IR 05000285/1979017
| ML19257A265 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
| Issue date: | 11/15/1979 |
| From: | Randy Hall, Kelley D, Westerman T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19257A263 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-285-79-17, NUDOCS 8001030381 | |
| Download: ML19257A265 (9) | |
Text
,
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION IV
Report No. 50-285/79-17 Docket No. 50-285 License No. DPR-40 Licensee: Omaha Public Power District 1623 Harney Street Omaha, Nebraska 68102 Facility Name: Fort Calhoun Station - Unit 1 Inspection At: Fort Calhoun Station, Blair, Nebraska Inspection Conducted: October 17-18; October 29 - November 2, and November 6, 1979 Inspectors:
/.
W /u/
////5/7/
. L. Kelley, fteapt#r Inspector Ifate Y
H&<l
// l5/7f R. G. ~ Spangler,vRea'ttor Inspector ats
/
OJW
~/'eskwny,/
ll-I S -19 D. P. ToitrHn' son ( Reactor Inspector, Date Engineering Support Section Approved by:
/r - /t -7f R. Ef Hall, Chief, Engineering Support Date Section
& f.
//-/i-7f T. F. Westerman, Chief, Reactor Projects Date Section Inspection Summary Inspection on October 17-18, October 29 - November 2, and November 6, 1979 Report No. 50-285/79-17)
1666 354
->
8001080
-
.
_ _ _ _ _.
_.. _ _
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the licensee's (1) Of f-Site Review Committee, (2) Off-site Technical Support Staff; (3) Follow-up on Items of Noncompliance; (4) Follow-up of licensee responses to IE Bulletins and Circulars; and (5) Witness of licensee's examination of feedwater piping to Steam Generator Welds. The inspection consisted of eighty-four (84)
inspector hours onsite by three (3) NRC inspectors.
Results: Of the five (5) areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
1666 355
.
._--
-.-
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Omaha Public Power District
- S. C. Stevens, Manager, Fort Calhoun Stat. ion
- R. L. Andrews, Section Manager, Operations
- W. C. Jones, Division Manager, Production Operations
- R. L. Jaworski, Section Manager, Technical Services
- J. M. Gloshen, Corporate, QA Engineer
- F. A. Thurtell, Division Manager, Environmental and Regulatory Affairs K. J. Morris, Manager, Administrative Services M. J. McEwan, Test Engineer J. J. Fisicaro, Supervisor, Administrative Services J. Fluehr, Mechanical Engineer B. Patel, Mechanical Engineer G. Pleischman, Level III Inspector R. Lisowyj, Metallurgist Westinghouse Electric Corporation E. Pade, Site Engineer R. Burlingame, Level III Inspector J. Flanagan, Level III Inspector
- Denotes those atter. ding exit interview.
The inspectors also talked with and interviewed other licensee employees during the inspection. These included reactor operators and office personnel.
2.
Follow-up on Items'of Noncompliance The inspector reviewed the licensee's response to the item of noncompliance (7910-6) identified in NRC inspection report 50-285/79-10.
The inspector has no further question concerning this item and the item is considered closed.
3.
Off-site Review Committee (SARC)
The inspector reviewed the charter, procedures and the meeting records since the last inspection of the Safety Audit and Review Committee (SARC) to determine the following:
-
Any changes to the charter were consistent with Technical Specifications.
i666 356
_
_
_
_
_-
_
_,
-
Membership qualifications are consistent with Technical Specifications and Regulations.
-
Meeting frequency was in accordance with requirements.
-
A quorum was present and consisted of the necessary expertise in the areas reviewed.
-
That the following areas were reviewed by SARC:
-
Reviews in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59
-
Technical Specification and Operating License changes
-
Items of noncompliance
-
Events requiring 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> notification
-
Reports and meeting minutes of the On-Site Review Committee
-
That any use of consultants was in accordance with Technical Specifications.
The review consisted of the following:
-
The SARC Charter, Revision 4, September 20, 1979
-
SARC Procedure No. 1, Revision 2, October 26, 1978, " Safety Audit and Review Committee Records"
-
SARC Procedure No. 2, Revision 2, October 26, 1978, " Safety Audit and Review Committee Reviews"
-
SARC Procedure No. 3, Revision 4, October 26, 1978, " Safety Audit and Review Committee Auditing."
-
The following meetings:
-
September 20, 1979; also included SARC Audit 3-79, "Conformance of Facility Operations"
-
May 25, 1979; also included SARC Audit 1-79, "QA Program Effectiveness"
-
Janrary 30, 1979; also included SARC Audit - 3-78, " Performance, Training and Qualifications"
-
December 11, 1978 1666 357
.
- -
.-.
_
-
-
.
-
October 27, 1978; also included SARC Audits 2-78
"Conformance of Facility Operation" and 4-78
" Fort Calhoun Station, Unit No. 1, Emergency Plan"
-
July 27, 1979 SARC Audit schedule published January 2, 1979
-
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
Off-Site Support Staff The inspector reviewed the records and procedures of the off-site support staff to verify the following:
-
Administrative controls describe, responsibilities, authority and line of communication for personnel who perform:
-
Design
-
Technical Support
-
Quality Assurance
-
Construction
-
Interface between on-site and off-site functions
-
Procedures for the above are in accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B and the licensee's QA Program.
-
That personnel understand their responsibilities and authorities
-
Personnel are qualified for the tasks they perform The following documents were reviewed by the inspector to verify compliance with the above:
-
Licensee QA Manual
-
The following procedures:
-
PO-TSAP-1, Revision 2, February 1, 1979, " Preparation and Approval of Technical Services Administrative Procedures"
-
PO-TSAP-4, Revision 2, August 18, 1978, " Design Review" 1666 358
-
PO-TSA-5, Revision 2, March 8, 1979, " Operational Support Analysis Documentation"
-
PO-TSAP-6, Revision 2, March 8, 1978, " Operational Support Analysis Development" PO-TSAP-7, Revision 2, March 8, 1978, " Operations Support
-
Analysis Review"
-
PO-TSAP-8, Revision 0, September 20, 1977, " Operations Support Analysis Guidelines Development and Review"
-
PO-TSAP-9, Revision 1, January 22, 1979, " Modification Request Control" No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
IE Bulletin and Circular Follow-up A.
IE Bulletins The inspector reviewed the licensee's response to the IE Bulletins to ascertain:
-
Written response was with in the time period specified
-
Written response included the information required
-
Adequate corrective action was specified
-
Information in response was adequate
-
Corrective action taken was as specified.
The following IE Bulletins were reviewed:
IE Bulletin 79-11 IE Bulletin 79-18 IE Bulletin 79-16 IE Bulletin 79-19 IE Bulletin 79-17 IE Bulletin 79-21 1666 359
__
_
.
.
IE Bulletin 79-15, was further reviewed by the inspector to verify the following:
-
The number of deep draft pumps utilized in safety-related applications
-
The manufacture, model, capacity and plant application
-
Overall pump dimensions
-
Summary of startup, testing and routine maintenance history
-
Operational problems and major repair efforts
-
The longest interval that each pump has been available for operation without corrective maintenance.
B.
IE Circulars The inspector determined that the following IE Circulars had been received and reviewed by licensee management and that appropriate action were taken in response to applicable Circulars:
IE Circular 79-02 IE Circular 79-12 IE Circular 79-04 IE Circular 79-13 IE Circular 79-05 IE Circular 79-15 IE Circular 79-08 IE Circular 79-18 IE Circular 79-09 IE Circular 79-20 IE Circular 79-10 No item of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Follow-up to IE Bulletin 79-13 The IE inspector reviewed special procedure SP-FW-1 prior to the ultrasonic inspection of the feedwater nozzle welds on steam generators
"A" and "B".
The procedure has been approved by OPPD as modified by NRR. All pertinent inspection parameters and an absolute Go/No-Go acceptance criteria have been included in the final draft of the procedure and a clarification meeting was held to assure uniform 1666 360
.-
.
.
interpretation of the requirements.
Certifications were reviewed for each instrument, transducer and inspector along witb the material certification for the couplant used. The IE inspector witnessed the qualification of the ultrasonic instruments and associated equipment prior to the performance of the inspection. Also witnessed was the pre-test calibration of the instrument utilizing a calibration standard at ambient temperature as stated in the procedure.
The "A" steam generator nozzle field weld was inspected first, as it was anticipated that this weld would exhibit the worst-case conditions and potentially the most severe indications. Ultrasonic reflectors were noted both in the weld root and in the adjacent piping base material. The indications were not uniformly dispersed around the circumference of the weld but appeared to be limited to the lower ninety degree (90 ) quadrant of the joint and the pipe. Temperature readings taken with an electronic pyrometer showed that this was the coolest area on the pipe (approximately 160 F) and was significantly below the anticipated inspection temperature of 500 F.
This temperature variation, in addition to the very sensitive inspection gain setting requirements, could have resulted in the locating of non-relevant reflectors.
A maximum single indication with an approximate length of two inches (2")
was noted in the weld root area with several others of varying lengths being located both at the weld root and in the base material.
As these indications were of sufficient oscilloscope amplitude to cancel the test, only a cursory inspection of the "A" steam generator shop weld was performed. No ultrasonic reflectors were noted in this weld.
The shop welds, however, were produced at a time when access to the inside was possible and potential indications were removed by grinding the ID smooth.
Although it was not necessary, the inspection team also ultrasonically scanned both welds on the
"B" steam generator nozzle and found that similar conditions existed on both steam generators.
In accordance with the procedure, steps were immediately taken to place the plant in a cold shut-down condition and proceed with the radiographic requirements of IE Bulletin 79-13.
On November 6,1979 the IE inspector reviewed the radiographs of the feedwater nozzle welds for both steam generators.
This inspection was performed by Nebraska Testing Labroatory in accordance with IEB 79-13 and Special Procedure.SP-FWRG-1 Revision "0" using Dupont 55 film and an 85 curie IR source. Using an electronic pyrometer before beginning the inspection d was determined that the piping and nozzle surface
temperatures were below 120 F.
The shooting sketch attached to the procedure specified that the source be placed on the pipe 0.D. opposite the film resulting in an approximate 16" source-to-film distance.
As access to the I.D. of the pipe was impossible, it was necessary to use film-side penetrameters on all of the radiographs.
1666 361
.
Prior to the review by the IE inspector, all of the radiographs had been signed off as acceptable to IEB 79-13 criteria by an OPPD Level III inspector and a Level III inspector from Nebraska Testing Laboratory. There were numerous film artifacts on the radiographs apparently resulting from abusive handling and a poor developing process.
The double film technique was used and in some cases these artifacts appeared on both radiographs in a set. Measurement of the artifacts on both radiographs showed that although the indications were close to being in the same location their positions were not exact and could not therefore be cause for rejection. The location variations in the position of the artifacts on a given set of radiographs typically ranged from.250" to.750".
The IE inspector concurred with the two Level III film interpreters that the radiographs did not exhibit visible indications of cracking in the feedwater nozzle welds or adjacent base material.
In the areas inspected, no discrepancies with the requirements of IE Bulletin No. 79-13 were noted.
This item will remain open pending completion of the remaining Bulletin requirements.
7.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in para-graph 1) on October 18, November 2, and November 6, 1979. The inspectors summarized the scope and finding of the inspection.
1666 362
.