[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 177 (Monday, September 14, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49139-49140]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-24566]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414]
Duke Energy Corporation, et al.; Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1
and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos.
NPF-35 and NPF-52, issued to Duke Energy Corporation, et al. (the
licensee), for operation of the Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2,
located in York County, South Carolina.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed Action
The proposed action would amend the Catawba Facility Operating
Licenses (FOLs) for Units 1 and 2 and to revise the Catawba Technical
Specifications (TSs) to be consistent with the Improved Standard
Technical Specifications (ITS) conveyed by NUREG-1431 (April 1995).
The proposed action is in response to the licensee's application
dated May 27, 1997, which was supplemented by letters dated March 9,
March 20, April 20, June 3, June 24, July 7, July 21, and August 5,
1998.
The Need for the Proposed Action
It has been recognized that nuclear safety in all plants would
benefit from improvement and standardization of the TSs. The
Commission's ``NRC Interim Policy Statement on Technical Specification
Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors'' (52 FR 3788, February 6,
1987), and later the Commission's ``Final Policy Statement on Technical
Specification Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors'' (58 FR 39132,
July 22, 1993), formalized this need. To facilitate the development of
individual improved TSs, each reactor vendor owners group (OG) and the
NRC staff developed standard TS (STS). For Westinghouse plants, the STS
are published as NUREG-1431, and this document was the basis for the
new Catawba Unit 1 and Unit 2 TSs. The NRC Committee to Review Generic
Requirements reviewed the STS and made note of the safety merits of the
STS and indicated its support of conversion to the STS by operating
plants.
Description of the Proposed Change
The proposed revision to the TSs is based on NUREG-1431 and on
guidance provided in the Final Policy Statement. Its objective is to
completely rewrite, reformat, and streamline the existing TSs. Emphasis
is placed on human factors principles to improve clarity and
understanding. The Bases section has been significantly expanded to
clarify and better explain the purpose and foundation of each
specification. In addition to NUREG-1431, portions of the existing TSs
were also used as the basis for the ITS. Plant-specific issues (unique
design features, requirements, and operating practices) were discussed
at length with the licensee, and generic matters with the OG.
The proposed changes from the existing TSs can be grouped into four
general categories, as follows:
1. Nontechnical (administrative) changes, which were intended to
make the ITS easier to use for plant operations personnel. They are
purely editorial in nature or involve the movement or reformatting of
requirements without affecting technical content. Every section of the
Catawba TSs has undergone these types of changes. In order to ensure
consistency, the NRC staff and the licensee have used NUREG-1431 as
guidance to reformat and make other administrative changes.
2. Relocation of requirements, which includes items that were in
the existing Catawba TSs. The TSs that are being relocated to licensee-
controlled documents are not required to be in the TSs under 10 CFR
50.36 and do not meet any of the four criteria in the Commission's
Final Policy Statement for inclusion in the TSs. They are not needed to
obviate the possibility that an abnormal situation or event will give
rise to an immediate threat to public health and safety. The NRC staff
has concluded that appropriate controls have been established for all
of the current specifications, information, and requirements that are
being moved to licensee-controlled documents. In general, the proposed
relocation of items in the Catawba TSs to the Updated Final Safety
Analysis Report, appropriate plant-specific programs, procedures, and
ITS Bases follows the guidance of NUREG-1431. Once these items have
been relocated by removing them from the TSs to licensee-controlled
documents, the licensee may revise them under the provisions of 10 CFR
50.59 or other NRC staff-approved control mechanisms, which provide
appropriate procedural means to control changes.
3. More restrictive requirements, which consist of proposed Catawba
ITS items that are either more conservative than corresponding
requirements in the current Catawba TSs, or are additional restrictions
that are not in the existing Catawba TSs but are contained in
[[Page 49140]]
NUREG-1431. Examples of more restrictive requirements include: placing
a limiting condition for operation on plant equipment that is not
required by the present TS to be operable; more restrictive
requirements to restore inoperable equipment; and more restrictive
surveillance requirements.
4. Less restrictive requirements, which are relaxations of
corresponding requirements in the existing Catawba TSs that provide
little or no safety benefit and place unnecessary burdens on the
licensee. These relaxations were the result of generic NRC actions or
other analyses. They have been justified on a case-by-case basis for
Catawba and will be described in the staff's Safety Evaluation to be
issued in support of the license amendments.
In addition to the changes previously described, the licensee
proposed certain changes to the existing TSs that deviated from the STS
in NUREG-1431. These additional proposed changes are described in the
licensee's application and in the staff's Notices of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Opportunity
for a Hearing (63 FR 25106, 63 FR 27760, 63 FR 40553). Where these
changes represent a change to the current licensing basis for Catawba,
they have been justified on a case-by-case basis and will be described
in the staff's Safety Evaluation to be issued in support of the license
amendments.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action
and concludes that the proposed TS conversion would not increase the
probability or consequences of accidents previously analyzed and would
not affect facility radiation levels or facility radiological
effluents.
Changes that are adminstrative in nature have been found to have no
effect on the technical content of the TSs, and are acceptable. The
increased clarity and understanding these changes bring to the TSs are
expected to improve the operator's control of the plant in normal and
accident conditions.
Relocation of requirements to licensee-controlled documents does
not change the requirements themselves. Future changes to these
requirements may be made by the licensee under 10 CFR 50.59 or other
NRC-approved control mechanisms, which ensures continued maintenance of
adequate requirements. All such relocations have been found to be in
conformance with the guidelines of NUREG-1431 and the Final Policy
Statement, and, therefore, are acceptable.
Changes involving more restrictive requirements have been found to
be acceptable and are likely to enhance the safety of plant operations.
Changes involving less restrictive requirements have been reviewed
individually. When requirements have been shown to provide little or no
safety benefit or to place unnecessary burdens on the licensee, their
removal from the TSs was justified. In most cases, relaxations
previously granted to individual plants on a plant-specific basis were
the result of a generic NRC action, or of agreements reached during
discussions with the OG and found to be acceptable for Catawba. Generic
relaxations contained in NUREG-1431 as well as proposed deviations from
NUREG-1431 have also been reviewed by the NRC staff and have been found
to be acceptable.
In summary, the proposed revision to the TSs was found to provide
control of plant operations such that reasonable assurance will be
provided so that the health and safety of the public will be adequately
protected.
These TS changes will not increase the probability or consequences
of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluents
that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in
the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action involves features located entirely within the restricted area as
defined in 10 CFR Part 20. It does not affect nonradiological plant
effluents and has no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the
Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable
environmental impact associated with the proposed amendments, any
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be
evaluated. The principal alternative to this action would be to deny
the request for the amendments. Such action would not reduce the
environmental impacts of plant operations.
Alternative Use of Resources
This action did not involve the use of any resources not previously
considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to the
operation of Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1 and Unit 2.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on August 25,1998, the staff
consulted with the South Carolina State official, Mr. Virgil Autry,
Director, Division of Radioactive Waste Management. The State official
had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.31
and 51.32, the Commission has determined not to prepare an
environmental impact statement for the proposed amendment.
For further details with respect to this action, see the licensee's
letter dated May 27, 1997, which was supplemented by letters dated
March 9, March 20, April 20, June 3, June 24, July 7, July 21, and
August 5, 1998, which are available for public inspection 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.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of September 1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter S. Tam,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate II-2, Division of Reactor
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-24566 Filed 9-11-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
