ML20009F911
| ML20009F911 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 07/14/1981 |
| From: | Durr J, Mccabe E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20009F894 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-352-81-10, 50-353-81-08, 50-353-81-8, NUDOCS 8108030158 | |
| Download: ML20009F911 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000352/1981010
Text
l
.
.
U.S. NUCi. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
Region I
50-352/.81-10
Report No. 50-353/ 81-08
50-352
Docket No.
50-353
CPPR-106
.
License No.
CPPR-107
Prior':ty
-
Category
A
Licensee:
Philadelohia Electric Comoany
2301 Market Street
Philadelohia, Pennsvivania 19101
Facility Name:
Limerick Generatino Station. Unit Nos. I and 2
Znsraction at: Ljmerick, Pennsylvania
'
Znspection cond ted:
June 15-30, 1981
inspectors:
Abri
n k)c)
7
9/
.'Pg/Uurr,SeniorResidentInspector
/ date signed
date signea
'
date signed
E. O. b M . de.
N
Approved by:
E. v. McLace, unter, neactor
data signed
,
Projects Section 2B
.
Inscection Summary:
(Unit No.1) Inspection on Ju..e 15-30, 1981 (Recort No. 50-352/81-10)
Areas Inscected: A routine inspection by the resident inspector of pipe welding,
electrical equipment, concrete practices, plant tours, and licensee's action on
previous inspection findings. The inspection involved 42.5 inspector-hours on site.
,
Results:
One item of noncompliance was identified in five areas inspected
(attachment of seismic category I equipment to nonseismic structures).
(Unit No. 2)
Insoection on June 15-30, 1981 (Report No. 50-353/81-08)
Areas Inspected: A routine inspection by the resident inspector of pipe welding,
concrete practices, plant tours and licensee's action on previous inspection findings.
The inspection involved 15.5 inspector-hours on site.
Results:
No items of noncompliance were identified.
Region I Form 12
e108030158 810715
(Rev. April 77)
PDR ADOCK 05000352
G
pop
.
. - - -
.
._--.,,.--,----,.,,p.
- . . -
,_-.--m,.,
._7.,,--s
-
r=.w,.me
v--%=-
-
-m
-
---
- t---
' - - --- - --
-
-
_
_
-
4
.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Philadelphia Electric Company
J. M. Corcoran, Field QA Branch Head
D.A. Marascio, QA Engineer
R.T. Scott, Senior Engineer
Bechtel Power Corporation
G.E. Fissel, Lead Field Civil Engineer
H.D. Foster, Project Field Quality Control Engineer (QCE)
M. Jan, Lead Field Mechanical Engineer
J.L. Martin, Lead Site QA Engineer
T. Molinaro, Project Superintendent
K.L. Quinter, Assistant Project Field QUE
D. Shaw, Assistant Project Field Engineer
D. Smolinsky, Mechanical Staff Engineer
R. Weaver, Lead Site Mechanical Engineer
A.G. Weedman, Project Field Engineer
The above listed personnel attended the exit interview held on
June 30, 1981.
Other engineers, carftsmen, quality control technicians,
and supervisors were contacted as the inspection interfaced with their
work.
2.
Plant Tours
(Unit Nos. 1 and 2)
Periodically during the inspection, tours were made of the Unit Nos.1
and 2 primary reactor containment, the reactor buildings, the control
structure, and surrounding yards and shops.
The inspector examined
completed work, work in-progress, quality control activities, and
I
equipment storage, handling, and maintenance.
He discussed the technical
aspects of the work with craftsmen, supervisors, and engineers to
assure work was being perfonned in accordance with requirements.
No itens of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Licensee's Actions on Previous Inspection Findings
(Closed) Unresolved Item (352/78-03-04)
The inspector identified a lack of implementing procedures for 10 CFR 21
requirements as an unresolved item.
The first procejure identified was
for posting of 10 CFR 21 requirements. The licensee stated that the
regulation does not require procedures for posting and that compliance
was all that is required.
The inspector reviewed 10 CFR 21 and concurred
I
l
l
_ _ _ _ .
.
_ . .
. ._
_ _ _ _ ._ ___
_
_
.
.
3
-
..
,
with the licensee's position.
He verified that the licensee is
complying with regulatory posting requirements.
The second procedure identified was for specifying the provisions of
10 CFR 21 in procurement documents. The licensee presented the
" Procedure for Procurement of Equipment, Materials, Services or
Combination thereof," as satisfying Part 21 for procurement.
However,
the ERDP Index page does not indicate applicability to the Limerick
Project, only to the Peach Bottom facility.
Further inspection disclosed that procurements by the Philadelphia
Electric Capany for the Limerick Station are processed separately
from other procurements. The major portien of items procured for
Limerick Station are processed by the architect-engineer and nuclear
steam system supplier.
Only selected itms such as the RPV safe end
modification, the high density spent fuel storage racks, and the
emergency response facility are being purchased directly by PECO.
These procurements are described in Section 2 of the Quality Assurance
Plan.
A review of the procurement documents for the RPV safe end modification
disclosed that 10 CFR 21 requirements were not invoked in the procure-
ment procedure, "QA Program and Procedures for Removal and Replacement
of RPV Safe Ends and Feedwater Closure Welds to RPV Safe Ends," or the
" Requisition en Purchasing Division".
However, a letter of intent,
dated August 31, 1979, did invoke Part 21.
The contracts for the remaining procurements are not available at the
site for review.
This item is unresolved pending verification of
Part 21 requirements in the remainder of PECO centracts and the
establisinent of procedures to assure implementation of Part 21 for
procurement.
(352/81-10-01)
(Closed) Unresolved Item (352/78-10-01)
ASME Code Nameplates may interfere with preservice and inservice
ultrasonic inspection.
The inspector examir.ed pipe spools HBB-140-1-2
and GBB-119-1-3 and measured the free distance between the center line
of the weld and the ASME Code Nameplate.
The distances measured were
approximately 1" for the HBB pipe and between 13/4" and 2" for the
.
GBB pipe.
Discussions with the responsible subcontracts engineer for
preservice inspection disclosed that the HBB pipe is not scheduled for
preservice testing and the GBB pipe welds have been satisfactorily tested
ultrasonically.
- - - -
. . .
. . ..
- . -
-_.
--
, .
.
.
,
4
.
.
.
.
.
Furthemore, specification M-246A, "Preservice and Inservice Inspec-
tion, Services for Nuclear Piping Systems", has provisions in
paragraph 4.2.2 requiring compliance with accessibility limits per the
ASME XI Code. The licensee presented a Nonconfomance Report
that identified several pipe spools that had been reworked because
ASME Code Nameplates interfered with Preservice testing.
This matter is closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (352/78-10-03)
The magnetic particle test (MT) procedure, 80A1563, for preservice
testing did not have adequate acceptance criteria for all possible
uses. The licensee stated that the vendor does not have any MT
equipment on site, he has not perfomed any MT on site, and he does
not intend to employ MT during the preservice program.
This matter is closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (352/78-10-04)
The use of longer than specified studs for shell type expansion anchors
presented prograrmiatic concerns for anchor bolt thread engagement.
The inspector re-examined pipe support GBC-104-H2 and its associated
drawing. The shell type expansion anchors have been replaced by
grouted in threaded rods. The entire anchor bolt program has been
reviewed by the licensee and the NRC under Bulletin 79-02 (see
IE Reports 352/81-01, 04 and 06).
This matter is closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (352/78-10-05)
Pipe support HBC-182-H1 was installed with improper clearances.
The
inspector re-examined the pipe support clearances and other selected
details on drawing HBC-182-H1, Revision 3.
He verified that clearances
appear to satisfy drawing requirements.
However, during the examina-
tion it was noted that item 7, a stiffener plate, was welded to a
ledge angle for the concrete decking. The ledge angle and decking
are considered construction aids and are not Q-listed (safety-related)
items.
The pipe support is installed as it appears on the design drawing.
The problem appears to be one of design interfaces, in that the pipe
support design group attached a seismic category I support to the
building structural steel without adequate review by the civil group.
The attachment of Q-listed, seismic category I pipe support elements
to non-Q-listed, non-seismic structural elements is an item of non-
compliance.
(352/81-10-02)
.
, - , , -
,-,w-..g--
p
--
- - - -
- - - ,
c--
-
- ,, ,
---
-
.
.
5
.
< .
,
w
(Closed) Unresolved Item (352/79-01-03)
Worbnen observed walking on Power Generation Control Canplex (PGCC)
cables. The licensee issued Finding Report N-147 which directed the
placenent of signs in the work area to prohibit walking on the cables.
In addition, he revised the Project Quality Control Instruction
8031-E-6.0 (F1) to provide for surveillance checks for damage to the
PGCC cables.
Inspection of the PGCC area verified that the signs have
been posted ar.d that the cables are protected by wooden walkways.
This item is closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (352/79-02-01)
j
The licensee and the NRC inspector concurrently identified undersized
i
weld on pipe supports. The licensee had documented the conditions on
NCR 3449 which discussed undersizes ranging from 1/32" to 1/8". The
major cause appears to have been skewed angle "T" joint fillet welds
which do not oresent the normal inspection configuration. The
inspectors were not properly equipped with gages to measure these
The licensee analyzed the undersized welds and dispositioned the NCR
to "use-as-is".
He also provided additional training to the quality
control inspectors as documented on Quality Action Request F121.
The inspector verified that skewed "T" fillet weld gages are available
,
to the inspectors.
This matter is closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (352/79-02-03 and 353/79-02-01)
Unconsumed tack welds on the reactor building columns have welding
i
defects. The licensee issued Finding Report N-149 and NCR 3508.
T: e NCR directed that additional columns be inspected and all non-
conforming welds be removed or repaired.
Eight more welds were identi-
fied that required rework to maFa them acceptable.
The NRC inspector
visually examined the accessible areas on columns E-17, 20, 26, and 29
on elevations 177', 201', and 217'. No nonconforming welds were
identified.
l
This matter is closed.
.
i
l
4
a
. .
. . .
.
. - . _ . . _ . . _ . . . _ . _ _ , . _ _
.
.
_ , _ _ _.
.-
.
.
.
'
6
..
(Closed) Deficiency (352/80-03-01)
Failure to maintain preheat while welding. The licensee's response
to the noncompliance was to:
Issue a stop-work ordar for the affected pipe
--
restraint and other welding supervised by the foreman.
Provide refresher training to foremen on general
--
welding requirements.
Perfonn nondestructive tests on the weld to
--
.vepify its acceptability.
In addition, the licensee issued Nonconfonnance Report No. 4045. The
inspec. tar reviewed the NCR and the associated Quality Control
Inspection Record No. C-932-W-19 and verified that nondestructive tests
!
were perfanned and the weld found acceptable.
He also verified that
training classes were held on March 6, 1980, for the foremen to discuss
preheat welding requirements.
This matter is closed.
4.
Electrical Components
The following equipnent was selected for examination of storage and
maintenance conditions and review of quality documentation:
Equipment
Storage
Maintenance
Quality Records
10B204 Reactor Area 480VMCC
X
X
10B211
Load Centcr
X
X
X
"
"
10B223
" 480VMCC
X
X
X
"
10B225
X
"
"
"
"
l
108226
X
"
"
"
10CO23 Cleanup Filter Demin.
X
10C221 Fuel Pool Pump Panel
X
105292 Reactor Bldg. & RWCU
Sample
X
The storage examination verified that the equipment was covered and
protected from construction hazards and that heaf cs were energized.
The maintenance records review verified that periodic visual examinations
are made and that equipnent heaters are energized. The quality records
review verified that selected test records were supplied by the manu-
facturer.
-- -.
.. - ..- - -
. .
- -
. . _ - - . _ - - -
-. .
. - .
_
.
.
7
.
The inspector toured the offsite storage and test facility for the
electrical protective relay devices.
He verified that the relays are
properly stored and that procedures have been implemented for the
acceptance testing and control of protective relay devices.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Observation of Welding Activities
Reactor coolant pressure boundary (ASME III, Class I) and other safety
related pipe welds (ASME III, Class II and III) were selected for
document review and observation of welding activities. The document
reviews verified the welder's qualifications, proper welding procedures
were employed, required nondestructive tests specified, appropriate
quality control inspection points specified and signed off, and proper
-
preheat and postweld heat treatments were required. The observation of
welding consists of, where applicable, examination of the cleanliness,
fitup, and alignment of the parts; proper welding equipment; purge and
cover gas flow rates; electrodes and filler materials; appearance of M.e
weld deposit; evidence of quality control activities; and proper docu-
mentation.
The following welds were examined:
WELD NO.
CLASS
SYSTEM
STATUS
GBB-102-4-FW57
II
Root & intennediate passes
"
"
"
GBB-102-4-FW58
II
GBC-201-14-FW56
III
MS
Fitup
"
GBC-201-14-FW57
III
MS
No itens of noncompliance were identified.
6.
Concrete Records
'
The inspector reviewed specification C-61, " Specification for
l
Furnishing and Delivery of On-Site Concrete", to familiarize himself
with the applicable requirements for concrete at the Limerick Station.
He noted that paragraph 4.3.5 d F ned a flat particle as having a width
l
to thickness ratio greater than 4.
Also, an elongated particle is
'
defined as having a length to w.dth ratio greater than 4
The specification and the FSAR reference USACE CRD-C119-53 which defines
both elongation and flatness as ratios greater than 3.
This item is
unresr N P gnding review by the NRC.
(352/81-10-03)
. -
- . - . . - . .
- . -
-
_
- - . -
.
. . - ..
--
..-
.
_ . . .
8
- .
..
-
.
7.
Unresolved Items
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is needed
to determine if they are noncanpliances, deviations, or acceptable.
Unresolved items are discussed in paragraphs 3 and 6.
8.
Exit Interview
On June 30, 1981, an exit interview was held with members of the licen-
see's staff, denoted in paragraph 1, to discuss the inspection findings.
l
,
l
l
l
.