ML19210C068
| ML19210C068 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zion File:ZionSolutions icon.png |
| Issue date: | 10/26/1979 |
| From: | Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Peoples L COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19210C069 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7911130226 | |
| Download: ML19210C068 (6) | |
Text
.d.
4
/
UNITED STATES 8
o*'n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r,;
y WASMNGTON, D. C. 20556 October 26, 1979 Docket No. 50-295 Mr. D. Louis Peoples Director of Nuclear Licensing Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690
Dear Mr. Peoples:
RE: ADVANCE RELIEF GRANTED FOR INSERVICE INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS (SECOND 40-MONTH PERIOD) FOR ZION UNIT NO.1 By letter dated October 1,1979 you requested advance relief for certain non-destructive examinations (NDE) which were part of your June 28, 1978 revised Inservice Inspection (ISI) program.
The specific relief requested, the Code requirements, your basis for the request, and our evaluation are presented in the enclosure. Based on our review, imposition of those requirements would, in our view, result in hardships or unusual cifficulties without a compensating increase in the level of quality of safety. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)
(6)(i), we grant the advance relief that you have requested from the inservice inspection requirements of the ASME Code. Therefore, you are authorized, and should proceed, 'to implement that part of the second 40-month proposed program of your October 1,1979 submittal as identified in the enclosure.
We have determined that (1) the granting of this advance relief for these items does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered nor a decrease in safety margins and thus does not involve a significant hazards consider-ation, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission? s regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
1319 340 7 911130 M 5>
f
s Mr. D. Louis Peoples Commonwealth Edison Company October 26, 1979 Furthermore, we have determined that the granting of this advance relief for these items from ASME Code requirerents does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level. Therefore, we have concluded that the granting of this relief is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4) that an environmental statement, or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal, need not be prepared in connection with this action.
A copy of the related Notice of Issuance is also enclosed.
Sincerely,
/
/SA A.
chwencer, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #1 Division of Operating Reactors
Enclosures:
1.
List of Advanced Relief Granted 2.
Notice of Issuance cc: w/ enclosures See'next page 1319 341
Mr. D. Louis Peoples Commonwealth Edison Company October 26, 1979 cc: Robert J. Vollen, Esquire U.
'S. Environmental Protection Agency 109 North Dearborn Street Federal Activities Building Chicago, Illinois 60602 Region V Office ATTN:
EIS COORDINATOR Dr. Cecil Lue-Hing 230 South Dearborn Street Director of Research and Development Chicago, Illinois 60604 Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago.
100 East Erie Street Chicago, Illinois 60611 Zion-Benton Public Library District 2600 Emmaus Avenue Zion, Illinois 60099 Mr. Phillip P. Steptoe Isham, Lincoln and Beale Counselors at Law One First National Plaza 42nd FToor Chicago, Illinois 60603 Susan N. Sekuler, Esquire Assistant Attorney General Environmental Control Division 188 West Randolph Street, Suite 2315 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Mr. W. Bruce Dunbar Mayor of Zion Zion, Illinois 60099 Department of Public Health ATTN:
Chief, Division of Nuclear Safety 525 West Jefferson Springfield, Illinois ~62761 Director, Technical ' Assessment Division Office of Radiation Programs ( AW-459)
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Crystal Mall #2 A-l irgton, Virgiri a 20460 om a
OC W JuU U,\\
a 13i9 3'42
LIST OF ADVANCE RELIEF GRANTED ZION UNIT 1 INSERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM REQUESTS FOR RELIEF (SECONDFORTHMONTHPERIOD) 1.
Request relief from performing visual and surface or volumetric examination of the reactor vessel closure head cladding and visual examination of the reactor pressurizer, and steam generator vessel cladding.
(Items Bl.13, Bl.14, B2.9, and B3.8, Examination Categories B-I-l and B-I-2).
Qde Requirement Visual and surface or volumetric examination of the reactor vessel closure heac cladding shall include at least six patches (each 36 sq. in.) evenly aistributed in the closure head. Visual examination of the reactor vessel cladding shall include at least six patches (each 36 sq. in.) evenly distributed in accessible sections of the vessel shell. The examinations performed during each inspection interval shall cover 1007, of the patch areas.
Visual. examination of the pressurizer and steam generator vessel cladding shall include at least one patch g36 sq. in.) near each manway in the primary side of the vessel. The examinations performed during each inspection interval shall. cover 1007, of tne patch areas.
The examination of the patch areas in the pressurizer and steam generator may be perfomed at or near the end of the inspection interval.
Licensee Basis for Recuesting Relief The design of these vessels. accounts for the stress loads to be adequately accommodated by the ferritic base material which is examined volumetrically as required by other examination categories. Additional technical guidance is provided by later editions of Section XI where cladding examinations are no longer required.
Evaluation Examination of the reactor vessel head cladding patches and the pressurizer and steam generator vessel cladding is impractical to perfom because of the relatively high radiation levels present in the areas required to be visually examined. Other examinations which will be performed on these components will give more meaningful. data about tne structural acceptability of the components. These examinations have been found to be suitable alternatives for the visual examinations,
of the vessels cladding and the visual and surface or volumetric examination of the vessel head cladding.
1319 343
. Examination of the reactor vessel cladding is also impractical to perform because of the necessity to remove the fuel and core barrel to accomplish the visual examination required. Examination Category B-N-1, which the licensee has committed to perform, requires visual examination of the reactor vessel interior in accessible areas above and below the reactor core during normal refueling outages at approximately three-year intervals. This examination 5 conjunction with the volumetric examinations perfomed on shell anc nozzle welds will provice adequate assurance of the structural integrity of
'the reactor vessel.
Tne staff finds that the examinations which will be perfomed by the licensee on the reactor vessel head, reactor vessel, pressurizer, and steam generator will provide data necessary to detemine the structural integrity of these components and concludes that relief from the required examinations of the components cladding may be granted as requested.
2.
Request relief from stamping or physically marking welds for identification ano location as required by Appendix I - 6200.
Code Reouirement Weld icentification and location shall be shown as a " Weld Identification Plan."
(Weld Locations, I-6210) Low stress stamps and vibratooling may oe used to pemanently identify each weld. Marking applied after final stress relief of the component shall not be any deeper than 1/64 in.
Licensee Basis for Reouesting Relief This marking was not perfomed at the time of the preservice inspection.
As an alternative, a means of establishing a unifom datum point for each weld is maintained by procedurally describing datum or reference points such that subsequent relocation of the examination area can be achieved with an accuracy of 0.5 inches. Experience has shown the aoove alternative to be adequate in describing inspections and results.
The need for such marking, the resulting radiation exposure of personnel and the potential for introducing undue stresses in the components are not considered necessary in lieu of the alternatives.
Evaluation The Code does not require physical marking or stamping of welds but does require that welds be identified and shown on a 6;ld Identification P1an. The 1icensee's system and procedures for identifying welds meets the Code requirements and therefore relief is not required.
1319 344
. 3.
Request relief from volumetric examination of integrally welded supports for piping and reactor coolant pumps.
(Items B4.9 and 85.4, Examination Category 54-1)
Code Requirement Volumetric examinations performed during each inspection interval shall cover 257. of the integrally-welded supports. This includes the welds to the pressure-retaining boundary and the base metal beneath the weld zone and along the support attachment member for a distance of two support thicknesses.
Licensee Basis for Requesting Relief The piping system integrally welded supports are attached to the pipe by fillet welds. The configurations of such welds is such that volumetric examinations will not provide meaningful results.
Surface examination will be perfonaed on integrally welded dttachments as an alternative to the volumetric examination.
Two of the reactor coolant pumps have integrally welded supports.
The geometric configuration and nature of the materials of the pump support welds are such that ultrasonic examination cannot be perfomed as required by IWB-2600. Surface examinations will be perfomed as an alternative. The other two pumps have no welds in this category anc therefore, the examination requirements are not acceptable.
Evaluation Volumetric examination of the integrally welded supports is impractical to perfonn because of the welds design, geometry, or materials of construction of the components. The licensee has committed to subject these welds to surface examinations. Based on the loading conditions of these types of welds, flaws would most likely generate at tne weld surface and thus be detectable by surface examination which the licensee has committed to perfom. The examination method to be employed is considered acceptable in providing assurance that the supports' structural integrity will be maintained. The staff concludes that relief from the volumetric examination may be granted.
1319 345