ML023170540
| ML023170540 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 11/13/2002 |
| From: | Florida Power & Light Co |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| BL-02-002, TAC MB5917 | |
| Download: ML023170540 (20) | |
Text
/cA o
A: ;
I!-QC ce O/A /Jo 1,
.J A Z I I C /I C.J -ln J i 11](4 CI I -I
ý_., _; - ý BEV-ý 100POO d
FPL St Lucie Unit 1-18 RVHP Inspection Results and Issues October 12, 2002 1
i-Attachment 3
St. Lucie Unit 1 RVHP Exam Results FPL
- SL1-18 Exam Scope
"* Committed to 100% bare metal visual of the 78 RVHPs
"* Committed to UT all of the 78 RVHPs
- Results
"* No flaw indication to date
"* Large volume of material has been UT inspected
"* VT results are being addressed by our CR process o No evidence of leakage or wastage 2
4*
,NNW "q;t p
ý I
St. Lucie Unit 1 RVHP Exam Results FPL Bare Metal Visual-Results All 78 penetrations reached in all 4 quadrants
"* No wastage or evidence of boric acid leakage from penetrations noted
"* Resolving VT debris issues with Video & UT results issue in CR process Using Matrix of UT and VT Data (spreadsheet sent)
Still attempting to facilitate cleaning/debris removal in some locations
"* Samples 2 locations 47 and 59 (swiped with a cotton glove)
Samples characterized as paint, tested positive for boron but activation product ratio was very old (very normal) 3
W St. Lucie Unit 1 RVHP Exam Results FPL UT Examination - Results
" No flaw indications to date in areas evaluated.
"*Completed scans on 67 of 69 CEDMs, 3 of 8 ICIs and the Vent e Expect to conclude by Sunday
" FPL identified the scan issue of UT liftoff in our Thursday call.
" In the area that a safety significant Circ crack could be present
- 100% coverage in nozzle material above weld in all but 2 CEDMs 3360 and 290' respectively (#2 & 38) e 100% coverage in nozzle material adjacent to weld root in all but 6 CEDMs In the 6 the coverage range from 2750 and 3360 e We have a bounding deterministic evaluation to address a 1800 circ' crack at the weld root plane 4
W St. Lucie Unit 1 RVHP Exam Issues FPL UT Examination Issues
"* Two CEDM location with bent guide sleeves precluded collection of data
"* FPL was not able to make a determination of RVHP integrity e The guide sleeves will be removed and a rotating scan performed
"*Leak Path UT results
- Verification of no leak path obtained in 24 locations (4 ICIs).
- Will investigate for future inspections at FPL units
- Likely the result Of a smaller interference contact than other unit 5
W St. Lucie Unit 1 RVHP Exam Issues F=PL UT Examination Issues
"*Nozzle 2 approach e Missing 240 of UT data 9 We have a bounding deterministic evaluation to address a 180' circ crack at the weld root plane
- No evidence of wastage or leakage.
- Viewed 3600 around the area.
0 1 quadrant obstructed by insulation - making an attempt to clear
"* Due to the excellent results with the rest of the RVHPs we conclude this penetration is not cracked or leaking and has reasonable certainty to have margin against ejection.
"* If insulation can not be cleared FPL is complete with this penetration.
6
St. Lucie Unit 1 RVHP Exam FPL Conclusions Remaining Examination Plans/Conclusions
"* Area of complete coverage at/above weld addresses the safety significant circ flaw
"* Leakage/wastage is addressed by the VT as well as the UT exam
"* Results are very good - no indications (93% complete)
"* Complete remaining 2 CEDM and 5 ICI RVHPs by Sunday
"* Will initiate system restoration this weekend
"* Document areas of lack of coverage per Bulletin 2002-02 response.
7 I
FIPL St Lucie Unit 1-18 RVHP Inspection Results and Issues October 10, 2002 1
1 A t a h e n t 2
St. Lucie Unit 1 RVHP Exam Results F=PL
- SLI-18 Exam Scope
"* Committed to 100% bare metal visual of the 78 RVHPs
- noted physipalt limitations
"* Committed to UT all of the 78 RVtHPs 4 with physical limitations-Ist of a kind
- Bare Metal Visual-Results All 78 penetrations reached in all 4 quadrants
"* No wastage or evidence of boric acid leakage
"* Difficult exam due to the close fitting insulation and asbestos collars
"* Sorn-e debris noted-asbestos - not relevant, not significant compared to the EPRI Visual Guidelines report.
- Willclcan/remove debris from representative sample 2
St. Lucie Unit 1 RVHP Exam Results Bare Metal Visual-Results 3
a St. Lucie Unit 1 RVHP Exam Results FPL UT Examination - Results No indications to date in areas evaluated.
Completed scans on 54 CEDMs and the Vent
- Expect to conclude by Sunday IAFirst CE designed plant with guide sleeves/funnels to be inspected I This geometry has never been inspected before Obtaining -*00% coverage in nozzle material adjacent to weld root &
above
& 360 degrees for all but I RV14P ( 336 degrees for 1) 4
7 St. Lucie Unit 1 RVHP Exam Issues FPL UT Examination Issues
"* Experiencing lift off in material below weld root adjacent to the weld
"* Missing data is typically less than 180 degrees 0 only 7 are >180 degrees of the 30 analyzed so far
" Bent guide sleeve/interference may preclude obtaining 360 degree UT scan 0 Potentially 2 CEDMs identified 5
2 St. Lucie Unit I RVHP Exam Issues FPL Typical Blade Probe Blade probe K,
path
/e A
//
/
I
.1 6
FPLSt. Lucie Unit 1 RVHP Exam Issues
- Typical limited coverage area
-Material adjacent to weld root and above fully interegated
--Region that safety significant circ flaws could be is addressed
2 St. Lucie Unit 1 RVHP Exam Issues NPL UT Examination Issues Significance of UT area evaluated Material adjacent to weld root and above (-100% coverage)
Growth of citc flaws in this area could lead to safety issue Growth of axial flaws in this area could lead to leaks Obtaining good coverage in material adjacent to the weld root & above Primary concern for circumferential flaws and the potential for pressure boundary leakage is addressed 8
SSt.
Lucie Unit I RVHP Exam Issues FPL UT Examination Issues
" Significance of UT area with lift off (partial coverage)
Nozzle material adjacent to weld below root and above toe no circ flaws identified in this area in industry data evaluated by our vendor axial flaws identified in this area don't leak until they extend above the weld (into the area we have coverage).
VT data shows no wastage or evidence of leakage "Significance of partial UT scan due to guide sleeve interference
- Fracture mechanics flaw evaluation in place to support acceptable margin for a postulated cire flaw greater than the extent of the missing coverage area 9
7 St. Lucie Unit 1 RVHP Exam Issues FPL Remaining Examination Plans/Conclusions
"* Area of complete coverage at/above weld addresses the safety significant circ flaw
"* Leakage/wastage is addressed by the VT as well as the UT exam
"* Results to date are vei-y good - no indications
- Complete remaining CEDM and ICI RVHPs by Sunday
- Document areas of lack of coverage per Bulletin 2002-02 response.
-