IR 05000244/1979003
| ML17249A237 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 09/12/1979 |
| From: | Mcbrearty R, Ternigan E, Lester Tripp NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17249A236 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-244-79-03, 50-244-79-3, NUDOCS 7911020487 | |
| Download: ML17249A237 (14) | |
Text
U.S.,NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I II p
N
. ~24 7.0 Docket No.
50-244 License No.
DPR-18 Priority Category Licensee:
Rochester Gas and Electric Cor oration 89 East Avenue Rochester, New York 14649 Facility Name:
Inspection at:
Ginna Station, Ontario, New York Inspection conducted:
ebruary 21-23 and March 7-8, 15-16, Inspectors:
E.
P.
ernigan eactor Inspector Eu 7'.
A. McBrearty, Rea or Inspector 1979 yzj date igned 0 )~ 7 ate signed Approved by:
.t'
. Jrul&
E.
E. Tripp,'hief, Engineering Support Section No, 1, RC8ES Branch date signed
<li~/~~
'ate signed Ins ection Summar
Ins ection on Februar
,21-'23 and March 7-8, 15-16, 1979'e or t No. 50-244 79-03 Areas Ins ected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by regional based Inspectors o
lnserylce inspection activities and eddy current testing of Steam Generator Tubes.
The inspection involved 46'nspector hours onsite by two regional based inspectors-.'~
'esu1ts:
Ro items of noncompliance with regu1atory requirements were identified.
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
WM.x6.'so
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Rochester Gas and Electric Cor oration (RG8E)
"B. Snow, Plant Superintendent, A. Curtis, Welding and NDE Engineer
"J.
Noon, Assistant Plant Superintendent
"T. Schular, equality Assurance Engineer J.
Bondine, equality Control Engineer M. Saporito, NDE Engineer
~denotes those present at the exit interview.
Southwest Research Institute SwRI)
M. McGaughey, NDE Engineer C. Cotton, Project Engineer R. Priest, Electronics Engineer Hartford Steam Boilers Ins ection and Insurance Com an (HSB M. Tanski, Authorized Inspector R. Claverie, Assista'nt Nanager (SIS}
Babock and Milcox B&M S. Bushkill, Section Supervisor Radiography Meetin Attendees (Narch 15-16, 1979}
RG8(E B.
Snow J.
Noon A. Curtis N. Saporito SwRI M. Flack M. McGaughey M. Ehustrom
Teled ne En ineerin Services M. Cooper G.
Moy HSB R. Claverie W. Tanski NRC E. Jernigan J.
Shea M. Hazelton M. Collins C.
Cheng Oak Rid e National Laborator (ORNL)
K. Klindt Sandia J. Gleski 2.
Plant Tour The inspector observed work activities in progress, completed work and plant status in several areas of the plant during a general plant tour.
The inspector examined work activities for obvious defects and/or noncompliance with regulatory requirements.
No items of noncompliance with regulatory requirements were identified.
3.
Inservice Ins ection (ISI Pro ram a.
Sco e of ISI Interval The inspector reviewed the ISI Program established for the current inspection interval (10 Year) to ascertain whether the document is consistent with examination requirements delineated in Section XI of the ASME Code.
The review included the followin 'P
SwRI - NgAPM, Revision
Ginna Station Inservice Inspection Program for the 1977-1979 Period Examination Schedule The inspector found that the examinations scheduled were evenly distributed over the ten year interval.
Additionally, the documents identify the welds/components which have been examined and those remaining to be examined during subsequent refueling outages.
No items of noncompliances or deviations were identified.
b.
Im lementin NDE Procedures The inspector reviewed the following NOE procedures to ascertain their technical adequacy.
These procedures had been reviewed and
- approved by authorized licensee personnel.
SwRI - V-FE-101-2 SwRI - NDT-700-6, Revision
SwRI - NOT-700-5, Revision
SwRI - NDT-900-1, Revision
SwRI - NDT-900-2, Revision
The reviews included, but was not limited to, the considerations listed below:
The type of apparatus including frequency range is specified.
The extent of coverage, beam angles',
nominal frequency and transducer size are specified.
Recording, evaluation and acceptance criteria for flaw in-dications are specified and consistent with the ASME Code requirements.
No items of noncompliance with regulatory requirements were identifie c.
Personnel uglification Records The inspector audited qualification records of personnel performing NDE's during the current refueling outage.
The records reviewed identified the discipline in which the individual had been trained and certified.
Physical examination records indicated whether or not visual aids were required when performing examinations.
No departures from SNT-TC-1A (the governing document)
were identified.
No items of noncompliance with regulatory requirements were identified.
d.
Observation of Work in Pro ress The inspector observed the performance of examinations in progress on the reactor pressure vessel to safety injection nozzle weld.
Also, the calibration check following this examination was witnessed.
This weld was examined ultrasonically in accordance with pro-cedural requirements.
Additionally the inspector's observation included the examination data sheets, calibration records and evaluation of findings.
The inspector also determined that personnel involved with this examination were qualified in accordance with SNT"TC-1A.
No items of noncompliance with regulatory requirements were identified.
4.
Licensee Event No.
PNO-79-50 On March 9, 1979 the licensee reported to the NRC, that an ultrasonic (UT) indication, apparently exceeding ASME Section XI code requirements, was detected in the "B" primary loop inlet nozzle-to-shell weld.
Licensee/NRC Meetin Summar A meeting of representatives of the Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation (RG8E),
NRC and their respective consultants was held at the plant site on March 15-16, 1979, to assess the structural adequacy of the Ginna RPV for continued service.
UT Examination/Evaluation
UT results of the reported indication were presented in detail by the licensee ISI. contractor (Southwest Research Institute (SwRI)).
These examination/evaluation details were reported in the licensee<s 3-11-79 transmittal to the NRC (Curtis to Wamback)
The indication of concern is located at the nozzle forging to weld interface near mid-wall'of the nozzle-to-shell weld.
This indication was not detected during the 1969 pre-service examination using the ASME code defined technique for examination of this area.
It was detected only with a
angle longitudinal wave from the nozzle bore.
The licensee deemed this technique to be more sensitive than the code defined examination in that the sound beam is directed essentially perpendicular to the subject weld axis.
Based on the ASME code 50K distance amplitude correction (DAC) sizing criteria, the reported indication through-wall direction dimension exceeds that allowable in Table IWB-3512. 1 of the Summer 1974 Addenda of Section Xl code.
However, if the beam spread correction at 50K DAC is employed, this sub-surface indica-tion size is'=reduced in length and through wall direction dimensions to values which are acceptable dimensions per Table IWB-3512. l.
The licensee rationale for this determination is based on Section XI, paragraph IWA-2240 which states that "Alternative examination methods, combination of methods or newly developed techniques may be substituted for the methods specified in this. Division, provided the results yield demonstrated equivalence or superiority to the satisfaction of the Inspection Specialist."
Therefore, RG8E has concluded that the indications detected i'n the "B" inlet nozzle weld of the RPV meet the acceptance standards of Section XI 1974 edition through the Summer 1975 Addenda.
Further, the licensee concludes that these indications correspond to the entrapped slag observed in the fabrication radiographs and no significant flaw exist in this weld which will detract from its structural integrity or serviceability.
Summar of Fracture Mechanics A detailed fracture mechanics evaluation on the reported flaw size (sized at 50K DAC uncorrected for beam spread)
was performed and presented by the licensee's contractor Teledyne Engineering Services (TES).
Based on this evaluation, it was concluded that a flaw with a through wall dimension of 4-inches would still satisfy the code acceptance requirments under the same service conditions as the reported indication, which was reported to be within an envelope
of.93-inches through-wall dimension.
This evaluation supports the licensees conclusion that the reported flaw satisfies the code criteria for acceptance by evaluation and is acceptable for continued service without removal or repair.
Preliminar Staff NRC) Position Based on our preliminary review of RG8E's UT examination results and fracture mechanics analyses, the staff is conditionally accepting the affected weld for continued service by evaluation.
However, a determination as to the successive inspection require-ments specified in IMB-3123.3 for conditionally acceptable flaws, will be made during the forthcoming review of the licensees updated.ISI program.
This issue has been transferred to NRR for disposition.
(Transfer of lead responsibility, IE:ROI:TP-79-03, dated 3-22-79).
5.
Steam Generator Ins ection The licensee's steam generator inspection program delineated in Appendix B of the licensee's gA Manual was reviewed by the inspector.
This review was to ascertain compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.83, Revision 1 dated July 1975.
The inspector found the program to be consistent with the regulatory guide.
It established the extent and frequency of tubes to be examined.
It also defines the plugging threshold of degraded tubes.
The inspector audited the implementing procedure used to perform eddy current (ET) testing of steam generator tubes during this (1979)
outage.
The procedure audited is identified as NDE-500-4, Revision 4, dated February 12, 1979.
Additionally, the inspector audited the preliminary results of the examination data.
This data, although preliminary, indicated that approximately six tubes in "B" steam generator will require plugging.
The report and associated records indicated that procedural requirements had been met.
No items of noncompliance with regulatory requirements were identified.
6.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives, asterisk in paragraph 1, at the conclusion of the inspection on March 16, 1979.
The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
The representatives acknowledged the inspector's finding II gS