IR 05000546/1982006
| ML20054D044 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Marble Hill |
| Issue date: | 03/25/1982 |
| From: | Norton J, Williams C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054D043 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-546-82-06, 50-546-82-6, 50-547-82-06, 50-547-82-6, NUDOCS 8204220272 | |
| Download: ML20054D044 (7) | |
Text
-
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
Reports No. 50-546/82-06(DETP); 50-547/82-06(DETP)
Docket Nos. 50-546; 50-547 Licenses No. CPPR-170; CPPR-171 Licensee: Public Service of Indiana Post Office Box 190
New Washington, IN 47162 Facility Name: Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Marble Hill Site, Jefferson County, IN Inspection Conducted: March 9-12, 1982 Inspector:
J. F. Norton GC'ece6-Approved By:
C. C. Williams, Chief 2[
/
'
Plant Systems Scotion
,/
Inspection Summary Inspection on March 3-12, 1982 (Reports No. 50-546/82-06(DETP);
50-547/82-06(DETP))
.
Areas Inspected: Quality Assurance program, implementing procedures, specifications, work activities, and records related to the application of Service Level I protective coatings. This inspection involved a total of 32 onsite inspector-hours by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection.
j
.
J
.
.
.. - -
-
-. -.
.
l DETAILS Persons Contacted Public Service of Indiana (PSI)
- L.
Ramsett, Executive Director - Nuclear Quality Assurance
- C. Beckham, Quality Engineering Manager C. Togni, Chief Civil Engineer
- B.
Morrison, Quality Engineering Superintendent, Civil
- J. Wolfe, Quality Assurance Administrative Assistant
- D.
Whalen, Project Engineer, Civil
- G.
Fisher, Quality Engineer, Civil
- R. Borchert, Contract Manager, Composite J. Pelle, Resident Engineer, Composite R. Frederich, Acting Project Contract Manager
C. Hawley, Assistant Contract Manager i
- W.
Kropp, Audit Supervisor J. L. Manta Incorporated (JLM)
W. Bates, Quality Assurance Manager D. Ullrich, Lead QA/QC Inspector D. Weise, QA/QC Inspector Other Persons Contacted
- J.
Harrison, Region III Resident Inspector, NRC
- Denotes those attending the exit meeting.
Functional or Program Areas Inspected This inspection consisted of a review of the coating contractor's Quality Assurance Manual, QA/QC implementing procedures, quality records, and governing specifications. The storage area for Service Level I coating materials was inspected. Observation of surface preparation and Service Level I coating application was accomplished in Unit 1 containment and in the onsite blast shop.
1.
General J. L. Manta Incorporated of Chicago is the Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station coatings contractor responsible for the surface preparation, application, and first line QC inspection of Service Level I protective coatings. The purchase of coating materials, including source surveillance, is the responsibility of the licensee.
Materials are being obtained directly from the Carboline Company.
Receipt, receipt inspection, storage and documentation is the responsibility of JLM.
.
.
2.
-Review of JLM Qua71ty Assurance Manual and QA/QC Implementing Procedures Review of_the JLM QA Manual was accomplished. The manual contains 16 sections addressing the following:
1.0.0 Quality Assurance Program 2.0.0 Organization 3.0.0 Design Control 4.0.0 Procurement Document Control (Class I Material)
5.0.0 Instructions and Procedures 16.0.0 Document Control 7.0.0 Control of Purchased Material, Equipment and Services 8.0.0 Inspection 9.0.0 Test Control 10.0.0 Control of Measuring and Test Equipment 11.0.0 Handling and Storage 12.0.0 Inspection and Test 13.0.0 Non-Conforming Items 14.0.0 Corrective Action 15.0.0 Quality Assurance Records 16.0.0 Audits The QA/QC implementing procedures were reviewed to assure that they satisfactorily detail and set forth the methods by which the pro-visions of the QA Manual can be effectively implemented. Additionally, Specification Y-2831-A was reviewed to assure its compatibility with Manta implementing procedures. Twenty-two procedures were examined.
The Region III inspector noted in reviewing JLM/QP-04, Revision 4 (Non-Conforming Items Procedure), that the Manta NCR form does not contain review and signature sections for the Architect-Engineer and licensee engineering. This was discussed with Manta's QA Manager and Lead Inspector and also with licensee representatives.
It was learned that in the past appropriate review and sign-off have been accomplished and written in on the NCRs.
The QA Manager indicated the form would be revised to include the required review sign-off.
This item is open and will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection (50-546/82-06-01; 50-547/82-06-01).
3.
Review of Quality Records The following quality records were examined to verify conformance to appropriate procedures:
a.
Personnel Certification / Qualification Records (1) The Region III inspector reviewed training records of three QA/QC inspectors. One met Level III and two met Level II requirements in accordance with ANSI N45.2.6, and were certified accordingly.
.
-
(2) Training and qualification records for 28 Coating Applicators were examined. Of these, 17 were tested and qualified for applying Carbo Zinc 11 Primer and 11 for Pheno 305 Topcoat.
The personnel met the requirements set forth in JLM/QP-06, Revision 5, Applicator Qualification Procedure (Steel Substrates).
b.
Jobsite Training Records Records of training of JLM production personnel accomplished at the jobsite were reviewed and found to be in order.
c.
Receiving Inspection and Warehousing Records A random sampling of receiving inspection reports were reviewed.
Records for the following batches were checked:
.
Batch No. 1B2277Z - Carbo-Zinc Filler /Zine Dust Batch No. 1E2407Z - Carbo-Zinc Filler / Zinc Dust Batch No. 1H5687M - Carbo-Zinc 11 Base Batch No. 1E0685M - Carboline Thinner No. 21 Batch No. 1G1523M - Carboline Thinner No. 33 Batch No. 1B3798M - Phenoline 305 Finish Batch No. 1A3406M - Phenoline 305 Finish The records documented appropriate manufacturer's certifications to pertinent ANSI standards, and were in accordance with JLM/QP-01, Revision 5 (Receiving Procedure) and JLM/QP-02, Revision 6 (Warehousing Procedure).
d.
Measuring and Test Equipment Calibration Records Calibration records for the following instruments were examined:
(1) Thermometers: Taylor No. 1330P, Serial No. 0; Taylor No. 1330P Serial No. 02; United Electric No. 3706; United Electric No. 650, Serial No. SN-3708; PTC Model No. 315F, Serial No. 18423; Stortz SAMA, Serial No. 122176-1; Honeywell, Model No. 612X9-H7-00-00-7ML Temp RH Recorder, Serial No. 8135332422001; KTA Sling No. SN10595 and KTA Surf. Thermo.
No. 10929.
(2) Sling Psycrometer No. 10595 (3) KTA Mikrotest No. 16792 The records indicated each instrument was properly calibrated within the frequency limits specified in JLM/QP-03, Revision 6 (Control of Measuring and Test Equipment Procedure).
.
-
4.
Material Storage Coating materials are stored in a walled off 38 foot by 12 foot area located in a large metal warehouse.
Service Level I materials occupy a 24 foot by 12 foot area of the storage space.
An 8 foot by 8 foot locked QA/QC hold area is provided within the area. The total storage area is locked and controlled. Only escorted access is allowed, in conjunction with maintaining a personnel entry-exit log.
One longitu-dinal wall of the area is the warehouse wall. This wall has 5 inches of insulation against the metal warehouse skin. The area has a dry concrete floor and is equipped with air conditioning and heating facilities. A continuously recording United Electric No. 650 Disc Thermometer monitors temperatures. The storage area is well lighted, clean, and orderly. The Region III inspector observed that all Service Level I materials were properly tagged, that "no smoking" signs were posted outside and inside the area, and a fire extinguisher is provided beside the entrance door. The area complies with JLM/QP-10, Revision 3 (Housekeeping Procedures) and with JLM/QP-02, Revision 6 (Warehousing Procedure).
It is also in compliance with Environmental Condition Level (B) as outlined in ANSI N45.2.2 for material protection of Service Level I coatings.
5.
Observation of Work a.
Blast Shop Ongoing production work was observed in the blast shop on March 11, 1982. Beams and columns, scheduled for installation in safety-related plant areas, were surface prepared and coated.
Treatment of beams 1081B11, 1042-B3, 1049-B1, 1033=B3 and column 111-C8 was accomplished during the work observation.
The Blast Shop is in a large metal warehouse.
It has three separated areas for receiving, coating, and curing.
Two closed-off coating bays, each approximately 20 feet by 60 feet, are in the central area. These are well lighted and ventilated. Several large heavy-duty wagon gears are used to transport the steel members through the shop processing.
The steel members first received a white metal blast cleaning in accordance with SSPC-SP5-63 criteria (Steel Structures Painting Council). The method employed was dry blasting with compressed air nozzles using abrasive mixtures approximating 80% 2.8 - 3.0 mesh Ottawa sand and 20% G40 steel grit. After the blast cleaning was completed, the members were cleaned by air blowing and brushing.
Inspection for nicks and steel slivering and contamination (oil, grease or other deleterious substances) was then accomplished.
Slivers and undesirable deformities were identified and ground off.
Surface profiles were then checked with a KTA Surface Profile comparator to assure that a 1 to 3 mil blast surface profile was obtained. After final inspection and release by a
.
.
QA/QC inspector, the members were moved into the coating bays.
The measuring, mixing, and thinning of the primer, Carboline Carbozinc 11 and Carboline thinner, and also the topcoat material, Phenoline 305 components A and B (an epoxy) and thinner were observed. The coating was accomplished by pre qualified applicators using Binks No. 66 BP air taps, Binks fluid nozzles and two gallon Binks agitating pots at 41 PSI pot pressure and 80 PSI nozzle pressure. After coating, visual QA/QC inspection was performed, then the material transported to the curing area.
Dry Film Thickness measurements were observed being taken on other cured steel members in the curing area. A Mikrotest gauge (No. 18810) was being employed, and readings of about 9 mils were being obtained. The desired total thickness range is approximately 6 to 14 mils, b.
Unit 1 Containment Work is now underway on the Unit 1 containment liner. The planned effort calls for continuous work shifts until the liner coating is completed, which may encompass several weeks. Work observation in the containment area was limited to air blast cleaning and inspection of cured primed work. Dry blast c1 caning using compressed air blast nozzles and Ottawa sand was being employed to obtain a white metal blast (SSPC-SP5-63) cleaning on the rusted areas and a brush off blast (SSPC-SP7-63) on areas which had been coated with Carbozine 11 before the recent con-struction shutdown.
Six No. 6 Clemco nozzles were in operation.
Approximately 14 tons of sand are blown each 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> shift. Air is supplied by two Joy compressors, with capacities of 800 and 900 cfm.
The containment is heated with 6 LP gas units, each having 1 x 106 BTU capability. Eight air-driven Spider swing stages were in use.
Six were being deployed for production workers and two for inspection purposes. The containment liner coating effort was discussed with the contractor's lead QA/QC inspector and a licensee Quality Engineer, while observing the work.
6.
Service Level I Coatings QA/QC Program In the course of this inspection, the Region III inspector learned that the accelerated Unit 1 coating effort was being undertaken with the contractor planning to accomplish containment first line QA/QC inspection with two inspectors.
Serious concern regarding this was registered with the contractor QA/QC Manager, with the first line Lead Inspector, and also with licensee officials.
Licensee officials agreed that this was not a reasonable disposition of first line QA/QC personnel for a production effort of this magnitude and length, and indicated immediate action was in order and would be taken to address the concern.
-
s.
The Region III inspector subsequently reviewed this with NRC Management March 16, 1982. Also, NRC Region III personnel held telephone communi-cation. March 16 with the licensee Executive Director of Nuclear Quality Assurance, Mr. Loren Ramsett, to affirm NRC concern.
Mr. Ramsett indicated the concern was being addressed by their r
.act Management people. On March 23, Messrs. Ramsett and Charles '
.-nam, Quality Assurance Manager, telephoned the Region III inspector regarding the concern. Manta Construction has assigned two additional people to the containment inspectors staff. This brings the contractor's QA/QC
,
inspector onsite strength to 5.
7.
Exit Interview i
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted under
'
Persons Contacted) at the conclusion of the inspection on March 12, 1981. Also, communication by telephone was held March 16, 1982, as described in Paragraph 7 of this report. The inspector summarized the findings and concerns, as reported herein. The licensee acknow-a; ledged the findings reported herein.
,
f D
b i
.
i
.
-
-