ML20236U474
| ML20236U474 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 11/30/1987 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236U472 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8712030075 | |
| Download: ML20236U474 (2) | |
Text
__
j
>QCECo
[o UNITED STATES g
[
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
- j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
- ...+
l_
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION I
RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.110 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-35 BOSTON EDISON COMPANY PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION l
DOCKET NO. 50-293
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In letter BEco 87-092, dated June 2,19A7, the Boston Edison Company requested a change to the technical specifications for Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station.
The proposed change is concerned with the Control Rod Block Actuation Instrumentation.
2.0 EVALUATION 1
The major portion of this proposed change is concerned with modifying the technical specification description of the Control Rod Block Actuation Instrumentation operation. The existing technical specifications describe the operability in terms of two separate trip systems per trip functions.
The actual system is a one-out-of-n logic system per trip function. The proposed change also adds new operability requirements for the Control Rod Block Actuation Instrument, not previously addressed in the technical specifications but described in the Final Safety Analysis Report. The operability requirements for the APRM Upscale and the Inoperative Trip functions are revised from the the run mode only to the run, startup and refuel modes, to be consistent with the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
The second portion of the proposed change is concerned with reformatting technical specification Table 3.2.C into Tables 3.2.C-1 and 3.2.C-2.
This change is to consolidate information and to add a new footnote 4 to Table 3.?.C-1, referencing a special SRM operability requirement in section 3.10.
Table 4.2.C is revised to include test / calibration requirements for the additional trip functions (from FSAR) added to Tables 3.2.C-1 and 3.2.C-2.
The Bases Section 3.2 is also revised to reference the APRM and IRM downscale trip setpoints. Section 3.2.C.1 is revised to reference the new Tabler 3.2.C-1 and 3.2.C-2.
The remaining portion of the proposed change is concerned with removing a conflicting calibration frequency requirement statement in the notes for Tables 4.9.A through 4.7.G.
G71203OO7S B71130 DR ADOCK 050 3
4 We have reviewed the proposed technical specification changes in accordance with Chapter 7 of the Standard Review Plan. The proposed changes, which change the description of Control Rod Block Actuation Instrumentation operation and remove a conflicting calibration frequency requirement statement in the notes for technical specification Tables 4.2.A through 4.2.G have been reviewed. He find that these changes only clarify previous information and do not change any of the operational or safety parameters.
Therefore, we find these changes to be acceptable.
The proposed changes concerning the operability requirements of the Control Rod Block Actuation Instrumentation and the operability requirements for the APRM Upscale and Inoperative trip functions have been reviewed. We have examined the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and have concluded that the addition of these operability requirements adds more conservatism to operations. Therefore, these operability changes to the technical specifications are acceptable.
We have reviewed the rest of the proposed changes concerning the reformatting of Table 3.2.C into Tables 3.2.C-1 and 3.2.0-2, the addition of Table 3.2.C-1 footnote, the revising of Table 4.2.C test / calibration requirements, the correcting of the reference in P,ases 3.2 to the APRM and IRM downscale trip setpoints, and the revising of Section 3.2.C.1 to reference the new Tables 3.2.C-1 and 3.2.C-2.
We have concluded these changes are of an editorial nature and are, therefore, acceptable.
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 CFP, Part 20.
The staff has deternined 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. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eli categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(gibility criteria for 9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statenant or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLllSION 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 the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Date: November 30, 1987 l
l Principal Contributor:
R. Lasky
__