ML021500431
| ML021500431 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 05/21/2002 |
| From: | Kent A South Texas |
| To: | NRC/SECY/RAS |
| Ngbea E S | |
| References | |
| +adjud/ruledam200505, 67FR12488 00004, PR-50 | |
| Download: ML021500431 (5) | |
Text
OCOKET Nuclear Operating Company PR South Tebas Proeed Electric Generatln&Station P. Box 289 Wadsworth, Texas 77483 -J/v----
May 21, 2002 NOC-AE-02001327 File No.: G25 10CFR50.55a DOCKETED USNRC May 29, 2002 (11:43AM)
Secretary OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission RULEMAKINGS AND Washington, DC 20555-0001 ADJUDICATIONS STAFF Attn: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff
Subject:
Comments on Proposed Rulemaking on 10CFR50.55a
Reference:
Federal Register Notice, "Incorporation by Reference of ASME BPV and OM Code Cases," Volume 67, No. 53, 12488, March 19, 2002 In the referenced Federal Register Notice, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission solicited comments on a proposed rulemaking that would incorporate ASME and OM Code Cases by reference in 10CFR50.55a, "Codes and Standards". The South Texas Project's comments on this proposed rulemaking are attached.
If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact either Mr. Michael Lashley at (361) 972-7523 or me at (361) 972-7786.
Alex P. Kent Manager, Testing/Program Engineering PLW
Attachment:
Comments on Proposed Rulemaking on 10CFR50.55a, "Incorporation by Reference of ASME BPV and OM Code Cases", 67 FR 12488, March 19, 2002
-Feml~t=ýSE N 7 secf..oz
NOC-AE-02001327 Page 2 cc:
(paper copy) (electronic copy)
Ellis W. Merschoff A. H. Gutterman, Esquire Regional Administrator, Region IV Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 M. T. Hardt/W. C. Gunst Arlington, Texas 76011-8064 City Public Service U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mohan C. Thadani Attention: Document Control Desk U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike R. L. Balcom Rockville, MD 20852 Reliant Energy, Inc.
Richard A. Ratliff A. Ramirez Bureau of Radiation Control City of Austin Texas Department of Health 1100 West 49th Street C. A. Johnson Austin, TX 78756-3189 AEP - Central Power and Light Company Cornelius F. O'Keefe Jon C. Wood U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Matthews & Branscomb P. O. Box 289, Mail Code: MN116 Wadsworth, TX 77483 C. M. Canady City of Austin Electric Utility Department 721 Barton Springs Road Austin, TX 78704
Attachment NOC-AE-02001327 Page 1 of 3 Comments on Proposed Rulemaking on 10CFR50.55a, "Incorporation by Reference of ASME BPV and OM Code Cases,"
67 FR 12488. March 19. 2002 1 STP recommends the requirements shown as 10CFR50.55a(i) be relocated under 10CFR50.55a(b) because of the similarity of requirements between these sections.
- 2. 10CFR50.55a(i)(2)(ii), 55a(i)(3)(ii), and 55a(i)(4)(ii):
The requirement to apply a modification or limitation imposed by NRC on a later version of a Code Case to a previous version of that Code Case is not justified. STP previously commented on the proposed implementing Regulatory Guides; see comment 5.1 below.
- 3. 10CFR50.55a(i)(2)(iv), 55a(i)(3)(iv), and 55a(i)(4)(iv):
Annulled Code Cases should be allowed to be used beyond the update of a Section III code of record or beyond the start of a new inspection or testing interval provided:
0 The annulled Cases are compatible with (i.e., applicable to) the new code of record, and 0 The annulled Cases do not unintentionally supplant a requirement of the new code of record.
STP previously addressed this issue in comments on the proposed implementing Regulatory Guides; see comment 5.2 below.
- 4. STP recommends addition of a reference to optional ASME Code Cases for the following paragraphs of 10CFR50.55a as shown underlined below to clarify where approved ASME Code Cases may be used.
" 10CFR50.55a(f)(3)(iii)(B): Pumps and valves, in facilities whose construction permit is issued on or after November 22, 1999, which are classified as ASME Code Class 1 must be designed and be provided with access to enable the performance of inservice testing of the pumps and valves for assessing operational readiness set forth in editions and addenda of the ASME OM Code (or the optional ASME Code Cases listed in the Regulatory Guides incorporated by reference in paragraph (i) of this section) referenced in paragraph (b)(3) of this section at the time the construction permit is issued.
" 10CFR50.55a(f)(3)(iv)(B): Pumps and valves, in facilities whose construction permit is issued on or after November 22, 1999, which are classified as ASME Code Class 2 and 3 must be designed and be provided with access to enable the performance of inservice testing of the pumps and valves for assessing operational readiness set forth in editions and addenda of the ASME OM Code (or the optional ASME Code Cases listed in the Regulatory Guides incorporated by reference in paragraph 0) of this section) referenced in paragraph (b)(3) of this section at the time the construction permit is issued.
" 10CFR50.55a(f)(4)(i): Inservice tests to verify operational readiness of pumps and valves, whose function is required for safety, conducted during the initial 120-month interval must comply with the requirements in the latest edition and addenda of the Code incorporated by reference in paragraph (b) of this section on the date 12
Attachment NOC-AE-02001327 Page 2 of 3 months prior to the date of issuance of the operating license (or the optional ASME Code Cases listed in the Regulatory Guides incorporated by reference in paragraph (i) of this section), subject to the limitations and modifications listed in paragraph (b) of this section.
" 10CFR50.55a(f)(4)(ii): Inservice tests to verify operational readiness of pumps and valves, whose function is required for safety, conducted during successive 120 month intervals must comply with the requirements of the latest edition and addenda of the Code incorporated by reference in paragraph (b) of this section 12 months prior to the start of the 120-month interval (or the optional ASME Code Cases listed in the Regulatory Guides incorporated by reference in paragraph (i) of this section),
subject to the limitations and modifications listed in paragraph (b) of this section.
" 10CFR50.55a(g)(4)(i): Inservice examinations of components and system pressure tests conducted during the initial 120-month inspection interval must comply with the requirements in the latest edition and addenda of the Code incorporated by reference in paragraph (b) of this section on the date 12 months prior to the date of issuance of the operating license (or the optional ASME Code Cases listed in the Regulatory Guides incorporated by reference in paragraph (i) of this section),
subject to the limitations and modifications listed in paragraph (b) of this section.
" 10CFR50.55a(g)(4)(ii): Inservice examination of components and system pressure tests conducted during successive 120-month inspection intervals must comply with the requirements of the latest edition and addenda of the Code incorporated by reference in paragraph (b) of this section 12 months prior to the start of the 120 month inspection interval (or the optional ASME Code Cases listed in the Regulatory Guides incorporated by reference in paragraph (i) of this section), subject to the limitations and modifications listed in paragraph (b) of this section.
- 5. The following comments were previously transmitted to the NRC for proposed implementing Regulatory Guides for use of ASME Code Cases. They are also applicable to the current proposed 10CFR50.55a rulemaking.
5.1 To require that an NRC limitation or condition placed on a later version (revision) of a Code Case be applied to a previously adopted earlier version of that Code Case is an unwarranted imposition of regulatory requirements. A licensee's adoption of a Case is based on several factors including a commitment of resources to implement the Case. This usually is based on expected savings of man-hours and/or man-rem of radiation exposure throughout the inspection/test interval. The licensee's adoption of a generically approved Case is based on the understanding that it will provide an acceptable level of quality and safety for the entire interval for which it is adopted. In addition, NRC limitations or conditions regarding a later version of a Case may result from the revisions included by ASME in the later version, and may not be applicable to an earlier version of the Case.
Imposing additional limitations or conditions on a previously adopted Code Case during the inspection/test interval is not consistent with the regulatory requirement to periodically update ISI Code bases in accordance with 10CFR50.55a. When NRC updates the reference to Section XI Codes in 10CFR50.55a, this regulation requires adoption of the later Code rules at the beginning of the next interval, except for expedited implementation for special
Attachment NOC-AE-02001327 Page 3 of 3 circumstances. Licensees can continue to apply the current ISI Code bases up to ten years before adopting a revised Code requirement, or an NRC modification or limitation on a Code requirement. Therefore, it should be acceptable to retain an adopted Code Case for up to ten years before deciding whether to adopt a revised Case, or limitation or condition imposed by NRC on a revised Case. Otherwise, application of additional limitations or conditions on a previously adopted Code Case should be considered a backfit.
5.2 ASME's actions to annul Code Cases are primarily taken because a Code Case has been incorporated into the Code. Some Cases are also annulled because ASME is not aware of a continued need for the Case. The NRC should revise its requirements to allow an annulled Case to be adopted by a licensee because of the hardship this creates for licensees that have not yet adopted use of the Case, or the Code edition or addendum incorporating the Case. The current NRC position on Cases annulled because of incorporation into the Code forces a licensee to either not be able to use the Case, or to submit a request for relief to use the annulled Case or the later Code edition or addendum that contains the incorporation. This request for relief would be required because often the NRC has not yet accepted in 10CFR50.55a the edition or addenda incorporating the Case. There is no technical reason for not continuing to allow an annulled Case to be used when the only reason it was annulled was because it has been incorporated.