ML20128P280
| ML20128P280 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 05/28/1985 |
| From: | Jaudon J, Mcneill W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20128N263 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-458-85-40, NUDOCS 8506030500 | |
| Download: ML20128P280 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000458/1985040
Text
.
k
!
$ APPENDIX B
b. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
NRC Inr.pection Report: 50-458/85-40 Construction Permit: CPPR-145
Dockett 50-458
Licensee: Gulf States Utilities
P. O. Box 2951
Beaumont, Texas 77704
Facility Name: River Bend Station
Inspection At: River Bend Site, St. Francisville, Louisiana
Inspection Conducted: April 15-1 and April 29 - May 3, 1985
.
Inspector: I 16 ($
eactor Inspector, Project Date '
Reactor Project Branch 1
Approved: s ///// M
J P./Jaud , 'ChieT,9roject Section A,
Sh
Date
act(or P ject Branch 1
Inspection Summary
Inspection Conducted April 15-19 and April 29-May 3, 1985 (Report 50-458/85-40)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of action on previous
inspection findings. The inspection involved 47 inspector-hours onsite by
one NRC inspector.
R_esul ts: Within the one area inspected, two violations were identified (high
strength steel bolts preload and inspection records, paragraph 2).
.
8506030500 850528
PDR ADOCK0500g58 R
G
/
,
__. . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ .
s .
4
4
-2-
!
,
DETAILS
.
3 1. Persons Contacted
Gulf States Utilities (GSU)
J *J. E.- Booker, Manager of Engineering and Li.
- T. L. Crouse, QA Manager
i *J. C. Deddens. Vice President, River Bend Nuclear Group
- *I. M. Malik, Supervisor, Quality Engineering
i *R. B.' Stafford, Director, Quality Services
- P. F. Tomlinson, Director of Operations QA
- D.' Barry, Superintendent, Site Engineering Group (SEG)
- M. Berow, Field Quality Control (FQC) Inspector ;
,
G. Byrnes, Assistant Superintendent, FQC
J. Culbreth, Construction Supervisor
j *B. R. Hall, Assistant Superintendent, FQC
- R. Philippi, FQC Engineer
! J. Rigsby, FQC Supervisor
,
D. Scheele, FQC Engineer
- R. L. Spence, Resident QA Manager
W. T. Tucker, Assistant Superintendent, SEG
- T. M. Years, Structural Engineer
'
The NRC inspectors also contacted other site personnel including
administrative, clerical, construction, and inspection personnel.
- Denotes those attending the exit interview conducted on April-19, 1985.
, Both of the NRC senior resident inspectors for construction and operation '
j also attended this meeting.
, 2. Action on Previous Inspection Findings
>
(Closed) Open Item (458/8426) - As a followup to a Construction Appraisal
Team finding, a sample of 200 bolts were torque tested. The S&W sampling
4 inspection plan was used; this inspection plan is a modified Mil-Std 1050
'
sampling plan. Table 1 dercribes the 200-bolt sample. With the exception
, of 6 bolts, all were 7/8-inch, galvanized, A325 bolts, in nonbearing type <
-connections. All bolts were inspected with the same " Job Inspection
Torque" (JIT) used originally to verify preload as identified on the
inspection report (IR) issued for a connection. The S&W specification
i 210.310 requires high strength bolts to be installed and inspected to the
!
"Research Council on Riveted and Bolted Structural Joints" (RCRBSJ). The
preload of bolts may be verified or inspected by one of three methods. .
_One method is by observation of the installation and ccunting the turns t
(e.g. ,1/3 turn). This is called the " turn-of-the-nut" method. The
i
l
!
,
'w !
.
'
.
, ' -3-
of load indicating washers (LIWs), which have dimples that deform at a
given load and result in a specific gap between the bolt head and the LIW.
This is called the direct tension indicator method. A third method, used
by S&W during early construction at River Bend, was the job inspection
torque method. In this method, three bolts each day were tested by
preloading the bolts and the torque was established that was necessary to
turn the nut or head 5 degrees. The average of the three bolts was then
called the JIT. This JIT was then applied after bolts were installed.
Specification 210.310 preferentially identifies the JIT method over the
turn-of-the-nut for inspection. From mid 1982 and on the the present
S&W had used LIWs.
The results of the 200-bolt sample are summarized in table 2. .Eight
significant failures were identified. A significant failure was any bolt'
that turned at 90% or less the JIT. The 10% allowance was for any
relaxation that might have occurred. These findings indicate that preload
was not present in all cases, and this was identified as a violation
(458/8540-01). S&W has resampled the activities of one inspector and to
date 48 failures (defined as less than 100% of JIT) in 802 bolts of 179
connections were found. It is noteworthy that of the 48 failures were
found in 38 connections with 6 connections having more than one half of
the bolts in the connection as failures.
During this inspection of the 200-bolt sample, a number of documentation
errors were identified. Examples of these errors are:
- The number of bolts found in connections and also detailed on
drawings did not agree with the number of bolts reported as inspected
on three irs (S1201447, 1564, and 1575) in nine different
connections.
- The connections of element 1-382 to the south wall embedment
described on IR S1201564 did not exist as an embedment connection.
- A connection identified on the markup drawing (a drawing used to
relate connections to irs) as to have been inspected on S1200884 was
dated on the steel with the same date as IR S1202017 not the date of
IR 51200884. However, neither IR S1202017 nor S1200884 identified
this connection.
- A connection of element 1-93C1 to an extension of 1-24B4 was found
. "with an inspection date marked on the steel yet the markup drawing
did not document such an inspection.
In order to quantify this problem, a second sample of seven irs rep-
resentative of the work of six inspectors was reviewed and the connections
inspected. The review and inspection was to identify any documentation
errors. No torque testing of bolts was performed. The results are
P
L. .-
n . ,
7
. .
-+
, c ,; ..
.,. .w.
..
,
%. ; ,
'
,
, -4-
s. .
,l ,,
l" '
summarized in table 3. Each.IR was found to have some measure of errors.
Of the 61 connections checked, only 32 were found to be free of
,
documentation errors.. The most common error was the failure to describe
the number.of bolts in a connection accurately. This was identified as a
violation'(458/8540-02). A review of " Quality Control Instructions,"
.,
" Quality. Standards," and " Inspection Plans" established that inspection
was to record the connection-description, number of bolts / connection and
number of bolts inspected (10% of the bolts installed but at least 2 per
. con'nection). 'In 1ddition, the applicable IR was to be recorded on a set
'of; mark.up drawirgs. irs were to be reviewed for. completeness and
,
accuracy.' It was also an unofficial practice to paint mark the connection
-
with the date and inspector's initials. .
The calibration records of the Skidmore/Wilhelms equipment used to~ .
y establish the JIT were reviewed. A number of out of tolerance reports had. >
'
been. issued on this equipment, however, no pattern appeared. A sample of4
,
-
. certified material ~ test reports of_the bolts were also reviewed.
. TABLE 1: -200 Piece Sample
,
Inspection Report No. Connections Sampled Bolts Sampled
c. 2204. 7 14
-
2177 S' 12
2168*
'
3 6
J2027- '
5. - 12 1
'2023- . 7 34J
"
2017 5 10
2013 11 '
34 ~
2011 2 ,. 6 i ,
- 1871 5
8 -
'
1657~ 9 18 .
3l
' '
'
_1575 - 1 -
9.
r 1564; 3 , 11 .
1447 4 16 ~ '
,, 1221 5 10
- 0nly black bolts and also'only bearing type connection, all others
~
, A325 Galvanized 7/8" bolts.
^
< . TABLE 2: Failures In Sample
>
' .
'
Inspection
Report ,
JIT Connection Slip Reading %
~
1657 375: 1-27C2 to 1-52C2 85% of JIT
1-52B2 to 1-11187 59
4
4
S
.
' '
g .- ~
..
"
,
_
, ,,
,
- e
,
,s,
..; I** -
_
'
' , ' V,
c
-
,-
- "~, . ,!) _
N' s - 4
,
-
.
_
c _
, 7 _
. "s, -
- '
, > -5-
..
-
O - -
-
r
'f
L,4 n :< ,
. . < ,
. . ,
'
,
~'; .
-
. .1-26C3 to 1-11186 27
' ' 2023
.
.m, .4
'
m - . , 320 , ~3-1085, 3-2582 to 3-1181 88 ;
'.. , ~3-1085,'3-2682.to 3-1181 _ 78- s
',1 c' -
3-1085, 3-2682 to 3-1181' 69 ,
,
,
,1575l . c -320 , 1-75B1,' 2-47H2 to 1-67B1 56 < _
s
e 1564. ,
-
300 1-382 to Embed North Wall- 70 -
TO
'
,. .
-
,
'
iAverage "T/% , ,
- , .
,. . .
,
+.".. g ' '4
. _
'
-. %ca;rTABLE'3: :
- Documentation Errors- -
n ,
,
' : 7- .
^
< .
1
Number of .
y-2f g ' Chnnections Checked 1 Connections Error
'
h 512'01221 . 14
-
,52-10 to 2-3482
52-8 to S2-10
The mark up
drawing did not' '
-
!_ -
.
-
'-
'
- S2-8 to 52-16B2. agree with the IR ..
- ~( S3-35 to 2-1585-1. (mark up error)"
'-
- "
4 S2-6 to S3-35. "
m -
- w , ,S2-4=to 2-3084
-
.c
'
.
52-8 to 52-10 The' number of
1. . -
S2-10 to 2-3482 ' bolts / connection.
W
,
'
1
a '
S3-35.to 2-1585-1 *
on the IR did-
,.
,'
S2-1 to:2-1583-2< not' agree with'the
M
~
2,
.c . ,
, actual number installed'
', -a f. . .
, , y, t - (bolting error)-
L *J ,
?
,o
-
- ,
- ,
- ,
., ,
' ,
"
,' t
'SZ-10 to 2-3482 The connection
l'
'
' '
. . <
'
- .
- .sde'scription of
9- O ' -
imembers on the.
(
,
.
IR does_not agree
'
-
. ~t
, ,, _
,
-* .
'
, ,
! ., with the installed
,
,7
'
,l ~ ' - <
1
a . condition (connec-
'
t ' - ' -
- tion description
,pi .
, Y ,/ -
, 'irror)
. > - , . .<
, , , ,
o "$,b '
1201420 . 6-
'
1-2781 to 1-26B2' Connection
". , 1-27B1 to 1-2683
'
description error
' ' ,
- ' 1-2781 to' embed - 1 '
.1-2882-to embed
'
.,-
'c c1 ,
'
'.- .
2-2482 to 2-2481' Bolting error' ,
,
'
d- l+ ,
4 ',. #
, -
- ,
o
'
,4r ' ' 4- i
' ,/ -
9
' ' '
,, ,
.
I N
, ,
h ' /
v?); ,
m m ._.h____
'
m m _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . ._ ._____.________._._______.__l__.____________
IIfm, e., ['~
"
+ - ' '
.
[,,
Nyg.M. 7M N. n.N, : , n. , . ,4, , ,.
.
..
. y;.:M%c3 u . w-ibsl mpg ' ,
,
u.p --
x :, . . e -
e ':
(3 p_. .a..
.. .
,
. y- ..
-
.
,
15-
bi;$ ,!20 .~r y f Me;q s y tg -
<hy? - < . y -y ; .
.t' 44'k.1
'-
'
+. ? > -
,
'
....'A . : c ,
- *
6~ ' '
Q Q y, gf ; ' 5[,6 f ( . -
,
- ' ' - '
"
f
,y... . M(,,' +-; , y ;, , 1 3 xt .., 9 .g u ' *
, ,.
,
,
c
, 7
.: ,
..g
_
,
.x, , 4 ,
, , -
~ , ..;
y q: '
7' (" , ,
,
r. . , . . . : - 'g: 1201553 - n ^10, 4. -
,
1-1782'to 1-3482 - '- - Bolting error- .e ' s '
4,u.1-~r', ,
4
, . . , , ' '1-3582 to 1-21C1
-
- - * - .
g* y'
%/ 1, .
x .
1-3483
t
to 1-3381 <
- M
u .-
4_, t *
' ' ' ' ' "
,
- $1201598 4
.
~
5
'
'1-69C2 to_16981-
-
Bolting erro'r. '
,
.c ,
-
^2-2481 to 2-2388 4
'
.
- ,- , L2-2481 to Embedt .
-
', .
- e . ,
s ,,
.
'
,
- .
.,
,
-
'
% 2-24811to Embed'+ Mark up error. ,
'
of +
[ l n.. - I1201686l n1 1-b82t'o. 53P1 Mark ~up error ,
x
%l . . - - - o . n.
N
,
"
-2-784 to-2-882 4 Inspector'.s initials
~
<
1201780 ;14 '
' y, "
. 1
'2-784 thru 2-881 . on steel did not *
agree with the IR.
~
m
'
s to-2-686
x.. ,
4
~
- ; - S1201938 10 : 1-28C3L to Embedment Bolting error S
'
'
'
1-28C3R to Embedment *
"
.
..
'1-28C3R to 1-2883 <
#3- 1-2981 to Embedmont
.M . 1-2982 to Embedment. .
l .T "
4
1-2883 to 1-1281
t- 'l-2883 to-1-981 W ; e! x ..
>
, , a: .
" '
M 1-28C3L to'Embedment' >
Connection
0 '
1-28C3R'to Embedment description-
,V> .
mc ' '
.1-2981'to Embedment . error ;
' '
-
,, .
- 1-2982 to Embedment -
, ,
.
,
;
-
,
-
,
u
a e .
4 .
.. '
3. ! Exit Interview ,
'
-
g.. . .
'
-
JAn exit interview was conducted on' April 19, 1985, withtho's'el personnel -
w , denoted?in paragraph 1.of.this report. At this exit interview the NRC
'
., inspector summarized the' scope and findings of this inspection. -
tu 5 , .,s
,
a w y.
E ;qv '
,Y *
,
8
e' . - ,
'
.
,., .
. , .
-
t
.. J6 (k., P'
.s-
-
h..
*
c. , ,
e_ i
-
St ,
py,rf ,r Q~ ' 3. , . '
g => ' ,c.
<
,
:y % l <. n x. . j* ;
? ;- l ' ,,
,1- +. ,- %
- t . 't
.
i 5 s , ,
1
.
h f. g
*'* j1 '4 % + "
j/* y, J. !
,,.# t s
-
_
u , =
,
., - g . 9 /
.y g1' . ,T , yr. +, t s p
* *
i r
,
" l =* s . . * * v w
* ?t ' y , g, ,g.f
^I \ L~ " '
> -' '
b-y u .. .
' 4
. , . .* ,
r *-
o , j_ , . < > ss k-
l
c ;j f. #n ; . " ^ t; - 1. ' .a
n,
,
g ;- e .y . g- ~.r *,r , y~g-
,
,
. I ^;p ._;
'
[*s, ,.
'
n-
y .
- . . . . . ,
,'
,
' '
A.; W
. ,g
~
a,, _r.,. ,,. ,- ~ej >lt .
+ ..
_
,
! - # ~
. /
'
,s.
-_'l !
* ' } _
. .
, . _ . l_
.
}}