ML20128L617

Discusses Core Spray Sys Insp Conducted at Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station

ML20128L617
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	10/10/1996
From:	Eaton R NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Roche M GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
References
TAC-M96692, NUDOCS 9610150147
Download: ML20128L617 (4)

Text

S'~~Oh yw/aeta%t UNITED STATES

1. E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f WASHINGTON, D.C. 20666 0001

% ,, # October 10, 1996 I Mr. Michael B. Roche Vice President and Director GPU Nuclear Corporation i

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Post Office Box 388 '

Forked River, New Jersey 08731

SUBJECT:

CORE SPRAY SYSTEM INSPECTION - OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION (TAC NO. M96692) i

Dear Mr. Roche:

The Oyster Creek Generation Station Operating License, paragraph 2.C.5, '

regarding subject inspection requires that authorization be obtained from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff before the plant is restarted l from the refueling outage. By letter dated October 7, 1996, GPU Nuclear submitted the Core Spray System Inspection Program - 16R, Topical Report No.

TR-Il0, Project No. 328382, for NRC staff review.

In your letter, you informed the staff of your intention to supplement your present commitments associated with IE Bulletin (IEB) 80-13, " Cracking in Core Spray Spargers," dated May 12, 1980, during the current refueling outage at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. Specifically, you stated that you performed inspections of your core spray interr.al piping and spargers using the industry guidance contained in the BWR Vessel and Internals Project (BWRVIP) document, " Core Spray Internals Inspection and Flaw Evaluation Guidelines (BWRVIP-18)," dated July 26, 1996.

Using the BWRVIP-18 guidance for the inspection and scope of the core spray internal downcomer piping, all accessible welds were cleaned using a nylon brush and inspected using an enhanced visual inspection (EVT-1) technique capable of achieving a 0.5 mil resolution. All accessible portions of the piping and attachments were visually inspected using a 1.0 mil resolution (CSVT-1) as recommended in IEB 80-13. For the core spray spargers, you cleaned accessible portions of the end cap welds (eight locations) and inspected the welds using enhanced visual examination (EVT-1). The remainder of the spargers were inspected using the CSVT-1 technique which is currently recommended in IEB 80--13.

Because the inspection methods you proposed would focus on areas of the core spray piping and spargers that are more likely to experience intergranular stress corrosion cracking and the proposed inspection methods are equal to or more stringent than those recommended in IEB 80-13, the staff finds that the scope and inspection methods used for the inspection of the core spray internalpipingandspargersattheOysterCreekplantareacceptableforthishtg outage, l

l , 0 i

9 l

_- ._ -- - . - ._ -- - - - - _ = . .- . _ _ . .

I Michael B. Roche O 1

It should be noted that the NRC staff is presently reviewing the acceptability of using BWRVIP-18 generically for all BWRs. While the staff has not identified any major deficiencies in the BWRVIP's technical assessment at this i time, neither has the staff made a determination as to its generic i acceptability. Therefore, you should be aware that if concerns are identified during the staff's generic review of BWRVIP-18, and if you intend to follow the BWRVIP-18 guidance in the future, the NRC staff may request that you also address these concerns on a plant-specific basis.

As a result of your inspections of the core spray internal piping and spargers

this outage, you have concluded that the only confirmed crack in the sparger 1

system is the through-wall crack at 208 degrees that was clamped in 1978. No

change was noted in the crack this outage. You noted that t;ie repair clamp

. appears to be intact and in good condition. One rounded, through-wall 4

indication which you have determined to be a fabrication flaw and was found in

1992 in the toe weld designated L-3A has not changed. No new indications have been identified this inspection.

On the basis of the staff's review of the information provided in the report, the staff concludes that inspection results are acceptable. Therefore, plant '

restart from ICR is authorized. This authorization applies to license condition 2.C.5.  !

Sincerely,  !

,'bftlb on&Id B. E ton, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 1-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Docket No. 50-219 cc

See next page i

4 4

4

Michael B. Roche October 10, 1996

, It should be noted that the NRC staff is presently reviewing the acceptability of using BWRVIP-18 generically for all BWRs. While the staff has not identified any major deficiencies in the BWRVIP's technical assessment at this time, neither has the staff made a determination as to its generic acceptability. Therefore, you should be aware that if concerns are identified during the staff's generic review of BWRVIP-18, and if you intend to follow the BWRVIP-18 guidance in the future, the NRC staff may request that you also address these concerns on a plant-specific basis.

As a result of your inspections of the core spray internal piping and spargers this outage, you have concluded that the only confirmed crack in the sparger system is the through-wall crack at 208 degrees that was clamped in 1978. No change was noted in the crack this outage. You noted that the repair clamp appears to be intact and in good condition. One rounded, through-wall indication which you have determined to be a fabrication flaw and was found in 1992 in the toe weld designated L-3A has not changed. No new indications have been identified this inspection.

On the basis of the staff's review of the information provided in the report, the staff concludes that inspectyy,n results are acceptable. Therefore, plant l restart from 16R is authorized. This authorization applies to license condition 2.C.5.

Sincerely,  !

Original signed by:

Ronald B. Eaton, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 1-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-219 cc: See next page DISTRIBUTJ0N: .

Docket File ' -

PUBLIC PDl-3 Plant SVarga JZwolinski JStolz CJamerson REaton DTerao OGC ACRS PEselgroth, RI DOCU G:

1. ........ NAME:\ EAT.ON\M96692.LTR

.. MENT . . . . c . c.,, . . .u. . ,. r . c.,, . s .,, s ,. . ,. . u.....

0FFICE PDl-2:PM (/ PD3-3:LA l C. PDl-E:D l l l NAME REaton d CJamerson n h , JStolz't3 ~

DATE 10//v /96 10/to/96 ')7 10/10/96 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY

p M. Roche Oyster Creek Nuclear I GPU Nuclear Corporation Generating Station cc:

Ernest L. Blake, Jr., Esquire Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 2300 N Street, NW.

l Washington, DC 20037 l Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road i King of Prussia, PA 19406 BWR Licensing Manager GPU Nuclear Corporation 1 Upper Pond Road Parsippany, NJ 07054 Mcyor Lacey Township 818 West Lacey Road Forked River, NJ 08731 1

Licensing Manager l Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Mail Stop: Site Emergency Bldg.

P.O. Box 388 Forked River, NJ 08731 Resident Inspector c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 445 Forked River, NJ 08731 i Kent Tosch, Chief New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Nuclear Engineering l CN 415 Trenton, NJ 08625 t