ML20198D961

Application for Amend to Licenses DPR-57 & NPF-5,revising Tech Specs to Change Administrative Controls Covering Organization & Responsibilities of Plant & Safety Review Boards.Fee Paid

ML20198D961
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	05/16/1986
From:	James O'Reilly GEORGIA POWER CO.
To:	Muller D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20198D966	List: ML20198D961 ML20198D973
References
0346H, 346H, SL-511, TAC-61637, TAC-61638, NUDOCS 8605270160
Download: ML20198D961 (10)

Text

-

Georga Power Compary

. 313 Pedmont Avenue .

A9anta. Georga 30308 Teiephone 404 5264526 Mamng Adrbess:

Post Omce Box 4545 Aranta. Georg a 30302 James P. O'Reilly N a#m h SWern Sen.or %ce President Nuclear Operations 0346H May 16, 1986

, Of rector of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Mr. D. Muller, Project Director BWR Project Directorate No. 2 Division of Boiling Water Reactor Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 NRC 00CKETS 50-321, 50-366 OPERATING LICENSES DPR-57, NPF-5 EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1, 2 PROPOSED CHANGES TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS ,

REGARDING ADMINISTRATION OF THE PRB AND THE SRB Gentlemen:

In accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.90 as required by 10 CFR 50.59(c)(1), Georgia Power Company (GPC) hereby proposes changes

, to the Plant Hatch Units 1 and 2 Technical Specifications, Appendix A, to Operating Licenses bPR-57 and NPF-5 These proposed changes would revise the administrative contrcis in the Technical Specifications which cover the organization and responsibilities of the Plant Review Board (PRB) and the Safety Review Board (SRB). The actual operation of plant equipment and/or systems i

would be unaffected by the implementation of these proposed changes since

{

- they are purely administrative in nature.

Enclosure 1 provides a detailed description of the proposed amendinents and circumstances necessitating this change request.

Enclosure 2 details the bases for our determination that the proposed changes do not involve a significant hazards consideration.

Enclosures 3A and 3B provide page change instructions for incorporating the proposed changes.

8605270160 960516 hoo\

DR ADOCK 0 g1 p

' I Ru.i t ga W56*0 c

L k Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: 11r. D. Muller, Project Director BWR Project Directorate No. 2 flay 16,1985 Page Two ,

The proposed changed Technical Spect ficatf ors pages follow Enclosures 3A and 38.

Payment of filing fee is enclosed.

In order to allow time for procedure revision and orderly incorporation into copies of the Technical Specifications., we request that the proposed amendment, once approved by the NRC, be issued with an effective date to be no later than 60 days from the date of issuance of the anendment.

Pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.91, a copy of this letter and all applicable attachments will be forwarded to Mr. J. L. Ledbetter of the Environmental Protection Divisio1 of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources.

Mr. J. P. O'Reilly states that he is Senior Vice President of Georgia Power Company and is authorized to execute this oath on behalf of Georgia Power Company, and that to the best of his knowledge and belief, the facts set forth in this letter are true.

GE RGIA POWER COMPANY By: nwr k. l9 hk dames P. O'Reilly (

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 16tiHay of May 1986

' Notary Public b Ynb

?ther, Pubbe, cle(ton County, Georma My (Wmimon Empires Dec 12. IW9 Enclosures c: Georgia Power Company Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. d. T. Beckham, Jr. Dr. J. N. Grace, Regional Administrator Mr. H. C. Nix, J r. Senior Resident Inspector GO-NORftS State of Georgia Mr. J. L. Ledbetter 0346H

Georght POWCf ENCLOSURE 1 NRC 00CKE75 50-321,60-366 OPERATING LICENSES DPR-57, hPF-5 EDWIN 1. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1, 2 PROPOSED CHANGES TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING ADMINISTRATION OF THE SRB AND THE PRB BASIS FOR CRANGE REQUEST The current Plant Hatch Units 1 and 2 Technical Specifications require that the Plant Review Board (PRB) be composed of certain specified onsite department managers or their temporarily designated alternates (no more than /

two alternates allowed at one time). Due to the heavy won load imposed on those managers as a result of normal and unexpected plant activities, there has been frequent difficulty in obtaining PRB quorums, especially for

(

unscheduled meetings; and the use of alternates (within the allowances of Technical Specifications and other restrictions) is a regular practice. The same type of problem has been experienced (to a lesser degree) with the offsite Safety Review Board (SRB) as a result of the current Technical Specifications membership and quorum requirements for that group. To alleviate the above difficulties, the enclosed proposed Technical Specifications changes improve the flexibility of the membership, quorum, and review requirements for the PRB and the SRB. These proposed changes also clarify certain other requirements for these two groups.

The proposed changes to the PRB membership requirements (Section 6.5.1.2 in both Technical Specifications) would allow for supervisory level personnel to serve as permanent members while still maintaining the requirement for representation from the six onsite departments whose managers currently comprise the voting membership of that group. The minimum quorum requirement for the PRB would also be reduced by one member (Section 6.5.1.5 in both Technical Specifications) to coincide with the proposed reduction in the minimum membership requirement for this Board. These changes would also delete the requirement for the Plant Hatch General Manager and the Deputy General Manager to serve on the PRB. However, plant management control of the Board's activities would still be maintained since the General Manager would be responsible for PRB membership appointments, and also since he would still be required to review / approve (per plant procedures) actions performed by that group to meet the requirements of Units 1 and 2 Technical Specifications (Section 6.5.1.6, PRB Responsibilities).

The proposed changes to the SRB membership and quorum requirements (Sections 6.5.2.2 and 6.5.2.6 in both Technical Specifications) would make those limits equivalent to those specified in Sections 4.3.2.1 and 4.3.2.3 of ANSI Standard N18.7-1976. These revisions would also shift the corporate management responsibility for the SRB (Sections 6.5.2.2, 6.5.2.3, 6.5.2.8.g, 6.5.2.9, and 6.5.2.10 in both Technical Specifications) from the Executive Vice President-Power Sipply to the Senior Vice President-Nuclear Operations since the latter of the two officers now has full direct responsibility for matters pertaining to GPC operating nuclear facilities.

I 1

0346H rwm

Geoigia Power m.=

k ENCLOSURE 1 (Continued)

PROF 0 SED CHANGES TG TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS RGKMi XUMi?I5TRAT10N OF THE SRB AND THE PRB liWi5 FGR CHANGE REQUEST Also proposed is a rewording of the lead statement for Technical Spectfications Section 6.5.2.7 (both units) which would allow the SRB to delegate certain review tasxs while retaining overall responsibility for perforraance cf those reviews. Finally, these proposed changes clarify the SRB audit requirements cor.tainea in the Unit 1 and the Unit 2 Technical Specificaticns Eection 6.5.2.8.1 by spelling out the acronyms "0DCM" and "PCP" and by defining "oiennially."

These proposed changes would improve the consistency between the Plant Ha tt.h Units 1 and 2 Technical Specifications and the draft Technical Specifications for Plant M gtle Unit 1 (currently under construction) regarding the requirenents covering the PRB and the SRB organizations and functions. This type of consistency between the administrative controls for both pl nts is considered to be desirable by GPC corporate management.

Furthermor.e, since a single group fulfills the SRB function for both Plant

.4atch and Plant Vogtie, coordination of the requirements for that Board between the two facilities is essential.

These proposed changes to the Plant Hatch Units 1 and 2 Technical Specificaticos would have no affect oq the operation of any plant equipment or system. These changes only affect the Administrative Controls section of the Tecimical Specifications. Furthermore, these changes would not reduce the effectiveness or the ability of either the PRB or the SRB to perform their respective review and audit functions as currently required by the Technical Specifications for both units. Finally, these proposed changes have been reviewed by the current PRB and the SRB Subcommittee, and both groups have determined that the changes would not result in an unreviewed safety question.

2 0346H 10077s

F GeorgiaPowerd ENCLOSURE 2 NRC DOCKETS 50-321, 50-366 OPERATING LICENSES DPR-57, NPF-5 EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1, 2 PROPOSED CHANGES TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING ADMINISTRATION OF THE SRB AND THE PRB 10 CFR 50.92 EVALUATION Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.92, Georgia Power Company has evaluated the enclosed proposed amendment for Plant Hatch Units 1 and 2 and has determined that its adoption would not involve a significant hazards consideration. The basis for this determination is as follows:

Proposed Change 1 This change would alter the specific membership (6.5.1.2)* and the minimum quorum (6.5.1.5)* requirements for the Plant Review Board (PRB).

Basis:

This change is consistent with Item (1) of the " Examples of Amendments That are Considered Not Likely to Involve Significant Hazards Considerations" listed on page 14,870 of the Federal Register, April 6, 1983. Item (i) covers changes which are purely administrative, including those proposed to achieve consistency throughout the Technical Specifications, to correct an error, or to change nomenclature. The changes proposed by this submittal apply to Item (1), because they only affect the Administrative Controls section of the Plant Hatch Units 1 and 2 Technical Specifications, and because they are proposed to achieve consistency between the Technical Specifications for Plant Hatch and Plant Vogtle (draft).

Georgia Power Com)any has reviewed these proposed changes and has determined that they do not <nvolve a significant hazards consideration for the following reasons:

A. The probability of occurrence and the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety would not be increased above those analyzed in the FSARs, because the changes are administrative in nature and do not affect the operation of any plant equipment or system.

B. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of a different type than any previously analyzed in the FSARs would be created, because the changes are administrative in nature and would not introduce any new modes of plant equipment operation or failure.

• Noted items in parentheses denote applicable section numbers in the Technical Specifications for Plant Hatch Unit 1 and Unit 2.

1 0346H FC3775 s

Georgia Power d ENCLOSURE 2 (Continued)

PROPOSED CHANGES TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING ADMINISTRATION OF THE SRB AND THE PRB 10 CFR 50.92 EVALUATION C. The margin of safety as defined in the Technical Specifications would not be reduced because the changes only affect the " Administrative l

Controls" section of that document and, therefore, do not change any Limiting Condition for Operation, Surveillance Requirement, Trip Setpoint Allowable Value, Limiting Safety System Setting, Safety Limit, or Definition.

Proposed Change 2 This proposed change would alter the minimum permanent membership (6.5.2.2)*,

temporary alternate membership (6.5.2.3)*, minimum quorum (6.5.2.6)*,

corporate management reportability (6.5.2.2, 6.5.2.3, 6.5.2.8.g, 6.5.2.9, and 6.5.2.10)*, and review (6.5.2.7)* requirements for the Safety Review Board (SRB).

Basis:

This change is consistent with Item (i) of the " Examples of Amendments That are Considered Not Likely to Involve Significant Hazards Considerations" listed on page 14,870 of the Federal Register, April 6, 1983. Item (i) covers changes which are purely administrative, including those proposed to achieve consistency throughout the Technical Specifications, to correct an error, or to change nomenclature. The changes proposed by this submittal apply to Item (1), because they only affect the " Administrative Controls" section of the Technical Specifications, and because they are proposed to achieve consistency between the Technical Specifications for Plant Hatch and Plant Vogtle (draft).

Georgia Power Company has reviewed these proposed changes and has determined that they do not involve a significant hazards consideration for the following reasons:

A. The probability of occurrence and the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety would not be increased above those analyzed in the FSARs, because the changes are administrative in nature and do not affect the operation of any plant equipment or system.

B. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of a different type than any previously analyzed in the FSARs would not be created, because the changes are administrative in nature and would not introduce any new modes of plant equipment operation or failure.

• Noted items in parentheses denote applicable section numbers in the Technical Specifications for Plant Hatch Unit I and Unit 2.

2 0346H 700FTS L.

Georgia Power d ENCLOSURE 2 (Continued)

PROPOSED CHANGES TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING ADMINISTRATION OF THE SRB AND THE PRB 10 CFR 50.92 EVALUATION C. The margin of safety as defined in the Technical Specifications would' not be reduced, because the changes only affect the " Administrative Controls" section of that document and, therefore, do not change any Limiting Condition for Operation, Surveillance Requirement, Trip Setpoint Allowable Value, Limiting Safety System Setting, Safety Limit, or Definition.

Proposed Change _3_

The proposed change would clarify the SRB 24-month audit requirement for the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (0DCM) and the Process Control Program (PCP)

(6.5.2.8.1)*.

Basis:

This change is consistent with Item (1) of the " Examples of Amendments That are Considered Not Likely to Involve Significant Hazards Considerations" listed on page 14,870 of the Federal Register, April 6, 1983. Item (i) covers changes which are purely administrative, including those proposed to achieve consistency throughout the Technical Specifications, to correct an error, or to change nomenclature. The changes proposed by this submittal apply to Item (1), because they only affect the " Administrative Controls" section of the Technical Specifications, and because they are proposed to clarify nomenclature contained in the subject requirements.

Georgia Power Company has reviewed these proposed changes and has determined that they do not involve a significant hazards consideration for the following reasons:

A. The probability of occurrence a,1d the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety would not be increased above those analyzed in the FSARs, because the changes are administrative in nature and do not affect the operation of any plant equipment or system.

B. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of a different type than any previously analyzed in the FSARs would not be created, because the changes are administrative in nature and would not introduce any new modes of plant equipment operation or failure.

• Noted 1tems in parentheses denote applicable Section numbers in the Technical Specifications for Plant Hatch Unit I and Unit 2.

3 0346H 700775

Georgia Power JL. k ENCLOSURE 2 (Continued)

PROPOSED CHANGES TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING ADMINISTRATION OF THE SRB AND THE PRB 10 CFR 50.92 EVALUATION C. The margin of safety as defined in the Technical Specifications would not be reduced, because the changes only affect the " Administrative Controls" section of that document and, therefore, do not change any Limiting Condition for Operation, Surveillance Requirement, Trip Setpoint Allowable Value, Limiting Safety System Setting, Safety Limit, or Definition.

Proposed Change 4 This proposed change would correct two minor punctuation errors which occur in the requirements covering SRB reviews and audits (6.5.2.7.a and 6.5.2.8.j)*.

Basis:

This change is consistent with Item (i) of the " Examples of Amendments That are Considered Not Likely to Involve Significant Hazards Considerations" listed on page 14,870 of the Federal Register, April 6, 1983. Item (i) covers changes which are purely administrative, including those proposed to achieve consistency throughout the Technical Specifications, to correct an error, or to change nomenclature. The changes proposed by this submittal apply to Item (1), because they only affect the " Administrative Controls" section of the Technical Specifications, and because they are proposed to correct minor punctuation errors.

Georgia Power Company has reviewed these proposed changes and has determined that they do not involve a significant hazards consideration for the following reasons:

A. The probability of occurrence and the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety would not be increased above those analyzed in the FSARs, because the changes are administrative in nature and do not affect the operation of any plant equipment or system.

B. The possibility of an accident or malfunction of a different type than any previously analyzed in the FSARs would not be created, because the changes are administrative in nature and would not introduce any new modes of plant equipment operation or failure.

• Noted items in parentheses denote applicable Section numbers in the Technical Specifications for Plant Hatch Unit 1 and Unit 2.

4 0346H T@lf f 3

Georgia Powerkh ENCLOSURE 2 (Continued)

PROPOSED CHANGES TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS REGARDING ADMINISTRATION OF THE SRB AND THE PRB 10 CFR 50.92 EVALUATION l

C. The margin of safety as defined in the Technical Specifications would not be reduced, because the changes only affect the " Administrative Controls" section of that document and, therefore, do not change any Limiting Condition for Operation, Surveillance Requirement, Trip Setpoint Allowable Value, Limiting Safety System Setting, Safety Limit, or Definition.

5 0346H 700775

e  ; .

GeorgiaPowerd ENCLOSURE 3A NRC DOCKET 50-321 OPERATING l! CENSE DPR-57 ~

EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 1 PROPOSED CHANGE TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS REGAKUING ADMINI5IRATIUN Ut Uit 5Hti ANU IHL PMB

. a The propose changes to the Technical, Specification's (Appendix A to Operating License DPR-57) would be jncorporated as follows:

REMOVE-PAGE INSERT PAGE 6-6 6-6 .

6-7 6-7 6-9 6-9 6-10 6-10 T

6-11 6 6-12 6-l? ,

W

> 8 k',

s 4

4 y #

l I

/

L f

a 1~ ,

I

• l 0346H

' 700775 ,

k. ,, __