ML19317G368

ETS Change Requests 3 & 6 Re ETS 1.1,2.4,3.1,3.2, & 5.3 Through 5.6,correcting Typographical Errors,Consolidating Reporting Requirements & Deleting Inapplicable Sampling Stations from Preoperational Program Element

ML19317G368
Person / Time
Site:	Crystal River
Issue date:	07/21/1977
From:	FLORIDA POWER CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML19317G367	List: ML19317G366 ML19317G368
References
TAC-08886, TAC-08887, TAC-42054, TAC-8886, TAC-8887, NUDOCS 8003030770
Download: ML19317G368 (62)

Text

-

.

i N.

,

t

'*

• T'ECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST No. 3 (ETS)

() Replace the pages indicated below with the attached replacement pages.

Justification for these changes is given in the following sections.

Page Replacement Page Table of Contents Table of Contents 11 11 111 iii 1-1 1-1 1-3 1-3 1-4 . 1-4 2-4 2-4 2-5 2-5 2-6 2-6 4

2-9 2-9 2-11 2-11 2-14 2-14 2-19 2-19 2-20 2-20 3-1 3-1

• 3-2 3-2 3-3 3-3 3-9 3-9 3-10 3-10 3-11 3-11 3-12 3-12 3-13 3-13 3-14 3-14 3-15 3-15 3-16 3-16 '

3-17 3-17 3-18 3-18 3-21 3-21 3-22 3-22 3-25 3-25 3-27 3-27 3-28 3-28 5-1 5-1 5-2 5-2 5-3 5-3 5-4 5-4 5-4a 5-4b

.5-5 5-5 5-6 5-6 5-8 5-8 5-10 5-10 5-10A 5-11 5-11

,

8003 939)70

. _ - _-

, -

- _

.

. k.

. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REOUEST NO. 34 (ETS)

.

• Reason for Proposed Change The following changes correct typographical errors, include missing information, and delete information which is not applicable.

1. Table of Contents, Section 5.4 (page 11) - Correct the title to read " Action to be Taken if Limiting Condition for Operation is Exceeded."

2. List of Tables, Number 3.2-5 (page 111) - Correct the title to read

" Lower Limit of Detection Capabilities of Environmental Sample Analysis."

3. Specification 1.16 (page 1-3) - Delete the definition. There is no requirement in the ETS to calculate the Dose Equivalent I-131.

(Also delete Table of Contents, Section 1.16 (page 1).)

4. Specification 2.4, Obj ective D (page 2-4) - Correct the Objective to read "The annual total quantity of all radiciodines and radioactive material in particulate forms with half-lives greater than eight days above background from all reactors at a site..." This wcs the original objective and the words were inadvertently deletcd during the numerous drafts.

5. Specification 2.4.1.K (page 2-6) - Correct the second sentence to read

" Prior to tr. king samples from a monitoring tank, or laundry and hot shower su=p, at least two liquid content volumes shall be circulated."

The name of the su=p was incorrectly inserted in ETS and culy the actual waste liquid volume should be circulated.

6. Bases Specification 2.4.1.G - After " Regulatory Guide 1.21", add

"(Rev. 1, 6/74) . " This is the latest revision of the Regulatory Guide.

7. Specification 3.1 (page 3-1) - In the second paragraph, correct "4 short-term intensive survaillance program elements" to "3 short-term intensiv~e surveillance program elements." The fourth program element was moved to Section 4.1.

8. Specification 3.1 (page 3-2) - In the third paragraph, correct the third and fourth lines to read "(1) Benthos in discharge area,

(2) Marsh grasses, and (3) I=pingement on intake screens." The thermal plume model verification was moved to Section 4.1.

9. Table 3.2-1 (pages 3-9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14) - On page 3-9:

Correct the Table Number from "3.2.1" to "3.2-1;" Correct the heading of the rightmost column to "95 Percentile Value"; in the Nuclide column under Water, Precipitation: Change 2n-54 to Zn-65 and add Mn-54 under it with "(a)" in the Median Value and 95 Percentile Value columns for Mn-54; Correct Footnote (a) to end "...the median value is assumed to be the LLD..."

l l

,

10. On paga 3-10: ( Median Vclu3 fer C;-137 in Se~ Vat:r chnuld b2

"(c)", n3t "9 (s) . (Th10 u ed to raad "(o)", was incorrcctly typed

, ca "9a)" and was incurrcerly cerrcettd to "9(3)".).; delat2 th2 cprca

. . in the units designation for the 95 percentile value of Ra-226 in Sea Water; Correct the units for Gross S in Air from "pCi/kg" to "pC1/m3" Correct Footnote (a) from "See pg. 3-10" to "See pg. 3-9."

On pages 3-11, 12, 13, and 14: Correct Footnote (a) from "See pg. 3-10" to "See pg. 3-9."

11. Table 3.2-2 (pages 3-16, 3-17) - In the column headed " Analysis Routine,"

correct

"

all analyses titled " Extended y - Spectral Analysis" to read

- Spectral Analysis." This correction was to have been made when Table 3.2-5 was changed from an MDC table which specified bothy -Spectral and Extended Y-Spectral Analyses, to an LLD table which does not.

12. Table 3.2-3 (page 3-18) - In the column headed "* Critical Radionuclides" for the Pathway " Air Submersion", correct "XE-133" to read "Xe-133."

13. Table 3.2-5A (page 3-21) - Add Table note Mark "(a)" to the Table Number; change Table Note Marks (b) from the "LLD Analysis" colu=n to the " Water [pC1/kg]" column; Add Table Note (d) to the Table Notes and Table Note Mark (d) to the heading "LLD Analysis"; Ad'd LLD's for Ba-140 and Ra-226 for Total Deposition; Correct the unit notations for " Soil" and " Total Deposition." These changes oake the table more correct and complete; Table Note (d) was left out and it is required by Specification 3.2.2.

14. Table 3.2-5B (page 3-22) Add Table Note Mark "(a)" to the Table Number;

-

change Table Note Marks (b) from the "LLD Analysis" colu=n to the " Water

[pC1/kg]" column; Add Table' Note (d) to the Table Notes and Table Note Mark (d) to the heading "LLD Analysis". Delete columns headed "So'il" .

and " Total Deposition"; Correct Table Note (c) to read "K-40 is reported in g/kg." These changes make the table more correct and complete. Table Note (d) was lef t out and it is required by Specification 3.2.2; the State of Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitation Services does not per-form Soil and Total Deposition analyses, therefore it is not applicable to have these LLD's in the Table.

15. Figure 3.2-3 (page 3-25) - Correct Control Station C28 to C27.

16. Specifications 5.3.5.4.3, and 5.5.3.b (pages 5-3, 5, and 6) - The functions and responsibilities of the NGRC are more clearly spelled out in the new Specification 5.3. This Specification is modeled after Appendix A Technical Specification 6.5.2. Because of the new expanded Specification 5.3, Specifications 5.4.3 and 5.5.3.6 are revised so that they are in line with the NGRC responsibilities.

17. Specification 5.6.1.3 (page 5-8) - Af ter the pv. rase " Regulatory Guide 1.21" (there are three), insert the phrase "(dev. 1, 6/74)." See Item 6.

18. Specification 5.6.3.B (page 5-11) - Correct this Specification to read

" Request for changes in environ;antal technical specifications shall be submitted to the Director, Division of Reactor Licensing for review and authorization. The request shall include an evaluation of the environ-mental impact of the proposed change and a supporting benefit - cost analysis." This correction will make Specification 5.6.3.B consistent

[ with Regulatory Guide 4.8 (Rev. O, 12/75), " Acceptable Wording for l Specification 5.6.3.B."

!

_

'

s ,

d

-

19r Sp cification -1.1 (pcg21-1) - Corrcet tha "Ona par chif t" frIquency to read "At least once per 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />." This is to make the definition

.

.

consistent with the Appendix A ~ Technical Specifications and it does not affect the ETS as there are no "One per shift" requirements.

Add " Biweekly - At least once per 15 days." This is to define the biweekly frequency specified in Table 2.4-1.

20. Specification 1.10 (page 1-3) - Change the specification to read:

"...and within two tiles of the Point of Discharge." instead of

". . .and with two mi_es of the north discharge dike." There is no north discharge dike per se and the Point of Discharge is what rs originally meant.

21. Specification 3.2.2 (page 3-27) - Change the second sentence in the second paragraph to read "The control station value for each media, radioisotope and station will be defined as either (1) the upper 95 percentile value from the preoperational program if it is greater than the LLD or (2) the upper 95 percentile value from operational stations outside of the plant's influence, whichever is smaller."

The "%" was included incorrectly so it should be deleted. The change to the first half of the "or" statement is necessary because many values less than the LLD (both Median Values and 95 Percentile Values) were included in Table 3.2-1 for completeness of the results. In fact, 47 of the 134 values actually given are below the LLD's in Tables 3.2-5A and B. As can be seen by the 240 times Footnote (a) was used, it was not meant for values less than the LLD to be used in determining the control station values. This change presents this fact more concisely.

22. Bases Specification 2.4.2.A (page 2-14) - Correct the sixth paragraph to read: "For radioiodines and radioactive material in particulate form with half-lives greater than eight days, the most restrictive location is a garden located 7650 meters in the E direction (vent X/Q=4.2x10-8 sec/m3 ),"

Initial results of an aerial garden survey performed in August, 1976, showed a garden in the NE direction at 4800 meters. Subsequent terrestrial investi-gation showed no active garden at this location; the ETS was never corrected.

The final aerial garden survey confirmed the existence of the garden in the E direction at 7650 meters. Since the NE location was never actually sampled, a letter per Specification 3.2.1.2 is not applicable to make this change.

An Evaluation of the Environmental Impact of Proposed Change This item has no impact on the environment around CR #3 as it only corrects the ETS to what should and is being performed and is not presented correctly in the ETS.

A Benefit-cost Analysis of Proposed Change Because this item has no impact on the environment around CR #3, a benefit-cost analysis is not applicable.

n '

-

,

i

.

.

• s TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST NO. 3b (ETS)

Reasons for Proposed Change These changes will put all the non-routine reporting requirements in the Non-routine Reporting Specification where they belong and not in the Limiting Conditions for Operation Specification. To consolidate and coordinate the routine and non-routine reporting requirements in Specifications 5.6.1. A(2), 5.6.2.C(l), and 5.6.2.C(2):

1. Specification 2.4.1.H (pages 2-5, 6) - Change to read "If the cumulative release of radioactive materials in liquid effluent, excluding tritium and dissolved gases, exceeds 2.5 C1/ reactor /

calencar quarter, a report shall be made in accordance with Section 5.6.2.C(1) .

2. Specification 2.4.2.C (page 2-11) - Change to read "Should any of the conditions in 2.4.2.C(l), (2), or (3) listed below exist, a report shall be made in accordance with Section 5.6.2.C(l)."

3. Specification 3.2.4 (page 3-27) - Specification 3.2.4 should be the " Reporting Requirements" paragraph just before the " Milk and Green Leafy Vegetables" paragraph.

The four paragraphs under Milk and Green Leafy Vegetables should become Sections 5.6.2.C(2)b, c, d, and e, respectively.

This will place the requirements in the non-routine reporting section.

4. Specification 3.1.4 - Correct "Section 5.6.2" to "Section 5.6.2.C(2)" to better identify the non-routine reporting section for the radiological environmental monitoring.

5. Specification 5.6.2.C(2)b - Correct " average concentration" to

" average I-131 concentration" to be consistent with the Specification 5.6.2.C(2)c.

6. Specification 5.6.2.C (2) d - Change " quarter" to " year" to be consistent with Table 3.2-2 because vegetables are only collected semiannually per the new census requirements.

Also delete "in lieu of milk" because of the new census requirements.

7. Specification 5.6.2.C (2) e - Delete "in lieu of milk" because s of the new census requirements.

8. Specification 3.2.4 (page 3-28) - Delete the External Radiation Section as it is included in the radiological monitoring program already covered in this section.

9. Specification 5.6.2.C (2) (page 5-10) - Change the paragraph present under "(2)" to "(2)a."

10. Table of Contents (page 11) - Change Section 3.2.4 to " Reporting Requirements."

r , ,

,

l l

i

,

.An Evaluation of the Environmental Impact of Proposed Changes Items 1-4 and 8-10 have no impact on the environment around CR #3 as they only restructure the ETS so that all non-routine reporting requirements are j

in Section 5.6.2.C(2).

l Item 5 has no impact on the environment around CR #3 as it makes it clear

'

that it is the I-131 concentration that is being specified.

Items 6 and 7 have no impact on the environment around CR #3. They only complete the changeover to the new census requirement of Section 3.2.1 from the old specification that required milk sampling and then vegetable sampling in lieu of milk if milk was not available.

A Benefit-cost Analysis of Proposed Changes Because these items have no impact on the environment around CR #3, a benefit-cost analysis is not applicable.

.

i i

I

?

.

>

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST NO. 3c (ETS)

Reason for Proposed Change This change deletes sampling stations from a preoperational program element which is no longer applicable.

Table 3.2-2 (page 3-15) - Change the Sample Stations-for Sea Water from "C01, C09, C13, Cl4H, Cl4M,- C140" to "C01, C09, C13,

.C14G." Sample Stations C14H and C14M (See Figure 3.2-3) are a holdover from a preoperational program element that has been-deleted. Since sampling would be on a monthly frequency and the discharge canal water has a residence time of approximately 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />, no meaningful long-term information could probably be obtained from these stations. Also delete the redundant " Monthly" frequency.

An Evaluation of the Environmental I=oact of Proposed Change A buildup of radioactive effluent in the discharge canal is not considered probable because of the turbulence (mixing) of the discharged water and the short reisdence time in the canal.

In fact if the sa=ples happened to be taken after a r21 ease, it would result in a higher than normal canal activity and this would be detrimental to the surveillance program. .

Therefore, the deleting of Sample Stations Cl4H and Cl4M from the monthly seawater sampling program will have no impact on the environment.

A Benefit-Cost Analysis of Proposed Change Because this item has no impact on the environment around CR #3, a benefit-cost analysis is not applicable.

.

1 i

-

_ _ _ -

'

f

'

, TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST No. 3d (ETS)-

. .

Reason for Proposed Change This change more correctly defines the circumstances for which a monitoring requirement is to be performed.

~

Table 2.4-2 (page 2-19) . - Substitute "(5)"-for "(2)" as a note on line C and add "(5)" as a note to line D.

Table 2.4-2, Note (2), (page 2-20) - Change the note to read: "During containment purge operation analysis shall be performed upon the reactor building . vent effluent following ascent into MODE 1."

Table 2.4-2, (pag'e 2-20) - Add Note (5) as follows: "(5) Analysis shall be performed upon the condenser air ejector effluent following the detection of a steam generator leak."

Modification of Note (2) and the addition of Note (5) will clarify the phrase "similar operational occurances which could alter the mixture of radionucliden." These are events that could alter the mixture of radionuclides and they should therefore be spelled out and not just alluded to in the note.

An Evaluation of the Environmental Impact of Proposed Change It is desirable to define as fully as possible any monitoring requirement as to insure the correct monitoring is carried out. To leave the contioring requirement as a nebulus term is to invite misunderstanding and misinter-pretation. The only environment impact that this change would have is if there are other similar operational occurrences that would not be monitored and lead to an alteration of the mixture of radionuclides released to the environment. However, because of the monitoring requirements

, placed on the points of release to the environment, any alteration would be quickly identified and accounted for in the gaseous effluent release averages. Therefore, the impact to the environment around CR #3 is expected to be non-existent.

A Benefit-cost Analysis of Proposed Change Because this item is not expected to have an impact on the environment around CR #3, a benefit-cost analysis is not applicable.

.

______._

~ .-

.

"

- TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST NO. 3e (ETS)

Reason for Proposed Change Revisions in corporate organization are not reflected in the existing specification.

In Section 5 (pages 5-1 to 5-6) change " Senior Vice President -

System Operations" to " Senior Vice President - Engineering and Construction", " Nuclear Plant Superintendent" to " Nuclear Plant Manager", " System Operations Department" to " Power Production Department" , " Manager Nuclear Operations" to " Manager Nuclear Support Services."

An Evaluation of the Environmental Impact of Proposed Change These items have no impact on the environment around CR #3 as they only correct the ETS to reflect the organizational change.

A Benefit-cost Analysis of Proposed Change Because these items have no impact on the environment around CR #3, a benefit-cost analysis is not applicable.

.

0 4

.v-

-- .,

, TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REOUEST NO. 3f (ETS)

-

, .

Reason'for Proposed Change An eastward extension of the outer bay is proposed, which is necessary to meet the definition of " Outer Bay" given in the Environmental Technical Specifications. That definition states: "the outer basin as shown in Figure 1.1-2 in which the plankton ecosystem becomes as important as the bottom ecosystem." According to the preoperational data, the planktonic

• ecosystem raches this level of importance in Basin 2 (the eastern edge of the proposed extension; Exhibit 1).

Change area map (Figure 1.1-2, page 1-4), to the configuration shown. .

Modification of the area map in this manner would allow placement of the zooplankton station within the influence of the thermal plume. Sampling will be conducted at a station sampled during the preoperational study near the end of the south discharge spoil bank (see Exhibit 2). A station located at this site within the area af fected by the thermal plume would yield more information than a station icoated in the original " Outer Basin,"

which is outside the area affected by the thermal plume.

An Evaluation of the Environmental Impact of Proposed Change .

This item would change the ETS to a form which would, more completely, detect changes related to operation of CR #3 in the zooplankton community. This increase in information on the effects of CR #3 on the zooplanton community would accrue from the placement of the sampling station within the area of influence of the thermal plume. Slight loss of information will occur-since the original station will be eliminated. However, the lost infomration would be of less value, in relation to the effect of CR #3 on the environment, than the information gained by the proposed station.

A Benefit-cost Analysis of Proposed Change The benefit which will accrue fro = this change involves the addition of 1

pertinent data dealing with the effects of CR #3 on the zooplankton co=munity structure in the area of influence of the thermd pl'ae. There will be no additional cost since one station will be replaced by another. ,

l l

l l

l l

l

_

l

- - - --

g .

. .

. . .:

s,s

. .  !

T f, ..

.

.

e

. ,

j'

- -

.

A_ y ' .

• b u, *$ .', '

.'

& s 8 #

l  ?

.

p

,a"

% ,;

'

. -;

'*

-

4 e ;T

,.... 1 h' D,"[

,

... . s ,

V cs -

D *

,

O q gpi '

'

1. \ -

h'

~

%%

'

.

,P d sn

'

1 6 , y G h

, .

s

'

s t

/ f o

c.

• a _% * ") ,

-

. o #f *% .4 fa,$ /

...

.

,

k

-

b(

f

??jIll' 7(

, 5 ,

{

1 Y

, x -s;u M 4

J4, .

,,

y[_~

y

'

%a bg h

g' f o . /

~

-

=

I 2 a

. N I

e

)

'

% l

.

.I N e o

'

,r k 4e i .

h t k k

! 2 [{i R D. k a >

. . . - _ . . . . . . _. - __

E'

.

f V!;t N ?

,,

,

. . : ,. :* g,.. ; p*~~.i-V7%$l J N ,e g ll r

- - ,

2 .,e o <

'.t4 .

om . .

?h .  ?~ , k A

.'

s  % i = j.

O ' ~ ;: Q <r ,

. -

. ,

.

• Y

,

k

'

i g

%s, d .-

%%~ l T' *

.

fr., . 'y'. .

-

,a, $ ;, .

D i -. yf my '

% , f- )!

9 s.

% Y S&'

/ ...,

...

o gO sm N ',

%

. o'$ .?

'

jd, ,' N ,

.  % .

i.y , j

,,...

-

e u

s, .

. ,

4, '

f*~  ;

'

$ -  %

-

o . / .

>

0

"-

,b  :

.

'

,

o<

l 3- t n

-

~ (JyN 9 ~

Q l

• .. H '

I j X

r

.Qs W O jE

.._. n -

- - -.- ..-. . . -.. ..... . . . . . . . . . . -

-

. -

.

-.. -

'

,

.

t

. .

- TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE REQUEST 3h (ETS)

Reasons for Proposed Change A critical review of the preoperational data will adequately determine the

" number, frequency and location" of the stations to be sampled in the operational studies. -As presently stated, the " number, frequency _and location" of operational stations would be determined "from a statistical analysis." Preoperational data does not lend itself to such statistical interpretation and, 'therefore, the use of stat 1stical analysis for this task would be inappropriate.

"Preoperational research" should be substituted for "research presently being" because the preoperational studies were completed in 1974.

Proposed change shall read: (page 3-3, lines 1-3)

". . . number, frequency and location of samples to be taken shall be determined from a critical review of the results of the pre-operational research conducted in this area. Samples shall be stratified by macrophyte..."

An Evaluation of-the Environmental Incact of Proposed Change This item will have no additional impact on the environment. The use of statistics in this case is inappropriate, since a critical review of the preoperational studies will yield an adequate number of stations.

.

A Benefit-cost Analysis of Proposed Change There would be no benefit in using statistical analyses to determine the number, frequency and location of the benthic community structure stations.

Use of statistical analyses for this purpose would involve a greater cost than a critical review of the data and as suggested above no benefit would accrue. Therefore, the overall cost will be reduced if the proposed change is approved and the acceptability of the program will not be reduced.

.

- -

, ,,,,,w. - - -

.

.

e-

-

.

,

, TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No.

1.0 DEFINITIONS 1.1 Frequency 1-1 1.2 Gross (S,y) Analysis 1-1 1.3 Point of Discharge (POD) 1-1 1.4 ST Across the Condenser 1-1 1.5 Unit 3 Mixing Zone 1-1 1.6 Emergency Need for Power 1-1 1.7 Abnormal Power Operation 1-1 1.8 Known Radioactive Source 1-3 1.9 Intake Area 1-3 1.10 Discharge Ares 1-3 1.11 Inner Bay 3 1.12 Outer Bay 1-3 1.13 Channel Calibration 1-3 1.14 Channel Check 1-3 1.15 Channel Functional Test 1-3 1

2.0 LIMITING CONDITIONS FOR OPERATION 2.1 Ther a1 2-1 2.1.1 Maximum AT Across Condenser 2-1 2.1.2 Maximum D'ischarge Temperature 2-2 2.2 Hydraulic 2-3 2.3 Chemical 2-3 2.3.1 Biocides 2-3 2.3.2 Corrosion Inhibitors 2-4 2.4 Radioactive Effluents 2-4 2.4.1 Liquid Waste Effluents 2-5 2.4.2 Gaseous Waste Effluents 2-9 2.4.3 Solid Waste Handling and Disposal 2-16 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE 3.1 Nonradiological Surveillance 3-1 3.1.1 Benthos in Discharge Area 3-2 3.1.2 Marsh Grass 3-3 3.1.3 Impingement on Intake Screens 3-4 3.1.4 General Ecological Survey 3-4 3.1.5 Chemical-Industrial Waste Water Treatment System 3-5

.

_ . . -

.

-

7 .,

'

1 1

.

,

11 s TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd)

Page No.

'3.2 Radiological Environmental Monitoring 3-5 3.2.1 Milk and Green Leafy Vegetables Census ~ 3-26 3.2.2 Media Other than External Radiation 3-27 3.2.3 External Radiation 3-27

-3.2.4 Reporting Requirements 3 (

4.0 SPECIAL SURVEILLANCE, RESEARCH, OR STUDY ACTIVITIES 4.1 Thermal Plume Determination During Unit 3 Operation 4-1 4.2 Intake Velocity Determination 4-2 4.3 Study of Erosion in the Discharge System 4-2 5.0 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS 5.1 Organization ,

5-1 5.2 Responsibility 5-1 5.3 Review and Audit 5-3 i 5.4 Action to Be Taken If Limiting Condition for Operation is j Exceeded 5-5 5.5 Procedures 5-5 5.6 Plant Reporting Requirements 5-6 5.6.1 Routine Reports 5-6 5.6.2 Non-routine Reports 5-8 5.6.3 Changes 5-11

. 5.7 Records Retention 5-11

'

5.8 Special Requirements 5-11

_ _

'

y

.

.

.

iii LIST OF TABLES No. Page No.

2.4-1 Radioactive Liquid Sampling and Analysis 2-17 2.4-2 Radioactive Gaseous Waste Sampling and Analysis Frequency 2-19 2.4-3 PWR-Liquid Waste System: Location of Process. ,

and Effluent Monitors and Samples Required by Technical Specifications 2-21 2.4-4 PWR-Gaseous Waste System: Location of Process and Effluent Monitors and Samples Required by Technical Specifications 2-22 4

2.4-5 Gamma and Beta Dose Factors for Crystal River Unit 3 2-23 3.2-1 Su= mary of Preoperational Environmental

.

Surveillance Results 1971-1974 3-9 3.2-2 General Pathway Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program 3-15 3.2-3 Critical Pathway Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program 3-18 3.2-4 Operational Sample Station Locations 3-19 3.2-5 Lower Limit of Detection Capabilities of Environmental Sample Analysis 3-21 5.6-1 Environmental Radiological Monitoring Program Summary 5-9 l

1 l

1 l

l l

l l

1

- .- . -. . - . , ..--l

-

,

.

1-1

'

.

3.0 Definitions The following terms are defined for uniform interpretation of the Environmental Technical Specifications for Crystal River Unit 3.

1.1 Frecuency - Terms used to specify frequency are defined as follows:

One per shift - At least once per 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />.

Daily - At least once per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.

Weekly - At least once per 7' days.

Biweekly - At least once per 15 days.

Monthly _- At least once per 31 days.

Quarterly - At least once.per 92 days.

Semiannually - At least once per 6 months.

.

A maximum allowable extension for each surveillance requirement shall

'

not exceed 25% of the surveillance interval.

1.2 Gross (8.y) Analysis - Radioactivity measurements of gross beta or gross beta in conjunction with gross gamma as defined in Regulatory Guide 1.21.

1.3 Point of Discharge (POD) - The intersection of the discharge canal and the original bulkhead line as shown on Figure 1.1-1.

1.4 AT Across the Condenser - The average temperature difference between the inlet and outlet of Unit 3 condenser boxes. -

1.5 Unit 3 Mixing Zone - The enclosed area of the discharge canal bounded by the eastern end of the canal and the cable chase from Units 1 and 2 by crossing the canal.

1.6 Emergency Need for Power - Any event causing authorized Federal officials to require or request that the Florida Power Corporation supply electricity to points within or without the State or other

,

emergencies declared by State, County, or Municipal authorities

'

during which an uninterrupted supply of electric power is vital to public health and safety.

,

1.7 Abnormal Power Ooeration - The operation of Crystal River Unit 3 beyond these technical specifications due to the Emergency Need for Power.

r

!

- - - , , . -

.

.

. -

1-3 1.8 Known Radioactive Source - A calibration source which is traceable to the National Bureau of Standards radiation measurement system and is capable of reproducible geometry.

1.9 Intake Area - The intake canal and all of the water area south of the north intake dike and within two miles of the west tip of the south intake dike.

1.10 Discharge Area - The discharge canal and all of the water area north of the south discharge dike and within two miles of the Point of Discharge. .

'

1.11 Inner Bay - An area as shown in Figure 1.1-2 which is five feet or less in depth composed of a mixture of grassy bottoms, oyster associa-tions, algal bottoms and areas of sand and mud.

1.12 Outer Bay - The outer basin as shown in Figure 1.1-2 in which the planktonic ecosystem becomes as important as the bottom ecosystems.

1.13 Channel Calibration - The adjustment, as necessary, of the channel output such that it responds with necessary range and accuracy to-known values of the parameter which the channel monitors. The channel calibration shall encompass the entire channel including the sensor and alarm and/or trip functions, and shall include the channel func-tional test. Channel calibration may be performed by any series of sequential, overlapping or total channel steps such that the entire channel is calibrated.

1.14 Channel Check - The qualitative assessment of channel behavior during operation by observation. This determination shall include, where possible, comparison of the channel indication and/or status with other indications and/or status derived from independent instrument channels measuring the same parameter.

1.15 Channel Functional Test - The injection of a simulated signal into the channel as close to the primary sensor as practicable to verify operability including alarm and/or trip functions.

l 1

i

%

- 1-4 4

ee r

-

ano i*

' * * :!

A == ,.,.

.

'

.

, .

.

".e.*

("'

• e 4

<^.". o y/ N 't."

V =*

I" ,

i t

f....

('

2

,,',,' E t"7 ~ "t '

3,

.: * \

• p E *, 1 I s t

• .,

b ;'g aE \ e d

= lrl:

i, e f

i 5 .k

.

5 \

bl

-\

,q tt 0 $

e I \ 6 82

\ \ g v- u

• • 8 \\ U 0 N

\\ to\

}\) ,

6 h (*t '., \' I=

o

\s Lo

\

\ , O o

%# ,,

o $

g* " \ -

, \ s.

m

\.N ,1

'

.

I s M

, .

"

\

g

\ p Y

• 1,2 4 e

.. m 1 s' E kk ,', '.,, ,. c

",

i,\\ ,. . -

>

n

• g

• \\*,f,. ;., e ,,

,.

. r ,,

6 \ \s

%\\u ' '-,'. O' \.

31

\\\ -

','1 t\\',.- 'L

'?

\\ c'.', ,

.$

\

O '**

,,

\\ se *

,

_ . _ _ _

_. _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _

\\ ,. .e.

.

4

- -

2-4 water box is being chlorinated, a sample is taken from the outlet water box, analyzed for residual chlorine (free and combined), and the results are recorded on a circular recorder. Samples are auto-matically changed by solenoid valves in accordance with the sequence of the chlorine generatica system. This system provides a continuous record of chlorine residual in each outlet water box.

2.3.2 Corrosion Inhibitors No chromates shall be used.

.

2.4 RADIOACTIVE EFFLUENTS Objective: To define the limits and conditions for the controlled release of radioactive: materials in liquid and gaseous effluents to the environs to ensure that these releases are as low as reasonably achievable. These releases should not result in radiation exposures in unrestricted areas greater than a few per cent of natural background

"

exposures. The concentration of effluent discharges of radioactivities

,

shall be within the limite specif: ed in 10 CFR Part 20.

To ensure that the releases of racioactive material above background to. unrestricted areas be as low as reasonably achievable, the following design objectives apply:

For liquid wastes:

A. The annual dose above background to the total body or any organ of an individual from all reactors at a site should not exceed 5 nrem in an unrestricted area.

B. The annual total quantity of radioactive materials in liquid waste, excluding tritium and dissolved gases, discharged from each reactor should not exceed 5 C1.

For gaseous waste:

J C. The annual :otal quantity of noble gases above background discharged from the site should result in an air dose due to gamma radiation of less than 10 mrad, and air dose due to beta radiation of less than 20 mrad, at any location near ground level which could be occupied by individuals at or beyond the boundas e of the site.

D. The annual total quantity of all radioiodines and radioactive material in particulate forms with half-lives greater than

'

eight days above background from all reactors at a site should not result in an annual dose to any organ of an individual in an unrestricted area from all pathways of exposure in excess of 15 mrem.

..

l

, <

,

.

t 2-5

,

.

.

E. The annual total quantity of iodine-131 discharged from'each reactor at a site should not exceed 1 C1.

2.4.1 Liouid Waste Effluents Specification A. '. ha instantaneous concentration of radioactive materials rsleased in liquid waste effluents from all reactors at the site shall not exceed the values specified in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table II, Column 2, for unrestricted areas.

B. The cumulative release of radioactive materials in liquid waste ef fluents excluding tritium and dissolved gases, shall not exceed 10 Ci/ reactor / calendar quarter.

C. The cumulative release of radioactive materials in liquid waste effluents excluding tritium and dissolved gases, shall not exceed 20 C1/ reactor in any 12 consecutive months.

D. During release of radioactive wastes, the effluent control monitor shall be set to alarm and to initiate the automatic closure of each vaste isolation valve. prior to exceeding the limits specified in 2.4.1.A above.

E. The operability of each automatic isolation valve in the liquid radwaste discharge lines shall be demonstrated quarterly.

F. The equipment installed in the liquid radioactive waste system shall be maintained and shall be operated to process radio-active liquid wastes prior to their discharge when the projected 4 cumulative release could exceed 1.25 Ci/ reactor / calendar quarter,

' excluding tritium and dissolved gases.

G. The maximum radioactivity to be contained in any liquid radwaste tank that can be discharged directly to the environs shall not exceed 10 C1, excluding tritium and dissolved gases.

H. If the cumulative release of radioactive materials in liquid effluents, excluding tritium and dissolved gases, exceeds 2.5 C1/ reactor / calendar quarter, a report shall be made in accordance with Section 5.6.2.C(l) . l Liquid Waste Sampling and Monitoring Requirements I. Plant records shall be maintained of the radioactive con-centration sud volume before dilution of liquid waste intended for discharge and the average dilution flow and length of time over which each discharge occurred. Sample analysis results and other reports shall be submitted in accordance with Section 5.6.1.B. Estimates of the sampling and analytical errors associated with each reported value shall be included.

. - -. -, .

"-; .

.

t

'

.

, .

2-6 J. Prior to release of each batch of liquid waste, a sample shall be taken from that batch and analyzed for the con-centration of each significant gamma emitting isotope in accordance with Table 2.4-1 to demonstrate compliance with Specification 2.4.1 using the flow rate into which the waste is discharged during the period of discharge. All liquid wastes collected in the laundry and hot shower sump shall be transferred to the radioactive liquid waste treatment system for monitored batch release through the liquid.radwaste discharge pipe.

K. Sampling and. analysis of liquid radioactive waste shall be performed in accordance with Table 2.4-1. Prior to taking samples'from a monitoring tank, or the laundry and hot shower sump, at least two liquid content volumes shall be circulated.

L. The radioactivity in liquid wastes shall be continuously monitored and recorded during release. Whenever these monitors are inoperable for a period not to exceed 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />, two independent samples of each tank to be dis-charged shall be analyzed and two plant personnel shall independently check valving prior to the discharge. If these monitors are inoperable for a period exceeding 72

-

hours, no release from a liquid waste tank shall be made and any release'in progress shall be terminated.

.

M. The flow rate of liquid radioactive waste shall be continuously measu.ed and recorded during release.

N. All liquid effluent radiation monitors shall be calibrated at ,

'

least quarterly by means of a radioactive source which has been calibrated to a National Bureau of Standards source. The relation-ship between effluent concentration and monitor readings should l

1

.

. ..

i

.

-

. .

2-9 G. The sampling and monitoring requirements provide assurance that radioactive materials in liquid wastes are properly controlled-and monitored in conformance with the requirements of Design Criteria 60 and 64. These requirements provide the data for the licensee and the Commission to evaluate the plant's per-formance relative to radioactive liquid wastes released to the environment. Reports on the quantities of radioactive materials released in liquid waste effluents are furnished to the Commission according to Section 5.6.1.B in conformance with Regulatory Guide 1.21 (Rev. 1, 6/74). On the basis of such reports and any additional inform 1 tion, the Commission g may from tLne to time require the licensee to take such action as the Commission deems appropriate.

2.4.2 Gaseous Waste Effluents Specification The terms used in these Specifications are as follows:

subscripts v, refers to vent releases 1, refers to individual noble gas nuclide (Refer to Table 2.4-5 for the noble gas nuclides considered)

QT = the total noble gas release rate (Ci/sec)

=kQisumoftheindividualnoblegasradionuclides determined to be present by isotopic analysis E = the average total body dose factor due to ga=ma emission (rem /yr per C1/sec)

E = the average skin dose factor due to beta emissions (rem /yr per C1/sec)

Ei = the average air dose factor due to beta emissions

' rad /yr per Ci/sec)

E = the average air dose factor due to gamma emissions (rad /yr per Ci/sec)

• The values of E, E, 5 and N are to be determined each time isotopic analysis is required as delineated in Specification 2.4.2.J. Determine the following using the results of the noble gas radionuclide analysis:

l

_ - -

'

.

t

.

.

2-11

-

(2) The average release rate of noble gases from the site during any 12 consecutive months shall be

~ "

__

25 QN j[ l

,

Tv v ,

and

. .

13, Q5 <1

_

, Tv v ,

'

(3) The average release rate per site of all radiciodines and radioactive materials in particulate form with half-lives greater than eight days during any calendar quarter shall be such that -

I 13 3.5 x 104 Qy j[1

. _

(4) The average release rate per site of all radioiodines and radioactive materials in particulate form with half-lives greater than eight days during any period of 12 consecutive months shall be such that

- -

25 3.5 x 104 q <1

. _

(5) The amount of iodine-131 released during any calendar quarter shall not exceed 2 C1/ reactor. -

.

(6) The amount of iodine-131 released during any period of 12 consecutive months shall not exceed 4 C1/ reactor.

C. Should any of the conditions of 2.4.2.C(l), (2) or (3) listed below exist, a report shall be made in accordance with Section 5.6.2.C(1).

(1) If the average release rate of noble gases from the site during any calendar quarter is such that

. _

50 Q5 >1

_ Tv v _ l or

- -

25 QM >1 1 Tv v

. .,

f

l l

...

l

-

a

,

'

-

.

.

. .

2-14 For Specification 2.4.2.A(1), gamma and beta dose . factors for the individual noble' gas radionuclides-have been calculated for the plant gaseous release points and are provided in Table 2.4-5. The expressions used to calculate these dose factors are based on dose

- models derived in Section 7 of Meteorologv and Atomic Energv-1968 and model techniques provided in Draft Regulatory Guide 1.AA.

. Dose. calculations have been made to determine the site. boundary location with the highest anticipated dose rate from noble gases using onsite meteorological data and the dose expressions provided in Draft Regulatory Guide 1.AA. The dose expression considers the release point location, building wake effects, and the physical characteristica of the radionuclides.

The offsite location with the highest anticipated annual dose from released noble gases is 1450 meters in the ENE direction.

The release rate Specifications for a radio. odine and radioactive.

material in particulate form with half-lives greater than eight days are dependent on existing radionuclide pathways to man. The pathways which were examined for these Specifications are: 1) individual

inhalation of airborne radionuclides, 2) deposition of radionuclides onto green leafy vegetation with subsequent consumption by man, and 3) deposition onto grassy areas where milch animals graze with consumption of the milk by man. Methods for estimating doses to the thyroid via

'

these pathways are desdribed in Draft Regulatory Guide AA. The offsite location with the highest thyroid dose rate from rodionuclides and radioactive material in particulate form with half-liver :r'2ter than eight days was determined using onsite meteorological data and 4

the expressions described in Draft Regulatory Guide 1.AA.

Specification 2.4.2.A(2) limits the release rate of radioiodines and radioactive material in particulate form with half-lives greater than eight days so that the corresponding annual thyroid dose via the most restrictive pathway is less than 1500 mrem.

For radioiodines and radioactive material in particulate form with

. half-lives greater than eight days, the most restrictive location

- is a garden located 7650 meters in the E direction (vent X/Q = 4.2 x l

.

10-8 sec/m3 ). I c

Specification 2.4.2.B establishes upper offsite levels for the releases-of noble gases and radioiodines and radioactive material in particulate form with half-lives greater than eight days at twice the design j objective annual quantity during any calendar quarter, or four times

. ... - .-.

' -

Table 2.4-2 .

,

RADIOACTIVE GASEOUS WASTE SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS FREQUENCY .

'

Detectable Gaseous Sampling and Analysis Type of Concentrat s Source Frequency Activity Analysis (pCi/ml)

Principal Gamma Emitters 10" (}

A. Waste Gas Decay Each Tank (Grab Sample)

Tank Releases Release 11 - 3 10~

Principal Camma Emitters 10- (2)

B. Containment Purge Each Purge Releases (Grab Sample) 11 - 3 10~

C. Co' n denser Air Ejector We'ekly (Grab Sample) Principal Gamma Emitters 10~ () (}

-6

! Monthly (Grab Sample) 11 - 3 10 Y

D. Environmental Release Weekly (Gas Grab Sampic) Prinicpal Gamma Emitters 10~

Points Monthly (Gas Grab Sample) 11 - 3 10~

.

(On Line RMS)

-12 Weekly (Charcoal Filter) I-131 10 (On Line RMS)

-10, Weekly (Charcoal Filter) I-133, 1-135 10 (On Line RMS) c Weekly (Particulate Filter) Principal Gamma Emitters

<- (Ba-La-140, 1-131 and others) 10~

Monthly Composite

~

(Particulate Filters) Gross a 10 Monthly Composite Sr 89, , _gy (Particulate Filters) Sr 90 i

-__ _ . - _ _ - - - _ _ _ - - -

/

m

. . 2-20 Table 2.4-2 (Continued)

WOTES:

(1) The above detectability limite for activity analysis are based on technical feasibility and on the potential significance in the environment of the quantiti?s released. For some nuclides, lower detection limits may be readily achievable and when nuclides are measured below the stated limits, they should also be reported.

(2) During containment purge operation an analysis shall be performed upon the reactor building vent effluent following ascent into MODE 1.

(3) For certain mixtures of ga=ma emitters, it may not be possible to measure radionuclides at levels near their sensitivity limits when other nuclides are present in the sample at me'.h higher levels. Under these circumstances, it will be more appropriate to calculate the levels of such rddionuclides using observed ratios with those radionuclides which are measurable.

(4) To be representative of the average quantities and concentrations of radioactive materials in particulate for= released in gaseous effluents, sa=ples should be collected in proportion to the rate of flow of the effluea-stream.

.

(5) Analysis shall be performe'd upon the condenser air ejector effluent following the detection of a steam generator leak. -

.

'

!

l

.

/ ,. . '

' .. .

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE 3.1 NONRADIOLOGICAL SURVEILLANCE Study Plan The estuary has been exposed to the influence of the operation of Units 1 and 2 for approximately seven (7) years. During this time, the systems in the area have adapted to this influence. A preopera-tional surveillance program was designed to determine the exact nature of the new stabilized conditions relative to control areas adjacent to the plant site. This surveillance consisted of system modeling with waasurements of biomass, productivity, respiration and.

.

'

diversity in all major compartments. The information derived will serve as a baseline for comparison with the data taken after Unit 3 becomes operational.

The operational surveillance program is designed to determine any significant environmental effects of the operation of the power plant, particularly unpredicted and catastropic changes. The program consists of 3 short-term intensive surveillance program elements and 2 long-term progra= elements. l A period of adjustment of the ecosystem is expected concurrent with Crystal River Unit 3's initial operation. This will be a localized perturbation limited to a portion of the inner bay associated with the higher water velocity as well as the temper;ture increase resulting from the condenser discharge.

Any ecosystem which experiences a change in its environment will undergo a period of adaptation unless catastrophic conditions occur.

With the small changes anticipated with the addition of Unit 3, no j catastrophic effects are expected. However, any changes in the environmental conditions of a system will normally cause it to oscillate. An example of the oscillation of a hypothetical system's productivity is shown below.

-

" \

p Time to Perturbation

'

I p Time to Minimum I

l T. Approximate Time to Stabilization I i i l i

'

l I Stabilized Level

'

I I

Productivi ty '

= -._l- _ _ _ _ _ ~ - - -- Initial I.evel I

h

_ _ _ - . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ Minimum I.evel Time u l

. .

- - _ -

,

,. -

.

.

3-2

.

In this particular system the final stabilized level is higher than the initial level and is only obtained after a period of stabiliza-tion and after going through a suppressed level fellowing the initial perturbation. The recognition of this type of potential response is-obviously important in considering any surveillance program.

The models of the systems involved at Crystal River along with the data available indicate that the approximate time to stabilization should not exceed one year. Ther2 fore, the time frame for the intensive surveillance program elements allows one year of monitoring to determine the transient response that the systems are experiencing.

An additional year of monitoring is required to indicate the new stabilized level. If the second year's data indicate that the systems have not approached stabilization, the monitoring will be extended for an additional year. It is anticipated that the intensive sur-veillance program elements should not be necessary beyond three years.

The areas in which intensive monitoring will be performed as indicated or until stabilization occurs include the following program elements:

(1) benthos in discharge area, (2) marsh grasses, and (3) i=pingement l on intake screens.

In addition to the short-term intensive surveillance program elements designed to determine how the systems have responded to the per-turbations, an on-going program element designed to obtain a diagnos-tic view of the condition of the environment will be continued during the operational life of the plant. This indicator program element consists of a number of simple measurements which will detect any major changes in the system. A second long-term program element involves chemical-industrial waste water monitoring.

3.1.1 Benthos in Discharge Area Objective To determine the ecological condition of the benthic system in the area directly affected by the thermal plume.

Specification Operational monitoring of productivity, respiration, diversity and biomass of the benthic system in the area adjacent to and north of the discharge canal shall be measured on a quarterly basis until the system has approached stabilization.

Samples shall be taken by methods employed in che preoperational studies including harvesting quadrats, by sediment cores, and by venturi pumps. The number, frequency and location of

-

.

.

.

~

3-3

.

.

samples to be taken shall be determined from a critical review of the .results of the preoperr.ional research con-ducted in this area. Samples shall se stratified by macrophyte dominance. Productivity and respiration of the system shall be determined by the methods currently employed in the modeling work.

,

Reporting Requirement Results of the data gathered in this program element shall be reported in accordance with Section 5.6.1. In the event that any parameter

measured changes beyond two standard deviations of dhe value measured in the preoperational monitoring program, a report shall be submitted as specified in Section 5.6.2.

Bases In the discharge area adjacent to the canal, the prc ductivity, respiration and biomass should increase due to an increased temperature of the cooling water. If any of these parameters changes beyond 20 (two standard deviation) of that measured during preoperational monitoring, the system should be investigated for catastrophic results.

3.1.2 Marsh Grass i

Objective To determine the ecological condition of the salt marsh adjacent to the discharge area.

Specification The biomass, productivity, and respiration of the salt marsh shall be measured on a quarterly basis after plant operation begins until.

the system has approached stabilization. Quadrats shall be harvested to determine biomass and productivity.

Reporting Requirement Results of the data gathered in this program element shall be reported in accordance with Section 5.6.1. In the event that

.

any parameter measured changes beyond 2e (two standard deviation)

'

of the value measured in the preoperational monitoring program, a report shall be submitted as specified in Section 5.6.2.

l l

-

, ,..

+

'. - 3-9

' TABLE 3.2-1

SUMMARY

OF PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE RESULTS 1971 - 1974 Preoperational Concentrations Environmental Media Nuclide Median Value 95 Percentile Value Water, Potable -

Gross S (a) 19. pC1/1 H-3 (a) (a).

Co-58 (a) (a)

Co-60 (a) (a)

Ba-140 (a) (a)

Cs-134 (a) (a)

Cs-137 (a) (a)

Zn-C5 (a) (a)

Mn-54 (a) (a)

I-131 (a) (a)

Water, Surface Gross 5 (a) 19. pCi/1 H-3 (a) (a)

Co-58 (a) (a)

Co-60 (a) (a)

Ba-140 . (a) (a)

Cs-134 (a) (r)

Cs-137 (a) (a)

Zn-65 (a) (a)

Mn-54 (a) (a) 1-131 (a) (a)

Water, Precipitation Gross S (a) 19. pCi/l

' '- 3 (a) (a)

Co-58 (a) (a)

Co-60 (a) (a)

Ba-140 (a) (a)

,

Cs-134 (a) (a) l Cs-137 (a) (a)

Zn-65 (a) (a)

Mn-54 (a) (a)

I-131 (a) (a)

(*)The median value is less than the Lower Limit of Detection (LLD); the median value is assumed te be the LLD (Table 3.2-5, A and B).

.

~ - -

,

+ m- ,-- +-

,. _.-

.

'3-10

'

-TABLE.3.2-1

SUMMARY

0F PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE RESULTS 1971 - 1974 (Cont'd.)

Preoperational Concentrations Environmental Media Nuclide Median Value 95 Percentile Value

~

Sea Water H-3 71. pC1/1 87 pC1/1 Ba-140 -(a) 11. pCi/kg Cs-137 (a) 10. pCi/kg l Zn-65 (a) 7. pCi/kg Mn-54 (a) (a)

. 1-131 (a) (a)

K-40 0.18 g/kg 0.44 g/kg Ra-226 (a) 600. pCi/kg Th-232 (a) 7. pCI/kg Zr-95 (a) (a)

Ru-106 (a) (a)

Cs-134 (a) (a)

Air Gross S 0.029 pC1/m3 0.120 pCi/m3 }

Ba-140 (2) 0.016 pC1/m3

,

Cs-137 (a) 0.013 pC1/m3 Zn-65 (a) (a)

Mn-54 (a) (a)

O.004 pC1/m3

'

1-131 (a)

. K-40 (a) (a)

Ra-226 (a) 0.241 pC1/m3 Th-232 (a) 0.008 pC1/m3 Zr-95 0.003 pC1/m3 0.043 pCi/m3 Ru-106 0.025 pC1/m3 0.216 pC1/m3 Ce-144 0.003 pC1/m3 0.172 pCi/m3 Milk Sr-90 4. pCi/l 6. pC1/1 Cs-134 (a) (a)

I-131 (a) (a)

Ba-140 (a) (a)

Co-58 (a) (a)

Cc-60 (a) (a)

Ma-54 (a) (a)

Zr-95 (a) (a)

Cs-137 16 pC1/1 22 pC1/1 (a) See pg 3-9.

.

-

.

,. --

,

, , 3-11 Table 3.2-1

SUMMARY

OF PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRORIENTAL SURVEILLANCE RESULTS 1971 - 1974 (Con't'd)

Preoperational Concentrations Environmental Media Nuclide Median Value 95 Percentile Value

'

Soil Ba-140 (a) (a)

'

Cs-137 270. pCi/kg

• 1100. pCi/kg Zn-65 (a) (a)

Mn-54 . (a) (a)

I-131 (a) (a)

K-40 713 pCi/kg 1482 pCi/kg Ra-226 (a) 2200. pCi/kg Th-232 (a) 300. pCi/kg Zr-95 40. pC1/kg 150. pCi/kg Ru-106 0. pCi/kg 330. pC1/kg S=all Terrestrial Ba-140 (a) (a)

Animals Cs-137 (a) 80. pCi/kg 2n-65 (a) 160. pCi/kg Mn-54 (a) (a)

I-131 (a) 100. pCi/kg K-40 3.17 g/kg 4'.28 g/kg Ra-226 (a) 720. pCi/kg Th-232 (a) (a) .

Zr-95 (a) 70, pCi/kg Ru-lCS (a) (a) 3 pCi/m2-day

'

Total Deposition Ba-140 22 pCi/m'-day 2

Cs-137 (a) 6 pCi/m,-day Zn-65 (a) 7 pCi/m'-day

) Mn-54 (a) (a)

I-131 (a) (a K-40 (al .03g/m}-dgy Ra-226 20 pCi/m'-day. 508. pCi/m'-day Th-232 (a) 6. pCi/m -day Zr-95 (a) 13. pCi/m32-day )

Ru-106 (a) 152. pCi/m -day j

.

(" See page 3-9.  !

l l'

t

. . .

'

. -

i 3-12 -

'. .

-

l Table 3.2-1  ;

SUMMARY

OF PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL

-

SURVEILLANCE RESULTS 1971 - 1974 (Cont'd)

Preoperational Concentrations Environmental Media Nuclide Median Value 95 Percentile Value Oyster Meat Ba-140' (a) (a)

Cs-137 (a) (a)

. Zn-65 (a) . 33. pCi/kg Mn-54 (a) (a) 1-131 *

(a) (a)

K-40 (a) 2.2 g/kg Ra-226 (a) 534. pCi/kg Th-232 (a) (a)

Zr-95 (a) (a)

Ru-106 (a) 82. pCi/kg Blue Crab Ba-140 (a) 55. pCi/kg Cs-137 (a) 75. pC1/kg

- Zn-65 (a) 127. pCi/kg Mn-54 (a) 24. pCi/kg I-131 (a) (a)

K-40 1.7 g/kg 2.4 g/kg Ra-226 1325. pCi/kg 3600. pC1/kg Th-232 92. pCi/kg 170. pCi/kg Zr-95 (a) 13. pCi/kg Ru-106 (a) (a)

Cs-134 (a) (a) lierbivorous Fish Ba-140 (a) 50. pCi/kg Cs-137 (a) 110. pCi/kg 2n-65 (a) 63. pCi/kg Mn-54 (a) (a)

I-131 (a) (a)

K-40 2.6 g/kg 3.7 g/kg Ra-226 960, pCi/kg 3100, pCi/kg Th-232 (a) 84. pCi/kg Zr-95 (a) 9. pCi/kg Ru-106 (a) 90. pCi/kg Cs-134 (a) (a)

(* See page 3-9.

..

.

Am

.

. 3-13

. .

Table 3.2-1

SUMMARY

OF PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMElrIAL SURVEILLANCE RESULTS 1971 - 19;4 (Cont'd)

~

Preoperational Concentrations Environmental Nuclide Median Value 95 Percentile Value

_ Media

- Carnivorous Ba-140 , (a) 72. pCi/kg Cs-137 (a) 43. pci/kg Fish 99. pCi/kg

'

Zn-65 (a)

-

Mn-54 (a) , (a)

I-131 (a) (a)

K-40 -

2.8 g/kg 4.6 g/kg Ra-226 335. pCi/kg 2400. pCi/kg Th-232 (a) 92. pCi/kg Zr-95 (a) 12. pCi/kg Ru-106 (a) (a)

Cs-134 (a) (a)

Shrimp Ba-140 (a) (a) .

Cs-137 (a) 37. pCi/kg Zn-65 (a). (a)

Mn-54 (a) (a)

. I-131 (a) (a)

K-40 1.1 g/kg 3. g/kg Ra-226 (a) (a)

Th-232 (a) 36. pC1/kg Zr-95 (a) (a)

Ru-106 (a) (a)

Food Crops Co-58 (a) (a)

(Oranges) Co-60 (a) (a)

Ba-140 . (a) (a)

Sr-90 105. pCi/kg 130. pCi/kg Cs-134 (a) (a)

Cs-137 -) (a)

Zn -65 ..) (a)

Mn-54 (a) (a)

I-131 (a) (a)

(a)3,, p,g, 3_9,

{

,

-

, ,

. . . . . _

,

_

~

'-

3-14

'. . Table 3.2-1

SUMMARY

OF PREOPERATIONAL ENVIROhTENTAL SURVEILLANCE RESULTS 1971 - 1974 (Cont'd)

.

Preoperational Concentrations Environmental Media Nuclide Median Value 95 Percentile Value Vegetation K-40 .69 g/kg 2.9 g/kg Ra-226 (a) 2363. pCi/kg Th-232 (a) 120. pCi/kg

-

Ba-140 26. pCi/.kg 253. pCi/kg Zr-95 (a) 31. pCi/kg Cs-137 *1363. pC1/kg 5416. pCi/kg Zn-65 (a) 589. pCi/kg Mn-54 (a) (a)

I-131 (a) (a)

Ru-106 (a) (a)

Aquatic Plants Ba-140 (a) 75. pCi/kg and Grasses Cs-137 (a) 181. pCi/kg (Including Algae 2n-65 (a) 156. pCi/kg and Plankton) Mn-54 (a) 43. pCi/kg I-131 (a) 37'. pCi/kg K-40 1.8 g/kg 15. g/kg Ra-226 624. pCi/kg 3300. pCi/kg Th-232 (a) 280. pCi/kg Ru-106 (a) 360. pCi/kg Zr-95 18. pCi/kg 157. pCi/kg External Radiation All 62. mrem /yr 77. mrem /yr Ocean Sediment Ba-140 (a) (a)

Cs-137 (a) 250. pCi/ks Zn-65 (a) (a)

Mn-54 (a) 19. pCi/kg I-131 (a) 34. pCi/kg K-40 .31 g/kg 1.2 g/kg Ra-226 2900. pCi/kg 10000, pCi/kg_

Th-232 90. pCi/kg 300. pCi/kg Ru-106 190. pCi/kg 690. pCi/kg Zr-95 12. nei/kg 40. pCi/kg Cs-134 (a) (a)

("}See page 3-9. -

l

.. _.

_ - _ . .

.

.

'

.

.

Table 3.2-2

'

GENERAL FATilWAY RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM Sampling / Collection Sample Sample and Analysis Analysis Type Frequency Routine Pcthway Stations Air External C04, C07, C09 Continuous / Quarterly . TLD ')

Submersion Radiation C18, C26, C40 C41, C43, C1411, C14M, C14G, C46 Air Air C04, C07, C18 Continuous / Weekly Cross B and C26, C40, C41 I-131 weekly, Inhalatton C46 y-Spectral on quarterly composite, Sr-89, w 90 of quarterly com- 4

- posite Precipitation Total C04, C26, C40 continuous / Monthly 11-3, y-Spectral Analysis Deposition C01, C09, C13, C14C y-Spectral Analysis, Sea Water Water Monthly ,

composite for Sr-89, l3 90,11-3 quarterly Water CIS Quarterly 11-3, y-Spectral River Wate-Analysis I

Ground Water Water C40 Semiannual y-Spectral Analysis 11-3

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _

.

.

'

.

.

.

Table 3.2-2 GENERAL PATHWAY RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (cont'd)

Sampling / Collection Sample Sample and Analysis Analysis Pathway Type Stations Frequency Routine

.

Potable Water C07, CIO, C18 Quarterly y.,pectral S l.

_

• Water .

Analysis, H-3 Shoreline Bottom C01, C09, C14H Semiannual Y-Spectral External Sed in.cn ts C14M, C14G Analysis; Sr-90, Sediment Sea Food Chain Marine Plants C29, C30 Semiannual y-Spectral (Marco Algae Analysis, Sr-89, 90 and submerged Sea Plants) y Crab 5

Ingestion C29, C30 Semiannual '

y-Spectral Analysis Crab on edible portions Ingestion Carnivorous C29, C30 Semiannual or in y-Spectral Analysis Fish Fish Season on edible portions ,s 3

Ingestion Herbivorous Fish C29, C30 Semiannual or in y-Spectral Analysis Fish' Season on edible portione Ing'estion Oysters C29, C30 Semiannual .y-Spectral Analysis Oysters on edible portions Ingestion Shrimp C27 Semiannual y-Spectral Analysis Shrimp on edible portions Ingestion Milk C47, C49 Monthly I-131 Analysis; j Milk y-Spectral Analysis, Sr-89, 90

.

.

.. .

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

__

.

.

.

.

.

Table 3.2-2 GENERAL PATiiWAY RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (cont'd)

Sampling / Collection Sample Sample and Analysis Analysis

'

Pathway Type Stations Frequency Routine

-^

Ingestion Small C45

-

Semiannual , y-Spectral Analysis Animals Terrestrial Animals Food Chain Vegetation COS, C40, C41 Semiannual y-Spectral Analysis (grasses)

Ingestion Food Crops C19 Annual or at harvest y-Spectral Analysis Food Crops (Citrus)

Ingestion Food Crops C04 Annual or at harvest y-Spectral Analysis U Food Crops (Watermelon) .

Food Chain Soil C04, C07, C18 First year, then every y-Spectral

. C26, C40, C41, C46 Third Analysis Food Chain Heat C50 Semiannual , y-Spectral. Analysis )

Food Chain Poultry & Eggs C51 Semiannual y-Spec'eral Analysis-Food Chain Green Leafy C48, C47 Semiannual y-Spectral Analysis, Vegetables St-90 Note: All Sampling Stations, except those sampling stations listed in Table 3.2-3, are background (control)

,

stations.

I

- _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - - _ - _ - -_

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _

.

.

.

.

Table 3.2-3 CRITICAL PATilWAY RADIOLOGICAL ENVIR0tiMEllTAL M0titTORIt1C PROGRAM Sample Sample Sampling / Collection Analysis

• Critical Pathway Type Stations Frequency Routine Radionuclides Air External C1411, Cl4M Continuous / Quarterly TLD Xe-133, Kr-88 l Submersion Radiation C14G Air Air C41 Continuous / Weekly I-131 1-131

, Inhalation Analysis Ingestion Milk C49 Monthly I-131 1-131 Milk Analysis Ingestion Crab C29 Semiannual y-Analysis Cs-134, Cs-137 Crab on edible- I-131 Y portions $

Ingestion Fish C29 Semiannual in Season. y-Analysis Cs-134 Cs-137-Fish on edible. 1-131 port ions Shoreline Bottom C 1411, C14 M Semlannual y-Analysis Cs-134, Cs-137 External Sediments Cl4G , . ,

3 Sediment Boating, Sea Water C14G Monthly y-Analysis Cs-134, Cs-137 Swimming I-131 External Ingestion Green Leafy C48 Semiannual 'y-Analysis I-131' Vegetable Vegetables

• .

Nuclides which contribute at least 70% of dose in the pathway.

.

.- _- - __

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .__

.

-

. ,

Table 3.2-5A(a)

DETECTION CAPABILITIES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE ANALYSIS -

Airborne Fish, Heat, Total ,

LLD Water Particulate and Poultry Hilk Vegetation Soil Deposition Analysis (d) [pci/kg] [pci/m3] 1pC1/kg wet]_ [pCf/1] _[pCi/kg wet] [pCi/kg' dry] [pCi/m 2 /da Cross Beta 2(b) 0.03 NA NA NA NA NA

.

~l1-3 1200(b) NA NA NA NA NA NA K-40(c) 30 0.02 30 NA 30 30 8 Mn 20 0.01 10 10 10

'

10' 5 2 Co-58 15 NA 15 15 15 NA NA

,

Fe-59 30 NA 30 NA NA NA NA Co-60 20 NA 20 20 20 NA NA Zn-65 20 0.01 20 NA 20 20 5 Sr-89 10 0.005 NA 10 10 NA NA

"

Sr-90 2 0.001 8 2 8 150 NA Zr-95 20 0.01 20 20 20 20 5 Ru-106 120 0.06 120 NA 120 ,,

120 30 I-131 10 0.005 10 10 10 10 3 Cs-134 15 0.01 15 15 15 15

-

NA t

.. .

Cs-137 20 0.01 20 20 20 20 5

'

Ba-140 50 0.03 50 50 50 50 30 Ce-144 NA 0.1 NA NA NA NA NA Ra-226 300 0.2 300 NA -

300 300 -

30 Th-232 20 0.01 ,

50 NA 50 50 5

'

(a) Per University of Florida.

'(b) Gross Beta and ll-3 are reported in pCi/1. 2 (c) K-40 is reported in g/kg except Total Deposition is reported in g/m / day.

(d). LLD for External Radiation is 15 mrem /yr. *

- -

NA Not Applicable.

_ _

_ - _ - _ _ _ _ _

4

.' .

Table 3.2-5B .(a) , l-

.

.

DETECTIOil CAPAllILITIES FOR ENVIRONitENTAL SAMPLE ANA13 SIS

-

Airborne . Fish, Ifeat, LLD Water Particulate and Poultry Milk Vegetation

.

Analysis \d) [pCi/kg] [pCi/m3] [pCi/kg vet} {pCi/1] (pCi/kg wet]

• NA NA Gross Beta 1(b) 0.01 NA NA NA NA

! . H-3 20db) NA 0.11 394 NA 248 3 K-40(") - 51

,

15 0.01 32 NA 21 Mn-54 NA 60 NA 24 Co-58 17

!

NA 260 NA NA

'

Fe-59 30 NA 60 NA 24 Co-60 17 0.02 66 NA 42 Zn-65 30 u Sr-89 5 0.0019 NA 5 11 A w

0.0008 24 2 4 Sr-90 2 Zr-95 14 0.01 31 NA 20 84 0.05 184 NA + 118 Ru-106 .

0.01 38 10 24 1-131 17 Cs-134 17 0.01 60 15 . 24 .

Cs-137 17 0.01 37 10 24 Ba-140 17 0.01 39 10 24 Ce-144 NA 0.06 NA NA NA Ra-226 57 0.04 200 NA 80 Th-232 28 0.02 100 NA 40 (a) Per State of Florida Department of IIcalth and Rehabilitation Services. '

(b) Gross Beta and 11-3 are reported in pCi/1.

(c) K-40 is reported in g/kg.

(d) LLD for External Radiation is 20 mrem /yr, NA Not Applicable.

.

~,

-

,

,

-

e

'

/ s l -

\ ~

- .

. . .

- u

• h

<,

ya+

!!a:

,

0t ,

\

($sW i.

.0 0

",

~'

u ROGRAM AMP ING SITES

'

/' CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT 3

.

-

,._

.

. . 3-27 any location from which fresh leafy vegetables can no longer be

+

obtained may be dropped from the surveillance program af ter notifying the NRC in writing that such vegetables are no longer grown at that location.

3.2.2 Media Other Than External Radiation Specification Samples shall be taken from locations ano at frequencies listed in Table 3.2-2-and will be analyzed according to the routine listed in Table 3.2-2 using procedures which shall provide concentration values with LLD which are equal to or less than those listed in Table 3.2-5.

The preoperational environmental surveillance results (Table 3.2-1) have been summarized. The control station value for each media, radioisotope and station will be defined as either (1) the upper 95 percentile value from the preoperational program, if greater

,

than the LLD, or (2) the upper 95 percentile value from operational stations outside of the plant's influence, whichever is smaller.

3.2.3 External Radiation Specification Ambient external radiation levels shall be measured at locations and frequencies listed in Table 3.2-2 using procedures which will provide radiation level values with LLD increases over preoperational mean background which are equal to or less than that listed in Table 3.2-5.

3.2.4 Reporting Requirements The results of the radiological monitoring program shall be reported on a routine basis as specified in Section 5.6.1. In addition, mease ments of radioactivity in critical pathway environmental media samples shall be reported on a nonroutine basis as described in Section 5.6.2.C(2).

<

L

3

---

.

~

/~.

i

.

'. - 5-1

.5.0 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS Objective To define the organization, assign responsibilities, describe the environmental surveillance procedures, provide for a review and audit function, and prescribe the reporting requirements in order to insure continuing protection of the environment and implement the Environ-mental Technical Specifications.

5.1 ORGANIZATION The organization responsbile for environmental protection, environ-mental monitoring and the implementation of the Environmental Techni-cal Specifications for Crystal Rivcr Unit 3 is shown on Figure 5.1-1.

5.2 RESPONSIBILITY The responsibility for the conduct of the preoperational environmental monitoring program described in Section 3 and special studies described in Section 4 is that of the Quality and Environmental Department under the direction of the Director of Environmental and Licensing Affairs.

The responsibility for the. conduct of the operational environmental l monitoring program and the implementation of Environmental Technical Specifications becomes the responsibility of the Power Production l Department. .

The plant organization is responsible for the development of Operating and Surveillance Procedurcs described generally in Section 5.5 and supplying field data to the Manager, Nuclear Support Services as required by Sections 2, 3 and 4 of the Environmental Technical Speci-fications.

The Manager, Nuclear Support Services is responsible for consultant l contracts, State and local regulatory agreements, assembly of data, preparation and review of reports required by Section 5.6 of these Environmental Technical Sepcifications, and making recommendations to improve environmental protection practices.

All reports and correspondence with the NRC regarding the Environmental Technical Specifications shall be approved and signed by the Director, Power Production. The Nuclear Plant Manager shall, however make reports by telephone and telegraph of any incident or occurrent requiring reporting within 24Lhours or less, as required in Section 5.6.

l

.

. . - . , ., - - ,

. ____ _. . .. . _ _ .

. _ ,

.

.

5-2 i

PRESIDENT SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND ENGINEERING S CCNSTRUCTION GENERAL COUNSEL

.-

DIRECTOR ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT POWER PRODUCTION OUALITY & ENVIRONMENTAL DEPARTMENTS

-

l MANACER DIRECTOR PLANT MANAGER NUCLEAR SUPPORT ENVIRONMENTAL 8 LICENSING SERVICES AFFAIRS I

PLANT STAFF FIGURE 5.1-1 ORGANIZATION FOR IMPLEMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS L

-

. , ,.

f

.

~

_

'

5-3 5.3 REVIEW AND AUDIT 5.3.1 Function The Nuclear General Review Committee shall function to provide independent review and audit of designated activities in the areas of environmental monitoring and surveillance.

5.3.2 Composition The NGRC shall be composed of the Chairman, Vice Chairman, and at least 5 members. No more than a minority of the members shall have line responsibility for operation'of the facility.

The committee shall collectively have the experience and com-petence required to review problems in the following areas:

,

a. Nuclear power plant operations

!

b. Nuclear engineering

c. Chemistry and radinchemistry

d. Metallurgy

e. Nondestructive testing

f. Instrumentation and control

g. Radiological safety

h. Mechanical and electrical engineering

1. Administrative controls J. Environmental

k. Quality assurance practices 5.3.3 Qualifications

,

The following minimum experience requirements shall be established for those persons involved in the independent off-site safety review and audit program:

a. Chairman and Vice-Chairman-Bachelor of Science in engineering or related' field and ten years related experience including five years involvement with operation and/or design of nuclear power plants.

b. Member-Bachelor of Science in engineering or related field and five years related experience including three years involvement with operation and/or design of nuclear power plants.

-- . -

. _ . . . . . . . .

l ! l !I lll l1 i

Y&

T L S

.

L N A E T M T E D NE A S I R

N N S M T G E E N N D U E R O

-

I hS DC O R P O R T I

M O R T P MIOE RN C NPA E NEV PRA E Y E

S L

A CI E

P T I

E R V D I

L C

I E aD A V N T U E N Y O _

G A T -

T I L

SI A

_

S U S Q -

A T I

D U

A D

N A

W EI V

E R

E E E T T E N TI T E M D TI N M M E O M P R C O E T A T C D N E WE N N E L A I DI C I V L W R S U E P EI E N R V O R E F P L R A N R O I

E T N A E Z G IN A

G R

O l

-

3 5

E R

U GI F

N O

I

.

_

T N .

C O I

U T T R C N T R U E S O D R N T C O OI DI S O E R N E C R P E R I D

S P 8 R E GN E -

C I W I

V R O E P E

N I

G N

E

_

.

. -

-

.- . ~ ,

!

.. . 5-4a

,

5.3.4 Alternates All alternate members shall be appointed in writing by the NGRC Chainnan to serve on a temporary basis; however, no more than two alternates shall participate as voting members in NGRC activities at any one time, c 5.3.5 Consul tants

.

Consultants shall be utilized as determined by the NGRC l Chairman to provide expert advice to the NGRC.

,

5.3.6 Meeting Frequency The NGRC shall meet at least once per calendar quarter during the initial year of facility operation following fuel loading and at least once per six months thereafter.

5.3.7 Quorum A quorum of NGRC shall consist of the Chairman or his designated alternate and five additional NGRC members, including alternates.

No more than a minority of the quorum shall have line responsi-bility for operation of the facility.

5.3.8 Review The NGRC shall review:

a. Proposed changes to the Environmental Technical

.,

Specifications and the evaluated impact of the changes.

b. Proposed changes or modifications to plant systems or equipment and the evaluated impact which would require a change in the procedures described in 5.5.1 below (or which would affect the evaluation of the plant's environmental impact) as determined by the Plant Review Committee.

c. Reported instances of violations of Environmental Technical 4

Specifications, the reaching of specified reporting levels, and reportable environmental occurrences.

d. Proposed special tests or experiments which might involve a change in the Environmental Technical Specifications or involve an unreviewed environmental impact question. 1

e. Temporary changes to procedures as described in 5.5.2.

f. Events requiring 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> notification to the Commission.

g. Descriptions of changes, tests or experiments, and the

,

results thereof, as described in 5.5.3.a.

l

!

-

.

, ,-

.

.

-

...

5-4b

h. Audits of the en'vironmental monitoring and sur-veillance program.

5.3.9 Audits Audits of facility activities shall be performed under the cognizance of the NGRC. These audits shall encompass:

a. Impler atation of the environmental monitoring and surve;ilance programs at least once per twelve months.

b. Conformance to procedures and ETS requirements at least once per twelve months.

c. Contractor environmental monitoring and sur-veillance activities at least once per twelve months.

5.3.10 Records Records of NGRC activities shall be prepared, approved and distributed as. indicated below:

a. Minutes of er.ch NGRC meeting shall be prepared, approved and forwarded to the Senior Vice President, i Engineering and Construction within 14 days following each meeting.

b. Reports of reviews encompassed by Section 5.3.8 above, shall be prepared, approved and forwarded to

! the Senior Vice President Engineering and Construction within 14 days following completion of the review.

i

'

c. Audit reports encompassed by Section 5.3.9 above, shall be forwarded to the Senior Vice President-Engineering and Construction and to the management positions responsible for the areas audited within 30 days after completion of the audit.

5.3.11 Authority

.,

The NGRC shall report to and advise the Senior Vice President-Engineering and Construction on those l areas of responsibility specified in Sections 5.3.8, 5.3.9 and 5.3.10 (see Figure 5.3-1).

.

..

- e ---.e - , y q- g- -m. -

y vm-g - -e-vw

. - _

.

.

' '

5-5 I

5.4 ACTION TO BE TAKEN IF LIMITING CONDITION FOR OPERATION IS EXCEEDED 5.4.1 Imediate remedial actions as permitted by these environmental technical specifications 'shall be implemented until such time as the limiting condition for operation is met.

l 5.4.2 The occurrence shall be promptly reported to the Chairman of the Nuclear General Review Committee and investigated as specified in Section 5.3. l 5.4.3 The Nuclear General Review Committee shall prepare and submit a report for each occurrence in accordance with Section 5.3.10.

5.4.4 The Director, Power Production, shall report the occurrence to the NRC as specified in Section 5.6.2.

5.5 PROCEDURES 5.5.1 Explicit written procedures, including applicable checkoff lists and instructions, shall be prepared for the implementation of the monitoring requirements described in Sections 2 and 3, approved as specified in Section 5.5.2, and adhered to for operation of all systems and components involved in carrying cJt the effluent. release and environmental monitoring programs.

Procedures shall include sampling, instrument calibration, analysis, and action to be taken when limits are approached or exceeded. Calibration frequencies and standards for instruments used in performing the measurements shall be included. Testing frequency of alarms shall be included. These frequencies shall be determined from experience with similar instruments in similar environments and from manufacturers' technical manuals.

5.5.2 All procedures implemented by plant staff personnel described in Section 5.5.1 above, and changes thereto, shall be reviewed as specified in Section 5.3 and approved by the Nuclear Plant Manager prior to implementation. Temporary changes to procedures wh'ch do not change the intent of the original procedure may be i made, provided such changes are approved by two members of the plant management staff, one of whom holds a senior operator's license. Such changes shall be documented, subsequently reviewed and approved by the Plant and Nuclear General Review Comittees. All procedures and changes to procedures utilized by contractors to implement the environmental and monitoring programs described in Section 3 shall be reviewed and approved by the Manager, Nuclear Support Services.

- _ . _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

, .. .,

, . ,_

w . /

..

..

5 5.5.3 Prior to special tests or changes:

a. If the Nuclear Plant Manger decides to make a change in the facility or Operating Procedures, or to conduct a test or' experiment, and concludes that the proposed change,-

test, or experiment does not involve a change in the Environmental Technical Specifications or an unreviewed environmental impact question, he may order the change, test i

or experiment to be made, shall enter a description thereof

-in the operating records of'the facility, and shall send a i copy of the instructions pertinent thereto to the Chairman of the. Nuclear General Review Committee for review per Section 5.3.8.

l b. If the Nuclear Plant Manager desires to make a change in the facility or _0perating Procedures, or to conduct a test or experiment which in his opinion might involve a change in the Environmental Technical Specifications, or involve an unreviewed environmental impact question, he shall not order such change, test or experiment until he has referred the matter to the Nuclear General Review Committee for review and report to the Senior Vice President-Engineering and Construction for resolution.

J 5.6 PLANT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS .

5.6.1 Routine Reports A. Annual Environmental Operating Report (1) Non radiological Volume l A report on the nonradiological environmental surveillance programs for the previous 12 months of operation shall be

'

\

!

\

"

JBC: hic 864-P l

l

. . _ _

> . - - - . . _ _ . , , , _ . _ - . ,. .

- ._. . ~.

,

.z t

.

.- f

. . .

. . .

5-8'

.

. Results of all radiological environmental samples taken shall be summarized on an annual basis following the format of Table 5.6-1. In the event that some results are not available within the 90-day period, the report shall be-submitted, noting and' explaining the reasons for the missing

, results. The missing data shall be submitted as soon as possible in a supplementary report.

B. Semiannual Operating Report - Radioactive Effluents

, A report on the radioactive discharges released from the site during the previous 6 months of operation shall be submitced to the Director of the Office of Inspection and Enforcement '(with ~a copy to Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulatica) as _part of the Semiannual Operating Report within 60 days af ter Januat'/ 1 and July 1 of each year. The period of the first report shall begin with the date of initial criticality. The report shall include a summary of the quantities of radioactive liquid and gaseous effluents and solid waste released from the plant as outlined in USNRC. Regulatory Guide 1.21 (Rev.1, 6/74), with data summarized on a quarterly basis following the format of l Appendix B thereof.

,

The report shall include a summary of the meteorological conditions

'

concurrant with the release of gaseous effluents during each quarter

'

as outlined in USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.21 (Rev. 1, 6/74), with 4

data summarized on a quarterly basis following the format of l

Appendix B thereof. Calculated offsite dose to humans resulting from the release of effluents and their subsequent dispersion in

-

the atmosphere (Regulatory Guide 1.109) shall be reported in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.21 (Rev. 1, 6/74).-

l 5.6.2 Non-routine Reports A. Limiting-Condition for Operation Exceeded l-In the event that a limiting condition for operation is exceeded including any unplanned release of radioactive material from the site, or an event involving a significant adverse environmental.

impact occurs, a report will be made within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> by telephone

and telegraph to the Director of the Office of Inspection 'and i

Enforcement followed by a written report with a copy to the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation within 15' days.

j

'

The telegraph report will quantify the occurrence, its causes and, if aspects of the Crystal River Unit 3-operation are among the causes, planned remedial action to the extent possible. The written report will fully describe the occurrence and will i

describe its causes and corrective action as fully as possible.

. __ -- - - _ _ _ _ .. . . . .__ _ .. _ _ . _ - . . _ _ , . . _ , . . _ _ _

.

• g ..

,

.

• '

• 10 B. Nonradiological Report Levels In the event that a nonradioactive reporting level is reached, a written. report shall be made within 30 days to the Director of the Office of Inspection and Enforcement with a copy to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. The report shall describe, analyze and evaluate the occurrence, including extent and magnitude of impact; describe the cause of the occurrence; and if _ aspects of the Crystal River Unit #3 operation are among the causes, indicate the corrective action taken to preclude repetition of the occurrence.

C. Radiological Reporting Levels In the event a report level specified below is reached, a report shall oe made within the designated time period to the Director of Inspection and Enforcement with a copy to the Director of Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

(1) Radioactive Discharge If measured rates of release of radioactivity in the environ-ment, averaged over a calendar quarter, exceed the design objective rates as specified in specifications 2.4.1.H for liquid effluents and in 2.4.2.C for airborne effluents, a report of the causes of the release rates and of a proposed program of action to reduce the release rates will be submitted within 30 days from the end of the quarter during which the release occurred.

(2) Radiological Environmental Monitoring

a. If a single measured value of radioactivity concen- l trations in critical pathway environmental medium samples identified in Section 3.2 exceeds ten times the control station value as defined in Section 3.2, a written notification including an evaluation of any release conditions, environmental factors, or other aspects necessary to explain the anomalous result shall be submitted to the Director of the

NRC Regional Office (with a copy to the Director, office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation) within 10 days atcar confirmation.*

b. If milk samples collected over a calendar quarter show average I-131 concentrations of 4.8 picocuries per liter or greater, a plan shall be submitted within thirty (30) days advising of the proposed action

-

'

to ensure the plant-related annual doses will be within the design objective if 15 mrem /yr. to the thyroid of any individual.

CConfirmation is defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8.

_ _

, . -- ,, ~. ,

,

,

^J

• *

• 5-10a

c. If individual milk samples show I-131 concentrations of 10 picoeuries per liter or greater, a plan shall be submitted within one week advising of the proposed action to ensure the plant-related annual dosas will be within the design objective lf 15 mrem /yr. co .the thyroid of any individual.

d. If green leafy vegetable samples ~ collected over a calendar year show average concentrations of I-131, 220 picoeuries per kilogram or greater, a plan shall

- lue submitted within thirty (30) days advising of the proposed action to ensure the plant-related annual doses will be within 'the design objective of 15 mrem /yr.

to the thyroid of any individual.

e. If individual green leafy vegetable samples collected show I-131 concentration of 440 picocuries per kilogram or greater, a plan shall be submitted within one week advising of the proposed action to ensure the plant-related annual doses will be within the design objective of 15 mrem /yr. to the thyroid of any individual.

.

• N

e 1

.. ~

n: ,-.

,a

'

. .

• 5-11 5.6.3 Changes A. A report shall-be made to the Director of Office of Nuclear -

Reactor Regulation prior to implementation of a change in plant design, in plant operation, or in procedures -described in Section 5.5 if the change would have, in the judgment of the applicant, a significant adverse effect on the environment or involves an environmental matter or question not previously reviewed and evaluated by the USNRC. The report shall include a description and evaluation of the change and a supporting benefit-cost analysis.

B. Request for changes in environmental technical specifications shall be submitted to the Director, Division of Reactor Licensing for review and authorization. The request shall include an evaluation of the environmental impact of the proposed change l and a supporting benefit-cost analysis.

5.7 RECORDS RETENTION 5.7.1 Records and logs relative to the following areas shall be retained for the life of the plant:

2

a. Records and drawing changes reflecting plant design modifications made to systems and equipment as described in Section 5.6.3.

b. Records of environmental surveillance data.

c. Records to demonstrate compliance with the liniting conditions for operation in Section 2.0.

5.7.2 All other records and logs relating to the environmental technical specifications shall be retained for five years.

5.8 SPECIAL REOUIREMENTS The chemical-industrial waste water treatment system shall collect and transport all water wastes to the percolation / evaporation ponds.

The system'is shown diagramatically in Figure 5.8-1.

.

y , t -, --

.

, ..

-

'

~ Technical Specification Chance Reqcest No. 6 Replace page 3/43-13,3/43-16,3/43-20,3/48-5 with the attached replacement page 3/43-13,3/43-16,3/4_3-20,3/48-5.

Reason for prooosed Chance Mr. Stolz, in his letter of June 6,1977 to Florida Power Corporation, requested us to apply within 45 days of receipt of his letter, for an amendment to our facility operations license to incorporate comparable technical specifications to those presented in Enclosure 2 of his June 6, 1977 letter.

The attached Technical Specification pages contained in Change Request No. 6 are being submitted by FPC in response to Mr. Stolz's request dated June 6, 1977.

Additional information concerning the development of these technical specifications for Crystal River Unit 3 is contained in items a) through d) below.

a) Crystal River 3 Technical Specification 3.3.2.1, Table 3.3-3, Item 5 - The undervoltage relaying at Crystal River 3 has the 2 out of 3

>

coincidence logic. The applicable number of channels and the Action "B" (which is already Action 9 to this Table) for this configuration were incorporated.

b) CR3 Technical Specification 3.3.2.1, Table 3,3-4, Item 5 - Upon a loss of voltage, the voltage on the. bus will go to zero. Therefore, the value of "0 volts" for the Trip Setpoint and Allowable Value is appropriate.

The Trip Setpoint and Allowable Value for the Degraded Voltage Specification is 2375.1 volts. The 480 y equipment starters are capable of withstanding a degraded voltage of 553 rated voltage for 2 seconds. This is the design criteria for the degraded voltage setpoints. The potential transformers that supply the voltage to  :

the undervoltage relays from the 4160 v busses are rated at 4200 v/120v, phase-to-phase. (The undervoltage relays, GE type IAV53K, are phase-to-ground, 69 v nominal). The relay must be set to trip more conservatively than 55% of the rated voltage being supplied to it (4200 v from the potential transformer). The relays are set at 56.55% (nominally above 55% of 4200 v or 2375.1 v.

The electrical system is designed to automatically prevent load shedding of the emergency busses once the diesel generators are j supplying power to all sequenced loads on the emergency busses. I The system is also designed to automatically reinstate the load )

shedding feature when the diesel generator supply breakers are 4 tripped. )

i l

I

-

., -

,

'

l

. Tha undervoltag2 protection do:s not employ any timm delay in s- addition to the time delay inherent in the relay which is accounted for in the FSAR analyses.

c) CR3 Technical Specification 4.3.2.1.1 Table 4.3-2, Item 5 - This Specification was added per the respective Model Technical Specification.

d) CR3 Technical Specification 4.8.1.1.2.c.3.d - This Specification was added per Model Technical Speci#ication 4.8.1.1.X.a.l.c. The other parts of Model Technical Spe :ification 4.8.1.1.X are already incorporated into CR3 Technicri Sp ecification 4.8.1.1.2.c.3.

Safety Analysis Justifying Proposed Change The proposed changes to the Crystal River Unit 3 Technical Specifications identified in Change Request No. 6 are consistent with the Staff's Statement of Staff Positions contained in Mr. Stolz's letter of June 6,1977 and will thereby demonstrate the capability of the onsite power system to perform its required function. Therefore none of the requirements applicable to safety analysis are diminished by the propsed changes and no unreviewed safety question is involved.

.

O

.

A 7-_

_. . .

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.. . .. ..

• TABLE 3.3-3 (Cont'd) .

El4GIllEERED SAFETY FEATURE ACTUATI0ft SYSlEM INSTRUMENTATION f 9

g MINIMUM gj TOTAL !!0. CilAHilELS CilANNELS APPLICABLE r- FUNCTIONAL UNIT OF CllAN!!ELS TO TRIP OPERABLE MODES ACTION

o

$ b. Steam Line Rupture Matrix I 1. Low SG Pressure 2 per steam 1 per steam 2 per steam' 1, 2, 3*** 10

.g generator generator generator

-i m 2. Automatic Actuation Logic 1 per steam 1 per steam 1 per steam 1, 2, 3 10 generator genera tor generator )

5. LOSS OF POWER ,

a. 4160V Emergency Bus Undervol.. ige (Loss of m Voltage) 3 per bus 2 per bus 2 per bus 1, 2, 3 9-5 m b. 4160V Emergency Bus

.' Undervoltage (Degraded

" Voltage) 3 per bus 2 per bus 2 per bus 1, 2, 3 9

s. .. ' '

.

.b

,

-.

'

ELECTRICAL POWER SYSTEMS SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS (Continued)

2. Verifying the generator capability to reject a load of

> 515 kw without tripping,

_

3. Simulating a loss of offsite power in conjuction with reactor building high pressure and rear .Jr building high-high pressure test signals, and; a) Verifying de-energization of the emergency busses and load shedding from the emergency busses, b) Verifying that the 4160 v. emergency bus tie breakers open.

c) Verifying the diesel starts from ambient condition on the auto-start signal, energizes the emergency l busses with permanently connected loads, energizes the auto-connected emergency loads through the load sequencer and operates for > 5 minutes while its generator is loaded with the emergency loals.

I d) Verifying that on diesel generator trip, the loads are shed from the emergency busses and the diesel re-starts on the auto-start signal, the emergency busses are energized with permanently connected loads, the auto-connected emergency loads are energized through the load sequencer and the diesel operates for > 5 minutes while its generator is loaded with tne eiiiergency loads.

4. Verifying the diesel generator operates for > 60 minutes while loaded to > 3000 kw, --

5. Verifying that the auto-connected loads to each diesel generator do not exceed the 2000 hour0.0231 days <br />0.556 hours <br />0.00331 weeks <br />7.61e-4 months <br /> rating of 3000 kw, and

6. Verifying that the automatic load sequence timers are OPERABLE with each load sequence time within + 10"..

_

.

' CRYSTAL RIVER - UNIT 3 3/4 8-5

- _ _ _ _ _ _- A

- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ .

.

TABLE 3.3-4 (Cont'd)

.

'

ENGIllEERED SAFETY FEATURE ACTUATION SYSTEMS INSTRUMENTATION TRIP SETPOINTS FUNCTI0tlAL UNIT TRIP SETPOINT ALLOWABLE VALUES h 3. REACTOR BLDG. SPRAY w

2 a. Reactor Bldg. Pressure 9 liigh-liigh < 30 psig < 30 psig i

, coincident with IIPI Signal fee 1.a.2, 3, 4 See 1.a.2, 3, 4

b. Automatic Actuation Logic Not Applicable Not Applicable

"'

'

)

4. OTilER SAFETY SYSTEMS

a. Reactor Bldg. Purge Isolation on liigh Radioactivity Gaseous 1 x 102 pci/sec Not Applicable

b. Steam Line Rupture Matrix

{

Y 1. Low SG Pressure > 600 psig > 600 psig

$ 2. Automatic Actuation Logic iiot Applicable liot Applicable

5. LOSS OF POWER

a. 4160V Emergency Bus Undervoltage (Loss of Voltage) > 0 volts > 0 volts

x

b. 4160V Emergency Bus Undervoltage (Degraded Voltage) > J75.1 volts > 2375.1 volts

.

- w

--

r .

..

.

'-

TABLE 4.3-2 (Cont'd)

- n. ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURE ACTUATION SYSTEMS Ih3TRUMENTATION SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENTS 5

U CllANNEL MODES IN WilICil E CilANNEL CilAtlNEL FUNCTIONAL SURVEILLANCE

o FUNCTIONAL UNIT CllECK CALIBRATION TEST REQUIRED

• 2 9 3. REACTOR BLDG. SPRAY e a. Reactor Bldg. Pressure 5 liigh-High coincident with IlPI Signal

[ S R M(4) ,

1, 2, 3

]

b. Automatic Actuation Logic N/A ft/A M(3) 1, 2, 3

4. 0 tiler SAFETY SYSTEMS

a. Reactor Bldg. Purge Isolation

,

on liigh Radioactivity

1. Gaseous S R H All Modes

' $$ b. Steam Line Rupture Matrix

1. Low SG Pressure N/A R N/A 1, 2, 3 l

2. Auto .atic Actuation Logic N/A N/A M(3) 1,'2, 3 '

5. LOSS OF POWER l

J'

a. 4160V Emergency Bus Undervoltage (Loss of Vol tage) S R M 1, 2, 3

b. 4160V Emergency Bus Undervoltage (Degraded Voltage) S R M 1, 2, 3 -

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- = m _- . _ _ _ _a