ML20107A828

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Insp Rept 50-219/73-01 on 730409 & 10.No Violations Noted. Major Areas inspected:post-exam Cleaning Requirements of Liquid Penetrant Test Procedure
ML20107A828
Person / Time
Site: Oyster Creek
Issue date: 05/15/1973
From: Brown R, Howard E, Sanders W
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML18039A986 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-95-258 50-219-73-01, 50-219-73-1, NUDOCS 9604150145
Download: ML20107A828 (7)


See also: IR 05000219/1973001

Text

- ._

..

.

- _ .

- . -

-_

...

.

_., _

.

,

i

'..-

(

.

.

'

j.

..

,

U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

i

DIRECTORATE OF REGUIATORY OPERATIONS

!

l

i

REGION I

l

RO Inspection Report No.:

50-363/73-01

Docket No.:

50-363

'

Liesnsee:

Jersey Central Power and Light Company

License No.:

Madison Avenue at Punch Bowl Road

.

- Priority:

Morristown, New Jersey 07960 (Forked River 1)

Category:

A-1

I[> cot ton:

Klockner Works, Osnabruck, Germany

Typ3 of Licensee:

PWR MW(e) 1070

1I Typa of Inspection:

Announced, Vendor

-

(

D:tso of Inspection:

April 9 and 10, 1973

Dstes of Previous Inspection:

October 30, 1972

i

Rsporting Inspector:

M

74

Ross,L. Brown, Reactor Inspector

Date

-Accompanying Inspectors: M[F

,/ fed

0////73

i

W. F. Sanders, Reactor Inspector

/ Dafe

Date

1

<

-

Date

Date

.

Othar Accompanying Personnel:

Date

Rsviewed by:

Wh [) Jet

.

[

)

f-/5'-74

E. M.'Howard, Chief, Faci /ity' Construction

Date

and Engineering Support Branch

-

Date

s

%

9604150145 960213

PDR

FORA

DEKOK95-258

PDR

e

'

,

. . .

,

_

. . _

. _ . . .

.

,

.

_ .

.(

.

.

.

_.

. . _ . - .

..

..

- . - . . . -

- ~ . .

.

. . ~ . .

..

..

e

1

m

(

, , ,

.-s

.-

,

54

<

'

i

'

SUMHARY OF FINDINGS

,

Cr.f( 7+ ment Action

None

. Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement-Items

'

No previously identified enforcement items.

' Design Changes-

.None identified

Unusual Occurrences

None

,

Other Significant Findings

A.=

Cdrrent Findings

The inspector observed that the vendors activities were not in con-

'

formance 'with the post examination cleaning requirements of the " liquid

penetrant test procedure, however, the deficiency was corrected prior

to completion of the inspection.

(Details, Paragraph 4)

B.

Status.of Previously Reported Unresolved Items

No previously reported unresolved items.

Management Interview

4

A.

.The following persons attended a management meeting, conducted by

Mr. Brown and Mr. Sanders at the conclusion of the inspection.

.

.Klockner Works

'

i

Dr. W. Brohl,' Director, Quality Assurance

> -

Mr. W. Neumann, Quality Control

Mr. . G. Grote Quality Control Engineer

Mr. J. Kuone, Project Manager

Mr.' A. Rudolph, Quality Control

.

.

!

i

'

e

, . .

,

e

f -

,#'

>. .,

,

2

-

j

l N( ~ ~

~

,

.

,

. .

. .

_

_ , _ , _ _ . _ . . _ . .

.,

.

,

_

. , . _

.-

'.

'

t

-2-

-

.

Combustion Engineering Corporation (C.E.)

Mr. R. J. Cepluch, Manager, Quality Assurance

Mr. J. C. Moulton, Psoject Manager

Mr. G. S. Brunetto, Quality Assurance Representative

Sulzer - KSB (SKK)

Mr. B. D. Jacobsen, Manager, Quality Assurance

The items discussed and management comments were as follows:

B.

The inspector stated that the quality documents audited appear to be

satisfactory, but in some cases traceability required the use of docu-

ments written in German that will not be included in the final document

package submitted to the customer, this will create a problem at a later

date.

The management personnel present stated that this condition will be cor-

rected.

(Details, Paragraph 3a)

C.

The inspector stated that the "Klockner Heat Treatment Procedure," does

not, in all cases, specify an acceptable temperature range.

The Klockner management stated that the procedure should probably specify

a temperature range of plus or minus 250F. , but that the heat treat require-

ment will be reviewed and the procedure revised to include the acceptable

code requirements and engineering practices.

D.

The inspector stated that the management personnel present are responsible

to conduct sufficient audits to ensure conformance with established require-

ments, thus preventing a recurrence of a situation similar to that observed

where the item was not cleaned following the exanination in accordance

with the liquid penetrant test procedure.

(Details, Paragraph 4)

The C-E, SKK, and Klockner management stated that audits to determine con-

formance with the procedural requirement will be conducted on a periodic

1

basis.

E.

The inspector stated that the codes and specifications may not require con-

trols against possible contamination in all materials or conditions associ-

ated with the manufacturing, inspection, or testing of stainless steel clad

,

components.

It would appear to be good manufacturing practices to consider

imposing some control measures to prevent contamination in the following

areas:

.

.

e

. - . . - .

. - . - -

n....

..

,

- -

. -- .

- .

-

.

'

-4.

I

-3-

r

1.

Couplant used during ultrasonic testing.

2.

Surface cleaning prior to subjecting the component to elevated

temperatures; e.g. stress relief.

The Klockner management stated that the ultrasonic test procedures will

be revised to include the control of halogen and sulphur content of all

of couplants used.

They also stated that item two will be discussed with Klockner Metallur-

gical Department for recommended shop practices.

During two telephone contacts with Mr. Cepluch, subsequent to the inspection

on April 23 and 27, 1973, he stated that C-E does not believe that the

cleaning in Item 2 need be any more than a visual examination to assure that

all heavy debris and combustibles have been removed, but the need for any

solvent cleaning is not required.

The inspector stated during these telephone contacts that the situation

will be reported to R0 Headquarters for their review and recommendations.

F.

The inspector was asked if Klockner and/or their customers are permitted

to use copies of the AEC Inspection Reports or AEC letters to the utility

company as part of their sales presentation to potential customers.

The inspector stated that he did not know, and would not encourage their

use, but is unaware of anything to prevent their use, since copies of these

documents are on file in the Public Document Room.

.

e

~

/

.

._ .

_-

._ . _ _

_

_ .

_ _ _ _

__.

.

.

.

I

. et

C

.t

j

,

.

.

DETAILS

1

1.

Persons Contacted

Klockner Works

-

Mr. C. Maidorn, Supervisor, Quality Control-

Mr. W. Neumann,- Qualit/ Control

Mr. ~ G. Grote, Quality Control Engineer

Mr. A.~Rudolph, Quality Control

Sulzer - KSB'(SKK)

Mr. B. D. Jacobsen, Manager, Qualit Assurance

' Combustion Engineering Corporation (C-E)

Mr.'R.'J. Cepluch, Manager, Quality Assurance (MSV)

'

Mr. J. C. Moulton, Project Manager

Mr. G. S. Brunetto, Quality Assurance, Representative

,

2.

General

The first p' ump casing complete with seal flange, inlet and outlet nozzles is

scheduled to be shipped'to KSB in September 1973.

3.

Record Review

a.

The inspector reviewed the material test reports, heat treatmen't

certificates or furnace charts, non-destructive examination reports,

and dimensional inspection records to assure that the following

components are in conformance with the material requirements speci-

fled in the purchase ' order, ASME Codes and Standards.

(1) Pump Casing No. II, Heat No. 412340, Material SA-508-69, Class 2.

(2)' Seal Flange No. II, Heat No. 412376/2, Material SA-508-69, Class 2.

(3) Suction Nozzle No. II, Heat No. 412424/12, Ebterial SA-508-69,

'

Clas s-- 2.

,

. (4) Randomly selected heats of type 308L and 309L,-welding electrode.

,

4

f

=

.

'

9

f

-

+~~

__

-

,.

, , . .

-

.

. -

~

-...

-

-

. .. .-

.

.

-_.

.

. . - . -

-

- . ..

'

\\

.:

y,

l

-5-

'

s

i

1

i

1

No violations were identified, but traceability of heat treatment

charts to the item was difficult because it required the use of

the shop travelers (which are written in Germaa and will not be

'

a part of the final quality package), to establish reference to

i

the item number. The vendor stated that the documentation will

be reviewed and the necessary cross references will be recorded

on.the English translation of the documents.

C-E management stated that they will conduct a comprehensive record

audit prior co shipment of the pumps,

b.

The following fabrication and in-process inspection records were

,

selected to determine:

(a) if inspection hold points were being

observed; (b) if inspections were' documented by qualified personnel;

(c) if' approved inspection procedures were 'being utilized; and (d)

if the acceptable results were in accordance with the procedure

acceptance criteria.

(1) Weld history record (welder, procedure, preheat temperature,

electrode heat number and interpass temperature) ultrasonic

examination for bond report, and liquid penetrant examination

,

report for the internal cladding of Pump Casing No. 1.

,

(2)- Weld history records and non-destructive examination records

(magnetic particle, radiography, and ultrasonic (0-450

600))

-

for the suction nozzle to safe end weld.

(3)

Radiographs for weld seam No. 3 (outlet nozzle to shell) for

Pump Casing No.1.

4. - Component Cleaning Following Liquid Penetrant Examination

The inspectors' observations of work in process indicated that the vendor

was not performing the procedure required, cleaning following liquid pene-

trant examination of cladding of Pump Casing No. 3.

The vendor took the following corrective action that was completed trior

to completion of the inspection.

a.

Issued a deviation report that required the item to be cleaned in

accordance with the liquid penetrant procedure; results were reviewed

and approved by responsible supervisor.

,

e

,

.-

-_

..,n,,,.

-

\\

b

4

s .-

(

s

-

'

-6-

'

l

b.

Written instructions were issued to the non-destructive testing

personnel, stating that the inspection is not complete and the

report can not be signed until the required cleaning has been

accomplished for all non-destructive testing methods.

Klockner management stated that in addition to the above instruc-

tion, this requirement was discussed with the responsible supervisors

and testing personnel.

.

'

j

e

. . . . .

.. . _ - . - . -

- . . . ..

j