IR 05000397/1980017
| ML19345C275 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 10/29/1980 |
| From: | Dangelo A, Haist D, Haynes R, Wagner W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19345C274 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-397-80-17, NUDOCS 8012040310 | |
| Download: ML19345C275 (5) | |
Text
I L./
U. S. NUCLEAR RECUL\\ TORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF I!;SPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
Report No. _50-397/90-17 50-397/80-17 CPPR-93 Docket No.
ticcns, go, safeguards Group Washington Public Power Supply System Licensee:
P. O. Box 968 Richland, Washington 99352 Washington Nuclear Project flo. 2 (WNP-2)
Facility Name:
WiiP-2 Site, Benton Coanty, Washington
'
Inspection conducted:
Inspectors:
/ /
.?/
/O,
'/hM
D. P. riaist, Reactor Inspector Date Signed Ibb Ec'f'YlbU
/6f2'l/50 f(}[dtWagner kl Reantor Inspector
/
6 ate signed
- 1 : //
-
'
,
/
' j]Tl/$L ~
/a/,?llA-O
'
,
,
~
Date signed A. g. D'Angelo, Reactor Inspector
'
Approved By:
fA. C. if
/ O/t7/d a
)
O
.
.
_h = =
R. C. Haynes, b ei, e'rojects Section Date Signed Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Insoection durino the period of October 7-10,1980 (Recort flo. 50-397/80-17)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by regional based inspectors of construction activities including licensee action in response to 10 CFR 50.54(f) request; licensee actions on 50.55(e) reportsle deficiency; investigation of allegations of concrete voids; maintenance of installed equipment; and licensee action on previous inspection findings.
The inspection involved 70 inspector-hours onsite by three f!RC inspectors.
Resul ts : Of the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
'
RV Forta 219 (2)
80 120go3/o
-
.
.
DETAILL 1.
Persons Contacted a.
Washinaton Public Power Sucolv System (WPPSS)
- M. C. Bibb, Project "anager
- R. G. Matlock, itanaging Director's Office
- B. A. Holmberg, Change Manager
- T.
A. Gross, Task Force II Coordinator
- D. C. Timmins, Contract 215, Engineering Director
- J. P. Thorpe, Quality Assurance Engineer
- A. M. Sastry, Deputy Project Manager, System Turnover
- R. M. Foley, Deputy Project Manager, Engineering
- G. I. Nells, Deouty Project Manacer, Construction
- R. J. Johnson, Project Quality Assurance Manacer
- P. I. Verrios, Manager, Vendor Surveillance / Audits
"M. E. Witherspoon, Division Quality Assurance Manager
'
- R. M. Tanner, Contract 215, Quality Control Director C. R. Edwards, Principal Quality Assurance Engineer E. Carlson, Equipment Maintenance Coordinator b.
Burns and Roe, Inc. (B&R)
- M. J. Parise, Special Projects Manager
- H. R. Tuthill, Assistant Quality Assurance Manager R. D. Carmichael, Lead Surveillance Engineer L. F. Akers, Senior Welding Engineer Supervisor F. Neingard, Lead "uclear/ Mechanical Engineer B. Murpny, Hanger Engineering Supervisor J. Mahoney, Senior Supervisor - Mechanical Engineering R. Breland, Surveillance Engineer c.
MSH/Boecon/GERI (U3G)
T. B. Page, Quality Assurance Manager P. Webster, Quality Engineering Documentation Supervisor J. Robanske, Maintenance Engineer Denotes attendance at the NRC management meeting on October 10, 1980.
- In addition, Mr. A. D. Toth, the NRC Senior Resident Inspector, attended the meeting.
2.
Plant Tour Upon arrival at the site, the inspectors conducted a tour to observe completed work and the general state of housekeeping and equipment maintenance.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
.
.
.
.
.
-
,
.
.
.
-2-3.
Licensee Resoonse to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Reouest a.
(Ocen) Followuo Item (50-397/80-14/02) - Task I A'ctivities - Expedite -
Resolution of Outstanding Concerns and Problems - Nonconformance Reoorts l
The insoector examined Project "anagement Instruction PMI 4-4, Revision 4, Contractor Control of Nonconformances. The instruction was revised to establish cerformance standards and to reouire the construction quality organization to monitor work activities to ensure incorporation of dispositioned NCR's. The Construction Management Instruction CMI-4 has been revised to reflect these responsibilities.
The inspecter reviewed the contract 215 orocedure No. QA-5 for control of nonconformances and found that the procedure references the reader back to the 215 contract specification for conditions when the engineers.nonconformance report form is to be used. The licensee
-
stated that the applicable specification section will be appended to the contractors procedure.
The licensee is presently expanding the deficiency coding assigned to nonconformance reports to make trending more meaningful. The
numbers and types of deficiencies will be related to productivity to determine trends and generic problems.
Trending of nonconformance reports will begin after the new deficiency codes have been assigned to open nonconformance reports. The inspector had no further questions i
at this time, b.
(Ocen) Followuo Item (53-397/30-10/05) - Task II - Phase 1_ Activities
- -
Leacina-to 9estart of Safety Related Work.
Task Force II Personnel
,
Ouatirications
<
The. inspector reviewed procedure No. RCSW-08, Rev. O, " Qualification and Certification of QA Personnel for RCSW Task Force" against the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.58, September 1980 and ANSI N.45.2.5-1978. The procedure appears to equal or exceed the requirements of AMSI U.45.2.6-1978. The procedure is not in accordance with Regulatory
-
Guide 1.58-September 1980, paragraphs C.5, requiring Level III personnel capability of reviewing and approving inspection, examination, and testing procedures and of evaluating the adequacy of such procedures to accomplish the inspection, examinations, and test objectives; C.6 requiring candidates for level I, II-and IIIlto be a high school graduate or to have earned the General Education Development equivalent of a high school diploma; and C.10, requiring documented objective evidence (i.e., procedures and record of written test) demonstrating that the individual indeed does have " comparable" or " equivalent" competence to' that which would be gained from having the required education and experience. The licensee's position with regard
. to compliance to Regulatory Guide 1.58, September 1980 and ANSI-i N45.2.6-1978 has not yet been detennined.
.
'
i
,
,
,.v,,
y c - - - - -, -
- - -4,
-,,, - -
-
-
,
,
.,
,.e-,
y..
_. ~
-3-The inspectors examined the personnel qualification records of fifteen of the 41 task force nembers including all contract 215 team renbers. All personnel appeared to be qualified in accordance with ANSI M5.2.6-1978.
Five of the fifteen persons reviewed have worked for other contractors on site or for the architect-engineer.
The insoector expressed concern about the objectivity of persons who ray be assigned to review the work of their former emoloyer, or their own work.
The task force coordinator stated that he has detected no loss of objectivity.
It aopears that with the exception of one person, team members are not being assigned to the task force team examining their former employer. The inspector also expressed concern that no effort is being made to verify the accuracy of resume statements. The task force coordinator did not consider this a orablem, statino that he oersonally knows the task force members and their qualifications or they nave been referred to him. This situation could change however, if additional task force members are
-
hired. The subject of personnel qualifications will be examined during suosequent inspections.
(50-397/80-17/01)
-
4.
Licensee Action on 10 CFR 50.55(e) Reoortable Deficiencies - Power Pioino Comoany - Poor Weldments The existence of poor weldments in Power Piping Company Beam Attachment HS-42 was reported by the licensee on August 20, 1980.
The HS-142 sway brace brackets were supplied with undersized fillet welds with respect to the minimum requirements of ASME Section III, Division 1.
In addition, examination of these weldments revealed incomplete fusion at the toe and legs of the fillet welds.
Stress analysis performed by the licensee have determined that a design deficienc" exisgs for these brackets when loads are applied at an angle greater than 15 off the perpendicular.
The calculations were made using ASi1E allowable stress values.
The inspector discussed the proposed corrc:tive actions with licensee personnel.
A test program has been drafted and is going through the review and aoproval cycle.
The testing is designed to evaluate the effect of the poor weldments on the structural integrity of the sway brace brackets.
That is, how the weld discontinuities affect the load requirements under worst case conditions.
The insrector expressed concern over the adequacy of the testing program to address the following areas:
(a) The effect of the undersized fillet welds and possible low heat input on the heat affected zone of the base metal. This would involve a metallographic aaalysis to deternine the microhardness across the heat affected zone and to determine the presence of underbead cracking or martensitic si.ructure in the heat affected zone. The information required for this analysis, which was unavailable at the site, includes the welding processes used, the type and size of electrode, bracket materials and preheat and interpass temperature control '
.-
(b) The extent of lack of fusion _and its uniformity throughout the selected samoles.
(c) The extent that this.problen affects other sway strut members such as the strut barrel to socket weld, sway strut to clamp weldment, and turn buckle welds.
The licensee acknowledged these concerns. Actions taken to resolve this deficiency will be examined during a subsequent inspection.
5.
Licensee Action on Previous Insoecting Findings (Closed) Followuo Item (50-397/80-14/01): Calibration of Weldino Eouioment-for Sacriticial Snield Waii Reoalr.
' Procedures for calibration of welding eouipment is addressed in WBG Work Procedure flo.170, Rev.1.
This work orocedure received licensee approval on October 10, 1980. This procedure contains provisions to assure that electrical characteristics (amos, volts), and travel speed are as specified in the weld procedure specification and procedure qualification records.
-
The inspector had no further questions on this matter.
6.
fiaintenance of Installed Eouipment The inspected examined the WBG maintenance system for safety related mechanical equipment. Maintenance system consists of PMS card (issued at intervals as specified in' maintenance manual for each equipment)
which instructs the craft to perform required maintenance on specific equipment and a FM log which is the official record of maintenance performed on equipment.
PliS cards for RCIC pump, tag number RCIC-P-1, from 3/24/80 thru 7/28/80 were not in agreement with the maintenance manual for the pump.
GE maintenance manual C50.3, Rev. 3 calls for the pump shaft to be rotated 10 times per month and oil changed each six month period.
PMS card for
.
the above dates had called for pump shaft-to be rotated 14 times-per-
month and oil changed each month.
- .
l Pit list was found to have problems with missing maintenance entry.
HPCS oump, tag number HPCS-P-1, was shown on the PM list to have had no maintenance performed for the month of May,1980.
This was incorrect since a P'tS card was found for the month of May, card was dated 5/21/80.
WBG did have a maintenance engineer looking into their PM log and PMS
.
card system for these' types of problems at the time this inspection was conducted.
'
,
_
.
.-
-5-A follow-uo inspection will be done in this area after WBG has completed upgrade of their maintenance system.
(59-397/80-17/02)
7.
Allecations of Concrete Voids in Turbine Building itezzanine Area An allegation had been raised of concrete voids in the turbine building walls and floor at the mezzanine level.
Inspection was made of the turbine building south wall in the vicinity of main steam pipe whip support flos. PWS-315-5, PWS-315-6, PWS-315-7 and PWS-315-8.
flo surface voids were found during the inspection.
The inspector will attempt to obtain the exact lc ation of voids in the T-G building from the allecer.
Follow-up irsoection will be conducted if this information is obtained.
8. * !!anacement Interview At the conclusion of the inspection a meeting was held with licensee representatives denoted in Paragraph 1.
The areas inspected and the observations and findings of the inspectors were stated.