ML20023A490

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
AR Nuclear One Unit 1 Inservice Insp Program, Technical Evaluation Rept
ML20023A490
Person / Time
Site: Arkansas Nuclear Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 09/17/1982
From:
SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP. (FORMERLY
To:
NRC
Shared Package
ML20023A491 List:
References
CON-NRC-03-82-096, CON-NRC-3-82-96 SAI-186-028-39, SAI-186-28-39, NUDOCS 8209200375
Download: ML20023A490 (16)
v • d • e


Text

s

'. 6

)

.? v ATTACmENT 1 n

w.. : n. -..z

'.-:O-

-,:.w.~

v

-e.

.t

.[

(*

. [f ?. '

- % ";, "..ed

. ',, v,#., '..

,1g.

. +.

O

....e,.

..I 4* % - ',

<.1'e.

..$4g

  • E

'.8 e.,'

w-

,,...%g,e

,".d

,.**7,$.,

  • .O_.

, [.q,*..

' w,,

4 ^ p

  • vT.
  • h g,.

.f.E.,,,gy,gu'*

  • ,*"4,,f*

i,

  1. 4"* g' s
  • ,, ' ".f '

L. - *

'J 4-,,

p

..y'

,,4..

s

  • ... s..,

. j

..." 'q,k *.f,'.',...

., [.

e'eg*,,

.y

' yz.(~%. ~:';. M. g. ;-L'Qs.

- s Q.,*^ '.'

s

'.', '~,-*.. ;6;.'-. J. ;,, ::,v(...~ r.... '.g Q *-Q,;;

,,*t[.v. t

. A,..',

.n..

3.

,;t '

'^

f,/

C r

.... ;,.,g.t %c... g,. A.W. n, 5 ',s - U.,'J :<: s,r.yy,.

w h.,..,

.,c,,5,;' -

'43

%. V, g,. c..,,

,s

. *C r : ' *- *

- :,

  • ft e; >.s. :*. y ('. (. - Y',.k.(::

.E:*'.,: '

.'V; l* i-**gr Q.'. '. b. ?,

m

~.. <

9

.../

,, /

r.

r

~~' a,: * ~ -* a ::'.*' :. :. 2 7 *

.,py

-.. 3 h.er ).;

-i.M V.;,Ws.,3.?

l

.. <? vs.,

.. ' W:.>g,j *. - < *. ' * *. y :..**." <.

r-c.s.%. y.7.w.-. yN ',/,,.'p e, Q..;* jf-. + %g. ah;,p.','

h'/ %

s Uq

,, *": t. x,,.. y..

(*

.~

,a~,

\\*

o.c:

.s

?,

6.

7<.g,..xx 9.,..- ~j.,... c,.

g

....r.

..~.e a,.,s.,Y f,,h.. h__

w"kf?. $,'.?'! m'f y; *A.

%.U vW

&h

_. ~._.

a, _-.

  • lc.??'5".,)_,--l. ?l w e. - 1

,, ~

. '._-.e'

%* q.

n-v

.=.

i.W- $>...%'$.., _

?.'^.-

W

..'? ~

, 9f : ; 4.c.,

's

~;

&:, J.;?'t y y" W L ; W %y, - '

9.W:s f".;; w

'qsi 5.;.

p.jp,

yN..y',h,;.,m s

~

3. 3, 4.7 4

W

..,..r h

c t

4

.*,s.gg *s

.w*-

*L*. 2. ;..

l+3.

4 g

(" ',.ta.,h ve&.g.;'n

. w....( ;..

1_

0:

d'.2

.; ;. a; t:+.,,

.~; ; +- j._.,

',ig.r if h,='.

m

. ".c..

., ' 4 'T..'";.v x.0 ',- s;. ;-I'.6

' -t ir-1

  • w'.

, y.

4.

s w

.A

~;._

. p M.. t *c.

}

f

(

't-

(_

i *:s,.,4..== e

.i.,

e a

h;s&'Qf,, */h; r'7 *'

s. 'C*~

':J yr.

' [* Q

'J

..4

-W,,-

'/:%;-%;u; W:ra dM.-

.d

..g

>>~n %

&. n

~

.C 2

e

- s,.s a. a w.. s..s, r, -

e-

~ v...' m.q'.; y y 8

, gg,

g 4.y

  • g pa

-?

W: % v w.h s

n

,e. x-

.W..vh, p'f,'

.s e-p 2

-:n -

cs~..

W...y%V

. : si.

4.a,?ay !.

w

,e

3.. ' ^

,4 '

v'f., <y y J n,mT-

.,_3.

m;;. 2;;s

.;, ;r.

p _ya v w,.,

.. ;. ~.3 N-g

.. w5 w..

nW w p,/* g y

.-5.sw;,Y. M,

s%.<~

. p@> %{ i.C $m > we.a /^*M=3.*%QQ? 8$.e.1%.fJ.%p:re '

,$.- WtR

./.-

n...a. s v

f,?,,.K s 'la:Q'.Q be.'.h e,:sv:Wu. e f.

.%4 Af

-?W O' a %.:Q'e

~

' }:

.- w /.,u:a.2g-p., w;.e:y%g.2:

t 4 p a.

nG;.~: M:5@4;.vW ^

Aem a-

> o,-

.v Wt u..uaK..@ke:fh%w* k.g.a*g*.^ n;R,L**,

~

%<.*nc'%2 W % y?tW;,:

2 a. :::. L.vz.p.'.,Wr..

'- i.:n

_,. : %==,.4 3

m. y... 7,~; ;w.#-..I A.s

.%., e*W *g;; g V

'. m. ~. r.cNr

  • , cq '-

=m u.3:.:.

a.

/.g,.c,e re.

._~w.,s..

W,,;".3:.g,C:y'.ec? : 7:.k,,y,< f:

,g:;

y q.

., w '*,-

.R r;;;;;Oy *n.W:.'.%"7.< :gp[h.-Q+-Q'el.sv :-y7m

,-;b

. h ;.=': a;r,',:-j ;

2 2.'.

lWi t

M&G;:7kditv: ld }.@:.q.'.V.'L:

.x'-'

~

iiQQ ;N:. df,Q.Q:

%NhMN...@h?hh e.y r ex..w.w.m....

..n..

.s:,

,-....-n

. k S.;.L. N 'i; ; -

[. '

h hMhehhph.[

h,

,2

.w IbI MN. '.t4%k'f * ** h$h.-

N.'$$i,d.),%-@~;pp?I# N7hh_5Q.;4 t Y _

h.

C f[d_. @5,h.4Mff$k. _k.*Q*N,e.b k f

.4 Y,(G W:' ' *;.

n -
  • h

~.

O

~

Y*

5.k %'nd.M *.:S S&-cm,.

.L

-t'=i-N t

l Y S $ S W E:$ C W. %'

Y.Y.# w ; US..

m.;e.. w.

^

g%

..w j%. y--. y.. t, 3

+ s,ep,, w. e~v.

w.4..n.s3....J.

n

v. s.v,,y.,e....

y=

.w,. u.

m

. w u w%.,s..c..,.

s ;

,,.& w}

m.

..e 3.

. a...

r :, r.,:s

..+f km

,. i.:, o.. :.n u +m.,...

.m...,

.g;.;,.*, a,

-,:^

t.c 7.,ye g:..y'; m,.;; g.;

-r f-). $:p + --..,:,. -

^

i r >r.,..

e.

p

.es*

?.

..j~

s;

. E{ ^ 32 '*v s

..~

l. l &.f.,*

V' p."w^a.':

,... s.,,. g, w,,,.My.h,.,Q.. ff,g,&m, k 'f'.m.b;?)

I

- ~ ~~..,,n,N

,&..m'.h. '?.'='fe'i W-i_ 'C'w s....n,s-p

~l

' ^

k L.

.m,n,',.,,'~~...L-

..Q, g e wy.~..,...,~.s. o ;.

. w,:- ;.,,.,..

.-e-r m...

-x w

, s....

.4

~r.m v.: 4 );m.

. _,, p

,,.f\\.,....,..e.,._. ?*H Q;'*'q'.'.'.V. ;P. '. ' ~-.'M. g.,

pi-.

m.

. ; Y.. 8.. L. s.h% -

...'t ~ h l

  • :, ".' l *

'r.:1

.,,r i s

. p m y,pe.

E:

r.

.u,.,g,;..,4Mg gm n v

,a_

n.

~.

  • ".,. g.

e..u..,,

m.w...

.m.

p,,.,1,.;,,.

  • . 1. a.s, a.Jegg yp,,,y,g.J s,.. ~,, s.o.y. e,,%.. 'e, O.v.au mig,,,7mI *.a.m.g'.*,y W '

..c'-

.......w.-~,.

n.

.5-

.- r

.,(.G.,

..... q..e4 3

,r g

.i a~;., +.4..,.,,r g

3

    • M> +uf%. ~a
  • p,-

U4.QQM[,l;.n y[. '.'.M. ? %*8* e'v'.*."'.'-

"'"e.#$n**.'N.*:'O' v

. : * *.M. c3'.' h. C.r**. 4

  • .t
  • l ~~. > e.'v.$. -.

O 2'

3D E

ed *

t. ; %s-n y'

a-w Cs,.6.

v..

  • &=

~

J

'.

  • 4f$ki.,T f.1,* A,f

$&k?%Y'*$t*f

?1;f.

    • D^'~

$'A? "M '?.W W.

w&Q$'~,LVW. ***f *WV -NYW***eEI1'?.:'"&' MQ%$fyQ x

  • %U?W$Qg

'~

... ; w;.

emwn n w;

,.: w.: c. a x,. w,.v. n.e. :en. m.

c-lw>.

w

.w

. n-w a 7,. w :: w y.s w-g,.

.z4.. y* '. r w m.:.r& &>. m ic.@%m* u

.w p-~,..-

~ m..gm :;g mcp?

.s :

" d %*4g h,

N*%. "

A W.S O > mo F-h.f>+4'

"(T*q %g%y, ws;gQ
  • :s i,7 #.pQ-

Ca

s. :,; ?.. <.:@.W

., Ji-

. % kT M,:,.;.s.'.,6;g %.Q &m.&..

CW :,%m,.,,y'b",.,

W~",5

-, j'. W r

- Mi%.

b M*4hW )

y n,

?gv -

M w m. a mlw%.

n n

.., y,.yg.,.:: m

++ 5 4,.s.-

.. :.4<

- - n.

...a

.,e.e

%, ',?,f.~ p ? ;r Cf inM.*e..

11,,,

.$ Y.*

.p -@f..M',,

W f
h Vb O.

,, ta pp b.

n.

r

':m i]p r.vp4y

,c.

NGMM.,$p.(-

i r.,.,+,

r MSGIE

% -..,,PP i TIO M- ~ -

P

_ a

~ - - -

?

~~

WBmembew%CE%cdtemsdemw s#p.~sp m

w m g g @ v ~1,, ip $1$ q ?. M M ann y

mmn,.

- p. ~ N__nv ' fp . m~*n-

,ggpgM 1

mX5@9Cb(py.4N Wp C.

M

.. mr

. Aa,wkwr ow:%Ww&m'%ir ^ +M+~P" ~ r iC M W fM.W C &~ M M&Kn- ?Mn

.g: :c.2fQ WUM 46. &..

=":.:M.m&.a.w:.s % :.a.a:-w: ::.waaw..rm.p%. m.m@y.p~g %v.9..xx k.+

..: e. m w

W M w. M,wM4mMZ@w 9.

W w

w. 3 xv

. c.-

\\

4'

".g % l.

't u =

~

i c

SAI Report No. 186-028-39 c

ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE, UNIT 1 r

INSERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT Submitted to:

C U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Contract No. 03-82-096 c

Science Applications, Inc.

McLean, Virginia 22102 C

l i

'C September 17, 1982 C

sr h

Science Applications,Inc

+

p.

.1 t ' '>

r

.c CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.........

1 1.

CLASS 1 COMPONENTS '.......................

4 A.

Reactor Vessel 4

1.

Nozzle-to-Shell Welds and Nozzle Inside Radiused Sections, Category B-D, Item Bl.4 4

2.

Nozzle to Safe-End Welds, Category B-F, Item Bl.6 6

3.

Pressure Retaining Bolting, Category B-G-2, r-Item Bl.11.......................

8 B.

Pressurizer (No relief requests)

C.

Heat Exchangers and Steam Generators (No relief requests)

(*

10 D.

Piping Pressure Boundary 1.

Circumferential Butt Welds, Category B-J, 10 l

Item B4.5.......................

2.

Integrally Welded Supports, Category B-K-1, c

Item B4.9 12 E.

Pump Pressure Boundary (No relief requests) l F.

Valve Pressure Boundary (No relief requests)

II. CLASS 2 COMPONENTS (No relief requests)

III. CLASS 3 COMPONENTS (No relief requests)

IV. PRESSURE TESTS (No relief requests) iC V.

GENERAL (No relief requests) l 14 l

REFERENCES 1

L 1

ll' l

science Apphcations,Inc.

,j,

_ n.

y 7 - ~

F

\\

,r TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE, UNIT 1 INSERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM INTRODUCTION f

The revision to 10 CFR 50.55a, published in February 1976, required that Inservice Inspection,(ISI) Programs be updated to meet the requirements (to t'he extent practical) of the Edition and Addenda of Section XI of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code

  • incorporated I

in the Regulation by reference in paragraph (b). This updatir.g of the programs

'ias required to be done every 40 months to reflect the new requirements of the later edition of Section XI.

As specified in the February 1976 revision, for plants with Operating Licenses issued prior to March 1, 1976, the Regulations became effective after September 1,1976, at the start of the next regular 40-month inspection period.

The initial inservice examinations conducted during the first 40-month period were to comply with the requirements in editions of Section XI and addenda in g

effect no more than six months prior to the date of start of facility connercial operation.

The Regulation recognized that the requirements of the later editions and C

addenda of the Section XI might not be practical to implement at facilities be-cause of limitations of design, geometry, and materials of construction of components and systems.

It therefore permitted detenninations of impractical examination or testing requirements to be evaluated. Relief from these require-C ments could be granted provided health and safety of the public were not endan-gered giving due consideration to the burden placed on the licensee if the requirements were imposed. This report provides evaluations of the various requests for relief by the licensee, Arkansas Power and Light (APL), of tne D

Arkansas Nuclear One, 'Jnit 1 Plant.

It deals only with inservice examinations of components and with system pressure tests.

Inservice tests of pumps and valves (IST programs) are being evaluated separately.

L

Al

/

- science Appucations,Inc.

a

1-c The revision to 10 CFR 50.55a, effective November 1,1979, modified the time interval for updating ISI programs and incorporated by reference a later edition and addenda of Section XI. The updating intervals were extended from 40 months to 120 months to be consistent with intervals as definea in Section XI.

For plants with Operating Licenses issued prior to March 1,1976, the provisions of the November 1,1979, revision are effective after September 1, C

1976, at the start of the next one-third of the 120-month interval. During the one-third of an interval and throughout the remainder of the interval, inservice examinations shall comply with the latest edition and addenda of Section XI, incorporated by reference in the Regulation, on the date 12 months prior to the start of that one-third of an interval.

For Arkansas One, the ISI program and the relief requests evaluated in this report cover the second and third 40-month inspection period of the first 10-year interval, i.e., from April 19, 1978, through December 19, 1984. This procram was based upon the 1974

(

Edition of Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code with Addenda throuah the Suraner of 1975.

The November 1979 revision of the Regulation also provides that the ISI C

programs may meet the requirements of subsequent code editions and addenda, incorporated by reference in Paragraph (b) and subject to Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approval. Portions of such editions or addenda may be used provided that all related requirements of the respective editions or addenda C

are met. These instances are addressed on a case-by-case basis in the body of this report.

Finally,Section XI of the Code provides for certain components and systems to be exempted from its requirements.

In some instances, these exemp-tions are not acceptable to NRC or are only acceptable with restrictions.

References (1) to (9) listed at the end of this report pertain to infor-mation transmittals on the Inservice Inspection (ISI) Program between the L

licensee and the NRC. By letters of April 28 and November 24, 1976,(1,3) the Commission provided general ISI guidance to all licensees. Submittals in response to that guidance were made by the licensee on June 9, 1976,(2) and October 19,1977.I4) The October 19, 1977, submittal also contained propcsed C

changes to the Technical Specifications. The Commission granted interim 13, 1978,(6) and relief on April 20,1978.(5) By letters of September

.I

. science Aconcations. inc.

?"'~'_^

J

r March 2, 1982,(10) the NRC requested additional information to ccmplete this review. Some responses were furnished by the licensee on December 15, 1978.(7) As of the date of this report, the licensee has not responded to the Marcii 2,1982, request.

In addition, a one-time r.elief request was made on January 10,1979,(8) for reactor welds whose examination had not been in compliance with Code. Relief was granted on March 8,1979,(9) and so this request is not. covered in this report.

I From these submittals, a total of fiv.e requests for relief from Code requirements or updating to a later code were identified. These requests are evaluated in the following sections of this report. The failure of the licensee to respond to the March 2,1982 request for information does not affect SAI's evaluation of these relief requests. However, the licensee apparently still has a number of pending items that have not been fomalized into relief requests.

In addition, he has not committed to a program to inspect the Emergency Core Cooling, Residual Heat Removal, and Containment Heat Removal systems as required by 10 CFR 50.55a(b)(2)(iv)( A).

C

(

e i

c u

l

//

af f Science Apphcations,Inc.

f

1 r

I.

CLASS 1 COMPONENTS A.

Reactor Vessel 1.

Nozzle-to-Shell Welds and Nozzle Inside Radiused Sections Category B-D, Item Bl.4

(

Code Requirement A volumetric analysis of these welds shall be made according to the schedule given in paragraph IWB-2411, which states, "at least 25% of the required examinations shall have been completed by the expiration of one-third of the inspec-tion interval (with credit for no more than 33-1/3% if ad-C ditional examinations are completed) and at least 50% shall have been completed b inspection interval (y the expiration of two-thirds of thewith credit for no more tha The remaining required examinations shall be completed by the end of the inspection interval."

Code Relief Recuest Relief is requested from the schedule given in IWB-2411.

C-Proposed Alternative Examination All nozzles will be examined once every 10 years near the end of the interval when the core barrel is removed.

In ad-dition, both outlet nozzles would be examined from the inside during the first third of the interval.

C Licensee's Basis for Requesting Relief i

This request involves the four inlet nozzles and two core flood nozzles. Access to these nozzles would require defueling and removal of the core barrel.

lC Evaluation i

i Removing the core barrel more than once during an interval merely to comply with schedule given in IWB-2411 is not practi-q cal from the standpoint of keeping personnel exposures as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA). This is recognized for Category B-B pressure retaining welds where Code pennits exami-nation at or near the end of each inspection interval. The licensee's proposed alternative examination exceeds Code requirements in one respect: the outlet nozzles are examined c

twice--once during the first third of the interval and once at the end of the interval.

//

Arf f science Apphcations,Inc.

g.

Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the above evaluation, it is concluded that for the welds discussed above, the code requirements are impractical.

Iiis further concluded that the alternative examination dis-r Msed above will provide necessary added assurance of struc-tural reliability. Therefore, the following is recommended:

Code relief from IWB-2411 should be granted and the pro-posed alternative of examining all the nozzles at one time f'

when the core barrel is removed (with the outlet nozzles already examined during the first inspection period) should be approved.

c References Reference 4.

T C

C C

i

(

sr C

a

-5 Science Apphcations. Inc.

h -

L s

(

s 2.

Nozzle to Safe-End Welds, Category B-F, Item Bl.6 Code Requirement Volumetric and surface examinations shall be made of 100% of each circumferential weld of dissimilar metals.

Examinations in each 40-month period shall be in accor-dance with paragraph IWB-2411.

r_

Code Relief Request Relief is requested from the schedule given in IWB-2411 for the two core flood nozzle safe-end welds.

O Proposed Alternative Examination Both core flood nozzle safe-end welds would be examined at the end of the interval from the vessel ID using a remote examination device, c

Licensee's Basis for Requesting Relief Access would require defueling and removal of core barrel. Although these welds were examined from the OD during baseline, ultrasonic examination from the vessel C

ID using a remote examination device is preferred to limit high radiation exposures to personnel.

Evaluation Examination from the inside using the remote examination r

device is the only practical way to examine tnese welds and keep personnel exposure as low as reasonably achievable. The core barrel needs to be removed to make these examinations and this should only need doing once per interval. This is recoc-nized in the Code requirements for Category B-B examinations, which only require that the examination be done at or near the

(

end of the inspection interval.

Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the above evaluation, it is concluded that for l

the welds discussed above, the code requirements are im-practical.

It is further concluded that the alternative examination discussed above will provide necessary added assurance of structural reliability. Therefore, the fol-lowing is recommended:

(

Jl jf f, Science Appheauons. Inc.

1 s

(

Code relief from IWB-2411 should be granted and the proposed alternative of examining both core flood nozzles at one time when the core barrel is removed should be approved.

References Reference 4 i

(

r

(.

r C

(

's Al

/

8 ~

7_

Science Apphcations,Inc.

-~ - -

u.

- ~. w.

-.c.: a...-. : -..

s C

3.

pressure Retaining Bolting, Category B-G-2, Item Bl.11 i

Code Requirement T

Visual examination of 100% of the bolts, studs and nuts each interval is required. Bolting may be examined either in place under tension, when the connection is disassembled, or when bolting is removed.

(

Code Relief Request Relief is requested from examining 100% of the Control Rod Drive Mechanism (CRDri) bolts and housing flange rings.

C' proposed Alternative Examination The licensee proposes to examine bolts and nuts on 10% of peripheral CRDM's to coincide with the extent of CRDM's examination as required by. Category B-0, Pressure p

Retaining Welds in CRD Housing.

Licensee's Basis for Requesting Relief It is impractical to visually examine the light flange bolts on each of the 69 CRDMs from the platform of the head C

service structure, approximately 20 feet above the flange surface. Most of the bolts on the 24 peripheral CRDM can be observed through the twelve 12" dia. ports in the ser-Vice structure cylinder. The remainder of the CRDMs accessible for examination only when removed.

C Evaluation Due to the design of the reactor, the pressure retaining bolting, except for the peripheral CRDM is not accessible l

for visual inspection except when the CRDM is removed. Visual Ie inspection of the bolting in place provides only limited in-l fonnation about the condition of the bolting.

Furthermore, unbolting to examine the bolting may compromise the system more than it provides assurance of integrity.

Evidence of leakage during pressure tests provides better information.

The cost and personnel exposure encountered in removing all C

the CRDMs to make a visual inspection is not warranted by the increase in safety.

The licensee proposes to examine 10% of the 24 peripheral CRDM bolting each interval.

In addition, the licensee should examine the bolting of any CRDM when removed and should con-G duct the visual inspection for leakage during pressure tests.

8 science Appheations.inc.

_.a..

.. ~..,,,.

.n~

.u w -..

'..m>

f..-

,--w

L.

... ;... n.;..... _ _.

-._a

=.

s C

Conclusions and Recommendations t.

Based on the above evaluation, it is concluded that for the bolting discussed above, the code requirements are im-practical. It is further concluded that the alternative ex-amination discussed above will provide necessary added assur-ance of structural reliability. Therefore, it is recomended that relief should be granted from 100% visual examination of C

the CRDM bolting, provided that:

(a) the bolting of 10% of the peripheral CRDris is examined each interval, (b) the bolting of all the removed CRDMs is examined, and C

(c) visual examinations for evidence of leakage are made -

during pressure tests perfonned according to IWB-5000.

References C

Reference 4.

C C

l 1

C C

1 C

A O Science Applications,Inc.

g,

w___-.

.u..

s

. C-v B.

Pressurizer i.

'No relief requests.

k.

C.

Heat Exchangers and Steam Generators No relief requests.

lC D.

Piping Pressure Boundary l

1.

Circumferential Butt Welds, Category B-J, Item B4.5 C?

Code Requirement The volumetric examinations performed during each in-spection interval shall cover all of the area of 25% of the circumferential joints, including the adjoining 1-foot sections of longitudinal joints, as scheduled according to r,

paragraph IWB-2411. Examinations in each interval shall cover a different 25% until all welds have been examined.

Code Relief Request Relief is requested from making examinations of inacces-C' sible circumferential welds which are as follows:

(1)

High Pressure Injection Lines - Welds Al-8A, A2-4A, B1-10A, and B2-10A.

(2)

Core Flood Lines

- Welds W-1 and Y-1.

Proposed Alternative Examination None.

C Licensee's Basis for Requesting Relief High Pressure Injection welds Al-8A, A2-4A, B1-10A, and B2-10A are inside penetrations in the shield wall and are not accessible for examination.

Core Flood welds W-1 and Y-1 are inaccessible for examination due to pipe g,

supports. These welds were not examined during baseline and this fact is documented in the preoperational inspec-tion report.

l C

Al J

D science Apphcahons,Inc.

s

-r-----.

pL u..

.=

l G

l Evaluation Because these six welds are completely inaccessible, examination is not practical. However, the number of in-(

accessible welds is sufficiently small and random, compared with the total number of welds in Category B-J (or in either of the two affected systems) that none of these welds needs to be included in the 25% sample to be examined during this inspection interval.

P For subsequent inspection intervals, the licensee has the option of updating to subsequent code versions or of staying with the 1974 Edition and addenda through the Summer i

1975 Addenda, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(b)(2)(ii). Updating would allow the licensee to examine the same 25% sample, if the provisions of the Sumer 1978 Addenda of the 1977 Edition con-tinue to prevail (see Footnote (2) of Category B-J in Table IWB-2500-1). Byadopting10CFR50.55a(b)(2)(ii)theCommission I

was offering an option whereby " operating facilities with on-going inscrvice inspection programs would have continuity in the extent and frequency of examinations for pipe welds" (see 44 FR 57913).

G Based on these considerations, relief from these require-ments is not required at this time for these welds.

It is preferable to defer a decision until the next inspection interval after the licensee has detennined which of the above options he wishes to exercise.

C In addition, visual examination of the welds for which code relief is requested could be performed in the interim.

Those welds covered by the pipe supports could also be examined if the pipe supports can and need to be disassembled for

- maintenance.

G Conclusions and Recomendations Based on the above evaluation, it is ccncluded that for these welds in the core flood and high pressure injection G

lines, relief from the impractical Code requirements is not needed. Therefore, the following is recomended:

(a) Relief from volumetric examination should not be granted for this inspection interval.

O (b) In the event that the pipe supports are disassembled for maintenance and the welds W-1 and Y-1 in the core ficod lines are accessible for examination, the Code-required examination should be perfonned.

O References Reference 4.

A O

science Apphcations,Inc.

s.

-11 3

3.

-y,-,s,.g.,~~~--~--~--e

~~

- - - - - - ~ ~ ~

r-

L_

C 2.

Integrally Welded Supports, Cateaory B-K-1, Item B4.9 Code Requirement _

The areas shall include the integrally welded external support attachments. 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 C

two support thicknesses. The examination performed during each inspection interval shall cover 25% of the integrally welded supports and shall be scheduled within the interval per IWB-2411.

'C Code Relief Request Relief is requested from the volumetric examination.

Proposed Alternative Examination Surface examination will be performed on integrally C

welded attachments.

Licensee's Basis for Reauesting Relief The welds are not designed for ultrasonic examination.

e Most of the welded attachment for supports are fillet welds (as opposed to full penetration) and are comprised of com-ponents with geometric configurations that prohibit ultra-sonic examination of the examination area.

G Evaluation The geometry of fillet welds for piping supports generally cannot be examined to the extent required by Section XI by ultrasonic examination. Ultrasonic examination of the base metal would detect piping flaws in the heat affected zone

,9 but would provide little or no information on weld penetra-l tion. Any penetration flaws would most likely generate at the surface and be detectable by surface examination.

Conclusions and Recomendations C

Based on the above evaluation, it is concluded that for the welds discussed above, the code requirements are im-l It is further concluded that the alternative practical.

examination discussed above will provide necessary added assur-t l

ance of structural reliability. Therefore, it is recomended that Code relief from volumetric examination be granted provided I

' O the alternative surface examination is performed.

References Reference 4.

A

~

science Applications.Inc.

b __

v-c E.

Pump Pressure Boundary No relief requests.

F.

Valve Pressure Boundary No relief requests, e

II. CLASS 2 COMPONENTS No relief requests.

L III. CLASS 3 COMPONENTS C

No relief requests.

IV. PRESSURE TESTS No relief requests.

C V.

GENERAL No relief requests.

G

/

(;

O C

C 2l J

Q science Applications.inc.

8

. -., - - et-, e - :- -

~-

L.

.(

REFERENCES

}

1.

D. L. Ziemann (NRC) to J. D. Phillips (APL), Arkansas Nuclear One-

[

Unit No. 1, April 28, 1976.

I 2.

W. Cavanaugh, III (APL) to D. L. Ziemann (NRC), Inservice Inspection Testing Requirements, June 9, 1976.

i 3.

D. L. Ziemann (NRC) to J. D. Phillips (APL), Arkansas Nuclear One-Unit No. 1, License No. DPR-51, November 24, 1976.

4.

W. Cavanaugh III (APL) to D. K. Davis (NRC), Arkansas Nuclear One-Unit No.1, Docket No. 50-313, License No. DPR-51, Proposed Technical Specifications, October 19, 1977.

5.

R. W. Reid (NRC) to W. Cavanaugh III (APL), April 20, 1978.

6.

R. W. Reid (NRC) to W. Cavanaugh III (APL), September 13, 1978.

C 7.

D. H. Williams (APL) to R. W. Reid (NRC), Arkansas Nuclear One-Unit No. 1, Docket No. 50-313, License No. DPR-51, Inservice Inspection Program, December 15, 1978.

c.

8.

D. H. Williams (APL) to R. W. Reid (NRC), Arkansas Nuclear One -

Unit No. 1 Docket 50-313, License No. DPR-51, Inservice Inspection, January 10, 1979.

9.

R. W. Reid (NRC) to W. Cavanaugh III (APL), March 8, 1979.

(

10.

J. F. Stolz (NRC) to W. Cavanaugh III (APL), March 2, 1982.

c.

C C

1/ fe science Apohcanons.inc.

ggy

...--.7-_.,,,-

~--

-

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20023A490&oldid=4633099"