ML20057A173
| ML20057A173 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 09/07/1993 |
| From: | Jeffrey Jacobson, Schapker J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18059A366 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-255-93-05, 50-255-93-5, NUDOCS 9309130146 | |
| Download: ML20057A173 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000255/1993005
Text
.
.
.
i
I
,
I
t
!
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
f
REGION III
i
l
4,
!
Docket No.
50-255
i
'
!
Report No.
50-255/93005(DRS)
License No. DPR-20
I
j
Licensee: Consumers Power Company
212 West Michigan Avenue
Jackson, MI 49201
'
t
Facility Name: Palisades Huclear Plant
l
,
i
Inspection At: Covert, MI
-i
Inspection Dates: June 15-25, 1993 (Region 1)
June 14-17, and 29; July 1, 20-21, and August 3-4, 1993
!
i/7/[3
Inspector:
]
. F. Scha Wer, Reactor Inspector
Date '
'
k1
hgM
9
'? - 1.3
Approved , :[ ' .
j
j
/ Jrg'obson Chief
f
Date
,
j
teriah
i rocesses Section
'
Inspection Summary
l
t
ins.fection on June 14-17. and 29: Jul y 1. 20-21. and August 3-4
1993
!
(Region 111): June 15-25. 1993 (Region 1) (Report No. 50-255/93005(DRS))
Inspection Summary and Conclusions: Routine announced inspection of inservice
{
inspection (ISI) activities including review of program (73051), procedures
j
(73052). observation of work activities (73753), data review and evaluation
(73755), review of corrective action for previous inspection findings (92701),
j
review of erosion / corrosion program (49001), and independent examinations
performed by the NRC Mobile Laboratory of the main steam, containment spray,
i
'
safety injection, shutdown cooling, pressurizer relief, long term cooling,
'
containment air cooling, charging line, pressurizer spray and pressurizer
.
surge piping welds.
f
,
Results: Of the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
!
'
The NRC did not agree with the licensee's disposition of an indication in weld
PCS-4-PRS-lPl-2. The NRC determined, because of the results obtained by its
I
independent evaluation, that it was more appropriate to treat the indication
as a planar flaw. The licensee subjected this indication, utilizing
conservative dimensions, to analysis in order to determine the component was
!
,
l
acceptable.
In their correspondence dated July 20, 1993, they restated their
evaluation of the indication, a commitment to reevaluate the indication during
i
the next two outages and submitted an engineering evaluation that concludes
!
I
that the flaw will not propagate.
.
l
!
l
1
,
!
!
a
!
9309130146 930907
ADOCK 05000255 n[m
{
DR
1
_ ,
.
_
9
. .
.
,_.
.
.
- 1
.
-
-.
. -- - - . -
_ - - . ..
.
-
,
f
l
-
l
t
>
1
1
Inspection Summary
2
,
4
The 14RC inspectors noted the following:
,
<
j
The implementation of ISI was improved considerably from the previous
[
l
inspection. Corrective actions were taken to resolve the inspection
i
J
findings previously identified. Observations and examinations performed
this outage showed improvements in procedures and implementation of the
!
ISI program.
d
Steam generator (SG) secondary water chemistry and maintenance appears
l
to be substantially improved since the SGs were replaced. This is
,
i
evident by the secondary side cleanliness (small sludge buildup) and
eddy current examination results.
!
a
t
l
,
!
s
!
.
'
l
-
i
f
!
,
t
5
1
9
d
0
4
e
w
=w
nm---r
--
,-
,.-4
-
- -
--
- -+-
. _ -
- -
-
.
.
-.
-
_.
.
. _ - -
.
.._.
_
1
i
,
d
DETAILS
~
1.
Persons Contacted
Consumers Power Company (CPCo)
i
- D. Rogers, Safety and Licensing Supervisor
- C. Hillman, Licensing Engineer
- B. VanWagner, Predictive Engineering Supervisor
!
- T. Fouty, Senior Nuclear Operations Analyst
R. Smedley, Staff Licensing Engineer
S. Maclean, Senior Engineer
D. Engle, Senior Engineer
i
D. Morris, Quality Assurance
l
Pacific Sierra Nuclear Corporation (PSN)
W. Lee, Vice President
,
f
U. S. Nuclear Requlatory Commission (NRC)
- M. Parker, Senior Resident Inspector
,
,
D. Passehl, Resident inspector
l
,
j
- R. Landsman, Project Engineer
i
'
i
i
- Denotes those attending the exit interview on August 4, 1993.
-
Other licensee and contractor personnel were contacted during the course
,
of the inspection.
!
'
i
i
2.
L icensee Action on Previous Inspection finding _s_L9270]!
j
s
,
1
l
(Closed) Unresolved item (255/92012-ll(DRS):
Ventilated Concrete Cask
for Dry fuel Storage QA/QC weaknesses.
The licensee's contractor
i
eversight and QA/QC implementation was weak.
Tre NRC inspector
]
icantified weaknesses including: failure to follow procedures,
!
1
msof ficient training of craf t, and inadequate cefinition of QA/QC
i
responsibilities.
Reference NRC inspection report 50-255/92018(DRP), which addressed the
l
NRC inspector's inprocess review of cask fabricetion and the
i
implementation of corrective actions. The NRC inspector reviewed the QA
!
i
Data Package for the dry cask fuel storage vessels, units 1 and 2.
1
fabrication records and test results were acceptable, this item has been
,
J
satisfactorily resolved,
l
l
1
(Closed) Violation 255/92012-10(DRS):
10 CfR Part 50.55(a), requires,
in part, that inservice inspection (151) of plant components be
<
conducted in accordance with the American Society of Mechanical-
Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code -(Code),Section XI.
The Code
]
requires that longitudinal pipe welds be included in the ISI program and
J
}
.
,
j
--
._
_
.
-
- .
..
. . - -
.-
_ _ _ _ _ _ .
__
_ . _ . __ .. -.._ _ _
._.
.
_ _ _ ,
i
,
-
,
t
i
i
,.
-
inspected at the intersection with circumferential welds.
Upon
I
-
examination of welds MSS-36-MSL-ISI-211, HSS-36-MSL-2SI-212, and MSS-36-
!
3
i
HSC-2SI-219 on the main steam system, it was noted that the intersecting
{
longitudinal welds had not been examined and were not included in the
!
licensee's ISI program.
,
(
j
The licensee examined all the longitudinal welds on the main steam
system that required inspection prior to the plant leaving cold shutdown
j
'
from the 1992 refueling outage. All welds were found to be
!
satisfactory.
In addition, all welds with longitudinal welds required
i
by 10 CFR Part 50.55(a) to be examined were added to the ISI 40 year
!
'
master plan. This violation has been satisfactorily resolved and is
l
considered closed.
s
i
!
.
3.
Steam Generator Eddy Current Examination (73753. 73755)
!
y
i
The licensee replaced steam generators (SGs) during the 1990-1991
outage. This was the third eddy current examination performed since
4
j
installation of the replacement SGs.
The inspection included full
i
length tube examination of 1598 tubes in the "A" SG and 1602 tubes in
j
the"B" SG utilizing a beo' bin coil probe with multifrequency ET (MIZ-18)
i
data acquisition system.
In addition, 201 random motorized rotating
1
i
pancake coil (MRPC) examinations were performed in SG-A and 202 in SG-B.
{
'
The examination results were as follows:
'
!,
SG-A
SG-B
,
i
MEM*
37
71
f
l-19%d*
1
23
6
11
I
,
'
!
30-39%
2
l
40-49X
1
'
t
- Manuf acturing Burnish Mark (permeability indication due to cold working
{
!
etc.)
i
- Fercent wall loss due to degracation, wear
,
!
The row 137, column 94 tube in SG- A was found to have a 41% indication
(40-49% reported above) which was plugged in accordance with the
l
e
'
Palisades Technical Specification requirement.
!
,
j
No reportable indications were found as a result of the random MRPC
!
}
inspection. MRPC of bobbin disterted indications (DI's) was also
!
performed with no indications substantiated as defects.
i
Results of the examination and comparison with the baseline ET concluded
!
i
that the replacement SG's show no significant degradation.
l
,
9
l
'
!
!
I
J
t
4
i
i
h
'
I
--,
.,
-
- - -
-
-
-
-
-
- -
-
-
-
.-
.
. . - - .
=
-
. . - ,
_-
- _ _ _
.
i
,
The licensee performed sludge lancing, secondary side cleaning and
'
3
foreign object inspection. Sludge lancing for the last two outages
,
since SG replacement resulted in very small sludge recovery. The small
'
,
sludge production during operations is attributed to excellent water
chemistry control of the secondary side combined with upgrades of
secondary side tubing materials.
i
The NRC inspector observed ET in progres:, verified
calibration / certification of ET equipment and calibration standards,
,
reviewed the examiner / analyst qualification certifications and the ET
'
Data Analyst Guidelines.
l
q
The NRC inspector also observed evaluations of ET data in progress,
4
sludge lancing post cleaning inspection (via remote camera VCR) and
'
.
reviewed the secondary side cleaning and inspection data.
,
]
No violations or deviations were identified, the licensee's SG
I
maintenance program since SG replacement has improved considerably.
'
i
4.
Erosion / Corrosion (E/C) Monitorina Proaram (490011
'
3
Procedure EM-09-08, Revision 3, describes the minimum requirements for
I
the erosion / corrosion program.
The selection of systems, component
.i
selection, ultrasonic inspection, data logging, data evaluation, and
,
engineering evaluations methodology were reviewed. The licensee's E/C
.
program appears to be conservatively implemented and based on good
,
{
engineering principles. Weaknesses which were identified in inspection
report 50-255/92012 are being addressed by the licensee.
The licensee's
l
predictive engineering department has submitted budget requisitions to
i
purchase and implement the EPRI Chet Works E/C program, an enhanced E/C
l
program with capabilities to continually update the computer model with
current plant operations data.
'
l
The licensee inspected 154 components cr subcomponents this outage.
.
]
Four components were replaced due to E/C.
The licensee replacements are
-
'
'
upgraded, using chrome / moly or stainless steel when possible.
t
j
The NRC inspector observed the ultrasonic measurement and data logging,
verified inspector and equipment certifications, and reviewed the data
e
'
and engineering evaluations performed this outage.
l
No violations or deviations were identified.
i
i
,
5.
Exit Interview
i
!
{
The inspectors met with the licensee representatives (denoted in
!
paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on August 4,1993.
The
inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection
i
activities.
The licensee acknowledged the inspection findings.
The
a
'
j
inspector also discussed the likely informational content of the
inspection report with regard to documents or processes reviewed by the
,
i
inspector during the inspection.
The licensee did not identify any such
!
j
document / processes as proprietary.
! !
,
1
1
3
i
.
-.
..
._
.-
-
_.
--
. - -