IR 05000412/1983008
| ML20024E138 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 07/25/1983 |
| From: | Durr J, Narrow L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20024E135 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-412-83-08, 50-412-83-8, NUDOCS 8308090268 | |
| Download: ML20024E138 (5) | |
Text
,
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Region I
.
Report No. 50-412/83-08 Docket No. 50-412 License No. CPPR-105 Priority Category A
--
Licensee:
Duquesne Light Company-Robinson Plaza Building No. 2 Suite 210, PA Route 60 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15205 Facility Name:
Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 2 Inspection At:
Shippingport, Pennsylvania Inspection Conducte -
June 27 - July 1,1983 Inspectors:
M 7//[/k3 L. Narrow, Lead Reactor Engineer dite figned date signed
'
f Approved By:
fa d
f4 J. P(/Durr, CTEef~, Raterials and Processes pTts/ signed
~
Section Inspection Summary:
Inspection on June 27 - July 1,1983 (Report No. 50-412/83-08)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by a region based inspector of piping installation and review of related QC records. The inspection involved 30 inspector hours onsite.
Results: One violation was identified in one of the two areas inspected; failure to comply with the requirements of the QA procedure for control of
" Hold Tags" (Paragraph 4).
8300090268 830725 PDR ADOCK 05000412 O
.
- -
.
..
._.
. -
.-
.,
DETAILS ~-
1.
-Persons Contacted
s Duquesne Light Company (DLC)
-
- L. E. Arch,~ Senior QA Engineer
'*R. Coupland, Director, QC
.
- C.
R.' Davis, Director, QA R. Dieter, Lead Inspector, Area C
- C. E. Ewing, Manager, QA
- M. A. Kauffman, QC Inspection Supervisor
- S. K. Mukherjee,- Project Engineer
- J. Stabb, Compliance Engineer
.
Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation (S&W)
- C. R. Bishop,fSenior Resident Manager A. C. McIntyre, Superintendent, Engineering Schneider Power Corporation (SPC)
- T. Biernat, Site Project-Manager M. Buckland, Site Project Engineer C.-Kraus, Area Superintendent
'
- Attendees at exit rteeting.
2.
Plant Tour The inspector made a tour of the facility to observe work in progress, l-completed work and construction status. Control and. protection of
material and equipment was observed. Areas toured included the reactor j
building, auxiliary building, service building and safeguards building.
l No violations were observed.
- 3; Piping Installation Activities The inspector observed installation and partially installed condition of
' the Residual Heat Removal-(RHR) and Safety Injection System (SIS).
I Activities. observed. included handling, protection and installation of
'
pipe ~ spools. The inspector requested and was furnished test reports of
"SILTEMP" cloth which was purchased as a pre-engineered material for protection of piping during welding and burning operations.
T
,-
-, -,, - -.,
,,
,,,.,
-.,,,__..,..-_e
- - -.
-.,~.._,_,#
. - - ~.. - -., -- -, -. - - -,.- - -. -. -..
---<, - - -...
-
..... _ _.
.
.
.
_ e
.
-
-Inspection of piping.insta11ation'was discussed-with licensee personnel; A program for verification of conformance to design requirements has not
,
been provided. _The inspector'was. informed that this_questionLhas. pre-viously;been identified by the Senior Resident _' Inspector as an unresolved
'
item (50-412/82-02-03) but that"the: licensee had not yet determined the
_ requirements of'such.a program. 'The inspector was informed;that.a position concerning'a verification ~ program will be established by the licensee (Project Management):within the next three months.
This item remains unresolved.
"
4.-
SIS Piping
.
The inspector _ observed the as-installed condition of the SIS piping for
-
conformance to the design as shown on isometric drawings (IS0) No.108201-2D and-108202-2C and Specification 2 BVS-920, " Field Fabrication and Erection.
of Piping ASME Section III, Classes 1,.2 and 3 and ANSI.B31.1.0,~ Class.4".
This line (Loop 23) was es'sentially complete between Safety Injection Accumulator. Tank 2 SIS-Tk21C and spool piece SIS-69-4A and conformed to.
the design requirements.
"
A " hold" tag dated JuneL11, 1983'had been placed on SIS-69-4A'at weld
'
joint 2-SIS-069-F-506..The weld data sheet-showed a required wall' thickness for this. pipe (class 1502):of_1.148: inches and-VT measurements had shown a minimum reading of.l.118. The SQC representative removed this tag.and explained'that review of the proposed Nonconformance and Disposition-(N&D)
report specification 2 BVS.939A had.shown that the required minimum wall
~
' thickness for this line was actually 1.10 inches and that this " hold": tag
'
should have been_ removed earlier. The inspector;noted that neither the'
N&D; report nor the " hold" tag was-numbered and that the " hold" tag was.
i identified on the N&Dl report as " temporary"..He questioned this informal
,
,'. treatment of an apparent-nonconformance. _He was informed by licensee
'
representatives that the inspectors generally placed an unnumbered temporary
,
l
" hold": tag on items considered to be nonconforming and prepared an N&D
'
If the N&D report was not approved, the inspector would remove L
report.
the temporary " hold" tag.
If the N&D report was. approved the tag.would
>
..
,
[-
be numbered.. In this case.the N&D report was not approved but the tag had h
not been removed.
'
Schneider Power Corporation (SPC) QA Manual Section 16.0, Rev. 3 requires that an N&D report'be prepared when an item not in accordance with the code, specifications or drawings, that it be recorded in-the Master
i
. Conformity. Log and that a numbered " hold" tag or ' sticker be attached
~
'
'~
lto.the nonconforming item and that the " hold" tag number be recorded in a
LMaster. Tag Log and referenced in the _N&D report. After the N&D disposition i;
is carried out'and the:N&D is closed.the " hold" tag will be destroyed.
T'he' informal. treatment of nonconformance.and use of temporary " hold"
. tags is not in accordance with the approved procedure and is a violation-of 10 CFR.50, Appendix B, Criterion XV.-
(412/83-08-01)
,
,
.
.
4
.r.
p
g.--
+,---m
+
g
. _,..
4-.c,-
-ww.4,,,,w,.yo4. +,
m,
,,,h,,c,-,,,,.,,,.,,,,--ww.-,,--,,,-.--i.,,,,v,-,.,,,-www
,_,..,,w,
,,.,
.-h v.
,,,,-
e,,--,.--,-,,,
g-m.,,,v-
'
.a
,
5.
Piping Records a.
N&D Reports The inspector reviewed N&D reports of nonconformance identified on SPC work during April - June 1983. These records were legible, properly identified and readily retrievable. They were routinely processed for. resolution and corrective action. The records showed evidence of review for generic problems.
In May 1983, Site Engineering identified a potential generic problem in installation of non-ASME materials in ASME systems. However, the inspector noted that between April 11 and June 9,1983 the established Authorized Nuclear Inspector (ANI) " hold" points had been bypassed four times. This was discussed with SQC as a recurrent problem and the inspector was informed that it would be referred to the Trend Analysis Committee (TAC) for review and further action if necessary.
c
'
This item is unresolved pending analyses by TAC and review by an NRC inspector (412/83-08-02)
b.
A'idi ts The inspector reviewed the licensee's audit schedule and three audits of SPC activities during 1982 and 1983. Findings are reported to the audited organization and are followed for corrective action. One scheduled' audit in 1983 had been deferred since the licensees auditors participated in an S&W audit of SPC in March 1983.
1h) violations were identified.
6.
Independent Analysis of Materials Paragraph 6.3.7 of Inspection Report 50-412/83-05 identified carbon and stainless steel pipe and welding materials that were obtained from the Beaver Valley Unit #2 site nuclear materials storage area for independent analysis. The chemical analysis of elements including carbon, manganese phosphorus, sulfur, silicon, nickel, chromium, molybdenum and copper were compared to the specification requirements and the expected values for the materials evaluated. This independent analysis was performed on samples of SA106 Gr B, 316 SS and 304 SS piping and on E7018, ER70-S-2, E308 and ER 308L welding materials.
No deviations in chemical content were noted.
7.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, violations or deviations. -An unresolved item disclosed during the inspection is discussed in Paragraph 5.
-~. -
-.
.
.
.
...
.
.
.. -.
,
... --
-
-
-
. _ -
.
,
s4
.
w -
>
g
.
.y
.,
,t t
,. 0
g
'
y; > :e 8.
Exit Interview An exit interview was held on July 1, 1983 with members of-the licensees
. staff.'and contractors as denoted in. Paragraph 1.
The inspector discussed
.the. scope.and findings of the inspection. The Senior' Resident Inspector,-
g
.Mr hG.'Walton also attended the exit interview.
y,;
~1
s
-
+:
,
.}'.
,
r '-
r;
? -
'a
.-
,
s
-
j.
L
\\
H i%
%
i vk
.\\-
- v
-
k L
,1 i ',
' s
,
m-
<
s a t
i v'
2 k
j
?
E k[
~y.
.
+ ;3s..
s
'
i s
-
,
.,
<.
-..
..
.
.. - - -..