ML19247A130
| ML19247A130 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Satsop |
| Issue date: | 05/22/1979 |
| From: | Haynes R, Hutson T, Kirsch D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19247A125 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-508-79-04, 50-508-79-4, 50-509-79-03, 50-509-79-3, NUDOCS 7907300107 | |
| Download: ML19247A130 (12) | |
See also: IR 05000508/1979004
Text
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMEh"I
"
50-508/79-04
50-509/79-03
Report No.
50-508
CPPR-154
Docket No.
50-509
License No.
CPPR-155
Safeguards Group
Washington Public Power Supply system
Licensee:
P. O. Box 468
Richland, Washington 99352
Facility Name:
WNP-3 and WNP-5
Inspection at:
WNP-3 and WNP-5 Site (Satsop)
April 17-20, 1979
Inspection conducted:
Ib#
6 - 2 / '7N
Inspectors:
D. F . Kirsch, Reactor Inspector
Date Signed
5bt b #l
T. W. Hutson, Reactor Inspector
Ddte' Signed
Date Signed
Approved By: .
/
[
&
f
R.
C.' Haynes, Chief, Project Section, Reactor
Dfte S(gned
'
Construction and Engineering Support Branch
Sunwa ry r
Inspection during period of April 17-20,1979 (Report Nos. 50-508/79-04 and
50-509/79-03)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by regional based inspectors
of construction activities including:
licensee action on previous inspection
findings; licensee action on IE Bulletins and Circulars; structural steel
and supports installation; structural concrete work and quality records; non-
confomance report corrective action; and 0A audits. The inspection involved
50 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspectors.
Results: Of the six areas inspected no items of noncompliance were identified
in five areas; one apparent item of noncompliance was identified in the area of
structural concrete (infraction - failure to perfom in-process test on grout
used for structural purposes - Paragraph 8).
RV Form 719 (?)
490
071
q90ND
w
n,.
DETAILS
1.
Individuals Contacted
a.
Washington _ Public Power Supply System (WPPSS)
- F.
D. McElwee, Assistant Director - Projects
- W. J. Talbott, Division Manager - WNP 3/5 Project
- C. E. Love, Deputy Division Manager
J. E. Werle, Supervising Project Engineer
- J. C. Lockhart, Project QA Manager
- J. M. Walker, Senior Project Quality Engineer
- R. M. Simons, Senior Project Quality Engineer
- M. L. Jones, Project Engineer
- R. R. Quimby, QA Engineer
- H. Johnson, OA Department Secretary
L. Heiser, Lead Mechanical QA Engine-c
C. A. Cal, Senior Project Quality Engineer
K. A. Kirkevold, Electrical Engineer
R. M. Norris, Senior Nuclear Engineer
D. Koski, Civil Engineer
L. F. Adams, Lead Project Quality Engineer
E. L. Stephens, Project Quality Engineer
b.
EBASCO Services Inc. (Ebasco)
- D. L. Quamme, Manager of Construction
- J. P. Sluka, Manager of Engineering
- C. B. Tatum, Senior Resident Engineer
- A. M. Cutrona, Assistant QA Manager
E. L. Chatham, Contract Manager
T. E. Cottrell, Resident Engineer - Field
J. R. Sowers, Senior Project Quality Engineer
G. P. Zerbst, QC Engineer
H. L. Barton, Senior Engineer - Field
R. V. Potter, Contract Engineer
D. LaBreck, Document Control Supervisor
L. Adams, QC Engineer
R. Jabola, QC Engineer
c.
Pittsbura Testing Laboratory (PTL)
M. R. Tallent, Jr., Site Manager
D. A. Perry, Assistant Corporate QA Manager
W. K. Barbour, Level II Technician
490
072
-2-
d.
J. W. Cain, Project Welding and QA Superintendent
e.
G. F. Atkinson Company (GFA)
D. G. Summers, QC Supervisor
f.
Morrison Knudsen Company (M-K)
F. C. Edler, Project Quality Enaineer
D. D. Reader, QC Supervisor
J. L. Mawers, QC Inspector
g.
State of Washinoton
- G. Hansen, Engineer (EFSEC)
- Denotes Exit Interview attendees.
2.
Project Status
The licensee reported that construction work on Units 3 and 5 was 11.2%
and 1.8% complete, respectively, at the time of the inspection. The
slip-forming of the Unit 3 biological shield wall was ccmpleted and
concrete placements for the auxiliary building exterior walls were in
progress. Concrete work on Unit 5 involved basemat and shield wall
foundation activities.
In response to the inspector's inquiries, the licensee noted that
WNP-3/5 does not use or specify for use any large wire size Kulka
teminal blocks and that prepurchased Class lE equipment would be
evaluated for the inclusion of these terminal blocks.
3.
Site Tour
Upon arrival, the inspectors conducted a site tour to observe the activities
of construction, housekeeping and general compliance with requirements of
the PSAR and applicable codes and standards. The inspectors noted that there
was a considerable amount of construction aid steel laying on the basemats
of Unit 3 and Unit 5.
Some of this steel was marked with paint to identify
it and some was not. The licensee took inmediate corrective action to remove
any unmarked convenience steel and instruct the applicable contractors on the
requirements for marking the steel. The corrective actions appeared effective
as the inspector noted later during the inspection that all convenience steel
appeared to be properly identified.
Also noted during the tour was a signifi-
cant amount of laitance and loose material on the rebar prior to and after
490
073
,
-3-
installation.
The inspector questioned the ability of the contractors to
remove the material during preplacement cleanup, especially in areas of con-
gested rEbar and areas close to the concrete forms.
Observation of the pre-
placement cleanup of two placements verified that the cleanup was effective.
4.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Items of fioncompliance
The licensee response to the following items of noncompliance was examined:
a.
(0 pen) floncompliance (508/78-08-01):
Falsification of personnel
qualification records by PTL.
The licensee response was summarized in WPPSS letter flos. G03-79-346,
of February 26,1979, and G03-79-405, of March 9, 1979.
The inspector examined the surveillance planning matrices and preplanned
surveillance checklists for contracts 3240-216 and 263. Minimum fre-
quencies had been established and adhered to.
The checklists appeared
to be comprehensive.
The licensee established an audit group to examine the adequacy,
implementation and effectiveness of contractor 0A programs. Audits
had been scheduled and conducted using cL cklists.
The Engineer assigned a laboratory engineer to review all quality
activities performed by PTL.
Ebasco procedure ASP-RE-2-4 (Construction Contract Document Submittals)
was initiated and contractor quality procedures are reviewed by both
quality engineering and quality surveillance.
Construction procedures
are reviewed by both field engineering and construction supervision
personnel.
By implementation of the increased audit / surveillance activities, the
licensee noted several deficient conditions at PTL involving personnel
eye examination records, personnel qualification and equipment calibra-
tion. As a result, the licensee issued a stop work order to PTL on
Feburary 13, 1979.
On February 17, 1979, the stopwork was partially
lifted by the specification of certain personnel and equipment which
could be used in concrete testing activities.
Licensee action to
resolve the deficient conditions noted was continuing and will be
examined further during a subsequent inspection.
The licensee committed
to document additional corrective actions taken with the regard to
PTL personnel.
490
074
-4-
b.
(0 pen) fioncomoliance (508/78-09-04):
Failure of PTL to submit and_
Ebasco to review all shop test records.
The licensee response was summarized in WPPSS letter flo. G03-79-255,
dated February 21, 1979. The licensee committed in his response to
the item of noncompliance, to modify PTL procedure QC-DC-1 (Document
Control) to require submittal of all onsite test reports within one
week of test completion. This commitment was to be implemented by
December 18, 1978, with final approval of the revised procedure to be
obtained by February 23, 1979. This procedure was still in process
of revision.
The inspector examined a number of test reports including:
initial set
tests IST-9 through 18; concrete tracking records, truck trip tickets
and PTL Concrete Field Test Inspection Records for placements ABW-014349,
lb349,18349,18362.5 and 20362. The inspector found that PTL was not
submitting the test data within the one week as required by Ebasco pro-
cedure ASP-RE-2-2.
Licensee personnel indicated that this commitment
was in the process of implementation.
This item is considered to be a continuing item of noncompliance.
c.
(Closed) fionccmpliance (508/79-01-05): Failure of WPPSS Engineering
and 0A to review specification changes.
The licensee response was summarized in WPPSS letter flo. G03-79-430,
dated March 9,1979.
The inspector examined the corrective action
taken and action to preclude recurrence and found the implementation
to be as stated. The inspector noted that WPPSS engineering reviews
FCris after they become commercially effective and, as such, provides
a control point for proper classification and technical adequacy. The
Ebasco Site Support Engineering organization had been delegated the
responsibility for the review of drawing changes.
QA is now required
to review specification changes, procedure revisions and contract
changes per ASP-RE-2-23 (Design Change Control). The inspector had
no further questions.
d.
(Closed)
f!oncompliance (508/79-01-06): Ebasco failure to implement
document control instructions.
The licensee response was summarized in letter fio. G03-79-430, dated
March 9,1979. The inspector samoled and examined the detailed
corrective action and action to preclude recurrence and noted no
further discrepancies.
Ebasco instituted a document transmittal acknowledgement system to
indicate update completion for all controlled distributions. The
490
n?cJ
v.
- 5-
revised tracking system was implemented and Ebasco was in the process
of specifying the tracking system in a document control instruction
(DCI-5), which was in the approval process.
The inspector had no further questions on this item.
5.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Followup Items
a.
(Closed) PTL test record deficiencies and completeness (508/78-09-05).
PTL form QC-FSTC-1 was revised to include all of the report requirements
specified by ASTit-C-403-70 (Initial and Final Set). The inspector examined
a number of completed test records for initial set tests, gradation tests,
fineness modulus and moisture content of aggregate and noted that the
forms appeared to be properly completed, acceptance criteria had been
specified, the data had been marked as conforming or nonconforming and
the required reviews had been accomplished. The inspector had no further
questions.
b.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (508/78-09-03):
Issuance of procedure to
specify contractor document review / approval responsibilities.
Ebasco appreved and issued on April 18,1979, ASP-RE-2-2 (Engineering
Review and Processing of 204/209 Contractor Submittal Test Data, Docu-
mentation and Inspection Reports).
Quality Assurance Instruction 17-1
(Receipt and Review of Quality Verification Records) specifies review
requirements for vendor and contractor submitted quality verification
records. This item is resolved.
c.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (508/79-01-04):
Desian controls of
Ebasco topical report not fully implemented by procedures.
Ebasco procedure ASP-III-7.3, reissued as ASP-RE-2-23 (Design Change
Control) was revised to properly implement the requirements of the
Ebasco fluclear Quality Assurance Program f!anual procedure flo. QA-I-4.
Two separate Field Change Request forms had been instituted; one for
drawing configuration changes for which QA review and approval is not
required arid one for specification and drawing note changes for which
QA review and approval is required. This item is resolved.
d.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (508/79-01-08): Backscatter on CBI radiograph
ifl 2C, 0-1 R-l .
Seam B12C, from 0-1 was re-radiographed by CBI and the film was reviewed
by the inspector. The reshot was acceptable and no backscatter was in-
dicated on the film. The inspector discussed the problem of backscatter
with the personnel responsible for reading the radiographs and determined
490
076
-6-
that backscatter had been a slight problem earlier in the program and
had been corrected by lead screens.
The cognizant personnel were aware
of the backscatter requirement and were present when the inspector
noted the backscatter on B12C, 0-1.
The inspector determined that the
failure to reject B12C due to backscatter was an isolated instance.
e.
(Closed) Followup Item (509/79-02-02): GFA filing of FCRs to facilitate
retrieval.
GFA has revised the filing of FCRs and DCNs and now requires filing in
alphanumeric order. The inspector selected a drawing and sampled the
retrieval capability of the alphanumeric system.
All FCRs and DCNs
sampled were easily located using the new filing system. This item is
closed.
f.
(Closed) Followuo Item (509/79-02-03): GFA trainina of QC inspectors
on structural concrete drawinq requirements.
The records of training sessions for the QC inspectors on structural
concrete drawing requirements and drawing familiarization were reviewed.
Discussions with OC inspectors indicated that the training had been
effective.
The inspector has no further questions on this matter.
6.
Bulletins and Circulars
The inspector examined WPPSS procedure No. EDI-1.3 (Processing of NRC
Inspection and Enforcement Bulletins and Circulars). The procedure spec-
ified adequate controls to assure prompt evaluation and response to IE
bulletins and circulars.
Bulletins 78-01, 02 and 04:
Ebasco letter No. EBWP-78-487, dated
May 31, 1978, to the WPPSS project manager stated that the Ebasco
review of the above IE bulletins indicated that for WNP-3/5:
(a) GE type CR120A relays are not used or specified for use in
safety related systems.
(b) Unprotected terminal blocks were not used in systems which
must function in the post-accident environment inside
containment.
(c) Neither NAMC0 Model D2400X nor Model EA-170-302 SNAP LOCK
switches will be used in any safety related equipment inside
containment.
Since these bulletins were issued prior to the issuance of the construction
permit, the licensee had not responded formally to IE:RV. These bulletins
are considered closed.
490
077
- .a
-7-
Bulletin 78-05: The licensee response to the subject bulletin was
summarized in WPPSS letter No. G03-78-526, dated June 15,1978, which
stated that GE Model CR105X auxiliary contact mechanisms were not
used or planned for use in any safety related systems. This bulletin
is closed.
Circular 78-09: WPPSS requested that Ebasco review the subject circular
for applicability in letter No. WPEB-78-470.
Ebasco responded in
letter EBWP-78-802 indicating that the appropriate Ebasco engineering
disciplines were made aware of the problem and that Ebasco would ensure
that the problem would be rectified prior to awarding any contract in
the event that the subject contact was proposed for use in any safety
related systems. This circular is closed.
Circular 78-16: The licensee required Ebasco to review the content of
the circular for its applicability to WNP-3/5.
Ebasco letter No. EBWP-
78-1061, dated December 5,1978, indicated that Limitorque type SMB-0,
1, 2 and 3 valve actuators, equipped with 3600 RPM motors, were used
extensively on the containment spray and safety injection systems.
This
letter further steted that recommendations for equipment modification
or special operating procedures and an inservice i.ispection program are
pending the results of Limitorque Corporation's durability studies.
It
appeared that Ebasco had taken measures to resolve the problem. This
circular is closed.
Circular 78-19: WNP-3/5 project personnel reviewed circular 78-19 and
found that the safety isolation function of the containment isolation
valves would not be bypassed during a containment purge.
The licensee
further concluded that everything on the systen level that is bypassed
would be annunciated on an individual basis and that all bypasses would
be manually initiated and not compromise the operability of the isola-
tion valve. The licensee further concluded that adequate administrative
controls would be facilitated by the provision of isolation valve control
and position indication. This circular is closed.
7.
Safety delated Structures (Structural Steel and Supports)
Observation of Work and Work Activities
During a s.'te tour on April 17, 1979, the inspectors observed a number of
pits, in the Unit 3 auxiliary building basemat, containing anchor bolts.
The pits were filled with sediment and water and the protective tape cover-
ing on several anchor bolts / nuts had been partially or completely removed or
damaged, allowing the water / sediment in the pit to contact the anchor bolts /
nuts.
The licensee indicated, in response to the inspector's questions,
that the bolts were structural steel column anchor bolts.
00
078
-8-
The inspector found that Ebasco specification No. 3240-216, " Reactor Auxiliary
Building Foundation Mat Construction and Performance of Related Work," requires
that "After concrete formwork is stripped, anchor bolt threads shall be hand
regraphited and rewrapped as necessary and nuts reinstalled...." Although
this requirement appeared to have been met initially for tne aforementioned
column anchor bolts, no provisions had been made by the licensee or his con-
tractor's for maintaining the protective bolt wrapping to prevent deterioration
of the components. This item is considered to be unresolved.
(508/79-04-01)
8.
Structural Concrete
,
a.
Observations of Work and Work Activities
(1) Guy F. Atkinson Company Concretina Activities
The inspector observed concrete placements activities associated
with Unit 5 ringwall placement RBF-002, 004 and -351.
The observa-
tions included preplacement cleanup, completion of preplacement
checklists and concrete tracking records, placement of grout, place-
ment of concrete, consolidation, checking of vibrator frequency and
coverage by QC personnel. The sampling and testing of fresh concrete
by PTL personnel was also observed. The concrete placenent was con-
ducted in accordance with QCP-ll, Concrete Placement and Finish of
Uniform Surfaces, and the testing of fresh concrete perfomed by PTL
appeared to conform to the ASTM procedurcs. The curing of Unit 5
baserat placement BMS-005-335 was obs cved and the cure card reviewed.
No items of noncompliance or deviatbns were identified.
(2) Morrison-Knudsen Company Concreting Activities
The concrete activities conducted by M-K for Unit 3 auxiliary
building wall placement ABU-004 elevation 335' to 349' were observed.
The activities observed included pumping of concrete, placement
(lift height, drop and flow), consolidation and reinforcing steel
cleanup. The above activities appeared to comply with the require-
ments in CP-01, Procedure for Forming, Placing, Curing, Finishing,
Inspection and Repairing Concrete.
No items of noncompliance or
deviations were identified.
(3) Testing of Grout
During the observation of placements RBF-002, 004-351 in Unit 5
and ABW-004 in Unit 3 on April 18, 1979, the inspector inquired about
testing of grout by the flow cone method.
The inspector was informed
by PTL that when the grout arrived for placement RBF-002, 004-351,
PTL told the Ebasco Concrete Receiving Engineer that PTL had no
one qualified to perform the test and no flow cone had been calibrated
490
079
.
_9_
due to a recent rescinding of qualifications at PTL by a WPPSS
stop work order. The concrete receiving engineer then told PTL
to take cubes for RBF-002, 004-351. iio flow cone test was run for
the six yards of grout used in RBF-002, 004-351 or the one yard of
grout used in ABW-004. The inspector noted that Table 2 of Speci-
fication flo. 3240-415, " Testing and Inspection Requirements for
Concrete Materials and Concrete," requires that ordinary grout be
tested by the flow cone method (CRD-C79) daily during production
or every five cubic yards, whichever is more frequent. The failure
to test the grout placed on April 18, 1979, appears to be an item
of noncompliance.
(509/79-03-01)
b.
Review of Quality P,ecords
(1) Guy F. Atkinson Company
The inspector reviewed quality records associated with Unit 3
basemat concrete placements BMS-002-335, BMS-Oll-335 and Unit 5
basemat placements BMS-004-335, BMS-014-335 and BMS-015-335.
The review included the following records:
reinforcing steel
installation inspection, reinforcing steel placing tolerances,
conduit installations and inspection, grounding cable installation
and inspection, piping installation and in-place inspection, pip-
ing fabrication and connection, embedded metals and structural
steel, operations preparatory to placing con: rete, preplacement
inspection of placing equipment, final inspection before placement,
concrete placement card, adverse weather preparations, concrete
placement and finish of unformed surfaces, concrete acceptance
checklist, concrete placement inspection, concrete consolidation
inspection, post placement inspection, concrete curing card, in-
spection reports, applicable nonconformance reports, reinforcing
steel receiving checklists, reinforcing steel receiving form, and
four QC inspectors qualifications. The review of Inspection Reports
(surveillance reports on in-process work) showed that several re-
ports noted deficient items which were not corrected or followed
up at a later date.
For example, an inspection report dated
January 2,1979, for BMS-002-335 stated that corrective action
on rebar placement would be verified the next norning, yet no
inspection report could be found to close the deficient item. An
inspection report dated February 9,1979, for BMS-Oll-335 docu-
menting a dry pack repair states that PTL was notified to sample
the material, but the sample was never taken and the item was
apparently not followed up for close out.
Discussions with cogni-
zant personnel indicated that this problem had been previously
idc.itified and corrective action had been taken to review all
inspection reports prior to a particular placement and close out
any open or deficient items before the placement. To verify the
490
080
-10-
corrective ction, the inspector reviewed the records and inspec-
tion reports for placements BMS-0014-335 and BMS-015-N5 in Unit 5.
All deficiencies or open items had been corrected during the review
of the records for the Unit 5 placements.
No items of noncompliance
or deviations were identified.
(2) Morrison-Knudsen Company
The following quality records associated with Unit 3 auxiliary
building wall concrete placements 3ABW-012-349 and 3ABW-002-349 were
reviewed for compliance with applicable procedural documentation re-
quirements:
pour package sumiary index and final review, concrete
placement checklist, field fabrication of reinforcing steel, ware-
house requisitions, concrete inspection reports, curing reports, cur-
ing inspection reports, reinforcing steel inspection reports and
postplacement inspection reports. No items of noncompliance or
deviations were identified.
(3) PTL
The inspector noted that PTL had, with Ebasco concurrence, removed
the gradation sieves from the calibration program reportedly because
PTL could not obtaia glass calibration beads from the National Bureau
of Standards.
The inspector further noted that PTL procedure QC-LT-1, " Laboratory
Testing," failed to include specific criteria for the inspection
of sieves prior to use.
The licensee stated that QC-LT-1 would be
modified to include specific sieve inspection criteria. This item
is open pending review of the actions taken to assure gradation
sieves provide accurate test results.
(508/79-04-02)
9.
Allegation of Inadequate Corrective Action on an Identified Nonconformance
On April 4,1979, the inspector received a telephone call from a site employee
wherein it was alleged that inadequate corrective action was taken by the
licensee in dispositioning a nonconforming condition involving welding on
liquid radwaste tanks. These tanks were fabricated onsite by CB&I using welders
who had not completed the required welder performance tests.
This quality pro-
tal:n had been documented on nonconformance report No. NCR-0198 during execution
of the site quality assurance program. The corrective actions specified by
the licensee included a requirement to radiograph three percent of the total
leng' is of welds involved in order to ascertain acceptability of the welding
performed by the aforementioned welders. The alleger stated that 10 percent
of the welds should have been required to be radiographed. The total length
of welds in question was approximately 300 feet.
490
081
,
'
'
-11-
The liquid radwaste holdup tanks were classified by the licensee as quality
group D, non-nuclear safety related.
This classification was consistent
with the licensee's PSAR and NRC Regulatory Guide 1.26.
These tanks were
determined by the licensee to not perform a significant safety function in
service; consequently, the quality standards of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B wet e
not applicable to their fabrication.
Rather, the tanks were required to
meet the API-650 commercial standard, or equivalent.
The inspector found
that the licensee's quality class determination was consistent with the PSAR.
Notwithstanding the minor safety significance of the tanks during service,
th: inspector examined the corrective actions taken by the licensee.
The
inspector found that the licensee had radiographed approximately five percent
of the total length of welds and had contracted with Southwest Research
Institute to evaluate the acceptability of the welds.
In addition to re-
viewing the radiographs, Southwest Research Institute visually examined the
welds . The inspecccr found that Southwest Research Institute had concluded
that the tanks were serviceable. The inspector reviewed several radiographs
and these radiographs indicated that the welds were sound.
Based on the above, the inspector found that the corrective actions taken
by the licensee were adequate to ascertain tne serviceability of the tanks.
This item is closed.
10.
Site Audits
The inspector reviewed the following three audits to ascertain compliance
with the licensee's QA program and procedure QAI-18-1 (Audits): WNP-3/5-EQA
263-2, WNP-3/5-EQA 213-3 a.;d WNP-3/5-EQA 219-2. This review included the
audit schedule, audit plans, audit checklists and auality finding reports.
It appears that the audit schedule is being followed and the audits and
any followup actions required are being conducted per QAI-18-1 and the QA
program. No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified during
this review.
11
Exit Interview
The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1)
at the conclusion of the inspection on April 20, 1979, and summarized the
scope and findings of the inspection.
The licensee was informed of the
matters considered as items of noncompliance.
The inspector expressed his concerns regarding the instance (Paragraph 8.a(3))
wherein the Ebasco field engineer apparently allowed work activities to pro-
ceed without obtaining prior written approval of deviations from testing re-
quired by the specification. The inspector further noted that tne failure
to perform grout testing in a manner required by specification va aggra-
vated by the failure to perform an adequate piglacement survey of equipment
and personnel required to perform concrete testing activities.
00
082