ML20082L669

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Final Version, Inservice Insp Program Plan for 1980-1983 Period. Explanation of Changes Also Encl
ML20082L669
Person / Time
Site: Fort Calhoun Omaha Public Power District icon.png
Issue date: 09/26/1983
From: William Jones
OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
To: John Miller
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20082L679 List:
References
LIC-83-242, NUDOCS 8312050556
Download: ML20082L669 (2)


Text

,

4 Omaha Public Power District 1623 Harney Omaha, Nebraska 68102 402/536 4000 September 26, 1983 LIC-83-242 Mr. James R. Miller, Chief U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l

Division of Licensing Operating Reactors Branch No. 3 Washington, D.C. 20555

Reference:

Docket No. 50-785

Dear Mr. Miller:

Fort Calhoun Station In-Service Inspection (ISI)

Program Plan For The 1982-83 Period.

The ending date for Fort Calhoun Station's (FCS) first 120 month ISI Pro-gram Plan is September 26, 1983. This plan was last revised in August, 1982, for the inspection period from 1980 to 1983. In order to reflect significant changes in testing, and to summarize all the exceptions to the 1974 ASME code which now have been taken (including those taken dur-ing the 1983 ten year reactor vessel examination), the updated ISI Pro-gram Plan published in August,1982, has again been brought up to date.

Attachment 1 identifies all changes made to the plan since the August, 1982, edition. These changes are listed by page number, with an explana-tion for each change. Attachment 2 is the final version of the 1973-1983 In-Service Inspection Program Plan for the Fort Llhoun Station.

Sjnc9ely, l

\

,f f

, Jones '

W.C.IonManager Divis Production Operations WCJ/JCB/nh Attachments cc: LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby'& MacRae 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 Mr. E. G. Tourigny, Project Manager Mr. L. A. Yandell, Senior Resident Inspector G312050556 830926 Employment with Equal opportunity PDR ADOCK 05000285 Male / Female l G PDR )

Attachment 1 CHANGES MADE SINCE THE AUGUST, 1982 EDITION lj. OF THE FORT CALHOUN STATION ISI PROGRAM PLAN

[

]' _ Pages 5& 6: Addition of the " Exemption on Safety-Injection and Con-tainment' Spray Discharge Piping With Respect to Hydro Test Pressures". As explained in the " Basis for Ex-ception", ' analysis and consultation with the pump manu-facturer indicated.that subjecting-the suction' side of these pumps to the discharge hydro pressure would i:' damage the pumps. The later editions of the code have recognized this unfortunate oversight in the early ad-ditions and have made the distinction on hydro-test boundaries more specific, so this is no longer a

problem under the later codes. Despite this correct
- change to the lator codes and the technically correct nature of this action, to be within the " letter of the law" under the 1974 code, we would either have to actu-ally test the pumps to full discharge pressure or we must specifically have an exemption from testing, and that is why this exemption has been added.

$ Page 8: Exceptions to IWB-2600, Items Bl.2 and Bl.6. As a re-sult of the 1983 reactor vessel examination performed by the Southwest Research Institute, limitations to the areas of Class 1 components specified for exami-nation under the code were identified. Specifically, it was found that certain of the head welds (Item

( Bl.2)'and parts of the-nozzle to safe end welds (Item

} Bl.6) could not be accessed for examination. The reasons for the limitations and alternate methods of F verification are listed in the plan.

[ Page 9: Removal of the Exception to Item B4.5 of Table IWB-i 2600 of the 1974 Code. This exception has been re-moved because the technical limitations on ultrasonic examination of certrifugally cast stainless steel pipe and welds in such pipe have been overcome.

Page 27: Deletion of TCV-211-1 and 2. These valves were de-

, .leted per plant request and Technical Services' con-currence that they are not safety related. (It should be noted that under the 1980 code all PCV, LCV, and i

TCV valves may be removed from testing, if they do not

~

receive an accident signal. This change, reflecting the fact that continuous correct operation of a system

pressure, level, or temperature is considered suf-ficient, is evidence of valve operability.)

Page 44: Removal of the Exception fo r HCV-746 A.

3 This valve is no longer tested in a direction opposite that of actual flow, so no exception is now needed.

'