1、Designation: D 7491 08Standard Guide forManagement of Non-Conforming Coatings in CoatingService Level I Areas of Nuclear Power Plants1This standard is issued under the fixed designation D 7491; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the case of
2、 revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope1.1 This guide provides the user with guidance on develop-ing a program for managing non-conforming
3、 coatings inCoating Service Level I areas of a nuclear power plant.1.2 Non-conforming coatings include degraded previouslyDBA-qualified or acceptable coatings, unqualified coatings,unknown coatings, and unacceptable coatings.1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of thesafety concerns, if
4、 any, associated with its use. It is theresponsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:2D 4538 Terminology Relating to Protective Coati
5、ng andLining Work for Power Generation Facilities2.2 Other Documents:Regulatory Guide 1.54 Service Level I, II, and III protectiveCoatings Applied to Nuclear Power Plants3EPRI Report 1003102 Guideline on Nuclear Safety-RelatedCoatings, Revision 1 (formerly TR-109937)43. Terminology3.1 DefinitionsDef
6、initions for use with this guide areshown in Terminology D 4538 or other applicable standards.3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:3.2.1 non-conforming coatings, na coating or coatingsystem in a Coating Service Level I application that lacks orhas insufficient documentation to support
7、or verify DBAqualification.3.2.1.1 DiscussionThis would include coatings referred toas unqualified, unacceptable, and degraded qualified coatings.3.2.2 unacceptable coating system, nA safety relatedcoating system for which no suitability for application reviewwhich meets the plant licensing requirem
8、ents has been com-pleted.3.2.2.1 DiscussionTherefore, no reasonable assurance ex-ists that, when properly applied and maintained, the coating orlining will not detach under normal or accident conditions.This is applicable to “pre-ANSI” plants.4. Summary of Practice4.1 The process and use of this gui
9、de is summarized inFig. 1.5. Significance and Use5.1 There are several methods for managing non-conforming coatings in an operating nuclear power plant. Thisguide outlines methods that have been determined to beacceptable to the nuclear industry.5.2 Managing the amount of non-conforming coatings isk
10、ey to ensuring the amount assumed, in the licensing bases isnot exceeded.5.3 EPRI Report 1003102 Revision 1 (formerly TR-109937) provides additional information on the selection,application, inspection and maintenance of nuclear plantsafety-related protective coatings. This reference offers adetaile
11、d discrussion of inportant considerations related toprotective coatings and can be used to supplement this guide asdeemed necessary.6. Establishing the Design Limit of Non-ConformingCoatings6.1 Determine what coatings do not meet the licensing basisfor the plant. For plants that have commitments to
12、meetRegulatory Guide 1.54 (applicable revision) and/or related1This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D33 on ProtectiveCoating and Lining Work for Power Generation Facilities and is the directresponsibility of Subcommittee D33.10 on Protective Coatings Maintenance Workfor Power Gener
13、ation Facilities.Current edition approved Nov. 1, 2008. Published December 2008.2For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, orcontact ASTM Customer Service at serviceastm.org. For Annual Book of ASTMStandards volume information, refer to the standards Document Summary page
14、onthe ASTM website.3Available from U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Distribution ServicesSection, Washington, DC 205550001, http:/www.nrc.gov.4Available from EPRI Customer Fulfillment, 1355 Willow Way, Suite 278,Concord, CA 94520.1Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700,
15、 West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.FIG. 1 Managing Non-Conforming CoatingsD7491082ANSI/ASTM standards typically require DBA testing of coat-ings and extensive documentation associated with the applica-tion of the qualified coatings. This may be a more significantrequirement to satisfy
16、than for an older plant which has notmade commitments to these requirements.6.2 The key to ensuring plant safety is to manage theamount of non-conforming coatings so that it does not exceedthe amount assumed in calculations that support plant opera-tion, such as sump suction strainer head loss.6.3 M
17、anaging non-conforming coatings, must consider thecapacity of the Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS)suction strainer to accommodate debris expected to reach theECCS suction strainer (including coating debris) withoutreducing the overall ECCS pump net positive suction head(NPSH) margin below an acc
18、eptable value. Those plants withsignificant operational NPSH margin for accommodating ad-ditional debris may require less precision when determining theamount of non-conforming coatings; simplified bounding tech-niques may be sufficient.6.4 The non-conforming condition may also affect otherplant des
19、ign and licensing limits, such as coating thicknessaffects on the accident heat transfer and peak temperaturecalculations, and Fire Hazards Analysis.7. Determining the Amount of Non-Conforming Coatings7.1 Essentially every plant has some amount of non-conforming coatings inside of primary containmen
20、t and thismay be an acceptable condition. There are two considerationswhen identifying non-conforming coatings.7.1.1 Does the coating meet the licensing basis commit-ments?7.1.2 Is there reasonable assurance the coating will notdetach during normal operation or a Design Basis Accident(DBA)?7.2 The a
21、mount of coating that was applied inconsistentwith licensing commitments and design requirements needs tobe identified.7.3 It may also be appropriate to review procurementdocuments (including records of work performed ) for equip-ment installed in containment to determine if coating applica-tions pe
22、rformed off site conforms to licensing bases and designrequirements.7.4 If records cannot be found that identify the types andquantities of coatings (for example, weight or volume) in-stalled in containment, then some area, thickness, and densityestimations need to be performed.7.5 The results of th
23、e investigation should be tabulatedaccording to the various containment surfaces, indicating thetype, quantity, location, and qualification classification of thecoating applied. Photographic documentation is also helpfulfor reference to the findings.7.6 The tabulation should also consider identifica
24、tion of thecomplete coating system as applied.7.7 Periodic reassessment or establishing a new baselineshould be considered.8. Guidance on Managing Non-Conforming Coatings8.1 Once an accounting of the amount of non-conformingcoatings is determined, a decision will need to be made as tohow to manage t
25、he results. It is important to know the reasona particular area of coating is non-conforming.8.1.1 Conditions that may cause a coating to be non-conforming:(1) Lack of or incomplete documentation for the applica-tion process.(2) Lack of or incomplete documentation regarding appli-cator qualification
26、.(3) Lack of or incomplete documentation regarding inspec-tor qualification.(4) Lack of incomplete design change documentation forthe use of alternate coatings.(5) Improper or inadequate specification of technical andquality procurement requirements for services and materials.(6) Improper dedication
27、 of commercial grade coatings.(7) Incomplete documentation for the testing used toestablish conformance with the design bases.(8) Incomplete/inadequate specifications and procedures.(9) Undefined or vague personnel qualification criteria.(10) Degraded coatings, both qualified and unqualified.(11) Mi
28、sapplication of a DBA qualified coating system.8.2 Remove, Repair, or Replace Non-Conforming Coatings:8.2.1 If a condition assessment reveals that the coating hasphysically degraded in service, the degraded coating should beremoved or replaced in accordance with the coatings programas appropriate to
29、 restore that area to a qualified status.8.2.2 Another option may be the replacement of a non-conforming coating with a qualified or an acceptable coatingsystem.8.3 Mitigate the Consequences of Further Coating Degra-dation:8.3.1 To preclude the removal, repair, or replacement ofnon-conforming coatin
30、gs, techniques may be used to mitigatethe consequences of further degradation and detachment ofcoatings.8.3.1.1 These measures may include construction of con-tainment devices around the equipment coated with the non-conforming coating to prevent debris formation or transport.8.3.1.2 The acceptable
31、resolutions must be based on plant-specific conditions, and the impact such containment wouldhave on the operation and maintenance of the equipment.8.4 Evaluate the Safety Impact of Non-Confoming Coatings:8.4.1 An evaluation that determines the impact of thenon-conforming coating on the operation of
32、 the ECCS suctionstrainers following a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) mayneed to be performed.8.4.1.1 Typically, this will be required only when the totalamount of non-conforming coating exceeds the amount con-sidered in the ECCS suction strainer head loss calculation.(a) Consideration of the failu
33、re characteristics of thecoating, the time of failure, and the transport and strainer headloss characteristics of the detached coatings can all be used inthe evaluation.8.4.1.2 Use of the plant corrective action program willtypically be required when the amount of non-conformingcoatings exceeds that
34、 considered in the current ECCS suctionstrainer head loss calculations.D74910838.4.2 Non-conforming coating can also have a potentialimpact on other safety related SSC performance, such as theaffect on the pressure/temperature curves during a LOCA orMain Stream Line Break (MSLB), Fire Hazards Analys
35、is, etc.,and should be evaluated accordingly.8.5 Managing the Addition of New Coatings:8.5.1 The coatings program should address the use ofappropriate controls, such as procedural requirements andspecifications, to ensure that the amount on non-conformingcoatings does not increase in an uncontrolled
36、 manner.8.5.2 The introduction of new equipment or structuralcomponents as a result of plant modifications or maintenanceon existing equipment and structures could lead to an unwantedincrease in the amount of non-conforming coatings. Therefore,the plant modification and maintenance programs should h
37、avea means to evaluate such potential impacts.8.5.3 The Nuclear Coatings Specialist should ensure thattechnical requirements specified for replacement or repaireditems, adequately addresses coatings program requirements.8.5.4 Acceptance of their respective responsibilities, byother licensee organiza
38、tions, for example, design engineeringand procurement, who do not own the overall coatings pro-gram, is an important issue. The responsibilities of otherdisciplines should be clearly resolved early in the developmentof a safety-related coatings program.8.5.5 Controls should be provided to address th
39、e use ofpaints and inks for labeling and stenciling. Some are organicmaterials and may not be included in the coatings program.8.6 Upgrading Non-Conforming Coatings:8.6.1 The upgrade of non-conforming coatings to an accept-able status can be accomplished by conducting those evalua-tions and/or tests
40、 that will compensate for the missing orincomplete documentation that supports the acceptability of thecoating. The activities performed should result in reasonableassurance that the coatings were acceptable when applied.8.6.2 It is important to recognize that the objective inmoving particular coati
41、ng work from a non-conforming statusto an acceptable status is the achievement of reasonableassurance that is consistent with the licensing basis of the plant.8.6.3 The requirements for the evaluation/test are not pre-defined because they should be tailored to address the specificweaknesses identifi
42、ed.8.6.4 In some cases, it may be appropriate to supplement thedocumentation evaluation with limited testing to bolster theconclusions or address areas where the results of the documen-tation evaluation are inconclusive.8.6.5 In lieu of performing extensive documentation re-views to upgrade the stat
43、us of a coating, it may be morepracticable and cost-effective to perform the necessary teststhat would provide at least an equivalent level of assurancewith regard to coating acceptability as would be achieved viaa documentation review.8.6.6 An acceptable method is to perform DBAqualificationtesting
44、 on representative samples of the non-conforming coat-ings. Acceptance of the test results will also require supportingdocumentation of the application of the original coating toensure the samples are representative of the coating beingtested. Alternately, actual samples from the facility may beremo
45、ved and DBA tested, if practical.9. Documentation9.1 Design Basis Limits for Non-Conforming Coatings:9.1.1 Each plant should have a documented basis for theamount on non-conforming coatings that currently exist withinthe containment structure and are part of the debris source termin the design of th
46、e ECCS suction strainer configuration.9.1.2 This documentation should provide the maximumacceptable quantity of non-conforming coatings allowed withinthe containment structure.9.2 Documentation of Actual Total Non-Conforming Coat-ings:9.2.1 The Nuclear Coating Specialist should maintain a logor some
47、 other documentation that details the quantities of eachtype on non-conforming coating.9.2.2 This documentation should include the type of non-conforming coating, the quantity of each, the location, why itis non-conforming, and the plan if any, to resolve the non-conformance.9.2.3 This documentation
48、 should be updated or revised eachrefueling cycle with the removal, remediation, replacement, oraddition of non-conforming coatings.9.2.3.1 The effect on design margin of the ECCS systemshould also be assessed by this update.10. Keywords10.1 Design Basis Accident (DBA); Emergency Core Cool-ing Syste
49、m (ECCS) suction strainer; licensing basis; safetyrelatedASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentionedin this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the riskof infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years andif not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments a
