ML20076G351
| ML20076G351 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 10/07/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20076G346 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9410190259 | |
| Download: ML20076G351 (3) | |
Text
'
dl2 stouq%g UNITED STATES 8"-
o
~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
WASHING ton, D. C. 20555 D
%...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NVCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO.125 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-35 AND AMENDMENT NO.119 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 May 24, 1994, as supplemented August 4 and September 8, 1994 Duke Power Company (the licensee) submitted a request for changes to the Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Technical Specifications (TS).
The requested changes would transfer the boron concentration in TS 3.9.1 for the reactor coolant system and the refueling canal during MODE 6, and the boron concentration for the standby makeup pump water supply from the spent fuel pool in TS 4.7.13.3 from the TS to the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR).
The associated Bases to the TS are also changed. The application is submitted in response to the guidance in Generic Letter 88-16 which addresses the transfer of fuel cycle-specific parameter limits from the TS to the COLR.
The August 4,1994 and September 8,1994, letters provided clarifyirp information that did not r.hange the scope of the May 24, 1994, application or affect the initial propwed no significant hazards consideration determination.
2.0 EVALUATION The proposed changes to Catawba's TS are addressed below.
(1) The following specifications were revised to replace the values of cycle-specific parameter limits with reference to the COLR that provides these limits.
(a) TS 3.9.1.b:
The numerical value of the boron concentration is replaced with the term:
"the minimum specified in the Core Operating t.imits Report." A corresponding change is made to the ACTION statement.
(6) TS 4.7.13.3: The numerical value of the boron concentration is replaced with the term:
" greater than or equal to the minimum specified in the Core Operating Limits Report."
The Bases of affected specifications have been modified by the licensee to include appropriate reference to the COLR.
(2) The COLR provides the values of cycle-specific parameter limits that are applicable for the current f uel cycle.
TS 6.9.1.9 requires that NRC-approved methodologies be used in establishing the values of these limits 9410190259 941007 PDR ADOCK 05000413 P
. for the relevant specifications and that the values be consistent with all applicable limits of the safety analysis. The COLR is submitted, upon issuance, to the NRC.
The licensee's submittal of May 24, 1994, indicated that the subject boron concentration limits would continue to be evaluated using methodology in the report DPC-NF-2010 A, " Nuclear Physics Methodology for Reload Design," which was approved by the NRC staff on May 13, 1985.
The NRC staff requested additional information regarding how the methodology in the report DPC-NF-2010 A would be used to develop the boron concentration values. The licensee's letter of September 8, 1994, clarified that the spent fuel pool concentration would be made equal to that in the refueling water storage tank (RWST). During refueling operations, water from the RWST is used to fill the refueling canal and during fuel transfer the water in the canal can mix with water in the spent fuel pool. The licensee states that it would therefore be desirable to have the minimum concentrations for the RWST, the refueling canal and the spent fuel pool be the same in order to prevent dilution problems which could result from different concentrations in separate volumes of water. The RWST boron concentration is based on the post-LOCA subcriticality evaluation and its associated all-rods-out critical boron concentration as discussed in the September 8,1994, letter, the Final Safety Analysis Report Section 15.6.5.2, and DPC-NF-2010A. The analysis methodology for determining the all-rods-out boron concentration is included in DPC-NF-2010 A and the staff approved this report on May 13, 1985. The staff approved the transfer of the RWST boron concentration to the COLR by amendments to the Catawba operating licenses that were issued on March 25, 1994. Therefore, the staff concludes that the subject boron concentration values to be transferred to the COLR are developed based on NRC-approved methodology.
This specification continues to require that all changes in cycle-specific parameter limits be documented in the COLR before each reload cycle or remaining part of a reload cycle and submitted upon issuance to the NRC.
Based on our review, the NRC staff concludes that the modifications proposed by the licensee are in accordance with the NRC guidance in Generic Letter 88-16 on modifying cycle-specific parameter limits in TS.
Because plant operation continues to be limited in accordance with the values of cycle-specific parameter limits that are established using NRC-approved methodologies, the NRC staff concludes that this change has no impact on plant safety. Accordingly, the staff finds that the proposed changes are acceptable.
3.0 STATE CONSVLTATION 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.
[
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 and change surveillance requirements. 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 i
offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding (59 FR 45022 dated August 31,1994). 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 4
or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance i
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:
T. Huang,SRXB l
R. Martin,PDII-3 Date:
October 7, 1994 l
1 1
1