ML20059L198
| ML20059L198 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 11/09/1993 |
| From: | Berkow H Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059L202 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9311160343 | |
| Download: ML20059L198 (5) | |
Text
.
I 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY CONNISSION FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT 3 DOCKET NO. 50-302 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuancr. of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-72, issued to i
Florida Power Corporation (FPC, the licensee), for operation of Crystal River, Uni: 3, located in Citrus County, Florida.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action:
The proposed amendment will amend the Technical Specifications (TS) to reflect currently accepted NRC standards for containment tendon surveillance testing. The proposed action is in accordance with portions of the licensee's amendment request dated August 25, 1989, and letter dated October 25, 1993.
i The Need for the Proposed Action:
Complete replacement of the TS with Improved Technical Specifications (ITS) was requested by the August 25, 1989, letter.
By letter dated October 25, 1993, FPC requested expedited issuance of the containment section of the ITS to support containment tendon testing. Containment tendon 1
surveillance testing was scheduled to begin on November 1,1993, to prevent exceeding the surveillance interval which expires on January 10, 1994.
Issuance of the ITS is likely in this time interval which would create a conflict of requirements since the ITS and the current TS differ in this area.
FPC considers it preferable to perform the containment tendon testing to the i
currently accepted NRC standards contained in the ITS and the NRC agrees.
9311160343 931109 PDR ADOCK 05000302 P
i !
Descriotion of the Proposed Chance:
The current TS specify that the structural integrity of the containment i
shall be maintained at a level consistent with the acceptance criteria specified in the surveillance requirements.
If structural integrity is not met, it must be restored within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or the plant must be taken to cold shutdown. The surveillance requirements specify the details of the testing.
a The proposed TS state that the containment structural integrity must be maintained at a level consistent with the acceptance criteria specified in the surveillance program or restored to within the limits. The proposed containment tendon surveillance program, inspection frequency, and acceptance criteria shall be in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.35, Revision 3,1989.
The proposed TS also require that any abnormal degradation of the containment structure detected during these tests be reported to the NRC within 30 days.
In addition, in the letter dated October 25, 1993, FPC committed to follow Regulatory Guide 1.35, Revision 3, except for the timing of testing tendons deferred as part of the fifth CR-3 tendon surveillance.
Per Regulatory Guide 1.35, Revision 3, tendons that are randomly selected j
but cannot be tested (due to plant conditions at the time) should be inspected 1
during the following plant shutdown.
In the case of the fifth CR-3 tendon surveillance, this would require testing during the next refueling outage in April 1994, ih addition to the scheduled testing beginning on November 1, 1993.
Five randomly selected tendons are inaccessible during the November 1993 testing since the testing is being performed with the plant on line.
FPC proposed to perform testing on these tendons during the next tendon
r surveillance currently scheduled for Refuel Outage 10 in April 1996. This is approximately 2 years later than the April 1994 outage, when the testing would i
normally be conducted per the Regulatory Guide.
FPC stated that previous tendon testing in the area of these five tendons l
has met the TS requirements. The licensee concluded that operating history f
indicates that deferral of the testing does not increase the potential for l
undetected degradation during the time interval.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed revision to the TS. The changes will not affect the capability of the containment to perform its design function.
These TS changes will not increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluent that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed TS amendment.
With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed amendment involves features located entirely within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
It does not affect non-radiological plant effluent and has no other environmental impact.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable environmental I
impact associated with the proposed amendment, any alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be evaluated. The principal alternative to the amendment would be to deny the amendment request.
Such action would not enhance the protection of the environment.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of resources not considered previously in the Final Environmental Statement for Crystal River, Unit 3.
I Aaencies and Persons Consulted:
The NRC staff consulted with the State of Florida regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action.
FINDING 0F NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed amendment.
For further details with respect to this proposed action, see the licensee's letters dated August 25, 1989, and October 25, 1993. These letters are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, and at the I
i
.,. - - - -.., -.. ~ - -. - - -. - - - -
t 1,
i t
local public document room located at the Coastal Region Library, 8619 W.
Crystal Street, Crystal River, Florida 32629.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 9th day of Nov.1993, l
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION l
L bert N. Berkow, Director roject Directorate II-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i
I
[
L J
F t
t l
W
=- -
-g-vw imm-y-s-w y
mmuy-y--
y,
-ww,i
---+-,
yr-g-w g-y*r-gyw-y,
,, - ---