IR 05000423/1978005
| ML19263D829 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 09/26/1978 |
| From: | Mcgaughy R, Toth A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19263D822 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-423-78-05, 50-423-78-5, NUDOCS 7904130299 | |
| Download: ML19263D829 (9) | |
Text
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No. 50-423/78-05 Docket No. 50-423 License No. CPPR-ll3 Priority
--
Category A
Licensee:
flortheast Nuclear Energy Company P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101 Facility Name:
Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3 Ir.;pection at:
Millstone Unit 3, Waterford, Connecticut Inspection conduct
- A gust 30-Sept.ber 1, 1978 Inspectors-hM A. D. Toth, Reactor Inspector date signed date signed date igned-Approved by:
'[M //HbW
.l^; 38 IJh W t
'
R.W.McGaughyYC64f,ProjectsSection, v date signed'
RC&ES Branch Inspection Summary:
Unit 3 Inspection on August 30-September 1,1978 (Report No. 50-423/78-05)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by a regional based inspector of work activities for safety related structures welding.
The inspector also performed a plant tour-inspection, reviewed licensee action on previous inspection findings, and performed follow-up action as necessary to resolve questions which arose during the course of inspection of the above areas.
The inspection involved 12 inspector-hours onsite by an NRC regional office based inspector.
The inspection conmenced 7:30 p.m. outside the normal dayshift working hours at the site.
Results:
Of the one specific area inspected one apparent item of noncompliance was identified.
(Infraction - Failure to implement nonconformance control measures -
Paragraph 5).
79041302Ti Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Northeast Utilities Service Company
- i. W. Deshefy, Residenc Civil Engineer
- K. W. Gray, Jr., Site Quality Assurance Lead
- S. R. Toth, Construction Site Manager
- J. H. Szymanski, Construction Quality Assurance Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation
- W. B. Anderson, Assistant Superintendent - Field Quality Control
- R. H. Lane, Superintendent of Construction
- W. Mackay, Resident Manager
- C. A. Marrs, Superintendent of Construction
- M. G. Pace, Assistant Superintendent Field Quality Control
- F. K. Sullivan, Resident Engineer
- G. G. Turner, Superintendent of Field Quality Control J. Whedbee, Welding FQC Senior Engineer Graver Tank and Manufacturing Company
- R. E. Kimball, Supervisor
- W. Walker, Supervisor Richmond Engineerino Comoany_
K. Evans, QC Inspector J. Williams, Welder
- denotes those present at management interview.
2.
Plant Tour The inspector arrived on-site at 7:30 p.m., August 30, 1978, to inspect activities in-progress and plant conditions at a time other than the usual day shift.
No construction work was in-progress.
Observed plant cor.ditions included, a recent concrete placement on the crane wall, which was under proper moist cure; accumulator tank in-place storage included cover gas of at least 6 psig; containment penetration weld end preparations were covered; permanent plant materials were stored out of the construction areas.
Subsequent plar.t tour inspection was conducted during the day shift on the following da.
..
.
The inspector observed work activities in-progress, completed work, and plant status in several areas of the plant during general inspection of the plant.
The inspector examined work items for any obvious defects or noncompliance with regulatory requirements or license conditions.
The inspector interviewed craft personnel, supervision, and quality inspection personnel as such personnel were available in the work areas.
Where more detailed inspection of an area was conducted, the inspection scope and findings are described in other paragraphs of the report.
No items of noncompliance were identified during this general inspection activity.
3.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (423/78-02-02) Use of VPI-260 for safety injection pumps.
The inspector examined documentation of completed engineering reviews by S&W and Westinghouse, regarding utilization of corrosion inhibitors. At this time, the site is converting to use of vapor phase corrosion inhibitors, such as "Stor-Safe" (Northern Instruments Corporation); however, VPI-260 is planned for continued use with five NSSS Pacific Pumps.
The inspector noted provisions in Equipment Storage History Cards (ESHC) for definition of changing out corrosion inhibitors at routine intervals.
The inspector had no further questions at this time; this matter is resolved.
The following relevant documents were examined relative to the above:
ESHC #10570 (Revised)
Letters:
SWVL-1781, S&W/ Westinghouse NEU-2761, NUSC0/S&W Memo:
S&W Project Engineer / Resident Engineer, dated August 21, 1978 (0 pen) Unresolved Item (423/78-02-01) Storage of safety related piping and valves.
The inspector examined an August 31, 1978, direction from the S&W project engineer to the resident engineer, which included back-up correspondence from various vendors regard-ing storage requirements for equipment.
The document prescribes action to be taken on the covered valve previously observed by the inspector (P.O. 483-77-10113).
The instruction had just been received at the site and steps for implementation had not yet been ini tia ted.
However, the warehouse staff had the instruction for action.
The inspector had no further questions regarding this matter at this time, and this aspect is considered resolve.
.
The inspector also examined engineering evaluation of pipe rusting and the site staff's plan for corrective action.
The licensee plans to inspect some of the oldest pipe spool pieces at the site to determine if corrosion pitting is occurring.
The S&W engineers do not consider general rusting to be probable cause for violation of minimum pipe wall. This item is not yet resolved, pending examination of the licensee's sampling plan and results regarding assessment of pitting.
The inspector examined the following documents relative to the above:
Project Engineer / Resident Engineer Memorandum, June 1,1978 Meeting Report FM-MPS-687, August 28, 1978 4.
Licensee Action on NRC Issued Bulletins (Bulletin 78-10): Bergen-Patterson hydraulic shock suppressor accumulator spring coils.
The inspector examined documents and hardware which show that this Bulletin is not applicable to this site (nor is Circular 78-07) since only Paul Monro hydraulic snubbers have been procured, and are specified in the applicable purchase orders.
The PSA and INS mechanical snubbers are authorized by specification, and PSA devices purchased.
The site warehouse and quality control staff were aware of the Bulletin.
The inspector had no further questions.
The inspector examined the following records relative to the above:
Specifications #'s 2280.005-152 and 127 Drawing #'s 12179-BZ-2C-30-2, Sheet 1 Engineering Storage History Card #10290 S&W Letter #SWVL-1894 5.
Safety Related Structures-Welding-Work Activities The inspector observed work activities in-progress by Richmond Engineering Company (RECO), on the two stainless steel boric acid tanks, ASME,Section III, Class 3.
One REC 0 welder and one RECO QC inspector were on-site; the welder was performing a rework of the vertical seams of tank No. RCN-204. (On September 5,1978, the licensee site manager advised the NRC inspector by telephone that a stop work order was issued to RECO on September 1, 1978, due to the absence of RECO work supervision on-site.)
.
..
.
The NRC inspector observed the welding in-progress on one vertical seam and the completed welds of the access hatch of tank No. RCN-204, and the completed fillet weld of nozzle No. 7 on tank No. RCN-203.
For welding in-progress, the inspector considered weld identification, use of applicable procedure and specified material, qualification of the weld procedure and welder, requirements for nondestructive examination, and control of weld material.
Repairs were being performed under the original weld procedure, which included back-gouge provisions.
The inspector noted that the welder, who was working inside tank No. RCN-204, had not plugged in his portable electrode oven.
The condition was not identified by the RECO QC inspector; however, the electrode was not yet cold to the touch.
The Stone and Webster site QC weld inspector observed this condition and did issue an "UNSAT" finding on QC Inspection Record No. 8020012 which will require evaluation / disposition by Stone and Webster Engineering.
Two cardboard boxes with used and unused scrap weld rod were in the RECO trailer adjacent to the rod storage oven.
However, the REC 0 QC inspector advised the NRC and S&W inspectors that this material was planned to be returned to the S&W weld material issue area shortly.
No used/ scrap weld rod was observed in the welding work area.
For 3 inch nozzle No. 7 on tank No. RCN-203, the inspector observed grinding or ground undercut greater than 1/16" deep at the toe of the fillet weld on the nozzle.
He also observed that the fillet weld at the edge of the reinforcement plate for the access hatch was, for a 6" length, less than the 1/4" size required by REC 0 drawing D-74-412, Revision 9.
The RECO Traveler form QC-7 showed that these welds had received visual and liquid penetrant examination by the REC 0 QC inspector, and the traveler was signed accordingly.
Tne RECO QC inspector had no documented nonconformance report nor open item identifying the equipment hatch nonconforming conditions, nor disposition of possible encroachment on minimum wall of nozzle No. 7.
The Stone and Webster QC surveillance staff had no nonconformances identified in this area. The possible minimum wall encroachment for nozzle No. 7 is unresolved (423/78-05-01).
At the management interview, and in a subsequent September 5,1978, telephone conversation with the inspector, the licensee representa-tive stated that the tanks had not yet been turned over to Stone and Webster by RECO, and the RECO and Stone and Webster " final" inspections had not yet been performed.
The inspector advised that the in-process documented acceptance of the specific welds by the REC 0 QC inspector, without exception, appeared to be a breakdown in at least one tier of the QA program, and the equipment hatch undersized weld is an apparent item of noncompliance.
(423/78-05-02)
.
.
The inspector examined the following documents relative to the above:
RECO Drawing D-74-412, Revision 9 REC 0 Welding Procedures P8/MMA, dated July 14, 1978 REC 0 Welding Procedure Qualification for P8/MMA REC 0 Welder Qualification for P8/MMA (Mr. Williams)
REC 0 Vessel Data Sheet No.12178-P-147 SH1, SKl S&W Specification No. 2275-001-023, dated August 26, 1974, with Addenda 1 thru 4 Material Certifications for Allegheny-Ludlum Steel Corporation SST Plate Heat Nos. 448231, 448246, 422048, 448249, 448230, 322030 REC 0 Work Traveler Form QL-7, Pages 1-8 S&W QC Inspection Record No. 8020012 6.
Welding of Long Deformed Bar Studs to Containment Liner Plate The inspector observed the completed stud-welds of 3'-10" studs to the containment liner plate exterior side.
He noted evidence of S&W QC inspection, including marking of accepted and rejected welds.
Sister weld bend specimens were in the area, bent to the 15 specification requirement.
Long-extension limited access grinding tools were available in the work areas, and completed welds showed clear evidence of proper surface grinding.
Studs in the area were wire brushed at both ends for good electrical contact.
The inspector interviewed the S&W quality control inspector, who demonstrated familiarity with the applicable specifications, addenda, inspection procedures, and inspection techniques.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
.
.
.
7.
Control of Removal of Temporary Attachments From Containment Liner Plate The inspector interviewed Graver site management /QC personnel regarding controls over temporary attachments to the containment liner plate, and removal of such attachments. The inspector was advised that removal of attachments and nondestructive examination of the removal area would be controlled by erection control sheets; a sample of these was examined by the inspector.
The Graver per-sonnel described a quality release procedure involving examination and release of each section of liner plate.
The inspector had no further questions on this item.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
8.
Reinforcing Steel Certifications The licensee advised the inspector of incorrect No. 18 reinforcing steel deformed bars which were included in certified shipments from Bethlehem Steel Company. This has now occurred on three occasions where bar marked grade 60 was included with the material which was certified as ASTM-A615-72 Grade 40, (with Supplement S1) 50,000 psi yield strength Special Grade to meet ACI-318-71 (with 1974 Supple-ment to Section 3.5.l(a)). The licensee stated that in 1976, 11 bars were found installed in the containment area, and accepted as-is based upon tensile and chemical tests performed by the licensee.
On August 8, 1978, 14 bars were found in storage; these were shipped offsite to Bethlehem steel on August 14, 1978.
The inspector examined the documentation related to these 14 bars.
The licensee advised the NRC inspector on August 31,1978, that another 7 bars were found installed in the crane wall, and action had not yet been completed on these.
The anticipated action is to take 3 samples for physical and chemical verification tests. The licensee also stated that steps will be taken to prevent future recurrence of installation of non-special grade bar.
This is to include revision of the cadweld QC checklist to verify the bar being spliced. The licensee stated that the number of noncon-forming bars found thus far was a small fraction of the total special chemistry steel required for safety related structures, and that the standard grade 60 bars had been evaluated as acceptable where previously found.
The licensee stated that this matter has been evaluated for reportability under 10 CFR 50.55(e) and has been determined to be not reportabl.
The inspector examined the following documents relative to the above:
Nonconformance Report N&D-6863, dated August 8,1978 QA Inspection Reports #S7051567 and #S8050839 Material Receiving Report MRR-77-8282 Certificate of Conformance Release #571, J.0.12179.50, dated September 28, 1977 Bethlehem Steel Report of Mechanical and Chemical Test, P.O.
2199-310-279, Shipment #204-1436, Heat #207B320 Returr.ed Material Report - RMR #78-623 (Heat #207B320 and 207ClM)
No items of noncompliance were identified.
The inspector requested the licensee to identify the material in heat #207Cl34, which was returned to Bethlehem Steel under RMR #78-623.
This is unresolved pending futura review of the cause for rejection of that material.
(423/78-05-0 3)
9.
Storage of Stainless Steel Piping The inspector examined documents relating to the current storage of stainless steel reactor coolant pressure boundary pipe on-site.
The NSSS supplier, Westinghouse, visited the site in May 1978, inspected the storage structure and conditions, and found these acceptable with some exceptions.
The licensee took corrective action as requested by the supplier.
The pipe is now stored within wood / plastic enclosures with ventilation holes, and with shipping wrapping removed, as requested by Westinghouse.
The inspector inquired as to whether or not the capped pipe spools contained a corrosion inhibitor inside, and if this required periodic mainten-ance.
Neither the licensee nor the Stone and Webster field QC could provide the information.
The licensee agreed to make arrange-ments for the inspector to witness the inspection of the pipe interior at a subsequent inspectio,
No items of noncompliance were identified.
The inspect r xamined the following documents relative to the above:
Westinghouse / Stone & Webster letter #NEU-2682, dated January 14, 1978 Westinghouse Service Representative Da'ily Report, J.0.12179-MP-3, dated May 11, 1978 Pipe Spool Delivery Report, dated August 28, 1978 10. Unresolved items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviations. Unresolved items disciosed during the inspection arediscussed in Paragraphs 5 and 8.
11.
Managenent Interview At the concision of the inspection on September 1,1978, a meeting was held at the Millstone Unit 3 site with representatives of the licensee and contractor organizations.
Attendees at this meeting included personnel whose names are indicated by notation (*) in Paragraph 1.
The inspector summarized the results of the inspection as described in this report.