ML20141K441

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Submits Info Provided to Applicant Concerning ACRS Subcommittee on Oyster Creek 681122-23 Meetings
ML20141K441
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 11/19/1968
From: Gaske M
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To: Bush S, Etherington H, Stratton W
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
Shared Package
ML20091A092 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-91-282 NUDOCS 9203190284
Download: ML20141K441 (1)


Text

__= - - - _ _ . _ _

d ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. 20$4$

November 19, 1968 Dr. W. R. Stratton Mr. M. J. Palladino Dr. S. H. Bush Dr. S. H. Hanauer Mr. H. Etherington Dr. J. M. Hendric -

t 6

JERSEY CENTPAL PCMER & LIGitT CCMPANY - OYSTER CREEK UNIT NO.1 1

Information provided to the applicant concerning the Oyster Creek Unit No.1 Subcommittee meetings on Novecher 22 and 23,1968 is as follows: '

Priday - November 22, 1968 A. The appliennt should be prepared to give a presentation concerning:

1. The Reactor Pressure Vessel
2. The Operating Staff B. The applicant should be prepared to discuss the following:
1. Pressure Vessel nepairs

. 2. Primary System Leak Detection and Procedures When Leaks i are Detected l 3. Technical Specifications

, 4. Comparison of In-Service inspection with Ptoposed N-45 Code j 5. Operating Staff Including Training, Experience,-organization, Support by GE,- etc.

6. Reactor Building Closed Cooling Water System
7. Radiolysis and the Advantages of Inerting
8. Variability of Flux Trip Point with Flow t 9. Feedwater Control Valves on FWCIS j Saturday - November 23, 1968 The applicant should be prepared to discust:
1. Subchannel Separation (Including Physical Separation)
2. Inst umentation-General Considerations
3. Auto-relief, A-C Interle:k and Information Available to operator
4. Cable Tray overloading

,ip % s [c,i

- ]N +4 Marvin C. Gaske. Assistant l

to Executive Secretary

/

9203190284 910807 , /

L PDR FOIA 'e e M. -

l DEKOK91-2B2 PDR -/ iu _

, , ( (

Q g , .r .

ff*

Osthr 10, IM8 h. Y;U j, Q}&ftM' W. R. Stratton, oyster Creek pubcomunittee hirman i

OYSTER CREEK - REACTOR PRES 8URE VESSELS 1

i in gj ' . . - m Stub tube Fabrication Stress os Discussed at DEL Meettaa cf,4ug q. 1968.

l' to level strain at the field weld is inevitable and it would j -

' be useful,.to attenept to control _ induced stresses remnote a ,. o

.nis position is refuted by the observation ihat stub-tube cracking did not occur adjacent to the field wold but did occur remota from the field weld. The strass at the outer surface of the stub tubes is believed to be compressive naar the weld and tanstle where stacking occurred, g

2. _The magnitude of the stress, above some low threshold,yalue, is not an important factor te atrasa caerosion.

(a) There appearad to he conflicting views ce this.

(b) Again the position is not supported by the ^*ehavior -

of the stub tubes, which were highly stressed over much of the j ourface but which cracked in the reg % of higbast calculated stress.

(c) Many reports and imrestigaticas of strass corrosion (including some by CE) attribute lettures in part to M stress.

j 3. Jgsg_ if an identlest stress pattern had been developed by a mechante. ally _ applied shrin_k ring at the top of the stub tube instead of by contracti_on_of the weld region, ao attention would k. ave been paid to the s tress.

Does this imply that the Code requi.coments are not considered -

applicable to the stub tubes of ter ti. eld weldiset m y would the stresses, twt ba ocasidered secondary bseding stressas sub,)ect to the 3 So limit?~

File: Ovster Creek Unit 1 omet > h. CPS... . - - . . . - - - - - -- - - - - - - - . - - . --- - -

SURNAME > .. .- . - - . . - . - - - - -- --- - - - - - - - - - - - - -+--

  • 10 10-68 DATt > _ , , , , _ , , , _ . , , . ,,

/2 gy murc.m .,- }

( I W. 1. Strattce 2- cetc&er 10, 1948

4. jk b ,
  1. tress is _1.oe(cycling will redistrtWtt the strees sad a htth initial ,2 not taiportant_ sesen an altsrnatium stress is superts; posed, ,.

nere is no questica that redistrihtime occurs, but Sectice

~

N-415.2, besign for Cyclic LoAJing, explicitly atates that eceplimace with fat (gue requtramente doss not exespt fras meeting the seneral stress limits of hetico N-414 S. (a) corrosion in Oyster Dutterica with 303 L eliminates the hasard of stre_sa, Creek, s (b) Jhs stub tubes La NLae Mlle Point have nyt S+en_ pre-exposed tc, a damaging ettvirormagt and will mot b_e su,sceptible to stress corrosion in service - gey will not be costed with 308 L. _

Bothprestanptions are probably valid, but the frequency of sn-expected stress-corrosion fatturas leaves room for concern. Stress i cerrosion of sustenttic eteel has been with us for over 40 years, and over most of that time the phenomer.co vos currently believsid tc. be 6 reasonably well understood. Yet unexpected failures are santinuing to occur.

t no Dresden 1 piping fattures provide amesplast

! l (s) First, stress corrosion osas found in the IRZ of pipe welds, l  !

! and the tattelle report describes these failures .a " unexpected" and with % precedent" in the high purity water envirotmeent.

(b) nen, stress corrosion was found in a straight run of i [ unsans i t ired (Q.A.) pipe. Esttelle again reported no precedent I

(

and no good explanation.

} (c) In a somewhat dif ferent category, stress corrosion failures were observed is, cap screws of fuel channels, i

that might In such c.ssos, it is usual to point to soma ancaalous condition that the failure hava contributed to failure, but never with any suggestion i

should have bsen predicted.

environment We recent work by CE and others en ths effects of pre-service is impressive, kt history suggests that we are not yet in a position to be either complacent or dogmatic cza the subject of strass cortosion.

6. A mandrel has been ass,d to reveld the control red housings te the stub tubes. We only purpose was to maintain necessary clearance foe thermal sleeves. Mitigation of the strassed condition in the stub tubes 1sas not an ob jective and was ect considered. Use of a mandrti sasy incrape the sentraction strain in the weid metal, but since there is atraady a H straim, any smditicnal strain is unimportant.

+. =+ esses SUPNiMEt>t.

I om ,, ) . .. . . . .

i Form A.!T*818 Mev W _= =_ = === -

=

v s me. n n,ew cma eo ne cs

i t . .

t

(

W. E. Stratten Detober 18, 1944 y l,. u~ .. s..

ne n toatrain.

the algebrate sum of free thermal sentreettaa and .t'd f atr$ss (mdueed weld, but it is probably souch 1sse than n. Campista constratat we increase the unknown tensile strain by H.

ne 10'. ferrite La a 308 L vsid shwld provide ample protse-ties a$ainst estero-eracking samt hot eracks in an tracenstrained weld.

Wat evidence is th=re that this is also true for a weld rigidly eee-strained a.y,rinat chrinkAge?

L i

1 11arold Etheriastoo ACES Member CC: Dr. D. Ukrer.t l

l l t i

l f

k p4 n .

  • ? **,? > 's t M..4.

OFTICE > ,_

sun u ut> . . . . .

g fjg.

e = :.= -

I __

(

09' '

~'

I

' woo shat l L9/16/H p m ,.

Prefeet: Dyster Creek Unit No. 1 w

jiNA* s i 4N J ta t=2 1 Provisioe41 Operating License Requested D. A4 Deck.tround:

The Cyster Croak hhcommittee not with repressatatives of the applicant Washington, D.C. on and Juneon22. July October 20. and november 17 and 27 LH7 im

26. 1967 in Tous River, New Jstsey. The project vs s considered et the November and Decend>er 1967 ACE 8 eneeting DRL tenort 1

}

with the DRL has concluded applicant prior to licensing. that thereThese are are two areas that smat be resolve l

! 1 blowdown unless availability of the core spray systesi is a

{

2.

j Centcal must be resolved. (Dtt. also needs to determine th vessel repairs are adequate, and an acceptable set of Technical 8pecifica-tions needd to be developed. )

licensing:DRL has Ldentified the followtus which will be studied af ter initial 1.

l tion and surveillance progreas. Improved primary systaca leak detection and 2.

Detailed review of design of WOI prior to system eperation.

i 3.

I Continued review of the desi:m aM perforunnes capability of the

i. maatn staae line isolation values.

l l t DEL currently plans to provide a report to the Ccamittee to essrly f Naraaber control. concerning the reactor preseura vessel and gaslity assurance and I

guidaneo Provided to Applicant fasettas The t applicant was informed rer.arding the October 17,196! Subsecisittee A. The reneter pressure vessel would not be discussed. t

.3 ,

B. >

A presentation abould be given regarding a general review of the .

ECCS and the emergency power supplias.

I ome > I I td. 4ppiteant' abould-be preparrt to dtacussr -- -

SURNAME 4 . .

DATE > . ..O

_4------- ---

Forna LDC-Jts (het. 4 6.11 "m==" - - -

/ '"

v3 sovrneirNip.mc orFKY 1.w-O 214 429 ,

1 _ _ _ _ . . _

lr i p t

  • l (

Pro)est/8tatus - Oyeter Creek Wait Re.1 - 2-t

n-
1. The emergemey sendenser imelaties salves, }& j'y c ,.
1. N outo-relt.af system. , ~.f.f,.. 4
3. Primary systems lash detection during asseter operetten.
4. Main otsam lism valve tests.
5. lastruesatatten, includtag sub-chamael separatima amt flow signal te AFM scrans (including need for . * '-

i).

t

6. Emergency pisas.
7. Startue and power ascension program.

l.-

8. Technical specifications.

(a) Safety limits (b) ta-service inspeetion and surveillance Queations

1. DEL has Ladicated several items they plan to report at the-November meettaa of the ACAS. It might be worthvbile for the suboosmittee to hear the status of these iteous A. Coastal -angineering Research Center's evaluation of the maximum probable flued height.

R. The need for vibrational tastias of b staan separater.

C. Status of b Technical Sepcifiaattans.

2. h acceptability of using a 120% of full power value for the overpower set point, instead of a smaller value, might be discussed.
3. b Nine Mile Point toector has the same problem regarding the

-j tocatian of the inciation valves in the line to the amargency sendenser at a potat outside the drywell. DRL might be. asked if they would also propose to accept this situation for the Nine Nite Potat asactor.

) + ; s. ' ,

3 - ).lR 1

eet *j' 1, OFTICE > , .. . . . . . . --. . . . . ~

SURNAMEb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ - . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . .

DATE > . . . . . . . . , . . . . _ _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ptrerr AEC=818 (Rev. 6-63) -.

u.s sownwrwt Pmw7ms wru aw+-o 2:413

,,= - _. ,,_.._m

_ ...._ _ _ ..___..._.m. . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ ._ _ _. . . _ _

f_ - - - . - . .

l oP J8888h=8 w w se fv.N.,

f :... -

M jeqtt tystee Creek Omit No. 1 ..

_3,,tatma ? Provistanal operating License tegeested b'S Boekareued: 1 h e Oyster Creek Subsemalttee est with representatives of t.he applicant on June 12. Otteber 20. and Noved er 17 and 27, 1967 la unshimstoo, D.C. sad on July 24, 1967 la teen River, New Jersey. The-t - . -

projoct wee sonsidered at the Berember and Dessaber if57 Acts meetings. 1 DE tenort _

1 with the DE applicant has eencluded prior to that 11aansing.there are Mese twoare: arena that maat be reesived 1.-

Prettsson of an laterlock ta the auto-relief system to prevent a blowdow unless ' availability of the sore spray system is assared, 2,

! Central must be essolved. (DE also needs to determine thet vessel repairs are adequate, and an acceptable set of Techniaal Spesifiaa-tions seeds to be developed.)

t D2L: has identified the following which will be studied af ter initial licensing l

1. 1 tion and surveillance programs. Improved primary system leak detection and 2.

.  ? Deteiled rertow of design of Fb'CI prior to system operatism.

3.

Continued review of the desiim and perforunnee capability of the main stems line-isolation values.

DE eurrently pleas to provide a report to the Comnittee in early I. November concerning the reactor pressure vessel and spality securence and controf.

[

i 4

re % .*=tdedted.eue-t

'meetins: he r7plicent bas Astormed regarding the October 17,1962 26 committee L

A. The reeeter pressure vessel weild not be disemmesd.

S.

4Je A presentation abould he given regarding a general review wf the - -

50C8 and the energency power supplina.

wn4r .he appliams should be prepared-to dia::usst - - - " ~

$UR7sAME D .......-.s .... . --- - - - - * - - - - - - - * - * * ' - ~ * * * " " * * '"

t p yg ,

Form AECa819 (Rev. 6-43)

. .. ._ . - . - . . ~ . . . - . - - - - -

/-

u.4 eMamenensnesarra tems2e a -

-c , , . . . , , . . ,- , . , ,-.

1

._- . , . I l

l

. ( (

l

~

I projost/8tatus = Oyotar Creek Omit Be. 1 .

k

1. Da emergency condenser isolaties walves. i pc
2. D e auto-relief system, k.. .r.'b
3. Primary system leak detecties durias reacter operation.

. 4. Main steam line valve tests.

5. Instrumentation, incluetag sub thammel separation and fNw signal to APM seress (lacludias need for nf - '- y).

3 6. amargency plans.

7. Startup and power ascension progren.
8. Tochoisal specifications.

(a) safety limits (b) la-service inspection and surveillance Questions

! 1. DEL has indicated several items they plan to report at b dovember meeting of the ACAs. It might be worthwhile for the suboensittee i

l to hear the atatus ei these itans:

' A. Coastal angineering Research center's evaluation of the l .

ment === probable fleed height.

3 Se need for vibrational testing of b steen separater.

C. Status of the Technisal Sepeifiaatians.

2. He acceptability of maing a 120% of full power value for the overpower set point, instead of a smaller value, might be disemesad.

_3. Se Nine Mile Palat reneter has the same problem regarding the j

~

tocatime of the isolation valves ta the line to the emersemey h at a potat emitside the drywell. DEL might be asked if they would.sise propose to avecept this situation for the Wine Nite Point Beester.

kW:

3r3d

,,, ,C ;>c .

1 O m CE > l sunuwe b . . - . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

om * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- - . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . _ . . . . . -

WN N8I8 @"* W . . .

u.s sowiiarrr mv,ms crrts i tank-o ai4-s2s e