ML20199J885

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 128 to License DPR-57

ML20199J885
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	06/26/1986
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20199J867	List: ML20199J861 ML20199J885
References
TAC-59308, NUDOCS 8607080456
Download: ML20199J885 (2)

Text

__

[o UNITED STATES g

[

g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION L

j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

...../

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 128 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. DPR-57 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY OGLETHORPE POWER CORPORATION MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC AUTHORITY OF GEORGIA CITY OF DALTON, GEORGIA EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT N0. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-321 i

1.0 Introduction and Evaluation By letter dated July 26, 1985, the licensee, Georgia Power Company (GPC),

has proposed to add a specification and a table to address component cyclic and transient limits in Section 5.0 of the Hatch Unit 1 Technical Specifications (TSs). GPC also proposed to correct Section 6.10.2.e in the TSs to reference the new table being added to Section 5.0.

As stated in Attachment I to GPC's July 26, 1985 submittal, Hatch Unit 1 TSs currently refer to a non-existent table to identify component cyclic and transient limits.

In Attachment 4 to the July 26, 1985 submittal, GPC has provided the new specifications, and a table that lists selected cyclic and transient limits for which the reactor pressure vessel is designed and within which it shall be maintained. The proposed limits y

conservatively bound (lower bound) the design cyclic and transient limits I

given in the Hatch Unit 1 updated FSAR (Appendix I), and are consistent 3

with corresponding limits in the Hatch Unit 2 TSs. Furthermore, the proposed limits are consistent with those given in Part 2 of Standard TSs for GE Boiling Water Reactors (BWR/5 - NUREG-0123, Revision 3 issued in Fall 1980).

i

?

ii Based on our review, as discussed above, we have concluded that the proposed changes to the Hatch Unit 1 TSs are acceptable.

2.0 Enviromental Considerations s

This amendment involves a change in the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.

We have determined that the amendment involves no 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 the cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Connission has previously issued a proposed finding that this amendment involves no i

significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, this 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 assess-ment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.

e607080456 860626 PDR ADOCK 05000321 P

PDR

-2 3.0 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 Comission's regulations, and the issuance of the amendment will not be inimical to the i

common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

1 Principal Contributor:

R. Pichumani Dated: June 26, 1986 i

j J

I i

I i

4 1

l l

1 I

}

l

}

.