IR 05000389/1982013

IE Insp Rept 50-389/82-13 on 820329-0402.Noncompliance Noted:Use of Incorrect Calibr Block for Psi Ultrasonic Test of Weld 123-2

ML20054K287
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	04/27/1982
From:	Coley J, Crowley B, Herdt A, Kleinsorge W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20054K276	List: IR 05000389/1982013 L-82-232, Responds to NRC Re Violations Noted in IE Insp Rept 50-389/82-13.Corrective Actions:Weld 123-2 Presently Scheduled for re-examination Using Proper Calibr Block ML20054K275 ML20054K278 ML20054K280
References
50-389-82-13, NUDOCS 8207010390
Download: ML20054K287 (16)

Text

- _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _

. .

1. UNITED STATES

-

8 tg% NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

$ REGION 11

$

g 101 MARIETTA ST N.W., SUITE 3100 e[ ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303

• • • • • j Report No. 50-389/82-13 Licensee: Florida Power and Light Company P. O. Box 529100 Miami, FL 33152 Facility Name: St. Lucie Docket No. 50-389 License No. CPPR-144 Inspection at St. Lucie site near Ft. Pierce, Florida Inspectors: . [, . 23 B. Date Signed

/ /

j * I- -

.

0 ~

$ L W.P/K inso Date Signed h_-J. ChColey

. Iu 3N'

D4te Sfgned Approved by: !bd M/87/[d A. R. Herdt, Section Chief [Iate' Signed Engineering Inspection Branch Division of Engineering and Technical Programs SUMMARY Inspection on March 29 - April 2,1982 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 102 inspector-hours on site in the areas of reactor coolant pressure boundary piping, safety related piping, safety related components, reactor vessel installation, preservice inspection, previous inspection finding, and concern regarding Pullman weldin Results Of the seven areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified in six areas; one violation was found in one area (Violation - Use of incorrect cali-bration block for PSI UT of Weld 123-2, paragraph 13.a).

8207010390 820615 PDR ADOCK 05000389 0 PDR

_ _ . ______ _ - . - J

.

REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees

• B. J. Escue, Site Manager

• N. T. Weems, Assistant Manager QA-PSL G. Gotch, Nuclear Section Supervisor for Codes and Inspections - NED

• E. Crowell, Site Engineering Supervisor

• J. L. Parker, Project QC Supervisor

• G. J. Boissy, Startup Superintendent

• P. W. Heycork, PSI Site Supervisor - NED

• R. A. Symes, Supervising QA Engineer

• W. F. Jackson, Welding Superintendent

• F. T. Carr, NDE Supervisor - NED

• D. R. Cooper, Supervising QA Engineer

• E. W. Sherman, QA Engineer

• P. P. Carier, Licensing

• J. W. Adams, QA Engineer E. L. Lake, Level'II Examiner Other licensee em,nloyees contacted included construction craftsmen, QC inspectors, NDE examiners, security force members, and effice personne Other Organizations G. R. Perkins, President, NDE Engineering Consultants, In *R. W. Zaist, Project Superintendent, Ebasco Services, In *G. H. Krauss, ESSE Project Engineer, Ebasco Services, In *R. A. Garramore, Senior Resident Engineer, Ebasco Services, Inc.

,

NRC Resident Inspector

,

• S. A. Elrod l * Attended exit interview Exit Interview l The inspection scope and findings were summarized on April 2,1982, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The inspectors described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings listed below. No dissenting comments were received from the license (0 pen) Unresolved Item 389/82-13-01, Misinspection of Pipe Welds, paragraph l 7.b(1).

!

l (Open) Unresolved Item 389/82-13-02, Material Identification Conflict, paragraph 7.b(2).

(

I

,

-

.

.

.

I (0 pen) Inspector Followup . Item 389/82-13-03, Nonretrievable Installation Records, paragraphs 9.b and 1 (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 389/82-13-04, Revision of MT Procedure to Identify Yoke Calibration Requirements, paragraph 1 (0 pen) Violation 389/82-13-05, Use of Incorrect Calibration Block for PSI UT of Weld 123-2, paragraph 1 (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 389/82-13-06, Revision of Procedure NDE To Clarify Tranducer Size, paragraph 1 (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 389/82-13-07, Calibration Notch Requirements for Roll-bond Clad Calibration Blocks, paragraph 1 (0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 389/82-13-08, Under Sensitive Inspections Using Roll-bond Clad Calibration Block . Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item 389/81-02-03: " Marking In NDE Area of Interest" See paragraph 7.b(1). (Closed) Unresolved Item 389/81-19-01: " Undersize Fillet Welds in-Piping" See paragraph 7.b(1). (Closed) Unresolved Item 389/81-25-04: " Orifice Fillet Leg Size" See paragraph 7.b(1). (Closed) Unresolved Item 389/82-07-04: " Undersized Socket Welds" See paragraph 7.b(1). (Closed) Unresolved Item 389/81-02-04: " Level 'A' Temperature Excur-sions" This item concerns temperature excursions beyond that allowed by licensee procedure SQD-3. The licensee has determined that no material or equipment on site now or ever required level "A" storag The inspectors have no further questions; this item is considered close . Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to determine whether they are acceptable or may involve violations or devia-tions. New unresolved items identified during this inspection are discussed in paragraph nos. 7.b(1) and 7.b(2).

. _ - _ . ..

.

.

.

3 Independent Inspection Efforts Construction Activities

The inspectors conducted a general inspection of the reactor building and auxiliary building to observe construction activities such as welding, welding filler material control, material controls, housekeeping and storag Within the areas examined, no violations or deviations were identifie . Inspector Followup Items (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 389/81-05-03: " Reference for Incorrect Procedure For Lifting CBS." Paragraph 5.2.4 of SQP-72 has been revised to reference the correct procedur . Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping (RCPB)

'

'

The inspectors reviewed procedures and observed welding work activities for RCBP piping as described below to determine whether applicable code and procedure requirements were being met. The applicable code for RCBP piping is the ASME B and PV Code,Section III, Subsection NB 1977 edition with addenda through summer 191 The inspectors observed in process welding activities of RCPB piping field welds as described below to determine whether applicable code and procedure

,

requirements were being me Review of Quality Assurance Implementing Procedures The inspectors reviewed the below listed procedure to determine whether inspection and/or work performance procedures covering installation of the piping, related appurtenances, and materials, contain provisions j for the type and thickness of insulation and covering and whether those t

activities are controlled and performed in accordance with NRC require-ments and SAR commitment NO TITLE FLO-2998-100 " Heat, Antisweat and Process Heating Insulation for Nuclear and Non-Nuclear l Piping and Equipment for Seismic and

[

Non-Seismic Services" Visual Inspection of Welds The inspectors visually examined completed and accepted reactor coolant l

'

pressure boundary welds as described below to determine whether appli-cable code and procedure requirements were being met.

l

,

- , . - . .

.-. -

.

(1) The below listed welds were examined relative to the following:

location, length, size and shape; weld surface finish and appearance, including inside diameter of pipe welds when acces-sible; transitions between different wall thicknesses; weld reinforcement -- height and appearance; joint configuration of permanent attachments and structural supports; removal of tempo-rary attachments; arc strikes and weld spatter; finish grinding or l machining of weld surface finish and absence of wall thinning; surface defects -- cracks, laps, and lack of penetration, lack of fusion, porosity, slag, oxide film and undercut exceeding pre-scribed limit WELD NO SYSTEM RC-0122-001 Reactor Coolant RC-0116-002 Reactor Coolant RC-0113-002 Reactor Coolant RC-0121-002 Reactor Coolant RC-0121-003 Reactor Coolant RC-105-004 Reactor Coolant RC-113-003 Reactor Coolant RC-116-003 Reactor Coolant RC-105-002 Reactor Coolant RC-105-003 Reactor Coolant RC-105-004 Reactor Coolant With regard to the inspection above the inspectors on April 1, 1982 noted markings in the NDE 1/2 inch area of interest on the pipe adjacent to completed and accepted ASME Class 1 reactor coolant socket weld joint nos. RC-0113-002 and RC-0116-002. The above is contrary to FP&L SQP-47, Revision 6, " Pipe Erection" Attachment 4.2 which prohibits joint identification / markings within the NDE area of interest on ASME Class 1 piping. The above indicates that the inspector of record failed to inspect in the area of pipe marking. At the time of this inspection the extent of the above failure to inspect in accordance with procedure and the safety significance could not be determine Unresolved Item nos. 389/81-02-03, 389/81-19-01, 389/81-25-04 and 389/82-07-04 concern failure to inspect in accordance with proce-dures in the areas of undersize socket welds and marking of socket welds. The inspectors discussed the above with the licensee, who stated that af ter the completion of cold hydro they would rein-spect socket welds on a sampling basis to determine the extent of the above misinspectio The inspectors stated that the above unresolved items would be closed as individual items and made examples of a new unresolved item 389/82-13-01: "Misinspection of Pipe Welds." This item will be evaluated for significance upon the completion of the licensee's reinspectio H

T

. .

.

.

(2) Quality records for the welds listed in paragraph 7.b(1) were examined relative to the following: records covering visual and dimensional inspections indicate that the specified inspections were completed; the records reflect adequate quality; ' history records are adequat With regard to the inspection above, the inspectors noted several discrepancies between the material identification marking on the base materials joined by welds RC-105-002, -003 and -004, and the weld travelers for those joints. The licensee indicated that they would look further into the matter. The inspectors stated that the above would be unresolved item 389/82-13-02: " Material Iden-tification Conflict."

Within the areas examined no violations or deviations were identifie . Safety-Related Piping (SR)

The inspectors reviewed procedures and observed welding work activities for safety-related piping as described below to determine whether applicable code and procedure requirements were being met. The applicable code for safety-related piping is the ASME B and PV Code,Section III, Subsections NC and ND, 1977 edition with addenda through summer 1977. The inspectors observed in process welding activities of SR piping field welds as described below to determine whether applicable code and procedure requirements were being me Review of Quality Assurance Implementing Procedures The inspectors reviewed the below listed procedure to determine whether inspection and/or work performance procedures covering installation of the piping, related appurtenances, and materials, contain provisions for the type and thickness of insulation and covering and whether those activities are controlled and performed in accordance with NRC require-ments and SAR commitment NO TITLE FLO-2998-100 " Heat, Antisweat and Process Heat Insu-lation for Nuclear and Non-Nuclear Piping and Equipment for Seismic and Non-Seismic Service" Visual Inspection of Welds The inspectors visually examined completed and accepted safety related piping welds as described below to determine whether applicable code and procedure requirements were being met.

i

- - -

. . _ . - _ _ _

_ ,~ _ ,

-. _ - - - - ~ - .

.. - . .

. .

l

.

,8

i (1) The below listed welds were examined relative to the following:

location, length, size and shape; weld surface finish and appear-ance, including inside. diameter of pipe welds when accessible; i transitions between different wall thickness; weld reinforcement

-- height and appearance; joint configuration of permane'nt attach-

ments and structural supports; removal of temporary attachments; l arc strikes and weld spatter; finish grinding or machining of weld

! surface - surface finish and absence of wall thinning; surface i

defects -- cracks, laps, and lack of penetration, lack of fusion, l porosity, slag, oxide film and undercut exceeding prescribed'

limi '

i i WELD NO SYSTEM

!

.

l RC-0514-003 Reactor Coolant RC-0514-004 Reactor Coolant l RC-0514-005 Reactor Coolant i

! (2) Quality records for the welds listed in paragraph 8.b(1) were J

examined relative to the following: records coveri.ng visual and dimensional inspections indicate that the specified inspections

, were completed; the records reflect adequate quality; history

]

records are adequat , Special Welding Activities The inspectors examined special welding activities as described below to determine whether applicable code and procedure requirements were being me ! Seal Welding

! Records of the following seal welds were examined relative to the

following: welding procedure used; welding procedure. . includes - all pertinent requirements; welding procedure qualification; welder i performance qualification; ANI witness of performance qualification;

.

base and filler ' material as specified; NDE performed, and records

!

complete.

WELD NO SYSTEM-SI-0430-001 Safety Injection SI-0430-001A Safety Injection l SI-0430-006 Safety Injection .

-

SI-0430-006A Safety Injection i

SI-0429-001 Safety Injection SI-0429-001A Safety Injection SI-0429-006 Safety Injection

SI-0429-006A Safety Injection

Within the area inspected, no violation or' deviations were identifie ,

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

- - ____ -- . . _ - - __

.

-

,

7 Reactor Vessel Installation The inspectors reviewed procedure;, made a physical inspection of the reactor vessel installation and reviewed quality records to ascertain whether procedures, field activities and records pertaining to the instal-lation of the reactor vessel are consistent with NRC requirements, applic-able codes standards and commitments, Review of Quality Assurance Implementing Procedures (1) The inspectors reviewed the below listed documents to determine whether inspection activities meet established procedures, including record keeping requirements and qualifications of j inspection personnel responsible for reactor vessel installation

inspectio N TITLE QP 2.9 Rev 4 " Qualification of QA Audit, QC Inspection i and Construction Test Personnel" QP 10.2 Rev 2 " Inspection of Plant Construction" QP 17.1 Rev 7 "The Collection and Storage of Quality Assurance Records for Nuclear Power Plants."

(2) The inspectors reviewed the below listed documents to determine

'

whether vessel protection procedures and internal cleanliness preservation procedures were established prior to need, and were adhered t N TITLE QP 2.8 Rev 3 " Cleanliness Control Methods" SQP-3 Rev 7 " Material Control" SQP-23 Rev 1 " Preventive Maintenance" SQP-29 Rev 3 "NSSS Access and Cleanliness" SQP-30 Rev 2 " System Cleanliness" SQP-32 Rev 4 " Equipment Installation"

-

CE " Reactor Vessel Assembly Manual" 12/77

!

!

,

. .

.

8 Observation of Work and Work Activities The inspectors reviewed the below listed documents to determine whether placement had been accomplished as specified in the areas of lifting and accessory equipment, route used and rate of vessel travel during placemen FP&L COP-5-14/Bigge E-CF-1, Rev 1

" Load Test of Bigge Coatainment Loading Facility"

-

FPL COP-5-15/Bigge E-RV-2, Rev 2

"Loadout, Transport and Installation Inside Containment of the Reactor Vessel"

.

-

FPL COP-5-17/Bigg E-CF-2 Rev 1

" Load Testing of Bigge NSSS Component Upending Facility"

-

CE Reactor Vessel Assembly Manual dated 12/77

.

At the time of this inspection, the inspection records for SQP 32 inspections relative to the installation of the reactor vessel were not retrievable. This is a part of inspector followup item 389/82-13-03 discussed further in paragraph 10 ! Review of Quality Records (1) The inspectors reviewed the below listed document as well as those listed in paragraph 9b to determine whether the established scope l of quality assurance activities relative to handling, installation

and inspection of the reactor vessel was accomplished.

l N TITLE FP&L SQP-68 Rev 4 "RV Measurements" (2) The inspectors reviewed surveillances and audits to determine whether the required number (or frequency) of audits and inspec-tions have been made relative to reactor vessel storage, handling, installation and post-installation protection.

,

Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.

!

1 Safety Related Components The inspectors reviewed procedures, made physical inspections of installed

, safety related components and reviewed quality records to ascertain whether

! procedures, field activities and records pertaining to the installation of l safety related components were consistent with NRC requirements, applicable codes standards and commitments.

l l

1 _ - . --- _ -. -

.

a. Review of Quality Assurance Implementing Procedures The inspectors reviewed the below listed documents to determine whether post-installation cleaning, preservation and inspection requirements have been established prior to nee N TITLE QP Rev 3 " Cleanliness Control Methods" SQP-3 Rev 7 " Material Control" SQP-23 Rev 1 " Preventive Maintenance" SQP-29 Rev 3 "NSSS Access and Cleanliness" SQP-30 Rev 2 " System Cleanliness" SQP-32 Rev 4 " Equipment Installation" SQP-47 Rev 6 " Pipe Erection" b. Observation of Work and Work Activities The inspectors examined the below listed installed components and reviewed the below listed documents as well as those listed in para-graph 10a to ascertain whether; storage, handling, and protection; installation; protection; nonconforming components or activities; utilization of QA and inspcction QC personnel, meet applicable requirement COMPONENTS Steam Generator 2B Reactor Coolant Pump 282 Pressurizer 2 Reactor Coolant Pipe Spool 771-1603 Safety Injection Valve V-3614 Safety Injection Valve V-3644 DOCUMENTS FP&L COP-5-16/Bigge E-SG-2, Rev 2

"Loadout, Transport and Installation Inside Containment of Steam Generators Nos. 2A and 2B" FP&L COP-5-17/Bigge E-CF-2, Rev 1

" Load Testing of Bigge NSSS Component Upending Facility

FP&L COP-5-14/Bigge E-CF-1, Rev 1

" Load Testing of Bigge Containment Loading Facility" FP&L COP-5-18/Bigge E-PZ-2, Rev 1

"Loadout, Transport and Installation Insid.e Containment of Pressurizer"

. - _

. .

.

At the time of this inspection, the inspection records for SQP 32 inspections relative to the installation of the 28 steam generator, 2B2 reactor coolant pump and pressurizer as well as the reactor vessel discussed in paragraph 9b were not retrievabl This will be iden-tified as inspector followup item 389/82-13-03: Non-retrievable Installation Record Review of Quality Records (1) The inspectors reviewed pertinent quality related work and inspection (QC) records relative to the components indicated in paragraph 10b to ascertain whether the records are in conformance with established procedures and whether they reflect work accom-plishment consistent with applicable requirements in the areas of storage inspection, and installation inspectio (2) The inspectors reviewed records of QA audits and surveillances associated with safety related components to ascertain whether applicable requirements were met in the following areas:

-

Records confirm that the audits performed were of the scope and frequency specified

-

Deficiencies identified during the audits were corrected (or being corrected in a timely manner), documented, and whether corrective action was such that repetition of the deficiency, or similar deficiencies, was precluded

-

Auditors were qualified for the work they performed Within the areas examined no violations or deviations were identifie . Concern Regarding Pullman Welding The NRC was contacted by an individual who expressed the following concerns in substance: Concern Several welders employed by the Pullman Corporation are not qualified

'

because their certification has expire Inspection The inspectors reviewed Pullman's welder qualification records and welder qualification maintenance records. The maintenance records examined covered the previous twelve months. Within the period all welders qualifications were properly maintaine The inspectors were unable to substantiate the concer _

. _ . . _ _ _ _ - _ - . _ .. --

.

.

'

11 Concern Fillet welds are being undersized in the plenum rooms (Nos. 8A, 8B,10A and 10B) at the 43' elevation. These welds are being undercut and ground down to unacceptable depth Inspection The inspectors made a physical inspection of plenum Nos. 8A, 88,10A and 108. No undercut or grinding, adjacent to welds was identified that exceeded that allowed by the applicable acceptance criteria. The above plenums are non safety related/non seismic. The inspectors were unable to substantiate the concer Within the area examined no violations or deviations were identifie . Preservice Inspection (PSI) - Review of Procedures The inspectors reviewed the PSI procedures described below to determine whether the procedures were consistent with regulatory requirement The PSI is being performed in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI, 1977 Edition with addenda through S78 as modified by 10 CFR 50.55a.(g). Magnetic particle testing (MT) procedure ' NDE 2.1, revision 0A, FCN00012 " Magnetic Particle Examination" was reviewed for technical content relative to:

(1) Examination method (2) Contrast of dry powder particle color with background and surface temperature (3) Suspension medium and surface temperature for wet particles (4) Viewing conditions (5) Examination overlap and directions (6) Pole or prod spacing

, (7) Current or lifting power

! (8) Acceptance criteria The inspectors noted that the procedure referenced a procedure that had not yet been written or " equivalent FP&L approved procedure" for calibration of the magnetic yoke used for inspection of welds. The intention and actual practice was to use a St. Lucie site procedure

until the referenced procedure was issued. The NDE supervisor agreed

to revise procedure NDE 2.1 to identify the requirements for calibra-

'

tion of magnetic yoke This matter is identified as inspector followup item 389/82-13-04, Revision of MT procedure to identify yoke calibration requirements.

.

- - . ,

.-%m , - . , _ _ _ ,. _ , _ .- , -_, y -

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

. .

.

.

12 Ultrasonic (UT) inspection procedures NDE 5.4, revision 1A, FCN00051,

" Ultrasonic Examination Procedure for Austenitic Piping Welds" and NDE 5.2, revision 0A, FCN00017, " Ultrasonic Examination Procedure for Ferritic Piping Welds" were reviewed for technical content relative to:

(1) Type of apparatus (2) Extent of coverage including beam angles and scanning technique (3) Calibration requirements (4) Search units (5) DAC curves (6) Reference level for monitoring discontinuities (7) Method of demonstrating penetration (8) Levels of evalutaing and recording indications (9) Acceptance standards Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identi-fie . Preservice Inspection - Audit of Work and Work Activities by Reverification Inspection (Unit 2)

The inspectors selected the following Class 1 and 2 pipe weld joints for inspection verification. This verification was accomplished with Region II Ultrasonic (UT) equipment and personnel. See paragraph 12 for the applic-able cod ZONE N WELD JOINT N PIPE SIZE SCAN PERFORMED 72 BF-19-FW-1 20" Dia. X 1.031" 45* from one side and radial scans 72 BF-19-FW-2 20" Dia. X 1.031" 45 from both sides and radial scans 72 BF-19-SW-P4 20" Dia. X 1.031" 45 from one side and radial scans 6 114-2 42" Dia. X 4.7" 45* & 60 both sides for 42" and radial scans 7 123-2 42" Dia. X 4.7" 45 from both sides and radial scans 12 112-1 30" Dia. X 3.75" 45" from both sides and radial scans The above inspections were compared with code requirements and the applic-able UT reports in the following areas:

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

.

.

,

-

Adequate examination surface

,

-

Type of apparatus used, as well as linearity and signal attenuation accuracy

-

Examination equipment data

-

Calibration data sheets

-

Calibration method including frequency and use of required calibration block

-

Size and frequencies of search units Definition of reference level for monitoring discontinuities

'

-

-

Demonstration of penetration

-

Interference or deviations from test noted on report  ;.

Method of recording significant indications

'

-

,

'

-

Extent of examination recorded

-

Acceptance limits are determined i

During performance of the above examinations, the following problems were found

! During review of licensee inspection examination results for weld 123-2, Zone 7, the inspectors noted that calibration block UT-6, 3h" in thickness, was used for the 45 angle beam calibration. The recorded thickness for the weld was 4.7". Table T-434.1 and paragraph T-434.3 i of ASME Section V require that the calibration block be within one inch i of the thickness of weld. This failure to follow ASME Section V requirements, invoked by ASME Section XI, is in violation of 10 CFR 50.55a(g) as implemented by paragraph 5.2.4 of the FSAR. This viola-i tion i s identified as item number 389/82-13-05, Use of Incorrect Calibration Block for PSI UT of Weld 123-2.

' The inspectors also noted that the UT examiner had used a 45* Aerotech

'

.5" X 1.0" transducer to examine welds BF-19-SW-P4, BF-19-FW-1 and BF-19-FW-2 in Zone 72. These welds are located in the 20" diameter

! carbon steel feedwater syste Florida Power and Light procedure,

!

'

" Ultrasonic Examination Procedure for Ferritic Piping Welds," NDE- revision A, required that search units for angle beam inspection of pipe with nominal pipe diameters of 12" to 20" be inspected with a 0.5" diameter or 0.5" X 0.5" transducer. However, NDE-5.2 indicated by omission of the word " inclusive" that other transducer sizes could be used. During reinspection the inspectors found that the 0.5" diameter i and 0.5" X 0.5" transducers required by NDE-5.2 were in fact the l correct size transducers for use on pipe with nominal pipe diameter of i 12" to 20" . The larger transducer had approximately 50% of its surface area that was not in contact with the pipe causing the transducer t rock and the extent of scan overlap being questionable. The inspectors re-examination of the above feedwater system welds with a 0.5" X 0.5"

'

transducer however, verified that all indications recorded by the NDE

) examiner were correctly recorded and evaluate The licensee's

>

Level III examiner agreed to revise NDE-5.2 to clearly specify that the

.

I

!

<

, , . . . , - - . - - - , ,

7-., -..cr . . , , - - - _ , - - - - - - - .- -

-

- - , - - , - - - , - - - - - - -- - - - , - -<

______ _-____ _ _ - _ _ _ ___ _ __ __ ___ _ _____ _ ______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _

.

.

smaller transducer presently required by this procedure be used inclu-sively in the 12"-20" diameter pipe range. This item was identified as inspector followup item 50-389/82-13-06, Revision of Procedure NDE- to clarify transducer siz c. In addition to the above, during the inspection of the cold leg weld (Jt. No.112-1), a discontinuity was noted at an approximate depth of 7/8T from the 0.0. A second discontinuity was noted between the first indication and the steel / clad interfac Both discontinuities displayed an amplitude of approximately 100% DAC when compared with the DAC from the calibration block side drilled hole The licensee's PSI personnel were notified of the discontinuities and immediately reinspected the weld area of concern. Both the examiners and the inspectors evaluations agreed that the discontinuities were acceptable. However the inspectors felt that the indications should

,

have been recorded during the initial examination based on the 7/8T

position of one discontinuity and the 100% DAC amplitude for both discontinuities. The licensee examiners rightfully contended the ASME code requires that discontinuities at or near the surface should be compared with the 2% notch calibration and not the side drill hole The indications would not be recordable when compared with the signal

'

from the 2% notch. The inspectors agreed that the licensee had followed article 4 of Section V of the ASME cod However :he reference level from the notch was located at 170% full screen heigh The 100% DAC point observed when the side drill holes were used, was 30% of full screen height. Therefore, there was a 14 db difference between the notch and the side drilled hole reference points. The inspectors contended that in order to get a difference between the notch and the side drill holes of 14 dbs the notch would have to be a 10% notch instead of the 2% notch required by Article 4 of Section The inspectors felt that the UT examiners should have realized that the signal amplitude from the reference level established by the notch was not realistic and would have used the 3/4T reference level on the DAC for evaluation of the discontinuitie Further evaluation of the calibration block and the reactor coolant piping revealed that the roll-bond clad process had been used on this pipe. This process produces a clad that has acoustic properties almost identical to the base metal of the reactor coolant piping. Therefore when the 2% notch in the base metal is added to the depth of the notch through the roll-bond clad, a notch equivalent to a 10% base material

'

notch results. This does not appear to be what the ASME Code intended for Article 4 examination since the 0.D. notch is only 2%. However, it does meet code requirements for a 2% notch in Article 4 of Section V and it also meets the requirements for an approximate 10% notch required by Appendix III of Section X The licensee elected to examine this pipe to the more strigent requirements of Section V Article 4 in lieu of Appendix III to Section X . _ . . _ - _ . - _ . .

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

. .

!

.

J

'

i j Since the above calibration method for roll-bond clad pipe meets both

ASME Section V, Article 4 and Section XI, Appendix III, it appears that I the ASME code has not recognized the fact that the roll-bond clad is

)' acoustically the same as the piping base material. This problem should be resolved with the ASME Section XI code committee and is identified

as inspector followup item 389/82-13-07, Calibration notch requirements

.

for roll-bond clad calibration blocks.

Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identifie . 10 CFR Part 21 Report Subsequent to completion of the inspection, RII received a 10 CFR Part 21

! report from an FP&L contractor concerning a potential deficiency in the PSI examinations of RPV nozzle to pipe welds from the I.D. surface for San Onofre, Units 2 and 3 and Palo Verde, Units 1, 2, and 3. The problem'was i'

i discovered during PSI of identical welds at St. Lucie Unit 2 and pertains

.

to the use of a roll-bond clad UT calibration block for inspecting welded clad component The attenuation difference betweeq a welded clad block

,

and a roll-bond clad block is 12-16 db difference resulting in an under

} sensitive inspection when inspecting a welded clad component using a roll-

bond clad calibration block and inspecting from the I.D. This problem is identified as inspector followup item 389/82-13-08, Under Sensitive Inspec-tions Using Roll-Bond Clad Calibration Blocks.

!

I f

f

,

d

!

!

i

_ _

. _ _ -_ _ . . _ . .