IR 05000361/1979006
| ML13309A682 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 03/05/1979 |
| From: | Elin J, Haynes R, Hernandez G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13309A681 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-361-79-06, 50-361-79-6, 50-362-79-06, 50-362-79-6, NUDOCS 7904130021 | |
| Download: ML13309A682 (6) | |
Text
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
50-361/79-06 Report N /79-06 50-361 CPPR-97 Docket N License No. CPPR-98 Safeguards Group Licensee:
Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 Facility Name: San Onofre Units 2 and 3 Inspection at: Construction Site, San Diego County, California Inspection Conducted: January 2-5 and 15-26, 1979 Inspectors:
9 JJ 0. Elin, Reactor Inspector at Signed G
ernandez, Rea r Inspector
'Date Signed Approved By:
_______-3
/___7 R. C. Hayne4 f, Projects Section, Reactor Date Signed Construction and Engineering Support Branch Summary:
Inspections on January 2-5 and 15-26, 1979 (Report Nos. 50-361/79-06 and 50-362/79-06)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspections by regional based inspectors of construction activities including safety related equipment receiving; storage and installation; and electrical cable installatio The inspection involved 96 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspector Results:
Of the two areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie (
IE:V Form 219 (2)
DETAILS 1. Individuals Contacted a. Southern California Edison Company (SCE)
- H. B. Ray, Manager, Quality Assurance
- R. R. Hart, Construction Superintendent
+*P. A. Croy, Site QA/QC Supervisor
+L. L. Seyler, Project QA Superviosor
+P. R. King, QA Engineer J. J. Pantaleo, QA Engineer
+W. F. Rossfeld, QA Engineer R. Frick, QA Engineer b. Bechtel Power Corporation (Bechtel)
+*C. A. Blum, Quality Control Manager
+*R. H. Cutler, Project Field Engineer
+*J. E. Geiger, Project Field OA Supervisor
+*J. R. Caldwell, Project QA Supervisor
- J. E. Bashore, Division QA Manager In addition, construction craftsmen, engineers and foremen were contacted during the inspection *Denotes-attendees at management meeting on January 5, 197 +Denotes attendees at management meeting on January 19, 197. Safety Related Components a. Storage, Handling and Protection The safety related equipment storage areas were toured to verify implementation of the Bechtel procedure WPP/QCI-009, Rev. 8, Housekeeping, and assure that the requirements of ANSI N45.2.3, Housekeeping During the Construction Phase of Nuclear Power Plants, and NRC Regulatory Guide 1.39 were being met. The stor age, handling and protection of safety related equipment appeared to essentially meet the requirements referenced above. The Charg ing Pump Room 106A was found to contain a small amount of con struction trash and metal cuttings; this area was designated as a Zone IV and should have been "swept clean of dirt and debris."
This was brought to the attention of the responsible Bechtel Field Engineer and the material was removed immediately. The charging pump and motor were covered with plastic and sealed with tape; therefore, the cleanliness of the equipment was not affecte b. Receipt Inspection Five safety related components were selected to verify compliance with Bechtel WPP/QCI-008, Rev. 9, Material Receiv ing, Pre-Installation, Storage and Handling Procedure; ANSI N45.2.2, Packaging, Shipping, Receiving, Storage and Handling of Items for Nuclear Power Plants; and NRC Regulatory Guide 1.3 The methods of handling, identification, receipt inspection pro cedures, segregation of nonconforming items and documentation were reviewed for the following items:
RIDR N Description (1) 9009 40" Butterfly Valves (2) 9019 Vital Bus Power Supply System Panels (3) 8987 RCP Internals (4) 8963 3" 150# Disk Tilt Check Valve (5) 8317 RCP Motor & Flywheel No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie c. Installation Two safety related components outside of the reactor coolant pressure boundary were selected to observe whether procedural requirements relative to installation were being met. This was accomplished by observation, review of design drawings and inspection documentation. The components selected were the Vital Bus Power Supply System Panels (RIDR 9019) and the Reactor Coolant Pump Internals (RIDR 8987).
d. Protection After Installation On January 22, 1979, a tour of the site was conducted to observe protection of installed safety related components. Six compon ents were selected and verified that the requirements identified in Paragraph 2.a above were being met. In addition, meggering records were also reviewed and compared with the requirements of WPP/QCI 610, Rev. 5, Preoperational Maintenance of Electrical Equipment. Meggering records for the Component Cooling Water Pumps for Unit 2 and 3 indicated that during two periods the monthly megger readings were missed. However, subsequent read ings were taken and no degradation of the megger values occurre The readings were missed due to the person scheduling the work misinterpreting the schedule requirements. This person has now been reinstructed to schedule the megger readings as required by the procedure WPP/QCI 610, Rev. 5. The components selected were as follows:
Name ID Number (1) Boric Acid Make-up Pump S21218MP174 (2) Containment Spray Pump S31206MP013 (3)
Low Pressure Safety S21204MP015 Injection Pump (4) High Pressure Safety S21204MP017 Injection Pump (5)
Component Cooling Water Pump S31203MP024 (6) Spent Fuel Pool Pump S21219MP009 e. Construction Specification/Work Procedure
.
On January 25, 1979, the inspector selected two disciplines, Electrical and Piping, to verify that controlled documents used in the field were technically adequate and the latest issue. There were no drawings found out of revision in the electrical area. In the piping area, six field drawings were found to be of an earlier revision than the most recent revision as indicated below:
Drawing N Latest Revision (1) 40307 - Rev. 9 Rev. 10 (2) 40326 - Rev. 7 Rev. 8 (3) 40393 -
Rev. 5 Rev. (4) 40400 -
Rev. 5 Rev. 6 (5) 40440 - Rev. 3 Rev. 4 (6) 43000 - Rev. 1 Rev. 3
-4 The inspector found that Bechtel procedure WPP/QCI 019, Rev, 11, requires the Construction Area Clerk (CAC) to "periodically audit the files to insure that the documents are updated in accordance with the Weekly Document Log (WDL)
and the Daily Document Log (DDL)
and either destroys or marks "Void" on the out-of-date revision The CAC had interpreted "periodically" as once per month which re sulted in some drawings being out-of-date by that amount of tim In subsequent discussions, licensee personnel stated that use of the'daily and weekly drawing logs to update the construction draw ing file monthly appeared to be the cause of the problem. A Cor rective Action Request (CAR) was initiated for the out-of-date drawing The inspector also checked the revision status of six piping drawings being used by the pipefitters to install pipe in four different locations. All of the drawings were the current revisio This item is considered to be unresolved pending further review of implementation of procedure WPP/QCI 019, Rev. 11, regarding the drawing file updating practices (50-361/79-06/01). Electrical Cables and Terminations:
Observation of Work and Work Activities Two safety related raceway hangers in the containment building were examined and their installation compared to the approved drawing Selected sections of completed cable raceway in the containment build ing, cable spreading room, and control building were also examined and compared to the approved drawings. No items.of noncompliance or deviations were observe Three cable pulls by two separate crews were observed. The inspector verified the requirements of Bechtel procedure WPP/QCI 604, Rev. 5, Cable Installation, were implemented. Routing and inspection of the raceway prior to start of the pull was verified. Both crews took adequate care to protect the cables from damage. No areas of devia tion or noncompliance were observed in association with these cable pull Protection of installed safety related cable was observed throughout the plan In general, the cable was found to be well protected with unplaced lengths properly secured and ends capped. It was noted that, in some areas, spray-on insulation was being applied to the ceil ings above the cable trays. This insulation, in many cases, made its
way into the cable trays and was found over and around the cable The effects of this material on the cables was discussed with the licensee's management personnel and the licensee committed to provide additional data in this are This is an unresolved item (50-316/
79-06/02).
The installation of fire main piping was noted in various areas such as the cable spreading room. The piping was installed in a manner to provide for automatic spraying of the cable trays with water. Although this piping is not considered safety related, there was concern that the mounting of the piping may not be fully adequate. The licensee stated that this condition had been previously identified and a CAR had been initiated (CAR F-699, dated 11/06/78). The inspector had no further questions on this matte.
Management Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) on January 5 and 19, 1979. The scope of the inspections and inspector's findings as noted in this report were discussed. The licensee representatives had no additional comments.