IR 05000373/1979019
| ML19249C110 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 07/17/1979 |
| From: | Danielson D, Yin I NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19249C105 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-373-79-19, 50-374-79-13, NUDOCS 7909070437 | |
| Download: ML19249C110 (5) | |
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATCRY COMMISSION
,
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGIGN III Report No. 50-373/79-19; 50-374/79-13 Docket No. 50-373; 50-374 License No. CPPP.-99; CPPR-100 Licensee:
Commonwealth Edison Company
_
P. O. Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Name:
La Salle County Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: La Salle Site, Marseilles, Illinois NSSS Supplier, and Licensee Vendor offices Inspection Conducted: May 10-11, 1979, at the site June 13-14, 1979, at GE, San Jose, California June 15, 1979, at Pacific Scientific Company, Anaheim, California July 5, 1979, discuss finding through phone conference f
7 /B/7'7 Inspector:
I. T. Yin
<
.t w A. a.)//,-
/
'
Approved By:
D.11. Danielson, Chief 7/h)77 _
Engineering Support Section 2
'
Inspection Summary Inspection on January through July, 1979 (Report No. 50-373/79-19; 50-374/79-13)
Areas Inspected:
Inspection of safety-related hangers and restraints including (1) review previous identified items, (2) review licensee A-E and NSSS supplier audits, and (3) review NSSS and mechanical snubber manufacturer's design and test controls. The inspection involved a total of 30 inspector-hours onsite and in GE and PSCo offices by one NRC inspector.
Results: No apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
79090704 M 321210
.
-
DETAILS
,
Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Personnel (CECO)
- L. J. Burke, Site Project Superintendent
- M. E. Lohmann, Station Construction Engineer
- L. J. Tapella, QA Engineer
- D. J. Skoza, QA Engineer
-
- E. R. Wendorf, Station Construction Engineer
- G. E. Groth, Station Construction Engineer J. R. Kodrick, QA Mechanical Coordinator R. T. Rose, Field Engineer R. A. Braun, QA Engineer B. J. McAndrew, Lead Mechanical Engineer Morrison Construction Company (MCCo)
T. O'Connor, Superintendent R. C. Schulz, QC Supervisor M. Wherry, QC Welding Supervisor General Electric Company (GE)
E. O. Swain, Manager, Piping Design R. C. Boesser, Manager, QA and OM G. R. Hosack, Manager, Quality Audits R. J. Valencia, Audit Coordinator Pa_cific Scientific Company (PSCo)
J. B. Glanser, Director of Engineering F. M. Frederickson, District Application Engineer The inspector also contacted other licensee representatives in the course of conducting this inspection.
- Denotes some of those attending the exit interview through phone conference on July 5, 1979.
Licensee Action on Previous Identified Items (Closed) Noncompliance (373/78-25-02; 374/78-16-02):
Inadequate installation and QC inspection procedure for hangers and snubbers. The inspector reviewed Procedures PC-102A and PC-102B, Rev. 2, for installation of PSC snubbers and considered the manufacturer's requirements met the installation tolerance and identification of deviations established.
In addition,
-2-321211
temporary installation is controlled in accordance with F0QCS-627, Process
,
Control Reporting, issued December 1, 1978.
In regard to the tolerance requirement set by S&L, the inspector reviewed ECN M-143-LS, dated January 9, 1979, and had no adverse comments.
(open) Noncompliance (373/78-25-02):
Inadequate hanger QC inspections were identified during record reviews. The corrective actions conducted by CECO included (1) the hangers will be inspected during final line walks, and (2) the snubbers are being reinspected 100% in accordance with a modified QC program.
The inspector reviewed records on snubber Nos.
M09-MSO4-l?253, M09-MS04-1332S, and M09-MS04-1340S, and considered the rein pection adequate.
However, in regard to the allowable gap between shear lugs and clamps, no criteria had been provided by S&L. The licensee stated reinspection of such gaps will be performed for all applicable pipe hangers, snubbers and restraints.
(Closed) Noncompliance (373/78-25-04; 374/78-16-03):
Inadequate control of nonconformance items. The inspector reviewed MCCo Nonconformity and Disposition Report No. 338, issued on November 13, 1978, and closed on April 24, 1979.
Report 338 listed all the Main Steam and Feedwater supports that were reclassified from non-safety related to safety related.
Subsequent to a detailed licensee evaluation, these supports were classified back to non-safety related. The inspector stated that he had no further questions.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (373/78-25-08; 374/78-16-07):
Change of hanger installation tolerance.
S&L ECN No. M-143-LS, " Snubber Installation Tolerances," dated January 9,1979, was implemented by MCCo based on modified inspections in accordance with PC-102A and PC-102B procedures.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (373/78-25-07; 374/78-16-06):
Failure of PSCo mechanical snubbers under faulted loads.
Further review was performed during the inspector's last site visit, and the concerns were stated in RIII Reports 373/79-01 and 374/79-01.
During a meeting held at the Pacific Scientific Company (PSCo), Anaheim, California, on June 15, 1979, the question on load control dymanic test was raised by the inspector.
The PSC Director of Engineering responded with a thorough discussion of the characteristics of the MTS testers, including the snubber loss of motion that had caused the electro-hydraulic testing machine operated ahead of the programed sinusoidal load curve, and as time elapsed, sudden load buildup that exceeded the design ratings were experienced by the snubbers being tested.
The inspector observed the settings and relative documentation, and considered the explanation valid.
Functional or Program Areas Inspected 1.
Licensee Audit of Sargent and Lundy Engineers During a previous site visit, the inspector informed CECO of problems relative to inadequate hanger design control and review that had-3-321212
.
been identified during his inspections of other facilities in RIII.
.
Prior to the inspector's planned independent audit of the A-E's hanger design and calculation provisions, CECO QA had performed a program audit at S&L (the A-E) for their La Salle, Byron, and Braidwood projects in the same concern areas.
The audit was performed on February 21-27, 1979, and a number of deficiencies were identified.
The inspector reviewed the audit report dated March 8, 1979, relative to audit areas and licensee control and verification of corrective actions taken by the S&L engineers.
The correspondance reviewed included:
-
S&L reponse letter to Ceco dated March 16, 1979, " CECO QA Audit of February 21-27, 1979."
-
S&L response letter to CECO, dated March 15, 1979, "PI-LS-17 -
Control of Piping Support Assembly Design."
-
S&L Instruction PI-LS-17, " Control of Piping Support Assembly Design," Rev. O, dated March 9, 1979.
-
S&L letter to CECO, "Overall Design Review Status Report,"
dated April 25, 1979.
-
CECO letter to S&L, "S&L Response to CECO Audit of February 21, 1979," dated April 6, 1979.
-
CECO letter to S&L, " CECO QA Audit of February 21-27, 1979,"
dated April 4, 1979, with Attachment, " Surveillance of S&L, Design Review and Design of Supports, La Salle County Station."
-
CECO letter to S&L, "QA Audit of February 21-27, 1979," dated April 17, 1979.
-
La Salle site memo to CECO Manager of QA, No. QAL No. 1506,
"50.55e At Zimmer Nuclear Station on S&L Hanger Design," dated Janua ry 12, 1979.
In conclusion, the inspector stated that the problems relative to S&L hanger design control and calculations had been identified by the licensee and extensive corrective actions were undertaken by S&L and monitored by CECO.
To ensure overall acceptability of the S&L hanger design program and its implementation extending to those hangers that had already been installed, the inspector will select a number of representative samples at the site and trace the review checklists, calculations, and systems analysis at the S&L office.
In so doing, the effectiveness of the established S&L engineering and QA procedures can be evaluated. The inspector further commented that, except for the recirculation system, all pipe whip restraints
_4_
T1213
.
were designed by S&L, and he saw no evidence that audits had been
,
performed by CECO in this area. This is considered an unresolved item.
(373/79-19-01; 374/79-13-01)
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
2.
Licensee Audit of GE Since pipe hangers, snubbers, and restraints installed on the main steam and recirculation systems were designed and procured by GE, the question of adequacy of design control and calculations for these items, similar to the issue discussed in Paragraph 1, was addressed in a recent licensee audit at GE.
The audit was performed on May 1-3, 1979, and the inspector reviewed the audit checklist and had no adverse comments.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
3.
Observation of Activities At GE The inspector visited GE, San Jose, California, on June 13-14, 1979.
Areas reviewed included: pipe stress analysis, pipe whip restraint design, work procedures, and personnel qualification.
In the areas of pipe whip restraints, the GE calculations for the cable type restraints installed on the 12, 16, and 24-inch recirculation loop had not been reviewed by another qualified engineer, however, because of the conservatism established in the scaling formula derived from actual tests, and the use of alternative computation methods, the overall measure of the calculation and documentation was considered acceptable.
In regard to the hanger calculations made by ITT-Grinnell Corporation, no documents were retained by ITT-G.
The need for evaluation of the adequacy of ITT-G hanger design was discussed with the licensee.
This is an unresolved item.
(373/79-19-02; 374/79-13-02)
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Unresolved Matters Unresolved matters are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance or deviations.
Unresolved items disclosed during this inspection are discussed in Paragraphs 1 and 3.
Exit Interview The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the it
,ection during
a telephone conversation with licensee representatives on July 5, 1979.
The licensee acknowledged the findings reported herein.
-5-321214