ML20215A762
| ML20215A762 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 06/12/1987 |
| From: | Tucker H DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215A765 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-65591, TAC-65592, NUDOCS 8706170071 | |
| Download: ML20215A762 (5) | |
Text
1 DUKE POWER COMPANY P.O. Box 33180
)
CILARLOTTE, N.O. 28242 IIAL IL TUCKER TEl.E PilONE vu.m remainert
'(704)o73-4531 weetman puuosiction j 'j '
(
i June 12, 1987 sy.
,a U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555 Re: Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2i Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414 Technical Specification Amendment Radioactive Liquid Effluent Monitoring J
Dear Sir:
- ,' j
- r l This letter contains a proposed amendment to the Technical Specifications for_
j Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-35 and NFF-52 for Catawba Units 1 and 2.
The
'j attachment' request involves adding operability and surveillance requirements for-
'l radioactive liquid effluent monitoring instrumentation for the. Turbine Building sump and will provide radioactive liquid waste sampling and analysis program-o requirements for the Turbine Building sump demineralizer skid and radiation monitor -
EMF-31. The attachment contains the proposed change and a discussion of the justification and safety analysis.
The analysis is included pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91 and it has been concluded that the proposed' amendment does not involve significant hazards considerations.
AN This request involves one amendment request to Catawba's Technical Specificatioin.
Accordingly, pursuant to 10 CFR 170.21 a check for $150.00 is' enclosed.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91 (b) (1) the appropriate South Carolina State Officidl is being provided a copy of this amendment request.
/
Very truly yours,
,f
/
i,,
' t,
_ gk
/
Hal B. Tucker RWO/62/sbn g
Attachment 8706170071 870612
~
DR ADOCK 05000413 g
lL (
p OO' PDR
.hO
- I
]
U.. S. Nuclet.r RsgulatoryL Commission 1
~ June 12, 1987 Pate Two q
i u
1 xc:
Dr. J. Nelson Grace, Regional Administrator 4
Region, Nuclear. Regulatory Commission U. S.
II 101 Marietta' Street, NW, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia.30323 q
Mr.1Ha:rward 'Shealy,. Ch af j
Bureal c4 Radiological Health q
South Carolina Department of Health &
Env3.rc2nental Controir 2600 Bull Street Columbie, South.Carolino. 29201 i
American Nuclear Insurers e/o Dottie Sherman, ANI Library The Exchange, Suite;245
' 270 Farmington Avenu'e f
Farmington, CT 06032 l
M&M Nuclear Consultants I
1221 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10020 INFO Records Center Suite 1500 1100 Circle 75 Parkway i
L
, Atlanta, Georgia 30339 Mr. P. K. Van Doorn NRC Resident Inspector Catawbs Nuclear Station i
i i
/
a I
l l
1
7 t
3,
. U. S. Nuclear Ragulatory Commission June 12. 1987
's Pago Four i
HAL'B. TUCTER, being duly sworn, states that he is Vice Presiden of Duke Power Company; % hat he is authorized on the part of said Company to sign and file with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission this revision toj t,he Catawba Nucl(.et Station Technical Specifications, Aprandix A to License N68. NPF-35 and NPF-52; and that ali statements and' matters set forth therein. ire true and correct to the best of
[,
(is knowledge. <
l l
{,
~'
/
~
Hal B. Tucker."V,1ce President j
i, i
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 12th day of Jt,nd, 1987.
j i
8 (1-.
-)_ ')
-3
_Norarp Public d > ',/
op o n o ro ri
/,+.,,gL.gj,'
$ ?,.l' n o I 4,, f,........**., fk My Commission Er.pires:
- c.
M_f'
/
//
]
O x
g[ N;
'skp. gg@l Ipppgy,9pd s
}
t i
3 s
)
Y s
b i
i N
l
/
(
1 l-f 1
i l
Discussion and Analysis of No Significant Hazards Consideration The proposed amendment to Technical Specification Tables 3.3-12, 4.3-8 and 4.11-1 would add operability and surveillance requirements for radioactive liquid effluent monitoring instrumentation for the Turbine Building sump and provide radioactive liquid waste sampling and analysis program requirements for the Turbine Building Sump Demineralizer Skid and radiation monitor EMF-31.
Primary to secondary leaks can develop through reparable defects in the steam generator heat exchangers and into the normally non-radioactive turbine steam system (" secondary side") water. Such leaks would be repaired as they occur, but require continued unit operation with leakage until the leak can be fully identified and characterized. When these leaks occur, the Turbine Building sump can become radioactively contaminated.
The volume of wastewater produced during these leaks can exceed the treatment capacity of the Liquid Radioactive Waste Treatment System. Duke Power Company plans to provide portable equipment as needed to treat the water from these potential situations. The treated wastewater will be discharged into the Low Pressure Service Water (RL) System. The attached flow schematic indicates the flow path. The radioactive release rates will meet 10 CFR Part 20 Appendix B limits.
The NRC dose limit imposed by the Technical Specifications and 10 CFR Part 50 will also be met.
A Nuclear Station Modification (NSM) is being installed which will provide influent and effluent flow paths for Chem-Nuclear Company equipment during a primary to
]
secondary leak. The processed water will be discharged thro gh Radiation Monitor EMF-31 to the RL discharge piping ;, the Turbine Building from the Turbine Building j
sump.
The purpose of this modification is to allow very low levels of radioactivity to be discharged through the Conventional Wastewater Treatment (WC) System from the Turbine Building sump as a result of primary to secondary leaks as well as the Auxiliary Building drain sump when contaminated. During a primary to secondary leak, the Turbine Building sump can be contaminated with very low levels of to j
radioactivity. The quality and quantity of this wastewater may not be amenable treatment in the Radwaste Treatment System or by the portable equipment.
The decision of whether the wastewater will be routed to the Radwaste Treatment System or the WC system would depend on the level of activity, anticipated volumes of sump effluent, anticipated volumes of liquid waste requiring processing through radwaste, and the need to process normal nonradioactive wastes. The Radwaste System has a process capacity of only 16,000 to 18,000 gallons per day. Depending on the type of primary to secondary side leakage, sumps could add in excess of 72,000 gallons per day.
Technical Specification 3/4.11.1, Table 4.11-1 already identifies the WC System as a radioactive release point. All releases through the WC System will be made in accordance with the Technical Specifications and will not result in unacceptable concentrations of radioactive effluents released offsite. Neither will there be any increased risk to public health and safety.
. I It should be emphasized that the Radwaste Treatment System will remain the primary treatment system for processing highly contaminated radioactive wastes and their subsequent release. The proposed modifications will be utilized for processing secondary side and trace-contaminated wastes such as Auxiliary Building ventilation condensate. These waste waters will be controlled and their radioactive content reduced to within 10 CFR Part 20, 10 CFR Part 50 and Technical Specifica~ ion limits.
The (C System will be monitored and discharged in compliance with all applicable radiological effluent concentrations and dose requirements stated in the stations Technical Specifications and Federal Regulations.
It will also be sampled and monitored in compliance with the NPDES permit.
Please note that these changes are being requested for clarification and consistency. The 10 CFR 50.59 review which was performed during the review of the above mentioned NSM concluded that Technical Specification changes were not required since discharge through the Conventional Waste Water Treatment line is already addressed in Technical Specification Table 4.11-1.
10 CFR 50.92 states that a proposed amendment involves no significant hazards considerations if operation in accordance with the proposed amendment would not:
(1)
Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequencas of an j
accident previously evaluated; or j
(2) Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3)
Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The proposed amendment does not involve an increase in the probability or j
consequences of any previously evaluated accident. The probability of an accident 1
is not increased because these changes involve addition of components to mitigate the consequences of previously evaluated accidents. The offsite dose consequences resulting from primary to secondary leaks will be decreased as a result of this modification and Technical Specification amendment. These changes will allow installation of processing equipment capable of reducing offsite doses.
This modification and Technical Specification amendment will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated since these changes do not affect the design or operation of any Safety-Related Systems.
These changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety since these changes do not affect the design or operation of any Safety-Related System.
For the reasons stated above, it is concluded that the proposed amendment does not involve significant hazards consideration.