ML090080469
| ML090080469 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 01/21/2009 |
| From: | Nadiyah Morgan Plant Licensing Branch 1 |
| To: | Sena P FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co |
| morgan n | |
| References | |
| TAC MD9559, TAC ME0097 | |
| Download: ML090080469 (3) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 Jant=rry 21, 2fD1 Mr. Peter P. Sena III Site Vice President FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company Beaver Valley Power Station Mail Stop A-BV-SEB1 P.O. Box 4, Route 168 Shippingport, PA 15077 SUB~IECT:
BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNIT NO.2 - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RE: THE 2008 STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INSPECTION REPORT (TAC NOS. MD9559 AND ME0097)
Dear Mr. Sena:
By letter dated August 7,2008, as supplemented by letter dated October 28,2008, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company submitted information summarizing the results of the 2008 steam generator (SG) tube inspections for Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit NO.2 (BVPS-2). By letter dated May 27,2008, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff summarized information previously provided to the NRC staff concerning the 2008 SG tube inspections at BVPS-2.
The NRC staff is reviewing the submittal and has determined that additional information is needed to complete its review. The specific questions are found in the enclosed request for additional information (RAI). The NRC staff is requesting a response to the RAI within 30 days of receipt.
Please contact me at (301) 415-1016, if you have any questions regarding this issue.
~----------
Nadiyah S. Morgan, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-412
Enclosure:
RAI cc w/encl: Distribution via Listserv
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 2008 STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INSPECTIONS FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNIT NO.2 DOCKET NUMBER 50-412 By letter dated August 7,2008 (Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML082240290), as supplemented by letter dated October 28,2008 (ADAMS Accession No. ML083050508), FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company submitted information summarizing the results of the 2008 steam generator (SG) tube inspections for Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No.2 (BVPS-2). By letter dated May 27,2008 (ADAMS Accession No. ML081410092), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff summarized information previously provided to the NRC staff concerning the 2008 SG tube inspections at BVPS-2.
In order to complete the review of the document listed above, the NRC staff needs the following additional information:
- 1. As a result of finding a circumferential flaw in a 2.6 volt ding, additional inspections of dings were performed. The scope in SG C (the SG where the flaw was detected) appeared biased toward the upper elevations in the tube bundle. The upper elevation on the hot-leg is generally cooler than the lower elevations. Given the general trend that stress-corrosion cracking is more predominant at higher temperature regions in the tube bundle (i.e., lower elevations of the hot-leg), discuss the basis for biasing the inspections of the dings to the upper region of the tube bundle.
- 2. Provide the bobbin voltage amplitudes for the three indications of axially oriented outside diameter stress-corrosion cracking indications detected at the tube support plate elevations.
- 3. Several possible loose part indications were detected in SGs Band C. Discuss whether these loose parts were confirmed to be present through visual inspections. If so, discuss whether the loose parts were removed or how they were dispositioned.
- 4. Discuss the results of the upper steam drum inspection of SG A (Le., the inspections of the moisture separation equipment and feedwater header and selected J nozzles).
- 5. A high frequency plus-point examination was performed in the U-bend region of any row 1 tubes that had excessive noise values. Discuss whether the same practice was employed for the row 2 tubes. If not, provide the basis for this decision.
- 6. Discuss the results of the plus-point inspections performed at the bulges and over expansions below the F* distance.
- 7. A visual inspection was performed on all tube plugs. Discuss the results of these inspections and discuss whether this inspection included verifying that all plugs were present.
Enclosure
- See memo dated December 9, 2008 OFFICE LPLI-1/PM LPLI-1/LA DCI/CSGB/BC DORULPLI-1/BC NAME NMorQan SUttle AHiser*
MKowal DATE 1/15/09 1/15/09 12/09/2008 1/21/09