IR 05000412/1979009
| ML19322E534 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 01/15/1980 |
| From: | Mcgaughy R, Narrow L, Waltor G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19322E515 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-412-79-09, 50-412-79-9, NUDOCS 8003280312 | |
| Download: ML19322E534 (10) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
.
.
,
O U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT 9 "
50-412/79-09 Report No.
Docket No. 50-412 A
License No. CPPR-105 Priority Category
~~
Licensee:
Duquesne Light Company 435 Sixth Avenue Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219 Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 2 Facility Name:
Shippingport, Pennsylvania Inspection at:
Inspection condu. ed:
Cec 10-13, 1979 Inspectors: @ 7/
S[
-s
,,
L. h!rrow, Reactor Inspector date signed Y
&m, J{ (q fD l A.
It
date ' signed
-
G. A. Walton, Reactor Inspector b
W/lf & swl1J
& [ /9(1 W. F. Sanders, Rea or Inspector
/
date signed Approved by: 'h0ft1
/7Vil{)9@
.v R. W. McGa'ughy,Md4f, Projects Section (/
date ' signed RC&ES Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on December 10-13,1979 (Report No. 50-412/79-09)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by three regional based inspectors for observation of pipe welding in progress and review of welding records; review of structural steel welding procedures and review of welder qualifications; and review of the status of outstanding items.
The inspection involved 44 inspector-hours onsite by three regional based inspectors.
Resul ts : Of the three areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified in two art:as and one item of noncompliance was identified in one area:
Failure of drawings to require maintenance of 30-inch vertical separation between cable trays of redundant color groups, (Paragraph 3).
i
'
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
3003380'312--
l
.
.
.
,
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- L. E. Arch, Senior QA Engineer
- H. N. Crooks, Assistant Director of Quality Control
- R. Coupland, Director of Quality Control
- C. R. Davis, Senior QA Engineer
- D. W. Denning, Assistant Director of Quality Control D. Gasper, QC Inspector
- E. F. Kurtz, Senior QA Engineer J. Long, Inspection Supervisor, Structural
- A. F. Mosso, QA NDE Specialist C. Majumdar, Senior QA Engineer D. Rohm, Quality Control Engineer E. Staples, QC Engineer
- W. Sikorski, QA Supervisor
- R. Washabaugh, Manage, Quality Assurance Department R. L. Williamson, Quality Control Inspector T. J. Walsh, Construction Engineer Stone and Webster (S&W)
- C. R. Bishop, Superintendent of Construction
R. Faust, Site Structural Engineer
- A. C. McIntyre, Site Engineering Office W. W. Pardo, Resident Engineet J. Winn, Electrical Engineer, SE0 Schneider, Incorporated G. Sessler, QA Manager G. Timko, QC Engineer The inspectors also interviewed other licensee and contractor
'
personnel during the inspection.
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
l I
!
l
.
.
2.
Plant Tour The inspector observed work activities in progress, completed work, and construction status in several areas. Work items were examined for obvious defects and for noncompliance with regulatory requirements and licensee commitments.
Specific activities observed by the inspector included preparations for placement of concrete for repair of crane support wall; testing and placement of concrete for Safeguard Building Mat No. 23; grinding of neutron tank welds for examination and repair; and welding of containment cap.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Cable Tray Separation Requirement The inspector reviewed several drawings to determine that the requirements for minimum separation of cable trays would not be intringed by drawing tolerances as identified in NRC inspection 50-412/78-09.
During review of the drawings listed below the inspector noted that the requirements of Project Procedure 2BVM-41 for 32-inch vertical separation of cable trays containing redundant groups of cables had not been maintained.
Dwg. No.12241-RE-34AG-7A, " Cable Tray Arrangement - Rod
.
Control Bldg." showed Cable Tray B-X (Blue) at Elevation 740' - 8" and Cable Tray 0-X (0 range) at Elevation 739' - 4" Dwg. No.12241-RE-34A-56, " Cable Tray Arrangement - Cont.
.
Bldg. Cable Spreading Area" showed Cable Tray W-X (White) at Elevation 730'-0" and Cable Tray Y-X (Yellow) at Elevation 728'-8".
Dwg. No.12241-RE-340-48 " Cable Tray Arrangement Tunnel"
.
showed Cable Tray B-X (Blue) at Elevation 715'-4" and Cable Tray 0-X (0 range) at Elevation 714'-0".
In eacn of the above cases the cable trays in question had been involved in a drawing revision.
Failure of drawings to require maintenance of vertical separation of cable trays appears to be a breakdown in drawing change control and is considered to be in noncompliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion III (79-09-01).
P
- -,.
-
-
--,
.
.
.
4.
Protection of Equipment in Temporary Storage An inspection of a material lay down area adjacent to a roadway close to the primary containment, disclosed certain items of quality material placed in temporary storage subject to the hazards of construction traffic. The items noted are listed below:
a.
RHS-16-3, Class 2 Pipe Spool, had evidence of tire scuff marks on side, pipe end cap protection was damaged.
b.
SWS 329, Class 3 pipe spool pieces also had tire scuff marks on side of pipe adjacent to roadway c.
SIS-252-1, Stainless Elbow - no apparent damage stored on edge of roadway.
d.
Large Valve - VGW-015-A-4 No visable damage but located on edge of truck turn around.
The inspector was informed that the protection of material in transit between the storage areas and the actual installation had been a problem in meeting the requirements of D.L.C. FCA-ll para.
8.6.3 " Material must be maintained as nearly practical in its required storage level during transit" and S.I.C.P 13.2 Rev. 2 Level D " Reasonably removed from actual construction area and traffic so that possibility of damage from construction equipment is minimized."
A copy of S.Q.E Storage deficiency report no. 0122 which described a deficiency in the storage of Rebar, Conduit, and embedment plates, was given to the inspector as an example of attention given to the problem.
Prior to the conclusion of this inspection corrective actions were implemented by removing the material from the hazardous locations and a memorandum written from the Director of Quality Control to the Assistant Superintendent of Material Control describing further actions.
This item is considered unresol or and will be inspected on future inspections. (79-09-02)
l
__
. _ _ _ _ -
.
.
5.
Safety Related Piping - Observation of Work and Review of Quality Records The inspector selected four welds in the safety injection system, Class 2, for review to determine if the welds meet the licensee's commitments, the ASME, B&PV Code Section III.
The following welds were selected for review:
2-CHS-424-F- 02 2-CHS-424-F-01 2-S IS-029-F-09 2-CHS-423-F-01
'
The audit was performed to assure the following:
By visual observation the inspector determined that the surface
.
was prepared as required by applicable codes, such as merge angle, reinforcement, condition suitable for nondestructive examinations.
Welds and welders were properly identified
.
Review of the weld history records covering visuaf, dimensional,
.
nondestructive examinations, weld repairs and reinspection after repair.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
6.
Structural Steel Welding Procedures An inspection was made to determine if there were existing procedures relative to the weld activities to identify the requirements of the construction specifications and that the equipment, material and tr.hnique is of proper and specified type. Welding procedure SMA Rev. A for full penetration SMSW welds was examined to determine if it complied with the requirement of AWS D.1.1.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
,
(
!
-
-
.
.
.
.
7.
Review of Nonroutine Events Reported by the Licensee a.
On December 7,1979, the licensee had reported, as a significant deficiency in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e), that linear indications had been identified in the skirt to ' base flange weld of the neutron shield tank.
A visual inspection was made of the welds and the excavated cavities of defects on the weld joining the bottom flange to the shell.
The welds were previously inspected by Magnetic Particle exam, however, when they arrived onsite a visual inspection revealed the presence of linear indication at the toe of the fillet weld joining the flange to the shell.
'.
Additional exploratory work is being performed to determine the extent of the defective areas.
The inspector was informed by the licensee representative that actions were being taken to detennine why the procurement activities failed to identify the problem prior to shipping from the vendor shops.
This item will be inspected on subsequent inspections.
b.
Deficiency in forging to sleeve welds of flued head penetrations
-
had been reported by the licensee as a significant deficiency in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e) on December 7,1979.
Radiographs of these welds in four of the containment penetrations were examined to assess the Quality of the welds and the Quality of the radiography.
The penetrations selected nos.
51, 52, 55, 56,were examined using procedure CRT-2/C and were rejected by the licensee for incomplete fusion, porosity and slag. The inspector examined the radiographs and found that the Radiographic Quality as judged by the penetrameter image and density was sufficient to accurately discern the quality of the welds. Additional actions are planned and will be examined on subsequent inspections.
c.
The inspector discussed with the licensee's representatives
and reviewed records of corrective and preventive actions by
'
the licensee in accordance with letters dated November 7,1979 from I&E Region I to the licensee and November 19,1979 from the licensee to Region I, following a report by the licensee of the omission of rebar from a section of the containment crane wall.
-. _
_
.
_
l
'
.
.
The following records were examined:
(1) Licensee's memo dated November 7,1979 stopping work on all Category I concrete until released in writing by the QA Manager or the Director of Site QC.
(2) Memo dated November 19, 1979, DLC-SQCL-0592C which states that review of drawings and inspection reports concerning the crane wall concrete had been completed and identified the differences between the engineer's and fabricator's drawings. This memo also recommended review of all Category I concrete drawings.
(3)
Inspection Procedure IP-6.2.3 which had been amended to require use of both Enoineer's and fabrit stor's drawinas.
(4) Memo dated November 15, 1979 which verif n s that additional training of inspectors had been provided in connection with IP-6.2.3 (5) Notes of audit by the licensee to evaluate the adequacy of S&W review of the fabricator's drawings.
The audit resulted in a conclusion that the original drawing verification was satisfactory but that both the Fabricator's and Engineer's drawings were required to be used for field installation of rebar.
(6)
FCP-ll8, dated November 19, 1979, " Engineering Review of Fabrication Drawings" which provides for review of rebar drawings and revisions to such drawings. This procedure also provides for control of detailing and fabrication of rebar resulting from drawing changes.
(7) FCP-119, change 3 " Placement of Reinforcing Steel". This procedure has been revised to require use of both Engineer's and Fabricator's drawings.
i i
i
,
~
.
.
(8) Memo dated November 21, 1979, DLC-SQCLL-05920 which removed stop work order subject to requirements of FCP-118, FCP-119, change 3 and IP-6.2.3 as outlined above.
The inspector discussed the review of drawings and inspection reports with representatives of the licensee and of S&W and was infonned that additional reviews were in progress.
In addition an audit of S&W change control will be conducted by the licensee in accordance with a telephone discussion between licensee and Region I representatives.
The inspector observed that Inspection Reports No. Il59-A for inspection of rebar, joints, cracks, concrete removal and plates, No.1159-B preplacement inspection, No. ll59-C, Electrical Inspection and 1159-D, welding inspection had been performed in preparation of concrete placement and that NCD No.1159 had been dispositioned to provide for concrete placement.
The inspector also examined the area of concrete removal for possible damage to reinforcement and for conformance to NCD No.1159.
This item remains unresolved pending completion of the corrective and preventive actions.
8.
Problems Identified at Other Sites A question had previously been raised concerning material furnished by Modern Suppliers. Material furnished. by this company at another site had been found to be defective.
The inspector examined records of discussions with procurement personnel onsite and at the S&W Boston office which confirmed that no purchase orders had been placed with Modern Suppliers for this project.
The inspector had no further questions concerning this n.atter.
9.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings l
(Closed) Unresolved Item (78-09-02):
Drawing requirements for
!
maintaining minimum separation between cable trays.
The inspector
!
examined Project Procedure 2BVM-41, Addendum I which has revised the drawing requirements so as to maintain the minimum separation I
for dissimiliar channels taking into account installation tolerances permitted by the drawings. The inspector also enmined a random selection of cable tray arrangement drawings and observed that, except as described in Paragraph 3 above, the drawing dimensions conform to the revised requirements of 2BVM-4 __
'
.
.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (78-09-03):
Effective dates of referenced standards in Purchase Orders.
The inspector examined Memo dated December 11, 1979 from site Engineering to Site QC which stated that all specifications had been reviewed for correction of effective dates.
Except for 13 specifications for material which had been shipped, specifications had been updated if required.
The specifications for equipment already shipped will be updated later but the inspector was informed that their documentation was reviewed for correctness of code dates and found to be acceptable. The inspector examined a random selection of specifications and determined that they included the required dates of code, and standards or alternately that EDCR's had been written to identify the effective dates for later inclusion in the specifications.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (78-09-04):
Inspection of non-safety related pipe hangers adjacent to safety related systems.
The inspector discussed structural design, fabrication, installation and inspection of Category II pipe supports with licensee representatives and reviewed the procedures listed below:
IP-7.3.1 dated November 20,1979, " Fabrication and Installation
.
of Pipe Supports". This procedure establishes the same requirements for inspection of Category I and Non-Category I seismic pipe supports.
Schneider. Inc. Construction Procedure No.10.2, Rev. 2 dated
.
March,1979, " Components Supports Control" this procedure establishes the same requirements for Category I and Category II supports.
The inspector had no further questions concerning this item.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (79-05-03):
NDE of flued head penetration welds.
This item has been reported by the licensee as a significant deficiency in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e).
The status is discussed in Paragraph 8 of this inspection report.
10. Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, or items of noncompliance. An unresolved item identified during this inspection is discussed in Paragraph 4.
l i
__- _
'
.
.
.11.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee and contractor representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on December 13, 1979. The inspector sunnarized the scope and findings of the Intpection as described in this report.
l
I
=
b
.,
.
_ _ _
,,
_
y _.-..--.,..,,.-, - - -.. -___ _ _. -
.
..y-y--