IR 05000400/1981011
| ML18017B441 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 07/07/1981 |
| From: | Blake J, Herdt A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18017B440 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-400-81-11, 50-401-81-11, 50-402-81-11, 50-403-81-11, NUDOCS 8108040488 | |
| Download: ML18017B441 (6) | |
Text
~
+gg AK0+
(4 P0
++*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTAST., N.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 Report Nos. 50-400/81-11, 50-401/81-11, 50-402/81-11 and 50-403/81-11 Licensee:
Carolina Power and Light Company 411 Fayetteville Street-Raleigh, NC 27602 Facility Name:
Shearon Harris Docket Nos. 50-400, 50-401, 50-402 and 50-403 License Nos. CPPR-158, CPPR-159, CPPR-160 and CPPR-161 Inspection a
Inspector Harris facility near Raleigh, NC g'c Date Signed A. R. Herdt, Section Chief Engineering Inspection Branch
'ngineering and Technical Inspection Division at Signed SUMMARY Inspection on May 26-29, 1981 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 25 inspector-hours on site in the areas of previous inspection findings; reactor coolant pressure boundary piping (welding)
review. of procedures; reactor coolant pressure boundary piping observation of work.
Results Of the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
8108040488 8l0708 PDR ADdCK 05000400
'
PD 'l
s ~
fi
~
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
"R. M. Parsons, Site Manager
- A. M. Lucas, Senior Resident Engineer
"D. C. Whitehead, Senior QA Specialist
'L. E. Jones, Principal QA Engineer
"E. L. Betz, Project QA Specialist C.
R. Osman, Principal QA Specialist
- R.. Hanford, Principal Engineer, Welding/Metallurgy
- T. J. Wait, QA Specialist Other licensee employees contacted included construction craftsmen, QA/QC technicians, and office personnel.
Other Organizations
~J. Kirk, Assistant Project Manager, Daniel Construction NRC Resident Inspector
"G. F. Maxwell V*Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on May 29, 1981 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
The inspector discussed his concern over the fact that the responses discussed in paragraph 3 contained the type of errors that they did.
The licensee acknowledged a problem with two responses and stated that more attention would be placed in this area.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings a.
(Closed) Violation (50-400/81-06-01)
- Failure to require the desig-nated site inspection personnel to perform inspections at designated hold, points.
The inspector held discussions with the Senior Resident Engineer and QA specialists and examined corrective actions stated in the CP5L letter of response dated April 28, 1981.
During this inspec-tion, the inspector noted two discrepancies in the licensee's letter of response.
The first was a typographical error involving a proce-dure number; and the second involved the.statement that weld joints involved had been radiographed and accepted',
when in fact, one weld
was being repaired on May 29, 1981.
This second error turned out to be the result of typographical or editorial actions in that the site had reported that the welds had been radiographed at the root level and accepted.
The inspector cautioned the licensee about the poten-tial problems with errors in responses to the NRC.
In that the corrective actions were complete and the errors editorial in nature, this item is closed.
(Open) Violation (50-400/80-22-01)
Failure to correctly translate and implement codes and standards for special procedures.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's response of May 1, 1981, with the Senior Resident Engineer and gA specialists.
"The inspector was informed that a revision to the response was being prepared because of typographical errors and additional data which became available after the original was forwarded to the corporate office for transmittal to NRC.
The inspector also reviewed the site's forwarding memo to'he corporate office which explained that the report should be reviewed with the site prior to forwarding to NRC because data was still coming in.
The inspector informed the licensee that from a technical standpoint, the errors which were being corrected would not change the meaning of the report, but NRC should not be put in the position of accepting a rep'ort that was unacceptable to the people that prepared it.
Therefore, this item remains open pending receipt of the corrected report.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Inspector Followup Items (Closed)
IFI (50-400/80-23-09; 50-401, 402, 403/80-21-09) -
Placement of lead let'ter "B" on film cassette.
The inspector reviewed the procedure clarification in this area; discussed the placement of the letter with radiography personnel; and examined cassettes which were ready for use.
There are no further questions at this time.
6.
Licensee Identified Items (50.55(e))
(Open)
Licensee Identified Item (50-400/80-23-11)
Pipe hanger deficien-cies.
This is the construction deficiency reported by the licensee concerning the problems discovered by noncompliance No.
50-400/80-22-01.
This item will be closed in conjunction with that item of noncompliance when the corrected report, discussed in paragraph 3,
has been received by NRC and accepted by all people involved.
7.
Reactor Co'olant Pressure Boundary Piping (Melding) - Review of'Procedures The RCPB piping is being installed in accordance with ASME B&PV Code Section III, NB of 1974 with W76 Addend. The licensee is in the process of preparing the
"C" loop hot-leg for welding.
The plans are to use the Automatic Gas Tungsten Arc (AGTAM)
welding process with a "K" insert.
Melding will initiate from the inside surface with the insert weld and at least one layer over that.
The balance of the weld will be by AGTAM from the outside.
The weld between the reactor vessel and hot-leg spool piece will be a bi-metallic weld of inconel to stainless steel and the weld between the hot-leg spool and the steam generator will be stainless to stainless.
The two welds will be made simultaneously to balance residual stresses.
The inspector reviewed. in detail the licensee's procedure for the bi-metallic weld, MPS Ho. 43-8 BU1, Rev.
0, 3/31/81, which was qualified to the 1980, winter addenda of Section IX of ASME B&PV Code as certified by PQR
'No.
76 of 3/31/81.
The inspector discussed the fact that the procedure was qualified using a
'/4-inch thick plate welded in the 1G position, with the licensee's welding engineering personnel.
The inspector was shown some segments of piping mock-ups which had been welded in addition to the tests required by ASME Section IX.
There were no violations or deviations in this area of the inspection.
.C 8.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping Observation of Mork and Work Activities The inspector observed the preparations for welding of the "C" loop hot-leg.
These activities included the handling and positioning of the hot-leg piping and the inspection of the weld prep areas.
There were no violations or deviations in this area of the inspectio ~
'L t