IR 05000413/1986006
| ML20141N732 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 03/04/1986 |
| From: | Blake J, Vias S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20141N730 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-413-86-06, 50-413-86-6, 50-414-86-08, 50-414-86-8, IEB-79-02, IEB-79-14, IEB-79-2, NUDOCS 8603180029 | |
| Download: ML20141N732 (5) | |
Text
,
_, _ _ _ _,.
. _ _ _ --
_
.
' UNiftOSCTit
[ p negg**g'
'
NUCLE AD MEGULATORY COMMIS$10N
R4060N il j
M 1 MAMitTTA SintiT.NW.
i
ATL ANTA. OROtt01 A 30323 i
- %
,Y
.....
Report Nos.:
50-413/86-06 and 50-414/86-08 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 i
Docket Nos.: 50-413 and 50-414 t.icense Nos.: NPF-35 and CPPR 117 Facility Name: Catawba 1 and 2
,
Inspection C d:
nuary 28-31, 1986 Inspec r:
_3 p 64, 5.
af -
Date Signed IP J /d6 Appro ed by.
J/
Inake, Section Chief Date 5fgned Ph neering Branch 01 ision of Reactor Safety
$U! WARY Scope: This routine, announced inspection entailed 33 inspector-hours on site in the areas of pipe support baseslate designs using concrete expansion anchors IEB 79-02 and seismic analysis for as built safety related piping systems IEB 79-14 - Unit 2.
Results:
One violation was identified - Failure to follow procedures during installation, inspection and review of quality assurance documents for pipe supports / restraints, paragraph 6.
i
- H h
G P
,
.
-
-
-
C
-
.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- E. M. Couch, Project Manager, Construction and Maintenance
- T. B. Bright, Engineering Manager, Construction and Maintenance
- H. B. Barron, Superintendent of Operations
- J. W. Cox, Superintendent Technical Services
- L. N. Adams, Quality Assurance (QA), Operations
- W. A. Boyles. Technical Services Supervisor
'J. Kinard, Construction Maintenance, Mechanical
- P. G. LeRoy, Licensing Ennineer
- F. P. Schiffley II, Licensing Engineer
- J. W. Willis, Senior QA Engineer Other licensee employees contacted included construction craf tsmen, technicians, operators, quality assurance inspectors, design engineers and office personnel.
NRC Resident Inspectors
- P. Skinner, Senior Resident Inspector Operations
- P. K. VanDoorn, Senior Resident inspector Construction
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summartred on January 31, 1986, with those persons indicated in paragraph I above.
The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed tn detati the inspection findings Itsted below. No dissenting comments were received from the licensee, Unresolved item, 50-413/86 06 01 and 50 414/86-08 01, Control of Coatings on Pipe Supports / Restraints, paragraph 6.c.
Violation. 50 414/86 08 02, failure to Follow Procedures During Installation, Inspection and Review of Quality Assurance Documents for Pipe Supports / Restraints, paragraph 6.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspection.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcerent Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspection.
- -
-
.
.
,
l
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to determine whether they are acceptchie or may involve violations or deviations.
One new unresulved item identified during this inspection is discussed in paragraph 6.
S.
Independent inspection Effort ConstructionProgress(Unit 2)
The inspector conducted a general espection of containment and auxiliary building to observe construction progress and construction activities such as welding, coatings, material handling and control, housekeeping and storage.
Within the areas examined, no violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Safety-RelatedPipeSupportsandRestraintsSystems(50090) Unit 2 a.
Observation of Work and Work Activities The inspector selected the following two hangers / supports in the area of dynamic pl)e supports and component supports structures that had
been QC final inspected.
Documentation for the installation, inspection and design were reviewed; the hangers were reinspected with the assistance of QA/QC inspectors; and the results discussed with the QA/QC inspectors to determine the effectiveness of the hanger program.
Hanger Numbig Syttem M
2-R-CA-1645 Auxiliary Feedwater Double #6 Springs 2-R-CA 1626 Auxillary Feedwater
- 3 Spring The above hangers were reinspected against their detail drawings for configuration, identification, fastener / anchor installation, clearances, member size, welds, and damage / protection, in general, the hangers were installed in accordance with design documents with the exception of the items identified by the inspector listed below.
T1e inspector observed that for support 2-R CA-1645, the southeast anchor bolt has a gap of 1/8" between the washer and the baseplate.
The washer was being held up by the east weld between the tube steel and baseplate.
This is contrary to Construction Procedure CP 115,
" Installation of Concrete Expansion Anchors." During the review of the l
documentation for the same hanger, both CP 635A form, dated August 28, 1984, and a CP 635A stamp, Indicate that there are only two non-NF welds.
Hanger sketch, Revision 2, sheet 1 of 4 shows three non NF welds.
.
-
_.
._____-
-_ -
+
.
'
Not identifying and listing all non-NF welds on CP-635A forms is contrary to Construction Procedure CP-635, " Documentation of Non-NF Hanger Welds by QC Inspectors."
b.
Review of QC Documentation and Records The inspector selected the following sample of 10 hangers / supports QC documentation packages in the area of dynamic pipe supports and component su) ports structures that had been QC final inspected and final QA rev<ewed.
j Hanger No.
Coment/ Discrepancy 2-A-NI-4210
- None 2-A-N!-4227
- None 2-R-NS-1119
- M-51C - Final Walkdown - No QA Signature 2-R-CF-1620
- None 2-R-VX-1007
- None 2-R-NM-1251
- None 2-R-NM-1324
- None 2-R-VX-1017
- None i
2-R-CA-1021
- M-51C - Final Walkdown - No QA Signature 2-R-NV-1083
- Non-NF Weld locations not indicated on Hanger Sketch as per CP-635
- Non-NF Welds that had been deleted due to redesign were not correctly identified or
,
deleted on Form CP-635A j
The discrepancies noted in paragraphs 6.a and 6.b are contrary to the procedures as noted, as required by Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50, " Instructions, Procedures and Drawings", and is identified as Violation 50-414/86-08-02, " Failure to Follow Procedures During Instal-lation, Inspection and Review of Quality Assurance Documents for Pipe Supports / Restraints."
c.
During inspection of com)onent supports, the inspector noted that various spring setting ' load indication plates, NPT plates and identifying markings for hanger identification were painted over. With respect to hanger identification, lack of clear markings makes quick identification very difficult.
Another concern is that the pivot axials and washers of constant spring supports were noticed to be covered with paint, having a possible effect of decreasing the ability of the spring to function as required by their design.
Also that pivot bushings in paddles of snubbers were also coated with paint.
Pending review and evaluation by the licensee and further NRC inspec-tion, this matter was identified as Unresolved Item 50-413/86-06-01 and 50-414/86-08-01, " Control of Coatings on Pipe Supports / Restraints."
-
- - - -
-
-
.- _ -
-_
__ _____ _ - _ _ - _ _
-
..
.
!-
7.
InspectorFollowupItems(IFI)
(Closed) IFI 414/85-65-01, " Hanger / Support Inspection Discrepancies." The inspector has reviewed the concern as stated in the 'IFI; upoti further
inspection of additional supports and documentation and identifying additional discrepancies, this item is closed as an IFI and opened as Violation 414/86-08-02, " Failure to Follow Procedures during Installation, Inspection and Review of Quality Assurance Documents for Pipe Supports / Restraints" (see paragraph 6).
l
'
l
!
,
'
t i
r t
l
- - -
-
..
-
-
-
-
.
-- -