ML18094B173
| ML18094B173 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 11/17/1989 |
| From: | Stone J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Miltenberger S Public Service Enterprise Group |
| References | |
| IEB-88-002, IEB-88-2, TAC-67320, TAC-67321, NUDOCS 8911280513 | |
| Download: ML18094B173 (6) | |
Text
Docket Nos.
50~272/311 M. Steven E. Miltenberger Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer Public Service Electric and Gas Company Post Office Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038
Dear Mr. Miltenberger:
November 17, 1~
DISTRIBUTION w/enclosure
'[Jo'cfet File-MO'Brien NRC PDR JStone Local PDR MThadani SVarga OGC BBoger EJordan WButler ACRS (10)
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - RAPID PROPAGATING FATIGUE CRACKS IN STEAM GENERATOR TUBES, BULLETIN 88-02 (TAC NOS. 67320/67321)
RE:
SALEM GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 By letter dated April 5, 1989, WCAP-12090 for Salem Unit 2 w~s submitted and by letter dated July 31, 1989, WCAP-12296 for Salem Unit 1 was submitted by PSE&G in response to Bulletin 88-02.
These reports provide detailed analysis for steam generator tube vibration fatigue.
The staff has reviewed the two submittals and finds that additional information is needed before we can proceed to close the Bulletin 88-02 issue for Salem 1 and 2.
The requested information is identified in the Enclosure.
You are requested to respond to this request within 60 days of receipt of this letter. The reporting and/or record keeping requirements of this ~etter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/enclosure:
See next page
[67320/l]
LA en 89
~I-2/PM I ~~tone:m,i t1 !17 /89
,---- 1")80r.13 8 91117 I
891l~
~
Q5000272 PDR ADOCK PNU
~
Sincerely,
/S/
James C. Stone, Project Manager Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 Docket Nos. 50-272/311 M. Steven E. Miltenberger Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer Public Service Electric and Gas Company Post Office Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038
Dear Mr. Miltenberger:
November 17, 1989
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR AODITIONAL INFORMATION - RAPID PROPAGATING FATIGUE CRACKS IN STEAM GENERATOR TUBES, BULLETIN 88-02 (TAC NOS. 67320/67321)
RE:
SALEM GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 By letter dated April 5, 1989, WCAP-12090 for Salem Unit 2 was submitted and by letter dated Julv 31, 1989, WCAP-12296 for Salem Unit 1 was submitted by PSE&G in response to Bulletin 88-02.
These reports provide detailed analysis for steam generator tube vibration fatigue.
The staff has reviewed the two submittals and finds that additional information is needed before we can proceed to close the Bulletin 88-02 issue for Salem 1 and 2.
The requested information is identified in the Enclosure.
You are reouested to respond to this request within 60 days of receipt of this letter. The reporting and/or record keeping requirements of this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/enclosure:
See next page Sincerely, James C. Stone, Project Manager Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Mr. Steven E. Miltenberger Public Service Electric 2i Gas Company cc:
Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esquire Conner and Wet.terhahn Suite 1050 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20006 Richard Fryling, Jr., Esquire Law Department - Tower SE 80 Park Place
- Newark,
~hl 07101 Mr. L. K. Miller General Manager - Salem Operations Salem Generating Station P. 0. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 Mr. S. LaBruna Vice President - Nuclear Operations Nuclear Department
- P. 0. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Kathy Halvey Gibson, Resident Inspector Salem Nuclear Generating Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Drawer I Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 Richard F. Engel Deputy Attorney General Department of Law and Public Safety CN-112 State House Annex Trenton, NJ 08625 Dr. Jill Lipoti, Ph.D New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Division of Environmental Quality Radiation Protection Programs State of New Jersey CN 415 Trenton, NJ 08625 Maryland People's Counsel American Ruilding, 9th Floor 231 East Baltimore Street Baltimore, Maryland 21202 Salem Nuclear Generating Station Richard B. McGlynn, Commission Department of Public Utilities State of New.Jersey 101 Commerce Street Newark, NJ 07102 Regional Administrator, Region I U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Lower Alloways Creek Township c/o Mary O. Henderson, Clerk Municipal Building, P.O. Box 157 Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 Mr. Bruce A. Preston, Manager Licensing and Regulation Nuclear Department P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 Mr. David Wersan Assistant Consumer Advocate Office of Consumer Advocate 1425 Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 Mr. Scott B. Ungerer MGR. - Joint. £eneration Projects Atlantic Electric Company P.O. Box 1500 1199 Black Horse Pike Pleasantville, NJ 08232 Mr. Jack Urban General Manager, Fuels Department Delmarva Power & Light Company 800 King Street Wilmington, DE 19899 Public Service Commission of Maryland Engineering Division ATTN:
Chief Engineer 231 E. Baltimore Street Baltimore, MD 21202-3486
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PUBLIC SERVTCE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY SALEM UNITS 1 AND 2 IMPLEMENTATION OF BULLETIN 88-02 ENCLOSURE By letters dated April 5 and July 31, 1989, the licensee submitted WCAP-12296
- for Salem Unit 1 and WCAP-12090 for Salem Unit 2.
These reports detail analyses for steam generator tube vibration fatigue which were performed in response to NRC Bulletin 88-02.
The staff has reviewed these reports and has the following comments concerning estimates of flow peaking factors for certain tubes.
The staff requests that information be provided as necessary to resolve these comments and to demon-strate ~hat the.subject tubes are acceptable for continued service. Alterna-tively, the tubes should be plugged at the next scheduled steam generator inspection.
Unit 1, S/G 2 tube R9C60 WCAP-12296 states in Table 8-7 that AVR configuration 6d (defined in Figure 8-7' is applicable to this tube.
T~us, a flow peaking factor of 1.0 is assumed for this tube.
In the staff's opinion, the idealized AVB configuration 6d (in Figure 8-7) bears little resemblance to the actual AVB configuration for this tube.
Figure 6-3 indicates that the AVB between columns 61 and 62 will effectively restrict flow between tubes R9C61 and R9C62.
Given the "as pictured" center line location of the AVB between columns 62 and 63, it seems possible that this AVB will act to restrict flow between tubes R9C62 and R9C63.
Assuming that the AVBs between columns 57 and 58, and 58 and 59 extended to row 8, one could argue that idealized c~nfiguration 4d in Figure 8-7 applies to the subject tube. The corresponding flow peaking factor would be 1.44, exceeding the allowable flow peaking factor as given in Figure 9-8 of WCAP-12296.
Actually, the AVB between*columns 58 and 57 extends far enough down to restrict flow between tubes R7C58 and R7C59.
Thus, the flow peaking factor may exceed 1.44 for the subject tube.
Unit 2, s;r, 1, tube R9C35 WCAP-1?.090 assumes that AVB configuration 8e (flow peaking fact.or equals 1.0) apolies to the subject tube (see Table 8-7 and Figure 8-7). This assumption appears to the staff to be clearly in error since there is no similarity between idealized configuration 8e and the actual configuration.
~ 2 -
AVB projection data in Figure 6-2 of WCAP-12090 show that the following AVRs may possibly project far enough down to restrict flow in the gaps between row 8 tubes:
AVB between columns 32 and 33 AVB between columns 33 and 34 AVB between columns 37 and 38 AVB between columns 38 and 39 Accordingly, it is the staff's opinion that idealized configuration 4c (see Figure 8-7) better matches the actual AVB configuration. The corresponding flow peaking factor is 1.58 which exceeds the allowable peaking factor of 1.35 (see Figure 9-8).
Unit 2 2 S/G 2, Tube RllC17 WCAP-12090 assumes that AVB configuration 6d (peaking factor= 1.0) applies. It is not clear to the staff that this assumption is conservative.
The actual AVBs between columns 12 and 15 are at least partially effective in restricting flow around tubes RllC13, R11C14, and R11Cl5.
This effect is not modeled in the idealized AVB configuration 6d.
Unit 2, S/G 2, Tubes Rl1C45 and R11C4&
WCAP-12090 assumes that AVB configuration 4a (peaking factor= 1.16) applies.
This seems very conservative provided the AVB projections between columns 41 and 44 are greater than 9.4.
However, the numerical projection values_ for these AVBs is not given in Figure 6-3.
It is not clear to the staff whether the peaking factor would rema1n within acceptable limits if the AVB projection values are less than 9.4.
Unit 2, S/G 2, Tube R11C50 No flow peaking was assumed in WCAP-12090 for this tube (i.e., flow peakinq factor= 1.0).
Numerical AVB projection data is not provided in Figure 6-3 for AVBs between columns 51 and 53.
Assuminq the AVB projections for these tubes are 9.4, then the staff believes that AVB-configurations Sb, 5c, or 15d are applicable.
The corresponding peaking factors would be in the range of 1.08 to 1.11 which is still acceptable.
However, if the projection values for certain of the AVBs between columns 51 and 53 are less than 9.4, the flow peaking factor for RllC50 could potentially exceed 1.11, although it is not *clear whether it could be as high as 1.20 which is the maximum acceptable value (per Figure 9-8).
Unit 2, S/G 4, R9C35 WCAP-12090 assumes that AVB confiquration 8d applies (peaking factor= 1.16) applies.
The staff believes this assumption to be non-conservative because neither of the AVBs between columns 34 and 36 appears to project to the 9.4 location where they would begin to restrict flow past the subject tube.
For AVB configuration 8d to apply to the subject tube, the AVB between columns 34 and 35 5hould project down to at least the 9.4 location.