ML19319E103

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to AEC Re Violations Noted in Insp Rept 50-312/73-04.Corrective Actions:Primary Pipe Weld ABW-4,film View 66-82,X-rayed Again & Personnel Reminded That One Penetrameter Must Be Used for Each Exposure
ML19319E103
Person / Time
Site: Rancho Seco
Issue date: 08/28/1973
From: Mattimoe J
SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
To: Engelken R
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
References
NUDOCS 8003310612
Download: ML19319E103 (2)


Text

O 0

~

9 SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTIUTY DISTRICT C

6201 S Street, Box 15830, Sacramento, California 95813; (916) 42 August 28, 1973 D

D Mr. R.11. Engelken

~

Director of Region V oa_

U. S. Atomic Energy Commission c

9 '.h l 3]- 1[

3 i

P.'O. Box 1515 g_j_

Berkeley, California 94701

_a

Dear Mr. Engelken:

Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1 AEC Audit, June 12-15, 1973 D_ocket an. 050-0312 In response to your letter of August 1, 1973, we offer the following comments regarding the three areas of non-compliance with our quality assurance program requirements found by the AEC audit June 12-15, 1973 at the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station.

1.

flon-compliance with USASI B 31.7, fluclear Power Piping, Para-graph C-1-120.2(c):

The lack of a penetrameter used for the radiographic exposure for Station 66-82 on primary pipe weld ABW-4 has been resolved as follows:

(a) The ilSS primary pipe weld ACW-4, film view 66-82, has been X-rayed aoain.

Film view 66-32 has been accepted by a qualified inspector and a Code-authorized inspector.

(b) The personnel involved in this non-conformance have been reminded that at least one penetrameter must be used for each exposure and the plane of the penetra-meter must be normal to the radiation beam. This is the only known occurrence where a penetrameter is lacking. A revieu by the Quality Assurance Department produced no additional similar oversights.

(c)

Full compliance was achieved by July, 1973.

2.

tion-compliance with Criterion XVII - Quality Assurance Records - the results of the inspection were not indicated.,03 in all cases on some primary coolant pipe welds.

Th'tCfollo y, t j/?,

ing action has been taken:

i n g,,.

. x.- N i,

m.

I \\,\\

T(h e?

370[/2, 9@

\\

=

~.

.,;.c, 5 3.t 9,gg k,P ft Ig n p/ k W

g

~

O

[

g R

r

_[L ov a

il Mr.'R. H. Engelken August 28, 1973 l

(a) The inspection data sheets used by the contractor for the ultrasonic, penetrant, and radiographic examinations have been properly completed.

(b)

In this instance, the inspect' ion personnel involved were signing the forms, bot-were not marking the

" accept / reject" column. The inspection personnel and i

inspection supervision have been notified that it is mar.datory that the results of the inspection be indicated in all cases.

In addition, the in-process data sheets used for ultrasonic, penetration, and radiographic examination havo is en reviewed by the quality assurance group and all deficiencies have been corrected.

(c) Full compliance was achieved July, 1973.

3 Hon-compliance with Cabcock and Wilcox " Field Weld - Local-Stress Relief Procedure," in which the heating rate during the

(

stress relief of primary veld A-BW-7 exceeded 100*F./ hour for I

a period in excess of 1-1/2 hours has been resolved as follows:

(a) The Babcock and Nilcox Mechanical Design Section was cc1tacted and they were specifically asked to review the post weld heat treatment data of the A-BW-7 weld joint.

The follouing reply was provided:

"At the time the l rocedure was written, it was thoucht that for simplicity, a single rate of heating and cool-ing would be ident.ified. This value was called from ambient to the holding temperature again for simplicity, i

even though code only requires this strict control above 600 F.

Ilou,ver, it is significant that some uniformity be held in heating and. cooling rate below 600"F which resultcd in the blanket value of 100*F/hr.

The subject deviation is completely acceptable in that the rate of heatiny below 600 F is fairly uniform although it exccoh the 100*F/hr. criteria, and it is not exceeded above 600'F "

(b) This particular ilo.n was documented on Rancho.5cco Non-conformance I: ' port No. 46011, Rev.1, in accordance with Quality As:anmace Procedure flo.17, and accepted by the Engineerimi lieview Coard.

(c) Action was completed on i% ust 23, 1973.

Sincerely yours,

.) '). Yn18.x

'd.Ud. h ttimoe Assisi. ant General Manager