IR 05000416/1979002
| ML19289F077 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 03/15/1979 |
| From: | Conlon T, Vandoorn P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19289F073 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-416-79-02, 50-416-79-2, 50-417-79-02, 50-417-79-2, NUDOCS 7906010205 | |
| Download: ML19289F077 (5) | |
Text
..,. -
UNITED STATES
- g n m:00 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o,,
.
REGloN il
[
g 101 MARIETT A STREET, N.W.
5*
E*
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 3o303
's...../
Report Nos.: 50-416/79-02 and 50-417/79-02 Licensee: Mississippi Power and Light Company P. O. Box 1640 Jackson, Mississippi 39205 Facility Name: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos.: 50-416 and 50-417 License Nos. : CPPR-118 and CPPR-119 Inspection at Grand Gulf Site near Port Gibson, Mississippi
.8 /[ ~/9 Inspector:C ar
>v r
' Date Sig6ed r
P. K. VanDoorn Accompanying Personnel:
M. Thomas (Trainee)
Approved bymj m!m)
8 /t 79 T. E. Conlon, Section Chief, RC&ES Branch
'Da te ' Sighed SUMMARY Inspection on February 12-15, 1979 Areas Inspected routine, unannounced inspection involved 50 inspector-hours onsite in Th'
the areas of safety related piping handling and welding activities; reactor coolant pressure boundary piping records and storage.
Results Of the two areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in one area; one apparent item of noncompliance was found in one area (Deficiency - Failure to follow procedure for control of weld filler metal - paragraph 5)
2234
';26 790601030T
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees P. W. Sly, QA Field Supervisor
- J. C. Fuller, QA Representative
- S. F. Tanner, QA Representative D. D. Little, QA Representative Other licensee employees contacted included five construction craftsmen and two inspectors.
Other Organizations Bechtel Power Corporation (Bechtel)
- C. A. Terell, Production Superintendent
- J. H. McCarty, Production Field QC Engineer
- R. J. Alexander, Lead Field Welding Engineer
- W. B. Phillips, Welding QC Engineer R. L. Scott, Project QA Manager R. E. Dennis, Piping / Mechanical QC Engineer W. S. Mechatto, Records QC Engineer
- J. W. Yelverton, QA Engineer
- A. S. Bettencourt, QA Engineer
- Attended exit interview.
2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on February 15, 1979, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The noncompliance and unresolved item described in paragraph 5 were discussed in detail.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not Inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to determine whether they are acceptable or may involve noncompliance or deviations. A new unresolved item identified during this inspection is discussed in paragraph 5.
22!)k
) f
.
-2-5.
Independent Inspection Effort (Units 1 and 2) The inspector conducted a walk-through inspection a.
of the containments, auxiliary building and welder qualification area to observe construction progress and construction activities such as welding, welder qualification, material control, house-keeping and storage.
(Unit 1) Installation of safety related piping is being performed b.
in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, 1974 edition, plus addenda through the summer of 1974. The inspector observed handling activities of pipe spool numbers Q1B21-G022-23-11 and Q1E51-G003-9C-7 to determine if requirements were being met.
(Unit 1) The inspector observed four class 2 welds at various c.
stages of completion to determine if requirements were being met.
The following welds were observed:
Weld No.
ISO Size State of Completion W26 M1348C 18"x.438" Final welded W27 M1348C 18"x.438" Intermediate welding in progress W14 M1348C 20"x.500" Intermediate welding in progress W100 M1348A 18"x.438" Root weld in progress Areas reviewed included, as applicable, veld identification evidence of QC verification, use of specified weld procedure, physical appearance of weld, welder identification use of specified pre-heat and interpass temperature, use of specified weld material, and suitability of weld surface for inspection.
d.
(Unit 1) On February 13, 1979, the inspector found approximately 30 Type 7018 electrodes in one location of the drywell area not in a container and unattended. This is in noncompliance with procedure WFMC-1, Rev. 2, which requires that welding electrodes be issued in containers and that unused filler material be returred to the issuing rod room.
The inspector was informed that the electrodes had fallen from an upper level the previous day and, although the electrodes had not been removed, none of the uncontrolled electrodes had been used.
This information was based on interviews with welding personnel.
A review of other areas in the containment indicated that this was an isolated case of noncompliance. This is in noncompliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, as implemented by the PSAR, paragraph 17.1.5. This is Deficiency 416/79-02-01
" Failure to follow procedure for control of weld filler material."
2234 328
'
.
.
.
-3-e.
(Unit 1) On February 13, 1979, the inspector observed defect removal being performed on weld FW25 of ISO M1348C. This weld was at an intermediate level and grinding had resulted in an open root area. The inspector questioned whether the excavation area would be examined prior to welding in accordance with the ASME Code 74S74,Section III, paragraph NC-4453.1, which states in part "The area prepared for repair shall be examined and comply with the requirements of NC-5340 and NC-5350." The referenced paragraphs provide MT and PT inspection requirements. The inspector was informed that the specific repair observed was being performed based on an intermediate information radiographic test requested by shop personnel.
The inspector was also informed that MP&L interpretation is that the Code paragraph does not apply when weld metal is removed through the root level, i.e., all weld metal is removed in the defect area.
It is considered by MP&L that the inspection requirement is only to verify defect removal and therefore does not apply in the case of a through thickness grindout. An alternate interpretation would be that the inspec-tion is performed to verify sound metal prior to welding, i.e.,
verify that defect removal has not damaged the material or to verify that a defect such as a crack has not propogated into the surrounding metal.
It is noted that Code paragraphs NB-4453.1 and ND-4453.1 contain similar requirements for class 1 and class 3 welds respectively. These paragraphs need an interpretation as to the requirements for a surface inspection for all repair cases, i.e., intermediate repairs as well as repairs made after final inspection and both through wall and partial repairs. MP&L indicated that an ASME Code interpretation of the above paragraphs would be obtained. This is Unresolved Item 416/79-02-02.
No items of noncompliance or deviations, except as identified in paragraph 5.d, were identified.
6.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping - Review of Quality Records (Unit 2)
The inspector selected various reactor coolant pressure boundary piping spools for review of pertinent records to determine conformance with procurement and storage QA/QC site procedures. These spools were purchased in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III,1971 edition, plus addenda through the summer of 1973.
Records of the following items were selected for review to ascertain whether they (records) were in conformance with applicable requirements relative to the following areas: material test reports / certifications; vendor supplied NDE reports; site receipt inspection; and storage inspection.
2234 529
'
..
.
-4-
.
Item System Q2E12-G015-15-23 RHR Q2E51-G004-06-20 RCIC Q2B21-G026-12-23 NBS Within the areas examined, there were no noncompliance or deviations identified.
7.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping - Observation of Work and Work Activities (Unit 2)
The inspector observed non-welding work activities for reactor coolant pressure boundary (RCPB) piping. The applicable code for installation of RCPB piping is delineated in paragraph 5.b.
Observation of specific work activities were conducted to determine conformance, where applicable, with the following: inspection and/or work procedures, record keeping requirements, and specified materials.
The inspector observed storage of the three spools listed in paragraph 6.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
2234 330