ML17340A302

Responds to Discussing Dp Breland Concerns Re Steam Generator Repair Problems & Formulation of Evacuation Plan.Eis & Safety Evaluation Being Prepared to Address Issues.Util Emergency Plan Updated

ML17340A302
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	10/07/1980
From:	Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:	Chiles L SENATE
Shared Package
ML17340A303	List: ML17340A302
References
NUDOCS 8010280097
Download: ML17340A302 (34)

Text

~dmin)!%IfgogfP RlQ" Isgpr on-V>>80 Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251 The Honorable Lawton Chiles United States Senator.

State Office Federal Building Lakeland, Florida 33801

Dear Senator Chiles:

This is in response to your constituent's, Mr. D. P. Breland, letter dated June 2, 1980 in which he referred to problems with the Turkey Point Steam Generator Repair and requested Florida Power and Light Company (FPL) be urged to publish an evacuation plan to the customers within a 40-mi le radius of the plant.

Mr. Breland also asked:

l.

What concerned Floridians can do to ensure continued safety to individuals and the environment, 2.

What actions lave been taken or will be undertaken to make sure Turkey. Point does not become an unwarr anted economic burden to the customers, and 3.

What actions have been taken to see that our safety is secured and our future is not endangered because plans are not made nm~.

Regarding Mr. Breland's concerns about the repair of the Turkey Point'team generators, the NRC is preparing a detailed environmental impact statement and a safety evaluation of the entire program.

These reports will address, among other things, the radiation exposure and effluent discharges which may result from this proposed activity as well as the cost/benefit analysis of the repair.

These reports are expected to be issued'in draft form in October 1980 and in the final form in February 1981.

These documents when published may be seen by members of the public at the Local Public Document Room (LPDR) at the FIorida International University. In addition, copies are also sent to the Homestead

{Florida)

Public Library.

The repair work is scheduled to begin about October

1981, assuming'that the hearing has been completed and the decision is favorable.

With regard to emergency plans (of which evacuation plans are a part),

a final rule upgrading the Commission's emergency planning requirements uas published in the Federai

~Re ister on August 19, 1980 (45 FR 55412).

In anticipation of this rule, the NRC, together with the Federal Emorgeei~cy Management Agency

{FEtLA), had been working with FPL on an improved emer-'ency plan to meet the eourgency planning criteria presented in NUREG-O(54, OFFICE) s SURNAME DATE/.

cop enc ose an now re ect 1n t e rece y pu 1s>ed roue.

NRC FORM 318 (9-76) NRCM 0240 OU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 289 369

'~i

'I l

I r

0 t

S 2

Members of the NRC staff, along with FEN and the,various State and local=--,'-

officials had a meting on this-subject in Homestead on February 27,-

1980.

At this meeting FPL was requested to update.,their plans to meet NUREG-0654.They submitted-this'-'new plan'on" tund=.-l6,'1980.'hese new

"(draft)'lans-'may'be'.seen in the'Local.Public Document, Room at the Florida-

:::-.';-;.'.-'...'..=:.':"-.

International University

-In addition we have-'sent

'a copy'f the draft emergency plan to the"Homestead Public Library'

-'etails of the plan, such as'he publication of evacuation routes,"involve" State and. local officials as well as FPL and NRC-At the meeting in February,, the State and local officials expressed some reservations about.;....'-..:

the publication of the evacuation routes.. They have experience with such evacuations as:-they have been'mp)'emented in connection with hurricane-.

emergencies, and they, feel that publi'cation of such plans would not necessarily

• 'e of substantive help.

This specific point is under. further evaluation...:

by FEHA and the NRC. -:.,:

We appreciate the concerns members of the public have regarding nuclear-power.

Our rules of practice specifically require accommodation o'f these

concerns, consistent with accepted administrative controls.'

member of the public, such as Nr. Breland,has available to him in his vicinity all the published documents pertaining to the issues involved.

Public

~

meetings and hearings in the vicinity of the site are held after prior

'ublic notification-Subject to certain requirements, active intervention in the proceedings themselves by members of the public can be made.

A11 members of the public are afforded an opportunity to express-their

'iews regardless of whether they are-formal intervenors or not.

Public hearings will be held in the near future on the proposed steam generator repairs.

In addition, the public naeting on emergency planning held on February 27 and 28, 1980 at the Holiday Inn, Homestead, Florida>which was advertised by press release to local newspapers also served to ~inform interested members of the public.

I suggest that the forthcoming hearings to be held early next year on the stea'm generator repair will provide to ter. Breland an opportunity to express his views.

Notice of the hearing will be advertised in the local papers well in advance of the hearing date.

t With regard to the economic aspects of the steam generator repair, our environmental ilrpact statement will address this question and is one of the iters to be reviewed 'by the hearing board in the forthcoming public.

hearings.

Our impact statement will be available for public use well in advance of the hearing date.

OFFICEI SURNAME DATEF

Senator Chiles 3

oo Finally, regardi ng i"r. Breland's concern regardi ng continued safe operation of Turkey Point, actions already taken and additional measures being implemented have as their objective the added assurance of the safe operation of Turkey Point and,all nuclear po;i r plants.

As a result of our investigations of the Three bile Island 2 accident, significant requirements have already been imposed on Turkey Point.

These requirements ar listed in the enclosed report, HURE6-0578, "TI",I-2 Lessons Learned Task Force Status Report and Short Term Recorvendations."

ilarIy of these requirements have already been implemented on Turkey Point

,arith the remaining items scheduled for corrpletion by January 1981.

The full time NRC Resident Inspector assigned to Turkey Point a~ill oonitor the irrIple-7entation of these requirements as n ll as the overall operation of the fac i 1 ity.

Additional longer-term requirements have beer established in i UREG-0660 "I'iRC Action Plan Developed as a Result of tile TVI-2 Accident."

I am enclosing a copy of Ij'olume 1 of this plan >;hich lists the specific require-ments applicable to operatinIg reactors, gives a techr.ical description of the items and the implementation schedules.

All these documents, as iiell as copies o

all of our actions regarding Turkey Point may be found in the Local Public Document Room at Florida International Univer ity in i.iaIii.

I believe this letter has beenI responsive to ~'Ir. Dreland's concerns.

contact us again should you have urther questions-Sincerely,

.(g@ely +QehtH Please li1 1 i am J, Dirci:s Executive Director for Operations

Enclosures:

As Stated OFFICE P.

SVRNA"E

~

OAVE $.

L 1

Distribution '=.

'ocket Fi les 50-250 and.50-251 NRC PDRs'(2)

, Local PDR

'T,ERA NNSI C EDO Reading NRR Reading,,

ORB1, Reading W. Dircks H.,Denton E. Case:"-:::-;,

Eisenhut,:.,

V., Stello J.

Cook B, Snyder B. Grimes R: Vollmer Ross S-Hanauer R. Mattson PPAS R-PurPle T-Novak S.

Varga M. Grotenhuis C. Parrish I8IE (3)

Attorney, OELD OCA G. Ertter (EDO-09291)

A. Ferguson E.

Hughes M. Stine J. Butts

'bcc:

The Honorable Lawton Chiles-=":::":,

':.='=.,::,'tate Office Federal Building Lakeland, Florida 33801 t

t

,g M WJDircks mgli<lso o7I. Iso DL:ORBl NGrate.nhu.is:.J OP.y.(.8O.......

1 S

.a........

/80..

T ov k..

DGE>

ut EP JB OSIESIBO.......

~

~

~

. HRDeo&n.....

...07J...J.80.l.>.

,']

~ORC FORM 3IS I9 16l HRCM 0240

'IrI'U.S. GOVERItIMENTPRWTIItIQ Ot FICE:-1979.2&9 369

t

/incoming DISTRIBUTION., encl s.

~KET FILES (ENVIRON)*

DPCIeecy TERA*

SFel d NRC-PDR*(5)

Local-PDR*(5)

NRR Rdg.

ET Rdg'.

CBAB Rdg.*

Docket Nos.:

50-270 50-287,........... DQsenhut/TTel ford 50-302, 50-335,.-,...,....,HDenton/ECase

~

and 48=253,

~',.;.

..QBg.kow/WRussel 1 RDe Young/DMul 1 er DRoss Mr. Richard E. Meiner, Directot

.....pPgttppp,...,

Division of Power Supply and. Rel jabiljty. JJGJoff,.(JIRR 3746 &,3738)

Economic Regulatory Administration....

BJYoungblood Department of Energy

=

, MErnst..

'000 M Street, N. M.

'.. gcopee g

& 3-CBAB

!(ashington, D. C.

20461

~

,,St...Luci.e g-.CBAB Crystal River 3-CBAB

Dear Mr. 1(einer:

,,.. Tupf<ey Point 4-CBAB V

You requested notification.'of our decisions

$ n your February 1,

and February 5,

~

I980 letters to Harold Denton. that surenapized the views of the U. S. Department

~

of Energy regal ding the'electr ic system reliability impacts that may be associated with the implementation, of. the,RShort;Term Lessons Learned" requirements in the Florida and, Virginia-Carolinas.(VICAR) subr egions of the Southeastern Electric Reliability Cauncil,(SERG),

Enclosed is Mr. Denton's February 7,

$980 letter to Duke Power Company concerning Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 2 and 3.

The modified Order requires that Unit 2 bq shutdown after Unit 1 reaches full power, tPat Unit 3 be shutdown on or before larch 15,

1980, and certain administrative controls, The Order. may be modified if additional power reliability information.is.- provided and we conclude that severe reliability impacts extend beyond March 15,

1980, Enclosed,

also, are two letters to the Florida.power and Light Company,(FPL) and a

letter to the Florida Power Corporation

.(FPC). cpncerning the Florida subregion of SERG.

Mr. Denton's February 14, 1980 letter to FPL iqcludes the modified Order requiring that St. Lucie, Unit No. 3, be,sPutdpyn.

pn pr before /larch 15, 1900 for completion of "Category A" requirements

.. Mr., Schwencer' February 22, 1980 letter to FPL amends the Turkey Point Plant, Unit 4., Technical Specifications to allow the unit to operate an additional four equiva1ent full power weeks, but not later than Apri'I 1, 1980.

Mr. Reid's February. 15, 1980."l etter to FPC indicates that Crystal River, Unit 3, will be permitted. tp operate. through. Mooch 31, 1980, with certain administrative controls.

These four enclosures provide you,.the, present.,status of tge actions associated with

Oconee, Units 2 and 3, Crystal River, -Unit 3; St, Lucie, Unit,l; and Turkey Point Plant, Unit 4...

sr OFT ICKW OVRNAMCW

~

~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I EIATC9N

~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~

MRC FORM 518 (9-76) NRCM 0240 e

• II,T.OOVCIINMCNTPIIINTINOOI'FICC'ese eee 7 ~ e

fir. Richard E. Meiner S=l

~

\\

~

~ 4 Ft The assistance of the Division. of Pope;,.Supply.

and Reliability with regard to the reliability and stability evaluations, for Florida and VACAR is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Enclosures:

As stated OHlrlNNster]ED BY B. J.

Youngblood, Chief Cost-Benefit Analysis Branch Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis 1

1 ~

r ltr'4 ~

N ~ 11

~

I OFf ICEMAN SUllHAMC~

S

~

~

F

~

~

2-25-88 DSE E

zCB BJYo n blood/

HRC FORM 318 (9.76) NRCM 0240

~ItS OOVCNNMCNt I NINtlNO OIFIFICOI It 1 ~

SS ~

tS ~

gR REDO o

P 4**>>4 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMli'i!SSIOi VIIASHINGTON,D. C. 20555 February 7,1980 Docket Nos. 50-270 and 50-287 Mr. William 0. Parker, Jr.

Vice President - Steam Production Duke Power Company Post Office Box 2178 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242

Dear Mr. Parker:

The ComIission has issued the enclosed Order Modifying the January 2, 1980 Show Cause Order for Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 2 and 3.

Your January 15, 1980 response requested that the sequential shut down of the Oconee units be allowed, based on power reliability, such that at no time prior to Hay 31, 1980, will two or more units be out of service as a result of the Order.

We have determined that good cause has been shownto modify the Order to extend Unit 3 shutdown to March 15, 1980.

The modified Order requires that Unit 2 be shutdown after Unit 1 reaches full power, Unit 3 be shutdown on or before Miarch 15,

1980, and a dedicated qualified person be stationed

'in the control room to monitor certain valves.

The Order may be modified if additional power reliability information is provided and we conclude that severe reliability impacts extend beyond March 15, 1980.

A copy of this Order is being filed with the Office of the Federal Register for publication.

Sincerely,'nclosure:

Order Modifying January 2, 1980 Strow Cause Order Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc w/encl:

See next page

Duke Power Company February 7, 1980

'cc w/enclosure(s):

Mr. William L. Porter Duke Power Company Post Office Box 2178 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 J.

Michael McGarry, III, Esquire DeBevoise h Liberman 700 Shoreham Building 806 15th Street, H.W-Washington, D. C.

20005 Oconee Public Library 201 South Spring Street Walhalla, South. Carolina 29691 Honorable James M. Phinney County Supervisor of Oconee County

Walhalla, South Carolina 29621 Director, Technical Assess nt Division Office of Radiation Programs (AW-459)

U.

S.

Environm ntal Protection Aoency Crystal Mall E2 Arlington, Virginia 20460 U.

S. Environmental Protection Agency

'egion IY Office ATTN:

EI5 COORD IHATOR 345 Courtland Street, H.E.

Atlanta, Georgia 30308 Hr. Robert B.

Borsum Babcock 5 Wilcox Nuclear Power Generation Division Suite 420, 7735 Old Georgetown Road

Bethesda, fairyland 20014

Hanager, LIS NUS Corporation 2536 Countryside Boulevard Clearwater, Florida 33515 Office of Interaovernm ntal R lations 116 West Jones Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 Nr. Francis Jape U.

S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission P.

0.

Box 7

Seneca, South Carolina 29678

~

'NITED STATES OF N/FRICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of DUKE POWER COMPANY (Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 2 and 3)

Docket No. 50-270 50-287 ORDER MODIFYING JANUARY 2, 1980 SHOW CAUSE ORDER I

On January 2, 1980 Duke Power Company (the licensee) was issued an Order to Show Cause why it should not, by February 15, 1980, implement all "Category A" Lessons Learned requirements or shut down Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 2 and 3 unless among other things, a shutdown would severely impact the power reliability of the Virginia-Carolina (VACAR) subregion of the"Southeastern Electric Reliability Council.

The Order provided that it was temporarily effective pending further-order.

The licensee answered the. Order on January 15, 1980 requesting on the basis of power reliability that sequential shutdown of the Oconee units be allowed such that at no time prior to May 31, 1980 will two or more units be out of service as a result of the Order.

A shutdown js necessary to meet the two outstanding r-quirements which pertain to direct indication of valve positions and containment isolation.

The licensee has indicated that it could adopt compensatory m asures consisting of a dedicated man to monitor valves in the control room until the out-standing requirements are met.

The Department of Energy has reviewed the power reliability for the

YACAP, area and concluded that there is a risk of severe system reliability impacts if two of the three Oconee units are shut down during the February 15, 1980. to March 15,

7590-Ql 1980 period. If March is colder than expected, the potentially severe reliability impacts may extenC until the end of March.

In view of the 'power reliability analysis conducted by DOE and the compensa-tory measures which the licensee could take, I find good cause shown to modify the January 2, 1980 Order.

Accordingly, pursuant to the Atomic Ener'gy Act. of 1954, as

amended, and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR Parts 2 and 50, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the January 2,

1980 Order is modified as follows:

(a)

Unit 2 shall be shut down for implementation of the Category A

Lessons Learned requirements after Unit 1 reaches full power operation, but no later than March 15,

1980, (b)

Unit 3 shall be shut down for implementa ion of the Category A Lessons Learned reguirements on or before March 15, 1980, (c)

Until Unit 3 is shut down the licensee shall provide a dedicated qualified person in the control room to monitor the PORV and safety valves, to close any valve that might be open in case a low reactor coolant system pressure'ignal is generated, and to notify control operator if any out-of-normal indications are noted, and

'd)

The requirement that Unit 3 be shut down by March 15, 1980, may be modified if additional power reliability information is provided and NRC concludes that severe reliability impacts extend past March 15, 1980.

3 7590-01 For the reasons given in the January 2, 1980, Order, I find that the public health, safety, and interest requires that this Modification Order be effective imnediately.

IV The licensee may file a written answer to this Order under oath or affirmation within twenty (20} days of the date of the Or'der.

The licensee or any other person whose interest may be affected by this Order may request a

hearing within twenty (20) days of the date of the Order.

Any request for a hearing will not stay the temporary effectiveness of this Order.

Any request for a hearing shall be addressed to the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Hashington, D. C,, 20555.

If a hearing is requested by a person whose interest may be affected by this Order, the Comnission will issue an Order designating the time and place of any such hearing.

In the event a hearing--is -requested, -the -.issue.,to-be. considered at, such....

hearing shall be:

whether the renaining "Category A" requirements and the compensatory measures should be implemented in accordance with the schedule prescribed by this Order.

Operation of the facility on terms consistent with this Order is not stayed by the pendency of any proceedings on the Order.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 7th day of Februarv

, 1980 Harold R., Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

~

NC IJ,O

~1*<<+

UNITED STATES

'l EAR REGULATORY COMfi'IISSIO'VASHINGTON.

D. C. 20555 February 14, 1980 Docket No. 50-335 Dr. Robert E. Uhrig Vice President Florida Power

& Light Company Advanced Systems

& Technology P. 0.

Box 529100

'iami, Florida 33152

Dear Dr. Uhrig:

The Comnission has issued the enclosed Order Modifying the January 2,

1980 Show Cause Order for the St. Lucie Plant, Unit No. l.

Your January 22, 1980

response, as supplemented February ll, 1980, stated.that all "Category A" Lessons Learned requirements (excluding 2.1.7.a) would be implemented by February 15, 1980, except the valve position. indication requirement of Item 2.1.3.a.

Information on power reliability was provided by your letter of January 15, 1980.

You requested that the shutdown of St. Lucie, Unit No. 1, for implementation of "Category A" Lessons Learned requirements be delayed until the March 15, 1980 refueling.

Me have reviewed the power. reliability information and the status of your implementation of "Category A" requirements and have determined that good cause has been shown to modify our January 2, 1980 Order to extend the St. Lucie, Unit iso.

1 shutdown to March 15, 1980.

The modified Order requires that St. Lucie, Unit No. 1, be shutdown on or before Miarch 15, 1980, for completion of "Category A" requirements.

A copy of this Order is being filed with the Office of the Federal Re'gis'ter for publication.

Sincerely, i

Enclosure:

Miodified Order Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc w/encl osure:

See next page

Fl ori da Power

& Light

.npany c c w/encl osur e( s ):

Robert Lowenstein, Esquire Lowenstein,

Hewman, Reis

& Axelrad 1025 Connecticut

Avenue, H.M.

Washington, D.C.

20036 Horman A. Coll, Esquire HcCarthy, Steel-,

Hector

& Davis 14th Floor; First Hational Bank Building Miami, Florida 33131 Indian River Junior College Library 3209 Virginia Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida 33450 Mr. Hamilton Oven, Jr., Administrator Florida Department of Environmental Reg.

Power Plant Siting Section Montgomery Building 2562 Executive Center Circle Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Hr. Mel don B. Lewi s County A'dministrator St. Lucie County 2300 Virginia Avenue, Room 104 Fort Pierce, Florida 33450 Director, Technical Assessment Division Office of Radiation Programs (At<-45g)

V. S.

Environmental Protection Agency Crystal Mall f2 Arlington, Virginia 20460 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IV Office ATTN:

EIS COORDIHATOR 345 Courtl and Street, H.E.

Atlanta, Georgia 30308 Mr. Jack Shreve Office of the Public Counsel Room 4, Holland Bldg.

Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Bureau of Intergovernmental Relations 660 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32304

Enclosure

~

7590-01 UNITED STATES OF N<ERICA

,'UCLEAR REGULATORY COHHISSION In the Hatter of Florida Power 8 Light Company St. Lucie, Unit No.

1 Docket No. 50-335 ORDER MODIFYING JANUARY 2, 1980 SHOW CAUSE ORDER On January 2, 1980, Florida Power 5 Light Company (the licensee) was issued an Order to Show Cause (45 FR 2434, January ll, 1980) why it should not, by February 15,

1980, implement all "Category A" Lessons Learned require-ments (excluding 2.1.7.a) or shut down St. Lucie, Unit No.

1 (the plant) unless among other things, a shutdown would severely impact the power reliability of the Florida subregion of the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council.

The Order provided that it was temporarily effective pending further order.

The licensee answered the Order on January 22, and February ll, 1980, stating that all "Category A" requirem nts would be implemented by February 15, 1980, except the valve position indication requirements of Item 2.1.3.a.

Infor-mation on power reliability was provided by the licensee on January 15, 1980.

Completion of the in-containment work associated with this item necessitates a plant shutdown which the licensee has requested be deferred until the Harch 15, 1980 refueling outage.

The bases for this request are power reliability, existing position indication for the subject relief valvs and compensatory measures consisting of a dedicated man to monitor the relief valves in the control room until the outstanding requirements are met.

7590-01 The Department of Energy (DOE) has reviewed the power reliability for Southeastern Florida and concluded that there is a risk of severe system reliability impacts if one of the licensee's three units (St. Lucie 1 and Turkey Point 3 and 4) is shut down during February 1980 or if two of these units are shutdown during triarch 1980.

Currently, Turkey Point 4 is required by its license to shut down on February 26, 1980, for steam generator tube inspections which will extend into the first half of Narch.

In view of the power reliability analysis conducted by DOE and the compensatory measures which the licensee could take, I find good cause shown to modify the January 2,

1980 Order.

Accordingly, pursuant to the Atomic I'nergy Act of 1954, as

amended, and the Coranission's regulations in 10 CFR Parts 2 and 50; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the January 2, 1980 Order is modified as follows:

(a)

St. Lucie, Unit No. 1, shall be shut down for implem ntation of the "Category A" Lessons Learned requirements (excluding 2.1.7.a) on or before March 15, 1980, and (b)

Until implementation of "Category A" Item 2.1.3.a is complete, unless St. Lucie, Unit No.

1 is shut down, the licensee shall provide a

dedicated, qualified person in the control room to monitor the power operated relief valve and the safety valve positions and,to notify 2

the control room operators if any out-of-normal indications are noted.

For the reasons given in the January 2,

1980 Order, I find,that the public health, safety, and interest require that this Hodification Order be temporarily effective as of this date.

7590-01 IV The licensee may file a written answer to this Order under oath or affirmation within twenty (20) days of the date of the Order.

The licensee or any other person whose interest may be affected by this Order may request a

hearing within twenty (20) days of the date of the Order.

Any request for a hearing will not stay the temporary effectiveness of this Order.

Any request

'or a hearing shall be addressed to the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnission, Washington, D. C.

205'5.

If a hearing is requested by a person whose interest may be affected by this Order, the Commission will issue an Order designating the time and place of any such hearing.

In the event a hearing is requested, the issue to be considered at such hearing shall be:

whether the remaining "Category A" requirements and the compensatory measures should be implemented in accordance.

with the schedule prescribed by this Order.

Operation of the facility on terms consistent with this Order is not stayed by the pendency of any proceedings on the Order.

FOR THE VUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Dated at Bethesda,

Haryland, this 14 day of F~ebruar

, 1980 rHarol R. Denton, Ds rector Cffice cf Nuclear Reactor Regulation

~pP <ECy

+~

~0 UNITED STATES NU LEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Vi'ASHINGTON,D. C. 20555 Docket No. 50-251 F >RNRY 4 2 f~

Dr. Robert E. Uhrig, Vice President Advanced Systems and Technology Florida Power and Light Company Post Office Box 529100 Miami, Florida 33152

Dear Dr. Uhrig:

The CoIInIission has issued the enclosed Amendment No.

44 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-41 for the Turkey Point Plant Unit No. 4.

The amendment consists of changes to the Technical Specifica-tions in response to your application transmitted by letter dated January 23,

1980, supplemented February 1 and February 14, 1980.

The amendment permits continued operation of the Turkey Point Plant, Unit No.

4 for an additional four equivalent full pmer weeks from that authorized by Amendment No. 43 dated December 14, 1979 for a total of eight equivalent full power months plus four equivaleITt full power weeks. from June 1,

1979 but not later than April 1,

1930, at which time the steam generators shall be inspected.

Copies of the Safety Evaluation and the Notice of Issuance are also encl osed.

Sincerely, Encl osures:

1; Amendment No. 44 to DPR-41 2.

Safety Evaluation 3.

Notice of Issuance A. Schwencer, Chief Operating Reactors Branch 1

Division of Opera:ing Reactors cc:

w/encl osures See next page

,sr~ r,'

gV ip

<<+*+~

UMITEDSTATES M~'AR REGULATORY COMVilSSIOM VI'ASHIWGTOM,D. C. 20555 February 15, 1980 Docket No. 50-302 Mr. J.

A. Hancock Director, Nuclear Operations Florida Power Corporation P. 0.

Box 14042, Miai 1 Stop 'C-4 St. Petersburg, Florida 33733

Dear Mr. Hancock:

On January 2, 1980, Florida Power Corporation was issued an Order to Show Cause why it should not, by February 1.5,

1980, implement all "Category A" Lessons Learned Requirements or shut down.

On February 1, 1980,,you were advised that the Commission accepted the justification provided with regard to installation of equipment necessary for the monitoring of PORV and safety valve position.

Your February 6, 1980 letter, identified a problem in completing the contain-ment isolation installation while the plant -is operating.

In response to discussions with the staff on this matter, you identified in February 8, and 13, 1980 letters, administrative controls that will be instituted until such time as the containment isolation circuitry is installed.

The staff has reviewed the proposed administrative controls and such controls meet the Lessons Learned Requirement 2.1.4, Containment Isolation.

Therefore, operation through March 31, 1980, will be permitted.

Sincerely, cc:

See next page Robert k!. Reid, Chief Operating Reactors Branch,44 Division of Operating Reactors

R

FROLI:

IRicsI-rd VIcinor DATE OI'OCUh1I.NT 2/}/60 DATL RILSSVLD NO, 41:"iR->74(i LTR MEMO:

OTHER'S TO I ORIG.

CC'THER:

ll. R. Denton CLASSIF.:

DESCRIPTION: (MVHBe USSSI4SSiIHdl POST OfFICE RED. NO.

ACTION NECESSARY NO ACTION NECESSARY Q

F II,E CODE.

REFERRED TO CONCURRENCE COh1hIENT DATE DATE ANSWFREO 0

BY RECEIVED BY DATE StJ."NARIZES TJP. VIP.BS OF 'A1F. U.S.

DOE RBGARDI."eG TJP. ELECTRIC SYSTFA RELIABILITYQ!PACT ZH t1IE VIRGIihTA

'OUT1KASiTR ELECTRIC RELIABLI LI'$Y COUNCIL hlKN OCONEH MKLUAR U14ITS 2 and 3 ARE REQUIRED TO BE R H. R. Bonton iGVED 31.BErkov/ H.

R ssoII D. Ross REMARKS:

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORYCOMMISSION MAILCONTROL FORM FORM NRC.326S 14 T91

v

~8 Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20461 I EEi 1 L~80 NRC-Docket Nos. 50-270, and 50-287 Mr. Harold Denton Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555

Dear Mr. Denton:

This letter suagaarmzeg the ~j ews....oX. Xhe U.S...Department.of Energy regarding. the el,qc~~c.system reliability impact...in,.ghe Virginia-Carolina~s VACpEQ sub-regional area of the SoutheasternElectric Reparability Coupci,l when Oconee Muclear Units 2'nd 3 arg required t~fe rem ved fgqjrr service simultaneousX'y to Ymplement the,",lessons Learned Short-Term" requirements=Zh'i.s'.sxmulTa'ri'eous outage would occur for Hie"three weeks begi.nning February 16, 1980.

I want to reiterate the fact that a shutdown of large generating

units, such as these, at a time other than planned, will pose a risk that the operating utility will have insufficient capacity to meet its consumer's demands.

Available energy supply from the generating units remaining in service and fuel resources could be constrained or insufficient to supply customer energy requirements during the outage period.

The necessary margin of reserve generating capacity is variable for different operating systems, different areas of the country, and different times of the year.

Electric utilities typically plan for a level of reserves that consider construction slippages, necessary or planned maintenance, or forced or unexpected outages.

Operating reserves are normally provided to insure against the loss of the single largest power source on the system and for certain system operating needs.

The analysis done of the anticipated VACAR situation is from the perspective of adeouacy of operating reserves considering possible support from other electric systems.

2 The review of avaz able information* regardin the simultaneous outage of two Oconee nuclear units in the February 15, 1980, to March 15, 1980, period indicates that the VACAR and Duke Power Company systems will stand the risk of severe system reliability impacts unless at least 1700 MW of power are assured in February and 700 MW of power are assured in March from neighboring systems.

There has been no information presented for review that indicates a commitment of such an assured supply, although data reported to the DOE Monitoring Center indicates that some capacity may be available from the Southern

Company, American Electric Power, and Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland systems.

Duke has indicated in phone conversations with DOE that, should two Oconee Units be simultaneously shut down in the latter part of March, the outages of two large fossil units planned for that time could be rescheduled to lessen the adverse reliability impacts.

The power requirements of the VACAR region are very sensitive to the weather in the month of March. If this month is colder than expected, the potentially severe reliability impacts may extend until the end of the month.

DOE was informed on January 29, 1980, that the outage of Oconee Unit 1 will be extended until February 17.

When Unit 1 returns to service, Unit 2 will be shut down for refueling and modification.

The reliability of the VACAR and Duke Power Company systems will be inadequate if Oconee Units 2 and 3 are removed from service, as scheduled, prior to Unit 1 returning to service, even if a power supply from neighboring systems is assured.

The current analysis differs from the evaluation performed by DOE for NRC Docket No. 50-206 (San Onofre) in that the San Onofre data had already accounted for forced outages.

As a result of this difference and differences in system configurations and locations, a direct comparison of the two evaluations is not possible.

The evaluation of the VACAR area during the month of February, with the simultaneous outage-of two Oconee units, shows an operating reserve margin of 8.3 percent (2,160 MW).

The lower loads projected for March would improve this operating margin to 12.0 percent (2,845 MW).

These margins would be below the desired levels to provide reliable service without an assured power supply from neighboring regions.

• Informatz,on utz.lazed was that contained in the letter of January 15,

1980, from William O. Parker of Duke Power Company to Mr. Harold R.

Denton and Mr. Richard Weiner; the letter of January 15, 1980<

from Mr. Paul H.

Mann of Duke Power Company to Mr. Richard Weiner; the Duke Pober Company's answer to Order to Show Cause; the January 10, 1980, letter from Mr. William R. Brownlee of SERC to Mr. Harold Denton; the letter of January 17, 1980, from Mr. Robert Fischbach of the North Carolina Utilities Commission to Mr. Harold Denton; the January 17, 1980, letter from Mr. Henry G. Yonce of the South Carolina Public Service Commission.to Mr. Harold Denton; and information periodically filed. with the Department of Energy by electric utilities.

3 The VACAR utilities have a generation mix that includes approxi-mately 3,000 MW of hydroelectric generation and 2,100 MW of combustion turbines.

These types of resources cannot be depended upon to supply energy requirements over an extended period because of storage reauirements.

DOE has also reviewed some currently filed operating information for utilities in the VACAR region.

This data indicates the amount of capacity on forced outage and capacity constrained by partial outages at the time of the monthly peak load.

For the winter 1978-79 period, the forced outages averaged 3,000 MW while partial outages amounted to an average of 2,500 MW.

The latest available data for December 1979 show a total of approximately 5,000 MW unavailable due to forced and partial outages.

Based on this actual data, it appears that information presented by Duke Power Company may be too conservative and that an operating reserve margin in. VACAR must be at least 15 percent to assure reliable service.

The only non-VACAR resources that are included in the above evaluation is a purchase of 114 MW by Duke Power Company from the Southeastern Power Administration.

The VACAR region has substantial transmission ties to other, regions and could continuously import up 'to 2,000 MW.

An assured source of power from outside the

region, when two Oconee units are shut down, will improve the VACAR reserve margin.

Utilizing a significant portion of the region s

trans'fer capability for continuous support-limits the capability to import additional power should another unexpected event occur.

In order to have an adequate operating reserve margin of 15 percent in February, VACAR would need assured imports from other regions totaling 1,724 MW or 86.2 percent of their transfer capability.

In March the requirements would be 721 MW which represents 36.1 percent of the capacity of the transmission ties.

DOE has also -evaluated the effect of a simultaneous shutdown of two----

Oconee units on the Duke Power Company system.,

The-expected February Duke operating reserve margin is a negative 1.0 percent with the simultaneous outage of two Oconee units.

The March situation would only improve to an 8.5 percent operating reserve margin.

These margins are not considered to be sufficient to provide adeauate system reliability.

The Duke situation is similar to the VACAR analysis in that an assured source of power from another utility, either outside VACAR or another VACAR member, could provide the necessary augmentation to internal reserves for Duke to provide reliable service to its'ustomers.

This analysis deals only with electric system reliability and energy supply; it does not consider the need to reduce operating costs and conserve oil or natural gas.

The simultaneous outage of Oconee Units 2 and 3 will probably result in increased costs to the consumers of electricity in the Carolinas because of the resulting increased use of oil and gas.

The above represents an analysis done utilizing the available data.

Circumstances in this power study situation can change on a

daily basis, but this evaluation recognizes the more probable variations.

Any dramatic changes in the relevant time frame will require further evaluation.

I will appreciate notification of your decision regarding the shutdown of Oconee Units 2 and 3 to implement the Tl1Z "Short-Term" Lessons Learned changes.

Sincerely, Richard E. Weiner, Director Division. of Power Supply and Reliability Economic Regulatory Administration

I QOM Richard E.

1~'einer, Director DOE IO.

DA'IK OF DOCVLIKNI 2/5/80 LTR X

ORIG.;

X MKMO.

DAIL~VED 2/11/80 RKPORTI

OTHER,

@ 79$

NRR-3738 OTHER.

H.

R.

Denton CLASSIF,I POST OFFICE RED. NO ADIIDNNlclssARv IX NOACIIONNKCESSARY Q

FILE CODE.'ONCURRENCE COLILIENT Q

DATE ANSI'KRED, Bv2 25 80 DKSCRII'IIOhIIIhe~ee Be Vneleee Indi RE:

THE ELECTRIC SYSTEh1 RELIABILITY Ih1PACT IN THE FLORIDA HUBREGION REFERRED TO D.

sen~ut DATE 2/11 RECEIVED Bv DATE ENCLOSURES:

Co ies To:

H. R. Denton E.

G. Case H.

Berl<ow/lit. Russe R.

DeYoun D. Ross R. h1attson.

REMARKS:

ffon distribut o Please place I,"...IGrof on 1

e l.

Also return origina ye o

o IMGroffv:hen yellow control ticI:et to I,. r action completed.

U.S. NVCLEAR RKGVLAIORYCOh'IhIISSION MAILCONTROL FORM FORLI hRC SISS Id )SI

8 C

~ <<g

('/

~':-

Department of Energy'ashington, D.C. 20461 FEB 5

NRC-Docket Nos.

50-302 and 50-335 Mr. Harold Denton Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.

20555

Dear Mr. Denton:

This letter summarizes the views of the U.S. Department of Energy regarding the electric system reliability impact in the Florida subregion of the Southeastern Electric, Reliability Council of requiring the shutdown of more than one nuclear generating unit at the same time in February and March.

The following represents our understanding of the operating status of nuclear generating units in Florida.

There are four nuclear generating units with operating licenses in Florida at the present time.

These are Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 (697 MW each),

located 25 miles south of Miami; St. Lucie Unit 1 (795 MW), located 100 miles north of Miami all on the Florida Power and Light system; and Crystal River Unit 3

(797 MW), located on the Florida Power Corporation system 60 miles n'orth of Tampa.

Turkey Point Unit 3

is currently undergoing start-up procedures, following a refueling outage during which the req'uired off-line TMI "Lessons Learned Short-Term" modifications were made.

This unit is expected to be operating at full capacity by February 9, 1980. Turkey Point Unit 4 is operating at full capacity and has also completed the off-line modifications.

All remaining TMI "Lessons Learned Short-Term" modificaitons at the Turkey Point plant are supposed to be completed by February 15,

1980, and 'will not require any curtailment of the generation from these units.

There is a requirement that Turkey Point Unit 4 be shut down every six months for a detailed steam generator inspection.

The next inspection, is scheduled for February 26 and is planned for one month.

Florida Power

& Light has requested a delay until late April when the refurbished turbine rotors will be available for installation, thus combining two required outages.

St. Lucie Unit 1 and Crystal River Unit 3 still have to be shut down to implement "Lessons Learned Short-Term" requirements.

Conversations with the HRC staff have indicated that Crystal River Unit 3 has been granted a waiver of the shutdown order until March 1 due to late delivery of some necessary equipment.

Should St. Lucie be shut down on February 16, as currently scheduled, it would return to service by the time Crystal River is to be taken off line.

This situation would avoid having two nuclear units in Florida out of service at the same time in the latter half of February, providing Turkey Point Unit 4 is granted the extension on the steam generator inspection outage.

The timing of these various nuclear units to be shut down is different from the schedule when the show cause order was written.

The DOE analysis of the rather complex relationship between the Florida transmission

system, load center location, and nuclear unit location indicates that the system reliability in Florida will not be adequate if St. Lucie Unit 1 is taken out of service prior to the beginning of March.

Nhen Florida s loads decline in March, the outages of Crystal River Unit 3 and either St. Lucie Unit 1 or Turkey Point Unit 4 can be accommodated within adequate reliability limits.

The simultaneous outage of St. Lucie Unit 1 and a Turkey Point unit in March would not provide reliable service to consumers in Southeast'Florida.

The available information* shows that, if St. Lucie Unit 1 is shut down for the last half of February, the resulting operating reserve margin for Florida would be 3,039 I)N or 17.1 percent of the expected peak load.

Included in this figure is maximum possible import of 330 MW from the Southern Company and the continued operation of Turkey Point Unit 4.

The configuration of the Florida trans-mission system, the distribution of loads within the state, and the ability of the transmission ties to outside regions make this level of operating reserves inadequate to assure reliable service.

Delay of the St. Lucie outage until the beginning of March, to occur simultaneously with the two-week shutdown of Crystal River, along with the lower projected load levels at this time, would leave an operating reserve of 4,830 MN (33.7 percent) with Turkey Point 4

operating.

Should Turkey Point 4 also be shut down, the operating

• Information utilized was that contained in the letter of January 14f

1980, from I~is. Patsy Y. Baynard of Florida Power Corporation to Mr. Harold Denton; technical supporting documents supplied by Florida Power and Light Company, dated January ll, providing responses to the data requirements enumerated by NRC in the letter describing the DOE reliability analysis effort; the January ll, 1980, letter from Mr. Michael R. Gent of the Florida Coordinating Group to Mr. Richard E. Neiner; and the January 10, 1980, letter from Mr. Nilliam R. Brownlee of. SERC to Mr. Harold Denton; and phone conversations with Florida Power

& Light to update maintenance schedules on February 4.

reserve margin would be 28.8 percent (4,137 HW).

These operating reserves also include a maximum import from outside the region (330 HN).

Reserves of this magnitude would be adequate for Florida considered as a single entity.

The loads in Florida are extremely sensitive to the weather at this time of year; and it would be possible to have March loads reach the February levels, especially in the early part of the month.

The Southeastern portion of Florida is a major load center located near the tip of the peninsula.

Only four transmission lines connect this area to the rest of the state.

The three Florida Power and Light nuclear units are in this area as well as other major generating plants.

These sources of power are not sufficient to meet the peak demand in the area and are normally supplemented by power imports over transmission ties to the west and the north.

These transmission ties provide an import capability of 1,500 HN.

Reliable system operation requires that enough capacity be available on these transmission lines to absorb a load increase equal to the largest generating unit operating in Southeast Florida.

This situ-ation makes it necessary to further evaluate the impact of the shutdown of St. Lucie Unit 1 on Southeast Florida separately from the overall Florida reliability margin analysis.

The operating reserve margin in Southeast. Florida in the second half of February will be a negative 2.1 percent (a deficiency of 127 HN) if St. Lucie is out of service.

This margin considers a transfer into the area of 705 MW (almost the maximum that can be reliably imported).

The maximum unreliable import of 1,500 MN would provide a reserve margin of 668 HW.

This amount is insufficient to cover the outage of a Turkey Point nuclear unit and would, therefore, not be able to assure reliable service to consumers in this area.

Load levels are expected to be considerably lower in March.

This would leave an operating reserve margin of 21.1 percent (1,018 HW) if St. Lucie is taken out of service in the early part of the month, 705 HW are imported into the area, and Turkey Point Unit 4 remains in service.

Should Turkey Point Unit 4 be shut down simultaneously with St. Lucie Unit 1, the operating reserve margin in March would be 321 HW (6.6 percent).

e The above analysis shows that reliable service cannot be maintained in Southeast Florida during February if any nuclear units in this area (the Turkey Point units or St. Lucie) are out of service.

Assuming normal March weather conditions, either St. Lucie Unit 1 or Turkey Point Unit 4 can be shut down at the beginning of March and not severely impact the reliability of this area of Florida.

-Should both of these units be out of service simultaneouly in March, the resulting operating reserves, including maximum reliable imports from the remainder of the state, would not be sufficient to insure reliable service to the consumers in Southeast Florida.

This analysis deals only with electric system reliability and energy supply; it does not consider the need to reduce operating costs and conserve oil or natural gas.

The outage of any large non-oil generating unit in Florida results in increased costs to the consumers of electricity in the state because of the resulting increased use of oil-fired generation.

The above represents an analysis done utilizing the available data.

Circumstances in the Florida power supply situation change on a

daily basis, but this evaluation recognizes the more probable variations.

Any significant changes, such as a need to remove either Turkey Point nuclear unit from service to complete TIKI "Short-Term" modifications, will require further analysis.

I will appreciate notification of your-decision regaroing the shutdown of Crystal River Unit 3 and St. Lucie Unit 1 to implement "Lessons Learned Short-Term" changes and Turkey Point Unit 4 for its steam generator inspection.

Sincerely, Richard E. Neiner, Director Division of Power Supply and Reliability Economic Regulatory Administration