ML20244D756
Text
_ _ _ _ _ - _ -
EAR 2 61366
/
Docket No. 50-443 MEMORANDUM FOR: Victor Nerses, Project Manager PWR Project Directorate #5 Division of PWR Licensing.A FROM:
Charles E. Rossi, Assistant Director for PWR.A Division of PWR Licensing.A
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, SEABROOK NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1, SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT SUPPLEMENT In acenrdance with a request from the Project Manager, the Engineering Branch i
(PWR-B) has prepared the attached SSER input (Attachment 11 to Sections 5.2.4 and 6.6 addressing the Preservice Inspection (PSI) Prngram for Unit 1.
The staff has evaluated all documentation related to the PSI Program. The SSER identifies two outstanding issues:
(1) the ultrasonic testing of the cast stainless steel welds in the reactor coolant piping and (2) requests for relief from impractical ASME Code preservice requirements.
J
(
A SALP input is enclosed as Attachment 2.
Charles E. Rossi, Assistant Director for PWR-A Division of PWR Licensing _A Attachments: As stated cc:
G. Lainas DISTRIBUTION:
D. Crutchfield Docket File W. Minners PBE8 Reading R. Bosnak MHum V. Noonan Hum CHRON J. Durr, Region I ERossi j rq WJohnston f
1
Contact:
M. Hum, PWR-B/EB CCheng X-28188 ESullivan SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE SHEETS
- RR,allard
^
FC
- PWR-B/EB
- PWR.B/EB
- PWR-B/EB
- PWR-A/EB
- PWR-
- PWR-A/AD
. : _g_ c.
AME :MHum:ws
- CYCheng
- WJohnston
- ESullivan
- RBall
- tERoss ATE :3/ /86
- 3/ /86
- 3/ /86
- 3/ /86
- 3/ti/86
- 3/1 786 OEEJCIAL-RECORILCOPY w
LU G 40%#
Docket No. 50-443 2
\\
MEMORANDUM FOR: Victor Nerses, Project Manager PWR Pro.iect Directorate #5 I
nivision of WD Licensing-A FROM:
Charles E. Rossi, Assistant Director i
for PWP-A Division of PWR Licensing-A
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, SEABROOK NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1. SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT SUPPLEMENT In accordance with a request from the Project Manager, the Engineering Branch (PWR.B) has prepared the attached SSER input (Attachment 1) to Sections 5.2.4 and 6.6 addressing the Preservice Inspection (PSIl Program for Unit 1.
The staff has evaluated all documentation related to the PSI Procram. The SSER identifies two outstanding issues:
(1) the ultrasonic testing of the cast stainless steel welds in the reactor coolant piping and (21 recuests from relief from impractical ASME Code preservice requirements.
A SALP input is enclosed as Attachment 2.
Charles E. Rossi, Assistant Director l
for PWR-A Division of PWR Licensing _A j
i Attachments: As stated cc:
G. Lainas DISTRIBUTION:
I D. Crutchfield Docket File I
W. Minners PBEB Reading l
R. Bosnak MHum V. Noonan Hum CHRON J. Durr, Region I ERossi WJohnston
Contact:
M. Hum, PWR-B/EB CCheng X.28188 ESullivan RBallard SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE SHEET *
~
3FC
- PWR 8/EB
- PWR-5/EB
- PWR-B/EE5
- PWR-A/
WR-A
- PWR-A/AD CAME :MHum:ws
- CYCheng
- WJohnston : ESulliva
- RBall
- CERossi m_...:........__.:..____..____:............:.._____....:..__........:._______..__:...________
SATE :3/ /86
- 3/ /86
- 3/ /86
- 3/lD/86
- 3/22/86
- 3/ /86 l
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY l
Docket No. 50 443 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Victor Nerses, Project Manager l
PWR Project Directorate #5 Division of PWR Licensing A FROM:
Charles E. Rossi, Assistant Director for PWR.A Division of PWR Licensing _A
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, SEABROOK NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1, SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT SUPPLEMENT In accordance with a request from the Project Manager, the Engineering Branch (PWR.B) has prepared the attached SSER input (Attachment 1) to Sections 5.2.4 and 6.6 addressing the Preservice Inspection (PSI) Program for Unit 1.
The staff has evaluated all documentation related to the PSI Program. The SSER identifies two outstanding issues:
(1) the ultrasonic testing of the cast stainless steel welds in the reactor coolant piping and (2) requests from relief from impractical ASME Code preservice requirements.
A SALP input is enclosed as Attachment 2.
Charles E. Rossi, Assistant Director for PWR.A Division of PWR Licensing-A Attachments: As stated cc:
G. Lainas DISTRIBUTION:
D. Crutchfield Docket File l
W. Minners PBEB Reading R. Bosnak MHum V. Noonan Hum CHRON J. Durr, Region I ERossi WJohnston
Contact:
M. Hum, PWR-B/EB CCheng X-28188 ESu111 van RBa11ard 0FC
- PWR.B/EB PW
//B.
V.... :..F_ _[_A5/f:.f...:..__../EB
- PWR-A/EB
- PWR-A/AD
- PWP#3 PWR-A 0.........
ZAME :MHum:ws
- CY hm g
- WJohnston : ESullivan
- RBallard
- CERossi 3....:_...________:.__......__.:.......__..:..__..______:........___.:..__....__.:...........
BATE :3/iv/86
- 3/R/86
- 3//f/86
- 3/ /86
- 3/ /86
- 3/ /86 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY l
l ATTACHMENT 1 PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SEABROOK NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT 1 DOCKET NUMBER 50-443 SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT SUPPLEMENT l
i ENGINEERING BRANCH I
DIVISION OF PWR LICENSING-A 5.2.4 Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Inservice Inspection and Testing This section was prepared with the technical Msistance of DOE contractors from the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory.
5.2.4.3 Evaluation of Compliance with 10 CFR 50.55afg) for Seabrook Unit 1 i
This evaluation supplements conclusions in this section of NUREG-0896 which addresses the definition of ex6nination requirements and the evaluation of compliance with 10 CFR 50.55a(g). NUREG-0896 Supplement 3 previously reported that the staff considered the review of the preservice inspection (PSI) program to be an open issue subject to the Applicant:
1 (1) providing additional plant-specific information about the effectiveness of the ultrasonic (UT) examination of the cast austenitic stainless steel welds in the primary piping systems (2) providing clarification on the visual acuity requirements for personnel performing visual examinations, and (3) submitting all relief requests with supporting technical justifications. The staff has completed the review of the FSAR through Amendment 56 dated November 1985, the Seabrook Unit 1 Balance of Plant (BOP)
PSI Program, Revision 1, dated January'6,1984, the Seabrook Unit 1 Reactor Pressure Vessel PSI Program Plan, Revision 3, dated March 15, 1984, the Supplemental Examination Program Plan (SEPP) for Seabrnok Unit 1, Revision 0, dated November 25, 1985, and the letter from the Applicant dated December 20, 1985 responding to the outstanding issues.
l l
l l
7 l
The staff recognized that the ultrasonic examination of the cast stainless steel fittings and components in the primary piping
)
i system may be difficult. However, a review of the available documentation indicated that appropriate calibration standards were not included in the PSI Program.
In SSER 3 the staff determined that the Applicant should attempt and document a preservice inspectinn on all welds with the best available instrumentation with straight beam and angle beam techniques in accordance with Section XI requirements.
Attachment A to the December 20, 1985 submittal contains the Applicant's response, which states that the welds will be UT examined and the examination results will be documented as part of the 80P PSI Program.
In support of the UT examination, cast stainless steel material has been acquired and fabricated into l
calibration standards. A UT procedure to examine the cast stainless steel welds is being developed by the Applicant and will be made available for staff review.
The staff has requested a meeting and specific demonstration at the plant site to detemine the effectiveness of the Applicant's UT examinations using the cualified procedures on actual plant welds. The results of this meeting will be reported in a future SER l
supplement, i
)
The Applicant har, committed to revise Visual Examination Procedure 80A647A to state that visual examination personnel shall be certified in accordance with the latest revision of NES Document No. 80A9069 and at least one member of a visual-
)
examination team shall be certified to at least Level II. The staff considers this issue resolved.
4
. The specific areas where the Code requirements cannot be met will be identified after the examinations are performed. The j
Applicant has committed to identify all plant-specific areas where the Code requirements'cannot be met and provide a supporting technical justification for requesting relief.
The staff will complete the review and will report its conclusions in a supplement to the SER after the Applicant:
(1) demonstrates the effectiveness' of the ultrasonic testing procedures and instrumentation to examine the cast stainless steel weldments, and (2) submits all relief requests with a supporting technical justification.
The initial inservice inspection program has not been submitted.
This program will be evaluated after the applicable ASME. Code edition and addenda can be determined based on 10 CFR 50.55a(b),
but before the first refueling outage when inservice inspection Commences.
6.6 Inservice Inspection of Class 2 and 3 Components This section was prepared with the technical assistance of DOE contractors from the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory.
6.6.3 Evaluation of Compliance with 10 CFR 50.55afg) for Seabrook Unit 1 This evaluation supplements conclusions in this section of NUREG-0896 which addresses the definition of examination requirements and the evaluation of compliance with
1 l
-4 l
NUREG-0896 Supplement 3 previously reported that the staff considered the review of the preservice inspection (PSI) program to be an open issue subject to the Applicant:
(1) providing additional information about the PSI examination of welds in the Residual Heat Removal (RHR), Emergency Core Cooling l
(ECCS), and Containment Heat Removal (CHR) systems, (21 providing clarification on the visual acuity requirements for personnel performing visual examinations, and (3) submitting all relief requests with supporting technical justifications.
The staff has completed the review of the FSAR through Amendment 56 dated-November 1985, the Seabrook Unit 1 Balance of Plant (BOP) PSI Program, Rev{sion 1, dated January 6,1984, the Supplemental Examination Program Plan for Seabrook Unit 1, Revision 0, dated November 25, 1985, and the letter from the Applicant dated December 20, 1985 responding to the outstanding issues.
Att chment A to the December 20, 1985, submittal contains the Applicant's response with regards to volumetric examination of a representative sample of welds in the RHR, ECC, and CHR systems.
In lieu of revising the BOP PSI Program, the Applicant has developed a Supplemental Examination Program Plan (SEPP) dated November 25, 1985.
In this Plan, Code Case N-408 was used as guidance for selecting welds to be UT examined in those portions of Reactor Makeup Water (RMW), Safety Injection (SI), Containment Building Spray (CBS), and Chemical and Volume Control (CVC)
]
systems which had been exempted from examinations based on the l
Section XI exclusion criteria contained in Paragraph IWC-1220.
(
The Applicant has stated that for the systems identified above, approximately 15% of the welds in each system have been selected for the SEPP preservice inspection and that this constitutes twice the number of weld inspections required by Code Case' N-408. The staff has reviewed the SEPP and determined that the
. selection of welds for PSI satisfies the inspection requirements of General Design Criteria 36, 39, 42, and 45, and that use of Code Case N-408 is acceptable based on the conditions specified l
in NUREG-1.147.
The Applicant has committed to revise Visual Examination Procedure 80A647A to state that visual examination Sersonnel shall be certified in accordance with the latest revision of NES Document No. 80A9069 and at least one member of a visual-examination team shall be certified to at least Level II. The staff considers this issue resolved.
The specific areas where the Code requirements cannot be met will be identified after the examinations are performed. The Applicant has committed to identify all plant-specific areas where the Code requirements cannot be met and provide a supporting technical justification for requesting relief. The staff will report this evaluation in a supplement to the SER after the information is submitted by the Applicant.
The initial inservice inspection program has not been submitted.
This program will be evaluated after the applicable ASME Code j
edition and addenda can be determined based on 10 CFR 50.55 afb),
but before the first refueling outage when inservice inspection commences.
i 1
ATTACHMENT 2 SALP REPORT PLANT:
Seabrook Unit 1 LICENSEE: Public Service Company DOCKET NO.: 50 813 of New Hampshire REVIEWER:
M.-R. Hum LICENSING ACTIVITY:
PSI SSER EVALUATION CRITERIA RATING REMARKS 1.
Management Involvement 2
and Control in Assuring Quality 2.
Approach to Resolution 2
to Technical Issues from a Safety Standpoint 3.
Responsiveness to NRC 2
Initiatives 4.
Enforcement History NA l
5.
Reporting and Analysis NA of Reportable Events 6.
Staffing NA