ML20078L632
| ML20078L632 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 02/01/1995 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20078L635 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9502130079 | |
| Download: ML20078L632 (7) | |
Text
__
l V 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION DUKE POWER COMPANY. ET AL.
DOCKET NO. 50-413 NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE. PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION. AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-35 issued to Duke Power Company (the licensee) for operation of the Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1, located in York County, South Carolina.
The proposed amendment would change Tecnical Specification (TS) 3.6.1.2 to defer the next scheduled containment integrated leak rate test (ILRT) at Catawba Unit 1 for one outage, from the end-of-cycle (EOC) 8 refueling outage (scheduled for February 1995) to E0C 9 (scheduled for June 1996). Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50, Appendix J, requi.es that three ILRTs be performed at approximately equal intervals during each 10-year service period at a nuclear station.
"Approximately equal intervals" is defined in Catawba's TS as 40 plus or minus 10 months. The proposed one-time change would allow Catawba to extend that interval to 60 plus or minus 10 months.
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act) and the Commission's regulations.
The Comission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in
~
950213o079 950201 DR ADOCK 0 3
+- -
accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or conseque1ces of an accident previously i
evaluated; or (2) create the possibilit t of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(ay, the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:
The following analysis is presented, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91, to demonstrate that the proposed change will not create a Significant Hazard Consideration.
1.
The proposed change will not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
Containment leak rate testing is not an initiator of any accident; the proposed interval extension does not affect reactor operations or accident analysis, and has no radiological consequences. Therefore, this proposed change will not involve an increase in the probability or consequences of any previously evaluated accident.
i 2.
The proposed change will r ot create the possibility of any new accident not previously evaluated.
The proposed change does not affect normal plant operations or configuration, nor does it affect leak rate test methods. The test history at Catawba (no ILRT [intergrated leak rate test) failures) provides continued assurance of the leak tightness of the containment structure.
3.
There is no significant reduction in a margin of safety.
It has been documented in draft NUREG-1493 that an increase in the ILRT interval from 1 test every 3 years to 1 test every 10 years would result in a population exposure risk in the vicinity of 5 representative plants from.025 to.14%.
The proposed change included herein, an increase from 40 [plus or minus) 10 months to 60 [plus or minus) 10 months, represents a small fraction of that already very small increase in risk.
Therefore, it may be concluded that no significant reduction in a margin of safety will occur.
Based on the above, no significant hazards consideration is created by the proposed change.
e_9y7-?-+--
3
--m
=
4 6.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied.
Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significact n:zards consideration.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this propdsed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of the 30-day notice period. However, should circumstances change during the notice period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility, the Commission may issue the license amendment before the expiration of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will consider all public and State comments received.
Should the Commission take this action, it will publish in the FEDERAL REGISTER a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a hearing after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.
Writtee comments may be submitted by mail to the Rules Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and shoulo cite the publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room 6022, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays.
Copies of written comments received 5
w e
i t,.
may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for } eave to intervene is discussed below.
By March 8, 1995
, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the sutdect facility operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a i
hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's " Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part 2.
Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714 which is available at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at the York County Library,138 East Black Street, Rock Hill, South Carolina.
If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, designated by the Commission or by the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the designated Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will j
1 issue a notice of hearing or an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following factors:
(1) the nature l
u
% of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made party to the proceeding; (2) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. The petition should also identify the specific aspect (s) of the subject matter of the proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene. Any person who has filed a petition for leave to intervene or who has been admitted as a party may amend the petition without requesting leave of the Board up to 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended petition must satisfy the specificity requirements described above.
Not later than 15 days prior to the first prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner shall file a supplement to the petitiin to intervene which must include a list of the contentions which are sought to be litigated in the matter.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted.
In addition, the petitioner shall pro <ide a brief explanation of the bases of the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and our which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion.
Petitioner must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact.
Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration.
The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to file such a
1 e
6 supplement which satisfias these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those psmitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing, including the opportunity to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses.
If a hearing is requested, the Comnission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held.
If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment.
If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Attention: Docketing and Services Branch, or may be delivered to the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 21N L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by the above date. Where petitions are filad during the last 10 days of the notice period, it is requested that the petitioner promptly so inform the Commission by a toll-free telephone call to Western Union at 1-(800) 248-5100 (in Missouri 1-(800) 342-6700). The Western Union operator should be given Datagram Identification Number N1023 and the following message addressed to Herbert N. Berkow:
r t
4 petitioner's name and telephone number, date petition was malled, plant name, and publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER notice. A copy of the petition should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and to Mr. Albert Carr, Duke Power Company, 422 South Church Street, Charlotte, North Carolina, attorney for the licensee.
Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervene, amended petitions, supplemental petitions and/or requests for hearing will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding officer or the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition and/or request should be granted based upon a balancing of the factors specified ini 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).
For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated October 18, 1994, which is available for public inspection at the Comission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at the York County Library, 138 East Black Street, Rock Hill, South Carolina.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day of February 1995.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION f(Z6
/Ro dit E. Martin, Project Manager
~'
g Project Directorate II-3 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1