IR 05000387/1980001
| ML17138B410 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 04/09/1980 |
| From: | Gallo R, Mcgaughy R, Rhoads G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17138B406 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-387-80-01, 50-387-80-1, 50-388-80-01, 50-388-80-1, NUDOCS 8007210355 | |
| Download: ML17138B410 (24) | |
Text
U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I 50-387/80-01 ort No 50 388/80 Ol 50-387 Oocket No.
50-388 CPPR-101 License, No ~
CPPR-102 Priority Licensee:
Pennsylvania Power 8 Light Company 2 North Ninth Street Category Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101 Facility Name:
Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Inspection at:
Salem Township, Pennsylvania Inspection conducted:
january 21 - February 1 and February 11-29, 1980 Inspectors:
R.
~
G
,
S or Resident Inspector ate signed G.. G ~
Rhoads, Resident Inspector at signed Approved by:
/-'.
W.
McGaughy ief, Projects Section
'C8ES Branch date sign'ed
/d te signed Ins ection Summar:
Unit 1 ins ection on Januar 21 - Februar 1,
1980 and Februar
- 29, 980'e ort No. 50-38 0-0
~A*I d:R I Ip'I bybRId Ip I:
installation and welding of reactor coolant pressure boundary and other piping; installation of safety-related components; ACR/PGCC Rework; Preventative'aintenance during Pre-operational testing; procedures and work in progress for the Reactor Pressure Vessel Recirculation System nozzle modification; installation of safety-related pipe support and restraint systems; IE Bulletin Followup.
The inspectors also performed
~
~
~
plant tours and reviewed licensee actions on previously identified items.
The inspection involved 100 inspector-hours, including 20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br /> during off shift, by the NRC Resident Inspectors
~
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
8 0 0 p p $ 0+d5+'
Results:
Of the ten areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified in eight areas; two apparent items of noncompliance were identified.
(Infraction - failure to follow approved procedures during Preventive Maintenance - Paragraph 12.b; (Infraction - failure to establish a proper test program for performance of hydrostatic testing-Paragr'aph 4.a)
Unit 2 Ins ection on Januar 21 throu h Februar 1,
1980 and e ruar 1-29, 1980 Re or t No; 50-388 80-01 Areas Ins ected:
Routine inspection by the Resident Inspector s of:
Insta lation and welding of reactor coolant pressur e boundary and other piping; IE Bulletin Followup.
The'inspectors also performed plant tours and reviewed licensee actions on previously identified items.
The inspection involved 17.5 inspector-hours, including 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> during off shift, by the NRC Resident Inspectors.
Results:
No items of noncompliance were. identifie DETAILS Persons Contacted Penns lvania Power and Li ht Com an R. Beckley, Site gAE G.- Burvis, Site gAE Note 1,3,4,5 R.
E.
T.
S.
J.
R.
E.
M.
J.
W.
E.
T.
A.
R.
G. Byram, Plant Supervisor of Maintenance
Carroll, Site gAE Clymer, Site gAE L. Denson, Project Construction Manager D. Everett, ISG guality Engineer H. Featenby, Assistant Project Director J. Gorski, Plant guality Supervisor Gorski, Resident Engineer Green, Resident NgA H. Gulliver, Senior Project Engineer - NgA Lazarowitz, Resident Engineer F. Oldenhage, Resident Engineer R. Sabol, Manager, Nuclear guality Assurance
1, 2, 3,
4,5 1, 3,
4
1
.
A. Schwar z, Senior Project Engineer - Construction Bechtel Cor oration G.
J.
M.
J.
E.
G.
C.
J.
A.
H.
T.
W.
J.
W.
N.
K.
C.
C. Bell, Bechtel gAE G. Berra, Project Superintendent
- Services A. Drucker, Electrical gAE Colker, Lead Pipe/Mechanical Engineer W. Figard, Assistant ISG Supervisor Gelinas, gC Lead Engineer Piping/Mechanical Headrick, Assistant Project Field FACE Khandar, Mechanical
'gAE Konjura, Mechanical gAE Lilligh, Project gAE Minor, Project Field Engineer Mourer, Superintendent O'ullivan, Assistant Project Field Engineer Ross, Lead Welding Engineer Shah, Civil Engineering Group Supervisor Stout, Project Field FACE Turnbow, Field Construction Manager Engineer 3,52,3,4,5 12,3,4
3, 4,
5 1, 2, 3,
5
General Electric Com a-Nuclear Ener Business Grou NEBG Note E.. A. Gustafson, Site Manager T.
M. LeVasseue, guality Assurance Representative General Electric Com a-Installation'and Service I&SE G. Bragan, Site Manager Peabod Testin Com an M. Whalen, NDE. Supervisor Notes
.,1 - Denotes those present at the exit interview January 25, 1980.
2 - Denotes those present at the exit. interview January 31, 1980.
, 3 - Denotes those present at the exit interview February 15, 1980.
4 - Denotes those present at the exit interview February 22, 1980.*
5 - Denotes those present at the exit interview February 29, 1980.
The inspectors also interviewed other PPSL employees, as well as employees of Bechtel, Peabody Testing Company and General Electric Company.
2.
Plant Tours - Units 1 and
The inspectors observed work activities in progress, completed work and plant status in several areas of the plant during general inspection of the plant.
The inspectors 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 identification, housekeeping and equipment preservation.
The inspectors interviewed craft personnel, supervision and quality insection personnel as such personnel were available in the work areas.
No i tems of noncompliance were identifie.
Licensee Action on, Previousl Identified Items a.
(Closed)
Noncompliance (387/79-04-01):
Failure to comply with ASME III Code pipe aligrment requirements.
The-inspector reviewed corrective and preventive actions regarding the subject item of noncompliance.
The inspector reviewed Nonconformance Report No. 3452 regarding the misaligned vendor weld, "B" in pipe spool GBB-118-2-3.
The final disposition was to scrap the existing pipe spool and.
replace it with a new spool fabricated by the field.
The inspector verified that isometric drawing GBB-118-2 had been
.
revised to show the field fabricated pipe spools.
The inspector verified that Bechtel QC had examined
.10 pipe spools at random for similar conditions.
The inspector verified PPSL QA had examined ITT Grinnell vendor welds for similar conditions from May thru November 1979.
None of the vendor welds examined by the licensee exceeded'he code allowed alignment tolerance of 3/32 inch.
The inspector verified that the Bechtel supplier quality representative had been directed to perform increased surveillance of pipe alignment at Grinnell's shop..
The inspector examined seven vendor welds in three Grinnell pipe spools.
No discrepancies were observed.
Documentation reviewed by the inspector included:
Bechtel Field Engineering Field Inspection Report dated March 30, 1979
.
Bechtel Interoffice Memorandum CMO-1469 dated March 16, 1979 Bechtel Interoffice Memorandum 101702 dated March 23, 1979 Bechtel Isometric Drawing GBB-118-2 Revision 3F5 Nonconformance Report No. 3452
. PPSL letter to NRC, PLA-348 dated April 30, 1979 PPSL NQA Memo dated November 8, 1979 documenting NQA sampling of vendor welds.
The inspector had no further questions on this matte (Closed)
Unresolved Item (387/79-10-03):
Minimum wall thickness of gate valve 24-DCA-GT-ZS-51608-P-Z in the RHR system discharge line.
The, inspector had previously observed during installation of the above gate valve that there existed two excavated areas on the inside surface of the valve body.
The inspector had inquired if the excavated areas met minimum wall thickness requirements for this system.
The inspector reviewed the Ultrasonic thickness measurement report number 1260 from Peabody Testing which reported minimum thickness of valve in area of excavations was approximately 2.5 inches.
The inspector reviewed Assembly Drawing number 93-13744 Revision F which stated that minimum wal'i. thickness was 2.28 inches for a 24 inch 900 pound gate valve with an inside diameter of 21 inches.
The drawing also referenced ASME code Section III, Division
Table NB-3542.1.
The inspector reviewed this table and verified the information on the drawing.
The inspector had no further questions on this matter.
(Closed)
Unresolved Item (387/79-10-04 and 388/79-06-01)
Review of Project Special Provisions Notice SF/PSP G-3. 2 The licensee reviewed the implementation of PSPG-3.2 regarding GE equipment to determine if adequate measures had been established to control the preservation of GE equipment.
As a result of this review, the licensee issued Deficiency Report (DR) 094 addressing the untimely disposition of Nonconformance Reports (NCR) regarding GE equipment.
In response to the PP8L DR Bechtel Field Procedure FP-G-ll., Revision.18 was issued to include corrective actions, to restore the minimum storage environment, by the Bechtel Lead Equipment Storage Engineer in cases where an NCR cannot be immediately dispositioned.
The inspector reviewed NCR's issued subsequent to the field procedure revision and noted that NCR No. 4462 was provided with a Conditional Release to take immediate corrective action prior to the final dispositioning.
The inspector reviewed Bechtel guality Audit Checklist 21.3.P.7, Revised 2/21/80, to include audit of implementation of FP-G-ll, Revision 18 regarding correction of storage conditions.
The inspector had no fur ther questions on this matte d.
(Closed)
Noncompliance (387/79-21-02):
Refueling Platform Drawings.
The inspector reviewed licensee action regarding this item of noncompliance.
The inspector verified that the drawings referenced on Nonconformance Report No. 4063 had been reviewed and approved and processed for site work in accordance with Field Procedure FP-G-4.
The inspector verified for a sample of drawings that the latest drawing revision had been used for construction activities.
The inspector discussed the approval of vendor drawings with the Bechtel Resident Engineer who demonstrated familiarity with the requirements of FP-G-4.
Documentation reviewed by inspector included:
Bechtel Interoffice Memorandum File No. 40.d, 460 dated October 5, 1979 Nonconformance Repor t No. 4063 PPSL letter to NRC, PLA-415 dated October 23, 1979 Yendor Drawings AD-2088-D, A-17091-D, A-17600-D, and A-17599-01-D Sheets 1 thru 4 The inspector had no further questions on this matter.
4.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundar and Safet -Related Pi in - Unit
Pi in Work in Pro ress - Unit
The inspector examined work activities and records relative to the hydrostatic pressure testing of Residual Heat Removal (RHR)
and Core Spray System Piping.
The inspector reviewed:
gC coverage of hydrostatic testing; inspection and test documents; test pressure per design documents, except as noted below; status control including marked up PEID's and pressure test lo Documentation reviewed by. the inspector included:
Bechtel Drawings M151 Sheet 1, M152 and M199 Specification M214 Revision
Pressure Test Report - Release Nos.
1885A1, 1885B, and 2094 for the Core Spray System and 1897A, B, C, and D for the RHR system Field Procedure FP-P-5 Revision
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III'Article NB 6200 The inspector determined that portions of RHR and Core Spray system pump discharge piping had been hydrostatically tested in conjunction with hydrostatic tests of the pump suction piping.
Test pressures used by Bechtel for these tests were in accordance with Bechtel Drawing M-199 for the pump suction piping, HBB-104 for the Core Spray system and HBB-110 for the RHR system.
The design pressures for the pump suction piping are Core Spray (HBB-104) - 40 psig and RHR (HBB-110) - 125 pslg..
The design pressures for the pump discharge piping are Core Spray (GBB-101) - 500 psig and RHR (GBB-104) - 450 psig.
The inspector reviewed the ASME Code Section III, Paragraph NB-6221 which specifies the hydrostatic test procedure as "not less than 1.25 times the design pressure."
The inspector stated that the hydrostatic testing of the pump discharge piping to the suction piping design pressure did not meet the requirement of Paragraph NB-6221.
This is contrary to the requirements of 10.CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XI.
(387/80-01-01 )
b.
Pi in S stem Installation Verification - Unit
The inspector examined work activities relative to turnover to the startup group of the head spray portion of the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) system, and the Emergency Service Water (ESW) system.
The system turnover boundaries for the RHR system are defined by Startup System Turnover No.
149 D.0.0.1, and for the ESW system by Startup System Turnover No. 154A. The inspector verified that the system turnover was being accomplished in accordance with applicable procedures, the PSAR Appendix D, and FSAR commitments.
During inspection of the RHR system it was noted that SP-DCB-102-1 was not shown as an attachment to DCB-102-1 on Revision 5 of the drawing.
The PP&L Nuclear Design Project Engineer stated, this would be incorporated in the next revision to this drawing.
This item will remain open pending review of this revised drawing (387/80-01-02).
It was also noted during the inspection that valve F020, a
four inch motor operated gate valve, is installed in a six inch line.
The inspector reviewed drawings M-151 Sheet 1,
Revision 14, GBB-108-1, Revision 5, and GBB-117-1, Revision
which all showed this valve to be a four inch valve.
The inspector then reviewed the General Electric Standard Plant Drawing 761E232A Revision 6.
This drawing did not show F020 as a 4" valve and also did not show the 6" x 4" Reducers on either side of the valve as were shown on previously mentioned drawings.
The inspector questioned whether this change from original GE design had been reviewed by General Electric.
The
'nspector reviewed Bechtel letter BLP-11398 dated September 7,
1979 regarding I8E Circular 79-11, "Design/Construction Interface Problem",
and Bechtel'etter BLP 11365 dated August 27, '1979 regarding GE Review, of Bechtel Design.
The inspector requested verification of the commitments contained in those letters relative to GE review of Bechtel changes to GE standard designs.
This matter is considered unresolved pending NRC review of evidence of the aforementioned reviews.
(387/80-01-03)
During, inspection of the Emergency. Service Water system the inspector noted numerous interference problems between portions of. the ESW piping and various cable tray supports, hanger supports and ventilation duct supports.
These interference items were not part of the turnover exception list for the system.
Bechtel Quality Assurance issued QAR-F-584 regarding pipe interference problems.
This item will remain open pending NRC review of the QAR response.
(387/80-01-04)
c ~
Valve Installation
The inspector examined welds B3 and B4 in the Recirculation system, VRR-B-31-2.
The welds are used to attach the suction gate valve HV-IF-.023B to the piping.
Radiographic film was reviewed for both welds with no discrepancies noted on the film.
The inspector did note that various documentation was missing from the weld data sheet.
This was brought to the attention of Bechtel-guality Assurance, and was promptly corrected.
During a field inspection the inspector visually observed the two welds and noticed that there appeared to be weld spatter on the valve. side of weld 83.
This spatter was removed promptly.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
No'items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundar and Safet -Related Ps sn 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 D, The Bechtel guality. Assurance Manual Section III, Site Specifications M 204 and M 207, drawings M-198 and M-199, and Peabody Testing Procedure IPPT-300-39;03.
a. 'eldin
- Unit 2 b.
Wel ding of:
GBC-201-12-FW12 The inspector verified selected detailed drawings, welding procedures, base and filler materials as specified, welder qualification, quality control documentation, weld appearance, welding variables such as gas flow and amperage and nondestructive testing activities as appropriate.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
Nondestructive Testin
- Unit
Liquid Penetrant Inspection of:
GBB-106-1 Hanger
VRR-B31-2-FWB12M Buildup Repair R-1 YRR-B31-2-FWB12M Sweepolet Weld Prep Area The inspector verified.conformance to the applicable testing procedure, qualification of the examiner and test technique.
No items of. noncompliance were identifie.
Recirculation S stem Nozzle Modification - Unit. 1 The inspector reviewed procedures and observed work in progress
'elative to the Recirculation System nozzle modification.
The procedures and work were examined to verify conformance with ASME Section III thru Summer 1976 Addenda and Section XI 1974 edition for General Electric Installation and Service Engineering (GE I8SE)
work; and ASME Section III thru Winter 1972 Addenda for Bechtel work; and commitments in PP&L letters, to the NRC, PLA-291 dated September 25, 1978 and PLA-350 dated May 4, 1979.
Procedures reviewed and utilized for inspection included:
Bechtel FCI-M-174 Revision
The inspector observed welding work in progress and verified conformance to applicable procedures.
Specific observations included:
Counterbore grinding of the sweepolet for weld VRR-B31-2 FWB12M Welding of:
VRR-B31-2 FWB12M VRR-B31-1 FWA14M VRR-B31-2 FWB14M VRR-B31-2 FWB19M No items of noncompliance were identified.
7.
Unauthorized Weldin of an Attachment to the Unit
Reactor ressure essel-By letter to the NRC dated February 1,
1980, the licensee reported a deficiency, involving the unauthorized welding of a pipe support attachment directly to the Unit 1 Reactor Pressure Vessel, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e).
The inspector reviewed Bechtel MCAR 1-46 and Nonconformance Report No.
5241 regarding this deficiency.
Determination of the final disposition for the unauthorized weld had not yet been determined.
Additional documentation reviewed by the inspector relative to this deficiency included:
GE Field Deviation Disposition Request KR1-193, Revision
Bechtel letter to GE M-1-1397
The inspector informed the licensee that the compliance with the ASME Code Section III regarding the welding of temporary or permanent attachments to code pressure vesssel was considered an unresolved item pending the licensee's final disposition of the deficiency.
(387/80-01-05)
8.
Lamellar Tearin on HVAC Plenum Plate The inspector reviewed the disposition of Bechtel MCAR 1-45 regarding lamellar tearing on HVAC plenum plates.
The tearing was originally identified visually as longitudinal cracks within the thickness of the plate.
The defects were evaluated for reportability in accordance with,l0 CFR 50.55(e)
by Bechtel and PPSL and determined to be not
'reportable.
The inspector reviewed the following documentation relative to this matter:
Management. Corrective Action Report No. 1-45 with Final Report dated February 14, 1980
.
Peabody and Wind Supplier Deviation Disposition Request 059 dated January 11,. 1980 with corrective actions PP8L letter PLI-7153
, The inspector had no further questions'on this matter.-
s
~
9.
Reactor Vessel Installation - Units
and
The inspector examined protection of the installed reactor vessel and stored closure head-for compliance with site procedures and PSAR Appendix D commitments.
The inspector reviewed the procedural requirements for vessel protection and verified that required inspections and preventive maintenance were being completed.
Documentation reviewed by the inspector included:
Project Special. Provisions Notice SF/PSP G-5.1, Revision
Equipment Mai.ntenance Requirements and Record Form for the Reactor Vessel Closure Heads GE IPSE Closure Stud Threads Inspections September 19 and December 14, 1979 No items of noncompliance were identifie.
Reactor Vessel Internals
-. Units 1 and
The inspector examined protection of the. stored reactor vessel internals for compliance with site procedures and PSAR Appendix D
coomitments.:
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 separator for Units 1 and
and the Unit 2 shroud.
Documentation reviewed by the inspector included:
Project Special Provisions Notice SF/PSP G-5.1, Revision
Equipment Maintenance Requirements and Record (EMRR) Form for the Unit 2 steam dryer, shroud; and the shroud head and separator.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
11.
Advanced-Control Room Work in Pro ress a.
The inspector observed work in progress in the control room.
Work in progress included:
Rework required by Nonconformance Report No.
5075 regarding Separation Criteria Violations I
System 164 A, Recirculation System, pre-turnover circuit checks Rework of panel connectors in accordance with GE Field Disposition Instruction WJIQ, Revision
as documented on QCIR-NSSS-WJIQ-1C608-J106 No items of noncompliance were identified.
b.
During routine inspection of ACR/PGCC panels two terminated cables were found with a
"Do Not Terminate" tag attached. to them.
The two tags were on Cable 80400/012A-009 in. panel 1C-600-11, and Cable 88542/C92A-003 in panel 1C-651.
It was later determined that the tag on Cable 80400/012A-009 should have been cleared, this tag was removed.
It was determined that termination of Cable b8542/C92A-003 should not have been made.
This termination has been removed pending completion of the required rework.
Further inspection of ACR/PGCC Panels for similar tags was conducted by Bechtel Field Engineering.
Subsequent examination by the NRC inspectors identified no further tagging discrepancies.
No items of noncompliance were identifie.
Safe 14'elated Com onents -
- Uni ts:1-'and'
a ~
Stora e and Protection Unit 1 and
The inspector examined pipe hanger materials, and motor control center (MCC)'storage conditions in the onsite warehouse and protection of safety-related MCC's after installation.
The
~inspector verified that-requirements were Being met relative to:
prevention of damage, protective covers, identification, segregation, proper storage position; and surveillance/inspection activities.
The "inspector evaluated the storage and protection of MCC's and pipe hanger materials against criteria established by:
the PSAR Appendix.D; Bechtel Field Procedure G-ll, Revision 18;. Bechtel Project Special Provisions Notice PSP G-5.1, Revision 4,. and AD6.10, Revision 2, "Equipment Maintenance Control".
Except as noted below no items of noncompliance were identified.
b.
Preventive Maintenance Pro ram -stems'under co nizance of PP&L-Unit
The inspector examined the licensee's procedures for implementation of a preventive maintenance program for systems placed under control of the PP&L staff.
The inspector examined these activities relative to commitments in the PSAR Appendix D, and AD6.10, Equipment Maintenance Control.
AD6.10 stated in part that Startup Work Requests (SWR) would be written by the startup engineer to notify PP&L staff of what storage and maintenance requirements should be followed by plant staff from time of system turnover until the system is placed in initial operating mode, and also a
SWR should be written to
. the SSES Supervisor of maintenance to begin appropriate section of the plant staff Preventive Maintenance Program.
Startup system 006A - Essential 480 volt Motor Control Centers (MCC)
was inspected to see if above requirements were followed.
The first portion of this system was turned over on February 16, 1979 and four other subsystems have subsequently been turned over throughout the past year with last subsystem being placed under PP&L cognizance on January 24, 1980.
As of February 27, 1980 no SWR had been sent to PP&L staff or to the Supervisor of Maintenance instructing them to perform or. initiate a program of Preventive Maintenance.
AD6.10 states that the plant staff should continue applicable portions of the Bechtel Construction storage and maintenance program as recommended by the startup engineer until the system is placed in the initial operation mod Appendix A of Bechtel Field Procedure FP-G-ll Revision
states regarding the storage requirements for equipment which must be protected from condensation that there should be adequate power service for space heaters and that space heaters must operate satisfactorily.
This requirement is checked monthly by Bechtel guality Control prior to system turnover.
On February 22, 1980 the inspector examined twenty MCC's involved in the Startup system 006A.
The following MCC's had space heaters de-energized with both space heater breakers open:
1.
MCC-OB-516 2.
MCC-OB-526 3.
MCC-OB-536 4.
MCC-OB-546 M+".$--146 was found with one space heater breaker shut, and one ripped.
The panel was cold to the touch.
Although no formal SWR had been sent to PPIIL plant staff as required by the startup procedures manual, an informal memorandum dated October 9, 1979 had been sent to the plant Shift Supervisors stating in part that Motor Control Centers should be checked periodically to verify that breakers feeding MCC strip heaters
... are closed.
c ~
The inspector stated that the failure to follow prescribed procedures to implement.a preventive maintenance program was contrary to the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B Criterion V.
(387/80-01-06)
Construction S ecifications/Work Procedures The inspector reviewed controlled drawings for proper revision, documentation, and content.
The following production drawings were reviewed from the foreman's office Area 30 on the 719'evel:
l.
2.
3.
4.
5.
M-26-2-Revision
M-26-3-Revision
M-26-4-Revision
M-26-9-Revision
M-26-ll-Revision 27
The following stick file drawings were reviewed from stick file number 16.
1.
M-30-1-Revision
2.
M-32-12-Revision
3.
M-33-10-Revision
4.
E-34-3-Revision
5..
E-33-3-Revision
6.
E-32-6-Revision
7.
E-30-1-Revision
No discrepancies were noted during this review.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
13.
IE Bulletin Followu
- Units'1'and
a 0 Discussion b.
IE Bulletin 79-.02 Revision 2 issued to PPSL was.reviewed to verify that the licensee reviews and evaluations of the bulletin are complete and accurate, as supported by other'facility records and by inspector. observation of installed plant equipment.
~Findin s
Paragraph 4 of actions to be taken by licensees states, in part, "For base plate supports using expansion anchors, but raised from the supporting surface with grout placed under the base plate, for testing purposes it must be verified that leveling nuts were not used.
If leveling nuts were used, then they must be backed off such that they are not in contact with the base plate before applying tension or torque testing."
PPSL did not address this item in the'tr response to the bulletin.
Discussions with site personnel indicate leveling nuts had been used.in the past, but there may not be adequate documentation to show where leveling nuts were used or if they were backed off before applying tension or torque testing as addressed in the bulletin.
PPSL was informed that they should respond in writing to this item of the bulletin.
This bulletin will remain open pending NRC review of PP8L's bulletin respons Atmos heric Radioactive Waste Draina e Pi in Based-on information provided to the NRC regarding possible damage done to
"Texas Pipe" during installation at the site, the inspector reviewed the possible uses and locations of piping, supplied by this vendor.
The inspector determined that piping was purchased for Susquehanna Steam Electric Station from Texas Pipe Bending Co.
on Purchase Order Number 8856-P-6-AC.
Purchase Order No. 8856-P-6-AC refers to Technical Specification 8856-M-203 "Technical Specification for Shop Fabricated Atmospheric Radioactive Waste Drainage Piping
.
The inspector reviewed specification M-203, Revision 5 which specifies that all materials, fabrication, testing and examination is in accordance with the Code for Power Piping, ANSI B 31.1.0.
This specification is not designated as "g" or safety-related by Bechtel.
The inspector reviewed the Bechtel Nuclear guality Assurance g-list, Job 8856, Revision 10 and determined that there were no g listed applications of Purchase Order P-6-AC or Technical Specification M-203 for Susquehanna.
The Susquehanna FSAR Section 3.2.2.1 states that certain portions of the radwaste system meet the additional requirements of guality Group D (Augmented)
as defined in NRC Branch Technical Position ETSB ll-l.
Branch Technical Position ETSB 11-1, Section B.l, Note 1, states that the liquid radwaste treatment system does not include sumps and floor drains provided for collecting liquid waste.
Based on a review of 54 drawings associated with Purchase Order P-6-AC the inspector determined that the Texas Pipe was being used in the Equipment and Floor Drainage System described in FSAR Section 9.3.3.
The Texas Pipe Co. piping used in this system meets the description of sumps and floor drains discussed in Branch Technical Position ETSB 11-1.
The Purchase Order P-6-AC piping is therefore not subject to the guality Assurance requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B since it is.not safety-related and is not subject to the guality Assurance requirements for Radioactive Waste Management Systems in Branch Technical Position ETSB ll-l since it is used as floor drain piping.
Based on the aforementioned review the inspector concluded that the alleged possible damage of this piping, if it actually occurred, would have no affect on the health and safety of the publi.
Unresol ved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required
'o ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviation.
Unresolved items disclosed during the inspection are discussed in paragraphs 4.b (three items)
and 7.
16.
Exit Interviews At. periodic intervals during the course of this inspection, meetings were held with facility management (dates and attendees are denoted in Details 1) to discuss inspection scope and finding k r
V t,
0