ML20135E838
| ML20135E838 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 09/09/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20135E831 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-57304, TAC-57305, NUDOCS 8509170050 | |
| Download: ML20135E838 (1) | |
Text
.
a neo
!m
'o' 8
~g UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
r, y
WASHWCTON, D. C. 20555 s.,...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENTS N05.ll4 AND 54 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES NOS. DPF-57 AND NPF-5 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY OGLETHORPE POWER CORPORATION MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC AUTHORITY OF GEORGIA CITY OF DALTON, GEORGIA EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKETS NOS. 50-321 AND 50-366 Introduction and Evaluation
' Subsection 6.15.1 of the existing Hatch Units 1 and 2 Technical Specifications requires that the environmental qualification program for Hatch Units 1 and 2 be completed by June 30, 1982.
10 CFR 50.49 provided new schedule requirements for equipment qualification schedules superseding the June 30, 1982 deadline and any other previously imposed date for environmental qualification of electric equipment. By letter dated March 11, 1985, Georgia Power Company (GPC) requested that Technical Specification Section 6.15.1 which specifies the June 30, 1982 completion date be deleted.
We conclude that the proposed deletion modifies the TSs to conform with the regulations and is acceptable. However, GPC is still subject to the provisions of 10 CFR 50.499 and must meet the specified completion dates or the extended completion dates granted by the Comission in response to requests by GPC.
Environmental Considerations l'hese amendments relate to changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, these amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, tO t:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comiss' ion's regulations, and the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the comon defense l
and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: September 9, 1985 Q91{00 g
g Principal Contributor:
G. Rivenbark
-