ML20128R189

Underscores Need for Full & Complete Exam of Plant Safety. State Atty General Should Be Made Aware of All NRC Findings

ML20128R189
Person / Time
Site:	Wolf Creek
Issue date:	03/05/1985
From:	John Carlin KANSAS, STATE OF
To:	Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20128R100	List: ML20128R098 ML20128R140 ML20128R159 ML20128R189 ML20128R210 ML20129A017 ML20129A045 ML20129A088 ML20129A112 ML20129A128
References
FOIA-85-161 NUDOCS 8507270141
Download: ML20128R189 (4)

Text

. _ > -_ __ _ _ _ -_. - __

c STATE OF KANSAS 3 ,

9 OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR State Capitol

- Topeka 66612-1590

. John Carlin Corer"' March 5, 1985 4

The Honorable Nunzio Palladino Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wasnington, D.C. 20555

Dear Chairman Palladino:

During the past few months, you have' received letters of concern from various sources regarding questions which exist relating to the Wolf Creek Generating Station. Enclosed are copies of such letters, which include the following:

1) November 5, 1984 letter to Darrell Eisenhut, Director of Reactor Licensing, from the Kansas Corporation Commission;

~2) February 1,1985 letter to you from Congressman Glickman; *

3) February 8,1985 letter to you from Congressman Slattery; 4)- February 14, 1985 and. February 18, 1985 letters to you from over one hundred of our Kansac legislators.

I am writing you to underscore the need for a full and complete examination of all ~ matters which relate to the plant's safety, since such questions obviously impact directly upon our public welfare. As previously requested, I urge you to make your findings available to my office, our Attorney General, our Congressional . delegation and to the Kansas Corporation Commission.

kog5072 1 850603 l STEPHE 5-161 PDR

Chairman Palladino .

March 5, 1985 Page Two I am confident that you appreciate the right of all Kansas citizens to be assured of the safe construction and operation of Wolf Creek.

I look forward to your response.

e ,

JOHN C RLIN Governor JC:jj Enclosures (4) e

, ,-,,,---,,-- ,,, - -m.--- - , -

4 STATE OF KANSAS T

1 OFFICE OF 1HE GOVERNOR State Capitol Topeka 66612 1590

~ John Carlin Cor'"' '

March 5, 1985 F

, I p3 The Honorable Nunzio Palladino Chairman 2j Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8* Washington, D.C. 20555

s. A sf s.

u

Dear Chairman Palladino:

k F- During the past few months, you have received letters of 23 concern from various sources regarding questions which exist 4j relating to the Wolf Creek Generating Station. Enclosed are

-y copies of such letters, which include the following:

-L 1) November 5, 1984 letter to Darrell Eisenhut, 3$ Director of Reactor Licensing, from the g g' Kansas Corporation Commission; ,

~

3 2) February 1, 1985 letter to you from j" Congressman Glickman; -

.h

~

3) February 8,1985 letter to you from J

Congressman Slattery; ,

4) February 14, 1985 and February 18, 1985 letters to you from over one hundred of our Kansas legislators.

I am writing you to underscore the need for a full and complete examination of all matters which relate to the plant's safety,.

since such questions obviously impact directly upon our public welfare. As previously requested, I urge you to make your findings available to my office, our Attorney General, our Congressional delegation and to the Kansas Corporation Commission.

3/7....To EDO to Prepare Response for Signature of Chairman and Comm Review...Date due Comm: Mar 19...Cpys to: RF.85-186

.s..-

T Chairman Palladino March 5, 1985 Page Two I am confident that you appreciate the right of all Kansas citizens to be assured of the safe construction and operation of Wolf Creek.

I look forward to your response.

e ,

JOHN C RLIN Governor JC:jj Enclosures (4) o

-O

.'- s ,

nTATc cF KAN2AD m two.u HOUSE OF

~. ~ REPRESENTATIVES February 14, 1985 The Honorable Nunzio Palladino Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission

~ ~ : - 6: q wu, D.C. . o. " = .

Dear Mr. Chairman:

We, the undersigned, members of the Kansas Senate and House of Representatives, art deeply concerned with the approach-ing conditional licensure of the Wolf Creek electrical generating station. It is our understanding that this licensure may occur in spite of the fact that open investigations exist into matters such as alleged construction defects and quality assurance de-ficiencies. Since such matters are directly relevant to the issue of plant safety, we ask for your assistance.

Correspondence between your office and the offices of Congressman Dan Glickman and Congressman John D. Dingell has _

been made available for our review. It is clear from our review of the Congressmen's questions and your response that:

1) A substantial number of structural steel welds have been found to be below accepted standards;

2) Investigations into the weld deficiencies are underway, including such issuesgas missing, falsified or erroneous quality assurance records; and

3) Unanswered safety questions remain, including problems relating to the safe separation of electrical cables.

We have, for several years, expressed our concerns and our citizen's concerns relating to the safe and economical pro-duction of nuclear-generated electricity. The Wolf Creek p.roject has been the object of scrutiny from this Legislature and from other agencies of state government. We have attempted to maximize the ability of our utility commission to review the project and determine the extent to which the ratepayers

will assume construction related costs.

[

--T7(iTTdV.[M - -

.. . Honorcblo Nunzio Palladino

7sbruary 14, )85 Pcgo Two However, Congress hasest,ablished that your commission is the review mechanism for al'1 matters relating to the safe construction and operation of nuclear plants. It is in that capacity that we ceek your assistance.

We asic that all investigations, including any pre-invest-igation matters pending in the Office of Investigation and of Inspection and Enforcement, be concluded in a comprehensive and thorough manner. We ask that your findings be made available to us, to the Kansas Congressional delegation, our Governor and Attorney General, and to the Kansas Corporation Commission. We ask that these things be done prior to the issuance of a conditional, low-power operating license. ,

When the power is turned on at Wolf Creek, it is essential that all questions have been answered and all safety standards met. Only these conditions will provide the needed assurances, to Kansas to validate the operational integrity of the Wolf Creek plant.

We ask for your prompt response, and express our appre- a ciation for your consideration of this matter.

Sincerely,

/

/?detR m24.

Rep. R.H. Miller

~ skA

' Rep. vin Wm. W rkis /

el Johnston

- Se)WintWinter Df9tb ~

R/p.fenGrotewiel / 5en. Au $ .na , 'J . /

e 71Avk~Jr Rep. Richard Schmidt '

J

~. Kenneth W. Green 2L Rep IH.G. Dillon raw Rep. Bill Wisdom

+- _ :

Repl Kent Campbell '

1 - _& W JoanWagno[

_ w . . _ .._ ._.- _ ._

l A 0 ,, h Jdstep. nry H M ers / Rep. Theo Cribbs

/K .?/

Rep. Anthony Hensley I

/123/

[ep.JudithC.

d Runnels L S Qrom adaw ,oa E~-w M . Joan Adam , ,ch Sgt,pt Ili?b k . ib,l ' / fe l~ f ,

Rep. Darrel Webb [ Rep.Jo' So11:5ch

/ g i .3

-f gEhbfvu[e#

j g i m 2** ,

Rep. Ruth Luzzatf8 ' Rep. Homer E. Jarchow ,

. A*f '

Ws Re [ ack Lacey Rep.< @ ry F. Turnquht Q(' r _

Y- 2 / -

Re .

NormanlE. [ stice \ R$p. Rick Bowden

/! $l t.kn .5.c . .w' C fN fi ! '

Rej// Geoge . R. 'Df an Rep.' Donna Whiteman 09 BMnthal ' h,~ til Gyr pep. Gary;' Rep. Don M. Rezac

, f_/

c  ; j < ,

\nai" e

% a. s c._) .

~

i&%'nk I Rep. Jessie Brans 3n~ Rep.DianeGjerst/d

/ ni. - -

-__ A Rep.' Mar ne M son Rafp. Jack Shriver r-r-y -

-m v-9 ,n,- , - , - . - -

v -et w7+ r -m- + -- ' - -- -- , e w------w-r w ---d------ w

• w--= ~-'-

.m L2 m** W

$ O $x &

Rep.,Duane A. Goossen ,

Rep. Elaine Hassler I 144[d1 / .

C?L U c w- g O

,Rdp. Vincent K. Snowcarger/

Re M lizabeth Bake i

~

i .

1. O  ! . n.t '!

Re . Denise C. Apt Rep. Burt DeBaun Rep. Phil Kline

_i

(' /b b.'Gayle Mollenk p

~

o '/ -

f, -? L. < -)/  := ., /2-w r Rep. S.B JS grs 6 Rep. Nancy Brown

' 5p. E AMl

'in Bideau, III l x R'ep . Rex B. Hoy 0 hDI Rep. C yde D. Graeber

_s . G Rdp. Don Sallee b

. / -

,R[p.l Mike O'Neal '

]

Rep. A1 Ramir

/

/2 *

/, NW

' Rep. Richard Eckert

' ! k. $

Rep. Martha Jenkins

syn. Phil' Martih Sen. JosepW. Norv u M (\k\/E YM  := / /z"/fh , qw

, / Sen. Richard'G. Gannon en. James L. Francisco M

/ Syn. .Tohn Strick, Jr. ' V Rep.' il}iam Rn rt A

Sen.' Bill Kulich n '

D esse u-Hardei h line '

aL *1 -

Sed. :y Parrish IRep. b V. J45m) /foper ,

/0 . / A u E erhon

/ w 5

/

Sen. Paul Feleciano,'Jr'.8

/ '

I w.w-- - w-, - , + - - - ,,r,, , , e-, - ,<-- -- ,-w.- , ---,.,,-w ,--_,ew ,-- ---------w,--- - - - - - , , , _ , - w.-.----,----e-n-,--wn.v,---e--

.. / . .

..? , 9.,

w fb .. .%u? , , - *M Rep. Patricia Weaver

Rep. Donald Mainey /

Rep. Bill'Biady / o m)

Rdp. KatWryn SughrQ

- % ~

Rep. LeRoy F#' Fry '

// vs ep. C.C. Love

/ A r2r s /

R(p. Micha(pi J. 'Peterson

~ Rep. Georgegeagarce'n ulmn Rep. Ken Francisco .

Rep. /katky Jo Charlton hdUL  % Oys Rep. Bill Reardon

/J J hep. Rob 1n Leach

~

l l

~

Re'p. Robejft <

im .

Vancr'uin ' ' ' . Rep. Yithur Douville 1& -

Rep JMM Y

Ke rf- Patrick Re LA 0 J.C. Long *

^^

2/Y A R . ger'Barr Rep. Wanda Fuller Rep. Ron Fox [

n.~~ 9'rd Rep

~~= v' % < g X

• 4 ,..,

oe Knopth \

Rep. Keith Roe

}

" Rep. Stephen R. Cloud gep. Ke'Ht Y. 'Ott Rep.

b (L ./

awrence/J. Wilbert

. c

. p l

/4tep. James E. Lowther Rep.'Fran UJ. Buehler

$Y0 -& m C~

R4p/

. Ed C. Rolfs

[ Rep. Robert D. Miller -

MM[ Rep Dennfs S aniol Yep. Thomas F. Walker IMd Rep. Vernon' Williams seu Rep.'E A& Y w ne L. Sh' ore'

~

ci ) * /W

~

/~1a, 08 Rep. Kenneth R. King

/

rva wsr<1TM Rep. David F. Loud.s 9

- - - - - _ _ - . . . . , _- , _ _ _ _ . _ . - . , , - _ , . ,m, , , , - . , m , ---.__-_~--_-,._,_._,-,,,w, , , . , , . - - , - - , , - . . , . , ,

,7 ,.,--mp -,,,%s. - - , , , -,-w . - - , - , -m,, 4

s Rep. David G. Milh r

^

^ -

Rep. J.S. Duncan f

T~

I.N ......

x.pyD.1eR.1 e

6 e

, y -- , , r,, --.,,- --.-.- - - -- --,r- , -. . , a ,--- n , e- . , ,.y,-n -

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

I .

.% .) X.-- -

1 mm emme $Q$6 Orffora$$on ammission Q7" Fourth Floo,, State ofeos Bldg.

n. _

"" TOPEKA. KANSAS 666121571

)

November 5, 1984 l Mr. Darrell Eisenhut Diractor of Raactor- Licens,in,g- 07 Unit.ted States Nuclear Regulatory Coh=aion Washington, D.C. 20555 Dear Mr. Eisenhut I We have recently received from Kansas Gas & Electric Company a copy of NRC Inspection Report No. 50-482/84-22 in Docket No.

50-482 (Wolf Creek Generating Station). The report was generated following an inspection conducted between June 11, 1984 and September 28, 1984. Generally, the report concludes that two violations were identified: (1) failure to assure conformance of

safety-related structural steel welds with requirements; and (2)

. failure to maintain adequate electrical separation.

! Specifically, the report cites a variety of problems which appear to be substantial:

During a review of QA/QC and Quality First personnel qualifications and subsequent interviews, the NRC inspector became aware of potential problems with corrective action reports CAR 29 and 31. The NRC

. inspector subsequently obtained copies of the two documents. CAR l-W-0029 (initiated on March 22, 1983) states, in part, ' Subsequently to the issuance of CAR 1 1-W-0019, quality has instituted a random reinspection I of accessible structural steel fillet welds in all O buildings. It has been determined by the results of this reinspection that an unacceptable percentage of these welds are' deficient in the auxiliary, control, and fuel buildings.' Attached documentation revealed that in the auxiliary building, 60 welds were inspected, with 53 being rejected. In the control and fuel buildings, 50 welds were inspected with 43 rejected, and 53 inspected with 35 rejections, respectively. Revision 2 to CAR 1-W-0029 stated in the disposition that the defective welds would be transferred to a Nonconformance Report (NCR). The NRC inspector obtained a copy of NCR ISN 10381PW which was used as the vehicle to carry out the direction provided by. CAR l-W-0029. It appears that DIC Project Welding Engineering personnel again reinspected the welds to h 0257 341105 DaADOCKOS000g q((. qg l

. r .- - ,

> Letter Mr. Darrell Eisenhut

~~

Page 2 i

' more clearly define the nature andA extent of the majority of the defects on-a weld-by-weld basis.

j defective welds were categorized as having " cosmetic" defects. The DIC recommended disposition was use-as-is for welds identified containing " cosmetic' defects.

The NCR states that " cosmetic" defects include arc strikes, convexity, cold roll (understood to be synonymous with overlap), porosity, and acceptable amounts of undercut. The NRC inspector noted with respect to these defects 1-75 that Code, overlap and is prohibited specific by accertance the governing AWS D' l'

criteria for the other defwets tare also defined by this- l Code.  !

i e 9 e On August 16, 1983, DIC personnel issued CAR 1-C-0031 which indicated that approximatley 16.4 percent of the "Q" 4

miscellaneous structural steel welding After records for back corresponding welding could not be located.

j and forth, DIC and the engineer concluded that it was

< acceptable for some amount of these records to be missing, provided that the quality inspection program was acceptable. Senior licensee QA management expressed to the NRC inspector that the program had obviously been fully successful since very few welds had been found to require repair after a substantial 4

reinspection effort associated with CAR 29. The NRC inspector expressed concern with this approach to resolution and suggested that the licensee reevaluate their position.

• t I

During the week of September 17, 1984, a reinspection of the identified structural members with the highest design loads or the lowest design strength safety

• margin was initiated. The reinspection identified a number of welds which do not meet drawing requirements. This information was presented to the NRC staff du'ir; a meeting conducted on September 25, 1984. In an effort to confirm certain of the identified conditions, the NRC inspector accompanied DIC welding inspectors into the reactor building to  ;

observe specific, identified weld joints. This  ;

s

1. observation confirmed the welding inspectors' findings;  !

e.g., welds that are undersized and of insufficient length, lack of fusion, and missing welds.

The missing welds are from the same location in each of six pressurizer support connections. Certain of the other welds in the pressurizar support connections were .

. 'n

. Let'ter Mr. Darrell Eisenhut i Page 3 undersized and of insufficient length. Drawing No.

C-05 2994 shows that various length 5/8-inch welds are required in 14 specific locations. Four locations

-required a 5/8-inch fillet weld of 8 inches in length.

The actual welds in two of the locations measured between 3/8-inch and 1/2-inch by 5 inches in length, and 1/2-inch by 3 inches in length. The missing welds and the undersized, insufficient length welds are clearly not in compliance with the requirements of the drawing or ~

AWS Dl.1-75. The initial weld inspection record- 3r chose connections coub. not b. 1:caisd.

The NRC' inspector accompanied two DIC welding

- inspectors for reinspection of nine structural steel '

connections in the auxiliary building. Drawing.No.

K6720, applicable to these connections, shows 12 weld locations per connection with certain of the welds requiring returns. Reinspection of the welds and returns involved provided the following summarized datas

- Missing welds -

2

- - Welds with insufficient length 9

- Undersized welds 6

- Undersize welds with insufficient length 2

- Overlength returns 44 Undersize returns 25

- Unde'esize returns with insufficient length 1 -

l The NRC inspector requested the initial weld inspection records for these welds and returns in the 9 reinspected connections. As of September 28, 1984, the only inspection records that were located pertained to i

10 welds and 6 returns in one connection, and 8 welds and 4 returns in each of 3 other connections. These

records did not indicate that the welds were.anything other than acceptable. The licensee informed the NRC inspector of a situation where one inspection record for connection 524B2 clearly indicated by an attched '

sketch the existence of the a weld that reinspection found not to exist. This problem will be followed up in conjunction with the other structural steel i

problems.

! The NRC inspector made a comparison between the existing initial inspection records and the results of i

<--.--.__..-,m_-v_,.,_-,, -

, . . , .-,-. _-. .,., ,__,,_,, , ,_. ,, m,._,., _,,.7,, , . . _ . _ _, , _ . _ , . _ _ , , , , .

o';

w .

.M .

, . I.etter Mr. Darrell Eisenhut .

Page 4 the reinspection effort in order to determine the validity of the initial records. The initial records show that the 10 welds with 6 returns in one connection The were inspected and accepted on December 11, 1978.

reinspection identified one undersized weld, other undersized and overlength returns, and three overlength returns. The initial records for the other three connections show that eight welds with four returns per connection were inspected and accepted on September 8, 1979. The reinspection of these welds and returns 1

1Natified two returns M.w:. pyyg overlength and .

undersized and two returns which were overlangen per connection.

The f ailure to execute the required welding inspection ,

program is a violation of Criterion X of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50. (482/8422-01).

We note that you have recently been quoted by the press as indicating that these welding problems could portend extensive l

i d+. lay s . We assume that you now question the most recent NRC case load forecast panel estimate for the date of fuel load. Due to.

the catemaking impact of project delay, it is necessary that we inquire as to your best estimate at this time of the length of project delay occasioned by the defects identified in the above-referenced inspection report.

.I Thank you for'your cooperation.

Li Sincerely, KANSAS CORPORATION COMMISSION I

= I g .

asV h_ '

[

/ Michael Lennen Chairman M

JMha4d C.#1Pete) poux Commissioner / ,

/ c [ _

,e s tn .. h.nie,- n ICommissioner U i RF/jlm l

4

1 I

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