ML20062E773
| ML20062E773 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Washington Public Power Supply System |
| Issue date: | 07/02/1982 |
| From: | Mazur D WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM |
| To: | Faulkenberry R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20062E746 | List: |
| References | |
| GO1-82-0411, GO1-82-411, NUDOCS 8208100323 | |
| Download: ML20062E773 (6) | |
Text
f 5}b Washington Public Power Supply System P.O. Box 968 3000 GeorgeWashingtonWay Richland, Washington 99352,/((50.91372-5000
' :0! 3 July 2, 1982 j.
G01-82-0411 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region V 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596 Attention:
R. H. Faulkenberry
Subject:
NUCLEAR PROJECTS 1 AND 4 NRC INSPECTION WNP-1/4 DATES OF INSPECTION APRIL l-30, 1982 j
DOCKET N05. 50-460 AND 50-513 CONSTRUCTION PERMIT NOS. CPPR-134 AND -174
Reference:
Letter RH Faulkenberry to RW Root NRC Inspection at WNP-1/4 Site dated June 8, 1982 The above referenced letter delineated the results of the April 1-30, 1982 inspection of activities authorized by NRC Construction Permits Nos. CPPR-134 and -174.
Further, Inspection Report (Nos. 50-460/82-06, 50-513/82-04) identified an Open Noncompliance Item (460/79-13-02),
related to weld weave widths which exceeded procedural limits that required clarification by the Supply System.
The specific finding, as identified in Report-460/79-13, and the Supply System amended response is provided herewith as Appendix A.
hW/,
D. W. Mazur
^
Acting Program Director DWM:JMS:lm cc: CR Bryant, BPA (399)
JP Laspa, Bechtel (360)
V. Mani, UE&C (897)
V. Stello, Director of Inspection, NRC FDCC (899) 8208100323 820804 PDR ADOCK 050J0460'
\\
PDR b1 ~YI -
O
AMMENDED SUPPLY SYSTEM RESPONSE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN AND RESULTS ACHIEVED The original response to th'is item of noncompliance indicated that all craft superintendents, welders, and QC personnel would be trained in the specific limitations for weld weave on both stainless and carbon steel pipe. This activity was performed as stated; however, for the period from December 1,1979, through July 1,1980, the weld weave criteria was relaxed, allowing a somewhat wider weave than that in effect at the time of the NRC inspection. The Supply System, in conjunc-tion with United Engineers and Constructors (UE&C), during this same time period (December / July) completed an Intergranular Stress Corrosion Study and concluded that the related weld weave requirements were not as conservative as they would have liked, and mandated that they be changed to be more conservative without being as restrictive as the original criteria.
The more liberal weld weave criteria used during the aforementioned six (6) month period was analyzed by UE&C Engineering to ascertain whether or not it represented a significant concern relative to inducing intergranular stress cracking.
It was concluded by Engineering that the use of the more liberal welding parameters would not result in conditions conducive to cracking.
To assure that all of the welds made during this period fell within acceptable limits, J. A. Jones performed a reinspection of all welds made during the subject period.
However, not all of the weld weave widths could be measured. This is because a number of the welds had been ground flush for inservice inspection. The results of that inspection activity were transmitted to UE&C Engineering for evaluation.
Engineering has concluded that all of the welds made during the period in question are acceptable as is, and no further action is required. The welds that were ground flush were acceptable by virtue of the fact that they will be monitored continuously as part of the inservice inspection program.
The welds made prior to the initial NRC finaing have also been reinspected and those that failed to comply with the weld weave criteria were identi-fied on J. A. Jones Contractor Nonconformance Reports (CNCRs).
The CNCRs generated by J. A. Jones were dispositioned by UE&C Engineering in accordance with approved procedures.
All of the welders, craft superintendents and QC Inspectors have been trained in the new weld weave criteria and all of the appropriate proce-dures have been revised accordingly.
t i
~
APPENDIX A NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION V 1450 MARIA LANE, SUITE 210 WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596 DOCKET N0. 460 CONSTRUCTION PERMIT NO. CPPR-134 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Based upon the results of NRC inspection activities conducted by the resi-dent inspector during the period of December 1-31, 1979, it appears that one of your activities was not conducted in full compliance with conditions of your NRC Construction' Permit No. CPPR-134 as indicated below.
Criterion 9 of Appendix B of 10CFR50 requires that measures shall be esta-blished to assure that special processes, including welding..., are con-trolled and accomplished by procedures, in accordance with applicable codes, standards, specifications, criteria, and other special requirements.
Section 17 of the PSAR describes implementation of Appendix B, and Section
.3.12 describes Regulatory Guides 1.31 and 1.44.
The WPPSS contract speci-fication #257 Section 17A-3 item 3.1. 2.1 requires that " Weld procedures shall include instructions governing heat input---bead width shall be maximum of 3 times the core diameter for the manual SMAW." The contractor procedure JAJ-WP-P8-1 includes instructions on weld technique, regarding oscillation, -- 3 times electrode core diameter. (i.e.', 3/8-inch maximum weave.)
Contrary to the above, on December 17, 1979, examples where the maximum width of 3/8-inch weld weave was exceeded were identified in auxiliary feedwater and purification system piping in completed and inspected welds numbered F411499-021 and F411975-006. These welds contained excessive weaves of 3/4-inch and 5/8-inch respectively.
This is an infraction.
i i
i
APPENDIX A NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION V 1450 MARIA LANE, SUITE 210 WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596 DOCKET N0. 460 CONSTRUCTION PERMIT N0. CPPR-134 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Based upon the results of NRC inspection activities _ conducted by the resi-dent inspector during the period of December 1-31, 1979, it appears that one of your activities was not conducted in full compliance with conditions of your NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-134 as indicated below.
Criterion 9 of Appendix B of 10CFR50 requires that measures shall be esta-blished to assure that special processes, including welding..., are con-trolled and accomplished by procedures, in accordance with applicable codes, standards, specifications, criteria, and other special requirements.
Section 17 of the PSAR describes implementation of Appendix B, and Section 3.12 describes Regulatory Guides 1.31.and 1.44.
The WPPSS contract speci-fication #257 Section 17A-3 item 3.1. 2.1 requires that " Weld procedures shall include instructions governing heat input---bead width shall be maximum of 3 times the core diameter for the manual SMAW." The contractor procedure JAJ-WP-P8-1 includes instructions on weld technique, regarding oscillation, -- 3 times electrode core diameter. (i.e., 3/8-inch maximum weave.)
Contrary to the above, on December 17, 1979, examples where the maximum width of 3/8-inch weld weave was exceeded were identified in auxiliary feedwater and purification system piping in completed and inspected welds numbered F411499-021 and F411975-006. These welas contained excessive weaves of 3/4-inch and 5/8-inch respectively.
This is an infraction.
I
1 AMMENDED SUPPLY SYSTEM RESPONSE CORR'ECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN AND RESULTS ACHIEVED The original. response to this item of noncompliance indicated that all craft superintendents, welders, ana QC personnel would be trained in the specific limitations for wald weave on both stainless and carbon steel pipe.
This activity was performed as stated; however, for the period from December 1, 1979, through July 1, 1980, the weld weave criteria was relaxed, allowing a somewhat wider weave than that in effect at the time of the NRC inspection. - The Supply System, in conjunc-tion with United Engineers and Constructors (UE&C), during this same time period (December / July) completed an Intergranular Stress Cerrosion Study and concluded that the related weld weave requirements were not as conservative as they would have liked, and mandated that they be changed to be more conservative without being as restrictive as the original criteria.
The more liberal weld weave criteria used during the aforementioned six (6) month period was analyzed by UE&C Engineering to ascertain whether or not it represented a significant concern relative to inducing intergranular stress cracking.
It was concluded by Engineering that the use of the more liberal welding parameters would not result in conditions conducive to cracking. To assure that all of the welds made during this period fell within acceptable limits, J. A. Jones performed a reinspection of all welds made during the subject period.
However, not all of the weld weave widths could be measured. This is because a number of the welds had been ground flush for inservice inspection. The results of that inspection activity were transmitted to.UE&C Engineering for evaluation.
Engineering has concluded that all of the welds made during the period in question are acceptable as is, and no further action is required.
The welds that were ground.
flush were acceptable by virtue of the fact that they will be monitored continuously as part of the inservice inspection program.
The welds made prior to the initial NRC finding have also been reinspected and those that failed to comply with the weld weave criteria were identi-fied on J. A. Jones Contractor Nonconformance Reports (CNCRs).
The CNCRs generated by J. A. Jones were dispositioned by UE&C Engineering in accordance with approved procedures.
All of the welders, craft superintendents and QC Inspectors have been trained in the new weld weave criteria and all of the appropriate proce-dures have been revised accordingly.
L
O STATE OF WASHINGTON)
)
COUNTY OF BENTON
)
R. W. Root, being first duly sworn, deposes and says:
That he is the Assistant Program Director-Construction and has been delegated the full responsibility and authority to act for the Program Director, WNP-1/4, for the WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM, the applicant herein; that he is authorized to submit the foregoing on behalf of said applicant; that he has read the foregoing and knows the contents thereof; and believes the same to be true to the best of his knowledge.
7//
DATED
, 1982
/
n b
/
R. ' W. ROOT ~
' i'
)
On this day personally appeared before me R. W. ROOT to me know to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he signed the same as his free act and deed for the uses and pur--
poses therein mentioned.
GIVEN under my hand and seal this foy day of f;gd
, 1982 C/ " y ppI/b 1
Notfary Public in and for the State of Washington j
Residing at /////z/g,rpf
-