ML19308D864

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 4 to License DPR-72

ML19308D864
Person / Time
Site:	Crystal River
Issue date:	05/12/1977
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML19308D858	List: ML19308D857 ML19308D860 ML19308D863 ML19308D864
References
NUDOCS 8003191064
Download: ML19308D864 (3)

Text

s,.g:au w~~..Mzgf*y y 7,'p M.W**%'

<% T y 1 * "T.VQ

['"~

A..<

s.

2 mw

,e Ot

~

,'4

, g. 4..

SW M

M 3,_

. ~,-

.s i'

m, 7,

,e

- ~

SAPITY WAI11ATION BY 'INE OFFICE OF NUCIEAR REACIOR REGJIATIOt3 j '.K...

+~ suppOP.fiNG APWE9ESFF 10. 4 TO LICENSF.10. OPP-72

^

n

~

'q.

':v y >

,i T

FICRIDA POWEP COEPORATION, ET AL 1-

+

, V g ; c, m

7 pg

,7

~

CRYSTAL RIVER INIT 3 NOCLEAR GDERATDC PI>NT

'h,

',,': t DOCKER NO. 50-302

- 4 n ;N ::;, -

.-w'-

e.

- : 1f N['g}MM n.K' A,

- fi) :" :. ';r. p

.,,,, Eh !

. ; ly_ '

f' s

' MrEOo0CTION - /: C MN $ 2 I

~ '. :! N

.7 W e* % @r. q 1; I Q.. * ~' % Ch,R.}{&s;. %,.:.:;' W...<,9 )~**

c.,h *

?-,,

p st.

n.

.,v a

tn?.the 1tcheiical We".i'ficetkine$ il+[to Facil,ity Operating Llipen,a c

.w 1977, Florida Power Corporatiori requested

%g'.Meyletter.datedApril;21, i

e se No(

1, i

li 7 l Int-72 ffor? crystal River. Units) Nuclear 6enerating Plant. The prc;osed f

? bchange= consists' f allowinig the demonstrated rernoval efficiency for methyl o

31odideof a representative carbon.saeple of charcoal' absorbers in the. auxiliary Sbuilding ventilation,enheuetisystem. to be greater than or equal to 95 percent,

sversue the' allowable efficiency of 99 percent l that ;is specified_ in mogulatory f.,

7 jGuide'1.52; "Doefgn, Tes' ting,'and Maintenance Criteria for Engineered. - Safety-

~

%)tfeaturet Atimesphere cleanup systemi Air. Filtration and Absorption Units of. Light '

.Jwater-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants," Revision 1,. July 1976.

,i.3C t

+.a j

/

~,

.: 9

. ; 9 1 Florida Power Corporation' states"that the reason for requesting the change in-

' demonstrated removal efficiency is that the existing technical specification 1 drestrictive'lfer verifying 99 percent removal efficiency is unneceezarily.

Orequirement.

and will' resulit in?emocesive charcoal replacement at. considerable i

, g. expense witNout"eufficient. benefit to the public or to plant employees. ;The-,,

Ln ;.. W eemil.iacy bellhing wome!!1stion' h t system at Crystal. River..Dmit'3 is;, ' '

' E 3;j $;:; designed,as 'a 'dentinuousitiair"see aus Ex ystem in idsich,7unlike many, other plant' 6esieynsi 4

theAaremaPabsorherisiemenet;be5.bygnesed. ' '-this;continuoos.use of the'enfinust

~

1 QayoteeW eeabined. withithejambient conditione' ef'high humidity. typical;.of3theM

reglen ~and locel air sentamination from two'fosoel-fired power plants on. the w J

/

site,.results infan annoosseery.eeensnic penalty tcIsaintain 99 pereent' demon-

'strat'ed removel efficioney for;the charcoal absorbers.

V-d>+

1

,g, g $g % e,-

W a,,c g qQ. g y vv.y y,a.

m; g.jp.a. > t,.c 4,.

y

,v

. us;. y.,c.,

~;.;;7 ;;y,:;;n%y ? 'h.r(*.R'y',;,l' M

• ]

[

Y,

a &;; ~. m.

, ' gA.

w ;,mwa w',

3:;.,q:

s

. ' ~

y,

. : y.n v.

~

,nm n

9,,

7mieTetumpe' ), reposed V Flor'il$a 3 ewer Corporatl ion would in effect have waived

,7 entirely tduelleboratocy testing er'iteria for activated' carbon as specified 2

W 3.ite magela' ery' Widsi :1.$23 'Revisieri 1,- July 1975, when the intent ofj:h Ul t

proposed change was to allowfa~1 ewer acceptance result for the labordtory y test o(a representative carbon ~ sample with regard to the rernoval of methyl

- iod ide.: Regulatory Guide 1.32 states that the efficiency of the activated

...b

.q

..a oY0 F D ' My {

n f.

. K

. +.,j',

..,j

~,%.

g t

, 1 Am=. > -

J lH '

.p

~

e m

I OPP 4C8 &-.

1

.u...:

.....w

=

.g.oyA i 9 J.gXif l

e,, w NRC FORM 318 (9 76) NRCM 0240 W u. e. novsman.awr Psiinvene orrocs. so7s - ese-eaa 1,<

+ -

. w.

q m 4,.

g W

5 9 s*

~

w,

.y.

,.v

~

j N

r...

m.

carbon absortAr'section should be determined by laboratory testiry; of repre-.

sentative samples of the activated' carbon exposed simultaneously to the same

/

service conditions as 'the absorber section.- The guide further states that in order to assign a decontamination efficiency of 95 percent for elemental

- 'and organic iodine in.a two inch' activated caroon bed depth, the representative sample should meet an' acceptance level of 99 percent or greater, y,. f _ Q.; G y

.Q g#.

irer. Crystal River Unit' 3,(theDC staff's l evaluation of the.radiolodical s

3

.m. eensequencesiforl postulated design'besiafaccidents'is contained irithe Safety l,,

M Dvaluation otthe crystal River Unit 3,'~imeued on July 5,1974. In that evalv-l 7 ation.isie asetsmedfa 'decantaminatica efficiency'of 90 percent for elemen'al 1

t

, ( iodine and 70 percent for' organic.' iodine for the charcoal ~ absorbers of the 2

t

.~auaillary building ventilation system'in mitigating the consequences of a

' postulated fuel handlirui accident. Vee' calculated a potential dose of

~

aine.reen,to the thyroid and _less than one rem to the whole body.at' the

~

i.

' exclusion area boundary for 'the lfirst'two 'heurs of the postulated accident.

i usi also calculated pbtential da=== of less than one rem to the thyroid d~

andAele body-for :the.30-day courme-of the postulated accident 'at the ye p,

outer boundary of the low population sene.

The purpose of the surveillance requirements of the Technical Specifications I

with regard to the acceptance results of the laboratory tests for a repre-

-mentative sample of carbon is to assure that the decontamination. efficiency

. assumed in the safety' anal.ysis of. 6esign basis accidents 'can reasonably be expectediin the.eiventi bat a,postalated accident occurs. For.-this r t

~

l

- Astulatosfy edide 152[ recommends aP"laboratoryftest' officlency"of 99".eeson, percent Der. the renseal'ef mothfifiedide;ia order' te assure expoeted decontamination TI

^

'of' 95' percent fo' Tlthe 'removalief ' elemental and orgastic-iodine.

i

- offi'elency &Q pgkf* Jy Ng y r

.QJ%

e f 'y f Q,g. q qa.

q y[ <;w::. ~y', } f f'

.t.., x ' ' l f.

M

, -:. 2 nymuntcar Q_ W;y

-9 r n.r,,j.... M Y, : m u, W & :'i w w a. -

., c w[ Q G ~ ~

??+

. e w.

,m..s noe evaluated LFlorida Power Corporation [equeet' t'o' change the dAnc'nstra'ted resmovel'effic3ency for. methyl. iedide to 95 percent for the acomptance results of the.. laboratory test of a representative sanple. We determined ~that' a

~

4

. demanstrated.ramoval.efficioney of. 95 percent' is acceptable ~ to proeide'

~

reasonable assuraince that the rea6M Mfficiencies of 90 percent fer. ele-7 mental,iodineVand 70. piercant",for organic _ todine can be espected,in the event

~

of occurrenoo'ofithe'peetulated twef handling accident. Our determination is'bemed en a cenyerimon of.the demonstrated and expected values in Pegulatory Guide 1.52 to, the demonstrated and expected values proposed by Florida Power Corporation On this basis we conclude that a demonstrated removal ~ efficiency of 95 percent or greater is an acceptable limit for methyl iodide 'for the laboratory test of a representative sample of carbon.

n; ;c t

N

~,

[x d'

a (.,,

u;A.

Q O e[ ~

~

~l

~

~

J A %#

b-

"w E

g gmes a me 3 h DATg h 1

x

/

' Our evaluation also gives consideration to the fact that the potential off-I l

site doses due to the postulated fuel handling accident is significantly less than the guideline values of 10 CFR Part 100 even if no crodit is given for l

removal of radioactive iodine as discussed in our Safety Evaluation of the Crystal River Unit. 3, issued on July 5,1974.

Consequently, Amendment No. 4 to the Facility Ooerating License tio. CPR-72 allows an acceptance result of 95 percent methyl iodide removal efficiency

{

for the laboratory test of a representative samole of carbon in the charcoal absorber units of the auxiliary building ventilation exhaust system. The amendment does not, however, allow a 6eviation from any of the other labora-tory testing criteria for activated charcoal as specified in Regulatory Position C.6.a of Regulatory Guide 1.52,' Revision 1, July 1976, since this clearly l

was not the intent of Florida Power Corporation.

ENVIJONMF2 tral OCNSIDERATION 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 i

any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which is insignificant from the starkipoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR SSI.5(d)(4),

_ that an erairotwental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact a;praisal need not ce prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment, i

CONCIUSION We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:

(1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the pro-bability or consequences of accidents previously considered or a significant decrease in any safety margin, it does not involve a significant hazards.

i consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of tne public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

I Date: May 12, 1977 D 90 90 NNS~

. a J L J ij l AL i

4