IR 05000440/1987017

Safety Insp Rept 50-440/87-17 on 870810-12.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Implementation of Actions Set Forth in Generic Ltr 84-11

ML20238A645
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	08/25/1987
From:	Danielson D, Jeffrey Jacobson NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20238A625	List: IR 05000440/1987017 ML20238A621
References
50-440-87-17, GL-84-11, NUDOCS 8708310157
Download: ML20238A645 (6)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:,. . . . .

      ,
 .
 .. . . .
   .
   .. .
    .
    . .
     . .
.
*
,
,

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

      '

REGION III

Report No. 50-440/87017(DRS) Docket No. 50-440 License No. NPF-58 Licensee: Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company Post Office Box 5000 Cleveland, Ohio 44101 Facility Name: Perry Nuclear Power. Plant, Unit 1 Inspection At: Perry Site, Perry, Ohio Inspection Conducted: August 10-12, 1987 4h1  % Inspector . M. Jacobson 2 #J

Approved By: s>atun D. H. Danielson, Chief f!25/P7 Materials and Processes Date Section Inspection Summary Inspection on: August 10-12, 1987 (Report No. 50-440/87017(DRS)) Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced safety inspection of the implementation of actions set forth in Generic Letter 84-11 (Temporary Instruction 2515/89).

(25589) Results: No violations or deviations were identifie I l l l i

l

      !
      !

l

 {$@8AS$$d0$0hg
      - - _

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

   .. .. .  .
      .
.
.

i l DETAILS Persons Contacted i Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (CEI) l G. A. Dunn, Compliance Engineer L. Teichman, Supervisor, Maintenance Planning i U. K. Higaki, General Supervising Engineer l

 * E. Coleman, Quality Assurance H. Walls, Senior NDE Administrator A. Bradshaw, Lead NDE Int pector E. Riley, General Supervisor
 *D. C. Jones, Operations Engineer
 *D. J. Takacs, General Supervisor The inspector also contacted and interviewed other licensee employee * Denotes those attending the exit meeting on August 12, 1987. (Closed TI 2515/89) Inspection of BWR Stainless Steel Piping in Accordance with Generic Letter 84-11    .

l General Generic Letter 84-11, in summary, contained the following i information and required actions: l Inspections conducted at several boiling water reactors (BWRs) revealed intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) in large-diameter recirculation and residual heat removal piping. These inspections were conducted pursuant to IE Bulletins 82-03, Revision 1 and 83-02, and the NRC August 26, 1983 Order The Commission i believes that the results of these inspections mandate an ongoing ' program for similar reinspection at all operating BWRs. Where IGSCC is discovered, repairs, analysis and additional surveillance may also be required to ensure the continued integrity of affected , pipe Staff efforts as of April,1984 on this issue included review of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) report dated August 4, 1983, establishment of a pipe crack study group within the staff, evaluation of the results of IGSCC inspections already conducted, and discussions with licensees and industry groups. As a result of these considerations, the staff concluded that the following actions would be considered an acceptable response to the current IGSCC concerns: i I L

,

     ,
,'    ,
.

l (1) A piping inspection program was to be undertaken. This program was to identify the percentage of each group of welds to be inspected and the expansion of the inspection scope to occur q when crack formation or growth was discovere (2) The competence of all Level 11 and Level III ultrasonic test examiners was to be demonstrate (3) Leak detection system sensitivity, and operability limits were to be established. The conditions for shutdown as a result of unidentified leakage or of inoperability of leakage measurement , instruments were to be establi.she . b. Inspection Program ) The Perry Nuclear Power Plant Safety Evaluation Report states in 1 part, the following: I l

     '

The applicant has taken extensive measures at Perry to prevent cracking of piping by IGSCC. All stainless steel piping , supplied by the nuclear steam system supplier conforms to the j material requirements of Section III of NUREG-0313, Revir,lon Measures have been implemented to reduce the susceptil ility to intergranular stress-corrosion cracking, including application J of corrosion-resistant cladding followed by solution annealing on the recirculation inlet safe-end and thermal sleeves with Type 316L austenitic stainless steel material having a no-crevice design. Additionally, service-sensitive recirculation 3 bypass lines, control rod drive hydraulic return lines, and ) isolation condenser lines have been deleted. The standby liquid control system piping will be fabricated from Type 316L stainless steel conforming to the material requirements of NUREG-0313, Revision 1. The NRC staff has concluded that all' applicable piping conforms to the material selection and processing guidelines of NUREG-0313, Revision 1, and there is no need i for augmented inservice inspection and leak detectio All piping in the RCPB and engineered safety features (ESF) i systems, other than the NSSS-supplied systems and the standby ' l liquid control system, is fabricated from Type 304 stainless steel. Individual pipe lengths and fittings have been p_rocured in the solution-annealed condition under ASME Specification SA-312, SA-376, and SA-403 and is, therefore, not sensitize Additionally, the following weld methods are employed for all pipe sizes: i i

u

.      }
~
,
.
(1) Weld heat input is controlled to limit the material heat flux values to avoid the conditions that cause excessive sensitizatio j (2) Weld interpass temperatures are limited to a maximum of 'l 350 F, and the weld weave pattern is limited to a maximum of four times the core wire diameter to control the heat buildup which contributes to excessive sensitization, j i
(3) Weld procedures also conform to the guidelines of Regulatory l Guide 1.44, " Control of the Use of Sensitized Stainless Steel."

]

     ,

In addition, all piping of 2-in, nominal pipe size or less is l field feiricated using socket-welded fittings which prevent the ) welded portion of pipe from being exposed to the reactor coolant i or other process fluid. This also eliminates the necessity for j interior grinding since the interior surface of the pipe is not -{ disturbed. Socket welding can avoid excessive welding ~ sensitization of the pipe inside surface when proper welding procedures are followe ! It should be noted for clarification that certain portions of piping in service-sensitive systems were described by the i applicant as being nonconforming; however, these specific lines j are actually test return lines or relief valve discharge lines , and are not part of the reactor coolant system during operatio The NRC inspector reviewed a sample of the Recirculation System j Piping documentation including Material Certifications, Code Data l Reports, and NDE reports. The material was found to comply with ! the material selection and processing guidelines of NUREG-0313, Revision 1. The NRC inspector also reviewed a sample of the documentation provided by Pullman Power for the corrosion-resistant cladding and solution annealing of the Loop A and Loop B Reactor

     '

Water Clean Up System and RHR tie into the Recirculation Syste The shop travelers, heat treating charts and NDE results were found to be acceptabl In an effort to enhance the Preservice Inspection effort, the licensee elected to perform an ultrasonic examination of the Recirculation System welds for IGSCC. The NRC inspector reviewed Procedure 83A0811, Revision 1 (NES) "UT Examination of Stainless Steel Piping for IGSCC" and found it acceptable. The NDE reports of 14 welds and the EPRI Certified qualifications of the Level II inspectors were also reviewed and found acceptable. .NRC Inspection Report No. 50-440/85007 addresses the technical adequacy of this IGSCC examinatio l

     \

l l

  *

! L

<~

..      1
-
.
,

i 3. Exit Meeting The inspectors met with site representatives (denoted in Persons Contacted l paragraph) at the conclusion of the inspection. The inspector summarized l the scope and findings of the inspection noted in this report. The 1 inspector also discussed the likely informational content of the inspection report with regard to documents of processes reviewed by the inspector ; during the inspection. The licensee did not identify' any such documents / ' processes as proprietar _- _-

:       ^\
.      4 a-e '

d' j ;.s 4 Lt.de

 , g t- -

Q, s - : f% % in y o@,A +; EXh5 co ;t

  -
  -3 ,

6.. -l -

      .

M- 4 p4 -p v@3 d~ 'J V

      'l M

V *

  (f     1
      )

! t I ! I i i i ! i .

l l l I l i l

      .

I

l l

      '1

1 l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ }}