IR 05000309/1985023

Insp Rept 50-309/85-23 on 850826-30.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Inservice Insp Program,Nde Procedure Review,Observation of Work in Progress & Review of Inservice Insp Data

ML20137U271
Person / Time
Site:	Maine Yankee
Issue date:	09/11/1985
From:	Mcbrearty R, Wiggins J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20137U254	List: IR 05000309/1985023 ML20137U247
References
50-309-85-23, NUDOCS 8510030053
Download: ML20137U271 (5)

Text

F

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report N /85-23 Docket N License No. OPR-36 Priority -- Category C Licensee: Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company 83 Edison Drive Augusta, Maine 04336 Facility Name: Maine Yankee Nuclear Power Station Inspection At: Wiscasset, Maine Inspection Conducted: August 26-30, 1985 Inspectors: . Wt- r Rf A. McBreartt'yv Readtor Engineer

, t,$t R //j/ N dath Approved by: C .

, f,, r- +0 v/[ N J . T . Wi ggi n's , Ch fi ef f'/ / ~ dMe Materials & ProcesseY Section Inspection Summary

Inspection on August 26-30, 1985 (Report No. 50-309/85-23)

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of inservice inspection activities including ISI program, NDE procedure review, observations of work in progress and review of ISI data. The inspection involved 31 inspector hours onsite by one regional based inspecto Results: No violations were identified."

I i

i i

8510030053 850918 PDR ADOCK 05000309 G PDR I

L

r

.

.

DETAILS Persons Contacted Maine Yankee-Atomic Power Company

"J. Garrity, Plant Manager

• W. Schubert, ISI Coordinator

"L. Speed, Lead Performance Engineer Yankee Atomic Electric Company

• L. Mullins, ISI Coordinator Magnaflux Corporation D. Mansfield, Level III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• C. Holden, Senior Resident Inspector

• Denotes those present at the exit meeting on August 30, 1985 Inservice Inspection (ISI) Program Review The ISI Program at Maine Yankee includes the period from December 28, 1982, to December 28, 1992, which is the facility's second inspection interval. The program was reviewed and approved by the licensee and received NRC approval on March 5, 198 The inspection interval is divided into three equal periods, and all the items which are scheduled for examination during each period are identified by the progra The current refueling outage is the second outage of the first period of the second interval. Examinations scheduled for completion during the outage are identified on the Maine Yankee ISI Work Plan for 1985. The licensee ISI Coordinator. maintains program status with the aid of information provided by the ISI vender. This includes marked up isometric drawings and lists of completed examination No violations were identifie . Nondestructive Examination (NDE) Procedure Review The inspector selected the following NDE procedures for review:

~*

-YA-UT-1, Revision 3, " Ultrasonic Examination - General Requirements"

!

_

<

r

.

'

YA-UT-3, Revision 2, " Ultrasonic Examination of Vessels - Flange to Shell Weld From Flange Face"

YA-UT-6, Revision 2, " Ultrasonic Examination of Flange Ligaments"

YA-UT-10, Revision 5, " Ultrasonic Examination of Piping Austenitic Welds"

YA-UT-11, Revision 2, " Ultrasonic Examination of Piping Dissimilar Metal Welds"

• YA-PE-2, Revision 5, " Liquid Penetrant Examination"

YA-MP-111, Revision 0, " Procedure For Magnetic Particle Examination" The ultrason*c examination procedures require that indications which are attributed to geometric reflectors must be confirmed per code require-ments. The liquid penetrant procedure use is limited to the temperature range from 60F to 125 F unless it is qualified for specific temperature outside of this range. Requirements, including minimum lighting, for the use of visible dye and fluorescent dye are defined. The magnetic particle procedure permits the use of prods, coils, direct contact and AC or DC magnetic yokes. The use of yokes is limited to the detection of discon-tinuities which come to the surfac The inspector found that the reviewed procedures complied with applicable code and regulatory requirements, and were technically adequate for their intended us No violations were identifie . Observations of ISI In Progress The inspector observed ultrasonic and liquid penetrant examinations in progress to ascertain that Code and regulatory requirements were met, and that procedural requirements were complied with. The following were included in the inspector's observations:

Ultrasonic Examination

Weld S-13, line 10" - SIH-22, Safety Injection System Liquid Penetrant Examination

Welds S-6 and S-7, line 10" RH-25, Residual Heat Removal System

Weld S-5, line 10" RH-12, Residual _ Heat Removal System The inspector found that the ISI technicians verified weld' identification prior to performing an examination to assure that the correct weld was

!

!

. *

.

.

examined and that the examinations were done in compliance with the applicable procedure. Indications were properly recorded, and in the case of penetrant indications, welds were re-examined to confirm that the source of an indication was removed, or that the indication was non-relevan No violations were identifie . Review of ISI Data Data associated with the following welds were reviewed to ascertain completeness and compliance with applicable code and regulatory require-ments:

Ultrasonic Examination

• Weld S-5, line 4" SIH-41 Magnetic Particle Examination

• Weld S-8, line 6" - SDVH-4 Liquid Penetrant Examination

• Welds 40 and 40A, line 10" CS-36

• Weld 3, line 10" CH-6

• Weld S-21, line 12" RH-30

• Weld 70A, line 10' SIH-22

• Weld S-5, line 10" RH-12

• Welds S-6 and S-7, line 10" RH-25 The data were readily available and sufficient information was included to permit evaluation and disposition of the examination result No violations were identifie . NDE Personnel Qualification / Certification Records Records of Magnaflux personnel who participated in examinations represented by the data listed in paragraph 4 and in the examinations observed by the

.

inspector were reviewed to ascertain that each individual was properly l qualified to perform the examinations in which he participated.

(

I-l L

l1 l

.

.

The records were found to be complete and indicated that the individuals were properly qualified to perform their assigned responsibilit No violations were identifie . Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives denoted in paragraph 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on August 30, 1985. The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and the findings. At no time during this inspection was written material provided by the inspector to the licensee.

!

l