ML20096A863
| ML20096A863 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 05/04/1992 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20096A831 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9205110248 | |
| Download: ML20096A863 (2) | |
Text
.
p usom e
/
3%
E T.
UNITED STATES i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[
WASHINoToN, D C. 2%%
o
- 't, SAFETY EVALUATION BY THL OF NVCLEAR REACJDR REGULATION
!W EGL ING AMENDMENT NO. 141
.,ClllTY OPERATING llCENSE NO. OPR-72 i.
FLO!.10A POWER CORPORATION d _ L GLSTAL RIVER UNIT NO. 3 NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT DOCKEi N0. 50-302
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated sanuary 23, 1992, Florida Power Corporation (the licensee) proposed changes to the Technic.11 Specifications (TS) for the Crystal River Unit 3 (CR-3) Nuclear Generating Plant.
Specifically, the proposed changes would relocate the Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (RETS) requirenents from the TS to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (0DCM) or the Process Control Frogram (PCP), in accordance with the guidance of NRC Generic Letter 89-01, " Implementation of Programmatic Controls for Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications and Relocation of Procedural Details of RETS to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual or the Process Control Program," dated January 31, 1989. GL 89-01 stated that the staff would approve a TS amendment to delete RETS if the requirements would be relocated to the ODCM or PCP.
2.0 EVALVATION The proposed request incorporates programmatic controls in the Administrative Controls Section of the TS that satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 20.106, 40 CFR Part 190,10 CFR 50.36a and Appendix 1 to 10 CFR Part 5'); relocates the current specifications involving radioactive effluent monitoring instrumenta-tion the control of liquid and gaseous effluents, equipment requirements for liquid and gaseous effluents, radiological environmental monitoring, and radiological reporting details from the TS to the ODCH; relocates the definition of solidification and the current specifications on solid radioactive wastes to the PCP; simplifies the associated reporting requirements; simplifies the administrative controls for changes to the ODCH and PCP; adds record retention requirements for changes to the ODCH and PCP; and updates the definitions of the ODCH and PCP consistent with these changes.
The licensee plans to utilize the 10 CFR 50.59 process as the control mechanism for the relocated specifications, and has included requirements for 9205110248 920504 PDR ADOCK 05000302 P
l e.
review and acceptance by the Plant Review Committee (PRC) and approval by the Director, Nuclear Plant Operations (DNPO) prior to implementation.
This will t
allow the licensee to make changes to the specifications which will maintain conformance with Federal, State, and other applicable regulations and will not adversely impact the accuracy and reliability of effluent, dose, or setpoint t
calculations.
The implementing procedures for the relocated specifications will also be u ntrolled in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 and require PRC and DNPO review and approval prior to use.
The proposed chat.ges, as discussed above, are based on NRC GL 89-01 dated January 31, 1989.
These changes follow the guidance as specified in GL 89-01 for removing RETS to the ODCM or PCP, as appropriate.
Requirements for the contents of the RETS program are specified in Section 6 of the TS.
In addition, the changes do not alter the conditions or assumption's of any accident analysis, as stated in the CR-3 Updated fincl Safety Analysis Report.-
Therefore, the NRC staff finds the proposed changes to be acceptable.
4
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
Based upon the written notice of the proposed amendment, the Florida State official had no comments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendment involves changes in recordkeeping, resorting or administrative procedures or program requirements. Accordingly, tie amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has 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, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3)'the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
F. Rinaldi Date: May 4,1992
-.i
. _,