IR 05000280/1988015
| ML18152A930 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 05/24/1988 |
| From: | Blake J, Newsome R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18152A928 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-88-15, 50-281-88-15, IEB-87-001, IEB-87-1, IEIN-87-036, IEIN-87-36, NUDOCS 8806070414 | |
| Download: ML18152A930 (13) | |
Text
Report Nos. :
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA STREET, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 50-280/88-15 and 50-281/88-15 Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company Richmond, VA 23261 Docket Nos.:
50-280 and 50-281 License Nos.: DPR-32 and DPR-37 Facility Name:
Surry 1 and 2 Date Signed Date Signed SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, announced inspection was in the areas of Unit 1 Inservice Inspection (ISI) activities including Eddy Current (EC) examination of steam generator tubing and balance of plant Nondestructive Examination (NOE).
Activities and documentation reviews of pipe wall thickness determinations as dictated by BU87-0l and IN87-36 was accomp 1 i she A 1 so, previously opened items were addresse Results:
No violations or deviations were identified.
8806070414 880527 PDR ADOCK 05000380 Q
1:
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees REPORT DETAILS F. Bresee, Corporate Inservice Inspection (ISI) Engineer D. Dodson, Senior Staff Specialist D. Fortin, Supervisor Corporate !SI
- D. Grady, Supervisor Nondestructive Examination (NOE)
- A. McNeill, Supervisor !SI and Test
- G. Miller, Licensing Coordinator
- J. Price, Manager Quality Assurance (QA)
Other licensee employees contacted included engineers, technicians, security force members, and office personne Other Organization J. Bell, !SI Coordinator, Westinghouse Electric Corporation..Q'll NRC Resident Inspector
- W. Holland, Senior Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on May 6, 1988, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 abov The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection finding In addition, the inspector discussed the following commitments agreed to by the licensee: During the next refueling outage, the Unit 2 nozzles will receive a visual examination of order to determine the physical configuration at the safe end to nozzle weld area Paragraph 3.a.).
reactor vessel out 1 et the inside surface in of the inside surface (See details in Historical documentation of the Unit 2 safe end to reactor vessel outlet nozzle welds will be researched in order to determine what the physical configuration of the inside surf ace of the nozz 1 es is suppose to be, according to the fabrication documentatio ( See details in Paragraph 3.a.).
2 Documented assigned responsibility will be established for the technical review of in-process !SI examination reports and for a technical review of final IS! report (See details in Paragraph 3. b.).
No dissenting comments were received from the license The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspectio Note: An alphabetical tabulation of acronyms and abbreviation used in this report is listed in Paragraph.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (Open) Unresolved Item 281/86-34-02, Q.A. records do not agree with visual examination conclusion Limited visual examination of the inside surface of the thre~ RV outlet nozzles indicated that this surface does not appear to be what is shown on the construction drawings that were submitted at the time the item was identifie This inspector reviewed the remote visual examination video tapes recorded by W of the inside surface of these nozzle The visual examinations-recorded on video tape indicated that no definitive conclusions, with regard to the inside surface, could be reached using this visual examinatio The area examined was very limited, the video tape was made with inadequate lighting, and due to the angle of the camera and the lighting combination it appeared impossible to make any absolute determination with regard to the inside surface at the small area that could be recognized, much less a determination with regard to the surface for 360 degree Discussions with licensee corporate and site personnel with regard to this matter, resulted in the following commitments being agreeded to by the licensee:
During the next Unit 2 refueling outage, the reactor vessel outlet nozzles will receive a visual examination of the inside surface, in the safe end to nozzle weld areas, in order to determine the physical configuration of these surface Historical documentation of the Unit 2 safe end to reactor vessel outlet nozzle welds will be researched in order to determine what the physical configuration of the inside surface of the nozzles is suppose to be according to the fabrication documen-tatio Pending fulfillment of the above commitments and subsequent review by the NRC of these licensee actions, this item will remain open.
3 (Open) Unresolved Item 281/86-34-03, Reactor Nozzle Indications. The most recent remote ultrasonic (UT) examination of the Unit 2 RV outlet nozzle to safe end welds revealed indications that were not previously reported during IS! examinations. This inspector reviewed the fi na 1 W report for the most recent examination and the video tapes recorded during the outlet nozzle to safe end UT examinations utilizing a 41° longitudinal wave on Loops A and C, the near surface examination utilizing a 60° longitudinal wave on Loop B, the 45° shear wave examination on Loop C, and portions of the technique designated as 11 zeroing 11 used to interrogate the bi/tri metallic interfaces at the nozzle to safe end weld position During the review of these video tapes, it was very apparent that high amplitude signals were being generated at or near the inside surface of the nozzles and in some instances at the outside surface as wel Narrations recorded on the tapes by W Level III examiners indicated that the signals were being caused by a variety of reasons but primarily due to the ul\\rasonic sound entry surface conditioning which could be causing geometric reflections and sound beam redirections. The video tapes indicated that a representative sample of these signals was explored in some detail and the final W report include representative information and indication plot Some of the indications that were plotted and sized would be rejectable by the ASME B&PV Code un 1 ess they could be determined to be caused by geometry and not true defect signal The W report stated 11Accordingly, remote VT-1 grade visual investigation was employed on representative ID surface areas (approx. 12° at TDC) of each safe end weld to determine the potential for geometric reflector This visual investigation determined that the Loop A safe end inside diameter was essentially 11 as welded, 11 with a predominant 11 ridge
noticeable on the stainless side of the weld pre Loop B and C which yielded nominal 60°L dual results, showed an essentially smooth if slightly concave weld prep are These visual results were accepted as confirmation that the s i gna 1 responses were represen-tative of geometrical condition Though the visual investigations support the interpretation of geometric causes, as noted above, a fracture analysis was prepared on the assumption that the measured reflectors were p 1 ana r oriented flaws; and not due to geometric cause This analysis supports the continued integrity of the areas of interest.
As stated in a. above, the vi sua 1 examination of these surfaces were limited and of questionable qualit The yJ_ statement that a fracture analysis was prepared on the assumption that the reflectors were planar oriented flaws and not due to geometric causes seems to leave the fi na 1 determination as to what is causing these various UT signal open to intrepertation.
Apparently the licensee was unable to reach a conclusion and requested W to clarify the conclusions, with respect to the RV safe end -examination The W response, by letter dated November 20, 1987, stated, 11A 11 investigated i ndi cations were categorized as non val id -- that is, they were assessed as being caused by other than fl aw reflector Because the physical condition of the inside surface of these nozzles is not factually know ( See Unresolved Item 281/86-34-02 in a. above) for 360° and because these indications have not previously been reported, some questions still exist with regard to the origin of the indication During the early stages of the inspector 1 s review of this item it did not appear that the 1 icensee was conducting a technical review of the final ISI report This conclusion was reached because there was no documented assigned responsibility for this tas However, discussions with licensee corporate and site personnel revealed that a technical review of the. in process examinations and the final IS! reports was being accomplished, as evidenced by the request for W report clarification, but that documented responsibility was not currently in plac However, the licensee agreed to the following commitment:
Documented assigned responsibility will be established for the technical review of in-process ISI examination reports and for a techni ca 1 review of final !SI report Pending the determination of the inside surface condition of the outlet nozzles, as stated in a. above, and an explanation as to why the currently reported indications were not previously reported, and fulfillment of the above commitment, and NRC review of these actions, this item will remain ope.
Unresolved Items Unresolved Items were not identified during this inspectio Inservice Inspection (ISI) Unit 1 The inspector examined documents, and records as indicated below to determine whether !SI was being conducted in accordance with applicable procedures, regulatory requirements, and licensee commitment The applicable code for IS! is American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vesse 1 (ASME B&PV)
Code,Section XI, 1980 edition with addenda through Winter 198 Westinghouse Electric Corporation J..'!jJ_ has the responsibility as the IS! contracto However, nondestructive examination (NOE) activities were being performed by '!!_ and Virginia Corporation of Richmond (VCR) personnel.
- 5 Review of Procedures Unit 1 (73052)
(1)
The inspector reviewed the procedures indicated below to determine whether the procedures were consistent with regulatory requirements and licensee commitm~nt The procedures were also reviewed in the areas of procedure approval, requirements for qua 1 ifi cation of NOE personne 1, and compilation of required records; and if applicable, division of responsibility between the 1 i censee and contractor personne 1 if contractor personne 1 are involved in the !SI effor Procedure ID DAT-GYD-001 (R2)
NDE-MT-1 (R4)
NDE-PT-1 (RS)
VPA/VIR ISI-11 (RO)
VPA/VPR OPS-NSD-101 (RO)
VPA/VIR ISI-10 (RO)
VPA/VIR ISI-47 (RO)
VPA/VIR ISI-70 (RO)
VPA/VIR ISI-206 (RO)
MRS 2.4.2 VEP-1 (R2)
Title Data Analysis Guidelines Magnetic Particle Examination Liquid Penetrant Examination Liquid Penetrant Examination Preservice and Inservice Inspection Documentation Qualification of Manual Ultrasonic Equipment Manual Ultrasonic Examination of Welds Vessels Magnetic Particle Examinations in Manual Ultrasonic Examination of Welds Digital Multifrequency Current Inspection Eddy of Heat Preservice and Inservice Exchanger Tubing A 11 procedures 1 i sted above had been reviewed during previous NRC inspection Only current revisions to the procedures were reviewed during this inspectio (2)
The inspector reviewed UT Procedures ISI-47 and ISI-206 to ascertain whether they had been reviewed and approved in accordance with the licensee's established QA procedure The procedures were reviewed for technical adequacy and conformance with the ASME Code Section V Article 5 and other licensee commitments/requirements in the following listed areas: type of apparatus used; extent of coverage of weldment; calibration requirements; search units; beam angles; DAC curves; reference level for monitoring discontinuities; method for demonstrating penetration; limits for evaluating and recording indications; recording significant indications; and, acceptance limit *
(3)
The inspector reviewed EC Procedures DAT-GYD-001 and MRS 2. VEP-1 for technical content relative to:
multichannel examination equipment is specified; method of examination is specified including probe speed during inspection; method of calibration and calibration sequence; description of calib~ation reference standard; applicable criteria for test data interpretation and indication reporting parameters; and, acceptance criteri (4) The inspector reviewed PT Procedures NDE-PT-1 and VPA/VIR ISI-11 to ascertain whether they had been reviewed and approved in accordance with the licensee's established QA procedure The above procedures were reviewed for techni ca 1 adequacy and conformance with the ASME Code Section V, Article 6, and other licensee committments/requirements in the following areas:
specified method; penetrant materi a 1 i dent ifi cation; penetrant materials analyzed for sulfur; penetrant materials analyzed for total halogens; acceptable pre-examination surface; drying time; method of penetrant app 1 i cation; surface temperature; so 1 vent removal; surface drying prior to developing; type of developer; examination technique; evaluation technique; and,.procedure requalification.
(5)
The inspector reviewed MT Procedures NDE-MT-1 and VPA/VIR ISI-70 to ascertain whether they had been reviewed and approved in accordance with the licensee's established QA procedure The procedures were reviewed for technical adequacy and for conformance with the ASME Code Section V, Article 7, and other licensee commitment/requirements in the following areas:
examination methods; contrast of dry powder particle color with backgroud; surface temperature; suspension medium for wet particles; viewing conditions; examination overlap and directions; pole or prod spacing; current or lifting power (yoke); and, acceptance criteri Revi~w of !SI Work Activities Unit 1 (73753)
The inspector reviewed certification records of equipment, materials, and NOE personne 1 which had been and wi 11 be utilized during the required !SI examinations during this outage. The reviews conducted by the inspector are documented belo (1)
The following listed ultrasonic equipment and materials certification records were reviewed:
Ultrasonic Instruments Manufacturer/Model Sonic/MK-1 Sonic/MK-1 Sonic/MK-1 Serial N E 08683E 11222E The inspector reviewed spectrum analysis data for the ultrasonic transducers tabulated below:
Size Frequency Seri a 1 N.0 2.25 MHz
- H04305
.375 2.25 MHz F16335
.25 2.25 MHz 53086
.-25 2.25 MHz K01412 Ultrasonic Couplant Batch 8767, Sonotrace 40 (2)
The inspector reviewed the below listed liquid penetrant materials certification records to ascertain if the sulfur and halogen content of the material was within acceptable content limit Material Liquid Penetrant Cleaner/Remover Developer Batch Number 85L045 87M025, 87C008, 86M001 85M035 (3)
The inspector reviewed documentation indicating that a ten pound lift test had been performed on magnetic particle AC yokes 195, 6579, 8811, and VCR-Y-02 and a review of magnetic particle material certification records for Batch Numbers 86E062, 86M057, 87C024, and 85J071 indicated the sulfur and halogen content of the material was within acceptable content limit (4)
The inspector reviewed the qualification _documentation for the below listed W and VCR examiners in the following areas:
employer 1s name; person certified; activity qualified to perform; effective period of certification; signature of employer 1 s designated representative; basis used for certifi-cation; and annual visual acuity, color vision examination, and periodic recertificatio Method - Leve TI Comeany Examiner UT
3
w w
w w
w w
w VCR VCR VCR SJB IIA BKP III FOG III TJS II JWB II
- n II II II II JPW II II II II II II PJK II II II I
I I
I JPB II I
II JOO II II II II II II II JRS III II I III -
III III III III In service Inspection, Data Review and Evaluation, Unit 1 (73755).
(1)
Records of completed nondestructive examinations were selected and reviewed to ascertain whether:
the method(s), technique, and extent of the examination complied with the !SI plan and applicable NOE procedures; findings were properly recorded and evaluated by qualified personnel; programmatic deviations were recorded as required; personnel, instruments, calibration blocks, and NOE materials (penetrants, couplants) were designate Records selected for this review are listed belo Sketch ISI Item We 1 d/Item Method VPA-2-1100 118
UT VPA-2-1100 120
UT VPA-1-4506
17 PT VPA-1-4502
lDM UT VPA-1-4502
lOM PT VPA-1-4503
lDM PT VPA-1-4503
lDM UT*
VPA-2-2500 121
PT VPA-1-4502 MC-11 12S & 24N VT VPA-1-4506 MC-12 12S & 12N VT VPA-2-2202 160
MT VPA-2-2500 124
PT VPA-2-2510 125
PT VPA-2-2510 126
PT VPA-2-2510 127
PT VPA-2-2511 129
(2) Steam Generator Tubing Eddy Current Examination Data Review (a)
The inspector reviewed records of the eddy current examinations indicated belo The reviews were compared with the applicable procedures and the Code in the following areas:
the multi-channel eddy current examination equipment has been identified; material permeability has been recorded; method of examination has been recorded; and, results are consistent with acceptance criteri SG-B SG-C Row Column Row Column
2
47
3
47
2
50
23
59
23
59
31
27
32
22
32
53
36
73
37
7
46
10
83
43
15
55
23
57
33
71
90
92
74
65
68 (b)
At the conclusion of the NRC inspection all examination had been complete The inspector discussed the program and status with the licensee and the preliminary examination status for steam generators Band Care listed belo Examination of steam generator A will not be accomplished during this outag Number of Tubes Examined SG 8 788 - Full length bobbin coil 106 - From #7 c/1 TSP to TEH 115 - 8 x 1 coils 115 - Profilometry 20 -
RPC SG-C 788 - Full length bobbin coil 107 - From #7 c/1 TSP to TEH 115 - 8 x 1 coils 116 - Profilometry 31 - RPC The EC examinations did not reveal any tubes in either SG that required pluggin Within the areas inspected, no violation or deviations were identifie.
IE Bulletin 87-01, Thinning of Pipe Walls in Nuclear Power Plants, Units 1 and The licensee has officially responded to the requirements of Bulletin 87-0 The inspector conducted a review of documentation and data relative to the actions being generated as a result of this bulletin. The inspector also observed work being performed as a result of actions being taken by the license The documentation reviews and observations conducted by the inspector are documented in the following subparagraph Plan Review The inspector reviewed the below listed document relating to the inspection plan in the area -of:
plan approval; general QA require-ments; examination procedures; control of examinations and examination equipment; quality records; personnel qualifications; and NDE record SUADM-M-33 Secondary Piping Inspections - 4/7/88 The inspector reviewed Ultrasonic Procedure NDE-UT-4 R This procedure is being utilized to obtain the thickness readings required by the licensee's inspection plan. The procedure was reviewed in the areas of procedure approval, requirements for qualification of NDE personnel, and compilation of required record The inspector observed approximately 15 thickness readings being taken on the item listed belo The inspector also reviewed cert ifi cation records of equipment, materi a 1 s, and NDE personne 1 being utilized during the examination of this ite Test Location 1-SD-PSFR-96 (Reducer) The inspector conducted an independent verification on several of the thickness readings taken on the above test locatio The verifi-cation reading were made following the completion of the examinations conducted by licensee personnel and with the use of the licensee's equipment, couplant, and calibration bloc The verification readings obtained were within and acceptable tolerance range although minor deviation were noted that could be attributed to transducer placemen The inspector reviewed the thickness data and associated records for the test locations indicated belo The data was reviewed to determine * whether the reported thickness was consistent with the data being obtained in the fiel The data was also reviewed to determine compliance with requirements for examination record Test Location FWPSF274 ESPSF249 LMPSF271 SDPPS-24 Discussions with licensee personnel and a review of the completed data shows that replacement of several items was necessary. Several items are scheduled for replacement due to the wall thickness being near minimum or the wall thickness being below minimum requirement Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identifie NRC Information Notice 87-36, Significant Unexpected Erosion of Feedwater Lines IE Bull et in 87-01 requests written response from 1 i cen sees concerning their programs for monitoring the thickness of pipe wa 11 in high-energy single-phase and two-phase carbon steel piping system As noted in paragraph above, the licensee has responded to the bulleti Information Notice 87-36 notifies licensees that a thinning problem has been identified in feedwater piping inside the containmen The feedwater piping inside containment is included in the current inspection progra The inspector reviewed results of examinations conducted on areas of feedwater straight run piping inside containment, Unit 1, designated as areas 1-FW-PPS-163 and 1-FW-PPS-8 Inspector Followup Items (IFI)
(a)
(Close) !FI 281/86-34-04, Review Video Tape to Determine Effective-ness of Licensee A 1 ternate Examination of the OD Surface on the Reactor Vessel Nozzle to Safe-end Butt Wel The inspector reviewed the video tape of UT examinations conducted by~ utilizing several different techniques including a 41° longitudinal wave, a 45° shear wave, and a technique designated as 11 zeroing 11 used to interrogate the bi/tri metalic interfaces at the nozzle to safe-end weld position During these reviews, spurious indication signals being omitted from the OD surface were evident for a majority of the examination surface which indicates that adequate ultrasound penetration from the inside surface to the OD surface is taking plac This suggests that an adequate UT examination is being conducted at the OD surface as require This item is considered close *
(b)
(Close) IFI 280,281/86-42-0l, Clarification of Surface Preparation Methods in NOE Procedures. The licensee has reviewed the appropriate NOE procedures and determined that the initial conditions for weld surface preparation is. adequately addressed in the procedure Specific surface preparation criteria* prior to conducting NOE, is adequately addressed in Vi rgi ni a Power Procedures P-101, Genera 1 Piping and Pressure Vessel Welding Procedure and Surry Power Station Procedure MMP-C-G-131, Weld Prep For Inservice Inspectio The inspector reviewed the above mentioned procedures relative to NOE surface preparation requirements prior to conducting NOE examinations and has concluded that these procedures adequately address the concern in questio The inspector considers this matter close.
Acronyms and Abbreviations AC ASME B&PV BU C/l DAC DPR EC ID I FI IN
!SI L
MHz MT NOE N NRC OD Pre PT QA R
RPC RV SG TEH TDC TSP UT VCR VT w
Alternating Current American Society Of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Bulletin Cold Leg Distance Amplitude Curve Demonstration Power Reactor Eddy Current Inside diameter Inspector Followup Item Information Notice Inservice inspection Longitudinal Megahertz Magnetic particle Nondestructive Examination Number Nuclear Regulatory Commission Outside diameter Preparation Liquid penetrant Quality Assurance Revision Rotating Pancake Coil Reactor Vessel Steam Generator Tube End Hot Leg Top Dead Center Tube Support Plate Ultrasonic Virginia Corporation of Richmond Visual Westinghouse Electric Corporation