IR 05000508/1978006
| ML20062B083 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Satsop |
| Issue date: | 09/22/1978 |
| From: | Eckhardt J, Haynes R, Kirsch D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20062B081 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-508-78-06, 50-508-78-6, 50-509-78-06, 50-509-78-6, NUDOCS 7810230094 | |
| Download: ML20062B083 (10) | |
Text
,
'
U. S. NUCLEAR REGUIATORY COMMISSION
,
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
..
REGION V
-
50-508/78-06 Report No.
50-509/78-06
,iDocket No. *50-508, 50-509 License No. CPPR 154, CPPR-155 Safeguards Group Licensee:
Washington Public Power Supply System P. O. Bo' 468 Richland, Washington 99352 Facility Name: WNP-3 and 5 Inspection at: WNP-3 and 5 site (Satsop)
Inspection condu ed:
September 5-8, 1978 Inspectors:
7-2Z-D. Y. Kirsc W deactor inspector Date Signed Y $)
0- 2/2-al. H.Tck6udt, Reactor inspector
'
Date Signed Date Signed C
]d;A 2e d78 Approved By:
~
R. C. MaynC Ghief, Project Section
/
Data Signed Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Summary:
Inspection on September 5-8, 1978 (Report Nos. 50-508/78-06 and 50-509/78-06)
Areas Inspected:
Routine unannounced inspection by regional based inspectors of site construction activities including:
site preparation, foundations, folicwup on IE Bulletins, licensee action on previously identified enforcement and open items, equipment storage, and review of nonconformance reports.
The inspection involved 54 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspectors.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
.
RV Form 219 (2)
7Tr/613 o o fy g
,
..
.
-
. ~..
,
.
.
.
DETAILS
.
.-
1.
Persons Contacted Washington Public Power Supply System ('..PPSS)
- W.
J. Talbott, Division Manager
- F. D. Mc Elwee, Assistant Director Projects
- T. E. Trapp, Project Engineering Manager
- E. Bodholt, Construction Manager
- T. B. Willis, Project QA Manager
- C. A. Cal, QA Engineer
- R. R. Quimby, QA Engineer R. K. Jackson, QA Engineer J. Walker, QA Engineer Guy F. Atkinson Co. (GFA)
,
J. C. Forrester, QA Manager D. G. Summers, QC Supervisor W. Granville, Office Engineer P. Parfait, Document Control Clerk
'
Pittsburg Testing Laboratory (PTL)
K. O. Drake, District Manager-P. A. Mc Collum, Site Manager J. Van Veen, Level II Inspector Ebasco Services, Inc. (Ebasco)
C. B. Tatum, Senior Resident Engineer
- A. i4. Cutrons, Supervising Project Quality Engineer
- J. R. Sowers, Supervising Project Quality Engineer W. Johnson, Equipment Administrator J. E. Hayes, Material Manager W. K. Flint, Concrete Engineer Associated Sand and Gravel (A3&G)
L. B. Wacmity, Quality Assurance Manager P. Meservey, QC Technician
- Denotes management interview attendees
.
.
~
~
,
.
. _ - _ _ _ _ _.
.
,,
.
-2-2.
General
/
The placement of reinforcing steel and embeds was in progress in
-
preparation for concrete placement in Area 1 of the Unit 3 Reactor
'
.
Auxiliary Building (RAB) basemat. The licensee had not placed any quality class 1 concrete in the Unit 3 PAB basemat.
Ebasco was in process of approving the concrete design mixes to be used and had established a checklist of items requiring completion prior to placement of the RAB basemat.
Excavation for Unit 5 had recently been completed to bedrock. The ground water drainage system in-stallation was in progress on both units.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings The inspector examined the corrective actions taken by the licensee on the following previously noted enforcement and open items.
a.
(Closed) Noncompliance (50-508, 509/78-01):
Indication of quality of desiccant in equipment and periodic check of humidity indication.
'
The licensee issued Administrative Site Procedure (ASP-V-37),
" Care and flaintenance of Prepurchased Material and Equipment"
.
(approved 6/1/78) which requires a desiccant record card, affixed to equipment, to be completed each time the desiccant
'
is changed indicating the date of installation and quantity of desiccant installed.
All quality equipment containing desiccant was examined and desiccant cards were affixed to the equipment as required.
Also, maintenance records of this equipment indicated periodic checks of the humidity indicators were being performed.
b.
(Closed) Nonccmpliance (50-508, 509/78-01):
Receipt inspec-tion (Material Receiving Report) not ccmpleted for nitrogen recycle tank.
The Material Receiving Report was ccmpleted for the subject tank on March 11, 1978. Administrative Site Procedure No.
ASP-V-35 (Warehouse Control-Receiving, Storage and Issue) was approved 6/1/78 and requires the Material Control Supervisor to be notified prior to off-loading of material and equipment into a storage area so that the Material Report can be completed.
c.
(Closed) Open item (50-508, 509/78-01):
National Ready Mix Concrete Association (NRMCA) batchplant certification checklist (waterheatingcapacity).
.
.
.
._
.
......
-
.
,
. _ _
,
.
.
3-
-
-
-
Associated Sand and Gravel (AS&G) issued a revision (letter 209EB-78-30, dated May 26,1978) to the HRMCA certification checklist in the area of water heating capacity.
The check-
,
.
.t list now reflects the actual batch plant capabilities.
d.
(Closed) Open item (50-508, 509/78-04): Use of low alkali cement.
Specification 3240-209 was revised to require Type II low alkali cement to be supplied until such time as it has been determined that the potential reactivity between the aggregate and cement does not exist as verified by A3TM C-227 (Mortar BarTest).
Review of cement test reports indicates that the cement being supplied is low alkali cement (contains less than 0.60 percent alkalies per ASTM C-150).
4.
Foundations
a.
Review of Quality Assurance Implementing Procedures Selected quality assurance implementing procedures, identified below to contractor, were audited for inclusion of PSAR committed industry codes and standards requirements.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
(1) Guy F. Atkinson Company (a) Concrete Placement (CP-1)
(b) Reinforcing Bar Installation (CP-2)
(c) Control of Contract Occuments (CP-7)
(d)
Indoctrination of Construction Supervisory Personnel (CP-8)
_
(e) General Housekeeping (CP-12)
(f) Forms, Sharing, Falsework and Scaffolds (CP-15)
(g) Reinforcing and Embedment Support System (CP-16)
(h) Concrete Handling Equipment (CP-17)
(i) Material Handling and Storage (CP-26)
(j)
Indoctrination and Training of GFA Personnel
,
(CP-1)
(k) Material Receiving and Storage (QCP-2)
,
W D
W m
._
.
_
.
-
,
-4 (1) Guy F. Atkinson Company (Cont.)
(1) Reinforcing Steel (QCP-3)
.'
(m) Cadwelding (QCP-4)
(n) Formwork and Shoring (QCP-5)
(o) Concrete Preplacement Inspection (QCP-9)
(p) Concrete Placement and Finish of Unformed Surfaces (QCP-11)
(q) Post Placement Inspection - Repair, Finish of Formed Surfaces, and Curing (QCP-12)
(r) Document Control (QCP-12)
(s} Nonconformances (QCP-15)
(t) Audits (QCP-16)
(u) Weld Rod Electrode Control (QCP-19)
(2) Pittsburg Testing Laboratory (a) Personnel Qualifications (PQ-2)
I (b) Document, Specification and Instrument Control (CAL-3)
(c) Control and Reporting of Nonconformances (CRN-1)
(d) Field Sampling, Testing and Inspection of Concrete (FSTC-1)
(e) Concrete Pix Proportioning (CMP-1)
(f)
Internal Audits (IA-1)
(3) Associated Sand and Gravel (a) Document Control (Procedure No. 2)
(b)
Inspection (Procedure No. 4)
(c) Control of Measuring and Tr.st Equipment (Procedure No. 6)
(d) Handling, Storage and Shipping (Procedure No. 7)
i
,
(e) Audits (Procedure No. 10)
(f) Quality Assurance Records (Procedure No.14)
.
.
- _ _ _
.
,
-5-
.
b.
Observation of Work and Work Activities
-
Guy F. Atkinson Company
.'
The in-progress installation of reinforcing steel and formwork
-
in Area 1 of the Unit 3 foundation basemat were inspected for
'
-
compliance with procedures.
In addition, the inspector ex-amined field welds Nos. 120,121 and 122 on sump drain tank F04 for compliance with Section III of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
c.
Review of Quality Records (1) Guy F. Atkinson Company The following quality-related records were audited for compliance with procedural requirements:
(a) Qualification / Indoctrination documentation for three Level III inspectors, five Level II inspectors, one Level I inspector and several administrative and engineering personnel.
(b) Audit schedule and frequency list.
(c) Documentation and findings of six audits.
-
(d) Twenty-five lift drawings frcm location DC8 (Area 1 of Unit 3 foundation basemat) and a comparison to the Master Drawing Control Log for inclusion of proper revision.
(e) Master Calibration List and the Calibration Scatus Sheets for several instruments.
(f) Weld inspection documentation for Welds 120,121 and 122 on sump drain tank FO-4.
(g) Welding Procedure Specification GFA-P-105 and associated qualification records.
(h) Welding electrode issue records.
(i) Welding filler metal certification for E 3C8 filler heat 761456.
(j) Receipt inspection documentation fer welding filler metal heat 761456.
_
(k) Welder qualification documentation for two welders.
. _. _..
. _
.... _
.
..._. _
.
.
.
_s_
.
,
The calibration status sheets for three recently purchased
-
pressure gauges did not have the accuracy requirements
<
identified. GFA personnel had accepted the gauges based on a +1% accuracy specified on the purchase document but
,
.
e one gliuge (CS/til522-2275-4) did not meet the +1% accuracy.
- Subsequent re-evaluation by GFA personnel determined that the accuracy required was 12% which the gauge did meet.
The 12% requirement was entered onto the Calibration Status Sheets for the gauges.
,:n The drawings sampled at location DC8 showed that one drawing contained a Revision 4 while the Master Orawing Log identified Revision 3 as being issued. GFA personnel determined that Revision 4 was proper and that drawing locations contained the proper revision. The Master
Drawing Log was modified to reflect Revision 4.
tio items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
'
,
(2) Pittsburg Testing Laboratory _
s The following quality-related records were audited for compliance with procedural requirements:
,
_
(a) Qualification documentation for three Level I and
.
three Level II inspectors.
'
.
(b) Test equipment calibration records and calibration standard documentatien for several items of test equipment.
,
PTL personnel stated that the qualification records of sixteen transferred or terminated technicians had been recently relocated to the Seattle district office due to lack of space on site, and that the Level III certifi-cations were at the district office. PTL personnel initiated action to have these qualification records returned to and stored on site.
Ebasco surveillances indicated tnat the Level III certifications had been reviewed satisfactorily.
PTL representatives noted that Level II technicians would exercise approval of testing documentaticn only for those tests for which the Level II was qualified to perform.
,
P. had utilited the waiver of experience allowance of
,
AftSI fi45.2.5 (Qualificaticns of Inspection, Examination and Testing Personnel for the Construction Phase of fluclear Power Plants) for the certification of some Level I tecnnicians and provided as a basis a documented
.
'
'
training and testing program for various concrete / soils
'
testing activities.
'
,
-
'
I t'
(
,
,
.
.
-
_7_
,
.
.
Licensee personnel indicated that when quality class 1 concrete placement begins, PTL will utilize a computer to
j perform the statistical analyses required by ACI-214
-
.-
(Recommended Practice for Evaluation of Compression Test
!
Results of Field Concrete).
Examination of several test instruments for ccmpliance with procedural requirements indicated that two minor errors had been made in transcribing the calibration /re-
calibration due dates from the calibration documentation to the instrument sticker.
It was noted that the instru-ment calibration recall system would have precluded use
'
of test instruments after the recalibration due dates specified.
PTL personnel immediately corrected the sticker dates.
ilo items of noncompliance or deviations wer,e identified.
(3) Associated Sand and Gravel Implementation of the procedures listed in Paragraph 4.a.
,
(3) was examined.
Particular areas sampled and inspected were; documentation control, calibration of test equip-
,
mant, cement and aggregate storage, test results, inspection
'
checklists, and audits.
In the areas examined, AS&G t
appeared to be following their quality assurance procedures.
,
S.
Equipment Storage and Maintenance Quality class 1 equipment stored at the Saginaw outdoor storage area and Aberdeen warehouse was examined and compared with the requirements of AtlSI N45.2.5, " Packaging, Shipping, Receiving, Storage, and Handling of Items for tiuclear Power Plants (During the Construction Phase)." Equipment examined included pumps, motors, tanks, and reinforcing bars.
Particular areas examined included desiccant installation, meggaring, cleanliness, environmental protection, and equipment identification.
Preventative maintenance
records were also reviewed to ascertain whether required periodic checks were being performed. ilo items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
tionconformance Report (flCR) Review
l l
Ebasco initiated nonconformance reports for the period of May 1, to August 18, 1978 were reviewed.
The l4CR dispositions appeared to be satisfactory and tiCR acministrative procedures were being followed.
-
.
l
'
,
r
. _. _...
._
_ _. _... _.
-
... _. _ _ __...._......._.._.
.
.
.
-8-
.
7.
IE Bulletins
,i
"
a.
IE Bulletin 78-06 (closed)
The licensee reported on August 7,1978 that Cutler-Hammer type M relays are not used or planned for use in any safety-related systems on WNP-3 and 5 projects.
b.
IE Bulletin 78-10 (closed)
The licensee reported on August 4,1978 that Bergen-Paterson hydraulic shock suppressors had not been specified or approved for use on the WNP-3 and 5 projects in safety-related appli-cations.
8.
Management Idterview The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on September 8, 1978, and summarized the inspection purpose, scope and findings.
The inspectors noted that the certification bases used for PTL Level I technicians would be examined during future inspections (see Paragraph 4.c.(2)) and licensee representatives indicated their intent to perform similar examinations.
,
.