ML20198Q262
| ML20198Q262 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 10/24/1997 |
| From: | Bateman W NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Maynard O WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATING CORP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20198Q266 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-M93381, NUDOCS 9711120158 | |
| Download: ML20198Q262 (4) | |
Text
,_
[ [ - fc M
.ptW8.g y-t UNITED STATES
]
NUCLEAR RE2ULATERY COMMISSION u
WASHINGTON D.C. 306E4001 October 24. 1997 Mr. Otto L. Maynard President and Chief Executive Officer Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation Post Office Box 411 Burlington. Kansas 66839
SUBJECT:
SECOND TEN YEAR INTERVAL INSERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM PLAN AND ASSOCIATED REQUESTS FOR RELIEF. WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION (TAC NO. M93381)
Dear Mr. Maynard:
The staff has reviewed and evaluated the.1 formation provided by the Wolf Creek Operating Corporation in its letter dated August 30. 1995, related to the second ten year interval inservice inspection program plan and associated requests for relief for the Wolf Creek Generating Station. Additional information was provided by the licensee in its letters dated September 20.
November 17, 1995. May 3. December 9, 1996. January 23. and May 6, 1997.
The l
staff has determined that for the licensee's second ten year interval inservice inspection program for Wolf Creek Generating Station no deviations from regulatory requirements or commitments were identified.
The staff concluded that certain inservice examinations cannot be performed to the extent required by Section XI of the ASME Code.
In the cases of Requests for Relief 12R-03. 12R-04. 12R-05. 12R-06, 12R-07. 12R 08, 12R-14. and 12R-18.
the licensee has demonstrated that specific Section XI requirements are impractical. Therefore, the staff concludes that pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(1) Requests for Relief 12R 03, 12R-04. 12R-05. 12R-06. 12R-07, 12R-08. 12R-14 and 12R-18 are granted.
These reliefs are authorized by law and will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security and are otherwise in the public interest, giving due consideration to the burden upon the licensee that could result if the requirements were imposed on the facility.
The staff concluded that for Requests for Relief 12R-01, 12R-02, 12R-10.
12R-12. 12R-13. 12R-15. 12R-17. and 12R-20. the licensee's proposed alternatives provide an acceptable level of cuality and safety in lieu of the Code-required examinations and are authorizec pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(1).
The use of Code Case N-509, as recuested in 12R-20.
is authorized until such time as the Code Case is publishec in a future revision of Regulatory Guide 1.147. At that time. if the licensee intends to continue to im)lement this Code Case, the licensee is to follow all the provisions in Code Case N-509 with limitations issued in Regulatory Guide 1.147, if any.
\\
The staff concluded that for Request for Relief 12R-19 (use of Code Case N-498-1) the licensee has demonstrated that specific Section XI requirements would result in hardship or unusual difficulty without a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety. Therefore, the licensee's proposed 1.s
- u I.IL1.1 I.lliIIBil1.111.1l 11 M R!.E CENTP~ spy 7 11 g 8 7
o a
-.xon--
.Mr. Otto l.. Haynard alternatives authorized )ursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(11). The use of Code Case N 498-1 is autlorized until such time as the Code Case is published in a future revision of Regulatory Guide 1.147. At that time, if the licensee intends to continue to implement this Code Case. the licensee is to follow all the provisions in Code Case N 498 1 with limitations issued in Regulatory l
Guide 1.157, if any.
l Request for Relief 12R 11 was withdrawn by the licensee and deleted from the ISI Program Pian by letter dated May 3, 1996, in response to the NRC's request for additional information.
For Requests for Relief 12R 09 and 12R-16. it is concluded that the licensee has not provided sufficient justification to support the determination that i
the Code requirements are im)ractical or that compliance with the Code-
[
-requirement would result in lardship.
Therefore, in these cases relief is denied.
The staff'i evaluation and conclusions are contained in the enclosed safety evaluation.
Sincerely.
[
William H. Bateman Director Project Directorate IV-2 Division of Reactor Projects III/IV--
Office of Nuclear Reactor-Regulation Docket No. 50-482
Enclosure:
Safety Evaluation cc w/encls: See next page
- 2.d=>! M_ &Oqg..t ry N-k
- %WhgmWF um e
&w-
l Mr. Otto L. Maynard,
pp W
alternatives authorized >ursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(ii).
The use of ~ i e'
CodeCaseN498-1isautlorizeduntilsuchtimeastheCodeCaseispublished-in a future revision of Regulatory Guide 1.147. At that time if the licensee intends to continue to implement this Code Case, the licensee is to follow all the provisions in Code Case N-498 1 with limitations issued in Regulatory Guide 1.157, if any.
Request for Relief 12R-11 was withdrawn by the licensee and deleted from the ISI Program Plan by letter dated May 3, 1996, in response to the NRC's request for additional information.
For Requests for Relief 12R-09 and 12R-16 it is concluded that the licensee has not provided sufficient justiN.ation to support the determination that the Code requirements are imaract U.41 or that compliance with the Code requirement would result in lardship. Therefore in these cases relief is denied.
.The staff's evaluation and conclusions are contained in the enclosed safety evaluation.
Sincerely.
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY: Gall MARCUS FOR William H. Bateman Director Project Directorate IV-2 Division of Reactor Projects Ill/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-482
Enclosure:
. Safety Evaluation cc w/encls:
See next page
)lSTRIBUT'ON:
Docket F1 e-EAdensam (EGA1)
WBateman ACRS PUBLIC:
EPeyton KThomas OGC PDIV 2 Reading THarris (TLH3)
WJohnson. RIV GHill (2)-
THiltz. ED0 RWessman Document Name:
933811SI.2WC
,, o.N OFC PM/PD4-2 LA/PD4-2 EMEB ? M E OCd N [D/PD4-2 NAME KTEs/vw E eM RWessman M(4df WBateman # b Y
h DATE 10/A/97' 10/ai/97 10/10/97 10/N/97 10/2 4/97 C
COPY
[iEDNO M/NO YES/NO YES/h YES/NO 1
( E1 '
0FFICIA RECORD COPY
\\./
I q,.
/
M;_-
_=
Mr. Otto L. Haynard CC:
Jay Stiberg, Esq.
Chief Operating Officer Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation 2300 N Street, NW P. O. Box 411 Washington, D.C.
20037 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Regional Administrator, Region IV Supervisor Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corpor6 tion 611 Ryan Plaza Drive Suite 1000 P.O. Box 41)
Arlington, Texas 76011 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Senior Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Resident Inspectors Office P. O. Box 311 8201 NRC Road Burlington, Kansas 66839 Steedman, Missouri 65077_1032 Chief Engineer Utilities Division Kansas Corporation Comission
-1500 SW Arrowhead Road Topeka, Kansas 66604 4027 Office of the Governor State of Kansas
- Topeka, Kansas 66612 Attorney General Judicial Center 301 S.W. 10th 2nd Floor Topeka, Kansas 66612 County Clerk Coffey County Courthouse Burlington, Kansas 66839 Vick L. Cooper, Chief IRadiation Control Program Kansas Department of Health l
and Environment Bureau of Air and Radiation Forbes Field Building 283
' Topeka, Kansas 66620
'_=__
==
=.====
y a e.r,.w.,
.,e
. + + -..,
mae.,,mw ww e e