IR 05000329/1980029
| ML19339B096 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 10/03/1980 |
| From: | Cook R, Knop R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19339B089 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-329-80-29, 50-330-80-30, NUDOCS 8011060292 | |
| Download: ML19339B096 (6) | |
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGUIATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-329/80-29; 50-330/80-30 Docket No. 50-329; 50-330 License No. CPPR-81; CPPR-82 Licensee:
Consumers Power Company 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, MI 49201 Facility Name: Midland Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Midland Site, Midland, MI Inspection Conducted:
S tember 1- 0, 1980
/6
[O Inspector:
R. J. ok
'"
Approved By:
R. C.
Cif A' YIU Projects Section 1 Inspection Summary Inspection on September 1-30, 1980 (Report Nos. 50-329/80-29: 50-330/80-30)
Areas Inspected: Examination of site conditions; core support assembly-procedures; attendance at meeting with petitioners to intervene in the Soils Hearing; damage to Diesel Generator 1G11 rotor; welding procedure changes for installation of HVAC systems; timeliness of QC inspections for instal-lation of HVAC systems. This inspection effort involved a total of 49 inspection hours by one NRC inspector.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
l
F
]
DETA ILS Persons Contacted Consumers Power Company Personnel D. Miller, Site Manager T. Cooke, Project Superintendent
- J. Corley, Site Project QA Superintendent
- D. Keating, IE&TV Section Head M. Schaeffer, Electrical Supervisor F. Pimentel, NDE & Welding QA Supervisor M. DeWitt, QA Mechanical D. Hendrix, QA Electrical Numerous other principal staff and personnel were contacted during the reporting period.
- Denotes those present during the exit interviews conducted during the reporting period.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item No. (329/79-28-01; 330/79-28-01); The Resident Inspector examined a letter from B&W to Consumers Power Company dated July 30,1980, which offers an explanation for not having current valid vessel internal assembly procedures on site during the initial attempt at fitting the core support assembly guide blocks.
The letter identifies a weakness in B&W Engineering Procedures which allowed Task Engineers the responsibility of upgreding the Midland plant procedures contingent upon changes to other plants. The Task Engineers failed to upgrade the Midland core support assembly procedures to reflect changes which were required at other facilities.
To preclude failure of implementing current changes at affected sites, the B&W Site Problem Report Procedures were modified such that all contract Project Engineers must implement appropriate changes or report why imple-mentation is not necessary.
Implementation of the B&W Engineering and Site Problem Report Procedures is being referred to the NRC Vendor Inspection Branch for further evalua-tion. This item is considered closed.
Functional or Program Areas Inspected 1.
Site Tours At periodic intervals during the report period, tours of selected site areas were performed. These tours were intended to assess the-2-
I
.
,
cleanliness of the site; storage conditions of equipment and piping being used in site construction; the potential for fire or other hazards which might have a deleterious effect on personnel and equip-ment, and to witness construction activities in progress.
.
2.
Meeting With Soils Hearing Petitioners On September 3,1980, the Resident Inspector attended a meeting between those individuals petitioning to intervene in the Soils Settlement Hearing, Consumers Power Company and NRR. The intent of the meeting was to clearly describe the cententions of the petitioners so that these contentions would be clearly understood by all parties involved prior to the ASLB prehearing conference scheduled for September 10, 1980 at Midland, MI.
The petitioners are acting without legal council, there-fore, legal proceedings and protocol were explained during the meeting.
The petitioners to intervene had submitted their contentions to the NRC prior to the meeting. Each contention was discussed and any necessary clarifications were offered.
3.
Damage to Diesel Generator Electrical Rotor During the reporting period, the electrical rotor for Diesel Generator 1Gil was transfered from storage to installation in the diesel generator.
During this transfer, the rotor sustained physical damage to a pole winding coil form; insulation on a lead cable from a winding; and deformed threads on a frame bolt. This damage occurred when the rotor was lifted using a "J-hock" which did not appear to have proper clearances to prevent interference with the internal portions of the rotor and/or the rotor was not lifted using steady slings. Lif ting of the rotor may not have been performed as described in the manufacturers literature and the source of the design for the "J-hook" has not been established.
Bechtel Power Corporation initiated Nonconfonmance Report No. 3126 to address the damage to the rotor and to follow subsequent repairs.
Consumers Power Company initiated Quality Action Request No. F-008 to address the potential lack of specific written procedures for the hand-ling of the diesel generator rotors. Consumers Power Company also initi-ated Nonconformance Report No. M-01-9-0-059 to address removal of the diesel generator rotor from storage without appropriate QC verification for handling and for failure to issue an F-10 form to include any manu-facturer's special handling procedures. This item is considered unresolved pending the determination for QC involvement and the adequacy of the manu-facturer's handling instructions for transfer of the diesel generator rotors. Unresolved Item (329/80-29-01; 330/80-30-01).
4.
Welding Procedure Changes for Installation of Heating. Ventilating and Air Conditioning ( HVAC) Systems As a condition for the resumption of safety related work by the Zack Company, Consumers Power Company imposed the following commitment
...
-3-
r
. _ -
--
--
P
.
"there is to be no MCAW welding of A-36 or A-572, Grade 50, material less than 10 gauge with.035 diameter weld wire pending qualification of procedure WPS-1 for the.035" weld wire. An alternative to the qualification is to clarify Section 5.2 of Procedure WPS-1 to delineate on which materials the different diameters of weld wire may be used.
(Refer NRC Inspection Report No. 50-329/80-21; 50-330/30-22)
During the reporting period, Zack Co. welding procedure No. WPS-1 for Gas Metal Arc Welding Section 5.2, was changed to reflect the use of 0.035" diameter electrodes when one or both base metals are less than 1/8" thick and 0.045" diameter electrodes when both base metals are 1/8" thick or greater. Similarly, welding procedure No. WPS-2 for Shielded Metal Arc Welding, Section 5.2, was changed to reflect the use of 3/32" diameter electrodes when one or both base metals are less than 1/8" thich and 1/8" and 3/32" diameter electrodes when the base metals are 0.1382" (10 Ga.) or 1/8" thick. This fulfills the above referenced commitment made by Consumers rower Company.
5.
Timeliness of QC Inspections for Installation of HVAC Systems As a condition for the resumption of safety-related work by the Zack Company, Consumers Power Company agreed to develop within 30 days of the release from the Stop Work Order of March 20, 1980, a mechanism to assure that Zack QC inspections are performed in a timely manner and thus avoid " backlog" inspection conditions which ex'sted prior to March 20, 1980.
(Refer NRC Inspection Report No. 50-329/80-21:
50-330/80-22)
During the reporting period, the licensee modified their Project Inspection Plans for HVAC - Material Receiving and Storage, HVAC -
Field Fabrication, and HVAC - Installation to reflect the date an inspection is initiated by Zack Co. and the length of time to close the inspection record or inspect a designated QC Hold Point.
If this time frame exceeds two weeks for installation or field fabrication and three weeks for material receiving and storage, Consumers Power Company Management is made aware of the situation by the requirements of the Project Inspection Plan. The initiation of an inspection is dated at the time an inspection is requested under the provisions of Field Quality Control Procedures FQCP-5, Installation. The licensee stated this mechanism should ensure that timely QC inspections are being performed and retains the latitude to alter the monitoring program if inadequacies are detected. This fulfills the above referenced commitment made by Consumers Power Company.
-4-
,-. _..-.
.
.
...
-
. -. - - -
-.
.
.
.
t
,
Unresolved Matters Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order ~to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncom-pliance, or deviations. One unresolved item disclosed during the inspec-tion is discussed in Paragraph 3.
Exit Inte rview The Resident Inspector attended the Exit Interview conducted by K. Ward,
,
Region III Reactor Inspector on September 24, 1980.
The Resident Inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted under Persons Contacted) on September 30, 1980. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection effort to date. The licensee ac-knowledged the findings reported herein.
A t tachment:
Preliminary Inspection Findings i
d n
!
,
j
i e
!
I
!
'
i
-5-J
.
--
m
,1--
-
~,
,,-,
-w
--,,,,
q
,
--m
-,, - -
,7,,
,.,,,,
,4,.
m,
-
E
.
--.-
-
.
.
.
... - -
.,...
-
-
---
e
,,
v-4w ve.
4. s. -w
.. v.. <u.s
...
,
n.
..
v.s C;..
.
g-n a
<
@
,) d
-
,
.
w = ~.. (.. s.m
. g e.2.,.. a g.
.. =.s... a e
. A
....
.a
...
u.. v.4
..... 4se a I
.
.
w_ N..e.ose
,,
_
-.,
..
a u. v....
O
,Cr.
rr4
.iu
.
,
.
CLT.Su; Ors 2*N ei".Cor.267.y
.'
., Cat
,.47..a.. Aose
...5. Nucicar Regulatory Ccar.is.ica
....swS
..
.
.
...nsp0C Ciun b r.;.orceLOT.t,
.'
'
i V. t '. - J Ot e
.
....
A
...
. ea500, i..
452v..
i
..'7 ')..)
nooSCVeAt RoGG
.
.
.
.
'
.
,
... C. L a w.r.., E.
\\, /..G.an C,
,,,.
,._,
..
_
...,
...j u.u n 4..y n,..
QUAo7
.
.
,....
,._,
e.. -. e n c.,. nit 2 s c.ic.. e n o,..,
-.
I i
.
l
.
-
....s..c. --eas
...
... :,
......
.~ w a.
.
.
.,....,..', a.:.
i5.
.,n...
..-
...s. ew
. r. v _,..,..... w.s
....
.
.
i 5^,-52s 5C-350
! C?E-i'.
C222-52
!.u,us.
.4 c-
--
so,
- e m.. _..
c-9o u-
.
_
k'ithin the scope of the inspection, no it :. of noncompliance or uviation c.
were fauna.
-
_
s 7.
"nc followin; r.stters ore rclininary inspection findings:
"he c'osence of specific written procedures for the handling of Diesel Generator.'Gli rotor and removal from storage without apparent QC verification for handling tac rotor and the resultant camage to the rotor is considered an unresolved item pending the determination for (C involvement and the adag.acy of manufacturer's handling instructions.
'
J l
-
,
,
i l
,
'
l
I l
i
! 6.
"hese prelitinary inspection findings will be reviewed by NRC Supervieicn/
- ^
'
~
Snnsgenent at the Region 'll Gifice and they will correspond with you concerning any enforcement ect. ion.
,
,
bWf t
.
SUc' or Reguiatory Co?.aission ~nspector
.
,,,.
,--
- -, -
c n.
,,-
, - -
--n
, -,
,.,,
-,,n-,-w..,.,.
,y
<
- - - -,
-
.