ML20204B421
| ML20204B421 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Mcguire, Catawba, McGuire, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 03/16/1987 |
| From: | Tucker H DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8703250051 | |
| Download: ML20204B421 (2) | |
Text
'
u.
- -1 j
l DUKE Powen COMPANY P.O. abX 33189 e
CHAmLOrrE. N.C. 28848 e
~ HAL B. TUCKER -
e.
Taa.spesons
== raa="?
- samtmas enumecreon
- (704)373 4801 s. -
W e
March 16, 1987 a
i v.
k U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Doctament Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555
Subject:
Catawba Nuclear Station s
Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414 McGuire Nuclear Station Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370 Ice Condenser. Door. Surveillance v
v j
Gentlemen:
I J
b i-By letters dated July 12, 1985, Abgust 7,1985, Novest er 8,1985, April 14,1_986 and September 18, 1986 we provided discussions of proposed' revisions to the McGuire and Catawba Technical Specifications. The proposed revisions would change the required surveillance interval for the ice condenser lower inlet doors from their current frequencies (50% every 9 months for McGuire and 25% every 6 month,s for [
i.
Catawba)'to require a 100% inspection every 18 months.
i l
The proposed test frequency will provide at least the same amount of assurance that any random door failure will be detected as does the current requirements. For McGuire, testing 50% of' the doors every 9 months will be equivalent to testing all of the doors every 18 months. Since the doors'are note \\ested at random, that is the first half of ti.e doors are tested at one time and the second half of them are i
tested the next time, the time between tests for any particular door will still be 18 months. For Catawba, the proposed change will add conservatism to the test L
frequency. By testing 25% of the doors every 6 months, thema is a span of 24 months between tests for any one door. The new Survaillance interval would allow a maximum of 18 months between the tests for any one door. Therefore, the proposed amendment is at least as conservative _as the current Specifications.
- My September 18, 1986 letter mentioned 6 incidents at Catawba where lower inlet doors failed to meet the acceptance criteria.
Subsequent retesting of the affected doors showed all acceptance criteria met with no adjustments or repairs having been made. This indicates that the previous test data was likely inaccurate - possibly because the crew, which had no trainin'g or experience on this procedure, did not set up the test equipment properly. The test procedure was subsequently revised to more clearly specify how the test equipment is.to'be set up.
I 8703250051 870316 08 1
PDR ADOCK 05000369 L
i i
,i PDR
'I Q*
n-
d a
U. S. Nucl Or Regul tery Consiscien March 16, 1987 Page Two e
Therefore, based on 10 years of test data at McGuire and approximately 3 1/2 years of data from Catawba, there is nooindication of any degradation of the ability of -
tha ice condenser lower inlet doors to function as required.
.Very truly yours, Q^
f).
Hal B. Tucke RWO/31/sbn Attachment xc:
Dr.'J. Nelson Grace, American Nuclear Insurers Regional Administrator, Region II c/o Dottie Sherman, ANI L'ibrary U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission The Exchange, Suite 245 101 Marietta Street, NW, Suite 2900 270 Farmington Avenue Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Farmington, CT 06032 Mr. Hayward Shealy, Chief Mr. Dayne Brown, Chief Bureau of Radiological Health Radiation Protection Branch South Carolina Department of Health &
Division of Facility Services Environmental Control Department of Human Resources 2600 Bull Street P. O. Box 12200 Columbia, South Carolina 29201 Raleigh, North Carolina 27605 INPO Records Center Mr. P. K. Van Doorn Suite 1500 NRC Resident Inspector 1100 Circle 75 Parkway Catawba Nuclear Station Atlanta, Georgia 30339 M&M Nuclear Consultants
.Mr. W. T. Orders c
1221 Avenue of the Americas NRC Resident Inspector New York, New York 10020 McGuire Nuclear Station s{
4 4
e 4
9 O
I
_ _ _, _,, _ _...., - _ -.. - _ - _ - - _ - _ _ _. _