ML20244C317
| ML20244C317 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 06/06/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20244C310 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8906140209 | |
| Download: ML20244C317 (3) | |
Text
_ _. - _ _ _ _ _.
8"
'o UNITED STATES c
['
(
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
- p WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 (s...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF HUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NOS. 163 AND 100 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSES DPR-57 AND NPF-5 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY OGLETHORPE POWER CORPORATION MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC AUTHORITY OF GEORGIA CITY OF DALTON, GEORGIA EDWIN 1. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-321 AND 50-366
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated March 27, 1986, Georgia Power Company (the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) for the Edwin I. Hatch huclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.
The (1) change the Hatch Unit 1 Reactor Protection System (proposed changes would:
RPS) and Control Rod Block surveillance requirements to provide for consistency with the Hatch Unit 2 TS; and (2) change the RPS functional test frequencies and equipment outage times for both units based on General Electric Company Topical Report NEDC-30851 P which provides a probabilistic basis for RPS surveillance frequencies and equipment outage times. The proposed changes were noticed in the Federal Pegister (FR 23610) with an opportunity for prior hearing on June 30, 1986.
No requests for a hearing on the application have been received.
By letters dated April 22 and December 27, 1988, the licensee furnished additional information in sup) ort of the original request for amendment.
These letters did not alter tie changes requested, but merely supplied amplifying and clarifying information in support of the request.
2.0 EVALUATION On July 15, 1987, the Division of Engineering and Systems Technology, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), issued a Safety Evaluation Report (SER) based on its review of GE Topical Report NEDC-30851P. That SER stated that NEDC-30851P provided an acceptable generic basis for supporting plant-specific TS changes related to the RPS for plants using a relay RPS, subject to the following plant-specific conditions as stated in Table 1 of the SER:
Condition 1.
Confir,m the applicability of the generic analyses for NEDC-30851P to its plant.
hb*&OCK0500o3,,
209 89060s y
PDC l
_._ _-__-__ _ _ ______~
. Condition 2.
Demonstrate by use of current drift information provided by the equipment vendor or plant-specific data, that the drift character-istics for instrumentation used in the RPS channels in the plant are bounded by the assumptions used in NEDC-30851P when the functional test interval is extended from monthly to quarterly.
Condition 3.
Confirm that the differences between the RPS in the plant and the RPS of the generic analysis plant were included in the plant-specific analysis using the procedures of Appendix K of NEDC-30851P, or provide plant-specific analyses to demonstrate that thtre is no appreciable change in RPS availability or public risk.
The staff has reviewed the plant-specific analyses reports for Hatch Units 1 and 2, MDE-75-0485 and MDE-76-0485, and has determined that they confira:
(1)the applicability of the generic analysis, NEDC-30851P and (2) the differences between the Hatch RPS and the RPS of the generic analysis plant. The staff also reviewed GPC's response to RPS instrumentation drift when the functional test interval is extended from monthly to quarterly and determined that response to be acceptable.
GE reports MDE-75-0485 and MDE-76-0485 were utilized to support a plant-specific evaluation of the differences between the RPS in the plant and the RPS of the generic analysis plant. A seven step process of evaluation is documented in Appendix A of these reports. These reports conclude by stating that the results of the evaluations indicated that the RPS configurations for Hatch Units 1 and 2 have several differences compared to the RPS configuration.in the generic evaluation. The analysis reported in NEDC-30851P states that these differences would not significantly affect the improvement in plant safety due to the changes in the TS based on the generic analysis. The generic ar.alysis in NEDC-30851P is, therefore, applicable to Hatch Units 1 and 2.
The staff has determined that GPC has met the requirements as set forth in the NRR Safety i. valuation Report dated July 15, 1987, and as clarified in the NRC Staff Guidatca for Condition 2, dated April 27, 1988. Approval of the proposed arendments would provide for consistency between Unit I and Unit 2 RPS and Cantrol Rod Block instrumentation surveillance requirements and would change the RPS surveillance frequencies and outage times for both units.
I The staff has evaluated tne licensee's proposed amendments and found them acceptable. The acceptance is based on the criterion that safety will be maintained as stated in the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Final Safety Analysis Report Update.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the Commission has determined that the issuance of these amendments will have no significant impact on the environment (54 FR 24279 ).
p f
L
_o
~
, l'
4.0 CONCLUSION
The Commission issued a Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Opportunity for Prior Hearing which was published in the Federal Register on June 30, 1986 (51 FR 23610). No public comments were received, and the state of Georgia did not have any comments.
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 amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health sad safety of the public.
Principal Contributor:
R. D. Starkey, RII Lawrence P. Crocker, PDII-3/DRP-I/II
' Dated: June 6,1989