ML17275B378
| ML17275B378 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 08/11/1981 |
| From: | Clark R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Burstein S WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO. |
| References | |
| TAC-43600, TAC-43601, NUDOCS 8108240260 | |
| Download: ML17275B378 (18) | |
Text
eport No.
Docket No.
50-397 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIO OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION V
License No CPPR-93 Licensee:
Washington Public Power Supply System P.O.
Box 968
- Richland, Washington 99352 Faci 1 ity Name
~
Washington Nuclear Project No.
2 (WNP-2)
Inspection at WNP-2 Site, Benton Country, Washington Inspection conducted:
April 1-30, 1981 Safeguards Group Inspectors:
A.
D. Toth Senior Resident Inspector
= =-- - ---
5 gi Z/
ate igned
- ~a te igned aproved By:
ik i/
Summary:
R.
T. Dodds, Chief Reactor Projects Section 2
Reactor Construction Projects Branch Date Signed 5 ~i g-/
ate Signed Ins ection durin the eriod of A ri 1 1-30 1981 Re ort No. 50-397/81-08 Areas Inspected:
- Routine, unannounced inspection of'icensee and contractor activities to re-evaluate and improve detailed work methods.
The inspection involved 82 inspector-hours on-site by the resident inspector.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
,><>see~>>
RV Form 219 (2)
DETAILS Persons Contacted Washin ton Public Power Su 1
S stem WPPSS
- W. C. Bibb, Project Manager
- R. T. Johnson, Project guality Assur ance Manager
- B. A. Holmberg, Deputy Project Manager, Engineering
- G. L. Wells, Deputy Project Manager, Construction
- A. N. Sastry, Deputy Project Manager, Systems Turnover W.
G. Keltner, Assistant Construction Manager M. A. Clinton, Project Engineering Management Specialist, Systems Turnover R. Grant, Construction guality Manager D.
M. McCorkle, Team Leader 81, RCSW L. T. Harrold, Engineering Division Manager J. Garvin, guality Assurance Engineering and Systems Manager R. L. Knawa, Project Engineering Management Specialist J.
G. Tellefson, Cost 5 Scheduling Manager C. L. Fies, Management Specialist Burns and Roe Inc.
BM
- H. R. Tuthill, Assistant guality Assurance Manager R.
D. Carmichael, Supervisor guality Assurance Surveillance
- D. Smedley, guality Assurance Engineer Wri ht-Schuchart-Harbor/Boecon Cor./General Ener Resources Inc.
WBG R. T. Scott, Project General Manager P. J. Garcia, Project Construction Manager K. Bishop, Office Engineering Manager S.
Y. Young, Corporate Audit Manager D.
W. Tolley, Deputy Project Manager, Containment Area R. Walters, Engineering Supervisor, Reactor Outside P. Webster, Procurement guality Manager Bechtel Power Cor oration E.
E. Felton, Construction Nanag'er C.
D. Headrick, Project guality Control Manager M. J.
- Jacobson, Project guality Assurance Manager D.
R. Johnson, guality Control Manager P.
E. Lindstrom, Project Field Engineering Manager T. A. Mangelsdorf, Project Manager Johnson Controls Incor orated JCI)
T. Bastyr, Project Manager
I"
- Denotes principal personnel present at monthly summary management meeting.
Also, the WPPSS gA Manager met weekly with the resident inspector to discuss status of licensee activities and NRC findings.
In addition to the persons identified above, the inspector also routinely interviewed construction, engineering, and quality assurance staffs of the licensee,
- engineer, and the contractors'n-site organizations.
Pro 'ect Personnel On April 17, Mr. Robert B. Glasscock assumed the position of WPPSS Corporate guality Assurance Director.
Mr. Witherspoon, who previously held this position has assumed the position of Manager, Technical Programs.
WPPSS has also announced that Mr. Charles S. Carlisle will assume the position of Deputy Program Director at WNP-2 on May 1.
Mr. Carlisle formerly served as Director of the Department of Energy FFTF Project Office, and Mr. Glasscock formerly served as the FFTF Director of guality Assurance.
Within the mechanical contractor's organization (WBG), Mr.'; J. Garcia who has been Project General Manager since July ll, 1980 has now been assigned as Project Construction Manager.
Effective April 10,
- 1981, Mr. Robert O. Scott has been assigned as Project General Manager.
General The resident inspector was on-site April 1-3, 6-10, 20-24, and 27-29, 1981.
During this period, the inspector continued examination of daily activities of the licensee, the architect-engineer, and the mechanical contractor, concerning efforts to re-evaluate and improve detailed work methods.
Attendance at meetings, examination of correspondence, and interview of personnel at all organizational levels was involved.
The inspector sought to ascertain the scope, criteria, personnel, data base, conclusions, and corrective actions involved in the implementation of the commitments in the WPPSS July 17, 1980 reply to the NRC 10 CFR 50.54(f) inquiry.
An NRC Region V inspector was on-site April 13-16 to review status of current activities and licensee actions relative to previously identified NRC findings.
Three NRC Region V inspectors were on-site April 28-30 to review documen-tation of the licensee evaluations of detailed work methods of the heat-ing/ventilation system contractor (The Waldinger Company),
and the electrical contractor (Fishbach and Lord),
and to assist the resident inspector relative to restart of the mechanical contractor.
Activities of the above inspectors are documented in separate inspection reports.
J
The resident inspector's supervisor, Chief of Project Section 82, was on-site April 21-23 to review the activities of the senior resident inspector, and interview WPPSS project management.
Bechtel Transition Activities In its role as systems completion contractor, Bechtel wi 11 be procuring supplies from the mechanical contractor lJBG.
For ASME work, such pro-curement requires verification of the supplier's acceptability as a
source.
A previous licensee-contract oversight of this requirement is described in IE Investigation Report No. 50-397/8'0-08 paragraph l.d, relative to WBG and GE on-site exchange of materials.
WPPSS construction management has issued letter WNPlJBG-215-F-81-0871 (dated April 8, 1981) to arrange for the required Bechtel survey of WBG.
The inspector and his supervisor attended a Bechtel management presentation to the WPPSS work restart independent review team representative.
An overview of the Bechtel functions was presented,-indicating
=that safety analysis report, quality assurance
- manual, and procedural controls were being developed for the dual Bechtel functions of Systems Completion Contractor and Construction Manager.
Functionin Of The WPPSS Task Forces,'ask Force II continues to function as described in the licensee's July 17, 1980 reply to the NRC 10 CFR50.54(f) inquiry.. Task Force 'II activities are still being confined to reviews to assure that contractor work methods are adequate for assuring compliance with conditions of the construction permit.
Hardware reinspection activities and record reviews have not yet started, nor have approved plans yet been established.
Some planning activities are underway.
Since most of the site contractors had been released to restart work by the end of March, the size of the task force has been reduced to a current level of twenty professional and clerical personnel, with furthur reductions of key personnel anticipated'ask Force III activities involve review and strengthening of management
- systems, including those of the contractors.
Additional emphasis has been given to this area this month.
A WPPSS management team performed a
walk-through/spot-check of the WBG management system, relative to that described in the November 12, 1980 letter to NPC.
guality assurance deficiency reviews, engineering change control, and work package preparation were considered.
The inspector monitored the management team's activities to familiarize themselves with the details of the contractor 's system.
The managers identified several deficient areas, and are scheduled to pre-sent recommendations to the contractor in May.
6.
Limited Work Restart Authorizations The inspector examined work restart authorizations issued to the site contractors, in April.
For each such authorization he verified that it was reviewed by the project gA organization, and the RCSW as appropriate to its scope.
He ascertained that the particular work released was commensurate with the status of the WPPSS evaluations.of detailed work methods and corrective action plans, as described in the WPPSS July 17, 1980 reply to the NRC 10 CFR 50.54(f) inquiry.
The following work release items were reviewed.
Electrical contractor (218) all guality Class I work.
(ref. WNP2FL-218-F-81-0627 dated April 2, 1981)
This re1ease includes conditions that 46 of the contractor procedures be revised to include WPPSS comments before start of work.
b.
Containment Retrofit contractor (213A) - All guality Class I
work, except sway brace brackets.
-(ref. WNP2PDM-213A-F-81-0232).
c ~
d.
Coatings Contractor (219) - all guality Class I work.
(ref. WNP20BC-219-F-81-0071 dated April 14, 1981)
Coatings Contractor (234) all guality Cl.ass I work.
{ref. WNP20BC-234-F-81-0097 dated April 20, 1981) e.
Mechanical Contractor (215) - delivery of guality Class I
materiial to the site, except defer receiving inspection.
(ref. WNP2WBG-215-F-81-0944) 7.
Restart of Work b the Mechanical Contractor In January 1981 the NRC concurred in the mechanical contractor's start of repair of the sacrificial shield wall, at the 541'levation.
Release of furthur installation activities was conditional upon NRC review of the WPPSS re-evaluation of detailed work methods and corrective action plans.
That re-evaluation has been ongoing since Mid-1980, and preliminary documentation of the results has been compiled in four manuals.
These were made available to the WPPSS independent review team, and the project quality assurance organization on April 28, 1981.
At the same date, the manuals were made available to the resident inspector for preliminary review.
The manuals are not yet co~piete, and the associated draft restart letter contains about ten pages of tentative "Conditions to Restart."
The work scope encompassed by the manuals includes:
a.
Pipe whip restraint repair and installation b.
Large and small bore hangers, and concrete inserts c.
Large and small bore pipe, except CRD piping d.
Repair of SSW accessible external welds On April 28, 1981 the Project Manager established a trailer office on-site for the gA reviewers and the Independent Review Team to use for their reviews.
This places these reviewers on-site, and available for first hand involvement in the completion of the outstanding issues and resolution of the review teams comments.
This.also establishes a
parallel effort toward the end of the WPPSS review chain, potentially contributing to expediting of the review process.
WPPSS Re-evaluation of Detailed Work Methods and Corrective Action Plans for Restart of Work on Mechanical S stem Han ers, Pi in and Sacrificial Shield Wall On April 28, 1981 the licensee presented a partially complete restart review package to the NRC resident inspector.
On April 29 the inspector provided the licensee with a list of questions associated with the inspec-tor's current inspection activities.
These addressed several areas where the inspector was awaiting conclusion of the WPPSS specific evaluation/
corrective-actions.
The inspector requested the licensee to provide the current status of each of the items for consideration by the inspector during his review of the restart package.
These items involve plans for future actions, or problem areas previously identified by the licensee and under control of the nonconformance control and corrective action systems of the established gA programs.
The licensee management representa-tives agreed to provi,de the resident inspector with data, or reference to locations of data, relative to disposition of the above matters.
This data will be considered during subsequent NRC resident inspector review activities.
Licensee Action On Previous NRC Ins ection Findin s
The WPPSS gA organization has continued assignment of personnel with full time duties for followup on previous and current NRC inspection findings.
These individuals have prioritized the backlog of issues and are addressing each one with the responsible contractors.
For each
- item, the gA engineer prepares a checklist for evaluation of the contractors'orrective action scope, actions to preclude recurrence, and detailed verification checkpoints.
After verification of implementation of the corrective actions, the gA engineer compiles supporting data and maintains the materia1 for review by the NRC inspector.
The system includes status reporting to guality Assur ance Management.
During the month of April, several items were presented to the resident inspector for consideration.
I l
E
Many additional items still remain outstanding, and are relevent to the adequacy of the WPPSS work restart package submitted to the inspector on April 28.
The licensee plans to accomplish the resolution of these outstanding issues and submittal to the resident inspector concurrent with his review of the restart package.
Of the items presented to and examined by the resident inspector in April, sufficient information was available to support resolution of the following items:
a ~
Closed Followu Item 397/80-08-05
- Work continued on support FDR-385 after issuance of a nonconformance report.
The contr actor response sheet OWBGWNP2-215-81-4730, with referenced inspection reports, shows that this problem was due to failure to place a hold tag by the quality control inspector.
The matter was judged to be an isolated case.
The improved training programs were expected to prevent future similar events.
This item is resolved.
b.
Closed Noncom liance 397/80-08-11 Incorrect clearances at pipe supports RCC-57 and EDR.-36?.
The inspector considered the corrective actions described in the WPPSS letter to NRC dated September 19, 1980.
The contractor 's supporting response sheet PWBGWNP2-215-81-4730 identifies the probable cause as an inadequate as-built program and insufficient qualification and training of the inspectors.
Contractor proce-dures have been revised to improve verification of qualifications, improve the inspector training program, and improve the as-built procedures/controls.
All previous as-built drawings are required to be reverified according to the new WPPSS approved procedure WP-332.
Inspection reports 86090 and 6091 have been prepared by the contractor for insertion into the work package for the specific hangers in question to assure rework prior to system completion.
This matter is resolved.
C.
Closed Noncom liance 397/80-08-16):
Incorrect filler metal and weld procedure used for thermowells on MS system.
The inspector examined the corrective actions described in the WPPSS letter to NRC dated September 19, 1980.
The contractor's supporting response sheet PWBGWNP2-215-81-4794 identifies the probable cause as a mistake by a field engineer.
It documents that a sample of additional records prepared by the engineer showed no similar errors.
The applicable procedure GWS-2 now clarifies that a welding-engineer shall complete similar required weld instruction sheets.
The particular discrepant condition was evaluated by the Burns E
Roe engineers and the
use of the ER309 material in lieu of ER308 material was determined not detrimental and was acceptable under the ASME Section IX Code.
This matter is resolved.
0 en Followu Item 397/80-08-30
- Missing EgA findings.
The WPPSS reviewers presented the resident inspector with contractor statements that the EgA checklists are not considered to be permanent records.
However, the EgA records identify discrepent conditions, and the contr actor did not establish the nature of the discrepancy and assurance of completed corrective action for the E(}A findings on the missing page w2.
The inspector restated the NRC request for this information.
Closed Noncom liance 397/80-08-38 Failure to perform the 72-hour magnetic particle examination required by work procedures.
The inspector considered the corrective actions described-in-the WPPSS letters to NRC dated September 19, 1980 and March 10, 1981.
The contractor issued the inspection report SIR-5934 dated July 25, 1980 and associated nonconformance report 86573 dated June 19, 1980.
The Burns E
Roe engineer dispositioned the NCR with an affirmation that the 72-hour examination was in fact required.
Implementation of the disposition will be deferred until work restart, which will be controlled under a
work package including the NCR for action.
The contractor sampled 372 additional work packages against the requirements of WP-84, finding 29 cases where the 72-hour examinations had also been designated as "not required," con-trary to the procedure.
This work was done in conjunction with WBG Corrective Action Request 0 CAR-175, with results documented in WBG memorandum JAS-118.
In response to this finding, the contractor has determined that all hanger work packages which had been worked to procedure WP-84 will be reviewed for the same problem.
This is to be controlled by Special Requirement Checklists, and will be based upon new procedures WP-635 and GWS-81.
To the extent that the check-
- lists, are implemented, this matter now appears to be under control.
The inspector considers controls of the checklist implementation as part of the general restart effort of this contractor, relative to hangers.
This matter is resolved.
0 en Followu Item 497/80-16-03
- Outdated architect-engineer specifications used for restart reviews.
The WPPSS reviewers presented the resident inspector with information demonstrating that specification change lists (SCL)
and specification lists of effective pages (LEP) have been provided to the task force reviewers.
The data showed that SCL's used by the contract 220 review team in December 1980 had been subsequently significantly revised to include additional listings of applicable changes; many of these additions were the result of Burns 8
Roe dog ment control reviews to identify old changes which had never t~een incorporated into the SCL's in the past.
It was not clear ow defective the SCL indices were at the time of their use by the review team.
The inspector also noted that the SCL did not include the principal PED's for the sacrificial shield wall repair, which had been submitted to NRC as license application supplemental information (e.g.PED-W3776).
The inspector returned this item to the WPPSS reviewers with a request to define the degree of progress in updating the SCL/LEP relative to RCSW review teams'chedules.
0 en Unresolved Item 397/81-01-01
- --Engineering personnel qualifications verification.
The WPPSS reviewers presented the resident inspector with in-formation which showed that Burns 5 Roe direct hired engine'ers are required to sign statements allowing verification of ed-ucation and work experience.
The inspector had no furthur questions regarding this aspect.
However, there was no evidence that contractors in fact were performing the same verification for direct hires or for job shoppers.
There was no evidence that Burns E
Roe was auditing the job shops relative to this aspect of the quality assurance program.
The inspector identified various documents establishing requirements in this ar ea, and returned this item to the WPPSS reviewers with a request for evidence of WPPSS verification activities.
Closed Followu Item 397/81-05-02
- Documentation of RCSW restart reviewers comments relative to phase 2 reinspection activities.
The contract 8234 review team issued memorandum RCSW-81-414 (dated February 18, 1981) to document their recommendations for phase 2 reinspection/documentation review.
This matter is resolved.
(Closed)
Unresolved Item 397/81-05-07 Adequacy of postings of OCFR Part 21.
The inspector examined WPPSS quality assurance surveillence report file 80-636, reports dated March 9 and March 19, 1981.
These indicate that the gA engineer had verified improved posting on-site.
On March 27, 1981 the inspector observed that conflicting old and new postings existed in the WPPSS building gl, and that the W86 glass enclosed outside bu11etin board was posted-to show the designated persons to whom reports should be made.
Subsequent to a March 27 management meeting with the inspector, the licensee took steps to correct the observed condition; the inspector verified this action.
The licensee provided the latest revision of Part 21 to the con-tractors for use in procedure revisions and standard postings.
Postings observed by the inspector included information from the latest revision.
This matter is resolved.
Closed Previous Discussion Item 397/81-06
. ara.8 Verification of qualifications of gua1ity Control Inspectors dispatched by the local labor unions.
Corrective actions by the mechanical contractor in some cases-relies upon upgraded qualification verification and training programs to improve confidence that inspection efforts will achieve the intended quality results.
These actions are recogni',zed in the basis for resolution of NRC findings discussed above.
However, there have been recent experiences by contractors at this site where a local union hall (Local 8598 of Plumbers and Steamfitters) has dispatched to the contractor, guality Control Inspectors with questionable qualifications (e.g.
IE Inspection Report 50-397/81-06 paragraph 8).
This month the instrumentation contractor identified another such case, after performing further checking of the individuals'ackground, beyond the assurances provided by the labor union.
This revealed that the education or experience requirements (ANSI-N45.2.6-1978) had not been met by the individual, and the resume'nformation was not accurate.
In the cases noted to date, the individuals have been able to pass the contractor's screening tests and personal interviews.
( In these
- cases, the contractors referred the individuals back to the labor hall after identification of the situation).
Project Managers of two of the contractors have advised the resident inspector that additional negotiations and arrangements are continuing with the union to improve the contractors'onfidence in the qualifications of personnel. dispatched under contract with the union.
Progress on this matter will be considered in future inspections.
10.
Mana ement Meetin s
The inspector met with the WPPSS site gA Manager and the Project Manager and contractor staff on May 1, 1981 to summarize his inspection findings and to receive a status report of principal WPPSS activities.
Attendees at this meeting are identified by notation (*) in Paragraph 1 of this report.
The inspector also met weekly with the gA Manager to discuss status of his inspection efforts.
At the April 14 meeting, the licensee representatives advised that the mechanical contractor work restart evaluation package would be formally presented to the gA organization, the Independent Review Team, and the NRC Senior Resident Inspector on April 28.
The inspector noted that considerable effort would be required to evaluate the restart package as well as the licensee's resolution of NRC findings not yet closed out by the licensee.
P h
i VC g