ML20044C479
| ML20044C479 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 04/13/1973 |
| From: | Crossman W, Mcfarland C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20044C467 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-92-569 50-324-73-02, 50-324-73-2, 50-325-73-02, 50-325-73-2, NUDOCS 9303230104 | |
| Download: ML20044C479 (7) | |
See also: IR 05000324/1973002
Text
.
..
.-
.
.
F
.
RO Inspection Report Nos. 50-325/73--2 and 50-324/73-2
Licensee: Carolina Power and Light Cowany
336 Fayetteville Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
Facility Names: Brunswick 1 and 2
Docket Nos. :
50-325 and 324
License Nos.:
CPPR-68 and CPPR-67
Category:
A2 and A3
Location: Southport, l' orth Carolina
Type of License: 821 Mae
Ek'R, G-E
Type of Inspection: Routine. Unannounced, Construction
Dates of Inspection: February 21-23, 1973
Dates of Previous inspection: January 16-19, 1973
Principal Inspector:
C. R. McFarland, Reactor Inspector
Facilities Section
Facilities Construction Branch
-
Accompanying Inspector:
W. D. Kelley, P4 actor Inspector
Engineering Section
Facilities Censtruction Branch
Other Accompanying Personnel: None
CW w
APR 131973
Principal Inspector:
by W. A Cn.smes
g
C. R. McFarland, Reactor Inspector
Date
Facilities Section
Fdeilities Constructio g g
b ** A C'
-
APR 13 m-
Reviewed By:
W. A. Crossman, Acting Senior Inspector
Date
Facilities Section
Facilities Construction Branch
_
9303230104 930202
0 'fEALI92-569
.
1
~
..
.
t
.
i
RO Rpt. Nos. 50-325/73-2
-2-
and 50-324/73-2
)
i
,
!
SUlttAkT OF FINDINGS
,
5
1.
Enforcement Action
'
r
A.
Violations
'
None
F
(
i
L.
Safety Items
e
None
II.
Licensee _A_ctien on Previously Identified Enforcement Matters
_
A.
Violations
l
t
72-3/A1
Cadweld Inspection Records and Cadweldor Qual _ification
Records (ROtII letter dated August 16, 1972)
~
_
_
!
Contrary to 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion X,
.
" Inspection," records had not been properly maintained
{
by the licensee.
t
Collated inspection recorda prepared by Brown and Root, Inc.
.
!
(B&R), are being analyzed by United Engineers and Constructors,
Inc. (UE&C).
A final report, in response to.the referenced
(
3
violations, will be prepared and issued by CP&L in the
near future.
(Details I, paragraph 4.b)
i
73-2/A1 _Use of Uncontrolled Documants (RO:II letter dated
November 3 1972),
x
'
\\
Contrary to 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, " Corrective
'i
Action," measuras have not been taken to delete referenced
uncontrolled doeursents from welding procedures prior to use
of the procedures for velding on safety related piping.
!
,
(Details II, paragraph 2)
'
B.
Safety Items
h
.1
None outstanding.
~i
,
I
t
i
i
i
-l
.
.
+
'
..
.
l
i
RO Rp t. Nos . 50-325/73-2
- 3-
and 50-324/73-2
t
Ill. Nea Unresolved Items
t
73-2/1 Temporary Pins and Bolts in Preloaded Spring Hangers Not Identified
!
I'
Warning tags and identification markings have been removed from
i
temporary pins and bolts in preloaded spring hangers.
(Details
II, paragraph 3)
,
'
'
73-2/2 Ionroper Installation of Main Steam Piping Hangers
.
I
Some clevis bolts are undersized, short, or have the threaded
portion in shear. One hanger clevis was wider than the hanger
rod and spacers had not been used to center the hanger rod.
,
(Details II, paragraph 3)
>
,
.
!!
!
IV.
Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Items
l
I
\\
~
73-1/1 Verification of Nuclear Valves to Design Specifications
l '
!
(RO:II letter dated June 30, 1972)
i
l
'
l
The licensee's letters of August 29 and September 29, 1972,
!
have transmitted information in partial fulfillment of our
requirements . The item vill rer.ain unresolved until
!
l
subsequent information is received relative to measurements
of all valves.
4
i
73-1/2 Limitorque Valve Operator Failures (RO:II letter dated
i
December 4, 1972)
'
The licensee's letter of January 9,1973, indicates that
l
CP&L is developing for Region II a program of corrective
<
actions that will be submitted within 90 days. This item
i
'
.
i
vill remain an unresolved item until their program can be
!
'
!
evaluated.
t
73-1/3 Differential Pressure (D/P) Cell Survejt
!
The use of D/P cells with the potential for erratic
!
performance vill be determined by the licensee and any
l
,
l
indicated corrective action will be initiated. This
!
I
,
item vill remain unresolved until information is subndtted
'
I
by the licensee.
t
!
,
!
_
b
r
,
_.
.
.,
.
,
.
t
..
i
.
.
RO Rp t. Nos . 50-325/73-2
-4-
and 50-324/73-2
,
V.
Design Cnanges,
.
_!
'
None
VI.-
Unusual occurrences
'
None
Other Si ni_ficant Findings _
VII.
f
A.
Prolact_S tatus
'
B&R estimated that the field construction of Unit 2 is 60%
'
complete and Unit 1 is 40: couplete. The site preparation
is S6% cornplete and the excavation and backfill is 97%
i
conelete.
(Details I. paragraph 2)
'
B.
Per_sonnel or Organizational Chan_ges
Tne reorganization of the project staff for E&R discussed in the
>
last inspection report has been put into effect.
A. M. Earnes Sr. ,
is the Project ManaFer and J. Dodd is the Assistant Project
Manager.
W. L. West, Jr. , the B&R QA Manager, has reorganized
,
i
the QA staff and is actively recruiting for additional
I
inspectors.
(Details I, paragraph 3)
'
!*
C.
J_et_P_uem Adaptor _ Repair
l-
'
The jet pump adaptors for both reactors have been retuoved to
repair deficient velds. Yne repair work is to be completed
i
by April 15, 1973, for Unit 2 and June 2,1973, for Unit 1.
The effect of this repair work on the project schedule has
i
not been assessed to date. B&R has consulted with the General
Electric Company (G-E), UE&C, and Huntington Alloy about the inconel
f
welds and the repair velding program.
(Details I, paragraphs
4 and 5)
,
D.
Cadweld Program
_
The B&R report of the data for the cadweld program has been sent
l
to UE&C. CP&L expects UEEC to develop a report to analyze the.
,
data and to present an integrated report for CP&L transrittal to ~
'
Region II. - (Details-I, paragraph 4.b)
,
I
I
l
'h
!
.
?
!
i
,
,_.
-
.
..
!
-
.
i
I
RO Rpt. Nos. 50-325/73-2
-5-
l
and 50-324/73-2
VIII. Management _ Inte_rview
A.
_A_t_ t._en_d_e_e_s
,
,
Carolina Power and Lirht Company JCP&L),
F. R. Coburn - QC Specialist
W. N. Phillips - QC Technician-
F. C. Strehle, Jr. - Quality Surveillance Specialist
P. C. Starmer - Resident Engineer, Construction
Brown and_ Root,_ Inc. (E&R)
A. M. Barnes
Sr. - Project Managar
.
J. Dodd - Assistant Project Manager
R. E. Gautreaux - Chief Project Engineer
l
W. L. West, Jr. - Project QA Manager
J. D. Williamson - Pipe Superintendent
A. M. Barnes , Jr. - Welding Sunerintendent
j
W. L. Bierwith - QC Engineer
W. C. Gum - QA Welding Engineer (Houston)
.
General Electric Cogany (G-El
I. B. Choate - QA Inspector
_ Unit _ed_ En,gineers_and _Const_ructo_rs Inc. _(UE&C),
'
n
J. M. McSpadden - QA Ens:ineer
'
T. U. Halecki - QA Specialist
'
E.
I t e_m_s_,,Di_a c_u_s s e d,
i
!
The following ite:ns were discussed by C. R. McFarland:
1.
The attendees were apprised of the general areas of
inspection of each inspector. The violations related to
the Cadweld program and the welding on safety related
'
piping vill renain open.
(Section II, Licensee Action
On Previously Identified Enforcernent Matters) Two
unresolved iteins related to piping hangers were identified
}
as requiring further exacination during subsequent
j
inspections.
(Section III, New Unresolved Iterm)
i
!.
- _
t
,
4
l
'
.,
e
R0 Rpt. Nos. 50-325/73-2
-6-
and 50-324/73-2
The new unresolved iters of the previous inspection will
renain unresolved until further information is received.
(Section IV, Status of Previously Reported Unresolved
Iters)
,
2.
The inspectors recognized the reorganization efforts by B&R
as an effort to hold the schedule for fuel loading for Unit 2
to be March 1974. To cowlete the construction efforts
,
required prior to the turnover of responsibilities fron
construction to operations for prestartup tests will require
an increased amount of QA work in all areas of work. Re gion
II will continue to sonitor the CP&L and constructor efforts
and schedules and Region II will schedule its work to emet
the needs of the project.
(Details I, paragraph 2)
3.
The principal inspector requested a copy of the recently
revised B&R QA/QC Procedures Manual. The request will be
referred to the CP&L Raleigh office.
4.
The progress of work related to the replacement of the jet
pump adaptors was reviewed. CP&L expects to issue an interin
report by February 28.
(Details I, paragraphs 4.s and 5)
5.
The B&R report of the Cadweld inspection records that was
sent to UE&C for analysis was reviewed cursorily during the
inspection.
CP&L expects the UE&C report to evaluate the
work to date and to recommend a suitable course of action.
(Details I. paragraph 4.b)
6.
The QA/QC program activities of CP&L and B&R appear to be
iglemented in a generally satisfactory manner. This
inspector reviewed numerous items related to the BLR
deficiency and disposition reporta (DDR) and the CPEL
surveillance menoranda (SM) . The tire required to obtain
corrective action on soce DDR's and SM's indicates a need
for more management action. The inspector was assured
that manageeent action and concern is quite evident onsite
even though its visibility is not documented.
(Details I,
paragraph 4)
The following items were discussed by W. D. Talley:
7.
The item under Enforcerent Action above was discussed in
detail.
(Details II, paragraph 2)
-
.s
.
.
. .
R0 Rpt. No. 50-325/73-2
-7-
and 50-324/73-2
8.
The inspector said that he had observed in preloaded
spring hangers. te:::norary pins and bolts which were
not properly identified to assure rer: oval prior to
plant operation.
CPLL answered that a SH had been
issued requiring that tecoorary pins and bolts in
hangers be identified. The inspector said that this would be
reexas ined on a subsequent inspection.
(Details II. paragrann 3)
9.
The inspector stated that he had observed vide elevis hancers
that did not have spacers to center the hanger rods in the
clovis and that he had also found clevic bolta whien had
their threads loaded iu shear.
The licensee replied that
UELC would perform a design review to determine whether
these ite:ns vera adequate for the intended service. The
inspector stated that this would be examined ou a subsequent
.
inspection.
(Details II, paragraph 3)
10.
The inspector stated that he was concerned about the high
rejection rare in welding and the high veldor turnover
which could have a serious ir.: pact on the quality of safety
related itecs. The licensee replied that CP&L nanagermnt
i
had been informed of the inspector's concern.
(Details II,
'
paragraph 4)
e
11.
CP&L was infor,cd that the insnector had reviewad SM
concerning previously identified questionable areas.
~,
He said that he had no further questions concerninp the
following iter,s :
a.
Repair of KHE darc. aged valves.
(Details II. parunrenh 5)
t
b.
Repair of overground buttselds on FJIR system.
(Details II,
paragraph f,)
!
Certification of spacer u.aterial used ou nain stecn
c.
piping.
(Details II, paragraph 7)
d.
Safety systers vining documentation.
(Details II,
paragraph C)
12.
The inspector stated ths.t he had nudited the new procedure
i
for documentation of welding of safety systems pipin; and
had no further questions.
(Details II, paragraph 9)
)
l
omer >
l
ROrEE
PA:H---
U * ~"
5"" "
CRMcParlandret~WACwm au
-
unt>
. . . . . . . . . . ....a..9/!]l7}
-
Torm AEC-SIS (Rev,9-53) AECM 0240
._
._.
eee
wa--26-sw6-1 me-ets
l
l
j
l
'
-