ML20206F023

Advises That ASME Code Section XI Sys Hydrostatic & Sys Leakage Pressure Tests for Plant Must Be Performed W/Reactor Noncritical as Stated in NRC 860505 Position,Per 870401 Appeal Meeting

ML20206F023
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	04/10/1987
From:	Sniezek J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	James O'Reilly GEORGIA POWER CO.
References
TAC-66947, NUDOCS 8704140073
Download: ML20206F023 (3)

Text

1 14 %%% .ct'd%  ;" Aar - .4 - 4:L:p-

%, sw  %. . ;-

April 10, 1987 Docket Nos. 50-321/366 Mr. James P. O'Reilly Senior Vice President - Nuclear Operations Georgia Power Con'pany P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302

Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

By letter to Georgia Power Company (GPC) dated February 10, 1987, we reaffimed the NRC staff position as stated in our May 5,1986 letter that ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI system hydrostatic and system leakage pressure tests on the Hatch reactor primary coolant system must be perfomed prior to pulling control rods. GPC, by letter dated March 13, 1987, expressed disagreement with the staff position, requested that we reconsider this position and requested an appeal meeting to discuss the issue.

The appeal meeting was held in the NRC's offices in Bethesda on April 1,1987.

At the meeting, the NRC staff discussed the bases for its position and GPC representatives discussed the bases for GPC's disagreement with the staff position and for GPC's view that it should be allowed to perform these Section XI system hydrostatic and system leakage pressure tests at the Hatch plant after pulling control rods and using nuclear power to heatup and pressurize the primary coolant system. GPC stated that it had performed these pressure tests with the reactors critical since the initial startup of both Hatch units. GPC explained that prior to entering the drywell to check for leakage, during these pressure tests, it carefully plans and rehearses the role of each member of the inspection team. Each menter of the team is assigned to look for leakage at certain locations on the primary coolant system. The team then enters the drywell wearing protective clothing as necessary for the environmental condition at assigned inspection locations. This preplanning minimizes the amount of time required for the team members to be inside the containment.

During the meeting, the staff requested that GPC provide information concerning the cost impact and additional visual inspection capability that would result from perfoming the pressure tests with the reactor non-critical. GPC provided this information by letter dated April 6,1987.

We have considered this infomation together with the appeal meeting discussion and all of the previous correspondence on this issue. We are concerned that, while it may be possible to perform adequate pressure 8704140073 870410 PDR ADOCK 05000321 p PDR Nac ronu ais no.soi nacu o2a OFFICIAL RECORD COPY * "S "o 2'83-*oo-24 7

- e- . -

..- - ..~ ~ .n - ~ -~ ~s.~ ~ ~

L Mr. James P. O'Reilly _2_

fc^n;priqW. e. n ,---~ ,n .a:= . :acw m - 3.y;; ,,,79-tests with the reaci.or critical at about 5 percent power, at temperatures well above the minimum required system temperatures and with the drywell buttoned up (i.e., as GPC described its test conditions), such drywell environmental conditions are not conducive to a thorough and deliberate visual inspection. We believe that a more deliberate visual inspection and one posing less potential danger to the inspectors can better be performed in the cooler and less hazardous environment associtted with reactor coolant system temperatures near the minimum required test temperature. This is, in our view, more consistent with the intent of completing a satisfactory boundary pressure test before resuming operations.

We nave therefore concluded that the Section XI system hydrustatic and system leakage pressure tests for Hatch Units 1 and 2 are to be performed with the reactor non-critical as stated in our May 5, 1986 position.

We appreciate your effort in providing your views and in quickly responding to our request for information so that we could resolve this issue.

Sincerely, .

Original sii;ned by James H. Sniezek James H. Sniezek, Deputy Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc: See next page DISTRIBUTION Docket File JPartlow NRC PDR NThompson Local PDR Glainas PD#2 Plant File RHermann OGC-Bethesda SNorris HDenton GRivenbark JSniezek ACRS (10)

RBernero EJordan BGrimes

/

y, th i A A omu> . ..DBkDf.2,. ,0.BM _ . ..

.ML/,AD , p.B.L gM. . . . . . P.B L . . [ . , . . . ,., ... . ....

= ' ~ > GRivenbark,:j f,, RJJe. . . n.n. ,

. GI,..a j. .f...l.0.. . RBe r,n,e ro. ,, J.. .0Zak... . .......... .. ..

==> .94/.7/87.. . . 04/ '/z87 . o .g187. .... 04zg.za.7.. o.4z.yza7 . ..o.4/.J.0/.e2.. ... .. .... . . . . . .

NRC FORM 310 f tO 80t NRCM O240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY ..__..,._._,_.".~.~.....~~e.-

• GS 2'83-*o 247

.g. _ . - - - ._

Mr. J. P. O'Reilly Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Georgia Power Company Units Nos. I and 2 cc:

Bruce W. Chruchill, Esquire Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 2300 N Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20037 Mr. L. T. Gucwa Engineering Department Georgia Power Company Post Office Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Nuclear Safety and Compliance Manager Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Georgia Power Company Post Office Box 442 Baxley, Georgia 31513 Mr. Louis B. Long Southern Company Services, Inc.

Post Office Box 2625 Birmingham, Alabama 35202 Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Route 1, Post Office Box 279 Baxley, Georgia 31513 Regional Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, 101 Marietta Street, Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mr. Charles H. Badger Office of Planning and Budget Room 610 270 Washington Street, S.W.

Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Mr. J. Leonard Ledbetter, Commissioner Department of Natural Resources 270 Washington Street, N.W.

Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Chairman Appling County Commissioners Count / Courthouse Baxley, Georgia 31513 N