ML19317G113
| ML19317G113 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 12/14/1970 |
| From: | Dodds R, Spencer G US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19317G111 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-312-70-07, 50-312-70-7, NUDOCS 8002210801 | |
| Download: ML19317G113 (10) | |
Text
.
V g
U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION DIVISION OF COMPLIANCE REGION V Report of Inspection CO Report No. 50-312/70-7 Licensee:
Sacramento Municipal Utility District License No. CPPR-56 Category A Date of Inspection:
November 16-18, 1970 Date of Previous Inspection:
September 17-18, 1970 i /
d Inspected by:
r R.'T. Dodds Date l
Reactor Inspector
- k '. ' C --
Reviewed Ley:
,G. S. Spencer Date Senior Reactor Inspector Proprietary InformaNon:
None E.S98.
Type of Facility:
Pressurized Water Reactor Power Level:
2452 }tre Location:
Sacramento County, California Type of Inspection:
Construction Inspection (Containment)
' Accompanyinst Personnel:
On November 18, 1970 R. W. Smith, Director CO:V, and G. S. Spencer, Senior Reactor Inspector CO:V, accompanied the inspector on a tour of the site and attended the management interview.
Type of Inspection:
Construction Inspection e Boi g
s
O
- Construction Deficiencies - None Status of Previousiv Recorted Problems - Satisfactory corrective action has been taken on the density deficiency noted in the spot radiographs taken of welder's work on the containment liner. This item was identified during the l
previous inspection. Comparative radiographs were taken and they demonstrated that there was no noticeable difference-in weld definition. Bechtel specialists have viewed about 50% of the radiographs of the liner and determined that, while the radiographs do not meet the density requirements of the code, proper i
welding has been performed and that an adequate level of weld quality has been attained. In the future the contractor will be required to comply strictly with the applicable code.
(Section C.1.)
Other Sinnificant Items i
1.
Overall project construction status was estimated to be on schedule with 21% completion as of October 31, 1970. Concrete for the reactor containment building exterior wall has been placed to elevation +73.9 feet (100 of 140 feet of vertical wall). About one-third of the second natural draft cooling tower has been completed. All of the structural steel for the turbine building has been completed.
(Section B.)
s<
)
(
2.
The system of identifying concrete trucks has been modified to assure the delivery of the proper mix.
(Section C.2.a.)
3.
All inspectors have been advised to ascertain work accomplishment before sign off.
(Section C.2.b.)
4.
Comparison strength tests between point of placement and batch plant appear to demonstrate that the proper strength concrete is being placed.
(Section D.1.)
5.
The fabrication of parts for and the construction of the reactor /l vessel support structures appears to be consistent with the practices stated in CO's PIs.
(Section E.1.)
6.
The licensee appears to have established an acceptable QA plan for Class I piping. Source inspections have held up the delivery of pipe because 1) the vendor was attempting to upgrade A312 pipe to A376 and 2) it was not apparent that required hydrotesting had been performed (special SMUD requirement).
(Section F.1.)
l 7.
Section G. lists the start of fabrication and shipping dates for principal primary system components.
Management Interview - The results of the inspection were discussed with Messrs. Mattimoe, Jackson, Raasch, Hiltz, Ibsen, McMahon and Stinchfield.
O
/
n U
N V) Summary results of the Compliance inspections for the past year were also discussed for the benefit of upper management. Specific comments by the licensee regarding some items of interest were as follows:
1.
In the future, source inspectors will be required to document items reviewed and asterials inspected.
2 Copies of certifications for welding procedures will be obtained to allow for their review at the site.
DETAILS A.
Persons Contacted The following persons were contacted during the inspection.
SMUD J. Nhttimoe Assistant Chief Engineer D. Raasch Project Engineer J. Jackson Quality Assurance Director J. Hiltz Resident Engineer D
Bechtel Corporation - (Engineering and Construction Manager ent)
.W. Stinchfield Project Manager I. Ibsen Startup and Quality Assurance Manager V. McMahon Project Quality Assurance Engineer Quality Assurance Engineer (Source Inspection)
R. Hunter W. Taylor Quality Assurance Engineer (Mechanical)
W. Chapla Quality Assurance Engineer (Welding)
L. Stromberg Quality Assurance Engineer (Electrical)
A. Ericson Concrete Testing Laboratory Supervisor Bechtel Corporation - (Construction)
J. Vander Knyff Construction Manager B. Boyd Welding Supervisor D. Wilson Welding Engineer
. J. Aguilar Welding Assistant B.
Status of Construction j
i Site construction was estimated to be generally on schedule with 21%
completion as_of October 31, 1970. Work inside'the containment vessel
.,_.,..,v.
^
(3 N/ is. ahead' of sche'dule, however, the initial installation of Class I piping will be behind. schedule because SMUD has rejected a vendors attempt to upgrade A312 pipe to A376 pipe.- Concrete for the reactor containment building exterior wall has been placed to elevation +73.9 feet (100 of 140 feet of vertical wall). About 140 feet of the total 425 foot height of the second natural draft cooling tower has been completed.
All of the structural steel for the turbine building has been erected.
About 30,000 cubic yards of concrete has been placed thus far in the construction of the auxiliary building.
Much of the we-i the dam for the 160 acre reservoir has been completed.
C.-
Previous 1v Reoorted Deficiencies 1.
Radiceraohs of Welders' Work (Containment Liner)
The inspector reviewed with Mr. Jackson the records that pertain to corrective action taken ay SMUD as a result -of a CO finding that the radiographs used to judge the quality-of welders' work on the containment liner did not comply with the applicable code requf.re-ments.for film density. About 50% of the liner radiographs were C/
selected at random and were reviewed by nondestructive testing
. specialists from Bechtel Quality Control Services in San Francisco.
A. M. Croswell, Chief Welding Engineer, headed the group of specialists.
Each radiograph was checked for the required identification and penetrameter image and then reviewed for general weld quality in accordance with the job specifications. A density value was taken through the penetrameter image of the radiograph and three density values were taken through the weld metal portion of each of 481 radiographs. Radiographs were reviewed for weld quality using a Picker Industrial 1000 watt viewer while all density readings were taken using a Macbeth Quantalog transmission type densitometer.
The folluwing results and conclusions were br, sed upon the compre-hensive survey of radiographs by Bechtel:
a.
"21.4 percent of all radiographs reviewed meet all requirements of the job specifications, b.
"15 percent of all radiographs reviewed had one of the three density values below the minimum specified value of 1.3.
O) ss~_-
c 1
p
~
O
^ c.
"Only 7.7 percent of the radiographs reviewed had two or more density values below the 1.3 value, d.
"77.9% of the 481 radiographs sampled exceeded the allowable variation from penetrameter density of minus 15 to plus 30 percent.
" Radiographic techniques used on the containment liner welds
.e..
have not resulted in radiographs which meet all of the density requirements fo the job specifications, however, all radio-graphs have the proper penetrameter image detail and the weld zone of each radiograph is interpretable to the extent we are assured that proper welding has been performed and that an adequate level of weld quality has been attained, f.
"All containment liner welds have been examined using the vacuum box testing method. The absence of leaks deronstrates that the expected leak tight quality of the containment liner has been achieved.
g.
"The planned pre-operational leak rate test will constitute.
the final acceptance test of the containment liner and will s
establish the required leak tightness and that the requirements of the Preliminary Safety Analyses-Report have been fulfilled."
In addition to the above review two radiographs of liner welds, using lead screens, were_taken to make a comparison analysis with two previous filma. The inspector-examined the comparison radio-graphs in the presence of Mr. Boyd. Boyd concluded and the inspector concurs, that "the re-takes, using the leaded screens, meet the requirements of paragraph UW-51 of ASME Section VIII, as to density limitations.... No apparent defects (porosity) were observed that could not be identified to the previous films."
Detailed records, corrective action memos and test reports have been dacumented in support of the Engineering Review Board's approval of.the nonconformance report. Further, CB&I has been advf. sed by SMUD that, "they must comply strictly with UW-51 of Section VIII on all future work to be performed on the liner."
2.
Other' Items of Interest The Quality Assurance records disclosed that following corrective action was-taken as the 14sult of observations made by the ' inspector at.the conclusion of the last inspection.
9:
O
-TT=m M
9 y
-e 7-
- +
-W-
~.
' la.
MMie system for identifying concrete transport trucks for the receipt and' delivery of the correct concrete mix has been modified by placing a 12 x 12 inch plaque on each side of the truck. The plaque has a distinctive color for each strength catagory of concrete.
b.
All. inspectors have been "strongly advised" that procedure sign-off is.only after work accomplishment. Follow-up checks by the Chief Inspector on November 5,1970 show ther. the proper procedure was being followed by field inspectors.
D.
Concrete (Class I Structures) i
' Correlative Strenath Tests 1.
f The -comparison of strength tests of concrete samples when taken from the batch plant versus point of placement have thus far shown bucket concrete to average about 300-600 psi lower strength than the batch plant concrete, while the pumped concrete samples have higher strengths than the batch plant samples. In all cases, the results of-the 28 day tests exceeded the minimum specified strengths by at least 40p psi.
o s
In accordance with a previous statement, Mr. Ericson is now sampling pumped concrete at the point of placement at least once a week'.
This is in addition to the routine sampling requirements
-from the batch plant and truck discharge.
E..
Other Class I Structures i
1.
Reactor Vessel Suncort The inspector's review of records pertaining to the manufacture of materials and the placement of embedded items for the reactor vessel support disclosed that the procedures being followed and work performance was consistent with the licensee's QA program and with Attachment E of CO's PI 3800. The review also included an examina-l tion of bearing plates that were stored at the site. The inspector l
made the following observations as a result of the review, a.-
One of the 18 lateral support bearing plates ("T" sections fabricated with~ double "J" welds) had four areas of-weld undercutting in the base metal that.were about 1-1 inches in length and a maximum'of 1/16-inch in depth. A Nonconforming Msterial Report was prepared at the time of. the inspection that required the areas to be repaired by grinding to eliminate a notch'effect. The welding was performed pursuant to AWS D2.0-69.
)
.. L
+
'-h-a we-t
=+v
- ---se e
m--=
- - * - + v
---e-
-
---=*+--*"'=-~e
Un
'~'
V ~
b.-
One of Bechtel's source inspectors did not identify the specific items being inspected at the vendor's shop. Messrs. McMahon and Taylor stated that this was not a requirement since the QA inspection plan.only called for surveillance of vendor activities in progress at the time of the inspection. He agreed however that it would be prudent for the inspector to list the items be surveyed and stated that inspectors would be advised to do this during future inspections.
Items reviewed included the following:
Vendor evaluation reports Material certifications Source inspection plans Vendor inspection reports Shipping reports Receiving inspection reports F.
Other Class I Pipine 1.
Quality Assurance Program g
The "QA Plan" for Class I piping other than the primary piping was
]
initially reviewed with Messrs. Jackson, McMahon, Hunter and Chapla.
Class I piping and fittings (2 inch and over) will be supplied by four different menufactures (PIPECO, SWEPCO, Cameron and Taylor Forge) to Associated Pipe, Compton, California for prefabrication.
From Associated Pipe it will be shipped to the job site for installation by Bechtel Construction. Appendix "A" graphically illustrates the QA plan for two inch and over Class I piping.
No action has been taken as yet for smaller piping but it will receive comparable procurement scrutiny according to McMahon.
Vendor evaluation has already.been performed on the pipe, fitting and hanger suppliers. SMUD has rejected an effort by PIPE 00 to upgrade A312 stainless steel pipe to A376. As a result, all pipe to be supplied.by PIPECO will be shipped direct from US Steel and will manufactured and inspected in accordance with the requirements of the ASTM standards.for A376. PIPECO will only act as a jobber for the transaction. There is also a hold on SWEPCO pipe since
.SMUD had requested it be hydrotested before shipment and it was not apparent to the Bechtel inspector that this had been cone.
. Delivery of pipe to the job site has been delayed as a result of these two' items. Other suppliers and fabricators were found to have acceptable QA-QC prograam.
\\
l v
T y
-<---g-
~
C'
( SNUD will be contracting for NDT inspection of pipe installation at the site. That contract has not yet been awarded.
The Bechtel Corporation has received a certificate of authorization for use of the ASNE "N" code stamp for field fabrication. The ASNE has approved the Bechtel Construction QA manual. However, the
" Code Committee" will survey the Rancho Seco job site in early 1971 before it will authorize Bechtel's use of their "N" stamp at Rancho Seco.*
The Bechtel welding procedures (already qualified) have been submitted to SHUD for review and approval. SMUD has submitted these procedures to a consultant (Nuclear Services Corp., San Jose, California) for review and comment. According to Messrs. Boyd and Chapla any changes requested by SMUD will be evaluated to ensure that they do not require the procedures to be requalified (i.e.:
changes in essential variables). It was expected that some procedures would have to be requalified. The only accepted procedure on site at the time of the inspection was for pipe hangers. It was noted that the procedure had been approved by appropriate personnel but a copy of the code certification for the weld procedure was not available at the site.
Mr. McMahon stated, in the management
('~N interview, that a copy of weld procedure certifications would be
(
)
maintained at the site.
A detailed inspection plan has been formulated and approved for field piping construction. All systems have been identified and the appropriate NDT requirements listed on the welding schedule.
Based on the inspectors review, it appears that a QA program has been formulated and implemented that is consistent with Attachment G of CO's PI 3800, PI 4805.03 and PI 5005.03.
G.
Status of Fabrication of Principal Class 1 Components The licensee provided the inspector with a copy of the " Critical Path Schedule" for the principal Class I components that are being manufactured by Babcock and Wilcox. A copy of the schedule has been furnished to CO Headquarters to be used ior the scheduling of vendor inspections. Start of fabriestion and scheduled shipping dates of components were as follows:
Component Startina Date Shippimr Date Reactor Vessel January 1970 February 1972 Reactor Vessel Internals August 1970 September 1972
. Steam Generators (2)
January 1970 January 1972 Pressurizer October 1970 March 1972 Core Flooding Tank January 1971 June 1971 f
Reactor Coolant Piping July 1971.
March 1972 I
- Note: Pipe installation required prior to Committee survey.
A
- 44 g
4 r
s u
O be 4
'e Q
6 M*
4 M
=
M e
4
- i
=
E 8
d O-I'I' H
+
~
ci w,
i m
s m
e v
G eJ '
O N
N 4
A Q
u g
NN ]. g x
b k
A.
N
\\~
')
4, 5
y g
~
~q' Q
M
%-.n.
%f u
r O
y p
u-d t<
h
%v{'
s
.3
%s.
N; w
p;I cu.
t 3
%O o0 T~I d
' D O
=5
-O
-0
-0 y
t s
m L
Q 1
v
.N...
'O D
\\
n wl w
mts 8'
.f i
.j N I
k E
c','
s
, u 3 )
f;+
3 e
N 7,
se.
4 o
I.
k W
f 7 -- f_
eq-l Y
l I
l k
3 l
3 4 v? d
$ @<d 8,
l n
Uq N
~
~
~
s e
D N
S' Q"k
=R N
N
(
cQ
=
\\
O s'
R
+ qu w
v.
g x
% I
~
w" Q
0 e
A u g
I' I bw k
bb (13. E E'
D s
G 45
$n ch se N 3 3
A s}'
kd "d
O 't 4d
- j
,N e w
s <-
. e 3
D 64
% *d sS
..i i
3*
C Ns.f.-
d u
S I Q si
,R
- % k
,\\,'
s( D
~
e s s
s p
'D k D
NU (O
$b E
,s v
ggQQ 0
^~
~
./
,s
.x DIVISION OF COMPLIANCE NON'lHLY REPORT. NOVEMBER 1970 it e
b.
4
- Sacramento Municipal Utility District (Rancho Seco) - An in-spection was conducted on Novemoer 10-10 to review the fab-rication of Class I structure's; to audit the QA program for
- Class.I piping; and to review the adequacy of the corrective action taken regarding previously detected deficiencies j.
(October Monthly Report).
All previously reported deficiencies j
have been satisfactorily. resolved.
No new problems were identified.
t I
t e
A I
p
}.'
l
~
....