Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: fde4aca8-91fc-456b-a158-beaedf808cb2
Document Type: srp
Title: STEAM GENERATOR PROGRAM
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0703/ML070380194.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 5
Section ID: 5.4.2.2
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
erator tube wall thickness. This methodology accounts for flaw growth and the uncertainty in measuring the size of the flaw (i.e., nondestructive examination uncertainty). The general principles of RG 1.121 can also be used to evaluate the acceptability of alternate tube repair criteria, that is, to assess tube repair criteria based on inspection parameters (e.g., flaw length) other than the depth of the flaw (i.e., other than a minimum wall- 5.4.2.2-6 Revision 2 - March 2007 thickness repair criterion). Tubes with flaws that exceed the repair criteria, as determined by the steam generator program, are removed from service consistent with the objective of the steam generator program to maintain tube integrity. 5. With respect to tube repair methods, the review of these methods ensures that the repair is accessible for inspection and that techniques are available to find the forms of degradation to which the repair may be susceptible. The acceptability of any materials used in the repair is evaluated under SRP Section 5.4.2.1. The review of the acceptability of the mechanical design of the repair is consistent with the design requirements of the ASME Code and the steam generator performance criteria in the Standard Technical Specifications. The repair criteria for the repair method are reviewed under the guidance in RG 1.121. 6. The latest revisions of NUREG-1430, NUREG-1431, and NUREG-1432 address ISI; however, preservice inspections are essential in assessing the nature and significance of indications detected during ISI. As a result, it is important to inspect all tubes before placing the steam generators in service, using techniques that should be used during subsequent inspections (i.e., ISI). Although preservice inspections should use techniques that are expected to be employed during ISI, this expectation should not be construed to inhibit the use of new technology or to imply that the techniques used during the preservice inspection will always remain