IR 05000354/1980019
| ML19345E870 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 12/11/1980 |
| From: | Bateman W, Mattia J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19345E863 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-354-80-19, 50-355-80-19, NUDOCS 8102060299 | |
| Download: ML19345E870 (11) | |
Text
-
.
.
O U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT i
Region I 50-354/80-19 Report No. 50-355/80-19 50-354 Docket No. 50-355 CPPR-120 License No. CPPR-121 Priority Category A
--
Licensee:
Public Service Electric and Gas Comnany 80 Park Plaza - 17C Newark. New Jersev 07101 Facility Name:
Hooe Creek Generatino Station. Units 1 and 2 Inspection at:
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey
,
Inspection conducted: November 3 - 30, 1980 Inspectors: b.Ik.
I[T
_
/1/S/80 W. H. Bateman, Resident Inspector da te' signed date signed date signed
/ 3 /h ko Approved by:
-(. AM
. C. Mattia, Chief, Projects Section (Acting)
date signed Inspection Summary:
Unit _1 Inspection of November 3
_30, 1980 (Report _No. _50-354/80-19):
Areas Inspected:
Routine announced inspection by the resident inspector of work in progress including valve ir.ternals inspection, structural steel welding inside containment, structural steel erection inside and outside containment, containment upper spray header pipe support welding, storage of piping, hangers, and equipment; pipe installation in-cluding rigging and welding, rebar installation including mechanical splicing, con-crete preplacement, placement, and curing; load testing of reactor pressure vessel (RPV) lifting rig, upper bioshield welding and painting, and concrete test lab activities. The inspector also made tours of the site on a regular basis, reviewed RPV lift, transport and set procedures; reviewed inspector qualifi::ation records, and evaluated licensee action on previous inspection findings.
The inspection involved 55 hours6.365741e-4 days <br />0.0153 hours <br />9.093915e-5 weeks <br />2.09275e-5 months <br /> onsite by the resident inspector.
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77 810 20 60 /N)
-
l
.
.
Insne_ction Summa _ry
.
R_e_sul t_s_: Of the fourteen areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified in thirteen areas and one item of noncompliance was identified in one area.
(In-fraction - failure to bolt together safety reiated structural steel connections in accordance with jobsite requirements as discussed in paragraph 3.)
Unit 2 Insp_e_ction of November 3 - 30, 1980 (Report No. 50-355/80-19):
Areas Inspected:
Routine announced inspection by the resident inspector of work in progress including concrete preplacement, placement, and curing; equipment maintenance, and backfill. The inspector also made site tours on a regular basis and evaluated licensee action on previous inspection findings. The inspection involved 15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br /> onsite by the resident inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance were identified.
,
,
.
_ DETAILS
1.
Pers"ns Cont _ acted Public Servic_e Electric and_ Gas Company _(P_SE&G)
A. Barnabei, Site QA Engineer R. Bravo, Senior Construction Engineer R. Donges, Site QA Engineer A. E. Giardino, Froject QA Engineer R. Inverso, Construction Engineer P. Kudless, Principal Construction Engineer A. Myer, Site QA Engineer R. Robinson, Site QA Engineer D. Skibinski, Site QA Engineer A. Smith, Project Construction Manager Bec_h_tel Power Corporation _ (_B_echtel)
E. Applegate, QC Engineer L. Bedford, Contract Administration R. Bowers, Civil QC Engineer W. Cole, QA Engineer A. Falvey, Field Welding Engineer L. Fields, Civil QC Engineer J. Gatewood, Lead Site QA Engineer S. Graham, Lead Civil Field Engineer B. Groch, QA Engineer R. Hanks, Project QC Engineer R. Hanselman, Field Welding Engineer W. Hindle, Project Field Engineer C. Holod, Project QC Engineer M. Hopfenspirger, Civil QC Engineer P. Hudson, QA Engineer W. Jenkins, Civil QC Engineer K. Jones, Area Superintendent D. Long, Project Superintendent M. Macondray, Assistant Project Field Engineer R. McCoy, Lead QC Engineer G. Moulton, Project QA Engineer G. Rafferty, Civil Field Engineer C. Rogers, Mechanical Field Engineer D. Sakers, Lead Civil QC Engineer R. Seraiva, Field Superintendent P. Schuetz, Resident Civil Engineer P. Willis, Civil QC Engineer
.
- - - -.
- -
,.
y
-
y-.
g-y y
.
j
Pittsburgh - Des Moines_ Steel _ Company (PDM)
D. Davis, Eastern Division QA Manager J. Mercuri, Project Engineer M. Stiger, Site QA Manager General _ Electric Nuclear Engineering Division (GENED)
J. Cockroft, Site Engineer Schneider, Inc.
B. Chuhralya, Corporate QA Engineer G. Davidson, Site Supervisor W. Goebel, Site QA Manager E. Hansson, QC Inspector G. Heinrichs, Corporate QA Supervisor J. Levine, Corporate Engineer Hake-Lampson D. Ellis, QC Engineer
,
P. Gohn, Site Project Manager Peabody Test Labs H. Dody, Site QC Supervisor
.
__.
.
2.
Si_te Tour Routine tours of the site were made to observe the status of work and con-struction activities in progress. Work activity remains minimal on Unit 2 with the exception of the floor slab at elevation 102' in the diesel gen-erator area.
The inspector noted the presence of and interviewed QC and construction personnel. Work items were examined for obvious defects or noncompliance with regulatory requirements or license conditions. Areas observed incitded:
Unit 1: Vent line bellows repair, storage and maintenance of piping, hangers, and equipment; backfill, rebar installation, upper bioshield welding and painting, concrete curing, and preparations for reactor pressure vessel (RPV)
placement.
Un_it 2:
Preservation activities, backfill, concrete curing, and equipment storage.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Containment (Steel Struc_tu_r_es and_ Supports) - Observation of Work and Work Activities - Unit 1 While touring containment to observe ongoing activities including structural steel erection, the NRC inspector was questioned by a concerned individual as to the technical acceptance of using a hydraulic jack to force high strength bolts through misaligned holes in structural steel members. The inspector stated that this was not an acceptable practice and proceeded to investigate.
The inspector subsequently observed this activity taking place during bolting activities involving erection of containment structural steel at elevation 121'-7h".
In particular an ironwcrker crew used a hydraulic jack to force bolts through misaligned bolt holes in drywell framing steel and then used a " thread chaser" or die to clean up the bolt threads to enable threading the nut into place.
Bechtel Specification C-126(Q), Rev. 6, " Technical Specification for Erection of Structural Steel for Category I Structures" states in paragraph 7.4 that:
"Each part of the structure shall be properly aligned before making field connection... Fitting-up bolts and drift pins shall not be used to bring out-of-tolerance fabricated members and parts into place." The inspector informed the licensee of this unacceptable activity and the licensee issued a stop work order to halt structural steel bolting activities inside containment at elevation 121'-7h" pending investigation of the extent of the problem, the extent of the damage, and corrective action required to prevent recurrence.
Bechtel proceeded to inspect all the bolted connections at elevation 121'-7h" and a large number of bolts at other elevations. The inspection was visual and by touch in an attempt to detect thread damage to the threaded portion of the bolt protruding beyond the nut. All bolts whose threads appeared to be damaged were removed and the metal adjacent to the bolt holes examined for damage.
.
._
_ _.
.
Additionally, a random number of bolts were removed and the condition of the structural steel examined. The results of the inspection indicated that, although there was some damage to the metal adjacent to the bolt holes, the large percentage of the bolted connections were satisfactory.
An NCR was written to identify and disposition the damaged holes and the ironworkers were all lectured to by Bechtel Field engineering concerning bolting practices. Additionally, Bechtel Work Plan / Procedure Record C-2523, Rev. O, " Structural Steel Erection Checklist" has been revised to prevent use of hydraulic jacks to install bolts unless field engineering inspects the connection prior to bolt installation and QC inspects after bolt installation.
The failure of jobsite personnel to follow bolting procedures when making bolted connections of drywell framing steel is an item of noncompliance relative to Criterion V of Appendix B of 10 CFR 50.
(354/80-19-01)
The action taken by the licensee to resolve this noncompliance was completed prior to the end of this inspection report period.
As a result, the item of noncompliance is considered closed and no written re-sponse is required.
Safety Related Pjpe Sup_ port and Restraint Systems - Unit 1 Schneider, Incorporated, (SI) a subcontracter to PDM, has the responsi-bility to install the safety related piping and supparts inside containment.
The inspector observed work in progress on modifict ons to the upper spray header supports and reviewed associated docun,entation. The review also included verification of qualification of NDE personnel. Documentation reviewed included:
SI Component Support Multiple Weld Data Sheets for supports MA-1-H09
-
and MA-1-H10 SI Drawing 52000-1, Rev. 5, Hanger Mark No. MA-1-H1 thru MA-1-H20
--
ASNT-TC-1A Personnel Qualification Records
--
SI Nonconformance & Disposition (N&D) Report No. 520-F7 dated 3/7/79.
--
t l
The documentation review was satisfactory except that an open question re-mains regarding the dispostion of N&D 520-F7. This nonconformance was written to request that the zero clearance between the 0.D. of the spray header pipe and the I.D. of the support collar as called for on SI drawing 52000-1 be modified to permit up to a 3/16" clearance for supports MA-1-H2, l
H4, H7, H11, H12, H13, H14, H17, and H20. The disposition stated that the l
3/16" clearance would be acceptable provided that the size of weld be in-l creased by 3/16". The inspector requested to review documentation associated with this disposition to ensure that the requirements of Subsection NC of Section III of the ASME Code were considered when the disposition was made.
l Specifically, the inspector questioned the dispostion permitting
'
crease in the gap to 3/16" when, in paragraph NC-4433, it appears i maximum gap is limited to 1/8". Additionally, after discussions wito PDM, l
SI, and licensee personnel to explain this question, it became apparent to
!
.
.
.
the inspector that there was confusion as to whether Subsection NC or NF was used when evaluating this nonconformanco.
,
These questions will remain unresolved pending resolution of the appropriate Code class for the joint in question and evidence that the requirements of that Code class were applied to the joint when the disposition to SI N&D 520-F7 was made.
(354/80-19-02)
5.
Licens_ee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (354/79-06-01): A non-Q hanger appeared to support Q piping and the same hanger was installed such that contact with 4 supporting lugs was not possible. The licensee has instituted a seismic II/I program:
Seismic II/I items are those portions of structures, sys-tems, and components whose continued function is not required but whose failure, caused by a SSE, could reduce the functioning of a seismic category I structure, system, or component to an unacceptable safety level or could result in an incapacitating injury to occupants of the control room. Hanger 1-PBE-049-H07 has been added to this classification which means that the pertinent requirements of the Bechtel QA program will be applied to this hanger. All areas of the power plant will be examined to determine if similar type problems exist and once identified will be made part of the seismic II/I program. The incorrect location of the hanger support lugs has been identified on the appropriate QC1R and will be corrected prior to signoff of the QC1R.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (354/80-14-05):
Lack of definition as to the sequence in which a mandatory inspection is to be performed. GEI&SE has stated that in the future all signoffs of root I.D.'s will reflect the initial date of the root visual inspection.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (354/80-16-04):
Conflict between flow direction arrow and valve internal construction symbol on 3" gicbe valve 1-BE-V031 in the Core Spray system. The licensee disassembled the valve and determined that the flow direction arrow was correct and that the internal construction symbol was incorrect. This means that the valve, as presently installed, is correctly installed. Steps will be taken to permanently identify this conflict to prevent similar questions at some future time.
(Open)
Noncompliance (354/80-07-02;355/80-07-01):
Failure to use a qualified weld procedure to weld beam seat support brackets to embedded plates when the included angle is less than 60 degrees.
The licensee presented Amendment 2 to Weld Procedure Specification P1-A-Lh (Structural),
Rev. 3 which qualifies the type of geometry used to make the aforementioned welds. However, the licensee in their letter of response to this noncom-pliance stated, "The additional variables indicated for the revised welding procedure have been met for the welds made..." Proof of this was not available for the inspector's review prior to the end of this inspection report period. Consequently, this item remains open pending review and
.
y 4-r-
y
--
-e
.
- - -
.
.
acceptance of the data used to justify the licensee's statement as quoted
'
above.
6.
Reac_ tor __ Vessel _ Installation - Observation of Work _ and Work Activity - Un_it _1_
The activities involving (RPV) are being performed by a joint venture be-the transporting, lifting, and setting of the reactor pressure vessel rank W. Hake, Inc. and Lampson Universal Rigging, Inc.
Basically, tween c
,
'
Hake is managing the work and Lampson is supplying the equipment and techni-cal procedures and drawings. The inspector reviewed the following docu-ments as part of an overall inspection of RPV installation activities:
Bechtel Technical Specification FSK-M-056(Q), " Transport, Up-Ending,
--
and Landing of Reactor Pressure Vessels" F. W. Hake, Inc., "QA Manual for Shipping, Storage, and Handling of
--
Items for Nuclear Power Plants" Lampson Procedure No. LUR-TP-28-30, Rev. 4, " Load Test for the Lampson
-
Crawler Transporters and Haul Road for Unit No. 1" Lampson QCIR IP-HC-001 for activities of LUR-TP-28-30
--
Lampson Procedure No. LUR-TP-28-20, Rev 4, " Load Test for the Lampson
--
Transi-Lift Mobile Lift Crane" QCIR IP-PC-002 for activities of LUR-TP-28-20
--
LUR-WP-28-10, Rev. O, " Load Out Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) and
--
Secure to Crawler Transporters" QCIR IP-HC-003 for activities of LUR-WP-28-10
--
LUR-WP-28-11, Rev. O, " Transport Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) from
--
Storage to Containment Building" QCIR IP-HC-004 fcr activities of LUR-WP-28-11
--
LUR-WF-28-12, Rev. O, " Upend and Set Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV)"
--
QCIR IP-HC-005 for activities of LUR-WP-28-12
--
Lampson Dwg. LUR-1719-D, " Crawler Transporter Test Load Arrangement
--
Unit Nos.1 and 2, RPV Haul Route and Travel Route - Unit No.1" LUR-1729-D, " Crawler Transporters with Bolsters - General Arrangment"
--
.
- -
-
. _, _.
m. _ __ _.
.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _
,
.
. - _ -
.
_
__.
-
.
.
i
}
LUR-1715-D, "Transi-Lift Load Test Unit 1 Test Load Arrangement"
--
LUR-1716-D, "Transi-Lift Load Test Unit 2 Test Load Arrangement"
--
LUR-1724-D, "Transi-Lift Load Test General Arrangement
--
LUR-1730-0, "RPV Unit 1 - Load Out from Storage - Elevation" j
--
LUR-1731-D, "RPV Unit 1 - Load Out from Storage - Plan"
!
--
LUR-1732-D, "RPV Unit 1 - Transportation Arrangement"
--
,
LUR-1700-D, "RPV Unit 1 - Upend and Set Operations - Plan View"
--
!
LUR 1720-D,"RPV Unit 1 - Upending and Set Operations - Elevation View"
--
i
,
.
The procedures were undergoing revision to incorporate more details. The
'
drawings were complete and appeared to reflect adequate consideration of the uniqueness of this site to ensure that no handling, transporting, and setting problems will be encountered. The QA manual is a generic docu-
]
ment that is adequate.
I The inspector witnessed various preliminary operations including load
testing of the transporter route from the RPV storage location to the uoending location adjacent to the south wall of the power block and load testing of the Transi-Lift and associated rigging. The load testing of the Transi-Lift involved simulating the actual RPV lift, i.e., the test weight was picked at a 95 foot radius (radius is measured from base of i
boom to the load) and the boom rotated over the power block with the test load at the correct elevation. Additional load testing. involved lifting the test load at 95 foot radius and lowering the boom to radii of 143 feet and 145 feet to simulate the radii required to center the RPV's inside the containment drywell of Units 1 and 2.
~
No items of noncompliance were identified.
-
'
'
7.
Structural Concrete - Observ_ation__of Work and Work Activities - Units 1 and 2 The inspector observed preplacement, placement, and curing activities of pour
'
number 9F-F-S001/7, Unit 2 diesel generator slabs at elevation 102'. Also observed were curing activities on miscellaneous wall and slab pours through-
!
out both units.
In particular the-inspector verified that preplacement activi-t ties were completed prior to release of the placement, adequate QC personnel were present, adequate craft personnel were present with sufficient equip-ment to properly place the concrete, and that curing of the concrete was performed.
Additionally, the inspectr observed colicrete test lab operations to ensure that the required tests were performed including determination of-
'
. air content, temperature, and slump of concrete; that concrete test cylinders were taken, and that batch plant tickets were accurately issued with each truck load of concrete. -QC personnel were interviewed to determine their
,
>
e r w wd'-
w-
+-evo+
-*
T wg--4
--
,.,
,w--
-
S
- -,w
-+
re-e-
---
v-
-
,-
v
,r'
-
.
understanding of the inspection requirements. The inspector also reviewed the qualification records of several new QC personnel to determine if they were adquately qualified. Two of the Level I QC inspectors were recent college graduates with no related on site work experience. These inspectors were collecting batch plant tickets and were :.ot involved in placement in-spection. Although these inspectors were not directly involved in critical inspection activities, the inspector cautioned the licensee against the use of inexperienced QC personnel for critical inspection activities.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
8.
Safety Re_ lated _ Structures _0bservation of Work and Work Activities Including Welding - Unit 1 The inspector observed the continuing activities on the three serments of the upper bioshield.
Inspection of the upper bioshield by Bechtel site QC personnel resulted in the identification of several problems including missing NDE records, welding defects, lack of material identification, lack of weld history records, and a missing stiffner.
Prior to shipment to the site, other problems had been identified including as built di-mensions that were not in conformance with specification and design draw-ing requirements.
In particular the inspector observed painting, stud welding, NDE, weld re-pair, and weld end preparation activities. The painting was performed by Surfco/Metalweld under environmentally controlled conditions after the surface was sandblasted to a white metal condition. Stud welding was per-formed by Owens-Corning and involved stud welding stainless steel studs onto the surface of the inner bioshield plate - the studs to be later used as part of an insulation support system.
NDE was perfomed by Briggs En-gineering and Testing Company to investigate welds for which there were no original NDE records. As a result of this NDE defects were located and repaired and reexamined. Bechtel employed an oxy-acetylene cutting operation to prepare the ends of the three bioshield sections for subse-quent welding. This operation was required because of the lack of con-formance between the as built dimensions and the design drawings. Addi-tionally, Bechtel welded a backing bar to the bottom of the upper bioshield for the purpose of compensating for the lack of squareness of the bottom of the upper bioshield.
The inspector also observed structural steel installation aG.ivities in-side the containment.drywell.
In particular bolting and welding activities were observed for confomance to jobsite requirements. The bolting is discussed in paragraph 3 of this report and the welding appeared to be acceptable in that the welders and procedures were qualified and QC was present to witness the various hold points.
No items of noncompliance were identifie.
-
9.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items or items of noncompliance. An unresolved item identified during the inspection is discussed in paragraph 4.
10.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee and contractor personnel on each Friday of this inspection report period. At these times the inspector summarized the scope and findings of that week's inspection activities.
.