ML20098E006
| ML20098E006 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 09/14/1984 |
| From: | Van Brunt E ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE CO. (FORMERLY ARIZONA NUCLEAR |
| To: | Bishop T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20098E008 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-PT21-84-464-000 ANPP-30519-TDS, DER-83-42, PT21-84-464, PT21-84-464-000, NUDOCS 8409280105 | |
| Download: ML20098E006 (11) | |
Text
. 6 DECEIVED liRC
- Arizona Public Service Company
!M SEP 17 g3,3 p September 14, 1984 ANPP-30519-TDS /TRB
'D D U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission j
Region V Creekside Oaks Office Park 1450 Maria Lane - Suite 210 Walnut Creek, CA 94596-5368 Attention: Mr. T. W. Bishop, Director Division of Resident Reactor Projects and Engineering Programs
Subject:
Final Report - DER 83-42 A 50.55(e) Reportable Condition Relating To Thermowells In The Reactor Coolant System.
File: 84-019-026; D.4.33.2 Ref erence : A) Telephone Conversation between P. Johnson and J. Roedel on June 29, 1983 B) ANPP-27398, dated July 25,1983 (Interim Report)
C) ANPP-27852, dated September 21,1983 (Time Extension)
D) ANPP-28320, dated November 30, 1983 (Time Extension)
E) ANPP-28575, dated January 9,1984 (Time Extension)
F) ANPP-28733, dated January 27,1984 (Interim Report, Rev. 1)
C) ANPP-29714, dated June 11, 1984 (Time Extension)
H) ANPP-30191, dated August 13,1984 (Time Extension)
I) Telephone conversation between P. Narbut and T. Bradish on August 14, 1984
Dear Sir:
Attached is our final written report of the Reportable Deficiency under 100FR50.55(e), ref erenced above.
Very truly yours, EEUam%gfg E. E. Van Brunt, J r.
APS Vice President
~
Nuclear Production ANPP Project Director EEVB/TRB/nj Attachment cc: See Page Two 8409280105 840914 PDR ADOCK 05000528 S
'g ZE.A7 L..
.y.
- Mr. T. - W. Bishop DER 83-42 Page Two.
CE Doc. No. CEN-265(V)-P
- Revision 1-P -
Proprietary Copies cc:
' Richard DeYoung, Director.
- 2 Office of Inspection and Enforcement U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 T. G. Woods, Jr.
- 3 D.
B.' Karner -
W. E. Ide D. B. Fasnacht A. C. Rogers L. A. Souza D. E. Fowler T. D. Shriver
- 4 C. N. Russo J. D. Houchen J. R.-Bynum J. M. Allen J. A. Brand A. C. Cehr
- 5 W. J. Stubblefield
- 6 W. G..lingham
- 7 R. L. Patterson
- 8 R, W. Welcher
- 9 H. D. Foster
- 10 D. R. Hawkinson
- 11 L. E. Vorderbruegger
- 12 R. P.-Zimmerman
- 13 M. Woods T. J. Bloom D. N. Stover L. Clyde D. Canady Records Center Institute of Nuclear Power Operations 1100 Circle 75 Parkway, f,uite 1500 Atlanta, GA 30339 Mr. E. Licitra
- 14 through #37 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Phillips Building 7920 Norfolk Avenue Bethesda, MD 20814 File: DER 83-42
- 38
'* Non-Proprietary Copy Attached
t
,4-4.
FINAL REPORT - DER 83-42 DEFICIENCY EVALUATION 50.55(e)
ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY ( APS)
PVNGS UNITS 1, 2, 3
-I.-
Description of Deficiency l
While perf orming pre-core hot f unctional' testing (HFT) of -
the RCS at Unit 1 in June 1983, it was reported that -
thermowells installed in the hot and cold legs of the RCS were not usintaining the pressure boundary and vere emitting steam from their respective temperature elements.. The thermowells were identified by' tag numbers 1JRCA-TW-112CA, IJRCC-TW-112CC, IJRCA-TW-122CA, lJRCD-TW-112CD, and 1JRCE-W-111Y. The subject.thermowells were supplied by Combustion i
Engineering (C-E).
Evaluation The RCS pressure boundary must be maintained to ensure safe operation of the unit. Devices installed in the RCS piping that do not maintain pressure boundary integrity are unacceptable.
A review and analysis of the thermowell deficiencies by C-E
~
(Ref.1) determined that the principal failure mechanism was flow-induced vibration f atigue caused by vortex shedding.
Relative motion between the thermowells and the nozzles as a
- result of flow-induced vibration and the close proximity of the thermowell's natural f requency to the vortex-shedding f requency caused wear on the nozzles and thermowells which contributed to the failures.
In some cases shearing and/or bending of thermowells in the cold legs was also due to impact from heavy objects in the flow stream.
C-E also indicated that the cold leg flows were greater than those postulated in their analysis of the RCS system, i.e.,
single pump operation at runout.
The C-E review concluded that the thermowells did not have adequate _ design strength to overcome the affects of the flow-induced vibration and that a modified nozzle /thermowell design is required to satisfy objectives as follows:
- 1. Increase the natural f recuency of the thermowell to move it away f rom the potential vortex shedding f requency.
4
- 2. Eliminate the clearance and, thus, the motion at the support between r.he thermowell and nozzle.
- 3. Reduce stress levels.
l l
- 4. Decrease the affects of vortex shedding.
79 3.;
L
\\
TMr. T. W. Bishop
.g.
DER 83 '
(Page Two
.- I I.' ~
Analysis of Safety Intilicat' ions:
Based on the fact-that thernowell failures violated the RCS pressure boundary integrity,' this-condition is evaluated as
~
reportable under the' requirements of 10CFR50.55(e), since extensive repair is required; and, if the condition were to L
remain uncorrected, it would represent a significant safety condition. This condition is also evaluated as reportable under the requirements of.10CFR21.
In Reference (3), Discussion o'f Safety Implications, C-E points out that failure, of several-thernowells would not
~
jeopardize safe operation since the leakage is controlled by.
the nozzle orifice and the charging pumps are ' capable of
^
making up the loss of.' coolant. However, since the RCS pressure boundary was violated, C-E concurs - that their reportability assessment (Reference 1) is still applicable.
III.-
Corrective Action k
A. Reference (2)' provides that C-E will replace the originally supplied thermowells and nozzles in Units 1, 2i and 3 (30
~
thermowells and nozzles per Unit) with redesigned thermowells and nozzles. Because of the clearance and i
fitup requirements, each thermowell is matched by serial' number to a nozzle location and nozzle serial-number for r
final installation.
j'
)
Bechtel has issued DCPs 1SM-RC-101, 2SM-RC-101, and 3CM-RC-101 to replace the thermowells identified by tag numbers as follows and their respective nozzles.
Unit 1-Unit 2 Unit 3 i
1JRCA-TW-112CA 2JRCA-TW-112CA 3JRCA-TW-112CA IJRCB-TW-112CB 2JRCB-TW-112CB 3JRCB-TW-112CB IJRCC-TW-112CC 2JRCC-TW-112CC 3JRCC-TW-112CC IJRCD-TW-112CD 2JRCD-TW-112CD 3JRCD-TW-112CD IJRCE-TW-111X 2JRCE-TW-111X-3JRCE-TW-111X
-1JRCE-TW-111Y 2JRCE-TW-111Y 3JRCE-TW-111Y 1JRCA-TW-112HA 2JRCA-TW-112HA-3JRCA-TW-112HA IJRCB-TW-112HB 2JRCB-TW-112HB 3JRCB-TW-112HB
- 1JRCC-TW-112HC 2JRCC-TW-112HC 3JRCC-TW-112HC IJRCD-TW-112HD
'2JRCD-TW-112HD 3JRCD-TW-112HD 1JRCA-TW-115 2JRCA-TW-115 3JRCA-TW-115 1JRCE-TW-121X 2JRCE-TV-121X 3JRCE-TW-121X
,~
ts
- n,
,s
" ~
^
Mr[ TL W. Bishop
)
DER '83-42
- 1 Page Three 4
- Unit'l Unit 2-Unit 3 1JRCE-TW-121Y'
. 2JRCE-TW-121Y.-
'1JRCA-TW-122CA 2JRCA-TW-122CA 3JRCA-TW-122CA
.2JRCB-TW-122CB 3JRCB-TW-122CB
~
1JRCC-TW-122CC 2JRCC-TW-122CC 3JRCC-TW-122CC IJRCD-TW-122CD 2JRCD-TW-122CD 3JRCD-TW-122CD IJRCA-TW-122HA 2JRCA-TW-122HA-3JRCA-TW-122HA
~1JRCB-TW-122HB 2JRCB-TW-122HB 3JRCB-TW-122HB
'IJRCC-TW-122HC 2JRCC-TW-122HC 3JRCC-TW-122HC
-1JRCD-TW-122HD 2JRCD-TW-122HD 3JRCD-TW-122HD 1JRCB-TW-125 2JRCB-TW-125 3JRCB-TW-125-
- 1JRCA-TW-111HA.
- 2JRCA-TW-111HA
- 3JRCA-TW-111HA-'
- 1JRCB-N-111HB'
- 2JRCB-TW-111HB
- 3JRCB-TW-111HB
- 1JRCC-TW-111HC
- 2JRCC-TW-111HC
- 3JRCC-TW-111HC
- 1JRCD-TW-111HD :
- 2JRCD-TW-111HD
- 3JRCD-TW-111HD
- 1JRCA-TW-121HA
- 2JRCA-TW-121HA-
- 3JRCA--TW-121HA.
- 1JRCB-TW-121HB
- 2JRCB-TW-121HB
- 3JRCB-TW-121HB'
- 1JRCC-TW-121HC
. *2JRCC-TW-121HC
- 3JRCC-TW-121HC-
- 1JRCD-TW-121HD
- 2JRCD-TW-121HD
- 3JRCD-TW-121HD
[
- Hot leg anomaly thermowell and nozzle. No resistance temperature detector (RTD)-instrument is installed.
j-These DCPs also provided for changing the RTDs for improved time-response characteristics, i.e.,
single element RTDs,'from RdF part No. -(P/N) 21233 to P/N 21458, and dual element RTDs l
f rom P/N 21252.to P/N 21459.-
B.
NCRs SJ-2201, SM-2185, and SM-2249 have been dispositioned in accordance with the respective DCPs.-
C.
A copy of this report will be sent to Combustion Engineering for their review and disposition under the requirements of 10CFR 21.
D.
Combustion Engineering will revise drawings, manuals, and qualification documents to incorporate the re-designed thermowells and nozzles and the upgraded RTDs.
i.
l-u,.
L.,
~, - -
-=
l t
Mr. T. fW.~ Bishop DER 8 3-42 Page Four
)
i E.. A demonstration test was performed on the Unit 1 RCS 'during.
July and August, 1984 to confirm that the redesigned' nozzle /thermowell assemblies exhibited insitu responses consistent with results obtained during previous tests and -
by analysis.- Various thermowells were equipped with internal accelerometers 'to determine tip deflections.
Accelerometers were also mounted on the RCS pipe at the RTD locations to determine pipe motion and to verify input.
The maximum allowable deflection of a thermowell tip for an infinite number of cycles was calculated to be 3.0 mils based on the endurance limit of the material. The.results of the test showed the peak thermowell tip displacement to vary. between.23 to.62 mils f or runout flow conditions and
.17 to.36 mils for normal operating conditions.
The test results have verified the redesigned thermowell/ nozzle assembly to be satisfactory.
A detailed description of the investigative and testing program, the results, and the physical modifications perf ormed, is included in Ref erence (3).
IV.
References (1) Letter, V-CE-18813, August 16, 1983 (2) Letter, V-CE-19093, October 6,1983 (3) Letter, V-CE-30902, September 6,1984 C-E's Proprietary Final Report CEN-287(V)-P, Rev.1-P, Palo Verde Unit 1 Resistance Temperature Detector Thermowell s
r-,
e n
'af.L -
d/-b 84 SEP 11 P1:19 A-C E Power Systems Tel. 203/6881911 Ce t bustion Engin*ir006 CENTEh ** 99297 1000 Prospect Hill Roao
'Nendsor. Connecticut 06095 f4-cw4/9 i R 3 POWER Emmaus SYSTEMS September 6, 1984 V-CE-30902 Mr. E. E. Van Brunt, Jr.
Arizona Nuclear Power Project P. O. Bcx 21666 - Sta. 3003 Phoenix, Arizona 85036
Subject:
10 CFR 50.55(e) Report on the Palo Verde RTD Thermowells
Dear Mr. Van Brunt:
Enclosed for your submittal to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is the 10 CFR 50.55(e) report on the Palo Verde RTD Thernowells along with the proprietary a f fidavi t.
Copies 1 through 25 of the proprietary report are intended for submittal to the NRC. Copies 26 through 43 are provided for APS use.
In addition, thirty-five copies of the non-proprietary version are also enclosed.
This report is a final report and is considered complete.
If you have any questions feel free to call.
Very truly yours,
,b
/ 'gx/. /[ f C. Ferguson Project Manager
- To Assign CF/TJC:jld Enclosures Resp.I cc: D. B. Amerine w/ copy 45 L'8r / ! AcG
'I W. G. Bingham w/ copy 44 S2PV M-T. R. Bradish Ve G. A. Butterworth
-%',f M-'~24 /
-3" J. R. Bynum l M';-
V J. W. Dilk R. H. Holn W. L. MacDonald
-3yg g
W. H. Wilson g$
g W. F. Quinn
{
g
~
E$
. hip _
/
d y 24.B Jr,[v' enc.
J' S* fl
~*sLv
- n. o E0uff
~l~~
_~
- A yU File 14-00/- V/1) eva.
-.,s I
L AFFIDAVIT PURSUANT TO'10 CFR 2.790 Combustion Engineering, Inc.
)
State of Connecticut-
)
County of Hartford
)
SS.:
I, A. E. Scherer, depose and say that I am the Director, Nuclear Licensing, of Combuscion Engineering, Inc., duly authorized to make this ' affidavit, and have reviewed or caused to have reviewed the information which is identified as proprietary and referenced in the paragraph immediately below.
I am sut...stting this affidavit in conformance with the provisions of 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations and in conjunction with the construction permit of Arizona Public Service Company, for withholding this information.
The information for which proprietary treatment is sought is contained in the following document:
CEN-265(V)-P Revision 1-P, Report on Palo Verde Unit 1 Resistance Temperature Detector Thernowell.
This document has been appropriately designated as proprietary.
I have personal knowledge of the criteria and procedures utilized by Conbustion Engineering in designating information as a trade secret, privileged I
or as confidential commercial or financial information.
l Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b) (4) of Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, the following is furnished for consideration by the Commission in determining whether the information sought 1o be withheld frcm public disclosure, included in the above referenced document, shou;d be withheld.
P
=
1.
The information sought to be withheld from public disclosure are the
-design and test results pertaining to high response thermowells, which is owned
-and has been held in confidence by Combustion Engineering.
- 2..The information consists of test dataTor other similar data concerning a process, method or component, the application of which results in a substantial competitive advantage to Combustion Engineering.
3.
The information-is of a type customarily held in confidence by Combustion Engineering and not customarily disclosed to the public. _ Combustion Engineering has a rational basis for determining the types of information cust00 trily held in confidence by it and, in that connection, utilizes a system to determine when and whether to hold certain types of inform 3 tion in confidence. The details of the aforementioned systen were provided to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission via letter DP-537 from F.M. Stern to Frank Schroeder dated December 2, 1974 This system was applied in determining that the subject document herein are proprietary.
4.
The information is being transmitted to the Commission in confidence under the provisions of 10 CFR 2.790 with the understanding that it is to be received in confidence by the Commission.
5.
The information, to the best of my knowledge and belief, is not dvailable in public sources, 3nd any ' disclosure to third parties has been made pursuant to regulatory provisions or proprietarj agreements which provide for maintenance of the information in confidence.
6.
Public disclosure of the information is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of Combustion Engineering because:
1 l
l
3 1
- a.. A similar product is manufactured and sold by major pressurized water reactor competitors of Combustion Engineering.
b.
Development of-this information by C-E required thousands of man-hours of effort'and hundreds.of thousands of dollars. To the best of my knowledge and belief a competitor would have to undergo-similar expense.in generating equivalent information, c.
In order to acquire such information, a competitor would also require considerable time and inconvenience related to high response thermowells design and testing.
d.
The infornation required significont ef fort and expense to obtain the licensing approvals necessary.for application of the information.
Avoidance of this expense would decrease a competitor's cost in applying the information and marketing the product to which the information is applicable, The information consists of high response thernowell and test e.
results, the application of which provides a competitive economic advantage.
The availability of such information to competitors would enable them to modify their product to better compete with Combustion Engineering, take marketing or other actions to improve their product's position or impai'r the position of Combustion Engineering's product, and avoid developing similar data and analyses in support of their processes, methods or apparatus.
~
f.
In pricing Combustion Engineering's products and services, significant research, development, engineering, analytical, manufacturing, licensing, quality assurance and other costs and expenses must be included.
The ability of Conbustion Engineering's competitors to utilize such information i
l I
l h,,....,,.
i i s
4
-4 l
without similar expenditure of resources may enable them to sell at prices reflecting significantly lower costs.
g.
Use of the infornation by competitors in the international marketplace would increase their ability to market nuclear steam supply systems by reducing the costs associated with their technology development.
In addition, disclosure would have an adverse economic impact on Combustion Engineering's potential for obtaining or mair.taining foreign licensees.
Further the deponent sayeth not.
jm_m A. E. W erer Director Nuclear Licensing Sworn to before me j !((Y thisd day of M
I AL., (2 La uac, y%~
1 - ymaa
,u 7
([
j