IR 05000413/1981004
| ML20003H246 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 03/27/1981 |
| From: | Herdt A, Zajac L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20003H242 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-413-81-04, 50-413-81-4, 50-414-81-04, 50-414-81-4, IEB-80-08, IEB-80-8, NUDOCS 8105050398 | |
| Download: ML20003H246 (4) | |
Text
,
'
p r. sag,,*o UNITED STATES
'
'-
!'
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
y g,
ea REGION 11
)
g
[
101 MARIE" 4 ST N.W.. SulTE 3100
,
'
C o@
ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30303 g
+....
S Report Nos. 50-413/81-04 and 50-414/81-04 Licensee:
Duke Power Company 422 S. Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Facility Name: Catawba Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414
'
License Nos. CPPR-116 and CPPR-117 Inspection at Catawba site near Rockhill, SC Inspector:
[~'.,-
'
L. D. Zajac Date Signed
.
-
.-
//
I Approved by:
.
A. R. Herdt, Section Chief Date Signed Engineering Inspection Branch Engineering and Technical Inspection Division
'
SUMMARY Inspected on March 3-10, 1981 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 17 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of IE Bulletin 80-08, Containment Liner Penetration Welds - Review of records and radiographic films; and followup of previous unresolved items -
80-18-01, Pipe design and inspection clearance; 80-29-04, Inconsistent pipe bending inspection requirements and practices; 80-29-05, Omitted rinse after bending.
Results Of the 2 areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
,
.
.
..
. _
...
.
. --
._.
-
.
i REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- D. G. Beam, Project Manager
- S. W. Dressler, Senior Construction Engineer
"J. C. Shropshire, Supervisor, QA Engineer S. W. Hamrick, Mechanical Engineer i
Other licensee employees contacted included 2 construction craftsmen and 2 technicians.
NRC Resident Inspector
- P. K. VanDoorn
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope 'and findings were summarized on March 10, 1981 with those persons indicated in paragraph I above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (0 pen) Unresolved Item (413, 414/80-18-01) - Pipe design and inspection clearance requirements. The-licensee provided the inspector with a copy of a draft (CN-SA-0070 dated 2/19/81) which delineates design intent and inspection requirements regarding pipe clearances. Issue and implementation of the draft recommendations is pending management concurrence and approval.
Thus, this item remains open until draft is formally issued and implemented.
(0 pen) Unresolved Item (413, 414/80-29-04) - Inconsistent pipe bending inspection requirements and practices. The licensee provided the inspector with a copy of revision 10 to procedure M-25 which clarifies the number of pipe bends requiring inspection.
THe inspector reviewed logs being main-tained which show that the licensee is complying with the revised procedure.
However, the revised procedure has not been formally issued. Thus, this item remains open until revision 10 to procedure M-25 is issued.
(0 pen) Unresolved Item (413, 414/80-29-05) - Omitted rinse after bending.
The licensee advised the inspector that a demineralized water rinse was now in effect when Triton X-100 was used as a lubricant on pipe bends. However, when the inspector observed a pipe bend where Triton X-100 was used as a lubricant, the surface was cleaned with SpotCheck cleaner rather than
!
I
~v
, - - -
-
,-
ee
-,
.-----,,m
--v.
,
e
- - - -
s
.
.
.
.-
.
demineralized water. In discussion with the craftsman and his supervisor, the inspector was told that they knew of no change in procedure that speci-fically required cleaning with demineralized water.
They stated that SpotCheck was an approved cleaner in procedure CP-116.
In view of the obvious confusion or misunderstanding as to which cleaning method is required, this item remains open.
4.
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 5.a.
5.
Review of IE Bulletin No. 80-08, Examination of Containment '_ ner Penetra-tior Welds I'Bulletin 80-08 was forwarded on April 7,1980, and requested the licen-d 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 9t been radiographed, are of particular concern as they are potentially defective.
In response to the Bulletin, Duke Power Company forwarded a letter dated July 7,1980, which indicates the flued head design was used and welded with butt joints without backing rings. The letter also indicated that the welds were either examined by ultrasonic or radiography dependent on which provided the most meaningful results.
The inspector reviewed design drawings, records and/or radiographs for the penetration welds listed below.
Unit 1 Penetration 110 (PM-16) Serial No. H-6862 Penetration 142 (PM-3) Serial No. H-6870 Penetration 261 (PM-15) Serial No. H-6855 Penetration 309 (PM-15) Serial No. H-6864 Penetration 343 (PM-15) Serial No. H-6883 Penetration 393 (PM-15) Serial No. H-6856 Penetration 423 (PM-16) Serial No. H-6857 Penetration 217 Weld Ident. IKC52-1 Penetration 207 Weld Ident. 1,NI63-1
F e
..
'
j
i Unit 2
'
Penetration 110 (PM-16) Serial No. H-6866 Penetration 142 (PM-5) Serial No. H-6871 Penetration 261 (PM-15) Serial No. H-6859 -
Penetration 309 (PM-15) Serial No. H-6868 Penetration 343 (PM-11') Serial No. H-6902 Penetration 393 (PM-15) Serial No. H-6860 Penetration 423 (PM-17) Serial No. H-6861 The following discrepancies were noted:
a.
The radiograph'c technique information did not accompany the radio-graphic films for penetrations 207 and 217 of Unit-1. The ASME Code,Section V, Article 2, paragraph T-283 states that to aid in interpre-tation of_ radiographs, a sketch, drawing, written procedure, or equiva-lent record shall be prepared to show the radiographic setup and that this information shall accompany each group of radiographs.
The film reader's sheet did refer to a standard setup by number 5-1-J.
However, the licensee could not locate technique sheets describing this setup.
The licensee stated that the technique sheets are probably mixed with other records and agreed to search their files for them.
Since this discrepancy is pertinent to all code radiography records, not just the Bulletin records, it will be carried as Unresolved Item 413, 414/81-04-01, " Missing radiographic technique records".
b.
The records for penetrations 142 (H-6871) and 343 (H-6883) indicate that neither radiography nor ultrasonic examination was performed on the butt welds.
c.
The radiographs for penetrations 110 (H-6862) and (H-6866) and 309
-
(H-6868) show that the butt weld has less thickness than the adjacent base metal.
The film reader's sheet indicates that internal grinding was performed on the welds, but does not indicate that the weld thick-ness was measured to insure minimum thickness had not been violated.
The licensee agreed to investigate the above described discrepancies and determine corrective actions needed.
This Bulletin will remain open.
l
_
_ _
_
_. _
-
-