ML20249B590

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Util Response to GL 92-01, Rev 1,suppl 1, Reactor Vessel Structural Integrity. Licensee Should re-evaluate RPV Weld Chemistry Values and Submits Response within 90 Days of Ltr Receipt

ML20249B590
Person / Time
Site:	Brunswick
Issue date:	06/17/1998
From:	Trimble D NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Keenan J CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO.
References
GL-92-01, GL-92-1, TAC-MA1182, TAC-MA1183, NUDOCS 9806230346
Download: ML20249B590 (6)

Text

-

. .y %

j \-

UNITED STATES j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

. wasmuovon, o.c. mess.esei June 17, 1998 Mr. J. S. Keenan, Vice President Carolina Power & Light Company Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Post Office Box 10429 i Southport, North Carolina 28461

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI) REGARDING REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL INTEGRITY - BOILING WATER REACTORS (BWR) FOR THE BRUNSWICK STEAM ELECTRIC PLANT, UNITS NO.1 AND 2 (TAC NOS.

MA1182 AND MA1183)

Dear Mr. Keennn:

Generic Letter (GL) 92-01, Revision 1, Supplement 1 (GL 92-01, Rev.1, Supp.1), " Reactor Vessel Structural Integrity" was issued in May 1995. This GL requested licensees to perform a review of thei reactor pressure vessel (RPV) structural integrity assessments in order to identify, collect, and report any new data pertinent to the analysis of the structural integrity of their RPVs and to assess the impact of those data on their RPV integrity analyses relative to .

the requirements of Section 50.60 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 50.60),10 CFR 50.61, Appendices G and H to 10 CFR Part 50 (which encompass pressurized thermal shock (PTS) and upper shelf energy (USE) evaluations), and any potential impact on low temperature overpressure (LTOP) limits or pressure-temperature (P-T) limits.

After reviewing your response, the NRC issued you a letter dated December 23,1996, for the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Units 1 and 2. In this letter we indicated that you had submitted the requested information and that you indicated that the previously submitted evaluations remained valid. As a result, the NRC concluded that no additional information regarding the structural integrity of your RPV was available at that time. Following issuance of these letters, the BWR Vessel and Intemals Project (BWRVIP) submitted the report " Update of Bounding Assessment of BWR/2-6 Reactor Pressure Vessel Integrity lasues (BWRVlP-46)." This report included bounding assessments of new data from 1) the Combustion Engineering Owners Group (CEOG) database released in July 1997 which contains all known data for CE fabricated welds in PWR and BWR vessels; 2) Framatome Technologies Incorporated (FTI) analyses of Linde 80 welds which are documented in NRC Inspection Report 99901300/97-01 dated January 28,1998; 3) FTI's analysis of electro-slag welds which was referenced in a Dresden and Quad Cities P-T limits submittal dated September 20,1996; and 4) Chicago Bridge and Iron quality assurance records. New data for one vessel fabricated by Hitachi was also y included in the BWRVIP report. .

The staff is requesting that you re-evaluate the RPV weld chemistry values that you have /O \

previously submitted as part of your licensing basis in light of the information presented in the

' CEOG, FTl and BWRVIP reports. The staff expects that you will assess this new information to g/ l

,_ determine whether any values of RPV weld chemistry need to be revised for your facility.

Therefore, in order to provide a complete response to items 2,3 and 4 of the GL, the NRC.

~

. requests that you provide a response to the enclosed request for additional information within 91506230346 980617 Y P Mt ADOCK 05000324 P PDR '

MOlh @g ~ ,

.. o 2 90 days of receipt of this letter, if a question does not apply to your situation, please indicate

' this in your RAI response along with your technical basis and, per GL 92-01, Rev.1, Supp.1, provide 'a certification that previously submitted evaluations remain valid.

The information provided will be used in updating the Reactor Vessel Integrity Database (RVID). Also, please note that RPV integrity analyses utilizing newly identified data could result in the need for license amendments in order to maintain compliance with 10 CFR Part 50.60, and Appendices G and H to 10 CFR Part 50, and to address any potential impact on P-T limits.

If additional license arnendments or assessments are necessary, the enclosed requests that

- you provide a schedule for such submittals.

If you should have any questions regarding this request, please contact me at (301) 415-2019.

Sincerely, (Original Signed By)

. David C. Trimble, Project Manager

' Project Directorate 11-1 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324

Enclosure:

As stated cc wIencl: See next page l Distribution Z ;j fjie KDempsey A.D. Lee, MSC 0-7D4 PUBLIC i

OGC PD ll-1 RF ACRS J. Zwolinski L. Plisco, Rll

FILENAME - G

\BRUNSWIC\ BRA 1182.RAI -

~! OFFICE PM:PDil-1 LA:PDil-in PD:PDil-1/ fi - /

uw NAME' DTrimbleD7 Dunnington PTKUOk3\y i DATE - 6[/98 - 6//J98 - 64^98 COPY. ho ^

(Yesho YesJNo U OFFICIAL RECORD COPY L

1

Mr. C. S. Hinnant Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Carolina Power & Light Company Units 1 and 2 cc:

Mr. William D. Johnson Ms. Karen E. Long Vice President and Senior Counsel Assistant Attomey General Carolina Power & Light Company State of North Carolina.

Post Office Box 1551 Post Office Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Mr. Jerry W. Jones, Chairman Mr. Robert P. Gruber Brunswick County Board of Commissioners Executive Director Post Office Box 249 Public Staff- NCUC Bolivia, North Carolina 28422 Post Office Box 29520 -

Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0520 Resident inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8470 River Romo Director Southport, North Carolina 28461 Site Operations Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Regional Administrator, Region ll Post Office Box 10429 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Southport, North Carolina 28461 Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85

' Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Mr. William H. Crowe, Mayor City of Southport Mr. Mel Fry, Director 201 East Moore Street Division of Radiation Protection Southport, North Carolina 28461 N.C. Department of Environment l and Natural Resources Mr. Dan E. Summers ,

3825 Barrett Dr. Emergency Management Coordinator  !

Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-7721 New Hanover County Department of Emergency Management  ;

L Mr. J. J. Lyssh Post Office Box 1525 '

i' Plant Manager Wilmington, North Carolina 28402 l

Carolina Power & Light Company L Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Ms. D. B. Alexander l Post Office Box 10429 Manager l Southport, North Carolina 28461 Performance Evaluation and Regulatory Affairs CPB 9 Public Service Commission Carolina Power & Light Company State of South Carolina Post Office Box 1551 Post Office Drawer 11649 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-1551

- Columbia, South Carolina 29211 Mr. K. R. Jury Mr. Milton Shymiock Manager- Regulatory Affairs U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Carolina Power & Light Company Atlanta Federal Center Post Office Box 10429

-61 Forsyth Street, SW, Suite 23T85 Southport, NC 28461-0429 Atlanta, Georgia 30303

.- . a. : .a, - - -- - -

1 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL INTEGRITY Section 1.0. Assessment of Best-Estimate Chemistry The staff recently received the BWRVIP report " Update of Bounding Assessment of BWR/2-6 Reactor Pressure Vessel integrity issues (BWRVIP-46)." ,

Based on this information, in accordance with the provisions of Generic Letter 92-01, Revision 1, Supplement 1, the NRC requests the following:

1. An evaluation of the bounding assessment in the reference above and its applicability to the determination of the best-estimate chemistry for all of your RPV beltline welds.

Based upon this reevaluation, supply the information necessary to completely fill out the data requested in Table 1 for each RPV beltline weld material. If the limiting material for your vessel's P-T limits evaluation is not a weld, include the information requested in Table 1 for the limiting material also.

With respect to your response to this question, the staff notes that some issues regarding the evaluation of the data were discussed in a public mcating between the staff, NEl, and industry representatives on November 12,1997. - A summary cf this meeting is documented in a meeting summary dated November 19,1997, "Meetir.g Summary for November 12,1997 Meeting with Owners Group Representatives and NUI Regarding Review of Responses to Generic Letter 92-01, Revision 1, Supplement 1 Rasponses" (Reference 1). The information in Reference 1 may bu useful in helping you to prepare your response.

In addition to the issues discussed in the referenced meeting, you should also consider what method should be used for grouping sets of chemistry data (in particular, those from weld L _ qualification tests) as being from "one weld" or from multiple welds. This is an important consideration when a mean-of-the-means or coil-weighted ayerage approach is determined to be the appropriate method for determining the best-estimate chemistry, if a weld Mnvelds) l were fabricated as weld qualification specimens by the same manufacturer, within a short time i span, using similar welding input parameters, and using the same coil (or coils in the case of tandem arc welds) of weld consumables, it may be appropriate to consider all chemistry samples from that weld (or welds) as~ samples from "one weld" for the purposes of best-estimate chemistry determination. If information is not available to confirm the aforementioned details, but sufficient evidence exists to reasonably assume the details are the same, the best-estimate chemistry should be evaluated both by assuming the data came from "one weld" and by assuming that the data came from an appropriate number of " multiple welds." A justification

._ should then be pro tided for which assumption was chosen when the best-estimate chemistry '

~

was determined.

l r_________ . _ _ _ _ _ .

. . . . - - - - - - - _ .. - . . - ~. . . - . . .- ..- .

Sechon 2.0. P-T Lirait Evaluation

2. If the limiting material for your plant changes or if the adjusted reference temperature for the limiting material increases as a result of the above evaluations, provide the revised RT, value for the limiting material. In addition, if the adjusted RT, value increased, provide a schedule for revising the P-T limits. The schedule should ensure that compliance with 10 CFR 50 Appendix G is maintained.

Reference l

l 1. Memorandum dated November 19,1997, from Keith R. Wichman to Edmund J. Sullivan,

• Meeting Summary for November 12,1997 Meeting with Owners Group 3 Representatives and NEl Regarding Review of Responses to Generic Letter 92-01, ]

Revision 1, Supplement 1 Responses."

Attachment:

Table 1 l

l e

e

n TL RO rE o t

_ Ta R

A n

p i

r a

M o,

l s o, a

n e

t a

M T, g

t m

s RW l

aT (

)

1 im i

i t

R L I n( 0 1

r o n

/

d g o t n f ow h

c a a e e 1

d dorF wm S H e

l e h i. in E t - C r

- L W e1 d i

W B V M e A P C t s d l

T R e a n )

u q W o dl yF e hc d eatrC nns(

r s

e i a

a t

s gemr F saet o it e l a r o

u q AsMhc Ca na et a f

d e

r F t ad e n mec s n o -

U o h

D cn0") e gn a i

s a I itna l t

a s

u m

r Le1 Ou ime l

i D c s

o elf x( i v i f l r d D n .

eu n I

hs a t

'do o omr f

t e l t ae nf h t

snk euc or e i

i t

a o M BtsN E c s s i

f i l e i s

t b y r

n et a l a

e e r n r

u t snp t

ae dmo i

l A t

c eep a r e nf h t a BtsC o ed t a f

u E t a en f e n o H a mi n e e e m a

M r im he r i a

i r

yl VWt t t W t e l

i is cs P d a Rl oe r e od ud e n l ae ))

1 2 a Fv-W~H ((

D W

~

, i