IR 05000280/1986013
| ML18150A491 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 07/08/1986 |
| From: | Blake J, Coley J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18150A490 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-86-13, 50-281-86-13, NUDOCS 8608110123 | |
| Download: ML18150A491 (8) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA STREET, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 Report Nos.:
50-280/86-13 and 50-281/86-13 Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company Richmond, VA 23261 Docket Nos.:
50-280 and 50-281 Facility Name:
Surry 1 and 2 Inspection Conducted:
June 2~6, 1986 License Nos.:
~~,;z'. ~
J. L~y
,
App"°frv d by~J J.J.Br e~,
Engineering Branch
- f Division of Reactor Safety 7-7-'Bb Date Signed 2-~-i' G
- Date Signed SUMMARY Scope:
This was a routine, unannounced inspection in the areas of inservice inspection, repair activities and review of previous open item Results:
No violations or deviations were identifie *
- Persons Contacted Licensee Employees REPORT DETAILS R. F. Saunders, Station Manager
- H. L. Miller, Assistant Station Manager
- E. S. Grecheck, Superintendent of Technical Services
- R. H. Blount,-Supervisor of Surveillance and Test
- W. D. Craft, Licensing Coordinator
- J.M. McAvoy, System Engineer
- H. L. Travis, Supervisor of Nondestructive Testing Spooner, Level III Nondestructive Test Examiner A. McNeil, Engineer Other licensee employees contacted included construction craftsmen, engineers, technicians, operators, mechanics, security force members, and office personnel *
Other Organizations Westinghouse Electric Corporation D. J. Obazenu, Field Service Engineer J. Bell, Inservice Inspection (ISI) Coordinator NRC Resident Inspectors
- M. J. Davis
- Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on June 6, 1986, with those persons indicated in the paragraph abov The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection finding No dissenting comments were received from the license On June 11, 1986, the inspector notified Mr. H. L. Miller, Assistant Station Manager of the Surry Facility, that the inspector followup item listed below would be issued for tracking the licensees administrative actions to clarify the inservice inspections requirements for eddy current examination (Open) Inspector Followup Item 50-280,281/86-13-01, Programmatic Change for Eddy Current Examination *
The licensee did identify as proprietary some of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspection, however, details from those materials are not included in this repor.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (Open) Unresolved Item 280, 281/85-15-02:
Adequacy of Transducer for Examination of Cast Stainless Steel Piping. This item concerns the type of ultrasonic transducer used by the licensee 1 s contractor, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, to ultrasonically examine cast stainless steel (CSS)
piping welds. The transducer referred to has been found lacking in the examination of some CSS piping, as documented in NRC Inspection Report 50-395/81-22. Transducers developed more recently, appear to provide better examinations when scanning in the axial directio In order to resolve this issue and to ensure that the best examination possible would be performed on the reactor loop piping the licensee conducted a technical evaluation of nine transducers which the licensee felt could possibility examine the CSS. Th_e licensee 1s evaluation was partially impaired by the shortage of adequate centrifugal cast stainless steel (CCSS)
blocks with appropriate notch reflectors or crack In addition, several of the CCSS obtained *by the licensee were flat blocks and not suited for transducers with wedges that had been ground to fit the outside diameter of reactor loop pipin The licensee 1s approach towards the resolution of this extremely difficult technical issue is to be highly commende As a result of the investigation the licensee issued a field change to procedure ISI-206, Rev. 1, to require the use of the newer design dual element longitudinal wave transducer when scanning reactor loop piping in the axial directio During the review of the field change to procedure ISI-206, Rev. 1, the inspector noted that the licensee was using the 3/4 T side drill hole (SDH) reflector to establish calibration reference level sensitivit The inspector felt the licensee had selected the wrong calibration reflector because inservice inspection of the reactor loop piping is performed to detect service cracks originating at the pipe inside diamete CCSS pipe is difficult to examine with ultrasonics (UT) because of the material 1s *grain size and shap In fact, in order to examine this material, highly specialized transducers which produce refracted longi-tudinal waves are require A refracted longitudinal wave transducer however, produces a considerable amount of sound mode conversion when directed at a perpendicular type reflector in CCSS (Crack or calibration notch).
This significantly reduces the amplitude of the signal received by the UT instrumen The 3/4 T SDH has volume and is very easy to detec However, it does not represent the type of defect that the examination is performed to detec In fact when calibrated on the 3/4 T SDH, the end of the calibration block (representing a 100 percent through wall crack) would not be rejectable and on many CCSS blocks would not be recordable *
The licensee stated he would issue a field change to procedure ISI-206 to ensure that all examinations performed during the present outage on Unit 1 reactor loop piping, would be examined using the more sensitive notch reflector for the calibration reference level. However, the licensee stated that he intended to perform further evaluations of the calibration reflector The inspector concurred and offered the licensee the opportu-nity to use the Region II CCSS cracked and notched specimens in resolving this issue and for improving their examination technique~.
Within the area examined, no violation or deviation was identifie.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during the inspectio Inservice Inspection and Repair Activities Unit 1 The inspector reviewed in service inspection (IS!) procedures, observed !SI work activities, and reviewed completed data (which included review of examiner certifications) to determine whether the inspection and repair activities were *performed in accordance with licensee commitments and NRC requirement The applicable code is the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel (B&PV) Code,Section XI, 1980 Edition with Addenda through winter 198 For pipe only the ASME Code Section XI, 1974 Edition thru summer 1975 Addenda is used to define the extent of examinations in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55 Review of Inservice Inspection Procedures (73052) Unit 1 (1)
The following ultrasonic procedures were used by the licensee for work activities observed by the inspecto The technical contents of these procedures were reviewed by the inspector to ensure the method of examination, extent, and techniques were adequately described and in conformance with the requirements of ASME Sections V and XI and special requirements imposed by joint NRC or industry initiative Applicable Code (80W80)
(80W80)
Procedure ritle Procedure N Manual Ultrasonic Examination ISI-47 of Welds in Vessels Rev. 4 Manual Ultrasonic Examination ISI-206 of Welds Rev. 1 (2)
The following eddy current procedures were reviewed to determine if they met the intent of NRC Regulatory Guide 1.83, Rev. 1 of July 1975 and the equipment and procedural requirements of Appendix IV to Section XI of the ASME, B&PV Code from the summer 1976 Addenda to the 1974 Code through the winter 1984 Addenda to the 1983 cod *
Procedure Title Steam Generator Tubesheet Marking SM-10 Operating Procedure Procedure N MRS 2.2.2, VEP-3 Rev. 1 MRS 2.4.2, VEP-2 Rev. 1 Digital multi-frequency Eddy Current Examination MRS 2.4.2, VEP-1, Rev. 1 as noted in the above procedures the licensee is using a ZETEC MIZ-18 instrument to examine the steam generator tube This instru-ment is the latest in the state of the art equipment available for eddy current examination However, in order to use this equipment the licensee has to invoke later editi ans of the code and addenda than they are presently committed to in their !SI program or technical specificatio The inspector discussed this matter with the licensee's assistant station manager and was assured by the licensee that this isolated exception to the normal !SI program requirements would be addressed with a programmatic chang It is not the intent of NRC to discourage technical improvements in high technology equipment particularly when the inspector has observed the equipment in operation and is satisfied with the integrity of the eddy current examination The* licensee's action to clarify this program exception is considered adequat However, Inspection Followup Item 50-280,281/86-13-0l, programmatic change for eddy current examinations, will be issued to track the completion of the stated action Observation of Work and Work Activities (73753)
The inspector observed a limited amount of work activities due to the massive examination effort being directed towards the Unit 1 steam generator Indications had been detected during eddy examination of the tubes in steam generators A and In addition, ultrasonic examinations performed on steam generator C detected rejectable indications in girth weld No. 6 which initially appeared to originate at the inside surface of the steam generator. This was particularly significant because the licensee had completed the required repair work on the inside surface and had closed the access to the generator. The observati ans and reviews conducted by the inspector are documented belo (1)
Ultrasonic (UT) Examination The inspector observed ultrasonic exami nati ans performed by a Westinghouse Level III examiner using enhance (UT) techniques to determine the precise location and size of reported defect indications in girth weld No. 6 on steam generator The observations were compared with the applicable procedure and code in the following areas:
availability of and compliance with approved nondestructive examination (NOE) procedure; use of
knowledgeable NOE personnel; type of apparatus used; extent of coverage of weldment; calibration requirements; search units, beam angles; distant amplitude curves; reference level for monitoring discontinuities; method of demonstrating penetration; limits of evaluating and recording indications; and acceptance limit The examiner used a 5 MHZ 45° and 60° transducer to perform the evaluations in order to reduce the effect of beam spread that had been experienced with the 2.25 MHZ transducers used in the initial examination ~
Precise thickness measurements in the areas of interest were also taken. These values were then plotted on a detail sketch to determine the orientation and depth of the indication As a result of the above examinations, six of the indications were determined to be unacceptable when compared to Table IWB-3511-1, of Section XI, to the ASME Cod The indications however, were determined to be sub-surface and did not result from inadequate surface examination or from repairs made just previous to the ultrasonic examination At the conclusion of this inspection, the licensee had expanded the volume of weld to be examined in accordance with the requirements of Section XI to the ASME Cod (2)
Eddy Current Examination The inspector observed Westinghouse examiners perform eddy current examinations on steam generators A& The following examinations were compared with the applicable procedures and code in the following areas:
availability of and compliance with NOE procedure; use of knowledgeable NOE personnel; type of apparatus used; method of demonstrating penetration; calibration require-ments; limits of evaluating and recording indications; and acceptance limits. Examinations were observed for the following steam generator tubes Row#
Column #
88 A
25 A
92 A
65 A
42 C
Westinghouse had tentatively reported to the licensee that six tubes would require plugging on steam generator A and seventeen tubes would require plugging on steam generator In order to confirm the eddy current evaluations and to determine the cause of the defects the licensee was having a rejected tube pulled for destructive analysi The licensee also had expanded the eddy current examinations to include all the tubes in steam generators A& (3)
Examiner Qualification The inspector reviewed the qualification documentation for the below listed Westinghouse examiners in the following areas:
employer's name; person certified; activity qualified to perform; effective period of certification; signature of employer's designated representatives; basis used for certification; annual visual acuity, color vision examination and periodic recertifi-catio Examiner Method - Level UT PT VI MT ET RHC ITI CTI ITI ITI JWB LII LII JRD LII LII LI LI TJB LI LI NAB LII LII LI LII JTF LI LI PJK LI LI LI SAS LII LII LII LII TAS LII LI LI I TRS LI LII LI LI CFT LII JJC LII DJT LII SJB LII RAV LII JMZ LII JCH LIII FDG LIII JOI Trainee JAD Trainee DJO LII JWE LII JHG LI DRF LII FDD LII RSB LI SRK LI GWM LII Section XI Repair Activities The inspector reviewed the repair procedures listed below to determine whether these procedures complied with the Code in the following areas:
approved procedure used; delineation of the scope of work and division of responsibility between licensee and contractor; identification of the NDE method that revealed the flaw; description of the flaw removal method; and description of the NDE method to be used after the repair is complete The following procedures were reviewed:
Procedure N SS2.7.2-VPA-1 Rev. 0 MRS2.3.2 VEP-1 Rev. 1
Type of Repair Repair by Grinding Cracks on the inside surface of Steam Generator A, B, & C girth weld No. 6 Mechanical Plugging of Steam Generator Tubes Review of Completed Repair Records The licensee identified cracks in the inside surface of the upper shell to transition cone welds (Welds No. 6) of their Unit 1 steam genera-tors. All evidence of cracking, as confirmed by magnetic particle testing (MT), has been removed by grinding the affected welds in steam generators A, B, and The inspector examined the licensee's actions in addressing this matter through a review of the complete data package and through discussions with cognizant personne The cracks in the Unit 1 steam generators were similar to those detected in the Unit 2 steam generators during the 1985 outage ( See Report Nos. 50-280, 281/85-15 for details).
The licensee also issued a detail report describing location of the cracks, size, and depth of grinding required to remove the indication Within the areas examined, no violation or deviation were identifie,