ML20077E726
| ML20077E726 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 12/08/1994 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20077E723 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9412130105 | |
| Download: ML20077E726 (2) | |
Text
-
pa ssa 4
UNITED STATES
.j e j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINoToN. D.C. 20666 @ 01 p'
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 126 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-35 AND AMENDMENT NO. 190 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 JNTRODUCTION j
By letter dated August 25, 1994, Duke Power Company, et al. (the licensee),
submitted a request for changes to the Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Technical Specifications (TS).
The requested changes would revise the testing interval for auxiliary feedwater (AFW) system pumps from monthly to quarterly on a staggered test basis. The amendments are consistent with the guidance in NUREG-1366, " Improvements to Technical Specifications Surveillance Requirements" and Generic letter 93-05, "Line-Item Technical Specifications Improvements to Reduce Surveillance Requirements for Testing During Power Operation," dated September 27, 1993.
In addition, a note is incorporated from NUREG-1431, " Revised Standard Technical Specifications, Westinghouse Plants" into the TS clarifying that the turbine-driven AFW pump cannot be tested until the required pressure exists in the secondary side of the steam generator. Changes have also been made to the Bases section 3/4.7.1.2 to reflect this note.
2.0 EVALUATION The NRC has completed a comprehensive examination of surveillance requirements in the TS that require testing during power operation. The evaluation is documented in NUREG-1366, " Improvements to Technical Specification Surveillance Requirements," dated December 1992. The staff found that while the majority of testing at power is important, safety can be improved, equipment degradation decreased, and an unnecessary burden on personnel resources eliminated by relaxing a small fraction of the TS testing intervals.
Based on the results of the evaluations docum.*d in NUREG-1366, the NRC issued Generic Letter 93-05.
Section 9.1 of NUREG-1366 discusses the pot e al advantages of reduced surveillances for the auxiliary feedwat :r pm,.
As noted in the report, although performance of surveillances
~.s en spari at mechanism in the identification of problems with the au.<ilic; fuc rater pumps, the testing also contributes to the degradation of the w y v system unavailability.
The analyses used in the report found ;lat e son y surveillance test interval may be contributing to AFW p ur ur w allc ility through failures and equipment degradation.
The report reck a ided a raange in the testing frequency to a quarterly interval. Another s,antage of the quarterly testing 9412130105 941200 PDR ADOCK 05000413 P
is that it is consistent with the requirements of the ASME Code. As discussed in Generic Letter 93-05, the licensee has indicated that the change in surveillance frequency is compatible with observed plant operating experience and is consistent with the NRC guidance on this issue. The change in the footnote eliminates a now obsolete footnote and replaces it with a clarification of when the subject testing is required to be performed. This clarification is consistent with the NRC guidance in NUREG-1431 and is acceptable.
On the bases discussed above, the NRC staff finds the proposed changes to the Catawba TS to be acceptable. The revised Bases pages have been incorporated into the Catawba TS.
3.0 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.
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 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 51619 dated October 12, 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 or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
5.0 CONCLUSION
l Thr 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 ac"ivities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, anj (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common i
defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: R. E. Martin, PD 11-3 Date: December 8, 1994