ML20128B803

Forwards SE Accepting Licensee 120-day Response to Suppl 1 to GL 87-02,dtd 920921.Staff Finds Licensee Commitment to Implement GIP-2,including Clarifications,Interpretations & Exceptions,Acceptable Method for Resolving USI A-46

ML20128B803
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	11/23/1992
From:	Andersen J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Opeka J CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER CO., NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO.
Shared Package
ML20128B807	List: ML20128B803 ML20128B823
References
REF-GTECI-A-46, REF-GTECI-SC, TASK-A-46, TASK-OR GL-87-02, GL-87-2, TAC-M69458, NUDOCS 9212040090
Download: ML20128B803 (4)

Text

o

~

Y

- *g UNITED STAT 2s he

[

g

) g a

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W ASHING TON, D. C. 20%S g'/g k...../ November 23, 1992 Docket No. 50-245 Mr. John F. Opeka Executive Vice President, Nuclear Connecticut Yankeo Atomic Pover Company Northeast Nuclear Energy Company Post Office Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270

Dear Mr. Opeka:

S'J8 JECT: SAFETY EVALVATION Of THE MILLSTONE UNIT 1, 120-DAY RESPONSE TO SUPPLEhENT NO. 1 TO GENERIC LETTER 87-02 (TAC M69458)

By a letter dated September Pl, 1992, Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO) submitted its response to Supp?ement No. I to Generic Letter (GL) 87-02 for the Hillstane Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1. Supplement No. I to GL 87-02 required that all addressees provide, within 120 days of the issue date of the supplement, either a commitment 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 f.'y the staff's Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report No. 2 (SSER No. 2) on GIP-2, or else provide an alternative method for responding to GL 87-02. The supplement also requirad that those addressees committing to implement GIP-2 provide an implementation schedule, and provide the detailed informatien as to what procedures and criteria were used to generate the in-structure response spectra to be used for USI A-46.

In addition, the staff requested in SSER No. 2 that the licensees inform the staff in the 120-day response if they intend to change their licensing basi to reflect a commitment to the USl A-46 (GIP-2) methodology for verifying th seismic adequacy of mechanical and electrical equipment, prior to receipt of the staff's plant-specific safety evaluation resolving USI A-46. Enclosed is the staff's evaluation of NNEC0's response to Supplement No. I to GL 87-02, dated September 21, 1992.

The staff finds that NNEC0's commitment to implement GIP-2, including the clarifications, interpretations and exceptions identified in SSER No. 2, as an acceptable method for resolving USI A-46 at Millstone Unit 1. The staff finds that it h, acceptable for the licensee to use previously performed anchorage evaluations for USI A-46, provided that the evaluations meet the criteria and procedures approved in SSERcu . 2 (Section 11.4,4). The staff also finds that it is acceptable to rse exist 49 seismic qualification test reports to demonstrate operabilny for SSEL equioment which was qualified to IEEE 344-1975. The methods defined in EPRI Repor_t NP-6041-SL are, in general, not acceptable to the staff for resolving equipment outliers. However, the staff will consider the application of some of the criteria provided in EPRI Report NP-6041-SL, fcr the resolution of equipment outliers, on a case-by-case basis, g The proposed implementation schedule for Millstone Uu c 1 exceeds the 3-year rnsponse period. However, because of its current refueling outage schedule, the stiff finds that the proposed schedule is ace,ntable, g ]/ Ll

)

9212040090 921123 NW 97d M

& bm Oem PDR P

ALOCK 05000245 IN d> d$k[ bif,3 b^

PDR

-~ - . _ ~ - - . - - - . - . - . - - - - . - . - _ - - - - . . .

U , ,

• Hr. John F. Opeka  ;

The staff has reviewed NNECO's response concerning in-structure response s)ectra, and has concluded that it is acceptable, with one possible exception -

w1ere NNECO refers to SSER No. 2, Section 11.4.2.4. If NNECO intends to use ,

IPEEE spectra for USI A-46, it should submit for staff review as soon as i possible, the information requested in SSER No. 2. Section ^11.4.2.4.

NNECO indicated that, as part of the resolution of GL 87-02, they intend to  :

change their licensing basis, via 10 CFR 50.59, to include the GIP t methodologies as an option for demanstratir.g the seismic adequacy of new and replacement plcnt equipment. The staff recognizes that NNECO may ievise their' i licensing basis in accordance with 10 CFR 54.59 to reflect the acceptability of the USI A-46 (GIP) methodology for verifying the seismic adequacy of electrical and mechanical equipment covered by the GIP. Howev2r, since NNECO intended to augment their licensing basis to include the GIP methodology as.an option for verifying seismic adequacy, rather than revise their licensing ,

basis such that the G!p-2 would be the sole methodology, the staff cautions that it is not acceptable to combine any part of GIP-2 with the current.

licensing basis methodologies such that it results in a less corservative approach than if GIP-2 or the current licensing basis uthodologies were ,

. applied separately. ,

If you have any questions concerning this review, please contact me.  ;

Sincerely, Original signed ,.

by James W. Andersen, Acting Project Manager Project Directorate 1-4 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/11 Office of Nuclear Reactor' Regulation Enclosuro: ,

Safety Evaluation ,

a cc w/ enclosure:

See next page

• See previot.s concer. ence J- ns/M .

o m et LA:PDI-4; -PM:PDI-4b D:PDI-4 @ EMEB* ECGC*

L #

WE SNO JAnders[nken JStolz JNorberg GBagchi eut

\\/Q92 0 /N/92 // /A3/92 11/20/92 11/20/92 .

OFFICIAL REC 01D COPY l Document Name: G:\ANDERSEN\69458.SE

. - _ _. _ _ _ . - =. z_. _ . _ . . . _ . _ . _ . - . - , _ .

i

-l l

4 ,;

l Dist ribg11oni Docket file NRC & Local PDRs PD I-4 Plant SVarga JCalvo SNorris JAndersen i OGC-Jiforberg PChen '

DJeng McMcBrearty I GBagchi l ACRS (10) 1 LTDoerflein, RI t

L r

.h 1

k i

e a

i Hr. John F. Opeka Millstone Nuclear Power Station Northeast Nuclear Energy Company Unit 1 CC:

Gerald Garfield, Esquire R. M. Kacich, Director Day, Berry and Howard Nuclear Licensing Counselors at Law Northeast Utilities Service Company City Place Post Office Box 270 Hartferd, Connecticut 06103-3499 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270 W. D. Romberg, Vice President D. O. Nordquist Nuclear, Operations Services Director of Quality Services Hortheast Utilities Servica Company Northeast Utilities Service Company Post Office Hox 270 Post Office Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270 Kevin McCarthy, Director Regional Administrator Radiation Control Unit Region I Department of Environmental Protection U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission State Offica Building 475 Allendale Road Hartford, Connecticut C5106 King of Prassia, Pennsylvania 19406 Allan Johanson, Assistant Director First Selectmen Office of Policy and Management Town of Waterford Policy Development and Planning Division Hall of Record:

80 Washington Street 200 Boston Post Road Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Waterford, Connecticut 06385 S. E. Scace, Nuclear Station Director P. D. Swetland, Resident Inspector Millstone Nuclear Power Station Millstone Nuclear Power Station Northeast Nuclear Energy Company c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comeission Post Offf a Box 128 Post Office Box 513 Waterford, Connecticut 06385 Nititic, Connecticut 06357 H. F. Haynes, Nuclear Unit Director Hillstone Unit No. 1 Northeast Nuclear Energy Company Post Office Box 128 Waterford, Connecticut 06385 Nicholas S. Reynolds Winston & Strawn 1400 L Street, NW '

Washington, DC 20005-3502 l

l l

b