ML19220A535
| ML19220A535 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 08/31/1970 |
| From: | Brown R, Howard E, Hunnicutt D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19220A526 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-320-70-05, 50-320-70-5, NUDOCS 7904230051 | |
| Download: ML19220A535 (4) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. t.
- 5. N10MIC ENERGY CCMMISSloN REGION 1 DIVISION OF COMPLIANCE Report of Inspection CO Report No. 320/70-5 Licensee:
Metropolitan Edison Company (Met Ed) (Three Mile Island Unit No. 2) License No. CPPR-66 Date of Inspection: August 10-12, 1970 Date of Previous Inspection: June 18, 1970 Inspected by: /X _.2 Ewt 7!?/ 70 D. M. Hunnicutt, Reactor Inspector (Principal) Date sY A 7 /i h o t R. L. Brown Reactor Inspector (Construction) Date ,/ Reviewed by- ,// ) Id/ 20 ' E. M. Howard, Senior Reactor inspector -Date Proprietary Information: None SCOPE A routine, announced inspection was made of Unit No. 2, one of the two 2535 MWt pressorized water reactors (B&W) under construction on Three Mile Island near Middictown, Pennsylvania. The inspection effort was directed toward an appraisal of the performance of the licensee-contractor effort of various items listed in'PI 3800/2 and included an inspection of Attachment C Contain-ment, Concrete (4600) and Welding (4800), Attachment F, Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundry Piping (5000) and review of selected procedures.
SUMMARY
Safety Items - None Nonconformance Items - None. Inusual Occurrences - None i Other Significant Items - None j i 6F2f7 79042300 W Status of Previousiv Reptrted Problems - No previously reported problems for Unit No. 2 are outstanding. Manacement Int e rview - An exit inte rview wa s held with Mescrs. Hreczuch, Allen, Fant and Brodsky on August 12, 1970. The inspector stated that an in-depth review of the concrete records and observations indicated that concrete for Unit No. 2 met the re-quirerents in Appendix 5.D of the PSAR. The inspector stated that a conflict between PDM Specification WPS-25 and PDM Weld Procedures PS-1 and PS-2 appeared to exist in the area of weld repairs in that PS-1 and PS-2 per=it removal of cracks prior to depositing the next bead of welding and WPS-25 states that major repairs require prior approval of Engineering. The definition of a major repair in WPS-25 appears to cover imperfections described in PS-1 and PS-2. Mr. Hreczuch and Mr. Fant stated that the possible deficiency would be investigated and that appropriate action would be taken. The inspector stated that the reactor coolant piping purchase s. iication appeared to meet the PSAR requirements. Mr. Hreczuch stated that the piping would be basically the same as the piping to be furnished for Unit No. 1. The inspcctor stated that the radioactive waste system piping appeared to ccet the ASTM specifications, but that the PSAR did not specify the type or other pertinent information. Mr. Hreczuch stated that the piping would meet the applicable Codes and Specifications. DETAILS ~ A. Persons Contacted Met Ed Mr. Gene Hreczuch, Construction Engineer Mr. Earl Allen, Resident QA Supervisor UE&C Mr. J. E. Fant, Site QC Manager Mr. Paul Dailey, QC Engineer B&R Mr. J. C. Brodsky, QC Supervising Engineer e f% us 219
3-B. Construction Status Mr. Hreczuch estimated that Unit No. 2 was approximately 57. complete. This estimate was b ased on manhours expended. C. Concrete The inspector perf ormed a review of the QC system in accordance with At-tachment C - Containment, " Concrete", PI 3800/2. The inspection covered items 4605.04.a.1 through and including 4605.05.b.5. The procedures, instructions and specifications are in agreement with commitments in the PSAR. No deficien-cies or omissions in procedures and record keeping related to concrete sampling, testing or placement were observed during the inspection. D. Containnent Welding _ The inspection effort consisted of a detailed review of procurement docu-ments and procedures as required by Attachment C - Containment, PI 3800/2, 'Nelding", items 4805.04.a.1 through and including 4 805. 04. g. 5. All items were found to be in accordance with the PSAR code commitments with the ex-ception of a conflict between the detailed welding procedure and the general welding procedure specification which was found by the inspector. PDM Speci-fication WPS-25 stated that the veld repair area shall be examined by the same method as specified for the original weld. PDM Weld Procedures PS-1 and PS-2 state that any crack that appears on the surface of any bead of welding shall be removed before depositing the next bead of welding. This statement is contrary to PDM weld proced-re Specification WPS-25, paragraph 13.81, which states that major repairs shall require prior approval of Engineering. This paragraph defines major repairs as repairs to the base metal or the weld cetal where there are surface imperfections 1/8 inch or greater in depth,and repair of a defect which is indicative of either a fundamental material problem or process out of contral. The inspector pointed out that cracks (other than crater cracks) cou!! fall under these categories and possibly an engineering review and repair procedure be completed prior to repair. E. Rea; eor Coolant Piping The inspcetion ef fort consisted of a detailed review of procurement docu-ments and procedures as required by Attachment F - Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundry Piping, PI 3800/2, (5005.04.a.1 through and including 5005.04.d.3 and e.1 and e.2). The inspection 1.idicated that the B&W-CNC purchase specifica-tion for the reactor coolant piping met the applicant's PSAR co=mitment. Ship-ping, receipt, storage and issue, and handling was adequately covered by pro-cedures to assure proper supervision and inspection in the areas of marking, identification, cleanliness, protection and control of primary coolant piping. The reactor coolant piping will be supplied by Babcock and Wilcox Co=pany, Power Generation Division, Commercial Nuclear Components (P6W-CNC), Barberton, Ohio. L 1 G5 219 m
. L. F. Radicactive Waste Syst em Pipint Pipe ordered by UE&C from Pipeco Incorporated, Fords, New Jersey, on purchase order No. 9059-02-5064 The purchase order states: 1. Size - 6 and b inch, schedule 40 pipe. 2. Type - 300 seamless stainless steel pipe conforming to either ASTM 312 or A-376. 3. Mill test reports (certifications) are to accompany the s h i pe.e n t. Review of Mill test reports (Pipeco) revealed the following: 1. Pipe supplied in accordance with ASTM A-376, cold drawn type 304, less and USAS-B31.7, Class III. seam-2. Flattening tests were conducted in accordance with A-376-64 3. Hydrostested in accordance with Section 5 of ASTM-A-530-68 according to formula P-2ST/D and paragraph 5.2 (test pressure 2800 psi). 4 The above tests plus chemicals and physicals were acceptable. The PSAR, Chapter 11, Radioactive Waste and Radiation Protection, does not discuss this system in sufficient detail to determine the basic requirements. l 1 w I i 2 GE 220 l =}}