ML20046C957
| ML20046C957 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 07/26/1993 |
| From: | Connaughton K Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Horn G NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT |
| References | |
| REF-GTECI-A-46, REF-GTECI-SC, TASK-A-46, TASK-OR GL-87-02, GL-87-2, TAC-M69439, NUDOCS 9308130106 | |
| Download: ML20046C957 (3) | |
Text
"
Docket No. 50-298 Mr. Guy R. Horn Nuclear Power Group Manager Nebraska Public Power District Post Office Box 499 Columbus, Nebraska 68502-0499
Dear Mr. Horn:
SUBJFCT:
EVALUATION OF LICENSEE'S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO SUPPLEMENT N0. 1 TO GENERIC LETTER 87-02 FOR COOPER NUCLEAR STATION (TAC N0. M69439)
By letter dated September 21, 1992, the Nebraska Public Power District responded to Supplement No. I to Generic letter 87-02, " Verification of Sei,mic Adequacy of Mechanical and Electrical Equipment in Operating Reactors, Unresolved Safety Issue A-46," for the Cooper Nuclear Station.
Based upon a review of that response, the staff determined that the in-structure response spectra (IRS) provided should be considered " median centered". This determination was based upon a statement in your submittal that the IRS were generated assuming \\% damping. The approved generic implementation procedure requires licensees to compare the 5% IRS with Bounding Spectrum and Generic Equipment Ruggedness Spectra.
For this reason, the staff could not accept the IRS provided as " conservative, design" spectra.
By letter dated February 24, 1993, you clarified that the statement in the September 21, 1992 response was not correct, and that the IRS provided were generated assuming 5% damping. Thus, based on a review of the IRS
%nplification and peak broadening) at various floor levels of the Reactor Building, the staff concludes that the IRS developed by the procedure described in your September 21, 1992 response can be considered as
" conservative design".
Sincerely, KeNh.koNuhtok,ProjectManager Project Directorate IV-1 9308130106 930726 PDR ADOCK 0S000299 Division of Reactor Projects - III/IV/V P
PDR Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc: See next page DISTRIBUTION:
~ Docket File NRC & Local PDRs PD4-1 Reading E. Adensam T. Chan P. Noonan ACRS (10) (P-315)
OGC (15B18)
A. B. Beach, RIV PD4-1 Plant File K. Connaughton J. Roe H. Ashar P. Chen J. Gagliardo, RIV P. Sears M. McBrearty H. Rood G. Bagchi J. Norberg 0FC LA/PD4-ISA_
PM/PD4-1 O V PM/PD4-1 D/PD4-1 NAME PNoonan)
KConnaught$/v HRood h T4 hank
/
DATE
~7/])/93 7 /23/93 1/6/93 7/24/93 L
YEkYO)
/YE57NO dh/N0 YES/NO 3
COPf 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY 1T6cument.Name: C0069439.LT1 Mm o - h.c.e081,8 COPY
v,
" ato I
w 1 Q N '[^ h
- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[
}v(
UNITED STATES N
=
~~3-(Q
/
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 4 001 July 26, 1993
)
Docket No.' 50-298 1
i Mr. Guy R. Horn Nuclear Power Group Manager 1
Nebraska Public Power District 1
Post Office Box 499 i
Columbus, Nebraska 68602-0499 i
Dear Mr. Horn:
SUBJECT:
EVALUATION OF LICENSEE'S SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO SUPPLEMENT.N0. l TO GENERIC LETTER 87-02 FOR COOPER NUCLEAR STATION'(TAC NO. M69439) 1 By letter dated September 21, 1992, the Nebraska Public Power District.
responded to Supplement No 1 to Generic Letter 87-02, " Verification of Seismic Adequacy of Mechanical and Electrical' Equipment in Operating Reactors, Unresolved Safety Issue A-46," for the Cooper Nuclear Station.
Based upon a review of that response, the. staff determined that the in-:
structure response spectra.(IRS) provided should be considered " median centered".
This determination was based upon a statement in your. submittal that the IRS were generated assuming \\% damping. The' approved generic implementation procedure requires licensees to compare the 5%~ IRS with' Bounding Spectrum and Generic Equipment Ruggedness Spectra.
For.this reason,.
the staff could not accept the IRS provided as " conservative,.' design" spectra.
l By' letter dated February 24, 1993, you clarified that the statement in the.
September 21, 1992 response was not correct, and that_the IRS provided were-generated assuming 5% damping. Thus, based on a review of the IRS (amplification and peak broadening)'at various floor. levels of the Reactor-Building, the staff concludes'that the IRS developed by the procedure described in your September 21, 1992 response can be considered as l
" conservative design".
Sincerely, N.. -
Kevin_A. Connaughton, Project Manager-l Project Directorate IV-1 Division of Reactor-Projects III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation-i cci See next page
]
l
~
w Y-a p-
,e.
-- +.-
.. q h
Mr. Guy R. Horn Nuclear Power Group Manager Cooper Nuclear Station cc:
Mr. G. D. Watson, General Counsel Nebraska Public Power District P. O. Box 499 Columbus, Nebraska 68602-0499 Cooper Nuclear Station ATTN: Mr. John M. Meacham Site Manager P. O. Box 98 Brownville, Nebraska 68321 Randolph Wood, Director Nebraska Department of Environmental Control P. O. Box 98922 Lincoln, Nebraska 68509-8922 r
Mr. Richard Moody, Chairman Memaha County Board of Commissioners Nemaha County Courthouse 1824 N Street Auburn, Nebraska 68305 Senior Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 218 Brownville, Nebraska 68321 Regional Administrator, Region IV U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011 Mr. Harold Borchert, Director Division of Radiological Health Nebraska Department of Health 301 Centennial Mall, South P.-0. Box 95007 Lincoln, Nebraska 68509-5007 1
--