ML20205F135
| ML20205F135 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Limerick  |
| Issue date: | 03/17/1987 |
| From: | Kowalski S PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| To: | Murley T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8703310094 | |
| Download: ML20205F135 (5) | |
Text
W:
s y.
,,e e
cn g.y" iN 2E76023430 y
f, j
)
) HILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY R
'c
/.
,( 6, 2301 M ARKET STREET N...\\
N,'\\,'
\\ ^.
^
'\\ I P.O. BOX 8699 L
O h;
PHILADELPHIA. PA.19101
, g.
y Q% -
S,J. M O 90
(%
'4. ( i h '.
..y...-P R E SI D E P, /'
VIC(
9...
E..t
,,r,,17, 1,g,
- V
(,
.l Mrs Th'o;Ind'E. Murley].,Di7petor s.
y' i Ut } te'P Stat /*s, Net. lear Regulatory Commission
'5 0f fi@Fard 1v n eof Inspectio'n & Enforcement, Region I eu.
\\,
- 631, King of Prussia,' P6<,
19406 s'
\\
'hr b.'\\
Subject:
[qfNRC IE Region I Letter Dated February 17, 1987 s
\\.
.7 s
)I
') 2'
'\\ '
RD Site Inspection of December 22, 1986 to February 2, 1987
-)
i t
Inspection Report No. 50-353/86-21
'N Limerick Generating Station, Unit 2 y
s.
(,n l'
. kile ': QUAL l-2-2 (353/86-21)
NN
.(
T.
Dear Mr.Murley:
3 i.,
t-g InsIlaoonse to the subject letter regarding the items identified during the sub' ect".fnanction of construction activities authorized by NRC License No.
j 2-i Ke g; ) @/C\\9P.kl0f we' t'ri6: smit herewith the following:
g: '
y
~
[ - (X'tCd y%) ave any, questions concerning these items, t
' Attachment I - Response to Appendix A 3
Y Sho
, ter discCas riam with you.
1 I
V ti "s
Sincerely
- i. [
]<,
'.';')
N f
t
,5 S.!. Kowalski
..)
\\NtT/pc
/r f
~,, Attachment s
Copy toi ;Mirector of Inspection and Enforcement
[p c iUnited States Nuclear Regulatory Commission ly, Wash!ry; ton, DC 20555 t.
g' E., Gramm, USNRC Resident Inspector 4
.c 5..
8703310094 &70317 PDA ADOCK 05000353
>}' G 'N, PDR l
\\\\
l Ec o \\
w.
.. m.,
~
r*
2
.- x J
2E76023430 tp w g ;s bec:
M.'Iyer, Bechtel s.
G..C. Bell, Bechtel - LCS s
f1>
K. G. Stout, Bec.htel a LGS t
~'
J. S. Kemper c
v go, S. J. Kowalski e~
5
't:
L. B. P rih Y
~ hr...(*'
E. J. Bradley
.. r 5
T. P. Gotzis J. J. Clarey J. M. Corcoran P. K. Pavlides
^f D. B. Fetters
~ G. R. Hh:t 3
Project File (DAC NG-8)
C. J. McDermott 1// : - if i
G. T. Brecht s
ss
't s.
'1 3
t g-k " s.
,s, e
W 9
N
-w
,5
't f
C.
r 1
'i S.
ky fh I
s i-li
'k.
3 r
e t
\\'
g 6
g
-p w
e
e, e..
7 3'
u 2E76023430 e
Attachment I N
I
. Response to Appendix A - Item A Violation
'N 10 CFR 50, Appendix B Criterion VI and the Limerick Preliminary Safety Analysis Report Appendix D.4.13 require that measures be established
~to control;the,. issuance of documents which prescribe activities affecting
. quality..
Contrary to the above, as of January 16, 1987, an unverified and unapproved document containing' design and vendor data, which prescribed activities affecting quality, was created and issued to the Bechtel' Electrical 72 Construction Engineering Cable Group to provide input data for the performance of cable pull. tension calculations.
1
- Response-
. w-The unverified-and unapproved document containing cable' design and vendor data is no longer in use. Both Construction Engineers and Quality Control
- (-
. Engineers have been-instructed that the source of design and vendor data Ah is the approved, controlled project. documents.
- The cable pull tension calculations that were prepared using the unapproved document were reviewed.- Where required, the calculations were revised.
- The cable pulls associated with the revised calculations had not been made.
Therefore, the hardware was not af fected.
i:
- 1
. l'4l a
I b
t d
I 1/2 353 86-21
=
- NA ~
2E76023430 Attachment'I
' Response to Appendix A - Item B
< Violation 10 CPR 50i Appendix B Criterion III and the Limerick Preliminary Safety Analysis Report Appendix D.6.2.1 require that drawings affecting quality are reviewed - for, technical adequacy. Further,_Bechtel Engineering
. Department Procedure EDP-4.58 requires that supplier documents _ and '
equipment'are reviewed to assure compliance with the Bechtel design.
Contrary to the above, on January 16, 1987,- shop welds on the Residual Heat Removal heat exchanger support gusset plates,.were as shown on Bechtel approved vendor drawing 8031-C-41A-292-6, rather than as depicted
~
on associated Bechtel design drawing C-196, Revision 13.
Response
NCR - 11,583 was issued to document the fact that only two sides on a gusset plate of the Residual' Heat -Removal heat exchanger support steel was welded
'by the vendor.and not.four sides as required by Bechtel Drawing 8031-C-196.
The existing condition was reviewed and determined to be adequate. NCR-ll,583
- has been dispositioned "Use-As-Is".
The vendor drawings prepared from design drawing 8031-C-196 were reviewed. -Minor discrepancies were noted.
-_ Each was evaluated and design drawing 8031-C-196 was revised to reflect the as built condition.
LTo determine if additional draf ting errors existed in drawing 8031-C-196, the Field Change Requests that were incorporated into this drawing were reviewed. No additional-draf ting errors were noted,
^Since 8031-C-196 was revised'to reflect as-built conditions, no reinspection by Quality Control is required for the RHR Heat Exchanger support steel. An instruction has been issued to all Quality Control. Engineers to use the.
' design drawing to perform inspections when the same information is shown on both the vendor and the design drawings. We are in the process of reviewing other vendor drawings that have been used for inspections to assure the
~
vendor drawings used are consistent with the design drawings. We expect to complete this review by May 1, 1987.
i c
b I
I i
JMC/pc I 2/2
.3/11/87 353 86-21
RECEWED-REGION 1 gg Hta.I9 Pg 1: 46 a
,