ML20132E211
| ML20132E211 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 09/18/1985 |
| From: | Thompson H Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20132E215 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8510010014 | |
| Download: ML20132E211 (4) | |
Text
.
7590-01 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
Docket No. 50-333
)
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE
)
0F NEW YORK (James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear
)
Power Plant)
)
EXEMPTION 1.
The Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY/the licensee) is :
i the holder of Facility Operating License No. DPR-59 which authorizes the licensee to operate the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (the facility) at power levels not in excess of 2436 megawatts thermal. The facility is a boiling water reactor (BWR) located at the licensee's site in Oswego County, New York. The license provides, among other things, that it is subject to all rules, regulations and Orders of the Comission now or hereafter in effect.
II.
Paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii) of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 requires that airlocks opened during perieds when containment integrity is not required j
by the plant's Technical Specifications, shall he tested at the end of such periods at not less than P, (the calculated peak containment internal pressure related to the design basis accident). The licensee, in its letter of May 2,1985, has requested an exemption from the requirements of Paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii) of Appendix J.
The licensee proposes to conduct a seal test, in lieu of the entire airlock test, following a period during which containment integrity is not required by the plant's Technical 8510010014 85091 l
PDR ADOCK 05000333 P
PDR l
l
- Specifications and no maintenance has been performed on the airlock that could affect its sealing capability. The seal test would be conducted at P, (45 psig) with a leakage limit of 120 SCFD and would require approximately 30 minutes to conduct. The licensee has provided the following discussion to support its request.
The existing airlock doors are designed so that a full pressure test of an entire airlock at P, can only be performed after strong backs (structural bracing) have been installed on the inner door. Strong backs are required because the pressure exerted on the inner door during the test:
is in a direction opposite to the pressure direction following a postulated accident and the locking mechanisms are not designed to withstand reverse forces associated with pressures on the order of P,.
Installation of the strong backs must commence approximately 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> prior to the need to establish containment integrity. During this 24-hour period, approximately I hour is required to inspect the door: seal and door seat surfaces; 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> are required to install strong backs; and 16 to 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> are required to pressurize the airlocks to 45 psig and troubleshoot.
This could effectively delay plant startup by up to 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
The periodic 6-month leak test of Paragraph III.D.2(b)(.1) and the 3-day test requirements of Paragraph III.D.2(b)(iii) provide assurance that the airlock will not leak excessively due to its being opened during cold shutdown or refueling, assuming that no maintenance has been performed on the airlock.
We have evaluated the licensee's requested exemption from Paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii). Whenever the plant is in cold shutdown (Mode 4) or
refueling (Mode 5), containment integrity is not required. However, if an airlock is opened during Modes 4 and 5, Paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii) of Appendix J requires that an overall airlock leakage test at not less than P, be conducted prior to plant heatup and startup (i.e., entering Mode 3).
The required 6-month test of Paragraph III.D.2.(b)(i) and the, test of Paragraph III.D.2(b)(iii) will provide assurance that the airlock leakage rate will not be increased as a result of airlock openings in Mode 4 or Mode 5, provided no maintenance has been performed on the airlock.
Accordingly, the staff concludes that the licensee may substitute the :
seal leakage test of Parag aph III.D.2(b)(iii) for the full pressure test of Paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii) when no maintenance has been perfomed on an airlock. Whenever maintenance has been performed on an airlock, the requirements of Paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii) must still be met by the licensee.
Therefore, an exemption from the requirements of Paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii) of Appendix J, following nomal door opening during periods when containment integrity is not required and maintenance has not been performed on the airlock, is justified and acceptable for the James A.
FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant.
III.
Accordingly, the Comission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a), the exemption requested by the licensee's letter of May 2,1985, is authorized by law ~ and will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the public interest. The Comission hereby grants to the licensee an exemption from the requirements of Paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii) of Appendix J to 10 CFR 50 to the extent that l
7
- l j the licensee may substitute the seal leakage test specified in Paragraph III.D.2(b)(iii), for the full pressure test specified in Paragraph III.D.2.(b)(ii), prior to restoring containment integrity after periods when containment integrity is not required, and airlock doors have been opened but no maintenance has been perfonned on the airlocks.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the Commission has determined that the issuance of the exemption will have no significant impact on the environment (50 FR37736 ).
This Exemption is effective upon issuance.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COWilSSION Hu h L. Thompso r.,
rector Di sion of Licensin Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 18th day of September 1985.
1
-