IR 05000329/1975006
| ML19329F112 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 08/18/1975 |
| From: | Hayes D, Lee E K, Yin I NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19329F110 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-329-75-06, 50-329-75-6, 50-330-75-06, 50-330-75-6, NUDOCS 8006200641 | |
| Download: ML19329F112 (9) | |
Text
,
.
.
m i
~
'
..
/~N
.
(
)
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COFDilSSION
\\
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report of Construction Inspection
.
,.
IE Inspection Report No. 050-329/75-06,
IE Inspection Report No. 050-330/75-06 l
Licensce:
Consumers Power Company 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201 Midland Plant Construction Site License No. CPPR-81
'
Units 1 and 2 License No. CPPR-82 Midland, Michigan Category: A
.
Type of Licensee:
PWR (B&W) Unit 1 - 650 W e Unit 2 - 818 MWe Type of Inspection:
Routine, Unannodnced fN.
(
)
Dates of Inspection:
July 29-31, 1975
- /['7 5'
Principal Inspector:
I. T Y (Date)
.
Accompanying Inspector:
.
($
^
s
~
w '
73 E.
. K.
e (Date)
'
.
.
Other Accompanying Personnel:
None.
'/ ef" 7 4
'
Reviewed By:
D. W.
Senior Reactor Inspector (Date)
Construction Projects
.
e
. -
8006200
-
-
.
~
i
7
-
-
s s '-
.
-
.
,
.
~
-
s
...
.,.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
_f~m -
.
.\\
!
v
Inspection Summary
.
Inspection on July 29 - 31, (75-06):
Follow-op inspect 1an on NSSS equip-ment onsite storage, field design sketch handling, linear plate RT
,
film density deviation, and other previously identified unresolved matters.
Enforcement Items
,
.
None.
-
Licens'ee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Items None.
Other Significant Items
"
.
A.
Systems and Components
,
None.
B.
Facility Items (Plans and Procedures)
As a result of a number of rebar discrepancies during auxiliary
g building concrete pours, a new procedure for preparation of field sketches was prepared by the Bechtel Power Corporation.
'
r C.
Managerial Items
'
' Effective August 1, 1975, Mr. F. Southworth is to beccme the
'
new Consumers Power Company (CP) Project Quality Assurance Services Department (PQASD) Director, replacinb Mr. G. Keeley.
Mr. Keeley
,
has been appointed Midland Project-Manager ef fective the same
,
day.
l
~
D.
Noncompliance Identified and Corrected'by Licensee
,
None.
E..
Deviations
.
!
Cuntrary to the commitment in paragraph 5.1.4.1.1.c of the PSAR, containment liner plate radiographic film density fails to meet the proposed ASME' Boiler and Pressure Vessel (B&PV) Code, Section-III,-Division 2, requirements.
This matter was identified by
'
,
the licensee.
(Report Details,Section II, Paragraph 1)
~
.
> -f}
'-2-
\\s
'
e
.
-
.
--
-
.
'
.
.
..
.
.
.
-
s
.,
.
'
-
.
f'S
.
\\m_.)
,
. ' Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Items F.
1.
Unit 2 NSSS Equipment Unsite Storage (IE Inspection Reports No. 050-329/75-03 and No. 050-330/75-03)
a.
Removal _cf the Spraylat coating from the vessel coated areas and covering vessels with tarpaulfn's have been undertaken. This item remains open pending completion of the task.
(Report Details,Section I, Paragraph 1)
b.
Inspection of NSSS internal "as received" conditions has been completed. The vessel internals were determined to be in good condition.
(Report Details,Section I, Paragraph 2)
2.
Work Interface Between Design and Construction Engineeri,.;
-
Groups The lack of adequate control of field sketches resulted in the auxiliary building rebar problem. A new procedure has been written and implemented to correct this condition, and this matter is considerad resolved.
(Report Details,Section I Paragraph 3).
/ -
3.
Discrepancy Between PSAR and Specification 7220-C-231 (__
- (IE Inspection Reports No. 050-329/75-03 and No. 050~330/75-03)
-
The licensee stated that the PSAR will not be revised to include the inadvertency margin and/or the rejection limit,
,
as' stated in the specification.
The inspector stated that this matter will be referred to IE Headquarters and Regulatory Licensing for final resolution.
Management Interview A.
The following personnel attended the management interview at the
.
conclusion of the inspection:
Consumers Power Company (CP)
H. W. Slager, Midland Quality Assurance Administrator J. L. Corley, Midland Quality Assurance Superintendent G. W. Somsel, Field Electrical Supervisor P. K. Welling, Construction Control Supervisor
.
,
.s-3_
-
.
.
.
--y-
-
,
. - -
a
< -, - -
w-
e
- .
..
.
.S
.
.
.
.,
.s
J
/~s o
k,)
'Bechtel Power' Corporation'(BPC)
T. C. Valenzano, Project Field-Engineer G. L. Richardson, Lead Quality Assurance Engineer J. P. Connolly, Project Field. Quality Control
.
B.
Matters discussed and comments, on the par't of mah4gement personnel,
- '
were as follows:
,
1.
In regard to the two (2) previously identified unresolved items relative to the Unit 2 NSSS equipment onsite long-term
. storage requirements, Spraylat removal is still considered an.
open item upon work completion.
Inspection of NSSS equipment interiors has been completed and no problem areas identified.
The inspector stated that, although the technique and engineer-ing judgement on inspecting the vessels are sound, certain pro-cedural requirements had not been followed.
The inspector added that were possible (as in this. case) future justification for deviating from procedures should be made prior to the work being performed.
The licensee representative agreed.
2.
The inspector stated that the unresolved item previously identified on work interface control relative to field sketch handling is considered resolved, after reviewing the BPC's subject new e.
,
3.
The inspecto; stated that the discrepancy between PSAR and specification, relative to concrete slump identified during an inspection on February 5 and 7, 1975, will be referred
,
to IE Headquarters and Regulatory Licensing for final
"
resolution.
4.
The inspector stated that the linerplate RT film density matter will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection pending resolution between the licensee and his contractor.
.(Report Details,'Saction II, Paragraph 1)
,
5.
The. inspector stated that two (2)-BPC nonconformance reports, one (1) CP nonconformance report, and one (1) BPC quality assurance discrepancy report were reviewed and appeared to
,
be closed out properly.
(Report Details,Section II, Paragraph 2)
I l
-
D'
!
b
- v-4-
-
.
,
'i
~~
.
-.
d
_
-
,
-
-
y_,
-
..
.-
,
'
.
.
-'s
.
(
)
REPORT DETAILS-w/
.
,
SECTION I.
Prepared By:
I. T. Yin
.
,.
Persons Contacted
.
The following persons, in addition to the individuals listed under the Management Interview Section of this report, vere contacted during the' inspection.
Consumers Power Company (CP)
R. E. Whitaker, Field Quality Assurance Engineer D. R. Keating, Field Quality Assurance Engineer - Mechanical D.- E. Horn, Field Quality Assurance Engineer - Civil D. J. Vokal, Mechanical Field Engineer Bechtel Power Corporation (BPC)
_
K. F. Pulito, Field Engineer W. P. Giehm, Senior Safety Representative
,
Results of Inspection 1.
Unit 2 NSSS Equipment Spraylat Coating,_pamage It was determined by the licensee that damaged Spraylat coating will not be repaired.
Instead, all Spraylat coating will be removed from Unit 2 NSSS vessels sad pipes stored outdoors and then, specially designed tarps will to utilized for the needed
-
weather protectio.n. The project status is shown in the table
,
below:
-
.
_ _ _....
_.
._. ____........
..
-
, Unit 2 NSSS
! Spraylat Removal e
{ Equipment Tarps Completion Date
'
i lReactorVessel Onsite July j
-.
'
Reactor Vessel Requisition Unknown
,
. Cover Head Approved
'
_a
_
iThe Two Steam j
Onsite September
,
'. Generators
- . _.
.
- - -.. _.. _ _
Pressurizer
!-
Onsite September
--(-(
)
!
.
..v' :
Tr'iN'd liping' ~ '
Re'quisition ~
Unknown
-
'
'
~
'
Approved
.
'
,
....
.
.
.
-5-
~
-
-.
.-
.
..
,
,
..
,
.
%
2.
Inspection of Unit 2 NSS'S Vessels "As Received" Condition
,,
.,
Since the last NRC site inspection in April 1975, moisture
~~
indicators, in addition to desiccant and nitrogen, were installed
,
for protecting the vessel interior.
Prior to the programmed long-term onsite outdoor storage, the two (2) steam generators, the pressurizer, and the reactor vessel were inspected in
June 1975, for interior surface deterioration.
The engineering evaluation has determined that all creas inspected were in acceptable condition.
The inspect *or concurred with BPC's finding, as well as,techn'ique and safety precaution given in carrying out such a task.
Ilowever, certain approved work pro-cedures had not been observed and followed.
The inspector cautioned the licensee that. future work procedures should be prepared, reviewed, and approved to reflect actual needs and deletion of any parts of a general type procedure should be justified and documented prior to start of the work activities.
The licensee agreed.. This matter is considered closed.
3.
Procciuto for Handling'the Field Enginecing Comments and Sketches Insufficient procedures and controls of design and field engineering interface had b'een identified as contributing to a auxiliary building rebar placement nonconformance. Attempts to resolve this matter had been made by adding additional requirements into the existing BPC Procedure for Review of Vendor Drawinge fer Midland Units 1 and
_ _ _
[\\
2, FPC-3, Revision 3.
During the previous NRC site inspection (IE Inspection Reports No. 050-329/75-03 and No. 050-330/75-03) the inspector commented on the draft and identified a number of deficiencies. Since then, BPC has abandoned such an attempt and prepared a new Procedure for Preparation of Field Sketches documented in Field Project General (FPG)-14 Revision 0, dated
'
May 28, 1975. The inspector reviewed the new procedure content in the areas of:
(1) preparation, (2) change control, and (3)
distribution and considered it to be adequate and satisfactory.
In regard to the lack of description of responsibilities of both Bechtel Associates Professional Corporation (BAPC) and BPC
.
identified during the last NRC site inspection, the inspector stated he has no further questions based on reviewing the following documentation:
Midland Project Plant Units 1 and 2 Procedures Manual, Issued By BPC and CP
-
l Part II-Division Project Functions
'l
.-
Section 2 - Bechtel Power Corporation Division Project Function -
Engineering
.
e
/\\
/b l'
-6-
.
O
,
r-
-
-. -
.
.
.
.
..-
- --
- -
. -..
-
.
. _ -. _..
_
'
,
-
.
,
,
.'
.-
s
.,.
,
<,
.
Section-3 - Bechtel Power Corporation Division Projection
'
s
..
. Contruction.
<
!
4.
Effects of Carpenter Strike
.
The carpenters strike which lasted approximately two-and-a-half
,
,
months (since May 1975) affected concrete pour schedules for the auxiliary building and the Unit I containment structure. The
- .
licensee project personnel indicated that they plan to catch up
,
lost work activities by increasing the man,ual work force to about
!
300 from the present 100 plus level.before November 1975.
- e e
!
l
'
+
.
-
.
{
.6
l
.
!
i
!
i U
,
,
e
.
f e
.
1
. l
.
!.
f-
-
.
,
e g
,
,'
+
,
l
.
.
,
. f
, *
i Ni
_ _
. _ _ _ _.,
.
.
. _ _ _ _.
._.,. _., _._ _ _., _ _ _, _..., _.
__f.,__.
f
.,
_
.
.
. _
-_ _ _ - _ __
,
'
.
..
.
"
.
$
.
.
.
REPORT DETAILS
"
(\\~, -
.
SECTION II
.
Prepared By:
E. W. K. Lee
.
,.
.
'
Persons Contacted The following persons in addition to the individuals, listed under the Managerment Interview of this report, were contacted during the inspection.
,
Consumers Power Company (CP)
D. E. Horn, Field Quality Assurance Engineer - Civil D. R. Keating, Field Quality Assurance Engineer - Mechanical Results qf Inspection 1.
Containment Liner Plate Radiograph Film Density At the end of June, the' licensee inforced IE:III that 15 of the ('d_s')
100 liner plate radiograph films reviewed did not meet the
density requirements stated in the proposed ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 2, which is committed by paragraph 5.1.4.1.1.c of the PSAR.
.
During'this inspection, the inspector established that Noncom-formance Report (NCR) No. QF-51, dated June 23, 1975, had been
initiated by the licensee.
The NCR recommended four (4) corree-tive actions. The inspector also reviewed the licensee's contractor's
.
response dated July 21, 1975, to NCR No. QF-51.
It was established that the contractor fulfilled the licensee's recommended correc-tive actions. Nonetheless, a CP's letter dated July 28, 1975,
-
stated that corrective actions n're considered adequate, except for the extrapolation of data to 1.49 film density.
The licensee's contractor had not responded to CP's rejection.
This matter remains unresolved pending further review during a subsequent inspection.
2.
Review of NCR's The inspector reviewed the following NCR's and determined that they appeared to be closed out properly.
)
v-8-
,
.
.
.,
. --
-- -
-m
,
..-
.
_
_
.-_. _
._ _
_
. _..
...,.
...
.
....
.
'..
s
,
..
.
.
!
~ a.
Bechtel Power Corporation NCR's No. 256 and No. 262.
b.
,
c.
Bechtel Power Corporation Quality Assurance Descrepancy
'
Report No. 051.
.
-
.
,.
>.
Review of Storage Procedure
~
~
~
.
The inspector reviewed L2chtel Power Corporation Procedur,e No.
FPC-3,. Revision 3, dated July 15, 1975, " Procedure for Storage-
.
.
and Storage Maintenance of Q-listed Equipment and Material"
and determined it to be acceptable.
f
.
!
.
l L
t
.
f f
f
!
e
.
g
!
,
)
i
.
O 9_
-
.
.
e
- - - ~
,
,.,, -
.4
.-,
,
.y
.-.y.r
[.. -, h,., -,
,,.,..m, w__,,_,_,..-
,.
%y,,_,,,ym
,,_.,,m,
_,m..w.
-c..,..r.9.,m.yme.e,,
g-