ML20057B631
| ML20057B631 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 09/16/1993 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20057B630 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9309230035 | |
| Download: ML20057B631 (3) | |
Text
.
d go atog\\
i
)*
S UNITED STATES 5
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
(
,/
w AsuiscTon. o.c. 2osss-oooi SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.109 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-35 AND AMENDMENT NO.103 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-52 DUKE POWER COMPANY. ET AL.
CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION. UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-413 AND 50-414
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated February 25, 1993, as supplemented May 20 and August 31, 1993, Duke Power Company, et al. (the licensee), submitted a request for changes to 1
the Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Technical Specifications (TS).
The requested changes would change the frequency of reporting the quantity of i
each of the principal radionuclides released from the plant site to unrestricted areas in liquid and in gaseous effluents from semiannual to i
annual. Specifically, the title " Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Report" would be changed to " Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report" in TS 1.18, 6.9.1.7, 6.13.2.a, 6.14.2.a. 6.15.a, 6.16, and TS Index page XVIII.
The proposed change for TS 6.9.1.7 would also require that the Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report covering the operation of the unit during the previous calendar year be submitted before May 1 of each year, and that the quantity of solid waste releases be reported on an annual, rather than a semiannual, basis. The letter of August 31, 1993 provided clarifying information that did not change the initial proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
The revised requirement that the report be submitted before May 1 of each year will provide additional time for completion of analyses and will assist in elimination of the need for supplements to the initial report.
2.0 EVALUATION As noticed in the Federal Reaister on August 31, 1992 (57 FR 39353), the NRC has amended 10 CFR 50.36a to reduce the required frequency of reporting the quantity of each principal radionuclide released to unrestricted areas in liquid and gaseous effluents from every 6 months to every 12 months. The amended regulation is intended to reduce the administrative burden to licensees.
The NRC staff finds that the proposed amendments for Catawba with respect to reporting releases in liquid and gaseous effluents on an annual (rather than semiannual) basis is consistent with the revised regulation, has no adverse safety implication, and is, therefore, acceptable.
9309230035 930916 PDR ADOCK 05000413 p
a
, The reporting requirement for solid waste releases is not addressed by the revised 10 CFR 50.36a. However, reporting the quantity of solid waste releases on an annual (rather than semiannual) basis is consistent with the intent of the proposed changes for liquid and gaseous effluents. Moreover, i
this change affects only the reporting frequency and has no adverse safety implications. The change to an annual reporting basis for solid wastes is, therefore, acceptable to the NRC. Additionally, the NRC staff contacted the agencies that receive the reports regarding the proposed issuance of the amendments. These agencies are:
(1) the Division of Habitat Conservation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, (2) the Reactor Radiological Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and (3) Region 4 of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The representative of each agency acknowledged that reporting of solid waste on an annual basis would be acceptable.
t
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Comission's regulations, the South Carolina State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no coments.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The amendments change requirements with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve 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 Comission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public coment on such finding (58 FR 41502 dated August 4,1993).
Accordingly, the amendments meet 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 the amendments.
The amendments also relate to changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements. 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 environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
t
5.0 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:
Robert E. Martin Date:
September 16, 1993 I
-