IR 05000508/1980012
| ML19341A292 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Satsop |
| Issue date: | 11/26/1980 |
| From: | Dangelo A, Haist D, Haynes R, Wagner W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19341A280 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-508-80-12, 50-509-80-12, NUDOCS 8101220543 | |
| Download: ML19341A292 (8) | |
Text
.
g
.
.
..
U. S. ::UCL".iR PSCULiTORY CCMMISSION OFFIC2 0F I!!SPECT!O!i A!!D E!!FORC2!E!;T
"
50-508/80-12 50-509/80-12 Report !!o.
50-508 & 50-509
- con 3e 3,, CPPR-154 & 155 Safeguards Group Docket !!o.
Licensee:
Washington Public Power Supply Systen P. O. Box 968 Richland, Washington 99352
'
Facility Name:
WNP-3 and WNP-5 Inspection at:
WMP-3 and WMP-5 Site (Satsop)
Inspection conducted:
Cctober 21-24, 1980 Inspectors:
-d #
// 2 Ro u.
r.
calsL, Meactor inspector
Date signec h
t%AMfhr
// 2G 80 ffe'J.Wagyer,ReactorInspector
/ Daye Signed
)/lu yL,
/~,,, /h>
'
( /.
'
n A..J. D' Ailgelo, Reactor Inspector Date Signed Approved Oy:
_/
!
/
///76/80
<t w ~ ~
R.'
C. Haynes,.'rhint, Projects Section Date Signed Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch S u:~mry :
Inspection during the period of Cctober 21-24, 1980 (Report !!os. 50-508/80-12 and 50-509/80-12)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by regional based inspectors of construction activities including welding procedures and welding by the prime electrical contractor, structural steel erection, quality assurance program
.
of the civil / structural contractor inside the reactor building, licensee action I
on previous inspection findings, and licensee audits of contractor activities.
The inspection involved 63 hours7.291667e-4 days <br />0.0175 hours <br />1.041667e-4 weeks <br />2.39715e-5 months <br /> onsite by three NRC inspectors.
Resul ts: One item of noncompliance at Unit flo. 3 was identified in the area of control of nonconforming conditions by the HVAC contractor.
,
.
RV Form 219 (2)
,
.
8101220f43
.
-.
,
-
t
.
,
.
DETAIts 1.
Persons Contacted a.
Washincton Public Power Suooly System (WPPSS)
- D. E. Dohon, Division Manager
- J. C. Lockhart, Quality Assurance Manager
- 0. E. Trapp, Project Engineering Manager
- C. }l. Tewksbury, Senicr Project Quality Engineer
- R. A. Davis, Senior Project Quality Engineer
- J. A. Vanni. Quality Assurance Engineer b.
Ebasco Services, Inc. (EBASCO)
-
- A. ft. Cutiona, Decuty Project Quality Assurance fianager
- T. E. Cottrell, Senior Resident Engineer
- D. Cuamme, Construction Manager
- J. C. Murphy, Project Superintendent
- C B. Tatum, Construction P. Peck, Project Quality Engineer T. F. Tully, Cuality Assurance Auditor P. McGrath, Quality Assurance Records Clerk c.
fiorrison-Knudsen, Inc. (f!K)
F. C. Edler, Project Quality Manager D. Cook, Quality Control Inspector, level II d.
Pittsburoh Testina_ Laboratory (PTL)
J. Adatchi, Site Supervisor T. Gibbs, Quality Assurance Manager e.
Fischbach and l'otte, Inccrporated (F/f t)
J. A. 'Jiley, Construction Manager H. S. Jaillet, Project QC Manager J. flispagel, Quality Control Welding Engineer
- Denotes those persons present at the f!RC exit interview meeting on October 24, 1980.
In addition, Mr. G. Hansen, Sr. Project Engineer, State of Uashington Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, attended the meeting. fir. T. W. Bishop, Senior Resident Inspector and l'r. R. T. Dodds, Chief, Engineering Support Section, USt!RC Region V also participated in this meeting.
2.
Site Tour Upon arrival at the site the inspectors toured the UtlP-3 and 5 plant areas to observe completed work, equipment storage and housekeeping. The inspectors also observed sandblasting in progress on the Unit 3 containment vessel. tio deviations or items of noncompliance were
!
identified.
l
.-
_
_
_
.
.
.
-2-
.
l-t
.
.
3.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Followup and Unresolved Items a.
Closed (50-508/80-02/01) Followup Item:
Calibration Check of Gradation Sieves The inspector previously examined the concrete testing contractor's
(PTL) program to assure calibration of aggregate gradation sieves and had concerns which were documented in IE Inspection Report Nos. 50-508/79-04 and 79-05. The licensee described the system used for control of sieves in his letter No. G03-80-597 dated March 24, 1980. This system included purchase of sieves in compliance with ASTM-E-ll and periodic visual inspection for damage.
To clarify the requirements for sieve calibration programs, the
,
inspector obtained guidance from IE management in the form of an IE position statement. This statement described basic requirements as follows:
(1) verification that the sieve conforms to reouirements when received by the using organization; (2) frequent visual checks by the user to verify that the sieve has not been damaged, and (3) periodic checking "indeoendent" of user on an annual frequency, based on the criticality of particle size and
the importance to safety of the end use of the sieve analysis.
Gradation of concrete aggregates is not considered by IE to be a critical use requiring periodic checking as in (3) above.
i The inspe
'xamined PTL procedure Nos. OC-LT-1, Revision 8 and OC-
- vision 1 for conformance to the IE position. The procedure, require visual examination of sieves for damage prior to each use by a laboratory technician. The inspector also sampled receiving documentation and ascertained that the sieves were verified for conformance to requirements (ASTM-E-ll).
A visual inspection disclosed that all sieves are in good condition.
The licensee stated that the contractor will revise his procedures to require periodic checking of sieves in accordance with the IE position in the event that sieves are used where particle size is critical to safety, for example, j
graded filters associated with an earth filled safety
-
related dam or impoundment, or for controlling a parameter influencing liquefaction.
Sieves are not presently being used
,
for these critical types of applications. The inspector had no further questions in this area.
'
b.
Closed (50-5G3/79-08/01) Followup Item:
Peter Kiewit Sons-Ouality Assurance Implementing Procedures did not
Implement Certain Code and 0A Program Requirements.
The inspector examined procedure No. PKS-UI-302, Pipe Cleanliness
Control, Revision 4 as approved by EBASCO with comments.
The procedure now incorporates appropriate controls over the removal of marking naterials or pressure sensitive tapes.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
,
!
,
- - - -
.
..
.-
.-,
~. -
-
-
.,,.
-,.,
_
_ _. -
_ _ _ _ - _
- _
_
_ _. _
_ _ _ _
.
-
i-3-
.
.
i
.-
r,
.
c.
Closed (50-508/80-07/02) Followup Item: Wallace/ Superior (HVAC Contractor) Use of Cortractor flCR Form - Procedure OCP-12-12.
Closed (50-508/80-08/01) Unresolved Item: Wallace/ Superior i
fianconfomance Report flo. 054.
Open (50-508/30-12/01) Noncomoliance: Wallace/ Superior -
Control of flonconformina Conditions.
The inspector initially expressed concern (item 50-508/80-07/02
of IE InsDection Reports flos. 80-07 and 80-10) that definitive criteria was lacking about the use of the Wallace/ Superior nonconformance report form in procedure QCP-12-12. Specifically, disposition of nonconformance reports by the contractor in some
cases could bypass those engineering reviews required pursuant
'
to the cuality assurance program requirements of 10 CFR 50 Appendix B.
,
Subsequently the f1RC senior resident inspector. examined Quality Class I duct hanger flo. 5210 installed by Wallace/ Superior and identified that the I-beam clips were not installed in conformance with the current architect-engineer approved drawing. This nonconforming condition had been documented and accepted "as is" based upon calculations performed by the contractor.
(Ref:
IE Inspection Report 50-508, Item 80-08/01).
Wallace/ Superior
!
flonconfomance Report No. 064 documented these actions. The
,
nonconforming condition was that one instead of two beam clips had been used to attach the duct hanger to supporting I-beams.
'
The licensee's investigation discloseu that the duct hanger I
had been installed in accordance with Revision 4 of Wallace/
J Superior Drawing !!o. I-3.
However, this drawing (Revision 4)
was not consistent with the arcidtect-engineer's specification
!
,
f!o. 3240-232 in that the drawing required one beam clip and the specification (governing document) required two beam clips
,
on each end of the supporting I-beams.
(Specification No. 448 i
is invoked by flo. 3240-232 and shows on page 21 that two beam clips are recuired.) Wallace/ Superior flonconformance Report No. 064 was initiated documenting the supports where the single clip configuration existed and accepted these i
installations "as is" based upon an engineering analysis of
,
vertical weight distribution and the AISC parameters for one-
!
sided connections. Also, Wallace/ Superior revised Drawing I-3 (Re/ision 5 dated April 17,1980) to include the double clip configuration and ~ this revision was approved by the architect-engineer.
However, Wallace' Superior did not notify the
/
architect-engineer that supports had been installed with r
single clips and accepted "as-is" in nonconformance with the requirements of the architect-engineer's specification.
.
$
.. -.
,
,_.. *
- - _. -,,
. _. -
~ _ -.
,
.,,,m
., - _. -,,.
.. _ _ _,,,
,
. -,. - - -,
,, - -
-4-
-
r.
.
.
The licensee's actions in respor.se to this problem have included:
(1) an audit on September 2, 1980 of Wallace/ Superior nonconformance reports which identified five nonconformance reports whose disposition should include the approval of the architect-engineer; Wallace/ Superior has not yet responded to these audit findings; (2) mandating changes to Wallace/ Superior Procedure fio. QCP-12-12 to require criteria for the use of the Wallace/Suoerior nonconformance report; (3) a commitment to audit all remaining Wallace/ Superior nonconformance reoorts for inoroner use; and (4) a calculation confirming that the sinnie beam clin configuration is acceptable for the worst condition.
The failure of the contractor's quality program to assure that affected organizations are notified of nonconforming conditions
"
s ition thereof, as appropriate, is an apparent and accept the dis s
item of noncompliance.
(50-508/80-12/01)
4.
Steel Structures and Sucoorts a.
Visual Examination of Containment Vessel Welds - Chicaco Bridae and Iron - Contract Humoer 213 The inspector visually examined 6 completed weld seams performed during fabrication of the Unit 5 containment vessel.
The welds selected, both vertical and horizontal, were located between airth seans 1-2 and 2-3.
Weld preparation has progressed to the 3rd and 4th girth seans.
Characteristics examined were weld 13ngth, size and alignment, weld reinforcement height and absence of surface discontinuities exceeding code requirements.
The inspector also examined one completed weld seam and weld fit-no on the Unit 5 top head (containment dome). Welding on the Unit 3 top head has not started; however, the inspector examined the tack welds and fit-up for possible mismatch and overlap of the to-be joined segments.
fio items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
b.
Weld Procedure Specifications and Quality Assurance Procedures -
Fischbach and Moore-Contract flos. 225 and 253 The inspector examined Fischbach and floores (F&fi) quality assurance responsibilities relative to their welding activities associated with electrical cable trays and safety related hangers.
F&M's cuality assurance manual " Project Quality Assurance Manual for Electrical Installations at fluclear Power Plants" was examined to verify that procedures addressing the preparation, qualification, approval, distribution and revisions of weld procedure specifications have been establishe _.
_
.-
,,
.
_ -
-5-
,
r.
.
.
The inspector also examined the following procedures for compliance with the structural welding code (AWS D1.1) and contractor's quality assurance program:
(1) CP-403S3, Revision 1 dated April 4,1920
" Construction Procedure for Welding of Steel Structures". The following F&M A',>S 01.1 prequalified joint welding procedures are attachments to CP-403S3:
AWS-1 Pev. O dated January 15, 1980
.
AUS-2 Rev. 1 dated April 4, 1980
.
AWS-3 Rev. 1 dated April 4,1980
-
.
AWS-4 pey. 1 dated April 4,1980
.
AWS-5 Fev. 1 dated April 4,1980
.
AUS-6 Rev. 1 dated April 4, 1980
.
(2) CP-40853, Revision 1 dated liarch 4,1980
" Construction Procedure for Welding Filler Material Control."
f fio items of nonccmpliance or deviations were identified.
i c.
Weldino Material Control - Fischbach and Moore - Contract Hos. 225 ano 253.
,
The control, issue, return and storage of F&M's weld filler materials were ooserved by the inspector.
Implementation of these activities was inspected for ccmpliance to the centractor's procedure CP-408S3
and applicable AUS Dl.1 requirements. The inspector found that the holding ovens were calibrated and operating within the. required temperature range; portable rod warmers were being properly maintained; and low hydrogen electrodes were discarded if they were returned damaged, vet, or had received exposure to the atmosphere beyond the permissible length of time (4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />).
!!o items of nonccmpliance or deviations were identified.
d.
Observation of Ueldinn Activities - Fischbach and l'oore - Contract
,
flos. 225 and 253 l
In-process welding of clip angles to support flo.170 column 4W Line B was observed in the Uni't 3 reactor auxiliary building. The
inspector examined the as-completed weld quality, weld rod control, l
and through discussions with the welder, was able to determine that i
adequate instructions about the weld joint and welding procedure used were provided prior to welding. The welder's qualifications to perform this welding operation were examined by the inspector.
l l'o deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
.
. -_ -
. - _
_
.-
- _,
__,-
-G-
.
t
.
.
,
5.
Safety Related Structure - Review of Ouality Assurance /Imolementing Procedure - J. A. Jones - Contrac_t flo. 265 The inspector examined the J. A. Jones quality assurance program P0P-fi-700, Revision 2 " Project Quality Assurance Prograns and Organizations", to ascertain whether cuality assurance plans, instructions and procedures for specific safety related activities have been established in the contractor's nuality assurance programs and whether these documents conform to PSAR comitments and industry s tandards. Areas of the program examined included organization, project docurentation, desian control, procurement control, control of instructions and procedures, docunent control, control of purchased material, equipment and services, identification and control of materials, parts and components, and control of special processes.
- t'o items of nonconoliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Safety Pelated Structures - Structural Steel and Suocorts Morrison-Knudsen -
Contract Ho. 263 a.
Observation of Work and Review of Quality Records Unit 5 Reactor Aux 1iiary Buildina
!!orrison-Knudsen (M-K) structural steel activity was examined for cenoliance to approved H-K construction proceoure No. CP-05, Pevision 3 " Structural Steel Erection, Class I, II and G" in Unit 5 auxiliary building, nortneast quaorant, elevation 362.5'.
Three neams were selecteo (column 438A ano girders 209E and 119-H)
and reviewed for necessary documentation ano erection.
Exanination of receipt inspection report for column 438A revealed a gouge in flange of the column. A nonconformance renort had been written along with a conditional release request
,
allcwinq erection of column with repair at later date.
The structural steel storage area for Quality Class I structural steel was observed and appeared in ccmpliance with approved fi-K procedure and AflSI l'45.2.2 storage requirements.
f c items of nonccmpliance or deviations were identified.
'
b.
Peview of Structural Steel Inspection Fersonnel Oualifications The inspector revicwed qualification records of fi-K structural steel quality control inspectors for compliance with it-K
'
,
'
administrative instruction AI-11, Revision 2, "qA/QC Qualifications, Certification, and Training Programs". All ?!-K structural steel 1C inspectors had been designated as qualified to AflSI ft45.2.6-1973 level II capabilities.
l r
!
'
c-m
-
JWb W
U
.
_
. _ _
-
-..
. - - _
.
f
,
,
.
The inspector found that the records for one M-K structural steel QC inspector indicated that not all of the education and experience requirements recermended in ANSI M45.2.6-1973 were net. I!owever, the M-K procedure and ANSI M45.2.6 allowed sone discretion in imposing the education and exoerience
>
requirements if other factors provided reasonable assurance as to the ability of the inspector.
In this case, the contractor had considered the individual qualified based on other factors.
The inspector found that this decision was reasonable and had
,
no further questions on this natter.
Mo items of noncemoliance or deviations were identified.
c.
Review of Ouality Assurance Audits
.
The inspector reviewed EBASCO audits of M-K for activities in the Auxiliary Building. No audits had been performed specifically on M-K structural steel activities in Unit 3 auxiliary building and Unit 5 auxiliary building. The EBASCO auditor stated that audit #10 scheduled for December, 1980 will address M-K structural steel activities in the auxiliary building on Units 3 and 5.
,
No items of noncompliance or ceviations were identified.
7.
Exit Interview ideeting The inspectors, including the Senior Eesident inspector met with the licensee and ECASCO representatives denoted in paragraph 1 on October 24, 1900. The inspectors sua.marized the scope and findings of the inspection as described in this report.
i
<
i e
'
. -
-, _.
-.. -.
_,
--