ML17342A332
| ML17342A332 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 12/11/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17342A331 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8512310186 | |
| Download: ML17342A332 (21) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:~S RK0y O I 0 C O I O Cy gO W~*y+ UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 ENCLOSURE 1 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO REQUESTS FOR RELIEF FROM INSERVICE INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY TURKEY POINTS UNITS 3 AND 4 DOCKET NOS. 50-250/251 INTRODUCTION Technical Specification 4.2 for the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station Units 3 and 4 states that inservice examination of ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 components shall be performed in accordance with Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code and applicable Addenda as required by 10 CFR 50.55a(g) except where specific written relief has been granted by the Commission. Certain requirements of later editions and addenda of Section XI are impractical to perform on older plants because of the plants'esign, component
- geometry, and materials of construction.
- Thus, 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(i) authorizes the Commission to grant relief from those requirements upon making the necessary findings.
By letters dated November 20, 1984 and February 4, 1985, Florida Power and Light Company submitted its inservice inspection program, revisions, or additional information related to requests for relief from certain Code requirements determined to be impractical to perform on the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Stations Units 3 and 4 during the inspection interval. The program is based on the requirements of the 1980 Edition through Winter 1981 Addenda of Section XI of the ASME Code, and remains in effect until February 22, 1994 and April 15, 1994 for Units 3 and 4, respectively, unless the program is modified or changed prior to the interval end date. EVALUATION Requests for relief from the requirements of Section XI which have been determined to be impractical to perform have been reviewed by the staff's contractor, Science Applications International Corporation. The contractor's evaluations of the licensee's requests for relief and his recommendations are presented in the Technical Evaluation Report (TER) attached (ATTACHMENT 1). The staff has reviewed the TER and adopts the evaluations and recommendations except in the case of the reactor coolant pump casing weld examination. We have not granted relief because the proposed alternative of visual examinations alone are judged insufficient to provide assurance of the continued structural integrity of the pump casings. Prior to this relief request, the licensee requested relief from 8512310186 851211 PDR 'ADOCK 0500025'0 i 8 PDR
ff h tt INW't 4 I N I 4th It P ~ 1 I') P N ~ Ph ~ 4 K ~ 4 ~ 4 4 h 4 K 4 h KK 4I N K 'I I P 1 ',', K t )I = ~ ~ I ff 4, P 14 4 4 II P N 14) P 4 t I K 4't h 1 P E t 4
performing the volumetric examination for the reactor coolant pump casing welds for Turkey Point Unit 4. The NRC staff reviewed the request and granted relief (NRC letter to FPL dated February 14, 1983) based on the alternative examinations proposed by the licensee. The proposed alternative examinations were a visual and partial surface examinations were a visual and partial surface examination of the external casing welds of one pump. The combined visual and surface examinations are an acceptable alternative to the volumetric examination for Turkey Point, Units 3 and 4, and will provide a high degree of certainty that the pumps structural integrity will be maintained. Therefore, instead of the proposed alternative of a visual examination alone, the visual and surface examinations are acceptable in lieu of the required volumetric examination. A summary of the determinations made by the staff is presented in the following tables:
fra rlKKK I rl) li l ~ ri II i K 1 a 0 It Kr n KK K
TABLE 1 CLASS 1 COMPONENTS IMB-2500-1 IMB-2500-1 SYSTEM OR ITEM NO. EXAM. CAT. COMPONENT AREA TO BE EXAMINED LICENSEE PROPOSED REQUIRED ALTERNATIVE RELIEF REQUEST METHOD EXAMINATION STATUS Bl. 30 B1.40 B3. 90 B-A B-A B-D Reactor Vessel Reactor Vessel Reactor Vessel Shel 1-to-Flange Meld (Wel ds 3-MR-18 and 4-MR-18) Head-to-Flange Meld (Melds 3-MH-12 and 4-MH-12) Nozzle-to-Vessel Melds (Melds 3-DO-A, -B, and -C, and 4-DO-A,-B, and -C) Volumetric Volumetric and Surface Volumetric Ultrasonic to Extent Practical and System Pressure Tests Ultrasonic to Extent Practical and System Pressure Tests Ultrasonic to Extent Practical and System Pressure Tests Granted Granted Granted B2. 51 B2. 60 B-B B-B Regenera-tive Heat Exchangers (PTP-3 and PTP-4) Regenera-tive Heat Exchangers (PTP-3 and PTP-4) Circumferenti al Volumetric Head Melds (Melds RGX-(I)-1 RGX-{III)-1) Tubesheet-to-Volumetric Head Melds (Melds RGX-(I)- 2, RGX-(II)-2,and and RGX-{II)-2) Visual (VT-2 and VT-3) During System Pressure Tests Visual{VT-2 and VT-3) During System Pressure Tests Granted Granted
TABLE 1 CLASS 1 COMPONENTS (continued) IMB-2500-1 ITEM NO. IMB-2500-1 EXAM. CAT. SYSTEM OR COMPONENT AREA TO BE EXAMINED REQUIRED METHOD LICENSEE PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE RELIEF REQUEST EXAMINATION STATUS B3.150 Ec B3. 160 B8. 40 B9.11 5 B9. 31 B-D B-H B-J Regenera-tive Heat Exchangers (PTP-3 and PTP-4) Regenera-tive Heat Exchangers (PTP-3 and PTP-4) Reactor Coolant and Auxi1iary Cooling System B3.150: Nozzle-Volumetric to-Vessel Melds B3.160: Nozzle Inside Radius Section (Melds RGX-(I)-9, RGX-(I)-11, RGX-(II)-9, RGX-(II)-11, RGX-(III)-9, and RGX-(III)-11) Integrally Volumetric Melded or Surface Attachments (Melds RGX-(-)- LUG Series) Pipe Size > 4 Surface and in. B9. 11: Volumetric Circumferential Melds; B9.31: Branch Pipe Connection Melds (Melds 12"-RC-3, 14"-AC-4, and 12"ll0"-RC) Visual (VT-2 and VT-3) During System Pressure Tests Visual (VT-2 and VT-3) During System Pressure Tests Ultrasonic to Extent Practical and System Pressure Tests Granted Granted Granted
n
TABLE 1 CLASS 1 COMPONENTS (continued) IMB-2500-1 ITEM NO. INB-2500-1 EXAM. CAT. SYSTEM OR COMPONENT AREA TO BE EXAMINED LICENSEE PROPOSED REQUIRED Al TERNATIVE RELIEF REQUEST METHOD EXAMINATION STATUS B9. 21 Bl0. 20 B-K-1 Regenera-tive Heat Exchangers (PTP-3 and PTP-4) Reactor Coolant Pumps Pipe Size < 4 in. Circum-ferential fields (Melds RGX-(I)- 5, RGX-(I)-7, RG}{-(II)-5, RGX-(II)-7, RGX-(III)-5 and RGX-(III)-7) Integrally Melded Attach-ments (Melds 3-RCP-A-L1, 2, and 3, 4-RCP-A-Ll, 2, and 3, 3-RCP-B-Ll, 2, and 3, 4-RCP-B-Ll, 2, and 3> 3-RCP-C-L1, 2, and 3, and 4-RCP-C-L1, 2, and 3) Sur face Volumetric or Surface Visual (VT-2 and VT-3) During Pres-sure Tests Surface and Visual (VT-3) to Extent Practical and Surface Upon Dis-assembly of Pump Granted Granted
>(
TABLE 1 CLASS 1 COMPONENTS (continued) LICENSEE PROPOSED REQUIRED ALTERNATIVE METHOD EXAMINATION IMB-2500-1 IMB-2500-1 SYSTEM OR AREA TO BE ITEM NO. EXAM. CAT. COMPONENT EXAMINED RELIEF REQUEST STATUS B12.10 5 B12. 20 B12. 50 B-L-1 B-L-2 B-M-2 Reactor Coolant Pumps Reactor Coolant Pumps Valve Pump Casing Melds (Melds 3-RCP-A 4-RCP-A, 3-RCP-8 4-RCP-B, 3-RCP-C and 4-RCP-C) Internal Surfaces Valve Body, Exceeding 4 in. Pipe Size Volumetric Visual Visual Hydrostatic Tests and Visual of Casing Melds Hydrostatic Tests and Visual of External Surfaces IN-3400 and/or IW-2500 and/or System Leakage Test and Visual (VT-3) Upon Disassembly of Valve for Maintenance Not Granted Granted Provided Pump is Not Dis-assembled for Mainten-ance during Interval Granted
S I
TABLE 2 CLASS 2 COMPONENTS LICENSEE PROPOSED INC"25OO-1 INC-2500-1 SYSTEM OR AREA TO BE REQUIRED ALTERNATIVE RELIEF RE(VEST .ITEM NO. EXAM. CAT. COMPONENT EXAMINED METHOD EXAMINATION STATUS C5.10, C5.11, C-F 8 C5.12 Contain-Piping Melds ment Spray < 1/2 in. System Hall Thickness C5. 11: Circumferential Meld C5. 12: Longitudinal Meld Surface Demonstration of Open Flow Path in INC-5222(d) Not.Granted
TABLE 3 CLASS 3 COMPONENTS NO RELIEF RE(UESTS
TABLE 4 COMPONENTS SUPPORTS NO RELIEF RE(UESTS
(, ~ JI
TABLE 5 PRESSURE TESTS NO RELIEF RE(UESTS
~0 fl I d
CONCLUSION Based 'on the review summarized, the staff concludes that relief granted from the examination and testing requirements and alternate methods imposed through this document give reasonable assurance of the piping and component pressure boundary and support struct'ural integrity, that granting relif where the Co'de requirements are impractical is authorized by law and will not endanger life or property, or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the public interest considering the burden that could result if they were imposed on the facility. December ll, 1985 PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTORS: G. Johnson S. Lee
~ ~ J.t I II t ~ 4 It J}}