ML20033H023
| ML20033H023 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 03/27/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20033E015 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-88-01, GL-88-1, NUDOCS 9004160068 | |
| Download: ML20033H023 (2) | |
Text
.
. o l
f#o. weg\\
j UNITED 8TAft8 l
f NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[
usHwatow,0. c. tosos
]
(.....
ENCLOSURE 1 i
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION 1
EVALUATION OF RESPONSE TO NRC GENERIC LETTER 88-01 j
i t
j PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY j
j PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY l
DELMARVA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY j
l ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY l
PEACH BOTTOM ATOMIC POWER STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3 1
DOCKET NOS. 50-277 AND 50 278 l
1.0 INTRODUCTION
PhiladelphiaElectricCompanysubmitteditsresponsetoNRCGenericLetter(GL) 88-01, titled "NRC Position on IGSCC in BWR Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping" i
for Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, by letters dated August 2, i
i 1989, and March 31, 1989.
Subsequent to its response to GL 88 01, additional information was requested by the staff in a June 16, 1989 letter.
In its l
August 25, 1989 response, the licensee elected to wait for the staff to review the original submittals and identify any open items. The licensee stated it would provide a response to the open items.
GL 88-01 requested licensees and construction ermit holders to resolve the i
intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC issue for BWR piping made of austenitic stainless steel that is four inches or larger in nominal diameter l
and contains reactor coolant at a temperature above 200 degrees Fahrenheit during power operation regardless of code classification. The licensee was requested to address the following:
l 1.
The current plans regarding pipe replacement and/or other measures taken i
I to mitigate IGSCC and provide assurance of continued long term integrity and reliability.
I l
?..
TheInserviceInspection(ISI)Programtobeimplementedatthenext refueling outage for austenitic stainless steel piping covered under the I
scope of GL 88-01 that conforms to the staff positions on inspection I
schedules, methods and personnel, and sample expansion.
3.
A Technical Specification change to include a statement in the section on
!$1 that the !$1 Program for piping covered by the scope of GL 88 01 will be in conformance with the staff positions on schedule, methods and personnel, and sample expansion.
3 FDC l
t
)
. 2 4
The confirination of the licensee's plans to ensure that the Technical i
Specifications related to leakage detection will be in conformance with the staff positions on leakage detection included in GL 88 01.
5.
TheplanstonotifytheNRCinaccordancewith10CFR50.55a(g)ofany 1
flaws identified that do not meet !WB-3500 criteria of section XI of the ASME Code for continued operation without evaluation, or a change found in i
l the condition of the welds previously known to be cracked, and evaluation of the flaws for continued operation and/or repair plans.
3 2.0 DISCUSSION i
The licensee's response to NRC GL 88-01 has been reviewed by the staff with the j
ast.istance of its contractor, Viking Systems International (VSI). The Technical 1
EvaluationReports(TERs)providedasAttachments1and2areVSl'sevaluations
{
of the licensee's responses to NRC GL 88 01. The staff has reviewed the TERs and concurs with the evaluations,he licensee's responses are acceptable with conclusions, and recommendations contained in the TERs. The staff finds that t the exception of the following:
1.
Thelicensee'spositionnottoamendtheTechnicalSpecifications(TS)to T
include a statement on ISI as discussed in GL 88-01.
I 2.
The licensee did not indicate its position on water chemistry, weld over16y, stress improvement of cracked weldments, and clamping devices.
3.
The licensee's use of the term " generally" with regard to ultrasonic testing.
4 The licensee did not indicate why the reactor water cleanup system welds outside containment were considered to be uninspectable, 5.
The licensee did not provide actual inspection plans.
l For discussion of these items, see sections 2.0 and 3.0 of the attached TERs.
3.0 CONCLUSION
l Based on the review of the licensee's response to GL 88-01, the staff concludes l
that the response as evaluated is acceptable with the exception of the licensee's l
positions as identified above.
Subject to the resolution of the identified open items, the staff concludes that the proposed IGSCC inspection and mitigation program will provide reasonable assurance of maintaining the long-term structural integrity of austenitic stainless steel piping at the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3.
Dated: March 27, 1990 Principal Contributors:
T. McLellan W. Koo 6