ML20137W582
| ML20137W582 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 09/18/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137W566 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8510040344 | |
| Download: ML20137W582 (2) | |
Text
l g* **49'o UNITED STATES i
8
~g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
$ glw)j
- g WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 81 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-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 Crystal River Unit 3 (CR-3) Technical Specifications (TSs) to permit the reactor vessel head seismic instrumentation to be inoperable during operating Modes 5 and 6.
The existing TSs require all seismic instrumentation, including the triaxial peak accelograph mounted on the reactor vessel head, to be operable at all times.
Evaluation The operability of the seismic instrumentation ensures that sufficient capability is available to promptly determine the magnitude of a seismic event so that the response of those features important to safety may be evaluated. This capability is required to permit comparison of the measured response to that used in the design basis for the facility.
In addition to the vessel head accelograph, two other triaxial peak accelographs and three triaxial time-histroy accelographs are installed at various locations in the plant and are required to be operable at all times.
These instruments will provide the necessary seismic information.
In Mode 6, the vessel head is either removed from the vessel or not securely bolted to the vessel and the accelograph is removed from the head.
In Mode 5, in many cases the accelograph is of necessity not in place on the vessel head. This accelograph would provide no useful information in either case and would be returned to service prior to entering Mode 4.
Therefore, the requirement that this instrument be operable in Modes 5 and 6 is neither necessary nor feasible, and deleting this equipment would have no adverse effect on plant safety.
Environmental Consideration This 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 8510040344 850918 PDR ADOCK 05000302 P
PDR i
l
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) 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:
September 18, 1985 Principal contributor:
J. L. Mathis
/
e 9
t 4
_