IR 05000329/1975001
| ML19329F133 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 02/28/1975 |
| From: | Rohrbacher R, Vetter W, Williams C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19329F128 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-329-75-01, 50-329-75-1, 50-330-75-01, 50-330-75-1, NUDOCS 8006200667 | |
| Download: ML19329F133 (14) | |
Text
. _,
c.
," :s.
'
--
qf * -
.
.
,.
/- - ;
,
.
,
A
--
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0FD11SSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
-
Report of_ Construction Inspection
'
'IE Inspection Report.No.' 050-329/75-01 IE Inspection Report No. 050-330/75-01
,
Licensee:
Consumers Power Company-1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201 Midland. Units 1 and 2 Licenses No. CPPR-81
'
Midland, Michigan and No. CPPR-82 Category:
A Type of Licensee:
Type of Inspection:
Routine,-Unannounced
-
.
.
Dates of Inspection:
February 5-7, 1975 s
Dates of Previous Inspection: D ember 11-13, 1974 (Construction)
^b5. t.cb
,
Principal Inspector:
T. E. Vandel j
'W-7F (Date)
j
,/W
,
Accompanying Inspectors:
I f. Yin A
)
/(Date)
.W>>.fp!L~
-
-
-
,
'
E. W. K. Lee J/ - f3 (Date)
Other Accompanying Personnel:
None Reviewed By:
D.IM a
Reactor Inspector
,2
Reactor Construction Branch-(Date)
Od
'a7=ofg7
.
-
-
_
.
__
-
-
.~';_,
^
cc
'
'
'
"
~
j'
.
.,
~
'..
.,
~ "** :
(
'
'
'
SUMMARY 0F FINDINGS
-
-
. Enforcement Action
<
A.
' Noncompliance
'No noncompliancefof NRC requirements were identified during the Lcurrent inspection.
- B.-
- Safety Matters No safety matters were identified during the current inspection.
. Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Action No previously. identified enforcement matters remain unresolved.
Design' Changes None Unusual Occurrences None: identified Other Significant Findings A.
. Current Project Status
-
1.
Percent Facility Completion Engineering
-
37%
Construction 9.2%
-
l2.
Concrete Placed in' Cubic Yards Unit: 1 - 5,783 Unit 2 - 17,980 (Auxiliary Building and common facility - 12,336 3.
Percent Liner Plate' Completion
~
' Unit 1 - 34%
. Unit 2 - 61%
-
.
(_ L-2-
.
.]
-
-
--
-
s,
,
,
.
.wp T
g'
Mn-Ni
^
' -
n.x-
_
~
..
, ',
-9
,
'
sm
-
' f.
}
s
[
.
-
.,, '
,y4
~ = 14.. LDelivery of-Babcock'& Wilcox~ Company-(B&W) NSSS" Components.
'
_ j
):
'for Unit l.
"
4 4,,
,
Delivered.at; site - 2 steam generatorsi r
f.-
u l'. pressurizer
.
-
'l reactor-vessel.
,
1-. closure ' head.
_
_
_
'All the primary coolant' piping
- w 15.-.;JLiner Plate
- Coating' Status
.
..
a.-
-Unitzl:
First; Lift-P*-
-Complete
' J (erected).
F*
-One of-the two coatsadone
-
Second-Lift P
None.
F=
None
~b.
-Unit 2
.First Lift P
Complete; possible fire damage
'(erected F
None Second-Lift P
Complete F
One of-the two-coats done
.
- P.-' Prime coat, carbozine 11
"5
_
- F-
. Finish coat, phenoline 305 gj..
B.:
- Unresolved Matters
1.-
Unit 2 Containment Rebar' Spacing Review'of' documentation developed in connection with-the containment rebar spacing nonconformance resulted in a request for additional information pertaining to design calculation.
.j
- parameters.
(Report Details,Section I, Paragraph 1)
2.
Long-Term NSSS Equipment Storage
- The
- external surface protective coating (Spraylat) on some-NSSS' equipment was damaged and stripped off.
This matter is
- considered unresolved upon conditions of repair work done.
-i-(Report DetailsSection I, Paragraph 3)
.
[3b : Extended Long-Tern NSSS Equipment Storage
" Procedures :for :NSSS equipment that will be stored onsite for-more than one year, due to prolonged' construction schedule,
,
_
twere not available'for review atithe time of'the' inspection.
,..
,
. - -
J4.
Discrepancy Between PSAR and-Specification 7220-C-230 n()J
-
-
'
JThe slump criterion stated inLthe PSAR-and; specification 7220-C-230
- appears Lto be discrepant.'(Report Details, Section TT, paragraph 3)-
]
_
.
-3-L j
a.
,
r m.
r
,,,,
,,_
'
.
,
.
.
.
~
.
~ C.
Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Matters
-'
1.
Storage of NSSS Equipment (R0 Inspection Reports No.
050-329/74-11 and No. 050-330/74-11)
-
The licensee has not yet inspected and documented NSSS equipment internals "as received" conditions.
This item was considered unresolved.
2.
Water in Unit No. 1 Containment (RO Inspection Reports No.
050-329/74-11 and No. 050-330/74-11)
Unit No. I containment steel liner plate floor section welding had been completed. Nitrogen purge has been applied on all leak chase internals. The inspector reviewed CP Project QA Service Daily Log Sheet indicating:
(1) observation on welding, (2) removal of water prior to welding, (3) welders's qualification check, and (4) proper procedures used. The matter was considered resolved.
Management Interview A.
The following persons attended the management interview at the conclusion of the inspection:
,,,,
(
I
~
~
Consumers Power Company (CP)
-
x-W. E. Kessler, Project Manager T. C. Cooke, Project Superintendent H. H. Slager, Project Quality Assurance Administrator J. L. Corley, Field Quality Assurance Engineer B. H. Peck, Field Supervisor Bechtel Power Corporation (Bechtel)
G. L. Richardson, Lead Quality Assurance Engineer J. P. Connolly, Project Field Quality Control Engineer J. F. Newgen, Field Supervisor-B.
Matters discussed and comments, on the part of management personnel, were as follows:
1.
The inspector stated that the corrections and resolution of the rebar spacing nonconformance appear to be adequate, with the exceptions of some questions raised relative to the design parameters used in the calculation of the structual integrity of the containment wall.
The licensee indicated that additional information would be developed and that this would be expected to be completed by early March 1975.
, ' 'N
,
!
-4-L U
.
-.
--
,
'
be.
bl
'
.
,
_
.
.
. -
-
- .
.c
'
,~~
~*:'
g e
, A, j 2.~
Th'e inspector. stated that he had no further questions relative to the fire' damage of Unit 2 containment.
However, he. urged
"
' that the engineering disposition of NCR No. 239 (for.the liner
,
l coating 1 repairs) show some considera-lons of possible adverse
_
,
impact for an 18-month delay in completion of repair.
The licensee' indicated that it would be taken into consideration.
-3.
.The inspector indicated his understanding that the licensee is planning to inform Region III by letter of the personnel changes affected by.the curtailment of construction activities.
The licensee indicated that a letter is presently being prepared and that, in addition, the Licensing Board will be informed, also by letter, in the near future.
'4.
~The inspector indicated that present long-term NSSS equipment-storage procedures and surveillance program appear to be in effect and adequate.
(Report Details,Section I, Paragraph 3)
,
5.
The inspector questioned the meaning of extended long-term storage of NSSS equipment onsite.
The-licensee responded that
" extended long term" means more than a one-year period.
The licensee has committed April 1, 1975, as a target date to complete their studies and furnish a workable procedure ~for the task.
f'~'N)
6.
The inspector stated that Unit No. I containment water problem
during base plate welding has been resolved and that he had no further questions.
7.
The-inspector acknowledged the licensee's comments on the last
inspection report ~ (No. 050-329/74-11 and No. 050-330/74-11) and will' record these comments in the next inspection report (Attachment A, this report).
8.
The. inspector stated that, during the review of concrete placement records for ~ pours No. CC(622. 25)a' and ik). A(589.75)a', he established that there appears to be no systematic method of
. obtaining samples for slump, air, and strength tests relative
~
.to complying to the sampling frequency as stated in the PSAR and the specification.
The licensee agreed to investigate and, if possible,. establish a' systematic method of obtaining samples.
9. -
The inspector stated, during the review of NCR's submitted by the licensee, the following areas appear to be possible generic problems:
a..
A number of NCR's were initiated because of equipment and/or
- materials arriving at the job site without proper documentation.
V-s-
.
y
.w n-
.
...
.
.7.-
.
. -...
-
.
-.
-...
..
.-. _....
-.
._-. -.
7. _
.-,,..
.
-
- --
>
--
.
,
,
-
+
-
- A.
.
_,
.,,
- -f.
,
I -
-
-b.
NCR's do not appear to be closed out in a timely manner.
r j
?The--licensee. acknowledged the stove comments and scated that the Bechtel=" Procurement Inspection Department Manual" has been
,
' revised'to improve item a'. above.
The licensee also. stated that
'
.
!
'. effort will..be made to close out NCR's in.a more timely-fashion.
!
101 The inspector' indica'ted that'seven NCR's.were reviewed for.
' documentation and close out with no problem areas being identified.
c
4
.
!
i f.
.
I
)
.
k t.
4 -.
i i
r
.
i i -
!
)
a -
1-t.
!
,
.-
i'
S.
.
'
i
%
e
, #
.
,
-
-
,
.
~
,
.
.
.,
.
,
'
'
.
__
..
l
- ..
REPORT DETAILS Section I
.
PreparedIBy:
I. T. Yin Persons Contacted The following persons, in addition to the individuals listed under the Management Interview Section of this report, were con: acted during the
- inspection.
Consumers Power Company (CP,1-D. J. Vokal, Field Engineer.. Mechanical R. E. Witaker, Field Quality Assurance Coordinator D. R. Keating, Field Quality Assurance Coordinator - Mechanical C. A. Hunt, Executive Engineer R. W. Rogness, Senior Engineer Babcock'and Wilcox Company (BSW)
V. N. Asgaonkar, Site Representative
~
~
-#
Results of Inspection
'
1.
Unit 2 Containment Liner Rebar Spacing Nonconformance
'The inspector reviewed the rebar spacing calculations and indicated that there was insufficient information on documentation and justification of formulas chosen, design and analysis conditions assummed, and the allowables used.
Verification checklists should also be a part of the report. presentation. The licensee has committed March 15, 1975, as a target date to resubmit calculations for'IE:III inspection review.
The inspector reviewed:
(1) Bechtel QA to CP letter, dated January 24, 1975, transmitting Field Instruction Civil (FIC) No. 7, approved on January-23,L1975, to-be used on rebar spacing inspections.
This instruction detailed the reasonable, usual occurring deviations from
. spacing of rebars which ;can to allowed, and the others that must be documented and approved,'and (2) Bechtel QC to CP letter, dated-January 24, 1975, stating'that a review indicated that proper rebar spacing had been maintained in accordance with FIC No. 7.
The
~
inspector was informed 1by the licensee that a training session had-been _hvid on January 27, 1975, : regarding this method.
The rebar
. spacing-check-procedures appeared to be satisfactory.
-d.
i
/.
N,2-7-
.
-
..
- - - -
- -
,
_
--
.
,
..
,
.
.,
. fN L
,
-
!
)
.
-
s -(
The Bechtel: specification on rebar spacing requirements had been revised (No. 7220-C-231, Revision 6, dated January 23, 1975, for paragraph 8.7.1.c) to delete some of the.less definitive wordings.
2.'
Fire in Unit 2 Containment Documentation was reviewed by the inspector that established the acceptability of the containment liner and concrete of Unit 2 containment that was-subjected to a fire on November 21, 1974.
The
'results of testing and the engineering cvaluation appeared adequate and acceptable. Documentation reviewed included:
a.
Bechtel NCR's No. 266 and No. 238.
b.
An engineering evaluation and disposition prepared by Bechtel design engineers dated January 9, 1975.
}
c.
A report, titled " Evaluation of Liner Plate Sample,"'No. GS 15-1, completed by the Bechtel Quality Control Services Group in San Francisco.
..
.d.
A Bechtel interoffice memo outlining the results of rebar tests.
.
e.
A Bechtel interoffice memo outlining the results of concrete f~}
examination.
\\- /
f.
Bechtel NCR No. 239, waiting final disposition by engineering, covering the repair of the metal liner coating.
'3.
Outside Storage of NSSS Equipment
,
The inspector-reviewed Bechtel's Unit 2 NSSS equipment long-term storage requirements and considered that adequate, protective measurements had been taken.
These procedures had been approved
^
.The. inspector' inspected the Bechtel storage and maintenance and/or inspection records and considered that a proper surveillance program on Unit.2 NSSS equipment had been in effect.
The settlement
' readings on the Unit 2 reactor, steam generators, and pressurizer
"
were required'by B&W and recorded by.Bechtel Engineering Department.
The inspector also reviewed handling procedures on NSSS equipment, qualifications and testings of the lif ting.nachine and haroware,-and also the personnel training and checklists for handling the NSSS equipment. Documentation appeared to be adequate.
./"'N1 Q,)
-8-
~
y g
ye-eww r
v
.
.
.
. _..
,
-
.
d i
,
,
- .
.
.,
,
,
-
~.
.,
.V.
' Documents 1 reviewed:
t
~
a.
Bechtel: File No. F-1-73, Revision 2, dated November 20, 1974, Long-Term Storage Requirement'for Unit 2 Reactor Vessel.
$
"b.
-Bechtel-File'No.'F-1-75, Revision 1, dated November 20, 1974, LLong-Term Storage Requirement.for Unit 2 Reactor Vessel Closure
,
Head.
c.
Bechtel File No. F-1-62, Revision 5,' dated December 30, 1974.
Long-Term Storage Requirement for Unit 2. Steam Generator.
,
d.
Bechtel File'No. F-1-83,. Revision 2, dated November 20, 1974, Long-Term Storage Requirements for Unit 2 Pressurizer.
Bechtel. File 'No. F-1-1, Revision 2, dated November 13, 1974, e.
Long-Term Storage Requirement for Unit 2 Reactor Coolant
' Piping.
f.
B&W Construction Procedure Review Index No. 8, dated November 11, 1974, on Bechtel NSSS Storage Procedures.
.
f g.
Bechtel Procedure Reviews on QC Storage Inspection Requirements,
g dated November 13, 1974, and November 22, 1974.
(O i
W
.
.
l
.
.l l
I
,
I q
.
.
,
-
_ 9_
n
'
c-
-
,
.
A-:
,
,
.'
.
.
~.
,
(~)
s
REPORT DETAILS Section II
.
Prepared By:
E. W. K. Lee Persons Contacted The following_ individuals, in addition to individuals listed under the Management Interview Section of this report,.were contacted during the inspection.
Consumers Power Company (CP)
D. E.-Horn, Quality Assurance Engineer D. R.-Keating, Quality Assurance Engineer Bechtel Power Corporation (Bechtcll L._R. Albert, Lead Civil Quality Control Engineer A. L. Boulden, Quality Control Welding Engineer
~
R. L. Bowren, Assistant Project Field Quality Control Engineer J. C. Fitzgerald, Civil' Quality Control Engineer sq l\\ ')
W. J. Key, Quality' Assurance Engineer J. W. Miller, Quality Control Engineers (Documentation)
R. E. Sevo, Quality Assurance Engineer Results of Inspection 1.-
Observation of Concrete Work Performance The inspector observed concret'e placement (pour No. C(601.92)a) for Unit 1 containment exterior wall, elevation 591' - 6" to 601' -
11", and column blockouts at elevatien 591' - 6",
and the following were determined:
a.-
Forms appeared to be tight, strong, and clean.
b.
Rebars appeared to be spaced properly, c.
-Field Inspection Plans No. C-231-2-431, Revision 0, dated December 4, 1974 (log'No. 1327) and No. C-231-3-459, Revision 0, dated December 31, 1974'(log No. 1430) were signed off, where appropriate, as acceptable.
d.
Slump and air tests and temperature were determined to be within the' range as specified. ~ The label on air content test
-~s a
.
- 10 -
.c e
<
-
,
L
.
'
q-
.e p
.
.
,
,
b
,
t
..
,
L
, ~s
,
!
N-J '
,
?
'
equipment (I.D. UST equipment No. 77) indicated calibration was current.
1.
'Two (2) placement crews were performing the work.
Each crew e.
^
consisted of ten (10) persons, and seven (7) vibrators per crew were used.-
2.
Review of Records The following documents were reviewed and. appeared to be acceptabic:
!
a.
Bechtel Specification 7220-C-231Q, Revision 4, dated Novemter 14, 1973, " Technical Specifications for Forming, Placing, Finishing,
.
and Curing of Concrete."
b.
Bechtel Procedure No. FIC-3, Revision 0, " Concrete Placing Instructions for the Placing Crew."
c.
Field Inspection Plan No.-C-231-2-332, dated September 18, 1974 (log No. 939).
d.
-Field Inspection Plan No. C-231-3-340, Revision 2, dated October.1, 1974 (log No. 998).
l
{s~N e.
Field Inspection Plan No. C-230-95, Revision 1, dated
,/
October 1, 1974 (log No. 997).
,
l
f.
Field Inspection Plan No. C-208-49, Revision 3, dated October 1, 1974 (log _No. 996).
g.
Slump, air and strength test records for tickets No. 03337, No. 03342, No.-03353, No. 03369, No. 03387, No. 03404, No. 03419, and No. 03439.
h.
The following cement certi11 cations from Martin Marietta:
(1) Ticket No. 74-08732, dated December 27, 1974.
(2) : Ticket No. 74-08729, dated December 27,.1974.
(3) Ticket No. 74-08720, dated December 26, 1974.
(',)
Ticket No. 74-08717, dated December 26, 1974.
.(5). Ticket No. 74-08712,- dated December 26, 1974.
(6)' Ticket No.'74-08703, dated December 23, 1974.
.
.
('7) Ticket No. 500198, dated January 27, 1975.
[u i
p n_
ll
L
'
_
._
=.
--
-
,
u
.
-
.'
.
.
'
,-.
.%
'
.
y"
~ Ticket No. 500043, dated January 20, 1975.
(8)
(9) Ticket No. 500041, dated January 16, 1975.
.
(10) Ticket No. 500060, dated January 7,1975.
(11) Ticket No. 500061, dated January 7, 1975.
1.
-The following fly ash certifications from Michigan Ash Sales Company:
(1) Ticket No. 20678, dated December 27, 1974.
.
(2) Ticket No. 20672, dated December 23, 1974.
(3)
Ticket No. 20519, dated November 25, 1974.
J.
United States Testing Company, Test Reports No. 66, dated January 15, 1975, and No. 67, dated Jar.uary 16, 1975, for Type II cement, fly ash water and aggregates.
k.-
The following admixture certifications from Master Builders:
(1)
Lot No. LP-672-Y4, shipment date November 20, 1974.
s
' ') '
,
(2) Lot No. LP-060-X4, shipment date October 14, 1974.
(3) Lot No. LS-578-Y4, shipment date November 20, 1974.
(4) Lot No. LS-488-X4, shipment date October 14, 1974.
3.
Review of Bechtel Specification No. 7220-C-230, Revision 5 Dated November 22, 1974, Entitled " Technical Specification for Subcontract for-Operating Onsite Batch Plant and Furnishing Concrete for the Consamers Power Company Midland Plant" The inspector reviewed.the referenced specification, and the following was established:
PSAR, page 5-6, paragraph 5.1.1.3.1, states, in part, that:
",.
.. a low slump of two or three inches are used.
.".
.
..
Tabic 9.1, of the above specification, has a slump rejection limit of 4 1/2" to 5" pending on the classification of concrete.
CP stated that this-discrepancy is due to the fact that the specification has an inadvertency margin, and the PSAR will be revised accordingly.
.
This matter will be reviewed during the subsequent inspection.
'
Attachment:
, ~3 A.
'
- 12 -
.
w
,
.._ -_ _
"
'
.
,
$
e
,
,
,
[ '.
(
')
'g.
A._/
ATTACINENT A IE Inspection Report No. 050-329/74-11 Corrections IE Inspection Report No.. 050-330/74-11 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Other Significant Findings
'A.
Current Project Status
.1.
Percent Project Status Engineering - 46%
Deleta information under Percent
-
,
Construction - 9.5%
Project Status.
'
5.
Liner Plant Coating Status Correct information shown in this report under the same heading.
REPORT DETAILS
,
Results of Inspection fs (.,,)
4.
Outside Storage of Class 1 Materials
. Third paragraph, second sentence:
Procedures F-7220-C-61 and -101 These are subcontractor's number, were used.....
not procedures.
5.
Concrete and kebar Quality Assurance First paragraph, second to the last sentence:
Temperatures of concrete Specification No. C-230, Revision (allowable range of 45-65 F)
5, allows minimum 40 to 80 F during are checked.
cold weather condition, depending on
....
the size of the section and whether the concrete has fly ash or not.
Specification No. C-230, Revision 5, allows minimum as near 50 F as possible and maximum'85 F, depending on the
,
size of the section poured for hot weather concrete.
v
.
.
.
'
.
" '
.
,
.d
.
.
-.,.
.
- "
'
. :73
-, -
7.
Site Preparation (Lakes and'
Dams)
,
Second paragraph, first sentence:
,
.
Therefare six-(6) main zones D1557-66T - incorrect of soil, including surfaces, Cohesive Soils - ASTM D1557-70 and the specification governing cohesionless Soils - ASTM D2049-69 compaction is D1557-66T.
8.
Steel Liner for Unit No. 1 Containment First paragraph, second sentence:
One wclder.
Procedure Should be PIAC-Lh.
...
P1AA1H.
' Third paragraph, last sentence:
Radiography was not 100%
In both cases, RT should be MP.
....
RT.
. only 10% RT is
,
..
required.
'
!
ATTACIDfENT A O'
3.
Dechtel NCR No. 90-- Underweight Concrete that has five pounds icss
'
Cement Placed in Auxiliary required cement.
Building
....
.
4.-
Bechtel NCR No. 91 -~ Liner Plate Liner plate warpage.
Thickness Deviation
!
l
.
-
1-T s
- l
,
'
[
1. '
'% !
.
2
- -
f
-
,-
.m g--
r
--
+
--
.,----e e
-.aw g nygg
,-
2 egg.--,q m-r,'-4-c g--m=
.,
-..
-
,
w
,..
,,
.
.
UNITED STATES
-
-g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISS!ON
%
.
)
0FFICE.OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
[
REGION lli l
799 ROOSEVELT HO AD GLEN ELLYN, ILLINOl$ 60137
!
-
050-329/75-G1
,
l A.,
IE Inspection Report No.
nsn_11n/7s_n1 l
Transmittal Date
March 3_'1979 Distribution:
Distribution:
l IE Chief, FS&EB IE Chief, FS&EB l
- IE:llQ (5)
IE: LIQ (4)
l'
DR Central Files L:D/D for Fuels & Materials Regulatory Standards (3)
DR Central Files
'
Licensing (13)
IE Files IE Files IE Chief, M& PPB L:D/D for Reactor Project B.
IE Inquiry Rc; ort No.
^:
Transmittal Date
Distribution:
Distribution:
IE Chief, FS&EB IE Chief, FS&EB IE:llQ (5)
IE:11Q DR Central Files DR Central Files Regulatory Standards (3)
IE Files Licensing (13)
IE Files i
i I
C..
Incident Notification From:
(Licensee & Docket No. (or License No.)
.
Transmittal Date
l l
l Distribution:
Distribution:
i IE Chief, FS&EB IE Chief, FSLED l
IE:11Q (4)'
IE:llQ (4)
'
Licensing (4)
L:D/D for Fuels & Materials
.DR Central Files DP Central Files IE~ Files IE Files
. dotuTIO
,,,,
'
g p
-
e e
+
_
T in.e 5 g.
9-m c.
_
V3 l
' ##16.W@