ML20245J806
| ML20245J806 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 06/27/1989 |
| From: | Butler W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Miltenberger S Public Service Enterprise Group |
| References | |
| TAC-69079, NUDOCS 8907030173 | |
| Download: ML20245J806 (5) | |
Text
_ _
pa %9 UNITED STATES y
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,E j
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655 k..... f 8
June 27, 1989 Docket No. 50-354 Mr. Steven E. Miltenberger Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer Public Service Electric & Gas Company Post Office Box 236-Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038
Dear Mr. Miltenberger:
SUBJECT:
INSERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM CATEGORY B-A RELIEF REQUESTS (TAC NO. 69079)
Re:
HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION In our Safety Evaluation Report dated December 11, 1987, the NRC staff concluded that the Hope Creek Generating Station Inservice Inspection (ISI)
Program, Long Term Plan, First 10-Year Interval, Revision 0, was acceptable and in compliance with 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(4).
In the program, the Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G), requested relief from the ASME Code Section-XI examination requirement of Category B-A reactor vessel welds. The requests were not granted pending development of the staff's position on the examination of Category B-A welds.
In a letter dated May 26, 1988,.PSE8G asked that these relief requests remain under consideration until our position was developed and a practical means established for code compliance. The three Code requirements and their L
respective bases for relief were:
L l
a.
Code Requirement:
Section XI, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-A, Item B1.30, I
requiring 100% volumetric examination of the Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) shell-to-flange weld as defined by Figure IWB-2500-4.
Item B1.40 requires both 100% volumetric and surface examinations of the RPV head-to-flange weld as defined by Figure IWB-2500-5.
Basis for Relief:
Shell-to-flange weld: The flange configuration prohibits scanning from the flange side of the weld. Thermocouple pads limit scanning from the shell side of the weld in two regions. Approximately 97%
l of the weld length is accessible for scanning, and approximately l
92% of the Code-required volume will be examined with at least one angle-beam component.
l DF*/
I 8907030173 890627 PDR ADOCK 05000354 Q
o s
t i,
Head-to-flange weld: The flange configuration prohibits scanning from the flange side of the weld. 100% of the weld length is 1
accessible for scanning, and approximately 88% of the Code-required volume will be examined with at least one angle-beam component.
b.
Code Requirement:
+
Section XI, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-A, Item B1.11 and.81.12 require a 100% volumetric examination of the Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) circumferential and longitudinal shell welds as defined by figures IWB-2500-1 and IWB-2500-2, respectively.
Basis for Relief:
The design of the RPV includes nozzles, welded insulation pads, support skirt attachments, and other geometric constraints that prevent a 100% ultrasonic examination nf the subject RPV welds.
l There is a 2% volumetric limitation as a result of interface noise at the sound beam entry at the outside vessel surface.
For eleven of the twenty subject welds this is the only examination limitation.
c.
Code Requirement:
Section XI, Table IWB-2500-1, Examination Category B-A, Item Bl.21 and 81.22 require a 100% volumetric examination of the Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) circumferential and meridional head welds as defined by Figure IWB-2500-3.
Basis for Relief:
The design of the RPV lower head support skirt attachment limits scanning in one location on each of the lower head meridional welds and the proximity of the control rod drive mechanisms limits scanning from below the lower head dome circumferential weld but does not significantly impact coverage.
The only restriction for the eight closure head meridional welds and the dome circumferential weld is the 2% volumetric limitation, as a result of interface noise at the sound beam entry at the outside surface of the vessel head.
The staff has re-evaluated its position on the examination of the above Category B-A welds and has concluded that the requirements of the Code are impractical due to RPV design constraints.
Compliance with the specific requirements of Section XI would require redesign or replacement of components and a baseline examination of the new components. The limited Section XI volumetric examination of the subject welds, along with the Code-required pressure test, ensures an acceptable level of inservice structural integrity.
Relief is therefore granted for relief requests No. 3.1.1.1, 3.1.1.2, 3.1.1.3, 4
I:,
,)
j I
! Table 1 Safety Evaluation Report dated December 11, 1987 pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(i). The relief granted is authorized by law and will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security and is otherwise in the public interest, giving due consideration to the burden on the licensee that could result if the requirements were imposed on the facility.
Our technical evaluation has not identified any practical method by which the existing reactor pressure vessel at the Hope Creek Generating Station can meet the specific requirements of Section XI of the ASME Code. The development of new or improved examination techniques will continue to be monitored. When improvements are achieved, the Commission may require that they bo incorporated in the examination requirements of the Hope Creek inservice inspection program.
Sincerely, Walter R. Butler, Director j
Project Directorate I-2 i
Division of Reactor Projects I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc: See next page l
t
[.[
1 ic>-
Mr.' Steven'E. Miltenberger Hope Creek Generating Station Public Service Electric & Gas Co.
I cc:
M. J. Wetterhahn, Esquire Conner & Wetterhahn Suite 1050 1747. Pennsylvania Avenue l
Washington, D.C.
20006 R. Fryling, Jr., Esquire Law Department - Tower SE 80 Park Place Newark, New Jersey 07101 Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 241 Hancocks. Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Mr. S. LaBruna Vice President - Nuclear Operations Nuclear Department P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Mr. J. J. Hagan
')
General Papager - Hope Creek Operations Hope Creek Generating Station P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Mr. B. A. Preston, Panager Licensing and Regulation L
Nuclear Department P.O. Box 236 i
-Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Mr. David M. Scott, Chief Bureau of Nuclear Engineering Division of Environmental Quality i
Department of Environmental Protection f
l State of New Jersey l
CN 411 1
Trenton, New Jersey 08625 l
1 l
I Table 1 Safet Evaluation Report dated December 11, 1987 pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(i. The relief granted is authorized by law and will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security and is otherwise in the public interest, giving due consideration to the burden on the licensee that could result if the requirements were imposed on the facility.
Our technical evaluation has not identified any practical method by which the existing reactor pressure vessel at the Hope Creek Generating Station can meet the specific requirements of Section XI of the ASME Code. The development of i
new or improved examination techniques will continue to be monitored. When improvements are achieved, the Commission may require that they be incorporated in the examination requirements of the Hope Creek inservice inspection program.
Sincerely,
/s/
Walter R. Butler, Director Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc: See next page DISTRIBUTION:
- Docket-File.
NRC PDR Local PDR PDI-2 Reading TMurley JSniezek JPartlow CRossi SVarga BBoger WButler M0'Brien (2)
CShiraki SBrown 0GC, CYCheng EJordan BGrimes TMeek (4)
ACRS (10)
GPA/PA ARM /LFMB Previously concurred *
[ MILT LETTER]
G-PDI PDI-2/PM*
PDI-2/D OGC*
)
b"Md'h{fLA en CShira ki:tr yButler MYoung 0/J/89 06/05/89 h/J7/89 06/14/89
-_