ML18153A407
| ML18153A407 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 05/22/1997 |
| From: | Edison G NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Ohanlon J VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| GL-92-01, GL-92-1, TAC-M92737, TAC-M92738, NUDOCS 9705290115 | |
| Download: ML18153A407 (4) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555--0001.
May 22, 1997 Mr. J. P. 0' Han 1 on Senior Vice President - Nuclear Virginia Electric and Power Company Innsbrook Technical Center 5000 Dominion Blvd.
Glen Allen, Virginia 23060
SUBJECT:
CLOSEOUT FOR VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY RESPONSE TO GENERIC LETTER 92-01, REVISION 1, SUPPLEMENT 1 FOR SURRY POWER STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. M92737 AND M92738)
Dear Mr. 0' Hanlon:
On May 9, 1995, the NRC issued Generic Letter 92-01, Revision 1, Supplement 1 (GL 92-01~ Rev; 1, Supp. 1), "Reactor Vessel Structural Integrity." In GL 92-01, Rev. 1, Supp. 1, the NRC requested that nuclear licensees perform a review of their reactor pressure vessel structural integrity assessments in*order "to identify, collect, and report any new data pertinent to [the] analysis of
[the} structural integrity of their reactor pressure vessels (RPVs) and to assess the impact of those data on their RPV integrity analyses relative to.
the requirements of Section 50.60 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 50.60), 10 CFR 50.61, Appendices G and H to 10 CFR Part 50 (which encompass pressurized thermal shock (PTS) and upper shelf energy (USE) evaluations), and any potential impact on low temperature overpressure (LTOP) limits or pressure-temperature (P-T) limits."
More specifically, in GL 92-01, Rev. 1, Supp. 1, the NRC requested that addressees provide the following information in their responses:
(1) a description of those actions taken or planned to locate all data relevant to the determination of RPV integrity, or an explanation of why the existing database is considered complete as previously submitted; (2) an assessment of any change in best-estimate chemistry based on consideration of.all relevant data; (3) a determination of the need for the use of the ratio procedure in accordance with the established Position 2.1 of Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.99, Revision 2, for those licensees that use surveillance data to provide a basis for the RPV integrity evaluation; and (4) a written report providing any newly acquired data as specified above and (1) the results of any necessary revisions to the evaluations of RPV integrity in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.60, 10 CFR 50.61, Appendices G and H to 10 CFR Part 50, and any potential impact on the LTOP and P-T limits in the technical
- \\
specifi~ations, or (2) a certification that previously submitted evaluations remain valid.
. Orv\\. V 2fJ0034
\\
-- --~ 9705290115 970522 PDR ADOCK 05000280 p
\\.
)
I IRC RI.E CBmER COPY
- Revised evaluations and certificatioris were to includ~ consideration of Position 2.1 of RG 1.99, Revision 2, as applicable, and any new data. The information in Reporting Item (1) was to be submitted within 90 days of the issuance of the GL.
The information in Reporting Items (2) - (4) was to be submitted within 6 months of the issuance of the GL.
The NRC staff has noted that Virginia Electric and Power Company {VEPCO) submitted the information requested in Reporting Item (1) on August 10, 1995, and the information requested in Reporting Items (2) - (4) on November 20, 1995. s;.nce VEPCO has submitted the requested information and has indicated that the previously submitted evaluations remain valid, the staff considers the RPV integrity data for the Surry Power Station to be complete at this time and has closed out TAC Nos. M92737 and M92738.
The staff has noted that the most recent reactor vessel integrity assessment
.for the Surry Power Station is covered by the scope of Babcock and Wilcox
{B&W) Topical Evaluation BAW-2257, Revision 1. This topical report was the subject of an April 30, 1996, meeting between the NRC staff and representatives.of the Babcock and Wilcox Owners Group {BWOG).
The topi ca 1 report indicates tnat all licensees addressed in the report have determined the best estimate copper and nickel contents of their plant's beltline and surveillance welds.
The report also indicates that the ratio procedure described in Position 2.1 (pages 1.99-3 and 1.99-4) of RG 1.99, Rev. 2, need not be applied to the PTS assessments and USE assessments of RPV.beltline welds made from Linde 80 fluxes.
At.a meeting on April 30, 1996, representatives of the BWOG provided the bases for the conclusions in the topical report. The staff informed the BWOG personnel that the information presented was insuffici~nt to support the owners group's proposal.
The BWOG representatives indicated that the owners group would consider performing additional work to address the staff's concerns, and would consider submitting another topical report for NRC review.
- The staff does not consider the BWOG proposal to be acceptable at this time.
The topical report also included analyses to demonstrate that application of the ratio procedure would not cause RTpts values for the limiting materials in B&W fabricated RPVs to exceed the PTS screening criteria specified in.10 CFR 50.61.
However, the report did not address the potential. impact on applying the ratio procedure to the development of pr~ssure-temperature limit curves and LTOP limits. Therefore, you are requested to provide an assessment of the application of th~ ratio procedure, as described in Position 2.1 of ~G 1.99, Revision 2 (May 1988), to your pressure-temperature limit curves and LTOP limits. This assessment should include an evaluation relative to the margins specified in applicable codes and standards (i.e., Appendix G to Section III of the ASME Code.)
(
- You are requested to provide this assessment by September 30, 1997.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281 cc:
See next page Distribution
..,*-Docket-Fi-1 e PUBLIC PDII-1 RF S. Varga D. McDonald OGC ACRS J. Johnson, RII FILENAME - G:\\SURRY\\SR92737.GL OFFICE PDII-1 LA: PDII-1 NAME TEaton 1f.
Dunnd:ri on DATE COPY Yes/No Sincerely, (Original Signed By)
Gordon E. Edison, Sr. Project Manager Project Directorate II-1 Division of Reactor Projects I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation AD: PDII-1 z;-- /Tl-f 9 7
~=~~~-~------
?
L Mr. J. P. O'Hanlon Virginia Electric and Power Company cc:
Mr. Michael W. Maupin, Esq.
Hunton and Williams Riverfront Plaza, East Tower 951 E. Byrd Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Mr. David Christian, Manager Surry Power Station Virginia Electric and Power Company 5570 Hog Island Road Surry, Virginia 23883 Senior Resident Inspector Surry Power Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 5850 Hog Island Road Surry, Virginia 23883 Chairman Board of Supervisors of Surry County Surry County Courthouse Surry, Virginia 23683 Dr. W. T. Lough Vifginia State Corporation Commission Division of Energy Regulation P. 0. Box 1197 Richmond, Virginia 23209 Regional Administrator, Region II U. S. N~clear Regulatory Commission Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Robert B. Strobe, M.D., M.P.H.
State Health Commissioner Office of the Commissioner Virginia Department of Health P.O. Box 2448 Richmond, Virginia 23218 Surry Power Station Office of the Attorney General Commonwealth of Virginia 900 East Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Mr. M. L. Bowling, Manager Nuclear Licensing & Operations Support Innsbrook Technical Center Virginia Electric and Power Company 5000 Dominion Blvd.
Glen Allen, Virginia 23060 Mr. Al Belisle U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth St., SW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mr. W. R. Matthews, Manager North Anna Power Station P. 0. Box 402 Mineral, Virginia 23117