ML20005B542
| ML20005B542 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 06/19/1981 |
| From: | Danielson D, Yin I NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20005B535 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-461-81-14, NUDOCS 8107080352 | |
| Download: ML20005B542 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000461/1981014
Text
..
. .
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
- _ _
'
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND EhTORCE.'fENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-461/81-14
Docket No. 50-461
License No. CPPR-137
Licensee:
Illinois Power Company
500 South 27th Street
Decatur, IL 62525
Facility Name:
Clinton Power Station, Unit 1
Inspection At: Clinton Site, Clinton, IL
Inspection Conducted: June 5-6, 1983
.auu.alh
Inspector:
. T. Yin
C'//f '/
.479d.LwO
~
l
Approved By:
D. H. Danielson, Chief
0!/fk/
'
Materials and Processes Section
'
Inspection Summary
Inspection on June 5-6, 1981 (Report No._ 50-461/81-14)
Areas Inspected: Followup on piping suspension system and penetration
assembly corrective measures taken in re'sponse to Region III Immediate
,
Action Letter dated March 5, 1981. *ihc inspection involved a total of
16 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
s
fh
m.
b,.
.
_____
_
_ - - -
.
..
..
.
.
.
.
_______________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
-
.
,
DETAILS
-
Persons Contacted
Illinois Power Company (IP)
- G. M. Brashear, Manager of Clinton Site
- J. D. Geier, Manager - NSED
- A. J. Budnick, Director of QA
- M. C. Hollon, Construction QA Supervisor
J. S. Spencer, Director, Design Engineering
Baldwin Associates, Inc. (BA)
- H. R. Swif t, Project Engineer
- F. Camasta, Assistant Piping Superintendent
- T. Selva, Manager, Q and TS
J. W. Smart, Manager of QA
- L. A. Gelbert, Manager of QC
- R. Forbes, Senior QA Engineer
- R. C. Campbell, Senior QC Engineer
- Denotes those attending the management exit interview on June 6,1981.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Items
(Clesed) Unresolved Item (461/81-07-01):
Questionable areas identified
during the inspector's review of hanger installation and inspection
program procedures.
Concerned items included:
(1) bolt pattern devia-
tions, (2) large gaps on restraints, (3) hydraulic snubber inspection
checklists, and (4) Phase I welding inspection requirements. These
concerns are addressed in the revised BA manuals. Resolution details
are discussed in Paragraph 1.a through 1.d of this report.
Funtional or Program Areas Inspected
1.
Review of _ Hanger Program Provisions
In conjunction with Region III Inspection Report No. 50-461/81-07,
Paragraph 1, " Procedure Review," and Paragraph 2, " Documentation
Eeview," the inspector reviewed the following revised BA procedures:
BAP 3.2.5, " Piping Component Supports," Revision 1, dated
.
May 7, 1981
TS Instruction, " Piping Hanger Visual Inspection," Revision 1,
.
dated April 16, 1981
TS Procedure Specification for " Visual Inspection Weldments,"
.
Revision 11, dated April 17, 1981
QCI, " Piping / Mechanical QC Inspection Criteria - Hangers and
.
Supports," Revision 1, dated April 11,1981
-2-
.
.
.. .
.
__
__
_ _ _
- - - - - - - - - - - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -- - J
-
.
m
-
c
.
..
The inspector considers that the five issues addressed in the ref-
-
erenced inspection report have been resolved.
Relative to the bolt pattern change, the four bolt square plate
a.
installation tolerance was checked by S&L and found to be ac-
ceptable. Design bolt locations will be evaluated by S&L on a
case by case basis.
b.
Installation requirements for box type pipe guides with large
.
gap clearances were explained in detail by the field piping
engineer. He stated that the QC inspectors were indoctrineted
to make them aware of the .cceptance criteria.
c.
At present, there are no hydraulic snubbers at the site or
planned for installation in the near future.
Checklist items
were voided on Form TV-693 on June 5, 1981.
d.
Phase I welding inspections, including check of location,
orientation, and fitup, were established in the recently
approved TS instructions and QC procedures.
The requirement for the site QC inspector to docmaent any
e.
deficiencies found during each phase of the hanger inspections
was further r-viewed by the inspector.
Such requirement was
prescribed in all inspection checklists, and in BA project, TS,
and QC instructions and procedures.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified as a result
of the program review.
2.
Review of Hanger Audit and Surveillance Reports
The inspector reviewed the subject reports including audit and
surveillance checklists.
In addition, a trend analysis program was
implemented by BA QA in May 1981.
The hanger trending progiam
requirements are established in QA Instruction Manual, BQAI 160-2,
"QA Review of Piping Component Support Inspection Checklists,"
Revision 0, dated April 11, 1981.
Some of the audit and surveillance reports reviewed by the inspector
included:
IP QA Surveillance Plan and Report, File No. Q24-81(05-20)-L,
.
dated May 4-15, 1981.
IP QA Surveillance Plan and Report, File No. Q24-51(05-29)-L,
.
dated May 18-29, 1981.
BA External Audit Report No. E-280, audit of BE, Johnstown, PA
.
dated April 14, 1981.
BA External Audit Report No. E-281, audit of BE, Pittsburgh and
.
Etna, PA dated April 15, 1981.
-3-
.
.
-
.
- -
-
_
.. .
-
. - - .
..
,
.
BA Supplier QC Activity Report No. C-6110,15, dated May 21,
.
.
1981.
BA Supplier QC Activity Repor? No. C-6110.16, dated May 22,
.
1981
BA Site Surveillance Report No. S-468, " Component Traveler
.
Review - Second Limited Work Release," dated June 4, 1981
.
BA QA Corionent Support Trend Analysis _ dated May 1981
.
No it-ms of noncompliance or deviations were identified as a result
cf the procedure, audit, surveillance, and trend analysis review.
3.
Observation of Hanger Installations
On June 6, 1981, the inspector selected seven hangers and restraints
fer observation. These. components are ir. stalled in the Diesel
Generator Building, Auxiliary Building, and fuel Building.
The
first four on the 12it were installed subsequent to the revised
hanger program.
ISX0900R
.
ISX63028X
.
1SC12006R
.
IVG03019R
.
1RH20001R
.
ISX26013X
.
IFC03050V
.
As res 11t of the observation, the inspector concluded that QC in-
spection for the above components was adequate.
In regard to the installation of 1RH20001R, a sway strut unit connected
to a floor mount structural frame, the inspector questioned the existing
conditions in three areas:
(1) there was no clearance between the pipe
clamp and the vertical structural frame members, yet the design did not
call for a horizontal restraint; (2) one of the frame vertical members
Las welded approximately ( inch from the floor embedment plate edge.
One and sne-half inch minimum edge distance is required for a ceiling
plate, as specified BAP 3.2.5.
The inspector questioned whether the
ceiling plate requirement should apply to the floor plate since the
loading conditions are the same; (3) the stardard 15" x 15" anchor
bolt attachment plate thickness is one inch; however, the 15" x 15
embeiment plate observed was only one-half inch thick. The inspector
questioned whether or not rigidity of the floor plate was considered.
The inspector stated that he will followup on these items during a
future site inspection. This is considerti an unresolved item.
(461/81-14-01)
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
1
-4-
..
..
< .
1
.
4.
Observation of Pipe Penetration Test
On June 5, 1981, the inspector observed tests being performed on
the six inch Reactor Water Cleanup System pipe penetration assembly.
The purpose of the tests was to determine if preload exists between
the process pipe and the guard pipe seismic guide shoes.
Dial in-
dications of 0.002 to 0.003 inch of movement were observed when a
series of manually applied forces were applied to the process pipe.
This could possibly indicate that a minimum or no preload existed
.
within the assembly. The inspector's observation of these tests
was in conjunction with a design evaluation meeting held in the S&L
office with the S&L design engineer and IP engineering management
personnel on April 27, 1981.
During the meeting, questions were
raised that the S&L considered stresses at zero gap clearance between
the process pipe and the seismic shoes did not include possible pre-
loading of the system due to weld distortion and shrinkage.
For the remaining set of seismic shoes to be installed on the eight
i
inch RCIC System guard pipe assembly in the main steam tunnel,
.)
improved inrta11ation procedures were established on June 5, 1981.
In discussion with IP management, the inspector agreed that the stop
work imposed by the March 5, 1981, Region III Immediate Action Letter,
J
could be lifted. However, the inspector requested that the licensee
y
submit a formal report to Region III by August 15, 1981, documenting
the tests and evaluations that concluded the existing conditions were
not a safety problem.
It was noted that this report should include
functional verification of the pipe penetration assemblies that will
be conducted during the startup and testing program. The licensee
agreed to submit the report.
Unresolved 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. An unresolved item disclused during the inspection is dis-
cussed in Paragraph 3.
Exit Interview
Tt
aspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted under Persons
Contacted) at the conclusion on the inspection on June 6, 1981. The inspector
summarized the purpose and findings of the inspection.
The licensee acknow-
ledged the findings reported herein.
.
-5-
1
m_
_-
-