IR 05000491/1981003
| ML20038D144 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cherokee  |
| Issue date: | 10/09/1981 |
| From: | Debbage A, Upright C, Wright R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20038D132 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-491-81-03, 50-491-81-3, 50-492-81-03, 50-492-81-3, 50-493-81-03, 50-493-81-3, NUDOCS 8112160102 | |
| Download: ML20038D144 (9) | |
Text
_
UNITED STATES o,,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[
g D
E REGION 11
%, * * * * *,o'[g 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 S
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report No. 50-491/81-03, 50-492/81-03 and 50-493/81-03 Licensee: Duke Power Company Facility Name: Cherokee Nuclear Stat. ion Licensee Nos. CPPR-167, CPPR-168 and CPPR-169 Inspection at the Cher kee[ site near Gaffney, South Carolina Inspectors:
J IC/4/fs
!
A. G. Debbage Dat6 Signed Y{b.
N 9 9l a
R. W. Wright g
Date Signed Approved by:
/
/d f $/
-
"C. M. Up r'T)h, S e on Chief
~ Ogtp/ Signed
~
Engineeri and pection Branch Division of Engineering and Technical Inspection J
SUMMARY Inspection on September 8-11, 1981 Areas Inspected
,
This routine unannounced inspection involved 47 inspector-hours on site in-the l
areas of extended construction delay implementing procedures; observation of work and work activites; and review of quality records.
!
Results Of the three areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified iri two areas; one violation was found in the storage area (Failure to implement N45.2.2 storage requirements paragraph 7.g.).
l l
l l
-
l
!
'8112160102 811200 PDR ADOCK 05000491
PDR k
.. _. -. _ _, -
.
. - -.
--
.._
_,
-
-
.
.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- D. L. Freeze, Acting Project Manager
- K. Patterson, Resident Cashier
- D. E. Whipp, Site Technical Support, Construction
- D. S. Mason, Supervising Technician
- K. W. Schmidt, QA Engineer D. P. Hensley, QA Technician R. Lee, QC Receiving Inspector M. Robbs, Document Control Technician S. Ferrell, Warehouseman "A" - Electrical D. Wright, Storekeeper Assistant J. Byers, Assistant Stores Supervisor
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview
.
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on September 11, 1981 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Construction Status In January 1980, Duke Power announced a reduction in force from 1850 personnel to 800 at Cherokee; Unit 1 was to be delayed from 1987 to 1990, Unit 2 delayed from 1989 to 1992 and Unit 3 to continue on indefinite delay.
In February 1981, Duke Power decided to further reduce the level of work at the Cherokee project and during March 1981 nearly all major construction activity was suspended. Activities continued including shipping materials to other Duke Power projects; the protective coating of components, piping and containment dish; erosion control; and security perimeter fence installation. It appears that the service water dam is now complete except for installation of further instrumentation. A survey team is recording as-built locations of pipe sleeves and plates.
Storage pads have been prepared for the Unit 1 reactor pressure vessel and steam generators which
.
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
____ _
_
_
._ _
_ _ _ ____
_
______ ___ __
..______
.
.
,
should be delivered during March 1982.
Licensee QC activities have been limited to storage and preventive maintenance inspections, limited receipt of material, and maintenance of QA records.
At the present time there are 160 people employed on the site, 140 of these being craf t employees.
6.
Review of Quality Assurance Imp 1.ementing Procedure (920518)
The following QA specifications, procedures, and instructions for extended construction delay activities were reviewed to confirm that the licensee has an adequate quality assurance program to handle the Cherokee Project'
construction delay activities.
a.
Preliminary Safety Analysis Report and Related Documents The Duke Power Compary's Quality Assurance Program is contained in the Topical Report DUKE-1 (Amendment 5) titled " Duke Power Quality Assurance Topical Report - Quality Assurance Program".
The NRC acceptance letter is dated July 14, 1981.
The Quality Assurance Program of the NSSS supplier Combustion Engineering is described in Topical Report CENPD - 210A, Rev. 3 entitled " Quality Assurance Manual for NSSS". These replace the QA programs previously described in the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report and the Combustion Engineering System Safety Analysis Report.
The Combustion Engineering procedure related to this inspection was reviewed; this was CEND-353, Rev. 6 entitled " Field handling, maintenance and stcrage requirements for Combustion Engineering furnished equipment".
b.
Construction Quality Assurance Procedures i
,
i R-1, Rev. 8 - Work Stoppage Procedure l
R-2, Rev. 7 - Corrective Action l
P-1, Rev. 21 - Receiving Inspection l
P-3, Rev.12 - Storage Inspection l
R-5. Rev. 3 - Nuclear Regulatory Commission Reporting Requirements 0-1, Rev. 21 - Control of Measuring and Test Equipment V-1, Rev. 3 - Training of Personnel M-28, Rev. 5 - Inspection of Housekeeping Requirements
'
Q-1, Rev.15 - Control of Nonconforming items G-1, Rev.15 - Document Control E-3, Rev.16 - Field Procurement of Items and Construction Services CKD 16, Rev. 5 - Storage Control of Mechanical Equipment l
CKD 17, Rev. 6 - Handling of Materials and Components CKD 28, Rev.1 - Receipt, Marking and Warehousing of Safety-Related Materials
'
l i
i
__
-
,
.
.
,
c.
Quality Assurance Manual Procedures QA-100, Rev. 5 - Preparation and issue of Quality Assurance Procedures QA '.46, Rev. 2 - QC Inspector Training QA-150, Rev. 2 - Trend Analysis QA-160, Rev. 0 - Performance of Corporate QA Audits QA-210,Rev 11 - Departmen:a1 Audit Procedure QA-230, Rev. 8 - Departmental Audit Scheduling and Follow-up QA-300, Rev. 3 - Construction Surveillance QA-403,Rev 7 - Quality Assurance Specification Review d.
Duke Power Corporate QA Program Procedure 7.0, Control of Purchased Material, Equipment, and Services, references regulatory standard ANSI N45.2.2.-1972, Packaging, Ship-ping, Receiving, Storage and Handling of Items for Nuclear Power Plants.
QA Manual for ASME Code Work QA Department QA Manual QA Program Procedure A-2 " Definitions and Implementation of the QA Program defined three QA Condition Areas:
QA Condition 1 - The QA Program applied to nuclear safety QA Condition 2 - The QA program applied to the radwaste facilities QA Condition 3 - The QA program applied to fire protection for nuclear stations.
Within the above area of construction delay procedural review, no viola-tions or deviations were identified.
7.
Work Observation (920538) and Review of Quality Records (920558)
The following representative safety related items were randomly selected for inspection to ascertain whether applicable construction delay require-ments and activities, as delineated by work and inspection procedures are being met, and that related quality work and inspection records reflect work accomplishment consistent with applicable requirements.
a.
The high pressure safety inspection pump S/N 117815 was stored in Warehouse No.1, a Level B storage facility.
The unit was housed in its shipping crate and a nitrogen gas positive pressure was being maintained.
Shaft rotation and oil changes were made at specified time intervals and inspections were conducted to verify that the
.
'
'
'
.
.
maintenance had been performed. The Boric Acid Concentrators were stored in their shipping containers and monthly rotation of all pump shafts were performed. Two reactor drain tank coolers S/N 79434 and S/N 79332 contained dessicant and humidity indicators were visible underneath glass cover plates.
The containment spray pumps and charging pumps with motors were also stored in this area.
In all cases the level of environmental storage was satisfactory for the equipment inspected.
b.
Electrical conduit was inspected in the Electrical Warehouse, a Level B storage area.
The conduit had previously been stored outside and weathering had resulted in rusted threads and reduction in protective coating.
1his had already been identified by the licensee.
Other equipment included the low pressure safety injection pump 77F14438, Bettis Corporation BIF Butterfly valve and Robotarm S/N 64096-2, General Signal BIF limitorque butterfly valves S.'N 64087-5 and N64102, and expansion joints S/N K-2272. In all cases the level of environ-mental storage was satisfactory for the equipment inspected.
The low pressure safety injection pump, made by Ingersoll Rand, was founa to have galled motor shaft threads when the impelier was removed. This was identified in a nonconforming item report #1782 and a Field Action Request Nuclear Form FAR #6473-50 was completed. The motor is now to be returned to Westinghouse, Buffalo, NY, for shaft replacement.
c.
The reactor make-up pump was stored in the Level A facility of Warehouse No. 1. The humidity indicator showed that a dessicant change was due very soon. Examination of the maintenance records showed that it was scheduled for change during September 1981.
The waste gas snalyzer panels P0 9872869, containment cooler and condensate pumps i
were also stored in this facility.
(
d.
No safety-related equipment was stored in Warehouse No. 3, a Level C storage facility.
An ITT Grinnel mechanical shock arrester 4408, class NPT, was stored in Warehouse No. 4, also a Level C storage i
facility.
e.
Equipment and materials stored in various laydown areas were also examined.
The sectional containment plates for Unit I were stored in the containment plate laydown area. The plates had been covered with protective coating and stored correctly with spacing blocks and sloping for water runoff. The reactor drain tank and pipe was stored in area L-7.
Stainless steel piping was observed outside the pipe fabrication shop and the licensee suted that they were in the process
l of making a laydovn area for this piping. Four safety injection tanks L
were stored at the railhead location; it was noted that some of the bolt holes had not been paint protected.
l i
l l
-
.
.
- - -.
. _.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-
.
.
In the L-9 laydown area, the Ingersoll Rand Nuclear Water Pump S/N 057953 and the shutdown heat exchanger S/N 79359 were inspected.
In the rebar yard, the reinforcing steel bar was stored on wood supports above ground level. L-13 laydown area was utilized for the storage of nuclear service water piping.
f.
The inspectors examined reactor Unit 1 and the equipment stored in place. When work ceased,.the concrete containment was approximately two thirds of its projected height. The spherical primary containment shell was only partly completed and the spherical shaped base had not been floated for setting in its final position. The welded spherical shape had received protective coating and drainage appeared satis-factory since there was no evidence of residual water.
Reinforcing steel bar not covered with concrete was sheltered by corrugated steel panels, sloped to permit rain run-off.
Embedded plates and sleeves were protective coated.
Equipment stored in place included the component cooling heat exchangers S/N 28482 and S/N 28483 which were pressurized with nitrogen to 10 PSIG. The letdown heat exchanger S/N N-2372 was pressurized to 7 PSIG. Also inspected was the gas stripper
<
main skid S/N 2205-1 and the gas stripper pump skid S/N 2205-2.
In all cases level C storage (in place) was satisfactory for the equip-ment inspected and the nitrogen purges satisfactory.
g.
During the warehouse inspection on September 8,1981, the inspectors found three gasoline containers stored with approximately seven.other empty gasoline containers in Warehouse No. 1, a Level B store area where safety related components were stored. Flammable materials were also found stored in the Level A portion of Warehouse No. 1.
Addi-tionally, evidence of smoking (cigarett butts, cigarett packages) were found in all warehouses with the exception of the Level A area and drinking by personnel (soft drink cans, plastic coffee cups) was evident in most warehouse storage areas.
The above example of failure to implement ANSI N45.2.2 storage
,
!
requirements (paragraphs 6.2.3 and 6.3.3) was identified to the licensee as violation 50-491/81-03-01.
l h.
Handling of non-conforming items (NCI) was reviewed to determine that they had been adequately identified, documented and corrective action implemented. All NCI's are entered into the NCI log book and two NCI files are maintained "Pending Action" (by Field) and "Pending Dispo-sition" (by Corporate HQ). The latest status list was issued August 27, 1981 and there were 41 outstanding NCI's as of that date.
The licensee stated that they were committed to closing all the NCI's that could be closed as soon as possible.
.
-
.
.
1.
The QAM Procedure QA-300 provided for surveillance of major work activity. The following records of monthly surveillance of activities were examined:
M-1, Receipt storage and issue of mechanical items surveillance records were examined for 6/78 through 8/80.
'
M-10, Welding material receipt, storage and issue surveillance records were examined for 7/78 through 4/80.
C-11, Containment: Receipt and storage surveillance records were examined for 5/79 through 3/80.
C-19, Civil materials receipt and storage surveillance records were examined for 7/78 through 8/80.
The following records of auarterly surveillance of activities were examined:
S-4 (and S-4S), Receipt, storage and issue surveillances were conducted 9/80,12/80, 3/81 and 6/81.
j.
Discussions were held and correspondence reviewed to determine steps taken by the licensee to establish effective controls as a result of the extended construction delay and severe reduction in manpower. The following licensee correspondence was reviewed:
March 6,1981. Construction shutdown considerations - subjects covered included miscellaneous buried pipe, component-cooling water pipe and pump structure, turbine building and service building substructure and underdrain systems, earthwork and drainage, environmental monitoring program, perimeter fence and yard track.
l March 16,1981. Memo contained directions on both carbon steel and stainless steel piping, fittings and flanges.
l March 25, 1981. Memo detailed the monitoring required for the site groundwater, powerhouse groundwater and the nuclear service water dam settlement.
'
April 1, 1981. Memo discussed settlement monitoring.
Another
!
memo dated April 1,1981 covered Combustion Engireering supplied
'
equipment, protective coatings and repainting.
April 8, 1981.
Memo addressed outdoor storage of electrical equipment; an inspection tour by Duke Power Electrical Division had been made of the Cherokee electrical equipment outdoor storage area to determine the extent cf equipment rusting. One l
I L
-
.,
.
,
of the recommandations was that the rigid steel conduit elbows be cleaned of rust, painted as required and moved to inside storage.
April 14, 1981.
Memo discussed protecting piping materials and fiberglass pipe.
September 10, 1981 memo covered electrical storage in the L-9 laydown area.
With the exception of the violation discussed in paragraph 7.g, no other violations or deviations were identified.
8.
General Inspection Findings The calibration program previously implemented by the licensee is now virtually nonexistent.
The tools under the former program had been calibrated to verify correctness and then taken out of the program.
All of the equipment and items in storage were found in the proper environment and storage locations and were being maintained and documented as specified in the Equipment Special Storage and Maintenance Inspection procedures.
These procedures were current and readily available to the persons doing the work.
Control and distribution of precedures and revisions appeared to be adequate.
Protective covering, internal preservation, supports, cleanliness, weather protection, and fire protection (with the exception of the area where gasoline had been found) were all observed to be within the requirements of the particular item in storage.
Records of nonconforming conditions or activities (NCI's) pertinent to the above inspected safety related items were examined to see if they were legible, complete and that proper corrective action was taken.
Inspector crosstraining and certification had been undertaken to ensure that personnel were available to inspect the remaining activities during the construction delay period.
Examination papers and certification records reviewed of the inspectors currently employed appeared to be
adequate.
l Access control to the site has been completed with the site boundary fenced L
with gates, storage buildings and warehouses padlocked.
Security forces man the entrance to the site and also at the entrance gate to provide general overall security against unauthorized intrusion.
!
'
Within the area, no violations or deviations were identiffed.
!
l
>
i,
.
,
9.
Records Revie.' (92055B)
Additional records examined pertinent to equipment and materials selected for review included:
a.
Safety-related item purchase orders b.
QC receiving inspection reports c.
Equipment special storage and maintenance inspection containing requirements and inspection verification.
d.
All of the mechanical procedures (M Series) for preventive maintenance and inspection records appropriate to these activities, e.
Storage area inspection reports, f.
All remaining nonconforming item reports.
g.
Review of memoranda relating to the initial reduction in force (January 1980) and reduction in level of work (February 1981).
h.
Surveillance checklists (Forms QA-300A).
Based on this review, no violations or deviations were identified.