IR 05000460/1980004
| ML19312E701 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Washington Public Power Supply System |
| Issue date: | 04/11/1980 |
| From: | Haynes R, Toth A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19312E684 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-460-80-04, 50-460-80-4, 50-513-80-04, 50-513-80-4, NUDOCS 8006090418 | |
| Download: ML19312E701 (7) | |
Text
'
'
,.-
.,
.
.
O U. S. NUCLEAR REcULAToRY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REcION V 50-460/80-04 R2 port No.
50-513/80-04
,
Docket No.
50-460. 50-513 License No.
CPPR-134, CPPR-174 Safeguards Group Licensee:
Washinoton Public Power Sunolv System P O Rnv 06R Richland, Washington 99352 Washington Nuclear Projects Nos.1 and 4 (WNP 1 & 4)
Facility Name:
Inspection at:
WNP 1 & 4 Site, Benton County, Washington Inspection condu ted:
March 1-31, 1980 Inspectors:
%-
'
I.<- A. D. To t t)
esident Reactor Inspector Date Signed Date Signed Date Signed
=-
-
N/Ge Approved By:
'j R. C. Hap d Chief, Projects Section Date Signed Reactor Construction & Engineering Suppo'rt Branch Surrna ry : Inspection on March 1-31, 1980 (Report No. 50-460/80-04)
i
!
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by the resident inspector of construction activities relating to:
reactor coolant pressure boundary welding, safety related piping installation., reactor pressure vessel storage, fire
,
prevention during construction, s2fety related component in-place storage, j
previous inspection findings, and general construction activities. The inspection involved 88 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: Of tne 7 areas inspected, one deviation was identified in the area of i
reactor coolant pressure boundary welding.
Inspection on March 1-31, 1980 (Report No. 50-513/80-04)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by the resident inspector of construction activities relating to:
safety related piping installation, reactor pressure vessel storage, fire prevention during construction, safety related component in-place storage, and general construction. activities. The inspection involved 14 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
)
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8006090Y/T 4?
.
_
.
. _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - - _ _
_,
'
+
.
.,
,
.
.
DETAILS 1., Persons Contacted Washington Public Power Supply System
- M. C. Carrigan, Construction Manager
- T. J. Houchins, Project QA Manager
- G. D. Dyekman, Engineering Manager
- J. P. Thomas, Deputy Project Manager United Engineers and Constructors
- E. C. Haren, Deputy Project QA Manager
- G. E. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Project Manager
- R. H. Bryans, Field Project Engineering Manager
- W. J. Taylor, Deputy Construction Manager J. A. Jones Construction Company W. Roe, Quality Assurance Manager R. Pope, Engineering Manager G. F. Atkinson, Wright, Shuchart/ Harbor (AWSH)
M. Latch, Quality Assurance Manager Peter Kiewit Sons Construction K. Bedell, Project QA Manager The inspection also included discussions with craft, quality control, supervision, and middle management personnel.
- Principal licensee and architect-engineer staff representatives to whom inspection findings were presented at exit interviews.
2.
General Construction Activities - Units 1 and 4 The inspector was on-site March 3-7, 10-14, 17, 24-28 and 31.
During this period, plant tours were made during the day shift at various times each week.
Craft personnel, supervision and quality control inspectors were interviewed as they were encountered in the various work areas.
Interviews during the second shift were also conducted as described in paragraph 6 of this report. The inspector examined in-process records, such as work control forms and inspection logs, calibration tags, quality release tags and equipment identification tag r
'
- '
.
.
.
.
.
.
-2-The tours included observation of facility and equipment relative to compliance with general codes and standards, regulatory guides and requirements, and implementation of quality assurance program require-ments.
General housekeeping and fire prevention, equipment protection, presence of quality control inspectors for each work area, and work quality were considered.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified during the plant tours.
3.
Status of Previous Inspection Findings (460/80-03-01) Unresolved Item (0 pen):
Unidentified surface contamination on stainless steel pipe spools.
The inspector identified a contractor nonconformance report (1-CNCR-257-266)
dated July 27, 1979, which had been voided apparently because of licensee followup action. The CNCR highlighted that concrete curing water was contaminating the surface of stainless steel piping and expressed concern over possible high halogen content.
J. A. Jones, the piping contractor, requested assistance from the licensee via letter No. JAUE-79-5786, dated August 13, 1979, to have other contractors assist in the control of piping contamination. A licensee letter, No. UEJA-79-5275, dated September 4,1979, advised the piping contractor that a swipe test was taken from each of three stainless steel pipe spools and leachable chlorides / fluorides were found to be well within a WPPSS 5 microgram-per-square inch acceptance criteria. The letter indicated that additional swipe tests would be conducted periodically.
The piping contractor, therefore, voided the nonconformance report and since then has not exercised controls to prevent concrete curing water orother dust and debris from accumulating on the stainless steel piping in laydown positions at the facilities.
Project specifications and PSAR commitments impose halogen concentration limits for materials contacting stainless steel.
This item remains unresolved pending review of subsequent swipe test data.
4.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Piping Welding - Unit 1 The inspector audited work activities for welding of piping to the reactor vessel, the steam generator, and the reactor coolant pumps (weld Nos. 184710E-FW8, FW5, and FW6). Joint fitup for FW6 and FW5, and welding of FWS and FW8 were examined. Applicable codes, standards and quality requirementi are described in PSAR Sections 17 and 5.2, job i
specification No. 211, contractor procedure Nos. (JAJ) WP-Pl/P3-1 and HT-001, iprocess traveler No. (JAJ) T-211-0059C, and drawing No. 184710E/FP-50849.
.
.
. ___
..
'
.,
.
.
-3-For the pipe weld fitups, observations, examination of records, and interviews of personnel were conducted relative to: dimensions of the weld-end preparations, cleanliness and protection of the joints, evidence of QC inspection, documentation of fitup and inspection activities on the approved process traveler, appearance of welds on the fit-up lugs, qualification of the fitup lug welders (Nos. W5 and G4),
compliance with postweld heat treatment criteria (fillet welds less than 1/2" throat), and support of the pipe spool.
For the welding in progress, the following aspects were examined:
control by process traveler and weld data sheets, availability of the control documents near the work areas, compliance of the weld procedure with the ASME code and supplementary PSAR commitments, qualification of welders (marks G4, X6, J1, Y2), certifications of filler material / base material / backing rings, working conditions for the welders, equipment and tool condition and availability, preheat and interpass temperature control, interpass cleaning, provision for removal and penetrant testing for backing rings, in-process radiography to check weld status, and presence of QC inspectors and supervision. The inspector also examined the general post-weld heat treatment procedure and discussed qualification testing with the contractor's engineer. The inspector examined supplies and records in the weld material disbursal area and examined records for weld electrode heat Nos. 422E5861, 40lK2811 and 92013A001.
The inspector particularly probed in the area of welding equipment
performance.
Some dissatisfaction was euressed by several craft
,
personnel regarding welding equipment hot-start capability and avail-
'
ability of large power brushes for cleaning deep into the 2 7/8-inch deep weld joints. The contractor management / engineering had already been evaluating this matter and had initiated corrective action.
Of
,
particular concern was that the welding machines provided by the licensee did not appear in the manufacturer's literature to be recommended i
for use with 5/32-inch E-7018 weld electrode, SMAW process.
Based upon in-process radiography results and welder comments, the contractor obtained replacement machines for rework and continuation of the welding
on these pipe joints.
Further equipment evaluation by the licensee (
and contractor is in progress.
Initial data indicates that weld quality has improved with attention to the equipment selection. The
,
licensee has also initiated an evaluation of weld equipment performance in the general services building.
There was no material certifications on-site for the weld backing rings Neither the contractor (JAJ) nor engineer (UE&C) records center files
'
i, contained identification of the backing ring material.
Such records were absent as a result of the contractor / engineer consideration of i
ASME Section III paragraphs NB-4421 and NB-4231.2 provisions which indicate that temporary attachment material need not be certified; the rings were therefore classed as quality class II and material traceability on-site was not maintained. The ring material was
__
_
__
--
.....
.
.
-4-supplied by Babcock & Wilcox (B&W) nuclear steam system supplier, and the B&W site representative was able to identify the material to assure its acceptability for welding. A February 22, 1980 memorandum from B&W to UE&C identified the material prior to the start of welding. This record is now available to the record centers and the B&W site staff anticipates receipt of additional information within 30 days. The piping contractor has also initiated action to clarify records which originally showed the material as WPPSS quality class I.
The relevant weld material certifications (heat Nos. 422E5861, 40lK2811, 92013A001) appeared to comply with requirements of ASME Section II SFA5.1 and ASME Section III NB 2400, and was certified accordingly. The SFA 5.1 specification is identified on the approved weld procedure, JAJ-WP-Pl/P3-1, Carbon and Low Alloy Steels. Table 5.2.5 of the PSAR indicates that SFA 5.5 material will be used for reactor coolant piping and the steam generator, and other primary system components. The NSSS contractor procedure review of January 4, 1980 (procedure JAJ-WP-P1-13, Carbon Steel) recommends use of SFA 5.5 Exxxx-Al weld electrodes on the basis of proven experience and predictability of properties. The licensee's log of PSAR deviations does not identify any change in this area. The licensee and NSSS supplier are reviewing this item. This is a deviation.
(460/80-04-01)
5.
Safety Related Piping - Unit 1 The inspector audited work activities for five typical piping i
f activities. This involved observation of as-built measurements of
'
main steam restraint No. 350-8364-lC; review of tool room and ware-house supplies for welders / fitters, attendance at training of pipe r
]
rigging crews, and observation of fab-shop pipe spools. Applicable
codes, standards and quality requirements are described in PSAR
Sections 17, job specification No. 257, and contractor procedure No.
JAJ-WI-16.1.
Observations, examination of records, and interviews of personnel were
!
conducted relative to: checks to assure that the as-received pipe restraint complied with dimensional requirements prior to installation, content of rigging crew training relative to hold points-tagging-handling i
'
prohibitions, availability of weld repair tools to fitters, and marking of socket welds in the fab-shop.
.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
.
.-
.
- . '. *,
\\
.
.
.
-5-6.
Safety Related Piping Installation - Unit 4 The licensee stated that the site prnject manager for the spray pond piping contractor (Peter Kiewit & Sons) had written a formal objection to production impacts arising from NRC inspector interviews of craftsmen in February, 1980. The inspector stated that his direct interfacing with crafts of this contractor involved less than three hours for the entire course of this contract to date and that such interfacing should be expected as a part of NRC inspection activities.
During this month, the inspector interviewed members of this contractor's quality control staff to evaluate whether the quality control function was sufficiently free of production pressures. Personnel interviews, review of personnel qualification records, organization charts, and 22 contractor nonconformance reports were conducted in addition to a review of QA indoctrination records for the five welders currently working for this contractor and the NIX Testing Inc.
l technician who performed magnetic particle testing of pipe spool 4ESW-3-1-6-S-167. The contractor's instrument calibration program was also considered. The inspector found that the two principal QA engineers appeared to be well qualified and the trainee is a college graduate who is 6 months into an on-the-job training program which is commensurate with ANSI Standard N45.2.6.
Organizational independence was apparent as was influence of the QA staff. The inspector had no further questions.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Reactor Pressure Vessels - Units 1 and 4 The inspector audited work activities for the in-place storage of the reactor pressure vessel at Unit 1 and the covered yard-storage of the reactor pressure vessel at Unit 4.
Applicable codes, standards and quality requirements are described in PSAR Sections 17 and 3.12 (Regulatory Guides 1.38 and 1.39), job specification No. 211, and contractor procedure No. FS-II-2.
Observations, examination of records, and interviews of personnel were conducted relative to: covers on nozzles and other openings, dunnage condition, protection from construction hazards, desiccant indicator status for the vessel in yard storage, access room locks at the installed vessel, cleanliness of the installed vessel while internal preheat was in progress for the welding of pipe spools to the vessel nozzles.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
i
_
.
__
_
_ __
_
'
.....
.
.
-6-8.
Fire Prevention / Protection - Units 1 and 4 The inspector audited work activities for fire prevention and protection at the construction site. This involved tours of the facilities during January, February and March, and consideration of potential for damage of safety related equipment as may arise from a fire. Applicable codes, standards and quality requirements are described in PSAR Sections 17 and 9.5.1, job specification Nos. 211, 257, 253 and 254, and contractor procedure Nos. PMP-8-108 and QAP-12.
Observations, examination of records, and interviews of personnel were conducted relative to: control of combustible materials, control of cutting and temporary heat processes, presence and maintenance of fire extinguishers and hose stations.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
,
Safety Related Components - Units 1 and 4 9.
i The inspector audited work activities for protection of safety
,
i related components after their installation. This involved weekly tours of the plant during which observations were made of equipment
t condition, presence of maintenance staff and QA surveillance staff.
Applicable codes, standards and quality requirements are described in PSAR Sections 17 and 3.12 (Regulatory Guide 1.39), job specification No. 257, and contractor procedure Nos. FGCP-9, FGCP-16 and JAJ-WI-005.
l l
Observations, examination of records, and interviews of personnel were conducted relative to:
prevention of damage from dirt, dust, debris, condensation water and adjacent construction activities; lubrication; desiccant and inert gases control; coatings integrity;
,
and contractor surveillance activity.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
10. Management Interview At the conclusion of the inspection on March 31, 1980 a meeting was held at the site with representatives of the licensee and the
).
architect-engineer organizations. Attendees at this meeting included personnel whose names are indicated by notation (*) in paragraph 1.
The inspector summarized the results of the inspection as described j
in this report, during weekly status meetings on March 10, 24 and 31, 1980.
!
,
.
,,
-,
-