IR 05000454/1978011
| ML19259B627 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron, Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 01/23/1979 |
| From: | Barrett P, Hayes D, Konklin J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19259B625 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-454-78-11, 50-455-78-11, 50-456-78-14, 50-457-78-14, NUDOCS 7903130466 | |
| Download: ML19259B627 (8) | |
Text
.
.
t U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
,
.
.
Report No. 50-454/78-11; 50-455/78-11;
-
50-456/78-14; 50-457/78-14.
Docket No. 50-454; 50-455; License No. CPPR-130; CPPR-131 50-456; 50-457.
CPPR-132; CPPR-133 Licensee:
Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Names:
Byron Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 Braidwood Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2
.
Inspection At:
CECO Corporate Offices, Chicago, IL
,
Inspection Conducted:
December 14, 1978
-
/.f jhbl~
Inspectors:
J. E. Ko glin'
//Sh/27
'
f.h. M 23[N 9'.(g. Barrett
'{,) s-T cc/c%~
-
Approved By:
D.
Hayes, C id
/
.
Projects Section
//23/77
/
'
Inspection Summary Inspection on December 14, 1978 (Report No. 50-454/78-11; 50-455/78-11; 50-456/78-14; 50-457/78-14)
Areas Inspected; Licensee corrective actions relative to reportable deficiencies per 10 CFR 50.55 (e); licensee acticas relative to the handling and resolution of IE Bulletins; licensee corrective actions relative to reportable deficiencies per 10 CFR 21.
This inspection involved a total of 12 inspector-hours at the CECO Corporate Office by two NRC inspectors.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
.:
.
790313046G
.
.
c DETAILS Persons Contacted Princi_ pal Licensee Employees
.
- W. Shewski, Manager of Quality Assurance
- G.
F. Marcus, Director of Quality Assurance
- T.
E. Watts, SF.ED Project Engineer
- R. Todd, SNED QA Supervisor J. E. Rohde, SNED QC Supervisor J. T. Westermeir, SNED Project Engineer.
W. Segresell, SNED Project Engineer.
- Denotes those who attended the exit interview.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Open Item (50-454/78-03-02; 50-455/78-03-02).
Corrective action on Harnischfeger crancs.
The previous IE-RIII Report (50-454/
78-03; 50-455/78-03) designated an open item regarding the Harnischfeger and CECO Engineering evaluations of the modifications chich have been made to correct the Harnis:hfeger crane control circuit deficiencies.
Section 1.1 of this report discusses the Region III inspector's review of the corrective actions and evaluations relative to this itet, and concludes that adequate evaluations of the modifications have been made.
This item is considered to be resolved.
-:
-2-
.
.
Section I Prepared by J. E. Konklin Reviewed by D. W. Hayes, Chief
.
Projects Section
.
.
Corrective Action on Harnischf eger Cranes, Reported Per 10 CFR 50.55(e)
1.
The inspector reviewed the corrective actions taken by the licensee with regard to the control circuit deficiencies found on Harnischfeger The deficiencies were Cranes at the Byron and Braidwood sites.
found as the result of an occurrence on March 15, 1978, when the Byron broke and cable on one of Turbine Building overhead cranes at The CECO the main hook assembly fell to the mezzanine floor.
17, 1978, outlined the final report to Region III, dated April cause of the occurrence and the actions to be taken to correct the control circuit deficiencies.
(50-454/78-03; 50-455/78-03)
A previous Region III Inspection Report the deficiencies had been noted that the modifications to correct completed and designated an open item (454/78-03-02; 455/78-03-02)
pending completion of the Harnischfeger and CECO Engineering evaluations of the adquacy of the modifications.
the CECO Corporate Office, the Region III During this inspection at inspector discussed the modifications with the licensee and reviewed the following documents:
21, 1978, from CECO Engineering to A letter dated March S & L, which requested a review of the control schematics a.
and an evaluation of the cause of the deficiencies.
18, 1978, from S & L to CECO, which A letter dated April transmitted the results of the S & L review and the S & L b.
recommendation regarding the modifications which should be made.
The meeting notes for a meeting between CECO and Harnischfeger on August 2,1978, during which the modifications and c.
safety considerations were discussed.
25 and August ??,
The Harnischfeger letters of August 1978, which submitted drawings of the modifications and d.
discussed safety aspects of the fix.
A memo from the Operations Analysis Department of CECO to CECO Engineering, which recommended that the crane e.
.
-3-
'
-
.
.
control be reviewed with Harnischfeger to assure that there are no other safety deficiencies in the crane control design.
,
_
.
f.
A note by CECO Engineering, affixed to the above memo, and dated October 18, 1978, which verifies that the safety considerations have been reviewed with Harnischfeger and which states that the design fix made by Harnischfeger is within acceptable engineering parameters.
Based on the discussions with the licensee and review of the above documents, the inspector concluded that an adequate eval-uation of the control circuit modifications has been made by Harnischfeger and the licensee. The above 10 CFR 50.55 (e) item and the previous open item are considered to be resolved.
2.
Corrective Action on Steam Generator Support Frames. Reported Per 10 CFR 50.55(e)
The inspector reviewed the corrective actions take*n by the licensee with regard to the weld crack problems found on the Braidwood Unit I steam generator lower lateral support frames.
The CECO final report to Region III, dated April 27, 1978, discussed the completion of ti e repairs on the Braidwood Unit I support frames and the incorporation of a modified design on Braidwood Unit 2 and Byron Units 1 and 2 to prevent reoccurrence of the problems.
During this inspection at the CECO Corporate Office, the Region III inspector discussed the corrective actions with the licensee and reviewed the following documents:
a.
S & L Meeting Notes, dated August 19, 1977, which discussed the probable causes for the weld cracking, and which documented the agreed-upon procedure for repairing the defective field welds.
b.
A letter f rom CECO Er.gineering t$ S & L, dated December 1,1977, which directed that the remaining sup-port frames be provided with bolted joints to permit shop f abrication of all major welded joints.
c.
A letter from S & L to CECO, dated December 2, 1977, which transmitted the structural drawings of the bolted connection design for the support cross-ties.
d.
The S & L calculation. ark sheets, approved on Octo-ber 9, 1978, which cover the analysis of the bol~ted connection design, and which indicate that the design is adequate for the intended purpose.
-4-
..
.
Based on the discussions with licensee personnel and review of the above documents, the inspector concluded that adequate corrective actions have been implemented with regard to the 10 CFR 50.55(e) item noted above.
This item is considered to be resolved.
3.
Corrective Action on HVAC Ductwork Deficiencies, Reported Per 10 CFR 50.55(e)
The inspector reviewed the corrective actions taken by the licensee with regard to the HVAC ductwork forming and installation deficiencies identified at Byron.
The CECO final report to Region III, dated August 17, 1978, discussed the specific deficiencies and the corrective action which would be taken to correct the deficiencies.
During this inspection at the CECO Corporate Offices, the inspector discussed the corrective actions with the licensee, and reviewed the following applicable documents:
a.
A letter from S & L to CECO, dated June 23,1578, which pointed out three apparent nonconformances with regard to the HVAC ductwork.
b.
The CECO NCR's, which address the three areas of
- nonconformance:
(1) NCR F 241, closed out on July 25, 1978.
(2) NCR F 242, closed out on July ll, 1978.
(3) NCR F 240, closed out on July 11, 1978, contingent upon implementation of specific S & L recommendations.
c.
A letter from S & L to CECO, dated November 21, 1978, which discussed the results of a meeting on July 21, 1978, in which concurrence was reached between S & L and CECO regarding the corrective actions to be taken.
Based on the discussions with the licens. 2 and review of the above documents, the inspector notified the licensee that further inspection is required at the Byron Site to verify adequate imple-mentation of the changes documented in the above NCR's prior to Region III closcout of this item.
i-5-
-
.
.
t 4.
Other Inspection Items
.
The inspector discussed with the licensee the corrective actions taken or planned relative to the following items:
a.
A 10 CFR 50.55 (e) reportable deficiency regarding defective Ratheon RC 747D integrated circuits utilized at Byron and Braidwood. The CECO final report to Region III, dated January 19, 1978, identified the corrective actions to be taken by Westinghouse and CECO with regard to inspection, inventory review, and re-placement of the defective integrated circuits. At the time of this inspection the corrective actions had not yet been completed; therefore, this item will remain open for review during future inspections, b.
A report per 10 CFR 21 from Jamesbury Corporation to NRC Region I, dated October 16, 1978, regarding specific limitorque valve actuators at four p,lants, including Byron and Braidwood, which do not meet the applicable seismic loading requirements.
Discussion with the licensee and review of the CECO Engineering files, showed that Jamesbury Corporation had not reported this item to the licensee.
In this regard, the inspector reviewed Change Order No. 3, dated March 31, 1978, to CECO Purchase Order No. 803067 with Jamesbury Corporation.
Change Order No. 3 notified the contractor that the pro-visions of 10 CFR 21 apply to the purchase order. The CECO QA Manager stated that CECO will contact Jamesbury Corporation to reemphasize the requirement for reporting 10 CFR 21 items to the utility.
The inspector provided the licensee with a copy of the Jamesbury Corporation report of October 16, 1978.
This item remains open pending identification and completion of the required corrective actions by CECO.
-6-
..
.
sSection II Prepared by P. A. B&rrett
-
Reviewed by R. L. Spessard, Chief Engineering Support Section 1 Licensee Actions Concerning IE Bulletins The Region III inspector reviewed documentation which indicated the licensee's actions concerning the following bulletins. The appropriate CECO Station Nuclear Engineering Department Project Engineer was assigned the responsibility of carrying out the requirements of the e
bulletins:
1.
IE Bulletin No. 78-01 dated January 16, 1978 A letter (CAW-2408; CAW-1875), dated March 7, 1978, from Westinghouse Corporation to the Sargent & Lundy Project Director and a letter dated March 14, 1978, from the S 6 L Senior Electrical Project Engineer to the SNED Project Engineer indicated reviews which concluded that no General Electric type CR120A relays were used in equipment purchased as of March 14, 1976, at the Byron and Braidwood plants.
Additionally, if such a relay would be required after March 14, 1978, the supplier would be required to provide a certificate stating that the CR120A relays are provided with Valox 310-SED contact-arm retainers. The inspector has no further questions on this matter.
2.
IE Bulletin No. 73-04 dated February 2, 1978 During a telephone conversation on December 22, 1978, the Region III inspector discussed the CECO response to the bulletin with the SNED Project Engineer.
The respons. dated April 20, 1978 (amended July 19, 1978) identified the safety-related valves on which the subject limit switches were used.
The response did not address the measures to be taken to assure that the stem-mounted limit switches would provide valve position indication during postulated accident conditions. Also, the response dated April 4, 1978 identified two motor operated valves which utilized the subject limit switches. However, no indication was made as to whether or not these were the only two MOVs which are affected by the concerns ard requirements of the bulletin. The SNED Project Engineer stated that he would pursue these concerns. This matter remains open and will be reviewed during subsequent inspections.
.
-7-
..
.
.
3.
IE Bulletin No. 78-05 dated April 14, 1978 A letter dated May 30, 1978 from the SNED Project Engineer indicated that a SNED review of the equipment drawings revealed no instance where G. E. CR105X auxiliary contacts were-used in safety related functions.
The inspector has no furthe'r questions on this matter.
4.
IE Bulletin No. 78-06 dated May 31, 1978 A letter dated July 14, 1978 from the S & L Senior Electrical Project Engineer indicated that a review of equipment drawings revealcd no instance where the subject relays with a de coil had been specified to be used in safety related functions.
The inspector has no further questions on this matter.
Except as noted, the requirements of above bulletins appeared to have been fulfilled.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted u;ider Persons Certacted) at in.e conclusion of tie inspection of December 14, 1978.
The inspectors summarized the purryose and findings of the inspection.
The licensee acknowledged the finjings reported herein.
.
-8-