ML17209B045
| ML17209B045 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 01/02/1981 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17209B043 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-389-80-15, NUDOCS 8105110527 | |
| Download: ML17209B045 (6) | |
Text
APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Florida Power and Light Company St. Lucie License No.
CPPR-144 Based on the NRC inspection October 27-31, 1980, certain of your activities were apparently not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements as indicated below.
These items have been categorized as described in correspondence to you dated December 31, 1974.
A.
As required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion IX and as implemented by the Florida Power and Light Company Topical Report (FPGL TQARl-76A) Section 9, "Measures shall be established to assure that special processes, including
- welding, heat treating and nondestructive testing are controlled and accomplished by qualified personnel using qualified procedures in accordance with applicable
- codes, standards, specifications,
- criteria, and other special requirements."
SNT-TC-1A, paragraph 8.6.4 and procedure QI 2.7 requires the examinee to identify 90/ of the known indications.
Contrary to the above, the following examples of noncompliance with applic-able code or procedural requirements were noted in training and qualification test specimens for the certification of magnetic particle (MT), liquid penetrant (PT) and visual (VT) examiners.
MT test specimen
$/6 which is one of two currently used MT test plates used of certify examinees has chisel marks as defects which can be seen visually.
In addition to not typifying weld defects which an examiner will encounter, the disposition sheet for the test specimen does not, indicate how many indications are present, so establishing if the examinee has in fact identified 90/ of the known indications is opinion in lieu of established fact.
2.
Test specimen j/10 which is used exclusively for testing PT examinee's does not typify actual PT evaluations encountered by a
PT examiner.
In addition, the disposition sheet for this test specimen also does not identify how many known indications are present to determine whether an examinee has in fact identified 90/ of the known indication as required by the criteria
- above, most of which would be rejected visually and does not test the examinee's ability.
<> 05 1l 0 5'R7
Florida Power and Light Company License No.
CPPR-144 Appendix A
3.
(a)
Test specimens for visual certificaton are not formally in the training program (b)
Test specimens do not adequately test examinee's ability to use measuring devices or evaluate welds/fitups in accordance with the licensee's written Procedure QI 9.1 or Paragraph NB-5521 of Section III to the ASME Code.
(c)
Several defect/surface conditions are not included in hardware samples; i.e., burn thru, cracks, blow holes, 3-1 tapes and weld prep surfaces.
This is a deficiency.
B.
As required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion IX and as implemented by the Florida Power and Light Company Topical Report (FPSL QARI-76A) Section 9, "Measures shall be established to assure that special processes, including
- welding, heat treating and nondestructive testing are controlled and accomplished by qualified personnel using qualified procedures in accordance with applicable
- codes, standards, specifications,
- criteria, and other requirements."
Licensee proecedures QI 9.1.,
9.4 and 9.5 establish the visual magnetic particles and liquid inspection requirements respectively.
Contrary to the
- above, on October 27-31,
- 1980, the following examples of noncompliance with applicable code or procedural requirements were noted in nondestructive testing and visual inspection.
l.
A level I liquid penetrant (PT) examiner accepted nine linear indications on weld joint jj'2F-2-P-OE7003 that should have been rejected.
2.
A level II PT examiner failed to mark/identify two linear indications on the base material within g" of weld joint j/2F-2-P-OE6-003.
Two level I magnetic particle (MT) examiners were observed performing a
MT examination on weld joint j/2F-2-STL-G803-015 in which the appli-cation of the MT powder was extremely heavy, the removal of the particles were accomplished by vigorously blowing with the MT blow bulb at close
- range, and the color of the MT powder used for the inspection did not adequately contrast with the examination of the as-welded surface condition.
4.'eld joint AS-0029-007 which had been visually accepted, was noted to have a sharp transition between the weld metal and the adjacent Tee fitting.
This is an infraction.
Florida Power and Light Company License No.
CPPR-144 Appendix A C.
As required by Paragraph (a)(1) of 10 CFR 50.55a,
"...Systems...
shall be...
fabricated....
and inspected to quality standards commensurate with the inportance of the safety function to be performed".
For safety related piping weld radiography this requirement is implemented by Florida Power and Light Company Topical Report (FPSLTQAR1-76A) Appendix C, which requires nondestructive examination to be accomplished in accordance with Section V
Contrary to the
- above, the radiographic examination of safety-related piping welds was not performed in accordance with ASME Code Section V or licensee procedure in that:
1.
Penetrameters and lead letter "F" were positioned on the weld, when it was possible to place same on adjacent base metel.
2.
Radiographic films were not dated.
3.
Location markers were not used to identify area of weld to be reviewed.
4.
Base metal defects were not evaluated or dispositoned on the film reader's record.
5.
The film reader's record contains erroneous information regarding radiographic technique and required radiographic sensitivity.
This is an infraction.
D.
As required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion VIII and implemented by the Florida Power and Light Company Topical Report (FPRL TQARI-76A) Section 8, "Measures shall be established to assure that material, parts, and components shall be identified and controlled as required throughout fabrication,
- storage, construction, etc."
Contrary to the
- above, the inspector noted that weld travelers at fitup inspection did not indicate where temporary attachments were installed, nor was the areas where the attachments were welded marked.
,A review of the licensee's visual inspection procedure did not have procedural requirements that will adequately control the use and inspection of temporary attachments.
This is an infraction.
E.
As required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI and implemented by FPSL Topical Report (FPSL TQARI-76) Section 16, "Corrective Action" which states in part that measures shall be established to assure that conditions adverse to quality, such as..., deficiencies, deviations,...
and nonconformances are promptly identified and corrected.
ANSI 45.2.3-1973 establishes the requirements for housekeeping during the construction phase of nuclear power plants.
Florida Power and Light Company JAN 2lssi Appendix A Contrary to the
- above, during the week of October 27, 1980, it was found that construction debris and garbage which included highly inflammable liquids, were found in many areas of the containment, and auxiliary buildings where safety-related materials were being or had been installed.
This is an infraction.