ML20084S586
| ML20084S586 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 05/22/1984 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20084S584 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8406050074 | |
| Download: ML20084S586 (3) | |
Text
/
?g UNITED STATES fg
, g,gd. g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.g j WASHINGTCN. O C. 205%
y ~ r,. y SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 80 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-59 POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET N0. 50-333 1.0 Introduction By letter dated October 28, 1982*, the Power Authority of the State of New York (the licensee) proposed certain changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP) pertaining to surveillance testing of the fire protection system. The intent of the changes is to clarify existing surveillance requirements and was proposed in response to an inspection finding (No. 333/81-15-02) documented in IE Inspection Report No. 50-333/81-15.
2.0 Evaluation The licensee proposed three changes to the TS surveillance requirerents for the high pressure water fire protection system. The first change proposes to delete the word " system" from the phrase " system functional test" in Section 4.12.A.I.e.
The licensee stated that the term " system functional test" is undefined and that the correct term is " functional test." This latter term is defined in the TS and is otherwise used consistently throughout the surveillance requirements.
The second change proposes to delete the reference to an " operating sequence" in Section 4.12.A.1.e.1 pertaining to the automatic actuation of the fire pumps. The licensee states that the phrase is misleading since no sequencing of events occurs.
Rather, the pump control circuit is simple and uses only a pressure switch for automatic actuation, and local and remote switches for manual initiation.
The third change proposes to redify Section 4.12.A.I.e.4 that requires sequential testing of the fire pumps. The change would permit non-sequential tests. The phrase "...each pump starts sequentially..." in Section 4.12.A.1.e.4 can be read as the single, continuous decrease in the fire protection system pressure from normal with the observed start of the electric fire pump at 95 psig and the diesel fire pump start at 85 psig.
The licensee states that testing in this manner is neither necessary nor desirable when the design basis of the system is considered.
Modifying the TS in the proposed manner would remove this ambiguity.
g6050074840522 p
ADOCK 05000333 PDR
We have reviewed the licensee's October 28, 1982 submittal.
In addition, we have reviewed the applicable portions of the JAFNPP TS and Section 9.8, Fire Protection System, of the JAFNPP Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
Based on our review, we find that:
The proposed deletion of the word " system" from Section 4.12.A.1.e clarifies the surveillance requirement without changing the intent and makes the wording of the specification consistent with similar surveillance requirements.
The proposed deletion of the term " operating sequence" from Section 4.12.A.1.e.1 clarifies the surveillance requirement without changing the intent of the specification and removes the misleading phrase.
The proposed change to Section 4.12.A.1.e.4 to permit non-sequential testing of the fire pumps is consistent with the plant design bases as described in Section 9.8 of the JAFNPP FSAR. We find that each pump is fully capable of supplying the anticipated maximum fire flow demand independently and that the design basis did net intend for simultaneous running of both pumps to meet system requirements.
In addition, based on our review of the licensee's fire protection program, we conclude that the existing system design complies with the technical requirements of Appendix R to 10 CFR 50 and the fire protection guidelines of Appendix A to BTP ASB 9.5-1.
Furthermore, we agree with the licensee that no benefit is derived from testing the pumps in a sequential manner.
Based on our findings, we conclude that the licensee's proposed TS changes are acceptable.
3.0 Environmental Consideration 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 l
not result in any significant environmental impact.
Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 651.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement, or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment, j
4.0 Conclusions We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) public I
such
4 activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commissiori's regulations 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.
Principal Contributor:
H. Abelson Dated: May 22,1984 1
I