ML19320C755
| ML19320C755 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hope Creek  |
| Issue date: | 03/19/1980 |
| From: | Bateman W, Mcgaughy R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19320C739 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-354-80-02, 50-354-80-2, 50-355-80-02, 50-355-80-2, NUDOCS 8007170682 | |
| Download: ML19320C755 (9) | |
See also: IR 05000354/1980002
Text
.
.
_
.
. - . _ -
.
.
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
G
'
0FFICE OF INSPECTION'AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION I
50-354/80-02
Report No.
50-35S/80-02
'
,
50-354
l
Docket No.
50-355
4
CPPR-120
,
License No.
CPPR-121
Priority
_
Category
A
--
1
,
Licensee:
Public Service Electric and Gas Company
i
_80 Park Place
l
Newark, New Jersey 07101
Facility Name:
Hope Creek Generating Station, Units 1 and 2
Inspection At:
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey
i
'
Inspection Conducted:
February 4-29, 1980
Inspectors * .h Y $
h44()l9 lW
ots
1
. H. Bateiiian, Aesgent Reactor Inspector
date '
date
4
date
Approved by:
//Mhfu
_
h
/6/98P
l
R. W. McGaugh/G.'ylef, Projects Sector
date /
Inspection Summary:
,
Unit 1 Inspection on February 4-29, 1980 (Report No. 50-354/80-02)
Areas Inspected:
Routine announced inspection by resident inspector of work in
progress for H ncrete activities including form erection, preplacement/ placement /
post placement activities; reactor pressure vessel cleaning activities; sand-
l-
blasting and painting activities inside the drywell; storage and maintenance
l
activities; welding activities; rebar fabrication; pipe joint,fitup; hanger
'
installation activities; and storage of radioactive sources held by Peabody Test
Laboratory and Branch Laboratory.
The resident inspector also performed site
tours on a regular basis.
The inspection involved 37 hours4.282407e-4 days <br />0.0103 hours <br />6.117725e-5 weeks <br />1.40785e-5 months <br /> on site by the
. resident inspector two of which were spent offshift.
Results:
Of the eight areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified
in six areas; one item of noncompliance was identified in each of two areas
(Infractions - failure to establish measures to maintain cleanliness of safety
relief valve piping stored in the suppression chamber as discussed in paragraph
4; failure to maintain weld rod control as discussed in paragraph 5.)
,
Region I Form 12
(Rev. April 1977)
g
E
.
.
. .
.
_ _____
__
__
_ _ . ,
_ . _ _ _ _ __
_ _ _
.
.
.
.
2
Unit 2 Inspection on February 4-29, 1980 (Report No. 50-355/80-02)
Areas Inspected:
Routine announced inspection'by resident inspector of work in
progress for concrete activities, rebar fabrication, storage of radioactive
sources, and torus welding activities.
The inspector also performed site tours
on a regular basis.
The inspection involved 21 hours2.430556e-4 days <br />0.00583 hours <br />3.472222e-5 weeks <br />7.9905e-6 months <br /> on site by the resident
inspector one of which was spent offshift.
Results:
Of the four areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified
in three areas; one item of noncompliance was identified in one area (Infraction -
required bend testing of embedded channel Nelson studs was not completed as dis-
cussed in paragraph 3).
t
!
l
l
!
,
..
_
. . - .
.,
,
-
-
, - - - - . . .
- - ,
.
.
._
,
.
,
.
.
,
l
l
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Public Service Electric and Gas Company
A. Barnabei, Site QA Engineer
- A. E. Giardino, Project QA Engineer
P. T. Liv, Site QA Engineer
- G. Owen, Project Construction Engineer
- R. Pochank, Senior Construction Engineer
D. Skibinski, Site QA Engineer
J. Stefanache, Lead Field Engineer
Bechtel Power Corporation (Bechtel)
R. Baldwin, QA Engineer
C. Brownwell, Process Piping Area Supervisor
W. Cole, QA Engineer
D. Graham, Concrete Engineer
- R. L. Hanks, Project QC Engineer
,
j
- W. Hindle, Project Field Engineer
M. Hopfenspirger, Civil QC Engineer
>
L. Inabinette, Welding QC Engineer
C. Kasch, Assistant Project Engineer
A. Landi, Hanger QC Engineer
T. Lee, Supervisor Document Control
T. Malpass, Civil QC Engineer
R. McCoy, Lead (C Engineer
J. Morel, Piping Superintendent
- J.
Patch, Field Contract Administrator
D. Reel, QC Engineer
A. Riazance, Materials and Quality Services - Coatings Engineer
- L. E. Rosetta, Field Construction Manager
D. Sakers, Lead Civil QC Engineer
S. Schultz, Subcontracts Administrator
S. Vezendy, Lead Welding QC Engineer
L. Vincent, Materials and Quality Services - Coatings Engineer
P. Walker, Civil QC Engineer
M. White, Lead Concrete QC Engineer
N. Wypych, Lead Piping QC Engineer
>
Pittsburgh - Des Moines Steel Company (PDM)
F. Hatmaker, QC Engineer
R. Langer, Assistant Superintendent
M. Stiger, QA Manager
.
. - -
- - -
-
-,.
.,
, , , , , , ,
-c
-
.,,
---,--.n,,,
. ..--,--
-
.
.
.
.
4
Liberty - Westcon
R. Ayers, Vice President Technical Services
R. Johnson, QC Manager
R. Root, Batch Plant Operations Supervisor
Peabody Testing Services
H. Ocdy, Concrete Technician
Branch Labs
W. Branch, Project Manager
D. Dodd, NDE Inspector
Metalweld, Inc.
H. Moschik, Project Manager
J. Smith, QC Supervisor
W. Wells, Corporate QA Manager
Schneider, Inc.
W. Goebel, Site QA Manager
P. Hudson, Senior Construction Representative
L. Ludwig, Corporate QA Manager
J. Cockroft, Lead Mechanical Engineer
The inspector also talked with other site personnel.
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Site Tour
Daily tours of the site were made to observe the status of work and con-
struction activities in progress.
The inspector noted the presence of
and interviewed QC and construction personnel. Work items were examined
fo.' obvious defects or noncompliances with regulatory requirements or
license conditions.
Areas observed included:
Unit 1:
Installation of torus spray piping, coating activities
inside the containment drywell, inplace storage of plant equioment,
piping and hanger fabrication activities, concrete activites, and
welding.
Spoke with representatives from Liberty-Westcon, Peabody
Testing, Metalweld, and Branch Labs.
i
l
I
l
.
.
.
.
5
Unit 2:
Concrete activities and torus installation and welding.
Spoke with representatives from Liberty-Westcon, Peabody Testirg,
Metalweld, and Br.
-h Labs.
No items of noncompliance were ident'fied.
3.
Structural Concrete-Observation of Work and Work Activities - Unit 2
The inspector observed placement activities of pour 9F-D-WOO 3, 005, 007,
013, 014, and 070.
This placement involved the diesel generator building
walls to elevation 102' and used two types of mix designs - BLC-1 and
BLC-2. The BLC-2 was transferred from the truck discharge to the point of
placement by pumping.
The BLC-1 mix was delivered via crane and bucket.
The reason for the two mix designs was to facilitate placement of concrete
in a wall section with a heavier than normal concentration of rebar.
The
BLC-1 mix design uses a smaller aggregate just for this purpose.
The
inspector observed the presence of QC personnel, backup equipment, vibra-
tion activities, carpenters working on formwork to stop leaks, and provi-
sions for cold weather concreting.
The placement activities were in con-
formance with site requirements, and the inprocess inspection activities
required to be performed by QC per QCI 1.30, " Concrete Placement Inspec-
tion," were being performed by a sufficient number of QC personnel.
The inspector noted during observation of placement activities that on three
lengths of embedded channel the required bend testing of Nelson studs per
QCI 1.20, " Concrete Preplacement Inspection" had not been performed.
Para-
graph 2.5 of Rev. IV of QCI 1.20 entitled " Embedded Items" specifically
requires that, "The last two studs at each end of each section or length
of channel (6" or 12") shall be ' bend tested' to 15 ."
It should be noted
that the required bend testing of the Nelson studs on the exposed portion
of the remaining channel eniteds had been performed.
As the pour was in
progress and approximately 2' of concrete was in the formwork, the inspec-
tor could not determine if bend testing had been performed on the bottom
end studs of any of the channel.
Bechtel QC personnel did bend test the four studs involved prior to the
l
concrete reaching test stud elevation.
During bend testing of the four
l
studs, one failed and had to be replaced.
The failure of Bechtel QC to
perform a complete preplacement inspection prior to signing off the pre-
placement inspection QCIR (Quality Centrol Inspection Report) is an item
of noncompliance relative to Criterion X of Appendix B of 10 CFR 50.
(355/80-02-01)
4.
Safety Related Piping - Observation of Work and Work Activities - Unit 1
The inspector observed the condition of the Safety Relief Valve (SRV) dis-
charge piping stored in the torus (suppression chamber).
Schneider, Inc.
(SI), a subcontractor to PDM with the responsibility for fabrication and
_ _ _ _ _ ,
_
<
.
.
.
6
installation of the SRV piping (and other piping and penetration work), is
responsible for storage of this pipe.
SI's Nuclear Site Quality Assurance
Manual in section 14, Revision 2 discusses requirements for storage and
preservation and states that these activities shall be conducted in accord-
ance with the design specification.
The design specification (C-152(Q),
Rev. 14, " Design Specification for Furnishing, Designing, Detailing, Fabri-
e
on, Delivery, and Erection of Primary Containment") states in paragraph
lo.3.3 that "...all pipe ends shall be capped with metal or plywood caps
to protect the surfa:es and to prevent entry of foreign materials or mois-
ture.
Caps will be secured in place and will remain in place during stor-
age, shipment, and handling." Foreign matter observed inside the SRV piping
included-brooms, light bulbs, water, rope, and excessive amounts of corro-
sion products.
There was no effective capping of any of the piping.
SI had
responsibility for storage activities, and their QC/QA program should have
been effective in avoiding the type of conditions discussed above.
However,
PDM and Bechtel also have surveillance responsibilities which in this
instance appear to be ineffective.
This is an item of noncompliance rela-
tive to Criterion XIII of Appendix B of 10 CFR 50.
(354/80-02-01)
Based on SI's lack of an effective storage program, answers to the following
questions are required in relation to the foregoing item of noncompliance:
(1) What assurance is there that the torus spray leader piping already
installed does not contain foreign matter that could render the pip-
ing system inoperative?
(2) Based on the obvious lack of surveillance by QC/QA, are there suffi-
cient QC/QA personnel to perform an effective QC/QA pr.ogram?
5.
Safety Related Piping - Observation of Welding Activities - Unit 1
During a rottine inspection of SI's welding activities, the inspector
noted 7018 e'ectrodes and stubs (between one and two dozen) scattered
about on the bottom of the torus.
SI's construction procedure SICP 8.1,
Rev. 5, " Weld n'aterial Control" is reproduced in part below:
"S.7
Welding Katerial Field Handling
5.7.1
All welding materials to be scrapped shall be returned to the
issue station for proper disposal.
5.7.3
Each welder shall be responsible for all welding materials and
the containers issued to him...All electrode stubs or damaged
electrodes shall be retained by the welder in a suitable con-
tainer (stub bucket) for proper disposal at the issua station.
l
5.7.4
Consumable welding materials of any type...shall not be placed
l
or layed on beams or floors...where inadvertent or intentional
j
use by unauthorized personnel would be made possible."
l
,
.
.
.
7
The SI QA manual references this SICP in paragraph 8.4.4.4.1 as the proce-
dure to be followed for low hydrogen electrodes.
The lack of effective weld material control as evidenced by failure to
return electrode stubs and unused or damaged electrodes to the issue point
is an item of noncompliance relative to Criterion IX of Appendix B of
(354/80-02-02)
6.
Containment-Observation of Work and Work Activities - Unit 1
Metal Weld, Inc. has the contract to perform certain coating activities
relating to the containment and structural steel beams.
During the time
covered by this inspection report the inspector witnessed many of the
activities related to coating the inside of the drywell.
The key to a
successful coating operation depends in part on control of the environment
and preparation of the surface to be coated.
In order to establish
required environmental conditions prior to sandblasting and coating the
drywell interior, it was necessary that metalweld insulate the entire
exterior of the drywell and connect major suction and return lines to the
drywell from a source of clean heated air.
The environmental parameters
involved were air and surface temperature, humidity, air purity, and air
changes.
The system had to be reliable because curing activities require
narrow ranges of the above parameters for periods of time ranging up to
7 days.
Once the environmental conditions were obtained sandblasting
operations commenced.
The establishment of a 1.0-3.0 ail surface profile by sandblasting was
the specification requirement.
The inspector witnessed sandblasting ope-
rations and surface profile measurements.
During sandblasting operations
any surface defects noted were taped over and eventually identified on a
map for disposition and coating at a later time.
Sufficient lighting for
sandblasting, painting, and inspection activities was specified to be
'
50 foot-candles - this was exceeded.
The coating system for the drywell interior was two coat phenolic epoxy
on steel.
The first coat was applied (spray) and then inspected for dry
film thickness using a magnetic dry film thickness gauge.
More than the
minimum required area to be inspected was inspected by Metalweld.
Because
the final dry film thickness of both coats had to be in the range of 8-12
mils, the dry film thickness of the first coat was limited to 4 to 6 mils.
Any additional surface defects revealed during inspection of the first
coat were again noted and eventually mapped.
The inspector witnessed dry
film thickness measurements and verified that all the equipment Metalweld
[
was using was calibrated.
Additionally, it was observed that QC personnel
were present during paint mixing and applicable activities and that partial
mixing of components was not permitted.
In areas where the coating thick-
ness did not fall within the 4-6 mil limits, either hand sanding or spray-
ing of additional material brought the area to within the limits.
__ _
_
_
__
__
- - _ _
_
.
.
,
.
.
8
.
The second coat activities were similar to those of the first coat - the
only major difference being the curing time.
The inspector again witnessed
i
final inspection activities.
Observation of the finished product as well
!
as evidence of an effective QC/QA program and adherence to the environmental
constraints convinced the inspector that the drywell coating is satisfactory.
There are identified and mapped surface defects that require evaluation and
coating at a later time.
(354/80-02-03)
!
!
No items of noncompliance were identified.
7.
Structural Loncrete-Observation of Work and Work Activities - Unit 1
The inspector observed post placement concrete activities of pour number
IR-F/G-WOO 4/005.
This pour closed in the south exterior wall up to
elevation 132'.
The particular activities observed related to provisions
for cold weather concreting.
The top of the formwork was adequately closed
,
in to retain the heat from a propane heater and maintain the temperature
,
!
of the exposed concrete above the minimum required.
The concrete surface
was maintained in a moist condition per the curing procedures.
Personnel
l
were in attendance to take action if the heat source had broken down.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
8.
Containment-Observation of Welding Activities - Unit 2
I
l
The inspector observed torus welding activities being performed by PDM
'
personnel.
The use of preheat was observed in all areas where welding
4
activities were in progress.
QC personnel were evident and were checking
and verifying proper preheat temperature. Weld material control was
effective, i.e., weld rod was issued and unused and damaged electrodes
and electrode stubs were returned in accordance with PDM procedures.
The
inspector verified that no welding was performed unprotected from rain
and snow.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
,
9.
Containment Weld Wire Documentation
On August 31, 1979 the licensee reported a potential significant deficien
-
in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55(e) involving lack of
j
post weld heat treat (PWHT) test data for weld wire that would be post weld
j
heat treated.
In Inspection Report 80-01 it was stated that PDM's weld
l
repair procedure was not complete.
The procedure is now complete and was
reviewed by the inspector.
The procedure is PDM Repair Procedure RP-19,
Rev. C, " Repair Procedure for Coupon Removal and Repair and Weld Wire
Removal and Repair of Electrode Purchased Without PWHT Test Results."
Associated with RP-19 is Fabrication Check List Addenda (FCA) #578 which
!
!
..-
-
- . - . - . - . . - .
.. - . - - . . - _ , .
. - . --
.. - _ ,. - _ . , . -
_.
. _ - -
.
.
.
.
.
9
is a QC document used to provide for QC hold points, QC witness points,
and QC signatures.
Based on the inspector's concern for assurance of
complete removal of the questionable material prior to rewelding, PDM
agreed to add a QC hold point to FCA #578 to inspect to ensure all affected
material is removed prior to rewelding.
(354/80-02-04)
The inspector had no other questions at this time.
10.
Concrete Activities - Units 1 and 2
The inspector witnessed batch plant and concrete test lab operations during
mix design requalification testing.
Several mix designs were being requali-
fied because of a change in the source of sand.
The appropriate Bechtel
engineering personnel and Liberty-Westcon batch plant personnel were in
attendance to verify results.
Slump and air tests and concrete test cylin-
der preparation activities in the concrete lab were performed in accordance
with site requirements.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
11.
Exit Interview
The inspector met with licensee and contractor personnel (denoted by an
asterisk in paragraph 1) on each Friday of this inspection report period.
At these times the inspector summarized the scope and findings of that
week's inspection activities.
l
i