ML15261A210
| ML15261A210 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 11/16/1998 |
| From: | Joseph Sebrosky NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9811200013 | |
| Download: ML15261A210 (16) | |
Text
Noveniber 16, 1998 LICENSEE:
Duke Energy Corporation (DUKE)
FACILITY:
Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, AND 3
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MANAGEMENT MEETING BETWEEN THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (NRC) STAFF AND DUKE REPRESENTATIVES TO DISCUSS THE OCONEE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION On October 29, 1998, representatives of Duke met with the NRC staff in Rockville, Maryland, to discuss the Oconee license renewal application. A list of meeting attendees is provided in. A copy of the presentation material discussed at the meeting is provided in.
Duke provided a high level status of different aspects of the review. One area of concern for Duke was staff feedback on Duke's responses to the staff's request for additional information (RAI) in the containment area. Duke stated that it had responded to the 25 RAls in July and had not had any feedback on whether or not their responses satisfied the staff. The staff indicated that it would provide Duke with a high level verbal response on the RAls by November 16, 1998. The staff also indicated that there maybe a need to have a meeting with Duke to facilitate closure of the issues.
Duke stated that the B&W Owners Group's responses to the draft safety evaluation report open items regarding the Reactor Vessel Report (BAW-2251), and the responses to the second set of RAls for the Fluence Methodology (BAW-2241 P) will be provided to the staff in the near future. Duke was concerned that it had not heard back from the staff regarding the Reactor Vessel Internals Report (BAW-2248). The staff stated that the report was under active review and any questions the staff had would be submitted as RAls by December 4, 1998. The staff also reaffirmed its commitment to have all RAls for the Oconee license renewal application issued by this date.
The staff indicated that its RAls would be provided to Duke in a staggered fashion to the extent possible. The staff agreed that for tracking purposes it would rely on the system developed by Duke to track the issuance and Duke's responses to the RAls (Enclosure 3). At the end of the meeting the staff and Duke agreed that the next management meeting would be tentatively scheduled for December 16, 1998.
original signed by:
Joseph M. Sebrosky, Project Manager License Renewal Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287
Enclosures:
As stated cc w/encls: See next page DISTRIBUTION:
See next page 2
DOCUMENT NAME:G:\\SEBROSKY\\1 0-290CO.SUM OFFICE LA PDLR/DRPM:PM PRLR/DRPM:PM PDLR:D NAME LB I r JSebrosky SHoffman ClGrime DATE 1ll96 11/i/98 fi 11/98
___1_1_8 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 9811200013 981116 PDR ADOCK 05000269 P~~!,T a
J
Distribution:
Hard copy PUBLIC Docket File PDLR RF M. EI-Zeftawy, ACRS T2E2 E-mails F. Miraglia J. Roe D. Matthews C. Grimes T. Essig G. Lainas J. Strosnider G. Bagchi H. Brammer T. Hiltz G. Holahan S. Newberry C. Gratton L. Spessard R. Correia R. Latta J. Peralta J. Moore R. Weisman M. Zobler E. Hackett A. Murphy T. Martin D. Martin W. McDowell S. Droggitis PDLR Staff H. Berkow D. LaBarge L. Plisco C. Ogle R. Trojanowski M. Scott C. Julian R. Architzel J. Wilson R. Gill, Duke D. Walters, NEI
Oconee Nuclear Station (License Renewal) cc:
Mr. J. E. Burchfield Paul R. Newton, Esquire Compliance Manager Duke Energy Corporation Duke Energy Corporation 422 South Church Street Oconee Nuclear Site Mail Stop PB-05E P. 0. Box 1439 Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006 Seneca, South Carolina 29679 J. Michael McGarry, Ill, Esquire Ms. Karen E. Long Anne W. Cottingham, Esquire Assistant Attorney General Winston and Strawn North Carolina Department of Justice 1400 L Street, NW.
P. 0. Box 629 Washington, DC 20005 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Mr. Rick N. Edwards L. A. Keller Framatome Technologies Manager - Nuclear Regulatory Licensing Suite 525 Duke Energy Corporation 1700 Rockville Pike 526 South Church Street Rockville, Maryland 20852-1631 Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006 Manager, LIS Mr. Richard M. Fry, Director NUS Corporation Division of Radiation Protection 2650 McCormick Drive, 3rd Floor North Carolina Department of Clearwater, Florida 34619-1035 Environment, Health, and Natural Resources Senior Resident Inspector 3825 Barrett Drive U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-7721 7812B Rochester Highway Seneca, South Carolina 29672 Gregory D. Robison Duke Energy Corporation Regional Administrator, Region II Mail Stop EC-12R U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0. Box 1006 Atlanta Federal Center Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Robert L. Gill, Jr.
Duke Energy Corporation Virgil R. Autry, Director Mail Stop EC-12R Division of Radioactive Waste Management P. 0. Box 1006 Bureau of Land and Waste Management Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006 Department of Health and RLGILL@DUKE-ENERGY.COM Environmental Control 2600 Bull Street Douglas J. Walters Columbia, South Carolina 29201-1708 Nuclear Energy Institute 1776 I Street, NW County Supervisor of Oconee County Suite 400 Walhalla, South Carolina 29621 Washington, DC 20006-3708 DJW@NEI.ORG W. R. McCollum, Jr., Vice President Oconee Site Chattooga River Watershed Coalition Duke Energy Corporation P. 0. Box 2006 P. 0. Box 1439 Clayton, GA 30525 Seneca, SC 29679
ATTENDANCE LIST OCTOBER 29, 1998 NRC MEETING WITH DUKE OCONEE UNITS 1, 2 AND 3 NAME ORGANIZATION
- 1.
Steve Hoffman NRR/DRPM/PDLR
- 2.
Chris Grimes NRR/DRPM/PDLR
- 3.
Jack Roe NRR/DRPM
- 4.
Greg Robison Duke Energy
- 5.
Mike Tuckman Duke Energy
- 6.
Joe Sebrosky NRR/DRPM/PDLR
- 7.
P.T. Kuo NRR/DRPM/PDLR
- 8.
Dennis Read Southern Nuclear
- 9.
Lynn Connor Doc-Search Associates
- 10.
Michael Henig Virginia Power
- 11.
Dave Firth Framatome Technologies
- 12.
Raj Kundalkar Florida Power and Light
- 13.
Chuck Rayburn Baltimore Gas and Electric
- 14.
James Bennett Baltimore Gas and Electric
- 15.
B. W. Doroshuk Baltimore Gas and Electric
- 16.
Don Shaw Baltimore Gas and Electric
- 17.
Charlie Cruse Baltimore Gas and Electric
- 18.
Terry Pickens Northern States Power Company
- 19.
Doug Walters NEI
- 20.
Rounette Nader Duke Energy
- 21.
Jim Lang EPRI
- 22.
Cynthia S. Sochor NRR/DRPM/PGEB
- 23.
Jack Strosnider NRR/DE
- 24.
Ralph Architzel NRR/DRPM/PGEB
- 25.
Dave Solorio NRR/DRPM/PDLR
- 26.
Marian Zobler NRC/OGC
- 27.
Mike Neal NUSIS
- 28.
Altheia Wyche SERCH Licensing/Bechtel
- 29.
Ralph Beedle NEI
- 30.
Guy Cesare ENERCON Services
- 31.
Jit Vora NRC/RES/DET
- 32.
Roger Huston Licensing Support Services
- 33.
Tony Pietrangelo NEI
- 34.
Fred Polaski PECO Energy
- 35.
Joseph J. Hagan PECO Energy
- 36.
Mike Schoppman Florida Power and Light
- 37.
R.P. Heibel Baltimore Gas and Electric
- 38.
Wan C. Liu NRR/DRPM/PDLR
- 39.
Hai-Boh Wang NRR/DRPM/PDLR
- 40.
Goutam Bagchi NRR/DE/ECGB
PmW Duke
- Eney.
Oconee License Renewal Duke/NRC Management Meeting October 29, 1998 lwDuke Enerff Agenda
- Accomplishments a Key License Renewal Topics a Safety Review m Environmental Review a Hearing Process a Future Activities m Expectations October 29, 1998 Oconee License Renewal Project 2
Ener Accomplishments a September 28, 1998 - NRC/Duke Management Meeting II
- October 1, 1998 - Scoping/Screening Process Overview Meeting
- October 6, 1998 - Environmental PM Visit to Oconee a October 15, 1998 - NRC/Duke Management Application Overview Meeting m October 19,1998 - Environmental Scoping Meeting a October 19-21, 1998 - Environmental Site Visit
- October 22, 1998 - Electrical Review Meeting a October 27-30, 1998 - Process/Methodology Review Meeting October29, 1998 Oconee License Renewal Project 3
Duke Key License Renewal Enerw Topics
- 1. NRC complete review of Containment portion of Application
- 2. NRC complete review of Reactor Vessel Internals Topical Report (BAW-2248)
October29, 1998 Oconee License Renewal Project 4
2
Duke Energy-Safety Review a Reactor Coolant System
- Reactor Vessel Report (BA W-2251) - submitted June 29, 1996, draft safety evaluation issued, BWOG/Duke review in progress
- RV Internals Report (BA W-2248) - submitted July 29, 1997, Key License Renewal Topic #2
- Fluence Methodology (BA W-224 1P) - submitted May 14, 1997, written responses to second set of RAls will be submitted by BWOG in near future October 29, 1998 Oconee License Renewal Project 5
DDuke tEnerf.
Safety Review a RAI Status:
- of RA/ letters received by Duke - 1
- of RAls received by Duke - 25
- of RAI responses submitted by Duke - 25
- of RAI responses pending at Duke - 0
- of RAI responses awaiting NRC feedback - 25 October 29, 1998 Oconee License Renewal Project 6
3
Duke tyEne W-Safety Review
- Working Level Technical Meetings have been held or are planned on the following topics:
- Process/Methodology Review
- Fire Protection Review
- Electrical Review October 29, 1998 Oconee License Renewal Project 7
1 Duke P#Energy-Environmental Review m Environmental Scoping Meeting was very successful n Environmental Site Visit was very productive
- Communications with NRC project manager continue to be effective a SAMA review proceeding in parallel - separate technical discussions are planned in November
- RAls expected by January 3, 1999 October 29, 1998 Oconee License Renewal Project 8
n e rHearing Process a Chattooga River Watershed Coalition has petitioned to intervene n Contentions by the CRWC are due by 10/30/98 to the Licensing Board a Duke will provide response in November m Prehearing Conference may be scheduled in late November October 29, 1998 Oconee License Renewal Project 9
P Duke O#Ene gy.
Future Activities a BWOG provides responses to draft safety evaluation concerning Reactor Vessel Topical Report (BAW-2251)
" BWOG provides written responses to RAI Set
- 2 concerning Fluence and Uncertainty Topical (BAW-2241 P)
October 29, 1998 Oconee License Renewal Project 10
Duke OhEnerW.4 Expectations N Expectations to be accomplished by next NRC / Duke Management Meeting (mid - December):
- Successful Process/Methodology review meeting
- Successful Fire Protection review meeting
- Successful Electrical review meetings
- SAMA review technical discussions will be conducted
- Technical RAIs will be issued over several weeks
- All technical RAls will be issued by 1214/98 October29, 1998 Oconee License Renewal Project 11 6
Oconee License Renewal Application NRC Request For Additional Information Status October 29, 1998 231Frcomponents, including weldments, which are identified as outside
-July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into tescope of the evaluation boundary for the reactor building, please the Oconee License clarify where those components will be a ddressed in the Ocone eea plcto submitted July 6, 1998.
2.3-2 Section 2.2.l1l.B of the working draft standard review plan for license July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into renewal (SRP-LR) dated September 1997, discusses that plant items the Oconee License that are intended to be used during normal operation and maintenance Renewal Application of a system or structure and are not replaced based on calendar submitted July 6, 1998.
frequency or a predetermined qualified life. These items include sealing materials, gaskets, o-rings, and packing. The SRP-LR discusses that the applicant may either (1) identify these items as subject to aging management review, or (2) identify that degradation of these items may cause aging effects on the structure and component in which these items are installed and manage those aging effects accordingly. However, a plant item that specifically performs an intended function necessary for meeting 10 CFR 54.4 is to be identified as subject to an aging management review for renewal.
Please discuss the treatment of items, such as tendon grease, seals, and joint sealants, for Oconee.
2.3-3 Section 2.3.1.3 of the report states, "the lower tendon access gallery July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into does not support the intended functions of the Containment and is the Oconee License therefore not within the scope of the Rule." Please provide additional Renewal Application information regarding the seismic classification of the gallery and, if submitted July 6,1998.
not seismic Class I, the effects of gallery degradation on the integrity of the reactor building.
2.3-4 Please provide a discussion regarding "miscellaneous attachments to July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into the liner" as stated in Section 2.3.2.2 of the report. Also provide a the Oconee License figure showing some typical details and the "evaluation boundary."
Renewal Application submitted July 6, 1998.
2.3-5 Please discuss why Section 2.3.2.5 of the report does not indicate that July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into the sump piping has an intended function to maintain the leak-tight the Oconee License boundary of the containment Renewal Application submitted July 6, 1998.
2.3-6 Please clarify the evaluation boundary for the electrical penetrations July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into discussed in Section 2.3.2.6 of the report. Does it include all the Oconee Lcense elements subject to containment internal pressure? If not, please Renewal Application justify any exclusion.
R enewal ppicaio submitted July 6, 1998.
2.3-7 Section 2.3.2.5 of the report indicates that there are no expansion July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into bellows used on mechanical penetrations. Please confirm that bellows the Oconee License are not used on any other type of Oconee containment penetration.
Renewal Application submitted July 6, 1998.
10-29 RAI STATUS.doc Page 1
Oconee License Renewal Application NRC Request For Additional Information Status October 29, 1998 3.3-1 Section3.3.1.1.2ofthe reportconcludes that there are no applicable July 6, 1998 Respons incororate into aging effects for containment concrete components. The proposed LeOoe ies justification is largely based on concrete construction meeting designRewaAplcto codes and standards. The report indicated that NUREG-1522 and submitted July 6, 1998.
NUREG/CR-6424 were reviewed.
However, NUREG-1522, Appendix A, documented containment concrete degradation in plants constructed to similar codes and standards. In addition, NUREG/CR-6424 states, "The performance of reinforced concrete structures in Nuclear Power Plants has been good.
However, as these structures age, incidences of degradation due to environmental stressor effects are likely to increase to potentially threaten their durability."
Further, 10 CFR 50.55a requires concrete containments be inspected according to Subsections IWE and IWL of the ASME Section XI Code.
Section 3.3.II.B of the SRP-LR contains information on applicable aging effects for concrete containment components.
Thus, the staff disagrees that there are no applicable aging effects on containment concrete components. The applicant should revise the assessment of applicable aging effects for Oconee concrete components and propose aging management for the applicable aging
___effects.
3.3-2 Discuss any containment steel components that are not protected. by July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into coatings or encased in concrete. Describe how corrosion will being the Oconee License managed for those components?
Renewal Application submitted July 6, 1998.
3.3-3 The report indicates that Subsections WE and IWL of the ASME July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into Section X Code are necessa y for managing aging for reniewal.
the Oconee License Please specify the code "examination categories" for all of the Renewal Application referenced ASME Section XI inspections relied on for aging submitted July 6, 1998.
manageme-nt.
3.3-4 The report discusses that Section X "will continue to be maintained July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into through the consensus process of the ASME Code" and are "expected the Oconee License to be effective in managing" aging during the period of extended Renewal Application operation. In addition, the report states, "the Commission's process submitted July 6, 1998.
of reviewing Ed ions and Addenda of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, and incorporating them into 50.55a with limitations and modifications as required, provide reasonable assurance that required activities will adequately manage the aging effects." The report should identify the specific edition and addenda of the ASME code for staff review. Also, if certain paragraphs of 10 CFR 50.55a are relied on to manage aging for renewal, these paragraphs and the year of publication should be cited.
3.3-5 Discuss the aging management programs to be relied on for
-July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into inaccessible areas of steel components regarding corrosion and the Oconee License cracking.
Renewal Application
____________submitted July 6, 1998.
3.3-6 Section 3.3.2.2.1 of the report discusses loading cycles for the liner.
-July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into However, Section 3.3.1.1.1.2 of the report indicates that "the periodic the Oconee License Type A Integrated Leak Rate tests are the major sources of load Renewal Application changes." Where are the Type A loads included in Section 3.3.2.2. 1?
submitted July 6, 1998.
10-29 RAI STAT S.doc Page 2
Oconee License Renewal Application NRC Request For Additional Information Status October 29, 1998 3.3-7 Section 2.3.2.2 of the report indicates that the polar crane brackets July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into and other miscellaneous attachments are within the scope of this the Oconee License report. Discuss whether there are periodic loads on thes structures Renewal Application that need to be evaluated as part of the time-limited aging analysis in Section 3.3.2.2.1.
submitted July 6, 1998.
3.3-8 Section 3.3.2.2.1 of the report indicates that the projected number of July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into heatup and cooldown cycles would not exceed the originally assumed the Oconee License 360 number even for 60 years. Please provide information on the Renewal Application number of heatup and cooldown cycles already experienced and the methodology for projecting them to 60 years.
submitted July 6, 1998.
3.3-9 Fretting and lockup of the personnel airlock and equipment hatch July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into could result from mechanical wear. Provide appropriate aging the Oconee License management for these and any other aging effects applicable to the Renewal Application
.c submitted July 6, 1998.
3.3-10 Discuss whether expansion joint sealants have ever deteriorated July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into causing degradation of the liner below the floor and, if so, what the Oconee License actions were taken.
.Renewal Application submitted July 6, 1998.
3.3-11 Discuss whether corrosion has ever been observed in crevices where July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into the coating ends and steel is exposed and, if so, what actions were the Oconee License taken.
Renewal Application
_____________submitted July 6, 1998.
3.3-12 Was a corrosion allowance specified for the liner? Describe any liner July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into thickness surveys that have been conducted and, if conducted, the the Oconee License estimated corrosion rate from those surveys?
Renewal Application submitted July 6, 1998.
3.3-13 Section 4.5 of the SRP-LR considers metal corrosion allowance as a July 6, 1998.
Response incorporated into time-limited aging analysis. Discuss whether this is applicable to the the Oconee License containment steel components.
Renewal Application submitted July 6, 1998.
3.3-14 (1) Section 3.3.3.1.2 of the report indicates that "minor grease -
July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into leakage through the concrete shell and at anchorages have been the Oconee License observed.... The grease leakage is being monitored and there Renewal Application exists no evidence to date to show that the bulk-fill grease has submitted July 6, 1998.
any detrimental effect on concrete." Provide additional information on how the aging effects of grease leaked into concrete is being managed and discuss how the elements in Section 3.0.Il.C of the SRP-LR are met by the program.
(2) Also, discuss the potential effects of grease on the shear load capability of the concrete structure.
3.3-15 Section 3.3.1II.C.4 of the SRP-LR indicates that an increase in July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into temperature increases the prestress loss in prestressed tendons. It the Oconee License identifies sun exposure or proximity to hot penetrations as potential Renewal Application contributors. Please discuss management of this potential aging R
e dal 6,1998.
effect for renewal.
submitted July 6,1998.
3.3-16 Section 3.3.3.1.3.1 of the report uses words "similar" and July 6,1998 Response incorporated into "similarities." Please discusses the intent of this wording and whether the Oconee License there are any differences between the selection of words.
Renewal Application submitted July 6, 1998.
10-29 RAI STATUS.doc Page 3
Oconee License Renewal Application NRC Request For Additional Information Status October 29, 1998 3.-7Section 3.3.3.1.1 of the report indicates that loss of materials due to Juy6--8 Repneicrprtdit corrosion is the only applicable aging effect for tendons. However, h
cne ies other aging effects have been observed at operating plants such asRe waAplcto stress corrosion cracking, hydrogen embrittlement, stress relaxation of sbnte uy6 98 prestressing wire, and shrinkage creep that could result in loss of prestress. Revise the report to discuss these additional potentially applicable aging effects for the tendons.
3.3-18 Section 3.3.2.1.1.4 of the report discusses Oconee's "existing coating July 6, 1998 Response incorporated into maintenance procedures." However, Table 3.3-1 of the report does the Oconee License not include this as an aging management program for renewal. If Renewal Application coatings are credited for preventing or minimizing corrosion of the submitted July 6, 1998.
coated steel, the coating maintenance procedure is considered an aging management program. Please clarify whether the coating procedure is credited as an aging management program, and. if so, discuss how the elements in Section 3.0.1.C of the SRP-LR are met 10-29 RAI STATUS.doc Page 4
Oconee License Renewal Application NRC Request for Additional Information Summary October 29, 1998 1INRDUCTION 0
11Proe 0
1.2 Description of Oconee Nuclear Station 0
1.3 Technical Information Required for an Application 0
1.4 Process to Update Technical Information 0
1.5 Generic Safety Issues 0
- 2. IDENTIFICATION OF STRUCTURES & COMPONENTS 0
SUBJECT TO AGING MANAGEMENT REVIEW 2.1 Introduction 0
2.2 Identification of Systems, Structures, and Components Within the 0
Scope of License Renewal 2.3 Reactor Building (Containment) Structural Components 7
Open Pre 7f/98 2.4 Reactor Coolant System Mechanical Components and Class 1 0
Component Supports 2.5 Mechanical System Components 0
2.6 Electrical Components 0
2.7 Structures & Structural Components 0
- 3. IDENTIFICATION OF APPLICABLE AGING EFFECTS 0
3.1 Introduction 0
3.2 Description of the Process to Identify Applicable Aging 0
Effects 0
3.3 Aging Effects for Reactor Building (Containment) Structural 18 Open pre 77/98 Components 3.4 Aging Effects for Reactor Coolant System Components & Class 1 0
Component Supports 3.5 Aging Effects for Mechanical System Components 0
3.6 Aging Effects for Electrical Components 0
3.7 Aging Effects for Structural Components 0
- 4. AGING MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES 0
4.1 Introduction 0
4.2 Program and Activity Attributes 0
4.3 New Programs and.Activities 0
4.4 Battery Rack Inspections 0
4.5 Boric Acid Wastage Surveillance Program 0
4.6 Chemistry Control Program 0
4.7 Coatings Program 0
4.8 Containment Inservice Inspection Plan 0
4.9 Containment Leak Rate Testing Program 0
4.10 Control Rod Drive Mechanism Nozzle and Other Vessel Closure 0
Penetrations Inspection Program 4.11 Crane Inspection Program 0
4.12 Duke Power Five-Year Underwater Inspection of Hydroelectric 0
Dams and Appurtenances 4.13 Duke Quality Assurance Program 0
4.14 Elevated Water Storage Tank Civil Inspection 0
4.15 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Five Year 0
Inspection 10-29 RAI COUNT.doc Page 1
Oconee License Renewal Application NRC Request for Additional Information Summary October 29, 1998 4.16 Fire Protection Program 0
4.17 Heat Exchanger Performance Testing Activities 0
4.18 Inservice Inspection Plan 0
4.19 Inspection Program for Civil Engineering Structures and 0
Components 4.20 Penstock Inspection 0
4.21 Piping Erosion/Corrosion Program 0
4.22 Program to Inspect the High Pressure Injection Connections to the 0
Reactor Coolant System 4.23 Reactor Coolant System Operational Leakage Monitoring 0
4.24 Reactor Vessel Integrity Program 0
4.25 Service Water Piping Corrosion Program 0
4.26 Steam Generator Tube Surveillance Program 0
4.27 System Performance Testing Activities 0
4.28 Tendon - Secondary Shield Wall - Surveillance Program 0
4.29 230 kV Keowee Transmission Line Inspection 0
- 5. TIME-LIMITED AGING ANALYSES AND EXEMPTIONS 0
REVIEW 5.1 Introduction 0
5.2 Process Overview 0
5.3 Time-Limited Aging Analyses for the Reactor Building 0
(Containment) Structural Components 5.4 Time-Limited Aging Analyses for the Reactor Coolant System and 0
Class 1 Components 5.5 Time-Limited Aging Analyses for Mechanical Components 0
5.6 Time-Limited Aging Analyses for Electrical Equipment 0
5.7 Time-Limited Aging Analyses for Structures & Structural 0
Components Total Number of RAIS 25 10-29 RAI COUNT.doc Page 2