ML17346A826
| ML17346A826 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 02/04/1985 |
| From: | Williams J FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| L-85-57, NUDOCS 8502080185 | |
| Download: ML17346A826 (11) | |
Text
REGULATORY l.
ORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYS 1 (RIDS)
ACCESSION NBR:8502080185 DOC ~ DATE: 85/02/04 NOTARIZED; NO DOCKET ¹ FACIL:50 250 Turkey Point Plant~
Unit 3i Florida Power and Light C
05000250 50-251 Turkey Point Plant~
Unit 4i Flo'rida Power and Light C
05000?51 AUTH.NAIVE AUTHOR AFFILIATION NILLIAMSiJ ~ N.
Florida Power L Light Co, REC IP ~ NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION VARGAzS ~ AD Operating Reactors Branch 1
SUBJECT; Forwards addi info on inservice insp second 10-yr summary program re valve exams K Relief Request 8 rc visual exam of internal valve surfaces, Relief Request 11 encl for clarification.
DISTRIBUTION CODE; A047D COPIES RECEIVEDoLTR ENCL SIZE ~
TITLE:
OR Submittal: Inservice Inspection/Testing NOTES:
OL: 07/19/72 OL: 04/14/73 05000250 05000251 REC IPIENT ID CODE/NAMF NRR ORB1 BC 01 INTERNAL: ACRS 1e ELD/HDS4 MTEB 14 EG 04 COPIES LTTR ENCL 7
7 10 10 1
0 1
1 1
1 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME ADM/I FMB NRR/DE/MEB 15 NRR/DL/TAPMG RGN2 COPIES LTTR ENCL 1
0 1
1 1
1
<<1 1
1 1
1 NRC PDR 02 TOTAL NUMBER OF. COPIES REQUIRED:
LTTR 27 ENCL 25
,0 I'
~
~
\\
l II
yNII l//r 0~
FLORIDAPOWER & LIGHTCOMPANY February 4, 1985 L-85-57 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention:
Mr. S.
A. Varga, Chief Operating Reactors Branch ¹1 Division of Operating Reactors U.
S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555
Dear Mr. Varga:
Re: Turkey Point Units 3 and 4
Docket Nos.
50-250 and 50-251 Inservice Inspection Second 10-year Summar Pro ram Our letter (L-84-341) dated November 20, 1984 provided additional information on the Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Inservice Inspection Program.
Further information on valve examinations and Relief Request 8 are provided as requested by your staff.
In addition, a copy of Relief Request 11 is provided for clarification.
Relief Request 11 was not modified by our November 20, 1984 letter.
Very truly yours, J.
W. Williams, Jr.
Group Vice President Nuclear Energy JWW/PLP/js Attachment cc: J.
P. O'Reilly, Region II Harold F.
Rei s, Esquire P NS-LI-85-054-1 8<0208 CK 05000250 018'50204 PDR ADO PDR 8
PEOPLE... SERVING PEOPLE
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TURKEY POINT UNIT NO. 3/4 SECOND INSPECTION INTERVAL NRC QUESTION NO 5 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Please indicate whether the entries under item B12.50 of Appendix A
in your May 4, 1984, submittal means that you have identified a total of 13 valve groups in the Turkey Point Plant that fit footnote 3 for Item B12.50.
For how many of these groups have you examined one or more valves
? What were the results of these examinations
? If this information has been previously submitted to NRC, you may refer to specific pages in previously submitted documents.
FP&L RESPONSE:
The 13 valves identified in the Program represent the total number of valves, not groups, subject to code requirements (footnote 3).
FP&L has reviewed the maintenance records for the First Inspection Interval and have determined a total of eight (8) valves were disassembled.
Table No.
1 denotes the maintenance records and valves inspected within each group and the results.
REVIEW OF MAINTENANCE RECORDS FOR THE FIRST INSPECTION INTERVAL VALVE NO.
1972 1973 1976 1977 1982 EXAMINATIONRESULTS GROUP 2
875 A
875 B
875 C
GROUP 1
750 751 4"
4 NO RECORDABLE INDICATIONS NO RECORDABLE INDICATIONS NO RECORDABLE INDICATIONS NO RECORDABLE INDICATIONS NO RECORDABLE INDICATIONS NOTE:
THE 3 AND 4 REFER TO TURKEY POINT UNITS 3
OR 4
TABLE NO.
1
J
TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 6
4 INSERVICE XNSPECTION RELIEF REQUEST 4
8 A.
COMPONENT IDENTIFICATION:
CLASS 1 CODE EXAMINATION CATEGORY B-M-2 VALVE BODIES B
EXAMINATIONREQUIREMENTS:
1)
ITEM B12.50 VISUAL EXAMINATION (VT-3)
OF INTERNAL SURFACES VALVES C
BASIS FOR RELXEF:
Disassembly of these valves for the sole purpose of performing' VT-3 visual examination is not practical.
The process of disassembling these components will result in considerable exposure of personnel to radiation and significantly increase the risk of component damage or failure without providing a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety.
D ALTERNATIVE EXAMINATION 1)
Periodic Inservice testing per subarticles IWV-3400 and/or IWV-3520 (valves);
or 2)
Periodic system leakage test per Category B-P, table XWB-2500-1; 3)
Perform the required VT-3 examinations, in accordance with the sampling criteria of table IWB-2500-1, category B-M-2 in the event the components are disassembled for maintenance or repair; 4)
The alternative tests and examinations provide an assurance of acceptable quality and safety.
E.
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE SECOND INSPECTION INTERVAL
r
TURKEY POINT UNITS 3 6
4 INSERVICE'NSPECTION RELIEF REQUEST 4 11 A.
COMPONENT IDENTIFICATION:
CLASS 2
CODE EXAMINATION CATEGORY C-F PRESSURE RETAINING WELDS IN PIPING CONTAINMENT SPRAY SYSTEM B. EXAMINATIONREQUIREMENTS:
1)
ITEM C5.10 PIPING WELDS, 1/2 INCH OR'ESS NOMINAL WALL THICKNESS ITEM C5.11 CIRCUMFERENTIAL WELDS, 100%
SURFACE FOR EACH WELD REQUIRING EXAMINATION; 2)
ITEM C5.12 LONGITUDINAL WELDSg SURFACE EXAMINATION2.5t AT THE INTERSECTING CIRCUMFERENTIAL WELD.
C BASIS FOR RELIEF:
- 1) The Containment Spray piping is not required to operate during normal system operation;
- 2) Following initial,inspection and testing, the containment spray piping downstream of the second isolation valve outside containment is subject to no pressure transients and no temperature transients other than ambient containment building/auxiliary building pressure and temperature; thus, there is no mechanism for failure; 3)
ASME Section XI, table IWC-2500-1, examination category C-H, note 1, exem'pts open ended portions of systems from VT-2 tests.'.
ALTERNATIVE EXAMINATION 2)
At least once every (5) years, the piping is tested by performing an air or. smoke flow test through each spray header to demonstrate an open flow path.
(
REFERENCE:
)
In the'vent that the Containment Spray System is operated or in the case of.a significant seismic event.
FPGL will reevaluate this Relief Request to determine if additional nondestructive examination is warranted.
0 l
lH I
RELIEF REQUEST ¹ ll continued E.
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE SECOND INSPECTION INTERVAL
I~