IR 05000413/1990018

Insp Repts 50-413/90-18 & 50-414/90-18 on 900625-29.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Inservice Insp & Maint,Including Plan for Outage,Reviews of NDE Procedures & Independent Exam of Verifications

ML20058M939
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	07/11/1990
From:	Blake J, Economos N, Newsome R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20058M938	List: IR 05000413/1990018 ML20058M936
References
50-413-90-18, 50-414-90-18, NUDOCS 9008130133
Download: ML20058M939 (14)

Text

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

g:

a y ,.

-

N' ,

<

p tsouq UNITED cTATES

, ,* o NUCLEAR RECULATORY COMMIS$10N y REGION tl 3-

101 MARIETT A STRE ET. ^

ATLANTA GEORotA 30323

,

....+

~

Report Nos.:- 50-413/90-18 and 50-414/40-18

'

Licensee: Duke Power Company

-

422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242

>

' Docket Nos.: 50-413 and 50-414 License Nos.: NPF-35 and NPF-52 Facility Name: Catawba 1 and 2 Inspection Conducted: June 25-29, 1990

[ :nspector:

.

m[M( . New eC

.zuwe e  ?- f- 7 0 Date Signed 5 #*

_

'

Mn

/

9-9"90_

Date 51 ned B

fdhoo

< Appra ed by:_ - -. 7 rN-J lake, Chief Dhte Signed

'

'

t ials and Processes Section n neering Branch

Di ision of Reactor Safei;y [

- s l

SUMMARY I

, Scope:

.

This.-routine,- ann 0unced inspection was conducted on site in the areas of i Inservice Inspection (ISI) and Maintenanc l

'

The inspee !on of ISI activities included a review of the Unit 2 ISI plan for i this outage; reviews of' nondestructive examination (NDE)- procedures; Ee obse m tions of in-progress NDE examinations; independent examination verifications; reviews of NDE personnel qualifications; reviews of .NDE -

equipment calibratian-and material certification documentation: and, a review

'

s I of completed NDE examination dat ,

L 1 The maintenance inspection was a performance oriented inspection to. observe preventative.and corrective maintenance of safety related valves. Maintenance

-

procedures and quality records were reviewed for technical adequacy and

-

accuracy.

k ,

_

-

_

^

9008130133 900713

PDR .; DOCK 05000413 0 PDC 1

3

• --_ - . . . . . . .

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

_ . . . .

,

.;b- 5 ! { -?4 .,

', , $

% *

..

n 4 c ,

--.

.y1_;-

'

3,.

_

, .y .)

,,.c -

,  ; .

.-

i

% d

'

-

.

)

2;

I

'

.1 f

Results:~ t

..; ,

?In the ~ areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identifie , -i Lihis .. ins >ection' indicated ~ that- ISI nondestructive examinations witre being 1-conducte< adequately.- j q

All maintenance areas inspected indicated that the licensee's maintenance  !

program was well' organized and adequately implemente 't i

.- ,

r. - .j

'.t

.f .

'!

-

>

!

?

e ' , !

.

e i

'.

)

e l

t i

.g .;

$

,

,

.

.

.$ " f

,

-r L

s i

,

i s

.

, ,

w .

-p. - y ,,-w. w.,. e..... ..m.em- . , , ,,,,r, . , , , , , - , . , .,%..g-, ,-, < + , -1,-. -. .. %

.

<-

i

.

V REPORT DETAILS  : Persons Contacted .

Licensee Employees

,

• J. Barbour, Quality Assurance (QA), Director Operations

• J. Cherry, QA ISI

• R. Giles, QA ISI Coordinator R. Johnc'on, Foreman, Valve Maintenance ,

• V. King, Compliance E. Kulesa, Nuclear Production Engineer, Maintenance ,

• W. McCollum, Mairlinance J. McKeown, Nuclear Production Engineer, Maintenance '

• T. Owens, Catawba Station Manager R. Pettet, NDE Supervisor *

T. Walkowiak, Quality Control Inspector, Mechanical Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included craftsmen, engineers, technicians, and administrative personne NRC Resident Inspectors

• Orders, Senior Resident Inspector J. Zeiler, Resident Inspector i

• Attended exit interview i Acronyms and initialisms used throughout this report are listed in the last paragrap . Inservice Inspection The inspectors reviewed documents and records and observed activities, Os indicated below, to determine whether ISI was being conducted in j accordance with applicable proceaures. regulatory requirements, and '

licensee connitments . The applicable code for-ISI is the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel (ASME B&PV) Code, Section XI,1980 edition with addenda through Winter 1981. Duke Power Company (DPC) (PT),

liquid penetrant nondestructive magneticexaminatlan personnel particle (MT). are performing),the radiography (RT ultrasonic - (UT), and visual (VT) examinations. Steam generator (SG)

tubing ' eddy current (EC) examination data collection was  :

accomplished by Duke Power personnel with Babcock and Wilcoxbeing (B&W )

performing the primary data analysis and Duke Power personnel performing a secondary data evaluatio I a

_J

.

. ,

.

'

.

g

,

a. ISI Program Review, Unit 2(73051) 4 The inspectors reviewed the following documents relating to the ISI program to determine whether the plan had been approved by the licensee and to assure that procedures had been established (written, reviewed, approved and issued) to control and accomplish. the following applicable activities: organizational structure including .

qualifications, training, reponsibilities, and duties of personnel '

responsible for ISI; material certifications, and identification of-components to be covered; work and inspection procedures; control of processes including special methods, and use of qualified personnel; scope of the ih tpection including description of areas to be examined, examinition category, method of inspection, and extent of examinations; de 'inition of inspection interval; and, qualification of NDE personne Inservice Intpection Pirn Catawba Nuclear Station Unit 2

'

-

NDE-B(RI61 Training, Qualification And Certification Of NDE personnel y

l l

. RevievofNDEProcedures, Units 1and2(73052) "

(1) The inspec. tors reviewed the procedures listed below to determine

'

whether these procedures were consistent with regulatory requirements and licensee commitment The procedures were also ,

reviewed in the areas of procedure approval, requirements for qualification cf NDE personnel, and compilation of required

'

records; and, if applicable, division of responsibility between -

"

the licensee and contractor personnel if contractor personnel are involved in the ISI effor .

-

151-119(R12) tiltrasonic Examination of Stainless Steel and Nickel Base Alloy Weld Seams i

-

ISI-120 (R25) Ultrasonic Examination Of Piping and -

with CA-88-06, Vessel Welds Joining Similar and 90-01 & 90-03 Dissimilar Materials

-

NDE-35(R13) Liquid Penetrant Examination

-

NDE-12 (R8) General Radiography Procedure Fur Preservice and Inservice Inspection *

-

QCF-9 (R4) Piping Support Installation Inspection

-

QCL-13(R6) Inservice Inspection (ISI) Visual

. Examination, VT-1

-

QCL-14 (RIO) ISI Visual Examination, VT-3 and VT-4 i .

't

. .

,

'

, ,

'

3 ,

t

-

1S1-424(R14) Multi-Frequency Eddy Current Examination of .750" OD X .044" Wall -

RSG Tubing For ASME Exam, and Wear At .

Tube Support Plates

-

151-460(RIS) Technical Procedure For The Evaluation of Eddy Current Data of Nuclear Grade ,

Steam Generator Tubing

- Eddy Current Analysis Guidelines For Catawbc Nuclear Station Unit 2,, (Rev. 2)

All procedures listed above Fave been reviewed during previous NRC inspection Only current revisions were reviewed during this inspectio (2) The inspectors reviewed the Ultrasonic procedures to ascertain whether they had been raviewed and approved in accordance with the licens2e's established QA procedures. The procedures were also reviewed for technical adequacy and conformance with ASME, Section V4 Article 5, and other licensee commitments / requirements in the following 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 pentration; limits for evaluating and recording indications, recording significant

.

'

indications; and, acceptance limit ,

(3) The inspectors reviewed the Liquid Penetrant procedure to ascertain whether it had been reviewed and approved in accordance with the licensee's established QA procedure The procedure was also reviewed for technical adequacy and conformance with ASME, Section V, Article 6, and other licensee commitments / requirements in the following areas: specified ,

method; penetrant material identification; penetrant materials analyzed for sulfur; penetrant materials analyzed ' for total halogens; surface temperature; acceptable pre-examination surface conditioning; method used for pre-examination surface '

cleaning; surface drying time prior to penetrant application; method of penetrant application; penetrant dwell time; method used for excess penetrant removal; surface drying prior to developer application, if applicable; type of developer; .

examination technique; evaluation techniques; and, procedure requalificatio (4) The inspectors reviewed the Radiographic procedure to determine whether it contained sufficient information to assure that the following parameters were specified and controlled within the limits permitted by the applicable code, or any other '

specification requirement: type of material to be radiographed; material and weld surface condition requirements; type of

I, -

o  ;

. .

~

.

7 ,

-

.

,

radiation source, effective focal spot or effective source size; I film brand or type; number of films in cassette; minimum source *

to film distance; type and thickness of intensifying screens and filters; quality of radiographs; film density and contrast for single and composite viewing; use of densitometers for assuring compliance with film density requirements; system of radiograph identification; use of location markers; methods of reducing and testing for back-scatter; selection of penetrameters including -

penetrameter placement; number of penetrameters; shims under *

penetrameters; radiographic technique for double wall viewing; ;

and, evaluation and disposition of radiograph (5) The inspectors reviewed the Visual examination procedures to determine whether they contained sufficient instructions to -

assure that the following parameters were specified and controlled within the limits permitted by the applicable code, standard, or any other 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; sequence of performing examinatio when applicable; data to be tabulated, if any; acceptance i criteria is specified and consistent with the applicable code section or controlling specification; and, report form comple-tio ;

^

(6) The inspectors reviewed the Eddy Current procedures for technical content relative to: multichannel examination unit, multichannel examination indication equipment is specified, examination sensitivity, method of examination, method of calibration and calibration sequence, and acceptance criteri All procedures reviewed appeared to contain the necessary alements for conducting the specific examinatio c. Observation of Work and Work Activities, Unit 2(73753)

The inspectors observed -in-progress work activities, conducted independent examination verifications, reviewed certification records of NDE equipment and materials, and reviewed NDE personnel qualifications for personnel that were utilized during the required >

ISI examinations during this outage. ,The observations and reviews conducted by the inspectors are documented belo (1) The inspectors observed calibration activities and DPC examiners performing in-process ultrasonic (UT) examinations being '

conducted on 6 Safety Injection System circumferential pipe weld These observations were compared with the applicable procedures and 2 ASME B&PV Code in the following areas: i l

l l

l

_ _

s

..

. .

.

availability of and compliance with approved NDE procedures; use of kncwledgeable NDE personnel; use of NDE personnel qualified to the proper level; type of apparatus used; calibration requirements; search units; beam angles; DAC curves; reference level for monitoring discontinuities; method of demonstrating penetration; extent of weld / component examination coverage; limits of evaluating and recording indications; recording significant indications; and, acceptance limit The inspectors conducted an independent ultrasonic verification examirttion, using DPC equipment, on portions of 3 of the welds previt ,1y observed being UT examined. These examinations were conduct od in order to evaluate the technica: adequacy of the ultraso ic examination procedure being used by the licensee and to asses the validity of the information being reported by the ultrason. ' exah11ner The verification ultrasonic examinstions conducted by the inspectors indicated that the procedure being used to conduct the examinations is adequate and the verification examination results cempared favorably with the information rer9rted by the ultrasonic examiner The following listed ultrasonic equipment and materials certification records were reviewed:

Ultrasonic Instruments 1219 and 31501-976 [

I The inspectors reviewed spectrum analysis data for the !

ultrasonic transducers listed belo Serial N Size Frequency G15062 .25" 5.0 MHz 32357 .375" 2.25 MHz ,

42963 .5" 2.25 MHZ j 42960 .5" 2.25 MHZ j

Ultrasonic Couplant Batch Numbers 8767 and 8981

,

Ultrasonic Calibration Blocks 50307, 50316, and 50312 (2) The inspectors observed the in-process liquid penetrant (PT) ,

examinations of 10 Safety Injection System circumferential pipe I weld The observations were compared with the applicable procedure and the ASME B&PV Code in the following areas:

specified method, penetrant materials identified; penetrant materials analyzed for halogens and sulfur; acceptable pre-examination surface; surface temperature; surface drying time prior to penetrant application; method of penetrant <

application; penetrant dwell time; method used for excess !

i

)

..

. ,

.,

'

l 6 penetrant removal; surface drying prior to developing, if applicable; type of developer; examination technique; evaluation technique; and, reporting of examination result The NRC inspectors re-evaluated 9 of the welds noted above following the PT 6xaminers evaluation but prior to the developer being removed from the weld surfaces. These re-evaluations were conducted in order to determine if the evaluations performed by the PT examiners were in accordance with the applicable procedure acceptance criteria and to determine if the examination results were being reported as required. The re-evaluations conducted by the NRC inspectors indicated that the proper evaluations were made by the PT examiners and that !

the examination results were being reported as require The inspector's review of the below listed liquid penetrant materials certification records indicated that the sulfur and halogen content of the material was within acceptable content limits.-

,

Materials Batch Number Liquid Penetrant 78E084 Cleaner / Remover 88H0385, 88D039, 88J021, 89801K Developer 88G033 (3) The inspectors reviewed documentation indicating that a 10 pound lift test had been performed on magnetic particle alternating current (AC)yokesCN0-30andCN0-16 A review of the magnetic particle material certification record for batch number 87F008 indicated the particles met the applicable specifications requirement ;

(4) SteamGenerator(SG)TubingEddyCurrentExamination The inspectors observed the EC activities indicated below. The observations were compared with the applicable procedures and the Code in the following areas: method for maximum sensitivity is applied; method of examination has been recorded; examination equipment has been calibrated in accordance with the app?icable rarformance reference; amplitude and phase angle have been calibrated with the proper calibration reference and is u

recalibrated at predetermined frequency; required coverage of steam generator tubes. occurs during the examination; acceptance criteria is specified or referenced and is consistent with the procedure or the ASME Code; and, results are consistent with the acceptance criteria.

P 1

^

_- - -

. . . _ .

.

.. . O e

,

I

~

(a) Steam enerator tube eddy current data collection was being accomp ished by DPC personnel. In-process tube data i acquisition, including calibration confirmation and tube !

location verifications, was observed for 33 SG tubes, 17 in l SG-B and 16 in SG-D.

~

(b) In-process eddy current data evaluation, including .

calibration confirmation, was observed for 70 SG tube J Primary data analysis, being conducted by Babcock and Wilcox (B&W), was observed for 50 SG tubes, 20 tubes in SG-B and 30 in SG-D. Secondary data analysis, being 1

'

conducted by DPC, was observed for 20 tubes in SG- The NRC inspctors co-evaluated 31 of the SG tubes during the :

observations of the primary and secondary analyst's evaluations, 10 in SG-B, and 21 in SG-D. The sample of evaluations, some having reportable indications and some with no reported indications, was conducted in order to confirm the validity of the - reported tubing. conditio The co-evaluation analysis s conducted by the inspectors agreed well with the reported ;

result Certification records for EC calibration standard A-7591 were reviewed for material type, correct fabrication, and artificial flaw location and siz :

(5) The inspectors reviewed ' personnel qualification documentation ;

for 3 UT ( te niners, 5 PT examiners, 5 MT examiners, 3 VT examiners, 2' DPC EC data ' collection personnel, 3 B&W EC data analysts, and 2 DPC EC data analysts.. These personnel qualifications were reviewed in the following areas: employer's name; person certified; activity qualified to perform; current period of certification; signature of employer's designated representative; and, annual visual acuity, color vision examination, and periodic recertificatio . Data Review and Evaluation, Unit 2(73755)

(1) Records of completed ISI nondestructive examinations for 12 UT, 31 PT, 10 MT, and 28 VT examinations 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 designate '

(2) The inspectors reviewed the eddy current data analysis results l

and a sample of associated completed records for over 40 SG i- tubes from Steam Generators B and The reviews were compared L

'

L

'1 . _

__ _ . . _ . _ _

'

.

' *  !

'

-

.,

. .

,

with the applicable procedures and the ASME B&PV Code in the i

.following areas: the multichannel eddy current examination ,

equipment has been identified; material permeability has been recorded; method of examination has been recorded; and, results :

are consittent with acceptance criteri i All of the reviewed examination reports appeared to contain the required examination information including disposition of ,

indications, if an .

A random sample of current examination results were compared with historical examination results. No major discrepancies were noted during the comparison In the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identifie ,

3. Maintenance Unit 2(62700) This work effort' was a performance oriented inspection conducted to '

observe preventive and corrective maintenance activities on selected safety related valves that was in-progress at the time of this visi '

Towards this end, the inspectors concentrated on monitoring these activities with the emphasis on the licensee's technical expertise as evidenced by ~ work preparation, evaluation of the problem, communication between craft and the various levels of supervision, engineering involvement, problem resolution and job completio Valves selected for this work effort were as follows'

1) Swing Check Valve 2NI-101 2) Relief Valve 2NV-14

3) Code Safety Relief Valve 2NC-01 4) Code Safety Relief Valve 2NC-02 l 5) Safety Relief Valve 2NI-161 Valve 2NI-101: This valve was disassembled and inspected for wear degradation under the licensee's preventive maintenance program for check valves. The valve was identified as item number 5B229 and classified as an 8 inch 150 pound Swing Check Valve, ASME Code ;

Section III Class B. The valve was manufactured by Walworth. The valve appears on flow diagram #CN-2562-1.2 Isometric 1CN-2492-N1020 and is located in the line from the refueling water storage tank to the suction side, common to the safety injection pumps. At the time of this inspection.. the valve had been disassembled and the internals had been transported to the hot machine shop for inspection. The flapper arm was disconnected from the disc, both parts were visually inspected and critical dimensions were taken at:d recorded. The threads on the disc stud were chased with the use of a die nut and

__

_ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _

. _ _

_

. ( a

-

a .

i

.,- . 1

.4 j

'

.

9- )

O l

subsequently inspected for possible defects. Within these areas, the j inspectors noted that although the procedure identifies the parts to .

be inspected and where and how dimensions were to be taken, it did I not provide acceptance criteria for these dimensions. Instead,.the I as found dimensions are compared for acceptability by the engineers j with those of replacement parts in storage. The inspectors found j this approach to be somewhat inefficient and unusual and suggested to j the engineer that a revision .in the procedure to incorporate 1 acceptance criteria should be considered. The engineer agreed with j this recommendation and indicated that he would look further into  :

l this matter during the current procedure revision. Maintenance work on this' valve was performed on Work Request WR #001832ME Valve 2NI-161:- This valve was removed from service for corrective maintenance when it was found to be leaking from the vent plug hole in the bonnet. The valve was identified as item number CSR-128 and classified as an 1-1/2 inch, 900 pound safety . relief, ASME Code Class B. The valve was manufactureo by Dresser Industries Inc. This valve appears on Isometric CN 2492-NIO38 and is located on the crossover line on the discharge side of the safety injection pum At the time of this' inspection, the valve had been removed from service--and was being disassembled in the hot machine sho Following disassembly, a visual inspection confirmed a pitting condition existed in the valve body / base on the sealing surface below the guide gasket. The licensee discussed the problem with the valve manufacturer, who authorized the removal of 1/16" material by _i machinin Af ter removing 0.010" of material, there appeared a discontinuous string of porosity type indications measuring about one inch long. An additional cut of 0.045" failed to remove this defec ,

At the close of the ins)ection the licensee, in consultation with the  :

l manufacturer, was plann< ng-to try salvaging-the valve by grinding out the Mect, examining the area. to verify material integrity followed i

'

by a weld repair. Maintenance work on this valve was performed on work requet' WR #3689NSM.

(. Valve 2NC-01: This valve was removed from service, packaged and sent 1'

L to Wylie Laboratories for leak testing and cold pressure setting verifi.:ation to assure compliance with Technical Specifications 4.4.2.1 and 4.4.2.2 requirement The valve was one . of the three-inch pressurizer safety reliefs and was identified as -item

, number PRS-001 ASME Code Section III Class A. Details on the valve l were covered by specification CNS-1205.09-00-001 and drawings L CN-2NC-112 Revision 5 and CN-2NC-113 Revision 0. A spare valve, S/N L BS02867, was used as replacement. The work was performed on Work i Request WR 40044995WR and maintenance procedure MP/0/A/7650/01, Flange Gasket Removal and Replacement. A separate attachment to this procedure covered removal of the outlet and inlet flanges. The inspectors reviewed the maintenance history of this valve to ascertain whether anything other than ordinary maintenance had been performed on this valve. In-that the record showed nothing unusual

,

.

Ttr-- - -.3

- eg

_ - .

,

'

!

, . i s < . 4 f

.  :

'

-

10 j it was concluded that the valve has been performing its intended task satisfactoril Yalve 2NC-02: This valve is a pressurizer code safety in loop #2 and ;

was removed to establish a vent. path for drain and fill of the E primary system during this outag The work was performed on Work ,

Request #004472 SWR and maintenance procedure MP/0/A/7650/01. The inspectors reviewed the maintenance history of this valve and ascertained that nothing other than ordinary maintenance had been ;

performe Therefore, it was concluded that the valve has been performing it's intended task satisfactoril l Valve 2NV-14: This valve was removed from service for corrective maintenance to investigate the reason for leeking-by to the pressurizer relief tank. The valve was identified as item CSR-31 and classified as a three (3) inch flanged, 300 pound, ASME Code Class ;

The valve was manufactured by Dresser Industries Inc., and had been, installed in the letdown relief line of Unit 2, as shown in drawing -

number CN-2491-NV056 Revision 14. At the time of this inspection, the repair work had been completed and the valve had been set on the bench to check' the 618 pounds lift pressure set poin The t inspectors witnessed the test and verified that the valve lifted at the above set point within the allowed + 3% margin. The test was

-

repeated successfully three times as re juired by procedure. This ,

activity was performed under . Work Request #0453320P Following r completion' of these tests, the subject valve was installed on the i seal table of Unit Following is a list of maintenance procedures, common to the '

activities described above, which were reviewed for technical ,

conten '

,MP/0/A/7600/12 Walworth and Aloyco Bolted Cover Swing Check Valves Corrective Maintenance MP/0/A/7650/37 Relief Valve Pressure Testing and Adjustment MP/0/A/7600/33 Wolworth and Aloyco Bolted Cover Swing Check Valves Corrective Maintenance. Enclosure 13.1, ,

Dresser Relief Valve Flange T; 3 Corrective Maintenance MP/0/A/7650/88 System Pressure Testing of ASME and ANSI Piping Systems and ASME Section XI Suitability Evaluation MP/0/A/7650/01 Flange Gasket Removal and Replacement

.

y m-

,

.

, .

i

-

- 11 j

)

The following instruments were used for measuring purposes' on the-subject valve ~ Serial Number Type 18361 Depth Micrometer '

18420 Inside Micrometer 16686 Dial Indicator 1 Calibration stickers showed the instruments were controlled and within the period of calibratio WeldingUnit'2(55050) ,

Discussions with cognizant licensee personnel disclosed that a portion of carbon steel pipe connecting the Heater Bleed System to the Turbine Crossover System was being removed because of erosion corrosion problems and was being replaced with piping made of stainless steel material. This activity was contrclied under work *

request 13137NSM and maintenance procedure MP/0/A/7650/94, Controlling Procedure for Mechanical Piping Nuclear Station Modificatio Applicable Drawings included CN-2490-HC003 R'vi.51on 7 and CN-2594-2.0 Revision 6. The replacement material was 18 inch diameter stainless steel A312 type TP304 electric fusion welded pipe

'

and elbows of standard wall schedule thickness 0.375 inches. The material was procured under Catawba's specification '

CNS-1206.00-02-1002 Appendix 23 dated 5/28/8 Applicable field weld data sheets L-232 _ Revision 11 and L-231 Revision 18 were reviewed for technical content and accurac This system was classified as Duke, Class G which indicates that it is not safety related. No welding was in progress at the time of this inspection although the old pipe had been removed and the replacement spools were temporarily stored in the work area. Following weld

,

completion the subject system including the new welds will be leak '

o tested to verify integrity.

,

Other documents reviewed included Station Problem Report CNPR-04579 l and Exempt Change CE-2772 dated 4/18/9 The latter document provided an evaluation to show tnat a 1DCFR 50.59 evaluation was not l

required for the subject modificatio Within the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identifie ..

i I

.

G *

.

.

,

>

4 Exit Interview ,

The inspection scope and' results were summarized on June 29, 1990, with those persons' indicated in paragraph 1. T.,e inspectors describe the areas inspected.and discussed in detail the inspection results. A chough reviewed during this inspection, proprietary information is not contained '

in this report. Dissenting comments were not-received from the license . Acronyms and Initialisms >

AC - Alternating Current ASME - American Society of "echanical Engineers  :

B&PV - Boiler and Pressure Vessel B&W - Babcock and Wilcox CA - Change Authorization DAC - Distance Amplitude Curve DPC - Duke Power Company EC - Eddy Current ISI - Inservice Inspection s MT - Magne'.ic Particle -

MHz - Megahertz NDE -

Nondestructive Examination N Number-  :

NRC - Nuclear Regulatory Commission OD - Outside Diameter PT - Liquid Penetrant QA - Quality Assurance R -

Revision RT - Radiographic Test SG - Steam Generator S/N -

Serial Number UT -

Ultrasonic VT - Visual