ML19207A936

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
IE Insp Repts 50-460/79-06 & 50-513/79-06 on 790424-27. Noncompliance Noted:One Weld on Containment Equipment & Floor Drain Pipe Spool Did Not Meet ASME III Class 3 Requirements
ML19207A936
Person / Time
Site: Washington Public Power Supply System
Issue date: 06/14/1979
From: Albert W, Dodds R, Eckhardt J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML19207A933 List:
References
50-460-79-06, 50-460-79-6, 50-513-79-06, 50-513-79-6, NUDOCS 7908230061
Download: ML19207A936 (6)


See also: IR 05000460/1979006

Text

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

50-460/79-06

REGION Y

50-513/79-06

p

50-460

CPPR-134

Docket No.

50-513

License No.

CPPR-174

Safeguards Group

Washington Public Power Supply System

Licensee:

P. O. Box 968

Richland, Washington 99352

Facility Name:

WNP 1 and 4

Inspection at:

WNP 1 and 4 Site, Richland, Washington

Inspection conducted:

April 24-27, 1979

/N 7[

Inspectors:

-

/ Darji Signed

-

W.

' Al e t, React.or Inspcctor

J. H." Eckhar

Rdector Inspector

~

df/f*f79

(h

/ ate / Signed

D

,

$0

M TME /971

'

  1. d.

,1

, Reactor Inspector

Date Signed

Approved By:

D di'r

[

[

/

-r

f. Y. dodds, Chief, Engineering Section, Reactor

bate digned

Construction and Engineering Support Branch

Summary:

Inspection on April 24-27,1979 (Report Nos. 50-460/79-06 and 50-513/70-05)

Areas Inspected:

Routine, unannounced inspection by regional based inspectors of

construction activities involving licensee corrective action on previous inspection

findings, piping installation and welding, and major equipment support installation.

The inspecticn involved 75 inspector-hours onsite by three NRC inspectors.

Results: Of the three areas inspected, no deviations or items of norcompliance were

identified in two areas; one apparent deviation was identified in the area of pipe

welding (Paragraph 4).

RV Form 719 (2)

rj86153

700823 M

DETAILS

1.

Persons Contacted

a.

Washington Pt blic Power Supply System (WPPSS)

  • W. M. Hultgren, Division Manager, WNP 1 and 4
  • M. E. Witherspoon, Division Manager, Quality Assurance
  • T. J. Houchins, Project Quality Assurance Manager, WMP 1 and 4
  • W. M. Lazear, Project Quality Assurance Superviser
  • J. P. Thomas, Project Manager, WNP 1 and 4

J. Carson, Senior Quality Control Engineer

J. R. Nickolaus, Quality Assurance Engineer

R. D. Crisp, Quality Assurance Engineer

R. C. Mertens, Senior Quality Assurance Engineer

M. F. Dreher, Senior Quality Assurance Engineer

A. G. Hosler, Licensing Engineer, WNP 1 and 4

A. D. C. Y,immons, Licensing Engineer

G. Sorenson, Supervisor, Licensing Engineer

C. R. Edwards, Supervisor, Quality Audits

W. D. Blair, Quality Assurance Engineer

R. G. Cockrell, Manager, Engineering

R. Jablonski, Preventive Maintenance Supervisor

  • Attendees at exit interview.

b.

United Engineers and Constructors (UE&C)

E. C. Haren, Deputy Quality Assurance Manager

J. A. Raymond, Project Specialist, Audits

J. Lincoln, Quality Assurance Engineer

B. F. Brockett, Field Superintendent, Quality Assurance

R. Le etz, Quality Assurance Engineer

R. A. Bryans, Field Engineer, Manager

0. P. Kalami, Field Superintendent, Design

c.

J. A. Joas Construction Company, Inc. (Jones)

W. S. Roe, Quality Assurance Manager

(3) Welders

(2) Shop Foreman and Engineer

2.

Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings

a.

(Closed) Follow-up Item (50-460/79-02/01):

Training Program

Applicability:

The original Section 17.4 of the PSAR did not cont-in a specific

commitment for training of UE&C Quality Assurance p. rsonnel, nor

786154

-2-

was such a commitment part of Section 17.2.

However, WPPSS has

stated that Site QA training orientation for UE&C QA personnel

would be the same as that provided by WPPSS for the.r personnel.

The inspector reviewed training organization, training implementation,

and records for WPPSS and UE&C QA personnel selected at random.

It

appeared that both WPPSS and UE&C personnel were receiving equivalent

training.

UE&C QA auditor certification was equivalent to WPPSS certi-

fication, but from a UE&C source. This item is closed.

b.

(Closed) Followup Item (50-460/78-07/02):

Storage and Maintenance

Requirements:

The basic method of providing the site with requirements for storage

and maintenance of items was the completion of the form entitled

" Equipment / Material Storage and Preventative Maintenance Requirements"

by the UE&C design office. A previous inspection had shown that only

a small percentage of these forms had been completed. The licensee

stated that these forms would be essentially complete in early 1979.

At the time of this inspection, the work had been accomplished.

Additionally, WPPSS Field General Construction Procedure 16, " Preven-

tive Maintenance Program," establishes a new preventive maintenance

system in which engineers onsite will establish preventive maintenance

requirements, tasks and frequencies based on recommendations provided

by (a) vendors technical manuals, (b) the USS supplier, and (c) UE&C

Design Engineering.

c.

(Closed) Follow-up Item (50-460/79-02/14):

Licensee to Improve Resolution

Time for Items Reportable to the NRC under 10 CFR 50.55(e):

Changes in the licensee's practices for processing items reportable to

the NRC under 10 CFR 50.55(e) were examined.

The NRC has been critical

of the length of time necessary to determine whether or not a matter

was reportable under the regulation; up to seven months in some in-

stances.

In response to this concern, the licensee has decentralized

this control and rested responsibility in the project organizations.

Revised procedures have been issued these were examined.

The inspector

had no further questions at this time. The performance of the licensee

in this matter will be examined as part of the NRC'c routine follow-up

on individual 50.55(e) items that may arise in the future.

d.

(0 pen) Follow-up Item (50-460/78-07/05):

Disposition of Beams with

Questionable Shear Studs Which Had Been Embedded in Concrete Prior to

October 1978.

The inspector examined and discussed the design approach to assuring

that completed composite slab-beam structures met design requirements.

The discussion included (1) the statistical basis for the failure

78E155

.

-3-

.

rates being assumed for shear studs installed through Q decking, (2)

the AISC design practices being relied upon for resolution, and (3)

the revised concrete strength data which would be utilized.

The item

will remain open pending completion of UE&C's engineering work and a

review of this work by the licensee.

(Closed) Follow-up Item (50-460/78-07/01):

Licensee to Modify Procedure

e.

for Handling IE Bulletins and Circulars.

A revised procedure providing for engineering (rather than QA) control

over responses to IE Bulletins and Circulars was examined and discussed.

The procedure was ready for immediate issue at the time of the inspection.

The inspector had no questions and the item is closed.

f.

(Closed)

Follow-up Item (50-460/78-07/02):

Revised Procedure for

Retention and Control of Quality Records.

Changes in the licensee's practices for retention control, and storage

of quality records resulted in the need to change procedures FQS 17-1,

" Record Retention and Control," to reflect the actual practices.

Rev. 3,

approved April 24, 1979, was reviewed and appeared to reflect the pre-

sent practice for control and retention of records.

g.

(Closed)

Follow-up Item (50-460/79-02/09):

Receipt Inspection Personnel

Handling of " Certification of Conformance" documents.

The procedure actually used by receipt inspection personnel, FQS-17-2,

" Records Review-Receiving," has been revised and now includes instructions

for handling " Certifications of Conformance." The procedure appeared

to be satisfactory.

3.

Examination of Licensee Action on IE Bulletins and Circulars

a.

Circulars

Licensee action on applicable circulars 78-08 through 78-19 was examined

by reference to the files of the organization controlling or monitoring

licensee actions.

It was found that no action was indicated for

circulars 78-08, 78-09, 78-13, 78-15 and 78-16.

However, the project

files were not examined in this matter.

The item will be further

examined with regard to project records during a subsequent inspection

(50-460/79-06/01).

b.

Bulletins

Licensee action on applicable Bulletins 78-04 through 78-14 was examined

and found satisfactory except for Bulletins 78-12,78-12A and 78-12B

which were not due for response at the time of the inspection.

786156

.

,

-4-

.

4.

Containment Structural Concrete and Supports - Observations

Variations in rebar placement for the ring wall at the 160 to 170 position

were examined against design drawings to determine if the variations observed

in spacing and bar size conformed to design.

The inspector found that the

structure corresponded to design and had no further questions.

5.

Piping Installation and Welding

a.

Review of QA Program

The inspector examined the Jones QA Program to ascertain that the

program is in compliance with the 18 Appendix B criterion, ATISI

f145. 2-1971, and the applicable daughter standards.

In particular,

the following procedures were reviewed:

(1) Quality Assurance Program for Piping and Equipment Installation,

Rev. 1, 4/12/79

(2) fluclear QA Manual for ASME B&PV Code,Section III, Division 1,

Rev. 4, 11/10/77

(3) Project Operating Procedures

These procedures appeared to be satisfactory with the exception of

Project Operating Procedure P0P-T1-704W regarding measuring and test

equipment; this procedure which was previously discussed in inspection

report 79-02, is presently being revised by Jones.

Specific elements of the QA Program were examined to ascertain implemen-

tation of the procedure noted above. There elements involved management

audits, monthly QA status reports, qualification and certification of

project QA auditors, storage of equipment, segregation of " hold" items,

storage and issue of weld filler material, and storage of QA records.

flo deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.

b.

Observation of Work and Work Activities

The inspectors visually examined four completed pipe welds and one in-

process weld for pipe sections fabricated in the onsite shop to ascertain

compliance with ASME Section III requirements.

One weld on a contain-

ment equipment and floor drain (DFR System) pipe spool (Weld No. 500)

did not meet the requirements of ASME Section III Class 3 as stated

in ND 5300.

In this weld, the inspector observed, by feeling and visually

with a mirror, that three or more inches of the weld root lacked complete

fusion. Tnis weld had been previously accepted by the contractor's

inspector.

This is considered a deviation.

(50-460/79-06/02)

78G157

.

,

.

-5-

4

6.

Review of Audits

WPPSS Project audit records were examined to confirm that all Q Class I

contractcrs are being audited to the 18 criteria of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B,

annually.

It was found that applicable criteria were being auditted.

It

was observed that UE&C Quality Standard FQS 18-1, Site Audits (Revision 3)

int.ludes provisions for the necessary audit coverage of activities which

are completed less than one year.

The audits conducted within the last six months for Pittsburgh-Des floines

Steel Company, J. A. Jonel Company, and Atkinson and Wright-Schuchert-

Harbor were examined in detail, flo problems were identified.

7.

Storage of Reactor Vessel and Supports

The Unit 4 reactor vessel and closure head receiving inspection, storage

and maintenance were examined and compared to At1SI fl45.2.2-1972 require-

ments. Additionally, the receipt and storage of Unit 4 reactor vessel

support embedments was reviewed for compliance with this AriSI standard.

tio items of noncompliance were identified.

8.

Exit Interview

The inspectors stated that they had been briefed by licensee personnel

regarding allegations of improper QA/QC practices in the AWSH organiza-

tion (civil structural contractor).

The licensee had already started an

investigation to determine the substance and validity of the allegations

and agreed to keep RV advised of any significant findings.

The status of all open items examined during this inspection was discussed.

The licensee confirmed the inspector's understanding that the fir,al disposi-

tion of the open item on embedded shear studs would be reviewed by the UE&C

design office.

'

.

78G158