ML20214U689
| ML20214U689 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 11/20/1986 |
| From: | Bateman R, Rose J, Russell J TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214G966 | List:
|
| References | |
| WP-05, WP-05-R01, WP-5, WP-5-R1, NUDOCS 8612090357 | |
| Download: ML20214U689 (8) | |
Text
_,,. t -
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: WP-05 SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT TYPE: Walding Project REVISION NUMBER: 1 TITLE:
Duct Installation and Documentation Requirements REASON FOR REVISION: N/A SWEC
SUMMARY
STATEMENT: N/A i
PREPARATION PREPARED BY:
Original Sinned By R. N. Bateman 08-25-86 SIGNATURE DATE REVIEWS PEER:
Original Sinned By J. E. Rose 08-25-86 SIGNATURE DATE i
l TAS: TECHNICAL 9 VIEW ONLY ll N $$
SIGNATURE DATE
~
CONCURRENCES OriEinal SiEned By CEG-H:
L. E. Martin 09-03-86 SRP: k w 8. (b M ak ll.20. U, I
SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE
- DATE APPROVED BY:
Nd N/A
[4/
ECSP NANAG LR DATE MANAGER OF NUCLEAR POWER DATE CONCURRENCE (FINAL REPORT ONLY)
- SRP Secretary's siEnature denotes SRP concurrences are in files.
2242T 8612090357 861124 PDR ADOCK 05000327 P
PDR l
L
.c.
7 d'
4 WELDING PROJECT
" C.;) '
GENERIC EMPLOYEE CONCERN EVALUATION REPORT REPORT NUMBER:
WP-05-SON, R1 DATE 08-26-86
SUBJECT:
DUCT INSTALLATION AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS CONCERN CONSIDERED:
IN-85-339-005 PH-85-012-XO3 mL M %
, OC, WP FREPARED B REVIEWED BY
. E..
A 8/2M8f,
, OC, WP
)
REVIEWED BY d 2 6 d6
, QA, WP RE IEWED B V
7[
, CEG-H, WELDING J
~
' ll i
APPROVED BY b
, PROGRAN MANAGER
~
\\
l/
1 t
l Revision 1 was issued to incorporate comments made by the Senior Review Panel on 8/19/86 to include a statement of the evaluation results for suitability of service.
i l
f 00400
~
l
'\\
[
I i
l i
t
<2
/?
,c GENERIC EMPLOYEE CONCERN e
~
~~'~ ('{':
SUMMARY
SHEET Report Number:
WP-05-SON. R1 Report
Title:
DUCT INSTALLATION AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS J
I.
CONCERN CONSIDERED:
IN-85-339-005 PH-85-012-X03 i
II.
ISSUES INVOLVED 1.
EGT piping is too close to wall for adequate access for welding.
2.
Welde should be welded and inspected from the incide of the pipe to assure adequacy.'
3.
Welding and brazing inspection may have been/was deleted from the QA program without adequate justification.
III. STATEMENT OF CONCERN / ISSUE VALIDITY Validity: Y X
,N
, Substantiated: Y
- I
,N
.jj
- Substantiated for Issues 1 and 2 only. Not substantiated fot" Issue 3.
IV.
EFFECT ON HARDWARE AND/OR PROGRAM
\\
None l
V.
JUSTIFICATION There were procedures in effect for inspection and documentation of l
duct and duct supports during SQN construction.
Inaccessability of welds was recognized during SQN construction and appropriate corrective measures were taken. Corrective measures were verified by the WP-Reinspection Program.
l VI.
RECOMMENDATION AND/OR CORRECTIVE ACTION NEEDED None
~
VII.
REINSPECTION NEEDED: Y
,N
- X
- Reinspection has been performed on this issue.
VIII.
ISSUE CLOSURE By this report.
o
.A Page 1 of 2 00400
r WP-05-SQN, R1 P'
~
II.
ATTACHMENTS
- 1.
Text of the Employee Concern 2.
')
Page 2 of 2 00400
i 9'
h.
GENERIC EMPLOYEE CONCERN
""~
' ~ ~
Report Number:
WP-05-SON, R1 2
Report
Title:
DUCT" INSTALLATION AND DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS l
I.
SCOPE OF EVALUATION t
This evaluation covers the following WBN specific concern deemed to have possible gener,1c implication to SQN:
IN-85-339-005 PH-85-012-X03 a
II.
ISSUES ADDRESSED BY CONCERN EGTpipl$gistooclosetowallforadeyuateaccessforwelding.
1.
2.
Welds should be welded and inspected from the inside of the pipe to assure adequacy.
3.
Welding and brazing inspection may have been/wes deleted from the QA program without adequate justification.
III. CONCERN VALIDITY OR SUBSIANTIATION
~
The EGI (Emergency Gas Treatment) system is a safety-related duct system constructed from spiral-welded pipe.
^~
The WP-SQN Reinspection Program directly investigated the generic lesues of this concern by the review of a comparable HVAC system.
Complete details are included in the Welding Project SQN Phase II l
Report. Three welds were investigated in the Containment Purge Air System at SQN. Welds in this system were chosen because of their
(;
accessability, because they are representative of construction I
techniques used on all duct systems at SQN, and have areas of limited access to the outside diameter due to physical barriers such as walls. These three welds (one-10-inch diameter ac3 t,wo 24-inch diameter) had inspection windows cut in them to s11ee' direct access to the inside diameter of the duct.- In all thvea av :., it was determined that the inside diameter had best
,414.., in areas where there was no corresponding weld on the outside diameter.
l-This reinspection also confirmed that in all cases the length of weld I
deposited on the inside diameter of the duct was greater than the unwelded length left on the outside diameter of the duct and effectively overlapped the unwelded area. The weld quality of the inside diameter welds were found to be acceptable.
I
<n I
Page 1 of 3 00400
,mw-
-v
-_,-,-m.-.-
,,-..._,.,,,,..~- -,
..... _.. - - - - -.. -, =..
l WP-05-SQN, R1
' * <! 4 ' ~
~Further support'for the integrity of this duct system is found in the l
fact that after the original construction, a satisfactory leak check l
~
was performed on these ducts, thus providing additional evidence that lR1 the joints are welded to provide adequate sealing.
Based on the reinspection of these three weld joints in the Containment Purge Air System, the following conclusions were reached:
1.
SQN Construction recognized the problem of accessability on the
~ Containment Purge Air System and implemented a program of welding on the inside diameter of the duct to assure adequate welding in areas of limited accessability on the outside diameter.
l 2.
The observed weld quality was acceptable, indicating that the welds were originally inspected during installation.
3.
The Containment Purge Air System is not a safety-related system. It r
is reasonable to assume'that at least the same level of quality and erection technique, described in items 1 and 2 above, were exercised in safety-related duct systems.
TVA SQN Design Specification N2M-865, " Field Fabrication, Assembly,
~
Examination, and Tests for Pipe and Duet Systems," was reviewed to determine the requirements for inspection and documentation for duct systems.
This specification references SNP Construction Procedure M-27 for field inspection and documentttion requirements. Review of SNP
.j;)
Construction Procedure M-23, outlines the inspection and documentation requirements for duct supports. These specifications and procedures establish that there was a program for the inspection and documentation of duct and duct support systems for SQN construction.
TVA is carrently evaluating the limited QA program requirements for B31.1 Seismic and Ductwork Systems to determine if program improvements and corrective actions are appropriate. Any program improvements will be used for future construction. Quality Technology Corp (ERT)/NSRS has performed a preliminary investigation on this issue at WBN.
In summary, Issues 1 ar.d 2 of the subject concerns are substantiated due I
to the following factors.
1.
It has been determined by direct inspection that there are areas of j.
spiral weld duct which are not welded on the outside diameter i -
because of the close proximity to walls and other barriers in similar systems.
2.
It has been determined by direct inspection that welds have been made and subsequently inspected on the inside diameter of the spiral weld pipe where there are corresponding areas which are not welded on the outside diameter.
,75\\
~
Page 2 of 3 00400 l
~
5 WP-05-SQN, R1
- t
'~'"'s;\\'
' Issue 3 is not substantiated because there was a program in place for
^^
~
welding inspection on ductwork and duct supports during construction at SQN.
There is no hardware effect from Issues 1 and 2 due to the fact that this problem was recognized during construction and that measures were taken to correct the problem.
These issues are closed by this report.
O k
t.'
+
l l
i
[] Page 3 of 3 00400 .._-,,_,.,,,_7_, - -, - -, _ ~. m.___
Page 1 or 1 ] '04/ds/86 CEMPLOYEE CONCERNS) '08:54:32 LOC STATUS RESP -QTC-PPP CFR INSP TC ------CONCERN PROBLEM ID 194 EG8G D11 SR IN-85-339-OOS WCMHY K_;WORDS: DESIGN CRITERIA SPECIFIC X: W Y: C 2: N WBNP, UNIT #2, EGT PIPING IS GENERICALLY INSTALLED TOO CLOSE TO WALL TO PERMIT ADEQUATE ACCESS FOR WELDING. WELDS SHOULD BE WELDED / INSPECTED FROM INSIDE OF PIPE TO ASSURE ADEQUACY. TECHNICALCONNENTARY: ISSUES CONSIDERED: 1.EGT PIPING IS TOO CLOSE TO WALL FOR ADEQUATE WELDING.
- 2. WELDS SHOULD BE WELDED AND INSPECTED FROM THE INSIDE OF OF THE PIPE TO ASSURE ADEQUACY.
LOC STATUS RESP -QTC-PPP CFR INSP TC ------CONCERN-'------ PROBLEM ID SR PH-BS-012-XO3 WCPIF XEYWORDS: INSPECTION PROGRAM CRITERIA DUCT X: W Y: C 2: Y 1 WELDING AND BRAZING INSPECTION OF SAFETY-RELATED HUAC DUCTWORK WAS DELETED SUBJEQUENT TO 1981 FROM THE QA PROGRAM WITHOUT ADEQUATE JUSTIFICATION. WATTS BAR UNITS 1 & 2, SAFETY RELATED DUCTWORK. ADDITIONAL DETAILS ARE AVAILABLE IN FILE. TFCHNICAL COMMENTARY: 0 '.;fdE CONSIDERED: WELDING AND BRAZING INSPECTION MAY HAVE~BE.EN/ WAS DELETED FRC THE QA PROGRAM. ( l l 'Y .~.__-,_-..--.,,_m . _.. _. _ ~. -, -}}