IR 05000397/1979004
| ML17272A504 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 04/16/1979 |
| From: | Bishop T, Haynes R, Kirsch D, Kirsch D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17272A495 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-397-79-04, 50-397-79-4, NUDOCS 7907030094 | |
| Download: ML17272A504 (29) | |
Text
U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COf'IMISSI OFFICE GF INSPECTION Aflak ENFORCEfl"=!lT REGIOff V Report No 5O-397/79-O4 Docket No.
License tfo.
CPPR-93 Safeguards Group Licensee:
Washington Public Power Sup
System P. 0.
Box 968 Richland, Washington Facility Name:
Washington Nuclear Project No.
2 (WNP-2)
WNP-2 Site, Benton County, Washington
,Insp tion Conducte 'ebruary 27-28, March 1 -2 and 14-1 6, 1 979 Cptaa
.a ~tarn -~ /
'nspectors:
~
~ I~
~ CL
'
4/~dt 'I T.
W. Bis op, Re tor Inspector Date Signed
.
D. f ~irsch, Reactor Inspector Date Signed C.
~4M/7Q J. 0. Elin, Re tor Ihspector Date Signecg Approved By: ~: A.t ~
.
~/d/79 R.
C.
Hayn s, Chief, Projects Section, Reactor Date Siqned Construction and Engineering Support Branch Surrmary:
Ins ection on Februar 27-28, March 1-2, and 14-16,. 1979 Re ort No. 5C-397 79-04
~AI td:
t t, dt p
t by t
ttyb dt p t of construct>on activities including:
observations of instrumentation work activities and review of quality related records; electrical cable and termina-tion gA implementing procedures, observation of stork activities, and review of quality records; observations of electrical components and systems work activities and review of quality related records; qualification of electrical equipment; followup on a reported 50.55(e)
item; and followup on previous inspection findings.
The inspection involved 91 inspector hours onsite by three NRC inspectors.
Form 219 (2)
~DOVOSaP P 9
~
Summary:
(Report Ho. 50-397/79-04)
(Con'. )
Results:
Six items of noncompliance were identified in the nine'areas inspected (three infractions.- failure to maintain system cleanliness protection, Paragraph 4.a. (3); failure to properly install batteries, Paragraph 6.a.(2);
and failure to properly perform welding inspections, Paragraph 4.a.(4).(a);
and three deficiencies - failure to maintain status of welding inspections, Paragraph 4.a.(4).(b); fai lure to identify 480 volt breakers as to quality class, Paragraph 6.a.(l);
and failure.to
.properly color code electrical cables, Paragraph 5.b.(1).
I
l
DETA1LS Persons Contacted Washin ton Public Power Su
S stem (WPPSS
- D
- M.
- C.
- A.
4'J
- D S.
- R.
- G
- J
- W S.
- F
'.
I.
L. Renberger, Assistant Director - Technology E. Witherspoon, Division Manager guality Assurance B. Organ, Assistant Director - Projects D. Kohler, WNP-2 Project Manager Janus, Construction Manager L. Hoviard, Operational quality Assurance flanager M. Sastry, WNP-2 Project guality Assurance Manager Young, WNP-2, Senior guality Assurance Engineer S. Sallee, WNP-2 Senior guality Assurance'ngineer K. Afflerbach, Supervising Test 'Engineer F. Peters, Startup Administrative Supervisor M. Steidi, WNP-2 Senior guality Assurance Engineer E. Farone, WNP-2, guality Assurance Engineer - Electrical L. Washington, guality Assurance Engineer - Startup R. Ozment, Senior Maintenance Engineer Bufis, Test Group Supervisor Butler, Test Engineer Burns 5 Roe Inc.
(BSR)
- R.
- M
- R; M.
- G M.
- H
- p W.
R.
W.
Root, Deputy Project Manager J. Parise, Deputy Project guali ty Assurance Manager D. Carmichael, guality Assurance Engineer - Electrical A. Lacey, Resident Project Engineer Harper, Technical Support Manager Burnztein, Lead Electrical Engineer
'uthill, Senior Project guality Assurance Enoineer Massman, Senior guality Assurance Engineer - Electrical Smith, Civil Engineer Masey, guality Assurance Engineer Amatt, Hanger Engineer Fischback/Lord F/L)
J.
J.
J.
R.
R.
H.
C.
Y.
Collins, guality Assurance Manager Logan, Supervisor, Raceways and Cables Lambert, Assistant Construction Superintendent Stewart, equality Assurance Engineer.
Einan, Supervisor, System 'Startup and Test
Zimmerman, equality Assurance Supervisor Nitsche, guality Assurance Engineer Sills, Calibration Technician
j t
-2-WSH Boecon/Bovee and Crail/GERI A. Larson, guality Assurance Manager L. Buckner, guality Control Supervisor P.
Young, guality Control Inspection Supervisor C. Fusch, Senior Equipment Engineer Johnson Controls Inc.'CI T. Bastyr, Project Manager J.'ardin, Project Superintendent R. Jones, guality Assurance Manager R. Swift, guality Assurance Engineer
- Denotes those present at exit interview on Narch 2, 1979.
In addition, Mr. N. L. Fitch, Executive Secretary, Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council of the State of Washington, attended the exit interview.
- Denotes thos present at exit inter view on March 2 and 16, 1979.
'2.
Construction Status As of February 23, 1979, the licensee considered the overall completion of the WHP-2 project to be 621.
This is a revised percent completion figure, and is consistent with the licensee's projected commercial opera-tion date of September 1981.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Ins ection Findin s
a.
(Open)
Noncompliance (50-397/78-10/01 ):
Structural column anchor bolt lock nuts had not been installed.
The licensee's response to the item of noncompliance was summarized in WPPSS letter 602-78-275 of December 27,. 1978.
The licensee has initiated action to procure and install the required lock nuts.
In addition, the licensee has issued, instructions (WPPSS letter WNP2i~iCL-1-78-366 of December 20, 1978) to all contractors reviewing the cited condition and directing each contractor to assure their installation procedures preclude the recurrence of such a condition.
The preven-tive and planned corrective actions by the licensee appear adequate;.
however, this item will remain open pending further review of the effectiveness of the licensee's actions.
b.
(Open) Noncompliance (50-397/79-01/Ol):
Piping system cleanliness was not maintained for a CRD scram discharge header and a
RHR piping penetration.
The licensee's reponse to the item of noncompliance was summarized in HPPSS letter no. G02-79-28 of February 22, 1979.
The licensee corrected the specific cleanliness violation identified, reviewed
the subject with contractor and subcontractor personnel; and initiated increased surveillances to assure procedure compliince.
These activities were verified by the NRC inspector.
In addition, the licensee has initiated a change to Mork Procedure MP-59 to clarify cleanliness requirements.
This item will remain open pending approval and implementation of the revised work procedure.
(Closed)
Followup Item (50-397/78-09/Ol):
Instrumentation installation contractor needs to develop and implement guality Class I equipment installation procedures.
The instrumentation install ation contractor, Johnson Control s Incorpor ated, developed and implemented the procedures which had been in question during the previous NRC inspection.
Accordingly, this item is closed.
However, several instances of failure to meet 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B
requirements were identified during this inspection which are identified items of noncompliance.
Refer to Paragraph 4 of this report for details.'Open)
Unresolved Item (50-397/78-10):
Information was not available to verify the installed clamps used to support rigid electrical conduit will perform their intended function during a seismic event.
h The licensee has received additional criteria for proper clamp installation from a clamp manufacturer.
This item remains open pending verification that clamping devices meet all required criteria.
(Closed)
Unresolved Item (50-397/78-10/05):
Potential cable separation problem was observed for safety division 2 and 3 wireway below control room panel no.
P680.
The licensee stated that the electrical installation contractor, Fischbach and Lord, would not be conducting a reinspection of guality Class I cables because they have inspected and will continued to inspect to Burns 5 Roe (Architec't-Engineer ) drawings.
Burns and Roe is responsible to specify adequate separation criteria on the design drawings. 'he inspector examined the two trays in question and, following discussion with BER personnel, concluded that these trays are designed to be covered.
The inspector had no further questions on this matter.
(Closed)
Followup Item (50-397/78-10/06):
The electrical contractor had not adequately defined the situations requiring cable pulling tension calculations.
The contractor revised construction procedure CP-404 to clarify requirements specifying when cable pulling tension calculations were
.
and were not required.
The revised procedure was examined and deter-mined to be adequate.
This item is close p I
I
(Open)
Fol 1 owup Item (50-397/78-10/07):
Equipment maintenance inspection record forms were inconsistent with corresponding procedures.'he licensee had developed and initiated implementation of a new work procedure
{HP-106) which defines the equipment maintenance program requirements.
The procedure was examined and was found to be consistent with requirements of applicable codes and standards.
The program includes a computerized periodic print-out of 'inspection requirements.
The first such set of inspection requirements was to be issued tlarch 2, 1979.
This item will be further examined after initial inspections, under the new program, have been completed.
'Closed)
Followup Item (50-397/78-11/01):
Plant housekeeping requires improvement to prevent possible damage to installed safety related systems or components.
The licensee's program of clearly defining housekeeping responsibilities and periodic surveillance of housekeeping conditions has. been effective in significantly improving. housekeeping at the MHP-2 site.
The inspector had no further questions regarding this item'.
(Closed)
Unresolved Item (50-397/78-11/03):
guality inspection records for structural welding in the Sampling and Analyzer and CRD platform areas were not available for review.
A records search by the contractor and licensee was unsuccessful in locating the misplaced records.
Accordingly, a nonconformance report was issued (NCR 206A-3537)
and the welds were reinspected and found satisfactory.
In addition, the contractor took action to verify other records had not been similarly misplaced.
The inspector examined the records of weld reinspection and had no further questions on this item.
J (Closed)
Followup Item (50-397/78-14/01 ):
A nondestr ucti ve examination contractor, NIX Testing Co.,
was using a single set of written examina-tions, some of which were administered openbook, for qualification of personnel.
The licensee provided evidence that multiple written examinations have'een developed by the contractor.
Subsequent to the inspection, the
'licensee provided additional documentation indicating that future written examinations will be administered closed book and that all currently qualified personnel will be requalified with closed book examination at the time of the next normal recertification, or within six months, whichever comes first.
This item is closed.
~
~
l
I
f
-5-k.
(Closed)
Followup Item (50-397/78-14/02):
<<DE practical qualification examinations were not always administered by a Level III examiner, nor was documentation provided which officially delegated this responsibil-ity to a Level II examiner.
The NDE contractor, NIX Testing Co., identi,ied and documented which Level II examiners may administer practical examinations.
The contrac-tor also noted that all tests are under the guidance of a Level III examiner.
This item is closed.
l.
(Closed)
Followup Item (50-397/78-07/02):
Provisions for assuring the
.
removal of arc strikes were not fully developed.
Work procedure No. 114, entitled
"Rework of Surface Defects,"
was issued.
The procedure establishes the requirements for documentation and rework of surface defects on piping systems.
The inspection for such defects are to be conducted during the final system walkdown inspection.
The inspector examined the, new procedure and found it to be consistent with pertinent code requirements.
This item is closed.
4.
instrumentation Com onents and Systems a
~
Observations of Work and Work Activities The inspector examined completed and inprocess work being performed by the instrumentation'nstallation contractor, Johnson Controls Incorporated, for jet pump instrumentation process piping.
The examin-ation included inspection of work package preparation, field change control, material control, field fabrication (pipe bending, welding, and cleanliness maintenance),
and contractor inspection activities.
The activities were examined to ascertain compliance with applicable PSAR, specification, and code requirements.
The following items were identified.
(1)
Field change control - Work package field changes initiated by field engineers have included the addition of piping fittings (e.g.,
socket weld elbows).
This addition of fittings added new weld joints.
Although the field engineers designated the weld inspection requirements, including hold points for the sample examined, it is not clear whether this is consistent with JCI procedural requirements.
JCI procedure gAS-601-H2 requires gA personnel to verify inspection requirements are identified and add appropriate hold points on original work packages.
JCI procedure gA2-602-H2, which provides for field changes of work packages, does not clearly establish responsibilities for identi-fying inspection requirements..
The subject of field change control is considered unresolved and will be examined further during a subsequent inspection.
(50-397/79-04/Ol)
(3)
(4)
Material control - Fabrication material control requirements are provided in JCI procedure gAS-902-HZ, Rev. 0, entitled "Trace-ability Procedure (g-l, ASt1E III)." Included in the procedure are requirements to control access to storage areas, transfer material traceability markings before materials are cut into smaller pieces, and document the issuance of materials from the storage areas to the custody of the crafts.
The inspector noted that in five instances (Requisition Nos. 220-'25.0-29e,
-30e, -30f,
-72b, and -73c) records indicated> that in February 1979,materials were issued from the controlled storage area to the custody of the crafts, including several short (1 foot-2 foot) pieces of pipe supposedly cut from longer pipe stock.
However, it was determined that most of this material was still in the controlled storage area on March 1, 1979, and was not in the custody of the. crafts.
In addition, the small pieces of pipe had not been cut from the longer sections.
The contractor reported that the combined lengths of short pieces equalled one full length of pipe and that a full length section had been issued to the crafts.
An inspection of the full length pipe sections in the custody of the crafts identi-fied tagged bundles of pipe for three of the five requisitions..
The location of piping materials for the remaining two requisitions could not be specifically identified. It was further noted that the crafts pipe rack is immediately adjacent to the "storage pipe, rack," separated only by a rope.
Access control to the pipe in storage was not clearly established.
Licensee representatives stated that the above conditions would be examined and appropriate actions taken.
The control of materials by the instrumentation contractor is considered to be an unresolved item.
(50-397/79-04/02)
tlaintenance of system cleanliness
- JCI procedure no.
SP-2005-H2, Rev.
2 (entitled "Installation and Erection Procedure, gI and ASNE III") requires all pipe and tube ends to be-capped or other-wise closed at the end of each day.
On February 27, 1979, and March 1, 1979, the process instrument pipe No. 220-3.0-X-448e and nine other.ports off of reactor vessel nozzle N9A were found open and unattended.
The failure to maintain system cleanli'ness in accordance with established procedures is an item of noncom-pliance.
(50-397/79-04/03)
Melding inspection activities:
r (a)
Melding inspection criteria and practices were reviewed with
'ognizant contractor personnel.
The weld data sheets for work packages of the 220-3-X-448 series establish requirements for quality assurance inspection of weld joint fit-up and material preheat.
From discussions with cognizant inspection
personnel, it was determined that as of March 1, 1979, no direct measurements of pipe material temperatures are made to verify adequate preheat (minimum 60 F).
The inspectors reported that the ambient air temperature is assumed to be the material preheat temperature, and that the temperature indicated on the shop wall-mounted thermo-meter was recorded as the material preheat temperature.
The failure to accomplish required inspections is contrary
'o the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B. -This.
is an item of noncompliance.
(50-397/79-04/04)
=
(b)
An examination of the records of weld fit-up and preheat
.
inspection identified an additional concern regarding the maintenance of weld inspection status.
The weld data sheets for welds 220-3-X-44Ba,
-44Bb, and-44Bd indicated the welds had been completed on February 27, 1979, whereas the fit-up and preheat temperature inspections were indicated. as having
'een performed on February 28, 1979.
Oata sheets for welds 220-3-X-44Bc, -44Bf; and-44Bk indicated wel,ds had been com-pleted February 28, 1979, yet on Parch 1, 1979, there was no
'documented evidence to indicate the status of inspections for weld fit-up and preheat.
The contractor subsequently reported that the inspections had been performed in a timely manner, but that inspection status sign-offs were not made until the following day.
The failure to maintain evidence of inspection status throughout manufacturing and installation is an item of noncompliance.
(50-397/79-04/05)
No other items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
b.
Review of uali t Related Records As noted in Paragraph 4.a.,
above, the welding inspection records for
jet pump instrument piping identified on JCI drawings 220-3-X-44Ba thru-448m, and material requisition records for JCI drawing's 220-25.0-29e,
-30e, -30f, -72b, and -73c; were examined.
Other than stated in Para-graph 4.a, no items of noncompliance or deviation.were identified.
5.
Electrical - Cable and Terminations a ~
Review of ualit Assurance Im lementin Procedures The inspector examined two procedures of the electrical installation contractor, Fischbach/Lord, to ascertain their compliance with PSAR and licensee's gA program requirements.
The procedures examined were Nos.
CP-801 and gAP-801 (both entitled "Calibration and Certification of Tools, Inspection and Test Equipment" ).
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified. It was noted, however, that while an
~
'E I
,
P
evaluation of test equipment found out of calibration was required, neither'rocedure specified those aspects to be considered in the evaluation nor did they require documentation of the corrective actions determined pursuant to such evaluations
.
F/L and B&R per-sonnel stated that the procedures would be revised to correct the oversight.
The revised procedures wil,l be examined during'
subse-'ent inspection.
(50-397/79-04/06)
b.
Observations of 'tfork and l<ork Activities The inspector examined approximately 60 cable terminations to ascertain
,
compliance with procedure and specification requirements, The examina-tion included inspection for cable identification, cable separation, and termination integrity and location=.
In 'addition, the contractor's programs for hydraulic crimping tool calibration and, the B&R program for controlling cable tray and conduit fill were examined.
The fill of. one conduit was veri,fied by calculation, as acceptable.
The licensee reported that B&R, was in the process of assessing the criteria being applied to separation of Class 1 circuits at termination locations.
This item will be examined further in a subsequent inspection.
(50-397/79-04/07)
'I The following items were identified during the examination:
(1)
Cable Color coding - It was.noted that the PSAR established.
requirements to attach color coded identification tags at the end of each cable as one method of assuring cables of different safety divisions are properly segregated.
F/L procedure gAP-404.1 (entitled "Inspection of Insulated Cable Installation" ) requires
. that safety division 2 cable tags be color coded orange and that division 3 cable tags be color coded red.
The procedure further requires quality assurance inspectors to verify cables are properly identified.
Contrary to these requirements, the inspector observed five division 3 cables which were labeled with orange color coded tags:
.Cable Control Room Location 3 HPCS-0381-C-DIV3 3 HPCS-0091 -C-DIV3 3 HPCS-0257-C-DIY3 3 HPCS-0258-C-DIV3 3 HPCS-0259-C-DIY3 Panel P680G Panel P680G Panel P681A Panel P681A Panel P681A guality records indicate that each of the cables had been inspected and accepted by inspection personnel on December ll and 12, 1978.
The failure to properly color code electrical cables is an item of noncompliance.
(50-397/79-04/08)
'1 I
I V
-9-Hydraulic crimping tool calibration - Calibration procedure (Ho. TI-2) for the 15 ton, Hodel TBH-15 hydraulic operated crimping tools requires that hydraulic pressures of 100 psi and 9,800 - 10,000 psi be applied during specific calibration checks.
There was no documented evidence that these checks
.
had been performed at the specified hydraulic pressures.
The above findings had been identified previously by a contractor corporate audit conducted January 23-.25, 1979.
The site gA response to the. audit did not address this inding. 't was noted that the equipment calibration technicians had been using a 10,000 psi pressure gauge with 500 psi increment markings, spaced about 1/8" apart.
Consequently, interpola-tion of the maximum pressure reached at cut-off was difficult.
A new gauge with more appropriate markings was installed with a tell-tale indicator to provide more precise indication of cut-off pressure.
From discussions with equipment calibration technicians, it was determined that the newer models of the equipment are sup'plied with an adjustable electrical cut-off switch which the manufacturer specifies to be set at 9,600 psi
.
The technicians stated that a numbe~ of these switches were set from 100 psi to 200 psi low when the equipment (vas received for recalibration and had to be adjusted upward to meet the 9,600 psi criteria.
Records identifying those TBN-15s affected inhere not kept.
The inspector noted that, if the cut-off swi tch were adjusted to 9,600 psi, the relief valve
.
operation at TI-2 requirements,(9,800-10,000 psi) could not be verified.
On March 13, 1979, the crimping tool manufac-turer provided information establishing that crimps made at hydraulic pressures of 9,500 psi were satisfactory and that any crimps which achieve deformations of specified 'dimensions are satisfactory (regardless of pressure).
Testing by the
.
licensee verified satisfactory crimps were made at pressures as low as 8,000 psi.
The contractor obtained signed state-ments from the calibration technicians establishing that the tools had never been received from the field with a pump pres-sure below 9,500 psi.
The contractor then sampled deformations on 36 terminations (each with a minimum of four crimps per termination, for a minimum total of 144 crimps)
and found all to be acceptable.
Based on the above inforriation, the licensee concluded that all installed crimps made with a TBM-15 are satisfactory.
The licensee stated that TBH-15 calibration data would be documented in the future.
This item will be examined further during a subsequent t/RC insoection.
(50-397/79-04/09)
No items of noncompliance or deviations except as noted in Paragraph 5.b.(l) were identifie w l
-10-c.
Review of ualit Records The following quality related records for seven power cables and control cables were examined to ascertain compliance with procedural requirements:
(1)
Cable pull records including tension calculations, routing specification, cable specification and cable traceabi lity.
(2)
Selected conduit and cable tray installation and inspection documentation.
(3)
. Cable termination records including tool traceability. and termination 'Location.
(4)
Nongestructive test documentation including megger test, continuity, insulation resistance, as applicable, and, records of test equipment traceability..
(5)
Ten nonconformance reports= related to cables and terminations.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
'6.
Electrical -
Com onents and S stems a
~
Observations of Work and Work Activities The inspectors examined completed installations of safety related batteries and switchgear to ascertain conformance with PSAR, drawing, and specification requirements, as well as protection and cleanliness preservation.
The examinations included inspection of:
125 volt batteries
.Nos. Bl-1 and Bl-2; 250 volt batteries B2-1; 4160 volt'witchgear SN-7 and Stl-8; and 480 volt switchgear SL-71 and SL-81.
The following items were identified during the inspection:
(1)
Battery rack installations - The battery rack installation instruction procedure (entitled "Instruction for Assembling Seismic Restraint Racks for Exide Batteries,"
B&R File No. 51A-00-0013, approved for fabrication on February 4, 1976) states, in Para-graph E.8., that, following the insertion of plastic spacers between cells, "...be sure cells sit snug against the rear cell support rails and snug against the plastic spacers between cells."
Paragraph E.10 states,
"Pack as many shims between the frame up-rights and rails as necessary to produce a very snug fit of the rails against the cells.
This must be done properly or seismic protection could be negated."
I
(2)
(3)
Contrary to these requirements, the cell spacers installed between cel.ls of batteries Bl-l, Bl-2 and 250 VDC battery B2-1 did not fit snugly between the cells and were found to move both laterally and vertically.
In addition, no shims were in-stalled between the rack uprights and rails for batteries Bl-l,'l-2 and B2-1 resulting in about 25 cells of Bl-l and about 10 cells of B1-2 having a gap between cell and rail of 1/8" to
.
1/4".
The battery cells had been inspected and accepted by the contractors quality control inspectors on September 12, 1978, as documented on Inspection Report 218-F/L-5240; The
- failure to properly install and inspect the safety related battery racks is an item of noncompliance.
(50-397/79-04/11)
Identification and interchangeability of switchgear - The contract specifications for 4160 and 480 volt switchgear require that breakers of different quality classes shall not be inter-changeable.
In addition, the 480 volt breaker specification requires that breakers be positively identified as to quality Class I or II, Mechanical devices to prevent interchangeability were identified on 4160 volt breakers, but could not be identified on 480 volt breakers.
The licensee stated that the design features which precluded interchangeability of 480 volt breaker's would be investigated.
This item is unresolved and will be examined further during a subsequent inspection.
(50-397/79-04/10)
Regarding identification of breakers, it was noted that while Class I 4160 volt breakers were properly labeled, there was no identification as to quality level for either Class I or Class II 480 volt cir-cuit breakers.
This is an item of noncompliance.
(50-397/79-04/12)
Equipment protection and cleanliness preservation
- In, general protection of switchgear appeared consistent with good work prac-tices and periodic checks were being made.
It was noted, however, that a light coating of dust had accumulated in 480 volt switch-
. gear SL
and SL 81.
The licensee detaile'd his methods of cleaning and preservation of installed switchgear and stated that the problem could have been caused by construction activities in the. area.
As the preservation program appeared adequate to correct this problem, the inspector had no further questions concerning this matter.
Regarding the physical protection of the batteries, the inspector observed that three supports for ventilation ductwork traversing the room housing battery Bl-1 appeared to be improperly anchored to the overhead.
Discussions with B&R personnel indicated that, due to a large number of deficiencies noted in the work of that particular contractor, a
100% reinspection was being performed of that contractor's guality Class I work and that the inspection, of ventilation support anchors was just beginning.
This item will be examined further during a subsequent inspection when the magnitude and extent of rework has been determined.
(50-397/79-04/13)
-12-Except as noted above, no items of noncompliance or devations were identified.,
b.
Review of ualit Records guality records for safety related switchgear and batteries were examined.
For 4 KV switchgear Sfl-7 and SN-8 and 480 volt switchgear SL-71, SL-73, SL-'81 and SL-83, the review included records of vendor source inspection; receipt inspection; installation; testing; preser-vation and maintenance; qualification of two inspection (gC) personnel; and B&R and F/L audits performed in the previous six to eight months.
guality related records for batteries Bl-1 and 81-2 which were examined included:
battery shop discharge test; battery rack certificate of conformance; supplier operation sheets and travelers; supplier inspec-tion status records; dynamic seismic response data; certified reports of tests performed by battery supplier; supplier generated cell test data; test results documenting licensee compliance with IEEE-STD-450 requirements; site receipt inspection documentation; site storage inspection documentation; records of battery rack bolt torquing; battery rack upright grout preplacement, placement and curing re-cords; and selected nonconformance reports.
The records were examined to ascertain compliance with PSAR, specification, and procedural require-ments.
Except as noted below, the records were complete and indicated satisfactory completion of safety related activi ties.
No items of non-compliance or deviations were identified, but the following items were noted:
(1)
Battery maintenance
- Licensee test results indicated that a
number of cells had specific gravity less that the required minimum of 1.200.'The licensee had been in contact with Exide and it was felt that a high rate discharge/charge cycle would provide adequate electrolyte mixing action.
The licensee in-dicated that the cycle would be performed in about 2 months following receipt and, installation of a discharge load bank.
A Startup Deficiency Report was written Harch 2, 1979, document-ing the low specific gravities noted.
The licensee was in the process of reviewing a procedure for implementation of the neces-ssary battery tests and inspections.
In the interim, the require-ments of IEEE-450 were being use as the test and inspection cri-teria.
The licensee's actions with regard to the startup deficiency report resolution, test and inspection procedure review and imple-mentation, and compliance with IEEE-450 requirements will be examined during a future inspection.
(50-397/79-04/14)
(2)
Battery certification - The certificate of conformance for the batteries was not supplied by the manufacturer, but the licensee had identified this and placed 'this item on the turnover docu-ment deficiency list.
The inspector had no further questions on this item.
'< ~
w
~
~
~ ~
t
~
t h
~
-13-(3)
Battery installation records The inspector requested that the records of installation inspection (Form IPC-13) of the batteries and racks be made available for. examination.
F/L personnel stated that IPC's for the batteries could not be located and had been formally requested from the field for about three months.
F/L personnel stated that new IPCs would be generated and the batteries inspected for installation compliance to applicable drawings and procedures.
In addition, bolt torque records, dated December 13, 1977, indicated that 240 - 3/8" bolts were torqued for battery rack Bl-l and 320 - 3/8" bolts were tor-
'ued for battery rack Bl-2.
F/L personnel could not explain the discrepancy since both racks appeared identical.
Records of torque check for the rack floor mounting bolts (50 ft. lbs)
could not be located.
Battery installation records will be examined further in conjunction vrith the resolution of the noncompliance identified in Paragraph 6.2.(2) of this report.
(50-397/79-04/12)
(4)
Documentation of audit responses
- 'The contractor's documentation of action taken in response to F/L audit report Ho. 78-29 was in-sufficient to demonstrate adequate corrective actions were taken.
The audit identified numerous problems with out-dated drawing revisions in the field and three instances where drawing title blocks had been cut out and taped back in.
Review of this sub-ject with cognizant contractor representatives established that actions, in addition to those documented, had been taken, includ-ing improvements in the drawing control system.
These ad'ditional actions, while appropriate and adequate to correct the audit find-ings, had not been documented in the audit response.
Contractor and licensee representatives stated that future audit responses would be reviewed to assure documented responses accurately reflect actions taken.
The inspector had no further questions on this item.
7.
50.55 e
Item Follow-u On January 17, 1979, the licensee submitted a preliminary report (letter no. G02-79-17) identifying that pipe hangers supporting two reactor closed cooling (RCC) system pipes above Class IE cables in the radwaste building would be overloaded during a design seismic event.
Redesign of these pipe hangers was in progress.
Licensee personnel also indicated that BSR would conduct a review of area detail drawings and conduct an inspection of the area to determine if any similar installations exist.
This review and inspection had not begun.
The licensee further noted that an FSAR amendment was being prepared, for submittal to NRR, to detail any class IE items and circuits install in seismic Class II structures.
This item will be examined further during a subsequent inspection.
(50-397/79-04/15)
'e I
~
-14-
8.
iifi 'ti PSft~R1tdE1 ti i
p t
i I
bii and Electrical Connector Assemblies A list of all Class IE equipment including splices, terminal blocks, termination cabinets and connectors is presently being compiled by the licensee.
The licensee stated that the list will contain information as to:
a.
Equipment location b.
Safety Functional Requirement c.
Manufacturer and Model Number d.
qualification Nethod (test - analysis)
e.
Identification and location of gualification Documents Additionally, the documentation is to be reviewed to insure that the testing was adequate to meet the seismic and environmental extremes under which the equipment must satisfactorily funtion.
The licensee expects the reviews to be completed in late fall 1979.
This subject will be re-viewed further during a subsequent inspection.
(50-397/79-04/16)
9.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable, items of noncompliance or deviations.
Unresolved items in this inspection report are discussed in paragraphs 3.d, 4.a.(l), 4.a.(2),
and 6.a.(Z).
10. 'xit Interview At the conclusion of the inspection, a meeting was held with licensee and Burns
Roe representatives denoted in Paragraph 1.
The activities covered during the inspection and observations and findings of the inspectors were discussed.
Licensee representatives stated that immediate action would be taken on the items identified during the current inspectio '
~
~
~
',