ML20206D555
| ML20206D555 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 11/10/1988 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20206D550 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8811170130 | |
| Download: ML20206D555 (2) | |
Text
_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1 UNITED STATES
+
,,{
a, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 205$5
- ..../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 119 To FACILITY OPERt. TING LICENSE NO. DPR-59 POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE Or NEW YORK JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCVET NO. 50-333 1.0 INTR 00tlCTION i
Ry letter dated May 27 1988 (Reference 1), the Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNYT req,uested changes to the Technical Specifications for James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant. The changes update the Technical Specification for the reactor water level instrumentation modifications that were proposed to comply with the requirefrents of NUREG-0737 and Regulatory Guide 1.97.
The proposed modifications were found acceptable in our letters to PASNY dateo February ?6,1982 (Reference 2), December 19, 1986 (Referente
- 3) Parch 16, 1983 (Reference 4), anc March 14, 1988 (Reference 5).
References ? and 3 included changes to the Technical Specificatione (Amendient Nos. 67 and 103, respectively, to the facility operating license) incorporatino modifications to reactor water level instruments setpoints. The proposed changes to the Technical Specifications consist of rewording on five l
tables (Tabiras 3.1-1, 3.?-1, 3.?-?, 3.2-6,'3 ?-7) and three pages (11, 18, 55) for the consistency of nomenclature and updating Tables 3.2-? ano 3.2-6 to incorporate modifications that were found acceptable in References 4 and 5.
2.0 EVAltlATION The proposed changes involving reworcing for consistency of nomenclature are only administrative. The technical adequacy of these changes were found acceptable in Referen:es 2 and 3.
The proposed changes to incorporate modifications approved in References 4 and 5 are as fol
(1)
Item !!.K.3.13 of NUREG-0737 required modificat'
.:CIC initiation logic to permit automatic RCIC restart on reacto dater level following its trip on reactor high water level. The existing logic closes RCIC turbine trip valve on reactor high water level. The licensee's studies determined that compliance to the NUREri requirement can be achieved by reodifying the logic to close the RCIC ' seam line isolation valve in lieu of RCIC turbine trip valve on reastor high water level. The staff evaluation in Reference 4 found this nedification acceptable. The proposed change in Table 3.2-2 of the Technical Specification reflects this modification and is, therefore, acceptable.
1 1
U 8-
,C t
)
<. e 2
(?) As parip of the modifications to implement Regulatory Guide 1.97 requirements, the licensee proposed to recalibrate the reactor water level fuel zone instrument to cover a wider range that will include full active length of fuel, and to add a water level indicator-recorder to one of the two channels of the reactor water level wide range instrument.
The staff evaluation in Reference 5 found these modifications acceptable.
The proposed changes in Table 3.2-6 reflect these modifications and are, therefore, acceptable.
Based on the above evaluation, the staff concludes that the proposed changes to the technical specifications represent the modifications that were previously approved by the staff, do not involve an unreviewed safety ouestion and, therefore, are 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 CFR Part 20.
The staff has determined 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 Comission has d
j previous 1v issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no i
significant hazards consideration and there has been no public coment on such finding. Accordinoly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR Sec 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.??(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be pre pared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSI0tl We have cone'uded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (11 there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) s':ch activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission'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.
5.0 REFERENCES
1.
PASNY letter (Juhn C. Bronsl to NRC, dated 5/27/88, 2.
NRC Letter (Phil J. Polk) to FASNY (Leroy W. Sinclairi dated 2/26/82.
hRC Letter {Harvey Abelson) to PASNY (John C. Brons) dated I?/19/00, 3.
NRC Letter Dominic B. Vassallo) to PASNY (Leroy W. Sinclairl dated 3/16/83.
4.
5.
NRC Letter (Harvey Abelsoni to PASNY (John C. Bronsi dated 3/14/88.
Dated: November 10, 1988
, PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTOR:
I. Ahmed n