ML20034C697
| ML20034C697 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 04/26/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20033E011 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-88-01, GL-88-1, NUDOCS 9005040341 | |
| Download: ML20034C697 (3) | |
Text
p rao o
UNITED STATES 3m j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n a WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 ~
%...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION EVALUATION OF NRC GENERIC LETTER 88-01 RESDONSE BOSTON E0lSON COMPANY PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION DOCKET NO. 50-293^
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Boston Edison Company, the licensee, submitted its responses to NRC Generic tetter (GL) 88-01, "NRC Position on: 1GSCC in BWR Austenitic Stainless Steel piping" for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station by letters dated August 4,-1988:
and June 19, 1989.- GL-88-01 requested licensees and construction permit-holders to resolve the (IGSCC) issue for BWR piping made.of austenitic stainless steel--
that is 4 inches or larger in nominal-diameter and contains reactor coolant at 1
a temperature above 200 degrees Fahrenheit during power operation, regardless of Code classification.
The licensee was requested to address the following:
1.
Their current plans regarding pipe replacement and/or other measures taken i
-to mitigate IGSCC and to provide assurance of continued long term integrity and reliability of the subject piping.
2.
Their Inservice Inspection (ISI) program as required by GL-88-01, to be implemented at.the next refueling' outage for austenitic stainless steel piping, and that conforms to the staff positions on inspection schedules, methods and perstnnel and sample. expansion.
3.
A proposed Technica1' Specification change to include a statement, in th'e.
section on ISI, that the ISI Program for piping covered by the scope of this
- 3 q
letter'will follow staff positions on schedule, methods and personnel, and sample. expansion in GL 88-01 (See model BWR Standard Technical Specification i
enclosed in GL 88-01).
It is recognized that the Inservice = Inspection and
- 1 Testing sections regarding these welds may be removed from the: Technical Specifications through the TS improvement program.
In this: case, this requirement would remain with the ISI section when it is removed to an alternative document.
4.
Confirmation of plans to ensure that the Technical Specifications related j
to leakage detection will be in conformance with the staff positions on leak detection included in GL 88-01.
i i
O 3
j P
r
- f
-j,
[
2 5.-
Their plans to notify-the NRC,.in accordance with.10 CFR 50.55a(g). of any identified flaws that do not meet the IWB-3500 criter_ia of Section XI of the-Code _in regard to continued operation without evaluation of the flaw, or a 4
change found_in the condition of welds previously known to be cracked.
Such notification should include evaluation of the-flaws, justification'for continued operation and/or~your repair plans.
2.0 DISCUSSION The licensee's response to GL 88-01 has been reviewed by the staff with the' assistance of its contractor, Viking Systems international (VSI). The attached Technical Evaluation-Report (TER) is VS1's. evaluation of-the licensee's response to Gt 88-01. The staff has reviewed the TER and concurs with the evaluations, conclusions, and recommendations contained in the TER with the exception noted below.
In the review of the licensee's GL 88-01 submittal, the staff has found the following positions to be unacceptable:-
1 1
1.
The. licensee's position to ex1cude from the scope of applicability of Gl. 88-01, the welds in the portion of,the RWCU piping outboard of the isolation valves. As a minimum the licensee.should prepare an inspection plan of the RWCU piping outboard of the isolation valves j
on a sampling basis with justification.
t
'l 2.
The licensee's-position on sample expansion does not comply with the requirements in GL 88-01.
3.
The licensee's position not to amend the Technical. Specification-(TS) to include an 151 statement as required in GL 88-01.
For a detailed discussion of these items see sections 2.0 and 3.0 of'the TER attached to the SE.
The staff has re-evaluated the frequency of leakage monitoring.
After discus-sions with several BWR' licensees the staff concluded that monitoring every four hours creates an unnecessary administrative hardship on the plant operators.
Therefore, the staff takes exception to the TER recommendation and-considers the licensee's position to monitor unidentified leakage every eight hours acceptable.
3.0 CONCLUSION
i Based on our review of the licensee's responses the staff-concludes thatLthe responses are acceptable with the exception of the licensee's positions as _
identified above. The licensee is requested to submit a TS change to include a piping ISI statement as required in Gl. 88-01 and submit as committed in the licensee's letter of June 19, 1989, the TS on leakage monitoring with the exception i
that unidentified leakage may be monitored every eight hours instead of every four hours.
i
E J, i!
g 6
'4'
'II,
.jp f (
a a '
C u.
a The staff also concludes that the-proposed IGSCC inspection and hit.igation program will provide. reasonable assurance of maintaining the'long term struc-tural integrity of'austenitic stainless steel piping at the Pilgrin Nuclear Power:.y Station.
6, 3 /
Principal Contributor:
William H. Koo
./
-i Dated:-
13 i
f 2
i
/
5/-
b 3
j
)f t
E q{ ( $ ri o
. x,
/;i\\
t'
,i-
-21 L
~-
i t
'( I
/
=
--M s
f I
?
-A
?
i t
V l.l/
(f i
s 1
s
/
-)
2 7
,y,-
,t, s
_.......