IR 05000311/1979019
| ML18079A404 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 04/05/1979 |
| From: | Mcgaughy R, Toth A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18079A402 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-311-79-19, NUDOCS 7906140635 | |
| Download: ML18079A404 (5) | |
Text
'.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Rep9rt N Docket N Region I License No. ------
CPPR-53 Priority------
Category __
B ____ _
Licensee:
Public Service Electric and Gas Company 80 Park.Place Newark, New Jersey 07101 Facflity Name:
Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2 Inspection at:
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey Inspection conduct;d:* Mar~?l979 Inspectors: &-ti-i-:ft,_
A. D. Toth, Reactor Inspector 4:11. /97'J date si'gned
date signed
.
date signed Approved by:
~ls.1fl1
,
ate 1igned Inspection Summary:
Inspection on March 7-8, 1979 (Report No. 50-311/79-19)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by a regional based inspector of licensee action on previous construction inspection finding The inspection involved 13 hours1.50463e-4 days <br />0.00361 hours <br />2.149471e-5 weeks <br />4.9465e-6 months <br /> onsite by one NRC regional office based inspecto Results: No items of noncompliance were identified *
- Region I Form 12
{Rev. April 77)
7 9061 40~;35 '
- DETAILS Persons Contacted
.. * Public Service Electric and Gas Company K *. Bass, Sponsor Engineer, Newark (via telephone)
- S.-Chawaga, Project QA Engineer
- R. T. Griffith, Senior Staff Engineer, QA D. L. Mclaughlin, Senior Construction Engineer
. *E. H. Meyer, Site QA Division Head a~ Straubmul ler, Assistp.nt Chief Oes igner, Mechanical
- United Engineers and Constructors R. Jorgenson, QC Engineer M. Livingston, QC Records Assistant Supervisor
. *P. - M~cconi, Project Engineer
. *E. A. Walsh, Superintendent Field QC Peabody Testing Company c. Penley, Site Manager
- R. Kusy, Level * I I Examiner Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved item.(311/7-8"".02"".04)-: Nondestructive testing of steam generator nozzle The inspector examined the liquid penetrant test reports for the steam generator nozzle ring weld examinations conducted on the four steam generators, and he interviewed responsible licensee and nondestructive test personnel regarding removal of observed defects~ The documents.and interviews indicated that the one linear and two rounded indications have been reworked and eliminated. The inspector examined the following specific test reports relative to the above:
SG #21:
- 24250 dated 8-24-78
.#.35464 dated 1-19-79
.#35498 dated 1-22-79 SG #22:
- 24251 dated 8-17-78
.#35465 dated 1-19-79
- SG #23:
.#24252 dated 8-24-78
- 35466 dated 1-19-79 SG 124:
- 24253 dated 8-18-78
- #35467 dated 1-19-79 This item is resolve (Open) Unresolved item (311/78-09~01): Drilled-Anchor-Bolt embed depth deficiencie The status of this item was previously reported in IE Inspection Report No ~311/78-19 and 50-311/79-0 The licensee was to conduct a sampling inspection program for anchor-bolt depth of embedmen Since that time, IE Bulletin 79-02 has been issued, requesting similar action, and NRR has requested information from the licensee, of a similar natur The inspector reviewed the status of the licensee 1s program, including interview of licensee engineering personnel and site management personnel and examination of documentation of bolt UT inspection results. The inspector also examined a draft of the disposition to Deficiency Report #6633, which discussed interim inspection results and some rationale for not in-specting floor support bolts and certain bolts which were not accessible at*this tim The licensee reported that as of March 7, 1979, 10529 installed Hilti bolts (total plant, safety and non-safety related) had been identified,
- 6627 had been inspected for proper embed depth via ultrasonic testing, 3902 were not inspected due to inaccessibility or due to impracticality (the floor mounted exposed*stub/nut is only an embedded extension of a previously installed embed bolt, connected by a coupling nut such that ultrasonic determination of total combined length is not practical),
1462 inspected bolts were found to be embedded to less than the catalog specified*valu *
Based upon test results provided by Hilti Incorporated letter dated December 20, 1978 (along with a March 24, 1977 letter of test data originated by Abbott A. Hanks Inc. Testing Laboratories), the licensee 1s engineers evaluated nonconforming bolts against the 11ultimate tensile load divided by safety factor of four.
11 *Of 1171 thus evaluated; 187 did not meet the criteria and were rejected and designated for repai The licensee identified that of*total bolts inspected, the resultant
- reject rate*is about 3 1/2%.
The licensee engineers concluded that this reject rate is acceptable for the bolts which could not be inspecte The basis included consideration of safety factors*and the size of defects encountered in inspected bolts.* It also considered that floor bolt drilli_ng would be more likely to achieve full penetratio..
- *
depth, due to the relative ease of drilling and the low probability of encountering reinforcing steel, which steel is set deeper than in wall structures. Also, some floor anchors are not subject to tensile load The inspector noted that of the 3902 bolts which were not inspected, some of the safety related bolts may have embed depths such that a load safety factor of less than 4 may exist. This item remains unresolved pending completion of NRR review of related informatio The inspector also interviewed the two individuals who performed the ultrasonic testing of the anchor bolts for correct lengths and observed detailed measuring and calibration techniques for 6
, 8
, 10 11 and 12
Hilti anchor bol~s. The inspector ascertained that the UT examiners
.
were familiar with interpretation anomalies associated with measurement of Hilti anchor bolt lengths, and had relevant training/guidance prior to their initiating their length measurement progra The inspector had no further questions on this matte Possible Sensitization of Safety Injection Pump Small Bore Piping On each of two Safety Injection System pumps (#21 and #22) there are five 3/4 11 vent and drain line pipe stubs of ASTM A268 type 410 materia Drain and vent lines are connected to these stubs through socket weld fittings of ASTiv'I A403 type 316 material. Welding of the connections involved post weld heat treatment of the fillet weld to 1400°F ~ 1425°F fot one hou One connection to the Pump #22 suction nozzle involved this heat treatment on two separate occasions, November 1977 and January 197 (Due to cut out of the pump in October 1978 and subsequent replacement with a repaired Unit 1 pump).
The inspector questioned the impact of the PWHT on the integrity of the 3/4 11 socket weld fitting and connecting 3/4 11 drain piping, relative to sensitization of the type 316 stainless steel, and potential long term corrosion effects. This question arose due to similar concerns previously documented relative to Salem Unit #1 (IE Combined Inspec-tion Report 50-272/78-31 and 50~311/78-51, paragraph 10).
The licensee representatives stated that the two vent lines from pump #22 were cut off and sent to the PSE&G Maplewood laboratory for analysis of sensitization. Subsequent to the inspector identification of the double heat treatment of the pump suction nozzle drain (Field weld # 2RH-2218-l and 2RH-2218-1-A) the licensee advised the inspector that the vent lines would also be given a double heat treatment to
.*....,
'5
- simulate worst case sensitization condition The licensee repre-sentatives stated that.the sensitization tests would not necessarily be performed to the criteria*of ASTM-A262 referenced in Regulatory Guidel.4 The FSAR does not appear to commit to the Regulatory.
Guide l.44 for site installation activities, although it does impose th~ guide on NSSS suppliers/contractor *
The inspector examined the followi.ng records relative to the above:
PSE&G Drawing #108386 Issue 6 (Pacific Pumps Inc. Drawing
- FC-45489-9)
.
.
UE&C Fillet Weld History Records For Welds Nos.: 2RH-2224-4, 2RH-*222l-5,' 2RH-22l8..;l and lA, 2RH-2339-l, 2RH-2340-l; 2RH-2212-l,
- 2RH-22l 0-1, 2RH-2207B-l UE&C Isometric Drawings For The Above Welds: (Series 233441)
D-4216-3 and D-42.16... ll (Sheet 22)
D~4216-6 and D-4216-ll (Sheet.21)
D-4216-6 (Sheet 20)
0... 4216... ll (Sheet 57)
UE&C Deficier:icy Report No. 931C Data Review - Receiving Report #MM-243A Quality Shipment Release #671514-l Heat Treatment Charts For Welds Nos.: 2218-l and lA, 2221-5, 2224-4, 2339-l and 2340-l~
This item is unresolved pending examination of licensee test results relative to sensitization *. (jll/79-19... 0l) Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviation An unresolved item disclosed during the inspection is discussed in paragraph * Management Interview At the conclusion of the inspection on March 8, 1979, a meeting was held at the Salem Unit.2 site*with representatives of the licensee and contractor organizations. Attendees at*this meeting included*personnel whose names are indicated by notation (*) in paragraph l. The inspector summarized the results of the inspection as described in this report.