IR 05000458/1980009
| ML19339A012 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 09/24/1980 |
| From: | Beach A, Crossman W, Gilbert L, Randy Hall NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19339A011 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-458-80-09, 50-458-80-9, NUDOCS 8010310536 | |
| Download: ML19339A012 (4) | |
Text
t)
.
,
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region IV Report No. 50-458/80-09 Docket No. 50-458 Category A2 Licensee:
Gulf States Utilities Post Office Box 2951 Beaumont, Texas 77704 Facility Name:
River Bend, Unit No. 1 Inspection at:
River Bend Site Inspection conducted:
September 9-12, 1980
!
Inspector:
e d
7/29/ 8
'[L. D. Gilbert, Reactor Inspector, E.1gineerhg " Support s
D&te '
Section Reviewed:
LJj JA C rl)
9/23/fO A. B. Be'ac1, Reactor Inspector, Projects Section Date Approved:
eMn
-
8d W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section Date
/
? 'f R. E. Hal1, Chief, Engineering Support Section 04te<
Inspection Summary:
Inspection on September 9-12, 1980 (Report No. 50-458/80-09)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of construction activities including observation of work and review of records for welding of safety-related pipe; and review of records for welding af reactor containment vessel.
The inspection involved twenty-eight inspector-hours oy one NRC inspector.
Resul ts:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
solos 1053fo
-
.
f DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Orincipal Licensee Emoloyees
- T. C. Crouse, QA Director
'
- R. R. Doggart, QA Engineer
- W. J. Cahill, Senior Vice President
- J. W. Leavines, Assistant Project Engineer
- W. S. Stuart, QA Engineer
- R. B. Stafford, QA Supervisor
- G. L. Mochel, Construction
- J. R. Dunkelberg, Assistant Superintendent Stone and Webster Emoloyees
- C. D. Lundin, Project QA Manager
- J. Borden, QA Engineer
- R. L. Spence, Superintendent of FQC
- A. J. Losso, Superintendent of Engineering
- W. R. Whitley, Assistant Superintendent of FQC
- F. J. Trainor, Superintendent Construction
- S. W. Crowe, Q* ingineer
- C. A. Lepisto,..ssistant Superintendent Construction W. Hathoway, Senior Welding Supervisor R. Mayhew, ASME Quality Control Program Supervisor
Graver Employees
- D. T. Wente, QA Engineer L. Sutton, Site Senior QA Engineer The IE inspector also interviewed other licensee and contractor employees during the course of the inspection.
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Reactor Containment Vessel Weldina The IE inspector reviewed the Graver Welding Procedure Specification for electroslag welding of carbon steel (P No. 1 Group 2), WPS 307N, Revision 4 and the supporting Procedure Qualification Report, PQR E-117 with no discrepancies noted from the requirements of the Stone & Webster Containment Specification 219.710, Revision 2 and Addenda 2, including ASME B&PV Code, Sections III (NE) and IX, 1974 edition.
The IE inspector reviewed the welder and welding operator performance qualification maintenance program for Graver welding personnel and deter-mined that it did not conform to the requirements of ASME Section IX as clarified in the ASME Code Committee Interpretation No. IX-79-68 iss';?d-2-
_ _ _ _ _.
.
on July 30, 1979, in that, cerformance qualification for welders and welding operators were not being maintained separately.
Two of the submerged arc welding (SAW) process welding operators, listed on the Qualified Welders List issued on September 6,1980, had their ner-formance qualification maintained based on usage of the shielded metal arc welding ($ MAW) process as a welder and not a welding process which required the use of a welding operator.
The two welders were immediately removed from the Oualified Welders List for the SAW process.
A review of the weld material issue records for these welding operators confirmed that they had not used the SAW process during the time period in which they should have been listed as unqualified; therefore, Graver had not committed a violation by using unqualified welding operators.
Since the Code interpretation is relatively new, this item shall be considered unresolved pending revision of the procedural requirements for maintaining the performance qualification of welders and welding operators consistent witP Code Interpretation IX-79-68.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
3.
Safety-Related Pioing a.
deview of Procedures The IE inspector reviewed the Stone & Webster Company Quality Assurance and Control Manual for ASME Section III, Division 1 arr lications with a date of June 25, 1980.
In the areas reviewed, the manual was con-sistent with the eighteen criteria of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50.
A Stone & Webster Welding Technique Sheet, WilC, Revision 0 was selected and reviewed for compliance with ASME Section IX requirement for a supporting procedure qualification report with no discrepancies noted, b.
Observation of Welding Activities The IE inspector observed welding activities associated with attaching two Weldolets to the Class 3 Service Water pipe identified us field weld FW-001 on Control Drawing 1-SWP-27-B1 for Line 1-SWP-30-27-3 and field weld FW-010 on Control Drawing 1-SWP-26-A2 for Line 1-SWP-30-26-3.
Field weld FW-001 was observed being welded using the shielded metal arc welding process with electrode type E7018 of Heat No. 39610 00658122143 in accordance with Welding Technique Sheet WllC, Revision 0.
Field weld FW-010 was observed being root welded using the gas tungsten arc welding process with weld rod type E705-2 of Heat No. 065393 in accordance with Welding Technique Sheet W11C, Revision 0.
The storage and issuance of welding material was inspected for compliance to the Welding Material Control Procedure CMP 6.4, Revision 0 with no discrepancies noted.
-3-k
....
The IE inspector observed the qualification testing of two Stone &
Webster welders and revieued documentation for performance testing of the two welders working on field welds FW-001 and FW-010 identified above.
In the areas inspected, no discrepancies of the Construction Methods Procedure CMP 6.9, Revision 0 for performance qualification of welders were observed.
It was noted, however, that the requirements specified in CMP 6.9 paragraph 5.2.59 for retesting after failing a performance qualification test are more liberal than ASME Section IX, paragrah QW-321; in that, after failing a test, waiting 30 days and taking a new test instead of a retest does not appear to satisfy the conditions of Section IX for retesting.
Since the Code interpretation is not clear, this item shall be considered unresolved pending a revision to the procedure which will assure that the Code requirements for retesting are met.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncoc.gitancc, or deviations.
Two unresolved items related to performance qualification of welding personnel are discussed in paragraphs 2 and 3.
5.
Exit Interview The IE inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) on September 12, 1980, and summarized the purpose, scope and findings of the in'section.
-4-
-
-
- _.
. _ _. -.
.