ML20040E129
| ML20040E129 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 01/22/1982 |
| From: | Widner W GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20040E130 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-47893, NUDOCS 8202030153 | |
| Download: ML20040E129 (3) | |
Text
.-
Gr crg.a Power Corr f.nny 3M Petront AwfLe A!unta. Georg a 30308 -
Ta tAore 404 526-7025 Mating AdJrcu Post Othee Box 4545 Attania. Gnorg a 30302 January 22, 1982 Georgia Power W. A. W6dner
" " * * * " ~
V(e Pres &nt and General Vanager D
ry.u ano nyero ceneraton 3
03 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation S
.9ECO"J:~n U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 pgg g 7ggg, 7 uc:n,amumea::a //
Er.BT acennt u WC DOCKET 50-366 N:
g OPERATING LICENSE WF-5 p
EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 2 4
REQUEST FOR CHANGE TO THE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS Gentlemen:
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90 as required by 10 CFR 50.90(c)(1), Georgia Power Company (GPC) hereby requests a change to the Technical Specifications (Appendix A to the Operating License).
The proposed change would provide an alternate method of meeting Source Range Monitor (SRM) operability requirements.
Present requirements state that a count rate of at least 3 cps be maintained before and during all core alterations.
The proposed change would; a)
Eliminate this requirement for core alterations involving only fuel unloading provided the SRMs are confirmed to read at least 3 cps prior to unloading and are checked for neutron response.
b)
Eliminate this requirement prior to a full core reload.
To meet the 3 cps requirement, two diagonally adjacent fuel assemblies will be loaded into their previous core positions next to each of the 4 SRMs.
The Plant Review Board and Safety Review Board have reviewed the proposed change and have determined that it does not involve an unreviewed safety question.
The probability of occurrence and the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety are not increased above those analyzed in the FSAR due to this change.
For the case of fuel unloading, it is not necessary to maintain 3 cps; core alterations will involve only reactivity removal and will not result in criticality.
Loading of diagonally adjacent fuel bundles prior to obtaining 3 cps is permissible because the bundles were in subcritical configuration when removed and will remain subcritical when replaced in their previous positions.
The possibility of an accident or malfunction of a different type than that analyzed in he FSAR does not result from this change because no new modes of operation are introduced.
These provisions are already incorporated into the Hatch Unit 1 Technical Specifications.
The margin of safety as defined in the Technical Spacifications is not reduced.
du 8202030153 820122
- [
19 00 8
PDR ADOCK 05000364 fh0 P
PDR g/
6 1
GeorgiaPbwer A Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission January 22, 1982 Page Two Attached are instructions for incorporation of the proposed change, copies of affected pages, determination of amendment class, and payment.of applicable fees.
W. A. Widner states that he is Vice President of Georgia Power Company and is authorized to execute this oath on behalf of Georgia Power Company, and that to the best of his knowledge and belief the facts set forth in this letter are true.
GEORGIA POWER COMPANY By: 2((
d W. A. W.i.dner Sworn t and subscribed before me this 22nd day of January,1982.
[
Notary Public, Georgia, State at Large
/
IJ.,,/ IT.
I My Commession Esperes Sept. 20.1983 Notary Public REB /mb Enclosure xc:
M. Manry R. F. Rogers, III d
r
ATTACFNENT 1 PEC DOCKET 50-366 OPERATING LICENSE tPF-5 EDWIN I. HATCH tAJCLEAR PLANT UNIT 2 PROPOSED CHANGES TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS Pursuant to 10 CFR 170.12 (c), Georgia Power Company has evaluated the attached proposed amendment to Operating License iPF-5 and has determined that:
a)
The proposed amendmerit does not require the evaluation of a new Safety Analysis Report or rewrite of the facility license; b)
The proposed amendment does not contain several complex issues, does not involve ACRS review, and does not require an environmental impact statement; c)
The proposed amendment does not involve a complex issue, an environmental issue or more than one safety issue; d)
The proposed amendment does involve a single safety issue, namely deletion of the 3 cps requirement for SRMs under certain conditions.
e)
The proposed amendment is therefore a single Class III amendment.
_ _ _ _ _ _