ML17263A577

Forwards Safety Evaluation of Third 10-year Interval Inservice Insp Program Relief Requests 25 & 26.Alternatives Proposed Will Provide Acceptable Level of Quality & Safety If Addl Surface Exam Performed on Root Pass of Weld

ML17263A577
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	04/11/1994
From:	Butler W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Mecredy R ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP.
Shared Package
ML17263A578	List: ML17263A577 ML17263A579
References
TAC-M88416, TAC-M88417, NUDOCS 9404180394
Download: ML17263A577 (6)

Text

, April 11, 1994 Docket No. 50-244 Dr. Robert C. Hecredy Vice President, Nuclear Production Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649

SUBJECT:

R.

E.

GINNA NUCLEAR POWER STATION THIRD 10-YEAR INSERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM RELIEF RE(UESTS 25 AND 26 (TAC NOs.

H88416 AND H88417)

By letters dated December 9,

1993, and January 7,

1994, you requested relief from the provisions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASHE)

Code,Section XI requirements for hydrostatic testing for welded repair and replacement activities on the Ginna service water (Relief Request 25) and component cooling water systems (Relief Request 26) as a part of the plant's Third 10-Year Interval Inservice Inspection (ISI) program.

Proposed in Relief Requests 25 and 26 are alternatives to the Code.

The NRC staff, with the assistance of its contractor Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, reviewed the subject requests for relief and concluded in the enclosed Safety Evaluation, along with the attached Technical Evaluation Summary, that the alternatives in Relief Requests 25 and 26 will provide an acceptable level of quality and safety if an additional surface examination, as proposed, is performed on the root pass of the weld.

Therefore, pursuant to paragraph 50.55a(3)(i) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 50.55a(3)(i)),

the proposed alternatives contained in both requests for relief are authorized for the 1994 refueling outage.

Sincerely, Original signed by:

Walter R. Butler, Director Project Directorate I-3 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

Safety Evaluation w/attachment cc w/enclosure:

See next page

• See revious concurrence OFFICE LA:P 96:991 tI PM: PDI-3

• OGC D: PDI-3 NAHE DATE SLittle'

/(I /94 KCotto 4/A/94 AJohnson

'/>494

&/kCLEC WButler 4/6/94

/94 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY FILENAME: A:iH88416. HEM.

c 94041803'94 940411 PDR ADOCK 05000244 P

'DRI

~4~ 4:.go

Ã1~lt'HE~ CPERB

t I

L' t.

Il 11 1

l'

gI ~ R<0OC

~C Wp0 Cy I

0O I

~!c

+~

gO

++*<<+

Docket No. 50-244 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 April 11, 1994 Dr. Robert C. Hecredy Vice President, Nuclear Productio~

Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649

Dear Dr. Hecredy:

<<<< ~

~

p

~

~

~

SUBJECT:

R.

E.

GINNA NUCLEAR POWER STATION THIRD 10-YEAR INSERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM RELIEF RE(UESTS 25 AND 26 (TAC NOS.

H88416 AND M88417)

~

I By letters dated December 9,

1993, and January 7,

1994, you requested relief from the provisions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASHE)

Code,Section XI requirements for hydrostatic testing for welded repair and replacement activities on the Ginna service water (Relief Request 25) and component cooling water systems (Relief Request 26) as a part of the plant's=

Third 10-Year Interval Inservice Inspection (ISI) program.

Proposed in Relief Requests 25 and 26 are alternatives to the Code.

The NRC staff, with the assistance of its contractor'daho National'ngineering Laboratory, reviewed the subject requests for relief and concluded in the enclosed Safety Evaluation, along with the attached Technical Evaluation Summary, that the alternatives in Relief Requests 25 and 26 will provide an acceptable level of quality and safety if an additional surface examination, as proposed, is performed on the root pass of the weld.

Therefore, pursuant to paragraph 50.55a(3)(i) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 50.55a(3)(i)),

the proposed alternatives. contained in both requests for relief are authorized for the 1994 refueling outage.

Sincerely,

Enclosure:

Safety Evaluation w/attachment cc w/enclosure:

See next page Walter R. Butler, Director Project Directorate I-3 Division of Reactor Projects I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Dr. Robert C. Hecredy R.E.

Ginna Nuclear Power Plant cc:

Thomas A. Hoslak, Senior Resident Inspector R.E.

Ginna Plant U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1503 Lake Road

Ontario, New York 14519 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Hs.

Donna Ross Division of Policy Analysis 8 Planning New York State Energy Office Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza

Albany, New York 12223 Charlie Donaldson, Esq.

Assistant Attorney General New York Department of Law 120 Broadway New York, New York 10271 Nicholas S.

Reynolds Winston

5. Strawn 1400 L St.

N.W.

Washington, DC 20005-3502 Hs. Thelma Wideman

Director, Wayne County Emergency Hanagement Office Wayne County EmergencyOperati,ans.Center 7370 Route 31

Lyons, New York 14489 Hs. Hary LouiseHeisenzahl Administrator, Honroe County Office of Emergency Preparedness 111 West Fall Road, Room ll Rochester, New York 14620

~

0 l

~

DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File NRC

& Local PDRs PDI-3 Reading W. Russell/F. Hiraglia L. Reyes E. Rossi J.

Lieberman S.

Varga J.

Calvo W. Butler S. Little A. Johnson K. Cotton OGC E. Jordan G. Hill (2 copies)

ACRS (10)

OPA OC/LFDCB V. HcCree, EDO J. Linville, RI J.

Roe H. Boyle J.

Wiggins J. Strosnider T. Sullivan T. HcLellan B. Liaw G. Hillman, RES B. Brown, INEL W. Lazarus, RI

f F

I 1

t