ML20149K145
| ML20149K145 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 02/11/1988 |
| From: | Hopkins J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20149K148 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8802230381 | |
| Download: ML20149K145 (9) | |
Text
i c.-
7590 01 UNITEDSTATESNUCLEARPE00LATORYCOMMISS$
DUKF DOWER COWDA4", ET A1.,
00CKET NOS. 50-413 AND 50 d14 NOT!CE OF CONSIDFDaTTON OF ISSilANCE Or AMFNpprNTS TO FACILITY OPEPATING LICFHSF.S AND PROPOSED NO STGMfFICANT 4A7APDS CONSIDEPATION DETERMINATION AND OPPORTUNITY TO HEARING The U. S. Muclear Regulatory Comission (the Connissicr) is ennsidaring issuance of amer &*nts to Facility Oparatino License Nos. NPr-35 and NPF 0, issued tn Duke Power Company, et e1., (the licensee), for operation of the Catawbe Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 9, located in York County, South Carolina.
The proposed amendments wnuld revise Table 2.?-1 Technical Specification (TS) 3/4.2.3, and Figure 3.?-3, and woulst redue.e the reouire Poactor Coolant System (RCS) total ficw from 396,100 gpm to 387,600 gpm.
The licensee stated in its submittal, reauestino the TS changes, dated February 10, 1988, that on January 13, 1988, following Catawba Unit 1 secerd refueling cutage, a precision calorimetric test was conducted as recuirad by TS surve111arce requirement 4.2.3.5.
This test resulted in the lowering of the RCS elbow tap flow coefficients which are used to ennvert albow tap pressure drops to RCS flow rates, tipon insertion of the new renstants into the operator aid computer, indicated RCS flow decreased to between 90.9% and 100,1% of the required flow.
Because RCS flow was not consistently above 100%
of the required flow, pnwer was limited to 98% of the licensed onwer level of the unit in accordance with TS Fioure 3.?-3.
The fact that the RCS flow ra+a had remained constant throughout the past cycle and had returred to the same value (100.3%1 followino startun indicates that there is nn daaradation in Eg22;ggggego P
-p.
ectual RCS flow rate but that there is an annunt o#
.certaintv attributable to the RCS flow measurement.
An investiaation into the indicated decrease in PCS flow rate is beino pursued by the licensee's and Westinghnuse's personnel.
One of the areas being investdaated is the possibility that changes in RCS thernal streamina is causing a change in indicated hot and cold leg RTO tenperatures. The precision heat balance calorimetric test is extremely sensitive to any un-certainty in this parameter.
All applicable FSAR postulated accidents and transients that have been analvzad used an assumed finw which is eoual to, or conservative with respect to, the proposed TS flow of 3A7,600 gon.
Certain Catawba FSAD Chapter 15 transients, those using the Imornved Themal Design Procedure (ITOP), are analyzed with a nominal flow rate of 387,600 gpm at nutlined in the above submittal.
The appropriate finw rate assurption for the catawba FSAR Chapter 15 trar.sients not using ITDP is the ornposed TS ninimum measured ficw, 3R7,600 gpm, ad,4usted down by the flow uncertainty, ?.M. to give 379,073 gpm. All of thase transients are l
currently analyzed, as outlinad in the above submi*tal, with flow rates less than this ad,iusted value and are therefora conservative.
l The thermal hydraulic design analyses #nr the latest reload cores, l
Catewha 1 Cycle 3 and Catawba 2 Cvele ?, used the minirum raasured flow of 387,600 gpm.
It can he seen from this and from the preceding discussion of l
FSAP Chapter 15 analyses, that all applicable steady-state and transient core therrel-hydraulic analyses have been perfomed with ' lows equal to, or i
conservative with resp?ct to, the proposed TS minimum measured ' low.
l l
l
.,. 1 PCS average temperature will remain urchanged with the change in minimum measured flow.
This means that PCS initial fluid and metal stored energy will remadr assantially unchanged.
Fur +her, a constant pct averaga temperature l
inplies that the driving temperature dif#erence for primary-to-secordary heat transfer wil' remain essentially ur.channad. These two parametart, initial energy certent and rate of energy transfer arross the steam generator tubes, are the maans b9 which mass and anergy releases influence containment respense for the trarsients analyzed in Saction 6.2.1 of the FSAR. Pecause tha change in RCS flow is being made with a negligible change in RCS averace tencerature, the mass and energy releases calculated in Sections 6.2.1.3 through 6.2.1.5 of the FSAP will not be af# acted.
Frem the above discussions the licensee concluded that the revisinn to the TSs will not adversely impact the accident analyses documented in Sectient 6.9.1 ard 15 of the FSAR nor the steady-state thermal-hydraulic reload design analyses discussed in Section d.4 of the FSAR.
Before issuance of the preposed licorse amandments, the Comission will have made findings recuired by the Atomic Eneroy Act of 1954, as amended r
(tha Act) and the Comission's regulations.
The Comission has made a proposed detennication that the renuest for anordment involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Comission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.9?, this means that operation of the
'acility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significent increase in the prebability or consequences of an accident pre-viously evaluoted or (2) create the pessibility of a new or dif'erant kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (31 involve a signi-ficant raduction in a margin of safety.
~':
t-The licensee's submittal dated February 10, 1988, concluded that the raquested TS changes do not involve a significant hazards censideratien for the reasons set forth below.
(D The proposed amendments would not involve a sionificant increase in the probability or censequences of anv previnusly evaluated accident because all apolicable accidents have already been revised using the RCS flow which is beino orepesed.
The results of the analyses usina the new finw assumptions have been found to be acceptable. Therefore, the current analyses will not be affected by this proposed chantle.
(2) The proposed amendments would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated because the lower flow rate was accounted for in all aoolicable accident analyses.
The results of the analyses using the new flow assumptions ware found to be acceptable.
Ne new modes n# opera
- ion that have not been ana1yzed will be introduced.
(3) The proposed amendments would not involve a significant reduction in a margin of sa'ety because all applicable safety analyses were perfomed using the proposed flow rate or a flow rate which is conservative with respect to the proposed flow rate.
All accident analyses resulte, remain within acceptable limits and therefora the proposed change will rot signi-ficantly impact the margin of safety.
Based on its review, the Comission agrees with the licensee's conclusion.
Accordinaly, based on the reasons and conclusions given above, the l
Comission prnposes to determine that the requested TS chances do not involve l
a significant hazards consideration, i
l
..,. The Comission is seeking public cements on this proposed determination.
Any coments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will he considered in makina anv final determiration.
The Commission will not nomally make a final detarmination unless i+ receives a requast for a hearing.
Written coments mav be submitted bv rail to the Rules and Procedures Branch, Division of Rulet and Records, Office of Administration, ll. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C. 20555, and should cite the publica-tion date and page number cf tha FEl1EPAL QEGISTER notice. Written coments may also be delivered to Room 4000, Maryland National Bank Puilding, 7735 Old Georgetown Roed, Bethesda, Maryland frem 8:15 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Copies of written enments received may be examined at the NPC Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washinaton, D. C.
The filing of racuests for hearica and petitions for laave to intervene are discussed below.
l By March 18, 1988, The licensee may file a recuest for a hearing with respect to issuance of the arendments to the subject facility operating licenses and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceedinq and who wishes to participate as a party in the ornceedirq must fila a written petition for leave to intervene.
Request for a hearing and petitions for leave to interview shall be filed in accordance with the Comission's "Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedirns in 10 CFR Part 2.
If a request for a hearing nr petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Comirsion or an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, desianated by the Comission or by the Chaimer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Roard Panel, will rule en the request and/nr petitirn and the Secretary or the desicrated Atomic Safety and Licerting Roard will issue a notice of hearina or an appropriate order.
,,. As required by 10 CFR 92.714, a petition for leave to intervene sha11 se+ forth with particularity the interest of the patitioner in tha proceedino, and how that 'ntercst may be affected by the results of the oreceeding.
The patition shculd soecifically exclain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following factors:
(1) the nature of the petitioner's richt undar the Act to be made party to the proceedino; (2) the reture and extant of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order which ray be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest.
The petition should e.lso identify tha specific aspect (s) of the sub.4ect matter of the proceeding as to which petitioner wishes to intervene.
Any person who has filed a petition for leave to irtervene or who has been admitted as a party may amend the petition withcut requesting leave of tha Board up to 'i' teen (1 9 days prior to the # irs prehearing conference scheduled in the prncaadina, but such en amended petition must satisfy the specificity requirements described above.
Not later than fifteen (15) days prior to the first prehearing conferenca scheduled in the proceeding, a petitioner shall fila a supplement to the petition to intervene which must include a list o' the contentinnt which are sought to be litigated in the matter, and the bases for each contention set forth with reasonable specificity.
Contentinns shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendments under consideration.
A petitinner who fails to file such a supplement which satisfies these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be pemitted to participate as a party.
.?
Those remitted to intervene bacome perties to the proceediro, sub.iect to anv limitations in the ordar grartinq 1eeve to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the cerduct of the hearino, including the cpportunity to present avidence and cross-axamine witnesses.
If a hearing is requested, the Comission will make a final determination on the issue of no significart hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide wher the hearino is held.
If tha final detemine+1on is that the request #cr amendments involves nn significant hazards consideration, the Comission ray issue the amendments and make then effective, notwithstardina the request for a hearing.
Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendments.
If a final determination is that the amendments involve a significart harards censideration, any haaring held weuld take placa before the issuance of any anandrants.
Normally, the Comission will not issue the amendments until the axpiration o' 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 Comission may issue the licensa amendments before the expiration of the 30-day notice period, provided that its final detemination is that the amendments involve no signi#icant hazards consideration. The final determ4 ration will censider all public and State coments received.
Should the Comissinn take this action, it will publish a notice of issuance and provide for opportunity for a hearirg after issuance.
The Comission expects that the need to taka this action will occur ver.y in'requentiv.
s,*
-8 A request 'or e hearing or a petition fer leave to intervene must be filed with the Secretary of the Comission,11. S. Nuclear Recula+ory Comission, Washirp+0n, D. C. ?0555, Atten+4cn:
Docketing and Service Aranch, or may be delivered te +he Comission's Public Pocument Room,1717 H Street, N.W.,
Veshington, D. C., by the above date. Whare patitions are filed during the last ten (10) days o' the notice period, it is requested that the petitionar promptly so inform the Comission by a tnll-free telephone call to Festern Ifnion at (8001 325-f000 (in Misseuri (R00) 347-6700). The Western Union operator should be giver Datagram identification Number 3737 and the 'ollow-ing messaga addressed to don 8. Hopkins:
(petitioner's name and ta1* phone number), (date petition was reailed), (plant name), and (publication date and page number of this FEDERAL REGISTER noticei.
A copy of the petition should also be sent to the Office of the Genera' Ceunsel-White Flint, ll. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D. C. 2n555, and to Mr. Albert Carr, Duke Power Cerrpany, 4P? South Church Street, Charlotte, North Carolina, 28242, attorney for the licensaa.
i Nontimely filings of petitions for leave to intervana, amended petitions, suppl *martel petitions and/or reouests for hearing will not be entertained absent a detemination by the Comission, the presidina officer or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board designated to rule on the petition and/or reouest, that the petitioner has mada a substantial showing of gned cause for the grantiro of a late petition and/or request.
That detemination will be based
(
f l
upon a balanciro of the factors speci'4ed in 10 CFR 2.714(a)(1\\(i)-(v) and 2.714(d),
l t
l
i :
For further details with resoect to this action, see the application for i
amendrents dated February 10, 1988 which is available for public inspectior at the Commissicr's Public Document Rocn,1717 H Straet, N.
W., Washington, D. C., and the York County Librarv 138 East Black Street, Rock Hill, South Caroline. ?9730.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland on this litt day of February
, 1988.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS9 ION i
,/ j^ /
Jon B. Hopkins, Acting Director l
Project Directorate 11-3 l
Division of Reactor Proiects I/II Office of Nuclear Peactor Peculation F
3 i
i I
i W
PDII-3/rRP-I/II PDII-3/DRP-I/II II-3/DRP-!/II KJabbour/nac PPond JHopkins, Acting PD 4
02/ll/88 02/
/88 02/jy/PR l
t
.