L-2011-189, License Amendment Request No. 211, Technical Specification Changes Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features

License Amendment Request No. 211, Technical Specification Changes Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features

ML11161A062
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	05/25/2011
From:	Kiley M Florida Power & Light Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
L-2011-189
Download: ML11161A062 (24)

Text

POWERING TODAY.

EMPOWERING TOMORROW." 10 CFR 50.90 L-2011-189 May 25, 2011 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 Re: Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251 License Amendment Request No. 211 Technical Specification Changes Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features In accordance with the provisions of Sections 50.90 and 50.91 (a)(1) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Florida Power and Light Company (FPL) hereby submits an application for amendment to Renewed Facility Operating License DPR-31 for Turkey Point Unit 3 and DPR-41 for Turkey Point Unit 4. The application proposes changes to the Design Features Technical Specifications (TS) in Section 5.0 of Appendix A.

The proposed changes would relocate the specifications in Section 5.2 - Containment, Section 5.4 - Reactor Coolant System, and Section 5.6 - Component Cyclic or Transient Limit, to the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report. TS 5.5.3 regarding spent fuel storage pool capacity would be revised to a total pool capacity limit only. This application also satisfies FPL commitments in Turkey Point Licensee Event Report 05000250/2010-001-01 dated November 22, 2010 and FPL letter L-2011-032 dated February 22, 2011 as discussed in the Background section of Attachment 1. provides the proposed changes and the supporting justification including the Determination of No Significant Hazards and Environmental Considerations. Attachment 2 contains TS page mark-ups showing the proposed TS changes. Attachment 3 contains the retyped TS pages.

The Plant Nuclear Safety Committee has reviewed the proposed amendment. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91 (b)(1), copies of the proposed amendment are being forwarded to the State Designee for the State of Florida.

FPL requests approval of this application within 12 months of receipt by the NRC.

Implementation by FPL will be within 60 days of license amendment issuance by the NRC.

A0o0 an FPL Group company

Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 L-2011-189 License Amendment Request No. 211 Technical Specification Changes Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features Page 2 of 2 Please contact Mr. Robert Tomonto at 305-246-7327 if there are any questions about this license amendment application.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on ,14X' ,2S'- .20It Very truly yours, Michael Kiley Vice President Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Attachments: 1) Evaluation of Proposed Technical Specification Changes

2) Marked-up Technical Specification Pages

3) Retyped Technical Specification Pages cc: Regional Administrator, Region II, USNRC Senior Resident Inspector, USNRC, Turkey Point Plant Mr. W. A. Passetti, Florida Department of Health

Attachment 1 Florida Power and Light Company Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-31 and DPR-41 Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251 License Amendment Request to Change the Technical Specifications Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features Evaluation of Proposed Changes Contents Section Page 1.0 Introdu ction ............................................................................... 1 2.0 Description of Proposed License Amendments .................................. 1 3.0 B ackground ............................................................................ 1 4.0 Regulatory Analysis ................................................................. 2 5.0 Analysis of Proposed Changes ..................................................... 3 6.0 No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination .......................... 7 7.0 Environmental Impact Consideration Determination ............................... 8 8.0 R eferences ............................................................................. 9

Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 L-2011-189 License Amendment Request No. 211 Technical Specification Changes Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features Page 1 of 9

1.0 INTRODUCTION

In accordance with the provisions of Sections 50.90 and 50.91 (a)(1) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Florida Power and Light Company (FPL) hereby submits an application for amendment to Renewed Facility Operating License DPR-31 for Turkey Point Unit 3 and DPR-41 for Turkey Point Unit 4. The application proposes changes to Technical Specification (TS) Section 5.0, Design Features. The proposed changes would relocate the specifications in Section 5.2 - Containment, Section 5.4 -

Reactor Coolant System, and Section 5.6 - Component Cyclic or Transient Limit, to the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). TS 5.5.3 regarding spent fuel storage pool capacity would be revised to a total pool capacity limit only.

2.0 DESCRIPTION

OF PROPOSED LICENSE AMENDMENTS The proposed TS changes for Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 are as follows:

TS 5.2, Containment, would be deleted. The containment design features in TS 5.2 would be relocated to the UFSAR.

TS 5.4, Reactor Coolant System, would be deleted. The reactor coolant system design features in TS 5.4 would be relocated to the UFSAR.

TS 5.5.3, Capacity, would be revised to a total spent fuel storage pool capacity limit only.

The specific storage area limits would be relocated to the UFSAR.

TS 5.6, Component Cyclic or Transient Limit, would be deleted. The component cyclic or transient limits in TS 5.6 would be relocated to the UFSAR.

3.0 BACKGROUND

Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 are owned and operated by FPL. The plant is located on the shore of Biscayne Bay in Miami-Dade County, Florida, about 25 miles south of Miami, Florida. The plant consists of two Westinghouse pressurized water reactor nuclear units.

Each unit utilizes a spent fuel pool (SFP) for the storage of irradiated nuclear fuel assemblies to remove decay heat and provide radiation shielding. The major portion of spent fuel storage in the Turkey Point SFPs is of a two zone (Region) rack design. Region I was designed for storing fresh fuel (i.e., high reactivity fuel), while Region II was designed for storage of irradiated fuel (i.e., low reactivity fuel). In addition, a cask area rack can be installed to increase storage capacity.

Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 L-2011-189 License Amendment Request No. 211 Technical Specification Changes Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features Page 2 of 9 TS 5.5.3 limits the maximum combined capacity of the Region I and II storage racks in each SFP to 1404 fuel assemblies. TS 5.5.3 limits the cask area rack in each SFP to 131 fuel assemblies. TS 5.5.3 also limits total capacity of each SFP to 1535 fuel assemblies.

FPL identified and reported to the NRC in a Licensee Event Report (LER) (Reference 1) storage cells in each unit's SFP that were damaged due to flow from the cooling system discharge piping. Sixteen cells in each spent fuel pool were removed from service and there are no current plans to repair them for return to service. Their removal from service effectively reduces the storage capacity in the storage racks they are located in. The affected storage racks are in Region II of the SFP. Therefore, the storage capacity in Regions I and II of each SFP is reduced by sixteen storage cells to 1388. As a corrective action in the LER, FPL indicated that a license amendment would be pursued to revise the capacity of the Region II storage racks.

FPL submitted a license amendment application on February 22, 2011 (Reference 2) to revise the criticality analysis for the SFP storage racks for extended power uprate conditions. The letter transmitting that application committed to submitting this application by May 30, 2011.

The NRC-approved Standard Technical Specifications (STS) for Westinghouse Plants, NUREG-1431, Revision 3 (Reference 3), contains design feature TSs in Section 4.0.

Turkey Point design feature TSs are in Section 5.0. STS 4.3.3 specifies a limit for overall SFP capacity whereas Turkey Point TS 5.5.3 limits overall SFP capacity as well as the capacities of the Region I and II storage racks combined, and each cask area storage rack.

FPL's proposed change to TS 5.5.3 would adopt the STS model. TS 5.5.3 would limit SFP total capacity to 1535 fuel assemblies. The capacity of Region I and II storage racks and the cask area storage racks would be relocated to the UFSAR.

Also consistent with the STS, FPL proposes to relocate the design features contained in TS 5.2, 5.4 and 5.6 to the UFSAR.

4.0 REGULATORY ANALYSIS

Applicable Regulatory Requirements/Criteria Section 182a of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as amended, requires applicants for nuclear power plant operating licenses to include the TSs as part of the license. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's regulatory requirements related to the content of TSs are set forth in 10 CFR Section 50.36 (Reference 4). The regulation requires that the TSs include items in specific categories, including: (1) safety limits, limiting safety system

Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 L-2011-189 License Amendment Request No. 211 Technical Specification Changes Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features Attachment I Page 3 of 9 settings, and limiting control settings; (2) limiting conditions for operation (LCO); (3) surveillance requirements; (4) design features; and (5) administrative controls.

10 CFR 50.36(c)(4) describes design features to be included in TSs as follows:

Design features to be included are those features of the facility such as materials of construction and geometric arrangements, which, if altered or modified, would have a significant effect on safety and are not covered in categories described in paragraphs (c) (1), (2), and (3) of this section.

As noted in the Federal Register Notice (60 FR 36953) accompanying the issuance of 10 CFR 50.36, the rule reflects that TSs were intended to be reserved for those conditions or limitations upon reactor operation necessary to obviate the possibility of an abnormal situation or event giving rise to an immediate threat to the public health and safety. That is, the condition is of controlling importance to operational safety. When the TSs involve physical, designed-in features that prevent operations staff from immediately exceeding the assumptions in the bounding analysis in the course of operations, then the TSs would not be of controlling importance to safety and could be relocated to the UFSAR or other similarly controlled document.

The NRC issued the Westinghouse STS (Reference 3) as a model for improved TSs that satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 50.36. Updating TSs consistent with the STS has been encouraged by the NRC in a Policy Statement issued in the Federal Register on July 22, 1993 (58 FR 39132).

10 CFR 50.59, Changes, Tests and Experiments, allows a licensee to make changes in the facility as described in the UFSAR, make changes in the procedures as described in the UFSAR, and conduct tests or experiments not described in the UFSAR without obtaining a license amendment pursuant to Section 50.90 only if certain criteria are met.

5.0 ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED CHANGES Description of Proposed Changes Marked-up pages of the proposed Unit 3 and Unit 4 TS changes are shown in Attachment 2 to this application. The description of the proposed changes is summarized below.

The following Design Features TSs are to be deleted:

5.2 Containment

Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 L-2011-189 License Amendment Request No. 211 Technical Specification Changes Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features Page 4 of 9 5.4 Reactor Coolant System 5.6 Component Cyclic or Transient Limit The following Design Features TS is to be revised:

5.5.3 Capacity Proposed Technical Specification Changes A. TS 5.2 - Containment Summary of Specification and Its Bases TS 5.2 identifies geometric values pertaining to containment height, diameter, thickness of components, and free volume. TS 5.2 also identifies design temperature and pressures.

Evaluation of Proposed Change TS 5.2 can be deleted because the containment design values are not of controlling importance to operational safety. This rationale is consistent with the Westinghouse STS and the 1993 NRC Policy Statement. Containment operational limits are contained in TS Section 3/4.6, Containment Systems. Operational limits on containment pressure and temperature are contained in TS Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCO) and Surveillance Requirements (SR) Sections 3/4.6.1.4 and 3/4.6.1.5. Containment material condition is monitored and maintained in accordance with ASME Code Inservice Inspection requirements as required by SR 4.0.5. In addition, the containment design values are already contained in UFSAR Sections 5.1.1 and 5.1.2. Therefore, an administrative basis exists for deleting TS 5.2 from the Turkey Point Unit 3 and 4 TSs.

B. TS 5.4 - Reactor Coolant System Summary of Specification and its Bases TS 5.4 identifies reactor coolant system (RCS) design pressure, temperatures and nominal volume.

Evaluation of Proposed Change TS 5.4 can be deleted because the RCS design values are not of controlling

Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 L-2011-189 License Amendment Request No. 211 Technical Specification Changes Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features Attachment I Page 5 of 9 importance to operational safety. This rationale is consistent with the Westinghouse STS and the 1993 NRC Policy Statement. RCS operational limits are contained in TS LCOs and SRs in Section 3/4.4, Reactor Coolant System. RCS operational limits for pressure and temperature are contained in TS LCOs and SRs in Section 3/4.4.9. RCS material condition is monitored and maintained in accordance with ASME Code ISI requirements as required by SR 4.0.5. In addition, RCS design values are already contained in UFSAR Section 4.1.

Therefore, an administrative basis exists for deleting TS 5.4 from the Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 TSs.

C. TS 5.6 - Component Cyclic or Transient Limit Summary of Specification and its Bases TS 5.6 specifies allowable cyclic or transient limits for the RCS and secondary coolant system.

Evaluation of Proposed Change TS 5.6 can be deleted because cyclic or transient limits are not of controlling importance to operational safety. This rationale is consistent with the Westinghouse STS and the 1993 NRC Policy Statement. The limits are derived from design analysis and are tracked in accordance with plant procedure 0-ADM-553, Maintaining Records for Design Cycles. While contained in 0-ADM-553, some but not all of the cycle or transient limits are contained in UFSAR Section 4.1 (Table 4.1-8). Limits not already incorporated in the UFSAR will be included as part of the implementation of the license amendments approving the deletion of TS 5.6. Therefore, an administrative basis exists for deleting TS 5.6 from the Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 TSs.

D. 5.5.3 - Capacity Summary of Specification and its Bases TS 5.5.3 limits the fuel assembly storage capacity of Regions I and II combined in each SFP, the fuel assembly storage capacity of a cask area storage rack, and the total capacity of each unit's SFP.

Evaluation of Proposed Change TS 5.5.3 would be revised to a total SFP fuel storage capacity limit only. The

Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 L-2011-189 License Amendment Request No. 211 Technical Specification Changes Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features Page 6 of 9 capacity of individual storage racks or combination of storage racks in specific regions of the SFP is not of controlling importance to operational safety. This rationale is consistent with the Westinghouse STS and the 1993 NRC Policy Statement. The limits are derived from design analysis and the physical configuration of the installed storage racks.

Regions I and II of the SFP are currently licensed for storage of up to 1404 fuel assemblies in accordance with License Amendments 226 and 222 (Reference 5),

and License Amendments 243 and 239 (Reference 6) for Units 3 and 4, respectively. License Amendments 226 and 222 incorporated the cask area racks (capacity - 131 fuel assemblies each, one in each SFP) into the licensing basis and established the acceptability of bulk pool cooling capability and pool structure adequacy for the total loads imposed by the maximum storage capacity of 1535 fuel assemblies.

License Amendments 243 and 239 revised allowed fuel storage configurations in Regions I and II of the SFPs to remove credit for Boraflex neutron absorber material. In addition, the impact on pool structure adequacy and local temperature effects were assessed due to the intended use of MetamicTM inserts as a neutron absorber.

Sixteen cells in Region II of each unit's SFP have been removed from service as discussed in the Reference 1 LER. The FSAR has been updated to reflect the change in storage capacity of the Region II storage racks. While the number of installed storage cells has not changed (1404) in Regions I and II combined in each unit's SFP, the number of usable cells that meet the design basis has been effectively reduced to 1388 due to the removal from service of sixteen cells.

In order to ensure TS 5.5.3 is consistent with the configuration of the Unit 3 and 4 SFPs, FPL proposes that TS 5.5.3 be revised to a total pool capacity limit of 1535 fuel assemblies only. The whole pool analysis supports this total while the capacity of each storage rack may be affected if individual cells are removed from service due to their inability to satisfy their design basis. The FSAR currently reflects and will continue to reflect the current status of SFP capacity on both the total pool and storage area (Region I, II or cask area rack) basis.

Therefore, an administrative basis exists for deleting the Region I and II combined, and cask area rack maximum allowable fuel storage capacity limits from TS 5.5.3.

The relocation of design features values from TS 5.2, 5.4, 5.6 and 5.5.3 to the UFSAR will ensure that any proposed changes to those values will be evaluated in accordance

Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 L-2011-189 License Amendment Request No. 211 Technical Specification Changes Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features Page 7 of 9 with 10 CFR 50.59 to determine if prior NRC approval is required.

6.0 NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION FPL has evaluated these TS changes to determine if a significant hazard is present. The No Significant Hazards Consideration evaluation required by 10 CFR 50.92 is provided below.

1) Would operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

Response: No The deletion of TSs 5.2, 5.4 and 5.6 with design values and cyclic or transient limits relocated to the FSAR, and the relocation of storage rack capacities in TS 5.5.3 to the FSAR are administrative in nature. The TS changes do not represent any physical change to plant systems, structures, or components, or to procedures established for plant operation. Therefore, initial conditions associated with and systems credited for mitigating the consequences of accidents previously evaluated remain unchanged.

Therefore, facility operation in accordance with the proposed amendment would not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

2) Would operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?

Response: No The deletion of TSs 5.2, 5.4 and 5.6 with design values and cyclic or transient limits relocated to the FSAR, and the relocation of storage rack capacities in TS 5.5.3 to the FSAR are administrative in nature. The TS changes do not represent any physical change to plant systems, structures, or components, or to procedures established for plant operation. Because the proposed changes are administrative and do not alter or create a new mode of plant operation or configuration, the possibility of a new or different kind of accident is not created.

Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 L-2011-189 License Amendment Request No. 211 Technical Specification Changes Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features Page 8 of 9 Therefore, operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.

3) Would operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

Response: No The deletion of TSs 5.2, 5.4 and 5.6 with design values and cyclic or transient limits relocated to the FSAR, and the relocation of storage rack capacities in TS 5.5.3 to the FSAR are administrative in nature. The TS changes do not represent any physical change to plant systems, structures, or components, or to procedures established for plant operation. Because the proposed changes are administrative and do not alter or create a new mode of plant operation or configuration, margins of safety are unchanged.

Therefore, operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment will not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

Based on the above, FPL concludes that the proposed amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration under the standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c),

and, accordingly, a finding of "no significant hazards consideration" is justified.

7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) provides criteria for identification of licensing and regulatory actions eligible for categorical exclusion from performing an environmental assessment. A proposed amendment to an operating license for a facility requires no environmental assessment if operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not:

(i) involve a significant hazards consideration, (ii) result in a significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite, and (iii) result in a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.

Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 L-2011-189 License Amendment Request No. 211 Technical Specification Changes Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features Attachment I Page 9 of 9 FPL has reviewed the proposed amendment to relocate design features TSs to the UFSAR, from the Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Unit 3 and 4 Renewed Facility Operating Licenses. Because these changes are administrative it has been concluded that the proposed amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, with no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite since existing effluent pathways are not impacted by the proposed change and new pathways are not created.

There is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure because the relocation of TSs is an administrative function that does not involve radiation exposure. The proposed amendment also involves no significant hazards consideration as discussed in Section 6.0 of this evaluation and meets the criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(b). An environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need not be prepared in connection with issuance of the amendment.

8.0 REFERENCES

1. Turkey Point Licensee Event Report 05000250/2010-001-01 Submitted to the NRC by Florida Power and Light Company Letter L-2010-276 dated November 22, 2010, "Spent Fuel Storage Design Feature Assumptions are Exceeded, Supplement"

2. Florida Power and Light Company Letter L-2011-032 to the NRC dated February 22, 2011, "License Amendment Request No. 207, Supplement I to Fuel Storage Criticality Analysis"

3. Standard Technical Specifications, Westinghouse Plants, NUREG-143 1, Revision 3, June 2004

4. 10 CFR 50.36, Technical Specifications

5. NRC Letter to Florida Power and Light Company (J. A. Stall) dated November 24, 2004, "Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 - Issuance of Amendments Regarding Temporary Spent Fuel Pool Cask Racks"

6. NRC Letter to Florida Power and Light Company (J. A. Stall) dated July 17, 2007, "Turkey Point Plant, Units 3 and 4 - Issuance of Amendments Regarding Spent Fuel Pool Boraflex Remedy"

Attachment 2 Florida Power and Light Company Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-31 and DPR-41 Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251 License Amendment Request to Change the Technical Specifications Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features Marked-up Technical Specification Pages

INDEX DESIGN FEATURES SECTION PAGE 5.1 SITE 5 .1.1 S ITE LO CA T ION ........................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 . .. .ED 5 .2 .1 C O NFIG UR A T IO N ........................................................................................................ 61 I 5.2.2 DESIGN PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ............................................................. 5 1 5.3 REACTOR CORE 5.3.1 F UE L A S S E MB LIE S ..................................................................................................... 5-4 5.3.2 C O NTRO L RO D A SSEM BLIES .................................................................................... 5-4

!DELETEDI 5.4 REACTOR :L,.-TSYSTEM 5.4.1 DESIGN PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE ............................................................... 5 4 5 .4 .2 V O L U ME ....................................................................................................................... 5 4 5.5 FUEL STORAGE 5 .5 .1 C R IT IC A LITY ................................................................................................................ 5-5 5 .5 .2 DR A INA G E ................................................................................................................... 5-6 5 .5 .3 CA P AC ITY .................................................................................................................... 5-6 TABLE 5.5-1 BLANKETED FUEL - MINIMUM REQUIRED FUEL ASSEMBLY BURNUP (Bu) AS A FUNCTION OF ENRICHMENT (En) AND COOLING TIME (Ct).. 5-7 TABLE 5.5-2 NON-BLANKETED FUEL - MINIMUM REQUIRED FUEL ASSEMBLY BURNUP (Bu) AS A FUNCTION OF ENRICHMENT (En) AND COOLING T IME (C t) ........................................................................................................ 5-10 TABLE 5.5-3 FUEL CATEGORIES RANKED BY REACTIVITY .......................................... 5-13 //

FIGURE 5.5-1 ALLOWABLE REGION I STORAGE ARRAYS .............................................. 5-14/

FIGURE 5.5-2 ALLOWABLE REGION II STORAGE ARRAYS ............................................. 5-15 FIGURE 5.5-3 ALLOWABLE INTERFACES BETWEEN REGION II - REGION I ARRAYS. 5-16 FIGURE 5.5-4 ALLOWABLE REGION II STORAGE ADJACENT TO SPENT FUEL PIT W A LLS ........................................................................................................... 5-17 IP NENT CYCIC OR TR.A.N1ENT M1.T................. .........................................

&6 -

T.A.-E. I-CO.MPONAIENT CYCLIC OR TRANSIENT LIMITS. ......................................... 9 lot TURKEY POINT - UNITS 3 &4 xiV AMENDMENT NOS. 2,34 AND 229

5.0 DESIGN FEATURES 5.1 SITE 5.1.1 The site is approximately 25 miles south of Miami, 8 miles east of Florida City, and 9 miles southeast of IDELETED Homestead, Florida 5.2 ___

T__ -__ I 6.2. 1 Thnz onainmenE Duineing is a steel lined, Feinrcrzca conerote euiiaing eT 6yllnanc6al wnape, with a aamc rF and havonai the fellew*ini dcciin featurcz:

Nominalncidc dhamcet - 116 fcet.

Nominal inishciqht - 170.6 feet.

MiniFnmm the*ikenI cf concct, walls - 3.76 feet.

Minimum thicknccs of eenRc~tc rozf - 3.25 feet.

e, mawnmum mfleKne..s of e^neFrct flor pad - 1" feet*

NeFminal thwekness of steel lincr - 0.26 inehcz.

Nominal net frcc velumc - 4 _660Gcubic feet.

DESIGN PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE; 5.2.2 The contawnmcnt iguilaina is acsianca and snall be maintainca Tar a maxi1mum intcrai BrcSSUrs of I i li I aF ~d a tcmperaturc at 2@30F. Thnc cntainmcnt 19UNEdlg isalso tructurally Eicsignea to witfsiana an intceMnal vacuu--wm. o-f 2.56 ps6ig.

TURKEY POINT - UNITS 3 &4 5-1 AMENDMENT NOS. 24-9 AND 244

DESIGN FEATURES 5.3 REACTOR CORE FUEL ASSEMBLIES 5.3.1 The core shall contain 157 fuel assemblies with each fuel assembly containing 204 fuel rods clad with Zircaloy-4 or ZIRLOtm, except that replacement of fuel rods by filler rods consisting of stainless steel, or by vacant rod positions, may be made in fuel assemblies ifjustified by cycle-specific reload analysis using NRC-approved methodology. The reactor core contains approximately 71 metric tons of uranium in the form of natural or slightly enriched uranium dioxide pellets. Each fuel rod shall have a nominal active fuel length of 144 inches. Should more than 30 individual rods in the core, or 10 fuel rods in any fuel assembly, be replaced per refueling, a Special Report discussing the rod replacements shall be submitted to the Commission within 30 days after cycle startup.

CONTROL ROD ASSEMBLIES 5.3.2 The core shall contain 45 full-length control rod assemblies. The full-length control rod assemblies shall contain a nominal 142 inches of absorber material. The absorber material shall be silver, indium, and cadmium.

All control rods shall be clad with stainless steel tubing.

C A Vý rr 'ffIAkT "ITý~

DESIGN PRIES SURE A TE.MPERA.TURE AD I

I I II I c n -r 16ealan; 6vstem is gesliqganca oncical be monainca:~g

6. 4.1he Rto;

_:Z:_ J .'_ * -- -- 1: * -- * ,,4*L LL..

• pt'% A a- in a6cccraRn6@~ nct.ocrcilcct Frciaeiiz- in erstln 9.1 OT thc FARi, wifn i~o~c f8r nRmFF~d dcgrodatwen purcuant t9 the applieablc Gurvzillanee Regulrcmcnts, m

F-Ar RiRrcqqum At PAMf ncoF+/-4 104 Rnd For a tcmpcroturc of 6602P, cccpt fGotho p......iZ.. which is 6802P.

VQtMME

• . ... L .. .... L 6.444 nhe seminal waicr ana cicom volume eT the Rcacior kooiani Gzccdic GUN feet cc at a noffmnal Rngor 674.20F TURKEY POINT - UNITS 3 &4 5-4 AMENDMENT NOS. 224 AND 24-9

DESIGN FEATURES 5.5.1.3 Credit for burnup and cooling time is taken in determining acceptable placement locations for spent fuel in the two-region spent fuel racks. Fresh or irradiated fuel assemblies shall be stored in compliance with the following:

a. Any 2x2 array of Region I storage cells containing fuel shall comply with the storage patterns in Figure 5.5-1 and the requirements of Table 5.5-1 and 5.5-2, as applicable. The reactivity rank of fuel assemblies in the 2x2 array (rank determined using Table 5.5-3) shall be equal to or less than that shown for the 2x2 array.

b. Any 2x2 array of Region II storage cells containing fuel shall:

i. Comply with the storage patterns in Figure 5.5-2 and the requirements of Table 5.5-1 and 5.5-2, as applicable. The reactivity rank of fuel assemblies in the 2x2 array (rank determined using Table 5.5-3) shall be equal to or less than that shown for the 2x2 array, ii. Have the same directional orientation for Metamic inserts in a contiguous group of 2x2 arrays where Metamic inserts are required, iii. Comply with the requirements of 5.5.1.3.c for cells adjacent to Region I racks, and iv. Comply with the requirements of 5.5.1.3.d for cells adjacent to the spent fuel pit walls.

c. Any 2x2 array of Region II storage cells that interface with Region I shall comply with the rules of Figure 5.5-3. Arrays II-E and Il-F may interface with Region I without special restriction.

d. Any 2x2 array of Region II storage cells may adjoin a row of assemblies with a reactivity rank of 11-2 (or lower) that is located in the outer row adjacent to the spent fuel pit wall. The outer row of reactivity rank 11-2 (or lower) fuel assemblies need not contain any Metamic inserts or full length RCCAs, as long as the following additional requirements are met:

i. Fuel is loaded to comply with the allowable storage patterns defined in Figure 5.5-4, and ii. Arrays II-E and Il-F are loaded without any additional restriction on that 2x2 array. Arrays II-E and II-F do not have empty cells, Metamic inserts, or RCCAs that restrict the interface with the adjoining reactivity rank 11-2 (or lower) fuel assemblies.

DRAINAGE 5.5.2 The spent fuel storage pit is designed and shall be maintained to prevent inadvertent draining of the pool below a level of 6 feet above the fuel assemblies in the storage racks.

CAPACITY is I

5.5.3 The spent fuel pool etrgo rackS ae designed and shall be maintained with a cterage capacity limited to no More than 1401 fuel *ac* mlie in to resg* eFagerG* , and the cask area tr age rackAis designe and srhall be maitained with a storage capacity limited to no More than 13351 fueall s l The to storage capacity .e limited to no more than 1535 fuel assemblies.

TURKEY POINT - UNITS 3 & 4 5-6 AMENDMENT NOS. 234 AND 22-9

DESIGN FEATURES, 6.6 COMPONENT CGCIC*.OR TRANSIENT LMIT.

41 iI 6.6.1 The ccmpcncnts identified in Tablc 6.6 1 arc desagnea and shall be mainialnea witnin the zYGiic Or Eranzicnt i i aa i Iimits cf Tablc 6.6 1.

TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 & 4 54. A.MENDME.NT NOR 231 AND 229 A,"

U 0

c c c U

C (A

S p0 0

I-0 C

U -t

-c A* AId4 I I

)

C.

C (A

U C

Al C Al L

I.

)CJ JU Il c

1 A

c P

Pp

.4-I P-

• p

-10

• p P 4

Pp

'C

'C

'I-Pp C

-t

'-I C

• I c U 0

Tri lovcV I1 onlPMT 1 Witr QMT Q- A~~~r~4

• fl Ark 11"fl Arh IT

~

N ll"% t.4f l,eJA

- ALIfl

I '4'IC'4

'I I)

II

Attachment 3 Florida Power and Light Company Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-31 and DPR-41 Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251 License Amendment Request to Change the Technical Specifications Regarding Section 5.0 Design Features Re-typed Technical Specification Pages

INDEX DESIGN FEATURES SECTION PAGE 5.1 SITE 5 .1.1 S ITE LO C A T ION........................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 DELETED 5.3 REACTOR CORE 5.3.1 FU E L AS S E MBLIE S ..................................................................................................... 5-4 5.3.2 CO NTRO L RO D ASSEM BLIES .................................................................................... 5-4 5.4 DELETED 5.5 FUEL STORAGE 5.5.1 CRITICALITY ................................................................................................................ 5-5 5.5.2 DRAINAGE ................................................................................................................... 5-6 5.5.3 CAPACITY .................................................................................................................... 5-6 TABLE 5.5-1 BLANKETED FUEL - MINIMUM REQUIRED FUEL ASSEMBLY BURNUP (Bu) AS A FUNCTION OF ENRICHMENT (En) AND COOLING TIME (Ct).. 5-7 TABLE 5.5-2 NON-BLANKETED FUEL - MINIMUM REQUIRED FUEL ASSEMBLY BURNUP (Bu) AS A FUNCTION OF ENRICHMENT (En) AND COOLING T IME (Ct) ........................................................................................................ 5-10 TABLE 5.5-3 FUEL CATEGORIES RANKED BY REACTIVITY .......................................... 5-13 FIGURE 5.5-1 ALLOWABLE REGION I STORAGE ARRAYS .............................................. 5-14 FIGURE 5.5-2 ALLOWABLE REGION II STORAGE ARRAYS ............................................. 5-15 FIGURE 5.5-3 ALLOWABLE INTERFACES BETWEEN REGION II- REGION I ARRAYS. 5-16 FIGURE 5.5-4 ALLOWABLE REGION II STORAGE ADJACENT TO SPENT FUEL PIT W A LLS ........................................................................................................... 5-17 TURKEY POINT - UNITS 3 & 4 xiV AMENDMENT NOS. AND

5.0 DESIGN FEATURES 5.1 SITE 5.1.1 The site is approximately 25 miles south of Miami, 8 miles east of Florida City, and 9 miles southeast of Homestead, Florida 5.2 DELETED TURKEY POINT - UNITS 3 & 4 5-1 AMENDMENT NOS. AND

DESIGN FEATURES 5.3 REACTOR CORE FUEL ASSEMBLIES 5.3.1 The core shall contain 157 fuel assemblies with each fuel assembly containing 204 fuel rods clad with Zircaloy-4 or ZIRLOtm, except that replacement of fuel rods by filler rods consisting of stainless steel, or by vacant rod positions, may be made in fuel assemblies if justified by cycle-specific reload analysis using NRC-approved methodology. The reactor core contains approximately 71 metric tons of uranium in the form of natural or slightly enriched uranium dioxide pellets. Each fuel rod shall have a nominal active fuel length of 144 inches. Should more than 30 individual rods in the core, or 10 fuel rods in any fuel assembly, be replaced per refueling, a Special Report discussing the rod replacements shall be submitted to the Commission within 30 days after cycle startup.

CONTROL ROD ASSEMBLIES 5.3.2 The core shall contain 45 full-length control rod assemblies. The full-length control rod assemblies shall contain a nominal 142 inches of absorber material. The absorber material shall be silver, indium, and cadmium.

All control rods shall be clad with stainless steel tubing.

5.4 DELETED TURKEY POINT - UNITS 3 & 4 5-4 AMENDMENT NOS. AND

DESIGN FEATURES 5.5.1.3 Credit for burnup and cooling time is taken in determining acceptable placement locations for spent fuel in the two-region spent fuel racks. Fresh or irradiated fuel assemblies shall be stored in compliance with the following:

a. Any 2x2 array of Region I storage cells containing fuel shall comply with the storage patterns in Figure 5.5-1 and the requirements of Table 5.5-1 and 5.5-2, as applicable. The reactivity rank of fuel assemblies in the 2x2 array (rank determined using Table 5.5-3) shall be equal to or less than that shown for the 2x2 array.

b. Any 2x2 array of Region II storage cells containing fuel shall:

i. Comply with the storage patterns in Figure 5.5-2 and the requirements of Table 5.5-1 and 5.5-2, as applicable. The reactivity rank of fuel assemblies in the 2x2 array (rank determined using Table 5.5-3) shall be equal to or less than that shown for the 2x2 array, ii. Have the same directional orientation for Metamic inserts in a contiguous group of 2x2 arrays where Metamic inserts are required, iii. Comply with the requirements of 5.5.1.3.c for cells adjacent to Region I racks, and iv. Comply with the requirements of 5.5.1.3.d for cells adjacent to the spent fuel pit walls.

c. Any 2x2 array of Region II storage cells that interface with Region I shall comply with the rules of Figure 5.5-3. Arrays II-E and II-F may interface with Region I without special restriction.

d. Any 2x2 array of Region II storage cells may adjoin a row of assemblies with a reactivity rank of 11-2 (or lower) that is located in the outer row adjacent to the spent fuel pit wall. The outer row of reactivity rank 11-2 (or lower) fuel assemblies need not contain any Metamic inserts or full length RCCAs, as long as the following additional requirements are met:

i. Fuel is loaded to comply with the allowable storage patterns defined in Figure 5.5-4, and ii. Arrays II-E and Il-F are loaded without any additional restriction on that 2x2 array. Arrays II-E and Il-F do not have empty cells, Metamic inserts, or RCCAs that restrict the interface with the adjoining reactivity rank 11-2 (or lower) fuel assemblies.

DRAINAGE 5.5.2 The spent fuel storage pit is designed and shall be maintained to prevent inadvertent draining of the pool below a level of 6 feet above the fuel assemblies in the storage racks.

CAPACITY 5.5.3 The spent fuel storage pool is designed and shall be maintained with a storage capacity limited to no more than 1535 fuel assemblies.

TURKEY POINT - UNITS 3 & 4 5-6 AMENDMENT NOS. AND