IR 05000269/1985033

Insp Repts 50-269/85-33,50-270/85-33 & 50-287/85-33 on 850923-26.No Violation or Deviation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Unit 3 Inservice Insp,Review & Record Evaluation & Main Feedwater Flow Nozzle post-weld Heat Treatment

ML20138M988
Person / Time
Site:	Oconee
Issue date:	10/17/1985
From:	Blake J, Economos N NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20138M986	List: IR 05000269/1985033 ML20138M981
References
50-269-85-33, 50-270-85-33, 50-287-85-33, NUDOCS 8511040509
Download: ML20138M988 (7)

Text

,

pQ Qtco UNITED STATES f ^

'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[* o REG lON ll 3 j 101 MARIETTA STREET. N.W.

• '

g ATL ANTA GEORGIA 30323

%, ...../

Report Nos.: 50-269/85-33, 50-270/85-33, and 50-287/85-33 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Docket Nos.: 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287 License Nos.: OPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55 Facility Name: Oconee 1, 2, and 3 Inspection Cond d* S tember 23-26, 1985 Inspect /o: N. E

/ /c 7!6[

o ~f Date Signed Approve y: __

/o 1 Y J. J lake,~5ection Chief Date Signed En n ring Branch D' i on of Reactor Safety SUMMARY Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 32 inspector-hours in the areas of Unit 3 inservice inspection (ISI), review and record evaluation, main feedwater flow-nozzle post weld heat treatment; closing of open items; reassembly of reactor coolant pump 3A2 - work observation and record review.

Resul ts: No violations or deviations were identified, t

851104050985hh69 PDR ADOCK O PDR G

)

'. ,

,

i REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees '

• M. S. Tuckman, Station Manager B. Millsaps, Mechanical Technical Support Engineer B. Carney, Mechanical Technical Support Engineer R. J. Brackett, Senior QA (Quality Assurance) Engineer R. H. Ledford, QA Technical Support Supervisor W. R. Hunt, ISI Coordinator J. M. Crowe, Technical Support QA C. R. Hensen, Welding /NDE (Nondestructive Examination) Inspector, Quality Control (QC)

• T. C. Matthews, Compliance Other Organization Babcock and Wilcox (B&W), Special Products and Integrated Field Services H. E. Stopplemann, ISI Coordinator NRC Resident Inspectors

• J. C. Bryant, Senior Resident Inspector

• K. Sasser, Resident Inspector

• L. King, Resident Inspector

• Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on September 24, 1985, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings listed below. No dissenting comments were received from the license (0 pen) Unresolved Item (UNR) 287/85-33-01, Main Feedwater Flow Nozzle Weld Postweld heat treatment (PWH) documentation, paragraph The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspectio . Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (Closed) Unresolved Item (UNR) 287/85-27-04, ISI Radiographs Area of Interest Coverage. The inspector reviewed actions taken by the licensee to demonstrate that ISI radiographs depicting what was believed to be

.

,

.

2  !

l l

, inadequate area of interest coverage met code requirements. These demon-strations included measurements of weld reinforcement, description of adjoining parts / components and overlays. The licensee agreed to use lead markers (shot) to mark t.he weld edge and thereby eliminate questions of this sort in the futur . Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to determine whether they are acceptable or may involve violations or devia-tions. New unresolved items identified during this inspection are discussed in paragraph . IndependentInspectionEffort(92706,62700) Reactor Coolant Pump (RCP) Bearing Housing Assembly Bolt Failures -

Unit 3. This work effort was a followup to that documented in Report 287/85-27 concerning the discovery of certain broken bolts on the upper and lower sections of the bearing housing assembly (BHA) in RCP-3A At the time of this inspection, the licensee had reassembled the pump and was preparing to start tensioning the main flange stud The inspector observed portions of this work effort, inspected the work area, discussed the activity with the cognizant engineer, and reviewed quality records of the following item Purchase Purchase Order Component Order N Item N Heat N Stuffing Box 40781 Z6866 ----

Thermal Barrier 47037 H1862 ----

Studs M40887-73 ----

C25230 4 A540CL-5, Gr-823 )

Nuts 0-0065 ----

C25220 AS40CL-5, Gr-823 Impeller Assembly C-8062 904-1 44226-#2 A351-65, Gr-CF 8 Shaft Assembly C-8062 904-1 534820-3T Type - 31655

The impeller and shaft assembly were purchased from Three Mile Island (TMI) when it was discovered that reassembly to manufacturer's specifi-cation could not be achieved. The licensee believes that the rework on the bearing housing assembly may have contributed to this proble Within these areas, no violations or deviations were identifie Postheat Treatment of Main Feedwater Flow Nozzle Welds Oconee Nuclear Station Maintenance Directive IV H dated June 20, 1985, (Directive) is the licensee's controlling document for welding and thermal treatment (preheat, postheat) of welds. Section 8 of this "

l

l

- . _______ _ _ _ - . . . , , _ . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ . . _ - _ _ _ . - . _ _ _ . . , _ _ . -

_,

)

.

,

Directive provides specific instructions for postweld heat treatment of weld repairs perfomed under ASME Code Sections XI and III as well as for field weld joints fabricated under ANSI B31.1, 1967. The Directive identified the maintenance engineer or his designee as responsible for specifying and preparing the applicable data sheets according to instructions in Section 9 of the Directive. Paragraph 9.2.2 Postweld Heat Treatment, requires the postweld heat treatment to be done in accordance with Form MWP-22A Postweld Heat Treatment Data Sheet, and the activity to be monitored with temperature sticks or pyrometers as applicable. Methods used to control and document temperatures are specified under paragraph 9.2.4 of this Directiv Subparagraph 8.2.8.3 of the Directive states that, postweld heat treatment shall be monitored by Quality Control Inspectors in accordance with Quality Control Procedure QCL-1 R/1 Feedwater flow nozzle welds 1A,1B,1C and 10 were fabricated and postweld heat treated under requirements of ANSI B31.1-67 Power Piping Cod Paragraph 131.3.4 of this code states that postheat treatment temperatures shall be checked by .... thermocouple pyrometers. ..to assure that the requirements established by Table 131... are accom-plished. Also, paragraph 131.3.7 identifies the minimum width of material (band) e.g. weld plus base metal, to be postweld heat treated and, requires that the entire band be brought up to the uniform specified temperature over the complete circumference of the pipe section with gradual diminishing of the temperature outward from the edges of the ban In response to the inspector's request for objective evidence for review and evaluation to determine whether the above code and procedural requirements had been met, the licensee provided the inspector with (1) a copy of Form MWP-22A, showing the location of the thermocouple and heating elements relative to the weld joints - the thermocouples and recording instruments used were not identified; (2) the strip charts showing time and temperature profiles for each of the four welds and (3) related weld card Although postweld heat treatment was marked on the weld cards as required, this line item had not been signed off by Q In discussions with cognizant licensee personnel, the inspector indicated that: As depicted on Fom MWP-22A, positioning the thermocouples on top of the weld instead of locating them strategically over the band of material requiring postweld heat treatment is not in full compliance with paragraph 131.3.7(c) of the code which requires uniform temperature control over the entire band and for the full circumference of the pipe. Also, the inspector stated that failure to identify the thermocouples and their respective recording instruments complete with calibration record (s)

diminishes the validity of the strip chart information whose accuracy is heavily dependent on calibration and therefore it is

)

.

,

.

difficult to say whether the recorded temperatures and times met the requirements of Table 131 of the cod Judging from the weld cards, it did not appear that QC inspectors had monitored this activity as this line item had not been signed i off on the weld cards. Discussions with cognizant QC personnel revealed that QCL-1 does not apply to ANSI B31.1 Code Class G welds. The inspector indicated that lack of QC participation, in I this phase of weld fabrication, was contradictory to the other inspections on these welds, particularly since all four welds were fabricated in accordance with weld procedures and welders qualified to Section IX of the ASME Code and radiographed in accordance with procedure NDE-10A which complies with ASME Section V/ ANSI B3 With regards to controls on postweld thermal treatment of ANSI B31.1 code welds the Directive, as written, tends to be inadequate in that it disregards the requirements and implications of paragraphs 131.3.4 and .7 of the Code except for those welds identified as safety-relate Also, in reference to temperature recording instruments, subparagraph 9.2.4.2.2 of the Directive requires that instrument calibration be maintained in accordance with applicable Administrative and Maintenance procedures but it fails to identify and/or reference these procedure Also subparagraph 9.2.4.2.4 requires, without exception to type of weld or classification that thermocouples be tack welded per qualified weld procedures and welders, and that the activity be inspected by QC inspectors per procedure QCL- However, in that QCL-1 does not apply to the aforementioned welds which are ANSI B3 category Class G, nonsafety, it could not be ascertained at this time whether QC inspected this activit Cognizant licensee personnel disclosed that the aforementioned Directive is presently undergoing revision and indicated that the above comments / concerns would be taken under consideration and addressed in the revised documen Finally, the inspector reviewed radiographs of the aforementioned welds for compliance with applicable code require- ,

ment Until the revised document can be reviewed to determine whether the above concerns have been addressed, the matter was identified as Unresolved Item 287/85-33-01, Main Feedwater Flow Nozzle Weld PWH Documentatio . Inservice Inspection, Data Review and Evaluation, Unit 3(73755)

Records of completed nondestructive examinations were selected and reviewed to ascertain whether the methods technique and extent of the examination complied with the ISI plan and applicable NDE procedures; findings were properly recorded and evaluated by qualified personnel; programmatic devia-tions were recorded as rcquired; personnel, instruments, calibrations blocks

__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

_ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ . __ _ . - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

. .

-

'

!

,

, 5

and NDE materials (penetrants, couplants) were designated and qualifica-l tiens/ certifications were on file. The applicable code for this activity 1 was ASME Section XI (80W81). Records selected for this review were as 4 follows

'

Ultrasonic Examination

j Reactor Coolant Pump 181"x4.372 0" Scan i Main Flange Studs i QA Tag 446780 HT #C25230 S/N - Many Visual Examination l Reactor Coolant Pump f

Main Flange Nuts QA Tag #45630 i Heat #C25220 S/N Many 4"x21" Visual (VT-1)

'

Ultrasonic Examination E04.001.001 A-1 Discharge Makeup 31x0.95" Nine Inds. identified Nozzle Safe End - HPI ranging from 60% to Thermal Sleeve 200% DAC Radiography ,

performed, evaluated

'

,

i by Level II Believed to be debris trapped between

! thermal sleeve and

{ pip B03.130.001 3A W-Z Axis Outlet Two 360' continuous

! Nozzle, 35GA-WG50-2 indications off  :

l nozzle 10. Evaluation j Report (ER) #85-06 B09.011.212 High Pressure Two Intermittent Injection (HPI) Pipe

'.

, indications 0 root i to Tee. W #3-51A-63-09 of wel ER #85-07

.

809.011.211 3A1, HPI Valve to Pipe Two Intermittent

W #3-51A-63-03 Indications each 100%

! and 400% DAC ER #85-0008

! B09.011.203 Decay Heat Terminal Two Intermittent

.

End Pipe to Nozzle, Hot Leg Indications each 90%

!

A side W #3-53A-18-11 and 159% DAC i ER #85-009

I

_ _ . - , _ _ _ , _ . _ _ _ - _ _ _ . - - _ , _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , . _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ . _ _ , _ . _ , - _ , . , - _ _ . - _ _ _ , _ _ _ , _ . , . _ . _ , . _ , _

r

.

,

'

.

C05.021.004 Low Pressure Injection One Intermittent Elbow and Pipe Indication 0 200% DAC W #3-53A-24-09 360 at root of weld ER #85-010 C05.021.005 Low Pressure Injection One Intermittent Pipe to pipe W #3-53A-24-9A Indication 200% DAC, 360" at root of weld ER #85-011 C02.021.002 Generator A Steam Outlet One Intermittent Nozzle X-Y, Axis Indication 335% DAC, W #3SG-A-WG23-2 360*. Geometric reflector from nozzle inside radius ER *85-004 C02.021.003 Generator B Steam Outlet One Intermittent Nozzle W-X, W #35GB-WG23-1 Indication 251% DAC, 360 Geometry from nozzle inside radius ER #85-005 C01.010.003 Steam Generator "A", Four Intermittent Nozzle Belt to Shell indications 141% to W #35GA-WGB-3 251% DAC - all geometries limited scan to one side of weld because of high radiatio ER #85-002 C01.010.004 Steam Gen A, Nozzle Belt Four Intermittent to Shell W #35GA-WG8-4 indications 100% to 159% DAC - all geometries because of configuration ER #85-001 Evaluation of these indications were being performed by the licensee at the time of this inspection. Results of these evaluations will be reviewed by the inspector on a routine basis on a future inspectio Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.