ML20248F246
| ML20248F246 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 10/02/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20248F093 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8910060298 | |
| Download: ML20248F246 (2) | |
Text
g; iM t
(
s 6
<,o f
UNITED STATES j
]
f
,e g
NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION g.
p
' WASHINGTON, D, C. 20555
%...../
^
l SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION l
\\
SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.121 TO FACILITY 0PERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-72 l
]
FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION. ET AL.
CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT NO. 3 NUCLEAit GENERATING PLANT j
DOCKET NO. 50-302 INTRODUCTION By letter dated June 12, 1989, Florida Power Corporation (FPC or the licensee)
F requested an arnendment to the Technical Specifications (TS) appendeo to facility Operating License No. DPR-72 for the Crystal River Unit No. 3 Nuclear Generating Plant (CR-3). The proposed amendment would add a new specification
-to address the use of hydrogen purge valves for containment depressurization during power operation.
- EVALUATION The normal function of the hydrogen purge valves (LRV-70, 71, 72, and 73) is to provide containment isolation for the hydrogen purge system. The configuration of. these valves prevents a single failure from preventing hydrogen purging during a postulated loss of coolant accident.
Furthermore; each valve is powered from a separate battery-backed vital bus; therefore, in the event of a loss of AC power, DC power would be available to operate the valve. Becau se these valves were not automatically actuated by the Engineered Safeguards Features Actuation System, they could not be opened during power operation without prior NRC approval. A modification was performed to actuate LRV-70, 71, 72, and 73 on an Engineered Safeguards Features Actuation System signal.
These valves are also actuated by a high radiation signal to ensure that CR-3 does not challenge the radioactive effluents discharge limits of 10 CFR Part 100.
The containment purge valves (AHV-1A, IB,10, and ID) would normally be used for depressurization of containment during power operations; however, detailed analysis of the purge valves has failed to conclusively demonstrate their ability to close during a large-break loss of coolant accident in time to prevent offsite doses from exceeding 10 CFR Part 100 limits.
Therefore, these valves are required to be locked shut during modes 1, 2, 3, and 4.
The hydrogen purge valves will close within 2 seconds against a differential pressure of 80 psid at an operating temperature of 670 degrees F.
These conditions meet or exceed the requirements for the containment purge valves as stipulated in paragraph 5.3.3 of the CR-3 Final Safety Analysis Report.
i 891006o298 891002 PDR ADOCK 05000302 P
PDC 1
n
{.*-
' l
SUMMARY
The new specification will ensure limited use of the hydrogen purge valves, and is consistent with current Staricard Technical Specification 3.6.1.8.6 (NUREG-04S2).
It represents an additions 1 restriction on plant operations which is necessary to ensure time periods with direct access from the containment atmosphere to the outside atmosphere are minimized. Therefore, based on our review, the changes proposed in this request are adequate and acceptable.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION This amenament involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and adds surveillance requirements. 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 amendinent 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) 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 comon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: October 2,1989 Principal Contributor:
~
G. Wunder w______-____
_