IR 05000155/1977014
| ML20002E452 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/30/1977 |
| From: | Danielson D, Erb C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20002E450 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-155-77-14, NUDOCS 8101280073 | |
| Download: ML20002E452 (5) | |
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO?t11SS105 OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND E'IFORCEMENT
-
REGION III
h Report No. 50-155/77-14
,
~
Docket No. 50-155 License No. DPR-6 Licensee:
Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jacksva, MI 49201 Facility Name: Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant Inspection at:
Big Rock Point Site, Charlevoix, M1 Inspection Conducted: September 12 and 13, 1977 i
.
.
lJilLin.ct 7'im ~
'// (b 7
.
Inspectors:../..C.M. Erb
A /N' 5 r~ e. c
.e. / Et s ~
" ' d? b >
.
Approved By:
D. H. Danielson, Chief
'
Engineering Support Section
.
[
Inspection Summary 50-155/77-14):
Inspection on September 12 and 13,1977, (Report No. Inservice inspection i -
Areas Reviewed _:
visual and ultrasonic testing; UT evaluation sheets; and repairs arising from this inspection. The inspection involved 16 inspection-hours onsite by one URC inspector.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Results:
.
W
4
4
..
ff6(?Soo D
-
-
-
_
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.__
__
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
DL1 A H.
-
Persons Contacted (
Consumers Power Company C. J. Hartman, Plant Superintendent T. W. Elward, Technical Superintendent S. E. Martin, Senior Engineer G. C. Withrow, General Engineer G. D. Gilbooy, Quality Assurance Engineer B. O'Donnell, Quality Assurance Engineer R. Kropp, Engineer T. Raynor, Welding Specialist All the above persons were present at the exit interview except Mr. Raynor.
Functional or Program Areas Inspected 1.
Inservice Inspection Work Observation and Data Review a.
History of Inservice Inapection Requirements The Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant went into commerical service on December 8, 1962. The first ten year plan was initiated on January 1,1972 and December 31, 1981, will mark the end of this ten year period.
The end of the second 3 1/3 year period will occur on August 31, (.
1978, at which time an update of Technical Specifications to 10 CFR 50.55(a) will require categorization and addition of Class 2
"
and Class 3 systems to the ISI program. Under the present Technical Specifications, Class 1 and certain high energy piping systems are subject to ISI. Welds in the pressure vessel belt line region are not accessible for UT due to thermal sleeves.
The outside of the pressure vessel is not accessible due to proximity to the concrete shield.
'
b.
Reactor Pressure Vessel Welds taring this inspection, it was not possible to witness nondestructive testing or to examine hardware as a leak rate test was underway in containment.
For the pressure vessel, cracklike reflectors from UT are to be evaluated to ASME Section XI, 1974 edition.
-2-(
Nozzle Nelds were inspected uring a fixture and working from the inside of the vassal. No b21t welds were. inspected, but
.
the flange to vezeel wald was in:p cted using the fitnge curface.
-
lio defects requiring evaluation were noted in this weld.
(
c.
Records - Reactor Depressurization System This system was installed in 1975.
Five welds in this system were given a UT pre-service and eleven welds were. inspected by radiography. While pipe material is onsite for fabrication into calibration standards, the necessary machining has not been performed.
This system will be inspected to the requirements of ASME Section XI, 1974 edition.
This is an unresolved matter and will be examined be_ ore the next UT inspection.
d.
Piping Systems - Repairs (1) Weld Procedures No. GT-1-1, Revision 3 and SM-1-1, Revision 0, were used to repair carbon steel velds where required.
These procedures are in conformance with ASME Section IX and Section XI.
(2) Deviation reports relating to the following areas were examined. These reports were written when repairs were required due to this inservice inspection.
Weld No.
System Size NDT_
Comment 43A Main Steam 10" x.940 RT-01 Repaired
,
6 ECS-102 6"
visual Not Repaired
'
2 RCS-106 2" Socket LP Repaired 18PL 20 MRS-121 Support Lug UT In Review Weld 43A on a bypass line has been radiographed. Radiographic report No. 4001 had not been returned from Jackson so was not available onsite for examination. The required hydrotest for this weld was not known.
Weld No. 8, was in a 6" pipe to the emergency condenser and was completely cut out.
A new weld preparation has been made. This weld will be made, after completion of contain-ment leak rate test.
-3-(
.
.
_
_
,
~
Wald No. I hrs bisn estisfectorily rspaired.
Ilowever, weld dispositicn No. 18PL will require further. review.
,
Documentation relative to the above areas will be
-[
reviewed during a subsequent inspection. This area is considered unresolved.
,
e.
Records (1) The authorized inspector for this ISI was L. Dykstra, Hartford Steam Boiler and Insurance Company. The third party inspector for the veld repair was L. Osborne also of the Hartford Steam Boiler and Insurance Company.
(2.) Several deviation reports were examined and found to conform to the CPQA Manual. Deviation report No. BRP-77-113 was written against Main Recirculation Valves MO-N003B and MO-N003 A&B. Corrective action was outlined, and
,
-
-
. required replacement of several studs and nuts.
(3) A number of UT data sheets and calibration sheets were examined and found to conform to ASME Section XI and SWRI specifications.
Certifications of materials, equipment, and personnel were on file and met UT, PT, and VT requirements of ASME Section XI.
Many dirsimilar welds (stninless steel to carbon steel) exist in this plant and special effort will be made to examine such welds, particularly when the revised Techni-1.,
cal Specifications are adopted.
Radiation is a very real
.
problem in this plant.
In 1962 the contour and surface condition of welds was not controlled as it is today, which results in considerable grinding and rework for meaningful ISI results.
Within the areas examined, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
2.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviations. Unresolved items disclosed during the inspection are discussed in Paragraphs 1.c and 1.d.
-4-(
i i
..
-
-
._.
.. - -
-
.a. *
..
-
3.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (shown under Persons Contacted) at the conclusion of the inspection on September 13, 1977. The inspector summarized the purpose and findings of the inspection. The licensee acknowledged the findings as reported.
,
e
.!,.
[
!
I i
i e
.:
-S-
-
,
'
i
.
-
-
.....
.
,_