ML17209A624
| ML17209A624 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 01/19/1981 |
| From: | Clark R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17209A623 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8102060324 | |
| Download: ML17209A624 (7) | |
Text
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET NO. 50-355 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICNESE The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has issued Amendment No. 37 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-67, issued to Florida Power and Light Company, which revised Technical Specifications for operation of the St. Lucie Plant, Unit No.
1 (the facility), located in St. Lucie County, Florida.
The amendment is effective as of its date of issuance.
The amendment changes the Technical Specification to add requirements associated with actions taken to satisfy the NRC's "Category A" Lessons Learned Recommendations.
These changes include adding operability requirements for relief block valves, adding safety injection as an actuation signal for containment isolation and adding requirements for accident monitoring instrumentation.
The applications for the amendment comply with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations.
-The Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment.
Prior public notice of this amendment was not required since the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
0
't.. ~
T 7590-01 2
The Commission has determinded that the issuance, of this amendment will not result in any significant environmental impact and that pursuant to 10- CFR 551.5(d)(4) an environmental impact statement, or 1
negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with issuance of this amendment.
For further details with respect to this action, see (1) the applications for amendment dated January 22 and October 31, 1980, (2) Amendment No.
37 to License No..DPR-67 an'd (3) the Commission's ',
related letter dated January 19, 1981. All of these items are avail-able for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document
- Room, 1717 H Street, N. W., Washington, D.C.
and at the Indian River Junior College Library, 3209 Virginia Avenue, Ft. Pierce, Florida.
A copy of items (2) and (3) may be obtained upon request addressed to the U. S.
Nuc'lear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555, Attention:
Director, Division of Licensing.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 19th day of January 1981.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Robert A. Clark, Chief
,Operating Reactors. Branch 83 Division of Licensing
1 g0%
JUN 4 1981 Docket Ho. 50-335 Dr. Robert E. Uhrig Vice President Advanced Systems 8 Technology Florida Power 8 Light Company P. 0. Box 529100 Miami, Florida 33152
Dear Dr. Uhrig:
By letter dated Inarch 19, 1981, you requested exemptions to 10 CFR 550, Appendix R, Sections III.A, G, J and 0.
The exemption to Section III.Awould remove the requirement to modify your fire pump controllers so that they neet all the criteria of HFPA-20, and the requirement to automatically load the fire pumps onto vital buses in the presence of a safeguards actuation.
This request is based on your assertion Chat the design of the fire pump controllers and switchgear presently installed meets or exceeds the intent of NFPA-20.
You further assert that such modifications would be detrimental to overall facility safety.
Part of the exemption to Section III.G would remove the requirements to install fire doors at six locations currently equipped with door and assembly units manufactured as flood barriers.
You noted the fire barrier capability of the existing doors in asserting that substituting doors that conform with the requirements of Section III.G would not enhance fire protection safety at your facility.
Part of the exemption to Section III.G would remove the requirement to install fire-rated dampers in safety-related duct peneCrations of the Auxiliary Building.
This request is based on low levels of combustibles, ductwork fire protection capability, the potential for violating the radiological boundary of the Auxiliary Building and the potential for affecting operation of vital equipment.
You assert that installation of the subject dampers would not signifi-cantly enhance fire protection and would reduce overall plant safety.
<~ (~g>02-> ~
OFFICE/
SURNAME/
DATEII NAG FOAM 318 (10-80) NACM0240
~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0WO ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~
~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
~
0 USGPO: 19SI~S-060
ter. Robert Uhrig w2w Lle have found that your requests regarding Sections III.A (fire pump controllers and switch gear) and III.G (fire doors and dampers) provide sound technical bases warranting further staff review.
The schedule requirements for these items are, therefore, suspended in accordance with 10 CFR 50.48(c)(6) until final Commission action on these requests.
Hith respect to your request not to install fire dampers in safety related ductwork of the Auxiliary Building, you are requested to:
- l. list the safety-related duct penetrations of the Auxiliary Building in which you are requesting approval not to install dampers; 2.
provide details supporting your conclusion that the radio-logical boundary of the Auxiliary Building could be violated; and 3.
provide details supporting your conclusion that the operation
'of. vital emergency safeguards equipment could be affected.
This information should be provided within 30 days of receipt of this letter.
Part of the exemption to Section III.G would remove the need to fully meet the requirements for fire protection of safe shutdown capability based on your assertion that the site-specific fire protection features and modifications, previously approved by the NRC staff in its St. Lucie Unit 1 fire protection Safety Evaluation Repor ts (SERs),
provide an acceptable level of fire protection for the safe shutdown capability of St. Lucie Unit l.
Your request for exemption from the requirements of Section III.G for those areas of the plant ~hich have already been reviewed and approved by the Commission is denied.
Such an exemption request must be based on a reexamination of those previously approved configurations that do not meet the requirements as specified in Section III.G.
Based on this reexamination you must either meet the requirements of'ection III.G of Appendix R or apply for an exemption that justifies alternatives by a fire hazard analysis.
You have provided no such justification.
In your letter of IIarch 19, 1981, you requested exemption from the schedule requirements of 10 CFR 550.48 Section C in the event that we deny your request for exemption to Appendix R,Section III.G.
Me are reviewing this schedule-related request.
OFFICEI SURNAME/
DATE Q NRC FORM 318 {10.80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USG PO: 1991-935.960
w j 0
4
~
E
~'