IR 05000397/1979009
| ML17272A584 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 06/29/1979 |
| From: | Bishop T, Dodds R, Vorderbrueggen NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17272A583 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-397-79-09, 50-397-79-9, NUDOCS 7908150212 | |
| Download: ML17272A584 (23) | |
Text
'
~ S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
'Report No.
50 397/79-09 Docket No cense No CPPR-93 Washington Public Power Supply System Licensee:,
P. 0.
Box 968 Safeguards Group Richland, Washington 99352 Washington Nuclear
.Inspection at:
WHP-2 Site.
Benton Project No.
2 (WHP-2)
County,. Washington
,Inspectors:
Inspection condu
Ma T.
W. Bishop, 14-17, 1979 eactor In pector c)
Da e Si ned Approved By:
Suirmary:
L. E. Vorder rueggen, React nspector g)
d
/
J.
0.
in, ctor In ec or R. T. Dodds, Chief, Reactor Engineering Support Section, Reactor Construction and.Engineering Support Branch D te Si ned Date Signed D te igned Ins ection on Ma 14-17, 1979, Re ort Ho. 50-397 79-09
~AI d:
.
dy d
y by y
yb dd-spectors of construction activities including:
reactor recirculation nozzle modifications - review of quality implementing procedures, observations of work activities, and review of quality records; structural steel installation - observations of work activities, and review of quality records; electrical cable installation - observations of work activities and review of quality records; licensee's use of large wire size Kulka terminal blocks; and followup on previous inspection findings.
The inspection involved 75 inspector-hours onsite by three NRC inspectors.
Results:
Ho items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
RV Form 219 (2)
F9 osz SOP-I>
DETAILS l.
Persons Contacted (Jashin ton Public Power Su
S stem WPPSS b.
"A. D. Kohler, WNP-2 Project Manager M. E. Witherspoon, Division Manager, Quality Assurance
- J. Janus, Construction Manager
"A. M. Sastry, tJNP-2 Project Quality Assurance Manager K. D. Cowen, Project Engineering Manager W.
G.
Conn, Supervisor, Startup Support
- G. K. Afflerbach, Supervising Test Engineer
- S.
R. Sallee, Sr. Quality Assurance Engineer
~J.
H. Steidl, Sr. Quality Assurance Engineer
- M. F. Sullivan, Sr. Quality Assurance Engineer R. J. Schutte, Mechanical Engineer, WNP-2
- F. R.
Ozment, Sr. Maintenance Specialist
- G. I. Wells, Construction Specialist G.
W. Brastad, Instrumentation and Controls Engineer J.
R. Zitpmerschied, Quality Assurance Engineer Burns 5 Poe, Inc.
B R
c ~
- R.
C. Root, Deputy Project Manager
- H. J. Parise, Deputy Project Quality Assurance Manager
- G. T. Harper, Technical Support Manager H. Bernstein, Chief Electrical Engineer
- H. R. Tuthill, Sr. Project Quality Assurance Engineer
- P. J.
Hassman, Sr. Quality Assurance Engineer J. Wermelinger, Quality Assurance Engineer The Waldin er Cor oration TWC W. Hack, Site Quality Assurance Supervisor L. Dodson, Quality Assurance Engineer d.
WSH/Boecon/Bovee and Crail GERI A. Larson, Quality Assurance Manager L. Buckner, Quality Control Supervisor P.
Young, Quality Control Inspection Supervisor R. Taron, Quality Control Inspection Supervisor e.
Industrial Heatin 8 Plumbin IHP E. Rasco, Project Manager W. Dale, Quality Assurance Manager C. Schwerin, Lead Quality Assurance Inspector
1.
Persons Contacted (Cont.)
g.
General Electric Installation 5 Service En ineerin GE ISE Y. Lesiuk, Site Manager W. Pappin, guality Control Supervisor H. Carter, guality Control Inspector Fischbach Lord, Inc.
F L h.
J. Collins, equality Assurance Manager J.
Logan, Group Supervisor, Cable Records B. Nitsche, gE V. Stills, Calibration Tester E.
Hayes, Construction Engineer (Containment)
Johnson Controls Inc.
T. Bastyr, Project Manager R. Jones.
guality Assurance Hanager
- Denotes that present at exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Ins ection Findin s a 0 (Closed)
Noncompliance (50-397/79-01/01):
Piping system cleanliness was not maintained.
The licensee's response to the-item of noncompliance was summarized in WPPSS letter No.. G02-79-28 of February 22, 1979.
With the exception of revision and implementation of work procedure No. 59, all actions identified in the letter were verified during previous inspections.
Revision 7 to work procedure No.
59 (entitled "Cleanliness Program and Control Procedure" ) and its implementation were examined during the current inspection.
Training on Revision 7 of WP-59 was found to be in progress at the onset of the current inspection.
This training was completed for all cognizant personnel prior to the. end of the inspection.
The inspector examined the completed records of training and found them to be satisfactory.
In addition, the inspector examined piping activities in the containment, reactor building, and steam tunnel and verified that the requirements of work procedure No.
59 have been satisfactorily implemented.
The* inspector did observe four instances where pipe covers were damaged or not properly installed.
Based on the number of pipes inspected (approximately 200), these four instances are considered isolated cases.
Each of the damaged or improperly installed caps were correcte t l'
-3-Licensee representatives stated that surveillance for clean-liness control will be maintained.
It appears that the action taken by the licensee will assure adequate system cleanliness is maintained.
This item is closed.
(Closed)
Noncompliance (50-397/79-03/02):
Inadequate licensee audit followup.
The item of noncompliance involved inadequate followup of.a licensee audit finding.
The failure to followup in a timely fashion allowed quality problems to go undetected in a sub-contractor's organization.
While the specific subcontractor quality problems are being properly corrected, the licensee was requested to take action to assure future'audit findings are resolved in a timely manner.
The licensee's action to prevent a recurrence of the item of noncompliance was summarized in WPPSS letter No. G02-79-76 of April 20, 1979.
The preventive action consisted of establishing a
new requirement for licerisee and Burns 5 Roe management briefings when contractors fail to take action in a timely manner.
This requirement was documented in Project Management Instruction No.
PMI 4-7, Revision
(entitled "Auditing of Site Contractors and Site Departments" ).
A review of recent audits revealed that the licensee has made use of the management meeting requirement twice in recent months.
It appears that the licensee's action is sufficient to prevent a recurrence of this item of noncompliance.
This item is closed.
(Open)
Noncompliance (50-397/79-03/01 ):
Inadequate inspecti on of a pipe support by the Industrial He~ting and Plumbing Company (IHP).
The licensee's response to the item of noncompliance was summarized in WPPSS letter No. G02-79-76 of April 20, 1979.
The action included reinstallation and reinspection of the pipe support in question (as directed in Nonconformance Report 2808-216-04068),
retraining of IHP inspection personnel, reinspection of all quality class I pipe supports installed by IHP prior to the NRC inspection, and an increase in the IHP surveillance frequency by Waldinger guality Assurance and WPPSS/BSR guality Assurance offices.
The inspectors verified
,
that each of the above actions had been prop rly completed or initiated.
In addition, the inspector verified that IHP inspection procedures were properly approved and that adequate reference material was available or being procured.
It was noted from a review of recent pipe support inspection records that inspectors were identifying a large amount of discrepancies in each support inspected.
No support had yet passed final inspection.
This item will remain open pending final IHP acceptance of a suitable number of supports so that the effectiveness of the routine-IHP inspection program can be properly evaluate d.
(Closed)
Noncompliance (-50-397/79-04/03):
Maintenance of system cleanliness.
The licensee's response to the item of noncompliance was summarized in l<PPSS letter No. G02-79-92 of May 10, 1979.
Johnson Controls Inc., the site contractor involved, has revised procedure No. gAS-1402-H2 to include daily inspections of'ipe and tube ends to insure that they are capped or other-wise closed.
Nonconformance Report No. 220-02654 was initiated against nozzle N-9A.
The disposition was to clean, inspect and recap.
A walkthrough inspection of the site revealed no open pipe ends or tubing in the area controlled by Johnson Controls.
e.
(Closed)
Noncompliance (50-397/79-04/04):
Failure to properly perform welding preheat inspections.
The licensee's response to the item of noncompliance was summarized in HPPSS letter No. G02-79-92 of May 10, 1979.
Johnson Controls Inc., the site contractor involved, is now using contact pyrometers, traceable to National Standards, to
. measure pipe material temperatures to verify adequate preheat.
The proper use of these pyrometers was observed.
As the previously welded pipe was stored and subsequently welded in the shop with an ambient temperature of 70o F
the preweld temperature was greater than the required
F.
This item is closed.
(Closed)
Noncompliance (50-397/79-04/05):
Failure to properly document the status of inspections.
The licensee's response to the item of'oncompliance was summarized in WPPSS letter Ho. G02-79-92 of May 10, 1979.
The item of noncompliance concerned a contractor's failure to properly document the status of inspections for weld fit-up and preheat.
A training session was held to insure that inspectors at Johnson Controls, Inc., signed off documents immediately upon inspection.
The work in progress indicated that the training sessi'on was effective.
This item is closed.
g.
(Closed)
Noncompliance (50-397/79-04/08):
Failure to properly color code electrical cables.
The licensee's response to the item of noncompliance was summarized in 'IlPPSS letter Ho. G02-79-92 of May 10.
1979.
Fischbach/Lord, the site contractor involved, issued a stop wor k order and checked all class I electrical cable tags issued to the field to assure compliance to contract specifi-cations.
In addition, the color coded tags are now checked for correctness prior to issuance to the field, and color charts have been issued to craftsmen installing cabl lt k
,i f
I lf t
-5-A walkthrough survey of class I cable installed showed no improperly tagged cable.
Cable which had previously been improperly tagged had been corrected.
This item is closed.
(Closed)
Followup Item (50-397/79-04/09):
Inadequate hydraulic cable crimping tool calibration procedure and documentation.
The revision to the TBM-15 hydraulic crimping tool calibration
'rocedure was reviewed and the actual calibration testing of a TBM-15 hydra~lie crimper was witnessed.
Procedure TI-2, Revision 3 of April 2, 1979 reflects the crimp tool manufac-turer's recommendations as to calibration requirements.
The revised calibration procedure records the "as received" pressure setpoint as read on a "tell-tale" pressure gauge.
If this pressure is below the acceptable limits, the revised procedure requires notification of quality assurance so that checks of terminations made at low setpoint pressure can be made.
Fischbach/Lord's action to verify adequacy of crimps previously made was also reviewed and found satisfactory.
This item is closed.
(Closed)
Followup Item (50-397/79-08/Ol):
Procedural concerns associated with planned replacement of the reactor vessel recirculation inlet nozzle safe ends.
The licensee's response to the NRC concerns associated with RRC nozzle safe end replacement procedures were reviewed, as indicated below:
(1)
The licensee investigated the availabi1ity of a single wheel type pipe cutter for making the final parting cut on the closure spool located 'directly above the pump discharge valve.
,No such device capable of'utting material of the hardness involved could be located.
After further evaluation, the licensee concluded that the vacuum cleaning and visual inspection that will be per-formed, followed later by system flushing, will be adequate measures to remove any dust that may enter the discharge riser during the grinding operation for the final cut.
(2)
Ilith regard to cleaning and control of miscellaneous materials, the licensee has inserted in the work procedures the statement that the cleaning method to be employed for specific work operations will be as designated by the GEISSE field engineer in charge of the activity.
Detailed cleaning techniques and the listing of approved cleaning and miscellaneous materials are contained in GE Specifi-cation Ho. ZlA2040.
(3)
The inspector examined the GE drawings which detail weld preparations and fit-up requirements and noted that quantitative valves and tolerances were shown for paral-lelism; concentricity, and all other critical dimension (4)
Cleanup following weld bevel preparations in the re-assembly procedure (SEH-6) is directed by the GEISSE field engineer in charge.
The cleanliness verification by the quality control engineer is a visual examination.
The licensee intends to provide a borescope or other remote viewing equipment for examinations where direct viewing is not practical.
(5)
In a meeting with cognizant personnel involved with the safe-end modification program, the licensee emphasized the necessity for strict compliance with all requirements of the procedure~,
and that any departures from the procedures must have documented approval.
(6)
The cutting machine misalignment situation was resolved utilizing smaller diameter wheels on the front end of the machine.
This modification eliminated the necessity of revising the work procedure (SEW-4).
(7)
The ultrasonic equipment data used for the wall thickness measurements in procedure SEH-1 has been entered on the data sheets associated with those measurements.
(8)
General Electric Company has provided written approval to the licensee for the use of "Cimperial-10" as cutting fluid.
I The inspector concluded that the above actions adequately addressed the items of NRC concern.
h (Open)
Fol 1 owup Items (50-397/78-09/05 and 50-397/79-04/07):
Separation of electrical class-I circuits at terminations.
The licensee has implemented a program to assure adequate.
separation of all safety-related electrical cables and ter-minations.
The responsibility for assuring adequate separation has been assigned to General Electric for the NSSS. and Burns 8,
Roe and llPPSS for the balance of'he plant.
HPPSS and Burns
Roe will perform surveillance of the GE activities.
Deficiencies in the initial NSSS wiring were identified by GE in a Part 21, Report (50-397/78-09/05).
In this regard, GE is providing revised drawings and modifying wiring to assure separation is accomplished in accordance with SAR requirements.
The actual, wiring changes will be performed by Fischbach/Lord personnel under contract to GE.
The LIPPSS/Burns 5 Roe activities for BOP wiring consist of refining separation criteria, performing'
detailed plan review to assess compliance to the criteria, and a walkdown of cables to verify adequate separation.
Deficient areas of separation will be corrected to assure compliance with SAR requirements.
The program is being accomplished on an area-priority basis, with the control room designated the first priority area.
Licensee representatives
~
'
k.
estimated that the program would be completed for the control room by mid-July, 1979.
These items will remain open pending review of the refined separation criteria and verification that the actions being taken. by the licensee.
Burns 5 Roe, and GE are adequate to assure separation in accordance with SAR requirements.
(Open) Unresolved Item (50-397/78-10/03):
Information was not available to verify that the clamps used to secure rigid electrical conduit will perform their intended function during a seismic event.
Burns Im Roe engineering has received additional test data from one clamp manufacturer which provides information on clamp load limits as a function of installation position.
The onsite electrical contractor will perform a review of actual installations to determine compliance to the manufacturer's recommendations for positioning.
This item will remain open pending verification by the licensee that the, clamp design loads are greater than anticipated seismic loads and clamp installations are in accordance with manufacturer's recom-mendations.
3.
Reactor Recirculation Inlet Nozzle Safe End Re lacement a ~
Review of Procedures The inspector examined the following welding procedures which govern the welds involved in the replacement program:
General S ecifications 1.
GWP1000 Rev.
2.
GMP1001 Rev.
3.
GWP1003 Rey.
4.
GWP1003.S2 Rev.
5.
GWP1010A Rev.
6.
PP-FH-4001 Rev.
7.
HSEH V Rev.
8.
HSEH YI Rev.
Joint S ecifications 1.
WPSHSEH IV 2,
WPS 8.2.3.5 Rev.
3.
MPS 43.2.4.5 Rev.
4.
PAR HSEH-1 8, Ir 5.
POR 43.2.3.1 General Welding Procedure General Repair Procedure Melding Performance gualification Melding Performance gualification Supplement (Restricted Access and Hockups)
Weld Filler hletal Control Ferrite Measurement Welding Procedure for Safe End Hodification
'elding Procedure f'r Spool Piece Replacement Melding Specification for Spool Piece Buildup Welding Specification for Automatic Hachine Welding Melding Specification for Insert and Joint Fill Hockup Procedure gualification Procedure gualification for Insert
0'
Ij Ij I
Joint S ecifications (Cont.)
6.
PQR 306 7.
PQR 506 8.
PQR 1000 9.
WQ 8.2.3.1 Rev.
10.
WQ 43.2.4.1 Rev.
11.
WQ 8.2.4.4 Rev.
12.
WQ 43. 2.4.4 Rev.
13.
HQHSEH-III Re air S ecifications Procedure Qualification for Automatic Nachine Welding Procedure Qualification for Joint Fill Procedure Qualification 'for Spool Piece Buildup Welder Qualification for Insert Tacking Welder Qualification for Insert Tacking Welding Operator Qualification for Automatic Welding Welder Operator Qualification for Automatic Welding
.
Welder Qualification for Spool Piece Buildup l..
1JPS 8.2.4. 2R Rev.
2.
.
HPS 43.2.4.2R Rev.
3.
PQR 302 4.
PQR 43.2.3.2 5.
PQR 3.8. 9. 5. 2 6.
PQR 43.2.3.1 7.
PQR 506 8.
HQ 8.2.3.1 Rev.
9.
WQ 8.2.3.2 Rev.
10.
WQ 43.2.4.2 Rev.
Welding Specification -
SS to SS Weld Welding Specification - Inconel to Inconel Held Procedure Qualification Open Butt -
SS Procedure Qualification Open Butt-Inconel Held Procedure Qualification Insert Repair Procedure Qualification for. Insert Repair -
Inconel'rocedure Qualification for Weld Repair
- Inconel Welder Qualification for SS Insert Repair Welder Qualification for Open Butt Repair. - SS Welder Qualification for Weld Repair
- Inconel The procedures were noted to be properly approved and satisfy the requirements of Section IX of the ASHE-B5PV code.
The work control system (Traveler) being used by GE-IPSE was examined.
The system was found to be well organized, with each Traveler listing the sequential steps of the referenced
-
'ork procedure with spaces provided for the appropriate in-spection signoffs.'o deviations from the procedural requirements were observed.
b.
Observation of Work l,
The inspector observed work in progress on cutting out the closure spool on nozzle N2-J at the 300-degree azimuth of the vessel.
The cut being made was at the safe-end to nozzle weld and had progressed all the way through the wall thickness for approximately three-fourths of the nozzle circumference.
The cut appeared to be vertical and "clean."'
I l
The closure spool that had been removed from nozzle H2-D (azimuth 120 degree)
was also examined.
The cut surfaces on both ends were smooth and plumb with the inner and outer pipe surfaces.
Both ends were observed to be properly stamped to assure that the modified spool will go back into the location and orientation from which it was removed.
The inspector also examined the temporary restraints installed on one of the jet pump risers inside the reactor vessel and noted the locations where the reference measurements for pipe movement are taken.
It was apparent that the intended measures for maintaining vessel cleanliness were being followed and were effective.
Five of the required 10 type 316 SS safe-end forgings had been received and were in storage in the warehouse.
One of the forgings was examined by the inspector.
High quality work-manship was evident.
The subcontractor (Power Cutting, Inc.) engaged for the machining operations involved in the safe-end replacement program had completed the mockup of the existing nozzle/thermal sleeve configuration required in Paragraph 3.2 of Procedure SEN-4, Ilachining Sequence for Disassembly of Recirculation Inlet Hozzles.
The mockup is constructed to replicate the physical clearances and critical dimensions that exist in the present as-built nozzle conditions.
The mockup is intended for qual-ifying the work procedures and demonstrating the capability of the cutting, machining and welding equipment, as well as the proficiency of the craftsmen.
The inspector examined the mockup; however, cutting work on it had not yet commenced because the detailed procedures were still undergoing final approval review by General Electric Company.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in the work activities discussed above.
Review, of ual it Records The GE-I&SE Travelers associated with the work accomplished up
= to the time of the inspection were examined.
These covered the installation of the temporary supports/restraints on the system piping (Procedure SEt1-2), the installation of the jet pump riser restraints (Procedure SEM-3), and the position monitoring data on the system piping (Procedure SEH-5).
The inspector also examined the GE-I8SE guality Reports being used to document the presence of arc strikes or other unusual conditions observed on the removal spool pieces, and the
"vendor data" (ASHE Form H-2, Manufacturer's Data Reports and General Electric -
NED Product guality Certification) which had accompanied the shipment of the five replacement safe-ends.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie <>
-10-4.
Safet -Related Structures Structural Steel Su orts and Weldin a.
Observations of Work and Work Activities The inspector examined the work activities associated with the fabrication and erection of structural steel and supports in the steam tunnel for compliance to plan and procedure (WP-104)
requirements.
The inspector examined the installation of two structures (WBG Nos.
393 and 413).
The examination included observations of use of specified materials, work procedure compliance, utilization of qualified personnel, and proper record keeping and testing.
The inspector further examined six selected welds on these structures for evidence of proper location, size, condition, use of proper filler material and procedure, and nondestructive examination.
Cognizant quality control personnel were interviewed to ascertain their knowledge of procedural requirements.
The inspector noted that some problems were being experienced during the erection of the supports but that these problems were being properly documented and dispensed.
guality control personnel were knowledgeable of job requirement.
The work that had been accepted by quality control was found to be in compliance with plan and procedure requirements.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
b.
Review of ualit Records The quality records associated with the structures identified in Paragraph 4.a above were reViewed.
This included a review of material certifications, anchor bolt installations and testing, inspection activities, weld history, welding material control, and nondestructive examination.
The inspector also examined records of welder and inspector qualifications.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Installation of Electrical Cables for Neutron Monitors The inspector examined the work activities associated with the installation.of several neutron detector cables.
Cable assemblies examined were neutron detector 40/57B, 32/49B and 24/41B.
The examination included observations of use of specified material, work procedure compliance, utilization of qualified personnel, and proper record keeping.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Licensee's Use of Lar e Wire Size Kulka Terminal Blocks The licensee was asked to provide a listing of large wire size Kulka terminal blocks that must function during a
DBE and could be
-11-subjected to a harsh environment prior to or during the event.
The licensee reported that they do not intend to use the large size Kulka terminal blocks in safety-related applications.
7.
Plant Tour j
The inspectors walked through various areas of the plant to observe the control of work activities, status and condition of tags affixed to equipment, and to examine the general state of housekeeping.
Ho items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8.
Exit Interview At the conclusion of the inspection, a meeting was held with =licensee and Burns 5 Roe representatives denoted in Paragraph 1.
The activities covered during the inspection, and observations and findings of the inspectors were discusse '
'