ML20134L673
| ML20134L673 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 02/17/1997 |
| From: | Gaudet T ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| GL-92-01, GL-92-1, W3F1-97-0030, W3F1-97-30, NUDOCS 9702190258 | |
| Download: ML20134L673 (5) | |
Text
'h
-~
Entergy g y - = =. m c.
Operations
~u-w somwm I
W3F1-97-0030 A4.05 PR February 17,1997 i
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555
Subject:
Waterford 3 SES Docket No. 50-382 License No. NPF-38 Generic Letter 92-01, Revision 1, Supplement 1 Gentlemen:
On August 17,1995, Entergy Operations, Waterford 3, provided a response to Generic Letter 92-01 Revision, Supplement 1 via letter W3F1-95-0127. In this letter, Waterford 3 committed to provide a schedule for providing the information requested by the Generic Letter by February 17,1997. The purpose of this letter is to provide the complete information requested by the Generic Letter rather than just provide a i
schedule as previously documented by Wateriord 3.
In December 1992, Entergy Operations, representing ANO-2 and Waterford 3 joined the ABB-CE Reactor Vessel Group (RVG). The primary purpose of the RVG was to abstract and evaluate the design and fabrication records for reactor vessels built by j
ABB-CE. The records abstracted and reviewed included Certified Material Test i
Reports (CMTRs) on plates and forgings, fracture toughness tests performed by ABB-CE, and chemical analyses of weld filler material as well as as-deposited weld metal chemistries. The records abstracted and reviewed included information on other plants that had the same heat of weld material as Waterford 3. These records have been received and evaluated by Waterford 3.
f 9702190258 970217
- DR ADOCK0500g2 f}
~
190018
l l
r l
l
' Generic Letter 92-01, Revision 1, Supplement 1 W3F1-97-0030 Page 2 February 17,1997 In 1995, Entergy Operations, representing ANO and Waterford 3, joined the ABB-CE Reactor Vessel Working Group (RVWG) to address the issue of weld chemistry variability identified by Generic Letter 92-01, Revision 1. The purpose of the RVWG was to determine the best estimate copper and nickel values, including standard deviations, for each weld material heat used in the beltline region of ABB-CE fabricated reactor vessels. This effort included the collection or evaluation of original ABB-CE fabrication records, surveillance test results, and supplemental testing by other NSSS suppliers and utilities. These records and evaluations have been received and evaluated by Waterford 3.
The responses to items one (1) through four (4) of the Generic Letter are based on the collective evaluations and records generated from both the RVG and the RVWG.
Resoonse to item 1 The existing data base is judged to be complete as previously submitted by Waterford 3 based on the collection of records and evaluations received from the RVG and RVWG. Waterford 3 determined there was not a record available for weld metal with heat number HODA used on welds 101-1248 & C to verify the initial nil ductility reference temperature (RTuor) of-60 F as previously reported to the NRC. Waterford 3 believes the initial RTuor f-60 F for welds 101-124B & C is o
an acceptable value. This judgment is based on an impact test record of 131 ft.-lbs.
at 10 F, on other data for similar weld metals, and the fact the weld metals were produced under the same specification, ASME SFA-5.5, E-8018-C3. The weld metals thus have the same chemical composition, the same manufacturing process, and a low copper content with no significant variability in the copper content since the weld electrodes were not coated with copper. We note that pursuant to 10CFR50.61 an RTwor f-56 F may be used if a measured value of RTuor is not j
o available.
The initial RTuor f the limiting material, plate M-1004-2,is +22 F. Therefore, o
because of the significant difference between the reference temperatures (-60 F and
+22 F) any small change in the RTsor f welds 101-124B & C will not change the i
o analysis of record.
l-t
^;
j Generic Letter 92-01, Revision 1, Supplement 1 i
Page 3 l
l February 17,1997 i
Resoonse to item 2 The copper and nickel values were evaluated for validity based on available data.
The best estimate copper and nickel values for the Waterford 3 vessel were determined using various statistical methods, depending on the complexity of the -
data. The evaluation resulted in changes to the previously reported chemisty.
values, and these changes are tabulated below:
i l Weld ID.
Heat No.
Previous Values (%)
Best Estimate (%)
j 101-142A/C 83653 Cu - 0.030, Ni - 0.200 Cu - 0.042, Ni - 0.102 l
101-171 88114 Cu - 0.050, Ni - 0.160 Cu - 0.043, Ni - 0.189
]
i 101-124A BOLA /HODA Cu - 0.020, Ni - 0.960 Cu - 0.027, Ni - 0.913 101-1248 & C HODA Cu - 0.020, Ni - 0.960 Cu - 0.027, Ni - 0.947 The effects of these changes in copper and nickel values are explained in the i
response to item 4.
l j
Resoonse to item 3 L
l A response for this item is not required since surveillance data is not being used for j
the vesselintegrity evaluation.
]
i Resoonse to item 4 The previous reactor vessel integrity evaluations for 10CFR50.60,10CFR50.61, Appendix G and H, Low Temperature Overpressure Protection (LTOP), and the Pressure Temperature limits in the Technical Specifications remain bounding even though the copper and nickel values were increased slightly, which increases their reference temperatures. These previous evaluations were based on the reference temperature of plate M-1004-2, which remains the limiting material. Thus, the 2-foregoing evaluations remain valid.
The information received from ABB-CE from the RVWG effort is currently undergoing j
review and validation by the industry. We will apprise the NRC should I
i a
i I
i i
Gen 5ric Letter 92-01, Revision 1, Supplement 1 W3F1-97-0030 Page 4 February 17,1997 any of the results we currently have change and affect the results and conclusions i
herein documented.
Please contact me at (504) 739-6666 or Robert J. Murillo at (504) 739-6715 should there be any questions regarding this submittal.
Very truly yours, U
C
'dA T.J. Gaudet Acting - Director Nuclear Safety & Regulatory Affairs TJG/RJM/tmm cc:
L.J. Callan, NRC Region IV C.P. Patel, NRC-NRR R.B. McGehee N.S. Reynolds NRC Resident inspectors Office i
i i
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION J
In the matter of
)
)
Entergy Operations, Incorporated
)
Docket No. 50-382 Waterford 3 Steam Electric Station
)
AFFIDAVIT Timothy Joseph Gaudet, being duly sworn, hereby deposes and says that he is Acting Director, Nuclear Safety & Regulatory Affairs - Waterford 3 of Entergy Operations, Incorporated; that he is duly authorized to sign and file with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission the attached Generic Letter 92-01, Revision 1, Supplement 1; that he is familiar with the content thereof; and that the matters set forth therein are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.
MN Timothy Joseph dAuddt Acting Director, Nuclear Safety & Regulatory Affairs -
Waterford 3 STATE OF LOUISIANA
)
) ss PARISH OF ST. CHARLES
)
Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public in and for the Parish and State above named this /77" day of fEG?va* 'T'
.1997.
bky A
Notary Public My Commission expires w
- um i