IR 05000382/1981028
| ML20040B852 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 12/15/1981 |
| From: | Constable G, Cummins J, William Jones, Westerman T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20040B845 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-382-81-28, NUDOCS 8201260476 | |
| Download: ML20040B852 (4) | |
Text
.
.
APPENDIX B U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
NRC Inspection Report: 50-382/81-28 Licensee:
Louisiana Power and Light Company 142 Delaronde Street New Orleans, Louisiane 70174 Facility:
Waterford Steam Electric 5tation, Unit 3 Inspection At: Taft, Louisiana Inspection Conducted: October 16, 1981-November 15, 1981 w,0 un'V
/2//5/7/
h?'
cc np o:
,F G. L. Constable, Senior Resident Inspector
'Dats
.
/2//s/K/
l3 $n W o w u n d
'u I. E. Cunnins, Resident Inspector
- 'Date Assisting Personnel:
3 h: 2/w,,, m f
/2//s/3/
j W. B. Jones, Engineering Assistant
/Dat6 Approved By:
l5 in ) b o ur k e &
_
/.2//5/ 7/
@ T. F. Westerman, Chief, Reactor Projects Gate'
Section 1 Inspection Summary Inspection conducted October 16, 1981-November 15, 1981 (Report No. 50-382/81-28)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, announced inspection of:
(1) Preoperational Testing, and (2) Const3ction Activities, including test witnessing safety system cleanliness and uelding electrode control This inspection involved 135 inspector-hours by two NRC inspectors.
Results:
In the three areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified in one area. Two violations were identified in the areas of safety system cleanliness (Violation-failure to follow procedures-Paragraph 5), and welding electrode control (Violation-failure to follow procedures-Paragraph 6).
k'$&lK05000302 76 811216 o
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
.
.
DETAILS I
1.
Persons Contacted S. A. Alleman, Assistant Plant Manager T. K. Armington, Lead Startup Engineer
- D. B. Lester, Plant Manager
- J. Gutierrez, Ebasco QA Site Supervisor
- L. N. Richardson, T-B QA Supervisor
- Present at exit interviews In addition to the above personnel, the inspector held discussions with various operations, construction, engineering, technical support, and administrative members of the licensee's staff.
2.
Plant Status Construction of the Waterford-3 site is approximately 91% complete. The current LP&L schedule indicates initial fuel loading during October 1982.
3.
Site Tour The NRC insoectors toured the Auxiliary Building, Fuel Handling Building, Reactor building, and the Turbine Building to observe ongoing construction and testing from October 16-November 15, 1981.
No violations or deviations were identified in this area of the inspection.
4.
Preoperational Test Witnessing The NRC inspectors witnessed a portion of the preoperational test on the 125V DC system. The test witnessed was the Load Profile Test performed on Battery 3A-S per paragraph 7.3.2 of preoperational test SP0-02-001.
The following was noted by the NRC inspectors:
SP0-02-001, paragraph 7.3.2.9 requires the recording of pilot cell voltage
'.
and terminal voltage at 15-minute intervals during the one-hour test. These voltages are to be recorded on Attachment 8.2.3.1, but this attachment has only one block for recording each of these voltages. This necessitated the use of five Attachment 8.2.3.1's to record the required data at 15-minute intervals, when one properly designed data table could have been used. Most of the data blocks on the additional data sheets had to be marked not applicable (N/A).
Recording data in this way causes confusion in the review process and complicates record keeping.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _.
._
_
_._
_ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _
_---._ _ _.
_
_.
._.
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
.
!
)
..
.
l
The NRC inspectors observed that many switches and breakers operated
l during the test did not have permanent identification tags. The identity
of these components was detennined by reading the installed Danger or
system In-Test tags,or from the memory of the startup engineer. The NRC
inspector also observed that the licensee did not have an adequate method j
of attaching these cautionary tags to their appropriate breakers or switches.
Several tags were found on the floor, in the bottom of cabinets, or otherwise displaced from where they should be. These two areas of concern will be reviewed during future inspections.
(0penitems 8128-01
,
j and 8128-02.)
,
f No violations or deviations were noted.
I 5.
Piping System Cleanliness
.
During the course of the inspection, the NRC inspectors looked at installed i
piping to ensure that piping cleanliness was being maintained per Tompkins-Beckwith Procedure TBP-29, " Piping System Cleanliness Procedure." This
"
procedure requires that openings and pipe ends be sealed at all times j
except when they must be unsealed to carry out necessary operations.
i The NRC inspectors observed on September 23, 1981, and several other times i
up to and including October 28, 1981, that both the inlet and discharge
pipes to Fuel Pump A room had not been sealed. The NRC inspectors later
]
determined that the inlet and discharge pipes had been open since August 29, l
1981.
)
Section 6.3 of Tompkins-Beckwith Procedure TBP-46, " Care and Maintenance j
Instructions of Permanent Plant Items," requires that an in-place surveillance j
of the equipment be performed monthly and the findings recordca on on In-Place Surveillance Report. Two in-place surveillance reports were
l completed during the period from September 23-October 28, 1981, for the Fuel Pool Pump A room. The two reports were dated Septemtmr 25, 1981, and
October 9, 1981, respectively.
Each report had been completed by a different i
l Tompkins-Beckwith inspector. On both reports, item three of the in-place
!
l surveillance report checklist, " Component Openings Capped / Covered.," was j
checked off as being acceptable.
]
!
The NRC inspectors are concerned that actual surveillances of the Fuel Pool j
Pump A room may not have actually been made on September 25, 1981, and October 9, 1981, as documented by the surveillance reports. This failure a
i of the two Tompkins-Beckwith inspectors to identify the open piping in the i
Fuel Pool Pump A room which, at the time, contained only the inlet and
}
discharge pipes to the missing pump and the pump's motor appears to
corroborate the NRC inspectors' concern.
I This is a violation.
i I
i
'
i l
i
!
i
!
1.
-
.
.
.
.
--)
._ _ _ _ _.
_
._
_
_
__
_. - _ - _ -. _
.
_ _
_
_ _ -
__
..
.
,
l 6.
Welding Electrode Control l
l The NRC inspectors observed activities related to welding while touring the Auxiliary Building, Fuel Handling Building, and the Reactor Building.
i The NRC inspectors noted that used and unused low hydrogen (7018) welding
!
electrodes were not being controlled in accordance with Ebasco Procedure ASP-IV-18, " Receiving, Storage, Issuing and Control of Welding Electrodes and Filler Materials." This procedure requires that any remaining undamaged low hydrogen (7018) welding electrodes be returned to the warehouse at the end of each shift and that rod stubs and damaged electrodes be deposited only in designated, controlled containers that are stationed at various locations in the field. The following was noted by the NRC inspectors at the end of two different shifts.
a.
October 20, 1981 Several used and unused 7018 welding electrodes had been left on
.
a work platform near the Reactor Coolant Pump 2A.
Several unused 7018 welding electrodes had been left adjacent to
.
the Control Element Drive Mechanism Motor Generator A.
Used 7018 welding electrodes were found in a trash barrel inside
-
the Reactor Building by the equipment hatch.
b.
October 27, 1981, several used and unused 7018 welding electrodes were left on a work platform and on the floor in the pipe chase area of the Fuel Handling Building on the +1-foot level.
After reviewing past NRC inspection reports for Waterford, the NRC inspectors noted that similar cases of improper welding electrode control were identified in report numbers 76-06, 78-05, and 81-17.
The NRC inspectors are concerned that the controls and corrective actions implemented in the past have not been adequate to ensure that welding electrodes are controlled.
This is a violation.
7.
Exit Interviews The NRC inspectors met with the licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at various times during the course of the inspection. The scope and findings of the inspection were discussed.