IR 05000244/1987006

Insp Rept 50-244/87-06 on 870224-27.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Activities Associated W/Steam Generator Exams & Maint,Inservice Insp & Licensee Actions on Previous Insp Findings

ML20205G967
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	03/24/1987
From:	Lodewyk A, Mcbrearty R, Strosnider J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20205G920	List: IR 05000244/1987006 ML20205G916
References
REF-GTECI-A-03, REF-GTECI-A-04, REF-GTECI-A-05, REF-GTECI-SG, RTR-NUREG-0844, RTR-NUREG-844, TASK-A-03, TASK-A-04, TASK-A-05, TASK-A-3, TASK-A-4, TASK-A-5, TASK-OR 50-244-87-06, 50-244-87-6, NUDOCS 8703310590
Download: ML20205G967 (7)

Text

.

,_  ;

__

-

,

/

. .

,

'

'

'

, ,

,

.

_.)

,

.

. .

.

. -i U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f- ,

REGION I H Report N d-244/87-06 ,

? '

'

Docket N .

License No. DPR-18 P ri o ri ty _-- Category C_ . ,

Licensee: Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation 4

.

49 East Avenue e

Rochester, New York 14649 -

,

'

Facility Name: GINNA >

- s

,

',

'

Inspection At: Ontario, New York

~

~

Inspection Conducted: February 24-27, 1987 - .

Inspectors: h '

~R.A.McBrearty,ReactorEngher

)

,

M*

date

1. f/f-C

$5 b' .

W. }9E]

A. Lodewyk, Reactor Engineer d __ date

'

'

Approved by: ([. _ ,, ;#; e d '

g/u/fo ~

'jJ R. Strisnider, Chief,p 6 da'tc Materials & Processes'Section, EB, DRS -

s Inspection Summary: Inspection on February 24-2[,1987_(ReportNo.'244/37-06] /

< .

Areas Inspected: A routine, unannounced inspection coriducted by two regional *

based inspectors of activities associated with steam generator examinations ~

and maintenance, in-service inspection, and licensee actions on previous x inspection finding , ,

Results: No violations were identifie ,

-

%

%

SD0 O B70325 0 & K 05000244 ,

PDR '

.

._--+e-iy_&.e=- *g aww--'wp'-e yy"*wvge,, e w'- ^-4- fT' -p-a.in?- **

. . . . _ . . .

.

e% , ~

'jg>'y_;

,

., +

,

w .c -

's-Y a, '

,

f .... ,,

{; 't g

( -

'

A

.

DETAILS

'

51, Persons Contacted q :. ,.,

' .

Mi Rochester Gas'& Electric Company .

, ,

i;; ., .

• J. Bedine, Nuclear' Assurance Manager,

'

• A. E.'Curtis III, Manager Materials Engineering & Inspection Services

, A. Harkry , Chemistry Department Supervisor

q ,~

G. Henry', Materials Engineering /NDE

.

, P. Lewjs, NDE Laboratory Technician '

' '

'

'D McCormick, NDEJoreman Materials Engineering C ' '. ad. L. McCoy, Director, Research & Science

*K. 'Nas sauer, Quality Control Supervisor

• M. Saporito, Supervisce fiaterials Engineerin *B. A. Snow, Superintendent Nuclear Production

• S. M. Spector, Superintendent GINNA Froduction

!

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• T. ,Polick, Senior Resident :Ir spector

• Denotes those present at'the exit meetin !

<

Licensee Action on Previcus Inspection Findings

.

(Clo sed) Unresplved item (84-05-01): Technical Specification change regarding inspection interval. The ten year inspection interval for Quality Ghaup A Components commenced on January 1,1970, and ended on

' December 31' 1979. The ten year inspection interval for Quality Group

,

B4C Components commenced on May 1, 1973, and was scheduled to end on April 30, 1983. The licensee wished to change the dates of the interval

'- for the Quality Group 3&C Components so that it would be coincident with the Group A interval. This required a Technical Specification change and

-

,at the time of inspection 84-05 no change was requested by the license Technical Specification 4.2, Amendment No. 5 has since been issued and specifies that the commencement of the inspection intervals for Quality

,

.

Group B&C Compen'nts e shall be ten year intervals of service commencing

!

May1,1p73, January 1, 1980, 1990 and 2000 respectively. This change

'

serses to coordinate the intervals for Quality Group A, B & C Components subsequent to the first interval.

. . - Based on the above this item is closed.

(Closed) Unresolved item (84-05-03)

Evaluation of ultrasonic examination indication. The. inspector questioned the accuracy of the evaluation of a

-

recordable indication in a centrifugally cast stainless steel pipe to elbow weld in the reactor coolant loop B. The cause of the indication was s attributed to weld root geometry based on a sketch which did not accurate-ly depict the pipe surface contour, and no data were available to verify

_

'

.

.~ .

,

e-- g

%f

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

. - - _ . .

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

___ _

_ _

. .

,

.. 3

'

the actual pipe configuration. In response to the inspector's questions the licensee requested Southwest Research Institute, its ISI vendor, to provide further resolution regarding the source of the indication. Docu-mentation which was provided to the inspector for his review during the current inspection verified that the following actions were taken:

A contour gauge was used to obtain an accurate representation of the pipe outside surface contou . Ultrason'ic thickness measurements were taken at 1/4 inch increments to depict the pipe inside surface contou *

Design drawings of weld joint configurations were reviewed to approximate the weld fusion line *

Sound velocity differences in the pipe and calibration block material were determine l

. Refracted beam angles in calibration block and pipe material were

'

verified through a combination of physical and ultrasonic measurement Using data obtained from the above actions, the weld was re-examined with examination beam angles of 45 , 50 and 60 (measured angle of 58.5*).

The beam angle and the metal path in the pipe material was calculated and the information was used to re-evaluate.the data regarding the indicatio The cause of the questioned indication was determined to be the inside

, surface geometry not associated with the weld root. The indication was noted at varying amplitude levels for 360 around the weld, and-the con-dition which produced the indication was verified by the surface contour

~

information. The inspector stated that he' agreed with the licensee's

_ evaluation of the weld condition and this item is considered close >

(Closed) Unresolved item (244/84-05-04): Regarding In-service inspection weld radiographs and reports. A previous NRC review of weld radiographs identified the following concerns:

(a) The number belt placement and corresponding film cassette locations were such that preceding lead numbers did not appear on certain radiographs, and (b) Discontinuities appeared within radiographs but were not identified on the radiographic report To resolve the first issue, the licensee re-reviewed each radiograph which did not show preceding lead numbers. The area of interest was measured and recorded on the corresponding reader sheets. Each recorded weld length was compared with the field measured weld circumference to verify complete coverage. The radiograpny p*ocedure has also been changed

.

T

, _ _ _ _ _ .

-

.

-  :-

to ensure sequential lead numbers appear on corresponding radiograph The inspector reviewed two sets of radiographs (weld numbers MS1001 0 and MS1001 B) to verify complete weld coverage as noted on the radiographic '

records. Based upon the measurements made during this review, the inspector determined the complete weld coverage was attainabl In response to the second concern, the licensee re-reviewed the radio-graphs in question. New reader sheets were completed to identify weld-discontinuities. The inspector's review confirmed that the updated reader sheets identified each radiographs discontinuitie In addition to a review of the above mentioned radiographs, the inspector selected a sample of the current outage radiographs for review. The results of the additional examinations are discussed in Section 5 of this

,

, report. The inspection had no further questions at this tim This item is close (Closed) Unresolved item (84-05-06): Changes to NDE personnel qualifica-

'

tion procedure. Procedure No. QM 909, Revision 1, dated January 21, 1983 was found to contain a definition of NDE Level I that did not agree with the ASME Section XI definition. Additionally requirements for the qual-ification of visual inspection personnel were inadequate and did not represent the training and experience required by the license The inspector reviewed Procedure No. QR & S 909, Revision 0, dated March 27, 1986, which was found to address and correct the deficiencies of QM 909, Revision 1. Additionally a separate procedure, QR & S 911, Revision 0, entitled " Qualification of Visual Examination Personnel" was prepared by the licensee to govern the qualification of visual inspection personne The inspector's review indicated that the procedures met code requirements and that the provisions of QR & S 911 represented the licensee's training and experience requirements. The inspector stated that the procedures were acceptable and this item is closed.

, 3.0 Observations of ISI Work in Progress The inspector observed a portion of the ultrasonic examination of the "B" steam generator hot leg studs and nuts, and the calibration of the associated ultrasonic examination system. The inspector's observations were made to ascertain that the examinations were done by qualified personnel in accordance with applicable ASME code and procedural require-ment The operations which were performed in the inspector's presence included the longitudinal beam examination of the aforementioned studs and nuts, initial system calibration and subsequent calibration checks.

J

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

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

__ . .. .

s -

The inspector found that the. examinations were conducted in accordance with applicable Section XI requirements. Additionally the examinations were performed by qualified personnel and the method was found to agree

.with procedural requirement No violations were identifie . Review of Inservice Inspection (ISI) Data The . inspector reviewed ISI data to ascertain that the data were complete, accurate, and that applicable ASME code and regulatory requirements were met. The inspector's review included data associated with the following welds:

Safety Injection System Elbow to Pipe Weld 8-SI-2003-19R-FW33

Safety Injection System Tee to Elbow Weld 8-SI-2003-7N-FW7

Low Head Safety Injection System Tee to Pipe Weld 10-RH-2013-18

Residual Heat Removal System Pipe to Elbow Weld AC-1004-DSW-7 Weld 8-SI-2003-19R-FW33 was found to be free of indications by both the penetrant and ultrasonic examination method. Ultrasonic indications were reported in each of the three remaining welds, and the inspector found that each indication was plotted to verify its location in the material, and that a resolution sheet which identified the cause of each indication was prepared by the licensee's ISI vendor. The inspector confirmed that the plots were accurately drawn, and that the resolution and disposition of each indication was documented in accordance with applicable requirement No violations were identifie . Radiographic Film Review The inspector reviewed a sample of radiographic films for compliance with ASME B&PV Code requirements as discussed in paragraph 2 of this repor During a sample review of the current outage radiographic film, the inspector questioned the acceptability of the film density for weld N FW 1005-F5, O to 9 inch location. The inspector and licensee representa-tives jointly checked the film density and agreed the density was greater than the Code allowable. The measured film densities disagreed with those previously recorded by the licensee on the film holde Further investigation by the licensee determined the rejectable film was mistakenly included in the film packet. The weld area in question had been re radiographed to obtain an acceptable film density. During the licensee's film review and storage process, the acceptable film was mis-takenly replaced with the previous unacceptable fil .

' '

_ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . . _ . _ _ _ _ .

- .

The appropriate film was replaced in the weld package. The inspector reviewed the film for acceptability and verified the measured densities agreed with those previously recorded on the film holder. No further discrepancies were identified. However, this incident indicates'

additional licensee attention may be warranted in the area of radiographic film contro . Steam Generator Preventive Maintenance The licensee's steam generator (S/G) preventive maintenance program (as it is related to maintaining S/G integrity and controlling station secondary water chemistry) was reviewed relative to criteria, commitments, and recommendations provided in:

--

QAM, Appendix B, Inservice Inspection Program for the 1980-1989 Interval, Section Condition 2C.(4) of License No. DPR-18 regarding a secondary water chemistry monitoring progra Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Report NP-2704-SR, "PWR Secondary Water Chemistry Guidelines", Revision 1 (1984).

--

NUREG-0844, "NRC Integrated Program for the Resolution of Unresolved Safety Issues A-3, A-4, and A-5 Regarding Steam Generator Tube Integrity".

Licensee performance in S/G preventive maintenance was determined by

.

interviews with chemistry, radiation protection, maintenance, quality

'

assurance, and plant engineering personnel; review of selected procedures, reports and records; ar.d observations of plant facilities and

.

equipment during facility tour The review addressed the licensee's maintenance, inservice inspection (ISI) and ALARA program procedures, policies and implementatio Those plant procedures selected for review were found to contain:

-

critical chemical variables and limit / action levels for secondary water chemistry control I

i

'

-

schedules for obtaining chemical samples as well as data recording and reporting guideline The procedures reviewed were consistent with license conditions and generally followed the guidelines established by EPRI. Records of

,

chemical data for the past operating cycle determined normal chemical concentrations are maintained within industry established guideline Additional licensee efforts to achieve and maintain good water chemistry include condenser eddy current testing (ECT), helium snooping, secondary system component material replacements, sludge lancing and crevice j flushing.

!

,

- - - - - - . , ,,-------.-- -,.-..-.- - ,- - - - . - , , . - -

. -- ,. -

. , . ~ , --

o

. ..

7-Steam generator inservice inspection included a 3% tube sample for full ,

length examination, profilometry and rotating eddy current probe testing. l Eddy Current results typically identified S/G tube discontinuities due to l IGA and SCC. Where pos.sible, the licensee installed sleeves in the -

degraded S/G tubes to maintain reactor coolant system flow for maximum heat removal. Other, defective steam generator tubes were scheduled to be plugge '

Management of ECT activities included the following guidelines to achieve radiation exposures ALARA:

-

use of advanced ECT equipment which does not require entry into the S/G (other than to install primary system nozzle dams).

-

complete training of S/G mockups prior to initilting S/G wor installation of lead doors in the S/G manway At the time of this inspection, the outage plan ALARA estimates had been exceeded due to an unexpected number of tube sleeving / plugging activitie However, it should be noted that until this point, the estimates for radiation exposures were accurate and reasonably lo Licensee identification and control of foreign objects is achieved through secondary side visual inspections, supplemental ECT, and Quality Control. The Current Outage Visual Inspection Report identified two loose parts for removal. Review of log sheets confirmed quality control of foreign object entry / removal from the steam generators. However, effectiveness of this log-in procedure is under review by site QC as a number of loose part entries were made without QC notification and tracking. This concern will be addressed within the licensee's QA/QC Audit Progra Overall, the licensee's preventive maintenance and inspection activities to maintain S/G integrity appear to meet industry recommendations and requirements. The inspector had no further questions regarding activities at this tim . Exit Meeting The inspector met with licensee representatives listed in paragraph 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on February 27, 1987. The inspector summarized the purpose and the scope of the inspection and the finding At no time during this inspection was written material provided by the inspector to the license .