IR 05000354/1979003
| ML19208B650 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 07/27/1979 |
| From: | Bateman W, Mcgaughy R, Narrow L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19208B632 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-354-79-03, 50-354-79-3, 50-355-79-03, 50-355-79-3, NUDOCS 7909210133 | |
| Download: ML19208B650 (7) | |
Text
'
'
.
.
'
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I 50-354/79-03 Report No. gn_199/70 n1 50-354 Docket No. 50-188 CPPR-120 License No.cppp_191 Priority Category A
--
Licensee:
Public Service Electric & Gas Comoany 80 Park Place Newark, New Jersey 07101 Facility Name:
Hope Creek Generatino Station. Units 1 & 2 Inspection at:
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey Inspection cond ted:
16-19, 1979 Inspectors:
6///-[7f L. Narrow,'Rea tor I pector
/date tigned S,18 /79
'
W. H. Bateman, Reactor Inspector date s'igned date signed
'
Approved by:
8/ hA b
,
(tP/,3 0 / N R.W.McGaughyD/Iief,ProjectsSection,
,y ate s4ned '
RC&ES Branch Inspection Summary:
-
Inspection on April 16-19,1979 (Report No. 50-354/79-03)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by regional based inspectors of the QC program for fabrication and installation of containment penetrations, structural steel equipment supports, and welding of metal containment liner and suppression chamber.
The inspection involved 42 hours4.861111e-4 days <br />0.0117 hours <br />6.944444e-5 weeks <br />1.5981e-5 months <br /> on site by two NRC regional based inspectors.
Results:
Of the three areas inspected one item of noncompliance was identified in one area (infraction - failure to cap open end of piping penetrations -
Paragraph 3).
Inspection on Anril 16-19,1979 (Report No. 50-355/79-03)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by regional based inspectors of concrete curing, installation of reinforcing steel and welding of netal containment liner and suppression chamber.
site by two regional based inspectors.
The inspection involved 16 hours1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br />,36;',fod.
gn
,
'
.
Results: No items of noncompliance were identified.
.
7g0981071 "
Region I Form 12 d
(Rev. April 77)
]
-
-
,
,
,
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Public Service Electric and Gas Company Y. Contractor, Site QA Engineer J. Dugan, Site QA Engineer
- A. E. Giardino, Project QA Engineer
- L. Jankowski, Site QA Engineer
- P. J. Kudless, Principal Construction Engineer
- A. C. Smith, Project Construction Manager Bechtel Power Corporation (Bechtel)
,
B. Bain, Lead Field Welding Engineer A. J. Bryon, Assistant Project Construction QC Engineer
- C. Clark, Contracts Administrator W. Cole, QA Engineer
- W. F. Hindle, Project Field Engineer
- C. Kasch, Assistant Project QC Engineer T. Lee, Document Control D. Stover, Project Superintendent of Serv. ices S. Vezendy, Lead Welding QC Engineer Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Company (P-DM)
J. Benedetti, QA Foreman
- M. Steiger, QA Manager The inspector also talked with several other employees of the architect-engineer constructor.
,
- denctes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Plant Tour (Units 1 and 2)
A tour of the site was made to observe the status of the work and construc-tion activities in progress.
The inspectors examined work items for any obvious defects or noncompliances with regulatory requirements or license conditions.
Areas observed included:
pregrout alignment of Unit 1 HPCI 36M33is
.
.
'
.
-
.
I turbine to pump; welding in progress on metal containment and suppression chamber; final rebar assembly work on Unit 2 reactor vessel support pedestal; and structural steel welding of safety-related equipment supports.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Storage of Containment Piping Penetrations During inspection of work and work activities relating to containment piping penetrations as discussed in Paragraph 6 below, the inspector noted that the ends of some piping penetratic1s in storage were protected with covers and others were not.
In addition, the inspector noted that the majority of piping penetrations installed in containment were not capped on the ends.
This situation is in conflict with the requirements of PDM Field Storage Procedure, FSP-01, which states in Paragraph 2.9 that, " Penetration pipes shall be capped with protective closures." This is an item of noncompliance relative to Criterion V of Appendix B of 10 CFR 50.
(354/79-03-01)
4.
Observation of Unit 1 Suppression Chamber Welding Activities The inspector examir.ed PDM's work in progress and completed work on several sections of the suppression chamber.
Examination of the tack welds made during fit-up of piece mark 1567590A2 showed evidence of being made without prior removal of rust from the welding surfaces.
ASME Code Section III Division 1-1974 Subsectun NE requires welding surfaces to be free of scale, rust, oil, grease, and other deleterious substances.
PDM QC had not performed an inspection of the fit-up and tack welds involved.
This item is unresolved pending PDM inspection and resolution of the apparent failure to remove rust from the weld surfaces prior to welding.
(354/79-03-02)
5.
Weld Surface Cleanliness Requirements ASME Code Section III Division 1-1974 Subsection NE requires welding surfaces to be free of scale, rust, oil, grease, and other deleterious substances.
PDM's weld specification WS-3, Revision 5, for primary contain-ment welding references SSPC-3, Power Tool Cleaning, as the cleaning pro-cedure to be used to prepare surfaces prior to welding.
This procedure states in part, "It is not intended that all mill scale, rust, and paint he removed by this process..." The inspector pointed out that there is a conflict between the Code requirements and the requirements of SSPC-3 for weld surface cleanliness.
PDM personnel stated that they are following the Code requirements. This item is unresolved pending clarification of the 50'i3 %
.
_4 reference to SSPC-3 in PDM weld specification WS-3 as regards weld surface cleanliness requirements (354/79-03-03 and 355/79-03-01)
6.
Containment Piping Penetrations - Review of Quality Records and Observation of Completed Work The inspector randomly selected piping penetration 131 P20 as representative of containment piping penetration work being perfonned on Unit 1.
This is an 8 inch diameter penetration found at elevation 94'-0 and azimuth 900 It is located in the drywell section of containment and its service is Recirc Pump Seal Water.
The inspector examined completed work, questioned PDM QA personnel, and examined the following documents in an effort to ascertain conformance of work to requirements of SAR, jobsite specification, and ASME Codes:
,
PDM Drawing E40 - Drywell Penetration Schedule
--
--
PDM Drawing E42 - Erection Details for penetration 131P20
--
PDM Welds Specification, WS-3, Revision 5 PDM Field Storage Procedure, FSP-01
--
--
PDM Fabrication checklist for penetration 131P20 ASME Code Section III Division 1-1974, Subsection NE
--
--
PDM Shop and Field Workmanship Standards, SWS-1 Revision C, entitled,
" Surface Defects Acceptance Criteria per ASME Code Section III, Division jn Bechtel Design Specification 10855-C-152(Q), " Design Spec for Furnishing,
--
Designing, Detailing, Fabrication, Delivery and Erection of Primary Containment for the Hope Creek Generating Station Nos.1 and 2 Units,"
Revision 14
'
--
PDM Corporate Field ASME III Divisions 1 and 2 QA Manual for Nuclear Power Plant Components for PDM Contracts 15675 and 15676".
Except as detailed in Paragraph 3 above, no items of noncompliance were identified.
Sb63.Y/
.
.
7.
'RHR Heat Exchanger Supports The inspector performed a visual inspection of the support for RHR Heat exchanger 1 BE-205, which had been fabricated in the structural fabrication shop onsite and had been installed in place using temporary bolts.
Fabrica-tion had been perfonned and installation was in progress in accordance with the following documents:
Drawing C-0845-0, sheet 2(Q), " Reactor Building RHR Heat Exchanger
--
Supports Sections and Details", and FSK-CD-1005, Revision 5 Specification C-133(Q), Revision 2, Addendum No. 4, " Technical Specifi-
--
cation for Purchase of Miscellaneous Steel for ASME Component Supports",
,
and FC0 No. 287 Specific Work Plan / Procedure (SWP/P)-053, " Installation of Mechanical
--
Equipment."
Work Plan Procedure Record (WPPR) M-1050 had been prepared in accordance with SWP/P-2 for control and recording installation of the Heat Exchanger and support.
The inspector examined the documentation listed below for conformar;e to the requirements of the above drawings and specifications as well as ASME,Section III, Subsection NF:
a.
Receiving Inspection Reports and Material Receiving Reports with attached Material Test Reports.
QCIR No. C-133-R-28568 and MRR No. 28568
--
--
QCIR No. C-133-38085 and MRR No. 38085
--
QCIR No. C-133-38421 and MRR No. 38421 b.
Welding and NDE Inspection Reports:
QCIR No. 3F1-M-51-1-1
--
QCIR No. 1-BE-205-M-100
--
Filler metal withdrawal slips and qualification records of
--
welders identified on the inspection reports 884338
,
.
.
.
Experience, training and qualification records of the welding and
--
mechanical inspectors performing inspection of welding, fabrication and installation of the supports.
The inspector discussed fabrications, drawings, engineering supervision of fabrication cnd inspection of welding and installation of the support structure with the responsible field engineer and _the welding and mechanical inspectors.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
8.
SAR Changes The inspector reviewed the licensee's project and' QA procedures for review, approval and recording changes to the PSAR and examined a random selection of such changes.
The procedures reviewed included:
a.
Project Manual, Section 1.2, Revision 4, SAR Change Notices."
b.
QAI 3-2, Revision 4, " Deviations From Safety Analysis Report Require-ments" c.
QAI 6-5, Revision 3, " Architect-Engineers Quality Related Documents."
No items of noncompliance were identified.
9.
Review of Nonroutine Events Reported by the Licensee By letter dated November 22, 1978, the licensee reported, as a significant deficiency in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e), that certain 1/2 inch Nelson studs attached to embedments had exhibited a higher than normal failure rate when subjected to a bend test.
The licensee's investigation revealed that the 1/2 inch studs had been welded improperly and without an approved procedure.
The vendor's (ACME Steel Engineering Company) procedure has been revised. Operator training and requalification was initiated and stud welding / testing was added as a witness point to tho shop inspection program.
NCR No. 368 was issued to identify the defective studs in storage and NCR No.* 369 to identify the studs on installed embedmonts which had been concreted in place.
The Engineering Evaluation and Disposition f9e No. 369 has been completed and requires modification of certain embeunents.
.
384339
.
.
.
.
This item remains unresolved pending review by an NRC inspector of NCR's No. 368 and 369, after closecut of NCR No. 369.
(78-00-03)
10.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (79-02-02):
Clearance between pipe and support structure members.
Item 2 of Drawing 1-P-BC-019-H13(Q) has been replaced to allow the 1/16 inch clearance as required by the drawing.
The inspector observed that this clearance had been established.
In addition, Bechtel letter of April 2,1979, to the licensee states that fit-up will be revised by construction to assure clearance.
Clearance at the vertical support members will be provided by shims after completion of piping installation.
'
11.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, or items of noncompli-ance.
Unresolved items identified during the inspection are discussed in Paragraphs 4 and 5.
12.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on April 19, 1979.
The inspector sumarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
36j4.340