IR 05000259/1992031
| ML18036A856 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 09/08/1992 |
| From: | Blake J, Economos N NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18036A855 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-259-92-31, 50-260-92-31, 50-296-92-31, NUDOCS 9209220126 | |
| Download: ML18036A856 (19) | |
Text
gp,8 REGS (4
Cy OO Wp*~4 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMM(SSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTASTREET, N.W.
ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30323
'
Report Nos.:
50-259/92-31, 50-260/92-31, and 50-296/92-31 Licensee:
Tennessee Valley Authority 3B Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801 Docket Nos.:
50-259, 50-260 and 50-296 License Nos.:
DPR 33 I DPR 52 and DPR-68 Facility Name:
Browns Ferry 1, 2, and
Inspection Cond ted:
ust 17-21, 1992 Inspector:
N.
E on at Signed Approved by: J. J.
ake, Chief te ials and Processes Section ng'neering Branch Division of Reactor Safety ate Signed SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection was conducted in the areas of Unit 3 Pipe Replacement Project, and as a followup to the inspection documented in Report 92-26.
Inspection activities included work observation in the area of welding and nondestructive testing; field record review and replacement material quality records.
Results:
By work observation and through document reviews the inspector ascertained that the quality of field work was satisfactory.
The prime contractor (GE)
showed adequate strength in planning and implementating the replacement project.
Testing of field welds (RT) and work monitoring by TVA was satisfactory.
Within the areas inspected violations or deviations were not identified.
9209220126 9209i5 PDR ADOCK 05000259
REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees R. Baron, Licensing Manager S.
Fox, Level II Examiner Radiography/Supervisor K. Groom, Welding Engineer Supervisor/Modifications
- E. Hartwig, Project Manager E. Knuettel, Licensing Engineer Unit 3
- J. Maddox, Engineering Manager
- H. McCluskey, Vice President Browns Ferry Restart
- T. Pitchford, Project Coordinator, Pipe Replacement
- P. Salas, Compliance Manager
- J. Scalice, Plant Manager
- J. Wallace, Compliance Engineer
- 0. Zeringue, Vice President, Browns Ferry Operations Other license employees contacted during this inspection included engineers, mechanics, technicians, and administrative personnel.
Other Organizations General Electric Nuclear Energy (GENE)
R.
Cameron, Manager QA/QC L. Grycko, Welding Specialist D. Harbison, Asst. Manager QA/QC G. Nelson, Project Manager G. Phelps, QC/Level III Examiner R. Pietzak, QC Supervisor J.
Rodabaugh, Piping Replacement Manager
T. Damico, Engineer NRC Resident Inspectors
- W. Bearden, Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview Replacement of Recirculation Piping and Inlet Nozzle Safe Ends Unit 3, (2512/13)
The inspection is a continuation of work activity undertaken by regional inspectors to monitor the replacement of recirculation piping and inlet nozzle safe-ends at this
unit.
Similar work performed in this area has been documented in Region II Report 92-26.
a.
Welding (55050)
The applicable Codes and Standards for the pipe replacement project are:
American Society of Mechanical Engineering Boiler and Pressure Vessel (ASME, B&PV) Code Sections III, V and XI 1986 Edition.
ASME, BaPV Code Section II and IX, Latest Edition.
American Welding Society (AWS) D1.190.
AWS D1.3-89.
American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
B31.1 1967 Edition.
American Society for Nondestructive Testing (ASNT)
SNT-TC-lA 1984 (GE)
Field Inspection:
At the time of this inspection all welding and NDE activities in the recirculation piping system had been completed.
Welding on the reactor water cleanup (RWCU), system replacement piping was in progress
- this work was centered around the RWCU heat exchanger room.
The Mechanical Stress Improvement Process (MSIP) had been applied to all the new recirculation piping welds and on selected dissimilar welds, i.e., control rod drive and, residual heat removal systems.
The inspector observed this activity and will discuss it later in this report.
Completed and ground replacement weldments on the ringheaders, risers and safe ends were inspected visually to verify the adequacy of surface finish, crown contours, transitions and cleanliness maintained on and around these weldments.
The inspector found weld surface conditions and the immediate surrounding area to be satisfactory.
Production Welding:
The weldment being fabricated and observed by the inspector was identified as RWCU-3-002-G028.
At the time of inspection the insert was in the
L
process of being consumed.
The inspector observed this phase of fabrication, the subsequent hot passes and the remaining pa'sses except for the final pass.
The weldment involved a 3" schedule 80 stainless steel pipe.
The weld was being fabricated with the automatic gas tungsten, pulsating arc process.
The inspector observed conditions around the liquid weld metal pool (puddle) including metal flow, melting action and other related welding arc characteristics.
Parameters checked included amperage, primary voltage, travel speed, oscillation amplitude, wire feed, and background pulse.
Other items checked included log entries describing shift activities, welder identifications, weld wire documentation, interpass temperatures checks and shielding gas flows.
The dew point temperature log was reviewed to ascertain whether parameters where being monitored, equipment (meters)
were in calibration and flow gauges were functioning satisfactorily.
Performance qualification records for welding machine operators working on the above weld were reviewed to verify qualification status.
Completed welds in the RWCU system selected for visual examination were as follows:
RWCU-3-002-G024 RWCU-3-002-G025 RWCU-3-002-G055 RWCU-3-002-G056 RWCU-3-002-G057 RWCU-3-002-G058 3" dia.
Sched
3" dia.
Sched
3" dia.
Sched
3" dia.
Sched
3>t dia Sched.
3" dia.
Sched
As stated earlier in this report, these welds were visually inspected for physical appearance including crown morphology, finish and cleanliness.
The inspector found surface conditions of the subject welds to be consistent with code and procedural requirements.
Document Review:
Weld Travelers As stated in previous reports, GE utilizes a traveler system to document the preparation, fabrication, inspection and testing of weldments as required by code and related standards.
In an effort to determine the degree of accuracy and completeness of the
information entered, the inspector selected for review the following sample of weld travelers:
Traveler NOZZLE SAFE ENDS Weld Comments RRSEJ RWR-3-001-G010 Three NCR(s)
written, two involving machining tolerances and one because of a base metal indication.
RRSEH RWR-3-001-6007 Two NCR(s)
written, one involving counterbore tolerance and one for a rejectable indication.
RRSEG RWR-3-001-G004 Three NCR(s)
written, two involving rejectable indications and one for dimensional tolerance with counterbore RRSEF RWR-3-001-6001 Sc RWR-3-001-6002 One NCR written because of a weld fabrica-tion indication discovered by Radiography Weld RHR-3-002-G002 RZNGHEADER 24" RHR Spool S Valve Comments Two NCR (s)
written, one because of a rejectable weld indication and
RWR-3-001-G025 28" Pipe to Cross to Tee Assembly one because MSIP results exceeded dimensional requirements
- Fabrication performed without dimensional or weld related problems encountered RHR-3-002-G001 RWR-3-001-G019 24" RHR Spool to Tee 22" Cross Tee to Bent Integral Tee Weld See (*) above See (*) above RWR-3-001-G021 22" Cross Tea to Bent Integral to Tee Weld See (*) above RWR-3-001-G017 12" Stick Elbow to Reducer End See (*) above RWR-3-001-G023 12" Stick Elbow to Reducer End See (*) above Within the RWCU system, the inspector selected at random a sample of prefabricated spools for a review of quality records.
Records reviewed included GE product quality certifications, receipt inspection reports, manufacturing reports, NDE test data reports, material certifications vendor audits and Code Data Reports.
Spools selected for this work effort were as follows:
Subassembl G028-1,
-2 Size 4" schedule
Descri tion 90'lbow, Ht NLGXT, SA403 Pipe, Ht g9E6295, SA376 G011 6" schedule
90'lbow, Ht gLGYC, SA403 Pipe, Ht g24540, SA376
IL
G010 6" schedule
90 Ellg H't ¹LGVCp SA403 Pipe Ht ¹24540, SA376 G019 4" schedule
90 Ellg Ht ¹LGXT/
SA403 Pipe, Ht ¹9E6295, SA376 g Coupling Ht ¹632TNE-2, SA182 These above materials were made from type 316 nuclear grade stainless steel.
These subassemblies were procured through TVA's purchase order (PO),
RD300267 and GE's PO
¹205-91E209 Rev.
13 to the requirements of ASME Code Section III 1989 Edition with 1990 Addenda.
The material was manufactured by Taylor Forge Stainless and fabricated in accordance with requirements of ASME Section III 1986 Edition.
Safe End Quality Records Review The eleven replacement safe-ends were procured through purchase order No. 91NJC-80581D-01 and GE drawing number 112D4870 from WFI Nuclear Products of Houston Texas.
They were made from SA182 type 316NG stainless steel nuclear grade material produced from heat number 632TNE and 632TNE1.
The code of record was ASME Sections III and II 1986 Edition with 1988 Addenda, Subarticle NCA-3800.
As indicated in the quality records, these safe ends were fabricated,
.
heat treated examined, tested and surface treated (Electropolished and preoxidized)
as required by the subject code and the specification as applicable.
The material failed to meet delta ferrite requirements, however this matter was evaluated and resolved by engineering.
Within the areas inspected violations or deviations were not identified.
Nondestructive Examinations Review of Radiographs (57090)
Radiographic films of completed welds were selected at random for review to ascertain whether film quality and technique used were consistent w'ith code and procedural requirements.
The applicable procedure was identified as NRT-1 Revision 16 and the referenced code was ASME Code Section III 1986 Edition.
Welds selected for radiographic film review were as follows:
Weld RWCU-3-002-G013 RWCU-3-002-G019 RWCU-3-002-G024 RWCU-3-002-G025 RHR-3-002-G001 RHR-3-002-G002 RWR-3-001-G017 Size 4" x.337" 6n x 436n 6" x.436" 6n x 436n 24" x 1.175" 24" x 1.148" 12u x.640n Comments Valve to Pipe Pipe to Pipe Pipe to Elbow Pipe to Elbow Spool to Tee Spool to Valve Right Bull-horn to Bent Tee RWR-3- 001-G019 RWR-3-001-G021 22" x 1.125" 22" x 1.15" RWR-3-001-G023 12" x.640" RWR-3-001-G025 12" x 1.425" Liquid Penetrant Examination (57060)
Tee to Header Bent Tee to Cross Tee Pipe to Header Pipe to Pipe The inspector observed liquid penetrant examinations on selected RWCU welds in the heat exchanger room.
The examination was performed by GE personnel in accordance with TVA procedure No.
TVA 26 Revision B.
The subject welds were as follows:
Weld Size RWCU-3-002-G055 RWCU-3-002-G056 RWCU-3-002-G057 6" schedule
6" schedule
6" schedule
Liquid penetrant materials used were identified as follows:
I
Cleaner-DR60 Penetrant-DP40 Sherwin-118F4 Sherwin-18D1 Developer-D100 Sherwin-16K6 The conduct of the examination, material certification personnel performance and qualifications were satisfactory.
Within the areas inspected violations or deviations were not identified.
Mechanical Stress Improvement Process (MSIP) Utilization MSIP is a method used to remove residual tensile stresses from weldments, this preventing/suppressing the potential for initiation of cracks and retarding the growth of pre-existing cracks in piping systems.
The process involves a slight permanent contraction of the pipe on one side of the weldment.
The resulting plastic metal flow redistributes the residual as-welded tensile stresses and imparts beneficial compressive stresses at the inner pipe surface in both the axial and loop directions at all locations in the region of the weldment including the weld metal and heat affect zones.
The compressive stresses are generated at the weldments by mechanical means via a hydraulically actuated mechanical clamp used to contract the pipe on one side of the weldment.
The amount of contraction needed to complete stress redistribution depends on the geometry of the joint and component materials.
Usually the required change of pipe circumference measured prior to and after applying the process remains within a range of 0.05 to 0.08:.
The pipe contraction at the weldment is only about 0.2 to 0.3%.
MSIP was identified in NUREG-0313 Rev.
2 as a special process gualified to provide protection from IGSCC in BWR piping welds.
The site procedure used to carryout this process on replacement pipe welds and existing dissimilar metal welds was identified as GE-TVA-20.3 Rev.
0 Field Service Procedure, Mechanical Stress Improvement Process.
Application of the process was observed on the following welds:
Weld RCRD-3-50 RCRD-3-52 RCRD-3-49 Circumf.
Chanche 0.16" 0.15" 0.16" Nominal Closure 0.35 Pipe diam.
Avera e 4 48" 4.49" 4.48"
,I
DRHR-3-02 0.50" 0.86" 24.14" Records of replacement recirculation pipe welds where MSIP had been performed were reviewed for completeness, accuracy and content.
These weld were as follows:
Weld RWR-3-001-G001 RWR-3-001-G003 RWR-3-001-G004 RWR-3-001-G017 RWR-3-001-G007 RWR-3-001-G012 RWR-3-002-G013 RWR-3-002-G015 RWR-3-002-G025 RWR-3-002-G019 RHR-3-002-G004 RHR-3-002-G001 RHR-3-002-G002 DRHR-3-02 Circumferencial Chan e
0.35" 0.28" 0.31" 0.25n 0.38 0.34" 0.41" 0.41" 0.53" 0.59" 0.68" 0.62" 0.59" 0.50" Nominal
~Closur 0.35" 0.55" 0.55" 0.50" 0.55" 0 50" 0.55" 0.50" 1 10" 0.90" 0.90" 0.90" 0.90" 0.86" Average Pi e diameter 13.91" 12. 84n
89n 12.81" 13.92n 12.84"
92n
83n 30.98n 22.22"
11n 24.15" 24. 15n 24. 14n At the time of this inspection, two NCR(s)
had been written for exceeding change in circumference parameters.
The welds and the NCR(s) written were as follows:
Weld NCR RWR-3-002-G003 S-1BNH-9-043 RWR-3-002-G002 S-1BNH-9-044 Both NCR(s)
were resolved through evaluation using finite element analysis which showed the welds were "acceptable as is".
The subject report (2244-412-002),
was issued by the
contractor, AEA O'Donnnel.
The records indicated that personnel were retrained on the proper use of equipment and procedural parameters.
Within the areas inspected violations or deviations were not identified.
Exit interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on August 21, 1992, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1.
The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results.
Proprietary information is not contained in this report.
Dissenting comments were not received from the licensee.