ML062900263
| ML062900263 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 11/02/2006 |
| From: | Geoffrey Miller NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLI-1 |
| To: | Chernoff H NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLI-2 |
| Miller G, NRR/DLPM, 415-2481 | |
| References | |
| TAC MD3296 | |
| Download: ML062900263 (4) | |
Text
November 2, 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Harold K. Chernoff, Chief Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM:
G. Edward Miller, Project Manager
/RA/
Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1 - FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION, TALKING POINTS TO BE DISCUSSED IN AN UPCOMING CONFERENCE CALL REGARDING STEAM GENERATOR INSPECTION (TAC NO. MD3296)
The enclosed discussion points were transmitted by facsimile on September 17, 2006, to Mr. Mike OKeefe, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (FPLE) to facilitate a conference call with FPLE to discuss their inspection of the Seabrook Station Steam Generator tubes. Review of the discussion points would allow FPLE to better prepare for the conference call. This memorandum and the attachment do not convey a formal request for information or represent an NRC staff position.
Docket No. 50-443
Enclosure:
Discussion Points
November 2, 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Harold K. Chernoff, Chief Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM:
G. Edward Miller, Project Manager
/RA/
Plant Licensing Branch I-2 Division Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1 - FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION, TALKING POINTS TO BE DISCUSSED IN AN UPCOMING CONFERENCE CALL REGARDING STEAM GENERATOR INSPECTION (TAC NO. MD3296)
The enclosed discussion points were transmitted by facsimile on September 17, 2006, to Mr. Mike OKeefe, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC (FPLE) to facilitate a conference call with FPLE to discuss their inspection of the Seabrook Station Steam Generator tubes. Review of the discussion points would allow FPLE to better prepare for the conference call. This memorandum and the attachment do not convey a formal request for information or represent an NRC staff position.
Docket No. 50-443
Enclosure:
Discussion Points DISTRIBUTION:
Public KKarowski AHiser LPLI-2 R/F RidsNrrPMGEMiller RidsNrrLACRaynor Accession No.: ML062900263 OFFICE LPL1-2/PM LPL1-2/LA NRR/DCI/CSGB/BC NAME GEMiller CRaynor AHiser DATE 10/27/06 10/27/06 11/2/06 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INSPECTION DISCUSSION POINTS PREPARED BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION FPL ENERGY SEABROOK COMPANY SEABROOK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-443 The following discussion points have been prepared to facilitate the phone conference arranged with the Seabrook licensee to discuss the results of the SG tube inspections to be conducted during the upcoming Seabrook Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1 refueling outage. This phone call is scheduled to occur towards the end of the planned SG tube inspection interval, but before the unit completes the inspections and repairs.
The staff plans to document a brief summary of the conference call as well as any material that is provided in support of the call.
1.
Discuss any trends in the amount of primary-to-secondary leakage observed during the recently completed cycle.
2.
Discuss whether any secondary side pressure tests were performed during the outage and the associated results.
3.
Discuss any exceptions taken to the industry guidelines.
4.
For each steam generator, provide a description of the inspections performed including the areas examined and the probes used (e.g., dents/dings, sleeves, expansion-transition, U-bends with a rotating probe), the scope of the inspection (e.g., 100% of dents/dings greater than 5 volts and a 20% sample between 2 and 5 volts), and the expansion criteria.
5.
For each area examined (e.g., tube supports, dent/dings, sleeves, etc), provide a summary of the number of indications identified to-date of each degradation mode (e.g.,
number of circumferential primary water stress corrosion cracking indications at the expansion transition). For the most significant indications in each area, provide an estimate of the severity of the indication (e.g., provide the voltage, depth, and length of the indication). In particular, address whether tube integrity (structural and accident induced leakage integrity) was maintained during the previous operating cycle. In addition, discuss whether any location exhibited a degradation mode that had not previously been observed at this location at this unit (e.g., observed circumferential primary water stress corrosion cracking at the expansion transition for the first time at this unit).
6.
Describe repair/plugging plans.
7.
Describe in-situ pressure test and tube pull plans and results (as applicable and if available).
8.
Provide the schedule for steam generator-related activities during the remainder of the current outage.
9.
Discuss the following regarding loose parts:
what inspections are performed to detect loose parts a description of any loose parts detected and their location within the SG if the loose parts were removed from the SG indications of tube damage associated with the loose parts the source or nature of the loose parts if known 10.
Discuss the results of any secondary side inspections.
11.
Discuss any unexpected or unusual results.