ML16341C888
| ML16341C888 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 02/08/1979 |
| From: | Haynes R, Hutson T, Kirsch D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16341C889 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-275-79-01, 50-275-79-1, NUDOCS 7903190071 | |
| Download: ML16341C888 (24) | |
See also: IR 05000275/1979001
Text
U.
S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COP)MISSION
OFFICE
OF
INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
50-275/79-01
,Report
No.
50-323/79-01
50-275
Docket
No.
50-323
CPPR-39
License
No.
CPPR-69
Safeguards
Group
Licensee:
Pacific
Gas
and Electric Company
77 Beale Street
San Francisco,
94106
Facility Name.
Diablo Canyon Units
1 and
2
Inspection at
Diablo Canyon Site,
San Luis Obispo County, California
Inspection
Conducted
January
22 - February 1,
1979
Inspectors:
D. F. irs,
eactor Inspector
9
T. W. Hutson,
Reactor
Inspector
ate Signed
Approved By:
R. C.. Haynes~
f, Project Section,
Reactor
Construction
and Engineering
Support
Branch
Summary:
Ins ection'.during period of Januar
22,
1979 throu
h Februar
1,
1979
Re ort Nos.
50-27
-6l an
Areas
Ins ected:
Routine,
unannounced
inspection
by regional
based
inspectors
of
icensee
action
on previous inspection findings; licensee
action
on reported
50.55(e)
items; electrical
and instrumentation
work observation
and record
review related to the seismic trip system
and dedicated
shutdown panel; arc
strike repair program;
VSL tendon
and rock anchor
work observation
and record
review; pipe support
and restraint work observation
and record review; as-built
drawing completion
and engineers
equipment releases;
and
gA audits.
The
inspection involved 77 inspector-hours
onsite
by two
NRC inspectors.
Results:
Of the eight areas
inspected,
no items of noncompliance
or deviations
vre~e Vuentified in seven
areas
and
one
unr esoived
item was identified in .the
area of pipe support
and restraints-(Paragraph
10).
0~~80oq (,
IE:V Form 219 (2)
ll
DETAILS
Individual s Contacted
a ~
Pacific
Gas
and Electric
Com an
(PGSE
b.
+R.
- M
- M.
- D
- J
- V
- J
- D
D.
H.
C.
J.
R.
R.
S.
J.
J.
J.
R.I.
J.
B.
Gu
D. Etzler, Project Superintendent
N. Norem, Startup
Engineer
E. Leppke,
QA Supervisor
A. Rockwell, Resident Electrical
Engineer
N. Cochran,
Resident Civil Engineer
L . Killpack, Resident
Mechanical
Engineer
Arnold, Coordinating
QC Engineer
L. Polley, Assistant
To Project Engineer
Nielsen,
Senior Electrical
Engineer
J. Gormley, Supervising
Mechanical
Engineer
Braff, Pipe Support Supervisor
A. Holley, Piping Inspection
Group Supervisor
A. Young, Electrical
Engineer
Bell,
QA Inspector
J. Foat, Electrical Field Engineer
Nystrom, Electrical
Inspector
Cole, Electrical Field Engineer
Hanna,
NSSS Group Supervisor
Mendoza, Field Engineer
Macdonald,
Engineering
Services-Scheduler
R. Sumner,
Startup
Engineer
Gragg,
Welding Inspector
F. Atkinson
Com an
GFA
c ~
M.
T.
p.
M.
H.
M. Walsh,
QA Manager
Loomis,
QA Auditor
Bernasconi,
QC Inspector
Anderson,
Lead Inspector
P. Foie
Com an
Foie
V. Tenneyson,
QA Manager
d.
Pullman-Kelloq
(Kello
D.
V.
D.
Geske,
Assistant
QA Manager
J . Casey,
Level II Examiner
K. Truran,
QA Engineering
Supervisor
+Contacted
via telecon
on February 2, 1979.
- Attended January
25, 1979, exit interview at site.
- Attended February 1, 1979, exit interview at Corporate Office.
Project Status
The licensee
plans to be prepared
to load fuel in Unit
1 about
May 1,
1979,
pending completion of the operating license
hearings
and
issuance
of an operating license,
and plans to complete all seismic
modification work on Unit
1 prior to fuel load, except:
a.
Seismic
upgrade of the fire protection
hose reel
system.
b.
Installation of flange extensions
to the Turbine Building
structural
steel
columns.
The Unit
1
punch list was reviewed
and noted to contain about
265 items, not all of which are required for fuel loading or
startup.
The licensee
stated that the punch list would Become
much smaller following the performance of system verification
testing, currently to be performed in February
1979.
Gener al
Effective February 1, 1979, Mr.
W. A. Raymond
assumed
the duties
of gA Director, replacing Mr. R.
P.
Wischow.
Mr. Raymond
was
previously Plant Superintendent
at Humboldt Bay Nuclear
Power
Plant.
In response
to inspector questions,
the licensee
reported that
no
Kulka terminal blocks
(No. 604D-2402-06)
are
used in safety re-
lated applications at Diablo Canyon.
Licensee Action on 0 en Items of Enforcement
(0 en) Infraction - Failure to Se grate Mutuall
Redundant Circuits
n Contr'o
Room
Pane s'in
a Manner
Re uvre
b t e
PS
R
5 -275 an
2
8-
In response
to the item of noncompliance,
the licensee
reported the
discrepancy in accordance
with 10 CFR 50,
Paragraph
50.55(e).
The
licensee
submitted letters to the
NRC on November 2, 1978,
and Jan-
uary 18, 1978, addressing
the corrective actions required
by the
Notice of Yiolation and
10 CFR 50, Paragraph
50.55(e).
Representatives
of the licensee's
Engineering
Department
had
inspected
the Unit
1
and
2 Auxiliary Safeguards
Cabinets
A and
B,
Solid State Protection
System Trains
A and
B and the Main Control
-3-
Boards.
These
inspections
did not disclose
any additional defi-
ciencies in separation
of mutually redundant circuits.
The li-
censee
had written Nonconformance
Report
(NCR) No. DCO-78-EG-009
documenting
the item of noncompliance.
This
NCR was in the pro-
cess of resolution.
An instruction (NPI-2.3,
"NRC Licensing" )
was issued
on November 15, 1978, to assure that verification
actions are taken
by engineering
in response
to
NRC licensing
comnitments
not covered
by normal design or construction verifi-
cation.
The inspector observed that the licensee
had begun separation of
mutually redundant circuits in the control
room panels
and noted
that inspection
and acceptance
had not yet been performed.
This
area will be examined during
a future inspection.
5.
Licensee Action on Ins ector Identified Followu
Items
a.
(Closed)
Pi
e
Su
ort Ins ection
50-323/78-15-04
The licensee
stated that
a final walk'down inspection
was being
performed
on Unit
1 pipe supports
and
was also scheduled
for
Unit 2.
The licensee
reaffirmed the commitment that all Unit
1
mechanical
would be inspected
and stroked within 30
days prior to fuel loading to assure
proper operation.
The
Unit
1 final pipe support inspection -program
has
shown that
only a small percentage
of Unit
1 hangers
have discrepancies
(mainly loose nuts).
Although the Unit 2 final walkdown had not begun,
the licensee
had corrected
the discrepant
conditions
noted
on Unit 2 sup-
ports
Nos.
564-90
and 564-95.
(Ref.
IE Inspection Report
No.
50-323/78-1 5. )
The inspectors verified that the licensee's
walkdown program
adequately
addressed
final inspection criteria
and appeared
effective in determining discrepant
conditions requiring repair.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
I
b.
(Closed) Unresolved
Item - Unit 2 Pi
e
Su
ort Meld Surface
re arat
on
5 -323 78-
-05
The inspector
examined the licensee's
actions to resolve what
appeared
to be rough surface conditions
on
a weld of support
No.89-25R.
The licensee
ground the weld area in question
to a smooth surface
and performed
examina-
tion of the area
on December
20, 1978.
The liquid penetrant
(LP) examination
record
was
examined
and
no rejectable indica-
tions were found.
LP examinations
were witnessed
by PG&E gC
personnel.
This was the fourth satisfactory
LP examination
performed
on that shop weld.
No items of noncompliance
or
deviations
were identified.
(Closed) Protection of Safet
Related
Com onents
50-323/78-15-06
The inspector
examined
the licensee's
program for maintaining
and verifying cleanliness
of primary system
components.
Proce-
dure MFI-3-2 and Specification
8752 require that component
openings
remain closed
except
as necessary for installation or
fitup.
Licensee
representatives
stated that only the Resident
Mechanical
Engineer
may authorize entry to the primary system
for specific activities; moreover; after flushing, strict con-
trol is employed wherein
permanent
covers
are installed
and
entry is allowed only with proper clothing and material
account-
ability.
The licensee
pointed out that an inspection
and cleanup
of primary piping is per formed prior to and after flushing.
The Unit 2 primary system
had not been flushed yet.
The pro-
gram for maintaining
and verifying cleanliness
of primary system
components
appears
to adequately
implement the
NSSS suppliers
requirements.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were
identified.
(Closed) Safet
Related
Outside
Tank Foundations
50-
32
8-
The inspector
examined
the licensee's
actions to preclude voids
in the concrete
foundations of outside safety related
tanks
and
found that the actions
appeared
adequate.
Documentation
examined
'ncluded
the batch plant inspector's daily reports, daily strength
reports
and concrete
placement
cards for lifts F317-B,
C and
D
of the Unit
1 condensate
storage
tank and lifts F327-A, B, and
C of the Unit
1 refueling water storage tank.
The
GFA procedure for stud welding
(gCP-16)
was examined for
compliance with AWS-D1.1.
The completed installations of about
500 studs
were examined for compliance with procedural
require-
ments.
The
GFA stud welding inspection reports
and bend test
inspection reports were sampled
and
examined for compliance
with procedural
requirements.
The following activities related to the installation of seismic
modifications
on the outside safety related
storage
tanks were
sampled
and
examined for compliance with procedural
requirements.
(1)
Completed welding and fitup of tank stiffener plates.
(2)
Reinforcing steel installation on Unit
1 condensate
storage
tank and refueling water storage tank.
(3)
Goner ete curing conditions.
(4)
Rebar storage conditions.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
e.
Closed
Seismic Stron
t3otion Indication and Reactor Tri
'
stem
50-275
323 78- 5-08
The licensee classified the seismic strong motion indication
system as."not safety related"
and the reactor trip system
as
safety related.
(1)
Review of
A Im lementin
Procedures
The following Foley procedures
were examined for compliance
with FSAR commitments
and licensee
drawing requirements:
(a)
gCP-9:
"Installation of Raceways,
Junction
Boxes
and
Terminal
Boxes for Wire Pull"
(b)
gCP-10:
"gC Procedure f'r Power, Control
and Signal
Wires"
(c)
gCP-ll:
"Cable and Wire Terminations"
No items of noncom'pliance
or deviations
were identified.
(2)
Observation of Work and
Work Activities
The following completed
work associated
with the seismic
trip system
was
examined for compliance with procedural
and
FSAR requirements.
(a)
Nine conduit installations.
(b)
Thirty-five cable installations,
including
terminations.
(c)
Nine conduit supports.
(d)
Cabinet mounting
and circuit installations in
Seismic Trip Cabinets for Trains
A and
B.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
(3)
Review of
ual it
Records
The following quality related
records associated
with the
above observations
were examined for compliance with pro-
cedural
requir ements:
(a)
Conduit installation sheets
(b)
Raceway inspection reports
(c)
Circuit installation records
(d)
Circuit installation resistance
data
(e)
Cirucit termination records
(f)
Class
IE support inspection reports
(g)
Support installation work sheets
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
f.
(Closed) Fire Protection
and
Su
ression
S stem
The licensee
had performed
a walkdown inspection of Unit
1
piping systems
to determine
the number of anchors installed into
concrete
blocks of concrete
block walls.
Licensee representa-
tives noted that the center
of concrete
blocks was not an area
of concern
because
the centers
are filled with steel-reinforced
concrete.
A similar walkdown inspection
was scheduled for
Unit 2.
An evaluation of the effectiveness
of a small
number
of hangers
installed in the concrete
blocks was being performed.
The inspector
had
no further questions
on this item.
Licensee
representatives
noted that fire protection
hose reel
lines would be supported
by seismically qualified hangers
and
that about 405 of this work had
been
completed in Unit 1.
Fire
protection sprinklers
were being
added
over Class
1 equipment
and all
new sprinkler
system lines are to be supported
by
seismically qualified hangers.
This work was currently 305
complete in Unit l.
It had
been identified by an
NRC inspector that one Cardox
system pipe support
had loose locknuts
and
was missing
one
U-bolt nut.
(IE Inspection
Report
No. 50-275/78-15.)
The
9
licensee
noted that the Cardox system
was
a Class
2 system
and that the repair of the identified discrepancies
was
completed
on January
23,
1979.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
(0 en
Ru ture Restraint Bolt Tension Settin
s
50-323/76-03,
05,
8-
an
Discussions
with licensee
and contractor
personnel
disclosed that
all A490 bolts installed in rupture restraints,
that
had been
torqued more than once, will be replaced.
The most recent revision
of the
AISC Specification for Structural
Joints
Using
ASTl1 A325
or A490 Bolts requires that A490 bolts not be reused after final
torqueing.
Numerous rupture restraints
have
been disassembled
and reassembled
due to modifications or rework and therefore con-
tain reused
A490 bolts.
This practice
was allowed by the pre-
vious edition of the structural
steel bolting standard.
Due
to the difficulty in determining accurately
which bolts
had
been
torqued
more than once,
the licensee
decided to replace all A490
bolts used in the rupture restraints.
This item will be examined
during
a future inspection.
Licensee Action on 50.55 e) Items
a ~
(Closed)
Ade uac
of tlotor Driven Auxiliar
Pum
s
e
.
IE Ins ect on
Re ort
o.
5 -2
an
3
The licensee
had submitted
a final report addressing
this matter
on October
24, 1978.
The report
was reviewed
and appeared
to
provide adequate
resolution of the identified condition.
This
item is closed.
b.
(Closed
De th-to-Thickness
Ratio of Turbine Buildin
Column
e s'Excee
owa
es of
IS
Manua
The licensee
submitted
a 50.55(e) report
on December ll, 1978,
describing the actions
taken to correct the identified Turbine
Building column "depth-to-thickness ratio" deficiencies.
The inspector reviewed drawings
2277-S-V-E101
and
E102 and the
welding procedure
(WS-10) being used to weld the stiffeners to
the columns.
Twenty-six completed
welds were examined for com-
pliance with visual
acceptance
criteria of AWS D1.1-1975.
All
examined
appeared
satisfactory.
The contractor
had noticed earlier what appeared
to be
a crack
in the weld termination areas
of the partial penetration
A nonconformance
report
(NCR No. 243)
was written documenting
the deficient weld areas.
The contractor
stated that this matter
would be resolved.
The welding and inspection records for
columns 10.6, 12.2,
14,
20 and 23.8 on the
A line were reviewed.
This review included Field Erection Inspection Sheets,
Welding
Electrode
Issuance
Records
and Welder gualifications.
No items
of noncompliance or deviations
were noted
and the inspector
had
no further questions
on this matter.
c. '"(Closed
Material Documentation Deficiencies in Small Structural
tee
S
a es
On December
13, 1978, the licensee
submitted written notification
of a discrepancy
reportable
under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.55(e).
This report identified that material certifications
and test re-
ports, associated
with small structural
steel
shapes
supplied
by
a local supplier,
were improper.
The licensee
had undertaken
an
extensive investigation to determine the adequacy of safety re-
lated materials
purchased
from that local supplier
by all site
contractors
and presented
the results of that investigation.
A
final 50.55(e) report was submitted
on January
31,
1979.
The
results of the investigation were examined
by the inspector.
The licensee's
investigations
appeared
to be comprehensive
and
adequate.
The licensee
had examined manufacturer's
certifications at the
original mill and conducted
physical
and chemical tests,
per-
formed by an independent
laboratory
and the licensee's
Department
of Engineering
Research,
on
31
samples of material for which
certifications were either questionable
or not available.
Of
the certifications
examined or obtained
by testing, only one
heat
number
was rejectable
(failed only the bend test).
The
material with that heat
number
was rejected
and replaced with
" conforming material.
This item is closed.
7.
Dedicated
Shutdown
Panel
a ~
Observation of Work and
Work Activities
The following completed
work was examined for compliance with
procedural
requirements.
(1)
Five installed circuits.
(2)
Three conduit supports
and
one conduit installation.
e
-9-
(3)
Dedicated
shutdown
panel
mounting.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
b.
Review of
ualit
Records
The following quality related
records
associated
with the above
work observations
were examined for compliance with procedural
requirements.
(1)
Conduit installation sheet
and raceway inspection report.
(2)
Circuit installation, termination
and insulation resistance
records.
(3)
Class
IE support inspection reports
and support installation
work sheets.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
8.
Arc Strike
Re air Pro ram
The )nspector
reviewed the arc strike repair program established
by Kellogg.
Engineering Specification
D-271,
Procedure for Removal
of Arc Strikes
and
Weld Splatter
on Piping and Components,
was re-
viewed for compliance with ASME Code Section XI, thru Summer
1978
Addenda.
At the time of the inspection,
the program was newly
implemented;
however, four Deficient Condition Notices
(DCN) had
been issued,
of which two were closed out.
DCNs 332-006
and 332-013,
and the related Field Process
Sheets,
Reports
and
Ultrasonic Test Reports
were reviewed for compliance with the repair
program requirements.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were noted.
9.
VSL Tendon
Rock Anchor
uglification
The inspector
reviewed the
VSL Report
on Turbine Pedestal
Test Anchors,
dated
December
15, 1978.
Documentation
reviewed included the material
certifications for tendon wire and the cement
used in grout; receiving
inspection reports; certificate of calibration for the hydraulic ram;
calculation of tendon elongations;
correlation of calculated
and meas-
ured extensions
in the test anchors
and calculation of the required
bond lengths
based
on the test anchor results.
PGSE
had documented
their review and approval of the test results for the turbine pedestal.
The
same testing
program would be used for the
VSL tendons to be
installed
on the outside vital tank enclosures.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations
were identified.
-10-
10.
Pi
e
Su
orts and Restraints
The inspector
reviewed the final walkdown inspection
program for
Unit
1 rupture restraints.
At present,
the program is approximately
50% complete for Unit 1.
The inspector selected
two rupture re-
straints,
5-6RR and 3-11RR, for examination to verify the effective-
ness of the final walkdown inspection.
The final walkdown and
documentation
review for rupture restraints identified several
unacceptable
items w'hich were documented
on the review record
and
on Deficient Condition Notice
(DCN) 43-58.
The
DCN stated that
D of restraint 3-llRR was undersized.
The inspector visually
examined the weld, after repairs effected
by the
DCN were complete,
and noted that
some
base metal
had
been
removed.
The dimensions
of this area
were approximately
6 inches long, 3/8 inch wide and
extended
into the base
metal
approximately 1/16 inch.
A review
of the field process
sheet for weld
D repair .identified that the
weld had
been
accepted
by the Kellogg gC inspector
on December 7,
1978.
Discussions with licensee
personnel
indicated that the area
of base
metal
removal
was acceptable.
This item<is considered
unresolved
pending further review by the inspector.
(50-275/79-01-01)
The installation, settings
and quality records of the following
nine spring
hangers
in the Unit
1 containment
were examined.
S rin
Han er
1044-7V
52-12V
46-9V
52-23V
46-8Y
52-22V
51-24V
176-145Y
Size
(Load Ratin
14
7
3
12
6
12ll
4
13
A visual inspection of spring
hanger
46-9V indicated that
no lock
nuts were present
on either
end of the turnbuckle installed in the
hanger rod.
A review of the Support Final Inspection
Record veri-
fied that the missing lock nuts were identified by the
gC inspector
during the final inspection,
and recorded
as not being tight (as
required
by procedure
ESD-223, "Installation and Inspection of
Class
I Pipe Supports" ) in the locknut checkoff column.
The
gC
inspector failed to record the discrepancy
in the remarks
column
as required
by ESD-266,
"Final hlalkdown Inspection of Class
I Pipe
Supports,"
and signed off the support
as being acceptable.
Discus-
sions with licensee
and contractor
personnel
indicated that the
same
gC inspector
had questionable
inspection practices
in the past
and
that corrective action was in progress
to reinspect all work pre-
viously accepted
by that
gC Inspector.
The inspector
had
no
further questions
on this matter at that time.
As-Built Drawin
s and
En ineer
E ui ment Releases
12.'3.
'he
licensee's
design drafting department
had incorporated into drawings
62Ã of the Priority 1 as-built conditions received
from the field.
A
summary report was being issued
monthly to track completion of the
as-built documentation.
The licensee
was performing this activity as
required
by EDP-3.7, "As-Built Documents,"
and requires that all
Priority
1 as-built conditions
be completed prior to fuel lo'ading.
It appears
that actions to implement this commitment are adequate.
The licensee
stated that engineering
release
of components
and.
equipment would be completed prior to fuel loading.
Thirty-six
Unit
1 Engineering
Releases
remain to be completed
and adequate
controls appear to be implemented
to assure their completion.
No items of noncompliance or deviations
were identified.
gA Audits
The licensee's
internal audit system
was inspected
by examining
ten
gA audits
performed
since
November 9, 1978.
In the conduct of
these audits,
the licensee identified ten findings which required
corr'ective action.
The corrective actions
had
been initiated
and/or completed
in accordance
with the licensee's
nonconformance
reporting
system or open item resolution
system.
No items of non-
compliance or deviations
were identified.
Unresol ved
Items
Unresolved
items are matters
about which more information is required
in order to ascertain
whether they are acceptable
items,
items of non-
compliance,
or deviations.
One unresolved
item was identified during
this inspection
and is discussed
in Paragraph
10.
14.Exit'Interview
The inspectors
met with licensee
representatives
(denoted
in
Paragraph
1) at the conclusion of the inspections, on January
25,
1979,
and February 1, 1979,
and
summarized
the inspection
purpose,
scope
and findings.
The licensee
was informed of the unresolved
item and noted that the circumstances
would be evaluated.