IR 05000382/1979007
| ML19249C881 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 07/12/1979 |
| From: | Randy Hall, Stewart R, Tapia J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19249C877 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-382-79-07, 50-382-79-7, NUDOCS 7909190243 | |
| Download: ML19249C881 (4) | |
Text
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR RECUI.ATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT RECION IV Report No. 50-382/79-07 Docket ib. 50-382 Category A2 Licensee: Lauisiana Power and Light Company
142 Delaronde Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70174 Facility Na=a: Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit No. 3 Inspection at: Waterford Sit 2, Taft, Louisiana Inspection conducted: June 19-22, 1979
}
-
/
i
'
l/
Inspe.* m s:
/,.-v
'.
f__,
_
j
/*
R. C. St'e0dttV Reactor In'spector, Projects Section Date
'
(Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6)
.W*
) -A
T Section(P[t eac'torIngector,EngineeringSupport Da t'e d
J.
I. Tapia, e
graph 5)
7//z/7T Approved:
+ - - -
W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section Date
,'
j
'
s
./-c 7/n 77 R. E. Hall, Chief, Engineering Support Section pate /
Inspection Summary:
Inspection on June 19-22, 1979 (Report No. 50-382/79-07)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of construction activities rtiated to a follow-on review of reactor and steam generator pressure boundary piping welding, reactor shield building dome installation, and an examination of actions taken with regard to previously identified inspection findings.
The inspection involved fif ty-six inspector-hours by two NRC inspectors.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
F ri r, ?
,U J l).) J
!
t7 79091901 3
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Ecoloyees
- T.
Gerrets, Project QA Engineer
- B. Toups, QA Engineer
- S. Alleman, Assistant Station Superintendent
- R. Dalton, Project Coordinator
- L.
Stinson, Manager, Site QA Program, Ebasco'
- R. Hartnett, QA Site Supervisor, Ebasco
- S. Kelat, Contract Administrator, Ebasco
- R.
M11hiser, Project Superintendent, Ebasco 1".. Caudel, Project Engineer, Tompkins-Beckwith (T-B)
- L. Richardson, QA Supervisor, T-B
- J.
Britt, Site tbnager, Nuclear Installation Services Company (NISCO)
- I. Skah, QA/QC Manager, NISCO
,
- H. McGlothlin, Assistant Superintendent, Fegles Power Service Corporation
- G.
Campbell, Field Engineer, Fegles Power Service Corporation N. Radabaugh, QC Supervisor, Fegles Power Service Corporation The IE inspectors also interviewed other licensee and contractor personnel including te=bcrs of engineering and QA/QC staffs.
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Infraction (50-382/79-02):
Failure to Follow Procedure -
Surveillance of Welding Parameters. During this inspection, the IE inspector conducted a follow-up review of the corrective action delineated in the licensee's letter of reply, dated Ibrch 22, 1979. The corrective action included tonitoring of Daily Reports by Tompkins-Beckwith's QC engineer (welding) daily to ascertain that the requirements of Procedure TBP-26, paragraph 6.1.14 are satisfied. The IE inspector observed that QA/QC records reflect welding surveillance and audit activities are being conducted in accordance with TBP-26, paragraph 6.1.14 requirements.
This item is considered.iosed.
-2-y ()[
b3
.
(Closed) Inf raction (50-382/79-04A):
Failure to Perform Required Surveillances as Required by Approved Procedures. During this inspection, the IE iaspector verified that Ebasco Procedure ASP-IV-3,
" General Housekeeping," was revised lby 22, 1979, as stipulated in the licensee's letter of reply, dated hcy 15, 1979.
This item is considered closed.
(Closed) Infraction (50-382/79-04B):
Failure to Follow Contract
?rocedures Related to Care and Maintenance of Related Components.
During thts inspection, the IE inspector conducted a follow-on review of corrective action delineated in the licensee's reply, dated May 15, 1979. During a plant walk-through, the IE inspector observed that the installed charging pumps, HPSI pumps and other installed equipment were adequately protected from damage or deterioration. This matter is considered closed.
3.
Site Tour The IE inspectors walked through various areas of the site to observe construction activities in progress. Particular attention was given to the housekeeping procedures being followed in the various areas. The equipment and areas inspected included the coolant charging pumps and various elevations in the Reactor Auxiliary Building, the reactor vessel cavity, and the fuel pool areas.
No items of noncompliance or deviatione were identified.
4.
Reactor Coolant Loop Piping - Observation of Welding Activities During this inspection, the IE inspector conducted examinations and observations oi the in-process welding activities on the Reactor Coolant Loop piping.
In process welds included the eight 30 inch pipe welds involved in the four reactor-to-pump pipe spools installations, and the four 42 inch pipe welds involved in the two reactor-to-steam generator pipe spools installations. All welds were in various stages of completion, with only one vold, PlW1, considered complete.
Examination and observation conducted by the IE inspector were per-formed utilizing the Nuclear installation Services Company (NISCO)
Welding Procedure NPS 10.1.14, " Welding Procedures Specification (Reactor Coolant Piping Systems)," dated April 18, 1979, Combustion Engineering Specification No. 09270-PE-104, Revision 04, and appli-cable sections of ASME B&PV Code,1977 Edition, including Winter 1977 Addenda.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Reactor Building Dome An inspection was conducted of construction activities performed by Fegles Power Service Corporation under Contract No. W3-NY-3, " Concrete Masonry Construction of Reactor Shield Wall and Dome."
During this-3-D']c3 9 6r3
.
inspection, concrete reinforcing steel was being placed in preparation for the first sequential placement in the dome.
Ebasco Specification No. LOU-1564.473, Revision 3, " Concrete Reinforcing Steel Furnishing, Fabrication and Delivery," and Ebasco Specification No. LOU-1564.472, Revision 5, " Concrete tbsonry," set forth the technical requirements to be used in the construction of the dome. The following Fegles Power Service Corporation construction procedures were reviewed and found to be in conformance with the specification requirements:
No. CP 303-1, " form Erection and Inspection," Revision 1 No. CP 303-2, " Placement Area Preparation and Inspection," Revision 1 No. CP 303-3, " Concrete Placement and Inspection," Revision 1 No. CP 303-4, " Concrete Finishing, Curing and Inspection," Revision 2 No. CP 303-5, " Concrete Repair and Inspection," Revision 1 No. CP 303-6, " Dome Form Decentering " Revision 1 The placement of reinforcing steel was witnessed by the IE inspector.
Those sections of in-place reinforcing steel, which were observed, were cocpared to and found to conform with Ebasco Drawing LOU-1564-G-522 and -523, ' Reactor Building Dome Reinforcing," Sheets 1 and 2, respectively.
During the tour of the reinforcing steel lay-down area, randomly selected bar cark-nucher tags were recorded and subsequently identified in the
' Quality Assurance Department Material Received Report (MRR).
MRR No.
900459 involved 40,128 pounds of number eleven and number eight bars. The FRRs identify the mill heat numbers involved in the shipments.
The Florida Steel Corporation "Chemicaland Physical Test Record" report for eight heat ru=bors was reviewed. The reported results were compared to the correspond-ing Peabody Testing Cucpany "Mer*aanical Tests of Reinforcing Steel" report, which contains the results of the tensile tests performed on site. The results of both test reports were found to conform to ASTM A 615-76a,
" Standard Specification for Deformed and Plain Billet-Steel Bars For Concrete Reinforcement."
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Exit Interview The IE inspectors cet with the licensee representatives (denoted in para-graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on June 22, 1979.
The IE inspectors su=marized the scope and findings of the inspection.
C[O
,-
s k
'
-4-
,