IR 05000361/1980001
| ML19323C223 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 03/06/1980 |
| From: | Eckhardt J, Haynes R, Hernandez G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19323C210 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-361-80-01, 50-361-80-1, NUDOCS 8005150164 | |
| Download: ML19323C223 (7) | |
Text
-
-_-. - _.
-.
8005150 /
-
e
'
.
.
O
'O
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
Report No.
50-361/80-01 CPPR-97 Docket No.
50-361 License No.
Safeguards Group Licensee:
Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 Facility Name:
San Onofre Unit 2 Construction site, San Diego County, California Inspection at:
Inspection conducted:
February 12-15, 1980 nm f/g/[8 Inspectors:
n 3. H. Eckhattit, Reactor Inspector datd Signed 0. b A a.-,LAGv 3-fe-Bo G/ Hernandez, Rea6 tor Inspector Date Signed Date Signed 3 /[!b Approved By:
I
R. C. H'ynes, Chief, ' Reactor Projects Section, Ddte 'S igned a
Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Inspection on February 12-15, 1980 (Report No. 50-361/80-01)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by regional based inspectors of construction activities including:
previous open items, equipment supports, pipe welding, and pipe supports and restraints. The inspection involved 46 onsite inspector hours ty tuo NRC inspectors.
Results:
Of the areas inspected, one item of noncompliance in the area of pipe spring hangers was identified.
RV Form 219 (2)
..
.
.
,
.
.
DETAILS
.
1.
Individuals Contacted a.
Southern Ca*.ifornia Edison Company (SCE)
0. E. Nunn, Manager, Quality Assurance
P. A. Croy, Site Project Quality Assurance Supervisor
R. R. Hart, Construction Manager 0. B. Schone, Lead Engineering Site Representative
W. L. Rossfeld, Construction Lead QA Engineer W. Petro, Assistant Project Manager
S. S. Dziewit, QA Engineer V. A. Gow, QA Engineer E. McLaughlin, QA Engineer b.
Bechtel Power Corporation (Bechtel)
R. H. Cutler, Project Field Engineer C. A. Blum, Project Field QC Supervisor
J. E. Geiger, Project QA Supervisor
L. W. Hurst, Project Field QA Supervisor
W. D. Nichols, Assistant Project Field Engineer A. L. Erickson, Project Field OC Engineer
J. McAlary, Welding Field Engi !er H. Bumgarner, Welding Field E
.neer S. Scott, Field Engineer G. Austerman, Lead Pipe Support Group L. Garvey, Assistant Lead Pipe Support Group J. T. Lorenzen, Lead Construction Field Engineer T. R. Moskalyk, Construction Field Engineer
- Denotes those at. tending exit interview.
2.
Status of Previous Inspection Items
,
a.
(Closed) Open Item (Report 50-361/79-29) Cable resting on
)
edge of cable tray.
j Nonconformance report E-ll61 concerning Class IE control cables entering penetration ZAC3RP08 from tray BPAWA6 has been wri tten. The NCR was reviewed and the disposition requiring
,
installation of a dropout on the end of the tray appears satisfactory. This item is considered closed.
b.
(Closed) Open Item (Report 50-361/79-29) Operation of mechanical shock arrestor (snubber).
Pacific Scientific snubber installed on Unit 2 pipe restraint assembly S2-SI-065-H-009 was observed to not operate smoothly.
The licensee had this snubber reinspected and determined that
'
the snubber met the criteria for proper operation as given in paragraph 4.0 of ITT Grinnel Maintenance and Installation Manual PHD-7594-1, Revision 2.
This item is considered closed.
.
-2-
,
.
.
c.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-361/79-08/02)
Insufficient thread engagement of screws attaching pivot mount to snubber housing plate.
Previously, Bechtel had identified screws attaching the ITT Grinnel rear pivot mount to the housing plate on Pacific Scientific mechanical snubbers as having insufficient thread engagement. These screws have been replaced with longer screws supplied by ITT Grinnel. Also, the Bechtel procedure for pipe restraint installation has been revised to reference the ITT Grinnel maintenance and installation procedures for proper torquing requirements of the screws. This item is considered closed.
d.
(Closed) Open Item (50-361/79-29/02) Control of keys for third of a kind load interlock system.
It was previously determined that the control of keys for the interlock system of " third of a kind" electrical loads was questionable. The licensee has reviewed the program for control of the keys and has determined that controls will not be established until turnover of the system for startup.
At that time, new locks will be installed in the transfer switches and key control implemented. To ensure this takes place, this item will be tracked on the SCE " outstanding items for startup" list. This item is considered closed.
3.
Equipment Supports The installed support for Unit 2 containment spray pump S2-1206-M-P012 was examined and compared with installation instructions and drawings. The examination included measurement of selected fillet welds, identification of bolt types, identifi-cation of heat numbers, and grouting of base plates.
Also, NRC N-627 concerning bolt torquing was reviewed.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
4.
Pipe Welding Activities Inprocess pipe welding activities were observed on the following weld joints in the Unit 2 containment and safety equipment building:
l l
l
.
i o-
',
-3-
,
.
.
Line Weld flo.
Pipe Dia.,
Activity j
inches Observed l
S2-1206-ML-028 B(C)
Repair welding Sht. 1
.i'-1201-ML-016 G
Liquid penetrant examination of
,
'
weld repair S2-1201-ML-043 US 3/4 Root pass Sht. 1 S2-1204-ML-067 SA(C)
First pass of socket weld S2-SI-043-H-016 SB
Liquid penetrant (pipe support)
examination of dummy pipe to pipe weld The activities appeared to be conducted in accordance with appropriate Bechtel work and quality control instructions.
In addition, field welding check lists, filler metal withdrawal records, and liquid penetrant reports (where applicable) of the listed welding activities were reviewed.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were idc1tified.
5.
Safety-Related Pipe Supports and Restraints a.
The following pipe support and restraint documents were reviewed for conformance to licensee and code requirements.
,
(1) WPP/QCI Number 414, Revision 5.0, Field Fabrication and Installation of Pipe Supports of Project Class A-I & P.
(2)
Specification Number CS-P206, Revision 7, Design Guide for Supporting Small Piping (2 inch and under).
(3)
Specification Number CS-P207, Revision 6, Pipe Support Field Fabrication and Installation.
flo items of noncompliance or deviations were identified, b.
Observation of Work and Work Activiti_es (1) The following safety related mechanical shock arrestors (snubbers) were selected for examination at the warehouse storage area:
-.
.
. _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
. _ _ _ _ _
,
-4-
.
.
.
.
Snubber Load Classification S2-CC-082-H-007 700#
S2-RC-016-H-003 39208#
S2-RC-017-H-077 5265#
S2-RC-027-H-005 650#
S2-RC-017-H-067 6000#
S2-SI-066-H-009 350#
Selected snubbers were checked for smooth shaft travel and for unit activation by sudden movement. All snubbers conformed to the applicable drawings and had correct hot and cold settings indicated on stainless steel tags, except for snubber S2-RC-017-H-067, which had hot and cold settings which differed from those stipulated in the drawing. Licensee personnel stated that prior to release from the warehouse all snubber settings are checked against the appropriate drawing.
(2) The following six (6) installed mechanical snubbers in Unit 2 were examined for compliance with procedural requirements:
Snubber Load Classification S2-CC-070-H-004 650#
S2-CC-080-H-010 1500#
S2-CC-014-H-005 350#
S2-ST-001-H-002 120,000#
S2-ST-001-H-004 120,000#
S2-FW-190-H,015 50,000#
The identification tag for snubber S2-CC-014-H-005 had different hot and cold settings than those specified in the hangeridrawing, although the snubber was correctly j
installed to the settii.gs given in the drawing. This snubber had been rejected by Bechtel Quality Control.
i Since the inspector could not determine at this time i
whether a procedural requirement exists to verify the settings prior to release from the warehouse, this item will be inspected further during a subsequent inspection.
(50-361/80-01/01)
i i
a
-5-
'
.
.
.
'
(3) The following ten (10) spring hangers and suppo s in
.
Unit 2 were examined for compliance with licensee and ASME Code requirements.
System Support Number Component Cooling Water S2-CC-014-H-001 S2-CC-078-H-009 S2-CC-080-H-009 Fuel Storage and Refueling S2-FS-025-H-006 S2-FS-010-H-005 S2-FS-024-H-005 Condensate and Feedwater S2-FW-189-H-016 S2-FW-223-H-016 Containment Spray S2-CS-041-H-022 Gas Radwaste S2-GR-064-H-007 The pipe support assemblies were all quality class It, seismic class I, and ASME class 2 or 3.
The supports were examined to ascertain conformance to applicable drawings and specifications. All of the supports had received Quality Control final inspection prior to February 14, 1980. The inspector identified the following deficiencies:
Support Number Deficiency S2-CC-078-H-009 The pipe clamp lock nuts were loose
.
52-CC-080-H-009 Spring hanger rod lock nuts were loose S2-FS-025-H-006 Tho pipe clamp lock nuts were loose S2-FS-010-H-005 Beam attachment to beam field welds were specified on the drawing as front and back, actual condition was on the
,
radius or the sides of the beam attachment S2-FW-223-H-016 Hot and cold indicators were put as specified on the drawing S2-GR-064-H-007 (1) Hot and cold indicators were not as specified on the drawing.
l (2) The pipe clamp and spring hanger rod lock nuts were loos,
_.
._
-6-
,
..
.
.
.
-
.
The failure to identify the deficiencies noted in the installation of the pipe support assemblies is considered an apparent item of noncompliance.
(50-361/80-01/02)
Additionally, for pipe support drawing number S2-FS-010-H-005 the latest applicable Design Change Notice (DCN)
could not be readily determined. The numbering and
,
engineering review dates of the DCN's only added to the confusion. Accordingly, since this represented only a small sanple of drawings examined it could not be determined
.
whether this was an isolated case.
This item is considered unresolved and will be examined further during a subsequent inspection.
(50-361/80-01/03)
W c.
Review of Quality Assurance Records The Supplemental Data Reports (SDR) and Construction Inspection Plans (CIP) for those pipe supports listed in paragraph 5.b were reviewed for conformance with procedural requirements.
No items of noncompliance or deficiencies were identified.
6.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on February 15, 1980.
The scope and findings of the inspection as noted in this report were discussed.
..
E
.
.-
1