IR 05000336/1987028

Insp Repts 50-336/87-28 & 50-423/87-29 on 871130-1204.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Steam Generator Eddy Current Insp,Water Chemistry Controls & Radiological Controls During Steam Generator Insp & Repair

ML20149M961
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	02/16/1988
From:	Strosnider J, Winters R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20149M955	List: IR 05000336/1987028 ML20149M954
References
50-336-87-28, 50-423-87-29, NUDOCS 8802290320
Download: ML20149M961 (9)

Text

.

.

...

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

1. '. Repcrt No /87-28 50-423/87-29 Docket No License No DPR-65 NPF-49 Licensce: Northeast Nuclear Energy Company P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270 Facility Name: Millstone Units 2 and 3

Inspection At: Waterford, Connecticut Inspection Dates: November 30 - December 4, 1937 Inspector: b R. W. Winters, Reactor Engineer, MPS, EB, date DRS, Region I Approved by: . 2 /3 /88 J Strosnider, Chief, Materials & Processes date ection, Engineering Branch, DRS, RI

.In_spection Summary: Routine unannounced inspection on November 30 - l December 4,1987 (Report Nos. 50-336/87-28 and 50-423/50-23)

Areas Inspected: Steam Generator eddy current inspection, water chemistry )

controls, and radiologicel controls during steam generator inspection and j repai '

Results: ho violations or deviations were identifie I 8802290320 890222 PDR ADOCK 05000336

'

O PDR

'

l

-

-_ ,_ -_-__ _

-

,

.

..

.

'

i DETAI.LS

. 1.0 Persons Contacted a Northeast Nuclear Energy Company -

T. Blanchard, Nondestructive Test Specialist, Unit 2 T. Burns, Chemistry Supervisor, Unit 3

• C. Clement, Superintendent, Unit 3

• G. Closius, Plant Quality Services Supervisor

• M. Gentry, Engineering Supervisor, Unit 3

• H. Haynes, Millstone Station Services Superintendent J. Keenan, Superintendent, Unit 2 '

• D. Kross, Instrument and Control Supervisor, Unit 2 L. Loomis, Nondestructive Test Specialist, Unit 3 t S. Ragland, Associate Chemist, Unit 2 M. Roche, Chemistry Technical Specialist, Unit 2

• S. Scace, Millstone Stttion Superintendent S. Turowski, Radiation Specialist, Unit 3  !

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• S. Barber, Resident Inspector, Millstone Unit 3

• Raymond, Senior Resident Inspector, Millstone

• T. Rebelowski, Senior Reactor Engineer

• Denotes those attending the exit meetin The inspector also contacted other administrative and technical personnel during the inspectio ;

2.0 References / Requirements Steam Generator surveillance activities were inspected to determine compliance with the following requirement * Technical Specifications - Steam Generators - paragraph 3/4.4.5, .

-

Units 2 and ;

i

' Final Safety Analysis Report - Steam Generators paragraph

!

4.3.2, Unit 2, paragraph 5.4.2, Unit t 3.0 Activities Reviewed The inspector reviewed the eddy current (ECT) test data and radiation

data collected during the last outage, and the water chemistry results ,

for the preceding year. The same infonnation was reviewed for both Units 2 and !

i

!

l l

-_ _ - ___

_ , _ _ ___ __

_ ____ ____ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _

,

.

.-

,

..  ;

'

. 3 3.1 Steam Generator Eddy Current Inspection

'

Oetails of the Review - Unit 2 At the time of this inspection Unit 2 was operating at 100% power and no steam generator work was in progress. The inspector reviewed the.results of the last ECT and discussed the planning for the next inspection with licensee personnel. The condition of the two steam generators after the last ECT inspecticn was as '

shown in Table ,

In the planning for the next outage the licensee has established i the pluggirg limit'for previously sleeved tubes as 40% of the nominal through wall thickness of the sleeve in accordance with ,

the footnote to paragraph 4.4.5.1.4(a)6 of the Technical i Specification !

Findings - Unit 2 The licensee reported the condition of the two steam generators

,

in Unit 2 as shown in Table 1 based on the cumulative inspections '

, preformed on these steam generator TABLE 1 f

Tubes per steam generator: 8519 - 3/4 0.D. 0.048 inch wall thicknest i  !

Generator A Generator B

. Hot Leg Cold Leg Hot Leg Cold leg

'

.;

Flaws 10% to 40% 1471 391 659 351 ,

,

!

Sleeved Tubes 666 2071 156 2224 Plugged Tubes 1034 838

.

,

.

{ Planning for the next inspection included provisions to inspect  :

j the degraded tubes as required by the Technical Specifications.

! Efforts were underway to assure that the contracted ECT v.,rk will be carried out as required by the regulations and followed by the ,

i licensee's quality control group. Final evaluation is planned to

! include review by an individual certified as level III in ECT and

, verified by a second certified Level III inspector.

!'

Conclusions - Unit _2 <

Planning for the next ECT is well under way for Unit The  :

licensee personnel involved are aware of problems encountered in  !

.

the past and are endeavoring to prevent recurrence. The new l l computer display developed for tracking ECT was demonstrated to l

! the NRC Inspector and appears to be adequate for its intended >

,

purpos ,

i

- - _ - .--- . . . - - . , _ . - _ . . . _ . - _.- - - -

c-

~

.

.

. 4 No deviations or violations were identifie . Details of the Review - Unit 3 The inspector reviewed the results of the first ECT of the steam generators in Unit 3. This inspection had been completed prior to the NRC inspection and the steam generators closed. Results of this ECT inspection are shown in Table Findings - Unit 3 Based on inspection of all tubes the condition of the steam generators B, C, and 0 in Unit 3 are as shown in Table TABLE 2 Tubes per steam generator: 5626 - 0.688 0.0. 0.040 inch wall thickness Generator B Generi o C Generator 0 Flaws 0 to 19% 2 3 10 20 to 29% 2 1 4 30 to 39% 0 2 3 40 to 100% 0 0 0 Plugged 3 3 1 The licensee elected to plug three tubes in each steam generator B and C and one tube in steam generator D. These were in addition to the defects noted above. The inspector reviewed the locations of the plugged tubes and noted that the plugged tubes appeared to be randomly locate Conclusions __ Unit 3 The results of the recent steam generator ECT were acceptable and were available in a timely manner. Based on these data the steam generators for unit 3 are in Technical Specification category C- No deviations or violations were observe .2 Water Chemistry Details of the Review - Unit 2 The inspector reviewed selected water chemistry reports for the period from January 1987 to the time of the inspectio Secondary water sampling is done at various points in the feedwater system including the condenser hot well, condensate ;

pump c.ischarge, condensate polishing filter discharge, steam jet -

~ -_.

.

, 5 air ejector (includes samples for steam generator tube leak detection), drain cooler discharge, feedwater heater number 1, and the steam generator blowdown lin The inspector selected October 1987 for a detailed evaluation of secondary water chemistry since the plant was operating at 100%

power for the entire period. This provided data with the plant under steady state conditions and optimum conditions for water chemistry control .

Findings - Unit 2 The results of the evaluation are shown in Table 3 along with the steam generator manufacture *'s recommendations for various elements and water propertie TABLE 3 Element Location CPD FWHT ISG 2SG MFG RECM pH 8.95-8.84 8.9-8.81 8.6- .6-8.75 8.5-1 Spec Cond uMhos/cm 1.9- .84-1.92 1.4- ,3- Cat Cond uMhos/cm .08 .07 .08 .1 .08 .1 Chlorides (ppb) .05- .05- Sodium (ppb) .03 .03 .05- .0- Ammonia (ppb) 145-102 155-110 0xygen (ppb) 1.0- .0 0-10 Hydrazine (ppb) 23-27 Sulfate (ppb) .05- .04- Conclusions - Unit 2 Based on these data the licensee is maintaining secondary water chemistry within the manufacturers and Industry (EPRI)

recommended guideline In the case of chlorides and sulfates it appears that the quantities to be measured are approaching tF*

lower limit of the equipment the licensee has available to perform the analysi No deviations or violations were observe Details of the Review - Unit 3 The inspector reviewed selected water chemistry reports for the period from January 1987 to the time of the inspectio Secondary water sampling is done at various points in the feedwater system as shown in Table py -

.

- ., ,

,

..

i

. -6:

! 1.'.{ t 1ABLE 4 l Location Element Condenser . 02, Sp Cond,' Grab Condensate Feed pH, Na, C1, 02, Sp Cond, Cation Cond, Grab

' Pump Discharge Condensate Demin Na, Cl, Sp Cond, Cation Cond, Grab  :

Discharge Chemical Additions

.SJAE Rad Monitor for Tube Leakage Before 6th Stage pH control, Grab Stage Ht Exh

' Heater Drain Pump Grab  ;

Discharge Between 4th & 3rd Grab Stage Ht Exh After 2nd Stage Grab Ht Exh After 1st Stage 02, pH, Sp Cond, Cation Cond, Hydrazine, Grab !

Ht Exh SG Blowdown Na, C1, pH, Sp Cond, Cation Cond, Grab I Main Steam Line pH, Sp Cond, Cation Cond, Grab i The inspector selected October 1987 for a detailed evaluation of ;

secondary water chemistry. During this period the plant was operating'at 100% power until October 14, with approximately 10%

power reduction until October 29 when the plant was shut down for i the planned outage. This selection allowed comparison of Units 2 and 3 during steady power operation as well as Unit 3 during the transient for shut dow .

Findings - Unit 3

,

The results of the evaluation are shown in Table 5 for various elements and water propertie TABLE 5  !

Element Location Vendor COND FWHT 2SG 35G Rec'd opm ;

pH .0 8.5 min Spec Cond uMhos/cm 1,4- .6- .8- .75- ;

Cat Cond uMhos/cm .05 0.1- .1- max t Chlorides (ppb) .5 .5 75 max (

Sodium (ppb) .1 0.5- .5- l 0xygen(ppb) 3-4 .0 max Sulfate (ppb) .5 3.0-1 .0-1 Silica (ppb) 55-110 75-150 5 max ,

!

i

!

.

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

,- .

O

~

, 7  !

,

Conclusions - Unit 3 <

!

Based on these data the licensee is maintaining the secondary water chemistry within the manufacturers and industry (EPRI) .

recommended guideline In the case of chlorides and sulfates it ;

appears that the quantities to be measured are approaching the l lower limit of the equipment the licensee has availcble to !

perform the analysis. Additionally, grab samples are considered

'

suspect at the low values being measured due to contaminants from the sample containers and collection methods. The licensee is evaluating additional methods of collecting and analyzing to achieve better accuracy in these very low ranges.

.

No deviations or violations were observe .3 Radiation Exposure - Units 2 and 3 Details of the Review Radiation exposures are tracked by means of daily radiation work permits (RWP) for both Units 2 and 3. The exposure ir. formation on these RWP is updated daily in the computer data base. Sorting can be done en any of the fields in the data base to provide information for the control of exposures during an outage and for planning the next outage. Daily reports are provided to management for the morning outage meeting. The inspector reviewed tha printout for all steam generator work during the Unit 3 outage.

j Findings

,

From the review of the daily report to management and the i detailed printout of the RWP exposures it appeared that the

! licensee had overestimated the exposures to be received in the i steam generator work in Unit 3. For example the actual exposures for sludge lancing was about 66% of that originally estimate : Similarly for the Eddy Current Testing that was sutstantially

completed the actual was approximately 30% of the original estimate. However, in both cases the estimates were based on past experience with Unit 2 since this was the first outage for

-

Unit Conclusions The licensee has adequate reporting of the radiation exposures received during the steam generator work. A daily summary was prominently posted in the room used for the morning outage

! meeting assuring that management was aware of the daily outage

status of exposures, j No deviations or violations were identifie I

_

--+-9w9y- y p - + - - * - - - ,_ wm gw *cg-*-TaY~s

_ _ _

. _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ ,

,

'

.a

!

.'

, ;

.. 8 i t

"

>

e

'4.0 Management Meetings i

Licensee management was informed of the scope and purpose of the '

inspection'at the entrance interview on November 30, 1987. JThe; findings of the inspection were discussed with licensee-representatives during the course of the inspection and presented to licensee management at the December 4,1987 exit interview (see paragraph I for attendees). .

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

inspectio E i

!

i

,

k E

s i

e

[

,

l l l -

'

.

I r

1 i

--

- . -

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

, a *

U.S. NUCLE AM REGULATORY t,OMMIS$10N me. cast s.setcioar ne.ie assi erst w w.w.ev l

eme soau ns I - ' N *

INSPECTOR'S REPORT anve nta Office of Inspection and Enforcement ,

=seir oas {

i<, set ,t . .a*=,- _ .,, ,0 . ,,,.oa ,,,,,,

=o isi escovCvm3., ..

al . ,

,, o ,,,

,,,,,,,,C,&,,

,,

' ~ * * 5 o 3 2 E i 7 2 % a Wit.%1MiiTbt.LheA b E6 Y Cs _ " **"

-

4 7. 5 q7 1 3 e

< o -

-

6 . ottift C a . ettgaCl o i J ta 15 to ar$ picro % Pf asoeugo s, onGA,wat;ON CCC4 or ritco%ino Co%pvC'

rtacc os vivlf TsGavCN<m6*tCiv% ' ' "# #'

p_ow 10 . stGygat os t Ct $f ass Ot 'al a ey-weeeir uew aricwwig a " av eme I k _ sit GON tav i$$% tes.e _,

wo spy va M) 04, va ; . algc(%1 msetCtoa 3. PlasoavanCt appaassat It aw 4 ll kQ %l"I %lt Chl't 4gl7 27 33 Sa 35 30 25 M 31 t v ri of A C ifYli v C o% DVC Y t D iC sion ere tes ew al GC%&. aC1c% te . p.Oveer

' ""** k 02 . $asti, _

M . wGwl Vibi _

tc. eta %fCtc SS mvtSteGatc%

C3 . m CCt h1 0* - SPtCiat it - mtst vta 1. fa:C soe w not QF . vt'dooa 12 - 5*=*wtNtitspoa1 K, 3 - tICcNat oneCl Littga (4 .(msoPClwfN' ~

O!, - WGw' avDit (9- WAT acct 13. ies s *

77 3r 3t

.% g rt s i .0% ,.h. I bT *Ga 10h s i% D% i tovat g,,ygg a gwpoaC(wik1 Co%s tathCE atroaf ContaeN 2 71K ttfua om ageoat f eatSurtf at oaf t

" ' * * "

o' *G.alC%S a%o >Ett *' 0" "'I C%

4 9 C D C,i via t e.$ h*Cronw w stroat samt oa st a to*0 80s X X 1 . CLlaa LCT1t e rss AD aCTC%

i - WO AYitm

)'

_

3 - C4wiatc=

a je C C ale- Cjol a e C $ we osi va uo par va ;

e . vioutiom & otve' o,Qic,Q_ , , i l j i . vts i . vtl ,GQ pp @ [ l 1 34, as as as ' "el to ti f y .

wo:, , ,%,o.wa v,o%

woons.seonv6.o%

w3Dytt plQ Fostont' 'pI.E,, wooVtt hvett e s%$t gg wCOVit ato sotto [ ",h woDUtt hVW9t a s%$P y[ ,g m !!:

'

c .

1;

I: -

-

!!! !I -

i; t!

ia5

!:

si s q-

_

!

1:

I:

.

-

!Nh! xr: : s .

!

- It si ;

r

i :

y 2 i5

,-

F e

N g mru a

? ; i 1/ a i i 5 f - 5 ma: r82 3 :I aw! gy -

"

b dj 4hgO ,  ! l1 l l e i

l g i i ill g l e i l lt I ( l t t 1

'

i 1, I 1 I i 1 Qgg4 $ t tl 1 e i !t t I I i f i !

'

t i e 1 (__) i i i 1

'

U i i g!I I i t 1 i i t !I t l

t lt t l e $ 3:3l7 tdj Dl '

nM i , lt i l e , i ll t l t i i i

,

l,,l l,,l l ossosaw * ,s ,7 , , ,

.

, , , , ,

CF @t.Tt FTS E S ' P

,

i e t i i 1 i !}

I t t i r i i

>

,, , , , 1,,1 o i n , , , I,,l'

b 1 lisi sl '

s7 i i , , , lii( , , i !ii !

'

i i i e i liil

' I 1

• I ST. D A*I O

tl tb i ! l l1 I l

'

I l i l  ! !I i !

• #

'

t i e 1 i l1 1 l n t t i t _ t e

1. e i !

i t i t t i 1 i t i i e

' 1 I I t

"

i i j t i 1 !ia e t l lt l l

'

i g L i 1_ l l1 1 l

1 1 I i _ 1 !I i 1 _

t j I i_ l_Lu_L I t a t_ t i t i I I i __ s 1 1 i i _,

l ll l gl g gl g g g l 0 C*Ctt SscutwCs u D g g D

,g

[ g

• • ' to. on c4 v.t.on to is is te is to ti itI i] *} 2 lS 9 12 is 95 ,* 4 it to !ti ar, i]3 >l a ] $ 32 it