Text

Insp Rept 50-298/88-10 on 880404-07.Violation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Welding Activities,Allegation Assessment & Previously Identified Insp Findings
	ML20151W499
Person / Time
Site:	Cooper
Issue date:	04/25/1988
From:	Barnes I, Gilbert L; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20151W468	List: ML20151W465; ML20151W489; ML20151W499;
References
	50-298-88-10, NUDOCS 8805030413
	Download: ML20151W499 (5)
	v • d • e

.

'

<:,,

_ , i

APPENDIX B

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULA10RY COMMISSION

, ~REGION IV

NRC Inspection Report: 50-298/88-10 Operating License: DPR-46

Docket: 50-298

Licensee: Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD)

P.O. Box 499

Columbus, NE 68601

Facility Name: CooperNuclearStation(CNS)

Inspection.At: CNS, Nemaha, NE

Inspection Conducted: April 4-7, 1988

/

Inspector: //Sf/TI

L. 0. Gilbert, Reactor Inspector, Materials Uate '

and Quality Programs Section, Division of

Reactor Safety

Approved: /- 434 Y 2.6

~

Date

f .jBarrps, [hief, Materials and Quality

frograms Section, Division of Reactor Safety

Inspection Summary

Inspection Conducted April 4-7, 1988 (Report 50-298/88-10)

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of licensee action on

previously identified inspection findings, welding activities, and allegation

assessment.

Results: Within the three areas inspected, one violation was identified

(failure to perform Quality Assurance surveillance to verify that welding is

conducted in accordance with procedures, paragraph 3).

8805030413 880427

PDR ADOCK 05000298

O DCD

>

. . . ,

. .

2

DETAILS

.

1. Persons Contacted

NPPD

G. R. Horn, Division Manager of Nuclear Operations

G. E. Smith, Quality Assurance (QA) Manager

E. M. Mace, Engineering Manager

R. A. Jansky, Outage and Modification Manager

D. M. Norvell, Maintenance Manager

J. M. Meacham, Senior Manager, Technical Support

J. Hilgenkamp, Lead Mechanical Engineer

G. R. Smith, Licensing Supervisor

J. L. Smith, Technical Weld Specialist

L. E. Bray, Regulatory Compliance Specialist

Bechtel Energy Corporation

P. M. Steeb, Bechtel Field Engineer

Power Plant Maintenance (PPM)

J. Hearn, Welding Coordinator

Southwest Engineering Corporation (SEC0)

T. Love, Quality Control Inspector

NRC

W. R. Bennett, Senior Resident Inspector

E. A. Plettner, Jr. , Resident Inspector

The NRC inspector also interviewed other licensee and contractor employees

during the inspection.

Denotes those attending the exit interview.

2. Licensee Action on Previously Identified Inspection Findings (92701

and 92702)

(Closed) Open Item (298/8720-01): Editorial Discrepancies Concerning

Revisions to the Welding Procedure Specifications in Maintenance

Procedure 7.7

The welding procedure specifications in Maintenance Procedure 7.7 have

been rewritten and issued as separate procedures. The NRC inspector

-__ . - -

-

..

,

s,.

3

reviewed 13 of the revised procedures. No revision inconsistencies were

identified in the new procedures.

This open item is considered closed.

(Closed) Unresolved Item (298/8720-02): Technical Discrepancies in

Procedures with Materials Requiring Notch Toughness Properties - The

licensee has reviewed the applications of the procedures containing

technical discrepancies and determined that the safety-related welds that

are in the facility were performed within the qualified ranges of the

procedures. The technical discrepancies in WPS P1-B and NPS P1-G have

l

been corrected and the prccedures rewritten and rectalified. The licensee

, has deleted WPS P1-F (CVN) because it was applicabie to a single plant

j modification, which has been completed.

This unresolved item is considered closed.

(

l (Closed) Violation (298/8720-03): Failure to Perform a Required

Examination - During this outage, the welds for the replacement of valve

RWCU-MOIS were liquid penetrant examined in accordance with the

l

. construction code, ASME Section III,1983 Edition through Sumer 1983

i

Addenda. One weld was rejected, repaired by filing the surface, and

accepted after reexamination. The repaired weld also passed the ASME

Section XI inservice inspection examination using the liquid penetrant

method. The licensee has issued Station Procedure 0.30, "ASME Section XI,

Repair / Replacement Program" to ensure that similar violations do not

occur.

This violation is considered closed.

I 3. Welding Activities (55050 and 55100)

l

'

a. Welder Qualification

The NRC inspector reviewed the welders qualification program for

contract welders qualified for making safety-related welds. The NRC

inspector noted that the method of documenting the qualification of

,

the Power Plant Maintenance (PPM) welders was not adequately

l specified in the NPPD Station Procedure for Welder Performance

Qualification, Procedure 7.7.2.1.

This is an open item pending the issuance of a change to

Procedure 7.7.2.1 to clarify the administrative controls associated

with the qualification of contract welders and the documentation of

actual test conditions by the person conducting the test. l

(293/8810 01)

b. Observation of Work Activities i

The NRC inspector observed safety-related activities associated with

fabricating supports for two design changes. In addition to

l

!

r

. .. . ..

l

4

observing weldments for the supports, the following related documents

were reviewed:

(1) Design Change 87-113

Maintenance Work Request 88-1156

Weld Checklist 88-292 '

f

Pipe Support Orawing SX933N

Pipe Support Drawing SK924N

Receipt Inspection Report for P.O. 264295

Station Procedures 7.7.16, WPS for PI-STRUCT

(2) Design Change 87-063

Maintenance Work Request 88-1049

Weld Checklist 88-362

Drawing SKE-HV-12

OSC No. 4 to DC 87-063

CMTR for P.O. 264295 (E7018)

Station Procedure 7.7.13 WPS for AWSD1.1

In the areas inspected, the work was consistent with the design

requirements, the weld filler material was that required by the weld

procedure specification (WPS), the welders were qualified for the

WPS, and the entries on the weld checklist were consistent with the

status of the work. However, the welders were not familiar with the

WPS and the foreman of the welders performing the work did not have a

copy of the WPS in the work area. The NRC inspector determined that

QA surveillances had not been performed in this aree if special

processes. control and the surveillance checklists were r.ot available

for accomplishing surveillances to assure that special processes are

conducted in accordance with written and approved procedures,

drawing, and/or instructions.

This is an apparent violation for failure to perform QA surveillances

is conducted in accordance with written and

to verify that

approved welding (298/8810-02)

procedures.

4. Allegation Followup (99014)

(Technically closed) Allegation (4-88-A-022): An allegation was made to

the NRC that PPM welders for the moisture separator modification work

were: (a) welding test plates in other than the proper position to

qualify for the horizontal, vertical, and overhead positions, and

(b) welding test plates for other welders who were not able to qualify

themselves. The alleger later provided the names of two PPM welders who

the alleger did not believe could pass the qualification tests.

The NRC inspector interviewed eight PPM welders, interviewed the person

conducting welder performance qualification testing for PPM, reviewed the

welder performance qualification logs for testing of PPM welders, and

- _ _ _ _

e ,7, .

}" .

5

observed the qualification testing of PPM welders that were welding in the

vertical and overhead positions.

The safety analysis report for CNS classifies the moisture separators as

nonessential; therefore, the moisture separators are not safety-related.

Southwest Engineering Corporation (SECO) is contracted to perform the

modifications to the moisture separators. SEC0 is using PPM welders who

pass the performance qualification test for four'SEC0 welding procedures.

The NRC inspector reviewed the qualifications of the two PPM welders

who were alleged had others complete their qualifications tests because

they were unable to pass the qualification tests. The two welders were

documented as qualified for welding the moisture separators but did not

pass all the qualification tests and therefore, were limited to one or two

l* of the four SECO welding procedures. One of the two welders had all

qualifications cancelled on March 16, 1988, for unacceptable workmanship

on the moisture separator welds. _

The remaining PPM welders used for welding the nonsafety-related moisture

separators are qualified to SEC0 welding procedures and would have to be

retested using NPPD welding procedures before welding any safety-related.

work.

Tiicre was no information provided during the interviews of already

qualified welders that would indicate that the test plates used in their

original qualifications were not positioned as required by procedure and

therefore the (a) portion of the allegation could not be substantiated.

in regard to the (b) portion of the allegation, while it was not

l

conclusively verified that welders other than those documented as

'

qualified made the test coupons as alleged, it does appear.that at least

one of the two welders identified by the alleger as unqualified may not

have been able te pass the test. The allegation is therefore considered

to be partially substantiated. As noted above, the welded components

involved are not safety-related and thus not within the licensee's QA

program nor within the normal regulatory purview of the NRC. There were

no additional technical issues in this allegation.

5. Exit Interview

j The NRC inspector summarized the inspection scope and findings on April 7,

1988, with those persons identified in paragraph 1.

The licensee was notified on April 15, 1988, that the QA surveillance of

! welding activities wss being changed from an open item to an apparent

f violation.

l

<

s

ML20151W499

Text

Navigation menu

Search