ML19344E316
| ML19344E316 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 08/22/1980 |
| From: | Andognini G BOSTON EDISON CO. |
| To: | Ippolito T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19344E317 | List: |
| References | |
| 80-198, NUDOCS 8008280379 | |
| Download: ML19344E316 (2) | |
Text
6 5
BOSTON EOlsON COMPANY G ENERAL OFFICES B00 SQYLETON STREET BOSTON, M ASS ACHUSETTS O 219 9 G. cans ANocomm S W PERINTENDENT NUCLEA7 DPEN ATIONS DEPARTedENT August 22, 1980 BEco. Ltr. #80-198 Mr. Thomas A. Ippolito, Chief Operating Reactors Branch Q Division of Operating Reactors Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 License No. DPR-35 Docket No. 50-293 Final Report on Inservice Inspections Conducted During Refueling Outage Ref. a.) BECo letter (J. E. Howard) to NRC (T. A. Ippolito)
" Supplement to Reload 4 Submittal and Request for Technical Specification Change" dated April 3, 1980 b.) Inspection Report No. 50-293/80-3, dated February 12,.
1980
Dear Sir:
The 1980 Inservice Inspection of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Unit #1 was and in accordance with the requirements of ASME Sec-completed on May 19, 1980, i
tion XI, Boston Edison Company is submitting the final report of all inserv ce Examinations were inspection activities conducted during the refueling outage.
The conducted by Southwest Research Institute and Peabody Testing Services.
examinations conducted by Southwest Research Institute included mechanized nanual examinations of the reactor pressure vessel and nozzle welds and a remote visual examination of the accessible portions of the reactor internals (a separate is included for each examination). Peabody Testing Services conducted i
manual and direct visual exarainations of Class 1 and 2 pipe welds and components.
report The results of the mechanized, manual and direct visual examinations did not reveal any unacceptable results; however, in conducting the remote visual exam-indications were reported.
ination of the core spray sparger,several surfaca The results of this inspection were submitted to your office prior to start-uprefu During our next
(
via Reference a.).
re-examined to determine if any of the flaws have promulgated.
' &\\$
\\j s8'0 0 8 u s o 379 Q
J
1 s
J IID3TDN EDl2DN CDMPANY U
Mr.- Thomas A. Ippolito, Chief August 22, 1980 Page 2 The third re-examination of the N2B nozzle was conducted during this' outage and the results of the inspection indicated that the flaw is well within the original parameters set-forth by the ACRS in 1974.
The re-examination was conducted in accordance with the procedure, technique and equipment utilized during the 1976, and 1977 inspection.
The results of the 1980 inspection were reviewed during an I&E inspection (Reference b.) in which the inspector concurred that the indication is well within the original tolerances defined by the ACRS.
Based on this evalu-ation the N2B nozzle will be returned to its normal inspection frequency which would require that the nozzle be re-inspected during the first period of the second interval (1983 Refueling Outage).
The re-inspection of the N2B nozzle will be con-ducted in accordance with the requirements and technique as defined in the approved edition of Section XI in force at that time.
Very truly yours, s
attachments:
3 Copies Final Report cc:
Director, Office of Inspection & Enforcement Region I (1 copy)