IR 05000413/1985045

Insp Repts 50-413/85-45 & 50-414/85-45 on 850930-1004.No Violation or Deviation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Welding Verification,Review of Preservice Insp Procedures & Work Activities Performed During Preservice Insp

ML20198E647
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	11/01/1985
From:	Blake J, Coley J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20198E614	List: IR 05000413/1985045 ML20198E611
References
50-413-85-45, 50-414-85-45, NUDOCS 8511140123
Download: ML20198E647 (10)

Text

km Efou UNITED STATES

/ * g[o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j p REGION 11 g,

• -

j 101 MARIETTA STREET. 's ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323

\...../

Report Nos.: 50-413/85-45 and 50-414/85-45 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Docket Nos.: 50-413 and 50-414 License Nos.: NPF-35 and CPPR-117 Facility Name: Catawba 1 and 2 Inspection Conducted: September 30 - October 4, 1985 Inspector: %,N

'

Le /0-30-63

~ q Date Si ned Approved by: - I// ) #f .8 E,'Section Chief Date Signed E ine ing Branch D vision of Reactor Safety SUtttARY Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 31 inspector-hours on site in the areas of welding verification, review of preservice inspection procedures, review of work act(vities performed during preservice inspection, licensee identified items, and followup on inspector identified problems and unresolved items.

Results: No violations or deviations were identifie PDR ADOCK 05000413 G PDR

_ -_ .

REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees

• R. McCollum, Acting Plant Manager

• F. P. Schiffley, Licensing Engineer

• K. W. Schmidt, Quality Assurance (QA) Engineer .

• H. Bell, Supervisor QA l *E. Williams, QA Technician

• J. E. Cherry, QA Specialist, Inservice Inspection (ISI)

Other licensee employees contacted included construction craftsmen, engineers, technicians, mechanics, and office personne Other Organizations Babcock and Wilcox (B&W) - R. Patterson NRC Resident Inspector

• P. Skinner

• Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on October 4,1985, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection finding No dissenting comments were received from the licensee. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspectio . Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (Unit 2)

'

(0 pen) Unresolved Item 414/85-31-02: " Failed Containment Spray Pipe Support".

During pre-operational testing of the Unit 2 containment spray system on

'

April 1985, a water hammer was experienced during a pump start-up. This water hamer occurred in the "B" train piping. Visual damage resulting from the water hammer consisted of partial anchor pull out on one support /

restraint and some irregularity on an adjacent support. The licensee issued Nonconforming Item Report No. 19890 to evaluate and fix the damaged support The licensee initially had identified that the water hammer

resulted from stopping the containment spray 28 pump before the drain header

isolation valve was closed. The error was attributed to poor comunica-tion The licensee's corrective action dealt with identifying and

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

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

correcting the defect. The inspector discussed the cause (poor connunica-tion) of the water hammer with the licensee and suggested that the licensee ,

i flag this problem in the operating procedure to prevent future occurrence '

The licensee stated that they would investigate the corrective action relative, to cause, and take appropriate corrective actio Subsequent corrective action.will be reviewed during a future inspectio Closed) Unresolved Item 414/85-34-03: " Apparent Failure of Babcock and

. ilcw to Perform Audits of their Inspection Services Division".

As a result of an inspector's findings on Unit 1, Duke Power and B&W decided, during preservice inspection (PSI), to have two certified

.

technicians perform each ultrasonic examination. Both technicians are l equally responsible for the integrity of each weld examined. In addition to i the two independent examinations the B&W QA Audit Group performed an audit 1 in Lynchburg on such things as personnel, and equipment certification !

B&W's Level III Ultrasonic examiner was on site on numerous occasions to j evaluate indications, audit paper work, and observe examinations in proces , The licensee stated that a statement would be put' in the completed PSI i package to indicate that the combined audit methods described above were

sufficient to fulfill B&W's PSI program audit commitments. The licensee stated that during the first refueling outage for Unit 2, B&W would audit

activities on site, in lieu of two examiner verification, which would result i in excessive personnel radiation exposur i (Closed) Unresolved Item 414/85-34-02

" Clarification NDE-11 and NDE-12 i Needed".

!

l This item dealt with the failure of the above procedures to specify the maximum source size. The licensee's corrective action consisted of deleting NDE-11 from the active procedure files and adding the maximum source sizes

. as a note to paragraph 10.1.2 of NDE-1 The inspector considers the licensee's corrective action to be adequate.

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

! Unresolved Items t

!

Unresolved items were not identified during the inspectio . Welding Verification - (55150)(Unit 2)

In conjunction with the inspection of the licensees QA Program as reported in NT,C Report No. 50-414/85-43, the inspector reviewed a licensee

,

surveillance report finding, and a subsequent program interpretation of an i American Welding Society (AWS) Code involving weld size of structural fillet

'

welds. The inspector, discussed the finding with the licensee's QA, craft and site eng'neering personnel. In addition, the inspector performed a visual inspection of the fillet weld used to attach the support discussed in j the surveillance report to an embed plate. The inspector concluded that the specific weld specified in the surveillance report was satisfactory. The

-_ _ _ --_ - _- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ ___ - _ _ - __ - _ -

.

'

inspector noted that the licensee's program interpretation that a visual weld examiner is not required to verify at final visual inspection that the weld fillet size has been increased by the amount of fitup gap when this gap exceeds 1/16 inch and is not over 3/16 inch was an apparent deviation from the AWS Cod (An exception to this discrepancy would be if design had considered this and built adequate conservatism into the drawings fillet sizes.) Due to time limitations, design was not contacted. An unresolved item addressing this item in detail is reported in NRC inspection report 50-414/85-4 Within the area examined, no violations or deviations were identified. Preservice Inspection - Review of Procedures (730528) (Unit 2)

The inspector reviewed CONAM's eddy current procedure to ascertain whether the procedure pertaining to the preservice inspection of the steam generator tubes was consistent with the applicable codes, regulatory requirements and licensee commitments. The applicable codes and specifications for the eddy current examinations were the ASME Code,Section XI, 74S75 and 77S78, Nuclear Regulatory Guide 1.83, revision 1, and additional examinations required by the owne CONAM used the following procedure and equipment to perform the examina-tions:

Procedure No: -

42-EC-085, Rev. O, "Multifrequency Eddy Current Procedure Westinghouse Series D4 and D5 steam generator tubing M1Z-18 Digital Eddy Current System" Equipment: -

Zetec M1Z-18 digital multifrequency instrument

-

Eddy current instrument controller and operating display: HP9836 Computer with GPIO interface and Zetec M1Z-18 software

-

Digital recorder: Zetec HCD-752

-

Interface: HPIB to MIZ-18

-

Printer: HP2671G

- Analysis System: Zetec DDA-4 Software with HP 9836 Computer

-

Probes: Zetec .610 SFM, .600 SFM, .580 for Row 1 and others as required The procedural configuration set-up for the D4 and D5 model steam generators are 4 differential and 4 absolute channels: differential channels required by procedure were 550 KHZ, 400 KHZ, 200 KHZ and 130 KHZ, absolute channels required by procedure were 550 KHZ, 400 KHZ, 200 KHZ and 130 KH .-. -_ . - _ . ,

... -_ - = - - - - . . . . _ - . -

'

.

'

i l

The inspector reviewed the procedure to ascertain if the procedure included

, the following information: tube material diameter, and wall thickness size and type of test probe including manufacturer's name and part

, number test frequency 3 type and model of eddy current equipment to be used ,

i scanning direction and speed during examination (insertion, retraction,  !

or both - from inlet or outlet end)

4 description of inspection technique, for example, hand probe,

mechanized probe drive, remote control fixture description of calibration procedure and calibration standards j description of data recording equipment and procedures 1 procedure for interpretation of test results and the applicable i criteria for reportable indication Within the area examined, no violations or deviations were identified.

I Preservice Inspection - Observation of Work and Work Activities (730538)

2 (Unit 2)

I l The inspector reviewed completed records to ascertain whether the onsite inspection of class 1, 2 and 3 pressure retaining components were performed

-

in accordance with regulatory requirements and licensee's commit.nents. The

,

applicable code for PSI was the ASME Code,Section XI, 74S7 :

Records for 4 different methods of examination of components were reviewed I to detemine whether: procedures were being followed; examination personnel ,

j were certified; equipment and test materials were calibrated or certified; '

I

'

and calibrations, examinations, evaluations, acceptance of nondestructive examination (NDE) results and any corrective actions / repairs or replacements l were recorded as specified in the PSI program and NDE procedures. Record i review was selected as the window of opportunity for direct observation of 1 work had passe Volumetric Examination Using Eddy Current Technique i

'

The inspector reviewed the completed work package frcm CONAM inspection j for the eddy current examinations of the steam generators on Unit Surface Examination Using Liquid Penetrant Technique

'

Records associated with the liquid penetrant examination of the following weld identification / component number were reviewed by the

,

inspector:

!

,

- - . . , - , .--,;,.._w.-. s w r-,,,y -.--,,.--7--1.-s,-,..,

-

,y, , y r, - v--r,-~--, .-.% - ,,c---..w .,p,-- ,..----p,.,,-,._-re.-. - -

. ; .

Weld / Component Examiner Number Item Number Examination Date Verified Valve 2SV2 E3.01.001 5-3-84 R. Valve 2SV6 E3.01.005 5-3-84 W. Valve 2SV8 E3.01.006 4-30-84 Valve 2SV3 E3.01.019 5-18-84 T. ND33 E3.01.032 11-26-84 R. NI332A E3.01.041 1-27-84 J. NI342 E3.01.047 1-11-85 A. ND28A E3.01.031 11-26-84 R. RHR-HX-2A C1.03.150 1-16-84 P. NC9-WN8 B4.07.001 1-27-85 W. NC9-WN5 84.07.002 10-5-84 NC9-WN6 B4.07.003 2-1-85 NC9-WN6A B4.07.004 2-15-84 NC11-WN6 B4.07.009 2-23-84 P. NC11-WN5 B4.07.010 2-23-84 H. NC13-WN5 84.07.017 2-23-84 R. NC13-WN8A B4.07-019 2-29-84 J. NI77-02 B4.07.052 3-20-84 NC9-WN9 B4.06.0018 11'-29-84 NC11-WN7 84.06-0038 12-1-84 G. The above liquid penetrant examinations were performed by Duke Power Personnel using approved Duke Power preservice inspection procedures.

Surface Examination Using Magentic Particle Technique

'

'

Records associated with the magnetic particles examination of the following weld identification / component numbers were reviewed by the inspector:

Weld / Component Examiner Number Item Number Examination Date Verified 2CF60 E3.01.021 11-26-84 J.A.P & C. A Accumulator C1-03.101 10-25-84 R. Tank 2B Accumulator C1.03.102 10-24-84 T. Tank 2C Accumulator C1.03.103 10-25-84 Tank 2NAC-LH-Skirt C1.03.106 1-29-85 W. The above magnetic particle examinations were performed by Duke Power personnel using approved Duke Power PSI procedures.

i

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

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

i

!

'

!

I

Visual Examination Records associated with visual inspection of the following weld

identification / component numbers were reviewed by the inspector

r Weld / Component Numbers Item Number lI

'

2SGA-Clad-INLT B3. i 2SGA-Clad-0TLT B3. SGA-MW-X-Y B3.1 NC-112-M3-1 B4. '

', 2NC65-MJ-1 B4,1 '

2NC12 B6. RCP-2 B5. .

I 2RCP-2A-11 B5.9.1 i

i The above visual inspections were performed using B&W PSI personnel and l procedure ! In addition to the review of complete records for the 4 methods of examina-

tions described above the inspector reviewed the weld repair records and

,

subsequent PSI examinations for the following welds:  !

! Weld Identification N Item N Size

l 2NC53-05 B4.5.231 3" diameter x .438"

<

2NC65-01 B4.5.239 3" diameter x .438"

! 2NI174-12 B4.5.647 6" diameter x .719"

l The above welds were rejected by B&W during ultrasonic examination performed

,

for PSI and repair welding was performed by the license ,!

.

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

) Licensee Identified Items (92700) (Unit 1)

'

Closed) Item 414/85-05: " Correct Starting Air Check Valve Deficiencies" i

10 CFR 50.55(e)).

i The final report was submitted on October 2,1985. The report has been reviewed and determined to be acceptable. The inspector held discussions with responsible licensee representatives and reviewed supporting documenta-

tion.

4 ,

i Based on the investigation, performed by Dominion Engineering, into the .

'

causes of the check valve failures at Grand Gulf and Shoreham, it was determined that the failures resulted from high cycle fatigue at approxi-1 mately 1600-2000 hours of engine operation. Additionally, disc misalignment j (Grand Gulf) and improper disc seating (Shoreham) may have contributed to j the check valve failures.

< .

!

i

-

_ . , _ . , .

.

The original disc assembly material used in the check valves were case 304 stainless stee The corrective action to be taken by Duke Power Company is the installation of new modified disc assemblies manufactured from 17-4 PH stainless steel, which is not subject to the high cycle fatigue failures that were experienced with the cast 304 stainless steel assemblies. In addition, dimensional controls will allow the disc to be properly seated in the valve body so that potential cracking of the valve body will be minimize Since the the Unit 2 diesels have operated for only approximatley 200 hour0.00231 days <br />0.0556 hours <br />3.306878e-4 weeks <br />7.61e-5 months <br /> Duke Power expects to replace each Unit 2 check valve disc assembly with the modified disc assembly by the end of the first refueling outag The inspector closed this item based on the inspections performed on Unit 2, diesel generator; air start system check valves, investigations performed by Dominion Engineering and the licensee's in-place program for replacement by the end of the first refueling outag (Closed) Item 414/85-03: " Portions of Piping Systems Not Protected From Effects of Postulated LOCA" (10 CFR 50.55(e)).

The final report was submitted on April 12, 198 The report has been reviewed and determined to be acceptable. The inspector held discussions with responsible licensee representatives, reviewed supporting documenta-tion, and observed representatives samples of work to verify that the corrective actions identified in the report have been completed. Inspector Followup Items (92701B) (Units 1 and 2)

(Closed) Item 414/86-34-04: " Technical Review of Preservice Records".

This item dealt with an inspector finding that information recorded on a ultrasonic test report was an obvious mistake. Since preservice inspection work was complete on Unit 2, the inspector was of the opinion that B&W should perform a technical review of the data obtained to insure the correctness and completeness of the dat This review should be completed at the earliest date possible in order to assure major events would not be impacted by " catch up work" resulting from audit findings. B&W performed the technical review and did not discover any additional discrepancies. The licensee will also conduct an independent technical review prior to opera-tions. The corrective action taken by the licensee appears to be adequat (Closed) Item 414/85-31-01: " Resolve Snubber Installation Discrepancies".

This item dealt with an inspector's findings of a loose locknut and pipe insulation caulking on a snubber body, in contact with the snubber piston sleeve. The licensee issued deficiency report no.19891 to correct these isolated discrepancies and corrective action was completed on August 21, 198 In addition the licensee instituted an " area walk" (Reference:

Constructon Procedure - 864) to detect obvious defects that may have been

.

created during construction and/or testing the corrective action taken by the licensee appears to be adequat (Closed) Item 413/85-11-01 and 414/85-09-01: "QA Program Responsibilities".

In order to clarify program responsibilities the licensee added a statement to the " Catawba Unit 1 Inservice Inspection Plan" and the " Catawba Unit 2 Preservice Inspection Plan". The statement added reads as follows; "Each inspection will be performed under the QA program of the organization performing the inspection". This statement is found in paragraph 3.0 of each plan. The corrective action taken by the licensee appears to be adequat (Closed) Item 413/85-11-02 and 414/85-09-02: " PSI /ISI Audits".

This item reported that an inspector could not find any objective evidence that the licensee QA program for audits covered PSI and ISI. This inspector met with cognizant personnel from corporate QA, representing the vendor surveillance division, construction, and operation These individuals provided this inspector with yearly audit schedules, complete audits and surveillance reports which covered PSI /ISI in detail. The inspector reviewed the past audits and discovered that the licensee has a very effective program for auditing PSI /ISI. The corrective action taken by the licensee appears to be adequat (Closed) Item 413/85-11-03 and 414/85-09-03: " Unavailable Procedures".

This item dealt with an inspector's concern that procedures listed in a revised B&W index of inservice procedures were not in the ISI manuals. The following procedures, 151-425, 151-462, 151-463, 151-467 were not available because none of the actual B&W procedures that will be used for inservice inspection of Unit 1 are on site. B&W is revising all inservice procedure to the 1980 Winter 1981 edition of the ASME Code. All procedures will be available for review prior to first outage of Unit Procedure DPC-APP-1 was found mis-filed in the NDE-Manua Corrective action taken by the licensee appears to be adequat (Closed) Item 413/85-11-04 and 414/85-09-04: " Level III Approval".

Certifications for a B&W Level III examiner who had reviewed a ISI procedure were received by the licensee on July 29, 1985. The Level III certification records were not at the site since the examiner had never been to the Catawba site. The inspector reviewed the examiner's certifications and considers corrective actions taken by the licensee to be adequat (Closed) Item 413/85-11-05 and 414/85-09-05: " PSI /ISI Code of Record".

The licensee reply to the inspector's concern was as follows;'

"At the time DPC-NDE-26 was used on site at Catawba, Revision 0 was in effec This revision of NDE-26 was written in accordance with the 1974 Edition of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section XI,

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

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

.

'

\

with addenda through Summer 197 OPC-QA-M4, M10, M12 are ASME Section III procedures, QA condition 1 and meet all requirements needed to be used for our baseline dat All Duke and B&W procedures referenced in the ISI Plan for Unit I will be updated to the 80W81 edition of the ASME Code at a later date."

The inspector considers the explanation given by the licensee to be adequate

,

and documented in the list of applicable licensee procedures to be used for PS l f

,

(Closed) Item 413/85-11-06 and 414/85-09-06: " Regulatory Guide 1.150

Revision". .

An inspector had questioned the licensee as to what revision of Regulatory Guide 1.150 would be applicable for ISI of Unit 1. The licensee stated t that, Revision 1 of the Catawba Unit 1 ISI plan made the change to show Regulatory Guide 1.150 Revision 1, would be applicabl !

i Within the areas examined, no violations or deviations were identifie I i

l

I

,

,

i i

[

l

>

,