ML20247D837
| ML20247D837 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 05/09/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247D804 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8905260014 | |
| Download: ML20247D837 (3) | |
Text
_ _. _ _ _
4 f uay'o UNITED STATES
~g 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
g g
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655
\\
/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 127 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-59 POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-333 INTRODUCTION l
By letter dated May 19, 1988, the Power Au'thority of the State of New York (PASNY or the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TS)
- Appendix A of the Facility Operating License - and to the Radiological j
Environmental Technical Specifications (RETS) - Appendix B of the Facility Operating License - for the FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant.
DESCRIPTION The proposed RETS portion of the amendment would:
(1) modify Note (b) to Table 2.2-1 by changing the analysis required if the monitors do not meet operability requirements from a gross radioactivity (beta or gamma) to a principal gamma emitter analysis since gama emitters are analyzed using gamma spectroscopy which is more reliable and accurate; (2) add Iodine-133 to Table 3.2-1 for the type of activity analysis included in the radioactive gaseous waste sampling and analysis program for consistency with the program for determining the gaseous dose rates of Section 3.2 and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (0DCM); (3) reformat and combine some Table 3.2-1 notes for clarity and consistency; (4) change the noble gas sample location designated in Surveillance 3.5.1. from the Steam Jet Air Ejector discharge (only) to either the Steam Jet Air Ejector discharge or the offgas recombiner discharge (prior to delay of the offgas) in order to obtain a more representative sample of gross radioactivity release rate during offgas recombiner operation; (5) add new LCOs and corresponding surveillance requirements to Specification 3.6 to address charcoal bed bypass capability (rather than bypass of the offgas treatment system) and required actions per the ODCM since it is the charcoal beds which specifically treat the offgas; (6) modify LCO Specifications 3.7.b.2. and 3.7.b.3. concerning isolation of the offgas system dealing with the offgas recombiner inlet and outlet temperature sensor instrumentation limits for clarity; (7) modify Surveillance Requirement 3.7.c. so that it more closely reflects its corresponding LC0 by specifying the recombiner effluent rather than the recombiner for the sample location; (8) modify Table 3.10-1 to show that Footnote (a) only applies to the first six trip functions listed in the table and to show that the requirement for operability in Footnote (a) is l
l 8905260014 890509 PDR ADOCK 05000333 p
PDC t__________.___-.
concerned with one operable or tripped instrument channel per system; (9) delete Note (1) from the calibration column of Table 3.10-2 since the test only applies to instrument channel functional testing. The proposed amendment would also change the instrument channel calibration frequency for the turbine and radwaste building radiation exhaust monitors from semiannual to quarterly for consistency with similar tests; (10) correct an error b deleting the words " ground level" and corresponding footnote from Note (y) to Figure 5.1-1 d
since the actual evaluation of the vents is taken into account in the offsite dose calculations method in the ODCM; (11) delete the contents found under the Food Products subheading (Items a. and b. of Table 6.1-1) since it provides an unnecessary alternative for milk sampling. Milk sampling has been and will continue to be, performed in conjunction with similar programs at Hine Mile Point (NMP) Units 1 and 2; (12) change the reporting levels of 2 and 1 pCi/ liter for Iodine-131 in water samples in Tables 6.1-2 and 6.1-3, respectively, to 20 and 15 pCi/ liter, respectively, for consistency with recent NRC criteria and NMP site RETS, since the direction and distance to the nearest water intake means that the plant does not have a drinking water pathway under normal operating conditions; (13) change Specification 7.3.d. to show that the reactor centerline used for determining sample locations listed in the Annual Environmental Operating Report can be either the NMP Unit 2 or the FitzPatrick reactor centerlines.
This will allow continued use of the NMP Unit 2 reactor centerline to determine sample locations, which is consistent with NRC guidance for sites with joint environmental programs.
The proposed change to the TS (Appendix A to the Operating License)
Specification 6.18, would eliminate the annual FSAR update as an alternative method for reporting major modifications to the radioactive waste systems.
This requirement will be furnished in either the semiannual report or the annual 10 CFR 50.59 Safety Evaluation Report, as specified in this TS Section.
EVALUATION The proposed changes to the RETS, Appendix B, and Technical Specifications, Appendix A, will not impact plant safety or operation. All of the changes are administrative or editorial in nature. There are no setpoint changes regarding isolation or alarms. The proposed changes do not involve safety limit changes. These changes clarify or correct errors as currently written in the specifications. The proposed changes are designed to improve and facilitate the use of RETS. These changes will help the plant operators by achieving consistency and reducing the necessity for interpretation of RETS.
The proposed change on page 5 to the current Note (b) does not impact plant operations, since it clarifies grab sample analysis for radionuclides.
The proposed change related to additional specification and reporting requirements, Specification 3.6, does not impact plant operation, since it I
clarifies the charcoal beds operability when bypassed. Projected cumulative doses that could result from bypassing the charcoal beds, will now be monitored.
I
e l
The addition of Iodine-133 proposed to Table 3.2-1 on page 21, and the l
c* arrangement of the table footnotes on page 23, are needed to achieve j
woi sistency throughout RETS. These proposed changes, therefore, are ad> uistrative in nature and do not impact facility operation.
l The ;ropored change related to the sampling location for gross radioactivity
>~':ase race of noble gases, Surveillance Requirement 3.5.a. provides an alternative location for better sampling.
The current specification is too restrictive when sampling during different modes of offgas recombiner operations. This change will not affect plant operation.
The proposed changes to pages 56, 58, 59, 60, and 68 do not impact facility operation. They are administrative in nature and consistent with the Nine Mile Point RETS.
The proposed change in Appendix A, on page 258c, eliminates the FSAR as an alternative for reporting major modifications to radioactive waste systems.
This change does not impact facility operation, since the reporting requirements will be included in either the semiannual radioactive effluent release report or the annual 10 CFR 50.59 safety evaluation report.
The proposed changes to RETS, Appendix B, and the Technical Specifications, Appendix A, do not change any system or subsystem and will not alter the conclusions of either the F5AR or SER accident analysis. They are, therefore, found to be acceptable.
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 emendment 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 Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public connent on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eli for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR Sec 51.22(gibility criteria 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 this amendment.
CONCLUSION We have 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this emendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: May 9, 1989 PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTOR:
D. LaBarge
- _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - _ _ _.