ML19325E105
| ML19325E105 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 10/24/1989 |
| From: | Nerses V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Ellen Brown PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE |
| References | |
| IEB-88-011, IEB-88-11, TAC-72080, NUDOCS 8911010218 | |
| Download: ML19325E105 (6) | |
Text
%g ycq f[
g 7
LQ.%[I I
~
y October 24, 1989, 1
+:
m a.
$iMM.[D6dketNo.L50.'443L P.
"J a _. _
1 a
6 Mr. Edvard.A.LBrown 3
LPresident 8 Chief Executive' I
4 E
? Officer.
1 M'"
. New Hampshire Yankee' Division i
Public ServiceiCompany of. hew a
b O.
. Hampshire:.
s c
JPost Office! Box'300:
DJ
'Seabrook, New Hampshire,03874
Dear Mr. Brown:
. ',A yJ -
SUBJECT:
'SER ON SEABROOK SURGE LINE STRATIFIC,ATION (TAC N0.72080)
- The. staff has completed its evaluation _ on the issue pertaining to thermal'
- l f,*
- stratification in the pressurizer surge line of Seabrook Unit 1.
The j
evaluation report'is enclosed."
Our evaluation cobcludes that you.have made acceptable efforts to meet the'
~
requested action item 2.a' and' 2.c of NRC Bulletin 88-11. Those efforts have 1
' demonstrated that the' surge line meets the. applicable designLeode..However,..
j L
-we request that you continue monitoring the surge line until the.first refueling:
33 outage;to ensure that the design thermalt transients.and stratification temperature -
profiles used at. this time are indeed bounding for verifying code compliance.
^
We.would appreciate your response to the request to continue monitering..
j Odginal signed by:
j Victor Nerses, Project Maneger j
Project Directorate I-3 Division of Reactor Projects I/II
Enclosure:
1 lN As stated i
H cc w/ encl. See next page DISTRIBUTION:h9isfiiFFile; NRC& local PDRs, MRushbrook, PDI-3 r/f, SVarga, BBoger, I
VNerses 0GC, EJ6r' dan 7 8 Grimes, ACRS(10), JJohnson,Rgn.I RWessman, AChu
~
i.
-(:
d LDFC; :PDI-3/LA
- PDI-3
- PDI-3
- PDI-3/DIR 3
.....:.....a--...-:-
NAME:MM ook :AChu2
- c....-f..L---.-...
- .-fs.(-...--:--..........:.......-..-:---.----....:----..--....:.....---
s s mw :RWes 1
(DATE.:10/Q89
- 10/[/89
- 10/J/89
- 10/Id/89 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY q
Document Name:
SEABROOK TAC 72080 SURGE LINE f0 8911010218 891024 I 1 i
PDR ADOCK 05000443 2
O PDC
,y e,
Yc 9-t i
?8r. Edward'A.' Brown '
j.
g CC.
Thomas Dignan Esq.
Mr. A.- M. Ebner, Project Manager i
p John A. Ritscher, Esq.
United Engineers & Constructors Ropes and Gray Post Office Box 8223 225 Franklin Street Philadelphia. Pennsylvania 19101 Boston, Massachusetts 02110 D. Pierre G. Cameron, Jr... Esq.-
Mr. Bruce B. Beckley, Project Manager General Counsel Public Service Company of New Hampshire Public Service Company of New Hampshire Post' Office Box' 330 Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 i;
Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Mr. T. L. Harpster-Dr. Mauray Tye, President Public Service Company of New Hampshire -
Sun. Valley Association P. O. Box 300
.209 Sunener Street '
Seabrook, New Hampshire.03874 Haverhill, Massachusetts 01830 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road Robert Backus, Esq.
King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Backus, Meyer and Solomon s
l 116 Lowell Street Ashod N. Amirian, Esq.
l Manchester, New Hampshire 03106 Town Ccunsti for Merrimac 376 Main Street Diane Curran, Esq.
Haverhill, Massachusetts 08130 Harmon and Weiss 2001 S Street, NU Mr. Calvin A. Canney, City Manager Suite 430 City Hall Washington, D.C.
20009 1.26 Daniel Street fortsmouth, New Hampshire 03801 Philip Ahren, Esq.
Assistant' Attorney General Mr. Alfred V. Sargent, State House, Station #6 Chairman Augusta, Maine 04333 Board of Selectmen Town of Salisbury, Massachusetts 01950 Seacoast Anti-Pollution League 5 Market Street Senator Gordon J. Humphrey Portsmouth, New Hampshire 03801 ATTN: Tom Burack L
531 Hart Senate Office Building L
Mr. T. Feigenbaum U.S. Senatt Public Service Company of Washington, D.C. 20510 of New Hampshire Post Office Box 330 Mr. Owen B. Durgin, Chairman Seabrook, New Hampshire 03874 Durhem Board of Selectmen Town of Durham Resident Inspector Durham, New Hampshire 03824 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Consnission Seabruok Nuclear Power Station Pos* Office Box 1149 Seaorook, New Hampshire 03874
7 l
u
'1
[
s' h
Mr. Edward A. Brown. t cc:
H
' Board of Selectmen Jane Spector i
RFD Dalton Road Federal Energy Reculatory Commission j
Brentwood. New Hampshire 03833 825 North Capital St wet, N.E.
. Room 8105 Ms. Suzanne Breiseth, Washington, D.C. 20426-Board of Selectmen Town of Hampton Falls Mr. R. Sweeney Drinkwater Road Three Metro Center Hampton Falls, New Hampshire ~ 03844 Suite 610-Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Mr. Guy Chichester, Chairman Rye Nuclear Intervention Mr. George L. Iverson, Director Committee,
New. Hampshire Office of Emergency c/o Rye Town Hall Management
'10' Central Road State Office Park South 8tye, New Hampshire 03870 107 Pleasant Street Concord, New Hampshire 03301 gipan,BoardofSelectmen
-Adjudicatory Fil'e (2)
South Hampton, New Hampshire 03827 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board l
' Panel Docket R. Scott Hill'- Whilton U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission g.
l Lagoulis,~ Clark, Hill-Whilton Washington,.D.C. 20555 t
& McGuire 79 State' Street Congressman Nicholas Mavroules l '-
Newburyport, Massachusetts 01950 70 Washington Street' t
Salem, Massachusetts 01970 I
'Ms. R. Cashman, Chairman Mr. John C. Duffett I
l Board of Selectmen President and Chief Executive Officer l
Town of Amesbury Public Service Company of New Hampshire i
Town Hall 1000 Elm St.,
P. O. Box 330 l
Amesbury, Massachusetts 01913 Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Mr. Donald E. Chick, lown Manager Town of Exeter 10 Front Street
[
Exeter, New Hampshire 03823 1
l l
l
w j
j I
f p
i.'
~
l 1,
~
'\\
ENCLOSURE SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT ON
'SEABROOK SURGE LINE STRATIFICATION I
.~f',
Introduction In light of thermal stratification 'ound in the. pressurizer surge line of
.several PWRs, NRC issued Bulletin 88-11 on December 20. 1988.
Since thermal i
stratification causes changes in piping stresses, fatigue life,< and'11ne deflections from those predicted in the original design, all licensees and j,
NT0L applicants of PWR plants were requested to conduct visual inspection of the surge. line; to update stress and fatigue analysis for ensuring code' compliance, and to monitor thermal conditions and line deflections. Actions -
requested should be. completed within periods-specified in the Bulletin unless changes are considered acceptable to NRC.
i Evaluation In response to the Bulletin's requested actions, the licensee submitted a letter (Reference 1) attached with a Westin line isometric drawing (Reference 3)ghouse report (Reference 2) and a surge on March 7,1989.
Additional information for responding to staff ouestions was also provided in April,1989 (Reference j
4). On June 30. 1989, a detailed plant speci'ic stress analysis of the surge line was submitted by the applicant (References 5 and 6). The submittals indicated that Seabrook Plant Unit.I had conducted a walkdown after hot functional testing, instrumented sensors, and performed a quantitative assess-ment to show ASME Code Compliance. The following is the staff evaluation of information presented in References 1 to 6.
1.
Section 5.1 in Reference 2 indicated that the result of the walkdown i
performed after hot functional testing by the licensee showed no signs of distress in the supports and there was no indication of any crushed insulation or signs of abnormal pipe movements.
This is positive evidence that clearances around the pipe were adequate to i
accomodate piping thermal deflection by stratification.
2.
We have reviewed locations of thermal and displacement monitoring points.
Inconsistency in sensor locations were found in References 1, 2 and 3.
In addition, their intended application was not described. The licensee clarified these matters in a conference call and a detailed monitoring location was provided in Reference 6 in conjunction with the description of the monitoring program.
h[h
,I f
.n
.; g q
a:
j 2-1 f
3.
We have reviewed a comparison of various operating parameters 'and
)
~
thermal monitoring results in the Seabrook. Plant, Unit I with those of s
m,
)
four similar Westinghouse designed PWR plants.in which plant-specific D
analyses were performed (Table 1 and 2 in Reference 4).
We: find that the Seabrook operating parameters and monitoring results are enveloped by the four plant specific analyses.
.]
i;,
4..
In Reference 5 and 6, we found that temperature and displacement
. data measured from recent heat up operations in the Seabrook Plant F'
were incorporated into the bounding transient set for calculating the stratification induced thermal stresses..The licensee indicated that the monitoring would continue during the ascension phases of the plant' M k o htbe"hould k thnske!'t E'Ne"bbev[$o0eUe Ehhthe monitoring should continue ~until the next refueling outage to ensure that the thermal transients used in the Seabrook surge line' design are l
indeed bounding, since some operational transients may not take place during the startup tests.
5.
Fatigue evaluations of striping effects on the surge line was _
t described in Reference 6.
Our generic information from Westinghouse indicated that Westinghouse had conducted flow test in their Waltz Mill Laboratory.
Striping amplitudes and frequencies were 1
conservatively defined based on the test results.. The attenuation i
i
[
effects of time and distance on the amplitude of thennal-striping l'
were also considered.
We found that the approach for assessing the l
striping effects is conservative and calculation results are L
acceptable, p
l-6.
In Reference 6 methods and procedures used in calculating stratifi-L cation effects were described.
The calculated stresses and fatigue l
usage factors were combined with effects of other loadings including striping. We have reviewed the above information. We found that the approaches used are reasonable and the resultants of stresses and fatigue usage factors are within the FSAR committed Code allowables, which is delineated in Section III of the ASME Boiler and Pressure i
Vessel Code, 1977 Edition through 1979 summer addenda.
l Conclusions c
Based on our review of information provided by the licensee in References 1 to 6, we ennelude the licensee has made acceptable efforts to meet the requested action items 2.a and 2.c as delineated in NRC Bulletin 88-11. Their efforts have demonstrated that based on bounding input from Seabrook hot functional test and available stratification data of other five Westinghouse plants, the surge line meets the applicable design code.
However, the licensee should be committed to continue monitoring the surge line until its first refueling outage to ensure that the design thermal transients and stratification temperatures profiles used at this time are indeed bounding for verifying code compliance.
is L*
n-
?l
?,. c * '
- -. ' References Njk?
.c 1.
Letter, Public Service of New Hampshire to NRC, " Response to NRC Bulletin 88-11;. Pressurizer Surge Line Thermal Stratification", NYN-89023. March f
7, 1989, i
p 2.
Westinghouse Report WCAP-12151 (Proprietary) and WCAP-12152 (Unrestricted),
" Assessment of Thermal Stratification for the Seabrook Unit >1 Pressurizer Surge Line", attachment to Reference 1. February 1989.
3.
Westinghouse piping isometric-drawing.
Pressurizer Surge Line of Seabrook Plant, Unit 1 Drawing No. SURG-WOO 49, attachment to Reference 1.
i
~
4 Westinghouse Report, Supplement I to WCAP-12151 (Proprietary) and WCAP-12152(Unrestricted).
" Additional Information in Suppor+ of the i
Assessment of Thermal Stratification for the Seabrook unit 1 Pressurizer l
Surge Line", April 1989.
5.
Letter,. Public Service of New Hampshire-to NRC, " Follow-up Response to.
NRC Bulletin 88-11:
Pressurizer Surge Line Thermal Stratification",
L NYN-89077, June 30, 1989.
6.
Westinghouse Report WCAP-12305 (Proprietary) and WCAP-12306 (non-proprietary), " Evaluation of Thermal Stratification for the Seabrook, Unit ! Pressuri:er Surge Line", attachment to Reference 5, June 1989.
f i
E l
I d
h o
.,,-a
--s.
r-,,
~
.. - -. - -.