IR 05000445/1985018
Text
_ _____
'
{y % Nk IS
'
MAY 2 21986 MEMORANDUM FOR:
S. H. Phillips, Senior Resident Inspector - Construction, Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station FROM:
T. F. Westerman, Chief, Reactor Safety Branch. ORSP SUBJECT:
CHANGE TO NRC INSPECTION REPORT 50-445/85-18; 50-446/85-15
.
A change was made to page 8 of Appendix C to NRC Inspection Report 50-445/85-18; 50-446/85-15, prior to issuance, to make it technically correct.
A copy of the original page and the corrected page are attached.
l Odgital SWk T. F. Westerman T. F. Westerman, Chief Reactor Safety Branch Attachment cc:
E. Johnson I. Barnes RIV File RIV:RSB T esterman hl/86 kf0fX0500o445 6 070019 DR
PDR,
.
- ='*$**-~6=
~
m
,_..#..
,_,,..
,
.
,
., -.
o
'< l
,
,
)
c
.. j i
-.
,
!
-
.
s
,
.
-8-
]
'
'
i that the containment ventila$ior; system (which contains eight f
subsystems /compor3enti) is seismic C:stegory 11 and* poesafetT-rch4ed, j
with tha exception cf the containment parge exhiust dntwork, support, I
debris screen, ud isolation nives, w!".ch are seismic' Category I.
i Only thq inlation valver. which"ars safety and code class 1, e.re safety-relat,ed and seismic Category 1.
.
.
l
$
.
1ha Gibbs & Hill Inc. specification for HVnc systems is 2323-76-85,
'levision 3.
Selected portions of this specification were reviewed to select the the hardware to be inspected.
Isolation dampes'.or valves
'
and hydrogen purge systems were selected for inspecti m i
'
'
The NRC inspector used Drawings 2323-W 2-0301, Work ob,rrvad:
b.
RevisioiTFT, and 2323-M2-0502, Revision 1, to irerify the equipment as-installed; 1.e., identification, location, ard' configuration of the hydrogen supply / exhaust, and containment supply / purge / relief systems.
'
The following were inspected:
,
f CONTAINMENT SERIAL RECEIVING INSPECTION PENETRATION VALVE NWBER REPORT (RIR)
M III 18 2HV 5543 14759-1B 12191 2HV 5563 14759-18 12191
.
2HV 5542 14759-1F 12191 2VA 001 AF 074 9579
,
M III 19 2HV 5541 14759-1A 12191 I
14759-1B 12191 '
2HV 5562'
i 2HV 5540 14759-1C 12191 2VA 002 AF 003 9579 MV2 2HV 5539.
-14759-3C 12191 2HV 5538 14759-30 12191 M V 14 2HV 5549 14759-2A 12191 2HV 5548 I4759-28
,12191 2VA 005-AD 213 06565
.
.
MV1 2HV 5537 14759 3A 12191 2HV 5536 14759-X 12191'
2VA 003 AD 219'
08509 C
RecordsRev'idirTheNRCinspectorreviewedRIRpackages:
12191, 13710,
.
13186, iscTT!IS7.
. These packages contained a receiving checklist, l
c.
drawir,gs, QA cracklist, and a documentation ytekage which,fecluded:
'
,;
l drawings, order specificatie sheet, meterial tracesility list, t<4, d
!
mill test report-(NTR),afisc NTR,\\stra NTR, disc pin NTR, gasket retair,er NTR, g4sket retainer, bolts certification (Cert), filler acto j test r6 port,(TQ,' manufacturer'rmterial TR, certificate of complianceji liquid penetrant:TP;. sid repair' retet, bo% radiogrer$ TR,. well.
.
,
$
)
,
,
,
j
?(
..m.,r,--7.,.-
,,_
,
- - -
-
.
'
,
.
-8-that the containment ventilation system (which contains eight
'
subsystems / components) is seismic Category II and non-nuclear-safety with the exception of the containment purge exhaust ductwork, support, debris screen, and isolation valves, which are seismic Category I.
Only the isolation valves, which are safety and code class 2, are safety-related and seismic Category I.
The Gibbs & 11111 Inc. specification for HVAC systems is 2323-MS-85 Revision 3.
Selected portions of this specification were reviewed to select the the hardware to be inspected.
Isolation dampers or valves i and hydrogen purge systems were selected for inspection, Work observed: The NRC inspector used Drawings 2323-M-2-0301, b.
Revision CP-4, and 2323-M2-0502, Revision 1, to verify the equipment as-installed; i.e., identification, location, and configuration of the hydrogen supply / exhaust, and containment supply / purge / relief systems.
The following were inspected:
CONTAINMENT SERIAL RECEIVING INSPECTION PENETRATION VALVE NUMBER REPORT (RIR)
M III 18 2HV 5543 14759-1B 12191 2HV 5563 14759-18 12191 2HV 5542 14759-1F 12191 2VA 001 AF 074 9579 M III 19 2HV 5541 14759-1A 12191 2HV 5562 14759-18 12191 2HV 5540 14759-1C 12191 2VA 002 AF 003 9579 MV2 2HY 5539 14759-3C 12191 2HV 5538 14759-30 12191 M V 14 2HV 5549 14759-2A 12191 2HV 5548 14759-2B 12191
.
2VA 005 AD 213 08565 MV1 2HV 5537 14759-3A 12191 2HY 5536 14759-3B 12191 l
2VA 003 AD 219 08509 l
c.
Records Review: The NRC inspector reviewed R1R packages: 12191, 13110..
13186, and 13187.
These packages contained a receiving checklist, i
drawings, QA checklist, and a documentation package which included:
drawings, order specification sheet, material traceability list, body l
j mill. test report (MTR), disc MTR, stan NTR, disc pin MTR, gasket retainer MTR, gasket retainer bolts certification (Cert),' filler metal
<
test report (TR), manufacturer's material TR, certificate of cumpliance, Hquid penetrant TR, weld repair report, body radiography TR, wall l
f
!
.
\\
'
l-
- - -.:.-
r,..,
_
_
,
D I
'
- *%e UNITED STATES
'
!'I
,
%
4., CLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.
o Ta '
j
REGION IV
=
k, -
811 AYAN PLAZA DRIVE, SUITE 1000
,
ARUNGTON, TEXAS 70011 j
,,,,,
l May 12, 1986
<
MATRIX OF DRAFTS FOR REPORT 85-16/13 H.
S.
PHILLIPS Documents:
,
'
la L lb Handwritten draft for Linit 2 construction inspection.
(Submi tted 3rd week Dec. 1985)
2a L 2b First revisions per. comments on Ia.
First draft of report.
First draft reviewed by management and management writes in conclusion and directed changes on pages 7,8,12 and 13, Para. 6 was revised because status changed.
Sa & Sb Second draft and Final draft.
Final incorporates minor revisions.
6a Final report is a composite of construction, operations, and RIV technical review team followup.
Exit Inspector informed TUGCO of violations on December 4, 1985.
KEY
- Ori gi nal Submission
- Difference
- Mgt directed change implemented i
SUPJECT/ PARAGRAPH DOCUMENTS COMMENTS (Inspector)
la Ib 2abb 3
Sa
,
Report Cover Pace
Violations dropped.
Action on 10CFR50.55(e)
,
!
Def i ci enci es Identified by the Acolicant/ Para 3.0 m.
TUGCO failed to
NA
Violation dropped.
devel op /i mpl ement a
procedure to show or reference objective evidence that defi-ciencies were corrected.
Vi ol ati on of Criterion V " Procedures. Instruc-t2cns and Drawings" of 10 CFR Part 50,
,
l Appendix B.
(Phillips,McCleskey finding; Phillips wrote the violation).
l
l l
f
^
!
l
_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
- _ _ -
__
- - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - -
_ _ _ _
._
_
.__- -- - _ _.
5/12/86 SUBJECT / PARAGRAPH DOClfMENTS i
COMMENTS Pg 2 (Inspector)
la 2 a ?.< b C
Sa b.
TUGCO failed to re-
NA
Violation dropped.
vise implementing-
- *
procedures before corporate NED Pro-cedure CS-1 was implemented, result-ing in conflict with five other proce-dures.
Violation of Criterion VI " Document Control".- (Phillips finding and wrote the violation.)
c.
TUGCO failed to main-
Violation dropped.
tain 50.55(e) files
(OA records) that were retrievable; i.e, could not pro-
duce record in almost
!
a month.
Violation of Criterion XVII "OA
.
Records". (McCleskey I
/
finding) Phillips wrote
,
the violation. )
f d.
TUGCO failed to re-
Violation dropped.
I port to the NRCathe
- *
I corrective action actually taken and changes to commitment regarding corrective action reported to l
NRC. Violation I
(McCl es k ey, Phillips
finding; Phillips wrote the violation. )
l e.
TUGCO failed to have
Mgt changed finding l
a procedure. This
.to a positive state-violation of Criterion ment about TUGCO V was changed to an action. TUGCO unresolved statement never. discussed in 1.a.
(revision 4 this commitment para. 3.) (Phillips)
with inspector's before this change was made to report.
Insert #1.
.
.s+-t=,***rav W W we9, te -NMWfee c.**f P e *r*pt# * e, N18 9 1-g* ~9 % t*
- } ]*
- '*A "9 M4 &1 M' 7 *7 W*{'M * # '"
?:'_'t'r"'
7*"'
'*Mi'
,Y "" 4 "]' " (
% 7%[
!
5/12/86
.
SUBJECT / PARAGRAPH DOCUMENTS COMMENTS
.Pg 0
'l
,
(2nspector)
la 2abb
4 5a
f.
TUGCO files were not
Mgt. dropped para, auditable with respect
and substituted to. corrective action.
para. where TUGCO Violation of 1G CFR admitted violation Part 50.55(e) and many but was taking
,
TUGCO letters which action. Insert #1.
j stated records avail-I able. Changed from violation to strong paragraph.
(McCleskey)
Aeolicant Acti on on l
IE Bulletins Para. 4 a.
TUGCO never responded
Statement dropped.
to all aspects of
Unresolved item IED 79-14. Unresolved dropped per item pending further direction.
revi ew. (McCl eskey, Phillips)
6.
TUGCO IEB files for
Statement dropped.
/
1982 and 1985 did
Unresolved item not contain suf fi-dropped per cient records or ref-
. direction.
erence to records which show IEB action /
corrective action compl?te. Unresolved item. !'hillips, McCloskey)
c. TUGCO had replaced
Violation dropped NAMCO switches per
to unresolved.
IEB 79-28 but 2 of 14 that were field inspected were not properly identified on installation traveler. Violation of Criterion VIII
{
" Identification /
control of Materials,
'
Parts,and Components" (McCleskey,.Phillips finding.
Phillips wrote the violation. )
.
i
,
)
i l
..
.
,q
_, _. _,, -, _ _, _,.
,. _.,.,. -
._,y..
.,,.;,..
my..~,.-..
,._...,p-
_
... _ _.. _ -.,,....
l l
'.
5/12/86 j
.
SUBJECT / PARAGRAPH DOCUMENTS
)
COMMENTS Pg 4
'
(Inspector)
la 2a t<b
!-
Sa d.
TUGCO procedures for
Mgt. dropped and handling IEB are wrote insert #2 are deficient in that in Document #4
)
i they do not describe how construction manage-ment / personnel hanole IEB requiring action, especially hardware
,
'
}
repair, replacement
'
and modification.
Prior to writeup, I stated to management that this is a viola-tion but mot. disagreed and I wrote it as unresolved.(McCleskey, Phillips finding)
e. No TUGCO construction
Mgt. dropped and focal point was found wrote insert #2 i
for tracking such IEB
.in Doc.#4.
actions.
Prior to writeup I stated to management that this l
/
is a violation but mot.
!
disagreed and I wrote it as unresolved.
(McCleskey,Phillips)
Action on Previ ous
.
l Inscettien Findino Para 2 Failure to properly re-
- **
The dropping of
.
view design change i.e.
this violation was DCA 18728, not reviewed coordinated with for impact before sign-T. Young by ing DCA 29894.
Viola-Messers McCleskey tion dropped.(McCleskey, and Phillips as Phillips)
additional infor-i
mation was foundito I
show compliance.
Mr. Young agreed.
Electrical Penetration
.
Seals Whole paragraph changed
Viol ation dropped.
.
after management di-Request for office l
,
l rected additional in-investigation to j
spection in late Dec.
review also l
1985 and after BISCO dropped.
i Memo to IE reviewed by RIV Mgt.(T. Young)
!
.
l
i
,
.p.,-
,
. -..,,, _,....,,...
.,
..
._.m~,-.,..
_4.v._.
_.;~.
,,,
,,.....
4,
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _