ML15218A252
| ML15218A252 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 04/08/1992 |
| From: | Matthews D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Hampton J DUKE POWER CO. |
| References | |
| TAC-M82803, NUDOCS 9204200264 | |
| Download: ML15218A252 (4) | |
Text
gREG~~j4 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20565 April 8, 1992 Docket No. 50-270 Mr. J. W. Hampton Vice President, Oconee Site Duke Power Company P. 0. Box 1439 Seneca, South Carolina 29679
Dear Mr. Hampton:
SUBJECT:
RELIEF REQUEST NO. 92 SAFETY EVALUATION FOR OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT NO. 2 (TAC NO. M82803)
By letter dated February 4, 1992, you forwarded Request for Relief (92-03) from the requirements of Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, 1980 Edition (with Addenda through Winter 1980) Article IWA-5214(a),
which requires that a component repair or replacement shall be hydrostatically tested prior to resumption of service. The component replaced was 2FDW-233, a 6-inch check valve that prevents backflow from the 2B Steam Generator to the Emergency Feedwater System.
Hydrostatic testing of the welds associated with the replacement of check valve 2FDW-233 would require pressurizing the steam generator. To avoid the system stresses involved in an extra hydrostatic test of the steam generator beyond the requirements of the normal hydrostatic test cycle, you propose an alternate examination:
the welds would be 100% radiographed and a VT-2 visual inspection would be performed at normal operating temperature and pressure.
The NRC staff has reviewed and evaluated your relief request and your proposed alternative testing of the welds. We find that an additional hydrostatic test is impractical because of the considerable practical difficulties involved and the unnecessary stresses to which the steam generator system would be subjected.
Your proposed alternative to hydrostatic testing (100% radiography and VT-2 inspection of the welds at normal operating temperature and pressure) would provide assurance of the integrity of the welds and their ability to remain leak-tight ati.ormal operating conditions.
INC F L ETRCP
/__920420626492040 PDR-ADOCK 05000270 P
PDR F
Mr. J. April 8, 1992 Based on the above considerations, the NRC staff finds that your alternate radiographic and visual inspections are acceptable in place of the hydrostatic testing requirements of the ASME Code.
Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(i), your request for relief (92-03) from hydrostatic testing is granted. The NRC staff has determined that the proposed alternative testing provides an acceptable level of quality and safety and that compliance with the code would result in hardship or undue burden without a compensatory increase in the level of quality or safety.
This relief is authorized by law and will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security and is otherwise in the public interest given due consideration to the burden that could result if the requirements were imposed on the facility.
Sincerely, David B. Matthews, Director Project Directorate 11-3 Division of Reactor Projects -
I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc: See next page
Mr. J. April 8, 1992 Based on the above considerations, the NRC staff finds that your alternate radiographic and visual inspections are acceptable in place of the hydrostatic testing requirements of the ASME Code.
Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(i), your request for relief (92-03) from hydrostatic testing is granted. The NRC staff has determined that the proposed alternative testing provides an acceptable level of quality and safety and that compliance with the code would result in hardship or undue burden without a compensatory increase in the level of quality or safety.
This relief is authorized by law and will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security and is otherwise in the public interest given due consideration to the burden that could result if the requirements were imposed on the facility.
Sincerely,
/s/
David B. Matthews, Director Project Directorate 11-3 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc:
See next page DISTRIBUTION:
Oconee R/F LWiens Edordan, MNBB3701 L~idtie7 SVarga SKirslis ACRS (10), P-315 NRC & Local PDRs GLainas DMatthews LReyes, Ru PD II-3-R/
LBerry OGC, 15B18 JWiggins PDIT-3:
PD 1-06 W
t P M D
13C LBerry scw Lgies
/3/3/92
'/4//92
/9 41FICIAL RECORD COPY 3
Document Name:
RELIEF REQUEST 92/03 OCONEE
Mr. J. W. Hampton Duke Power Company Oconee Nuclear Station cc:
Mr. A. V. Carr, Esq.
Mr. M. E. Patrick Duke Power Company Compliance 422 South Church Street Duke Power Company Charlotte, North Carolina 28242-0001 Oconee Nuclear Site P.O. Box 1439 Seneca, South Carolina 29679 J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.
Winston and Strawn Mr. Alan R. Herdt, Chief 1400 L Street, NW.
Project Branch #3 Washington, DC 20005 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street, NW., Suite 2900 Mr. Robert B. Borsum Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Babcock & Wilcox Nuclear Power Division Ms. Karen E. Long Suite 525 Assistant Attorney General 1700 Rockville Pike N. C. Department of Justice Rockville, Maryland 20852 P.O. Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Manager, LIS NUS Corporation Mr. R. L. Gill, Jr.
2650 McCormick Drive, 3 Floor Licensing Clearwater, Florida 34619-1035 Duke Power Company P. 0. Box 1007 Senior Resident Inspector Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1007 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Route 2, Box 610 Seneca, South Carolina 29678 Regional Administrator, Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street, NW., Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Mr. Heyward G. Shealy, Chief Bureau of Radiological Health South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Columbia, South Carolina 29201 Office of Intergovernmental Relations 116 West Jones Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 County Supervisor of Oconee County Walhalla, South Carolina 29621