REGULA~ Y INFORMATION DISTRIBUTIO YSTEM =('R IDS)

ACCESSION NBR:8305020345 DOC ~ DATE: 83/04/27 NOTARIZED; NO

FACIL:50-335 St, Lucie Planti Unitt ii Florida Power 8, Light Co<AUTH,NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION

iUHRIG'RNE ~ Florida Power 8 Light Co ~

REC IP, NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATIONCLARKiR~

AD�

'perating Reactors Branch 3

SUBJECT: Summarizes 830425 meeting w/NRC re,reactor vessel internals8 thermal shield plant recovery program concerningpressurized thermal shock.'Plant may safely operate,w/o.restriction from pressurized thermal shock considerations.

DISTRIBUTION CODE: AOAOS COPIES RECEIVED:LTR - ENCL l SIEE:TITLE: OR Submittal: Thermal 'Shock to Reactor Yessel

NOTES'OCKET05000335

REC IP IENTID CODE/NAME

NRR ORB3 BC 01

INTERNAL: ELD/HDS2 12NRR DIRNRR/DE/MTEBNRR/DL DIRNRR/DSI DIRN DIRRE4 FIL

A

COPIESLTTR ENCL

7 7

1 01 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

RECIPIENTID CODE/NAME

MURLEYgTNRR V I SS ING i G04NRR/DHFS D IRNRR/DL/ORAB 11NRR/DSI/RSBNRR/DST/GIBRES/DETRGN2

COPIESLTTR ENCL

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 01 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

EXTERNAL: ACRSNRC PDRNTIS

1002

6 61 1

1 1

LPDRNSIC

0306

1 1

1 1

tTOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED: LTTR 33 ENCL '31

IF (I W ~

e

li «J'

Wf,

W I I'I( WFW I I,W W'f Fi)1"L iAIIF

i' ff f'W'W '3

fI'(., ~

(, W„r II(,q, >I,, r,~WWa .i

I g WI (

'I I( W "(.>«7,, l W I if WF> 1(I> Il ~ I!h Iff »hfW( I >4 I !i 1(i

(i'll if '1> If Ig((f(I~,'» y W I 1

I'I

'I( 'I1 f

>h ")

uF' I'I I

>I >>1««WF I >(Qf >»II r'WI,I, fi u I'I IT ~W

>i Ih (hhh,lT( hà I

I )I(hi ih

f'I Ihh(

l,) ~< >-IThh hh

hf ihhl'jf'5Ih iY i W> (J ll Ih I,I(jh

If

I IW

lh,,l

F'W(F)

I!,h I

'''WW Ri'inc'I'W>7,'

I J(,,h

II

h'g; hl i

li'

II

; Iji"'q

hli' 'h,,( g y '(g

F) >)

R

~~

P. O. Box 14000, JUNO BEACH, FL 33408

FLORIDA POWER & LIGHTCOMPANY

April 27, I 983L-83-263

Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationAttention: Mr. Robert A. Clark, Chief

Operating Reactors Branch $/3Division of Licensing

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Clark:

Re: St. Lucie Unit I

Docket No. 50-335Reactor Vessel Internals and Thermal Shield;Plant Recover Pro ram

In a meeting on April 25, 1983, Florida Power and Light Company provided you withinformation about the St. Lucie Unit I reactor vessel with respect to pressurizedthermal shock (PTS). This letter sum'marizes that meeting and satisfies item D(l) ofour letter of April I 9, I 983 (L-83-230).

CEN-I89, Appendix F ("Evaluation of PTS Effects due to Small Break LOCA's withLoss of Feedwater for the St. Lucie I 8 2 Reactor Vessels" December, l98I),provided an evaluation of the St. Lucie I reactor vessel for PTS effects of certainspecific hypothetical plant transients (post TMI 2 Action). The governing axial weldis located in the lower shell course at an azimuthal location where the fluenceprofile is 47% of the peak fluence. Using the material and fluence data developed inCEN-I89, Appendix F, the residual chemistry for this weld is 0.30 wt. % Cu and .64wt. % Ni. The resultant end-of-life RTNDT for this weld is predicted to be 2I7OFusing the shift prediction method of SECY-82-465 ("NRC Staff Evaluation of PTS",November 23, I 982).

For the sake of comparison only, even if St. Lucie I operated from beginning-of-lifeto end-of-life without a thermal shield, the end-of-life RTNDT predicted by themethod of SECY-82-465 would still only be 252OF. Since St. Lucie I has operateduntil now with a thermal shield, the end-of-life RTNDT would be somewhat less thanthis upper bound value. We understand the NRC staff and their consultants aredeveloping a revision to the RTNDT shift prediction method of SECY-82-465 whichwould result in a lower EOL RTNDT prediction.

830502034~ 0335gg 830427PDR ADOCY 0

@DRP

PEOPLE.E... SERVING PEOPLE

'

~i%

~ ~

Page 2Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationMr. Robert A. Clark, Chief

These evaluations will be updated as the results of the surveillance capsule programbecome available. Also, the vessel beltline weld in-service inspections beingcompleted this outage will provide additional confirmation of the soundness of thevessel material. Based on these evaluations, St. Lucie I may safely operate withoutrestriction from PTS considerations.

Very truly yours,

Robert E. UhrigVice PresidentAdvanced Systems & Technology

REUjDAC/cab

cc: Harold F. Reis, Esquire

Enclosure

~~

ST, LUCIE -'1

PTS MEETING AGENDA

APRIL 25, 1983

1,. REVIEW PRESENT PTS .STATUS

2. EFFECTS OF THERMAL SHIELD REMOVAL ON PTS

3, ONGOING PTS EFFORT

E4, SCHEDULES

ST, LUCIE — j.

PRESENT PTS STATUS

l .. MELD CHENI.STRY .

2, FLUENCE CALCULATIONS

3, RT-NDT PREDICTIONS

FIGURE F6-1

ST. LUCIE El REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL HAPINITIAL RTNPT IN 'F

20

4J ~

XZ eo

~ IC ~ 6 ~ 3 E3D I 203@@ C. 6-2 Egg";. C 6 II%03

UJIOO

C3

C ~ 7-I QD 2 2o3CZ5 C-V.2 Qfj C V ~ 3C~~Q

aIio

4J

(ZI

100a

~ 2 C 8 3CEI

3 2o3E9

CORE

C 8 ~ I C++3 C ~ 8-2~

220

eo ..0 IeO

Al I tlUTIIAL LOCA I I otl, OCGREE5

TABLE F6-1 ST. LUCIE UNIT NlREACTOR VESSL'L HATERIALS

ProductForm

Via ter ia 1

Identi ficationOrop Weight~NDTT 'F

InitialRTND~T'F Nic el Phos horus

ChemicaI Content~i)

PlatePlatePlatePlatePlatePlatePlatePlatePlateWel dWel dWel d

r Meld

f

C6-1C6-2C6-3C7-1C7-2C7-3CS-1CS-2CB-31-203 A,B,8C

3-~03 A,B,t|C

9-203

10-30-10

0-30-30

. -1000

N/AN/AN/AN/AN/A

10-30-10

Oa

0a

1020

0a

'c-50-50

'-50

-60-60

.53

.53

.53

.64

.64

.58

.56

.57

.SSd

.11

b.14b.14b.14,11.11.11.15.15.12

. ~ 22

~l.21.23

'.012. 011.011.004.004.004.006.006.004.015.018.013.016.013

N/A

a

bcde

Not AvailableOetermined using Branch Technical Position HTEB 5-2E'stimated based on average of similar platesEstimated {see Table F6- 2)Estimated Ni content {high nickel type wire)Estimated Ni content low nickel type wire)

a

ST. LUCIE — 1

CURRENT FLUENCE CALCULATIONS

(REF, CEN-j.89)

NS-2 . R5 DOT PROFILE CNS-2 POMER DIST.)

~ VIS-2 CAPSULE BENCHNARK

SL-1 POINT KERNEL PEAK (SL-j. POWER DIST.)

I.b

HORIIAL)ZED FAST FLUX

ST. LUCIEI AZIMUTHAL FLUENCE VARIATION

AI VESK Ojio INTSFAK

b.7

8.6,

b.k

Jh 15

%TA IKNEES

FIGURE F5-3

FIGURE F6-2

ST. LUCIE fl REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL NPADJUSTEO RTNDT IN 'F (12/31/81)3.55 Effect)ve Ful 1 Power Years

0.33 x 1019n/cm2 Peak Surface Fluence

20

th~ W

XZ 60

4P

ujIOO

C)K

C3Iio

4

~ II.203-

2 203-

C ~ 6 ~ 3 i

C ~ 7 ~ I

I 203-

2 203-

C.6.2

C-7 ~ 2

C ~ 6.I.T

C ~ 7 ~ 3

4J(3

CZItQ

ClI 80

~ 2

3 203>

C ~ 8,3 C~W

3203'

C B.I C ~ 8 ~ 2

220

260- ISO 360

Rl I tIUIIIRL LOCA I 10:7, OEGREES

~ ~

ST, LUCIE - 1

CURRENT STATUS

I

EOL PEAK FLUENCE = 2..83 x 10 x/cz 'Ol NEv)

EOL HELD FLUENCE = A7..5X x PEAK

1,,305 x j019 v/c~2

EOL HELD RTNDT= 2 17,.7 F

k

~ ~

ST, LUCIE — j.

EFFECTS OF THERMAL 'SHIELD REMOVAL ON PTS

1). EOL FI UENCE

2) EOL RT-NDT'

ST. LUCIE — 1

"(32 .EFPY M/0 T,S.)

THERMAL SHIELD WORTH~1.75 x FLUENCE

EQL PEAK FLUENCE =.+ Q,95 x 10 N/CN

EOL WELD FLUENCE—+ 2.35 x 10 w/cm

I

EOL WELD RTNDT > 252,7 F (CONSERVATIVE

UPPER BOUND)

ST, LUCIE - 1

ONSOINj PTS EFFORT

l) SURVEILLENCE CAPSULE EVALUATION

2) UPDATED FLUENCE CALCULATIONS

5) 1OOX BELTLINE HELD ISI

gg0II

180

I~OUHet Nozzle/// I

I

Core Shroud

—Core Suppor't Barrel

lf.„F.. t

Reactor VesselI f

Thermal Shield

~ inletiNozzle

—263Core.tNidpfaneVs'esselCapsule

Ass embl)

g

4

ThermalShield

ReactorVessel

CoreSupportBarrel

p~,d nlan Vit

FIGURE F5-4

ElevationView

ST, LUCIE — 1

UPDATED FLUENCE CALCULATIONS

SL-1 9'DOT (SL-1 POWER DIST, CY 1-5)

SL-1 Hk DOT (SL-1 CY6 POWER DIST.)

SL-1 SURVEILLENCE CAPSULE BENCH''1ARK

~ ~ r

l