ML20212G310
| ML20212G310 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 09/24/1999 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212G297 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9909290190 | |
| Download: ML20212G310 (2) | |
Text
.
Goog
[
4 UNITED STATES j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
't WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 Y+9...
90 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 217 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-57 AND AMENDMENT NO.158 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NPF-5 SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY. INC.. ET AL.
EDWIN 1. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT. UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-321 AND 50-366
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By "HL-5811, Application for Amends to Licenses DPR-57 & NPF-5,revising Wording Contained in LCO 3.1.7 Re [[system" contains a listed "[" character as part of the property label and has therefore been classified as invalid. Sys|letter dated July 29,1999]], Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (Southern Nuclear, the licensee), et al., proposed license amendments to change the Technical Specifications (TS) for the Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. The proposed changes would change TS Section 3.1.7, " Standby Liquid Control (SLC) System." The change would replace " greater than the Region B limits" with "within the Region B limits."
2.0 EVALUATION Section 3.1.7, Condition A states " Sodium pentaborate solution not within the Region A limits of Figure 3.1.7-1 or 3.1.7.-2, but greater than the Region B limits." The intent of this statement, as it is explained in the Bases, is to allow 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> to restore the sodium pentaborate solution to the Region A limits as long as the solution is within the shaded area, marked " Region B," of the two figures. The current TS, by using the phrase " greater than the Region B limits," could be interpreted to mean the area outside the shaded area, which would be incorrect. Thus, replacing the phrase " greater than the Region B limits," with the phrase "within the Region B limits" eliminates the possibility of this incorrect interpretation. The staff finds this change to be acceptable. No change to the Bases are needed, since the Bases already contain the correct words.
3.0 STATE CONSULTATION
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the Georgia State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendments. The State official had no comments.
4.0 LNVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION The amendments change a requirement with respect to the installation or use of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The NRC staff has determined that the amendments involve 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 individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendments involve no 9909290190 490924 PDR ADOCK 05000321 P
2-significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public comment on such finding
'(64 FR 46449). Accordingly, the amendments meet 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 amendments.
6.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission has 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, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the
' Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: L. Olshan Date: September 24,'1999 i
)
i
_... j