ML15113A376
| ML15113A376 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 09/04/1997 |
| From: | Berkow H NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Mccollum W DUKE POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML15113A377 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-M98208, TAC-M98209, TAC-M98210, NUDOCS 9709120293 | |
| Download: ML15113A376 (3) | |
Text
September 4, 1997 Mr. W. R. McCollum Vice President, Oconee Site I
Duke Energy Corporation P. 0. Box 1439 Seneca, SC 29679
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR RELIEF NO. 97-02 AUGMENTED EXAMINATION FOR THE REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL - OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 (TAC NOS. M98208, M98209, AND M98210)
Dear Mr. McCollum:
By letter dated March 13, 1997, Duke Power Company submitted a request for relief from 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(ii)(A) for the Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3. This section addresses augmented examination requirements for reactor vessel shell welds. The staff, with technical assistance from its contractor, the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), has reviewed your submittal. Our evaluation and conclusions are contained in Enclosure 1. Enclosure 2 is INEEL's Technical Letter Report.
Based on the information provided regarding the augmented reactor pressure vessel examination, the staff has concluded that examination coverage for the reactor vessel welds has been maximized and compliance would result in hardship or unusual difficulty without a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety. Based on the coverages obtained, it can be concluded that degradation, if present, would have been detected. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(ii)(A)(5) and 50.55a(a)(3)(ii), the alternative proposed is authorized.
Sincerely, Herbert N. Berkow, Director Project Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/11 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287
Enclosures:
- 1. Safety Evaluation
- 2. INEEL Technical Letter Report cc w/encl: See next page Distribution:
Docket File BBoger OGC SShaeffer, RII PUBLIC THarris (e-mail SE)
ACRS GHill (6)
PD 11-2 Rdg.
TMcLellan JJohnson, RIl To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachmentlenclosure "E" =
Copy with attac entlenclosure "N" = No copy
- See previous concurrence OFFICE PM:P 1-2 LA:PDII OGC*
D: P_
___2__
NAME DLaB n
LB rry MYoung HBeriH9 DATE J/A-I
/97 8/22/97
/ /197
/97
/ /97 DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\OCONEE\\ C98208.LTR OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 9709120293 970904 TER11 Sp1 11 111 ii111 iili PDR ADOCK 05000289 N
11111 C11 111 Illi liii CI ii Yiil P
__PDR A
9
UNITED STATES 0
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Z
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 September 4, 1997 Mr. W. R. McCollum Vice President, Oconee Site Duke Energy Corporation P. 0. Box 1439 Seneca, SC 29679
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR RELIEF NO. 97-02 AUGMENTED EXAMINATION FOR THE REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL - OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 (TAC NOS. M98208, M98209, AND M98210)
Dear Mr. McCollum:
By letter dated March 13, 1997, Duke Power Company submitted a request for relief from 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(ii)(A) for the Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3. This section addresses augmented examination requirements for reactor vessel shell welds. The staff, with technical assistance from its contractor, the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), has reviewed your submittal. Our evaluation and conclusions are contained in Enclosure 1. Enclosure 2 is INEEL's Technical Letter Report.
Based on the information provided regarding the augmented reactor pressure vessel examination, the staff has concluded that examination coverage for the reactor vessel welds has been maximized and compliance would result in hardship or unusual difficulty without a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety. Based on the coverages obtained, it can be concluded that degradation, if present, would have been detected. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(ii)(A)(5) and 50.55a(a)(3)(ii), the alternative proposed is authorized.
Sincerely, He e N. Berkow, Director P ject Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/Il Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287
Enclosures:
- 1. Safety Evaluation
- 2. INEEL Technical Letter Report cc w/encl: See next page
Oconee Nuclear Station cc:
Mr. Paul R. Newton Mr. J. E. Burchfield Legal Department (PBO5E)
Compliance Manager Duke Energy Corporation Duke Energy Corporation 422 South Church Street Oconee Nuclear Site Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 P. 0. Box 1439 Seneca, South Carolina 29679 J. Michael McGarry, III, Esquire Winston and Strawn Ms. Karen E. Long 1400 L Street, NW.
Assistant Attorney General Washington, DC 20005 North Carolina Department of Justice Mr. Robert B. Borsum P. 0. Box 629 Framatome Technologies Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Suite 525 1700 Rockville Pike Mr. G. A. Copp Rockville, Maryland 20852-1631 Licensing - ECO50 Duke Energy Corporation Manager, LIS 526 South Church Street NUS Corporation Charlotte, North Carolina 28242-0001 2650 McCormick Drive, 3rd Floor Clearwater, Florida 34619-1035 Mr. Richard M. Fry, Director Division of Radiation Protection Senior Resident Inspector North Carolina Department of U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Environment, Health, and Commission Natural Resources 7812B Rochester Highway 3825 Barrett Drive Seneca, South Carolina 29672 -
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-7721 Regional Administrator, Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, S.W., Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Max Batavia, Chief Bureau of Radiological Health South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, South Carolina 29201 County Supervisor of Oconee County Walhalla, South Carolina 29621