ML19318B300
| ML19318B300 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 05/20/1980 |
| From: | Crossman W, Gilbert L, Randy Hall NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19318B297 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-445-80-13, 50-446-80-13, NUDOCS 8006250221 | |
| Download: ML19318B300 (7) | |
See also: IR 05000445/1980013
Text
_ __ _ -____ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
RECION IV
Report No. 50-445/80-13; 50-446/80-13
Docket No. 50-445; 50-446
Category A2
Licensee: Texas Utilities Generating Company
2001 Bryan Tower
Dallas, Texas
75201
Facility Name:
Comanche Peak, Units 1 and 2
Inspection at:
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Glen Rose, Texas
Inspection Conducted: Apri? 21-25, 1980
Inspectors:
/ 7
[
/dd'
L. E. Martin / Reactor Inspector, Projects
' Dat'e
Section (Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 6 & 7)
Y.90/S O
E. D. biltfert, Reactor Inspector, Engineering
/ Da(e
Support Section (Paragraphs 4 & 5)
Approved:
/
R
S/So/ S"O
<-
/g1 W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section
Date
2c.-
,R. E/Hhll, thief, Engineering Support Section
/ Dat6
Inspection Summary:
Inspection on (Report No. 50-445/80-13; 50-446/80-13)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of construction activities
including site tour; follow up on previous inspection findings; Reactor Coolant
Pressure Boundary piping - Unit 1; safety-related piping - Unit 2; and electrical
systems (cable pulling and terminations). The inspection involved sixty-two
inspector - hours by two NRC inspectors.
Results: Of the five areas inspected, two items of noncompliance were identified
in two areas (infraction - failure to follow welding procedure
paragraph 4;
infraction - failure to follow inspection procedures - paragraph 6.c).
8 0062 5 02.M
.
.
_
.
.J
.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Principal Licensee Personnel
i
- J. R. Ainsworth, TUGCO, QE Supervisor
J. T. Marritt, TUSI, Engineering & Construction Manager
- L. M. Popplewell, TUSI, Project Electrical Engineer
W. H. Benkert, TUGCO, Quality Engineer
s
Other Personnel Contact ed
- D. C. Trankum, B&R, Project Manager
W. Baker, B&R, Project Welding Engineer
D. Hursey, B&R, WDCC Supervisor
R. Schultz, B&R, Pipe Fitter, Foreman
G. LaBowe, B&R Rod Room Foreman
T Dilodare, B&R Electrical Engineer
The IE inspectors also interviewed other licensee and contractor personnel
during the course of the inspection.
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
I
(0 pen) Unresolved Item (50-445/79-06; 50-446/79-06):
As previously documented
j
in NRC Report 50-445/79-25, the licensee has committed to reinspect non-
'
Class IE hangers installed prior to March 1979 as seismic Caterory I,
including welding.
This item will remain open pending documentation of the completion of
this reinspection.
(Closed) Infraction (50-445/79-19; 50-446/79-19): Failure to Follow
Nonconformance Procedures for Electrical Cable.
The IE inspector had
,
previously documented corrective actions taken in NRC Report 50-445/79-25.
The IE inspector reviewed the training records for the supplemental
training on nonconformance reports for QC and QE personnel.
)
1
This item is considered closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item _(50-445/79-25; 50-446/79-24):
The IE inspector
reviewed several EEIs (Craft Work Procedures) and QIs (Quality
Control Instructions) to insure compatibility and reviewed records
for joint and individual craft and QC training meetings.
Discussions
with craft and QC personnel indicate that the communication level
has improved.
2
.
w
,, --- - --
r
-- --
-,
,,-
,,
,,-*-,.--e
--a--
.
, - - -
_ . -
_
.
.
This item is considered closed.
(Closed) Infraction (50-445/79-28; 50-446/79-27):
Failure to
Provide Appropriate Instructions for Installation of Class IE
Equipment. The IE inspector examined operational travelers
EE-79-131-02AB and EE-80-072-200 for the installation of the
hot shutdown panel. The documents now reflect the appropriate
engineering and vendor documents for installation and inspection
of this panel. The IE inspector reviewed the training agenda and
records for the additional training on traveler preparation held on
March 20, 1980, with engineering and QE personnel.
This item is considered closed.
(Clo. sed) Infraction (50-445/79-31; 50-446/79-29):
Failure to Follow
Welding Procedure. The IE inspector reviewed the documeatation of
training and observed QC personnel verifying that the proper weld
rod had been issued for tack and root welding.
This item is closed.
3.
Site Tour
The IE inspectors walked thru Units I and 2 Containment Buildings,
Auxiliary Buildings, the control complex areas, Essential Service
Water Building, and various yard laydown areas to observe construction
activities in progress.
Particular attention was given to housekeeping
and storage of in place electrical equipment. During the walk thru of
the Essential Service Water Building, the IE inspector noticed that three
pieces of safety-related electrical equipment did not have heaters energized.
Subsequent investigation by licensee representative revealed a faulty power
cord which was repaired. This was an isolated case; all other equipment
observed during the walk thru by the IE inspector was adequately stored
in accordance with applicable storage and maintenance procedures and
ANSI and IEEE standards.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping - Unit 1
The IE inspector observed the pipe end preparation and cleanliness
of two field welds, FW 4 on Drawing SI-1-RB-059-1 and FW 19-1 on Drawin'
SI-1-RB-037-1, in the Safety Injection piping system for Unit 1.
No discrepancies were noted from the pipe end preparation and cleanliners
requirements of the pipe fabrication construction procedure, CP-CPM 6.9.
After observing the welding for the root and fill welding of FW 4 on Drawing
SI-1-RB-059-1, it was determined that welder "AUA" was not following
3
__
_
-
._.
_
_
. _ , ,
-
-
-
.
.
the Welding Procedure Specification (WPS) 88012, Revision 4, ICN 4 in
that, the fourth, fifth and sixth weld layers had been deposited using the
GTAW process when the WPS specified the SMAW process for the fourth and
subsequent weld layers. The IE inspector further determined that welder
"APL," who was tack welding FW 19-1 on Drawing SI-1-RB-037-1, was also
going to depocit approximately five layers with the GTAW process using
WPS 88012, Revision 4, ICN 4.
This is an apparent item of noncompliance, in that, 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix B, Criterion V requires that activities affecting quality shall
be accomplished in accordance with the prescribed instructions,
procedures or drawings.
5.
Safety-Related Piping - Unit 2
The IE inspector observed the root welding of a Safety Injection piping
system field weld designated FW 7 on Drawing SI-2-RB-016-0.
In the
areas of weld identification, filler material traceability, welding
process, welder qualification, QC verification, and welder surveillance;
no discrepancies with requirements of the welding procedure WPS
88021, construction procedure CP-CPM 6.9 or welder surveillance
instruction WEI-3 were noted.
The welding rod issue room was inspected and found to be consistent
,
with requirements of weld filler material control procedure CP-CPM 6.9B
1
for storage, issue and recycling of welding rod.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Electrical Systems and Components
a.
Review of Procedures
The IE inspector reviewed the following procedures and instructions
for compliance sith 10 CFR 50, FSAR, Electrical Specification
2323-ES-100, and applicable industry standards:
35-1195-ECP-10, Revision 4, " Class IE Cable Tray and Hanger
Fabrication," including Interim Change Notices 1, 2, 3, 4 and
Addendum 1
35-1195-EEI-7, Revision 3, " Cable Installation"
35-1195-EEI-8, Revision 2, " Class IE and Non Class IE Cable
Terminations"
QI-QP-11.3-27, Revision 1, " Class IE Cable Meggering"
QI-QP-11.3-27.1, Revision 1, " Monitoring of Meggering Cables"
4
l
I
!
-
.
..
._
_
_ _ . . _ .
_. .
.- . _ _
-.
._
_ _ _ _ -
-
.
.
QI-QP-11.3-28, Revision 1, " Class IE Cable Terminations"
QI-QP-11.3-28.7, Revision 3, " Verify Proper Lugger, Connector
Type, Size, and Final Crimp"
!
!
QI-QP-11.3-28.17, Revision 1, " Multi-Pin Connectors"
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
l
- b.
Cable Pulling
TheIEinspectobwitnessedthepullingofClassIECableE0000379A,
B, C.
This cable was made up of three 1/C 500 MCM conductors.
The
pull was. initiated as a hand pull, one conductor at a time, thru tray
and conduit for a total pull of approximately 120 feet. The first two
conductors were pulled the total distance of the pull and the third
i
conductor was pulled to within 10 feet of the destination when the
'
third conductor hung up and could not be moved by hand pulling. The
QC inspector terminated the pull and contacted engineering.
i
The responsible engineer inspected the route from the last pull box
'
tothedestinationanddeterminedghattheconfigurationofthe
conduit constituted a total of 288 bends for a total pull of 28 feet.
,
This configuration requires a calculation of maximum pulling tension
l'
and the use of a tension monitoring device per procedure 35-1195-EEI-7.
The QC inspector immediately initiated a nonconformance report
,
(No. NCR 2226) and tagged the cables as nonconforming due to the failure
to inst a that maximum pulling tension and sidewall pressure had not
been exceeded.
,
,
The IE inspector, thru subsequent discussions with the responsible
,
engineer and quality engineer, determined that the original sign-
off, by engineering approving the route and pull to be within the
requirements of EEI-7 (which allows a maximum of 270 bend between
pull points), did not include the flex-conduit and its angled
connectors at the destination end.
To preclude recurrence of this problem, engineering instituted a
4
sign-off control requirement that the responsible engineer must
,
j
indicate if the approved route includes the flex-conduit and its
j
fittings.
If the approved route does not include the flex-conduits
then it must be removed prior to pulling cable.
i
This cable pull was well covered by two QC inspectors during the
total pull.
Interviews with the QC inspectors, by the IE inspector,
'
indicated that they were familiar with the applicable procedures,
and cognizant of industry practices for cable pulling.
'
5
i
s.
.
_ , . - .-,
_-
. . _ , ,
_ _ , _ , _ _ . . - . , , . .
. . . . ,
. .
,,,m..
. _ _ . ...,-,.m-
, ~ , , . . . _ . , . . . . . , , , _
._..x-,,
r.
--,.
-
_ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-
.
The IE inspector reviewed the cable pulling records and inspection
reports for the following cables:
E0139478
E0139414
AG138647
EG139384
E0138668
EG139383
E0100653A,B,C
E0139132
EG139342
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
c.
Cable Terminations
The IE inspector witnessed final QC inspection of six cables.
The first five were cables that terminated on terminal blocks.
The sixth cable was an interconnect cable for the control board-
to-terminal cabinet with multi-pin connectors on each end.
The QC inspector verified that the connector had the correct
number of pins and that the connector was mated to the correct
plug in the terminal cabinet.
The IE inspector questioned the
QC inspector concerning this inspection with respect to QI-QP-
11.3-28, " Class IE Cable Termination."
QI-QP-11.3-28.9, Revision 1, " Verify Terminations," paragraph 3.1.a
states, "The QC inspector shall verify that conductors are terminated
to the proper place and shall be in accordance with the latest
applicable engineering or vendor drawings."
QI-QP-11.3-28.7, Revision 3, " Verify Proper Lugger, Connector Type,
and Final Crimp," paragraph 3.2, requires that the QC inspector inspect
the final crimp for attributes consistent with quality, including
proper stripping, crimping, and damage.
QI-QP-11.3-28, Revision 1, Figure 1, " Inspection Report for Terminating
Class IE Cables," has sixteen total items of which nine should be
applicable to virtually 100% of the final inspection of cable termina-
tions.
On April 23, 1980, the IE inspector witnessed the final QC inspection
of Cable E0139478 termination.
This cable had multi-pin connectors
at both ends.
The IE inspector observed that the only attributes
the QC inspector checked with regard to the connector was that it had
the correct number of pins and that it was mated to the plug in the
cabinet.
The QC inspector stated that he did not have the tools
required to determine if the pins were properly oriented (terminated
to the proper place), properly seated in the connector, and had the
proper pin (lug) and proper crimp.
The IE inspector observed that
6
,,
,.
,
.. ..
the QC inspector documented the items as satisfactory or not
applicable.
A subsequent interview, with two other QC inspectors and a review
inspection reports for eight other cables, indicated that this is
a common practice in the final inspection of cable termination
where the termination is made thru a multi-pin connector.
The IE inspector discussed this practice with the Quality
Engineer responsible for the above listed procedures to determine
applicability to the final termination inspection of multi-pin
connectors.
The Quality Engineer stated that the procedures
were applicable.
The Quality Engineer had not received any questions
from the QC inspectors or their supervision as to how to implement
these items on the inspection report.
The IE inspector pointed out that the above was contrary to the
requiremeats of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V which requires
that activities affecting quality shall be accomplished in accordance
with applicable instructions, procedures or drawings.
7.
Exit Interview
The IE inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in
paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on April 25, 1980..
The
IE inspectors summarized the purpose, scope and findings of the
inspection.
The licensee representatives acknowledged the statements
t
by the inspectors with regard to the items of noncompliance.
7
.
-_
_ _ . -
- .
_
_ _ _ .