IR 05000335/1978013
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:4 EIGuy UNITED STATES
(pt g g')g. ~.k NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGloN 11 g 230 PEACHTREE sTR EET, N.W. sulTE 1217 .- - r y [c ATLANTA. GEORGI A 30303
%,.... f - Report Nos.: 50-335/78-13 and 50-389/78-6 , Docket Nos.: 50-335 and 50-389 License Nos.: DPR-67 and CPPR-144 Category: C, A2 Licensee: Florida Power and Light Company P. O. Box 013100 Miami, Florida 33101 ' - , Facility Name: St. Lucie Units 1 & 2 Inspection at: Hutchinson' Island, Florida . Inspection conducted: May 15-18,'1978 Inspectors: R. W. Wright B. R. Crowley Reviewed by: h6 6? [ I //9/7;P t A. R. Herdt, Chief / 'Da'te ,' ! Projects Section Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Insi)ectionSummary Inspection on May 15-18, 1978 (Report Nos. 50-335/78-13 and 50-339/78-6) Areas Inspected: Routine unannounced inspection (for Unit 1) - inservice inspection, nondestructive examination program; (for Unit 2) - containment welding, material control, construction status and general houskeeping, audit review, and the handling of licensee identified items and IEBs.
Unit l's inspection involved 18 inspector-hours on site by one NRC inspector.
Unit 2's inspection involved 34 inspector-hours on site by two NRC inspectors.
Results: Of the two areas inspected for Unit 1, no apparent items of - noncompliance or deviations were identified in one area; one apparent item of noncompliance (Deficiency: failure to follow procedure for ' j documentation of liquid penetrant inspection) was identified in one Of the five areas inspected for Unit 2, no apparent items of area.
- noncompliance or deviations were identified in four areas; two apparent
! items of noncompliance (Infraction - failure to follow procedures - material control), (Infraction - failure to follow procedures preven- ' tive maintenance) were identified in one area.
i ' 8508150649 850703 PDR FOIA LEIGHTO84-293 PDR - - - - , ,. _.
,
- RW'%
es-+h.- .,g
- , \\ - . t RII Rpt. Nos. 50-335/78-13 and 50-389/78-6 I-1 i i e DETAILS I Prepared by: [d[ .n$d[-- ~ Date 7B R. W. Wright,@rincipal Inspector Projects Section Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Dates of Inspection: May 15-18, 1978 Reviewed by: $ A fn [$r b db/W A. R. Herdt, Chief / ' Date Projects Section Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch . All information in Details I applies to St. Lucie Unit 2 only.
1.
Persons Contacted a.
Florida Power and Light Company (FPL) - .
- B. J. Escue, Site Manager
- W. M. Hayward, QA Supervisor
'
- J. W. Adams, QA Engineer
'
- R. A..Symes, QA Engineer
!
- R. E. Vaeth, Area Stores Supervisor
- .
- C. E. Carter, Stores Supervisor
- S. C. Wills, Administrative Engineer
- J. L. Parker, Project QC Supervisor B. M. Parks, QA Engineer D. Hardison, QC Receiving Supervisor b.
Contractor Organizations - Ebasco Services, Inc. (EBASCO) i
- R. A. Garramore, Senior Resident Engineer
- H. T. Powers, Jr., Process Control Engineer
- G. Maxwell, Materials Supervisor l
- Denotes those present at the exit interview conducted on May 18, 1978.
j I i ~ 2.
Licensee Actions on Previous Inspection Findings , The licensee actions on previous inspection findings were not , i reviewed during this inspection.
i ,
- ~
- * * -
~ ..- . , ~_.-~~~- w:.-x.
, _ _ ___ .
- . .
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-335/78-13 and 50-389/78-6 1-2 . . 3.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable. items, items of noncomplience, or deviations.
Unresolved items disclosed during the inspection are discussed in Paragraph 5.c.
4.
Independent Inspection Effort The inspector conducted a walk-through inspection observing the construction status, work activities underway and the general housekeeping conditions for Unit 2's intake structure, turbine generator building, auxiliary building and reactor containment building.
Within the areas examined there were no items of noncompliance identified.
5.
Material Control A review was made of the below listed approved St. Lucie Unit 2 procedures for controlling the following activities: receiving, storage, identification and marking, preventive maintenance, discrepant conditions, and the licensee's implementation of these procedures was examined.
Administrative Site Procedure or Quality Instruction No.
Title . ASP-3, Rev. O Material Contrcl ASP-17, Rev. 1 Preventive Maintenance QI-7.1, Rev. 2 Instructions for Receiving Inspection of Seismic or Safety Related Material QI-15.1, Rev. 4 Identification and control of Discrepant Conditions a.
Infraction Item No. 389/78-06-01 Material Control - Failure to Follow Procedures The following four examples of nonconformance with FPL Procedure j ASP-3 were identified as one infraction item for Unit 2.
I Procedure ASP-3, paragraph 8.2.4.2 states, " Prior to or during the off-loading operations, the Warehouseman shall apply to each - prenumbered tag or pressure sensitive label which item a indicates that the item is pending QC inspection and material , release.
He shall record the purchase order number (PO#) and , '
material release number (MRR#) on the tag (or label) with !, . ... ......... -.... - - . .. - . . ,,
- M N**-
"e& g
- . , '.
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-335/78-13 and 50-389/78-6 I-3 . waterproof markers.
He shall record the tag (or label) numbers and location on the NRR form."
, (1) Contrary to the above, on May 16, 1978, the RII inspector found no PO numbers on the pending inspection labels attached to reinforcing steel located in the auxiliary building laydown area for rebar lots bearing MRR Nos. 08946 and 08975.
Likewise on May 17, 1978, pipe spool pieces located around N7 field storage area were found to contain pending inspection lables with NRR No.08754 but no PO number was indicated on the subject labels.
~ (2) Contrary to the above, on May 15, 1978, the RII inspector found that Warehouse G-2 contained three or four pallets of water-stop material and only one pallet of the group was properly tigged with a pending inspection tag.
The responsible stores supervisor took immediate corrective action to this matter.
, (3) Contrary to the above, Warehouse F4 was found to contain 2 reels of grounding wire (MRR No. E00246). Approximately one month had lapsed since the delivery of the subject items , and the date QC receiving inspection was performed on the items, indicating that the items should have been in an ' I impending inspection status during the interim period.
Ilowever, the tag (or label) numbers of the subject impending inspection tags were not properly recorded on the MRR form as , required by procedure.
Procedure ASP-3, paragraph 8.2.4.7 states, "For conforming items, the Storekeeper shall remove the pending inspection tag (or label), and he shall apply the unique identification number to the item (i.e. MRR number and Quality Group Designation number)."
(4) Contrary to the above, Warehouse G-1 was found to contain several boxes of Boric Acid Concentrator (a conforming item) in the warehouse's controlled temperature - humidity room that did not have proper identification on them in that the quality group designation was missing on the boxes.
The responsible stores supervisor took immediate action to this i - j matter.
' b.
Infraction Item No. 389/78-06-02 Preventive Maintenance - Failure to Follow Procedures Procedure ASP-17, paragraph 7.2 specifies, "The process Control
Engineer shall be responsible for implementation of this . procedure." Paragraph 8.6 furtner states, " process Control shall i monitor all maintenance delineated by the Resident Engineer Office, ensuring these have been performed on schedule."
i h- % w - n w+w- ~ . -. - ~ .
, , .. . .
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-335/78-13 and 50-389/78-6 I-4 . Contrary to the above, safety injection pump motor (MRR # E-00100, P0. No. CE-13171) preventive maintenance records reviewed indicate that the subject motor has been receiving monthly shaft rotation since the program starting date (February 2,1978); whereas, CEND-353, Rev. 6, paragraph 4.2.19 specifies rotation by hand every two weeks to preclude bearing damage.
In addition, Side 2 of Attachment No. I to ASP-17 " Preventive Maintenance Requirement" specifies a two-week frequency for the subject motor shaft rotation.
The above two infractions are considered to be in noncompliance with Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 as implemented by FPL's Topical Quality Assurance Report (TQAR) Section 5.1.
- c.
Unresolved Item No. 389/78-06-03 Control and Handling of Discrepant Conditions ' . The RII inspector had difficulty differentiating between i " conforming items" and " discrepant items" placed in a hold condition at the sites southwest field storage area due to the various obscure segregation methods being employed as permitted by procedure. There was insufficient time for the inspector to , fully research the matter; therefore, this entire matter was addressed as an unresolved item which the licensee is currently i
evaluating.
6.
Audit Review The TQAR, Section 18.0 titled " Audits" specifies that a comprehensive system of planned and periodic audits shall be carried out to verify compliance with all aspects of the quality assurance program and to determine the effectiveness of the program. Audit results are to be , ! documented and reviewed by management having responsibility in the area audited.
The following FPL QA audits were examined by the RII Inspector for deficiencies found, corrective actions specified, l completeness and their implementation in accordance with the l licensee's Prodedure No. QP 18.1, " Conduct of Quality Assurance Department Quality Audits."
! l l j Audit No.
Subject
QAC-77-40 Field Material in Storage l QAC-77-65 Preventative Maintenance QAC-77-75 Cleanliness and Housekeeping l ... I l Within the scope of the audit review, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
._ x...... .... - _
. .. . . RII Rpt. Nos. 50-335/78-13- ' and 50-389/78-6 I-5 7.
Licensee Identified Items 50.55(e) Prior to this inspection, the licensee identified an item which was considered potentially reportable under 10 CFR 50.55(e).
The item is as follows: ~ (Closed) Item 389/78-06-04 Deficiency in Design of Westinghouse (W) 4.16 KV Switchgear The licensee advised RII on April 6,1978, that as a result of recent seismic tests on similar equipment (W) has determined that the potential transformer secondary disconnecting contact assemblies supplied in this equipment could become dislodged from their normal positions under a seismic event, and open circuiting or shorting of the secondary circuits might result. FPL submitted a final report on this ' deficiency (L-78-145) dated April 21, 1978. FPL has determined that -- this deficiency does not require utensive evaluation, redesign or repair to enable the switchgear to meet the seismic performance requirements.
(W) has available a modification kit to correct the defect in the design. The seismic adequacy of this modification will be reviewed along with the rest of the seismic report for this equipment.
Once the seismic report and equipment are deemed acceptable, the hold on the switchgear will be removed allowing it to be installed with any required modifications.
The RII inspector ' visually inspected the subject switchgear on site and confirmed that this equipment was being stored in a hold (segregated) status. RII has no further, questions regarding this matter at this time.
i 8.
IE Bulletins . a.
(Closed) IEB 78-01 Flammable Contact - Arm Retainers in GE CR 120A Relays The licensee submitted an interim response to the subject IEB on March 17,1978 (L-78-97) and a final letter of response (L-78-133) dated April 14, 1978. GE Type CR120A relays will be used in St. Lucie Unit 2 motor control centers; however a Valox material (which is self-extinguishing and flame resistant) will be used for the contact-arm retainers in St. Lucie Unit 2 relays. RII has no further questions regarding this matter at this time.
. b.
(Closed) IEB 78-02 Terminal Block Qualification ! The licensee submitted interim responses to the subject IEB on February 22, 1978 (L-78-64), and March 31, 1978 (L-78-113).
' . - - I FPL's final letter of response dated April 17, 1978, states unprotected terminal blocks will not be used on safety related systems inside the containment at St. Lucie Unit 2.
RII has no further questions regarding this matter at this time.
. .. ...... . . ... ... - - _.
- . , k s-. r-- .- ~,n, _ _ _ _,_ __ _,_ _
. . . , , RII Rpt. Nos. 50-335/78-13 and 50-389/78-6 I-6 . . c.
(Closed) IEB 78-04 Environmental Qualification of Certain Stem Mounted Limit Switches Inside Reactor Containment . The licensee responded by letter (L-78-157) dated April 28, 1978, stating that reviews have found that neither NAMCO Model D2400X nor EA-170-302 snap lock limit switches are used in any safety-related equipment in the primary containment; therefore the subject IEB is not applicable to St. Lucie Unit 2.
RII has no further questions regarding this matter at this time.
d.
(Open) IEB 78-05 Malfunctioning of Circuit Breaker Auxiliary Contact Mechanism - General Electric Model CR 105X , . Licensee response to the subject IEB is due June 14, 1978.
9.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on May 18, 1978. The inspector summarized the scope of the inspection as follows: material control; construction status and general housekeeping; audit review, the handling of licensee identified items and IEBs; described the details concerning two new items of noncompliance (paragraphs 5.a and 5.b) and discussed the details concerning unresolved item 389/78-06-03 (paragraph 5.c).
The licensee raised some questions concerning the , . severity levels of the noncompliances identified but had no dissenting comments.
. . . f em
t .
e- .m$ gg g ED y.r..___...._.. __m _ . _ __ ,
'
- <
.,, ,
RII Rpt. Nos'. 50-335/78-13 and 50-389/78-06 II-1 b DETAILS II Prepared by: . B'.R.Crowley,Metallurgf[al Date Engineer Engineering Support Section' No. 2 Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Dates raf Inspection: May 15-18, 1978 M!M d' 7 [[ Reviewed byC T. E. Conlon, Chief 'Date
Engineering Support Section No. 2 Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch ,
1.
Persons Contacted Florida Power and Light Company (FP&L) a.
l
- C. M. Wethy, Plant Manager (Unit 1)
G. M. Vaux, QC Supervisor (Unit 1)
- A. W. Bailey, QA Supervisor (Unit 1)
- G. Gotch, GO PRN Staff Specialist
- C. A. Wells, Operations Supervisor (Unit 1)
- J. E. Bowers, Operations Superintendent (Unit 1)
- W. W. Kitchens, Staff Technical Engineer (Unit 1)
- R. K. Ryall, Reactor Engineering Supervisor (Unit 1)
- N. G. Roos, QC Engineer (Unit 1)
T. M. Lyons, Supervisor II, QC (Unit 1) E. G. Becker, QC Engineer (Unit 1)
- B. J. Escue, Site Manager (Unit 2)
- W. M. Hayward, QA Supervisor (Unit 2)
- J. W. Adams, QA Engineer (Unit 2)
b.
Contractor Organizations (1) Ebasco Services, Inc. (Ebasco)
- R. A. Garramore, Senior Resident Engineer
' ' (2) Chicago Bridge and Iron Company (CB&I) - l .
- C. L. Fields, Project Welding and QA Superintendent
- G. Rowe, QA Engineer
. vr -- n. W== O ,. ,.w.......m..~. ._- --
. . - . ,. . RII Rpt. Nos. 50-335/78-13 and 50-389/78-06 II-2 - . 2.
Licensee Actions on Previous Inspection Findings (Unit 2) , (0 pen) Unresolved item (77-07-03): Surface rust on stainless steel ~ pipe in storage.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's actions to date.
Corrective actions have been initiated and documentation of these actions is in process.
Item will be reviewed further after final documentation.
3.
Unresolved Items No unresolved items were dentified during this inspection.
- . 4.
Independent Inspection Effort (Unit 2) The following areas of interest were examined by the inspector: A general walk-through inspection of the site was made.
Site a.
housekeeping and general construction and welding activities / were observed and compared with the requirements of Construction Site Procedure (CSP) Number CSP-20, " General Instruction for Housekeeping During Construction".
b.
The storage area for piping materials was inspected and compared with the requirements of Administrative Site Procedure (ASP) Number ASP-3, " Material Control".
In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations ' were identified.
.. 5.
Inservice Inspection - Review of Program (Unit 1) The inspector reviewed the licensee's Inservice Inspection (ISI) program to ascertain completeness and conformance with regulatory requirements and licensee commitments.
The long-term ISI program is detailed in FP&L "St. Lucie Plant Unit 1, Long-Term Inservice Examination Plan, Class 1, 2, and 3 Components and Systems", dated . November 1977, which requires ISI in accordance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1974 Edition with addenda j through the summer of 1975.
l The program for the recently completed ISI is detailed in SwRI " Project Plan for the 1978 Inservice Examination of St. Lucie i l Plant, Unit 1" and " Nuclear Quality Assurance Program Manual".
. . _.
u M %* es As* *== wh, ,
' . ~ < . ,. . RII Rpt. Nos. 50-335/78-13 and 50-389/78-06 II-3 ' . In addition to the above SwRI program, additional FP&L requirements are specified in the following FP6L procedures: F " Schedule of Quality Assurance Department Audit Activities", QP 18.2, Rev. 5 ' Form QP 18.2-1 dated 12/15/77 " Qualification of QA Audit and QC Inspection Personnel", QP 2.8, Rev. O " Audit Program Plans and Schedules", QI 18, Rev. 1 . " Corrective Action and Audit Procedure", QP 16.1, Rev. 1 . " Quality Control Surveillances", QI 18-PR/PSL-2 " Plant Inservice Inspection Team Charter", QI 10 PR/PSL-4, Rev. O " Quality Assurance Records", QI 17-PR/PSL-1, Rev. 1 "The Collection and Storage of Quality Assurance Records for Nuclear Power Plant", QP 17.1, Rev. 1 The above program and additiona: FP&L requirements were reviewed in the areas of organizational structure; personnel responsibilities, training and qualifications; audit program; general QA requirements including specification of required documentation and control of established ISI program; generation and maintenance of required quality documentation; identification of components covered by the program; establishment, review control, and availability of work and inspection procedures; control of special processes and techniques; corrective action procedures; document control including control of quality records; control of examinations and examination equipment; the scope of the inspection; the inspection schedule including inspection intervals; and the control and storage of NDE records.
In the areas reviewed, no items of noncompliance or deviations were , identified.
6.
Inservice Inspection - Data Review and Evaluation (Unit 1) , The inspector reviewed the following rough NDE data and coupared i i the results with the applicable requirements of the ISI program as defined in the documents noted in paragraph 5. above.
The final ,, ISI report has not been completed.
- " - - - - - . S GO' h *W9M * W 6'& Mg gh
<
. , ' . ,. ' . . RII Rpt. Nos. 50-335/78-13 and 50-389/78-06 II-4 . Data sheets for the visual inspection of the interior of the a.
reactor vessel were reviewed and compared with requirements of CE Procedure 19367-ESS-106, " Procedure for Visual Examination of the Interior of the Florida Power and Light St. Lucie Unit 1 Reactor Vessel". ' b.
For Line 30"-RC-112, Weld 3LU-I, the following SwRI NDE record sheets were reviewed in the areas of recalibration records, recording of examination data and indications, evaluation of examination by a Level II or Level III examiner, and compliance with procedure used for evaluation: SwRI Sheet Nos.
300001 180001 160003 190002 ' ' 250004 For Line 30"-RC-112, Weld 7, the following SwRI NDE record c.
sheets were reviewed in the areas of recalibration records, recording of examination data and indications, evaluation of examination by a Level II or Level III examiner, proper evalua-i tion of indications, and compliance with procedure used for ' evaluation: , SwRI' Sheet Nos.
300012 110020 i . , 180017 250008 180033 250018 ^ 130013 190005 160084 , 190030 190003 ' 130017 190026 310005 . . l d.
For FE 3311 flange bolting in Line 3"-SI-140, SwRI record sheets 300101 and 280029 were reviewed and compared with SwRI ', _ Visual Inspection Procedure 900-1.
In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations - were identified.
l 's -. + k W w 'h p.W1 ?W ~w ~ ~ -- ~*.g,.=: w. ~. _
- ,
.. . . RII Rpt. Nos. 50-335/78-13 and 50-389/78-06 11-5 . . 7.
Nondestructive Examination (Unit 1) The inspector reviewed the licensee's nondestructive examination (NDE) practices applicable to maintenance work to determine whether regulatory requirements and approved codes were being met.
The NDE practices reviewed were being controlled by FP&L Procedure QI-10-PR/PSL-3, " Technical Specification Control - RCS Corrective Maintenance", which specified the use of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section XI, 1971 Edition with addenda through the winter of 1972.
The following practices were reviewed and/or observed: Personnel qualification and training records for one Level III a.
and one Level II NDE examiner were reviewed and compared with " the requirements of FP&L Procedure QI 9-PR/PSL-2, " Control of Liquid Penetrant Testing".
~ b.
FP&L Procedure 0010465, Rev. 1, " Liquid Penetrant Testing" was reviewed and compared with the requirements of the above referenced code, c.
The inspector witnessed liquid penetrant (PT) inspection of repair welds on mounting flanges for safety relief valves MS 8201 and 8202.
In addition, plant work orders (PWO) Nos.1191 and 1192, which covered the repair work and inspection of the repairs, were reviewed.
, During review of documentation of the above PT inspections, the inspector found that the licensee procedure for documenta-tion of testing was not being followed.
(1) Quality Instruction QI-10-PR/PSL-3, paragraph 5.2, requires in part that, " Applicable Plant Work Orders shall be prepared, reviewed and processed according to AP #0010432' " and " Inspection hold points, examination requirements, ... and examination acceptance criteria shall be inserted by QC, during review by this procedure." Contrary to this requirement, the examination requirement and examination acceptance criteria (procedure no. and/or other acceptance requirement) had not been entered on the PWO.
. (2) Paragraph 5.b of the same procedure requires in part ! that, " Examinations shall be documented by the inspector performing or witnessing examinations on a Nondestructive I
Examination Report Form QI 10-PR/PSL-3-1." Contrary to " this requirement, the form was not filled out and some of the information required on the form, e.g. acceptance criteria, was not available on any other record.
. N
- - - -
. - _ , , Wj ^*****%*A
- * * -
fee ,
- . ,'. . . . RII Rpt. Nos. 50-335/78-13
and 50-389/78-06 II-6 . Failure to follow the procedure indicated in the two examples above is a noncompliance with Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 as implemented by the FSAR, paragraph 17.1.5.1 and paragraph 5.2.1 of the FP&L QA Manual. This is a deficiency and is identified as item 335/78-13-01.
d.
The following records for veld no. 1, ISO IT-AJ1, at valve I-V00101 (Containment pressurization valve for ILRT) were reviewed and compared to the code listed above: (1) Radiographic film (2) PWO 3975 - including QC reports for PT, RT, Visual, and fitup ' In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified, except as noted in paragraph c.
. 8.
Containment (Structural Steel Welding) - Observation of Work and Work Activities (Unit 2) The inspector observed the welding activities described below relative to containment structural steel welding to determine , whether the requirements of applicable specifications and procedures were being met.
Welding is being performed in accordance with the ! ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Subsection NE, 1971 Edition with addenda through the winter of 1972 as implemented by Ebasco Project Specification No. FLO-2998-757, "Ebasco Specifica-tion Steel Containment Vessel."
. The following in-process welding was observed: a.
Containment Bottom, Ring B - Seam G
Maintenance Hatch - Seam 90A Personnel Lock Insert - Seam 81A 8th Ring - 7-8 Girth 0 -90 9thRing-8-9 Girth 0-g0 9th Ring - 8-9 Girth 270 -0 9thRing-8-9 Girth 180,-2f0 8th Ring - 7-8 Girth 270 -0 8th Ring - 7-8 Girth 180 -270 ' For these welds, the following areas were examined; weld identification; joint preparation and alignment; evidence of ' _ QC verification of fitup; use of specified weld procedures; welder qualifications; use of specified weld materials; , specified NDE performed at proper state of fabrication; and I evidence of periodic welding variable checks, as applicable to each weld.
-l . ~~ m.
, .
- w....a f.*
...
7- ,
.*, s .. . RII Rpt. Nos. 50-335/78-13 and 50-389/78-06 II-7 . b.
Working site welding material issue locations were examined for storage conditions, temperature control, issue records, and handling of returned materials.
' c.
Welding areas were examined for the presence of uncontrolled welding materials.
d.
Work site was inspected for the presence of a sufficient number of adequately qualified QA and QC personnel commensurate with the work in progress.
I'n the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
9.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in paragraph I at the conclusion of the inspection and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
In addition to the general scope of the inspection, the noncompliance of paragraph 7.c. was discussed in detail.
The licensee did not comment.
In reference to the unresolved item of paragraph 2, the licensee agreed to , . complete documentation of corrective actions.
i . . S . !. . J e - M ^. -
, _ ' _ _. .. - '4 o
. , ~ s e8"%g UNITED STATES h p , jo,, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION R EGloN 11 g g -
- -
eE 101 M ARIETTA STREET,N.W.
k
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 , l .. . '
AUG 2 91979 In Reply Refer To: RII: BRC 50-389/78-7 -,- Florida Power and Light Company - Advanced Systems and Technology ATTN: Dr. R. E. Uhrig, Vice President P. O. Box 529100 Miami, Florida 33152 Gentlemen: This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. B. R. Crowley of this office on July 18-21, 1978, of activities authorized by NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-144 for the St. Lucie Unit 2 facility, and to the discussion of our findings held with Mr. B. J. Escue at the conclusion
of the inspection.
! Areas examined during the inspection and our findings;ere discussed in the enclosed inspection report. Within these areas, the inspection , consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the inspector.
Within the scope of this inspection, no items of noncompliance were disclosed.
- L.
We have examined actions you have taken with regard to previously reported unresolved items. The status of these items is discussed in the enclosed report.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice", ( Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public j l Document Room.
If this report contains any information that you (or l your contractor) believe to be proprietary, it is necessary that you make a written application within 20 days to this office to withhold such information from public disclosure. Any such application must include a full statement of the reasons on the basis of which it is ( claimed that the information is proprietary, and should be prepared l so that proprietary information identified in t}ie application is - contained'in a separate part of the document.
If we do not hear ' from you in this regard within the specified period, the report will be placed in the Public Document Room.
I FotA-1N-243 l Z L /12.5' < - - .
. .... -. __ - . t - .
. ' ' <- ' ' , , . . Florida Power and Light Comp &ny - -2-AUG 2 9 M Should you have any questions concerning this letter, we will be glad " to discuss them with you.
Sincerely, < J Charles E.
phy, Ch ef Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch
Enclosure:
Inspection Report No. 50-389/78-7 '
REGION 11 p g
3 g 101 M ARIETTA STREET, N.W.
- ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30303
, S %Q..CI,o ... . ... Report No.: 50-389/78-7 Docket No.: 50-389 i i - License No.: CPPR-144 Licensee: Florida Power and Light Company P. O. Box 013100 - Miami, Florida 33101 Facility Name: St. Lucie Unit 2 Inspection at: Hutchinson Island, Florida Inspection Conducted: July 18-21, 1978 Inspector: B. R. Crowley nev& [ZI7 Reviewed b j T. E. Conlon, Chief Date Engineering Support.Section No. 2
Reactor Construction and Engineering n
Support Branch
1 ' Inspection Summary Inspection on July 18-21, 1978 (Report No. 50-389/78-7) - Areas Inspected: Followup on unresolved items; structural steel . ""- containment; major equipment supports. The inspection involved 25 inspector-hours on site by one NRC inspector. There were no Part 21 or 50.55(e) items included in this inspection.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
_.
, -e
- 7
^ ,. _/3 em i ( hE ' '[k .. ..-
~ - , - _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . N- " o - s , , . RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-7 I-1 . . DETAILS I Prepared by: [!/.7 Y e B~. R. Crowley, Metallurgi(al Engineer Date Engineering Support Section No. 2 , Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Dates of Inspection: July 18-21, 1978 Reviewed
8 T. E. Conlon, Chief /Dath Engineering. Support Section No. 2 Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch 1.
Persons Contacted a.
Florida Power and Light Company (FP&L)
- B. J. Escue, Site Manager
!
- N. T. Weems, Assistant QA Manager i
- W. M. Hayward, QA Engineer
,' !
- J. W. Adams, QA Engineer, Mechanical
- E. W. Sherman, QA Engineer i
- R. E. Vaeth, Area Stores Supervisor
' B. M. Parks, Quality Engineer, Mechanical H. D. Averbach, QC Pipe Welding Supervisor J. R. Behres, Mechanical Area QC Supervisor , b.
Contractor Organizations-L- Chicago Bridge and Iron Company (CB&I)
- C. L. Fields, Project Welding and QA Superintendent
- G. E. Rowe, QA Engineer K. A. Franz, Welding QA Engineer In addition to the above, the inspector interviewed other licensee and contractor personnel.
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
., .. _ _.
, ..... . -,. - ,.. m- -- w ,-
v-,
- - - - - , - - - ,,
__ , '
,, .. . ' ~ , , , . -
RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-7 I-2 . . 2.
Licensee Actions on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved item (77-07-03): Surface rust on stainless "- steel pipe in storage.
The licensee has determined that the rust was most likely caused by improper handling by the piping vendor.
< Corrective action has been taken as documented by licensee memo to , file dated 7/18/78. This item is closed.
(open) Unresolved item (78-06-03): Control and Handling of Discrepant Conditions. The inspector observed storage conditions in warehouse G-2 and the southwest field storage area.
" Inspection Hold" areas are well defined and material on hold and material pending inspection is well segregated from accepted material. However, the procedure controlling these activities is being revised. This item remains open pending final procedure revision.
3.
Unresolved Items
No unresolved items were identified during this inspection.
- l 4.
Independent Inspection Effort b l The inspector observed the welding activities described below
' relative to containment structural steel welding to determine whether the requirements of applicable specifications and procedures were being met.
Welding is being performed in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Subsection NE, - 1971 Edition with addenda through the winter of 1972 as implemented
- .;
by Ebasco Project Specification No. FLO-2998-757, "Ebasco Specification Steel Containment Vessel."
, ! l a.
Seam B to C, "90 degrees - 180 degrees" on the bottom head was
observed during in process welding.
Weld appearance, use of the l correct veld material, preheat, and welder qualification were examined.
! b.
Ring 9 to 10, "90 ddgrees - 180 degrees" and "180 degrees - 270 l degrees" welds were observed in the finished weld condition after preparation for NDE. Weld surface condition was examined.
- c.
In process Helium Leak Rate Testing of bottom head, ring A, seams 1A and 2A was observed.
, , t i i -..., - _ _ _ _ ,, _
. _.. _ _ _ - _ _ _ , _ . .
- !
o ) ' . _ . RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-7 I-3 . . In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
- 5.
IE Bulletins (Open) IEB 78-05: Malfunctioning of Circuit Breaker Auxiliary Contact Mechanism-General Electric Model CR 105X The licensee responded by letter (L-78-219) dated June 26, 1978, stating that FP&L has requested from all suppliers of electrical equipment with a potential for use of the GE CR 105X auxiliary contact mechanisms a response in writing concerning its use.
If these contacts are found in equipment to be supplied to St. Lucie Unit 2, the contacts will be replaced or modified in accordance with the GE service letter.
The results of this investigation will be available by September 1, 1978.
, 6.
Containment (Structural Steel Welding) - Review of Quality Records . The inspector reviewed the quality records desdribed below relative , to containment welding to determine whether thE records were in conformance with established procedures and whether the records l reflected work accomplishment consistent with applicable requir(ments.
, In addition to the code and specification noted in paragraph 4. above, the records were compared with the requirements of CB&I implementing procedures spe~cified in CBI " Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual for ASME, ~ III Products, Division 4, Construction."
-- The following records were reviewed: a.
Records relative to visual and dimensional inspections, weld history, preheat and interpass temperature, NDE, weld material control, welder qualification and inspector qualification were - _ reviewed for the following welds: Ring 2-3, 90 degrees - 180 degrees i l Ring 3, Seam B - j Ring 6-7, 180 degrees - 270 degrees i Ring 10-11, 270 degrees - 360 degrees Ring 11, Sean A , ! , . Ring,7, Sean F ,. > -,, _ .. ! ' ! - -. - - .. -- . _ - .. . . _ _.
. _ _ _. .. -. - - .
- . , _ . -
- .v:
. - - 'g . . . RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-7 I-4 . Records reviewed, as applicable to the above welds, included: (1) CB&I Record Dwgs. R8 and R9 (2) CB&I Record Dwg. Table (RDT) Nos. 85, 83, 97, 96, 109 and 107 (3) " Performance Qualification Test" forms for welders , (4) " Record of Nondestructive Examination Performance," "NDE . Certification Data," and " Individual Training and Indoctrination Summary" for inspection personnel (5) Radiographic film - reviewed RT reports and a sample of film for each weld (6) " Work Record" for fitup, preheat and interpass temperature checks b.
" Welding Material Authorization and Release Report" Nos. 26, 28, and 29 were reviewed.
These reports document receipt inspection and material certification.
I A sample of " Daily Weld Material Distribution Log" sheets l covering the dates for the above welds were reviewed.
6 j c.
CB&I "QA Program Audit 1978-2" and FP&L Audit No.
! QAC-PSL2-78-12 were reviewed. The corrective action for the
finding of paragraph 6.2.1 (MT inspection not on master checklist) of the CB&I audit was reviewed for timeliness and adequacy.
d.
CB&I "Nonconformance Control List" for nonconformances 36, 34, ' 30 and 20 was reviewed to determine if the records of the . nonconformances were complete, legible, retrievable and properly closed out.
In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Containment (Steel Structures and Supports) - Review'of Quality - Records.
, Quality records for containment plate were reviewed to determine whether records reflected material characteristics consistent with applicable requirements.
See paragraph 4. and 6. for the applicable code, specification, and QA procedures.,, . - '" Shop' Release fo'r Shipment Checklists," which document receipt inspection and material certification, and " Material Heat No. Sheets," which correlate plate serial numbers with plate heat numbers, were reviewed for the following plates: Shell Plates - Serial Nos. 12-4-15, 18, 33, 34, 31, 35, 36, 37, 79, 81, 80, 87, 78, and 89 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
.. . 'r.
. ,~. , , . . RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-7 I-5 . Roof Plates - Serial Nos. 11-4-1, 2, 3, and 4 Top Head Plates - Serial Nos. 11-3-10, 14, 16, 12, 13, and 11-15-1 In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations . were identified.
8.
Containment (Structural Steel Weldine) - Review of Ouality Assurance Implementing Procedures.
The inspector reviewed the quality assurance implementing procedures listed below, related to major equipment support welding, to determine whether adequate procedures are included or referenced in the QA manual.
Design, fabrication and erection of class 1 structural steel equipment supports is being accomplished in accordance with Ebasco Specification FLO-2998-761.
WeldingandNDEwillbeinaccordancewithAWNStructuralWelding Code DI.1-74.
' ! Within the areas of nondestructive examination, calibration of welding equipment, control of preheat and interpass temperatures and control of repairs, the inspector reviewed the following , procedures: , _._ CSP 32, Rev. 1 - Field Welding Control CSP 10, Rev. 1 - Weld Repair Procedure QI 9.2, Rev. 1 - Inspection of Field Welding QI 9.3, Rev. 1 - Radiographic Inspection QI 9.4, Rev. 1 - Magnetic Particle Inspection AQR 10.2 - Nondestructive Examinations AQR 15.4 - Weld Repair Data In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
9.
Containment (Steel Structures and Supports) - Observation of Work and Work Activities - 'The iispe'c' tor " observed partially completed work and work records for the polar crane girder to determine whether activities relative to this structure were being accomplished in accordance with applicable . - - - - ,,. _ - - - -,,,. _,,, - -, - - - -
_ m . e,
- '-An
' . ,. . .~ - -- 7- , , . . RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-7 I-6 .. .
requirements.
The girder is being installed in accordance the code, specification and QA procedures referred to in paragraphs 4. and 6. above.
,, The following work activities and records were examined: a.
In-process fitup work was observed on partially' fit assembly, "O degrees - 90 degrees." Evidence of QC inspection and sign off of fitup was noted.
, b.
Locating assembly "270 degrees - O degrees" in place on the containment shell was observed.
c.
For Seam 8-A on assembly "270 degrees - O degrees", RDT 63 and RT report 16 were reviewed.
d.
For Seam 4-A on assembly "O degrees - 90 degrees," RDT 62 and RT report 11 were reviewed.
,
e.
Training and qualification records for personnel involved in irspectionandNDEofaboveactivitieswp,rereviewed.
f.
Record dwg. R15 was reviewed.
i' g.
" Shop Release For Shipment Checklist" and " Material Heat No.
Sheet" for plates Serial Nos. 37-A-4, 10, 12, and 13 were reviewed.
, In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations -- were identified.
10. Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives denoted in paragraph I at the conclusion of the inspection and summarized ~ the scope and findings of the inspection.
In addition to the general scope of the inspection, the licensee action on the two unresolved items of paragraph 2 were discussed. The licensee had no dissenting comments.
, .. -..
- . , . _,. _ .
- _.., - .- _. - - - -. _ _. _. - __ -- - - - - - . - -. - }}