ML20204F177

Responds to NRC 880729 Request Re plant-specific Seismic Verification Plans to Resolve USI A-46.Current Plan Entails Implementing Generic Criteria & Methodology in Rev 0 to Generic Implementing Procedures to Resolve Issue

ML20204F177
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	10/13/1988
From:	Fitzpatrick E GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
References
REF-GTECI-A-46, REF-GTECI-SC, TASK-A-46, TASK-OR NUDOCS 8810210528
Download: ML20204F177 (3)

Text

, )*

OPU Nuclear Corporation N Igay w Mu One Upper Pond Road Pars ppany, Ne* Jersey 07054 201 316 7000 TELEX 136-482 Writer's Direct Dial Number:

October 13, 1988 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk flail Station Pl-137 Washington, D.C. 20555 Gentlemen:

Subject:

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS)

Docket No. 50-219 Response to Generic SER on SQUG Resolution of Unresolved Safety Issue A-46 On July 29, 1988, the NRC Staff issued a Safety Evaluation Report (SER) on Revision 0 of the Generic Implementation Procedure (GIP) for seismic verification of Nuclear Plant Equipment developed by the Seismic Qualification Utility Group (SQUG). The letter to SQUG enclosing the SER requests that SQUG member utilities provide to the NRC, within 60 days, a schedule for implementing the GIP. By letter dated August 19, 1988 to fir. Shao, SQuG clarified that the sixty days would expire on October 7, 1988. This letter responds to the NRC request for our plant-specific seismic verification plans for Oyster Creek, "Verification of Seismic Adequacy of fiechanical and Electrical Equipment in Operating Reactors, Unresolved Safety Issue (US!)

A-46."

As a member of SQUG and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), we have supported the many efforts on which the GIP is based. The SER endorses the methodology and criteria embodied in Revision 0 of the GIP, subject to satisf actory resolution of a number of open issues and NRC comments. Action by SQUG and its contractors is underway to resolve the identified open issues and comments in accordance with the SQUG schedule presented at the August 10-11, 1988 meeting with the NRC Staff and included with the SQUG letter to fir. L. Shao dated August 19, 1988. This schedule projects completion of Revision 2 of the GIP in Spring of 1989, contingent upon SQUG and NRC agreement on the resolution of the various open issues. Revision 2 of the GIP is the version which is scheduled to contain all of the information needed to tmplement the US! A-46 Generic Letter at SQUG member plants. The final NRC SER Supplement on Revision 2 of the GIP is anticipated by mid-1989.

CU310210528 891013 PDR P

ADOCK 05000219 PDC q ,

GPU Nuc er Corporaton es a subs 4a y cf Gevv PutWe Ut Lt es Cor;waton

• 1 GPU Nuclear's plans for implementation of the GIP at Oyster Creek are therefore preliminary given the current status and schedule for completion of Revision 2 of the GIP and NRC's SER supplement on that revision. However, it is our current plan to resolve USI A-46 for Oyster Creek by implementation of the generic criteria and methodology included in Revision 0 of the GIP, as clarified by the SQUG responses to the PMC SER in SQUG 1etter to itr. L. Shao dated September 22, 1988.

, Assuming no major changes in the workscope currently envisioned, as described in Revision 0 of the GIP including the criteria to be added for cable raceways, tanks, heat exchangers, and relays, we plan to perform the seismic verification plant walkdown required by the GIP by the conclusion of the second refueling outage af ter receipt of the final SER supplement and resolution of all open issues. If the final NRC SER supplement with no open items is issued by the second Quarter of 1989, then the plant walkdown at Oyster Creek is expected to be completed during our 14R outage which is projected to he completed in December, 1992. Tnis schedule is based on our oversll plan to address Unresolved Safety Issue A-46 for both Oyster Creek and Tit!-1. In order to effectively utiltre our resource and experience, we plan to complete the Tit!-1 walkdown in 1991. Upon completion of the plant walkdown, the results of the walkdown and a proposed schedule for complete t esolution including corrective modifications or replacements, If required, ,

will be provided in the Oyster Creek A-46 summary report submittal.

Identification of safe shutdown equipment, gathering of necessary I plant-specific data and training of our walkdown team members w111 be

! initiated prior to the walkdown.

l' Our current implementation plan and schedule, as described above, are based on the "SQUG Commitments" identified in each section of the GIP. In addition,  !

our implementation and schedule cos11tment is contingent upon our cur ent understanding of the GIP. If the scope of the final revision of the GIP or '

the cost and effort required to implement it at Oyster Creek changes significantly from the current scope and cost estimates, we will reevaluate our commitments, in view of the uncertainties in the requirements and schedule for resolution of these related issues, we reserve the right to revise the implementation schedule for US! A-46 at Oyster Creek. W will advise you in writing of any changes in our implementation plans and schedules.

Very truly yout 5, l

(

~

b i E. E. Fitzp rick Vice President and Director l Oyster Creek EEF/YN/pa(7449f) cc's on next page I

. cc: fir. 41111am T. Russell, Administrator Region !

U.S. Nucicar Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA. 19406 NRC Resident Inspector Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, N.J. 08731 Mr. Alex Dromert;k U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission itail Station PI-137 Washington, D.C. 20555 i