ML20094R777

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 71 to License DPR-72

ML20094R777
Person / Time
Site:	Crystal River
Issue date:	08/13/1984
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20094R757	List: ML20094R777
References
TAC-48450, NUDOCS 8408210066
Download: ML20094R777 (3)

Text

. _.

p uru F['

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n

3 i

e WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 a

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.

TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. OPR-72 FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION. ET AL.

CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT NO. 3 NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT 00CKET NO. 50-302

1. 0 Introduction 4

The Florida Power Corporation filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission a request to amend Facility Operating License DPR-72. The amendment would approve a revision to their approved physical security plan entitled, " Crystal River Nuclear Plant Unit 3 Modified Amended Security Plan".

2.0 Discussion By letter dated February 23,1984,the Florida Power Corporation submitted for staff review Revision 4 (initially submitted May 6,1982) to the Crystal River physical security plan.

The revision includes the following significant changes:

Plan was rewritten in a format compatible with NUREG-0908.

Security management structure was reorganized.

Screening procedures and documentation were clarified.

Owner-controlled area surveillance was eliminated.

The secondary alarm station was deleted as a vital area.

Access procedures for personnel vehicles and materials during normal operations and emergencies were rewritten.

Additional measures for the control and accountability of keys, locks, and related equipment were added.

Special procedures to be taken during refueling and major maintenance were added.

Testing procedures were expanded.

~

Special measures to be taken during anticipated long term construc-tion activities were added.

Other changes were administrative in nature involving terms and definitions, additional commitments to required security audits, conformance with reporting requirements, and updated contingency response information.

1 8408210066 840813 PDR ADOCK 05000302 P

PDR

~

3. 0 Findings The following summarizes the findings regarding the proposed changes:

o The format changes improved the inspectability J tb7 security plan and made the plan easier to use for those charged sih its implemen-tation.

o The changes in the security management structure should improve the security plancimplementation.

o The additional commitments added to the plan regarding the facility employee screening program significantly upgraded the previous program.

o Since there is no regulatory requirement for owner-controlled area surveillance, this change is appropriate.

o The secondary alarm station is not required by regulations to be vital.

o More details have been added to the plan regarding access authoriza-tion for personnel, vehicles, and materials. These changes enhance the effectiveness of the security plan.

o The revised program for control and accountability of keys, locks and related equipment now conforms to NRC guidelines.

o The addition of measures to be used during refueling and major maintenunce brings this section into conformance with regulatory requirements.

o The revised testing procedures reflect current NRC guidelines.

o Record keeping commitments as revised and consolidated reflect

~

current NRC guidelines.

o The nodification to allow for anticipated long term construction activities should improve the security during construction and also enhance ~inspectability of these activities.

Evaluation The staff has determined that the revised -Crysta; diver Nuclear Plant Unit 3 Modified Amended Security Plan", dated February 1,1984 (transmittal letter dated February 23, 1984) continues to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55(b) through (h) and accordingly is acceptable.

2

~-

'E Environmental Consideration This amendment relates solely to safeguards matters and does not involve any significant construction impacts. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(12). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.

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

(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance 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:

August 13, 1984 Principal Contributor:

C. Gaskin l

l l

l l

l l

3 r

.. _ -