ML16341F382
| ML16341F382 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 10/25/1989 |
| From: | Rood H Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Shiffer J PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16341F383 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-71812, TAC-71813, NUDOCS 8911030102 | |
| Download: ML16341F382 (8) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 October 25, 1989 Docket Nos.:
50-275 and 50-323 Mr. J.
D. Shiffer, Vice President Nuclear Power Generation c/o Nuclear Power Generation, Licensing Paci fic Gas and E 1ectr i c Company 77 Beale Street, Room 1451 San Francisco, California 94106
Dear Mr. Shiffer:
SUBJECT:
SAFETY EVALUATION OF REVISIONS 7
AND 4 TO THE TEN-YEAR INSERVICE INSPECTION (ISI)
PROGRAM PLAN FOR DIABLO CANYON UNITS I AND 2, RESPECTIVELY (TAC NOS.
71812 AND 71813)
The purpose of this letter is to forward the NRC staff's most recent safety evaluation report addressing the First Ten-Year Interval ISI Program Plan for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units I and 2.
This SER covers the ISI Program Plan through Revision 7 for Unit I and Revision 4 for Unit 2, which Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PGSE) submitted by letter dated June 23, 1989, as supplemented by PG8E letters dated September 7 and 19, 1989.
These revisions resulted, in part, from the NRC Staff's Safety Eva'luation Report transmitted to PG8 E by letter dated December 14, 1988.
-The NRC staff, with technical assistance from the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory
( INEL), has reviewed and evaluated the above plans and the additional re1ated information that has been submitted.
Based on the information that PG&E has provided, the NRC staff has determined that certain Section XI Code requirements are impractical to perform at Diablo Canyon.
Therefore, we are granting relief from these requirements.
- However, we are not granting part of Relief Request 8 concerning system pressure testing of Class 2 non-safety related system containment penetrations.
The reason for this is that for some lines the supporting information provided was insufficient to support a finding that the Code requirements are impractical.
Specifically, relief is granted as requested for all lines except 527, 986, 1161, 1679, 3000, 3001, 3242, 3729, 3935, and 4353.
For these lines, relief is denied.
A summary of the bases for granting or denying each of PG5E's relief requests is included in the attached SER.
In sutanary, the staff has concluded that the First Ten-Year ISI Program Plans through Revisions 7 and 4 for Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2, respectively, with the additional information provided and the specific reliefs granted, (except as noted above, for part of Relief Request
- 8) are in compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55a(g) and Technical Specification 4.0.5.
Based on
- this, we find the ISI programs acceptable.
r 8941030i 02 89i025 PDRf
- DOCN, 05000275 6
PNU
4 tt t
J.
D. Shiffer October 25, 1989 Please contact us if you have any questions regarding this evaluation.
This completes our efforts on TAC Nos.
71812 and 71813.
Sincerely, original signed by Harry Rood, Senior Project Nanager Project Directorate V
Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
Safety Evaluation'c w/enclosures:
See'next page DISTRIBUTIONj NRC and LPDRs PDV Reading File t)Virgi 1 io JLee HRood OGC EJordan BGrimes GJohnson RHermann CYCheng ACRS (10)
D S /PD5 DRSP/PD5 HRood 1
89 10/g o/89 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DR 5
GK ton 10/gg/89
g, )a
~i
-P
<II )I >)4 a~'
1 5 lf"gl q>l~
w Yj/ ~
[J<ll 5
~i, p')3"
.."~l 3<
> 'elf)
".'lb
<<V '.,l
>'f
~~ 8
~ 6S
~
i J<1k) Naif s e ~.>~l.)Al
>~V c
~ 1~"" i '<l )
> Vt;i"l>J ll'~~
l'g,'.~gy,~I/ '),0.)'4 g 4 )
3gpk 'III If y IIJ >gC] y f $
I I
)f i'~
J~y 4 )'gled il c,~i'<<
~ 'g)~'
>I~)ll P..'CR PN ) '(
)
' ),
bf>
~If)J gV1 A<'>f') <i[~'~$',
$ 01~>~;hH 'fb >J 'Ill Df I~A e 9 IdC "Pl 3'>>
03., lief ~V3 "/S s I'r ~
'P g
X3
~
. Bid')f'3 33('." 3>
>" tR A'lJ,, <,,
'l f i ~>>lf ~a~)~>
'~<>'l f I'> 'l f '~ "l Gg>>())
~.,~~ 1.~"3
, ll 4>al '~~1'3'i I')
!3J'I" i" (I""'~if'lg'i7.',]
l I
l> ling
~'<,)(']9;
J.
D. Shiffer October 25, 1989 Please contact us if you have any questions regarding this evaluation.
This completes our efforts on TAG Nos.
71812 and 71813.
Sincerely, Harry Roo, Senior Project Manager Pr oject Directorate V
Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
Safety Evaluation cc w/enclosures:
See next page
f C
P l
Mr. J.
D. Shiffer Pacific Gas and Electric Company Diablo Canyon CC:
Richard F. Locke, Esq.
Pacific Gas 8 Electric Company Post Office Box 7442 San Francisco, California 94120 Ms. Sandra A. Silver 660 Granite Creek Road Santa Cruz, California 95065 Mr. Peter=H.
Kaufman Deputy Attorney General State of California 110 Mest A Street, Suite 700 San Diego, California 92101 Managing Editor The Count Tele ram Tribune
~13 1 Jo neon venue P. 0.
Box 112 San Luis Obispo, California 93406 Ms. Nancy Culver 192 Luneta Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 Regional Administrator, Region V
U.S; Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Malnut Creek, California 94596 Mr. John Hickman Senior Health Physicist Environmental Radioactive Mgmt. Unit Environmental Management Br anch State Department of Health Services 714 P Street, Room 616 Sacramento, Ca 1 ifornia 95814 NRC Resident Inspector Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0.
Box 369 Avila Beach, California 93424 Bruce Norton, Esq.
c/o Richard F. Locke, Esq.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company Post Office Box 7442 San Francisco, California 94120 Dr. R. B. Ferguson Sierra Club - Santa Lucia Chapter Roc'anyon Star Route Creston, California 93432 Chairman San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors Room 270 County Government Center San Luis Obispo, California 93408 Michael M. Strumwasser, Esq.
Special Assistant Attorney General State of California Department of Justice 3580 Milshire Boulevard, Room 800 Los Angeles, California 90010
L r
J of