1 / 10

Qualification of Non-Destructive Testing in Finland

Qualification of Non-Destructive Testing in Finland. CURRENT STATUS NERS Meeting Vienna 23.9.2004 STUK. Progress made since September 2002 in NDT qualification in Finland.

mckile
Télécharger la présentation

Qualification of Non-Destructive Testing in Finland

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Qualification of Non-Destructive Testing in Finland CURRENT STATUS NERS Meeting Vienna 23.9.2004 STUK Metso/Valkeajärvi/Aro, 10.9.2002

  2. Progress made since September 2002 in NDT qualification in Finland • Top management of both licensees now understand the issue and are committed to work on it; national strategy document, presenting the involved organisations and their tasks, has in principle been agreed between the licensees • Management and planning of NDT qualification process has been contracted to an expert organisation rather than doing it within the licensee organizations as second priority work • Regulatory guide YVL 3.8 on In-Service Inspections has been issued (http://www.stuk.fi/english/publications) • Technical level guidance for implementation of qualification projects is ready • First qualification has been approved by STUK: internal inspections of Loviisa NPP reactor pressure vessel wall Metso/Valkeajärvi/Aro, 10.9.2002

  3. European NDT qualification model is followed • European Network for Inspection Qualification (ENIQ) report "European methodology for qualification of non-destructive tests“, EUR 17299 EN in 1997 • Since then ENIQ has also published several recommended practices based on pilot studies Metso/Valkeajärvi/Aro, 10.9.2002

  4. Finnish requirements for the NDT qualification • Qualification of NDT procedures, equipment and personnel has to be done as required in the regulatory guide YVL 3.8 • area of application: pre- and in-service inspections for equipment and structures in safety classes 1 and 2 • NDT qualification practices required in the YVL 3.8 are generally based on ENIQ methodology Metso/Valkeajärvi/Aro, 10.9.2002

  5. Players in NDT qualification (1) • Licencees (utilities) • appoint the national Steering Group for the qualification activities • contract expert organizations to manage the qualification process (annual fee) and to provide planning and guidance • specify the inspections to be qualified and for each inspection: • contract a Qualification Body which is dedicated to this inspection only • provide input data and materials • Inspecta SFS Certification - independent (privately owned) expert organization for conducting certification and verification tasks in different areas of commerce and technology • manages qualification process on behalf of the licensees • provides a responsible leader and a second permanent member for Qualification Bodies (same individuals in all Qualification Bodies) Metso/Valkeajärvi/Aro, 10.9.2002

  6. Players in NDT qualification (2) • VTT - independent expert and research organization • provides written guidance on compilation of qualification documentation • provides experts to Steering Group and to Qualification Bodies • Testing companies • provide experts to Steering Group and to Qualification Bodies when not involved in the respective inspection • prepare NDT procedure and technical justification (in case the company implements inspection and its qualification) • STUK - regulatory body • gives final approval of each qualification on the basis of assessment report prepared by the Qualification Body Metso/Valkeajärvi/Aro, 10.9.2002

  7. Players in NDT qualification (3) • Steering Group (to be appointed by the end of year 2004, will meet 2-3 times per year) • membership: • all members are from management level • members from Inspecta, VTT, Polartest; they are alternating as chairman of the group • other members from licensees and STUK • the responsible leader of all Qualification Bodies serves as secretary • tasks: • agrees on resources and provides guidance and follow-up for the national qualification approach • appoints the Qualification Bodies Metso/Valkeajärvi/Aro, 10.9.2002

  8. Players in NDT qualification (4) • Qualification Bodies • appointed and contracted separately for each qualification task (i.e., each inspection to be qualified) • continuity and consistency is provided by permanent members in all Qualification Bodies: the leader and the second member appointed from Inspecta SFS Certification • 1-3 other members from testing companies • members are inspectors with high level certificate and they bring technical hands-on experience to the process • not from the company who’s procedures, equipment and personnel is being qualified Metso/Valkeajärvi/Aro, 10.9.2002

  9. Qualification of inspections for the new NPP • The main contract between TVO and Framatome ANP includes qualification of pre-service inspections • responsibility is with the FANP • However, there is a need to have a Finnish qualification framework and practice in place before the work starts • possibility of getting foreign expert support is being considered (SQC-Sweden, IVC-UK, ?) Metso/Valkeajärvi/Aro, 10.9.2002

  10. Lessons learned • Licensees first underestimated the resources needed for qualification; qualification according to ENIQ requires a lot of work • Leaving the qualification process to technical level persons within the licensee and the regulatory body did not lead to progress • Key role given to independent expert organizations turned out to be necessary; roles and costs are now defined in a clear and transparent manner • Optimum use of existing expert knowledge and organizations is necessary in a small country, but adequate independence needs to be maintained Metso/Valkeajärvi/Aro, 10.9.2002

More Related