ML17264A512
| ML17264A512 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 05/28/1996 |
| From: | Jeffrey Mitchell NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Mecredy R ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17264A513 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-M94509, NUDOCS 9605310053 | |
| Download: ML17264A512 (5) | |
Text
~8 AE00 Po 0
'C O
I cA0 gO
++*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMIVIISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 May 28, 1996 Dr. Robert C. Mecredy Vice President, Nuclear Operations Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation 89 East Avenue Rochester, NY 14649
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS (ASME)
CODE SECTION XI RE(UIREMENTS FOR R.
E.
GINNA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT (TAC NO. M94509)
Dear Dr. Mecredy:
By letter dated January 12,
- 1996, as supplemented March 27,
- 1996, you submitted Request for Relief Nos.
VR-8 Revision 1,
VR-9 Revision 1,
and PR-9 Revision 1 and proposed alternate testing for the Ginna Nuclear Power Plant.
The enclosed Safety Evaluation (SE) addresses relief from the requirements of Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASHE Code) which had been determined to be impractical to perform at the R.
E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant during the Third 10-Year Interval Program for Inservice Testing (IST) of pumps and valves.
R L F
R U ST VR-R VISION 1
RELI F
9 0
Based on the determination that the proposal as modified by the SE will not compromise the reasonable assurance of operational readiness and that compliance with the Code would result in hardship without a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety, the proposed alternative is authorized for one year pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(ii) in order for the licensee to provide documentation of extreme hardship and actual in-plant data from previous testing to support the extended test in refueling outages.
l terval of every three ping PtII.t'EBH~V 9605310053 960528 PDR ADOCK 05000244 P
PDR Based on the determination that the proposal as modified by the SE will not compromise the reasonable assurance of operational readiness and that compliance with the Code would result in hardship without a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety, the proposed alternative is authorized for one year pursuant to 10 CFR,50.'55a(a)(3)(ii) in order for the licensee to provide documentation of extreme hardship and actual in-plant data from previous testing to support the extended test interval of every three refueling outages.
)
l I.
t j
R. Hecredy Based on the determination that compliance with the Code requirements is impractical, and considering the burden on the licensee if the Code requirements are imposed, relief is granted from the IWP-3100 requirement on the first aspect of PR-9 Revision 1 on establishing fixed discharge pressure or flow rate reference value pursuant to 5 50.55a(f)(6)(i) provided the seven el'ements identified in Section 4.3 of the SE are incorporated into the IST program.
With respect to the second aspect of PR-9 Revision 1, the licensee's proposed alternative to measure discharge pressure in lieu of differential pressure for positive displacement pumps is approved per NUREG-1482, Section
- 5. 1.2, through GL 89-04, Supplement 1, provided that discharge pressure is monitored with the specified limits of OH-6.
f Relief is denied regarding the'third aspect of PR-9 Revision 1 for the use of a minimum operability.limit of 15 gpm per Technical Specifications in place of the allowable range of flow rates specified in IWP-3100-2.
Before this operability limit can be approved, the licensee will have to provide additional bases including vendor's recommendation and historical test and repair data showing that the minimum operability limit of 15 gpm without the Alert Range will adequately detect hydraulic degradation of these charging PulllPS.
The NRC staff concludes that the relief requests as evaluated and modified by the SE will not compromise the reasonable assurance of operational readiness of pumps and valves in question to perform their safety-related functions.
The staff has determined that authorization of alternative or approval of relief requests pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(ii) or (f)(6)(i) is authorized by law and will not endanger life or property, or the common defense and security and is otherwise in the public interest.
Sincerely, Docket No. 50-244
Enclosure:
Safety Evaluation cc w/encl:
See next page Project Directorate I-1 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Ar 4
l I
Dr. Robert C. Hecr edy R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant CC:
Peter D. Drysdale, Senior Resident Inspector R.E. Ginna Plant U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1503 Lake Road
- Ontario, NY 14519 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Hr. F. William Valentino, President New York State
- Energy, Research, and Development Authority 2 Rockefeller Plaza
- Albany, NY 12223-1253 Charlie Donaldson, Esq.
Assistant Attorney General New York Department of Law 120 Broadway New York, NY 10271 Nicholas S.
Reynolds Winston
& Strawn 1400 L St.
N.W.
Washington, DC 20005-3502 Ms. Thelma Wideman
- Director, Wayne County Emergency Hanagement Office Wayne County Emergency Operations Center 7336 Route 31
- Lyons, NY 14489 Ms. Mary Louise Heisenzahl Administrator, Monroe County Office of Emergency Preparedness 111 West Fall Road, Room ll Rochester, NY 14620