ML20031B971
| ML20031B971 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 09/11/1981 |
| From: | Elsasser T, Mattia J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20031B963 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-423-81-08, 50-423-81-8, NUDOCS 8110060290 | |
| Download: ML20031B971 (10) | |
See also: IR 05000423/1981008
Text
.
.
.
,
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION I
Report No.
50-423/81-08
Docket No.
50-423
License No.
CPPR-113
Priority
Category
A
--
Licensee:
Northeast Nuclear Energy Company
P. O. Box 270
Hartford, Connecticut 06101
facility Nome: _jfillstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3
Inspection At:
Waierford, Connecticut
_
Inspection Conducted:
July-13-31 and August 3-14, 1981
kcfBA
~
f[// [@
Inspectors: [/J . C . ji
a, Senior Resident Inspector
'date
f
date
r
,.
Approved by:
[
((M
9 / [/
'
T. Elsasfer, Chief, Reactor Projects
'datfe
Secti'an 18, DRPI
Inspection Summary:
Unit 3 Inspection on July 13-31 and' August 3-14, 1981 (Report No. 50-423/81-08)
Areas Inspected: Routine inspection by the Resident Inspector of work activities
associated with concrete placement; pipe erection; structural support welding;
training; structural steel erection and storage of safety related items.
The inspector also performed plant inspection tours and review licensee action on
previously identified items. The inspection involved 16i inspector-hours,
including eight off-shift hours by ore NRC inspector.'
Resul ts: Of tne eight areas inspected. three items of noncompliance were iden-
tified in the following areas: (1) Failure to follow storage and maintenance
proce6. ire for electrical cables (paragraph 8); (2) failure to use the required
~
minimum prehwc when welding (paragraph 9); (3) using obsolete welding technique
sheet to weld recirculation cooler supports (paragraph 9).
_
Region I Form 12
(Rev. April 1977)
8110060290 810917
DR ADOCK 05000423
eor
.
-
_
-.
--
.
.
.
,
1
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Northeast Utilities Service Company (NUSCO)
D. Ofedrick, QA Manager (Berlin)
R. Busch, Project Manager
F. Comstock, QA Telchnican
A. Cooper, Construction Project Specialist
K. Gray, QA Construction Supervisor
K. Murphy, QA Specialist
S. Orefice, Superintendent, New Site Ccnstruction
J. Peterson, QC Specialist
T. Sullivan, Construction Electrical regineer
Stone & Webster CorporationE&WJ
W. Mackay, Resident Manager
F. Sullivan, Senior Resident Engineer
A. Prussi, Resident Engineer
J. Kappas, Superintendent of Construction
J. Carty, Head of Site Engineering Office
P. Gagel, QA Program Administrator (Boston)
G. Turner, Superintendent of Field QC
W. Anderson, Assistent Superintendent of Field QC
M. Matthews, Assistart Superintendent of Field QC
G. Marsh, Senior QC Engineer
W. Orr, Senior QC Engineer
S. Morris, Senior QC Engineer
R. Hagerman, QC Engineer
R. Jenson, Lead Power Engineer
W. Miller, Field QC Inspector
Westinghouse Corporation
E. Harlow, Site Representative
C. Peterson, NDE and Welding Site Representative
2.
Concrete Work A:tivities
The inspector observed portions of the fo11 ewing placements:
C-7033,
C-7045, C-3765 and C-2010 during this inspection period. The inspector
verified that for the portions he observed that the requirements of S&W
specification (C999) and quality standard QS-10.13 were adhered to.
The
following are the specific items inspected:
Verified that the preplacement inspection by QC had been performed.
--
--
That the inspection personnel were located in close proximity ~to the
truck discharge and final placement location.
_
.
.
.
,
3
--
The quality requirements of the concrete being placed were verified
by testing near the poiat of placement and at the mixing truck. The
inspector verified that the delivered concrete met the specification
requirements for the placement as to mix design slump, air and
temperature.
--
Consolidation of concrete in the forms was adequate.
--
The form work was adequate and the rebar cover was as required by
specification.
S&W concrete pour card was properly filled out per the requirements.
--
.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findi_ngs
a.
(Closed) Item of noncompliance (423/81-02-02). A subcontractor
(Heating, ventilating and air conditioning - HVAC) was performing
safety related work activities using his QA program which did not
have the required approvals. The inspector reviewed a S&W letter
dated February 5,1981 sent to the subcontractor approving his QA
program, aad also an internal office memorandum dated May 6,1981,
~
which stated, that to prevent recurrence of this item of noncompliance
correspondence shall-be issued aoproving all subcontractors QA/QC
,
program prior to their performing any safety related work activities
'
onsite.
In addition, S&W Field QC group had not verified that the subcontractor's
weldors were qualified prior to their performing production welding
activities. The inspector reviewed the following S&W inspection
reports (IR) which indicated verification of the HVAC subcontractor's
weldors for different times:
--
IR #X1050001, dated 2/4/81
--
IR #X1050002, dated 3/4/81
--
IR #X1050003, dated 3/4/81
--
IR #X1050005, dated 5/6/81
b.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (423/81-02-16) the HVAC subcontractce's QA
supervisor reviewed and approveo two weldor's qualifications two
months after the weldors were actually welding on site. The HVAC
procedure SQAP 2.1 was revised to state that the QA supervisor is
required to review and accept weldor's qualifications prior to their
performing production welding. This item is considered resolved.
c.
(Closed) unresolved item (423/81-05-09) The inspector found a stiffener
plate on safety injection accumulator (3SIL-TK-1A) support skirts
which was bent.
S&W issued a nonconformance and disposition report
- 0723 for this discrepancy. This item was a part of Westinghouse's
scope of supply, therefore a Westinghouse deficiency report (CDR
Number NEUM-10021) was also issued. The disposition was to visually
- -
. - - - -
-
-
-
-
- - -
-
- -
-
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-
_ _ _
_ _ _ -
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
!
.
l
.
.
4
{
inspect the welds on the stiffner plate for damage and if they are
acceptable then leave the bent stiffener as is. This was accomplished
and condition of stiffener plate was accepted as is. This item is
considered resolved.
4.
Containment Structural Concrete Records
The inspector reviewed quality related records associated with concrete
placement (C-2702) previously observed for the structural concrete exterior
wall of the containment building.
The inspector determined that the
records reflect work accomplishment according to criteria identified in
the following:
--
PSAR Chapter 3 & 7 committment
S&W Job Specifications C-999 and 281
--
--
S&W Instructions and Procedures (QAD & QS)
The inspector reviewed the following documents to verify that the applicable
requiraments listed in the above document.s was accomplished:
a.
Preplacement preparation and inspection report IR Number S1001517,
dated 6/2/81
b.
Delivery and placement report IR number S1001512, dated 6/2/81
c.
Concrete curing records - construction records for this placement
for the curing which was from 6/3 to 6/9/81. Also the QC inspection-
report (S1001525, dated 6/4/81) for inspection of the curing by S&W
inspector.
d.
Concrete Materials.
--
Coarse aggregate (IR Report S1001877 and Tests Nos. CA57-935,
CA67-514 and CA4-356)
Fine aggregate (IR Report S1001876 and Test No. F41399).
--
Cement lab test report from Atlantic Cement Co. for the cement
--
used.
e.
Compressive strength test reports for cylinders 1444, 1445 and I446
(Required 3000 PSI at 60 days).
No items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Training - Stone & Webster
During a previous inspection (inspection report 423/81-02) it was identified
that training of S&W personnel onsite was a weakness. The inspector
reviewed the following documents:
.
_.
.
.
.
,
5
S&W memorandum dated, July 24, 1981, which listed the number (backlog)
--
of craftsmen who had not taken the required S&W " Manual Orientation
Program." Some of these craftsman had been scheduled for this
course at least eight times.
--
S&W memorandum dated, August 5, 1981, which indicated that all the
craftsmen listed on the July 24, 1981 memorandem had completed the
orientation program and that the ongoing orientation training is
I
also being given when new people are hired.
The inspector also monitored two of the following training classes
in urder to evaluate the quality of the training being performed by
the S&W construction and QC departments:
--
Training session for crafts on cement curing and finishing.
Training session for quality control personnel on S&W " Inspection
--
l
Report System": (QS - 14.2).
l
l
Buth courses were taught by recently hired training specialists.
.~he inspector found the content and presentation of the courses to
'
be excellent. The inspector informed the licensee that he had no
further questions on this matter.
6.
Structural Steel Erection
The inspector observed the erection and welding of structural steel for
the engineered safety features (ESF) building. The work activities were
being controlled by S&W drawing ES-31E-5 (Elevation 56' - 6") and weld
technique sheet W70G Rev. 3.
The specific activites inspected were as
,
follows:
>
-
Joint preparation and fitup
-
Weld material control at the weld location
-
Welding of tacks for fit-up
-
Weldors performance
-
Depositing and the cleaning of completed weld & weld passes
-
Size, length and quality of completed weld.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
7.
Safety Related Piping Welding Activities
a.
The following weld joints, which were in various stages of welding,
located in the containment building were inspected to verify compliance
with welding and installation procedures, and code requirements:
(1) 3RCS-029-ll-1, Field Weld #001.
This weld joint was the reactor
vessel nozzle to the reactor coolant hot leg. The joint was
two layers beyond the root. Welding was in accordance with S&W
-
..
.
.
_ _
_ -
_ _
.
.
.
,
6
weld technique procedure W13B Rev. 3.
The inspector observed
the actual welding and verified that the requirements for
welding such as interpass, staggered welding, shrinkage control
recording, and proper electrodes were adhered to.
(2) Observed the rigging and handling of reactor coolant spool
piec.e identified as PC-LPI-HLI (W NEU-PCPCFB) for fitup to the
reactor vessle nozzle.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
b.
The following weld joint located in the engineered safety features
building was inspected to verify compliance with the applicable
s
installation and welding procedures and code requirements:
(1) Weld joint 3QSS-014-26-2 field weld no. 3 was in the process of
welding and was approximately 1/3 complete. The inspector
observed the welding and cleaning of one pass. The weld data
card for this joint was reviewed to verify that all required
hold points were accomplished and approved by an authorized QC
inspector. Appropriate welding material was being used and
maximum interpass temperature was not exceeded.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
c.
The following weld joint located in the auxiliary building was
inspected to verify compliance to the applicable welding procedure
and code requirements.
,
(1) Weld joint 3 CHS-003-20-2FW2. The final weld pass was in
progress.
The inspector observed the actual welding and reviewed
the weld data card for this weld joint. The correct weld
material was used and the maximum interpass temperature was not
exceeded.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
8.
Outdoor Storage of Safety Related Items
The inspector inspected the four controlled lay down areas on site to
verify compliance to S&W storage procedure CMP 1.3 and 05-13.11. The
following are the areas inspected and conditions found:
a.
Northeast Pipe and Northeast Storage Areas
(1) Safety related (category - 1) Embeds with threaded ends and
nuts (received on material receiving report 81-4909). The
protective coating was deteriorating and some rusting was
evident.
S&W had the threads cleaned and recoated. This was
verified by the inspector.
_
_
_
__
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
(2) Pipe stock (safety related - category 1) the plastic . cover was
partially off.
These items were purchases on P.O. 11473. S&W
took appropriate corrective action.
(3) The inspector observed that several fabricated (Cu-Ni clad,
carbon steel pipe) spool pieces were covered with surface rust,
except for the shop circumferential welds. The inspector
informed the licensee that the method of fabrication will be
reviewed by a Region I specialist at a future inspection.
(4) The end caps were off of two pipe spool pieces (3PGS-1-4-2-2
and 3RSS-20-2-4-2).
Immediate corrective action was taken by
S&W.
(5) The inspector noted that a Cu-Ni service water pipe, identified
as a 3 SWP-25-3-6-3, was dented.
Inquiry determined that Stone
& Webster QC had not issued an unsatisfactory inspection report.
Stone & Webster took corrective action and issued an unsatisfactory
inspection report.
This item is considered unresolved pending
review of the S&W disposition of this damage by the NRC inspector.
(423/81-08-04).
b.
Safety Related (Category I) Electrical Reel Area-
The inspector found many discrepancies related to the storage of
electrical reels.
(1) Kerite (Manufacturer) reels identified as E-7643, G-3666,
H-4195, G-2885, G-3439, H-9228, B-185, B-871 and M-8421 did not
have the original protective covering that was placed on tne
reel when shipped from tne mariufacturer.
The only protective
covering was 90 lb. mir.eral slate roofing paper which did not
properly protect the cable from exposure to sunlight or weather.
The inspector noted that portions of cables were exposed at
time of inspection.
(2)
In addition, electrical reels identified as Kerite *H-9228 and
Anaconda #02689 did not have required " cable storage cards"
indicating the reel identification, supplier, order number,
item number, cable type mark number, length of cable on reel
when recieved and net length remaining (if applicable), as
required by the S&W engineering specification E-350.
(3) Anaconda black 3 conductor was found wound oi. Kerite cable reel
B-871.
No traceability of the Anaconda cable to purchase order
or certifications was available.
(4) The Kerite seven conductor 14 AWG black cable wocnd on Kerite
cable reel B-185 was not traceable to any quality control
documentation.
_
_
_
.
..
.
J
8
The inspector informed the licensee that the use of the 90 lb.
mineral slate roofing paper as electric cable reel protective
covering was contrary to the S&W construction storage procedure
CMP 1.3 and ASNI N45.2.2 which requires cover'ngs to be of flame
resistant material. The inspector also informed the licensee
that the other discrepancies noted in the storage of the category
I cables were contrary to the S&W storage procedures and engineering
specifications E-350.
This item is considered an item of noncompliance and contrary
to the requirements of criterion V, appendix B, of 10 CFR 50.
(423/81-08-01).
9.
Safety Related Structure Supports - Welding
a.
The inspector observed structural welding in different locations in
containment building to verify compliance with applicable weld
procedure and code requirements. The following specific items were
found:
(1) A weldor was weldiag a reactor coolant support in the "C"
cubicle in accordance with E&DCF. #FJ-32 32 and weld technique
W70G Rev. 3.
The inspector noted that no preheat was being
used or maintaineo. The item being welded was 2 inches thick
,
which, by procedure, required a minimum of 150 F preheat.
(2) A weldor welding a category 1 platform at elevation - 11' - 2",
in accordance with construction revision notice CH-MPS-2-01,
E&DCR Nos. PS-3334 and FS-5079 and weld technique W70J Rev. 1,
,
did not maintain or use the required minimum preheat of 150 F
for the thickness being welded (greater than 1 1/2 inches).
The inspector informed the licensee that the above was contrary
to criterion V, appendix B of 10 CFR 50 and it is considered an
item of noncompliance (423/81-08-02).
b.
The inspector observed structural welding in the engineered safety
features building to verify compliance with the requirements of
applicable weld procedures and codes. The following specific items
were noted:
Welding of containment recirculation cooler supports was observed in
two different locations (well joints identified as RSS-EIA-D, field
numbers 15 and 1A).
In each casa S&W weld technique W5S, Rev. 0 was
.ieing used.
[ The inspector questioned S&W reprear'nives on the absense of a
minimum preheat of 150 F normally requireo for the material being
used (low alloy steel - ASTM A.588, Grade B) in the thickness range
of 3/16" to 5 1/4".
The inspector also noted that this material was
not listed as an ASME approved material for Settion II, Subsection
-
,
.
.-
- - .
-
.-
.
,
-.
.
..
.
.
9
NF component support. The S&W welding engineer informed the inspector
that a code case, No. N-71-9, was issued modifying subsection NF to
i.llow the use of this material. This resulted in issuing Revision 1
- o weld technique sheet No. WSS on 5/1/81 which included the appropriate
preheat requirements. However, inadequate document control procedures
resulted in the actual use of technique sheet W S, Rev. O for the
work observed.
The technique actually used did not contain the
required preheat procedure.
The inspector informed that licensee
that all welds performed on ASTM A 588 material under Revision 0 of
technique W5S were of questionable quality with respect to delayed
cracking, and further evaluation or analysis would be required to
determine their acceptability.
The inspector informed the licensee that failure to follow prescribed
procedures is contrary to criterion VI, appendix B of 10 CFR 50 and
is considered an item of noncompliance (423/81-08-03).
10. Plant Tours
The insper, tor observed work activities in progress, completed work and
construction status in several areas of the plant. The inspector examined
work for any obvious defects or noncompliance with regulatory requirements
or license conditions.
Particular note was taken of the presence of
Quality Control Inspectors and Quality Control evidence such as inspection
records, material identification, nonconforming material identification,
housekeeping & equipment preservation.
Specifically, the inspector
observed various preparations for concrete and/or fill operations for the
following:
cooling water discharge tunnel, (form erection, rebar placement,
membrane installation and fill after placement); auxiliary and engineered
safety feature ' slabs and walls, (rebar erection, embed placement, drains,
electrical ducts and grounds); main steam valve building walls and slabs,
fuel building and pipe tunnel walls and slabs.
The inspector also observed the installation of cable trays and their
supports in the various category I buildings.
Fireproofing with pyrocrete
- 102 in the control building was also observed.
No items of nonconcomplaince were identified during the various plant
tours conducted, however, the following conditions were observed:
a.
On the containment dome liner plate located approximately at elevation
145' and 5' to the right of azimuth 210 , a fillet weld for a liner
temporary attachment appeared to be not cleaned of slag after the
burning operation. S&W engineering instructions require that after
burning the attachment (1/2" remaining) and cleaning the fillet
welds they are to be magnetic particle examined in accordance with
ASME code requirements. The inspector questioned whether the welds
were cleaned and examined.
S&W is investigating this with the
containment fabricator. This item is unresolved pending review of
the results of S&W investigation (423/81-08-05).
,
_
_
_
__.
..
,
..
.
,
10
b.
The inspector noted that the two residual heat remove (RHR) exchangers
located in the ESF building did not have a nitrogen purge (on one
heat exchanger the gage read zero pressure and the other did not
have a gage installed). A review of maintenance records indicated
that the purge was removed on 3/19/81, in accordance with a S&W
interoffice memorandum Field Quality Control did not reply to concur
or add any provision for this action. The Westinghouse storage
criteria for these heat exchangers required either a desicant or
inert gas blanket in the carbon steel, shell side, when the storage
is greater than 6 months. The bottom covers on both heat exchangers
j
were removed to inspect the inside on 8/13/81 after the inspector
informed the licensee of the problem. No corrosion pitting or
i
moisture was noted on the tube sheets. The insides were cleaned and
,
I
the covers reinstalled. Although the six month limit had not been
exceeded, the inspector infcrmed the licensee that their controls
c
for storage maintenance requirements need to be that equipment
stored at intended locations still receive the required storage
maintenance. This item is unresolved pending completion of l kensee's
review (423/81-08-06).
11. Management Meetings
At periodic intervals during the course of this insrection, meetings were
held with senior plant management to discuss the scope and findings of
,
this inspection.
l
12. Unresolved Items
Unresolved items are matters about which more 11 formation is required in
'
order to ascertain whether they are acceptab1r. items, items of noncompliance,
or deviations. Unresolved items disclosed di. ring the inspection are
discussed in Paragraphs 8 and 10.
-
. .
.
..
_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _