IR 05000245/1993002

Insp Repts 50-245/93-02 & 50-423/93-02 on 930111-15.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Isi Acitivities to Ascertain Those Activities Conducted in Accordance W/ Applicable ASME Code & Regulatory Requirements

ML20138D668
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	02/05/1993
From:	Gray E, Mcbrearty R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20138D659	List: IR 05000245/1993002 ML20138D655
References
50-245-93-02, 50-245-93-2, 50-423-93-02, 50-423-93-2, NUDOCS 9302230036
Download: ML20138D668 (6)

Text

- _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

.

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

REPORT / DOCKET NOS: 50-245/93-02 50-423/93-02 LICENSE NO DPR-21

'

NPF-49

'

LICENSEE: Northeast Nuclear Energy Company FACILITY NAME: Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit I and Unit 3 INSPECTION AT: Waterford, Connecticut INSPECTION DATES: January 11 - 15, 1993 INSPECTOR: Med'8 N /bM 1/P/93

' bate R. A. McBrearty, Reactor Engificer, Materials Section, EB, DRS APPROVED BY: [

E. Harold Gray, Chilff, Materials Section,

'b Date

'

Engineering Branch, DRS Areas inspected: An inspection was conducted on the licensee's inservice inspection (ISI)

activities to ascertain that those activities were conducted in accordance with applicable ASME Code and regulatory requirements. Emphasis was placed on the licensee's evaluation and disposition of nonconforming examination results and its action related to NRC concerns expressed during a previous inspectio Results: The licensee's ISI program is being implemented in compliance with applicable ASME Code and regulatory requirements. Nonconforming results are identified on Unresolved Indication Reports and the accompanying evaluations and dispositions wer determined to be based on technically justified methods which confirmed that the related -

components were acceptable for continued service. The licensee's action in response to NRC cor.cerns were judged to be appropriate and to strengthen the ISI program at each of the licensee's nuclear facilitie ,

9302230036 930211 PDR ADOCK 05000245 4 PDR-

-

G

. _

- . .

.

2 INSERVICE INSPECTION (ISI) PROGRAM All Millstone units are planning to upgrade their ISI scheduling and tracking system in the near future. At Unit 1, the FILEMAKER PRO computer data base is presently used to schedule examinations and track the ISI program status. Additionally, it is used to manage augmented programs such as the Generic Letter 88-01 intergranular stress corrosion cracking detection progra ,

An upgraded computer program is scheduled to be installed in Unit 3 during the week of January 17,1993, and will be installed in the other units prior to their next scheduled refueling outage. The system has been in use for approximately two years at another nuclear facility where it was observed to function extremely well. In addition to its usefulness as a scheduling and tracking mechanism, the system can be programmed to verify that the proper equipment was used for specific examinations, and that the examiners were currently qualified and certified to perform the examination Also, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, in conjunction with the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) at Phlo Alto, California performed an inspection accessibility study of the Millstone Unit I reactor pressure vessel. The study was performed to determine to what extent ASME Code Section XI volumetric examination requirements can be complied with using the latest available equipment, and to establish a technical basis for code relief for those portions of vessel welds that are proven to be inaccessible to volumetric examinatio Similar studies have been performed or are planned at numerous boiling water reactors throughout the United State Conclusion The licensee has shown ir.2iative in upgrading its inservice inspection program tracking system. The new system will enhance the licensee's control over its vendor's activities, has the capability of confirming that currently qualified personnel performed the examinations, and that the appropriate equipment was use .0 INSERVICE INSPECT'ON ACTIVITIES (IP 73753)

I The licensee's method for evaluating, dispositioning, and tracking ISI results that required ( further evaluation was inspected by examining Unresolved Indication Reports (UIR) that l

were generated during the last refueling outage at Unit I and Unit 3. Those reports were used because no inservice inspection activities were in progress during this inspection.

L l

l I'

l l

l

. _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ ,

,

, ,

The following UIRs were selected for inspection: ,

Unit 1 UIR #MPl-91-002,100, and 101 Unit 3 UIR #M3-91-013,020,021,022,023,027,033,036,039,040, and 042 Unit 3 URIs Nos, 020, 021, 022, 023, 027, 033, and 040 relate to liquid penetrant examinations whose results were judged to be unacceptable when evaluated to the standards of ASME Section XI, Table IWB-3514-2. Section IWB-3514.3 permits re-evaluation by ultrasonic examination methods of surface indications. The ultrasonic evaluation must be performed using an ultrasonic method that has been demonstrated to be capable of detecting the questionable condition. In each of the above cases, the licensee used a search angle of 85, calibrated on a reflector 0.015" deep in a block fr.bricated from ASTM 240 type 316

-

stainless steel. The area of pipe containing the rejectable pnetrant indication was scanned, and in each case, no ultrasonic indications were detected. The licensec assumed that the -

maximum depth of each of the liquid penetrant indications was 0.015" and evaluated a reflector that deep for the total length of each penetrant indication. The evaluations were performed to the ultrasonic standards of ASME Section XI, Table IWB-3514-2 and each condition was found to be acceptabl The inspector interviewed the licensce's Level Ill who performed the ultrasonic examinations and, based on the description of the method provided by the Level III examiner and the documentation of the examination, the inspector agreed that the ultrasonic technique was valid and the results were acceptabl The documentation associated with the remaining components confirmed that those items were acceptable for continued servic Personnel Oualification/ Certification Records The qualification records of the examiners responsible for performing the examinations represented by the UlRs listed above were inspected to determine whether the individuals were properly qualified to perform those examination The records confirmed that each examiner was qualified and certified to the appropriate .

SNT-TC-1A level of competence for the examinations each performe , - _ . -

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

?'

^ ' u .,

'

(

1,,.  ;

,

.

'

tuensee Actions in Resoonse to NRC Concerns

-

During the April 1991 NRC inspection at Unit 1, Report No. 91;38, a concern was discussed - l with station management as follows: Various data packages showed evidence that the training on nondestructive'

examination (NDE) procedures provided by the licensee to vendor technicians was not j

-

always effective. The technicians did not have a sufficient understanding of the procedures in all case ,

• The licensee's Level 11 ultrasonic data receiver signed data sheets containing information that was not clearly understood at the tim' of signin ~ Procedures were, in some areas, difficult to understand and were open to  ;

interpretation by individual user In response to the NRC concem, the licensee performed its own investigation of the

perceived problem and initiated the following corrective action: -

I Northeast Utilities Service Company (NUSCO) initiated action to revise the NDE ,

vendor training and monitoring procedures. Special emphasis is given to the proper ,

completion of NDE data sheets. The training program now incorporates classroom

instruction by a licensee instructor and a written examination at the conclusion of the classroom work. Practical performance demonstrations are required in each NDE metho . Data reviewers were reminded of the importance of understanding the obligations 1 associated with signing inspection records and attesting to their accurac . An extensive program was initiated to revise and upgrade all NDE procedures in  ;

accordance with the INPO/NU writers guide format. The procedure upgrade effort . ,

will include revision of NDE data sheets. Also, the new ISI program data'

management software being installed in the various piants will include an option to review NDE data sheets for accuracy.

The inspector reviewed a draft copy of a liquid penetrant procedure written in the new-

-

format and its associated data sheet. Additionally, a proposed data sheet for recording thel *

results of a VT-3 visual examination was provided to the inspector for his revie The inspector determined that the new forn.at provides clearly written, easy to understand - =,

i requirements which appear to be an improvement over the old format. The data sheets _

require the. appropriate information to be entered in a way that should minimize any -

misunderstanding on the part of the use >

, .

__

4 , , . - _ . ~ .. . - . . _ . , , .-...,J . . -. . _ . . _.~ .. - - . ,..

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ . _ _ _ __

.

O

Conclusion The rather innovative method used for resolving liquid penetrant indications by means of ultrasonic examination techniques is evidence of the ISI staffs understanding cf ASME Section XI provisions. The method is permitted by Section XI, but is not in common use throughout the industr '

Actions taken in response to NRC concerns expressed during the Unit 1 inspection,91-08, have strengthened the licensee's ISI program at all of its nuclear facilitic Overall, the ISI staff continues to be progressive and incorporate new ideas and methods to enhance the ISI program implementation and maintain good control of its ISI vendo .0 EXIT MEETING The inspector met with licensee representativer, denoted in Attachment 1, at the conclusion of the inspection on January b,1993. The inspector summarized the scope and fmdings of the inspection.

l l

..

i i

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

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

O

.

.

ATTACIIMENT 1 Persons Conky,1cd Northeast Utilities

• C. Clement, Director - Unit 3

• D. Harris, Nuclear Licensing

• J.1.cason, Unit 1 Engineering

• T. Lyons, Unit 3 Engineering

• D. R. MacNeill, Unit 3 Engineering U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• P. Swetland, Senior Resident Inspector

.

• Indicates those present at the exit meetin s

_ ________ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _