ML20148U521

Forwards SE Accepting Licensee 950915 Request Re Third 10-yr Interval for Pump & Valve Inservice Testing Program

ML20148U521
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	07/07/1997
From:	Berkow H NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Sumner H SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING CO.
Shared Package
ML20148U526	List: ML20148U521 ML20148U614
References
TAC-M95727, TAC-M95728, NUDOCS 9707100203
Download: ML20148U521 (4)

Text

fpnr.

J g

UNITED STATES

g j

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20566 4 001

\\,'

/

,, s July 7, 1997 Mr. H. L. Sumner, Jr.

~

Vice President Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

P. O. Box 1295 Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295

SUBJECT:

SAFETY EVALUATION FOR THE THIRD TEN-YEAR INTERVAL FOR THE PUMP AND VALVE INSERVICE TESTING PROGRAM - EDWIN 1. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. M95727 AND M95728)

Dear Mr. Sumner:

By letter dated September 15, 1995, Georgia Power Company (GPC), submitted the Third Ten-Year Interval Inservice Testing (IST) Program for the Pumps and Valves at Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.

Your submittal included several proposed relief requests, deferred test justifications, and other sections of the IST program developed according to the requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) OM Code 1990 Edition for pump and valve testing, with the exception of safety relief valve testing, which was generated in accordance with the requirements of the ASME OM Code 1995 Edition.

By letter dated April 12, 1996, the NRC transmitted a Safety Evaluation (SE) that provided the staff's review of your above IST relief requests. Two relief requests were denied and one relief request was granted on a provisional basis.

In addition, the staff informed you of concerns regarding four relief requests, which were granted on an interim or provisional basis during the second 10-year interval. Consequently, you were requested to provide a response to the specific issues raised in the evaluation within 60 days of the date of the third 10-year interval SE.

By letter dated June 4, 1996, you addressed the items which were denied, required a response within 60 days, or were granted provisionally. You also provided an additional response dated July 24, 1996, in which revisions to Relief Requests RR-V-4, RR-V-8, and RR-V-9 were submitted. On December 2, 1996, you submitted revised Relief Request RR-P-10, which included an evaluation of test parameters under current operating conditions, due to a recent power uprate.

In addition, you submitted a new Relief Request, RR-P-12, that was developed to address the use of control room instrumentation for high pressure coolant injection discharge pressure monitoring during performance'of IST.

~

NRC RLE CENTER COPY I

\\

lDE'R888R8E888%

IlllllllllllllllllIlllllllllll'Ill!ll\\

PDR

d H. L. Sumner i t casults of the staff's review of your responses to the staff's April 12 SE and other supplemental letters, are provided in the enclosed SE.

Specifically:

(1) Relief Requests RR-P-10 and RR-P-12 are authorized pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a provides an accep(a)(3)(1) based on the determination that your proposal t

l table level of quality and safety; (2) Relief Requests RP. P-9 and RR-V-2 were withdrawn by GPC; (3) Revised Relief Requests RR-V-4, RR-V-8, and RR-V-9, have now satisfied the conditions placed on interim relief, for i

i the second 10-year interval, in the staff's April 12 SE; (4) Revised Relief Requests RR-V-4, RR-V-8, and RR-V-9 are granted as impractical for the third i

10-year interval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(f)(6)(i); (5) Refueling Outage Justification R0J-V-2, has satisfied the provisional conditions stated in the staff's April 12 SE, but GPC should redesignate this R0J as a relief request-i no further staff review is needed; and (6) GPC has clarified the anamoly 7.9-Pump Note 7 regarding the diesel fuel oil transfer pumps, and anamoly 7.12-Valve Note 13 on the residual heat removal minimum flow line valves.

In the April 12 letter, the staff stated its disagreement with GPC's information pertaining to the exclusion of the reactor core isolation cooling (RCIC) system from its IST program.

In a separate evaluation, the staff will address anamoly 7.8-Pump Note 3, and anamoly 7.14-Valve Notes 16, 17, 19, and 20, regarding whether the RCIC system (other than its containment isolation function) may be removed from the IST program.

This task will remain open until the NRC staff completes its review of your plan to delete the RCIC system from the IST program.

Sincerely, g

i

/'

l He ert N. Berkow, Director Project Directorate II-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos.

50-321 and 50-366

Enclosure:

Safety Evaluation cc w/ enc 1:

See next page

i H. L. Sumner July 7, 1997 i

The results of the staff's review of your responses to the staff's April 12 SE and other supplemental letters, are provided in the enclosed SE.

Specifically:

(1) Relief Requests RR-P-10 and RR-P-12 are authorized pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i) based on the determination that your proposal provides an acceptable level of quality and safety; (2) Relief Requests RR-P-9 and RR-V-2 were withdrawn by GPC; (3) Revised Relief Requests RR-V-4, RR-V-8, and RR-V-9, have now satisfied the conditions placed on interim relief, for i

the second 10-year interval, in the staff's April 12 SE; (4) Revised Relief Requests RR-V-4, RR-V-8, and RR-V-9 are granted as impractical for the third 10-year interval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(f)(6)(i); (5) Refueling Outage Justification R0J-V-2, has satisfied the provisional conditions stated in the staff's April 12 SE, but GPC should redesignate this R0J as a relief request-J i

no further staff review is needed; and (6) GPC has clarified the anamoly 7.9-Pump Note 7 regarding the diesel fuel oil transfer pumps, and anamoly 7.12-Valve Note 13 on the residual heat removal minimum flow line valves.

i In the April 12 letter, th? staff stated its disagreement with GPC's i

information pertaining to the exclusion of the reactor core isolation cooling (RCIC) system from its IST program.

In a separate evaluation, the staff will address anamoly 7.8-Pump Note 3, and anamoly 7.14-Valve Notes 16, 17, 19, and 20, regarding whether the RCIC system (other than its containment isolation function) may be removed from the IST program.

This task will remain open until the NRC staff completes its review of your plan to delete the RCIC system from the IST program.

Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:

Herbert N. Berkow, Director i

Project Directorate II-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

)

Docket Nos.

50-321 and 50-366

Enclosure:

Safety Evaluation I

cc w/ encl:

See next page 4

Distribution:

Docket File LBerry JJohnson, RII PUBLIC KJabbour PSkinner, RII I

PD 11-2 Rdg.

DTerao THarris (e-mail SE only TLH3)

BBoger OGC GHill (4)

HBerkow ACRS GTracy, EDO

• See previous concurrence To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box:

"C" - Copy without i

attachment / enclosure "E" - Copy with attachment / enclosure "N" = No copy 0FFICE PM:PDII-2 PM:PDII-2*

E LA:PDII-ht C' OGC*

D:PG%% _

NAME NLe 'T" KJabbour:cn LBerry Ul)

EHoller HBo/rkok /

DATE 7/ $ /97 6/27/97 7/

/97 \\

6/9/97 7/' n /97 00CUMENI NAME: 6:\\ HATCH \\lST.528 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY '

l Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 cc:

Mr. Ernest L. Blake, Jr.

Mr. Thomas P. Mozingo Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge Program Manager 2300 N Street, NW.

Nuclear Operations Washington, DC 20037 Oglethorpe Power Corporation 2100 East Exchange Place Mr. D. M. Crowe P. O. Box 1349 Manager, Licensing Tucker, Georgia 30085-1349 Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

Charles A. Patrizia, Esquire P. O. Box 1295 Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker i

Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295 10th Floor 1299 Pennsylvania Avenue

)

Resident Inspector Washington, DC 20004-9500 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11030 Hatch Parkway North Chairman Baxley, Georgia 31513 Appling County Commissioners l

County Courthouse Regional Administrator, Region II Baxley, Georgia 31513 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1

Atlanta Federal Center Mr. W. G. Harriston, III 61 Forsyth Street, S.W., Suite 23T85 President and Chief Executive Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Officer Southern Nuclear Operating i

Mr. Charles H. Badger Company, Inc.

Office of Planning and Budget P. O. Box 1295 Room 610 Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295 l

270 Washington Street, SW.

i t

Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Mr. J. D. Woodard Executive Vice President Harold Reheis, Director Southern Nuclear Operating Department of Natural Resources Company, Inc.

205 Butler Street, SE., Suite 1252 P. O. Box 1295 Atlanta, Georgia 30334 Birmingham, Alabama 35201-1295 Steven M. Jackson Mr. P. W. Wells i

Senior Engineer - Power Supply General Manager, Edwin I. Hatch Municipal Electric Authority Nuclear Plant of Georgia Southern Nuclear Operating i

1470 Riveredge Parkway, NW Company, Inc.

i Atlanta, Georgia 30328-4684 11030 Hatch Parkway North Baxley, Georgia 31513 j

i