[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 209 (Wednesday, October 29, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56207-56208]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28619]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-302]
Florida Power Corporation; Environmental Assessment and Finding
of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or NRC) is
considering issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of its
regulations to Florida Power Corporation (the licensee), holder of
Facility Operating License No. DPR-72 for operation of the Crystal
River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant (CR3) located in Citrus County,
Florida.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed Action
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated June 21, 1996 as supplemented November 22, 1996, for
exemption from certain requirements of Section III, Paragraph G, ``Fire
protection of safe shutdown capability,'' of Appendix R, ``Fire
Protection Program for Nuclear Power Facilities Operating Prior to
January 1, 1979,'' to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations part
50 (10 CFR part 50). Specifically, the licensee requests an exemption
from the requirements of Section III.G.2.c of Appendix R, to allow the
use of the existing fire barrier material, Thermo-Lag, with less than
1-hour fire rating, for protecting one train of certain redundant safe
shutdown cables located in the auxiliary building elevations 95 and
119, and intermediate building elevation 119.
This environmental assessment does not address the licensee's
request relating to the requirements for battery powered lighting in
areas for the operation of safe shutdown equipment.
The Need for the Proposed Action
10 CFR part 50, Appendix A, ``General Design Criteria for Nuclear
Power Plants,'' Criterion 3 ``Fire Protection,'' specifies that
``Structures, systems, and components important to safety shall be
designed and located to minimize, consistent with other safety
requirements, the probability and effect of fires and explosions.'' 10
CFR part 50, Appendix R, sets forth the fire protection features
required to satisfy the General Design Criterion 3 of the Commission's
regulations. Pursuant to 10 CFR part 50, Appendix R, Section III,
Paragraph G, design features shall be established that are capable of
limiting fire damage so that one train of systems necessary to achieve
and maintain hot shutdown conditions is free of fire damage.
Specifically, 10 CFR part 50, Appendix R, Paragraph III. G.2.c, in
part, requires (if Paragraphs III.G.2.a or b are not applicable)
enclosure of cable and equipment and associated non-safety circuits of
one redundant train in a fire barrier having a 1-hour rating; in
addition, fire detectors and an automatic
[[Page 56208]]
fire suppression system shall be installed in the fire area.
The current CR3 design includes Thermo-Lag fire barriers which do
not provide the level of fire endurance required by NRC regulations. As
part of its program for resolving Thermo-Lag issues, the licensee has
determined that the Thermo-Lag material used as a fire barrier for the
protection of certain safe shutdown cables located in certain
elevations of the auxiliary and intermediate buildings does not qualify
as 1-hour fire rated barriers. In lieu of upgrading the existing
Thermo-Lag fire barriers to satisfy the 1-hour fire rating requirement,
the licensee proposed to implement an enhanced automatic fire
suppression system coverage for these specific fire zones. The licensee
indicates that its proposed enhanced automatic fire suppression system
coverage coupled with the existing Thermo-Lag barriers and other
defense-in-depth features will ensure that one train of equipment
necessary to achieve hot shutdown remains free of fire damage. An
exemption from 10 CFR part 50, Appendix R, Section III, Paragraph G. 2.
c. is required to allow the use of existing Thermo-Lag material that
has less than a 1-hour fire rating, for the specific cables and
equipment located in certain elevations of the auxiliary and
intermediate buildings. By letter dated June 21, as supplemented
November 22, 1996, the licensee submitted the exemption request.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the licensee's
application.
The exemption request is for the following fire zones: auxiliary
building elevations 95 and 119 (fire area AB-95-3B and G, AB-119-6A)
and the intermediate building elevation 119 (fire area IB-119-201A). A
fire in the 95 or 119 elevations of the auxiliary building could cause
the loss of the redundant divisions of the makeup system, heating
ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), instrumentation, battery
charging or essential power supplies. A fire on the 119 elevation of
the intermediate building could cause the loss of redundant divisions
of instrumentation needed to achieve and maintain safe shutdown
following a fire.
These four fire zones contain fire detectors and an automatic fire
suppression system. To enhance the sprinkler coverage in these zones,
the licensee proposes to upgrade the existing sprinkler protection in
the vicinity of the Thermo-Lag fire barriers. The additional sprinkler
protection, coupled with the existing automatic detection, manual fire
suppression capability and the administrative controls provided in
these fire zones, would provide reasonable assurance that an exposure
fire from in-situ or transient combustible materials in the vicinity of
the existing Thermo-Lag fire barriers will not challenge the barriers,
such that damage to redundant divisions of systems and instrumentation
needed to achieve and maintain safe shutdown following a fire will not
occur. Based on data obtained from industry sponsored fire test
programs, the staff estimates that the existing Thermo-Lag barriers
would provide a minimum of 20 minutes of fire resistance. The licensee
is also committed to maintain the Thermo-Lag fire barriers that are the
subject of this request in place. Automatic wet pipe sprinkler
protection that is designed, installed and maintained in accordance
with NFPA 13, ``Installation of Sprinkler Systems,'' have historically
demonstrated a high reliability in controlling fires during the
incipient stage, thereby limiting fire damage and propagation until
extinguishment can be achieved through manual actions. Further, the
licensee has administrative controls that are designed to control the
type, amount, use and location of combustibles. Proper control of
combustibles minimizes the possibility of starting, spreading, or
contributing to a fire.
4.0 Conclusion
On the basis of this evaluation, the NRC staff concluded that
protection provided for the fire zones, auxiliary building elevations
95 and 119 (fire area AB-95-3B and G, AB-119-6A) and the intermediate
building elevation 119 (fire area IB-119-201A) would provide reasonable
assurance that a level of safety equivalent to that specified by the
regulation would be met, and, therefore, is acceptable.
The change will not increase the probability or consequences of
accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluents that
may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in the
allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action does involve features located entirely within the restricted
area as defined in 10 CFR part 20. It does not affect nonradiological
plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the
Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Alternative to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered
denial of the proposed action. Denial of the application would result
in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental
impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
This action did not involve the use of any resources not previously
considered in the Final Environmental Statements related to operation
of CR3, dated May 1973.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on October , 1997 the staff
consulted with the Florida State Official, Mr. Bill Passetti of the
Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, regarding the
environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no
comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental
impact statement for the proposed exemption. Based upon the foregoing
environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that the proposed
action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human
environment.
For further details with respect to this action, see the request
for exemption dated June 21, as supplemented November 22, 1996, which
are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document
Room, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC and at the local public
document room located at Coastal Region Library, 8619 W. Crystal
Street, Crystal River, Florida.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of October 1997.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Frederick J. Hebdon,
Director, Project Directorate II-3, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-28619 Filed 10-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
