ML20205L966: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Adams | |||
| number = ML20205L966 | |||
| issue date = 03/24/1987 | |||
| title = Const Insp Repts 50-445/86-20 & 50-446/86-17 on 860701-0831.Violations Noted:Failure to Specify Documents/ Revs,Describe Work Operations & Failure of Qa/Qc to Adequately Monitor/Assure Traveler Sys Implementation | |||
| author name = Barnes I, Phillips H, Spessard R, Wagner P | |||
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) | |||
| addressee name = | |||
| addressee affiliation = | |||
| docket = 05000445, 05000446 | |||
| license number = | |||
| contact person = | |||
| document report number = 50-445-86-20, NUDOCS 8704020235 | |||
| package number = ML20205L898 | |||
| document type = INSPECTION REPORT, NRC-GENERATED, INSPECTION REPORT, UTILITY, TEXT-INSPECTION & AUDIT & I&E CIRCULARS | |||
| page count = 23 | |||
}} | |||
See also: [[see also::IR 05000445/1986020]] | |||
=Text= | |||
{{#Wiki_filter:- . . . - .. .- .- . . _ -- - . _ . . . . . . | |||
.. ,; | |||
APPENDIX B | |||
I | |||
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION REPORT | |||
: U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION | |||
' REGION IV | |||
i | |||
i | |||
! | |||
' | |||
NRC Inspection Report: 50-445/86-20 Permits: CPPR-126 | |||
50-446/86-17- CPPR-127 | |||
: Dockets: 50-445 Category: A2 | |||
50-446 | |||
!~ | |||
Construction Permit. | |||
Expiration Dates: | |||
Unit 1: August 1, 1988 | |||
j Unit 2: August 1,:1987; - | |||
1 | |||
j Applicant: Texas Utilities Electric Company. , | |||
, Skyway Tower . ., | |||
~ ., | |||
', _ | |||
400 North Olive Street # | |||
^~ ' | |||
Lock Box 81 - | |||
_ | |||
Dallas, Texas 75201 - ' ., , | |||
, | |||
i , | |||
- | |||
3 s . | |||
1 Facility Name: Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES),. Units.'1 & 2 . | |||
, | |||
~ 4 | |||
Inspection At: | |||
~ | |||
l Glen Rose,-Texas . . . . , | |||
, ..,. | |||
+ | |||
3 | |||
-+ > | |||
1 ' | |||
- ? | |||
j | |||
. | |||
Inspection Conducted: July 1 through August 31, 1986.' > | |||
' | |||
' | |||
Inspectors: - | |||
* | |||
3/4 V/f7 | |||
j H. S. Phillip(, Senior R%sident Reactor Date | |||
; | |||
Inspector, Construction, Region IV | |||
' | |||
CPSES Group | |||
! (paragraphs 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, ' | |||
; and 10) | |||
t | |||
@,C.LJa9 A s/24/sy | |||
l P. C. Wagner, Reactor Vnspector, Region IV Date | |||
j CPSES Group | |||
j (paragraph 9) | |||
. | |||
i | |||
j | |||
j | |||
' | |||
Consultants: EG&G - A. Maughan (paragraph 9) | |||
Parameter - J. G. Gibson (paragraph 9) | |||
i 8704020235 870330 | |||
1 PDR ADOCK 05000445 | |||
1 G PDR | |||
i | |||
, . | |||
2 | |||
] | |||
Reviewed By: 8 F7 | |||
R. L. Spessard7 Deputy Director, Division of Date | |||
Inspection Programs, Office of Inspection | |||
and Enforcement | |||
Approved: 8% 3/27/97 | |||
I. Barnes, Chief, Region IV CPSES Group Date | |||
Inspection Summary | |||
Inspection Conducted: July 1 through August 31, 1986 (Report 50-445/86-20) | |||
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannouriced inspection of applicant actions on | |||
previous NRC findings. | |||
Results: Within the one area inspected, one violation, with multiple examples, | |||
was identified (failure to specify documents / revisions, describe work | |||
operations, and obtain Westinghouse approval on travelers, paragraphs 5b(2) and | |||
5b(3) and failure of QA/QC to adequately monitor / assure traveler system | |||
implementation, paragraph Sc). | |||
Inspection Conducted: July 1 through August 31, 1986 (Report 50-446/86-17) | |||
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of plant status; general | |||
plant conditions; applicant actions on previous hRC findings; installation of | |||
electrical, mechanical, and support components; safety-related pipe welding; | |||
steam generator installation; control rod position detectors; and electrical | |||
work activities. | |||
Results: Within the eight areas inspected, two violations one with multiple | |||
examples, were identified (a. failure to specify document / revision and obtain | |||
Westinghouse approval on NSSS equipment travelers, paragraph 5b(2); failure to | |||
describe work operations or reference procedures in travelers, paragraph 5b(3); | |||
failure of QA/QC to adequately monitor /e sure traveler system implementation, | |||
paragraph Sc; failure to have work traveler package at worksite, paragraph 6; | |||
b. failure to issue NCR on steam generator name plates and documentation, | |||
paragraph 7). | |||
. . | |||
3 | |||
DETAILS | |||
1. Persons Contacted | |||
Applicant Personnel | |||
! ***J. Audas, Senior Licensing Engineer, Texas Utilities Generating | |||
Company (TUGCo) | |||
***J. Barker, Engineering Assurance Manager, TUGCo | |||
**T. Brandt, TUGCo Quality Engineering (QE) Supervisor, EBASCO | |||
**R. Camp, Project Manager, Unit 1, TUGCo | |||
*W. Counsil, Executive Vice President, TUGCo | |||
*P. Halstead, Manager, Quality Control (QC), TUGCo | |||
*J. Kuykendall, Vice President, TUGCo | |||
D. McAfee, Quality Assurance (QA) Manager, TUGCo | |||
***J. Krechting, Director of Engineering, TUGCo | |||
**J. Merritt, Director of Construction, TUGCo | |||
**L. Nace, Vice President, TUGCo | |||
*J. Streeter, Director of QA, TUGCo | |||
. | |||
***T. Tyler, Comanche Peak Response Team (CPRT) Program Director, TUGCo | |||
*F. Powers, Assistant Unit 1 Project Manager, TUGCo | |||
****C. Welch, QC Services Supervisor, TUGCo | |||
Contractor Personnel | |||
R. Baker, Assistant Manager Regulatory Compliance, Brown & Root | |||
(B&R) | |||
R. Vurpillat, QA Manager, B&R | |||
B. Wright, Welding Engineer, B&R | |||
The NRC inspectors also interviewed other applicant employees during this | |||
inspection period. | |||
* Denotes personnel present at the August 7, 1986, exit interview. | |||
** Denotes personnel present at August 7 and September 5, 1986, exit | |||
interviews. | |||
*** Denotes personnel present at September 5, 1986, exit interview. | |||
**** Applicant representative at August 13, 1986, meeting to discuss | |||
details of violations identified. See paragraph 10 of this report. | |||
2. Plant Status, Unit 2 | |||
, | |||
The NRC inspector discussed the status of work with TUGCo and contractor | |||
: (electrical and mechanical) management personnel. Project status reports | |||
, | |||
, , , - - = * ~ | |||
_ | |||
. . | |||
4 | |||
were also reviewed. Construction has turned over approximately 56% of the | |||
subsystems to TUGCo Startup and overall construction is about 83% | |||
complete. | |||
3. General Plant Inspections, Unit 2 | |||
I | |||
At various times during the inspection period, the NRC inspector conducted | |||
general inspections of the Unit 2 reactor, safeguards, and diesel | |||
generator buildings. Selected rooms in these buildings were inspected to | |||
observe current work activities or major safety related equipment which | |||
was stored in place. The storage inside these buildings and the storage | |||
area for steel supports located just outside Unit 2 were also inspected. | |||
l One backshift inspection was performed during this inspection period. | |||
No violations or deviations were identified. | |||
> | |||
4. Applicant Actions on Previous NRC Inspection Findings, Units 1 and 2 | |||
l | |||
l a. (0 pen) Unresolved Item (445/8516-U-04; 446/8513-U-04): Applicant | |||
l action on IE Bulletin 79-28. In early November 1985, the NRC | |||
i | |||
inspector found that 2 of 14 NAMCO switches inspected had | |||
< | |||
identification numbers on the travelers which did not match the | |||
l identification numbers on switches installed on residual heat | |||
removal (RHR) valves 1-HCV-606 and 1-FCV-618. At this time only | |||
travelers EE82-1415-5801 and EE83-1851-5801 were found; however, | |||
l approximately 1 1/2 to 2 months later, TUGCo located and submitted | |||
travelers EE83-0459-5801 and EE83-0373-5801 to the NRC inspector to | |||
show that the identification of installed switches was consistent. | |||
with the documentation. | |||
The NRC inspector found that the number of switches replaced in | |||
Unit 2 was unavailable. After the NRC inspection period ended, two | |||
generic nonconformance reports (NCRs) E83-01074, R2 and E83-01077, | |||
which required replacement of switches in Unit 2, were located. This | |||
, specific item remains unresolved pending the review of the NCRs and | |||
i corrective actions for Unit 2. | |||
b. (Closed) Unresolved Item (445/8614-U-02; 446/8611-U-04): Redlining | |||
cable tray welds on new design drawings. This item pertained to the | |||
practice of redlining new design drawings when craft / engineering | |||
inspected and found undersized welds on cable trays which had been | |||
i previously installed, inspected, and accepted to old design | |||
! documents. | |||
f | |||
The NRC inspector reviewed the documentation maintained by the TUGCo | |||
QA organization and found that nonconformances will not be generated | |||
because Corrective Action Report (CAR) No. 53, Revisions 0, 1, and 2, | |||
dated November 26, 1985, January 3 and 31, 1986, will cover this item | |||
generically. The redlined drawings identifying these undersized | |||
welds will be maintained or referenced in the CAR file to show | |||
deficiencies identified and corrected as a part of the generic | |||
_. . - . -. ~ .- -. - - | |||
__ | |||
. . | |||
5 | |||
corrective action. The final step after correcting or modifying | |||
these hangers will be QC inspection for acceptance and, if | |||
unacceptable welds or as-built conditions are identified at this | |||
point, NCRs will be issued. | |||
No violations or deviations were identified. | |||
5. Installation of Electrical, Mechanical, and Support Components, Units 1 | |||
and 2 | |||
a. Review of Procedures, Instructions, and Drawings | |||
The NRC inspector reviewed B&R Procedure CP-CPM-6.3, Revision 1, | |||
dated 1978, through Revision 12, dated July 14, 1986, and found that | |||
the traveler controls the work activities either by the description | |||
of work on the traveler or through references to multiple | |||
construction procedures, drawings, specifications, and other | |||
documents which control work activities. The traveler is also used | |||
as a QC checklist to assure that work activities are performed and | |||
documents the inspection in those cases where no inspection report is | |||
required. As a result of this review, two open items were identified | |||
i | |||
as follows. | |||
- | |||
Paragraph 3.1.1 of CP-CPM-6.3 discusses Westinghouse (W) site | |||
organizational approval of travelers when work involves Nuclear Steam | |||
System Supplier (NSSS) equipment. Although it is clear that major | |||
equipment travelers must be approved, this paragraph does not clearly | |||
state whether this means only large equipment, small equipment, or | |||
all equipment. The W role is also unclear as their organization is | |||
- | |||
> | |||
not described in the TUGCo QA program. This is an open item | |||
(445/8620-0-01; 446/8617-0-01). | |||
Attachment 3 of B&R Procedure CP-QAP-12. " Mechanical, Component | |||
Installation Verification N-5 Certification," Revision 7, dated | |||
April 4, 1986, shows 18 items that are verified on the operational | |||
traveler for N-5 Certification. Item No. 18 involves verifying the | |||
code class of items. Procedure CP-CPM-6.3 for processing travelers | |||
does not address entering the code class. This is an open item | |||
(445/8620-0-02; 446/8617-0-02). | |||
b. Inspection of Completed Work and Records | |||
The NRC inspector observed completed work rather than work in | |||
progress because major safety-related components have been in place | |||
for some time. This activity was accomplished by observing | |||
components in place and reviewing records of work activities. | |||
l | |||
(1) Receipt Inspection, Material Certification, and Nonconformance l | |||
; | |||
Reports 1 | |||
The NRC inspector reviewed nine receiving inspection reports, ; | |||
five material receiving reports, eight }{ quality releases, and ; | |||
; | |||
; | |||
, | |||
. . | |||
6 | |||
two nonconforming reports for NSSS components listed in | |||
Appendix C, Table 1. | |||
No violations or deviations were identified. | |||
(2) Traveler Preparation, Review, and Approval | |||
The NRC inspector selected 21 travelers that were processed | |||
between 1979 and 1983 which controlled work such as rigging, | |||
setting, and installation of NSSS equipment. These travelers | |||
were reviewed to determine if they were prepared, reviewed, and | |||
approved in accordance with Procedure CP-CPM-6.3. | |||
Procedure CP-CPM-6.3, Revisions 1-12, has consistently required | |||
general information on the traveler such as traveler number; | |||
equipment number; reactor unit number; quantity; activity | |||
description; reference drawings; specification, work procedure | |||
and/or engineering instruction; location of work system; and | |||
review / approval block. This information is required in blocks | |||
1-10 of the traveler form. This information was generally on the | |||
traveler except for the following information which was of ten | |||
missing in blocks 7 and 8 of the form; i.e., reference drawings | |||
and specifications, work procedure and/or engineering instructions. | |||
Paragraph 2.1.1 of CP-CPM-6.3 requires that operations, | |||
description, methods, and procedures (including instructions) be | |||
provided on the traveler by number and revision. | |||
Paragraph 3.1.2 states that it is the responsibility of the | |||
organization controlling the traveler to ensure that the current | |||
document revision number is referenced on the traveler. | |||
, Paragraph 3.1.1 requires the discipline engineers or | |||
construction personnel to obtain }{ approval of the traveler if | |||
it involves NSSS equipment. | |||
The NRC inspector found that 16 of 21 travelers processed to | |||
control work on NSSS equipment were not prepared and reviewed in | |||
full accordance with paragraphs 2.1.1, 3.1.1, and 3.1.2 of | |||
CP-CPM-6.3 as shown in Appendix C, Table 2; i.e., | |||
document / revision and W approval. | |||
The NRC inspector selected seven additional travelers to | |||
determine if recently processed travelers were processed in | |||
accordance with CP-CPM-6.3. These travelers, listed in | |||
Appendix C, Table 3, were processed from 1984 to 1986 and were | |||
used to control electrical, mechanical, and hanger work | |||
activities. | |||
In addition to procedural requirements previously referenced, | |||
paragraph 2.2.1 of later revisions of CP-CPM-6.3 (Revisions 10 | |||
._ . . . . _ _ _ .- ._ __ | |||
. . | |||
7 | |||
' | |||
through 12) requires that room location, where work will be | |||
done, be provided. | |||
The NRC inspector found that each of the seven recently | |||
processed travelers were not prepared and reviewed in full | |||
compliance with paragraphs 2.1.1, 2. 2.1, 3.1.1, or 3.1. 2 as | |||
shown in Appendix C, Table 3. Blocks 7, 8, 9, and 10 did not | |||
contain the information required; i.e., document / revision, | |||
location, and system. | |||
This failure to prepare and adequately review travelers to | |||
assure that the correct documents and revisions are specified | |||
and obtain W approval for work on NSSS equipment is a violation | |||
' | |||
of Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 (445/8620-V-03; | |||
446/8617-V-03). | |||
(3) Installation Instructions for NSSS Equipment and Accessories | |||
(a) The NRC inspector evaluated completed work described on | |||
travelers for two large heavy pieces of NSSS equipment, | |||
nitrogen air tank (CP2-SIATRT-01) and accumulator | |||
(TCX-SIATRT-03), a part of the Unit 2 Safety Injection | |||
; System. | |||
Paragraph 2.1.1 of CP-CPM-6.3, Revision 9, requires that | |||
' | |||
the traveler not only provide the general information | |||
previously discussed, but also requires detailed | |||
a | |||
information described in the work operations. Any other | |||
information as required to successfully complete the | |||
operation in accordance with applicable requirements is | |||
also required. | |||
The following traveler deficiencies in the description of | |||
work operations (steps) were identified: | |||
. | |||
1) Traveler ME83-2702-5700 for installing tank No. 1, | |||
4 dated March 8, 1983, did not reference MCP-1 General | |||
Installation of Mechanical Equipment, or incorporate | |||
the necessary procedural steps of this procedure into | |||
the traveler. As required by paragraph 4.1.2, the | |||
traveler did not specify minimum clearance between | |||
equipment base and foundation. As required by | |||
paragraph 4.2.3 of Revision 3, rigging traveler | |||
RI83-1051-5700 for tank No. 1 did not specify that QC | |||
will be notified 24 hours prior to equipment | |||
installation and did not describe t.he loading and | |||
, transporting equipment used. | |||
2) As required by paragraphs ,.2 2, 4.2.4, and 4.2 of | |||
' | |||
MCP-1, Revision 3, trav.ser MC79-260-5700 for tank | |||
No. 3 did not descri b the leveling and shimming to | |||
, | |||
- _ _ - - . - | |||
, | |||
. . | |||
8 | |||
assure proper installation. It also did not include | |||
i an operation which describes tightening the nuts to | |||
secure the tank to anchor bolts. | |||
; 3) In the operational steps of the traveler for tank | |||
l No. 3, grouting was specified in accordance with | |||
CPP-16; however, no revision was documented on the | |||
traveler. | |||
4) Operation Nos. 2 and 5 were revised after the traveler | |||
: was approved. Operation No. 2 was a minor change; | |||
I | |||
however, No. 5 was a major revision as a step which | |||
had been left out was added. Such changes were not | |||
approved or noted as revisions. | |||
, (b) The NRC inspector reviewed travelers and found that work | |||
l steps or operations for Class 1E switches installed on | |||
valve 1-HCV-606 did not adequately describe all work | |||
operations or reference appropriate project procedures. | |||
The following are examples: | |||
1) Operation No. 1 on traveler EE82-1415-5801 differed | |||
from that contained in traveler EE83-0459-5801, a | |||
traveler which replaced the same switch, in that | |||
EE82-1415-5801 traveler cautioned that determinating | |||
the conductors should be done gently to prevent damage | |||
while the other traveler did not mention this | |||
instruction. Both travelers stated that NAMCO | |||
switches should be determinated "per standard | |||
construction practices"; however, this standard | |||
practice was neither described in the traveler nor | |||
referenced in a written instruction such as Procedure | |||
EEI-8, " Class IE and Non-Class IE Cable Termination," | |||
or other standard instruction manual. Similarly, | |||
Operation No. 5 of traveler EE82-1415-5801 stated that | |||
retermination should be done "per standard I | |||
l construction practices." l | |||
l l | |||
2) Traveler EE83-0459-5801 stated that back cover screws | |||
should be torqued to 20 in-lbs, per EEI-21 but | |||
! EE82-1415-5801 traveler did not mention EEI-21 in | |||
l block 8 or in subsequent traveler operations. Neither | |||
! traveler stated whether the installation should be in | |||
accordance with paragraphs 3.0, 4.0, or 5.0 (which are | |||
instructions for different locations of switches). | |||
Traveler EE82-1415-5801 did not clearly describe the | |||
torquing of terminal and top cover screws as described , | |||
l in EEI-21, Revision 0, dated August 20, 1982. l | |||
l | |||
, | |||
. . | |||
9 | |||
This failure to provide or describe work operations is a violation of | |||
Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 (445/8620-V-04; | |||
446/8617-V-04). | |||
c. QA/QC Monitoring of System Implementation | |||
The NRC inspector reviewed QA/QC activities concerning the | |||
development, review, approval, and inspection activities in 28 work | |||
travelers (Appendix C, Tables 2 and 3) which cover work that was | |||
accomplished between 1979 to August 1986. | |||
Paragraph 2.1 of CP-CPM-6.3, Revision 12, states that the B&R Site QA | |||
Manager is responsible for monitoring the implementation of this | |||
system. | |||
The NRC inspector found that the system had not been adequately | |||
monitored to assure implementation. Twenty-three of 28 travelers, | |||
dating back to 1979, contained one or more deficiencies and were not | |||
adequately reviewed to assure compliance with construction, QA | |||
procedures and the equipment manufacturer's manual. Seven travelers | |||
(EE86-41073-2-4901, EE84-40170-2-5501, EC85-JB-2C-4870 | |||
EE86-4069-2-5701, HS86-4450-1-3100, HS86-4293-1-4900, and | |||
MP85-4901-5100) are recent examples which indicate this condition | |||
currently exists. Specific examples are as follows: | |||
i | |||
' | |||
(1) Paragraph 3.6 of CP-CPM-6.3, Revisions 5 and 9 in effect in | |||
1979 and 1982, requires that revisions, regardless of their | |||
significance, shall be documented by revision numbers and a | |||
description of the change after the last step of the traveler. | |||
Travelers RI83-1051-5700 (1-19-83), Operation 5 for rigging and | |||
hoisting a tank added a step; dimensions were changed on | |||
ME83-2702-5700 (3-8-83), Attachment No. 1; and ME79-260-5700 | |||
(3-27-79), Attachment No. 1, without documenting revision number | |||
or describing the change. | |||
(2) Paragraph 2.2.1 of CP-CPM-6.3, Revision 11, dated August 8, | |||
1984, and Revision 12, dated July 14, 1986, requires the QC | |||
inspector to annotate the applicable inspection / revision numbers | |||
on the traveler operation at the time of the inspection. | |||
Paragraph 3.1.2 of CP-CPM-6.3, Revisions 11 and 12, which were | |||
in effect in 1985 and 1986 requires the CC inspector to record | |||
the design document revision level used at the time of final | |||
inspection. | |||
, | |||
Columns 3 and 4 of Table 3 of Appendix C shows that QC inspectors | |||
* | |||
did not annotate inspection and/or revision numbers on four of | |||
seven travelers and did not record the design document revision | |||
level on three of seven travelers used at the time of final | |||
inspection. In addition, paragraph 3.0 of QI-QP-11.1-47 | |||
Revision 10, dated June 21, 1984, " Electrical Inspection of | |||
Class IE Limit Swifches," states, in part, "The QC inspector | |||
i | |||
. . | |||
. . | |||
10 , | |||
shall inspect the installation of Class IE limit switches to the | |||
latest revision of all referenced documents." | |||
4 | |||
Specifically, traveler EE84-40170-2-5501, part No. 1 did not | |||
reference EEI-21 and EEI-8 and the QC inspector did not annotate | |||
the applicable inspection procedure revision number on the | |||
traveler at the time of inspection as required by CP-CPM-6.3, | |||
Revision 11. Therefore, there is no indication on the traveler | |||
that the inspection was accomplished to the proper revision; | |||
and likewise for traveler EE86-41073-2-4901. Similarly, | |||
EE83-0459-5801 did not state, as required, current procedures | |||
and revisions which were used. | |||
(3) Paragraph 3.2 of B&R Procedure QI-QAP-11.1-39, Revision 0 (2-2-83), | |||
i states, in part, "QCI shall verify . . . b. The top of the concrete | |||
foundations are free of oil, grease, and foreign materials." | |||
No such operation or inspection was described on traveler | |||
ME83-2702-5700 (3-8-83) for setting the nitrogen air tank. | |||
(4) Paragraph 3.4.1 of QI-QAP-11.1-39, Revision 0 (2-2-83) states, | |||
in part, "QCI shall verify that equipment is positioned, oriented, | |||
and set to elevation as shown on Level / Location / Elevation / Record | |||
(Attachment 1)" and paragraph 5.0 states, in part, "QCI shall | |||
sign and date . . . Record (Attachment 1)." | |||
! Attachment 1 of ME83-2702-5700 (3-8-83) was not signed and | |||
! dated by the QC inspector to show that the nitrogen air tank was | |||
installed as required. | |||
! | |||
(5) Paragraph 3.4.2.2 of QI-QAP-11.1-39, Revision 0 (2-2-83) states, | |||
in part, "b. All equipment excluding rotating equipment and heat | |||
i exchangers may be set using a carpenter's level placed on the | |||
; base of machined surface, as appropriate. The equipment shall | |||
be shimmed so that the bubble is contained between the two | |||
closest lines on the level. NOTE: for a. and b. above, (quipment | |||
setting requiring grout, a minimum grout space of one inch shall | |||
, be provided at the point of minimum clearance between the | |||
equipment bases and concrete foundation." | |||
l | |||
Neither a minimum clearance was specified on traveler | |||
ME83-2702-5700 (3-8-83) nor was the applicable construction | |||
Procedure MCP-1, Revision 3, referenced. No evidence of | |||
inspection was shown on the traveler. | |||
(6) Paragraph 3.4.3 of QI-QAP-11.1-39, Revision 0 (2-2-83) states, in | |||
part, "QCI shall verify that anchor bolt threads are not damaged | |||
prior to and during the setting of equipment." | |||
.. . ._. - | |||
-- | |||
_ _ . - | |||
. . | |||
11 | |||
: | |||
Traveler HE83-2702-5700 (3-8-83) neither specified the inspection | |||
of anchor bolt threads in the operational steps nor addressed | |||
the tightening of the bolts. | |||
j This failure to adequately monitor traveler implementation to assure | |||
completeness and compliance with QA/QC and construction procedures is a | |||
' | |||
violation of Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 (445/8620-V-05; | |||
446/8617-V-05). | |||
; 6. Safety-Related Pipe Welding, Unit 2 | |||
The NRC inspector observed mainsteam spool piece MS2-RB-29-1 which was on | |||
the 905' elevation of the reactor building. The ends were being prepared | |||
: for welding field weld (FW) No. I which will join the spool piece to the | |||
' | |||
steam outlet of the steam generator No. 3. The various welding activities | |||
are recorded on weld data card No. 650239. | |||
' | |||
On July 2, 1986, in the same general location, the NRC inspector observed | |||
the post weld heat treatment of FW-27 on a 6-inch feedwater line | |||
FW-2-RB-024R-2 which is shown on Drawing FW-2-RB-024R-2. During a | |||
!, discussion with the attendant who was monitoring the heat treatment | |||
controls, the NRC inspector learned that he was in training. Copies of | |||
the work traveler and checklist were requested; however, they were not at | |||
the work site but were located a considerable distance away at the weld | |||
rod room outside containment. | |||
Paragraph 3.2 of CP-CPM-6.3, Revision 12, dated July 14, 1986, requires | |||
that the work traveler package remain in the work area until the work has | |||
been completed and accepted by QA/QC or until the end of the shift, which | |||
ever is first. This failure to maintain the traveler package in the work | |||
area is a violation of Criterion V of Appendix to of 10 CFR Part 50 | |||
(446/8617-V-06). | |||
7. _ Inspection for Steam Generator No. 4 Installation | |||
The NRC inspector. reviewed Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), | |||
Section 5.0, Volume 1, Figure 1-2-18, Amendment 10 dated 1980; | |||
Figure 5.1-1, " Flow Diagram Reactor Coolant System," Amendment 54 dated | |||
January 1985; and Gibbs & Hill, Inc. Drawings 2323-A2-502, Revision | |||
(Rev.) 5, 2323-A2-0503, Revision 4, and 2323-0504, Revision 4, to select | |||
and inspect components. Steam generator loop No. 4 was identified in the | |||
FSAR and Gibbs & Hill drawings as Spin No. TCX-RCPCSG-04 and this | |||
i | |||
component was selected in order to continue a previous inspection; i.e., | |||
the pressurizer (which is a part of loop No. 4) had been previously | |||
4 inspected. | |||
In July 1986, the NRC inspector reviewed installation records (which were | |||
in the QA records vault) for steam generator loop No. 4 spin | |||
: | |||
No. TCX-RCPCSG-04, to complete the planned inspection; however, an | |||
inspection performed during the August 1986 inspection period revealed | |||
j | |||
' | |||
that records previously reviewed were actually for the steam generator | |||
located in loop No. 1, compartment No. 1. This matter was pursued by | |||
._ _ _ | |||
_. .. | |||
_ __ . | |||
l | |||
1 | |||
. . | |||
l | |||
12 | |||
l | |||
, | |||
l | |||
discussing the deficiency with W personnel. The NRC inspector found that | |||
no NCR had been written; however, several letters (written in 1980) | |||
discussed the fact that the spin numbers were incorrect. Texas Utilities , | |||
Service, Inc. letter (CPPA-6244) dated August 25, 1980, and l | |||
telecommunications (TWX #12,309) dated June 27, 1980, requested W to | |||
correct the deficiency by changing the name plates and documentation. The | |||
name plates and documentation were not changed. As a result, the ' | |||
hardware, the FSAR, drawings, and QA documentation is incorrectly | |||
identified. The same is true for loops 2 and 3. Subsequent to NRC | |||
identification of this condition, NCRs M-2875, M-2876, M-2877, and M-2878 | |||
i were written. | |||
This failure to write an NCR and correct FSAR and Gibbs & Hill drawings is | |||
a violation of Criterion XVI of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 | |||
(446/8617-V-07). | |||
8. Installation of Control Rod Position Detectors. Unit 2 | |||
a. Storage / Handling | |||
The NRC inspector observed the storage and handling of three control , | |||
rod drive (CRO) position detectors (equipment No. TCX-RCPCRV-01) | |||
which were removed from the warehouse "C" to the staging area at | |||
Unit 2 equipment hatch. The handling of these components was | |||
controlled by traveler HW86-7528-2-5501 which authorized movement to | |||
the 905' elevation of the reactor building. The rigging was | |||
accomplished in accordance with B&R Procedure CP-24, Revision 4, | |||
dated June 26, 1980. | |||
b. Detector Installation | |||
The NRC inspector witnessed the cleaning (with demineralized water) | |||
of the CR0 rod travel housing which the detector fits over. Detector | |||
M2-SN34SH00194 was placed in accordance with the traveler and | |||
W Drawing 1533E84, Revision 3. The NRC inspector observed detector | |||
Nos. 04, and L3 which had previously been placed, | |||
c. Installation Record l | |||
The NRC inspector reviewed the subject traveler, drawing, and the | |||
sign off sheet attached to the traveler. | |||
' | |||
No violations or deviations were identified. | |||
9. Inspection of Electrical Work Activities. Unit 2 | |||
The NRC inspector observed the following, in process, electrical work | |||
activities: | |||
l \ | |||
l | |||
! | |||
. | |||
t | |||
l . . | |||
l | |||
l | |||
13 | |||
! | |||
I | |||
a. Installation of Class IE Cable | |||
l | |||
(1) Cable Reel Storage | |||
The NRC inspector toured the electrical cable storage yard to | |||
' | |||
evaluate the adequacy of the storage activities. The NRC | |||
l inspector noted that all cable reels were uniquely identificd by | |||
number and that those reels which had not, as yet, been QC | |||
accepted were segregated from the others. The NRC inspector | |||
l | |||
noted that plastic sheeting was used to cover the Class 1E | |||
cables and verified that the cable ends, for approximately ten | |||
Class 1E cables, were sealed with either heat shrink tubing caps | |||
or electrical tape, | |||
. | |||
i | |||
No violations or deviations were identified. | |||
(2) In-Process Storage | |||
The NRC inspector made the following observations of in process | |||
cable stor N ': | |||
(a) Cables removed from cable tray T240SF0, located in the | |||
Unit 2 safeguards building, were coiled, hung from piping, | |||
and covered with plastic for protection while modifications | |||
were performed on the cable tray. In addition, the | |||
immediate area was roped-off and tagged "No work in area | |||
without QC notification." | |||
(b) Cables to be installed in cable tray T240RDD, located near | |||
electrical penetration assembly 2E65 on the inside of the | |||
Unit 2 reactor building, were coiled, hung from | |||
scaffolding, and covered with flame retardant material in | |||
preparation for being connected to the penetration | |||
assembly. . | |||
(c) Cables in cable trays T23GRCL and T22GRBM, located in the | |||
lower level of the Unit 2 reactor building, were protected | |||
from painting activities in the area by wrapping the trays | |||
with plastic sheeting. | |||
As part of daily plant tours, the NRC inspector verified that | |||
electrical cables were protected from cutting, grinding, and | |||
welding activities in their vicinity by covering with fire | |||
retardant blankets or boards during these activities. The NRC | |||
inspector also observed: (1) that cable, cable tray and conduit | |||
identification, both color coding and numerical designations, l | |||
were being properly applied and maintained; and (2) that damaged I | |||
' | |||
components were identified by red "QC lloid" tags, indicating | |||
that NCRs were written for the disposition of the problem. | |||
I | |||
l No violations or deviations were identified. | |||
I i | |||
i | |||
l | |||
l | |||
- _- _- | |||
- _- . . - . | |||
.- . - - - _ - . -. | |||
< | |||
l . . | |||
14 | |||
(3) Electrical Cable Installation | |||
l The NRC inspector witnessed the termination of cable E0245751 in | |||
Unit 2 cable spreading room termination cabinet CP2-ECPRCR32. | |||
The instrument cable contained two conductors and a shield wire, | |||
which were terminated on a Weidmuller terminal block. The NRC | |||
inspector verified that: (a) the connections were made in | |||
accordance with the applicable drawing, (b) cable identification | |||
was preserved, (c) cable bend radius was maintained, and (d) | |||
wire stripping was performed in accordance with the applicable | |||
procedures. | |||
The termination of cables EG224092Z, EG224182Z, EG224182X, and | |||
EG224092V, Y, and W in junction box J82C-484C and the | |||
retermination of cable EG239372, involving twisted shield wires, | |||
was also observed. Project QC inspectors witnessed the | |||
termination and continuity testing of the latter cable which | |||
were performed in accordance with the applicable drawings and | |||
procedures. | |||
Tape was observed to be covering the outer jacket of a cable l | |||
that was routed through conduit C13018589 located in the Unit 2 I | |||
safeguards building. A review of appropriate records showed | |||
that the above conduit contained electrical cables A0 009333 and | |||
A0 104419 and that a cable jacket repair had been satisfactorily | |||
performed. | |||
The NRC inspectors also performed more detailed inspections of | |||
the Class 1E and associated cables, conductors, and terminations | |||
at the Unit 2 hot shutdown panel, CP2-ECPRLV-01, and the . | |||
shutdown transfer panel, CP2-ECPRLV-15. These inspections were | |||
of approximately 321 cables comprising 1,925 terminations and | |||
related jumpers. ; | |||
The NRC inspections consisted of observations to determine if: | |||
(a) cable, wire, and termination materials were as specified. | |||
(b) cable identification was preserved and' located where . | |||
i | |||
specified; (c) bending radius was.as specified; (d) required- ' | |||
separation and independence was maintained; (e) segregation was | |||
maintained; (f) any evidence of damage existed;'(g) the | |||
terminations were properly located and made and of the correct | |||
type; (h) cable supports were provided and were adequate; (i) | |||
cables and conductors were protected from sharp edges, hostile | |||
environments and adjacent construction activities; (j) the | |||
panels were maintained free of debris; and (k) specified fire | |||
barriors, compartment boundary seals and fire retardant | |||
materials were installed or applied where required. In | |||
addition, as-built verification was performed by obtaining the | |||
latest revision of the installation drawings and unincorporated i | |||
design changes to the applicable drawings, and then comparing i | |||
these documents with the actual installation. | |||
1 | |||
; | |||
. . | |||
15 | |||
! | |||
During the inspection of the above items, the NRC inspectors | |||
identified the following conditions: | |||
(a) Unit 2 Hot Shutdown Panel (CP2-ECPRLV-01) | |||
1) Drawing 2323-E2-0173-01, Rev. 2, 9-20-84 | |||
. Drawing shows cable EG224092 connected to TB11. | |||
Cable was physically identified in panel as | |||
"E2-224092." | |||
. Drawing shows jumpers from TB14, terminals 80 and | |||
81, to TB7, terminals 145 and 146 on Drawing | |||
E2-0193. These jumpers were not physically | |||
installed. | |||
. Drawing shows a jumper from TB14, terminal 78 to | |||
terminal 81. The jumper was not tight under the | |||
terminal 81 screw. | |||
2) Drawing 2323-E2-0192, Rev. 3, 8-21-84 | |||
. Drawing shows cable EG204523 with two conductors | |||
identified as "SP(BW)" and "SP(BLB)." These | |||
conductors were not physically identified as | |||
nSp,n | |||
. The flex communication cable sheath was not | |||
connected at the box mounted on the vertical | |||
divider. Also, the plug.was not fully engaged at | |||
the floor mounted box. | |||
3) Drawina 2323-E2-0193, Rev. CP-1, 7-7-86 | |||
. At 105, terminal 51, a vendor installed terminal l | |||
lug was bent apparently in excess of 90 degrees. ' | |||
. Drawing shows cable E0204734 had an unlanded | |||
spare conductor identified as "SP(WB)." | |||
Physically, conductor "WB" was landed at TB5, | |||
terminal 85. | |||
. A jumper was physically installed at TBG, between | |||
terminals 1 and 7, the drawing does not show this | |||
jumper. | |||
. The jumpers shown on the drawing at TB7, | |||
termdnals 145 and 146, were not installed. | |||
\_ | |||
. . | |||
16 | |||
(b) Unit 2 Shutdown Transfer Panel (CP2-ECPRLV-15) | |||
1) Drawing 2323-E2-0173, Rev. CP-1, Sheet 15, 5-15-86 | |||
. General Coment - It would appear that certain | |||
revisions made by CP-1 are physically | |||
accomplished, while others are not. This | |||
revision incorporates alread | |||
changeauthorizations(DCAs)yissueddesign | |||
and a package | |||
processing form (PPF). | |||
. Drawing shows cable E0206065 with conductors | |||
landed on TBl. The cable was physically | |||
identified as E0206965. | |||
. Cable E0211195, conductor GLB was physically | |||
landed at TB3, terminal 47. The drawing does not | |||
show this connection. | |||
! | |||
' | |||
. Drawing shows cable E0211195, conductor OB landed | |||
at TB3, terminal 50. The conductor physically | |||
installedwasBL(blue). | |||
l | |||
l . Drawing shows a jumper at TB3 between terminals | |||
96 and 101. This jumper was not installed. | |||
l . Drawing shows cable E0211195, conductors BLB and | |||
BW, landed at TB3, terminals 116 and 117. | |||
( respectively. These conductors were not | |||
I physically installed at these terminals. | |||
. Drawing shows cable E0209831 has spare conductors | |||
SP(B,0). These conductors were physically landed | |||
at TB4, black (B) at terminal 1, and orange (0) | |||
at terminal 11. | |||
. Drawing shows cable E0211317 has spare conductor | |||
SP(B); however, the black (B) conductor was | |||
landed at TB4, terminal 41. | |||
. Drawing shows cable E0209801 has unlanded spare | |||
l | |||
conductorSP(W). This conductor was physically | |||
landed at TB4, terminal 33. | |||
. Drawing shows cable E0209836 has unlanded spare | |||
conductorsSP(B,0). These conductors were | |||
physically installed at TB4, terminals 63 and 73, | |||
respectively. | |||
. | |||
. Cable E0211318 had conductor WR landed at TB4, | |||
l terminal 64, and conductor 0, landed at TB4, | |||
l | |||
l | |||
., . . | |||
. ./, | |||
, , | |||
. /" | |||
i | |||
17 i | |||
' | |||
I | |||
- | |||
, | |||
- | |||
. u | |||
terminal 72. The draw %g ooes not show these [ | |||
\ connections. , | |||
' | |||
i | |||
. | |||
Cable E0209802 hadconductar/RlandedatTbN | |||
terminal 65. The drawirg' dens not show this'; | |||
. connection. , , . | |||
' | |||
. Drawing shows catie E0209839 has two unlanded , , | |||
- , | |||
l | |||
- | |||
spare conducto,rs, SP(B, 0). Thesc-conductors , | |||
... | |||
'' | |||
were physically installed at TB4'' terminals 94 , , | |||
, | |||
, | |||
- | |||
and 104, respectively. | |||
. Drawing shows cable E0209806 has aniunlanded | |||
spare conductor SP(W). This conductor was 7 , | |||
, | |||
physically installed et id4, terminal 95. ,J ' | |||
. Drawing shows cable LO211319 has unlanded spare | |||
conductors SP(5', 0, OL, WB). The B ard 0 - | |||
conductors were phys!cally installed at 10g, | |||
terminals 96 and 103, respectively. | |||
2) Drawing 23;'3-E2-0173. Revision' CP-2. Shekt 36, 4-23-P6 | |||
, | |||
w s | |||
l | |||
' | |||
. Drawing shows six conductors landid at NB10,, | |||
terminals 119 through 124, which are fp m cafd | |||
. ame assu.:bly /,, Connector J-8. Theu ' ' | |||
conductors were not physically installee!, | |||
, | |||
. | |||
. | |||
~ | |||
. Drawing shows six con @Jctors landed at TB11, ' | |||
terminnis 119 through 124, wnich ara from card | |||
frame casembly A, conr.,tetor J-7. These | |||
' | |||
conductors weri not physically installed. . | |||
. Drawing shows cable E0211101 with conductors N | |||
landed at T812. This cable was not installed. | |||
l | |||
' | |||
. Drawing shows cable Eu,?06212 has an unlanded ' | |||
spare conductor SP(0). This cunductor was | |||
physically installed at T012, terminal 98. ;, | |||
l | |||
. At TB12, terminal 98, there were additional ,,. i | |||
orange and red conductors installed. The | |||
drawings does not show these ronductors. | |||
. | |||
. | |||
Cable E0211102 bad conductors'RB vnd AB Qttelled | |||
l | |||
' | |||
at YB12, terminals 110 and 118. Wspet.tinly. - | |||
, | |||
The drawing does not show these connectfuns. j | |||
P | |||
. Drawing shows cable E020G212 hrs snianded spare | |||
l coniluctor SP(B). This conductor van' physically - | |||
installed at TB12, terminki 117, iure was also | |||
- | |||
, , | |||
, ; | |||
' | |||
r ) ' | |||
. , | |||
l | |||
, | |||
:; .F | |||
I | |||
; , L ,' i | |||
i __ ,_ ' | |||
. _ . _ . . . _ . _ , , _ L. . . . - .- --, - - -A | |||
7 . | |||
9 t :W .. | |||
/, ) , | |||
, | |||
' | |||
'\ | |||
' | |||
~ | |||
, | |||
s | |||
18 | |||
,, , | |||
* | |||
t | |||
, | |||
what appeared to be a jumper installed at TB12, | |||
i terminal 117, that is not shown on the drawing. | |||
I The above identified observations were discussed with | |||
! appropriate applicant personnel to ascertain the source of the | |||
apparent discrepancies. These items remain unresolved pending | |||
l ; fesults of the applicant's review and response to the apparent | |||
' discrepancies (446/8617-U-08). | |||
- | |||
; L | |||
No violations or deviations were identified. | |||
b. Installation of Instrunentation | |||
: The NRC inspector checked the routing, slope, fittings, supports, and | |||
identification markings of the instrumentation tubing for the Unit 2 | |||
- | |||
Containment Spray Pump instruments, 2PT-4775-1, and 2PI-4771-1 | |||
and -2. | |||
- | |||
The NRC inspector noted that instrument rack 2LI-21, upon which two | |||
Containment Spray flow transmitter instruments (2FT-4773-1 and -2) | |||
were mounted, had two junction boxes attached to the left side with | |||
_ | |||
flexible conduit connected to the instruments. Neither the junction | |||
box, nor the short piece of conduit connecting the boxes, was | |||
2, | |||
identified by an alphanumeric designation as would normally be | |||
required by CPSES electrical specifications. All three components- | |||
were, however, identified by green color coding as being safety | |||
related, as Train B components and the incoming conduit were | |||
appropriately designated with both the green color coding and number | |||
1 | |||
, C24G08204. The condition concerning missing designations was | |||
l , discussed with applicant QE personnel who provided copies of drawings | |||
j to explain the installation. | |||
1 | |||
, | |||
' A review of Drawing 2323-E2-2803-01, " Conduit Layout, Seismic | |||
Instrument Rack," Revision 3, dated September 24, 1984, showed that- | |||
, | |||
' | |||
the typical configuration consists of one junction box with rigid | |||
; conduit and conduit fittings routed to the instruments. However, as | |||
; | |||
allowed by Note 4 of this drawing, the use of.an equivalent junction | |||
: | |||
' | |||
box and flexible conduit can be' substituted for the rigid conduit | |||
! | |||
' | |||
and/or conduit fittings. These components are then considered part , | |||
of the instrument rack. The interpretation that the junction boxes ) | |||
' | |||
and conduits are a part of the instrument rack was further confirmed ) | |||
by review of the cable and raceway schedule which indicates the | |||
' | |||
a instrument rack as the cable destination. ' | |||
1, , No violations or deviations were identified. | |||
' <: . Instrument Tubing Replacement | |||
i | |||
The NRC inspector witnessed the replacement of tubing for loop 4 | |||
; steam generator level transmitter 2LT-547. The craft personnel | |||
Estalled the tubing and fitting as required by the drawings and | |||
* | |||
. | |||
! | |||
i | |||
i | |||
$ | |||
'r. | |||
-- , . , . - , - - , . . . - - , - . - - - - . , , . , , | |||
. - . . - - .-. | |||
. . | |||
! | |||
19 | |||
procedures. No QC was present during the installation. This | |||
l installation was to be inspected by QC at a later date. | |||
l No violations or deviations were identified. | |||
l 10. Exit Interview | |||
l Exit interviews were. conducted on August 7 and September 5, 1986, with the | |||
!. applicant's representatives identified in paragraph 1 of this report. | |||
l During these interviews, the NRC inspectors summarized the scope and | |||
findings of the inspection. The TUGCo Director of QA responded during the | |||
l August 7, 1986, exit interview to the findings concerning work travelers | |||
by stating that they too were reviewing travelers. He requested a meeting | |||
to determine if they had independently identified the deficiencies | |||
regarding travelers prior to the NRC inspector's identification of a- | |||
violation in this area. | |||
In a subsequent meeting on August 13, 1986, with the TUGCo Director of QA | |||
and his representative, they stated that they had found that the failure | |||
to follow traveler Procedure CP-CPM-6.3 had caused or contributed to two | |||
hardware problems; i.e., engineering failed to generate a control-document | |||
to accomplish rework of Bunker' Ramo electrical penetration splices and the | |||
failure to process operational travelers for shortening upper lateral | |||
restraint anchor bolts of;the steam generator may have caused this | |||
deficiency. These causes were described in TUGCo response (TXX-4946) to | |||
NRC Notice of Violation dated May 2, 1986. - - | |||
The TUGCo Director of-QA stated that their review had not revealed the | |||
deficiencies in the traveler system as described in detail by the NRC | |||
inspector. The applicant acknowledged the, findings. | |||
- | |||
. | |||
. | |||
l | |||
^ | |||
< , - s | |||
u | |||
S | |||
+ | |||
l -y - | |||
: | |||
; | |||
, | |||
: ... . | |||
- | |||
., | |||
. | |||
. . | |||
, | |||
v I h | |||
s | |||
1 . | |||
* ' | |||
T | |||
I | |||
! | |||
L . | |||
, | |||
\ | |||
s | |||
9 | |||
k | |||
: i | |||
n ! | |||
, ' | |||
: . | |||
' ' | |||
: . - - h- . . ... . a. - | |||
_ - - -. -. .- = . - | |||
. . . . . .. . . | |||
t | |||
- - | |||
, | |||
s s | |||
, , | |||
- . | |||
j - s | |||
e _- | |||
i - | |||
s | |||
., . -. | |||
~ | |||
. APPENDIX C | |||
' | |||
M c'< < | |||
' | |||
' ' | |||
Table 1 - | |||
- | |||
- | |||
c | |||
,. . | |||
l _ | |||
Item Identification *RIR *MRR **W QR/ [' ' ' e | |||
i | |||
NCR | |||
l | |||
Accumulator TCX-SI-ATAT-02 04705 1206 35666 | |||
Tanks TCX-SI-ATAT-03 04705 1206 35667 | |||
l Accumulator 2-8806C 11801 5908 30238 * ' | |||
10" motor | |||
operator valve | |||
2-36" Nitrogen CP-2-SI-ATRT-01 19742' 10849 2383 | |||
Accumulator CP-2-SI-ATRT-02 19742 10849 .2383 | |||
Tanks, rings and | |||
hardware s i | |||
l | |||
Pressurizer (PZ) TCX-RCPCPR-01 10317 26135/ | |||
M-3291; | |||
j M-11395 | |||
, | |||
PZ - 3" Pilot PCV-2-455A 4750 35199 | |||
operated relief PCV-2-4568 i | |||
valve , | |||
( PZ - 6" Safety SN-56964-00-0068 03881 36111 | |||
i Relief Valve | |||
l | |||
l | |||
NDE Records for TCX-RCPCSG-01/ '15775 | |||
02/03/04; and | |||
TCX-CRPC-PR-01 | |||
l * Denotes: RIR - Receiving Inspection Report | |||
l MRR - Material Receiving Report | |||
l W QR/NCR - Quality Report /Nonconformance Report | |||
. | |||
-~ | |||
. _ - - . | |||
' | |||
, .. | |||
. | |||
APPENDIX C | |||
Ta.ble 2 | |||
Equipment /' *I.D. No. Doc./Rev. S)ecified W | |||
, | |||
Traveler No. Dwg. Spec. ) roc. Kpp. | |||
r | |||
Nitrogen CP2-SIATRT-01 | |||
Accumulator Tank | |||
' No.1 | |||
RI83-1051-5700 N N N NA | |||
ME83-2702-5700 C C N NA | |||
Accumulator Tank TCX-SIATAT-03 | |||
No. 3 ' | |||
ME79-260-5700 N N N N- | |||
RI79-182-2-5700 C N N C | |||
CR0 Position TCX-RCPCV-01 i | |||
i | |||
Detectors t | |||
- | |||
MW867528-2-5501 C N N C' | |||
' | |||
Reactor Vessel TCX- RCPCRV-01 , | |||
ME79-248-5500 N N N -C' ' | |||
, | |||
- | |||
' | |||
4 | |||
Pressurizer TCX-RCPCPR-01 . - | |||
ME85-4896-5500 C NA NA C. . , , | |||
--> | |||
ME85-4872-5500 N NA NA ' | |||
C. . | |||
' - | |||
- | |||
' | |||
' | |||
MW86-7510-2-5500 C C C .N | |||
- | |||
. | |||
,g - | |||
* | |||
~ | |||
' | |||
Steam Generator TCX-RCPCSG-04 ' | |||
' | |||
/' | |||
" | |||
ME-83-2747-5500 N N NA 'C , . | |||
s | |||
RI80-369-5500 N N C- C , | |||
- | |||
' | |||
CE79-017-5500 C C NA N. '> | |||
ME84-2993-5500 N N N C i | |||
ME82-2231-5500 C NA NA- C l | |||
ME81-2139-5500 C N NA C- 1 | |||
ME83-2758-5500 NA NA NA C | |||
ME83-2959-5500 N N NA N , , | |||
ME83-2880-5500 ' | |||
C NA NA 'C - . | |||
ME85-4868-5500 C NA NA C - | |||
**RHR Valve 1-HCV-606 | |||
Class 1E | |||
Electrical | |||
Switches | |||
, EE83-0459-5801 N N N 0*** | |||
EE82-1415-5801 N N N 0*** | |||
, | |||
* | |||
- . , . . . . . - . . _. , _ _ . _ . , . . _ _ . , _ - | |||
1 | |||
.- . | |||
2 | |||
Denotes: C - Compliance l | |||
N - Noncompliance' J | |||
NA - Not Applicable ' | |||
* Denotes: 1.D. No. - Identification Number I | |||
** Denotes: Unit 1 equipment ) | |||
*** Denotes: Open Item | |||
i | |||
l | |||
1 | |||
- - | |||
% | |||
4 | |||
t | |||
m | |||
i | |||
o | |||
k | |||
. - . - .. . - - .. | |||
-. .. Y | |||
i | |||
APPENDIX C | |||
Table 3 | |||
Equipment / Doc. W Insp. ' Design Room | |||
Traveler No. 7Rev. Kpp. Rev. Rev. Location / System | |||
Spec. Spec. Unit | |||
EE86-41073-2/4901 N NA C NA N C | |||
EE84-40170-2/5501 N C C. 'NA C C | |||
EC85-JB2C-4870 N NA N C C C | |||
EE86-40692/5701 N NA C N N N | |||
HS86-4450-1-3100 N NA N N N C | |||
HS86-4293-1-4900 N NA N N N C | |||
MP85-4910-5500 N NA N NA N C | |||
Denotes: Doc./Rev. - Document / Revision | |||
W App. - Westinghouse Approval | |||
Insp. Rev. Spec. - Inspection Procedure Revision Specified | |||
Design Rev. Spec. - Design Document Revision Specified | |||
EE 86 - Traveler issued by electrical department in 1986 | |||
. | |||
, | |||
> ! | |||
: | |||
. | |||
l$ | |||
, | |||
J. | |||
' | |||
\ | |||
i | |||
1 | |||
- - , , , - - - . . , . , - - - . - - | |||
, - , , - - . , . . _ , - , . ., - . , | |||
}} | |||
Revision as of 01:11, 20 December 2021
| ML20205L966 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak |
| Issue date: | 03/24/1987 |
| From: | Barnes I, Phillips H, Spessard R, Wagner P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20205L898 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-445-86-20, NUDOCS 8704020235 | |
| Download: ML20205L966 (23) | |
See also: IR 05000445/1986020
Text
- . . . - .. .- .- . . _ -- - . _ . . . . . .
.. ,;
APPENDIX B
I
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION REPORT
- U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
' REGION IV
i
i
!
'
NRC Inspection Report: 50-445/86-20 Permits: CPPR-126
50-446/86-17- CPPR-127
- Dockets: 50-445 Category: A2
50-446
!~
Construction Permit.
Expiration Dates:
Unit 1: August 1, 1988
j Unit 2: August 1,:1987; -
1
j Applicant: Texas Utilities Electric Company. ,
, Skyway Tower . .,
~ .,
', _
400 North Olive Street #
^~ '
Lock Box 81 -
_
Dallas, Texas 75201 - ' ., ,
,
i ,
-
3 s .
1 Facility Name: Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES),. Units.'1 & 2 .
,
~ 4
Inspection At:
~
l Glen Rose,-Texas . . . . ,
, ..,.
+
3
-+ >
1 '
- ?
j
.
Inspection Conducted: July 1 through August 31, 1986.' >
'
'
Inspectors: -
3/4 V/f7
j H. S. Phillip(, Senior R%sident Reactor Date
Inspector, Construction, Region IV
'
CPSES Group
! (paragraphs 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, '
- and 10)
t
@,C.LJa9 A s/24/sy
l P. C. Wagner, Reactor Vnspector, Region IV Date
j CPSES Group
j (paragraph 9)
.
i
j
j
'
Consultants: EG&G - A. Maughan (paragraph 9)
Parameter - J. G. Gibson (paragraph 9)
i 8704020235 870330
1 PDR ADOCK 05000445
1 G PDR
i
, .
2
]
Reviewed By: 8 F7
R. L. Spessard7 Deputy Director, Division of Date
Inspection Programs, Office of Inspection
and Enforcement
Approved: 8% 3/27/97
I. Barnes, Chief, Region IV CPSES Group Date
Inspection Summary
Inspection Conducted: July 1 through August 31, 1986 (Report 50-445/86-20)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannouriced inspection of applicant actions on
previous NRC findings.
Results: Within the one area inspected, one violation, with multiple examples,
was identified (failure to specify documents / revisions, describe work
operations, and obtain Westinghouse approval on travelers, paragraphs 5b(2) and
5b(3) and failure of QA/QC to adequately monitor / assure traveler system
implementation, paragraph Sc).
Inspection Conducted: July 1 through August 31, 1986 (Report 50-446/86-17)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of plant status; general
plant conditions; applicant actions on previous hRC findings; installation of
electrical, mechanical, and support components; safety-related pipe welding;
steam generator installation; control rod position detectors; and electrical
work activities.
Results: Within the eight areas inspected, two violations one with multiple
examples, were identified (a. failure to specify document / revision and obtain
Westinghouse approval on NSSS equipment travelers, paragraph 5b(2); failure to
describe work operations or reference procedures in travelers, paragraph 5b(3);
failure of QA/QC to adequately monitor /e sure traveler system implementation,
paragraph Sc; failure to have work traveler package at worksite, paragraph 6;
b. failure to issue NCR on steam generator name plates and documentation,
paragraph 7).
. .
3
DETAILS
1. Persons Contacted
Applicant Personnel
! ***J. Audas, Senior Licensing Engineer, Texas Utilities Generating
Company (TUGCo)
- J. Barker, Engineering Assurance Manager, TUGCo
- T. Brandt, TUGCo Quality Engineering (QE) Supervisor, EBASCO
- R. Camp, Project Manager, Unit 1, TUGCo
- W. Counsil, Executive Vice President, TUGCo
- P. Halstead, Manager, Quality Control (QC), TUGCo
- J. Kuykendall, Vice President, TUGCo
D. McAfee, Quality Assurance (QA) Manager, TUGCo
- J. Krechting, Director of Engineering, TUGCo
- J. Merritt, Director of Construction, TUGCo
- L. Nace, Vice President, TUGCo
- J. Streeter, Director of QA, TUGCo
.
- T. Tyler, Comanche Peak Response Team (CPRT) Program Director, TUGCo
- F. Powers, Assistant Unit 1 Project Manager, TUGCo
- C. Welch, QC Services Supervisor, TUGCo
Contractor Personnel
R. Baker, Assistant Manager Regulatory Compliance, Brown & Root
(B&R)
R. Vurpillat, QA Manager, B&R
B. Wright, Welding Engineer, B&R
The NRC inspectors also interviewed other applicant employees during this
inspection period.
- Denotes personnel present at the August 7, 1986, exit interview.
- Denotes personnel present at August 7 and September 5, 1986, exit
interviews.
- Denotes personnel present at September 5, 1986, exit interview.
- Applicant representative at August 13, 1986, meeting to discuss
details of violations identified. See paragraph 10 of this report.
2. Plant Status, Unit 2
,
The NRC inspector discussed the status of work with TUGCo and contractor
- (electrical and mechanical) management personnel. Project status reports
,
, , , - - = * ~
_
. .
4
were also reviewed. Construction has turned over approximately 56% of the
subsystems to TUGCo Startup and overall construction is about 83%
complete.
3. General Plant Inspections, Unit 2
I
At various times during the inspection period, the NRC inspector conducted
general inspections of the Unit 2 reactor, safeguards, and diesel
generator buildings. Selected rooms in these buildings were inspected to
observe current work activities or major safety related equipment which
was stored in place. The storage inside these buildings and the storage
area for steel supports located just outside Unit 2 were also inspected.
l One backshift inspection was performed during this inspection period.
No violations or deviations were identified.
>
4. Applicant Actions on Previous NRC Inspection Findings, Units 1 and 2
l
l a. (0 pen) Unresolved Item (445/8516-U-04; 446/8513-U-04): Applicant
l action on IE Bulletin 79-28. In early November 1985, the NRC
i
inspector found that 2 of 14 NAMCO switches inspected had
<
identification numbers on the travelers which did not match the
l identification numbers on switches installed on residual heat
removal (RHR) valves 1-HCV-606 and 1-FCV-618. At this time only
travelers EE82-1415-5801 and EE83-1851-5801 were found; however,
l approximately 1 1/2 to 2 months later, TUGCo located and submitted
travelers EE83-0459-5801 and EE83-0373-5801 to the NRC inspector to
show that the identification of installed switches was consistent.
with the documentation.
The NRC inspector found that the number of switches replaced in
Unit 2 was unavailable. After the NRC inspection period ended, two
generic nonconformance reports (NCRs) E83-01074, R2 and E83-01077,
which required replacement of switches in Unit 2, were located. This
, specific item remains unresolved pending the review of the NCRs and
i corrective actions for Unit 2.
b. (Closed) Unresolved Item (445/8614-U-02; 446/8611-U-04): Redlining
cable tray welds on new design drawings. This item pertained to the
practice of redlining new design drawings when craft / engineering
inspected and found undersized welds on cable trays which had been
i previously installed, inspected, and accepted to old design
! documents.
f
The NRC inspector reviewed the documentation maintained by the TUGCo
QA organization and found that nonconformances will not be generated
because Corrective Action Report (CAR) No. 53, Revisions 0, 1, and 2,
dated November 26, 1985, January 3 and 31, 1986, will cover this item
generically. The redlined drawings identifying these undersized
welds will be maintained or referenced in the CAR file to show
deficiencies identified and corrected as a part of the generic
_. . - . -. ~ .- -. - -
__
. .
5
corrective action. The final step after correcting or modifying
these hangers will be QC inspection for acceptance and, if
unacceptable welds or as-built conditions are identified at this
point, NCRs will be issued.
No violations or deviations were identified.
5. Installation of Electrical, Mechanical, and Support Components, Units 1
and 2
a. Review of Procedures, Instructions, and Drawings
The NRC inspector reviewed B&R Procedure CP-CPM-6.3, Revision 1,
dated 1978, through Revision 12, dated July 14, 1986, and found that
the traveler controls the work activities either by the description
of work on the traveler or through references to multiple
construction procedures, drawings, specifications, and other
documents which control work activities. The traveler is also used
as a QC checklist to assure that work activities are performed and
documents the inspection in those cases where no inspection report is
required. As a result of this review, two open items were identified
i
as follows.
-
Paragraph 3.1.1 of CP-CPM-6.3 discusses Westinghouse (W) site
organizational approval of travelers when work involves Nuclear Steam
System Supplier (NSSS) equipment. Although it is clear that major
equipment travelers must be approved, this paragraph does not clearly
state whether this means only large equipment, small equipment, or
all equipment. The W role is also unclear as their organization is
-
>
not described in the TUGCo QA program. This is an open item
(445/8620-0-01; 446/8617-0-01).
Attachment 3 of B&R Procedure CP-QAP-12. " Mechanical, Component
Installation Verification N-5 Certification," Revision 7, dated
April 4, 1986, shows 18 items that are verified on the operational
traveler for N-5 Certification. Item No. 18 involves verifying the
code class of items. Procedure CP-CPM-6.3 for processing travelers
does not address entering the code class. This is an open item
(445/8620-0-02; 446/8617-0-02).
b. Inspection of Completed Work and Records
The NRC inspector observed completed work rather than work in
progress because major safety-related components have been in place
for some time. This activity was accomplished by observing
components in place and reviewing records of work activities.
l
(1) Receipt Inspection, Material Certification, and Nonconformance l
Reports 1
The NRC inspector reviewed nine receiving inspection reports, ;
five material receiving reports, eight }{ quality releases, and ;
,
. .
6
two nonconforming reports for NSSS components listed in
Appendix C, Table 1.
No violations or deviations were identified.
(2) Traveler Preparation, Review, and Approval
The NRC inspector selected 21 travelers that were processed
between 1979 and 1983 which controlled work such as rigging,
setting, and installation of NSSS equipment. These travelers
were reviewed to determine if they were prepared, reviewed, and
approved in accordance with Procedure CP-CPM-6.3.
Procedure CP-CPM-6.3, Revisions 1-12, has consistently required
general information on the traveler such as traveler number;
equipment number; reactor unit number; quantity; activity
description; reference drawings; specification, work procedure
and/or engineering instruction; location of work system; and
review / approval block. This information is required in blocks
1-10 of the traveler form. This information was generally on the
traveler except for the following information which was of ten
missing in blocks 7 and 8 of the form; i.e., reference drawings
and specifications, work procedure and/or engineering instructions.
Paragraph 2.1.1 of CP-CPM-6.3 requires that operations,
description, methods, and procedures (including instructions) be
provided on the traveler by number and revision.
Paragraph 3.1.2 states that it is the responsibility of the
organization controlling the traveler to ensure that the current
document revision number is referenced on the traveler.
, Paragraph 3.1.1 requires the discipline engineers or
construction personnel to obtain }{ approval of the traveler if
it involves NSSS equipment.
The NRC inspector found that 16 of 21 travelers processed to
control work on NSSS equipment were not prepared and reviewed in
full accordance with paragraphs 2.1.1, 3.1.1, and 3.1.2 of
CP-CPM-6.3 as shown in Appendix C, Table 2; i.e.,
document / revision and W approval.
The NRC inspector selected seven additional travelers to
determine if recently processed travelers were processed in
accordance with CP-CPM-6.3. These travelers, listed in
Appendix C, Table 3, were processed from 1984 to 1986 and were
used to control electrical, mechanical, and hanger work
activities.
In addition to procedural requirements previously referenced,
paragraph 2.2.1 of later revisions of CP-CPM-6.3 (Revisions 10
._ . . . . _ _ _ .- ._ __
. .
7
'
through 12) requires that room location, where work will be
done, be provided.
The NRC inspector found that each of the seven recently
processed travelers were not prepared and reviewed in full
compliance with paragraphs 2.1.1, 2. 2.1, 3.1.1, or 3.1. 2 as
shown in Appendix C, Table 3. Blocks 7, 8, 9, and 10 did not
contain the information required; i.e., document / revision,
location, and system.
This failure to prepare and adequately review travelers to
assure that the correct documents and revisions are specified
and obtain W approval for work on NSSS equipment is a violation
'
of Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 (445/8620-V-03;
446/8617-V-03).
(3) Installation Instructions for NSSS Equipment and Accessories
(a) The NRC inspector evaluated completed work described on
travelers for two large heavy pieces of NSSS equipment,
nitrogen air tank (CP2-SIATRT-01) and accumulator
(TCX-SIATRT-03), a part of the Unit 2 Safety Injection
- System.
Paragraph 2.1.1 of CP-CPM-6.3, Revision 9, requires that
'
the traveler not only provide the general information
previously discussed, but also requires detailed
a
information described in the work operations. Any other
information as required to successfully complete the
operation in accordance with applicable requirements is
also required.
The following traveler deficiencies in the description of
work operations (steps) were identified:
.
1) Traveler ME83-2702-5700 for installing tank No. 1,
4 dated March 8, 1983, did not reference MCP-1 General
Installation of Mechanical Equipment, or incorporate
the necessary procedural steps of this procedure into
the traveler. As required by paragraph 4.1.2, the
traveler did not specify minimum clearance between
equipment base and foundation. As required by
paragraph 4.2.3 of Revision 3, rigging traveler
RI83-1051-5700 for tank No. 1 did not specify that QC
will be notified 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> prior to equipment
installation and did not describe t.he loading and
, transporting equipment used.
2) As required by paragraphs ,.2 2, 4.2.4, and 4.2 of
'
MCP-1, Revision 3, trav.ser MC79-260-5700 for tank
No. 3 did not descri b the leveling and shimming to
,
- _ _ - - . -
,
. .
8
assure proper installation. It also did not include
i an operation which describes tightening the nuts to
secure the tank to anchor bolts.
- 3) In the operational steps of the traveler for tank
l No. 3, grouting was specified in accordance with
CPP-16; however, no revision was documented on the
traveler.
4) Operation Nos. 2 and 5 were revised after the traveler
- was approved. Operation No. 2 was a minor change;
I
however, No. 5 was a major revision as a step which
had been left out was added. Such changes were not
approved or noted as revisions.
, (b) The NRC inspector reviewed travelers and found that work
l steps or operations for Class 1E switches installed on
valve 1-HCV-606 did not adequately describe all work
operations or reference appropriate project procedures.
The following are examples:
1) Operation No. 1 on traveler EE82-1415-5801 differed
from that contained in traveler EE83-0459-5801, a
traveler which replaced the same switch, in that
EE82-1415-5801 traveler cautioned that determinating
the conductors should be done gently to prevent damage
while the other traveler did not mention this
instruction. Both travelers stated that NAMCO
switches should be determinated "per standard
construction practices"; however, this standard
practice was neither described in the traveler nor
referenced in a written instruction such as Procedure
EEI-8, " Class IE and Non-Class IE Cable Termination,"
or other standard instruction manual. Similarly,
Operation No. 5 of traveler EE82-1415-5801 stated that
retermination should be done "per standard I
l construction practices." l
l l
2) Traveler EE83-0459-5801 stated that back cover screws
should be torqued to 20 in-lbs, per EEI-21 but
! EE82-1415-5801 traveler did not mention EEI-21 in
l block 8 or in subsequent traveler operations. Neither
! traveler stated whether the installation should be in
accordance with paragraphs 3.0, 4.0, or 5.0 (which are
instructions for different locations of switches).
Traveler EE82-1415-5801 did not clearly describe the
torquing of terminal and top cover screws as described ,
l in EEI-21, Revision 0, dated August 20, 1982. l
l
,
. .
9
This failure to provide or describe work operations is a violation of
Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 (445/8620-V-04;
446/8617-V-04).
c. QA/QC Monitoring of System Implementation
The NRC inspector reviewed QA/QC activities concerning the
development, review, approval, and inspection activities in 28 work
travelers (Appendix C, Tables 2 and 3) which cover work that was
accomplished between 1979 to August 1986.
Paragraph 2.1 of CP-CPM-6.3, Revision 12, states that the B&R Site QA
Manager is responsible for monitoring the implementation of this
system.
The NRC inspector found that the system had not been adequately
monitored to assure implementation. Twenty-three of 28 travelers,
dating back to 1979, contained one or more deficiencies and were not
adequately reviewed to assure compliance with construction, QA
procedures and the equipment manufacturer's manual. Seven travelers
(EE86-41073-2-4901, EE84-40170-2-5501, EC85-JB-2C-4870
EE86-4069-2-5701, HS86-4450-1-3100, HS86-4293-1-4900, and
MP85-4901-5100) are recent examples which indicate this condition
currently exists. Specific examples are as follows:
i
'
(1) Paragraph 3.6 of CP-CPM-6.3, Revisions 5 and 9 in effect in
1979 and 1982, requires that revisions, regardless of their
significance, shall be documented by revision numbers and a
description of the change after the last step of the traveler.
Travelers RI83-1051-5700 (1-19-83), Operation 5 for rigging and
hoisting a tank added a step; dimensions were changed on
ME83-2702-5700 (3-8-83), Attachment No. 1; and ME79-260-5700
(3-27-79), Attachment No. 1, without documenting revision number
or describing the change.
(2) Paragraph 2.2.1 of CP-CPM-6.3, Revision 11, dated August 8,
1984, and Revision 12, dated July 14, 1986, requires the QC
inspector to annotate the applicable inspection / revision numbers
on the traveler operation at the time of the inspection.
Paragraph 3.1.2 of CP-CPM-6.3, Revisions 11 and 12, which were
in effect in 1985 and 1986 requires the CC inspector to record
the design document revision level used at the time of final
inspection.
,
Columns 3 and 4 of Table 3 of Appendix C shows that QC inspectors
did not annotate inspection and/or revision numbers on four of
seven travelers and did not record the design document revision
level on three of seven travelers used at the time of final
inspection. In addition, paragraph 3.0 of QI-QP-11.1-47
Revision 10, dated June 21, 1984, " Electrical Inspection of
Class IE Limit Swifches," states, in part, "The QC inspector
i
. .
. .
10 ,
shall inspect the installation of Class IE limit switches to the
latest revision of all referenced documents."
4
Specifically, traveler EE84-40170-2-5501, part No. 1 did not
reference EEI-21 and EEI-8 and the QC inspector did not annotate
the applicable inspection procedure revision number on the
traveler at the time of inspection as required by CP-CPM-6.3,
Revision 11. Therefore, there is no indication on the traveler
that the inspection was accomplished to the proper revision;
and likewise for traveler EE86-41073-2-4901. Similarly,
EE83-0459-5801 did not state, as required, current procedures
and revisions which were used.
(3) Paragraph 3.2 of B&R Procedure QI-QAP-11.1-39, Revision 0 (2-2-83),
i states, in part, "QCI shall verify . . . b. The top of the concrete
foundations are free of oil, grease, and foreign materials."
No such operation or inspection was described on traveler
ME83-2702-5700 (3-8-83) for setting the nitrogen air tank.
(4) Paragraph 3.4.1 of QI-QAP-11.1-39, Revision 0 (2-2-83) states,
in part, "QCI shall verify that equipment is positioned, oriented,
and set to elevation as shown on Level / Location / Elevation / Record
(Attachment 1)" and paragraph 5.0 states, in part, "QCI shall
sign and date . . . Record (Attachment 1)."
! Attachment 1 of ME83-2702-5700 (3-8-83) was not signed and
! dated by the QC inspector to show that the nitrogen air tank was
installed as required.
!
(5) Paragraph 3.4.2.2 of QI-QAP-11.1-39, Revision 0 (2-2-83) states,
in part, "b. All equipment excluding rotating equipment and heat
i exchangers may be set using a carpenter's level placed on the
- base of machined surface, as appropriate. The equipment shall
be shimmed so that the bubble is contained between the two
closest lines on the level. NOTE: for a. and b. above, (quipment
setting requiring grout, a minimum grout space of one inch shall
, be provided at the point of minimum clearance between the
equipment bases and concrete foundation."
l
Neither a minimum clearance was specified on traveler
ME83-2702-5700 (3-8-83) nor was the applicable construction
Procedure MCP-1, Revision 3, referenced. No evidence of
inspection was shown on the traveler.
(6) Paragraph 3.4.3 of QI-QAP-11.1-39, Revision 0 (2-2-83) states, in
part, "QCI shall verify that anchor bolt threads are not damaged
prior to and during the setting of equipment."
.. . ._. -
--
_ _ . -
. .
11
Traveler HE83-2702-5700 (3-8-83) neither specified the inspection
of anchor bolt threads in the operational steps nor addressed
the tightening of the bolts.
j This failure to adequately monitor traveler implementation to assure
completeness and compliance with QA/QC and construction procedures is a
'
violation of Criterion V of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 (445/8620-V-05;
446/8617-V-05).
- 6. Safety-Related Pipe Welding, Unit 2
The NRC inspector observed mainsteam spool piece MS2-RB-29-1 which was on
the 905' elevation of the reactor building. The ends were being prepared
'
steam outlet of the steam generator No. 3. The various welding activities
are recorded on weld data card No. 650239.
'
On July 2, 1986, in the same general location, the NRC inspector observed
the post weld heat treatment of FW-27 on a 6-inch feedwater line
FW-2-RB-024R-2 which is shown on Drawing FW-2-RB-024R-2. During a
!, discussion with the attendant who was monitoring the heat treatment
controls, the NRC inspector learned that he was in training. Copies of
the work traveler and checklist were requested; however, they were not at
the work site but were located a considerable distance away at the weld
rod room outside containment.
Paragraph 3.2 of CP-CPM-6.3, Revision 12, dated July 14, 1986, requires
that the work traveler package remain in the work area until the work has
been completed and accepted by QA/QC or until the end of the shift, which
ever is first. This failure to maintain the traveler package in the work
area is a violation of Criterion V of Appendix to of 10 CFR Part 50
(446/8617-V-06).
7. _ Inspection for Steam Generator No. 4 Installation
The NRC inspector. reviewed Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR),
Section 5.0, Volume 1, Figure 1-2-18, Amendment 10 dated 1980;
Figure 5.1-1, " Flow Diagram Reactor Coolant System," Amendment 54 dated
January 1985; and Gibbs & Hill, Inc. Drawings 2323-A2-502, Revision
(Rev.) 5, 2323-A2-0503, Revision 4, and 2323-0504, Revision 4, to select
and inspect components. Steam generator loop No. 4 was identified in the
FSAR and Gibbs & Hill drawings as Spin No. TCX-RCPCSG-04 and this
i
component was selected in order to continue a previous inspection; i.e.,
the pressurizer (which is a part of loop No. 4) had been previously
4 inspected.
In July 1986, the NRC inspector reviewed installation records (which were
in the QA records vault) for steam generator loop No. 4 spin
No. TCX-RCPCSG-04, to complete the planned inspection; however, an
inspection performed during the August 1986 inspection period revealed
j
'
that records previously reviewed were actually for the steam generator
located in loop No. 1, compartment No. 1. This matter was pursued by
._ _ _
_. ..
_ __ .
l
1
. .
l
12
l
,
l
discussing the deficiency with W personnel. The NRC inspector found that
no NCR had been written; however, several letters (written in 1980)
discussed the fact that the spin numbers were incorrect. Texas Utilities ,
Service, Inc. letter (CPPA-6244) dated August 25, 1980, and l
telecommunications (TWX #12,309) dated June 27, 1980, requested W to
correct the deficiency by changing the name plates and documentation. The
name plates and documentation were not changed. As a result, the '
hardware, the FSAR, drawings, and QA documentation is incorrectly
identified. The same is true for loops 2 and 3. Subsequent to NRC
identification of this condition, NCRs M-2875, M-2876, M-2877, and M-2878
i were written.
This failure to write an NCR and correct FSAR and Gibbs & Hill drawings is
a violation of Criterion XVI of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50
(446/8617-V-07).
8. Installation of Control Rod Position Detectors. Unit 2
a. Storage / Handling
The NRC inspector observed the storage and handling of three control ,
rod drive (CRO) position detectors (equipment No. TCX-RCPCRV-01)
which were removed from the warehouse "C" to the staging area at
Unit 2 equipment hatch. The handling of these components was
controlled by traveler HW86-7528-2-5501 which authorized movement to
the 905' elevation of the reactor building. The rigging was
accomplished in accordance with B&R Procedure CP-24, Revision 4,
dated June 26, 1980.
b. Detector Installation
The NRC inspector witnessed the cleaning (with demineralized water)
of the CR0 rod travel housing which the detector fits over. Detector
M2-SN34SH00194 was placed in accordance with the traveler and
W Drawing 1533E84, Revision 3. The NRC inspector observed detector
Nos. 04, and L3 which had previously been placed,
c. Installation Record l
The NRC inspector reviewed the subject traveler, drawing, and the
sign off sheet attached to the traveler.
'
No violations or deviations were identified.
9. Inspection of Electrical Work Activities. Unit 2
The NRC inspector observed the following, in process, electrical work
activities:
l \
l
!
.
t
l . .
l
l
13
!
I
a. Installation of Class IE Cable
l
(1) Cable Reel Storage
The NRC inspector toured the electrical cable storage yard to
'
evaluate the adequacy of the storage activities. The NRC
l inspector noted that all cable reels were uniquely identificd by
number and that those reels which had not, as yet, been QC
accepted were segregated from the others. The NRC inspector
l
noted that plastic sheeting was used to cover the Class 1E
cables and verified that the cable ends, for approximately ten
Class 1E cables, were sealed with either heat shrink tubing caps
or electrical tape,
.
i
No violations or deviations were identified.
(2) In-Process Storage
The NRC inspector made the following observations of in process
cable stor N ':
(a) Cables removed from cable tray T240SF0, located in the
Unit 2 safeguards building, were coiled, hung from piping,
and covered with plastic for protection while modifications
were performed on the cable tray. In addition, the
immediate area was roped-off and tagged "No work in area
without QC notification."
(b) Cables to be installed in cable tray T240RDD, located near
electrical penetration assembly 2E65 on the inside of the
Unit 2 reactor building, were coiled, hung from
scaffolding, and covered with flame retardant material in
preparation for being connected to the penetration
assembly. .
(c) Cables in cable trays T23GRCL and T22GRBM, located in the
lower level of the Unit 2 reactor building, were protected
from painting activities in the area by wrapping the trays
with plastic sheeting.
As part of daily plant tours, the NRC inspector verified that
electrical cables were protected from cutting, grinding, and
welding activities in their vicinity by covering with fire
retardant blankets or boards during these activities. The NRC
inspector also observed: (1) that cable, cable tray and conduit
identification, both color coding and numerical designations, l
were being properly applied and maintained; and (2) that damaged I
'
components were identified by red "QC lloid" tags, indicating
that NCRs were written for the disposition of the problem.
I
l No violations or deviations were identified.
I i
i
l
l
- _- _-
- _- . . - .
.- . - - - _ - . -.
<
l . .
14
(3) Electrical Cable Installation
l The NRC inspector witnessed the termination of cable E0245751 in
Unit 2 cable spreading room termination cabinet CP2-ECPRCR32.
The instrument cable contained two conductors and a shield wire,
which were terminated on a Weidmuller terminal block. The NRC
inspector verified that: (a) the connections were made in
accordance with the applicable drawing, (b) cable identification
was preserved, (c) cable bend radius was maintained, and (d)
wire stripping was performed in accordance with the applicable
procedures.
The termination of cables EG224092Z, EG224182Z, EG224182X, and
EG224092V, Y, and W in junction box J82C-484C and the
retermination of cable EG239372, involving twisted shield wires,
was also observed. Project QC inspectors witnessed the
termination and continuity testing of the latter cable which
were performed in accordance with the applicable drawings and
procedures.
Tape was observed to be covering the outer jacket of a cable l
that was routed through conduit C13018589 located in the Unit 2 I
safeguards building. A review of appropriate records showed
that the above conduit contained electrical cables A0 009333 and
A0 104419 and that a cable jacket repair had been satisfactorily
performed.
The NRC inspectors also performed more detailed inspections of
the Class 1E and associated cables, conductors, and terminations
at the Unit 2 hot shutdown panel, CP2-ECPRLV-01, and the .
shutdown transfer panel, CP2-ECPRLV-15. These inspections were
of approximately 321 cables comprising 1,925 terminations and
related jumpers. ;
The NRC inspections consisted of observations to determine if:
(a) cable, wire, and termination materials were as specified.
(b) cable identification was preserved and' located where .
i
specified; (c) bending radius was.as specified; (d) required- '
separation and independence was maintained; (e) segregation was
maintained; (f) any evidence of damage existed;'(g) the
terminations were properly located and made and of the correct
type; (h) cable supports were provided and were adequate; (i)
cables and conductors were protected from sharp edges, hostile
environments and adjacent construction activities; (j) the
panels were maintained free of debris; and (k) specified fire
barriors, compartment boundary seals and fire retardant
materials were installed or applied where required. In
addition, as-built verification was performed by obtaining the
latest revision of the installation drawings and unincorporated i
design changes to the applicable drawings, and then comparing i
these documents with the actual installation.
1
. .
15
!
During the inspection of the above items, the NRC inspectors
identified the following conditions:
(a) Unit 2 Hot Shutdown Panel (CP2-ECPRLV-01)
1) Drawing 2323-E2-0173-01, Rev. 2, 9-20-84
. Drawing shows cable EG224092 connected to TB11.
Cable was physically identified in panel as
"E2-224092."
. Drawing shows jumpers from TB14, terminals 80 and
81, to TB7, terminals 145 and 146 on Drawing
E2-0193. These jumpers were not physically
installed.
. Drawing shows a jumper from TB14, terminal 78 to
terminal 81. The jumper was not tight under the
terminal 81 screw.
2) Drawing 2323-E2-0192, Rev. 3, 8-21-84
. Drawing shows cable EG204523 with two conductors
identified as "SP(BW)" and "SP(BLB)." These
conductors were not physically identified as
nSp,n
. The flex communication cable sheath was not
connected at the box mounted on the vertical
divider. Also, the plug.was not fully engaged at
the floor mounted box.
3) Drawina 2323-E2-0193, Rev. CP-1, 7-7-86
. At 105, terminal 51, a vendor installed terminal l
lug was bent apparently in excess of 90 degrees. '
. Drawing shows cable E0204734 had an unlanded
spare conductor identified as "SP(WB)."
Physically, conductor "WB" was landed at TB5,
terminal 85.
. A jumper was physically installed at TBG, between
terminals 1 and 7, the drawing does not show this
jumper.
. The jumpers shown on the drawing at TB7,
termdnals 145 and 146, were not installed.
\_
. .
16
(b) Unit 2 Shutdown Transfer Panel (CP2-ECPRLV-15)
1) Drawing 2323-E2-0173, Rev. CP-1, Sheet 15, 5-15-86
. General Coment - It would appear that certain
revisions made by CP-1 are physically
accomplished, while others are not. This
revision incorporates alread
changeauthorizations(DCAs)yissueddesign
and a package
processing form (PPF).
. Drawing shows cable E0206065 with conductors
landed on TBl. The cable was physically
identified as E0206965.
. Cable E0211195, conductor GLB was physically
landed at TB3, terminal 47. The drawing does not
show this connection.
!
'
. Drawing shows cable E0211195, conductor OB landed
at TB3, terminal 50. The conductor physically
installedwasBL(blue).
l
l . Drawing shows a jumper at TB3 between terminals
96 and 101. This jumper was not installed.
l . Drawing shows cable E0211195, conductors BLB and
BW, landed at TB3, terminals 116 and 117.
( respectively. These conductors were not
I physically installed at these terminals.
. Drawing shows cable E0209831 has spare conductors
SP(B,0). These conductors were physically landed
at TB4, black (B) at terminal 1, and orange (0)
at terminal 11.
. Drawing shows cable E0211317 has spare conductor
SP(B); however, the black (B) conductor was
landed at TB4, terminal 41.
. Drawing shows cable E0209801 has unlanded spare
l
conductorSP(W). This conductor was physically
landed at TB4, terminal 33.
. Drawing shows cable E0209836 has unlanded spare
conductorsSP(B,0). These conductors were
physically installed at TB4, terminals 63 and 73,
respectively.
.
. Cable E0211318 had conductor WR landed at TB4,
l terminal 64, and conductor 0, landed at TB4,
l
l
., . .
. ./,
, ,
. /"
i
17 i
'
I
-
,
-
. u
terminal 72. The draw %g ooes not show these [
\ connections. ,
'
i
.
Cable E0209802 hadconductar/RlandedatTbN
terminal 65. The drawirg' dens not show this';
. connection. , , .
'
. Drawing shows catie E0209839 has two unlanded , ,
- ,
l
-
spare conducto,rs, SP(B, 0). Thesc-conductors ,
...
were physically installed at TB4 terminals 94 , ,
,
,
-
and 104, respectively.
. Drawing shows cable E0209806 has aniunlanded
spare conductor SP(W). This conductor was 7 ,
,
physically installed et id4, terminal 95. ,J '
. Drawing shows cable LO211319 has unlanded spare
conductors SP(5', 0, OL, WB). The B ard 0 -
conductors were phys!cally installed at 10g,
terminals 96 and 103, respectively.
2) Drawing 23;'3-E2-0173. Revision' CP-2. Shekt 36, 4-23-P6
,
w s
l
'
. Drawing shows six conductors landid at NB10,,
terminals 119 through 124, which are fp m cafd
. ame assu.:bly /,, Connector J-8. Theu ' '
conductors were not physically installee!,
,
.
.
~
. Drawing shows six con @Jctors landed at TB11, '
terminnis 119 through 124, wnich ara from card
frame casembly A, conr.,tetor J-7. These
'
conductors weri not physically installed. .
. Drawing shows cable E0211101 with conductors N
landed at T812. This cable was not installed.
l
'
. Drawing shows cable Eu,?06212 has an unlanded '
spare conductor SP(0). This cunductor was
physically installed at T012, terminal 98. ;,
l
. At TB12, terminal 98, there were additional ,,. i
orange and red conductors installed. The
drawings does not show these ronductors.
.
.
Cable E0211102 bad conductors'RB vnd AB Qttelled
l
'
at YB12, terminals 110 and 118. Wspet.tinly. -
,
The drawing does not show these connectfuns. j
P
. Drawing shows cable E020G212 hrs snianded spare
l coniluctor SP(B). This conductor van' physically -
installed at TB12, terminki 117, iure was also
-
, ,
, ;
'
r ) '
. ,
l
,
- .F
I
- , L ,' i
i __ ,_ '
. _ . _ . . . _ . _ , , _ L. . . . - .- --, - - -A
7 .
9 t :W ..
/, ) ,
,
'
'\
'
~
,
s
18
,, ,
t
,
what appeared to be a jumper installed at TB12,
i terminal 117, that is not shown on the drawing.
I The above identified observations were discussed with
! appropriate applicant personnel to ascertain the source of the
apparent discrepancies. These items remain unresolved pending
l ; fesults of the applicant's review and response to the apparent
' discrepancies (446/8617-U-08).
-
- L
No violations or deviations were identified.
b. Installation of Instrunentation
- The NRC inspector checked the routing, slope, fittings, supports, and
identification markings of the instrumentation tubing for the Unit 2
-
Containment Spray Pump instruments, 2PT-4775-1, and 2PI-4771-1
and -2.
-
The NRC inspector noted that instrument rack 2LI-21, upon which two
Containment Spray flow transmitter instruments (2FT-4773-1 and -2)
were mounted, had two junction boxes attached to the left side with
_
flexible conduit connected to the instruments. Neither the junction
box, nor the short piece of conduit connecting the boxes, was
2,
identified by an alphanumeric designation as would normally be
required by CPSES electrical specifications. All three components-
were, however, identified by green color coding as being safety
related, as Train B components and the incoming conduit were
appropriately designated with both the green color coding and number
1
, C24G08204. The condition concerning missing designations was
l , discussed with applicant QE personnel who provided copies of drawings
j to explain the installation.
1
,
' A review of Drawing 2323-E2-2803-01, " Conduit Layout, Seismic
Instrument Rack," Revision 3, dated September 24, 1984, showed that-
,
'
the typical configuration consists of one junction box with rigid
- conduit and conduit fittings routed to the instruments. However, as
allowed by Note 4 of this drawing, the use of.an equivalent junction
'
box and flexible conduit can be' substituted for the rigid conduit
!
'
and/or conduit fittings. These components are then considered part ,
of the instrument rack. The interpretation that the junction boxes )
'
and conduits are a part of the instrument rack was further confirmed )
by review of the cable and raceway schedule which indicates the
'
a instrument rack as the cable destination. '
1, , No violations or deviations were identified.
' <: . Instrument Tubing Replacement
i
The NRC inspector witnessed the replacement of tubing for loop 4
- steam generator level transmitter 2LT-547. The craft personnel
Estalled the tubing and fitting as required by the drawings and
.
!
i
i
$
'r.
-- , . , . - , - - , . . . - - , - . - - - - . , , . , ,
. - . . - - .-.
. .
!
19
procedures. No QC was present during the installation. This
l installation was to be inspected by QC at a later date.
l No violations or deviations were identified.
l 10. Exit Interview
l Exit interviews were. conducted on August 7 and September 5, 1986, with the
!. applicant's representatives identified in paragraph 1 of this report.
l During these interviews, the NRC inspectors summarized the scope and
findings of the inspection. The TUGCo Director of QA responded during the
l August 7, 1986, exit interview to the findings concerning work travelers
by stating that they too were reviewing travelers. He requested a meeting
to determine if they had independently identified the deficiencies
regarding travelers prior to the NRC inspector's identification of a-
violation in this area.
In a subsequent meeting on August 13, 1986, with the TUGCo Director of QA
and his representative, they stated that they had found that the failure
to follow traveler Procedure CP-CPM-6.3 had caused or contributed to two
hardware problems; i.e., engineering failed to generate a control-document
to accomplish rework of Bunker' Ramo electrical penetration splices and the
failure to process operational travelers for shortening upper lateral
restraint anchor bolts of;the steam generator may have caused this
deficiency. These causes were described in TUGCo response (TXX-4946) to
NRC Notice of Violation dated May 2, 1986. - -
The TUGCo Director of-QA stated that their review had not revealed the
deficiencies in the traveler system as described in detail by the NRC
inspector. The applicant acknowledged the, findings.
-
.
.
l
^
< , - s
u
S
+
l -y -
,
- ... .
-
.,
.
. .
,
v I h
s
1 .
- '
T
I
!
L .
,
\
s
9
k
- i
n !
, '
- .
' '
- . - - h- . . ... . a. -
_ - - -. -. .- = . -
. . . . . .. . .
t
- -
,
s s
, ,
- .
j - s
e _-
i -
s
., . -.
~
. APPENDIX C
'
M c'< <
'
' '
Table 1 -
-
-
c
,. .
l _
Item Identification *RIR *MRR **W QR/ [' ' ' e
i
l
Accumulator TCX-SI-ATAT-02 04705 1206 35666
Tanks TCX-SI-ATAT-03 04705 1206 35667
l Accumulator 2-8806C 11801 5908 30238 * '
10" motor
operator valve
2-36" Nitrogen CP-2-SI-ATRT-01 19742' 10849 2383
Accumulator CP-2-SI-ATRT-02 19742 10849 .2383
Tanks, rings and
hardware s i
l
Pressurizer (PZ) TCX-RCPCPR-01 10317 26135/
M-3291;
j M-11395
,
PZ - 3" Pilot PCV-2-455A 4750 35199
operated relief PCV-2-4568 i
valve ,
( PZ - 6" Safety SN-56964-00-0068 03881 36111
i Relief Valve
l
l
NDE Records for TCX-RCPCSG-01/ '15775
02/03/04; and
TCX-CRPC-PR-01
l * Denotes: RIR - Receiving Inspection Report
l MRR - Material Receiving Report
l W QR/NCR - Quality Report /Nonconformance Report
.
-~
. _ - - .
'
, ..
.
APPENDIX C
Ta.ble 2
Equipment /' *I.D. No. Doc./Rev. S)ecified W
,
Traveler No. Dwg. Spec. ) roc. Kpp.
r
Nitrogen CP2-SIATRT-01
Accumulator Tank
' No.1
RI83-1051-5700 N N N NA
ME83-2702-5700 C C N NA
Accumulator Tank TCX-SIATAT-03
No. 3 '
ME79-260-5700 N N N N-
RI79-182-2-5700 C N N C
CR0 Position TCX-RCPCV-01 i
i
Detectors t
-
MW867528-2-5501 C N N C'
'
Reactor Vessel TCX- RCPCRV-01 ,
ME79-248-5500 N N N -C' '
,
-
'
4
Pressurizer TCX-RCPCPR-01 . -
ME85-4896-5500 C NA NA C. . , ,
-->
ME85-4872-5500 N NA NA '
C. .
' -
-
'
'
MW86-7510-2-5500 C C C .N
-
.
,g -
~
'
Steam Generator TCX-RCPCSG-04 '
'
/'
"
ME-83-2747-5500 N N NA 'C , .
s
RI80-369-5500 N N C- C ,
-
'
CE79-017-5500 C C NA N. '>
ME84-2993-5500 N N N C i
ME82-2231-5500 C NA NA- C l
ME81-2139-5500 C N NA C- 1
ME83-2758-5500 NA NA NA C
ME83-2959-5500 N N NA N , ,
ME83-2880-5500 '
C NA NA 'C - .
ME85-4868-5500 C NA NA C -
- RHR Valve 1-HCV-606
Class 1E
Electrical
Switches
, EE83-0459-5801 N N N 0***
EE82-1415-5801 N N N 0***
,
- . , . . . . . - . . _. , _ _ . _ . , . . _ _ . , _ -
1
.- .
2
Denotes: C - Compliance l
N - Noncompliance' J
NA - Not Applicable '
- Denotes: 1.D. No. - Identification Number I
- Denotes: Unit 1 equipment )
- Denotes: Open Item
i
l
1
- -
%
4
t
m
i
o
k
. - . - .. . - - ..
-. .. Y
i
APPENDIX C
Table 3
Equipment / Doc. W Insp. ' Design Room
Traveler No. 7Rev. Kpp. Rev. Rev. Location / System
Spec. Spec. Unit
EE86-41073-2/4901 N NA C NA N C
EE84-40170-2/5501 N C C. 'NA C C
EC85-JB2C-4870 N NA N C C C
EE86-40692/5701 N NA C N N N
HS86-4450-1-3100 N NA N N N C
HS86-4293-1-4900 N NA N N N C
MP85-4910-5500 N NA N NA N C
Denotes: Doc./Rev. - Document / Revision
W App. - Westinghouse Approval
Insp. Rev. Spec. - Inspection Procedure Revision Specified
Design Rev. Spec. - Design Document Revision Specified
EE 86 - Traveler issued by electrical department in 1986
.
,
> !
.
l$
,
J.
'
\
i
1
- - , , , - - - . . , . , - - - . - -
, - , , - - . , . . _ , - , . ., - . ,