View source for GO2-83-109, Final Deficiency Rept,Condition 274 Re Excessive Gapping Between Pipe Support baseplates.Fifty-nine of 2,299 Baseplates Require Rework to Correct Deficient Baseplate Gap

{{Adams
| number = ML20082M228
| issue date = 11/23/1983
| title = Final Deficiency Rept,Condition 274 Re Excessive Gapping Between Pipe Support baseplates.Fifty-nine of 2,299 Baseplates Require Rework to Correct Deficient Baseplate Gap
| author name = Sorensen G
| author affiliation = WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
| addressee name = Martin J
| addressee affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION &amp; ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
| docket = 05000397
| license number = 
| contact person = 
| document report number = 10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, 274, GO2-83-1093, NUDOCS 8312060049
| document type = DEFICIENCY REPORTS (PER 10CFR50.55E &amp; PART 21), TEXT-SAFETY REPORT
| page count = 3
}}

=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:__        _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
o P.ECEl'dU fMC Washington Public Power Supply System f             P.O. Box 968 3000GeorgeWashingtonWay Richland Washington 99352 (509)372-5000
::: !!07 Z8 FM 12: 6h November 23, 1983 G02-83-1093 REGlWiV P.F Mr. J. B. Martin Regional Administratcr Region V 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596

==Subject:==
NUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 10CFR50.55(e) REPORTABLE CONDITION #274 EXCESSIVE GAPPING BETWEEN PIPE SUPPORT BASEPLATES

==References:==
: 1. Telecon QA2-83-185 dated August 2, 1983, L.C. Floyd to B. Dodds.
: 2. Letter G02-83-778, dated August 26, 1983, C.S. Carlis'e to J.B. Martin.
In accordance with the provisions of 10CFR50.55(e), your office was informed l              by the references of the above subject condition. The attachment provides the Project's final response on Condition #274.
If there are any questions concerning this matter, please contact Roger Johnson, WNP-2 Project QA Manager, (509) 377-2501, extension 2712.
p       6wn G. C. Sorensen Hanager, Regulatory Programs JGT/kd

==Attachment:==
As stated cc:   W.S. Chin, BPA N.D. Lewis, EFSEC A. Toth, NRC Resident Inspector Document Control Desk, NRC 8312060049 831123 PDR ADOCK 05000397 g                    PDR f}$

d WASHINGT03 PU3LIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM HUCLEAR PROJECT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-397 LICEllSE NO. CPPR-93 10CFR50.55(e) CONDITION #274 EXCESSIVE GAPPING BETWEEH 3ASEPLATES AND CONCRETE SURFACE FINAL REPORT Description of Deficiency Several pipe supports which utilize baseplates for attachment to concrete surfaces were discovered to be deficient in that excessive ca? (creater than 3/32") between the baseplate and concrete was observed. The condition was deterained to be contrary to the technical require.aents of Contract Specifica-tion 215 although the supports had been previously final inspected and accepted by 3echtel Quality Control.
Safety Significance The oesign of pipe supports is based upon specified conditions for adequate oearing between the hanger baseplate and the supporting surface. Additional loaos are introduced into the caseplate and anchor bolts when the tolerances between the nating surfaces exceed the specified conditions. A case by case evaluation is required to deteraine if the excessive gap would impair the capacity of the individual hanger. The condition is considered a reportable deficiency due to the reinspection required to identify where the discrepan-cies exist and the rework or reevaluation which will be required to establish the acceptability of the installation.
Cause of the Deficiency The deficiency was caused by the failure of Bechtel Field Engineering (F/E) and Quality Control (QC) personnel to implement the requirement in some cases, as specified in approved procedures. In addition, some pipe supports installed and QC accepted by the previous contractor (U3G) also exhibited this ceficient ceniition.
Corrective Action This deficiency was detected by a Bechtel Power Corporation internal audit as QA Finding (QAF) Wo. 3 of Audit 5.3.2, entitled " Pipe Support In-Process Control." Corrective action taken as a result of this audit included a 100%
reinspection of accessible Quality Class 1 pipe support baseplates and sub-sequent rework where required. A "go-no go" gage was used to perform these reinspections and entire support base plates were accepted or rejected, even though in uany cases, rejection was cased upon only partially r;.issing or in-complete grout. The corrective action taken was verifieu by Bechtel QA ano the QAF was subsequently closed.
In conjunction with the reinspection program described above, Engineering direction was requested and provided regarding the following issues:
a) iiaxioua Allowable Baseplate Gap - The uaxiaum allowable gap was increased froa 3/32" to 1/8" (Ref:                                                 PED-215-H-X908).

Final Report #274 Page 2 of 2 Corrective Action (Continued) b) Inspection of Torqued Baseplates - The requirement to check the baseplate gap with the anchor bolts torqued to no more than 10% of final required torque was relaxed for this reinspection program (Ref: NCR-21961).
c) Inaccessible Installations - Ninety (90) Quality Class 1 hanger base plates were deemed inaccessible and were accepted based on statistical data result-ing from the Quality Class 1 hanger reinspections (Ref: NCR-21S51, Rev.
2).
d' Oual'.sy Class II/5 cia.iic Cai.cyory I (QCII/I) In:>i. allot.ivis:, - In spt ci.ioti of QCII/I hanger baseplates was deemed unnecessary based upon the statis-tical data resulting frca the QC 1 hanger resinpections. These supports were originally installed and inspected as QC I installations and it was concluded that reinspection results would be siailar to those discovered during the QC 1 reinspections (Ref: RFI-C0500-ii-3258) .
             ..c a result, 53 of 2299 Daseplates reinspected were determined unacceptable and require rework to correct deficient baseplate gap. Reuaining construc-tion work is in progress and will be completed on QC 1 installations by Fuel Load.
Action to Prevent Recurrence Upon completion of the pipe support reinspections and Engineering evaluation, it was determined that less than 3% of the installed supports require rework.
Although the reinspection criteria differs sligntly froa the original instal-lation criteria, the results indicate that a large majority of the personnel responsible for installing and inspecting pipe hanger baseplates were, and are, cognizant of the Engineering criteria. A quality progrca breakdown does not appear evident. Suppleaental training and instruction for QC and FE per-l sonnel regarding this issue has been completed and constitutes the required l        action to prevent recurrence.
l l
!}}