ML19261B933
| ML19261B933 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 01/05/1979 |
| From: | Conlon T, Crowley B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19261B927 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-364-78-20, NUDOCS 7903070557 | |
| Download: ML19261B933 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000364/1978020
Text
.
-
.,
" '
km "f cog
UNITED STATES
o
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.
g
'
REGloN 11
2
3 y,
g
3
' ' - r
g
101 M ARIETT A sT RE ET, N.W.
!
[
os, m f
....
Report No.: 50-364/78-20
Docket No.: 50-364
License No.:
CPPR-86
Category: A2
Licensee: Alabama Power Company
Post Office Box 2641
Birmingham, Alabama 35291
Facility Name: Joseph M. farley Plant, Unit 2
Inspection at: Ashford, Alabama
Inspection conducted: December 11-14, 1978
Inspector:
B. R. Crowley
/![ 7f
Reviewed b
M;Y M _/
_
T. E. Conlon, Chief
' Date
Engineering Support Section No. 2
Reactor Construction and Engineering
Support Branch
Inspection Summary
Inspection on December 11-14, 1978 (Report No. 50-364/78-20)
Areas Inspected:
Pre-service inspection program, procedures and inspection
activities; housekeeping. This inspection involved 30 inspector-hours on-site
by one NRC inspector.
Results: Of the four areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or
deviations were identified in three areas, one apparent item of noncompliance
(deficiency-lack of written procedures defining responsibilities for PSI,
Details, paragraph 5 was identified in one area).
7003070 6 7
.
.
-
.
.
RII Rpt. No. 50-364/78-20
-1-
//4 7f
!
ti
DETAILS
Prepared by:
.
y,
,
B.~R. Crowley, Metallurgical (Engineer
Date
Engineering Support Section No. 2
Reactor Construction and Engineering
Support Branch
Dates of Inspection: December 11-14, 1978
//fhf
Reviewed by r
b/ p;rr/
T. E. Conlon,' Chief
/ Dafe
Engineering Support Section No. 2
Reactor Construction and Engineering
Support Branch
1.
Persons Contacted
Alabama Power Company (APCO)
a.
- J. D. Woodard, Assistant Plant Manager
D. Morey, Maintenance Supervisor
- D. L. Vines, Level III Examiner
M. Brown, Engineer
- F. A. Wurster, Operations QA Engineer
- D. L. Cox, Operations QA Engineer
b.
Contractor Organizations
(1) Southern Company Services (SCS)
- T. B. Caudle, Pre-Service /In-Service Coordinator
(2) Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Nuclear Energy
Systems, Nuclear Services Division (W-NSD)
- L. W. Lunden, Site Coordinator
J. E. Duvall, Shift Supervisor
(3) Zetec, Inc.
T. S. Beiers, Level IIA Examiner
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Lic_ensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
Actions on previous findings were not examined during this inspection.
.
.
.
4
RII Rpt. No. 50-364/78-20
-2-
3.
Unresolved Items
No unresolved items were identified during this inspection.
4.
Independent Inspection Effort
A general walk-through inspection of the reactor building was made.
General housekeeping and overall construction activities were observed.
In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were
identified.
5.
Pre-Service Inspection - Review of Program
The inspector reviewed the licensee's pre-service inspection (PSI)
program in the areas of program approval and QA program requirements,
including organizational structure and audit requirements.
Except for
the steam generator Eddy Current tube inspection, the applicable code
for the PSI is the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section XI,
1974 Edition, with addenda through the Summer of 1975, as required by
paragraph 5.2.8 of ' .e FSAR.
The applicable code for the steam generator tube Eddy Current
inspection is Appendix IV to the Summer of 1976, addenda to Section XI.
The documents reviewed included:
" Westinghouse Examination Program for Pre-Service Inspection for
a.
Class 1 and 2 Components FNP-78-1362", and APC0 approval letter
dated November 30, 1978
Note
Program was not complete - sketches had only been issued for some
Class 2 lines
b.
" Westinghouse Examination Program for Pre-Service Eddy Current
Inspection of Steam Generators FNP-78-1364" and APC0 approval
letter dated November 30, 1978
c.
W-NSD procedure OPR-610-3, Revision 0
d.
W-NSD procedure MRS 2.4.2 GEN-18, Revision 0
e.
W-NSD "QA Program Plan", NSD-PA-001, Revision 3
.
.
.
RII Rpt. No. 50-364/78-20
-3-
f.
APC0 Operating Quality Assurance (OPC) Administrative Procedures:
(1) OQA-AP-01, Revision 8
(2) OQA-AP-05, Revision 2
(3) 0QA-AP-06, Revision 4
(4) OQA-AP-07, Revision 8
(5) 0QA-AP-10, Revision 10
(6) OQA-AP-09, Revision 8
(7) 0QA-AP-11, Revision 11
g.
APC0 OQC Work Procedures:
(1) 0QA-WP-23, Revision 0
(2)
DQA-WP-29, Revision 0
During review of the licensee's program for the control of PSI, the
inspector found that certain of the licensee's organizational responsi-
bilities are not adequately defined by written procedures.
There is no
procedure defining who has the overall responsibility for pre-service
inspection. The pre-service /in-service coordinator, who works for SCS,
performs certain review and approval recommendation functions as well
as overall coordination and surveillance. None of his responsibilities
to the pre-service /in-service program are defined by procedure. An
APCO Level III examiner also performs certain review and approval
recommendations as well as surveillance during inspections. His respon-
sibilities are not defined by written procedures.
Discussions with
APC0 indicate that the Operations Maintenance Supervisor has the overall
responsibility for pre-service /in-service inspection. However, this
responsibility is not delineated in writing nor is his interface with
the above personnel or the pre-servica/in-service contractor described
by procedure. This lack of written definition of pre-service responsi-
bilities appears to be in noncompliance with Criterion I of Appendix B
to 10 CFR 50, which states in part, "The authority cd duties of persons
and organizations performing activities affecting the safety-related
functions of structures, systems and components shall be clearly esta-
blished and delineated in writing.
These activities include both the
performing functions of attaining quality objectives and the quality
assurance functions." At the exit interview, the licensee stated that
he considered that all authority and responsibilities were adequately
defined in APC0 administrative procedures - AP-1, Section 10; AP-3, Sec-
tions 5.1.2 and 5.6.5; and AP-15, Section 2.6.
The inspector reviewed
the aforementioned procedures and concluded that the personnel responsi-
bilities for PSI are not adequately defined in writing.
Therefore, this
is a deficiency and is identified as item 364/78-20-01.
In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance, except as noted in
the above paragraph, or deviation were identified.
.
-
.
.
.
RII Rpt. No. 50-364/78-20
-4-
6.
_ Pre-Service Inspection - Review of Procedures
The inspector reviewed the pre-service inspection procedures indicated
below relative to Eddy Current inspection of steam generation tubes to
determine whether the procedures were consistent with regulatory require-
ments and licensee commitments. See paragraph 5 above for the applicable
code.
The following procedures were reviewed:
W-NSD Procedure MRS 2.4.2 GEN-18, Revision 0, " Eddy Current Inspec-
.
tion of Steam Generator Tubing - Pre-Service and In-Service"
Technical Supplement No. 1, Revision 2 to Procedure MRS 2.4.2
.
GEN-18, " Steam Generator Tubing Inspection for Tube Wall Degradation -
Detection and Quantification"
These procedures were reviewed in the areas of:
Procedure approval, requirements for qualification of NDE
a.
personnel and procedure scope.
b.
Procedure technical content relative to; specification of two
channel examination unit and indication equipment, establishment
of criteria for maximum sensitivity, description of examination
method, description of calibration method and sequence, descrip-
tion of calibration block, and reference to acceptance standards,
Compilation of required records such as examination results and
c.
data sheets, tapes, equipment data, calibration data sheets and
calibration block data.
In the areas reviewed, no items of noncompliance or deviations were
identified.
7.
Pre-Service Inspection - Observation of Work and Work Activities
The inspector observed the pre-service activities described below
relative to steam generator tube Eddy Current inspection to determine
whether these activities were being performed in accordance with regula-
tory requirements and licensee procedures.
See paragraphs 5 and 6
above
r the applicable code and procedures.
Personnel qualification records for three Level I and three Level II
a.
examiners were reviewed.
b.
In process Eddy Current examinations, including the calibration
sequence, was observed for tubes C15-R6, C15-R7, C15-R8, C15-R9,
.
.
.
.~
.
.
RII Rpt. No. 50-364/78-20
-5-
C15-R10 and C15-R11 on the inlet side and tubes C83-R25, C83-R26,
C83-R28, C83-R29 and C83-R30 on the outlet side of steam generator
"A".
The inspection was compared with the applicable procedures
in the following areas:
(1) Program and procedures being followed
(2) Personnel familiar with examination methods
(3) Administrative controls for examination execution, altera-
tions and records
(4) Reference points clearly defined for future inspections
(5) Use of two channel examination equipment
(6) Use of maximum sensitivity as required
(7) Calibration requirements
(8) Percentage of tube coverage during examination
(9) Acceptance criteria
In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations
were identified.
8.
Exit Interview
The inspector met with licensee representatives denoted in paragraph I
at the conclusion of the inspection and summarized the scope and
findings of the inspection.
The inspection included housekeeping and
pre-service inspection program, procedures and activities.
The
noncompliance of paragraph 5 was discussed and the licensee stated that
at this time they did not agree with the noncompliance.