ML17346A864
| ML17346A864 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 02/13/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17346A863 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8502280556 | |
| Download: ML17346A864 (5) | |
Text
\\
SAFETY. EVALUATION 0
ENCLOSURE 1
~ I
~ ~*::
r-I r
I I
t I.
INTRODUCTION r"
,I By letter dated December '16-,
- 1983, Florida Power and Light Company (the licensee)'requested relief from specific requirements of Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure
.Code, 1980 Edition through Winter 1981
- Addenda, (Code) mandated for the Turkey Point Nuclear Plant pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a.
The licensee subsequently supplemented the initial requests for relief in Relief Request No.
3 to the Second ISI 10-Year 'Summary
- Program, dated November 20, 1984.
This report provides a safety evaluation
,'of the licensee's request;and the staff's basis for approval or denial of each request pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g).
II. BACKGROUND In compliance with 10 CFR 50.55a(g),
the licensee has committed to subject the pressure retaining components of the two Turkey Point Nuclear Plant:
Units to volumetric and surface examinations 'required by Article IWB-2000 of the Code.
These examinations, for ASME Code Class 1 components, are defined in Article IWA-2000 of the Code.
The licensee has determined that these requirements for specified components and piping runs are not practical and has proposed alternate methods for examining 'piping and components for structural.integrity.
""III. EVALUATION OF RELIEF RE(UESTS The licensee has requested written relief from volumetric and surface examinations that have been determined to be impractical in accordance with paragraph 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(iii).
We have evaluated the information in the referenced.
documents and have determined that imposing. these requirements would result in hardships of unusual difficulties without a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety.
Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 50;55a(g)(6)(i),
conclusions that these inservice requirements are impracti'cal are justified as follows.
Component:
ASME Class 1 Regenerative Heat Exchangers.
The following is a
Tiist o welds, associated examination category arid item numbers.
Examination
~C B-B B-B Item No.
B2.61 B2.61 Unit No.
Number of Welds
~geld Tv e Shell to Tube Sheet Shell to Tube Sheet 55omm50556 850215 8
PDR ADOCK 05000250
4
)II,
Enclosure B-D t
8-'D t
8-H 8-H 8-J 8-J 83.150
'3.160 83.150 83.160
'88.40 88.40 89.21 89.21 and 3
and 4
3 4
t 3
Examination Item
'~C Ii.
t tt t Number of Welds 6
6 1...
1 6
6
~Meld T e
Nozzle to Shell Nozz3e to Shell Welded Support Welded Support Interstage Piping Interstage Piping Code Re uirements:
Table IWB-2500-1 requires the following examination for t e item num ers above:
Examination
~C B-B 8-D Item No.
- 82. 61 83.150 83.160 Re uired Examination Volumetric examination, to include 100%
of the length of circumferential tube sheet to shell weld.
Volumetric examination to include 100K of each nozzle to vessel weld and nozzle inside radius area.
8-H 88.40 Volumetric or surface examination to include lOOX of each integrally welded support of one exchanger.
89.21 Alternate Examination:
Because performing the required volumetric and sur ace examinations are impractical, the licensee has proposed to perform visual examinations during system pressure tests as indicated'elow:
a.
During each refueling outage the following will be performed:
(1)
Perform a visual examination (VT-3) at the beginning of each refueling outage for leakage and boric acid accumulation.
8-J Surface examination to include 100% of weld surface on approximately 25% of the total interconnecting piping joints.
Reason for Relief Re uest:
The licensee has determined that performing the require 'o umetric an surface examinations was impractical in that
.'omponent configuration, limited accessibility',
high radiation levels and support locations preclude 100% volumetric and surface examination coverage of the required Code examination volume and surface area.
En"1osure (2).Prior to returning. to operation, from each refueling outage, a
visual examination (UT-2) will -be performed during the system leakage test.
b.
Perform a visual examination (VT-2) during th'e syste'm hydrostatic pressure te'st at or nea'r.,'he,end of the inspection interval.
Staff Evaluation:
The staff: has detemiined that performing the Code re-q qq d
f i ti 1d i p
"'d h
d lip the licensee without a compensating increase in the level of quality. 'he licensee's proposed alternate examinations for verifying component structur-al integrity provide an:acceptable degree of assurance regarding structural integrity which is commensurate with ASt<E Code requirements for this compo-nent classification.
IV. CONCLUSIONS The staff has determined that relief from the inservice volumetric and surface examinations required by Section XI is justifiable.
The alternative
- program, as proposed by Florida Power and Light Company, will provide an acceptable level of structural integrity.
Relief may be granted pursuant to paragraph 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(i).based on.our finding that certain specific requirements of the Code, are impractical.,
Implementation of the require-ments would result in hardships or unusual'ifficulties. without a compen--
sating increase in the level of quality and safety;-.
0
'k'e therefore conclude that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner and (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations ahd the issuance of this relief request will not be inimical to the common -defense and security or to the health and
'safety of the public.
Dated: February 13, 1985 Princi pal Contributor:
W.
P. Kleinsorge
P