IR 05000424/1985025

Insp Repts 50-424/85-25 & 50-425/85-24 on 850617-21.No Violation or Deviation Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Preservice Insp of safety-related Piping Welds,Including Review of Procedures,Observation of Work & Data Review

ML20132E584
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	06/28/1985
From:	Blake J, Newsome R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20132E575	List: IR 05000424/1985025 ML20132E571
References
50-424-85-25, 50-425-85-24, NUDOCS 8508020034
Download: ML20132E584 (11)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter: , , .

.j   UNITED STATES
- / p Kreg%  NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
 "

g, g REGION 11 g j 101 MARIETTA STREET, * 2 ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323

\...../

Report Nos.: 50-424/85-25 and 50-425/85-24 Licensee: Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Docket-Nos.: 50-424 and 50-425 License Nos.: CPPR-108 and CPPR-109 Facility Name: Vogtle 1 and 2 Inspection Conducted: ,? June 1 -21, 1985  ; Inspector: P

  - hh   -on/ 2[ //[[

R. W. Newsome Date Signbd Approved by: /8, [. betd ,k d/AFh5 J. J. Blake, Section C$ ef ' D&te Si'ned g Engineering Branch / Division of Reactor Safety SUMMARY Scope: This routine, announced inspection involved 36 inspector-hours on site in the areas of preservice inspection (PSI) of safety-related piping welds including review of procedures, observation of work, data review and evaluation, indepen-dent ultrasonic verification examinations, and licensee action on previous enforcement matters; also, general observation of construction activities, construction progress and material storag Results: No violations or deviations were identifie $ 4 P

. .

'
.

REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees

*G. Bockhold, General Manager, Nuclear Operations (NO)
*C. Belflower, Quality Assurance (QA) Site Manager, Operations
*E. Groover, QA Site Manager, Construction
*E. Meadows, Regulatory Compliance Plant Manager
*C. Hayes, Vogtle QA Manager
*C. Pugh, Senior Engineer
*R. Loftin, Plant Engineer Supervisor
*S. Lee, Plant Engineer Other licensee employees contacted included construction craftsmen, engineers, tecnnicians, operators, mechanics, security force members, and office personne Other Organizations J. Davis, Nondestructive Examination (NDE) Supervisor Level III, SouthernCompanyServices(SCS)
*R. May, Preservice NDE Coordinator, SCS
*A. Maze, NDE Level III, SCS NRC Resident Inspector W. Sanders, Senior Resident Inspector, Construction t
* Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on June 21,1985, with those persors indicated in the above paragraph. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings listed belo 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 Inspector Followup Item (IFI) 50-424/85-25-01, " Procedure UT-V-406, clarification of establishing primary reference response," paragraph 6.a.(2).

Inspector Followup Item 50-424/85-25-02, " Procedure UT-V-404, applicable material," paragraph 6.a.(2).

. .

.
.

3. Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (Closed) Unresolved Item 50-424/85-07-01, " Determine Adequacy of Liquid Penetrant Examinations." This item concerns the possible compromise of liquid penetrant examinations which had been performed by a PSI examine The individual had been questioned by an NRC inspector, see report 50-424, 425/85-07, regarding liquid penetrant examination procedure requirements and during the questioning the examiner gave an incorrect answer to one of the critical elements of the examination procedure. SCS agreed to determine I the adequacy of the liquid penetrant examinations which had been performed by the individual by re-examining ten percent of the welds examined by the examiner. A ten percent randomly selected sample of the welds were re-examined by a Level III SCS examiner. lne results of the re-examination of these welds indicated no significant difference existed between the two examinations. The inspector reviewed supporting documentation and has no further questions regarding this ite (0 pen) Unresolved Item 50-424/85-07-02, "Preservice Inspection Program Procedures." This item concerns establishment of PSI procedures to define PSI responsibilities, audits, control of materials and indoctrination / training of vendor PSI personne Discussions with licensee personnel indicated that procedure ADM-V-217 is in the review stage and addresses the major portions of the areas in questio Procedural requirements for the remaining portions of the questionable areas are still in the in-process stage. This item will remain open pending licensee completion and implemen-tation of the controlling procedures and subsequent NRC revie . Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspectio . Independent Inspection Effort (92706) Units 1 and 2 The inspector conducted a general inspection of the Unit 1 and Unit 2 containments, auxiliary building, and material storage areas to observe construction progress and construction activities such as welding, material handling, housekeeping and storage. The inspector did not observe any questionable workmanship and discussions with mechanics indicated that they were knowledgeable of requirements. The inspector also observed that material protection, handling, and storage appeared adequat Within the areas examined, no violations or deviations were identifie ' 6. Preservice Inspection (PSI) (Unit 1) The inspector examined documents, activities, and records as indicated below to determine whether PSI was being conducted in accordance with applicable procedures, regulatory requirements and licensee commitments. The applic-able code for PSI is the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Y T _ _ _

. .
'
.

Pressure Vessel (ASME B&PV) Code, Section XI,1980 edition with addenda through Winter 1980. Southern Company Services (SCS) has responsibility as the PSI contracto However, nondestructive examinations have been performed by Sonic Systems International (SSI) and Lambert, MacGill, Thomas Inc. (LMT). SCS Level III examiners are performing the ultrasonic examina-tion evaluation Review of Procedures (730528)

 (1) The following SCS procedures were reviewed in the areas of procedure approval and qualification of NDE personnel:

Procedure N Ti tle AUX-H/F/V-300(R2) Procedure (Written Practice) for qualification and certification of nondestructive examination personne AUX-V-306 (RO) Measuring and recording search unit location during manual ultrasonic examination AUX-V-307(RO) Preservice and inservice inspection with deviation 001 documentatio UT-V-404(R0) Manual ultrasonic examination of full-penetration weld UT-V-406 (RO) Manual ultrasonic examination of cast stainless full-penetration weld UT-V-411 (RO) Manual ultrasonic examination of pressure vessel welds (2 inches to 12 inches in thickness).

. UT-V-455 (RO) Qualification of manual ultrasonic with deviation 001 instruments.

, UT-V-465 (RO) Ultrasonic thickness examination procedur MT-V-505 (RO) Dry powder magnetic particle examination: Yoke Metho PT-V-605(RO) Color contrast, solvent-removable with deviation 001 liquid penetrant examination procedur (2) The inspector also reviewed procedures AUX-V-306, UT-V-404, UT-V-406, UT-V-411, and UT-V-465 to ascertain whether they had been reviewed and approved in accordance with the licensee's _ _ _ _ _ _ __

 . - - - - . - - - - - - -    - - - - . - - - - - . -
<.- .

I

 .

'

established QA procedures. The above procedures were reviewed for technical adequacy and conformance with ASME, Section V Article 5

and other license commitments / requirements .in the below listed areas: type of apparatus used; extent of. coverage of weldment; calibratiet requirements; search units; . beam angles; DAC curves; reference level for monitoring discontinuities; method of demonstration of penetration; limits for evaluating and recording indications; recording significant indications and; acceptance , limits.

! While reviewing ultrasonic procedure UT-V-406, the inspector noted that in paragraph 8.6.5 subparagraph 5 the description for establishing a primary reference response could become confusing in those cases where the inside diameter (ID) notch exceeded the amplitude from the side drilled hole at 3/4 SCS personnel agreed with this assessment and will issue a revision to the , procedure which clarifies the method for establishing a primary reference response. Pending issuance of the clarification and review by NRC, this item will be identified as IFI 50-424/85-25-01, " Procedure UT-V-406, clarification of establish- [ ing primary reference response."

During.the review of ultrasonic procedure UT-V-404, the inspector

'
'

noted that the procedure made no distinction as to the applicable material on which the procedure could be utilize During discussions with SCS level III personnel, the inspector pointed this fact out and in addition pointed out that the possibility existed for the inadverent use of this procedure _on cast stainless pipe which would be an unacceptable examination. SCS personnel agreed that the applicable material needed to be specified in the , procedure and will issue a procedure revision stipulating the ' applicable material. Pending issue of the revision and review 1 by NRC, this item will be identified as IFI 50-424/85-25-02, j " Procedure UT-V-404, applicable material."

! (3) The inspector also reviewed procedure PT-V-605 to ascertain ! whether it had been reviewed and approved in accordance with the licensee's established QA procedures. The above procedure was , reviewed for technical adequacy and conformance with ASME, Section V, Article 6, and other licensee commitments / requirements

  'in the below listed areas: specified method; penetrant materials

' identified; penetrant materials analyzed for sulfur; penetrant + materials analyzed for total halogens; acceptable pre-examination surface; drying time; method of penetrant application; surface temperature; solvent removal; dry surface prior to developing; type of developing; examination technique; and evaluation

techniqu !

,

6

- , - - 1 > -, ,, , w-w,m---,-,- -,,-,,-,,n,- --,-w.- ,rw , , , , , , - - - - - ~ , - -
    -
       - -,,..,,,r, .w,, , , v  - , , . . _ , , , , - - '

.. .

.

S'

(4) The inspector also reviewed procedure MT-V-505 to ascertain
 .whether it had been reviewed and approved in accordance with the licensee's established QA procedures. The above procedure was reviewed for technical adequacy and .for conformance with ASME Section V, Article 7, and other licensee commitments / requirements in the below listed areas: examination method; contrast of dry powder particle color with background and . surface temperature; examination overlap and directions; pole or prod spacing; current
 ,or lifting power (yoke) and; acceptance criteri ObservationofWorkandWorkActivities(73053B)

The inspector observed a limited amount of work activities due to the limited number of examinations being performed and- the time required for independent ultrasonic verification examinations utilizing-Region II equipment and personnel. The inspector reviewed certifica-tion records of equipment, materials, and NDE personnel which had been and will be utilized during the required PSI examination The reviews conducted by the inspector are documented belo (1) Examiner Qualification The . inspector reviewed the qualification documentation for the below listed Southern Company Services (SCS) and Lambert, MacGill,

    .

Thomas, Inc. (LMT) examiners in the following areas: employer's name; person certified; activity qualified to perform; effective period of certification; signature of employer's designated representatives; basis used for certification; and annual visual acuity, color vision examination and periodic recertificatio Method - Level-VT Examiner (SCS) E E E 'E EC 1-T-3-4 DRC I II I - I II II II II JMD III III III III- - III III III III RTD III III III III - III III III III KJH I II II - - - - - - KSJ II II II III - - - - - TWL I II II - - - - - - RLM II II - - - - - - - AGM III III III III - - - - - KFW II II II - - - - - -

m - .

.
   '

Method - Level VT Examiner (LMT) Ul E MT RT E_C 1-2 -7 - 4 RDB II II II - - - - - - KLH II I - - - - I - - WRR II II II - - II - II II AWV I II II - - - - - -

(2) The inspector conducted verification ultrasonic examinations using Region II equipment on portions of the below listed Class 1 weld The examinations .were performed in order to evaluate the technical adequacy of the ultrasonic examination procedures being used to perform preservice ultrasonic examinations and to assess the validity of the information being reported by the ultrasonic examiner The ultrasonic examination procedures used to perform the verification examinations were UT-V-404 or UT-V-406, as

> applicabl Weld ID Description S.ystem 11201-002-5 Hot Leg Elbow to Nozzle Main Coolant Loop 2 11201-005-7 Crossover Pipe to Elbow Main Coolant Loop 1 11201-004-4 Hot Leg Pipe to Elbow Main Coolant Loop 4 11204-024-14 6" Valve to Pipe . Safety Injection 11204-024-19 6" Pipe to Branch Connection Safety Injection 11204-021-10 8" Pipe to Reducer Safety Injection 11204-021-9 8" Pipe to Pipe Safety Injection L 11201-049-1 12" Branch Connection to Pipe Residual Heat Removal The verification ultrasonic examinations conducted by the inspector indicated that the procedures being used to conduct the preservice examinations are adequate and that the information being reported by the ultrasonic examiners compares favorably with . ' the verification examinations. The verification examinations also indicated that a very conservative examination was being performed where procedure UT-V-404 is being utilize (3) The inspector observed portions of the ultrasonic examinations indicated belo The observations -were compared with the applicable procedures and the Code in the following areas: , availability of and compliance with approved NDE procedure; use of ! knowledgeable NDE personnel; use of NDE personnel qualified to ! the proper level; type of apparatus used; extent of coverage of weldment; calibration requirements; search units; beam angles; DAC ) curves; reference level for monitoring discontinuities; method o demonstrating penetration; limits of evaluating and recording indications; recording significant indications and; acceptance limits.

l L

_ . .

*
.

Weld ID Description 151-11201-006-3 Main Coolant Loop Pipe Weld Loop 2 Crossover ISI-11201-005-4 Main Coolant Loop Pipe Weld Loop 1 Crossover (4) The following listed ultrasonic equipment and materials certifica-tion records were reviewed: Ultrasonic Instruments Manufacturer / Model Serial N Nortec 1310 410 Nortec 131D 129 Nortec 131D 409 Nortec 131D 311 Nortec 131D 273 KK USL-38 210308N KK USL-38 210349N Ultrasonic Rompas Blocks LMT-069 LMT-027 SCS-793381 Ultrasonic Couplant Sonotrace 40 Batch No. 8440 Ultrasonic Transducers Size Frequency Serial N .25" 2.25 MHz G11461

 .375" 2.25 MHz C85204 1.0" 2.25 MHz R781
 .75" 2.25 MHz 978
 .25" 2.25 MHz Y2880
 .25" 2.25 MHz 13231 1.0" 1.0 MHz J31550
 .75" 1.0 MHz P979
 .375" 5.0 MHz 1994 1.0" 1.0 MHz 26226
 .75" 5.0 MHz B08526 '
 .5" 1.0 MHz LO4108
 .25" 2.25 MHz M17106
     -

. .

*
.

Ultrasonic Calibration Blocks Identification N Material ISI-D-331A Cast Stainless steel ISI-D-303A Stainless Steel ISI-SK-107 Cast Stainless Steel ISI-D-304A Stainless Steel ISI-D-310A Carbon Steel ISI-D-309A Carbon Steel (5) The below listed magnetic particle yokes were available for use by examiners for the performance of PSI examinations. Because the yokes were available for use, the inspector requested that the required ten pound lift test be performed on eacn yoke to verify it would meet the requirements of controlling documents. The lift

. test plate documentation was reviewed and a satisfactory left test was performed on each magnetic particle yok Yoke Serial N LMT-003 LMT-002 SCS-6662 (6) The inspector reviewed the below listed magnetic particle material certification records:

Batch Number 84C038 84K087 (7) The inspector reviewed the below listed liquid penetrant materials certification records to ascertain if the sulfur and halogen content of the material was within acceptable content limit Materials Batch Number Liquid Penetrant 82G111, 84H027, 81E120, 81H114 Cleaner / Remover 84M067, 84E051, 81F076, 83B027 Developer 84M029, 840005, 838001, 81H085 c. PSI Data Review and Evaluation (73055) Records of completed nondestructive 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

r

. .
'
.

procedures; findings were properly recorded and evaluated by qualified personnel; programmatic deviations were recorded as required; personnel, instruments, calibration blocks and NDE materials (pene-trants, couplants) were designate Records selected for this review are listed below: Component Weld ID NDE Method Valve to Pipe 11204-023-WO PT Valve to Pipe 11204-023-WO UT-0 , 45 , 60 Valve to Pipe 11204-021-W0 PT Valve to Pipe 11204-021-W0 UT-0 , 45 , 60 Pipe to Valve 11201-049-W0 PT Pipe to Valve 11201-049-W0 UT-0', 45 , 60* Elbow to Pipe 11201-036-W0 PT Elbow to Pipe 11201-036-W0 UT-0', 45 , 60 Pipe to Elbow 11201-029-W0 PT Pipe to Elbow 11201-029-W0 UT-0', 45*, 60 Pipe to Elbow 11201-030-WO PT Pipe to Elbow 11201-030-W0 UT-0', 45', 60 Elbow to Pipe 11204-039-WO PT Elbow to Pipe 11204-039-W0 UT-0', 45*, 60 Valve to Pipe 11204-201-W0 PT Valve to Pipe 11204-201-W0 UT-0 , 45 , 60 Pipe to Valve 11301-016-WO MT Valve to Pipe 11301-016-W0 MT Pipe to Valve 11301-013-W0 MT Pipe to Valve 11301-014-WO MT During the review of the above listed data, the inspector requested an explanation of how SCS was determining the location and/or position of the ultrasonic indications being reported. The method being used by the SCS Level III examiners, in part, utilizes a computerized system whereby information pertaining to the ultrasonic beam path, material velocity, material thickness and profile, and ultrasonic transducer location relative to a given point are fed into a computer which then analyzes the data and produces a representative plot of the reported ultrasonic reflector relative to the weld being examined. This method of determining ultrasonic reflector location appears to be accurate within acceptable limits although the accuracy of the plotted reflector is dependent upon the examined material velocity which is not a positive factor, but can be established within a generally accepted deviation limit. In addition to the computerized plot, if the validity of the reflector location appears ambiguous, a more detailed ultrasonic re-examination of the area is performed and the final determination of the reflector location is established from all sources of information which includes weld profile measurements, taken on the pipe inside surface and outside surface for the main coolant loop piping, and on

. .

'

10 the outside surface of all other piping in most case The above method for determining ultrasonic reflector location combined with a review of available radiographs of the examination area is used to make the final decision relative to reflector type and subsequent disposi-tion. The above described method for determining reflector disposition appears relatively accurate and adequat Within the areas of inspection, no violations or deviations were identified. }}