ML20093J283
| ML20093J283 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1983 |
| From: | Nagata P EG&G, INC. |
| To: | Koo W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20093J272 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-A-6429, RTR-NUREG-0313, RTR-NUREG-313 EGG-FM-6207, EGG-FM-6247, GL-81-04, GL-81-4, TAC-46671, TAC-46672, NUDOCS 8407300018 | |
| Download: ML20093J283 (41) | |
Text
'
EGG-FM-6247 TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF INTEGRITY OF
~
THE PEACH BOTTOM UNITS 2 AND 3 REACTOR COOLANT BOUNDARY PIPING SYSTEM Published June 1983 Peter K. Nagata Materials Engineering Branch Materials Sciences Division EG&G Idaho, Inc.
Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Responsible NRC Individual and Division:
W. H. Koo/ Division of Engineering Docket No.: 50-277 and -278 TAC Nos.: 46671 and 46672 Prepared for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Under DOE Contract No. DE-AC07-761001570 FIN No. A6429 CSKo$000h?y PDR
- _....... ~.
=.. -
- A8STSACT.
NUREG-0313 Rev.1, Technical Report on Material Selection and Processing Guidelines for BWR Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping, is the NRC staff's revised acceptable methods to reduce intergranular stress corrosion cracking in boiling water reactors. The responses to NRC Generic Letter 81-04 of the Philadelphia Electric Company concerning whether its Peach Botton. Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 meet NUREG-0313. Rev. I 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 8 of NUREG-0313 Rev. 1.
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, j
Inc., Materials Engineering Branch.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission funded the work under the authorization, B&R 20 19 10 11.
i
-)
4 i
i L
~
i i
ii e
m..--
,%yc,-,.n,,..~,%.,c.,-_,%
y_,,y.,.-~.rme_,_,c_..-,
r,
,_y,
,,,.c
,,,.r,-
SdMMARY As may be observed in the following table, with the exception of Parts IV.B.1.b.(3), IV.B.I.b.(4), and IV.B.2.b.(6), Peach Bottom 2 and 3 do not meet any of the parts of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 evaluated in this document.
The following table is a synopsis of the EG&G Idaho, Inc. evaluation of Philadelphia Electric Company's response to NRC Generic Letter 81-04.
Additional Data Part of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 Evaluated Evaluation, Required Discrepancy Section II.
II.C.
Provides alternative to Yes Minor NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 Section III.
Section IV.
IV.B.1.
Provides alternative to Yes Minor NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 IV.B.I.a.(1)
Provides alternative to Yes Major NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 IV.B.I.t.(2)
Does not meet NUREG-0313, No Major Rev. I f
IV.B.I.b.
Provides alternative to No Minor NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 IV.B.1.b.(3)
Meets NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 No No IV.B.I.b.(4)
Meets NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 No No l
IV.B.2.
Provides alternative to Yes Minor NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 IV.B.2.a.
The comments for Parts IV.B.I.a.(1) and IV.B.I.a.(2) i apply here.
IV.B.2.b.
Provides alternative to No Minor NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 IV.B.2.b.(6)
Meets NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 No No aSee Tables 1 and 3 for additional information.
bSee Tables 1 and 4 for additional information.
111
.-,-u,-
w---.
__.,_,,_..y.,,,
y-,-.s
..---w.,.-,-.-v
.,w9ycw..,---,
e
l CONTEU.TS AB ST R AC T..............................................................
"11
SUMMARY
iii 1.
I N TROD UC T I ON.....................................................
I 2.
EVALUATION.......................................................
4 2.1 NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 Guidelines..............................
4 e
2.2 Discussion 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.......................................................
36 TABLES i
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. I and Licensee's Responses........................................................
27 4.
Additional Data Required of Licensee.............................
33 I
E i
l i
iv t
TECHNICAL EVALUAIION OF INTEGRITY OF THE PEACH BOTTOM UNITS 2 AND 3 REACTOR COOLANT B0UNDARY PIPING SYSTEM 1.
INTRODUCTION Intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) of austJith v
stainless steel (SS) piping has been observed in boiling wath reactors (BWRs) since December 1965.I The NRC established a Pire Crack Study Group (PCSG) in January 1975 to study the problem.
Tha PCSG issued two documents, NUREG-75/067 Technical Report, Investigation and Evaluation of 3
Cracking in Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping of Boiling Water Reactors and an implementation document, NUREG-0313, Rev. 0.2 After cracking in large-diameter piping was discovered for the first time in the Ouane Arnold BWR in 1978, a new Pr.SG was formed. The new PCSG in turn issued two reports, NUREG-0531, Investigation and Evaluation of Stress-Corrosion 4
, Cracking in Piping of Light Water Reactor Plants and NUREG-0313, Rev. 1, Technical Report on Material Selection and Processing Guidelines for BWR Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping.5 NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 is the implementing document of NUREG-0531 and discusses the augmented inservice inspection (ISI) and leak detection requirements "for plants that cannot comply with the material selection, testing, and processing guidelines" of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.5 NRC Generic Letter 81-04 requested each licensee "to review all ASME Code Class 1 and 2 pressure boundary piping, safe ends, and fitting material, including weld metal to determine if (they) meet the material selection, testing and processing guidelines in" NUREG-0313, Rev.1.0 The generic letter offered the option of providing a description, 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 oarly detection of leakage from pipe cracks.
1
~. - -. - -
In, response to NRC Generic Letter 81'-04, Philadelphia Electric Company.
submitted a letter on October 1, 1981.7 A req.; eat for information from the NRC staff elicited additional letters on December 3,19828 and December 15, 1982.9 EG&G Idaho personnel evaluated these responses, 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.a 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 i
sufficient information to judge the licensee's program.
3 There is an effort underway to revise NUREG-0313, Rev. I by NRC in light of research on IGSCC and recent instances of IGSCC at Nine Mile Point (March 1982) and Monticello (October 1982). Because of this contemplated c
revision of NUREG-0313. Rev. 1, the following issues will not be evaluated.
1.
The licensee's proposed Technical Specifications to implement the requirements, with the exception of the leak detection requirements in NUREG-0313, Revision 1, Sections IV.B.l.a.(1) and IV.B.1.(a)(2).
l 2.
The acceptability of licensee-proposed augmented inservice inspection J
(ISI) sampling criteria.
i a.
Part III of NUREG-0313, Rev. I contains guidelines; Part IV contains requirements.
I J
f I
1
^
-,.,----,-w_,----
,,,e
- - -.... -- ----~~- - - - - - - ~ * - - - - -
3.
C,redit for past operating expe/ ience and 'inspectiori results.
r t-4.
The acceptability of induction heating stress improvement (IHSI), heat sink welding (HSW), and weld overlay as alternates to augmented ISI.
i i
1 4
h
'I e
i l
t 1
i.
1 i
t 3
I 2.
EVALUATION 2.1 NUREG-0313. Rev. 1 Guidelines The guidelines and requirements outlined in NUREG-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 mater.ial selection, testing, 4
and processing guidelines. Part III summarizes acceptable methods to l
minimize IGSCC susceptibility with respect to the material selection.
l testing, and processing guidelines. Part IV deals with leak detection and inservice inspection requirements of nonconforming (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 summarizes the licensee's responses, l
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 sections in Parts II through IV of NUREG-0313, Rev. I are not l
discussed in the right hand column.
In these cases, one of the comments below will be used.
i 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.
l 4
Thelicenseehasnotfurdisheddataonthistopicinhis
,o.
responses to NRC Generic Letter 81-04.
o No commer.t made because alternative plans were not evafuated.
Table 2 lists the summaries of the licensee's responses to NRC questions on implemeatation of NUREG-0313 Rev. I guidelines. Therefore, in Table 2 the reader is able to read all the summaries in one table without having to search Table 1 for all the summaries. The same compilation applies to Tables 3 and 4.
Table 3 lists the differences between the licensee's proposed implementation program and that reconsnended in NUREG-0313 Rev. 1.
Table 4 lists the areas where additional information is required to properly evaluate the licensee's proposed
' mplementation program. All the items in Tables 2, 3, and 4 are listed in i
their respective tables in the order they appear in Table 1.
2.3 Discrepancies
- Any alternate proposal that did not meet a specific guidelina or
] -
requirement of NUREG-0313, Rev. I was considered a discrepancy.
Evaluation l
of alternate proposals was outside the scope of this task, as indicated in l
Section 1 of this report. Licensees have submitted definitions of "nonservice sensitive" and augmented ISI proposals that differ from l
NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.
These differences are considered minor because the NRC l
staff is considering major modifications to those requirements. An example of a minor discrepancy is the use of the stress rule index (SRI) to choose f
which welds would be subjected to augmented ISI.
i l
If the alternate proposal to leak detection does not meet the l
requirements in NUREG-0313, Rev.1, it was considered a major discrepancy l~
because NRC is not considering major modifications to those requirements.
I i
An example of a major discrepancy is a licensee's not proposing Technical Specifications to implement leak detection requirements in NUREG-0313 Rev. 1.
l Only major discrepancies are listed in the Conclusions section.
t 5
i i
l 4
,n
,,--ane-, -. - - - -,
.-...,-.,~,v----m-<--mne---,-,-,-,n--~re-+-
-/~~ev----
-~~-e~~-~~~-r---
3.
CONCLU$ IONS Peach Bottom 2 and 3 have the following major discrepancies:
IV.B.I.a.(1)
Leak Detection and Monitoring Systems Philadelphia Electric Company has not adequately demonstrated that the Peach Bottom 2 and 3 leak detection and monitoring systems are in compliance with those described in Section C of Regulatory Guide 1.45.
IV.B.I.a.(2)
Leak Detection Requirements l
Philadelphia Electric Company has not put the provision for shutdown after a 2-gpm increase in unidentified leakage in 24 h i
into-the Peach Bottom 2 and 3 Technical Specifications.
Philadelphia Electric Company has not put the provision for monitoring the sump level at 4-h (or less) intervals into the Peach Bottom 2 and 3 Technical Specifications.
There are minor discrepancies as well as the major ones listed above.
j These minor discrepancies are not listed here. However, it should not be inferred that NRC personnel approve of the actions taken by the licensee that were evaluated as minor discrepancies from NUREG-0313. Rev.1.
The licensee has not supplied sufficient information to evaluate his responses to topics II.C, IV.8.1, IV.B.l.a.(1), IV.B.I.a.(2), IV.B.2, and IV.B.2.a.
Taole 4 lists the required information for each topic.
i 1
i
?
l l
l l
6 l
s 4
-9
'-c-m
,rm-,--e
---www,.---v---,--,
w--,-,
e.,-
mn-w-,.-.-
-.w-,-
w---,w-.,.
-*,,w,,-
-e.e.,,---
w.~,.--m.w.,-.---%,
, - - - -m%,-.m m,
TABLE I.
REVIEW OF LICENSEE'S RESPONSE TO NRC GENERIC LETIER 81-04 Encerpts f rom muREG-0313. Rev.1 EG&G Idaho Evaluation - PEACH BOTTOM 2 AND 3 II.
IMPLEMENTATION 0F MATERIAL SELECTION. TESTING. AND Md E55I N LINE5 ll.A.
For plants under review but for which a A.
Not appilcaele because the construction permit for this construction permit has rot been issued, all ASME plant has been issued.
Ccde Class I, 2 and 3 lines should conform to the guidelines stated in Part III.
II.B.
For plants that nave seen issued a construction B.
Not appilcable because the operating Ilcense for this permit Det not an operating license, all ASME Code plant has been issued.
Class 1. 2 and 3 lines should conform to the guidelines stated in Part III unless it can be demonstrated to the staf f (nat laplementing the guidelines of Part III would result in undue hardship. For cases in which the guidelines of Part 111 Jee not complied with, additional measures should me taken for Class 1 and 2 lines in accordaoce with the gulJelines stated in Part IV of this document.
II.C.
For plaats that nave neen issued an operating C.
SUNMARY license. NkC cesignated " Service Sensitive" lines (Part IV 8) sneuld be modified to conform to the Philadelphia Electric Company (PEco) plans to, replace guidelines stated in Part III, to tne entent. _
some nonconforming " service sensitive" pipe and also plans i
t practicaole. Wnen " Service Sensitive" and other to apply induction heating stress improvement (lH51) to Class I and 2 lines do not meet the guidelines of other nonconforming " service sensitive' pipe, t
Part III, additional measures should be taken in l
accordance with the guidelines stated in Part IV PEco has not supplied sufficient technical data on the N
of this document. Lines that espertence cracking appilcation of INSI to " service sensitive
- piping to allow durlag service and require replacement should be an evaluation as to whether NUREG-0313. Rev. I has been met, replaced with piping that conforms to the guidelines stated in Part III.
DIFFERENCES NuREG-0313. Rev. I requires that all NRC-destgr:ated
" service sensitive" lines be replaced with i
corrosion-resistant materials to the extent practical.
Also lines that emperience cracking should be replaced with corrosion-resistant materials.
}
PEco plans to replace some nonconforming " service sensitive' pipe with pipe which meets NUREG-0313. Rev.1.
PEco also plans to apply gh5I to other nonconforming
- service sensitive
- pipe.
I T
l
-- - _.-. ~ -.
i ADDITIO ML DATA REqulAE0 1.
Identify to whicQ acaconforslag "servicO sensitive" pipe the 1815I technique will be applied.
2.
Identify which nonconferslag " service sensitive" pipe will be replaced with pipe that meets NUREG-0313. Rev.1.
e 3.
Identify welch nonconforming
- service sensitive" i
pipe utll have neither of the aheve--replacement m
or Ils51--applied to them. ladlCate what measures
?
N will be taken en these pipes te altigate IG5CC.
t III. SismARY OF ACCEPTABLE hiiH005 TO MININIZE CRACK j
5115CEPTIBILITY--IIRTERIAL 5ELECTIOll. TESTINE. Am re-L553Ks tiUIRLIR5 l
III.A. - Selection of staterials A.
The licensee has not furnished data on this paragraph la his responses to MC Generic Letter 81-04. See
{
Only those materials described in paragraphs I comment on part II.C. aseve.
and 2 telow are acceptable to the MC for lastallation in SUR ASIIE Code Class 1, 2 and 3 piping systems. Other materials may be used when j
evaluated and accepted by the MC.
l III.A.I. Corrosion-Resistant flaterials 1.
The caements en III.A. alse apply here.
4 j
All pipe and fitting material lacluding safe ends, thermal sleeves, and weld metal should he of a type and grade that has been 4
)
on demonstrated to be highly resistant to osygen-assisted stress corrosion in the i
4 as-lastalled conditlen. flaterials that have heen se demonstrated laclude ferritic steels.
"Ihsclear Grade" austenit1C stataless steels.*
i Types 304L and 316L austealtic stainless i
steels. Type CF-3 cast stataless steel.
I i
Types CF-8 and CF-SM cast austealtic stainless steel with at least 55 ferrite. Type 30AL I
stainless steel weld metal, and other austenttic stataless steel weld metal with at least 55 ferrite content. unstanill ed I
wrought austealtic stalniess steel without controlled low carton has not been so
- These materials nave centrolled low carten (0.021 man) and nitrogen (0.11 eaa) contents and meet all requirements, j
including mecnanical property requirements of ASfE i
specification for regular grades of Type 3d4 or l
316 stataless steel pipe.
1 i
i i
i 4
i a
a.
~.
demons
- rated encept when the piping is in the solution-aanealed condition. The use of such material (i.e., regular grades of Types 304 and 316 stainless steels) should be avoided.
If such material is used, the as-Installed pistne lacluding welds should be in the solutlan-aanealed condition. Idhere regular grades of Types 304 and 316 are used and welding or heat treatment is required, special measures, such as those 4 scribed in l
Part Ill.C. Processing of Materials, should be taken to ensure that IGSCC will not occur.
Such measures may include (a) solution annealing susseguest to the welding or heat treatment, and (b) weld cladding of materials to se welded using procedures that have been demonstrated to reduce residual stresses and sensittaation of surface materials, 1
Ill.A.2. Corrosion-Resistaat safe Ends and Thermal 2.
The comments on III.A. also apply here.
Sleeves 1
All unstabillaed wrougt.t austealtic stainless j
steel materials used for safe ends and thermal i
sleeves without controlled low carton contents (L-grades and huclear Grade) should be la the solution-annealed condition. If as a o
i j
consequence of faericatta, welds joining 1
these materials are not solution annealed, j
they should me made between cast (or weld j
overtald) austenttic stainless steel surfaces e
(51 elalaws ferrite) or other materials 'having l
hign resistance to osygen-assisted stress
~
corrosion. The jolet aesign must be such that any high-stress areas in unstattlized wrought austealtic stataless steel without controlled low carton content, which may become sensitized as a result of the welding process, 4
i is not esposed to the reactor coolant.
1 Thermal sleeve attachments that are weIded ta j
the pressure soundary and form crevices where 4
luperttles may accumulate should not te esposed to a SW coolant environment.
1 Ill.B. Testing of staterials 8.
The licensee has not furnished data on this paragraph la his responses to IRC Generic tetter 81-04.
i for new lastallation, tests should be made on all I
regular grade stainless steels to se used in the ASME Code Class I, 2, and 3 piping systees to j
demonstrate that the material was properly i
f i
. ~.
annealed and is met susceptitl2 to IGSCC. Tests that have been tsed to deterslae the t
susceptimility of IGSCC laclude practices A*
and E " of A51M A-267, i
- practice A--Omalic acid etch test for classificatten of etch structures of stainless steels.
" practice E--Capper-capper sulfate-sulfuric acid test for
)
detecting susceptiellity to latergranular attact la l
stainless steels.
i "Secom m e practices for Detecting Susceptiellity to latergranular Attack in Stalaless Steels" and the electrochemical potentletinetic reactivaties (Ept) test. Tae Ept test is met yet accepted my the MC. If the Ept i
test is used, the acceptance criteria applied est i
te evaluated and accepted by the MC en a l
case-ty-case tests.
III.C. processine of materials C.
The licensee has not furalshed data en this paragraph la als responses to NRC Generic Letter 81-04. See t
- . Correstsa. resistant claddlag ulth a duplea cwts en part II.C. ateve.
i microstructure ($1 mialass territe) may be applied j
to the ends of Type 304 or 316 stalaless steel pipe for the purpose of avelding IG5CC at k
weldments. Such claddlag,unich is latended to i
(a) mieleize the NAZ en the pipe laser surface.
(h) move the MZ auay from the alghly stressed l
O reglen nest to tee attacament meld, and l
(c) 1selate the meldsent free the envirement, may he applied mader the felleulag condittens:
III.C.I. For lattial constructlen, provided that all of 1.
The comments on III.C. aise apply here.
l the piping is solutten annealed af ter clWing.
III.C.2. For repair meidlag and modification to 2.
The cements en III.C. aise apply here.
la-place systems la operattag plaats and plaats under constructies. When the repair meldlag er modification requires replacement 1
of pipe, the replacement pipe should be seletion-annealed af ter claddlag.
1 Correslea-resistaat cladelag applied la the i
"flel4* (i.e. ulthout susseguent solutlea anneallag of the pipe) is aCCeptatie caly en that porties of the pipe that has not seen removed from the piplag system. other -fleid-j 1
i i
applications of corrosion-resistaat cladding are not acceptante. Other processes that have neen found by lasoratory tests to alatatae stresses and IGSCC in austealtic stataless steel weldseats include laduction heattag stress leprovement (INSI) and heat stat meldlag (NSW). Although the use of these processes 45 an alternate to segmented laservice laspectica is not yet accepted by the mRC. these processes may se permissible and =111 te considered on a case-ey-case masts provided acceptante supportive data are samaltted to the M C.
IV.
Ih5ERVICE Im5pfCTI0m Amo LEAK DETECTION REqu!REMENTS Tut auss usin vsmians. utsatts or a.uur-_ _t to N G UTOELINES IV.A.
For plaats whose ASME Code Class 1. 2. and 3 A.
The licensee has met furnished data en this paragraph pressure neundary piplag meets the guidelines of la his responses to MC Generic Letter 81-04.
Part Ill, no augmented laservice laspectlen or teet detection requirements toyend those specified la tne 10 CTR 50.55a(g) " Inservice Inspecties Requirements
- and plant Techalcal Specifications for_ leakage detection are necessary.
IV.S.
ASME Code Class I and 2 pressere mMary plplag 8.
The licensee has not furalshed data on this paragraph h
that does not meet guidelines of part III is la his responses to MC Generic Letter 41-04.
destgaated "monconforslag* and must have additional laservice laspection and more stringest lean detection re w irements. The degree of augmented laservice laspection of such piplag depends on whether the specific *nonceaforslag" piplag runs are classified as *$ervice Sensitive." The *$ervice Sensitive" lines were and will se destgaated my the mRC and are detlaed as those that have emperienced cracting of a generic asture, or that are considered to se particularly susceptible to cractlag because of a comminatloa of high local stress, material condition, and high osygen content la the relatively stagnant, latermitteet, or low-flow coolant. Currently, for the acaconforslag A5fE Code Class 3 piplag ne additional laservice Inspection beyond the Section II visual esamination is required.
t s.=, se s = piping sunsidered to be ~5ervicz sensitive
- laclude but ara not llaltad to: cora spray lines, recirc:lation riser lines.*
recircclaties typass lines (or pipe
- Stace ne ISSCC has seen caserved la the domestic plants and la view of the posstale nigst radiatten espesure to the laspection personnel, surveillance and mealtering means etner thae these spec 1 fled la Sectlen IV of this report for recirculatten riser lines will se considered on a case-ty-case tasts.
entenstems/ stub tunes en plants where the typass lines have been removed), control rod erlee (CBS) mydraulle return lines, tselatlee condenser lines, recirculatten talet Ilnes at safe ends unere crevices are formed by the melded thermal sleeve attachments, and snutdemn heat enchanger llaes.
If cracklag should later te found la a particular piplag run and coesleered to be generic, it all!
he designated my the mRC as " Service Sensitive.*
Leakage detecties and augmented laservice laspectlen requirements for "morenferslag* 11aes and *menconferelag. Service Sessitive*illaes are specified telen:
i}
I V.S. I.
- menconferslag' Lines That Are het *5ervice 1.
54seenaY a
5ensitive"
(
PECe does not believe it is appropriate to propose l
Technical Specificattens changes to lacorporate an augmented ISI program, tocasse, la part, of their planned long ters ro modifications to reduce augmented ISI requirements.
I i
PECe has met supplied sufficient data en its long ters 1
modificattens to show that the modifications meet j
aunfG-0313. Rev. 1.
l DIFFERfmCf5 anC Generic Letter 81-04 requires that the licensee's f
Techalcal Specifications te changed to inciede an augmented ISI program for nesconferslag piplag.
i pfCe has ladicated that its leeg ters program included replaclag selected piplag with material that meets auREG-0313. Rev.1;(and evaluatlag the laductlee heattagINSI) process for inmititleg stress la of IGSCC.grevement inerefere. PECe does not telleve it is appropriate to propose Techalcal Specificatless changes te i
locarporate an segmented ISI program for noncesferetag piplag because of this leeg term program to reduce augmented 151 requirements.
~
i e
O 8.
.,s, c
ADDITIONAL DATA REgillAEB 1.
idhat propertion of the nonconferelag piping new la Peach setten 2 and 3 m111 be subjected to replacement en a planned basis and te lle587 2.
laut are the selecties criteria for a pipe to se subjected to replacement er letSIT IV.B.I.a.
Leak Setectlen: The reacter coolant a.
The Ilconsee has met furnished data en this paragraph leakage detectlen systems should he in als responses to NAC Generic tetter 88-04.
a eperated under the Technical Specificatten reestrements to e-e the discovery of 1
entdentitled lem age that may laclede through-wall cracas developed in aesteettic stataless steel piping.
3 IV.B.1.a.(1) The leanage detecties system provided (1) SepetARY sheeld leclude sufficiently diverse leat detectlea methods ulth adessate PECa's descripties of Peace Settem 2 and 3's led sensitivity to detect and seasure small detectles methods is met detailed enough to determine leans in a steely manner and to identify whether they meet Sectles C of Replatory Guide I.45.
the leakage seurCes within the praCilCal limits. Acceptable led age detectien and SIFFERENCES mentterlag systems are descrlhed la C
Sectlen C. Regulatory Positten of The alae subsectless of Secties C of Segulatory Begulatory Guide 1.45. "Seacter Coelaat Guide 1.45 are discussed telen.
Pressere boundary Led age Detectlen Systems.*
Col PECs has stated that iedage to the peleary reatter centalsment frem identIfled sources is Particular attenties should te given to callected such that upgradlag and calltratlag these leak the f)em rates are gitered separately fren detectlen systems taat allt provide prompt a.
ledicatten of an lacrease la ledage rate.
meldentified lemage, ame I
Staer eguloalent lemage detectien and to the tetal 1SW rate Can he established and collectlen systees allt be reeleued on a maattered.
case-ay-case masts.
)
C.2 Gue to many comples f acters, it is not clear that unidentified lemage to the primary reactor contalement la Peach Settes 2 and 3 can te j
cellected and the flew rate pitored with as 4
I accuracy of I gas er better.
Itemover, a l
- lemage (detectlengcapability en the order of 1 gpa is espected."
(F5At Secties 4.10.3) t l~
I i
4
_y
__._n
C.3 Ime PECe le s detecties systems coasist of tae fallenlag:
C.
Brymell Temperetare sheetter n.
Orpsell Pressere 8tentter C.
Alrhorse Sadleactivity IIsalters Badleactive noble Gas atentter ledlee Iannitor Particulate 8tmmiter d.
kyuell Fleer kale 5 esp 80antter.8 ine amese systems aset Sectlee C.3 et asymlatory Golde 1.45.
C.4 It is not clear amether provistems haue mees made
~
at Peach Setten 2 and 3 F5At to anniter systems
~
commected to see aCPS for signs of latersystem leasa,e.
C.5 It is met clear from sne Peacm setten 2 and 3 T54ss if tne sensitivity and re. pense time for the meldestitled leakage is adeenete to detect a leakage rate of 3 y le less than I h.
C.6 Tae Peach Betten 2 and 3 alreerne particulate s
redleectivity anniterleg system is met fonctlesel
~
unen subjected to sst.
C.7 Indicaters and alares for the reertred leetage detecties system are provided la the male centrol reen. It is met clear frem the Peach Betten 2 and 3 F54R meether precedures for convertleg terless ledicatless to a commen leetage oemteeleet are asellaele to the aparators.
It is set tasms asetter calltratlee of the ladicaters accounts for the seeded SW.
verlantes.
C.S All Peacs 6 tten 2 and 3's leet detectlen systems i
enamorated la Reference a can he calltrated or tested earlag aparatles.
l O
a e
9 8
8,
9 9
m C.9 Ite Peac3 setten 2 and 3 Iectek:1 Specif kattens laclede lleitleg canditless for lesettfled and j
seidentifled ledage.
i MCs mas ideettfled the seallellsty of sne Peach Settem 2 and 3 systems for detectieg and samplieg system is almeys asallele.3{ tee air anniterleg led age. Elther the samp
~
It casset he detereteed from tee asese unether Peach j
tottam 2 and 3 eset aeostatory Golde 1.45. Secties C.
AaSlilanRL esta afgslaf3 1.
Radicate unetaer proelstens mese nose made le the Poect settas 2 and 3 F5AA to mentter systems comescted to tae SCpt for signs of latersystes temage (Sesectles C.4 of aegulatory Eelde 1.45).
2.
ledkate unetter calltratten of the ledkaters acceents for tae esaded P*
arlales.
Also, tedicate meetmer precedores for cessertleg worless ledkattens to a <==== leenage egelsalent are asalle ne to tae operators (5mdesettles C.2 of me,.latory E lde 1.as).
3.
ledkate emetaer the seesitletty and response time for esldoettfled lemage is maat ase to detect a leenage rate of I y la less taan I h.
us (Sea.sectles C.5 et asy atory Emide 3.45).
13 S.I.e.(2) Plas.t emJh sneste me isttlated far (2) temiant angertles and correctSee actles ames any leenage detectben systes ledicates, witale Polladelpela flettric Caepeny (MCa) has met W a persed of 24 neurs or less, an Secrease tae feett Setten 2 and 3 Iecanical Specittcatless to as rate of embasettfled leanage la encess laterporate tae proelslee for samtdeme for a 2.ges lacrease ed 2 gallaes per alente er its egalseleet, le soldentitled lemage le 24 m. PEte does not maatter the er emes tae total eewestfled leakage samp lesel at tae latervals reestred my aAAEG-8313. See I.
attales a rate af 5 gallees per eteete er its sentealent. estcaeser ecours first.
MCs does set meet aAREG-4313. Sew. I la this metter.
Far samp le el assitarleg systems witm elaes-eraw latereal metees. ame strFrata[Ys level smaald me somstared at 4-mour latervals er less.
samfG-4313. See. I reestres that reactar samtds e ne lentleted ames there is a 2-ges Secrease le soldentitled lemage le 24 m. Far seep lesel maatterlag systems mita the fleed-atasaremmet laterial metaed. See lowel saamid te monitared eeery 4 h er less. ABC Generic tetter St.f4 reestres taat see anose reentems he lacerporated le the plant 1ecaskal Specittcatsens.
MCe ledkates smet it mes been meetleg tais part of esa%4313. Aee. 3.
Peach Settan Tecamkal Specificatan 3.5.C este fonct Betten sereelllance tests already aset
- 13. See. 3.
MCs plans te locarpe* ate tee mueet 1ecaelcal Specifkattens attached to SC Esmer!C tetter 81-88 to tae reec. not.a. 4,st ptent that it is applkale to the a
y n
,m-
Please sanoit tae presesed changes le tae Peata netten 2 and 3 Tocaskel Specif katsees regarding leat rate thosts and leakage sentterlag latervals.
IW A I.a.(3) ansammattled lemage smania lect se all (3) as cemeset esse mecause alternattee plass sere est leenage steer taan:
evaneated. MCs emets sumEE-4313 aav. I le tels estler (f5aa Seccles e.le.3).
Iv A I.s.(3)(a) temage Seta closed systems seca as (a) w rws en IvA1.a.(3) aise apply mere.
peso seas er. iee pecalog less taat are ces.ree, f m. eeneres, ama camensted ta a sess er callectleg tama. er II.S.I.a.(3)(t) tassage leta tae cantabeset (t) Ihe <=====ss en It.8.3.a.(3) aise apply here.
asemeenere free searces taet are tota seacif kally located ame aseme altner est ta teserfere alta sne aparettees af enleentif toe leenage emettarles systems er est to se free a t
7 =1R craca le tae payleg ottate tae reactar cantant pressere ammasary.
It a l.a.
Angeneted Reserence f=seartles: Ieeers ke S.
supong tasometten ed ase h==8ereseg.
=====-wsce 5esattlegr* Ilmes sammle se MCe Setends to telemmat as alteroattee angemetes I5I
(=.a.<ted le acareesce ette tae f alle 6eg an en selected ASE Cees Class I somsenteroles piplag program:*
Se Setten 2 and 3.
Slffragarr5 cs
- Ints program ls largely tames fren 14 : reentremmets of A5pt matt-4313. see. I regnsres taet===r==8ereleg asiler asa pressere messel Caer. Secties 13. referenced le "esseerwice seasstlee* pnpleg to sesject to as ammemeted 358 tme peragree go) of la tra sa.sse. =Cears ans s===.em-es.-
program.
MCe *=*e=*s ta telemmat as angamated I5I progras en selected A5pt Code Class I===r==8ereleg piplag te peact Setten 2 and 3.
(Emere are es A$sE Caee Class 2
===r==8erolog pipes le peach tottas 2 and 3.) MCe elli ese tae Stress tele lados, teamstry eagers==re, fles condialens, and steletaatles of persammel restatten espesare to
- estantist eenseery locattens le certale systems sekt allt preende necessary asserance of pressere hommeery yCredit tty and a reesamanly achte este enasteettee progres.?
allt ne tanee for past esamleettees.
adSEYlmat anTa afgeleES anse.
Ts.S.I.e.(I) Ter assE Case Class I r=r====*s and (3) Ike ews as IV.S.I.D. aise apply more.
pastet, esta press.are.retaletes alsstellar metal sets see)ect ta tenerwace lespettlee reestrements of Sectnem 13 samald me esao&med et least esce la es enre thee SS===e== (g tmares og tae time
m T
prescrised to Ene A5sE haller med Pressere tesset Caer Secttee 33). Seca esaseoastes I
semele tecimee all toternet attar===.a l
menes test are not t;.-
7 ::ll seles met are seleed to er fare part of ame presomre ansesary.
IV.S.R.o.(2) Dee is13emeng 25sE Ceae Class I ploe sehas (2) h casemets se ETAl.a. aise esply here.
i ses3mct to tenerwace sneencties regnerws of Sectnes 33 see.no se esameses et Enest asce to as amre seen as assens:
of pipe (a) Tee cammmets se IV.S.IA anse esply aere.
IV.8.R.a.(2)(a) All senes at taseteel sess a
l at messel serates; i
- 3ereteet enes are tae entreettles of pepteg rues test causert ta strocaeres. coupements (seca as sesseh, peos.
ea3.es) er pipe assners. esca et untcm acts as engte restretets er presters at neest see emprees et reestates to partog sament essenstem.
IvAI.m (2)(a) AII menes aestag a destga cmunteed (t) Ene cammmmets as IWAIA aise apply more.
n preemry o es sar==a ry stress reage of 2.95.er more-It.B.I.m.(2)(c) AIR senes mestes a austes commlettee (c) Dee commmets se iga 1A ales apply more.
fata, e maage faster of a.4 er more:
~
IwAn.a (2)(e) Seaflesamt meestlemet menes essa sie (e) m commmets en sv A 1 A asse aspay more.
pan-esas for crecates to esse ame saa.1 semen to ass se ta=
nas le esca partog srstas.
1: 1 5.a (3) ame fette.tes 49a: Caer stans 2 asse (3) m mmet
.enes, s sject to tener. ace tensecutes reentres of Sectnes 31. Se eaca NCe mas me ASE Come flass 2 peptog to Poeca restamen meet suom I sassams emme,macy amatan 2 aos 3.
Iner* e. *.te need est meme as --g---aad care canttag systems, ama cantatsumet meet I5I plan for seese pr ws.
o rummmel spaamm smente se seamenos at least asce le me omre taas as sensas:
stFftsteES aumEG. alt 3. as.. I reentres taet mesconferstes AfsE Ceee Class 1 and Class 2 ptetes he sesjected to an augmented 158 sragram. 3me amemmeses 353 program far AssE Caer Class I peptog ettfors f aa that reentred em Class 2 ptetes. Alts angenstes ISI reestrements etifer for A3E Csee Class 2 ptges te ne leasected por parts ITA1A(3) ame IWA1.m.(e) of muesL8583, see. 3.
Setten 2 ame 3) aSIE Code Class 2 pipes la Peach NCe aos Emerefore, teure is as eene far as 1
augmentes ISI for Asst Case Class 2 pei os to poeca t
settas 2 aos 3.
I
Noni.
IV.E.1.2.(3)(a) All welds ef tha ttralral ends cf (a) Tha comments on IV.B.1.b.(3) alsa apply hers.
~
Pipe at vessel nozzles, and i
IV.B.1.b.(3)(c) At least 101 of the welds selected (b) The comments on IV.B.I.b.(3) also apply here.
proportionately from the following i
categories:
1 IV.B.I.b.(3)(b)(1) Circumferential welds at locations (1) The comments on IV.B.1.b.(3) also apply here.-
where the stresses under the loadings resulting from Jan plant conditions as calculated by the sum of Equations (9) and (10)liin NC-3652 i
exceed 0.8 (1.2Sh*SA IV.B.i.b.(3)(b)(ll)
Welds at terminal ends of (11)ThecommentsonIV.3.1.b.(3)alsoapplyhere.
piping, including branch runs; IV.B.1.b.(3)(b)(lli)
Dissiellar metal welds; (lit)The ccesents on IV.B.I.b.(3) also apply here.
[
~
l f
IV.B.1.b.(3)(b)(lv)
Welds at structural (iv) The comments m. af.B.I.I'.(3) also apply here.
discontinuitles; and
, e
,i
.g
' IV.B.I.c.(3)(b)(v) Welds tnat cannot be pressure tested (v) ThecommentsonIV.E.1.b.(3)alsoapplyhere.
In accordance with IWC-5000.
i Tne welds to be examined shall be distributed approximately equally K
i among runs (or portions of runs) that are essentially stellar in design, size, system function, and service i
conditions.
IV.B.1.b.(4)
The following ASE Code Class 2 pipe (4) SleMulf welds in systems other than residual heat removal systems, emergency core PECo has no A$E Code Class 2 piping in Peach cooling systems, and containment heat Botton 2 and 3.
Therefore, PECo need not have an aupnented -
removal systems, which are subject to 151 plan for these pipes.
Inservice inspection requiremer s of Section II, shc.uld be inspectew at DIFFERENCES least once In no more than 80 months:
I 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 C.'ess 1 piping differs from that required on Class 2 l
piping. Also, augmented ISI requirements differ for ASME Code Class 2 pipes to be inspected per Parts IV.B.1.b.(3) and.V.6.1.b.(4) of NUREG-0315. Rev.1.
Botton 2 and 3.g ASME Code Class 2 pipes in Peach PECc has n i
Therefore, there is no need for an augmented 151 for ASME Code Class 2 piping in Peach l
Botton 2 and 3.
p I
4 e
e, e
w
~
ADDITIONAL DATA REQUIRED None.
IV.B.1.b.(4)(a) All welds at locations where the (a) The comments on IV.S.I.b.(4) also apply here.
stresses under the loadings resulting-from
- Normal" and " Upset" plant conditions including the operating 1
basis earthquake (08E) as calculated by the sum of Equations (9) and (10) in NC-3652 exceed 0.8 (1.2Sh + Sa);
I V.8.1.b. (4)(b) All welds at terminal ends of pfptng, (b) The comments on IV.8.1.b.(4) also apply here, i
including branch runs; l
IV.8.1.b.(4)(c) All dissiellar metal welds; (c) The comments on IV.8.1.b.(4) also apply here.
IV.8.l.b.(4)(d) Additional welds with high potential (d) The comments on IV.8.1.b.(4) also apply here.
I for cracking at structural discontinuities
- such that the total f
nunner of welds selected for 3
examination equal to 255 of the circumferential welds in each piping system.
h w*
i
- Structural discontinuities include pipe weld joints to vessel nozzles, valve bodies, pump casings, pipe fittings j
(such as cibows, tees, reducers, flanges, etc., confor.alng 1
to ANSI Standard 816.9) and pipe branch connections and l
fittings.
t IV.8.1.b.(5)
If examination of (1), (2), (3), and (5) The comments on IV.S.I.b.(1), (2), (3), and (4) also (4) above conducted during the first apply here.
80 months reveal'no twidence of j
stress corrosion cracking, the examination frequency thereaf ter can revert to 120 months as prescribed in i
l Section XI of the ASME 8oller and Pressure vessel Code.
t I
IV.8.Ib.(6)
Sampling plans other than those (6) The licensee has not furnished data on this paragraph i
described in (2), (3), and (4) anove in his responses to fetc Generic Letter 81-04.
1 will be reviewed on a case-by-case j
Dasis.
]
-IV.8.2.
" Nonconforming" Lines That are " Service 2.
,SupetARY Sensitive" 4
4 PECo does not believe it is appropriate to propose i
j Technical Specifications changes to incorporate an augmented 1
151 program, because, in part, of their planned long term 1
modifications to reduce augmented ISI requirements.
PEco has presented an alternative plan to the augmented j
ISI plan in NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.
DIFFERENCES MUREG-0313, Rev. I requir2s that the licInsee's Technical Specifications $s changed to include cn augmentsd ISI program for nonconforming piping.
PECo has indicated that its long term program included replacing selected piping with material that meets NUREG-0313. Rev.1;(and cvaluating the induction heatingIHSI) process for inh stressimprovement of IGSCC.
Therefore PEco does not believe it is appropriate to propose Technical Specifications changes to incorporate an augmented ISI program for nonconforming j
piping because of this long term program to reduce augmented ISI requirements.
i l
ADDITIONAL DATA REQUIRED l
1.
What proportion of the nonconforming piping now in Peach Botton 2 and 3 will be subjected to j
replacement on a planned basis and to IHSIf 2.
What are the selection Criteria for a pipe to be subjected to replacement or IHS!?
IV.B.2.a.
Leat Detection: The leakage detection a.
The comments made in Parts IV.B.I.a.(1) and l
requirements, described in IV.B.1.a above, IV.B.I.a.(2) apply here.
should be implemented.
1 IV.B.2.b.
Augmented Inservice Inspection:
b.
StetMARY PECo intends to implement an alternative augmented ISI to I
O program on selected ASME Code Class 1 nonconforming piping in Peach Botton 2 and 3.
i O!FFERENCES 4
MUREG-0313 Rev. I requires that nonconforming " service sensitive" piping be suoject to an augmented ISI program.
PEco intends to implement an augmented ISI program on selected ASME Code Class I nonconforming piping in Peach Botton 2 and 3.
(There are no ASME Code Class 2 nonconforming pipes in Peach Botton 2 and 3.) PECo will use the Stress Rule I Itx, industry experience, flow conditions, and alnialzation of personnel radiation exposure to
" establish boundary locations in certain systemis 'which will provide necessary assurance of pressure toundary }ntegrity and a reasonaoly achievable examination program".
Credit will be taken for past examinations.
ADDITIONAL DATA REQUIRED None.
9 4
e 9
0 m I
~.
IV.B.2.b.(1)
The welds and adjoining areas of (1) The comments on IV.S.2.b. also apply here.
bypass piping of the discharge valves In the main recirculation loops, and of the austenttic stainless steel reactor core spray piping up to and including the second isolation valve, should be examined at each reactor refueling outage or at other schedule <1 plant outages. Successive j
emanination need not be closer than 6 months, if outages occur more f requently than 6 months. This requirement applies to all welds in all bypass lines whether the 4-inch valve is kept open or closed during operation.
In the event these examinations find the piping free of unacceptable.
^l indications for three successive inspections, the examination may be j
extended to each 36-month period J
(plus or minus by as much as 12 months) coincident with a refueling outage. In these cases, 1
the successive examination may be limited to all welds in one bypass
.y pipe run and one reactor core spray y
piping run. If unacceptable flaw Indicatio6.s are detected, the l!
remaining piping runs in each group should be examined.
'1 In the event these 36-month period examinations reveal no unacceptable
{
indications for thrre,uccessive inspections, the we1Js and adjoining areas of these piping runs should be j
examined as described in IV.B.1.b(1) for dissimilar metal welds and in l
IV.B.1.b(2) for other welds.
IV.B.2.b.(2)
- he dissimilar metal welds and (2) The connents on IV.B.2.b. also apply here.
adjoining areas of other ASME Code i
Class 1
- Service Sensitive
- piping
{
should be examined at each reactor refueling outage or at other scheduled plant outages. Successive j
examinations need not be closer than 6 months, if outages occur more i
frequently than 6 months. Such I
examination should include all
)
Internal attachments that are not through-wall welds but are welded to 1
or iora part of the pressure boundary.
I i
i
'lV.8.2.b.(3)
The welds and adjsining creas of (3) Tha comuments on IV.8.2.b'. als2 apply her2.
cther ASME Codi Class 1 " Service
~ Susitiv2* piplig should b2 Examined using the sampling plan described in IV.8.1.b(2) except that the frequency of such examinations should be at each reactor refueling outage or at other scheduled plant outages.
Successive examinations need not be closer than 6 months, if outages occur more frequently than 6 months.
IV.8.2.b.(4)
Ine adjoining areas of internal (4) The commients on IV.S.2.b. also apply here, attachment welds in recirculation inlet lines at safe ends where i
crevices are formed by the welded
?
thermal sleeve attachments should be examined at each reactor refueling outage or at other scheduled plant i
outages. Successive examinations need not be closer than 6 months, if outages occur more frequently than 6 months.
. I V. 8.2.b. (5)
In the event the examinations (S) The comments on IV.8.2.b. also apply here.
described in (2). (3) and (4) above find the piping free of unacceptable indications for three successive inspections, the examination may be g
w l
w extended to each 36-month period (plus or minus by as much as 12 months) coinciding with a j
refueling outage.
In the event these 36-month period examinations reveal no unacceptable indications for three successive inspections, the frequency of enemination may revert to 80-month periods (two-thirds the time prescrioed in the ASME Code
]
SectionII).
4 I V.8.2.b. (6)
The area, extent, and frequency of (6) SLNMARY l
examination of the augmented I
inservice inspection for ASME Code PECo has no ASME Code Class 2 piping in pea'ch Class 2 " Service Sensitive" lines Botton 2 and 3.
Therefore PEco need not have an augmented will be determined on a case-by-case 151 plan for these pipes, basis.
DIFFERENCES 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.
la 1.
+
80ttom2and3.yASMECodeClass2pipinginPeach PECo has n Therefore, there is no need for an augmented ISI for ASME Code Class 2 piping in Peach Botton 2 and 3.
I ADDITIONAL DATA REqulRED
}.
None.
i IV.8.3.
Nondestructive Examination (NDE) Requirements 3.
The licensee has not furnished data on this paragraph i
in his re.ponses to NRC Generic Letter 81-04.
The method of examination and volume of material to be examir.ed, the allowable indication j
standards, and examination procedures should comply with the requirements set forth in the 1
applicable Edition and Addenda of the ASME Code,Section XI, specified in Paragraph (g),
" Inservice inspection Requirements," cf 10 CFR 50.55a, " Codes and Standards."
In some cases, the code examination procedures may not be effective for detecting or evaluating i
IGSCC and other ultrasonic (UT) procedures or 1
advanced nondestructive examination techniques may be required to detect and evaluate stress corrosion cracking in austenttic stainless steel piping. Improved UT procedures have been S.
1 developed by certain organizations. These 1
improved UT detection and evaluation procedures to W
that have been or can be demonstrated to the NRC to be effective in detecting IGSCC should be used in the inservice inspection.
Recommendations for the development and eventual i
implementation of these leproved techniques are included in Part V.
i j
V.
GENERAL RECDe#IEN0ATIONS V.
The licensee has not furnished data on this paragraph j
In his responses to 18tC Generic Letter 81-04.
i The measures outlined in Part III of this document i
provide for positive actions that are consistent with j
current technology. The implementation of these actions should markedly reduce the susceptibility of stalnless a
steel piping to stress corrosion cracking in Sles. It 15 recognized that additional means could be used to l
limit the extent of stress corrosion cracking of BWR pressure boundary piping materials and to improve the a
overall system integrity. These include plant design I
and operational procedure considerations to reduce l
system exposure to potentially aggressive environment, leproved material selection, special f abrication and l
welding techniques, and provisions for volumetric inspection capability in the design of weld joints. The I'
use of such means to limit IGSCC or to improve plant system integrity will be reviewed on a case-by-case i
basis.
i l
l
4 TABLE 2 SumARIES OF EVALUATION OF LICENSEE'S RESPONSES II.C.
Material Selection, Testing, and Processing Guidelines f,or BWRs with an Operating License Philadelphia Electric Company (PECo) plans to replace some i
nonconforming " service sensitive" pipe and also plans to apply 1
induction heating stress improvement (IHSI) to other nonconforming
" service sensitive" pipe.
PECo has not supplied sufficient technical data on the application of IHSI to " service sensitive" piping to allow an evaluation as to whether NUREG-0313 Rev. I has been met.
t IV.B.l.
Incorporating an Augmented ISI Program for "Nonservice Sensitive" Piping into the Technical Specifications 1
PECo does not believe it is appropriate to propose Technical Specifications changes to incorporate an augmented ISI program, because, in part, of their planned long term modifications to reduce l
augmented ISI requirements.
l PECo has not supplied sufficient data on its long term modifications to show that the modifications meet NUREG-0313 Rev. 1.
IV.B.I.a.(1)
Leak Detection Methods PECo's description of Peach Bottom 2 and 3's leak detection methods is not detailed enough to determine whether they meet Section C of Regulatory Guide 1.45.
s.
24 e
4 f
~
~
j y
L IV.B.I.a.(2) Shutdown for Leakage /
Philadelphia Electric Company (PECo) has not changed the Peach Bottom 2 and 3 Technical Specifications to incorporate the provision i
for shutdown for a 2-gpm increase in unidentified leakage in 24 h.
- PECo does not monitor th~ sump level at the intervals required by NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.
PECo does not meet NUREG-0313, Rev. 1 in this matter.
IV.B.1.b.
Augmented ISI Program on Nonconforming "Nonservice Sensitive" Pipes PECo intends to implement an alternative augmented ISI program on selected ASME Code Class 1 nonconforming piping in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.
i l
IV.B.l.b.(3) Augmented ISI for ASME Code Class 2 Pipe' Welds PECo has no ASME Code Class 2 piping in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.
Therefore, PECo need not have an augmented ISI plan for these pipes.
IV.B.I.b.(4) Augmented ISI for ASME Code Class 2 Pipe Welds PECo has no ASME Code Class 2 piping in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.
l Therefore, PECo need not have an augmented ISI plan for these pipes.
1 IV.B.2.
Incorporating an Augmented ISI Program for " Service Sensitive" Piping into the Technical Specifications a
PECo does not believe it is appropriate to propose Technical Specifications changes to incorporate an augmented ISI program, because, in part, of their planned long term modifications to reduce augmented ISI requirements.
PECo has presented an alternative plan to the augmented ISI plan in NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.
25 t
gr
+.-g
---,w.r.-
--.-y.---,v----
.g,---e.-
,w-,-%7
.g r yw,
2m-,-m,n-.,---,,.-,,y1-i,--e-,w
...,, _.-,--,.,,,..%,..-%em.,.
--,-e,rm=
.-.m-e~w
a IV.B.2.b.
Augmented ISI Program on Nondonforming " Service Sensitive" Pipe.s PECo intends to implement an alternative augmented ISI program on selected ASME Code Class 1 nonconforming piping in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.
IV.B.2.b.(6) Augmented ISI for ASME Code Class 2 Pipe Welds PECo has no ASME Code Class 2 piping in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.
Therefore, PECo need not have an augmented ISI plan for these pipes.
i m
I J,
j 26
TABLE 3 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN NUREG-0313, REV.1 AND LICENSEE'S RESPONSES II.C. Material Selection, Testing, and Processing Guidelines for BWRs with an Operating License 9
l NUREG-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 I
be replaced with corrosion-resistant materials.
PECo plans to replace some nonconforming " service sensitive" pipe i
with pipe which meets NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.
PECo also plans to apply INSI to other nonconforming " service sensitive" pipe.7 l
i IV.B.1.
Incorporating an Augmented ISI Program for "Nonservice Sensitive" Piping into the Technical Specifications NRC Generic Letter 81-04 requires that the licensee's Technical Specifications be changed to include an augmented ISI program for nonconforming piping.
i PECo has indicated that its long term program included replacing l
selected piping with material that meets NUREG-0313, Rev.1; and evaluating the induction heating stress improvement (IHSI) process for inhibiting propagation of IGSCC.7 Therefore, PECo does not l
believe it is appropriate to propose Technical Specifications changes to incorporate an augmented ISI program for nonconforming piping because of this long term program to reduce augmented ISI requirements.
I i
27 L
.n
.--,-,n.
,.,,,,..-,-,,,.,,n.
ne
,-w--
r
IV.B.I.a.(1) Leak Detection Methods 4
The nine subsections of Section C of Regulatory Guide 1.45 are discussed below.
C.1 PECo has stated that leakage to the primary reactor containment from identified sources is collected such that a.
the flow rates are monitored separately from unidentified leakage,8 and b.
the total flow rate can be established and monitored.0 T
C.2 Due to many complex factors, it is not clear that unidentified leakage to the primary reactor containment in Peach Bottom 2 and 3 can be collected and the flow rate monitored with an accuracy of I gpm or better.8 However, a " leakage (detection) capability on the order of 1 gpm is expected."10 (FSAR Section 4.10.3)
C.3 The PECo leak detection systems consist of the following:
a.
Drywell Temperature Monitor l
b.
Drywell Pressure Monitor c.
Airborne Radioactivity Monitors Radioactive Noble Gas Monitor Iodine Monitor Particulate Monitor l
d.
Drywell Floor Drain Sump Monitor.0 28
7 5
The above systems meet Section C.3 of Regulatory Guide 1.45.
C.4 It is not clear whether provisions have been made at Peach Bottom 0 and 3 to monitor systems connected to the RCPB for signs of intersystem leakage, i
C.5 It is not clear from the Peach Bottom 2 and 3 FSARs if the sensitivity and response time for the unidentified leakage is adequate to detect a leakage rate of 1 gpm in less than 1 h.
C.6 The Peach Bottom 2 and 3 airborne particulate radioactivity monitoring system is not functional when subjected to SSE.
C.7 Indicators and alarms for the required leakage detection system are provided in the main control room.
It is not clear from the Peach Bottom 2 and 3 FSAR whether procedures fo.r coeiverting 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 independent variables.
C.8 All Peach Bottom 2 and 3's leak detection systems enumerated in Reference 8 can be calibrated or tested during operation.
C.9 The Peach Bottom 2 and 3 Technical Specifications include limiting conditions for identified and unidentified leakage.
PECo has identified the availability of the Peach Bottom 2 and 3 systems for detecting and monitoring leakage. Either the sump or the air sampling system is always available.Il It cannot be determined from the above whether Peach Bottom 2 and 3 meet Regulatory Guide 1.45, Section C.
29 9
-g+-wy--+y-gg yvy
--v-w-.w g
--ve-re-w--wego-y*y&+
-, -g.--g,%-m
-yvwygn,rp.,_yw
,y_,.-,,_,,,,_,_.,,y,,,_,,_,,_,p,,,_,,,,,p+,,,,-9-,p..
,,-,.f
j IV.B.l.a.(2) Shutdown for Leakage 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 less. NRC Generic Letter 81-04 requires that the above requirements be incorporated in the plant Technical Specifications.
PECo indicates that it has been meeting this part of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.
Peach Bottom Technical Specificaton 3.6.C together with Peach Bottom surveillance tests already meet NUREG-0313, Rev.1.
PECo plans to incorporate the model Technical Specifications attached to NRC Generic Letter 81-04 to the " extent that it is applicable to the Peach Bottom design."9 IV.B.I.b.
Augmented ISI Program on Nonconforming "Nonservice Sensitive" Pipes NUREG-0313, Rev. I requires that nonconforming "nonservice sensitive" piping be subject to an augmented ISI program.
i PECo intends to implement an augmented ISI program on selected ASME Code Class 1 nonconforming piping in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.
(There are no ASME Code Class 2 nonconforming pipes in Peach Bottom 2 l
and 3.) PECo will use the Stress Rule Index, industry experience, flow conditions, and minimization of personnel radiation exposure to
" establish boundary locations in certain systems which will provide l
necessary assurance of pressure boundary integrity and a reasonably achievable examination program."
Credit will be taken for past examinations.
IV.B.1.b.(3) Augmented ISI for ASME Code Class 2 Pipe Welds NUREG-0313, Rev. I requires that nonconforming ASME Code Class 1 and Class 2 piping be subjected to an augmented ISI program. The l
augmented ISI program for ASME Code Class 1 piping differs frcm that 30
f.
required on Class 2 pipingh Also, augmented ISI requirements differ for ASME Code Class 2 pipes to be inspected per Parts IV.B.I.b.(3) and IV.B.l.b.(4) of NUREG-0313, Rev.1.
PECo has no ASME Code Class 2 pipes in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.7 Therefore there is no need for an augmented ISI for ASME Code Class 2 piping in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.
IV.B.l.b.(4) Augmented ISI for ASME. Code Class 2 Pipe Welds NRC Generic Letter 81-04 requires that nonconforming ASME Code Class 1 and Class'2 piping be sub,Jected to an augmented ISI
. program. The augmented ISI program for ASME Code Class 1 pbing differs from that required on Class 2 piping. Also, augmented IST requirements differ for ASME Code Class 2 pipes to be inspected per j
Parts IV.B.l.b.(3) and IV.B.l.b.(4) of NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.
PECo has no ASME Code Class 2 pipes in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.7 Therefore there is no need for an augmented ISI for ASME Code Class 2 piping in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.
IV.B.2.
Incorporating an Augmented ISI Program for " Service Sensitive" Piping into the Technical Specifications NRC Generic Letter 81-04 requires that the licensee's Technical Specifications be changed to include an augmented ISI program for nonconforming piping.
7 PECo has indicated that its long term program included replacing selected piping with material that meets NUREG-0313, Rev. 1; and evaluating the induction heating stress improvement (IHSI) process for inhibiting propagation of IGSCC.7 Therefore, PEco does not believe it is appropriate to propose Technical Specifications l
changes to incorporate an augmented ISI program for nonconforming I
Piping because of this long term program to reduce augmented ISI requirements.
31 i
..--__...-,..-._,-,..,_..,..__.-,..,_._,__._em_.,
..__,_,...._,,._.___,__m..
IV.B.2.b.
Augmented ISI Program on Noncbnforming " Service Sensitive" Pipes 9
NUREG-0313, Rev. I requires that nonconforming " service sensitive" piping be subject to an augmented ISI program.
PECo intends to implement an augmented ISI program on selected ASME Code Class I nonconforming piping in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.
(There are no ASME Code Class 2 nonconforming pipes in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.) PECo will use the Stress Rule Index, ind'ustry experience, flow conditions, and minimization of personnel radiation exposure to
" establish boundary locations in certain systems which will provide necessary assurance of pressure boundary integrity and a reasonably achievable examination program".7 Credit will be taken for past examinations.
IV.B.2.b.(6) - Augmented ISI for ASME Code Class 2 Pipe Welds NUREG-0313, Rev.1 requires that nonconfonning 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.
PECo has no ASME Code Class 2 piping in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.7 Therefore, there is no need for an augmented ISI for ASME Code Class 2 piping in Peach Bottom 2 and 3.
l 0
32
c TABLE 4 ADDITIONAL DATA REQUIRED OF LICENSEE II.C. Material Selection, Testing, and Processing Guidelines for BWRs with an Operating License t
1.
Identify to which nonconforming " service sensitive" pipe the
~
IHSI technique will be applied.
2.
Identify which nonconforming " service sensitive" pipe will be replaced with pipe that meets NUREG-0313, Rev. 1.
3.
Identify which nonconforming " service sensitive" pipe will have neither of the above--replacement or IHSI--applied to them.
Indicate what measures will be taken on these pipes to mitigate IGSCC.
IV.B.l.
Incorporating an Augmented ISI Program for "Nonservice Sensitive" Piping into the Technical Specifications 1.
What proportion of the nonconforming piping now in Peach Bottom 2 and 3 will be subjected to replacement on a planned basis and to IHSI?
2.
What are the selection criteria for a pipe to be subjected to replacement or IHSI?
IV.B.l.a.(1) Leak Detection Methods 1.
Indicate whether provisions have been made in the Peach Bottom 2 and 3 FSAR to monitor systems connnected to the RCPB for signs of intersystem leakage (Subsection C.4 of Regulatory Guide 1.45).
l 33 l
1 i
I
- - _. -, - - - -,, -, _.. - - ~. - -, - -.
2.
Indicate whether calibratibn of the iridicators accounts for the needed independent variables. Also indicate whether procedures for converting various indications to a common leakage equivalent are available to the operators.
3.
Indicate whether the sensitivity and response time,for unidentified leakage is adequate to detect a leakage rate of
'~
1 gpm in less than 1 h.
(Subsection C.5 of Regulatory Guide 1.45).
3 IV.B.1.a.(2) Shutdown fcr Leakage Please submit the proposed changes in the Peach Bottom 2 and 3 Technical Specifications regarding leak rate limits and leakage monitoring intervals.
1 IV.B.I.b.
Augmented ISI Program on Nonconforming "Nonservice Sensitive" Pipes None.
IV.B.I.b.(3) Augmented ISI for ASME Code Class 2 Pipe Welds None.
IV.B.l.b.(4) Augmented ISI for ASME Code Class 2 Pipe Welds None.
IV.B.2.
Incorporating an Augmented ISI Program for " Service Sensitive" Piping into the Technical Specifications 1.
What proportion of the nonconforming piping now in Peach Bottom 2 & 3 will be subjected to replacement on a planned basis and to IHSI?
l l
34 l
j i
y
,2.
What are the selectio#-criteria for a pipe to be subjected to replacement or IHSI?
IV.B.2.b.
Augmented ISI Program on Nonconforming " Service Sensitive" Pipes None.
IV.B.2.b.(6) Augmented ISI for ASME Code Class 2 Pipe Welds
-( -
None.
4 l
1 1
35 i
. _ _ - _. _, _ - - _ _ _ _...-.. ~ - -
- 4.. REFER 8NCES 1.
E. D. Eason et al., The Cost Effectiveness of Countermeasures to Intergranular Stress corrosion cracking in SWR Piping, EPRI NP-1703, February 1981, p. A-04.
2.
.U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Technical Report on Material Selection and Processing Guidelines for 8WR Coolant Pressure Boundary _
i Piping, USNRC Report NUREG-0313, July 1977.
3.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Technical Report,-Investigation l
.and Evaluation of' Cracking in Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping of Boiling Water Reactor Plants, USNRC Report NUREG-75/067, October 1975.
I 4.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Investigation and Evaluation of Stress-Corrosion Cracking in Piping of Light Water Reactor Plants, USNRC Report NUREG-0531, February 1979.
5.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Technical Report on Material t
Selection and Processing Guidelines for BWR Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping, USNRC Report NUREG-0313, Rev. 1, July 1980.
6.
D. G. Eisenhut letter to all BWR licensees (except Humboldt Bay and La Crosse), " Implementation of NUREG-0313, Rev,1, Technical Report on Material Selection and Processing Guidelines for BW3 coolant Pressure 4
Boundary Piping (Generic Task A-42)," Generic Letter 81-04, February l
26, 1981.
7.,
S. L. Daltroff to D. G. Eisenhut letter, October 1,1981 (NRC Accession No.: 8110060400).
I 8.
S. L. Daltroff to J. F. Stolz letter, December 15, 1982.
(NRC Accession No.: Nonegiven).
i 9.
S..L. Daltroff to J. F. Stolz letter, December 3, 1982 (NRC Accession No.: Nonegiven).
- 10. Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 Final Safety Analysis Reports, p. 4.10-5.
- 11. Peach Bottom Units 2 and 3 Technical Specifications.
9 36
~.
i NRC PO.'.u 335 U1 NUCLEAR KEIULATORY COMMISSION BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEEy EGG-FM-6247
'ffc'ffn$"cafEva'l'uationofIntegrityofthePeachBottom l
Units 2 and 3 Reactor Coolant Boundary Piping System
- 3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
- 7. AUTHOR 6)
- 5. DATE REPORT COMPLE70 P. K. Nagata June I " 1983
- 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS (lactode lea Codel DATE REPORT ISSUEL, July I"^* 1983 "o"'"
EG8G Idaho, Inc.
S. ft,,,, y,,,,
Idaho Falls, ID 83415
- 8. (Leave Nanki
- 12. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS (lactude Zip Codef Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i,, pin yo.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 A4729
- 13. TYPE OF REPORT PE RioO Cove RE D linclusive ades)
- 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
- 14. (teave oteit/
- 16. ABuTR ACT (200 words or lessi f
- 17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSTS 17a DESCRIPTORS l
17b. IDENTIFIE RSIOPEN-EN DE D TE RMS l
- 18. AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
- 19. SE CL*RITY CLASS fThes report /
21 NO OF PAGES Unclassified I
Unlimited 2o Cdnciassified CURITY CL ASS (TM,s part
- 22. PRICE S
N KC FORM 335 att ets
. _.. _ _