IR 05000358/1978031
| ML19276E068 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 01/17/1979 |
| From: | Hayes D, Naidu K, Vandel T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19276E067 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-358-78-31, NUDOCS 7903020277 | |
| Download: ML19276E068 (13) | |
Text
..
,
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-358/78-31 Docket No. 50-358 License No. CPPR-88 Licensee:
Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company 139 East 4th Street Cincinnati, OH 45201 Scility Name:
K5. H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Plant Inspection At:
b5. H. Zimmer Site, Moscow, OH
';-
Inspection Condugted: December 12-15, 1978-T~i j
/_
7'$l/.)(skcsfl7 t
Inspectors:
T. E. Vandel
,
/- / 7-77
A4 K. R. Naidu
/ // /7
.Ia
/-/7-79
,c
2 TWp1f
'
H. M. Wescott
'
, _,/_
,
--
'M
/ // 7!,7 7 Approved By:
I W. i
'es, Ch Projects Section Inspection Summary Inspection on December 12-15, 1978 (Report No. 50-358/78-31)
Areas Inspected:
Review of a piping system ready for turnover for pre-operational testing, review of suppression pool structural modifications, observations and records review of instrumentation cables and systems, and followup of previously identified concerns.
The inspection involved a total of 88 inspector-hours onsite by four NRC inspectors.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified during the inspection.
.
790302c177
.
DETAILS _
Persons Contacted Cincinnati Cas and Electric Company (CG&E)
- B.
K. Culver, Project Manager
- R. P. Ehas, QA&S Engineer
- W. W. Schwiers, Principal QA6S Engineer
- J. F. Weissenberg, QA&S Engineer
- R. L. Ward, QA&S Engineer
- J. W. Haf f, QA&S Engineer Kaiser Engineers Inc. (KEI)
- R.
Marshall, Project Manager
- R.
Turner, QA Manager
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
Other CG&E and KEI personnel were contacted during the course of the inspection.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Open) Noncompliance (358/78-16-06) - Several site contractors (Groups)
conducting safety-related inspection / testing, procedures not fully addressing the requirements of ANSI-N45.2.6-1973.
The inspector reviewed 200 and No. 213, which documents the results of CG&E audit reports No.
audits conducted on Reactor Control, Inc. and Waldinger/ Young and Bertke's This item remains open pending CG&E's QA conducting training programs.
an audit of CG6E Electrical Operating and Test Department (EOTD).
(Closed) Unresolved item (358/78-29-01) - The inspector could not deter-mine how CG&E plans to assure that Class 1E cable wireways, which are a one inch air space routed inside control boards, are routed such that between the wireways and the end plates of the panels is provided.
The inspector reviewed revision 9 dated November 30, 1978 to QACMI E-8 which addresses this item.
(open) Unresolved Item (358/78-08-02) - Procedures for construction testing of instrumentation. The inspector reviewed the following:
QA indoctrination training requirements for temporary personnel, dated November 16, 1978; procedure 1C.G1P.G500 Revision 00 dated November 22,
-
~
m b-2-
.*
.
1978 for Administrative Directives for test data documentation including revision status of procedures, drawings and methods of controlling set-This item will remain open, point changes to precalibrated instruments.
pending the licensee's approval of procedure LM. SAD.01.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (358/78-16-03) - Separation criteria for the
~
RPS cables were not available at the site.
The inspector reviewed General Electric Design Specification No. 22A2988 Revision 6, titled and Electrical Equipment, Separation for Safeguards Systems; Sargent Lundy design drawings and Design Document change SLE-468 dated August 23, 1978. The inspector has no further questions.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (358/78-03-06) - Unavailability of DDR 9136.
(DDR) 9136 It was previously reported that Deviation Disposition Request requested liquid penetrant examination of (1) the attachment welds of the gussets to the upper and lower bolting rings, stand pipes and for lack of compliance separators, and (2) the lif ting eyes to correct The licen-with GE specification 21A3319, revision 3, paragraph 4.9.8.
see furnished a copy of DDR 9136 dated February 14, 1975.
The DDR indicates that the following did not meet the GE specification 21A3319, Revision 3:
(1) the seal welds may be inadequate, paragraph 4.9.8, (2) Liquid Penetrant examination was incomplete, paragraph 5.2.2.
Corrective action was to bring the core structure into specification requirements. Three FDI's 35/63000, 37/63000 were issued to correct the situation. The NRC inspector did not review the rework during the inspection, since verification of satisf actory completion of corrective action is required to close the FDI.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (358/78-03-06) - Whether all DDR's were closed prior to the shipment of the RPV.
It was previously reported that the licensee would perform an audit to determine whether the RPV was shipped The with shop initiated DDR's on which corrective action was incomplete.
licensee performed an audit and documented his findings in the QALS Surveillance Report No. 53 dated July 10, 1978.
The audit indicates that 50 DDR's issued during core structure f abrication, were reviewed to verify whether shop initiated DDR's were closed out prior to the RPV shipment. The audit identified that only DDR 9136 was open.
It was of RPV.
noted that only DDR 9136 was generated af ter the shipment (Closed) Unresolved Item (358/78-03-09) - Inadequate information on stand pipe assembly welds.
It was previously reported that the weld sizes could not be verified due to the availability of adequate information including drawings. GE generated a Field Disposition Instruction (FDI)
No. 81/63000 dated May 5, 1978 instructing a visual inspection of the core structure fabrication welds on the Shroud Head and Separators,
-
-
e
-3-
.
.
the wel' ding requirements Core Plate, Top Guide and Shroud to verify that The rele-are in compliance with General Electric drawing requirements.
vant drawings were referenced. The inspection was performed by a team The results of the reinspection and the of GE engineers f rom San Jose'.
suggested disposition are documented in Field Deviation Disposition Request (FDDR) KN-1-180, R1 dated August 17, 1978.
The acceptance criteria for the visual inspection of welds is furnished in GE specifi-Corrective cation 21A3319 Standard Requirements for Core Structure.
The NRC action is in progress by Reactor Controls Incorporated (RCI).
engineers inspector considers the visual reinspection by GE San Jose this time.
acceptable and has no further questions at (0 pen) Unresolved (358/78-09-03) - Inadequate information on inspection procedure SPPM 4.6 (358/78-09-03).
It was previously reported that information contained in procedure SPPM 4.2 did not explicitly state how Nelson Studs are attached to structural members and inspected there-available during this inspection.
after. Additional information was not (Closed) Unresolved Item (358/77-11) - Inspection criteria for Heating Waldinger, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) ductwork hanger welds.
the contractor for the installation of HVAC ductwork Young and Bertke, developed a procedure titled " Standard Operating Instructions" delin-eating the inspection requirements and refers to other documents such as SLM-330 for acceptance criteria. The inspector verified the imple-to be acceptable.
mentation of the inspection procedure and determined it
-
.-
.-
-4-
.
.
Section I Prepar'ed by K. R. Naidu Reviewed by R. L. Spessard, Chief Engineering Support Section 1 Fuel Storage Racks 1.
Review of Quality Records on Spent Fuel Storage The inspector reviewed the documentation on the Spent The SFSR's Racks (SFSR) supplied by General Electric Company (GE).in Uilmington were manuf actured by the GE plant Though the requirements of GE specification 22A 2553.3 26 were three GE drawings 105 D4781 P001,105 D5225 and 10 to meet The did not provide details on the welds, was available on site.
f ollowing documents were reviewed and determined acceptable:
SFSR's iso. 211, 213, 214 and 215 a.
(1) Material Received Report (MR) No. 11827 dated October 9, 1974, indicates that four Spent Fuel Racks (SFSR) were received and stored in the compound.
1974 Receiving Inspection Plan (RIP) dated October 14, (2)
identifies no visible damage on these racks.
00402 dated Product Quality Certification (PQC) No.
(3)
October 8, 1974, signed by a GE shop representative, certifies that the above SFSR's met the applicable requirements.
b.
SFSR's No. 196, 202, 205_
10888 dated August 19, 1974, indicates that three MR No.
(1)
SFSR's were received and stored in the compound.
(2) RIP dated August 29, 1974, identifies no visible shipping damage on these racks.
16, 1974, signed by a GE shop (3) PQC No. 00344 dated August the above SFSR's met representative, certifies that the applicable requirements.
..
e
'-5-
.
.
SFSR's No. 174, 177, 179, 180, 181 and 190 c.
(1) MR No. 10889 dated August 19, 1974, indicates that six SFSR's were re.c61ved and stored in the compound.
(2) RIP dated August 29, 1974 identifies no visible shipping damage on these racks.
(3) PQC No. 00338 dated August 15, 1974, signed by a shop representative, certifies that the above SFSR's met the applicable requirements.
d.
SFSR's No. 185, 187, 194, 201, 203 and 204 (1) MR No. 10887 dated August 19, 1974, indicates that six SFSR's were received and stored in the compound.
(2) RIP dated August 29, 1974, identifies no visible shipping damage on these racks.
(3) PQC No. 00340 dated August 15, 1974, signed by a shop representative, certifies that the above SFSR's met the applicable requirements.
SFSR's No. 182, 183, 184, 191, 193 and 195 e.
(1) MR No. 10866 dated August 16, 1974, indicates that six SFSR's were received and stored in the compound.
(2) RIP dated August 29, 1974, identifies no shipping damage.
(3) PQC No. 00337 dated August 14, 1974, signed by a GE shop representative, certifies that the above SFSR's met the applicable requirements.
f.
SFSR's No. 188, 189, 206, 208 and 209 (1) MR No.10868 dated August 16, 1974, indicates that six SFSR's were received and stored in the compound.
(2) RIP dated August 29, 1974, identifies no visible shipping damage on these racks.
(3) PQC No. 00335 dated August 16, 1974, signed by a GE shop representative, certifies that the above SFSR's met the applicable requirements.
._
,,
..
-6-
,
.
g.
SFSR's No. 186, 192, 197, 198, 199 and 200 (1) MR No. 10867 dated August 16, 1974 indicates that six SFSR's were received and stored in the compound.
(2) RIP dated August 29, 1974, identifies no shipping damage on these racks.
(3) PQC No. 00336 dated August 14, 1974, signed by a GE shop representative, certifies that a above SFSR's met the applicable requirements.
h.
The NRC inspector observed oxidation on some of the aluminum plates of the SFSR's which had been installed in the Spent Fuel Storage Pool.
The licensee informed the inspector that this condition was identified and documented in QA surveil-lance reports. The inspector reviewed the following QA surveillance reports:
+
(1) QA Surveillance Report (QASR) No. 553Q dated February 2, 1978 identifies surface contamination grime and aluminum oxide on the SFSR's.
(2) QASR No. 554Q dated February 2,1978 identifies surface contamination on the Stainless Steel beam supports of the SFSR's.
(3) QASR No. 1438 dated December 6, 1978 indicates that the groove welds may be incomplete.
Corrective action has not been recommended.
Corrective action recommended on QASR's No. 553Q and 5540 was to clean them prior to final installation.
The inspector concurred with the findings documented in the above reports.
The inspector accompanied by representatives of GE and the licensee inspected some of the SFSR's and Control Rod Racks which are stored in the compound, on dunnage, covered with tarpaulin.
Some of the aluminum plates were coated with oxidation. The GE representatives explained that these SFSR's were stored since 1974 and that the surface oxidation condition was due to the weather conditions.
They stated that this would be cleaned and reexamined to determine whether the quality of the aluminum was degraded.
Also, the inspector expressed concern on the sizes of some of the fillet welds and groove welds on the bottom of the racks.
Due to the
.
-
-7-
.
unavailability of GE shop drawings, the size of the welds could not be verified. As this condition is identified in OA sur-veillance report No. 1438 dated December 6, 1978, the licensee agreed to obtain additional information and perform an inspection on the as built welas. The inspector informed the licensee that this matter is considered an unresolved item.
(358/78-31-01)
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in the above areas.
Review of Safety Related Duct Work Activities 2.
The inspector reviewed the work activities performed by Waldinger Young and Bertke (WBY), the contractor installing the Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning systems.
The inspector independently examined the adequacy and conformance of several completed welds on Seismic Category 1 ductwork hangers and verified they were acceptable. Also, the findings documented during a reinspection of the hangers, including corrective action taken to repair the welds identified therein, were independently examined and verfied to be acceptable.
The following are the details of the welds which were verified by the NRC inspector along with representatives of the licensee and WYB.
a.
Hangers No. 1880, 1879 in the Diesel Generator intake structure, Room A.
b.
Hangers No. 1849, 1885 in the Diesel Generator intake structure, Room B.
c.
Hangers No. 1486, 1895, 1893 and 1894 in the Diesel Generator intake structure, Room C.
elevation 510. Unacceptable Hangers in Switchgear Room at d.
welds such as cracked welds, and craters were marked on the respective hangers.
Corrective action had not commenced in this roon.
Waldinger, Young & Bertke (WYB) developed Standard Quality Instruc-tions delineating the inspection requirements and refers to other documents such as SCH-330 for acceptance criteria.
Inspection Reports (IR) document the findings.
In instances where nonconformances are identified, the 1R is stamped "Nonconformance
.
D e
-3-
Report."
Provisions are incorporated in the report for a QC inspector to reinspect the rework and determine whether the rework is acceptable.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in the above areas.
..
.
_9_
.
Section II Prepared by J. Hughes Reviewed by R. L. Spessard, Chief Engineering Support Section 1 1.
Instrumentation - Observation of Work Activities Including The inspector observed several work areas and activities.
terminations of cables. Results are as follows:
Panel lA were properly terminated, a.
Terminations at Instrument exceeded, i.e., proper lugs used, minimum bending radius was not cable identification tags were installed and separation cri-teria inside control panels, e.g., 6" to 12" were maintained.
Cables included: AP237, AP760 and AP239.
Drawings used were E-2457, Revision C and E-2368, Revision D,which were the revisions when terminations were completed.
current 1H13-P608 control panel (Power Range Monitoring b.
Terminations at Cabinet) were properly terminated, i.e., proper lugs used, minimum bending radius was not exceeded, cable identification tags were installed, and separation criteria was adhered to.
Cables included: RP031, RP030, RP022, RP023 and RP024.
Drawing used was E-2431, Revision E, which was tha current revision at the time of termination.
c.
Te.ninations at containment electrical penetrations (E-8) inboard side located in the drywell were properly terminated, i.e., proper lugs used, minimum bending radius was not exceeded, cable iden-tification tags were installed, and separation criteria was adhered to.
Cables included: NB046, NB050, NB054, NB345, NB349, and NB076. Drawing E-27 33, Revision K, was being used with Conax Instruction Manual No. IPS 109.1 during termination.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
2.
Instrumentation - Review of Quality Records The RIII inspector reviewed cable termination records for the a.
cables mentioned in paragraph 2.
The following was determined:
.
N e m
- 10 -
.
(1) Termination drawings were the current revisions; (2) Calibration records for crimping tools were up to date; (3) Correct materials were being used.
Termination inspection records (CIP) included provisions as b.
evidenced by KEI QA stamp, to verify that:
(1) Current drawing revisions are used; (2) Component name and location; (3) Cable number and number of conductors; (4) Crimping tool calibrated and number of tool used; (5) Stripping of cable and proper lug being used; (6) Separation and bundles secured properly; (7) Cable color codes current; (8)
Inspector stamp and date of inspection.
Records and other documents reviewed include:
c.
(1) Cables Terminated (Cable Number)
AP237 RP022 RP030 NB050 AP239 RP023 RP031 NB054 AP760 RP024 NB046 NB345 NB349 NB076 (2) Construction Inspection Plans CIP/1913-P611 CIP/ lH13-P636 CIP/lH13-P632 CIP/lH13-P608 CIP/lH13-P629 CIP/11P01EA CIP/ LAP 50EF CIP/1H13-P603 No items of noncompliance were identified.
-
..
.~
- 11 -
.
.
Section III Prepared by H. M. Wescott Reviewed by D. W. Hayes, Chief Projects Section Review of Quality Records for Safety Related Piping (Welding)
1.
The inspector reviewed quality assurance records related to field welds made in the Low Pressure Core Spray system as follows:
Weld history records (Kaiser Engineers - Weld Data Sheets)
a.
for welds numbered LP-ll, 12, 13, 14, 31, 32 and 33.
The records included interpass temperatures, radiograph reports, and liquid penetrant reports for gamma plug welds ll-GP-12 and 11-GP-14.
Each of the weld data sheets had the weld material issue b.
slips attached to provide traceability to the heat numbers.
Seven (7) welders ID symbols were taken from the weld data c.
sheets (item a above) and traced to their qualification records.
d.
Training and Qualification records of three (3) NDE inspection personnel that had performed inspections of the field welds were reviewed. These personnel were qualified to SNT-TC-1A 1968 requirements.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
.
2.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping (Welding) Observation of Work Activities The inspector reviewed the equipment turn-over system and performed a walk-down of Low Pressure Core Spray system as follows:
Review of Quality Assurance and Standards Procedures:
a.
(1) " Assembly and Verification of Documentation Prior to Preoperational Testing," Procedure No. 14-QAS-01, Revision 2, dated September 22, 1978.
._
e %
- 12 -
.
,
(2) " Receipt and Storage Control for Records Received by QA&S Turnover Group," Procedure No. 14-QAS-03, Revision 0, dated September 22, 1978.
Performed a "walkdown" of the L?CS system with a member of b.
Due to testing that was taking place the turnover group.
during this inspection the inspectors were unable to make a visual inspection of the LPCS system located within con-the suction line connection to the suppression tainment at pool.
Visual inspection of shop and field weldments.
c.
Visual examination of isolation valve installation.
d.
Inspection of the " Exception List," PT-LP-01, dated e.
December 1, 1978.
<<
f.
Review of Nonconformance Report NR 7148, concerning the restricting orifice.
Review of " Punch List," PT-LP-01, Revision 4, dated g.
September 6, 1978.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
Unresolved Matters Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required items of in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, An unresolved item disclosed during the noncompliance, or deviations.
inspection is discussed in Section I, Paragraph 1.h.
Exit Interview personnel (denoted under The inspection team met with Zimmer Management Persons Contacted, Details Section) at the conclusion of the inspection on December 15, 1978. The inspectors summarized the purpose, scope and results of the inspection which was acknowledged by Zimmer personnel.
._
b a *
- 13 -