IR 05000266/1993010
| ML20036B177 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 05/12/1993 |
| From: | Jeffrey Jacobson, Schapker J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20036B174 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-266-93-10, 50-301-93-10, NUDOCS 9305180269 | |
| Download: ML20036B177 (5) | |
Text
,
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,
REGION III
Reports No. 50-266/93010(DRS); No. 50-301/93010(DRS)
Docket Nos. 50-266; 50-301 Licenses No. DPR-24; No. DPR-27 Licensee: Wisconsin Electric Power Company 231 West Michigan - P379 Milwaukee, WI 53201 facility Name: Point Beach Nuclear Plant - Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Two Rivers, WI 54241 Inspection Conducted: April 14-15, 21-22 and May 5-6, 1993
ct.uA/M.ja S-t r
't 3 1nspectar:
a Jl. ; ff. chap;er O
Date
/
Approved B euBM T-< " d
-
Mcobson, ChTET Date J./M/ {Qs,lnd Processes Section dateri Inspection Summary g
Inspection on April 14-15. 21-22 and May 5-6. 1993 (Reports No.
50-266/93010(DRS): 50-301/93010(DRS))
Areas Inspected:
Routine t.nannounced inspection of inservice inspection (151)
activities including review of program (73051), procedures (73052),
coservation of work activities (73753), cata review and evaluation (73755),
t and inspection of modification to the CVCS-RHR cross-connect line (37700).
Results:
Of the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
During the course of the inspection, the following were noted:
l Based on the areas reviewed the licensee appears to have an effective o
151 program.
The licensee contracts for some ISI services and performs ISI activities to ASME Section XI requirements, utilizing state of the
'
art 151 equipment and procedures.
The 1986 ASME Section XI Code is the applicable Code requirement.
The licensee recently implemented their documented repair and replacement program as required by IWA-4130 of the 1986 Code.
!
The Unit I steam generators were replaced in 1984 After nine operating cycles, eight steam generator +ubes have been plugged.
The licensee's
'
operational and maintenance program and new steam generator design has been successful in reducing the degradation of steam generator tubes.
9305180269 930513 PDR ADOCK 05000266 i
G PDR
~
i
'
j
.
- !
DETAILS
-
'
1.
Persons Contacted Wisconsin Electric Power Company (WEPCo)
- T. Koehler, Manager, Site Engineering
- J. Becka, Manager, Regulatory Services j
- T. Staskal, Senior Project Engineer l
- K. Crowley, Senior Engineer, Performance Engineering
- C. Prothero, Senior Engineer, Performance Engineering
- F. Fleutje, Regulatory Administrative Specialist
!
J. Michaelson, Quality Assurance Supervisor
Hartford Steam Boiler Enaineerina and Insurance Company (HSB)
i J. Gault, ANII l
Westinahouse Electric Corporation (WEC)
D. Obuzenu, level III Eddy Current Examiner
V. S. Nuclear Reculatory Commission (NRC)
J. Gadzala, Resident Inspector i
K. Jury, Senior Resident Inspector
,
- Denotes those attending the exit meeting on May 6, 1993.
Other licensee and contractor personnel were contacted during the course of this inspection.
i 2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findinas (92701)
(Closed) Unresolved Item (266/91009-01(DRS); 301/91009-01(DRS)):
The licensee's repair and replacement program did not comply with the
.American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure
,
Vessel Code,Section XI,1986 Edition. The program previously complied with ASME Section XI, 1977 Edition. Summer 1979 Addenda, wnich was the i
'
Code commitment for the second ten year ISI plan.
The licensee recently completed the revision to the repair and replacement program to
.
'
comply with' the 1986 Code. The NRC inspector reviewed the revised program and confirmed that the requirements of ASME Section XI,1986 Edition are now included and controlled by the program procedures.
'
3.
Inservice Inspection Eeview of Plan (73051)
a.
The NRC inspector reviewed the third ten-year inservice inspection
(151) plan for the first period, second outage.
The 151 plan conformed to the requirements of the ASME Section XI,198o i
Edition. Relief requests in accordance with 10 CFR
.
i
!
.
50.55a(G)(5)(IV) had been applied for by the licensee, f4RC review l
of ISI examinations that the licensee was unable to perform is
currently in progress.
The services of an Authorized fluclear l
Inservice Inspector (Af111) were procured and the ISI procedures
'
and personnel certifications were reviewed by the ANII.
-
The licensee contracted EBASCO Services, Inc. and Professional
!
Welding Associates to assist the WEPCo Quality _ Assurance Department in performing the ISI. WEC was contracted to perform i
eddy current examination (ET) of steam generator tubing.
l
!
b.
ISI Documentation Review (73755)
The f4RC inspector reviewed documents relating to the following:
Nondestructive examination (NDE) procedures utilized for l
ISI.
'
NDE personnel certifications in accordance with SNT-TC-1A.
I f4DE equipment calibration and examination reports.
Ultrasonic instruments, calibration blocks, transducers, and l
ultrasonic examination couplant certifications.
Liquid penetrant material certifications.
j ET examination reports.
>
ET data analysis guidelines.
!
No violi.tions or deviations were identified.
j
c.
Observation of Work Activities (73753)
Se NRC inspector observed the following work activit es in progress:
ET exa-ination of steam generator (SG) tubes.
Ultrasonic examination (UT) of reactor vessel ( 1) closure head studs.
'
,
Mechanized UT used with the Enhanced Data Acquisition Systen
-;
(EDAS) of RV outlet nozzle welds and the flange to shell weld.
'
t Liquid penetrant examination of the 1-CV-369A c eck valve to piping welds.
,
I Visual examination of reactor vessel upper internals.
,
-
P
.
,
i Work activities were performed in accordance with approved
procedures, utilizing calibrated NDE equipment, and certified personnel.
Detection and evaluation of flaws were completed in
,
accordance with ASME Code and regulatory requirements.
I t
No violations or deviations were identified.
!
4.
Eddy Current Examination of Unit 1 Steam Generator Tubes (73753. 73755)
j a.
General
The licensee employed WEC to perform ET of the SG tubes as required by the Point Beach Technical Specifications (TS). WEC
utilized the Zetec HIZ digital cultifrequency acquisition and i
analyzer system to conduct the examinations.
Inspection of the SG
'
tubes included:
Full-length inspection of 588 "A" SG tubes and 591 "B" SG tubes (random periphery of tubesheet).
Hot leg to tube support plate number one:
"A" SG - 202 tubes; and "B" SG - 206 tubes (SG tubesheet periphery).
Hot leg "U" bends:
"A" SE 55 tubes and "B" SG 55 tubes (Rows 1, 2, and 3).
Inspection of the "A" SG detected 78 manufacturing burnish marks (MBMs) in the hot leg and 66 in :he cold leg.
Eight multiple i
manufacturing burnish marks wers found in the hot leg and eight in i
the cold leg. Two tubesheet indications and one indication in the anti-vibration bar (AVB) region -as detected (20-29% thru wall).
l No tubes exceeding the tube plu;;ing criteria were identified.
,
The "B" SG inspection detected ~. MBMs in the hot leg and 52 in the cold leg. Dr.e 20-29% thru.211 indication and one 30-39% thru wall indication was found in the hot leg 5th support plate and AVB region respectively, with no tu:ss exceeding the tube plugging
!
criteria.
b.
Inspection
!
The NRC inspector observed the i of the SG tubes in progress, verified calibraticn/certificar:n of ET equipment and calibration
,
standards, and reviewed the e/a-iners/ analyst qualification certifications. The NRC inspec::r also reviewed the ET Data Analyst Guidelines for the Unit '. SGs and observed the analyst's
evaluations of indications in L':gress.
The licensee's ET program and 1;:e degradation preventive
!
maintenance progran appear Ic bt conservative in assuring the safe
'
operation of the SGs for Unit 1.
The increased number of MBM's reported this outage is due to E.hanced reporting criteria for
!
t i
'
i
!
i i
these type of indications. Due to recent tube failures in the l
free span area of the SG tubes at other plants, the ET examiners i
have scrutinized these indications to assure they do not degrade.
]
l tio violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Modification of CVCS/RHR Second Isolation Valve
!
Modification to the 1-CV-369B second isolation valve for the CVCS/RHR
,
cross-connect line was required to resolve a deficiency in the valve l
design which had a 1/16 inch diameter hole in the disc.
The modification also included a new section of 2 inch diameter pipe where a
,
crack was identified upstream of the 1-CV-369A valve.
The existing l
piping was designed, and installed to USAS B31.1-67. The replacement
,
piping was designed and installed in accordance with ANSI B31.1-89.
The-
>
2 inch piping between 1-CV-369A and 1-CV-369B was replaced and a 3/4 i
inch test connection was installed to enable independent testing of.the two valves.
,
!
After installation, the ICV-369A and B valves were tested for leak I
tightness. Although the ICV-369B valve was replaced with the correct
!
type, leak tightness was not achieved during testing. The ICV-369A, a
,
manual operated valve (normally locked closed), passed the containment
!
leak testing. The Point Beach FSAR, Figure 5.2-10 lists 3 valves on
'3 this line as containment isolation valves; CV-371A, a normally open, air actuated valve, inside containment and CV-369A and CV-369B, outside containment. The licensee concluded that the CV-369B valve is not i
required to assure containment integrity. The installation of the test-t connection enables the testing of the CV-371A and CV369A valves to l
i assure leak tightness of both valves. The licensee committed to revise the FSAR and procedures to reflect these changes and is ir. the progress of initiating a LER to report these changes (LER 50-266/93006).
.
Through observat,ons o' fitup, welding, and nondestructivs examinations.
!
the f4RC inspector concluded that the licensee's procedures were adequate
!
and implemented tsy qualified personnel. The f4DE contract:r performing l
the weld PT. demonstrated good work practices.
!
fio violations or devia: ions were identified.
6.
Exit Meetinq
!
!
The f4RC inspector met.cith licensee representatives (deno:ed in l
Paragraph 1) at the cerclusion of the inspection on May 6.1993.
The i
}
inspector summarized ine purpose and findings of.the inspection.
The licensee representatives acknowledged this information.
The inspector also discussed the likely informational content of the ins:>ection repor3
'
with regard to documen:s or processes reviewed during the inspection.
,
The licensee representatives did not identify any such documents or l
processes as proprietary.
.
t
!
!
,
$
m
.
f