ML20133D347

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 155 to License DPR-72

ML20133D347
Person / Time
Site:	Crystal River
Issue date:	01/06/1997
From:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20133D338	List: ML20133D335 ML20133D341 ML20133D347
References
NUDOCS 9701090150
Download: ML20133D347 (3)

Text

. - ~ _ - - - - . - - - . - _- - . _ - . - . - - . . - - - - --. - . - - - -

• ' l

, p+2nsg i g k

• UNITED STATES 1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 3008H001 g...../ SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION LICENSE AMENDMENT FOR ESAS SURVEILLANCE  :

CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT 3 DOCKET NO. 50-302

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated September 23, 1996, the Florida Power Corporation (FPC or the licensee) proposed changes to the Crystal River Unit 3 (CR3) Technical

, Specifications (TS). The proposed changes involve deleting a note in the l

Surveillance Requirement (SR) for the Engineered Safeguard Actuation System (ESAS) Automatic Actuation Logic. The NOTE in the TS SR 3.3.7.1 states: "When ,

an ESAS automatic actuation logic matrix is placed in an inoperable status l l solely for performance of this Surveillance, entry into associated Conditions

! and Required Actions may be delayed for up to 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />, provided the associated

! ES [ Engineered Safeguards) function is maintained." The CR3 design of ESAS l is such that when the automatic actuation logic for a particular ES function is placed in " test," the associated components for either the "A" or "B" ES train are blocked from actuation in response to a valid automatic or manual actuation. Thus, the NOTE does not provide the relief intended and is not  ;

required. Therefore, the licensee proposes to delete the note, and enter into applicable TS Conditions during the performance of the ESAS test and bypassing of the associated ES function.

1 j 2.0 DISCUSSION The channel functional test for the ESAS automatic actuation logic is performed by an ES function. While the actuation matrices are tested, the ES 1 function is bypassed. When "one or more automatic actuation logic matrices  !

inoperable," TS 3.3.7.1, Condition A, requires to place the associated '

component (s) in the ES configuration or declare them inoperable within l 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />. However, during an ESAS Surveillance and the ESAS automatic actuation  !

logic matrix is placed in an inoperable status solely for performance of the surveillance, a NOTE in TS SR 3.3.7.1 provides relief from the TS 3.3.7.1 Required Actions. The NOTE allows up to 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> for entry into associated Conditions and Required Actions may be delayed, provided the associated ES function is maintained.

The CR3 system design and testing method are such that while the three ES l functions (high pressure injection, low pressure injection, and reactor l building isolation and cooling) are tested, the associated end devices, will '

. not respond to either an automatic or manuai actuation of the ESAS function.

! Thus the CR3 system design and testing method could not maintain the associated ES function and, therefore, could not utilize the intended relief '

I in the NOTE for delaying the required actions for up to 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />. When performing the Surveillance, the licensee proposes to declare automatic actuation logic matrices inoperable and, accordingly, to enter the TS 3.3.7.1, ENCLOSURE 9701090150 970106 PDR ADOCK 05000302 P PDR

l i

2 Required Action to restore the ES configuration within the allowed I hour time. The licensee states that I hour is adequate to complete testing of the l individual test gr~ups, including the time needed to assess potential l equipment failures. In the event of a failure of an individual ES actuation I

matrix, the affected equipment would be placed in the ES configuration or declared inoperable until repaired while the remaining matrices are returned to an OPERABLE configuration. The proposed TS is consistent with the required action for TS 3.3.7.1 and therefore, deleting the NOTE in SR 3.3.7.1 is acceptable.

3.0 STATE CONSULTATION

l Based upon the written notice of the proposed amendments, the Florida State official had no comments.

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

The amendments change requirements with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defineri in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes the surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released l offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative l occupational radiation exposure. The Comission has previously issued a l proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards l consideration, and there has been no public coment on such finding (61 FR 55034). Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR El.22(c)(9). Pursuant to l 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.

l

5.0 CONCLUSION

Based on review of the proposed changes as discussed above, the staff has concluded that the proposed TS changes to delete the NOTE to Surveillance Requirements 3.3.7.1 are acceptable.

The Comission 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 i activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Principle Contributor: Sang Rhow, HICB i

Date: January 6, 1996 i

)

. o

• l

Mr. Percy M. Beard, Jr. CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT NO. 3  ;

Florida Power Corporation GENERATING PLANT l 1

l l cc:

l Mr. R. Alexander Glenn Chairman l Corporate Counsel Board of County Commissioners l Florida Power Corporation Citrus County l MAC-ASA 110 North Apopka Avenue l P.O. Box 14042 Iverness, Florida 34450-4245 St. Petersburg, Florida 33733-4042 l Mr. Larry C. Kelley, Director

! Mr. Bruce J. Hickle, Director Nuclear Operations Site Support Nuclear Plant Operations (kA2C) (SA2A)

Florida Power Corporation Florida Power Corporation Crystal River Energy Complex Crystal River Energy Complex 15760 W. Power Line Street 15760 W. Power Line Street Crystal River, Florida 34428-6708 Crystal River, Florida 34428-6708 l Mr. Robert B. Borsum Senior Resident Inspector i B&W Nuclear Technologies Crystal River Unit 3 ,

1700 Rockville Pike, Suite 525 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l Rockville, Maryland 20852 6745 N. Tallahassee Road Crystal River, Florida 34428 l

, Mr. Bill Passetti l Office of Radiation Control Mr. Gary Boldt Department of Health and Vice President - Nuclear Production Rehabilitative Services Florida Power Corporation 1317 Winewood Blvd. Crystal River Energy Complex Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700 15760 W. Power Line Street Crystal River, Florida 34428-6708

, Attorney General l Department of Legal Affairs Regional Administrator, Region II j The Capitol U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l

Tallahassee, Florida 32304 101 Marietta Street N.W., Suite 2900 l Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Mr. Joe Myers, Director Division of Emergency Preparedness Mr. Kerry Landis Department of Community Affairs U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2740 Centerview Drive 101 Marietta Street, N.W. Suite 2900 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 Atlanta, Georgia 30323-0199

-. ,