ML19350B327
| ML19350B327 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 03/13/1981 |
| From: | Sylvia B VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| To: | Clark R, Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0588, RTR-NUREG-588 153, NUDOCS 8103200274 | |
| Download: ML19350B327 (3) | |
Text
6 Ve co March 13, 1981 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Serial No.
153 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation PSE&CS/HHB Attn:
Mr. Robert A. Clark, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 3 Docket Nos. 50-339 Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission License No. NPF-7 Washington, DC 20555 g p f
/((
Dear Mr. Denton:
- dd h 'ff}
f (q
'n U LT
" PARTIAL REVIEW" a
EQUIPMENT EVALUATION REPORT BY NRC y 8
/Sg7 h
NORTH ANNA POWER STATION UNIT NO. 2 M
% (.p/
A NUREG-0588 i A i
7
/
.\\
4 6
This letter is in response to the NRC letter of March 3, 1981, from Mr.
Thomas M. Novak, Assistant Director for Operating Reactors.
Mr. Novak's letter transmitted the "Part'31 Review, Equipment Evaluation Report by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation," which identified a number of potential enviromental qualification of class lE equipment deficiences for North Anna Unit 2 and requested review of the impact on safety.
It is not clear, in all cases, what technical bases were used to determine the potential inadequacies identified by the staff in their review.
Therefore, we request a meeting with the staff at your earliest convenience to discuss bases to be used for any reevaluation by the staff and Vepco.
Vepco has reviewed each of the identified potential deficiencies for its impact on safety. We have concluded, based on our interpretation of the staff's comments, that the environments used in our qualification program are appropriate. Further, we have concluded that the equipment identified as having potential deficiencies will not result in any unacceptable impact on the safety of North Anna Unit 2 operation while the required item by item reevaluation referred to in your March 3, 1981 letter is completed.
Our conclusions are based on the information contained in the following submittals and our review referenced above:
1.
Letter dated October 31, 1980, (Serial No. 886) transmitted the NUREG 0588 review, revision 1.
2.
Letter dated December 1,1980, (Serial No. 958) transmitted the revision 2 to the NUREG 0588 review.
(
exosuou974 L
vlRGINM EMCTRIC AND POWER COMPANY TO Mr. Harold R. Denton SHEET NO.
2 3.
Letter dat.; December 23, 1980, (Serial No. 1006) transmitted the responses to 1 through 9 consnents developed during the NRC audit of December 2, 1980.
4.
Letter dated January 2, 101 (Serial No. 1027) transmitted the responses to the tenth and' final comment developed during the NRC audit of December 2, 1980.
5.
Letter dated January 30, 1981, (Serial No. 065) transmitted revision 3 of-the NUREG 0588 review.
Very truly yours, B. R. Sylvia Manager - Nuclear Operations and Maintenance cc: Mr. Victor Stello, Director NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement Division of Reactor Operations Inspection Washington, DC 20555
.Mr. Zoltan R. Rosztoczy, Branch Chief NRC Equipment Qualification Branch Division of Engineering Washington, DC 20555
~
e COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
)) s. s.
CITY OF RICHMOND
)
Before me, a Notary Public, in and for the City and Commonwealth aforesaid, today personally appeared B.
R.
Sylvia, who being duly sworn, made oath and said (1) that he is Manager-Nuclear Operations and Maintenance, of the Virginia Electric and Power Company, (2) that he is duly authorized to execute and file the foregoing response in behalf of that Company, and (3) that the statements in the response are true to the best of his knowledge and belief.
Given under my hand and notarial seal this l30 day of l h w h
\\98%
My Commission expires MkxcL%
l$ }9b v
v i
fM(gw 0 d4@
" Notary Pdblic Ckf L-W J CNnd.11Ad (L>
W, (SEAL) i
_.-