ML17354B088
| ML17354B088 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 08/17/1998 |
| From: | Hebdon F NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Plunkett T FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17354B089 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-REGGD-01.147, RTR-REGGD-1.147 TAC-MA1470, TAC-MA1471, NUDOCS 9808190238 | |
| Download: ML17354B088 (6) | |
Text
pe AK00
~o Cy 4V Cl I
0
+~
qO
++*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COIVIMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 2055&0001 August 17, 1998 Mr. Thomas F. Plunkett President - Nuclear Division P. O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, Florida 33408-0420
SUBJECT:
SAFETY EVALUATIONOF REVISED REQUESTS FOR RELIEF FOR THE TURKEYPOINT PLANT, UNITS 3 AND4 (TAC NOS. MA1470 AND MA1471)
Dear Mr. Plunkett:
The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff, with technical assistance from its contractor, the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), has reviewed and evaluated the information provided by the Florida Power and Light Company (FPL), in its submittal dated April 9, 1998, regarding its revised requests for relief from certain requirements of American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code,Section XI, 1989 Edition, for the Turkey Point Plant, Units 3 and 4.
Revised Relief Request No. 11, "Alternative Evaluation of Leakage,"
requests relief from ASME Code,Section XI, 1989 Edition, Paragraph IWA-5250(a)(2), regarding the visual examination of components and corrective measures ifleakage occurs at bolted connections during system pressure tests.
'he staff has reviewed the information submitted regarding FPL's alternative to perform an evaluation of the bolted connections to determine the susceptibility of the bolting to corrosion and the potential for failure. Ifthe evaluation concludes that the bolting is degraded or is inconclusive in determining degradation, the bolt closest to the source of leakage shall be removed, VT-1 examined and evaluated in accordance with IWA-3100(a). When the removed bolting shows evidence of unacceptable degradation, all affected bolting shall be removed and VT-1 examined and evaluated in accordance with IWA-3100(a) or the affected bolting shall be replaced.
This alternative will provide an acceptable level of quality and safety, as the integrity of the joint will be maintained.
Therefore, the licensee's proposed alternative is authorized pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i).
Revised Relief Request No.18 proposes to expand the applicability of Code Case N-533 from Class 1 systems to Class 1 and 2 connections when Code compliance is determined to be impractical. This proposal is an alternative to Code Requirement IWA-5242(a) that requires insulation be removed from pressure-retaining bolted connections for VT-2 visual examination in systems borated for the purpose of controlling reactivity. The alternatives proposed include the performance of the examination of bolted connections in accordance with Code Case N-533 supplemented by additional requirements for Class 1 and Class 2.
Based on the information submitted, the staff concludes that FPL's proposed alternative to use Code Case N-533, as supplemented by additional requirements for ASME Class 1 and Class 2 components,
'7808%90238 9808i7 PDR ADOCK 05000250 p
Mr. T. F. Plunkett August 17, 1998 provides an acceptable level of quality and safety. 'herefore, the licensee's proposed alternative is authorized pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i) until such time as the code case is included in a future revision of Regulatory Guide 1.147.
The quality and timeliness of these relief requests allowed the staff to process them without the need for additional information, and on a schedule compatible with other licensing actions needed for the forthcoming refueling outage for Turkey Point 3 in the, fall of 1998. This represents good planning and management of your licensing activities.
The staff's safety evaluation and conclusions are contained in the Enclosure.
Attached to the Enclosure is the INEEL Technical Letter Report.
Sincerely, Original signed by:
Frederick J. Hebdon, Director Project Directorate II-3 Division of Reactor Projects
- I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251
Enclosure:
Safety Evaluation cc w/enclosure:
See next page DS BU ION
<DocRee.Fitee PUBLIC TPN Rdg.
JZwolinski FHebdon ACRS TMcLellan BClayton KJabbour THarris (e-mail SE to TLH3)
OGC GHill (2)
LPlisco, Rll GBagchi MTschiltz, EDO To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment/enclosure "E" = Copy with attachment/enclosure "N" = No copy NAME KJabbourcw BClayton OFFICE PDII-3/PM E
PDII-3/LA E
E Bagchi OG PDII-3/D FHebdon DATE 07
/98 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 07/ '5/98
/98 08/
/98 DOCUMENT AWE: GATURKENSE.KNJ 08/ I7/98
0 I
4
'J
't it I
It C
IJ i
't t.
ij
Mr. T. F. Plunkett provides an acceptable level of quality and safety. Therefore, the licensee's proposed alternative is authorized pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(a)(3)(i) until such time as the code case is included in a future revision of Regulatory Guide 1.147.
The quality and timeliness of these relief requests allowed the staff to process them without the need for additional information, and on a schedule compatible with other licensing actions needed for the forthcoming refueling outage for Turkey Point 3 in the fall of 1998. This represents good planning and management of your licensing activities.
The staffs safety evaluation and conclusions are contained in the Enclosure.
Attached to the Enclosure is the INEEL Technical Letter Report.
Sincerely, Frederick J. Hebdon, irector Project Directorate II-3 Division of Reactor Projects
- I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251
Enclosure:
Safety Evaluation cc w/enclosure:
See next page
. "lx 1
V~>.
c:P