ML20247H798
| ML20247H798 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 07/18/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247H791 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8907310133 | |
| Download: ML20247H798 (2) | |
Text
UNITED STATES
' '3" NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
wassmcToN. o. c. 20sss v..
i SAFETY EV/10ATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED T0 AMENDMENT NO. 67 TO FACILITY'0PERATING LICENSE NPF-35 AND AMENDMENT NO. 61 TO FACILITY OPERATING-LICENSE NPF-52 DUKE POWER COMPANY, ET AL.-
CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NCS. 50-413 AND 50-414
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated April 26, 1989, Du ke Power Company, et al. (the licensee),
proposed amendnents to the operating licenses for Catawba Nuclear Station
~
Units 1 and 2, which would revise Item 2.a. of Technical Specification (TS).
l Tables 3.3-7 and 4.3-4.
The TS revision would change the elevation at which seismic monitor (triaxial peak accelerograph) IMIMT 5010 is located from 613'
+ 8 9/16" to 588 ' + 6 1/8".
The relocation of the monitor, from the auxiliary feedwater. line near the top of steam generator ID to a cold leg accumulator.
lifting lug, was required because of operability concerns associated with its previous location. A description of the inoperability and the plans to relocate the monitor were submitted by the licensee in a special report dated February 24, 1989. The changes are applicable to Unit 1 only. Unit 2 is included adminis-tratively because the TSs are conbined in one docunent for both units.
2.0 EVALUATION l
1 On December 8,1988, while performing the 18 month channel calibration on triaxial peak accelograph IMIMT 5010, the licensee discovered that the recorder was damaged due to vibrations on the auxiliary feedwater line. _The same problem was discovered in 1987 and at that time it was assuned to be. an isolated occurrence.
However, failure analysis and trending alerted the licensee that this was a reoccurring failure. The component was replaced and returned to service at the same location on Decenber 12, 1988.
l The licensee's evaluation indicated that the monitor would remain operable until it is exposed to process induced vibrations during and after Unit 1-startup.
Therefore, the licensee concluded that if the monitor is not moved to a new location before startup, the component should be declared inoperable at the I
time of startup and TS 3.3.3.3 Action Statement followed.
To provide for long-term operability, the monitor was moved to a cold leg
]
accumulator lifting lug at elevation 588' + 61/8" on 4anuary 16, 1989, prior i
to startup of Unit 1 from its third refueling outage.
The new location of the monitor would preclude process induced vibration and would satisfy the intent of Pegulatory Guide 1.12 in that it is on " reactor equipment."
g 3 gCK 05o00413 3 89073e p
PNU l
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - = -
a
i 4
' Based on its review of the licensee's request, the staff agrees with the licensee's conclusions in that the changes have no impact on the design or.
operation of the station, and would not pose an undue risk to public health and safety.
Therefore, the change in the elevation and location of triaxial peak accelerograph IMIMT 5010 is acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
4 l
These amendments involve changes to the installation or use of fecility compo-
{
rents located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The staff has determined that the amendments involve no significant increase in the amounts, I
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 exposure. The Commission has made a final no significant hazards consideration finding with respect to these amendments. Accordingly, the amend-i ments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in l
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact state-ment or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance.
of these amendments, i
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission made a proposed determination that the amendments involve no significant hazards consideration which was published in the Federal Register (54 FR 25373) on June 14, 1989. The Commission consulted with the state of South Carolina.
No public comments were received, and the state of South
)
Carolina did not have any consents.
1 We have 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, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations, and the issuance of these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
I Principal Contributor:
K. Jabbour, PDII-3/DRP-I/II Dated: July 18, 1989 I
i I
I
DATED:
July 18, 1989 AMENDMENT NO. 67 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 AMENDMENT NO. 61 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 2 DISTRIBUTION:
iDocket= Filew NRC"PDR' ' ~"
Local PDR PD#11-3 R/F Catawba R/F S. Varga 14-E-4 G. Lainas 14-H-3 D. Matthews 14-H-25 M. Rood 14-H-25 DI K. Jabbour 14-H-25
)
- )
OGC-WF 15-B-18 B. Grimes 9-A-2 E. Jordan MNBB-3302 W. Jor.es P-130A T. Meek (8)
P1-137 ACRS (10)
P-135 GPA/PA 17-F-2 ARM /LFMB AR-2015 J. Calvo 11-F-23 f
D. Hogan MNBB-3302 G. Bagchi i
l I