ML073532107

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
NRC Staff Proposed Questions
ML073532107
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 09/24/2007
From: Baty M
NRC/OGC
To:
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
References
50-219-LR, RAS 14809
Download: ML073532107 (2)


Text

September 24, 2007 UNITED STATES OF AlVlERlCA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -

BEFORE! THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND I-ICENSING BOARD DOCKETED USNRC In the Matter of December 19,2007 (9:55am)

AMERGEN ENERGY CORIIPANY, LLC i Docket NO.50-219-LR OFFICE OF SECRETARY RULEMAKINGS AND

)

(Oyster Creek Nuclear Ge~neratingStation) ADJUDICATIONS STAFF

)

NRC STAFF PROPOSED QUESTIONS Consistent with the Board's September 24, 2007 request for proposed questions, NRC Staff submits the following six questions for consideration by the Board:

1. Dr. Hausler testified to the uncertainty in taking UT measurements in a cramped location like the sand bed region. Does AmerGen have anything to say on how accessibility in the sand bed region may have impacted exterior UT measurements? What was the total dose received by the workers taking the external measurements? Does the Staff have anything to add?
2. Dr. Hausler, your testimony considered the unknown number of inclusions in the plates that make up the drywell shell as an element of uncertainty. Have you considered the standards that were applied to the purchase of the material such ASTM 212 Grade B and the Certified Material Test Report that affected the plate?
3. Dr. Hausler, yesterday we believe you cited a statistics theorem which you referred to as the Central Value Theorem. Didn't you mean the Central Limit Theorem? If so, please state the theorem and explain it. AmerGen, do you agree with Dr. Hausler's characterization? Staff, do you agree with Dr. Hausler's characterization?
4. Dr. Hausler testified that there is at least one area of the drywell shell in the sand bed region that does not meet the pressure criteria of 0.490. AmerGen, are you aware of any location or locations that don't meet the acceptance criteria?
5. Citizens' Exhibit 61, page 13, shows 9 locations missed in the 2006 survey, but 106 locations were found. AmerGen, in those locations where you could not find the 1992 reading location, what was the condition of the shell? Could you have taken a UT reading there?
6. Dr. Hausler you testified about pinholes in the coating. What evidence do you have about pinholes, and (lo AmerGenls VT data sheets document pinholes?
7. Dr. Hausler, you testified that AmerGen has exceeded the pressure criteria. How did you arrive at that concl~usionbased on AmerGen's 2006 data?

Respectfully submitted, Y

Mary C. Baty Counsel for NRC Staff Dated at Toms River, New Jersey this 24th day of September, 2007