IR 05000395/1987009
| ML20209J566 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 04/20/1987 |
| From: | Blake J, Newsome R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20209J543 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-395-87-09, 50-395-87-9, NUDOCS 8705040311 | |
| Download: ML20209J566 (16) | |
Text
_
,
---
.
Ii
>R WTog UNITED STATES
'
_-/
- #o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'[ " -
$
REGION 11 g
j 101 MARIETTA STREET.N.W.
ATLANTA GEORGIA 30323
%...../
.
Report No.:
50-395/87-09
'
Licensee:
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company Columbia,..SC 29218'
,
,
,
'
.
,
,
Docket.No.:
50-395 License No.:
t 3-
~
Facility Name:
V. C. Summer
-
m
.,
- Inspectio'n ~ Co
Ma h 30 - April 3, 1987,
'
Inspect r: -
Ao 7 R.
Date Signed
.
Appro ed by
_
e/
o!S7
~
J J.
Take, Section Chief Date Signed
,
ngi eering Branch
"
Div sion of Reactor Safety
-
SumARY Scope:
This routine, announced inspection was conducted in the areas of
' inservice inspection procedures review, work observation, and review of completed examination data.
Also, work observations of the Steam Generator
-
(SG) tube plug removal operations, tube "U" bend stress relief and shot peening operations were accomplished.
In addition, a review of. documentation and
' procedures associated with the SG work activities was conducted.
Previously opened Inspector. Followup Items were addressed during this inspection.
Results:
No violations or deviations were identified.
,
!
l
[
!
!
l 8705040311 870429
'
PDR ADOCK 05000395 G
PDR i-
.
.
.-~--,____ __.
. _ _ _ _ _.. _ _ -,.. _
.. -.... _. _.. -. -,. -... _ -.... _... - _, _.
- --..., _
,. ~,., _ _ _ _ _..
.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- D. A. Nauman, Vice President, Nuclear Operations
- 0. S. Bradham, Plant Manager
- J. G. Connelly, Director, Nuclear Services
- D. R. Moore, Director, Quality and Procurement Services
- J. L. Skolds, Deputy Director, Operations and Maintenance
- M. N. Browne, Group Manager, Technical and Support Services
- S. R. Hunt, Manager, Quality Control (QC)
- F. J. Leach, Manager, Quality Assurance (QA)
- W. T. Frady, Associate Manager, QA
- M. D. Quinton, Manager, Maintenance Services Other licensee employees contacted included construction craftsmen, engineers, technicians, operators, mechanics, security office members, and office personnel.
NRC Resident Inspectors
- R. Prevatte, Senior Resident Inspector
- P. Hopkins, Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on April 3,1987, with those persons indicated in the above paragraph.
The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings.
No dissenting comments were received from the licensee.
The licensee did identify as proprietary some of the material provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspection; however, this material is not discussed in this report.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspection.
4.
Unresolved Items
'
Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
.
_ _. --__
..
.
.
.
-.
<
5.
Independent Inspection Effort
a.
Steam Generator Tube U-Bends Stress Relief and Tubesheet Roll Transition Area Shot Peening Processing (49053)
Stress relieving is widely recognized in the industry as bein solution to the intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC)g a which occurs in rows 1 and 2 tube u-bends as well as tube stress corrosion cracking occurring in the tubesheet roll transition area of certain steam generators.
Cracking at the.u-bend areas _is generally longitudinal and generally located at the apex or tangent of the bend
. between the tube flank and extrados, while cracking at the tubesheet
area generally occurs at the roll transition region.
Both areas of concern appear to possess residual tensile stresses as a result of fabrication and fit-up operations.
In the u-bend areas the stress is partially a result of the tube bending process while stress at the tubesheet area is a result of the tube being rolled, using a variety of techniques, in a manner sufficient for making an acceptable fit-up
'
prior to the tube end being welded to the tubesheet.. Since it appears that thermal and mechanical processing are strong factors in causing Inconel 600 to become susceptible to stress cracking and that stress cracking may occur if the three factors necessary for any stress cracking are present; 1) aggressive environment, 2) susceptible material, and 3) tensile stress, it follows that if any of the three factors which cause stress cracking can be reduced
,
i or eliminated,-it will in turn reduce the materials susceptibility to
stress cracking.
Since two of the stress cracking causal factors, l-aggressive environment and susceptible material, are-difficult to i
change, an attempt to reduce the third factor, tensile stress, by two different tensile stress relief processes are being utilized at Suniner, one in the tube u-bends and the other in the SG tubesheet
'
tube rolled areas.
Babcock and Wilcox Company (B&W) is responsible for applying the stress relief processes to the steam generator.
tubes.
!
(1) Tube U-Bend Stress Relief of Hot Leg Tubes, Rows 1 and 2
!
l (a) Simply stated, the process calls for heating the u-bend l
area to a predetermined temperature and maintaining that I
temperature for a specified length of time to relieve the l
high residual tensile stress on the primary side of the tube u-bends that was introduced by the tube bending
,
i process.
The residual stresses can be reduced by a brief l
thermal heat treatment, i.e. stress relief. For installed steam generators a stress relief of individual u-bends is
accomplished with the aid of a flexible heater, remotely
!
inserted and positioned, within each individual tube that
,
requires stress relief.
Heater and tube temperature
-
information is monitored thrrugh an array of thermocouples l
with the information being presented on a monitoring CRT I -
and also recorded through a printer attachment.
.
.
..
..
...
.
.
..
~ _ _, _.,
-
.
<
'
v
,
(b) The inspector observed the heat treatNent stress relief
- process in operation for those tubes listed below.
These observations were made in order to evaluate procedure adequacy relative to the process.
/
-
SG-A
' SG-C N
'
'
'
,
Row Col Row Col
101
111
100
110
114
-,f(
113,
,
(c) The inspector also reviewed the ukbend stress relief records for SG-C and the u-bend stress relief data sheets for SG-A and SG-C.
!,t
<
'
N (d) The inspector reviewed the below liste'd B&W documdnts and procedures, relative to the u-bend stress relief; process, in order to evaluate the adequacy of process controls and documentadion requirements, and to determine the extent of
'e the licensee's program.
-
,
l
'
RSG U-Bend Stress Relief Heat Treat Systefr. Checkout
,
Requirements - 1166768 - R5
L U-Bend Stress
Relief 0 Variables' For
1169405-R0'pyrating
'
V.C. Summer
-
U-Bends Stress Relief Qualification Report xFor 3/4" i
,
l'
U-Bends - 1169253 - R0 Process Specification For Stress Relieving b/4" RSG
Tube U-Bends - 51-1165943-00 s
.(
,
'
Recirculating Steam Generator U-Bend Stress Relief 1169346 - R1 (e) Each of the three steam generators have 228 tubes to be stress relieved.
The tubes completed at the
- co,nclusion of this inspection is as follows:
.
Row 1 Row'2 l
('
'
,
i SG-A
20
/
'
SG-B
0
>>
/
SG-C 18
.
.
'
/
\\
'[
>
t
,
.\\
l
-
_. _ _. _ _ _
s
e
.
,
t
.
(2) Shot Peening of Hot Leg Side Tube Rolled Areas in the Tubesheet Region (a) This process utilizes a system whereby shot peening material bombards the Inside Diameter (ID) of the tube surface to be peened with balls of loose shot in a random distribution pattern with the intention of putting a thin
,
compressive layer on 100% of the tube ID by the process to inhibit stress corrosion cracking.
For installed steam generators, shot peening of the tubesheet region is accomplished with the aid of a peening nozzle which is remotely inserted and positioned within each individual tube that requires shot peening (in this case, the hot leg side only). The nozzle is manipulated within the tube at a predetermined rate of travel and over an established portion of the tubes axial length.
Shot is feed to the nozzle and expelled at a specified velocity and feed rate.
All essential variables are monitored remotely to assure
proper peening and operation of equipment.
Essential
,
variables are presented on a CRT during the peening of each tube. and this information is recorded with a printer attachment.
(b) The inspector observed the shot peening stress relief process being applied to the tubes listed below.
During these observations, the inspector verified that all essential operating parameters were within the established procedural requirements.
SG-B Row Col
10
10
10 g'
10
14
14
14
,
!
(c) The inspector reviewed the below listed B&W documents and procedures, relative to the shot peening process, in order
'
-
to evbluate the adequacy of process controls and documentation requirements, and to determine the extent of the licensee's program.
x Shot Peening Process Development Report - 1162767 -R2 Effects of Shot Peening on Base-Line Eddy Current Data 1162716 - R0 j<6#
f I,
.' '
'
,
-
-
.. _.
._
__.
- _,.
_
m i
J r
s t
'l v
.; >.
-
.
_
,,i
.
+
,*"#
Process Specifications..for Shot Peen!ng.750" Steam '
Generator Tubes - 51-1159413-01 Peening process and Personnel Qualification
Requiremests 51-1158679-04 g
.,
,
(d) The extent)and completed status of tubes requiring shot b'
'
I peening,is'tabuiited below. Tubes completed was the status
.
attheconc7u]onofthisinspection.
t SG-A SG-B SG-C
.,
2178 2212 2171
,: Tubes (To Be Shot Peened iei
138
. G>t 3 / C,
Tubes Completed
'
}
- ,
'
'.
,si (e) Steam Generator Tube Plug P,edoval m;
,
.
Steam Generator (SG) tuSe plug removal operations b;'m
-
'
1)
e
.'
being accomplished byjBiW.
The purpose of the plug s
~
removal operation,is to qe-evaluate the tube condition j
,
.
in an effort to hwe rure tubes available in'each SG.
'i If more tubes can.he fmade available, the SGs will
-
operate in a more efficient manner.
.s i
- s 2)
The tube plugs are of two types, Westinghouse ribbed
ar.d B&W rolled. The removal of the Westinghouse plugs requires that a plug removal bolt befinserted in the plug prior to removal so that the removal tool will have a surface to grasp. The B&W plugs have a manufac-tured lip that the tool can grasp. Jhe entire removal r
'
s I
operation of the removal tool is4ccomplished by
,
remote control from outside of containment 'while
~
constantly monitoring tt'e entire operation via several
i closed circuit video cameras. Approximately 120 plugs are scheduled for removal; however, due to the extended period of time being required to remove the plugs, the effort was curtailed unti,1 after u-bend stress relief
,
'
and shot peening of the SG tubes has been completed.
i
.'
At the conclusion of this inspection 19 B&W plugs End five Westinghouse plugs had been removed from SG-B and
s none from either of the remaining SGs.
P
- o
,
,
,
3)
The inspector /60 served the plug removal operations for
'
e those tubes listed below.
These observations were i
made in order to evaluate pcceedure adequacy relative to the removal operations.
.
- pieamGeneratorBHotLeg
! f f,
';
e
'
,
'
i o
,,o
,
,
,
,
e i
,\\
,
..
4 o j
c
,.
,
,
l 3f*
.
,
.
-
.
f
'
Row Col
-
68
73 4)
The inspector, reviewed the below listed B&W documents and procedures, relative to the plug removal f
operations, in order to evaluate the adequacy of the
if process controls and documentation requirements, and to determine the extent of the licensee's program.
Westinghouse.750 Ribbed and.750 B&W Roll Plug Removal Field Procedure - 1169333 - R3
.
Tig Torch Plug Relaxation / Plug Removal Operating Instructions - 1169214 - R3 Quality Control Engineers Scope Of Responsibilities For Westinghouse.750 Ribbed and
.750 B&W Roll Plug Removal Field Procedure -
1169379 - R0
.750 Plug Removal Tool Operating Instructions 1166972 - R1 Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
3 6.
Inservice Inspection (ISI)
The ISI activities being conducted during this outa accomplished by South Carolina Gas and Electric (SCE&G)ge were being
'
and their agents.
SCE&G and Universal Testing Laborst(ries, Inc. (UTL) are conducting manual Ultrasonic (UT) examinations, Liquid Penetrant (PT), Magnetic Particle (MT), and Visual (VT) examinations. Eddy C';rrent (ET) examinations of the steam generator tubing was performed oy Babcock and Wilcox (B&W).
Mechanized UT examination of the reactor vessel will be performed by Combustion Engineering (CE).
a.
Procedure Review (73052)
The inspector reviewed the ISI procedures indicated below to determine _ whether the procedures were consistent with regulatory requirements and licensee commitments.
Based on the licensee's Technical Specification, the applicable code for ISI is the ASME
Code,Section XI 1977 Edition, Winter 1978 Addenda.
(1) The following procedures were reviewed in the areas of procedure approval, requirements for qualification of NDE personnel, and
,; (,
compilation of required records.
'
,'
C3
.-
--
._
-
-
,
Identification Title UTL-PT-01, Rev. 1
" Liquid Penetrant Examination (color contrast solvent removal)"
UTL-PT-02, Rev. O
" Liquid Penetrant Examination (Final Issue)
(water washable fluorescent and colorcontrast)
UTL-MT-01, Rev. 2
" Magnetic Particle Examination (MT), Prod and Yoke Dry Method" UTL-UT-02, Rev. 2
" Ultrasonic Examination of Bolt Studs ULT-UT-08, Rev. 1
" Manual Ultrasonic Examination of Vessel Welds" ULT-UT-01, Rev. 2
" Ultrasonic Examination of Piping Welds" B&W-ISI-424, Rev. 9
"Multifrequency Eddy Current Examination of.750 OD x.044 Wall RSG Tubing for ASME Exam and Tube Wear at Support Plates" SCE&G-T-NQCP-10, Rev. 5 " Manual Ultrasonic Examination for Piping Systems (ASME Section XI)"
CE-SUM-410-002, Rev. O
" Procedure For ID Examination of The Reactor Pressure Vessel" CE-SUM-410-001, Rev. 0
" Automated Ultrasonic Examination Procedure for Reactor Vessel Welds" CE-SUM-410-003, Rev. O
" Procedure for the Visual Examinations of a Reactor Pressure Vessel Upper Guide Structure" (2) The inspector reviewed the below listed UT procedures to ascertain whether they had been reviewed and approved in accordance with the licensee's established QA procedures.
The below listed procedures were reviewed for technical adequacy and conformance with ASME,Section V Article 5 and other license commitments / requirements in the below listed areas:
type of apparatus used; extent of coverage of weldment; calibration requirements; search units; beam angles; DAC curves; reference level for monitoring discontinuities; method for demonstrating penetration; limits for evaluating and recording indications; recording significant indications and; acceptance limits.
.
.
.-_ -
__
-
.-
_
--
_
-.-
_
..
-
.
t UTL-UT-02, Rev. 2 UTL-UT-08, Rev.1 UTL-UT-01, Rev. 2 SCE&G-T-NQCP-10, Rev. 5 CE-SUM-410-002, Rev.0 CE-SUM-410-001, Rev. 0
,
(3) The inspector reviewed Eddy Current procedure, B&W-ISI-424, Rev. 9 for technical content relative to: multichannel examination unit, multichannel examination indication equipment is specified, examination sensitivity, material permeability,
,
method of examination,- method of -calibration and calibration sequence, and acceptance criteria.
(4) The inspector reviewed PT procedures UTL-PT-01, Rev.1 and UTL-PT-02, Rev. O, to ascertain whether they had been reviewed and approved in accordance with the licensee's established QA procedures.
The above procedures were reviewed for technical adequacy and conformance with ASME,.Section V, Article 6, and
other licensee commitments / requirements in the below listed areas: specified method; penetrant material identification;
penetrant materials analyzed for sulfur; penetrant materials analyzed for total halogens; acceptable pre-examination surface; drying time; method of penetrant application; surface temperature; solvent removal; surface drying prior to developing; type of developer; examination technique; evaluation technique; and procedure requalification.
(5) The inspector reviewed MT procedure UTL-MT-01, Rev. 2, to ascertain whether it had been reviewed and approved in accordance with the licensee's established QA procedures.
The above procedure was reviewed for technical adequacy and for conformance with ASME Section V, Article 7, and other licensee commitments / requirements in the below listed areas: examination method; contrast of dry powder particle color with background; surface temperature; suspension medium and surface temperature for wet particles; viewing conditions; examination overlap and directions; pole or prod spacing; current or lifting power (yoke) and; acceptance criteria.
(6) The inspector reviewed visual examination procedure
!
CE-SUM-410-001, Rev.
O, to determine whether it contained sufficient instructions to assure that the following parameters were specified and controlled within the limits permitted by the applicable code, standard, or any additional specification
'
requirement; method direct visual, remote visual or
-
translucent visual; application hydrostatic testing,
-
fabrication procedure, visual examination of welds, leak testing, etc.; how visual examination is to be performed, type of surface condition available; method or implement used for
.
- _
. _ _, _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _.
_.,. _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _. _... _.. _, _.. _ _... _,,, _... _. _.. - _... _.. - -...
.. -
_
-
,
surface preparation, if any; whether direct or remote viewing is used, special illumination, instruments, or equipment to be used, if any; sequence of performing examination, when applicable; data to be tabulated, if any; acceptance criteria is specified and consistent with the applicable code section or controlling specification; and report form completion.
b.
Observation of Work and Work Activities (73753)
The inspector observed a limited amount of work activities since most of the examinations had been completed prior to this inspection.
The inspector reviewed certification records of equipment and NDE personnel which had been and will be utilized during the required ISI examinations during this outage.
The reviews conducted by the inspector are documented below.
(1) Examiner Qualification The inspector reviewed the qualification documentation for the below listed B&W, UTL, and SCE&G examiners in the following areas:
employer's name; person certified; activity qualified to perform; effective period of certification; signature of employer's designated representatives; basis used for certification; and annual visual acuity, color vision examination and periodic recertification.
METHOD - LEVEL VT Company Examiner UT pT MT EC
2
4 III B&W JSS
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
II MSL
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
,
II
SRB
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
II WDB
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
II LDK
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
II HMM
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
,
l II UTL OH II
'
-
-
-
-
-
-
l RRD III III III III III
-
-
-
!
FR
-
-
II
-
-
-
-
-
II II II II JCR II II II
-
DMM II II II
-
-
-
-
-
MD III III III
-
-
-
-
-
II GWK II
-
-
-
-
-
-
II II II II II CHC
-
-
-
l
!
SCE&G BEM II II II II II II
-
-
l REK II
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
II II JCH
-
-
-
-
-
~
ARC III III III
-
-
-
-
.
--
.-
-
. - -..
- -
~
.
.
..-_=
-
.
(2) The inspector reviewed the below listed liquid penetrant materials certification records to ascertain if the sulfur and halogen content of the material was. within acceptable content limits.
Materials Batch Number Liquid Penetrant 321J47 Cleaner / Remover 46F4 Developer 45F6 (3) The inspector reviewed documentation indicating that a lift test had been performed on the MT Alternating Current (AC) Yoke No.
10402 using a ton pound steel plate, Serial No. AC-11, with the yoke being operated in the AC mode.
Certification records for the lift test plate were reviewed to confirm the plate weight.
The lift tests were performed satisfactorily.
(4) The following listed ultrasonic equipment and materials certification records were reviewed:
Ultrasonic Instruments Manufacturer /Model Serial No.
Sonic - MK1 02413E K/B - USK-7 4690 & 4933 Ultrasonic transducers - serial nos. 40543 & 80359 Ultrasonic Calibration Blocks - I.D. Nos. CGE-13 & CGE-16 Ultrasonic Couplant - Exosen 30, Batch Nos. 0927843002 &
0927843001 (5)
Eddy Current (EC) Examination of Steam Generator (SG) Tubes ISI activities during this outage included Eddy Current Examination of tubes in "A," "B," and "C" SGs. Data acquisition and analysis was being conducted by B&W.
(a) Examination was performed with a multi-frequency technique and utilized the computerized MIZ-18 EC Examination System to analyze tube integrity.
Discussions with the licensee disclosed that as of April 3, 1987, tubes showing indications of 40% thru wall or greater was: SG-A, 76 tubes; SG-B, 80 tubes; and SG-C, 60 tubes.
Final disposition of these tubes had not been completed at the end of this inspection.
(b) Certification records for EC calibration standards Z-3941,
,
Z-3956 and Z-2914 were reviewed for material type, correct fabrication, and artificial flaw location / size.
_,,, _ -
. _
_---
._
-
.
(c) The inspector observed the evaluation of the EC examination data for the SG-A tubes listed below.
The observations were accomplished to verify: use of approved procedure-and equipment; use of knowledgeable examination personnel with proper qualifications; and proper recording of examination data.
Row Col Row Col
97
55
54
55
88
55
88
55
89
56
89
56
90
56
54
56
56
73
54
41 c.
Inservice Inspection, Data Review and Evaluation (73755)
(1) Records of completed nondestructive examination 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; personnel, instruments, calibration blocks and NDE materials (penetrants, couplants) were designated and qualifications / certifications were on file.
Records selected for this review are listed below:
Drawing Weld NDE Drawing Weld NDE No.
I.D.
Method No.
I.D.
Method CGE 2-25238
UT CGE-1-4300A 1DM PT 126LS UT
UT CGE-2-1140A
UT CGE-2-2551
PT 124LS UT S-2 PT CGE-2-2523C 123LS UT CGE-2-2557A
MT CGE-2-2551
UT CGE-2-2556A
-
.
Drawing No.
I.D.
Method No.
I.D.
Method.
CGE-2-1120
UT CGE-2-2556A 20*
UT 18*
UT CGE-2-2557A 27*
UT 24*
UT 31*
- Current examination results were compared with preservice examination results. No major discrepancies were noted.
(2) The inspector selected for review, at random, EC examination data results from SG tubing which had been analyzed as having experienced wall degradation.
This review was conducted in order to assess the severity of the tubing degradation and to determine where the majority of the degradation was occurring along the tube length.
The results of the current examinations-were compared with previous examination results.
The tubes selected for review are listed below:
SG-A SG-B SG-C Row Col Row Col Row Col
41
16
14
6
56
22
7
65
25
7
57
35
7
64
35
17
19
37
17
20
65
21
25
85
.
!
I L
.
.
,-
..
-
SG-A SG-B SG-C Row Col Row Col Row Col
38
33
45
56
70
56
36
71
61
71
73
66
82.
69 Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Inspector Followup Items (92701B)
a.
(Closed) Item 50-395/87-07-01, "UTL Procedure Discrepancies."
This item deals with several procedures and several individual discrepancies.
Most of the procedures did not contain specific acceptance criteria.
Since UTL is in this instance being used as an examination and reporting agency and not actually evaluating the data, which is being accomplished by SCE&G personnel, the examination procedures did not contain acceptance criteria.
SCE&G has issued a memo, CGSV-0020-N00, to UTL instructing them to use ASME section XI 1977 Edition with aUdenda through Summer 1978.for acceptance criteria should UTL be required to evaluate the examination results. Further, the procedures had not yet been reviewed and approved for use by ANII, this has now been done.
Follmving is a listing of - the procedures and the associated discrepancies and any additional comments necessary to resolve the discrepancy noted.
UTL-VT-01, R0 did not provided specific acceptance criteria for VT-1 and VT-4 (see above comments).
'
.
-
.-
_.
.-
._
_.
-;
..
e
,
UTL-MT-01, R1 did not address maximum temperature of 600 F as
required by AMSE V. T-725-1; does not require " adequate
,
contrast" of particles with the background as required by ASME V T-725.1; and did not provide specific acceptance criteria.
(See-above comment; also, R2 of this procedure has been issued and i
resolves the discrepancies noted.)
.
UTL-PT-01, R1 did not provide specific acceptance criteria.
(See above comment.)
UTL-PT-02, R0 did not address the prohibition of fluorescent
liquid penetrant examination after a visible examination as
.
!
required by ASME V, T-630(c); fluorescent examiners shall be in darkened area for at least five minutes prior to performing the examination to enable their eyes to adjust to dark viewing and if examiner wears glasses or lenses, they shall not be photo sensitive.
This is contrary to good industry practice.
The
.
ASME has added this as a requirement to the 1983 Edition of Code
,
i Section V; and procedure did not provide specific acceptance criteria.
(See above comment; also, the first review of this procedure was a preliminary draft, the finalized issue of R0 resolves the discrepancies noted.)
I
UTL-UT-02 specified transducer size larger than allowed by ASME VT525.2(a); and the procedure was is confusing as to inspection
techniques, straight beam or angle beam technique; was not clear which surface is to be examined; and did not provide specific acceptance criteria.
(See above comment; also, R2 of this procedure resolved the discrepancies noted.)
UTL-UT-01, R1 and UTL-UT-08, -R0 did not provide specific accep-
tance criteria.
(See above comment.)
'
!
UTL-QAP-09.2, R1 paragraph 4.5.4.c does not describe how "a composite grade of 80% is determined.
(This discrepancy was
resolved by reviewing UTL-Form, UTL-361, which addresses com-
'
l posite grade computation).
![
Based on the above noted resolutions reviewed by the inspector, this
item is considered closed.
!
i b.
(Closed) Item 50-395/87-07-02, " Code Case N-401 Approval."
The Authorized Nuclear Inservice Inspector has accepted Code Case N-401
'
l for use, this is in keeping with the requirements stated in the response from the ASME Code Committee as noted in the Inquiry submit-
!
ted to the Committee regarding this code case. This item is consider-l ed closed.
I
!
.
l l l
-
15 c.
(Closed) Item 50-395/87-07-3, " Unavailable CE Procedures" The proce-dures in question have been received on site and have been reviewed.
This item is considered closed.
d.
(Closed) Item 50-395/87-07-04, "SCE&G NDE Procedure Discrepancies" Procedure T-NQCP-1 did not specify the year edition of SNT-TC-1A
that was being utilized to certify NDE personnel.
However, this procedure references procedure A-NQCP-8, Qualification and Certification of Nuclear Quality Control Inspection Personnel, which does specify the edition year as 1975.
The discrepancies noted for procedures T-NQCP-2 and T-NQCP-3 are
being addressed in the forth coming procedure QPS-1101 and QPS-1102 that will be issued in the near future and will take the place of procedures T-NQCP-2 and T-NQCP-3 which will no longer be in use. The inspector reviewed the preliminary drafts of these procedures.
Based on the above reviews, this item is considered closed.
.
!