Text

Definition of Operable,Ja Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant
	ML20096D331
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	01/31/1984
From:	Farmer F; EG&G, INC.
To:	Abelson H; Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20096D319	List: ML20096D316; ML20096D321; ML20096D331;
References
	CON-FIN-A-6429 EGG-EA-6480, NUDOCS 8409060026
	Download: ML20096D331 (9)
	v • d • e

'

EGG-EA-6480 JANUARY 1984 DEFINITION OF OPERABLE JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT F. G. Farmer i

Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Operated by the U.S. Department of Energy

. l.,:. 7llj'. 2 W'dF,ff

.'W s

!N'

.Q.

l 1

i 3

\\

Y:? S l

af m

rr c-S t.

y.,m._.

p.=.

%=-% --wa-g.

h

,, 'l.

r Sh~

W

-?

~i.===s ;;,d m===sr.m',.

c M

hY.1 -

~ ~ '

s

~

^-

-n

~

This is an informal report intended for use as a preliminary or working document B40906g6gO 3

PDR AD PDR P

Prepared for the U. S, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[]

Under DOE Contract No. DE-AC07-76ID01570 E b E 6 1daho FIN No. A6429

a EGG-EA-6480 DEFINITION OF OPERABLE JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Published January 1984 I

F. G. Farmer EG&G Idaho, Inc.

Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Responsible NRC Individual and Division:

H. Abelson / Division of Licensing Docket No. 50-333 TAC No. 43019 Prepared for the-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Under DOE Contract No. DE-AC07-76ID01570 FIN No. A6429

c o

ABSTRACT This report reviews the extent of compliance of proposed changes to

~

the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Technical Specifications with clarifications of the definition and applicatior, of the term OPERABLE which have been required by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

FORWARD Thisreportissuppliedaspartofthe["SelectedOperatingReactors Issues Program (III)" being conducted for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of Licensing, by EG&G Idaho, Inc., NRC Licensing Support Section.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission funded the work under the authorization, B&R 20 19 10 11'1, FIN No. AS429.

..N0TICE

/

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of tne United States Government.

Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or respansibility for any third party's use, or the results of such use, of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosec in this report or represents that its use by such third party would not infringe privately owned rights.

e 11

a, g

i s l,,

sg E

CONTENb i 11 INTRODUCTION....................................................

1

+4

't.

c 2.

REVIEW CRITERIA

..................yc......'........................

1

...v\\.

3. [ 0ISCUSSION.......................................................

3 4 '. '

CONCLUSI NS.....................................................

3 5.

REFERENCES 4

e f '

%. y

)

f.

'i

'd, p

?

h T

a 6

\\

t

's l-y e,

i f

'*J e

')'

3 i

ky v

iii o

\\p dr li

!N DEFINITION OF OPERABLE, JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT 1.

INTRODUCTION On April 10, 1980, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued a generic letter to all Power Reactor Licensees which clarified the term OPERABLE and identified portions of the Model Technical Specifications (MTS) which are recommended to assure that safety systems remain OPERABLE within the limits of the single failure criterion (Reference 1).

In that letter the NRC requested that Licensees review their Technical Specifications (TS) and submit such proposed changes as were necessary to incorporate the requirements of the MTS.

On February 20, 1981, the Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY) responded to the generic letter, proposing changes to the FitzPatrick Technical Specifications (Reference 3).

EG&G Idaho, Inc., has reviewed the proposed changes to the FitzPatrick TS.

This report provides an evaluation of the proposed TS changes for conformance to the criteria established by the NRC.

2.

REVIEW CRITERIA The review criteria for this task are contained in NRC's April 10, 1980, letter and in Reference 2 and are summarized below, f

Definition of OPERABLE A system, subsystem, train, component or device shall be OPERABLE or have OPERABILITY when it-is capable of performing its specified function (s). ~ Implicit in this definition shall be the assumption that all necessary attendant instrumentation, controls, normal and emergency electrical power sources, cooling or sea water, lubrication or other

~

auxiliary equipment that are required for the system, subsystem, train, component ur device to perform its function (s) are also capable of performing their related support function (s).

1

(

Limiting Condition for Operation When a Limiting Condition for Operation is not met because of circumstances in excess of those addressed in the specification, except as provided in the associated ACTION requirements, within one hour action shall be' initiated to place the unit in a MODE in which the Specification does not apply by placing it, as applicable, in:

1.

At least STARTUP within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months , 2.

At least HdT SHUTDOWN within the following 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months , and 3.

At least COLD SHUTDOWN within the subsequent 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months .

Where corrective measures are completed that permit operation under the ACTION requirements, the ACTION may be taken in accordance with the specified time simits as measured from the time of failure to meet the Limiting Condition for Operation. Exceptions to these requirements are stated in the individual Specifications.

When a system, suosysten, train, component or device is determined to be inoperable solely because its emergency power source is inoperable, or solely because its normal ;ower source is inoperable, it may be considered OPERABLE for the purpr,' of satisfying the requirements of its applicable Limiting Condition, for Operation, provided:

(a) its corresponding normal or emerg a, ;,cwer source is OPERABLE; and (b) al.1 of its redundant system (s), subsystem (s), train (s), component (s) and device (s) are OPERABLE, or likewise satisfy the requirements of this specification.

Unless both conditions (a) and (b) are satisfied, within two hours action shall be initiated to place the unit in at least STARTUP within 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months , in at least HOT SHUTDOWN within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months , and in at least COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months . This specification is not applicable in MODES 5 or 6.

2

3.

DISCUSSION The proposed amendment (Reference 3) to the FitzPatrick TS provides a new definition of the term OPERABLE which is extracted verbatim from the MTS. - This proposed definition complies with the review criteria.

The licensee's proposed amendment includes chances to the FitzPatrick Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCOs) which add these conditions:

In the event a Limiting Condition for Operation and/or associated

~

ACTION requirements cannot be satisfied because of circumstances in excess of those addressed in the specification, the unit shall be placed in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months unless corrective measures are completed that permit operation under the permissible ACTION or until the reactor is placed in an OPERATIONAL CONDIT.;0N (mode) in which the specification is not applicable.

Exceptions to'these. requirements shall be stated in the individual specifications.

When a system, subsystem, train, component or device is determined to be inoperable solely because its emergency power source is inoperable, or solely.because its nc mal power source is inoperable, it may be considered OPERABLE for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of its applicaole Limiting Condition for Operation, provided:

(1) its corresponding normal or emergency power source is OPERABLE; and (2) all of its recundant system (s), subsystem (s), train (s),

component (s) and device (s) are OPERABLE, or likewise satisfy the requirements of this specification. Unless both conditions (1) and (2) are satisfied, the unit shall be placed in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months .

This specification is not applicable when in Cold Shutdown or Refuel Mode.

These constraints are more stringent than the MTS and are thus in conformance with the review criteria.

4.

CONCLUSION The licensee's proposed redefinition of the term OPERABLE and the revised LCOs meet the NRC requirements for providing adequate clarification of the term OPERABLE as it applies for Essential Safety Features systems to support system outages or multiple outages of redundant components.

4 3

p..

y..

q.

5.

REFERENCES-

-1.

NRC. letter,, 0. G. Eisenh'ut to All Power Reactor Licensees, dated

' April 10,>1980.

'2.

NRC internal memorandum,. S. Miner to S. Varga, et al., " Definition of Operability--Multi-Plant Item D-17", dated March 26, 1981,

-3.

Power. Authority of the_ State of New York letter, J. P. Bayne to NRC,

. Director, NRR, dated February 20, 1981.

)

l.

L L

E

+,

s n.

bq O.

gk k

k

~

4 4

U" U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

<11 en SIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET EGG-EA-6480 4 TITLE AND SU8 TITLE

2.. Leave orm*/

D:.finition of Operable, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant

3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.

7 AU T MO R ISl

5. DATE REPORT COMPLE TED voNTH l YEAR F. G. Farmer January 1984

9. PERFORutNG ORGANIZATION NAME AND V AILING AOORESS //netuor 240 Cooef OATE REPORT ISSUEO ucNrw jvEAR

.1anuary 1984 EG&G Idaho, Inc.

e it,,v, o,,,,,

Idaho Falls, ID 83415 8 (Leave Dranel 12 SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME AND M AILING AOORESS (snetuoe leo Cooel to PROJECT TASA WORK UNIT NO Division of Licensina O'Tfice of Nuclear Reactor Reaulation 11 AN NO-U.S. Nuclear Regulatcry Commission k!ashington, DC 20555 A6429 13 TYPE OF REPORT

E RnOO COV E DE O sinclus.ve detest 15 SUPPLEVEN TARY N O TE S 14 stesve onces 16 ABSTR ACT 1:00 aoras or :ess)

This report reviews the extent of compliance of proposed cnanges to the James A. Fitt o trick Nuclear Power Plant Technical Specifications with a

clarifications of the definition and application of the term GPERABLE which have been required by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

t

....O t 7 KE Y WOROS AND OOCUMENT AN ALYSIS 17a OESCRIPTORS II" x 17b IDENTIFIERS.OPEN ENOE D TERMS 18 AV AILA8tLITY STATEVENT 19 SE CURI TV CLASS sra s recort' l2' NO OF PACES Unclassified

)

Unlimi ted 2o uCuRiTY CL A$s <ra s om 22 eR Cs i

Unclassified 5L_

)

NRc ecru ass m en 4

ML20096D331

Text

Navigation menu

Search