ML20127P187

Forwards Safety Evaluation Accepting Util Proposed Implementation Schedule to Use SQUG Commitments & Implementation Guidance Described in GIP-2

ML20127P187
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	11/20/1992
From:	De Agazio A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Sieber J DUQUESNE LIGHT CO.
Shared Package
ML20127P189	List: ML20127P187 ML20127P208
References
REF-GTECI-A-46, REF-GTECI-SC, TASK-A-46, TASK-OR BV-92-041, BV-92-41, GL-87-02, GL-87-2, TAC-M69428, NUDOCS 9212020127
Download: ML20127P187 (3)

Text

_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

s e u l'

[as tea '%g ~

n UNITED sT ATES NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION cukJ

{. y 6.=AsmNomN, D C M46 November 20, 1992

( .....

Docket No. 50-334 Serial No. BV-92-041 Mr. J. D. Sieber, Vice President Nuclear Grou)

Duquesne Lig1t Company Post Office Box 4 Shippingport Pennsylvania 15077-0004

SUBJECT:

EVALUATION Of RESPONSE TO GENERIC LETTER 87-02, SUPPLEMENT I (TAC N0. M69428)

On September 22, d92, Duquesne Light Company responded to Generic Letter 87-02, Supplement 1 (the supplement), The ;upplement required that all addressees, within 120 days, either (1) commit to use both the Seismic Qualification Utility Group (SQUG) commitments and the implementation guidance described in the Generic Implementation Procedure, Revision 2 (GIP-2), as corrected on february 14, 1992, and as supplemented by the staff's Supplemental Safaty Evaluation Report No. 2 (SSER No. 2) on GIP-2, or (2) provide an alternative method for responding to GL 87-02. The supplement required also that those addressees committing to implement GIP-2 provide an implementation schedule, and the detailed information as to the procedures and criteria used to generate the in-structure response spectra to be used for USI A-46. Additionally, in SSER No. 2 the staff requested that licensees inform the staff in the 120-day response if they intend to change their licensing basis to reflect a commitment to the US! A-46 (GIP-2) methodology for verifying the seismic adequacy of mechanical and electrical equipment, prior to receipt of the staff's plant-specific safety evaluation resolving USI A-46.

Duquesne Light Company's response to the supplement is not clear as to whether or not it intends to implement both the SQUG commitments and the implementation guidance. We interpret the response as a commitment to the entire GIP-2, including both the SQUG commitments and the implementation guidance, and we, therefore, consider the response acceptable. If our interpretation is incorrect, Duquesne Light Company should, as soon as practicable prior to implementation, submit for review: alternative criteria and procedures for responding to GL 87-02. Additionally, Duquesne Light Company should not merely follow the August 21, 1992, SQUG letter for l

implementing GIP-2, but should refer to Enclosure 2 to this letter which l provides the staff's October 2, 1992, response to the SQUG letter.

It is noted that Duquesne Light Company's response did not indicate if it intends to change the Beaver Valley, Unit I licensing basis to reflect a commitment to the USI A-46 methodology prior to receipt of the staff's plant-l specific safety evaluation.

• [ '

~ ' '"

9212020127 921120 PDR ADOCK 05000334 "J ' ~ ^ ' 7\

~ 4' t i P PDR

(

% 3

Mr. J. D. Sieber Duquesne Light Company's proposed implementation schedule is within the 3-year period requested by the staff in GL 87-02 and is, therefore, acceptable.

Duquesne Light Company's response regarding in-structure response spectra is acceptable.

Sincerely, Original t gnnd i

by I l

Albert W. De Aro, Sr. Project Manager  !

Project Directorate 1-4 l Division of Reactor Projects - 1/11- i Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation j

Enclosures:

l

1. Staff Safety Evaluation i

2. Staff letter to SQUG dated October 2,1992 i cc w/ enclosures: i See next page Distribution: -

Docket File i NRC & Local PDRs PD l-4 Plant SVarga JCalvo -

SNorris ADeAgazio OGC JNorberg PChen MMcBrearty ~~

JMa ACRS (10)

JfRogge, RI

• See previous concurrence m dL/

o"Ic5 LA:PDI-4 PM:PDI-4O EMEB* Di$l-J hw SNis ADeAgazio:cn JNorberg JStolh DATE l l /.FC/92 // /00/92 11/19/92 // /M92 / / -l'

-0FFICIAL RECORD COPY Document Name: G:\DEAGAZIO\69428SER i

4 Mr. J. D. Sieber Beaver Valley Power Station Duquesne Light Co.oL.ny Units 1 & 2 CC:

Jay E. Silberg, Esquire Bureau of Radiation Protet. ion Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Pennsylvania Department of 2300 N Street, NW. Environmental Resources Washington, DC 20037 ATTH: R. Janati Post Office Box 2063 Nelson Tonet, Manager Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Nuclear Safety Duquesne Light Company Mayor of the Borroug~h of Post Office Box 4 Shippingport Shippingport, Pennsylvania 15077 Post Office Box 3 Shippingport, Pennsylvania 15077 Commissioner Roy M. Smith West Virginia Department of Labor Regional Administrator, Region i Building 3 Room 319 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Capitol Complex 475 Allendale Road Charleston, West Virginia 25305 King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 John D. Borrows Resident Inspector Director, Utilities Department U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Public Utilities Commission Post Office Box 181 IP.0 East Broad Street Shippingport, Pennsylvania 15077 Columbus, Ohio 43266-0573 Director, Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency Post Office Box 3321 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105-3321 Ohio EPA-DERR ATTN: Zack A. Clayton Post Office Box 1049 Columbus, Ohio 43266-0149

. . .