IR 05000344/1986008

Insp Rept 50-344/86-08 on 860303-07.No Violation or Deviation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Welding Program

ML20202H339
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	03/25/1986
From:	Wagner W, Thomas Young NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20202H321	List: IR 05000344/1986008 ML20202H316
References
50-344-86-08, 50-344-86-8, NUDOCS 8604150234
Download: ML20202H339 (4)

Text

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

.

-

,.

'

l U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION V

Report No.-50-344/86-08

!

Docket No. 50-344 License No. NPF-1

.

Licensee:-Portland General Electric Company 121 S. W. Salmon Street Portland', Oregon 97204

Facility Name: Trojan Nuclear Plant Inspection at: Rainier, Oregon Inspection Conducted: March 3-7, 1986

+

Inspector: g/ , 1yQH [.

3-Wkb

{ 'Wagnei, tor I or Date Signed Approved By: . 8~ ~

l T. Young, Jr., C ' f

// // Date Signed Engineering Secti n (f V Summary:

! Inspection During the Period of March 3-7, 1986 (Report No. 50-344/86-08)

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by a regional based i inspector of the licensee's welding program. During this inspection,

{ Inspection Procedures 55050 and 92701 were covered. +

i i

Results: No violations or deviations were identifie .

r

-

.O

+

t f '

4 v9 - wG ,

i j

{ <

"

_ :-^' ? y ,

• I i

, ,

. , .

, .

' i .

'

.i

'

t

• J 8604150234 860326 PDR 0 ADOCK 05000344 '

PDR

.

'_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .

'

_._a_-______.___

"

. s -

i

. ,

DETAILS _ l Persons Contacted

• J. D. Reid, Manager Plant Services

• C. A. Olmstead, Manager QA Department

• D.'W. Swan, Maintenance Supervisor

• S. A. Bauer, Onsite Regulation Engineer

• D. Wheeler, QC Supervisor-

• A. O. Wogen,.ISI Engineer

• C. H. Brown, QA Operations Branch Manager

• H. F. Moomey, Resident Engineer, Oregon Department of Energy

• W. Kershul,' Nuclear Safety and Regulation Engineer-

• J. A. Russell, QA/QC' Specialist

• J. K. Aldersebaes, Manager Plant Modifications R. Curtis, Welding Engineer D. Roberts, Head Storekeeper ,

• Denotes those individuals attending exit meeting of March 7,198 , . Nuclear Welding Program * Welder Performance Qualifications Thelicensee'sproceduresfor'qualificatAonofweldersis. contained in Maintenance Procedure MP-3-7,, Revision"3 of/ January 3, 1986.' The inspector reviewed this procedure'to assure complianceiwith Section IX of the ASME Code. The; system for maintaining a continuous record of the qualification status;of all welders"is effectively utilized and accurate. Review of the Welder Performance Qualification -

Listing revealed that.the welders performing production' welding have been and are currently qualified to weld under the(respective ,

procedures. However, the inspector note'd'thst.the= qualification procedures did not include adequate provisions;to' preclude ,

falsification of welders qualifications,7 i . provisions to prevent one person from " standing in" for another.~ The licensee committed to include these provisionsfin their welding program ~(Followup Item 50-344/86-08-01). t Welding Procedures The' inspector reviewed the-program established for the preparation,

. qualification and approval of welding procedure specifications for use at the Trojan Nuclear Plant. All qualified and approved welding procedures are prepared in conformance with Maintenance Procedure HP-3-3, Revision 10 of April 26, 1985. The following welding procedure specifications (WPS) and the supportir.g procedure qualification. records (PQR) were reviewed to verify that these procedures were qualified with the applicable edition of Section IX of the ASME Code:

~_ :_ _ _ __-__--__:-__-_-___ .- ._ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . --. _ - -

r

_

J ,

~-

,

.~ 2

WPS N PQR N Revision N WP- 1-3 .- 101 3 WP-1-8H 103 4 WP-1-B -104 6

.WP-1-D 106 4 WP-1-DS 108 4-WP-8-G- 128 5 This review revealed that five welding procedures required impact

.

test for notch-toughness during qualification. Welding procedure specifications for use in applications requiring impact testing should be qualified using the maximum anticipated amerage and voltage settings to be used in production welding. An increase in the amperage or voltage is an essential variable and the welding procedure should be requalified whenever'such increase occurs. The inspector performed-calculations on the maximum heat' input.,that could be generated by the WPS-versus = the asximum allowed by the PQ Three of.the-five welding proceudres, WP-1-3, WP-1-8H and.WP-1-DS, exceeded the amount of heat input allowed. by. the PQR. ; In. addition, the inspector noted_ that permissibleJ 1imits for' travel speed were

.

not specified on the WPSs or the'PQRs which is imperative when heat input is an important cons,ideration. ' It"was' not- determined,s during this inspection, whether there are; applications involving welding of steel requiring impact testing"for. notch toughness. at the Trojan Nuclear Plant. Notch toughness ~anid travel speed requirements will be reviewed during a'later inspection (Unresolved Item N '

"

50-344/86-08-02). -

?< .

.

, x Weld Filler Metal Control .

'

z

.

The. inspector reviewed procedures established for' purchasing, receiving, storing, disbursing and handling of welding material In addition, the inspector observed control of. welding materials .

issued from the~ warehouse. -Two concerns were identified in this area; the . first being rod oven operating. temperature control. Each rod oven has a ' thermometer which'is calibrated every five year Since.the: thermometer doesn't control or record temperature, the concern is how verification is performed to assure, at any given time, that rod oven temperatures are or were within 'the required operating limits. Presently, the storekeeper daily observes the thermometers to assure the rod ovens are within temperature limits however,.this activity is not documented. The licensee committed to revise their procedures.to include verification and. documentation of rod oven. operating temperatures (Followup Item 50-344/86-08-03).

The second concern is the identification of bare welding filler 1 material. Maintenance Procedure MP-3-6 requires bare electrodes to be flagged or dyed on both ends to indicate'tbeir type. However, the procedure does not: describe the dying'or. color codirg system .i used. TheLlicensee committedoto revise their procedure. to include  !

-instructions addressing this concern.(Followup Item ' i 50-344/86-08-04). -

i l

-

l

. .

. , , , ,y * , + ,y"y - -.- v% , -- ,.,f -g. .---=., + -.m---,=--w-. e p , - + , .e e v..,,-y ,

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

v -

': ,

. ,

-

3: - . ,

.

,

D #

e, -

' > \

.:No violations or deviationstwere' identifie ' '

< <

,

.

,1

'- ., , ! ' ~

Licensee Action on Previously Identified: Items'

.

n .,'

--

' --

.

~

~

~ . . .

(0 pen) Followup Item 50-344/85-d7-01"'.'Co$pleted ISI~ Inspections versus .

Code Requirements" e 3 ,

_

{

,

- : m '; w The inspector reviewed the basis and'results of.the licensee's. comparison-

.

.

,

s l

to determine' Inservice Inspection .(ISI) .performan'ce 'complian'ce 'with Code requirements. This effort is' documented in letterinumbe'r>RLS-273-86

,

~

!

dated March 6,1986 from the Nuclear. Plant Engineering Department'-  !

addressed to Westinghouse. Electric Corporation. The basis for the

' Ten-Year Plan. (first ISI 10 year interval) review consist.of checking for i t- inconsistencies between the Ten-Year Plan, examination reports for the '

outages, ISI drawings, and requirements of the ASME B&PV . Code,1974

.

Edition and Addenda through Summer 1975. The letter informs Westinghouse of a number of detected discrepancies in Westinghouse's Ten-Year Plan

which are listed in Appendices A through.D. The licensee has requested i

Westinghouse to implement the actions noted in Appendices A through D during the 1986 scheduled shutdown as the first 10-year interval ends on -

{

! May 20, 1986. This item will remain open until the inspector reviews Westinghouse's response to the licensee's reques . Exit Meeting i

j  !

The inspector met with licensee management representatives denoted in j

j paragraph 1 on March 7, 1986. The scope of the inspection and the'

inspector's findings ss nc ed in this report were discussed.

i.

?

i-

i l

i

i t

i i

i

$

i

!

'

E

'

I

,

J

i , ,

I

4

-

r-- - - .g.., er ww-- , g , , --

-g-, ,-vv.- ,c- --o'-w - - - < w -vm" + n-n- - -- e e se~