IR 05000280/1990034
| ML18153C448 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 11/14/1990 |
| From: | Economos N NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18153C447 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-90-34, 50-281-90-34, NUDOCS 9011260235 | |
| Download: ML18153C448 (12) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA STREET, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 Report Nos.:
50-280/90-34 and 50-281/90-34 Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company Glen Allen, VA 23060 Docket Nos.:
50-280 and 50-281 License Nos.: DPR-32 and DPR-37 Facility Name:
Surry 1 and 2 J. B 1 a ke, Chief a rials and Processes Section Engineering Branch Division of Reactor Safety SUMMARY Scope:
Date Signed 111/fh~
Date Signed This routine, unannounced inspection was conducted in the areas of Unit 1 Inservice Inspection (ISI) activities, design changes, and modification Results:
Eddy Current testing (ET) of steam generator (SIG) tubes, revealed a degraded tube wall condition in SIG 11 C 11 which may require pluggin Numerous other ET indications were identified at or-immediately above the tube sheet (TS) region of S/Gs 11 C 11 and 11 8 11 *
These indications were identified through the use of a rotating pancake coil (RPC) and do not resemble the classic corrosion type defect Discovery of these indications, expanded the RPC examination to.include 100 percent of tubes in S/Gs 11 8 11 and_ 11C 11 and a representative sample of tubes in S/G 11N1 *
In general work activities were consistent with approved procedures and:good work practice Design, work packages, as well as records, were readily retrievable, complete, and accurat Cognizant personnel were made available to review the subject matter and assist in the interpretation of nondestructive records, i.e. radiographs.
In the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identifie.6 0::50002:::0 F'DC Persons Contacted Licensee Employees REPORT DETAILS J. Eastwood, Nuclear Specialist, Steam Generator Eddy Current Planning
- A. Flescher, Assistant Superintendent Engineering
- D: Grady, Supervisor Nondestructive Testing
- D. Hart, Quality Assurance Supervisor
- M. Kansler, Surry Station Manager
- A. Price, Surry.Assistant Station Manager
- G. Smith, Manager QA Surry E. Throckmorton, ISI/NDE Service Project Engineer Other licensee employees contacted during this* inspectfon included technicians, and administrative personne NRC Resident Inspectors W. Holland, Senior Resident Inspector
- J. York, Resident Inspector S. Tingen, Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview Inservice Inspection (!SI) Unit 1 - Program and Procedures 2.a. Program The applicable code for IS!- is American Society of Mechanica Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel (ASME B&PV) Code,Section XI, 1980 ~edition with addenda through Winter 1980. Westinghouse Electric Corporation 00 has the responsibility as the IS! contracto However, nondestructive examination (NOE) activities were being-*
performed by~ and the licensee's NDE personne Independent third party inspection service (ANII/ANI), was provided by Hartford Boiler Company; 2.b. Review of Procedures (73052)
- The inspector reviewed the procedures indicated below to determine whether they were consistent with regulatory requirements and -
licensee*commitments. The procedures were also *reviewed in the areas of procedure approval, requirements for qualification of NOE personnel, and compilation of required records; and if applicable, division of responsibility between the licensee and contracto *
Procedure ID MRS2.4.2 VEP-1 Rev. 4 NDE-MT-201 Rev. 1 NDE-MT-202 Rev. 1 NDE-PT-201 Rev. 1 NDE-UT-201 Rev. 2 NDE-UT-202 Rev. 2 NDE-UT-204 Rev. 1 NDE-UT-205 Rev. 2 *
NDE-7.2 Re NDE-4.1 Rev. 11
Title Digital Multifrequency Eddy Current Inspection of Preserv*ice and Inservice Heat Exchanger Tubing Magnetic Particle Examination Procedure Magnetic Particle. Examination of Bolting Liquid Penetrant Examination
- Manual Ultrasonic Examination of Piping Welds Ultrasonic Examination of dissimilar welds> 2 11 thick Inservice Ultrasonic Examination of Bolting Manual Ultrasonic Examination of Reactor Coolant Piping Welds General Requirement for ISI Nondestructive Examination Virginia Power Written Practice for Certification NOE Personne A 11 procedures 1 i sted above had been reviewed during previous NRC inspections. Only current re~isions to the procedures were reviewed during this inspectio.
Unit 1 ISI, Observation of Work and Work Activities (73753)
3.a. Piping and Supports Observation of ISI work activities was i~peded significantly during this inspection by other outage related events including opening of SIG manways, lifting of the reactor vessel head and a *site emergency dril As an alternative, the inspector observed the ultrasonic.
- examination of two sensitiied pipe welds in the safety injection system, 1 i quid pen et rant examination of designated pipe sections (patches) in the safety injection system and *the visual inspection of two safety related hangers. The items involved in this activity are identified in the table below.
- Item/Weld N SS-32/W-20 SS-31/W-21
- SS-078 SS-077 SS-075 SS-074 H-14 H-4
Component Description Drawing Ultrasonic Examination
11x0.58
VPA-2-2303 Rev. 1
11x0.58
VPA-2-2303 Rev. 1 Liguid Penetrant Examination PC-40 PC-39 PC-37 PC-36 Visual Insp~ction
11-CC-173 VPA-2-2303* Rev. 1 VPA~2-2303 Rev. 1 VPA-2-2303 Rev. 1 VPA-2~2303 Rev. 1
.* MUS-112 AJ2 MUS-127 Fl The
~1*trasonic examination observation was cdmpared with th appli~able procedures and the Code. in the following areas:*
avc:1. il ability of and comp 1 i ance with approved Nondestructive Examination (NOE) procedure; use of knowledgeable NOE personnel; use of NOE personnel qualified to the proper level; type of *apparatus used; extent of coverage of we 1 dment; ca 1 i brat ion requirements; search units; beam angles; DAC curves; reference level for monitoring discontinuities; method of demonstrating penetration; limits of evaluating * and recording indications; recording significan indications and; acceptance limits, as applicabl.b. Steam Generator (S/G) Tubing Eddy Current Examination By memorandum, ser, a 1 number NSD-RNE-0077 dated October 16, * 1990 *
Westinghouse 00, submitted to the licensee, for review and approval, the Eddy Current Inspection Plan and Date Analysis Guidelines for the current Unit 1 outage. In this memorandum~ included a proposed five (5) year outage inspection pla Under the proposed plan, only two S/Gs would be a opened/inspected per outage.. This plans.is *
accordance with EPRI guideline of inspecting 100 percent of all S/G tubes over five (5) fuel cycle Data *Analysis Guidelines incorporate findings from previous inspections as well as general industry experienc For this outage, the ET inspection plan called for the examination of S/G(s)
11811 and 11C 11 and was as follows:
c*1)
Bobbin coil_ in~pection of 25 percent of all tubes in S/G Band 35 percent of a 11 tubes in S/G C through their full lengt Additionally, inspect, all tubes with previous indications. The 25 percent and 35 percent tube sample includes all Row 1 and 2 tubes and tubes on the periphery, two rows dee (2)
Rotating Pancake Coil Inspection (RPC) of 20 percent of the hot leg tubes at the top of the tube sheet in the low flow region of the steam generato The licensee's review and approval of the subject inspection plan was documented in a letter from E. W. Throckmorton to.D. R.* Rogers dated October 17, 199 Basically the review found tha*t the subject inspec'l;.ion plan complies with requirements of ASME Section XI, I~B-2500-1-and Technical Specification (TS), Section 4.1 At the time of this inspection W had completed the bobbin coil inspecticin of S/Gs Band Thii inspection discovered that a tube located in S/G "CII, Row 1 column 47 exhibited a defect which was evaluated ~s a 37 percent through wall degradatio In addition, the RPC inspection of 150 tubes, revealed that eight (8) tubes exhibited indications that were evaluated as significaht tube degradations but were unlike the classic secondary to primary corrosion type defect This finding caused the licensee to inspect an. additional sample of 300 tubes which resulted in finding.five (5) more tubes with similar indication A second expansion sample of 600 tubes resulted in finding an additional fiv_e (5) tubes exhibiting a similar COf!ditio In S/G 118 11, -similar indications were found with the RPC techniqu In this S/G, a total of nine (9) indications had been identified following i~spection of the second sample of 302 tube By the end of this inspection, the licensee had expanded the inspection to include a 100 percent RPC inspection of S/Gs 11B 11 and 11C 11 and had decided.to inspect 302 tubes in S/G 11A11 using the RPC techniqu Two tubes wi 11. be pulled from SIG 11C 11 for failure anal y s i s by '!}_ at a l ate r date.
- Data Review and Evaluation Inservice Inspection Records ~eview (73755)
Records of completed nondestructive examination(s) were selected and reviewed to ascertain whether:
the method(s), technique, and extent of the examination complied with the ISi plan and applicable NOE procedures;.
findings were properly recorded and evaluated by qualified personnel;*
programmatic deviations were recorded as required; personn~l, instrumerits, calibration blocks, and NOE material (penetrants, couplants) were*
designate Records selected for this review are listed below.
4.a. NOE Examination Item N RC-P-18
Description Reactor Coolant Pump Flywheel Examination 0° Ultrasonic This review included records of inspections/examinations observed and discussed in paragraph.b. Personnel Qualifications Qualification and certification records for the following personnel were reviewed to ascertain whether training and visual acuity tests were current and consistent with code and regulatory requirement Name R. J. K.H.B '
R.H. K.A. I C.FB Qua 1 ifi cation PT II PT II, VT-3, II UT II, VT-3 II ET III A ET III A ET III A ET II A ET II A Organization VEPCO VEPCO Westinghouse Westinghouse Westinghouse Westinghouse Westinghouse Westinghouse 4.c. Certifications/calibration records of YT equipment, standards, and materials were reviewed to ascertain whether they were complete,*
accurate and consistent with applicable industry standards and regulatory requirement These records were for the following item Probes SIN 0059-1090 SIN 0060-1090 SIN 0017-1090 SIN 0018-1090 Tube Standards Serial Number
-
Z-1749 Z-1373 Z-5094 Equipment - MIZ 18A SIN 029, 025, 807 Eddy Current Heat N Size 7/8 11x.05l" 7/8 11x.051
7/8 11x.051 11
Equipment Sonic - Mark-I S/N06209E Material Cleaner Pe net rant Developer
Ultrasonic Transducers L8300 Liquid Penetrant Type SKC-NF SKL-HF/S SKL-NF Couplant Ultragel II S/N8976 8872 SIN 90E01K 888062 90E03K Within* the areas inspected no violations or deviations were identifie.
Iridependent Inspection Effort, Design Changes and* Modifications*
(37700/55050)
Numerous*design changes and engineering work requests (EWR(s)), affecting both the primary and secondary side of the plant were scheduled for this
- outag Of these, the inspector selected three for observation o-f work activities and a review of engineering documents, drawings, procedures and field. generated records to determine* their technical adequacy and compliance with applicable standards and code requirements. The selected'
modifications and engin~ering work requests were as follows:
EWR 90-104 Replacement of Degraded Non-Safety Related Single Phase Piping:
EWR-88 EWR 88-021 Modification to Feedwater Check Valves (1-FW-27,-58,-59)*
DCP-87-08-01 Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps Full Flow Recirculation Modification 5.a. EWR 90-104 was issued as the controlling document for replacement of p1p1ng components determined to require replacement due to erosion-corrosion (E/C), phenomen This document addressed only non-safety related (NS), porti ans of secondary side piping systems that are affected bi single phase fl ow and includes feedwater, condensate and steam drairi The degraded pipe and associated fittings i.e. elbow, tees, reducers, are made of low carbon steel material which is being replaced with 2\\ percent chromium, one percent molybdenum, or chrome:..mo ly, 1 ow a 11 oy, P-22 Grade, stee 1 materia This material selectiqn is based on satisfactory performance in similar application According to this document chrome-molY material improves resistence to E/C, by a factor of four
over carbon steels, while materials having a chromium content> 12 percent are virtually immune to E/ Od1er factors taken into consideration in the selection of this type of replacement material*
included availability; ease of fabrication; and compatibility of physical and mechanical properties (i.e. coefficient of thermal expansion~ unit weight and yield strength) with existing components at operating condition.b. EWR 88-021 was issued as the contro.lling document for replacing existing crane swing check valves which are suspected of leakage (and because their closure time may contribute to the suspected auxiliar feedwater, * (AFW), system water hammer that occurs wheri -the cold AFW reaches the hot feedwater system).
The three inch ( 3 11 ) replacement valve is a faster closing, tilting disk check valve, which is manufactured by Roc::kwell International. The three replacement valves were bullt in accordance with ASME Sect,on III Class 2 quality level without an 11 N
Stam The applicable vendor specification was SA-1619697, Design Specification for Size*4 11 and Smaller Class 900 Tilting Disk* Check Valves for Nuclear Servic The subject EWR indicated that specification SA-1619697 compared favorably with similar specifications issued by Stone and Webster and For Unit l, the replaceme.nt v_alves were identified by mark numbers 1-FE-27-58 and -5 *
Attachment 1, to the subject EWR, is a submital for a relief request from ASME.Section XI requirements for hydrostatic pressure testing following valve installation. The basis for this request was on the inability to isolate the S/Gs from the hydrostatic test boundar Radiography and surface examination on the new welds was proposed as an alternative to the hydrostatic tes *
5. c. DCP-87-08-01 was issued as the contra 11 i ng document -for the AF system modification. This modification will provide for a higher AFW pump recirculation flow for periodic flow testing needed to assess the operational readiness of the subject pumps per ASME Section XI requirement Presently, the AFW pumps. are tested by reci rcul ati ng flow through minimum recirculation. lines back to the Emergency *
Condensate Storage Tank (ECST). Testing the subject pumps at very low flow conditions subject than to hydraulic instability, accelerated internal wear, and precludes the. detection of changes in pump performanc This modification provides for installation of new full flow
.
recirculation lines for the motor driven and turbine driven AFW pump*.
The motor driven pumps will be provided with four inch ( 411 ),
recirculation lines, and the turbine driven pump with a six incti(6 11 )
lin The new recirculation piping will tie into the discharge piping for each of the three AFW pumps and will be routed through a_
common header back to' the ECST fill pipin This piping and
-*--**
associated components are classified as seismic Class 1 component The piping is safety related ASME Class 3 for !SI purpose Each
r*ec:irculation line will be equipped with a globe valve, a check valve and a restriction orifice. The restriction.orifice will be sized for a m~ximum flow of 110 percent of design flow i.e., 809 gpm for the turbine driven pump and 407 gpm for the motor driven pumps with fully open globe valve Such an arrangement will allow for *adequate testing of the pumps around the design point.
. The subject modifications are considered to be a 11 replacement 11 under ASME XI - 1980 Article IWD-7000 and, therefore, will meet original design, fabrication and inspection requirement The AFW system piping*was designed.to ANSI 831.1 - 1955 _Code requirements in accordance with NU~-2 Instrumentation will meet the requirem~nts of ASME XI Article IWP-400.
Components will be pressure tested ~nd visually examined in accordance with ASME XI Subsection IW The new recirculation p1p1ng will extend the ASME Class 3 pressure boundary for the AFW pumps and therefore will be included in the ISI Program for pre-service and periodic inspections. A baseline inspection of the new piping will be performed in accordance with STD-GN-033 for future input to the erosion/corrosion study~
This DCP also raises the design pressure for the existing piping, so the new piping as well as the existing piping will be hydrostatically t~sted to.2148 psi (1.5 design pressure) with the exception of the nonisolable portion, tied to the ECST fill line, which will be subjected to inservice leak tes Functional testing, for the new piping, will involve flow testing each of the pump recirculation paths separately to verify operation
. of the throttle valves, restriction orifices and a common flow elemen The f~nctiorial testing for the recirculati~n p1p1ng will also be used to verify the AFW pump curves in preparation.for performing ASME XI Subsection IWP flow testin *
The licensee's ~valuation of this design chang~ indicates that it will not create an unreviewed safety question as defined in 10 CFR 50.5 In reference to the above modification, the inspector observed in-process welding; performed system walkdowns; held discussions wi~h cognizant engineers, foremen, and craft; and reviewed design documents, radiographs procedures, and records as described beltii:
5.d. Document Review DCP 87-08-01 Pl-Ul P2-Ul P3-Ul NUS-20
Instruction for excavation required for installation of new AFW piping and for installation of tornado missile shield over excavated pipin Instruction for installation of AFW full flow recirculation piping, except foi final tie-ins to the AFW pump discharge pipin Instruction for installation of AFW full flow recirculation piping final tie-ins to the AFW p1p1ng discharge piping and instruction for pressure relief valves of AFW pump suction pipin Specification for Piping NDE-RT-101, Rev. 1 Radiographic Examination Weld Map Drawing Weld N W-12 W-11 W-10 W-9 W-4A W-3A Weld N W-12 W-11 W-10 W-4 W-3 W-2 DC87-08-E 107 Rev. 2 98708-3-M-400 Rev. lA Weld Inspection Configuration Pipe to Elbow Elbow to Pipe Pipe to Valve Pipe to Valve Flange to Pipe Pipe to Flange Radiographic Review Drawing E..,107 Rev. 2 E-107 Rev. 2 E-107 Rev. 2 E-107 Rev. 2 E-107 Rev. 2 E-107 Rev. 2 Size
11 x0.337
11x0.337
11x0.337 4"x0.337
11 x0.337
11x0.337 Size
11x0.337
411x0/337
4 11x0.337 11.
11 x0/337
4 11x0.337
A"x0/337
- -
Purchase Order CSY309348 (1)
Pipe (2)
Elbows (3)
Valves
Materials
11 schedule 80 and standard A106-B
11 schedule 80 and standard Al06-B 90°, 6 11 schedule 40 and standard A234WPB 45°, 6 11 schedule 80 Seamless A234WPW
11 Velan No. 600 PD No. CNT292403 S/N 902174 EWR 88-021 CSY175185
11 Velan No. 600 S/N 902191
11 Velan No. 600 S/N 908178 Purchase Order for 3 11 Tilting Dish Check valves SA-1619697 Rev. 1 Design Specification for Size 411 and $maller Class 900 Tilting Disk Check Valves for Nuclear Service Radiographic Review Weld N W-2 W-2 W-2 EWR 90-104 Drawing N E-102 E-101 E-100 Size
11 x0.300
3 11x0.300
311X0.300 11 Observation/inspection of completed welds Weld N W-2 W-2 Drawing N M-006 90104-M-007 Size/Type 1811 xQ. 500 11 nominal.**.
pipe to pipe l8 11 x0.500 11 nominal pipe to pipe
.,
'
Document Review PO No. CSY 307039 Component Cooling Heater Exchanger Replacement (1)
Pipe 60 feet of 18 11 seamless schedule x-strong, 0.500 11 wall nominal ASTM A 355 Grade P22 Heat No. 50209 (2)
Elbows 90°Ell, 20"x0.375 11 nominal A234 WP22, 8uttwelded Ends, Per ANSI 816.9-64 Heat No. OII8S (3)
Reducer
11x20x0.375 11 nominal A-234 WP22 8uttwelded Ends, Heat No. OEM 88 Welder Performance Qualifications Weld stencils which appeared adjacent to completed welds, identified earlier in this report, were noted and subsequently used to ascertain whether the licensee had a workable system for maintaining a continuous record of qualification status of all welders, and that this system was effectively utilized and accurat Also, the inspector reviewed the qualification status records of welders performing production welding to ascertain whether welders had been and were currently qualified to weld under the respective procedure Welder stencil number selected for this review included:
DK0062, RH3992, AA5043, DH9837 Within the areas inspected violations or deviations were not identifie.
Exit Interview The inspection scope* and findings were summarized on November 2, 1990, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 abov The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection result No dissenting comments were received from the license Proprietary information is not contained in this report.