ML20115H327
| ML20115H327 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 04/15/1985 |
| From: | Stewart W VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| To: | Harold Denton, John Miller Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 85-237, NUDOCS 8504230054 | |
| Download: ML20115H327 (2) | |
Text
WkruuL Staw NudazrC)wistbmikpurtment S kel'susdent IMODicelkaXui6 NudnUQur&Mts Onejarrus Ratrl%mo Ritheruarki tyrpnia 2%%1 April 15, 1985 WR0lNIA POWER t
Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Serial No.85-237 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation N0/JHL:acm Attn:
Mr. James R. Miller, Chief Docket Nos. 50-338 Operating Reactors Branch No. 3 50-339-Division of Licensing License Nos. NPF-4 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NPF-7 Washington, D. C. 20555 Gentlemen:
VIRGINIA POWER NORTH ANNA POWER STATION UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 INSERVICE TESTING PROGRAM FOR PCMPS AND VALVES On November 29 and 30,1984, Virginia Power, the NRC Staff and consultants met to discuss the North Anna Unit No. 1 inservice testing program for pumps and valves.
Since that time, your Staff indicated an intent to issue the Safety Evaluation Report (SER) for the pump and valve programs for both North Anna Units 1 and 2.
Virginia Power has performed a review of the differences between the Unit 1 and Unit 2 pump and valve programs consisting of a comparison of the tabular listings in the programs for like pumps and valves, test requirements and test frequencies. The result of the review indicates that the major difference between the programs is the number of reactor coolant system pressure boundary (isolation) valves tested. There are fewer valves on Unit 1 that require testing than there are on Unit 2. This is due to an Order for Modification of License on Unit 1, issued on April 20, 1981, which provided the listing of tae reactor coolant system pressure boundary valves to be tested and the Unit 2 Operating License, issued on August 21, 1980, which contained additional valves to be tested.
It is our understanding that this will be addressed in the Safety Evaluation Report. We do not believe that these additional valves need to be placed into the Unit 1 program.
Based on the results of this review, the issuance of one SER for both North Anna Unit Nos. I and 2 would be appropriate with the above noted dif ference between programs.
Please contact me if there are any further questions on this matter.
Ver* trul yo rs,
'At W. L. Stewart 8504230054 850415 PDR ADOCK 05000338 P
PDR s
VIRGINIA POWER cc:
Dr. J. Nelson Grace Regional Administrator Region II Mr. M. W. Branch NRC Resident Inspector North Anna Power Station
.