ML050730178
| ML050730178 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  (NPF-009, NPF-017) |
| Issue date: | 04/08/2005 |
| From: | James Shea NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD2 |
| To: | Gordon Peterson Duke Energy Corp |
| SHea J, 415-1388, NRR/DLPM | |
| References | |
| MC-GRP-01, MC-SRP-KC-01, MC-SRP-ND-01, MC-SRV-NS-01, TAC MC5571, TAC MC5572, TAC MC5573, TAC MC5574, TAC MC5575, TAC MC5576, TAC MC5577, TAC MC5578 | |
| Download: ML050730178 (6) | |
Text
April 8, 2005 Mr. G. R. Peterson Vice President McGuire Nuclear Station Duke Energy Corporation 12700 Hagers Ferry Road Huntersville, NC 28078-8985
SUBJECT:
MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RE: RELIEF REQUEST NOS. MC-GRP-01, MC-SRP-KC-01, MC-SRP-ND-01, AND MC-SRV-NS-01 (TAC NOS. MC5571, MC5572, MC5573, MC5574, MC5575, MC5576, MC5577, AND MC5578)
Dear Mr. Peterson:
By letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) dated August 12, 2004, as supplemented by letter dated on November 18, 2004, pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 50.55a(a)(3), you requested the use of an alternative to the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Operating and Maintenance Code, for McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2. The NRC staff has reviewed your submittal and has determined that additional information is required.
Our questions are provided in the Enclosure. We discussed these questions with your staff on March 17, 2005. Your staff indicated that a response could be provided within 45 days of the date of this letter.
If you have any further questions on this matter, please call me at (301) 415-1388.
Sincerely,
/RA/
James J. Shea, Project Manager, Section 1 Project Directorate II Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/encl: See next page
ML050730178 NRR-088 OFFICE PDII-1/PM PDII-1/LA DE/EMEB/SC PDII-1/SC NAME JShea CHawes DTerao JNakoski DATE 03/ 17 /05 03/ 14 /05 04 / 08 / 05 04/ 08 /05
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELIEF REQUEST NOS. MC-GRP-01, MC-SRP-KC-01, MC-SRP-ND-01, AND MC-SRV-NS-01 ALTERNATIVES TO ASME OM CODE DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-369 AND 50-370 General Comment The licensee should follow the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) guidelines in NEI White Paper, Revision 1,Standard Format for Requests from Commercial Reactor Licensees Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a, dated June 7, 2004 as endorsed in U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) Office Instruction LIC-102, Relief Request Reviews, Revision 1.
Generic Relief Request No. MC-GRP-01 Comment: The licensee is requesting generic relief for all the pumps characterized as smooth-running pumps. The staff has not authorized establishment of a minimum vibration reference value generically and has not authorized alert and required action range values for pumps classified in a licensees inservice testing (IST) program as smooth running. If a licensee intends to requests an alternative using a minimum reference value for each pump, the submittal should address the current vibration levels and the methodology for detecting pump degradation.
RAI 1: In order for the NRC staff to complete its review of this relief request, please provide the pump specific information on vibration levels and the methodology for detecting pump degradation for all pumps for which relief is requested.
Specific Relief Request No. MC-SRP-KC-01 RAI 2: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Operations and Maintenance (OM) Code Edition 1998 through the 2000 Addenda, requires that all pumps within the scope of an IST program need to be categorized either as Group A or Group B. Therefore, please specify the category of the component cooling water pumps (i.e., either Group A or Group B) and use the appropriate instrument accuracy, as required by the Table ISTB-3500-1.
RAI 3: The licensee is requested to specify the paragraph of the OM Code from which relief is requested.
RAI 4: Under the, Basis for Relief paragraph, the licensee specified a required pressure instrument accuracy of 2 percent based on Table ISTB-3500-1. This pressure instrument accuracy of 2 percent is only for Group A and Group B tests. The licensee did not provide accuracy information (i.e. +/- 0.5 percent) to be used for the comprehensive test of component cooling water pumps, as specified in Table ISTB-3500-1. Please clarify, and include the accuracy requirements for the comprehensive pump test.
RAI 5: Under the, Basis for Relief paragraph, the licensee did not provide information related to the component cooling water pumps discharge pressure and pressure gauge accuracy requirements (for Group A or Group B and comprehensive pump tests). Please clarify and provide all the related information.
Specific Relief Request No. MC-SRP-ND-01 RAI 6: ASME OM Code Edition 1998, through the 2000 Addenda, requires that all pumps within the scope of an IST program need to be categorized either as Group A or Group B.
Therefore, please specify the category of the residual heat removal pumps (i.e., either Group A or Group B) and use the appropriate instrument accuracy, as required by Table ISTB-3500-1.
RAI 7: The licensee is requested to specify the paragraph of the OM Code from which relief is requested.
RAI 8: Under the, Basis for Relief paragraph, the licensee states Range requirements will be waived for the tests. The purpose of quarterly test is to verify Tech. Spec. requirements are met and to obtain vibration data for trending. The instrumentation used for the quarterly residual heat removal test will meet accuracy requirements for assuring RHR pump operability per Tech. Spec.
Please clarify and explain how quarterly inservice testing fulfills the Technical Specification Requirements.
RAI 9: The licensee is requested to rearrange and clarify the details provided under Basis for Relief and Alternative Testing so that the information is easily distinguished between the Basis for Relief and Alternative Testing paragraphs.
RAI 10: Under the, Alternate Testing paragraph the licensee specified a required pressure instrument accuracy of 2 percent based on Table ISTB-3500-1. This pressure instrument accuracy of +/- 2 percent is only for Group A and Group B tests. The licensee did not provide accuracy information (i.e. +/- 0.5 percent) related to the comprehensive test as specified in Table ISTB-3500-1. Please clarify, and include the accuracy requirements for the comprehensive pump test.
Specific Relief Request No. MC-SRV-NS-01 RAI 11: In order for the staff to evaluate whether the proposed IST alternative is acceptable, the licensee must demonstrate that (1) the proposed alternative provides an acceptable level of quality and safety pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i) or (2) compliance with the specified requirements of this section would result in hardship or unusual difficulty without a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(ii), or (3) the code requirements are impractical pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(f)(5)(iii).
Please provide the information necessary to demonstrate the basis for the request consistent with these requirements.
RAI 12: The licensee is requested to specify the paragraph of the OM Code from which relief is requested.
RAI 13: In the submitted relief request, it appears that the licensee intends to use grouping criteria for IST of the subject check valves, however, it is unclear which paragraph of the OM Code the licensee is requesting relief from. Please clearly identify the IST criteria and the specific paragraph of the OM Code for which relief is requested.
Please note that ISTC-5221(c)(1) states, Grouping of check valves for sample disassembly examination program shall be technically justified and shall consider, as a minimum, valve manufacturer, design, service, size, materials of construction, and orientation. Paragraph ISTC-5221(c)(3) states, At least one valve from each group shall be disassembled and examined at each refueling outage; all valves in each group shall be dissembled and examined at least once every 8 years. Provided the licensee meets all the requirements of grouping for these check valves as specified in ISTC-5221(c), it is unclear why the licensee needs relief from Code requirements.
McGuire Nuclear Station cc:
Ms. Lisa F. Vaughn Duke Energy Corporation Mail Code - PB06E 422 South Church Street P.O. Box 1244 Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1244 County Manager of Mecklenburg County 720 East Fourth Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 Mr. C. Jeffrey Thomas Regulatory Compliance Manager Duke Energy Corporation McGuire Nuclear Site 12700 Hagers Ferry Road Huntersville, North Carolina 28078 Ms. Anne Cottingham, Esquire Winston and Strawn 1400 L Street, NW Washington, DC 20005 Senior Resident Inspector c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 12700 Hagers Ferry Road Huntersville, North Carolina 28078 Dr. John M. Barry Mecklenburg County Department of Environmental Protection 700 N. Tryon Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 Mr. Peter R. Harden, IV VP-Customer Relations and Sales Westinghouse Electric Company 6000 Fairview Road, 12th Floor Charlotte, North Carolina 28210 Ms. Karen E. Long Assistant Attorney General North Carolina Department of Justice P.O. Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Mr. R. L. Gill, Jr.
Manager - Nuclear Regulatory Issues and Industry Affairs Duke Energy Corporation 526 South Church Street Mail Stop EC05P Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 NCEM REP Program Manager 4713 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-4713 Mr. Richard M. Fry, Director Division of Radiation Protection North Carolina Dept. of Environment, Health and Natural Resources 3825 Barrett Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-7721 Mr. T. Richard Puryear Owners Group (NCEMC)
Duke Energy Corporation 4800 Concord Road York, South Carolina 29745 Mr. Henry Barron Group Vice President, Nuclear Generation and Chief Nuclear Officer P.O. Box 1006-EC07H Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006