IR 05000423/1979002
| ML19261E302 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 04/20/1979 |
| From: | Cerne A, Mcgaughy R, Toth A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19261E300 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-423-79-02, 50-423-79-2, NUDOCS 7907050527 | |
| Download: ML19261E302 (10) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. . U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No. 50-423/79-02 Docket No. 50-423 License No. CPPR-113 Priority -- Category A Licenree: Northeast Nuclear Eneray Comoany P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101 Facility Name: Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3 Inspection at: Millstone Unit 3, Waterford, Connecticut Inspection conducted: March 13-15,1 79 [[ 29 Inspectors: A. D' Toth, Reactor Inspector cate' signed (lC (cw A e r d 6 I cf 7 c/ A. C. Cerne, Reactor Inspector date signed date signed Approved by: ' /// ' hon e /dni/ 20 /f 77 R.W.McGaugffy[Chicf,ProjectsSection, " date signed RC&ES Branch Insoe tion Summary: Jnit 3 Inspection on March 13-15,1979 (Recort No. 50-423/79-02) Areas Insoected: Routine, unannounced inspection by two regional based inspectors of general site work activities in-progress, including structural steel erection and containment dome liner field fabrication, and records of construction craft / supervision training, and licensee action on previous inspection findings.
The inspectors performed followup acticn as necessary to resolve questions which arose during the course of the aspection of the above areas.
The inspection involved 32 inspector-hours onsite by 2 NRC regional office based inspectors.
The inspection commenced 7.J0 p.m. outside the normal dayshift working hours at the site.
Results: No items of noncompliance nere identified.
? Y 233 voo7030S n
. . DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Northeast Utilities Service Company
- K. W. Gray, Supervisor Ccnstruction Quality Assurance
- G. L. Johnson, Director, Reliability Engineering and Quality Assurance
- S. Orefice, Superintendent, New Site Construction
- J. F. Putnam, Senior Mechanical Engineer
- S. R. Toth, System Superintendent Generation Construction Stone and Webster Engineerina Corocration W. B. Anderson, Assistan+ Superintendent FQC L. J. Barbieri, Senior FyC Engineer R. Coelho, Supervisor of Training B. L. Holsinger, FQC Engineer
- W. MacKay, Resident Manager
- C. A. Marrs, Superintendent of Construction
- D.
J. Schlatka, Contract Administrator
- G. G. Turner, Superintendent FQC
- J. Whedbee, Senior FQC Engineer
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Plant Tour The inspectors arrived on-site at 7:00 p.m., on March 13, 1979, for an off-shif t inspection of work activities in-progress, plant conditions, and construction status.
While no construction work was in-progress, the inspectors observed the status and condition of completed and in-progress work during an inspection-tour of the Auxiliary Building, Containment, and Turbine Building.
Speci-fically noted were the availability of current drawings and instal-lation procedures for the Service Water and Component Cooling Water piping in the auxiliary building and the condition of erected material and stored equipment within containment.
2/k 23
. .
During the day shift on the following day, the inspector: made a general inspection of structural steel welding and bolting in the control building, and the containment dome liner fab':ation, including observation of joint preparation, prehea.
. welding activities in process.
The inspectors noted the avoi..oility of proper procedures in the work area and the currentness of drawings in use at their field location.
In all toured areas, work items were examined for any obvious defects or noncompliance with regulatory requirements or license conditions.
The inspector specifically noted the availability of quality control personnel where work was in progress and interviewed these QC inspectors as well as other craft and supervisory personnel, where available.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Insoection Findinqs (0 pen) Unresolved Item (423/76-03-01): Records starage and control conformance to ANSI N45.2.9.
The inspector examined documents and interviewed personnel concerning the on-site quality records stcrage and control system.
He inspected the storage facility and noted acceptable access controls, temperature and humidity provisions, and a filing system which references specific storage location to an updated index system.
TF records storage program was noted to include documented instructions regarding record receipt inspection-criteria and correction procedures.
The inspector ascertained that delegation of responsibilities for record receipt and custody had been procederally provided and that audits of the QA site file had been cor. ducted.
The above areas were evaluated against criteria esta)lished in the 15th Draft (Revision 0) of ANSI N45.2.9, publisbad in WASH 1283 (Revision 1) and conmitted to in Revision 10/75 to Section 17.0 of the ilillstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3, P5AR.
The following documents were included in the review: -- Stone and Webster (S&W) Quality Assurance Program for Mill-stone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3, specifically Revision B to the Introduction and Section 17.
-- S&W Quality Standard QS-17.1, Revision A.
Ab5
.
-- S&W Quality Assurance Directive QAD 17.1, Revision A.
S&W Project Record Type List, December 15, 1977 and QA Site -- File, February, 1979.
-- S&W Quality Control Instruction QCI FM3.D14.1-030, November 30, 1976.
-- S&W Construction Methods Procedure CMP 11.1-2.79.
S&W QC Records File Access List, December 5,1978.
-- S&W Engineering and Design Coordination Report (E&DCR) F-A- -- 932, December 2, 1976.
S&W QA Department Site Audit Reports, Nos. i, 2, 9, 11, and -- 14, with reference to the QA Site File.
This unresolved item was originally based upon records storage and control questions regarding the "ortheast Utilities Service Com-pany's (NUSCO) corporate QA program.
NRC inspectors have subsequently examined changes and program improvements (IE Inspection Report Nos. 50-423/76-06, 50-245/77-03, and 50-245/78-20).
Bastd upon the results of those inspections, and the results of the current Mill-stone 3 site-specific inspection, the previously identified questions appear to have been adequately addressed by the licensee.
However, one aspect of the records storage program remains to be resolved.
The licensee stated that the Millstone 3 site records storage facility had been constructed with the intent to ccnform to the requirements of the 14th Draft of ANSI N45.2.9, which calls for fire retardant doors with a minimum two-hour rating.
The inspector reviewed the S&W Field Work Order No. 90, March 24, 1975, which changed the doors to comply with this requirement.
However, a subsequent October 1975 revision to the PSAR commits to the 15th Draft of ANSI N45.2.9 which requires a minimum four-hour fire rated record storage facility.
The licensee stated that this appeared to be an oversight.
The inspector examined the Northeast Utilities Quality Assurance Program Topical Report NU-QA-1, Revision 2, Appendix F, which identifies this as an exception.
The topical report is r crently under review by NRC, and this item is unresolved pending completion of that review.
292 2E -
(0 pen) Noncompliance (423/78-05-02): Deficient welding and weld inspection on boron injectiva tanks.
The inspector examined records of additional fac*.s and corrective actions described in the licensee's October 23, 1978 letter to NRC.
The inspector ascertained that the previously identified defective weld has been repaired, and S&W field quality control inspectors have now completed a final visual inspection of all welds on the tanks.
The Contractor is no longer on-site, but is expected to return after 1980 for field erection of demineralized and refueling water storage tanks.
The inspector examined the specification and the quality assur-ance manual (S&W and RECo) requirements for the boron injection tank work to ascertain the nature of the delegation of duties and responsibilities relative to implementation of quality asser-ance requirements.
The inspector found various levels of controls, but no interface requirements which relieved the contractor (Richmond Engineering Company) from implementation of his own quality assurance program requirements for welding.
Additionally, the inspector noted that S&W specification No. 2275.001-023 (M023) clarifies the program requirements as follows: (Page 1-27) "It is not intended that the presence or activity of the engineer's shop or field inspectors shall relieve the Con-tractor in any way whatsoever of his obligation to maintain an adequate test, inspection, and documentation program of his own..." The inspector examined records of S&W surveillance of the tank contractor and two other site contracto.s (Graver Tank and Scoeco) to determine the nature of S&W followup on negative audit or surveillance findings and quality trends (e.g., low quality control index ratings).
The records examined showed sufficient followup actions.
For the Richmond Engineering Comoany work on the boron injection tanks, the total on-site fabrication time appeared to be about six weeks, such that by the time the low quality index rating (33%) materializea for evaluation and action, the work was comoleted.
However, the S&W representatives stated that this data will be taken into consideration for S&W action when the contractor returns to the site for his larger scope of work.
This item remains open pending review of corrective actions at that time.
Y b)
.
The inspector examined the following records relative to the above: S&W Specification No. 2275.001-023 (M023), Addenda 1-5.
S&W Letters to RECo dated September 7,1977. November ll,1977, August 2, 1978, August 3, 1978, September 15, 1978, September 19, 1978, and September 20, 1978.
RECo Letters to S&W dated February 14, 1978, September 5, 1978, October 13, 1978, and October 24, 1978.
RECo QA Manual - Statement of Authority, Revision 3, and Statement of Policy, Revision 3.
S&W QA Manual Checklist dated August 29, 1977.
S&W QA Inspection Reports (RECo): 7040208 cated November 15, 1977 8040070 Lated August,1978 8040073 dated August 2, 1978 8040075 dated August 3, 1978 8020009 dated August 15, 1978 8020010 dated August 17, 1978 8020012 dated August 31, 1978 8020013 dated September 1,1978 8020014 dated September 8.1978 8040098 dated September 26, 1978 7040053 dated April 21, 1977 S&W QA Inspection Reports (Graver Tank): 7040053, 7040072, 7040673, 7040116, 7040181, 7040190, 8040022, and 9040026.
S&W QA Inspection Reports (Soneco).
8000319, 8000824, and 8001097.
NUSCO Audit of Graver - #A40434 Site Audit file for S&W Boston OA Audits at Site Activities.
(Only a partial file existed on-site.
The site QC supervisor stated that in the future a complete file of audits of site activities would be retained onsite.)
'}{ ? '
(0 pen) Unresolved Item (423/78-02-01): Storage of safety related piping and valves.
The inspector reviewed the records of licensee action to evaluate rusting of carbon steel pipe spool pieces in storage, as noted in Paragraph 3 of IE Inspection Report No. 50- , 423/78-05.
A sampling plan had been established in accordance with S&W procedure QAD-7.ll (tightened inspection, to be used when evidence exists that product is deterioratirig).
Of 2000 pipe ' snools received on-site between 1974 and 1977, (including stainless . steel and copper-nickel alloy materials) 200 ere selected for examination.
Of these, twelve showed some evidence of pitting.
None of these were safety related pipe spools.
The spools have been moved to the pipe fabrication shop for evaluation of pitting relative to specific minimum pipe wall criteria furnished by S&W engineers.
This evaluation remains to be accomplished.
This item remains open pending results of the study, and assessment of impact (if any) on safety related piping.
Also, S&W has instructed the piping fabricator to install corrosion inhibitor (Northern Instruments Corporation Product PS-2) into pipe spools at the shops prior to shipping.
S&W plans to monitor the effectiveness of this approach.
The inspector examined the following documents relative to the above: S&W Engineering Memo to Field dated February 2, 1979 S&W Resident Engineer Memo dated January 22, 1979 Notes of Weekly Construction Mceting dated March 2, 1979 QA Inspection Report S900005 dated March 9, 1279 Procedure QAD-7.ll, Revision 0 4.
Control Building Structural Steel Erection The inspector examined the condition of bolted and welded joints at two randomly selected areas within the Control Building.
At one area where high-strength bolting was still in process, the inspector checked for any indications of fit-up damage, racking of the struc-tural members, or improper joint configuration.
At another area where bolted and welded joints had received final QC inspection, the type of bolts, nut engagement, washer placement, tightness of the joint, and size and length of the weld were examined.
The M
inspector interviewed craft personnel concerning bolt torquing procedures and QC personnel concerning inspection techniques.
He witnessed the use of the calibrated feeler gage (S&W M&TE 04787) to reinspect the bolt tension of two joints where load indicating washers had been used.
Since the utilization of load indicating washer represents a significant part of both the torquing and inspection program for proper bolt tension, the inspector verified, through interviews with site QC personnel and their discussions with S&W project engineering personnel in Boston, that test data on the quality of these washers was being periodically received and reviewed prior to the shipment of any particular load of washers to the site.
The inspector also reviewed the following drawings and an appli-cable E&DCR change to determine that actual as-built field conditions comply with the design requirements: S&W Drawing ES-77A-3, July 5,1977.
-- Thames Valley Steel Corporation Drawing E6, Revision 1 (S.0.
-- 6-091),Octeter 28, 1977.
-- E&DCR F-S-194., December 11, 1978.
-- S&W in-process QC erection, bolting, welding, and inspection as-built drawings for the ":ontrol Building Cable Tray Support Steel."
All inspection items were evaluated against criteria established in the following documents: -- Research Council on Riveted and Bolted Structural Joints (RCRBSJ) Specification for " Structural Jcints Using ASTM A325 or A490 Bolts."
-- AISC Manual of Steel Con-truction.
-- S&W Quality Assurance Directive QAD-10.5, Revision B.
-- S&W Quality Standard QS-10.17, Revision A.
S&W Specification 2199.330-970, August 5,1974.
-- No items of noncompliance were identified.
-. Construction Craft / Supervision Training The inspector interviewed personnel and examined computer logs of training of site construction personnel, with respect to quality requirements.
The inspector ascertained that site training is coordinated by a responsible individual, training facilities are provided, status of tra ling of craft individuals is docu-mented and monitored, trainieg sessions are scheduled routinely, and session attendees inclede the various construction crafts appropriate to the subject of the session.
Subjects such as " Focus on Construction Quality" and "New Hire Orientation" are scheduled routinely and speci"ically address 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, and related regulatory requirements.
Sessions on weld material control, construction housekeeping, care of lifting devices, and drawing control are included in the March 1979 construction training schedule.
This training is supplemental to other specific training / qualification activities associated with specific special processes.
The inspector examined the foi awing records relative to the above: Memorandum, Superintendent Construction Services to S&W Construction Supervisors and Subcontractors (Graver Tank and Thames Valley Steel) dated March 12, 1979.
Millstone Training Schedule - March 1979 Computer Listing of Personnel Training dated January 10, 1979 Class Script for New Hire Orientation Session The inspector considered the above information relative to imple-mentation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criteria II, XVII, and XVIII, and Millstone Point Unit 3 PSAR Section 17.1.1, Attachment A-4.2.8.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
6.
Management Interview At che conclusion of the inspection on March 15, 1979, a meeting was held at the Millstone Point Unit 3 site with representatives af the licensee and contractor orgainzations.
Attendees at this f
meeting included personnel whose names are indicated by notation (*) in Paragraph 1.
The inspectors summarized the results of the inspection as described in this report.
Other items discussed included: (a) Embeds with stud welds at this site are not fur-nished by Acme Steel Engineering Company, (b) There are no safety related drilled anchor-bolt installations in-progress, and no current site action relative to NRC Bulletin 79-02, (c) NRC infor-mation notices represent an advance notice of possible problem areas and warrant review by responsible and qualified project staff.
2 c;'l 2 4 2 }}