ML20247P550

Forwards Request for Addl Info on Proposed Tech Specs Change Re Visual Insp of High Energy Piping.Listed Concerns Based on Review of Bechtel Calculation 17322-S5,Rev 1

ML20247P550
Person / Time
Site:	Pilgrim
Issue date:	06/01/1989
From:	Mcdonald D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Bird R BOSTON EDISON CO.
References
TAC-61634, NUDOCS 8906060203
Download: ML20247P550 (3)

Text

_ __ _ ._ ._

June 1,1989 f .

Docket No. 50-293 Mr. Ralph G. Bird Senior Vice President - Nuclear Boston Edison Company Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station RFD#1, Rocky Hill Road Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - PROPUSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGE RELATING TO VISUAL INSPECTION OF HIGH ENERGY PIPING

REFERENCE:

TAC Number 61634 By letter dated May 23, 1986, you proposed changes to the Pilgrim Nuclear

~

Power Station Technical Specifications. The proposed changes delete the requirement to perform monthly visual inspections of high energy piping outside of primary containment while the station is operating.

During a telephone conference call on October 1, 1987, the NRC staff requested clarification on the information provided in your submittal. In addition, discussions relating to Bechtel Calculation 17322-55, Rev.1, were held. In order to complete our evaluation, we request you provide the information discussed during the conference call and respond to the request for information concerning'the Bechtel Calculation. We request this information be provided within 30 days.

The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.

Sincerely,

' Driginal signed by.

Daniel G. Mcdonald, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-3 Division of Reactor Projects I/II

Enclosure:

g$o As stated ao

,gj cc: See next page mo cyg DISTRIBUTION ~: Docket 3 E11e, NRC& Local PDRs, PDI-3 r/f, SVarga, BBoger, 28 MRushbrook, DMcDonald,' 0GC, EJordan, BGrimes, ACRS(10), RWessman, l o

_g JWiggins,Rgn.I, CPTa , GBagch

$" h6/ brook 89 D ' nald:mw 6/)/89 essma 6/\/89

g ..

d -

'f b ( -

Mr. Ralph G. Bird .

Boston Edison Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station I

cc:

Hr.' K. L..Highfill .Mr. Ralph G. Bird Station Director Senior Vice President - Nuclear -

Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Boston Edison. Company-RFD #1 Rocky Hill Road. Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station

- Plymouth -Massachusetts 02360 RFD#1, Rocky Hill Road Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360 Resident Inspector's Office' Mr. Richard N. Swanson, Manager U..S.- Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Engineering Department Post Office Box 867 Boston Edison Company Plymouth,. Massachusetts 02360 25 Braintree Hill Park

'Braintree, Massachusetts ~ 02184 Chairman, Board: of- Selectmen 11 Lincoln Street Ms. Elaine D. Robinson Plymouth, Massachusetts '02360 Nuclear Information Manager ,

Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station '

Office of the Commissioner RFD #1, Rocky Hill Road Massachusetts Department of Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360 Environmental Quality Engineering .'

One Winter Street Charles V. Barry Boston, Massachusetts 02108 Secretary of Public Safety Executive Office of Public Safety Office of the Attorney General' One Ashburton Place One Ashburton Place Boston, Massachusetts 02108 20th Floor '

Boston, Massachusetts 02108 Mr. Robert M.' Hallisey, Director

~

Radiation. Control Program  ;

Massachusetts Department of Public Health 150 Tremont' Street,-2nd Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02111 Regional Administrator, Regior I U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l 475'Allendale Road King of Prussia, Penns.ylvania 19406 Mr. James D. Keyes Re,, 'latory Affairs and Programs Group Lt. der Boston Edison Company 25 Braintree Hill Park Braintree, Massachusetts 02184 l

1

m.. f p .

ENCLOSURE J,. '

4f"*,. ..

REQUEST FOR-ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON HIGH ENERGY PIPING PROPOSED T.S. CHANGE

$ PILGRIM NPS i

Thefollowingconcernsarebasedonreview.ofBechtelCalculat$1on17322-55  !

Rev. 1.

1. On sheet No. 4-under item: Pressure load on floor. It'is indicated that ,

the unit pressure on'a-hatch cover is less than the unit weight of the hatch cover and therefore the floor is considered to be adequate with respect to pressure. Because in the figure shown on sheet No. 3 there is also a larger door opening.on the floor, explain the reason for not-considering the pressure on this door.

2. . -On sheet 4 under item: Temperature on floor. Stresses'due'to the temperature load are calculated by assuming a linear temperature gradient-

-as well as an equilateral triangle gradient and they are found to be 2587 and 3105 psi respectively. On the basis of this calculation, it was concluded that the stress calculation is not conservative. Computations on the basis of concrete thermal strain and thermal conduction were then made. From the results of these computations it was concluded that the

thermal load doec not produce significant stresses in the slab. The two conclusions appear to be contradictory. A clarification-should be-

, provided.

3. The break of high energy piping is' initially very violent and may involve an explosion and missiles. Therefore it cannot be represented by a steady state pressure, temperature and jet force as used in the calculation.

Indicate'if and how the initial state of the break was considered.

'4. In your section of missile loads, missiles are defined as valve stems, thermowells, etc. Since the break of the high energy piping may involve fragmented pieces of the pipe shell, indicate if such missiles were.

considered.

5. The high energy piping break involves pressure, temperature and jet loads in addition to dead, live and earthqua(e loads. However in your consideration of this event, each load effect is considered separately.

without any combination of loads. Provide your rationale for not combining the loads.

l

/ ,$

_ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _