ML20198E095

Forwards Safety Evaluation Accepting 920921 120-day Response to Suppl 1 to GL 87-02, Verification of Seismic Adequacy of Mechanical & Electrical Equipment in Operating Reactors,Usi A-46

ML20198E095
Person / Time
Site:	Cooper
Issue date:	11/25/1992
From:	Rood H Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Horn G NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
Shared Package
ML20198E101	List: ML20198E095 ML20198E109
References
REF-GTECI-A-46, REF-GTECI-SC, TASK-A-46, TASK-OR GL-87-02, GL-87-2, TAC-M69439, NUDOCS 9212040125
Download: ML20198E095 (5)

Text

_ - . _ _ _ _ . . - - , _ . _ _ _ . - . _ . . . _ < - _ . . _ _ _ _ ._ _

. ,w . Orela.T Me-( o g UNITE D $TATES -

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

,[ g y,

rl WA*,HINoTON, D. C. 20555

%,,,,,# November 25, 1992 Docket No. 50-298 ,

Mr. Guy R. Horn Nuclear Powe'r Group Manager ,

Nebraska Public Power District Post Office Box 499 Columbus, Nebraska ti8602-0499

SUBJECT:

EVALUATION OF LICENSEE'S 120-DAY RESPONSE TO SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 TO GENERIC LETTER 87-02 FOR COOPER NUCLEAR STATION (TAC NO. M69439)

By letter dated September 21, 1992, the Nebraska Public Power District responded to Supplement No. I to Generic Letter (GL) 87-02, " Verification-of Seismic Adequacy of ~ Mechanical and Electrical Equipment in Operating Reactors, Unresolved Safety Issue (USI) A-46," for the Cooper _ Nuclear Station (CNS).

Enclosure 1 provides the NRC staff's evaluation of you- letter.

Supplement No. I to GL 87-02 required that all addressees provide,-within 120 days of the date of issuance 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 by the staff's Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report No. 2 (SSER-2) on GIP-2, or else provide an alternative method for responding to GL 87-02. The supplement also required that those addressees committing to implement GIP-2 provide an implementation schedule, and provide the detailed information as to what proceLures 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-2 that the licensees inform the staff in the 120-day response if they intend to change their licensing basis to reflect a commitment to the USI 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.

Your response is~ unclear as to whether or not you intend to implement both the SQUG commitments and the implementation-guidance. --The: staff interprets your response as a commitment to the entire GIP-2 including both the SQUG

-commitments and the implementation guidance, and therefore considers it

-acceptable. If our interpretation is incorrect, then:in accordance with )

Supplement No. I to GL 87-02, you should provide for staff review, as soon as practicable prior to implementation, your. alternative-criteria and procedures for responding to GL 87-02. Additionally, you should not merely follow the August 21, 1992, SQUG letter for implementing GIP-2 as stated'in your i g

submittal, but should refer to Enclosure 2 to this letter which provides the D\

- 9212040125 921125-DR ADOCK:0500 8

,,m , - -

Y{

e % *g

, j @f g

{-,

e

. . DM Ble 4

Mr. Guy R. Horn t staff's res)onse to the SQUG letter. The implementation schedule you proposed is within tie 3-year response period requesteu by the staff in Supplement No. I to GL 87-02 and is therefore acceptable. Your proposed in-structure response spectra have also been reviewed by the staff and found acceptable for

. use as " median centered" spectra, rather than " conservative design" spectra, as you proposed. We note that you did not ir.dicate in your submittal that you intend to change the CNS licensing basis to reflect a commitment to the USI A-46 methodology prior to receipt of the staff's plant-specific SER.

This completes the staff review of your 120-day response to Supplement No, I to GL 87-02. If you have any ouestions concerning this issue, please contact

me.

Sinc.erely, 4

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:

i Harry Rood, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate IV-1 Division of Reactor Projects - III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

1. Safety Evaluation

2. NRC's response to SQUG l letter dated October 2, 1992 cc w/ enclosures:

See next page I

DISTRIBUTION:

, Docket File NRC & Local PDRs PD4-1 Reading 1

M. Virgilio J. Larkins P. Noonan ACRS (10) (P-315) OGC (15B18) A. B. Beach, RIV

, PD4-1 Plant File H. Rood J; Roe H. Ashar P. Chen J. Gagliardo, RIV i P. Sears M. McBrearty 4

• ee previous concurrence OFFICE JA}PD4-1 PM:PD4-g BC:EMEB* D:PDK NAME ( [PNoTnan HRood,:pM JNorberg J[pkins DATE J/ g,L3/92 k/h92 11/24/92 tl/2s/92 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY Document Name: C0069439.LTR l

t l

l

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

i l I.i' ,

i 0

l, '

Mr. Guy R. Horn  ; -

staff's response to the SQUG letter. The-implementation schedule you proposed is within the 3-year response period requerted by the staff-in Supplement .

4 No. I to GL _87-02 and is therefore accept 41e. Your proposed in-structure

! response spectra have also been reviewed by the staff _ and found acceptable for -

! use as " median centered" spectra, rather than " conservative design" spectra,

as you proposed. We note that you did not indicate in your submittal that you j intend to change the CNS licensing basis to reflect a commitment to the USI A-46 methodology prior to receipt of the staff's plant-specific SER.

. This completes the staff review of your 120-day response to Supplement No.1-j to GL 87-02. If you have any questions concerning this issue, please contact t me.

!. Sincerely, l.

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY; i

j Harry Rood, Senior _ Project _ Manager

. Project Directorate IV-1 #

j Division of Reactor Projects - III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

1. Safety Evaluation

! 2. NRC's response to SQUG letter dated October 2, 1992 f

cc w/ enclosures:

l See next page l-~ DISTRIBUTION _:

! Docket File NRC & Local PDRs PD4-l_ Reading l - M. Virgilio J.'Larkins P. Noonan-

, ACRS (10)_(P-315) OGC'(15B18) A.-'B. Beach,.RIV i- PD4-1 P1 ant File H. Rood J. Roe-l H. Ashar. P. Chen J. Gagliardo, RIV P. Sears _ M.-McBrearty

• See previous concurrence l

0FFICE. PM:PD4-g BC:EMEB*

fA'PD4-1 D:PDK l NAME i

PNoTnan HRood,:pE JNorberg hns DATE_' l/-pj/92 k/h92- 11/24/92 0 /25/92 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY. Document'Name: C0069439.LTR l-l4

i i

i* Mr. Guy R. Horn  :

i staff's res)onse to the SQUG letter. The implementation schedule you proposed is within tie 3-year response period requested by the staff in Supplement No. I to GL 87-02 and is therefore acceptable. Your proposed in-structure response spectra have also been reviewed by the staff and'found acceptable for

- use as " median centered" spectra, rather than " conservative design" spectra, 3

as you proposed. Ws note that you did not indicate in your submittal that you ir, tend to change the CNS licensing basis to reflect a commitment to the USI A-46 methodology prior to receipt of the staff's plant-specific SER.

This completes the staff review of your 120-day response to Supplement No.1 l to GL 87-02. If you have any questions concerning this issue, please contact me. l l Sincerely, l Harry - Ro Senior Project Manager i Project Directorate IV-1

> Division of Reactor Projects - III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i

Enclosures:

4

1. Safety Evaluation

2. NRC's response to SQUG 1etter dated October 2, 1992 cc w/ enclosures:

See next page i

I I

i i

w m- -- 4 --yw-e-w+, - ,-- eyywq -q- ,op g g9eqe p- m e q

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. Heacham 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 Mr. Richard Moody, Chairman riemaha County Board of Commissioners Nemaha County Courthouse 1824 N Street Auburn, Nebraska 68305 Senior Resident inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission F. 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 Hall, South P. O. Box 95007 Lincoln, Nebraska 68509-5007 J