ML20236G778
| ML20236G778 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/16/1987 |
| From: | Cilimberg R, Stone J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236G740 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900002 NUDOCS 8711030270 | |
| Download: ML20236G778 (8) | |
Text
._.
<-%.sy.
m g
>w.->a 4
-ORGANIZATION: -COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INCORPORATED WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT REPORT-INSPECTION INSPECTION.
.N0.:
99900002/87-01 DATES: 08/24-28/87-ON-SITE HOURS: '32 l
CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS:
Combustion Engineering, Incorporated ATTN: Dr. P. L. McGill Vice President, Nuclear Fuel.
1000 Prospect Hill Road Windsor, Connecticut 06095 1
ORGANIZATIONAL CONTACT: Mr. M. Glotzer TELEPHONE NUMBER:
903 ?RR En2d NUCLEAR INDUSTRY ACTIVITY:
Nuclear fuel assembly supplier for Combustion 4
l Eligineering (CE) and Westinghouse designed reactors.
.l l
A
?
ASSIGNED INSPECT 0P:
s(14r D
l
. L. Cilimberg, Progran phvelopment and Reactive Date i
Inspection Section (PliMS)
OTHERINSPECTOR(S):
D. J. Lynn, Consultant.
i APPROVED BY:
e
/6 E 7 J.[C.~ Stone, Chief,PDRIS, Vendor,InspectionBranch at j
=
\\
INSPECTION BASES AND SCOPE:
j A.
BASES:
10 CFR 21 and 10 CFR 50, Appendix B.
B.
SCOPE: Review tubing fabrication and testing, fuel pellet. manufacturing and testing, follow-up corrective action on previous inspection findings, and evaluations by CE o/ the leaking fuel at various facilities.
I PLANT SITE APPLICABILITY: San Onofre 2/3 (50-361/362), Calvert Cliffs 1/2 q
(50-317/318), Palo Verde 1/2/3(50-528/529/530), Waterford (50-382), St.-
1
.(50-368)(,FortCalhoun(50-285).50-389), Maine Yankee (50-309), Yankee Rowe (50j Lucie 2
]
]
3 8711030270 871028 OON2 pk 3
n ORGANIZATION:
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING INCORPORATED WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT
~
l REPORT INSPECTION N0.: 99900002/87-01 RESULTS:
PAGE 2 of-8
.A.
VIOLATIONS:
i l
None.
B.
NONCONFORMANCES:
1.
Contrary to Criterion VIII of. Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 and'Section 8.4.1.7 of the CE Quality Assurance Manual.(QAM), Revision dated May 4,1987, implies that traceability shall be niaintained only i
when required by contract.
(87-01-01) 2.
Contrary to Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, the CE QAM references Temporary Shop Instructions (TSIs) and there are no documents available, to describe how to use TSIs relative to the i
(87-01-02) 3.
Contrary to Criterion V of Appendix B to'30 ^FR 50,,and Sections 3.2.2 and 4.0 of QC-15-14, " Procedure fv., ;ial Process Qualifica-tion," Revision 1 dated March 18, 19Cr i t,-15-05. " Process Specification for Grinding Pellets," Tavt on.0, dated. November 23, 1971, does not contain'the required r;m:4ters or procedures.
(87-01-03) 4.
Contrary to Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, and Step 4 of OS 419, " Machine First End," Revision 2, dated September 16, 1974, end cap protection was not installed on the machined end i
of guide tubes although the sequence had been signed _off as complete on traveller ES 120-B.. (87-01-04) i 5.
Contrary to Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, and Section 3.11 l
of OS 510, " Load Fuel," Revision dated May 4,-1987, one. door.to the
.i stacking and loading room was propped open for 30 minutes.. (87-01-05)
C.
UNRESOLVED ITEMS:
(0 pen) Unresolved During the inspection, a CE employee alleged to the NRC inspecturs that he had observed other CE employees putting oversized fuel pellets in-trays containing acceptable fuel peilets. This was alleged to have occurred occasionally on the second and third shifts during'1985 and 1986.
On August 23, 1967, a Southern California Edison (SCE) auditor observed an oversize fuel pellet that prevented CE personnel from loading a stack
my; x
' ORGANIZATION:
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INCORPORATED I
WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT m-1 REPORT:
INSPECTION:
i N0.:.' 99900002/87-01
.RESULTS:
PAGE 3.~of 8
]
2 i
i
. reload for the San Onofre (SONGS)g to be used for? fuel rodsiin the batch F of fuel-pellets in zircaloy tubin J
. Unit 2 reactor.- CE increased their surveillance of pellet production'and discovered a11arge1 number of j
~
oversize. pellets. CE is' investigating the allegation, and evaluating.
pellet deviations.in' addition to obtaining' other= information concerning -
safety implications of pellet. dimensional problems. -This' item will-1 remain open until CE provides NRC with an answer to,the' allegation and resolution of.the fuel pellet dimensional. problems..
D.
STATUS OF PREVIOUS INSPECTION FINDINGS:.
1.
(Closed) Nonconformance (86-01-01):
Contrary to Section 6.6.2 of the CE QAM, Revision 1, dated January 22,~1986, ink changcs were made.to Sections B.4.0 and B.5.0-1 l
of Operation Sheet (0.S.) Number 925.." Leak Test," Revision 32, dated June 1984, without the proper approvals.-
The NRC inspectors determined that the' proper approvals were obtained on July 24, 1986, and review of other documents-has not j
revealed any additional ink changes.
I l
2.
-(Closed) Nonconformance (86-01-02):
.4 Contrary to Section B.7,0 of 0.S. Number 945, " Leak Test,"
Revision 32, dated June 1, 1984, the' helium leak test was not being conducted for'a minimum.of 30-seconds' as ' required.
The NRC inspectors detergined that' the' equipment ~.used to perform the helium leak test has been replaced with a new leak detector with an electronic test circuit that automatically achieves the times required for leak testing fuel rods.
E.
INSPF.CTION FINDINGS AND OTHER COMMENTS:
1.
Entrance and Exit Meetings l
The NRC staff informed CE management representatives of. the scope of the inspection during the entrance meeting and summarized the a
inspection findings and observations during the Lexit meeting ~on August 28, 1987.
1 1
l
+
-l ORGANIZATION:. COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INCORPORATED
. WINDS 0R, CONNECTICUT
^
REPORT ItiSPECTION
+
'N0.:
99900002/87-01
'RESULTS:-
PAGE 4'of 8 i
,s 2.
Fuel Pellet Manufacturing CE informed the NRC inspectors that fuel pellet dimensional problems were slowing production of the Batch F reload for the SONGS Unit 2 reactor. SCE has been auditing'CE. manufacturing of fuel bundles for the SONGS Units 2 and 3 reactors on all shifts since' June 1987. On August 23, 1987o a SCE auditor observed-l an oversize pellet that prevented CE personnel from loading a
]
l stack.of fuel pellets in zircaloy tubing to be used in the Batch I
F reload, CE initiated a number of TSIs to provide' extensive
- manual measurement on a?large sample of fuel pellets prior to
'. loading stacks of pellets in tubing. This eis the situation that existed when the NRC inspectors entered the fuel pellet area.
on August 25, 1987.
3.
Fuel Pellet Grinding The NRC inspectors reviewed CE -procedures OS 517, " Operating l
Instructions Grinder Area," Revision'17, dated June 29, 1987; l
MFG-15-05, " Process Specification for Grinding Pellets," Revision 0; j
QC 1514, " Procedure for Special Qualification," Revision 1; OS 1477, 4
" Pellet Shop In-Process Checks," Revision 39, dated August 10, 1987, and the CE QAM, Revision dated May 4, 1987. During this review the inspectors determined that MFG 15-05 does not contain l
the parameters or procedures required by QC 15-14. Revision.1.
(SeeNonconformance 87-01-03.)
L The inspectors observed the grinding of pellets in accordance with OS 517, Revision 17, and finished pellet surveillance in accordance with OS 1477, Revision 39.
The inspectors noted that:the' roller-micrometers were designed to se;arate undersize pellets-into tray one, acceptable pellets 'into tray 2, 'and oversize pellets 'into tray 3.
During the inspectors observation of these processes.on August: 26,.
1987, a CE employee alleged that he had occasionally seen_three operators putting oversize pellets 'in the acceptable tray during 1985 and 1986.
(See Section C of this report.)
4.
Fuel Pellet Stacking The NRC inspectors reviewed OS 510. " Load Fuel," Revision 55, dated June 30, 1987, and observed that operators were following the steps of this procedure for stacking, inspection, and rotation of troughs.
However, the inspectors observed that one of the doors ~to the-
n-w-a._
m---xu
~i
ORGANIZATION:- COMBUSTION' ENGINEERING,' INCORPORATED
0 WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT REPORT INSPECTION NO.:.99900002/87-01' RESULTS:'
PAGE 5 of 8 g
stacking and loading room.was propped open for 39 minutes.: The' inspectors told the-CE: supervisor who immediately closed the door.
(SeeNonconformance 87-01-05.)
5.
Fuel Pellet' Inspection On' August 25, 1987, the inspectors observed CE inspectors selecting; pellets from-troughs and measuring the diameter of.the pellets in accordance with TSI 107.. dated August 24, 1987. The dimensions of the pellets measured were' oversize and did not meet specifications-so the pellets in the stacking room could not be released for? loading-into tubing for fuel rods.
The inspectors l determined that the TSI is not referenced in the QAM,: Revision dated May 4,.;1987, and 'a '
document is not available in-the CE QA system which prescribes the proper use of a TSI. -(See Nonconformance 87-01-02.)
6.
Stop' Work On August 27, 1987, the NRC inspectors were advised by'the CE QA Manager that he had issued a stop work order on fuel; rod loading, upper end cap welding," fuel rod prt, cessing and inspect 1.on,= and fuel bundle assemb'ly, containerization and. shipment. : The' inspectors were provided with~a copy of.the written "Stop Work," dated:
August 27, 1987, which also identifies the requirements for lifting.
the "Stop Work."
7.
Guide Tube Processing The inspectors reviewed OS 419, " Machine First End," Revision 2,.
and observed the processing of guide tubes.according to'0S 419 and traveller ES 120-B. ' Guide-tubes were~ observed in a carrying box with machined ends that were not protected with plastic' caps as required by Step 4 of OS 419. The protector cap ~ installation had been signed off as complete on traveller ES 120-B.'
(See'Noncon-formance 87-01-04.)
8.
Document Review
')
The NRC inspectors reviewed shop trave'11ers'for outer guide tube',
assembly (Lot A-69). tube cleaning.(Lot 201), flange part'E 6111-B (Lots 139 and 190) and grid cage assembly. part EV-100A (Lot C1-22)l and procedures OS 2159,. Revision 4 and 0S 2402, Revisior 9.
Obser-:
vations determined that operations complied with the proser sequencing and~ sign-off.of travellers in conformance wit 1 approved l procedures.
l i
.m_____
i.a.'
i ORGANIZATION-COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INCORPORATED
' WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT I
REPORT INSPECTION N0.: 99900002/b?-01 RESULTS:
PAGE 6 of 8-
'l i
S.
Internal Audits The inspectors reviewed internal audit reports on material identifica-tion and traceability and determined these reports to be in compliance-with Section 18.of the QAM, Revision dated May 4, 1987.-
- 10. Equipment Calibration The inspectors determined that the micrometer with serial' number 13-04-16 and roller micrometer standards set number 7 were calibrated in accordance'with Section 12 of the QAM, Revision dated May 4, 1987.
- 11. Helium Leak Testing 4
The inspectors reviewed OS 945, " Operation of Varian Leak Detector,"
Revision 36, dated July 15, 1987, which details the steps required-to calibrate and operate the Varian Leak Detector (VLD).
1 The VLD equipment replaces the helium leak tester used to: perform leak tests which resulted in nonconformance 86-01-02. The VLD o
equipment automatically achieves the times-required,for leak '
testing fuel rods which replaces this function being performed.
manually by an operator. Document review did not reveal any ink changes being made since the last inspection.
Nonconformances 86-01-01 and 86-01-02 were closed out as a result of the inspection in this area.
12.
Fuel Performance CE currently manufactures fuel bundles / assemblies for (13) pressurized waterreactors(PWRs). The PWRs that use CE fuel are San Onofre Units 2 and 3; Calvert Cliffs 1 and 2; Palo Verde 1, 2, and 3; St. Lucie 2, Waterford, Maine Yankee, Yankee Rowe, Arkansas 2, and-Fort Calhoun. The CE Nuclear Fuel Projects group estimated that 127 fuel rods have leaked as a result of hydride failures' initiated by inadequate drying of tubing used for fuel cladding. -Arkansas Unit 2 contained 8 leaking fuel ' rods that were fabricated in 1977 to 1978 and 6 leaking' fuel rods that were fabricated in 1983.
St.
Lucie 1 contained 8 leaking fuel rods.that were fabricated in 1981.
SONGS Unit 3 contained 105 leaking fuel rods fabricated in 1981. -CE estimates that all fuel rods fabricated in a time period which
. - - - =. - _.
a Y
th a
k J
f 4
f
/
se T
"Y s
t 5
s e
ORGANIZATION:
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INCORPORATED WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT REPORT INSPECTION NO.:
99900002/87-01 RESULTS:
PAGE 7 of 8 would make them susceptible to hydride failure will be out of operating reactors in 1988.
CE has used ultrasonic fuel inspection systems to nondestructively test fuel rods at reactor sites.
The inspection systems detect the presence or absence of moisture on the inside of the fuel rods.
If water is detected in a fuel rod, that rod has experienced a breach in the cladding.
The results of these inspections are as follows:
(1) Arkansas Unit 2 - June 1986 Inspection of 177 assemblies identified 6 leaking rods by primary hydriding, 4 leaking rods by debris in the core, and 3 leaking rods by spacer grid fretting.
(2) Calvert Cliffs Unit 1 - October 1986 Inspection identified I leaking rod by debris fretting, 1 leaking rod by fretting at an inconel grid arch, and the cause of 1 leaking rod was unknown.
(3) Calvert Cliffs Unit 2 - March 1987 Inspection identified 5 leaking rods by debris fretting and i leaking rod was by an unknown cause.
(4) Maine Yankee - March 1987 Inspection identified 2 leaking rods by debris fretting and 2 leaking rods was by unknown causes.
(5) Yankee Rowe - May 1987 Inspection identified 14 leaking rods which were probably caused by baffle - jetting.
F.
PERSONS CONTACTED:
G. Buddenhagen D. Byerly
- G. Chalder E. Chan C. Collins
f
' ORGANIZATION: COMBUSTION ENGINEERING INCORPORATED l
.,s.
WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT REPORT INSPECTION i
N0.: 99900002/87-01 RESULTS:
PAGE 8 of 8-W. Coppersmith I. Courser
-l M. Czupryna'-
M.'Defrenzo i
G. Dube M. Duval F. Enos R. Freeman
- M. Glotzer
. l M. Guagengi J. Lema
- P. McGill I
'J. Presbie s
- F. Stern R. Tergliafera T. Vallon l
- Attended exit meeting.
i l
l l
4 l
5 0
j
. _ _ _ _ -.. - _ - _ _ - -