ML20236M029
| ML20236M029 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 07/08/1998 |
| From: | Kalyanam N NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Ohanlon J VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| TAC-MA0410, TAC-MA410, NUDOCS 9807130274 | |
| Download: ML20236M029 (5) | |
Text
_
July 8,1998 Mr. J. P. O'Hanlon i
Senior Vice President - Nuclear Virginia Electric and Power Company 5000 Dominion Boulevard Glen Allen,VA 23060 j
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - ASME SECTION XI RELIEF REQUESTS NDE-37 THROUGH NDE NORTH ANNA POWER STATION, UNIT 1 (TAC NO. MA0410)
Dear Mr. O'Hanlon:
On December 18,1997, Virginia Electric and Power Company forwarded Relief Requests NDE-37, NDE-38, NDE-39, NDE-40 and NDE-41, providing the basis for relief from certain l
requirements of ASME Section XI Code associated with partial examinations conducted during the 1997 Unit 1 refueling outage.
The NRC staff is reviewing and evaluating your request. The enclosure contains a set of questions from the staff in order to complete our review.
Sincerely, Original. signed by:
N. Kalyanam, Project Manager Project Directorate ll-1 Division of Reactor Projects -I/ll Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-338
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/ encl: See next page DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File OGC PUBLIC L. Plisco, R ll ACRS' J. Zwolinski k
i. FILENAME - G:\\NOANNA\\MA0410.RA1
[
D:PDll-1Mk
\\
OFFICE PM:PDll LA:PDil-1 NAME NKalyanam d'EDunnington ((o -
PTKuo (
DATE 7 / 9/98 7/8/98
] / y/98 sho kj/No Yes/No COPY
- { [ }. f; Ijy> a}"'$'] (phh
~
9807130274 900708 DR ADOCK 0500 3 8 L____._______._____
+
' p t
UNITED STATES s
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
WASHINGTON, D.C. "a8 "1 4
0 9....
9 July 8,1998 l
Mr. J. P. O'Hanlon l
Senior Vice President - Nuclear l
Virginia Electric and Power Company 5000 Dominion Boulevard l
Glen Allen, VA 23060 j
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - ASME SECTION XI RELIEF REQUESTS NDE-37 THROUGH NDE NORTH ANNA POWER STATION, j
UNIT 1 (TAC NO. MA0410)
)
Dear Mr. O'Hanlon:
I On December 18,1997, Virginia Electric and Power Company forwarded Relief Requests NDE-l 37, NDE-38, NDE-39, NDE-40 and NDE-41, providing the basis for relief from certain l
requirements of ASME Section XI Code associated with partial examinations conducted during the 1997 Unit i refueling outage.
The NRC staffis reviewing and evaluating your request. The enclosure contains a set of questions from the staff in order to complete our review.
Sincerely,
\\
N. Kalyanam, Project Manager Project Directorate ll-1 l
Division of Reactor Projects - l/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-338
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information 1
I ccw/ enclosure:
See next page l
l u_______________-
[
m.;.
_m i
Mr. J. P. O'Hanlon North Anna Power Station I
Virginia Electric & Power Company Units 1 and 2 l
cc:
Mr. J. Jeffrey Lunsford Regional Administrator, Region 11 County Administrator U.S. Nuclear Reg"'atory Commission Louisa County Atlanta Federal Center i
P.O. Box 160 61 Forsyth St., SW, Suite 23T85 Louisa, Virginia 23093 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Michael W. Maupin, Esquire Mr. W. R. Matthews, Manager Hunton and Williams North Anna Power Station Riverfront Plaza, East Tower P. O. Box 402 951 E. Byrd Street Mineral, Virginia 23117 Richmond, Virginia 23219 Mr. R. C. Haag Dr. W. T. Lough U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
Virginia State Corporation Atlanta Federal Center Commission 61 Forsyth St., SW, Suite 23T85 l
l Division of Energy Regulation Atlanta, Georgia 30303 l
[
P. O. Box 1197 Richmond, Virginia 23209 Mr. E. S. Grecheck, Manager l
Surry Power Station -
Old Dominion Electric Cooperative Virginia Electric and Power Company 4201 Dominion Blvd.
5570 Hog Island Road Glen Allen, Virginia 23060 Surry, Virginia 23883
)
Mr. J. H. McCarthy, Manager Robert B. Strobe, M.D., M.P.H.
i Nuclear Licensing & Operations State Health Commissioner Support Office of the Commissioner l
Virginia Electric and Power Company Virginia Department of Health Innsbrook Technical Center P.O. Box 2448 5000 Dominion Blvd.
Richmond, Virginia 23218 Glen Allen, Virginia 23060 Office of the Attorney General j
Commonwealth of Virginia 900 East Main Street L
Richmond, Virginia 23219 l
Senior Resident inspector North Anna Power Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission j
1024 Haley Drive i
Mineral, Virginia 23117 l
i l
l 1
t
o VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY l
NORTH ANNA POWER STATION UNIT 1 l
l REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION l
l SECOND 10-YEAR INTERVAL INSERVICE INSPECTION (ISI) PROGRAM PLAN l
1.0 Scoce/ Status of Review l
Throughout the service life of a water-cooled nuclear power facility,10 CFR 50.55a(g)(4) requires that components (including supports) that are classified as American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3 meet the requirements, except design and access provisions and preservice examination requirements, set forth in Section XI of the ASME Code, " Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power Plant Components," to the extent practical within the limitations of design, geometry, and materials of construction of the components. This section of the regulations also requires that inservice examinations of components and system pressure tests conducted during the l
successive 120-month inspection intervals comply with the requirements in the latest edition and addenda of the Code incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a(b) on the I
date 12 months prior to the start of an interval, subject to the limitations and modifications listed therein. The components (including supports) may meet requirements set forth in subsequent editions and addenda of the Code that are l
incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a(b) subject to the limitations and modifications listed therein and subject to Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approval. The licensee, Virginia Electric and Power Company, has prepared the North Anna Power Station, Unit 1, Relief Requests NDE-37 through NDE-41, for the second 10-year Inservice inspection Interval.
The staff has reviewed the available information in Relief Requests NDE-37 through NDE-41, submitted December 18,1997.
2.0 AdditionalInformation Reauired Based on the above review, the staff has concluded that additional information and/or clarification is required to complete the review of these requests for relief, a.
Request for Relief NDE-39:
The licensee is seeking relief from the required volumetric examination coverages for Welds SW-8, SW 9, and SW-41. It appears from the figures l
1
2 supplied by the licensee that these welds are branch connection welds (Item 89.31). However, the item number listed in the Code Requirements section of the request for relief (89.11) corresponds to piping circumferential welds.
Provide additionalinformation conceming the item classification of the subject welds.
Also, provide additionalinformation concerning the actions (if any) that have been taken to ensure maximum coverage of the subject welds (e.g., has a refracted longitudinal wave been tried or considered?).
b.
Request for Relief NDE-40:
The licensee is seeking relief from the required volumetric examination coverages for Welds SW-8, SW-31, and SW-38. However, the licensee has not demonstrated that the examination requirements are impractical to perform. The licensee's basis for relief states that the welds "have been examined to the extent practical as required by the Code. Due to interference by an existing pipe support, only 6 inches out of 21 inches were examined." The licensee provided a sketch of the pipe supports and welds; however, it is still unclear why the required examination is impractical. Can the pipe supports be removed to increase the examination coverage? Explain in more detail why this examination is considered to be impractical or why performing the examination would result in a burden or hardship.
c.
Request for Relief NDE-41:
The licensee is seeking relief from the required surface examination coverage for Weld 31. However, the licensee has not demonstrated that the examination is impractical. The licensee's basis for relief states that the weld "has been examined to the extent practical as required by the Code. The Code required surface examination coverage was reduced due to a Code name plate band restricting access to the base metal of the pipe." The licensee provided a sketch of the area; however, it is still unclear why the examination is impractical. Can the band be removed to increase the examination coverage? Explain in more detail why this examination is considered to be impractical or why performing the examination would result in a burden or hardship.
I i
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _