ML022200595
| ML022200595 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Mcguire, Catawba, McGuire  |
| Issue date: | 06/04/2002 |
| From: | Gill B Duke Energy Corp |
| To: | Rani Franovich Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Franovich R, NRR/DRIP/RLEP, 415-1868 | |
| References | |
| Download: ML022200595 (2) | |
Text
,Duke
'Power.
A Duh Eey Cempany Duke License Renewal Project Fax Date JUNE4, 2002 To Rani Franovich Fax 301 415 2279 Company NRC Phone 301 415 1868 From Bob Gill Fax 704-382-0368 Company Duke Energy Phone 704-382-3339 Number of pages 2
(including cover page)
Subject
- Rani, Comments on the draft telecon summary concerning RAI 3.5-4.
This facsimile contains information which (a) may be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY IN NATURE, OR OTHERWISE PROTECTED BY LAW FROM DISCLOSURE, and (b) is intended only for the use of the Addressee(s) named above. If you are not the Addressee, or the person responsible for delivering this to the Addressee(s), you are hereby notified that reading, copying or distributing this facsimile is prohibited. If you have received this facsimile in error, please telephone is Immediately.
TO a V0:60 200F-90-Nn£
FO'd 71i01 LICENSEE:
Duke Energy Corporation FACILITIES:
McGuire. Units 1 and 2, and Catawba, Units 1 and 2
SUBJECT:
TELECOMMUNICATION WITH DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION TO DISCUSS THE RESPONSE TO A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PERTAINING TO SECTION 3.5 OF THE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION On January 28, 2002. the NRC staff (hereafter referred to as *the staffl) issued a request for additional information (RAI) pertaining to Section 3.5, Aging Management of Containments, Structures and Component Supports, of the license renewal application (LRA). Duke Energy Corporation (hereafter referred to as "the applicant") responded to this request by letter dated March 11, 2002. On May 28, 2002, a conference call was conducted between the NRC and Duke Energy Corporation to discuss information that was provided to the NRC in response to RAi 3.5-4 with respect. Participants of the May 28, 2002, conference call are provided in an attachment.
The staff requested the applicant to expand upon their RAI response by explaining why the bellows (subject to cracking from exposure to chloride) was unique and different from the other components listed in the RAI (fuel transfer canal liner plate, sump liner, and sump screens).
The applicant indicated that a leaking bellows had been identified in 1993" and was replaced in 1994. In 1997, leakage from the replacement bellows was identified, and the leaking bellowsi,,
was replaced. A root cause determination attributed the 1997 blo= leak tc I-ess-corrosion c-ackin..Ig Z.=)
as a result of re to or contact with
- The applicant could not determine the source of xand speculated that the contaminant could have been introduced during the manufacturing process. The applicant further stated that'SCC had not rbee isted as an applicable aging effect for the other components (fuel transfer canal liner plate,,Ak 4
sump liner, and sump screens) because the' essentially consistedof sh t m.al or othe.
m,
,-k-PVJ S*iC-*
atori--', that had not been o1eV ed the manutacturer
./
,....j
- Aktr, The staff finds the appli s explanation OT whyC was not identified as an applicable aging d,I effect for fuel transfer canal liner plate, sump iner, and sump screens reasonable, but may characterize this as a Confirmatory Item in the Safety Evaluation Report pending the staff's y/,
receipt of this information, via letter, to augment the information provided in the applicant's RAI Y-C 1c response.
C'ols/0 r"-1 d0 d8 V8:60 FOOF-9S-Nn£