ML20248F236
| ML20248F236 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 10/03/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20248F227 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8910060291 | |
| Download: ML20248F236 (2) | |
Text
g g4 E3hig fo UNITED STATES 8-g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n
4
-E' WASHING TON, D. C. 20555 4
4.....
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION REQUEST FOR EXEMPTI_0N FROM 10 CFR PART 50 APPENDIX J LEAK RATE TEST - CORE SPRAY FULL FLOW TEST WELD REPAIR JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-333
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By "JPN-89-062, Forwards Application for Amend to License DPR-59,revising Tech Specs to Reflect Exemption from 10CFR50,App J Re Containment Leak Rate Testing to Permit Repair of Weld 10-14-884A on [[system" contains a listed "[" character as part of the property label and has therefore been classified as invalid. Test Return Line|letter dated September 28, 1989]], Power Authority of the State of New York, the licensee for James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant, requested a one-time exemption from Section IV.A of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 to allow repair of Weld No. 10-14-884A on the "B" Core Spray System full flow test pipe connected to the primary. containment suppression chamber without performing a leak rate test following the repair.
In lieu of a Type A, Type B or Type C test, the licensee proposed an alternate testing program consisting of 100 percent radiography, surface examination, and in-service flow test of the subject piping to ensure its leak tighttass.
2.0 EVALUATION As part of the Inservice Inspection Program conducted during the current mid-cycle maintenance outage, the licensee discovered the presence of a slag inclusion within Weld No. 10-14-884A on the "B" Core Spray System test return pipe (10"-W23-152-98) to the Primary Containment Suppression Chamber.
In accordance with the requirements of ASME Section XI and ANSI B-31.1-1967 the weld has been re) aired and reinspected. The weld is located on a section of piping between t1e Core Spray test return valve 14MOV-26B and the primary containment pressure suppression chamber shell and is part of the primary containment pressure boundary.
Although this type of repair to the containment pressure boundary is not specifically discussed in Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50, the licensee j
considers, and the staff agrees, that the intent of the regulation is that a Type A,. Type B, or Type C leak rate test, as applicable, be conducted.
However, because of the location of the weld repair, a Type B or C test is not applicable. Also, because of the setup and testing time involved, the significant delay it would have on plant startup, ard in consideration of the equivalent level of protection provided by the alternate tests, a Type A l
Primary Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test is not justifiable.
l The staff has reviewed the licensee's alternate testing program of 100 percent radiography, surface examination, and in-service flow test involving the subject piping and concluded that these tests are sufficient to assure the structural and leak tight integrity of the subject piping. Therefore, the staff concludes that these non-destructive examinations of the weld meets the s9100602{jgjj,88$33 q
ew m
a P
f 4
2 intent of Section IV.A of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50, which is to assure that modifications to the containment pressure boundary are leak tight.
It is recomended that the licensee's one-time exemption request from Section IV.A of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 be approved. The licensee has further committed to perform a Type A test during the refueling outage. in 1990.
3.0
SUMMARY
On the basis of the testing performed by the licensee to ensure the adequacy of the repair to the weld in the "B" Core Spray full flow test pipe to the Suppression Chamber, and in consideration of the problems involved with performing a leak rate test, and in recognition that the repairs and subsequent testing is in conformance with the applicable ASME and ANSI codes, the staff concludes that the licensee's request for a one-time exemption from the testing requirements of Section IV.A of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 for the weld repair during the remainder of the present operating cycle is acceptable. The weld repair will be included in the tests to be' performed during the 1990 refueling outage.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
. Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21, 51.32 and 51.35, and environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact was published in the Federal Register on October 3, 1989 (54 FR 40759).
Accordingly, based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission has determined that issuance of this amendment will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
5.0 CONCLUSION
We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety (2) such activitiesof the pub be endangered by operation in the pro)osed manner, and will be conducted in compliance with t1e Commission's regulations and the issuance 6f this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated:
PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTOR:
D. LaBarge l
l