ML20245A056
| ML20245A056 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 06/14/1989 |
| From: | POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20245A047 | List: |
| References | |
| JPTS-89-006, JPTS-89-6, NUDOCS 8906210054 | |
| Download: ML20245A056 (7) | |
Text
.
ATTACHMENT I l
PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION gH.ANGES REGARDING SUPPRESSION CHAMBER WATER TEMPERATURE INDICATION (JPTS-89-0 0 6 )
l l
I i
i l
I l
New York Power Authority JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Docket No. 50-333 DPR-59 62gfy,,.$$0h 3
i P
--- O
slenna h
n dg Cei s d
foie 2
4 2
vD o.or y NPb N
O ITA
)
T n
e N
o g
)
)
it n
e dE a
a is nM ic e a
g is F
rF F
rF a
g R
n
't r
r r
d n ep ar ep r
- r*
oU wo Ro o0 e '0 o0 e*0 CR in a otard 9 t d 0 t 5 d 5 3
d 3 t
ear a
r a
r R
r co1 co0 ic 2 o3 2
o2 P
e r
i c1 c -
ic di
(
P T
pd aic c -
yn d e0 Wde d
R0 In0 e0 d
0 e0 N
4S Ta NnR1 n
n 5
R5 i3 R3 (I
(I F
- 2. IN A
3 J
r e
e U
e e
b b
)
S e
r r
u u
m m
g t
t en e
a a
a a
a r
r r
h h
ru u
e e
C C
sR s
p p
e e
m m
ne ne sw s
r r
o u o u t
r o r
e e
ne Pr P
T T
ist ist r
l l
s a s a l
a le m
leN l
le le r
r
- a. p e
e e r
u p p w(
w w
w r
i pm ts y
y y
y
'b ST r
r r
r u e n
I D
D D
D
.o e Nl t
bn s
mael u eme r
n mpu n 1
2 1
r inOt a sh i f MoInC l!
ATTACHMENT II BAFETY EVALUATION FOR PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
}
CHANGES REGARDING SUPPRESSION CHAMBER WATER TEMPERATURE INDICATION (JPTS-89-0 0 6 )
\\
l New York Power Authority JAMES A.
FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT Docket No. 50-333 DPR-59
l Attachment II SAFETY EVALUATION Page 1 of 4 I.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES The proposed changes to the James A.
FitzPatrick Technical Specifications revise Table 3.2-6,
" Surveillance Instrumentation," on page 76a.
The changes are:
a) Replace "50 - 250 F" with "30 - 230 F" for the Suppression Chamber Temperature Indicator range, and b) Replace "50 - 350 F" with "30 - 230 F" for the i
Suppression Chamber Temperature Recorder range.
I c) Replace "4" with "2" for the number of channels provided by design for the Suppression Chamber instrumentation, d) Replace "2" with "1" for the minimum number of operable instrument channels required by the Suppression Chamber instrumentation.
l II. PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES i
The suppression chamber water temperature monitoring system has j
l been modified to meet the guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.97, l
l
" Instrumentation for Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants to Assess Plant and Environs Conditions During and Following I
an Accident" (Reference 4).
The upgraded suppression chamber l
temperature monitoring system consists of two independent I
channels with a revised temperature range of 30 - 230 F.
l Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737, " Requirements for Emergency Response Capability" (Reference 5) requires the implementation of Regulatory Guide 1.97 so as to provide data to assist control room operators in preventing and mitigating the consequences of reactor accidents.
The suppression chamber water temperature system was revised in accordance with these requirements as documented in Reference 6.
Reference 7 documents the acceptance of this modification by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
The proposed changes to Technical Specification Table 3.2-6 delete the operability and surveillance requirements applied to the original plant suppression chamber water temperature monitoring system; and impose the operability and surveillance requirements to the upgraded system.
Attachment II SAFETY LVkLUATION Paga 2 of <
.i I
III. IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES The change in the temperature range and the number of channels for the suppression chamber temperature monitoring system is not a safety concern because:
- 1) the new instrumentation provides sufficient information to control room operators to mitigate the consequences of reactor accidents.
- 2) the upgraded-suppression chamber water temperature monitoring system is in accordance with Table 1 of Regulatory Guide 1.97, Rev 2.,
as described in
~
Reference 6.
3)
- a. the existing instrument ranges were based on original plant design and engineering judgement.
The Authority reviewed the original design bases'in the FSAR and the Technical Specification Bases.
No bases for the originel broader instrument ranges were identified.
- b. the new narrower instrument ranges do not impact the plant's licensing basis.
The maximum peak temperature of the various accident analyses is within the new temperature range.
FSAR Figure 14.6-7, " Transient Results from LOCA - Pressure Suppression Pool Temperature - Initial Core6 establishes a peak torus temperature of 205 F.
- 4) a. the original monitoring equipment consisted of four instrument channels.
Each channel had a single temperature element and was connected to either an indicator in the control room or a recorder in the relay room.
A review of the original design bases in the FSAR and the Technical Specification Bases do not indicate a need for maintaining this original system in the Technical Specifications.
- b. the upgraded monitoring system does not impact l
the plant's licensing basis.
The upgraded system, consisting of two independent instrument channels each with sixteen temperature elements, provides a more accurate determination of suppression chamber l
bulk water temperature.
- 5) The technical specification requirement for maintaining operable redundant channels of suppression chamber water temperature instrumentation is unchanged.
Attachment II BAFETY EVALUATION Page 3 of 4
- 6) The conclusions of the plant's accident aralyses as documented in the FSAR and the NRC stcff's. SER are not altered by these changes to the Technical Specifications.
IV. EVALUATION OF SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION Operation of the James A.
FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant in accordance with this proposed amendment would not involve a significant hazards consideration, as defined in 10 CFR 50.92, since the proposed changes would not:
1.
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The changes update Table 3.2-6 to accurately reflect a plant modification.
The changes do not impact the plant's accident analyses as documented in the FSAR or the NRC staff's SER.
The peak temperature for these analyses are bounded by the new temperature range.
- 2. create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from those previously evaluated.
The suppression chamber temperature monitoring system does not perform any automatic functions.
The revised temperature range provides sufficient information to the control room operators to prevent and mitigate the consequences of reactor accidents.
The Technical Specification requirements for two temperature indicatcrs and two temperature recorders are unchanged by this amendment package.
The changes do not create any new failure modes; nor do they allow plant operation in an unanalyzed condition.
- 3. involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
The changes do not relax any administrative controls or limitations.
The changes update the suppression chamber water temperature instrumentation in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.97.
There is no change to the safety margin since the new temperature range encompasses the i
analytical temperatures established by the plant's safety analyses.
V.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES Implementation of the proposed changes will not impact the ALARA Program at FitzPatrick, nor will the changes impact the environment.
i
1 e
Attachment II SAFETY EVALUATION Page 4 of 4 VI. CONCLUSION l
These changes, as proposed, do not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined in 10 CFR 50.59.
That is, they:
- a. will not increase the probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the safety analysis report;
- b. will not increase the possibility for an accident or malfunction of a different type than any evaluated previously in the safety analysis report;
- c. will not reduce the margin of safety as defined in the basis
)
for any technical specification; and d.
involves no significant hazards consideration, as defined in 10 CFR 50.92.
VII. REFERENCES I
- 1. James A.
FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Updated Final i
Safety Analysis Report, Section 5.2.3.10 and Section 14.6.
- 2. James A.
FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Final Safety Analysis Report, S6ction 5 and Section 14.
- 3. James A.
FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Safety Evaluation Report (SER), dated November 20, 1972 and Supplements.
4.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.97, Rev.
2,
" Instrumentation for Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants to Assess Plant and Environs Conditions During and Following an Accident," dated December 1980.
- 5. NRC Generic Letter No. 82-33, " Supplement 1 to NUREG-0737 l
- Requirements for Emergency Response Capability," dated December 17, 1982.
Vassallo, dated November 30, 1984 regarding Supplement No. 1 to NUREG-0737 (Generic Letter 82-33) - Regulatory Guide 1.97, Rev. 2 Implementation Report.
- 7. NRC letter, D.B. Vassallo to J.C.
Brons, dated November 5,
1985 regarding emergency response capability -
conformance to Regulatory Guide 1.97, Rev.
2.
. _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - -