IR 05000321/1990013

Insp Repts 50-321/90-13 & 50-366/90-13 on 900430-0504.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Inservice Insp Documentation,Review of NDE Procedures & Preservice Svc NDE Exams of Weld Overlays

ML20055C479
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	05/09/1990
From:	Blake J, Newsome R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20055C478	List: IR 05000321/1990013 ML20055C477
References
50-321-90-13, 50-366-90-13, NUDOCS 9005240005
Download: ML20055C479 (10)

Text

~~

s' ,~ tam , l 7l&c ...

' ', * '

'

o , ,

h , d' . UNITED STATES m J pa ns!Uy'o* .. q- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMM!SSION -

"

{,'  :]-- - -

y 'IFCTW 11 -

j

.

p . g' 101 MAR A.TTA JTREET,N.W.

'

2 ..'*

'

2 ATLANTA,0EORGI A 30!?3

.

• t /'  ;

.

.

w....

Ih Report Nos.:' 50-321/90-13 and 50-366/90-1 ,

I Licensee:- Georgia Power Company P.O.. Box 4545

.

,

.?' Atlanta, Ga;30302

"

,

l

,

Docket Nos.': 50-321:and 50-366 License Nos.: DPR-57 and NPF-5

,

Facility Name: . Hatch 1 and 2~

• '

/ Inspection Conducted:- April30 thru May 4,1990 g

~

Inspector': k w.mu R6- fro J . L W Dat Signe Approved by: V 5 ft 7. lake, Chief Date Signed M te ials and Processes Section .

g neering Branch ivision of. Reactor Safety SUMMARY '

'

-Scope: ,

This routine, unannounced inspection was conducted on-site in the area of

, Inservice. Inspection (ISI) documentation and included a review of the Unit 1-ISI-inspection plan for this. outage, review of nondestructive examination (NDE)

. procedures, observation of Preservice' Service (PSI) NDE examinations of. weld overlays; review of NDE personnel qualifications, review of NDE equipment  :

- calibration and material certification documentation, and a review of completed NDEfexamination dat In addition, NRC previously opened items were addresse Results:

In the areas ~ inspected, violations or deviations were not identifie This inspection. indicated that ISI/ PSI nondestructive examinations were being

~ conducted adequatel Also, documentation of examination results, personnel ,

qualifications, and material certification records were adequat '

, <

QU240003 boo 3y; g ADOCK 05000321 g

i PDC

' -

p ;, m - -

,

,

q .

. a

} .( , j

,. , .

'

>

m . REPORT DETAILS a Persons. Contacted E, Licensee Employees

-

.;

• S.'Brinson, Supervisor, Quality Control (QC)

• 0. Fraser, Supervisor, Safety Audit And Engineering Revie *G. Goode, Manager, Engineering Support

< *J. Hammends, Supervisor, Regulatory Compliance

• T. Moore, Assistant General Manager, Plant Support

• L. Sumner, Assistant General Manager, Plant Operations

• S. Tipps, Manager, Nuclear Safety and Compliance Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included craftsmen, engineers, security force members, technicians, ard administrative personne Other Organizations R. Healey, Southern Company Services (SCS), Level III D. Swann,.SCS Engineer, ISI Coordinator s NRC Resident Inspectors l

• R. Musser, Resident Inspector

• L. Zerr, Resident Inspector

• Attended exit interview Acronyms and Initialisms used throughout this report are listed in the last paragrap ' Inservice Inspection (ISI) and Preservice Inspection-(psi)

The inspector reviewed documents and records, as -indicated below, to determine. whether ISI and PSI was being conducted. in accordance with ;'

applicable procedures, . regulatory requirements, and 1icensee commitment The applicable code for ISI/ PSI is the American Society of Mechanical-Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel- (ASME- B&PV) Code,Section XI,1980 ,"

edition with adoenda through Winter 1981. Southern Company Services (SCS)

has the primary responsibility as the ISI/ PSI contractor for Georgia Power Company and is performing overview functions for the licensee in all ISI NDE areas. General Electric Corporation personnel are conducting both the manual and automated ultrasonic (UT), liquid penetrant (PT), magnetic particle (MT), and visual (VT) examination .

.

[pm, , , .

2

. ISI _ Program / Plan Review, Units 1 and 2 (73051)

-

h The inspector reviewed the Unit 1 inspection plan for this outage and -I the below listed ' Georgia Power Company. (GPC) and SCS documents i

>

relative to the ISI program. These documents were reviewed in order-to determine _ whether the program / plan had been approved by the licensee and to assure that procedures and plans had been established i (written,-reviewed, approved and issued) to control and accomplish the '

following applicable activities:- organizational structure including qualifications, training, responsibilities, and duties of personnel responsible for ISI; audits including procedures, frequency, and >

-qualification of personnel; general QA requirements- including examination reports, deviations from previously established progra material certifications, and identification of components to be .

covered; work and inspection procedures; control of processes including suitably controlled work conditions, special methods, and use of qualified personnel; corrective action; document control; i control of examination equipment; quality records including

~ documentation of indications and NDE findings, review of documentation, provisions to assure legibility and retrievability, and-corrective action; scope of the inspection including description of areas to be examined, examination category, method of inspection, ,

extent of examinations, and justification for any exception; ,

definition of inspection interval and- extent of examination; qualification of NDE personnel; and, controls of generation, approval, .

custody, storage and maintenance of NDE record i-SCS Inservice Inspection Outage Plan 1990 Hatch-1 Refueling Outage Revision 1-SCSITS.1-l'(RO) Organization-SCSITS1-3(RO) Deviations-SCS ITS 2-1 (RO) Program-Including Relief Requests-SCS ITS 2-2 (RO) Examination And Testing Plan

.,

-SCS ITS 2-3 (RO) Outage Plan ,

>

-SCS ITS 3-1 (RO) On-Site Data Review-SCS ITS 3-6 (RO) Contractor Procedures - Review And Approval-SCS-AUX-H-302 (R4) Preservice And Inservice Inspection Documentation-GE-ADM-1002 (RO) Procedure For Review Process And Analysis Of Recorded Indications o

.

- _ _ . - - - _ _ _

=;

,

=4 ( w x

&: c ,

,

'

The review:of- the ISI plan and program procedures indicated that

adequate-ISI controls are in place and that the ISI plan was properly

. approved and contained the necessary informatio Review 6f NDE Procedures, Units 1 and 2 (73052) J

>

,

(1) The inspector reviewed the procedures listed 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 NDE personnel, and compilation of required records; and, if applicable, division of responsibility between the licensee and contractor personnel if contractor personnel are involved in the ISI effor SCS-UT-H-400(R9) Manual Ultrasonic Examination Of with deviation 002 Full-Penetration Welds (Greater Than0.200 Inch)

-

SCS-UT-H-408(R2) -Ultrasonic Examination Of ;

Weld Overlays

-

SCS-UT-H-470(RI) Planer Flaw Sizing Procedure j I

-

GE-UT-201 (RO) Procedure For Automated Ultrasonic Examination - Of- Weld' Overlayed

.

Austenitic Piping

-

SCS-PT-H-600(R2) Color Contrast, Solvent-Removable Liquid Penetrant Examination Procedure

-

SCS-PT-H-655(RO) Liquid Penetrant Examination Of !

Reactor Coolant ' Pressure Boundary 1 Socket Welds 2" And Less

!

-

SCS-MT-H-500(R4) Dry Powder Magnetic Particle Examination l (2) The inspector reviewed the Ultrasonic procedures to ascertain a whether they had been reviewed and approved in accordance with j the licensee's established QA procedures. The procedures were ;

n also reviewed for technical adequacy and conformance with ASME, 1 Section V, Article 5 and other licensee commitments / requirements 1 in the following areas: type -of apparatus used; extent of coverage of weldment; calibration requirements; search units; ;

beam angles; DAC curves; reference level for monitoring i discontinuities; method for demonstrating penetration; limits for evaluating and . recording indications; recording significant indications; and, acceptance limit ,

w a

,

'

,

. .

.

V 4-ku l j-(3)_ The inspector reviewed the- Liquid Penetrant procedures to ascertain whether they had been reviewed and approved in

'

accordance- with the licensee's established QA ' procedure The

,  : procedures -were also reviewed for technical adequacy and

-

conformance. with ASME, Section 'V, Article 6, and other licensee

'

.

commitments / requirements -in the following areas: specified .l method;- penetrant material identification; penetrant materials analyzed for sulfur; penetrant materials. analyzed for total

-

halogens; surface temperature; acceptable pre-examination surface-

-

conditioning; method used for pre-examination surface _ cleaning; surface drying. time prior' to penetrant application;- method of ]

'

M penetrant application; penetrant dwell time; method used for i excess penetrant removal; surface drying prior to developer J application, if applicable; type of developer; examination  :

technique; evaluation techniques; and, procedure requalificatio :

(4) The inspector reviewed the Magnetic Particle procedure to ascertain whether it had been reviewed and. approved in accordance

-

with the licensee's established QA procedures. The procedure was j E reviewed for technical adequacy and for conformance with the ASME 1 Code Section V, Article 7 and other licensee commitments / requirements {

in the following areas: examination methods; contrast _of dry 4 powder particle color with background; surface temperature; _

"

l suspension medium and surface temperature requirement. for wet particles; viewing conditions; examination overlap and ,

directions; pole or prod spacing; current or lifting power  :

(yoke); and, acceptance criteria.- Observation of Work and Work Activities, Unit 1(73753)  :,

The inspector did not observe in-progress ISI examinations as all ISI examinations had been completed prior to- this inspection. However, observations of work activities relating to the PSI examinations of weld overlays, for the 12 welds which required overlays in order to '

,

remain in service as a result of the intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) detected during ISI examinations, was accomplishe In addition, reviews of ISI certification records of NDE equipment and materials, and review of NDE personnel qualifications for- personnel that had_been utilized during the required ISI/ PSI examinations during this outage, was accomplished. The observations and reviews conducted by the inspector are documented belo ,

(1) The inspector observed calibration' activities and the in-process 4 automated ultrasonic (UT) examinations being conducted on 3-Recirculation system pipe weld overlays. Also, evaluation of'the !

,

data generated by the UT examinations was observed for portions of 2 of the weld overlays. These observations were compared with

'

H the applicable procedures and the ASME B&PV Code in the following (

l areas: availability of and compliance with approved NDE procedures; use of knowledgeable NDE personnel; use of NDE personnel qualified to the proper levelt type of apparatup used; l

o >

l

7

.

E.,

.

.. ..

k .

.

.:

calibration _ requirements; search units; beam angles; DAC' curves; E reference : level for monitoring discontinuities; method of

, demonstrating penetration; extent of weld / component examination coverage; limits of evaluating and recording indications; recording significant indications; and, acceptance limit Evaluations of the UT data for the first two weld overlays

..

examined indicated what' appears to be some unbonded conditions P between the weld overlay metal and the base metal. Preliminary

. evaluation of the third weld overlay examined indicated that the ;

unbonded condition of that weld was much less severe than the ;

e first two welds. The extent and acceptability of-the unbonded 1 L conditions had not been resolved by the end of this inspectio "

In addition, examination of the overlay welds with the automated -!

UT system has revealed several areas where the systems transducer can~ not maintain adequate contact. on portions of the overlay surfaces which has resulted in poor or no sound penetration into the overlay welds examined so far. The problem of transducer contact appears to be caused by inadequately prepared surfaces prior to UT examination in isolated areas of the weld overlay As a result of the problem with transducer contact, the licensee

-

i has decided to attempt a manual UT examination of those areas 'i

>

where the automated system can not maintain proper transducer y contact. Whether this will result'in any significant increase in I the area examined is questionable since the same size transducer

-

is used for both the manual and automated UT of the weld Manual examinations had not begun by the end of this inspectio The following listed ultrasonic equipment and materials certification records were reviewed:-

Ultrasonic Instruments i

Manufacturer /Model Serial N i KK/USK-7S 2194 KK/llSK-7 4309  ;

KK/USK-7 5289 i l KK/USK-7 2543 i KK/USK-7 4676  ;

!

'

,

!

-

.

'

.,

>

=

f ;+

'

. : - ~

> , .

, 6 y

. The inspector reviewed spectrum analysis data for the ultrasonic transducers listed below:

,

Serial N Size Frequency G2966 .5" 2.25 MH C26551 .5" 2.25 MHz i 031322 .375" 2.25 MHz 40734 .5" 2.25 MHz 87-297 .4" 2.0 MHz Ultrasonic Couplant Batch Numbers 8981, 8976, and 8868 Ultrasonic Calibration Blocks 148-H, 147-H, 97-H and 7-H (2) The NRC inspector observed the in process liquid penetrant (PT) j examination of the recirculation system weld overlay identified-as 1B31-1RC-28A- This weld was rejected due to porosity' .

indications on the face of the weld and linear indications at the a lower' toe of .the weld. The weld eventually required additional welding following the removal of the PT indications due to the j amount of weld metal that had to be removed in order to eliminate j

, the PT indications. This observation were compared with the j-applicable procedure and the ASME B&PV Code in the following '

areas: specified method, penetrant materials identified;

. penetrant materials analyzed for: halogens and sulfur;-acceptable pre-examination surface; surface temperature; surface drying time l prior to penetrant application; method of penetrant application; penetrant dwell time; method used for excess penetrant reinoval;

- surface drying prior to developing, if applicable; type o developer; examination technique; evaluation technique; and, reporting of examination result The NRC inspector re-evaluated this weld following the PT -

examiners evaluation of the weld but prior to the developer being removed from the weld surfaces and before the indications were removed. This re-evaluation was conducted in order to determine if the evaluation conducted by the PT examiners was in accordance

.with the applicable procedure acceptance- criteria and to

. determine if the examination _ results were being -reported - as required. The re-evaluation conducted by the NRC inspector indicated that the proper evaluation was made by the PT examiners and that the examination results were being reported as require .

Y s

,- ,

'p . , .

t pv<

-

b . .

Q .

The inspector's review of the below listed ' liquid penetrant i materials certification records indicated that the sulfur and

-

halogen content of the material was within acceptable content

' limit Materials Batch Number Liquid Penetrant 84H027, 84E019, 870037 Cleaner / Remover 89E04K, 880078 Developer 85K080, 85H029, 84G033-(3) The inspector reviewea documentation indicating that a 10 pound I lift test had been performed on magnetic particle alternating current (AC) yokes 43530 and 2362. The certification record for the lift test plate that was used to conduct the test, SCS-113, was reviewed to confirm the weight of the test plat A review of the magnetic particle material certification records f for batch numbers 85K026, 87LO23 and 87J014 indicated the particles met the applicable specifications requirements.

" (4) The inspector reviewed personnel qualification documentation for :

s 16 UT examiners, 6 PT examiners '6 MT examiners., and 2 VT M examiners. These personnel qualifications were reviewed in the ,

following areas: employer's name; person certified; activity 1 qualified to perform; current period of certification; signature ]

L' of employer's designated representative; basis used for certification; and, annual visual acuity, color vision examination, and periodic recertificatio i]

In all cases reviewed the NDE personnel ' appeared to be adequately qualifie d. . Data Review and' Evaluation, Unit 1 (73755) ,

Records of completed-ISI nondestructive examinations for 53 UT, 31 PT, 17 MT, and 12 VT examinations were selected and reviewed to ascertain whether: the- method (s), 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 deviations were recorded as required; )

instruments, calibration . blocks, and NDE materials (personnel, penetrants, :

'

D couplants) were designate a P *

All of the examination reports reviewed appeared to contain the l required examination information including disposition of indications, )

if any, j In the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identifie ;:r~

.

.

.

o=

- ,

k' Licensee Action on Previously Opened Items (Closed) Violation 50-321,366/88-31-01, Failure to Adequately Control Special Processes For Welding and Nondestructive Testing This violation dealt with 11 examples of nondestructive testing or welding discrepancies / program weaknesses, which indicated that special processes were not being adequately controlle Nine of the eleven items were addressed in NRC report 50-321, 366/90-04. The remaining two items were addressed during this inspection. The inspector reviewed documentation which indicated that the licensee has instituted actions, such as procedure

. revisions and training. of personnel, which will improve welding control The inspector has reviewed re-radiographs-and documentation'.of the residual -

heat removal (RHR) limit switch weld, FW-3, which was re-radiographed as a 1 result of this violatio The re-radiographs indicated an unacceptable condition and the weld has been removed and rewelded. The identity of-this weld. was changed to FW-3A from FW-3 as a result of the original weld remova The inspector reviewed the maintenance work order 1-89-184, relative to this replacement weld and has. reviewed the acceptance radiographs for weld FW-3A along -with the accompanying written documentation.

'

Based on the documentation and radiographs reviewed, this matter is considered close .- Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on May 4,1990, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1. The inspectors. described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection result 'Although reviewed during this inspection, proprietary information.is not contained ,

in this report. Dissenting comments were not received from the license :

t ,

q f

pp- g ,, . >

-

_

,

, .. .

p <

,

W :L n *

. :- . . :- .

b: ; lu;.

';l *

r ri

[n

"

5 ,- : Acronyms _and Initialisms

",

'AC- 1 : Alternating Current ~

American Society of Mechanical Engineers

' ASME1 - B&PV' -

-Boiler and Pressure Vessel-tf DAC -- Distance Amplitude Curve

"

GE- - , General Electric-Corporation

, -GPC' - -- Georgia Power Company B IGSCC . Intergranular

Stress Corrosion Cracking

[. -ISI - -Inservice Inspection KK= -- -

Krautkramer ,

h -MT- - Magnetic-particle

-

MHz -

Megahertz: i

NDE- --

Nondestructive Examination .

"- No ,' 1

-

g- Number-

, NRC - Nuclear Regulatory Commission- i*

PSI- -- Preservice Inspection

.PT - ~ Liquid penetrant ,

,

QA- a Quality Assurance  !

"

R -- Revision - -

ResidualiHeat Removal

'

RHR -

SCS -- Southern Company Service U1 -

Ultrasonic-  ;

V Visual- ,

,

.,

_

~:[s i

g

,

l

L' h

-[--

l 1, .

'

. .

,

• * -

e

i,

'

Ci i r

__