ML15239A306

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Informs That NRC Agrees W/Conclusion That Flaws Detected at Unit 2 During CRDM Nozzle Insp Acceptable for Operation for One Operating Cycle of 18 Months,Per Util 941102 Submittal. Understands That Another Insp of Flaws Will Be Performed
ML15239A306
Person / Time
Site: Oconee Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 11/09/1994
From: Wiens L
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To: Hampton J
DUKE POWER CO.
References
TAC-M90773, NUDOCS 9411170134
Download: ML15239A306 (3)


Text

November 9, 1994 Mr. J. W. Hampton Vice President, Oconee Site Duke Power Company P. 0. Box 1439 Seneca, South Carolina 29679

Dear Mr. Hampton:

SUBJECT:

EVALUATION OF CONTROL ROD DRIVE MECHANISM PENETRATION INSPECTION RESULTS - OCONEE UNIT 2 (TAC NO. M90773)

By letter dated November 2, 1994, you provided the NRC with the interim engineering evaluation performed by B&W Nuclear Technologies (BWNT) of the shallow indications found in Control Rod Drive Mechanism (CRDM) nozzle number

23.

You pointed out that the maximum flaw length,identified was 0.33 inches with a depth less than 0.079 inches (2 mm).

Two millimeters was the minimum depth detectable by the inspection performed. The BWNT evaluation determined that all flaws in nozzle 23 are within the allowable flaw sizes for one operating cycle of 18 months based on the inspection acceptance criteria.

The NRC staff has performed a preliminary review of the November 2, 1994, submittal, and agrees with the conclusion that the flaws detected at Oconee Unit 2 during the CRDM nozzle inspection are acceptable for operation for one operating cycle of 18 months. It is our understanding that another inspection of these flaws will be performed at the next refueling outage. The safety evaluation which provides the basis for the above conclusion will be transmitted to you at a later date.

If you have questions regarding,this matter, contact me at (301) 504-1495.

Sincerely, Original signed by:

Leonard A. Wiens, Project Manager Project Directorate 11-3 Division of Reactor Projects-I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-270 cc:

See next page DISTRIBUTION:

HBerkow WLocket__ File 7 LWiens PUBLIC CNorsworthy PDII-3 R/F OGC, 0-15 B18 SVarga ACRS (4), TWF JZwolinski BBoger (A), RII JStrosnider, 0-7 D4 To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box:

"C" Copy without attachment/enclosure "E" = Copy with attachment/enclosure "N" No copy OFFICE ILA:PD23:DRPE E PM:PD23:DR E E BC:EMCB:DE E D:PD23 E

NAME I,

CNorsworthy Sf)

LWiens:cw/,SIAA JStrosnider\\

HBerko DAT #/

///

/ 94 1f, / Z/94' j{

1 / g/94

/r11/

/9/4 DT -DOCUMENT NAME:_ G:\\OCONEE\\CRDMINSP

/

9411170134 941109 PDR ADOCK 05000270

___L PDR

_J

+/- uouL

So REGUNITED STATES 0

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 November 9, 1994 Mr. J. W. Hampton Vice President, Oconee Site Duke Power Company P. 0. Box 1439 Seneca, South Carolina 29679

Dear Mr. Hampton:

SUBJECT:

EVALUATION OF CONTROL ROD DRIVE MECHANISM PENETRATION INSPECTION RESULTS - OCONEE UNIT 2 (TAC NO. M90773)

By letter dated November 2, 1994, you provided the NRC with the interim engineering evaluation performed by B&W Nuclear Technologies (BWNT) of the shallow indications found in Control Rod Drive Mechanism (CRDM) nozzle number

23.

You pointed out that the maximum flaw length identified was 0.33 inches with a depth less than 0.079 inches (2 mm).

Two millimeters was the minimum depth detectable by the inspection performed. The BWNT evaluation determined that all flaws in nozzle 23 are within the allowable flaw sizes for one operating cycle of 18 months based on the inspection acceptance criteria.

The NRC staff has performed a preliminary review of the November 2, 1994, submittal, and agrees with the conclusion that the flaws detected at Oconee Unit 2 during the CRDM nozzle inspection are acceptable for operation for one operating cycle of 18 months. It is our understanding that another inspection of these flaws will be performed at the next refueling outage. The safety evaluation which provides the basis for the above conclusion will be transmitted to you at a later date.

If you have questions regarding this matter, contact me at (301) 504-1495.

Sin erely, eonard A. Wiens, Project Manager Project Directorate 11-3 Division of Reactor Projects-I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-270 cc:

See next page

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 Babcock & Wilcox P. 0. Box 629 Nuclear Power Division Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Suite 525 1700 Rockville Pike Mr. G. A. Copp Rockville, Maryland 20852 Licensing - EC050 Duke Power Company Manager, LIS 526 South Church Street NUS Corporation Charlotte, North Carolina 28242-0001 2650 McCormick Drive, 3rd Floor Clearwater, Florida 34619-1035 Dayne H. Brown, Director Division of Radiation Protection Senior Resident Inspector North Carolina Department of U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Environment, Health and Route 2, Box 610 Natural Resources Seneca, South Carolina 29678 P. 0. Box 27687 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Regional Administrator, Region II 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