ML20248D249
| ML20248D249 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 09/28/1989 |
| From: | Mcneil S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20248D253 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8910040172 | |
| Download: ML20248D249 (3) | |
Text
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - -.
7590-1 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK DOCKET NO. 50-333 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDINGS OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC/the Comission) is considering issuance of an exemption from the requirements of Appendix J of 10 CFR Part 50 to the Power Authority of the State of New York (PASNY/the licensee), for the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant located in Oswego County, New York.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action: The licensee would be exempted from the requirements of Section IV.A. of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 to the extent that a Type A, Type B, or Type C Leak Rate Test wculd not have to be performed following repair of Weld Number 10-14-884A in the "B" Core Spray System full flow test return piping to the suppression chamber (Pipe No.10"-W23-152-98) prior to startup from the current maintenance outage. The weld would be subject to a Type A Primary Containment Leak Rate Test prior to startup from the next refuelino outage, which is scheduled to start in March 1990.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
In accordance with Section IV.A. of Appendix J, a Type A, Type B or Type C Test (as applicable) is required to be i
performed following any major modification or replacement of a component which is part of the primary containment boundary. An inservice inspection conducted during the current mid-cycle maintenance outage has revealed the presence of a slag inclusion within Weld Number 10-14-884A, which has been repaired in
- fh? 10090 t 72 ssoa2g "DocN osooo m FDC"
2-accordance with ASME Section XI and ANSI B-31.1-1967. 'In order to comply with the' intent of Appendix J, the licensee has determined that the Type A, Type B, or Type C Leak Rate Test criteria are applicable.
However, the ifcensee has
{
also determined that, because of the location of the weld repair, an isolatable volume cannot be attained. Therefore, pressure testing can only be accomplished I
by performing a Type A primary containment integrated leak rate test. Further, the licensee has determined that performance of a Type A test is not feasible at this time since it would seriously delay plant startup from the current maintenance outage. Therefore, the licensee has requested an exemption from Section IV.A. of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50.
In lieu of a Type A, Type B, or Type C Test, the ifcensee has proposed 100 percent radiography, surface examination of the affected weld repair, and an inservice flow test. This will ensure that the intent of Section IV.A. (the identification of any potential leakage paths resulting from repair of a component which is part of the primary containment boundary) is met.
Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action: The alternate proposals would' er,sure that excessive leakage from the primary containment via the weld repair does not exist and would provide a level of safety at least equivalent to that attained by compliance with Section IV.A. of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50. On this basis, the Commission concludes there are no significant radiological l
environmental impacts associated with this proposed exemption.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed exemption involves features located entirely within the restricted areas as defined in l
It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no 1
other environmental impact. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
a l
Alternative to the Proposed Action:
It has been concluded that there is no measurable impact associated with the proposed exemption and associated license I
amendment; any alternatives to the exemption will have either no environmental impact or greater environmental impact.
Alternative Use of Resources: This action involves no use of resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement (construction permit and operating licensee) for the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant.
Agencies and Persons Consulted: The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed exemption.
Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, we conclude that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
For further details with respect to this action, see the request for exemption dated September 28, 1989, which is available for public inspection at the Comission's Public Document Room, Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C., and at the Penfield Library, State University College of Oswego, Oswego, New York.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Scott A. McNeil, Acting Director Project Directorate I-1 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
_. _. - - _ -. _ _ _ - - -