ML20128M617
| ML20128M617 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 07/03/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20128M608 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8507260031 | |
| Download: ML20128M617 (2) | |
Text
.
/[
jo,,
UNITED STATES
{
)et g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r.
s wA:HINGTON, D. C. 20656
\\,**.../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 75 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 letter dated August 30, 1984, Florida Power Corporation (FPC, the licensee) requested an amendment to the Technical Specifications (TSs) to replace the old remote shutdown system with the modified system implemented in accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix R.
Since the NRC staff has not yet developed criteria for operability and surveillance requirements for Appendix R-related remote shutdown equipment, the licensee requested by letter dated June 17, 1985, that the existing TSs be revised only to show the new location for instrumentation which is now in the new Remote Shutdown Panel.
Incorporation of the new remote shutdown system into the TSs will be evaluated in a separate SE.
, Evaluation The proposed revision to TS Table 3.3-9 showing the relocation of instrumentation involved in remote shutdown capability to the new Remote Shutdown Panel is consistent with the licensee's submittals on remote shutdown capability previously accepted by the NRC staff by letter dated January 6,1983.
No other changes to the TSs are involved.
Therefore, the staff finds the proposed TS change acceptable..
Environmental Consideration Tnis amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
We have determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). 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)
Nk bbo2 P
PDf<
i there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will k
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: July 3,1985 Principal contributor:
H. Silver A...