ML18152A323
| ML18152A323 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 05/08/1992 |
| From: | Blake J, Crowley B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18152A324 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-92-09, 50-280-92-9, 50-281-92-09, 50-281-92-9, NUDOCS 9205270158 | |
| Download: ML18152A323 (18) | |
See also: IR 05000280/1992009
Text
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION 11
101 MARIETTA STREET,N.W.
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323
Report Nos.:
50-280/92-09 and 50-281/92-09
Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company
Glen Allen, VA 23060
Docket Nos.:
50-280 and 50-281
License Nos.:
Facility Name:
Surry 1 and 2-
Inspection Conducted:
March 23 - 27 and April 6 - 10, 1992
Approved
Scope
. Blake, Chief
erials and Processes Section
Engineering Branch
Division of Reactor Safety
SUMMARY
Date Signed
This routine, unannounced inspection was conducted in the area of Inservice
Inspection (ISi). The inspection included a review of the Unit 1 ISi program and
plan for the current outage, as well as overall programmatic controls; review
of nondestructive examination (NDE) procedures; observation of in- process NDE
examinations; review of NDE personnel qualifications; and review of NDE. equipment
calibration
and
material
cert ifi cation
documentation.
In
addition,
implementation of the licensee's Flow Assisted Corrosion (Erosion/Corrosion)
program was inspected. Also, followup inspections were performed on previously
identified Inspector Followup Items (IFis) and Unresolved Items (URis).
, Results
This inspection indicated that, in general, a good ISi program was in place with
adequate implementation. Examination procedures meeting code requirements were
being used and inspections were being performed by qualified personnel.
The
procedures, examination techniques used to conduct the examinations, and
documentation of examination results were good. One site administrative control
procedure for ISi needed to be enhanced relative to transmittal and approval of
the ISi plans transmitted from corporate to the station .
9205270158 920508
ADOCK 05000280
. 0
2 -
When notified of a feedwater pipe cracking problem at another utility, _ the
licensee took prompt action to inspect similar components at Surry. The licensee
also took prompt corrective action for the violations identified.
In the areas inspected, one viplation, failure to follow procedures and
instructions for nonde~tructive examination of piping - paragr~phs 2.c.(1) and
(4), was identified. In addition, one non-cited violation, failure to initiate
repair and replacement documentation, was identified - paragraph 2.c.(8).
,I
1.
Persons Contacted
Licensee Employees
REPORT DETAILS
D. Dodson, Corporate Level III Examiner
- W. Benthall, Supervisor, Licensing
- D. Grady, Supervisor, NDE
- D. Hart, Supervisor, Quality
- T. Huber, Supervisor, ISI/NDE and Engineering Programs
- M. Kansler, Station Manager
- A. McNeill, Senior Staff Engineer
D. Phelps, Engineer
- J. Price, Assistant Station Manager,
- D. Rogers, tead ISI Engineer
- E. Smith, Manager, Quality Assurance
- T. Sowers, Superintendent, Engineering
D. Woodyard, Senior Inspector
Contractor Personnel
S. Erickson, NDE*Supervi$or, Virginia Corporation of Richmond (VCR)
Other* licensee employees contacted during this inspection* included
craftsmen, engineers, quality control personnel, security force members,
technicians, and administrative personnel.
NRC Reiident Inspectors
M. £ranch, Senior Resident Inspector
- J. York, Resident Inspector
S. Tingen~ Resident Inspector
- Attended interim exit interview on March 27, 1992
- Attended exit interview on April 10, 1992 *
Acronyms and Initialisms used throughout this report are listed in the
last paragraph.
2.
Inservice Inspection (ISi) (Unit 1)
The inspector reviewed documents and records, and observed activities, as
indicated below,
to determine whether ISi was
being conducted in
accordance with applicable procedures, * regulatory requirements, and
1 icensee commitments.
The applicable code for ISi (Units 1 and 2) is the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and -Pressure Vessel (ASM~
B&PV) Code,Section XI, 1980 Edition, Winter 1980 Addenda.
3
For Unit 1, the second IO-Year interval started in December 22, 1982 and
ends October 14, 1993.
The current outage is the first outage bf the
third period. -For Unit 2, the second IO-Year interval started May 1,
1983 and ends May 10, 1994.
The recently completed outage was the
last outage of the second period.
Revision O for the Unit 1 second interval program plan and relief requests
was submitted to the NRC by VEPCO 1 etter dated September 21, 1982.
Revision 1 to the Unit 1 plan and revision O of the Unit 2 plan were
submitted on
December 27, 1982.
NRC Safety Evaluation Reports (SERs)
dated January 24, 1984 (Unit 1), and January 24, 1986 (Unit 2), were
issued.
Additional submittals, including revision 2 to the Unit 1 plan
were dated November 26, 1985, and April 17, April 24, May 22, June 23, and
Septembe*r 30, 1986. Revision 3 for Unit 1 and Revision 1 for Unit 2 plans
were submitted on April 16, 1987. Additional information was provided by
VEPCO letters dated June 22 and September 30, 1988, and February 15 and
May 15, 1989. ihe NRC SER covering both units was issued March 14, 1991.
The program plans included 14 NDE relief requests.
All relief requests
were granted, granted with conditions, or determined to not need approval.
By letters dated July 11 and October 1, 1991, VEPCO extended the second
interval end dates for both Units based on extended plant outages.
The licensee's corporate and site ISi organizations are responsible for
the nondestructive examination (NOE) program.
Contractors furnish NDE
examiners and a NDE supervisor.with overall coordination.and supervision
provided by the VEPCO site ISi organization.
For the current outage,
Virginia Corporation of Richmond (VCR) is performing the majority of NDE
examinations.
Westinghouse is performing Eddy Current (ET) examinations
of steam generator tubing.
a.
ISi Program Review (73051) (Unit 1)
The inspector reviewed the following documents relating to the ISi
program to determine whether relief requests had been approved by
. NRR, the services of an Authorized Nuclear Inservi ce Inspector
(ANII) had been procured and was involved in ISi activities, the
plan h~d been approved by the licensee and to assure that procedures
and pl ans had been established (written, reviewed, approved and
issued)
to control
and
accomplish
the following
applicable
activities:
program organization including identification of
commitments
and
regulatory requirements,
preparing plans and
schedule~, and qualification, training, responsibilities, and duties
of personnel responsible for ISI; repair and replacement program*
requirements; ~ersonnel qualification requirements; and guidance for
identifying and processing relief requests.
Surry Power Station Unit 1 Inservice Inspection Plan For
The Second Inspection Interval Volume 2 -
Revision O -
September 1991
For Components
and Component Supports -
December 22, 1982 - October 14, 1993
3
lnservice Inspection Manual, Revi~ion 28
Augmented Inspection Manual
SUADM-M-23, dated 6/8/89, Disposition of ASME Section XI
Inspection and Testing _Discrepancies
SUADM-M-25,
Revision 0,
Documentation Control
and
Reporting Requirements
SUADM-M-26, dated 5/29/89, ASME Section XI Inspection and
Examination Control
VPAP-307, Revisioh 2, Repair and Replacement of ASME Section
XI Components
- SSES-1.05, Revision 2, Controlling Procedure For Engineering
Assignment Schedule
SSES-6.01,
Revision
0,
Controlling
Procedure
For
Engineering
SSES-6.02A, Revision 0, Controlling Procedure For Repair and
Replacement Follower
SSES-6.02B, Revision I~ Contrblling Procedure For Logging ASME
XI Reports
SSES-606, Revision 0, Controlling Procedure For The Review of
ISI Related Issues/Checklists Prior to Unit Startup Following
A Refueling Outage
SSES-7.01, Revision 0, Controlling Procedure For Surry NOE
Services
SSES-7.02, Revision 0, Controlling Procedure For the Review &
Routing of Completed NOE Reports
NDE-3.1,
Revision 6,
Preparation, Issue and *Control of
NDE-4.1, Revision 11, Virginia Power Written Practice For
Certification of Nondestructive Examination Personnel
NDE-6.2, Revision 2, Review of Contractor Nondestructive
Examination Interpretation By Virginia Power Personnel
NDE-6.3, Revision I, Storage and Control of NOE Calibrated
Equipment, Calibration Standards & Consumable NOE Materials
.
.
NDE-6.4, Revision O, Selection of Calibration Blocks For PSI
& ISi Ultrasonic Examination
(
.,
b.
4
NDE-7.2,
Revision
4,
General
Requirements
For
ISi
Review of the above _documents rev ea Ted the fo 11 owing area where
procedures nee~ed clarification and/or enhancement.
- The ISi manual details the types of inspecti~n plans to be issued
and requires that the corporate ISi organization.provide the station
an inspection plan (the Period Plan or a list of inspections
remaining for the period) for each outage.
From the plan provided
by corporate, the station prepares an outage plan.* The inspector
noted that procedures did not clearly iterate the controls required
. for the phns provic:led by corporate and that the pl an for the
current inspection was not formally transmitted to the station.
Review of the plan revealed that, ~though not formally coritrolled,*
the plan agreed with the IO-Year plan. The licensee agreed that the
plans provided to the station should be formally controlled, and
revised Section 7.2 of the ISi M~nual to require formal approval and
transmittal of the pl ans to the station and formal .contra ls for
c~anges to the plans. The inspector reviewed the revised ISi Manual
and had no further concerns on this issue.
Review of NDE Procedures (73052) (Units I and 2)
The
inspector reviewed the procedures listed below to
determine whether these procedures were consistent with
regulatory requirements and
licensee commitments.
The
procedures were al so reviewed in the areas of procedure
approval, requirements. for qualification of NDE personnel,
compilation
of
required
records,
and
division
of
responsibility
between
the
licensee
and
contractor
personnel.
NDE-PT-201, Revision 2, Liquid Penetrant Examination
NDE-MT-202, Revision 2, Magnetic Particle Examination of
Bolting
NDE-UT-201,_ Revision 3, Manual Ultrasonic Examination Of
Piping Welds
NDE-UT-204, Revision 2, Inservice Ultrasonic Examination
of Class I Bolting.
SUADM-M-20,
revision
1,
Section
XI
Visual
Examination
Program (VT-I, 2, and 3)
c.
Observation of Work and Work Activities (73753) (Unit I)
The inspector observed work activities, reviewed NDE personnel
qualification records, and reviewed certification records of NDE
equipment/materials,
and
as
detailed
below.
During
the
"*
- ..:.'
- - - - - - - - - -
5
examinations, the inspector verified: availability of and compliance
with approved NOE procedures, use* of knowledgeable NOE personnel,
and use of NOE personnel qualified to the proper level.
(1) .. Liquid Penetrant Examination (PT)
The . inspector observed * the in-process PT examinations as
indicated below.
The observations were compared with the
applicable procedure and the ASME B&PV Code in the followirig
areas:
specified method, penetrant materials i dent ifi ed;
penetrant materials analyzed
for halogens
and
acceptable ~re-examination surface;- surface temperature;
. surface drying time prior to penetrant application; method of
penetrant application; penetrant dwell time; method used for
- excess penetrant removal; surface drying prior to developing,
if applicable; type* of developer; examination technique;
evaluation technique; and, reporting of examination results.
- Examinations Observed
Drawing
11448-WMKS-1103A7
11448-WMKS-0123Fl
11448-WMKS-0123Fl
11448-WMKS-0123Fl
11448-WMKS-0123Fl
11448-WMKS-0123Fl
11448-WMKS-0123Fl
. MC-127
AE-069
AE-068
AE-065
AE-064
AE-063
AE-070
Welds/Component
W-1-02
RS PC-86.
- Rs PC-87
RS PC-90
RS PC-91
RS PC-92
RS PC-93
Items AE-063, 064~ 065, 068, 069, and 070 are sections of pipe
making up part of one of the Recirculation .Spray headers in
the containment .. Section 4.2, Item 2~2 and associated Table
4.2-1 of the Surry Technical Specifications (TS) requires that
the containment and recirculation spray rings be visually and
PT examined.
Surface (PT) examinations are to include 6
patches (each 9 inches square) evenly distributed ~round the
header. This TS requirement is implemented by the Augmented
Inspection Manual and referenced -ND£ procedures during ISi
fnspect i ans.
During the . PT inspection of the above pipe
sect ions, * the inspector noted that, for three of the 9"
squares, the inspection was
performed without cleaning
blotches of paint and other foreign materials (marking
materi a 1 s) from the areas of i nteresL
Paragraph 1. 5. 3 of
procedure NDE-PT-201, the applicable procedure, requires that
the surface to be examined and adjacent areas within at least
one inch shall be dry and free of all dirt, grease, ........ ,
and other extraneous matter that could obscure surface
openings or otherwise interfere with the examination.
This
failure to follow the PT procedure is in violation of 10 CFR,
Appendix B, Criterion V,
and is identified as Violation
280/92-09-01, Failure to Fo 11 ow Procedures and Instructions
I
..
6
For NOE of Piping. (See paragraph (4) below for an ~dditicinal
example of this violation).
(2)
- Magnetic Particle txamination
The inspector observed preparations for MT inspection of the
following reactor vessel (RV) .studs:
Drawing 11448-WMKS-RC~~-1.3*- RC STUDs 11 through 20 - Items
MC-182 through 191
In addition to discussion of the inspection procedure and
process with the examination personnel, the inspector reviewed
the inspection reports, equipment certification records, and
personnel certification records.
(3)
Ultrasonic Examination (UT)
The inspector observed calibration activities and the* in-
process
examinations
as
indicated
below.
These
observations were compared with the applicable procedures and
the ASME B&PV Code in the following areas: type of apparatus
used; calibration requirements; search units; beam angles; DAC
curves; reference level for monitoring discontinuities; method
of demonstrating
extent of weld/component
examination coverage; limits* of evaluating and recording
indications;
recording
significant
indications;
and;
acceptance limits.
Examinations Observed
Drawing
11448-WMKS-1103A7
11448-WMKS-1018A3
11448-WMKS-1018A3
11448-WMKS-RC-R-1.3
MC-127
AE-128
AE-126
- AE-182
Thru
AE-191*
Weld/Component
W-1-02
W-1-26
W-1-25*
RC STUD-11
Thru
RC STUD-20
- Observed only calibration and inspection preparation for
these components.
In addition, completed inspection
reports, equipment certification records, and personnel
certification record~ were reviewed.
,.
(4)
7
During observation of the UT inspection of welds W-J-26 and W-
1-25, the inspector questioned whether the required volume
(inside 1/3 of the weld an9 adjacent base material) was being
inspected by the technique being used for the circumferential
. angle beam scans.
For weld W-1-26, the*weld crown.was too
rough to UT inspect from the weld surface as required by ASME
Section XI, Appendix III.
The procedure allowed for this
event and required that the circumferential scan be performed
from
the
adjacent
base
material
with
the
transducer
- manipulated s~ch that the required volume is inspected.
The
examiners circumferentially scanned the base material adjacent
to the weld skewing the transducer +/- 20° as required by a
genera 1 requirement
of the
procedure
for
angle
beam
inspections.
It was not clear that the +/- 20° skewing is
adequate. manipulation of the transducer to ensure the full
inspection volume is covered.
Before the end of the
inspection,
the
licensee
provided * documentation
of.
demonstration on a cracked pipe weld sample that the required
volume was being inspected.
Visual Examinations (VT}
The inspector observed the* in-process VT examinat i ans as
indicated below.
The observations were compared with the
applicable pfocedure and the ASME B&PV Code in the following
areas:
specification of the procedure to be used; surface
preparation; availability and use of appropriate tools:
definition of location and extent of examination; test
attributes in accordance with procedures; and evaluation of
defects and reporting of results.
Examinations Observed
Drawing
11448-WMKS-0123Fl
11448-WMKS-0123Fl
11448-WMKS-0123Fl
11448-WMKS-0123Fl
11448-WMKS-0123Fl
11448-WMKS-0123Fl
ITEM
AE-069
AE-068
AE-065
AE-064
AE-063
AE-070
Component
RS PC-86
RS PC-87
RS .PC-90
-Rs PC-91
RS PC-92
RS PC-93
As noted in paragraph ( I) above, the TS, as imp 1 emented by the
Augmented Inspection Manual requires that the above 1 isted
items be
inspected.
During observation* of the VT
inspections, the inspector noted that the examiner was only
inspecting a 9 inch band around the header at each PT
inspection patch, in lieu of the required full pipe length
8
inspection.* This. failure to follow the inspection plan is
another example of violation 280/92~09-0l identified in
paragraph (1) above.
(5)
Eddy Current Examination (ET)
At the time of the inspeciion, * ET inspection of steam
generator (S/G) tubes had been completed.
The inspector
reviewed and discussed with licensee personnel the*inspection
plan and inspect ion results for the current outage.
The
following summariies the insp~ction plan and inspection
results:
The inspection p 1 an inc 1 uded* 35% of the tubes in S/Gs
"A" and* "B" .. Tubes in S/G "C" were not inspected this
outage.
The 35% inc 1 uded a 11 row 1 and 2 tubes and
tubes on the periphery two rows deep. Additionally, all
tubes with previous indications ~ere inspected.
-
.BOBBIN Coil inspections were used to ins~ect the full
length of the tubes. * Rotating Pancake Coil
(RPC)
inspections were only used to resolve uninterpretable
indications found with BOBBIN Coil inspections.
Inspection Results
927 Tubes
243 Tubes
2 Tubes
3*Tubes
9 Tubes
34 Tubes
4 Tubes
1 Tube
936 Tubes
234 Tubes
5 Tubes
4 Tubes
7 Tubes
4 Tubes
1 Tube
S/G "A"
- Te£ted Full Length From One End
~ Tested From Both Ends Due to Tight
Bends
- 30-39% Tube Wall Loss
- 20-29% Tube Wall Loss
- 1-19% Tube Wall Loss
- Manufacturing Marks
- Existing Plugs
.- Not Reportable (Small tube wall loss below
reportable criteria)
S/G "B"
- Tested Full Length From One End
- Tested From Both Ends Due to Tight
Bends
- 20-29% Tube Wall Loss
- 1-19% Tube Wall Loss
- Manufacturing Marks
- Existing Plugs
- Not Reportable (Small tube wall loss below.
reportable criteria)
9
3 Tubes
- Undefined (A signal that in the analyst's
opinion does not represent tube wall loss)
The licensee decided to plug the two S/G A tubes with
30-39% tube wall loss.
(6)
Personnel Qualifications
The inspector reviewed personnel qualification documentation
as
indicated
below
for
examiners
who
performed
the
examinations detailed in paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (4)
above.
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 designatgd representative; basis used
for certification; and, annual visual acuity, color vision
examination, and periodic recertification.
Examiner Records Reviewed
Method
Level
- Empl over
Number
II
VCR
3
II
VCR
3
I I
VCR
4
I
VCR
1
II
VCR
1
In addition, qualification records for one VEPCO level III
(PT, MT, VT, ET, RT, and UT) examiner was reviewed.
(7)
Equipment Certification Records
Equipment c~rtification records as listed below, for equipment
used iri the irispections detailed in paragraphs (1), (2), and
(3) above, were reviewed to ensure compliance with all
applicable requirements.
Eguipment Type
E g u i p m e n t
Identification
Penetrant Cleaner
Batch 027C4
Penetrant Cleaner
Batch 124-A4
Pen et rant
Batch 130A47
Penetrant Developer
Batch 06K6
. '*
1
UT Couplant
UT Transducer
UT Transducer
UT Transducer
Cal Block
Cal Block
UT Instrument
10
UT Instrument
Fluorescent MT Particles
Fluorescent MT Particles
(8)
Repairs and Replacements (R&R)
Batch 9088
Serial G28612
Serial G30429
Serial Hl4009
Serial VIR-4
Serial VIR-6
Serial 136-155
Serial 06798E
Batch 535G65.
Batch 528L65
The inspector reviewed the R&R packages, including work
documentation, for the following ASME Section XI repairs and
replacements:
WO 798074 - Repair of Crack in Socket Weld at Drain Line
Downstream of valve l-CH-HCV-1200A, B, and C.
WO 004633 - Replace Body to Bonnet Nuts and Bolts on Valve
02-RC-95
WO 729767 - Repair PT Indications in Line 3/4-RC-363-1502 at
."A" Cold Leg Valve MOV-2591, Weld 2
WO 761198 - Replace Check Valve 2-SI-79
In additi6n to review of the ~bove packages, the inspector
reviewed portions of the Design Change (DC) package and R&R
documentation for removal.of the Unit 1 reactor coolant loop
RTD bypass piping. At the time of the review, the mechanical_
portion of the work was essentially complete.
During this
review, the inspector found that the R&R "Follower" (Form to
Document R&Rs) had not been initiated. Procedure VPAP-2002,
Revision 1, Work Request and Work Orders, requires.that repair
and replacement of ASME Section XI components be identified in
accordance with procedure VPAP-0307.
Procedure VPAP-0307, *
Revision 2,
Repair and Replacement of ASME Section XI*
Components, required initiation of the R&R Form in order to
involve ISi Engineering in the R&R process to ensure that
required ASME Section XI inspection and testing are specified,
the required ANI/AN1I signatures are obtained, and the Code
required NIS-2 Form is issued.
In addition to the procedural
requirements, step 5.2.5 of the WO (3800121736) specified
initiation of the R&R "Follower".
Although failure to
initiate the R&R "Follower" is in violation of procedures and
10 CFR 50 ,Appendix B, Criterion V, the inspector found that
ISi Engineering had been involved in the process and a 11
required testing and inspections had been specified in work
documents and were being performed.
In addition, the Code
I .
RESULTS
,
11
Inspector had been involved in the* process and required
signatures were being obtained. Immediate action was taken to
initiate the R&R "Follower" and review other WOs .. Based on
discussions with licensee personnel, review of the R&R log,*
and the other WOs reviewed, it appeared this was an isolated
case.*
This NRC identified violation is not being cited
because criteria. specified in Section VII.B of the NRC
Enforcement
Policy were
satisfied.
The
violation is
identified as NCV 280/92-01-02, Failure to Initiate Repair and.
Replacement Documentation.
In addition to review *of DC and. WO documentation, the
jnspector reviewed the radiographic (RT) film for the three,
3" diameter cap welds for the RTD bypass piping.
The welds
were identified as weld nos. E-105-W~l, E-106-W-l, and E-107-
W-l on DC 91_;05.
In the areas inspected, one violation, Failure to Follow Procedures and
Instructions for NDE of Piping, was identified. In addition, a non-cited
violation, Failure to Initiate Repair and Replacement Documentation was
identified.
In general, a good ISI program was in place with adequate implementation.
Examination procedures meeting code requirements were being used and
inspections. were being performed by qualified personnel.-
As detailed
above, the need for clarification and enhancement of one administrative
procedure was identified.
3.
Flow Assisted Corrosiori (Erosion/Corrosion) P~o~ram
The inspector performed a limited review of the licensee's Flow Assisted
Corrosion piping inspection program.
The program is detailed in the
following documents:
Standard STD-GN-0033, Revision 2, Secondary Piping and Component
Inspection Program
Mechanical engineering Implementing Procedure ME-022, Revision 2,
Engineering Evaluation Procedure for Ut Inspected Components
In addition to the inspection plan for the .current outage, dated February
10, 1992, the inspector reviewed the following reports, which detail the
inspections and inspection results for the last Unit 1 and Unit 2 outages.
Technical Report ME-0040, Unit 2 1991 Refueling Outage Secondary
Piping and component Inspection Program
Technical
Report ME-0035,
Surry Power Station, Unit 1,
1990
Refueling Outage Results of Secondary Piping and Component
Inspection Program NP-111.1
12
In addition, the inspector selected a system (Auxiliary Steam) included in
the current outage inspection program and discussed the inspection program
for the system with licensee personnel'.
For Unit 1, 19 components in the
system hav~ been -inspected.
For Unit 2,
11 components have been
inspected. Although all portions of the system are not in the pl~n, the
port i ans considered susceptible to fl ow assisted corrosion, based on
inspection results and analysis, are in the program.
The licensee has a very pro-active* Flow Assisted corrosion program.
developed computerized programs CHECMATE and CHEC-ND[ are used for the*
selection of susceptible components and evaluation of inspection results.
Over 5000 components per unit are included in the program. * During th~
current outage, 127 unit 1 components were inspected.
Eleven components
required replacement as a results of inspections performed.
4.
Steam Generator*(s/G) Feedwater Nozzle Inspectiorts
Recently cracking of piping at the S/G Feedwater nozzle was identified in
a W PWR plant.
The cracking was attributed to thermally induced fatigue
caused by introducing relatively cold feedwater into the main feedwater
pipe upstream of the S/G.
This cracking problem was identified-in 1979
and NRC Bulletin 79-13 was issued to require inspection and replacement of
defective feedwater piping components.
Based on the currently identified cracking at another utility, the*
inspector discussed the status of any inspections of similar piping
components at Surry. Similar components are not included for inspection
in the current interval ISI program.
However, the licensee has recently
(1988) replaced the affected components (reducers) on all 3 S/Gs on Unit
2 and S/G "B" on Unit 1.
During the current outage, the reducer on Unit
1, S/G ".C" was be*i ng replaced.
The reducers were replaced as a materi a 1
upgrade resulting from the Flow Assisted Corrosion program.
Therefore,
only one reducer (S/G "A" on U~it 1) was suspect of being cracked.
The
licensee took immediate action and performed UT inspection on that
reducer.
No cracks were identified.
In.the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified. Whe~
notified of cracking in feedwater piping at another utility, the li~ensee
took prompt action to perform inspection of similar piping at Surry.
5.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
a.
(Closed) IFI 280,281/91-15-01, Acceptance Criteria for Boric Acid
Corrosion on Reactor Boundary Components
During an inspection of licensee's actions relative to NRC Generic
Letter (GL) 88-05, Boric Acid Corrosion of Carbon Steel Reactor
Pressure Boundary Components in PWR Plants, the inspector raised
concerns relative to the licensee's program specifying an acceptance
criteria of 10% of wall thickness for corrosion depth on all
components._ The concern was that 10% may be too liberal for some
critical components.
Based on the coDcern, the licensee searched
for guidelinei and contacted their contractor (W) for any available
,
13
guide 1 i nes for corrosion a.11 owances for reactor pressure boundary -*
components.
.W. indicated they were not aware of any _ issued
guidelines.
Based on the lack of guidelines, the licensee changed
the 10% criteria to 5% -for" a 11 components based on a 1 ater Edition
of ASME Section XI (1989 Edition of IWB-3517.1).
This item is closed.
b.
(Closed)"
IF!
280,281/91-15-02,
Visual
Inspection
of
Piping
Modification
This item conceined observing a QC inspector not using inspection
devices for size measurement and final acceptance of welds.
Based
on this issue, licensee QA performed an evaluation of their QC
inspection program.
Based
on the evaluation, the following
actions/improvements were implemented.
QA memorandum S91-167 dated May 24, 1991, was issued to re-
iterate tha requirements for following procedures.**
A June
28,
1991,
memorandum
was
issued to im~lement
improvements in the contractor QC program
The Inspector Handbooks were completely-revised and improved.
A multi-volume
training
course
was
developed
and*
implemented.
A 16 hour1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br /> training course for QC inspectors was implemented.
In addition to review* of the above program improvements, the
inspector interviewed 5 QC inspectors (3 VEPCO and 2 contractors)
relative to the final weld inspection requirements and the use of
measuring devices.
All 5 inspectors were very knowledgeable
relative to requirements and the proper use of* measuring devices.
The
inspector also obsefved one
inspector perform fitup
inspections on welds 13A and 14A on weld map DDC90-07-El02 and welds
2 and 10 on weld map DC92-06-El00.
For. all inspections, proper
measuring*devices were used and the inspector was knowledgeable in
the use of the tools and the acceptance criteria.
Based on the above review, this item is closed.
c.
(Closed) URI 280,281/91-26-02, Resolution of Preservice and !SI
Deviations
See inspection reports 50-280,281/91-21, 91-26, and* 91-35 for
documentation of previous inspections on this item.
This item concerns discovery that some ASME class 2 piping and
fitting long seam welds were not included in the ASME Section XI !SI
program.
Based on findings at another plant (Beaver Valley)., that
I
Ill*
I
'
14
some piping and fittings with loMg seams did not include the long.
seams in the ISi inspection program, the licensee initiated a*
program to determine if a similar problem exists at Surry.
The first phase of the program involved i dent i fyi ng ( based on review
of Piping Specification NUS-20) all class 1 and 2 systems where the
specification allowed an option to use seamless ~r welded pipe and
fittings. These systems were RCS, S1, RHR, CH, and MS.
For these
systems, drawings and vendor documentation records were ~eviewed to
determine where records indicated long seams existed.
This phase
has been completed for both Units 1 and 2.
The second phase of the program involves field walkdown and
inspections to verify the validity of the records.
At the time of
this inspection, this effort was approximately 50% (95 locations
inspected out of 180 locations to be inspected) for Unit 1 and had
not yet started for Unit 2.
No problems have been identified for
class 1 piping. For class 2 piping, long seams have been identified
in .the MS, SI, and RHR systems that are not in the ISi program. For
the SI and RHR systems, field inspections have identified long seams
where seamless piping and components were expected from record
searches. Deviation~ are being written and long seams added to the
ISI program where appropriate.
There is a difference in.code requirements for class 1 and class 2
piping.* For class 1, inspection of a pipe diameter length but not
more th~n 12" of each long seam that intersects a circumferential
weld requiring inspection, is required. The applicable code (ASME
- Section XI) is very specific about the required percentage of
circumferential welds, and thus long seams, that are to be inspected
each period in the inspection interval. Therefore, if class 1 long
seams are identified that are not in the program-to be inspected at
the required schedule, a code violation* and TS violation has
occurred~ As noted above, no class 1 problems have been identified ..
For class 2 welds, the requirements are not as clear about the long
seams
requiring
inspection
being
tied to
the
intersecting
circumferential weld.
In addition, 10 CFR 50.55a allows that the
extent of examination for class 2 welds be determined by the 1974
Edition, Summer 75 Addenda of ASME Section XI, which VEPCO is using.
This complicates requirements since this edition of the code
specifically covers long seams in fittings only* (not pipe), - and*.
infers that the full long seam is to be included. Also, there are
five types of welds included in category C-G, of which, long seams
are one type.
The 1974 code requires only that 50 % of the total
number of the welds in the category be examined over 40 years and
that the w~ld selection be distributed such that a representitive
sample is selected. It does not specify that the sample be selected
or prorated based on each type in the category or that each type in
the category be considered in the representative sample for each 10-
year interval in the 40 year inspection schedule:
Although the
present code requirements for long seams are not totally clear, as
,,,.
f ~*
' .
'
15
1 ong seams are i dent ifi ed with the above described program, the
licensee is adding a sample of those identified to the program and
inspecting the sample.
The licensee plans to have phase 2 of the above described program
completed and necessary updating of the ISI plans by September 4,
1992 for Unit 1 and August 26, 1993, for Unit 2. This will allow an
additional outage for each unit to complete any inspections deemed
necessary prior to the end of the current 10-year interval.
Based on the above, it appears that the licensee is performing the
necessary actions to ensure that the ASME Code and TS are complied
with and the programs in place will ensure ISI plans are updated to
include inspection of long seams as required. Therefore, this item
is closed.
- *
6.
Exit Interview
-
The inspection scope and results were summarized on March Z7 and April 10,
1992, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1.
The inspector
described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection
results listed below.
Proprietary information is not contained in this
report.
Dissenting comme-nts were not received from the 1 i censee.
(Open) VIO 280,281/92-09-01, Failure to Follow Procedures and Instructions
for NOE of Piping, Paragraph 2.c.(l) and (4)
(Closed) NCV 280/92-09-02, Failure to Initiate Repair and Replacement
Documentatibn, Paragraph 2.c.(8)
. .
"'
7.
..
16
Acronyms and Initialisms
ANII
GL
IFI
ISi .
- MS
NRC
RC
RII*
RPC
R&R
RV
S/G
S"I
SUADM
-
rs*
VCR
VEPCO . -
VPAP
fl
Authorized Nuclear Inservice Inspector
Authorized Nuclear Inspector
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Boiler and Pressure Vessel*
Charging System
Distance Amplitude Curve
Design Change*
Electric-Power Res~arch *Institute
NRC Generic Letter
Inspector Followup Item
lnservice Inspection
Main Steam System
Magnetic Particle Testing
Non-cited Violation
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Nuclear Re~ctor Regulation
Liquid Penetrant Testing.
Quality Assurance
Quality Control
Reactor Coo*l ant System
Residual Heat Removal System
Region 2
Rotating Pancake Coil
Repair and Replacement
Resistance Temperature Detector
Reactor Vessel
Safety Evaluation Report
Safety Injection System
Surry Site Engineering Services
Surry Administrative Procedure
Technical Specifications
Ultrasonic Testing
Unresolved Item -
Visual Testing
_
Virginia Corporation of Richmond
Virginia Electric and Power Company
Violation
Virginia Power Station Administrative Procedure
Work Order