ML120720519
| ML120720519 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 03/12/2012 |
| From: | Hartz L Virginia Electric & Power Co (VEPCO) |
| To: | Marilyn Evans Division of Operating Reactor Licensing |
| References | |
| 12-124, 2.206, G20110668 | |
| Download: ML120720519 (4) | |
Text
VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23261 March 12, 2012 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Michele G. Evans, Director Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Washington, D.C. 20555 Serial No.12-124 NL&OS/ETS Docket Nos.
50-338/339 License Nos. NPF-4/7 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY (DOMINION)
NORTH ANNA POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR COMMENTS PROPOSED DIRECTOR'S DECISION REGARDING THOMAS SAPORITO'S PETITION UNDER 2.206 In a February 28, 2012 letter, the NRC provided its proposed director's decision regarding Thomas Saporito's petition with respect to North Anna Power Station Units 1 and 2. As part of that letter, the NRC requested that Dominion review and comment on the proposed director's decision.
Dominion has reviewed the proposed director's decision and identified a few recommendations for clarification.
The comments are included in the attachment to this letter.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Ms. Margaret Earle at (804) 273-2768.
Very truly yours,
~-
L. N. Hartz
- r-L)..]~tJ-Vice President - Nuclear Support ServIces Commitments made in this letter: None
cc:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Marquis One Tower 245 Peachtree Center Avenue, NE Suite 1200 Atlanta, Georgia 30303-1257 Mr. J. E. Reasor,.Jr.
Old Dominion Electric Cooperative Innsbrook Corporate Center 4201 Dominion Blvd.
Suite 300 Glen Allen, Virginia 23060 State Health Commissioner Virginia Department of Health James Madison Building - t h floor 109 Governor Street Suite 730 Richmond, Virginia 23219 NRC Senior Resident Inspector North Anna Power Station Dr. V. Sreenivas NRC Project Manager U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North Mail Stop 08 G-9A 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland 20852-2738 Serial No.12-124 Docket Nos. 50-338/339 Page 2 of2
Serial No.12-124 Docket Nos. 50-338/339 Attachment Response to Request for Comments Proposed Director's Decision Regarding Thomas Saporito's Petition Under 2.206 Virginia Electric and Power Company (Dominion)
North Anna Power Station Units 1 and 2
Serial No.12-124 Docket Nos. 50-338/339 Page 1 of 1 Comments on Director's Decision The following comments are provided for your consideration:
On page 25 the Decision states, "Following the seismic event, the licensee installed a temporary uninterruptible power supply (UPS) to ensure that the seismic monitoring panel and its associated alarms that are used to determine if an emergency plan entry is required will remain operable during periods where power is being transferred between the normal supply and the semivital bus."
Dominion recommends that the sentence be changed to read "... remain operable during periods where power is being transferred between the normal supply and the emergency power supply."
On page 26, the Decision states, "The seismic monitors for both types of equipment at the North Anna 1 basemat were connected to the seismic instrumentation panel located in the control room with indications of OBE and SSE exceedence. "
Dominion recommends that the end of the sentence be changed to read "with indication of OBE exceedence."
On page 28, the Decision states, "Considering this issue, the NRC staff asked the licensee to discuss any plans to update seismic instrumentation at the plant to provide better ground motion recordings for any future earthquake events."
Dominion recommends that the additional sentence noted below be added following the above statement consistent with Item 4 of the Action List in the November 11, 2011 Confirmatory Action Letter (CAL). We recommend the sentence, "Consistent with the NRC CAL, Action Item 4, Dominion will implement a design change to replace the existing seismic equipment and main control room indication with upgraded and enhanced seismic monitoring instrumentation equipment, which includes installation of a permanent, free field seismic monitor."
On page 32 the Decision states that, "(e) no movement occurred at the bases of the loaded HSMs (spacing between several HSM roofs indicated some very slight movement,"
Since the initial operability evaluation, Dominion has performed additional surveys to verify proper alignment of the front face of the HSMs to the approach monuments.
The subsequent surveys indicated that all but one of the loaded HSMs exhibited a slight (less than 1 inch) sideways shift.
On page 36 the Decision states, "After NRC's investigation, which was assisted by the USGC, it was concluded in 1973 in the safety evaluation report, Supplement No.3, that "none of the faults known to exist....and 10 CFR Part 100.
Dominion recommends that the sentence read as follows, "After NRC's investigation, which was assisted by the USGC, it was concluded in 1976 in the safety evaluation report, Supplement No.2, states in part..."
The discussion of seismology is included in SER supplement 2 dated August 1976.