ML17241A461
| ML17241A461 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 09/23/1999 |
| From: | Peterson S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Plunkett T FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17241A462 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-MA5041, NUDOCS 9909270088 | |
| Download: ML17241A461 (3) | |
Text
September 23, 1999 Mr. T. F. Plunkett President - Nuclear Division Florida Power and Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, Florida 33408-0420
SUBJECT:
RELIEF FROM ASME CODE REQUIREMENTS RELATEDTO THE INSERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM SECOND 'IO-YEAR INTERVALFOR ST. LUCIE PLANT, UNIT2 (TAC NO. MA5041)
The NRC hereby'authorizes the proposed alternative to'he Code requirements for ISI RR-22, pursuant to Title 10, Code of Federal Re ulations, Section 50.55a(a)(3)(i), in that the staff finds that the proposed alternativ, with the conditions stated in the enclosed safety evaluation, willprovide an equivalent or better examination than the requirements in the 1989 Edition of the Code. Therefore, the proposed alternative provides an acceptable level of quality and safety.
Sincerely, Original signed by:
Sheri R. Peterson, Chief, Section 2 Project Directorate II Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 9909270088 990923 PDR ADQCK 05000389 P
PDR Docket No. 50-389
~ 8g gE~S DISTRIBUTION:
RScholl (email SE)
%Docket F~ile BClayton SPeterson PUBLIC OGC MSatorius WGleaves GHill (2)
LWert, Rll HBerkow WBateman DNaujock DOCUMENT NAME: G:EPDII-21St. LucieWIA5041 relief U2.wpd
- See previous concurrence Indicate in the box: "C"=Co without enclosure "E"=Co with enclosure "N"=No co ACRS (9)
St. Lucie R/F ESullivan Eq I
1' By letter dated February 18, 1999, and supplemented May 24, 1999, the Florida Power and Light Company submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) a request for relief from certain provisions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (Code),Section XI, contained in your second 10-year interval Inservice Inspection (ISI) Program for St. Lucie Plant,'nit 2. The staff has reviewed and evaluated the information provided in your proposed revision to the second 10-Year ISI program, Relief Request(RR)
No. 22, for St. Lucie Plant, Unit2.
The ISI program RR, which is authorized herein, is acceptable for implementation.
The granting of relief is based upon the fulfillmentof any commitments made by you in the basis for the RR and the proposed alternativ.
OFFICE NAME DATE c$ I'J A Q O
PDII-CPM WGleave 09/ ZS/99 09/B3 /99 09/15/99 09/22/99 OFFICIALRECORD COPY PDII-2KLA8 EMCB/SC OGC BClayto~ ESullivan
- Uttal
- PDII-2E S Peter 09/2
/99
f 1
pl
'I
't I
'l 1
(4gp,8 RECii "o
Cy 0O t7
~O
++*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 September 23, 1999 Mr. T. F. Plunkett President - Nuclear Division Florida Power and Light Company P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, Florida 33408-0420
SUBJECT:
RELIEF FROM ASME CODE REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO THE INSERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM SECOND 10-'YEAR INTERVALFOR ST. LUCIE PLANT, UNIT2 (TAC NO. MA5041)
Dear Mr. Plunkett:
By letter dated February 18, 1999, and supplemented May 24, 1999, the Florida Power and Light Company submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), a request for relief from certain provisions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (Code),Section XI, contained in your second 10-year interval Inservice Inspection (ISI) Program for St. Lucie Plant, Unit 2. The staff has reviewed and evaluated the information provided in your proposed revision to the second 10-Year ISI program, Relief Request(RR)
No. 22, for St. Lucie Plant, Unit 2.
The ISI program RR, which is authorized herein, Is acceptable for implementation.
The granting of relief is based upon the fulfillmentof any commitments made by you in the basis for the RR and the proposed alternativ.
The NRC hereby authorizes the proposed alternative to th'e Code requirements for ISI RR-22, pursuant to Title 10, Code of Federal Re ulations, Section 50.55a(a)(3)(i), in that the staff finds that the proposed alternativ, with the conditions stated in the enclosed safety evaluation, will provide an equivalent or better examination than the requirements in the 1989 Edition of the Code.
Therefore, the proposed alternative provides an acceptable level of
. quality and safety.
Sincerely, Sheri R. Peterson, Chief, Section 2 Project Directorate II Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-389
Enclosures:
Safety Evaluation cc w/encl: See next page