ML15117A296
| ML15117A296 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 05/15/1995 |
| From: | Berkow H NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Merschoff E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| References | |
| TIA-94-013, TIA-94-13, NUDOCS 9505180391 | |
| Download: ML15117A296 (1) | |
Text
MEMORANDUM TO:
Eli
- 4. Merschoff, Director May 15, 5
Div.on of Reactor Projects, Region iT FROM:
Herbert N. Berkow, Director Original signed by:
Project Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects -
I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
TASK INTERFACE AGREEMENT (TIA 94-013) - TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE REQUEST, SAFETY IMPLICATIONS RELATED TO A POTENTIAL STEAM LINE BREAK BLOWING DOWN BOTH STEAM GENERATORS AT OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 - REVISED RESPONSE By memorandum dated December 19, 1994, we provided our evaluation of four issues associated with potential failure scenarios involving piping systems attached to the main steam system at the Oconee nuclear units. We concluded, based on the information known to us at that time, that the current steam system design, which could result in a blowdown of both steam generators following a single line break, constituted an unreviewed safety question.
This conclusion was subsequently forwarded to the licensee.
Upon further review of this issue by Duke Power Company (DPC), additional information was provided to the staff which indicated that this potential failure scenario had been identified by DPC in a High Energy Line Break submittal dated April 25, 1972, and analyzed and found acceptable by their vendor, Babcock & Wilcox. The analysis was reviewed and found acceptable by the NRC, as documented in the Oconee plant licensing safety evaluation. Based on this additional information, we conclude that this potential failure scenario does not constitute an unreviewed safety question. Since this scenario was analyzed as a specific transient, the issue of being bounded by the steam line break analysis is moot. Since the design has been previously found acceptable, we have no basis to perform a regulatory analysis in support of a backfit. Finally, since the potential failure scenario was analyzed and found acceptable, it is not required to be reported under 10 CFR 50.72.
If you have any questions concerning this revised response, please contact Len Wiens at (301) 415-1495.
Docket Nos. 50-2u9, 50-270, and 50-287 cc:
R. Cooper, RI E. Greenman, RIII B. Beach, RIV K. Perkins, RIV, WCFO DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File PUBLIC SVarga JRoe, 0-13 A2 J~oe 0-1 A2 9505180391 950515 JZwolinski PDR ADOCK 05000269 PDII-2 R/F P
_DR EMerschoff, RII P
AChaffee, 0-11 Al RCrlejak, RHI PHarmon, SRI, RH DOCUMENT NAME:
G:\\OCONEE\\TIA9413.REV To raceive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment/enclo re "E" = Copy with attachment/enclosur "N" = No copy OFFICE LA:PD22:D E PM:PD22:DRPE E BC:SRXB:DSS E D:PD2 LAME LjERRY LWIE S RJONES HBER DA1E
/1//
O 95
///
-/9
/
/95
/
/95