IR 05000397/1986017
| ML17278A896 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 05/20/1986 |
| From: | Clark C, Royack M, Thomas Young NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17278A895 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-397-86-17, NUDOCS 8606100531 | |
| Download: ML17278A896 (10) | |
Text
0 U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report No.
50-397/86-17 Docket No.
50-397 License No.
NPF-21 Licensee:
Facility Name:
Washington Public Power Supply System P. 0. Box 968 Richland, Washington 99352 Washington Nuclear Project No.
(WNP-2)
Inspection at:
WNP-2 Site, Benton County, Washington Inspection conducted:
April 28 - May 9, 1986 Inspectors:
C.
Clark, Reactor Inspector J.
Roya eactor Inspector Approved by:
T. Young, Jr.,
hief, g
eering Section h
Ins ection Durin
'the Period of A ril 28 - Ma
1986 (Re ort No.
50-397/86-17)
5 lg g Date Signed 5 4o gg ate Signed u-m-Z4 Date Signed Areas Ins ected:
Routine, announced inspection by regional based inspectors of inservice inspection (ISI) activities, including:
review of the ISI program and implementing procedures; observation of ISI work activities; review of quality records.
During this inspection, Inspection Procedures 73051, 73052, 73753 and 73755 were covered.
Results:
In the areas inspected, no violations of NRC requirements were identified.
PDR o>>1 ShPg2P 86P6>p ADOCg pgppp~9 PDR
t II i
r,
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted a
~
Washin ton Public Power Su l S stem
~"C.
+D
- R.
"D
>R.
"R
"C.
D.
T.
I Powers, Plant Manager Feldman,, Plant QA Manager Rana, Principal Engineer R
Ramey, Inservice Inspection Engineer Webring, Mechanical System Supervisor Partrick, Administrative Supervisor Eggen, Primary Pire Protection Engineer Welch, QA Supervisor Hoyle, Code Program Supervisor b.
K~em er
<D. Vance, Authorized Nuclear Inservice Inspector
- "Denotes those personnel in attendance at the exit meeting on May 2, 1986.
The inspectors also interviewed other licensee and contractor employees involved with inservice inspection activities.
2.
Xnservice Ins ection a
~
Inservice Xns ection Plan The licensee's inservice inspection (XSI) of Class 1, Class 2 and Class 3 nuclear components in Unit 2 is being performed in accordance with ASME Section XX 1980 Edition, Winter 1980 Addenda, 1981 Addenda for IWF-3400 and 1983 Edition, Winter 1983 Addenda for Category C-P, XWA-2300(a)(l).
Lambert, MacGill, Thomas, Xnc. is the contractor performing ISI activities during this outage.
The ISX plan list the areas to be examined, the method and extent of the examination, and the calibration blocks used.
b.
Review of Procedures The following procedures were examined to assure that they adequately covered all areas specified in the licensee's commitment for XSI requirements:
(1)
QCI 3-3, Revision 1, "Liquid Penetrant Examination - WNP-2."
(2)
QCI 4-3, Revision 1, "Magnetic Particle Examination - WNP-2."
(3)
QCX 6-2, Revision 1, "Examination of Piping Welds for Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking (IGSCC)."
I I ~
(4)
gCI 6-13, Revision 3, "Ultrasonic Examination of Piping Welds (Manual)."
(5)
QCX 6-14, Revision 2, "Ultrasonic Examination of Bolting Larger than 2" Diameter."
(6)
QCI 6-15, Revision 2, "Examination of Piping Attachment Welds-WNP-2."
(7)
QCI 7-1, Revision 3, "Visual Examination (VT-1/VT-3)."
(8)
QCI 7-2, Revision 0, "Visual Examination (VT-2)."
(9)
Procedure 7.4.7.4.2, Revision 0, "Snubber Zunctional Test and Acceptance Criteria."
All the above procedures were approved by authorized licensee personnel and a Level XIX examiner.
c ~
Observation of NDE Activities The inspectors observed ultrasonic examination being performed on the valve (MS-V-22A) to penetration weld (No. 26MS(l)A-16) for main steam line A.
The following attributes were evaluated and found to be consistent with the approved procedure and ASME Section XI requirements:
The type of apparatus used, scanning technique, extent of coverage, calibration of the instrumentation and system prior to examination, beam angles, size and frequency of the search unit, limits of evaluation and recording of indications, and determination of acceptance limits.
Xn conjunction with this examination, the inspectors reviewed the calibration block certifications, transducer
.RF pulse wave forms, and the ultrasonic.
couplant certifications.
The inspectors also observed liquid penetrant examination of the valve (MS-V-22A) to penetration weld (No. 26MS(1)A-16) for main steam line A.
Surface preparation, application of penetrant and developer including recommended dwell times, penetrant removal, and visual inspection for surface indications were observed and found to be in compliance with the applicable procedure.
, (
During this inspection, scheduled XSI work,was delayed in some areas, so the inspectors observed magnetic particle and ultrasonic examinations performed per XSI procedures on non-ISI welds.
The examinations performed on welds
[numbers RCIC-662-9 weld B and RCIC-662-7.10 weld 5], were inspected for the same applicable attributes as ISI welds to check performance o'f NDE personnel and procedures.
d.
NDE Personnel ualifications The qualification and certification records of the NDE personnel performing ISI examinations were reviewed by the inspectors.
The records were compared with the guidelines of the American Society
'I
~
V 1I V
I,I'f
~
IV I
I
I V
I
for Nondestructive Testing Recommended Practice No. SNT-TC-lA,
"Personnel Qualification and Certification in Nondestructive Testing."
e.
Data Review and Evaluation The completed liquid penetrant, magnetic particle and ultrasonic examination records were reviewed to ascertain whether the following applicable documents/information were provided:
Examination results and data sheets, examination equipment and material data, extent of examination calibration data sheets, examination evaluation data and appropriate signatures.
This review revealed minor weaknesses or discrepancies in the following areas'.
There was some data recorded, that was outside the initial accept-as-is acceptance criteria, that'had 'been accepted without a documented record of the acceptance criteria used.
The licensee was able to explain the acceptance criteria used, for all the data records in question.
"A licensee representative stated they would take'
look at this time to see if additional information could be recorded in the future.
I One of the authorized nuclear inspectors signing for final review of the data records/sheets, did not identify his review/signature as an ANI review, while the other two inspectors did.
Snubber'Testin Review A review of the WNP-2 snubber surveillance procedure 7.4.7.4.2 and test results were conducted.
Specific items, relevant to the procedure, were requested for review as follows:
The completed snubber test data sheets, page 13 of surveillance procedure 7.4.7.4.2, were reviewed to determine if the resultant data was'ithin the acceptable boundaries outlined in surveillance procedure 7.4.7.4.2.
A total of 55 snubber test data sheets were reviewed.
Qualification certifications for outside snubber testing vendor, Paul Monroe.
Snubber testing equipment calibration certifications, subcontractors of Paul Monroe.
Snubber validator instruction manual, PS 247.
The inspectors'eview resulted in the following comments:
(1)
Review of the personnel qualification and training records indicate that an eye test was missing for an inspector.
WNP-2 QA personnel provided a document certifying the inspector's eye exa ~
~
Vp p
~ p I p p
p
~
~
~
~
(2)
Provide a list of snubbers to be retested on schedule the snubbers that fell in the 2-5X load area.
A licensee representative stated that a list of snubbers requiring retest, would be provided when the final test report is issued.
(3)
Data sheet, page 7.4.7.4.2-10 of 13 of surveillance test procedure 7.4.7.4.2, should provide a verification signature block/line as required in paragraphs 7.4.7.4.2.6 D
1 and 2.
A licensee representative stated they would review the subject data sheet and revise it as required.
(4)
Provide missing signatures on snubber test data sheets for RHR-20 and RHR-23.
A licensee representative stated these sheets had not received the final review at the time of this inspection, and that the above signatures shall be obtained.
No viol'ations of NRC requirements or deviations were identified.
The inspectors met with licensee management representatives denoted in paragraph 1 on May 2, 1986.
The scope of the inspection and the inspectors'indings as noted in this report were discusse hh J f )
II
~
<<ht) h)J'h'
'
g().
R
, ~r,r~h."
~
p
"J"$ f I
) "'
hJ
)'I'
') I 1'IIA
)"hfh'hh' ').
C 9'-"
h hfdf "
JV )'
)
'h'hlIJ!
ll,
-
"
'h'l',h)
"
-"'
9 t A~
~ )~
hh
'<<Qfhi(
g.,
'.,
hhf
<<J+
hflh
'L g
shW)hh"
)
rh Jr fflhh>.),';f>> !'f.) )0) <<'f p
I hI
.
'i
)
~ lt)
'
J f<-I J')h
"-,h,9 'a.
"'
""
'
) '.
'f)~
5 Gil h, "'L '
N f h
' )P.') 'hhfh'9
"hi C>> I ah>~)C" h,.!>>'S)"
)
"h h
. h) '."'
f.
)
- I(),< 5 ")
h
) "
4 ) 'h
I
) hf)"',lI'I V'..'.E,""fl)i 8:
C
,< ) i.'.)
"hh".f;~03,, 1'-f hh
'<<fhh )
hhh h 0 II
'h(, hah(J
))
")'
h h'h I'I <<,'IhVJ )h,', f) J'
'Ih('1)
h 1