IR 05000508/1981011
| ML20031A038 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Satsop |
| Issue date: | 08/20/1981 |
| From: | Bishop T, Dodds R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20031A036 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-508-81-11, 50-509-81-11, NUDOCS 8109180320 | |
| Download: ML20031A038 (6) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:z, .
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C01CilSSION "JFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENF0kCEMENT " 50-508/81-11 Report No.
50-509/81-11 CPPR-154 & 156 50-508 & 50-509 License No.
Safeguards Group Docket No.
Licensee: Washington Public Power Supply Systen P. O. Box 1223 Elma, Washington 98541 , WNP-3 and WNP-5 Facility Name: WNP-3 and WNP-5 Sits (Satsop) Inspection at: June 3-26. 1981 Inspection conducted: _ Inspectors: [k [[(/ T'.W.B[ shop, . Resident Inspector / hat'e Signed Date Signed ! ! Date Signed f 24/f/ Approved By: -- j R. T. Dodds, Chief, Reactor Projects Section 2 / Dat/e Signed Reactor Construction Projects Branch Inspection during the period of June 3-26,1981 (Report Nos. 50-5mi/81-11 and 50-509/81-11) _ Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by the resident inspector of construction activities related to: licensee actions on previous enforcement items; licensee actions on previous followup and unresolved items; an employee's concerns on material traceability; and inspection tours of site facilities.
The inspection involved 44 inspection hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified, t ! ! ! ! RV Form 219 (2) 8109180320 810821 ~ l PDR ADOCK 05000500 l G FDR . - . - - - . - - - - - - - - - -
. _ _. _ _ _ __ _ __.._.. _ _ - _ _ _ _ . _. _.- _ _.
'
4 DETAILS 1.
Dersons contacted The inspector interviewed various engineering..n.anagement, inspection
and construction personnel of the organizations. listed below.
Key personnel includirig those who attended the exit interview are specifically identified below.
a.
Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS) j
- R. S. Leddick, Program Director, WNP-3/5
. D. E. Dobson, Project Manager, WNP-3/5 ' '
- J. C. Lockhart, Project.0uality Assurance Manager
0. E. Trapp, Engineering Manager
- J. A. Puzauskas, Quality Assurance Engineering Supervisor C. H. Tewksbury, Quality Assurance Surveillance Supervisor N. Blaise, Sr. Project Quality Engineer
! J. Vanni, Sr Project Quality Engineer
- .
D. Kerlee, Q: 111ty Assurance Audits Supervisor M. Walker, Sr., Quality Assurance Engineer s.
i b.
Ebasco Services, Inc. (Ebasco) i
- A. M. Cutrona, Deputy Project Quality Assurance Manager J. C. Murphy, Project Superintendent i
- L. A. Bast, Project Quality Engineer M. R. Harris, Quality Assurance Engineer
' R. G. Peck, Quality Assurance Engineer J. B. Cleere, Quality Assurance Training Supervisor c.
Morrison-Knudsen, Inc. (MK) , R. Davis, Quality Manager d.
Wallace-Superior (WS) W. Frost, Project Director
e.
Peter Kiewit Sons Co. (PKS) D. Paulson, Quality Assurance Manager , H, Barton, Quality Engineer
- Denotes tbcse attending the NRC Management Meeting on June 26, 1981 2.
Licensee Actions on Previously Identified Enforcement Items , i a.
(Closed) Noncompliance (50-508/509/80-13-02) Failure to' translate design bases into working drawings j The licensee's response to the item of noncompliance is summarized in WPPSS letter no. 003 81-54 of January 9, 1981.
These actions included a technical review of the steel fabricator's drawings to determine conformance with the AI5C Manual of Steel Construction, ! - - - . - - - - - - -. - - - - - - -
, -2- . 4-and a revision to the design specification (No. 50ltla) to allow worHng bolt stresses consistent with AISC requirements.
The inspector reviewed the scope and results of the technical reviews with cognizant design personnel and verified that the as-built joint designs and resultant bolt stresses are consistent with AISC requirements.
This iten is closed.
. b.
(Close.H Noncompliance (50-508/509/81-02-03) Inadequate Structural Bolting inspection Procedure The licensee s response to the item of noncompliance is summarized in WPPSS letter no. G03-81-933 of April 16, 1981.
Those actions included a revision tc the bolting inspection procedure (no. Cp-05, entitled, " Structural Steel Erection Quality Class I, II, and G") to specify the proper inspection criteria.
The inspector verified that the procedure was revised to accurately reflect ANSI and AISC inspection requirements and the cognizant personnel were trained on the revised procedure requirements.
The licensee's response also stated that 100% of the accessible structural steel bolted connections in Unit 3 nd Unit 5 would be verified to be ia compliance with pertainent requirements.
This aspect of the item of noncomplience will be closed out in conjunction with noncom "nce no. 50-508/509/81-02-04 (inadequate structura'i steel bolting 'aspections).
Item no. 50-508/509/81-02-03 is closed, specify the quality cfassification of;.0@04) Failure to properly (Closed) Noncomoliance150-308/509/80 j c.
equipment.
The licensee's response to the item of noncompliance is documented in WPPSS letter no. G03-80-2966 of November 21, 1980.
The actions taken included a review of'the contrack, specification in question (no. 3240-251), and correction of the improper quality classification designations.
The letter further. stated all WNP-3/5 contr?. cts involving owner-furnished equipment would be reviewed by Ebasco engineering to assure casistency with PSAR quality classification designations.
The inspector verified that the contract reviews had i been completed and the improper quality class designations corrected.
This item is closed.
j 3.
License Action on Previously identified Followup and Unresolved Items a.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-508/509/81-02-02) Development of equipment
' quality classification list.
The licensee directed Ebasco to develop a Master Equipment List i which will function as the quality classification list.
The list I was developed by Ebasco and submitted to the licensee on l May 13, 1981. Licensee review of the list resulted in eight comments, which are to be incorporated into the next edition of the ' list (by August 1,1981). The development of an equipment h oualification list resolves the inspectors concerns in this area.
l This item is closed.
I
,, ., _. _ _, - -,, , ,- , _. -,. - - - -, ,.,
-3- . . b.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-508/509/81-02-06) Defin1t on of the intended scope of pipe support inspections.
The contract for pipe supports, issued to ITT-Grinnel, required that inspection personnel be qualified in accordance with ASME and ANSI req"irements. A supplemental requirement further specified
that one inspector be' certified to AWS requirements.
Nonconfomance ' report no.12462 was issued to address the failure of the vendor to provide an AWS certified weld inspector at his fabrication facility.
The wording,0f *the report inferred that the supports which had'already becidelivered to the site would be reinspected by an AUS certified inspector. Licensee representatives explaim d that it was intended that the AWS inspector provide an overview cf completed work and not-a complete ~ reinspection of previously accepted welds (which were inspected by personnel qualified to ASME/ ANSI requirements).
The clarified intent is documented in WPPSS memorandum no. QA-35-81-80 of February 17, 1981.
This item is closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-508/509/81-02-07) Traceability of c.
of bolting test material ' Visual indications identified in nuts used in pipe supports were evaluated by cone testing a 10% sample of the nuts. Nonconformance report N. 12477 directed the testing.
The documentation supporting the orginal response to the nonconfomance report did not assure traceability of test results to the nuts in question.
The final response to the noncompliance (dated February 10,1981) prcvided the required traceability.
This item is closed.
d.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-508/509/81-02-08) Voiding of nonconformance reports . Licensee action in this area included a review of the procedures addressing the voiding of nonconformance reports and a review of ' all nonconfomance reports which had been previously voided.
The inspector reviewed the revised instructions for voiding of nonconformance reports (procedure no. PSP-QA-7-3, Revision 1). The new instructions required that: the originator of the voided report must be notified; justification for voiding must be clearly statad; and QA must concur with the voiding. The status of the licensee's review was also examined. All voided reports had been reviewed and most findings had been resolved. Those with outstanding issues were weil docum(nted and controlled.
The action taken by the licensee appears appropriate to resolve this issue.
This item is c!) sed.
(Closed) Follow-up Item (50-508/509/80-14-Cover Letter) e.
Availability o: iecords for NRC, inspection.
Licensee actions to assure the availability of quality records for NRC inspections included a general meeting with contractor senior management and written direction to all contractor Project . _.. _ _ __ _ . _ _. - _ -
_.
_ - - -4- , Managers rei. rating the requirements to make quality affecting documents available immediately upon the request of an NRC inspector.
The written direction further specifies that no relevant document, in whcle or in part shall be withheld or be altered to indicate intentionally misleading infomation.
The inspectors have not experienced any further difficulties in obtaining access to quality records since the directives have been issued.
This item is closed.
f.
(Closed) Followup Item (50-508/509/81-04-04)' Actions to avoid deliberate malpractice Licensee actions to prJvent further incidents of deliberate malpractice were examined.
These actions included the development of training plans for new penonnel and supervisors.
The training has been implemented for all new personnel as a part of the indoctrination program.
Elements of the tr/ iing include a discussion regarding the need for properly performin9 work activities and the consequences of malpractice.
to the project, the public, and the individeal. The supervisors training also addresses actions to prevent and detect deliberate malpractice.
The licensee has offered the training program to all site contractors for their use in reindoctrinating employees. The effectiveness of actions taken will be assessed during the execution of the routine inspection program.
This item is closed.
g.
(0 pen) Followup Item (50-508/509/81-10-03) Employees freedom to express concerns about quality issues.
The licensee har had further dicussions with the cortractor (Wallace-Superior) regarding the contractor's memorandum to his employees. The memorandum states that instances of questionable quality must be identified to the contractor's management before such matters are taken up with WPPSS/Ebasco or the NRC, and that failure to do so will subject the employees to immediate dismissal.
The irspector expressed cor.cern to licensee ' management that, while the intention of the memrandum is supported (i.e., identify quality concerns through appropriate channels), there have been instances in the past where employees were fearful of approaching their management with a concern.
In mse cases 'it is apppropriate for , an employee to approach WPPSS/Ebasco or the NRC with the concern.
The meno may have a further effect of inhibiting the NRC's 'open door policy'. Licensee representatives stated that legal representatives I for the contractor have concluded that the memorandum is within . current legal and re.;ulatory requir2ments. > The licensee ' indicated that their next action will be to fomally address this l issue to NRC-headquaters.
Tnis item remains open pending licensee's actiu. to obtain a formal NRC statement on this issue and subsequent I resolu tion.
i i l l t ! l L -- -- - -- . . - - - .. . = - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. - - - . - - - - - - - .
- _ _ _ .__ __ . _- __ _ _. _ . _ _ . .__ ___ . . . -5- ,. f 4.
Concerns Rcgarding Vendor Supplied Material Traceabilit( The inspector received an expression of concern fran an individual
regarding an apparent relaxation in the method of achieving material traceability for the fabrication of steel doors by the Leckenby
Company of Seattle, Washington.
The individual was concerned that in lieu of maintaining traceability by physically marking each piece of steel, the contractor was going to use documentation and area control to retain traceability. The inspector reviewed the contract, codes, and standards for traceability requirements for the contractors > wJrk, concluding that the proposed method is consistent with requirements.
' In additi1n, the licensee performed a special review of traceability practices at the contractor's facility.
The licensee determined i that the contractor's practice would provide adequate material traceability, and further committed to periodicelly moni tor this area of contractor's performance in the future.
No items of nonc5mbliance or deviation were identified.
, -
5.
Inspection Tours of Si te ' Facilities. At various times during the' inspection -period the inspector made tours of the Unit 3 and 5' plant; island and material storage areas, examining , general housekeeping, OC and craf t supervisory coverage for work activities, availability of work documents, equipment calibration status, tagging
cnd identification of materials,: and protection of installed equipment, ' Practicular attention was given to piping and pine support erection activi ties.
~ ' , No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified during the inspection tours.
- i 6.
Management Meeting i A management meeting was held on June 26, 1981. Licensee and Ebasco representatives that ettended the meeting'are denoted in paragraph 1.
. During the meetings the inspector summarized the scope and findings of t the inspection. Licensee representatives stated that actions would be i initiated on the remaining open items.
. ! . F l<. - - - . - - - - . - . - . . }}