IR 05000373/1980002
| ML19294B376 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 01/24/1980 |
| From: | Danielson D, Erh C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19294B368 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-373-80-02, 50-373-80-2, 50-374-80-01, 50-374-80-1, NUDOCS 8002280261 | |
| Download: ML19294B376 (4) | |
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-373/80-02; 50-374/80-01 Docket No. 50-373; 50-374 License No. CPPR-99; CPPR-100 Licensee:
Commonwealth Edison Corpany P.O. Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Name:
La Salle County Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At:
La Salle Site, Marseilles, Illinois Inspection Conducted:
January 8-10, 1980 Inspector:
C.
. kr
- to J (MC
.i m m / n Approved By:
D. H. Danielson, Chief
/ du U Engineering Support Section 2
'
Inspection Summary Inspection on January 8-10, 1980 (Report Nos. 50-373/80-02; 50-374/80-01)
Areas Inspected: Observation and review of NDE records relative to in-stallation of CRD Scram Discharge System, Units 1 and 2; observation and review of NDE records relative to the recirculation inlet (N2) nozzle installation, Units 1 and 2; observation of welding refueling bellows, Unit 2; review of safety valves, cap plate hardness, and heat exchangers, Units 1 and 2.
The inspection involved a total of 19 inspector-hours on site by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8 0 0 2 28 0gGI
.
DETAILS
.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- L. J. Burke, Site Project Superintendent
- T. E. Quaka, QA Supervisor
- E.
R. Wendorf, Site Station Construction
- G.
E. Groth, Site Station Construction
- D. J. Skoza, QA Engineer
- A. Mayhan, QA Engineer
- L. J. Tapella, QA Engineer Contractor Personnel
- M. R. Dougherty, QA Supervisor, Walsh Construction Company
- H. Phillips, QC Supervisor, Reactor Controls, Inc.
- D. N. Bryant, QC Supervisor, G.E. Installation and Service Engineering hT. K. Mulligan, Welding Supervisor, G.E.I. & S.E.
kT. N. Czaplicki, Quality Assurance, G.E.I. & S.E.
- C. T. Brinson, QA Engineer, G.E. Nuclear Energy Division M. Fiorentini, QC Inspector, Walsh Construction J. Courtney, Site Manager, Reactor Controls, Inc.
J. Dowalo, Project Manager, Con AM R. Kananen, NDE Inspector, Reactor Controls, Inc.
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
Licensee Action on Previously Reported Items (Open) No. 374/79-XX-02 Cracking of Cap Plate Welds to Structural Beams, 50.55(e) item. The licensee has secured an Equo-Tip hardness tester which identifies a hardness difference between specified SA-36 plate and the harder 1157 material. The 1 inch plate testing program has been completed in Unit 2 with several harder plates rejected. A testing program for one inch plate in Unit I will be performed.
(0 pen) No. 373/78-XX-01E Problem with Safety Relief Valves Unit 1 and Unit 2.
Each has 18 safety relief valves manufactured by Crosby Company and supplied by General Electric Company. These valves are being returned to Crosby for rework and retest, because of a tendency to leak. The Unit 2 valves have been at Crosby since May, 1979, while the Unit I valves are still ou site.
Since the Unit 2 valves should be ready for installation first, they will be put in Unit 1 and the Unit I valves will be switched to Unit 2.
-2-
.
Functional or Program Areas Inspected
.
1.
8" Scram Discharge Piping for CRD System-Units 1 and 2 A repair weld in Unit I was observed in process. The weld was No. 20 and a grind through at the 6 o' clock position was being repaired.
Repair instruction WIS-1003, Revision 0, and WP-100 were being used by welder No. P-5.
This procedure called for a Gas Tungsten arc open butt completed by the Shielded Metal Arc process. All the welds were being ground to a finish suitable for NDE and In-Service Inspection.
Radiographic films of welds No. 18, 23, 26, and 11 at 270 azimuth in Unit 2 were examined.
No. 11 was a shop weld and the balance were field welds.
Procedure No. RT-2-ND, Revision 0, was used to make the four exposures required for this 8" pipe weld.
No. 18 weld film indicated a transverse indication across the weld, which could not be traced to a surface marking. The inspector re-quested a reshot of the weld which revealed an unacceptable defect.
This defect will be ground out and repair welded.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in this area.
2.
Inlet Nozzle (N2) Installation-Unit 2 Welding using the Dimetrics automatic welder was witnessed at azimuth 120. Qualified welding operators DG2 and DG4 were operating the equipment. The outside weld No. 3 was welded out to about 1/4" thickness and the welder was making the No. 2 inside weld.
Procedure No. WPS 43.2.4.5, Revision 2 was used for the No. 3 weld which is Inconel to Inconel. A y-shaped consumable is fused by the automatic equipment and filler metal is added ia succeeding passes.
The inside of pipe is purged until 3/16" of weld is de-posited. Welders who tack in the insert are qualified to WQ 43.2.4.1 or 43.2.3.1.
A 0.035 wire is used after the first fusing pass and there are 15 variables set forth for the equipment settings depending on which passes are to be made.
Radiography is performed to NDE-RT-3000, Revision 4, on safe end to nozzle weld No. 3 which is a nominal 14" diameter and 1.3" wall thickness. The code requirements are ASME Section III, NB, 1974 Edition, Summer 1976 Addenda.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in this area.
-3-
.
3.
Observation of Regenerative and Non-Regenerative IIeat Exchangers
'
Unit 2 The abeve two heat exchangers had hold tags affixed which were unclear as to the reason for hold.
The exchangers were built by Atlas ar.d were identified as MRR 1184, equipment 2G33-B001 and MRR 849, equipment 2G33-B002. Further investigation of the Unit 1 install-ation and hold tag information indicated that three " soc!,t welds" on each c(changer had been made on a temporary basis to make possible the hydrotest.
The information on these socket welds was clarified, while the in-spector was on site, so that the temporary welds would be ground out and the permanent welds made and Liquid Penetrant tested.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in this area.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee tepresentatives (denoted under Persons Contacted) on January 10, 1980.
te inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection, whict were acknowledged by the licensee.
-4-