ML20053E475

Requests Addl Info in Response to Listed Questions Re Util Responses to Aslab 820415 Memorandum & Order Concerning Repair & Future Operation of HPI Nozzles.Response Requested within 20 Days of Receipt of Ltr

ML20053E475
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	05/21/1982
From:	Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Mattimoe J SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
References
TAC-48349, NUDOCS 8206080391
Download: ML20053E475 (7)

Text

.

M D-c/ %

b' NAY 211982 0

'50

~

DISTR C Dockef m ORB #4 Rdg ACRS-10 NRC PDR DEisenhut IE L PDR RIngram H0rnstein MPadovan EBlackwood Docket Ib. 50-312 LRubenstein s8 II$

F1

_B1ack-JKnight p

Q AE0D -

g pgg Mr. J. J. Mattimoe 1

1 M, Y27$825 Assistant General Manager and

~~.

6201 S Street

- "Sigy$*w"a 5 Chief Engineer 9-ne

- Sacramento Municipal Utilit;y District P. O. Box 15830 Sacramento, California 95813' 0>

N Dear fir. Mattimoe

SUBJECT:

ASLAB MEMORANDUM AHD ORDER DATED APRIL 15, 1982 - REQUEST FDR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON HPI N0ZZLES As a result of make-up nozzle cracking experienced at the Crystal River-3 and Oconee plants, the Rancho Seco facility was shutdown on April 3,1982 to pemit ultrasonic testing and radiographi.c examination of the four high pressure injection (HPI) nozzles. The results of the examinations indicated: 1) the nozzle A safe-end was cracked, 2) the nozzle A themal sleeve was missing, and 3) the thermal sleeve in nozzle B was dislocated.

Following these discoveries, the ASLAB issued the April 15, W82 Memoran-dun and Order requesting infomation about your plans for nozzle repair and future operation of Rancho Seco. The questions the ASLAB asked were:

Question ib.1:

If the thermal sleeve has traveled to the bottom of the reactor vessel, what effect might this have on the instrumentation _ guide tubes?

Question ib. 2: Do the intended repairs include location and perhaps removal of the missing themal sleeve?

Question No. 3:

In replacing the sleeve, will the original design of the sleeve retention buttons be changed? If so,.how? If not, how will this problem be avoided in the future?.

Question ib. 4: What is being done to pmvent the loss of the tharmal sleeves in the other nozzles? If nothing is contemplated, why?

Question tb. 5: How can we be assured of safe operation if the plant mturns to full power after completion of these repairs?

We have reviewed your response to the ASLAB's questions and we find that additional information is necessary for us to complete our review.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f), we request that you provide us, withini 20 des of receipt of this letter, your response to the questions below.

o mea

...... ~.

.. ~. - - ~

B206000391 820521 son =4M

............ ~ -.

PDR ADOCK 05000312 P

PDR enn

.. - ~ ~

.~.~.-- ~..

~ ~ ~. ~.

~~~~

~~

~ -

~ " " ~

NRc rORM 318 00-80) NRCM 0ao OFFICIAL RECORD COPY uso - -aa> =

Of g.

xfY Hr. J. J. Mattimoe This infomation shall be submitted to the llRC signed under oath or affimation, to enable the Commission to _detemine whether or not your license should be modified, suspended or revoked.

I.

Provide the bases fbr your conclusion that "no. plausible means have been identified for the thermal sleeve,to cause,themal-hydraulic damage to the com fmm flow blockage". Consider the possibility of a damaged themal sleeve configuration (e.g., longitudinally split and flattened) that can enter the reactor vessel plenun between the flow distributor and the lower grid plate.,

II. If there is a plausible means of flow blockage fmn your considera-tions of Question 1 then describe the bases for concluding that the Loose Parts Ibnitor installed at Rancho Seco will be capable of detecting movement of the loose thermal sleeve.

III. The themal sleeve in nozzle A has been missing for an undetemined amount of time (up to six years,of_ plant operation).

In this situation thermal fatigue cracking may have occurred on the inside surface of the RCS cold leg piping downstream.of the make-up line connection. An illus-tration of such cracking in feeetater lines at the Barseback unit,in Sweden is shown in Enclosure.1, figures 1 and 2.

Although the thermal

~

and hydraulic conditions causing the pipe. cracking in the.Barseback uni.t are different than the conditions at Rancho Seco, we request _that you pmvide us with your plans for augmenting your ISI program to include non-destructive examinations of.thes.e areas on.a periodic bases.

IV. In your reply to the ASLAB's Question 4, you indicate that new themal sleeves are installed in nozzles _A,and,B, but no replacement of C&D themal sleeves is necessary.

A.

Please pmvide us your schedule for. future periodic non-destructive examinatione of the nozzles, so that loosing of the nozzles will be wtected.

V.

Pmvide an evaluation of the nuttier.of,thernal-cycles imposed upon the make-up nozzle fmm all sources,_against the design,nwber of allowable _-

themal gcles. The evaluation should_ include themal cycles from_ sur-ve111ance testing and plant startup.,ye. understand that during a normal plant startup~ and during surveillance., testing, valve SFV 23604..(see. _

, ) is ecled ntnerous. times since yalve SIM,034, leaks. This closing and opening of valve SFV 23604 could cause nozzle A to be_ repeatedly heated g by the RCS and then quickly cooled by make-up flow, causing additional themal ecling of nozzle A.,

CFFICE)

................a....

...... ~..............

..aaa an.~anaa

a. a a... a a.a..=.

• • a a.. a..~. a.a a aaa ** a n a ~ ~ a*

• SUANA40Eh

............a.a......

.........a...........a

..aaaan nan aa..

anaa..uananaa aa.a a..**a.a a**

care p

...~......-..~.a.

.-...~.a....~.....

---.~a.-

---.-a.-a mc row aia now meu oua OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usam m-mm

i 3

!!r. J. J.11attirce Tne reporting requirements contained _1n this, letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore. 0lE clearance is not required under P. L.96-511.

Sincerely,

}r! Sen1 nima f

Darrell G. Eisenhut Director, Division of Licensing Office of fluclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

1.

Illustration of Cracking 0 7 ["' ~ ~

Barseback Unit 2.

IIPI Piping Configuration.,_

]

cc w/ enclosures:

See next page

- L.e 3 C h

/

[1 I cAyaerrs,w

.r q,

i

DL

1. 4:DL, AD-pipC A C$E

/

... M... DE AD DSI OELD $. /....

B5 omen >

ek-suaname>............v..a..../..c..b

..d.

TNovak D

ut J K 9 t -

LR in RBlack n

h

.5./pf,/.8. 2........... 5./,. g,/.8. 2.......... 5./...j/ 8. 2.......

. 5../..

8. 2.......... 5.2../.8. 2.......

. 5. ft, /,8....

.. 5. /M/,8. 2.........

o4r y m ronu m om Nacu m OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usom isei--us-eso

i Sacramento Municipal Utility Rancho Seco, Docket No. 50-312 District cc w/ enclosure (s):

' David S. Kaplan, Secretary and Christopher Ellison, Esq.

General Counsel Dian Grueuich, Esq.

Sacramento Itunicipal Utility California Energy Commission District 1111 Howe Avenue 6201 S Street Sacramento, California 95825 P. O. Box 15830 Sacramento, California 95813 Ms. Eleanor Schwartz California State Office Sacramento County 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E., Rm. 201 Board of Supervisors Washington, D. C.

20003 827 7th Street, Room 424 Sacramento, California 95814 Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary Business and Municipal Department U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Sacramento City-County Library Washington, D. C.

20555 828 I Street Resident Inspector / Rancho Seco Sacramento, California 95814 c/o U. S. N. R. C.

14410 Twin Cities Road Herald, CA 95638 Dr. Richard F. Cole Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.

20555

~

Regional Radiation f.epresentative EPA Reaion IX Mr. Frederick J. Shon 215 Fremont Street Atomic Safety and Licensing Board San Francisco, California 94111 Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Mr. Robert B. Borsum Washington, D. C.

20555 Babcock & Wilcox Nuclear Power Generation Division Elizabeth S. Bowers, Esq.

Suite 220, 7910 Woodmont Avenue Chairman, Atomic Safety and Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Thomas Baxter, Esq.

Washington, D. C.

20555 Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 1800 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D. C.

20036 i

Herbert H. Brown, Esq.

Lawrence Coe Lanpher, Esq.

Hill, Christopher and Phillips, P.C.

1900 M Street, N.W.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Washington, D. C.

20036 Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Helen Hubbard Washington, D. C.

20555 P. O. Box 63 Sunol, California 94586

1 Sacramento Municipal Utility District Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Mr. Robert H. Engelken, Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Region V Board Panel 1990 N. California Boulevard Suite 202 I

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Walnut Creek, California 94596 Washington, D. C.

20555 Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U. S. Fluclear Regulatory Connission Washington, D. C.

20555 Dr. John H. Buck Atonic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D. C.

20555 Christine li. Kohl Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission l

Washington, D. C.

20555 Califo.nia Department of Health ATTN: Chief. Environmental Radiation Control Unit Radiological Health Section 714 P Street, Room 498 Sacramento, California 95814

Enclosu're 1

~

SMnk Cowssd'isA t""

N W,-

Figure 1 - BarsebEck 1 Pipe branch connection 1 -

Liquid penetrant indications inside of feed-water.',ine towards shut-down cooling inlet.

l (

?

T g T

&7_ll

~ W yf f t w-l Figure 2. - BarsebXck 1 - Pipe branch connection 1 -

Same as Fig. 7 except slinhtly different view.

~

I RANCHO SECO HPI 3P 4

PIPING CONFIGURATION

=

11 is f-r 5

su 1 r 1 r k k k k

---tx3 M

4 4

f I

I f

3

\\

\\

\\

V o

i 15 oiK X!

5 e

s i

2 C

P t

5 SX6 E

~

y o

o 3

3 0

2 E

o d

i u

N yI S3[d [

S3[

S3[

6 d

E s

1511 i

}

m.

=

=

== -

D g

D U

)

f f\\ f f

2

..