IR 05000311/1978031

IE Inspec Rept 50-311/78-31 on 780911-15 During Which No Items of Noncompliance Were Noted.Major Areas Inspected Included:Structural Integrity,Piping, & Cable Installation & Quality Verification Records

ML18078A395
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	10/06/1978
From:	Durr J, Paolina R, Toth A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML18078A394	List: IR 05000311/1978031 ML18078A393
References
50-311-78-31, NUDOCS 7811170299
Download: ML18078A395 (14)

Text

Report N /78-31 Docket N U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I License N CPPR..;53 Priority -------

Category __

___;B~---

Licensee: Public Service Electric and Gas Company 80 Park Place Newark, New Jersey 07101 Facility Name:

Inspection at:

Inspection Inspectors:

Approved by:

Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey R. McGaugh~

Section, RC&

Inspector Inspection Summary:

9,,{6/~

date signed *

~>hi n:z:r date signed 10/k/1~

&ate signed Oct s,;9;g date signed Inspection of Unit 2 on September 11-15, 1978 (Report No. 50-311/78-31)

Areas Inspected:

Routine, unannounced inspection by four regional based inspectors of Test P.rocedures for the structural integrity test; Work Activities.for the structural integrity test, safety-related piping in-stallation, instrument cable installation,~ instrument component instal-lation, electrical penetration leak testing; Quality Verification Records for reactor coolant pressure boundary pipe welding, other safety-.

related pipe welding, instrument installation, instrument cable installation, and licensee actions regarding items reported to NRC under 10 CFR 50.55(e).

The inspectors also performed plant tour-inspections, reviewed licensee tion on previous inspection findings, and performed follow-up action ecessary to resolve questions which arose during the course of inspection he above area The inspection involved 109 inspector-hours onsite by NRG regional office based inspector Results:

No items of noncompliance were identifie Region I Form 12

- (Rev. Apri 1 77)

781117001-9~

. **

DETAILS 1.

Persons Contacted Public Ser.vice Electric and Gas Company

• E. W. Barradale, Project Construction Manager

• R. A. Burricelli, Assistant Project Manager

• S. Chawaga, Principal Staff QA Engineer

• Y. I. Contractor, Site QA Engineer U. Desai, Structural Designer J. Flynn, Test Engineer~ Energy Laboratory (Maplewood)

• R. T. Griffith, Senior Staff QA Engineer

• C. P. Johnson, Startup Engineer K. Kraska, Materials Engineer

• H. S. Lowe, Site QA Engineer

• D. L. Mclaughlin, Senior Construction Engineer

• A. Meyer, Site QA Engineer

• G. D. Owen, Principal Construction Engineer H. Palmasino, Piping Stress Designer G. Ruane, Public Service Support

• R. T. Stanley, Lead Field Mechanical Engineer

• P. String, QA/QC Coordinator United Engineers and Constructors

• F. X. Albert, Assistant Lead Startup Engineer W. Copeland, QC Supervisor - Electrical H. Henry, Electrical I&C QC Inspector R. Jorgenson, Records Supervisor 0. J. Perkins, Startup Engineer

• R. J. Phelps, Superintendent Field QC

• denotes those present at the exit intervie.

Plant Tour The inspectors observed work activities in-progress, completed work, and plant status in several areas of the plant during general in-spection of the plant. The inspectors examined work items for any ob-vious defects or noncompliance with regulatory requirements or license conditions.. Particular note was taken of presence of quality control inspectors and quality control evidence such as inspection controls, material identification; nonconforming material identification, and i

equipment ca.libration tag The inspectors interviewed craft

. personne1, supervision~ and qua1ity inspection personne1, as such personne1 were avai1able in the work area Particular attention was directed toward type:. Band C penetration leak rate testing, structura*l integrity test preparations, safety-related small bore piping support, and areas of steam generator structural support rework. Where more detailed inspection of an area was conducted, the inspection scope and findings are described in other paragraphs of the repor No items of noncomp1iance were identifie, Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Open) Noncompliance and Unreso1ved Items (311/78-26-07, 08, 09 and 10): (References:

311/78-26 and 311/78-27):

Exceeding the heating and cooling. rates for local post weld heat treated (PWHT) pipe we1d The licensee responded to the foregoing item of noncompliance by 1 etter; dated May 9, 197 He stated that:

11 For reference and comparison purposes, a test will be performed on surplus pipe that is identical to the main steam pipin The pipe will be PWHT with an acce1erated. heating rate that is approximately 200° F/hr greater than allowed by code, held to 1150/1200° F for 30 minutes, heated to 1250/1300° F for 10 minutes and rapidly cooled.

The licensee presented a PWHT chart for the 30 11 diameter test pipe designated l-MS-30, which depicts:

(1) a heating rate of approximately 600°. F/hr above 600° F; (2) a hold time of 30 minutes at 1150/1200° F; (3) further heating to 1250/1300° F for approximately 15 minutes; and, (4) cooldown at about 750° F/h This appears to be consistent with the commitments stated in the May 9, 1978 lette The licensee also stated in the May 9th lettero. that,. acoustics emission tests would be performed on 4 main steam pipe welds during the plant cold hydrostatic test and on the PWHT test piec The inspector reviewed the test report entitled, "Acoustic Emission Monitoring at Public Service Electric and Gas Company, Salem 2 Nuclea*r Power Plant, 11 dated June,* 1978. *The report describes the acoustic emission tests performed on the 4 main *steam pipe welds and the PWHT test piec It states that there are no signifi~ant acoustic sources in the ASME grade A category; there are 7 sources designated as ASME grade B; and there are 13 sources rated as ASME

• grade C. It is the report's recommendation that the grade B sources be inspected by additional nondestructive test methods to ascertain their significance. This item remains open pending completion of 1icense action and related documentatio *

(Open) Noncompliance (311/78-05-01):

Cracked tack welds in socket welded pipe joints. The licensee presented three memoranda, Field Quality Control, April 10, 1978; Welding Phase 11A 11, April 20, 1978; and Engineering and Construction Department, September 15, 1978, which describe the circumstances leading to the cracked tack welds and the disposition of the conditio The cracked tack welds were examined by the engineering staff, removed, and replaced with sound tack welds~ The quality control groups issued instructions to the field* inspectors to perform preweld inspections immediately prior to welding if the possibility of piping movement could crack the tack weld This item remains open pending verification of the implementation of corrective action (Closed) Unresolved Item (311/78-11-03):

The partial resolution of this item is documented in IE Inspection Report No. 50-311/78-15.*

The item was not closed at that time due to indications that an FSAR change was planned by the licensee. Since that time, the licensee representative has discussed the matter, and reiterated that only the backfitting of coating applicator and coating inspection agency qualification documentation was involved as exception to ANS 101. This appears to be consistent with the scope of the existing FSAR com-mitment to upgrade the QA progra The IE inspections of coating activities at this site have not identified any other uncorrected departures from the ANS 101.4 requirement This item is considered resolve (Closed) Deficiency (311/78.:.02-02*):

Failure to inspect structural steel bolting. This item was documented as partially resolved in IE Inspection Report No. 50-311/78-09, with full resolution pending NRC review of a bolt torquing verification program implementatio That program has now been developed and is being implemented under licensee QA program control The inspector examined documentation of the in-progress implementation, and interviewed UE&C quality con-trol inspectors who were witnessing the wor *This item is resolve The following specific documents were examined relative to the above:

PSE&G NRC Question/Finding Followup Report #383 Engineering Change. Notice #S-45182, Revisions 0, 1, 2 (w/list of safety-related structural steel drawings)

-*

Fifteen Form 2611-1, 11Bolti ng Inspection Record

Three QC Surveillance Reports (C-29, 30, 33)

11Marked-Up 11 Drawing No. 241870-A-1626-2 (Closed) Unresolved Item (311/78-09-02): *spent fuel pool liner leakag The inspector examined the completed and closed Deficiency Report Nos. 6316 and 6572 (w/Addendum 2) for identification, repair, and nondestructive testing of defective welds in the Spent Fuel Pit and the Spent Fuel Transfer Pit. These reports document the liquid penetrant testing of weld seams, repair and retesting. Final test results show that leaks and weld defects have all been repaired and the Deficiency Reports closed August 8 and 11, 197 This item is resolved.

. (Closed) Unresolved Item (311/77-09-03):

Inspection of bolting of Boron Injection Tank and other equipmen The inspector examined documentation of UE&C evaluation of installation bolting of equip-ment, resultant plans for inspection of bolting of safe*ty-related equipment, and licensee site QA documentation of completion of such inspection and associated rework (where rework was required).

Boron Injection Tanks were include The licensee/UE&C evaluation and cor-rection of this matter appears sufficien This item is resolve The inspector examined the following documentation relative to the above:

PSE&G NRC Question/Finding Followup Form QAF-36, Item 334, Pages 1-3, August 23, 1978 Closeout UE&C Status Report, dated May 3, 1978, for PSE&G QA Memo SQAD 768 UE&C Project Superintendent Directive No. 2098, Revision 0, February 8, 1978 UE&C Project Engineer Letter to PSE&G, PS-ME-01-78-17, January 13, 1978 UE&C Procedure DCP-2404, Revision 2, Appendix A (annotated)

UE&C Tank/Vessel Installatiori Records (Boron Injection Tank - PSBP 112498)

Form 2404-1, dated October 20, 1977

(Closed) Unresolved Item {311/78-25-01):

Apparent particulate material in containment dome liner pain The inspector examined PSE&G Research Corporation Energy Laboratory Report No. 65183, dated September 7, 1978, which documents an August 31, 1978, visual and adhesion test inspection of the containment dome pain Fifteen test areas were inspected and tested for paint adhesion, including

"areas having deficiencies, dirt, sandblast residue, etc}' Solvent blisters were found in the refinish coats with some pinholing oc-curring down to the aged coating syste Sandblast residue ap-peared to be completeilyencapsulated by subsequent paint refinish coats. Overall condition of the coating was deemed "very good."

Adhesion test results in all areas were found to be good/very goo (Reference:

Federal Test Method Standard 14la Method No. 6304. 1).

The engineer concluded that the integrity of the coating system was not impaired by the scatterings of sandblast residue, dirt, and other matter. *The licensee action to resolve the technical question of possible nonconforming conditions appears timely and sufficien This item is resolve.

Licensee Followup Action *an Items Reported to NRC Under 10 CFR

• *50~55(e) Steam generator Support Pedestals The.inspector examined evidence of licensee actions described in the licensee 1 s May 12, 1978, letter to NRC, regarding Steam Generator Support Legs Vendor Weld The inspector considered these actions relative to criteria of 10 CFR 50 Appendix Grinding, repair and nondestructive testing of the defective pedestal areas of four Steam Generators are documented under four Deficiency Reports, Nos. 6156, 6157, 6158 and 616 These show that the nonconforming conditions were identified, documented, evaluated, dispositioned by repair, reinspected

~nd qccepte Ng 1terns of noncompliance were identifie Cha.rging Pump Shafts By letter to the NRC, dated August 15, 1977, Westinghouse Electric Corporation reported that the failure of certain centrifugal charging/safety injection pumps were under revie Preliminary evaluation results indicated the failures resulted from material property deficiencie Further review by Westinghouse resulted in--. changtng.*the temeering temperature for the pump shaft material from 1000° F to 1150° - *1200° The change in

.

tempering temperature improves material ductility and should alleviate the pump shaft failure *

The inspector examined vendor documentation found in QC Package Nos. 16175 and 15833 for No. 21 and 22 Charging Pumps with Shaft Serial Numbers 45613 and 4561 The documents reviewed by the inspector indicate that material Heat No. 15661, used for the two Unit 2 Replacement Charging Pump Shafts, was tempered in the required 1150 - 1200° F rang No items of noncompliance were identifie.

Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping and Other Safety-Related, Pipe Welding - Quality Records The following listed pipe welds were selected for review and veri-fication of compliance with PSE&G General Welding Specification 70-5050, the.USAS 831. 7 Code, and NRC requirements:

Weld Size Nuclear Class 2-RH-115-3 1011 I

2-RC:..67-4 611 I

2-RC-21-4-20 1011 I

2-RH-74-1-A gn II 2-SGF-19-1 1411 II 2-RC-21-1 311 II 2-SW-149-2 10 11 III 2-SGD-31-2 311 II 2-SF-1-gu III 2-RW-36.-1 411 III The review consisted of selected examinations of the weld history records, heat treat~ent records, nondestructive examinations, repairs, welding materials, welder and inspector qualification record No items bf noncompliance were identified.

, * Safety.:.Related Piping - Work Activities The inspector observed the in-progress verification of the piping stress calculations with the installed configuratio He discussed the technical aspects of the verification with the designers/engineers and selected one stress calculation sheet for a walkdown inspectio Stress Calculation List No. 238890-0-4352, Item No. 4, No. 567393, Revision 2, was selected for verification of installed configuration, general location of components and appearance of the piping syste It was confirmed that nonconforming items identified by the stres?

calculation team are being processed in a manner that assures docu-mentation, correction and verification of completed action The licensee stated that a trend analysis of these nonconforming conditions would be performed by the site engineering group to assure that no significant conditions exist,

No items of noncompliance were identifie.

Containment Structural Integrity Test Proce.dures The inspectors examined procedures which were planned for use as the basis for the procedure for the structural integrity test. The inspectors interviewed the responsible PSE&G and UE&C test personne They examined equipment record sheets planned for use in recording*

initlal concrete crack survey data, interviewed the field inspectors regarding crack width measurement techniqu They also inspected the concrete at the spring line and on the dome top area to verify initial crack measurement The inspectors considered the above activities relative to the requirements of the Salem Nuclear Generating Sta ti on FSAR, Section 5. 5, and Appendix D, and NRC Regulatory Gui de 1. 1 The final test procedure had not yet been prepared and approve However, the draft documents incorporated provisions which appeared to be inconsistent with the above reference test criteria: The draft procedures did not provide for use of crack sensitive paint for crack pattern* mapping. A concrete paint (Modac Exterior Coating: National Coatings.Corporation) exists on the containment exterior, and was anticipated to be left in place, based upon a PSE&G non-quantitative evaluation of the effect of the paint on the detection of cracks in the concret The September 7, 1978 report no. 65183, is based upon observation of cracks during com*pressive*tests of concrete cylinders, and d9es not.correlate paint crack size to concrete crack size,

• *

1nor type of crack (tension-shear) relative to that anticipated during* the structural integrity tests. Additionally, the inspector observed two areas of the containment (approximately six-inch diameter each) where the Modac coating had apparently not adhered to the concret Further examination showed that the non-adhering blister actually was loose concrete grout over construction joints, with Modac coating adhering only to the loose grout.* The coating in the blister area was bent 1800 by han This cracked the grout, but not the coatin The coating appeared to exhibit properties of toughness rather than brittlenes In view of the above, it is not clear that the Modac coating qualifies as the 11strain sensitive coating 11 described in the FSAR, Section 5.5.1.2, "Test Measurements and Instrumentation.

11 Containment liner strain gage location at the containment wall junction with the mat liner'- is not provided as called for *

by FSAR, Section 5.5.1. Crack pattern mapping near the base-wall intersection is not provided as called for by Regulatory Guide l.18, referenced in FSAR, Section 5.5.l.1 and Q5.20- Linear motion transducers at each personnel hatch are not pro~

vided as called for by FSAR, Section 5.5.1.2 and Q5.20- The 200 strain gages attached to reinforcing steel bars are not provided as called for by FSAR, Section 5.5. The repeat of test sequence for unplanned pressure drop during test is not provided as called for by Regulatory Guide l.18, Section C.10, referenced in FSAR, Section 5.5. 1.1 and Q5.20- The licensee stated that some of the above changes were due to the Unit 2 containment not being a prototype, whereas the Unit l was a proto-type, and the FSAR did not differentiate between the two units in this regar The inspector stated that this matter is unresolved pending review of the final approved Structural Integrity Test procedures, and current FSAR related and NRR approved commitments (311/78-31-01).

Containment Structural*. Integrity Test - Work Activities The inspectors observed the initial survey work in-progress by PSE&G Engineering Laboratory staff to map existing cracks in the containment concret The inspectors examined data sheets and maps of the con-tainment, interviewed personnel, examined measuring devices, and ex-amined existing cracks at the spring-line of the dome at the top of the dom The PSE&G staff was recording size and location of all cracks

• measured.01 inches width, or greate % complete, and no recordable cracks The i~spector used the optical gage at certa1ned that the cracks, as appeared

________ not exceed. 01 inc The survey work was about had yet been identifie several locations, and as-in the Modac coating, did

The inspectors noted that there were two blisters in the Modac coating at locations 1800 apart at the construction joint seven feet above the scaffold at the spring-lin The blisters appeared to consist of the Modac coating attached to a thin layer of grout, which did not adhere to the structure beneath it. The blisters covered existing cracks in the concrete under the blisters. The licensee stated that concrete construction joints had been brushed, grouted with 11 5-star 11 grout, cleaned with 11Sur-Klean, 11 and Modac coating applie The inspector questioned the general adherence of the Modac coating in the area -

of concrete construction joints/seams, and the ability to identify existence of cracks under non-adhering grout during the initial survey and later when the containment is pressurize This.item is unresolved (311/78-31-02). Containment Electrical Penetration Leak Testing - Work Activities The inspector observed leak testing activities in-progress for the electrical penetration at elevation 46 1 between. the residual heat removal heat exchanger room #22 and the containment sump drain valve roo The inspector examined the procedure and data sheets which were available in the work area, interv.iewed the test personnel, and examined the leak rate measurement instrument The personnel ap-peared knowledgeable in the procedure requirements for calibration of equipment and conduct of the tes No items of noncompliance were identifie.

Instrumentation Components/Systems - Quality Record The inspector reviewed pertinent work and quality records for instru-ment components associated with select process variables of systems required for safe shutdown and safety-related display instrumentatio The inspector verified that the records meet established procedures and reflect work accomplishments consistent with NRC requirements and licensee commitments noted in SAR Chapters l, 3, 6, 7, 8, 11 and Ap-pendix D (including pertinent codes and standards referenced in these chapters) for the following areas:

receipt inspection~ storage, handling; identification, type, size, range, material certification, installation, surveillance, nonconformances; legibility and retrieve-ability of records, and associated devices/hardware.

• System components selected for records examination included:

(1)

Header Pressure Control Panel 686-2 D (2)

Steam Generator Pressure Control Panel 684-2 B (3)

Outlet Steam Valve Control Panel 683-2 B (4)

Boron Tank Discharge Pressure - PT 942 (5)

Boron Tank Surface Temperature Probe TE-944A (6)

Charging and Letdown Heat Exchanger Control Panel 210-2 Applicable documents reviewed for this determination included:

(1)

Purchase Order Nos. E-158841, E-198853 and E-198854 (2)

Purchase Specification No. 72-8096

.(3)

Data Review and Receiving Report Nos. CR-7-50, CR-2B-204 and CR-28-188 (4)

Quality Control Receiving Inspection Documentation Package Nos. QC-6695, QC-9085, QC-11,052 and QC-12,11 (Includes material qualification, purchase order, specification eata and test results.)

(5)

Surveillance Record Report No E~8908, E-8744, E-8898, E-9746, E-8885, E-9225, E-9986 and E-10,070 (6)

Nonconformance Report Nos. DR-1638, DR-1640, DR-1669, DR-1810 and DR-2215 (7)

Quality Control Instructions QCI-13.3-E No items of noncompliance were identifie.

Instrumentation Components/Systems - Work Activities Th~ inspector observed work performance and completed work of the safe shutdown and safety-related display process variable instrument components noted in paragraph 1 He examined the installations from sensors to final actuated devices including associated sensing lines,

• 1 *

enclosures and supports. The inspector verified that the require-ments of applicable specifications, work procedures, test procedures, and inspection procedures were met for:

identification, location, nonconformance control and inspectio Documents examined relative to this determination included: Detail Construction Procedure Nos. 2501 and 2502 Field Procedure EP-407 Quality Control Instruction *Nos. QCI-13.7-E and QCI-13.5-E Installation and Assembly Drawings Nos. 233605-5, 233604-3, 237951-2, 233605-6, 218980-5, 240604-15, 240606-17 and 240606-17 No items of noncompliance were identifie Instrumentation Cables/Terminations - Quality Records The inspector reviewed pertinent work and quality records of select instrument cables, including terminations and associated hardware, to ascertain whether the records meet the requirements of established procedures and whether the records reflect wotk* accompli~hments con-sistent with NRC requirements and SAR commitments noted in SAR Chapters 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, and Appendix D (including pertinent codes and standards referenced in these chapters) for the following material certification, materials control, installation, termination, testing, nonconformances and deviations, legibility and retrieveability of re-cord For this determination, the inspector reviewed documents pertaining to Cable Nos. 2MS91-CQ, 2CVC31-DQ, 2CVC44-AQ, 2CVC46A-DQ, 2CVC147-BT, 2CVC169-AT, 2SI5-DQ, 2SI35-AQ and 2SI11-D The following specific applicable documents were examined: Purchase Order Nos. E-191523 and E-206601 Purchase Specification Nos. 73-1302, 77-l301A and 77-658A Surveillance Record Report Nos. E-7932, E-8004, E-8118, E-8995, E-9031, E-9513, E-9523, E-9546, E-9577, E-9825, E-9871, E-9896 and E-9808

, *

• Quality Control Receiving Inspection Documentation Package Nos. QC-10,741, QC-12,813, QC-15,615 and QC-15,662 (package includes material qualification, electrical/physical test data, reel number, size and type)

No items of noncompliance were identifie.

Instrument Cables/Terminations - Work.Activities The inspector observed work performance and completed work relative to cables selected in paragraph 12, including-terminations and associated device The inspector verified that the requirements of applicable specifications, work performance procedures and in-spection procedures were accomplished in the following areas: storage, handling, identification, installation, routing, termination and testin Documents examined r~lative to this determination included: Detail Construction Procedure No. 2205 Quality Control Instruction Nos. QCI-13.2-E, QCI-13.3-E and QC I -13. 7-Construction Detail No. tD-F-12 Computer routing sheet Wiring Diagram Nos. 208588, 208590, 208581, 208570, 208589 Storage/Handling Records for Cable Reel Nos. 4331, 4337, 4745, and 5293 To 11 Termination Surveillance Record Nos. E-9546 and E-9808 From 11 Termination Surveillance Record Nos. E-9991 and E-9577 No items of noncompliance were identifie.

Hydrotest of Pressurizer Relief Tank The inspector observed activities in-progress in preparation for hydro-testing of the pressurizer relief tan Valve line-up w~s in-progress in accordance with an approved procedure DTP-98-14-4 ~ * A calibrated pressure gage was installed, as was a pressure relief valv The equip-ment has been inspected and released under System/Equipment Turnover Package SET-98-M6-1 No items of noncompliance.were identifie *

1.

Pipe Restraint Clearance The inspector measured the clearances of Pipe Restraint No. 2-FWH-21-16 at elevation 107' - 4 11 inside the containment structure at penetration number The inspector compared these to the requirements of the applicable drawing Nos. 218395-A8915-10 and 222845~04202 (Sheets 2 and 14).

The measurements corresponded to.the drawing requirement The governing design documents were noted to be readily identifiable and retrievabl No items of noncompliance were identifie Accumulator Sensing Line Bracing During a previous inspection the inspector inquired regarding the absence of lateral seismic bracing of 2 11 diameter piping connected to the upper part of two accumulator These lines appeared to be about 10 feet lengths with two valves at the end, and only a single vertical hanger rod for end suppor The licensee representative showed the inspector draft ECN No. 27936 which detailed a new additional lateral brac The licensee representative stated that the stress analyst review of this ECN, in accordance with established procedures, would. affirm the need for, or lack of need for the additional bracin The inspector had no further question No items of noncompliance were identified~

1 Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, or items of noncompliance. Unresolved items disclosed during the inspection are discussed in Paragraphs 7 and.

Management Interview

'

At the conclusion of the inspection on September 15, 1978, a meeting was held at.the Salem 2 site with representatives of the licensee and contractor organization Attendees at this meeting included personnel whose names are indicated by notation (*) in paragraph The inspectors summarized the results of the inspection as described in this repor *