ML043560075
| ML043560075 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 12/20/2004 |
| From: | David Helker AmerGen Energy Co |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 2130-04-20336 | |
| Download: ML043560075 (2) | |
Text
An Fxelon Company 2 130-04-20336 December 20,2004 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Oyster Creek Generating Station Facility Operating License No. DPR-16 NRC Docket No. 50-219
Subject:
Proposed Relief Requests to the Requirements of 1 OCFR50.55a Concerning the Third Ten-Year Interval lnservice Inspection Program -
Response to Request for Additional Information
References:
- 1) Letter from M. P. Gallagher (AmerGen Energy Company, LLC) to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, dated June 12, 2003
- 2) Letter from M. P. Gallagher (AmerGen Energy Company, LLC) to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, dated February 18, 2004 In the Referenced 1 letter, AmerGen Energy Company, LLC, submitted for your review and approval four (4) proposed relief requests in accordance with 1 OCFR50.55a, associated with the Third Ten-Year Interval lnservice Inspection (ISI) Program for Oyster Creek Generating Station (OCGS). The OCGS third ten-year interval began on March 15, 1992, and concluded on October 14, 2002. The OCGS IS1 Program for the third interval complied with the 1986 Edition of the ASME Section XI Code. In the Reference 2 letter, additional information was provided.
In a conference call with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on November 10, 2004, the Staff requested additional information concerning Request Relief OC-32. As discussed in OC-32 (Reference 2), the performance of the shell-to-flange weld was deferred to the third period as part of the reactor vessel shell weld examinations in order to gain greater coverage of the weld by accessing it from the inner diameter (ID) using enhanced shell weld examination tooling. Additionally, the ID exam permitted scanning the weld from two (2) directions as compared to the OD (outer diameter) examination, which would only permit a one (1) sided manual examination. The ID automated exam resulted in a coverage of approximately 66%. If this exam were to be performed from the OD as a manual exam, due to the one sided configuration of the exam from below the vessel flange, and the anticipated obstructions (i.e.,
main steam nozzles), this exam would only have achieved an estimated 40% coverage.
Therefore, the automated examination performed from the inner diameter provided more extensive coverage (i.e., 66% versus an estimated 40% coverage).
U.S. Regulatory Commission December 20,2004 Page 2 If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Very truly yours, David P. Helker Manager, Licensing AmerGen Energy Company, LLC cc:
S. J. Collins, Administrator, USNRC, Region I R. J. Summers, USNRC Senior Resident Inspector, OCGS P. S. Tam, Senior Project Manager, USNRC File No. 03068