ML19294B767

Final Deficiency Rept Re Omission of Class B Fill Waterstops.Omitted Waterstops Will Be Installed as Separate Areas Become Available for Excavation

ML19294B767
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	02/29/1980
From:	CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML19294B766	List: ML19294B765 ML19294B767
References
NUDOCS 8003050547
Download: ML19294B767 (3)

Text

.

t FINAL REPOP.T 0:, SIGNIFICA::T DEFICIENCY OMISSION OF CLASS "B" FILL "A!!RST0?S Perry "uclear Power Plant Docket "es. 50-440; 50- 21 The Cleveland Electric ~ L1 minating Ccepany February 29, 1980 ,

_ g\\ '4

< c'ra)\ A gh s

d'} Q'$g\>>s#

_j'7 e

'9 '(N(sh\'/'s)%

s;#

f;00305 0

ISTT ODUCTION

[ In accordance with the requirements of 10CFR50.55(e), this is the Final Report on the Significant Deficiency on crission of the Class "B" fill waterstops which were to have surrounded yard piping pene-f

trating Class "A" fill. The report includes

(a) a description of the deficiency; (b) an analysis of the safety implications; and (:.1 a description of the corrective action taken. Sufficient info rma tio n has been provided to permit analysis and evaluat'.on of the deficiency and of the corrective action.

DESCRIPTION As described in the Interim Report, dated January 7, 1080, Great Lakes Construction Company, the safety-related backfill contractor, is required by specification to construct a double Class "B" fill waterstop around all piping which penetrates the Class "A" fill surrounding the main plant buildings. The specification requirement (SP-93, Rev. 1, item 4:02.2.4) states the Class "3" fill waterstops are to be constructed "...as shown on the drawings." Two safety-related backfill drawings contain a note describing the watarstops and a typical sketch . detailing the waterstop construction (E744-ISO and E744-lSS, respectively) . The typical detail shows two minimum three foot :enes of Class "3" fill separated by twelve feet of Class "A" fill along the length of the pipe.

Through a nisinterpretation en the part of the contractor's personnel, the double Class "B" fill waterstops were not being installed per the typical sketch provided. At the time the Project Organization's Resident Geotechnical Engineer identified the grablem, single water-stops varying in vidth from four feet to sixte.en feet had been installed at seven locations and no waterstops had been installed at thirteen locations where required. At the time the contractor initiated the nonconfor=ance report (NR GLC 526), waterstops had been installed at eight additional locations. These eight waterstops conformed to the specification requirements and are not considered to be nonconforcing.

ANALYSIS The underdrain system design includes two low permeability :ones of Class "3" backfill for each exterior piping syst=, whic" crossas th e Class "A" fill area surrounding the main plant buildings. These waterstops are designed to prevent developnent of significant flev paths thro ^ ugh the high perreability bedding aterial of the exteri:r piping systens in the event of a break :r leak in these systens.

0=ission of the double waterstops could lead to flooding of the undardrain system under the conditions Fypothesi:ed during the licensing of the system.

,4Dkh\0 W

WM@s hs N G

~ FINAL REPORT ON SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY PAGE 2 I

k CORRECTIVE ACTION f.

Ncnconformance Report GLC 526 identified twenty locations which did

, not meet specification requirecents with respect to the double Class "3" fill waterstops. At one of these locations, a sixteen foot long Class "B" fill waterstop had been previously installed. The water-stop described has been dispositioned as acceptable since the seepage path through the existing waterstop is greater than the design require-cent. However, this is a one time only acceptance and no single waterstops of any dinension will be accepted in the future. At four additional locations, the piping systems involved are not under constant pressure and the Engineer has determined that waterstops will not be required at these locations.

At the remaining fif teen locations, double Class "B" fill waterstops are to be installed per the specification requirements. The disposition of the nonconformance report requires approval of the locations of the watersteps by the Resident Geotechnical Engineer prior to ex-cavation. The nonconformance report provides the contractor with guidelines for excavating around existing piping systems so that the pipes will not be danaged.

To preclude any further omissions of the waterstops, Observation Action Request 208 was issued to Great Lakes Construction Company requiring inclusion of the requirements in their procedure. CLC procedure TQCP S Revision 5, now includes an item identifying the requiresents for installation of the double Class "B" fill waterstops.

CiC Soils QC inspectors have been indoctrinated to the requirements.

An Ergineering Change Notice (ECM 3404-93-51) was issued to revise the note on drawing E744-130. The revision provides additional clarification as to which areas around the plant require waterstops around piping systems.

S T ARY installation of the omitted waterstops vill be accocplished as the separate areas becoce available for excavation. The repair work will c: e under the scrutiny of the Resident Geotechnical Engineer and the Project Organization Construction Quality Contr al Inspectors. The corrective action taken with regards to the contractor's QC progran will prevent future occurrences of this type. The Significant Deficiency will be rectified upon completion of the repairs outlined on the non- -

conf ormance report. This Final Report closes out the Significant Seficiency; however, tracking of the repair activities will be accocplished en Nonconformance Report CLC 526. The nonconformance report will not b+ closed out until such time that all rep 41 s have been conpleted to Me satisfaction of the Resident 7eotechnical Engineer and the Constructi,n

ality Section.

j \

m.

.