ML20207N928
| ML20207N928 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 10/14/1988 |
| From: | Wilson R GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207N930 | List: |
| References | |
| 5000-88-1647, NUDOCS 8810190483 | |
| Download: ML20207N928 (2) | |
Text
.
- "g GPU Nuclear Corporation lgey One Upper Pond Road f
uwMu Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 201-316 7000 TELD( 136 482 October 14, 1988 Wnter's Direct Dial Number:
5000-88-1647 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention:
Document Control Desk liail Station PI-137 Washington, D.C.
20555 Gentlemen:
Subject:
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS)
Docket No. 50-219 License No. DPR-16 Mark I Containment Long Term Program
Reference:
ItPR-999, Revision 1, December 1987 "Addendum to MPR-734, Plant Unique Analysis Report, Torus Attached Piping" Enclosed is the referenced report which documents reanalyses of torus attached piping systems at Oyster Creek.
This report is an addendum to the original ltark I Long Term Program analysis report (MPR-734) on piping systens attached to the torus suppression chamber.
Only the information that differs from the original report, i.e.,
the reanalysis results, is included in IIPR-999. ItPR-734 documented that torus attached piping systems would satisfy the liark I Containment Long Term Program provided that certain modifications were made. As a result of subsequent changes to the piping and support arrangements it was necessary to reanalyze some of these piping systems to reconfirm that they satisfy liark I Program acceptance criteria and to redefine the needed modifications.
As documented in Sections 2.2 and 2.5 of the enclosed report, the calculated stress results for two specific piping locations showed Code allow 8bles were slightly exceeded for certain liark I loading combinations.
GPU Nuclear (GPUN) judged these Calculated overstresses to be acceptable based on known conservatisms in the analysis methodology and concluded there would be no actual overstress conditions due to the associated loading conb1 nations.
i ol gv
)
8010190483 301014 PDR ADOCK OECCH)219 Q
PDC GPU Nuclear Corporaton ss a subsdary d General Pubic UtWes Corpoiat.on
's U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page two During an NRC Region I inspection (88-15) of liark I Program implementation at Oyster Creek, the acceptability of the calculated overstresses was questioned.
In response, GPUN submitted a letter dated June 1, 1988 and l
provided further information during a meeting at Region I on July 26, 1988.
At the meeting, GPUN presented preliminary results of more accurate analyses indicating Code allowables are met and confirming the adequacy of our judgement cnnt.erning the calculated overstresses documented in the enclosed report. When the analysis results are finalized, they will be incorporated in a Revision 2 to MPR-999 which will also be submitted to the NRC.
The attached referenced document is submitted for information as concitted
[
to by GPUN during the July 26, 1988 meeting and in our response (dated September 19,1988) to the notice of violation associated with inspection 88-15.
If you should have any questions concerning this letter or the enclosure, please contact Mr. Paul 7. Czaya, BWR Licensing Engineer at (201)316-7975.
1 l
Ver tr ly y urs, 3
/
i R. F. Wilson j
Vice Preside.nt Technical Functions RFW/PC/pa(7368f) t cc: lir. William T. Russell, Administrator Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
475 Allendale Road j
King of Prussia, PA.
19406 NRC Resident Inspector Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, fl.J.
08731
[
fir. Alex Dromerick i
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1
11 ail Station PI-137 l
Washington, D.C.
20555 i
l 1
1 I
t 1