ML20010J549

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 43 to License DPR-72

ML20010J549
Person / Time
Site:	Crystal River
Issue date:	09/25/1981
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20010J546	List: ML20010J549 ML20010J550
References
TAC-46962, TAC-46973, NUDOCS 8110050324
Download: ML20010J549 (1)

Text

t. '

i f

g,t

(

p ancy

'x.

,'y m ' gs UNITED STATES

%s[

h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j,

R. 3 wasmuoTon. o. c. nosss

/s

~

e

.....-g

~'%.

s 3AFETY EVALUATI1N BY'THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION h

q u;-

~ - >

, SUPPORTING AtiENDtfEim no. 43 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-72

~~

FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION, ET AL.

CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT NO. 3 NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT

'0OCKET NO. 50-302 y

4 v

s In tri.

-. c n, 3

-t+

..\\

By_. letter dated September 24,4 1981, Florida Power Corporation (FPC) proposed'

'7 changes to the Crystal River Unit No. 3 (CR-3) Technical Sp2cifications.

The:pioposed change would extend the monthly control rod surveillance s s period for three dgys for the Sepenber 1981 test.

~

(-

', ?i3cussion and Safety Evaluation,

~

h.

V. Technical Specificatior 4.1.3.1.2 requires control rods to be exercised Mnce per month (31 dais + 25%) to verify that they are movable and, u.

therefore, free:frge mechanical. interference. The next test of a

control, rods would be required on or before noon on September 25, 1981, which is about 21/2 days before Cycle 4 refueling shutdown starts.

FFL 3as requested a delay of 3 days for this surveillance requirement becadse the test requires putting CR-3 into a manual control mode that niay cause an increase in the leak rate of the seals of a reactor n

coalant pump which hastsomewhat" degraded seals. !!anual control removesJ.he Integrated Control System from the reactor control system

'which inbrn results in pressure osci}'lations of up to + 20 pst of the primary system due to the characterist1es of the plant in that mode g

cf'bpes. tion. The primary system pressure oscillations would put more stren on tne reactor cooian't pump seals.

(

A deldy of. three days in the surveillance test is not considered to be

-4 sign'f(icant safety hazard because there has been no evidence of

' malfunction or sticking of the control rods during this cycle of

~ operation or the previous rori tests, including the August 1981 test.

e In addition, the reactor has considerable excess shutdown margin so that failure of several rods to unsert would not re'sult in failure of the reactor to shutdown a~s required.

\\

&.a

~ '

.f.

s

_bi fk" g.y,>,

v

+

M 9110050324 810925 PDR ADOCK 05000302

..L, P

PDR x

Q.

y /

a s?s. c

~;

t s

~*:

. 'i, c.

m knvironmental -Consideration We have determined that the amendment does not authorize a change in effluent types *or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will no',-result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that the amendment involves an action which'is insignificant fr<m the standpoi environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR t31.5(d)(4), knt of hat an g'r,

environmental impact statement, or negative declaration and environ-mental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance o!>this amendment.

Conclusion

).' ~

We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:

(1) because the. amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probabilit:f. ar consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendment does not' involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical

- i, to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

.r Dated:

September 25, 1981 e

s

-fv g

'n y_.-

s

,N W

b 4

o

)