ML17300B304
| ML17300B304 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 07/08/1999 |
| From: | Stephen Dembek NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | James M. Levine ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE CO. (FORMERLY ARIZONA NUCLEAR |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17300B305 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-MA0757, TAC-MA0758, TAC-MA0759, TAC-MA757, TAC-MA758, TAC-MA759, NUDOCS 9907150128 | |
| Download: ML17300B304 (7) | |
Text
0' RE+
P
~- +
o A.0 Vl O~
qO Mr. James M. Levine Senior Vice President, Nuclear Arizona Public Service Company P.O. Box 53999 Phoenix, AZ 85072-3999 UNITED
~STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 2055&0001 July 8, 1999
SUBJECT:
SECOND 10-YEAR INTERVALFOR THE PUMP AND VALVEINSERVICE TESTING PROGRAM FOR THE PALO VERDE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION (TAC NOS. MA0757, MA0758 AND MA0759)
Dear Mr. Levine:
For relief requests PRR-07, VRR-03, VRR-04, and VRR-06, compliance with the Code would result in hardship or unusual difficultywithout a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety.
For this reason, the proposed alternatives are authorized pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(ii). The alternative proposed in VRR-07 is denied since APS has not shown that relief is warranted pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(f)(6)(i), or otherwise proposed an acceptable alternative pursuant to 50.55a(a)(3)(i) or (a)(3)(ii).
By letter dated January 13, 1998, Arizona Public Service Company (APS) submitted the second 10-year interval of the inservice testing (IST) program for pumps and valves for the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3. As a result of a conference call held on September 17; 1998, revised relief requests (VRR-12, VRR-13, PRR-07, and PRR-08) were submitted on December 10, 1998.
In addition, APS revised the second 10-year interval IST program for pumps and valves by letter dated November 23, 1998, superseding the information provided in the January 13, 1998 letter. Further conferqnce calls were held on February 9, 16, and 261999. Subsequently, three relief lequests (PRR-05, PRR-06, and PRR-11) were revised and submitted in a letter dated March 16, 1999. The IST program was developed in accordance with the 1989 Edition of Section XI of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (the Code), which incorporates Operations and Maintenance (OM) Standards Part 1, Part 6, and Part 10 (OM-1, OM-6, and
'M-10) for IST of safety and relief devices, pumps, and valves, respectively.
The staff has reviewed the proposed relief requests, deferred test justifications, and other relevant sections of APS'ST program against the requirements of the 1989'Edition of the Code pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a.
The results of the review are provided in the enclosed safety evaluation.
Relief is granted for PRR-01, PRR-05, PRR-06, PRR-11, VRR-01, VRR-02, VRR-05, and VRR-08 pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(f)(6)(i). In mal<ing this determination, the staff has considered the impracticality of performing the required testing and has determined that performing the tests is impractical.
The staff has determined that the granting of these reliefs is authorized by law, willnot endanger life or property or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the public interest giving due consideration to the burden on APS ifthe requirements were imposed on your facility. The alternatives to the Code requirements as proposed in PRR-03, PRR-09, PRR-10, VRR-09, VRR-10, VRR-11, and VRR-12 willprovide an acceptable level of quality and safety and are authorized pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i)
~
pl 9'F07i50i28 990708 PDR ADOCK 05000528 p
il
J. Levine Two relief requests are partially authorized.
The alternative to the Code requirements of OM-6 paragraphs 5.1 and 6.1, as described in PRR-08, will provide an acceptable level of quality and safety and is authorized pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i).
However, relief from the requirements of paragraph 4.3 is denied, since APS has not shown that relief is warranted pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(f)(6)(i), or otherwise proposed an acceptable alternative pursuant to 50.55a(a)(3)(i) or (a)(3)(ii). The alternative to the check valve exercising requirements of OM-10 paragraph 4.3.2 described in VRR-13 willprovide an acceptable level of quality and safety and is authorized pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i).
However, use of a 25-percent margin to extend the maximum testing interval is not authorized.
Ifyou have any questions, please contact Mel Fields at (301) 415-3062.
Sincerely, original signed by L.. Raghavan for Stephen Dembek, Chief, Section 2 Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. STN 50-528, STN 50-529, and STN 50-530
Enclosure:
Safety Evaluation cc w/encl: See next page DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File PUBLIC PDIV-2 Reading SRichards (clo)
DLange RScholl (e-mail SE)
KBrockman, RIV o receive a co o
is ocumen, in ica e in e
ox
- Previousl Concurred NAME DATE M
srb
/
/99 OFFICE PDIV-2/PM C
CJamerson 7/7 /99 I
DTera'o
'5/1 9/99 PDIV-D/LA C EMEB'GC Suttai 7/2/99 DIV-SC embek
/
/99 DOCUMENT NAME: G:>PDIV-2>PaloVerdehRela0757.wpd OFFICIAL RECORD COPY N
~'(
J. Levine Two relief requests are partially authorized.
The alternative to the Code requirements of OM-6 paragraphs 5.1 and 6.1, as described in PRR-08, will provide an acceptable level of quality and safety and is authorized pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i).
However, relief from the requirements of paragraph 4.3 is denied, since APS has not shown that relief is warranted pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(f)(6)(i), or otherwise proposed an acceptable alternative pursuant to 50.55a(a)(3)(i) or (a)(3)(ii). The alternative to the check valve exercising requirements of OM-10 paragraph 4.3.2 described in VRR-13 willprovide an acceptable level of quality and safety and is authorized pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i).
However, use of a 25-percent margin to extend the maximum testing interval is not authorized.
If you have any questions, please contact (Kaly) N. Kalyanam at (301) 415-1480.
Sincerely, Docket Nos. STN 50-528, STN 50-529, and STN 50-530
Enclosure:
Safety Evaluation cc'w/encl: See next page phen Dembek, Chief, Section 2 roject Directorate IV& Decommissioning Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
l
, Palo Verde Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 Mr. Steve Olea Arizona Corporation Commission 1200 W. Washington Street Phoenix, AZ 85007 Douglas Kent,Porter Senior Counsel Southern California Edison Company Law Department; Generation Resources P.O. Box 800
- Rosemead, CA 91770 Senior Resident Inspector U.S, Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 40 Buckeye, AZ 85326 Regional Administrator, Region IV U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Harris Tower & Pavillion 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Arlington, TX 76011-8064 Chairman, Board of Supervisors ATTN: Chairman 301 W. Jefferson, 10th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85003 Mr. David Summers Public Service Company of New Mexico 414 Silver SW, ¹1206 Albuquerque, NM 87102 Mr. Jarlath Curran Southern California Edison Company 5000 Pacific Coast Hwy Bldg DIN San Clemente, CA 92672 Mr, Robert Henry Salt River Project 6504 East Thomas Road Scottsdale, AZ 85251 Terry Bassham, Esq.
General Counsel El Paso Electric Company 123 W. Mills EI Paso, TX 79901 Mr. John Schumann Los Angeles Department of Water & Power Southern California Public Power Authority P.O. Box 51111, Room 1255-C Los Angeles, CA 90051 Mr. Aubrey V. Godwin, Director Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency 4814 South 40 Street Phoenix, AZ 85040 Ms. Angela K. Krainik, Manager Nuclear Ucensing Arizona Public Service Company P.O. Box 52034 Phoenix, AZ 85072-2034 Mr. John C. Home Vice President, Power Generation EI Paso Electric Company 2702 N. Third Street, Suite 3040 Phoenix, AZ 85004 M8Y19,1999
I
- i