IR 05000483/1977003
| ML20032C734 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 04/04/1977 |
| From: | Elsasser T, Hayes D, Haynes D, Oberg C, Vandel T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17198A148 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-483-77-03, 50-483-77-3, NUDOCS 8111100795 | |
| Download: ML20032C734 (9) | |
Text
r
-
.
.
'
.-
.
,
.
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATol?Y COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
.
REGION III
Report of Construction Inspection IE Inspection Report No. 050-483/77-03 Licensee: Union Electric Company Post Office Box 149 St. Lsuis, MO 63166 Callaway, Unit 1 License No. CPIR-139 Calloway County, MO Category:
A Type of Licensee:
1100 MWe (W)
Type of Inspection:
Routine, Unannot.nced Dates of Inspection:
February 24-25, 1977
'
-
u Principal Inspector:
T. E. Vandel
-/ '7 7/
'
' (Da t e )"
k'$V
<t T.C.Elsasser,RI,,]
/ b / '7 //
Accompanying Inspectors:
'(Dar.e) ' /
6 C. R. Oberg, RIV
"/ '7Y
..
' (Date) /
Other Accompanying Personnel: None
.
/
{0.fC/0'
/ /
Reviewed By:
. W. Hayes, Chief
/ 7'/ 77
,
'
Projects Section
'/ (bate)
.
OOd[fhg
'
.
.
T
.
.
.-
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
i
.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Enforcement Action None.
-
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Items Not applicable.
Design Chances Not applicable.
Unusual Occurrences None.
'
Other Significant Findines A.
Current Findincs 1.
Acceotable Areas a.
Review of CA Program for Design and Procurement.
(Detail, Paragraph 2)
b.
Review of Audit Program.
(Detail, Paragraph 3)
c.
Review 'f Document Control System.
(Detail, Paragraph 4)
2.
Project Status The SNUPPS organization reported that power block engineering is approximately 45% complete, and that procurement orders have been placed for major components for all five units, Callaway Site - Construction on Unit 1 is approximately a.
3.5% complete.
Union Electric has reported a 1 year delay in completion of Unit 1 and a 4 year delay in completion of Unit 2.
.
l
.
.
I t
.._.
-
.
-
-
I
.
.
,
.
,
.
-
,
.
b.
Wolf Creek - A Limited Work Authorization has been granted for the Wolf Creek Unit; clearing and grading at the site has commenced.
c.
Sterling - ASL3 hearings are recessed.
Resolution of the type of cooling system authorized for the Seabrook Unit may impact the Sterling proceedings.
Depending on the outcome of the Seabrook issue, the Sterling record may have to be reopened on the matters of cooling system type and alternate site evaluation.
.
Due to the delay on completion of Callaway Unit 1, the SNUPPS organization has reported a delay in submittal of the FSAR from December 1978 to August 1979.
3.
Develoement of the Records Manacement system Trial implementation of the computerized records management system is still in progress.
(Detail, Paragraph 5)
4.
Insoection of the Project Model The inspectors reviewed the status of the scale model of the SNUPPS power block currently under construction.
The model of reinforcing steel for the containment has been transferred to the Callaway site to be used as a design and construction aid.
(Detail, Paragraph 6)
8.
Unresolved Items None identified.
C.
Status of Previously Recorted Unresolved Items No items outstanding.
l Manaaement Meeting At the conclusion of the inspection a meeting was conducted by Mr.
Elsasser to present the inspection findings.
The following persons were in attendance:
l
.
.
,I
-
_
-
,
.
=
.
.
'
.
.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. T. C. Elsasser, Reactor Inspector, NRC:I Mr. C. R. Oberg, Reactor Inspector, NRC:IV Mr. T. E. Vandel, Reactor Inspector, NRC:III SNUPPS Oreanization Mr. W. W. Baldwin, Administrative Manager Mr. E. Beckett, Licensing Manager Mr. S. J. Seiken, QA Manager'
Mr. R. P. White, Nuclear and Fuel Engineer The following items were di: cussed, and the inspectors' findings were acknowledged by the SNUPPS management personnel:
A.
Puroore of Insoection The inspector stated that the purpose of the inspection was:
Review the QA program for design and procurement activities,
--
audit and document control.
Discuss the status of the Records Management System (RMS).
--
Tour the project model.
--
B.
Project Status The inspector confirmed the project status information obtained during the inspection as presented under Other Significant Findings,
" Project Status" in thii report.
C.
Current Findines The inspector discussed the results of the inspection as presented under Other Significant Findings, Section A " Current Findings" in this report.
.
e
.
,
.
.-
e
,,~, -- - -., - -.,
-
.,,,,.,. -
-
,
-,,-
,, -. - -
_
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
.
In addition to those listed under Management Interview, the following persons were contacted during the course of this inspection.
SNUPPS
.
Mr. J. P. Burn, Lead A/E Director Ms. L. Lee, Correspondence Control Bechtel Power Corcoration Mr. W. A. Brown, RMS Project Manager Mr. H. Fitch, Senior Systems Analyst 2.
Review of OA Procram for Design and Procurement a.
Field Change Control ACP 3.6, (Rev. 0; Effective April 5,1976) Field Change Control, establishes a system for control of design changes generated at the site by the constructor or construction manager.
Dis-position of significant field-generated design changes (Field Change Requests (FCR)) are subject to the SNUPPS organization review and concurrence.
l Bechtel, as the Lead AE, maintains a log of all FCR's submitted from the sites.
These are reviewed as required by ACP 3.6 and
'
sent to the SNUPPS Staff (Technical Director) for information or action as appropriate.
The inspector reviewed the following FCR's.
2/5-00016-C Sampling Fresh Concrete 2/5-00017-C Concrete Mix Design 2/5-00018-C Duties of Contractor Batch Plant Inspector 2/5-00023-C Mixing and Delivery of Concrete 2/5-00024-C Concrete Aggregate Storage 2/ 5-00031 -C Aggregate for Lean Concrete 2/5-00034-C Use of Off-Site Batch Plant for Lean Concrete Backfill
,
e
.
.
---
..
- _ _ _ _
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
b.
Review of Procurement Documentation The inspector evaluated the SNUPPS procurement review for the electric cenetrations package (Bechtel specification No.
10466-E035 (Q)).
The procurement package for bidding was originally issued on November 17, 1975. The SNUPPS review appeared to be in accordance with the applicable procedure including the bidders list review.
The purchase order is presently ready for issue to the successful bidder.
During this part of the inspection, no discrepancies were identified.
3.
Review of Audit Procram The inspector reviewed the latest revision of the SNUPPS " Internal Audit Schedule" dated February 15, 1977, and the "SNUPPS Audit Program for Bechtel" (July 1976 to June 1977) dated Sepcember 1, 1976.
The inspector determined that these schedules were consistent with project status, a.
SNUPPS Internal Audits The inspector reviewed the following documentation of internal audits:
(1)
Internal Audit of Nonconformance Re ort System; letter SLS 6-102 dated November 4,1976. The followup corrective action for deficiencies identified by this audit are documented in letter SLS 6-106 dated November 16, 1976.
(2)
Internal Audit of Design Document Change Control; letter SLS 7-19. dated February 3,1977.
Followup corrective action is in progress for this audit.
b.
External Audits The inspector reviewed the following reports of external audits:
'
(1)
SNUPPS Audit of Bechtel Experience Feedaack Data System; letter SLBM 6-469 dated October 6,1976. The followup corrective action for deficiencies identified by this audit are documented by letters BLSM 3480 and 3349.
.
.
.
.
- - - - _ - - - _ - _. _ - - _ - _.. - _ _ _ _ _
.
.
.
-
!,
-
~
.
,
'
.
-
(2) SNUPPS Audit of Bechtel on October 27 and 28,1976; letters SLBM 6-514 dated November 5,1976 and SLBM 6-560 dated December 7,1976. The followup corrective action for deficiencies identified by this audit are documented by letters BLSP.- 500 dated November 24, 1976 and BLSM-3806 dated Fcaruary 4,1977.
(3)
SNUPPS Audit of Bechtel Project Procurement Activities December 29, 1976 through January 10,"1977; letter SLBM 7-21.
Followup action is in progress, but formal documenta-tion of corrective action has not been received by SNUPPS.
(4)
SNUPPS and Bechtel personnel conducted an audit of Westinghouse's Tampa Division on Octcber 12-14, 1976; letter BLWM-127, dated November 8,1976.
Westinghouse conducted followup action on the aucit findings and transmitted their cor.eccive measures to Bechtel in
-
letter SNP(A)-155 dated January 6,1977.
The SNUPPS QA organization then conducted another audit of Westinghouse Tampa on February 3-4, 1977; letter SLBM 7-87 dated February 22, 1977.
Followup action by Westinghouse as a result of this second audit is s;ill in progress.
The inspector determined that audits are being conducted in accordance with SNUPPS Standard Quality Assurance Procedure 13-1, " Audits by the SNUPPS Quality Assurance Committee." The inspector also reviewed the qualification records for all Str:/PS Quality Assurance auditors who are currently qualified.
The inspector determined that checklists are being utilized when conducting audits.
Followup actions to audit findings have been reviewed to insure that the proposed corrective action is effective in correcting identified deficiencies.
The number and type of audits appear to be consistent with the importance of the various activities being audited.
4.
Review of Document Control System The SNUPPS document control system was reviewed during the insoection.
The following applicable SNUPPS Administrative Control Procedures (ACP's) were referred to during the course of the inspection.
-
.
.
T
.
-
..
.
.
.
-
. _ _.
..
---
- -.
.
.
'
.
.
ACP 12.1, Revision 2 - File System ACP 12.2, Revision 2 - Quality Assurance Records ACP 3.6, Revision 0 Field Change Control ACP 3.7, Revision 6 - Construction Variances ACP 9.1, Revision 0 Control of Nonconformances The inspector selected the recards of nonconformance requests (NCR's), field change requests (FCR's), and construction variances requests (CVR's) as examples for. review of the record maintenance system.
Timely handling and close-out were examined as well as adherence to the prescribed handling procedure.
It was determined that submitted requests were being distributed properly, were being reviewed, dispositioned, and approved on a timely basis and it appeared that the SNUPPS over view activity was functioning properly.
It was additionally learned that the Bechtel Interface Action Plan and the Daniel NCR log (Provided per Daniel procedure AP-VII-02 for Callaway), periodically issued, were being utilized as a tickler system for identifying open items and for expediting close-out of items.
During discussions with SNUPPS personnel it was learned that the OA records file would be transcribed onto a microfilm system that would be consistent with and elatable to the RiiS system.
The inspector also selected for review an item identified as an open item by SNUPPS at the time of the last IE inspection on August 17, 1976.
The item was a Union Electric Company (UEC) transmittal (ULS884 dated July 22, 1976) of a site A/E specification for Bechtel review.
It was learned that the item was completed and closed out on August 18, 1976.
No discrepancies were identified in the document control system.
5.
Develocment of the Records Manacement System
!
A large quantity of information has already been stored in the RMS computer. This information consists mainly of tracking information for Lead A/E design documentation and records associated with equipment procurement.
Information provided by RMS consists of such things as:
pertinent records generated, responsibility for
the records and filing location of the record hard copy.
The l
computer terminal has been installed and is in operation at the l
Callaway site. Tracking information for construction related documentation is being gathered via the Callaway terminal.
,
.
.
'
[
. - _ _ _ _
.
.,
.
.
.
.
o Procedures for use of the system are in the final stages of prep-It is not intended that the system replace any existing aration.
requirement for document storage and control.
Hard copies of all required quality related documentation will continue to be maintained.
The system is to be used primarily as a management tool which will provide a tracking system for exisiting documentation and cross reference capability in the area of design, procurement and commit-ments to licensing and applicable codes and standards.
6.
Inspection of the Project Model The inspectors reviewed progress of SNUPPS power block model which is under construction. The portion of the model relating to reinforcing steel for containment has been transferred to the Callaway site to be used as a design and construction aid.
It was noted by the inspector that one of the audits reviewed by the inspector durir.g this inspection (Details, pargraph 3) dealt with design control as it related to use of the model.
SNUPPS examined the Sechtel practices for using the model as a tool for verifying design adequacy in terms of interference, access and space.
No discrepancies were identified with regard to use or construction of the model.
l l
l j
.
[
.-
-
.
?.
'.
rt EE COPY.
-
1,u
.
.
UNITt0 STATES
.&nascq'<\\
]70o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/
[ i.*,..[ k RECloN lli -
{.'7*$)f,j
,, /. j 739 RoostvCLT RC AO 9, M@
ctem couv~. stunois omr s,
-
.
.....
AUG 011977 Jocket No. 50-483 Union Electric Company ATT7:
Mr. John K. Bryan
- ce President - Nuclear Pos: Office Sox 149 St. Louis, MO 63166 Gentlemen:
This refers :o :he inspec: ion condue:ed by Messrs. K. R. Naidu and T. E. Vandel of this office, T. C. Elsasser, and A. A. Varela of the Region I office and C. R. Oberg of the Regica IV Of fice of Inspec: ion and Enforcement on June 29-30 and July 1, 1977, of ac:ivi:ies at the Callaway Unit I con-struction site authori:ed by RRC Cons: rue: ion Persi No.
CPPR-139 and to :he discussion of our findings wi:h Messrs. Doyne, Field, Weber, others of your s:aff, and others of the Callaway staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
The enclosed copy of our inspection report iden:1fies areas examined during :he inspec: ion. Within these areas, :he inspec:1on consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, observa:1ons, and interviews with personnel.
During this inspeccion, certain of your activities appeared to be in noncompliance with NRC requirc=ents, as described under 2nforcement I: ems in che' Su==ary of Findings section of the enclosed inspection raport.
This notice is sent to you pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.201 of the NRC's " Rules of Prac:1ce," Par: 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations. See:1on 2.201 requires you to submit to this office within thirty days of your receipt of this notice a writ:en statement or explanation in reply, including for each item of nonec=pliance: (1) correc:ive action taken and the results achieved; (2) corrective action to be taken to avoid further noncouplianec; and (3) the date when full ccmpliance will be achieved.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title
'd, Code of Federal Regulations, a
.
p c' hltbDE1
.
o
.
.
.
!-
.
tinion Electric Company-2-AUG 011977'
copy of this notico, the enclosed innpecticu report, and your responas to this notice will *va placci in the I;!'.C's Public Docunent Rocu, execpc as fcile :3.
If this report contain.2 info: uttion that you or your contracters believe to be proprictury, you ::asc apply in trcitin2. to this offico, uithin tirenty days of your receipc of this notics, to wittihold such infor=ation frcs public di:cle:ure.
- .hc applicctica mus:
includo - full scacenent of the reasono for traich the infor-
- ation is considerad proprictory, and chonid be rrepared so that propriestery infor=ntion identified in the applicatien is contained in an enclosura to the application.
Va trill gladly discusa any questions you hava concerning this incpaction.
Sincerely, R. 7. IIeic;r:an, Chlaf
- lesctor Conotruer:1ca and Engincaring Su; port :ranah Enc. ouron:
,
ap pend.,:: A.
.
.
.. t 4Ct of.
.so
.
A.
Violatica 2.
II'. Incpection P.pt :1o.
i 50-400/77-05 cc w/cncis:
Central Filoc Reproduction 1:nii:'.l20 20b POR Loc.a.1 PD2
- 3IC TIC
?.cgions I L !?
CTII -'.'/....-
Rl!L
!tI T I
./
!:IJ I Rill
'
M i l l _.p.,._
5. g. yo
...
o,, ce
~
... ;_,
-..
.
.
Y HHiel[l 8
_I.I ll *lt!
,, g..
.
d H'3'd /
IlYUM Mi*
-I f
\\.1 N li
- - '
sua=a.s >
7/2)/77
!- 1.' a s.w r ' '
D.nl l e lyon
,,,.
n.,,
,
.
.wc inn.w ua e,. o,.s u. si.,m c...................
o,..
............
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
Appendix A NOTICE OF VTOLATION Union Electric Company Docket No. 50-483
Based on the results of an NRC inspection on June 29-30 and July 1, 1977, it appears that certain of your activi:ies were in noncompliance with NRC requirements as noted below.
Both items are considered to be infractions.
,
1.
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix 3, criterion T s ates, in part, that " Activities affecting quality shall le... accomp-11shed in accordance with these instructions, procedures, o r drawing s... "
a.
Danie)
ernational (Daniel) Procedure AP-VII-09 requit in paragraph 3.4 a preplanned =onitoring of stored items on a mini =um of once a month to preclude deterioration of sacerial during storage.
Contrary to the above, on June 30, 1977, the inspector observed deterioration (rustine) of stainless steel material, the fuel transfer tube sleeve, which had gone unde:ec:ed for a period of at least six sonths.
b.
Daniel procedure AP-IV-01 requires in paragraph 3.6 tha: a Material Control Record (MCR) be prepared by field engineering :o provide receipt inspection personnel with sufficient infor=ation to perform a receipt inspection.
Contrary to the above, an MCR prepared for the Fuel Transfer Tube Sleeve failed to provide sufficient ir..'2cmation for an adequate receipt inspeccion.
Further an adequa:e receipt inspection has not been performed on this material to date even though a revised MCR issued on iby 11, 1971, called for re-inspection of the fuel transfer tube sleeve.
c.
The Snupps Standard QA Manual Section 3-3, para-graph 8.25, the Chicago Bridge and Iron Company (CBI) procedure SHP-(74-3750/59) Revision 3, dated January 21, 1976, and the C3I Nuclear QA 3\\,N D b TTTIMMbb
.
.
n-
-
,. - -.
.,, -,,
,-
,
n
,.-
,e-ww,w,~-.e
,
-
,
e
.,
-.--.m.
.-
n v
--m-r--
_
.
. _.
-. _..
_
.
.
.
.
,
.
- .
.
.
.
-2-
,
!
Manual,' Issue 6, Division 4, paragraphs 4.4.2 and 14.3.3 impose certain requirements relative to the handling-and storage of safety related equipment.
Contrary to the above:
(1) Procedural requirements were not followed to rope off and identify C3I storage areas; (2) timely measures were not taken'
'
,
to prevent accumulation of stagnant rainwater in 4.
pipe penetration sleeves 'and (3) procedural require-ments were not followed in identifying and segrega-
.
ting a liner plate with apparent handling damage.
i
,
d.
Daniel quality control procedure QCP-109 cicled
" Concrete Place =ent Grouting and. Post Pour" states
'
in part ".
. after placing and finishing is com-
.
pleted in a concrete pour, the Civil QC inspector that monitored and verified these activities shall complete a " Concrete Placement Report."
,
Contrary to the above, only one of approximately thirteen Civil QC inspectors who monitored the reactor containment base sat concreta placement activities p*ovided a Concrete Placing Report. Fur-ther, the Corc: te Placing Report in QCP-109 lists neither the appropriate attributes to be maintained nor the approprisce acceptance criteria to be veri-
'
fled.
2.
10 CFR 50, Appendix 3, Criterion V, stacas in part,
.
" Activities affecting quality shall be' prescribed by documented instructions, procedures, or drawings of a
.
type appropriate to the circumstances..."
Contrary to the above, the Daniel Work Procedure WP-109 titled " Concrete Placement, Grouting and Pest Pour," neither centains instructions, procedures or drawings nor does it reference the ACl Standard 309,
'! tecommended Practice for Consolidation of Concrete" tc 'mplement the requirements specified in the Techni-i cal Specification C-103.
!
.
i
.
.
.
.
'
.
.
..
.
U.S. NUCLE.\\R RECUL.iTORY C0:0!ISSION OFFICE OF I::SPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION.III Report No. 50-483/77-06 Docket No. 50-483.
License No. C?PR-139 Licensee: Union Electric Company Fost Of fice Sox 149 St. Louis, MO 63166 Facility Name: Callaway Unit 1 Inspection at: Callaway Site", Callaway County, MO Inspection Conducted:. June /29 - July 1, 1977
'.
Y
!? '77
-
- ^
Inspectors:
T.
i i
-
-
i, p
K. R.
a d if A N2 ff / 7'/
.
,
T. C. El }'s'sr',' RI -'W'irrrff.$s'
'7 f//99
.
sa e
/
,
A. A. Var / C "/ h'.:<a1:/: ' /.~
7,/N g,,.
s,t
//
/
i-si
,
/
'
'
ella, l'I
/
'
0 berg;,}h!/'Q,,,lf Q
..,
ii, f i.
'/
/
/
./
ff [7. [':f9 C. R. 3
.
.
/ b ~/
Approved by:
D. W. hay
Projects Sectica Insocction Summarv Inspection June 29-Julv 1.1977. (Recor: No. 50-433/77-06'
Areas Inspected:
(1) review or procedures, observation of work activities, and review of records for con:ainment structures and other safety related structures; (2) procedural review and observation of work activities re-latis2 to safety related piping; (3) procedural review, observation of storage area relative :o containment penetrations; (4) review of struc-cural concrete records, observation of structural concrete repair actiti-ties and review of implementation of contractor's indoctrination and training program. The inspection involved 106 inspec: ion-hours onsite by five NRC inspectors.
Resultsi Of the eight areas inspected no apparent items of noncompliance were identified in five areas. Two items of no..ccarliance were identified relative to receipt inspection and improper storage of fuel transfer tube sleeve, improper handling / storage of containment liner plates and lack of adequate concrete placement procedures and recor/
(Sections I, II
.
and V).
Okf6 DD
3nWPA'{kt
.
_
.
-.
.
.
.
DETAILS
,
Persons Contacted
-
Chicago Brid:e & Iron (CHI)
- W. A. Spaulding, CNQA Auditor
.
Daniel International Company (Daniel)
T. Antweiler, Mechanical Material Control
- C. B. 31eisener, QC Manager D. Poulin, Warehouse Office Supervisor
-
J. Hrapchak, Chief Civil Engineer i
- H. J. Starr, Assistant Project Manager l
- R. E. Hiliyer, Construction Manager l
- W. van der Zalm, QA Manager
J. K. Williams, Lead Receiving QC Inspector C. R. Xanderss Lead Documen ation Ccordinator P. Lacarter, Lead Civil QC administrator W. G. Westhoff, Civil QC Engineer J. Hrits, QC Training Coordinator Union Electric Comenny (UE)
- M. I. Doyne, General Superintendent
'S. M. Hogan, QA Engineer
,
- R.
I. Powers, QA Engineer
- C. E. Slisewski, QA Engineer
- W.
S. Stroth=an, QA Ingineer K. Kuechermeister, Assistant Engineer
- W. Weber, Manager Nuclear Construction
- denotes those persons who attended the management exit inte rview.
l 1.
Licensee Action on P_revious Insnection Findines a.
(Closed) Unresolved items: Three items relating to placement of safety related concrete.
(Reference NRC - Region III Inspection Report No. 50-4S3/77-03, Details Paragraphs 9.a, 9.b, and 10.c)
(1) Work Procedure WP-109 was revised, Revision 5 dated June 21, 1977, to require that previously prepared horizontal construc-tion joints should be checked for cicanliness and restored
1-2-i l
l
.
-e--
~
, -,, y
,
--
=,-
n,-.
.n.-e---,.,
..-r..----
,,,,, -.. -, -.,.,
.
r,--r.~.r
,-
,-..,nw,
, - - + -,-
.
,
..
.
-
.
.
.
.
where found unsatisfactory.
(Reference Details Paragraphs
.
9.a as above)
(2) The Periodic Maintenance Requirements (PMR) were revised to include the inspection of 3 series cadweld sicevos on
-
prefabrica,ted assemblies at receiving inspection and peri-odically during storage.
(Reference Details Paragraph 9.b as above)-
(3) Work Procedure WP-118.was revised, Revision 3 dated' June 7, 1977 to limit the permanent marking in cadweld preparation f. r splicing to craw file only.
(Reference Details Para-graph 10.c as above)
.
.
b.
(0 pen) Unresolved ite=s: Three items relating to placement
,
of safety related concrete.
(Reference NRC - Region III In-spection Report No. 50-433/77-03, Details Paragraphs 9.c, 9.d, and 9.e)
'i (1) The resolution of these items is dependent upon the issuance of a change to QCP 109 which is still in preparation. These items remain unresolved pending review of the revised QCP 109 by an NRC inspector.
(2)
Item 9.e_ identified a lack of definition in Specification C-103 regarding the degree of major imperfections in con-i crete after removal of forms where engineering review and evaluation is required prior to approval of the repair.
{
Also, WP-109 and QCP-109 did not require engineering evalu-
'
ation of =ajor imperfections in concrete after removal of forms.
The licensee intended.a revise only WP-109 and QCP-109 and leave C-103 as it is.
However, in light of the problems encountered with concrete defects in the containment tendon gallery discussed in Section V, paragr~aph 4 of this report, a revision to C-103 is also deemed necessary in order to provide comprehensive evaluation of aonconforming conditions.
!
,-
2.
Functional or Procram Areas Insoected Details of functional or program areas inspected are documented in Sections I through V.
l-3-
-
'
I
_ ~. _ - _ _, _ _ -. _ _. _...,,,. _., _ _.., _ _,
_, -,.. _.._.. _._.,__ _,-.,_,_ _., _,,-, ___ _
_
.
.
SECTIO:1 I Prepared by T. E. Vandel Review of Contninment Penetrntions A review was conducted of procedures and specifications for a.
containment penetrations as follows:
.
Specification 10466-C151(A)
Rev. 9 April 26, 1977 i
Speci~ication 10466-C151A(Q)
Rev. 7 April 26,- 1977 Speci:1 cation 10466-C171 Rev. 5 March 2, 1977 Specification 10466-C1713(Q)
Rev. 5 March 7, 1977
,
'
Specification 10466-M203 (Q)
Rev. 1 January 14, 1977 Specification 10466-E035(Q)
Rev. 2 December 7, 1976 b.
Review was conducted of the Fuel Transfer Tube Sleeve and
,
appurtenances material presently stored onsite procured
under contract 10466.-C171-2/1713-2.
Material receiving Report (MRR) No. B00669 was assignad to the material and the inspector observed that QC accept tags were afixed to the material dated Januany 17, 1977. The MRR showed that nine pieces of material had been received marked 2-25 T1 and T2, and 2-25 M1 through M7 and documents as follows:
(2) Material test reports (3)
Inspection procedures and verification reports (4) RT exam verification report (5) RT film-(1 set)
(6) Joseph T. Ryersen release for shipment The specificatiens appeared to be in conflict with the material
received in that only six pieces were required. A check of the engineering drawings showed that neither six nor nine were the correct number of pieces. Drawings reviewod included 10466-C-0L2921, 2922, 2924, 2925, 2931 and Drawing C-OL6905. Vendor Drawings 72-28, -21, -25 disclosed that the nine delivered included both safety and nonsafety related material. A check of the field
,.
engineering preparud MCR to be utilized in the receipt inspection et the material called out only one lot of material therefore all material was inspected and accepted by the QC receiving inspector as being safety related.
!
-4-
,
i
.
,-r-
,.y
-
--
- m
--e
,,,.
.,_n
...-..ye
,,, -
,.,.-,
,,. ~
.
.- _ - - - -.. _,... -.
.. ~._
.
.
.
SECTION II Prepared by K. R. Naidu 1.
Review of C3I 0A Implementing Procedures The inspector reviewed the Chicago Bridge & Iron (C3I) quality assurance implementing procedures to ascertain whether the quality assurance plans,. instructions and procedures established' by C3I conform to the NRC requirements and PSAR commitments relative to the c.,;tainment steel structures and supports. During the review, the inspector determined the following:
a.
Inspection Points Inspection points and work perfcrmance procedures are identi-fled in the Record Drawing Table. For ASME Code items, such as equipment hatch, inspection hold points are deter-mined with the concurrence of the Authorized Inspector, b.
QC Release Forms, which certify that the structural steel components are in conformance with purchase specifications, are used in lieu of material certifications.
c.
Receipt Inseection Precadure Procedure SHP-(74-3750/59), Revisica 3, datad June 21, 1976 titled " Shop Shipping / Packaging & Field Receiving / Storage /
Handlirg of Nuclear Fabd Material Parts and Assemblies" issued to control the receipt inspection and storage at site.
d.
Unresolved Item Though receipt inspections are to identify " evidence of damage to items fr:m tie down failure'and or rough handling" as required on page 3 of the above precedure, in paragraph 12, titicd " Receiving - Field Subsection b," no acceptance criteria was furnished. During a visit to the storage area, the inspector observed a liner place with a portion of the corner bent and subsequently verified that this item was not documented as a nonconformance. On further inquiry, the CSI site '4ciding and QA Supervisor stated that no guidance was available specifying the extent to which the-5-
.
.
.
plate could be bent prior to being reported as a noncon-formance. The inspector requested the licensee and CBI cognizant personnel to provide additional information on the acceptance criteria to evaluate " Evidence of damage to items from cie down failure and or rough handlidg."
'
This is considered an unresolved item and will'be reviewed dur.ing a subsequent inspection.
e.
Welding Activities (1) Record Drawing identifies mandatory hold points where witnessing or inspection is required.
(2)
Provisions are available to assure that welding pro-cedures are properly qualified Welding procedures require Bechtel (AL) approval.
.
(3) Provisions are available to assura that only CBI qualified weldors are utill:ed for welding operations.
(4) The following NDE procedures, reviewed and approved by Bechtel (AE) are being used:
(a) Magnetic Particle Test - Prod Method - MIP-123, Revision 10, dated April 2, 1975, approved on September 25, 1975.
(b) Magnetic Particle Test - Yoke Method - MTP-13B, Revision 10, dated April 2, 1975 approved on July 30, 1975.
(c) Liquid Penetrant Test - PTP-(74-3750/59)-10B, Revision 1, June 20, 1975 approved on October 29, 1975.
.
(d) Radiograph Test - Liner Plate-RTP-(74-3750/59),
Revision 1, March 25, 1976 approved on August 9, 1976.
(e)
Radiograph Test - Equipment hatch and other applications-RTP-(74-3750/59)-9B, Revision 1
,
January 25, 1976 approved on August 9, 1976.
(5) Provisions have been established to assure that NDE personnel are qualified to CLI requirements.
(6) Provisions have been established to assure that NDE equipment is of the proper and specified type, withia current calibration and to periodically check that
,
i-6-
.
x
- - -,
w--r,w-m.
. _, _
__
., _ _.
-- -, ~,.
- - _. -., -.
.,
m-,,
.
. _
-. -._.
.
.
.
-
i
,
the equipment is properly maintained and used as specified.
,
(7) The following items are documented in the Record
^
Drawing:
i (a) Weld location, weld nu=ber
.
(b) Weldor's initials
.
(c) Weld procedures used (d) -Weld filler caterial_ used; traceability is not
,
I required (e) Nondestructive examinations performed
,
!
(f) NDE technician's initials (g) NDE results (h)
Inspection requirements
(8)
Inspec: ion procedures cover the following:
!
(a) Preheat-
.?
]
(b) Interpass temperature moni:oring with tempstiks l
(9) Work performance procedures provide for the evaluation of weld. quality using approved NDE procedures and the evaluation of radiograph quali:y.
(10) General Repair Procedure - G3P-103 Revisica 13 dated August 1, 1975 is used to control defect repair where necessary and provides:
.
(a) Defect removal techniques (b) Defect re= oval verification (e) Acceptance of repair
,
(11) Weldrod control encompasses the following:
'
(a) Receipt verification of identity and conformance i
with specifications.
!
i
'
(b) Control of pre-issue storage conditions.
i-7-B E
-
0
.
t
--
r
-,- - - -
ne,
-w
,nn----,
-,-
-.~,.--e,n.
, -,
e,. -
s,or---r-o.
-
~ne--
.,,, e v.
.--es,,r--m-s-.msvr ee.,-.,y,-e,-
r r +, -,,
y.r se---n-
,, --
-,g
-
._
.
.
.
.
.
(c) Storage identification and issue con:rol, so that only acceptable material is issued and used.
(d) Disposition of issued but unused weldrod.
Note: CBI permits one days supply of weldred type E7013 to be stored in a pouch without the benefit of portable elec: rode holding ovens.
.
At the end of the shif:, unused electrodes are returned to the baking ovens where they are baked
,
at 250 F for eight hours. They are then returned to holding ovens from which weldors draw their supplies.
No items of noncompliance or deficiencies were identified within the above areas.
2.
Observation of Containment Steel Structures Work and Work Activities a.
Storace of Cecconents The inspector observed the following in the storage area designa:ed for C3I components:
(1) The s:orage area was not identified and roped off as
!
required by C3I procedure SHP-(74-3750/59), Revision 3, dated January 21, 1976. A section of :he storage area was adjacant to a heavily travelled cons: rue:1on road.
(2) One seccion of a penetration sleeve assembly was not on dunnage.
(3)
Several pipe penetration sleeves contained pools of stagnant water.
(4) A liner plate was observed with one of its corners
bent about 20. A C3I corporate QA person who was on site during the inspection concurred with the RIII
,
inspector tha: the subject liner plate was conconforming.
Contrary :o CSI Nuclear QA Manual, Issue 6, Divisien 1 paragraph 4.4.2 titled " Material Identification" the liner plate was not identified as a nonconforming item.
- Also, contrary to paragraph 14.3.3 ti: led "Correc:ive Ac: ion" corrective action in the form of engineering
.
evaluation had not been initiated. The liner plate was being stored along with other acceptable liner plates.
In addition, one liner plate with a questionable kink was observed. Note: An unresolved item related to a handling procedure which could aid identification nonconformances of this nature in future is discussed in preceding paragraph 1.d of this sec: ion of :his report.
.
_g_
.
O m.
---
s
, -,
,,
,-
- - -,, -
,., - -
-,--m,,g-w
-
g
-
r.--g-e,
---y
-, - -
a,-
o
_
-
.
.
.
.
b.
Unaccentabic Storace Conditions - Infraction The inspector infor=cd the licensee and cognizant C3I personnel that failure to follow CSI storage procedure resulted in the adverse storage conditions ennumerated in the above paragraph a.,
and that this was contrary to the requirements of 10 C7R 50, Appendix 3, Criterion V and the SNUPPS Standard QA Manual Section 3-3, paragraph 8.2.b.
Prior to the conclusion of the inspec:icn, NCR 117 was generated, identifying that shell plate-309-A-60 had a corner bend approximately 20.
c.
Installation of Liner Plates The inspector observed work performance on liner plates.
on which welding activities were either in progress or completed. No adverse findings were observed.
d.
Observation of Radietraphv !.ctivities The inspector observed radiographs being shot for a 10 feet vertical qualification weld identified as 3c, be:-
ween liner plates 309-A-5 and 309-A-3.
Iridium 192 scurce with approxima:ely 75 curies was used. Eastman Kedak Type AA with.005 and.010 thick lead intensifying screens were used on the fron; and back of :he film respectively. The radiography was perfor=ed in accordance with C3I procedure RT?-(71-3750/59), Revision 1, da:ed March 25, 1976 during off shift hours.
e.
Insoections Inspections were being condue:cd as prescribed in the record drawing by qualified individuals.
f.
Qualifications of NDE and Insnection Personnel The inspec:or reviewed the qualifications of the inspec:crs and radiography technician and determined them :o be current.
g.
Calibration of Test Eculpment The inspector observed a Macbeth densitemeter without a sticker indicating that it was calibrated. On further examining the calibratica and ""erification Checks" rec-ords for :he densitemeter, the inspec:or determined tha:
9_
-
.
.
.
.
the subject densitometer identified with Serial #2158C was calibrated as per manufacturcr's recommendations
every week during July 1,1977 to July 27, 1977 period using a step wedge supplied by the manufacturer. The CBI representative informed the licensee that crroneously, a sticker, indicating the date it was last calibrated. and the due date, was not affixed..
3.
Review of C3I Quality Records - Containment Steel Structures The inspector reviewed the 'following records relative to the CBI'
activities.
a.
Certification Records (1) Liner Plates
.
!
Selective review of liner plate receipt inspection records indicated that Quality Release Forms were duly signed by the CBI Cordova Shop authori:ed representa-tive and that liner places identified by 309-A-5 and 309-A-1 were shipped on May 19 and 24, 1977 and were receipt inspected on June 10 and May 19, 1977, respectively.
(2) Weldrod Receipt inspecticn records dated April 19, 1977 indi-
'
cated that:
(a) AIRCo supplied 4200 lbs of 5/32" d Type E6010 (SFA5.1) weldrod which conformed to C3I specifi-cations :iMS 435, Revision 2 and QAS 311, Revision 8.
(b) Chemeron supplied 5000 lbs of 1/S" 0 Type E7018 (SFA5.1) weldred which conformed to C3I specifi-cations %HS 501, Revision 1 and QAS. 311, Revision 8.
,
b.
Installation Racerds Record Drawing indicated that Shell Liner Places 309-A-5
.
and 309-A-3 ware welded with a vertical seam weld identi-
'
fled as SC, the weldor was identified by his initials, the
,
j fit up was checked, all the NDE uthor than radiography was completed, reviewed and determined acceptable.
- 10 -
.
.
-..
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
c.
Inspection Records
Inspection records were completed by CBI qualified personnel-indicating that the necessary inspections were performed,
'
evaluated and determined acceptable.
d.
Qualification Records The inspector reviewed the relevant records and determined that the NDE technician performing the Radiography,'the
weldor who performed ucid SC and the welding supervisor
were qualified to C3I procedurcs.
No items of noncompliances or deficiencies were identified in the above area.
4.
Observation of Work Activities - Safety Related Structures
,
(Structural Steel Succorts)
The inspector selected two completed welds in the Auxiliary Building area at elevation 1988.
Installation drawings K6720-Revision 2-201 and j 6720-E-204 were used. The welds had been visually inspected and determined acceptable. Welding activi-ties related to structural steel erection were not lLn pregress during the inspection.
5.
Review of Oualitv Records - Safety Related Structures The inspector reviewed the quality records for the above two welds and determined the following:
a.
Record Drawin2s (1) Notation on Drawing K6720-Revision 2-201 - Auxiliary
,
Suilding indicated that three welds on beam 23133,
joint between Columns A-13 and CA were completed.
(2) Notation on Drawing K6720-E-204 - Auxiliary Building indicated that one of the four welds on beam 253D1,
- -
joint between Columns AC and AH2, A31 and A14 was completed.
~
b.'
Inspection Reports The Uciding QC Surveillance Reports for the respective welds
>
identified the drawing 1, picco #, weld 4, weldor ID, welding procedure used, and the wcld material and indicated that 11 -
-
t l
.
m 7wvr
+
r, yer y
--
ga,
,,- g m---v-,
,-
pA
-,-g---
r*
-*
---g
g
-,-
.-g-r*--
--#-r*'T
-==v
--P N-g T wwWe'**-y ye-rwr w
r
.
.
,
.
the. welds were acceptable. The' documentation of the welding inspection will be reviewed further during a subsequent inspection to dctormine compliance with AWS D1.1 requirements.
c.
Unresolved Item A system providing cross reference between the welds /
drawings and the inspection reports is to be developed to f acilitate orderly -retrieval of welding inspection reports. Such a system would reduce ti=e expended in
'
locating relevant inspection reports where in a parti-cular veld inspection was documented.
6.
Observation of Site Storace Areas Storage of Stainless Steel Material
-
During a tour of the storage area, the inspector observed several unpacked stainless steel components _ unprotected frem stagnant rain water. It could not be reacily identified from the material identification tags whether these were safety related material.
The licensee stated that he would investigate this matter further with the Daniel cognicant personnel vested with storage inspections.
This matter will be reviewed during subsequent inspections.
Struerural Steel Cecconents Without Identification Tacs The inspector observed several structural steel ccaponents in the vicinity where repairs to steel components were in progress, I
without identification tags. The licensee informed the inspector
'
that this discrepancy was already identified. The inspector-reviewed Quality Assurance Audit Finding (QAAF) #77-06-01-02
dated June 16, 1977 which identified " Twenty-five safety related structural picces in the outside laydown yard 1 that were not
released to construction and had no indication of inspection
!
status. Due to the large number of unidentified pieces dis--
!
covered, this presents a breakdown in the QC system." Corrective action recommended was to identify the-cause of the problem and correct. Corrective action taken ucs to hold the inspectors who remove the QC Hold Tag res'ponsibic for retagging. The
,
!
R1II inspector informed the licensee that implementation of this matter will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
No items of noncompliance or deficiencies were identified in the above area.
.
12 -
-
l
.
-
--
- ---..
-_ -,-
-
.
.
.
.. -.
.-
^
!'^
ic
.
J-.
a
y
,.
.
.
.
,
,
,
?'3
.i
-
-
,
.
-
!
-
b.
';,
,-
,
7.
Review of QA Audies
-e i
.
s
+.
/
a.
Daniel OA Audits j/#
e The inspector 1 reviewed a QA audit performed by Daniel and
. documented in QAR #74-01-01 dated May.2, 19.77.
The audit
.
,
addressed four items namely:
(a). Evaluation and summary, /
(b') new items, (c) previous open items,;(dD previous open ou items closed. One of the items the audit' identified in (b) was relative to CBI storage inadequacies. However, the storage deficiencies were reported corrected immedi-ately. There was no evidence that the benefit of C3I'
.i storage procedural requirements was' consulted.r-The l'a-l-
spector infor=ed the licensee that the circumstances lead-
'
ing to the noncompliance identified in paragraphof.b of
'
thissectionshouldhavebeenavoidediftheC2Iprocedure,j.
~
_
was consulted and appropriate corrective action to prevent recurrences was taken. The inspector plans to review the Daniel audits further during subsequent inspections.
,,
-
b.
UE Audits The inspector reviewed an audit performed by UE QA personnel during the period November 2-4, 1976.
Several discrepancies were identified in the audit. However, no corrective action
-
was taken-by the appropriore UE management persennel. LThe licensee representative stated that the delay was due to
-...
changes in QA personnel. The inspector-infor:ed the licensee f
that he will review the corrective action taken.to resolve Y.
the discrepant items identified in the above audit during
", g
'
,
a subsequent inspection.
~
t
["
Y F
e e
.
13 -
-
i e -
-m y
+--
,
,,+-ei--
.--y y,y-i~~
v w=-ywy-,,r
,r-
-v-n
,w-..,...----w, y
=v w,
-
+wr.-vm-,
-,-
-
e.-
M
.
.
> ^
l'
.
SF.CTION III
>;.
I Prepared by C. R. Oberg, RIV n
-
Review of Daniel QC Or anization and Procedures
-
(t, The inspector reviewed the general organizational structure of the l
Daniel International Quality Control Organization.. including the QC indoctrination and training program and its t=plementation; quali-fication of selected QC personnel; assignment of stop-work authority; selected work and quality inspection procedures; corrective action procedures; selected material control procedures; and selected docu-ment control procedures.
'~ I In amplification of the above, the following Daniel documents, pro-cedures, and records were reviewed by the inspector:
a '.
Organizational Chart (Quality Control)
FS-C-0242 davision C, June 1977 i
b.
AP-ll-01, Revision 1 (November 10, 1976) Site Organi: scion and
.
,
Position Description
-
c.
AP-11-04, Revision 1 (April 29, 1977) Start /Stop-Work Authority
/
'
d.
AP-VII-02, Revisien 3 (February 12, 1977) Control of Nonconfor=ances f.
e.
AP-VII-07, Ravision 0 (January 13, 1977) Nonconfor=ance Trend Analysis f.
AP-VII-08, Revision 0 (May 19,1975) Corrective Action g.
Corrective Action Reports #2-0027-c
- 2-0029-c
- 2-0031-c
- 2-0032-c d2-0033-c
- 2-0034-c h.
Corrective Action Log (current)
.
i.
AP-VII-03, Revision 0 (May 7,1976) Material and Equipment Receiving and Inspecting j.
Indoctrination / Training Program for QC Personnel (undated, unsigned)
k.
Qualification / Training records for five (5) QC (civil) Personnel
,
The inspector determined that approximately 37 personnel are
- 14 -
. _ _ _
_.
..
.
I assigned to the QC Departmunt. They are of various disciplines including civil, welding, mechanicni, ciectrical and ncncral services. The QC Manager reports to the Project Manager with liaisoa authori:cd with the site QA Manager. The QA Manager reports - :he Corporate Director of QA.
Assignment of stop-vork authori:y is vested An Project Manager anc Constructioc Mausgur. The QL Manager recommends stop/ start work only. Adequate procedures exist for this activi:y. Other QC procedures for corrective action, material control, document contr;'. and QC work and inspection procedures have been issued and implements;.
The inspec:or also determinad that the detailed : raining program for the QC (civili Depart =en: has not been formally established and approved. This 1.s required to be consistent with :he intent of ANSI N45.2.6, paragraph 2.3.
Ageneral administrative procedure does exist. Training has been condue:ed and personnel hs e been appropriately qualified. However, the piogress of : raining does not appear to be consis:ent with the progress of the facili:y.
This ma:ter is considered to be unresolved and was discussed at the ext: in:e rview.
.
&
15 -
-
.
r -
- _
r- - -
-.%-..,
_
- - -, - -.
__
_
_
,
. _ _ _ _
.-.
.
- - _ -. -
.
. _ _..
_-
-. _ -.
.
...
_..
_
_
-
_
-
.
.
-
t a
SECTION IV Prepared by T. C. Elsasser, RI 1.
Review of Ottality Assurance Imnlementine Procedures for Welding of Safety delated Pinine
]
.,
The following documents were reviewed which pertain to the ucid-i ing of safety related piping:
-
'
3echtel Specification M-024, " Specification 8 r the Field
-
j Fabrication and Installation of Piping and Pipe Supports
!
to ASitE Section III, Revision 9.
>
Daniel Work Procedures
-
WP-200 Revision 2,tiay 13, 1977
WP-205 Revision 2, May 2, 1977 WP-502 Revision 2, March 23, 1977
WP-503 Revision 2, January IS, 1977
,
l WP-304 Revision 0, January 7,1977
-
Danici Quality Control Procedures QCP-302 Revision 0, January 12, 1977 i
QCP-503 Revision 1, February 11, 1977 QCP-508 Revision 0, January 19, 1977 Daniel Welding Procedurt Specifications
-
,
N-1-1 Revision 7, June 10, 1976 N-1-8 Revision 0, March 17,1977 l
N-8-8 Revision 0, May 19, 1976 Daniel Nondestructive E:: amination Procedures
-
i NDE 7.1 Revision 0, February 12, 1977 j
NDE 7.3 Revision 0, February 12, 1977
'
NDE 7.4A Revision 0, February 12, 1977
'
NDE 7.5 Revision 0, February 12, 1977
'
NDE 7.6 Revision 0, February 12, 1977 i
T* c inspector determined that adequate procedures were included or referencud in the QA mantal to assure that activitics relative
,
j to the welding of safety related piping are controlled and per-formed according to NRC requirements, SAR ccamitments and appli-
cabic portions of the AS E Code Sections III and IX.
- 16 -
,
- -....-,,,....-.--,.,-_._....,-.._...,,._..,,..._..-,,_,--_ _.....,... _. -._,_ _,....._,,...,
,...
..
_ _ _ _ _ -.
-
.
.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
2.
Safety Related Piping - Observation of Work and Work Activities The inspector observed the installation of a piping support for the essential service water system and verified that the following require-ments were met for installattoa of piping support 2-EF01-R002/311-Q.
Conformance with inspection and work procedures
-
Conformance with record keeping requirements
-
Conformance with installation specifications
-
Issuance and use of materials as specified
-
a.
The inspector made the following ins pection of work and work activities to determine conformance sith the applicable work procedurcs, quality control procedures and installation drawings.
Observation of welding in progress.
-
Direct measuremenc of weld sicos and support dimension
-
for conformance with tha applicable drawing.
-
Visual inspection of complaced welds.
-
Control of weld filler material by welder and issuing activity including storaga conditions.
b.
The following related documents were reviewed by the inspector:
-
Qualification records for weldar M-15 dated June 3, 1977.
Weld control record for support EF01-2002/311Q.
-
Applicable wcld material fiald requisitions (W-100).
-
Weld procedure N-1-1-A-6.
-
Bechtel letters 3LSE 3327 and 4090 approving Daniel
-
weld procedure qualification for procedures N-1-1 and N-8-3.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Review of Safety Relatad Pice Weldinc Ouality Records The inspector reviewed records for "DW Weld 2-EF-01-F-00 to ascertain whether che rccords reflected uork accomplishment consistent with NRC requirement and SAR commitments.
.
- 17 -
.-
.
.
.
The following records were reviewed by the inspector:
Weld Control Record F101
-
Weld Procedure N-1-1-BA-1
-
Qualification Records for Welder T-1
-
NDE Report (Form 276-5) dated April 21, 1977
-
Qualification Records For The NDE Inspector Performing The
-
Magnetic Particle Examination Applicable Wold Material Field Requisitions (11-100)
-
No items of nonco=pliance were identified.
.
- IS -
.
,
.
..
SECTIO:t V Prepared by A. A. Varela, RI 1.
, Review of Reactor Base Mat Concrete Records The inspector reviewed the pertinent work and quality records associated with the continuous (monolithic) placement of the reactor containment base mat.
Except as identified in enforce-ment items, unresolved items, and in paragraph on tendon gallery roof honeycombs, those records were found by the inspector to be in conformance with established procedures and that work was accomplished consistent with applicable requirements.
a.
Preplacement Preparation Location preparation
-
Preplacement inspection
-
b.
Deliverv and Placement
.
Mix specified was delivered and placed
-
Records of batches delivered
-
Required tests of placement taken and found+ acceptable
-
Qualifications of inspection personnel
-
c.
Curing Temperature records
-
-
Form removal Inspection records
-
d.
Concrete :hterials Records confirm that materials met specifications
-
Inspection records meet established requirements
-
relative to control of material - receipt, handling, storage, identification audits of testing laboratory activities
-
e.
Batch 'lant Operation
.
l Batch plant certification records
-
Production records for base mat placement
-
-
Calibration records Inspection records
-
Qualification of inspection (QC) personnel
-
'Jith the exceptions noted above, no items of noncompliance were identified.
I i
l t
- 19 -
i
-
- -
-
-
..
.__.
-
-
.
.
2.
Review of Structural Conerote Ouality Assurance Innlcmenting Proceduras The inspector reviewed the Danici impicmenting precedures relative to structural concrete to assure that the following specific activi-ties are controlled and perforacd according to NRC requirements and SAR commitments. Except as identified in enforcement items, unresolved items, and in the paragraph on tendon gallery honey-combs, these procedures appear adequate.
a.
Control of Soccific Materials
!
Robar and rebar splicing materials
-
.
All materials used in concrete mix
-
Receipt inspection
-
Material certifications
-
Cement and aggregate storage
-
Proof tests of concrete mix designs
-
b.
Control of Soecific Processes Manufacture and transportatien of concrete and limitation
-
on temperature and delivery time
-
Preparation for and placement of concrete
-
Rebar splicing and testing Concrete testing at placement location
-
Concrete curing
-
Concrete placement
-
Material testing
-
Batch plant equipment calibration
-
Documentaticn of inspection and testing results
-
With enceptions noted above, no items of nonccmpliance were identified.
i
'
3.
Review of Documentation Rosardinc Jeicosition of Circumferential Concreta Crack in Reactor Cavity Mont i
The inspector reviewed and evaluated documentation regarding disposition of NCR ;/2-0631-C-A, dated May 20, 1977, on a non-conformance described as a circumferential crack (up to 4 inch wide) occurring in the reacter cavity moat area, approximately 42 inches from cavity liner and extending through approximately 270 degrees arc.
(It was reported by licensee by telephone on
-
May 10, 1977, in accordance with 10 C7R 50.55.e that an investi-gation had been initiated fo determine the safety related
- 20 -
.
.
.
_
. _.
. ___ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _. _ _,. _ _ _
_
.
,
f
e
.
.
-
,
significance of :he crack,) The inspector visited the subject j
arca on June 28, 1977 and observed that, in accordance with the conclusion of the investigation and after repairs required i
by the NCR had been completed and accepted by QC, work had pro-l grossed to thu extent tha: physical inspection of the repair
'
was not possible. The inspector therefore augmented his docu-
mentation review for ovaluation of the nonconformance disposition by intoryiews with responsible QC personnel.
The followint documents and correspondence were reviewed by the inspector:
Trip Report May 10-11, 1977 - Investigation of Concrete
-
Crack at the Reactor Pi: Most Area by C. L. Miller, SNUPPS Civil Group Supervisor (Sechtel).
NCR No. 2-0631-C-A dated May 20, 1977.
-
Concrete Record of Repair - Grouting and Drypack Inspection
-
,
Report da:ed June 2, 1977, Unit 1 Reactor Cavity Moa: 31ock-
!
Out Elev. 1998'-5 3/4".
The NCR was closed when repairs vare completed in accordance ui:h
,-
prescribed disposition and approved by QC June 7, 1977.
]
The inspec:or observed no deficiencies in the above docu=en:ation.
4.
Tendon Gallerv Roof Honeycombed Cencrete i
The inspec:or reviewed documentation and inspected the :endon gallery to evaluate the conditions repor:ed by licensee in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55e on June 17, 1977. Specif' cation j
C103 See:1on 15, Repair of Concre:e, states that, damagej of
'
honeycombed concrete shall be removed :o sound concrete by chipping prior to application of concrete repair by drypack filling or con-crete replacement in accordance with conditions encountered. On i
removal of the tendon gallery root forms following placement of
'
the base =at, concreto imperfectiens were encountered and dry-
)
pack repairs were undertaken at approximately twenty-five loca-tions in the :endon gallery until May 31, 1977. Honeycombed
areas found dcoper than six inches and in close proximi:y :o at.d in back of the tendon :rumplates were encountered. An additional repair procedure was needed for these more ex:ensive areas of
honeycomb. The contractor :horefore initiated an NCR on May 11, 1977 requesting disposition by Bechtal for the above repairs.
j On June 27, 1977, after all honeycombed areas were chipped to
,
,
!
- 21 -
,
.
i
.
.
.
.
+
.
.
sound concretc, a map of each area was sent to Bechtel. The inspector reviewed the dimensional sketches for each of the ninctcen areas where chipping had occurred behind bearing plates and behind rebar. The inspector visited the tendon gallery and verifled the locations and observed that sound concrete (evidenced by well bonded broken coarse aggregatc),
surrounded the cavity in each area. The inspector also observed that only minor rebar damage (indentations of about 1/16" by pointed chipping tool hcid in one band) resulted from the chipping operation. The inspector observed that the non-confotping areas occur in a 90" are northerly and.100 arc southtriy and vary in si:e and dcpth, tne worst of which appears to be at azimuth 210 to 213.
It covers an irregular area affecting two tendon bearing plates and exposes four layers of hori: ental rebar at the bottom of the base mat to a maximu=
depth of 17".
The NCR states the cause of the nonconformance to be insufficient vibration of the toe of the first concreto lift by tencrete placing crews in the congested areas over the tendon gallery. The NCR adds that the mobility of crews was hamoered by the trumplace wall dowels, the =ain steel, rebar supports and form ties. The NCR's recommended disposition and basis for recccmendation requested from 3echtel was not avail-able at this inspectien. The inspector will review the recom-
'
mended disposition which is expected to accompany the licensce's thirty-day followup report required by 10 C7R 50.55(e).
5.
Base Mat ?our 2ecords - Lack of Concrete Placine Reecres Quality Control Procedure, QC?-109, Revision 6, Concrete ? lace-ment, Croutin; and Post Pour, states in Section 3.4 that, a civil QC inspector shall be present at all times during concrete placement and grouting operations and Section 4.5 identifies thirteen significant attributes on details of concrete disposi-tion, flow, placement, consolidation and use of vibrators which the QC inspector must verify. This procedure adds that after placing and finishing is completed in a pour, the civil CC inspector that monitored and verified these activities shall complete a Concrete Placing Report. The bass est placement took 62 hours7.175926e-4 days <br />0.0172 hours <br />1.025132e-4 weeks <br />2.3591e-5 months <br /> during which appro::imately thirteen QC inspectors, citernating on twelve hour shifts, monitored the basa mat place-ment. However, the documentary records en the base mat produced for the NRC inspector to review contain only one Concrete Placing Report. This report is signed by the inspector present at the termination of the pour. The report conrains no information regarding verification of work performed on shif ts when this one inspector was not present.
- 22 -
.
_
.
.
.
.
.
.
!
This failure to properly document quality control inspection activitics is not in accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B.,
Criteriun V.
i 6.
Quality Control Concrete Placine Renort Lacks Acceptance Criteria Quality Control Procedure QCP-109 identifies thirccen significant at:ributes for the control of concrete disposition, flow, place-ment, consolidation and use of vibrators for verification by the civil QC inspector. The procedure states that af ter concrete placing and finishing (as applicable) is completed in a pour, the civil QC inspector that monitored and verified these activi-ties shall complete a Concrete Placing Report, (CPR). However, the CPR and its instrue:1ons for completing the CPR (Exhibi: C of QCP-109) lists only one of the thir:cen significant at:ributes required by the procedure.
(The CPR con ains twenty-eight other items of a summary nature for a pour.) The civil QC inspec:or is required to sign this report. Although :he procedure states that the QC inspec:or signature on the CPR is docu=en:ation that all of the applicable inspec:1ons per QCP-109, See: ion 4.5 were verified, :he CPPR and its instrue: ions do not list nor otherwise identify the QC inspec:or his responsibility to provide quantitative or quali:stive acceptance criteria for de:er=ining that impor: ant ac:1vities have been satisfactorily accomplished.
This failure to identify acceptance criteria is not is accordance
"
vich 10 CFR 50, Appendix 3, Criterion V.
7.
Work Procedura Lacks Instructions on Consolidation Work procedure WP-109, 2evision 5, Concre:e Placemen:, Grou:ing, and Pos: Pour, states in the scope that the purpose of the procedure is to define and establish methods, standards and docu-ments: ion to insure tha: the placing, finishing, curing, protection, repair and grouting of safety related permanent plant concrete is performed in accordance with plans and specifica:1ons. WP-109 references C-10 (:echnical specifications for forming, placing, finishing, and curing of concrete), also references QCP-109. The fotmer in Sec:Lon 10.0 (Consolidation of Concrete) establishes detailed requirements for concrete consolidation by mechanical
.
(in:ernal type) vibrators and requires frequency of vibrators to conform to ACI 309 recommended practice. However, WP-109 provides no implementation of the specification requiraments on consolidation. Except for the fact that UP-109 charges the
- 23 -
-
.
.-
-
-
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
concrete supurintendent with responsibility to incure that sufficient standby equipment such as spare vibrators are available, there is a total lack of any additional infor-I mation on concrete consolidation in WP-109.
This is not in accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix 3, Criteria V, which requires that activitics af fecting quality shall be prescribed by documented procedures, instruction, or drawings.
,
S.
Instructions Lachine in Quality Control Surveillance of Concretc
-
Renairs
,
Technical Specification for forming, placing, finishing and curing of concrete, C-103,. Revision 7, establishes requirements in Section 15 for repair of concrete, and in Section 17 states that, inspection is required of any concre:e repair or patching of concrete imperfec:icns. QCP-109, Concrete Placement, Grouting, and post pour, provides two forms identified as Exhibi:s e and I which are applicabla to post pour inspection by QC of minor repairs.
However, major repairs which are the subject of an NCR should be identified in a special QC procedure in order :o identify verifying correction activi:1cs that implement significant required quali:y a ttribute s. The applicabili:y of using Forms H and I sad possibly L in QCP-109 requires additional instrue:1ons which should inter-f ace with AP-V11-02, Control of Nonconformances.
This is an unresolved 1:em.
,
f i
9.
Quality Control-and L'ork Procedures Lack Instrue: ion on Concrete Placement /Consolida:1on in Conces:cd and Dif ficui: Locaticas Regulatory Guide 1.55, Concrete Placement in Category I Structures is commit:ed in the SNUPPS PSAR. Consistent with this guide, special inst:uction/ provisions are required for.concre:e placement and con-solidation in congestad and difficult loca: ions. QCP and UP-109, Revisions 6 and 5, respec:ively, do not identify the need for special at:entica, training or the use of a special technique. This is an unresolved ite=.
.
i 10.
Unresolved Irans
.
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order :o ascertain whether they are ac:cptable items,
,
items of noncomplianca, or deviations. Unresolved items dis-closed during tha inspeccion are discussed in Section II, Para-graphs 1.d, 5.c,Section III, and See: ion V, paragraphs 3 and 9.
- 24 -
i
!
-
.. _,...,
-
. _ _ _,
-
.
_
.,,. - _ _ -.. -... -.. _ _
__.. _ -
.
.-
-
-
-.
. -
_- -
.
.
.
.
-
,
.
11.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with the licensee and contractor representa-tivos (denoted with an asterisk under Persons Contacted) at the conclusion of the inspection on July 1, 1977. The inspectors summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and the find-ings, and discussed the items of noncompliance and unresolved items id'entified during the inspection.
,
a
4
.
.
.
- 25 -
.
i
'
. - -
,
.
-
.,.
. -,.
. -. - -,
_
.
-,, -... _..,
..,
., _ - - _, _, -. - - _.
.
..
,