ML19332D649

FOIA Request for Listed Records Re Util Application for Exemption from 10CFR50,App a

ML19332D649
Person / Time
Site:	Crystal River
Issue date:	09/05/1989
From:	Saporito T NUCLEAR ENERGY ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT
To:	NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
References
FOIA-89-392 IEB-87-001, IEB-87-1, NUDOCS 8912050079
Download: ML19332D649 (1)

Text

-

J i

-

l

? n l

NUCLEAR ENERGY ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT j u

g 1202 Sioux Street

• Jupiter, Florida 33458 *(407) 743-0770 Environmental Protection

• involvement

• Utigatiorj

• Information j 81Ll1 1

Executive Director for Operations September 5, Fk6$3M 0F INF0RMATION I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 CIf{$

l Re: Freedom fpr Information Request ihQL)($=(

g Pursuant to the Freedom of Ioformation Act (FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 552),

we request copies of the following documents: '

- .

.

.(a1 Docket No. 50-302, Florida Power Corporation, Crystal River Unit 3 - Licensee's application for exemption (54 FR 24775 - 10 CFR Part 50 Appe ndi x A, General Design Criterion 4) dated December 16, 1980.  !

(br AEC lotter dated December 22, 1972 from A. Giambusso l

-( c f Evaluation report from Florida Power Corporation to the NRC ,

for continued operation of the facility while the identified deficiencies are being corrected which does not constitute a threat to the health and safety of the public. j

,(dr Florida Power Corporation letter to the NRC dated May 24, 1989 requesting a temporary exemption from the requirements or GDC-4 with

• respect to consideration of the environmental and dynamic effects of HELB.

.f e r N R C Bulletin 67-01, Thinning of Pipe Walls in Nuclear Power

'-

Plants (f) Florida Power Corporation plant procedures and operator ,

training materials reguarding i dentification of leaks and compensatory measures in the event of an HELB.

.(g) NRC staff safety evaluation r egar di ng Florida Power Corporation's request for exemption to GDC-4. .

4h) NRC documents relating to any special circumstances for

exemption from GDC-4 as set forth in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(v).

01-) ~ Flori da Power Corporation submi tta l to the NRC dated March 31, 1989 for granting of exemption from GDC-4.

The Nuclear Energy Accountability Project requests that fees be waived, because , finding the information can be considered as primarily benefitting the general public, 5 U.S.C. 552 (a) (4 ) (a) . For any documents or portions that you deny due to a specific FOIA exemption, please provide an index itemizing and describing the documents or portions of documents withheld. The index should provide a detailed' justification of your grounds for claiming each exemption, explaining why each exemption is relevant to the document or portion of -

the document withheld. This index is required under Vauahn v. Rosen i (I), 404 F.2d 820 (D.C. Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 415 U.S. 977 (1974).

I look forward to hearing from you within 10 days as the law stipulates.

'

Sincerely, h

SAPORITB9-392 PDR Thomas J. Saporito, Jr.

Executive Director. NEAP

...-. __-_. ___ . . _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _. _ _ _-

_ _ _ _ .

_ _ _ _ _ ,,,, ,

-.

-

• gnw. ' "

$$!NS No.: 6820 t

- .. OM8 No. : 3150-0011

(' K' NRCB 87-01

-

'

t'NITED STATES FUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION YASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 July 9, 1987

NPC BULLETIN NO. 87-01: THINNING OF PIPE WALLS IN NVCLEAR POWER PLANTS Addressees:

All licensees for nuclear power plants holding an operating license or a construction pennit. '

Purpose:

The purpose of this bulletin is to request that licensees submit infomation i concerning their programs for monitoring the thickness of pipe walls in

'

high-energy single-phase and twn-phase carbon steel piping systems.

Description of Circumstances:

O On December 9, 1986 Unit 2 at the Surry Power Station experienced a cata-strophic failure of a main feedwater pipe, which resulted in fatal injuries -

to four workers. This event was reported in IE Information Notice (IN)86-106 .

"Feedwater Line Break," on December 16,1986; IN 86-106, Supplemant 1 on ,

l February 13, 1987; and IN 86-106, Supplement ", on March 18, 1987. The licensee submitted Licensee' Event Report ILEpi 86-0?0-00 on January 8,1987; l

Revision 1. LER 86-0?0-01, on January 14, 29P7; and Pevision 2. LER 86-020-0?,

,

on March 31, 1987 A comprehensive report entitled "Surry Unit ? Reactor Trip l and Feedwater Pipe Failure Report," was attached to the updated LFP, Revisions ll 1 and ?. The findings of NRC's Augmented Inspection Team were issued on t l February '0,1987, in IE Inspection Report Nos. 50-280/86-42 and 50-081/86-42.

t l Investigation of the accident and exemination of data by the licensee NRC,

'

and others led to the conclusion that failure of the piping was caused by erosion / corrosion of the carbon steel pipe well. Although erosion / corrosion pipe failures have occurred in other carbon steel systems, particularly in H small diameter piping in two-phase systems and in water systems containing l- suspended solids, there have been few previously reported failures in large ,

l diameter systems containing high-purity water. Consistent with general indus-

? try practice, the licensee did not have in place an inspection program for l examining the inickness of the walls of feedwater and condensate piping.

Main feedwater systems, as well as other power conversion systems, are impor-

, tant to safe operation. Failures of active components in these systems, for I example, valves or pumps, or nf passive components such as piping, can result i

'

in undesirable challenges to plant safety systems recuired for safe shutdown and accident mitigation. Failure of high-energy piping, such as feedwater a

W O70?O918~

,9 I .A v

.

.

.

. . .

. . .

. - .-

. . . . . --

_

'

.

'

hP \

NPCB 87-01 i

,, July 9, 1987 e

.- Page 2 of 3

.

g >

\

system piping, can result in complex challenges to operating staff and the l plant because of potential systems interactions of high-energy steam and water '

with other systems, such as electrical distribution, fire protection, and security systems. All licensees have either explicitly or implicitly comitted to maintain the functional capability.of high-energy piping systems that are a i part of the licensing basis for the facility. An important part of this com- i mitment is that piping will be maintained within allowable thickness values.

Actions Requested:

Within 60 days from the receipt of this bulletin, licensees are requested to -

provide the following infonnation concerning their programs for monitoring the wall thickness of pipes in condensate, feedwater, steam, and connected high-energy piping systems, including all safety-related and non-safety-related piping systems fabricated of carbon steel: .

1. Identify the codes or stardards to which the piping was designed and -

fabricated. ,

P. Describe the scope and extent of your programs for ensuring that pipe wall thicknesses ere not reduced below the minimum allowable thickness.

Include in the description the criteria that you have established for:

.

a. selecting points at which to make thickness measurements

b. detenninino bow frequently to make thickness measurements

c. selectino the methods used to make thickness measurements

d. making replacement / repair decisions

3. For liquid-phase systems, state specifically whether the following factors have been considered in establishing your criteria for selecting points at which to monitor piping thickness (Item 2ai:

a. chr

b. pipingmaterial(e.g.le.g.omiumcontent) piping configuration , fittings less than 10 pipe diameters eparti

c. pH of water in the s '

d. system tempera ture (ystem e.o. , between f e.g.190

, pH less and 500'than Fi 101

e. fluid bulk velocity (e.g., greater than 10 ft/s)

f. oxygen content in the system (e.g., oxygen content less than 50 ppb) 4 Chronologically list and sununarize the results of all inspections that have been performed, which were specifically conducted for the purpose of identifying pipe wall thinning, whether or not pipe wall thinning was discovered, and any other inspections where pipe wall thinning was dis-covered even though that was not the purpose of that inspection,

a. Briefly describe the inspection program and indicate whether it was specifically intended to measure wall thickness or whether wall thick-ness measurements were an incidental determination, b.

Describe what p(iping was examined and how (e.g., describe th means fo'r locating measurement point (s) in subsequent inspections).

._ _

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

_ __, ._ _ _ .

p - '

~' ' ^

NRCB 87-01 i

. - -

July 9, 1987 ;

Page 3 of 3 j Cs ,

.

.- c. Report thickness measurement results and note those that were identi- i fied as unacceptable and why. i

d. Describe actions already taken or planned for p4ing that has been found to have a rtonconforming wall thickness. If you have performed >

l a failure analysis, include the results of that analysis. Indicate whether the actions involve repair or replacement, including any change of materials. i

5. '

Describe any plans either for revising the present or for developing new or additional programs for monitoring pipe wall thickness.  :

The written report shall be submitted to the appropriate Regional Adninistrator under of 1954,oath or affimation under provisions of Section 182a Atomic Energy Act as amended.

In addition, the original of the cover letter and a copy of the report shall be trensmitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission,  ;

Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 for reproduction and distribution. -

This request for information was approved by the Office of Management and Budget under blanket clearance number 3150-0011. Coments on burden and duplication may be directed to the Office of Management and Budget Reports Panagement Room 3208, New Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20503.

NRC intends to summarize the infomation collected under this bulletin and

( study it to help detemine if additional actions are required by the staff and/or industry. The information will be analyzed and placed in the PDR.

,

If you have any questions about this matter, please contact the Regional Administrator of the appropriate NRC regicnal office or the technical

<

contacts listed below, p -

. Ro si, D c  ;

Divit ion of Operati ne l Events Assessment Office of Nuclear Re tor Regulation Technical Contacts: Paul Wu, NRR (301)492-8987 Conrad McCracken, NRR (301) 492-7042 r

Attachment:

List of Recently Issued Bulletins l .

.

.,

L

- - . . . .. - -