IR 05000400/1992005
| ML18010A622 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 03/31/1992 |
| From: | Blake J, Kleinsorge W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18010A621 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-400-92-05, 50-400-92-5, GL-90-05, GL-90-5, IEB-87-002, IEB-87-2, NUDOCS 9205050179 | |
| Download: ML18010A622 (6) | |
Text
~I,S aEC0
0 Cy
I
~O UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTASTREET, N.W.
ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30323
+***+
Report Nos.:
50-400/92-05 Licensee:
Carolina Po~er and Light Company P. 0.
Box 1551 Raleigh, NC 27602 Docket Nos.:
50-400 Facility Name:
Ha is Inspection Con arch 9-12, 1992 Inspector:
leinsor e
P Re ctor Ins c
Materials Prosesses Section Di-
'
n f Reactor Safety License Nos.:
)fag 3/,/g'P~
Date Signed Approved by: J..
Blake, Chief erials and Processes Section ngineering Branch Division of Reactor Safety
8'ate Signed SUMMARY Scope:
I This routine, announced inspection was conducted in the areas of followup on NRC Bulletin 87-02,
"Fastener Testing To Determine
'Conformance With Applicable Material Specifications",
and Generic Letter 90-05,
"Guidance for Performing Temporary Non-Code Repair of ASME Class 1,
2, and 3 Piping".
Results:
The licensee has performed an appropriate analysis on the discrepant hardness data'eported in the response to NRC Bulletin 87-02.
The licensee appears. to be aware of the requirements of Generic Letter 90-05, but they, depend on tra'ining and personnel knowledge of the existence and requirements of the generic letter rather than procedures to assure compliance.
9205050179 920409 PDR ADOCK 05000400
A,
REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- R. Graybeal, Manager ISI
- C. Hinnant, General Manager, Harris Plant
- D. Knepper, NED Unit Manager
- J. Nevill, Manager, Technical Support
- C. Olexik, Manager, Regulatory Compliance
- L. Olsen, Manager, EDBS/Spare Parts
- F. Streble, Senior Engineer, NED
- M. Wallace, Senior Specialist, Regulatory Compliance Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included craftsmen, engineers, operators, mechanics, techni-cians, and administrative personnel.
NRC Resident Inspector(s)
D. Roberts, Resident-in-Training M. Shannon, Resident, Inspector
- J. Tedrow, Senior Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview Followup on NRC Bulletin 87-02, "Fasteners Testing To Determine Conformance With Applicable Material Specifications".
NRC Bulletin 87-02 requested licensees to test safety-related (SR) and non safety-related (NSR) fasteners.
Supplements 1 and 2 to the Bulletin requested the licensees to provide a list of suppliers and/or manufacturers from whom the fasteners may have been purchased.
Temporary Instruction TI 2500/27 required an NRC inspector to evaluate the adequacy of certain licensees'oot cause analysis and the implementation of corrective actions in response to Bulletin 87-02.
The licensee with the concurrence of the senior resident inspector, in 1987, selected a sample of 27 Q-Safety Related ASME Code Class
fasteners-(general plant application:
pressure boundary)
and 11 Q-Off-The Shelf fasteners (general plant application:
structural seismic)
in place of the
Safety Related and 20 Non Safety Related fasteners specified by the bulletin.
The licensee considered both categories of Q
fasteners to be
"Safety Related".
The licensee only purchased
"Non Safety Related" fasteners for specific applica-.
tions.
At the time of the sampling the licensee had no
"Non Safety Related" fasteners in stock.
The licensee considered in the absence of any Non Safety Related fasteners, a sample of 38 Safety Related fasteners was conservative when only 20
Safety Related. fasteners were specified, and no Non Safety Related fasteners were available for sampling.
The licensee does not intend to perform any further sampling.
Of the 38 samples selected, two Q-Safety Related ASME Class
fasteners supplied by the Texas Bolt Company of Houston (HNP-8 and HNP-25)
exceeded the maximum hardness values specified in the material specification.
In both cases the material was in conformance with all the chemical and physical property requirements except hardness.
The chemical and physical properties including chemical analysis, Ultimate Tensile Strength (UTS), Yield Strength (YS), Elongation, and Reduction In Area (RIA) were verified by the licensee.
In. view of the above the licensee determined that the installed material represented by both samples were acceptable for it's intended service and therefor was accepted as is.
The licensee determined that the remaining stock of uninstalled material represented by sample HNP-8 was acceptable for use, as the difference in hardness 96 Rb required vice 24 Rc actual (Rb 96 Rc 17)
is not significant.
The material represented by sample HNP-25, which conformed in all
- respects, except hardness, to the chemical and physical requirements of the purchase specification SA-193 grade B8 Class
(carbide solution treated type 304 stainless steel), vastly exceeded the tensile properties of the specification (UTS minimum required 75 kilo pounds per square inch (ksi) actual:
142 ksi and YS required:
30 ksi, actual:
102.5 ksi).
The licensee determined that the material conformed in all respects except hardness to SA-193 grade B8 Class
(carbide solution treated strain hardened type 304 stainless steel).
The chemical analysis for SA-193 Grade B8 Classes 1 and 2 are identical.
The licensee scrapped the remaining stock of uninstalled material represented by sample HNP-25 as the material was considered suspect without further testing.
Subsequent to the response to the Bulletin, the licensee identified material mixup problems at the Texas Bolt Co.
CP&L audits at Texas Bolt's facility and reviews at the Harris site satisfactorily resolved the material mixup issue.
The licensee has performed an adequate root cause analysis evaluation and disposition of the deviating material.
NRC bulletin 87-02 and TI 2500/27 are considered closed for the Harris site.
Followup on Generic Letter 90-05,
"Guidance for Performing Temporary Non-Code Repair of ASME Class 1, 2, and 3 Piping".
The inspector discussed the implementation of Generic Letter (GL) 90-05 with the licensee who indicated that they were aware
.of the requirements of the GL, and those requirements have been included in the training for engineers.
Temporary non Code repairs to ASME Class 1,
2, and 3 systems are controlled by CPEL procedure MOD-206, Revision 3,
Procedure MOD-206 is silent to the specifics of GL 90-0 The licensee depends on the training and awareness on the part of engineers and the personnel in the review and approval cycle to assure compliance with GL 90-05.
The licensee agreed to consider a procedure revision.
From the issuance of GL 90-05 to date, the Harris site has not made any repairs within the scope of the GL.
4.
Exit Interview The 'inspection scope and results were summarized on March 12, 1992, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1.
The inspector described the areas inspected.
Proprietary information is not contained in this report.
Dissenting comments were not received from the licensee.
5.
Acronyms and Initialisms ASME GL ksi NPF NRC NSR P.E.
RIA SR TI UTS YS American Society of Mechanical Engineers Generic Letter kilo pounds per square inch Nuclear Power Facility Nuclear Regulatory Commission Non Saf ety Related Professional Engineer Reduction In Area Safety Related Temporary Instruction Ultimate Tensile Strength Yield Strength