ML061790609
| ML061790609 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 07/31/2006 |
| From: | Stang J NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLII-1 |
| To: | Jamil D Duke Power Co |
| Stang J, NRR/DORL, 415-1345 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML061790672 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC MC5052, TAC MC5053 | |
| Download: ML061790609 (14) | |
Text
July 31, 2006 Mr. Dhiaa Jamil Vice President Catawba Nuclear Station Duke Power Company LLC 4800 Concord Road York, SC 29745
SUBJECT:
CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2, ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENTS REGARDING REPORTING REQUIREMENTS (TAC NOS.
Dear Mr. Jamil:
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 230 to Renewed Facility Operating License NPF-35 and Amendment No. 226 to Renewed Facility Operating License NPF-52 for the Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 (Catawba 1 and 2).
The amendments consist of changes to the licenses in response to your application dated October 27, 2004.
The proposed amendments would revise the facility operating licenses (FOLs) for Catawba 1 and 2 to remove license conditions (LCs) that (1) limit the maximum rod average burnup for any fuel rod to 60 Gwd/mtU, and (2) list reporting requirements with regard to maximum power level, Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), antitrust conditions, fire protection, and additional conditions. The proposed amendments also requested approval of revisions to the UFSAR to include a new discussion of the fuel burnup limit.
These amendments address only the changes to the reporting requirements. The licensees request to remove the LC that limits the maximum rod average burnup for any rod to 60 Gwd/mtU and approval of the changes to the UFSAR will be issued in separate license amendments.
A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. A Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's biweekly Federal Register notice.
Sincerely,
/RA/
John Stang, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No. 230 to NPF-35
- 2. Amendment No. 226 to NPF-52
- 3. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: See next page A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is also enclosed. A Notice of Issuance will be included in the Commission's biweekly Federal Register notice.
Sincerely,
/RA/
John Stang, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No. 230 to NPF-35
- 2. Amendment No. 226 to NPF-52
- 3. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: See next page DISTRIBUTION:
RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter Public RidsNrrPMJStang(hard copy)
RidsNrrDirsItsb(TKobetz)
LPL2-1 R/F RidsNrrLAMOBrien(12 hard copies)
GHill(4 hard copies)
RidsNrrDorlLpl2-1(EMarinos)
RidsRgn2MailCenter(MErnstes)
RidsOgcRp RidsNrrDorlDpr Package No. ML061790672 Amendment No. ML061790609 Tech Spec No. ML061790684 & ML061790722 NRR-058 OFFICE NRR/LPL2-1/PM NRR/LPL2-1/LA OGC NRR/LPL2-1/BC NAME JStang MOBrien SHamrick EMarinos DATE 07/20/06 07/20/06 07/25/06 07/27/06 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 & 2 Page 1 of 2 cc:
Mr. Lee Keller, Manager Regulatory Compliance Duke Power Company LLC 4800 Concord Road York, South Carolina 29745 Ms. Lisa F. Vaughn Duke Power Company LLC 526 South Church Street P. O. Box 1006 Mail Code = EC07H Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006 North Carolina Municipal Power Agency Number 1 1427 Meadowwood Boulevard P.O. Box 29513 Raleigh, North Carolina 27626 County Manager of York County York County Courthouse York, South Carolina 29745 Piedmont Municipal Power Agency 121 Village Drive Greer, South Carolina 29651 Ms. Karen E. Long Assistant Attorney General North Carolina Department of Justice P.O. Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 NCEM REP Program Manager 4713 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-4713 North Carolina Electric Membership Corp.
P.O. Box 27306 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 Senior Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4830 Concord Road York, South Carolina 29745 Mr. Henry Porter, Assistant Director Division of Waste Management Bureau of Land and Waste Management Dept. of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, South Carolina 29201-1708 Mr. R.L. Gill, Jr., Manager Nuclear Regulatory Issues and Industry Affairs Duke Power Company LLC 526 South Church Street Mail Stop EC05P Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 Saluda River Electric P.O. Box 929 Laurens, South Carolina 29360 Mr. Peter R. Harden, IV, Vice President Customer Relations and Sales Westinghouse Electric Company 6000 Fairview Road 12th Floor Charlotte, North Carolina 28210 Mr. T. Richard Puryear Owners Group (NCEMC)
Duke Power Company LLC 4800 Concord Road York, South Carolina 29745
Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 & 2 Page 2 of 2 cc:
Division of Radiation Protection NC Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources 3825 Barrett Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-7721 Mr. Henry Barron Group Vice President, Nuclear Generation and Chief Nuclear Officer P.O. Box 1006-EC07H Charlotte, NC 28201-1006
DUKE POWER COMPANY LLC NORTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION SALUDA RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
DOCKET NO. 50-413 CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 AMENDMENT TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 230 Renewed License No. NPF-35 1.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:
A.
The application for amendment to the Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (the facility)
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-35 filed by the Duke Power Company LLC, acting for itself, North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation and Saluda River Electric Cooperative, Inc. (licensees), dated October 27, 2004, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations as set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B.
The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C.
There is reasonable assurance (I) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; D.
The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E.
The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.
2.
Accordingly, the license is amended to delete paragraph 2.F. from Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-35. Paragraph 2.F. is hereby amended to read as follows:
2.F. Reporting to the Commission Deleted by Amendment No. 230 3.
This license amendment is effective as of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days of issuance.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/RA/
Evangelos C. Marinos, Chief Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Attachment:
230 Changes to License No. NPF-35 Date of Issuance: July 31, 2006
DUKE POWER COMPANY LLC NORTH CAROLINA MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY NO. 1 PIEDMONT MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY DOCKET NO. 50-414 CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 2 AMENDMENT TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 226 Renewed License No. NPF-52 1.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:
A.
The application for amendment to the Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 2 (the facility)
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-52 filed by the Duke Power Company LLC, acting for itself, North Carolina Municipal Power Agency No. 1 and Piedmont Municipal Power Agency (licensees), dated October 27, 2004, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations as set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B.
The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C.
There is reasonable assurance (I) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; D.
The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; and E.
The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied.
2.
Accordingly, the license is amended to delete paragraph 2.F. from Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-52. Paragraph 2.F. is hereby amended to read as follows:
2.F. Reporting to the Commission Deleted by Amendment No. 226 3.
This license amendment is effective as of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days of issuance.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/RA/
Evangelos C. Marinos, Chief Plant Licensing Branch II-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Attachment:
226 Changes to License No. NPF-52 Date of Issuance: July 31, 2006
ATTACHMENT TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 230 RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-35 DOCKET NO. 50-413 AND LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 226 RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-52 DOCKET NO. 50-414 Replace the following pages of the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses with the attached revised pages. The revised pages are identified by amendment number and contain marginal lines indicating the areas of change.
Unit 1 Remove Insert NPF-35 page 4 NPF-35 page 4 NPF-35 page 5 NPF-35 page 5 Unit 2 Remove Insert NPF-52 page 4 NPF-52 page 4 NPF-52 page 5 NPF-52 page 5
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 230 TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-35 AND AMENDMENT NO. 226 TO RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-52 DUKE POWER COMPANY LLC CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-413 AND 50-414
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated October 27, 2004 (Agency wide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML043030271), Duke Power Company LLC (Duke, the licensee), requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) for the Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 (Catawba 1 and 2).
The proposed amendments would revise the facility operating licenses (FOLs) for Catawba 1 and 2 to remove license conditions (LCs) that (1) limit the maximum rod average burnup for any fuel rod to 60 Gwd/mtU, and (2) list reporting requirements with regard to maximum power level, Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), antitrust conditions, fire protection, and additional conditions. The proposed amendments also requested approval of revisions to the UFSAR to include a new discussion of the fuel burnup limit.
These amendments address only the changes to the reporting requirements. The licensees request to remove the license condition that limits the maximum rod average burnup for any rod to 60 Gwd/mtU and make changes to the UFSAR will be issued in separate license amendments.
2.0 REGULATORY EVALUATION
A condition was included in the FOLs issued to some nuclear power plants requiring the licensee to make reports to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regarding violations of other sections of the operating license. This reporting requirement in most cases is redundant to reporting requirements contained in related the regulations (i.e. Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Part 50, Section 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73). A typical license condition reads as follows:
Except as otherwise provided in this license and its appendices, the Licensee shall report any violations of the requirements contained in Section [LC] 2.C of this license in the following manner: initial notification shall be made within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> to the NRC Operations Center via the Emergency Notification System with written followup within thirty days in accordance with the procedures described in 10 CFR 50.73 (Licensee event report [LER] system).
The proposal to eliminate the reporting of violations of specific requirements of FOLs is applicable to any licensee that has such a provision in its facility operating license. The NRC staff notes that many operating licenses do not contain the requirement because it was never added or was removed by a license amendment.
In addition to the information provided to support licensing decisions, the NRC obtains information about plant operation, licensee programs, and other matters using a combination of inspections and reporting requirements. Routine or scheduled reports that are required to be submitted to the NRC are defined in the related regulations, specific license condition, technical specification, or an NRC-approved program document. The reporting of emergencies, unplanned events or conditions, and other special cases may also be addressed within such documents by the inclusion of reporting thresholds and are also the focus of the reporting requirements in Section 50.72, Immediate notification requirements for operating nuclear power reactors, and Section 50.73, Licensee event report system. Changes to the reporting regulations in Sections 50.72 and 50.73 became effective in January 2001 (see Federal Register notice published on October 25, 2000 (65 FR 63769) and included extending the allowable reporting times for LERs from 30 days to 60 days.
3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION
LC 2.F of the Catawba 1 and 2 FOLs requires the licensee to report any violations of the requirements of LC 2.C of the FOL and defines the method and allowable time periods for such reports. The reporting threshold (i.e., a violation) for some of the conditions included in LC 2.F of the FOL duplicates those defined in Sections 50.72 and 50.73. However, the requirements in the FOL have different deadlines than those defined in the regulations (following a rule change in 2001). This difference in reporting requirements has led to variations in reporting. Units 1 and 2 have a 30-day reporting requirement in the FOL, the condition has decreased the benefits of the rulemaking. For those cases where the current FOL requirement to report violations is also reportable in accordance with the regulations defined in Sections 50.72 and 50.73, the NRC staff finds that the regulations adequately address this issue and the elimination of the duplicative requirement in the FOL is acceptable.
The NRC staff also assessed violations of administrative requirements that could be reportable under the current LC, but that may not have a duplicative requirement in a regulation or other regulatory requirement. The NRC staff finds that the requirements to report such problems within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> with written reports to follow using the LER process is not needed. The NRC staff is confident that the information related to such violations that is actually important to the NRCs regulatory functions would come to light in a time frame comparable to the 60-day LER requirements. The information would become available to the appropriate NRC staff through the inspection program, updates to program documents, resultant licensing actions, public announcements, or some other reliable mechanism. The NRC staff finds that the elimination of LC 2.F of the Catawba 1 and 2 FOL, will not result in a loss of information to the NRC that would adversely affect either its goal to protect public health and safety or its ability to carry out its various other regulatory responsibilities. Therefore the NRC staff finds the proposed changes to the FOLs acceptable.
4.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the South Carolina State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments relate to changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there have been no public comments on such finding (70 FR 38717) July 5, 2005. Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environment assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
6.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: John Stang Date: July 31, 2006