ML20115A121
Text
f
,~
~
I
' 8' -
(
UNITED STATES
[
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5
- E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
+#l March 29, 1984 T
Docket No. 50-382 NOTE FOR:
D.G. Eisenhut, D/,DL
[
FROM:
D.M. Crutchfield,,WTL
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF CAT FINDINGS AT WATERFORD
~
On March 23, 1984 I attended the exit interview with LP&L and the NRC CAT staff.
Results of inspections in seven areas were presented.
It was emphasized that the CAT effort was not intended to resolve any allegations although there may have been some overlap.
The first discussion was the electrical and instrumentation area.
It was noted that of 3500 fe_et of electrical raceway checked, there were 80 situations where the FSAR commitments were not met.
These were related'.to safety related train separation In some cases ~ redundant cable trays were less than 1 inch apart and had no covers. Another a.rea highlighted was the
^ "
fact that some 17 of 20 safety related cable tray supports examined have loads on them that are not shown on the design.
In some cases these loads
~
are 50% greater than allowable.
The next area presented was the mechanical one. Specifically examined were piping, supports, restraints and HVAC.
Over 1000 feet of piping were looked at and 3 of 20 hangers / restraints had problems of significance.
There we're -
some minor issues dealing with pipe-to-structure interferences that need to be resolved. There were several problems associated with supports and restraints (e.g., unspread cotter pins, and loose nu'ts). Of more concern is the fact that the LP&L walkdown of the systems reviewed by the NRC team was, not effective in finding this type of thing.
The applicant's as-built progranisquestionableandalargersampleneedsgobeexamined.
The next area discussed was the civil / structural one. Concrete pours, material certs, testing, cadwelding, backfilling and casonry walls were examined.
There were some document and records problems dealing with misplaced pages and questions of cadwelder testing frequency discrepancies.
A question relative to design adequacy of masonry walls needs to be reviewed.
The welding and NDE efforts were discussed next.
Included in that review were 930 pipe welds, 330 structural welds, 58 procedures, and 156 welder cualifications.
In the HVAC there were some welds that did not meet the requirements and.LP&L is getting an engineering review of the significance of that. A.s a result of the NDE reviews there is.one main steam line penetration that has a defect that needs to be addressed.
8404110496.840329 gofj)-$y 143 CF ADOCK 05000 t
s/u 4
c,e_
y
., _.,. _.-,s.
7,4.,
,,.,.,,.....,--7-,,,,7,
....,,,._,r.,
,.,._r-.y
..,y
f D.G. Eisenhut, D/DL March 29, 1984
)
Material traceability was then discussed to verify that safety related equipment was procured, received, installed, and properly documented. The only area where problems were identified were fasteners. There were 21 deficiencies in 37 areas examined including apparent wrong bolting material and lack of markings.
The Design Control Process was reviewed.
In some cases design or field changes were not incorporated into the plant r,ecord drawings and documents.
The final area examined and reported on was the Corrective Action System.
Non-Conformance Reports and Deficiency Notices were reviewed. Some procedural issues related to upgrading of DN's and the use of hold tags for NCR's were raised.
In summary, the applicant was told that they should look broader than the specific issues found by the team. Of particular concern were those items found previously during the normal inspection program that the applicant indicated would be corrected but the team found not fixed. The Region IV Administrator informed the applicant that several examples of actions that the applicant had committed to take were found to have not been completed and this raised questions as to adequacy of the applicants corrective actions.
Please note that the above items are preliminary and we must await the final report for details.
Original signed by D.M. -Crutchfield, WTL cc:
R. Heishman D+b DL
//4 d ln n d / k DC eld:cc M
/84 m ke L fed, a
6
D C
t GADSBY & HANNAH ONE POST OFriCE SOUARE 437 MADISON AVENVE H29 TWENTIETpt STREET, N W BOSTON, M ASS ACHUSETTS O2109 NEW YORK N Y 80022 WASHINGTON. O C 20036 (687) 357-8700 (202) 347-3434 m e.. n. 4A....
m,.o.n...o.
CA.LE G ADe* A*8 February 23, 1984 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Director FREEDOM OF INFORM /'!!
Office of Administration ACT RE UEST U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission d
Washington, D.C.
20555 6fst kl 2-MW Re:
Freedom Of Information Act Request
Dear Sir:
Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C.
- 552, et seg, as amended, and the implementing regulations appearing at TO C.F.R.
Part 9 et seg, request is hereby made for production, for inspection and copying, of the documents identified in the numbered paragraphs below.
As used in those numbered paragraphs, the term " Document" means any recorded information or recorded communication in whatever form, including without limitation, correspondence, letters, memoranda, including any memorandum or report of a meeting or telephone or other conversation, journal, diary, contract, agreement, study, report, handwritten or other note, sketch, picture, plan, chart, computer print-out or card, or any other written, recorded, transcribed, filmed or graphic matter.
" Document" also means all copies of documents, by whatever means made, if the copy bears any other marking or notation not found on the original.
With this defini* ion in mind, request is hereby made for the following materials:
1.
Any Document or Documents not available to the public in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
("N.R.C.")
Public Document Reading Room as of January 1, 1984 that refer to or in any way relate to Mercury Company of Norwood, Inc.
(" Mercury") or the work performed by Mercury in connection with the construction of a nuclear powered steam electric generating installation on the West Bank j
of the Mississippi River between Taft and Killona 1
in St. Charles Parish, Louisiana, about twenty-five D
^E rd s t o L_
- j
p C
i miles west of New Orleans (hereinafter referred to as "Waterford III").
Some of the documents pertaining to Waterford III that are available in the N.R.C.
Public Document Reading Room are filed under the Docket No. 50-382.
2.
Any Document or Documents not available to the public in the N.R.C. Public Document Reading Room as of January 1, 1984 that refer to or in any way relate to Ebasco Services, Inc. ("Ebasco") or the work performed by Ebasco in connection with the construction of Waterford III.
3.
Any Document or Documents not available to the public in the N.R.C. Public Document Reading Room as of January 1, 1984 that refer or in any way relate to Louisiana Power & Light Company ("LP&L")
or to LP&L's involvement in the construction of Waterford III.
4.
Originals or copies of any contract or contracts
+
contemplated or entered into between Ebasco and LP&L, including any modifications, changes or amendments to such contracts.
5.
Any Document or Documents not available in the N.R.C. Public Document Reading Room as of January 1, 1984 that refer to or in any way relate to the design or~ installation of instrumentation equipment on Waterford III.
In the event that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission determines that any of the above-requested documents contains information which falls within any of the statutory exemptions to mandatory disclosure, it is requested that such information be reviewed for possible discretionary disclosure, see 10 C.F.R. Part 2.790, and that any and all reasonably segregable portions of such documents be produced.
If the Nuclear Regulatory Commission determines that any document or portion thereof will not be made available to the undersigned, or that this request will not, in whole or in part, be complied with, prompt notice of such determination is solicited.
In addition, the undersigned requests that such notice
-include complete identification of the withheld documents (or portions thereof) by the title, author, date, and nature of such material, and an explanation of all the legal and factual bases for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's determination to deny disclosure.
Finally, it is requested in responding to this letter that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission adhere to the time limitations set forth in 5 U.C.S. S 552(a)(6)(A).
See also 10 C.F.R. Part 9.9.
7.-
s The undersigned hereby agrees to pay the reasonable and direct costs of locating and reproducing the requested documents to the extent required by 5 U.S.C. 9 522(a)(4)(A) and 10 C.F.R. Part 9.14.
However, prior notice to the undersigned is requested should the Nuclear Regulatory Commission determine that such costs will exceed a total of S500.
Please feel free to telephone me at (617) 357-8700 should you have any questions concerning this request, or if I can provide you with any further assistance in identifying the requested documents.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.
Ver / trul ours,l.
l
'l s'
.(
l 4l
./
_ j ' (,,
Rober J.
Kal r RJK/jrg e
e e-
GADSBY & H A NN All 3, u.t..t ou
.<t ~ n t o u t. 3.
~ u 3 t,
u i ~ w D. t w Y O D P N T 90077-w A t h t hC 10N L C 20 0)t
.,,,,,a m m >, > ' " o r
. m.L, u.
,c.....,-.....
C a b s feaL=a%
July 30, 1984 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Mr. J. M. Felton, Director Division of Rules and Records Office of Administration Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Re:
FOIA 143
Dear Mr. Felton:
Per your suggestion, I enclose marked copies of certain pages of the print outs you sent me in response to the above-referenced Freedom of Information Act request.
Please forward copies of the documents I have designated to me.
Thank you for your assistance.
Very truly yours,
/
//
/
g V. /
//fsh)s.'//h/
Robe J. Kal 'r RJK/jrg Enclosure cc:
James J. Myers, Esq.
i ll '1 L' ~j y;
b