ML20247D229

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amends 127 to Licenses DPR-32 & DPR-37

ML20247D229
Person / Time
Site:	Surry
Issue date:	05/18/1989
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20247D174	List: ML20247D173 ML20247D220 ML20247D229
References
NUDOCS 8905250251
Download: ML20247D229 (2)

Text

_ _-- __ --

• *+ UNITED STATES l ,[ g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

! 7.

-l WASHINGTON, D. C 20555 k . . . . . ,/ ~

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO AMENDhENT NO.127 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-32 AND AMENDMENT N0.127 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR-37 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY POWER STATION, UNIT NOS.1 Al'D 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-280 AND 50-281 INTRODUCTION The licensee, the Virginia Electric and Power Company, in its submittal dated March 30, 1988, proposed to amend the Technical Specifications (TS) to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-32 and DPR-37. The proposed revision would clarify TS Section 6.5.B.7, " Station Operating Records" for Surry, Units 1 and 2.

Currently, TS 6.5.B.7 states that the primary records of inservice inspections performed, including photographs of scope traces for welds which are tested by ultrasonic techniques and photographs of the surface of those welds inspected by a visual or surface examination, be retained during the life of the plant.

The proposed change would clarify the requirement to retain the photographs for the life of the plant.

EVALUATION A public hearing was held before an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) on March 20 and 21, 1972 on the issue of disputed welds and welding practices.

Subsequently, on April 26, 1972, the ASLB issued its initial decision on the above proceeding and concluded that certain requirements be stipulated in the Surry TS. One of these requirements (TS Section 6.5.B.7) reads as follows:

"B. Records relative to the following items shall be retained for the life of the plant.

7. Primary records of inservice inspections including, but not limited to radiographs (of welds which are radiographer), photographs of the scope traces for welds which are tested by ultrasonic techniques, and photographs of the surface of those welds inspected by visual or surface examinations."

The licensee has proposed to revise the above wording to read:

"7. Primary records of inservice inspections performed pursuant to Section XI of the ASME Code, as required by 10 CFR 50.55a, and ,

primary records of inservice inspections performed pursuant to these i Technical Specifications. If radiographs are taken or if photographs of scope traces (ultrasonic examination) or surface examination indications are taken, the radiographs and photographs shall be retained for the life of the plant."

8905250251 890518 PDR ADOCK 05000280 P PDC

- ,s .

. .- The reason the licensee is proposing this revision is to clarify the requirement for retaining primary records of inservice inspections performed in accordance  !

with Section XI of the ASME Code. As presently written, Section 6.5.B.7 of the TS could be misconstrued such that photographs of all scope traces and surface examinations performed would be required and that they be retained for the life of the plant. This would not be a reasonable interpretation. It is the staff's view that the intent of the TS was to require that if photographs were taken of the scope traces or surface examinations for the purpose of tracking an anomaly or a flaw over a period of time to determine its propagation rate, then retention of these photographs for the life of the plant is mandatory. Otherwise, literally thousands of unnecessary photographs would be required to be taken and retained for the life of the plant. Based on the staff's review of the licensee submittal, we find that the proposed change conforms with Secticn XI of the ASME Code, and is acceptable to the staff.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION These amendments relate to changes in recordkeeping, reporting or administrative procedures or requirements. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that these amendments involve no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding. Accordingly, the amendments meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of these amendments.

CONCLUSION We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of these amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.

Dated: May 18, 1989 Principal Contributor:

B. Buckley

_______- _ _ _ _ _ _ -