ML17342B000
| ML17342B000 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 10/30/1987 |
| From: | Mcdonald D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Woody C FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17342B001 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-62760, TAC-62761, NUDOCS 8711050220 | |
| Download: ML17342B000 (9) | |
Text
October 30, l987 Docket Nos.
50-250 and 50-251
SUBJECT:
Reference:
TAC Numbers 62760 and 62761 DISTRIBUTION
.j~l NRC 8 Local PDRs PD22 Reading Mr.
C. 0.
Moody, Group Vice President S.
Varga Nuclear Energy Department G. Lafnas Florida Power and Light Company D. Miller Post Office Box 14000 D. McDonald Juno Beach, Florida 33408 OGC-Bethesda E. Jordan
Dear Mr. Moody:
J. Partlow B. Elliot REACTOR VESSEL SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM ANALYSIS OF CAPSULE V - TURKEY POINT PLANT, UNITS 3 AND 4 ACRS (10) ~
Gray File L. Lois By letter dated August 29, 1986 and supplemented on February 26, 1987, you requested we review the surveillance report entitled, "Reactor 5'essel Material Surveillance Program for Turkey Point Unit 3, Analysis of Capsule V."
The re-quest was in accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix H, Section III, which requires a summary technical report be provided to the Corrmissfon.
You indicated in your initial submittal that the information in the report may be used for future Technical Specification revisions to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix G.
Me have completed our review of your submittals and included the details and results of our effort in the enclosed Safety Evaluation (SF).
'He have conclu-ded that (1) the method of analysis and the results are acceptable; (2) the test data indicates the formula in Regulatory Guide 1.99 (Rev.
1 and proposed Rev.
- 2) and 10 CFR 50.61 conservatively predict the effects of neutron irradi-ation on the limiting beltlfne weld materials in both units; and (3) the mea-sured Charpy upper-shelf energy for the limiting beltline weld materials may be less than the required fracture toughness of 10 CFR 50, Appendix G.
Me have also indicated in our SE that future use of the information and data fn the report requires a systematic error evaluation to support the method of analysis and the results.
The systematic error evaluation is needed because neutron survefllances, such as those detailed in the report, are subject to significant error (combined analytical and experimental) due to expected uncertainties.
lte also require that you submit a plan for complying with all of'he Appendix G,Section V.C. requirements within six months of'he date of the enclosed SE in that the measured Charpy value may be less than the re-quired fracture toughness of 10 CFR 50, Appendix G.
8711050220 871030 PDR ADOCK 05000250 P.,-
~ ~
I II I
I
'I ll
'l
~ l l I
~ I
Nr. C. 0.
bloody October 30I 1987 As a result of our review, we recommend that an integrated analysis of all capsule surveillance data withdrawn from both units be provided and that the integrated surveillance program be revised by moving Capsule X to a higher flux location.
This completes our actions related to the above referenced TAC numbers.
Sincerely,
Enclosure:
As stated Original signed by Daniel G. NcDonald, Project Yianager Project Directorate II-2 Division of Reactor Projects-I/II cc w/enclosure:
See next page Df 1 2
r 87
-,2 Dp D
icDonald:bg, Ipf8er 10/gQ'87 R~ /87
e II 0
l,i 3
~
- 55
~
v 55
~yS AEpy PO Cy p0 I
v~
p>
)fy**4 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 October 30I 1987 Diocket Nos.
50-250 and 50-251 Mr. C. 0.
Woody, Group Vice President Nuclear Energy Florida Power and Light Company Post Office Box 14000 Juno
- Beach, Florida 33408
'ear Mr. Moody:
SUBJECT; REACTOR VESSEL SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM ANALYSIS 0F CAPSULE V - TURKEY POINT PLANT, UNITS 3 AND 4
Reference:
TAC Numbers 62?60 and 62761 By letter dated August 29, 1986 and supplemented on February 26, -1987, you requested we review the surveillance report entitled, "Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Program for Turkey Point Unit 3, Analysis of Capsule V."
The re-quest was in accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix H, Section III, which requires a summary technical report be provided to the CoIIIIIission.
You indicated in your initial submittal that the information in the report may be used for future Technical Specification revisions to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix G.
Ve have completed our review of your submittals arid included the details and results of our. effort in the enclosed Safety Evaluation (SE}.
We have conclu-ded that (I) the method of analysis and the results are acceptable; (P) the test data indicates the formula in Regulatory Guide 1.99 (Rev. I and proposed Rev.
- 2) and 10 CFR 50.61 conservatively predict the effects of neutron irradi-ation on the limiting beltline weld materials in both units; and (3) the mea-sured Charpy upper-shelf energy for the limiting beltline weld materials may be less than the required fracture toughness of 10 CFR 50, Appendix G.
Me have also indicated in our SE that future use of the information and data in the report requires a systematic error evaluation to support the method of analysis and the results.
The systematic error evaluation is needed be'cause neutron surveillances, such as those detailed in the report, are subiect to significant error (combined analytical and experimental) due to expected uncerta'inties.
We also require that you submit a plan for complying with all of the Appendix G,Section V.C. requirements within six months of the date of the enclosed SE in that the measured Charpy value may be less than the re-quired fracture toughness of 10 CFR 50, Appendix G.
Mr. C. 0.
Moody As a result of our review, we recommend that an integrated analysis of all capsu1e surveillance Cata withdrawn <rom both units be provided and that the integrated surveillance program be revised by moving Capsule X to' higher flux location.
This completes our actions related to the above referenced TAC numbers.
Sincerely,
Enclosure:
As stated Daniel G. NcDonald, Project Manager Project Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects-I/II cc w/enclosure:
See next page
Mr. C., 0.
Woody Florida Power and Lfqht Company Turkey Point Plant CC:
Harold F. Refs, Esquire Newman and Ho>tzinger, P.C.
1615 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036 Mr. Jack Shreve Office of the Public Counsel Poom 4, Holland Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 John T. Butler, Esquire
- Steel, Hector and Davis 4000 Southeast Financial Center Miami, Florf da 33131-2398 Mr. C.
M. Wethy, Vice President Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Florida Power and Light Company P.O.
Box 029100 Miami, Florida 33102 Mr. M. R. Stierheim County Manager of Metropolitan Dade County Miami, Florida 33130 Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station Post Office Box 5?-1185 Miami, Florida 33257-1185 Jacob Daniel Nash Office of Radiation Control Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services 1317 Winewood Blvd.
Tallahassee, Florida 37399-0?00 Intergovernmental Coordination and Review Office of Planning
& Budget Executive Office of the Governor
. The Capitol Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Administrator Department of Environmental Regulation Power Plant Siting Section State of Florida 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Regional Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Coamfssion Sufte 2900 101 Marfetta Street
- Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Martin H. Hodder, Esquire 1131 NE, 86th Street Miami, Florida 33138 dinette Lorion 7269 SW, 54 Avenue Miami, Florida 33143 Mr. Chrfs J. Baker, Plant Manager Turkey Point Nuclear Plant Florida Power and Light Company P.O.
Box 029100 Miami, Florida 33102 Attorney General Department of Legal Affairs The Capitol Tallahassee, Florfda 3?304