ML19344F295
| ML19344F295 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 04/05/1978 |
| From: | Crossman W, Randy Hall, Renee Taylor NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19344F268 | List:
|
| References | |
| 50-445-78-05, 50-445-78-5, 50-446-78-05, 50-446-78-5, NUDOCS 8009150093 | |
| Download: ML19344F295 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000445/1978005
Text
c
-@
, [*
.. U
O-
^
f,
.
.
,,
~ '[.(~
U. S. flVCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIO!!
.
OFFICE OF ItiSPECTI0il Atl0 EtiFORCEMEilT
REGI0ii IV.
Report tio.- 50-445/78-05; 56-446/78-05
Docket flo. S0-445; 50-446
Category A2
!
.
' Licensee: Texas Utilities Generating Company
. 2001 Bryan Tower
,
Dallas, Texas
75201
i,
Facility tiame: comanche Peak, Units 1 & 2
Inspection at: Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Glen Rose, Texas
.
-Inspection conducted: March 21-24,1978
h
.%.
Inspector:
/! Ib'u
/
- h7,F
R.'G.
lay
r, Reactor Inspector, Projects Section
Dat4
'
Other
Accompanying
m
Personnel:
R. E. Hall, Chief Engineering Support Section
.
.
R. J. Garcia, Engineering Aide, Engineering Support 3ection
Approved:
of/of/78
'
_
W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section
Date
Inspection Summary:
inspection on March 21-24,1978 (Report tio. 50-445/78-05: 50-446/78-05)
,
Areas inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection involving inspection of
reactor vessel storage; containment steel structures; and operations of
the on-site pipe fabrication shop. The inspection involved twenty-seven-
inspector-hours on' site by one tiRC inspector.
3esults:
Of the three areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or
.
deviations were found in t.o; ene apparent item of noncompliance was found
.
in one area (infraction
. failure to follow' pipe fabrication procedures -
paragraph 5).
-
!
=
ib *
oh
-
e
_
-
p
\\'
.__
__
,
_
..
.y..
g.=
-
.. ;
O
' e'~.
a-
P
1 67.
'
'
e .i
-DETAILS
<
.
1.
Pe~rsons Contacted
.
Principal Licensee Employees
- J. B. George, TUSI Project General Manager
- R. G. Tolson,.TUGC0 Site QA Supervisor
.
- J.- T. Merritt, TUSI Resident Manager
- B. J. Murray, TUSI Engineering Supervisor
'
- R.~ V. Fleck, TUGC0/G&H QA Planner
-
- -
- J. V. Hawkins, TUGC0/G&H QA Site Representative
A. H. Boren, TUGC0 QA Engineer
.
A. Vega, TUGC0 Senior lA Engineer
C. Biggs, TUGC0 Lead QA Engineer-Systems Compliance
Other Personnel
'
,
- U. D. Douglas, B&R Project Manager
t
- B. C. Scott, B&R Site QA Manager
- R. M. Osborne, B&R Senior QC Supervisor
K. Silverthorne, B&R QC Mechanical Engineer
,
G. Osborn, B&R QC Mechanical-Inspector
-
The inspector also interviewed other contractor ecployees during
"
the course of the inspection. They included-QA/QC and craft labor
personnel.
.
.
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
,
l
2 .-
Reactor Vessel Storace
[
The HRC inspector inspected the Unit 1 stored reactor vessel to
l
,
determine whether requirements are being met as set forth by Brown
1
& Root Storage and Maintenance Requirement MEI-10-424 for " Reactor
. M.
Vessel and Associated Equipment," which in turn references Westing-
.
house fluclear Stear. System Component Receiving and Storage Criteria,
.
Mechanical Equipment Section, Shop Order 105. The vessel was found
1
to be sealed and the desiccant indicator showing a proper dry con-
dition.
-
,
.
l
'
The NRC inspector reviewed 507, of QC inspection records covering
reactor vessel storage to' ascertain conformance with Brown & Root
Quality Instruction CP-QCI-1.6-ll, " Safety Related Mechanical and
'
Electrical Equipment Storage Maintenance," which implements the
l
maintenance inspection requirements of Brown & Root Quality Pro-
)
cedure CP-QCP-1.6, "QC Surveillance of Mechanical, Electrical and
1
'
fpp
-.
-
-2-
.
...x.
. . _ . - -
.
..
-..
,
a
-
n
m
'
i, .
-,
'
.
,
Instrumentation Equipment Maintenance," and ANSI M45.2.2.
The
- -
-
,
recogds cover the period from receipt of the vessel on June 20,
1977._/ , to the current time.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
..
3.
Containment Steel Structures
Taa NRC inspector chose Valve. Isolation Tanks Cpl-RHATVT-02 and
cpl-CTATVT-02 as representative of steel containment structures
important to safety.
The two tanks are utilized with two addi-
tional like tanks to enclose the containment isolation valves
leading from the containment drain sumps to the residual heat
removal and containment spray systems, respectively and are an
extension of the containment pressure boundary although not with-
in the containment.
The tanks were purchased under order CP-0069A, with four supple-
.ments.
Engineering Specification 2323-M-69A (Revision 2) is a
part of the purchase document which in turn references the ASME
B&PV Code,Section III,1974 to the Summer 74 Addenda. .The Sub-
sections involved are NC for the vessel and NF for the support
s truc tures .
'
The NRC inspector reviewed vendor documentation for six selected
--
portions of each tank and +.he related support structure.
The
>===
. _ . .
certified material tast reoorts for each item of material satisfied
requirements of the applicable material specifications and the
nondestructive test repo; ts indicated acceptable weld quality for
the various welded joints involved.
The data package also included
the ASME Code certification and a " Quality Releace," signed by G&H
quality assurance vendor surveillance personnel.
It was noted that
the actual weld radiographs and vendor work process documents were
not available at the site as required by Engineering Specification
2323-M-69A although the " Quality Release" document indicated each
had been reviewed prior to release.
Brown & Root Material / Equip-
ment Control History Report No.1747, dated August 2,1976, ack-
nowledged receipt of the equipment, but noted that necessary quality
documentation had not been received.
The report was subsequently
cleared upon receipt of the documentation.
It could not be ascer-
tained from report 1747 whether the radiographs and work process
documents had been received and subsequently misfiled or never
received at all.
This will be considered an unresolved item pending an opportunity
to review the missing radiographs and documents.
,
i
1/ inspection Report No. 50-445/77-07
-3-
.
. . - . - .
- . . .
,
.
L...
p
n
m
~,
/
- 4.
Potential 10 CFR 50.55(o) Itcm
-
.
,
During the course of the inspection, the licensee became aware
of an incident involving the Unit 1 pressurizer and so informed
the IE inspector.
The incident occurred in railroad yards near
Tallahassee, Florida when a wheel of the rail car transporting
the pressurizer broke causing the car to derail.
It is under-
stood that the pressurizer was not dislodged from the car and
appeared to suffer no damage. The licensee will inspect the
pressurizer upon receipt at the site and will furnish RIV with
information relative to its condition. The IE inspector will
follow up on this item during a subsequent inspection.
5.
Pipe Fabrication Shoo
The IE inspector conducted an examination of the activities of
the Brown & Root pipe fabrication shop observing material control,
documentation generation, welding, identification and temporary
' storage of partially and completely fabricated pipe spools.
The IE inspector noted that one partially fabricated pipe section
for a safety related system, consisting of three inch schedule
160 stainless steel material, had been counterbored preparatory
-
to welding. The transition between the counterbored diameter and
the original pipe inside diameter at the end of the counterbore
appeared to be unusually steep.
P""""
It was subsequently established that no prect'sion measuring equip-
ment was available at the site to measure the transition angle
and that complete reliance was being placed on the ccnfiguration
of the cutting tool to provide
,e correct angle.
Examination
of the cutting tool, coupled with simple computations, established
that the tool could not provide transition angles of 30 or less
as required by Construction Procedure 35-1195-MCP-7, Revision 1,
and the ASME B&PV Code except in a few nontypical instances where
very shallow counterbore cuts were, being made.
.
Failure to counterbore the pipe as required by Construction Proce-
dure 35-1195-MCP-7 represents noncompliance with the requirements
in Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50.
6.
Unresolved Items
.
-
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required
in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of non-
,
compliance, or deviations. An unresolved item disclosed during the
inspection is discussed in paragraph 3 and will hereafter be referred
to as " Unavailable Vendor Quality Documentation."
.
-4-
__
_
_
--
.
1
7
m
g.
7-3,
-
, ,
,
7
.
m
-
. .
. .
f.-
l$ <. . , . .
.
.
.
.
'
,
.
e **
7;
' Exit Interview
.
,
-The inspector met with. licensee representatives (denoted in para-
Ae
graph .1) at the conclusion of the inspection on !! arch 24, 1978.
The. inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
t
'
.The' licensee' representatives had no questions relative to the-
..p-
findings.
,
9
e
I
,
D
.
s
, *
.
O
-
I
.
.
.
eu.
h.iS i'
W
'
.
i
e
S
.4
e
h
b
!
e
6
[.
. ~ , -.
z t.ffb
-
-
.
1
-5-
'
-l
.)
=
...
..
.
-
...
. - _ -
.
.
. _ .
.,
-.
..
'
,
. , . _
_
m.-
.i. _
,