ML20126D682
Text
A c.t * * * ' ' %,
UNITED STATES e
g j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION fjg
,[q,7)
E RE GION IV 7
f,**,:#
s k
611 RYAN PLAZ A DRIVE. SulTE 1000 t
ARLINGTON TEXAS 76011 May 15, 1984 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Dennis Crutchfield, leader Special Waterford 3 Team FROM:
Lawrence Shao, Leader Special Civil / Structural and Mechanical / Piping Team
SUBJECT:
ACTION FOR RESOLVING ALLEGATION A-296 in allegation A-296, concern was expressed on lack of proof of inspection of all shop welds in ASME C1 1 and 2
~ ing systems installed by T/B during the hydro tests, interview that he does not b ieve the signature o authorized nuclear inspectors on the N5 Form is a viable evidence, since the test instruction sheet referred only to field welds. We also found that the welds identified on the weld checkoff list are indeed all field welds only. The attached request for infortnation to LP&L represents a reasonable solution for both the alleger and us. You are requested to contact LP&L for timely response.
La rsn e Shao Deputy Director Division of Engineering Technology, RES
Enclosure:
l Request for Information l
cc:
D. Eisenhut G. Arlotto S. Hou R. Hubbard 8506150176 850301 PDR FOIA f*YAl/yVf CARDEB4-A-55 PDR 6
Ilo j
A'l
-MMtitt ur.u 3
\\'
yQ Pm"r!! FO I FCEdJ VI'?Y r
(\\
Be review of hydro tests conducted b J/8)for their,'n lied ASME i
Class 1 and 2 piping systems found a lack of proof of inspection e-all shop wefds during the tests. Since inspection of all welds for leakage is requirg( by.thp,A,5.ME_ Code and is essential to ensure #pH *,-
that shop welds were indeed structural integrity / Anfomation-th,st-itted.
inspected during the hydro tests shculd be' In 'i c u c f Cve,
one-acceptabie-etternativ0 isy submit a statement t0 Cer" cctd ci/~1dd',>
impic cnt+ tion-of shop weld ' inspection by,7esponsible personnel of LP&L j
p or Ebasco who had witnessed the hydro. tests.
/
s
\\
m p
l'
?
.{
,V_
~ ~
g
NCR-Ey7d y[
UNITED STATES k
[.;.,
NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5 f.,-&9' E
REG 10N lV S I'.
[.f 611 RYAN PL.AZ A DRIVE. SulTE 1000
%,, ll,, #
ARLINGTON. TEX AS 76011 May 15, 1984 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Dennis Crutchfield, Leader Special Waterford 3 Team FROM:
Lawrence Shao, Leader Special Civil / Structural and Mechanical / Piping Team
SUBJECT:
ACTION FOR RESOLVING ALLEGATION A-296 In allegation A-296, concern was expressed on lack of proof of inspection of all shop welds in ASME Class 1 fno systems installed b 4
Y T/B during the hydro tests.
interview that he does not believe the signature of authorized nuclear inspectors on the N5 Form is a viable evidence, since the test instruction sheet referred only to field welds. We also found that the welds identified on the weld checkoff list are indeed all fidd welds only. The attached request for information to LP&L represents a reasonable solution for both the alleger and us.
You are requested to contact LP&L for timely response.
La rdnce Shao Deputy Director
.,. - {;
Division of Engineering Technology, RES
Enclosure:
Request for Information cc:
D. Eisenhut J. Gagliardo G. Arlotto S. Hou R. Hubbard
.o
/r # f, '
b e
>l' #g
t 4
WATERFORD 3 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION Our review of hydro tests conducted by T/B for their installed ASME Class 1 and 2 piping systems found a lack of proof of inspection on all shop welds during the tests. Since inspection of all welds for leakage is required by the ASME Code and is essential to ensure piping structural integrity, information to verify that shop welds were indeed 3
inspected during the hydro tests should be submitted.
In lieu of above, one acceptable alternative is to submit a statement to confirm actual implementation of shop weld inspection by responsible personnel of LP&L or Ebasco who had witnessed the hydro tests.
i w._
l l
d
It has.been alleged that the hydrostatic testing 1)
Valid:
Y N*
,g p'rogram is not in accordance with the ASME Code.
2)
Significant:
Y(( N
- The Code requires visual examination of all velds 3)
Generic:
Y N*
during the test and the contractor has not documented
~~~
chat such visual examinations were performed.
~
Response
1)
Evaluation of Validity
==
Conclusion:==
Invalid.
Basis:
ASME Section III, Article 6000, requires that components installed shall be tested at a minimum pressure of 1.25 times design pressure for a minimum of 10 minutes in the presence of the Authorized N,uclear Inspector (ANI).
Test Data Sheets per procedure ASP-IV-63 were completed for all ASME Section III testing and verify that the above Code requirements were complied with.
All hydrostatic and pneumatic tests performed on ASME piping and components and their respective Test Data Sheets were subsequently reviewed by Ebasco's Quality Assurance Installation Review Group (0 IRG) to assure compliance with the above Code requirements.
This review has been completed and documented.
The review documentation and the actual Test Data Sheets are on file in the Quality Assurance vault.
3 The Code requires visual examination e all welds during testing.
This' 'was"'"
pairfoisiied end dedumented on'.the*indivic..ual Test. Data 7 Sheets' for4tch7ASME hydrostatic or' pneumatic-tesp.
The Te : Data Sheets are signed by the personnel perfirming the test as visually inspecting. witnessing, and accepting the, test.
g t
2)
Safety Significance,;,
==
Conclusion:==
No impact on safety.
Basis: N/A 3)
Generic Implications Systems: N/A Contractors: N/A e
j
' (18)
Shcat 2 of 2
\\
Within the work system, the cognizant supervisor is afforded latitude for independent judgement regarding utilization of personnel.
Each supervisor has the authority to retain only those reviewers who are capable of performing th' '
assigned tasks.
Additionally, the state eviewer training and qualifications is periodically reviewed a tored by the site training group in cooperation with the a' i review group supervisor.
2)
Safety Significance
==
Conclusion:==
No impact o-Basis: N/A 3)
Generic implications Systems:
N/A Contractors:
h s
's
.;.. (
O I
f
,N$-BECKWITH INC.
ATTACHMENT D
.3-105 TEST NUMBER TB 52A-2-8 1
.cchment D REVISION NUMBER 0
WELD CHECK-OFF LIST PAGE 1
OF 1
LINE NO.
DRAWING AND NO. OF SATISFACTORY FAILURE /
REVISION WELDS INSPECTED Q/C ANI WELD kJ W lug E QO 1RC3/4-159 E-3029-LW3-RC-SW-1,2,3,4,5,6,7, g 2 r/ Wf9ftga 1RC3/4-99RLlA 25 EFR-4 18,19,20,21,22 FW-1 i
)
4 p.-
g.
~
/ ?#,
ci }f 2
WATE MORD 1
.e'..,~.
I
\\
REV8tvvw bY_[h/4M6d L GP-723-103 Cover Shee t '
f HYDROSTATIC / PNEUMATIC TEST INSTRUCTIONS
[d Test Number:
TB 52A-2-8 Rev.0 System: Reactor Coolant s::: -
Code: ASME Section III, Division I, Subsection NB, 1974 Summer,1975 Adder a as Equipment Required: Hydro-pump and test gauge assemblies.
/
2 each 0-5,000 psig test gauges
[p -
w 1 each relief valve set 0 3,250 psig Prerequisites:
A.All valves must be tagged with "LP&L DO NOT OPERATE" tags.
B. Valve line-up to be verified by T-B Quailty Control C. Ebasco Safety Dept. notified 24 hrs. prior to test.
D.
+20 Inspection Method: Hold at the test pressure of 3130' psig for a minimum of 10 minutes. Then decrease the pressure to the ad3usted design pressure of 2525+25 psig and inspect all permanent field welds, joints and connectipns, while maintaining test pressure.
Acceptance Criteria:
No leakage from any permanent flipid weld, joint or connection.
Attachments:
A.
Hydrostatic / Pneumatic Test Data Sheet OMPKINS. BECKWITH, INC.
B.
Boundary Drawing CONTR0llED 00citWNT g
C.
Valve Line-up List MAY 20 E D.
Weld List Document Accountable & Retum 7-E.
Sequen~ce. ' f Tes t Control Number.3 o
F.
Official Hydro-pump and test gauge' connections.
Test Instruction Approval:
NAME COMPANY DATE
//
T-B Test & Start-up Coordinator S /R D T-B Project Engineer
</
V s C T-B QA Supervisor
,[/f.Y m,
M Ebasco m%m 4
bN s.
LP & L W'
(
[
d'
%Im 00T 271932 T-B QA R' CORDS E
M 'l TOMPKINS-BECKWITH N
Watorford #3 Project Form GP-723-18
/
Rev.4 Attach:r.-oct. A 4
HYDROSTATIC / PNEUMATIC TEST DATA SHEET TEST NUMBER TB52A-2-8 Rev.0 SYSTEM / COMPONENT Reactor Coolant DRAWING (S) LOU-1564-G-179 Rev.6 TEST BOUNDARIES:
As shown in yellow on the attached flow diagram.
. ~,. - '
.q Toot Mediums (A)
Potable Wate (
Disposal Method; Draintothefhr (B)
Demineralized Wate d drain system.
(C)
Other
" '"*Cao3 \\
+20 Danign Pressure 2,485 Te st Pressure 3,130psigMin.Te st Temp. tJ_ '-/- As specified ~
l~
psig by Ebasco)
(Maximum Component-Media Temperature Differential 25cF)
Engineering Verification of System Ready for Hydro or Pneumatic Test:
l Piping:
I o w Title %g7' eO.
Date 4 2s -f2, e
Hnngers u Y [ w Title 24 Dake 4 - 2I.Pt Toot Performance Tomps Metall2 *+- Media [ Time System Held At Test Pressure
.34%,1 Stagtic Pressure d
_ Gauge #1 AfMt.
Gauge #2
- [#
Vicuti Examination:
Satisfactory Exceptions (see below)
Rotoot Necessary:
No',,
Yes (see below)
Excoptions, comments and/or definitions of sections requiring retest:
i s
Test Change Notice Attached j
YES NO Toot Gauge No.:
///2.,
Calibrat. ion Date s.[-//-82 Location:
Toot Gauge No.: 9((
Calibration Date r [//-g2 Locations df Tact Gauge No.:
Ar/A Calibration Dates p /4i Location:
- /A i
r WITNESSED BY:
ACCEPT D Y
f, d~E$82 V&f h~ESb I
LAS O QC OfSPECTOR DATE hY V h c1 $ $
LO6S Jo-2/L
\\\\i LSpT-UPREP.
AN DATE Skilf2 a~.-/fe, /aC L w-e v j.
NESSES TEST AND STARTUP COORDINATOR, DATE
~0 pjoi'l:
[t. i e
sg s
l*
x W
02%
/
msmet nn
,vs oen r
0h5 a f
(G 6 %e Feindy-va yyyy h) c~