ML20196K255
| ML20196K255 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 10/22/1986 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20196K254 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-62027, NUDOCS 8803150239 | |
| Download: ML20196K255 (4) | |
Text
1 o
UNITED STATES
. 8 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
o h
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 64 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-5 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY OGLETHORPE POWER CORPORATION' MUNICIPAL. ELECTRIC AUTHORITY OF GEORGIA CITY OF DALTON, GEORGIA EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET N0. 50-366
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By application dated July 11, 1986, Georgia Power Company (GPC) proposed a change to the Technical Specifications to Facility Operating License No. NPF-5, for Edwin I. Hatch Unit 2.
The proposed change would update the Hatch Unit 2 Technical Specification Table 3.8.2.6-1 "Primary Containment Penetration Conductor Overcurrent Protective Devices", to reflect the addition of new equipment to be installed during the current refueling outage.
2.0 EVALUATION A design modification scheduled for implementation during the current Unit 2 refueling outage will result in the installation of two new drywell cooler units.
In order to ptovide electrical power to the new o
cooler units, it is necessary to add two primary containment penetration conductor overcurrent protective devices to the plant and to the listing in the Hatch Unit 2 Technical Specification Table 3.8.2.6-1 "Primary Containment Penetration Conductor Overcurrent Protective Devices".
This change is consistent with the guidelines of Regulatory Guide 1.63, Revision 2, "Electrical Penetration Assemblies in Containment Structures for Light-Water-Ceoled Nuclear Power Plants".
Based on the abve the staff has concluded that the proposed change to r
the Hatch Unit 2 technical Specifications to reflect the installation of two primary containmnt penetration conductor overcurrent protective devices is consister t with the plant safety analysis. Accordingly, the staff finds the proposed change to the Hatch Unit 2 Technical Specifications to be acceptable.
!! boos $
6 P
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
S The amendment changes a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the cmounts, 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 this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with_ the issuance of the amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(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 Commission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
B. Marcus Dated: October 22, 1986 E
a
y 620 L 7 32268 Federal Register / Vol. 51, No.175 / Wednesday, September 10, 1986 / Notices accident previously evaluated. The
~f restriction. or control not presently reactor shroud water level trip in Table change in enrichment would only affect [ The proposed Technical Specificationincluded in the TechnicalSpecifications.
3.3.3-1,(b) change the value used to en unplanned criticality event. As indicate the suppression chamber high indicated in the licensee's analyses. an modification imposes additional water level trip (actual levelis unplanned criticality event will not limitations. restrictions and controls and unchanged), and (c) change a 42.5 'F occur as Keff will not exceed.95 esen k therefore falls within this example.
area differential temperature allowable with Pool B fully loaded with the highest :
Therefore, since the application for value to 42 *F for simplification. These enrichment fuel and flooded with cold I amendment involves a proposed change changes are clarifications and unborated water, or dry storage racks that is similar to an example (til for corrections to the existing Technical immersed in a water mist of 7.5%
which no significant hazards Specifications and involve no changes in moderator density. Criticality is possible j considerations exists, the Commission the actual requirements. These are for a mist environment only if the higher, has made a proposed determination that administrative changes similar to enriched fuel occupies all of the l the application for amendment involves example (1).
locations in the dry storage racks no significant hazards considerations.
The Commission has also provided including those which are required to be Loco / Public Document Room standards for determining whether a s acant. To prevent this occurrence, the location: Appling County Public Library, significant hazards consideration exists licensee has taken measures to preclude 301 City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia.
(10 CFR 50.92(c)). A proposed improper fuel storagc.
A ttorney for hcensee: Bruce W.
amendment to an operating license for a
, 3. This proposed amendment will not Churchill, Esquire. Shaw, Pit tman. Potts facility involves no significant hazards involve a significant reduction in a and Trowbridge,1800 M Street, NW.,
consideration if operation of the facility margin of safety.
Washington, DC 20038.
In accordance with the proposed While the increased enrichment m, NRC Project Directorr Daniel R.
amendment would not:(1) involve a Pool D and the dry storage racks may hiulg significant increase in the probability or lessen the margin to c-iticality, this Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe consequences of an accident previously reduction is not sigmficant because the Power Corporation, hiunicipal Electric evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of overall safety margin is within NRC Authority of Georgia City of Dalton, a new or different kind of accident from criteria of Keffless than or equal to.95 Georgia. Docket No. 50-366 Edwin I, any accident previously evalustad; or (3)
RC Standard Review Phn, Sec. tion flatch Nuclear Plant Unit No.2, Appling involve a significant reduction m a County, Georgia margin of safety, Ba ed on the abo,e. the Commisslon's staff proposes to determine that the Date of amendment request.: July 18,
% e have evaluated proposed changes requested amendment does not insolve 1986.
(1). (3) and (4) above against these significant hazards considerations.
/
Description of amendment requesti criteria. None of these three proposed Loco /Public Document Room f The amendment would modify the changes to the Technical Specifications location: Crysta! River Public 1.ibra ry.
Technical Specifications to (1) revise involves or results in a change in the 668 NW. First Avenue. Cr> stal River, allowable values (and trip setpoints, design function of equipment or in the Florida 32029.
which are the same as the allowable mode of operating the plant. instead tne Attorney for hcensee: R.W. Neiser, I values) for the reactor vessel water changes inso!ve setpomt changes that Senior Vice President and General levels 1,2, and 3; the chroud water level; the licensee states have been Counsel. Florida Power Corporation, the ifPCI and RCIC steam line high flow; determined using the criteria cf NRC P.O. Box 14N2, St. Petersburg. Florida and the reactor steam dome low.
Regulatory Guide 1.105 and pressure instmments to provide for the methodology previously approved by 33733' Profect Director-John F. Stolz.
NRC use of Rosemount as well as Barton the NRC in Amendment 39 to the Hatch transmitters as the analogue transmitter Urtit 2 Technical Specifications. Changes th
' Georgia Power Company, Oglethorpe trip system instruments for these 1 and 3 preserve appropriate ma gins to P wer Corporation, hf uru,cipal Electnc parameters: (2) provide c'arifications the current anafytical limits for the Authority of Georgia, City of Dalton, and corrections. (3) revise the analytical Parameters involved. For change (4), it Georgia, Docke: No. 50-366, Edwtn I.
limits and the ccrresponding allowable was necessary to relax the analytical 11atch Nuclear Plant, Unit No.2 Apph.al values for instruments which actuate on limit for the RilR-LPCI and core spray County, Georgia high drywell pressure, and (4) lower the injection value permissives. However Date of amendment request fuly H.
core spray (CS) and residual heat the licensee has provided an analysis i 1986.
removal low pressure coolant inlection performed by General Electric Company Description ofomendment request (RiiR-LPCI) low rt actor pressure that shows that the impact of the change i The amendment would modify the injection permissive setpoints to allow in the analyticallimits on the resultant Technical Specifications to add two new for increased flexibility in the use of accident analyses, and hence safety of overcurrent protective devices to Table l Rosemount transmitters for this trip the plant,is negligible.
3.8.24-1 to reflect the installation durint function.
On the basis of the above, we have the upcoming refueling outage of new
~
Basis forproposed no significant determined that:
d hozords consideration determination:
- 1. Since the changes do not create f
rywell cooler units.
Basis forproposed no significant The Commission has provided guidance new modes of operation or change the borords consideration determination concerning the application of the design functions of equipment, they do
/
The Commission has provided guidance standards in 10 CFR 50.92 by providing not create the possibility of a new or l
concerning the application of the certain examples (51 FR 7751). One of different kind of accident from any standards it 10 CFR 50.92 by presiding, these examples (1) of actions involvitig previously evaluated.
I certain exan ples (51 FR 7751). An no significant hazards considerations
- 2. Since no new modes of operation cumple (ii) of actions involving no relates to a purely administrative are created and since the analytical significant hazards considerations is an\\
change to Technical Specifications.
limits are maintained or, where changed.
amendment irvolving a change that Change item 2 would (s) correct parts the impact on accident analysis results
_ constitutes an additionallimitation.
- numbers and the description of the has been shown to be negligible the
\\G
Federal Register / Vol. 51. No.175 / Wednesday. September 10.1D86 / Notices 32267
- orignally built usmg comparable codes specificabees to conform the tehl loaded with bel of the highest and cnteria.
specdicehoe to the seawed prsqtram."
a=w3-ted reactvity and Gooded with he proposed amenesamts will not The proposed changes incorpasste unborated water at a tersperature involve a sgmibcant reduction is a applicable portums ed time standard corresponsbaar to the heebest reactrvity.
margin ef safety. Changes to instr =*='
Technical Specair: atma surveiMance The amelysis subrmtted by the incensee response tunes and uncertainties have requiressenes and reference testag in indicates that stwage of 4M (nominal) been determmed, through test and accordance with specificasica tats.
earn:hed fuel in Poet B wiB sot cause anal) sis, to be consistent with, or not Basisforproposed so sipifa;ont Keff to exceed 0 95 under the conditions significantly different from. current hozords cons 4dereuon deternaamshoot abow. A second entysis for the dry values. The increased sesponse time of As stated abore, the =p====d chasess storage reds was performed. De rucks the RTDs is partially offset by the will be done to comph==m with a wi41 be losded m three 6 x 3 arrays elimination of the delay associated with regulatsen. and the end peeduct. Ibe such that every Ivurth row in the 6 >e 11 l
the bypass manifold piping. and partly revised tM sph wdf be rack is vacant. De ewelyses include l
by the reduction of the RTD electronic in comphance with an edition and margins for uncertainty in reactivity l
filter time constant. Licensee addends of the ASME Code Section XI ce4culations end in mechonical esaluations of uncertainties associated which is endorsed by a regehmeron.%ere tolerances.
with the modification conArm thet the is no thenge of burdune er operasb6 Usmg the etendeeds in to CRt 5092.
setpoints deboed in the McGuire procedures.Thus, requested changes do the licensee has concluded and the Technical Specikahncs remain vahd.
not crease the poserbality of ass accadest Com ntssion's staff agrees that the From our preliminary review of the or ma5unchos of a sMerent type isor*
proposed amendment invokes no licensee's es aluation, we agree with the thuse previously evanssted. do not significant hazards considerations for above determination. Th d on the involve a suyaincant W= in the the foflormg reasons:
above. the Commission proposes to probability or consequences of an
- 1. This propsed amendment will not determine that the changes do not accident previously evaluated, and do involve a significant increese in the invohe a signincant hazards not decrease a margin of safety.
probabihty or consequences of an consideratJon.
Derefore, the staff proposes to accident previously evaluated.The LocalPubhc Document Room determine that the prc. posed araendment probabifity of a previously evaluated location: Atkins Library University of involves no signincant hazards accident is not affected by an increase North Carohna. Charlotte (UNCC consideration.
in fuel enrichment. For example' Station). North Carolina 28223.
Loco / Pub //c Document Room positioning a fuel assembly outside the
.1tturney forlicenset: Mr. Aler' Carr. /occtim. B.F. Jones Mc tra,rdal Library' rack, or dropping vos ontor of the rack Duke Power Company,4:2 South 663 Franklin Avenue. Aliquippa, has negligible reactivity effects. Also.
Church Street. Charlotte. North Larofina Pennsyhania 15001, any effect is offset by the fact that no Attorneyferlicensee Gerald credit is taken for soluWe boron in tbe 28242.
NRC Pro /ect Directon B].
Chamoff. Esquite. Jay E. Sifberg, water which would reduce reactivity Youngblood.
Esquire. She w. Ritmen. PWets, ani significantly below the.95 criterion. To Duquesse Usht Campany, Docket Na.
Tr,oMge. WW SW E reduce the probability of an unplanned
% ashington. DC 200M.
criticality es ect. the licensee has 50434. Beaver VaHey Pewee Sanhem.
- N ###1'## O'"C88## E##### ^
physically blocked 12 storage bcations Unit No.1. Shippingpset. Pennsylva ni.a g
Date of umendment request: July 28.
in the dry fuel storage rack. An inerease FlorW a Pom ert' = = S m et ak.
in fuel enrichment will not by itself
- 1938, Description of amendment request:
Docket No. 50-3s2. Crystal Rhar Unit affect the mix 1ure of fission product ne proposed amendment would update No. 3 Nuclear Generating Plant. C11ms nuclides. A change in fuel cycle design the pump testing serwiliance County, F1nrid=
which makes use of an increased requirements to cornply wfth the Date e/,;_ h,trygmg.
enrichmeat may rewlt in fuel burnup requirements of 10 CFR 50.55a(g)4(i).
December la 19eu.
consistmg of a somewhat diffetent The Inservice Testing progra n rmist be Description of cmendment mguese mixture of nuclides. De effect in this Laetacce is insi phcant for the foHowing updated, hi accordance with to CFR This proposed -- bst would allow t
50.55(g)4{i), every 120 tsooths to the inatesing the Uranmm-2.Mleadmglistit rea sons.
latest edition and addende of the Code in the Crystal River Unit 3 spent hrel (e) The isotopic mixture of the 1
(ASME Section X1) reinenced in pool B and the dry fuel storage rack irradiated assembly is relatively paragraph (b) of that section twehe (12j irom 3.5 weight percent to e emight insensihve to the assembly's ininal morrths prior to the statt of the interval.
percess. This anase inestase in the enrichment.
Paragraph (b) references the 1983 loading hamit weeld allow the lacensee to ib) Because moet accidena doses are edition through the suntner 1983 utilize heel which is slightly higher in U.
such a sindi fraction of 10 CFR 100 addenda. The 1983 ASME Section XI 235 in future fuel cycles with a slight liraits. a large margin edsts before any code edition allows quarterly pump improvement in fuel seemeny for change becomes siemrficant.
testing, however, the current operation of the facihty.
(c) The change in platonium content surveillance eequirements resimre pamp Basis forpaposed so s@nAcant which werM result fro.a an merease in testing on a monthly basis.The reused hozords considemtsn s'etermutation; bumvp wooki produce more of some survesilance requirements are proposed The purpose of hmitag aikmable krel fission prodmet rnachdes and less of in accordance witir to CFit se.55ats)S(ii) enrichseest of einembboe stered in the other nuclides.Smallincreases in some which states. "If a revised inservice wet and dry sacks is to amre suffnent doses are offset by reductwns in other inspection program for a facihty safety margin esists to preverrt doses. The redtolegical cansequences of confhets with the tahnical inadvertent er ticality. N is done by accidents are not sigmhcantly changed.
specibestions for a facihty, the beensee assuring that a Kaff eupal to cr law than
- 2. Thas proposed aan ndment wil not shall apply to the Commission for om would be maintained create the possibility of a new or amendment of the technical cor:servativdy assuunna the racks fully different kmd of acendent from any
. _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _