IR 05000387/1979031
| ML17138B208 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 01/09/1980 |
| From: | Gallo R, Higgins J, Mcgaughy R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17138B203 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-387-79-31, 50-388-79-16, NUDOCS 8004100111 | |
| Download: ML17138B208 (17) | |
Text
class...,."
and in Section 3.1.6 states, in part: "All other welding require-ments are to be referred to the Lead Field. Welding Engineer for determination of proper procedure."
Procedure FCI M-174, Revision 3, and Procedure PB-T-AG-I-0-1 were applicable to the weld buildup YRR-B31-2-FW-B-13M.
Contrary'o the above, water quenching which was required and accomplished for weld YRR-831-2-FW-B-13M was not specified in the applicable procedures.
8004106 ///
U.
S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION I
50"387/79"31 Report No.,
50-388/79-16 50-387 Docket, No.
50-388 CPPR-101 License No.
CPPR-102 Pri ori.ty Category Licensee:
Penns lvania Power and Li ht Com an 2 North Ninth Street Allentown Penns 1 vani a 18101 Facility Name:
Sus uehanna Steam Electric Station Inspection At:
Salem Townshi Penns lvania Inspection Conducted:
Se tember 10-October
1979 Inspectors:
R.
M. Gallo, Resl t Reactor Inspector f2
da e
.
C. Hlggsns, ec r Inspector date Approved by:
R.
W.
McGaughy,,
i Projects Section, RC8ES Branch date da e
~t'
S Unct 1 Ins ection on Se tember 10-October
1979 Re ort No. 50-387/79-31 i<<R i
p gi based inspector of:
installation and welding of reactor coolant pressure bound-ary piping incl,uding the reactor vessel recircul'ation system nozzle modification; installation of safety related components; ACR/PGCC rework; emergency
'iesel engine modifications; pipe support design drawing deficiency; reactor vessel internals storage.
The inspector also performed plant tours and reviewed licensee action on previously identified items.
The inspection involved 51 inspec-
. tor hours, including 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br /> during off shift by the NRC resident inspector and 21 hours2.430556e-4 days <br />0.00583 hours <br />3.472222e-5 weeks <br />7.9905e-6 months <br /> by a regional based inspector.
-Results:
Of the seven areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified in six areas; two apparent items of noncompliance were identified in one area (Infraction - Failure to review SRSE 1-12, Revision 2, for adequacy - Paragraph S.b; Infraction - Failure to provide a documented instruction to control the accomplishment of the water quenching of weld VRR-B31-2-FW-B-13M, Buildup-Paragraph S.c.).
Region I Form 167 (August 1979)
Unit 2 Zns ection on Se tember 10-October
1979 Re ort No. 50-388/79-16
~p:
p p
f:
and welding of reactor coolant pressure boundary piping; emergency diesel engine modifications; reactor vessel and reactor internals storage.
The inspector also performed plant tours and reviewed licensee action on previously identified items.
The inspection involved 15'inspector hours by the NRC resident inspector.
Results:
No items of noncompliance were identifie DETAILS Persons Contacted Penns lvania Power and Li ht Com an Note R.
G.';
E; T.
S'.
J.
R.
E.
E; T.
D.
A H.
Beckley, Site gAE Burvis, Site gAE Capotosto, Site gAE Carroll, Site gAE Clymer, Site gAE L. Denson, Assistant Project Construction Manager D. Everett, ISG-equality Engineer H. Featenby, Project Construction Manager J. Gorski, Senior Nuclear equality Specialist Green, Resident NOAE Lazarowitz, Resident Engineer F. Oldenhage, Resident Engineer Ritter, Proj'ect Engineer, Construction R. Sabol, Manager, Nuclear equality Assurance Stokes, Senior Project Engineer; Contruction 1,2,3
1
2,3,4
2'echtel Cor oration 0.
M.
E.
G.
J.
A; T.
H.
J.
B.
K.
M.
G.
K.
C Dharia, Field Engineer A. Drucker;. Electrical gAE Figard, Assistant ISG Supervisor Gelinas,,
Lead. Piping/Mechanical FACE.
Khandar, Mechanical gAE Konjura, Mechanical gAE Minor, Project Field Engineer Lilligh, Project gAE O'ullivan, Assistant Project Field Engineer Ott, Lead Melding FACE D. Peterson, Resident Project Engineer Ross, Lead Melding Engineer Schrader, Project Field Engineer Stout, Assistant Project Field QCE Turnbow, Field. Construction Manager 1,4-
2,3)4 1,3
1,4 General Electric Com an -Nuclear Ener Business Grou NEBG E.
J.
A. Gustafson, Site Manager C. Malker, gA/gC Representative General Electric Com an -Installation and Service En ineerin IPSE G.
J.
Bragan, Site Manager Kong, Project Manager Recirculation System Nozzle Modification
Coo er Ener Services W. Stevenson, Field Engineer Peabod Testin Com an M. Whalen, NDE Supervisor Notes 1 - denotes those present at exit interview, September 14, 1979.
2 denotes, those present at exit interview, September 21, 1979.
3 - denotes those present at exit interview, September 28, 1979.
4 - denotes those present at exit interview, October 5, 1979.
The inspector also interviewed other PP8L employees as well as employees of Bechtel, Peabody Testing Company and General Electric Company.
2.
Plant Tour - Units 1 and
The inspector observed work activities in progress, completed work and plant status in several areas of the plant during general inspection of the plant.
The. inspector examined work for any obvious defects or noncompliance with regulatory requirements or license conditions.
Particular note was taken of presence of quality control inspectors and quality control evidence such as inspection records, material identification, nonconforming material iden-tification, housekeeping and equipment preservation.
The inspector inter-viewed craft personnel, supervision and guality Control personnel as such personnel were available in the work areas.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Ins ection Findin s (Closed)
Unresolved Item (387/78-17-01):
guenching of stainless steel piping during fabrication.
Nonconformance report (NCR) No.
3125 was issued to document the engineering disposition regarding the method of heat treatment for spool piece DCA-103-1-28, heat number 462127.
The vendor supplied a revised material test report stating that the material was solution annealed in accordance with Bechtel Specifica-tion M-207 including water quenching.
NCR No.
3622 was also issued to disposition additional pipe spools which did not meet Specification M-207 requirements for heat treatment.
The inspector reviewed PP8L letter PLB-9876 dated May 11, 1979 reaffirming PAL's requirements regarding the need for water quenching stainless steel pipe spools.
The inspector reviewed ASTM A-312 and ASTM A-376 which permit heat treatment using water quenching or rapidly cooling by other means.
The inspector had no further questions on this matte "
b.
(Closed)
Unresolved Item (387/79-15-02):
Recirculation bypass line sensitization tests.
The. inspector reviewed the-licensee's evaluation of the sensitization tests for. pipe spools OCA-141-1-.1 and OCA-141-1-3.
Nonconformance Report (NCR) No.
3732 was issued to document the inspector's findings.
In answer to the NCR the applicable vendor, SWEPCO, provided a 400X photo micrograph report which meets the magnification requirements of ASTM A262 Practice A.
The inspector reviewed isometric drawings for the four bypass lines in Units 1 and 2.
The drawings have been revised to state that sensitization tests are required per Practice A
and "if necessary" Practice E.
This requirement is consistent with ASTM A262 and NUREG 0531 Section 4.2.3 which state that Practice A
is a screening test and demonstrates acceptance but not rejection.
Practice E includes a basis for rejection.
The Practice E, test results documentation, which had been conducted, although not required, for Heat No.
76246 did not include a verifica-tion of the bend test-required by paragraph 36 of Practice E.
By letter from the applicable test laboratory, Spectrum Laboratories, it was confirmed that the Practice E bend tests had been conducted.
The: inspector had no further questions on this matter.
c; (Cl'osed)
Noncompliance (387/79-15-04):
Failure to provide a docu-mented instruction to control the storage and maintenance of the Unit 1 Reactor. Pressure Vessel.
The. inspector reviewed the General Electric Installation and Service Engineering (GE I&SE) instruction, FSC-80-780284-dated April 27, 1979.
This. instruction provides documented instructions for Reactor Vessel stud hole inspection.
The instruction incorporates the comments of Bechtel Resident Engineer's Memo 4279.
The inspector reviewed GE I&SE internal memos documenting the quarterly stud hole inspections in April and. July 1979.
The inspector had no further questions on this matter.
Reactor Coolant. Pressure Boundar Pi in Weldin The following activities were examined to determine that they were being performed in accordance with the ASME Section III and IX Codes, PSAR Appendix O, the Bechtel guality Assurance Manual Section III, Site Specifications M 204, M 207, drawings M-198 and M-199, and GE Specification 24A4628.
Weldin
- Unit 2 Welding of:
VNB-B21-4 FW B16 The inspector verified selected detailed drawings, welding procedures, base and filler materials as specified, welder qualification, quality
control documentation, weld appearance, welding variables and nondes-tructive testing activities as. appropriate.
No items of noncompliance were-identified.
5.
Recirculation S stem Nozzle Modification - Unit 1 a0 The inspector reviewed procedures and observed work in progress rela-tive to the Recircul'ation System nozzle modification.
The procedures and, work were examined to verify conformance with ASME Section III thru Summer 1976 Addenda and Section NI 1974 edition for General Elec-tric Installation and Service Engineering (GE I8SE) work; and ASHE Section III thru Minter 1972 Addenda for Bechtel work; and commit-ments in PPCL letters, to the NRC, PLA-291 dated September 25, 1978 and PLA-350 dated May 4, 1979.
Procedures reviewed included:
Bechtel FCI-N-174 Revisions 3 and 4 GE I&SE-Procedures:
SRSE'-12, Revisions 2 and 3, SRSE 1-16, Revision 6, SRSE 1-40, Revision 2, SRSE 1-41, Revision 2.
The inspector observed work in progress and verified conformance, except, as noted, to the applicable procedures:
SRSE 1-. 12. and FCI.-M-174.
'Specific work evolutions observed included:
Melding of thermal sleeve to jet pump (Meld No. 1) - N2H Nozzle Liquid Penetrant Testing of Sweepolet for External Riser RD-1-AS-N2H Nozzle Fitup and Tack Meld of Thermal Sleeve K Insert-N2F Nozzle Weld Build-up of Riser RD-1-B6A-Meld No. VRR-B31-2 FM B-13M Buildup b
During observation of work in progress on thermal sleeve N2F the inspector reviewed SRSE 1-12, Revision 2, "Recirc Inlet Nozzle Safe-End and Thermal Sleeve Installation and Alignment Procedure."
The inspector noted several discrepancies in Revision 2 of the procedure, including:
Step 6.2 did not refer to the correct detail welding procedure; Step 6.6 did not refer to the correct detail welding procedure; Step 6.11 did not refer to the correct detail welding procedures;
Reference 2.13, welder qualification SRSE 1-17, was incorrectly
,identified as a detailed welding procedure; C.
Detailed. welding procedures SRSE 1-40 and 1-41', used for manual welding in SRSE. 1-12, were not referenced in SRSE. 1-12.
GE: IPSE Procedure 1-. 12, Revision 3, dated September 20, 1979, was issued. to correct the above discrepancies.
The inspector verified that. the weTders performing welds, in accordance with the procedures identified in Revision 3 of SRSE 1-12, were qualified with the correct welder qualification procedure.
The failure to p'roperly review SRSE 1-. 12, Revision 2, for adequacy is contrary to the requirements of
CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion VI. (387/79-31-01)
During observation of work in progress on the buildup of recirculation system riser spool RD-1-B6A the inspector noted that the governing document FCI-M-174 Revision 3 did not address the setup of the riser for welding..
The inspector observed that the riser pipe was filled with water and ice to just below, the weld area.
The weld, identified as. VRR-B31-2 FMB-13M buildup, was being welded in accordance with welding procedure P8-T-AG-I-O-l Revisi'on 1.
The welding procedure did not address the use of ice water inside the pipe spool.
The inspector observed that;. the ice water was used to quench the weld area. after completion of each weld-pass.
The i'nspector-was informed that. the quenching with ice water was being done to reduce hoop shrinkage of the pipe spool during welding.
The in-spector stated that the purpose of the welding procedure is to ensure-that'he weldment is capable of having the required properties for its intended application.
The fail'ure=-to include in the procedure all acti-vities necessary to achieve the required properties is contrary to the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V.
(387/79-31-02)
FCI-M-174 Revision 4, issued for approval during this inspection, incorporates instructions for the use of the ice water inside the.
recirculation system riser.
6.
Coo er Ener Services Diesel En ine Modifications Cooper Energy Services, supplier of the emergency diesel generators, advised the NRC by letter, dated July 25, 1978, that springs for the overspeed shutdown butterfly valve failed on engines similar to those supplied to Susquehanna.
New springs were supplied to the Susquehanna site and installed in July 1978.
The inspector inquired if the new springs could be differentiated from the defective springs, either physically or by administrative methods such as serial numbers.
The licensee could not readily determine if any method existed.
This item is unresolved pending review by the licensee.
(387/79-31-03'88/79"16"01)
7.
ACR/PGCC Rework Oeficienc in Am henol Connectors and Cutler Hammer'-30 Switches By letter to the NRC, dated September 11, 19?9, the licensee reported the above deficiencies in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e).
The deficiencies noted are documented on Bechtel MCAR 1-. 37.
A discussion of. the deficiencies is found in Inspection Report 50-387/79-26.
Resolution of'he 50.55(e) report and MCAR 1-37 will be reviewed during a subsequent.
NRC inspection.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
b.
Connector External Oama e
The inspector noted three cable connectors in the Upper Relay Room which had been damaged on the external shell or threaded portion of the connector.
Cable numbers observed to have damaged connectors were:
9115/C12A-025 9115/C12A-019 9051/E367-028 c
The inspector inquired; if the cause and extent of this type of damage had been determined.
The inspector also requested how the necessary repairs would be documented.
This item is unresolved pending inves-tigation. by the licensee and review by the NRC.
(387/79-31-04)
Pin Pull Testin d.
The i'nspector" noted'that pin pull testing had been accomplished in accordance with FOI WJGO Revision 3 Section 3.4.4.
This procedure required the extraction of six pins per connector and pulling the pin against the wire.
However, FOOR KR1-548, Revision ll revised FDI WJGO to allow performance of the pull test with the pin in place.
The pull test was accomplished using a locking pliers to clamp onto the conductor insulation.
-The inspector inquired if the licensee had examined the conductor for possible damage from the locking pliers.
The licensee's representative stated that this matter would be i'nvestigated.
This item= is considered unresolved pending the licens-ee's investigation and review by the NRC.
(387/79-31-05)
Control Switch Installed Without Lockin Rin By letter to the NRC, dated July 19, 1978, General Electric Company submitted a written report in accordance with 10 CFR 21.21 concerning defects discovered during manufacturing of control room systems.
By letter to the NRC, dated August 29, 1978 the licensee submitted a
report on this subject in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e).
One deficiency noted in the GE report concerns the installation of CR-2940 control switches without a position locking ring.
GE FOI WJEG Revision 0 documents the installation method for adding the position locking ring to the CR-2940 switches for Unit 1.
The inspec-.
tor was informed that FDI WJEG had been completed for Unit 1 at the site and that Unit 2 control room panel switches had locking rings installed during routine manufacturing.
The. inspector compared switch configuration on panels 1C651 and 2C651 and noted that certain Unit 1 switches had locking rings installed but the Unit 2 switches did not have locking rings.
Switches so noted were the NSSS Manual Isolation switches.
The inspector inquired why there was a difference between the Unit 1 and Unit 2 switch configuration.
The licensee s representative stated that this matter would be investigated.
This item is considered unresolved pending the licensee's investigation and review by the NRC.
(387/79-31"06)
8.
Pi e
Su ort Desi n Orawin Deficienc
- Unit 1 By letter to the NRC, dated September 5, 1979 the licensee reported a defi-ciency i.n pipe support design drawings in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e).
The resident inspector reviewed Bechtel MCAR 1-36 regarding this deficiency.
The MCAR states that during stress walkdown of certain piping systems it was noted that 1'oadings indicated on hanger stress isometric sketches did not agree with the loadings on the hanger detail drawings.
Resolution of the 50.55(e) report and MCAR 1-36 will be reviewed during a subsequent NRC inspection.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
9.
Hi h Pressure Coolant In'ection HPCI)
S stem Pum Installation - Unit 1 The inspector examined work activities ih progress relative to the align-ment of HPCI pump components and pump discharge piping.
The inspector reviewed Nonconformance Report (NCR) No. 4346 regarding the final align-ment of the HPCI pump.
The disposition for this NCR required the cutting of the pump discharge piping,-EBB-102-1, aligning the HPCI pump then rein-stalling the pump discharge piping and associated supports.
However, the NCR disposition was revised to allow. reinstallation of pipe support EBB-102-H17 prior to completion of the rework on the pump and piping.
This support serves as an 'anchor point for the HPCI piping to the Reactor Building.
The inspector questioned the technical adequacy of the revised NCR disposition because the HPCI piping had been anchored to the Reactor Building and the HPCI main pump during the original attempts at final alignment of the HPCI main pump to the HPCI turbine.
Those attempts had caused NCR No.
4346 to be written.
The inspector inquired if the licensee agreed with the disposi-tion of NCR 4346.
The inspector stated that the disposition of NCR 4346 was considered unresolved pending the licensee's evaluation and review by the NRC.
(387/79"31-07)
~
~
~
~
~
~
10.
Reactor Vessel Installation - Unit 2
The inspector examined protection of the installed reactor vessel and stored closure head for compliance with site procedures and PSAR Appendix D commit-ments.,
The inspector reviewed the procedural requirements for vessel pro-tection and verified that required inspections and preventive maintenance were. being completed.
Documentation reviewed by the inspector included:
Field. Inspection Procedure G-5, Revi'sion
Project, Special Provisions Notice SF/PSP G-5. 1, Revision
Equipment Maintenance Requirements and Record Form for the Unit 2 Reactor Vessel and for Reactor Vessel Closure Head The Unit. 2 Reactor Vessel was released to GE I+SE on August 22, 1979 for installation of internals.
No items of'oncompliance were identified.
ll'..
Reactor Vessel'nternals
- Units 1 and
The inspector examined protection of the stored reactor vessel internals for compliance with site procedures and PSAR Appendix D commitments.
The inspector reviewed the procedural requirements for internals protection and verified that. required inspections were being completed.
The inspector observed in-plant storage of the steam dryer and.the shroud head and separa-tor for Units l and 2 and the Unit 2 shroud.
Documentation reviewed by the inspector included:
Field Inspection Procedure G-5, Revision
Project Special Provi'sions Notice SF/PSP G-5.1, Revision
Equipment Maintenance Requirements and Record (EMRR) Form for Unit 1 and 2 'steam dryer and the shroud head and separator.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
12.
E ui ment Stora e and Maintenance a.
References 1)
SF/PSP G-5.1, "Surveillance of Maintenance Activities," Rev.
dated November 20, 1978
2)
FP-G-ll, "Storage, Protection, Maintenance and Lay Up," Rev.
dated August 31, 1979 3)
AO 6.10; "Equipment'aintenance Control,"
Rev.
4)
Equipment Maintenance Requirements and Record (EMRR) Cards for:
Standby Liquid Control Pump, Remote Emergency Shutdown Panel, Core Spray Pump and Motor, HPCI Turbine and Pumps, Recirculation Pump Motor and 125 Volt Batte'ry Bank Assembly.
b; General The inspector reviewed the above referenced documents and toured various areas of the plant (including storage areas, drywell, wetwell, reactor building and turbine building) in order to determine that requirements were being met relative to:
.protective. covers and caps; equi'pment'emporary heat and humidity control; proper storage and labeling of components;'egregation of non-conforming items; quality control'urveillance; and lubrication and coatings.
Based on the current stage of construction and plant activity the inspector noted that requirements were being met and that equipment was provided with suitable protection against damage or deterioration.
With the exception of the below items, the inspector had no further questions in these areas.
c'.
Preventive Maintenance Ourin Preo erational Testin Ouring the review of controls on equipment maintenance and protection for the construction phase and for preoperational testing, the inspec-tor'oted that the potential existed for delays or gaps in the coverage between the two -phases.
Further review showed that monthly construction checks on the 125 volt batteries were stopped in January, 1979 and pre-operational checks were not done until May, 1979.
The licensee's representative stated that this delay would be avoided in the future by requiring construction personnel to continue their checks until the system turnover package was accepted by the plant staff.
The inspector also noted that the preventive maintenance program did not automatically include monthly checks of a type appropriate to protect equipment from continuing construction activities and that the instru-ment air compressors, which had been turned over, were not receiving
such checks.
The licensee's representative stated that this type of check would be called out as necessary by a Startup Work Request (SWR);
These two aspects of the Preventive Maintenance Program will receive further NRC review.
13.
Testin of Load Center Transformers The inspector reviewed the licensee's plans for preoperational testing of 4160/480 volt load center transformers and noted that there was no proce-dure for performing the full load testing called for in paragraph 1.g.(2)
of Regulatory Guide 1.68, Rev.
1.
The licensee's representative stated that this issue would be reviewed and consideration would be given to including such a test in procedure P100. 1 for overall electrical system testing; This item will receive further NRC review.
14.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviation.
Unresolved items disclosed during the inspection are discussed in paragraphs 6; 7.b; 7.c; 7.d; and 9.
Exit Interviews*
At: periodic: intervals during the course of this inspection, meetings were held" with facility management (dates and attendees are dehoted in Detail 1)
to discuss inspection scope, and findings.