ML20023A429
| ML20023A429 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick, South Texas, Comanche Peak, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 09/25/1980 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | Ahearne J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20023A411 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-82-603 NUDOCS 8010280578 | |
| Download: ML20023A429 (5) | |
Text
,
,..[ '.
., l E A ?. 2. E G U L i C F.'
T
J:SS:C'.
- V. j
.. t. 3. t !. G TO *J. D. C.. * " !.
- *: - - g, I
.., 2 9.!wlP i
D'.':A*C.'M G?.:
Chairman Ahearne
=/J:
W. J. Dircks, Executive Director for Operations
- 0P:
Victor Stello, Jr Director, Office of inspection s.
and Enfor:e.ent
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE ON ITEMS ASSIGNED TO IE FROM ECKHARDT HEARING J..
Be. low is thh response to Question #4 of your memorandum of September 23, 1980.
[
4.a.
Summary of Major Brown & Root Nuclear Work Built 2 units (Brunswick 1 & 2)
Building 4 units (Conanche Peak 1 & 2, So. Texas 1 & 2)
Brown & Root constructed a two-unit facility at Brunswick for Carolina Power and Light Company.
The Operating Licenses were issued as follows:
d Unit 2 12/27/74
'f, l[
Unit 1 9/8/76 he architect-engineer was United Engineers and Constructors, the nuclear
,j ystem steam supplier was Genera Electric.
IIf er M 3rown & Root at the current time is the constructor for two units at 6"gP)h:omanche Peak for the Texas Utilities Generating Co.
~U The Construction
- [iP'p.
Pemits for the units were both issued on 12/19/74.
The architect-engineer is Gibbs' and Hill and'the nuclear steam system supplier is g
Brown & Root at the current time is also the constructor for two units at South Texas for Houston Lighting and Power Company. The Construction Permits were issued on 12/22/75.
Brown & Root is also the architect-engineer and the nuclear steam system supplier is Westinghouse.
1 CONTACT:
. E. Shewmaker, IE 49-27551 XA Copy Has Been Sent to PDik N
b "go t o> 9of7
/
hY 83y
~
l
.s x
e Chairman Ahearne.
4.b.
Congressman Markey's questions and statements regarding the high percentage' of unacceptable welds found in those welds examined i
apparently arose from the information contained on pages 128, line 23 through 135,~ 11ne 25-of the NRC transcript' of the public meeting held l
on August 19, 1980.
The numbers -that were referred to by Congressman.
Markey are associated with ~ structural steel welds performed under the -
- Structural Welding. Code (AUS Dl.1-1975) of the American !?elding Society.
Regarding when the NRC was made aware of the information we feel it_ is also necessary to understand why this information was obtained.
As a result of:the special investigation performed during'the period of-s, November 1979 through February 1980 the staff concluded that safety-related welding completed at the site needed review. The Order to Show c
Cause issued on April 30, 1980 addressed this requirement-in Section V.A(3)(a) (see page 15 of the Order).
Note that this provision of the Order addressed all safety-related welding, including civil-structural and piping, which means all safety-related welding completed under several industry codes / standards.
Prior. to the Order the licensee, on April 11,1980, reported that a stop work order had.been imposed on safety-related and code welding.
On April 17 -1980 the NRC issued in Immediate Action Letter confirming the halting of safety-related welding except that under the' USA Standard.
B31.7, Nuclear Power Piping standard.
In the licensee's ' July 28, 1980 response to the Order to Show Cause, the results of the review of the safety-related welding were presented. The i
licensee reviewed two types of weldina:
that governed by the applicable ASME Code and that governed by the AWS Code.
The review-disclosed that-there were problems with pipe welding in terms of weld procedures, welder qualifications, inspection qualifications.and nondestructive a
test techniques and results.
.m The Ai!S structural welding review resulted in four-' specific findings.
L-1.
Lack of evidence that the inspectors in all cases performed all in-process checks on all welds, 1.
L 2.
lack of sufficient traceability of final inspection documentation in all cases for each weld or group of welds, 3.
lack of assurance that all existing documentation represents all completed field welds, and i
1 s
- d
Chairman Ahearne '
4.
lack of identifiable documentation that welders who were qualified in limited positions were always welding.within their qualifications.
It was also noted in the submittal. that all of the documentation was.
not necessarily required by the Code or project procedures, but were elements which could have aided the: review Task Force in evaluating completed welds from the viewpoint of. a document review.
The licensee
'then selected, on a random basis, ~ seventy-nine (79) completed safety-related structural steel welds ~ for visual examination.
Certain surface -
irregularities were.found on sixty-one.(61) of those welds examined.
The specific items of irregularities included undersized welds,' improper contour, overlap, undercut and arc strikes.
The information presented by the licensee in the prepared statement that was presented verbally is contained on pages-37 and 38 of the public 9
meeting transcript. As a result of this' information the licensee -
submitted, the staff questioned the licensee further at the public meeting about these structural welds.
It is that exchange addressed in the transcript beginning on page 128
~
which was apparently referred to by Congressman Markey. The numbers stated from memory by the licensee at' the public meeting were not exact as was' indicated by the speakers, Mr. Geurts ~and Mr. Hawks of Brown &
Root.
The point was that a high number of defects were found in those accessible welds re-examined visually and the staff questioned the
. licensee on the total number of welds this sample was to represent.
The approximate number given was 2000 (accessible and inaccessible).
The types of defects causing this high defect rate were noted along with the fact that about half could be-repaired by mechanical means such as grinding while the other half might require some rewelding. The visual-insoection criteria from-the AWS Code-against which the reinspection.
judg ;ents were made are provided in the enclosure.
Therefore, the first.
tire the I;RC specifically knew any' numbers associated with the results'
,c
.of the licensee's review of AWS structural welds was on July 29, 1980 when the July. 28, ;1980 response to the Order was' received.
The first time the liRC was aware that the sample visually reinspected was to represent about 2000 welds occurred at the public meeting on August~ 19, 1980.
- 'hile based on the types of defects found in these structural welds it -
n is not expected there would be any significant reductions in. structural-adequacy unless some of the undersized welds were significantly undersized, the staff ' pursued the matter with the licensee at the-public meeting.
The end result is that that licensee will now visually examine all accessible structural welds and then use that data to assess the condition
- d
Chainnan Ahearne
_ 4,,
of the few (thought to be about 70 out of abo'ut 2000) inaccessible welds.
It should be noted that in general structural welds and the structures in which they are used in. this case have structural redundancy as opposed to a piping seam or joint weld.
Therefore, from the viewpoint of structural safety significance the defects are probably not important.
The fact that the defects were not ident*fied before is significant in that it reflects on the' previous status of the licensee's execution of the QA Program and the attention to detailed requirements.
The licensee will now have to complete visual inspection of the remaining accessible structural welds and take the necessary. corrective actions prescribed in the AWS Code which are provided in the enclosure.
.J.
As outlined in the recent Coamission Infonnation Paper entitled " Plan for the Resumption of Currently Haltad Construction At the South Texas Project," the staff will be closely nionitoring these activities.
If there are further questions please contact us.
//
A Victor Stello,'Jr.
Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement
Enclosure:
Extracts from AWS DI.1-75 cc/w enclosure:
Commissioner Gilinsky Commissioner Hendrie
.a Comissioner Bradford
. Secretary i
c
.~
.e
.Chaircan Ahearne <
of the few (thought to.be about 70 out of about 2000) inaccessible welds.
)
It should be noted that in general structural welds and the structures E
in which they are used intthis case have structural redundancy as opposed (i
to a piping sean or joint weld.
Therefore, from the viewpoint of f
- structural safety significance the defects are probably not important, g!
The fact that the defects were not identified before is significant in d.
that it reflects on the previous status of the licensee's execution of f
the Q4 Program and the attention to detailed requirements.
,3e The licensee will now have to complete visual inspection of the remaining '
H accessible structural welds and take the necessary corrective actions E
prescribed in the AUS Code which are provided in the enclosure.
n
.q4 As outlined in the recent Cornission Information Paper entitled " Plan 3:
for the Resumption of Currently Halted Construction At the South Texas 4]
4 Project," the staff will be closely monitoring these activities.
=
If there art furthar qutstions please contact us.-
j;[E p:..
=
- J
' Victor Stello, Jr.
f.
Director Office of Inspection
- E' and Enforcement ip'
Enclosure:
Extracts from i=
.. ~
A;:S Dl.1-75
_ t~.=
E=
cc/w enclosunt:
[~@
Cor.issioner Gilinsky c :-
(j.p Co.nissioner Hendrie Co r:issioner Bradford S?cretary tri g..
. Distribution:
WP l
W. J. Dircks, EDO V. Stello, IE IE Files
~
E. K. Cornell, EDO R.'C. DeYoung, IE Central Files
?.6 1:
T. Rehm, ED3 D. Thompson, IE IE Reading jE L. W. Barry, CON H. D. Thornburg, IE ED0 Reading (9636)
[i' N. Haller,.9A J. M. Taylor, IE B. Matosko IE i..
H. R. Denton, HRR G. W. Reinmuth,' IE (Hll-2333-H06)
Ei R. B. Minogue, SD R. E. Shewmaker IE
!EE H. K. Shapar, ELD J. P. Murray, ELD EDO p5.
- Es 9/ /80 E
.R..C.I..:..I..E.....cf.
3/_.D : R CI.:..I..E.......
.D.D..:.RC.. I
...D.:..R.C. I :
DD:IE D:IE N
-.=-
m
....z 7
.Gi.l.?..e.y..m..u..t..h.........J!.,..M...y
.H...D.T...,,.....r.g..
..R..C..D...e.Y..o..u..n.g.....
R..E..S..h..e..m...... e........
. in m,,...,
.VS te..l l..o..........
WRE.9.:.J.t..... 9.le480............ 9/ d8%........9$.1.89,,,,,,,,,,,,,9,/,,, J,8 0,,,,,,,,,,9/,,,f80,,,,,,,
y
=cm mi,.m mu
- ..........b i =
ps
-