ML20086U150
| ML20086U150 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek, Nine Mile Point |
| Issue date: | 08/17/1966 |
| From: | Reinmuth G US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20086U000 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-95-36 50-219-66-04, 50-219-66-4, 50-220-66-06, 50-220-66-6, NUDOCS 9508030290 | |
| Download: ML20086U150 (10) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:, [l,j ~ " " * ~ ~ ~ ' , x-p a ..t y ~^ t 1 U.' S. ATGIIC ENERGY CG9(ISSION ' i HEADQUARTERS DIVISION OF COMPLIANCE August 17, 1966 'l C0 Report No. 219/66 l 220/66-6 q
Title:
JERSEY CENTRAL PolGR & LIGrf CGG'ANY j i LICENSE NO. CPPR-15 1-NIAGARA MORAWK POWER CORPORATION LICENSE NO. CPPR-16 i Date ofAisit: August 2-5, 1966 2.n. M-By: G. W. Reinmuth, Reactor Inspector (Prog. Stads.) s SUIMLRY i The Combustion Engineering (CE) plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee, was visited to observe preparations for the hydrostatic pressure test of the Jersey Central vessel and to review the record files for the j [ Jersey Central and Niagara Mohawk vessels. l The hydrostatic test of the Jersey Central vessel was successfully completed on August 5 without difficulty. Fabrication work on the Niagara Mohawk vessel.is complete. Nydrostatic pressure testing is scheduled following reseval of the Jersey Central vessel from the i test bay. Shipment of the vessels will occur approximately four to six weeks after completion of the hydrostatic tests. Review of the record files disclosed that CE continues to make every + effort to produce a high quality product. Deviation records for both i vessels were awamined and indicated that responsible actions were i taken in each instance to assure proper correction. Typical types of items are described in the report. Representative surveillance test data are listed in the report to demonstrate that the materials used in the two vessels met require-monts. Discrepancies in some of the Jersey Central surveillance test data were observed and explained on the basis of. poor quality test semples. Confirmation data from G-E test semples, which had not been broken at the time of the visit, will be reviewed when available to verify the suitability of the materials used in the vessel. (continued) i 9508030290 950227 PDR FOIA DEKOK95-36 PDR g
.~ .,... ' L; i a a = a~x.,..- ~ ~ t4; '~ +.+ 0 3-3.- ,Je f 2'- i DETAILS -l I. Seone of Visit t G. W. Reinmuth, Division of Compliance, visited the Combustion . Engineering (CE) plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee, on August 2-5. The Principal purpose of the visit was to observe preparations in progress j c -for conducting the hydrostatic pressure test of the Jersey Central vessel and to review the record files of the Jersey Central and the ,~ Niagara Mohawk vessels. i Discussions were held with the following persons: Combustion Engineerian W. G. Benz, Jr., Dfrector, Nuclear Components T. L. Bailey, Manager of quality Control, Power Boiler Operations E. L. Maclin, Chief Quality Control Engineer L. C. Northard, Manager, Manufacturing Engineering j H. Dinwiddie, Supervisor, Manufacturing Engineering' l John Fava, Quality Engineer j General Electric Cosmany j C. C. Roof, Quality Control Representative l L. R. Vancott, Quality Control Engineer l Dale Hackney, Quality Control Engineer II. Ensults of Visit i A. ECAfdlf. l l 1. Jersey Central Vessel At the time of the visit, work was in progress preparing for the hydrostatic test. Both the hydro test and the top head "0" ring leakage test were successfully concluded on August 5. t Following hydro completion, the welded caps on the vessel openings must be removed and the nossle surfaces machined i for piping field welds. Also, all weld surfaces on the vessel are to be magnetic particle (MP) inspected (ASME Code, Section III, N-618)* and one specific seam weld (continued) J ~*The Jersey Central and Niagara Mohawk vessels are Section VIII vessels; q however, many of the Section III requirements are incorporated in the l C-E specifications. i I . - ~
e. . f* .1 0 3, 1 -{. p Results of Visit (continued) ' f ultrasonically tested (tfr). He latter test is required by l General glectric because of an earlier weld flux problem (see CO Report No. 219/66-1, dated February 14, 1966). n ose operations are expected to take two to four weeks before the vessel can be prepared for shipment. j 2. Piamara Mohawk Vessel + f All major fabrication work on this vessel has.been completed. Hydrostatic testing will be conducted.when the Jersey Central l j f vessel is moved out. Space limitations allow testing of l only one vessel of this size at a time. r While the scheduled September 1 shipping'date of.the Niagara Mohawk vessel will not be met, shipment before the fall j freeze-up at the site may be expected. i i B. Hydrostatic Test [ No significant problems were experienced in performing the hydro j test except that prsparations for the test required two days longer than r planned, ne test was completed at 1875 psig or 150% of design (ASME, j Section VIII requirement) and 100*F (Nur +60'F). From observations of the work in progress, the benefits of con-l ducting a hydro test are more than meeting code requirements. He test i involves the first fitting of the closure head which in itself is a major i operation. With respect to the Jersey Central vessel, the parallelism I of the head flange surfaces were out of specification. He buyer had accepted the condition. It was found during bolt-down that a tighter l fit between the bolt tensioners and the head bolts resulted because of the deviation causing additional tims to complete the operation.(in' l excess of 32 hours vs the planned 16 hours). No reduction in' quality nor safety significance is attached to this minor deviation. 6 Bolt-down was completed in four passes around the vessel with tensioning of the bolts stopped at precalculated bolt elongation points. l Bolts, nuts and washers had been custom mated during fabrication and did not cause difficulty. Workmanship quality appeared to be excellent as evidenced by the lack of problems in the first time mating of fitted l components (nuts, bolts, flange, "0" rings, etc.). C. Record Review 1. General I I In examining the lengthy file, the greatest effort was ) concentrated in reviewing the specification deviation (continued) l l 1 --,,w
7 1- '~ n_ u_w ,O v d l i i 'h 8 Results of Visit (continued) ! i s 'l record. Since these records describe the problems' expe-rienced, it provides a good picture of tho'real quality control practiced by both the buyer and the fabricator. .j i The remainder of the file was spot checked for adherence to established procedures, described in previous Compliance ~ inspection reports. The file appeared to be complete and f s'. nothing unusual was observed which was not pointed out via -9 deviations. 1' 2. Deviations - Jersey Central Vassel The deviation file for both the Jersey Central and Niagara Mohawk vessels each contained about 60 rejection notices or deviations. These notices are usually initiated by the Manafecturing Section; however, other Quality Control or. Engineering Sections may issue a deviation as appropriate. l The form used provides the following information: a. A description of the discrepancy. b. The department (and personnel) responsible, either for rejection or the faulty workmanship, if applicable. l c. The cause. d. The recommended disposition for correction. t e. Special instructions if repairs were to be made by CE. f. If repairs were pefformed by CE, check-off and inspect' ion points. I } g. Final sign-off by CE Manufacturing Engineering, CE Quality Control, CE Project Engineer and customer. 1 l A check of the deviation records with other routinely kept - records disclosed proper cross reference to assure completion and continuity of shop work as well as follow-up inspections. .j Examination of these records demonstrated that the system of quality control was functioning. To illustrate the types of problems experienced during fabri-cation of large vessels, the following are typical examples: a. Stabilizer bracket dimensions out of tolerance because of weld shrinkage. Waiver granted by buyer. (continued)
m
n,1., l h i* ._u- _ g, _. _ m, .a c. -f L.' u o 0 j ~ .l w 1 n=aults of Visit (continued) 1 b. Dye check indications in "0" ring grooves and mating surfaces out of specifications after machining. j Customer accepted condition. b ~ c.. Some of the control rod penetrations were out of.tolar-i + 'ance with respect to-location.- Customer-issued weiver,' l a however, procedure for setting up boring jigs changed 7 l to prevent recurrence. r ^f j j d. "0" ring clip holes on head did not meet drawing requirements. Band reworked to correct. 1 e. Excessive slag in weld seas. Area dug out, rowelded, and magnetic particle tested. Final weld radiographed i according to code requirements, f. heo areas of cladding goused out by inadvertent machine l spindle movement. CE repaired via detailed instructions prepared by Manufacturing Engineering.- 3 Counter bore on 9/16" hole too deep due'to workman f inattention. Waiver issued. h. Six of 129 hydro test plugs for rod penetrations received } from outside vendor were out of tolerance. - Cs reworked. j i 1. Top surface of control rod drive housings cut to knife edge which would not adequately support hydro plugs. j Design change issued to permit rework. Emphasis in instructions placed upon maintaining the minimum dimen-sions in wall thicknesses and weld areas.- (NOTE: On' f G-E vessels, all openings except the rod drive holes are closed by a welded cap. "0" ring plugs are utilised to j seal rod drive holes.) W I .y
- j. One main shall section rejected after efforts to repair resulted in a dug-out area measuring 52" long, 5/8 -
1 3/4"' average depth, 1" average width. Plate had passed 4 ultrasonic inspection (UT) but was found unacceptable j by magnetic particle tests (Mf). The differences in i acceptance standards accounts for the discrepancy between the two methods. i k. Visual inspection of cladding on one of the outlet nossles indicated excessive gas holes. Areas repaired by grinding and raciadding. (continued) 1 ~ .m - ....n ,~,-n-- +- -~. -- a --a ,.n- -,---.,------,--.s-,we,, m
w l%.v * ' L ~... an-m .g. _L o 3 a ' - N. I o d. Easults of Visit (continued) ' ' i
- 1. ' Deviation notice issued by Quality Control for lack of sign off on traveler and no inspection ticket at specific checkpoint.. Shop logbook verified that inspection had been made and approved.-
j j m. Irr inspection indicated.five areas in nossle welds u j faulty. Defects chipped out and weld repaired. l l 2- % n. Tests of a second plate as received from the vendor -i-indicated two " snakes." Dug-out areas measured 1" l wide, 5/8" deep, 8" and 14" long. Weld repaired, i ratested by Mr and X-ray. Plate accepted. j i 3. Nianera Mohawk Vessel l.! A review of the deviation record for this vessel disclosed l similar type items as described above. The most apparent. difference was the detection and repair of e greater number of plate laminations. According to the record, all were adequately repaired and met code requirements. N observation was discussed with the G-E engineers present ~ at the site for the hydro test. They expressed little con-corn over the number or type of flaw. Their explanation was that a laminar flew was parallel to the principal stresses,. thus was not of great importance. Also, these types of l flaws should be expected since rolling at the mill inherently l produces them on the plate ends. l l 4. Surveillance Test Fronram I t As explained by G-E personnel, the surveillance test program for G-E vessels consists of three separate categories. t i a. Material qualification. j l b. Fabrication surveillance. l 1. c. Operational surveillance. .j t During the first phase, test samples of the base materials are used to determine the physical properties, the. chemical coutposition and nil ductility transition temperatures (NDT). From these data, the plates are selectively placed in the i vessel to assure that the better material is used in the more critical locations. i (continued) l m - re-r-- a w en -e, ime r -r -%e y, -itsewt g--W+re -t + r$ wwemWw'--rv
-[I, ,_ m 2 .O J-l q 1 xp ? Rasults of Visit (continued) 'f A second set of samples, including specimens from a main weld joint area, the adjacent heat.affected zone, and the. base metal,-is provided to demonstrate code coupliance I (Section III, N-313, N-331, and N-713). Although the l Jersey Central and Niagara Mohawk vessels are not Section-i f III vessels, 'C-E specifications require the fabricator to- _j provide the test samples which are equivalent to the l Section III requirement. f P m t The third set of samples are those placed in the vessel [ for operational surveillance. I charpy test values from the material qualification tests i for the Jersey Central and Niagara Mohawk vessels'are given in Addendum I. As may be noted, G-E required mate-i rial having impact properties of 30 ft-lbs @ 100F for the j critical areas (core and lower nozzle regions) and 30 ft-lbs @ 40*F for the remainder of the vessel. On this basis,'the l .l NDI for purposes of the hydrostatic pressure' test is 400F. .r In addition to the impact properties, values of yield .i strength, tensile strength and chemical composition were' l reviewed. Following are typical values noted. Variations from these numbers among the several hundred reviewed were l in the order of 1 57. Piece or Part Tensile Ilg}j, Charov Values l (1000 psi) (1000 psi) Base Material @ 3/4T 82.4 58.2 See Addendum I. l (Plate G-308-1) i Wold Metal (Main 81.6-87 23.5-67.7* 42-63 f t-lbs @ 10'F l j vertical shall course) 0 q Heat affected zone 83.3-91.8 61.7-78.6 19-161 ft-1bs @ 10 F l i (Adjacent to above veld) (4 of 16 samples under 30 ft-M i Top flange forging 146.5 121 40 ft-lbs @ 10*F l Steam outlet nossle 89.9 66.9 77.5-109.5 f t-lbs @ 10'F
- Two values in this series of fabrication surveillance samples were below 60,000 psi on yield.
CE personnel explained that the particular samples tested were those left over from those supplied G-E and were most probably below standard test specimens. Several Charpy values in the same group were also under those shown in Addendum I. Since C-E 'I has the choice test samples and had not broken them at the time of the visit, data shown may be erroneous. A follow-up review of the C-E tasts will be made to assure the validity of the test results. (continued) [ _, 1
, ; A-- ~ i 3g 7 - g 3 s-i ~ I Basults of Visit (continued)' i i i Typical Qaemical Compositions i E Ikt I 1 21 R He. I . Base plate .18.20 1.23-1.40 .008.021 .013.028 .11.21 .18.23 .45.50 l __? SA-302-5 g g gg g !4 ' Top flange .42 .78 .011 .018 .21 1.72 .88 .26 LF - forging (SA-336) i Steam outlet .20 .68 .014 .012 .26 .76 .35 .64 nossle (forging) l i D. Miscellaneous Topics l t 1. CE Oraanization Organisational changes in the Quality Control Department were made two weeks prior to the. visit. T. L. Bailey, formerly Manager of Quality Control for Nuclear Products, was promoted to a more responsible position in the power .i Boiler Section. E. S. Proctor succeeds Mr. Bailey in his former position. E. L. Maclin was promoted to fill l Mr. Proctor's fonner position.. Mr. Proctor is eminently qualified to head the quality Control Department through l a lifetime of work in this field. Mr. Maclin has had s l-appremiantely ten years of inspection experience and according to G-E personnel, may be expected to do a com-l potent job. Because of the experience level of all per-l sons involved, no reduction in the quality of CE produced j ~ products is anticipated by these changes. 2. Closure Head Nozzles { l r j According to the Preliminary Basards Summaary Report for the l 1 Jersey Central facility, the reactor vessel head was to have i 26 - 6" nosslos for pressure relief outlets. Observation of the vessel disclosed that only 1 - 6" nossle was provided l for this purpose. Two other nossles, one for instrumentation i and the other for venting, had been installed. Though this point may be a minor one, the design change'should be reflected in the final doctments. CE personnel stated that the Niagara Mohawk vessel had 17 instrimientation nossles on the top head, a significant j (continued) =
e ,O O,- b ( Results of Visit (continued) difference between the two vessels. Although the exact number was not verified, observation confirmed approximately-a 1 this number. 3. Interviews An exit interview was held with the C-E resident inspector and the engineers who were visiting the site to observe the i 3' l hydro test. Topics reviewed were those discussed in this report, with particular emphasis upon the discrepancies noted in the surveillance test data. Mr. Vancott made as-surances that the data from their independent tests would be made available to confirm that the vessels were in compliance with code requirements and the G-E specifications. He expressed confidence that their samples would confirm the integrity of the vessel materials. An interview was also held with Mr. Benz, the Director of the CE Nuclear Components Department. He expressed an i interest in receiving a written couemunication from the AEC, briefly explaining the Compliance inspection program. While this information.has been given on a verbal basis both to him and his predecessor, he indicated a letter would be helpful in explaining Compliance's presence to his management. It is intended that his suggestion will be followed prior to the next visit to Chattanooga.
Attachment:
Addendum I k i l 1
.I ADDEBRMt I Imosct Test Data l Jersey Central Niagara Mohawk ] Fe. Number Impact Value Fc. Number Impact Value Upper Course, Bottom G-1-1 30 ft-lbs @ 34"F G-1-1 30 ft-lbs'@ 34 F @ -4*F G-1-3 @ 36*F Head Segments
- G-301-1
@-12*F G-301-3 @ 22 F G-1-4 i 1 i G-301 " @ -4*F @ 32 F G-301-1 @ 4*F G-301-2 S-12*F G-1-2 l @-26*F p' Lower Course, Bottoni G-2-2 @ 4F G-2-1 8* F G-302-1 A Head Segments
- G-302-2 OF l
G-302-3 @ -4 F G-2-3 @ 34*F i .i d" @ 20PF G-3 @ 12*F Bottom Head Dome
- G-303-R Lower Shell Segments **
G-307 34.5 ft-lbs @ 10*F G-8-1 30.5 ft-lbs @ 10*F G-307-5 32.3 G-8-3 44.8 G-308-1 31.5 G-8-4 49.6 Lower Intermediate Shell G-8-6 31.5 ft-lbs @ 10 F G-307-3 35.3 ft-lbs @ 10*F Segments ** G-8-7 34.5 G-307-4 36.6 G-8-8 40.0 G-307-10 39.3 Upper Intermediate Shell G-307-7 52.3 ft-lbs @ 10PF G-8-2 22.6 ft-lbs @ 10*F Segments
- G-307-8 27.7 G-8-9 24.8 G-307-11 36.7 G-9-R1 20.0
'O Upper Shell Segments
- G-307-R1 30.3 ft-lbs @ 10 F G-8-5 56.5 f t-lbs @ 10*F G-307-R2 41.0 G-8-10 21.5 G-9-1 32.3 G-8-11 78.1 Closure Head Torus G-309-1 58.8 ft-lbs @ 10*F G-10-1 48.0 ft-lbs @ 10 F F
Segments
- G-309-2 34.3 G-10-2 33.8 Closure Head Dome
- G-310 32.8 ft-lbs @ 10PF G-11 32.8 ft-lbs @ 10 F
- G-E specifications require 30 f t-lbs @ 40PF or less.
~ j ~ **G-E specifications require 30 ft-lbs @ 10PF or less. y,! - ' ' + .,. i_ q 5, v = w s ~ (', e-3' ,}}