ML19339A120
| ML19339A120 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 09/17/1980 |
| From: | Julie Hughes, Williams C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19339A115 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-440-80-16, 50-441-80-15, NUDOCS 8011030093 | |
| Download: ML19339A120 (15) | |
See also: IR 05000440/1980016
Text
Oc
.
.
, .
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report Nos. 50-440/80-16; 50-441/80-15
Docket Nos. 50-440; 50-441
License Nos. CPPR-148; CPPR-149
Licensee: Cleveland Electrxc Illuminating Company
P. O. Box 5000
Cleveland, OH 44101
i
Facility Name: Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2
Inspection At: Perry Site, Perry, OH
Inspection Conducted: August 1-31, 1980
[. [, Whhw
- .'
-
Inspector:
J. Hughes
/
't
h
- WES E %
Approved By:
C. C. Williams, Chief
'7//7/h}
Projects Section 2
//~
'
!
Inspection Summary
Inspection on August 1-31. 1980 (Report No. 50-440/80-16; 50-441/80-15)
Areas Inspected: Routine inspection by the IE Regional Resident Inspector
(RI) of safety related construction activities, including welding of 4160
volt switchgear; concrete placement of Reactor Building vall; installation
of electrical conduit; containment spray brackets and records; and safety
related fluid system piping. This inspection involved 168 inspection hours
by one h3C inspector.
Results:
In the ten areas inspected, one item of noncompliance was identified
(deficiency: Units 1 and 2 - inadequate review).
,
8 011030 0$
1
-
-
__
.-
,
. . - . -
--
.
.
,
DETAILS
.
Persons Contacted
- M. Edelman, Manager, Nuclear QA Department
- G. Groscup, Manager, Nuclear Engineering Department
D. Fitzpatrick, Site Construction Manner
- W. Kacer, General Supervising Engineer, CQS
- J. Kline, General Supervising Engineer, Construction
- B. Barkley, General Supervising Engineer, Design
- P. Martin, General Supervising Engineer, PQS
- R. Vondrasek, CQS QE. Supervisor
S. Tulk, CQS Electrical Quality Engineer
,
'
K. Combs, CQS Engineering Aide
Other Personnel
- P. Gibson, CQS QC Supervisor (KEI)
- T. Arney, QA Program Manager (GAI)
R. Crofton, CQS Lead Piping Quality Engineer (GAI)
J. Connelly, CQS Lead Civil Quality Engineer (GAI)
W. Ware, CQS Lead Civil Quality Engineer (GAI)
G. Parker, CQS Mechanical Quality Engineer (GAI)
l
K. Peck, Assistant Project Manager (GAI)
J. Small, QC Manager (Dick Corp.)
R. Love, QA Manager, (L.K. Comstock)
P. Wang, Laboratory Chief (UST)
L. Young, CQS Mechanical Quality Engineer (KEI)
The inspector also contacted and interviewed other licensee and contractor
personnel during this reporting period.
$
- Denotes those attending at least one of the exit meetings.
l
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
(Closed) Unresolved Item (440/78-15-01; 441/78-14-01): Newport News
Industrial Corporation (NNIC) housekeeping in fuel cask area. During
this reporting period the inspector observed housekeeping in the fuel
cask area and found it to be adequate at this time.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (440/79-09-03; 441/79-09-03): Cable trays of
different divisions installed on same hanger support. The inspector
reviewed electrical drawings to determine separation criteria and to
note if fire barriers were going to be installed.
The inspector noted
that the drawings indicated that fire barriers were to be installed and
found it to be adequate at this time.
(Closed) Noncompliance (440/79-10-03; 441/79-10-03): US Testing (UST)
Procedure for qualification of inspection personnel does not meet the
-2-
__
.
.
,
1
intent of ANSI N.45.2.6-1973.
During this reporting period, the inspector
,
reviewed three personnel qualification records, licensee audit report #425
dated July 31, 1980, and the following U5'f procedures; QCP-9 Revision 4,
titled " Responsibilities and Required Qualification Levels of Personnel;"
,
'
QCP-6 Revision 2, titled " Training of Inspection and Test Personnel;" and
UST-TQ-1 Revision 10, titled " Training and Qualification of Inspection,
Test, and Audit Personnel." The inspector determined that the program was
being properly implemented and that the records reviewed did satisfy the
ANSI requirements.
.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (440/80-07-06; 441/80-07-06):
Great Lakes Con-
struction Company (GLCC) level II QC inspector filling out and signing
inspection reports for Level I who witnessed the soil field activities.
The inspector reviewed GLCC procedure No. T/QCP-8, Revision 6, " Excavation
and Backfill," dated May 22, 1980, which has been revised to reflect
changes. The GLCC Level I QC inspector initials the work forms and the
Level II reviews and signs off each daily report.
(Closed) Noncompliance (440/79-03-04; 441-79-03-04):
Newport News Indus-
trial Corporation (NNIC), improper verification signoffs on Manufacture
Installation Instructions (M/II's). The inspector reviewed NNIC's
Nonconformance Report (NR) No. 38-39 dated August 10, 1979, and licensee's
Action Request AR171 dated July 11, 1979 with attachments, and noted that
verification signoffs have been properly done.
Functional or Program Areas Inspected
1.
Plant Tours , Units 1 and 2
One or more plant areas were toured several times each week during
this reporting period to observe general construction practices,
area cleanliness, and storage / maintenance conditions of equipment,
piping, conduit, and cable trays.
One tour was made on back shift.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
2.
Observation of Concrete Work Activities and Related Quality Records,
Unit 2
Pre-Placement Inspection (RB2-WST4-639). The inspector performed
a pre placement inspection of Placement No. RB2-WST4-639 (reactor
l
building shield wall), containing approximately 47 cubic yards of
concrete and placed by Dick Corporation.
,
.
Placement Inspection (RB2-WST4-639).
a.
In Process Concrete Testing
(1) The United States Testing (UST) field QC personnel
performed slump, temperature, and entrained air tests
as follows:
.
-3-
.
.
,
Ticket No.
Slump (in.)
Temp ( )
% Ent. Air
,
49147
3-1/4"
67
6.5
49148
4"
66
---
49149
3-1/2"
65
---
49151
4"
69
---
All test results were within the allowed limits and performed
at the frequencies pecified.
(2) Field curing houses, which were suitably equipped to maintain
freshly cast compressive strength cylinders at the initial
curing temperature specified by ASTM C-31-69, were inspected.
(3) The inspector reviewed the calibration records for the
testing apparatus used on pour RB2-WST4-639, and found the
following equipment had current calibration data: air
meter #8, Unit weight bucket #3, field scale #15, and
thermometers #119, #136 and #204. Thermometer #119 was
found to be damaged during the first truck load sampling.
UST wrote a nonconformance report, #U3T ICAR #1027-31,
and replaced the thermometer with Nos. 136 and 204 which
were currently calibrated.
.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
3.
Delivery and Placement
Concrete was pumped to the placement area and deposited via
a.
a flexible hose which adequately confined the concrete, with
a maximum five foot free fall.
b.
Concrete was properly consolidated using internal concrete
vibrators numbers VIB-2, VIB-A1, VIB-3, and VIB-4, which
had been checked during operation to verify the 8000 VPM
frequency required by ACI-301-72, Chapter 8.
These checks
had been properly documented on the Dick Corporation
inspection report checklist as required by their procedure
FQC 10.2 Revision 6.
c.
The inspector reviewed Dick Corporation's documentaticn for
training of the craft in the use of vibrating techniques prior
to the concrete placement.
d.
The inspector observed the curing process of concrete placement
RB2-WST3-639.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
Observation of Electrical Work Activities
a.
The inspector observed welding or the 4160 volt switchgear
cabinet, tag No. 1R22S006. Upon questioning L.K. Comstock's
-4-
.-
-. _
_.
.
-_
_
_ __
.
.
,
(LKC) QC inspector, it was learned that only four (4) welds
,
per cubicle were going to be welded. Vendor drawings 335198-
E226 thru E233 specify eight (8) plug welds to be made per
cubicle. The inspector could not determine what effect going
to the lesser number of welds would have on the seismic
qualification of these cabinets.
This item is considered
unresolved (440/80-16-01; 441/80-15-01).
b.
During this reporting period, the inspector observed several
cable tray supports (hangers) that were accepted by LKC QC
inspectors and documented.
However, the inspector noted in
the area of the intermediate building that touchup painting
of the galvanized material on the inside of cable trays had
been missed (approximately four trays).
The electrical con-
tractor corrected this problem while the inspector was in the
area. The inspector has no further questions on this matter
'
at this time.
c.
During this reporting period, the inspector observed the
installation of conduit throughout the plant.
During review
of LKC QC inspection records, the inspector could not deter-
mine the following:
conduit cut square, reamed, tapered, or
,
'
champfered to remove all burrs and sharp edges, and threaded
ends painted with "Debanode" or equal. From May, 1980 to
August, 1980 in process inspections were documented on LKC
field inspection reports and form #82. There was no documen-
tation prior to May 1980 that indicated that a QC in process
inspection was performed. The inspector could not determine
at this time what effect, if any, not reaming the cut conduit
would have on cable pulls thru these conduits. The licensee
stated that they would investigate this concern.
This item
is considered unresolved (440/80-16-02; 441/80-15-02).
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Installation of Safety Related Penetrations
The inspector observed work activities including protection, welding
and liquid penetrant (PT) testing of safety-related penetrations.
The inspector observed the welding of the root pass of penetration
a.
F-102, RHR "A" pump suction, in accordance with Drawing B312-631,
Revision D, and field weld process sheet for FW14.
b.
The inspector observed PT testing of the welded root pass' in
,
accordance with Pullman Power Products (PPP) procedure PT-1XPT-1.
c.
During this reporting period, the inspector reviewed qualification
records for two NDE testing personnel (PPP) qualified to perform
FT examinations and verified that their qualifications were current.
l
l
!
-5-
-
'
. .
_ ___-_ _ -
.
.
,
d.
The inspector reviewed Magnaflux materials and purchase orders
.
- 7026-F5602 and 7026-F5862, Spotcheck Cleaner SKC-NF, Batch
- 80F055. Certifications were current for the above mentioned
material.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Observation of Safety Related Piping Welding Activities Unit 1
The inspector observed the following partially completed and
completed welding activities (PPP):
a.
Low Pressure Core Spray System Weld No. 01 on Isometric
No. 1-E21-6.
b.
Low Pressure Core Spray System Weld No. 03 on Isometric
No. 1-E21-3.
c.
Low Pressure Core Spray System Weld No. 05 on I :. metric
No. 1-E21-3.
d.
Residual Heat Removal System Weld No. 01 on Isometric IE-12-44.
c.
Reactor Core Isolation Cooling System Weld No. 03 on Isometric
No. 1-ESI-5.
It was determined that (1) work was conducted in accordance with the
traveler; (2) proper welding materials were used; (3) welding pro-
cedure requirements were met; (4) the work area was free of weld rod
stubs; and (5) physical appearance was acceptable.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Control of Welding Materials
i
The inspector toured the PPP welding material issuing station located
at the control complex building.
It was determined that:
a.
The welding materials are properly identified and segregated.
b.
The temperature of the rod ovens is maintained and thermometers
are currently in calibration.
c.
Records are properly kept,
d.
Issuance and return of welding materials are controlled in
accordance with approved procedures.
No items cf noncompliance or deviations were identified.
-6-
.-
.
.
,
8.
Visual Examination of Welds for Safety Related Piping Unit I
.
a.
Visual Examination
The inspector visually examined the following completed welds:
(1) Low Pressure Core Spray System Weld No. 01 on Isometric
1-E21-7.
(2) Low Pressure Core Spray System Weld No. 04 on Isometric
1-E21-3.
(3) Residual Heat Removal System Weld Nos. 03 and 05 on
l
Isometric 1-E12-35.
(4) Residual Heat Removal System Weld No. 01 on Isometric
1-E12-44.
(5) Reactor Core Isolation Cooling System Weld Nos. 02, 03,
and 09 on Isometric 1-E51-5.
It was determined that (1) the weld surface finish and appearance
'
were acceptable and there was no evidence of wall thinning due to
j
grinding; and (2) are strikes and weld spatter were not evident.
b.
Review of Records
The inspector reviewed weld data sheets for the above welds.
It was determined that (1) the records indicate specified
inspections were completed and (2) records are clear and
legible.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
9.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping - Observation of Welding
Activities (Unit 1)
a.
The inspector observed welding of the Reactor Recirculation
System Weld No. B33-1-All on traveller No. T1-B33-10, and
Weld No. B33-1-B7 on traveller No. T1-B33-09.
It was deter-
mined that (1) work was conducted in accordance with traveller;
(2) proper welding materials were used; (3) welding procedure
requirements were met; (4) work area was free of weld-rod stubs;
and (5) physical appearance was acceptable.
l
,
b.
The inspector reviewed radiographic film (RT) for the afore-
mentioned welds. Radiography technique was in accordance
with I&SE Procedure GEP-N-0004, Revision O.
Film review was
acceptable.
f
-7-
,
--
._
_
._
.
.
,
,
f,
c.
The inspector toured the I&SE welding material issuing station
!
located at the Intermediate Building.
It was determined that
l
(1) the welding materials are properly identifi-d and segregated;
(2) the temperature of the rod ovens is maintained; (3) calibra-
tions of temperature gauges are current; (4) records are properly
kept, and (5) issuance and return of welding materials are
controlled in accordance with approved procedures.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
10.
Reactor Containment Dome - Observation of Welding Activities (Unit 1)
a.
The inspector observed welding activities associated with the
containment dome, and determined the following:
(1) Welding of liner plates was in accordance with NNIC
welding instructions 465-NC-W001/N.
(2) Alignment and fit-up was in accordance with drawing
Nos. 249910-2 and 249910-4B.
(3) The root pass and subsequent layers of the weld were
subjected to visual examination (VT) procedure No. VT
701-N-N003, Revision A, and radiographic examination
(RT) procedure No. RT 465-NC-N002, Revision C.
(4) Containment Spray Header brackets were being welded
to the dome. The inspector observed that the welds
were in accordance with drawings 249905 series, except
the drawing indicated a 1/16" maximum fit-up tolerance
which could not be met.
The contractor issued a Manu-
facturing Problem Report (MPR), No. E-350, to revise
brackets to be trim fitted to the dome to 0-3/16"
tolerance with engineering's concurrence; welds for
these welded brackets were VT and Magnetic Particle
(MT) tested to procedure 465-NC-004 (MT), Revision D,
and were found to be acceptable.
b.
The inspector reviewed the weld history records for the
containment welding activities, and noted that MPR-E-350 was
not listed on the records for the containment brackets.
NNIC
corrected the weld history records immediately. The inspector
had no further questions of the contractor at this time.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
11.
Other Areas Inspected
a.
The inspector accompanied the licArArc audit team to witness
an in process radiography (RT) co: t performed by Construction
Quality Engineering on Pulle A art - Piodui<a.
Results of the
audit are reported in Audia ;eg i e'
ic. 437, dated August 28, 1980.
-8-
_
.
.
,
During this audit, the inspector reviewed the following concerns
o
which were previously reported in IE Report No. 440/80-12 and
441/80-11:
(1) The RT crews failed to survey and monitor the working areas.
During this inspection, the inspector found that the exposure
areas were properly secured, guarded, and monitored. This
item is acceptable.
(2) The RT crews failed to survey the radiographic camera and
Source guide tube upon completion of the RT.
The inspector
witnessed the survey of the camera and source guide tube
during this inspection and found this item to be acceptable.
b.
During this inspection period, the inspector questioned the
licensee regarding the Ruskin Manufacturing fire dampers
deficiency, which was reported to the NRC as a 10 CFR Part 21
item. There was no documentary evidence that the licensee
performed a cursory review to determine if the deficiency was
reportable under 10 CFR 50.55(e). PNPP Project Administration
Procedure 1501, Revision 1, paragraph 1.2.3, states in part
".
. Utilizing the criteria for reporting deficiencies, etc;
.
this is a project requirement." During the inspector's review
of Drawing D962-605, Revision G, (Reactor Building Annulus
Exhaust Gas Treatment System), and Drawing D912-617, Revision D,
(Fuel Handling Area Ventilation System), both systems were found
to be classified as Nuclear Safety-Related by the A/E. The
inspector informed the licensee that this failure to document a
review to determine if the deficiency is reportable is contrary
to 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V; PNPP PSAR, Chapter 17,
Section 17.15 and CEI Corporate Project Administration Procedure
1501, Revision 1, dated March 24, 1980. This item of noncompli-
ance is identified in Appendix A (440/80-16-03; 441/80-15-03).
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified, except as
noted.
Ut .esolved Items
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in
order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance,
or deviations. Unresolved items disclosed during this reporting period are
discussed in Paragraphs 4.a and 4.c.
Exit Interview
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Persons Contacted)
on August 8, 15, 22, and 29, 1980. The inspector summarized the scope and
findings of the inspections performed. The licensee acknowledged the findings.
l
Attachment:
Preliminary Inspection Findings
-9-
.g
-
.0FFICE OF INSPECT 10:1 AND ENTCRC
.
6*
.
_ PRELIMINARY INSPECTION FINDINGS
.
1
LICENSEE
2.
$O
REGIONAL OFFICE
__
dJA
l
,
---
f
bll'Y)10 $
.
.
DOCKET NUMBERS
4.
LICENSE NUMBERS
'O- Ho?.sb- w
CPP F 1t/ t d P2 i d T4' U To
5.
DA E OF INSPECTION
/
"
.
I 6.
'
Wi, thin the scope of the inspection, no items of'nonco/'
i
were found.
mpliance or deviation
..
7.
The following matters are preliminary inspection findi
k
i
ngs:
'
(
.
.
'
e
.
.
.
.
.
.
3.
These preliminary inspection findings will be reviewed by NRC S
.
Manage =ent n't
concerning any enforcementthe Region III Office and they will co"Jespond uith
upervision/
action.
.
you
--
/
,
_ [* /M M9
pgg BBB
p/
.OTTICE OF INSPECTION AND E!;TORCE!!!.f..
'-
' . -
.
PREL1HINARY INSPECTION FINDINGS
.
l
11.
LICENSEE
2.
REGIONAL OFFICE
0 l g t.) e k st h 6 0 2 L Y I L
fjj
'
-
()/kllA
11
.
.
.
3.
DOCKET NUMBERS
4.
LICENSE NUMBERS
5 ., DfTEOFINSPE) TION
fo- 49'o ,'To-W/
CPPB-lWfr cPEeA9 TM-M/fo
~
./
~
J
fa
/
-
.
,
,
_
{
6. .Within the scope of the inspection, no items of noncompliance or deviation
were found.
..
7.hfoll wing matters are preliminary insoecti
u
D
& L _Als o f {x
'
'
,
an
&res~asn
s
a-
s ws
JJk & &
,
-
,&&
,ecaeso, a k.e, an s~2
P n
ua
a
umf
~
,
s
'
s
a
8
d'$
sa2m an-
-
Jef %.
pillbereviewedbyNRCSupervis
-.
8.
These preliminary inspection findings
Management n't the Region III Office and they will corr s
nd yit you
l
-
concerning any enforcement action.
.Ga asSAC
clear Regul
ry Commission Inspector
- - -
- - - -
O
%2pdCa%& B-&a woi
'
'
0
(ka'- i,b
'
'
/z a, 2L zA/
.
./ut/4
'
.h pp
"
-
\\
b
~ s,caiu bich pci sro.c -e) m<D
c
M cFA' l?uS2/,
ky a
O
x&
6 M
wpz acp
Jes p as /ow d- aysgra s,f4
'
/ocH2fatf9/l'
My .$b dw.
a . i as
Wpn, al4>iCi?.
'
'
~sy-pe-
r~
uf $yw, y.
ggAec
s
.
n a- /s a m ,
-
.-../98v-
pgGR @@$$5
-
.
p3
-
-
...
%
.
24
\\
d A A y a k d 4 2 w e & {;
wesA u
van
a.
e- p ce L a
,L x
/ E.2 2 s o o l /t
?
u>wAun
OAb
s c xa eurk,
'
@)p<aKp caLA
269 ay g haaR kb Lj
t
exe
y
resm /~sagea g .
ss
w
ce)
- sesx b aey-
adab.
' b i
cow 2ueR
'
xauslaR.
..
,
.
O
.
..
4
. OFFICE OF lt:SPECTION A1;D E!;TORCEt:Et;T
,
,
.
PRELIMINARY INSPECTION FINDINGS
.
1.
LICENSEE
-
2.
RECIONAL OFFICE
cleoe k w/ Eb den
gy2 TE
' ~
U/)) /)'} CI llll
'
a
-
L
DOCKET NWiBERS
4.
LICENSE 1mMBERS
5.
D TE OF INSP CTION
@4Vo Giu49/
GMMK;&AeNY 9R-2 2 To
r
./
.
/
j,
<
{
6.
Vithin the scope of the inspection, no items of' noncompliance or deviation
were found.
..
-
7.
The following matters are preliminary inspection findings:
_
'
]DPA}g
w k S N[Nu
n
A
9'
r
3
d o Ju
,
J
.
.
.
.
'
l
8.
These preli=inary inspection findings will be reviewed by NRC Supervision /
Management at
F
the Region III Office and they will c rrespond ith you
concerning any enforcement action.
~
f(( (f? /(ff & Y&
duc1 car R
atory Commission. Inspector
i
~**'
--
OFFICE OF INSPECTION Al.D ENFORCDIENT
.
PRELIMINARY INSPECTION FINDINGS
'
i
.
1.
LICENSEE
2.
REGIONAL OFFICE
-'
Clevehn) Gedra
plu
--
.
ruuavna s 8 co
.
r
3.
DOCKET NUMBERS
4.
LICENSE NUMBERS
5.
DATE OF INSPE TION
%Wo/ A -@l
CPMifr(!cPMi47 74zs=29 2D
"
"
'
/
,
6.
/
Within the scope of the inspection, no items of noncompliance or deviation
were found.
,
..
7.
The following matters are preliminary inspection findings:
'
N
N
.~
T
.
.
.
I
_.
8.
These preliminary inspection findings vill be reviewed by NRC Supervision /
-
Management at the Region III Office and they will co respond u
concerning any enforcement action.
you
/dW AW
h
U
fuelear Regu
tory Commission Inspector
.
y
4
__
-- -