ML17059A992
| ML17059A992 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 11/09/1995 |
| From: | Edison G NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Sylvia B NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP. |
| References | |
| TAC-M89792, NUDOCS 9511150343 | |
| Download: ML17059A992 (12) | |
Text
November 9,
1995 Mr. B. Ralph Sylvia Executive Vice President, Nuclear Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station P.O.
Box 63
- Lycoming, NY 13093
SUBJECT:
NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT NO.
1 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (TAC NO. H89792)
Dear Hr. Sylvia:
In your letter dated June 23,
- 1994, you indicated plans to use
'an automated ultrasonic testing inspection technique instead of periodic testing with respect to feedwater nozzles and control rod drive return line nozzles.
The purpose of this letter is to request additional information related to your plans.
In order to complete our review, we'equire the enclosed additional
'nformation.
This information was discussed with Mr. D. Baker of, your staff on November 7, 1995.
ll This requirement affects 9 or fewer respondents and, there'fore, is not subject to Office of Management and Budget Review under P.L.96-511.
t'4 Please provide your response within 30 days so that we c'n continue our review.
3 Sincerely,
$ ll pl Original signed by:
Gordon,E. Edison,'enior Project Manager Project Directorate I-l Division of Reactor Projects I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-220
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/encl:
See next page Distribution:
Docket File
'UBLIC PDI-1 Reading SVarga JZwolinski LMarsh SLittle GEdison OGC ACRS CCowgill, RGN-I DOCUMENT NAME:
G: iNMPIiNM189792. RAI To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box:
C" ~
y without enclosures
~ Copy with enclosures "N
~ No copy OFFICE NAME DATE LA:PDI-1 SLittle ll/
/95 PM: PDI-1 GEdison:smm ll/
/95 D PDI-1 LMarsh ll/ /95 11/
/95 ll/
/95 t
95iii50343 95ii09 PDR ADOCK 05000220 8
PDR OFFICIAL R CORD COPY
1t P
P, lt N
j' u
IV P
I I j l
1
'll g
(
l'
~ I November 9, 1995 Mr. B. Ralph Sylvia Executive Vice President, Nuclear Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station P.O.
Box 63
- Lycoming, NY 13093
SUBJECT:
NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT NO.
1 RE(VEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (TAC NO. 889792)
Dear Hr. Sylvia:
In your letter dated June 23, 1994, you indicated plans to use an automated ultrasonic testing inspection technique instead of periodic testing with respect to feedwater nozzles and control rod drive return line nozzles.
The purpose of this letter is to request additional information related to your plans.
In order to complete our review, we require the enclosed additional information.
This information was discussed with Hr. D. Baker of your staff on November 7, 1995.
This requirement affects 9 or fewer respondents and, therefor e, is not subject to Office of Management and Budget Review under P.L.96-511.
i Please provide your response within 30 days so that we can continue ou) review.
Sincerely, Original signed by:
Gordon E. Edison, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-l Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-220
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/encl:
'See next page
~tli ii Docket File PUBLIC PDI-1 Reading SVarga QZwolinski LMarsh SLittle GEdison OGC ACRS CCowgill, RGN-I DOCUMENT NAME:
G: iNMPliNM189792. RAI
'o receive e copy of this document, Indicate in the born "C
~
y without enclosures
~ Copy with enclosures N
~ No copy NAME SLittle OFFICE LA:PDI-1 PH: PDI-1 GEdison:smm D: PDI-1 LHarsh DATE 11/
/95 ll/
/95 ll/ /95 OFFICIAL R CORD COPY ll/
/95 ll/
/95
ghee AEG0
+4 Po I
ClO IVl0 gO
+**++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON> D.C. 2055&4001 November 9,
1995 Mr. B. Ralph Sylvia Executive Vice President, Nuclear Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station P.O.
Box 63
- Lycoming, NY 13093
SUBJECT:
NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT NO.
1 - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (TAC NO. M89792)
Dear Mr. Sylvia:
In your letter dated June 23, 1994, you indicated plans to use an automated ultrasonic testing inspection technique instead of periodic testing with respect to feedwater nozzles and control rod drive return line nozzles.
The.;
purpose of this letter is to request additional information related to your plans.
In order to complete our review, we require the enclosed additional information.
This information was discussed with Mr. D. Baker of your staff on November 7, 1995.
This requirement affects 9 or fewer respondents and, therefore, is not subject to Office of Management and Budget Review under P.L.96-511.
Please provide your response within 30 days so that we can continue our review.
Sincerely, Docket No. 50-220 Gordon E. Edison, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-1 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/encl:
See next page
B. Ralph Sylvia Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit No.
1 CC:
Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esquire Winston
& Strawn 1400 L Street, NW Washington, DC 20005-3502 Supervisor Town of Scriba Route 8, Box 382
- Oswego, NY 13126 Mr. Richard B. Abbott Vice President Nuclear Generation Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station P.O.
Box 63
- Lycoming, NY 13093 Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O.
Box 126
- Lycoming, NY 13093 Gary D. Wilson, Esquire Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 300 Erie Boulevard West
- Syracuse, NY 13202 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Mr. F. William Valentino, President New York State
- Energy, Research, and Development Authority 2 Rockefeller Plaza
- Albany, NY 12223-1253 Mr. Norman L. Rademacher.
Unit 1 Plant Manager Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station P.O.
Box 63
- Lycoming, NY 13093 Ms. Denise J. Wolniak Manager Licensing Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Hile Point Nuclear Station P.O.
Box 63
- Lycoming, NY 13093 Charles Donaldson, Esquire Assistant Attorney General New York Department of Law 120 Broadway New York, NY 10271 Mr. Paul D.
Eddy State of New York Department of Public Service Power Division, System Operations 3 Empire State Plaza
- Albany, NY 12223 Mr. Martin J. McCormick, Jr.
Vice President Nuclear Safety Assessment and Support Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station P.O.
Box 63
- Lycoming, NY 13093
C'
S OR A IONA N
RMATION FOR E POINT NUC R
ATION UNIT NO.
1 The following information and/or clarification is needed to complete the NRC staff review.
The review has been organized into three parts.
The first deals with establishing the capabilities of detecting and sizing cracks, the second deals with establishing the validity of modeling, and the third deals with establishing the fracture mechanics.
l.
Establishing the capabilities of detecting and sizing cracks:
a.
Identify the areas of the nozzles that could be missed because of physical interferences or areas in'which the transducer angles may not be optimized to detect and size shallow cracks.
b.
Provide a copy of the ultrasonic test (UT) procedure that NHPC will use for the inner-radius examination.
If not part of the procedure,;
identify the detection and sizing techniques that NHPC will be using.
1)
Identify the demonstration NHPC is using for the qualificat,'ion 4 demonstration of the GERIS-2000.
Describe any deviations NHPC made.from the GE procedure.
2)
Describe how cracks originating from a grind-out or any other condition unique to NHPC would be detected and sized.
3)
Describe the acceptance criteria for the UT inspections,
-including how these criteria equate to the GE qualification demonstration.
Discuss sensitivity and changes in sensitivity during the examination.
How do these sensitivity settings compare with the settings used during the GE qualification demonstration2 c.
Describe any blind examinations performed using the GERIS-2000 equipment (by GE, NHPC, and/or the UT examiner) and/or NHPC's UT procedures that are applicable'o the NHPC inner-radius feedwater nozzle-to-vessel and control rod drive return line (CRDRL) nozzle-to-vessel configurations.
Include a discussion on false calls.
d.
Discuss the indications detected during the 1995 RFO-13.
Include noninnocuous indications that were detected, as well as indications that were observed in previous examinations.
e.
Describe when manual UT would be used to supplement the GERIS-2000 examination, along with the appropriate technique.
Enclosure
2.
Establishing the validity of modeling.
a.
Describe the extent to which modeling is being used for the preparation and implementation of the UT examination, that is, the percentage of coverage, transducer selection, flaw characterization, and so on.
b.
What is the limiting "mis-orientation" (the maximum acceptable angle from ideal for a returning signal) angle being used'ow was the angle establishedT Identify the transducers being used and provide coverage maps or a composite coverage map.
Describe the locations and the percentage of examination for the areas that will exceed the limiting "mis-orientation" angle.
c.
Describe the differences between the model and the NHPC configuration.
Explain how the model was verified for accuracy.
Explain how the model is representative of the NMPC configuration.
3.
Establishing the fracture mechanics.
a.
Identify which zone in Figure I, page 4 of Enclosure 3 (Technical Basis for Utilization...), of your June 23, 1994, submittal has the largest sizing tolerance and explain the effects of the tolerance on fracture mechanics calculations.
b.
Compare the operational history (startup-shutdown cycles and feedwater thermal transients) with GE's generic duty cycle.
c.
In the analysis of the CRDRL, identify the stresses used for computing cyclic crack loads.
4L 1