ML20214D930
| ML20214D930 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 10/08/1986 |
| From: | Pedleckas A, Quaka T COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| OL-A-139, NUDOCS 8705210545 | |
| Download: ML20214D930 (6) | |
Text
. SG - 4 $ N j / ~K
,.. s
/9 ' /3 7 Ms se, mm g a,w
/
SURVEILLANCE DATE:
March 13. 1986 FILE NO.
2790A.22S 37 go 21 P7 56 s2.1 e
BRAIDWOOD Q.A. SURVEILLANCE REPORT NO.
5624 vFF Contractor /
- 00Ci, Organization:
L.
K. Comstock
~
Category #: 15 SUBiEGI:
Closure of CECO NCR #451
SUMMARY
CECO NCR #451 originated when, upon receipt inspection, it was identified that a large percentage of system control corporation supplied hangers did not conform to AWS D.l.1 - 75 weld quality standards.
In turn, S&L requested reinspection of eighty (80) randomly chosen hangers to identify whether the weld quality deficiency existed in other system control corporation supplied hangers.
Two (2) S&L certified weld inspectors performed the reinspection.
Based upon weld maps generated (attached in NCR
- 451), S&L determined that no deficiencies of design significance were probable due to the weld quality concerns.
(Reference 12/13/84 Treece to Elias letter).
Upon review of the weld maps by QA, it was found that the hangers inspected correspond to the randomly chosen list by S&L and that the weld maps were prepared in an orderly manner.
Based upon this determination, no rework was necessary.
Corrective action to prevent recurrence was reviewed by QA 09/10/85 and found acceptable.
Additional deficiencies exist with system control corporation supplied hangers.
Specifically configuration and weld presence on the hangers do not conform to design requirements.
These deficiencies are currently being resolved via CECO NCR's #708 R/l and #709 R/1.
Upon review, Q.A.
found the NCR to properly disposition the nonconforming condition and corrective action to prevent recurrence adequate.
Based on this, this surveillance is closed and should be used as a basis for closure of NCR #451.
8705210545 861000 DR ADOCK 05000456 Reported by:
A / // e M
Date J
g Approved by Date
/Y fh AMP /kab (3146S) cc:
W. J. Shewski/K.
J. Hansing D.
L.
Shamblin Contractor A. M.
Padleckas Q. A. File 2790A.22S r
Q.G. 52.1 #451 ggg[I5vYjd*/{
FOR INFORMATION ONY
= U -(Rev. 8) 5-21-e2
=
//.s/
g NONCONFORMANCE REPORT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND TEST
.a m.
Station or Site LocationNA A vei'el
/
,_.fl_
C=*a85 (8m me m i e u... s isim ~ ni s. u...
.. 3 3 =,c..- o o,................ c o
. e....,
........o.,.,,2, b,(7 />[ d D #/>
bdri 4( /* uld d m q
$ bi m<s4 d 5 E 1 t v 3f t.g. e w t
.,/
,w.4L.../ bpm.
w bh. DG A b7A%2r5 h.). t I l. E 54ttem Co.d e c, I i
.. c.i.Joev J Q
.s.o.
.. c o.,n o o.s.nio u =o' w'Mi...ata.c C cow't.co.
Q 6.r.c owo = onco.non uca oocu.e =r a tio Scoms,ascrio
'o=
Q.u O ts.C.h co.non =cs a
C
- tit o..c.. - o, o co o.
c.
...,a o...a...
-a
.......a p
.c...c.
yy f'f *- y.,y g y
5A, Co.4ea \\ % au e
,adban Aoa
_.np &
mnt M'n B b "l5. I M t /c h d
~*-.
= ' a ' a ~'
a'i sg,l,h{pp Q) n/vb't a e e.
,aspuhsa e v; v \\ +s So e 25/r 3 o hm ri g
Sre/
Nw.,/ o SZ mb' ll4.)
g,c,.;*, C l/*xd,,_ f ( J) j:InlV bB'b r,::.:$'shmwYf C0-
/
=..r =.. y/. /nW Pe#
'Co.
WCM LIMITA!! CMS.
% WOM CAN PROctt.3 C wo M CANNOT PROCIED C QTHIA LIMI*ATIONS LIyu!N WOM t.IMITAf!QN l ygf ( G Ch
[9((.
kO g d 4. A b V d!O f Y' f.fX11 I O Vc.h I.
I Ull Ofid6 UIn/fb A A fA f. f t o6f"' Ldk* l O A N
$ lebkSOR
'06%.
i u m w.. u. oise.mi no%
13.
CA,4 o. oMcoh8ct u[$
p
)$ (,)
g...
7, l o r t-
.J s fe r e c o r> t i nc.c> e c kio n to ided.b chbcisack "g
g
_ 9 AJ e s. b v, a llotN ida A d(dio t M a h rs,a k 40 he iddAl!4d.,
- 2...
*C
~
....ct.c
.. 0. co
.O..e co.ec.
e.L4 1
r7 4cne o/. as S
(') 2 t v, w a.rcl Lv. /us //on e/ n,.n rc
.. -.- cre.., r..,
i sdn uc v ns onf.sHi/
oe ( _: '
==
lN;EzN'a n ' ' M*-
'" U.n%
~
%..h...v,o.;.;c;,.....o,.o.. cu i l< T. ~o-c.4...... ~o. 2.~.- l L l:.- % % & 4 / 1 7 l r & &' It
!~, ! '
w
=.
I.,,~
v c
l-Sac krr AcM 0 )
&fD/W/Wru' s _
,/
s.
,vp':g,, :
/ g v v.< -~ <0 8 81 va Md p
uwu e
[fT c..i. [lbiDm,., y$/$cif) Y,,
c.,,,,,
...a..~..
~
... ~ -.
..a...o o,.c,
..~.. co a.
c o.
a
- ,w N Ycx ctc$t0nmAu26aso0dM *ML.OMAbnC0 U
W c tco Oc.M"Es dW<f'fe5 t'?,*E"%"t"EL.v:: 5ysw a.a. G M' c Am' N ""*"F N "
eett % h% mens Wtbo Ee lmoetysh /e v stwyre n % owne+ c\\e's.e Ewrinktw W_
uue. Omw e. wou Lim. t At was %u e. tcx o m o ^. i 9eb to PT svsm M hetem Aan C e* L c M e* n AV""Tc R "Is. D ec "r te M aW o t-R e n H hvwee e
,rsis d maM. y ceepe._n.
.......o, m, a.,
n nw.o-u wo.: ns..
c#d..i t $t
,M n
,a ir<.
N.1.L M
- I &
s,
- t...
c.. - -- c ~.. m... em m.
p., a ti.<4.d detw u+d 1/M/lY p'+
a a... v..c.o,<
- u....
W -d O e L i /n, n
a
= = -
April 27, 1984 Attachment to NCR 451 Item 16 (Con't) Action Required to Correct the NonConf ormance The Sargent & Lundy review as described in their letters dated 3-11-83, 9-6-83, 10-27-83 and 2-17-84 h as determined th at a 95/95 confidence / reliability has been established that all of the Systems Control f abricated cable tray hangers are acceptable.
Note:
The reference to Byron NCR-850 on letter dated 2-17-84 is to be ignored.
Tne data used to resolve Braidwood NCR-451 was not used to resolve Byron NCR-850.
Item 17 Corrective Action Required to Prevent Reoccurance Clearly identify deficiencies during site. receipt inspection.
JD/sb/4350b 1
I i
I i
CECO NCR #451
Action to prevent recurrence is N/A because Edison no longer is purchasing any cable pan hangers from System Control.
Any other cable pan hangers that are needed are fabricated on-site by L. K. Comstock to AWS and are inspected by LKC Quality Control.
i As for PCD's Description of Corrective Action Initiated to Prevent Recurrence (Part 20 of this NCR) it is not applicable to NCR
- 451.
CECO NCRs #708 & #709 addresses presence of welds, not the quality of welds which NCR #451 has already addressed.
i Based upon the above, this NCR is ready for close-out.
1 0
V l
D. A. Hoff Q. A. Eng er Braidwood tation DAH/ajv (3345A) cc:
52.1 w/NCR #451 i
l l
I
A s
CC::STF.UCTIO:: DEFICIENCY EVALUATION e i f
- s ^
PART 1 DESCRIPTION Describe The Deficiency (Attach references) u_dbnet b3
(
4 m ct u A
o a
a m cR h Ld $ D\\,\\~75 C A c' R S C Be U.E $ct b aO C_ CE-c3 MN v
ll %
Y 25& W /3/
st/Y1 cheAA
(.a.7tA 9 11 e
[hiCL of S
8 0
O_ EC o O c_. R.
PART 2 EVALUATION 2A Safety Impact YES NO Does this deficiency, whether or not safety related, er.'ect safe operation of the facility, 4
i I
2B Significance YES NC Ts a t,raal. dour. in OA Progrr., appare.it which r equires ciZ,3v0
- r. rescurces to re-establish assurance of program?
i Arc expenditures of $100,00G necessary to rework structures, systens, cenponents into compliance with approved design?
Are expenditures of $100,000 necessary to recair structures, systems, components into compliance with approved desi5n?
Is approved final design inadecua*c to accure cenpliance with SAR and construction permit?
ggmout 0 0 N'" YT/
. a. +. s.
.,T *.7.
i T.T.* *QWC
- 88 e
n
e (2)
(
YES NO
{
)>(
During Installation / Testing is it apparent tr.at a structure, systen, ccncer.ent suppliec by Others can not meet the requirec performance specifications and should be reported (ICCF?21) other users?
(i.e. Potential Industry Deficiency) s Dces Inadecuate Managener.: review / corrective action exist whicn ignores significant adverse trends?
Do pre-operational or start-up test results.'letermine a systen that does nec neet safety analysis report or technical specification requirene,nts?
PART 3 REPORTABILITY OF A 50.553 NOTIFICATICN If the answer to Part 2A is Yes and any answer in Part 23 is Yes, this deficiency shall be reported to Nuclear Regulatory Connissicn Region III Headquarters.
Iten not reportable s
Iten reported to-date NRC Region Ill Evaluated /Beported by j /d
_ date 42 3[F 3 Cc:2b-feaYth Edisen
/
/
hj h
- '.Wfp*.l. e' t
~
l
..c
~
/
...n..
la n
0 a