ML19220B001
| ML19220B001 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 04/27/1973 |
| From: | Folsom S, Heishman R, Howard E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| 50-289-73-02, 50-289-73-2, 50-320-73-02, 50-320-73-2, NUDOCS 7904250152 | |
| Download: ML19220B001 (32) | |
See also: IR 05000289/1973002
Text
[Y
18.Cf.'.0 E D Ul E SitP
5"'"'""~'""'-
' ' ' " ' ' " " " '
' ' - * ' ' * ' ' -
,_
,
.,,r..,.,,,,,,.........,,4o,,,,...
i
,..... .-......-
. - . . , - . . . .
r....-......
! i o o. .w.. . aa a.o
-im
an === o
I
i' '] Chief. FSf2L
METROPOLITA?; EDISC'; C0!!PA':Y
,
kO:11Q (5)
RO Filer.
wn
TilRLE }!ILE ISLU;D l";ITS 1 A!:D 2
DR Central Files
Centr: 1
a il I Filer
Unit
RO I! SPECTIO:: PIPORT ::DS. 5_0-2E9/73-02
t o i . . .
,o
1 mmas
atmuu
50-320/i3-U2 >
~
' ' - - - ~ ~ ' '
Regulatory Standards f3)
Directorate of Licensing (13)
nan
The subject inspection report is forwarded
Local PDR
1:5I C
for inf or ation.
10 is . .r.. . re .,a.u
wa ru.a
st=uo
State of Pennsylvani a
art
a nou is..
. .no van > y
atuuo
E., M.11oward, RO:I
_
PHU'6 ,G
DaT's
X278
7/26/73
t*SE CTh1JR A< FOIL A43TIOens Klu.Mo
GPO : 19710.
wit
._
i
~
r-
-
.
.
%
N
9
)
.
..
~
-
,
s
-
?.
2
i
1
-
.
4'
.
O
e
'.
.
j
o
-
.
.
l
-
>.n
_en
1
a
..
s-
i
'
\\
7 90125 0 lFM
.
Q
'
.
.
.~
...
.
. - . - - .
,
..
..
-
. . . .
.
,. .
.
..~
.~.
U.S. AT0".1C E!CRGY CC:011SSIO::
1
DIRECTORATE OF REGULATORY OFERATIO::S
{
-
REGIO:; I
50-2S9
Docket :o. 50 -3:2
0:'
_50-299/73-02 and 50-320/73-
_
CPFL- L
RO Inspection Repcrt 1:o.:
CPTF.-66
License I;o.:
elitan Edison Co-nanv
Licensee:
- trn
Priority:
P. O. Box 542
_
Unit 1 - E
Unit 2 - A
Cate gory:
Reading, Pennsv1vania
19603
__
(Three Mile Island I &__2)
.
,
Location: Middletown.
_
.
-
F'.R 831 }Me (BE.10
Type of Licensee:
Routine. Unannounced
Type of Inspection:
Itarch 26 - 28, 1973
Dates of Inspection:
,
January 9-11, 1973
1
Dates of Previous Inspection:
Y [')
~),3
ffhl .
/ Date/
L
Reporting Inspector: Seth A. Folsom, Rea,ctor Inspector
Add b
g.2y_ <73
%-
_Au
Date
Accompanying Inspectots: E. M. Howard, Chief, Facility Construc-
5ti4~ Angi-eering Support Branch
- f/v/n
i
l
~
/ ate
D
Facility
R. F. Heishman, Sr. Inspector,
Construction-G" Engineering Support Branch
.
n'. 7 n . 7 -
!
~'\\
/ .*
- r.
,-
_
'
Date
Facility
J. H. Tillou, Senior Intp ector ,
{
Construction & Engineering Support Branch
Date
i
',
- None
_
Date
-
Other Acco=panying Personnel:
-
-
//-pef.73
1
Reviewed by:
, O /M
ga.c cl
Date
.
E. M. Howard, Chief, Facility Construction & Engineer-
k
4
ing Support Branch
,
.
'
j
Date
i
V.
-_
'r' .'f a , . ,
.
'\\
.
-ea
,
l;
_
.
SU!StARY OF FIND 11:CS
Enfo cerent Action
Delta-Fer_ rite Weldine Electrodes
A.
__The uabcock-bilcox .atcrial certifications for E-304 veldine electrode
centain evidence of 5-10% delta-ferrite
licats 032167 and #50311 do not
(D e tails ,
as required by the Babcock-Wilcox Specification I:o. CS-37-3.
Paragraph 4)
_Encineered Saf ecuards Motors , S_h_af t Rotation
B.
Several engineered saf eguards motor shaf ts were identified which had
(De tails,
not been rotated in accordance with applicable procedures.
Paragraph 5)
'
Serveillance of Instrument Panels, Control Boards. and Related Ecuincent_
_
C.
The surveillance of instru=cnt panels, control bcards, and related equip-
identify equip =ent inspected, provide quantitative or
cent does not
qualitative evidence relative to the equipment nor is surveillance
energized, equipment conducted.
(Details, Para-
of installed, but not
graph 6)
Prior Documented
Installation of Encineered Safecuards Purns Without
D.
Notification of Ouality Control
Four engineered saf eguards pe=ps were installed without evidence of
notification of the Field Quality Control Engineer contray to pro-
cedures.
(Details, Paragraph 7)
_
Audits of Measurine and Test Ecuipment
-
E.
_ Quarterly
The quarterly audits of measuring and test equipment do not meet
the requirements of Criterion XVIII.
(Details, Paragraph 8)
F.
Separation of Redundant Circuits
Engineered safeguards control consoles (CC and CR) do not have the
.
(Details, Paragraph 9)
specified separation of redundant channels.
_
_
. . _ o'q
_
em
=
" " * '
p -
m
-3-
C.
Sensors, Instrunents,and Associated Lines
The decign objective separation for process instruments and sensing
lines has not been provided, precluding preparation of quantitative
or qualitative acceptance criteria in procedures.
(Details , Paragraph
10)
H.
Construction Deficiencv Renorts
Darage to four engineered saf eguards cotors which occurred during the
flood, on or about June 23, 1972, was not reported in accordance with
10 CFR 50..'
e).
(Details, Paragraph 11)
Licensinc Artien on Pr.eviousiv Identified Enforcement Matters
.
.
A.
Borated Water Storace Tank RT Insoections
An RT echnique sheet has been provided for the RT inspections perforced
on the borated water storage tank, as required by the PDM Ouality As-
surance Manual. This item is considered resolved.
(Details, Para-
graph 12)
B.
borated Water Storace Tank, Carbon to Stainless Steel Hold-Down Clins
Deviation Report No. 72, dated September 26, 1972, was issued and
resolved relative to the carbon steel tie-downs which were used for
stainless steel cateric1.
This item is considered resolved.
CD e-
tails, Paragraph 13)
.
-
C.
Borated Water Storace Tank, Cleanine With Prohibited Solution
The prohibitien relative to the use of Acetone on stainless steel
was invoked by UE&C because of the industrial hazard rather than a
technical reason. All contractors and subcontractors have not been
advised of the prohibition. This item is considered resolved.
OD e-
tails, Paragraph 14)
.
.
~.
-
k
..
-
9
,
- 4-
D.
Lack of Procedures Prior to Start of Work
A UELC constructica acco, dated October 11, 1972, var issued to the
that for-
UESC purchasing organication, reaf firming the requirement
cally approved procedures must be available on site prior to start
of work. This ite= is considered resolved.
(Details, Paragraph
15)
.
B_ crated Water Storace Tank Insnection
E.
A review of the fina) inspection perfor=ed by PDM indicated that the
borated water storage tank had been cleaue ' i
accordance with applicable
procedures. UELC records also indicate that i.nc tank had been inspected
to verify conformance with the specifications.
This item is considered
-
'
resolved.
(Details, Paragraph 16)
F.
Borated Water Storace Tank Construction Code _
s
Amendnent No. 36 to the FSAR, dated February 9, 1973, pages 6 through
34, state that the borated water storage tank had been constructed in
accordance with Section VIII of the ASME Bciler and Pressure Vessel
Code, rather than AWWA D-108.
This item is consir'.cred resolved.
(D e-
tails, Paragraph 17)
C.
Corrective Actionn
Audit findings which were previously identified as yeing unresolved for
a period of time inconsistent with the QA plan, were found to be re-
-
solved. This item is considered resolved.
(De tailt., Paragraph 18)
H.
Pioe Veldine Def ect History
UELC Field Change, QC-33, dated October 3,1972, which is a revision
.
of the UE&C procedure QC-8, requires documentation of defect removal.
It includes a revised history record form and conforms to Gilbert
Associates Specification No. 5550, paragraph 2.7.3.
This item is
_
92~1f.i8
_
- @+
=
.
-5-
considered resolved.
(Details, Paragraph 19)
1.
Materials Certification for EiW Sunnlied Pice
__
Kecords and material certificatiens were on site for E5W supplied
pipe. This itta is considered resolved.
(Details, Paragrarh 20)
J.
Use of Line-Coated Electrodes
A review of welding material test reports by the UELC site welding
engineer and QC reco'rds clerk revealed a transcription error from one
welding material test certificate to a second which reculted in E-16-8-2
being incorrectly identified as E-308.
This item is considered re-
solved.
(Details, Paragraph 21)
K.
Radiocraoh Examinatior Ecuinnent
-
_
The Conam Testing Agency now has a ccepletely eculpped radiographic
inspection laboratory, including a hi-intensity viewer.
This item is
considered resolv:d.
(Details, Paragraph 22)
L.
Sockolet Fillet Welds
The fillet welds attaching a sockolet to the side of pipe No. DC-57
have been repaired. This item is considered resolved.
graph 23)
(Details, Para-
M.
Transweld Weave on Pine Scool CF-1
The transweld weave on pipe spool CF-1 has been ground to a smooth
finish, and hardness tests performed to verify that overheating during
-
the trans-weld weaving had not adversely affected the material.
This
item is considered resolved.
(Details, Paragraph 24)
N.
Delta-Territe Content - Grinnell Shon Welds
Inspection records show that a 100% ferrite scope inspection was con-
ducted on the surface of each shop weld made by Grinnell and the
resul ts evaluated by the A-E.
All velds were verified to have delta-
ferrite of at least 6%.
This ite= is considered resolved.
(Details,
Paragraph 25)
~
\\.
,
s
.
-6-
O.
Electrical Konconformine Condition Deficiency Reports
Deficiency reports and/or engineering deviation notices for noncon-
f orming conditions in the electrical, control, and instrumentation,
the design obj ective separation, are new being prepared.
relative to
This ite is considered resolved.
0 Details, Paragraph 26)
P.
Closure of Onenine Eetween Control Roon and Cahic Screadine Roon
Drawings are being developed for closure of the opening in the engineered
safeguards actuating control consoles.
This item is considered unre-
solved.
(D e tails ,
Paragraph 27)
Q.
Common Ventilation Svstem for Batterv Rooms
The co= mon ventilation system shared by the two battery roo=s will be
_
'
carried as an unresolved item until such time as the FSAR, Paragraph
8.2.2.10.e is accepted and approved by the Directorate of Licensing.
(Details, Paragraph 28)
R.
Use of Electrical OC Checklists
The procedure pertaining to the use of QC checklists while inspecting
has been changed.
The present system recuires that the inspector
carry a copy of the applicable procedure while inspecting and/or
witnessing the receiving, storing, and/or installation of the eculp-
ment. This item is considered resolved.
(Details, Paragraph 29)
5.
Quarterly Audits of Measurine and Test Ecuic=ent
Quarterly audits of measuring and test ecuipment were performed, which
-
resolves the original violation; however, the procedure used in per-
forming the audit does not meet the intent of Criterion V , Appendix B,
This item will be carried as a new violation.
(Details ,
Paragraph 8)
T.
Engineered Saf eeuards Motors, Shaf t Rotation
Several instances were identified where engineered safeguards motor
shaf ts were not rotated as required. This item will be carried as a
repeat violation.
(Details, Paragraph 5)
_
O
_
1
p.,
. . . .
_
.
- 7-
U.
Sunnlenentarv Heat for Hich Pressure Iniection Purn Motors
The high pressure injection pump notors had been turned over to the
startup unit and were in a controlled environ =ent.
Quality control
procedures state that rotors in a centrolled environment do not recuire
supplementary heat.
This ite: is considered resolved.
(Details, Para-
graph 30)
V.
Surveillance of Instrument Panels, Control Ecards, and Related
Ecuirnent
-
There is frag =ented documentation that instruments, panels, and control
boards had been inspected during storage for Three Mile Island Unit 1.
The docu=entation is considered inadequate since inspection records re-
viewed, with one exception, do not list the equipment which was in-
,
spected, nor could the quality control organization identify equipment
-
under their scope or its physical location.
This item will be carried
as a repeat violation.
(Details, Paragraph 6)
W.
Installation of Encineered Safecuards Pu=us Without Prior Documented
Notification of Ouality Control
Motification of the field supervisor, quality control, by the crafts
prior to installation of safety related equipment is not being accen-
plished.
This will be carried as a repeat violation.
(Details, Para-
graph 7)
I.
Senaration of Redundant Circuits
The engineered safeguards control console (CC and CR panels) located in'
the control room do not have separation as required.
This will be
-
carried as a repeat violation.
(Details, Paragraph 9)
.
Y.
Receint Inspection
Documentation was reviewed indicating that the reactor pressure
sensing actuators (RK-18) were an integral part of B&W equipment and
as such, did not require individual unit inspection.
This item is
considered resolved.
(Details, Paragraph 34)
_
e
L
,N
.- '
-
g
_
_
-8-
Z.
Sensors, Instruments, and Associated Lines
Procedures have been prepared for use in verifying that instrumenta-
tien has been installed in accordance with the engineering drawings.
The design separation objective for process control systems used in
the reactor protection system could not be identified.
This will be
carried as a new violation.
(Details, Paragraph 10)
AA. Calibration and Testinc of Instrerentation
Procedures have been prepared f or the calibration and testing of in-
stru=entation. This item is considered resolved.
(Details, Para-
graph 31)
,BB. Vertical Cable Trav Ccvers
.
Vertical cable tray covers have bien described in a general note en
'
the electrical drawings. Procedures requiring verification of this
installation have been prepared.
This will be carried as an unresolved
ite=, pending completion and verification of the installation.
CD e-
tails, Paragraph 32)
,
CC. Cable Trav Loadinc
Procedures have been prepared requiring verification that the design
objective cable tray loading has not been exceeded.
This will be
carried as an unresolved ites, pending installation of the remaining
cables and verification that the design loading objective has not been
exceeded.
0 Details, Paragraph 33)
_
Desien Chances
None
.
U nusual Occurrences
None
.
-
((
-
,
,
.
y
e4
-
,
-9-
Other Significant Findines
A.
Current Findines
1.
Subsecuent to the final inspaction and acceptance of the borated
water storage _ tank, this tank was splattered by welding being per-
formed on an adjacent structure.
(Details, Paragraph 16)
2.
Drawings and details of the cethed of effecting closure of opening
between the engineered safeguards actuating consolec and cable
spreading room were not available for review.
(Details, Pa ra g ra ph
27)
3'.
Ver*ical cable tray covers have been described in general note on
electrical drawings.
This will be carried as an unresolved ites
pending ccepletion of verification of the installation.
(De tails ,
_
'
Paragraph 32)
4.
Design objective cable tray leading has now been established as a
QC check point.
This will be carried as an unresolved ite= pending
verification of cable tray loading.
(Details, Paragraph 33)
5.
UESC internal audits required by QC-15 have not been i=plemented;
however, the schedule shows that such audits would be conducted
during the period April-December 1973.
This will be carried as
an unresolved item.
ODetails, Paragraph 35.c)
~
6.
The NP-1, Partial Data Sheets for the core spray and the pressurizer
surge lines do not include evidence of conformance to the Pennsylvania
Special Standard No. WC-1891, as required by the FSAR.
(De tails ,
Paragraph 3)
_
B.
Status of Previous 1v Reoorted Unresolved Items
Not reviewed during this inspection.
,
Manacement Interview
The management interview was held at the site on March 28, 1973.
Personnel Attending
General Public Utilities Service Company
-
Mr. W. A. Verrochi, Vice President, Design and Construction
Mr. B. G. Avers, Manager, Quality Assurance
Mr. M. J. Strenberg, Site QA Auditor
b
r ,7. y..,
-
44
$ u
.
- 10-
Mr. J. E. Wright , Site Quality Assurance Manager
Mr. J. A. Renshaw, Quality Assurance Specialist
Mr. W. T. Gunn, Proj ect Site Manager
United Encineers and Constructors -
Mr. V. 2. Cichocki, Construction Superintendent
Mr. C. F. Rabenold, Vice President
Mr. E. C. ::agle , Construction Manager
.
Mr. E. K. Ferguson, Project Superintendent
Mr. R. N. Moyer, Quality Control Supervisor
Gilbert Asscciates , Inc.
.
.
Mr. R. H. Fleming, Quality Assurance Site Coordinator
Burns and Roe, Inc.
Mr. R. S. Croseclose, Lead Site Quality Assurance Engineer
.
The following items were discussed:
A.
Indoctrination and Traininn Procrams for OC and Construction Personnel
.
The inspector stated _ hat the indoctrinaticn and training programs
for UELC site quality control personne'l and appropriate UE&C con-
structica personnel, as well as the incorpcration of training re-
t
quirenents in appropriate construction and quality control procedures,
_
i
conforned to the ccumitment contained in the licensee's letter of
December 14, 1972.
The licensee did not ec= ment.
B.
Ston-Work Authority
The inspector stated that the UE&C site procedures had been reviewed
for the inclusion of emphasis on stopping of nonconforming work as
stated in the licensee's letter of December 14, 1972.
The licensee did not co=nent.
_
.
-
7 p.
_! m. m
.
i
_
- 11 -
C.
Recreanization of Ouality Oreanization
The inspector stated that the organization described in the December 14,
1972 letter diff ers from the organiza tional structure as it
exists.
presently
The licensee stated that the organization did differ frc= their intended
structuring; however, the present structure is the result of assu=ption
by GPUSC of the site QA ranager responsibilities, and f elt that the
intent of the commitment had been met.
The inspector concurred.
D.
Redefinition of GPUSC Site OA Grouo's Responsibilities
The inspector stated that the function to be perforced by the GPUSC site
-
QA group appeared to be well underway; however, the assu=ption of the
administrative QA responsibilities by the site quality assurance cana-
ger had not yet been fully acco=plished.
The licences concurred and requested that future inspections be co-
ordinated through the Gr JC site QA auditor rather than the site quality
'
assurance manager until a smooth and orderly full transition is accom-
plished.
E.
Core Sorav and Pressurizer Suree Lines
The inspector stated that the NP-1, Partial Data Sheets, for the core
spray and pressurizer surge lines do not include evidence of conformance
to the Pennsylvania Special Standard No. WC-1891, as required by the
FSAR. The inspector stated that this item is unresolved.
(Details .
-
Paragraph 3)
F.
Delta-Territe Weldine Electrodes
The inspector stated that the Babcock-Wilcox material certification for
E-304 welding electrodes, Heats #32167 and #50311, did not contain
.
evidence of 5-10% delta-ferrite as required by B&W Specification No.
CS-37-3.
The inspector stated that this item is a violation.
(D e-
~
tails, Paragraph 4)
G.
Electrical Encineered Safecuards Motors, Shaft Rotation
-
The inspector stated th't the electrical quality control organization
a
k
_
4.a
M6
- sa
_
- 12 -
did not have a list of equipment in their assigned area of resptnsi-
bility, but cust search several documents to establish the quality
level classification. On Unit No. 1, the inspector found that six
notors were identified which had not had their shafts rotated in ac-
cordance with the. procedurcs, and six other notors for which no dis-
position existed from date of receipt on site.
These latter six motors
f ailed to appear on the construction list.
There was no audit at any
level which identified this deficiency.
Approximately 15 totors were
received for Unit No. 2, of which five are engineered saf eguards; how-
ever, no required preventive maintenance has been performed since re-
ceipt. The inspector further stated that this is the second similar
violation identified on consecutiv.e inspections in this area.
tails, Paragraph 5)
(D e-
' H.
Surveillance of Instrument Panels, Control Boards, and Related
Ecuiccent
_
The inspector stated that the surveillance of instrument panels, con-
trol boards, and related equipment did not list the equipment subjected
to such surveillance, nor its location.
The inspector stated that
audit or surveillance reports addressed general cleanliness of the
storage area; however, there were no reports indicating surveillance of
installed,but not energized, equipment as described in the Metropolitan
Edison letter of November 3,1972.
The inspector also stated that the
electrical quality control organization was not aware of the Nove=ber 3,
1972 commitment, nor did an equipment list with equipment locations and
status exist within this organization.
The inspector further stated
that this is the second similar violation identified on consecutive
inspections in this area.
(Details, Paragraph 6)
I.
Installation of Engineered Safeeuards Pumns Without Prior Documented
_
Notification of Ouality Control
'
The inspector stated that four engineered safeguards pumps were
installed with no evidence of prior notification of the Field Super-
visor, Quality Control, and without notification by " speed letter"
as described in Metropolitan Edison's letter of November 3,1972.
The
inspector further stated that this is the second similar violation
identified on consecutive inspections in this area.
(Details, Para-
graph 7)
-
w
g
,e.cmv>
-
. s <
_
- 13 -
Ecuireent
Duarter3v Audits of Measurinc and Test
J.
The inspector stated that the quarterly field audit for tools, gauges,
and instruments was reinstated on October 27, 1972, and that an audit
26, 1973; however, the audit report did
report was prepared on Januaryinspected and, in one instance, answered
not identify the equipnent
The inspector stated that ~ this was
the question , "How?" with "Ye s" .
the pro-
a violation of Criterion V and/or Criterion XVIII, in that
contain quantitative or cualitative acceptance criteria
cedures de not
and there is no ceans of identif ying all equip =ent audited or assuring
that all such equipment is accounted in the documentation of the audit.
(Details, Paragraph 8)
K.
Separation of Redundant Circuits
,
separation of the different engineered safe-
_
The inspector stated that
(CC
gucrds channels beneath the engineered saf eguards control consoles
and CR panels) erroneously identified as "saf eguard actuation cabinets"
had less than two inches air separation in two
in our previous report,
instances which is in violation of the design criteria.
This lack of
The
separation had not been identified by any quality organization.
-
inspector also stated that the present arrangement of cables in these
consoles made verification of channel separation i= practicable if not
The inspector further stated that this was a second viola-
L=possible.
tion on consecutive inspections of lack of separation and of failure of
the lack of separa-
the quality organizations to identify and document
tien.
(Details, Paragraph 2)
L.
Sensors, Instruments, and Associated Lines
,
The inspector stated that the procedure for inspection of instrument /
-
sensors and associated lines had been prepared, but the AEC was con-
cerned with the maintenance of separation and precluding the introduction
of a common mode of failure.
It was further stated that " quality as-
.
spects", addressed in the previous noncompliance, was concerned with the
failure to address the minimum acceptable separation of redundant
instruments /s,ensors and associated lines. The present procedure did not
contain quantitative or qualitative acceptance criteria, nor was there
guidance available concerning the stated design objective separation
or other criteria. The inspector stated that this would be listed as
a violation.
(Details, Paragraph 10)
_
b
%W
,I
J
.
_
- 14 -
M.
Construction Deficiency Recorts
Subsequent to the inspection, the licensee was informed that a viola-
tien of 10 CFR 50.55(e) had been identified associated with water
damage to four engineered safeguards pump motors which were damaged
during the ficod en or about June 23, 1972.
Two reports, one oral
and one in writing, failed to identify this ficod damage.
(Details,
Paragraph 11)
N.
3 crated Water Storace Tank RT Inspection
The inspector stated that an RT technique sheet has been provided for
the RT inspecticns perfor=ed on the borated water storage tank as
required by the PDM Quality Assurance Manual.
The inspector stated
that this ite= is considered resolved.
,
The licensee did not co==ent.
(Details, Paragraph 12)
_
O.
Eorated Water Storace Tank, Carbon to Stainless Steel Hold-Down
Clios
The inspector stated that Deviation Report No. 72, dated September 26,
1972, was issued and resolved, relative to the carbon steel tie-downs,
which were used for stainless steel =aterial.
The inspector stated
that this ite= is considered resolved.
The licensee did not cc=sent.
(Details, Paragraph 13)
P.
Borated Water Storace Tank Cleanine with Prohibited Solution
The inspector stated that he found documentation indicating that
.
the prohibition relative to the use of acetone on stainless steel
was invoked by UE5C because of the industrial hazard rather than for
a technical reason.
All contractors and subcontractors had not been
.
advised of the prohibition.
The inspector stated that this ite= is
considered resolved.
The licensee ,did not cc==ent.
(Details., Paragraph 14)
Q.
Lack of Procedures Prior to Start of Work
The inspector stated that a UE&C construction =e=o,
dated October 11,
I
1972, was issued to the UE&C purchasing organization, reaffir=ing
(
.
cg_2
.
r..
.,c
,
_
p
- 15 -
tFS requirement that formally approved procedures cust be available
on site prior to start of work. The inspector stated that this item
is considered resolved.
The licensee did not cenment.
(Details, Paragrcph 15)
R.
Eorated Water Storace Tank Insnection
The inspector stated that a review of the final inspection performed by
PDM indicated that the borated water storage tank had been cleaned in
accordance with applicable procedures, and UE&C records also indicated
the tank had been inspected to verify conformance with the specifi-
that
cations.
The inspector stated that this item is consid2 red resolved;
however, subsequent to the inspection and acceptance of this tank, welding
on an adjacent structure resulted in additional external weld splatter,
_
which had been identified and documented' by the licensee.
The licensee acknowledged the issuance of the nonconfor=ance report.
0]etails, Paragraph 16)
S.
Borated Water Storace Tank Construction Code
The inspector stated that Amendment No. 36 to the FSAR, which he re-
viewed, dated February 9,1973, pages 6 through 34, state that the
borated water stcrage tank had been constructed in accordance with
Section VIII of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, rather than
AWWA D-108.
The inspector stated that this item is considered resolved.
The licensee did not co==ent.
(Details, Paragraph 17)
.
T.
Corrective Action
-
The inspector stated that audit findings which were previously identified
as being unresolved for a period of ttme inconsistent with the QA plan
'
were found to be resolved. The inspector stated that this item is con-
sidered resolved.
The licensee did not co= ment.
(Details, Paragraph 18)
U.
Pine Weldine Defect Historv
The inspector stated that he found UE&C Field Change, QC-33, dated
-
-
October 3,1972, which was a revision of the UE&C procedure QC-8,
requires documentation of def ect re= oval and included a revised history
i
,_
_
@
e ry.a v ;q
r.,
. sa
-
_
- 16 -
record f orm, which confor=ed to Gilbert Associates Specification
No. 5550, Paragraph 2.7.3.
The inspector stated that this ite=
was considered resolved.
The licensee did not ec= rent.
(Details, Paragraph 19)
V.
Materials Certificatien for ELW Fuenlied Pine
The inspector stated that he had reviewed the detailed fabrication
records and = ate ial certificatiens which were on site f or E&W sup-
plied pipe.
Th, inspector stated that this ites was considered re-
solved.
The licensee did not cc= ment.
(Details, Paragraph 20)
.
.W.
Use of Line-Coa ted Electrodes
_
The inspector stated that a review of welding caterial test reports by
the UE&C site welding engineer and QC records clerk revealed a trans-
cription error from one welding material test certificate to a second
which resulted in E-16-8-2 being incorrectly identified as E-308.
The licensee did not cc==ent.
(Details, Paragraph 21)
X.
Radicerach 'Exanination Ecuionent
The inspector stated that the Cona= Testing Agency now has a completely
equipped radiographic inspection laboratory, including a hi-intensity
viewer. The inspector stated that this item is considered resolved.
The licensee did not co= ment.
(Details, Paragraph 22)
_
Y.
Sockolet Fillet Weld to Pine No. DC-57
.
The inspector stated that the fillet welds attaching a sockolet to
the side of pipe No. DC-57 have been repaired and that this ites is
considered resolved.
The licensee did not co= ment.
(Details, Paragraph 23)
Z.
Transweld Weave on Pioe 500o1 CF-1
_
The inspector stated that the transweld weave on pipe spool CF-1 has
been ground to a s=ooth finish, and hardness tests performed to verify
(
.
-
O
( '[
~
o
.$
, ,,
.
- 17 -
overheating during the trans-veld weaving had not adversely af-
this iten was con-
that
fected the caterial. The inspector stated that
sidered resolved.
(Details, Paragraph 24)
The licensee did not cc==ent.
AA. Delta-Ferrite Content - Grinnell Shon k' elds
The inspector stated that the inspection records .,hcv that a 100% f errite
d
scope inspettica was conducted on the surface of each shop veld ma e
All velds were veri-
by Grinnell and the results evaluated by the A-E.least 6%, but not in excess of 10%
fied to have delta-ferrite of atthis item was considered resolved.
The inspector stated that
(Details, . Paragraph 25)
_
The licensee did not comment.
.
BB. Electrical Monconformine Condition Deficienev Reports _
The inspector stated that Deficiency Reports and/or Engineering
Deviation Notices were now being prepared for nonconforming conditions
instrumentation installation where the
in the electrical control
design objective separation of cable trays and conduits has been vio-
The inspector stated that this iten was considered resolved.
lated.
03etails, Paragraph 26)
The licensee did not cc= ment.
CC. Closure of Opening Between Control Room and Cable Spreadine Room
The inspector stated that he had been informed that drawings are being
_
developed for closure of the opening in the engineered safeguards
This would be carried as an unresolved
actuating control consoles.
item pending review of the intended method of closure.
The licensee asked if he would be required to respond to this item.
.
The inspector stated that the use of the term " unresolved item" implied
d ther e-
that the item would be re-inspected, but was not a violation an
fore would no.t appear in the letter discussing the inspection find-
(Details, Paragraph 27)
ings and would not require a reply.
Common Ventilation System for Batterv Rooms _
_
DD.
the coc=on ventilation system shared by the
The inspector stated that
to further action by
two battery roons is considered resolved, subject
the Directorate of Lic.ensing.
.
w
_
r:p> -4 cri
(
.cv
-
_
W
- 18 -
(Details, Paragraph 28)
The licensee did not comment.
EE. Use of Electrical CC Checklists _
the procedure pertaining to the use of QA
inspector stated that
The present syst em r e-
The
checklists while inspecting has been changed.
quired that the inspector carry a copy of the applicable procedure
d/or
while inspecting and/or witnessing the receiving, storing, anField notes were pre
installation of the equipment.The notes were found to be cc=prehensive.
The in-
transcription.
this item was considered resolved.
spector stated that
(Details, Paragraph 29)
The licensee did not cc==ent.
for Hich Pressure Iniection Punn Motors _
. FF. Sucolenentarv Heat
-
the high pressure injection pump motors had
The inspector stated that
been turned over to the startup unit and were in a controlled environ-
Quality control procedures stated that motors in a controlled
therefore, this item
ment.
envirorment did not require supplementary heat;
was considered resolved.
(Details, Paragraph 30)
The licensee did not cer=ent.
GG. Receipt Inseection of Reactor Pressure Sensine Acutators
The inspector stated that he had reviewed documentation which indi-(RK-18) w
cated that the reactor pressure sensing actuators
lled.
as an integral part of the B&W equip =ent in *4hich they were insta
The inspector stated that this item was considered resolved.
CDetails, Paragraph 34)
The licensee did not ccm=ent.
HH. Calibration and Testine of Instrumentation
.
procedures had been prepared for the calibra-
The inspector stated t
mentation prior to installation, and that
tion and testing of in:
this item was consideme' resolved.
(Details, Paragraph 31)
The licensee did not cccment.
_
M
_
.
4
-
-
c e;- A C 4
(,
. . . ~
_
- 19 -
11. Vertical Cable Trav Covers
The inspector stated that the vertical cable tray covers had been
described in a general note on the electrical drawings, and that
procedures recuiring verification of this installaticn had been pre-
pared; however, this will be carried as an unresolved iten, pending
co:pletion and verificaticn of the installation.
The licenrae stated that fire barriers throughout were also pro-
cedurally covered.
(Details, Paragraph 32)
JJ. Cable Trav Loading
The inspector stated that procedures had been prepared requiring veri-
fication that the design objective cable tray loading had not been
,
exceeded; however, this would be carried as an unresolved item, pending
installation of the remaining cables and verification that tbo design
loading objective had not been exceeded.
The licensee did not cc=nent.
(Details, Paragraph 33)
KK. UE&C Internal Audits
The inspector stated that the UE&C internal audits required by QC-15
had not been implemented; however, the schedule showed that such
audits would be conducted during the period April - Dece=ber,1973.
This would be carried as an urresolved item.
The licensee did not co=nent.
(Details, Paragraph 35.c)
LL. Loes and Records
The inspector stated that an examination of typical construction logs
and records revealed a number of instances where unsuitable informa-
tion was included, and where deficiencies identified a year or more
ago remained uncorrected in the record.
This item re=ains unresolved.
The licensee did not ce==ent.
MM. Containment Rine Girder Repair Documentation
The licensee stated that, per the inspector's request, all docunentation
-
and history on the contain= cut ring girder repair had been asse= bled fol-
lowing completion of the repair work. An audit by QA had been conducted
( .
m
I' [
v.,
-#
. .
-
_
- 20 -
and the documentation package was now available for examinat ;cn.
The inspector stated that this docu=catation would be examintd during
a later inspection.
-
.
O
_
G
.
m
k
72-iS3
i
.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Centacted
General Public Utilities Service Comnany
Mr. W. A. Verrochi. Vice Pre-ident, Design and Construction
Mr. B. C. Avers, Manager, Quality Assurance
Mr. J. E. Wright, Site Quality Assurance Manager
Mr. M. J. Stremberg, Site Quality Assurance Auditor
Mr. J. A. Renshaw, Quality Assurance Specialist
Mr. G. Kcpp, Quality Assurance Engineer
12. P. Levine, Quality Assurance E,gineer
Mr. P. Gemmingen, U. S. Testing Quality Assurance Engineer
Mr. C. Talbott, Conan Inspection Agency, Contract Level III Radio-
graphic Inspector
United Encineers and Constructors
'
Mr. C. F. Rabenold, Vice President.
12. E. C. Nagle, Construction Manager
-
Mr. V. E. Cichocki, Construction Superintendant
Mr. E. K. Ferguson, Project Superintendent
Mr. R. N. Moyer, Quality Control Supervisor
Mr. H. Finlan, Site Welding Engineer
Mr. J. A. Schmidt, Records Coordinator
Mr. J. Fleming, Electrical Startup Engineer
Mr. R. W. Liscom, Electrical QC Engineer
12. N. A. Vitale, Documentation Engineer
Gilbert Associates, Inc.
-
Mr. R. H. Fleming, Quality Assurance Site Coordinator
Mr. N. R. Barker, Quality Assurance Project Engineer
,
_
Burns and Roe , Inc.
,
Mr. R. S. Groseclose, Lead Site Quality Assurance Engineer
Babcock and Wilcox
Mr. N. Norman, Associate Project Engineer
Mr. J. Uhl, Site Manager
Royal Globe Insurance Cornany
_
Mr. L. Gottshall, National Beard, Site Code Examiner
2.
Status of Construction
(
The licensee reported that there was no change in the projected com-
'
pletion dates. Construction was 85% complete, with hot functional
'
test Nove=ber 30, 1973; fuel loading February 1,1974; and 100%
-
power June 15, 1974.
i
,
t
r&n - 4 c /l
-
g
1
- 22 -
3.
Core Sprav and Pressurizer Surce Line , Not Certified in Accordance
with FS.\\P
The NP-1 Partial Data Sheets for tha 2%" core spray and the 10"
pressurizer surge line piping were signed of f by a State of Ohio
inspector as conforming to the ANSI B31.7 piping code but contained
no evidence that they were also in conf ormance with the Pennsylvania
Special Standard !?C-1891 as required by the FSAR.
4.
Irrroner Delta-Ferrite and 1.r.o.moer Certification - ,:eldinc Electrodes
'
It was f ound during a review of the records for BLW supplied equipment
-
that the materials certificates covering the ELW welding electrodes
classification E-304, heat 932167 contained 1.5 to 2.57. Delta-f errite
which is below the mir.i aum requxrement in the ELW specification CS-37-3
which requires 5 to 107. Delta-ferrite in all welding electrodes.
It was
also icund that welding electrode class E-304 heat #50311 showed no
chemical analysis of ferrite at all on the records.
5.
Encineered Safecuards Motors. Shaft Rotation
.
UE&C Procedure ECP-6, paragraph 5.1.4 requires that the engineered
safeguards motor shafts be rotated monthly.
The quality control
organization responsible for the electrical aspects of the job did not
have a list of the equipment under the scope of the quality assurance
organ.zation. The construction organization who has a responsibility
for rotation of motor shafts had an equipment list which was inspected
in detail.
Fif teen motors associated with the engineered safeguards
were found to be improperly accounted for. The quality control organi-
zation had not identified these deficiencies. The particular defi-
ciencies are as follows:
a.
Pump NS-P-1c (Nucicar Service Cooling) inadvertently shown as
being turned over to startup by construction.
Rotation of the
shaf t was not acce=plished betwee t Septecher, 1972 and the date
of the inspectica.
.
b.
Motors AH-E-15a and 15b were shown on the construction log having
been turned over to the Startup Unit in September, 1972.
The
Startup log shows that this unit assumed responsibility on
Dece=ber 8, 1972.
There is no record of rotation between Septe=ber,
1972 and Dece=ber, 1972.
c.
Motors AH-E-19b and AH-E-29a were shown on the construction log as
having been turned over to the startup unit on October 3,1972,
_
however, the startup unit nas no records indicating the assumption
and rerponsibility of these motors.
There is no record of rota-
tion between October 3,1972 and March 29, 1973.
(
.
.
-
y <j. - A Q
.
-.
_
- 23 -
d.
Motor All-E-lha was shown on the construction log as having beer
turned over to Startup in October, 1972, however , the Startup
log indicates assumption of responsibility on January 8, 1973.
There is no record of rotation between October 3,1972 and
January 8, 1973.
e.
The rakeup pucp main oil purps (MUP-3a, 3b, and 3c) do not appear
en the construction list.
There is no record indicating inspec-
tion and/or rotation, if required, since the initial receipt of
these pumps and =ctors.
f.
Makeup pump auxiliary cil pumps (MUP-2a,- 2b , and 2e) do not appear
on the construction list.
There is no evidence that these pumps
have been inspected and/or rotated since initial receipt.
6.
Surveillance of Instruments. Panels, and control Boards
UE&C Procedure ECP-10 requires that a surveillance be perforned on all
-
'
instrument panels, contrcl boards and related equipment to assure that
controlled storage conditions are maintained.
Paragraph 3 of this proce-
dure states:
" Documentation will be performed in accordance with
quality control check list for storage of instrument control centers,
cabinets, consoles and instruments racks..."
There is fragmented docu-
rentation which indicates that a cursory inspection of this equipment
has been made.
The quality control office does not have a list of
equipment under their scope nor the location of this equipment.
One
audit of this equipment performed approximately one year prior to
this inspection listed that equipment which was inspected, however,
subsequent inspections address .the general cleanliness of the area
and appears to be concerned primarily with equipment that is stored
in the warehouse.
In answer to our initial violation, Metropolitan
Edison stated that such surveillance included installed, but not
energized equipment.
~
.
7.
Installation of Engineered Safecuards Ecuin ent
l
l
UE&C Procedures ECP-6 and ECP-10 both require that the field super-
l
.
visor Quality Control be notified prior to the installation of
'
engineered safeguards equipment.
Metropolitan Edison's letter in
en.wer to our violations states in part:
".. .Further, starting in
Se p tech e,r , 1972, UE&C construction. craf ts notify QC by speed letter. . .".
It was found that the four engineered safeguards pumps, BSPIA, 7B,
and D3 PIA and IB, were installed without written co==unication.
_
d
%
,
,,a
e r
9N
+'U
,
S
- 24 -
S.
Measurinn and lest Encinment Calibratio-
UE6C Procedure QC-13 was revised on October 27, 1972 to reinstate the
requirement for quarterly field audit which had been deleted by a change
to this procedure dated July 6,1972. An intern
audit for tools,
gauges, and instruments was perforned on January 26, 1973; however,
the audit does not state what equipment was inspected. Instructions
for the check list states in part:
"...The applicability of a given
check list er item is left to the discretion of the person conducting
the audit."
It is not possible to determine if all tools, gauges, and
instrueents were audited or what portien if not all.
The audit check
list procedure does not centain qualitative or quantitative evidence.
9.
Senaration of Redundant Circuits
The FSAR, paragraph 8.2.2.12c states in part:
"In a very few cases,
the separation is about 12" and in these cases a barrier is installed
between the trays." A change to the FSAR to permit the 6" air separa-
_
'
tion criteria between channels in the area immediately under the
engineered safeguards control console (CC and CR panels) was stated
to be in the submission process; however, this proposed change was
not available for review.
Several instances were identified where the 6" separation criteria
which has been applied to these cabinets had been violated without
identification by the quality control organization. Again, it was
found that coils of wire, one or two coils, for each indicating
and/or actuating device were suspended under the consoles and in soce
instances constituting a confused cass of wiring making the verification
of separation impractical, if not impos s ible.
There is no cethod,
without recoving the cable terminations at both ends, to verify that there
is not channel mixing.
There is no code or standard that we are aware
of that addresses equipment internal wiring, however, the coiling of
-
wiring as described above precludes a valid determination relative to
separation between channels.
.
10.
_ Sensors, Instruments, and Associated Lines
The UE&C Construction Procedure MCP-14 has been prepared and is in use.
This procedure, hcwever, requires verification that the sensors and/or
instruments used in the detection of system abnormalities be verified for
conforcance with drawings.
There is no guidance relative to the design
objective separation of redundant sensing line and sensors. Consider-
-
able effort is expended in assuring that the power, control, and in-
-
strument wiring raintains a minimum separation. The design objective
separation of the cables is described in the FSAR and in the Architect-
Engineers Specifications, however, no reference to sensors and sensing
lines could be identified.
There is no means of establishing a quan-
(_
titative or qualitative criteria for inspection.
_
f
Mh
d
l ,%
. + ~
_
- 25
11.
Construction Deficiencv Renorts
the four engineered
Subsequent to the inspection it was found that
safeguards pumps, BSFIA, IB, DHPIA, and IB, which were installed
notification of the quality control organizations, were
withcut
or about June 23, 1972.
There was no
damaged during the flood on
21-22, 24-25,
reported flood damage during our inspection of June
50-289/72-11) and a negative reply to our letter of
1972, (R0 Reportrecuesting inf ormation relative to flood damage.
June 27, 1972,
Borated ': ster Storece Tank RT Insnections
12.
The inspector reviewed the PDM radiographic technique procedure
The technique
No.1 for contract 10146 dated September 8,1972.
procedure was signed by the PDM QA Manager and included the re-
In addition, records
quirements of the above ref erenced contract.
were reviewed to indicate that UE6C QC had reviewed all radiographs
~
for the borated water storage tank and found them to be of satis-
'
This item is considered resolved.
factory quality.
13.
Borated Water Storace Tank. Carbon to Stainless Steel Hold-down
Clips
72 dated
The inspector reviewed a B&W deviation r2 port No,
,
September 26, 1972 relative to the use of carbon steel hold-down
for the borated water storage tank
clips on stainless steel plate
received on site May 9, 1972.
The 9 aviation report indicated that
arcel traces by buffing and cleaning
the affected plates. This action is documented in a PDM report
26, 1972.
In addition, records were reviewed to
dated Septecher
indicate that B&W had reviewed other B&W site receipt inspection
reporte to determine if similar unresolved problems were indicated.
_
This catter is'
This review did not reveal any other cpen itema.
considered resolved.
Borated Water Storace Tank Cleanine with Prohibited Solutions
14.
.
The PDM Cleaning Procedure No. CP-1 allowed the use of acetone as
UE&C Site
a cleaning caterial on the borated water + arage tank.
Procedure No. MCP-3 prohibited the use of ccetone on the Three Mile
The licensee stated that from an engineering stand-
Island' site.
point acetone is allowab.le as a cleaning agent, however, UE&C
elected to prohibit its use as a safety precaution.
Documentation
was reviewed to indicate that all site subcontractors had been
in-
_
forced of the prohibition of use of acetone as a cleaning agent.
This item is considered resolved.
(
.
~
,
_
- 26 -
15.
Lack of Procedures Prior to Start _j# Ucrk
The inspector verified that UELC Cc .truction Memo dated October 11,
1972 reminded CELC Purchasing that .. hey should make sure that con-
tractors understand, that formerly appr oved procedures must be
available prior to start of work governed by these procedures.
The
inspector reviewed several QC check lists which indicated that the
field QC personnel cust assure that formal approval of procedures
has been obtained prior to start of work.
This ite= is considered
-
resolved.
16.
Borated Water storace Tank Inscection
The inspector reviewed final inspection records performed by PDM
to indicate that the outside and inside of the tank had been cleaned
in accordance with PDM cleaning procedure CP-1 and welding specifica-
tion WPS-48.
In addition, UE&C QC records were reviewed to indicate
'
verification that the tank had been inspected and found to be in
-
accordance with the above specifications.
Records were reviewed to
indicate that subsequent to this inspection, however, welding in the
vicinity of the borated water storage tank had caused additional
weld splatter and a nonconformance report (NCR) had been issued for
this ites.
RO:1 will review the resolution of this NCR during sub-
sequent inspections.
17.
Borated Water storace Tank. Construction Code
The ' inspector reviewed'FSAR A=end=ent No. 36, dated February 9,1973,
page 6-24 which indicates that the field erection welding require-
ments uere in accordance with Section VIII of the ASME Boiler and
Pressure vessel Code.
This item is considered resolvid.
18.
Corrective Action
-
The inspector reviewed records to indicate corrective actions had
,
been ce=pleted per the following table:
Audit No.
Date of Audit
Date of Resolution
72-1
12/28-29/71
Cleared 8/29/72
72-3 -
2 / 15 /72
Cleared 9/19/72
72-5
4/12/72
Cleared 8/29/72
The inspector also reviewed a nonconformance report relative to
incorrect alloy of steel plate for the fuel storage liner.
The
-
specification called for ASTM A240 =aterial and the caterial re-
ceived was ASTM A167 caterial.
The specification was changed by
the designer and the NCR was closed on December 27, 1972.
The
(
above items are considered resolved.
,
_
- $
e&
~a
-.
.
.
- 27 -
19.
Pine Ucidinn Defect 11i s t orv
The UELC welding engineer prodJced field change CQC-33 dated
October 3,1972 which is a revision of the UEEC Procedure QC-8,
revision 6, " Pipe Welding Control." This now contains a require-
nent for the documentation of defect renoval verification and in-
cludes a revised historj record form which provides for the docu-
tentation for this information.
20.
Materials Certification for BEN Sunnlied Pine
During this inspection, the UELC quality control records clerk was
able to produce the complete B&R Met Ed Three Mile Island piping
fabrication report C620-0005-50 which covers all records, quality
control and fabrication dccuecntation for the 28" and 36" piping.
The record package covering the 2 " core spray piping and the 10"
pressuricer surge line piping was also rade available for review.
,
This included the folicwing:
Cert.ification of conformance to the
-
B&W specification and ANSI B31.7 piping code.
Complete stress re-
ports in accordance with the requirements of ANSI B31.7 piping code,
attested by a professional engineer for the State of Ohio. The B&W
quality assurance release for shipment.
Quality upgrading and document review for non-destructive testing
and Class C cleanliness as well as final release for shipment.
Welding material records by welders No. , heat, lot, type, including
ferrite control information. Welding control records covering each
welding operator, each weld, each material joined, each weld method,
including qualification documents for each welding procedure and
welding operator. A full package of "as-built" dimensional drawings
covering each pipe spool utilized in the reactor coolant pressure
boundary systems. The NP-1, Partial Data Sheet for each pipe spool
signed off by the Hartford Steam Boiler inspector.
'A listing of all
contract deviations, their disposition and approval by the material
-
review boards. Co=plete caterial certificates covering tests for
chemical and physical characteristics for all caterial used as well
.
as the test for bonds on DETA (Dupont Corporation Exposure Bonded
Cladding) including dye penetrant, ultrasonic inspection for bonding
in accordance with B31.7 code case 1338-3. Welding procedure, re-
pair procedures, including records and re-inspection techniques.
B&W non-destructive testing shop specifications and procedures.
During the review of the NP-1 Partial Data Sheets signed by the
Hartford Steam Boiler Inspectors, it was noted that the for=s
covering the 28" and 36" reactor coolant piping, included not only
a statement of co=pliance to ANSI B31.7 but also a conformance to
-
the Pennsylvania Special Standard WC-1891.
(
~
-
f
>~ rN
A f~l O
o
.. a
.
- 28 -
21.
Use of Lire coated Electrodes
This item is considered closed since the UELC site welding engineer
and QC records clerk pointed out an error in transcription free
one welding material test certificate to another showing that
welding rod identified as E-308 were actually welding rod E-16-8-2
which accounts for the lower and acceptable chrc=ium cnd nickel
centent in this heat of electrodes.
During a further research cf
the records it was verified that the heat of electrodes which shewed
a 1caer chrc=ium and nickel chemical content was identified as
E-308 when it shculd have been E-16-8-2.
22.
Radiocrach Excrination Ecuierent
During this inspection the RO:I inspector observed that the Cona=
Testing Agency new have a completely equipped radiographic inspec-
tion laboratory, including a HI-intensity viewer and a densitoreter
for ceasuring and ccmparing film density to the requirements of
B31.7 piping code.
-
'
23.
Sockolet Fillet Welde
These fillet welds attaching a sockolet to a downecmer header in
the decay heat system did not ceet the requirecent of ANSI B31.7,
paragraph 1-727.4.4.
Since identification of this item by the RO:I
inspector, these welds have been repaired by grinding the observed
undercutting to properly blend this weld into the contours des-
cribed in the above paragraph of B31.7.
In addition, the UE&C
welding engineer produced a manufacturers specification from the
' plier to the sockolets which advised that particular care must
s
be exercised in installing these sockolets to large diameter piping,
in order to avoid undercutting and notch effects.
This information
had not been previously available to the welding fore =an who has a
-
copy in his possession for guidance in future welding in this type
of joint.
24.
Transweld Weave on Pine Scool CF-1
,
The inspector observed during his inspection that this weld No. CF-1
has now been ground to a mirror-like surface finish in order to
provide a suitable surface for the automated in-service inspection
of the' reactor coolant system. The UE&C welding engineer produced
records shewing that ferrite-scope readings indicated that there was
6 to 77. delta-ferrite in the weld. Hardness tests using portable
equipment verified that probable overheating of the weld by this
-
trans-weld weave pattern had not produced a surface hardness in
excess of that normally found in stainless steel welding.
The
data provided by these investigations was evaluated by the UE&C
welding engineers who concluded that this weld had sustained no
I._
det.imental effects from the probable overheating.
.
"f 0 - 4 .C 1
- 6
...x
.
.
.
,
- 29 -
Since the Grinnell piping and weld procedures limit weld weave
diameter,
patterns to a dimension equal to four times the electrode
this nonconformance to their own procedures is being reviewed by
UE&C with the Grinnell Corporation.
The licensee representatives
have stated that as soon as this problem is resolved with Grinnell
they will advise the RO:I inspector so he can review the documentation
which resolves this probler.
- Crinnell Shen Welds
25.
palta-Ferrite Content
ansuer which was received from Crinnell Corporation concerning
Tb2
this deficiency was vague.
A 10T. Ferrite-scope inspection was
conducted on the surf ace of each shop weld made by Grinnell on
stainless steel piping provided by that supplier.
The UE&C welding
engineer produced records of this inspection which verified that in no
case was the delta-ferrite content of the deposited metal less than
67. . In addition, Gilbert Associates conducted an engineering evalu-
ation of this material which resulted in a conclusion that based on
_
,
the Schaeffler diagram, each of the Grinnell shop welds contained
f rom 6 to 67. Delta-f errite.
26.
Electrical '!cnconformine Condition Deficiencv Reoorts
UELC Procedure QC-17, paragraph II, B1, states in part, "Noncon-
t
formance includes activitias, caterials and equipment whose con-
dition does not comply with the applicable. . .cpecification".
It
was found that deficiency teports and/or engineering deviation re-
quests had been prepared for approximately 100 instances where the
separation criteria had been violated.
~
27.
Closure of coenine Between Control Room and Cable Soreading Room
Drawings are presently in preparation describing the technique and
method to be used to provide a fire barrier between the opening and
the bottom of these panels and the cable spreading room below. This
will be carried as an outstanding item.
-
28.
Common ventilation System for satterv Rooms
Further inspection of the co= mon ventilation system for the two
battery rooms will be deferred until such time as it is determined
that the description in the FSAR is acceptable to the Directorate
of Licensing.
_
29.
Use of Electrical OC Check Lists
UE&C Procedure ECP-3, Addendum A, dated Marci. 2, 1973 states in
i
part:
"While perf orming inspections , the inspector will carry a
-
copy of ECP-3.
While inspecting and/or witnessing the receiving,
c a ,--. a v 9. ,
e..
. . , .
_
1
i
.
,
,
- 30 -
storing, and/or installation of the equipments, notes will be
It was f ound that the inspectors do have
vade as required. . .".
sice.
copies of Procedure ECP-3 which have been reduced to pocket
of the
While field notes are not maintained af ter preparatiot. transcribed
field notes not yet
check list, it was found that
In order to verify the adequacy of the in-
were cceprehensive.
spection program, cable tray 148 which contains 139 circuitsall cables
that
were inspected to assure
engineered safeguards designatien "a" or non-engineered safe-
all non-engineered safeguards cir-
In addition,
guards cables.cuits and engineered safeguards circuits in this tray were veri-
they were not routed in
fied on the ce=puter run to assure thatother than "a".
Engineered
an engineered safeguard designation,
safeguards cable designated CG-202, which appeared on the compucer
its
f or cable tray 148, was electrcnically verified throughoutsafeguards ch
"a"
Field run conduit, system "WG",
run
4
which contained cable designations 1CQ421a, ICQS21a, RP493a, RP5 1a,
entire run.
was inspected and all cable in this conduit were identified in the
~
"a".
System
cable schedule as engineered safeguards designation
No
"WL" field run conduit was also ' verified and found correct.
,
deficiencies were found.
for Hich Pressure Injection Puro Motors _
30.
Sunnlecentarv Heat
All notors were new f ound to be in a controlled environment w
does not require supplementary heat as defined by the UE&C
-
Procedure ECP-6.
Calibration and Testine of Instrumentation
31.
Procedure MCP-13 was reviewed and was found to require four
calibration points except where modules, control valves, and posi-
The elec-
tien switches are calibrated to vendor requirements.
trical quality control does not have a list of such equipment nor
.
is there any quality control task assigned to the calibration of
instruments.
32.
vertical Cable Trav Covers
.
added to the electrical drawings indicating
A general note has beca
that all vertical trays shall have- solid covers to 6 feet above
This item has been added to the check
their. floor penetrations.
This item will be carried as an
list under UESC Procedure ECP-8.
outstanding item pending verification that barriers, as described
_
in paragraph 8.2.2.11b of the FSAR, has been vetified.
33. Cable Trav Leading
The UE&C Procedure ECP-3 requires tray loading verification.
This will be carried as an outstanding item to assure that all
Tray 149 shows
engineered safeguards trays have been evaluated.
_
te r
. . s,
.
,
_
k
.-
.
-
.
- 31 -
approximately 501 fill o n the cable run schedule while the physical
fill is in excess of S01, however, this tra:, had not yet been evalu-
ated by th9 quality control organisation.
34.
Receiot inseection
Reactor Pressure Sensing Actuators, identified as RK-13 which were
selected for random inspection during the preceding inspection were
found to constitute a pcrt of the lar er device in which they
c
are
contained.
Receipt inspection on the individual sensors will not
be performa? but rather the receipt inspection for the cabinet and
all assceiated equipment in the cabinet was performed as a single
unit.
35.
Internal Audits
a.
GPU and MPR Audits
,
The inspector reviewed the following audit reports to verify
e
compliance with the requirements of the Three Mile Island
Quality Assurance Plan.
No deficiencies were
'd entified.
Audit Date
Sub iec t
Findines
Resolution
11/27 - 12/1/72
Drawing Control
25
Satisfs vory;
Verified 12/18/72
12/1-4/72 (72-15)
QA Records
5
Satisfactory;
Verified 1/3/72
11/24 & 12/11/72
UE&C QC Files
3
Satisfactory;
(72-16)
Verified 1/15/72
12/13-14/72
(72-17)
Crawing Control
5
Satisfactory;
Verified 12/9/72
.
(72-18)
UE&C Documentation
4
Satisfactory;
Status
Verified 2/9/73
1/2-5/73
Cable Tracing
1
Not yet resolved
(73-1).
Resolution: 3/28/73
b.
Gilbert Associates, Inc. (CAI) Audits
-
The inspector reviewed the CAI audits No. 41 and No. 81 relative
to Engineering Change Request (ECR) conducted on August 12-27,
1971 and November 27, 1972, respectively.
The results of Audit
(
No. 41 were not satisfactory and records of resolution were re-
-
$
s,' .y - A C .)
.
. . . ,.
-
.,
.
.
.
- 32 -
viewed for the period September 12, 1971 to Augest 29, 1972
at which time satisfactory resolution of the problems was
documented. Audit No. 81 was conducted during the period
Octcber-November, 1972. The results of this audit were con-
sidered unsatisfactory but were satisfactorily resolved en
February 20, 1973.
This area is the subject cf a reaudit
su'r.duled for April 1, 1973.
No deficiencies to QA progra=
recuirements were identified.
,
c.
United Encineers and Constructors (UEEC) Audits
The inspector requested information relative to internal audits
conducted by UEEC in accordance with Procedure QC-15.
The
portionsof QC-15 relacive to the " Response to Daner's Audits
and A/E Surveillance Reports" were reviewed as part of the
audits described in paragraphs 35a and b above. The portions
_
relative to internal audits were stated by site personnel to
'
have not been implemented; however, a schedule was produced
to indicate the require =ents would be implemented during the
period April-Decenber, 1973 which, if accomplished, will
satisfy the requirements of QC-15 requiring annual audits in
the areas of field purchase control, field QC group activities,
field engineering office activities, craft construction opera-
tions and subcontractor activities.
Some of the above areas
are included in QC audits performed of construction activities
and have been performed. Proced e QC-15 was recently revised
to include the internal audit function and that portion has not
yet been implemented. This. =atter will be reviewed during sub-
sequent inspections and is considered unresolved.
.
.
\\
.
-
=
.
...a
- -
!
_