amendment.
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 (3) the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date:
Principal Contributor:
Michele G. Evans, Region I 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY OL TAC 65787 - 0004.0.0 08/31/87
E L1Pl.11NG 10NDj))QN J QR Q([RA1]QN SHRV[](L Aff((_Rjp)J Rp(N T 3.5.A
{QrL$prgy_g nd_(P[l _5VD$y$1gm3 4.5.A (pgjpy y a nd L PC] _$k0 b ; t f' (cont'd)
(cont'd)
Check Once/ day Calibrate Once/3 months Test Once/3 months 2.
From and after the date that one 2.
When it is determined that one of the core spray subsystems is core spray subsystem is made or found to be inoperable inoperable, the operable core for any reason, continued reactor spray subsystem, the LPCI operation is permissible during subsystem and the diesel the succeeding seven days, generators shall be demonstrated provided that during such seven days all active components of the to be operable immediately.
The other core spray subsystem and operable core spray subsystem shall be demonstrated to be active components of the LPCI operable daily thereaf ter.
subsystem and the diesel generators are operable.
3.
The LPCI Subsystems shall be 3.
LPCI Subsystem Testing shall be as operable whenever irradiated fuel follows:
is in the reactor vessel, and prior to reactor startup from a
- a. Simulated Once/ Operating Cold Condition, except as Automatic Cycle specified in 3.5. A.4, 3.5.A.5 and Actuation 3.5.F.5.
Test
- b. Pump Once/ month Operability
- c. Motor Operated Once/Honth and valve Once/ cycle from operability the Alternate Shutdown Panel
- d. Pump Flow Once/3 months Each LPCI pump shall pump 4800 gpm at a head across the pump of at least 380 f t.
Amendment No.
104
i
(.
SALP Input Facility:
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Docket No.:
50-293 TAC No.:
65787 Licensee's Request Dated:
July 8, 1987 Functional Area:
Licensing Comparison of Performance To Criteria Attributes Criterion 1:
Management Involvement and Control in Assuring Quality Based upon the adequacy and quality content of the licensee's i
submittal, management's involvement and controls were apparent.
1 Rating:
Category 1
]
1 Criterion 2:
Approach to Resolution of Technical Issues From a Safety Standpoint The requested change in LPCI pump surveillance testing was the result of changes made in an update of the Pilgrim LOCA analysis. Also, the licensee's calculations for determining single pump performance parameters were very conservative.
Rating:
Category 1 Criterion 3:
Response to NRC Initiatives The licensee was responsive to the reviewer's questions and provided supplementary information in a very timely manner.
Rating:
Category 1
==
Conclusion:==
The licensee's rewording of TS 4.5.A.3.d to specify performance of each LPCI pump instead of performance of three pumps is evidence of a desire by the licensee to improve both content and ease-of-use of the TS.
Overall Rating: Category 1 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY OL TAC 65787 - 0007.0.0 09/09/87
_