ML13330B293
| ML13330B293 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 04/15/1988 |
| From: | Trammell C Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Baskin K Southern California Edison Co |
| References | |
| TAC-66164, TAC-67596 NUDOCS 8804210399 | |
| Download: ML13330B293 (3) | |
Text
4 0UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 April 15, 1988 Docket No. 50-206 Mr. Kenneth P. Baskin Vice President Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Post Office Box 800 Rosemead, California 91770
Dear Mr. Baskin:
SUBJECT:
STEAM GENERATOR INSPECTION REPORT - SAN ONOFRE UNIT NO. 1 (TAC NO. 67596)
This is in response to your letter of March 25, 1988, which provided the results of the February-March 1988 steam generator tube inspection.
First, we would like to comment on your statement that approval of this report is not required prior to startup. Note that Technical Specification 4.16.E.2, which involves only minor tube imperfections, states that "plant operation may resume" following the inspection. Similarly, specification 4.16.E.3, involving no more than three tubes requiring to be plugged, states that "plant operation may resume after performance of the corrective action in Specification F" (i.e. repair or plug defective tubes). Specification 4.16.E.4, involving the need for plugging more than 3 tubes and which is applicable in the present circumstances, does not state that plant operation may be resumed. To the contrary, it states that "the situation shall be reported to the Commission in accordance with Technical Specification 6.6 for approval of the proposed remedial action (emphasis added). The purpose of this is to allowfiorNRC review of licensee's inspection results to see if additional actions (inspections, plugging tubes, revised plugging limits, etc.) are needed before resuming operation. Clearly NRC review after returning to operation would not serve this purpose, and NRC disapproval following return to operation would be very disruptive. Although we may not have the need to publish a formal safety evaluation for each report received, we do need to page through such reports with sufficient care to ensure that additional actions are not needed. We have done this in the case of your current report and, based on that review, we have no objection to your resuming power operation. We approve your correc tive actions, subject, of course, to issuance of the amendment that you requested on March 10, 1988 to allow you to leave certain tubes with defects in the tube sheet unplugged.
8604210399 880415 PDR ADOCK 05000206 G
PDR 9
Kenneth P. Baskin
- 2 We do agree that the specification discussed above is somewhat ambiguous because it states that the inspection report shall be reported to the Commission "in accordance with Technical Specification 6.6" which, in turn, refers to a 30-day Licensee Event Report. Because of the ambiguity which this offers, we request that you submit an application for amendment to make it clear that NRC approval is required before plant operation may be resumed.
We request that such an amendment application be submitted within 60 days of your receipt of this letter so that we may have this matter behind us before the next steam generator inspection.
Finally, although not needed before startup, we do need to understand in greater detail the basis for your conclusion (p. 7) that intergranular attack (IGA) is not progressing at San Onofre Unit 1. For example, you mentioned that neither IGA indications were above the 50% plugging limit, but did not state the actual percent values. Please provide a more comprehensive discussion of IGA so that we may understand the basis for your conclusion that IGA is not progressing. We request that you provide this information within 30 days of your receipt of this letter.
Sincerely, original signed by Charles M. Trammell, Project Manager Project Directorate V Division of Reactor Projects -
- III, IV, V and Special Projects See next page DISTRIBUTION Docket File NRC & LPDRs CTrammell GHolahan JLee OGC-White Flint PDV Plant File Edordan JPartlow ACRS (10)
CYCheng HConrad KWichman V
EDR DV T mmell:dr C04 8g on
/88
/
//88 88 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Mr. Kenneth P. Baskin San Onofre Nuclear Generating Southern California Edison Company Station, Unit No. 1 cc Charles R. Kocher, Assistant Mr. Jack McGurk, Acting Chief General Counsel Radiological Health Branch James Beoletto, Esquire State Department of Health Southern California Edison Company Services Post Office Box 800 714 P Street, Office Bldg. 8 Rosemead, California 91770 Sacramento, California 95814 David R. Pigott Mr. Hans Kaspar, Executive Director Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe Marine Review Committee, Inc.
600 Montgomery Street 531 Encinitas Boulevard, Suite 105 San Francisco, California 94111 Encinitas, California 92024 Mr. Robert G. Lacy Mr. Dennis M. Smith, Chief Manager, Nuclear Radiological Programs Division San Diego Gas & Electric Company Governor's Office of Emergency Svcs.
P. 0. Box 1831 State of California San Diego, California 92112 2800 Meadowview Road Sacramento, California 95832 Resident Inspector/San Onofre NPS U.S. NRC P. 0. Box 4329 San Clemente, California 92672 Mayor City of San Clemente San Clemente, California 92672 Chairman Board of Supervisors County of San Diego San Diego, California 92101 Director Energy Facilities Siting Division Energy Resources Conservation &
Development Commission 1516 - 9th Street Sacramento, California 95814 Regional Administrator, Region V U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596 MrFasKspr xctieDrco