ML17289A851
| ML17289A851 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 07/27/1992 |
| From: | Harris R, Modes M, Peterson P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17289A849 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-397-92-20, NUDOCS 9209180037 | |
| Download: ML17289A851 (18) | |
See also: IR 05000397/1992020
Text
0
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION
1
DOCKET NO.
REPORT NO.
LICENSE NO.
LICENSEE:
2-2
QP-21
W hin
nP
li Pwr
u
1
r eW
hin
nW
ichl nd WA
2
em
FACILITYNAME:
INSPECTION
AT'NSPECTIONDATES:
W
hin
nPu li P w r
1
t mNu I'rPr
t
N~um sr 2
i hl
WA
un
1
1
2 t
J ne 12
1
2
INSPECTORS:
P. M. Peterson, Technician,
Mobile NDE Laboratory, EB, DRS
Da
. H. H
s, Techmnan,
Mobile NDE Laboratory, EB, DRS
ate
D. C. Wiggins; TET, Inc.; Mobile, Alabama
W. M. Mingus; TET, Inc.; Mobile, Alabama
APPROVED BY:
M. C. Modes,
hief, Mobile NDE
Laboratory, Engineering Branch, DRS
ate
9209180037
920901
ADOCK 05000397
0
2
n
mm
I
i
An announced inspection was conducted by the
NRC's Mobile Nondestructive Examination (NDE) Laboratory at Washington Wblic Power
Supply System Nuclear Project Number 2 (WNP2), during the period of June
1 through 12,
1992, (Report No. 50-397/92-20).
The purpose of the Mobile Nondestructive Examination
(NDE) Laboratory is to perform independent evaluations of components,
systems and welds
to assure that NDE performed by the licensee is done in compliance with the requirements.
I'he
licensee's program is designed to meet the minimum requirements
set by the American
Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME),Section XI.
One of the violations (VIO 397/92020-01) is the failure to calibrate the ultrasonic
instrumentation for the examination of defects oriented perpendicular to the weld. This
examination should be calibrated using axially orientated notches.
The welds were examined
for defects oriented transverse to the weld using the calibration reserved for defects oriented
parallel to the weld.
According to the licensee this variation from the code requirements was
performed for all the welds as part of a general policy. The failure to correctly calibrate for
defects oriented perpendicular to the weld, calls into question all examinations of a similar
orientation for the first interval of inservice inspection program;
The licensee identified that.
they would evaluate the calibration responses of the applicable calibration blocks and perform
an evaluation/reinspection of welds and examinations performed with questionable previous
calibrations.
The second violation (VIO 397/92020-02) is the acceptance of radiographs which did not
meet the minimum requirements of the ASME'Code,Section V. ASME,Section V,
provides minimum requirements for final radiographs for ASME Class 1, pressure retaining
One requirement, is that location markers be radiographically projected through the
component onto the filmfor each exposure.
The location marker identifies each film to
assure
100% coverage of the weld. The failure to radiographically project the location
markers on each film, as required, calls into question the coverage and acceptance of the
weld. The licensee radiographed the weld again and obtained Code acceptable film, and the
weld was evaluated as acceptable.
I
'
fU
1 p<<
ij
"
w yg,PCIR),lighp
injection spray (HPCIS), reactor core isolation cooling (RCIC), fuel pool cooling system
(FPC), residual heat removal (RHR), and the main steam lines (MSS) were examined by the
NRC utilizing various NDE methods as listed in the attached tables.
The licensee's
procedures, in conjunction with NRC procedures,
were used for nondestructive evaluation.
The licensee's
final evaluation reports were reviewed and compared with the results obtained
by the NRC.
~gilt'. Two violations of the ASME Code were noted during this inspection, one in
ultrasonic testing and one in radiographic testing.
0
II
,l
II
4
1.0
INTRODUCTION,
Code of Federal Regulations,
10 CFR 50.55a, requires that inservice inspections of safety
related equipment be performed to identify any service related degradation of safety systems.
These inspections are required to be performed in accordance with the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure
Vessel Code, Section XIfor Inservice
Inspection.
This inspection was made using the Mobile Nondestructive Examination (NDE)
Laboratory.
The Mobile NDE Laboratory is capable of independently duplicating the
exaini iations required of the licensee.
This provides the NRC with an overview of the
licensee's inservice inspection (ISI) program and tests the adequacy and accuracy of the
licensee's inspections.
(80W81).
3.0
INNERRNOENT MEAEUREMRNM. NOIIOIOTRU UNITE EE AMMA TION
AND QUALITYRECORDS REVIEW OF SAFETY RELATED SYSTEM>
2.0
INSERVICE INSPECTION PROGRAM REVIEW
The WNP2 inservice inspection program is in its first interval; ending December
13, 1994.
The program is based on the requirements of the 1980 Edition through Winter 1980 Addenda
of Section XIof the ASME Code (80W80), except that paragraph IWA-2300 (a) (1) and code
category C-F have been upgraded to the 1983 Edition, Winter 1983 Addenda (83W83). In
addition, Paragraph IWF-3400 has been upgraded to the 1980 Edition, Winter 1981 Addenda
During the period of June
1 through 12, 1992, an onsite independent NDE inspection was
conducted at WNP2. The inspection was performed. by NRC inspectors and by NRC
contract NDE personnel.
The objectives of this inspection were to assess
the adequacy of the
licensee's inservice inspection and flow assisted corrosion (FAC) inspection program.
These objectives were accomplished by independently performing selected examinations
required of the licensee by regulations and codes.
3.1
Visual Examination (57050)
Fourteen (14) safety related hangers were visually examined in accordance with NRC
procedure NDE-10, Rev. 1, Appendix B, and WNP-2 Procedure QCI 7-3, Revision 2, dated
1/17/86.
Visual examination was performed utilizing quality control documents, isometrics
and as-built drawings,
Included in this inspection were samples of ASME Class 2 and 3
hangers listed in Table 2 of Section 7.0 of this report.
The purpose of this examination was
to determine the general mechanical and structural conditions of components and their
supports, such as the presence of loose parts, debris, or abnormal corrosion products, wear,
erosion, corrosion, and the loss of integrity at bolted or welded connections.
Seventeen
(17) safety related pipe weldments and adjacent base material (1/2 inch on either
side of the weld) were visually examined in accordance with NRC procedure NDE-10,
Rev. 1, Appendix A, and WNP-2 procedure QCI 7-1, Revision 2, dated 4/9/90.
Visual
examination was performed of pipe systems and attached components utilizing quality control
documents, isometrics and as-built drawings.
Included in this inspection were the samples
listed in Table
1 under Section 7.0 of this report.
The examination was performed
specifically to identify any cracks or linear indications, gouges, leakage, arc strikes with
craters, or corrosion, which may infringe upon the minimum pipe wall thickness.
Mirrors',
flash lights and weld gauges were used, as required, to aid in the inspection and evaluation
of the weldments.
g~~lg The welds were found to be in compliance with the visual standards applicable to
their classification with good surface preparation and appearance.
The hangers listed in
Table 2 of Section 7.0 were in acceptable condition with no missing parts.
3.2
Liquid Pen'etrant Examination (57060)
Four (4) safety related pipe weldments and adjacent base material (1/2 inch on either side of.
the weld) were examined using the visible dye, solvent removable, liquid penetrant method
per NRC procedure NDE-9, Rev. 0, in conjunction with the WNP-2 procedure QCI 3-3,
Revision 3, dated 3/29/91.
For a listing of welds see Table
1 in Section 7.0.
~mlh: The results of the liquid penetrant examinations compared favorably with the results
reported by the WNP-2 inspectors and subcontractors.
3.3
Ultrasonic Examination (57080)
Eleven (11) safety related pipe weldments were ultrasonically examined by the NRC using a
Stavely Model 136D ultrasonic flaw detector in accordance with NRC procedure NDE-1,
Revision
1 and WNP-2 procedure QCI 6-13, Revision 4, dated 4/10/87.
The specific weld
identifications are listed in Table 1 in Section 5.0 of this report.
The licensee had evaluated
their ultrasonic examinations of these welds acceptable May 20, 1992.
The Stavely Model
136D was verified for linearity in conformance with NRC procedure NDE-2, Rev 1. To
obtain the greatest possible repeatability the examination was undertaken utilizing transducers
and cable that matched,
as closely as possible, those used by the licensee
. The distance
amplitude compensation
curves, used for acceptance of the welds, was established utilizing
WNP-2 calibration standards.
The specific calibration standards applicable to the welds are
listed in the footnote to Table
1 in Section 7.0 of this report.
'n addition to a direct comparison of the results of the ultrasonic examination, a number of
the welds were profiled utilizing a profile gauge and thickness readings.
This data was used
to construct a scale model of the weld in order to determine ifadequate coverage was
obtained in keeping with the requirements of ASME Section XI, Appendix III. These
r
coverage calculations were then compared with the coverage claimed by the subcontractor
and accepted by the licensee in the final inspection reports.
/~ill: Allthe examinations compared favorably for scans of defects oriented parallel to
the weld. The results of the NRC examinations were essentially the same as those of the
WNP-2 subcontractor.
The calculations for coverage,
based on profile 'data, showed
'dequate coverage was being obtained. The examination results reported by the
subcontractor, were accurate and detailed.
One violation was noted during the inspection;
the licensee failed to calibrate the ultrasonic instrument as required by ASME Code, Section
XI, Appendix III,paragraph 3430. (VIO 397/92020-01).
The failure was to calibrate the
ultrasonic instrumentation for the examination of defects oriented perpendicular to the weld.
This examination should be calibrated using axially orientated notches.
The welds were
examined for defects oriented transverse to the weld using. the calibration reserved for defects
oriented parallel to the weld. The licensee initiallyidentified that they consider their method
of calibration acceptable per paragraph IWA-2240 of Section XI, which stated, "Alternative
examination methods, a combination of methods,'r newly developed techniques may be
substituted for the methods specified in this division, provided the Inspector is satisfied that
the results are demonstrated
to be equivalent or superior to those of the specified method."
During this inspection, the licensee was unable to provide documentation that their method of
ultrasonic examination had been demonstrated to be equivalent or superior for all the
applicable ultrasonic calibration blocks.
According to the licensee this variation from the
code requirements was performed for all the welds as part of a general policy. When the
NRC performed the correct calibration, the NRC found variations in acceptance level of up
to 50%, depending on the pipe size and calibration block used.
These variations meant that
the licensee was evaluating indications at 50% when they were actually 100% of the
acceptance level or conversely, rejectable.
The failure to correctly calibrate for defects
oriented perpendicular to the weld calls into question all ultrasonic examinations of a similar
orientation for the first interval of the inservice inspection program.
The licensee stated that
they would evaluate the calibration responses of the applicable calibration blocks and perform
an evaluation/reinspection of welds and examinations performed with questionable previous
calibrations.
3.4
Radiography (57090)
During the current outage, the licensee performed a modification of the HPCI system drain
pipes.
1 pressure retaining welds.
These welds require a
volumetric examination for final acceptance.
The NRC NDE Mobile Laboratory selected
two (2) welds to radiograph.
The radiography was performed in accordance with NRC
procedure NDE-S, Revision 1. The welds which were examined are listed in Section 5.0,
Table
1 of this report.
~egllg
One violation was noted; the licensee's radiographs of weld WRR 8417 X1-1 failed
to meet the minimum requirements of ASME Section V, Article 2. (VIO 397/92020-02).
ASME,Section V, has minimum requirements for final radiographs
'for ASME Class 1,
pressure retaining welds.
One requirement is that location markers be radiographically
projected through the component on to the filmfor each exposure.
The location marker
identifies each film to assure
100% coverage of the weld.
Licensee Problem Evaluation
Request (PER) No. 292-592 identified that the first x-ray for weld WRR 8417 Kl-1 was
rejected by the authorized nuclear inservice inspector (ANILon the basis that the film did
not have the proper filmdensity in the examination area.
A second x-ray shot had the
proper filmdensity, but was rejected on the basis that no identification marker showed on the
film. The licensee then combined the film from the two shots and accepted the filmas a set
based on the fact that each film showed a unique spot on the fitting. On May 29, 1992, the
ANIIaccepted the set of filmon the basis that the set met the intent of the code.
The failure
to radiographically project the location markers on each film, as required, is a violation.
The licensee radiographed the weld again and obtained a Code acceptable film, and the weld
was evaluated as acceptable.
3.'5
Flow Assisted Corrosion (49001)
Concerns regarding flow assisted corrosion in balance of plant piping systems has heightened
as a result of the December 9, 1986 feedwater piping line rupture which occurred at Surry..
This event was the subject of the NRC Information Notice 86-106, issued December 16,
1986, and its supplement issued on February 13, 1987.
The licensee's actions with regard to the detection of erosion/corrosion in plant components
were reviewed with respect to NUREG-1344, "Erosion/Corrosion Induced Pipe Wall
Thinning in U. S. Nuclear Power Plants,
dated April 1989, Generic Letter 88-08 issued
May 2, 1989, and NUMARC Technical Subcommittee Working Group on Piping and
Erosion/Corrosion Summary Report, dated June 11, 1987.
WNP-2 started monitoring erosion/corrosion in 1985, and at least twelve components have
been replaced due to erosion/corrosion
since the start of monitoring.
The procedure used to
monitor the pipe wall thinning is WNP-2 procedure number 8.3.63
Surveillance Procedure
For Monitoring Pipe Wall." Allpiping systems were screened for the susceptibility to flow
assisted corrosion.
Some of the variables used for discrimination of a system are
temperature, flow velocity, system usage, flashing flow and cavitation.
Component selection for ultrasonic examination is based on plant and industry experience
along with Electric Power Research Institute's CHEC and CHECMATE computer codes.
The components that have the highest wear rates or have failed in other locations are the
highest priority for inspection.
Inspection frequency and intervals are based on the
remaining wall thickness and time remaining to reach minimum wall thickness.
The flow assisted erosion/corrosion monitoring program at WNP-2 is comprehensive
and
complete and well implemented.
It exceeds the industry recommendations in every regard
and takes a conservative approach in its sampling and application.
I
4.0
MANAGEMENTMEKTINGS
Licensee management
was informed, of the scope and purpose of'the inspection at the entrance
interview on June 2, 1992.
The findings of the inspection were discussed with the licensee
representatives
during the course of the inspection and presented to licensee management at the exit
interview (see paragraph 5.0 for those who attended).
Administrative inspection materials incident to the conduct-of the inspections were released to the
licensee per NRC 0620-05.03C during the inspection.
On June 12, 1992 an exit meeting was held
with members of the licensee s staff listed in Section 5.0. During this meeting, the findings of the
inspection were discussed with the licensee's
management.
The licensee indicated that they
understood the findings and would take actions as indicated in this report.
5.0
PERSONS CONTACTED
M. P. Reis
R. A. Moen
D. R. Welch
D. P. Ramey
C. R. Noyes
R. C. Webring
G. C. Sorensen
L. T. Harrold
D. L. Larkin
Tech Staff/Compliance
Materials &Inspection
Materials &Inspection
Materials &Inspection
Site Services
Technical Manager
Regulatory Programs Manager
Assistant Plant Manager
Manager Engineering Services
A. T. Gody
R. L. Nease
R. C. Sorensen
Acting Chief, Engineering, RV
Acting Resident Inspector, WNP-2
Senior Resident Inspector, WNP-2
Reactor Inspector, RV
D. Hoggarth
0
6.0
REVIEW OF SITE NDE PROCEDURES AND MANUALS
The following procedures were reviewed by the NDE Mobile Laboratory.
QCI 7-3
QCI 7-1
Visual Examination, Component Supports
Visual Examination
QCI 4-3
QCI 6-13
Magnetic Particle Examination
Ultrasonic Examination of Piping Welds
(Manual)
QCI 3-3'iquid Penetrant Examination
Qg~
2
4/9/90
3
1/17/86
3
3/29/91
4
3/29/91
4
4/10/87
QCI 6-16
Ultrasonic Examination of RPV Welds (Manual)
4
3/28/89
QCI 6-1
Ultrasonic Thickness Measurements
GE-UT-213
Automated Ultrasonic Examination of
Pressure Retaining Welds
QCI 6-28
Ultrasonic Examination of RPV Closure
Head Nuts (Manual)
QCI 6-14
Ultrasonic Examination of Bolting
Larger Than 2" Diameter (Manual)
QCI 6-27
Ultrasonic Examination of Class 2
Pressure Retaining Welds (Manual)
QCI 6-3
Ultrasonic Examination of Similar and
Dissimilar Metal Welds for IGSCC Using
Refracted Longitudinal Wave Techniques
QCI 6-23
Ultrasonic Transducer Evaluation
QCI 6-2
Ultrasonic Examination of Piping Welds
for IGSCC (Manual)
0
3/23/87
3
3/23/87
0
3/23/87
0
4/30/91
1
4/19/88
2
3/23/87
4
1/22/88
0
6/1/92
8.3.63
~
~
Surveillance Procedure for Monitoring
Pipe Wall
2
4/16/91
'I
!
I
i
"
10
7.0
COMPOMWXS AND WELDS INSPECTED BY THE NRC
NRC INDEPENDENT INRAEUREijEXM
TABLENo. 1
.
WELD ID. No.
SYS
OR
ISO/DRAWING
LIN
CL
SHT.¹ 1
NONDESTRUCTIVE TEST
ACC
REJ
26MS(l)D6 ~~
MS
26MS(1)6LDI ~~
MS
26MS(1)6LDO ~~
MS
X
X
X
X
X
K
X
X
X
26MS(1)D7 ~~-
MS
X
X
X
26MS(1)7LUO ~~
MS
26MS(1)7LU1 ~~
MS
26MS(l)A-8 ~~
MS
26MS(1)A-8LDI ~~,
MS
26MS(1)A-8LDO ~~
MS
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
N2 RISER A
N2 RISER B
N2 RISER D
N2 RISER E
12LPCS(1)-1 ~
12LPCS(1)-2 ~
WWR-8417-Xl-1
WWR-8417-Xl-3
RCC
RCC
LPC
LPC
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
K
X
X
X
K
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
~ WNP-2 Calibration Block UT-17
~~ WNP-2 Calibration Block UT-4
1il
,j
't
11
NRC INOERRNORNR NEAR~
HANGER/SUPPORTS
TABLE2
PROGRAM
IDENTIFICATION
FPC-47
FPC-48
FPC-49
FPC-50
FPC-99
FPC-100
FPC-123
FPC-126
FPC-907N
LPCS-2
LPCS-3
LPCS-902N
RHR-59
RHR-61
3
X
3
X
3
X
3
X
3
X
3
X
3
X
3
X
X
LPC
2
X
LPC
2
X
2
X
2
X
SYS
CL
ACC
3
X
REJ
COMMENTS