IR 05000352/1976009
| ML19275A886 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 10/13/1976 |
| From: | Elgasser T, Heishman R, Toth A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19275A881 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-352-76-09, 50-352-76-9, NUDOCS 7910220158 | |
| Download: ML19275A886 (21) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. In:I For= II (Jan 75) (R ev) . . U. S. NUCLEAR RECUL\\ TORY CC:CIISSION OFFICE OF I:i3PECTION CD F.NFORCDiE:;T -
REGION I
IE Inspection Report No: 50-352/76-09 Docket No: 50-352 Licensee: Philadelphia Elcetric Ccmpany License No: CPPR-lC6
2301 Market Street Priority: -- Philadelchia, Pennsvivania 19101 Category: A Safeguards
Group-Location: Linerick Unit I. Limerick, Pennsvivania Type of Licensce: ut?D-1065 V m ( <' M Type of inspection: Routine. Unannouncad D.cs of Inspection: Septenber 11, 14-17, 27, 1976 Dates of Ptevious Inspection: August 16-19, 22, 25, 1976 A Jl / ~ C C Reporting Inspector: - , aca-Inspector DATE " A. D. Toth, / Accompanying Inspectors: AM - /O " O ~ [[ ' ~ T. C. K sser, Reactor Inspector DATE ' / f W., s:- 7-
' - ,. ./ , W. F. Sanders, Reactor Inspector DATE DATE Other Accc=panyin;; Personnel: v ~.- DATE g Reviewed Ey: </7 /0 -O ~7k 3. F. Heishman, Chief, Construction Projects Section DATE Reacter Construction and En;;ineering Support 3 ranch . 7910220 SF SA
- . . SUh%\\RY OF FINDINGS ' Enforcement Action Items of Nonce nliance Infractions (Details, Paragraph 3)' A.
76-09-01: Failure to i=plement specification P-303 cleanliness control require =ents for control rod drive hydraulic line contain- =ent penetrations.
B.
76-09-02: Failere to maintain reinforcing steel clearances re-quired by specification C-36 and Standard ACI-318 in containment drywell wall.
C.
76-09-03: Failure to implement nonconformance control system for loss of concrete mix proportion control.
Licensee Action on Previousiv Identified Enforcement Items Not inspected.
Design Changes None identified.
Unusual Occurrences None reported.
Other Si2nificant Findines A.
Current Findings 1.
Acceptable Items The following items were inspected with respect to those aspects described in the Details of this report. No depart-ures from regulatory requirements or SAR commitments were identified, subject to any spec'ific exceptions which =ay be noted elsewhere under Enforcement Action or Current Findings of this report.
(Details, Paragraph 7, Subparagraphs as listed below).
_ h
-- .. _. . -2-Reactor Vessel Installation Equipment Tests - Transporter a.
b.
Site Preparation - Fill Place =ent Procedures.
Structural Steel and Supports Erection and Welding . c.
Procedures.
d.
Structural Steel and Equipment Support Inst 211stion.
Structural Steel and Supports Stud Welding.
e.
f.
Structural Steel and Supports Welding.
Containment Steel - Containment Dome Storage.
3h.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping Work Activities.
1.
Safety Related Piping Work Activities.
j.
Pipe Cleaning Activities.
k.
General Construction Activities.
2.
Unresolved Items The following items have been identified as unresolved.
(Details, Paragraph 4, subparagraphs as listed below): ~ a.
76-09-04: . _ .. _ Clarify Reactor Shield Inspection Item Acceptance Criteria.
_. _ _ _. b.
76-09-05: Update Spec C-9 for August 1976 PSAR Rev. for Backfill Compaction.
... . - - -... - - vvaluate Need For c.
76-09-06: Engineering Analysis of Pipe Support Adequacy Prior to Cutting of In-Place Lines.
_ Formali$ze Inspection d.
76-09-07: ~ ' - ' '~' '~ Records for Structural Steel Welding Electrical Para- =eters.
B.
Status of Previousiv Identified Unresolved Items 1.
The following ite=s have been resolved as noted: (Details, Paragraph 5, subparagraphs as listed belev): Reference: IE Inspection Report No. 50-352/76-08: Details, item 3.b. (1). IE Inspection Report No. 50-352/76-08: Details, Item 4.b.
.
- . -3-a.
76-08-3.b. (1) : Resolved: Procedures Have Been Revised to Include Criteria For Evaluating Reinforcing Steel Dama;e.
_ b.
76-08-4.b: Resolved: ?.eactor Vessel Installation Sub-contractor Inspection Scope Has Been Clarified in De-tailed Inspection Checklists.
' 2.
Certain actions have been taken on the following ite=s, but these renain unresolved as noted: (Details, Paragraph 6, subparagraphs as listed below): . Reference: IE Inspection Report No. 50-352/76-08: Details, item 4.a.
IE Inspection Report No. 50-352/76-08: Details, item 4.c.
, a.
76-08-4.a: Unresolved Ites Status: QA Personnel Training Progras Definition Has 3een Established For Reactor Vessel Installation Subcontractor RCI, But Not VSL.
b.
76-08-4.c: Unresolved Item Status: The Audit Frequency Has Been Clarified in the RCI QA Manual, But the VSL Audit Scope Has Not Yet Been Established.
, C.
Deviations None identified.
Management Interview At the conclusion of the inspection a =eeting was held at the site with representatives of the licensee and contractor organizations.
Attendees at this meeting consisted of personnel whose names are highlighted (i.e *) in paragraph 1 of Details Section of this report. The inspector su==ar-1:ed the purpose and the scope of the inspection (Details, Paragraph 2), and the results of the inspection (as listed in the " Summary of Findings".)
.
_ _ . DETAILS . 1.
Persons Cc.tacted Philadelohia Electric Comeany_ J. S. Kemper, Manager, Engineering and Research W. Vollner, Mechanical Engineer
- J. J. Clarey, Resident Engineer
- J. M. Corcoran, Site Quality Assurance Engineer
- D. A. Marascio, Quality Assurance Engineer J. T. Robb, Quality Assurance Engineer R. B. Atkinson, Quality Assurance Engineer W. T. Baxter, Quality Assurance Engineer J. Fedick, Construction Engineer
Bechtel Corcoration
- J. R. Reiney, Project Ccnstruction Manager
, E. Klossin, Lead Site Quality Assurance Engineer
- A. Veedman, Project Field Engineer M. 3rown, Project Field Quality Control Engineer R. Halk, Assistant Project Field Engineer R. Clayton, Lead Civil QC Engineer A. Shaw, Lead Civil Engineer
- R. Sevo, Quality Assuran e Engineer
- C. Vogeler, Area #1 Quality Control Engineer K. 31 shop, Lead Subcontract Engineer D. Kass, Quality Control Civil Engineer
- R. T. Baldwin, Quality Assurance Engineer E. Stankiewic:, Welding Quality Control Engineer E. Chalifoux, Welding Quality Control Engineer M. Ely, Subcontract Engineer H. Zytnik, Field Engineer, Concrete J. Hazlip, Construction Aid - Weld Rod Control J. Murphy, Foreman, Pipe Claaning Area M. Skulrak, Forenan, Pipe Fitting F. Ruff, Welder
- R. G. French, Lead Subcontract Engineer General Electric Co=cany F. Forsythe, Project Manager (
__. --. . -5-VSL Corcoration _ J. Allen, Project Manager Nooter Coreany R. Fry, General Superintendent
- S. Larson, Quality Control Representative Ken Tator Associates C. Holl, Coating Specialist 2.
General ' A preinspection meeting was held onsite en September 14, 1976, with the senior licensee representative, to discuss the scope of the inspection, and work progress or occurrences which =ay bear upon ' the inspection.
The status of previously identified itens, corrective actions or other outstanding ite=s were discussed.
A -- - -: 2 3 pector stated that th'e scope of'the' inspection would include ' review of the status of unresolved items, observation of tests of the reactor vessel transporter equipnent and possibly the transport of the reactor vessel onsite, examination of the quality assurance program and procedures for the onsite reactor shield fabricator / erector and observation of work in progress, observation of structural steel erection work and welding, review of fill placement procedures and work, observation of safety related piping activities, observation of steel storage such as the containment done and reactor vessel ring girder, and observation of general construction activities.
The licensee representative stated that there is no backfill work in progress for safety related work, and none has been done to date.
The inspector 'was "also af.. the site September 11, 1976, prior to the preinspection meeting, to observe the weekend activities of testing the reactor vessel onsite transporter.
.
- . -6-3.
Items of Noncomoliance/Deviatiens The following items were identified during this inspection, which represent noncompliance with NRC regulaticas or deviation from - commitments described in the PSAR or other formal communications between the licensee and NRC: a.
76-09-01: Infraction: Failure to Imolement Soecification P-303 Cleanliness Control Recuirements For Control Rod ' Drive Hydraulic Line Containment Penetrations Criterion V of Appendix 3 of 10 CFR 50 requires that " activities affecting quality. shall be accomplished in accordance .. with these instructions, procedures, or drawings."
Applicable instructions of job specification F-303 part 5.3.1 require that " protective closures and seals shall be applied to component openings to maintain cleanliness prior to, during,
and subsequent to erection, and closures shall be designed and utilized in a =anner that will be resistant to damage or loss, inclement weather conditions Part 6.3.3.2. 8 require s " ... that openings and pipe ends shall be sealed at all times except when they must be unsealep to carry out necessary , , febrication operations.
(Claes 3 ccmponents, as is CRD piping per F-303 table V.)
- Contrary to the above, the CRD penetrations were on September 27, 1976 observed to be uncovered and dust, particulates, and paint overspray were observed in the open socket weld ends.
b.
76-09-02: Infraction: Failure to Maintain Reinforcine Steel Clearances Recuired by Soecification C-36 and Standard ACI-318 in Containment Drvwell Wall - - Criterion V of Appendix B of 10 CFR 50 requires that " activities affecting quality... shall be accomplished in accordance with these instructions, procedures, or drawings."
PSAR Section 5.3.5.2 requires that construction of Class I seismic structures shall be in accordance with ACI-318-71.
Job Specification C-36, Rev. 8, Paragraph 6.1.4 requires that "The spacing of reinforcement shall be in accordance with A CI-318. " Section 7.4.1 of this standard requires "The clear distance between parallel bars in a layer shall not be less than the nominal diameter of the bars nor 1 inch."
_ % mm
-. __.
__ - . . -7- . Contrary to the above, on September 15, 1976, concrete repair work above the personnel hatch of the containment drywell wall uncovered #9 and #14 parallel reinforcing steel tied together - in direct contact at two places.
Following identificatiin of this noncompliance by the inspector, ' the licensee site quality assurance organization immediately issuad finding reports No. C-88 and C-89, which require evalu-ation and corrective action by the contractor. The licensee's response to a previous noncompliance regarding reinforcing steel clearances is documented in his August 27, 1975 letter to NRC.
.... -. .. c.
76-09-03: Infraction: Failure To I=olecent Nonconformance Control System For Loss of Concrete Mix Procortion Control . Criterion XV of Appendix 3 of 10 CFR 50 requires that "Non-conforming ite=s shall be reviewed and accepted, rejected, repaired, or reworked in accordance with docu=ented procedures."
Criterion XVII ruquires that inspection and test records shall ' as a minimum identify the inspector or data recorder, the type of observation, the results, the acceptability and the action taken in connection with any deficiencies noted.
Bechtel Field Inspection Manual Procedure G-3 Rev. 6 requires that nonconfor=ances shall be identified and reported in a controlled manner.
It provides that use-as-is determinations require Project Engineer approval prior to imple=entation, and concurrence by the Project Field Quality Control Engineer.
It requires documentation of engineering rationale where a use-as-is determination is made.
It provides a standard Non-conformance Report for the mechanics of cbtaining and documenting the above actions.
Contrary to the above, on September 16, 1976, the quality control inspection reports for June 23-24, 1976 concrete placement of the containment drywell walls did not reflect : (a) that concrete ingredient proportions were suspect for six truck loads of concrete, and may not have been within specifi-cationsi (b) that this situation had been reviewed by appro-priate personnel;(c) that the concrete use-as-is decision was supported by engineering rationale; ((d) that this matter was identified and reported in the controlled =anner provided by the nonconformance report system.
. M
.... .. . -. -.. .. . - -... - , -S-On Septe=ber 16, 1976, the licensee prepared nonconfor=ance report No. 1915, and conductec a training class with all . concrete laboratory personnel instructing that questionable concrete shall be cause to halt mixing and trucks dispatch and the NCR system shall be i=ple=ented where the concrete has already been placed.
, Licensee corrective action has been co=pleted, with the implementation of the nonconfor=ance control system described above es required by procedure G-3.
Evaluation and disposition of the deficiency are provided by the program controls.
, . W
.- - . -9- . 4.
Unresolved Items _ - l d The follcwing items were identified by the inspe l t l information: ~ Clarifv Reactor Shield ' ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ 76-09-04: Unresolved: Inspecticn Item Acceptance Criteria _ a.
activities Criterion V of Appendix 3 of l'0 CFR 50 requires that d affecting quality be perfor=ed in accordance with proce ures or instructions which include appropriate quantitative or qualitative acceptance criteria.
The erection procedure / inspection checklist utilized forit 19, 1976 contained appropr a e erection conducted to September also encompassed acceptance criteria, however, this checklist future erection activities for which appropriate acceptanceThe criteria are not included.
September the procedure / checklist has been discussed in a that . re-examined by Nooter Cocpany to identify needs for acceptance 22, 1976, criteria, and required revisions will be established prior to cocuencing new phases of the work activity.
- ...... Uodate Soec C-9 for_ 76-09-05: Unresolved: 1976 PSAR Rev for Sackfill Coccaction_ b.
Aueust PSAR section Q-2.32 and section 2.5.4.5 (August 1976) stated f the that select granular =aterial will be cc=pacted to 957. o maximum dry density in accordance with AASHO standard T-lS0-cohesionless select granular As an alternate, 70, Method D. material will be ecmpacted to 90% of the =aximum dry 2049-69.
in accordance with ASTM Standard D Contrary to this, Specification C-9, Revision 0, including Addenda 1 through 3, requires ccupaction to 90% of its max 1=um dry density as determined by AASHO T-180-70 Method D.
The licensee stated that no compacted backfill has been used d to date under safety related structures or safety related yar pipings and that the first such use of compacte The licensee noted that the applicable ?SAR the spray pond.
requirement will be translated into the job specifications safety related structures.
before use of compacted fill at This is unresolved pending review of the specification change.
. (
.- _ -. . . -10-c.
76-09-06: Unresolved: Evaluate Need For Encineerine Analysis of Pine Suocort Adecuacy Prior to Cuttint of . In-place Lines __ . . _. . . . -: . -. . ... .... ._ . [ ~ The site procedures ~ ~ provide for" field engineer or quali j control inspector ' surveillance of various construction activities which involve handling activities. However, on Septe=ber 16,1976, the inspector observed an 18" dianeter pipe spool being cut to permit installation of a 12" long insert in accordance with isometric drawing nu=ber H33-118-2 Revision 6; the inspector was on the scaffold with the pipefitters. When the cut was completed, the pipe spool shif ted on its hangers to an extent such as to da= age the work scaffold.
Clearances were such that neither the weld end preparations at the free end nor any nearby equipcent was da= aged.
There were no personnel injuries.
The inspector interviewed the craftsmen and determined that the responsibility for determination of adequacy of supports for such an operation was assu=cd by the piping foreman involved.
The field ensinaers who specified the cutting of the pipelina did not become involved in specifying support points or exa=- ination of support points for adequacy. The licensee stated that there is no specific quality program requirement for engineering verification of support points when inctalled or partially installed pipe systems are cut, and he was not prepared to make a co==it=ent on this item before completion of the inspection. Ecwever, the licensee stated that the need for such reviews will be evaluated with respect to material / equipment handling criteria.
' ' d.
76-09-07: Unresolved: Formalize Insoection Records For Structural Steel Weldine Electrical Parameters Criteria XVII of Appendix 3 of 10 C7R 50 requires that records shall include at least the results of inspections, tests, audits, and monitoring of work performance. Criteria X escablishes that the quality inspection program shall verify confor=ance with documented instructions, procedures, and drawings for accomplishing the activity. Project specifi-cation GUS-Structural, Revision 1 part 6.2 requires that welding amperage be as specified in the project Welding Procedure Specificatica, and that operations out of the reco= mended range require prior approval. The contractor quality control staff perfor=s monthly random checks of .
--- - - . _. ~ __ _ _ . -11-An informal working welding amperage being used by welders.
The contractor record has been used to record the results.
has not yet established a format for the formal record, al- - though activities are in progress to formalite such records.
The inspector examined a project =emorandum No. QAFOM-331 11, 1976 which requests attention to this area with dated June respect to piping related welding, and the licensee stated , that this would be considered relative to welding of structural stee1.
The licensee stated that piping and structural steel random surveillance would continue, and infor=al documentation would for continue to be made pending completion of the format formal documentation of surveillance results in this area.
e . e @ e .
%
~- - -- ._ _ -12-5.
Resolved Items The following items were reviewed by the inspector and the correc-tive actions effected by the licensee are considered adequate to - resolve the previously identified questions regarding these ite=s.
76-03-3.b. (1) : Resolved : Procedures Have Been Revised to Include a.
Criteria For Evaluating Reinforcinz Steel Damage Procedure QCl-C-1.40 Revision 6 dated September 15, 1976, has been provided to include Item 2.3.a which states that "Danaged rebar and other embeds (shall be) reported to the Project Field Engineer by in-process rework notice for disposition."
No. 50-This resolved ite= 3.b. (1) of IE Inspection Report 352/76-08; it also resolves item 4.a of IE Inspection Report No. 50-353/76-04 for Limerick Unit No. 2, regarding cadweld sleeve darage criteria.
b.
76-08-4.b: Resolved: Reactor vessel Installation Subcontracter Inspectior Scoce Has Been Clarified in Detailed Inscection Checklists The inspector examined the following quality control inspection checklists, dated Septe:bcr 1,1976, for reactor vessel installaticn work by Reactor Controls Incorporated (RCI): QCDS-1 Installation of CRD Housing Support 3eans QCDS-2 Setting Ring Girder QCDS-3 Alignment of RPV and Solting to Ring Cirder QCDS-4 Installation of CRD Housing Lateral Restraints QCDS-5 Ring Girder As-Built Location Data Sheet The inspector also exacined a September 3, 1976 RCI letter to Bechtel, which clarifies the QA manual reference to inspection checklists. The provision of these procedures and clarifi-cation of the QA manual resolsea item 4.b of IE Inspection Report No. 50-352/76-08.
6.
Unresolved Item Status The following items were reviewed by the inspector and the progress towards resolution determined as fol]ows.
c.
76-08-4.a: Unresolved Item Status: OA Personnel Training Procrar Definitten Has Scen Established For Reactor Vessel !nstallation Subcontra,ctor RCI. But Not VSL The inspector examined the following procedures and verified that these define the training program for quality control inspectors and quality program auditors: - _
_ . -1:- QAAP-1 dated 9/3/76 QA Audit Personnel Training QAAP-2 dated 9/3/76 QA Audit Personnel Qualification - and Certification Manual QCIP-1 dated 8/16/76 QC Inspection Personnel Training QCIP-2 dated 9/3/76 QC Inspection Personnel Qualifi-cations and Certification Manual.
These require certification of NDE personnel to SNT-TC-1-A, ' inspection personnel to ANSI-N45.2.6, and auditors to ANSI-N45.2.23 (not yet issued), and provides for levels of certification in each case.
The inspector also examined the RCI QA manual addendum No. LM-1 dated 9/3/76 which defines auditor training re-quirements.
This resolves item 4.a of IE Inspection Report No. 50-352/ 76-03, with respect to RCI.
The Personnel training program for VSL is still unresolved.
b.
76-08-4.c: Unresolved Ites Status: The Audit Frecu2nev Has Been Clarified in the RCI OA Manual. But the VSL Audit Scoce Has Not Yet Scen Established The inspector examined the RCI quality assurance manual addenden LM-1, which establishes that the first audit will be conducted after the ring girder is set cnd before set of the RPV, and the second audit will be perforned prior to RCI leaving the job site.
This resolves item 4.c of IE Inspection Report No. 50-352/76-08, with respect to RCI.
The audit scope for VSL activities is still unresolved.
.
- . . - - . - -.. _ _ _. - _. . . -14-7.
Acceptable Items The following ite=s were examined by the inspector to ascertain _ implementation of the quality assurance program with respect to these items. The inspectors did not identify any departures from regulatory requirements or PSAR commitments, except as cay be and specifically described in other paragraphs of this report referenced in subparagraphs below.
. Reactor Vessel Installation Ecuiorent Tests - Transoorter a.
The inspector observed the September 11, 1976 site activities between 9 a.m. and noon, which involved preparation of the reactor vessel transporter for the second test run down the hill from the vessel field fabrication area to the reactor building unloading area. The inspector observed the transport of the 750 ten load of concrete blocks, simulating the RPV load, along the first 100 yards of the proposed route The inspector examined repairs and changes which had been =ade to the transporter since the first test run conducted on August 22, 1976 (IE Inspection Raport No. 50-352/76-03). The inspector also interviewed personnel wno had been involved in the first test run and in the subsequent evaluation / repair of the equiptent. All welds on the transporter had had paint recoved and the welds magnetic particle examined; all 1 1/2" bolts had been ultrasonically tested; at least one bolt in every connection was removed and visually inspected along with the hole; all bent 1" bolts were replaced; side bracing was reinforced; weld joint high stress areas were ground and contoured to a low stress geometry; a hold-back harness was added; the transporter transmission was replaced on one tractor drive; and the tractor drive control consoles were =odified to prevent overspeed and improve e=ergency stop centrol. The inspector observed the ground welds, contoured joints, hold- ~ back harness and controls, in addition to revised procedures for conducting the test.
The inspector observed the hold-back provisions in action, which included a Manitowac crane without boom, backed up by two bulldozers with blades set aginst each of the crane tractor treads, with a cable from the crane to the transporter.
Dynamometers were used in friction tests to assure adequacy of the hold-back system. The licensee later reported that the test run took 18 hours, including a brake-f ailure test, and that the test was completed satisfactorily and demonstrated adequacy of the transport system. The licensee agreed to advise the inspcctor prior to actual move of the reactor . vessel.
'
. ._ . _ _. __
. -15-b.
Site Precaration - Fill Placceent Procedures The inspector examined the following documents which have . been developed by the architect-engineer to control fill placement work: Specification C-5 Rev. 10 Addendum 1 Site Preparation and Earthwork ' Specification C-9 Rev. 0 Addendum 3 Installation and Testing of. Underground Process Piping Specification C-ll Rev. 4 Addendum 2 Placing Unreinforced Concrete Specification C-32 Rev. 1 Structural 3ackfilling Quality Control Instruction QCI-C-1.02 Rev. 2 Fill Placement , These documents provide for concrete, fillcrete or cc=pacted granular fill in various areas. The specification C-5 re-
quires that all structures not founded on competent bedrock shall be founded on structural backfill co=pacted to 952 of the caximum dry density.
In provides for area preparation, placing of the backfill, and compaction of the fill.
Specifi- , cation C-9 requires ccepacted backfill under safety related piping, but it requires only 90" compaction, as described in the unresolved item paragraph 4 of this report. The specifi-cation C-9 also provides for use of concrete bedding for pipe where the concrete does not contact any field joints or shop welds / sea =s.
c.
Structural Steel and Supports Erection and Welding Procedures The inspector reviewed the specifications and procedures developed for the site erection and welding of structural steel and supports, including the erection and welding quality control inspection plans. The following documents were examined. Certain of these, plus other documents, were reviewed previously with respect to a Unit #2 inspection (IE Inspectica Report 50-353/75-05, Details Paragraph 12.f).
Soecifications C-41A Rev. 5 Addition #1 Furnishing, Detailing, Fabrication, C-46 Rev. 5 Addendum #1 and Delivery of Structural Steel C-63 Rev. 1 Addendum #4 Erection of Structural Steel C-91 Rev. 5 Structural Welding Standards C-55 Rev. 4 Installation of Shear Ccnnectors GWS(Structural) Addendum #1 General Welding Specifications . O
. _;- Welding Procedures . Pl-A-C (Structural) Rev. 1 Pl-A-Lh (Structural) Rev. O Pl-A-C (Structural) Rev. 1 Inspection Plans and Recorts
C-197-W-1-17 Structural Steel Erection QC-FF-W3 Weld QC In-Process Checkoff Sheet Weld Rod Issue Record Form NR-NC-2 Welder Qualification Status Sheet (8/26/76 issue) QCI-C-2.10 Rev. 2 Structural Steel Erection QCI-W-1.00 Rev. A. Draft, Welding and liDE for Structural and Electrical Component Installation These establish requirements for structural steel erection in accordance with AISC and AWS require =ents.
The general welding specification imposes AWS-Dl-1 requirements regarding weld joint details, preheat, filler material, wind and dampness protection, electrode protection and electrode size limitation.
The licensee stated that he is considering changes to control of type E7015 electrodes, but that appropriate PSAR changes would be filed in such event. Currently, portable ovens are used to assure dryness of type E7018 electrode onsite in work areas; the inspector observed these in use.
The specifications and inspection plans include AISC require-cents for high strength bolt tensioning, calibration of wrenches, and inspection.
d.
Structural Steel and Ecuirnent Succort Installation The inspector observed the pipe hanger support for hanger HCE-105-H5, which was welded to a W27XS4 structural steel beam in Area 15 Elevation 199' - 3".
The installaticn included a fillet veld across the flange of the beam, centrary to the apparent requirements of job specification C-63 Addendus 3 to Revision 1.
The inspector obtained the applicable inspection plan M-3-HC3-5-1 and referenced nonconfor=ance report NCR-1613 dated April 9,1975, and observed that this natter had been detected by the project quality control inspectors, and was accepted as-is by the design engineers on the basis that this particular bea: was not a load carrying member. Additional changes to piping specification P-301 are planned to provide prior engineering approval of specific case-by-case similar instances where non-load bearing members are involved.
.
.
e.
Structural Steel and Supports Stud Welding The inspector observed the erection activities in progress on structural steel girder C-41 at elevation 283 feet at the reactor building, Welding of shear stud arrays was being per- ~ formed on the top flange of the beam.
The beam was ground to base metal where each stud was to be welded, and completed groups of welds were bend tested as required by the AISC code.
The inspector observed four revs of 46, and two rows of 92, studs as shown on the applicable censtruction drawing C203 . Revision 5.
Stud installation appeared to be as required by specification C-55.
f.
Structural Steel and Succorts Welding The inspector visited the weld rod disbursal shed on September 16, 1976 and examined the weld rod issue for=s for safety related structural steel welding that day.
He identified steel beams , numbered 2A85 and 2D28, which were to have strengthening plates added per design change C-197-FDCN-3.
He verified that . type E7018 weld material was specified in accordance with applicable weld procedure Pl-A-Lh; the welders name was on the list of those qualified to weld to the procedure. He examined the weld visually prior to the incpection by the quality control welding engineer, verified use of proper weld material and evidence of joint cleaning prior to welding, and verified absence of major defects. He interviewed the quality control engineer and examined the applicable inspection plan W-1-17 to be used by the engineer. A second quality centrol weld engineer stated that on a monthly basis he made checks of welding current being used by various velders; his infor=al log and inspection results substantiated his inspections in this area (see unresolved item 07 paragraph 4.d of this report).
The inspector also observed three velders preparing veld joints and welding on structural steel beams in the control room south west area at elevation 283 feet. Use of heated portable ovens, cleaning of the veld joint, and presence of approved weld release forms (WR-NC-2 forms) were observ_i by the inspector, g.
Containment Steel - Containment Dome Storace The inspector observed the storage of the containment do=e en site.
The dome was supported by dunnage, was clearly identified to differentiate it from the Unit #2 dome stored adjacent to it, and the =achined lower edge was protected by a wat2rproof coating which appeared intact.
The containment vessel top matching machined edge appeared s1=ilarly coated and was covered by a steel protector cap.
-
. . -15-h.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Beendary Pipine Work Activities . The inspector observed that several major pieces of main steam piping had been placed temporarily inside containmer.t.
Three of the pieces of main steam pipe observed were: M-1 B21-G001-Items 2, 5, 8.
These pipe spools were properly protteted and adequately supported in the approximate position of final installation.
The inspector reviewed the folicking documentation associated with the three pipe spools to decernine if receiving inspections and handling were in accordance with applicable requirements, and nonconformances properly identified and dispositioned: (1) Quality Control Inspection - Record for Receiving.
(2) Form NPP-1 Data Report for Fabricated Nuclear Piping Subassemblies (9. W. Kellogg Co.)
(3) Material Receiving Report (Bechtel Corp.)
(4) Product Quality Certification (General Electric.)
(5) Non-Conforr.ance Reports (NCR) 928 and 1847.
1.
Safety Related Pioing Work Activities (1) Installatica of Pipe Hanger - The inspector cbserved work activities associated with the installation of pipe hanger GBB-ll3-H2S in the core spray system. The inspector verified that the work in progress was in accordance with the applicable drawing (GBB-113-H23 Rev. 2) and the applicable welding procedure (Pl-A-LH, Rev. 0).
No discrepancies were noted by the inspector.
The following documenta:1on pertinent to the hanger installation was reviewed by the inspector: (a) Welder Performance Qualificatien Test Record (Symbol PL 3) dated April 27, 1976.
(b) Welder Qualification Maintenance Record.
(Symbol PL 3) (c) Filler Metal Withdrawl Authorication.
. O
- . -19-(2) Pipe Spool Weld End Preparation and Preliminary Fit-up - The inspector observed the weld end preparation of pipe spool GEC-104-1-5 in the RER Service Water System. Work . activities appeared to be in accordance with the General Welding Standard CWS-FM-2 Rev. I and weld procedures Pl-At-Lh.
After completion,cf the end preparation, the inspector observed the initial phases of the fit-up prior to welding. He observed that the verkers took precautions to avoid ~ damaging the weld end preparation of the two pipe spools involved in the pre-weld fit-up, j.
Piee Cleaning Activities The inspector observed pipe spool sand blasting activities in progress a: the site.
The cleaning suoervisor had a list of each pipe spool, and the required cleanliness level for each at the cleaning work location.
In an interview he de=enstrated familiarity with the cleanliness criteria associated with each cleanliness level. He was able to show the NRC inspector the manner in which he applies the criteria, with respect to a recently cleaned pipe spool; this appeared consistent with the applicable criteria specifications.
The inspector examined the following documents relative to pipe cleanliness control: QCIR - P/1.30 Rev. 2, Inspection Report for Valve and In-line Component Installation.
QCI - P/1.10, Quality Instruction for Piping Subassembly Field Installation and Rework.
' JR-M-14 Rev. 1, Job Rule for Piping.
P-303, Specification fcr Cleanliness Control of Piping and Equipment.
These documents provide for onsite cleaning and cleanliness inspection of piping. Cleanliness level is re:orded per a Mechanical ibterials Reporting and Control Manual using a pipe-spool-action-card for each pipe spool. Following renoval from storage ensite, each pipe spool is cleaned to the required level, inspected by the Area Discipline Engineer prior to release from the cleaning area, and inspected by a que.lity control engineer prior to and during installation.
.
. . __ _ The lice. wee stated that eleven pipe spools had been the subject of r corrosion-in-storage study, and that final results have been sent to the techtel San Francisco engineer- ~ ing office for review. These results will be provided to the site for NRC review in connection with an NRC identified unresclved item regarding pipe wall thickness.
(IE Inspection Report 50-352/76-07.)
k.
General Construction Activities The inspecter toured the constructicn area and observed work in-progress.
The inspector observed nonconformance tags on items as follews: NRC-1877 - Control Room Steel at Elevation 259, where quality ' control inspectors identified welding as not in conformance with AWS-Dl-1.
NRC-1920 - Residual Heat Removal System piping in the lower level of the reactor building, where quality control inspectors were observed placing the nencenfernance tag en the d : aged ucid-end prepatation of pipe spool GsC-1-5.
The tags were referenced to appropriate documentation and work on the affected areas had not proceeded further. This non-conformance control appeared to be in accordance with the quality assurance progra= provisions.
. . }}