IR 05000387/1980004
| ML17138B488 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 05/28/1980 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17138B485 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-387-80-04, 50-387-80-4, 50-388-80-02, 50-388-80-2, NUDOCS 8009190288 | |
| Download: ML17138B488 (17) | |
Text
U..S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE, OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I License No.
Licensee:
50-387/80-04 II I II 50-387 I
I CPPR-101 NNNNNNN Prior ity Category
o t Allentown Penns 1 an'a
0 Facility Name:
Sus uehanna Steam E ectr'c Stat'on Inspection at:
Salem Township, Pennsylvania and Allentown, Pennsylvania Inspection conducted:March 3,
1980 - March 12, 1980 and March 20, 1980 - April 18, 1980 Inspectors:
7)
R.
M. Gallo, Senior Resident Inspector date igned
~
~
oa s, Resi ent Inspector d
e signed Approved by:
c aug y, ~,
rogec s
ection RC&ES Branch date signed Pal K te igned Ins ection Summar:
'Unit'1'-Ins ection on March'3; 1980 - March'12; 1980'and'March 20;'1980
-'
fail'18; 1980 Re ort'No.
0-
-0 Areas Inspected:
Routine inspection by the. Resident Inspector of':
installation and welding of reactor coolant pressure boundary and other piping; IE Bulletins and Circular Followup; followup on construction deficiency reports; installation of safety-related pipe support and restraint systems.
The inspector also per-formed plant tours and reviewed licensee action on previously identified items.
The inspection involved 61 inspector-hours by the NRC Resident Inspectors.
'esults:
Of the seven areas inspected, no items of noncomp1iance were identified In sIx areas; one apparent item of noncomp1iance was identified.
(Infraction-Failure to document chemical analysis of weld filler material - Paragraph 5.c).
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
8009190 2S V
Unit.'.2'ns ection'dn'March'3;-'1980.'--'ar'ch 12; 1980 and'March'20; 1980-A rl 8;
980 Re ort No.'0-38 80-02
Areas'ns ected:
Routine inspection by the Resident Inspector of:
Installation
.
an e
1ng o
reactor coolant pressure boundary and other piping; IE Bulletin and Circular Followup.
The inspector also performed plant tours and reviewed licensee actions on previously identified items.
The inspection involved 37 inspector-hours by the NRC Resident Inspector.
'esults:
Of the five areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified
~sn oor areas; one apparent item of noncompliance was identified.
(Infraction-Failure to document chemical analysis of weld filler material - Paragraph 5.c.)
'DETAILS Persons Contacted Penns lvania Power and'Li ht'Com an Note W.
R.
G.
S.
E'.
T.
S.
B. Barberich, Nuclear Licensing Group Supervisor Beckley, Site QAE Burvis, Site QAE H. Cantone, Superintendent of Plant Carroll, Site QAE Clymer, Site QAE L. Denson, Project Construction Manager 51,3,4 3, 4 J.
D. Everett, ISG Quality Engineer R.
E.
M.
W.
E.
T.
A.
R.
J.
H. Featenby, Assistant Project Director J. Gorski,. Plant Quality Supervisor Gorski~ Resident."Engineer=
H. Gulliver, NQA, 'Senior Project Engineer Lazarowitz, Resident Engineer F. Oldenhage, Resident Engineer R. Sabol, Manager, Nuclear Quality Assurance Schwan, NQA, Supervising Engineer Vernarr, Project Engineer - Civil 1, 2, 3,
F.
D.
Wurst, NQA, Project Engineer Zaprazny, Resident Project Engineer Bechtel Cor oration G.
G.
M.
G.
C.
B.
A.
H.
T.
M.
J.
W.
K.
C.
C. Bell, Bechtel QAE Cranston, Resident Project Engineer A. Drucker, Electrical QAE Finnan, Lead Welding QCE Headrick, Assistant Project Field QCE Henke, Welding Superintendent Konjura, Mechanical QAE Lilligh, Project QAE Minor, Project Field Engineer Muir, Project Manager O'ullivan, Assistant. Project Field Engineer Ross, Lead Welding Engineer Stout, Project Field QCE Turnbow, Field Construction Manager Engineer
1, 3,
3
2 1,
1,
2 2, 4 3,
2, 3,
1,2,3
Factor Mutual En ineerin 'Association W. Rogers, ANII
'Note General Electric Com an -Nuclear'Ener
Business'Grou (NEBG E. A. Gustafson, Site Manager General Electric Com an'-Installation'and'Service'En ineerin IPSE
)
G. Bragan, Site Manager Peabod Testin Com an M. Whalen, NDE Supervisor Notes 1 -- Denotes those present at the exit interview March 7, 1980 2. Denotes those present at the exit interview March 28, 1980 3 - Denotes those present at the exit interview April 4, 1980 4 - Denotes those present at the exit interview April ll, 1980 5 - Denotes those present at the exit interview April 18, 1980
'he inspector also interviewed. other PPSL employees, as well as employees of Bechtel, Peabody Testing Company and General Electric Company.
Plant Tours - Units
and
The inspectors made several tours of the facility during the course of the inspection including the containment wet well and drywell areas, the reactor building, turbine building, control room and control structure, steam tunnel, cable spreading and relay rooms, new fuel and spent fuel storage areas.
The inspector observed work activities in progress, completed work and plant status.
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 identifi-cation, nonconforming material identification, housekeeping and equipment preservation.
The inspector interviewed craft personnel, supervision and quality inspection personnel as such personnel were available in the work areas.
No items of noncompliance were identifie Licensee Action on Previous. Ins ection'Findin s
a.
(Closed)
Unresolved Item (388/77-05-03):.
Unit cooler structural member warped.
The referenced inspection report identified a warped structural member, J2R-11, for a unit cooler support in Unit 2 Area 33.
The inspector observed the condition of the structural member and several others for the cooler in question.
The licensee's response to this item included a verification that the warpage was in accordance with the tolerances of the AISC Manual of Steel Construction, Part 1, Standard Mill Practice.
The response also identifies other similar warped areas on the same cooler support indicating that the warpage was due to the manufacturing process and not due to misuse at the site.
The
'nspector reviewed the following documentation relative to this matter:
Nonconformance Report No.
1935 Bechtel guality Action Request F-310 The inspector had no further questions on this matter at this time.
b.
(Closed)
Item of Noncompliance (387/78-15-01):
Failure to qualify welders for the welding process in use.
During this inspection the inspector reviewed General Electric Installa--
tion and Service Engineering's (GE I&SE) Meld and NDE Spread Sheet 160-77E-0155, Revision 9 with Addenda No. 1.
The inspector reviewed the spread sheet for agreement between detailed welding procedures, applicable weld procedure qualifications and welder qualification procedures.
No discrepancies were identified during this review.
The inspector also verified completion of training sessions for GE I8SE welders regarding the application of and adherence to appropriate welding procedures.
Documentation reviewed by the inspector included:
PP8L letter to Bechtel PLB-9874 dated May 22, 1979 Bechtel letter to PPSL CMO-1715 dated May 31, 1979 GE IPSE Internal Memorandum SgI-777-080 regarding welding training The inspector had no further questions on this matter at this tim Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundar and Safet -Related Pi in a.
Pi in S stem Installation Verification - Unit
The inspector examined work activities relative to turnover to the startup group of the standby liquid control system.
The system turnover boundar ies are defined by Startup System 7urnover No.
153;0.1.
The inspector examined documentation relative to the system turnover and observed the installed standby liquid control piping.
The inspector verified that the system turnover was being accomplished in accordance with applicable procedures, the PSAR Appendix D and FSAR commitments..
The above activities were evaluated against criteria established in the following documents:
FSAR Section 9.3.5 b.
Bechtel gA Manual,Section III Bechtel Drawings M-148, SP-DCA-106-1, SP-DCB-101-6, M-26-4, M-29-5, SP-DCA-106-3 PP&L Administrative Directive 6.1, Revision
System Turnover Exception Form No items of noncompliance were identified.
Pi in Work in Pro ress - Unit
The inspector examined work activities in progress and reviewed associated documentation relative to the hydrostatic testing of Control Rod Drive insert/withdraw piping.
The inspector reviewed General Electric and NISCO drawings and procedures relative to this work, verified gC inspection requirements and observed a hydrostatic test of four piping lines.
The above activities were evaluated against criteria established in the following:
FSAR Section 4.6 PSAR Appendix D
ASME Code Section III
s.
Bechtel Drawings: M-146; M-147, Ml-C12-85(l)-3 (G.E.
No'.
762E577),
C-288 Bechtel Specification C-50 General Electric Specification 22A1342 NISCO Procedure ES-52-180, Revision C
NISCO Drawing 180-1088-3 Additional documentation reviewed included:
Bechtel Memos CWE-2429, EWC-4891 and EMC-4792 Bechtel Pressure Test Report Release No. 2226-1A NISCO Hydrostatic Test Sheets for Line Nos. 30-03, 38-03, 42'-03 and 34-03 No items of noncompliance were identified.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundar and Safet -'Related'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 D, the Bechtel guality Assurance Manual Section III, Site Spe-cifications M'-204, M-207, drawings M-198 and M-199, G.E. specifications 24A4628 and Peabody Testing Procedures IPPT-300-39-03 and IPUT-455-39-03.
a.
Weldin
- Units 1 and
Welding of:
VRR-B31-2 FWB13M -
DCA-209-1 FW3 DBB-218-1 FW2 DBB-219-1 FW2 (1)
The inspector verified selected detailed drawing, welding pro-cedures, base and filler materials as specified, welder qualifi-cation, quality control documentation, weld appearance, welding variables such as gas flow and amperage and nondestructive testing activities as appropriat (2)
The inspector noted that one of the welders observed welding DBB-219-1 FW2 was qualified to a maximum thickness of 1.5 inches for the w'elding process in use.
The wall thickness of the weld joint was 2.07 inches.
The inspector reviewed ASNE Section IX Code Interpretation IX-77-19 which allows welders to weld up to the maximum thickness for which they are qualified.
The extent of this welder 's work on the afore-mentioned weld was documented on the applicable Meld Card, WR-5.
In addition a training session was held for Bechtel Melding Engineers and Welding gC Engineers regarding thickness limitation on welders.
(3)
The inspector noted that one of two parallel welds in the feed-water system appeared to be incorrectly identified.
One weld was identified as DBB-219-'L'W5, an ASNE Class 2 joint, while the other was identified as DLA-201-1 FWl, an ASIDE Class
joint; Drawings DLA-201-1 and DBB-218-1 were changed to re-flect the proper weld identification of DBB-218-1 FW5.vice DLA-201-I.- FW1.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
b. 'Nondestructive'Testin
-Units'1 and
Liquid pentrant inspection of:
DLA-204-1-24 FW's 9 and
SP-HBB-147-2 FW's 2, 3, 4 and
SP-DCA-144-47 in accordance"with IPRN 3878:
Ultrasonic Inspection of:
SP-DCA-144-47 in accordance with IPRN 3878 The inspector verified conformance to the applicable testing pro-cedure, qualification of the examiner and test technique.
No items-of noncompliance were identifie Weldin Material Control - Units
and
The inspector examined the control of weld filler metal at site rod rooms.
Documentation and site practices regarding weld filler metal were reviewed to verify that purchasing, receiving, identifi-cation, storage, testing, issue and moisture control, including rebaking, where required, were accomplished in accordance with the Bechtel guality Assurance Manual '(B(AM)Section III, Appendix 2, WFMC-1 and Field Procedure W-1.
The inspector reviewed documenta-tion relative to four heats of filler metal.
Those heats were:
Heat No.
302171 7-55860 401J4091 411H7461
~Te E309L-16 ER-309 E7018:
E7018 The-inspector determined that certain documentation for the above heats of E309L-16 and ER-309 weld rod was not included in the Receiving Inspection Documentation Package, WFMC-l-R-F-3182-1.
Specifically, the inspector found that no chemical analysis had been documented for Vanadium, Columbium and Tantalum, Molybdenum, Titanium, or Copper, as required by the BREAM WFMC-1 Table 2 and ASME Section III, 1974 edition.
In FSAR Section 3.13 the licensee's position on Regulatory Guide 1.31 commits to the determination of delta ferrite in accordance with NB-2432 and NB-2433 of this code edition.
In addition, there was no documented certification of the weld rod for ASME Section III application as required by the BREAM, WFMC-1 Section 2.2.
Based on the results of the inspector's findings Nonconformance Report No. 5707 was issued by the licensee to document the afore-mentioned discrepancies and additional weld rod heat numbers with similar discrepancies.
One ASME III field weld, VRR-B31'-2 FWB6, was identified as having incorporated some of the material in
.
question.
The inspector stated the failure to provide the certifi-cation of the aforementioned welding materials as required by the ASME Code Section III and the Bechtel guality Assurance Manual Section III was contrary to the requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix B, Criterion VII.
(387/80-04-01; 388/80-02-01)
~
~
~
~
~
6.
'Farr'Com an 'Carbon'Filter ualification Deficienc Farr Company, supplier of carbon filters, advised the NRC by letter, dated October 12, 1979,= that the qualification of NPP-1 and NPP-2 carbon filters was in question due to problems discovered in their qualification test stand..
The Susquehanna site returned all NPP-2 carbon cells and test canisters to the Far r Company on January 18, 1980 for retesting.
The tnspector:-reviewed the Part 2T Report made by Farr Company, a Bechtel Nonconformance Report No. 4193 written against the NPP-2 Filters and the Bechtel Shipping Notice No. 8856-7646 dated January 18, 1980 shipping the NPP-2 carbon filters and test cannisters back to Farr Company.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
7.
8.
Deficfenc 'on Pacific'Valve,Inc."'Swin
'Check'Valves By letter to the NRC dated March 31, 1980, the licensee reported a
deficiency, involving Pacific Valve, Inc. swing check valves which have been identified with disc/body interferences,preventing closure of the valves.
The letter also reported another Pacific Valve, Inc.. swing check valve which would not close by gravity when installed in a vertical position.
These items were reported in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55 (e).
The inspector reviewed Bechtel MCAR 1-47 regarding this deficiency.
The subject valves have been repaired by the vendor.
Resolution of the 50.55 (e) report and MCAR 1-47 will be reviewed during a subsequent NRC inspection.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
Deficiencon ITT'General'Controls H'dramotor Actuator'S rin s Used In a et Re ate Dam ers By letter to the NRC, dated March 28, 1980, the licensee reported a
deficiency in the Milliampere Hydramotor Actuators attached to dampers supplied by American Warming and Ventilating Inc. in accordance with
CFR 50.55(e).
The inspector reviewed the
~ 10 CFR 21 Report from ITT General Controls to the NRC dated December 7, 1979,.a. notification letter from ITT General Controls to American Warming and Ventilating Inc. dated December 6, 1979, a 10 CFR 21 Report from Am'erican Warming and Ventilating Inc. to the NRC dated January 8, 1980, a letter of notification to the Bechtel Power Corp. from American Manning and Ventilating Inc. dated January 8, 1980, and Bechtel's Nonconformance Report No. 5283.
The above documents
state that a spring used in the Milliampere Hydromotor Actuators was discovered manufactured from wrong material, which did not possess design strength required, which could affect operation of'ampers used in safety-related applications.
Resolution of the 50.55(e)
Report and the Part
Reports will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
9. 'afet Related Pi'e'Su
'ort'and'Restraint S'stems
,a.
Actions'Taken'in Res onse'to'E'Bulletin'79-02 The inspector reviewed actions taken by the licensee in response to IE Bulletin 79-02 "Pipe Support Base Plate Designs Using Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts.'"
The inspector reviewed Bechtel specifica-tions.and procedures-regarding the following:
Testing and Repair Procedures Identification of Expansion Anchors Edge of Bolt Hole to Edge of Plate Distance Minimum Embedment Depth and Mininum Thread Engagement Base Plate Hole Dimension Relocation of Anchors Base Plate to Surface Gap Leveling Nut Installation Torque Test Valves The inspector was informed that Field Change Notice FCN-F-974 was issued in February 1980 to prohibit further use of shell type anchors for pipe support installation The inspector observed work, in progress relative to the installation and torque testing of expansion anchor bolts for pipe support EBB-203-H5.
The inspector verified appropriate gC inspection'>was in-'progress and gC documentation was completed and that expansion bolt installa-tion was in accordance with applicable specifications and procedures.
Documentation reviewed by the inspector relative to the above included:
OCIR C72-33-670-EBB-203-H5 Bechtel Specification C-72 Revision
Bechtel Field Procedure FP-C-11 Revision
FCN-F-974 dated February 18, 1980 The inspector also examined recently installed anchor bolts for pipe supports OBB-221-Hl and H2 for conformance to the hanger detail drawings.
The inspector confirmed anchor bolt spacing and bolt identi-ficationon.,
b.
Review of Res onse to Bulletin 79-02 The inspector met with PPSL representatives to discuss the PPSL responses to Bulletin 79-02.
The use of leveling nuts and the lack of a
PPSL response to this issue was discussed in Inspection Report 50-387/80-01.
The inspector also discussed the use of minimum factors of safety as presented in the Bechtel Generic Response to Bulletin 79-02 attached to PPSL letter PLA-378.
The inspector stated that the present NRC position was that the factors of safety discussed in the Bulletin must be met unless some additional justification was provided to the NRC for using lower. factor s of safety.
The inspector was provided with a list of nine large pipe supports referenced in Attachment 1 to PPSL letter PLA-378, The inspector reviewed the following relative to the Bulletin:
PPSL letters to the NRC:
PLA-378 dated July 6, 1979 PLA-435 dated January 7,
1980 PLA-461 dated March 25, 1980 Further review of the responses and actions taken relative to Bulletin 79-02 will be conducted during a future inspectio '.
Field'Observations Re ardin 'Pi'e Su orts (1)
The inspector noted one instance where pipe support materials were left outside the Unit 2 Reactor" Building and were exposed to inclement weather.
Nonconformance Report No.',5540 was issued to document and disposition this condition.
The--inspector had
-
no further questions on this matter at this time.
(2)
The inspector observed the pipe support mechanical snubber GBB-207-H14, located at Area 34 Elevation 683, in its shipping box but with a, layer of dirt on it.
The inspector was informed that PP&L Deficiency Report No.
103 had been issued February 20, 1980 regarding the in plant storage condition of mechanical snubbers.
The. inspector stated that further inspections would be conducted in this area to determine if adequate corrective actions were being taken.
A previously unresolved item regarding snubber storage remains open.
(387/79-40-03)
No.-'items; of, noncompliance were. identified.
.
- ~
~
I 10.
ualit Assessment of the Advanced Control Room ACR
On April-18, 1980 EG&G, contractor to PP&L,. conducted a briefing on the results of their quality assessment of the Advanced Control Room.
The purpose of the assessment was to investigate the extent and underlying causes; of. several deficiencies noted during the installation of the ACR equipment; A final report is expected to be issued in May 1980.
In addition to the Senior Resident Inspector, Mr. A. Finkel of NRC Region I attended the br iefing.
Review of the final EG&G Report will be conducted by the NRC and documented in-a. future inspection report.
No items of noncompliance were identified..
ll.
.IE Bulletin and Circular Followu The inspector discussed, with licensee representatives in Allentown, NRC policy regarding final verification and acceptance of PP&L actions rela-tive to IE Bulletins and Circulars.
- The inspector stated that actions considered appropriate by the licensee and committed to either in corres-pondence to the NRC or internal correspondence would be verified by the NRC prior to closeout.
The licensee's representatives described their present methods for tracking IE Bulletins and Circulars and stated that increased effort was being made to followup on committed 'corrective actions.
No items of noncompliance were identifie Fuel Load Forecast Meetin On March 20 and 21, 1980, the Senior Resident Inspector attended a
meeting with representatives of the licensee and the NRC regarding the site construction completion status and the scheduled fuel load date.
A summary of the meeting is contained in a letter to Pennsylvania Power and Light Company from the NRC Licensing Project Manager dated April 17, 1980.
In addition to those listed in the NRC letter, Mr.. H. Nicholas of NRC Region I attended the meeting on March 21, 1980.
Exit Interviews't 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 findings.