IR 05000369/1981014
| ML19350D940 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 05/14/1981 |
| From: | Herdt A, Zajac L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19350D939 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-369-81-14, 50-370-81-06, 50-370-81-6, IEB-80-08, IEB-80-8, NUDOCS 8105270272 | |
| Download: ML19350D940 (8) | |
Text
._
%*,t 4E UNITED STATES
.
j*
"
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,
I
REGION 11
{
f 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W SUITE 3100 g
p ATI.ANTA. G EORGIA 30303
++...
Report Nos. 50-369/81-14 and 50-370/81-06 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 Soutn Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Facility Name: McGuire Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370
,
License Nos. CPPR-83 and CPPR-84 Inspection at McGuire Ote r ar Charlotte, NC Inspector:
/fLjco 8 /M!8/
L. D. 24fa
'
//
Cate< Signed Approved by:
-
/
/
A. R. Herdt, Section Chief DatekSigned Engineering Inspectiott Branch Engineering and Technical Inspection Division
,
3UMMARY Inspected on April 27-30, 1981 Areas Inspected
'
This routine, unannounced inspection involved 30 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of IE Bulletin 80-08 Containment Liner Penetration Welds; Preservice Inspection - review of records and procedures; Safety Related Piping - obsor-vation of liquid penetrant examination, review of qualification records, walkdown of installed systems; Containment Penetrations protection of components, review of records; Previous Noncompliance - review of corrective actions taken.
l Results l
Of the four areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
,
l l
'80 0527 0 M t
__
_ _, _
, _
.__
.. _ _
. _ _ - -...
_ _ _.. - _
.
.
REPORT DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
"J. C. Rogers, Project Manager
- J. W. Willis, Project Senior QA Engineer
- E. B. Abrams, Construction Engineer
"G. B. Robinson, GA Engineer F. Bulgin, NDE Stpervisor J. Dunston, NDE Radiographic Film Reader Other licensee employees contacted included 8 other engineerr and techni-cians.
" Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on April 30, 1981 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (0 pen) Infraction 3E0/80-12-01, Inadequate training / qualification of visual examiners. The inspector reviewed actions taken by the licensee to resolve items a.(1), a.(2), and a.(3) of report 80-12 and found the actions taken to be satisfactory. However, the actions taken to resolve items a.(4)(a) thru
<
a.(4)(e) could not be reviewed since the actual hardwar' was not available
'
e for review.
This item will remain open until all corrective actions are reviewed.
Unresolved Items Unresolved ite s are matters about which more information is required to determine whether they are acceptable or may involve violations or devia-tient. New unresolved items identified during this inspection are discussed in paragraphs 7.b and 7.c.
!
l 5.
Preservice Inspection (Unit 2)
l a.
Review of Records i
The inspector reviewed records for the three welds listed below to
!
determine whether the PSI requirements of Section XI of the ASME Code l
were met in the following areas:
l
!
I
.
'--s a
g-m.e, cgy-e e--
7-+
-r---
Jy-g-
w-w-es-er
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
__ _
. _ _
_ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
l (1) Licensee's Quality Assurance program is applied to control the quality affecting activities performing repair work.
(2) Welding is performed by welders who are qualified and are using qualified procedures.
(3) Welding materials are controlled from purchasing through to actual use.
(4) Completed welds meet visual examination requirements and are examined by qualified personnel.
(5) Preservice inspection was performed and results recorded.
(6) Welds are pressure tested.
- Records reviewed:
Weld I.D.
System Pice Size & Mat'1.
Drawing No.
SM2FW8-40 Main Steam 6 " Carbon Steel ISO MCFI2SM8 NI2F611 Safety Injection 18" Stainless Steel ISO
-
MCFI2NI-21 NC2Fe22-12 Reactor Coolant 11" Stainless Steel 150 MCFI2NC-22 o.
Review of Procedures The inspector reviewed liquid penetrant procedure, ISI-240 Rev. 10, to determine if it specified compilation of required records such as examination results, data sheets, and the actual penetrant materials i
used.
c.
Review of Record System
.
The inspector reviewed the nondestructive examination record system to determine if the system contained provisions for files, records and documents on the items listed in Section XI of the ASME Code under
" Examination Categories".
No violations or deviations were noted.
l l
,
L
'
l.
6.
Safety Related Piping (Unit 2)
,
a.
System Installation The inspector performed a walkdown of the three systems listed below to determine if the systems were installed in accordance with the as-built / final design drawings.
Building System Elevation Drawing No.
Refueling Water 716'0" MC 2406-23.41-00 Rev. 8 Safety Injection 716'0" MC 2414-09.41-00 Rev. 15 Boron Thermal Regeneration 750'0" MC 2414-18.43-01 Rev, 12 b.
Liquid Penetrant Examination The inspector observed liquid penetrant examination (PT) of 2-inch sti.inless steel socket welds VS2FW41-22 and VS2FW41-9 to determine if tha examination was performed to the requirements of Section V of the AS4E Code and the licensee's procedure. The inspector also reviewed the qualification records for the individual conducting the examina-tion, and reviewed the certifications for the penetrant materials with regard to sulfur and halogen content.
-
The review of the qualification records disclosed that the eye acuity test was administered by the PT examiner's supervisor and the record failed to indicate whether or not the PT examiner required corrective lens to pass the test.
Paragraph 8.2.a of SNT-TC-1A (which is the applicable document per ASME) requires that the eye test be given to
.
assure natural or corrected near distance acuity, and be given by a qualified persca.
There was no documentation to indicate that the supervisor was qualified to administer the eye test. The inspector pointed out that the supervisor should not be in a position where he is certifying the people he supervises. Certifications should be accom-plished by an independent party.
The licensee agreed to annotate the NDE personnel records to reflect i
-
whether or not corrective lens were required and that an individual, considered qualified, would be formally appointed to administer the eye exams. This will be Inspector Followup Item 370/81-06-03 " Records for
,
'
administering and for limitations concerning visual acuity are incom-plete".
No violations or deviatiuns were noted.
l l
l l
l
.
v..,
-_ _-
---
,,
n
,
e-
.
.
.
7.
Containment Penetrations (Units 1 and 2)
a.
Protection of Components The inspector sighted, several penetrations containing bellows to ascertain if the bellows section was adequately protected from inad-vertent damage.
The bellows section on feedwater and main steam penetrations were not adequately protected from falling objects which could damage the very thin walled bellows. The licensee did provide some protection by installing scaffolding directly above the penetra-tions, but in some cases the scaffolding had been rearranged causing openings above tie bellows section. The inspector advised the licensee of this condition and the licensee immediately installed sheet metal
covers over the bellows section. The licensee agreed to instruct the craftsmen to insure that protective covers were in place when work is
-
not being performed on the penetrations.
b.
Review of QA Records The inspector reviewed the QA records for electrical penetration, E 103, and access panetration, C-152 to deternine if the applicable quality requirements had been met. The quality areas reviewed were:
(1) Material requirements imposed by the purchase specification;
.
l (2) Certification of material requirements; i
l
_ (3) Receipt inspection of penetration components for damaga and i
conformance to specification requirements;
!
(4) Required installation, inspections were perform ~ed; (5) Welding was performed in accordance with approved procedures; (6) Inspections were performed to verify correct positioning and
.
alignment; (7) Inspections confirm that required leak testing was satisfactorily accomplished.
From this review it was determined that no apparent records exist that verify the correct positioning and alignment of the penetrations. The l
licensee stated that since these penetrations were installed in 1974, records specifically for positioning and alignment may not exist.
However, the licensee stated that log books, surveillance reports, cr general installation records may be on file.
The licensee agreed to research these files accordingly. This item will be Unresolved Item 370/81-06-02, "QA records not available for containment penetration alignment" l
,
.
.
c.
Review of Radiographic Records and Films The inspector reviewed the radiographic records and films for the penetrations listed below to determine if the installation welds met the applicable ASME Code requirements.
penetration No.
Weld Ident.
Dwg. No.
1M154 FW-1 Mc1676-3.1 1M262 P4-1 Mc1676-3.2 1M441 FW-1 Mc1676-3.1 1M153 PW-1 Mc1676-3.2 2M154 FW-1 Mc1676-3.1 2M262 FW-1 Mc1676-3.2 2M441 FW-1 Mc1676-3.1 2M440 PW-1 Mc1676-3.2 The following discrepancies were noted in the radiographic films.
(1) IM154 (a) The films of (4-5) area show what appears to be a surface indication in the base metal adjacent to the weld which was not evaluated on the film reader's sheet.
The indication
.
appears relatively deep and has the shape of three-fourths the circumference of a -inch diameter circle.
(b) The radiographic technique used for the entire weld appears to be the same, but some films are identified by technique
"3-1-A" and others by technique "3-1-C".
(2) IM441 - The following base metal indications were not evaluated on the film readers sheet.
(a) A depression or groove (2 -inch long) about 1 -inch from the weld, which could violate minimum wall thickness.
(b)
1/8-inch weld spatter about -inch from weld.
l (c) An indication that appears to be a chunk of foreign material which is partially in the weld. The object is shaped similar to a triangle and measures about 3/4-inch by 3/4-inch.
(3) 1M153 - An adjacent weld has incomplete penetration on film (11-12) which was not addressed on the film reader's sheet.
.
.
(4) 2M15e (a) The adjacent weld on films (2-3), (3-4), (4-5), and (6-7) has gross uncercut which was not addressed on the film reader's shett. The undercut areas may violate minimum wall require-ments.
(b) Film (7-8) shows a glob of weld netal with a possible crack located on the base metal tbout 1-inch from the penetration weld. This indication was not evaluated on the film reader's sheet.
(5) 2M262 - The following conditions were not evaluated on the film reader's sheet.
(a) The adjacent weld appears to have numerous short cross cracks on filra areas (0-1), (2-3), (3-4), (4-5), (5-6) and (6-7).
(b) An arc strike 1-inch long in the base metal about 1/8" from the weld near film area number 5.
The licensee agreed to make overlays of each of the above film areas and evaluate them accordingly. In view of the above, it appears the licensee's film readers do not evaluate base metal or adjacent weld
-
conditions that appear on the radiographic films. However, the licen-see assured the inspector _that current instructions / procedures require the film readers to evaluate discontinuities detected in the material adjacent to the weld being examined. The inspector noted that this requirement does exist in procedure NDE-10 in paragraph 18.
Pending evaluation of the above identified conditions, this item will be Unresolved Item 369/81-14-01 and 370/81-06-01, " Bas'e metal and adjacent weld defects on radiographic films were not evaluated".
No violations or deviations were noted.
8.
(Closed) IE Bulletin No. 80-08, Examination of Containment Liner Penetration Welds (Units 1 and 2)
IE Bulletin No. 80-08 was forwarded on April 7,1980, and requested licen-sees to determine if their facility contained the flued head design for penetration connections, or other designs with containment boundary butt welds between the penetration sleeve and process piping as illustrated in Figure NE 1120-1, Winter 1975 addenda to the 1974 and later editions of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code.
If the licensee's facility does contain this design then the licensee was requested to determine if welds were made with a backing ring and whether or not volumetric examination was conducted by radiography. The Bulletin indicates that weld joints with a backing ring that have not been radiographed, are of particular concern as they are potentially defectiv.'
.
,
In response to the Bulletin Duke Power Company forwarded a letter dated July , 1980 which stated that.the flued head design was used with a butt joint design utilizing a single V groove weld without a backing ring.
The letter further stated that the butt weld joining the process pipe to the flued head was radiographically examined, but that the butt welds joining the guard pipe and the outer sleeve, respectively, to the flued head were ultrasonically examined since the joint geometry would not have provided meaningful results if radiographed. The inspector reviewed the ultrasonic examination records (for the sleeve to flued head welds) and the radio-graphic films (for the process pipe to flued head welds) for the penetra-tions listed below.
The review disclosed no discrepancies, thus the Bulletin is hereby closed.
Penetration I.O.
Unit Serial No.
1M153 G 6094 1M262 G 4791 2M440 G 6097 2M441 G 6093 2M154 G 6090 1M154 G 4786 1M441 G 4789 2M262 G 6095
.
'9 a
.. _.
_-
.
.
.
.
_ _.
.
-
__.
.