ML20097A744
| ML20097A744 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 09/06/1984 |
| From: | Gucwa L GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| To: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20097A746 | List: |
| References | |
| NED-84-421, TAC-54432, NUDOCS 8409130366 | |
| Download: ML20097A744 (3) | |
Text
h-
. Georgia Power Company 333 Piedmont Avenue Atlanta. Georg a 30308 Telephone 404 526-6526 Maang Add:eas:
Post Office Box 4545 Atfanta. Georgia 30302 Georgia Power L T. Gucwa _
the southern electr,c system Manager Nuclear Engineenng and Chtef Nuclear Engineer N84-421 September 6, 1984 Director of Riclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Mr. John F. Stolz, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 4 Division of. Licensing U. S. M1 clear Regulatory (bnmission Washirgton, D. C.
20555 NRC DOCKET 50-321 OPERATING LICENSE DPR-57 EIMIN I. HA'ICH NUCLEAR PIANT UNIT 1 AEVISION 'IO PROIOSED APRM/RBM TECHNZCAL SPECIFICATIOtB Gentlemen:
By letter dated February 6,
1984 (NED-84-030), Georgia Power Conpany (GPC) subnitted a reglest for amendment to the Edwin I. Hatch Units 1 and 2 Technical Specifications (Appendix A to the Operating Licenses).
Based on discussions with the NRC staff concerning that proposal, GPC albnits the following revisions to the reglested Technical Specifications changes for Unit 1.
'Ibese revisions would:
- 1) provide an additional restriction on plant operation claring the Limiting Condition for Operation with one recirculation loop odt of service; 2) remove the one hour time period allowed prior to blockage of control rod withdrawal with the plant in a Limiting Control Rod Pattern and both Rod Block Monitor (RBM) channels inoperable; and 3) correct a typographical error in that earlier subnittal.
This sibnittal includes a revision which walld reglire that the plant be operated below the limit shown in Technical Specifications Fic31re 3. 6-5 (which correspmds to a load line leading to 80% reactor power at rated core flow) within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> after the loss of service of one recirculation loop.
The NRC staff has previously reglested a similar change to the Unit 2 Technical Specifications in conjunction with the Unit 2 ARTS /P.r.T.rA albnittal. That reglested change was aabnitted by cur JL11y 12,1984 letter (MD-84-375).
\\
f h 8409130366 040906 Il PDRADOCK05000g P
=
5.
TGeorgiaPoiver A 1 Director of M1 clear' Reactor Recplation Attention: : Mr. John F. Stolz, 011ef Operating Reactors Branch No. 4 September 6, 1984~
Page Two Following discussionsI with the NRC staff, GPC proposed a one hour time limit for blocking of control rod withdrawals when both RBM channels were inoperable.
However, we have concluded that the proposed change, which was 1 intended to eliminate a problem with_ the vaguely worded existing gecification, : was inconsistent with our intent, -which was to block further control i rod withdrawal following discovery. that both RBM channels were inoperable.- 'Ite ' attached proposed wording.which recpires the blocking of further control rod ' withdrawals on discovery of inoperability of_ both RBM channels is more consistent with the intent of the specification.
~
Since aur February 6,~ 1984 aabnittal,. GPC has discovered that a symbol was ormnitted - from proposed Technical Specifications page 3.2-16a.
The revisions enclosed with this letter include a correction of that error.
.. - Both ' the Plant Review. Board - and the Safety Review Board have reviewed the : proposed changes and have. ' determined that they do not_ involve an unreviewed safety cpestion. -
'Ite. probability of occurrence and the consecpences 'of. an ' accident or malfunction of ecpipment important to safety
- would = not be increased-above those analyzed _ in - the FSAR d2e to these proposed : change _ becaise the affected ; systems will still be restricted to operational conditions bounded by those described in the FSAR.
The possibility.of an accident. or malfunction of a different type than analyzed
'in - the ' PSAR would not' rea11t from.these proposed change because no new
_ operational or transient. modes would be allowed by the new - reglirements.
'Ite margin of safety as defined in the Technical Specifications would not be redlced die ' to the proposed changes becaise they would rea11t in a more conservative restriction on allowed operational conditions.
Instructions for incorporation'. of these proposed changes as well as revised Technical Specifications pages are enclosed (Attachnent 1).
As( recpired by 10 CFR 50.92, ' a significant hazards review for these
. proposed _ changes is enclosed (Attachnent 2).
GPC has determined that
, implementation of these revisions would not involve a significant hazards consideration.
R1ralant to the regiirements of 10 CFR 50.91, Mr. J. L. Iedbetter of the Environmental Protection Division of the -Georgia Department of Natural Resources will be.sent a copy of this letter and all applicable attachments.
Sincerely yours, f76-L. T. G1 cwa 700775
y.-
- GeorgiaPowerd Director of Maclear. Reactor Regt11ation Attention: Mr. John F. Stolz, Chief Operatirg Reactors Branch No. 4
-September 6,~ 1984
.Page Three
--gg Encloalre xc:
.H. C. Nix, Jr.
-Senior Resident Inspector J. P. O'Reilly, (NRC-Region II)
~
.J..L. Iedbetter' 700775 -