ML20095A437

Provides Info in Support of 840806 Request for Proposed Tech Spec Change Re Containment Isolation Valves.Request Should Be Treated as Emergency Request to Avoid Undue Delay in Unit Startup

ML20095A437
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	08/14/1984
From:	Gucwa L GEORGIA POWER CO.
To:	Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NED-84-434, TAC-55555, NUDOCS 8408210474
Download: ML20095A437 (2)

Text

_ _ __ _ . _ . m 1

(.

a Georgta Power Company 333 Piedmont Avenue At!anta Georgta 30308 Telephone 404 5266526 Ma:liaq Address:

Post Off ce Box 4545 Atlanta. Georg'a 30302 Georgia Power L T. Gucwa the soutten c' ectr c system Manager Nuclear Eng*neering and Chief Nuckar Engir:eer August 14, 1984 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Mr. John F. Stolz, 011ef Operating Reectors Branch No. 4 Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccunission Washington, D. C. 20555 NRC DOCKE'IS 50-321, 50-366 OPERATING LICENSEE DPR-57, NPF-5 EIMIN I. HA'IGI NUCLEAR FIANT UNITS 1, 2 EMERGENCY RELIEF REQUEST - PROPOSED CHANGES 'IO 'IECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS KR 00NTAIl@4EN1' ISOLATION VALVES Gentlenen:

Georgia Power Cm pany (GPC) provides the following information in

- support of our August 6, 1984, proposed change to the Technical Specifications for Plant Hatch Unit 2. 'Ihis information provides the basis for our present request that this proposed change to the Technical Specifications be treated as a request for energency relief.

During the process of evaluation of our August 6 and August 10, 1984, subnittals, it was pointed out that the subject containnent isolation valves are only required to be OPERABLE in Operating Conditions 1, 2 and 3. 'Ihe ACTION statenent for the applicable Specification further states that operation of the Unit could continue with inoperable containnent isolation valves provided that each affected penetration is isolated by use of at least one deactivated automatic valve secured in the isolated position.

We have evaluated the impact of operation of the unit in the maver described above and have concluded that it would be physically possible to do so. However, in 'doing so, certain~ problens would arise, the primary one being the subsequent inability to perform systen flow tests on the RHR or Core Spray systens, should the need arise. In addition, because suppression pool cooling would not be available, other tests which add heat to the

suppression pool, such as HPCI or RCIC systen tests, could not ,be performed. Further investigation into potential impacts has led to the-Plant Unique Analysis Report (PUAR) for- Unit 2 which was subnitted to the NRC as a part of the Mark I contairment Progran. Section 7 of the report f

8408210474 840814 '

I"k y jDRADOCK 05000321 5

. PDR $

I e : ,

GeorgiaPower d Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Mr. John F. Stolz, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 4 August 14, 1984 Page 'IWo addresses the Suppression Pool taperature evaluation. Implicit in the evaluation is the assumption that at least one train of suppression pool cooling is available to maintain the pool taperature within required limits

- and to assure adequate mixing. In addition to systs testing, potential operational events such as a turbine trip, relief valve actuation, or a stuck open relief valve can add heat to the suppression pool, requiring suppression pool cooling. 'Iwo of the valves included in our proposed menchent provide for suppression pool cooling. The PUAR is now applicable to the Unit 2 suppression pool following the cmpletion of modifications required as a result of the Mark I contaiment Progra effort.We have This represents a revised design basis for the Unit 2 contaiment.

therefore concluded, as a result of the Unit's revised design basis docmented by the PUAR, that it is not desirable to operate with the lines providing for suppression pool cooling isolated and the valves deactivated.

Georgia Power Cmpany will evaluate whether additional Technical Specifications might be needed to provide for availability of the Suppression Pool Cooling Mode of RHR.

Unit 2 is now estimated to be ready for startup on August 18, 1984.

This schedule, coupled with the need to maintain suppression pool cooling capability, has prmpted GPC to request that our August 6,1984, request for an menchent to the Technical Specifications be treated as an mergency request, in order to avoid undue delay in the unit startup.

Very truly yours, cy#E A m L. T. Gucwa RDB/nb xc: J. T. Beckh m , Jr.

H. C. Nix, Jr.

J. P. O'Reilly (NRC- Region II)

Senior Resident Inspector L. B. Imdbetter uns