ML20236K440
| ML20236K440 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1998 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236K438 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9807090318 | |
| Download: ML20236K440 (3) | |
Text
.
- c*4 s.
g\\
p UNITED STATES
.g
]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS810N WASHINGTON, D.c. 20e06 4001
%...a SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO243 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR 59 i
l POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-333 l
1.0 INTRODUCTION
L By letter dated November 26,1996, as supplemented April 17,1998, the Power Authority of the l
State of New York (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Techniel Specifications (TSs). The requested changes would remove the snubber operability, surveillance, and records requirements from the TS and relocate them to piarit controlled documents. The licensee provided supplementalinformation on April 17,1998,
(
clarifying that the relocated requirements would be sufficiently described in the Final Safety -
Analysis Report (FSAR) to ensure future changes would be controlled under the provisions of 10
- CFR 50.59. This supplementalinformation did not affect the NRC staff's proposed finding of no significant hazards considerations.
2.0 BACKGROUND
AND EVALUATION The criteria for inclusion of a requirement in the TS are set forth in 10 CFR 50.36. The criteria are as follows:
(1) Installed instrumentation that is used to detect, and indicate in the control room, a j.
significant abnormal degradation of the reactor coolant pressure boundary; (2) a process variable, design feature, or operating restriction that is an initial condition of a Design Basis Accident or Transient analysis that either assumes the failure of or presents l
a challenge to the integrity of a fission product bamer; (3) a structure, system, or component that is part of the primary success path and which functions or actuates to mitigate a Design Basis Accident or Transient that either assumes the failure of or presents a challenge to the integrity of a fission product barrier, (4)' a structure, system, or component which operating experience or probabilistic safety
{-
assessment has shown to be significant to public health and safety.
Exi. ting TS requirements which fall within or satisfy any of the criteria of 10 CFR 50.36 must be retained in the TS, while those TS requirements which do not iall within or satisfy these criteria may be relocated to other, licensee-controlled documents.
Snubbers are devices used for supporting piping systems against dynamic loads while allowing thermal expansion of piping during normal and design loadin, conditions. The restraining action 9807090318 980630 I.
PDR ADOCK 05000333 P
l 2-of the snubbers ensures that the initiating event failure does not propagate to other parts of the failed system or to other safety systems. The existing TS action statement requires that an inoperable snubber be replaced or repaired within the allowed outage time. The surveillance requirement for snubbers is that they be periodically examined under the inservice inspection program in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a.
l Requirements related to the snubbers do not satisfy any of the final policy statement criteria which would necessitate that they be included in the TS. Operability requirements of snubbers are not explicitly considered in the design basis accident (DBA) or transient analysis, The requirement of the existing TS that all snubbers be operable is not a requirement that identifies a parameter that is an initial condition assumption for a DBA or transient, is not used to detect a significant abnormal degradation of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, and is not part of the primary success path which functions or actuates to mitigate a DBA or transient. Therefore, the licensee plans to relocate the requirements specified in the existing TS to licensee controlled documents and will be controlled in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 and 10 CFR 50.55a. The proposed amendment involves the procedures for controlling the snubber requirements, and do not involve changes to the operability and surveillance provisions of the snubber program.
Snubber operability and record requirements will be relocated to a plant administrative procedure. In the November 26,1996 submittal, the licensee stated that the plant controlled l
documents associated with the relocated requirements will be referenced in the first final safety l
analysis report (FSAR) update due more than 6 months after NRC issuance of this amendment.
The licensee provided supplementalinformation on April 17,1998, committing to sufficiently describe the snubber operating and surveillance requirements in the FSAR to ensure that future changes to the requirements would be subject to 10 CFR 50.59.
j l
i l
On the basis presented above, the NRC staff concludes that the snubber requirements do not need to be controlled by TS and that changes to these requirements are adequately controlled by j
i l
10 CFR 50.59," Changes, tests, and experiments." Should the licensee's determination conclude j
that an unreviewed safety question is involved, due to either (1) an increase in the probability or i
consequences of accidents or malfunctions of equipment important to safety, (2) the creation of a l
possibility for an accident or malfunction of a different type than any evaluated previously, or (3) a reduction in the margin of safety, NRC approval and a license amendment would be required
' prior to implementation of the change. NRC inspection and enforcement programs also enable j
i the staff to monitor facility changes and licensee adherence to FSAR update commitments and to l:
take any remedial action that may be appropriate.
l L
The NRC staff has concluded, therefore, that relocation of TS Section 3.6.1/4.6.1 is acceptable because (1) their inclusion in TS is not specifically required by 10 CFR 50.36 or other regulations, 3
ll
-(2) the requirements are not required to avert an immediate threat to the public l
health and safety, and (3) changes that are deemed to involve an unreviewed safety question will l-require prior NRC approval in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59(c),
t.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the New York State official was notified of the i
proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had no comments.
l
e*
l I
w 3-
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
l The amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component L
located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes the surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant l
. 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 Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (62 FR 4352). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment.
l
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: ' Joseph F. Williams Date: June 30, 1998 I
i 4
i i