ML20079K075

Forwards Supplemental Rept to Summary Rept for QA Engineering Task Force Review of Installed Structures/ Components.Info Based on Followup Audit Which Revealed Deficient Conditions

ML20079K075
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	11/21/1983
From:	Leddick R LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	Jay Collins NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
References
W3K83-1808, NUDOCS 8401240505
Download: ML20079K075 (7)

Text

.l I

LOUISIANA ,4ecseAmO~Oeernser . -o saxsOOs P O W E R & L I G H T! NEW OALEANE LOUISIANA 70174-6008 4 (504)366-2345 Ul20YsEsE November 21, 1983 ROTH S. LEDDICK Senior Vice President Nuclear Operations Mr. John T. Collins, Regional Administrator, Region IV W3K83-1808 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Q-3-A35.01 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76012

SUBJECT:

Waterford SES Unit No. 3 Docket No. 50-382 Supplemental Report to the Summary Report for ;he Quality Assurance /

Engineering Task Force Review of Installed Structures / Components

REFERENCE:

LP&L Letter W3I83-0115, L. V. Maurin to J. T. Collins, dated April 4, 1983

Dear Mr. Collins:

LP&L submitted the above referenced report providing a summary of the results of the Task Force Review. In this report, LP&L addressed the results noted in the specific areas reviewed under the limited scope of the assigned task. Simultaneous with the submittal of the Summary Report, LP&L Audit W3S-83-QP19.1/W3S-83-3 was submitted to Ebasco in accordance with the LP&L Quality Assurance Program. As a result of the LP&L/Ebasco follow-up on the audit, it became evident that certain deficient conditions would require correctiva actions not specified at the time of issuing the Summary Report. This Supplemental Report is submitted to update the Summary Report and to provide additional information.

LP&L Audit W3S-83-QP19.1/W3S-83-3 has been closed in accordance with the LP&L Quality Assurance Program. Attached is the Supplemental Report delineating specific items on a per-contractor basis.

Should you have any questions or require further information on the matter. please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours very truly,

/ ') s

/

. Led ick RSL/TFG/gc ,

i Attachments cc: E. L. Blake W. M. Stevenson R. C. DeYoung l

8401240505 831121 /

PDR ADOCK 05000302 $

i S PDR (

SUPPLEMENTAL

SUMMARY

REPORT ACTION PLAN FOR TASK FORCE REVIEW OF INSTALLED STRUCTURES / COMPONENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

As a result of USNRC Enforcement Action EA82-109, a management decision was initiated by LP&L to organize a Task Force to perform Quality Records review and physical verification of selected activities of contractors who performed safety related work prior to June 1, 1982. The Task Force assigned the implementation was comprised of personnel from the LP&L Quality Assurance Group and the LP&L Nuclear Project Support Group. The action plan for the Task Force was approved by the LP&L Senior Vice President-Operations. LP&L procedure QP 19.1, " Task Force Installation Verification" was approved and issued on January 11, 1983, under the direction of the Quality Assurance Manager. The QP provided the necessary direction for the implementation methods and reporting mechanisms to be followed. Appendices to QP 19.1 contained specific directions in the various discipline areas as follows:

Electrical Mechanical Civil Structural Testing Individual contractors selected for review included:

Fischbach & Moore, Inc. (F&M)

NISCO Combustion Engineering (CE)

Tompkins-Beckwith (selected radiographs) (T-B)

Nooter, Inc.

American Bridge Chicago Bridge & Iron (CB&I)

G.E.0. Testing (NDE & Construction Materials Testing (CMT) personnel qualification)

Peabody Testing Lab (concrete)

Sline Industrial Painting Ebasco Force Account (EBFA)

Ebasco (review of soils calculations)

Subsequent to issuance of the initial Summary Report, dated April 8, 1983 and the responses supplied to the LP&L Quality Assurance Audit W3S-83-3, it was determined that a Supplemental Summary Report was required. Contained in Section 2.0,

SUMMARY

, is the updated status relating to areas examined during the Task Force Review, and related areas pertaining to the Contractor's program and/or installations.

1

U 2.0

SUMMARY

(By Discipline)

2.1 Electrical

(F&M)

Based on welding deficiencies noted in W3S-83-3, Ebasco directed F6M to perform a 10% reinspection of welded connections of the cable tray supports. As a result of this reinspection effort, Ebasco Nonconformance Reports W3-6314, W3-6463, W3-6421, W3-6367, and W3-3145 were issued indicating failure to adequately inspect welds. Ebasco is presently evaluating disposition of the above NCR's to determine further action, if needed.

Additional concerns, not pursuant to the Task Force Review, are NRC infractions 83-09-1, 83-13-2, and Significant Construction Deficiency No. 90.

Ebasco Quality Assurance Installation Records Group (QAIRG) review of the F&M records is complete and in vault.

2.2 Mechanical (NISCO and CE) 2.2.1 NISCO - The documentation reviewed indicated compliance with NISCO procedures and no corrective actions were required. The physical verification performed indicated that the installation of the items inspected was in ac-cordance with drawings.

The Ebasco QAIRG records review of NISCO records was accomplished on a system basis and is complete.

2.2.2 COMBUSTION ENGINEERTNG (C-E) - The documentation review indicated compliance with the CE Avery Facility Procedures and was acceptable. Reeponses supplied as a result of the two (2) findings are acceptable.

The Ebasco QAIRG review of these records is by Startup System, and is current to support turnover. The review is 50% complete and is expected to be complete in January, 1984,

2.3 CIVIL

(J.A. JONES, LA INDUSTRIES, PEABODY) 2.3.1 In lieu of a physical verification, which was not feasible at this later stage of construction, Ebasco supplied LP&L with data on the adequacy of soils preparation and concrete placement.

The LP&L Nuclear Project Support Group reviewed this information and provided this Task Force Review with a Verification of Concrete and Scils providing an overview on the controls and verification progrcas in the areas of Class A backfill, concrete placement, and dewatering / settlement.

2

O o

• LP&L secured the services of Harstead Engineering Associates, Inc.

to perform an independent analysis of the cracks and water seepage in the foundation mat design and placement. Results of evaluations are as follows:

HEA Report No. 8304-1 Scope: a) Engineering criteria employed in preparation of site b) Cracking and leakage in basemat c) Laboratory tests performed en water & leachate samples d) Stability calculations performed for the steel Containment Vessel

SUMMARY

"In conclusion, there is no evidence of any process which has been or could be detrimental to the structural integrity of the foundation mat."

HEA Report No. 8304-2 Scope: a) The geometric criteria employed by Ebasco to formulate the finite model used to evaluate the structural adequacy of basemat b) The magnitudes and distribution of the loads employed by Ebasco to evaluate the structural adequacy c) A benchmark comparison between the initial HEA Test run against the comparable Ebasco basemat computer analysic d) A detailed comparison between a final HEA computer analysis and the corresponding basemat shear and moment capacity.

SUMMARY

"It is our conclusion that the design of the mat is extremely conservative, which, under the circumstances in which the design was carried out, we consider prudent and justifiable. Therefore, we see no need for.any remedial measures or the necessary of additional analysis."

l 2.3.1.1 The Ebasco QAIRG review of these records is by placement. This review is approximately 8%

complete and scheduled to be completed by December, 1983.

2.' STRUCTURAL: (American Bridge, Nooter, Sline, and Chicago Bridge & Iron) 2.4.1 American Bridge - The physical walkdown of the selected area of review indicated the engineered drawings reflect the as-built configuration with the exceptions as noted in audit.

As a result of the Task Force Audit W3S-83-3, Ebasco QAIRG review of records and the Ebasco QA Surveillance Group's review 3

4 M O of additional installed structural steel, it was determined that a reverification of the accessible bolted and welded connections would be required. This reverification program is being accomplished at this time with the anticipated completion date of December 1963.

NRC lnfraction 83-17 addresses Ebasco's failure to provide the required American Bridge safety-related documentation in accordance with established procedures. Significant Construction Deficiency No. 78 identified structural steel deficiencies and is being pro-cessed toward issuance of a Final Report. Documentation for the American Bridge activities are reviewed in bulk, by drawing. Review will be ongoing through the reverification program.

2.4.2 Nooter - The physical walkdown of the selected areas indicated welding deficiencies which were documented in Audit W3S-83-3, and involved corrective action. Minor problems were noted with regard to as-built configuration. Additional physical walkdowns performed by LP&L and Ebasco QA have found similar welding deficiencies. This is documented on Nonconformance Report W3-6560 and Discrepancy Notice DN-SQ-0430. Ebasco is currently reinspecting a percentage of all remaining pools and liners to evaluate the extent of the problems noted.

Ebasco has completed the documentation review of Nooter records.

2.4.3 Chicago Bridge & Iron - Hot Functional Testing being performed during the period of the Task Force Review prevented the antici-pated physical walkdown of the structural materials installed by CB&I. As an alternate method, a review of selected radiographic documentation was performed. This review indicated acceptability.

Additional information on CB&I activities is contained in section 2.5.3 of this report .

The review of the safety related purchase order documentation supporting CB&I activities is complete. Records were reviewed by Ebasco in bulk as submitted by the vendor.

2.4.4 Sline - The physical walkdown performed in the selected service Level Il areas indicated that the correct coating systems are installed as required.

The records for Sline are being reviewed in bulk. The Ebasco review is approximately 10% complete with an expected completion date of January, 1984.

2.5 TESTING

(GEO, Peabody, T&E)

Review of testing activities performed pertained to the following three (3) areas:

2.5.1 G.E.O. Testing - The Task Force reviewed documentation supporting the qualifications of nondestructive examinations (NDE) and construction materials testing (CMT) personnel. No items of noncompliance were found for NDE personnel qualifications.

4

- A w - a  : __

Deficiencies as noted in W3S-83-3 required a 100% review of j personnel qualifications in the CMT area. Response to W3S-83-3,

~

Reaudit 2, indicated acceptability of corrective action.

GEO records are reviewed by system as presented within a con-tractor's installation package.

l 2.5.2 Peabody Testing - The Task Force reviewed selected lab reports supporting testing of concrete. Documentation indicated i acceptability. In cases where materials did not adhere to specific conditions, documentation had been generated and corrective action

. had been initiated and referenced.

2.5.3 NDE (Radiography) - The radiographic review was accomplished by the LP&L Level III examiner and consisted of examining selected

, radiographs of activities performed by CB&I and Tompkins-Beckwith.

The radiographs of CB&I had been previously reviewed and accepted by CB&I and Ebasco. The Tompkins-Beckwith radiographs werc per-formed and evaluated by Peabody Testing with subsequent review by Ebasco. The review as performed by the Task Force Auditor was to provide that the CB&I and the Peabody initial evaluation and the Ebasco review of the radiographs were adequate and ac-ceptable in the areas examined. All radiographs reviewed were acceptable.

3.0 Contractor Records Review Status:

} 3.1 The following contractors were not part of the Task Force Review, but are included in this supplemental summary report to provide a status of records review as of September 28, 1983.

3.1.1 B & B Insulators - This documentation is currently being reviewed by Ebasco in bulk on a " building" basis and is approximately 5%

complete. Estimated date of completion is mid-January, 1984.

3.1.2 Gulf Engineering - These records were reviewed by systems.

Ebasco's review is complete and records are in Ebssco QA t vault.

3.1.3 Mercury - The tubing and hydrostatic records are reviewed by system; supports, hangers, instrument mounts, and tube track are reviewed in bulk. The records review for tubing and hydrostatic records is essentially complete. The review of tube track and supports is approximately 45% complete with an expected completion date of January, 1964.

Additional concerns are NRC Infractions 83-09-2, and 83-13-2.

4 3.1.4 Tompkins-Beckwith - The review of piping documentation for turnover

, to LP&L is currently underway and is being accomplished on a system basis. Problems originally encountered in LP&L QA's review have been resolved allowing for acceptance of T&B piping packages.

)

5 4

-,e-- ,.

y gw-,,,, - - - - , ,e,w

,--,--3 -n- -,--,-,-----_~-,y , ,,v,,,-,, ,- ,w- g ,-a, , - - - - -.m n - - - - - - - ------n---, - . - - - , - - --~r--------

v LP&L's review of pipe supports has identified deficiencies in both the documentation review and physical walkdown areas. Thes2 deficiencies are being addressed by Ebasco Quality Assurance Installation Records Group and Ebasco Engineering.

Additional concerns are NRC Infraction 83-13-02 and SCD # 60.

Ebasco's review of T&B records is as follows:

The piping documentation was reviewed on a system basis. The hangers, whip-restraints, and miscellaneous steel are bulk reviewed by component identification. The piping review is essentially complete. The hanger review is scheduled for completion by December 31, 1983.

3.1.5 Waldinger - The Waldinger HVAC contract was assumed by Ebasco HVAC.

Review was accomplished in bulk, by drawing and is complete.

3.1.6 Ebasco Engineering, Ebasco Construction Due to the nature of this contract and the constantly expanding scope of work, a physical verification of installation and a records review will be ongoing through the construction activities.

As the scope of work being assumed by Ebasco Construction increases, LP&L Construction QA has increased the monitoring of EC activities. Areas of primary attention relate to work control practices and installation documentation.

i

}

s 6

i i

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