ML21015A576

Final RAIs for Steam Generator 180 Day Tube Inspection Report

ML21015A576
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	01/14/2021
From:	Jennifer Tobin Plant Licensing Branch 1
To:	Grabnar J Energy Harbor Nuclear Corp
Tobin J
References
EPID L-2020-LRO-0063
Download: ML21015A576 (2)

Text

From: Tobin, Jennifer To: jjgrabnar@energyharbor.com Cc: Lashley, Phil H (EH)

Subject:

Beaver Valley FINAL RAIs for Steam Generator 180 day Tube Inspection Report (EPID L-2020-LRO-0063)

Date: Thursday, January 14, 2021 1:01:00 PM

Dear Mr. Grabnar,

By letter dated October 13, 2020 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems Accession No. ML20287A373), Energy Harbor Nuclear Corporation (the licensee) submitted information summarizing the results of the spring 2020 steam generator (SG) tube inspections performed at Beaver Valley Power Station (Beaver Valley), Unit 2, during refueling outage 21.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commissions (NRC) staff is reviewing your submittal and has determined that additional information is needed to complete its review. The specific requests for additional information (RAI) questions are provided below.

The draft RAIs were transmitted to you via email on January 13th and no clarification call was requested. Thus, these RAIs will be made publicly available. Per your request for an extension, a response to these RAIs is due February 28th.

Thanks and take care!

-Jenny FINAL RAIs The regulatory basis for these information requests is contained in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, GDC 14, 15, 30, 31, and 32; 10 CFR 50.55a; and 10 CFR 50.36.

Technical Specification (TS) 5.6.6.2.1 requires that a report be submitted within 180 days after the initial entry into hot shutdown following SG inspections performed in accordance with TS 5.5.5.2, which requires that an SG Program be established and implemented to ensure SG tube integrity is maintained. To complete its evaluation of the information provided by the licensee, the NRC staff requests the following information.

1. If there are sleeved tubes on the hot leg in rows 1 and 2, please clarify the inspections performed in the straight-leg portion of these tubes.

2. Please provide the following information about the detection for the first time of cold leg thinning at the second cold-leg support plate:

a. Describe how the form of the tube thinning compares to fleet operating experience for cold leg thinning in terms of the apparent mechanism.

b.Describe how the initial detection of this degradation mechanism in a Beaver Valley Unit 2 SG compares with fleet operating experience with respect to factors such as SG age, location, operating conditions, and type and amount of deposits.

c.Describe how an appropriate rate was determined for projecting degradation growth during the current operating cycle.

3. The discussion of tube plugging and repairs for SG21A indicates that sleeves were installed in two tubes following in-situ pressure testing, but the tubes were subsequently plugged based on engineering analysis. Please describe if the analysis would allow for future sleeving of in-situ pressure-tested tubes, and under what conditions, at Beaver Valley Unit 2.