ML20084L229
| ML20084L229 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 05/08/1984 |
| From: | Gilbert D NATIONAL SUPPLY CO. |
| To: | Deyoung R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| References | |
| REF-PT21-84-231-000 PT21-84-231, PT21-84-231-000, NUDOCS 8405140393 | |
| Download: ML20084L229 (3) | |
Text
P' N ATION AL SUPPLY COMPANY DIVISION OF ARMCO INC.
DALE E. GiLaERT RMCO Aooatss asa'v To WORN $ MANAGER 8 524 HORDER AVENUE TORRANCE. C A 90509 May 8, 1984 Mr. Richard C. DeYoung Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Re:
Report Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. p. 21.21(b):
Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit 2
Dear Mr. DeYoung:
This letter will confirm the substance of a telephonic report I made to Mr. Robert Martin, Deputy Regional Director for NRC Region II, on Friday, May 4, 1984.
I reported to Mr. Martin pursuant to 10 C.F.R. p. 21.21(b) (1983) on the X-14 ilued head incorporated into the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, of Georgia Power Company. That component, when manufactured at the Torrance Plant, was analyzed using state-of-the-art techniques employing a finite element computer program for solids of revo'lution.
The results of this analysis were then certified to the specifications using code interpretations by a recognized authority.
Specifications for the part included the ability to withstand the stress of eighty (80) cycles of the rated power thermal transient.
We understand that the documentation on Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, including operating and maintenance manuals and possibly the Technical Specifications, are premised on an 80-cycle life for the flued
- head, b
l 8403140393 840500 hI gDRADOCK 05000366 PDR
dR MC'O V
Mr. Richard C. DeYoung May 8, 1984 Page 2 Recent Analyses by different, currently-accepted techniques performed on a similar replacement part for Unit I afford a reasonable basis to i
conclude thac the X-14 component in Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, would be certified for only thirty-five (35) cycles under current analytical techniques and a different code inter pretation. We under-t stand that the component in use has experienced only four (4) or five (5) cycles since Unit 2 commended commercial operation in 1978, so that revised analyses of the original component raise no substantial safety issue. Based on the information provided to him, Mr. Martin generally
. concurred in that belief. We further believe that any safety issue may be averted by revision of the documentatior, on Unit 2 to stipulate replacement based on a 35-cycle component life.
I have advised both Georgia Power Company and Bechtel Power Corp., the design engineer, of the circumstances set forth in this notification.
This notification, filed pursuant to 10 C.F.R. p. 21.21(b) (3), is limited to a summary of my conversation with Mr. Martin in accordance with his request. Any further technical questions regarding this matter should be addressed to Mr. Brian Eidem at 213/323-4111. We anticipate that any additional information contemplated by 10 C.F.R. p. 21.21(b) (3) will be supplied through follow-up with Mr. Eidem.
Very truly yours,
{
Dale E. Gilbert Works Manager DEG/bb cc: Mr. Robert Martin Deputy Director Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street,- Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 4
I L
A O
V Mr. Richard C. DeYoung May 8,'1984 Page 3-cc: Mr. J. T. Beckham Vice President and General Manager Nuclear Operations Georgia Power Company Post Office Box 4545 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Project Engineer Bechtel Job 6511-20 15740 Shady Grove Road-Gaithersburg, Maryland 20760 Mr. Richard Green Purchasing Agent -
Pathway Bellows, Inc.
Box 1090
.1452 N. Johnson El Cajon, California 92022 Bill Anderson, Attorney Bracewell & Patterson 1825 I Street N.W.
Washington, D. C. 20006 s
8