IR 05000508/1981012
| ML20031A059 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Satsop |
| Issue date: | 08/20/1981 |
| From: | Dangelo A, Dodds R, Haist D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20031A058 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-508-81-12, 50-509-81-12, NUDOCS 8109180338 | |
| Download: ML20031A059 (11) | |
Text
2
- p UNITED STATES
!
i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
$
,E
REGION V
Q 1990 N. CAllFORNIA BOULEV ARD
% *.**
SUITE 202, WALNUT CREEK PLAZA WALhuT CREE K, CALIFORNIA 94596 AUG 21 1981 Docket No. 50-508, 50-509 Washington Public Power Supply System P. O. Box 1223 Elma, Washington 98541 Attention: Mr. R. S. Leddick Program Director, WNP-3/5 Gentlemen:
Subject: NRC Inspection at Washington Nuclear Project Nos. 3 and 5 This refers to the inspection conducted by Messrs. D. P. Haist and A. J. D' Angelo of this office on July 13-17, 1981 of activities authorized by NRC Construction Permit Nos. CPPR-154 and CPPR-155, and to the discussion of our findings with you and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
Arcas examined during this inspection are described in the enclosed inspection report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the inspector.
No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified within the I
!
scope of this inspection.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the l
NRC's Public Document Room.
If this report contains any information that you (or your contractors) believe to be exempt fram disclosure under
'
10 CFR 9.5(a)(4), it is necessary that you (a) notify this office by telephone within ten (1) days from the date of this letter of your intention to file a request for withholding; and (b) submit within 25 days from the date of this letter a written application to this office to withhold such information.
If your receipt of this letter has been delayed such that less than seven (7)
days are available for your review, please notify this office promotly(soConsistent with se that a new due date may be established.
any such application mt.t be accompanied by an affidavit executed by the owner
8109180338 810821'
PDR ADOCK 05000508 G
__
_ - - _.
_. _ _
.
_ _ _ _
_,, _
_. _ _ _ -. _, -, _.
. _. _
..
,, _,
-
. _ _ _
~. _
..
. _ _
__
.--
. _. _
Washington Public Power Supply System-2-AUG 211931 j
of the information which identifies the document or part sought to be withheld, i
l and which contains a full statement of the reasons on the basis which it is claimed that the infonnation should be withheld from public disclosure.
This section further requires the statement to address with specificity the
'
considerations listed in 10 CFR 2.790(b)(4).
The information sought to be withheld shall be incorporated as far as possible into a separate part of the affidavit.
If we do not hear from you in this regard within the specified periods noted above, the report wi. be placed in the Public Document Room.
Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be glad
'
to discuss them with you.
'
Sincerely, i
B. H. Faulkenberry, Chief Reactor Construction Projects Branch
.
Enclosure:
IE Inspection Report Nos. 50-508/81-12 50-509/81-12 I
REGION V==
50-508/81-12 50-509/81-12 Report No.
50-508 & 50-509 E*
l Docket. No.
License No.
Safeguards croup Washington Public Power Supply System i
Licensee:
,
P. O. Box 1223 Elma, Washington 98541 WNP-3 and WNP-5 Facility Name:
Inspection at:
WNP-3 and WNP-5 Site (Satsop)
l Inspection conducted:
July 13-17, 1981 Inspectors: _/
[/20!$[
D.P.gHaist,ReactorInspector
/ Dale Signed 2Cf8/
.
.
A.J.gD'Angpo,ReactorInspector pace Signed
'
Date Signed Approved By: #
M
/
R. T. Dodds, Chief, Reactor Projects Section 2
/ Dat/ signed Reactor Construction Projects Branch Sur:: mary:
Inspection during the period of July 13-17, 1981 (Report Nos. 50-508/81-12and50-509/81-121 Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by regional-based inspectors of construction activities including work on nuclear steam supply system components by the rigging contractor; storage and maintenance of nuclear steam supply system components; concrete plar,ement activities; installation of reactor support and restraint systems; licensee action on potentially reportable construction deficiencies; and licensee action on previous enforcement items and inspection findings.
The inspection involved 70 inspe: tion hours onsite by two NRC inspectors.
Resul ts: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
RV Form 219 (2)
._
.
DETAILS 1.
Persens Contacted Washhoton Public Power Supply Systeg (WPPSS)
a.
,
- R. S. Leddick, Program Director
- 0. E. Trapp, Project Engineering Manager
- J. Puzauskas, Quality Assu:ance Engineering Supervisor
- C. E. Love, Construction 54anager
- C H. Tewksbury, Quality Assurance Surveillance Supervisor
~
- M. Monopoli, Operations Quality Assurance Supervisor
- J. Kovacs, Acting Project Quality Assurance Manager
- D. Kerlee, Quality Assurance Audit Supervisor b.
Ebasco Service Inc.
+
'
- A. M. Cu trona, Quality Assurance Manager
- E. R. Ferguson, Deputy Site Manager
,
"T. Tuily, Lead Project Quality Engineer
- R. Jurbala, Quality Assurance Engineer
- J. P. Sluka, Manager of Engineering
- L. Bast, Quality Assurance Engineering Superviscr
,
- R. G. Peck, Senior Quality Assurance Engineer
'
R. Marshall, Site Manager-L. Heiser, Quality Assurance Engineer D. Vance, Quality Assurance Engineer c.
Lampson Universal Rigging, Inc.
.
D. Brown, Superinten' dent
,
G. Allen, Quality Assurance Engineer d.
_ Peter Kiewit Sons Inc. (PKS)
,'
,
D. Paulson," Quality' Assurance Manager
.
F. Wisner, Quality Control Manager
'
H. Barton, Quality Engineer e.
Morrison-Knudsen, Inc. (MK)'
'
J. Tittle, Quality Control Inspector R. Charnell, Foreman (Concrete)
f.
Wallace/ Superior (W/S)
A. Smith, Quality Assurance Manager M. Hemphill, Quality Assurance Engineer
!
g.
Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory (PTL)
'
l J. Curd, Level II lechnician (Conct ce)
- Denotes those present at the NRC management meeting on July 17, 1981.
,
!
_.. -.
._.
_. _.,._ _,_ ___
. _ _ _ _ _,.. _ _. _, _,., _... _ _ _ _ _ _.. _.. _ _ _. _. -... _. _ -.. _ _
-2-2.
Site Tour The inspectors conducted a site tour upon arrival at the site on July 13, 1981 to observe completed work and work in progress.
Included in this site tour was observation of concrete placement No. ABW-018-220.
No items on noncompliance or deviations were identified.
3.
Construction Status The licensee considered the WNP-3 and 5 projects to be 36 and 17 percent complete, respectively, on July 15, 1981.
The WPPSS Managing Director on May 29, 1981, announced the intention to institute a one year construction moratorium on Washington Nuclear Project Nos. 4 and 5.
Board of Directors approval of this plan was announced on June 18, 1981.
This action was considered necessary due to the high cost of financing units 4 and 5 resulPng from uncertainty over the need for power from these projects. Work force reductions are now in progress with the WNP-5 work force of 750 expected to be reduced to approximately 60 by calendar year end. Current construction at WNP-5 is concentrated on activities to close structures and protect equipment already in place and to maximize the ability to restart construction.
The licensee assured the inspector that maintenance of safety-related structures, systems and components will be continued as will quality assurance audit and surveillance of these activities.
4.
Licensee Action on Potential la CFR 50.55(e) Construction Deficiencies The inspector examined the following construction deficiencies, all of which were detennined by the licensee not to be reportable under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.55(e).
The inspector examincd the licensee's corrective action, evaluation of reportability, and evaluation of generic applicability.
a.
Failure of Unit 3 Turbine Building Crane This deficiency, reported on March 27, 1981, involved failure of a Unit No. 'l turbine building overhead crane hoist due to improper installation of a locking ring.
Investigations by both Ebasco and the crane manufacturer confirmed that the improper installation i
of the lock ring was the mode of failure.
The licensee has conr.luded that proper execution of the quality assurance program will prevent this deficiency on the Quality Class I polar cranes l
for Units 3 and 5.
This item is closed.
b.
Field Fabricated Reinforcing Steel Installed Without Inspection for l
Cracks
,
This' deficiency was reported on April 28, 1981.
The applicable
!
Ebasco speci/ication requires any field bending of reinforcing steel to be witnessed and documented by an inspector.
Ebasco
l
-3-
.
site ad home office engineering have conducted a design
'
analys; t of all reinforcing bars bent without inspection.
Assuming failure at bend locations, the design function of the structures 'would be r.atisfied. Additionally, all bars are inspected for location, size, and configuration prior to concrete placement.
Inspection was performed on bars listed on twel<e field fabrication re. quests and no defects were identified. To prevent recurrence, the applicable work procedure has been revised to require witnessing of all reinforcing steel bending by an inspector. This item is closed.
c.
Voids In Concrete Under Unit 5 Basement This deficiency, reported on April 30, 1981, was previously identified in 1979 and documented as a nonconforming condition.
Voids measuring from one to three inches were identified beneath 90% of two-three foot by three foot embed plates.
Repairs were
>
performed using a proprietary non-shrink grout after soundings and drilling of the plates where appropriate.
Inspection was also performed on the balance of embedded plates for the Unit 5 base mat to ensure that no other voids existed. This item is considered closed.
The inspector reviewed the 10 CFR 50.55(e) potential construction
,
deficiency reporting practices with licensee and Ebasco quality assurance personnel. Reporting of construction deficiencies is governed by Ebasco Procedure No. PSP-QA-7-4, " Reporting and Processing 10 CFR 21 and 10 CFR 50.55(e) Suspected Defects, Noncompliances and Significant Deficiencies." The Ebasco procedure does not ensure that reporting of potential 50.55(e)
items are identified and reported within the time period specified in NRC guidance on 10 CFR 50.55(e) Construction Deficiency Reporting issued on April 1, 1980. The licensee connitted to revise this procedure to ensure that nonconfonnance repcrts are examined for potential reportability within 14 days of issuance and that
significant deficiencies identified by other means such as
!
routine surveillances, audits, and stop work orders are also evaluated for potential reportability 'n accordance with NRC guidance. Licensee actions in this regard will be examined during l
a subsequent inspection. Followup Item (50-508, 509/81-12/01).
l l
5.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Items a.
(Closed) Noncompliance (50-508/80-04/02) - Incomplete Root Penetration in Stored Pipes (Closed) Noncompliance (50-508/80-04/03) ~- Excessive Offset on Pipe Subassemblies in Storage Contrary to the requirements of the ASME B&PV Code Section III the inspector had identified incomplete root penetration on one weld in each of two carbon steel pipe subassemblies and excessive offset at weld joints in four carbon steel pipe l
l l
l l
..
... -.
_
_ _ _ -. -
,_ _
_
_
__
_ _ _.
-
..-
_
.
-
-
-4-
.
subassemblies.
During subsequent inspections, the inspector identified an excessive offcet condition on a stainless steel pipe spool and an additional carbon steel pipe spool with excessive offset and lack of penettation at a sockolet connection.
The inspector verified that deficient pipe subassemblies have been identified, documented, and returned to the vendor's shop for repair. Action was ir.1tiated by the vendor on December 1,1980 to fair all welds.to a 3:1 taper. Sockolet and weldolet connections exhibiting areas ~ of insufficient penetration have been identified and will be repaired on site.
Ebasco has developed inspection criteria for weldolet connections and inspections are now being perfomed by receiving inspection personnel.
The vendor has been informed of the inspection criteria to prevent shipment of deficient pipe.
The in:pector examined 21 welds on six pipe subassemblies, including five weldolet type connections. No deviations from ASME Code requirements were identified.
The inspector also examined the storage conditice of pipe at the Saginaw laydown area for c'onformance to procedure and industry standard requirements.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
These items are now considered closed.
b.
(0 pen) Noncompliance (50-508/80-12-01) - Control of Nonconfoming Conditions.
The licensee's response to the item of noncompliance is documented in WPPSS letter nos. G03-80-3239 of December 19,1980, G03-81-885 of April 1,1981 and G03-81-1010 of May 1,1981. The actions taken by the licensee included approval by Ebasco engineering of Wallace/
Superior (W/S) Nonconformance Report no. 064, procedural changes to require owner / engineer evaluation of site identified nonconformances,
-
and training of inspection personnel in the application of W/S nonconformance reporting procedure QCP 6.0.
The inspector fcund, however, that the licensee did not have documentation identifying the k'/S nonaonformance reports which have been reviewed and provided to the licensee by W/S. The licensee had also committed to a review of other contractor's deficiency centrol systems and applicable NRCs to avoid similar violations. The above stated review has not been completed and was therefore not available for the inspector's examination. The anticipated completion date, as stated in the licensee's response letter, is August 1,1581. This item will remain open pending completion of this action and identification of the W/S nonconformance reports that have been reviewed and provided to the licensee.
J
,
-, _,
,.---, --
--
-, -. - -,,
- -,
,,
m-
,-
,
.
____ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
___._____ -_
.
.
6.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Followup and Unresolved Items a.
(0 pen) Followup Item (50-508/509/81-09/02) - Containment Penetration Leak Testing The inspector had expressed concern over provisions in procedure No. PKS-WI-306, Rev. 3, " Reactor Building Penetrations" for preumatic testing of process piping.
The ASME Code allows preumatic testing of process piping only under limited circumstances.
-
The inspector reviewed the results of a pneumatic test on the containment sleeve portions of containment penetration No. 24 (see paragraph 8).
The 251 contractor stated that the
" process pipe" pneumatic test in procedure No. PKS-WI-306, Rev. 3 refers to the containment sleeve because hydrostatic testing of the process piping is not included in the 251 contract.
The licensee examined contract specification No. 224 for inclusion of the process pipe hydrostatic testing on these penetrations.
<
It was not readily apparent that hydrostatic testing of process
'
piping for containment penetration Nos. 23, 24 and 44 is included in contract specification No. 224.
The specification of hydrostatic testing to satisfy ASME Code requirements will be examined during the next inspection.
b.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-508/81-09/03) - Unnumbered Work Release Included in Penetration No. 23 Package A revised work release was issued to transmit RFI-1531-FP to the containment penetration No. 23 work package.
The revised work release did not contain the work release number as required by contractor procedure Nos. PKS-EP-13 and PKS-EP-1.
~
The contractor stated that the revised' work release was inadvertently placed in the construction copy of the work package by the superintendent responsible for that work at,tivity. The revised work release was retreived and processed through document control as required by procedure.
The responsible superintendent was
i reinstructed in the provisions of the applicable procedures.
l Contractor personnel stated that.there have been no other instances
of documents bypassing document control processing.
This item is
'
considered closed.
c.
(Closed) 50-508/80-07-01, Followup Item - Control of Weld Filler Material.
During a plant tour the inspector had discovered weld filler material in a Peter Kiewit Sons gang box.
l
-
e -
-w
- --,,,,, _
,.-n,-,n,.
-m
_
y,-.
,
,
.,n.
,..,..,
,.,.y. -,
,,_.,-.-~,_...-m.,_,,,,,,
-,,,,,~-,--,.,...m..
,,,-,
- -,- -,, - _- _,a,--
,
-
-.
.
_
- _-
_
._
_ _ -
-6-
,
.
.
The inspector examined the Wallace/ Superior (W/S) weld filler material control procedure no. FP 2.1 for explicit instruction provided to weld rod attendants, welders and quality personnel for stcrage and issuing of weld filler material. An examination was made of Reactor Auxiliary Building Unit No. 3 rod issue station
,
and W/S shop rod issue station for compliance with W/S procedure no. FP2.1. Activities were found to be in accordance with these
requirements. This item is closed.
7.
Safety Related Components - Reactor Vessels and Steam Generators a.
Review of Quality Assurance Implementing Procedures j
The inspector examined the following quality assurance procedures
for conformance to the requirements of 10 CFR 50 Appendix B and applicable industry standards:
Procedure No.
Title
'
LUR-QA-01, Rev. 3 Quality Assurance Program LUR-QA-02, Rev. 1 Document Control Procedure LUR-QA-03, Rev. 0 Nonconfonnances Procedure LUR-QA-04, Rev. O Supplier f.Ldits Procedure LUR-QA-05, Rev. 0 Quality Assurance Document Filing Procedure LUR-QA-06, Rev. 0 Training of Personnel Precedure LUR-QA-07, Rev. O General Housekeeping Procedure LUR-QA-08, Rev. 0 Qualification of Level I, II and III Quality Assurance or Quality Control Inspectors or Engineers LUR-QA-09, Rev. O Purchase Order Procedure - In House or Field LUR-QA-10, Rev. 0 Quality Assurance Records Correction Procedure LUR-QA-11, Rev. O Control of Measuring and Test Equipment Procedure LUR-QA-12, Rev. O Corrective Action Procedure LUR-QA-14, Rev. O Internal Audits Procedure
,
LUR-WP-22, Rev. O.
.
- Initial Inspection and Load Test of Transi-Lift.
Drawing No. LUR-2005-D Transi-Lift Load Test-Drawing No. LUR;2003-D
, Test Load for Dome Set
,
CMI-02-044, Rev. O n
, Care and Maintenance Instruction for Steam i
-
"-
Generator CMI-02-042, Rev. 0~
.
Care and Maintenance Instruction T6r Reactor
'
l-Vessel l
No items of noncomp1'iance or deviations were identified.
b.
Observation of Work'and' Work Activities
,
The inspector observed load testing of the 'Lampson Transi-Lift to 110% of the load at the greatest anticipated lift radius.
This load test was conducted at 110% of the contain.nent dome test
'
load, approximately 575 tons, with 400 feet of main boom,
f
._
,m.
. - -, _....,,,
.. _ _...,. _ _ _.,. _. _ - _... _. _........ _. _ - -.,,,.,,,. _ _., _ _, -... _.
.
. - _, _, _ _ -.,. _
-
_ - -
. _ _
_ _ _ _ --
.
-7-
.
.
lifted to approximately 200 feat above the foundation pad.
The travel and swing capabilities were also tested at this load and lift radius.
The inspector also observed transport and offloading of one Unit No. 3 steam generato-from the barge slip to the plant island.
The inspector observed the storage conditions of the Unit 3 and 5 reactor vessels and heads and steam generators. Nonconformance reports had been initiated to c.cument damage to the exterior protective coatings on several of the components.
The inspector examined the interior of the Unit No. 3 reactor vessel.
There was no evidence of damage to the vessel interior or the protective coating and no evidence of moisture or debris.
The inspector observed that the steam generator nitrogen purge pressure gauges on the pressure regulators indicated a pressure of 1 PSIG whereas the primary and secondary side pressure gauges indicated a pressure of 1.5 PSIG. The inspector determined that Ebasco does not enter pressure gauges used to monitor gas blankets into the calibration log but instead, tests these gauges at six month intervals to assure that the gauges indicate zero when no pressure is applied and that the needle moves freely throughout the gauge range.
This practice does not appear to
,
comply with Project Site Procedure No. PSP-MM-11-9, Rev. O
" Care and Issue of Measuring and Test Equipment".
The licensee committed to revise this procedure to provide for the limited calibration of inert gas blanket pressure monitoring gauges.
This item will be examined during a future inspection.
Followup Item (50-508,509/81-12/02)
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
i c.
Review of Records The inspector examined the material receiving inspection report for Unit No. 5 steam generator No. 73274-1 and reactor vessel closure head no. 73174 and maintenance records and noncomformance reports for compliance with applicable specification and procedure requirements. Nonconforming conditions such as damage to protective coatings and possible loss of nitrogen blanket were adequately documented and dispositioned.
'
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8.
Containment Penetrations Review of Quality Records The inspector examined the work release package for containment penetration No. 24 including the following records:
"
,
t t
-
,v-_
... - - - - - - --,,,, - ~ - - - _ _ _. -,,
,yg,,.--y
,,..,,-,.,,.
,.,.,.. _
-
,
..,,-m
-
--,
.
_
-.
-.
.
-8-
,
.
.
Work Release Form Inspection / Examination Data Report Hold Points Form Weld Date Sheet Liquid Penetrant Test Report - Field We',d No. 7 Liquid Penetrant Test Report - Field Weld Fo. 4 Radiograph Test Report - Field Weld No. 6 Radiograph Test Report - Field Weld No. 20R2 Radiograph Test Report - Field Weld No. 4
'
Radiograph Test Report - Field Weld No._5 Radiograph Test Report - Field Weld No. '4R2 Radiograph Test Report - Field Weld No. 22-
,
Pneumatic Pressure Test Package No. PPT-3-CS-008 The inspector questioned contractor-personnel on (1) the physical conditica of the isometric drawing / weld' record form and (2) the large number of _ weld. repairs required on this penetration. The contractor recognized the poor condition of the isometric / weld
~
record (smudged and. torn isometric with insufficient space on the weld record to accommodate all information' associated with welding on this penetration) and plans to transfer all information to a clean copy while retaining the original. The l
contractor does not expect'pipo weld records to reach the same physical condition.~ The inspector will monitor the quality of weld records in-subsequent inspections.
The contractor quality assurance and quality control managers were aware of the large number of weld repairs required during assembly of the containment penetrations.
Several welders have been replaced in a effort.to improve weld quality. The contractor has no formal program to monitor weld quality but feels that at the current workload, the welding engineers can adequately monitor welder performance. The inspector will examine welder
performance in subsequent inspections.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
9.
Structural Concrete
a.
Observation of Work and Work Activities - Unit No. 3 Reactor Auxiliary Building The Morrison-Knud;en (MK) activities related to the placement of concrete for placement nos. ABU-270/272-427 and ABW-024-440 were observed for compliance to the requirements of the PSAR, Ebasco Technical Specification No. WPPSS 3240-412, and industry standard Nos. ACI-304, 309 and 347.
The observations included examination of form work, equipment, concrete delivery, handling, placement, and consolidation. The activities were found to be in accordance with reruirements. No items of noncompliance or devi3tions were identified.
-
_- _
.
_. _ _ _,
.
._ _ _. _ _. _ _ _. _,.
.
.. _.. _,
.__
-9-
.
'
b.
Observations _nf Work and Work Activities - Unit No. 5 Containment The J. A. Jones activities related to the placement of concrete for placement no. SRBO-025-351 was observed for compliance to the requirements of the PSAR, Ebasco Technical Specification No.
3240 Sections 412 and 2A, and industry standard Nos. ACI-304, 309, 347 and 211. The observations included examination of fonn work, equipment, concrete delivery, batch tickets, handling, placement, and consolidation. Activities were found to be in accordance with requirements. No items of' noncompliance or deviations were identified.
c.
Observations of Work and' Work Activities - Field Testing of Concrete
~
'
The Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory field testing of concrete for placement no. 58B0 025-351 'was, observed for compliance to the requirements of the PSAR, ASTM C-143,'172 and 231.
The testing observed included slump, air entrainment and temperature.
No items of nonc'ompliance or deviations-were identified.
10.
Containment Steel Structures and Supports a.
Observations of Work and Work ~ Activities J. A. Jones activities related to the hEndling and placement of grillage foundation for the steam generators (nos. 264-A, 266-B and 266-1) and horizontal upper support for the reactor in Unit No. 3 were examined for complian'ce to the PSAR, ASME Section III and contract specification no. 3240-470 requirements.
Specific items examined incluhd field storage / protection and placement location.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
b.
Review of Quality Records Certified material test reports for the grillage foundation assembly for the steam generators (nos. 264-A, 266-B and 266-1),
and horizontal upper support for the reactor in Unit no. 3 were examined for compliance to PSAR and ASME section II and III requirements.
Chemical and mechanical properties were found to be in accordance with ASME requirements.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
11. Mangement Meeting The inspectors met with the licensee and engineering management personnel denoted in paragraph 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on July 17, 1981.
The inspectors discussed the scope and findings-of the inspection and expressed concern over the cause of the deficiencies in concrete placement No. ABW-019/021-428 which had been completed on July 1, 1981 and which contained extensive voids and rock pockets.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- - -
-
-
.
-
-
- - -
-
-
.
,.
. -
..
.
- - - - _
..
.
..
., _, -. -.
. _ _.
. _ -
-16-
,
,
i
..
t
.~
$
The inspectors notified the licensee that these deficiencies are considered significant by the NRC ard requested the licensee to
inform the inspectors of the probable cause, when determined, the
proposed corrective action' plan, and the actions to prevent
~
recurrence. The inspectorsialso requested notification prior.to commencement of identical Slacement No. ABW-5/7-428. The licensee
,
'
acknowledged-the inspector's concern over this wall and committed to keep the'NRC informed as requested.
'
..
,
,t
~
<
!
.
O *
i
1
i
!
0
...