IR 05000389/1981010
| ML20010A578 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 07/20/1981 |
| From: | Economos N, Herdt A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20010A575 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-389-81-10, NUDOCS 8108110567 | |
| Download: ML20010A578 (7) | |
Text
-m m
-
m.
,"
.
- j>n rstoq'o
UNITED STATES y
't NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'
O E
REGION ll
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 o
g.....,g#
b ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 keport No. 50-389/81-10 i
t Licensee:
Fiorida Power and Light Company 9250 West Flagler Street
Miami, FL 33101 Facility Name:
St. Lucie Docket No. 50-389 t
License No. CPPR-144
,
Inspection at St. Lucie Site near Fort Pierce, Florida i
Inspectorb
~
7-/7-[/
m Nick tconomos
_ Date Signed
-
dO
/
Approved by:~A. R. Herdt, Section Chief
' Date Signed Engineering Inspection Branch Engineering and Technical Inspectf an Division i
SllMMARY Inspection on June 16-19, 1981 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 27 inc.pector-hours onsite in the areas of open items; licensee identified items; PSI observation of work activ-ities - weld repairs.
,
i Results No violations or deviations were identified.
,
i
.
(
8108110367 810722 ^
PDR ADOCK 05000389" G
PDR,
.
- -
-
-
-
-
.
.'
.'
REPORT DETAILS
1..
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees -
- B. J. Escue, Site Manager
- W. M. Hayward, Supervising QA Engineer
"W. F. Jackson, Welding Superintendent D. Behres, Area QC Supervisor, Mechanical K. V. Smart, QC Level III Examiner
Other Organizations EBASCO Services, Inc.
D. Geller, Pipe Engineer
- R. W. Zaist, Project Superintendent
- R. A. Garramore, Senior Resident Engineer
'
Union Boiler
,
s D. Lightfoot, Piping Superintendent
,
D. Waldron, Piping Foreman
'
R. Mellette, Piping Foreman j
- Attended exit interview i
.
2.
Exit interview i
)
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on June 19, 1981 with those. persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. -The inspector described the
.
areas inspected and discussed in detail.the inspection findings listed j
below. 'No dissenting comments were received from the licensee.
,
a.
(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item (IFI) 389/81-10-01:
" Repair of RT
'
-
indication in loop weld 2FCRC0115-006", paragraph 8.
[
b.
(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 389/81-10-02, " Linear Indication in RC
Pump 2A1 shell", paragraph 7.
l 3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings I
_
j a.
(Closed) Infraction 389/80-13-01:
Improper Storage.
FP&L letter of
'
response dated April 3,1981 has been reviewed and -determined to be
!
acceptable by Region II. The inspector held discussions with the
-
i l
%-
-
-
.
.
.
cognizant QA Engineer and examined the corrective actions as stated in the letter of response. The inspector concluded that FP&L had deter-mined the full extent of the subject noncompliance, performed the necessary survey and followup actions to correct the present conditions and developed the necessary corrective actions to preclude recurrence of similar circumstances. The corrective actions identified in the letter of response have been implemented.
b.
(Closed) Infraction 389/80-15-01: NDE Certification Program discrepan-cies. FP&L letter of response dated January 29,-1981 has been reviewed and determined to be acceptable by Region II. The inspector held discussions with the cognizant QA Engineer and examined the corrective actions as stated in the letter of response. The inspector concluded that FP&L had determined the full extent of the subject noncompliance, performed the necessary survey and followup actions to correct the present conditions and developed the necessary-corrective actions to preclude recurrence of similar circumstances.' The corrective actions identified in the letter of response have been implemented.
c.
(Closed) Infraction 389/80-15-02: NDE Performance.
FP&L letter of response dated April 3,1981 has been reviewed and determined to be acceptable by Region II. The inspector held discussions with the cognizant QA Engineer and examined the corrective actions as stated in the letter of response. The inspector concluded that FP&L had deter-mined the full extent of the subject noncompliance, performed the necessary survey and followup actions to correct the present conditions and developed the necessary corrective actions to preclude recurrence of similar circumstances. The corrective actions identified in the letter of response have been implemented.
d.
(Closed) Infraction 389/80-15-03: Failure of Radiographic Examination to comply with Code Requirements.
FP&L letter of response-dated January 29, 1981 has been reviewed and determined to be acceptable by Region II.
The inspector held discussions with the cognizant - QA Engineer and examined the corrective actions as stated in the letter of response. The inspector concluded that FP&L had determined the full extent of the subject noncompliance, performed the necessary survey and followuo actions to correct the present conditions and developed the necessary corrective actions to oreclude recurrence of similar circum-stances. The corrective actic::s identified in the letter of response have been implemented, e.
(Closed) Infraction 389/80-15-04:
Inadequate Control of Temporary Attachments. FP&L letter of response dated January 29, 1981 has been reviewed and determined to be acceptable by Region II. The inspector
_
held discussions with the cognizant QA Engineer and examined the corrective actions as stated in the letter of response. The inspector concluded that FP&L had determined the full extent of the subject
,
y.
.
,,-
-.m.
-+ww-
.r-,-w-,.
- - -
_
_
.
..
_
_
_.
,.
.
,
,
'l
.
.
noncompliance, performed the necessary survey and followup actions.to i
correct the present conditions and developed.the necessary corrective actions to preclude recurrence of similar circumstances.
The correc-tive actions identified in the letter of response have been imple-i mented.
i
!
f.
(Closed) Infraction 389/80-15-05: Corrective Action.
FP&L letter of l
response dated January 29, 1981 has been reviewed and determined to be acceptable by Region II.
The inspector held discussions with the
'
i cognizant QA Engineer and examined the corrective actions as stated in the letter of response. The inspector concluded that FP&L had deter-mined the full extent cf the subject noncompliance, performed the necessary survey and followup actions to correct the present conditions
~
and developed the necessary corrective actions to preclude recurrence of similar circumstances. The corrective actions identified in' the i
letter of response have been implemented.
g.
(Closed) V'nresolved Item 389/80-13-03:
Chloride Control. Through a series of memoranda starting with the QA Supervising Engineer dated September 22, 1980 and terminating with one from the Construction.
Superintendent dated December 15, 1980, the licensee has instructed area supervisors to remove the objectionable thread cutting fluids, e.g., Mistic Metal Remover and Rapid Tap, from the field and replace them with Trim Regular which is now in use.
Pipe material where
,
'
contact with these fluids may have resulted in a deleterious attack,.
were restored to the appropriate cleanliness level. This material will appear in' the approved items list which is undergoing revision.
h.
(Closed) Unresolved Item, 389/80-13-04: Omitted Nonessential Variable.
s The licensee has revised welding procedure specification ra. WPS74 to preclude peening of welds. This was done through revision one dated October 27, 1980.
^
1.
(Closed) Unresolved Item 389/80-15-09: Potential Unacceptable Safety Injection Pipe Weld. The weld in question No. SI-0417-002 was repaired under weld repair report (WRR) WRR 3094.
The - inspector reviewed related QC records and the radiograohic film of the' repair which was
<
consistent witn code requirements.
'
4.
Unresolved Items
)
Unresolved items were not identi#1ed during this inspection.
i
1
.
.w-
, - -.,,,. -
.,
.c.-
,w..- -,,
e.,
.
..,.s
,e v.,,.
.._
. _ - _
. _. _
_ _ _ ____. _
_
_
_
i
.
.
O O
,
j 5.
Independent Inspection Effort
-
j The inspector conducted a general inspection of the reactor building and auxiliary building to observe construction progress and construction ac-tivities including welding, welding material control,. housekeeping and stcrage.
,
j Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Inspector Followup Items s
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 389/80-15-10: Certification of Level II PT Examiner Training Experience". The licensee has recertified the Level I, PT inspector and reinspected the individual prior to this finding as disscussed during the October 31, 1980 exit interview.
7.
Licensee Identified Items (LII)
Prior to this inspection, tFc licensee identified the following items as a potential reportable under 10 CFR 50.55(e):
(0 pen) Item (LII), 389/81-10-02:
Linear Indication in RC Pump Shell. On June 10, 1981 the licensee notified IE:RII of a potential 50.55(e) item concerning linear indications identified in the 2Al RC pump shell area of interest next to field weld RC112FW4 on the inlet side of the pump.- The
,
I indications apoeared from 7/8" to 1 inch from the weld ID surface and extended over the entire circumference.
The licensee stated,.the indi-cations were dotected when the aforementioned weld > was radiographed for code
!
acceptama. At the ' time of this inspection the repair was still in progress'
j.
discussions with cognizant licensee personnel disclosed that a Byron Jackson
(vendor) representative had reviewed the radiographs and acknowledged that the i ndications were casting type defects.
The inspector observed? the repair effort and reviewed related QC records including weld travelers. The
repair was being performed under nonconformance reports (NRC) 1738M and i
1849M.
In response to questions concerning the condf tion of the other three
,
pumps the lice'nsee representative stated that a review of similar radio-i graphs had been conducted and there was no evidence of a similar condition l
existing in this area.
Within the areas inspected no violations or deviations were identified.
8.
Reactor Coolant Pipe Weld Repair
At tne time of this inspection work to repair defects in eight (8) primary
"
coolant loop welds was in progress. The licensee representative stated that orginally these welds were radiographed and were found acceptable by FD&L interpretors and the code inspector (ANI). However, the ultrasonic examina-
'
tion (baseline inspection) which was performed to satisfy A3ME Section XI
,
c-s-t,*
g r g-mu-9g-e
-9 gwyy9 m-ye.-y yy,--eiy--y-y y y gpr e i r t y-9 - -p wr 1 w
tva r ygt'etw=,
y 47 yay-----d go t
yy-q y
'-W v
y=
-wyir-ur'-y 3g-y y g rg r---y-r gy
y S-tv-yyp--
r--
y
l...'
l l
requirements detected. fabrication related type defects in the weld metal, Discussion with cognizant licensee personnel disclosed that a subsequent radiographic examination of the weld ligments in question confirmed the ultrasonic examination findings. Also the licensee representative stated that some of these defects appeared to be borderline cases with respect to the acceptance criteria of the applicable construction Code, ASME Section III (77577).
i In this case the licensee elected to repair' all eight welds now, that the plant was still under construction, rather than deal with them later.
The welds under discussion are as follows:
Weld-No.
Description / Condition Status 122-01 Excavated and did not find Repair work in defact(s), rewelded and progress,at time -
reradiographed, found of inspection.
porosity, repaired and
.
reradiographed; found accept-l able. Work repair requests
_(WRR), #4273, #4289.
115-06 Nonfusion Sk" excavated.
Repair work in about 2 1/8 inches from ID progress at time
~
to 00, defect still present.
of inspection.
Rewelded cavity.and excavated from OD to ID. Defect located-about 1 5/8 inches from OD surface, rewelded and j
reradiographed; found accept-able. WRR #4269, #4157.
121-03 23" Slag and/or lack of fusion Repair work in pro-kRR #4282 gress at time of I
inspection observed final pass 124-03 Lack of fusion 3k" total Excavation in at 9 and 6 o' clock looking progress at the into RC Pump.
Excavation time of the 2 3/8" in from OD. WRR inspection
- 4276 124-02 Lack of fusion 3 ', 4 3/8" Welds excavated and 2" WRR# 3154, 3168, 3222 repair approximately 1/3 complete at time of inspection.
Observed welding activity.
a
-
-
,
..
,
-... -
The :icensee stated that repair on welds 115-03, 121-02 and 124-01 had been completed. For the aforementioned welds, undergoing repair, the inspector observed excavation and/or weld repair in progress; discussed the activity.
with craft and field supervision, reviewed pertinent QA/QC records including weld procedures, welder performance qualification records, weld electrode issue slips and weld electrode certifications for material under Code numbers 083, 084, 165. On the evening of June 18, 1981, the inspector witnessed the radiographic examination of weld 115-06 excavation, which was -
performed to ascertain whether the. defect had been removed. Although film misplacement precluded a good view of area of interest, the film provided sufficient information to show that the defect was still present even though approximately 2 1/8" of weld metal had been removed. On June 19, 1981, the inspector was informed th3t the licensee had decided to stop excavating the weld from the ID of the pipe.
The licensee's plan was to weld out the excavated area and then to locate and remove the defect by excavating the weld from the 0D of the pipe. The inspector discussed the procedure with-cognizant licensee personnel and stated that IE:RII would be reviewing QC records including-film overlays, PT reports and related records which verified the removal of this defect and the subsequent weld repair. This matter was identified as IFI No. 389/81-10-01, " Repair of RT Indication in Loop Weld 115-06".
Within the areas inspected no violations or deviations were identified.
.
%.
-...,m,
.
,,_..m
.
.---,,-__--,..._,.w.
.
,#--
,
,,.-m--r.,.-,
_. - -.,
-
-
-
--
-