ML062560123
| ML062560123 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire  |
| Issue date: | 08/31/2006 |
| From: | Gordon Peterson Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Power Co |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| RR 06-MN-002 | |
| Download: ML062560123 (17) | |
Text
GARY R. PETERSON Vice President Energy McGuire Nuclear Station Duke Energy Corporation MGO1VP / 12700 Hagers Ferry Rd.
Huntersville, NC 28078 704 875 5333 704 875 4809 fax grpeters@duke-energy. corn August 31, 2006 U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, D.C.
20555-0001
Subject:
Duke Power Company LLC d/b/a Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (DUKE)
McGuire Nuclear Station Unit 1 Docket No.
50-369 Relief Request (RR) 06-MN-002 Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a) (3),
Duke requests approval to use alternatives to Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code.
Compliance with the specified requirements of this section would result in hardship or unusual difficulty without a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety.
However, the proposed alternatives will provide an acceptable level of quality and safety.
Specific details are described in the attached relief request.
Questions on this matter should be directed to Kenneth L.
Ashe, McGuire Regulatory Compliance, at (704) 875-5715.
Sincerely, G.R. Peterson Attachments (15 pages total) www. duke-energy. corn
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission August 31, 2006 Page 2 cc w/attachment:
Mr.
W.D. Travers Regional Administrator, Region II U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mr. J.F. Stang Jr., Project Manager (addressee only)
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North, Mail Stop O8-H4A 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Mr. J.B. Brady Senior NRC Resident Inspector McGuire Nuclear Station
ATTACHMENT Relief Request 06-MN-002 (5 pages including cover sheet)
Proposed Relief in Accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(iii),
Inservice Inspection Impracticality Duke Energy Corporation McGuire Nuclear Station - Unit I (EOC-17)
Third 10-Year Interval - Inservice Inspection Plan Interval Start Date= December 1, 2001 Interval End Date= December 1, 2011 ASME Section XI Code - 1998 Edition with 2000 Addenda and *Westinghouse Owner's Group Code Case N-460 is applicable Examination Dates April 13, 2004 to October 18, 2005 Request Relief 06-MN-002 Page 1 of 4 (WCAP-14572)
I.
IL.
Ill.
IV. & V.
VI.
VII.
Vill.
List Limited System I Code Requirement from Which Relief is Impracticality/
Proposed Implementation Justification for Number AreafVeld I.D.
Component for Which Relief is Requested:
Burden Caused Alternate Schedule and Granting Relief Number Requested:
100% Exam Volume Coverage by Compliance Examinations or Duration Area or Weld to be Examined Exam Category Testing Item No.
Fig. No.
Limitation Percentage
- 1.
INVIFW53-51 NV System Exam Category R-A (Table 4.1-I)
See Paragraph See Paragraph See Paragraph See Paragraph (RI-ISI Segment Pipe to Tee Item No. R101.011.157 "A"
"B".
"C".
"D" NV-080A)
Fig. IWB-2500-8 (c) & Note I See Attachment I See Attachment 1 58.3% Volume Coverage Pages 1-9 Pages 1-9
- Piping Welds examined under the RI-ISI Program developed in accordance with methodology contained in the Westinghouse Owner's Group (WOG) Topical Report, WCAP-14572, Revision 1-NP-A and Request for Relief 01-005 approved by SER, dated June 12, 2002.
- WCAP-14572 Table 4.1-I Examination Category R-A lists the Examination Requirement as Figure No. IWB-2500-8 (c) ' which normally applies to NPS 4" or larger. Since the risk-informed program requires a volumetric examination, this figure was used to define the exam volume on these less than NPS 4" welds also.
Request Relief 06-NIN-002 Page 2 of 4 IV. & V.
Impracticality/Burden caused by Code Compliance Paragraph A: (The Pipe to Tee material is stainless steel. The diameter of this weld is 3.000 inches with a wall thickness of.438 inches.)
During the ultrasonic examination of this weld, 100% coverage of the required examination volume could not be obtained. Coverage was limited because of the tee configuration, which prevented scanning from four directions. The amount of coverage reported presents the aggregate coverage from all scans performed on the weld and base material. The required volume was scanned using 45-degree, 60-degree shear waves and 70-degree shear waves. The 45-degree beam covered 47.2% of the volume in two circumferential directions. The 60-degree beam covered 69.44% of the volume in one axial direction from the pipe side of the weld. The 70-degree shear wave covered 21.12% of the volume from one axial direction from the reducer side of the weld but was not included in the percent of coverage because of the requirements in 10CFR50.55a(b)(2)(xv)(A)(2). In order to achieve more coverage, the weld would have to be redesigned to allow scanning from both sides of the weld, which is impractical.
Current technology is not capable of reliably detecting or sizing flaws on the inaccessible side of austenitic weld configurations common to U.S. nuclear applications. Instead of a full single side qualification, PDI offers a "best effort" approach, which demonstrates that the best available technology is applied. This best effort approach does not meet the requirements. PDI PDQS austenitic piping certificates list the limitation that single-side examination be performed on a best efforts basis. This requires the inaccessible side of the weld to be listed as an area of no coverage.
There were no recordable indications found during the inspection of this weld.
VI.
Proposed Alternate Examinations or Testing Paragraph B:
None. The scheduled 10-year code examination was performed on the referenced area/welds and it resulted in the noted limited coverage of the required ultrasonic volume. No additional examinations are planned for the area/weld during the current inspection interval.
7II.
Implementation Schedule and Duration Paragraph C:
None. The scheduled I 0-year code examination was performed on the referenced area/welds and it resulted in the noted limited coverage of the required ultrasonic volume. No additional examinations are planned for the area/weld during the current inspection interval.
Request Relief 06-MN-002 Page 3 of 4 VIII.
Justification for Grantin2 Relief Paragraph D:
Ultrasonic examination of this weld for item R01.011 was conducted using personnel, procedures and equipment qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI, Appendix VIII, Supplement 2. The subject weld is located in the Reactor Containment Building, on a 3" tee downstream of INV-454 (manual 75gpm letdown throttle valve). The weld is located outside the cranewall, thus it is not subject to neutron fluence and the resultant material embrittlement concerns. Any leakage from this weld would be confined within the Containment Building, and it is readily isolable via two, series, fail closed, Class A isolation valves (INVIA and 2A). Additional isolation capability is afforded just upstream of the weld via Class B containment isolation valves (INV-457A, 458A and 35A). A leak at this weld location would constitute Reactor Coolant System (RCS) unidentified leakage. Early detection of a leak at this weld location would be assured by one or more of the following means:
- 1. The Technical Specification for RCS Operational Leakage (3.4.13), limits RCS unidentified leakage to <1 gpm during Modes 1 thru 4. The associated Technical Specification Surveillance (3.4.13.1) further requires performance of the Reactor Coolant System Leakage calculation every 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.
- 2. The Technical Specification for RCS Leakage Detection Instrumentation (3.4.15) requires that diverse leakage detection instrumentation be operable during Modes I thru 4.
Leakage from the subject weld would be readily detectable by either the Containment Floor & Equipment Sump Level instrumentation, and/or the containment ventilation condensate drain tank level instrumentation.
- 3. Declining level trends and/or increased make-up frequency for the Volume Control Tank (VCT).
- 4. A decrease in indicated letdown flow rates, and/or an increased mismatch between charging and letdown flow rates.
Historical McGuire letdown piping weld leaks were caused by vibration, and/or water hammer. Letdown header vibration primarily resulted from letdown orifice/valve cavitation.
The cavitation and resultant vibration has been eliminated during normal operation thru use of a multi-stage valve trim. Use of the 45 gpm letdown orifice is further limited to low pressure operation, or in-the-event of failure on the normal letdown throttle valve. Similarly, the potential for water hammer has been minimized by requiring local, manual repressurization of the letdown header after an extended loss of letdown. If a potential water hammer did occur, local visual inspection of the piping would be probable.
One additional NDE ultrasonic examination was performed on a 3.00" diameter,.438 wall thickness weld in the NV System. The result of this examination was acceptable with 100%
coverage.
Request Relief 06-MN-002 Page 4 of 4 Other Information Jim McArdle (Principal UT NDE Level HlI Examiner) provided Sections I[I., IV., V. and part of Section VIII.
Bryan D. Meyer McGuire (MNS Systems Engineer) provided parts of Section VIII.
Gary Underwood (Sponsor) compiled the remaining sections of this relief request.
Sponsored By:
Date Approved By:
Date UT Examination Data RO1.011.157 2-2 A-6C,
ATTACHMENT 1 (10 pages including cover sheet)
- &O.UT Pipe We.,j Examination Site/Unit: McGuire /
Summary No.:
RD Workscope:
1 1.011.157 Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-600 16 Outage No.:
MNS1-17 Report No.:
UT-05-290 Page:
1 of 6
ISI 98683506 Code:
1998 thru 2000 Addenda CatJiltem:
R-A/R1.11.157 Location:
N/A Drawing No.:
MCFI-1NV53
==
Description:==
PIPE TO TEE System ID:
NV Component ID: R01.011.157/1 NVI FW53-51 Size/Length:
N/A Thickness/Diameter:
.438/3.0 Limitations:
Yes Start Time:
0934 Finish Time:
0937 Examination Surface:
Inside E)
Outside R]
Surface Condition: GROUND Lo Location:
9.1.1.1 Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
03125 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE32768 Surface Temp.:
78 OF Cal. Report No.:
CAL-05-290 Angle Used 10 45 45T 60 Scanning dB 46 Indication(s):
Yes LI No []
Scan Coverage:
Upstream LI Downstream []
Scan for additional coverage FC 05-08 Results:
Accept W Reject F)
Info Mj Initial Section XI Exam Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:
NO - 58.3%
Reviewed Previous Data:
No Examiner Level Signature Date Reviewer Signature Date Moss, Gary J. /tJCAJA10/1/2005
- rtu tt1O!O-Examiner Level II igature Date Site Review Signature
'Date Leeper, Winfred C.
10/11/2005 N/A Other N/A Level WA Si-grnme Date ANtI Revie\\
t
$,Signature Dale WA ID
/%
Date (J
P Duke D6 ergy-Determination of Percent Coverage for UT Examinations - Pipe Site/Unit: McGuire /
I Summary No.:
R01.011.157 Workscope:
ISI Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-600 16 98683506 Outage No.:
MNS1-17 Report No.:
UT-05-290 Page:
2 of 6
45 den Scan 1 Scan 2 Scan 3 Scan 4
% Length X
% Length X 100.000
% Length X 100.000
% Length X 47.200 47.200
% volume of length / 100 =
% volume of length / 100 =
% volume of length / 100 =
% volume of length / 100 =
47.200 47.200
% total for Scan 1
% total for Scan 2
% total for Scan 3
% total for Scan 4 Add totals and divide by # scans =
47.200
% total for 45 deg Other decq -
60 (to be used for supplemental scans)
The data to be listed below is for coverage that was not obtained with the 45 deg scans.
Scan 1 40.000 Scan t I 60.000 Scan tt 40.000 Scan 9"1 60.000 Percent complete coverage
% Length X
% Length X
% Length X
% Length X 47.200
% volume of length / 100 =
100.000
% volume of length/ 100 =
0.000
% volume of length / 100 =
100.000
% volume of length / 100 =
18.880 60.000 0.000 60.000 0,R114I/O
ýo total for Scan 1 Io total for Scan 7 I Ic total for Scan ;' a Vo total for Scans (_.
AYJL
-tA~l IJ.a!C9AfI:
Add totals for each scan required and divide by # of scans to determine; C
% Total for complete exam Site Field Supervisor: David K. Zimmerman Date:
10/4/2005 101 I
Note: 70' shear scan not included in percent coverage per requirements of IOCFR50.55a(b)(2)(xx)(A)(2). Best effort scan with 70 °shear obtained zft, % coverage in one axial direction.
.,ummary No.: R01.
Examiner: Mosi Examiner: Leer Supplemental Report Report No.:
UT-05-290 Page:
3 of 6
Level:
I, Reviewer:
Date:
L q2 ll Site Review: NIA Date:
Level:
NIA AN,, Review:
Date:
/10.
Comments: 45 and 60 degree shear wave coveragelcaculations. Represents 6.6"(60%) of total weld length.
Sketch or Photo:
- VCJ, A~A oF dL~j~
( M 0 0 j 00 L al 6<( ki~tle'
.f
P4w6Duk Supplemental Report Report No.:
UT-05-290 Page:
4 of 6
I.
Reviewer:
,"y I
f,*
11 WA Site Review:
ANII Review:
NJ A
Date:
Date:
Date:*
Other: WA Comments: 45 and 60 degree shear wave coveragelcaculations in area of limiting tee configuration. Represents 4.4"(40%) of total weld length.
Sketch or Photo:
I 21)
A/
r~Z~2~~I
"),, Lt; "K I Lý
fSupplemental Report Report No.:
UT-05-290 Page:
5 of 6
..ommaryNo.: Ro1.011.157 Examiner: Moss, Gary J Level:
II Reviewer:
/
Date:
Examiner: Leeper, Winfred C.
~
evel:
11 Site Review: N/A Date:
Other: N/A-'
, Level:
N/A ANII Review:
Date:
Comments: 70 degree shear wave supplemental coverage/caculations In area of limiting tee configuration. Represents 4.4"(40%) of total weld length.
Sketch or Photo:
(,-- I -
':ý 7-t~t~c~S ci.S-~
- 0.
.WS0 f
(Wk Cj"CTýT 2-t"A --
4L
-f -- J
DUKE POWER COMPANY ISI LIMITATION REPORT Component/Weld ID:
1 NV1 FW53-51 Item No:
R01.011.157 remarks:
0 NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Tee Conf.
-LIMITED SCAN I-1
[9 2 Z
1 E' 2 El cw M ccw FROM L 6.1 to L 10.5 INCHES FROM WO
.5 to Beyond ANGLE:
E- 0 [- 45 0 60 other FROM N/A DEG to N/A DEG 0
NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION Machined Taper El LIMITED SCAN E-1 0
2 EI 1 E] 2 [D cw 0 ccw FROM L N/A to L N/A INCHES FROM WO C/L to Beyond ANGLE:
E00 0 45 M-60 other FROM 0 DEG to 360 DEG El NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION E-LIMITED SCAN
[-
1
[E] 2 El 1 [l 2 [-] cw E] ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to ANGLE:
E 0 [] 45 El 60 other FROM DEG to DEG E
NO SCAN SURFACE BEAM DIRECTION El LIMITED SCAN El 1 El 2 El 1 E1 2 El cw E] ccw FROM L to L INCHES FROM WO to Sketch(s) attached ANGLE:
El 0 E] 45 El 60 other FROM DEG to DEG Z
yes El No Prepared By:
Gary MossA,,
Level:
ii Date:
10/01/05 Sheet 0&of 6
0'0'79 Dae Auhrie inpctrate:/
Reviewed By, David Zimmaae 10/04/05 Authat 05 I1 Rjo.*"
PdF.
UT Base MetE amination Site/Unit: McGuire /
Summary No.:
RO Workscope:
1 1.011.157 ISI Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-640 3
98683506 Outage No.:
MNS1-17 Report No.:
UT-05-283 Page:
1 of 2
Code:
1998 thru 2000 Addenda Cat./Item:
R-A/R1.11.157 Location:
N/A Drawing No.:
MCFI-1NV53
==
Description:==
PIPE TO TEE System ID:
NV Component ID: R01.011.157/1NV1FW53-51 Size/Length:
N/A Thickness/Diameter
.438/3.0 Limitations:
None Start Time:
1030 Finish Time:
1033 Examination Surface:
Inside E]
Outside R]
Surface Condition: GROUND Lo Location:
9.1.1.1 Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
03125 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE32768 Surface Temp.:
78 OF Scanning dB:
57 Cal. Report No.:
CAL-05-283 Amplitude Position One Position Max Position Two Ind.
Loss Remarks No.
Back Wagl Full Screen Li W1 W2 MP LM W1 W2 MP 12 W1 W2 MP NRI Comments:
Results:
Accept R]
Reject El Info F1 Initial Section XI Exam Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:
Yes-100%
Reviewed Previous Data:
No Examiner Level I Signature Date Reviewer Signature Date Moss, Gary J.
9/29/2005 oot I
ID0 O Examiner Level II Siature Date Site Review Signature Date Leeper, Wnfred C.,
9/2/2005 NWA Other Level WA Sigld'ture Date ANII Review Signature Date N/A
!I L/A h
1*
c?
poko =ý Supplemental Report Report No.:
Page:
Summary No.:
Examiner:
Examiner Other:
R01.011.157 Moss, Gary J.
Leep'er, Winfred C.#AV
.Z d-_-
N/A UT-05-283 2
of 2
Date: I~fto*o o Date:
Date:/
.3/A Level:
II Level:
II Level:
N/A Reviewer:
Site Review: N/A ANII Review:
n J
Comments:
Sketch or Photo:
ZAIJ1VIDDEAL\\ProfileLine2.jpg
'a- ý:
IA' Is 72F9
PkDuke (rEnergy.
Site/Unit: McGuire /
Summary No.:
RO Workscope:
1.011.157 ISI Procedure:
Procedure Rev.:
Work Order No.:
NDE-600 16 98683506 Outage No.:
MNS1-17 Report No.:
UT-05-284 Page:
1 of 1
Code:
1998 thru 2000 Addenda CatJiltem:
R-A/R1.11.157 Location:
N/A Drawing No.:
MCFI-1NV53
==
Description:==
PIPE TO TEE System ID:
NV Component ID: R01.011.157/1 NVI FW53-51 Size/Length:
N/A Thickness/Diameter
.438/3.0 Limitations:
Yes - See Attached Limitation Report ao ZC" be_. "to. 0-r - Os - Z, O Start Time:
1039 Finish Time:
1059 Examination Surface:
Inside []
Outside PJ Surface Condition: GROUND Lo Location:
9.1.1.1 Wo Location:
Centerline of Weld Couplant:
ULTRAGEL II Batch No.:
03125 Temp. Tool Mfg.:
FISHER Serial No.:
MCNDE32768 Surface Temp.:
78 OF Cal. Report No.:
CAL-05-284, CAL-05-285, CAL-05-286 Angle Used 0
45 45T 60 70 Scanning dB 41 46 49 Indication(s):
Yes E No [
Scan Coverage:
Upstream R Downstream E]
CW R]
CCW R Comments:
FC 05-08 Results:
Accept Rj Reject E]
Info L]
Initial Section XI Exam Percent Of Coverage Obtained > 90%:
No - 58.3%
Reviewed Previous Data:
No Examiner Level II Signature Date Reviewer Signature Date Moss, Gary J.
'fit 9/29/2005 IC I
1 o5 Examiner Level II
,/
ignature Date Site Review Signature Date Leeper, Winfred C.
9/29/2005 N/A A
intueDt Other Level N/A 4
-ure Date ANII Review Signature/
Date WA f/_*...
I I