ML20070T059

Suppl to Interim Deficiency Rept Re Structural Welds Failing to Meet Aws Weld Size Requirements.Nde Will Not Be Required.Welds Will Meet Aws Dl.L Requirements Upon Completion of Fillet Weld Qualification

ML20070T059
Person / Time
Site:	Satsop
Issue date:	01/28/1983
From:	Leddick R WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
To:	Sternberg D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
References
10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, D-N-47, GO3-83-82, NUDOCS 8302080177
Download: ML20070T059 (4)

Text

. .

Washington Public Power Supply System Box 1223 Elma, Washington 98541 (206)482-4428 Docket No. 50-508 February 1, 1983 G03 99 Document Control Desk U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

Subject:

POTENTIAL 10CFR50.55(e) DEFICIENCY STRUCTURAL WELDS - FAILURE TO MEET AWS MINIMUM WELD SIZE REQUIREMENTS (D/N #47)

Reference:

Letter, G03-82-1329, Docket No. 50-508, M . R. S. Leddick to Mr. D. M. Sternberg, same subject, dated December 29, 1982.

Attached is a copy of Supply System answers to region V questions concerning the interim 10CFR50.55(e) report (referenced letter) for the subject condition.

Should you have any questions or desire further information, please contact me directly.

c I

R. . Leddick (760)

Program Director, WNP-3 DRC:nj Attachment cc: J. Adams - NESCO, wo/a D. Smithpeter - BPA, wo/a Ebasco - New York, wo/a WNP-3 Files - Richland, w/a 9

1 8302000177 830128 PDR ADOCK 05000508 S PDR

T 1885 E.1.I T E R 5 ATisFIEt; CO.'.D.11 T .i!NT f o. -

WT E sexej. Int ,T etectsTsO'? ' Tills 1.cTTER 10015) (UDF.S t: Oil EsTA31.tsH Al:EW CC5.*.; AIT*.1.* *. .

SITE FILES WPPSS coHREsPONDEt;CE rio. 'o L ' deb ROUTING COMMITMENT CONTROL RB GLASSC0CK 280 GC SORENSEN 340 RE ABEL 701 CM KIM 707 < .0ECTRAPP2 161 n WG ALBERT /NRC 712 DJ LAGROU 751 Er DR C00DY 750 DD O'SULLIVAN 280 $)

KW COOK 709 DL QUAMME 723 8 DE DOBSON 760 R SHETTY 708 w JJ DORAN 723 JP-SLUKA 707

(

January 28, 1983 Yi G03-83-82 g ,,

U. S. Nuclear Regulstory Commission, Region V Office of Inspection and Enforcement y

S h

1450 Maria Lane, Suite 260 Walnut Creek, California 94596-5368

\

t 8

bj ,

A .

Attention: Mr. D. M. Sternberg, Chief m 3r, Reactor Projects Branch No. I  ;- dj f o 3 n. )

Subject:

POTENTIAL 10CFR50.55(e) DEF ENCYsQ E -

E

. STRUCTURAL WELDS - FAILUR' T IET \ 2 M '

AWS MINIMUM WELD SIZE RE( JI 'El.~N h e (D/N #47) 9 -

. E .g P1

Reference:

- Letter,G03-82-D 2. cet N -

8, Mr. R. S. Leddick 2 q @!

to Mr. D. M. Ste nt;'rg .ame s ect, dated December 29, 1982. - t o!

l -c (

The referenced 1.etter provided yous ce with an interim report con . ~

cerning the s 'ect condition. Upon review of the report by your staff, '

? '

additional uee ions were raised that require resolution to facilitate . $

)K NRC evaluc ionf. These concerns were identified to the Supply System via telephone cgnvers tions on January 4,1983. . Specifically, t.hree , P E qi stions wehe sk . as.follows: -

9

\ .

i'5 1  : 'the secob aragraph under " Description of the Problem," what $

do "' 'thout preheat" mean with regards to the nine additional C a c ' ns? g z g u 3

l 2 The third paragraph under " Description of the Problem," was interpretc Y

\) as indicative of a site-wide problem. Is this actually the case? ,y g

g

. s

3) What NDE, if any, was performed on the deficient welds? 3 'sf

1 The Supply System's response to the three questions noted above is as j follows

1

1) The use of the term, "without preheat," to describe the nonconformancc4 was incorrect. The nine welds in question (welded by J. A. Jones) didig glgg@

receive satisfactory preheat in accordance with the requirements of 9 Q AWS Dl.1 and the weld procedure. The nonconformance only involved the, L , U e e use of multiple pass welds in lieu of single pass welds which are gG U 2 required by AWS DI.l. I

Mr. D. M. Sternberg Janery 28, 1983 Page 2 G03-83-82

2) The problem has been specifically identified on the 265 Contract (J. A. Jones). However, due to the nature of the problem (i.e.,

detailer and contractor unfamiliarity with the requirements of AWS Dl.1, Table 2.7), the potential exists that other site contrac-tors may have had similar experiences. Since it would be impractical to inspect every small fillet weld on site to assure the requirements of Table 2.7 were met, it was decided to proceed with corrective actions as if all contractors had experienced the problem. Therefore, each contractor was directed to qualify their fillet weld procedures or demonstrate that they had in some manner provided the necessary heat input or controlled the rate of cooling.

The special restrictions imposed on the qualification testing (detailed in the referenced letter) represent the worst possible conditions (i.e.,

conditions most likely to have resulted in underbead or weld metal cracking). Further clarification of these restrictions to the quali-fication testing is as follows:

e Testingat50Fon3/4-inchplateprgvidesamaximizedcoolingrate.

It should be noted that with the -25 F allowed in the essential var-iables,theeffectivequafifiedtenperatureis25F. AWS Dl.1 requiresUpreheating to 70 F when the base metal temperature is below 32 F.

e By depositing 3/16-inch fillets (or their equivalent in the multi-pass 5/16-inch weld) utilizing the lowest workable amperage, the heat input has been minimized.

e Restraining the joint to prevent plate movement during welding will maximize the shrinkage forces.

3) NDE was not performed on the deficient welds identified in the referenced letter. Upon satisfactory completion of the fillet weld procedure qual-ification, the welds will meet the requirements of AWS D1.1 and the con-dition will be dispositioned use-as-is. Therefore, NDE will not be required.

It should be noted that, in some cases, the wording of the last restriction to the weld qualification testing (detailed on Page 2 of the attachment to the referenced letter) was changed to read, "The parameters of the WPS shall be followed and the amperage shall be the lowest that will produce a visually acceptable weld on 3/4" plate for each welding position used in prcduction." This change was necessary because one contractor's welding procedure specified an amperage range wide enough to cover all thicknesses and positions and the lower half of that range did not produce visually acceptable welds on the required 3/4" plate.

Mr. D. H. Sternberg January 28, 1983 Page 3 G03-83-82 Should you have any questions or desire further information, please contact

, me directly.

l . .

. S. Leddick (760)

Program Director, WNP-3 DRC:nj cc: J. Adams - NESCO D. Smithpeter - BPA Ebasco - New York WNP-3 Files - Richland

)

i

- - __ __ . _ _ _ - . - . , . _ . . . . . .--, -,