IR 05000322/1979002
| ML19269D525 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 02/15/1979 |
| From: | Durr J, Mcgaughy R, Toth A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19269D508 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-322-79-02, 50-322-79-2, NUDOCS 7906040188 | |
| Download: ML19269D525 (13) | |
Text
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No.
50-322/79-02 Docket No.
50-322 License No. CPPR-95 Priority Category A
--
Licensee:
Long Island Lighting Company 175 East Old Country Road Hicksville, New York 11801 Facility Name:
Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.1 Inspection at:
Shoreham, New York Inspection conducted:
January 22-6, 1979 Inspectors:
'2-9- 79 cth eactor Inspector date signed V Mn2n b w'
sf S f'79 M.P.Durr,ReactorInspector
' date' sign ~ed (L M & u.o 2/w/~)9 A. N. P'asano, Reactor Inspector
/ datd signed ( %M h M/sh77 Approved by: c Y. W. McGaughy, Chief, Projects Section date signed Reactor Construction & Engineering Support Branch 2260 086 Inspection Summary:
Inspection on January 22-26,1979 (Report No. 50-322/79-02)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by three regional based inspectors of work activities for (1) safety related pipe support and restraint installation, (2) mechanical equipment installation, (3) reactor coolant pressure boundary pipe welding, and (4) safety related pipe welding; also quality verifi-cation records for (5) mechanical equipment installation, (6) reactor coolant boundary pipe welding, (7) licensee action on NRC issued Circulars, and (8)
licensee followup activities relative to 10 CFR 50.55(e) items.
The inspectors also performed a plant tour-inspection, reviewed licensee action on previous inspection findings, and performed follow-up action as necessary to resolve questions which arose during the course of inspection of the above areas.
The inspection involved 85 inspector-hours onsite by three NRC regional based inspectors.
The inspection comenced at 4:30 p.m. outside the normal dayshift working hours at the site.
Resul ts : Of the eight areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified in seven areas; one apparent item of noncompliance was identified in one area.
Region I Form 12 (Infraction - failure to control post weld aat treatment in accord-(Rev. AprH 77)
ance with applicable ASME III code requirements - Paragraph 5)
7906040l
,
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Long Island LiahtinC Company
- D. M. Durand, Operating QA Engineer
- T. F. Gerecke, Engineering QA Manager
- R. Cutmann, Lead Startup Engineer
- J. M. Kelly, Field QA Manager
'
- L. W. Lewin, Assistant Startup Manager
- L. C. Lilly, Site Manager (UNICO)
B. McCaffrey, Project Engineer
- W. J. Museler, Assistant Project Manager E. Nicholas, QA Engineer
- J. P. Novarro, Project Manager Stone and Webster Engineering
- T. T. Arrington, Superintendent, FQC J. A. Burgess, Senior Engineer, FQC-Engineering
- T. F. Burns, Materials Engineer S. Crowe, Senior Engineer, FQC-Engineering
- C. A. Fonseca, Head-Site Engineering Office N. Goldstein, Quality Data Reviewer
- J. W. Hassett, Field QC Senior Inspector C. Lepisto, Mechanical Supervisor P. Martino, QC Engineer J. Powers, Lead Procurement Specialist L. Sousa, Site Engineering Office-Engineer Courter and Company
- A. B. Czarnowski, Project Manager E. Haraway, Welding Engineer
- W. Hunt, Assistant Project Manager R. Nayar, Project Engineer
- D. W. Papa, QA Manager J. Schmit, SQA Engineer Supervisor 2260 087 R. Scott, QA Engineer Hartford Steam Boiler I&I Company
- G. F. Cocuzzo, Authorized Nuclear Inspector
.
.
.
Other Accompanying Personnel
- A. C. Cerne, Reactor Inspector - USNRC
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Plant Tour The inspector observed work activities in-progress, completed work and plant status in several areas of the plant during general inspection of the plant. The inspector examined work for any obvious 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 records, material identification, nonconforming material identifi-cation, housekeeping and equipment preservation.
The inspector inter-viewed craft personnel, supervision, and quality inspection personnel as such personnel were available in the work areas.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (0 pen) Noncompliance (322/78-16-01): Failure to accomplish welding on the reactor building cranc in accordance with applicable speciff-cation and code.
The inspector examined evidence of action taken to effect corrections and preclude recurrence as described in the licensee's January 5, 1979 letter to the NRC.
The evidence examined includes: (1)intraoffice correspondence to LILCO from S&W, October 26, 1978, which is a response to a request for a preliminary inspection of the reactor polar crane assembly; (2) S&W QCIR, October 26, 1978, reactor polar crane inspection to AWS Dl.1-72, where 30% of the shop welds were inspected; (3) S&W Nonconformance and Disposition Report, N&D 1925, October 27, 1978, polar crane - which addressed the results of the 30% sample; (4) letter to the Whiting Corporation from S&W, December 18, 1978, which forwarded the S&W N&D 1925; (5) memorandum January 3,1979, SNPS-QC-1244, which specifies action required by S&W to prevent recurrence (at the audit level of activity).
The inspection of the shop SMAW welds remains to be completed. The final correction to the identified defective welds remains to be specified.
The licensee has stated that the inspection effort will be completed by April 30, 1979 and final corrective actions will be developed after the evaluation of the final inspection results. This item remains open pending the completion of the corrective action.
2260 088
.
.
(0 pen) Noncompliance (322/78-15-01): Failure to control and accomplish welding using qualified procedures in accordance with applicable codes.
The inspector examined evidence of action taken to effect corrections and preclude recurrence as described in the licensee's November 24, 1978 letter to the NRC.
The evidence examined includes: (1) Noncon-formance Disposition Report, N&D 1891, October 3,1978, which identifies weld technique sheet W70G as being qualified for an angle of 60 to
900 and records the listing of defective supports that had been accepted; (2) Procedure W200A-W70G, Revision 1, Technique Sheet; (3)
Procedure W200A-WlD, Revision 0, Technique Sheet, prequalified in accordance with AWS Dl.1 - 1972 for materials and D1.1 - 1975 for joint design; (4) E&DCR P-3054C, reference E&DCR P-3054, P3048, W200A, and PQM Manual, requesting clarification for welder qualification to use the weld technique issued on E&DCR P-3054 (W10); (5) S&W letter November 15, 1978, SNPS-WC-1213, Report of NRC Inspection No. 78-15, check of all FQC accepted supports that involved angular welding; (6)
training records November 9, 1978 and November 10, 1978 which instruct Courter non-manual supervisory personnel in the limits and use of W70G and E&DCR P-3054; (7) Records of Instruction for shift deputies and partners (limits and use of W70G and ElDCR P-3054) during the period November 10, 1978 - December 14, 1978.
The licensee has taken steps to assure that future welding is conducted in accordance with AWS Code requirements.
The previously accepted (FQC) supports have now been rejected and are being held for corrective action.
The licensee has deferred any action to correct existing non-conforming conditions pending a March 1979 AWS meeting at which the licensee anticipates an interpretation of related AWS Code requirements, which may affect the nature of the rework required.
The licensee is continuing to identify those supports previously installed using Procedure W70G.
The inspector visually examined work in progress and interviewed super-visory and craft personnel regarding pipe support welding and associated applicability of the new and revised weld technique sheets. Al though the inspector identified no weld deficiencies, craft and supervisory personnel were not sufficiently conversant on the new requirements to ascertain the training effectiveness. The licensee stated that continued training in this area, plus in-process monitoring of weld end preparations, will be conducted.
This item remains open pending final identification of suspect supports and implementation of appropriate corrective action.
2260 089
.
.
.
(Closed) Unresolved item (322/78-11-02): County Board certification of fire brigade members.
The licensee project management staff representative stated that LILCo does not require that members of the construction fire brigade be certified by the County Board. This is consistent with Construction Site Instruction #6.2.
The licensee stated that some members of the fire brigade had been or are members of volunteer fire departments and have been certified by the County Board, but that this is incidental to their employment at the site.
The inspector had no further questions on this item.
(Closed) Unresolved item (322/78-12-03): Field QC and Operations QA followup on procurement controls.
The inspector interviewed S&W FQC and LILCo/S&W 0QA site staffs, and examined records and procedures which assure followup on project instructions to control procurements as described in licensee respenses to NRC Bulletins 78-01, 78-05 and 78-06.
A specification change (E&DCR-F-16941) incorporates appropriate requirements and is available in FQC and 00A specification files. An 0QA Comment and Resolution form and a Procurement Document Checklist, each dated January 18, 1979, demonstrated that the 0QA review for spare parts procurement has implemented the E&DCR requirements effectively. FQC responsible procurement review staff was also familiar with the E&DCR.
The inspector had no further questions on this item.
(Closed) Unresolved item (322/78-05-03): Qualification of electrical cable splices. This item was examined and determined to be resolved during inspectior. 322/78-16 (paragraph 3 of IE Inspection Report 322/78-16 erroneously refers to item number 77-05-01, and " Seismic" rather than " thermal" certification).
(_0 pan)
Unresolved item (322/78-05-01): Environmental qualification of NEMA 4 and NEMA 12 enclosures for terminal boxes.
The inspector examined S&W letter to LILCo, #LIL-13444 dated November 16,1978, which documents that terminal blocks located inside NEMA 4 and NEMA 12 enclosures are being replaced by in-line butt-splices insulated with IEEE-323 qualified Raychem Thennofit products.
Boxes left in place are to be provided with pressure-equalizing vent holes.
Design drawings for Shoreham are being upgraded accordingly.
The memo also noted that Marathon or Buchanan terminal blocks are provided in qualified limitorque valve motor operators.
This item remains unresolved pending review of qualification test data and examination of installation.
2260 090
.
4.
Licensee Action on NRC Issued Circulars The inspector reviewed site records relating to NRC issued Circulars and discussed the followup actions with the responsible site individuals in the licensee and the constructor's organizations.
He verified that the Circulars were assigned for action to appropriate personnel as provided by project procedure 202A, and that responsibility for subsequent future actions was delegated. The inspector considered corrective action and provisions to assure completion of defined corrective actions as follows:
Circular 77-05: A project engineer August 8,1977 memo to file All.391 identifies valves with bonnets below horizontal, and states that each will be evaluated and those subject to potential over-pressure from fluid entrapment will be modified.
Circular 77-14: A project engineer November 20, 1978 memo to file A21.650 and M42.010 concludes that there are no interconnections between plant potable water systems and potentially radioactive sources.
It concludes that adequate separation is provided.
Fire protection and cement batch plant water sources are also considered.
Circular 78-02: Project engineer January 10, 1979 memos to file A21.650, and to the plant operations maintenance engineer requires incorporation of the HPCI lube oil recommendations into plant main-tenance procedures.
Circular 78-03: Project engineer December 6,1978 memo to file A21.650 and P63.010 evaluates the five waste shipping containers and two lead shields purchased for Shoreham solidification operations, relative to anticipated low specific activity materials. These are not presently qualified for greater than Type A quantities, and greater than Type A quantities are not anticipated. However, operations staff have been alerted to the information in the NRC Circular for future reference.
Circular 78-08; A project engineer January 5,1979 letter to Stone and Webster requests computation of necessary qualification data for NRC review.
S&W action is not yet complete.
Circular 78-09: A project engineer January 5,1979 letter to S&W requests necessary information to assure that the conditions described in the Circular are not applicable to Shoreham.
S&W action is not yet complete.
2260 091
.
.
.
.
Circular 78-11: A project engineer November 28, 1978 memo to file A21.650 documents that Preoperational Test Procedure PT120.001 is in preparation to include MG-set overspeed set point verification.
Circular 78-12: A project engineer November 28, 1978 memo to file A21.650 documents that GE FDI 59/88524 and E&DCR F-10778-M have been issued to incorporate the GE Service Information Letter #223 described in the NRC Circular.
Circular 78-13: A project engineer November 20, 1978 memo to file A21.650 describes that the Long Island Sound is the source of Shoreham service water and that freezing of the salt water is not anticipated.
Also, the Shoreham service water intake includes recirculation of warm water which will further assure against freezing. The conditions described in the NRC Circular are not considered applicable to Shoreham.
Circular 78-14: A project engineer December 1,1978 memo to file A21.650 describes that a GE Service Information Letter SIL-274 recom-mends modification of HPCI turbine hold down bolting. Shoreham has adopted the SIL recommendations through GE control document FDI-76-88524 and S&W design change E&DCR-F-14314.
Circular 78-17: A project engineer November 22, 1978 memo to file A21.650 documents that the Circular has been provided (by November 21, 1978 memo) to the Shoreham Security Supervisor specifically for his consideration in formulating the security training program.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
Licensee action on NRC Circulars appears appropriate. Future followup on Circulars 78-08 and 78-09 will be conducted.
5.
Licensee Followup Activities Relative to Items Reported to NRC Under 10 CFR 50.55(e a.
Flexibility of Anchor Plates and Nonconforming Installation of Anchor Bolts The inspector examined licensee followup of the construction de-ficiency reported to NRC in licensee letters to NRC dated July 19, 1977, October 18, 1977, September 9,1977 and December 2,1977.
The inspector interviewed S&W site inspection and engineering personnel and examined records of corrective actions relative to anchor bolt torque testing and ultrasonic testing for proper length and base plate flexibility analysis and redesign.
2260 092
-
.
All hangers have been identified on a computer list which identifies status of actions relative to the hangers.
This includes the question of whether or not base plate loading / flexibility analysis has been completed / resolved for each hanger. Accomplishment of the analysis is also noted by a coding on each hanger drawing.
Each analysis is documented and checked, and incorporates anchor-bolt nonconformance considerations documented in base plate applicability lists on nine nonconformance/ disposition reports.
Calculations are perfonned in accordance with a detailed calculation procedure.
The inspector examined three such calculations, which included an example where existing plate design was adequate, where gussets need to be added to the existing plate, and where the existing plate warranted replacement.
The inspector concluded that all installed anchor bolts had been inspected and nonconforming bolts identified.
Measures, including marking of bolts and QC installation inspection procedures, have been established to assure subsequent bclt installation into cleaned holes and with proper bolt length and nut torque. Measures are established to assure that each anchor plate is reviewed or analyzed for flexibility effects on bolt load capacity.
The inspector examined the following specific documents relative to the above:
Computerized Hanger Master List - January 1979
--
Review Procedure for Pipe Support Base Plate - LJO #35 dated
--
September 13, 1977 Reportable Deficiency Followup Report
--
LILCo Project Er:gineer/ Project Manager Memo dated August 15, 1977
--
Hanger Status Report for January 12, 1979
--
Hanger Drawings M-12370-6-2, M-12116-25-3, M-12370-16-2
--
--
Hanger Calculation Sheets (for the above drawings)
Engineering Design - Coordination Reports F-8974, F-6182A,
--
P-2940C, P-1510 S&W Interoffice Correspondence FQC/FE0 dated December 2,1977
--
2260 093
Nonconformance/ Disposition Report N&D - 1922
--
N&D Monthly Status Report dated January 5, 1979
--
Drawings BZ-3D-62 (Revision 5); P42-PSA-087/092
--
Calculation Sheet 23.15-2
--
The inspector also examined the LILCo Reportable Deficiency Followup Report which shows that S&W advised LILCo of the de-ficiency August 10, 1977 and the 30 day written report submitted to NRC September 9, 1977. The documentation showed that the Shoreham report arose from a S&W Problen Report issued in July 1977 from another S&W project.
The inspector concluded that the licensee reported this matter as prescribed by 10 CFR 50.55(e) and has established and imple-mented controls to assure resolution of the deficiency.
No items of noncompliance were identified, b.
Alignment of Primary Disconnects on 4160 Volt Switchaear The inspector examined records and interviewed personnel regarding the actions described in the licensee's June 7,1977 letter to NRC regarding alignment of the breaker primary disconnects of 4160 volt switchgear.
The inspector examined LILCo Deficiency Reports #LDR 75 and LDR-76 which document rework and rework inspection, GE factory instructions for rework, and GE Quality Assurance certification that the rework will not have detrimental effect on the switchgear. The inspector also examined GE March 9, 1978 rework instructions to LILCo and GE switchgear cubicle inspection records (Installation Service Engineering Department)
for reworked cubicles 103-6,103-9,102-6 and 101-2.
The inspector had no further questions on this matter.
6.
Observation of Pipe Welding The inspector observed the intermediate welding passes on the 4" diameter pipe joint 1G33-IClll8-FW-P.
He verified that the following items cmplied with the ASME III and IX Codes: weld identification, welding procedure, the welder's qualification, welding materials, appearance of the weld, and quality control checks.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
2260 094
.
7.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary - Review of Quality Records The following welds were selected for a review of the field post weld heat treatment (PWHT) charts for compliance with the ASME III Code and Courter and Company General Procedure for Pnst Weld Heat Treatment, NW-100, Appendix D.
1821-IC173-FW5
--
1821-IC173-FW6
--
1821-IC173-FW7
--
--
1B21-IC175-FW6 IB21-IC175-FW7
--
It was observed that the PWHT Instruction, Attachment 1, and Table 1 of the General Procedure for Post Weld Heat Treatment, NW-100, Appendix D, specified that the heating / cooling rates should be based on the thinner member where a weld joint spanned a thickness transition.
This is not consistent with the applicable code, ASME III, Winter Addenda 1972, paragraphs NB-4623.2 and.5, which requiresthat above 6000F, the heating / cooling rates be based on the maximum metal thickness.
The calculation for the heatup rate on weld joint 1821-IC175-FW6 was based on a 1.156 inches thickness when, in fact, it should have been based on 1.781 inches. The ASME III Code provides for a heatup rate of 4000F per hour divided by the maximum metal thickness; therefore, the 1821-IC175-FW6 joint heatup rate should not have exceeded 225 F
per hour. The heatup rate, as measured by the inspector from the PWHT chart, was approximately 2900F per hour between 640 F and 930 F.
0 The failure to control the post weld heat treatment in accordance with the applicable ASME III Code requirements is considered to be an item of noncompliance.
(322/79-02-01)
It was noted that the licensee is currently changing the PWHT program compliance from the ASME III 1971 edition, with Winter Addenda 1972, to meet the requirements of the 1974 edition. The licensee stated that the FSAR will be modified to reflect that similar changes to code editions will take place with appropriate notification to NRC:NRR.
Also, a letter will be sent to NRC:NRR, documenting the current change in PWHT Code editions.
The inspector had no further questions concerning this matter at this time.
2260 095
Seven complieted weld joint documentation packages were selected for review to ascertain their compliance with the ASME III and IX codes.
The following weld document packages were reviewed:
1821-IC173-FW5
--
1821-IC173-FW6
--
1 B31-NS005-BWil
--
1831-NS005-BW1
--
1B21 -IC175-FW14
--
--
1821-IC175-FW2
--
The document packages consisted of the Component Checklists, weld material requisitions, nondestructive examination reports, Noncon-formance Reports, process inspection records, post weld heat treat records, and welder and inspector qualification records.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
The following listed Nonconformance Reports were selected for review:
Nos. 414, 420, 429, 439, 365J, 451, and 468. These were reviewed for trends, adequacy of the disposition, retrievability, and, where applicable, proper closecut.
No items of. noncompliance were identified.
8.
Mechanical Inspection The inspector reviewed the FQC Procedure QCll.1, Revision B, which establishes a control program for field installation inspection of mechanical equipment and components to verify confonnance with specified requirements.
The document files for pumps lEll-P-014B and lE21-P-0138 were examined for requirements of procedure QCll.1.
The document file contained the foundation installation inspection, pre-installation inspection verification, and mechanical inspection as required by procedure QCll.1. The inspector made a visual check of work in progress on lE11-P-014A.
The pump was being fitted to allow for proper thrust clearance. The inspector interviewed the workers with respect to clearance criteria and bolt torquing.
The torque wrench to be used was found to have the required calibration tag attached.
The final alignment will be completed just prior to turnover of the pumps for startup testing.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
2260 096
.
.
.
.
.
9.
Safety Related Pipe Support and Restraint Systems - Work in Progress The following six supports were examined for pipe to restraint clear-ances, slide-lubrication, stops, weld status and acceptance, and orientation: (1) 1P42-PSSH-241; (2) 1P42-PSR-218; (3) lE21-PSR-057; (4) 1P42-PSR-037; (5) lE51-PSR-Oll; (6) 1P42-PSST-235; and (7) P42-PSSH-246.
Pipe Supports 1P42-PSR-218 and lE21-PSR-057 (in process) were found to lack the correct space tolerances between the box support and
>
the pipe making up each system. These observations were checked and confirmed against the respective pipe support drawings.
The inspector examined two accepted, similar supports,1P42-PSR-037 and lE51-PSR-Oll, and found the space tolerances correct.
The licensee also has a hold on another support Ell-PSR-223.
The inspector dis-cussed the methods used to assure correct tolerances with UNICO personnel. The licensee indicated an awareness of the situation and final FQC inspections, which remains to be completed on supports IP42-PSR-218 and IE21-PSR-057, are addressina this concern.
THe inspector had no further cuestions at this time.
No items of noncompliance ~were identified.
10.
Fuel Storage Pool Liner Reference IE Inspection Report 50-322/78-15, Paragraph 4.
The inspector examined documents which indicated that vacuum box testing of the fuel pool liner leak collection channels had been stopped on October 4, 1978, pending revision of the testing procedure #LT-2 to clarify timing parameters for performance of the inspection.
The documents show that the procedure was revised, requalified at the site to verify actual timing, and used as a basis for acceptance of previous inspection results.
The procedure provides 10 minutes to complete the examination.
The inspector examined the following specific documents:
Reactor Controls QC Hold Information #83A-40-F
--
S&W E&DCR-F-15995 and 15995A
--
Reactor Controls Procedure LT-2 Revision 2
--
Reactor Controls NDE Procedure Qualification LT-2
--
2260 097
.
.
The inspector found the above information to be acceptable relative to the safety related aspects of the leak collection channels.
No items of noncompliance were identified, 11.
Electrical Cable Installation The inspector examined specification change E&DCR-F-16796 and inter-viewed responsible field quality control personnel regarding measures to protect cable from cable tray sharp-edges at transition points.
Non-flammable halogen free rounded edge material is specified, and is included in field inspection activities.
The inspector had no further questions on this item.
12.
Licensee Action on Vendor Identified Deficiencies During review of licensee action on NRC Bulletins and Circulars, and followup of items reported to NRC under 10 CFR 50.55(e), the inspector reviewed related licensee actions regarding GE Service Installation Letters (SIL) and Service Advice Letters (SAL).
The licensee had recently taken steps to obtain all relevant SAL's, GE provided 45 applicable SAL's to the licensee. An existing LILCo prc, ject procedure P-308 includes instructions for LILCo handling each SIL received, and an interim project engineer instruction to OQA requires similar handling of SAL's.
Some of the SAL's had been the subject of NRC issued Bulletins, or 10 CFR 50.55(e) reports submitted by LILCo.
The inspector concluded that the licensee efforts to obtain and resolve potential deficiencies in this area are aggressive and effective and comply with criteria 15 and 16 of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
13. Management Interview At the conclusion of the inspection on January 26, 1979, a meeting was held at the site with representatives of the. licensee and con-tractor organizations.
Attendees at this meeting included personnel whose names are indicated by notation (*) in paragraph 1.
The inspectors summarized the results of the inspection as described in this report.
2260 098