IR 05000397/1981014
| ML17275B212 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 08/14/1981 |
| From: | Dodds R, Toth A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17275B211 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-397-81-14, NUDOCS 8109030062 | |
| Download: ML17275B212 (12) | |
Text
.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISS OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Report No.
50-397/81-14 REGION V
Docket No.
50-397 License No.
CPPR-93 Licensee:
Washin ton Public Power Su
S stem P. 0.
Box 968 Richland, Washin ton 99352 Facility Name:
Washington Nuclear Pr o ect No.
(WNP-2)
Inspection at:
WNP-2 Site, Benton Count Washin ton Inspection conducted:
July 1-24, 1981 Inspectors:
A. D. Toth Senior Resident Inspector Safeguards Group Da e igned Date Signed Date Signed pproved By:
Summary:
R. T. Dodds, Chief Reactor Projects Section
Reactor Construction Projects Branch Dat Signed Ins ection dur in the eriod of Jul 1-24 1981 Re ort No.
50-397 81-14 Areas Ins ected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of licensee and contractor activities to re-evaluate and improve detailed work methods.
The inspection involved 27 inspector-hours on-site by the resident inspector
.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations weve identified.
8i090300b2 8i0818 PDR ADOCK OS000397
,RV Form 219 (2)
'i h
)I I
"'
J
'h
'll
~j
DETAILS Pevsons Contacted
'ashin ton Public Power Su l S stem (WPPSS)
M. A. Clinton, Management Specialist, Special Projects R. T. Johnson, Pvoject Quality Assuvance Managev,
'W. G. Keltnev, Construction Assistant Manager R. L. Knawa, Project Engineering Management Specialist, Special Pvojects
>'.
Welch, NDE Supevyisov G. I. Wells, Constvuction Manager
.':C. 0.',Wright, Quality Engineei ing Supervisor Buvns 'and-:Roe Inc.
,(BER)
.,
~
cX'.
Br a@6',,Civil Engineev.'"
M. Gi'annini,'Constvuction, Support Gvoup Supervisor E. Zisman,"'Geotechnic En'gineex'ri
'h't-'Schuchavt-Har boi /Boeco'n; Cor
. /Gener al Enev Resour ces, K., Bishop,Z'ngineevin'g Manager"',"
~<
M. H'...Br.enner, Project Quality.-"Assurance Managev R. Clouse,'roject.'onstruction Managev R. J.
D'Amato, Deputy,Project Manager, Reactor Outside M. Houck, Systems Completion
',8 Turnover Managev R. T. Scott, Project Geneval Managev M. Thompson, Corporate Quality Assuvance Director R. Walters, Engineering Supervisor, Reactov Outside P.
Webstev, Piocuzement'~Quality, Manager S.
Y. Young,'Covporate,Audit Manager R. Smith, Acting Corpovate Audit Manager Bechtel Power Cov oration
"'D. K. Cosgvove, Quality Assuvance Engineer E.
E. Felton, Construction Manager C.
D. Headvick, Project Quality Control Managev M. J. Jacobson, Pvoject Quality Assurance Manager D. R. Johnson, Quality Control Manager P.
E. Lindstrom, Pvoject Field Engineering Manager T. A. Mangelsdorf, Project Manager Pittsbur h Des Moines Steel Com an T. Foley, Quality Assurance'Managev
~
~
I J
fg A,
A
~J J
~P t
T" I
r, I
I 4,
n C (
I h
I I
Il 1I
'll I I C
C
tj kk t
)I
)
p
.
I
-k
~ k Ii I
Bonneville Power -'Administrati'on
'p O':.,Grady, Project En'gineer In addit'ion to the persons identified above, the inspector also routinely,interviewed construction, engineering, and quality assurance 'staffs of the licensee, engineer, and the contractors'n-'site organizations.
>'<Denotes principal personnel present at the monthly summary management meeting.
Also, the resident inspector 's supervisor (Mr. R. T. Dodds)
was on site July 8, 1981 to tour the site and meet with the inspector.
General The resident inspector was on-site July 1-2, 6 10'7'nd 20-24, 1981.
During this period, the inspector continued surveillence of daily activities of the licensee, the archi-tect-engineer, and various site-contractors.
This included review of efforts to re-evaluate and improve detailed work
,methods, and initial planning for reverification of completed work.
The inspector considered the scope, criteria and commitments in the WPPSS July 17, 1980 reply to the NRC
CFR 50.54(f) inquiry.
The inspector's on-site activities this period emphasized planning for an NRC independent measurements program in September.
The inspe'ctor attended an off-site oreientation of associated equipment capabilities during July 14-16.
Bechtel Transition Activi'ties Bechtel has fully assumed the function of construction manager as of June 1, 1981, for site quality control suxveillence and quality assurance functions.
Staffing has been provided.
Function'i'n
'Of The WPPSS Task Forces Task Force I activities have been declared as complete, by the license r s 'f 1(
I Ag J,
)
p I/1 p,1 I
, 1 fff If-fj J
'llf ff I
I If
1'
,j
.-I
4
""4J e
If,l C
~ ~
'V J
i Il I
ff
'1
I I '1 ll ft,J I
Task Force II continued to function as generally described in the licensee July 17, 1980 reply to the NRC 10 CFR 50.64
~
(f) inquiry.
The contractor-restart review activities are essentially complete, and most of the job-shop personnel have terminated.
Some effort has been underway this month to retrieve some of the lessons learned from Task Force II for input into the'everification program.
This effort. is limited by the extent that review personnel have previously terminated, before initiation of the program to retrieve this type information from, them.
Hardware reinspe'cti'on active.ties and record reviews have not y'et 's't'ar'ted; however.so'me planning activities continue.
The-"reverification plan was"submitted to NRC with the WPPSS July,l>>,
1981 'fifth~~bi.-monthly;,pr ogr ess r epor t.
Task, For ce 'III.'activities i'nvolve< r eview and str engthening of "manag'ement. systems, <'including those of the contractors.
This ai'so.'ncludeg dissemination of lessons learned at WNP-,,2!to~'the o'ther
. WPPSS'projects.
The responsibility for cooidinating this pro'gram has now been assigned to the WNP,-1'/4~;proj'ec't.
The inspector believes that the quarterly r epoi,t.on this subj'ect.appears',,"more rigorous in its identi-PicaB.on, of information.and 'tracking of corr ective actions.
FP l
~,l
.i'estar t'f Work b the Me'chanical Contr actor The mechanical contractor made a management system proposal to the licensee and construction manager on July 2, 1981.
He proposes to redefine the clean woik package'concept, due to difficulties in obtaining timely resolution of outstanding issues.
The construction manager later approved the proposal.
The revised system includes a yellow folder in the work package, which would contain information governing new work, including some but not necessarily all of the engineering directives and nonconformance reports.
A red folder would contain all the records generated by previously completed construction activities and the new reinspection Special Requir ements Checklists.
A separate WBG Systems Completion and Turnover gr oup (construction/engineering/quality assurance)
has been organized to work on the red folder items, independent of the WBG'ainline construction/engineering/quality assurance organization which will procede with work on the yellow packages.
This revised approach allows work to procede around holds, even though there may be a risk of subsequent tearout and rewor I H
ft I
I (I I
.I(
IH I
I I
I
/I H
If f
I I
I U QI H
Hi C
I I
I
t (
,.HC (
'(
(
I'
(
I (
The above plan appears to represent a return to the approach whose avoidance was described in part 3.4.2 of the licensee's November 12, 1981 management system description.
However, the inspector could identify no regulatory requirement which would prohibit such risk-based construction work-axounds.
The inspector identified no items of noncompliance.
Containment Vessel Retrofit Contxactox Activities The inspector'bserved work activities in the suppression pool and the drywell.
These included welding of integral attachment lugs to downcomex piping,.surface grinding of structural steel supports of pressure relief valve discharge lines, and welding of replacement supports fox the dxywell containment'pray piping.
The inspector interviewed three welders and seven quality contxol inspectors regarding their workloads,,cxitex'ia, findings, and corrective actions by management.
These personnel were all quite open with the inspector, willing to discuss their current activities, in-spection results, and any concerns that they had.
No signifi-cant matters were identified which wex e not already under contxol and being tracked by the contractor
's quality assurance system.
The inspector also interviewed the quality assurance manager, relative to specific matters identified below, and with regard to exchange of inspection observations between contractors.
I4;was noted that the new, hotline will provide an d'ddt.tional clear mechanism',fox employees to convey.observed:
d'eficien'cies to m'anagement of another responsible contr actor
. ";,
.
The inspector examined wox'k in,"progress,'axId the associated work package WP-D5-207.:fox"',xeapii',,o', pre'ssure relief line MSS-lB-.1SOG SRV-8;-and-wox'k package WP-Cl49'--foxrepair of spray header pip'ing support,'f22..-<<-The i.nspectox,noted that working conditions,:for~'thh.welder'sand i'nspectoj's were kept clean and physically.well 'orgariiz'ed:,, Drawings 'and procedures were readily available>i.n, a caged'ork area Qi'thin the suppression pool, arid 'several IQC in'spectoxs weie in the area.
The 'inspector'ox'king.the drywell 'spray head'e'x.caxx'ied his procedures with him and was 'obsex',ved'to be using this material at the work location.
The repair of spray-header'upport 822 involved cutting thxough a previous weld; this 'cut,~x'evealed slag inclusions in the prior weld.
Questioning 5y 'the'nspector revealed that 23 of'4 suppox'ts were being cut out due to lack of identification of the welder'n existing records.
The existance of slag in the weld will be coincidently corrected as part of this effor r I
+C a
I I
Irr f*
rr r
p gf Ij r
r rP'I" klv I
r J I
"I
1 rr',
/
(I I
~
r
<r Ij Ir
The wetwell SRV-8 line showed laminations on the piping base-metal surface near the horizontal bracing assembly.
The contractor demonstrated that this part of the line was inadvertently not included. in the walkdown inspection, and that planning was already underway to perform the walkdown inspection of these 20-feet length pipe sections.
The ins-spector examined the repaix package associated with results of the walkdown of the remaining paxt of the line and found it to be quite comprehensive.
The contractor advised that the additional walkdown results and evaluation would be made available fox xeview by the NRC inspector
.
No items of noncompliance ox deviations were identified.
7.
Licensee Action On Previous NRC Xns ection Findin s The licensee has assigned Bechtel the responsibility for followup on items identifeid by NRC.
This function has been assigned to the Bechtel site quality assurance organization.
The licensee advised the inspector that supporting data will no longer be compiled for the NRC inspector, relating to previous inspection findings.
The Bechtel organization plans to provide summary data sheets only, describing their actions and conclusions; additional information needed by the NRC inspectors would be provided upon request during followup inspection activities.
The inspector examined, no specific items this period.
8.
Mana ement Meetin s The inspector met with a representative of the MPPSS site QA manager on July 2W, 1981 to summarize his inspection findings and to xeceive a status report of principal MPPSS activities.
Attendees at this meeting are identified by notation (
) in Pax'agx aph 1 of this r epox t.
The inspector confix'med that an NRC independent measurements pxogram would be conducted on-site during the month of September, 1981.
He confirmed a prior request for on-site space for the NRC van, nominal electric service, and access to site calibration standards and plant"structure h r
1 I
I N
t I
p'.
J'E (
,4+
~
CI lu I ~ I4 C
V l
H I
r (I t
'
lL h