IR 05000446/1987029

Insp Rept 50-446/87-29 on 871201-03.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Preservice Insp Activities,Including Review of Programs,Procedures, Observation of Work & Work Activities & Data Review

ML20238C961
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	12/14/1987
From:	Danielson D, Ward K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20238C956	List: IR 05000446/1987029 ML20238C954
References
50-446-87-29, NUDOCS 8801040016
Download: ML20238C961 (5)

Text

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION III

Report No. 50-446/87029 Docket No. 50-446 Construction Permit No. CPPR-127 Licensee: Texas Utilities Electric Facility Name: Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Unit 2 Inspection At: Comanche Peak Site, Glen Rose, Texas Inspection Conducted: December 1-3, 1987 Inspector: W YTd7 Date C'hYN U l Approved By: D. H. Danielson, Chief ' '"k7 Materials and Processes Section Date Inspection Summary Inspection on December 1-3, 1987 (Report No. 50-446/8702 9)

Areas Inspected: Routine, announced safety inspection of inspection (PSI) activities including review of programs (preservice73051), proced (73052),observationofworkandworkactivities(73053),datareviewand evaluation Results: No (73055),ionsordeviationswereidentified.and violat review of shop and field radiogra l

8801040016 871221'

DR ADOCK0500g6 E------_-----------

.

.

'

DETAILS 1. Persons Contacted Texas Utilities Electric (TV Electric)

• J. Muffett, Manager'of Civil Engineering

• F. Madden, Mechanical Engineering Manager

• M. Skaggs, ASME Section XI Coordinator

• D. Foken, PSI Coordinator J. Ragan, Level III, NDE i

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

]

• C. Grimes, Director, CPPD i

• R. Warnick, Assistant Director for Inspection Programs

• C. Williams, Technical Assistant of the Director {

WestinghouseNuclearServiceDivision,InspectionServices(W)

i

• R. Hilterman, PSI Coordinator

{

HartfordSteamBoilerEngineeringandInsuranceCompany(HSB)  !

W. Parr, ANII

>

The inspector also contacted and interviewed other licensee and contractor personne ;

• Denotes those present at the exit interview, December 3, 198 . PreserviceInspection(PSI), Unit 2  ; General

I WestinghouseNuclearServiceDivision},InspectionServices(W)

erformedultrasonicexaminations(UT liquid penetrant examinations PT),magneticparticleexaminations(MT),andvisualexaminations VT) in accordance with ASME Section XI, 1983 Edition, with no addend Pulse echo UT detection instruments and transducers with various angles, sizes and MHZ were used by W. The TV Electric PSI /ISI 1 Coordinator was qualified in ultrasonics for detection of IGSCC at !

the EPRI NDE Center, Tour of Westinghouse Facilities The NRC inspector made a tour of the W facilities escorted by the TV Electric and W PSI coordinators. No radiography, eddy current, or leak testing was performed by ,

W had six Sonic UT instruments; transducers with various sizes, angles and MHZ; and calibration blocks on sit . .. .

,

,

-

I

Magnaflux was the manufacturer of liquid penetrant materials, )

and magnetic particles. Two Y6 yokes and various colors of magnetic j particles were used to perform magnetic particle examination l i

Flash lights and mirrors were used to perform visual examination l All equipment was stored in an air conditioned / heated orderly are j Program and Procedures The NRC inspector reviewed the following PSI program and procedures and found them to be acceptable. TV Electric has not made a request for relief from the ASME Code to dat '

• TU Electric ASME Section XI progra * W, Visual Examination, TX-ISI-8, Revision * W, Qualification of Ultrasonic Manual Equipment, TX-ISI-10, Revision * W, Liquid Penetrant Examination, TX-ISI-11, Revision * W, Manual Ultrasonic Examination of Welds in Vessels, TX-ISI-47, Revision * W, Magnetic Particle Examination, TX-ISI-70, Revision * W, Preservice and Inservice Examination Documentation, TX-0PS-101, Revision * W, Manual Ultrasonic Examination of Weld Review of Data and Certifications of Material, Equipment, and Personnel The NRC inspector reviewed documents relating to the following:

• Ultrasonic instruments, calibration blocks, transducers, and i UT couplan ]

• Magnetic particle equipment certification * Liquid penetrant material certification l

• NDE personnel certifications for R. Hilterman, Level II, W. McCabe, Level II and K. Behanna, Level I in accordance with SNT-TC-IA. These individuals were actively performing ND * Data report l

• Isometric Drawing Observation of Work Activities The NRC inspector observed work and had discussions with personnel during the PSI activities. Observations included visually examining many welds on various systems (RHR, RC, CVCS, SIC, FW, MS). Some of these welds had been blended for NDE and others were in the as welded conditio _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ --

.

The NRC inspector also observed calibration, recording of documentation, and the W personnel ultrasonically examining weld No. 38 in the SI system and liquid penetrant examining weld No. 13 in the RHR syste No violations or deviations were identifie . Radiographic Review The NRC inspector toured the vault where radiographs were being store The temperature was maintained no higher than 70 F and the humidity no higher than 50L The temperature / humidity readings were being recorded constantly on a calibrated gauge (strip chart), were being checked daily and recorded in a temperature / humidity log. There is also a viewing area in the vault for interpreting radiograph The NRC inspector interpreted radiographs and reviewed reports of the following 24 shop pipe welds that were radiographer by ITT Grinnell Industrial Piping, Inc., in accordance with ASME Section III, 1974 Edition, Summer 1974 Addend These welds met ASME Code requirements and consequently were acceptabl System Weld N Thickness Diameter Date RT'd RH-2-$8-16-1 A S/40 10" 02/19/80 RH-2-SB-16-1 B S/40 10" 02/19/80 RH-2-SB-16-1 C S/40 10" 02/19/80 RH-2-SB-16-1 D S/40 10" 02/19/80 RH-2-SB-16-1 E S/40 8" 02/19/80 RH-2-SB-16-1 F S/40 8" 02/19/80 RH-2-SB-16-2 A S/40 10" 02/21/80 RH-2-SB-16-2 B S/40 8" 02/21/80 RH-2-SB-16-3 D S/40 10" 02/08/80 RH-2-SB-16-4 A S/40 8" 03/28/79 RH-2-SB-16-4 B S/40 8" 03/28/79 RH-2-SB-16-5 B S/40 8" 03/25/79 RC-2-RB-21-1 A S/140 12" 12/06/79 RC-2-RB-21-1 B S/140 12" 12/06/79 RC-2-RB-21-1 C S/140 12" 12/06/79 RC-2-RB-21-1 E $/140 12" 12/06/79 RC-2-RB-21-1 F S/140 12" 12/06/79 RC-2-RB-21-1 ZR S/140 12" 11/13/79 RC-2-RB-21-2 A S/140 12" 11/30/79 RC-2-RB-21-2 B S/140 12" 11/30/79 RC-2-RB-21-2 C S/140 12" 11/30/79 RC-2-RB-21-2 E S/140 12" 11/30/79 RC-2-RB-21-2 F S/140 12" 11/30/79 RC-2-RB-21-2 ZR S/140 12" 11/13/79 The NRC inspector also interpreted radiographs and reports of the following 24 field pipe welds that were radiographer by Brown & Root, Inc., in accordance with ASME Section III, 1974 Edition, Summer 1974 Addend These welds met ASME Code requirements and consequently were acceptabl _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ . _ _ _

~!

,

<

Syste Weld N Thickness Diameter Date RT'd SI-2-RB-023 FW-1 0.332" 10" 02/17/80 SI-2-RB-023 FW-2 0.907" 10" 11/02/80 SI-2-RB-023 FW-3 0.898" 10" 11/18/79 i SI-2-RB-023 FW-7 0.920" 10" 02/17/80 SI-2-RB-023 FW-8A 0.919" 10" 01/28/83 SI-2-RB-026 FW-2 0.657" 8" 05/08/83 SI-2-RB-026 FW-3 0.660" 6" 01/07/83 SI-2-RB-026 FW-4 0.658" 6" 09/13/82 SI-2-RB-026 FW-6A 0.823" 8" 10/11/82 CT-2-RB-091 FW-2 0.346" 16" 10/20/81 CT-2-RB-091 FW-5 0.331" 16" 05/10/82 i CT-2-RB-091 FW-6 0.335" 16" 10/07/82 RC-2-RB-021 FW-8 1.020" 12" 02/25/82 RC-2-RB-021 FW-3A 1.233" 12" 03/25/82 RC-2-RB-021 FW-2A 0.484" 4" 12/22/81 RC-2-RB-021 FW-5-1 1.060" 12" 12/03/81 RC-2-RB-021-2 FW-1-1 1.265" 12" 03/25/82 RC-2-RB-021-2 FW-1-2 1.304" 12" 03/25/82 ;

RH-2-Sd-16-1 FW-2 0.308" 8" 02/15/82 RH-2-SB-16-1 FW-Z-1A 0.342" 10" 12/02/81 RH-2-SB-16 FW-3 0.314" 8" 04/07/82 RH-2-SB-16 FW-3-1A 0.286" 8" 12/01/81 RH-2-SB-16 FW-4-3 0.304" 8" 12/01/81 RH-2-SB-16 FW-5 0.353" 10" 02/15/82 No violations or deviations were identifie . Exit Interview The inspector met with site representative (denoted in Persons Contacted paragraph) at the conclusion of the inspection. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection noted in this report. The inspector also discussed the likely informational content of the inspection report with regard to documents or processes reviewed by the !

inspector during the inspection. The licensee did not identify any such documents / processes as proprietary.

l l

l'