IR 05000443/1990002

Insp Rept 50-443/90-02 on 900319-23.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Licensee Inservice Insp Program,Steam Generator Tube Eddy Current Exam Program & Secondary Water Chemistry Control Program

ML20042G791
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	04/11/1990
From:	Mcbrearty R, Strosnider J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20042G790	List: IR 05000443/1990002 ML20042G789
References
50-443-90-02, 50-443-90-2, NUDOCS 9005160096
Download: ML20042G791 (6)

Text

_

'

.

..

.

-

,.

'

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

t Report No.

50-443/90-02 L

Docket No.-50-443 i

License No. NPF-67 I

Licensee:

Public Service Company of New Hampshire

Post Office Box 300 Seabrook, New Hampshire 03874

"

,

I Facility Name:

Seabrook Station. Unit 1

'

Inspection At:

Seabrook, New Hampshire Inspection Conducted: March 19-23, 1990 Inspectors:

bdna * /

$

/0, /f$

R. A. McBrearty, Reactor (ingineer dat6

'

Approved by:

M N

1. I)

M2. // /Up

/

J. R. Strosnidd/ Chief date

' Materials & Processes Section, EB, DRS Inspection Summary:

Inspection on March 19-23, 1990 (Report No. 50-443/90-02)

Areas Inspected: A routine, unannounced inspection was conducted of the licensee's-inservice inspection program, steam generator tube eddy current examination program, secondary water chemistry control program and the actions taken to maintain the steam generators prior to_ placing them in operation. Additionally, the licensee's program for reducing out-of-core radiation sources / fields was inspected.

Results:

No violations were identified, i

.

l 9005160096 900502 FDR ADOCK 05000443 Q

PDC

,

"

..

..

.

.

.

,

Details 1.0 Persons Contacted New Hampshire Yankee

• S. Buckwald, Quality Assurance Supervisor

• W. 01 Profio, Assistant Station Manager D. Jansen, Training Support Services Manager

• G. Kann. Program Support Manager

'

• J. Linville, Chemistry Department Supervisor R. Martel, Staff Engineer

'

• W. McDuffee, Senior Engineer D. Mc Gonigle, Staff Engineer

>

W. Monseith, Quality Assurance Engineer

• T. Murphy, I & C Department Supervisor

• E. Sovetsky, Technical Projects Supervisor R. Sterritt, ALARA - Health Physics W. Temple, NRC Coordinator

• J. Warnok, Nuclear Quality Manager K. Whitney, Inservice Inspection Coordinator m

V. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• N Dudley, Senior Resident Inspector

• P. K. Eapen, Chief, Special Test Programs Section, EB, DRS r

• Denotes those present at the exit meeting

.

2.0 Inservice Inspection (ISI) Program (73051)

NRC regulations require that inservice examinations of components and system pressure tests conducted during the initial 120 month inspection interval of a water-cooled nuclear power facility comply with the requirements in the latest edition and addenda of the code incor.corated by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a(b) on the date 12 months prior to the date of issuance of the operating license, subject to the limitations and modifications listed

therein.

'The Seabrook Station, Unit 1, first ten year interval ISI program plan, revision 0, and five requests for relief from code requirements were submitted on April 14, 1987, to the NRC for review and approval.

Based on the operating license date of October 1986, the program was written to meet the requirements of the ASME Code Section XI, 1983 Edition through Summer 1983 Addenda.

The extent of examination of pressure retaining welds i

in code class 2 piping was determined by ASME Code case N-408, " Alternative Rules for Examination of Class 2 Piping,Section XI, Division 1," which has been approved by the NRC as referenced in Regulatory Guide 1.147, l

t

i

..

v l

-

.

.

"

i I

" Inservice Inspection Code Case Acceptability, ASME Section XI Division 1."

In a letter dated April 4, 1988, the NRC requested additional information that was required to complete the review of the program plan. The requested information was provided by the licensee in a response to the NRC, dated j

June 3, 1988.

,

.

Using the exemption criteria contained in ASME Code Case N-408, the licensee

<

has committed to volumetrically examine a minimum of 7.5% of the class 2

-

)

-

piping welds in engineered safety systems including the Residual Heat Removal (RHR). Emergency Core Cooling (ECC), and Containment Heat Removal (CHR)

systems.

The NRC staff stated in its safety evaluation of the first ten year interval inspection program issued by letter, dated February 15, 1990,

concludes that the Seabrook Station, Unit 1 First Ten-Year Interval

,

Inservice Inspection Program Plan, Revision 0, complies with 10 CFR

!

50.55 a(g) and Technical Specification 4.0.5.

• The steam generator tube inservice inspection program is included in Technical Specification 4.4.5.0.

The scope of future steam generator tube r

eddy current examinations will be based, in part, on the preservice.

inspection results. Those results, in conjunction with additional licensee data, were inspected, judged to fully reflect the current condition of tubes in all four steam generators, and, collectively to permit the scope

,

of future tube eddy current examinations to be established in accordance

,

with applicable regulatory requirements.

!

The preservice eddy current examinations were controlled by vendor procedures.

Inservice examinations will be performed by qualified vendor personnel using vendor procedures, although the vendor has not yet been selected. The inspection sample will be selected by the licensee based i

on-preservice examination results and Technical Specification requirements.

The licensee presently has no eddy current qualified personnel but has

-

access to qualified individuals from the Yankee Atomic Electric Company at t

Bolton, Massachusetts.

-

Preservice examinations identified a number of tubes containing eddy current indications ranging from less than 20% through wall to greater

,

!

than-40% through wall. Tubes containing indications equal to or greater than 40% were plugged. No unique or unusual conditions were identified by the preservice examinations.

No violations were identified.

l

.

-

_

,

,4 s

.

.

.-

-4-i i

!

L L

3.0 Water Chemistry / Steam Generator Maintenance (84750)

-

The inspector reviewed the secondary plant water chemistry. reports for

!

the month of March, 1990 and discussed these data with responsible

'

individuals in the licensee's chemistry department.

'

The parameters reported were as follows:

e

,

Steam Generator

.

Conductivity Sulfate PH Silica

-

Sodium

Condensate

'

,

I'

Conductivity Dissolved Oxygen Strong Acid Cation Conductivity Feedwater

>

PH Dissolved Oxygen Iron Hydrazine

' Copper Main Steam Conductivity Sodium Westinghouse /EPRI recommendations are identified by Procedure CP3.2, Revision 9. and Action Limits are identified whereby specific actions must be taken if the reported parameters are out'of the recommended range.

Data are obtained by process instrumentation and from grab samples from the following locations:

Condensate Pump Discharge

-

Heater 22 Outlet

-

Heater 26 Outlet

-

Heater Drain Pump Discharge

-

,

Main Steam Header

-

Water Treatment Plant Effluent

-

Demineralized Water Storage Tank

-

Condensate Storage Tank

-

' Steam Generator Blowdown Demineralizer Effluent

-

Steam Generator Blowdown Recovery Evaporator

-

Secondary Component Cooling System

--

Stator Cooling-System Demineralyzer~ Influent

-

. Auxiliary Boiler Steam Drum Blowdown (Operating)

--

i

-

O i

k

..

..

.

.

.

.

5-During the period from January 1,1989 to May 23,1989 the steam generators were in wet lay-up. They were then drained and refilled and for approximately the-next forty days, while 5% power testing of the plant was. proceeding, hydrazine, and ammonia were added to the steam generators using SKD-91, the wet lay-up chemical addition point. During the first week of July,1989, the steam generators were returned to wet lay-up, and remained in that condition for the remainder of the year.

During the period of 5% power testing, blowdown was not in service due to

,

L testing of the emergency feedwater system. The lack of continuous blowdown during heat up and testing permitted chloride cuntaminants to build up, resulting in the following out of specification conditions:

Steam generator "B":

A total of 75.7. hours out of specification for

-

chlorides. 1he peak chloride concentration was 139 ppb.

Steam Generator "C":

A total of 27.7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> out of specification for

-

chlorides. The peak chloride concentration was 102 ppb.

(The guideline value for chlorides is a 100 ppb)

Subsequently steam generator chloride concentrations were reduced to the range from 20 to 80 ppb. The Westinghouse /EPRI guidelines committed to by the licensee are identified in Procedure CP 3.2, Revision 9,'l Secondary Chemistry Control Program."

j The Seabrook Station was designed at a time when Westinghouse employed phosphate steam generator control.

During the construction period in the mid-1970s, Westinghouse secondary chemistry control was changed to all

.

volatile treatment with hydrazine and ammonia.

During the licensing period

of the mid-1980s, Westinghouse adopted the EPRI/0wners Group Guidelines for

'

secondary chemistry. To aid in maintaining secondary water chemistry l

guidelines during power operation, the licensee's engineering group is i

evaluating several potential plant changes including condensers and L.

condensate polishing.

No violations were identified.

4.0 Occupational Exposure At.the present time, the licensee's program to minimize personnel exposure to radiation as it relates to methods for reducing out-of-core radiation sources is in the developmental stage.

,

Procedure Number MS 0519.12, Revision 1, " Disassembly, Repair, and Reassembly

'

'

of Crosby JRAK.BS Relief Valves" contains several statements to alert the user about precautions which should be observed regarding the transport of Stellite into the reactor coolant system. Additionally, a staff engineer participated on the EPRI Cobalt replacement Technical Review Group. The group's final report on the use of alternative materials in place of Ste111te is ready for publication and its recommendations will be considered in a revision of Engineering Procedure Number 35020, " Implementation and Review of ALARA Considerations."

'

,

Ib

f

'

k

'.

,... ^'

g i.

..

-

y.

,,

'

5.0 Exit meeting c

The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)

at.the conclusion of the inspection on March 23,-1990. The inspector.

i summarized the ' scope and findings of the inspection.

L-

,

b At no time during the' inspection was written material provided by the inspector.to the licensee.

The licensee did not indicate that proprietary l-information was. involved within the scope of this_ inspection..

l

,

h:

e

• ti

'

,t.

.

..

$

I l..

'

!4 l

.