ML20037A427
| ML20037A427 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 12/27/1977 |
| From: | Shao L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Goller K Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001140828 | |
| Download: ML20037A427 (4) | |
Text
6 w JU DEC 2 71977 O%'
'y,'
u i
v J
a
~ K. R. Goller, Assistant Director for Operating' MEMORANDUM FOR:
Reactors, Divisidd'6f'Opdfdfing Reactors I
FROM:
L. C. Shao, Chief, Engineering Branch, Division
[-
of Operating 'Itda'dt' ors
SUBJECT:
DUEE POWER COMPANY - INCORPORATION OF PROVISIONS OF 10 CFR 50.55a(g)"" INSERVICE INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS i
l' AND INSERVICE TESTING REQUIREMENTS (TAC 6931)
Plan't Names: Oconee Unit 2 Oconee Unit 3 NSSS Supplier: Babcock & Wilcox
" ' ' " * ~ * '
A-E: Owner /Bechtel Docket Numbers: 50-270, 50-287' "
Document Reviewed: Letter and 'At'tidhdedt's 'A'and B Gated September 21, 1977 fred WilliE'O."Pa'rkdr, Jr., to Edso6'G. Cdse.
l Letter frod William O. Pirker, Jr., to Edson G.
Case datdd July 8, 1977
" ~ ~' '
i Operational Technology Branch / Reviewer:
E.
{-
Operating Reactors Branch /ProjddtYRigdf:gine'ering Branch, H. A. Cevin 011B#1 D. Neighbors' ~
l Requested Completion Date: Pdch T"1970~ ~ ",'
' ~
t Review Status - Requesting Addi;{fddq1"fnfd@(idd,,, ' J,[]
i i
The Engineering Branch, Division of Operating Reactors, has reviewed the proposed inservice inspectied @3.rds'idd inservice testing program for Oconce Unit 2. and Oco' ee,Udi,{
, "' ] ~
1 j
n 1
We find that before we can comp!de@s;aff{'"j
~
lete our review, additional information is I
indicated in the enclosure, is L. C. Shao, Chief Engineering Branch
'~
Division of Operating Reactors '
Enclosure:
i
'As stated EB: DOR "-**
C.[dileng'! h df i
N, e
cc: See Page 2
[.
jgj77,,,,,,,,,
773070162 EB/DORj((L'EB/ DOR.[ij EB/ DOR [p HLevini[t o,,,,,,
VNoonan //
LCShao @
gn g pp p
e 12/23/77 12/fd/77.
12/g/77
~ ' ' '
' "1V"~
f
+
1
, e.,,,
I
'NRC FORM 3IS (9 76) NRCM 0240 Yru.s.novsam ruv enwrene orrecs. ters..sas.eaa
~.
e DEC 2 71977 X. R. Coller cc:
V. Stello
- ' " ~ ~ ~
R. I'.attson
' ~~ ""
D. Eisenhut
" " ' ~ " ' ~ ~
J. Knight.
A. Schwencer
~ " ' ' ' ~ " '
V. floonan l
C. Cheng b
G. Johnson
~" ""
J. Zudans-D. Teighbors I
i
?
OO7 D
D l.
OaY r
12:1:HL i-I i
i l
l
'h:.,
[
.v
\\ ~'
l f ':
.-i-w.'*._ Ces Lact:
orrece >
^
t,,
..s sunzawg mud..OOMM
, ~
' ' D'ars h
.~
..--3 3
i l
, NRC FORM 318 (9 76)'NRCM 0240 O u. s. ooven.sant eniwreme orrects vers-eas-sa4
OCONEE UNITS 2 AND 3 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION INSERVICE INSPECTION AND TESTING PROGRAM ENGINEERING BRANCH, D0R-1.
Clarify why Section XI of the 1970 Edition of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, including the Winter 1970 Addenda is being applied in your request for relief of the following items rather than the 1974 Edition including the Summer 1975 Addenda.
i
- 1) Core Flood and Decay Heat Ramoval System - Attachment Welds 53A and 10ZA.
- 2) High Pressure Injection System - Attachment Welds 93Z and 89C.
2.
Provide the basic for concluding that flow measurements for the concentrated boric acid low pressure pumps and auxiliary service water pumps is not required to demonstrate operability.
Indicate wby a s'.ation modification is not considered to be necessary.
3.
Propose a schedule for the periodic alternation of operating and stand-by pumps for the purpose of r.easuring Pi.
4.
What alternate methods of verification of proper lube oil level for the CBAP, the LB boric acid pumps and the auxiliary service water pump have you considered? Has an augmented bearing temperature verification program been considered? Discuss the feasibility of modifying these pumps or the feasibility of conducting lube oil level verifications through disassembly of the pumps.
5.
Provide an alternative schedule for the testing of all valves that cannot be tested during power operation.
I 6.
Provide information for all valves that cannot be leak tested to I
support the determination that this requirement is impractical.
Provide an alternate plan by which the safety function of the i.
untested' system can be confirmed.
7.
For each valve that cannot be exercised, provide the basis for concluding that the valve can be demonstrated operable and the system can perform its intended safety function.
8.
Provide information to justify a five year inspection interval l
for valves 2B5-19, 2B5-14, 3B5-14 and 3B5-19, rather than the interval specified in IWV-3520.
i
h The -language in the Technical Specifications 4.04 and 4.2.1 is not 9.
acceptable.
The sample technical ~ specification language recommended in-the letter from R. A. Purple, Chief, Operating Reactors Branch #1, NRC to Duke Power Company, dated April 26, 1976 should be used, i.e.
{
4.2.l_ - Inservice inspection of ASME Code Class 1, 2 and 3 components I
shall be performed in accordance with Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code and applicable Addenda as required by 10 CFR 50, Section 50.55a(g), except where specific written relief has'been granted by the NRC. pursuant to 10 CFR 50, Section 50.55a(g)(6)(i).
4.0.4 - Inservice testing of ASME Code Class 1, 2 and 3 pumps and valves shall be performed in accordance with Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code and applicable Addenda as required by 10 CFR 50, Section 50.55a(g), except where specific written relief has been granted by the NRC pursuant to 10 CFR 50, Section 50.55a(g)
(6)(i).
r t
1
(
\\
[.J.
~:k - 4l