IR 05000413/1980014
| ML19338G524 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 07/18/1980 |
| From: | Bryant J, Maxwell G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19338G520 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-413-80-14, 50-414-80-14, NUDOCS 8010310034 | |
| Download: ML19338G524 (7) | |
Text
.
o UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
n
$
3b
,, E REGION 11
[
101 MARIETTA sT., N.W., SUITE 3100 o
%
g'
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
AUG - 3 ggg Report Nos. 413/80-14 and 414/80-14
.
Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Facility Name:
Catawba Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2 License Nos. CPPR-116 and CPPR-117 Inspection at Catawba Site near Rock Hill, South Carolina Inspector:
2 -//-##
G. F. Maxwell
[
Date Signed
'
Approved by:
%d
') // f 8 J,C."Briant,@ctionChief,RCESBranch h te/ Signed SUMMARY Reporting Period on June 2-27, 1980 Areas Inspected This routine resident inspection involved 98 inspector-hours on site in the areas of pipe supports and restraints, structural supports, electrical cables and supports, structural concrete, and equipment storage.
Results Of the 5 areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviation were identified in 2 areas; 3 items of noncompliance were found in 3 areas (Infraction - failure to install a pipe strut in accordance with drawings and procedures (Paragraph Sc); Infraction - failure to apply structural welds in accordance with drawings (Paragraph 6d); and Deficiency - failure to specify the type fastening materials for medium and high voltage motors (Paragraph 7e).
QS10 ON
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
,
Licensee Employees
- D. G. Beam, Project Manager
- D. L. Freeze, Project Engineer
- S. W. Dressler, Senior Construction Engineer
- R. A. Morgan, Senior QA Engineer
- L. R. Davison, Senior QC Engineer
- H. D. Mason, QA Engineer
- J. C. Shopshire, QA Engineer C. R. Baldwin, Technical Supervisor Welding /NDE J. N. Warren, QC Civil / Electrical Engineer R. Hannay, Supervisor Electrical QC C. V. Sheriff, Supervisor, Civil QC Othe,r licensee employees contacted included 38 construction craftsmen, 12 technicians,1 operator, 2 mechanics, and 20 office personnel.
Other Organizations Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company
- J. W. Kosko, Authorized Nuclear Inspector (ANI)
- C. F. Toegel, ANI
- Attended exit interview.
2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on June 13, 20 and 27,
1980 with those persons indicated in Paragraph I above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Firdings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Safety Related Pipe Support and Restraint Systems - Units 1 and 2
,
i Evaluated DPC procedures CP-385 revision 7; CP-353 revision 5; CP-309,-
a.
revision 6 and CP-23 B. Observed that the aforenoted procedures, CP-115 and M-15 are the site procedures which affect the installation and inspection of safety related pipe support and restraint systems.
CP-115 and M-15 have been previously reviewed by NRC RII personnel and
.
.
.
,
-2-
,
documented in IE report 413/414-79-22.
The above procedures were reviewed for compliance with licensee commitments and NRC require-ments.
b.
Evaluated site QA surveillance of pipe support arid restraint system construction activities from April, 1979 through May, 1980.
The inspector observed that the surveillance by DPC QA has been conducted as required by QA procedere QA-300 revision 7.
c.
Selected, for inspection, three installed pipe supports. The three supports; l-A-KC-4563,1-A-KC-4221 and 1-A-KC-4308, had been previously
'
inspected and accepted as satisfactory by site QC. The NRC inspector checked the installed supports for assembly length, proper bolting materials, material identification, condition of ball bushings, physical condition, dimensions of support plates and configuration.
The inspector found that the support numbered 1-A-KC-4308 had one of the strut ball bushings wedged with a piece of metal raasuring about 1/4" wide by 1"long. The piece of metal was located such that movement of the strut would have been virtually none.
Further inspec*'on revealed that the strut must be permitted to move if it is to work in
,
unison with a mechanical snubber which has been installed adjacent to it.
The accompanying DPC QA representative documented the above unsatis-factory condition on a nonconformance report numbered 8673.
The inspector observed that neither the applicable design drawing, CN-AA-091, Rev. 4 or the applicable construction procedures require or allow that a metal wedge be placed such that the movement of sway struts may be limited.
The inspector informed the licensee that failure to install support numbered 1-A-KC-4308 in accordance with design drawings and construc-tion procedures is contrary to Criterion V of Appendix B to 10CFR50, as implemented by Duke's Topical Report, paragraph 17.1.5.2.
This is an item of noncompliance, an infraction identified as 413/80-14-01.
i.icensee construction management personnel informed the inspector th1t the above condition would have probably been discovered during system
" walk down" - just prior to system turn-over to steam production.
Ilowever, the inspector observed that there has not been a system or program developed which requires that, during a walk down inspection, struts or other supports be inspected for freedom of movement (if applicable).
d.
Selected seven documents (five construction procedures and two design drawings) which were being used by workers to install pipe supports and restraints inside unit I containment; the documents were found to be the most current revision.
,
-3-
"
Evaluated the vendor supplied documentation for hangers 1-A-KC-4563, e.
1-A-KC-4221 and 1-A-KC-4308.
The documentation was found to be as described in the purchase specification (CNS-1206.00-04-000. Para-graph 10.3.1.1, 10.3. 2.2 and 10.3.2.3).
Except as noted, no items of noncompliance or deviation were identified in the areas inspected.
6.
Structural Supports - Units 1 and 2 a.
Observed part of the installation inspection of the tubular steel in Unit 2 penetration room at elevation 577 between columns 61-68, BB-CC.
b.
Observed that procedures and drawings which were being used by the responsible QC inspectors, during the above inspection, were the most current revisions (five drawings and two construction procedures).
The inspector observed that the steel was the correct type, was installed at the correct locations and that the required welds had been marked by the DPC welding inspectors showing their acceptance.
Discrepancies which were found by the Q.C. inspectors, during the inspection, were documented in accordance with DPC QA procedure Q-1 (NCI numbered 8789).
Evaluated the applicable installation procedures; M-18, M-21, CP-360, c.
CP-412 and CP-413. The procedures were found to contain sufficient detail and insnection criteria to assure complian with the applicable AWS D1.1 an-requirements.
d.
Observed the installed condition of the structurmi supports located at elevation 594 of auxiliary building columns 58-59, DD-EE. The supports were found to be of the correct type and in their correct locations.
Measurements were taken and compared with the requirements on drawing CN-1205-2, revision 13.
The inspector compared three of the field welds, which had been applied to one of the supports, to the require-ments given on drawing CN-1201-4.2, revision 8, detail 26.
As a result, the inspector found that two of the three welds were less than the lengths specified on drawing CN-1201-4.2; the drawing required 3
'
fillet welds 2" long.
Observed that these three welds had been previously inspected and accepted by DPC welding inspection personnel.
The three welds were applied on the north base of a support in the auxiliary building, elevation 594, 5 feet south of column 59, DD-EE.
The inspector informed the licensee that failure to apply the length of welds as specified on design documents is contrary to Criterian V of Appendix B to 10CFR50, 25 implemented by Duke's Topical Report, paragraph 17.1.5.2.
This is an item of noncompliance, an infraction identified as 413/80-14-02; 414/80-14-01. Prior to the end of this reporting period the inspector observed that the licensee had taken sufficient corrective actica and had taken action to prevent this
.
condition from happening again; i.e., the welds were required to be
.
-4-welded to their design length (2") and training was administered to the workers responsible for assuring that structural velds meet design requirements. DPC site welding inspectors were given directions to assure that in the future structure welds are:,(a) inspected for correct lengths; (b) all structural welds are re-checked by the DPC welding QC department prior to completion of the structural inspection by the DPC QC Civil structural inspectors.
This item of noncompliance does not require a written response.
Except as noted, no items of noncompliance or deviation were identified in the areas inspected.
7.
Electrical Cables and Supports - Units 1 and 2 During tours of the auxiliary building the inspector observed the a.
installation of containment spray control cable 1*NS-522 and fuel pool cooling control cable 1*VF-549.
b.
The inspector observed the presence of the responsible electrical QC inspectors during the above cable installations and further observed:
1.
Awareness of the applicable procedural requirements.
2.
Cables being chectred for size, type, color, routing and reel numbers.
3.
Cables fastened down in their respective cable trays with metal ties.
4.
The workers sealing the ends of the electrical cables with a sealing tape.
c.
Observed the continuity testing of portions of main control panel numbered IMC7. The internal wiring of the panel was being tested to assure that it was wired in accordance with drawing CN-1711-07.01, revision 5.
The inspector observed that the testing was being conducted in accordance with CP-147 and documented on the applicable CD-147 forms.
d.
Compared the as installed condition of transformer IETXD with the details on drawings CN 1224-4, revision 11 and CN 1876-01, revision 14.
The transformer location and configuration were found to be in accor-dance with the aforementioned drawings.
Evaluated DPC electrical installation procedures M-41, CP-208, CP-209, e.
and interviewed site electrical workers, supervisory personnel, electri-cal QC inspectors and the project electrical engineer. As a result, the inspector observed that DPC design engineering has failed to provide design documents to specify the type and configuration of fastening materials that are to be used for making terminations at the motor end of medium and high-voltage motors. Further, there has not
__
r
.
.
,
-5-
.
been any acceptance criteria provided for electrical QC to verify that the correct fastening materials have been applied at the motor end of medium and high-voltage motors; i.e.,
identification of bolts, type bolts and washers, torque valves, type of tape to be used (if applicable) on fastening materials.
.
The inspector informed the licensee that the above condition is I
contrary to Criterian III of Appendix B to 10CFR50, as implemented by Duke's Topical Report, paragraph 17.1.3, requiring that design documents specify that materials are compatible with each other, design environ-mental conditions to which the material can be exposed and the appro-priate quality assurance requirements.
Prior to the end of this reporting period DPC design engineering developed the required electrical specifications to assure that fastening materials used on medium and high voltage class IE motor terminations are compatible with the motor terminals and that suitable quality is maintained. This is an item of noncompliance, identified as a deficiency 413/80-14-03; 414/80-14-02 design, not requiring a written response.
f.
Observed the installed condition of four control cables which were terminated in the diesel generator sequencing panels.
The cables (1*EQB-505, 506, 508 and 1*ATC-864) were found to be routed in accor-dance with their cable routing cards. However, they were installed such that the minimum bend radius had been exceeded by 5" to 7" for each of the cables.
The inspector informed the DPC QC personnel of this unsatisfactory condition. As a result, the cables were re arranged such that their minimum sbend radii were no longer exceeded and site electrical terminations personnel were reminded of the design specifica-tion requirements concerning minimum bend radius on electrical cables.
The inspector has no further questions about this matter at this time.
g.
Observed the installed condition of two electrical raceway supports and anchorages for safety-related cable tray.
Both bangers, 2 HAIF and 1HA3B, are located in the auxiliary building on elevations 594'
(column 58-57, JJ-HH) and 577' (Column 56 EE-FF) respectively. The supports were inspected for location, material type and size, bolting and configuration.
Observed that DPC QC electrical inspectors are marking the affected electrical drawings to show the current inspection status of hangers which have been inspected.
Except as noted, no items of noncompliance or deviation were identified in the areas inspected.
8.
Structural Concrete - Unit 2 Reactor Building Observed the placement of approximately 150 cubic yards of concrete in the reactor building shell wall. The work observed consisted of about one-half of the concrete identified as pour number 2W93 (DPC number 4484) that was
-___ _____ _
_
_
.. _ _ -. _....
.
-
-
.
.
.. -.
-
-
.
a i-6-
,
shown on drawings CN-1093-2, revision 6 and CN-1093-3, revision 11.
The design niix, C-1, was required to have a 1"-4" slump, 4-8% air and a maximum temperature of 85 degcees F.
The pre pour inspection form (form N-2A) was found to be completed as required by QA procedure H-2, paragraph 4.2.
.
During the placement of the above listed concrete the inspector observed the initial testing of the concrete and subsequent tests which were required by QA procedure M-2, paragraphs 4.3.3, 4.3.4, 4.3.5 and 4.3.6. and the use of vibrators for assuring consolidation of the concrete.
In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
f 9.
Equipment Storage - Unit I and 2 Observed the stored condition of both reactor vessel clossure heads a.
and reactor vessels.
J b.
Observed the stored condition of unit I reactor coolant pump casings.
Observed a worker ssnd blasting adjacent to class 1E switchgear numbered c.
,
2 ETA. Inspection of the switchgear revealed that it had not adequately protected prior to the sand blasting activities, as it had a significant amount of the sand blasting material accumulated in its internals.
The inspector brought this to the at'.ention of DPC QA personnel who documented it on a nonconformance report numbered 8722. Prior to the end of this reporting period the switchgear was cleaned and then covered with a protective cover.
The inspector has no further questions about this matter at this time.
In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviation were identified.
t
'
t l
.-.
-
-
- --
.-
,
-
-. -
-
- --
--
-,