ML15261A223
| ML15261A223 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 02/02/1999 |
| From: | Joseph Sebrosky NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9902090112 | |
| Download: ML15261A223 (5) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 February 2, 1999 LICENSEE:
Duke Energy Corporation (Duke)
FACILITY:
Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF JANUARY 26, 1999, PHONE CALL BETWEEN THE U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (NRC) STAFF AND DUKE REPRESENTATIVES TO DISCUSS THE OCONEE LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION On January 26, 1999, a representative of Duke had a phone call with the NRC staff in Rockville, Maryland, to discuss the Oconee license renewal application. The purpose of the phone call was to discuss the timing of new inspections to verify the presence or absence of various degradation mechanisms specific to certain components. The staff had asked several requests for additional information (RAls) in this area including the following RAls: G-2, G-4, 3.4.11-5, 4.3.1-4, 4.3.7-1, 4.3.9-2, and 4.3.13-1. The NRC staff participants were Stephanie Coffin, Rene Li, Merilee Banic, Barry Elliot, Joe Sebrosky and Ted Sullivan. The Duke participant was Bob Gill.
Duke stated that new programs and activities are identified in Section 4.3 of its license renewal application. This section of Duke's application discusses the new inspections. Duke stated that the timing of new inspections falls into the following three broad categories: (1) an on-going industry effort that has identified aging effects and corrective actions; (2) not enough data to demonstrate the effectiveness of the aging management program; and (3) no aging effects that have been identified.
Duke stated that two programs in its license renewal application fell into the first category, which are Section 4.3.1, "Alloy 600 Aging Management Program," and Section 4.3.11, "Reactor Vessel Internal Aging Management Program." In these areas, Duke stated that it would consider accelerating the schedule for the new inspections based on the results of on-going programs in this area.
Duke stated that two programs in the license renewal application fell into the second category which are Section 4.3.5, "Keowee Oil Sampling Program", and Section 4.3.8, "Preventative Maintenance Activity Assessment." Duke stated that more information is needed before it could demonstrate the effectiveness of the aging management programs and the activities in these areas. Duke indicated that it would collect data and confirm the effectiveness of the aging a
management program. Duke committed to perform an assessment of the effectiveness of the programs in these areas.
Finally, Duke stated that nine new inspections fell into the third category. The nine inspections are contained in the following sections of its license renewal application: 4.3.2 "Cast Iron Selective Leaching Inspection," 4.3.3 "Galvanic Susceptibility Inspection," 4.3.4 "Keowee Air and Gas Systems Inspection," 4.3.6 "Once-through Steam Generator Upper Lateral Support 9902090112 990202 PDR ADOCK 05000269 AD CKPDR R
U C
-2 Inspection," 4.3.7 "Pressurizer Examination," 4.3.9 "Reactor Building Spray," 4.3.10 "Reactor Coolant Pump Motor Oil Collection System Inspection," 4.3.12 "Small bore Piping Inspection,"
and 4.3.13 "Treated Water Systems Stainless Steel Inspection." Duke indicated that in these areas the new inspections would be performed near the end of the current licensing term because based on Duke's review, as documented in Section 3 of the license renewal application, Duke had not identified any near-term concerns regarding these programs.
The staffs general questions regarding new inspections (i.e., G-2 and G-4) dealt mainly with inspections that fell into the third category. The staff asked Duke to discuss the rationale for delaying the new inspections as part of these questions. Duke stated that the general response to the questions was that if industry experience had not identified aging effects for a component, then Duke would perform the new inspection near the end of the current licensing term. (Duke considers industry experience to be inspections and operating experience from other utilities as well as NRC generic communications.) Duke's technical rationale for this case was that performing the inspections later increased the chances of identifying potential problems because it would allow time for any potential aging effects to materialize such that the new inspections could identify them.
The staff noted that the above discussions did not appear in the license renewal application. The staff stated that Duke's technical rationale for the timing of the new inspections seems logical and that a summary of the previous discussions should appear in response to the staff's questions. The staff also stated that it would reserve judgement on this issue until it sees a complete description of the issue in the responses to the RAls. The staff noted that the general discussion above would not be adequate in response to RAI 4.3.7-1, which requires a detailed technical response. The staff also noted that the description of the program for Section 4.3.5 "Keowee Oil Sampling Program," of the license renewal application needed to be clarified as part of Duke's response to RAI G-4.
The staff and Duke agreed that guidance had previously been given to Duke on what constituted new inspections being performed "near the end of the current licensing term." Specifically, the staff provided the guidance in an August 13, 1997, letter to Duke whose subject was "License Renewal Inspection Program Example for Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3." In that letter, the staff stated that it considers the last two periods of the fourth interval of the Oconee inservice inspection plan meet the definition of "near the end of the current licensing term."
In addition, the staff stated that it expected Duke to specify that completion of the new inspections would be done prior to the start of the extended period of operations. The staff also expected that any corrective actions identified as a result of the new inspections would be
-3 performed such that the components intended function will be assured, without interruption, through the period of extended operation.
Orige Bign y
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 cc: See next page DISTRIBUTION:
See next page DOCUMENT NAME:G:\\SEBROSKY\\1 26PHN.WPD OFFICE LA PM:PDLR/DRPM EMCB/DE D:PDLR NAME LBerry JSebrosky TSullivan CIGrime DATE 0q99 01/9 O
/99 99
\\J OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
DISTRIBUTION:
Hard copy Docket FRle/
PUBLIC PDLR RF M. EI-Zeftawy, ACRS T2E2 E-mail R. Zimmerman BElliot D. Matthews M. Banic C. Grimes S. Coffin T. Essig R. Li J. Strosnider T. Sullivan G. Bagchi H. Brammer T. Hiltz G. Holahan S. Newberry C. Gratton R. Correia R. Latta J. Peralta J. Moore R. Weisman M. Zobler E. Hackett A. Murphy 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 C. Sochor R. Gill, Duke D. Walters, NEI
Oconee Nuclear Station (License Renewal) cc:
Mr. J. E. Burchfield Ms. Lisa F. Vaughn 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. Box629 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 11 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