ML050840063
| ML050840063 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 05/20/2004 |
| From: | Chernoff H NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD3 |
| To: | Raghavan L NRC/NRR/DLPM |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2004-0282 | |
| Download: ML050840063 (2) | |
Text
arold Chernoff - Point Beach Reactor Vessel Head Inspection Page i 1
,s s From:
Harold Chemoff
'K To:
Lakshminaras Raghavan /
Date:
Thu, May 20, 2004 8:24 AM
Subject:
Point Beach Reactor Vessel Head Inspection Point Beach Unit 1 - Reactor Vessel Head Inspection - Update On 5/19/04, staff Informed the licensee that Insufficient justification had been provided to support the request for limited UT coverage for nozzle 33 at and above the J-groove weld. Staff further reiterated that a surface exam of the entire J-groove weld would likely be required to justify the relaxation. The licensee subsequently elected to remove the thermal sleeve to perform examination of the nozzle to the requirements of the Order. A successful UT, after thermal sleeve removal, will eliminate the request for relaxation of the order In this area.
Background Information Requested Order Relaxations During the current Unit 1 refueling outage the licensee requested relaxation of the head Inspection order In two areas. They stated that they were unable to meet the Inspection requirements of the order for: 1) 17 nozzles that could not be examined one Inch below the toe of the J-groove weld on the OD surface; and 2) nozzles 32 and 33 which received less than 100% UT coverage.
- 1) Relaxation of one Inch below l-groove weld requirement The licensee stated the request for relaxation resulted from physical limitations of the UT tooling being used. The licensee's submittals have not yet provided all Information requested by staff to complete the review of this relaxation request. The 'required informration was Identified In a series of phone calls the week'of 5/10/04. The licensee's understanding of the requested information was confirmred on a 5/15104 call. However, the licensee's subsequent 5/15/04 submittal did not contain all the requested !nformation.
- 2) Nozzles 32'and 33 which received less than 100% UT coverage The licensee stated that as a result of weld distortion In these nozzles less than 100% UT coverage was achieved. During the 2002 inspection, similar coverage problems were encountered and they chose to remove the thermal sleeves from these nozzles'peiform the UT (100% coverage was achieved) and replace the thermal sleeves.
L im n
inisn rcord was deleWi hI accordance Wh Fe Freedom of InformaFfon Act, exempions 5
gOLPA-Ae4 -
arold Chernloff - Point Beach Reactor Vessel Head Inspection Page 21 arold Chernoff - Point Beach Reactor Vessel Head Inspection Paae2I CRDM Repair Relief Request During UT examination of nozzle 26 a large reflector was identified at the weld root on the downhill side of the nopzzle (180 degrees). This reflector was initially called crack like, but recharacterized as a fabrication related defect after additional review. The licensee chose to investigate bperforming a series of dye-penetrant (PT) examinations of the J-groove weld. These examinations revealed surface defects at - 90 degrees and 270 degrees. The licensee unsuccessfully attempted to remove the indications through grinding. Subsequently, the licensee chose to repair nozzle 26 and submitted a relief request to address the repair on 5/13/04. In a series of phone calls the week of 5/10/04 staff Identified areas of technical concern with the proposed technical justification for the repair. The most significant technical concern was that the proposed repair of nozzle 26 resulted in a unique configuration that had not occurred before at other plants; because of the thinner RPV head on 2-loop Westinghouse'plants, repairs of thigh angled" penetrations (those located outermost radially on the head) that are repaired using the Framatome pressure boundary relocation technique result In a portion of the new pressure boundary weld overlapping onto the existing J-groove weld. These concerns were not addressed in the 5/13/04 submittal.
Additional calls, were conducted to ensure the licensee understood the areas of technical concern. The licensee's understanding of the remaining requested information was confirmed on a 5/15/04 call. The licensee's subsequent 5/15/04 did not contain all the requested Information. The licensee has Indicated that the remaining information should be submitted soon.
Harold Chernoff, Project Manager - Point Beach Project Directorate 111-1 Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Office: (301) 415-4018 Fax: (301) 415-1222 CC:
hkc