ML19260D255
| ML19260D255 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 01/23/1980 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19260D254 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-12656, NUDOCS 8002080197 | |
| Download: ML19260D255 (2) | |
Text
l pa "'%g
+
o UNITED STATES 8'
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
E Whc 94tNGTON, D. C 20555
\\ *.. /
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR HEGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0.27 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. OPR-72 FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION, ET AL CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT NO. 3 NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-302 Introduction By "05000302/LER-1979-109-03, /03L-0:on 791221,following Reactor Trip,Chem/Rod Sampling Showed Reactor Coolant Dose Equivalent I-131 Exceeded 1.0 Uci Per G Contrary to Tech Specs.Caused by Leaking Fuel Pins & [[Atomic Element" contains a listed "[" character as part of the property label and has therefore been classified as invalid. Transient|letter dated January 11, 1980]], Florida Power Corporation (FPC) submitted Technical Specification (TS) Change Request Mc. 57.
This change request proposed intermittent operation of select containment isolation valves for sampling or surveillance testing purposes and a qualification to the limiting condition for operation for specific containment isolation valves.
Background
Based upon discussions with FPC, it was determined that containment isolation valve CAV-1 is presently inoperable in the open position.
As a result, we have restricted this evaluation of the January ll, 1980 submittal to the review of an exclusion of the valve CAV-1 from the provisions of TS 3.0.4 in order to expedite our review.
Discussion & Evaluation Containment Isolation Valve CAV-1 is an electric motor operated isolation valve located inside the reactor building on the pressurizer steam space sampling line.
In accordance with TS requirements, the manual valve upsteam from CAV-1 has been closed since CAV-1 is inoperable in the open position. The pneumatic valve downstream from CAV-1, which is located outside the reactor building, is maintained in its nonnal closed postion except during sampling periods. Therefore, double isolation of this sampling line is maintained.
We have reviewed the radiological consequences of a postulated accident considering potential releases from failure of the pressorizer stean space sampling line.
We have concluded that the radiological consequences from this postulated accident are a small fraction of the dose guidelines of 10 CFR 100. Additional occupational exposure is received during the press-urizer steam space sampling procedure with the current valve's arrangement.
Based upon the maxiram estimated radiation dose of 10 mrem per sampling procedure, we have concluded that the additional occupational dose will be acceptable for the period of time until CAV-1 is restored to service.
We have reviewed the interim valving arrangement for the pressurizer steam space sampling line and have detennined that the facility's administrative procedures are acceptable for the period of time until startup for Cycle 2 We approve of un exclusion in the TS for CAV-1 to allow time for the maintenance and repair of the valve.
80020B0 C
Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendment does not authorize a change in effluent types'or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact.
Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insionificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(c)(4), that an environmental impact statement, or negative declaration and environ-mental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amencment does not invcive a significant hazarcs censideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliarce with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: January 23, 1980
.