,

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIONOFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

Region i

Report No. 50-423/79-04

Docket No. 50-423

License No. CPPR-ll3 Priority -- Category A

Licensee: Northeast Nuclear Energy Company

P. 0.' Box 270

Hartford, Connecticut 06101

Facility Name: Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3

Inspection at: Waterford, Connecticut and Berlin, Connecticut

Inspection conducted: April 24-26 1979"

Inspectors: ,

A. [T. Toth, Reactor Inspector date signed

date signed

date signed

Approved by: /) e/ [// M 5 /M/Sd./fMR'. W. McGaugny(/C,kfff, Projects Section, v' date signed 'RC&ES Branch V

',

Inspection Summary:

Inspection on Aoril 24-26, 1979 (Recort No. 50-423/79-04)Areas Insoected: Routine, unannounced plant tour-inspection by one regionalbased inspector of construction work activities in progress and licenseecorporate office inspection of Quality Verification Records for followup onNRC issued Circulars and Bulletins, and audit of Stone and Webster designactivi ties . The inspection involved 10 inspector-hours onsite by one NRCregional office based inspector and 7 hours at the licensee's corporateoffices at Berlin, Connecticut.

Results: No items of noncompliance were identified.

.

0183EORegion I Form 12

7908I30h('(Rev. April 77) 0

-

DETAILS

1. Persons Contacted

Northeast Utilities Service Company

L. Chatfield, Assistant Project Engineer**D. G. Diedrick, QA Manager

H. C. Micsztowicz, QA Design Group Leader*H. Nims, Director of Generation Construction*S. Orefice, Superintendent of New Site ConstructionV. L. Patuzzi, QA Design Lead AuditorG. R. P tlan, Lead Electrical Engineeri

*S . R. Totti . System Superintendent, GenerationConstr ction

Northeast Nuclear Energy Company

R. W. Dommers, Startup Supervisor, Unit 3

Stone and Webster Engineer

L. Barberie, Quality Control Engineer*W. McKay, Resident Manager*C. A. Marrs, Superintendent of Construction*F. K. Sullivan, Resident Engineer*G. G. Turner, Superintendent of Field Quality ControlJ. Whedbee, Assistant Superintendent of Field Quality

Control

* denotes those present at the exit interview onsite April 25, 1979.

** Mr. Diadrick was advised of corporate office inspection findingsApril 26,1979.

The inspector also interviewed various craft, supervision, andquality control personnel, including those mentioned in paragraph2, below.

2. Plant Tour _

The inspector arrived onsite unannounced on April 24, 1979 and on thatday and the following day performed plant tour-inspection of all workareas at the site. The inspector interviewed craft, supervision andquality control personnel at each work location. The inspectorinterviewed such personnel to ascertain their familiarity with criteriaand quality program requirements, and to ascertain implementation ofquality control inspection activities. The inspector interviewed thefollcwing personnel and examined their work for conformance to applicablecodes and standards:

C1.SIbt1

3

a. One ironworker engaged in welding of structural steel pipe support.

b. Two ironworkers engaged in bolting of structural steel pipe supportracks in the containment building annulus.

c. Two ironworkers, a foreman and a quality control inspector, engagedin cadwelding of containment exterior wall reinforcing steel.

d. One ironworker engaged in field fabrication of the exterior rein-forcement assembly for the containment wall around the personnelair lock.

e. One supervisor and one quality control inspector engaged in receipt,slump testing, and pumping of concrete for the Auxiliary Buildingwall line 51.3, elevation 25-40 feet, (EC-37K-3-C-3178).

f. One foreman ana one quality control / nondestructive testing inspectorengaged in welding of containment dome steel liner sections.

- g. One area supervisor engaged in general piping and pipe hangeractivities in the Turbine Building.

h. One electrician and one quality control inspector engaged in conduitinstallation in tne control building.

The personnel interviewed appeared knowledgeable in the quality requirementsof their respective work activities. While observing the respective workactivities, the inspector identified no departures from applicable qualitycodes and standards. Additionally, the inspector had observed acceptablestorage conditions of component cooling heat exchangers (e.g. #3-CCP-E-lC)and the pressurizer (#3-RCS-TK-l) (cover gas pressurization and dunnage),and reinforcing steel and structural steel (dunnage).

No items of noncompliance were identified.

3. Licensee Action on NRC Issued Bulletins

The inspector reviewed corporate office records relating to NRC issuedBulletins, and discussed the followup actions with the responsible individualsin the licensee organization. He verified that the Bulletins were assignedfor action to appropriate management and that responsibility for subsequentfuture actions was delegated. The inspector considered accuracy of thelicensee's response, timeliness, evidence of described corrective action,and provisions to assure completion of defined corrective actions.

bad 5000

4

For the following listed Bulletins, the licensee response was within therequired time frame, the required responsibilities were assigned, andcorrective actions taken where required. The inspector had no furtherquestion on these items at this time.

-- (78-01) Flammable Contact-Arm Retainers in G.E. CR120A Reldys:The inspector reviewed the basis for the licensee's February 21,1978 reply letter to NRC. The licensee has ascertained that nosafety related equipment currently received onsite contains relaysof this possible type. The licensee's review of procurement specifi-cations ascertained that specific types of relays are designated,and the CR120A is not included in acceptable alternatives. Hisreview also ascertained on April 26, 1979 that no exceptions tothe specification, to permit CR120A type devices, have beenauthorized.

-- (78-02) Terminal Block Qualification: The inspector reviewed thebasis for the licensee's February 8, 1978 letter to NRC. Severalletters between NUSCo, Stone and Webster, and Westinghouse (e.g.GEE-78-47, NEU-2752, NEC-3164) illustrate contracting activity andtechnical work definition to assure that equipment is environmentallyqualified in accordance with IEEE-323/74 and that unprotected terminalblocks will not be used.

-- (78-04) Environmental Qualification of Certain stem Mounted LimitSwitches Inside Reactor Containment: The inspector reviewed thebasis for the licensee's April 27, 1978 letter to NRC. Correspondenceidentified as NEC 2813 and NEU 2732 indicate coordination withprincipal contractors to assure that the questionable limit switchesare not used. General qualification program (see 78-02 above) require-ments are expected to assure qualifications of limit switches.

-- (78-05) Malfunctioning of Circuit Breaker Auxiliary Contact Mechanism -G.E. Model CRl05X: The inspector reviewed the basis for the licensee'sJune 8, 1978 letter to NRC. A licensee letter (NEC-2863) and a respondingteletype from Stone and Webster (dated June 7,1978) confirms the engi-neering plan to review all safety related equipment specifications toassure that suspect breakers will not be incorporated into the equipment.T4 review was to be complete by August 1978 but the licensee respon-4

i.1bie engineer had no record that it had been completed; he stated thatthis woula be verified and documented in his file.

-- (78-06) Defective Cutler-Hammer Type M Relays with DC Coils. Theinspector reviewed the basis for the licensee's July 27, 1970 letterto NRC. A teletype from Stone and Webster (dated July 25,1973) confirmsengireering plans to review all safety related equipment specificationsto assure that the suspect relays will not be incorporated into the

D.DUi 2

.

5

' equipment. The review was to be complete by September 1978 but thelicensee responsible engineer had no record that it had been completed;he stated that this would be verified and documented in his file.

-- (78-10) Bergen-Patcrson Hydraulic Shock Suppressor Accumulator SpringCoils: The inspector reviewed the basis for the licensee's July 6, 1978letter to NRC. A document (#WGC-78-G-107) identifies Monroe suppressorsin limited areas as the only hydraulic shock suppressors planned foruse at the site.

4. Licensee Action on NRC Issued Circulars

The inspector reviewed licensee corporate office records and interviewedresponsible personnel to ascertain that circulars had been received byresponsible management, a review for applicability was performed, andappropriate corrective action taken or scheduled to be taken where necessary.The inspector ascertained that the above activities involved participationby technical and management personnel cognizant of the substance of thecirculars. The inspector noted a project engineer instruction (NPE-79-283dated April 4,1979) which requests review and recommendation on course ofaction for 1978 issued circulars, and documentation thereof. The projectengineer stated that he also plans a record review of actions taken on 1977circulars.

The inspector concluded that review responsibility has been assigned forall 1978 and 1979 (to date) circulars. Completion of review and definitionof correctiva action has been achieved for the following:

-- (78-02) Proper Lubricating Oil for Terry Turbines: This has beenreferred to the startup organization for action and has been enteredas an action item on the Commitment Followup Program.

-- (78-04) Installation Errors That Could Prevent Closing of Fire Doors:A licensee inquiry to Stone and Webster has ascertained that the typefire door in question is not used for the Millstone 3 project.

-- (78-08) Environmental Qualification of Safety-Related ElectricalEquipment at Nuclear Power Plants: The inspector examined lettersand meeting notes (NEC-2944, NES-19851, NES-19425, NES-12179, GEE-79-33,NEC-3164, GEE-78-308) dating from July 1978 to February 1979 relatingto qualifying equi; ment to IEEE 323/74 and documentation of suchqualification. Memorandum GEE-78-308 requests the electrical leadengineer to specifically investigate the subject of the Circular 78-08.Additional plans include having Stone and Webster list all categoryIE equipment, identify current environmental requ1rements for eachitem, review purchase orders for specification requirements consistentwith current requirements, and document analysis / resolution of anydeviations in vendor data.

618304

.

6

-- (78-09) Arcing of G.E. NEMA Size 2 Centactors: The licensee determinedthat ITE motor control centers are specified and do not contain GEStarters. For other panel. vendors,.the' licensee' lead electrical engineerstated that his staff will review bills of materials to identify whereadditional action is required.

-- (78-15) Tilting Disk Check Valves Fail to Close With Gravity inVertical Position: The licensee has entered this item for future veri-fication action, on the Startup Group Commitment Followup List.

-- (79-02) Failure of 120 Volt Vital AC Power Supplies: A January 31, 1979interoffice memorandum and statements by the licensee lead electricalengineer show that the licensee is actively engaged in negotiationswith the vendor (SCI) and other sources to resolve this problem and toobtain conformance to IEEE-323/74.

-- (79-04) Loose Locking Nut on Limit Torque Valve Operators: A licenseeproject engineer instruc. tion (NPE-79-282) to the startup group, a Stoneand Webster advisory operations field telephone record (April 19,1979),and statements by the licensee Startup Supervisor show that the licenseestartup group has assumed responsibility to stake or crimp locknutsduring Phase I testing. The Startup Supervisor stated that he hadadded this to his Commitment Followupit,tst.

-- (79-05) Moisture Leakage in Stranded Wire Conductors: The licenseeletter to Stone and Webster (NEC-3225) requests specific considerationof this item. No interim action onsite is required in view of projectstatus.

The inspector had no further questions on the above ite:as at this time. Noitems of noncompliance were identified durina this review.

5. Desian Audits

The inspector examined records and interviewed personnel regarding licenseeaudits of the Stone and Webster design activity. The inspector interviewedthe group leader and a lead auditor, examined an audit schedule / record for1974 to 1979, and examined one audit report and associated checklist, super-visor review sheet, audit schedule followup, and correspondence relating toresolution of the audit findings. The inspector considered the above itemsrelative to Criteria I, II, XV, XVI, XVII and XVIII of Appendix B of 10 C F R50, and ANSI N45.2.12. The inspector considered the scope of scheduled auditsto include applicable criteria of Appendix B, timeliness and extent offollowup on audit findings, measures to prevent recurrence of deficiencies,and provisions for reaudit of deficient / corrected areas. The 23pectorexamined audit #A00385 and related correspondence including QM3-E-394,QM3-E-399 and NES-19632.

No items of noncompliance were identified during this review.

'c183%

7

'

6. Management interview

At the conclusion of the inspection on April 26, 1979 a meeting was heldat the site with representatives of the licensee and contractor organizations.Attendees at this meeting included personnei whose names afe indicated bynotation (*) in paragraph 1. The inspector summarized the results of theinspection as described in this report. An exit interview also was held withthe Quality Assurance Manager at the conclusion of the inspection at thelicensee's Berlin offices.

,

e* . y