IR 05000327/1979008
| ML19289F184 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 03/09/1979 |
| From: | Conlon T, Vandoorn P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19289F171 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-327-79-08, 50-327-79-8, 50-328-79-04, 50-328-79-4, NUDOCS 7906040387 | |
| Download: ML19289F184 (5) | |
Text
.
-
.
UNITED STATES
- gR Rfoug NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o,,
[
REGION il
c o
M 101 MARIETTA STR EET, N.W.
.g
ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30303
+
o, s..v /
...
Report Nos.: 50-327/79-08 and 50-328/79-04 Licensee: Tennessee Valley Authority 500A Chestnut Street Tower II Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401 Facility Name: Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos.:
50-327 and 50-328 License No.-
CPPR-72 and CPPR-73 Inspection at Daisy, Tennessee h/
3/3 /7 f Inspector:
,m
'
'
' Date Signed P.~ K. VanDoorn J!f[77 Approved by
- 7 T. E. Conlon, Section Chief, RCESB
' Dat'e Signed SUMMARY Inspection on January 30 through February 1, 1979 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 20 inspector-bours on-site in the areas of reactor coolant pressure boundary piping records and welding activities (Unit 2); safety-related piping handling and welding activities (Unit 2); preservice inspection records (Unit 1); safety-related structures records (Units 1 and 2).
Results Of the four areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in three areas; one apparent item of noncompliance was found in one area (infraction-failure to follow procedure for handling and protection of stainless steel piping, paragraph 7.b).
}
7906040397
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees G. G. Stack, Project Manager, Construction
- R. W. Olson, Assistant Construction Engineer
- J. L. Smith, Assistant Construction Engineer
- J. M. Munns, QA Supervisor
- B. W. Farrell, Quality Control Records Unit Supervisor
- L. W. Jones, Welding Inspection Unit Supervisor
- R.
L. Hamilton, QA Engineer
- E. C. Pendergrass, QC Records Unit W. E. Andrews, QA Staff Supervisor R. H. Daniels, Level III Examiner Other licensee employees contacted included four construction craftsmen, three technicians and three office personnel.
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on February 1, 1979, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above. The noncompliance described in paragraph 7.b was discussed in detail.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item 50-327/78-41-02: Control of Linearity Calibra-tions for UT of Piping. This item concerned the fact that inspection personnel were not always performing daily linearity calibrations for UT of piping. The inspector verified that these daily calibrations are not required by the applicable Code (ASME Section V, 74S75).
TVA, therefore, intends to leave the applicable procedure (UT-1) "as is".
It contains only a 90-day calibration requirement in accordance with the code.
TVA info rmed the inspector that, since minimal work was involved and added assurance was obtained, daily linearity calibrations would be performed.
A further advantage is to eliminate confusion since daily calibrations are required by code for UT of pressure vessels.
These actions are satisfactory and this item is closed.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not Identified during this inspection.
2236 150
.
.
-2-
5.
Independent Inspection Effort a.
(Units 1 and 2) The inspector conducted a general inspection of the containment and auxiliary buildings to observe construction progress and construction activities such as welding, material handling and control, housekeeping and storage.
b.
(Units 1 and 2) The inspector reviewed receiving records for Waste Gas Decay Tanks 1 through 9 which are common to both units. The inspector also observed four tanks in place. This inspection was performed in order to verify the name of the manufacturer since extensive weld defects were found in similar tanks manufactured in the same time frame for another site. The manufacturer was verified to be Delta Southern Company of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, which is not the manufacturer of the defective tanks.
(Unit 1) The inspector reviewed pre-service UT inspection records c.
for four Class A welds to determine if procedure and Code (ASME Section XI, 74S75) requirements were being met.
Records were reviewed for 40 degree and L-wave inspection of loop welds RC-6, RC-4S1 and RC-4 and 45 degree and L-wave inspection of steam generator circumferential seam weld SGW-A2.
Areas reviewed included examination results, equipment data, calibration data, identification of couplant, chart records, evaluation and dispo-sition of findings, extent of inspection, calibration re-verification, accurate recording of indications, record reviews and control of temporary record storage. Within this same area, the inspector discussed inspector follow-up item 327/79-06-01 with TVA. This item concerned disposition of a significant UT indication found in weld RHRS-119.
Power plant maintenance branch has recommended repair of the weld; however, the final decision to repair has not been made. This item remains open.
d.
(Unit 2) The inspector reviewed welding above the root layer on reactor coolant pressure boundary and other safety-related piping to determine if procedure and code requirements were being met.
The applicable code is the ANSI standard B31.7,1969 edition and the 1970 addenda.
Areas reviewed included weld identification, use of applicable welding procedure, use of specified weld material, physical appearance of weld and documentation held at the work site. The following welds were observed:
Weld Number Class Size Type of Weld 2CX02642 B
1"x.250" Socket 2CX02643 B
1"x.250" Socket 2CX01198 A
2"x.343" Socket 2236 15i
.
-3-
.
Weld Number Class Size Type of Weld (Continued)
2CX01199 A
2"x.343" Socket 2CX01043 A
2"x.343" Socket 2CX01044 A
2"x.343" Socket 2CX01094B A
2"x.343" Socket 2CX01316 B
2"x.343" Butt 2CS00155 B
8"x.322" Butt No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping-Review of Quality Records (Unit 2)
Procurement, installation and inspection of components (e.g.,
pipe spools, fittings, pump / valve casings, etc.) in the reactor coolant pressure boundary piping system is controlled by the code delineated in paragraph 5.d, and approved QA/QC site procedures / specifications.
Records of the following items were selected for review to ascertain whether they (records) were in conform.nce with established requirements and reflect material / component properties consistent with applicable requirements. Components selected for this undertaking were as follows:
Item System Loop 2-1 RC Loop 2-5 RC Loop 1-3 RC Loop 1-4 RC Loop 4-1 RC Thermowells # TEN /RCPCTW-09 RC Thermowells # TEN /RCPCTV-10 RC Thermowells # TEN /RCPCTW-11 RC Thermowells # TEN /RCPCTW-12 RC 2SI-95 SI 2SI-101 SI 2SI-123 SI 2RC-16 RC 2RC-17 RC 2RC-20 RC The review effort was directed in the following areas: material test reports / certifications; NSSS manufacturer's quality releases; licensee receipt inspection reports; and, nonconformance/ deviations as applicable.
Records of piping storage inspections performed back to July 1978 were reviewed to ascertain whether inspection frequency and storage level requirements were being maintaingd.
2236 152
_
.
.
-
-4-QA surveillance / audit reports numbers SN-M-78-06 and SN-M-78-07 relative to piping were ieviewed to ascertain whether applicable audit require-ments were being met in the following areas: scope and frequency specified; identified deficiencies resolved and that the corrective action taken was sufficient to preclude identified problems from recurring.
7.
Safety-Related Piping-Observation of Work and Work Activities (Unit 2)
a.
The inspector observed handling of eight inch containment spray piping on either side of weld 2CS00155 to determine if code and procedure requirements were being met.
The applicable code is delineated in paragraph 5.d.
The applicable site procedure is process specification number 4.M.1.1(b) of December 20, 1973.
b.
On ~Janua ry 31, 1979, the inspector observed stainless steel contain-ment spray piping in the containment dome area with the following examples of noncompliance with the above process specification:
(1) Pipe end caps missing-three examples.
(2) Uncovered wire rope around pipes-two examples.
(3) Pipe placed against unpainted / uncovered carbon steel stands-four examples.
(4) Spray nozzle bosses uncovered-approximately one-third of bosses observed.
This is in noncompliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V as implemented by the FSAR, paragraph 17.1A.5. This is Infraction 328/79-04-01.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified, except as identified in paragraph 7.b.
2236 153
.