ML19242A498

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Submits Info in Response to 790525 Request Re PWR Feedwater Lines.Fabrication History,Preservice/Inservice Insp & Operating History Are Included
ML19242A498
Person / Time
Site: Arkansas Nuclear  Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 07/27/1979
From: Trimble D
ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT CO.
To: Eisenhut D
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
1-079-14, 1-79-14, NUDOCS 7908020476
Download: ML19242A498 (4)


Text

_

. .ll A .

-f L t'

./ -

J

_IM ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY POST OFFICE BOX 551 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72203 (501)371-4000 July 27, 1979 l-079-14 2-079-15 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ATTN: Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut Acting Director Division of Operating Reac ors U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

Subject:

Arkansas Nuclear One-Units 1 & 2 Docket Nos. 50-313 & 50-368 License Nos. DPR-51 & NPF-6 PWR Feedwater Lines (File 4400, 2-4400)

Gentlemen:

The following is provided in respense to your letter of May 25, 1979, concerning PWR Fecdwater lines.

Fabrication History Item 3 Provide the NDE performed during and after fabrication of the weld joints requested in question 2.

Response - Unit 1 Radiography was performed on 100% of the 14 inch and 18 inch main feedwater piping welds. Welds in risers received magnetic particle testing after fabrication.

Response - Unit 2 All welds described in item 2 received 100% radiography.

Item 4 Provide the Code edition to which the feedwater piping system was fabricated.

486 257 976 F VEMBER M; COLE SCUTH UTILIT4ES SYSTEM

1-079-14 2-071-15 Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut July 27, 1979 Response - Unit 1 The feedwater system was fabriated in accordance with ANSI B31.7-Class 2, 1968 edition.

Response - Unit 2 The feedwater system was fabricated in accordance with ACME Section III-Class 2, 1971 edition and surmer 1972 Addenda.

Item 5 State the fractree toughness requirements, if any, for the feedwater piping system.

Resp 0nse - Unit 1 ciere were no fracture toughness requirements for ANO-1.

Response - Unit 2 Impact testing was required for feedwater piping inside con-tainment. The impact test temperature was specified as 340F The test requirements and acceptance criteria are stated in ASME Section III, NB-2332, Summer 72 Addenda.

Preservice/ Inservice Inspection and Operating History Item 1 State whether the feedwater system welds received a preservice inspection in accordance with ASME B&PV Code,Section XI.

Response - Unit 1 Section XI did not apply to ANO-1 until April 19, 1978. There-fore, Unit 1 feedwater system welds did not receive a pre-service inspection in accordance with Section XI.

Response - Unit 2 Feedwater system welds have received a preservice inspection in accordance with Section XI.

n en 486 L3o

1-079-14 2-079-15 Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut July 27, 1979 Item 2 Provide the extent of inservice inspection performed on the feedwater pipe to steam generator nozzle welds. Include the results of the examinations, any corrective actions taken and causes of any failures.

Response - Unit 1 The B&W steam generator design does not include "feedwater pipe to steam generator nozzle welds."

Response - Unit 2 There has been no inservice inspection of feedwater pipe to steam generator nozzle welds.

Item 3 Provide the schedule and extent of inservice inspection for the the feedwater system for the next inspection interval.

Response- Unit 1 The schedule and extent of inservice inspection for the Feed-water System is based on the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Section 50.55a. In accordance with the Code edition and Addenda in effect, eleven feedwater piping welds are scheduled for 100%

volumetric examination during the next inspection interval.

Response - Unit 2 The schedule and extent of inservice inspection for the feed-water system is based on the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Section 50.55a. Due to being in power ascention testing at this time, we have not formulated a detailed inservice in-spection program for Uait 2 yet.

Item 4 Provide any history of water hammer or vibration in the feed-water system and design changes and/or action taken to prevent these occurrences.

Response-Unit 1 The Unit 1 feedwater system has had no waterhammer or excess vibrution problems.

_, n

. 1-079-14

. 2-079-15 Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut July 27, 1979 Response - Unit 2 Prior to feedwater system operation, the sparger and feed-water piping were modified to prevent partial draining during loss of feedwater and the subsequent water-hammer upon re-initiation of feedwater injection. The sparger was modified to inject feedwater upward and piping was rerouted to remain below the steam generator nozzels.

Item 5 Provide a description of feedwater chemistry controls and a summary of chemistry data.

Response - Unit 1 Chemistry is controlled with all volatile treatment and full flow demineralizers. We make every effort to maintain our secondary chemistry w '.hin the following B&W recommended limits:

Dissolved Oxygen 7 ppb Silica 20 ppb Total Iron 10 ppb Total Copper 2 ppb Total Solids 50 ppb Cation Conductivity .5 umho pH 8.8 - 9.2 Response - Unit 2 Chemistry is controlled with all volatile treatment. A summary of chen.istry data follows:

Dissolved Oxygen 10 ppb Silica 10 ppb Total Iron 10 ppb Total Copper 10 ppb Cation Conductivity .5 umho pH 8.8 -9.2 Very truly yours, (M]Lik David C. Trimble DCT/ MON /ew U

480