IR 05000456/1980003
| ML19323J104 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 05/06/1980 |
| From: | Hayes D, Naidu K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19323J099 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-456-80-03, 50-456-80-3, 50-457-80-03, 50-457-80-3, NUDOCS 8006170776 | |
| Download: ML19323J104 (6) | |
Text
>
,,O I
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-456/80-03; 50-457/80-03
- Docket No. 50-456; 50-457 License No. CPPR-132; CPPR-133
,
Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Coinpany P. O. Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Name: Braidwood Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Braidwood Site, Braidwood, IL Inspection Conducte : April 16-17, 1980 f;al c
Inspector:
K. R. Naidu 5~' 0 ' EO Q.&
6/6[M Approved By:
. W. Hayes f
'
Engineering Support Section 1
'
'
,
Inspection Sununary Inspection on April 16-17, 1980 (Report Nos. 50-456/80-03; 50-457/80-03)
Areas Inspected: Status of previously identified inspection findings; observation of installed safety related electrical equipment; review of records. The inspection involved a total of 12 inspection-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance were identified in the areas inspected.
8 006170YN g
-
- - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
O'
DETAILS Persons Contacted Commonwealth Edison Company
- R. Cosaro, Project Superintendent
-
R. Farr, Quality Assurance Engineer
- M. Gorski, Quality Assurance Engineer
- C. Mennecke, Electrical Supervisor
- J. Mervin, Mechanical Supervisor
- T. Sommerfield, Quality Assurance Supervisor L.K. Commstock & Company (LKC)
R. Brown, Quality Assurance / Quality Control Supervisor L. Facchine, Project Manager R. Yanketis, Quality Control Welding Inspector
- Denotes those present at the exit interview. The inspector also contact-ed other contractor and licensee personnel during the course of the inspec-tion.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (IE Report No. 456/79-02-01). It was previously identified that certain discrepancies existed in the material certifica-tions. The inspector reviewed the quality records relative to the stiffener on boxbeam B113BB1 and determined that the correct heat number for the 12" x 1/8" x 2'-1-3/8" stiffener is Y35895; the drawing specifies the material to be ASTM A570-72-D. Material certificate from U.S. Steel Corporation (USS), Gary works, indicates the stiffener material conforms to AST-A-570-72
,
Grade D.
For material with heat number 70E607, the USS Material Certificate stated that the material conformed to "EX-10".
l (0 pen) Unresolved Item (IE Report Nos. 456/79-05-01; 457/79-05-01).
It had been identified that the QA implementing procedures for the new electri-cal contractor had not been completed and approved. The CECO site project superintendent, with the concurrence of the electrical contractor's site manager, committed to have all the QA implementing procedures complete and approved in approximately sixty days.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (IE Report Nos. 456/79-02-02; 457/79-02-02).
It was previously reported that NCR 335 was generated to document that the anchor bolts were set too deep in the cement for the heat exchanger ICVO 3AB-1B and therefore did not meet the S&L drawing M1226 Sheet 20/3 in that the anchor bolt projection was 3-1/4" instead of 3-3/4".
CECO obtained clarification from Sargent&Lundy that the nonconformance was acceptable-2-
.
- -
.
p provided the nuts have full thread engagement. A note on the NCR indicates that the nuts have full thread engagement.
t
.
Phillips Getschow Company developed procedure PGCP-8 dated June 16, 1979 titled " Equipment Erection Record" with a checklist to denote the status of erection of a given equipment.
, Functional or Program Areas Inspected 1.
Review of Electrical Cable Tray Hanger Specifications The inspector reviewed the S&L Specification F/C 2815 for electrical cable pans and hangers and determined the following:
i Standard STD-EB-115 seismic Category 1 electrical hangers specifies a.
the following:
(1) The use of P1000, P1001 manufactured by Unistrut or equivalent for cable tray hangers (2) Nuts and bolts conforming to ASTM A-307 with electrogalvanized i
finish (3) All hardware to erect hangers be supplied by the electrical installation contractor. The licensee clarified this statement - the electrical contractor specifies his require-ments and CECO procures the material for them.
(4) -Welder qualifications, weld procedure specifications, and materials to be in accordance with the latest edition of the American Welding Society Code D1.1.
(5) Welds to receive a coating of zine rich paint.
The inspector observed that back to back spot welded "U" shaped Unistruts were being used for hanger applications. Some manufacturers have supplied this configuration with the spot welded areas touched with zine paint; others have not and exhibit rusting. The rust
.
exhibiting back to back spot welded Unistruts have been installed inside the containment. At the NRC inspector's request, the licensee contacted S&L representatives to inquire why dressing of spot welds with zinc paint was not specified even though dressing up of stick welds was expressly specified. Also, whether these rusted spots would contribute to the weakening of the hangers inside the contain-ment over the estimated 40 year life of the plant. The licensee is awaiting S&L's response which will address the following:
(1) Whether the rust on back to back Unistrut welds (for which zine painting is not expressly specified) will deteriorate-3-
., _
. - -.-.
,
_
__ _ _. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
I over the period of 40 years and contribute to weakening the hangers, particularly in the containment.
(2) Whether carbon steel ASTM A-36 plates used in the assembly of hangers should receive protective coating of paint.
This is an unresolved matter.
(50-456/80-03-01,50-457/80-03-01).
'
b.
Review of STD-EB-70 for Cable Tray fabrication indicates the following:
(1) AWS D1 1 or ASME Code Section IX have been specified for welding to be performed.
(2) The material for cable tray sections is specified.
(3) All parts not fabricated from pre galvanized steel, such as splice plate collars, sleeves, enclosures, etc. are to be hot dip galvanized after fabrication with zine coating.
-(4) Bolts and nuts to splice plate are to be ASTM-A-307 with cadmium plated finish.
c.
Review of STD-EB-702 for Cable Tray field installation specifies 30-35 foot lbs torque for 3/8" diameter bolts. However, note 16 on S&L drawing on un 3251 titled Cable Pan General Notes and Installation Y jecifies 20-35 foot lbs torque. Review of the third pat
,pn on page 2-1 of S&L Specification L-2790 l
dated November 12, 1976 indicates that the instructions on drawings supercede S&L standards without specifically revising
the engineering standards. Paragraph 3.3 of the LKC procedure 4.3.5, titled " Safety Related Pan Installation" reflects the
requirement'specified on note 16 of drawing 20-E0-3251.
No items of noncompliance were identified in the above area.
{
2.
Observation of Installed Equipment The inspector observed various sections of the main control board in the main control room at elevation 451'.
The physical location of the various sections of the panels for Units 1 and 2 are indicated on drawing 20E-0-3372B. The mounting details furnished on drawing 20-E-3391C indicate that the panels are attached to the embeds with intermittent 1/4" fillet welds, 3" long and 12" center to center.
None of these panels has-been installed. One of the Westinghouse nuclear instrumentation panels identified as IPM07J has been installed.
The inspector determined that the panel was attached to the embed with 1/8" size fillet welds 1-1/2" long spaced-12" center to center
!
-4-
,
,
.
-
-
.
,. _ - -
-.
- -.
.
t and that the installation meets detail 75 of S&L drawing 20-E-3391C.
The work was performed prior to the plant shut down; inspections have not been performed.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Records The inspector selectively reviewed quality assurance records relative to the cable trays and associated hardware and determined the following:
a.
Material Receiving Report (MRR) No. 5507 dated November 30, 1979 identifies that Shipment No. 158 consisting of safety related cable pans relative to Specification 2815 were received with no shipping damage. The applicable portions of the checklist were verified. The quantity of the cable pans is identified on separate packing lists. A certificate of conformance by the manufacturer dated November 7, 1979 indicates that material in Shipment 158 conforms to S&L Specification F/L 2815 and that sub-vendor's certified material test reports were on file at S&L.
b.
Certification from Chicago Hardware and Fixture Company, Franklin Park, Illinois, dated August 23, 1978 certified that 3000 pieces of 1/2"-13 zinc plated coupling nuts conformed to the specification. The inspector inquired and received clarifi-cation that these zine plated coupling nuts were intended.3r Category II threaded hangers. The specification requires cadmiam plcted nuts for Class IE applications.
TRW Nelson division product certification notorized on April 24, c.
1978 indicates that 3075 pieces of 5/8" diameter 2S6L cavaium plated bolts with heat number 658W560 met the ASTM A108 "3 specifications, Grade 1018. The NP.C inspector verified and determined that the tensile, physical, and chemical prop :rties met the requirements of ASTM 307
- .
d.
Review of NCR No. 209. This NCR, dated April 10, 1980, documents that the Upper Tie Plate (UTP) of the lower internals as indicated on W drawing 6120E24.for the Unit 1 Reactor Pressure Ver.sel (RPV) was damaged while being removed from storage stan.l.
It indicates that the load trollied toward the RPV without direction from signalman, resulting in the UTP engaged with the s'.orage stand seating flange bending it downwards. The NRC in pector inspected the damage. On April 16, 1980, the Westinghouse Resident Representative outlined that the proposed corr ective action was to remove the UTP and return it to Westinghouse for repairs. Meanwhile, they propose to substitute the Unit 2 UTP-5-
.
-
.
.-
. _.
__
.
.s
.
,
after verifying that it is identical and can be interchanged.
The proposed corrective action appears to be acceptable.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in
~ order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, it-ms of noncompliance or deviations. Unresolved items identified during this inspection are discussed in paragraph la.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in the Persons Contacted paragraph) at the conclusion of the inspection and outlined the scope of the inspection along with a summarization of the results.
!
6-
-
.
...
_
_
.