ML17208A420

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
1979 Annual Operating Rept.
ML17208A420
Person / Time
Site: Saint Lucie NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 02/29/1980
From:
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML17208A419 List:
References
NUDOCS 8004080265
Download: ML17208A420 (60)
v • d • e


Text

1979 ANNUAL OPERATING REPORT FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE UNIT f/1 FEBRUARY, 1980 Abstract: This report is submitted in compliance with Technical Specifi.cation 6.9.1.5, 4.4.11.3, 4.7.6.1.2, and 10 CFR 50.59.

\

gpptgt@50-3 55 t;ontrcl @ gOof&SO~

Dqfp~d~bpf Dpcttmeah Rot:.GoUVXORV DOI'KH FR.<

80040 ao 246

SUBJECT PAGE NUHBER Summary of Design Changes Per 10 CFR 50.59 Summary of Procedure Changes and 41 Special Tests Per 10 CFR 50.59 Core Barrel Hovement Summary 42 Steam Generator Tube Inservice Inspection 43 Radiation Exposure Summary 46 Hangrove Survey 47

Page 1 DESIGN CHANGES On the following pages are descriptions, including a summary of the safety analyses, of the design changes implemented at St. Lucie Unit i'/1 during the period January 1, 1979 through December 31, 1979 in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59.

Page 2 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION 111-76 PSL UNIT f/1 MODIFICATION OF THE INCORE CABLE CONNECTOR ASSEMBLIES A high rate of failure of the original incore cable connector assemblies was experienced. The vendor redesigned the connector to provide greater reliability and modifications in accordance with the vendor's new design were implemented.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10 CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased because no credit was taken in the accident analysis for the incore detectors, as discussed in Section 4.2.2.2.8, and because the system reliability has been increased.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis" P port has not been created because the function, location, or significant physical configuration of the incore cable assemblies has not changed.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased since Technical Specification 3.3.3.2 for the incore detectors has not changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 3 PLANT'CHANGE/MODIFICATIONNO. 132-76 PSL UNIT //1 STEAM GENERATOR WIDE RANGE WATER LEVEL INDICATION The steam generator narrow range level indication provides indication only in the normal" operating range.'ide range indication would be extremely useful in any steam generator level excursion, and the appro-priate transmitters indicators and circuitry were installed to provide wide range indication.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR,50. 59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased since the modi-fication was implemented using category two, Seismic I requirements which is identical to the affected piping classification, Class IE cable and separation criteria required by the FSAR, and the wide range system provides no safety function.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to, safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created because the wide range level indication provides no safety function and cannot affect any system that does provide a safety function.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased because no Technical Specifications have been changed or are applicable.

Page 4 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 150-76 PSL UNIT /$ 1

(

LOSS OF DIESEL GENERATOR CONTROL POWER ANNUNCIATION In order to enhance the reliability of the diesel generators, relays were installed across the control power fuses to detect and annunciate blown or pulled fuses.

This change does not consititue an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased because the Modification does not change the function, operation or response of the diesel generators and could increase the reliability.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than'ny previously evaluated in the Final, Safety Analysis Report has not been created by the addition of a blown fuse annunciato'r circuit on the diesel generator control power fuses. 'I
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases'f'he Technical Speci-fications has not been decreased since Technical Specification 3.8.1 governing the diesel generators has not been changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 5 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 269-77 PSL UNIT l/1 RELOCATE SAMPLE VALVES CONTROL SWITCHES Local control switches for primary sample valves V5200, V5201, V5202, V5203, V5204 and V5205 were located remote from the sampling point. New location in sample room will enhance sampling operations.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 beacuse:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased because system flow paths, flow rates, thermal capacity, mechanical operability or control logic (CIS) has not changed.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created by physically relocating a contxol switch without changing system function or reliability.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased. No Tech Specs have changed.

Page 6 foal

/

PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO 355-78 PSL UNIT REPLACE LETDOWN FLOW LIMITER PC/M 355-78 Replaced Fischer Porter Model 55EL 3000 Flow Limiter with Rochester Instruments Model 1362 which has a sharper cut off.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10 CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunc-tion of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased by substituting a more accurate instrument of equal reliability.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created because the function of the system and instrument remains the same.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifications has not been decreased. No Technical Specifications have been changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 7 LANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 359-78 PSL UNIT 81 CEA BLOCK CIRCUIT TEST EQUIPMENT A permanently installed test circuit with key lock switch was installed to allow operators to perform required CEA block circuit surveillance without the need of adding jumpers for a simulated signal.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunc-tion of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. This has been assured by the installation of a key operated switch and properly written procedures to prevent inadvertant operation of the system.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created since CEA misalignment has previously been evaluated and this modification cannot affect any other safety related systems or equipment.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifications has not been decreased since Tech Spec 3.1.3 on the CEA's has not changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 8 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 369-78 PSL UNIT 81 ALARM AND TROUBLE SWITCH FOR FIRE DETECTION ZONES Fire Protection Technical Specifications require periodic test for open circuit indication. Addition of test switches will expedite testing.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as-defined by 10 CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunc-tion of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased because this modification does not affect any safety related systems or equipment.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created by the addition of test
switches in the fire protection system since it is non safety related and does not affect any safety related systems or equipment.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifications has not been decreased since no Technical Specifications have been changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 9 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 374-78 PSL UNIT 81 FUEL HANDLING BUILDING VENT STACK AND EFFULENT MONITOR Under certain postulated wind conditions, the potential existed for the fuel handling building exhaust to be drawn into the RAB intake.

An exhause stack was added to increase dispersion and a new radiation monitor and flow transmitter were also added to simplify effluent accounting.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10 CFR 50.59 because:

l. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. The FHB HV&AC system is not safety related and cannot affect any safety related systems or equipment.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created because the FHB HV&AC system function has not changed and the new installation can-not affect any safety related systems or equipment.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased since no Mchnical Specifications have been changed.

~ '

Page 10 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 386-78 PSL UNIT 81 REPLACE SELECTED HYDRAULIC SEISMIC RESTRAINTS WITH MECHANICAL SEISMIC RESTRAINTS Experience has shown that hydraulic "snubbers" have had seal leakage problems and that mechanical "snubbers" have had an excellent record of reliability. 42 selected hydraulic snubbers were replaced with mechanical snubbers by this PC/M.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10 CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. The replace-ment snubbers are consistent with the original design philosophy, will perform the same function and are more reliable than the original hydraulic snubbers.

., 2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created since the function of all safety related systems and components remain the same. Failure of a mechanical snubber would be no different than failure of the original hydraulic snubber.

3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased, The 42 snubbers affected will be deleted from Table 3.7-2 of the Technical Specifications. The Tech Specification was developed to assure that seal leakage was discovered and is not applicable to mechanical snubbers.

This change does not represent a change to the facility.as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page ll PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 388-78 PSL UNIT Pil FlHQfAHITE MSCV'S 1A 6 1B Mainsteam check valves 1A & 1B flanges were drilled and furmanite pumped in to elimina~e steam leaks while at power to eliminate a unit outage.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10 CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. An engineering analysis was completed prior to implementing this PC/M and it was determined that using the furmanite process would not induce any unacceptable stresses on the valve> however, a continued leak could cause further degradation to the valve.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created since the function of the valve has not changed and a main steam line break has pre-viously been evaluated.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased because no Technical Specifications have been changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

0 0

Page 12 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 395-78 PSL UNIT /l1 V

FUEL TRANSFER TUBE SHIELDING Additional lead shielding was added over the fuel transfer tube at EL 62 between the FHB and the RCB to reduce radiation during transfer of a spent fuel bundle through the tube.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. The instal-lation of lead shielding cannot affect any safety related systems or equipment.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created since no safety related systems have been affected.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased. No Technical Specifications have been changed.

0 Page 13 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 411-78 PSL UNIT Pil CONTAINMENT COOLERS RELIEF VALVES FLANGES INSTALLATION Suction and discharge flanges were installed on the component cooling water discharge line relief valves from the containment coolers. This modification will allow testing of these relief valves in accordance with the 1974 ASM'ode, Section Zl, Paragraph EMV-3510.

This change is not an unreviewed safety question because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. Stress analysis studies have shown that the addition of flanges, as compared to welded fittings, will not affect the integrity of the system and therefore the ability of the containment coolers to mitigate the consequences of an accident will not be decreased.

I

2. The possibility for an accident or malfunction of a different type .

than any evaluated previously in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created. Loss of cooling water to the containment coolers has been evaluated in the single failure analysis of Section 6.2.2.3, Table 6.2-10 of the Final Safety Analysis Report. No other failure associated with this modification can be postulated.

3. The margin of safety as defined in the basis for Technical Specification 3.6.2.2 has not been decreased.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 14 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 417-78 PSL UNIT 81 4160V SWITCH GEAR DIESEL GENERATOR LOAD SE UENCING RELAYS The Diesel Generator sequencing time delay relays were replaced with relays with a smaller adjustable time range. This will allow a more accurate time delay setting.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. The replacement relays are made by the same manufacturer to the same standards as the original and therefore the resultant system is equal to the original,
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created. The function of the Diesel Generator and affected safety systems remains the same, and the loading sequence has not changed.
3. The. margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifications has not been decreased because no Technical Specifications have changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 15 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 441-78 PSL UNIT //1 EXPLOSIVE DETECTOR INSTALLATION An electronic personnel explosive detector was installed at the main entrance station for evaluation of meeting the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety A'nalysis Report has not been increased. This installation is non nuclear safety related and cannot affect any safety related systems or equipment.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased since no Technical Specifications have changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final fety Analysis Report.

,Page 16 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 452-78 PSL UNIT /31 SECURITY COMMUNICATIONS WITH LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT PC/M 452-78 provided uninterruptable power supplies to communications consoles and a tie from the SAS to the radio transmitter on 43'levation to meet the requirements of 10CFR 73.55.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. The above modification is non nuclear safety related and does not affect any safety related systems or equipment.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased. No Tech Specs are involved.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 17 LANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 454-78 PSL UNIT 81 CHARGING PUMP DISCHARGE PULSATION DAMPENER PHASE I This PC/M relocated the discharge valves for B&C Charging Pumps to a new location nearer the pumps in preparation for the installation of a discharge dampener and recirculation system in later phases.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased because only the valve location has been changed, and the new installation was built to the same standards as the original system.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created since the function and quality of the charging system remain the same.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifications has not been decreased since no Technical Specifications have changed.

Page 18

'LANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 461-78 PSL "UNIT !/1 MODIFY COMPONENT COOLING WATER PUMPS MISSILE SHIELDS Existing missile shields were welded making it difficult to remove for maintenance.

This PC/M modified shields so they are bolted and can be removed.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. The reliability of the CCW system has not been decreased, the missile shields meet the same criteria as the original welded ones,
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created since the function and reliability of the CCW system remains the same.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifications has not been decreased since no Technical Specifications have changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 19 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 479 PSL UNIT 81 CHARGING PUMP HEAD MODIFICATION A crack in the original charging pump cylinder head required replacement of the head. New head was manufactured with integral flanges instead of welded flanges of original head.

/

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.S9 because:

.1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased . A reanalysis of the seismic supports showed that the extra weight will not degrade, the seismic capability; new materials and dimensions have been fully evaluated and will not result in any degradation of the system.

.2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Rcport has not been created since the function and reli-ability of the system has not changed.

.3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased since no Technical Specifications have changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 20 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 485-78 PSL UNIT i/1 V'TEAM GENERATOR MODIFICATIONS RIM CUT)

The /f9 and 10 support plate lugs and rims were removed and certain tubes extended to stake support plates to eliminate potential support plate cracking caused by tube denting.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. Evaluations have determined that this modification will not degrade the integrity, create excessive stresses in or technically change the characteristics of the Steam Generators.

2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different'ype than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created since function and reliability of the Steam Generators has not decreased.
3. The margin -of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not. been decreased since no Technical Specifications have changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 21 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 496-78 PSL UNIT Ill MODIFY HARDWARE TO INCORPORATE NEW AND DELETED SECURITY POINTS This PC/M documents numerous changes to upgrade the Security System.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

.l. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased because this modifi-cation is non-safety related and does not affect any safety related systems.

2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created since no safety related systems are affected.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased because no Technical Specifications have changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 22 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 509-78 PSL UNIT /I1 ESFAS RELAY CHANGES The main steam isolation system auxiliary (isolation) relays were modified from normally closed to normally open and from "de-energize" to actuate to "energize" to actuate, and their power supply changed to a monitored bus annunciated in the control room on "loss of power". This will allow maintenance on the auxiliary circuit without the danger of inadvertant MSIS actuation.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. The function of the above relays is to provide isolation between "A" .(B) MSIS and "B" (A) MSIV close circuits. The change from NC to NO changes the mechanism but not the function of these relays. Failure of these relays alone could not prevent MSIS actuation.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased. Since no Tech Specs have been affected.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

A Page 23 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 512-78 PSL UNIT i/1 INSTALL HOUR METERS ON CHARGING PUMP BREAKERS Hour meters were installed on the charging pump breakers to assist in planning preventive maintenance.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. The above meters are powered from a source (120 VAC) to cubicle heaters separate from the charging pump control power via an auxiliary contact of the breaker and cannot affect charging pump operation in any manner.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased. No Tech Specs are affected.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 24 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 513-79 PSL UNIT f31 ADD POWER OFF SWITCHES TO ALL CARD READERS Switches were installed to isolate a single card reader for maintenance rather than remove an entire loop from service.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or 'the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased because no safety related systems or equipment were affected.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created because no safety related systems or equipment were affected.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased since no Technical Specifications were changed.,

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 25 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. PSL UNIT //1 CCW PUMP MISSILE SHIELD STRUCTURAL CHANGE A previous PC/M (461-78) modified the shielding so that the plates could be removed for maintenance, however, a structural support beam remained to interfere with pump removal. This PC/M provi'des for a bolted splice in the beam to facilitate removal.

{ This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. The added splice is designed to be as strong as the original beam, therefore, the system reliability has not decreased.

I

,2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created since the function of the CCW system remains the same and the reliability has not decreased.

.3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased because Technical Specification 3/4.7.3 on the CCW System has not changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 26 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 515-79 PSL UNIT /f1 REGENERATIVE HEAT EXCHANGER SHELL DRAIN VALVE REPLACEMENT An existing non-repairable valve was replaced by two more reliable valves.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased since the system was made more reliable.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created since the function of the system did not change and the system was made more r'eliable.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased because no Technical Specifications were changed.

Page 27 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 521-79 PSL UNIT /I1 ADD UNION TO AUXILIARY FEEDWATER PUMP TURBINE BEARING COOLING MATER LINE A union was required in the cooling waterline to the 1C Auxiliary Feedwater Pump Turbine Bearings to allow removing the Auxiliary Feedwater Pump Cover.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. The new installation meets the same criteria as the original and therefore the reliability of the system has not decreased.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created since the function and reliability of the system have not changed.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased since Technical Specifications 3.7.1.2 on the Auxiliary Feedwater system has not changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 28 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 527-79 PSL UNIT //1 HARD PIPING FOR INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST Permanent piping was installed from existing ILRT connections near the containment penetration to extend to the area east of the diesel generator building to facilitate ILR testing.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. Containment integrity has been maintained to the same degree as the original installation by specifying design standards equal to or better than that of existing piping. No other safety related systems or equipment have been affected.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased. No Tech Specs have changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis'Report.

Page 29 PLANT CHANGE/?JODIFICATION NO. 535-79 PSL UNIT 81 STEAN GENERATOR PRIMARY MAtJJJAY GASKET RETAINER CLIP This PC/H provides for the addition of clips to retain the steam generator primary gasket retainer plate while the primary manway cover is being secured.

These clips will reduce manway cover replacement time and reduce personnel exposure.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or th'e consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased be'cause the manway gasket retainer clips do not affect the structural integrity or the pressure boundary of the steam generators.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created since the function of the steam generators has not changed and the reliability has not been decreased.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifications has not been decreased since no Tech Specs have changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 30 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 536-79 PSL UNIT /$ 1 ADD SECURITY CARD READER AT RADIATION CHECKPOINT This PC/M added a card reader at the radiation check point in the RAB to enhance personnel movement and accountability.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased since this change is not safety related and will not affect any safety related systems or equipment.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created because this change will not affect any safety related systems or equipment.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased because no Tech Specs have changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

N Page 31 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 541-79 PSL UNIT //1 VOLTAGE SWING MODIFICATIONS An engineering evaluation stemming from the System Voltage Swing Study has concluded that MOV motors without temperature compensated thermal overload relays and with long valve stroke times (> 60 sec.) are not conservatively sized for all voltage variations. It was calculated that the thermal over-load relay might trip the MOV prematurely during repeated valve operation.

This PC/M provides for resizing the thermal overloads for 13 MOV's to produce more conservative ratings. The PC/M also revises the normal and emergency power supply to MCC 1C because of calculated .normal .loadings.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. 'he probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. The portion of the PC/M concerning MCC 1C power supply is non-safety related, and will not affect any safety related equipment. All of the protective thermal overloads on safety related MOV's are automatically bypassed on initiation of a safety actuation signal, therefore, they will have no affect on the safety system.

The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created. The circuitry, function operation or original design criteria of any safety related systems

'utilizing any of the MOV's has not been changed.

3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased because no Technical Specifications have changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 32 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 547-79 PSL UNIT //1 AUXILIARY FEEDPUMP 1C GOVERNOR IMPROVKKNTS Improvements to the Auxiliary Feedwater Pump 1C Steam Turbine governor controls were made as recommended by the manufacturer. These improvements included re-routing the governor servo drain line from the low point oil sump to the EGR actuator to insure the hydraulic control loop is continuously oil filled, and addition .of a support bracket to the oil sump assembly.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

/

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. Since the improvements were made to improve the reliability based on operating experience and the vendor's recommendation.
2. .-

The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to

, safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created because the function of the auxiliary pump remains the same and the reliability should be increased.

3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased since no Technical Specifications have changed.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 33 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 550-79 PSL UNIT f)1 CEA GUIDE TUBE MODIFICATION Wear sleeves were inserted into the guide tubes of selected fuel assemblies to prevent vibration caused wear. This PC/M is an extension of PC/Ms 397-78 and 421-78 previously reported.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created. Report CEN-90 (F)-P submitted to the NRC for PC/M 397-78 and 421-78 is applicable to this modification.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

1 0

Page 34 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 553-79 PSL UNIT dl MODIFY DIESEL GENERATOR COUPLING (D.G. TO RADIATOR FAN)

The D.G. vendor informed FP&L that the crank shaft coupling originally

~ ~

supplied with the units had failed in other applications and recommended

~

this modification.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased since this modification was implemented to improve upon original design.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created since the system function has not changed and reliability has been improved.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased. No Tech Specs are affected.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page. 35 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 565-79 PSL UNIT /ll AUTOMATIC INITIATION OF ESFAS "CIS" UPON ACTUATION OF "SIAS" This modification was required by the NRC as a result of TMI-2 Lessons Learned.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. Only 4 accidents were identified that initiated "SIAS"wi.thout "CIS" under the previous logic. The additional functions initiated by "CIS" will not impair the ability to mitigate the consequences of any of these accidents.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased. The revisions required to the Tech Specs will not decrease the margin of safety.

Page 36 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 568-79 PSL UNIT 81 COMPONENT COOLING WATER LINES RESTRAINT DISCREPANCY Discrepancies in CCW lines 4-CC-142 and 4-CC-116 restraints were discovered during the "As-Builting" Program and corrected by this modification.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased since this modification upgraded a deficient area to original design criteria.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important.

to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created.

3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased. No Tech Specs are affected.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 37 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 569-79 PSL UNIT 81 MAIN STEAM CHECK VALVE ROCKSHAFT MODIFICATION Repairs to tail link bushings and replacement of rockshaft were required due to damage.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. Engineering evaluation shows that new dimensions will slightly decrease the stiffness of the rockshaft. At the same time it will improve the design with respect to excessive radial deflection. The net result is there is no decrease in reliability.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created, since the reliability and function of the system remain the same.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased. No Tech Specs are affected.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 38 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 582-79 PSL UNIT //1 RE/OVAL OF CONTAINMENT COOLER FANS LOCAL CONTROL STATIONS The ability of the local push button stations to withstand LOCA conditions was questionable and since local control was not required, the local control circuit was disconnected at the switch gear.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased, since the function and reliability of the fan cooler has not changed.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been created.

'3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased. No Tech Specs are affected.

Page 39 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 594-79 PSL UNIT //1 POWER OPERATED RELIEF VALVE MODIFICATIONS These modifications to the PORV disc and pilot valve actuating lever were recommended by the manufacturer to improve operation and reliability.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased since the modifications were made to improve original design.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety ANalysis Report has not been created since function of the PORV remains the same and reliability has been increased.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased. No Tech Specs are affected.

This change does not represent a change to the facility as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Page 40 PLANT CHANGE/MODIFICATION NO. 623-79 PSL UNIT

//1'EPLACE V 6478 WITH A TEE AND DIAPHRAGM VALVE V 6478 is a 3-way valve discharging into A 6 B'aundry drain tanks. This PC/M eliminates this valve which traps debris and installs a more reliable system.

This change does not constitute an unreviewed safety question as defined by 10CFR 50.59 because:

1. The probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or mal-function of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report has not been increased. This installation is non-nuclear safety related and cannot affect any safety related systems or equipment.
2. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety of a different type than any previously evaluated in the Final Safety Analysis Report. has not been created.
3. The margin of safety as defined in the bases of the Technical Specifi-cations has not been decreased since no Technical Specifications are involved.

0 0

Page 41 PROCEDURE CHANGES Operatin Procedure 1630024 Refuelin Machine A temporary change was made to this procedure to allow extensive adjust-ments to be made to the refueling machine. This involved a fuel assembly stuck in the refueling machine approximately 20 inches from lowest exten-sion. The changes involved the use of a temporary elevator to ungrapple and lower the fuel assembly to the upender cavity bottom and then load test following the repairs. Repairs were made to the refueling machine but retest prior to use was not possible because the test weight was in the spent fuel pool. The fuel assembly was carefully raised to remove the temporary lifting unit and then lowered into the unender cavity. It was then transferred to the spent fuel pool. The test weight was trans-ferred to the refueling cavity and the refueling machine was subsequently tested satisfactorily. This evolution did not increase the consequence of the analyzed fuel assembly drop. Neither did it create a new accident or affect the margins specified in the Technical Specifications. Detailed procedure and close supervision of the evolution reduced the probability of a fue'1 assembly being dropped. This temporary change did not involve an unreviewed safety question.

0 eratin Procedure 0540021 Boric Acid Concentrator 0 eration The change involved adding a step to the procedure which allowed pumoing concentrator condensate directly to the Primary Water Tank (PWT) rather than the Boric Acid Condensate Tank and then to the PWT. Relief valve leakage to the quench tank had resulted in using large volumes of water from the PWT to cool the quench tank. Oxygen absorbed by the water in the Boric Acid Condensate Tanks would eventually end up in the quench tank and result in a potentially explosive mixture of hydrogen which is normally present in the quench tank. Pumping directly to the PWT elimi-nated the oxygen absorption problem. This change did not cause potential for a new accident nor increase the severity of any analyzed accident.

it If boric acid reached the PWT would not affect system materials. If it eventually reached the RCS it would add negative reactivity effected which is this conservative. No Technical Specification margins were by change. The change did not involve an unreviewed safety question. The change was incorporated on a temporary basis while pursuing repairs to the relief valves which were subsequently accomplished.

Page 02 CORE BARREL MOVEMENT Section 4.4.11.3 of PSL gl Technical Specifications requires the results of all periodic Amplitude Probability Distribu-tions (APD) and Spectral Analysis (SA) Monitoring to be in-

, cluded in this report.

Routine monitoring in 1979 included weekly APD processing and SA processing which was done in March, June, and October.

SA measurements in June included analysis at nominal thermal power levels of 20fo, 50fo, 80fo, and '100fo at the beginning of fuel cycle 3. At no time during the year were the alert or action levels exceeded.

As previously observed and reported in 1977 and 1978, the RMS levels of all excore neutron detector signals showed a grad-ual increase throughout 1979 with the exception of a step decrease following refueling. This pattern was similar to that observed in 1978 and was as expected.

The RMS levels at the end of 1979 over the frequency band generally associated with core motion (0-10 Hz) provide an estimate of 2.I to 0.5 mils motion at core midplane as com-pared to 2. 3 to 3. 8 mils at the end of 1978. This slight increase in level is not deemed. significant and the APD analysis continues to confirm that the core barrel motion is normally distributed.

Page 43 "STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INSPECTIONS" An inservice eddy current examination of selected tubes in the No. 1A and 1B St. Lucie Unit No. 1 Steam Generators was performed during the period of May 9 through May 16, 1979, by C-E Power. Systems,'ystem Integrity Services personnel. The inspection was conducted in accordance with C-E Test Procedures Nos. 00000-ESS-105, Revision 01 and 00000-ESS-070, Revision 02, and satisfied the requirements of the St. Lucie Plant Technical Specification 3/4 4-5 and the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, 1974 Edition through the Summer 1976 Addenda.

The inspection program consisted of 400KHz testing for the detection of tube wall anomalies and the assessment of tube denting with both data being taken simultaneously with one pass of the eddy current probe through the tube. Included in the test pattern for dent and defect detection was testing of 100% of the peripheral tubes which pass through the Number 9 and 10 drilled support plates. This test was carried out to ascertain if any damage had occurred during flame cutting of the support plates'n addition, 25KHz testing for sludge accumulation on the secondary side of the hot side tube sheets was carried out. Selection of tubes to be examined was based on an evaluation of where, in the tube bundle, problems had occurred in other steam generators in service. Additionally, when requested by the Data Analyst, certain tubes were re-examined at 200KHz for confirmation of tne 400KHz data.

The data from the inspection was recorded on magnetic tape and also on a four-channel strip chart recorder with the first two channels recording flaw data and the second two channels recording dent data. These recordings were evaluated by the data analyst and the results recorded on Eddy Current Examination Report Sheets.

Approximately ten percent of the tubes in both the 1A. and 1B steam Generators were inspected from the Hot Side, over the "U" bend, and part way down the Cold Leg Side past the Numbers 9 and 10 Drilled Support Plates. By use of specially adapted electronic circuitry both dent and defect data were taken simultaneously with one pass of the Eddy Current Probe. A summary of the numbers and magnitude of dents is included in Table I.

Analysis of the data indicated no detectable progression of service induced denting when comparing the data taken during this inspection period with that taken during the November 1978 Dent Assessment Examination.

Two tubes in the No. 1B Steam Generator were found to have one hundred percent through wall defects. These tubes, identified as Line 21 Row 91 and Line 110 Row 134, are outer peripheral tubes which had incurred damage during the flame cutting of the rim of the Drilled Support Plates on the Secondary Side of the steam generator prior to the Eddy Current Examination. Both of the tubes were subsequently plugged.

In addition to the dent and defect data, sludge measurements were taken indicating a maximum of 5.6" in the 1A generator and 6" in the 1B generator on the Hot Side Tube Sheet.

TABLE I SENARY OP EDDY CURRENT TEST RESULTS INSPECTION CONDUCTED HAY 1979 Total No. of Tubes (By design) 8519 Notes: 1) No tubes inspected from cold side Tubes thru partial support Plate No. 9 2225 (26.1%) 2) Total tube count exceeds that of Tubes thru partial support plate No. 10 771 (9.1%) support plate region because all tubes tested do not pass thru support plates.

Tubes Examined S/G No. Tubes Examined  % of Total Notside tubes thru partial support No. 9 800 35.9% No Tube Wall Degradation Indications 1B 799 35.9% No Tube Wall Degradation 'Indications Coldside tubes thru partial support No. 9 800 35.9% No Tube Wall Degradation Indications 1B 799 35.9% No Tube Wall Degradation Indications Notside tubes thru partial support No. 10 380 49.3% No Tube Mall Degradation Indications 1B 379 49.3% No Tube Mall Degradation Indications Coldside tubes thru partial support No. 10 1A 380 49. 3% No Tube Wall Degradation Indications 1B 379 49.3% No Tube Wall Degradation Indications Total tubes inspected from hot side 894 10.5% No Tube Wall Degradation Indications lB 900 10.6% No Tube Wall Degradation Indications Notside sludge measurement 62 .73% Hax 5.6 inches lB 62 .73% Hax 6.0 inches

Page 45 TABLE I (cont)

DENT ASSESSMENT RESULTS MAY 1979 S/G Support Side No. Tubes Percent X D Plate No. Inspected Occurrence mils mils Hot 800 11.5 1. 21 0. 19 Cold 800 0.6 1. 68 0.02 10 Hot 380 32. 9 l. 96 0. 76 Cold 380 7.6 2. 10 0.22 1B Hot 799 18. 7 1.60 0.36 Cold 799 4.2 1.64 0.10 10 Hot 379 46. 2 2. 47 1.28 Cold 379 27. 2 2. 20 0.70 Notes:

1) All tubes inspected from Hot side.
2) X value is the average dent size for observed dents (9 not included)
3) D value includes the 9 dent tubes and add a statistical error corresponding to a 95% confidence level to provide a conservative assessment on tube condition at the support plates.

ST. LUCI ~

T UNIT 81 APPENDIX B STANDARD FORMAT FOR REPORTING NUMBER OF PERSONNEL AND MAN-REM BY WORK AND JOB FUNCTION Yun>bcr ot I'crsonncl (> 100 n>rcm) Total Klan.Rem Contract Workers Contract Iyorkcrs

'IV>>rk k. Jol> I>unction Station I:mptoyccs Utility I'.mployecs and Others Station Lmptoyccs Utility I."mptoyccs and Others ltcactor Operations E. Surveillance M;>intcn:u>cc Pcrsunncl Opcratill" Personnel 32 17. 03 Il<<al(h I'hysics I'crsonncl 6 2 l. 35 0.30 Supervisory I'crsonncl L>noh)<<crn>" I <<rsol11'>cl l<ou tinc!>Iain tcnancc 1>laintcnan<v Personnel 83 3 28.87

l. 11 Opcraliii" Personnel llcalth Physics Pcrsonn<<l Su p 'rvisory I'crsonncl 7:98 .92 I!opine<<riot: Personnel Inscrvice Inspection

>>Iallltcnancc I cfsa>unct 33 24. 93 Opcratlllp I crsullltcl I lcalth I'hy>i<ory Personnel 3 1.34 lan"inccrint; Personnel Special hIaintcnancc Mi>intcnauc<< I'crsonncl 36 13. 21 Opcral lll" I clsonncI lie>>1th Phys><<s P<<rsonncl 4 4 2.15 0.67 Supcn'i>orI I'crsunncl 2 1.32 L>n dnccrin Personnel

~

2 2.90 4'aste Processing <<

!>Iaintcnancc I'crsonnct 12 6. 75 Op<<rat int; Personnel 8 3.75 ll<<alth I'hysics Pcr>onncl 7 2 1.87 1.42 Sup'rvisory I'crsonncI Iin in<<crine Pcr>onncl Itct ucting Maintc>rance I'crsonncl 51 24 134 65. 36 15. 37 84.54 OI>erat>lip Pcrsoln>cl 24 9.51 llcali!i I'hysics I'<<rsonncl 10 42 6.02 23.36 Supervisory P<<rsonn<<l 8 3 6.87 0.66 Lnplnccrlng I cf sunncl 3 1 0.85 0.14 TOTAL Ntalntcnancc Pcrsoilllcl 102 24 203 100.98 16.48 122.68 Op<<mting Pcr>onncl 51 30.29 I leal th Physics Pcr>onncl 10 55 15.09 29.00 Silp<<fvisof y I crsonnci 11 3 5 8.07 .6) lingin<<<<rinp I crsonncl 3 Grand Total 177 28 265 155.28 17. 28 157. 2

Page 47 Man rove Surve This information is submitted in accordance with St. Lucie Unit 1 Technical Specification 4.7.6.1.2.

A comparison of the December, 1975 aerial photograph FS-8770-310 with the December, 1979 aerial false color infrared photo indicates no natural or man-made deterioration of the mangroves. There continues to be indication of additional plant growth in the area, which would tend to provide flood protection at or greater than the design criteria level.

On-site inspection has confirmed the above.

The aerial photos are available for review in our documentary control facilities at the plant site.

W

~ a I

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML17208A420&oldid=2437995"