ML20107D571
| ML20107D571 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 02/14/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20107D565 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8502250026 | |
| Download: ML20107D571 (2) | |
Text
_
-_=
UNITED STATES
[
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r.
- j wasmuorow. o. c. zosss
%, e, -* /
SAFETY EVALUATION.BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION a
SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 73 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-72 FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION, ET AL.
l CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT NO. 3 NUCLEAR CENERATING PLANT i
DOCKET NO. 50-302 l
Introduction By letter dated December 14, 1984, as supplemented January 31, 1985 Florida Power Corporation (FPC, the licensee) requested a waiver of seven 18-month Technical Specification (TS) calibration frequency requirements for Cycle V, providing the surveillance is perfomed during Refuel V.
The TSs involved are:
4.3.2.1.1(4.b.1)
Steam Line Rupture Matrix, Low Steam Generator Pressure 4.3.3.5(4)
Renote Shutdown Instrument, Pressurizer Level 4.3.3.5(6)
Remote Shutdown Instrument, Steam Generator Pressure 4.3.3.6(7)
Pressurizer Level 4.3.3.6(8)
Stean Generator Outlet Pressure 4.3.3.6(11)
Startup Feedwater Flow 4.4.3.2.1 Power-Operated Relief Valve Calibration These surveillances require plant shutdown, and the licensee states that because of the high plant capacity factor for the current cycle, it has not had ti.e opportunity to perform the above surveillances.
It further states that the end of the most limiting surveillance interval, including ^he allowable 25% extension, is February 14, 1985, and that Refuel V is expected l
to connence on March 9,1985. The period of plant operation during the j
requested extensions, therefore, is a maximum of 23 days.
Evaluation Daily, monthly and quarterly surveillances for all' instrument strings'have been and will continue to be perfomed as required. All instruments appear to be perfoming in a nomal stable manner with no indication of.significant drift or other malfunction, and can reasonably be expected to' continue to do so l
for the short-(23 days maximum) extension period requested. Discussions with the licensee indicate.that during the last 18-month calibration all instruments,-
except pressurizer level, were found to be within tolerances. The pressurizer level-instruments were recalibrated at that time..It was felt that previous procedures, which did not require recalibration if the instrument readina was within tolerances, contributed to the_ observed out-of-tolerance readings, and the procedures were changed to require-recalibration to the design point.
All pressurizer level instruments now read very cloce-to'each other, so it is concluded that they have not drifted out of calibration and may be exoected to continue to operate in a nomal stable manner for the requested extension period.
PDR p.
2
Based on all the above, we conclude that there is reasonable assurance that the reactor operators will. continue to be provided reliable information of sufficient accuracy during the brief requested extension period. Therefore, it is acceptable to waive the seven requested 18-month calibration frecuency requirements for Cycle V providing the surveillance is performed during Refuel V, which is scheduled to commence on March 9,1985. The provisions of TS 4.0.1.b, limiting the total maximum combined interval time for any three
- consecutive tests to 3.25 times the specified surveillance interval, remain in effect.
Environmental Considerat!on This amendment involves a change in 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 the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. 8 cordingly, 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 mancar, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical.to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated:
February 14, 1985 The following NRC personnel contributed to this Safety Evaluation:
H. Silver.
3 1
- 1
- n.-
+
~