ML20244C759
| ML20244C759 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 04/14/1989 |
| From: | Papanic G YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | Fairtile M NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| BYR-89-74, NUDOCS 8904200400 | |
| Download: ML20244C759 (2) | |
Text
-_
'Y4 KEEATOMICELECTRICCOMPANY
"'fE"*lo" *jl,'g*;"l"
[
580 Main Street, Bolton, Massachusetts 01740-1398 -
April 14, 1989 BYR 89-74 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission j
Document Control Desk
-Washington, DC 20555 Attention:
Mr. Morton B. Fairtile, Project Manager Project Directorate I-3 Division of Reactor Projects I/II
References:
(a) License No. DPR-3 (Docket No. 50-29)
(b) Letter, YAEC to USNRC, Addition of Snubber to Pressurizer Drain Piping (Proposed Change 218), dated March 21, 1989 (c) Document No. DC-1, Revision 4, Seismic Re-evaluation and Retrofit Criteria
Subject:
Additional Information for Proposed Change 218
Dear Sir:
This letter provides the supplemental information requested with regards to Proposed Change 218, addition of a snubber to the Pressurizer Drain piping
[ Reference (b)].
The addition of the snubber will enhance the seisaic capability of the Pressurizer Drain piping. The snubber will not reduce the capability of the i
Pressurizer Drain piping to perform its operating or emergency functions. The design criteria [ Reference (c)] provides assurance that the piping and snubber will perform their intended normal and emergency functions.
No accident analysis assumptions are affected by the addition of the snubber.
l I
Therefore, based on the discussion above, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The design criteria [ Reference (c)] and installation requirements used are at least equal to the original plant design basis. The Pressurizer Drain piping with snubber installed is in a stress analyzed condition meeting the requirements of the design criteria. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
l h
69042 h.
f I
\\
.PDR P-i
Jy '['.. y
-dnited States Nuclear Regulatory Conunission April 14, 1989
(
Attention:
Mr. Morton B. Fairtile, Project Manager Page 2-BYR 39-74 i.
The addition of the snubber does not affect the~ basis of any Technical-Specification.. Also, there are no accident analysis assumptions affected.
_Therefore, the proposed change'does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
We trust that the information provided herbin is satia.fector y; however, if there are any questions,'please contact us.
Very truly yours, YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY u<~
Georg Papanic, Mr.
Senior Project Engineer GP/b11/0296v cc: USNRC Region I USNRC Resident Inspector, YNPS i
i