ML17250A805

Discusses Steam Generator Sleeving. Portions Deleted (Ref FOIA Exemption 4)

ML17250A805
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	11/25/1980
From:	Snaider R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML17250A806	List: ML17250A805 ML20040A393 ML20040A394 ML20040A395 ML20040A396 ML20040A397
References
FOIA-81-313 NUDOCS 8012110498
Download: ML17250A805 (2)

Text

Docket No. 50-244 NOVEMBER 2 5

]IIBP I

MEMORANDUM FOR:

Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch 85, DL I~I>-

'S% IBUT ION:

-'X00 OR/ 85 ReRing Raider

~

FROM:

Richard P. Snaider, Project Manager Operating Reactors Branch 85, DL

SUBJECT:

GINNA STEAM GENERATOR SLEEVE EXPLOSIVE WELDING As.you requested, I have briefly reviewed the information submitted by RG&E regarding their use of explosive welding to attack the lower ends of the sleeves to the 5 steam generator tubes being sleeved.

A considerable amount of testing was evidently performed in order to determine the proper location of the explosive charge such that the weld-ing and expansion of the sleeve would be satisfactory.

This sample testing was followed by sectioning of the.specimens and metallographic evaluation.

The data are probably avai16ble atB&W should we need 'to review them.

Extensive testing, during the development of the pnpcess, showed that the finished joints (both upper and lower) were satisfactory from the standpoint.

of'echanical integrity (primary and secondary hydrotesting and structural fatigue testing) and corrosion resistance.

However, the B&W report states that additional testing is planned, including mechanical integrity testiag, corrosion testing.

and vibration testing.

My understanding is that the only major difference between the small (5

tube) effort at Ginna and the major (" 7500 tube) effort at SONGS-1 is the use of She explosive welding proc'dss at Ginna.

However, because of the testing noted above and the small numbers of tubes to be sleeved, I see no reason for carrying NRC staff review any further. If there were evidence that the sleeving process resulted in tube degradation instead of enhancement, then the 50.59 determination of RG&E would indeed be in question.

However, I am satisfied that the process can be done (indeed has been done) safely.

The results of the test work already accomplished and to be performed in the future should be available at B&W for staff review if any questions are raised.

Att c!".."

'.s stated Ongmal signed by Richard P. Snaider, Project Manager Operating Reactors Branch 85 Division of Licensing 8 0).m Z.X(tII OFFICE)

SURNAME DATE) 0 Bh':DL:PM RSnai der: dk 11/+80 NRC FORM 318 I9.76) NRCM 0240 4U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979 289'369

r If d

I: 4.747

'4 4

,.4=

dr%

dH7 4

I

~

~

4 I'

4 HH 4

HI VI C

f 344

'4 I

4 ll 4

FH CI 4

44

~

II H

4 rl 4

~

4 Hr

~ I,'.4 >'v V

7 i

~ 4 4

I 7 ~

<<Vf>4 "d

$,,4'=

~ 4 V

~

4 88.,19so.."

4 4' III 4

1 4 fC',$

r

'I;,)

4 4

~

d fl I

'f 4

I

'PE HC 4

~. I

~ ',

• d

')4'il f I

~

f I

IH 4 ad p

,4,=

I Ht'Hv ~

L 7 ~" HH A J

4 C

I ~

V 4

H ff',I 4

~,4.,'4"i: 7'7 I "4 I 4

1 44 "I'

~

~

4 4

HI Pl I.

4 4

~ 41 i d 4) cJd '

47 7 I

"rr

~=4JI 4

I"

~ ~ 4 I

~

h rr-I I

F

/ 'I t.

J IV ~

4 I

44 4' rd44 g

E, 4

4, gF 4

I th I

4 4

HI74.

4 Ir 4

~

tt 4

4 F.

4 4 IH

'I 4

'I-4 4

4 ~

h ff ilh

~ I ~