ML20127C200

Discusses Requests for Relief from Leak Testing Requirements Per Section Ii,Subsection IWV-3420 of ASME Code.Weighted Approach Believed Most Appropriate Method of Assigning Allowable Leak Rates

ML20127C200
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	10/19/1984
From:	Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Spessard R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
Shared Package
ML20126D306	List: IR 05000373/1985016 ML20126D303 ML20126J272 ML20126J289 ML20127C200 ML20127D604
References
NUDOCS 8410310182
Download: ML20127C200 (2)

Text

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

. . )

o Q C809

/ So UNITED STATES *

^,

N . NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION fd ),, %. WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

• gw r '

I

%,.....Vj/ October 19, 1984 HEMORANDUM FOR: R. L. Spessard, Director Division of Reactor Safety, Region III FROM: Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing, NRR

SUBJECT:

RELIEF REQUESTS FROM LEAK TESTING REQUIREMENTS AS STATED IN SECTION XI, SUBSECTION IWV-3420 0F THE ASME CODE TIA 84-62 .

REFERENCE:

R. L. Spessard memorandum to D. G. Eisenhut dated July 19, 1984; Request for Technical Assistance - Relief Requests from Leak Testing Requirements as Stated in Section XI, Subsection IWV-3420 of the ASME Code (AITS F03043684)

Your July' 19, 1984 memo noted that the Commission has granted relief from leak rate testing requirements of IWV-3420 for containment isolation valves and permitted 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, type C testing as an alternative. This practice has led to two questions:

1. Does granting such relief exempt licensees from specifying discreet or weighted leak rates for Category A valves addressed by the relief request?

2. Does granting such relief exempt licensees from leak rate analysis and corrective action requirements as stated in IWV-3426 and 3427, respectively as well as those requirements stated in IWV-3420 through IWV-3425?

As requested, we have reviewed the questions and the implications of the granting of exemptions from Section XI, IWV-3420 of the ASME Code.Section XI of the ASME Code requires individual testing for each component in the IST program, including individual acceptance criteria. Containment Isolation Valves (CIVs) are required to be individually included in the IST program because of their accident mitigation service requirements. However, since licensees are required to perform leak rate testing of CIVs in accordance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J. NRR has routinely granted relief from the leak rate test requirements of the ASME Code for these components. For cases where this relipf is granted the staff requires that the licensee still meet the Analysis of Leak Rates and Corrective Action reoufrements of the Code, paragraphs IWV-3426 and IWV-3427 of the 1980 Edition, respectively.

The staff believes that a " weighted" approach is the most appropriate method of assignino allowable leak rates. This method is based on the existence of a linear relationship between valve sizes with respect to allowable leakage (i.e., a 6" valve would be allowed twice the leakage of a 3" valve).

Additionally, when the allowable leak rates are added up for all type C tested CIVs, the total should not exceed 0.6 LA. This allows a certain amount of O' ])\

(W ' Y OCT 291994

l~ . 2 f

I flexibility since the 0.6L3 value specified by Appendix J is the maximum allowed for the combined cumulative leak rates of type C tested CIVs and i

containment penetrations as determined by type B testing. I 4

This completes NRR review pursuant to TIA 84-62. - I

, -[;sk' .h UC

g. - Darrell (.' Eif$nhu , Director i

i Division of Licensing  !

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ,

cc

R. Wessman, NRR l

C. E. Norelius, RIII '

T. T. Martin, RI l J. A. 01shinski, RII R. Denise, RIV l

T. W. Bishop, RV J. M. Taylor, IE j

' J. G. Partlow, IE R. J. Bosnak, NRR -

4 F. C. Cherny, NRR l J. D. Page, NRR l

l

, , t 1 t I J 1

l

\  ;

i l J

l l

i i

~

{

-4 y .e .-

~ -  % .' ; . } , .  %. ..

l'; ' -

.f*,

. i ,

i o

i h

1

.a - er

_D_ IJTRIBUT10N:

& E Files IE Rdg.

l MAR 171990 R01 Rog.

l ADFC Chron.

} 55!':S tio. 6025 y

.f.

! SCORANDUM FOR: R. C. Lewis, Acting Chief. ROMS Branch, Region !!

FR0r's Samuel E. Bryan, A/O for Field Coordination OR01, IE

$U5 JECT: OPERASILITY REQUIRETNTS FOR PUWS (AITS NO. F02-700028-N07) l l l As we understand the1, the questions in your February 1 mmo ares

! 1. Do the Technical Specification ACTION stat m ent time per10s run consecutive or concurrently with the data evaluation time (96 hours0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br />) given in IW-3220 cf Section XI of the ASE toller and pressure Vessel

Code,1974 Edition with Addenda thru the Swr 1rr 1975, and

, 2. 1; hen should the test results be reviewed and, if out-of-specification,

! the associated pwp declared inoperable?

The answer to the first goestion is the Technical Specification ACTION state-  ;

rent tim period starts after the detamination is made that the puty is troperable as defined in EElon XI, SW-3230fc). If the data is within the required Action RanM of Table IW -3100-2 and it is decided to recalibrate the irstrunents and rerun the test, as provided for in !W-3230(b), the Technical Specification ACTION statement time starts d en the determination is cade that the data is within the Required Action Rance. The reasoning behind the preceeding statement is that once the determ nation is made that the data is within the Required Action Range the pwp must be declared inoperable. The provisions in IW-3230 to recalibrate and rerun the test to show the pw9 is still capable of fulfilline its function are interpreted by us as an alternative to replacemnt or repair, not an additional action that can be taken before declaring the pop inoperable.

The answer to the second question is that'as soon as the data is recognized as being within the Required Action Range the pwp mst be declared inoperable.

state Nst the test plan shall SectionXI,IWP-6230,"InserviceTestPlans*b1)Issubsection' include 'The reference values ' Table IW-310 IWP-3100-2), and any other values required by th limits of Pt and Tb (Table

. This statement

? .

p_ 1Q WW /* .

f(3 C0'; TACT: J. C. Stone, !E

!4 % cini

....>l

..e.e.ee l

-i _ _

WaikanailadYmiMisA&damshh stanhas..aMiceausuanA8 A andsgNA , !

i I . O g

! R. C. Lewis 2 MAR 17 IS80 i

then requires the acceptknce criteria to be included in the test plan.

i With that indomation available, the shif t supervisor should be able to make the detemination as to whether or not the data meets the requirements.

The toportant point is that once the data becomes available that shows the j pump cannet meet the inservice inspection requirements and by definition ,i l cannet fulfill its function then the po p must be declared inoperable. ..

. We have discussed the above interpretations with 00R personnel and the standard Technical specification Group and they agree. If you have any -

further questions, please call.

i -

S auel E. Bryan

. Assistant 01 rector  :

for Field Coordination J

, Division of Reactor l Operations Inspection. IE cc 4. C. Moseley, IE J. 5. Wetmore. ST3 G. Johnson E8 l J. C. Stone, IE - '

i F. J. Nolan, It i J. I. Riesland, IE

5. R. Messitt, RI!

, E. J. Brunner, RI R. F. Meishman RI!!

G.L.Madsen.IIV J. L. Crews, RV l

l l

)

I 3.\p.< s.

.. FC:R0!:IE ,\',[ ADFC:R0! , j 00R :E,9 f, , , ,

.. ... JC$ tone:LO. SEBryan v'y -

3/I3/80 3/l'l/80 3/g/80 _

_ - - - _ _