ML20070N526

Advises That Evaluation Required to Determine Scope of Problem & Resultant Corrective Actions Re Failure to Construct Masonry Block Wall in Accordance W/Quality Class I Completed.Rept Including Results & Corrective Actions Encl

ML20070N526
Person / Time
Site:	Satsop
Issue date:	12/10/1982
From:	Leddick R WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM
To:	Sternberg D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
Shared Package
ML20070N502	List: ML20070N498 ML20070N526
References
GO3-82-1276, NUDOCS 8301250532
Download: ML20070N526 (6)

Text

_

/

i Washington Public Power Supply System l

Box 1223 Elma, Washington 98541 (206)482-4428 Cocket No. 50-508 1

December. 10, 1982 G03-82-1276 3

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region V l

Office of Inspection and Enforcement 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 260 i

Walnut Creek, California 94596-5368 Attention:

Mr. D. M. Sternberg Chief, Reactor Projects Branch No. 1

Subject:

NRC INSPECTION--6T WNP-3 DEVIATION (50-508/82-h,..,

MASONRY BLOCK WALL - FAILURE T0. CONSTRUCT IN ACCORDANCE WITH QUALITY CLASS I

Reference:

G03-82-Il99, Letter, R. S. Leddick to D. M. Sternberg, j

NRC Inspection at Washington Nuclear Project No. 3 (WNP-3), dated November 24, 1982.

The referenced letter reported that the subject Deviation could not be resolved at the time because the evaluation required to determine the scope of the problem and resultant corrective actions had not been completed. This evaluation has subsequently been completed.

A report of corrective steps taken/ planned, results achieved and j

the date when corrective actions will be completed is attached.

Should you have any questions or desire further information, please 1 J contact me directly.

I I

m _

R. S. Leddick (760)

• Program Director, WNP-3 DRC:nj Attachments l

cc:

J. Adams - NESCO D. Smithpeter - BPA l

Ebasco - New York 1

WNP-3 Files - Richland 8301250532 830117 PDR ADOCK 05000508 PDR A

i

qe I

<t

,, ;,. p. 4,

.f

-m I

?

A U

8_.5 TLES AT' EVERT 'OTHER o

t.

L t

BLOCK 140RD., EVERT ThuRO BLOCK VERTICALLY' I

}.

s r.. r.'.D r s.

Y r.'

1 c....., G_

y I

.t,

.e..-;.;q w =jg 1

k s-

=

t. t.

p w

.e 0y g (a 2

2 conc.

.

= a 2

8g se Nn....:.

m. t.

0 x

l[C#;.'.lIU

.g l

.fa.

' l I ', '

4DT l

..Le.%.;:n..

• J V, E JL.:.t.:.0(>;

Q j

VERTJ2EBAR51..'

.... _ ~

.i

~

~

k

==-8 G QRa5BAR5 1

-@4.85 on-86' AS REGFD)

"EYW COURSE -

l

(

.I

,.h.;,

(..j'.l n,..

I 3

_ 4_ HOR;REBARS

' * * ~ -

[. EVERY COURSE.. _

~

e

i...

,. 4-s.,

.,....._s y

a O

us

_s i

I 7

< :.J ;..

... s.

g...

ee

.e-

..., u o

.,.sn n.

.s ERT REBAR'=

-~~

COtJC. FlLL-

_L'A *.5_on!.G.. As REcio)

.c -

1 s

p _m.,o 6, i

TYP. WALL SECTIONS d

h

,i

{

l

(

1 J

=,,.

m

.m, !

. r -, c. :.:..,v..e__c

.igs,,, - -

e. A 1 r., I'.','AE ~.NETON ?VSi.iC. D.IR SU FLY SYSTEY '

r-

)

. j :.:.. _ s,

-g 4,,.,a,:,2

, tt. v.

, MO _, :,,4 r

.::s i 8

-: 'c - 3 APPROVED i

l. -., C u t

}.._3X8CXC..DE.TKILS_OF.MASCNRY

, FIGURE i j l T.y :...,s._--.f i WALL REINFORCING

(-

~l F.~7.;-F l

I i

m m

4

=

ATTACHMENT 12 Request for Additional Information (Item 6)

Attachment B e

l P

_ _ r.. -.

Attachment to:

Letter, G03-82-1276, dated December 10, 1982

,f

)

1 II DEVIATION (50-508/82-16/03)

I!

MASONRY BLOCK WALL - FAILURE TO CONSTRUCT II IN ACCORDANCE WITH QUALITY CLASS I 1

4 i

ll DEVIATION Table 1.8-1 of the WNP-3 FSAR states that the WNP-3 project complies with Regulatory Gui.ie 1.29, Rev. 3.

Regulatory Position 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.29, Rev. 3, states, in part, that:

Those portions of structures...whose failure could reduce the functioning of any plant feature...to an unacceptable safety level...

should be designed and constructed so that the SSE would not cause'such failure.

i Regulatory Position 4 of Regulatory Guide 1.29, states, in part, that:

ii "The pertinent quality assurance requirements of Appendix B to 10CFR Part 50 should be applied to all activities affecting the safety-related functions of those portions of structures... covered under Regulatory Position 2..."

Contrary to the above, a masonry block wall 23 feG 1 inch high was installed approximately 6 feet from nuclear safety related Diesel Generator Control i

Panel "A".

Failure of this wall during a seismic event may disable the "A"

diesel generator. The wall was classified as WPPSS Quality Class G and therefore was installed as a non-:afety related structure not subject to the requirements of the licensee's quality assurance program required by 10CFR50, Appendix B.

i I!

REVIEW FOR BLOCK WALL (NO. 41) ACCEPTABILITY To determine the safety significance and acceptability of the wall in question, a detailed review was conducted by Ebasco. Results of the review are summarized as follows:

e All concrete block walls in the RAB have been seismically designed fr the SSE using loads derived from the maximum building accelerations at the :nstalled elevation of the block walls.

e All reinforcing steel is furnished as WPPSS Quality Class I.

e Since concrete blocks are commercially available only as manufactured standard products, they are procured as WPPSS Quality Class G with pro-visions for material certification that assure adequate and consistent strength as assumed in the design.

4 Bonding mortar does 'not conform to the requirements of WPPSS Quality i '

e Class I.

Mortar materials are only available as commercially manu-

I factured products. Mixing of mortar materials is controlled by the j

practical considerations of workability. Of real importance is the fact

,il that, in the case of these reinforced block walls, the mortar has little structural significance ar.d is not even considered in the structured t

]

analysis.

i e,

. +,. =

g w

v v--,w-

+wm--w ww-,

v-i----,,,----r*

-, - ~ -

---a-=-

--wy-et--w-ez"-e-

=y

-ww----9---un't

'==--

-p-

• T-'

-1 m

-._. n._.

DEV!ATION (50-508/82 d/03)

J MASONRY BLOCK WALL - FAILURE TO CONSTRUCT IN ACCORDANCE WITH QUALITY CLASS I Page 2 REVIEW FOR BLOCK WALL ( NO. 41) ACCEPTABILITY (CONTINUED) i e Concrete block fill (grout) does not conform to all of the requirements i

of WPPSS Quality Class I.

Even though the concrete fill material was i

furnished as Class I, it was not always tested as Class I at the point l

of discharge.

e The concrete block walls (including No. 41) have been constructed in accordance with WPPSS Quality Class G requirements, supplemented by the Engineer's visual inspection for compliance with the specification and drawings. These inspections have been documented by the use of one or more of three different record forms. For the wall in question (No. 41),

the inspections were documented on five Concrete Tracking Records and j

three Daily Reports.

e For all block walls constructed to date,'four prism test sections (without rebar) have been prepared in accordance with specification requirements.

Two of the test sections are being cured and two have been tested with test results exceeding design requirements.

1 e Independent compressive strength tests were performed on grout and mortar with results exceeding design requirements.

1 It has been concluded that, even though the bonding mortar and concrete fill j

do not meet the requirements of Quality Class I, the wall in question is acceptable based on:

1) the available records of inspection; 2) material tests performed to date; and 3) prism tests performed and in process.

In

.,j addition, it is considered that, with the exception of mortar and grout, the design and construction of all masonry block walls in the RAB are in compliance with the Supply System's response to the NRC regarding IE Bulletin 80-11 (Reference Letter G03-81-854, dated March 25, 1981).

CORRECTIVE STEPS PLANNED i

To further strengthen the program for the construction and inspection of masonry block walls in the RAB, the following actions are being initiated:

i

!j 1)

Inspection by the Engineer during construction will be strengthened

]

by issuance of a Resident Engineering Instruction that will provide l

more detailed inspection criteria.

In addition, a standard reporting l

format for documenting these instructions will be adopted.

1l

2) All concrete block walls previously installed in seismic zones and H

for which neither " Concrete Tracking Records" nor " Concrete Block Wall Construction Forms" exist (i.e., wall Nos. 45, 60, 64 and 66 at RAB EL 390) will be examined using metal detection methods to p

independently confirm the inclusion of reinforcing steel.

?a ll l

l

~

. '.6/03)

- i DEVIATION (50-508/8 MASONRY BLOCK WALL - FAILURE TO CONSTRUCT IN ACCORDANCE WITH QUALITY CLASS I Page 3 4

i CORRECTIVE STEPS PLANNED (CONTINUED) i

3) Prism tests will continue to be performed and recorded as required by the construction specification to demonstrate the requisite composite stren.gth of the concrete blocks, mortar and fill.

i j

4)

Independent tests will be conducted on the mortar and concrete fill l

(in accordance with the Uniform Building Code) at the same frequency I

i as the prism tests. All test results will be documented.

5) As determined by the Engineer, core samples, when obtained during the various phases of block wall construction (e.g., in conjunction with penetration installation), will be visually examined for soundness and the results documented.

l Additional corrective actions:

1) The FSAR will be amended to specify that mortar and concrete block fill are not furnished to Quality Class I.

The FSAR change has been submitted to the Supply System for review and implementation.

W

}

2) The Supply System response to IE Bulletin 80-11 will be amended to address that mortar and concrete block fill are not Quality Class I materials.

1 DATE WHEN CORRECTIVE ACTION WILL BE COMPLETED The program detailed above is presently being implemented. Full implemen-tation will be achieved prior to any further erection of masonry block walls in the RAB.

It is anticipated that all corrective actions will be

]

completed by February 28, 1983.

l 3

ATTACHMENT 12 Request for Additional Information (Item 6)

Attachment C

1565W-5 WNP-3

"*^ d FSAR Zn cfouseety,&(

crack. The portions of high energy piping systems within the steam tunnel satisfy the requirements of Subsection 3.6.2.1.4 and tnerefore are not postulated to rupture. However, tne tunnel is designed for a compartment pressure associated with a hypothetical crack in the main steam line. For additional discuscion see Subsection 3.6A.2.3.2.

g)

Concrete Block Wa'Is Reinforced concrete block walls are utilized in the RAB floors g,'[*(*

primarily for shielding, fire protection, partitioning, and other architectural purposes.

Use of concrete block walls for support of any safety-related components such as piping, HVAC ducts, cable trays,

[,' M bg electrical batteries, boxes, and conduits, is not permitted by the cp<7.r.1 wha-toa-

! project directive.6 Since concrete blocks are commercially available y

n#atl.-*d leaJ + M' only as manufactured standard products, they are procured in accordance

^[ % '

with Supply System Quality Class G requirements, however, with provisions for material certification that assures adequate and

\\gg, consistent strength as assumed in the design.g Additionally, the pf,ypft, h @ 2neret- +i!!, M reinforcing M used in the block wall lconstruction are supplied in accordance with Supply System Quality f]'[.}g])[g j,.

Class I requirements.

Installation of tnese walls follows Supply f

ed, y m.Q System Quality Class G requirements, however, augmented by documenting Mi.,5 ftudh he daily work activities in reference to the design requirements.

to,e rit b lee k 5, to.e 8/0, **"I N3 ie concrete block walls are designed primarily in accordance with 2

" ','fy

/

Chapter 24, Masonry, of tne Uniform Building Code, 1973 edition,

,,f,,)

following the working Stress Design method specified therein.

The

,;4 seismic loads used in the design of the concrete block walls are based Q,,,,d..

on the maximum building accelerations at various floors of interest as established by the seismic dynamic analyses of structures presented in Subsection 3.7.2.

3.8.4.1.3 Dry Cooling Tower Structure The Dry Cooling Tower Structure houses the Ultimate Heat Sink (UHS) components (Traina A and B) which provide heat rejection from the Component Cooling Water System (CCWS). The description of the UdS and CCWS are given in Subse ions 9.2.5 and 9.2.2, respectively.

The Category I Structure is located to the east of the Reactor Auxiliary isuilding and occupies an area of 520 f t by 85 f t, having its longitudinal axis oriented in the north-south direction as shown on Figure 1.2-2.

It is l

predominantly a reinforced concrete structure supported on a 4 ft thick founJation mat.

It extends from the top of the mat at EL. 390.00 ft to the roof grating level at EL. 437.33 ft.

A wind wall that extends 17 ft above the roof level is provided for each longitudinal exterior wall.

Within the structure, the heat exchangers are located at EL. 417.5 ft and supported by cross walls wnich are spaced approximately 49 ft apart. A fan deck is located at E l.. 428.50 ft.

Air Llow to the tower train is from each side - the east and west sides, and the concrete labyrinth or maze type design that provides exterior missile g

protection by the line-of-site approach is provided for the air inlet.

Air exhaust trom the Lower train in through the misaile protect,on root grating.

i Wind walls are provided to minimize exhaust air recirculation.

1,H 111 Am..ndme n t thi. 2m (12/H7)

_-- 3 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ENCLOSURE 4 (Item 11) SEISMIC QUALIFICATION A staff request for additional information in this review area has been sent to a number of pending OL applicants. A copy of that request is provided as 1 (Attachment I).

RESPONSE

The Seismic Qualification criteria are consistent with IEE Std. 344-1975 as supplemented by Regulatory Guide's 1.100 and 1.92 and Standard Review Plan Section's 3.9.2, 3.9.3 and 3.10 as discussed in the FSAR.

A compilation of the data necessary for the NRC SQRT to verify the acceptability of the Seismic and dynamic qualification of equipment will be submitted in accordance with the guidance delineated in Enclosure 11 (Attachment I).

4 0