ML17228A586

Forwards RAI Re Proposed License Amend Concerning Flood Protection.Util Should Provide Discussion & Justification for Removing Design Feature 5.1.3 from TS & Explain How Importance of Design Features Serves as Reason for Removal

ML17228A586
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	06/01/1994
From:	Norris J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Goldberg J FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
References
TAC-M88319, TAC-M88320, NUDOCS 9406080271
Download: ML17228A586 (6)

Text

June 1,

19 Docket No. 50-335 and 50-389 Hr. J.

H. Goldberg Executive Vice President Florida Power and Light Company Post Office Box 14000 Juno

Beach, Florida 33408-0420

SUBJECT:

ST.

LUCIE UNITS 1

AND 2 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORHATION-PROPOSED LICENSE AMENDMENT FLOOD PROTECTION (TAC NOS.

H88319 AND H88320)

In conducting our review of your October 25, 1993, submittal relating to the above subject for the St.

Lucie Plant, we have determined that we will need the additional information identified in the enclosure to continue our review.

This requirement affects fewer than 10 respondents and, therefore, is not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under P.L.96-511.

Please contact me at (301) 504-1483 if you have any questions concerning this letter.

Sincerely, (Original Signed By R. Croteau for)

Jan A. Norris, Sr. Project Manager Project Directorate II-2 Division of Reactor Projects-I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/enclosure:

See next page Distribution Docket File..

NRC 8 Local PDRs PDII-2 RF SVarga GLainas HBerkow ETana JNorris H.

P. Siemien, OGC DVerelli, RII OFFICE IIAHE DATE LA:PDII-, 2 ETana PH: PDI I-2 JNorris 06 94 06 f /94 D:P I

H e w

06

]

94 HSi i4n OFFICIAL RECORD COPY -, DOCUMENT NAME: G:i88319.JAN j

mc RE CM7pi, ~MV 4 6 9406080271 940601 7 l

PDR AOOCK',05000335' P

'DR~

C L

1'

Mr. J.

H. Goldberg Florida Power and Light Company CC:

Jack Shreve, Public Counsel Office of the Public Counsel c/o The Florida Legislature 111 West Madison Avenue, Room 812 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1400 Senior Resident Inspector St. Lucie Plant U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7585 S.

Hwy AIA Jensen

Beach, Florida 34957 Mr. Joe Myers, Director Div. of Emergency Preparedness Department of Community Affairs 2740 Centerview Drive Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 Harold F. Reis, Esq.

Newman 5 Holtzinger 1615 L Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20036 John T. Butler, Esq.

Steel, Hector and Davis 4000 Southeast Financial Center Miami, Florida 33131-2398 Mr. Thomas R.L. Kindred County Administrator St. Lucie County 2300 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 Mr. Charles B. Brinkman, Manager Washington Nuclear Operations ABB Combustion Engineering, Nuclear Power 12300 Twinbrook Parkway, Suite 330 Rockville, Maryland 20852 St. Lucie Plant Mr. Bill Passetti Office of Radiation Control Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services 1317 Winewood Blvd.

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700 Regional Administrator, RII U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street N.W., Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Mr. H. N. Paduano, Manager Licensing

5. Special Projects Florida Power and Light Company P.O.

Box 14000 Juno

Beach, Florida 33408-0420 D. A. Sager, Vice President St. Lucie Nuclear Plant P.O.

Box 128 Ft. Pierce, Florida 34954-0128 C. L. Burton Plant General Manager St. Lucie Nuclear Plant P.O.

Box 128 Ft. Pierce, Florida 34954-0128

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION guestion 1

Your request proposes to eliminate the design feature

5. 1.3 for St. Lucie l.

The Safety Analysis does not contain discussion or justification for its elimination.

The only reference to the design feature

5. 1.3 is in your conclusion which states:

"FPL proposes to remove design feature

5. 1.3 from the Unit 1 Technical Specifications.

These provisions are not considered to be important in relation to the other design features described within this section of the Technical Specifications."

Please provide:

a)

Discussion and justification for removing design feature

5. 1.3 from the Technical Specifications (TS) b)

Explanation of how the relative importance of design features serves as the reason for their removal from TS

~nest'o 2

In the NRC Safety Evaluation Report (SER) for Unit 2 (NUREG-0843),

on page 2-14 and again on page 2-17, there is a discussion of two FPL commitments regarding the conditions of beach dunes and highway embankment:

"The erosion analysis is considered to be conservative provided that the State SR-AIA embankment and sufficient beach material east of the embankment exist at the start of the storm in order to limit the heights of breaking waves to those used in the 'stalled hurricane'rosion analysis;"

The two commitments are

,then described, and the SER goes on to state:

"These above listed commitments (1 and 2) will not be required,

however, as long as existing technical specifications for Unit 1 requiring beach dune surveys and monitoring of mangrove swamps (Section 2.4.2.2 of SL-1 FSAR) remain in effect."

The NRC conclusion in the SER that the erosion analysis is conservative was conditioned on periodic verification of the soundness of the beach dunes and highway embankment.

You are now proposing to remove the above-mentioned surveys from the TS, but your Safety Analysis is silent on the issue of the two commitments.

Please provide:

Discussion addressing the issue of the two commitments.

0 J\\

v~

r'

• ~