IR 05000424/1985063
| ML20214D317 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 02/20/1986 |
| From: | Livermore H, Rankin W, Rogge J, Schepens R, Sinkule M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214D308 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-424-85-63, 50-425-85-41, NUDOCS 8603050098 | |
| Download: ML20214D317 (25) | |
Text
.
.
- -
,
-
,
,
-
,.
UNITED $TATES
>Q MC NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
/
o
'
[ 'i REGION H o
$ ',g,.
. j 101 MARIETTA STREET,N.W
- i
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 -
%,. /
....
Report Nos.: 50-424/85-63 and 50-425/85-41 Licensee: Georgia Power Company P.O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Docket Nos.: 50-424 and 50-425 License Nos.:
CPPR-108 and CPPR-109 Facility Name: Vogtle 1 and 2 Inspection Conducted:
December 9, 1985 - January 31, 1986 Inspectors:@~'2{k
~
Date Signed J//9/N g
H. H. Livermore, Senior Resident Inspector, Construction uM(GR ah/u
@ J. F. Rogge, Senior Resident D' ate' Signed Inspector, Operations
-
om Go
_zhs/u
~
@ R. J. Schepens, Resiaent Date Signed
<
Inspector, Construction ON Al/ff/S i
W. H. Ranki Project Engineer I) ate' Si ned MY Approved By:
ut tfu I
M.' V. Sinkule, Section Chief Date Signed Division of Reactor Projects SUMMARY
'
Secpe: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 518 resident inspection-hours on site (98 hours0.00113 days <br />0.0272 hours <br />1.62037e-4 weeks <br />3.7289e-5 months <br /> were on backshif ts) inspecting: containment and safety related structures, piping systems and supports, safety related components, auxiliary systems, electrical equipment and cables, instrumentation, preopera-
,
tional test program, quality programs and administrative controls affecting quality, and follow-up on previous inspection identified items.
,
Results:
No violations or deviations were identified, i
)
,
8603050098 860221 PDR ADOCK 05000424 G
'
.
,.
-n.,s,
.-
,,-,_-,._-e,,
,, - - - -, -. ~
,,
--,,---.n,.
- -, - - - - -.
-,-+ -,-., - -- -., - -
,.-.-,~n
-
-
.
-
,.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- R. E. Conway, Senior Vice-President, Vogtle Project Director
"D. O. Foster, Vice-President, Project Support R. H. Pinson, Vice-President, Project Construction W. T. Nickerson, Assistant to the Project Director
- W. C. Ramsey, Readiness Review Manager
- R. W. McManus, Readiness Review, Construction Team Leader
- M. H. Googe, Droject Construction Manager G. Bockhold, Jr., General Manager Nuclear Operations
- C. W. Hayes, Vogtle Quality Assurance Manager
- C. E. Belflower, Quality Assurance Site Manager - Operations
- S. D. Haltom, Quality Assurance Engineering Support Supervisor W. E. Mundy, Quality Assurance Audit Supervisor D. M. Fiquett, Project Construction Manager - Unit 2
- B. C. Harbin, Manager Quality Control
- G. A. McCarley, Project Compliance Coordinator
- W. C. Gabbard, Regulatory Specialist W. F. Kitchens, Operations Superintendent T. Dannemiller, Senior QA Engineer J. F. D' Amico, Regulatory Compliance Superintendent C. L. Coursey, Maintenance Superintendent M. A. Griffis, Superintendent-Maintenance
- N R. Harris, Quality Control Assistant Manager
- W. R. Duncan, Readiness Review Other licensee employees contacted included craftsmen, technicians, supervision, engineers, inspectors, and office personnel.
Other Organizations H. M. Handfinger, Preoperational Test Superintendent - Bechtel B. F. Hurless, QA Surveillance Specialist - Bechtel
- G. F. Trudeau, Readiness Review - Bechtel
- P. R. Thomas, Readiness Review - Bechtel
- J. H. Draggs, Readiness Review QA - Bechtel
- M. R. Thakar, Readiness Review Civil - Bechtel
- A. M. Nakashima, Readiness Review - Bechtel
- Attended Exit Interview
-
- - -
-
-
.
-
.
-
,.
2.
Exit Interview (30703C)
The inspectior. scope and findings were summarized on January 31, 1986 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings listed below.
No dissenting comments were received from the licensee.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspection.
(0 pen) Inspector Followup Item 50-424/85-63-01 " Review Licensee Action to Determine the Status of the Diesel Engine Mounted Water-Jacket Pump
<
Impe11ers" - Paragraph 20.
(Closed) Unresolved Item 50-425/85-13-02 " Loop No. 3 Hot Leg Elbow Repair" - Paragraph 3.
(Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item 50-424 & 425/85-21-01 " Review Revision to prequalified Concrete Expansion Anchors File No. X2BQO2 Calculation No. X2CQ5.2.7" - Paragraph 4.
(Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item 50-424/85-26-01 and 50-425/85-25-01 " Boron Injection Tank Description and Operation" - Paragraph 4.
(0 pen)
Inspector Follow-up Item 50-425/85-33-01 and 50-425/85-28-01
" Follow-up On Closure of Quality Concern No's. 84V396, 84V400, and 84VX250"
- Paragraph 4.
The following NRC exit interviews were attended during the inspection period by a resident inspector:
Date Inspection December 13 G. A. Ha11strom December 20 W. Kleinsorge A. L. Cunningham January 10 R. M. Latta January 16 R. W. Wright January 24 G. A. Hallstrom L. H. Jackson 3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (92702)
(Closed) Unresolved Item 50-425/85-13-02 " Loop No. 3 Hot Leg Elbow Repair".
The inspector has reviewed Westinghouse Letter No. QA-3945, dated June 25, 1985 which stated that based on the number of NOT reviews and visual inspections performed on the pipe below from initial fabrication through installation, it is reasonable to assume that the discontinuity occurred in
\\
.
_
._
. - -.
-
_ - -
,
. '
.
-
.
)
'
the field and was an isolated incident. The inspector has also reviewed completed Deviation Report Nos. PP-12199 and PP-09684 which documented the as found condition and the repair method to verify the elbow is restored to an acceptable condition.
The repair consisted of blending the excavated area to a 4:1 taper, liquid penetrant testing the area in accordance with ASME Section III NB 2546.3, and ultrasonic testing the area to assure the minimum wall thickness was not violated. Based on the information that the elbow was documented as being acceptable during fabrication, receipt inspection, initial fit-up and welding in the field and the fact that the minimum wall thickness was verified to be acceptable after repairing the discontinuity and that this is an isolated case, the inspector concurs with the licensee determination that this was not a reportable item and also concludes that no violation has occurred, this unresolved item is considered closed.
4.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Items (92701)
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 50-424 & 425/85-21-01 " Review Revision to Prequalified Concrete Expansion Anchors File No. X2BQO2 Calculation No.
X2C05.2.7". The inspector reviewed the revised calculations for the use of Pnillips concrete expansion wedge anchors contained in Revision 3 of Calculation No. X2CQ5.2.7. The affected portion of the calculation reviewed was Sheets 6 and 7 which deleted the Phillips values contained in Table 1-Tension Values and Table 2-Shear Values as a result of the revised vendor test data.
In addition Sheets 10A thru and including 10E, which detailed Bechtel Engineering's methodology for reconciliation of Phillips concrete expansion wedge anchor safety of f actor values as a result of the revised vendor test data, was reviewed by the inspector.
The inspector verified that the ultimate shear and ultimate tension values for commercial grade (WS) & nuclear grade (NWS) Phillips concrete expansion wedge anchors utilized in the revised calculation reflected the vendor's latest test data values published in Report No's. 2821, dated 3/15/77 for WS and Report No.
4420, dated 10/6/77 for NWS. This was contained in Table 3 " Comparison of Phillips (WS & NWS) wedge anchors with DC 1000-C, Appendix G Expansion Anchor Allowable Design Load Values" of the affected revised pages. Further review noted that after using the vendor's revised test data for Phillips concrete expansion wedge anchors the factor of safety of 4 was met in all cases except for the following sizes and types: 5/8", 3/4", & 7/8" WS and 5/8" & 3/4" NWS.
The revised calculation continued with a methodology for reconciliation of the apparent reduced factor of safety for the noted concrete expansion wedge anchor volt sizes / types.
In the first case bolt i
sizes 5/8" WS & NWS and 7/8" WS factor of safety reconciliation was achieved by taking advantage of the increased embedment depth required by Vogtle since the initial calculation used the embedmeme-depth specified in the vendor test data.
In the second case bolt sizes 3/4" WS & NWS factor of safety reconciliation was achieved by further taking advantage of the increased embedment depth utilized at Vogtle since Vogtle's requirement of embedment depth is measured af ter tensioning the anchor bolt whereas the
,
.
--.
-
- -
-
.
-
,.
vendor's requirement is prior to tensioning.
Based on the review of the revised calculation the inspector concludes that the calculation does in fact demonstrate that the use of Phillips concrete expansion wedge anchor bolts in conjunction with the design allowables stated in DC-1000-C is in conformance with NRC IE Bulletin 79-02 in light of the vendor's latest test data. This item is therefore considered to be closed.
(Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item 50-424/85-26-01 and 50-425/85-25-01 " Boron Injection Tank Description and Operation".
The inspector has reviewed the applicable portions of Georgia Power Company's (GPC) Amendment 17, dated July 19,1985 to the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP) Final Safety Analysis Report ( FSAR).
This amendment revised FSAR Section 6.3.2.2.2, i
Boron Injection Tank Description; FSAR Table 6.3.2.3 " Motor Operated Iselation Valves in the Emergency Core Cooling System"; and FSAR Figure 6.3.2.1 " Safety Injection System Piping and Instrumentation Drawing" to reflect the latest system design and operating characteristics.
Based upon the review of GPC's submittal of FSAR Amendment 17 the inspector has determined that this item has been acceptably addressed and therefore considers this item to be closed.
(0 pen)
Inspector Follow-up Item 50-424/85-33-01 ana 50-425/85-28-01
,
" Follow-up On Closure of Quality Concern Nos. 84V396, 84V400, and 84VX250".
The inspector has reviewed the stated quality concerns to determine whether an acceptable and traceable method was utilized for closure since the technical closecut was controlled through other Quality Control measures such as Corrective Action Reports (CARS) Deviation Reports (DRs), and Audit Finding Reports ( AFRs).
Quality Concern No. 84V396 questioned the workmanship used in construction by the manufacturer of three continuous exhaust Units 1-1553-N7-001-002, and 003.
Bechtel Power Corporation's investigation confirmed that the units
were not in compliance with equipment specification; X4AJ15, Rev. 9.
Deviation Report No. ED-07921 was written to resolve the electrical specification deficiencies associated with the subject continuous exhaust units on Unit No.1.
Work has been completed on the subject Unit No.1 equipment.
Deviation Report No. ED-10610 was written to resolve the electrical specification deficiencies associated with the subject continuous exhaust units on Unit No. 2.
The licensee is conducting an Assessment /
Inspection Program of the remaining Mine Safety Appliances equipment on site to verify that similar deficiencies do not exist.
Pending review of the licensee's Assessment / Inspection Program this item shall remain open.
,
Quality Concern No. 84V400 stated QC Inspection Reports on HVAC Duct and Supports were being performed as required; however, the Records Department does not have the records which support the inspections.
Consequently, Construction has to remove and reinstall duct work for reinspection.
The Quality Concerns Program investigation into this area consisted of
,
documented interviews of key individuals which concluded that the concern
,
could not be substantiated.
In addition walkdowns were conducteo which
~
~
.
."
.
identified discrepancies in identification of 616 duct. As a result the HVAC contractor initiated Corrective Action Request (CAR) No. 27. The final response to CAR #27 detailed corrective action taken and to be taken to resolve the condition, action to be taken to prevent recurrence and a completion date for all stated activities. The CAR is still open pending QA receipt of "as-installed" drawings which depict duct identification numbers as found during final inspection.
Pending review of the HVAC contractor's closed out CAR this item shall remain open.
Quality Concern No. 84VX250 stated GPC-QC does not monitor welder testing or welding parameters in the field for compliance to procedures as committed in the FSAR Paragraph 17.1.9A.
The licensee's investigation of this concern
,
revealed that FSAR Paragraph 17.1.9A does not require that GPC-QC monitor
'
"weider testing or welding parameters in the field for compliance".
But rather FSAR Paragraph 17.1.9A states the broad quality assurance program for the control of "Special Processes".
The requirement of Paragraph 17.1.9A for the GPC-QC group is to monitor "special process activity to insure that approved procedures are followed." The licensee conducted a QA assessment audit of AWS welding (Audit GD08-84/87) during the period of December 3-14, 1984 This audit did identify several problems in AWS welding and as a result Audit Finding Reports (AFRs) were issued.
This concern was subsequently closed based on the fact that Audit GD08-84/87 will address and correct the findings associated with this concern.
The inspector has conducted a review of the closed out AFR's associated with AWS welding Audit G008-84/87 to verify that the audit report did in fact address the concerns and that the AFRs issued were properly closed out. Based upon this review t
this item is considered to be closed.
!
5.
Employee Concerns, Discussions and Conclusions The following employee concerns were reviewed:
a.
Vogtle Structural Analysis Mobile Unit (V-SAMU) Quality Concerns (1) Concern The Senior Resident Inspector at Vogtle was notified by the licensee that the Quality Concerns Program had received six (6)
concerns from various people in the V-SAMU (The Westinghouse Design Group at Vogtle) relating to discrepancies in design at the site.
(2) Discussion
,
-
Georgia Power Company formed a special task force to investigate all allegations relating to the V-SAMU organization at Plant Vogtle.
The quality concerns which the committee had full responsibility for are 84V349, 84V353, 84V356, 85V001, and 85V005.
The quality concerns which were reopened and reinvestigated by the committee are 84V032, 84V068, and 84V30 *
.
-
.
A quality concern which the committee had limited responsibility for was 84V248.
During its investigation, the special task force interviewed 33 people which included V-SAMU management and engineers and B.echtel management. Approximately 1200 pages of documents were reviewed and over 900 man-hours were spent on the investigation by the special task force and its special counsel.
The concerns investigated by the special task force were categorized into common issues of concern and are as follows: The discharge of two (2) V-SAMU contract employees, personnel qualifications, introduction and training, poor Bechtel V-SAMU interface, poor Westinghouse coordination, insufficient design input, push for quantity affects quality, too many pipe supports, inefficient piping analysis, poor tubing design, errors in support design guide, errors in piping analysis handbook, errors in calculation forms, drawing and data control response time, lack of seismic considerations in support analysis, inadequate checking, i
checker comments ignored, incorrect calculations being released, tamp ring with computer output, and documentation assembly. The special task force jurisdiction in these concerns was limited to quality and safety issues.
The special task force also reviewed any disciplinary action or terminations at V-SAMU to determine if they were in any way related to issues of quality or were the result of retaliation over an employee filing a quality concern or an employee raising a quality related issue with V-SAMU manage-ment.
The special task force concluded that there was no issue raised by any of the individuals filing quality concerns that could be substantiated as having an impact on safety or tne quality of the work performed by V-SAMU.
(3) Conclusion The Resident Inspector reviewed Quality Concern No's. 84V032, 84V068, 84V248, 84V309, 84V349, 84V353, 84V356, 85V001, and 85V005 relating to the V-SAMU organization at Plant Vogtle.
These concerns were reviewed to ensure that all of the submitters'
quality related concerns were addressed by the special task force during their investigation of the V-SAMU organization.
The report of Georgia Power Company's-epecial task force review of V-SAMU quality concerns was also reviewed for the licensee's findings pertaining to the above concerns.
Based on this review the Resident Inspector has concluded that the licensee has conducted an extensive and meaningful investigation of the above
concerns.
This item is considered closed since none of the
'
quality concerns could be substantiated as having an impact on
-
-
-
--
-
~~
.
.
-
.
,
safety or the quality of work being performed by the V-SAMU organization, b.
Falsification of Nonconformance Reports (NCR's)
(1) Concern Two instances were identified when NCR's were written identifying a Quality Control Inspector as the initiator of an NCR subsequent to the inspector's date of resignation. The NCRs were identified as Numbers PP4974 and PP5279.
(2) Discussion The inspector examined all of the related documentation pertaining
-
to Deviation Report No. PP-4974 that is Pipe Support Installation J
Process Sheet; Weld Process Sheet; and Request for Support Removal for Hanger No. VI-2301-287-H001.
The inspector also interviewed J
the following Pullman Power Products personnel:
QA/QC Manager; QA/QC Assistant Menager; QC Chief Inspector; and QC Assistant Chief Inspector ccncerning Pullman Power Products Deviation Report No. PP-4974. During Pullman Power's Document Review Process, it
was noted that the final inspection sign-off block of the Pipe l
Support Installation Process Sheet was not initialed as being performed by the responsible inspector; however, the accepted "QC Accepted By" block had been signed-off. It would appear that the inspector neglected to put his initials in the final inspection block since he had signed for acceptance of the entire assembly.
Pullman Power Engineering in reviewing the Process Sheet made a determination that this was a nonconformance to their procedures
and therefore made the decision to write the referenced Deviation Report No. PP-4974. Since this was a backfit deviation report and
.
the inspector responsible was no longer on site his name was
!
printed in the QC Inspector Block and initialed by another person.
The inspector examined all of the related documentation pertaining to Deviation Report No. 5279 that is Pipe Support Installation Process Sheet; Weld Rod Stores Requisition; QC Hanger Inspection Checklist; Request for Support Removal; and the Stock Material Requisition for Hanger No. V1-2301-161-H002.
The inspector also interviewed the Pullman Power Products Assistant QA Manager t
concerning Pullman Power Products Deviation Report No. 5279.
During Pullman Power's Document Review Process, the Pullman Power QA engineer noted that the Process Sheet being reviewed was a reissue per the Request for Support Removal Sheet and that the original Process Sheet for Hanger No. V1-2301-161-H002 had apparently been lost after the hanger was cut down. The decision was made by Pullman Power to document this discrepancy by writing
,
Deviation Report No. 5279.
In documenting this discrepancy the QA Engineer printed the inspector's name who had accepted the hanger on the Reissue Process Sheet in the QC Inspector's block and i
-
.
-. -
-.... -
-
.-
-..
. - -. -
..-
--
.
,
-
.
,
I
'
,
initialed it with his own.
The inspector whose name was printed
{
in the QC Inspector block was not on site, therefore the reason j
why his name was printed and the initials of the individual doing i
this was right beside the printed name.
The inspector also
!
reviewed Pullman Power's inspector's signature list to verify that c
the signature and initials on the Reissue Process Sheet were the i
same as those on the list for the responsible inspector.
I j
(3) Conclusion
}
The hangers associated with the two (2) Deviation Reports are
{
contained in the Fire Protection System which is not safety related.
The deviation reports were written to document
,
discrepancies found during the QA Review Process of the work
,
package.
The Resident Inspector reviewed Deviation Report Nos.
4974 and 5279 and all related documentation.
Based on this
,
l review, the Resident inspector has concluded that the deviation reports were self-explanatory and did not indicate any hardware
<
j problem or intentional wrong doing but rather were written in a i
correct manner to document discrepancies found during the QA l
Review Process.
This item is considered closed since the concern
identified
{
above was found to be without substance.
I
}
6.
Construction Inspection - Units 1 & 2
,
!
'
)
Periodic inspections were made throughout this repc-ting period in the form
]
of general type inspections in different areas of both facilities.
The i
areas were selected on the basis of the scheduled activities and were varied
]
to provide wide coverage. Observations were made of activities in progress to note defective items or items of noncompliance with the required codes
,
and regulatory requirements. On these inspections, particular note was made i
of the presence of quality control inspectors, supervisors, and quality i
j control evidence in the form of available process sheets, drawings, material
identification, material protection, performance of tests, and housekeeping.
i
{
Interviews were made with craft personnel, supervisors, coordinators,
quality control inspectors, and others as they were available in the work j
areas.
i l
}
The inspector reviewed numerous construction deviation reports to determine
}
if requirements were met in the areas of documentation, action to resolve,
'
!
justification, and approval signatures in accordance with GPC Field Procedure No. GO-T-01.
-
I Observations were made of the installation of the new fuel storage racks and the reactor vessel CRDM cable support trams.
]
No violations or deviations were identified, i
!
i l
--
.
,'
,
s
7.
Fire Prevention / Protection and Housekeeping Measures - Units 1 & 2 (42051C)
The inspector observed fire prevention / protection measures throughout the inspection period. Welders were using welding permits with fire watches and extinguishers.
Post indicator valves were being maintained in the open position. Fire fighting equipment is in its designated areas throughout the plant.
The inspector reviewed and examined portions of the following procedures pertaining to the fire prevention / protection measures and housekeeping measures to determine whether they comply with applicable codes, standards, NRC Regulatory Guides and licensee commitments.
- GD-T-05, Rev. 6 Fire-Protection Equipment Inspection and Testing
- GD-T-15, Rev. 5 Welding and Cutting
- GD-T-17, Rev. 3 Housekeeping l
The inspector observed fire prevention / protection measures in work areas containing safety related equipment during the inspection period to verify the following:
Combustible waste material and rubbish was removed from the work
-
areas as rapidly as practicable to avoid unnecessary accumulation of combustibles
-
Flammable liquids are stored in appropriate containers and in designated areas throughout the plant
-
Cutting and welding opera. cions in progress have been authorized by an appropriate permit, ccmbustibles have been moved away or safely covered, and a fire watch and extinguisher was posted as required Fire protection / suppression equipment was provided and controlled
-
in accordance with applicable requirements No violations or deviations were identified.
8.
Structural Concrete - Unit 1 & 2 (47053C)
a.
Procedure and Document Review l
The inspector reviewed and examined portions of the following j
procedures pertaining to the placement of site safety related
'
Category 1 concrete to determine whether they comply with applicable
,
codes, standards, NRC Regulatory Guides and licensee commitments.
- CD-T-02, Rev. 15 Concrete Quality control
- CD-T-06, Rev.
Rebar and Cadweld Quality Control
- CD-T-07, Rev.
Embed Installation and Inspection
- CD-T-20, Rev.
Installation and Inspection of Trumpets, Rigic Extensions, and Duct Sheathing
-
-
-
-
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- ~-
.
.
-
.
!
l
!
l l
b.
Installation Activities The inspector witnessed portions of the concrete placement indicated below to verify the following:
(1) Forms, Embedment, and Reinforcing Steel Installation
!
Forms were properly placed, secure, leak tight and clean.
-
Rebar and other embedment installation was installed in
-
accordance with construction specifications and drawings, secured, free of concrete and excessive rust, specified
!
distance from forms, proper on-site rebar bending (where applicable) and clearances consistent with aggregate size.
(2) Delivery, Placement and Curing Preplacement inspection was completed and approved prior to
-
placement utilizing a
Pour Card (Procedure Exhibit CD-T-02*18).
Construction joints were prepared as specified.
-
Proper mix was specified and delivered.
-
Temperature control of the mix, mating surfaces, and ambient
-
were monitored.
Consolidation was performed correctly.
-
!
j Testing at placement location was properly performed in
-
accordance with the acceptance criteria and recorded on a
'
Concrete Placement Pour Log (Procedure Exhibit CD-T-02*20).
Adequate crew, equipment and techniques were utilized.
-
Inspections during placements were conducted effectively by a
-
sufficient number of qualified personnel.
Curing temperature was monitored.
-
Pour No.
Location j
2-071-014B Unit 2 Diesel-Generator Wall 1-44A-226, FH&LN Unit 1 Steam Tunnel Hatches 2-44A-028B Main Steam Roof 2-071-009C Unit 2, Diesel Generator South Wall
l
,
I
_.
.
_
,
.
-
.
,
!
The inspector observed cad weld installation on the main steam tunnel roof.
I No violations or deviations were identified.
9.
Containment (Steel Structures and Supports) - Units 1 & 2 (48053C)
!
'
Periodic inspections were conducted to observe containment steel and support
!
installation activities in progress, to verify the following:
Components were being properly handled (included bending or
-
,
straightening).
Specified clearances were being maintained.
-
.
'
Edge finishes and hole sizes were within tolerances.
-
,
i Control, marking, protection and segregation were maintained during
-
storage.
Fit-up/ alignment meets the tolerances in the specifications and
-
drawings.
,
Structural Steel Installations inspected were in Unit I and 2 areas beneath the steam generators (Level 170') and the Unit 2 Pressurizer Supports.
No violations or deviations were identified.
10.
Safety-Related Structures (Structural Steel and Supports) - Units 1 & 2 (48063C)
,
Periodic inspections were conducted to observe construction activities of safety-related structures / equipment supports for major equipment outside the containment to verify that:
l Materials and components were being properly handled to prevent damage.
-
l Fit-up/ alignment were within tolerances in specifications and drawing
-
requirements.
I Bolting was in accordance with specifications and procedures,
-
i
Specified clearances from adjacent components were being met.
-
,
Structural Steel areas inspected were in the Unit 2 Diesel Generator
Building.
No violations or deviations were identified.
i
!
-
-
.
_
,
.
.
,
11.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary and Safety Related Piping - Observation of Work and Work Activities - Unit 1 (49053C) (49063C) (37301)
During the inspection period, pipe run walkdowns were performed where piping installation is near completion to determine whether the piping run was installed as shown on approved drawings and in accordance with applicable construction specifications.
The applicable Code for installation of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary and Safety Related Piping is the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code (B&PVC),Section III, 1977 plus Addenda through Winter 1977. Specific pipe run walkdowns included a walkdown of the following ASME B&PVC,Section III, Class I and II Piping as listed below:
p&ID No. Revision Pipe Run Inspected IX4DB111, Rev. 12 Reactor Coolant Loop No.1 Piping. (Line No's. 001-29", 005-31", 009-27-1/2", 023-6",
036-12", 031-2", 025-2", 029-4", 009-3",
i
'
008-3", 124-10", 243-1-1/2")
1X40B113, Rev. 9 Reactor Coolant Loop No. I RTD By-Pass Piping (Line No's. 021-2", 183-2", 116-3", 191-2",
<
179-2", 025-2", 123-3/4", 128-3/4", 124-3/4",
120-3/4")
IX4DB119, Rev. 114 Boron Injection Tank Inlet & Discharge Piping (Line No's. 057-4", 057-6", 063-4", 076-3",
077-1-1/2", 079-1-1/2", 078-1-1/2", 076-1-1/2",
246-1-1/2", 245-1-1/2", 244-1-1/2", 243-1-1/2")
l
'
1X4DB120, Rev. 10 Accumulator Tank Discharge Piping (Line No's.
123-10", 127-10", 122-10", 126-10", 121-10",
125-10", 120-10", 124-10", 123-2", 135-2",
122-2", 134-2", 121-2", 133-2", 120-2", 132-2",
140-3/4", 168-3/4", 136-3/4", 144-3/4", 139-3/4",
167-3/4", 147-3/4", 143-3/4", 051-3/4", 138-3/4",
i 146-3/4", 142-3/4", 137-3/4", 165-3/4", 145-3/4",
i 141-3/4", 119-1", 118-1", 117-1", 116-1", 112-1",
j
'
115-1").
j Inspections were performed on a random daily basis.
Specific areas examined during the pipe run walkdown for compliance with the applicable piping & instrumentation drawings and the Plant Design and
'
Instrumentation Construction Specification No. X4A-Z01, were as follows:
Vent and Orain Connections and Locations Instrumentation Connections and Locations
Valve Installation and Orientation i
Line Size and Location
'
Fittings Type and Location
'
'
.
..
.
.
.
.
. _.
_-
_
.... _
__
_
,
.
-
.
,
Pipe / Valve / Fitting End Connections j
Hanger Locations and Types
!
.
No violations or deviations were identified.
~
12.
Reactor Vessel and' Integrated Head Package - Unit 1 & 2 (50053C)
Periodic Unit 1 inspections consisted of examinations of the Reactor Vessel installed in containment and the integrated head package stored on the refueling floor in its designated laydown area to determine that proper storage protection practices were in place and that entry of foreign objects and debris was prevented and that access was controlled.
The Unit 2 inspections consisted of examinations of the Reactor Vessel
.
installed in containment and the Reactor Vessel head with the installed j
control rod drive mechanisms on the refueling floor in its designated
,
laydown area to determine that proper storage protection practices were in place and that entry of foreign objects and debris was prevented.
No violations or deviations were identified, i
13.
Reactor Vessel Internals - Unit 1 (50063C)
I Periodic inspections were conducted during the inspection period of the I
upper and lower internals stored in their designated storage areas *o determine that proper storage protection practices were in place, entr of i
foreign objects and debris was prevented and that access was controllec.
During the inspection period, the Resident Inspector observed the I
hydrolazing of the upper and lower internals to establish cleanliness in i
preparation for installation for primary hydro, t
No violations or deviations were identified.
14.
Safety Related Components - Units 1 & 2 (50073C)
l The inspection consisted of plant tours to observe storage, handling, and l
protection; installation; and preventive maintenance after installation of I
safety-related components to determine that work is being performed in accordance with applicable codes, NRC Regulatory Guides, and licensee
commitments.
During the inspection, the below listed equipment was observed at various times during the inspection period to verify the-following as applicable:
,
Storage, environment, and protection of components were in accordance
-
with manufacturer's instructions and/or established procedures.
I
!
Implementation of special storage and maintenance requirements such as:
-
rotation of motors, pumps, lubrication, insulation testing
'
(electrical), cleanliness,etc.
1
i
.
-
-
-
-
- -
.
- -
- -
-.
-
.
-
.. _ _
-.
.
__
-.
.
-
__
.-
.
,
.
-
.
,
i Performance of licensee / contractor surveillance activities and
-
documentation thereof was being accomplished.
,
,
Installation requirements were met such as:
proper location,
-
t placement, orientation, alignment, mounting (torquing of bolts and expansion anchors),
flow direction, tolerances, and expansion clearance.
[
Appropriate stamps, tags, markings, etc. were in use to prevent
-
oversight of required inspections, completion of tests, acceptance, and
]
the prevention of inadvertent operation.
!
}
The following Unit I and 2 equipment was inspected on a random sampling
basis throughout the inspection period:
Residual Heat Removal (RHR) Pumps
-
Diesel Generators
-
.
Containment Spray (CS) Pumps
!
-
Pressurizer
'
-
Main Coolant Pumps l
-
l
-
Safety Injection Pumps
'
-
j RHR and CS Containment Penetration Encapsulation Vessels
-
Component Cooling Water (CCW) Heat Exchangers, Surge Tanks & Pumps
'
-
Cable Spreading Room Trains A & B
-
Accumulator Tanks i
-
Reactor Coolant Drain Tank Pumps
-
Chemical and Volume Control System (CVCS) Letdown Heat Exchanger
-
Reactor Coolant Drain Tank & Heat Exchanger
-
Reactor Cavity Pumps
-
Battery & Charger Rooms Trains A, B, C & 0
-
Nuclear Grade Piping, Valves & Fittings
-
,
Spent Fuel Pool Heat Exchangers
-
Pressurizer Relief Tank
'
-
j CVCS Centrifugal Charging Pumps & Positive Displacement Pump
-
Bottom Mounted Instrumentation (BMI) Seal Table
-
BMI and Supports Under Reactor Vessel
-
i i
j The inspector also performed a warehouse and storage yard storage inspection
'
in conjunction with Region II Readiness Review personnel.
Findings are
!
'
included in Inspection Report 50-424/86-04, i
- i No violations or deviations were identified, i
-
l i
i i
i
. _ - -
-m..
_
.%.,
.a_
..
- _
.
-
.
,
i
<
i 15.
Safety-Related Pipe Support and Restraint Systems - Unit 1(50090C)
Periodic random inspections were conducted during the inspection period to observe construction activities during installation of safety-related pipe
supports to determine that the following work was performed in accordance
'
with applicable codes, NRC Regulatory Guides, and licensee commitments:
Spring hangers were provided with indicators to show the approximate
-
" hot" or " cold" position, as appropriate,
,
No deformation or forced bending was evident.
-
Where pipe clamps are used to support vertical lines, shear lugs were
-
!
welded to the pipe (if required by Installation Drawings) to prevent l
slippage.
l Sliding or rolling supports were provided with material and/or
-
'
lubricants suitable for the environment and compatible with sliding contact rurfaces.
l Supports are located and installed as specified.
-
The surface of welds meet applicable code requirements and are free
-
,
from unacceptable grooves, abrupt ridges, valleys, undercuts, cracks, discontinuities, or other indications which can be observed on the i
j welded surface.
l The inspector conducted a walkdown of the Boron Injection Tank Inlet
-
I and Discharge Piping and the Accumulator Discharge Piping of the Safety Injection System. An inspection of the above attributes was conducted for the following completed / accepted pipe supports:
!
Pipe Support Dwg No./ Revision Support Type s
l V1-1204-121-H002, Rev. 3 Fixed-Pipe Support j
V1-1204-125-H012, Rev. 5 Two Directional Double Acting Restraint V1-1204-125-H014, Rev. 3 Rigid Strut VI-1204-126-H013, Rev. 1 Rigid Shock & Sway Arrestor
'
V1-1205-125-H016, Rev. 3 Fixed-Pipe Support
'
V1-1204-140-H601, Rev. 2 Fixed-Valve Support VI-1204-076-H024, Rev. 3 Rigid Shock & Sway Arrestor i
V1-1204-076-H037, Rev. 2 Fixed Pipe Support
V1-1204-076-H038, Rev. 2 Two Direction Formed Plate Restraint V1-1204-076-H041, Rev. 2 Rigid Shock & Sway Arrestor No violations or deviations were identified.
!
\\
t
!
-
- -
-
-
-
- -
-
.
.___..
.
.
_.
-
-_
._
--
.
.
_..
,
.
-
.
16.
Electrical and Instrumentation Components and Systems - Units 1 & 2 (51053C) (52153C)
Periodic inspections were conducted during the inspection period to observe safety-related electrical equipment in order to verify that the storage, installation, and preventive maintenance was accomplished in accordance with j
applicable codes, NRC Regulatory Guides, and licensee commitments.
During the inspection period, an inspection was performed on various pieces of electrical equipment during storage, installation, and cable terminating phase in order to verify the following as applicable:
,
Location and alignment
'
-
Type and size of anchor bolts
-
Identification
-
Segregation and identification of rionconforming items
-
Location, separation and redundancy requirements
-
Equipment space heating
-
Cable identification i
-
Proper lugs used
-
Condition of w re (not nicked, etc.), tightness of connection
.
-
]
Bending radius not exceeded
-
Cable entry to terminal point
'
-
!
Separation
-
i No violations or deviations were identified.
17.
Electrical and Instrumentation Cables and Terminations - Unit 1 and 2
(51063C) (52063C)
i a.
Raceway / Cable Installation The inspector reviewed and examined portions of the following procedures pertaining to raceway / cable installation to determine l
whether they comply with applicable codes, NRC Regulatory Guides and I
licensee commitments.
ED-T-02, Rev. 8 Raceway Installation
-
ED-T-07, Rev. 9 Cable Installation
-
Periodic inspections were conducted to observe construction activities of Safety Related Raceway / Cable Installation.
In reference to the raceway installation, the following areas--were inspected to verify
,
compliance with the applicable requirements:
i i
!
2 i
!
l
-
-
. -
-
-
_--
_-
.
-
--_
_ _ -
_. -
-.
..
-_-
_.
_
.
-
.
i
'
Identification
-
Alignment
-
Bushings (Conduit)
-
Grounding
-
r Supports and Anchorages l
-
!
In reference to the cable instal.ation the following areas were inspected to verify compliance with the applicable requirements:
!
l Protection from adjacent construction activities
-
l (welding,etc.)
Coiled cable ends properly secured
-
Non-terminated cable ends taped l
-
Cable trays, junction boxes, etc., reasonably
-
free of debris Conduit capped, if no cable installed
-
Cable supported
-
Bend radius not exceeded
-
Separation
-
)
o.
Cable Terminations The inspector reviewed and examined portions of the following
,
procedures pertaining to cable termination to determine whether they I
comply with applicable codes, NRC Regulatory Guides and licensee commitments.
ED-T-08, Rev. 7 Cable Termination
-
In reference to cable terminations the following areas were inspected to verify compliance with the applicable requirements.
Cable identification
-
Proper lugs used
-
Condition of wire (not nicked, etc.), tightness of connection
-
Eending radius not exceeded
-
Cable entry to terminal point
-
Separation
-
No violations or deviations were identified.
18.
Containment and Safety Related Structural Steel Welding - Units 1 and 2 (55053C) (55063C)
Periodic inspections were conducted during daily plant surveillances on safety-related steel welding at various stages of weld completion.
The purpose of the inspection was to determine whether the requirements of applicable specifications, codes, standards, work performance procedures and OC procedures are being met as follows:
-
-
.
-._.
--
_
_.
.
.
,
.
-
.
Work was conducted in accordance with a process sheet or drawing which
-
identifies the weld and its location by system, references procedures or instructions, and provides for production and or signoffs.
Welding procedures, detailed drawings and instructions, were readily
-
,
l available and technically adequate for the welds being made.
,
!
l Welding procedure specification (WPS) were in accordance with the
-
l applicable Code requirements and that a Procedure Qualification Record
(PQR) is referenced and exists for the type of weld being made.
!
'
l Base metals and welding filler materials were of the specified type and
-
grade, were properly inspected, tested, and were traceable.
Protection was provided to shield the welding operation from adverse
-
environmental conditions.
Weld joint geometry including thickness was specified and that surfaces
-
to be welded were prepared, cleaned and inspected in accordance with applicable procedures or instructions.
A sufficient number of adequately qualified QC inspection personeel
-
commensurate with the work in progress were present at the work site.
Weld area cleanliness was maintained and that alignment and fit-up
-
tolerances were within specified units.
l Weld filler material being used was in accordance with welding
-
specifications, unused filler material was separated from other types of material and was stored and controlled properly, and stubs were j
properly removed from the work location.
That there were no visual signs of cracks, excessive heat input, or
-
excessive crown on welds.
Specific detailed weld inspections were performed on the Unit 2 Reactor Cavity Access Ports, BMI Shaf t Elevation 192, and Unit 1 and 2 structure beneath the Steam Generators.
No violations or deviations were identified.
,
l i
i
{
'
.
- - _
-
--
- -
-
.
.-
. -. _. -.
-
_
.
-
.
t
,
19.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary and Safety Related Piping Welding -
Unit 1 & 2 (55073C) (55083C)
Periodic inspections were conducted during daily plant surveillances on safety-related pipe welding at various stages of weld completion.
The
purpose of the inspection was to determine whether the requirements of applicable specifications, codes, standards, work performance procedures and i
QC procedures are being met as follows:
.
Work was conducted in accordance with a process sheet which identifies
-
the weld and its location by system, references procedures or instructions, and provides for production and QC signoffs.
Welding procedures, detailed drawings and instructions, were readi'y
-
available and technically adequate for the welds being mace.
,
I Welding procedure specification (WPS) were in accordance. with the
-
{
applicable ASME Code requirements and that a Procedure Qualification
Record (PQR) is referenced and exists for the type of weld being made.
,
That the base metals, welding filler materials, fluxes, gases, and
-
!
insert materials were of the specified type and grade, have been i
properly inspected, tested and were traceable to test reports cr
!
certifications.
That the purge and/or shielding gas flow and composition were as
-
specified in the welding procedure specification and that protection
!
was provided to shield the welding operation from adverse environmental conditions.
,
I
That the weld joint geometry including pipe wall thickness was
-
j specified and that surfaces to be welded have been prepared, cleaned and inspected in accordance with applicable procedures or instructions.
,
I That a sufficient number of adequately qualified QA and QC inspection
'
-
l personnel were present at the work site, comnensurate with the work in progress.
i
]
That the weld area cleanliness was maintained and that pipe alignment
-
j and fit-up tolerances were within specified units, j
That weld filler material being used was in accordance with welding
-
specifications, that unused filler material was separated from other
types of material and was stored in heated cans, and stubs properly e
j removed from the work location.
I I
I I
-
- -
..
.
.
-.
.-
t
,
-
.
,
l
l That there were no evident signs of cracks, excessive heat input, l
-
,
.
sugaring, or excessive crown.
Specific detailed weld inspections were performed on the Unit 2 Containment Spray and Nuclear Service Cooling Water System piping.
,
No violations or deviations were identified.
20.
Preoperational Test Program Implementation / Verification - Unit 1 (70302) (71302)
The inspector reviewed, in part, the implementation of the preoperational test program.
Test program attributes inspected included review of administrative requirements, document control, documentation of major test events and deviations to procedures, operating practices, instrun.entation calibrations, and correction of problems revealed by testing.
Periodic facility tours were made to assess equipment and plant conditions,
.,
maintenance and preoperational activities in progress.
Schedules for program completion and progress reports were routinely monitored.
Discussions with responsible personnel, as they were available, to determine their knowledge of preoperational program.
Specific observations made
'
included portions of:
a.
Construction Acceptance Testing (CAT)
Cat No.
Equipment
!
85-3243 Diesel Generator (DG) HVAC i
85-4520 Reactor Coolant Pump Motor #2 j
l b.
Flushing Program
t System
<
Component Cooling Water Auxiliary Component Cooling Water
.
Residual Heat Removal Hot Leg Injection i
Chemical & Volume Control System Particular observation was made of safety related pump running to support flushing, c.
Diesel Generator Vendor / Initial Startups System Activity Diesel Generator A SOI-2403-KJ-B Initial Diesel Startup 501-2403-KJ-C Phase Sequence Verification l
=-.
na.;
,a
. -.
.-
., -
n--
.
-
.
During the initial diesel startup, the inspector was present when the
!
engine driven water-jacket cooling water pump failed.
The failure resulted when the impeller screwed off a threaded bushing.
The threaded bushing had apparently been manufactured with threading in the wrong direction with respect to shaft rotation.
The inspector was informed that the impeller was supposed to be of single piece construction. The licensee identified one of the spare impellers to be
,
l of similar construction.
The vendor has issued the NRC a report, l
pursuant to 10 CFR Part 21, stating that three impellers exist of this
!
construction and were issued to the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant.
.
To date the licensee has identified two impellers onsite (one on the
!
pump which failed and the other on a spare impeller in storage) pending review of licensee action to determine the status of the diesel engine mounted water-jacket pump impellers of the incorrect construction this matter is identified as an Inspector Followup Item (IFI).
IFI 50-424/85-63-01 " Review Licensee Action to determine the status of l
the die el engine mounted water-jacket pump impellers".
.
No violations or deviations were identified.
21.
Reactor Coolant System Hydrostatic Test - Unit 1 (70362)
.
This inspe: tion consisted of a review of the applicable procedures listed below to ascertain the overall scope, technical adequacy, and that the test is consistent with regulatory requirements, guidance and licensee commit-ments.
Discussions were held with the principal test supervisors.
Procedures reviewed included the applicable portions of:
!
Procedure Title l
1-300-03, Rev 0 RCS Primary Hydrostatic Test
'
1-1201-010, 4 Nov 85 PPP Hydro Package 13001-1, Rev 0 RCS Fitting and Venting 13003-1, Rev 0 Reactor Coolant Pump Operation Requirements, guidance and commitments as applicable were:
i Document Title FSAR Table 6.2.4.1 Containment Penetration / Isolation Valves FSAR Table 14.2.8.1.9 RCS Hydrostatic Preoperational Test Regulatory Guide 1.68, Rev 2 Initial Test Programs for Water-Cooled Plants 10 CFR 50.2 (V)
RCS Pressure Boundary Draft Tech Spec 3/4.4.9 RCS Pressure / Temperature Limits ASME,Section III, Div 1. NB ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
-
-
- -
-- -
_
_ __
___
_
_
_.. _ _
_ _ - -
.
__ _
_
-_
._
.
..
,
.
+
'
,
'
t t
The review concluded that:
!
The test boundary was adequate
-
The reactor coolant system will be adequately vented during filling
-
Appropriate water quality chemistry requirements were specified
-
Adequate temperature ranges and heatup rates and pressurization
-
rates were specified Minimum and maximum test pressures were properly calculated
-
The hydrostatic test pressure will be maintained for a minimum
-
of ten minutes
j Examinations for leakage will be conducted at design pressure
-
with an appropriate range i
j Final revisions to the above procedures will be revi:wed prior to the test j
performance.
The inspection also included a control room board walkdown of l
the instrumentation which will be utill:ed during the execution of the j
procedures.
)
]
No violations or deviations were identified.
!
22.
Plant Procedures - Unit 1 and 2 (424008)
i
This inspection consists of a procedural review to verify that administra-
tive controls are established and implemented to control safety related
I operations.
Procedures are selected at random and reviewed for technical i
j adecuacy and incorporation of requirements as appropriate for the proper
,
i operation of a nuclear facility in the startup and operational phase. The
!
l following requirements, guidance and licensee commitment were utilized as
i appropriate:
l 10 CFR 50.59 Change, Tests, and Experiments j
20 CFR 50 Appendix B Instructions, Procedures and Drawings Criteria V
,
,
(
i ANSI N18.7-1976 Administrative controls and Quality l
l Assurance for the Operational Phase i
Regulatory Guide 1.33 Quality Assurance Requirements for the l
Rev 2, 1978 Operational Phase of Nuclear Power Plants FSAR Section 13 Conduct of Operations
'
!
NUREG 0737, et al TMI Task Action Plan
!
j Procedures reviewed were:
!
a.
Administrative
Number Rev Title
J 00051-C
Procedures, Review, and Approval 00050-C
Procedure Development
.
00052-C
Temporary Changes to Procedures
!
1 i
I
-. _ _. -
,.
._- _
.-
-
- -. -.
.
b.
Startup Number Rev Title i
SUM 128
Flush Procedure Implementation SUM 16
Cleanness Verification and Guidelines SUM 23
Predispositioned Deficiency Reports SUM 37
Initial Test Program Conduct of Shift Operations CAT E20
Red 11nes/ Functional Testing c.
Operations Number Rev Title 10001-C
Log Keeping l
11011-1
RHR Alignment for Startup and Normal 11261-C
Radwaste Volume Reduction System Log 11405-1 0&1 125V DC IE Electrical Dist Sys Normal Alignment 14S08-1
CCp and Check Valve Inservice Test d.
Maintenance Number Rev Title
20004-C
Control of In process Materials 20011-C
Electrical Maintenance Personnel Training and Qualifications 2407/-C
Meteorological Station 10M
Back-up Wind Speed Channel Calibration 25006-C
RHR Motor Disassembly Inspection
& Reassembly 25713-C
Crimping Cable Terminal and Splicing 27082-C
Ingersoll-Rand WDF Pump Maintenance 27564-C
Wylie 100 Snubber Test Machine 28310-C
Functional Testing of Mechanical Snubbers 28830-C
Control Building Class 1E Batteries Quarterly Verification No violations or deviations were identified.
A