ML20213D814
| ML20213D814 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 09/30/1981 |
| From: | Johnston W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| CON-WNP-0392, CON-WNP-392 NUDOCS 8110080504 | |
| Download: ML20213D814 (9) | |
Text
/
(
p.\\Wi&~ 3 4
O
~
e N.
DISTRIBUTION.
Docket File S2
/[
'\\
SEP 3 0 1981 WPPS-2 File 2 i/S SEP.90 8
v.s. m 19 8 ).
88 k "'
Docket flo. S0-397 b,
~
/h&g5.}
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licensing, Division of Licensing FROM:
William V. Johnston, Assistant Director for Materials &
Qualifications Engineering, Division of Engineering
SUBJECT:
MEETIllG WITil WPPS CONCEDNING Tile PRESERVICE IllSPECTION PROGRAM ON OCTOBER 9,1981 Plant flame: Washington Nuclear Project No. 2 (WNP-2)
Suppliers : General Electric; Burns 12 Roe Licensing Stage: OL Docket Number: 50-397 Responsible Branch and Project Manager: LB #1; R. Auluck Reviewer:
M. R. liuri(J. F. Cock)
Requested Completion Date: October 1,1981 Description of Task: Preservice Inspection Program Review Status: Applicant's Response Required The Materials Application Section, Materials Engineering Branch, Division of Engin-eering, has completed the review of the Preservice Inspection Program for WNP-2.
The applicant has prepared a detailed submittal and has completed a substantial"por-tion of the preservice examination.
To complete our SER input before the February 12, 1982 deadline, we will require an acceptable response to the request' for infor-mation enclosed as Attachment 1.
A meeting was scheduled to discuss the PSI Program during the WPPS visit on August 26, 1981.
An Agenda and other topics for discussion at the October 9,1981 meeting is enclosed as Attachment 2.
We reouest that the Project Manager take appropriate l
action to notice the meeti.19 and transmit Attachments 1 and 2 to the applicant.
In/
William V. Johnston, Assistant Director l
for Materials & Qualific'ations Engineering i
Division of Engineering l
l Enclosures :
As s tated cc: See next page
,I\\h enn e n. u o u,,m
.m&
/\\
/)
1
,,,'f;,h,h,,
...p.g..Mii.f.E 9.hB,,,
,h:M,Uk,,
="'" d. h.. 4.8 1 p
1
- Q 8110000504 810930)..
MRI,1um,: cg,,
, S azel ton.
, SSPaw11ck WVJohns ton
/.
4 h,8,1, f'f,/81
,j,G,3,81 W
ADOCK_05000397,,
.\\W.....
. 3. 8.h./81.,,
j
" = '**-=-
l N c ronu ais sio,soinacu o24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
(
I e
e a
a KoDert L.
leoesco SEP 3 0 1981 cc:
R. H. Vollmer D. G. Eisenhut W. V. Johnston S. S. Pawlicki B. J. Youngblood W. S. Ilazelton G. Johnson R. Auluck J. Gleim J. Cook, INEL M. R. Ilum x6.
OFFICEk SUKNAMEf DATEk
, um mo-32 n::c ronw aia no, son uncu o24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
k ATTAOCENT.
g WASHIfiGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM WASHINGTON NUCLEAR PROJECT N0. 2 DOCKET NUMBER 50-397 PRESERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM - hEQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MATERI ALS ENGINEERING BRANCH - MATERI ALS APPLICATION SECTION 121.19 To evaluate your compliance with 10 CFR Part 50.55a(g)(2), we will require that all Class 1 and 2 pressure retaining welds that cannot be examined as required by Section XI of the ASME Code be identified with a supporting tech-nical jus tification.
A.
Where relief is requested for pressure retaining welds in the reactor vessel, identify the specific welds that did not receive a 100% preser-vice ultrasonic examination and estimate the extent of the examination that was performed.
B.
Where relief is requested for piping system welds (Examination Category B-J, C-F, and C-G), provide a list of the specific welds that did not receive a complete Section XI preservice examination including a drawing or isometric identification number, system, weld number, and physical configuration, e.g., pipe to nozzle weld, etc.
Estimate the extent of the preservice examination that was performed. When the volumetric exami-nation was performed from one side of the weld, discuss whether the entire weld volume and heat affected zone (HAZ) and base metal on the far side of i
the weld were examined. State the primary reason that a specific exami-nation is impractical, e.g., support or component restricts access, fit-l l
ting prevents adequate ultrasonic coupling on one side, component to com-l ponent weld prevents ultrasonic examination, etc.
Indicate any alterna-l tive or supplemental examinations performed and method (s) of fabrication examination.
121.20 Paragraph 50.55a(b)(2)(iv) requires that piping welds in the Residual Heat Removal Systems, Emergency Core Cooling Systems, and Containment Heat Removal Sys tems be examined.
List the lines in these systems that were exempted from preservice volumetric and/or surface examination based on Paragraph IWC-1220 of Section XI and provide a technical justification.
The control of water 1
(
( chemistry to minimize stress corrosion described in Paragraph IWC-1220(c) of Section XI is not an acceptable basis for exempting ECCS, RHR, and CHR compo-nents from examination because practical evaluation, review, and acceptance standards cannot be defined.
To satisfy the inspect ~an requirements of General Design Criteria 36, 39, 42, and 45, the Inservice Inspection Program must in-clude the examination of a representative sample of welds in the RHR, ECCS, and Containment Heat Removal Systens in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55a(b)(2).
121.21 For pressure retaining welds, the 1974 Edition, Summer 1975 Addenda,Section XI, paragraph IWA-2232 requires that ultrasonic examinations shall be conduc-ted in accordance with the provisions of Appendix I of Section XI. Applica-tion of Appendix I is limited to Class 1 and Class 2 ferritic vessels, 2h inches and over in wall thickness, with clad vessels included. Where Appendix I is not applicable (for example, piping welds) ultrasonic examination is required to be conducted in accordance with the application requirements of Article 5,Section V of the ASME Code,1974 Edition, Summer 1975 Addenda as r
amended by IWA-2232.
Provide a technical justification for any alternatives used such asSection XI, Appendix III, Supplement 7 for austenitic piping welds and discuss tae following:
a.
All modifications permitted by Supplement 7.
b.
Methods of assuring adequate examination sensitivity over the required examination volume.
c.
Methods of qualifying the procedure for examination through the weld (if complete examination is to be considered for examination conducted with only one side access).
When using Appendix III of Section XI for inservice examination of either fer-ritic or austenitic piping welds the following should be incorporated:
d.
Any crack-line indication, 20 percent of DAC or greater, discovered dur-ing examination of piping welds or adjacent base metal materials should be recorded and investigated by a Level II or Level III examiner to the extent necessary to determine the shape, identity, and location of the reflector.
l
( The Owner should evaluate and take corrective action for the disposition e.
of any indication investigated and found to be other than geometrical or metallurgical in nature.
121.22 The augmented inspection requirement for high energy piping systems as discus-sed in Standard Review Plan 3.6.1 and Branch Techr.ical Position APCSB 3-1 states that " Piping classification as required by Regulatory Guide 1.26 should be maintained without change until beyond the outboard restraint.
If the re-straint is located at the isolation valve, a classification change at the valve interface is acceptable."
Discuss the examination of welds between outboard containment isolation valves and piping restraints in accordance with the augmented examination provisions of SRP 3.6.1 and 3.6.2.
A 4
~
{
ATT ACHMENT 2 AGENDA FOR WASlilNGTON NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 MEETING October 9,1981 8:30 am to 3:00 pm Participan ts : NRC - R. Auluck, Project Manager M. R. Hum, Materials Engineering Branch J. Gleim, Materials Enginecirng Branch NRC Consultant - J. F. Cook, EG&G Idaho 1.
Objectives of Review 2.
Overview of Schedule and Status of PSI 3.
Examination Sampling Criteria and Exemptions Based on IWB-1220 and IWC-1220.
4.
Reactor Vessel Examination - Procedures, Resul ts, Areas that are Impractical to Examine, and Regulatory Guide 1.150.
5.
Piping Sys tem Examination - Procedures, Extent of Examination Coverage, Prac-tice with One-Side Access, Practice with limitations to Examinations, and Res ul ts.
6.
Relief Requests a
7.
Safety Relief Valve Discharge Line 8.
NRC Questions and Discussions d
n-
t I
WNP-2 PRESERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM MEETING TOPICS 1.
For some Class 1 and 2 welds, the WNP-2 preservice inspection plan utilizes Edi-tions and
- Addenda of the Code that are not approved by 10 CFR 50.55(a).
For those cases where examinations have not been performed in accordance with approved ASME Code Editions and Addenda, the application must provide a technical justifi-cation for the use of alternative examinations.
2.
WNP-2 states that remote mechanized ultrasonic examination calibration checks shall be perfonned at intervals not to exceed 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> instead of at intervals not to exceed 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> as required by Section XI, I-4230.
Confirm that calibra-tion over the intended 12 hour1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> calibration interval maintains accuracy and sta-bility as required by I-4230.
3.
WNP-2 states that RHR pump welds are inaccessible.
Is this access limitation only for ultrasonic volumetric examination, or are other examination methods limited also?
4.
WNP-2 states that no ultrasonic examination on Class 2 piping welds (circumfer-ential and longitudinal) with piping walls 13 inch or less will be performed. This action is not provided for in the 10 CFR 50.55a approved ASME Code.Section XI, 1974 Edition, Summer 1975 Addenda.
The later 1977 Edition up to and including the Summer 1978 Addenda does allow exempting Class 2 piping with walls !3 inch or less; however, portions of approved editions or addenda may be used provided that all related requirements of the respective editions or addenda are met. The pre-service and inservice inspection program plan should be modif'ed wherever later l
10 CFR 50.55a approved Code editions and addenda are involved to specifically identify the edition and addenda.
5.
WNP-2 states that no ultrasonic examinations will be perfonned on Class 1 piping welds less than 4-inch nominal pipe size.
10 CFR 50.55a has apprcved the use of the Section XI,1974 Edition up to and including the Summer 1975 Addenda, IW8-c 1220(b)(1) which states:
"Under the postulated conditions of loss of coolant from the component during normal reactor operation, the reactor can be shut down and cooled down in an orderly manner assuming makeup is provided by the reactor coolant makeup system only. However, in no instance may the size exemp-tion be more than 3 in. nominal pipe size."
(
( Additionally, normal makeup systems are those systems that have the capability to maintain i;eactor coolant inventory under the respective conditions of startup, hot s tandby, operation or cooldown, using onsite power.
The term onsite power is. that power available to the nuclear plant from onsite without any power being supplied from an offsite power distribution system.
The following information concerning piping size exclusions should be provided:
(a)
Confirm your calculations for liquid and gaseous fluid piping for which Paragraph IWB-1220(b)(1) exemption is invoked.
(b)
List the systems and line sizes that were exempted from preservice exami-nation based on Paragraph IWB-1220(b)(1) of the 1974 I:dition including Sunmer 1975 Addenda,Section XI based on nonnal makeup systems using only onsite power.
6.
The WNP-2 preservice inspection program plan does not discuss or define as inspec-table systems, the control rod drive cooling water lines common charging and dis-charging headers, and the control rod insert / withdrawal lines.
Identify the ASME i
Code classification of each of these piping systems and discuss the technical basis for your pmservice examination requirements.
Those piping system lines that are exempted by IWB-1220(b) and which are parallel pathed into a common header that is larger in size than allowable by IWB-1220(b) should be identified and the coninon header lines shall be included in the PSI examination program.
7.
WNP-2 has included in the PSI Program, Table 5.2-12, Items B.4.1 and B.4.5, "Exami-l nation Area" as follows:
l
" Safe end-to-piping welds, safe-ends in branch piping welds circumferen-tial and longitudinal welds to include base metal for a distance of 15T l
or 1 inch, whichever is smaller."
1 The 1974 Edition of Section XI including addenda through Sunmer 1975 cited as the Code being used by WNP-2 requires that base metal examination area include, at least, one-wall thickness beyond the edge of. weld.
Discuss the technical basis for your decision for selecting the examination area.
(
I 8.
In Table 5.2-12, Item B-1.4, it is stated that primary nozzle-to-vesse! welds and nozzic inner raduis components will be examined from the outside surface.
Confi rm that existing procedures and equipment have been qualified on calibration mockups /
standards that enable fatigue cracks to be reliably detected, identified, and characte ri zed.
9.
WNP-2 has invoked examination criteria sizing of 2 inches and smaller for category B-G-2 and larger than 2 inches for category B-G-1 as allowed by the 1978 Addenda to the 1977 Edition of the ASME Code,Section XI.
Confirm that all related exami-nation requirements of the 1978 Addenda to the 1977 Edition are being met.
- 10. WNP-2 states in the PSI Program Plan sampling limitations as follows:
a.
For Item 06.4, Category B-K-1, " Integrally Welded Supports" and Item 86.5, Category B-K-2, " Support Components" of Table 5.2-12, only valves in Cate-gory B-M-1 will be examined.
It is not the intent of Category B-K-1 and Category B-K-2 to be limited to the sampling.of Category B-M-1 of ASME Code,Section XI.
b.
For Item 85.4, Category B-K-1, " Integrally Welded Supports" and Item B5.5, Category B-K-2, " Support Components" of Table 5.2-12, only pumps in Category B-L-1 will be examined.
It is not the intent of Category B-K-1 and Category B-K-2 to be limited to the sampling of Category B-L-1 of ASME Code,Section XI.
c.
For Item B5.9, Category B-G-2, " Pressure Retaining Bolting 2 Inches and Smaller in Diameter" and Item B6.2, Category B-G-1, " Pressure Retaining Bolts and Studs Greater than 2 Inch Diameter" of Table 5.2-12 only pumps in Category B-L-1 and valves in Category B-M-1 will be examined.
It is not the intent of Category B-G-2 and Category B-G-1 to be limited to the sampling of Category B-L-1 and Category B-M-1 respectively of the ASME Code,Section XI.
Confirm that all required examinations of the above categories will be performed as part of the PSI Program.
e