IR 05000353/1986003
| ML20203B745 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 04/08/1986 |
| From: | Beall J, Gallo R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20203B725 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-353-86-03, 50-353-86-3, NUDOCS 8604180245 | |
| Download: ML20203B745 (11) | |
Text
_
-
-
-.
_
- _
-_
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 86-03
!
Docket No. 50-353 I
License Nos. CPPR-107 Licensee: Philadelphia Electric Company 2301 Market Street l
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Facility Name:
Limerick Generating Station, Unit 2 j
Inspection Conducted:
February 18, 1986 - March 29, 1986 I
Inspector:
E. H. Gray, Lead Reactor Engineer R. A. Gramm, Senior Resident Inspector
,
Reviewed by:
f
'
E. Beall, Pro' ject Engineer Date Approved by:
TA
_f!S R. M. Gallo, Chief, Date Reactor Projects Section 2A I
Inspection Summary: Report for Inspection Conducted February 18, 1986 -
March 29, 1986 (Report No. 50-353/86-03)
'
Areas Inspected: Routine inspection by the resident inspector consisting of followup on outstanding items, review of procedures, observation of construction activities, resident engineering, construction engineering,
.
Quality Assurance and Quality Control Examinations.
The inspection sampled work in planning and work in progress in electrical, piping and welding,
"
i civil / structural and reactor vessel internals installation. The inspection
'
involved 255 hours0.00295 days <br />0.0708 hours <br />4.21627e-4 weeks <br />9.70275e-5 months <br /> of onsite inspection at Limerick Unit 2.
,
Results: No violations were identified.
,
s 5604180245 860410 PDR ADOCK 05000353
,
__
_
. _ _
.. _ _. _ _
_.
_ _ _
_
_ _. _ _ _ _. _.. _ _ _
_ _.. _ _ _ _..
.
i i.
DETAILS
1.0 Persons Contacted i
Philadelphia Electric Company
,
- J. Clarey, Construction Superintendent
- J. Corcoran, QA Field Section Head
- G. Lauderbacn, Field QA Technical Branch
'
- P. Naugle, Assistant Superintendent Construction I
- P. Pavlides, Director of QA E&R j
Bechtel f
G. Memula, Resident Project Engineer
!
- W. Mourer, Construction Manager
- K. Powers, Project Field Engineer
- K. Stout, Project Field QC Engineer E
l A. Lileck, GE Site Manager i
I
!
Also, during this inspection period, the inspector discussed construction procedures and activities with other supervisors, engineers and craftsmen in the pEco, Bechtel and General Electric organizations.
,
- Denotes those present at the exit meeting.
2.0 Followup on Outstanding items
!
j (Closed) Violation (353/76-06-01).
Structural welds not meeting AWS
01.1 requirements.
Independent measurements inspection of structural
'
i steel, pipe hanger and pipe support welds as documented in report
!
!
353/84-07 and review of this issue in reports 353/84-07 and 353/84-05
!
provide background to conclude that adequate corrective action and l
l reinspection has been accomplished. This item is closed.
(Closed) Deficiency (353/80-08-01) in report 353/82-03 (Closed) Unresolved Item (353/80-10-02) in report 353/81-09
,
'
j (Closed) Violation (353/80-19-01) in report 353/84-05 l
(Closed)UnresolvedIten(353/80-19-02) in report 353/81-09
{
(Closed) Unresolved Item (353/B0-19-03) in report 353/81-09 i
l Detailed inspection findings and closecut of the above items are
{
discussed in the inspection reports noted above. These issues were
.
rereviewed during the 353/86-03 inspection and are closed.
t
,
,
!
l
- -
-
.
.
-
..
_
.-_.
- -.
J J
.
i 3.0 Background
?
'
Prior to the February 1, 1986 Limerick Unit 2 construction restart, NRC inspection of Unit 2 activities was reported in the Limerick Unit I report.
Starting with this report, inspection observations of Unit 2 will be reported separately.
At a meeting with NRC Region I management on February 7,1986,pEco manage-ment presented an overview of the construction organization staffing,
preparation for construction restart, emphasis on construction quality
and the intended similarity of Unit 2 to Unit 1.
Of particular interest J
to the NRC were PECo management comments addressing construction issues in l
the following areas:
1.
Components taken from Unit 2 for use in Unit I and other
!
plants are being tracked to provide for requisition and resupply to meet specification requirements.
I 2.
Previously installed portions of Unit 2 and documentation have
]
been inspected and reviewed with problems identified being
'
i documented on Non-Conformance Reports (NCRs) for engineering l
review and disposition.
!
3.
Changes made in Unit I during its construction are being
!
incorporated into the construction of Unit 2, such that from the perception of a plant operator and for plant operations
!
purposes, both plants will perform in the same manner.
!
4.
Construction procedures for Unit 2 are being rewritten to
incorporate beneficial construction methods identified during
'
Unit 1 construction and to improve the construction procedure format.
.
5.
Control and documentation of construction work, including QC
inspections will be accomplished using the Work Package Concept (Traveler).
!
f 4.0 Site Tour The inspector conducted frequent site tours to observe tasks in progress and plant status in both safety related and non-safety related areas.
,
The areas with safety related equipment observed include the drywell,
'
wetwell, reactor building, turbine building and the common Unit 1-Unit 2 areas such as the Control Room, Auxiliary Equipment Room, Cable Spreading
Room and 4KV switchgear rooms. The activities of Limitorque motor operated valve mechanism rework, inspection and testing, and welder
,
qualification were also observed during site tours and are discussed in
)
following sections of this report.
i
!
No violations were identified.
)
l
'
i
. -
.
-
_-
-
..-._ -
- _
.
..
. -. -.
_
- - - -.. --.
- - _.
l l
i l
L i
i
!
5.0 Electrical i
5.1 Control Room and Related Electrical Work I
Installation of electrical components and controls is in progress in
the Power Generation Control Complex (PGCC). The PGCC includes the Plant Control Room and the Aniliary Equipment Room located above
,
'
the control room. The interface between General Electric (GE), the
designer, and the field include s Field Design Deviation Requests (FDDR) and Field Disposition Instructions (FDI). Where electrical
j components have been removed from Unit 2 PGCC for use in Unit 1 or
,
I for offsite rework, the area where the component was removed is
'
j tagged with a serialized Electrical Exchange Record (EER).
i i
The inspector observed PGCC panel modification in progress in both
!
the Control Room and the Auxiliary Equipment Room, reviewed the i
applicable FDDR/FDI documentation and examined the records made by l
electricians noting work completion and verification of changes.
i The applicable procedure (CP-E-1 Rev 0) for electrical panel f
modifications and inspection criteria (E1412 Rev 27) were reviewed.
.
,
The FDDRs and FDIs applicable to modifications in progress were in
-
the work area and the craft personnel involved demonstrated a syste-i matic method of tracking work and performing overchecks of work as it
was accomplished.
Both Quality Control Inspection and Quality l
Assurance were involved in the panel modification process with QC j
inspection routinely provided and documented on QCIR's.
j The following work packages were in progress:
l
)
Work Package FDDR
!
ECR-601-015 HH2-3517 i
ECR-601-010 HH2-3472
ECR-601-009 HH2-3433
,
'
.
ECR-20C640-007 HH2-3364 i
ECR-20C609-003 HH2-3469
>
i.
PGCC engineering (Bechtel) provides daily support to construction in
,
'
planning panel modif. cation work and tracking FDDR/FDI and EER I
j status.
In a sample of EER numbers, CR 597 and CR 423, the inspector i
found both to be tracked and on file.
In review of closed work i
packages, ECR 20C608-006 (EER-CR322) was closed by PGCC engineering l
and forwarded to GE for FDDR closeout, i
I In summary, the inspector observed PGCC panel modification work in
!
progress, examined engineering input and quality control inspection j
and reviewed applicable portions of controlling procedures, inspection criteria and drawings.
)
]
No violations were identified, i
I
!
!
'
l i
i
.
5.2 Other Safetys Related Electrical Work
-
The installation and welding to structural steel of one power-load center cabinet was observed in the turbine building at the 239'
elevation. Other than the above, no other safety related plant electrical installation work was observed to be in progress during this inspection period.
6.0 Piping and Welding 6.1 Welding in Progress During plant tours, the inspector observed work in progress including weld joint fitup and welding of the following pipe or pipe to valyc components. The observations were compared to construction procedure and code requirements as applicable to the work in progress.
Specific observations were made on the following:
RHR Room 9177'
GBB-217-1/11 FW9, FW10 Pipe Fab Shop GBB-201-4 FW8, FW10 Pipe Fab Shop GBB-218-1/7 FW9, FW10
'
Pipe Fab Shop CRD-SP-DCB-I42-03KK-4/2 N/A Sockets to Piping Turbine Bldg.
EBB-203-1 FW5 Main Steam Piping Core Spray HBB-220-4 FW6 Integral Support to Pipe Work packages and required documentation were noted to be in the work area during fitup or welding, as applicable. The handling and rigging to position piping in the reactor building and drywell was verified to be in accordance with procedural requirements.
During the root pass welding of FW5, ISO EBB-202-1, the sound of a crack was evident.
Examination of the tack welds showed the top and bottom tack welds to be cracked, primarily at the edge of the GTAW tack weld bead.
The inspector noted QC to be in the process of docu-menting (in NCR 10679) the condition to provide for engineering review and disposition.
The entire root of FW5 was removed and the weld joint edges were repaired for welding. A second main steam pipe weld was tack welded in four locations with root welding intended to start on the following morning. Three of four of these tack welds also cracked overnight and are reported in NCR 10690. The contractor's welding department decided to initiate the practice of tack welding just before starting root pass welding to minimize tirre delay and associated excess stresses on the tack velds.
The NRC inspector observed the cracked tack welds and independently concluded that the cracking was the result of excess stress on small welds rather than a materials problem.
Later observations of tack welding,
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.,
-..
-
. _ - -
.
.
-
-
..
_ _ __ _
_
j
r
.
.i
,
root pass welding and radiographs of completed welds indicated that
'
this change and the application of continuous preheat were successful at preventing cracking of these carbon steel GTAW tack welds.
I No violations were identified.
i 6.2 Welder Qualification and Training The process of welder qualification including verification of the identification of welders was examined in detail.
Tests in progress of manual and machine welders were observed.
Records of qualification testing including the Test Shop Log and the Welder
Test Qualification Summary were reviewed. Welder qualification was i
compared with the requirements of the ASME Code,Section IX and the Bechtel Construction Procedure CP-W-1, Revision 1; no deficiencies were identified.
Welders with current weld qualifications upon transfer from anothee
i Bechtel site have their welder qualification documentation file transferred to the Limerick site. The transferred welders weld a test assembly to demonstrate their skill prior to being qualified
>
i at the Limerick site in accordance with the Bechtel Quality Assurance Manual (BQAM).
A sample of qualification records for welders PF374, PF376, PF340, PF373 and BM-48 was reviewed for comparison to the ASME Code Section IX requirements.
No violations were identified.
6.3 Weld Electrode and Filler Metal Control The weld rod issue station at-the 200' elevation of the turbine
building is the primary weld electrode / filler metal issue station
for Unit 2 welding. A second station presently not in use, and i
locked to prevent unauthorized access, is located on the 269'
i elevation of the turbine building. The weld material storage and
issue practice and documentation were examined for comparison to the
!
requirements of procedure WFMC-Revision 1, Weld Filler Metal Control, l
and to establish that control of weld materials were in effect. The l
record of weld material issued on February 24, 1986 and related fil-i ler metal withdrawal authorization forms WR5, WR6, and WR-NC-2A were i
reviewed.
Electrode holding oven contents and temperatures were j
examined for conformance to requirements.
The inspector reviewed the
procedure fur checking the qualification of the welder for the ap-j plicable welding procedure for which weld material was being issued.
J No violations were identified.
i i
.
- - -
-. - - -
- -
- - - -. - - - - - -. - -. -.
-.
. - -
.
-
- - - -
.
...
- -
- - -
- -. -
- - -
.
..
- -.
- -
._.
-
.. _.
-.
--
. _
_
.
- - _ _.
-
-
....
-
,
.
6.4 Machine Welding
l Machine welding of carbon steel piping (P1) and stainless steel piping (P8) are performed in accordance with welding procedures l
P1-T-I-0E and P8-T-AG-I-0-1, respectively. A separate welder per-formance qualification was run for each type of weld material in two positions for each machine weld operator. The inspector observed
welder training in process for stainless steel welding, and reviewed j
radiographs of both carbon steel and stainless for qualification of i
four welders.
The ASME Code Section IX permits qualification of l
welders for machine welding by either radiography or bend testing.
As supplementary confirmation of the ability of the machine equipment
to produce satisfactory welds, one set of side bends from a carbon steel weld and one set of side bends from a stainless steel weld were tested. These bend tests were acceptable per ASME Code Section IX.
'
,
l Production welding of carbon steel pipe per procedure PI-T-I-0E in
both the 2G and SG positions was observed during successive stages
of welding. The inspector also examined one set of four macro etch cross sections from a 2G stainless steel weld material qualification j
test. The SG carbon steel production weld EBB-203-1 FW5 and 2G production weld 080-201-1/7 FW7 were examined at several stages of
<
welding. Portions of the stainless steel recirculation weld WB-48 on
,
spool VRR-2RO-28 was examined during welding.
l
,
No violations were identified.
j
>
j 6.5 Postweld Heat Treatment (PWHT)
i The inspector observed a portion of the postweld heat treatment (PWHT) of weld SV#3 tn SV#4 (Turbine Main Steam Stop Valve Casting
l Weldment) including the hanger lug. The applicable drawings are STG-2M-03 and 8031-M20-20-1.
The progress and controls on the PWHT were compared to the requirements of the ANSI B31.1 Code.
The
'
required PWHT was noted to be under engineering department control i
and attended by two heat treatment operators.
-
No violations were identified.
'
6.6 Control Rod Drive Tubing
'
The inspector observed the shop fabrication of the Control Rod Drive
'
(CRD) insert and withdrawal tubing.
The inspector reviewed drawing
l SP-DCB-138-19K-4 Rev 2 and noted that ovality checks were specified for the tubing bends.
The inspector was informed by the cognizant l
Bechtel field engineer that ovality checks are performed on 100". of the bends by construction and that Quality Control (QC) performs a i
10*. surveillance of ovality.
The inspector was additionally
.
informed that the bending machine had been pre qualified. The I
i
!
!
!
l
!
-
- -. -. -
-
..
.. -
-
.
.-
-.
.
.
i.
i i
i inspector noted that the work was proceeding in accordance with the associated work package and the requirements of ASME Section III
j NC-4200.
i j
No violations were identified.
6.7 Liquid Penetrant Examination l
The inspector observed the conduct of a Liquid Penetrant (PT)
!
examination of a repair on the containment spray ring header. The
'
inspector reviewed procedure PT-SR-1,2 Rev 1, " Liquid Penetrant Nondestructive Examination Standard" that was in the possession of
,
,
the Unitech inspector. The procedure stated that Magnaflux solvent t
'
i and developer, type SKC-S and SKD-S respectively, were approved for i
use. The Unitech inspector was using Magnaflux types SKC-NF and
SKD-NF in lieu of the types specified in the procedure.
The
.
inspector interviewed the Unitech Level III and Bechtel QA i
personnel. He was informed that the materials in use were qualified l
and acceptable and that Bechtel QA had previously generated a
finding number 7328 with respect to the use of unspecified Magnaflux l
materials. The inspector reviewed the following documents:
Bechtel Quality Finding Report 732B
-
!
Bechtel Memorandum from Stoll (Level III) to Mourer dated
-
l March 18, 1986
~
Qualification Record NDE-PQR-001
!
-
Unitech Approved Products List
-
i j
Based upon the determination by Bechtel that both types of Magnaflux
materials are equivalent, the inspector had no further questions.
j 7.0 Structural
'
The fitup and welding of structural steel to the wetwell liner and to itself was noted to be in progress.
The Quality Control Instructions PQCI
- 8031/W 2.00F and 1.00F for use on AWS and Q listed ASME structural welding were reviewed. The Quality Control Inspection Record,
!
QCIR-8031-c.2.10 applicable to the structural steel erection in progress i
was reviewed with the QC inspector.
The NRC inspector concluded that the j
welding and installation were in accordance with the Drawing C228 Sheets 1
]
and 2 with QC performing applicable inspections.
The inspector observed installation activities for pipe support
HBB-217-H9-Rev 1.
The work activities were proceeding in accordance with j
the associated work package, t
i No viulations were identified.
I
'
-
- - - - -
--- -
-
-
.
.-.
.
..
>
l
.
'
,
' -
8.0 Equipment
,
8.1 Limitorque Refurbishing
!
The refurbishment of safety related Limitorque motor operated valves was observed to be under control of Bechtel engineering with 100%
>
surveillance by assigned QC inspectors. The work in progress was
,
compared to the requirements of the applicable Engineering Procedures
FM-4 and FM-6; no deficiencies were identified.
!
The inspector reviewed Procedure 8031-FM-4 which is the engineering procedure for the Limitorque rework program. The inspector also
'
j reviewed Procedure 8031-FM-6 which is the engineering procedure for q
torque switch setting. The objective of the Limitorque rework
!
program is to assure that these motor operators are examined, j
repaired as necessary, regreased, and ready for proper operation and
'
]
testing.
No violations were identified.
,
9.0 civil
i 9.1 Diesel Generator Building Excavation i
Periodic observations were made of the Diesel Building Foundation excavation work in progress.
The second concrete pour on bedrock to s
provide a slab under the diesel building was observed. Testing of a
.
sample of the concrete was in progress including temperature deter-mination, slump test, density measurement and casting of compression a
l test specimens as required by specification 8031-C-114 Rev 6.
!
Quality Control inspectors were noted to be present during the pour
!
and were performing inspection of aspects of the work.
Testing of the cast samples seven days after the pour was observed by the inspector.
The results of tests 235, 236, and 237 indicated concrete
i strength in excess of the minimum requirement.
!
No violations were identified.
9.2 Protection of Unit 1 Piping During Construction of the Unit 2
]
Diesel Generator Building
l The 30" RHR-ESW, the 26" RHR and the 20"ESW lines for Unit 1 are
!
located in the fillcrete with the 30" pipe located approximately 10'-8" from the outside surface of the east wall of the 'to-be-con-
,
'
structed' diesel generator building.
The inspector reviewed work
'
in progress and civil engineering notes taken during construction of
,
l shoring in this area.
1
i
!
.
.
The diesel building foundation and excavation plan including details of shoring are shown on drawing C656, sheets 1 and 2.
The measure-ments are being taken daily at seven locations to detect settlement of the RHR and ESW lines should this occur during installation of the shoring and placement of the grout and fillcrete.
In review of the civil engineering survey notes up to February 28, 1986, the inspector noted that movement of the RHR and ESW piping had not occurred.
During field inspection, it was found that piling excavation, installation and grouting including observations by the geologist were in accordance with Drawing C656.
No violations were identified.
10.0 Reactor Vessel Internals
!
'
The inspector observed welding in progress and completed welds in the area of reactor vessel internals installation. Welding in progress included that of the root pass (insert fusion) of the 300 degree Jet pump to thermal sleeve weld and welding of the similar weld at the 60 degree location. Weld wire control, issue and storage were examined. Welding documentation and traveler (work instruction) including records of completed QC inspections were reviewed. Work activities were compared with applicable code and procedural requirements; no deficiencies were identified.
The mockup for welder training in preparation for welding the jet pump brace arms to pads and arms to risers was observed. Welding procedures WPS 8.8.3 Revision 1 for consumable insert welding and WPS 8.8.1, Re-vision 0 for open butt welding, both for stainless steel materials, were noted to be in use where applicable.
Independent QC surveillance of weldir.; variables by GE QC was'shown to be in progress by review of QC records of this activity.
No violations were identified.
11.0 pipe Material Storage, Preparation and Painting The inspector toured the pipe spool laydown area and observed the storage condition of carbon steel and stainless steel pipe pieces and assemblies.
The internal shot blasting of carbon steel pipe was being done with 80 Grit Aluminum 0xide.
External pipe surfaces were observed to be shot blasted with either aluminum oxide or silica sand.
Preliminary review of painting practices indicate that painting of Unit 2 components will be the same as painting of Unit 1 components including use of the same paint contractor. The applicable specifications are 8031-A-25, A-34 and A-51.
The hard marking (steel stamping) of pipe materials was observed.
The use of Mathews low stress die stamps was noted.
No violations were identified.
.
.
.
..
..
.
-
-
.
.
.
.
..
-
-
-
-
. - - -
- -. - -
-__-.- _- -
-
- - _ _ _ _
.
. _. - - _.
.-
-
. -. - - _ -.. _ -
-
- --
i
!
'
.
!.
1 i
!
)
12.0 Project Engineering i
l A majority of the Limerick project engineering staff is assigned to the Limerick site such that most of the project engineering effort will occur
-
at the Limerick site rather than at Bechtel San Francisco, i
The inspector reviewed procedures EDP 2.14, EDP 4.25 and 4.62 which cover
the Project Engineering areas of Resident Engineering responsibilities, Design Interface Control and Field Change Request / Field Change Notice
'
'
activity. The engineering scope of responsibility of two' groups, plant j
design and mechanical engineering were reviewed with the respective j
supervisors for comparison to project requirements.
t
!
No violations were identified.
13.0 Measuring and Test Equipment j
The inspector reviewed the Bechtel program and facilities for the control i
of Measuring & Test Equipment (M&TE). The inspector reviewed the Master
Equipment List and discussed the control of equipment recall with Bechtel
!
personnel. The inspector examined the calibration laboratory and the M&TE
]
issue station. He noted control of inactive equipment and the use of j
calibration stickers thtt identify M&TE calibration due dates. The inspector examined procedure CP-25C for torque wrench calibration, j
No violations were identified, i
14.0 Exit Meeting g
,
!
The NRC resident inspector discussed the issues and findings in this
!
report with Mr. J. Corcoran and others throughout the inspection period
!
l and at an exit meeting held on March 27, 1986. At the exit meeting, the licensee's representatives indicated that the items discussed in this i
report did not involve proprietary information. No written material was
!
provided to the licensee during the inspection period.
<
f
,
i
!
!
.
!
i
l