ML18065A665
| ML18065A665 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 04/23/1996 |
| From: | Gamberoni M NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Smedley R CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| TAC-M93628, NUDOCS 9604290403 | |
| Download: ML18065A665 (5) | |
Text
--~,/
e Mr. Richard W. Smedley Manager, Licensing Palisades Plant April -23, 19-27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, MI 49043
SUBJECT:
PALISADES PLANT - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE THIRD 10-YEAR INTERVAL INSERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM PLAN AND ASSOCIATED REQUESTS FOR RELIEF (TAC NO. M93628)
Dear Mr. Smedley:
By letter dated September 6, 1995, you submitted the Third Interval Inservice Inspection (ISI) Program for the Palisades Plant.
On December 20, 1995, we forwarded our first Request for Additional Information (RAI) on this subject.
You responded to that RAI on February.19, 1996.
The staff has reviewed the available information in the Third 10-Year Inspection Interval ISI Plan for Palisades Nuclear Plant and the February 19, 1996, response to the RAI.
Based on our review, the staff has concluded that addition information and/or clarification is required to complete th~ review-of the ISI program.
Please provide a response to the enclosed questions within 60 days of the date of this letter.
In addition, to expedite the review process, please send a copy of your RAI response to NRC's contractor, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL), at the following address:
Michael T. Anderson INEL Research Center 2151 North Boulevard PO Box 1625
. Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415-2209 If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact me at 415-3024.
Docket No. 50-255 Sincerely, Original Signed By:
Marsha Gamberoni, Project Manager Project Directorate III-1 Division of Reactof Project~ - Ill/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/encl:
See next page DISTRIBUTION:
- Docket File*
PUBLIC
-PDIII-1 Reading J. Roe E. Adensam(EGAl)
OGC T. Mclellan ACRS W. Kropp, Riii DOCUMENT NAME:
G:\\WPDOCS\\PALISADE\\PAL93628.RAI To receive a copy of this document, Indicate In the box: *c* = Copy without attachment/enclosure "E" = Copy with attachment/enclosure "N" = No copy OFFICE LA: PD31 NAME CJamerson DATE I I q /96 9604290403 960423 PDR ADOCK 05000255 P
PDR I
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 April 23, 1996 Mr. Richard W. Smedley Manager, Licensing Palisades Plant 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, MI 49043
SUBJECT:
PALISADES PLANT - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE THIRD IO-YEAR INTERVAL INSERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM PLAN AND ASSOCIATED REQUESTS FOR RELIEF (TAC NO. M93628)
Dear Mr. Smedley:
By letter dated September 6, 1995, you submitted the Third Interval Inservice Inspection (ISI) Program for the Palisades Plant.
On December 20, 1995, we forwarded our first Request for Additional Information (RAI) on this subject.
You responded to that RAI on February I9, I996.
The staff has reviewed the available information in the Third IO-Year Inspection Interval ISI Plan for Palisades Nuclear Plant and the February I9, I996, response to the RAI.
Based on our review, the staff has concluded that addition information and/or clarification is required to complete the review of the ISI program.
Please provide a response to the enclosed questions within 60 days of the date of this letter.
In addition, to expedite the review process, please send a copy of your RAI response to NRC's contractor, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL), at the following address:
Michael T. Anderson INEL Research Center 2I51 North Boulevard PO Box 1625 Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415-2209 If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact me at 4I5-3024.
Docket No. 50-255
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/encl:
See next page Sincerely, Nl ~kc,.__ A c--li.M-L./ *
-Marsha Gamberoni, Project Manager Project Directorate III-I Division of Reactor Projects - III/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Mr. Richard W. Smedley Consumers Power Company cc:
Mr. Thomas J. Palmisano Plant General Manager Palisades Plant 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, Michigan 49043 Mr. Robert A. Fenech Vice President, Nuclear Operations Palisades Plant 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, Michigan 49043 M. I. Miller, Esquire Sidley & Austin 54th Floor One First National Plaza Chicago, I 11 i no is 60603 Mr. Thomas A. McNish Vice President & Secretary Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Judd L. Bacon, Esquire Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Regional Administrator, Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 801 Warrenville Road Lisle, Illinois 60532-4351 Jerry Sarno Township Supervisor Covert Township 36197 M-140 Highway Covert, Michigan 49043 Office of the Governor Room 1 - Capitol Building Lansing, Michigan 48913 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident Inspector's Office Palisades Plant 27782 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, Michigan 49043 Palisades Plant Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section Office Division of Radiological Health Department of Public Health 3423 N. Logan Street P. 0. Box 30195 Lansing, Michigan 48909 Gerald Charnoff, Esquire Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 2300 N Street, N. W.
Washington DC 20037 Michigan Department of Attorney General Special Litigation Division 630 Law Building P.O. Box 30212 Lansing, Michigan 48909 September 1995
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY PALISADES NUCLEAR PLANT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION I. In the December 20, 1995, RAI, you were requested to verify that at least 9(r,I of each reactor pressure vessel (RPV) shell weld (Items Bl.II and Bl.12) has been examined to satisfy augmented RPV examination requirements specjfied by the regulations in 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(ii)(A)(2).
In the FebriUary 19, 1996, response, you stated "Effectively, 100% of the acces*si'ble welds which are required for examination were examined by our contractor (Westinghouse) during the 1995 refueling outage." This*
response is not clear. Confirm that at least 90% of each of the Item 81.11 and Bl.12 shell welds have been examined and provide the percentage of the Code-required volume that was examined for each of these welds.
- 2.
In the summary by category contained in the Program, a total of 44 areas are identified for augmented examination, but are not scheduled during the third IO-year interval. Is this an oversight? Provide a clarification regarding the scheduling of these areas.
- 3. All 27 of the RPV welds that are accessible are scheduled to be examined during the third inspection period in accordance with Section XI.
However, in response to the RAI question on Request for Relief RR-9, you stated that the examinations performed following the vessel anneal (at the end of the first period) would be used to satisfy the examination requirements for the vessel and attaching welds.
Will the RPV be examined.
following the vessel anneal, as well as, at the end of the interval?
Provide clarification regarding the scheduling of examinations for the RPV wehls.
- 4. Request for Relief RR-9 requests to defer the examination of the RPV nozzle-to-vessel welds and inside radius sections to the end of the third interval. In the December 20, 1995, RAI, you were asked about this relief and how it would be effected by a mid-interval vessel anneal.
In respo.nse, you stated that the RPV anneal, currently scheduled for the 1998 refueli.ng outage, would make this relief unnecessary.
It was also stated that the fourth interval examinations would be performed at the end of the first !JiXeirlOd so that the time between exams did not exceed IO-years. This impHres that the nozzle exams will not be deferred.
Provide a clariifkation regarding the status of this request for relief.
- 5.
Request for Relief No. RR-3 seeks relief from examining the steam generator shell welds to the extent required by the Code.
However, the limiting factor causing a reduction in coverage (approximately 25%) is not clearly stated.
In addition, coverage is listed as 75% and 98% in the axial directions and 100% in each of the two circumferential directions.
Cumulatively, this amounts to 93% coverage and relief would not be
~--
1 I./ required.
Provide a description of the limiting conditi~n for this weld and describe how examination coverage is determined at Palisades.
- 6.
Request for Relief RR-4 requests relief from volumetrically examining the steam generator nozzle-to-shell welds to the extent required by the Code.
It is obvious that complete examination from the nozzle side is impractical (if not impossible).
However, considering the configuration, the axial coverage from the nozzle side appears high.
Provide an explanation describing how the axial scan from the nozzle side was performed.
- 7.
The revised version of Request for Relief RR-05 includes Items 83.150 (nozzle-to-vessel welds) and 83.160 (inside radius sections).
- However, the inside radius (IR) sections are not addressed.
If relief is required for the IR sections, provide a description of the limitations, the estimated coverage, and any alternatives that may be applied.
In addition, considering the low coverage obtained (<20%), provide a description of how reasonable assurance of the structural integrity will be provided for the nozzle-to-vessel welds.
- 8.
In response to an NRC RAI question regarding containment penetrations, you referenced Code Case N-522, Pressure Testing of Containment Pene.tration Piping, and stated that a request to use this Code Case would be submitted with a new pressure testing submittal. It was also noted that there is a separate program (EM-09-13, Inservice Inspection Pressure Testing Program) that has not been included with the ISi program.
Provide a copy of the pressure testing program so that it can be reviewed with the ISi program.