IR 05000309/1989010

Insp Rept 50-309/89-10 on 890612-16.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Inservice Insp Program, Including Outage Plans & Licensee Control of Program & Eddy Current Insp of Steam Generator Tubes

ML20247H673
Person / Time
Site:	Maine Yankee
Issue date:	07/18/1989
From:	Mcbrearty R, Strosnider J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20247H667	List: IR 05000309/1989010 ML20247H663
References
50-309-89-10, NUDOCS 8907310096
Download: ML20247H673 (7)

Text

. .

-

l

.

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report N /89-10 Docket N License No. DPR-36 Priority Category C Licensee: Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company 83 Edison Drive Augusta, Maine 04336 Facility Name: Maine Yankee Atomic Station Inspection At: Wiscasset, Maine Inspection Conducted: June 12-16, 1989 Inspector: h5

/

R. A. McBrearty, Reactor gineer

/h/9fr7

- 7 dat'e Approved by: Nk QJack R. Strosnider, Chief, Materials and if 89 I date

~T ' Processes Section, EB, DRS Inspection Summary: Inspection on June 12-16, 1989 (Report No. 50-309/89-10)

Areas Inspected: A routine, unannounced inspection was conducted of the licensee's inservice inspection program including outage plans and licensee control of the program. The areas inspected included eddy current inspection of steam generator tubes, schedules of items to be examined during the 1988 refueling outage and comparison of the schedule with the 10 year progra Results: The inspector concluded that the ISI activities reviewed during the inspection complied with applicable code and regulatory requirement I

!

!

_

8907310096 090719 9 PDR ADOCK 0500

!

_ _ _ ____ __.____-____--_ - -

_ _ _ - __ __ - _______ -

.

.

DETAILS Persons Contacted Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company

• Boulettee, Vice President Operations / Plant Manager

• Gifford, PED Section Head

• Leclerc, Quality Programs Section Head

• Mehlhorn, Inservice Inspection Coordinator

• Nichols, Licensing Supervisor

• Speed, Engineering Supervisor State of Maine

• Dostic, State Nuclear Safety Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• R. Freudenberger, Resident Inspector

• C. Holden, Senior Resident Inspector

• Denotes those present at the exit meeting on June 16, 1989.

2.0 Inservice Inspection Program (73051, 73753)

The Maine Yankee facility is in the 2nd inspection interval which commenced on December 28, 1982 and will end on December 28, 199 The facility is currently committed to observe the applicable requirements of the 1980 Edition of Section XI through the Winter 1980 Addend The 1988 outage ISI plan end the ISI 10 year program and current inspec-tion period plan were selected for inspection. The inspection was per-formed with respect to completion of scheduled items and to ascertain that the schedule agreed with the 10-year plan and the current inspection period pla The inspector determined that the required examinations were scheduled and completed. Changes to the schedule were documented. In addition, the 10 year program, which was manually maintained, has been converted to a computer based system, which after completion of the licensee's review, will be used to maintain the program and to track its status to assure that all required examinations are completed within the code and regulatory mandated time fram '

,

I

____ _ - _ - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - ._ -

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _------ _

.

.

.

Conclusions The examinations which were scheduled and completed during the 1988 refueling outage complied with the inspection interval and period progra: The licensee's decision to convert its 10 year ISI program to a computer based document is a good management initiative to control the program and to assure completion of the examinations within the mandated time fram .0 Nondestructive Examination (NDE) Cata Review Inservice inspection NDE data were selected for inspection to ascertain that ASME Code and regulatory requirements were complied with regarding recording of results, evaluation and disposition of findings, and complete-ness of the data. Data representing ultrasonic and liquid penetrant examinations, and visual inspections of the following welds and components were selected for inspection:

Tubesheet to head weld RHE-1

Pipe to safe end weld SE-J

Safe end tc pipe weld SE-1

Pipe to elbow weld 3"-RC-20-S-31

Nozzle to safe end weld 3"-RC-21-SE-4

• Pipe to weld 4"-SIH-41-S-6

Component supports 14"-RH-1-SH-42, 43, 44, -45, -46, -47 Evaluation sheets, deficiency reports and corrective action requests were used to provide engineering evaluation and disposition of examination results which did not meet the applicable acceptance criteria. The engineering disposition and corrective action included the requirements to expand the examination sample when that was appropriate. The ISI Coordinator, who is a member of the Engineering Department staff, participated in providing the evaluation, disposition and corrective action required to resolve NDE result The insiector determined that the evaluation and dispositions were technically adequate to return the subject item to an acceptable conditio Calibration records of ultrasonic examination equipment and certification records of ultrasonic couplant and liquid penetrant materials used to perform the examination of the aforementioned welds were inspecte The

_ _ - _ _ -

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

.

.

records confirmed that the equipment was used within its calibration period and that the materials met applicable requirements regarding sulphur and halogen conten Qualification / certification records of the NDE technicians who perf..med the subject examinations were inspected and showed that those individuals were qualified to perform their assigned dutie No violations were identified Conclusions:

Inservice inspectf on results were completely and clearly documented, and easily retrievable. ASME Code and regulatory requirements were complied with, and the data verified that outage ISI schedules were complied with and agreed with the 10 year ISI progra .0 Eddy Current Examination of Steam Generator Tubes Eddy current examination results were selected for inspection to ascertain that Technical Specification and regulatory requirements were complied with and that the examinations were performed by qualified personne Eddy current examination of tubes in steam generator #1 was performed by the licensee to comply with the Maine Yankee Technical Specification 4.1 The original examination sample of 514 randomly selected tubes was 9% of the 5703 total tubes in the steam generator as required by the Technical Specification. The sample was increased by 186 tubes in the per ahery region inspection for loose parts damag WF n a defective tube (pluggable) was detected in the 514 tube sample, the examination sample was increased by 1028 tubes. Another defective tube was detected in the expanded sample which resulted in a second expansion of 2056 additional tubes including the 186 peripheral tubes which were originally included for loose parts damage inspection. In addition to the eddy current examination, 59 tubes were inspected with profilometr Eleven additional tubes were examined to assure that an adequate sample was attained. A total of 3609 (63.3%) tubes were examined in steam generator # l

'

Eddy current examination data were analyzed in accordance with procedure MY-410-0.05, " Eddy Current Data Analysis Procedure, Evaluation of Steam Generator Tubing." All of the data received a primary and secondary analysis and a comparison of the results of each analysis was made for .

all tubes as follows: Any indication 220% through wall for which one analyst varied from the second analyst by more than 10% required resolution by the Combustion Engineering lead analys _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ --

-

.

.

.

5 Any indication whose analysed location varied by more than 1 inch required resolutio . Any indication that one analyst identified as 240% and the second analyst identified as (40% required resolutio . Any indication representing 240% wall loss required analysis by the lead analys A summary of the 1988 eddy current examination results follows:

Number of Total Tubes Plugged Total Tubes 5703 100%

Total Tubes 3609 63.3%

Examined Defective Tubes 5 0.089% 5 (2 40% TWD)

Degraded Tubes 12 0.21% 1 (2 40% < 40% TWD)

Imperfect Tubes 8 0.14% 0 (220% TWD)

In addition to the above, 7 tubes were plugged due to possible loose parts induced imperfections (2), or uncharacterized denting (5). This raised the total of tubes plugged in 1988 to 13 tubes (0.23% of the total tubes in SG #1). With regard to the potential for degradation due to loose parts, the licensee performed a secondary side visual examination and did not find any loose part Personnel qualification / certification records of the Combustion Engineering eddy current examiners and data analysts who participated in the examinations at Maine Yankee were inspected to ascertain that the individuals were qualified to perform the tasks required to accomplish a meaningful eddy current examination and data analysi The inspector determined that the examinations were performed and the data were analyzed by individuals who were adequately certified to the j level of qualification required to perform their assigned dutie I No violations were identifie _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _-

________ _ _____ __

_ _ - _ - _ _ _ _

.

.

.

Conclusions The eddy current examination of steam generator tubes during 1988 refuel-ing outage complied with Technical Specification requirements regarding the sample size, sample expansion and removing tubes from service when indications exceeding the plugging limit were identifie The data analysis process was conducted in compliance with applicable licensee procedures. The personnel who performed the analyses were adequately qualified to perform that function based on documented experience and training as were the individuals who performed the examination The following shows the total number of tubes in each steam generator that have been plugged during the service life of the plant:

Steam Generator Number of Outage Total Tubes Number Plugged Tubes Year Pluqqed 1 5 1978 m (5703 total tubes) 3 1985 21 E 13 1988 2 5 1978 (5703 total tubes) 13 1982 41 22 1985 1 1987 Plugged by C-E 3 6 Prior to service (5703 total tubes) 5 1978 22 11 1985 5.0 Quality Assurance Involvement In Inservice Inspection (730501) ,

To confirm that the Quality Assurance coverage of outage inservice inspection activities was sufficient to assess complisnce of these activ' cies with applicable Code and regulatory requirements the following were selected for inspection:  ;

l l

Aud.it Report No. MY-88-19

QA Evaluation No. 88E-067

QA Evaluation No. 88E-082

QA Evaluation No. 88E-096

QA Evaluation No. 88E-118

,

. ..

.

.<

'

.

The QA activities were performed during the period from October 29, 1988 to December 13, 1988 and included observations of licensee and ISI vendor activities regarding eddy current examination of steam generator tubes, analysis and evaluation of eddy current data, local leak rate testing, ultrasonic examinations, and. magnetic particle and liquid penetrant examination The reports verified that the areas covered by the audit and by the various QA evaluations were varied enough to adequately assess the quality of the observed activities and to determine compliance with the applicable code, regulatory and procedural requirement No violations were identifie Conclusions The licensee's quality assurance group performed a number of evaluations of ISI vendor onsite activities which served to provide confidence in the quality of work.being performed by the vendor. The areas which were included in the various evaluations were sufficient to adequately evaluate the vendor's performance and confirmed that applicable requirements were complied wit ,0 Exit Meeting The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)

at the conclusion of the inspection on June 16, 1989. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspectio .

i At no time during the inspection was written material provided by the inspector to the licensee. The licensee did not indicate that proprietary information was involved within the scope of this inspectio J

!

.

1 i

,

a 2__.._______ _ _ _--_-- ----- _---- -