ML20079P927
| ML20079P927 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 11/01/1991 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20079P923 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9111140167 | |
| Download: ML20079P927 (3) | |
Text
.
/p %c UNITED STAT ES
!)
3 #,
'I NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5.' 1 k
W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20Lb5 t -
S,
/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACT 09 REGUL ATig EL?TED TO AMENDMENT 00.176 TO FACILITY Opff ATING LICENSE OPR-57 AND APENDtiElli NO.117 TO FACILITY OPFRATING LICENSE NPF-5 GEORGIAPOWERCOPf's1Y,ETAL.
EDWIN1.HATCHNUCLE,AF,f. ANT, UNITS 1AND2 DOCKE'.405. 50-321 AND 50-366
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By [[letter::HL-1446, Application for Amends to Licenses DPR-57 & NPF-5 Revising Tech Specs Re Generic Ltr 88-01, NRC Position on IGSCC Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping|letter dated April 12, 1991]], the Georgia Power Company, et al. (the licensee),
proposed changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs) for the Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2.
The proposed changes incorporate NRC staff position on Inservice inspectico (151) in Generic letter (GL) 88-01, "NRC Position on 1GSCC in BWR Austenitic Staitiless Steel Piping," and the NRC Safety Evaluation (SER) of February 16, 1990. The first proposed change revises Unit 2 TSs 3.4.3.1, 3.4.3.2, 4.4.3.1, and 4.4.3.2 regarding the reactor coolant system (RCS) leakage monitoring.
The second proposed change modifies Unit 1 TSs 3.6.G.1 and 3.6 G.2 regarding reactor coolant leakage. The last proposed change revises Unit 1 TS 4.6.K and Unit 2 TS 4.0.5 to state the 151 Program for piping, as addressed in GL 88-01, is in conformance with NRC staff position except where a specific written relief has been granted, and to delete ASME Section XI requirements related to the start of comercial operation.
2.0 DISCUSSION NRC GL 88-01, issued January 5, 1988, provided guidance in the form of NRC positions regarding Intergranular Stress Corrosior. Cracking (IGSCC) problems in Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) piping made of austenitic stainless steel that is four inches or larger in nominal diameter and stains reactor coolant at a temperature above 200 degrees Fahrenheit duri;.
ractor power operation regard-less of ASME code classification.
NRC GL 88-01 requested licercees of operating BW o and holders of construction permits for BWRs to provide information regarding conformance with the NRC positions. One of the items which the GL requested licensees to address was a TS change to include a statement that the ISI program for piping covered by the scope of NRC GL 88-01 will be in conformance with the NRC positions on schedule, methods, personnel, and sample expansion included in this GL, or in accordance with alternate measures approved by the NRC staff.
3.0 EVALUATION The NRC staff previously completed an evaluation of the licensee's 151 programs outlined in response to GL 88-01.
By letter dated February 16, 1990, we informed the licensee that their programs were fully acceptable and satisfied all of the requirements in GL 88-01 except for the TS on the ISI l
program and identified leakage.
l 9111140167 911101 ADOCK0500gg?1 PDR P
n
. The licensee has proposed the following chinges to the TSs in conformance with the guidance in GL 88-01 and the February 16, 1990 Safety Evaluation:
Revise Unit 2 TS 3/4.4.3 to incorporate the requirements of an 11RC Confir-matory Order dated July 6,1983, and an flRC Safety Evaluation dated February 16. 1990.
Specifically, TS 3.4.3.1 will now require, under certain conditions, that grab samples be obtained and analyzed every 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> in lieu of 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />.
Similarly, in TSs 4.4.3.1.a and 4.4.3.1.b channel or sensor checks on the leakace detection systems will be performed at least every 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />. The same interval will apply for the surveillance requirements in TSs 4.4.3.2.a and 4.4.3.2.b.
Also, this TS revision will require monitoring of floor and equipment sump levels and flow rates, primary containment atmospheric particulate and gaseous radioactivity at least once every 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />. Further, TS 3.4.3.2.d will state that confor-mance to the 2 gpm increase in RCS unidentified leakage will be applicable, "within a 24-hour period or less." These changes comply with HRC positions stated in the February 16, 1990 SER, and therefore, are acceptable.
Revise Unit 1 TS 4.6.G applicable to reactor coolant leakage requirements und the surveillance frequency associated with the primary containment dimosphere particulate radioactivity monitoring system, the piimary containment radiciodine monitoring system, and the primary containment gaseous radioactivity monitoring system. The change will state, "at least once per 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />," instead of "at least once per 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />," as currently specified. Also, TS 3.6 G.I.a no longer specifies averaging over a 24-hour period for the 5 opm unidentified RCS leakage limit, and TS 3.6.G.I.b specifies that the limit for 2 gpm increase will not be exceeded "within a 2a-bour period or less."
Further, a phrase in TS 3.6.G.1.c was changed from, "a 24-hour period," to "any P4-hour period."
Surveillance Requirements under 4.6.G will also be changed to reflect the 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> requirer.ent. These changes follow the same requirements stated in the equivalent Unit 2 TSs, a.d therefore, are acceptable.
Add TS Section 4.6.K.4 for Unit 1 and 4.0.5.f f or Unit 2 to incorporate the Inservice Inspecticn Program for piping covered by GL 88-01. Also, delete Unit 2 TS 4.0.5.a.1 and renumber other TSs. This action removes obsolete ASME Section X1 requirer.ents applicable prior to the e'
of commercial operation of the facility.
The above changes to TSs 4.6.K.4 and 4.0.5.f are generally in accordance with the model TS and wording in GL 88-01 and flRC SER dated February 16, 1990.
These changes are administrative in nature because they amend the TSs by adding statements which incorporate a referer.ce to toe existing NRC-approved Hatch 151 program. The existing Hatch 151 program Ensures that surveillance is performed on p1 ping susceptible to IGSCC in a manner that increases the probability of detecting any defects or flaws. The revision to Unit 2 TS 4.0.5.a.1 is consi-dered administrative in nature, and therefore, acceptable to the NRC staff.
The conclusions of the Hatch plant's accident analyses as documented in the FSAR or the NRC staff's SEE re not altered by this change to the TSs. Therefore, the NRC staff has concluded that the TS changes satisfy the intent and objective of GL 88-01 and are acceptable.
--_-_-______--___________a a
. a.0, STATE CONSULTATION In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Georgia State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The Statt official had no cornents.
5.0 ENVIR0 tit' ENTAL CONSIDERAT10f4 The amendments change requirements with respect to installation or use of a facility component located wittin the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes surveillance requirements. The f:RC staff has determined that the amendments involve nn significant increase in the amounts, 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 radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, and there has been no pub 11c comment on such finding (56 FR 29275). Accordingly, forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)gibility criteria for :ategorical exclusion set the amendments meet the eli Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no -"ironmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendments.
6.0 00llCLt!S10H The Cunmission has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not he endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
Frank Rinaldi, PDil-3/DRPE Date:
November 1, 1991 i
u l
Jx
-