ML20090H767

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Technical Evaluation of Integrity of Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Rcbp Sys, Technical Evaluation Rept
ML20090H767
Person / Time
Site: Nine Mile Point Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 07/31/1983
From: Nagata P
EG&G, INC.
To: Koo W
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML17054A812 List:
References
CON-FIN-A-6429 EGG-FM-6253, TAC-46667, NUDOCS 8405140581
Download: ML20090H767 (40)
v • d • e


Text

_ _ _ _ _

l EGG-FM-6253 July 1953 TECHNICAL E'IALUATION OF INTEG?.ITY CF THE NINE MILE POINT UNIT 1 REACTOR COOLANT BOUNDARY PIPING SYSTEM 4

Peter K. Nagata .

Idaho National Engineering Labcratory Operatec cy the U.S. Cecartment of Energy

,~.- .;- 4 v . , .. .y;;,

;h '

, *yh. y;f) pe w.

w..* 1-}p:' h:,fh fli.4A*,r-

.s . #;s . f

-s .

-:w

-2

.g..}k

' - -:

  • f:;

- * % '; h' i'J

...J

'; . -r

,o ,

t ;

' :G; ;y,. ;'~. l3 .0!

7 7.Y.i .y ps':*%&. -Q'"

5 gj gid" .

    • , Nxa marcz armr, a6' E/.

{;<eq t;udak ,.rs.w:x .--

,y.*,,.W

- . - = . --- i - ,yd -]* s 97 -.,

, ED maarm wararrr araw rarer rw

. g. ge w  : - w

- r nwr b 5i ]l 13 +n m aamme-w e m--.5 m=r ==I'h

-y

.r g -

LM-- "t *G.&-jb. 4,-O.5,Cm ~~ - . _.1.a**,'. ..='- w.-e t 6Mf' ' 5 ' % -: @'7" -7 #'

i

, sg.) '

,--w ~ - ' --- - -~ .n .y , .f-

% W--.M-TC;W&. ._? .-

.,. A. Ny'($.,1...--. < ^ ' ~ ~ '

i = " "mg =_'-- .- . c m k . ..' - ,

%=itn . -J N 5.N. k .- -. -~

-y

$)l .., %..~ W...-e.h _3*** M.--'%-.15.; N

.*C~

s.'w.r.,.ro.' -.s !, R,'C2' w .-A. w S'?Qy,,g p. . ~.,_-.

'y .E.1 g.s ;

J.w." P 2cd h;b- 5 N.W.y.7.-w.#,% ev..de.t.. M fghf 4 .. N -? W

': M &.T,2dEt=.c.1?C%%bMWJ6S&?ih55h

  • h::,thD w~Mvhp$7'?MZ

%.S.S This is an inforrna! report intended for use as a prenniinary or working document-3 D di Prepared for the 't L U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Under 00E Contract No. DE-AC07-761001570 c 2 5 2 5 ,c.ne

l EGG-FM-6253 TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF INTEGRITY OF THE HINE MILE POINT UNIT 1 REACTOR COOLANT BOUNDARY PIPING SYSTEM Published July 1983 Peter K. Nagata Materials Engineering Branch Materials Sciences Division EG&G Idano, Inc.

Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Responsible NRC Individual and Division:

W. H. Xco/Divisicn of Engineering 00cket No.: 50-220 TAC No.: 46667 Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Under DCE Contract No. DE-AC07-76ID015'/0 FIN No. A6429 j/9vfC/yg501A

A3STRACT NUREG-0313, Rev. 1, Technical Recort on Material Selection and Processing Guidelines for EwR Cociant Pressure Soundary Picing, is the NRC staff's reviseo acceptable methods to reduce intergranular stress corrosion cracking in builing water reactors. The responses to NRC Generic Letter 81-04 af the Niagara Mohawk Power Corparation concerning whether its Nine Mile Point Unit I reactor meets NLREG-0313, Rev. I are evaluated by

-EGSG Idaho, Inc. in this report. Particular attention was given the leak detection systems described in Regulatory Guide 1.43, Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leak Detection Systems, referenced by Parts IV.B.l.a.(1) and (2) found on pages / ano e of (40RdG-0313, Rev. 1.

FOREWORD This report is supplied as part of the Selected Operating Reactor Issues Program being conducted for the U<S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of Licensing, by EG&G Idaho, Inc., Materials Engineering Branch.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmission funded the work under the authorization, B&R 20 19 10 11, 11

= -- _. ._

SUMMARY

NUREG-0313, Rev.1, Technical Report on Material Selection and Processing Guidelines for B'.a Coolant Pressura dounaary Picinc, is the NRC staff's revised acceptacle a:etnocs to reduce intergranular stress corrosion cracking in boiling water reactors. Tne responses to hRC Generic Letter 81-04 of the Niagara Moha.A Power Corporation concerning , nether its Nine Mile Point Unit I reactor meets NUREG-0313, Rev.1 are evaluated by EG&G Idaho. Inc. in this report. Particular attention was given the leak detection systems described in Regulatory Guide 1.45, Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leak Detection Systems, referenced by Parts IV.B. I.a.(1) and (2) found on pages 7 and a of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.

As may be observed in the following table, Nioe Mile Point does not meet any of the parts of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1-evaluated in this dccument.

The following table is a synopsis of the EG&G Idaho, Inc. evaluation of the Niagara Mchawk Power Corporation's response to NRC Generic Letter 81-04

, Additional Part of NUREG-0313, Data a b Rev. I Evaluated Evaluation Required Discrepancy Section II.

II.C. Does not meet NUREG-0313, Yes Minor Rev. 1 Section III.

Section IV.

IV.B.I.3.(1) Did not provide data in Yes Major response to NRC Generic Letter 81-04 IV.S. I .a. (2) Provides alternative to No Major NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 IV. 8.1.b. ( 3 ) Does not meet NUREG-0313, Yes Minor Rev. I

!Y.B.I.b.(4) Does not meet huREG-0313, Yes Minor Rev. 1 IV.S.2.a. Tne ccmments for Parts IV.B.1.a.(1) and IV.S.I.a.(2) apply here.

IV.B.2.b. Provides alternative to Yes Major NUREG-0313, Rev. I til I

l l

Additional Part of NUREG-0313, Data a b Rev. 1 Evaluated Evaluation Recuired Discreoancy IV.S.2.b.(6) Does not meet NUREG-0313, Yes Minor Rev. 1 Section V.

asee Tables 1 and 3 for additional information.

bSee Tables 1 and 4 for additional information.

iv s

. i CONTENTS ABSTRACT.............................................................. ii

SUMMARY

............................................................... i ii

1. I N TR O D UC T I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. EVALUATION ....................................................... 4 2.1 NUREG-0313, Rev. l. Guidelines .............................. 4 2.2 Olscussion of Tables .......................................

4 2.3 Discrepancies .............................................. 5

3. -C O NC L U S I O N S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. R E F E R E NC E S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 TABLES
1. . Review of Licensee's Response to NRC Generic Letter 81-04 .... .... 7 2._ Summaries of Evaluation of Licensee's Responses .............. ... 24
3. Differences between NUREG-0313 -Rev. 1.and. Licensee's Responses ........................................................ 26

-4 Additional Data Required of Licensee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; 31 6

+

8

.v 0

+

t g + * -

- - w '^

]"] _ ] , Y /

b... -

~8

\

- i B

TECH?ilCAL E'/ALUATION OF INTEGRITY OF THE NINE MILE POINT UNIT 1 REACT 0ft COOLANT BOUNDARY PIPING SYSTEM

1. INTRODUCTION
r. -

Intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) of austenitic

stainless steel (SS) piping has been observed in boiling water reactors l (BWRs) since Decemoer 1965.I The NRC estab.lished a Pipe Crack Study

[ Group (PCSG) in January 1975 to study .the ' problem.2 The PCSG issued tw'o

i. documents, NUREG-75/067 Technical Report, Investigat' ion and Evaluation of Cracking in Austenitic Stainless Stee1 Piping of Boiling Water Reactors 3 l

l and an implementation document, NUREG-0313, Rev. 0.2 'After cracking in L , large-diameter piping was discovered for the.first time in the Duane Arnold 8WR 'in.1978, a new PCSG was formed. .The rew PCSG in turn issued two

_ reports, NUREG-0531, Investigation and. Evaluation cf 3 tress-Corrosion -

4 Cracking in Piping of Light Water Reactor Plants and NUREG-0313, Rev. 1,.

Technical Report on Material Selection and Processinc Guidelines for 8WR Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping.5 NUREG-0313', Rev. 1'is the l implementing document of-NUREG-0531 and discusses the augmented inservice inspection (ISI)'and le'ak detection requirements "for plants that cannot-

~

. comply with tne material selection, testing, and processing g'uidelines" of NUREG-0313, Rey, l5 l .

g -NaC Generic Letter 81-04 requested each licensee "to; review all: ASME l Code Class 1 and 2 pressure boundary pip'ing,L safe ends, and fitting I-materiai, including weld metal to determine:1f (they) meet -the material-selection,. testing and processing guidelines'in" NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.0

. , ~ ,

~

!- -_-The' generic letter offered the option of.providing.a descr1ption,' schedule,

and justification for alternative actions that would reduce the

~

susceptibility of~ pressure boundary piping'and safe ends-to intergranular'

~

' stress; corrosion cracking (IGSCC) or increase' the probability of early; l detection ofJ1eakage from pipe cracks.

li _

~> .? - ,

,_ _ ~ .

- ' * * ^ Y;

  • In response to NRC Generic Letter 81-04, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (NMPC) submitted a letter on July 1, 1981.7 This letter in turn referenced another letter of December 16, 1977.8 EG&G Idaho personnel evaluated these responses, along with others dated August 6, 9

1982 and December 20, 1982 and this report provides:

1. A brief summary of the licensee's response to each part of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.
2. A discussion of areas where the licensee does not meet the guidelines or requirements of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.8
3. A brief discussion of the licensee's proposed alternatives to NUREG-0313, Rev.1; however, no determination of acceptability is made on these alternatives.

4 An identification of all areas where the licensee has not provided sufficient information to judge the licensee's program.

There is an effort underway to revise NUREG-0313, Rev. I by NRC in lignt of research on IGSCC and recent i.istances of IGSCC at Nine Mile Point (Maren 1982) and Monticello (October 1982). Because of this contemplated revision of NUREG-0313,'Rev. 1, the following issues will not be evaluated.

1. The licensce's proposed Tecnnical Specifications to implement the requirements, with the exception of the leak detection requirements in NUREG-0313, Revision 1, Sections IV.B.1.(a)(1) and I'/.B.1.(a)(2).
2. The acceptability of licensee-proposed augmented inservice inspection (ISI) sampling criteria,
a. Part III of NUREG-0313 Rev. I contains guidelines; part IV contains requirements.

2.

_m 6__ -

1

3. Credit for past operating experience and inspection results.
4. The acceptacility of induction heating stress improvement (IHSI), neat sink welding (hSW), and weld overlay as alternates to aug.r.ented ISI.

9 9

3

I

2. EVN_UATION 2.1 NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 Guidelines The guidelines and requirements outlinsd in tiUREG-0313, Rev. I form the basis of this evaluation. The NUREG-0313, Rev. I guidelines are found in Parts III and V and the requirements in Parts II and IV of that document. Part II discusses implementation of material selection, testing, and peccessing guidelines. Part III summarizes acceptable methods to minimize IGSCC susceptibility with respect to the material selection, testing, and processing guidelines. Part IV deals with leak detection and inservice inspection requirements of nonco'nforming (i.e., not meeting the guidelines of Part III of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1) piping. Part V discusses general recommendations.

2.2 Discussion of Tables Table I has the complete text Parts II through V of NUREG-0313, Rev.1 on the left side so that the reader may be able to refer to it as the topics are discussed. The right side sunnarizes the licensee's responses, lists the differences between the licensee's proposed implementation program and NUREG-0313, Rev.1, and identifies the additional data required to evaluate the licensee's response.

Many sectior,s in Parts II through IV of NUREG-0313, Rev. I are not discussed in the right hand column. In these cases, one of the ccaments

'below will be u:ed.

o Not applicable because the construction permit for this plant has been issued.

o Not' applicable because the operating license for this plant has been issued.

o Not applicable because the plant has been constructed.

4 t

, 't _,.

, ,/

o The licensee has not furnisncd oata on this topic in his responses -to NRC Generic letter 51-04.

o No comment made because alternative plans were not evaluated.

Table 2 lists the summaries of the licensee's responses to NRC questions on implementation of.NUREG-0313, rev. I guidelines. Therefore, in Table 2 the reader is able to reod all the summaries in one table

/, without having to search Table l'for all the tu.mmaries. Tne same ccmpilation applies to Tables 3 and 4 Tahle 3 lists the differences -

between the licensee's propbsed imflementation program and that recommended in NUREG-0313, Rev. 1. Table 4 lists the areas where additional informationisrequiredtopedoerly"evaluatethelicensee'sproposed implementation program. All the items in Tables 2, 3, and 4 are listed in their respective tables in the ' order they appear in Table 1.

2.3 Otscrepancies l , Any alternate proposal that did not meet a specific guideline or

'; requirement 6f NUREG-0313, Rev. I was contidered a discrepancy. Evaluation I'af alternate proposals was outside the scope of this task, as indicated in Section 1 of this report. . Licensees have submitted definitions of 4

2*nonservice *,ensitivo" and augmented ISI proposals that differ from NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 These differences are considered minor because the hRC 7 ,

staff <jsconsiderjngmajormodificationstothoserequirements. An example o(a minof discrepancy is the use of the stress rule index (SRI) to choose

..,' which welds would be subjected to augmented ISI.

<,?- I If the alternate proposal to leak detecticn does not meet the requirements in NUREG-0313 Rev 1, p. Ea's' co'nsidered a major discrepancy because NRC is not considering major M[ifications to those requirements.

An example of a mafur %screpancy is a licensee's not proposing Technical I#

, 4 Specifications t6 Im'plednt leak detection requirements in NUREG-0313, e '~, .Riv. 1. '

/

a r >

1
,/).  ; ,, Only major discrepincies are listed in the Conclusions section.

6 ; (( s/

r '

i *

] !f; k / ,

b.

% y ,

(. f

/

3. CONCLUSIONS Nina Mile Point has the following major discrepancies.

Part IV.B.I.a.(1) Leak Detection and Monitoring Systems NMPC's description of Nine Mile Point's leak detection methods are not detailed enough to determine whether they meet Section C of Regulatory Guide 1.45.

Part IV.B.1.a.(2) Shutdown for leakage NMPC has not put the provision for shutdown af ter a 2-gpm increaseinunidentifiedleakagein24il into the Technical Specifications for Nine Mile Point.

NMPC has not put the provision for monitoring the sump level at 4-h intervals (or less) into the Nire Mile Point Technical Specifications.

NMPC plans to adopt the NUREG-0313. Rev. O requirements and provides an alternative to NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.

There are minor discrepancies as well as the major ones listed above.

l These minor discrepancies are not listed here. However, while the licensee's alternate proposals that have been classified as minor discrepancies might be acceptable under the anticipated revision of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1, it should not be inferred tnat approval of those alternate propo:als has been given.

The licensee has not supplied suf ficient information to evaluate his respnnses to topics II.C., IV.B. I.a.(1), IV.B. I.a.(3), IV.B.l.a.(4),

IV.B.2.a., IV.B.2.b., and IV.B.2.b.(6). Table 4 lists the required information for each topic.

6

s a s

  • , e f-

,y.1 s >

. = ,

.( . , .

t ,& b

,,, p -

__ Q\ g" d' ., j g -( ;y '_-

~. .

'.' d ,.

ll L%

'y u s  ; p Y j,&4 l,*

y~.- a * '

f y ! y.7 q" .." , _ ~. . .s

. TABLt!-1. RIWt[W OF LILEN5Ef.'$ #LSPONSC 10 NRC Cf NLRIC '

Lfillit 81,.+04 < 1.-

, ,;r 3.. "%

~

fExcerpts from SaitG-0313 Rev. I' iN -~---~~IC&G Idaho Ivaluation - HINE Mite POINI. - +

W . . . , ..

P lit. .,IMPLEMENTAI10N OF MATERIAL 5f tEL110N. TE5117./AND ' j, ,

1L PNot.L$$ING tiUlbtLlNf 5 -

5 g i s

. l l . A.' For plants under restew, bat for'unich I. .

A. Not applicable because the t.onstruction permit f or th 5-

- , . L . construction permit has nct t>een issued l ,111 A5hi plant has been issued.

jf > / JLooe Class ,1, ?, and 3 lino should r;,dois to the

  • h ggoldelines stated in Part -Ila. ,j g-

. r

-[#w [II,8U for plants that nav'e t$cen issued a3 W ,truct' ion s, 8. Put applicable because the operating license for this s

"* MM , permst but not an operating ' license, alkASM' Code - plant.has been issued.

, A 6 Y@/ -bV;X 1

Class 1,12, and 3-1ines should cesfarn to.t!.e

' guidelines sieted -in Part. til unless. it can be, ' f '

gV, . ' demonstrated to the staf f inat implcednting tp' if

., _ j.

_ . , _  ! guidelines of Part Ill would result in nudue'

,y W .,/.

' hardsnip. ; For cases in which the guidelines of :

jf Part III are not complied with, addittorial

/ M' measures should be taken for Class I and ? lines '

'/

/-

M i - in accordance with;tne guidelines stated in

(.

Part IV.cf this-stucument.

s .

g_j.@a; s ll.C. For plants-that hase been issued an operaling C. SlPlHARY ,

C license HRC designated "ServlCe Sensitive" lines " -

] / "

yyp t

(Part. IV. 8) should be modif ied to conf orn to.the i Niagara Mohawk Pode Cmeany (fMQl . bas replatwt-the v guidelines statedian Part .Ill, to the edcat# ponconforming piping ^in the rerisculatim ,,htsw. It is r not

. ' . practicable. When "icrvice Sensitive' ana hther ? known whether NHPC has replaced all "scrgke sensitive"

/

, . ;47 - -

Class 1.and 2 lines do not meet the.guideyaes Of $ I f,- e piping. . . y s

4 rp Q.,j). . ,Part lli, additional measures shoc,ld t;e taken in'. , /O Mg ,'accordance with'ine guidelines st4ted in Part IV. #

4" f ' .J

,' - s1 N'

'DiffEREhtt5 ,

$$ ^ E,Jgf7 .s [j .

of th6s document. . ' Lines that experience.craciting -

during service and require replacement should be

% 77 NUREG-0313, Rev; c t requir.+5 that all f C designated l

' replaced with piping indt.cnnforms to the; ." service sensitive" lines be replaced with

., y& . fj t'~( ~ .x 1 guidelines stated in-Part lit, corrosion-resistant materials to the extent practical. -

" .y;(f -

.y_

+. 7 7 Also, lines that experience crading should be replaced with

  1. - corrosion-resistarit snaterials.
. .p4 m- . fMC had stated that it was not pra<.tical to replace

. , [? , piping in " service sensitive" sy.tems bei ause of the my excessive occupational exposures th.it would be ini;urred and m:

gl;

?

';g -

. .,.i.

extensive work -involved with primary containment penetrations,8 Ilowever, it is known that Niew fille Point detecteJ s

. lG500 in twn of the ten recirculation.saf e ends. Subsetoren t r

' ultrasonic examinations on those two safe ends and one other 4

confirmed cract indicatinns. flawd on this and other considerations, it was decided to replace Llw! ?il-in.

recirculati6n piping and the ten uf e ends. All the replacenent material will be AISI type 3th hG or equival nt. In this matter,f#tPt ant s Hill 4lG-0313,

, ; Rev. 1

+ - ,, - - - ~ . - , - - . _ . _ - - - - _ _ - _ ___.

A a ' '

It . ls ont known whether f4HPC'hw replaced all the nonconf usming " service sensitive

  • pipe.

ADDITIONAL MA REQUIRIO Indicate whics r ping systres are nonconforming '

" service sensitive

  • per fH! REG-Olli, Rev. 1. Indicat e

, -O whether.these nonconforming " service sensitive" piping systems will be replaced and what Lt e replacement schedule is.

~

III. SupelARS Of' ACCEPIA8tE MElllUDS' IO MINIMilE (RAtX IU5KPil8RUFMAl[H I AE stiTCl f 6s71E5} lNb7As0 FiRIS$isC duTutETs[5 IlllA.; 5 election of Materials 1 ' A. The licensee has not furnished data on this paragraph in his responses to imC Generir tetter 81-04. See Only those materials described in Parts.1 and 2 ctmanent on !!.C. above.

' below are acceptable to the 76RC for installation in HWH ASME Code Class 1, 2,' and 3 piping

{ systeau.' : Other materials may be used when

evaluated and accepted by the NRC.

[Ill.A.I. Corrosion-Resistant' Materials ') . The consnents on III. A. also apply here.

1All pipe.and fitting' material including safe.

.- ends, thermal. s leeves :ahd weld metal .should '

CD be of d' type and grade that has been -

i demonstrated to be highly resistant to *

' 7 ].! oxygen-assisted stress corrosion in.the T

as-installed condition. ' Materials that have -

' been so demonstrated include ferritic steels,

'* Nuclear Grade" austenttic. stainless steels.*'

..lypes 304t and 31ot austenitic stainless steels Iype Cf-3 cast stainless ~ steel,-

lypes CF-8 and CF-8M cast austenitic stainless steel with.at least 5% ferrite Type 300L

~

stainless steel weld n*:tal.. arid other

austenitic stainless steel weld metal with at . .

least $1.fttrrite contept. Unistabillied wrought austenitic' stainless steel without

. controlled, low car ben has not beer. So -

' dereinstrated except whru tr.c piping is in the ln - solution-annealed cuodition, lhe use of such O. "'

material (i.e., regular s

and 31b stainless steels)jrades of be Types 304 :

should evolded.

- If sucn material is used, the as-installed .

' piping in(luding welds shouldbe in the .

^ *Inese materials have ' controlled low carbon-(0.02% max) and

. . nitrogen (0.11 mas) contents 'and meet all reg:sirements,;

including mechasitcal property rewpsirements, of AMit specification for regular grades.uf lype= 104 or

- Jlb stainless hteel pipe, t

)

L -

(_; _-.

solution-annealed cundition. Where regular grades of, lypes 304 and 316 are used and welding or heat treatment is required. special measures, such as those descrit.ed in Part all.C Processing of Materials, shuuld be taken to ensure inat IGSCC will not occur.

Sucn measures may include (a) solutioes

. annealing subseqisent to the welding or heat treatment, and (b) weld cladding of anterials to be welded using procedures that have been dessunstrated to reduce restuual stresses and sensttisation of surf ace materials.

I!!.A.2. Corrustun-Resistant Safe Ends and thermal 2. l he C umen t s on . I I . A. also apply here.

Sleeves All unstacilised wrougnt austenitic stainless steel materials used for saf e ends and thermal sleeves without cuntrolled low carbon Cnuttuts 4 (t-grades and haclear Grade) should be in the

- solut ton-annealed condit ion. If as a consequence of f abrit.ation, welds joinihy these materials are not solution anne 4ted, they should be made between cast (or weld overlaid) austenitic stainless steel surfaces

($1 minimum ferrite) or other materials having -

hign resistance to oxygen-assisted stress ya ccrrosion. The joint design must be such that any hign-stress areas ir. unstabiliJed wrought austenttic stainless steel without controlled luw carbon content, wnich may become

  • sensill2cd as a result of. the welding process, is not exposed to the reactor coolant.

Increal sleeve attaounents that are welded to the pressure boundary and form Crevices where _

impurities may accumulate should not be .

exposed to a bW Coulant environment.

til.B. lesting of Materials 8. The licensee has not furnished data an this paragraph in his responses to NRC Generse letter 88-08

' For new installation, tests should be nude on all regular grade stataless steels to be used in the ASMC Code Class I, 7, and 3 piping systems to

. demonstrate that the material .as pri,perly annealed and is not susceptible to IC5CC. lests (nat have been used to determine the susceptibility of IGSCC include Practices A*

and E" of A51H A-262, "Recumer.ded Pract ices f or Detecting Susceptibility to Intergranular Attack in Stainless Steels" and the elec trochemic al .

. potentletinetic reactivation (fPR) test. The (Pit test is not yet-accepted by the NRC. I f t he L VN test is used, the accept.ince criteria .pplieJ anst be evaluate d and accepted tsy tiva fhtC on a case by-case basis

~ ~ ' . <" t ,

f'.

I ill.C. NrocessingofHaterials' O. .lhe licensee has not furnishevi data on this paragraph' in his responses to idtC Generic tetter 81-04. See JCorrosion-resistant cladding uith a duplesL _. , . comment on 11.L. above.

micrustructure (5% minimame ferrite) may be applied to the ends'of"lype 304 or 31b stainless steel'

. pipe for the purpose of avoiding IGSCC at 4

, ,weldoents. Such claddleg, wnich is intended to

~(a) minimize the llAl on the pipe inner surface, (b) move the I!Al.away f rom the highly stressed ,

region next to the attactwment weld, and '

. (c) isolate the weldnent f rom the environment, may -

be applied under the following conditions:

. Ill.C.I. f~oriinitial construction, provided that all of 1. The consnents on til.C. also apply here.

,,the piping is soluttan annealed af ter cladding.

+ lit.C.2. 'For repiir wel' ding'and modification to 2. The comnents on III.C. also apply here.

'in-place' systems in cperating plants and-plants under construction. Wnen the repair

. welding or modification requires replacena nt .

of pipe,- the. replacement pipe should be soluttun-annealed af ter cladding.

.-Corrosion-resistant . cladding applied in the "fleid" (i.e.) without subsequent solution '

' annealing of'the pipe) is acceptable only on E that partion of. the pipe that has not been

. . . . , - removed f rom tne. piping systes . Other " field

  • J C3 ' applicatiu'is i of corrosiusi-resistaint cladding . .

' art not acceptable.-

.

  • Practice A--Omaltc acid etch test for classification of

' etch structures of! stainless steels. .

' ** Practice E rCopper-copper sulf ate-sulf uric acid test for

. detecting susceptinility to intergranular attack in stainless steels.

Other, processes that have been found by .

laboratory tests to miniel2e stresses and IG5CC in austenitic stainless steel weldments

  • include induction heating stress improvement s

.(1861) and heat sink welding (16W). Although E t tne'use of these processes as an alternate to I. augmented . inservice inspect ion is not yet

accepted by. the.MIC, these processes may be.

permissible and will be considered on d case-by-case basis provided acceptable , '

supportive data are scum 6tted to the NRC.

l t.

v . v

r-IV. !N51RVICE INSPECTION AND IEAK DLif f T10N REyutlttHENI%

TiitT ftWds UifH VARV1fflit'tMtIdi TUidUkfiAtill iO hXifsi4L 5ELTCliON [E s i i4E, 'A5iEPR U[i s'$ 1'NE EUIi![ t INI 5 IV.A. for plants whose A5ME Cnde Class I, ?, and 3 A. The licensee has not f urnished data on this paragraph pressure imundary piping eeet s the gublelines of in his responses to rstC Gence ir Letter 8.l-04.

Part III, no au<puented inservice inspection or lean detection requirements beyund thuse specified in the 10 tf R 50.55a(g), " Inservice Inspection Requirements" and plant , fechnical Specif 1(allons f ur leakege detectioni are necessary.

IV,8. A5HE Code Class ! and 2 pressure boundary piping 8. Ine licensee has not furnishmt data on this paragraph that does not meet gu6delines of Part !!! is in his responses to ictC Cenes is Letter 88-04.

. des tynated "Anconf orming" and must have additional inservice inspection and more stringent leat detection requirements, lhe degree of aufnented inservice inspection of such piping depends on whether the specific "Nonconfuralng" piping runs are classified as " Service

, Sensitive." Ihe " Service Sensitive" lines were and will ce designated by the NRC and are defined as (nose that have esperien(ed cracking of a generic nature, or that dra considered to be particularly susceptible to cracking because of a combination of hign local stress, material

_, conditinn, and high oxygen content in the -

-- relatively stagnant, intermittent, or low-flow coolant. Currently, for the nonconforming ASME Code Class 3 piping, no addittunal inservice inspection beyond the Ser. tion XI visual ,

esamination is required.

  • faamples of piping considered to be " Service Sensitive" 6nclude but are not limited to: core spray lines, recirculat tim riser lines,"

recirculation bypass lines (or pipe ,

extensions /stuu tubes on plants where the bypass lines have been removed), control rod drive (LHD) hydraul.c return lines, isolation condenser I nnes, rectrculation inlet lines at safe ends where Crevices are formed by the welded thermal sleeve attatsunents, and shutdown heat exchanger lines.

If cracking should later be found in a particular piping run and considered to be generic, it will be designated by the NRL as *$ervice Senst tive "

Leakage detection and awpnented inservice

-inspect ion requirements f or "founconf ormanj" lines and "Nuncunf urming, 5er vice Sens 6t sve" Iinet5 ore specified below:

f; _ , r - . ,c- -

.1,.

' .L

'IV.6.l  % nconformi SensitiiE*~' g Lines inat Are Not " Service

'lV.B.I.a; Leak Detection: Ihe reactor coolant ,

learage detection systems should be-operated under the Technical Specification
. requirements to entsance the discovery of

. unidentified leakage treat may include .'

through-wall cracks developed in

, austenitic stainless steel piping.

~ *Since no IGSCC has beers observed in the domestic. plants and in view of the possible high radiation exposure to the inspection personnel. surveillance and monitoring means

other than those specified in Section IV of this report for

' recirculation riser lines will be considered on a case-by-case batis.

s

~

IV.8.1.4.(l) . The leakage detection system provided (1)

SUMMARY

should include sufficiently diverse leak detection methods with adequate .

NMPC's description of Nine #1ile Point's leak detection sensitivity to detect and measure small . methods are not detailed enough t.e .leteralise whether they leaks.in a timely manner'and.to identify meet Section C of Regulatory Guide 1.45.

the leakage sources within the practical *

.lletts. Acceptacle leakage detection and DlfftRENCts monitoring systems are described in

. ' if . Section C. Regulatory Position of the nine subsections of Sect ion C of Regulatory Guide Regulatory Guide'l.45. " Reactor Coolant 1.45 are discussed below.

Pressure 80andar y teakage Detectiori l

Systems." C.I NMPC has stated that le.,hage to the primary .

reactor containment trine identified sources is

.Particular attention should be given.to. collected such that

-~

upgrading and calibrating those leak detection systems' that will provide prompt a. the flowi frates aie magitared indication of an increase in leakage rate. unident ied . leak aqel ,and separately f rom Other' equivalent leakage detectiori and b. the total collectinn systems will be reviewed on a . nanittored.{fow rato i;an be established and case-by-case basis.

-C.2 Unidentitled leakage in the Nine Mlle Point -

prissary seactor cuntaineent can in collected and the f low rate puniitor ert with ari acr.iir ] of I gen p

or bet ter (Hases f or 3..'.5 and 4.2.5)

C.3 . NMPC has the f ollowing leak detection systems in

i. - ' Nine Mlle Point Unit 1.

F. ,

4. . fhpill6 ring rate of rise in the drywell floor drain tank level (level vs. tine)

I

h. -

, ~~

tu lime required to f ill the tank between two predetermined lev.Is (rate of change)

c. Timer reset on level sensor.10 The above systems correlate to only one of the three methmis recuesm'n.ted in Regulatory Guide 1.45.

C.4 It is nnt clear whethee provisions have been made in the+ Nine Mile Point f anal Safety Analysis Repor t (I SM) to monit..r systeins (s.nnected to the RCPS for signs of intersystem leakage.

C.5 The Nine Mile Point theit I leakage detection systems can detect an unidentified leakage of 1 9per. in less than I h.

C.6 It is not clear whether the Nine Mile Point a.rteorne particulate radioactivity taonitoring system remaths f unctiort.al whch subjected to the 55E.

C./ Indicators and alarms f or the required lean apr detection system are provided in the m.in control room. ProccJures for converting various indications to a cosisuni leakage equivalevit are

, avJilable to the operators, ca It . is not known whether (alitration of the indicators accounts for the needtd independent variables.

C.8 All Nine Mile Point leak detet tim systems etuamerated in Reference a can be calibrated or tested during operation.

C.9 The Nine Mile Point technical Specifications include limiting cond}tions for identitled and unidentifled leakage.

flowever, the availabilit y of the leikage detection instriaw nt s to ensure adequate coverage at all t imes cannut be d. termined.

It cannot be determined f rom the above whether Nine Mlle Point meets Regulatory Guide 1.45, Set-t ion C.

ADDITIONAL DA1 A ret {UIRp I. Indicate whether provis tons have heeft made in the Nine Mile Point (SM to monitor systems connected to the HCPU f or signs nf intersystem leakage (Subsection C.4 of hegulatory Guide 1.45).

?. In.licate wh.*ther calibe at ion of t he indicators arrounts f ur t h.= needmt independent variables

( Sute,et t ion t.. I o f Hmr'e la t os y Lu n de 1. 4 *a ) .

3. Indicate whether Nine Mile Point, (*ntt I has the f ollowing icak detection md monitoring systems.
a. Airtsorne partic ulate radioactivity monitoring,
b. Condensate f lnw rate monitoring frors air l tralers.

I

c. Airborne gaseous radspactivity monitoring (Subsection C.3 of Regulatory Guide 1.45).
4. Indicate the availability of the leakage detection instruments to ensure a+quate coverage at all times (Subsection C.9 of Hegulatory Guide 1.45),
5. Indicate whether the Nine Mile Point airtiorne particulate radiation a mituria.9 system ressains functional ehen subjected to 55E (Subsectinn C.6

,f Regulator y Guide 1.4' ).

IV.8.1.a.(2). Plant shutdain st.ould be initiated for (2) StAMdt v inspection and corentive action when any leakage detection system indicates, within fatPC has not put the provis h.n f or shutduwn af ter a a period of 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or less, an increase 2-gpm increase in unidentified led ige in 24 h into the in rate of unidentified leakage in encess Technical Spectf uations f or Nine Hele Point.

of / gallons per minute or its equivalent.

er when the total unidentified leakage retPC has not put the provistem for manitoring the w ap attains a rate of $ gallons per minute or level at 4-h intervals (or less) into the Nine Mile Point its equivalent, uniceever occurs f irst. lechnical Specifications.

for sump level monitoring systeres with fsned-seasureisent ienterval method, the. f.fiPC plans to adopt the IdMtG-0313. Rev. O requirements level s.ould be monitored at 4-hour and provides an alternative to IduR[t.-0313, Rev. l.

Intervals or less.

DIFff RE NCES tiUREG-Oll3, Rev. I requires t hat reactor shutJa.,n he initiated when there is a 2-9p.m incr ease in .anidentif ied leakage in 24 h. For sump level monitoring systems with the f ined-measur ement interval methmt, the level should he monitored every 4 h or less.

ITIPC plans to adopt NURIG-03tl. Rev. O on leak d e tec t ion. !DE(G-Oll3, Rev. O required that reactor shutdown be initiated when tiere is a 2-qpm increase in unidentifled leakage in 4 h. NORIG-0313, Rev. O s equirements do not meet those in NIRtG-0313. Rev. 1.

_ADull!0NAL DAT A Rf QUIRf D None.

I V. 81.1.a. ( 3) Unident if ied Is.skap should include all (3) NMPC's '.finition of unidentetied leakage for Nine ' Mile leasag,; otner th m: Pai.6 m 4.t.Q .gt s %tl G.0313. Rev. I (Isases f or 3.2.5 and

IV.8.1.a.(3)(a) testage into closed systems, (a) The coannents on IV.B.I.a.(3) also apply here.

such as pump seal or valve packing leaks that are captured, f low metered, and conducted to a sump or collecting tank, or IV.8.1.a.(3)(b) teakage into the containment (b) The ccomEats on IV.S.I.a.(3) 4150 apply here.

4tmosphere f rom sources that are both specifically located and known either not to

~

laterfere with the operations of unidentified leakage monitoring systems or not to be from a through-mail crack in the piping within the reactor coolant pressure bouaJary.

IV.8.1.b. Augmented Inservice Inspection: b. The llCensee has not furnjshed data on this paragraph Inservice inspection of the in his responses to NaC Generic Letter 81-04 "bonconforalng, konservice Sensitive

  • lines should be conducted in accordance with the folluwing prograa:*
  • lhls progree is largely taken f rom the requirements of ASHE *

(( Boller & Pressure Vessel CoJe,Section II, referenced in Lt.e paragraph (b) of ID CI A 50.554,

  • Codes and Standards."

IV.B.I.b.(1) for A9:C Code Class I components (1) The comments ~on IV.B.I.b. also apply here.

and piping, each pressure-retalning dissimilar metal helJ subject to inservice inspection requireacnts of Section Il should be examined at least once in no sure than '

80 months (two-thirds of the tlee prescribeJ la the A5hE Boller and Pressure Vessel Code Section II).

Such enastnation Shuuld include all Internal attachment melds that are not through-wall wclJs out are weldeJ to or form part of the paessure buuadary.

I V.8. l .b. (2) Ihe following A5f:E Code Class 1 (2) The concents on IV.8.1.b. also apply here.

pipe twlds subject to inservice inspection requirements of Section 11 should te examined at least once in no more than 80 months:

IV.8.1.0.(?)(a) All welds at terminal ehds* of (a) The comments on IV.S.I.b. also apply here.

pipe at vessel nottles;

I V.ti. l .b. ( ?)(b ) All welds having a design ciad>ined (b) The comments osa IV.ll.l.h. .also apply here.

primary plus secondacy stress ran.Je of 2.45, or more; IV.S. I .b. ( 2)(c ) All welds having a design cianalative (c) the comenents on IV.8.l.h. also apply here.

f at 69 ue usage f actor of 0.4 or m. ore; dra d IV.B.I.O.(2)(d) - Suf f'icient additional welds with high (d) The Cossacnts on IV.B.I.h. also apply here.

potential for cracking to make the total equal to 25% of the welds in each piping systeis.

  • Ierminal ends are the entremities of piping runs that col.nect to structures, components (such as vessels, pumps, valves) or pipe anchors, each of which acts as rigid
  • restraints or provides at least two degrees of restraint to piping thermal expansion.

I V.B. I.b. ( 3) the following A5MC Code Class 2 pipe (3) 5ttt4AR Y welds, subject to inservice inspection requirements of Section 11, in each letpC has not identificd those nonconforming "nonservice residual neat reinovel systems, caergency sensitive" pipes 6.hich are to be inspected per Part core cuoling systems, and containment heat IV.8.1.b.(3) et histCG-0313. Rev. l. Data are needed to a removal systems should be examined at determine which "nonservice sensitive

  • ASHE Code Class 2 cn least once in s.o esare than 80 isonths: ;ser as w.l! be lasps tcJ and vnat inspect ion procedures will be used.
  • DIFFfkEhrf5 NURfG-0313. Rev. ,1 requires that nuriconf orming ASME Code Class I and Class 2 piping he subjected to an augmented ISI program. The augmented ISI prr, gram for ASME Code Class 1 piping differs from th.it acquired on Class 2 piping. Also, augented ISI requir. ents dif f er f or ASHE Code Class 2 pipes to be inste te.1 per Par ts IV.B.I.b.( 3) aval IV.8.1.b. (4) of NtXI[G-0.ll). Fev. 1.

NftPC has sidgnitted the auqwnted 151 program for' nonconforising *nonservice sensit ive" piping, but has not distinguist.ed between the A91[ ro te Class I and Class 2 pipir.g. and between the ASMt Code Class 2 pipes which are to be inspected per Parts IV.fl.l.h.(1) and IV.3.1.b.(4) of Ntilf G-0313. Rev.1. Theref ore. WPC's prugs .m for A94E Cmle Class 2 piping cannot be evaluate.1 without imee data.9 Abulil0f4AL DAIA RIgutRty Identify which ASHi~ rnt. 41 '.s 2 pipe will be inspected per Par t IV.8.1.h.( 3) and writi h siispect lure proce.lue es will be used.

IV.8.1.b.(3)(a) All welds of the terminal ends of (a) The comments on IV.8.l.b.(3) also apply here, pipe at vessel nortles, and IV.8.1.b.(3)(b) At least 10% of the welds selected (b) The Cominents on IV.8.1.b.(3) also apply here, proportionately f rom the f ollowing categories:

IV.8.1.b.(3)(b)(1) Circumferential welds at locations (t) The cuanents on IV.8.1.b.(3) also apply here, where the stresses under the loaJings resulting f rom any plant conditions as calculated by the sum of Equations (9) anJ (10) in NC-3652 exceed 0.8 (1.25h

IV.8.1.b.(3)(b)(it) Welds at terminal ends of piping. (11) The connents on IV.8.1.b.(3) also apply here.

Including branch runs; IV.8.1.D.(3)(b)(lit) Dissiellar metal welds; (ill)The connents on IV.B.I.b.(3) also apply here.

IV.8.l.b.(3)(b)(lv) Welds at structural (lv) The comments on IV.8.1.b.(3) also apply here.

discontinulties; and IV.8.1.b.(3)(b)(v) Welds that cannot be pressure (v) The coassents on IV.8.1.b.(3) also apply here.

tested in accordance with IWC-5000.

Ihe welds to be esamined shall be distributed approximately equally among runs (or portions of runs)

-d that are essentf ally stellar in

'4 design, s tre, system f unction, and -

service conditions.

I V. 8. l .b. ( 4 ) - The following ASME Code Class 2 (4)

SUMMARY

pipe welds in systems other than residual heat removal systems, NMPC has not identified,those noncunforming "nonservice emergency core cooling systems, and sensitive" pipes which are to be inspected per Part containment heat removal systems, IV.8.1.b.(4) of huRIG.0313. Rev.1. Data are needed to which are subject to inservice determine which *nonservice sensit!ve" ASMT CuJe riass 2 Inspection requirements of pipes will be inspected and what inspection proceduies will Section II, should be inspected at be used.

least once in no s. ore than 80 months: DIFFERENCES NDRIG-0313. Rev. I requires that nonconforming ASME Code Class I and Class 2 piping be subjected to an augmented ISI program. The augmented 151 progran for ASME Code Class 1 piping dif fers from that required on Class 2 piping. Also, augmented ISI requirements dif fer f or ASME Code Class 2 pipes to be inspected per Parts IV.8.1.b.(3) and IV.O.I.b.(4) of hbREG-0313. Rev. 1.

liMPC has sutasitted the augmented 151 progrant for nonconforming "nonservice sensitive" piping, but has not distinguished between the ASM[ Code Class I and Class 2.

  • piping, and between the A5HE Code Class 2 pipes which are to be inspected per Parts IV.B.I.b.(3) and IV.8.l.b.(4) of -

NURfG-0313. Rev. l. Therefore, NHPC's program for ASME Code Class 2 piping cannot be evaluated without more data.9 AD0!110NAL DA1A REQUIRLD Identify which ASHE Code Class 2 pipe will be inspected per Part IV.B.I.b.(4) and which inspectlun procedures will be used.

it.8.1.b.(4)(a) All welds at locations where the (a) the cosanents on IV.8.1.b.(4) also apply here.

stresses under the loadings resulting from " Normal" and

  • Upset" plant conditions including the operating

. basis earthquake (00f) as calculeted by the sum of Equations (9) and (10) .

In NC-3652 exceed 0.8 (1.25n'+ SA )-

I V.8. l .b. (4)(b ) All welds at terminal ends of piping, ,

(b) The comenents on IV.8.1.b.(4) also apply here.

Including branch runs; I V.8.1.b. (4)(c ). All dissiellar metal welds; . ~(c) The comments on IV.8.1.b.(4) also apply here.

IV.S.I.b.(4)(d) Additional welds with high potential (d) The conuments on IV.8.1.b.(4) also apply here.

. for cracking at structural . .

' discontinulties* such that the total

'" nmeber of welds selected for esamination equal to 25% of the circumferential welds in each piping

  • system.

IV.S.I.b.(5) . If examination of (1), (2), (3), and '(5) The comwnts on IV.8.1.b.(1), (2). (3), and (4) also  ;

(4) above conducted during the first apply here.

80 months reveal no incidence of stress corrosion cracting, the esaminatten f requency the.ef f ter can revert to 120 months as prescribed in Section II of the A5HE soller and Pressure Vessel Code.

  • Structural discontinuities include pipe weld joints to vessel noules, valve bodies, pump casings, pipe fittings

- (such as elbows, tees, reducers, flanges,' etc., conforming to ANSI $tandard 8.16.9) and pipe branch connections-and ilttings, l

r

IV.8.1.0.(6) Sampling plans other than those (b) No cassav.t mate because alternative plans were not described in (2), (3), and (4) atsove evaluated.

will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

I V.8.2 % conforming

  • L ines that are " Service Sensitive
  • IV.B.2.4. teat Detection: The leakage detectiast 4. N'Sf G.0311, Rev. I requires that reactor shutdown t>e requirements, described in IV.5.I.a above, initiate-d wher* there is .4 7-gpe increase in should be implemented. unidentified leakage in /4 h. For sump level monitoring systers witti th. fined. measurement interval method, the level should be anonitored every 4 h er less. Ih.= cimanents made en Parts IV.B.I.a.(1) and (2) apply here.

IV.8.2.b. Auynented inservice Inspection: b. SlH4AR Y NMPC has replaced the 23-in. retirculatibn piping with lype 316 NG which is a conforming material. NMPL need not subject the par ts of the reti.ulation system s.ade of Type 316 hG to amywnted lit.

Ulfl.IE!%51 FHIREG.0313, Rev. I requires t hat

  • service sensit ive* '
  • piping be subject to an ane==mted 15 5 progran. Sc1cction methods f or pipes to be esamine,i are f ound tri Part IV.b.2.b.

of tamEG-0313. Nev.1. .

NMPC replated the recirtulation piping with type 316 NG which is a (onf orming material .s(ccrding to NUNEG.0313, Rev. l. NMPC therefore does not need to subject the pJrts of the recirculation system m*t.' of type 386 NG to du<pented 151.

  • ADDI!!ONAL DATA RfgjplD None.

iv.8.2.b.{l) Ine welds and adjoining areas of (1) The cors=nts on IV.B.7.b. also apply here.

bypass piping of the diuharge valves in the main recirt.ulation loops, and of the austenttic stainless steel reactor cure spray piping up tu and i

A including the second (sulat tun valve, should be esamined at eac's reactor refueling outage or 41 other scheduled plant outages. Successive examination need nut be closer than

. b sunths, if outages occur more f requently thari 6 anwiths. Ints requirement a;yites to all welds in dIl bypass lleses whether the 4-in(.h

- valve is kept open or clused during operattoin.

In the event these esaminations find the piping free of unacceptable inJacattuns for three successive inspections, the ensination may be catended to each 36-month period (plus or minus by as much as 32 months) Coincident with a refueling outage. In these cases, the successive esaminatinn anay be Inmited to all welds in one bypass pipe run and one reactor core spray piping rure, if unacceptable flaw indications are detected, the remaining piping runs in each group should be eaJsanned.

,$ la the event these 16-month period -

eneaawtims reveal sto usiacceptat:le indic.=t i(as f x three succes'.'y inspectius, the welds and adjoining areas of these piping runs shoJld be

  • esamined as described in IV.8.I.b( t)

' for dissimilar metal welds 4nd in Ilf.B.I b(2) for other welds.

I V.B. 2.b. ( 2) The dissimilar metal welds and (2) The licensee has not turnished data on this paragraph edioining areas of otner ASME Code in his respornses to fmL Geteric Letter 81-04.

Class I *5ervice Sensitive' piping .

should be enarnined at ee.ch reactor refueling outage or at other schcouled plant outages. Successive esaminations need not be closer than 6 months, if outagcs occur more f r?quently than 6 months. Such exarsination should include all internal attachments that are siot through-wall welds but are welded to or form part of the pressure boundary.

IV.5.2.b.(3) The welds and adjoining areas of (3) The cemem nts on IV.B.i.b. also apply here.

'other ASME Code Class I " Service Sensitive" piping should be esamined using the sampling plan described in IV.B.I.b(?) except that the f requency of such esaminations should be at each reactor refueling outay or at other scheduled plant outages.

Successive examinations need not be Closer than 6 months, if outages occur more f requently than 6 mimths.

IV.8.2.b.(4) The adjoining areas of internal (4) Ihe connaents on IV.8.?.b. also apply here.

attaa sent welds in recirculation inlet lines at saf e ends where Crevices are formed by the welded treermal sIceve att40mments should be es.unined at each reactor refueling outage ur at etner scheduled plant

. outages. Successive cuaminatioets

. need not be Closer (nan b months, if outages occur mure f requently than 6 monte:5.

I V.8. 7. b. ( 5) In the event the emaininations' (5) The connents on IV.B.,7.b. also apply here, described in (2), (3) and (4) above N, ' f ind ts.e piping f ree of unacceptable indications for three successive inspections, the enemination esay be extended to each 36-mun* h period - .

(plus or minus by as much as

~

12 meths) coinciding with a refueling outage.

In the event these' 36.auwith pertad '

esaminations reveal no un uteptable indicattuns for three successive inspectluns, the irequency af endaluat ion may revert to 80-mmth periods (two-thirds the time prescribed in the ASME toute Section XI).

I V.8.2.b. (6) the area, entent, and f requency of (6) StH4AR Y es.wainstton of the dusych.rnted laservice inspection f or A5hf Code letPC has submitted the augnented ISI program for Class 2 " Service Sensitive" Itses ~ nonconf orming " service sensitive

  • piping. but has not will be determined un a case-Dy-case distinguished between the AW t;*de Class I and Class ?

basis. piping, therciure, letPC's progr.un for A9tE Code Class ?

piping cannut be evaluated without more data.

i.

~

f- .-

D!fffRENfli fil&tG-Oll J. Rev. I requires that nonconforming A5ME Code Class I and Class 2 piping I.e wl.jec ted to an aursented 151 program, the ausprurited INI airogram tur #5NE fe41e rlsss I piping Jif'ers f ri,a that required c:t Class ? piping.

Ntte t-?- s.6% edentif ied tenne nonconforming " service sensitive

  • pipes wriich are in he inspe(ted per Par t IV.8.2.b.(6) of tstRLG-03 t J. Erv. l.

Data are needed to determine which " service sensitive" ASME Code Class ? pipes will im inspected and whJt inspection procedures wiiI be used.

ADDil!0NAL DATA Rffp)(Wl_D

1. Identify wtilct A5ME f: ode Class 7 pipe will be inspected per Part I V. it . 2.b . ( 6) .
2. Identify the inspection procedures for
  • service sensitive" ASME Cude Class 2 pipe.

IV.8.3. Nondestructive f ramination (NDE) Reguirements 3. The licensee has not furnished data on this paragraph in his responses to fGL C+ n+ ric Letter 81-04 The met hod of esamination ar.d volume of material m to be caa. mined, the allowable indicati<we 89 - . Standards, and esamination procedures should *

' cumply witn the requirements set f orth in the ,

applicable Edition and AddenJa of the ALME Code, Sectio t XI, specifico in Part (g), " Inservice irspection Requiremrnts,* of 10 LIR 50.554

" Codes aext Standagds.*

In sume cases, the code enemination procedures asay not t,e ef fective f or sietecting or evaluating Ib5CC and other ultrasonic (01) prxedures or advan(ed nundestructIve cadEtitiat100 techniques may be req +stre-d to detect and esaiuate stress corrosion crocsis.g in austenitic stainless steel pipsag. Improved UI procedures have been developed by certain organtiations. These improved UI detection and evaluation procedures that have beeri or casa be demonstrated to the HC to De ef fective in detecting IG5LC should be .

used to the inservice inspection.

Ruousnesedat tuns f or the development and eventual implementation of these improved Lethniques are included in Part V.

V. GENERAL Nf uRPt siDAllof6 V. Ih) coiment m.ede because all>reative plans were not evaluated.

the measures outlined in Part 111 of this document provide for positive actions that are Consistent with current technology. Ine implementation of these actions should markedly reduce the susceptibility of stainless steel piping to stress corrosion crackleeg in 8WWs. It is recognised Lt.at aJJitional means could tee used to limit the estent of stress corrosion cracking of 11wR pressure boundary piping materials and to improve the ,

overall system lategrity. Itsese include plant design ered operet tunal procedure considerations to reihace system espusure to potentially aggressive enviroienent, taproved material selection, spettal f abrication asi!

welding te(hniques, and provisions for volumetric inspection capaut tity in the design of weld joints. The use of such means to limit IL5CC or to improve plant system integrity will La reviewed on a case-tiy-case basis.

N Laa 4

TABLE 2 SUMMARIES OF EVALUATION OF LICENSEE'S RESPONSES II.C. Material Selection, Testing, and Processing Guidelines for SWRs with an Operating License Niagara Monaak Power Company (NMPC) has replaced the nonconforming piping in the recirculation system. It is not known whether NMPC has replaced all " service sensitive' piping.

IV.8.1.a.(1) Leak Cetection and Monitoring Systems NMPC's description of Nine Mile Point's leak detection methods are not detailed enouan to determine whether they meet Section C of Regulatory Guide 1.45.

IV.8.1.a.(2) Leak Detection Requirements l

NMPC has not put the provision for shutdown af ter a 2-gpm increase in unidentified leakage in 24 h into the Technical Specifications for Nine Mile Point.

NMPC has not put the provision for monitoring the sump level at 4-h

intervals (or less) into the Nine Mile Point Technical Specifications.

NMPC plans to adopt the NUREG-0313, Rev. O requirements and provides an alternative to NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.

IV.B.I.b.(3) Augmented ISI of Nonconforming "Nonservice Sensitive" ASME Code Class 2 Pipe NMPC has not identified those nonconforming "nonservice sensitive" pipes which are to be inspected per Part IV 8.1.b.(3) of NUREG-0313, 24

. l Rev. 1. Data are needed to determine which "nonservice sensitive" ASME Code Class 2 pipes will be inspected and what inspection procedures will ce used.

IV.B.l.b.(4) Augmented ISI of Nonconf aming "Nonservice Sensitive" ASME Code Class 2 Pipe NMPC has not identifi'.d those nonconforming "nonservice sensitive" pipes which are to be inspected per Part IV.3.1.b.(4) of fiUREG-0313, Rev. 1. Data are needed to determine which "nonservice sensitive" ASME Code Class 2 pipes will be inspected and what inspection procedures will be used. .

IV.B.2.b. Augmented ISI of Nonconforming " Service Sensitive" Pipe Welds l

NMPC has replaced the 28-in. recirculation piping with Type 316 tiG wnich is a conforming material. NMPC need not subject the parts of i the recirculation system made of Type 316 NG to augmented ISI.

j IV.3.2.b.(6) Augmented ISI of Nonconforming " Service Sensitive" ASME Code Class 2 Pipe l NMPC has submitted the augmented ISI program for nonconforming

! " service sensitive" piping, but has not distinguished between the t j ASME Code Class 1 and Class 2 piping. Therefore, ilMPC's program for i

ASME Code Class 2 piping cannot be evaluated without more data.

?

i l

i 25

TABLE 3 O!FFERENCES BETWEEfl NUREG-0313, REV.1 AND LICENSEE'S RESPONSES II.C. Material Selection, Testing, and Processing Guidelines for SWRs with an Operating License fiUREG-0313, Rev. I requires that all NRC-designated " service sensitive" lines be replaced with corrosion-resistant materials to the extent practical. Also, lines' that experience cracking should be replaced with corrosion-resistant materials.

fiMPC had stated that it was not practical to replace piping in

" service sensitive" systems because of the excessive cccupational

! exposures tnat would be incurred and extensive work involved with primary containment penetrations.O i

i +

l How.tver, it is known that hine Mile Point detected IGSCC in two of the ten recirculation safe ends. Subsequent ultrasonic examinations or, those two safe ends and one other confirmed crack indications.

Basea en this and other considerations, it was decided to replace

( the 28-in recirculation piping and the ten safe ends. . All the

! replacement material will be AISI Type 316 f4G or equivalent. In this matter, NMPC meets NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.9 It 1. not known whether NMPC has replaced all the nonconforming "ser" ice sensitive" pipe.

IV.B.I.a.(1) Leak Detection and Monitoring Systems i

The nine subsections of Section C of Regulatory Guide 1.45 are discussed below.

26

C.1 NMPC has stated that leakage to t'.e primary reactor containment from identified sources is collected such that

a. the flow rates are monitored separately from unidentified leakage,10 and
b. the total flow rate can be established and monitored.10 C.2 Unidentified leakage to the Nine Mile Point primary reactor containment can be collected and the flow rate monitored with an accuracy of I gpm or better (Bases for 3.2.5 and 4.2.5).10 C.3 NMPC has the following leak detegtion systems in Nine Mile Point, Unit 1.
a. Monitoring rate of rise in the drywell ficor drain tank level (level vs. time)
b. Time requi. red to fill the tank between two predetermined levels (rate of change)
c. Timer reset on level sensor.10 The above systems correlate to only one of the three methods recommended in Regulatory Guide 1.45.

C.4 It is not clear whether provisions have been made in the Nine Mile Point Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) to monitor systems connected to the RCPS for signs of intersystem leakage.

C.5 The Nine Mile Point Unit I leakage detection systems can detect an unidentified leakage of 1 gpm in less than I h.

.27.

w . - - _ _ _ _ _ _

C.6 It is not clear whether the Nine Mile Point airborne particulate radioactivity monitoring system remains functional wnen subjected to the SSE.

C.7 Indicators and alarms for the required leakage detaction system ar'e provided in the main control room. Procedures for converting various indications to a common leakage equivalent are available to the operators.

It is not known whether calibration of the indicators accounts for the needed independert variables.

C.8 All Nine Mile Point leak detection systems enumerated in Reference 8 can be calibrated or tested during operation.

C9 The Nine Mile Point Technical Specifications include limiting conditions for identified and unidentified leakage.

However, the availability of the leakage detection instruments to ensure adequate coverage at all times cannot be determined.

It cannot be determined from the above whether Nine Mile Point meets Regulatory Guide 1.45, Section C.

IV . 8.1. a. ( 2 ) Leak Detection Requirements NUREG-0313, Rev. I requires that reactor shutdown be initiated when there is a 2-gpm increase in unidentified leakage in 24 h. For sump

-level monitoring systems with the fixed-measurement interval method, the level should be monitored every 4 h or le'...

NMPC plans to adopt NUREG-0313 Rev. O on leak detection.

'NUREG-0313, Rev. O required that reactor shutdown be initiated when there is a 2-gpm increase in unidentified leakage in 4 h.0 NUREG-0313 Rev. O requirements do not meet those in NUREG-0313 Rev. 1.

28

IV.3.1.b.(3) Augmented ISI of Nonconforming "fionservice Sensitive" ASME Code Class 2 Pipe NUREG-0313, Rev. I requires tnat nonconforming ASME Code Class 1 and Class 2 piping be subjected to an augmented ISI program. The augmented ISI program for ASC Cod:t Class 1 piping differs from that required on Class 2 piping. Also, augmented ISI requirements differ for ASME Code Class 2 pipes to be inspected per Parts IV.B.1.b.(3) and IV.S. I.b.(4) of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.

NMPC has submitted the augmented ISI program for nonconforming "nonservice sensitive" piping, Qut has not distinguished between the ASME Code Class 1 and Class 2 piping, and between the ASME Code Class 2,oipes which are to be inspected per Parts IV.B.I.b.(3) ano IV.B.1.b.(4) of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1. Therefore, NMPC's program for ASME Code Class 2 piping cannot be evaluated without more dats.9 IV.8.1.b.(4) Augmented ISI of Nonconforming "Nonservice Sensitive" ASME Code Class 2 Pipe NUREG-0313, Rev. I requires that nonconforming ASME Code Class I and Class 2 piping be subjected to an augmented ISI program.- The augmented ISI program for ASME Code Class 1 piping differs from that required on Class 2 piping. Also, augmented ISI requirements differ for ASME Code Class 2 pipes to be inspected per Parts IV.8.1.b.f 3) and IV.8.1.b.(4) of NUREG-0313, Rev.1.

. NMPC has submitted the augmented ISI program for nonconforming "nonservice sensitive" piping, but has not distinguished between the ASME Code Class 1 and Class 2 piping, and between the ASME Code Class 2 pipes which are to be inspected per Parts IV.B.1.b.(3) and IV.8.1.b.(4) of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1. Therefore NMPC's program for ASME Code Class 2 piping cannot be evaluated without more data.9 29

IV.B.2.b. Augmented ISI of Nonconforming " Service Sensitive" Pipe Welds NUREG-0313, Rev. I requires that " service sensitive" piping be subject to an augmented ISI program. Selection methods for pipes to be examined are found in Part IV.S.2.b. of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.

NMPC replaced the recirculation piping with Type 316 NG which is a conforming material according to NUREG-0313, Rev. 1. hMPC therefore does not need to subject the parts of the recirculation system made of Type 316 NG to augmented ISI.

IV.8.2.b.(6) Augmented ISI of Nonconforming " Service Sensitive" ASME Code Class 2 Pipe ,

NUREG-0313, Rev. I requires that nonconforming ASME Code Class 1 and Class 2 piping be subjected to an augmented ISI program. The augmented ISI program for ASME Code Class 1 piping differs from that required on Class 2 piping.

NMPC has not identified those nonconforming " service sensitive" pipes which are to be inspected per Part IV.8.2.b.(6) of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.

Data are needed to determine which " service sensitive" ASME Code Class 2 pipes will be inspected and what. inspection procedures will be used.

-30 a

TABLE 4 A00!TI0t1AL DATA REQUIRED OF LICENSEE

!. II.C. Material Selection, Testing, and Processing Guidelines for SWRs with ,

an Operating License Indicate which piping systems are noncunforming " service sensitive" per t4UREG-0313, Rev. I'. Indicate whether these nonconforming " service sensitive" piping s,ystems will be replaced and what the replacement schedule is.

I't.S.I.a.(1) Leak Detection and Monitoring Systems

1. Indicate whether provisions have been made in the fline Mile Point FSAR to monitor systems connected to the RCPS for l signs of intersystem leakage (Subsection C.4 of Regulatory l Guide 1.45).
2. Indicate whether calibration of the indicators accounts for the needed independent variables (Subsection C.7 of Regulatory Guide 1.45).
3. Indicate whether Nine Mlle Point Unit I has the following leak detection and monitoring systems.

, a. Airborne particulate radioactivity monitoring.

b. Condensate flow rate monitoring from air coolers.
c. Airbornegaseousradioactivitymonitoring(Subsection C.3 of Regulatory Guide 1.45).

31

4 Indicate the availability of the leakage detection instruments to ensure adequate coverage at all . times (Subsection C.9 of Regulatory Guide 1.45).

5. Indicate whether the Nine Mile Point airborne particulate radiation monitoring system remains functional when subjected to SSE (Subsection C.6 of Regulatory Guide 1.45).

IV.B.I.a.(2) Leak Detection Requirements None.

IV.B.1.b.(3) Augmented ISI of Nonconforming "Nonservice Sensitive" ASME Code Class 2 Pipe Identify which ASME Code Class 2 pipe will be inspected per Part IV.B.1.b.(3) and which inspection procedures will be used.

l IV.B.I.b.(4) Augmented ISI of Nonconforming "Nonservice Sensitive" ASME Code Class 2 Pipe Identify which ASME Code Class 2 pipe will be inspected per Part IV.B.1.b.(4) and which inspection procedures will be used.

l IV.B.2.b. Augmented ISI of Nonconforming " Service Sensitive" Pipe ' Welds l

l Nont.

IV.S.2.b.(6) Augmented ISI of Nonconforming " Service Sensitive" ASME Code Class 2 Pipe

1. Identify which ASME Code Class 2 pipe will be inspected per PartIV.B.2.b.(6).
2. Identify the inspection procedures for "sorvice sensitive" ASME Code Class 2 pipe, i

32

--S

,; 4 REFEREi.C ES

1. E. D. Esson et al., inf'Most Ef fectiveness of Countermeasures to Intergrage Stress' .d rosion Crac<ing in SaR Picing, Eddi t49-l/03, r eDru ary, m l, p. 4-uw.

['

l

2. U.S. fluclope ite7uttery Commission, Technical Recort on Matarial Selection and P_ recessing Guidelines for d'aR Coolant Pressure Soundary Piping, USl4kC Report NUxiG-0313, July 1977.

l J

3. U.S. Iluclear Regulatory Commissien, Technical Reoort, Investigation and Evalo3 tion of Cracking in Austenitic Stainless steel Picinn of Boiling Wster Reacter Plants, U5liRG Report t4URE3-75/06/, Octooer 1975.
4. U.S. fluclear Regulatory Commission, liivestigation and Evaluation of Stress-Corrosion Cracking in Pioing of Lignc nater Reactor Plants, U5teRG deport 14URG-0531, recruary 19/9. -

, 5. U.Sl Pluclear Replatory Commission, Technical Recort on Material -

r Selection _and Processing Guidelines for BWR Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping, 25tiRG 8eport tiukE3-0313 Rev.1, July 19c0. ,

6 D. G. Eisenbt letter to all BWR license!es (except Humboldt Bay and La Crosse),'"!n.plementation of tiUREG-0313. Rev.1, Technical Report on

,, Material Sehction and Processing Guidelines for B'aR Goolant Pressure Bounoary Pipi. g 1 Generic Task A-42)," Generic Letter 61-04, Fecruary

, , Zo, 1961. t I 7. O. P. Dise to 0. G.: Eisenhut letter, Jul'y 1,1981 (flRC Accession fio.:

j g , 8107070307). ,

. e.

,, , b. O. P. Dise to G. Lear letter, December 16,1977 (tiRC Accession tio.:

tiege given).

9. T. E. I.emges to 0. G. Eisenhut letter, August 6,1982 (t4RC Accession ,

tio.: .tione given). i s 10. C. V. Mangan to D. B. Vassallo letter, December 30,1982(fiRC i Accession tio.: 830 440631).

i l

} \

,l f f

) < ,

.<g -

$')y s s, ,

{ ), b, I,

\,,

' \ , s,

  • 4  !. t }

f p y' , q[ .  ; g) . . ..

y ,y q y ,..

.s p& n , g.s . . ,s L '

'T T' c'

l l

fN",gsoav335, u s N'xLt An na:v6Afcav couversics ' " ' ** " I * * * " " ## ' ## ##

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET EGG-FM-6253 4 rirse A.*.s sverif ti 2 .t e.e e. => l TECH l! CAL E'/ALUATIO.'l 0F It4TEGRITY OF THE tiif4E i4ILE POI:4T I REACTOR CCCLAliT BOU!CARY PIPIiG SYSTE:4 2 asc.,1:N r oc:isseu.a A. r c. ,, , . , . .. .e a , c c.,< , ., e a

P. K. flagata July I"

1983 l a ea ucav.No cac As. A rion ave u.o vA.t. o Aeriaan u4,w., e, cm, cafe stroar mea wc 'e r *.

July lvtaa 1933 EGAG Idaho, Inc. .4,,,,,,,..,

Idaho Falls, 10 8J115 l a 2 .., . . i 12 $#0%$0RsNG 09C ANa2 4 r'ON N AU( ANS *A Aalt.NG A00 8f 55 (ser'wo, / / Cm)

, 7 , , ,7 gg Division of licenstnq Office of Nuclair aeactor Aecuiation .it ,,n No

( U.S. Nuclear Regi,iatory Ccfmission .

l Washington DC 20155 A6429 .

i l i) TvPtOf84804f et 8'00 C os e "a c use.va re Jewse 16 suretE *.it 'a r A a v *a 0 rt 3 14 <tene m ese s 16 A83 f R ACT WO **'n or s ies I

l l' r l

1 8 7 mt v *0801 A%0 0ccv9 TNT AN Abes'S If e Ct3 Cater 085 I

l ifs actNf6#;t al CPf N 4NCf D flav 6 14 Av aitaerLif v Sr Af tvtNT 19 SICu lfa v Ch a11 < fa s ,eee<*s 31 NO G* P Aal1 Unclassified Unlimi ted n : .w a tv et Ass <ra iew, si e=>:

Unclassified v 48C 8089 3JS 'is en

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20090H767&oldid=3494606"