ML20059N788

Safety Evaluation Accepting Util First 10-yr Inservice Insp Plan

ML20059N788
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	09/24/1990
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20059N773	List: ML20059N772 ML20059N788 ML20059N794
References
NUDOCS 9010170295
Download: ML20059N788 (22)

Text

> :v

.h

• ch"884o >

l( '

'ga UNITED STATER '

JI NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION - -

wAsHmcTow. o. c. roess

.....} -

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATED TO THE FIRST TEN-YEAR INTERVAL INSERVICE' JJNSPECTION PROGRAM PLAN.

HOUSTON LIGHTING-& POWER-COMPANY 00CKET'NO.~ 50-499 '

N

. SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT.-UNIT 2 m

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated June 15, 1989, HoustonLLighting:and Power Company'(the licensee) submitted the' South Texas Project Electric Generating Station, Unit 2,-First. 9 Ten-Year Interval Inservice Inspection (ISI) Program Plan to meet the requirements:

of the 1983 Edition, Summer 1983-Addenda of Section XI of-the ASME-Boiler and- H

• Pressure Vessel Code,:except that the extent.of' examination.for Code Class 12-'

~

piping welds has)been determined by'ASME Code Case N-408L " Alternative Rules 9 ]

for Examination of Class 2 Piping -Section XI,: Division 1." Code Case N-408- ,

o 1

is referenced in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.147,LRevision 7, as'an NRC. approved:

Code Case and, therefore, may.be used.' Previously (May 11, 1989),;the-licensee had submitted relief. requests from Section.XI'ISI. requirements for.'both Unit 11

-and Unit 2. Therefore, those relief requests:were~also> included:in this review.

On June

~

i 20, 1989,:the licensee requested approval:to apply'ASME' Code Cas'e-N-460,- ' '

" Alternative Examination Coverage"for Class 1 and Class 2 Welds" duringithe.

first ten-year interval at Unit.1 and Unit 2. : Code Case N-460 addresses which.

alternative rule may be used for Section XI,? Division:1,cexamination of Class 1- '

welds (IWB-2500) or Class 2 welds:(IWC-2500)'when-the entire examination volume or' area cannot be examined due to interference by'another component or part j geometry and' states that "a reduction in examination coverage-on any Class.1lor; i Class 2 weld may be accepted provided the reduction in coverage for;that weld is less than 10 percent." -

i d

The staff, with technical assistance from its contractor, the Idaho National? M

- Engineering Laboratory (INEL), has evaluated the.first. ten year interval " '

inservice inspection program plans, the additional information'related to:the' -

.- j

-program-plans, and the requests'for relief from certain ASME Code = requirements.

determined'to be impractical for South. Texas Project Electric Generating =

Station, Unit 2, during the first inspection interval' EThe ' status of the

staff approval of Code Case N-460 was:also reported.

9010170295 900924 PDR ADOCK 05000499 ,

Q PDC -)

. a

, ,1 e

y L_____.-__~.._----. --2 -

i l

5

. q

, 2- '

I i

2.0 BACKGROUND

t Technical Specification 4.0.5.for the South Texas Project, Unit 2,' states ,

that the surveillance requirements for Inservice Inspection and Testing of j the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure  !

Vessel Code Class 1, 2 and 3 components shall be applicable as follows: .

i Inservice Inspection of ASME Code Class 1, 2 and 3 components shall be i

performed in accordance with Section XI of the ASME Code and applicable' ,

Addenda as required by 10 CFR 50.55a(g), except where specific written relief  :

has been granted by the Commission pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(1).

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(4), ASME Code Class 1, 2 and 3 components  ;

(including supports) shall meet the requirements, except the design and i access provisions and the preservice examination requirements. set forth in .

i tha ASME Code,Section XI, " Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power. t Plant Components," to the extent practical within the limitations of design, j geometry, and materials of construction of' the components. The regulations .

require that inservice examination of components and system pressure tests conducted during the first ten year interval comply with the requirements in the latest edition and addenda of.Section XI of the ASME Code incorporated -

by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a(b) on the date 12 months-prior to the date n

of issuance of the operating license, subject to the limitations'and f modifications listed therein. The components (including supports) may meet the requirements set forth in subsequent editions and addenda of the ASME' ,

Code incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a(b) subject to the limitations ,

and modifications listed therein. '

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5), if the licensee determines that conformance I with an examination requirement of Section XI of the ASME: Code is not '

practical for his facility, information shall be submitted to the Commission  ;

in support of that determination and a request made for relief from the ASME-Code requirement. After evaluation of the determination, pursuant to  :

10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(1), the Commission may grant relief and may impose i alternative requirements that are determined to be authorized by law, will not endanger life or property'or the common defense and security, and are otherwise in the public interest, giving due consideration to the burden '

upon the licensee that could result if the requirements were imposed.

3.0 EVAlpATION The ISI program plans have been evaluated for (a) application of the correct.  !

Section XI Code edition and addenda, (b). compliance with examination and i test requirements of Section XI, (c) acceptability of the examination sample.

(d) compliance with prior ISI commitments made by the licensee, (e) correctness  !

of the application of system or component examination exclusion criteria. and (f) adequate information in. support of requests for relief from impractical.

Section XI Code requirements. The staff has determined that the licensee's {

-ISI program plans reflects compliance with the aforementioned requirements listed above. {

I

-- - . . - - _- .. . _ - - . -. .. =

I

I I

s. .

. i 3  !

l The information provided by the licensee in support of requests for relief from impractical requirements has been evaluated and the bases for granting' . 1

, relief from those requirements are documented in the attached INEL Technical )

Evaluation Report EGG-MS-8964. .The staff has not identified any practical l method by which the licensee een meet all-the specific inservice inspection-  !

requirements of Section XI of the AS*E Code for the existing South Texas i Project Electric Generating Station, Unit 2 facility. Therefore, it is  !

concluded that the public interest is not served by imposing certain' l provisions of Section XI of the A3ME Code that have been determined to be impractical. The staff further concludes that the relief granted and the alternative examinations imposed through this document provide reasonable l

)

j assurance that the acceptable level of quality and safety-intended by the ASME Code will be satisfied. Table 1 presents a summary of the reliefs requested I and the status of the requests as determined by the staff.

ASME Code Case N-460, " Alternative Examination Coverage for Class 1 and 2 Welds," has been reviewed by the. staff and is acceptable for use. This Code

~

l i

Case, without conditions, will be, included in Revision 8 to Regulatory Guide 1.147; i i

4.0 CONCLUSION

4 1

The staff concludes that the South Texas Project, Unit 2. First Ten-Year i Interval Inservice Inspection Program Plan, with the additional infomation l provided and the specific written relief, constitutes the basis for compliance ,

with 10 CFR 50.55a(g) and Technical Specification 4.0.5 and is therefore acceptable. The staff has determined that pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(1)- ,

granting relief where the inspection requirements are impractical is 1 authorized by law and will not endanger life or property or the common defense j and security and is otherwise in the public interest considering the burden '

that could result if the requirements were imposed on the facility.

Attachments:

1. Table 1 '

2. INEL 7ER EGG-MS-8964  !

Dated:

Principal Contributor: G. Johnson l

.l l

i

!- il j

j

I

. 1 TABLE:1

~

i SUPMARY OF RELIEF REQUESTS Relief- Licensee Relief i Request System or Exam Item Volume or Area Required ~ Proposed Request Number Component Cat. No. to be Examined Method Alternative Status RR-ENG-009 Pressurizer B-H B8.20 Support skirt-to-lower . Surface Ultrasonic Granted head weld 2Rll1NPZ101A examination and magnetic particle i examinations from surface i area A-B l (outside surface)

' RR-ENG-008 Steam C-8 C2.22- - Main steam nozzle inside- Volumetric Mone. Flow Granted

. Generator. radius sections examination restrictor prevents examination 4

. I O

gmw3 -

w- ge, ,w ,m,., -.y, -,.,,e y ypc,... *,3,, .- + w - y.w- --3.,- -y- y , ga yg-- , % 9 -y ,--w, m

--w -+ , , . 3. -w-w wg, w w, , , , , w#-,g. . . , -,www g-y ,,y.p,, w. g v ,,- ,,+r ,s_w , ww._ maw.-w..,w og