ML19208B735
| ML19208B735 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 05/16/1979 |
| From: | Gallagher E, Hawkins F, Neisler J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19208B724 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-373-79-17, 50-374-79-11, NUDOCS 7909210292 | |
| Download: ML19208B735 (10) | |
See also: IR 05000373/1979017
Text
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-373/79-17; 50-374/79-11
Docket No. 50-373; 50-374
License No. CPPR-99; CPPR-100
Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company
P. O. Box 767
Chicago, IL 60690
Facility Name:
LaSalle County Station
Inspection At:
LaSalle Site, Marseilles, Illinois
Inspection Conducted: April 24-25, 1979
f/lL/M
Inspectors:
F. C. Hawkins ,
a
,\\
l
I
'
,
T, / 4
79
E.
. Ga lag r
,
.
[p
4
<; - e p - ? 9
J. H. Neisler
Accompanying Personnel:
D. W. Hayes (April 25, 1979, only)
Approved By:
R. C. K
, Ch
O
/P
Projects Section
Inspection Summary
Inspection on April 24-25, 1979 (Report No. 50-373/79-17; 50-374/79-11)
Areas Inspected: Containment post tensioning procedures and quality
records (Units 1 and 2); Activities and records relative to suppression
pool modifications (Units 1 and 2); Procedures and records relative to
grouting safety related components (Units 1 and 2); Responses and
corrective action relative to Inspection and Enforcement Bulletins
(Units 1 and 2).
The inspection involved a total of 39 inspector-hours
on site by three NRC inspectors.
Results: Of the four areas inspected, no items of noncompliance
were identified in two areas.
Two items of noncompliance were
identified in two areas (infraction - failure to follow procedure;
infraction - failure to include requirements in procurement documents).
373217
7 9 0 0 0.10 '* 'N b
.
DETAILS
Ferrons Contacted
Principal Licensee (CECO) Employees
- L.
J. Burke, Site project Superintendent
- T.
E. Quaka, QA Supervisor
- E. Wendorf, Field Engineer
- K.
Steele, Field Engineer
R. Mathews, OAD Supervisor
- B.
L. Wood, QA Engineer
- R.
A. Braun, QA Engineer
- L. H. Lauterbach, QA Structural Coordinator
- L.
J. Tapella, QA Engineer
Contractor and Other Personnel
- M. R. Dougherty, QA Supervisor, Walsh Construction Company
- R. E. Spencer, Site Superintendent, General Electric Company
- Denotes personnel attending exit int e rview.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
(0 pen) Unresolved Item (373/78-31-02; 374/78-22-02):
Clarification
of requirement in Section 13-212.4.b4 of Specification J2533.
The
inspector was informed by licensee personnel that, subsequent to the
identification of this item, Section 13-212.4.b4 was deleted in the
revised Specification J2533.
Licensee personnel stated that the
basis for this deletion would be made available to the inspector at
a future date.
This item remains open pending review of the applicable documentation.
(open) Unresolved Item (374/78-22-03):
In-place storage of Unit 2
vertical tendons for extended periods of time pr' - ra *beir initial
greasing.
The licensee concurred that storage
u.
,ertical
tendons in place for periods up to one year prior to initial greasing,
increases the susceptability of the tendons to possible corrosion.
In addition, the licensee stated that an investigation of the tendons
present condition is warranted and will be performed prior to the
initiation of Unit 2 tendon stressing.
This item remains open pending the Unit 2 vertical tendon investigation.
-2-
I. N O.0 1 8
.
.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
(0 pen) Unresolved item (373/78-09-03; 374/78-08-03):
Grout for
safety-related equipment foundations. During an inspection on
April 18-20, 1978 the inspector identified that procedures for use,
testing and inspection of "non-shrink" grout under equipment founda-
tions had not been established.
During this inspection, it was
verified that the licensee's contractor had procedures for installation
and testing of grout for particular safety related equipment, however,
this procedure and test program was not required for all safety-related
equipment foundations.
This item is being left open pending review
of the licensee's investigation whether grout material is safety-
related and the inspection and test requirement for grouting under
equipment foundations.
-3-
O /.3.U.1.9
.
Section I
Prepared by J. H. Neisler
Reviewed by R. C. Knop, Chief
Projects Section
1.
Review of Licensee's Actions and Responses to Inspection and
Enforcement Bulletins
The inspector reviewed the licensee's actions and responses
a.
to IE bulletins affecting LaSalle Units 1 and 2.
The
licensee's response and actions are considered to be
adequate for the following bulletins:
(1) IE Bulletin No. 76-02, " Relay Failure - Westinghouse
BFD Relays"
(2) IE Bulletin No. 77-01, " Pneumatic Time Delay Relay
Setpoint Drift"
(3) IE Bulletin No. 77-05, " Electrical Connector Assemblies"
(4) IE Bulletin No.77-05A, " Electrical Connector Assemblies"
Supplement to 77-05
(5)
IE Bulletin No. 77-02, " Potential Failure Mechanism
in Certain Westinghouse (W) AR Relays with Latch
Attachments
(6) IE Bulletin No. 77-08, " Assurance of Safety and Safety
and Safeguards During an Emergency - Locking Systems"
b.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's action regarding
IE Bulletin No. 77-07, " Containment Electrical Penetration
Assemblies at Nuclear Power Plants Under Construction."
Licensee's response of January 20, 1978 stated that the
type of electrical penetration to be used at LaSalle had
not been determined.
Information received at the site
indicates that a response will be submitted by May 25, 1979.
2.
Weld Failures In Conduit Supports
The inspector was shown examples of weld failures on Superstrut
Catalog number 1202 conduit supports.
The supports consist of
two channels electrically spot welded back-to-back.
The weld
failures observed are those welds that are required to join
the two channels.
The licensee has reported the weld failures
pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55(e).
-
-
.9/13.2.20
.
Section II
Prepared by E. J. Gallagher
Reviewed by D. W. Hayes, Chief
Engineering Support Section 1
1.
Review of Containment Prestressing Quality Records (Unit 1)
a.
FSAR Section 3.8.1.1.3.2 and Specification J-2533 requires
that prestressing tendon elongation in excess of + 10%
of calculated be identified and evaluated by the consulting
engineers. Tendons that elongated beyond the tolerance
were identified by nonconformance reports.
The inspector
reviewed the following Walsh Construction nonconformance
reports relative to tendon elongation:
NCR No.
Tendon No.
Variation of Elongation
136
VIA
16.47%
139
V3A
10.74%
140
V4C
11.11%
141
V46C
14.41%
143
H4CB
13.68%
144
H13CB
11.05%
145
H22AC
10.94%
148
H54BA
10.83%
Through sampling the engineering evaluation for tendons
V4C, V46C, H4CB, H13CB and H54BA it was determined that
the extra elongation observed was due to the actual friction
factor being lower than the value used in predicting
tendon elongations.
b.
FSAR Section 3.8.1.4.7 (Concrete Creep and Shrinkage Analysis)
requires laboratory tests to be performed on the actual con-
crete used for construction in order to account for the
effects of elastic shortening, creap and shrinkage of the
concrete. The inspector requested to review the results of
these test.
The licensee indicated that the tests have not
been performed but that results would be made available af ter
tests are performed.
This item is considered unresolved
pending review of test results.
(373/79-17-01; 374/79-11-01)
-5-
,$4e)fdhd.Q
c-nvvy
.
.
c.
FSAR Section 3.8.1.1.3.2 requires friction rests to be
performed on typical tendons in the containment building
in order to compare results with assumed values in the
design of the Prestressed Containment.
The inspector
reviewed the construction procedure for performing friction
tests. The results on Unit 1 tendons IAC, 1BA and ICB were
fourn acceptable.
d.
FSAR Section 3.8.1.1.3.2 requires the pre-stressing sequence
to be the longest vertical tendons, to the shortest verticals
and the horizontal tendons.
INRYC0 drawing 676-23. Rev. F
(sequence of stressing) was compatible with the FSAR
requirement.
2.
Review of Grouting for Safety Related Work Activities (Units 1 and 2)
The inspector reviewed the program for controlling the grouting of
safety-related equipment foundations and grouting of the anchorage
of the Quencher modification in the Containment Suppression Pool.
The following specific items were reviewed:
Procedure for RPV Grouting which included adequate controls
a.
for foundation preparation, forming, mixing, placing and
curing.
b.
Procedure for Grouting Diesel Generation and Miscellaneous
Equipment Foundation.
c.
Twenty-eight day compressive strength test results for Grout
test #5 (8850 psi), #10 (8250 psi), #14 (7100 psi). Although
tests have been performed for compressive strength, Sargent &
Lundy engineers have indicated in letter to CECO dated July
10, 1978 that, "the Specification does not require tests of
this grout" and that, " strength cf grout is not a prime
consideration." This item is currently under review by CECO
to determine what are the prime considerations and what
requirements are to be met.
This item continues to remain
unresolved.
(373/78-09-03; 374/78-08-03)
d.
Procurement of Safety-Related Grout Material
The licensee indicated that the grout used for the anchorage
of the quencher modification in the suppression pool of
containment Units 1 and 2 is considered to be safety-related
materfal. The CECO Quality Assurance Manual, Procedure 4-1,
Section 4.6, requires safety-related material that are
manufacturer's standard product and not purchased to special
requirements of a CECO specification be purchased from a
manufacturer on the approved bidder's list and can be
J <: o r> ?r>ar.,u.o
xv
-6-
.
,
.
accepted at the plant based on the manufacturer's certifi-
cate of conformance. All grout material, to date, has been
putchased from an approved bidder without any special CECO
requirements and has been acccpted and used for safety-related
application without the required certific2te of conformance.
This failure to assure adequate quality requirements for
materials are included or referenced in procurement documents
whether purchased by the applicant or by its contractor is
considered an item of noncompliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B,
Criterion IV.
(373/79-17-02; 374/79-11-02)
After this item was identified by the NRC inspector, the
licensee notified the NRC that a "Stop Work" was iesued
to the contractor performing the safety-related grouting
of the quencher base plate anchorage until material with
proper certificate of conformance could be received.
In addition, while the inspector observed quencher base
plate anchorage completed and in preparation in the Units 1
and 2 suppression pool it was noted that grout material
was being stored in conditions adverse to the quality of
cement based materials,
i.e., wet and humid environment
with some of the grout bags containing tears and punctures
and potential for the material to hydrate.
Upon indicating
this to the licensee and contractor, the material was
promptly removed from those conditions to more suitable
storage conditions.
One item of nonc 0mpliance was identified in the above areas
inspected.,
-7-
<r.c v>q
s,n d .) f er Aer * 3
.
I'
-
'
Section III
.
Prepared by F. C. Hawkins
Reviewed by D. W. Hayes, Chief
Engineering Support
Section 1
1.
Review of 10 CFR 50.53(e) Item and Other Previously Identified Items
The inspector performed a followup inspection on two previously
a.
identified unresolved items No. 373/78-31-02, 374/78-22-02
and 374/78-22-03. These items a e discussed in detail under
the section of this report entitled, " Licensee Action on
Prec'ious Inspection Findings."
i
b.
f ai'tavup inspection to determine status of the 10 CFR 50.55(e)
item reported by the licensee concerning tendon buttonheads
with cracks exceeding the specification requirements, was
also performed.
During this inspection, the inspector was informed that the
test program on buttonhead crack widths has been completed
by INRYCO. A report, titled " Report on investigation of
Buttonhead Defects" has been submitted for review and
approval to Sargent & Lundy on March 9, 1979
This
p
report includes a detailed description of the tests
performed, test results, and conclusions.
The test
program included the following tests.
(1) 240 single w$re tensile tests
(2) 90 wire low-cycle dynamic test and subsequent static
tensile test
(3) Two 170 wire tendon low-cycle dynamic test and subsequent
static tensilt test
'
(4) Two 30 wire tendon high-cycle dynamic tests and subsequent
-
tensile tests.
Field inspections of the shop end buttonheads at the LaSalle
site included 15 horizontal, 30 vertical Unit I tendons and
31 horizontal, 19 vertical Unit 2 tendons.
No Unit 2 post-tensioning work is presently being performed,
,
pending resolution of Walsh and CECO NCR's concerning
8
excessive shcp snd field end buttonhead cracking and the
m. .;;w,,-v y <
.n
-8-
.
.
k
,
s.
/i
'
'
N
.
.
investigation to determine the condition of the vertic'al
tendons due to their extended in-place storage prior to
initial greasing.
In regard to the buttonhead cracking resolution, the
inspector was notified that CECO has removed the February 9,
1979 stop work order for the INRYCO, Inc., shop, thereby,
authorizing INRYC0 to resume production as of March 16, 1979.
This item remains open pending review of the licensee's
10 CFR 50.55(e) final report.
2.
Containment Post-Tensioning Review of Quality Records (Units 1 and 2)
The inspector reviewed manufacturer /cupplier certified material
test reports and in-process test supports of post-tensioning
grease (Visconorust 1601, Visconorust 1702 and Visconorust 2090P-4).
The following specific observations were made:
a.
Specification J-2592, Section 2-606.3 requires in part
that, the casing filler (2090P-4) will be " sampled from the
storage tank as the material is being used and recirculated."
Of nine 5000 gallon shipments of casing filler, three ship-
ments had been sampled and tested twice after their receipt
on site. Licensee personnel stated that in each of these
three cases, it appeared that the second sample was taken
during use and recirculation of the grease.
The licensee
was unable to verify to the inspector that samples for
the other six shipments (Batch Nos. 2861, 3202, 559, 477,
242, 64 and 1563) were taken as required and tested in accor-
dance with procedure TP-TG, Rev. O.
b.
Specification J-2592, Section 2-606.3 requires that the
testing contractor " sample and test the casing filler as
it arrives at the project site "at a frequency of once
for every tank truck or tank car.
Review of the testing contractor's sample log revealed
that casing filler Batch No. 64 was sampled.upon receipt
and that casing filler Batch No. 1563 was not sampled.
Further investigation revealed that receipt sample test
results were not available for either batch.
Licensee
personnel stated that the sample for Batch No. 64 had been
misplaced and that sample for Batch No. 1563 had not been
taken.
Each batch number represents tpproximately 5000
gallons of 2090P-4 casing filler grease,
zv
s,
ar
..a 4 <M M}
-9-
.
.
,
Specification J-2592, Section 2-606.1 requires that, the
c.
testing contractor "obtain the producer's certified
tests for the temporary protection (Visconorust 1601, 1702)
applied in the shop."
Neither licensee personnel or testing contractor personnel
were able to substantiate to the inspector that the producer's
certified test documentation for temporary protection applied
in the shop was being obtained, reviewed, and maintained as
required.
The licensee was adviset that these failures, as noted in Sections 2a,
b and c, to accomplish activities affecting quality in accordance
with documented iTstructions, procedures, or drawings is considered
dn item of taonCompliaPCe with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V.
(373/79-17-03; 374/79-11-03)
Unresolved Matters
Unresolved matters are matters about which more information is required
to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance
or deviations. Unresolved items disclosed during this inspection are
discussed in Section II, paragraph 1.b.
Exit Interview
The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted under
persons contacted) on April 25, 1979.
The inspectors summarized the
scope and findings of the inspection.
The licensee acknowledged the
findings as reported.
- 10 -
4 : n , v.
- ' t U?aik,e,