ML20058P180

Requests Addl Info Re Plant Third 10-yr Interval Inservice Insp Program Plan & Associated Requests for Relief within 60 Days of Ltr Receipt

ML20058P180
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	10/18/1993
From:	Beth Brown Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Richard Anderson NORTHERN STATES POWER CO.
References
TAC-M82545, NUDOCS 9310220138
Download: ML20058P180 (8)

Text

.

e

. c r 4 I

1. - ') . ~ UNITED STATES .

57i- 't! . NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION k * ;, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 0001 I October 18, 1993 Docket No.: 50-263 Mr. Roger 0. Anderson, Director

' Licensing and Management Issues  ;

Northern States Power Company 1 414 Nicollet Mall  !

Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT THIRD 10-YEAR INTERVAL INSERVICE INSPECTION.  ;

PROGRAM PLAN AND ASSOCIATED REQUESTS FOR RELIEF (TAC NO. M82545)

By letter dated July 29, 1993, Northern States Power submitted a copy of its report titled, " Inservice Inspection Examination Plan, Revision 1, Third  ;

Interval, June 1,1992 through May 31, 2002". This submittal of the i Section XI Inservice Inspection (ISI) contained five revised requests for  ;

relief and two. new requests for relief which required NRC Staff. evaluation. .

The staff has completed a preliminary review of your Third 10-Year Interval .

Inservice Inspection Program Plan and requests for relief from the ASME Boiler.  !

and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI requirements for Monticello. Enclosed is  !

a request for additional information (RAI) which is needed to complete the  !

review. We request a response to-this RAI within 60 days of receipt of this

' letter. If you have any questions concerning'the enclosed RAI plecse contact. '

me on (301) 504-3024. ,

'In addition, to expedite the review process, we request that you f.end a copy.

of the RAI response to NRC's contractor, INEL, at the following address:

l

+

Mr. Boyd W. Brown i EG&G Idaho, Inc. ,

INEL Research Center t 2151 North Boulevard .

PO Box 1625 .!

Idaho Falls, ID 83415-2209 l

'i

~!

N i 931022013e 931018 gDR.ADOCK 050002 3 g g %Y.  ;

i

a -

Mr. Roger O. Anderson October 18, 1993 >

The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.

Sincerely, fnA L hi-Marsha Gamberoni, Acting Project Manager Project Directorate III-l Division of Reactor Projects - III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

RAI cc w/ enclosures:

See next page b

1 '

Mr. Roger 0. Anderson

' October 18, 1993 l

The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.

Sincerely, '

Original Signed By:

9 Marsha Gamberoni, Acting Project Manager l Project Directorate 111-1 Division of Reactor Projects - III/IV/V  :

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation '

Enclosure:

RAI  :

cc w/ enclosures:

See next page  ;

DISTRIBUTION: i Docket 4 Fil e'" i NRC & Local PDRs  ;

PD31 Rdg File J. Roe ~

J. Zwolinski W. Dean B. Jorgensen, RIII C. Jamersea OGC ACRS(10', 'i M. Gam'mroni -

T. McLellan (7-0-4)

• J. Strosnider (7-D-4)

OFFICE LA:PD31 INT:PD31

. , (A)PM:PD31 (A)D:PD31 i NAME CJamerson k CBajwa:swh MGamberoni$h WMDean[///k DATE 10/15

/ 93 Y' IO /IS/93 10/40/93 [0 /l8/93 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY FILENAME: G:\WPDOCS\MONTICEL\ MON 82545.RAI i

I I

.I P

l

-Mr.-Roger O. Anderson, Director Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant l Northern States Power Company cc: l J. E. Silberg, Esquire Lisa R. Tiegel Shaw,~Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge Assistant Attorney General  !

2300 N Street, N. W. Environmental- Protection Division  ;

Washington DC 20037 Suite 200 l' 520 Lafayette Road U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Resident Inspector Office 2807 W. County Road 75 Monticello, Minnesota 55362 Site General Manager Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant  :

Northern States Power Company .i Monticello, Minnesota 55362 Robert Nelson, President Minnesota Environmental Control Citizens Association (MECCA)  :

1051 South McKnight Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55119 j Comissioner Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55119 Regional Administrator, Region III i U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission j 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137  ;

. Comissioner of Health Minnesota Department of Health  ;

717 Delaware Street, S. E.  ;

Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440 ,

Darla Groshens, Auditor / Treasurer l Wright County Government Center .

10 NW Second Street '!

Buffalo, Minnesota 55313  ;

Kris Sanda, Comissioner .!

Department of Public Service  !

f 121 Seventh Place East Suite 200 l St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-2145 ~

24 1993 j l

I

^

ENCLOSURE NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT DOCKET NUMBER 50-263 Reouest for Additional Information - Third 10-Year Interval Inservice Inspection Proaram Plan

1. Scoce/ Status of Review Throughout the service life of a water-cooled nuclear power facility, 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(4) requires that components (including supports) that are classified as American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Class 1, Class 2 and Class 3 meet the requirements, except design and access provisions and preservice examination requirements, set forth in the ASME Code,Section XI, " Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components," to the extent practical within the limitations of design, geometry, and materials of construction of the components. This section of the regulations also requires that inservice examinations of components and system pressure tests conducted during the successive 120-month inspection interval comply with the requirements in the latest edition and addenda of the Code incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a(b) on the date 12 months prior to the start of the 120-month interval, subject to the limitations and modifications listed therein. The components (including supports) may meet requirements set forth in subsequent editions and addenda of the Code that are incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a(b) subject to the limitations and modifications listed therein. The Licensee, Northern States Power Company, has prepared the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, Inservice Inspection (ISI) Program Plan to meet the requirements of the 1986 Edition of the ASME Code, except that portions of the 1974 Edition through Summer 1975 Addenda (74S75) to the Code are applicable to the Code Class I components.

As required by 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5), if the licensee determines that certain Code examination requirements are impractical and relief is requested, the licensee shall submit information to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to support that determination.

1 I

The staff has reviewed the available information in the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, Third 10-Year Interval ISI Program Plan, Revision 1, submitted July 29, 1993, and the requests for relief from -

the ASME Code Section XI requirements that the Licensee has determined to be impractical.

2. Additional Information Reauired  ;

i Based on the above review, the staff has concluded that the following .

t information and/or clarification is required in order to complete the ,

review of the ISI Program Plan-t A. During the second 10-year ISI interval, Monticello committed to add  :

a 7.5% augmented volumetric weld examination sample to the Program Plan for Class 2 piping in the containment spray and core spray [

systems. Consequently, the Second 10-Year ISI Program was approved l with that commitment.

The Third 10-Year ISI Program gives the distribution of the 7.5% l augmented volumetric examination sample. It appears that the entire  !

7.5% sample of welds selected for examination in the care spray system falls consecutively from the class break. A more random l distribution would be a better indicator of the system's overall  !

inservice condition. Please provide justification for having the total sample of welds fall consecutively from the class break or  ;

revise the 7.5% sample for a more random distribution in the core j spray system. Include the $sometric drawings that are not included l in the available ISI Program showing the sample distribution of the .  !

entire core spray system.

i B. Relief Request No. 7 (Rev. 0) seeks relief from the requirement to ~

i remove the bolting at a leaking bolted connection. The control rod drive (CRD) housings were cited in the Basis for Relief as having a bolted connection that may leak slightly during a pressure test, but does not leak during power operation. To support this position, an l

t evaluation of CRD housing leakage conditions (with input from General Electric) and a subsequent VT-2 acceptance criterion established for this system were cited. This information may support a determination that minor leakage at CRD housing bolted connections is acceptable during VT-2 examination. However, more information is necessary. Describe tha impracticality associated with the Code requirement for the CRD housings and submit the CRD housing leakage evaluation and VT-2 acceptance criteria for staff review.

The remainder of this request for relief appears to be generic in {

nature--no burden associated with the other bolted connections is stated. Generic relief cannot be granted. Revise this relief ,

request to only include CRD housing bolted connections or to address -

other situations where specific circumstances make the Code ,

requirement impractical.

C. Page 1.3-1 of the ISI Program contains a list of Source Documents with little or no other explanation defining the extent of their use or their function. Regulatory Guide 1.147, Rev. 9, with Code Cases N-416 and N-498, is referenced in Source Documents. This implies that these two Code Cases are being incorporated into the Monticello Third 10-Year Interval Program. It should be noted that the staff ,

considers the concurrent use of these two Code Cases unacceptable.

Confirm that Code Cases N-416 and N-498 are not being used concurrently.

4 D. 10 CFR 50.55a(b)(2)(ii) states that the extent of examination for Code Class 1 pipe welds may be determined by the requirements of Table. IWB-2500 and Table IWB-2600 Category B-J of Section XI in the 74S75. Please define what is meant by the statement " portions of the 1974 Edition, Summer 1975 Addenda to the Code are applicable to the Class I components" found in the Introduction, Page 1.2-1, of i the Monticello Third Interval Program. l l

l

- o. - - -

t

?

E. Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.26 and Standard Review Plan (SRP) 3.2.2 give guidance for quality group classification of components. In these 4 documents, the main steam line from the outermost containment j isolation valve to the turbine stop and bypass valves, and connected f

piping up to and including the first valve that is either normally closed or capable of automatic closure, is to be designated as Quality Group B or ASME Code Class 2. Based on RG 1.26 and SRP 3.2.2, it appears that this piping has been incorrectly classified :s as non-safety related. Provide technical justification for classifying this piping as non-safety related rather than Class : in accordance with RG 1.26 and SRP 3.2.2.

I I

f i

i f

- - . . - . - -