ML20037C349
| ML20037C349 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 01/19/1981 |
| From: | Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Abel J COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8102040522 | |
| Download: ML20037C349 (7) | |
Text
.
,u, p. '_..I>G-
((
y '^3 g. 0, UNITED STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
4
.. C WASHINGTON O, C. 20565 s-t
%, v s
/e
, w' / g JAN 19 1981
[/ k Docket Nos.:
50-373 h
_g 4
and 50-374 J4ff ~,;! lcg T u.,R'xeID% k9
~
D 2>' '
Mr. J. S. Abel
^
Director of Nuclear Licensing O,
<f Cermonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 f,/c d S
Chicago, Illinois 60690
Dear Mr. Abel:
SUBJECT:
RECUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATICN - LASALLE COUNTY STATICN 2
As a result of our review of your application for operating licenses for LaSalle, we find that we need additional information in the areas of materials engineering and systems interactions. The specific information required is provided in the Enclosure. With respect to the materials engineering concern, we discussed this issue at the LRG review meeting held on August 28, 1980, and we held a telecon with your personnel on the systems interactions concern on December 19, 1980.
If you desire any discussion or clarification of the information requested, please contact A. Bournia, Licensing Project Manager, (301)492-7200.
Sincerely, Y.C m.
Rcbert L. Tedesco Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
Requests For Additional Infonnation ces w/ enclosures:
See next page 8102040 qQ
i Mr. J. S. Abel Director of Nuclear Licensing Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690 cc: Philip P. Steptoe, Esq.
Suite 4200 One First National Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60603 Dean Hansell, Esquire Assistant Attorney General 188 West Randolph Street Suite 2315 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Mr. Roger 'dalker, Resident Inspector U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 224 Marseilles, Illinois 61364 4
9 e
i T
i t
1 a
w y
y gw,
eya g
4
-y g
a
~
ENCLOSURE Request for Additional Information
, LaSalle County Station, Unit Nos 1 & 2 Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374 120.0 Materials Encineerino Branch 121.21 We have assessed tne ferritic materials in the LaSalle County Station Units 1 & 2 containment system that constitute the containment pressure boundary to determine if the material fracture touchness is in compliance with the requirements of General Design Criterion (GCC) 51, " Fracture Prevention of Containment Pressure Bounda ry. "
GDC-51 requires that under operating, maintenance, testing and postulated accident conditions, (1) the ferritic materials of the containment pressure boundary behave in a nonbriti;le manner and (2) the probability of rapidly propagating fracture is minimized.
The primary containment of each of the units is a reinforced concrete structure i
with a thin steel liner on the inside surface which serves as a leaktight membrane.
The ferritic materials of the containment ' pressure boundary which were considered in our assessment were those applied in the fabrication of the equipment hatch, personnel airlocks, penetrations, drywell head and piping system components, including the isolation valves required to isolate the system. These components are the parts of the containment system which are not backed by concrete and must sustain loads.
The containment pressure boundary is comprised of ASME Code Class 1, 2, and MC components.
In late 1979, we reviewed the fracture toughness requireme'nts of the ferritic materials of Class MC, Class 2 and Class 1 components which typically constitste the containment pressure boundary. Based on this review we determined that the fracture toughness requirements contained in ASME Code Editions and Addende typical of those used in the design of the LaSalle County Station Units 1 & 2 primary containment may not ensure compliance with GDC-51 for all areas of the containment pressum boundary. We initiated a procram to review fracture toughness
requirements for containment pressure boundary materials for the purpose of defining those fracture toughness criteria that most appropriately address the rcquirements of GDC-51. Prior to completion of this study, we have elected to apply in our licensing reviews the criteria identified in the Suneer 1977 Addenda of Section III of the ASME Code for Class 2 components. These criteria were selected to ensure that uniform fracture toughness requirements, consistent with the containment safety function, are applied to all components in the containment pressure boundary. Accordingly, we have reviewed the Class 1, 2, and MC components in the LaSalle County Station Unit 1 & 2 containment pressure boundary according to the fracture toughness requirements of the Sunner 1977 Addenda of Section III for Class 2 components. However, in order to complete our review we. require additional information because the FSAR does not provide the infonnation necessary to characterize the fracture toughness of the reactor containment pressure boundary
- within the context of GDC-51. We request,' therefore, that the following information be provided by the applicant:
(1) Lowest Metal Service Temperature The lowest service metal temperature within the context of the effective NE 2300 and GDC 51.
(2) Penet rations (a) Listing of all containment hot and cold pipe penetrations and related supplemental information which identifies penetration assembly. sleeve, process pipe and end closure materials by specification, final heat treat condition, nominal 00 and schedule, wall or section thickness.
(b) Full size assently and detail drawings showing as-built configurations and dimensioning of hot and cold pipe penetrations.
(c) Fracture toughness data relating to the materials of those parts of pene-tration assemblies which perform the containment function and pmvide a pressure boundary' under the conditions cited by GDC 51
( 3)
Devwell Head - Equiement Hatch and personnel Access Airlock (a) Full size assembly drawing and detail drawings which identify and dimension those parts which. constitute parts of the containment pressure boundary.
(b) Supplemental information related to item 3(a) above whicn identifies materials of the parts of interest by specification, final heat treat condition, and section thickness.
(c) Fracture toughness data relating to the materials of those parts which perform the containment function and provide a pressure boundary under the conditions cited by GCC 51.
(4) Main Steam - Main Feedwater - Auxiliary Feedwater Systems (a) Full size piping diagram & related pipe line list, pipe design tables which identify these systems by line designators & pipe size, schedule or wall and material by specification and grade and which identify valves by number type and valve pressure boundary materials by specification, grade and final heat treat condition.
(b) Fracture toughness data relating to the materials of those parts of the main steam - main feedwater and auxiliary feedwater systems which perform the containment function and provide a pressure boundary under the conditions cited by GDC 51.
(c) Graphic legend infonnation relating to the piping diagrams addressed in item 4(a).
Should the fracture toughness data requested under items 2(c), 3(c) and 4(b) above be unavailable, the applicant is requested to provide the following infonnation for the materials of interest.
i l
i
( 1)
Seamless Pipe (a) Billet heating temperature prior to piercing (b) In-process reheat temperature (c) Stock wall thickness prior to final sizing (d) Reheat temperature prior to final sizing (e) Pipe final heat treatment or pipe assembly heat treatment
( 2)
Seamless Ells
~
(a) Stock heating temperature prior to hot forming (b)
In-process reheat temperatures (c) Ell final heat treatment or pipe assembly heat treatments
"( 3) Welded Pipe (a) Metallurgical heat treat condition or plate stock as entered into fabrication (b) Plate stock heating temperature prior to hot forming (c)
In-process reheat temperatures (d) Pipe final heat treatment or pipe assembly heat treatments (4) Welded Ells (a) Metallurgical heat treat condition of stock as entered in fabrication (b) Stock heating temperature prior to hot forming (c) In-process reheat temperatures l
(d) In-process heat treatments (e) Ell final heat treatment or pipe assembly heat treatments (5) Valves (a) Final metallurgical heat treat condition of the materials of those parts which constitute parts of the pressure boundary (b) In-process postweld repair heat treatments of the materials of those parts which constitute parts of the pressure boundary.
51 0.0 SYSTEMS INTERACTION BRANCH 51 0.1 Determine whether the action or failure of any non-safety grade power supply can cause the failure of one or more of the following systems to perform their monitoring function; or can cause the failure of local or control room instruments, readouts or alarms in the following systems which are used by the operator to ascertain radiation levels in the effluent stack:
a.
Plant Vent Stack Exhaust Sampler System (Figure 7.3-14, Sheet 1 in the FSAR),
b.
Station Vent Stack Wide Range Gas Monitor System (Figure 11.5-1, Sheet 2 in the FSAR),
c.
Standby Gas Treatment Vent Wide Range Gas Monitor Systen (Figure 11.5-1, Sheet 2 in the FSAR).
Discuss the results of your determination in detail.
51 0.2 Describe generally the review and analysis activities per',emed on the LaSalle design that are intended to identify adverse systems interactions.
e l
l I
i