ML17345B074
| ML17345B074 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 04/26/1983 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17345B073 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8305090091 | |
| Download: ML17345B074 (18) | |
Text
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO RE UESTS FOR RELIEF FROM INSERVICE INSPECTION RE UIREMENTS Florida Power and Li ht Co.
Turke Point Units 3 & 4 Docket No. 50-250
& 251 INTROOUCTION Technical Specification 4.2 for the Turkey Point Units 3 & 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 geom-
- etry, and materials of construction.
- Thus, 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(i) authorizes the Commission to'rant relief from those requirements upon making the necessary findings.
By letter dated February 25, 1977, April 28,
- 1977, Oecember 9, 1977,.
Apri'1 10,
- 1978, November 15,
- 1978, March 6, 1979, September 18,
- 1979, October 15, 1980 and June 14, 1982, Florida Power and Light Company sub" mitted its inservice inspection program revisions, or additional information related to requests for relief from certain Code requirements determined to be impractical to per form on Turkey Point Units 3 & 4 during the inspection interval.
The program is based on the 1974 Edition including Addenda through Summer 1975 of Section XI of the ASME Code, and covers the following inspection intervals:
o Unit 3 - The last 40 months of the current 120 month inspection interval '(August 14, 1979 to Oecember 14, 1982) o Unit 4 - The last 80 months of the current 120 month inspection interval (January 7,
1977 to September 7, 1983)
Although the date of applicability of this Code edition and addenda'as expired for Unit 3, the relief requests evaluated in this report may still be valid because all examinatibns required to be performed during the ten-year interval may not have been completed or because the examination requirements in the later edition and addenda of Section XI may be'he same as those for which relief has been requested.
The relief requests for the next 120-month inspection interval to be submitted for review should factor the information presented in this report into consideration.
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, Inc.
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 agrees with the evaluations and recommendations.
A summary of the determinations made by the staff is presented in the follow-ing tables:
830509009i 83042b PDR ADOCK 05000250 I
i 8
lP
'gt 4ll f gg)4
- ~l< 'j yg g
)
TABL'E 1 CLASS 1 COMPONENTS IMB"2600 IMB-2500 SYSTEM OR AREA TO BE ITEM NO.
EXAM.CAT. COMPONENT EXAMINED RE/ VI'RED METHOD LICENSEE PROPOSED RELIEF ALTERNATIVE REQUEST EXAM.
STATUS B1. 8 B"G-1 Reactor Vessel Closure Studs and
- Nuts, when Removed Volumetric and Surface Update to GRANTED 1977 Edition, Summer 1978 Addenda Bl. 10 B"G-1 B1. 9 B-G-!
Reactor Vessel Reactor Vessel Ligaments Between Threaded Stud Holes Closure
- Mashers, Bushings Volumetric Visual Update to 1977 Edition, Summer 1978 Addenda Update to 1977 Edition, Summer
- 1978, Addenda GRANTED GRANTED B5. 1 B"G-1 Pumps Pressure-Retaining Bolts and
- Studs, in Place Volumetric Update to 1977 Edition, Summer 1978 Addenda GRANTED B5. 2 B-G-1 Pumps Pressure-Retaining Bolts and.
Studs when Removed Volumetric and Surface Update to 1977 Edition, Summer 1978 Addenda GRANTED B5. 3 B-G-1 Pumps Pressure-Retaining Bolting Visual Update to 1977 Edition, Summer 1978 Addenda GRANTED Bl. 13 B-I-1 Reactor Closure Vessel Head Visual and None Surface or Volumetric GRANTED Bl. 14 B-I-1 Reactor Vessel Vessel Cladding Visual None GRANTED
IP 0
')
TABLE 1 CLASS 1 COMPONENTS IWB-2600 IWB-2500 SYSTEM OR AREA TO BE REQUIRED ITEM NO.
EXAM.CAT. COMPONENT EXAMINED METHOD LICENSEE P.ROPOSED ALTERNATIVE EXAM.
RELIEF REQUEST STATUS B1. 18 B-0 Reactor Vessel Pressure Retaining Weld in Control Rod Drive Housings Volumetric Surface Exam-ination, per 1977 Edition, Summer 1978 Addenda GRANTED B2. 9 8-I-2 Pres-sur12er Cladding Visual None GRANTED B3.7 B"H Heat Inte-Exchang-grally ers Welded Supports Volumetric Surface Examination, per 1977
- Edition, Summer 1978 Addenda GRANTED B3.8 B-I-2 Steam Cladding Visual Generators.
None GRANTED 8'4. 9
~ B"K"1 Pi pi.ng,
~
Inte-gral ly Welded Supports Volumetric Surface Exam-GRANTED ination, per 1977 Edition Summer 1978 Addenda B5. 4
.,B-K-1 P.umps Inte-grally Welded Support Volumetric Surface Examina-tion per 1977 Edition Summer 197.8 Addenda GRANTED B5. 6 B-L"1 Pumps Pressure Volumetric Retaining Welds Visual and Surface to Extent Prac-tical of Pump Casing Weld GRANTED (1)
(1)
Relief Granted by Letter Dated 2/14/83; Varga to Uhrig.
ll I
TABLE 1 CLASS 1 COMPONENTS IMB-2600 IWB-2500 SYSTEM OR AREA TO BE ITEM NO.
EXAM.CAT. COMPONENT EXAMINED LICENSEE PROPOSED RELIEF REQUIRED ALTERNATIVE REQUEST METHOD EXAM.
STATUS B5. 7 8-L"2 Reactor Coolant Pumps Casing Internal Surfaces Visual Visual and Partial Surface of External Casing GRANTED (1)
B6. 7 B-M-2 Valves Internal Surface Visual Examinati on at time of disassembly GRANTED (1)
Relief Granted by Letter Dated 2/14/83, Varga to Uhrig.
'C
TABLE 2 CLASS 2 COMPONENTS IWC-2600 IWC-2520 SYSTEM OR AREA. TO BE ITEM NO.
EXAM.CAT. COMPONENT
.EXAMINED LICENSEE PROPOSED RELIEF REQUIRED ALTERNATIVE REQUEST METHOD EXAM.
STATUS Cl:4 C2. 4 C3. 2 C-D Class 2
- Vessels, Piping,
- Pumps, Bolting Bolting Bolting Visual and either Volu" metric or Sur face Requested Update to 1977 Edition Summer 1978 Addenda GRANTED C4. 2 Valves Bolting
Il C
~ '
TABLE 3.
CLASS 3 COMPONENTS (No Relief Requests)
lf II
SYSTEM OR COMPONENT TABLE 4 PRESSURE TEST IMA-5000 IMB-5000 IMC-5000 8(
IMD-5000 TEST PRESSURE REQUIREMENT LICENSEE PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE TEST PRESSURE RELIEF REQUEST STATUS All Class 1,
2 8
3 systems IMA-5210(a)
Hold Time Request 10 minute hold time for non-insulated piping GRANTED
ik
TABLE 5 ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION TECHNI UE SYSTEM OR COMPONENT RE UIREMENT Class 1 and 2
ASME Code Piping fieldsSection V,
Article 5 LICENSEE PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE EXAMINATION METHOD (1) Indicati ons 50K DAC shall be recorded.
(2) Any indication
~ exceeding 100%
DAC shall be investigated to determine size,
- shape, identity and location of reflector (3) Any non-geometric indication, regardless of DAC, shall be recorded and investigated.
(4) All non-geometric indications shall be evaluated and correc-tive action taken.
RELIEF REQUEST STATUS GRANTED
'l
Based on the review summarized, the staff concludes that relief granted from
~
the examination requirements and alternate methods imposed through this docu-ment. give reasonable assurance of the piping and component pressure boundary and support structural integrity, that granting relief where the Code require-ments 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.
Environmental Consideration We have determined that granting relief from specific ASHE Section XI Code requirements does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environ-mental impact.
Having made this determination, we have further concluded that this is an action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4), that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the grant of this relief.
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because this action does not involve a significant increase in the proba-bility or consequences of accidents previously considered, and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin,, the action does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed
- manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's reguldtions and the issuance of this amendmen't will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Oate:
April ?6, 1983
Ih tg