ML20027E307
| ML20027E307 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 10/29/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20027E302 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8211120549 | |
| Download: ML20027E307 (3) | |
Text
[a ns UNITED STATES
, ! yg '
- (g NUCLEAR RF1ULATORY COMMISSION Q@*Nw ""' U E
WA.
'GTON. D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 71 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-59 POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT
- DOCKET NO. 50-333 I.
Introduction By letter dated June 26, 1979, the Power Authority of the State of New York-(licensee) proposed an amendment to the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP) Technical Specifications (TS) pertaining to the emergency
~
service water system. The change would modify the emergenc? service water pump surveillance test acceptance criteria to include an allowance for normal pump wear.
~
II. Background
~
The licensee's request for amendment was forwarded on Jurie 26, 1979. Shortly thereafter, the NRC's Office of Inspection and Enforcement issued, by letter da'ted July 11', 1979, IE Bulletin 79-15, Deep Draft Pump Deficiences. Since the licensee's emergency service water pumps were ipentified as similar in design to the vertical turbine pump design discussed in the bulletin, we in-formed the licensee by letter dated July 21, 1979 that approval of the proposed amendment was contingent upon its satisfactory response to the bul-letin. The licensee was advised that its application. for amendment would be held in abeyance pending receipt of its submittal and completion of our review.
' The licensee responded to the bulletin by letters dated August 3 and 9,1979.
^
Our review of the licensee's response was subsequently conducted and docu-I mented in IE Inspection Repvrt No. 50-333/80-15, dated December 31, 1980.
In the report, the inspector stated that he had reviewed the documentation pertaining to the bulletin.to verify that the licensee's response was timely, accurate, and adequate.
No inadequacies were identified by the inspector and' l
the review was considered complete. Thus, action cuuld then proceed on our l
l review of the licensee's proposed amendment.
l III. Evaluation The l'censee har proposed to modify TS 4.11.D.l.b, Emergency Service Water System, to include an allowance for normal pump wear in the emergency service water pump surveillance test acceptance criteria.
1 The flow requirements for the emergency service water pumps are given in 8211120549 821029 PDR ADOCK 05000333 P
2-the JAFNPP Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) Table 9.7-1, Equipment Supplied by the Emergency Service Water System. A total flow of 2915 gpm is required to meet all equipment needs. The current TS requires that each pump deliver at least.3700 gpm. This flow rate was derived based on a system head corresponding to a total pump head of 80 psi and is required w
to be demonstrated by a pump shutoff head of 120 psi. These'paramentersi were selected from the pump head-capacity design curves and reflect new pump performance without regard for wear.
In discussions between the licensee and the pump vendor, an allowance for normal' wear wherein pump overhaul should reasonably be considered was discussed and identified. This allowance wss four percent and would equate to a revised pump shutoff head of 117 psi, rather than the current TS criterion of 120 psi. Applying this same four percent allowance for normal wear to the entire design head-capacity pump curve would result in a minimum acceptable pump flow rate of 3250 gpm. This flow rate is 335 gpm above the required pump flow rate of 2915 gpm. Thaa, substantial pump capacity in excess of that required for the pumps to perform their intended safety function would exist and still provide allowar.ce for normal, pump wear.
We have reviewed the licensee's analyses submitted in support of the proposed amendment dated June 26, 1979 pertaining to the emergency service' water system surveillance test acceptance c-iteria. We have also examined Section 9.7.1, Emergency Service Water System, of the JAFNPP Final ' Safety 3
Analysis Report Update and Section 6.4, Other Enrineered Safety Featu'res, of our corresponding Safety Evaluation of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear 7
Power Plant, issued November 20, 1972. Based on that review, we agree with' the licensee's analyses and find that the inclusion of'an allowance V normal wear in the emergency service water pump hea"d-capacity curves still
~
provides adequate assurance that pump flow rates will be substantailly in i
excess of that required to meet the intended safety function while allor,ing for normal pump wear. We therefore conclude that the licensee's proposed TS amendment is acceptable.
i IV. Environmental Consideration e
We have determined that the amendment does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is in-significant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement or negative de-claration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in con.
nection with the issuance of this amendment.
V.
Conclusion
- l
. l.
'We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1)
I i
because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, does not create the possibility of an accident of a type different from any evaluated previously, and does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, the amendment does not involve a signifiont hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public
)
will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such M
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations g
1 t
r
--_m,,. _.
.,--m
.__._.,_p
3-and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
w Principal Contributor: Joseph Hegner Date: October 29, 1982 I
m s
- A c.
L v
t Fm 4
4 Pg e+
I4
)
< % < N*
s t
\\
^s g.
.g
%"[
'l T'
' 4.
.(
k N'
f
.q y
e 4
f
^
e ',,
e
, g -r
.'A g
ig i
\\$
\\
p
{
l
~
f1,d y',
~
-t
=>
a
+
a m
?
9 4
s
=
m.e.
-e
- * = =
- d 1
1 a_
. _ _.. _.i _.
1