IR 05000445/1982005

IE Insp Rept 50-445/82-05 on 820419-23.No Noncompliance Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Onsite Design & Const Activities,Design Insp of Pipe Supports & Installation of safety-related Pipe Supports

ML20054E670
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	05/21/1982
From:	Brickley R, Hunnicutt D, Clay Johnson, Westerman J, Westerman T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20054E669	List: IR 05000445/1982005 ML20054E668
References
50-445-82-05, 50-445-82-5, IEB-79-14, NUDOCS 8206140053
Download: ML20054E670 (6)

Text

. .

APPENDIX U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION IV

Report: 50-445/82-05 Docket: 50-445 Category A2 Licensee: Texas Utilities Generating Company 2001 Bryan Tower Dallas, Texas 75201 Facility Name: Comanche Peak, Unit 1 Inspection At: Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Inspection Conducted: April 19-23, 1982 Inspectors:

R. H .

Q %/ /

Bate'

b ckfey, TeacAdb Systems Section (Par phs 1, 2, 6 & 7)

0.0ama,1. OL s.2.0- 82 C. E. Johnson,' Engineering Section Date (Paragraphs 3, 4, & 5)

' 7 [.

~

Approved: f /S/ h 2-

, T. Westerman, Chief, Reactor Project Section A, RPB#1 Date A N D. Hunnicutt, Chief, Engineering Section, RPB#2 Date '

Inspection Summary:

I

!

Inspection During April 19-23, 1982 (Report 50-445/82-05)

'

Areas Inspecated: Special, unannounced inspection of onsite design and construction activities, including site tour; design inspection of pipe supports; and installation of safety-related pipe support The inspection

,

involved 77 inspector-hours by two NRC inspectors.

!

!

Results: No violations or deviations were identified.

i

!

'

8206140053 820528 PDR ADOCK 05000445 G PDR

_ . ~ .

--

,

, .

DETAILS Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Emgloyees

• J. T. Merritt, TUSI, Manager, E&C

• R. G. Tolson, TUGCO,_ Site QA Supervisor R. Michels, TUGCO, QA Specialist Supervisor J. C. Finneran, TUS1, Project Pipe Support Engineer Other Personnel J. P. Patton, B&R, QC Mechanical Superintendent B. Snellgrove, B&R, Lead QC Mechanical Inspector D. M. Rencher, B&V, Supervisor, Technical Services Design Review Engineering S. Desai, ITT Grinnell, Group Lead Engineer

• Denotes those attending the exit intervie . Design Inspection - Pipe Supports Procedures and Instructions Applicable Engineering Procedures (EP's) and Instructions (EI's) were examined to verify that QA program commitments for controlling the design process had been translated into subordinate procedures and instructions. The following procedures and instructions were examined:

CP-EP-2.1, " General Program for Pipe Support Design, Fabrication, and Installation," Rev. O CP-EP-4.0, " Design Control General Requirements," Rev. O CP-Eo-4.4, " Technical Support Group Design Control," Rev. O CP-EP-4.5, "Gesign Verification," Rev. 1 CP-EI-4.0-1, " Design and Design Verification Control for Pipe Support Engineering," Rev. 2 CP-EI-4.0-13, " Control of Stress Analysis for Pipe Support Engineering," Rev. 4

.

.

CP-EI-4.5-1, " General Program for As-Built Piping Verification,"

Rev. 4 CP-EI-4.5-4, " Technical Services Engineering Instruction for Pipe Hanger Design Review," Rev. 3 CP-EI-4.6-8, " Field Design Change Control for Large Bore Pipe Supports," Rev. 2 No violations or deviations were identifie Implementation Onsite engineering activities, with respect to large bore pipe hangers / supports, consist of translating the vendor design drawing (ITT Grinnell/ Nuclear Power Services) into a B&R construction drawing, review and approval of subsequent changes (documented via component modification cards), and producing "as-b;?lt" drawing After a hanger / support has been installed and accepted by QC, the Technical Services Mechanical Drafting Department compiles a hanger / support document package-for review by the Technical Services Design Review Engineer (TSDRE). This pack;ge typically consists of the latest revision of the vendor drawing, change documents affecting

'

the design, and other related information; i.e., sketches, load changes, etc. The TSDRE, who is the applicable vendor engineer, reviews the changes and conducts any necessary reanalytis, The results of the review and reanalysis are documented in the Design Review File (DRF).

The DRF and corresponding hanger / support document package for those hanger / supports identified by an asterisk in paragraph 4.c were examined by the NRC inspecto The inspector's examination of the analysis performed as a result of changes to hanger / support SI-1-093-Oll-S4212 disclosed that an error had been made in the calculations of Mc (moment at point c), Vc (vertical stress at point c), and Va (vertical stress at a). TSDRE personnel performed another analysis which confirmed that the changes made to SI-1-093-011-542R were acceptable. Time did not permit a detailed l examination of the new analysis or examination of additicnal DRFs to determine whether this was an isolated case or generic in natur This item will be considered unresolved pending the results of additional inspection of this are No violations or deviations were identified.

1, I

'

. - . _ . . _ _ _

. .

4 Site Tour The NRC inspector walked through Units 1 and 2 Reactor Containment and Auxiliary Buildings, Safeguards Building, and Control Room. The NRC inspector observed in process construction activities, construction status, and housekeepin No violations or deviations were identifie . Installation of Safety-Related Pipe Supports Review of Work Procedures The NRC inspector reviewed Quality Control and construction work procedures pertaining to safety-related pipe supports. All procedures reviewed have been approved by authorized licensee personnel. Means have been established to ensure the technical adequacy of activities pertaining to safety-related pipe supports, and they appear to comply with NRC requirements and licensee commit-ments. Procedures reviewed are listed belo (1) QI-QP-11.13-1, Rev. 2, "As-built piping verification instructions" (2) QI-QAP-11.1-38, Rev. O " Fabrication, installation ins'pections of A6ME moment restraints Class 1, 2, and 3" (3) CP-EP-2.1, Rev. 0, " General program for pipe support design, fabrication and installation activities" (4) CP-EP-4.6, P.ev. 7, ' Field design change control procedure" (5) QI-QP-11.2-3, Rev. 6, " Torquing and spacing of concrete anchor j bolts" No violations or deviations were identified.

l l Observation of Work and Work Activities The NRC inspector selected approximately 19 completed pipe supports for visual inspectio Supports selected were of various kinds such as spring hangers, sway struts, component support structures

,

for dynamic pipe supports, and multiple pipe supports. -During l visual examination there was no apparent deformation or forced j bending evident, surface of welc's appeared to meet applicable code

'

requirements, and spring hangers were provided with indicators to show the approximate " Hot" or " Cold" position.

l l

L_ i

. .

The NRC inspector noted two discrepancies: (1) One support pin to pin dimension for a dynamic support was not correct as required by design drawing, brackets were not connected and one bracket was missing on a sway strut. Both supports were signed off by quality contro The NRC inspector visually inspected additional supports of the dynamic and sway strut type'to determine if this was generic throughout the plant. This discrepancy was determined to be an isolated case by the NRC inspector after the additional support inspection The as-built configurations were as the design drawings and component modification cards (CMC) specified, except for the discrepancies identified in the above paragrap Approval and subsequent incorporation into final as-built drawings were properly controlled and documente No violations or deviations were identifie Review of Records The NRC inspector reviewed the records of the pipe supports visually examined. All required documents were present. All design changes were incorporated into the traveler package and approved as required. Type and classification of pipe support systems comply with appropriate drawings and/or specifications. Location and as-built configuration were verified by QA/QC. The records confirmed that the specifications and installation procedures were met, and that the required scope of QA/QC inspections were me Weld identification / location correspond to respective weld data cards and drawing. New or additional welds were identified on the CM Welding material used corresponds to the material specifie Welders were qualified for the welding procedures use The examination records are complete and appear to meet NDE procedural requirements, including personnel qualification Rec-eds Reviewed: Dynamic Pipe Supports SI-1-088-010-C42K

• SI-1-031-045-Y32K SI-1-045-041-S42K SI-1-044-033-542K SI-1-031-042-Y32K AF-1-035-035-Y33K

• SI-1-038-009-S22K

.

. .

6 Fixed Pipe Supports

• SI-1-029-022-Y32R

• SI-1-029-023-Y32R

• SI-1-032-002-S32R

• SI-1-039-021-S22R

• SI-1-093-003-S32R

• SI-1-093-011-542R

• SI-1-093-013-S42R

• SI-1-300-005-S32R SI-1-093-004-S32R SI-1-093-002-S22R Spring Hangers SI-1-092-003-C41S SI-1-089-007-C415 No violations or deviations were identifie . IE Bulletin 79-14 Seismic Analysis For As-Built Safety-Related Piping Systems The NRC inspector reviewed the as-built program established by TUGC0 to meet the requirements of IE Bulletin 79-1 TUGCO's as-built group has a program in progress which documents as-built configurations in accordance with design drawings and current revisions. They document actual dimensions, locations, and distance between support They also record actual lengths of pipe run All this information is documented on the drawings and submitted to the architect / engineer for seismic analysis. This program appears to conform with the conditions of IE Bulletin 79-1 No violations or deviations were identifie . Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, violations, or deviations. The unresolved item disclosed during the inspection is discussed in paragraph 2.

, Exit Interview The NRC inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) and R. G. Taylor (NRC Resident Reactor Inspector) at the conclusion of the inspection on April 23, 198 The NRC inspectors summarized the purpose, scope, and findings of the inspectio ,