IR 05000245/1982020
| ML20028B313 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 10/29/1982 |
| From: | Durr J, Mcbrearty R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028B309 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-245-82-20, NUDOCS 8211300278 | |
| Download: ML20028B313 (5) | |
Text
e
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 50-245/82-20 Docket No. 50-245 Category C
License No. DPR-21 Priority
--
Licensee: Northeast Nuclear Energy Company P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101 Facility Name: Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Inspection At: Waterford, Connecticut Inspection Conducted:
September 27 - October 1, 1982 Inspectors:
d 8. //, e Q
/a/yy/yy R.A.McBrearty,Reactorpspector date
'
Approved by:
_owAJ
/o//9/E y.P.Durr, Chief, Materials &
/ dste Processes Section, DETP Inspection Summary:
Inspection on September 27 - October 1, 1982 (Report No.
50-245/82-20 Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of inservice inspection activities including program review, NDE procedure review, observation of work j
in progress and review of NDE data, and review of core spray sparger in-spection results. The inspection involved 35-hours onsite by one regional based NRC isspector.
l Results:
No violations were identified.
I
!
l
--
8211300278 821103 j
PDR ADOCK 05000245
@
- -.
_.
.___-
_
.
e DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Northeast Nuclear Energy Company
~
- J. Leason, ISI Coordinator
- E. Mroczka, Station Superintendent
- R. West, NDE Coordinator S. Sikorski, NDE Level III CTS Power Services, Incorporated E. Egger, President C. Grant, Vice President Hartford Steam Boiler
- R. Smith, Authorized Nuclear Inspector
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Inservice Inspection (ISI) Activities a.
ISI Program Review The second ten year inspection interval started on December 28, 1980 and will end on December 28, 1990.
The licensee, by letter dated
September 18, 1980 submitted to the NRC a description of the ISI program, including requests for relief from certain ASME Code requirements, for the second interval. The new program is based on the ASME Code,Section XI, 1977 Edition, including Summer 1978
Addendum. The NRC letter dated April 10, 1981 indicated approval of the new program.
Subsequent to the above the licensee determined that the 1980 Edition of Section XI including Winter 1980 Addendum is more appro-priate for use at Millstone, Unit 1.
This edition of the code is referenced by 10 CFR 50.55a and, therefore, may be adopted by the i
licensee.
b.
ISI Procedure Review The following procedures were reviewed by the inspector.
o Document No. NU-UP-1, Revision 2, " Ultrasonic Examination Procedure - General Requirements" o
Document No. NU-UP-6, Revision 0, " Ultrasonic Examination Procedure for Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking (IGSCC)"
. _.
.-
.
-
_.
--
-.
.
.
.
3 o
Procedure No. 81-1-8, Revision 0, " Flaw Sizing and Characteriz-ing Technique" o
Document No. NU-MP-1, Revision 1, " Procedure for Magnetic Particle Examination" The above were reviewed with respect to technical adequacy and compliance with ASME Section XI requirements and licensee commit-ments.
The inspector observed magnetic particle testing in progress employ-ing a yoke with adjustable leg spacing.
a
'
Procedure NU-MP-1 is a generic procedure for magnetic particle i
examination using prods, coils and yokes, but does not describe the use of AC/DC yokes with adjustable leg spacing.
The inspector discussed the above with licensee representatives and was advised at the exit meeting that the procedure would be revised to provide the necessary instruction regarding the use of AC or DC, and the maximum leg spacing which may be used. This item is unre-solved and will be examined during a subsequent NRC inspection.
(82-20-01)
c.
Observations of Work in Progress The licensee contracted Ebasco to perform the required ASME Section XI examinations in accordance with the ISI program.
The various nondestructive examination methods are governed by licensee proce-dures and evalua* ion of examination results is done by a licensee level III individual.
,
The liquid penetrant examination of isolation condenser supply system class I welds ICAF-1 and ICAJ-1, and the magnetic particle examination of class 1 weld MSAJ-2, MSAJ-3 and MSAJ-4 in the main steam system were witnessed by the inspector.
In addition he observed the technique used by the licensee level III to identify and evaluate intergranular stress corrosion cracking in isolation condenser weld IC CF21.
The inspector observed the above with respect to the following:
o Compliance with applicable procedure o
Personnel qualification o
Compliance with ISI program requirements j
The two Ebasco technicians who performed the liquid penetrant examinations were certified as PT level II. One of the two techni-cians examining the main steam system welds was certified as MT
-
.-.
, -
-
-
-
-.
-
-_
.. -
-
<
-
level II and the second individual was considered a trainee with no certification. The uncertified technician was observed to aid in holding the magnetic yoke in the proper position on the weld and to remove excess magnetic particles with the use of a bulb type blower.
These portions of the examination were done under the direct super-vision of the level II and were observed by the inspector to meet the technique as described in the applicable procedure.
The use of an uncertified individual in the above capacity is permitted by SNT-TC-1A, 1975 Edition, paragraph 4.2, the governing document, and by Procedure No. NDE-1, Revision 9, the Ebasco written practice for qualifying and certifying NDE personnel.
Section 4.3 of procedure NU-MP-1, Rev. I requires that alternating current (AC) magnetic yokes must be capable of lifting a ten pound weight to a height of one foot at the maximum pole spacing at which the yoke will be used. The certificate of calibration for the Parker Probe, model DA-200, serial number 6160, which was used to examine the above welds did not identify the pole spacing at which the test weight (10.449 lbs.) was lifted.
In response to the inspector's question regarding the magnetic yoke pole spacing, the licensee demonstrated that the yoke in question was capable of lifting the required weight with the maximum possible pole spacing (approximately 18 inches). The inspector stated that the demonstration was satisfactory and that he had no further questions regarding the matter.
No violations were identified.
d.
Review of ISI Data Data associated with completed magnetic particle examinations were reviewed to ascertain completeness, possible trends in defect types and whether the examination was conducted in accordance with the applicable piecedure.
The inspector found inconsistencies in the way the data sheets were being filled in by the examination technicians.
In some cases the yoke leg spacing which was used was not identified and whether
'
alternating or direct current was used was not always apparent.
The inspector's concerns were discussed with licensee personnel during the course of the inspection and at the exit meeting. The licensee acknowledged the inspector's concerns and stated that the inconsistencies would be corrected. This will be examined during a subsequent NRC inspection.
(82-20-02)
No violations were identifie <*
3.
Core Spray _Sparger Inspection The core spray sparger inspection required by NUREG 0313 was done using remote, underwater television cameras and was recorded by CTS Power Services, Inc. on video tape.
The inspector reviewed the tapes to ascertain image quality and the degree of resolution attained by the equipment. A one mil (.001") thick wire was clearly shown on the tape.
The tapes revealed what were determined by the licensee's contractor to be two cracks, one located at the 270* side of the "D" sparger junction box, and the second was detected on the 180* side of the same junction box. No other cracks were noted. The worst condition was estimated to be 4 to 6 mils wide.
The licensee planned to use a clamping device, similar to what has been used at other plants, to prevent propagation of the two cracks.
No violations were identified.
4.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in paragraph 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on October 1, 1982. The inspector summarized the purpose, the scope, and the findings of the inspectiam.
Mr. D. Lipinski, NRC Resident Inspector, was present at the exit inter-view.
--
.
.
-
_
_
_
.
..
-
--
--