ML20154E317

Forwards Response to 880707 Request for Addl Info Re Plant Inservice Insp Program for Second Interval. Second 10-Yr Exam Plan, Encl

ML20154E317
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	09/08/1988
From:	Hairston W GEORGIA POWER CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
Shared Package
ML20154E323	List: ML20154E317 ML20154E324 ML20154E343
References
5818A, HL-54, NUDOCS 8809160289
Download: ML20154E317 (17)

Text

e

.a-d w:w lw ce,

31) i' e frN r t A.*" v9 e: c u c v ;a w w x v c w.,w :s swimm r.,,e y n,aus la vsr w n a':aus f,l'% f.,y

• n ~ m ' " o ^*

r.

. c n,,,

HL-54 5818A X7GJ17-H790 September 8, 1988 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission ATTN:

Document Control Desk Hashington, D. C.

20555 PLANT HATCH - UNITS 1, 2 NRC DOCKETS 50-321, 50-366 OPERATING LICENSES DPR-57, NPF-5 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON ELJiLMIQLMI PROGRAM F0fLSECOND INTERVM, Gentlemen:

By letter dated July 7, 1988, the Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) requested Georgia Power Company (GPC) to provide additional information regarding the Hatch Unit I and 2 Inservice Inspection (ISI) Program for the second 10-year interval.

Our responses to your requests are contained in Enclosures I and 2.

An uncontrolled copy of the Plant Hatch Units 1 and 2 Second 10-year Examination Plan is provided in Enclosure 3.

He hope the enclosed material will be helpful in your review.

You may contact this office if you have questions.

Sincerely, p).). /$

h i

H. G. Hairston, I!!

Senior Vice President Nuclear Operations GKH/km 4 7

Enclosures:

/p 1.

Response to RFA! on Second 10-Year ISI Interval 2.

Technical Position on Regulatory Guide 1.150, Revision 1 3.

Second 10-Year Emanination Plan for Both Units c:

(See next page.)

$$$"IObh; bbbb ji at w

i o

GeorgiaPower A U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission September 8, 1988 l

Page Two j

i c: Gtorgia PortLCol!sany (w/o Enclosure 3)

Mr. H. C. Nix General Manager - Hatch Mr. L. T. Gucwa, Manager Licensing and Engineering - Hatch

[

GO-NORMS U.S. Nuclear Reaulatory Comission. Mashinoton.. 0.C.

Mr. L. P. Crockir. Licensing Project Managir -~ Hatch 0

LL.$2Jultar Reaulatory Commission. RegiorL11 (w/o Enclosure 3)

Or. J. N. Grace Regional Administrator l

Mr. J. E. Menning. Senior Resident Inspector - Hatch

[

l I

i t

I i

i I

I t

5818A l

Georgia Power A.

ENCLOSURE 1 PLANT HATCH - UNITS 1, 2 NRC DOCKETS 50-321, 50-366 OPERATING LICENSES OPR-57, HPF-5 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON PLANT HATCH ISLEROGRAM FOR SECORD_IRIERVAL The following is a response to the NRC Request for Additional Information (RFAI) on the Plant Hatch ISI program (L. P. Crocker to H. G. Hairston, !!!)

dated July 7, 1988.

l 2.A MRCltqutit for Adnt10DLLInformationJRE&ll Provide isometric drawings showing the

welds, coepenents, and supports wh1Ch the ASHE Code requires to be examined during the second 10-year interval.

GEf_Reasonte The ditAih of our inspection program for the second 10-year interval are contained in a document entitled "Second 10-Year Examination l

Plan" for each unit.

Included within the document are isometrics, itemized listings of the cottponent s subject to examination, NDE procedure references, and other descriptive data necessary to irrplement the ISI program.

The Inservice Inspection Program document, as previously submitted, contains sufficient detail for the staff to determine that our program meets applicable regulations and codes.

Notwithstanding, enclosed is the latest copy of our plan l

document for each unit (3 volumes / unit) for your information and use.

It should be noted that this is an uncontrolled copy of our Second 10-year Examination Plan.

2.8 NRClEAl Provide an itemized listing of the components subject to examination during the second 10-year interval.

GECatsponit See Resprise to RFAI 2.A.

2.C SRC_RfAI Provide a list of the nondestructive examination procedures that are to be used during the second inspection interval.

SS18A El-1 09/08/88 HL-54

l l

Georgia Poner ENCLOSURE I (Continued)

RESPONSE TO RFAI - HATCH ISLEROGRA8 l

h GEC_Itagon11 See Response to RFA! 2.6 2.0 NRC RFAI Section 1.4 of the IS!

Piogram

states, in part:

...the classification of components as ASME Class 1, 2, or 3 equivalent for this program does not imply that the components were l

designed in accordance with ASME requirements".

Section 1.9 l

states:

"The acceptance standards for Class 1,

2, and 3 t

components will b6 either Article IHB-3000 or the Section III l

construction code for the

plant, as applicable.

...The acceptance standards for Class 1, 2, and 3 component supports will be either !HF-3000 or the Section III construction Code for the plant, as applicable".

GEC_Responit The first three paragraphs of Section 1.9 wlil be deleted and replaced with the following statement:

"Standards for examination evaluation of (ASME Class) CL 1, 2, and 3 components, including component supports, will be in accordance with Article INA-3000."

2.E BRC E Al Augmented examinations have been established by the NRC when added assurance of structural reliability is deemed necessary.

Examples of documents which may require augmented examination are:

(1) High Energy Fluid Systems Protection Against Postulated Piping failures in Fluid Systems Outside Containment, i

Branch Technical Position ASB 3-1; (2)

Regulatory Guide 1.150 Ultrasonic Testing of Reactor Vessel Helds During Pre-service and Inservice Examinations; (3) h0 REG-0619. EHR Feedwater Nozzle and CRD Return Line Nozzle Cracking 5818A El-2 09/08/88 HL-54 i

1

Georgia Power d ENCLOSURE 1 (Continued)

RESEQf[SE TO RFAJ - HATCH ISI PROGRAM (4) NUREG-0803, Integrity of BHR Scram System Piping; and (5) Generic Letter 88-01, hRC Position on IGSCC in BWR Austenttic Stainless Steel Piping (ref NUREG-0313).

Address the degree of compliance with each of the above and discuss any other augmented examination (s) which are being incorporated in the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Unit 1 and 2 Second 10-Year Interval ISI Program.

GEC_Reissnit (1)

Regarding ASB 3-1 Hatch Unit 1 is committed to a December 1972 NRC letter from A.

Giambusso concerning High Energy Pipe Breaks Outside Containment, in which augmented examinations were not required.

In an October 9,

1975 letter from the NRC to GPC, the NRC documented a GPC comitment to perform the following augmented inspections on Hatch Unit 2:

i "The applicant will provide the design criteria that has been utilized to design the piping between the Containment Isolation Valves.

The applicant has stated that breaks have not been postulated in these areas.

The applicant will comi t to provide 100% volumetric inspection of pipe welds in these areas on a best effort as accessible basis."

The above comitment applies to Main Steam Feedwater High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI)

Steam, Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC) Steam, and Reactor Hater Clean Up (RHCU).

(2) Subsequent to issuance of Regulatory Gutde (RG) 1.150, we upgraded our Nondestructive Examination (NDE) Procedures associated with Reactor Vessel Pressure (RPV) examination to include applicable technical guidance contained in the Regulatory Guide which we considered beneficial to quality.

These NDE Procedures are available on site for NRC review at any time. provides a sumary of 1

GPC's technical position relative to RG 1.150.

5818A El-3 09/08/88 HL-54

I Georgia Poner d ENCLOSilRE 1 (Continued)

RESPONSE TO RFAI - HATCH ISI PROGRAM (3) GPC complies with NUREG-0619 as defined in January 22, 1981 l

and April 4,

1985 letters from GPC to the NRC.

Examinations of the feedwater nozzle bore, insido blend radii, and safe-end welds are conducted in accordance with Table 2 and Section 4.3.2.3 of the NUREG. On Hatch Unit 1, the feedwater nozzles were declad and triple sleeved, and double piston spargers were installed during the Spring 1979 outage.

Hatch Unit 2 was declad and had welded in spargers installed prior to operattor,.

i On both units at Hatch, the Control Rod Drive (CRD) return line was cut, capped, and rerouted to feedwater via a thermal tee connection in the RWCU line.

Examination of this connection is performed each refueling outage, to the extent practical, in order to detect thermal stress cracking.

l (4) GPC's position with regard to NUREG-0803 is as defined in l

our March 5, 1982 letter to the NRC.

As a result, the welds on the scram discharge header are examined as Class 2 welds per IHC-2000.

(5) GPC's position with regard to Generic Letter 88-01 is as defined in our letter, SL-4489, dated June 30,1988, which was submitted to the Commission for review.

(6)

In addition to the augmented examinations discussed above, GPC also performs augmented examinations, as described in our 10-Year Examinations Plan, relative the the following:

a. IEB 80-13 Core spray spargers b.

RPV head thickness

c. GE SIL 330 Jet pump beams

d. GE SIL 420 Jet pump sensing lines

e. GE SIL 433 Shroud head bolts 2,F NRC RFAI Section 3.0 of the ISI Program states that, based on the 74S75 Code Section XI the pressure / temperature exerption will not be used for welds in the Residual Heat Removal (RHR), Core Spray (CS), and HPCI systems.

The control of water chemistry to minimize stress corrosion is not an acceptable basis for exempting components from examination because practical evaluation, review, and acceptance standards cannot be defined.

Verify that the chemistry control exclusion of 74S75 paragraph IHC-1220(c) will not be used, l

5818A El-4 09/08/88 HL-54

GeorgiaPone d ENCLOSURE i (Continued)

RESPONSE TO RFAI - HATCH ISI PROGRAM GPC Resnonu l

The chemistry control exclusion of 74S75 paragraph IHC-1220(c)

I is not being used at this time by GPC at Plant Hatch as a basis for exemption.

2.G EC_1EAI l

Paragraph 10 CFR 50.55a(b)(2)(iv) requires that ASME Code Class 2 piping welds in the RHR, Emergency Core Cooling (ECC), and Containment Heat Removal (CHR) systems be examined; these systems should not be completely exempted from inservice volumetric examination based on Section XI exclusion criteria contained in IHC-1220.

Later editions and addenda of the Code require volumetric examination of Class 2 welds in piping with greater than or equal to 3/8-inch nominal wall thickness and greater than 4-inch nominal pipe size (NPS).

The staff has previously determined that a 7.5% augmented volumetric sample constitutes en acceptable resolution at similar plants.

Veri fy that volumetric examination will be performed on at least h 7.5%

sample of the Class 2 piping welds in these systems.

GPC Resgonit As required by 10 CFR 50.55a (Code of Federal Regulations), the l

extent of examinations for all Class 2 ECCS piping welds was determined by the requirements of Paragraph IHC-1220 Table l

IHC-2520 ((ategory C-F and C-G welds), and Paragraph IHC-2411 of l

Section XI,1974 Edition with Addenda through Summer 1975.

To make this plan even more comprehensive, those welds with high stress values were selected for examination to the extent practical.

However, some exemptions allowed by Section XI such as pressure /

temperature were not used for particular systems.

The following sumarizes the general weld selection criteria for Class 2 systems:

EtL_Cou SanyathEC1 1.

GPC examines the required welds within the 10-year interval using the 1974 Code with Addenda through Sumer 1975 for selection, and the 1980 Code with Addenda through Hinter 1981 for technique, i

2.

High stress and terminal end locations are selected when practical.

3.

The pressure /teeperature exemption is not applied.

5818A El-5 09/08/88 HL-54

l t

Georgialher A ENCLOSURE 1 (Continued)

RESPONSE TO RFAI - HATCH ISI PROGRAM 4.

In addition to Code requirements, GPC examines (UT or surface as applicable) welds on branch connection lines l

1 greater than one inch in diameter that could impact the

{

safety-related function of the system out to the first closed manual valve, reverse check valve, or power

(

operated valve.

Otherwise, component connecitons, j

piping and associated valves, and vessels (and their supports), that are 4 inches neelnal pipe size and 4

smaller are exempt.

A minimum of 7.5% of the total f

wolds will be examined (volumetric or surface as

(

appilcable) each 10-year inspection interval.

5.

GPC examines 100% of attacheent welds within 10 years where the base material of the attachment is greater j

than or equal to 3/4 inches thick.

l Other Class 2 Systems 1

As permitted in 10 CFR 50.554, the remaining Class 2 piping

)

welds were selected using the 1974 Edition of the Code with 1

Addenda through summer 1975.

The following components were 1

exempted per IWC-1220:

1 1.

Components in systems where both the design pressure i

and temperature are equal to or less than 275 psig and 2000F, respectively.

2.

Components in systems or portions of systems, other than ECC systems, which do not function during normal l

reactor operation.

s 3.

Component connections, piping and associated valves, i

j and vessels (and their supports), that are four inches NPS and smaller.

1

],

2.H NRC RFAI i

Relief Requesi; 2.1.1 includes discussion of performing the r

Code-required volumetric examination on Reactor Pressure Vessel closure head welds (Examination Category 8-A, Items 81.21 and i

81,22) as well as beltline region welds

(!tems 81.11 and 81.12).

Specific relief is being requested for the beltline 6

i re ton welds; however, in the justification for the closure head l

J we ds, it is indicated that relief from the Code-required l

volumetric examination may not be required and it is stated l

that:

"If it is found during examinations that 100% coverage l

cannot be obtained, specific relief will be requJsted at that s

)

time".

i a

5818A El-6 09/08/88 4

HL-54 4

Georgia Puner ENCLOSURE 1 (Continued)

RESPONSE TO RFAI - HATCH Ill_f20GM8 GECltigonit During the 1985 update to the 1980 Code, the NRC had several questions concerning the extent of examination possible on the RPV to meet the requirements of the new Code.

The existing discussions under Items B1.21 and B1.22 defined the best estimate at that time for the examination of the bottom head and closure head welds.

As there is no relief required from the I

code at this timo for Category B1.21 or 81.22, these sections will be deleted from relief request 2.1.1.

2.I EC_ftfAl Relief Request 3.1.2 requests relief from performing the Code-required surface examination of the welded attachments on RHR, CS, HPCI and RCIC suction lines to the torus.

As an alternative, the Licensee proposes performing a

visual examination (VT-1) of the subject welds at Unit 2 and performing a best effort magnetic particle (MT) examination of the subject welds at Unit 1.

The Safety Evaluation Report (SER), dated September 29, 1986, granted relief for two of the welds (1E51 and IE41) at Unit 1 based on a significant percentage (80-100%) of the weld surface receiving a Code-required surface examination (HT).

For the remaining welds at Unit I and all of the subject welds at Unit 2, relief was denied based on the fact that the paint on there welds precludes not only dye penetrant surface examination, but also visual examination.

Also, the Licensee had not given l

sufficient justification (man-hours and radiation exposure) that removal of the paint and perfornance of a dye penetrant i

examination is impractical.

Relief Request 3.1.2, as submitted February 24, 1988, does not appear to contain any information different from that evaluated in the SER, dated September 29, 1986.

Therefore, provide further technical justification as to why relief should be granted for those welds for which relief was previously denied in the September 29, 1986 SER.

EClt300 Alt In reviewing your request for additional information, we have determined that the welds in question are actually part of the primary containment and, as such, are outside the scope of our Section XI ISI Program.

Relief Request 3.1.2 will, therefore, be withdrawn as it is no longer deemed applicable.

5318A El-7 09/08/88 HL-54

Georgia Poner b ENCLOSURE 1 (Continued)

RESEQNSE TO RFAI - HATCH ISI PROGRA8 2.J NRC RFAI General Relief Request 8.1.1 requests relief from the requirements of Section XI, Appendix III, which delineates the requirements for design and fabrication of basic calibration blocks used for ultrasonic examination of Class 1 and 2 piping systems.

The Licensee's justification for relief states, in l

part:

l "Correlation of ultrasonic data with previous examinations as required by Subarticle IHA-1400 of Section XI makes it necessary that these basic calibration blocks be used so future examination results can be correlated with past results."

01scuss the irepact of obtaining appropriate calibration blocks made from material of the same nominal diameter, nominal wall thickness or pipe schedule, and material specifications as the pi)e to be examined.

Also discuss why the Codo-required callbration blocks could not be used in conjunction with the ones used during previous examinations to provide correlations with the previous examination data.

GPC Re. spont l

It is GPC's position that obtaining calibration blocks solely to meet the 1980 Code would require unwarranted expenditures of time and money (approximately $300,000)

I without a corresponding increase in safety.

The use of the existing blocks with side-drilled holes as calibration reflectors provides meaningful and thorough examinations, I

which provides adequate assurance of structural integrity.

The following is a list of actions required to obtain approximately fifty (50) 1980 Code calibration blocks:

1.

Design calibration blocks 2.

Prepare approximately 50 new drawings 3.

Locate sources of materials 4.

Develop purchase orders and procure material 5.

Special order or have manufactured any material not available 6.

Audit all suppliers to ensure traceability 7.

Verify material received and test as needed 8.

Develop itst of quallfled nachine shops 9.

Develop specifications for fabrication and send out bids l

10. Award bid and audit machine shop 1

1 1

1 5818A El-8 09/08/88 l

HL-54 i

Georgialher d ENCLO5URE 1 (Continued)

RESPONSE TO RFAI - HATCH ISI PROGRAM

11. Have blocks machined

12. Heasure and verify all dimensions to be in tolerance

13. As-built calibration block drawings

14. Place in Plant Hatch inventory system

15. Run comparisons between old and new blocks

16. Revise Second Ten-Year Examination Plans to reflect new numbars 2.K EC_RfAl Provide a list of the ultrasonic calibration standards being used 1

4 during the second 10-year intervals at Hatch Units 1 and 2.

This list should include the calibration standard identifications, inaterial specifications, and sizes.

i i

GPC Responit A summary listing of calibration blocks currently used at Plant Hatch is provided for your information.

Due to changing requirements and techniques, the actual calibration blocks used are subject to change at any time.

4 l

l i

i t

5818A El-9 09/08/88

)

HL-54

\\

1 Ce11bration Block Listing (Inforination Only) 10 Nweer Block Description 10 Numbg Cal Block Description 4

l 2H 6' Sch. 80 28-H Pump Stud; 2-3/4' Diam.

SA-376, Tp 304 SA-540, Sr. B 23 4-H 3' Sch. 40 29 H 28'-1.50' Nos. Wa11 i

SA 106, Gr. B SA-106, Gr. B 5-H 6' Sch. 80 30-H Step Block 1

SA-106, Gr. B 5A-36 i

7-H 4' Sch. 80 36-H APY llock j

A!51 SE-1043

$A-908. C1. 2 I

10-H 10' Sch. 80 37-H 9'-1.40' Mon. Wa)1 SA 106, Gr. B SA-900, C1. 2,,

11-H 24' Sch. 80 43-H 14' Sch.100 SA-106, Gr. B 5A-333, Gr. 6 12 H 24' Sc h. 80 45-H 24' Sch. 30 SA-106, Gr. B 5A-106, Gr. 8 i

4 l

13-H 14' Sch.120 44-H 14' Sch.100 l

SA-106, Gr. B

$A 106, tr. I i

14-H 20' Sch to 50-H l' Sch.120

)

5A-106, Gr. 8 5A-333, Gr, 6 15-H 12' Sch.100 51-H 20' Sch 100

)

SA-106, Sr. 8

$A-333, Sr. 6 4

l 17-H 12' Sch. 60 52-H 8' sch,100 SA-3)2. Tp. 304 5A-106, tr. O I S-H 10' Sch. 40 53 H 16' Sch.100 i

$A-312, Tp. 304

$A-106, Gr. B l

21 H

.75' Plate 54-H 10' Sch.100 SA 312. Tp. 304 5A-106, tr. 8 2t-H 1.5' Plate 56-H 12' Sch. 80 SA 240. Tp. 304

$A 333, Sr. 6 23-H ~

RPY Stud: 6 1/4' Dias.

61 H 6.875' a l' x 24'

$A 29 5A 533 Gr. O C1. 1 Clad Al.4,

p. 304 1

62 H 5.875' x 9' x 23.5" 5A 533 tr. 8. C1. 1 Clad $fAl.4,fp.304 5818A t-10 09/08/88 i

i F.1.- 5 4 I

)

I Calibration Block Listing (Information only) i 10 Weer Block Description 10 Number Cal Block Descriptfon l

63-H 5.0" x 9" x 20' 88 H 12' Sch.120 SA 533. Gr. 8. C1. 1 SA-106, Gr. B Clad 5FA5.4, Tp. 308 64-H

4. 5' x 9'. it' 92-H 28* 2.30' Nos Wall

$A-533, Gr.

. C1. 1 5A-354, Sr. 304 6 5-H 24' Sch 40 97-H 5.4'-0.750' Nos. Wall SA-333, Gr. 6 58144, Alley 600 i

70-H 12' Sch 100 106-H 1.01' P1ete SA-333, Sr.'6 5A-504, C1, 2 1

i I

72 H 1.250' Piste 108-H 10' Sch.100 l

SA-516, Gr. 70 SA-106, Sr. B 1

73 H

0. 850' Pl a te 116-H 14' Sch. 80 f

SA 516, Gr.10 5A 106, Gr. I i

77 H 18' sc h. 120 119-H 3.0' Plate f

SA-104, Gr. B SA 533, Sr. 8 C Clad FA5.4, Yp.1.1 304 78-H 13.5' 1.20' km. Wall 120-H 5.437'O x 0.625T l

58-166, Alloy 600

/ 508. C1. 2 l

79-H 10.9'-0.60' Nos. Wall 121 -H 5.437'O a 0.813T i

58-164, Alloy 600 SA lat, F304 l

80-H 4' Sch,to 122 H 4' Sch.120 5A-376. Tp. 304 5A 106 Gr B 81 N 8' Sc h. 140 124 H Jet pump Seen 5A-106, Sr. 8 i

i 42-H 16'Sch. 40 125 N 3' a 4' a It' l

l SA-106, Sr. I TA 504, C1. 2 i

Clad FA5.4, Tp. 304 1

1 43-H 18* 2.10' Nos.

128-W 28'O a 1.144'T j

5A 516 Gr. 70 SA-354 Tp. 316MG s

64-N 24*-1.40' Woe Wall 129.W*

22'O x 1.75'T l

t SA-182. F-304 5A 354 Tp. 316te

)

i 85-H 12'-1.20' Mem. Wall 130 P 20'O x 0.879'T I

]

SA 182, F-304 5A 354. Tp. 314h6 l

l

\\

I 5sisA t-11 09/08/88 ML-54

)

\\

Calibration Block Listing i

(Information Only)

JD, Wumber Block Descriptf on

_ID Number Cal 81ock Description 131 -H*

24"O x 1.186"T 134-H

$5-Plate - Tp. 304 SA-358, Tp. 316NG Clad SFA5.4, Tp. 308 Overlay Block 132-H*

12'O x 0.792T 136-::

' I' Thick Mpe SA-358. Tp. 316NG SA= 306/58166 Welded Composite SFA5.14ERW. CR-3 Overity Over14y Block 133-17 6'O x 0.432'T 136 H Shroud Hee'd Bolt SA-358. Tp 316HG

$8-166 N06600 W/A/G

• Suilt during 1984 Hatch-2 Rect rc. Piping K4 placement 5818A

,E-12 M t,- 5 4

Georgia Power A ENCLOSURE 2 PLANT HATCH - UNITS 1, 2 NRC DOCKETS 50-321, 50-366 OPERATING LICENSES DPR-57, NPF-5 TECHNICAL POSITION ON REGULATORY GUIDE 1.150. REV.1 ihe examination program for the RPV in the past has been performed in accordance with Sections V and XI of the ASME Code.

R0gulatory Guide (RG) 1.150, Revision 1

"Ultrasonic Testing of Reactor Vessel Helds During Preservice ar;d Inservice Examination", has been issued to provide technical guidance for RPV examinations.

It is the position of GPC that the intent of RG 1.150, Rev. 1 (dated February 1, 1983) in it entirety does not apply to Plant Hatch.

But it is also our position that portions of the RG provide technical guidance that would improve our RPV weld examination program.

Therefore, the RPV weld examination program for Plant Hatch is conducted in accordance with Sections V and XI of the ASME code, augmented with portions of RG 1.150, R 1.

Our position is summarized below.

i 1.

Instrument Performance Checks Etch combination of transducer, cable, and ultrasonic Instruisent used for RPV weld examinations are subject to the instrument performance checks.

1,1 Pre-Examination Performance Checks The ; 3rformance checks for the instriment will be performed in the field before and after the weld exantnations.

1.2 Field Performance Checks l

0.

Screen Height Linearity I

As a sintrum, the screen height linearity of each ultrasonic instrument shall be performed before and after examining a11 the welds that require examination in the RPY during one outage.

Screen helght linearity will be checked as part of the calibration requirements.

't e

5818A E2-1 09/08/88 HL-54

i i

GeorgiaPower A ENCLOSURE 2 (Continued)

TECHNICAL POSITION ON REGULATORY GUIDE 1.150. REV.1 E.

Amplitude Control Linearity As a minimum, the amplitude control Ifnearity of each ultrasonic instrument shall be perfermed before and t.fter examining all the welds that require examination in the APY dering one outage.

The initial instroent sensitivity during the perfonnance of the amplitude control linearity check should be such that it falls I

at the calibration sensitivity or at some point between the calibration sensitivity and the scanning sensitivity. Amplitude control 11her-

1 be checked as part of the calibration requirements.

F.

Angle Beam Profile Characterization The vertical beam profile shall be determined for each search unit to be used during the examination prior to the examination. Beam profile curves shall be determined at different depths to coser the material thickness to be examined.

Each transducer will have angle beam profile characterization on each different calibration block for which it is to be used for.

2.

Calibration The system calibration shall be perfor.aed to establish the OAC curve and the sweep range calibration in accordance with Article 4,Section V of the ASE Code.

2.1 Calibration for Manual Scanning A static calibration shall be perfonned.

The signal responses shall be maximized during calibration and sizing of indications. Upon completion of calibration, detection of f aws shall be demonstrated by reference hole detection at scanning speed and detection level.

3.

Examination The scope and extent of the ultrasonic examinations shall comply with 1%2000,Section XI of the ASE CWe, Theexaminationsshallhavea ainimum 25 percent scan overlap based on transducer element size.

3.1 Internal Surface (Clad Components)

The capability to effectively detect defec'ts at the internal clad / base metal interface shall be demonstrated by the use of a 2 percent notch which penetrates the internal (clad) surface.of the calibration block.

j 5818A E2-2 09/08/88 HL-54 l

C

. ~.

GeorgiaPoner A ENCLOSURE 2 (Continuad)

TECHNICALfQSITION ON REGU_LTORY GUIDE 1.150. REV. 1 3.2 Scanning Weld-Metal Interface The volume of weld and adjacent base material to be examined as required by Section XI of the ASE Code will be examined with a 00, and nominal 450 and 600 examination techniques.

6.

Recording and Sizing of Indications Indications detensined to be from geometric sources will not be sized.

When indications are evaluated as geometric in origin, the basis for this detemination shall be described on the data sheet.

All indications producing a response of 50 percent DAC or greater shall be recorded.

The length of the reflector shall be determined by 50 percent DAC or half amplitude, which<ver is applicable.

If the size of an indication exceeds the allowable limits of Section XI of the ASE Code, the indication will be investigated to htensine if it was present since fabrication.

If fracture mechanics is necessary for continued operation, this will be determined by Georflia Power Company and they will take the necessary steps to resolve the ind' cations.

This technical guidance from Regulatory Guide 1.150 Revision 1 will be applied r

to.all welds in the RPY examination program.

l l

l l

E2-3 09/08/88 i

.----- ~

. - -..