ML20009F196
| ML20009F196 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/27/1981 |
| From: | Moon C Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20009F186 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8107300113 | |
| Download: ML20009F196 (4) | |
Text
h A
07/27/sJ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NOCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY )
Docket No. 50-466
)
(Allens Creek Nuclear Generating
)
Station, Unit 1)
)
NRC STAFF TESTIMONY OF CALVIN W. MOON REGARDING STUD BOLTS
[Doherty Contention 26]
Q.
Please state your name and present position with the NRC.
A.
My name is Calvin W. Moon.
I am a Senior Licensing Project A
Manager with Licensing Branch No. 4 of the Division of Licensing.
Statement of my professional qualifications is attached.
Q.
What is the purposa of this testimony?
l A.
This testimony is to respond to Doherty Contention 26 whi"h asserts that:
l There is insufficient assurance that each stud bolt i
in the redctor vessel head meets adequate minimum standards for yield strength during Anticipated l
Transients Without Scram (ATWS) conditions.
Q.
Wnat are the current NRC requirements or criteria w..si respect i
to stud bolts?
l A.
The NRC Staff (Haterials Engineering Branch) reviews reactor vessel naterials in accordance-with Section 5.3.1 and reactor vessel I
t integrity.cccording to Section 5.3.3 of the NRC Standard Review Plan l
Doch05000f6
^
8 PDR -
\\
w (NUREG-7b/087).
These reviews will vary in detail depending on whether it is a construction permit (CP) or operating license (0L) review.
During the CP review, the Staff verifies that the acceptance criteria for stud bolts meet the requirements of Section III, " Nuclear Power Plant Components,"
and Section XI, " Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Coolant Systems," of the ASME Code; the Staff positions of Regulatory Guide 1.65,
" Materials and Inspections for Reactor Vessel Closure Studs;" and the minimum fracture toughnass requirements set forth in Appendix G to 10 C.F.R. Part 50. A statement by the Applicant in the PSAR that it will comply with the above criteria is sufficient for Staff acceptance at the CP stage. During the OL stage of review, these criteria are scrutinized to verify compliance with the applicable requirements of the NRC Regulations, the Regulatory G'uides, and the ASME Code. With respect tu stud bolts, the Staff would review (1) bolting materials to a'ssure adequate fracture toughness and heat-treatment, (2) surface treatI11ents, plating t.e thread lubricants to protect against corrosion and contamination, (3) n idestruc-tive examination to detect surface and internal flaws and disconti 'uities, and (4) the inservice inspection program.
Q.
Doherty Contention 26 specifically refers to the pressure devel-oped during ATWS conditians and the adequacy of the reactor vessel studs to resist the pressure and maintain reactor vessel integrity. Does the NRC Staff require any information in the PSAR at this time regarding ATWS conditions and the resulting pressures on stud bolts?
A.
No. The acceptance criteria for ATWS as proposed in the new paragraph to 10 C.F.R. s 50.49 have not become effective because the proposed rule has not been adopted as of this date by the Commission.
l
s Qm 4
1 When and if it becomes effective, Allens Creek will have to comply with it.
The new ATWS rule may require a computation of the maxinum pressure developed during the most severe ATWS event (assumed to be the main steam-line isolation valve closure transient), and the ability of the stud bolts to withstand the stresses. As indicated above, verification of such pressures and stresses is not required at the CP~ stage of review.
Q.
Wnat does the NRC ' Staff conclude with respect to the accepta-bility of the Allens Creek stud bolts at the CP stage of review?
A.
Based on the statements of compliance set forth in the PSAR, I
Appendix C, the Staff concludes that the integrity of the stud bolts is assured because the Applican, meets the acceptance criteria of Sections III j
and XI of the ASME Code, Regulatory Guide 1.65, and 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendix G.
i f
h l
i I
\\
.s CALVIN W. MOON PROFhSSIONALQUALIFICATIONS LICENSING BRANCH NO. 1 DIVISION OF LICENSING I am a Senior Projtct Manager in Licensing Branch No.1, Division of Licensing, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
In my present position, I have overall responsibility for conducting the safety anc environmental reviews of power reactor license applications assigned to me. This includes the responsibility for planning and coordinating the efforts of other tech-nical personnel involved in the review.
I hold a Bachelor of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering from lowa State University and a Master of Science degree from Stanford University.
I am a registered professional engineer in the State of Iowa.
I have a total of 29 years of professional experience. For three years I was employed by the University of California at the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory with responsibdities for the design and development of mechanical systems.
For fourteen years I was employed by private industry in various
,I staff and supervisory enginee. ring positions working on the design and
'.i f.: -
ig *,,,
development of gas cooled reactors for application to military propulsion, marine prop,ulsion, space propulsion and space auxiliary power systems.
In 1968. I accepted a position as Reactor Engineer with the Regulatcry Staff of the Atomic Energy Commission.
In'this capacity, I participated in
'the development.of reactor safety criteria.
In my present position I have
/
participated in the. safety reviews of several power reactors by the Atomic
, Energy Commission and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
S o
.m e e-
%1 MP