IR 05000289/1979005
| ML19305A396 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 03/16/1979 |
| From: | Lester Tripp, Walton G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19305A395 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-79-05, 50-289-79-5, NUDOCS 7905020140 | |
| Download: ML19305A396 (7) | |
Text
,,
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
-
O OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No. 50-289/79-05 Docket No. 50-289 License No. OPR-50 Priority Category C
--
Licensee:
Metropolitan Edison Company
.
P. O. Box 542 Reading, Pennsylvania 19640
.
Facility Name:
Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Inspection at:
Middletown, Pennsylvania Inspection conducted:
February 15, 21, 22, and 23,1979
.
Inspectors:
}/ H.% b/fn 4&uk 14 w7er
$.A.Walton,ReactorInspector date signed date signed date signed Approved by-N /'k M1
/XAo M/87f u>
s,
. Tripp, Chief [/Edneering Support Section date s'igned
~
No.1, RC&ES Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on February 15, 21, 22, and 23, 1979 (Report No. 50-289/
79-05)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by a re inspector of the licensee's inservice inspection program.gional based The inspec-tion involved 28 inspector-hours on site by one NRC regional based inspector.
Results:
In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified.
7 9 0 5 0 2 01To R:gion I Fonn 12
.
(R;v. April 77)
- _ _
,
.
DETAILS
'
1.
Persons Contacted Metropolitan Edison Company R. O. Bailey, Lead Mechanical Engineer W. C. Ream, ISI Coordinator
- J. Seelinger, Unit 1 Station Superintendent Nuclear Energy Services R. Taylor, Level III Supervisor G. Dew, Level II Inspector, NDE Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection
- H. Donlin, System Regional Manager, Philadelphia
- W. Rogers, Authorized Nuclear Inspector
- present at the exit interview.
2.
Inservice Inspection (ISI) Data Review The inspector reviewed the eddy current examination results of steam generator tube inspections performed during the March-April 1978 refueling outage. The following was determined.
11.75 per-cent (1,825) of the tubes in steam generator "A" were examined at 400 KHz with a differ'ntial probe.
9.09 percent (1,412) of the tubes in steam generator "B" were examined at 400 KHz with a differential probe.
Selected tubes in both generators were examined using the absolute probe.
Also, 30 tubes in steam generator "B" were examined at 25 KHz to determine the possibility of sludge.
The permanent records, both magnetic type and strip charts of the examinations are on file at Nuclear Energy Services laboratory in Richmond, California.
Copies of the magnetic tapes are on file at the Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Station.
l l
,
.
One tube examined in steam generator "A" (RIT16) was found to contain an outside indication measured at 65 percent through the wall. This indication was not associated with a support or tube sheet. The indication was approximately 3 inches above the number 3 support. This tube was plugged. All other tubes examined were acceptable to the Regulatory Guide 1.83.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Inservice Inspection - Procedure Review The inspector audited selected implementing NDE procedures for technical adequacy and compliance with the requirements of ASME Section XI,1974 Edition, including the Summer 1975 Addenda.
The procedures audited included:
--
Liquid Penetrant Procedures 1300-IX, Revision 4 NES-NIP-019, Revision 2
-
Visual Procedures
--
'
1300-IV6 1300-IV32, Revision 1 Ultrasonic Procedures
--
1300-lK, Revision 4 NES-NIP 008-M, Revision 4 1300-lL, Revision 0 NES 80A2003, Revision 0 1300-E NES-NIP-018, Revision 6 The inspector noted this procedure was limited to a maximum thickness of 1.406 inches, however, the inspections planned to be performed on the reactor coolant piping ranged up"to a maximum thickness of 3.380' inches.
A " temporary change was-initialedand approved by the licensee which allowed thicknesses up to 3.380 inches to be examine.
.
1300-1J, Revision 3 NES-NIP-007-M, Revision 5 This procedure is applicable for ultrasonic e mination of the pressurizer vessel supports.
The inspector n.. ci that the coverage as stated in the procedure for the areas beneatn the attachment welds and along the supports did not satisfy the requirements of ASME Section XI.
The licensee corrected the procedure to comply with Section XI by issuing a " temporary change."
Eddy Current Procedures
--
NES-42-EC-026, Revision 0-42-EC-024, Revision 0-42-EC-034, Revision 0 Hydrostatic Procedure
--
1300-4A, Revision 0 The inspector considered the above procedures with regard to criteria delineated in 10 CFR 50.55 a(g) and the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI.
This included, but was not limited to the parameters described below for liquid penetrant, ultrasonic, visual, eddy current, and system pressure tests.
Liouid Penetrant Techniques; a.
The examination method is consistent with the ASME Code requirements.
b.
Surface preparation requirements are specified.
c.
The method of penetrant application and dwell times are specified.
d.
Component temperature is stipulated, e.
Evaluation and acceptance criteria ~ are specified and are consistent with applicable ASME Code requirement.
.
i Ultrasonic Examination Technique.
a.
The type of apparatus, including frequency range, is specified.
b.
Examination coverage, beam angle and transducer size are specified.
c.
Calibration is accomplished on notches and scanning sensitivity is defined and is consistent with ASME Code requirements.
d.
Evaluation, recording and acceptance standards for flaw indications are specified and consistent with the applicable ASME Code requirements.
Visual Examination a.
Type of visual examination used, direct or remote is specified.
b.
Lighting levels are adequate.
c.
Cleanliness of surface to be examined is defined.
d.
Measurement of clearances, tightness of bolting, physical
,
displacement, structural adequacy, freedom of motion and verification of settings as applicable are defined.
e.
Results are compared to acceptance criteria and required corrective measures taken where applicable.
System Pressure Tests a.
Test conditions of pressure and temperature are specified.
b.
Test condition holding time is specified.
c.
Rate of temperature and pressure increases are specified for each system.
d.
Pressure and/or temperature measuring instrumentation is defined.
e.
Gauges calibrated prior to tes.
.
Volumetric Examination using Eddy Current Technique a.
The two channel Eddy Current Examination equipment has been identified including indicator, meter, tube, strip recorder and tape (whichever is applicable).
-b.
Method for maximum sensitivity is specified.
c.
Method for determining material permeability of material to be examined is specified.
d.
Method of examination (Impedance, Phase-Analysis or Modulation Analysis) is provided.
e.
Examination equipment calibrated in accordance with the applicable perfonnance reference.
f.
Amplitude and phase has been calibrated with the proper applicable calibration reference and is recalibrated at predetermined frequency.
(Reference flaw simulates length, depth and shape.)
g.
Correct coverage of steam generator tubes occurs during the examinstion.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
4.
Inservice Inspection Activities The inspector audited the below listed activities relative to the inservice inspection.
Material certifications on ultrasonic and liquid penetrant
-
fluids.
Ultrasonic instrument linearity check records.
-
Ultrasonic calibration blocks.
-
Nondestructive examination personnel qualifications.
-
Preserivce data on selected welds.
-
The above audit was conducted to ascertain compliance with the licensee's technical specification and the ASME B&PV Code Section XI.
No items of noncompliance were identifie _
_. _
.
.
'
5.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Reference: MEC Letter GQL 0134)
l (0 pen) Infraction (78-26-01):
During the March-April 1978 refueling outage, the licensee's ISI contractor had performed ultrasonic examinations on certain welds and did not comply with the appli-cable procedure NES-NIP-018, Revision 1, in that examinations were performed using a 3.5 MHz transducer with the instrument pulser set at 5.0 MHz.
The following welds were involved:
FWW-1; FWW-2; and, HPW-5.
The licensee has reexamined the three welds during the current refueling outage using the approved procedure NES-1300-IE.
The inspector has no further questions regarding this portion of the noncompliance.
6.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representative (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on February 23, 1979.
The inspector summarized the purpose, scope, and findings of the inspection.
.
b
-
w -