IR 05000293/1987005
| ML20211P968 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek, Pilgrim, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 02/17/1987 |
| From: | Mcbrearty R, Strosnider J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20211P952 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-293-87-05, 50-293-87-5, GL-84-11, IEB-83-02, IEB-83-2, NUDOCS 8703020464 | |
| Download: ML20211P968 (7) | |
Text
<
l I ~
,
.
.*
'
,
,
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGIC.1 I Report No.
50-293/87-05
.
Docket No.
50-293 License No.
DPR-35, Priority Category C
--
,.
,
Licensee: Boston Edison Company M/C Nuclear 800 Boylston Street Boston, Massachusetts 02199
.
s
,
.
Facility Name:
Pilgrim Nuclear, Generating Station
,
!
Inspection At:
Plymouth, Massachusetts Inspection Conducted: January 12-16, 1987 Inspector:
-
u A l,-
/3
7C A. McBreart)(j ghactor Engineer d' ate 2[7M7
Approved by:
mv
/
f. R. Strosnider, Chief, Materials and date
_
d Processes Section, EB, DRS
,
Inspection Summary:
Inspection on January _12-16,1987 (Report No. 50-293/87-05).
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by one regional based inspector of licensee action on previous inspection findings; IE Bulletin 83-02 and Generic letter 84-11; inservice inspection activities includir.g review of procedures, review of data and review of QA/QC involvement with 15I activities; licensee
-
action regarding Oyster Creek drywell wall thinning findings.
Results: No violations were identified.
goaono464e70219 ADOCK 05000293
- ;
'fe. qq:-
.,
)
.
&.
DETAILS
%9 1.
' Persons Contacted Boston Edison Company
.)
M. Desmond, Senior QC Engineer
\\
- F. Famulari, QC Group Leader
- R. Grazio, Field Engineering Section Manager M. Green, Senior ISI Engineer
- P. Hamilton, Senior Compliance Engineer
- S Hudson, Acting Station Manager-B Perkins, NDE' Level III
- r. Roberts, Director Outage Management
-
-
General Electric Company M. Stamm, NDE Level III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- J. Lyash, Resident Inspector
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
,
b,.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
!.
(0 pen) Unresolved Item 84-21-02: Liquid penetrant acceptance standards for CRDs.
s Criteria proposed by the General Electric Company are not acceptable to the
'
i licensee. CRD 8311 contained penetrant indications which would have been accepted by the proposed criteria, but were found to be indicative of through wall intergranular stress corrosion cracks. The licensee has developed what it considers more appropriate criteria by which no penetrant indications are permitted in critical areas. This item will remain open pending the issuance of the licensee's acceptance criteria.
(Closed) Unresolved Item 84-26-03:
Licensee resolution of small bore piping acceptability.
The piping was originally considered suspect material because of results of the ultrasonic examination performed by ALPHA Testing Laboratories. The subject piping was evaluated by the licensee and was found to be acceptable based on the following:
1.
Ultrasonic re-examination of rejected pipe at ALPHA resulted in accept-ance of the pipe.
2.
Ultrasonic re-examination of subject pipe by General Electric Company
!
at the Pilgrim Station resulted in no recordable or reportable indica-l tions.
l
,
_..
.
.
3.
Issuance of new ASME Code Data Reports and Certificates of Compliance for the subject pipe by Mercury Company.
4.
Concurrence by the Mercury Company and Pilgrim Station Authorized Nuclear Inspectors.
The inspector reviewed documentation associated with the subject piping and, with the exception of the new Certificates of Compliance, found that the above listed actions were completed. The documentation package was found to contain the original Certificates of Compliance. The licensee promptly obtained the new certificates from the Mercury Company. The inspector remarked that the licensee's review of the documentation package as received from General Electric Company should have identified the discrepancy regard-ing the Certificates of Compliance, but he agreed with the licensee that the documentation confirmed that the piping is acceptable.
Based on the above this item is closed.
3.
IE Bulletins (Closed) IE Bulletin No. 83-02: Stress Corrosion Cracking in large -
Diameter Stainless Steel Recirculation System Piping at BWR Plants.
During Refuel Outage No. 6 (December 1983 to December 1984) the licensee replaced the majority of the recirculation system piping in the plant with conforming material.
Remaining susceptible piping is scheduled for exami-nation during the ongoing outage in accordarce with Action 1 of Generic Letter 84-11 which states that the reinspection program should commence within about two years of any previous inspections performed per NRC Order dated Aegust ?6, 1933. The licensee's program of examinations during the current outage u ceduced by the elimination of five RHR System 4-inch diameter welds bec c a the welds are now scheduled for replacement. The inspector reviewed data which confirmed that the augmented ultrasonic exami-nations were satisfactorily performed by EPRI qualified personnel.
Based on the above the licensee has completed the actions required by IE Bulletin 83-02.
4.
Inserv e Inspection (ISI) Procedure Review The inspector reviewed ISI NDE implementing procedures to ascertain compliance with ASME code and regulatory requirements, and for technical adequacy. The following procedures were included in the inspector's review:
Procedure TP 86-130 (UTM-002, Revision 1), " Ultrasonic Examination
of Austenitic Metal Welds For IGSCC."
Procedure TP 86-144 (UTA-004, Revision 0), " Automated Examination
of Dissimilar Metal Welds and Weld Butter Materials" Procedure TP 86-154 (UTA-005, Revision 0), " Automated Ultrasonic
=
Examination of Piping For Erosion or Corrosion"
-.
_ _ _ _.
_ _ -
-
__
. -
. _ -
.
.
.
Procedure TP 86-157 (UT 1.46, Revision 2), " Ultrasonic Examination
of Weld Overlayed Austenitic Piping Using Automated Equipment" Procedure TP 86-158 (UT-31, Revision 8), " Ultrasonic Examination
of Weld Overlayed Austenitic Pipir.g" The above are General Electric Company procedures which were incorporated as temporary pro:edures in the licensee's program, and were given BEco identification.
Quality Control Instruction (QCI) No. 50.10, Revision 2, " Liquid
Penetrant Examination - Solvent Removable Visible Dye" Quality Control Instruction (QCI) No. 50.20, Revision 2, " Magnetic
Particle Examination - Dry Method" Quality Control Instruction (QCI) No. 50.70, Revision 0, " Ultrasonic
Examination - General Requirements" Quality Control Instruction (QCI) No. 50.78, Revision 0, " Ultrasonic
Examination of Nozzle Inner Radius" The inspector's review indicated that the aforementioned procedures met code and regulatory requirements. Additionally, the inspector found that the procedures were technically adequate for their intended application.
5.
ISI Data Review The inspector reviewed selected ISI data to ascertain completeness and accuracy of the data and for compliance with ASME code and regulatory requirements.
Data associated with the following welds were included in the inspector's review:
Recirculation System
- Weld #2R-N18-8
- Weld #2R-N1B-9
- Weld #2R-N2A-1
- Weld #2R-N28-1
Core Spray System
- Weld #14-B-17
- Weld #14-B-18
- Weld #14-B-19
- Weld #14-B-20
.
-
._
__
.
.
Reactor Water Cleanup System
- Weld #12-I-34
- Weld #12-I-35
- Weld #12-I-31
- Weld #12-I-30
Jet Pump Instrument - Weld Overlay
- Weld #RPV-N9A-1 a
Residual Heat Removal System Weld #HL-10-4-28
Reactor Pressure Vessel Weld #RPV-N38-NIR
Weld #RPV-N3D-NV
Weld #RPV-N3C-NV a
- Welds examined in response to Generic Letter 84-11.
The aforementioned welds were examined in accordance with ASME code require-ments which included volumetric (ultrasonic) and surface (magnetic particle or liquid penetrant) examinations as specified by the code and by the ISI program for the particular component.
The magnetic particle method was applied to carbon steel welds and austenitic stainless steel material was examined with the liquid penetrant method.
The GL 84-11 examinations were required to be performed and evaluated by EPRI certified personnel. During the course of the examinations the EPRI certification of the contractor Level III expired although his SNT-TC-1A Level III certification remained valid. The individual was responsible for evaluating the results of completed examinations. The licensee was not aware of the problem at the time apparently because of the time period between publication of the EPRI register of certified personnel.
The individual, who began work at the site in September 1986, was listed on the May 1986 issue of the EPRI register, but his name was omitted from the December 1986 issue.
Expiration dates of individual certifications are not identified in the register nor is any mention made of the period for which a certification remains valid. When the problem was identified to the licensee it immediately requested of its contractor that a second Level III individual with current EPRI certification be sent to the site to re-review all of the GL 84-11 examination results which were originally reviewed and signed by the first
_. _ _
-
.
_
-
.. -.
.
_
.
.
'
.-
- -
-:
individual who arranged to be re-certified at the EPRI NDE Center..The
'
certified Level III was on site to begin work within_24 hours of the licen-
'
see's request, and the inspector confirmed that his name appeared on the latest register of certified personnel which was published by the EPRI NDE
.
Center.. In addition the inspector examined work which was completed by the certified Level III and found that his review confi.wed the results attested to by the first individual.
Subsequent to the inspection at Pilgrim the inspector inquired of the EPRI NDE Center regarding their policy on limits to certifications acquired at i
the Center. The inspector was advised that EPRI certifications are valid for a period of three (3) years which is consistent with the ASME Code /
SNT-TC-1A limitation.
He was further advised that the policy is not pub-lished, but that each individual is informed of the limitation at the time of qualification at the Center.
,
-The inspector found that the examinations were conducted in accordance with qualified, approv.ed procedures by personnel certified 'in accordance with
,
'l SNT-TC-1A,' and who were trained and certified at the EPRI NDE Center at Charlotte, North Carolina for the detection and sizing of intergranular
'
stress corrosion cracks (IGSCC). The inspector further found that the original. reviews of GL 84-11 examination-results were validated by the-
,
[
currently certified Level III.
No violations were identified.
,
6.
Drywell Wall Inspection
,
In response to the drywell wall thinning identified at the Oyster Creek
facility the. licensee has performed an inspection of areas similar to those
!
identified at Oyster Creek. The examinations were done after conferring with cognizant Oyster Creek personnel to assure the adequacy of the scope of'the work. Based on its discussions with Oyster Creek personnel the licensee selected 12 areas, each approximately 6" x 6" in size at the floor
'!
,
- .
elevation for its inspection. The thickness of each area was measured ultrasonically and minimum and maximum thickness readings were recorded for
_
each area. Small inclusions were noted in two of the areas but all 12 areas
'
were found to be free of pitting or erosion.
The inspector reviewed the results of the licensee's examinations and found that the work was done by a Level II individual and approved by a licensee Level III. The inspector further found that the examinations were planned by the licensee immediately upon its learning of the findings at Oyster Creek and in the absence of any requirement to do so.
!
7.
QA/QC Involvement The inspector reviewed QA procedures to ascertain that the licensee's QA
i program-provided for evaluation of the licensee's ISI contractor. Addition-l'
. ally, the inspector reviewed QC surveillance reports of contractor activities during the current outage to ascertain the frequency and adequacy of coverage l
provided by the licensee's QC group. The following QA procedures were included in the inspector's review:
!
-
-. -
.
-. - -. -.
.
. -.. -. - -
- -
- - -. -
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _
.
.
QA Department (QAD) Procedure No. 7.04, Revision 3, " Evaluation of
Suppliers" QAD Procedure No. 7.05, Revision 1, " Preparation and Issuance of
the BEco QA Approved Supplier List."
QAD Procedure No. 7.07, Revision 1, " Survey of Suppliers"
QA Surveillance Reports for the period from September 29, 1986
to December 18, 1986.
The insoector found that the reviewed procedures adequately provided for the evaluation of prospective suppliers, the re-evaluation of approved suppliers, the maintenance of a QA approved suppliers's list and for perforning QA sur-veys of suppliers. The QC surveillances of ISI vendor activities covered the various nethods of NDE used by the ISI vendor at the site including ultra-sonic, magnetic particle and liquid penetrant examinations. The licensee's coverage included automated and manual ultrasonic examinations and examined the attributes which would permit a determination of whether or not the NDE was properly performed, and additionally examined the qualification of the NDE examiner.
No violations were identified.
8.
Exit Meeting The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspector on January 16, 1987.
The inspector summarized the purpose and the scope of the inspection and the findings. At no time during this inspection wcs written material provided by the inspector to the licensee.
l
-. -.
-
_ _ _ _ - - - - - - _ - - - - - _ - - - - _ __
_
-;