IR 05000250/1991010
| ML20138F634 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 04/12/1991 |
| From: | Blake J, Lenahan J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138F621 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-250-91-10, 50-251-91-10, NUDOCS 9610180017 | |
| Download: ML20138F634 (9) | |
Text
-. -
-
-
=_.
..
-
- - _ -
.
ga Kato UNITED STATES n
.
/
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
~
REGION 11
,
g j-101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323
\\...../
_
Report Nos.:
50-250/91-10 and 50-251/91-10
-
Licensee:
FlorbaPowerandLightCompany 9250 West Flagler Street Miami, FL 33102
.
Docket Nos.:
50-250 and 50-251 License Nos.:
DPR-31 and DPR-41 Facility Name:
Turkey Point 3 and 4
_
Inspection Conducted: March 4-and March 18-22, 1991
._
Inspector:
!
A o /
d. J. Lenah Date Signed Approved by:
W 4 I/f/
d. Bla gF,/ Chief Date Signed MaterfaM Processes Section
'
Engirieering Branch Division of Reactor Safety
_
SUMMARY
-
Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection was conducted in the areas of procedures, work activities and quality records pertaining to erection of structural steel in the new diesel generator building, new security barriers, and cable tray and conduit supports, installation of new safety related cable, and repairs to the intake structure.
Results:
-
In the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identified.
All construction activities observed by the inspector showed evidence of prior planning and were well controlled; construction procedures were strictly adhered to; and QC inspection personnel were present, as required by procedures, to witness and inspect various activities.
Construction deficiencies were promptly identified and addressed by the licensee's corrective action system.
Minor weaknesses were identified, regarding the document control system, pertaining to the posting of two drawing change requests to the appropriate drawing, and documentation of structural steel inspections, paragraphs 2.b.(3) and 2.c.(3).
9610180017 910417
'
PDR ADOCK 05000250 O
PDH
,
,,,
.
...
.
.
-.. - - - -.
-.
. - -.
- - - - - - -.. - - - ~ - - -
I
l
.
.
.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees M. Blew, ISI Coordinator S. Chaviano, Civil Engineer A. Fata, Supervisory Civil Engineer
,
- T. Finn, Assistant Operation Superintendent-
_
S. Franzone, Juno Plant Nuclear (Engineering) Supervisor r
L
- M. Huba, Juno Plant Nuclear (Engineering) Supervisor R. Key.. Lead Civil QC Specialist D. Osborne, Backfit.QC Supervisor
- L. Pearce, Plant Manager
- T. Plunkett, Vice-President, Turkey Point
- D. Powell, Licensing Superintendent -
L. Wilson, Lead Electrical QC Specialist
,
,_
Other Organizations A. T.
Bailey, Electrical QC Supervisor, Stone and Webster W. Smith, Civil QC Supervisor, Stone and Webster
-
NRC Resident Inspectors
-
- R. Butcher, Senior Resident Inspector L. Trocine, Resident Inspector-
-
G. Schnebli, Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interviews 2.
Structural Steel and Supports (48051, 48053, and 48055)
The inspector examined procedures and quality records and observed work activities relating to erection of structural steel for the electrical power system enhancement project..This work included structural steel platforms in the new diesel generator building, and new cable -tray supports.
The inspector also examined structural steel erection and Inspection activities for the new security barriers in various area.
Details of the. inspection follow:
a.
Procedure Review
~ ~~
i The inspector examined the procedures. listed below which control
~
!
structural steel construction and inspection activities.
In addition i
to the procedures, the inspector also examined applicable drawings
!
and drawing change request notices.
Requirements for structural
steel construction and inspection are specified in the FSAR and the
._
l
.
,. -,
.-,
.. -.,..
,-n
-
- -.,
,,
-
,-,--,,,
-
--
._
.-_ __ - _ _.
.. _ _ _
-.. _ _ - _. _. _ _. _ _ _ _ _ -. - _ _ _. _ _.. _ _ _ _ _ _
f
..
~
~
,
,.
.
.
i
appropriate plant change / modification (PCM) documents.
Procedures j
examined were as follows:
j (1) ' Miscellaneous Metal Technical Specification 5177-074-C-131 Purchase of
!
'
(2) Technical Specification 5177-074-C-121, Purchase of Structural i
Steel i
(3) Performance Specification 5177-074-C-122. Erection of Structural Steel (4) Performance Specification 5177-074-C-132, Erecting Miscellaneous
Steel
,
)
(5) Quality Control Technique Sheet (Procedure) 10.5, Structural i
j Steel
_
i (6) Technique Sheet 9.1-5.1, AWS Visual Inspection (7) Technical Specification 5177-C-103.1, Procurement and
.
Installation of Concrete Expansion Anchors for Modifications to Turkey Point Units 3 and 4
(8) Technique Sheet 10.13, Expansion Anchors.
The inspector verified that the procedures were consistent with regulatory requirements and licensee commitments.
The inspector also verified that the procedures contained appropriate work J.
instructions, acceptance criteria, inspection hold points, and j
requirements for compilation of records.
b.
Observation of. Work Activities The inspector observed the following work activities.
(1) Diesel Generator Building Structural Steel Framing.
The inspector witnessed installation of structural steel support beams for the air dryer units on the elevation 42.0 platforms in the new diesel generator building.
The diesel
._
generator building is being constructed under PCM 87-259.
Details of the supports are specified on Change Request Notice (CRN) C-3944.
The inspector also examined completed structural steel framing for the diesel starting (compressed) air receiver tanks and framing for other sections of the elevation 42.0 platform steel.
Framing details are shown on EBASCO drawing
,
number 5610-C-1598, Sheet 1, Revision 4; and Sheet 2, Revision 2,
and CRNs referenced on the drawing.
No discrepancies were identified.
l-
-
---m-
<
..
s n'nv sp-
--e-m--
-n
,cm r
c w
ww w
m
--
__ _ __. _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. _. _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _. _ _ _ _. _ _
.
.
.
-
(2) Structural Steel Framing For Upgraded Security Barriers.
The inspector witnessed bolting of structural steel members erected to support the upgraded security barriers.
These barriers are being constructed under PCM 88-418.
The tightening
,
of the bolts was accomplished using the turn-of-the-nut method
'
specified in Specification 5177-074-C-122.
The inspector witnessed the bolt tightening on various connections on the
.
Unit 4 main steam barriers at elevations 54.0 and 72.0, and on the condensate storage tank and feedwater platform enclosure at
-
elevation 61.0.
The inspector verified that the proper size and type of bolts were used in the connections and that the work was accomplished in accordance with procedure requirements.
Framing details' are shown on EBASCO drawing numbers 5610-0-1680, Sheet 2, Revision 5; Sheet 3, Revision 5; Sheet 4, Revision 3; Sheet 5, Revision 4; Sheet 6, Revision 3; and Sheet 9 and on CRNs referenced on the drawings. Quality control personnel were-present to witness the bolt tightening as required by Technique Sheet 10.5.
The inspector also witnessed grouting of baseplates supporting the Unit 3 condensate storage tank barrier.
Specific areas inspected included mixing of the grout, quality control testing (flow cone measurements) and grout
'
placement and inspection.
Inspection requirement were specified
'
in Technique Sheet 10.14, Grout.
No discrepancies were
~~
identified.
(3)~ Inspection of Cable Tray Supports in New Diesel Generator Building.
The inspector examined completed cable tray support structures installed in the new diesel generator building under PCM 87-263.
Details of the cable tray support construction are shown on EBASCO drawing numbers 5610-C-1603, Sheet 1, Revision 1; and Sheet 2, Revision 1; referenced CRNs; and in specification 5177-E-302, Electrical Installation - Raceway Notes, Symbols, and Details.
QC inspection requirements are specified-in Technique Sheet 10.31-1. Electrical Raceway Installation (Cable Tray) and Technique Sheet 10.31-3 Electrical Raceway Hangers
-
and Support Inspection.
The inspector examined the support configuration, verified member sizes were as specified on the drawings, and verified weld type and sizes used in connections were as required per the design drawings.
The inspector identified the following discrepancy.
The inspector noted during the walkdown inspection that the 4 x 4 tube steel support member at elevation 27.0, indicated in Section D and Detail 1 on drawing number 5610-C-1603, Sheet 2, was not constructed in accordance with the details shown on the plans or on any CRNs referenced on the drawing.
Further review by the inspector disclosed that the details for this section of the support had been revised by CRN C-3522 which was not referenced on the
----e --
=
- --
-
r w
w r
_,+q
-._
y.
,-+,
i
... ~
_. _ _ _.
_ _ _ _ _ _. _._._ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _. _ _ _ _
!
.
__
l l
drawing. The inspector discussed this problem with the document control supervisor who indicated that it was the result of an oversight by document control clerical personnel, and was probably due to the large volume of CRNs being issued.
The inspector considered this problem an isolated occurrence with no i
safety significance since the revision was made to simplify j
construction and the support details revised by the CRN had been inspected and accepted by QC personnel, using the appropriate design documents, including CRN C-3522.
Licensee management personnel indicated that they intended to perform a review of this problem to determine corrective actions appropriate to identify other document control problems of this type.
(4)
Inspection of Cable Tray Supports in Turbine Building for Electrical Power System Enhancement Project.
The inspector examined completed cable tray supports installed under PCM 87-259 in the turbine building and observed cable tray support installation activities in the Unit 4, 4160 volt motor control center.
Installation and inspection requirement are stated in the procedures referenced in paragraph 2.b.(3), above.
Construction details are shown on EBASCO drawing numbers 5610-C-951, Revision 1; 5610-C-953, Revision 1; 5614-C-1721,
'
Sheet 1, Revision 3; Sheet 2, Revision 3; and Sheet 3, Revision 1; and referenced CRNS.
The inspector examined support
,
configuration and layout and verified they were in accordance with drawing requirements, verified member sizes were as L
specified, and verified weld type and size used in connection complied with design requirements.
The inspector also examined cable tray support baseplates and verified that br.seplate dimensions and anchorages were per drawing requirements.
No discrepancies were identified.
c.
Review of Quality Records The inspector examined quality records documenting purchase, erection, and inspection of structural steel.
Records examined were as follows (1)
Physical and chemical test reports for A-36 steel used in various cable tray supports (2) Results of inspections performed on the above referenced cable tray supports.
These records included Raceway Hanger and Support Inspection, Records (TS 10.31-3)
visual welding inspection reports, wold material requisition reports, and inspection reports for expansion anchors.
(3) Results of inspections performed on the elevation 42.0 platforms in the new diesel generator building, including assembly,
-
.
-
-
--
. -.
-.
_
.
._
- -. - _
.
. -.-. - -.
-. - -. - _ - _. _ -.. _. - - - -
.
-
,.
-
,
.
i
,
i
!
l
-
erection, and bolting, visual inspection of welds, and weld
material requisition reports.
During review of the above
.
i records the inspector identified a minor weakness regarding documentation on structural steel inspection reports (TS 10,5)'.
The inspector expressed concern to licensee management regarding
.
i the lack of specific data on the inspection reports to document i
more precisely the portion of the structure covered by the
individual inspection reports.
For example, licensee inspectors ~
l
presently document on individual reports that a particular
inspection covered perhaps ten bolts on Section AE' on a i
particular drawing.
Using such general references it is
)
difficult to specify which ten bolts were inspected, and would make it very difficult after the fact, to ascertain if all
connections had been inspected.
A drawing as used by the QC inspector to indicate which connection had been inspected by
,
coloring in the portions inspected.
However, after the i
inspection are all completed, it is difficult, if not impossible
-
to rdference individual inspection reports to specific
.
structural joints.
Licensee management stated that they would
!
evaluate the inspector's concern.
During review of the above i
quality records,-the inspector also identified another CRN which
was not referenced on drawing number 5610-C-1598, Sheet 1.
Within the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identified.
i I
3.
Electrical Power System Enhancement Project, Observation of Work
_
ActivMies,(51059)
e
!
The inspector witnessed various other construction activiti.es related to the electrical power system enhancement project during walkdowns performed
]
throughout the inspection period. Activities observed were as follows:
-
l a.
Installation of Conduit Sleeves through walls of the Unit 3, 4160
.
volt motor control center.
-
.
The inspector examined various conduit sleeves installed through the north wall of the Unit 3, 4160 volt motor control center structure.
!
The inspector verified that reinforcing steel had not been cut during conduit installation.
b.
Installation of Anchor Bolts.
The inspector witnessed installation of ador bolts in various areas.
The anchor bolts are installed by drilling circular holes in existing concrete slabs and walls, installing the anchor in the holes, and setting the anchor using grout.
The inspector verified that reinforcing steel was not being cut while drilling the holes.
When reinforcing steel was encountered, the holes were relocated to avoid the need to cut the rebar.
..
,1
..
.-
- _ _.
.-. _
.
-
..
..
. -
.
.
- - - -. -. - -.
. - -. - - - -. - -
-.. _ - - -
- -
.
.
.
~
-
..
-
.
..
~
c.
Cable Pulling Activities.
The inspector witnessed portions of installation of the following safety related cables-(1) Cable number 4D0147B*008 from PTC-3 to PB7348 This is-a two
.
conductor 750 mcm cable
I (2)
16 control cables from P87371 to PB7342; cable numbers weie 3E24xA*00A, 3A05A*00F and J,
4D5076A*00A, 4D5414A*00A, 3D5414A*00A, 3K58*00A, 3AD04A*00L, 3D5076A*00A, 3A001A*00A, 3DA07A*00D, 3AA17A*00B, 3K48*00E, KC4*00A, 3XA41*00A and A-SPARE /00A and 00F.
These cable were pulled by hand using a maximum of 3 men to obtain pulling tension.
(3) Cable numt er 3D2335B*00P, from PB7349 to PTC 1.
This is a two conductor 750 mcm cable.
During the pulls, the inspector noted that Bechtel supervisory personnel continuously monitored cable pulling activities, and that a sufficient number of craft personnel were available to perform the
- work.
QC personnel were present at all locations where the cable was exposed, to continuously inspect cable pulling activities, inspection requirements are specified' in procedure 10.30-1,
-
Electrical Cable and Wire Installation Inspection.
~
Within the sreas 1ispected, violations or deviations were not identified.
.
4.
Electrical Power System Enhancement Project, Review of Quality Records (51055)
-
The inspector reviewed the following quality records pertaining to cable pulling activities:
a.
Cable and Wire Installation Inspection Reports for cables listed in paragraph 3.c.(2)
b.
Nonconformance Report numbers N-91:0136, 0171, 0179, 0246, 0260, 0307, and 0759.
These nonconformances document and disposition j
various problems encountered during cable pulling.
l l-Within the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identified.
-
l
'
5.
Review of Civil - Structural Design Criteria and Calculations for Security W
Barriers (37701)
The igector examined the criteria used for deiign of the upgraded security barriers. The criteria reference applicable codes and regulatory requirements, specify design loads and design bases, and contain seismic response spectra.
The inspector reviewed calculation number
_
w-
" - - -
t--
r-i-e-e mim g
-
-v
<
-...
.-.
-.
--
-_. ~.
. - - - -
... -
.
. - - -
..
.
.
.
-
CIV-TPS-0769, Evaluation of Connections for Security Upgrade Structures.
The purpose of these calculations was to design non-standard and unique
.
connections in the various security barriers constructed under PCM 88-418,
-
419, and 364. The calculations were performed in accordance with licensee procedures and NRC requirements stipulated in 10 CFR 50, Appendix B,
,
Criterion III.
Within the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identified.
6.
Repairs to Intake Structure (62700)
Theinspectorexamin$dthemaintenanceandrepairsbeingperformedonthe intake structure.
The purpose of these repair fis to restore the concrete i
beams supporting the safety related intake cooling water pumps.
The repairs. are based on the results of investigations performed by the licensee to determine the extent and cause of the deterioration of the reinforced concrete beams.
The licensee investigation program was previously examined by the inspector during an inspection conducted July 5-8, 1988, dncumented in NRC Inspection Report Nos.- 50-250/88-17 and i
50-251/88-17.
TN
..pector reviewed FP&L Specification number CN-2.28, i
Revision 0, IntW Structure and Rephir, which outlines the licensee
--
program for rep. rs to the intake structure.
The inspector also review the fol. lowing documents which control the work:
>
PCM 89-006, Design of Steel Beam to. Support the Concrete Slab ICW
-
_
Pump 4B
.
.
'
PCM 89-549, Repair and Modification of Unit 3 Intake Structure
-
,
.
)
PCM 90-460, Repair and Modification of Unit 4 Intake Structure
-
Drawing number 5610-C-61, Sheet 3. Revision 0; Sheet 4, Revision 1
-
,
Sheets 5, 6, and 7 Revision 0; and referenced CRNs.
The inspector examined the repairs in progress on intake bay 381.
The deteriorated concrete had been removed by chipping and the existing reinforcing steel had been cleaned and coated with a corrosion inhibiting material.
In addition, a reinforcing steel beam had been installed under the existing concrete beam.
The new steel beam consist of a 3/8 inch thick steel picte stiffened by two Tee sections welded to the plate-The
<
steel plate is attached to the beam with concrete expansion anchors and anchored to steel plates anchored in the end walls of the intake bay.
The inspector observed installation and setting of approximately ten of the concrete expansion anchors, and installation of the Tee section on the east side of the plate.
~
^
'
The inspector examined the beams in intake bays 382 and 4A1, which had
~
been drained for inspection.
These beams will be repaired in a future outage, with all work scheduled to be complete by 1996.
The licensee repaired the concrate in intake bay 481 in 1988 During this inspection,
__
_
- -, -
-
..
.,
-,
.
-
- --
'-
.-
-
,
-
-
.
the licensse drained intake bay 4B1 to examine the repair work and to determine if the repair had been successful in preventing further deterioration of the beam. The inspector examined the beam and noted that the replaced concrete had not cracked or deteriorated, and that the steel plate / Tee' sections did not exhibit any signs of corrosion, except for some small pinhole areas around six of the concrete expansion anchors.
'
-
Licensee engineers. indicated that these areas will be cleaned and
,
recoated.
,,
Within the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identified.
j 7.
Action on Previous Inspection Findings (92701) (92702)
,
(Closed) NCV 250, 257/90-42-04, Loss of Control. of Quality Documentation on Safety Related Welds.
The inspector observed activities at the welding rod issue stations on a random basis during the inspection. No instances were identified regarding unattended weld documentation packages at the
,
weld issue point, or at other areas on the site. The licensee's action to correct this NCY have been effective.
8.-
Exit Interview
.
The inspection scope and results were summarized on March 8 and March 22, 1991, with those persons' indicated in paragraph 1.
The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results listed.
Proprietary information is not contained in this report.
Dissenting comments were not received from the licensee.
i
.-
%
e
e.--
._.
, _ _
. _,
..
_.