ML15218A257
| ML15218A257 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 03/31/1995 |
| From: | Wiens L NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Hampton J DUKE POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML15218A258 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-M90773, NUDOCS 9504050180 | |
| Download: ML15218A257 (3) | |
Text
Mr. J. W.Hampton March 31., 1995 Vice President, OconWSite Duke Power Company P. 0. Bol439' Seneca, SC 29679
SUBJECT:
SAFETY EVALUATION OF CONTROL ROD DRIVE MECHANISM PENETRATION INSPECTION RESULTS - OCONEE, UNIT 2 (TAC NO. M90773)
Dear Mr. Hampton:
By letter dated November 2, 1994, you provided the NRC with the interim engineering evaluation performed by B&W Nuclear Technologies of the shallow indications found in Control Rod Drive Mechanism (CRDM) nozzle number 23. The NRC provided you the results of a preliminary review of this evaluation in a letter dated..November 9, 1994, in which we agreed with the conclusion that the flaws which had been detected were acceptable for operation of Oconee Unit 2 for one operating cycle of 18 months. The safety evaluation which provides the basis for this conclusion was to be provided separately:
The NRC staff has completed its review of your submittal, and finds it to be acceptable. Our Safety.Evaluation is enclosed. The flaws observed in the CRDM penetration are smaller than the criteria proposed by the Nuclear Utility Management and Resource Council (NUMARC) (now Nuclear Energy Institute), and the crack growth projections are conservative based on laboratory data and field experience. The flaws are not expected to exceed the NUMARC flaw size criteria by the end of the next operating cycle, at which time we understand another inspection of these flaws will be performed. Therefore, we conclude that Oconee, Unit 2, can be operated until the next refueling outage.
If you have questions regarding this matter, contact me at (301) 415-1495.
Sincerely, Original signed by:
L. A. Wiens, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 11-3 Division of Reactor.Projects -I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No;, 50-270 ncbsure:
Safety Evaluation cc w/encl:
See next page DISTRIBUTIONW
-D-o ket Tle ACRS(4 PUBLIC--'
M, Merschoff, RII PD23.Read iig F ile
.RCrlenjak, RII S. Varga OGC J. Zwol i'ns ki DOCUMENT NAME:
G:\\0CONEE\\0C090773.LTR To receive a copy of this documeat, Indicate In the box: "C" = Copy without attachment/enclosure "E" = Copy with attachment/enclosure "N" = No copy OFFICE LA:PD23:DRPE)\\
E IPM:PD23:DRP 1
D:PD23:DRP I
NAME LBbrry
-VU/
ILWiens:dtio.
HB rkow~
I DATE
/
/95
/3//95 3/95 9504050180 950331 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY PDR ADOCK 05000270 P
~pd REG*
0, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 2O55-0001 March 31, 1995 Mr. J. W. Hampton Vice President, Oconee Site Duke Power Company P. 0. Box 1439 Seneca, SC 29679
SUBJECT:
SAFETY EVALUATION OF CONTROL ROD DRIVE MECHANISM PENETRATION INSPECTION RESULTS - OCONEE, UNIT 2 (TAC NO. M90773)
Dear Mr. Hampton:
By letter dated November 2, 1994, you provided the NRC with the interim engineering evaluation performed by B&W Nuclear Technologies of the shallow indications found in Control Rod Drive Mechanism (CRDM) nozzle number 23.
The NRC provided you the results of a preliminary review of this evaluation in a letter dated November 9, 1994, in which we agreed with the conclusion that the flaws which had been detected were acceptable for operation of Oconee Unit 2 for one operating cycle of 18 months. The safety evaluation which provides the basis for this conclusion was to be provided separately.
The NRC staff has completed its review of your submittal, and finds it to be acceptable. Our Safety Evaluation is enclosed. The flaws observed in the CRDM penetration are smaller than the criteria proposed by the Nuclear Utility Management and Resource Council (NUMARC) (now Nuclear Energy Institute), and the crack growth projections are conservative based on laboratory data and field experience. The flaws are not expected to exceed the NUMARC flaw size criteria by the end of the next operating cycle, at which time we understand another inspection of these flaws will be performed. Therefore, we conclude that Oconee, Unit 2, can be operated until the next refueling outage.
If you have questions regarding this matter, contact me at (301) 415-1495.
Sincerely, L. A. Wiens, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 11-3 Division of Reactor Projects-I/Il Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-270
Enclosure:
Safety Evaluation cc w/encl:
See next page
09 Mr. J. W. Hampton Duke Power Company Oconee Nuclear Station cc:
A. V. Carr, Esquire Mr. Ed Burchfield Duke Power Company Compliance 422 South Church Street Duke Power Company Charlotte, North Carolina 28242-0001 Oconee Nuclear Site P. 0. Box 1439 J. Michael McGarry, III, Esquire Seneca, South Carolina 29679 Winston and Strawn 1400 L Street, NW.
Ms. Karen E. Long Washington, DC 20005 Assistant Attorney General North Carolina Department of Mr. Robert B. Borsum Justice B&W Nuclear Technologies P. 0. Box 629 Suite 525 1700 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland 20852-1631 Mr. G. A. Copp Licensing -
ECO50 Manager, LIS Duke Power Company NUS Corporation 526 South Church Street 2650 McCormick Drive, 3rd Floor Charlotte, North Carolina 28242-0001 Clearwater, Florida 34619-1035 Dayne H. Brown, Director Senior Resident Inspector Division of Radiation Protection U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission North Carolina Department of Route 2, Box 610 Environment, Health and Seneca, South Carolina 29678 Natural Resources P. 0. Box 27687 Regional Administrator, Region II Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street, NW. Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 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