IR 05000269/1977017
| ML19316A261 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry, Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 09/27/1977 |
| From: | Blake J, Economos N, Murphy C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19316A252 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-269-77-17, NUDOCS 7912050835 | |
| Download: ML19316A261 (11) | |
Text
gi d Uhr,k p
UNITED STATES t
,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'#f S (D'
~',. -( 'F'ff,
" ""
-
r 230 PE ACHTREE STR EET, N.W. SulTE 1217
/J '-
ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30303
"
o s,
. j
.
- ...*
-
Report Nos.:
50-269/77-17 and 50-270/77-17 Docket Nos.:
50-269 and 50-270 License Nos. :
'
Licen'see:
D Power Company P.
Box 2178 422 South Church Street
- Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Facility Nsmr: "Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2.
-
'
Inspection at:
Oconee, Seneca, South Carolina Inspection conducted: August 23-26, 1977
'
l Inspectors:
Nick Fconomos J. J. Blake Other Accompanying Personnel:
R. D. Davis, Reactor Inspector (Trainee)
Reviewed by:/
w 7)
C. E. Murphyl,Ch N
' Date
.
Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Inspection Su= nary
,
Inspection on August 23-26,1977 (Report Nos. 50-269/77-17 and 50-270/77-17)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of inservice inspection activities in Units 1 and 2.
The inspection effort included review of inspection procedures, data evaluation, and work observation.
The QC data package for the Unit 2B S/G shell fix was reviewed and e'aluated.
v Tlie inspection involved 62 inspector-hours on site by two NRC inspectors.
Results: Of the four areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance
,
-
or. deviations were identified.
-
,
.
l
~
79120.50
[
.
.
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/77-17 I-l and 50-270/77-17
.
,
DETAILS I Prepared by:
N f
?h7-usw N. fconomos,CW6tallurgical Engineer
/
D,gte Engineering ' Support Section No. 2 Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Dates of In'spect ch-st 2 -26,1977 Reviewed by:
n/
7 7 A. R. Her'dt', ' Chief
/ D (te Engineering Support Section No. 2 Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch
.
1.
Persons Contacted a.
Duke Power Company (DPC)
- J. E. Smith, Station Manager
- J. W. Cox, Station QA Manager
- Doug Norton, QA Engineer, Charlotte
- R. J. Brackett, Operations QA Engineer
.
b.
Contractor Organizations (1)
Babc6ck and Wilcox Construction Company (B&W)
~
D. R. Welch, coordinator
-
Garry Able, Level II Examiner, Eddy Current P. G. Brazdzionis, Level,II Examiner, UT (2) Babcock and Wilcox, Lynchburg Research Center Dan'Schlader, Senior Research Engineer
- Denotes those present at exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Inspection Findings
'
-
This area was not inspected.
)
,
e
,
,
.
.
_
_
_
,
.
.
.
.
)
RII Rp t..Nos. 50-269/77-17 I-2
-
and 50-270/77-17
'
.
"
.
3.
Unresolved Items o
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviations.
Unresolved items disclosed during the inspection are discussed in Paragraph No. 7 of this report.
4.
Independent Inspection Effort a.
Inservice Inspection (ISI) Procedure Review, Unit 1 In addition to the programmatic procedure review, the inspec-tor selected the following B&W NDE and administrative procedures for review:
-
.
-
.
(1)
ISI-240 - Penetrant Examination of Weld and Base Materials
.
Including Studs, Nuts and Washers (2)
ISI-270 - Wet or Dry Metheds of Magnetic Particle Examination
'
of Welds.
'
(3)
ISI-401 - Eddy Current' Examination of OTSG Tubing Techniques
,
(4)
9A-169 - B&W Construction Company Quality Control Administra-tive Procedure.
The above procedures were reviewed for technical adequacy and compliance with the 1974 Edition of Sections V and XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, including the Summer 1975 Addenda.
b.
QA Audits of ISI Activities, Unit 3 The licensee's Quality Assurance Manual (QAM), procedure QA-500 delineates the requirements of the audits to be performed during inservice inspection.
The procedure requires that audits be performed in accordance with an approved written plan and check-lisp.s in order to insure depth, coverage and-continuity of ISI activities. Within this area, the inspector reviewed Unit 3 audit number 76-81 performed during the 9/20/76 to 12/10/76 fuel outage. No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
.
.
e
e
-_.-p y
.
.
.
.
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/77-17 I-3 and 50-270/77-17
.
.
5.
Inservice Inspection Review of Procedures Examination requirements for this ISI inspection are established by paragraph (g) of 10 CFR 50.55(a) and Section 4.2 of the Oconee Technical Specification as applicable.
The ISI inspection program plan has been prepared by B&W to meet the 1974 Edition of Section XI of the ASME Code including the Summer 1975 Addenda and applicable Regulatory Guides. The. plan, approved by DPC and B&W Level III Examiner, outlines examination over the 10 year ISI interval based on eight (8) planned outages.
Section 2 of the plan contains a listing of all applicable weld
,
areas, parts and/or components in Class 1, -and 2 categorie,s subject to examination per Section XI of the ASME Code. Section,3 of the plan contains a schedule o,f examinations and lists all examinations by specific number and the outages during which they are planned to be done. The last two, Sections 4 and 5, contain approved ISI procedures (NDE) and a list of the calibration blocks required for volumetric examination.
'
In order to verify that the program plan met examination require-s
'
ments as specified in the applicable Code and Regulatory Guides, the inspector selected five (5) items listed in the program plan and compared them against ASME Section XI, IRB-2000 and IWC-2000 as applicable. These items were as follows:
Item Descrip' tion NDE
% Coverage Outage
.
B.I.3.1 Vessel to Flange Weld UT 50%
B.1.9.1 Ligament Areas UT 50%
B.3.11.1 LA S/G Tubes ET 3%
B.4.5.192 LA1 HPI Line Pipe to
,
C.2.5.49 Main Steam A, Attach-i ment MT 100%
,
Ultrasonic procedure, 151-120, Rev. 5, used to examine Class 1 and 2 pipe welds was selected for review'of technical contents and compliance with Ccde requirements. Within these areas, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
.
.
O d
.
--
.
,
!
'
.
)
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/77-17 I-4
~
and 50-270/77-17 6.
Obwervation of Work and Work Activities (Unit 1)
The components scheduled for examination during this outage included certain welds and nozzles in the reactor vessel, certain tubes in
~
steam generator (S/G) 1A and IB, piping, pumps, valves, attachments and certain pressure vessels.
See paragraph 5 for applicable code requirements.
a.
Eddy Current Examination (ET) of Steam Generator Tubes At the time of this inspection, B&W was examining the tubes in S/G IB.
The examination was being conducted in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.83, Rev. 1.
,
.
The inspector met with the licensee and B&W to discuss the progress and results of this examination.
The licensee made the following disclosure:
.
First Sample, 3%:
Five (5) tubes exceeded acceptance criteria. One (1) tube will be i
plugged because of a metal object being lodged in it and efforts to dislodge it have failed. One (1)
tube has a wall indentation (" ding")
and B&W has recommended that it be J
,
plugged.
A total of seven tubes required plugging.
Second Sample, 3%:
A total of eight (8) tubes exceeded acceptance criteria and required plugging.
Third Sample, 6%:
A total of 13 S/G tubes were found to exceed acceptance cricerta and will require plugging.
Four':h Sample:
On August 31, the licensee reported by telephone that another 6% sample
.
will be done.
'
The defective tubes appear to be located between the 12th and 14th tube supports around the S/G periphery and towards the
.
,
S/G manway. Out of a, total of 2510 tubes examined thus far, 28 are scheduled to be plugged.
S/G, 1A will be ET eddy current examined with the first sample being 6%.
.
+
.
-
.
.~)
RII Rp t. Nos. 50-269/77-17 I-5
'
and 50-270/77-17
-
b.
Volumetric and Surface Examination Tine inspector witnessed surface (PT) and Volumetric (UT)
examinations on the following welds:
Weld #
Fh Lined NDE ISI-Proced.
WLD-7A B4.8.1 1A1 HPI PT 240 WLD-3 B4.5.192 1A1 HPI UT 120 Within this area, the inspector examined personnel qualifications, PT material and calibration block certifications, examination
'
procedures and, verified through questioning, discussions and observations that NDE personnel performing the examinations were throughly f amiliar with the examination procedures / methods.
TheweldmetalandtherequgredbasemetalofweldWLD-3were scanned with angle beam (45 ) and the straight beam (0 )
search units, respectively.
The examination revealed:
(1)
the base metal contained a 360 intermittent indication with an amplitude of 125% DAC reference which was interpreted as a cirgumferential lamination; and (2) the weld metal contained a 360 intermittent indication with an amplitude of 80% DAC
'
reference. Both indications met minimum code requirements;
'they-were recorded and no further action was anticipated.
In.
<
addition' to witnessing instrument calibration, the inspector
.
observed the construction of the DAC reference calibration curve, reviewed data sheets and calibration sheets as appropriate.
The FT examination produced no indications requiring investiga-tion. No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
ISI Dtta Review and Evaluation, Unit 1 As discussed earlier in this report, the program plan of this ISI was reviewed and found to be consistent with applicable code and Technical Specification requirements.
This inspection effort included a review of records of examinations conducted on pressure retaining welds on the,RPV,. pipe welds <2"
-
.
4 f
I
-...
...
-
---
-
~..-..- -... -
.-
.. -. ~ _
-
-
.
,
.
'
)
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/77-17 I-6 and 50-270/77-17
-
.
diameter, and pressure retaining bolts.
These items were identified as follows:
Item Fijg NDE Comments a.
Reactor Vessel
'
Head Bl.3.2 UT Clear b.
Pressurizer Supports Lug,
~
w/ axis B2.81 ~
UT Clear
-
c.
lAl Pump bolts B5.1.1 UT Clear d.. A Hot, Leg RTE
.
-
,
Noz. Sm Y-Z Axis B4.1.55 UT Clear
'-
e.
A Hot Le8 RTE Noz. SM Y-Z Axis B4.15.6 PT Clear i
'
!
f.
A Hot Leg RTE Noz. SM Z-W Axis B4.1.57 UT Clear g.
'A Hot Leg RTE
,.
,
Noz. Sm Z-W Axis B4.1.58 PT Clear h.
A Hot Leg Vent Noz. SE B4.1.67 UT Clear 1.
A Hot Leg Vent
.
Noz. SE B4.1.68 PT Clear For these items the inspector reviewed test results, calibrations and certifications of equipment and materials as applicable and personnel qualifications. Within those areas the licensee advised the inspector that a new set of calibration blocks have been fabricated by B&W and will be used in the examination of.the reactor vessel with the automated inspection tools.
Before using these
.
blocks, B&W will conduct attenuation tests to check their similarity
'
-
with those used for the preservice inspection.
The inspector
,
stated that this matter would be identified as an unresolved item
-
until RII has had a opportunity to review and evaluate the test data.
.
This was identified as unresolved item No. 269/77-17U1.
%
,3-e
..
_ -_.__ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -.
.. _. _ -.
._
,
.
.
.
I
.
-
.
,
(")
.
'.
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/77-17 I-7
and 50-270/77-17 8.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection. The inspector identified the areas inspected which were procedure review, observa-tion of work activities and evaluation and review of test data.
Unresolved item No. 269/77-17U1 was discussed in detail.
.
.
e e
=
'
.
.
<
-
.
.
e i
l
.
.
.
=
e f
!
.
'
.-
-... -
- -
-. -. _. -,
--
-
.-
-. -.
-
.-
~.-. -
.
.
.
-
.
/]-
RII Rpt.,Nos. 50-269/77-17
.
'
and 50-270/77-17.
II-l DETAILS II Prepared by:
.
2/2
Blake, Metallurgical Engineer Date ineering Support Section No. 2 Reactor Construction and Engineering
..
Support Branch Dates of Inspec on:
Augu t 23-26, 1977 Reviewed by:
A d
A. R. Herdt, Chief
' Date Engineering Support Section No. 2 Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch
'
.
-
1.
D rsons Contacted
'
ruke Power Company
- t. E. Smith, Station Manager
.
- h. J. Brackett, Station QA Manager
- R. T. Bond, Maintenance Engineer L. V. Wilkie, Assistant Engineer
- Indicates those present at the exit interview
,
The inspector also talked with and interviewed several other maintenance and QA personnel during the course of this inspection.
2.
Reensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings This was not inspected during this inspection.
3.
Unresolved Items There were no unresolved items identified durinir, this inspection.
4.
Independent Inspection Effort
'
'
The inspector observed calibration of ultrasonic equipment and evaluation of steam generator tube eddy current test data during inservice inspection of Unit 1.
There were no items of noncompliance in this area of inspection.
.
5.
Inservice Inspection Data Review and Evaluation (Unit 2)
,
The commercial service date for Oconee Unit 2 has been established as September 9, 1974; as such, the inservice inspection requirements
~
-
are.the 1970 Edition of Section XI of the ASME B&PV Code through the Winter 1970 edition.
~
-
'
.
_
-
_. _ _ _. _ _ -.
.
__.
... _ _
r
.
.
.
.
l
.
-
.
RII Rpt. 50-269/77-17 and 50-270/77-17 II-2
.
The inspector reviewed the copies of the inservice inspection data which had been retained by the licensee's QA staff pending receipt of the final report from the inservice inspection contractor (Babcock and Wilcox Construction Company). The data was reviewed to ensure that all of the inspections scheduled for this outage had been completed as required by the unit Inservice Inspection Manual.
This review showed that all inspections had either been completed or the inspections had.been rescheduled for another outage by formally changing the inservice inspection plan.
The inspector reviewed selected records for completeness of examina-tion and evaluation data recording, proper reference to calibration
'
data sheets, data on equipment and consumable materials used, and
,
qualification of inspection personnel. There were no items of j
noncompliance in this area of inspection.
The inspector ~did note one area of concern, which was that a station procedure which referetced the 1977 Inservice Inspection Manual for this unit also referenced the 1970 Section XI of the ASME B&PV Code with Summer 1970 Addenda, in lieu of the Winter 1970 addenda referenced by the
.
.
,
Inservice Inspection Manual. This item was of no major concern in that the proper code addenda was listed in the station Inservice Inspection Manual.
This item was discussed at the Exit Interview.
6.
Steam Generator Modification, Unit 2 The inspector reviewed the procedures and the quality related documentation for the' modification required to remove a file from the secondary side of the No. 2B steam generator.
.
The documentation review included the following:
,
a.
Nuclear Station Modification Process Record No. ON-0872
"Rev. 0A - Drilling of Holes in 2B OTSG per B&W FCA 2401."
"Rev. OB - Plug Holes Drilled in the "B" OTSG (See Rev. 0A)
per B&W FCA #04-2401-01."
.
b.
Field Weld Data Sheet, Shielded Metal Arc L-399-1 Rev. O.
with Welder Qualification L-199-5 and Procedure Qualification L-149-4..
.
c.
Work Request No. 95933 for NSM-0872 Rev. OA
.
.
,
d.
Work Request No. 95939 for NSM-0872 Rev. OB.
e.
Quality Assurance Department, Operations Division, NDE
-
'
Inspection Records
,
l
'
_.__ -.. _... _.. _ _ _ _. _ _ _. _ _ _ _..._
. __ _ __.
.. _
. _.
_. _
...
'
..
.
..
.
.
w'
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/77-17 and 50-270/77-17 II-3 There were no items of noncompliance in this area of inspection.
The inspector did note two items of concern which were discussed at the exit interview.
These items were:
(1)
extraneous unrelated papers were included in the modification file; and (2) a memo to
.
file which had been included in the modification file to provide continuity listed the wrong addenda for the steam generator fabrica-tion specification'. Again this item was of no major concern in that the proper Code addenda was listed in the working document.
7.
Exi,t; Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (identified in paragraph 1) to discuss the scope and findings of the inspection.
The inspector informed the licensee that an area of concern existed in the identification of the proper edition of mandatory reference documents. Two instances were identified during this inspection where the wrong addenda to a section of the ASME B&PV Code had been listed.
In both cases the erroneous reference could not have had any effect on work or QA records, but the fact that they existed showed a lack of attention to detail which could result in problems in the future. The licensee acknowledged that there was reason for concern in this crea.
.
.
4 G
S b
4