ML20087K944
| ML20087K944 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 08/18/1995 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20087K941 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9508240270 | |
| Download: ML20087K944 (2) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:,' '.. e m nn n m [ L t p' UNITED STATES L Mg! E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ~ H wAsuewovow, o.c. sones.coes 1 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION l RELATED TO AMENDMENT'NO.133 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF ! O .AND AMENDMENT NO. 127 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-52 DUKE POWER COMPANY. ET AL. G CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION.' UNITS 1 AND 2: DOCKET NOS. 50-413 AND 50-414 .i i ^ ] s
1.0 INTRODUCTION
i By letter dated Nay 18, 1995, as supplemented May 31, 1995, Duke Power Company,:et al'.-(the licensee), submitted a request for changes'to the' Catawba-Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Technical' Specification (TS).Sectiont. J 4.6.1.2.a. The requested cLanges would revise' the frequency for conducting the Catawba Unit 2 Integrated Leak Rate Test (ILRT) from a nominal: frequency. '1 of once per 40 months to :less than or equal to 70 months on a one-time basis for the interval between the second and third Type A tests. This also j involves the' granting of an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR Part-50, 1 Appendix J, which is addressed by separate correspondence. 2.0 EVALUATION The 1icensee's' letters of May 18,;1995,:and May 31, 1995, requested. temporary relief from the requirement to perform a set of three Type A tests at approximately equal ' intervals during each 11-year service. period;of the - primary containment. The' requested change vould permit a one-time interval extension of.the third Type A test by approximately 30 months ~(from the 1995 refueling outage at the end-of-cycle 7 (EOC-7), which begins in October ~1995, 'to EOC-8 refueling outage, currently scheduled for March 1997) and.would permit the third Type A test of the second'10-year inservice inspection period to not correspond with the end of the current American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure. Vessel Code (ASME Code)=. inservice inspection interval. Technical Specification 3.6.1.2 paraphrases the requirements of 10 CFR ~ In Part 50, Appendix?J, concerning reactor containment leak rate' testing.
- particular, TS 3.6.1.2 summarizes the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50,.
Appendix J, Paragraph'III.D.l(a), periodic retest schedule for the Type A test. With respect to Catawba,' Unit.1, on March 9, 1995, the staff issued an exemption from the Appendix J, Type A test schedule from' EOC-7 until EOC (See 60 FR 16207). The present TS change conforms the Catawba, Unit 2,!TS to reflect the exemption from.the Appendix-J testing requirement, and maintains - the' current form of the TS.for Catawba, Unit 1. : Based on the above, the staff finds the change to TS 3.6.1.2(a) proposed by the licensee to be acceptable. .9508240270 950818 7 PDR.ADOCK 0S000413: '9. PDR 1 .... =..
a< i 1.
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 x< -{ - official had no comments. 4.0 ERYlRQttiENIAL10NS10EBaIIDH The amendments 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 L 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 (60 FR 32362 dated June 21, 1995). 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, j
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 Contributors: R. Lobel J. Pulsipher R. Martin i Date: August 18, 1995 O L}}