ML20140J253
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| ML20140J253 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 03/18/1986 |
| From: | Constable G, Garrison D, Clay Johnson NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20140J172 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-498-86-02, 50-498-86-2, 50-499-86-02, 50-499-86-2, IEIN-79-08, IEIN-79-14, IEIN-79-17, IEIN-79-20, IEIN-79-23, IEIN-79-24, IEIN-79-27, IEIN-79-30, IEIN-79-32, IEIN-79-34, IEIN-79-8, IEIN-80-08, IEIN-80-18, IEIN-80-8, IEIN-81-26, IEIN-82-05, IEIN-82-07, IEIN-82-5, IEIN-82-7, NUDOCS 8604040289 | |
| Download: ML20140J253 (17) | |
See also: IR 05000498/1986002
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. 4
APPENDIX B
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0FillSSION
REGION IV
NRC Inspection Report: 50-498/86-02 CP.: CPPR-128 and 129
50-499/86-02
Dockets: 50-498 and 50-499
Licensee: Houston Lighting & Power Company (HL&P)
P. O. Box 1700
Houston, Texas 77001
Facility Name: South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2
Inspection At: South Texas Project, Matagorda County, Texas
Inspection Conducted: January 6 - February 14, 1986
Inspectors: [ M //I
C. I. Uohgson, Senior Resident Inspector Watg
ProjecVSection C, Reactor Projects Branch
I
D.
W 3lMl%
7a K ~
L.~ Garr/ son, Resident Inspector, Project
Section C, Reactor Projects Branch
Other NRC
personnel : J. F. Lara, CO-0P Student
.. & '
>
Approved: / -
G.9.T C%nstable, Chief, Project Section C
3/# I
D&te /
,
Reactor Projects Branch
hN D yB
G
.__ _ _ _
'
. .
,
2
,
Inspectior. Summary
Inspection Conducted Janitary 6 through February 14, 1986 (Report 50-498/86-02;
50-499/86-02)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of licensee action on previous
inspection findings, IE Information Notices, concrete activities, structural
steel activities, and piping activities. The inspection involved 256 inspection
hours onsite by two NRC-inspectors and a coop-student trainee.
Results:
2
Within the scope of this inspection, one violation was identified and is
1
discussed in paragraph 7.
.
.
3 - ! l~
. . . - - - . . , ,, ,_- .. - -,
.
,
3
DETAILS
1. Persons Contacted
Principal Licensee Employees
*J. T. Westermeier, Project Manager
*S. M. Dew, Deputy Project Manager
*D. L. Dujka, Site Engineer
*E. B. Miller, Deputy Project QA Manager
*K. M. O'Gara, Project Compliance Engineer
*J. J. Nesrsta, (Representative for INPO)
*S. Head, Lead Project Compliance Engineer
*W. Evans, Project Compliance Engineer
*C. McIntyre, Site Project Engineer
R. C. Arthurs, Project QA General Supervisor
*G. Shukla, Project Compliance Engineer
*T. Logan, PQC Supervisor
T. McGriff, QA Engineer
*T. Jordan, Project QA Manager
*J. Geiger, Nuclear Assurance Manager
Other Personnel
Bechtel Power Corporation (Bechtel)
*J. B. Gatewood, Lead QA Engineer
*R. H. Medina, Lead QA Engineer
*R. Schulman, Site Civil Engineer
S. Oliver, Piping Engineer
*R. W. Miller, Deputy Project QA Manager
Ebasco Service, Inc. (Ebasco)
*J. R. Parks, QC Manager-
*A. M. Cutrona, QA Manager
*J. J. Assenza, Senior QA Engineer
*R. C. Peck, Deputy Project QA Manager
*F. G. Miller, Welding Superintendent
*J. R. Martin, Senior Resident Engineer
*K. W. Silverthorne, ESI Welding
J. Mulkey, QC Inspector (Piping)
R.' Blentlinger, Civil QC Supervisor (Structural)
R. West, Civil QC Supervisor (Concrete)
P. Phelan, QC (Civil)
W. White, QC (Civil)
J. Blas, QC (Civil)
__
.
_
.o
.
4
Authorized Nuclear Inspector (Kemper)
D. Braman, ANI-Kemper
* Denotes those individuals attending the exit interview conducted on
February 14, 1986.
2. Site Tour
The NRC inspectors made several site tours in order to assess construction
in progress, general cleanliness and housekeeping activities, condition of
equipment, and plant status. The following areas of the plants were
inspected: mechanical-electrical auxiliary buildings, containment build-
ings, Intermeck fabrication shop (HVAC), pipe fabrication shop, weld test
shop, pipe laydown yard A, paint storage warehouse, warehouses A, B, and C,
fire pump house, fuel building, and essential cooling water structure.
No violations or deviations were identified.
3. Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
(Closed) Violation (50-498-8506-01):
This item concerns a Class 7 (II/I) HVAC support which had been accepted by
EBASCO field engineering; however, during a reinspection by NRC, it was
found~that the bolts were not torqued as required. Review of the licensee
response and corrective action revealed that procedures have been revised
for Class 7 components to include requirements for control of the~ removal
and/or modification of items that have been~ inspected and accepted by field
engineering. The Ebasco construction supervisors and engineers were
reinstructed on.these requirements as outlined in ASP-22 prior to modifying
or removing any item that has been. final-accepted. Craft personnel have
been reinstructed not to perform any unauthorized work on accepted items.
This was accomplished by distribution of a " check stuffer" to each employee
at the site.
This item is considered closed.
4. Licensee Action on IE Information Notices
(Closed) IE Notice 79-08
This item concerned the innerconnection of contaminated service air systems
into the breathing air system. The breathing air system used at STP is
separate and independent of any other system.
The NRC inspector reviewed specification 5Q129MD1007, Revision 0, and
Piping.and . Instrument Diagram SQ129F05044 concerning breathing air and
concluded that the response is adequate.
.
.
5
(Closed) IE Notice 79-14
This notice concerned the' classification of electrical supports and the
application of pertinent quality assurance requirements as defined in
Appendix B to 10 CFR 50.
The electrical support systems at STP are designated as seismic Category I
as referenced in the FSAR Chapter 3. The quality requirements are' classed
as "B" and meet the requirements of Branch Technical Position ASB 9.5-1,
IV.B.7.
(Closed) IE Notice 79-17
This notice concerned source holder assembly damage due to misfit in
reactors using 15X15 fuel assemblies. STP uses 17X17 fuel configuration.
Therefore, this should not occur. The limitation on secondary source
location in a 17X17 core is that they not be placed beneath a control
~
assembly.
(Closed) IE Notice 79-20
This notice expanded the subject of NRC enforcement policy in regard to NRC'
~
licensed individuals and summarized sanctions available for NRC to use when
violations occur. Ample correspondence was reviewed which indicates that
the licensee has reviewed and understands the notice.
(Closed) IE Notice 79-23
This notice concerned leaky oil coolers manufactured by Young Radiator and
used on GM diesels. STP uses Cooper diesels with American-Standard oil
cool ers.
(Closed) IE Notice 79-32
This notice is applicable to BWRs only and, therefore, does not affect the
STP.
(Closed) IE Notice 79-30
Proper reporting of defects and noncompliance in accordance with Part 21 of
Title 10, Chapter 1 of the CFR is addressed in this notice.
The NRC inspector reviewed the procedures concerning this area (PLP-02) and
determined that the method used by the licensee is adequate.
(Closed) IE Notice 80-08
This notice concerned electrical terminal links manufactured by States
Company which fracture easily.
-
,
&; ,
u ., . -
}[['a
~
'
. .
,
W _ ,
'
.
a
v.
.
P
In reviewing. documentation it was ascertair.ed that these items are not used
at the site.. They are . included in the STP restricted. items list.
'
(Closed)IE~ Notice 79-34
!
The topic of this notice was containment spray heat exchangers nanufactured
by Industrial Process. Engineers Inc. which were defective in design. STP
^
does not.use. this make of- heat exchangers.
(Closed)- IE Notice 79-27
< . .
. This notice concerned the rupture of steam generator tubes at two .PWRs.
Review of the licensee correspondence indicates that the root causes were
L: ; understood and appropriately considered by the licensee.
'(Closed)'IE Notice'79-24'
This item concerned a deficiency in the original analysis of containment
" ,
. pressurization as a result of a main' steam line break. The licensee has
addressed this issue in Section 6.2.1.4 of the-FSAR.
(Closed) IE Notice 82-05
,
This notice addres. sed the increasing frequency of drug-related~ incidents.
HL&P has established a comprehensive drug program. The licensee started
usi'ng dogs to search for drugs in 1985; this program has non escalated to
the' point'where drug use is strongly condemned and as a condi. tion of employ -
ment, employees are expected to be drug free. A urinalysis is being
performed for all- employees.
(Closhd)IENotice81-26
The subjects of this riotice are: Self Contained Breathing Apparatus,
' Chemicals, Monitoring Devices, Inert Environments and Survey Instruments;
all revolving around the health physics area. The licensee has addressed
,
each item in separate operating procedures.
(Closed) IE Notice 80-18
This item of concern is a weapons smuggling pouch. The licensee has
addressed.these concerns in the Physical Security Plan.
(Closed) IE Notice 82-07
- This item concerns inadequate personnel screening programs and lack of
_ .
audit pro' grams in this area. The. licensee has included the concerns of
this notice in plant procedures.
.
i
.. .
..
7
(Closed) IE Notice 82-09
This notice addressed fracturing in the makeup coolant lines in B&W plants
due to thermal cyclic fatigue. These lines in Westinghouse plants are of
different design and are not subjected to-the cyclic conditions in B&W
plants. This item was jointly investigated by.the licensee's engineer and
Westinghouse.
(Closed) IE Notice 82-27
This notice concerns fuel damage in reactors with down flow coolant
movement in the reactor. The. notice is not applicable to STP in that the
STP design uses an up flow path for coolant.
(Closed) IE Notice 82-25
This item concerns Hiller brand actuators used on fail-safe closure of air
operated valves. These items are not used~at the STP plant.
(Closed) IE Notice 82-12
This notice concerns a high failure rate of Bergen Patterson hydraulic
snubbers. STP does not use these particular units. STP uses mainly Paul-
Monroe snubbers _for the steam generator laterals, Pacific Scientific for
acceleration limiting and Anchor Darling for velocity limiting. The snubber
design and~ testing requirements are included in the FSAR, Sectior. 3.9.
(Closed) IE Notice 82-40
This notice concerned' poor workmanship in Bunker-Ramo electrical penetration
assemblies. STP uses Westinghouse assemblies.
(Closed) IE Notice 82-38 .
This notice concerns the change in distribution of circule.rs, notices, .and
bulletins and has been noted by the licensee.
(Closed) IE Notice 82-31
This notice concerned overexposure to divers in the fuel pool due to poor
work habits. Underwater work is not planned for this project but in the
event the situation arises, appropriate procedures will be developed.
(Closed) IE Notice 82-56
Robertshaw Thermostatic Flow Control Valves - this brand of valves is not
used at STP.
l l
_
.. .
.
8
(Closed) IE Notice 82-48
Failure of Agastat CR0095 Relay Sockets - This particular model of relay
socket is not. incorporated into the STP design.
(Closed) IE Notice 82-46
Defective and obsolete Combination Padlocks - STP is using approved locks
to lock safeguards cabinets.
(Closed) IE Notice 82-42
Defects in Panasonic Model 801 and 802 thermoluminescence dosimeters - The
licensee has noted this item and it is explained in HL&P procedure OPRP01-
ZX-0016.
5. Concrete (Structural)
a. Procedure / Specification Review
The NRC inspector reviewed procedures and specifications related to
the concrete activities at the STP. Review of these procedures and
specifications indicate that they contain adequate inspection require-
ments, reference code and standards, tolerances, tests required,
control of specific materials, and control of specific processes and
activities related to concrete activities.
Procedures / Specifications Reviewed:
. QCP-10.2, "Preplacement Concrete Inspection," Revision 6, dated
November 27, 1985
. QCP-10.3, " Concrete Placement Inspection," Revision 6, dated
November 22, 1985
. CSP-4, " Concrete Placement," Revision 5, dated June 28, 1985
. Specification 2A010CS1004, " Specification for Forming Placing,
Finishing, and Curing Concrete," Revision 4, dated March 28, 1985
o
b. NRC Field Inspection
The NRC inspectors performed inspections associated with Unit 2
- containment dome placement N'o. 2-RC-W-168-019 and MEAB Unit 2
l
pl acements 2-ME-W-033-025, 2-ME-W-03-021A, 2-ME-W-033-023,
2-ME-W-043-003, and 2-ME-W-033-001.
! Reinforcing Steel and Embedments ! l The NRC inspectors verified the size and location of reinforcing steel '
and checked structural plates for dimensional tolerances, azinuth and
I l ! f
..
.
.
9 ,
location for placement 2-RC-W-168-019. The NRC inspectors also
- checked clearances between reinforcing steel and fonn work. Observa-
-tion . indicated that reinforcing steel, embedments, and form-work.were
controlled and positioned in accordance with specifications,-codes,
drawings and procedures.-
The NRC inspectors also observed and examined tendon trumplets and
sheathing that were within placement 2-RC-W-169-019. Trumplets and
sheathing were installed within specified tolerances and were clean.
Tendon sheathing joints appeared to be~ tight. No apparent
discrepancies were observed.
.Cadwelding operations were observed on three buttresses within and
above placement 2-RC-W-168-019. Proper workmanship and installation
of the cadweld was evident. No discrepancies were. observed.
Placement
The NRC inspectors witnessed preplacement inspections performed by QC
prior to placement. Preplacement activities were performed in
accordance with the specification and procedures. Interviews and
discussions with QC inspectors indicated that they were very
knowledgeable of what was required for the preplacement inspection.
The NRC inspectors examination of preplacement activities indicated
that forms were properly set, construction joints properly prepared
and the placement cleaned.
The NRC inspectors observed the actual placement of concrete in
placements 2.-RC-W-168-019, 2-ME-W-033-025, 2-ME-W-03-021A,
2-ME-W-033-023, 2-ME-W-043-033, and 2-ME-W-033-001 in Unit 2. During
these placements the following activities were observed:
. Proper drop distance from trunk of pump line.
. Proper spacing, depth and insertion of vibrators.
. Proper consolidation for avoidance of voids and honeycombs in
congested areas.
. No segregation of aggregate due to improper use of vibrators.
. Batch tickets; these were reviewed for verification of proper mix,
location, and amount of water being added at the truck delivery
point.
. The equipment used to deliver concrete from the ready-mix truck
to the actual placement such as conveyors, lines, pumps and
buckets.
. Records indicating mix, location, time placed, water additions,
and temperature of concrete mix and ambient conditions.
- ..
1-
10
. Inspection i,y QC during placement.
There were no violations or deviations observed in any of the
. preceding activities.
The NRC inspectors observed in-process testing of concrete for
placements 2-RC-W-168-019, 2-ME-W-033-025, 2-ME-W-033-023,
2-ME-W-033-021A, 2-ME-W-043-003, and 2-ME-W-033-001. The following
items were verified in the review of the testing program conducted
-during the placement:
. Concrete temperature, slump, air content, and unit weight a
being determined at the proper location and frequency.
. Taking of the sample and testiag techniques conform to the
procedures specified in the ASTM standards.
. Test specimens for concrete strength determination are sampled at
the required location and frequency and are molded in accordance
with specified requirements.
The testing observed by the NRC inspectors was performed in accordance
with project procedures and specifications.
c. Records Inspection
The NRC inspectors reviewed records of concrete placements in the RCB
and MEAB. The licensee system for preparing, reviewing, and
mainti.'aing records is. functioning properly. The selected records
reflect work accomplishment consistent with specifications and
procedures. The records did not indicate any potentially generic
problems, management control inadequacies, or other weaknesses that
could have safety significance. Curing and post-placement inspection
reports were not reviewed.
Documents reviewed were:
Drawing.No.
. 2C23-9-C-1020, Revision 4 . 2C22-9-C-1039, Revision 5
. 2C23-9-C-1021, Revision'1 . 2C22-9-C-1046, Revision 5
. 2C02-9-C-1031, Revision 1 . 2C22-9-S-1012, Revision 1
. 2002-9-C-1032, Revision 1 . 2022-9-S-1013, Revision 0
. 2C22-9-C-1033, Revision 5 . 2C26-9-S-1004, Revision 2
. 2C22-9-C-1034, Revision 2 . 2C22-9-C-1035, Revision 4
. 2C22-9-C-1036, Revision 0 . 3A01-0-C-0001, Revision 20
. 3C01-2-C-1555, Revision 9
No violations or deviations were identified.
_.
---
_
._
-
..
1,
11
6. Structural Steel and Supports .
-a. Procedures / Specifications Review
The NRC inspector reviewed procedures and specifications to determine
whether these documents conform to appropriate reference codes and
standards as well as the licensee's commitment to quality standards.
The NRC inspector reviewed the Standard Site Procedure Manual and the
structural and miscellaneous steel specification.
Review of the steel specification by the NRC inspector. indicated that
the technical requirements for the fabrication, assembly, erection,
and inspection of structural and miscellaneous steel expressed in the
specification conform to the licensee's QA program as described _ in the
FSAR. There were no apparent deviations of the specification from
reference codes ar.d industry standards.
The NRC inspector reviewed the Standard Site Procedure Manual, SSP-11, i
" Fabrication, Erection and Bolt-Up of Structural Steel," to ascertain
whether the manual conforms to the structural steel specification as
well as the licensee's QA program. It was noted by the NRC inspector
that the procedure established appropriate methods and requirements
for the fabrication, assembly, erection, and inspection of structural
and miscellaneous steel .
Procedures and Specification reviewed were:
. SSP-11, " Fabrication, Erection and Bolt-Up of Structural Steel,"
Revision 1, effective date January 23, 1986
. Specification No. 3A010SS0030, " Erection of Structural Steel and
Miscellaneous Steel," Revision 6
b. Field Observation
The NRC inspectors performed an inspection of the installation and
erection of structural members and connections for the floor plan at
elevation 69'-6", HEAB Unit 2 (Ra#327). Welding was not observed
during this inspection.
Prior to start of the inspection the NRC inspectors witnessed the QC
calibration of the torque wrenches used in checking the required
torque values.
The.NRC inspectors randomly selected structural steel members to
determine if piece mark numbers stamped into the members matched the
drawing location / orientation as specified. Structural members
selected did match the installation drawing as required and no
apparent discrepancies were observed in the configuration / orientation
of the structural member examined. The NRC inspectors checked for
minimum torque values on 22 structural connections that had been QC
-_.
r-
,. -
%
12
accepted. One of the structural connections inspected had one bolt
which was loose. The licensee performed additional inspections in the
same area and found no loose bolts. Additionally the licensee used a
statistical sampling plan to determine at a 95/95 confidence level
that all connections were satisfactorily inspected. The NRC inspector
reviewed the results and was satisfied. The i.bove mentioned loose
bolt is considered to be an isolated case.
Drawings used were:
. USS American Bridge
K7030-X5, sheet E702
. Bechtel
3M01-9-S-4043, Revision 4
3M01-9-S-4044, Revision 4
3M01-9-S-4045, Revision 1
3M01-9-S-4001, Revision 6
3M01-9-S-4090, Revision 4
c. Records Inspection
The NRC inspectors reviewed inspection reports related to the structural
- members and bolted connections examined. The records were legible and
easily retrievable. Records indicated that work accor.plishments were
consistent with specification and procedure requirements.
Records reviewed were:
EBASCO Inspection Report (IR) No.
. 3167B2
. 3117B2
. 3158B2
. 3133B2
. 3125B2
7. Review of Nonconformance Reporting
The NRC inspector reviewed the licensee's commitment to nonconformance
reporting in.the " Quality Assurance Program Description," Section 15, which
requires that the licensee.and prime contractors Quality Assurance Program
include a system which is documented by written procedures for the
identification, segregation and disposition of nonconforming materials,
parts and components. The procedures are to specify the preparation and
.
..
+
,;'
13
handling of nonconformance documents, segregation requirements and which
groups are responsible for review and disposition of the items. Documenta-
tion is required to: (a) identify the nonconforming item; (b) describe the
nonconformance; (c) the disposition of the nonconformance; (d) inspection
requirements; (e) include signature approval of the disposition and final
closecut.
Procedure SSP-19 of the licensee!s Standard Site. Procedure (SSP),
paragraph 5.1.5, states that "NCRs are not to be used to report procedural
violations, design conflicts or other system QA problems unless the quality
of the hardware is affected." - Also, the contractor's procedure for
Nonconformance Reporting.QCP 15.1 states, "NCRs are not to be used to
~
report procedural violations or other system QA problems unless it affects
quality of. hardware. Procedural violations may be reported to QA for
appropriate action."
.For reporting " Hold Point" or other procedural violations, the QC inspectors
have been orally instructed to notify the QA group by memo, telephone,
'
verbal or any other available means. At this point the QA group may
initiate a Site Deficiency Report (SDR) for processing. No written project
procedure exists which requires inspectors to report " Hold Points" or other
procedural deviations, etc. Such deviations constitute a failure to follow
procedures. This is an a
of Appendix B. (86-02-1) pparent violation of Criterion X and XVI
8. Piping (Safety-Related)
. The. purpose of thi's piping inspection was to assure that the design basis
as described in the FSAR is transcribed into applicable specifications and
procedures and that these methods are adequately performed, inspected and
documented.
'
a. ' Procedures Review
The FSAR'in Section 3 describes the programmatic requirements and
classifies safety-related piping in various tables. The components /
'
systems are classed by safety class, standard or code applicability,
code class, quality assurance class and seismic design group in the
tables in Section 3.2. The piping program is in accordance with ASME
Section III.
l The classifications are further delineated in the Bechtel
Specification SL019PS004, Revision 8, " Criteria for Piping Design."
This document includes a service.index which describes piping system,
item code, quality class, design base reference, pressure, temperature,
material and specification code. The appended specification sheets
detail the materials and sizes for each service and design code. This
specification appears to be adequate.
. _ - . _ _ .
- - - _ - . . . ._ _- . . __. .
,
..-- +
14
"
The specification for " Fabrication of ASME Section III Piping 21/2 and
Larger," specification 4LO20PS0100, Revision 5,. outlines the methods
and procedures for conformance to ASME codes including materials,
'
welding, nondestructive examination cleaning, coating, heat treating
end workmanship. In reviewing this specification, it appears that it
.
is thorough and adequate in content.
I
Specification 5A010PS002, Revision 7, " Piping Erection and Field
Fabrication," delineates the parameters and. sets forth the guidelines
and inspection requirements from fabrication thru cleaning. .,
Procedure SSP-10, Revision 1, " Installation and Field Fabrication of
Piping," was reviewed for adequacy from requisition of materials until
final inspection of completed assemblies. The procedure was thorough
in the instruction for installation of assemblies, rework or edifica-
tion. Fabrication, bolting and final' inspection checklists were
adequate and had sign-offs for the major steps and hold points and
I'
provision for ANI or supervisory review.
Procedure SSP-12, Revision 1, "On-Site Shop Fabrication," details the
fabrication steps, from raw materials to completion of piping
assemblies at the fab shop. The procedure is inclusive of the
necessary steps and controls to assure proper workmanship, inspection
and ANI or supervisory review.
Other procedures reviewed which were relative to the functions of this
,
inspection were:
l
. The Project Quality Assurance Plan, Revision 8-- this document
describes the basic assignments of responsibility for each
particular phase of activity.
. QCP 9.1, Revision 6, " Weld Inspection" - Ebasco - details the
.
work process thru final inspection for the associated welding
effort.
. STP-PQPM Section 4, " Purchasing," Revision 4 - this procedure
, requires the inclusion of specification requirements into the
purchase order.
l
. STP-PQPM Section 18, " Audits," Revision 7.
.- SSP-13, Revision 1, "Haterials Control / Storage and Handling."
. SSP-22, Revision 1, " Piping System Cleanliness."
l
b. Control of Fabricated Piping Spool Pieces ,
Fifteen fabricated spool pieces in pipe yard A were selected at random
for verification of dimensions to the fabrication isometric drawing.-
Ten of the spools were fabricated under the direction of the present
l l -. - . .-. .- _
, ,
..'*
15
engineer (Bechtel) and five under the previous engineer (B&R). All of
the pieces were fabricated in the Southwest Fabricating Company shops
in Houston. Each assembly was inspected for damage, arc strikes, size,
protection and dimensions i.e., weld to weld, configuration, flange to
welds, angles and code markings and workmanship of welds.
The yard foreman was asked to locate the spools in the yard according
to the existing program used in controlling and locating each piece.
The 15 pieces were correctly spotted in the yard. It was also noted
that the materials in the yard were resting on wooden dunnage and the
yard was well drained and laid out by row and section. The pieces
examined were:
Auxiliary Feedwater Q2660-AF-38
Main Steam Q2659-MS-2
Reactor Co01 ant Q2660-RC-25
Reactor Coolant Q2660-RC-41
Reactor Coolant Q2660-RC-14
Safety Injection Q2660-SIR-29
Safety Injection Q2660-SI-61
Safety Injection Q2660-SI-31
Residual Heat Removal Q2660-RH-24
Residual Heat Removal Q6184-RH-109
Essential Cooling Water Q2661-EW-197
Essential Cooling Water Q2661-EW-260
Containment Spray Q6184-CS-40
Containment Spray Q6184-CS-27
Containment Spray Q6184-CS-127
No discrepancies were noted during the inspection of the fabricated
pre-installed piping spools.
c. System Walkdown and Inspection
An inspection of the major lines of the fabricated piping in the High
Head Safety Injection, Low Head Safety Injection and Containment Spray
System in Bays A, B, and C in the Fuel Handling Building at elevations
-2' to -30' was performed with the following results:
The suction side header consisted of 16" main pipe reducing to
12" for the Low Head, 10" for the High Head and 12" for the
Containment Spray. The three trains in each bay were examined
from the containment penetration to the second motor operated
valve on the header and to the pump. Approximately 125 linear
. feet of piping in each bay was inspected to the following
drawings:
'
2F369 PSI 572 sheets 3, 4, & 6
i 5F369PCS515 sheets 1, 2, & 3 i , k
*
..
_,
16
The discharge side of the High Head was 6" piping, the Low Head 8"
and the Containment Spray 8".- The three trains in each bay were
examined to the details of the drawings which were:
fe369 PSI 572 sheets 1, 2, & 7
2F369 PSI 572 sheet 5
SF369PCS515 sheets 1, 2, & 3
The examination included the piping from the pump to the
containment penetration. The piping inspected consisted of
approximately 300 linear feet in each bay.
No deficiencies were observed in the inspection of the th'ree systems
in each of three bays.
Also observed in the inspection was the cutting, cleaning, and
replacement of the Low Head suction pipe in Bay A. The cutting, weld
prep and weld out appeared satisfactory. The NRC inspector also
witnessed the flushing of part of the Low Head system in-the Fuel
Building and Containment Building.
d. Records Review
Qualification records for welders were reviewed in the Weld Test Shop
for five welders who were qualified to weld stainless steel in
addition to other types. The record of Welder Qualification Test
(ASME), Welder Qualification Test Record (AWS) and associated
documentation were reviewed for completeness, accuracy, adequacy, and
testing. These records were noted to be complete. Additionally, the
test shop facility was found to be clean and in order.
Training records .for mechanical-piping inspectors were reviewed in the
Ebasco training office for seven in'spectors who were qualified to
l different levels and types of inspection. The following records were
reviewed for cocpie'teness and included the Individual Quality
Assurance Training Summary, Summary of Qualification, procedure
certification, test scores and grades, training assignments, and sign
offs and examinations and scores. Also reviewed were work and
- experience history, education and training. No deficiencies were
!
noted in this area.
,
Nonconformance reporting concerning the safety injection system was
reviewed in order to assess the effectiveness of the program. Ten
!. NCRs were reviewed for legibility, completeness and review cycle or '
processing and resolution. The following nonconformance reports were
reviewed and found to be satisfactory:
C-M-00266-R2 C-P-00542-R0 C-P-03198-R0
F-M-03122-R0 C-P-00730-R0 C-P-03300-R0
B-N-03013-R0 C-P-00880-R0 C-P-03800-R2
C-P-00192-R2
! i
p --
,...= .
17
The HL&P audit schedule was reviewed and noted to indicate sufficient
audits in the piping area.
Fifteen packages of data for field welding _in the safety injection and
containment spray system were tracked through the review cycle and
into the records management system vault. The specific item reviewed
was the Process Data Checklist which is a record of all of the steps
involved in the weld. The following were reviewed and found to be
satisfactory.
Low Head suction A - SI-1101-FW0012 & FW0023
Low Head suction B - SI-1201-FW0006 & FW0017
Low Head suction C - SI-1301-FW0006 & FW0017
Containment Spray suction C - CS-1101-FW0001
Low Head discharge A - SI-1105-FW0002
Low Head discharge A - SI-1102-FW0002
Low Head discharge B - SI-1205-FW0002
Low Head discharge B - SI-1202-FW0002
Low Head discharge. C - SI-1305-FW0002
Low Head discharge C - SI-1302-FW0002
High Head discharge A - SI-1106-FWOO97
High Head discharge B - SI-1206-FW0001
High Head discharge C - SI-1306-FWOO39
In general, it was observed by the NRC inspector that the records are .
properly identified and stored and are readily retrievable from the
work stations and records vault.
9. Exit Interview
The NRC inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)
on February 14, 1986, and sumarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
J
}}