ML082260367

Containment Inservice Inspection Program First Interval, Third Period, Owner'S Activity Reports

ML082260367
Person / Time
Site:	Wolf Creek
Issue date:	08/06/2008
From:	Flannigan R Wolf Creek
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RA 08-0074
Download: ML082260367 (13)

Text

'CREEK OPERATING CORPORATION Richard D. Flannigan August 6, 2008 Manager Regulatory Affairs RA 08-0074 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555

References:

1) Letter ET 95-0112, dated October 31, 1995, from R. C. Hagan, WCNOC, to USNRC

2) Letter WO 95-0189, dated December 27, 1995, from 0. L.

Maynard, WCNOC, to USNRC

3) Letter dated February 9, 1996, from USNRC to N. S. Cams, WCNOC

Subject:

Docket No. 50-482: Containment Inservice Inspection Program First Interval, Third Period, Owner's Activity Reports Gentlemen:

This submittal provides the Owner's Activity Reports (OARs) for the third period of the first interval of the Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (WCNOC) Containment Inservice Inspection Program. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code Case N-532, "Alternative Requirements to Repair and Replacement Documentation Requirements and Inservice Summary Report Preparation and Submission as Required by IWA-4000 and IWA-6000," requires that an Owner's Activity Report (Form OAR-i) be prepared and certified upon completion of each refueling outage. Additionally, each Form OAR-1 prepared during an inspection period shall be submitted following the end of the inspection period.

In References 1 and 2, WCNOC requested use of ASME Code Case N-532 in lieu of current ASME Section Xl reporting requirements. In Reference 3, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) concluded that the proposed alternative to use Code Case N-532 and the clarifications contained within References 1 and 2 provided an acceptable level of quality and safety and approved the use of Code Case N-532 for use at Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS).

- Oq 7 P.O. Box 411 / Burlington, KS 66839 / Phone: (620) 364-8831 An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/HCNVET

RA 08-0074 Page 2 of 2 The enclosures provide the Owner's Activity Reports (Form OAR-i) for the timeframe of May 20, 2005 through May 14, 2008. This timeframe constitutes operational cycles 15 and 16 of the third period of the first interval of the WCNOC Containment Inservice Inspection Program. The enclosed OAR-1 Forms (Report No. WCRE-11, I1-P3-RF15 and Report No. WCRE-11, I1-P3-RF16) correspond to these cycles.

There are no commitments contained within this letter.

If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at (620) 364-4117 or Ms. Diane Hooper at (620) 364-4041.

Sincerely, Richard D. Flannigan RDF/rlt Enclosures I - Form OAR-i, Report No. WCRE-11, I1-P3-RF15 II - Form OAR-i, Report No. WCRE-11, I1-P3-RF16 cc: E. E. Collins (NRC), w/e V. G. Gaddy (NRC) w/e B. K. Singal (NRC), w/e Senior Resident Inspector (NRC), w/e

1:0(RM ()Al(-I t )WNEICS.' AI %'TIVH I ll'4*IOI I<C.I*I N111h11r

( )il Wolf Creck Nuclear O)perating Corporation, 1550 Oxen Lane No ielist. e  ; Iudtiyhor. Kansas 60X839

( Name and Addrless ott )wner)

I il: \Voli ( reek ( iiatiitg Staition, 1550 Oxen lane Northeast, titlingliN Kan adhs s f(193()

(Name anid Address il 'Planti) t Jnit No. I Commercial servicC date 9-3-85 R*efueling outage no. 15 (If applicable) tiurrcll ilspection interval I't Interval for the Containment Inservice Inspection P'rogramn Ist. 2nd. 3rd. 4th. other)

Cmirreiit inspection period 3"n period for the Containment Inservice Inspection Program tIst. 2nd. 3rd)

Edition and Addenda of Section XI applicable to the inspection plan 1998 edition with no addenda Date and revision of inspection plan WCRE-lI I Rev. 3, dated 9-21-2006 Edition and Addenda of Section XI applicable to repairs and replacements, if different than the inspection plan 1992 edition with 1992 addenda CERTIFICATE OF CONFORMANCE I certify that the statements made in this Owner's Activity Report are correct, and that the examinations, tests, repairs, replacements, evaluations, and corrective measures represented by this reort conform to the requirements of Section XI.

Certificate of Authorization No. N/A Expiration Date N/A (If aonlicable)

Signed Dennis E. Tougaw "%I.A/ _ P Engineer Date January 25, 2007 Oýnir or Owner's Deggnee, Title CERTIFICATE OF INSERVICE INSPECTION I, the undersigned, holding a valid commission issued by the National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors and the State or Province of Kansas and employed by The Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company of Connecticut of Hartford, Connecticut have inspected the items described in this Owner's Activity Report, during the period May 20, 2005 to November 10, 2006 , and state that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the Owner has performed all activities represented by this report in accordance with the requirements of Section XI.

By signing this certificate neither the Inspector nor his employer makes any warranty, expressed or implied, concerning the examinations, tests, repairs, replacements, evaluations and corrective measures described in this report. Furthermore, neither the inspector nor his employer shall be liable in any manner for any personal injury or property damage or a loss of any kind arising from or connected with this inspection.

- Commissions KS#594 A, N, I ln*' iors Signature National Board, State, Province, and Endorsements Date This form (E00127) may be obtained from the Order Dept., ASME. 22 I.aw Drive. Box 2300. Fairfield, NJ 07007-2300 0.4A-11-1/3-1k1"-/1

/ ',ale( I H'4 .

'I'A ItLE I

,AIIS'I'RA(1 ()01' IXAM INATI(ONS AN) TI:STS Complction of ],F-15 (I-1, P-3)

Total Total Total Total Exiaininntions Examinations Examinations Examinations Credited (%) to Examination Required For Credited for This Credited (%) for Date for the Category The Interval Period* The Period Interval Remarks I'-A 823 5 6 07 'Notc I E-C 8 I 12 50 Note 2 L-A 12. 6 50 100 Note 3 L-B 26 26 100 100 Notes 3, 4

?This column is interpreted to representthe cumulative number of exams performed to date in this period.

Note 1: 100% of the Accessible Surface Areas of Category E-A are required to be inspected each Inspection Period per Table IWE-2500-1

• Note 2: In accordance with IWE-1241, 4 components were reclassified as Category E-C in Period 2 resulting in 8 examinations in this Category being required for the Interval.

Note 3: The IWL components (Categories L-A and L-B) are'examined on a 5 year period basis at this point in the WCGS plant life. The IWL periods in the current Containment Inservice Program Plan correspond to the 15th and 2 0th year anniversary.

Note 4: As permitted by 10 CFR 50.55a, the initial examination of the tendons was conducted in accordance with the existing Tech Spec program. Thus only the tendon examinations after revision of the Tech Specs to utilize IWL (the 20th year anniversary) are listed.

oI4R-/

TIABL~E'2 ITE'IMS WVITH FLANN'S OR RI,;1, ;V ANTI' (N 1)I'll())N ST 'I IAT REIQUI REI) EVA LLATI ONOF() CO NTIINIJEI) SERVICE, I HFaw IFlaw or Relevant Condition Found Examination Item Item D)escription Cha racterization (IWA- l)uring Scheduled Section XI Category Number 3300) Examination or Test (Yes or No)

L-A L I. 12 Tendon Anchorage Areas Small amount of grease Yes of Tendon Access Gallery; leakage noted.

Vertical Grease Caps L-B L2.40 Tendon 22CB; Corrosion The absolute difference Yes Protection Medium between the amount removed and the amount replaced exceeded 10 percent of the tendon net duct volume.

L-B L2.40 Tendon IAC; Corrosion The absolute difference Yes Protection Medium between the amount removed and the amount replaced exceeded 10 percent of the tendon net duct volume.

L-B L2.40 Tendon 46BA Corrosion The absolute difference No II Protection Medium between the amount removed and the amount replaced exceeded 10 percent of the tendon net duct volume.

L-B L2.40 Tendon V65 Corrosion The absolute difference Yes Protection Medium between the amount removed and the amount replaced exceeded 10 percent of the tendon net duct volume.

Attachment I provides further information as required by the Containment Inservice Inspection Program.

OAR-/I

//II-1'3-RI*- 13 I 'C-l.t' .* I! .'

TABLE 3 ABSTRACT OF REPAIRS, REPLACEMENTS, OR CORRECTIVE MEASURES REQUIRED FOR CONTINUED SERVICE Flaw or Relevant Condition Found Repair, During Scheduled Repair/

Replacement, Section XI Replacement Code or Corrective Item Description Examination or Date Plan Class Measure Description of Work Test (Yes/No) Complete Number There were no repairs, replacements, or corrective measures performed on any Class MC or CC items during the period of this report, which were required due to an item containing a flaw or relevant condition that exceeded acceptance criteria.

OAR-I.

1I-P3-RF-i5 Page 4 of 5

Attachment I RF-15 IWLtExamination

1. The condition noted in Table 2 of the absolute difference between the amount removed and the amount replaced exceeding 10 percent of the tendon net duct volume for Tendons 22CB, lAC, 46BA and V65 was evaluated in CCP 11852. The amounts replaced ranged from 10.7%

to 17.35% of the net duct volume. This evaluation noted that the leak-tightness and structural integrity of containment is maintained.

2. All de-tensioned tendons were re-tensioned with acceptable elongations. The re-tensioning force of tendons were within the limit of 10% from that recorded during the last measurement.

3. The sheathing filler (grease) samples were tested and found to contain less than 10 percent by weight of chemically combined water (Chlorides, Nitrates, and Sulfides) or the presence of free water.

4. All tendons were resealed and re-greased.

5. During genekial visual examination of the containment surface, no grease leakage was on the containment surface. However; as noted in Table 2, grease leakage was noted on the tendon anchorage areas of the grease caps in the Tendon Access Gallery. This was evaluated in SWO 05-275375-001. The evaluation finds that this small leakage is not a non-conformance.

6. Tendon 46BA is not part of original 2 0 th year tendon inspection scope. The tendon was regreased due to the grease can being changed out at this location.

OA R- I l1-1P3-AP-. 5 l 'ag' .3 atl.

FORM OAR-I OWNER'S ACTIVITY REPORT Report Number WCRE-1 I, 11-P3-RF-16 Owner Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, 1550 Oxen Lane Northeast, Burlington, Kansas 66839 (Name and Address of Owner)

P,1-nt Wolf Creek Generating Station, 1550 Oxen Lane Northeast, Burlington, Kansas 66839 (Name and Address of Plant)

Unit No. I Commercial service date 9-3-85 Refueling outage no. 16 (If applicable)

Current inspection interval I` Interval for the Containment Inservice Inspection Program (1st. 2nd. 3rd. 4th. other)

Current inspection period 3nd period for the Containment Inservice Inspection Program N st. 2nd. 3rd)

Edition and Addenda of Section XI applicable to the inspection plan 1998 edition with no addenda Date and revision of inspection plan WCRE- I1 Rev. 3, dated 9-21-2006 Edition and Addenda of Section Xl applicable to repairs and replacements, if different than the inspection plan 1992 edition with 1992 addenda CERTIFICATE OF CONFORMANCE I certify that the statements made in this Owner's Activity Report are correct, and that the examinations, tests, repairs, replacements, evaluations, and corrective measures represented by this report conform to the requirements of Section XI.

Certificate of Authorization No. N/A Expiration Date N/A (If annlicable)

Signed Dennis E. Tougaw " 7 4 rFT ,ý - Engineer Date August 4, 2008 Ovner or Owner's Designdre, Title CERTIFICATE OF INSERVICE INSPECTION 1,the undersigned, holding a valid commission issued by the National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors and the State or Province of Kansas and employed by The Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company of Connecticut of Hartford, Connecticut have inspected the items t

described in this Owner's Activity Report, during the period November 11, 2006 to May 14, 2008 , and state that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the Owner has performed all activities represented by this report in accordance with the requirements of Section XI.

By signing this certificate neither the Inspector nor his employer makes any warranty, expressed or implied, concerning the examinations, tests, repairs, replacements, evaluations and corrective measures described in this report. Furthermore, neither the inspector nor his employer shall be liable in any manner for any personal injury or property damage or a loss of any kind arising from connected with this inspection.

-- ,, " Commissions NB 12882ANII KS 601 Inspector's Signature National Board, State, Province, and Endorsements Date This form (EOO 127) may be obtained from the Order Dept., ASME, 22 Law Drive, Box 2300, Fairfield, NJ 07007-2300, OAR-I I1-P3-RF-16 Page 1 of 6

TABLE 1 ABSTRACT OF EXAMINATIONS AND TESTS Completion of RF-16 (I-1, P-3)

Total Total Total Total Examinations Examinations Examinations Examinations Credited (%) to Examination Required For Credited for This Credited (%) for Date for the Category The Interval Period* The Period Interval Remarks E-A 823 274 33 100 Note 1 E-C 9 5 56 100 Note 2 L-A 12 6 50 100 Note 3 L-B 26 26 100 100 Notes 3, 4

• This column is interpretedto represent the cumulative number of exams performed to date in this period.

Note 1: 100% of the Accessible Surface Areas of Category E-A are required to be inspected each Inspection Period per Table IWE-2500- 1.

Note 2: In accordance with IWE-1241, 4 components were reclassified as Category E-C in Period 2, and another in period 3, resulting in 9 examinations in this Category being required for the Interval.

Note 3: The IWL components (Categories L-A and L-B) are examined on a 5 year period basis at this point in the WCGS plant life. The IWL periods in the current Containment Inservice Program Plan correspond to the 15 th and 20'"year anniversary.

Note 4: As permitted by 10 CFR 50.5 5a, the initial examination of the tendons was conducted in accordance with the existing Tech Spec program. Thus only the tendon examinations after revision of the Tech Specs to utilize IWL (the 2 0 th year anniversary) are listed.

OAR-I I1-P3-RF-16 Page 2 of 6

TABLE 2 ITEMS WITH FLAWS OR RELEVANT CONDITIONS THAT REQUIRED EVALUATION FOR CONTINUED SERVICE Flaw Flaw or Relevant Condition Found Examination Item Item Description Characterization (IWA- During Scheduled Section XI Category Number 3300) Examination or Test (Yes or No)

E-A El. II Piping Penetration P-35 Corrosion wall loss was Yes surface identified on containment penetration. The nominal wall thickness is 0.432 inch.

The penetration wall was reduced to 0.366 inch in an area of 1 inch by 2 inch.

E-C E4. I. Liner of sump at 90 Isolated pitting in the liner Yes degrees surface. The maximum dimension of the observed pitting was less than 1/32 inch in depth and 3/8 inch in diameter.

E-C E4.11 Liner of sump at 270 Isolated pitting in the liner Yes degrees surface. The maximum dimension of the observed pitting was less than 1/16 inch in depth and 1/4 inch in diameter.

E-C E4. 11 Incore tunnel sump liner Numerous pits identified in Yes the liner. The pit depths ranged from less than 1/16 inch up to a maximum of 0.226 inch.

Attachment 1 provides further information as required by the Containment Inservice Inspection Program.

OAR-I II-P3-RF-16 Page 3 of 6

TABLE 3 ABSTRACT OF REPAIRS, REPLACEMENTS, OR CORRECTIVE MEASURES REQUIRED FOR CONTINUED SERVICE Flaw or Relevant Condition Found Repair, During Scheduled Repair/

Replacement, Section XI Replacement Code or Corrective Item Description Examination or Date Plan Class Measure Description of Work Test (Yes/No) Complete Number MC Repair Incore Tunnel Sump Liner Plate Corrosion pits in the liner plate in the Yes Note A 2008-043 Containment Incore Tunnel Sump were corrected by repair activity.

Note A: The field work of the plant repair activity was completed during RFI6, which ended May 14, 2008. A Nonconformance was identified during documentation review.

The nonconformance resolution and documentation completion are still in process.

OAR-1 I1-P3-RF-16 Page 4 of 6

Attachment I RF-1 6 IWE Examination Revealing Flaw or Area Of Degradation Exceeding Acceptance Standards Flaws on Piping Penetration P-36

1) Description of flaw or area, including the extent of degradation, and the conditions that led to the degradation.

Corrosion and pitting was noted on the auxiliary building side of Penetration P-35. The area of wall loss was located at the bottom of the penetration in an area of approximately 1 inch by 2 inch. The nominal wall of 0.432 inch was reduced to 0.366 inch in this area. The corrosion that led to the wall reduction was caused by the auxiliary building side of the penetration being uncoated, combined with dampness and moisture in the penetration. The penetration has since had a coating applied.

2) The acceptability of each flaw or area.

The penetration area of reduced thickness was acceptable for continued service, as sufficient wall thickness exists for the penetration to perform its function.

3) A description of necessary corrective actions.

No corrective actions were necessary. This penetration will be monitored under the augmented examination category of the IWE program.

Reference WO 08-304986-001 and COP 12688 Flaws in Liner of the Sump at 90 Degrees

1) Description of flaw or area, including the extent of degradation, and the conditions that led to the degradation.

Isolated pitting was found in the liner of the sump at 90 degrees. The pitting was located on the vertical walls near the water level surface, approximately 14 inches above the sump liner floor. One pitted area was also located on the sump floor. The maximum dimensions of the pitting were less than 1/32 inch in depth and 3/8 inch in diameter.

Degradation of the surface coating by aging and perhaps localized damage, combined with being normally wet, has led to this relatively small amount of corrosion.

2) The acceptability of each flaw or area.

The areas were acceptable for continued service as sufficient thickness of the liner remains at the bottom of the pits to maintain the liner plate function.

3) A description of necessary corrective actions.

The areas with the degraded coating were cleaned and recoated. This sump liner will be monitored under the augmented examination category of the IWE program.

Reference WO 08-305796-001 and CCP 12751 Flaws in Liner of the Sump at 270 Degrees

1) Description of flaw or area, including the extent of degradation, and the conditions that led to the degradation.

Isolated pitting was found in the liner of the sump at 90 degrees. The pitting was located on the vertical walls near the water level surface, approximately 14 inches above the sump liner floor. The maximum dimensions of the pitting were less than 1/16 inch in depth and 1/4 inch in diameter. Degradation of the surface coating by aging and perhaps localized damage, combined with being normally wet, has led to this relatively small amount of corrosion.

2) The acceptability of each flaw or area.

The areas were acceptable for continued service as sufficient thickness of the liner remains at the bottom of the pits to maintain the liner plate function.

OAR-I 1I-P3-RF-16 Page S of 6

3) A description of necessary corrective actions.

The areas with the degraded coating were cleaned and recoated. This sump liner will be monitored under the augmented examination category of the IWE program.

Reference WO 08-305603-001 and CCP 12733 Flaws in Liner of the Incore Tunnel Sump

1) Descriptionof flaw or area,including the extent of degradation,and the conditions that led to the degradation.

Numerous pits were found in the liner of the incore tunnel sump. The most widespread pitting was located on the liner floor. Pitting and coating degradation was also identified, to a lesser degree, on the walls of the liner. However, the deepest pit was located on a liner wall, 1 /2 inch above the floor. The depth of the pits ranged from less than 1/16 inch up to a maximum of 0.226 inch. Degradation of the surface coating by aging and perhaps localized damage, combined with being normally wet, has led to this corrosion and pitting.

2) The acceptability of each flaw or area.

The pits with a depth of less than 0.150 inch were acceptable for continued service, as sufficient thickness of the liner remained to maintain the liner plate function.

3) A description of necessary corrective actions.

Eight of the pits were identified to have a depth of 0.150 inch or deeper. These were repaired by installing pipe caps, designed and installed as penetrations, over these areas (this repair is listed in Table 3). The installed pipe caps, and all areas with degraded coating, were cleaned and recoated. This sump liner will be monitored under the augmented examination category of the IWE program.

Reference WO 08-306055-006 and CCP 12758.

OAR-I II-P3-RF-16 Page 6 of 6