IR 05000508/1985010

Insp Rept 50-508/85-10 on 851118-21.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Containment Structural Integrity Test Records,Readiness Review,Const Assurance Program & Site Tour

ML20138N613
Person / Time
Site:	Satsop
Issue date:	12/05/1985
From:	Ang W, Dodds R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20138N592	List: IR 05000508/1985010 ML20138N590
References
50-508-85-10, NUDOCS 8512240086
Download: ML20138N613 (4)

Text

_ _ _ . _ . _ %

.

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION V

Report N /85-10 Docket N .

Construction Permit N CPPR-154 Licensee: Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS)

.P. O. Box 1223 Elma, Washington 98541 - ,

Facility Name: Washington Nuclear ~ Project 3

.

Inspection at: WNP-3 Site, Satsob 'Waskingtori

'

-Inspection conducted: November 18-21,2 1985' * '

,

-

,

.

. , c

,

Inspector: N ' ' * '

• It-5 -$f W. P. Ang, Reactor Inspector _ l Date Signed

,

/ ,. "

Approved By: f-f-R. 'T. Dodds', Chief, Reactor Projects Section 1 'Dite 4igned

'

Summary:

Inspection on November 18-21, 1985 (Report No. 50-508/85-10)

Areas Inspected: Routine unannounced inspection by a regionally based inspector of containment structural integrity test records, the readiness review construction assurance program,. and site tour. This inspection involved 23 hours2.662037e-4 days <br />0.00639 hours <br />3.80291e-5 weeks <br />8.7515e-6 months <br /> onsite by one inspector. Inspection procedure 63050 was used for guidanc Results: Of the areas inspected no violations or' deviations were identifie ~

8512240086 851205 PDR ADOCK 05000508 G PDR

%

.

DETAILS Persons Contacted Washington Public Power Supply System

• C. E. Love, Construction Manager

• D. R. Coody, Project QA Manager Ebasco Services In *P. L. Pitman, Acting Qu lity Program Site _ Manager C. A. Powell, Construction Superintendent HVAC D. G. McKinney, Resident Engineer, Civil

'

.

• Attended exit intervie . Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspectio . Independent Inspection Effort The inspector conducted a general inspection of the reactor building and portions of the auxiliary building to observe construction progress and housekeeping and storage. No deleterious effects 'aused c by inclement

weather (freezing) were observed during the inspection inside containment and the auxiliary buildin The inspector also conducted an inspection of structural material storage warehouse 8 for ANSI N45.2.2 requirements. The inspector also conducted

~

an inspection of the EBASCO QA records storage facility for compliance with ANSI N45.2.9 requirement Within the areas examined no violations or deviations were identifie . Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters I (Closed) Violation 82-16-04, Failure to Control Design Changes Supply System letters of response dated November 24, 1982 and February 11, 1983, were reviewed and discussed with the Project QA Manager and EBASCO QA Program Site Manager. The inspector concluded that the Supply System had determined the full extent of the subject noncompliance, performed the necessary survey and follow-up actions for the subject noncompliance. The licensee denied the violation in that they maintained the design agent, EBASCO, had controlled the design change. The inspector reviewed the following with the licensee and the A/ ,

I

.

.,,_.i._, "-- - *"

',

. 2 Project Change Proposal - 35Q-06723 - Alternate Beam Connections EBASCO Dwg WPPS-3240 - G-3510 - S1 and S3 Rev. 6 - RB Floor Framing and Details EBASCO Dwg WPPS-3240 - G-3514 Rev. 6 - RB Cowmn Schedule and Vertical Bracing EBASCO Design Guides AS-12-2 and AS-12-3, Beam Connection Angles and Tabulation of Safe Loads CBI Dwg 411A Rev. 3 - Floor Training and Details, EL 395 JA Jones installation and inspection records for subject beam clip Based on the above review, the inspector concluded that PCP-35Q-06723 provided a controlled design change. However, the inspector also felt that the PCP was not sufficiently clear with regard to the determination of clip length. The PCP had already been incorporated into the design drawings. As a result of the discussions, the A/E reverified that the installed clip lengths met drawing, PCP, and design guide requirements. Since the design change was controlled, the installation was verified to be correct, and the PCP had been incorporated into the design drawings, no further action appeared to be required. The violation was close (0 pen) Unresolved Item 85-07-01, Containment Construction Hatch Weld Area Configuration The unresolved item identified a potential problem regarding the fabrication and installation of the containment construction hatch in the weld area of the barrel to head weld. The Supply System and the A/E requested CBI, via EBASCO letter EB 213-85-020 dated November 6, 1985, to provide action to resolve the potential problem. CBI response to the licensee was provided by letter 213EE-85-WPC-18 dated November 13, 1985. . CBI stated that they had identified the in process problem and documented it on their nonconformance list. CBI further stated that a repair procedure was prepared, reviewed and approved by EBASCO, and the problem was corrected. However, CBI did not address the apparent release to the site of nonconforming barrel pieces that had been manufactured, inspected and source inspected-in the sho Pending further evaluation and determination of any further corrective action regarding the barrel manufacture and source l inspection, the unresolved item was left ope L '! ,

5. Licensee Identified Items (Closed) Item 85-03-01, "Titus Model 272 Grille" Tension Wires '

(D/N No. 58)" (10 CFR 50.55(c)) -

, ,

The final report was submitted on September 4 1983. The report has been reviewed and determined to be acceptable. The inspector held discussions with responsible licensee and A/E representatives, r,eviewed supporting

, .

,

.

.

.\ 3 documentation, and observed representative samples of work to verify that the corrective action identified in the report has been complete . Containment Structural Integrity Test The containment structural integrity test (SIT) was witnessed in part and inspected by RV and the inspection documented on report number 50-508/85-09. A follow-up inspection was performed to review QA records regarding the tes During this inspection, the licensee informed the inspector that CBI had completed the onsite work and took the SIT records with them for micro-filming. The licensee further stated that CBI would return for code stamping of the containment vessel and would turn over required QA documentation at that time. The following SIT Supply System and EBASCO QA surveillance reports were reviewe EBASCO Report No. EB-0038 - Solution Film Test Procedure

EBASCO Report No. EB-0037 - Strain Gage Data

WPPSS Report No. WNP-3-85-58 - Solution Film Testing WPPSS Report No. WNP-3-85-56 - Containment Overload Test WPPSS Report No. WNP-3-85-55 - Solution Film Testing

WPPSS Report No. WNP-3-85-54 - Training / Qualifications WPPSS Report No. WNP-3-85-53 - EBASCO Surveillance No violations or deviations were identifie . Readiness Review - Construction Assurance Program In Supply System Letter G03-85-563 dated September 25, 1985, the Supply System submitted its Construction Assurance Program (CAP) for NRC review and approval. The program was reviewed and discussed with the licensee during the inspection. The licensee had prepared (CAP) procedures but had not approved and issued the procedures during the inspection. The procedures (CAP 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4) were reviewed for information and discussed with the license The licensee was informed that NRC comments and questions regarding the CAP was issued on November 20, 1985, Questions and comments regarding the Oversight Committee, Conflict of Interest, CAP reports, sampling criteria, and 10 CFR 50 Appendix B applicability were discussed with the license No violations or deviations were identifie . Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on November 21, 1985, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings. No dissenting comments were received from the licensee. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the material provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspectio ,

_ . . _