ML20236E033
| ML20236E033 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 02/26/1982 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236E028 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-47893, TAC-48338, TAC-48339, NUDOCS 8710290032 | |
| Download: ML20236E033 (2) | |
Text
_ _ - _ - - -
l l.
h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
UNITED STATES
['
g.
MSHWG TON, D. C. 20655 2
.j
)
l Q.....]~
q l
i SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR' REGULATIO 26 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE N0. NPF-5 SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.
i l
GEORGIA POWER COMPANY j
OGLETHORPE POWER CORPORATION MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC AUTHORITY OF GEORGIA CITY OF DALTON, GEORGIA EDWIN 1. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT N0. 2
- l 0OCKET N0. 50-366
'k l'
Introduction 22, 1982, Georgia Power Company (GPC or the
[
By letter dated January licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TSs)
[
appended to Facility Operating License No. NPF-5 for. the Edwin I.
The changes involve TS 4.9.2.c Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2.
regarding the surveillance requirements needed to detennine the operability of the source range monitors during periods of core alteration.
l Evaluation.
?
The SRMs provide information during reactor startup for the use of the operators.and are withdrawn from the core prior to any significant power The present TSs for Hatch Unit 2 require that the SRMs generation.
have a count rate of at least 3 counts per second during core alterations;
.t however, the present TSs overlooked the situation where a full core i
offload takes place, as is the situation facing GPC during the forthcoming February 1982 reload. With a full core offload, there is no source of Hatch neutrons, in the reactor to provide a signal source for the SRMs.
Unit 2 uses a 1978 version of the Standard Technical Specifications (STS) for General Electric Plants. Later versions of the STS recognize this anomoly and provide for exactly this situation by surveillance requirements that are similar to the GPC request herein. The proposed change would cover only the periods when fuel is being unloaded from the core and prior However, prior to the reload, two diagonally to a full core reload.
adjacent fuel assemblies will be loaded into core positions next to the We SRMs to provide a signal source to ensure operability of the SRMs.
conclude on the basis of the above considerations that the change to TS 4.9.2.c is acceptable.
8710290032 820226 DR ADOCK 0500 6
s.-
j' f i
Environmental consideration We have determined that the amendment does not authorize a change
- in effluent types'or. total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impagt..Having l
made this' determination, we have further concluded that the amendment.
?
involves an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4), that an l
environmental impact statement, or negative declaration and environ-mental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the 4
issuance of this amendment.
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
l l
(1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in l
the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Comission's l
regulations and.the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical i
to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated: February 26, 1982 Horton B. Fairtile of the NRC staff prepared this Safety Evaluation.
d i
-