ML19208D846
| ML19208D846 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 08/09/1979 |
| From: | Danielson D, Yin I NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19208D844 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-358-79-22, NUDOCS 7910010164 | |
| Download: ML19208D846 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000358/1979022
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
FIGION III
Report No. 50-352/79-22
Docket No. 50-358
License No. CPPR-88
Licensee: Cincinnati Gas and Electric
Company
139 East 4th Street
Cincinnati, OH 45201
Facility Name: Wm H. Zimmer Power Station
Inspection At: Zimmer Site, Moscow, Ohio; and General Electric Company,
San Jose, California
Inspection Conducted: June 11-13, and July 18-19, 1979
79
Inspector:
I.
. Yin
Approved By:
n
hief
77 _
Engineering Support Section 2
Inspection Summary
Inspection on June 11-13, and July 18-19, 1979 (Report No. 50-358/79-22)
Areas Inspected:
Inspection of safety related hanger and restraint
activities including:
(1) Observation of licensee audit at NSSS supplier
office, (2) review status of hanger calculations, (3) review of QC inspection
procedures and implementation, (4) review site document control, and (5)
observation of hanger installation and storage conditions. The inspection
involved a total of 32 inspector-hours on site and at the NSSS supplier
office by one NRC inspector.
Results: Of the five areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance
were identified in four areas; one apparent item of noncompliance was
identified in one area (infraction - inadequate storage control for the
safety related hangers and restraint components - Paragraph 5).
.
1058 040
7910010/6"
. .
.
.
DETAILS
Persors Contacted
Principal Licensee Personnel (CG&E)
- B. K. Culver, Project Manager
- W. W. Schwiers, Principal QA&S Engineer
- J. Weissenberg, QA&S Engineer
- R. P. Ehas, QA&S Engineer
Henry J. Kaiser Company (HJK)
- R. Marshall, Project Manager
- E. V. Knox, Corporate QA Manager
- R. E. Turner, Site QA Manager
General Electric Company (GE)
- W. E. Smith, Project Manager
- E. O. Swain, Manager, Piping Design
- H. J. Pearson, Project EnFineer
- R. C. Boesser, Manager, QA&OM
- G. R. Hosack, Manager, Quality Audits
- R. J. Valencia, Audit Coordinator
USNRC - RIII
- T. E. Vandel, Project Inspector
- Denotes those personnel attending the exit interview on July 19, 1979,
at the Zimmer site.
- Denotes those personnel attending the exit interview on June 13, 1979,
at the GE, San Jose, California, office.
Licensee Action on Previous Identified Items
(Closed) Unresolved Item (358/78-27-02):
Improper component outdoor
stora6e and excessive time to resolve the NCR written on similar problems.
Followup inspections in this area were p, 'ormed and recorded in RIII
Report Nos. 78-32, and 79-11.
During thf
' sit, the inspector reviewed
the following documents:
1.
KEI FCP 2-210, "On Site Piping and Hanger Material Outdoor Laydown,"
Bev. 2, dated June 12, 1979.
2.
CG&E Audit Report No. 254, "On Site Piping and Hanger Material
Outdoor Laydown," dated July 17, 1979.
.
-2-
1053
041
.
.
.
3.
CG&E NCR No. 7229 issued on December 29, 1978; remains open.
The inspector stated that he had no adverse comments on these procedures
and t!* measures taken to resolve NCR No. 7229. However, after observing
the indoor storage of hanger and snubber attachments components, this
item is elevated to an item of noncompliance.
See Paragraph 5 of this
report.
Functional or Program Areas Inspected
I,
Observation of Licensee Audit at GE
The inspector accompanied the licensee's QA audit team on June 11-13,
1979, at GE, San Jose, California.
The audit areas included pipe
stress analysis, pipe whip restraint design, work procedures and
personnel qualification. As a result of the audit, the licensee
identified several deficiencies relative to the establishment of
formal procedures, procedure implementation, personnel qualification,
and review of vendor drawings. The audit team leader stated that
followup on these items will be in accordance with normal corporate
procedures. The inspector noted that since individual GE hanger and
snubber final design and verification is being performed by S&L, and
an extended effort in making hanger calculations have been carried
out in S&L, no further separate evaluation was required. The inspector
commented that the GE calculationn for the cable type pipe whip
restraints installed on the 10, 16, and 20-inch recirculation loop
had not been checket by another qualified engineers, however, because
of the conservatism established in the scaling formula derived from
actual testing and the use of alternative computation methods, the
overall measure of the calculation and documentative was considered
acceptable.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
2.
A-E Review on Safety Related Hangers and Restraints
Since March, 1979, S&L has reported to CG&E every two weeks the
status of subject reviews. To this date, seven reports were sub-
mitted from S&L indicating a consistent trend of approximately 50%
of all the items reviewed required major or minor redesign effort.
The 1,271 total number of hangers reviewed up to June 18, 1979,
represents approximately 25% of all the safety related suspension
system components. Among the 1,271 reviewed, 418 or so were formally
issued for final construction. The licensee's previously estimated
review completion date of the end of July, 1979 (RIII Report No.
79-11, Paragraph 2), was erroneous. From identification of the
problem that S&L did not have all the necessary design calculations
for safety related hangers and restraints back in September 1978, to
present, the corrective measures taken by the licensee appear to be
sufficient. However, the present rate of S&L hanger calculation,
review, and issuance of final construction drawings could have some
effect on the overall project completion schedule.
-3-
105B 042
.
. - . _ _ . .
.
.
.
3.
Review of QC inspection Procedures and Procedure Implementetion
The inspector reviewed the three main procedures used by CG&E and
KEI construction and QC personnel performing acceptance inspections.
These procedures are:
KEI QACMI M-12, " Inspection Instructions for Pipe Hangers,
a.
Support and Restraint Installation," Res. 2, dated June 26,
1979.
.
b.
CG&E MC-5, " Pipe Support Final Inspection," Rev. 2, dated
June 18, 1979.
KEI FCP 2-135, " Process Pipe Support Installation After Sargent
c.
and Lundy Final Design Analysis." Re". 2, dated June 12, 1979.
The above procedures "a" and "b" above are being used for all hanger
construction knowing that modification may be reouir<
later.
Procedure "c" was prepared for final QC inspect 2on of those hangers
that had been reworked in accordance with S&L final derign analysis.
To the dat* of June 18, 1979, among the 1,271 safety related hangers
reviewed by S&L, 701 required some sort of redesign. From March 20,
1979, to July 13, 1979, 34 transmittals from S&L have been forwarded
to the site. These include 418 safety related hangers and snubbers,
of which approximately 50% required field modifications.
During review of FCP 2-135, the inspector found that the S&L installa-
tion requirement codes G, M, and B were incorporated.
Since the
issuance of FCP 2-135, S&L has transmitted final design drawing with
codes F, E, S, and V (in addition to G, M, and B) without definition.
Furthermore, when the field identified deficiencies on the transmittals,
no formal request for clarifications from S&L was initiated by KEI.
The control and handling of hanger modifications will be reviewed
further. This is an unresolved item.
(358/79-22-01)
No items of noncompliance or deriations were identified.
4.
Review of Site Document Control
During the course of inspection, one book of procedures located in
the CG&E project section containing all the field construction
procedures was used for reference and discussion. The inspector
noted that this book was not a controlled copy, and furthermore "for
information only" marks were not stamped. Further review revealed
that the Index No. 1-X series and the Index No. 2-X up to 100 series
were not up-to-date, and five procedures contained under Index No.
2-X 100 series were not the latest approved copies. The inspector
checked other document control provisions and verified that one of
the books listed under control distribution was kept up-to-date.
The problem was discussed with the licensee and two corrective
.
-4-
105B
043
..
,
eeasures were established,
i.e., (1) the document department will
not issue controlled procedures to persons outside the distribution
list, and (2) a planned CG&E audit was scheduled for July 19, 1979,
covering issuance control of all the work procedures. The inspector
reviewed the CG&E and QA&S audit checklist and will followup on
adequacy of the audit and review findings identified by CG&E. This
is an unresolved item.
(358/79-22-02)
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Review of Hanger and Snubber Storage and Nonconformance Control
The inspector observed the indoor hanger, snubber, and component
storage area and identified the following problems:
Lack of control and identification of spare parts.
Spare parts
a.
consisted of parts with nonconforming conditions such as painted
and frozen ball bushings, rusted and frozen ball bushings,
damaged variable and constant spring coils, clamps that were
removed from installations, and scrapped items such as INC
mechanical snubbers.
b.
Some parts observed had been left outside on the ground and
appeared to be rusty and required restoration.
Spare parts, nonconforming parts, safety related items, and non
c.
safety items were mixed at all areas and scattered all over the
floors and passage walkways.
The lack of (1) storage control for safety related components, (2)
zestoration of adverse hardware conditions prior to be use as spare
parts, (3) control of the spare parts, and (4) identification and
segregation of nonconforming items are considered in noncompliance
with NRC regulations. This is an item of noncompliance identified
in Appendix A.
(358/79-22-03)
Unresolved Items
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in
order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncom-
pliance or deviations. Unresolved items disclosed during this inspection
are discussed in Paragraphs 3 and 4.
Exit Interview
The inspector met with site representatives (denoted in the Persons
Contacted paragraph) at the conclusion of the inspection on July 19,
1979. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection
noted in this report.
.
-5-
1058 044