ML20210T305

Summary of 750109 Meeting W/Util & Ebasco in Bethesda,Md Re Response to NRC Request for Addl Info.List of Attendees & Agenda Encl

ML20210T305
Person / Time
Site:	Satsop
Issue date:	01/24/1975
From:	Oreilly P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
CON-WNP-1749 NUDOCS 8605300029
Download: ML20210T305 (16)

Text

. . _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ .-. - . .

. . , . .e. . , , , . , . , . - .

-. . . ' . . i qcM.y ' '

/.

. r:-

s .

.s

, .i

~ ./*- ...- o' gar . .

l

, l ,,

, e ,

' l

,.T

! j -

~ "

i JAN. 2 4- ig7$ -

i i, . ..,

9, - .

l 'g

. "4  ;

- ' ['

?

i D00Gtr NOS.1- MIN 50-508 ri[0

~

! l -

'j.f.M ,'.'.

[.- ; C. b. :g ,~t. . . . . v g ( U ~. ?; '.~i. U ' ' ' ' -

. ,2. . ..m50.-509,&g .. , . ,;/.m .- -gw.~.

3

.. .. ,a .o o a yQ.%,w~>

v; . >S'DT

~.a. ,. .-

, ~.

.?APPLICANI M EWASEDECN PUBLIC POWER SUPPIX SYS'IIM OWPSS) . . 6,4 ; . ' ,  ?

M ; W*-

WGG Vi:V%Qgd&:- y,.%1N.vgs%Q . -

.Wh:$g.W ':%QQ@f';PSS NUCtZAR PROECT I

v M EACILET P g :. .A&a,1E.g. Am.+ ,y . y S.0 -Q y qdPV ; 7:. ~ .J -

NMM %bWS @%

,p52 MARY OF JAWARY 9,'1975 METING Wr!H APPLICANT '!O mrmt RESPONSES

' 3 i

4

\,. ~. , J;, M'!O;-Ovm,M,4 SIAIT'S REQUESIS FOR ADDITICNAL INFulHATION ..:, f , 'i

'y.g y . w +.

ygqq.4;3. *, , -

f: On January 9f1975, i=r n_hMves of trPSS:b Y m and Deseo met with the . i .3' .. .

I '

Regalatory staff in Bathseda. !he purpees of the meeting was to discuss  ! f' l I the responses to the staff's requests for additional information. A '

list of attendees and an agenda are attached as Enclosures No.1 and l

No. 2 respectively. ,.,,

T '

l p.

7 w ,  ; j0 .7 - 4

'We aalced WPPSS for a clarification of the respcmse to Item 110.7 ,

..a reprding machenical engineering , We questioned the use of Psat' ' S 4' $ 1nstead of the P ~for % ussed ce saturated water. In their

, &explan*4m, Deseo pointed out that theQ$PAanalysis was not used to Q

~ verify the adequacy of the design. We requested that the response 4

.to_ Item 110.7 be zwised to clear up any possible misl4L.y =W.icn of l the analytical tootnique. WPPSS x=a14-1 that the response would be j zwvised =mdingly. , . ,

a x ,

. f, Y .

_. w m. _-

' In a d4we==4m about the respcmse/'o t Item.110.9, we inquired about the

, equation for r=lemlating jet impingiisiEfforte7Wei~rgnarked thatthe definitica given for the valre4ty ratio used in this section was not '

q clear. WPPSS informed us that the response would be zwised to Isflect M'A the M wwg-4m. .: .

v; w.m

'. 3 y . , .

, . , .,,; 3a a. ,

l ,

4

..u ,c. .

4

, . . , 4 '

..% g f

< .' *FllIgen no.11.*; WPPSS stated that all af the results ; resented in this ' !,(- N#

my reopense would .be acrwarted to the F?A forest. \-

p. .

~_ . - my y qq.Qpgg; .g.p.; . :e + .  : p. . ,

y l- p %Ih a Mam==4m'about the respcmee to Item 110.6, we andood Wwthur the "1

.. 1; guard pipes treated in this response would be subjected to pressure  ;- .'

L, {, testing. Ehesco replied that the guard pipes will be pressure tested.

' .s l g'?

..WPPSS stated that the reopense to Item 110.5 will be zwised to prwide j I la reference to' the proper section in the PSAR whers the pressure testingy I

iis diarussed. s

. Xr - .

O  :

. U .. .

.,  ; , Q.: - ., .,

t .

,  ;  ;. .) y -

y;-

+

y. . , . ms ~,7. . :.qy : . ..

i .

RL:M 3 nMM I * 'i* I I '

• +

W a'a* = > e '

,. 8605300029 750124

, ,. PD0' t P PDR f. DOCK 05000508 1 0,.. 3, M

. eun====+-

w. -

M pdf8..

J.;,.

g-.

'/. - - As. PDR - , , .

W ys 7- ,s . , , , , , , g.

me> 2 / .-

- ^ -

. _..'.... . .- .c. . ../. J,-

Pesen AEC.318 (Rev. 9-SM ABCM 0240 ..,1 ... , W u. sa eevenmasant enistime orrecs, sera.sae.soe .~u. * --M g.;,whia A.s.u ManW4 hts *..Mhi'Jl43*M.'M,AsaddFM's . s.

n'd.,C: LM/ dis.34CLa' lidMMD.d.- Q .

- . - -.~m._,.__,,._-. .

. _ . . . . . . ~ . . . . , , .,,-.

. .. .; ,. .T .c .

• e ~

p 74 -a '

> ~g a u-

.! _' i n

JAN.

1. 2 41975

. +

r

't, #

i.

\

We ommented that the respcnse to Item 110.13 in Secticn 3.9 ccntains 'E material Wiich appermitly conflicts with the yield stress diamaafm in

~

Appen' dix 3.9.A.

[

WPPSS stated that the conf 1 fat would be removed with , .; .

m' a 6 zwisim

,. : m :ofM hble 9 '~ 3.9-3.

A w ,lJ w;", d. $; ,3,%

N & :.'.

.: w

..- '.{ .* Q L 1 C ' :'-

, M [..MWe espressed confusica over the respense to Itsei 110.17 in Appendix / Yk -j~

_;'Qgddah g$$3.9.B 'ariterim'is en page actually 3.9-2.1We being used. stated WPPSS thatinformed it is necessary us that theto - MI'. clarify. jiQ3

,T' f

4:

M requested elarification will be jawidad.. g C q.- 3,t s 'u, W . '

g .,w: p ~ ..;g.c;Spsgps:,w-g.ww. GD a

% m . .W -

~~ ~ T y

, . :,Ib a famaaim about the post-TACA radiotagia=1 does calm 1=tions, we ,s . #J informed WPPSS that our pt=14=4aavy n=1=1mtiens resulted in unr.cc.gabiy n ON

, l higts doses under.10 CFR Part,100 e>4d=14nes.. In a ccuparisen of the Ni ns C velues of the input perumsters, a disorspency was noted between the > ,'*

bypass leakage asaumpticna used by Nann and the assumptions that we i

! had used. Ibether ocuparison y4=1 dad significant differences in the two ' .:

sets of input X/Q valuma. Our X/Q values were nuch higher then those -

• l s

used by Nam. WPPSS and nanna agreed to review the meteorological data used to calmlate the X/Q values. Ibrther diamasims will be >

l , . , held after this review of tim .msteorolagia=1 data is ocuplated.

< ~ a . ~ . m . w a v..." w e e w w .-

s, - .-- ..

~ .

l ' 9We inquiruf about the 'distonosi$$rtueen the~ exhaust headers of the' . J; ' c- -

Shield Bi41 ding Vattilation System. WPPSS prwided the requested i infcaination and agreed to either indicate the locations cn an am vgiate t l

• figure in the PSAR or to provide a reference to a figure already ocutaining '

?

. the informaticn. . ., .

.2

.u -'.- .'

.x;-, . .- q .

i

~

'Iha respcmses to Itses 331.1. 14, 18, 19, .11, .12, .14, .15, and .18

! m regartling radialagical aaaanamartt were diam--4 WPPSS stated that the

,' necessary clarifloation or additicnal informatim uould be prwided.

~

infmumtion zugersiing effluent treatment systems. Cmtinuous monitoring ,t A

. , cof hydresan in the sessous redunste system, smitoring of radiation 4,:

M,lavels in process and effluent strouse during postulated mea 4d nts, > .;;7

~

and the mahining of liquid wastes into a solid matrix were discussed. ' r

%).

.,. ' s, _sq r, v. xn c up;y y;g . w. , .

3.. .

> W;, cWe informed WPPSS that Sectim 13.2.2 crmtnined material regentiing'kthe '. 4 f 09 A - rwtraining pmgram and r==14ficaticzt program that is more '

f. ' suitable for an vy-odng license application. WPPSS replied that this

% 'asteria.l would be deleted fmn , , ,w the PSAR. , . . - t x .

I De zuspenses to requests fc'r additicnal infwu= den imandng containment '

systens were d4=m ---9 We stated that ths' response to Ittes 042.15 as ,

given in (TSRAR is considered unacceptable. In addition, we diam---4 ,

l , the staff's position on purge valve Op==t.icn. We inferned WPPSS that .

~

l the zwquested information vca ming almimm items inside containment I -

had not beert inwidad.

l <. s , i e 7

. - .. P N, ,

e ~ oprics > ' ' '+ @W ,

^ -

q> '

• , ;* . Wh ** 1 ., ,."., , , , ,

e

,04 sunnanes > , , , , , .

j,,,,,,,y 4 %2 '{,,,,,._ *

• h

'., . .'. *. .n jwy'

.m . . , , , .. _ , . - -

, p r - - 4

- Fesma ABC.318 (Rev. 9-SH ABCM 0240 - - + 4 v. o. eovsamasswv paintene orricas se7e.eae.see -- . J '. 4F LMINIE;AieMI2w'.?N '

EQ:LJ - ' L.%JartM.A.J.rMif.:." wd.,eOS.W,1*d@msh4.wzJ6sm.ud@* M~ % C UMed.'

. . ~ ~ , .

s  : e;

pw ,

, 4 a.

s 9

v. ,

j c

., g v.

_[' .

JAN. 2 41975 -

l  % .

s c< , .u. .,.- .

- 3- -

. 2, ~w. .

.-: , , 4 -

,p y,, % . -,

• We asiand WPPSS about the stata of the dose analysis iequested by Item 422.1.pding emergency planing. WPPSS stated that the r w .c t=1 Infensticn was sobarthrf for subnittal in early February,1975. . ". g' 13h reply to our question about their consultartt's iW on industrial ,

I - , , security, WPPSS stated that this iW was scheck11ad for submittal in , ,

' , ~ ' fic . March,1375. We infczined IE'PSS that our safety evaluation in these two "

T b[ areas could not be ] supered without the requested irn. t.icn. . g .yg7 . r-p w, . . .y ,cp m.,ypgqx.,.gnsy.g;ty,w. ; .. q.~. ,.7:s  ;;,3 - ,.,  ;._ g g , .

.M J

Tus --J- --f curfacsuiem'that(the recent reorganization of WPPSS could -

esuse difficulty.In preparing' staff posities en quality assuranoe. ,

': v ,

oy+., . g:% m n . ,

. eg e .

, , /.

(,

<F Finally, draft positions ocnosming materials engineering and reactor ~,

systems wake discussed. 9,4.-46 nc.,c.. s,c; . -v

*u .. r:p.2 g - ..x .Q . e.@n .. ,

- g;;.

.r.

fy j ,.. f .s, .~ T Original Signed by , .

Patrick D. O'Re, illy i, C .

u. @, . , 3 Patrick D. O'Failly ,

. . . . . g,, S J K ' ' Light Water Reactors  ;

.....,u.-

m s . M..,..,.'% ,.,,l W H 4 5! $. .m.mw.w; ,; : a, Pmject Branch 1-3 Mi. . , , . .. _

i ..-> %y ., g.,wel:6 /,.n.s n .v., w -

j s.Ihalcourest ,m; dege  :( .

4 No.- 1, List of Attendees 'yx4 -

t I

No. 2, Agpnda .

__- ,j j{ .y'.: ( *.w .g,r * ,1 '.-2". J.A.--

s . ,

~ ^ '

ces: Mr. J. 'J. Stein

,.-Joseph B. Mietts, Jr. , Esq.'

- Richarti Q. Quigley, Esq.

f . .

< t

-_, n V. A > . , - . >: , , , ,

, y

~ . -, .5. .: e , , ,

.m..

.-y n

4 - 1, '.

- ' i p 4 ,

,,, .e .?  ; * . % i;y , .- i '.- y.

• 9, n .. -

9 -4.>,+g . . n "v;s .g.n ; *d

-:. . .g .og  ;' ,. e ;;.c ,_v. ,,.,.e-4- .:~c.

.,*; ., , , a , ,? v,' c. :;. h.,e.;s,*]# q9 ..',,.#. .

, .,p. .

• y .o 'g '.

- ,. .n%"Gl*s.

vw-= s.l ~g: ,

.,<.s Vj ,,

• s <

- w m ,ig A

^ %..g.

• m.c*.,.^:n , _

~>

~

e .

e1 '.

_ . ., : - jy  ?. i< . , , s

,s

' Q. .M. ...,-

3 ,y; p . G.~.m c

.n _.

..y p,c:'.W

.~y,F M, ,,w- d,w.p , , '

g;;e ,..-a ,, , i.j A ~.%g y,Q . Ml.T.$ ,If. m..oMa'*Q4,ip, .. , w t .

• . D, p *,i 2; 5s.l

..%.. -,m 2 s 4

p. . v e' ti.4,.,.,.eM.[f*,~, ,1,.

t] >* . .. g . '-.[

.. c.

,k *>f,,

.t 2'.#{8 k A . j , $

' . A .n. > : .,y. 'g u,,., ' .f* jf ,*% l

, M

'-' . C: *.;.-c ;

-: v ,.

Q w..( < .. e. .;..

r.,.. w, a; . ,  ;

'af.7: }- -4.9 y,.,-Af-5 m 2.l:?, , ,

%y,., cu o' v

'.r

-. ' <. . T.:.1. , y ;g. y ., M ' , q ij':y f 9 /.

^ '- ,

. . /. .

,,. ?f- 2 '",f s

.y. ~t '

t

.  ; ,- . ,3 .- ~-

s 4

/ . - q, --

q4 e .

., . s l

i ' .'. P Es cy; ,<-. i'.:A '.) & ,. .

.w a-ourNe s > , ~~ .*1 "W '

. . ., _ t  ; ,, .) r~ .-

1 ' eumwams' >

. .,,; ,2." 6 W i, ' ' D, t '. y? ^'. '

~

~~.,./. iL .J. ..y .;' ,o ;* , a 7 , . ,, g . ,

, .g

.- = <

,,,,,p -

. q. ,

, . < Fenn A50318 (Esr. S.53) ABCM 0240 a . v. pp ,; IA.

• u. s. oovammusmt enentime orrics: sera.sae.see ka A se (ci,A.iv.,4&mwhip;'W l-c% 2 L:%Ady'zfsyg,',j;w ,mggw,gm,m; _ gjy;g.v. .

. . s..

-y I

q i '

. ]

+

j D; CLOSURE 1 -

MEETING WTIH WPPSS i WNP-3 AND WNP-5 l

ATTENDANCE LIST i

, NRC P. D. O'Reilly P. SterMart l

Pei-Ying Chen L. Phillips Fnank C. Cherny M. Bolotsky V. Goel 1 Ebasco Services Russell T. Vickers W. Morit: ,

' R. C. Iotti D. H. Vories A. W. Barchas T. Donohue WPPSS Don Lagrou G. C. Sorensen e

9 e

. , . . . .. --- .- - - - - - - - ' ~

e' #

'. 3- -m

. t a _/

' I.

? ENCIDSURE 2

-i

! AGENDA JANUAW 9, 1975 j MEETING WITH WPPSS l I. Discussion of Fesponses to Staff's First Round of Pequests for Infomation

~

} A. Mechanical Engineering

1. Item 110.7

2. Item 110.9

3. 1 rem 110.11

4. Item 110.15

5. Item 110.13

6. Item 110.17 B. Fadiological Assessment

l. It s 331.1

2. Item 331.4

3. Item 331.6 -

4. Item 331.9

5. Item 331.11

6. Item 331.12

7. Item 331.14

8. Item 331.15

9. Item 331.18 C. Effluent Treatment Systems f D. Operator. Licensing

.. E. Dnergency Planning F. Industrial Security G. Quality Assurance II. Discussion of Post-ILCA Dose Palmlations III. Discussion of Draft Positions A. Materials Engineering (See Attachment A)

B. Reactor Systems

• • m 4 - a - p ->se ,e ~ps+ ~

w .s-s...-.e ,w-~e.o....,m . -, .* - s . . , ~ ~ - e a s

. -- - -- . . . - -.- . . ~ _

_ . _ _ . . _ . . _ _.~_. .. . - -

s * * - -

l

' Attacinent A i 120-1 l

1 120.0 MATERIALS ENGINEERING BRANCH. APPLICATIONS SECTION 120.24 (RSP) The response to Item 120.6 in Amendment 5 regarding avoiding 1-l (10.3) significant sensitization of austenitic stainless steel com-4

'j (10.4) ponents refers only to the ESF components,whereas Item 120.6

, i pertains to the steam and feedwater materials also. The e response is acceptable for t'ae ESF components. Confirm that

similar steps, in accordance with the recommendations of Regu-latory Guide 144, will be taken to avoid significant sensi-tization of pressure-retaining austenitic stainless steel components of the steam and feedwater systems.

120.25 (RSP) The response to Item 120.10 in Amendment 5 regarding confor-(6.1) mance to the interim Regulatory position on Regulatory Guide l (10. 3) 1.31 is acceptable except for paragraphs 4)b) and 4)c) des-(10.4) cribing a test sample to represent the production weld when a production weld must be evaluated for acceptability. This test sample is not permitted. The interim alternate Regu-i latory position 4.b. states: "When the production w -

e ld is

below the minimum acceptable level of delta ferrite, a sample of the weld shall be removed, and a metallographic examination or a band test shall be made on a transverse section to determine the presence or absence of excessive fissures. . . . ." Confirm that if Regulatory position 4.b. is followed as an alternate, the testing will be of the pro-i duction welds. *

=

120.26 (RSP) The response to Item 120.14 in Amendment 5 is unacceptable.

(6.1) The Regulatory position is that the fracture toughness pro-(9.0) parties of the ferritic materials of all Class 2 and 3 com-(10.3) ponents in WPPSS Nuclear Projects No. 3 and 5 must meet the

(10.4) requirements of subsubarticles NC-2310 and ND-2310 of the

i. Summer 1972 Addenda to Section III of the ASNE Code. The Regulatory poeirion requirements for fracture toughness pro-l perties of Class 2 and 3 ferritic material components are intended to supplement those of the 1974 Edition of Section

, III of the ASME Code. Confirm that you will comply with this Regulatory position.

I 120-27 (RSP) The response to Item 120.15 in Amendment 5 is not clear.

(9.0) The Regulatory position is that the mechanical properties (10.3) of materials specified for use in all Class 2 and Class 3 (10.4) components of WPPSS Muclear Projects No. 3 and 5 must be either as stated in Appendix I to Section III of the Code, or alternately, as indicated in Parts A, B, and C of Section Il of the Code. Confirm that you will comply with this Regulatory position.

- .- . . - - . _ . -++ -- .~ -_

e 4 y vy- - - , - - - ,-,wy.-__ , - - - -

~r -*------ , - - - -- - - + -,-e -- -

,S -]

. s 121.0 MATERIALS PERFORMANCE SECTION, MATERIALS ENGINEERING BRANCH 121.1 (RSP) Confirm that the design and layout of the high energy fluid (5.2.8) system piping between (a) the first rigid pipe connection to

(6.0) the containment penetration, or (b) the first pipe whip

! (9.0) restraint inside containment, and the first isolation valve l (10.0) outside containment will allow sufficient access to perform j adequate augmented inservice inspection. Acceptable augmented 4

service inspection requirements for these portions of piping are attached.

121.2 (RSF) The response to Item 12.13 (10.2.3) has not been received.

(3.5) We will require the following information in detail to complete (10.2) our evaluation of the integrity of the turbine disks.

1 (1) The specific ASME or ASTM material specifications for the turbine disk and rotor forgings.

f (2) The preservice inspacticn procedurcs and creeptance criteria used to verify the luitial integrity of the disk and rotor forgings.

(3) The maximum tangential bore stress (including centrifugal loads, interference fit and thermal gradients) in the low pressure disks at normal speed and design overspeed.

The corresponding minimum bore temperature at whi'ch the

, maximum bore stress occurs.

(4) The stress-rupture properties of the high pressure rotor materials and the method used to obtain these properties.

(5) The maximum steady state tangential and radial stress in the high pressure rotor assembly and the corresponding maximum steady state temperature.

(6) The inservice inspection program and associated acceptance

, criteria planned for the turbine rotors and disks.

(7) The fracture toughness (KTC) f the high pressure rotor and low pressure rotor and disk, materials.

The attached Branch Technical Position for turbine integrity describes acceptable criteria for these requirements.

m we p - e p ,,

m

- . . . - . . . . . . . - - . - ~ .

, y 1 )

121.3 (RSP) Acceptance standards should be in accordance with Section (5.2.8.5) XI, 1974 edition instead of Summer 1973 Addenda to -

Section XI.

121.4 (RSP) Line 9 should be changed to read, " Pressure Vessel Code, (5.2.8.6) Section XI, 1974 edition." Also line 2b should be changed to read, " requirements as'specified in the ASME Section XI .

, 1974 edition and in Regulatory Guide 1.51.

t 121.5 (RSP) Lines 4, 5, 6 should be changed to read, " Comply with re-(5.2.8.7) quirements of ASME Section XI, 1974 edition."

121.6 (RSP) Requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.45 will be strictly (5.2.7) followed.

O e

't e- **

_y . - -

r .

s'

< ~r

. - 0 1  ?

! AUCMENTED IUSERVICE INSPECTION OF FLUID SYSIE!! PIPING j i

f i B j 1. Protective measures, structures and guard pipes should not prevent -

the necess required to conduct the inservice examinations specified I in the ASME Boller and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, Division 1,

" Rules for Inspection and Testing of Components in Light-Water Cooled I i . Plants." "

l

2. For those portions of fluid systen /1piping between containment isolation valves, or, where no isolation valve is used insida containment, between the first rigid pipe connection to the contain- ,

ment penetration or the first pipe uhip restraint inside containment and the outside isolation valve, the e:: tent of inservice exaninations .

completed during each inspection interval (I"A-24CO, ASME Code, j Section XI) s.hould provide 100 percent volumetric examination of , j

. _ .. . s circunferential and lon.gitudinal pipe velds within the boundary of

~

these portions of piping.

3. For those portions of fluid systemsb! piping enclosed in guard pipes, inspection ports should be provided in guard pipes to pernit the required examination of circu=ferent.ial pipe velds. .Inspectiona ports should not be located in that portion of the guard pipe passing through the annulus of dual barrier contain=ent structures. j l

i 1/ Fluid Systems. High energy fluid systems that arc *' subject to the postulation of piping failurcs outside containment against which protection of essential systems and components is needed.

4 O

E i

0

++w. e n m eor-eos-a n O S

l , , ,3

, .g l .

i

~

BRANCl! TECl!NICAL POSITION - tfIEB i .

TURBINE DISK INTEGRITY

! 1. Materials Selection The applicant's selection of a disk or rotor material is acceptable if in accordance with the following:

1

-l.

The turbine disk or rotor should be made from a material and by a process that tends to minimize flaw occurrence and maxinize fracture toughness properties, such as a NiCrMoV alloy processed by vacuum melting and degassing. The material should be examined and tested to

. meet the following criteria: ,

a. Chemical analyses sliould be made for mach forging. Phosphorus and sulfur each should not exceed 0.015 ut.% for low pressure disks and 0.02 we.% for high pressure rotors.

b. The fracture appearance transition temperature (50% FATT) as obtained from Charpy tests performed in accordance with specific-ation ASTM A-370 should be no higher than C*F for low pressure disks and 50*F for high pressure rotors. Nil-ductility transition 5

(NDT) temperature obtained in accordance with specification ASTM E-203 may be used in lieu of FATT. NDT temperatures should .

be no higher than -30 and 20*F, respectively.

c. The Charpy V-notch (C ) energy at the minimum operating te=perature of each low pressure disk in the tangential direction should bc W- -

~

JT . . _ . _ . _ .. -- . .

]

. , I S. ] I l

i at least 60 ft-lba. The C enc'rgy of high pressure rotor

] y naterials at r,Inicum operating temperature shculd be at least l

q 60 ft-Jbs. A r.dninum of three C specimens should be tested in v

t accordance with specification AST!! A-370.

4 l

l

2. Fracture Toughness The lou pressure turbine disk and high pressure rotor franture tough-1

+ ness properties are acceptable if in compliance with the follouing criteria:

The ratio of the fracture toughness (EIc) f the disk and rotor materials to the maximum tangential stress at speeds from normal to design overspeed should be_at least two /in., and the fracture tough-l -

ness of the low pressure disk material should. be at least 150 ksi

/E~. at ninitum operating temparathre. Eore stress calculations should include corponents due to centrifugal loads, interference fit, and thernal gradients. Sufficient warmup time should be specified in the turbine operating instructions to assure that toughness will be adequate to prevent brittle fracture during startup. Fracture toughness propertie's can be obtained by any of'..the following methods:

a. Testing of the , actual material of the turbine dish to establish

~

the KIc ** "* "U " #"# E ## "E'""E"##U"#**

b. Testing of the actual material of the turbine disk with an instrucanted Charpy machine and a fatigue procracked specimen to c

. . . .. . ^

) ]

establish the 1,7(dynamic) valuo at normal operating temperatur.c.

If this nethod is used, K y (dynamic) shall be used in lieu of KIc (static) in meeting the toughness criteria above.

c. Estimating of K values at various temperatures from conventional l

7 t

Charpy and tensile data on the disk naterial using methods i

' presented by J. A. Begley and W. A. Logsdon in Westlinghouse 4

Scientific Paper 71-1E7-MSLRF-P1 (Ref. 5) . This method of obtaining K should be used only.on materials which exhibit a Ic well-defined Charpy energy and fracture appearance transition curve and are strain-rate insensitive. The test data and the calculated toughness curve should be cubmitted to the staff for review.

Estimating " lower bound" values of K Ic at various temperatures d.

using the equivalent energy concept of F. J. Witt and T. R. Mager,

. ORNL-TM-3894 (Ref. 6). Load-displacement data from the compact -

tension specimens and the calculated toughness data should be

! submitted to the staf f for revicu.

l .

e.

3. High Temperature Properties The stress-rupture properties of the high pressure rotor material l . .

are acceptable if they provide sufficient assurance of rotor integrity for the lifetica of the turbine. The applicant can demonstrate conpliance by submitting str.ss-rupture data of an equivalent material with similar properties to the staff for evaluation. ,

I

.~ -

M ~-

e ,

-* - - - .m . . . ..

• o n /

~

t

/

. - 4_

~

4. Preservice Inspe'etion

i. The applicant's preservice inspection progran is acceptable if in I .

compliance uith the follouing criteria:

4 1

a. Disk forgings should be rough machined uith mininum stock allow-j ance prior to heat treatment.. -

' b. Each finished disk should be subjected to 100% volumetric i .

(ultrasonic), surface, and visual examinations using procedures and acceptance criteria equivalent to those specified for Class 1 components in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, -

. Sections III and V.

'~

c. Finich machined bores, keyuays, and drilled holes should be

.,' subjected to magnetic particle or liquid penetrant examination.

No flaw indication in keyvay or hole regions is allovable.

d. Each fully bladed turbine rotar assedbly should be spin tested at the maximum speed anticipated during a turbine trip following I

l- loss of full load. ,

5. Turbine Design i

The applicant's design is acceptable if in acompliance uith the L

following:

l l

l The t'r:bine assembly should be desigaad to withstand narcal conditions, anti.ipated transients, and accidents tesulting in a tu-bine trip l

---

e - -

g -

,,s. v. , _ . - ,. _ . . , , . , ,

I

~. . , .

e

)

r

, 3 o 5-l_ without loss of structural integrity. The design of the turbine assembly should meet the following criteria:

,j

a. The design overspeed of the turbine should be 130% of rated i

l speed or 57. above th2 highest anticipated speed resulting from a

loss of load, whichever is greater. The basic for the assuesd j design overspeed should be subuitted to thm staff for review.

I J

! b. The tangential stress in low pressure disks or high prescu're rotors at design overspeed due to centr' fugal forces, interference fit, and thermal gradients should noc execed 0.75 of the minine:2 i specified yield strength of the caterial.

"* c. The turbine shaft bearings should be able to withstand any

\. combination of the noraal operating loads, anticipated transients, s.

and accidents resulting in turbine trip. .

d.. The turbine should be designe.d so that there are no critical .

frequencies between zero and design spted. if such critical speeds exist, assurance should be providad that they are not within 20% of norr:al operating speed and taist the turbina .till not dwell at them.

6. IndervicoInspection The opplicant's inservice inspect. ion prograra is acceptabic if in a co:?.pliance with the follotting criteria:

i a

• ' - * ^e  % . p p . .. , .

L -- -, , . . _ , , - , .

_ _ - - _ . _ ~ _ - _ __ . ,_ _ _._ __ _- _ -. - -

l The inservice inspection pr0;ran for tha steen tu:bine assembly and

! for valvcc associated with .the o.erspee'd protection systen should

.) - .

provide as7urance that disk flaws thac tight lead to brittle. failure 3

l of a disk at speeds up to design speed .111 Le detected and that.

f valves itgortant te the cycropced protection systen vill. be operable whe.n needed so the probabi),.ity of dick rupture at destructive ,

overspeed'will be reduced.

i The inservica in=pection progran for the turbind assa.::tly cho.uld 1 include the following:

a. Disassembly of the turbine at appro:-inately 10-year intervals, during plant shutdovn coinc.iding vith tha inscryice inspect 2.oa e

schedule as required by AS::E Ioiler cad Pressure Vesski Cc,Jo, . [

Section XI, and complete inspection cf oil norcally inaccessible parts, such as couplings, coupling bol<_s, turbine shatts, low pressure turbine blades, lov pressure disks, and high pressure roto s. This inspection should consist of v.isuil, surfaca, and volumatric examinations, as required.

The applicant should keep abreast of technological advances in volusceric exambutica techniques so that uhen improved achods for Auspection of turbine disks are doveloped they can bo incorporated into the . inservice inspection proget.n.

- ~ '

i.

,- b. Conduct an in place vi:, uni cranination of the turbine assenbly j at accessibic locations during refucting shutdot:ns at intervals .

r.ot exceeding two years. -

f the insoryice inspection of cain steam and reheat valves should i

include the follouing

i i

, c. Dismantle at least one nain stean stop valvo, one main steam control valve, one reheat stop valve, and one reheat intercept valve, at approxinately 3-1/3 year intervals during refueling or l maintenance shutdowns coinciding with the inservice inspection schedule required by ASE Code Section XI, and conduct a visual  ;

~

! and surface examination of valve seats, disks, and stems., If unacceptabic flaws or exessive corrosion p,re found in a valve, s, all valves of its type shall be inspected. Valve bushings should

. be inspected and cleaned, and borc dic=cter should be chached 7

for proper clearance. .

d. 1 lain steam stop and control and reheat stop and intercept valves should be exercised at least once a week bf closing each valve ,

and observing by tha valve position indicator that it moves

.scoothly to a fully closed position. At least once a conth i

this observation should be nade by actually watching the valve mot; ion.

i I,

. j e l l

l l

w --

- -~ -~

• ,.m , ,

. ) )

Distr @utim:

Docket File R. Tedesco -

, NRC PDR V. Stello

j. Imal PDR R. Maccary

! NRR Reading (M. Groff) H. Denton

'l R. DeYoung V. Benazuya V. Moore C. Img

! D. Skovtolt J. Kastner

-l D. Muller G. Iainas

! R. Denise D. Poss K. Goller T. Ippolito G. Imar J. Ynight W. Butler S. Pawlicki i J. Stolz L. Shao

- R. Clark B. Grimes T. Spies W. Ca=n411 D. Vasaalln R. h11mti K. Kniel P. Fine O. Parr T. Novak i A. Schwencer M. Spangler R. Schanal EP Project Manager - J. Norris D. Ziemam Attomey, eld P. Collins IE (3)

R. Purple V. Wilson G. Knighton ACRS (12) .

G. Dicker Project Manger - P. D. O'Reiny B. J. Youn=himd IMR 1-3 Reading '

W.H.Regd,Jr. IMR 1-3 File R. Vo11nen F. Yantor W. Houstm V. Goel S. Varga T. Johncon R. W. Klecker C. Stepp F. Schroeder J. Greeves D. Budge T. Murphy R. Kornasiewicz C. Liang P. Steddart J. Costello F. Cherney ' P. Chen -

E. Brooks R. Satterfield G. Mainz F. Ashe M. Bolotsky I. Sihweil L. PhiHips R. Culp Pei-Ying Chen v

. - -