ML19312B742
| ML19312B742 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 03/04/1969 |
| From: | Long F, Reinmuth G, Seidle W US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19312B741 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-269-69-02, 50-269-69-2, 50-270-60-02, 50-270-60-2, 50-287-69-02, 50-287-69-2, NUDOCS 7911180061 | |
| Download: ML19312B742 (11) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. I,
- i. J LJ
), 'O..
- f IMR 4 1969 U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION Fi C W:. II DIVib103 CF CC'2LLL' ICE Report of Inspection CO Report Gos. 50-269, 270, 287/69-2 Licensect Duke Power Corapany Lic ense "os. Ci'i'R-33, 34, 3 5 i
Category A l Date of Inspection: February 4-5, 1969 Date of Previous Inspection. January 6-8, 1969 Inspected By: [5 M 2 / 67 G W. C. Seidic, Reactor Inspector ' Date sys # 3-y -6 7 C. W. ReinMh, Reactor Inspector Date d D k/ ,-w_.7 8-4 -b 7 R. E. Oilcryietallurgical Engineer Date y Revicwed B[ts._ _. A / G
- w v '~
.7 - Y -[ h F. J. f.ong, Senior Reactor Inspector Date SCO?E An announced, two-day visit was made to the principal offices of Duke Power Company in Charlotte, North Carolina. On the first day, Reinmuth, Oiler, and Seidic cet with Duke Power Com?any (Duke) and Babcock & Wilcox (B&'.J) representatives for the purpose of exchanging information relative to the nanufacture of cenponents for the Oconce Nucicar Udits' 1, 2, and 3. Specific topics discusstd were the Duke, the E&W and the i Division of Ccupliance quality control programs covering the reactor i pressure vessels and other major components of the primary systens. On the second day, Scidic reviewed (1) Dukets program for auditing quality control in vendor shops, and (2) the follow-up action taken on the Unit I containment building penetration assembly shop wcld crack that was not detected by the vendor shop QC inspectors (reported in C0 Report No. 30-259/69-1). i s a n o th 9 d j,, 7911180 % ~
.l. J ra _ _ _ _ -. _.. _ _. u. s ~ e. S1??iiRY gfety Items - l'one Monconform.ince Items - Nonc _ Status of Previously Reported Probicas - One unu:;ual occurrence was This involved a three-inch reported in the previous inspection report. e long Southern Boiler Shop weld crcck in a 11nce plate penetration asser.bly which was not detected until the assembly was being erected in the wall. Duke has Shop radiographs of the wcld had clearly showed the crack. since rercad some 1500 shop radiographs of penetration assembly welds to assure themselves that other defects were not missed; none were noted } (see Section D). Other Sinnificant Items - As of January 24, 1969, Duke requires that all vendor bid packages must include a QA plan (see Section E). The competence of potential vendors are now checked by cognizant Duke engineers before any are asked to bid. Lee makes the final judgment in i all contract awards (see Section F). There is no separate QA component in the Duke Engineering Department o rganizat ion. The design engineers, and in some cases third party in-spectors, are responsibic for the audit of QC in vendor shops (sce Section G). Initial QA discussions on the reactor pressure vessels and other major prinary systcu components were held we Duke and B&W representativos (sce Section C). Interview - The inspectors met with Lee, Cwen, and L'ylic at Itanagement the ccxlusion of the visit. The following items were discussed: 1. Audit of Vendors supplyinn Class I Components In response to the inspectorts comments, Lee agreed that Duke should make at 1 cast one visit to vendor shops supplying' major Class I components for the purpose of auditing their QA program. He also nade note of the fact that a Duke representative has not audited the QA program in the Florida Stect mill supplying the containment building rebar, and yet the mill is only a few miles from the Duke of fices. He stated that such an audit would be made soon. t i \\ I
{ j i i L ~. ~ ~. r e 3 i t 2. Cuides for QA Audit s in Vendor Chons_ The inspector asked if written inspection guides are used by the Deke engineer when performing a vendor shop QA audit. Owen stated that they have recognized the need for such guides and, as a result, several are presently being prepared. 3. List of vendor Shgp Visits to Audit QA rrogram g The inspector asked, if the subject list was maintained for those visits involving shops supplying Class I couponents. I Owen stated that a list, as stch, sus not maintained. He did point out, however, that an inspection report is prepared { af ter each visit. Lee stated that he could see where such a list would provide a quick status report of their vendor shop inspection ef fort. In light of this, he directed Cwen to maintain a list start ing with th<3 first vendor shop inspect ion.. Lee stated also that he would maintain a copy of this list at the site for the inspector's review. 4. Liner Plate Penetration Assembly Crack Problem The recheck of some 1500 Southern toiler Shop radiographs of welds in Unit 1 penetration assemblics was discussed (see S ec t io n D). 6 5. Primary System QA Meeting of February 4 e As a follow-up to the subject meeting, Lee stated that he would voluntarily furnish the following items: t Summary of code specifications for all equipment being a. supplied by B&W. b. E&W material list. 1 List of pump casings containing electroslag welds. -c. d. B&W QA organization charts. DETAILS _ A. Persons Contacted First Day. February 4 (Prinary Systen QA liceting) t }' >; 4 -;r
- '" T
'~
s-.. .a
- s..
-x Le i. t a 4-
- 1 Dt+c Peuce Cc-~aag W. S. Lee, Vice Frcsident - Engineering J. R. Uc11s, Principal Field Engineer R. L. Dick, Project Manager - Oconce W. II. Owen, Principal Mechanical Engineer F. P. Lanning, Associate f.ngineer J. II. Curtis, QA Engineer 3
D. S. Robbins, Senior Engineer Construct ion C. E. Watkins, Assistant Vice President i Babcock & Uilcox Co:.m l D.,W. Montgomery, Project Manager W. II. Spangler, Assistant Project Manmger
- 11. P. Dobel, QA Manager - MPG 0 R. E. Mano11, QA Representative I. R. Ilicks, Section llanager - CN0 AEC l
C. W. Reinuuth, Reactor Inspector, CO:llQ R. E. Oiler, Metallurgical Engineer, CO:III 4 Second Day, Fchruary_5_ s Duke Power Com?any W. S. Lee, Vice President - Engineering W.11. Owen, Principal Mechanical Engineer R. E. Miller, Mechanical Design Engineer F. C. Templeton, Associate Engineer - Civil L. C. Dail, Principal Civil Engineer C. J. Uylie, Principal Electrical Engineer B. Administration and Organization Attached as Exhibit No.1 is a copy of the Duke Power Compan['. Engineering Department organization chart. Malcom Cu: tis recently joined the Duke Engineering Department as a QA Engineer. This is a new billet in the Engineering Department. Curtis was with Factory Mutual for 15 years price to joining Duke. 111s work involved ficid inspection and later, supervision of in-spectors. Owen stated that Curtis will be involved in vendor shop audits. 1 i
>-..n -s a g .1. 4 .e 0 t C. Primary System _QA Ifcoting with Duke and PAW Ronresentat ives NOTE: This section was prepared by Reinmuth and Oller. During a two-hour meeting on February 4, the following information ~ was exchanged relative to the manufacture of major primary system components for the Duke Ce snec Nuc1 car Stations 1, 2, and 3. i 1. AEC Objectives Reinnuth outlined the objectives of this meeting and reviewed the current Compliance pressure vessel inspection program. The raceting { objectives were a. To obtain information about Duke's program for auditing PJ.Uts performance regarding design, materials, fabrication, and quality control of the nucicar steam supply systems. b. To determine the frequency and depth of Duke's shop' in-spections and record audit of the components in the primary
- 4 coolant system.
c. To establish a line of communication which Compliance should follow in arranging inspection trips to B&W and resolving significant probicms. 2. Division of Compliance Program l a. Purposes of AEC Inspection t To assure that the local requirements are met in that the plant and its components are built in accordance with the j application. jl b. Purposes of Vendor Inspection !I (1) To assure that materials and fatricat ion comply wi,th ' pecifications, codes and AEC suppicmental standa' dt. s r '1 I (2) To evaluate the quality of the completed reactor vessel and other Class A vessels based on code requirements. 3. AEC Inspector Assignments _ Delegation of AEC inspection of reactor vessels was explained. To date, this responsibility has been assigned to Reinmuth to 3 4 t i l ,:-7..
5 t --{-l ' () L t:..i J _ t.. -. w _..--. r -.
- 1tJ
'e i s 1 !i = ! i i i prevent duplication of inspect ion by t he Cm p11ance regions. !!cwever, in the future, the inspection responsibility for reactor vessels in vendor shops may, bc assigned to specialists located in the various Compliance rer.lonal of fices. Oiler will assume the inspect ion dutics at B&W's 1:t. Vernon plant for all reactor vessels in the shop except those being built for Cone.cnwealth Edison Company. When the vessel 1 caves the vendor shop, it will then become the responsibility of the assigned reactor inspector in the specific Compliance region. When significant proLitms are found by Compliance, an attempt l will be made to resolve the shop probicm with Duke and B&U. If this is not feasibic, the probica would be referred to DRL. 4. AEC Inspection Itens Typical itens which will be of interest to the AEC inspectors i t were sumuarized. These include, but are not limited to, the following: i a. Observations of the product parts during manufacture. b. Observations of tests of all types and review of the results. c. Discussions with personnel including both shop and higher level management. d. Shipping arrangements. c. S pec if icat ions. f. !!aterial !!ill Test F+ ports for identification, codes, standards, chemical and physical properties, and test 'l results. .' s, j g. Fabrication, welding, and inspection procedures and their' F required qualification records. h. Fabrication deviations and the cvaluation and resolution by the manufacturer.
- i. Cladding procedures and tests.
j.
- j. Witness code tests such as hydrostatic tests.
T 1 i ,, -.- -.---,..- +- 3 -~ m
o "*a--- - ~ - - - ~ ~4 = y ~-._... ~ a 'l ~ -1.1 )., 1,. 1l - (', , s k. Itcat t reatu ent records. s 1. Stress analysis reports. {'
- m. - Cleaning and preparation for shipment.
-It was pointed out that a typical inspection trip takes two to three days. 5. Duke and B&W Response _ 'q During Reinmuth's presentation, numerous questions were asked. p j. and points clarified. Lcc agreed with the AEC activitics as outlined, and stated that the items were in ef fect, and that i j ! l l. Duke welcomed AEC inspection. He requested that all inspections be arranged through Duke. The. B&V contact man at Mt. Vernon i would be W. Basky or F. Kane. Specific people in,ukets Engineering Department have assigned 7-responsibility to audit B&W's quality control program and per-
- l formance. ~ 1towever, Duke does not have a resident inspector at B&Wfs plant. Routine visits are made approximately once per
~ six wecks. The subsuppliers for B&W are reviewed and audited by B&W. Duke does not have any third party inspections of B&W suppliers. e j It was noted that for site crection work, Duke has a separate contract with B&W to provide consulting advisory service i covering receipt of equipment, special handling, storage, .,,, g rigging, welding, and quality control. Duke personnel will b perform all crection and quality control work. i i p In discussing updated requirements of current issues of codes [ i i j and standards, E. Ilicks (B&U) stated that due to the long time span for building a reactor the codes ind standards in effect 4 on the date of the contract must be controlling to achieve 'l Ilowever, B&W and the ef ficient and reliabic f abricatica. i licensec evaluate the parts of new codes which could bc -ap'p'fied 7 to a reactor vessel during its nanufacture. If practical, these new features would be adopted.. Ilowever, new codes would not-be l used retroactively in their entirety. i The balance of the meetin3 consisted of B&W showing organiza-j' ,1 tional and functional. charts outlining. the responsibilitics of j the respective engineering, manufacturing, and quality control groups in Lynchburg, Barberton, and Ht. Vernon. .i-l i i \\ l ,r-i ~L -, s . ~~G i.,;~. - - - ~ ~- W - -- ..m-V.
- 4...a.p 7,;f._ y, q. -
.-n.--,- ---<s-~~~ N 1 y
O, s. L-- N,_ L; I b u -- v, i.. t i i
- o At the terninat ion of the cecting, Lee st ated that he would e
furnish Seidle a copy of the following items: Summary of code specifications for all equipraent being a. supplied by ELU. b. Material list. List of puap casings containing electroslag welds. c. d. B&W QA organizat ional charts. l Another significant cerca..cnt by Lee was that if the Compliance inspectors experienced any dif ficulty in obtaining information at any time, he wanted to be in forr.ed p _.'mptly. Itc dicated his intent to personally and expeditiously resolve any prob 1cus. The Ccmpliance personnel thanked Duke representatives for arranging the cceting and for their cooperation in answering questions. D. Unit 1 Penetration Asser.:bly Crack Probica (Ref. CO Report Nos. 50-269, 270, 287/69-1) Lcc stated that since the inspectorts last visit to the site in i January, the follo91ng additional action was taken on the weld l crack problem. A. E. Pranti, Suparvisor, Metals Inspection Services, Law Engineering Testing Company (third party inspector at Southern Boiler Shop), came to the Oconec site at Lects request and rercad and recorded i cvery radiograph associated with the Southern Boiler Shop supplied liner plate penetration assemblics received at the site to date. J This involved the rercading of about 1500 radiographs, according to Lee. Franti found several radiographs missing from the site records; all but four were found later at the Southern Boiler Shop. The wolds represented by the four missing radiographs will befr,c.- l shot in the field. Prantlt s recheck of the ra ographs did not'- reveal any heretofore undetected weld defects. 1/This action answers question No. 2 in Management Intervicw Section of CO Report Nos. 50-269, 270, 287/69-1, "...What assurance do you now have that all the other Southern Boiler Shop pcnctration section radiographs taken to date were reviewed by shop QC inspectcrsin d ---~~-;--- 7-'* ~
6 ~ - +. u t, ; t ;t l j '6 I i s E. Bid Pac _kage QA Requirement Lee stated that on January 24, 1969, Duke issued a new QA purchasing procedure entitled "QA Plan For Purchase and Equipment, Systems, Structures and Materials.u Included in this plan is a requirement that all bid packages v.ust now include: 1. Shop QA Organization. 2. QC Procedures. 3. Documentation of QC Tests. 4. Ilow and Uhen Docur.cntation Uill Be Delivered to Duke. F. Competence of Potential Vendors Before any vendor is asked to bid, a cognirant Duke engineer visits the shop to detenmine if, indeed, the potential vendor has the com-pctence to supply quality components. The inspecting cugineer advises the appropriate principal engineer (i.e., Dail, Wylie, or Owen) of his findings. The principal engineer then revicvs the vendor shop inspection results with Lee. All contract awards are made by Lee, C. Vendor Shop QO Audits By Duke _ s l. Mechanical Owen provid'd the inspector with the following inforrution: i Shortly after the cortract is awarded, Duke conducts a QA necting at the vendor shop. While at the shop, Duke cbtains the appropriate QA pro-cedures used by the vendor. Subsequent visits are made to the shop, either by a -Duhe design engineer or by a third party representative, to ' audit QC perforr.ance. All visits are documented in a written report which is filed in the Charlotte of fice. I. was pointed out that it is not Duke's policy to main-tain continuous surveillance in vendor shops. P?g'g
- gge -
sp... . ~. t
- L-s-
. J.,,-. ...i._a 14 1 _.......-.... 6. k ). c. ~ - -- WL ', J- 'i r 4 1 j i ' ? I j! +- At the inspector's request, Owen produced an inspection report ~ $ documenting a recent vendor visit. The report covered a visit l to the Velan Valve Company, Montreal, Canada, by R. E. Miller, ] i~ Hechanical Design Engineer, un October 2,1968.. The report addressed itself specifically to four-inch forged stainicss steel valves for use in the high pressure injection system and i waste disposal system. The report was quite detailed. All un-j resolved items were underscored. Owen stated that he reviews all reports and maintains a "ticklern file on all unresolved items. } I 2. Civil _ v i Dail stated that his people performed the same type of sur-I i veillance in vendor shops as was discussed in the Mechanical He did state that perhaps he was using the in-Section above. in c.pection services of third party inspectors more so than i Mechanical. He said that, at'present, Bechtel, Law Engineering Testing Company, and Frochling and Robertson are providing _ third party inspection services for Duke. Bechtel is in the Progressive Fabricators Shop, St. Louis, where the C'it I and i n 2 containment building access openings are being fabricated. Law is in the Southern Boiler Shop, full time, where the liner plate and access opening thimbles of Units 1, 2, and 3 are being f abricated. F6R is spotchecking the fabrication of structural steel in the Southern Boiler Shop. At the inspector's request, Dail produced an inspection report i covering a visit to the Whiting Corporation, Harvey, Illinois, t By F. C. Templeton on February 3-4, 1969.- The purpose of the - i visit was to review the QA procedures associated with the fab-rication of three 160-ton polar crancs and two 100-ton spent The report appeared to be quite comprehensive. fuci pool crancs. l ' 3. - Electrical _ y .The inspector met Wylie, Principal Electrical Engineer, but did ' l not.have time to discuss the audit of electrical QA progrday.fn vendor shops.
Attachment:
Exhibit No. L' t ? l t.- r t 6 L 2 ""*****'****F"o**., 'T**--*#""*'"**N'** e ^+**4
- '**~#**#^
w=m.- 4 tr gge>
- ge 9"W**Y.*"
-L
DUKE POWER C O M PANY ~ -e ' E NGINEERING DEPARTMENT ^ ORG ANIZ ATION CHART / y l 12 6 8 s t N P R ESIDE N T, EN GIN EE RIN G Is i, VIC E J .l' W. S. L E E i 1 l f OF FIC E PRINCIPAL ST AF F NUCLEAR ASSISTANT TO I] SUPERVISOR E N V!fi C N V E N T A L, ,VECH ANIC AL EN GINEE R VtCE PRE SIDE N T l I JE HOWARD E NG!N E E R J. O WRAY i E N GINE ER. i C. A. DE W E Y I E R. J A CKS ON_ E. C. E f S S 5 l ~ PRINCIPAL CIVIL E N GIN E E R PRINCIPAL E LECTRf C AL E N G'R. PRf NCIPA L MECH ANiC AL E N G'R. W H OWEN C. J. WYLIE L. C. D AI L N I f I CONTROLS y.' EQUIP M E NT SYSTEMS i CIVIL PR O J ECTS y_ POWER C. L. SA N S 5 0 R Y STEEL 8-E QUIP! S. K. B L AC KLE Y g I p G. M. B O STI A N T. A. S E N N .D. S. R O D BIN S : J. R S U L T M A N ! I l NU CLE A R DE SIG N STDS.; t CONTR OL ENG'G. N. R M ATHEW Sj). EQUIPMENT ARCH. L AY OUT. [- civil PROJECTS i T. E WYKE W J FOLEY B. M. RIC E I .i M. D. C A R S O N 'l f.W.PEARCE l BOARDS 8 I DESIGN CONTROLS DE SIC N f-SPC L. PROJE CTS l CIVIL PROJECTS l-A U X I L.SYS TE M S -l 4 J T. PA R N E L L S. - B. H A G E R l R. E. JEFFERIES J. R. H A L L R. _EJ ! L L E R H.J. L A R K TUMBIME S*8~ l LIGHT 8 COM M. AUTO. SYSTEMS 1 T~oin W 9 % M. M.. S M IT H R. H. WALTM A N Iht o tw c.s tt're s I t l , RELAYS 8 SW. STATIO NS i. r_ METERS 1. D. S. R E G O D. M. CL A R K ) h 2 - !NGiC AT ES TE CHNIC A L G UID A N CE ~ " Y ;^
- LL'%'*
% *~~
- * **~~;'~~~~~
m ^M'
- d. " '~~- "
?
- e. 4 n' '. r %: :.L^ -J ?:.=*M
- ;.'~~
- 1..
%L*;* 4 \\ w.w. w e' 1sw w.,% *.*+"T.?MzT e - m -a}}