IR 05000361/1987027

Insp Rept 50-361/87-27 on 871013-19.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Inservice Insp Activities,Including Insp Procedures 73052,73753 & 73755

ML20236P987
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	11/06/1987
From:	Clark C, Richards S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20236P976	List: IR 05000361/1987027 ML20236P974
References
50-361-87-27, NUDOCS 8711190126
Download: ML20236P987 (5)

Text

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

.

.

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION V

i Report No. 50-361/87-27 Docket No. 50-361 License No. NPF-10 Licensee: Southern California Edison Company P. O. Box 800 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 Facility Name: San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 2 Inspection at: San Clemente, California

Inspection Conducted: October 13-19, 1987 Inspector: M[4 -

-

8 h)

Date Signed l

C.Clgk,ReactorInspector j Approved by: In k S. Richards, Chief

///t,f87 Dat'e Signed Engineering Section j

!

Inspection During the Period October 13-19, 1987 (Report No. 50-361/87-27) l Areas Inspected: A routine announced inspection of Unit 2 Inservice Inspection (ISI) cctivities. During this inspection, Inspection Procedures 73052, 73753 and 73755 were covere Results: In the areas inspected, no violations of NRC requirements were ,

'

identifie i i

i i

G

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

-- -

,

.

,

DETAILS i

1. Persons Contacted Licensee

• M. Wharton, Assistant Technical Manager

• C. Couser, Lead Compliance Engineer

• J. Mundis, Nuclear Services Supervisor

• J. Boardman, ISI Engineer D. Henry, ISI Engineer

• R. Retana, QA Engineer T. Nichols, QA Engineer Contractor Personnel (Combustion Engineering)

• P. Lenz, ISI Engineer

Denotes those personnel in attendance at the exit meeting on October 19, 198 The inspector also held discussions with other licensee and contractor personnel involved with Inservice Inspection Activitie . Inservice Inspection - General Program Information The licensee's cycle 4 refueling outage Inservice Inspection (ISI) of Class 1, Class 2 and Class 3 nuclear components in Unit 2 was being performed in accordance with the 1977 Edition of Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code with Addenda through the Summer of 197 Combustion Engineering (CE) was the contractor performing ISI activities during this outage. The ISI program examination area summary sheets (from Manual M38218, dated November, 1982) list the areas to be examined, the method and extent of the examination, calibration blocks required and other useful information. The ISI program plan was previously reviewed 4 by the NRC as addressed in NRC Report No. 50-361/86-2 !

l 3. Inservice Inspection - Review of Procedures

)

!

The majority of ISI procedures used this outage, were previously reviewed I by the NRC. The following procedures reviewed by the inspector during this inspection represent newly implemented procedures to the ISI program: S023-XXVII-4.9976.15/0 (CE No. 9976-151-015, Revision 2), .

I

" Ultrasonic Examination Procedure for Steam Generator Extension i Ring, Tube Sheet, Nozzle and Lower (High Pressure) Head Welds." S023-XXVII-4.9976.25/0 (CE No. 9976-ISI-025, Revision 2),  ;

" Ultrasonic Examination Procedure for Steam Generator Secondary Side i Circumferential and Nozzle Welds." l

!

\

\

l -______J

.

i I XXVII-4.9976.56/0 (CE No. 9976-ISI-056, Revision 2),

" Ultrasonic Examination Procedure for Steam Generator Stay Cylinder J Welds." l The above procedures adequately addressed all areas specified in the j licensee's ISI progra No violations or deviations were identifie . Inservice Inspection - Observation of Work and Work Activities

)

The inspector observed ultrasonic (UT) examinations performed on welds in the cold leg (1201-009-30"-A-C) of loop 18, pump to reactor vesse These examinations covered ISI areas 02-011-001 (pump-to-safe end weld),

02-011-002 (safe end-to pipe weld) and 02-011-011 (safety injection nozzle-to-safe end). The following UT attributes were evaluated and found to be consistent with the approved procedure and ASME section XI requirements: The type of apparatus used, scanning technique, extent of coverage,-calibration of the instrumentation and system prior to examination, beam angles, size and frequency of the search unit, limits of evaluation and recording of indications, and determination of acceptance limit In conjunction with these examinations the inspector reviewed the equipment certifications, and these were found acceptabl The qualification and certification records of the inspection personnel (levels 1, II and III) performing ISI examinations were reviewed by the '

inspector. All personnel appeared qualified in accordance with ASME Section XI requirement No violation or deviations were identifie . Inservice Inspection - Data Review and Evaluation l

The inspector reviewed all the available NDE ISI data sheets generated during this outage, that had been reviewed and approved by the licensee's Level III reviewer. The authorized nuclear inservice inspector (ANII)'

had not signed off on these data sheets yet. The inspector was advised !

by the licensee that the ANII had been following the ISI work and had scheduled these data sheets for final review and signature. There were some documentation discrepancies noted during the inspector' data revie Examples of the discrepancies found, are noted below, by document number:

Document Number Discrepancy UT No. 15-2 Incomplete Procedure Number

UT No. 15-5 Incorrect identification of examination weld / area, ;

02-003-010 should read 02-003-011 as identified on UT sheet no. 15-5 ;

UT No. 17-1 Three of the examination weld / area identification u

L *

-

I

l numbers were changed, but only the last one had a date and set of initial Each change should have been dated and initiale UT No. 17-2 Same as above UT No. 19-11 Incorrect Procedure Number, should be 5023-XXVII-4.0.19 UT No 19-15 Same as above The above discrepancies were administrative in nature and did not contain any safety related concern These discrepancies were identified to the licensee Level III reviewer, who agreed they would be correcte The licensee stated that since the data sheets had not yet been reviewed by the ANII, the licensee review system may have still caught the identified discrepancies. The number of discrepancies found by the inspector during this data review, are evidence of a lack of attention to detail by the licensee in filling out and reviewing data sheet Since accurate ISI data / records are required to ensure the licensee has met all the ISI technical specificatiore requirements, the licensee needs to correct the conditions that are generating these data / record discrepancie In conjunction with other NRC inspections of this facility, it appear that this is another example, that shows the licensee and/or his contractors have not always followed a formal process during documentation of data, procedure changes and their reviews of the same documentation. Examples of similar items identified in recent NRC inspections are identified in paragraph 2.1 of inspection report no /87-19 and 50-362/87-2 This appears to be an area where additional management attention is required to ensure steps are taken to improve the licensee performance in recording accurate data, procedure changes and the reviews performed on this documentatio No violation or deviation were identifie . QA Involvement j Inspector discussions with QA personnel revealed that QA had issued a proposed schedule of QA surveillance, for the Unit 2 cycle IV refueling outage. The QA group felt that issuing this proposed schedule with 3 proposed dates for each surveillance, did not comprise the results of !

their surveillance. The results of these surveillance will be reviewed !

by the NR ;

i Some surveillance of ISI activities had been scheduled and performed ]

prior to this inspection, and their results will be documented in a final :

licensee report at the completion of the outage. The only identified rejected condition found to date during this ISI inspection by the licensee's contractor, was an eliptical (1/8 inch by 1/4 inch) peep hole I

_ _ - _ _ _ __ _ _ -

_

, __

'

.. ,

..

..

4

identified during visual inspection of.a support member.(VT No. 66-9). j This condition was documented on nonconformaqce report (NCR)-~ number- 1 2-2120 ' revision 0 for evaluation, to see ifithis'showed evidence of'

-

-loading sufficient'to deform a 3/16-inch diameter hole in this: upper -j vertical' support stu j No~ violations or deviations were identifie . . Exit Meeting The ' inspector met with the licensee 'nianagement representatives . denoted in ,

paragraph 1 on-October 19,'1987; fhtLscope of the~ inspection and the--

.

]

inspectors' finding as noted in this-report were discussed /. i a

l l

l

-___--__-____..__---____