IR 05000348/1980037
| ML19341D348 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 01/28/1981 |
| From: | Crowley B, Herdt A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19341D338 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-348-80-37, 50-364-80-51, IEB-80-08, NUDOCS 8103050410 | |
| Download: ML19341D348 (7) | |
Text
'
j SR Flo
'
UNITED STATES
~qt d
-
,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- ^
O
,
b[
E REGION 11 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 g[
e, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
$
+....
Report Nos. 50-438/80-37 and 50-364/80-51 Licensee: Alabama Power Company 600 North 18th Street Birmingham, AL 35202
,
Facility Name: Farley Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364 License Nos. NPF-2 and CPPR-86 Inspection at Farley site near Dothan, Alabama Inspection:
[.
/.2.Y Y[
/
B. R.
rowley Ohte Signed Skf/
Approved by:
/
A. R. lierdt, Section Chief, RC&ES Branch j6 ate Signed SUMMARY Inspection on December 15-18, 1980 Areas Inspectea This routine, unannounced inspection involved 29 inspector-hours on site in the areas of inservice inspection (ISI) (Unit 1), low pressure turbine disc cracking (Unit 1), IE Bulletin 80-08 (Units 1 and 2), previous inspection f
_
findings (Unit 2).
,
l'
Results No violations or deviations were identified.
l l
810 305 0D
__
.
W DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- W. G. Hairston, III, Plant Manager
- J. D. Woodard, Assistant Plant Manager
- R. G. Berryhill, Performance and Planning Superintendent
- G. S. Waymire, Systems Performance Engineer
- J. W. Kale, Jr., QA Engineer D. W. Herrin, Plant Engineer P. T. Webb, Plant Engineer
'
J. C. Payson, QA Staff Engineer J. G. Sims, Supervisor of Engineering Other licensee employees contacted included technicians, security force members, and office personnel.
Other Organizations R. Rowley, Systems Performance Engineer (Bechtel Corporation)
M. K. Hollingsworth, Project Welding Engineer (Daniel Construction Company)
NRC Resident Inspector
- J. P. Mul key W. H. Bradford
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview
.
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on December 18, 1980 with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed)
Deficiency 364/80-33-01,
" Failure to follow RT procedure ".
,
Alabama Power Company's letters of response dated October
and December 2, 1980, have been reviewed and determined to be acceptable by Region II.
Based on examination of corrective actions as stated in the letter of response, the inspector concluded that Alabama Power Company had determined the full extent of the subject noncompliance, performed the necessary survey and followup actions to correct the present conditions and developed the necessary corrective actions to preclude
.
-,
-
,_
_.
.
.
.
.
recurrence of similar circumstances.
The corrective actions identified in the letter of response have been implemented.
f 4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Inservice Inspection - Re tiew of Procedures (Unit 1)
The inspector reviewed the plans and procedure for Eddy Current (EC)
-
testing of steam generator tubes to determine whether the plans and procedure were consistent with regulatory requirements and licensee
,
'
commitments. Appendix IV to the 1977 Edition of Section XI of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel code is being used. The inspector reviewed the following:
,
a.
The " Inspection Program", ALA-B, was reviewed and compared with the requirements for steam generator tube inspection in the Farley 1 Technical Specifications.
The program requires inspection of 9%
of the tubes in steam generator
"B" including all row 1 and 2 tubes.
The remaining tubes to make up the 9% are to be randomly selected throughout the tube population.
b.
The inspector reviewed procedure MRS 2.4.2 GEN-23, Revision 2,
" Multi-frequency Eddy Current Inspection of Steam Generator Tubing
- Preservice and Inservice" for technical content in the areas of:
,
(1.) Specification of two channel equipment (2.) Establishment of criteria for maximum sensitivity (3.) Description of examination method (4.) Description of calibration method and sequence (5.) Description of calibration simulator (6.) Acceptance criteria
.
Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identi-fied.
,
6.
Inservice Inspection - Data Review and Evaluation (Unit 1)
The inspector reviewed the ISI data described below to determine whether the ISI for the first 40-month period of commercial plant operation had been accomplished consistent with regulatory requirements and licensee commitments.
The applicable code for the ISI is the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, 1974 Edition with Addenda through S75.
a.
To determine if the first 40-month inspection requirements had'
,
been met, the inspector reviewed site ISI data for Class 1 and 2 components for the current (1st 40-month) period and compared the data with requirements of the " Joseph M.
Farley Nuclear Power Plant No.1 Ten year Inservice Inspection Program" and the applicable
!
'
.
h g
-
N
-
.
.
code relative to areas inspected and extent of inspection.
The data reviewed included the Refueling Outage Core I-II ISI report,
" Inservice Inspection Report of the J. M.
Farley Nuclear Plant Unit 1" and the inspection data for inspections performed during the current outage outlined in the ISI program, "Fa rl ey Nuclear Plant Unit No.
Inservice Inspection Interval-1, Period-1, Outage-2, 1980".
During this review, the inspector noted two problems as follows:
(1.) The applicable code and the inspection program as submitted to NRC requires inspection of clad patches on the inside of the reactor vessel head.
The ten year plan requires inspection of some of these patches during the first 40-month period.
The licensee considers these inspections to be unfeasible because of the excessively high radiation in the area.
In addi ti on,
a later edition to the code, which has been approved by the NRC deletes inspection of clad patches.
However, the program and plans for Farley Unit
still require the inspection.
The licensee stated that changes would be made to the ISI program to delete the clad patch inspections.
This matter is identified as inspector followup item 348/80-37-01, " Deletion of clad patch inspections".
(2.) The procedures for inspection of variable spring type supports require that spring settings be recorded, but do not cover evaluation to insure that +he settings meet design require-
.
ments.
However, based on a previous noncompliance on Unit 2 PSI (See Infraction 364/80-43-02),
the licensee is in the process of revising the procedure for control of ISI/ PSI in the area 'of evaluation of reportable conditions.
The licensee is also in the process of developing a system for identi fying the design setpoints for all variable spring type supports to
.
be used in evaluating ISI results.
Evaluation requirements will be incorporated in applicable licensee procedures. This matter will be identified as inspector followup item 348/
80-37-02,
" Procedure for evaluation of support inspection results".
b.
NDE records for the current outage for Class 1 pipe welds, Class 1 pressurizer shell welds and steam generator channel head welds were reviewed to ascertain whethtr the selected records contained or provided reference to the follow"ng documents:
(1.) Examination results and data sheets (2.) Examination equipment data (3.) Calibration data sheets (4.) Examination evaluation data (5.) Records on extent of examination (6.) Records on deviation from program
.
.
c.
NDE records for the closure head to flange weld (weld 5, sketch ALA-102) for the 1979 outage inspection were reviewed to ascertain whether the following requirements were met:
(1.) The method, extent and technique of examination comply with licensee's ISI program and applicable NDE procedure.
(2.) The examination data is within the acceptance criteria as
,
outlined in applicable NDE procedure and applicable code requirements.
(3.) The recording, evaluation and disposition of findings are in-compliance with the applicable NDE procedure and applicable coda requirements.
(4.) Inservice nondestructive examination results are compared with recorded results of prior Section XI examinations.
(5.) ine method used for NDE was sufficient to determine the full extent of indication or acceptance.
d.
NDE records for the following pressure retaining pipe welds for the 1979 outage inspection were reviewed:
Sketch Weld Size System ALA-110
Loop piping Reactor Coolant
,
ALA-110
Loop piping Reactor Coolant ALA-148
14"-surge line Reactor Coolant ALA-148 6DM 14"-surge line Reactor Coolant i
ALA-132
8" Safety Injection ALA-118
6" Safety Injection l
The records were reviewed to determine whether the following requirements were met:
,
(1.) The examination unit calibration data sheets show no major
.
deviations between initial and final calibrations.
(2.) Collected examination data and any recordable indications are properly recorded to permit accurate evaluation and documen-tation.
(3.) Evaluation of examination data performed by a Level II or Level III examiner.
(4.) Evaluation of examination data complies with the procedure.
(5.) Evaluation of indications (if applicable)
comply with the criteria of the NDE procedure and ASME Section XI.
(6.) Incomplete examinations and results were reported to permit full evaluation (if applicable).
Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
--
_
-
-
_
. - -.
.
.
7.
IE Bulletins (IEB)
(0 pen)
IEB 80-BU-08, Examination of Containment Liner Penetration Welds, Unit I and 2.
This Bulletin described a problem where backing ring type weld joints had been used for welding primary piping contain-ment penetration flued head fittings to outer containment liner sleeves.
For some plants these welds were ultrasonic (UT) inspected in lieu of radiographic (RT) inspection.
Later RT inspection revealed defects in excess of code requirements. Alabama Power Company responded to the Bulletin by letter dated July 1, 1980, stating that for the application in question, no backing ring joints were used and that all welds received RT inspection.
As followup to the Bulletin to verify the licensee's response, the inspector reviewed the applicable drawings and RT film for the following flued head fitting to sleeve welds:
Unit Penetration Pent. Type ISO Weld
3 V
N11-EG180
1
II T52-1662
1
I P15-E2519 4F
50 II T52-1638
1
VI E11-EG41
2
I E21-E7859 2F
50 II P15-E9840
2
VI E21-EG2-415
In addition, the inspector reviewed the licensee's overall evaluation program for satisifying the requirements of this bulletin.
Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
8.
Indepenaent Inspection Effort (Unit 1)
.
As followup to IE Information Notice 79-37, Cracking in Low Pressure Turbine Discs, the inspector reviewed the following relative to cracking found on Unit 1 low pressure turbine 1 and 2 discs:
a.
Cracking was found in discs of both low pressure turbine 1 and 2 as indicated below.
The crack depths' for turbine 2 are final analyzed depths. The depths for turbine 1 are preliminary.
Turbine 2 - Major cracks: Disc 1 (Gov. End)
.470" in keyway Disc 1 (Gen. End)
.400" in bore Disc 2 (Gen. End)
.450" in keyway Turbine 1 - Major cracks:
Disc 1 (Gen. End) - 2.08" in bore Disc 1 (Gov. End)
.630" in bore Disc 2 (Gov. End)
.260" in bore
.
.
..
.
-...
-
.
....
.-
. -.
_
J-0
,
The inspector reviewed the UT technique used for finding the cracks which consisted of a tangential aim and radial aim tech-nique from the disc hub.
[
b.
Magnetic Particle (MT) inspection was in process to determine if any of the cracks extended to the. surface of the disc.
The inspector' observed in process MT inspection for the following discs:
i Turbine 2 - Gen. End - Discs 3, 4 and 5 Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identi-
~ fied.
A s
.
J
.
I.
.,
I i
l
.
,
.
s t
,
_
_
..
.
. _
_ - - _
-~
..
...
.
..
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
_
_ - _ - _.