Information Notice No. 86-81, Supplement 1:Broken External Closure Springs on Atwood & Morrill Main Steam Isolation Valves
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 January 11, 1988 Information Notice No. 86-81, SUPPLEMENT 1: BROKEN EXTERNAL CLOSURE SPRINGS ON ATWOOD & MORRILL MAIN STEAM ISOLATION VALVES Addresses: All holders of operating licenses of construction permits for nuclear power reactors. Purpose: This notice is provided as a supplement to Information Notice No. 86-81 to alert recipients of information about additional closure spring failures on main steam isolation valves (MSIVs) that have been reported at Fermi Unit 2. The MSIVs were manufactured by Atwood & Morrill and the springs that failed were manufactured by Duer Spring and Manufacturing. It is expected that recipients will review the information for applicability to their facilities and consider actions, as appropriate, to avoid similar problems. However, suggestions contained in this information notice do not constitute NRC requirements; therefore, no specific action or written response is required. Background: At Fermi 2, in May 1986, the licensee observed that four external closure springs (the inner members of the affected pairs of external springs) were broken into several pieces. The licensee analyzed two of the broken springs and determined the failure to be quench cracking caused by the heat treatment process during manufacturing. The spring manufacturer, Duer Spring and Manufacturing, also performed laboratory metallographic examination of the failed springs and verified that the failure was the result of quench cracking. Both Atwood & Morrill and Duer recommended that all the external closing springs on all MSIVs be cleaned and subjected to magnetic particle testing at the earliest opportunity. Duer provided an inspection procedure. In addition, General Electric (GE) issued Service Information Letter No. 422, dated July 18, 1986, recommending a visual inspection and in some cases load tests. It also stated that springs passing the 105 percent load compression test would be expected to provide satisfactory service at normal loads. The broken springs at Fermi were replaced with springs that had been compressed to 105 percent normal load. No magnetic particle inspection was conducted at that time. 8801050394 . IN 86-81, Supplement 1 January 11, 1988 Page 2 of 3 Description of Circumstances: At Fermi 2, on March 21, 1987, the licensee found two additional broken springs of the same type and location. These springs had been inspected according to the GE recommendations. The licensee attributed the failures to pre-existing seams and quench cracks (induced during heat treatment) that had propagated as brittle fracture failures. The spring material, which is the same as that of the springs that had previously failed, had undergone temper embrittlement. The licensee plans to replace all currently installed valve springs in early 1988. After heat treatment, but before they are painted, the replacement springs will be subjected to the following tests: magnetic particle, full compression (108 percent of the maximum operating stress), and spring constant. Discussion: The licensee performed a fracture mechanics analysis of the data, taking into account temper embrittlement. Their calculated value for critical crack size in temper embrittled material under 100 percent maximum operating stress is 0.03 inch. Their estimate for critical crack size in temper embrittled material under 105 percent maximum operating stress is 0.027 inch. These results are essentially equal. Measurements of critical crack size on 7 actual fractures varied from 0.044 inch to 0.077 inch. These crack sizes are smaller than those visually detectable, particularly when the surface is coated. Consequently, the licensee concluded that the 105 percent load test followed by a visual examination would not suffice for separating defective springs. It should be noted that a previous analysis contracted for by the licensee did not take into account temper embrittlement effects and did lead to an earlier conclusion that the 105 percent load test would suffice. The failures of springs which had been subjected to 105 percent load tests and visual inspection appear to confirm the licensee's conclusion that the root cause is temper embrittlement, quench cracking, and surface imperfections. The licensee's corrective action of conducting full compression testing followed by magnetic particle testing thus appears to be appropriate. Springs from Duer Spring and Manufacturing have been supplied to both pressurized-water reactor and boiling-water reactor nuclear power plants on MSIVs manufactured by Atwood & Morrill. Atwood & Morrill has identified those plants that would be affected by the problem. This list is attached. . IN 86-81, Supplement 1 January 11, 1988 Page 3 of 3 No specific action or written response is required by this information notice. If you have any questions about this matter, please contact the technical contact listed below or the Regional Administrator of the appropriate regional office. Charles E. Rossi, Director Division of Operational Events Assessment Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Technical Contacts: R. L. Cilimberg, NRR (301) 492-9656 Vern Hodge, NRR (301) 492-8196 Attachments: 1. List of Affected Plants as Identified by Atwood & Morrill 2. List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices
Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021