IR 05000329/1979028
| ML19296B265 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 01/07/1980 |
| From: | Cook R, Knop R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19296B262 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-329-79-28, 50-330-79-28, NUDOCS 8002200346 | |
| Download: ML19296B265 (5) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:U.S. NUF,..AR REGULATORY COMMISSION ' 0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-329/79-28; 50-330/79-28 Docket Nos. 50-329; 50-330 License Nos. CPPR-81; CPPR-82 Licensee: Consumers Power Cos'any 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, MI 49201 Facility Name: Midland Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Midland Site, Midland, Michigan Inspection Condcuted: November 1 - 30, 1979 hl be,~ /
Inspector: R. J. Cook I / 7/[[' ' acTC Approved By: R. C. Knop, Chief I
0.
Projects Section 1 Inspection Summary Inspection on November 1 - 30, 1979 (Report No. 50-329/79-28: 50-330/79-28) Areas Inspected: Examination of site conditions, qualifications of QC inspection personnel for tendon installation, assembly of Unit I reactor coolant pumps, Unit 1 post weld heat treatment, review of nonconformance reports, electrical fires, fabrication of boric acid storage tanks, U. S. Core of Engineers Geotechnical Review, Unit 2 reactor vessels in-ternal assembly. This inspection effort involved a total of 73 inspection hours by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8002200 . -...
. ' DETAILS Persons Contacted Consumers Power Company Personnel D. Miller, Site Manager T. Cooke, Project Superintendent
- J. Corley, QA Section Head IE & TV
- B. Peck, Construction Supervisor P. Kyner, QA Electrical Supervisor H. Allen, QA Mechanical E. Jones, QA Electrical Bechtel Power Corporation Personnel
- L. Dreisbach, Project QA Engineer B & W Personnel
- V. Asgaonkar, Project Engineer
- R. Shope, Project Engineer
- 0. May, Project Engineer Numerous other principal staff and personnel were contacted during the reporting period.
- Denotes those present during the exit interview conducted daring the report period.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (0 pen) Noncompliance (329/79-19-01; 330/79-19-01): Certification of quality control personnel for the post-tensioning work not being in accordance with committed Regulatory Guide provisions. During the report period the licensee had generated a series of questions for retesting of QC Personnel involved in tendon installation and submitted these questions to the NRC Region III Office for comment. A listing of tendons which had previously been inspected by QC individuals with contested qualifications has also been submitted to the NRC Region III Office for selection of tendons for reinspection. These items are discussed in NRC Inspection Report No. 50-329/79-23; 50-330/79-23.
Functional or Program Areas Inspected 1.
Site Tours At periodic intervals generalized tours of selected areas of the facility were performed by the Resident Inspector. These tours-2-
' were intended to assess the cleanliness of the site, storage of equipment and piping being used inside the construction aress, the potential for fire or other hazards which might have a deleterious effect on personnel and equipment and to witness construction activi-ties in progress.
It was noted that cleaning of Unit number 2 con-tainment with air lances generated excessive dust at a period of time when B & W was attempting welding operations. This dust caused the welding operations to be discontinued. At the exit interview the -- Resident Inspector indicated that suspension of welding operations in this type of environment was prudent and should be expected to enhance the integrity of the welding.
2.
Assembly of Unit 1 Reactor Coolant Pumps During the reporting period, the licensee has performed assembly work on the Unit I reactor coolant pump. The motor base for pump designated IP51B was shipped to the pump manufacturer for repairs.
The sealing surface for the pump casing seal was badly pitted.
3.
Post Weld Heat Treatment (PWHT) of Unit 1 Reactor Coolant System During the report period PWHT has beer performed on unit I reactor coolant joints designated WJ 6-2: 64, 4-4, 4-2, 1-1, 1-2, 6-1, 6-3.
Since the procedural changes and controls discussed in NRC Inspection Report No. 50-329/79-26; 50-330/79-26 have been applied minimal dif-ficulty has been experienced in keeping PWHT operations within the procedural limitations.
4.
Review of Nonconformance Reports During the reporting period the review of some selected nonconform-ance reports (NCR) was performed. This review was performed with the aid of a Regional Based Co-Op Employee. The review consists of select'v-Ly sorting those NCR's which have a dispostion of Use-As-Is which i eupported by minimal information on the NCR to arrive at this conclusion.
This review of selected NCR's was not concluded by the end of the reporting period and the review is still continuing.
5.
Electrical Fires During the reporting period two electrical fires of some potential significance occurred at the site.
One fire occurred on November 11, 1979 when a welding lead coupling short circuited against a Unit I cable chase at the 46 ft.
elevation of the auxiliary building. This ignited a piece of 1/2" rope in the imme!iate vicinity.
It appears that neither the cable chase or cables in the cable chase were damaged.
-3-
, ' The second fire occurred on November 27, 1979 at the 653 ft. eleva-tion of the evaporater building at the north switchgear room. A workman placed his tool box into the back of switch panel OB-22 and short circuited all three incoming feeders. The switch panel was energized. The workman was hospitalized as a result of this accident.
Switch p:mel OB-22 feeds 480 volt power to motor control center NCCOB-4-The switch panel was non-safety related (non-Q).
6.
Boric Acid Storage Tanks During the reporting period work activities associated with con-struction of the boric acid storage tanks was observed. Much of the material being used to fabricate these tanks requires surface cosmetic grinding to remove blemishes. Some of the deeper grind marks on the Unit 2 tank were UT scanned and are being evaluated for minimum wall thickness. More review of this matter will be performed at a later time.
7.
U. S. Core of Engineers Geotechnical Review The NRC has contracted the U. S. Core of Engineers to perform geo-technical review including abnormal settlements and site settlement monitoring. As a portion of this review, Messrs. R. Erickson and J. Kubinski of the U. S. Core of Engineers visited this site with members of the NRC to observe site conditions and examine remedial actions pertinent to abnormal site settlement.
8.
Unit 2 Reactor Vessel Internal Assembly During the report period the Resident Inspector reviewed activities associated with fitting the core support assembly guide blocks to the reactor vessel guide lugs. This activity was performed using Field Construction Procedure No. 119, R. V. Guide Lugs Prior To Trial Fit-Up.
Step 040 of the above referenced procedure required tighten-ing each bolt holding the guide blocks to the core support assembly to a torque value of forty to sixty ft.-lbs.
The Resident Inspector was able to ascertain that these procedural requirements had been adhered to.
However, with the torque value specified in the existing procedure, large forces would be required to move the guide blocks during the trial fit of the core support assembly. This phenomena had been observed at another B & W designed facility of similar design to the Midland plant. The Resident Inspector appraised the licensee and B & W site personnel of the large forces which would be required to position the guide blocks after tightening the guide block bolts to forty to sixty ft.-lbs torque and essentially challenged the exist-ing procedure.
The licensee stopped any further work on fitting the core support assembly until this matter could be resolved. B & W gen-erated a Site Problem Report and submitted it to B & W NPGD for resolu-tion. B & W NPGD responded with a drastically modified procedure than-4-
. ' was originally specified.
This ultimately required a procedural change to Field Construction Procedure No. 135, Trial Fit-Up of Internals For Core Support Assembly. The revised procedure requires torquing of the guide block bolts to nominally twenty in.-lbs.
torque.
It could be determined that B & W Construction Company had adhered to the existing onsite procedural requirements. However, these -- procedural requirements were not valid for the Midland reactors.
The absence of current valid assembly procedures onsite for the vessel internals is considered an unresolved item pending further review into this matter. Unresolved Items (329/79-28-01; 330/79-28-01).
Unresolved Matters Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of non-compliance, or deviations. One unresolved item disclosed during the inspection is discussed in Paragraph 8.
Exit Interview The Resident Inspector attended the Exit Interviews conducted by E. Lee and T. Vandel, Region III Reactor Inspectors on November 2 and November 30, 1979 respectively.
The Resident Inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted under Persons Contacted) on November 9, 1799. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection effort to date. The licensee ac-knowledgai the findings reported herein.
Attachment: Preliminary Inspection Findings-5- }}