IR 05000389/1977003

Letter Informing the NRC That FP&L Has Reviewed Report 05000389/1977003 and Advising That the Report Contains No Proprietary Information

ML18109A394
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	11/16/1977
From:	Murphy C NRC/RGN-II
To:	Robert E. Uhrig Florida Power & Light Co
References
L-77-348 IR 1977003
Download: ML18109A394 (11)

Text

( II, I

P. O. BOX 013100, MIAMI, FL 33101 ref

~ ,f= 3.~':, '.,

FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY November 16, 1977 L-77-348 centra3. files 50-389 Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement, Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 230 Peachtree Street, N.W., Suite 1217 Atlanta, Georgia 30303

Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

Re: RII:RWW t

50-389/77-3 Florida Power and Light Company has reviewed the subject inspec-tion report. There is no proprietary information in the report.

Very truly yours, Robert E. Uhrig Vice President REU/MV:ltm cc: Robert Lowenstein, Esq.

~'=,7i~;

g (<a

I'P,R RECIj UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION R EG ION I I 230 PEACHTREE STREET, N.W. SUITE 1217 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 OCT 25 19

+a*+~

In Reply Refer To:

, RII:RWW 50-389/77-3 Florida Power and Light Company Attn: Dr. R. E. Uhrig, Vice President of Nuclear and General Engineering P. 0. Box 013100 9250 West Flagler Street Miami, Florida 33101 Gentlemen:

This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. R. W. Wright of this office on September 13-16, 1977, of activities authorized by NRC Construction Permit No. CPPR-144 for the St. Lucie Unit 2 facility, and to the discussion of our findings held with Mr. B. J. Escue at the conclusion of the inspection.

Areas examined during the inspection and our findings are discussed in the enclosed inspection report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the inspector.

Within the scope of this inspection, no items of noncompliance were disclosed.

We have examined actions you have taken with regard to previously identified inspection findings. These are discussed in the enclosed inspection report.

In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice",

Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room. If this report contains any information that you (or your contractor) believe to be proprietary, it is necessary that you make a written application within 20 days to this office to withhold such information from public disclosure. Any such application must include a full statement of the reasons on the basis of which claimed that the information is proprietary, and should be prepared so it is that proprietary information identified in the application is contained in a separate part of the document. If we do not hear from you in this regard within the specified period, the report will be placed in the Public Document Room.

Florida Power and Light Company Should you have any questions concerning this letter, we will be glad to discuss them with you.

Very truly yours, C. E. Murphy, ief-Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch

Enclosure:

RII Inspection Report No.

50-389/77-3

REGION II==

230 PEACHTREE STREET, N.W. SUITE 1217 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303

<<>>*+>>

Report No.: 50-389/77-3 Docket No.: 50-389 License No.: CPPR-144 Category: A2 Licensee: Florida Power and Light Company P. 0. Box 013100 Miami, Florida 33101 Facility Name: St. Lucie Unit 2 Inspection at: Hutchinson Island, Florida Inspection conducted: September 13-16, 1977 Inspector: R. W. Wright C

Reviewed by:

J. C. Bryant, Chief Date Projects Section Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Ins ection Summar Ins ection on Se tember 13-16 1977 (Re ort No. 50-389/77-3 Areas Ins ected: QA manual including procedures for controlling CBI steel containment vessel work; work performance and activities for a reinforced concrete base mat placement; site audits conducted, licensee actions on previously identified enforcement and 50.55(e) items. The inspection involved 26 inspector-hours on site by one NRC inspector.

Results: No items of noncompliance or deviation'ere identified.

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/77-3 DETAILS I Prepared by: ~ I R. W. Wright, P incipal Inspector Projects Section 2c Srklf'77 Date Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Dates of Inspection: September I

13-16, 1977 by: C'eviewed J. C. r ant, ief Date Pro) ects Section Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch 1. Persons Contacted a. Florida Power and Li ht Com an FPGL

• B. J. Escue, Site Manager W. T. Weems, Assistant QA Manager L. T. Page, QA Engineer, Civil O. J. Karch, QA Engineer, Civil

• W. M. Hayward, QA Engineer

• W. M. Gaines, Site Engineer Representative

• M. L. Snow, Project QC Supervisor

+R. G. Reesby, Area QC Supervisor, Civil

• T. D. Geissinger, QC Inspector, Civil

• J. D. Kirk, Services Superintendent B. M. Parks, QA Engineer, Mechanical b. Contractor Or animations (1) Ebasco Services Inc. EBASCO)

J. D. Distel, NY Design Engineer

• W. J. Taylor, Project Superintendent

• R. A. Garramore, Senior Resident Engineer K. N. Flanagan, Construction Superintendent (2) Chica o Brid e and Iron Com an CBI C. L. Fields, Project Welding and QA Supervisor J. P. Capps, Project Foreman The inspector also interviewed other licensee and contractor employees during the course of the inspection. They included

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/77-3 I-2 CBI and Ebasco craftsmen, batch plant, materials testing and concrete placement QC personnel.

• Denotes those present at the exit interview on September 16, 1977.

2. Licensee Actions on Previous Ins ection Findin s (Open) Noncompliance 389/77-1Nl:

Failure to follow procedures for concrete agitation and vibration.

The RII inspector examined a proposed draft corrective action response to the above inspection finding which revealed .considera-ble indoctrination and a special retraining session have been conducted on vibration specifications for the manual placement crews including Journeymen, foremen and a general foreman. A%tend-ance records for the subject training session were examined to insure that this instruction was indeed implemented and documented.

Discussions with several attendees of the session revealed the training was beneficial. The Batch Plant Superintendent has reinstructed his concrete truck drivers to reset their truck drum revolution counters to a zero reading prior to being loaded by the central mix plant and to maintain drum rotation at agitating speed while in the stand-by position. The RII inspector witnessed the partial placement of reactor containment building placement 110-B and noted that proper vibration techniques and concrete agitation measures were being implemented. This item will remain open until the licensee's official response has been received and evaluated.

3. Unresolved Items No unresolved items were identified.

4. Inde endent Ins ection Effort Containment Structural Concrete I Observation of Work Performance and Work Activities The RII inspector observed the preparation, concrete delivery techniques, partial placement, inspection and testing for reactor containment base mat placement Section 110-B. The activities associated with the subject concrete placement were inspected for conformance to the following acceptance criteria: Sections 3.8.1, 3.8.3 and 17 of the PSAR; Ebasco Specification FL0-2998.473, Rev.

No. 3; Construction Site Procedure CSP-2; Quality Instructions 10.3, 10.4, 10.6, 10.11, 10.71, 10.76; ANSI 45.2.5 standards; and construction drawing Nos. 2998-G-488 Rev. 5, 2998-G-490 Rev. 2 and 2998~491, Rev. 4.

J>>) ~ ~

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/77-3 I-3 The batch plant operation was observed and the facilities inspected for proper storage, segregation and protection of concrete ingredient materials.

No items of noncompliance or deviation were identified.

5. Review of Contractor A Manual The PSAR, Chapter 17, paragraph 17.1.4.3, specifies the FP&L suppliers QA program evaluation commitments. The detailed instruc-tions for evaluation of a supplier's QA program are provided in Quality Procedure No. QP 7.4, "Evaluation of Contractor's/Suppliers QA Program and Procedures."

In accordance with contract No. NY-422501 the licensee obtained CBI's services to furnish, fabricate, shop paint, deliver, unload, haul, errect, single stage post-weld heat treat, test and field paint the steel containment vessel with all appurtenances, equipment hatches, personnel locks and other penetrations in strict accordance with specified Ebasco specifications and drawings.

FP&L's Audit No. 08.03.CBI.77.1 conducted January 17-18, 1977 on CBI's QA activities resulted in no unsatisfactory findings and verified the adequacy of CBI's QA program and related procedures.

The RII inspector reviewed Division 4, entitled "Construction" of the CBI "Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual for ASME Section III Products," issue No. 6 dated April 3, 1975 to assure adequate plans and procedures had been established for their scope of work. This review included site organization, control of material and processes, control of conditions adverse to quality, document control, test control and control of test equipment, control of quality records and audits.

Within the areas examined, no items of noncompliance or deviation were identified.

6. Site Audits The PSAR, Chapter 17.1.18.5, specifies the FP&L audit commitments.

The detailed instructions for conducting and scheduling audits are provided in Quality Procedure Nos. QP 18.1 and 18.2.

The FP&L internal audit system was inspected and it was found that seven audits had been conducted between May 31 and July 27, 1977.

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/77-3 I-4 In the conduct of these audits, the licensee identified two items needing corrective action and the required corrective action was found to have been accomplished in a timely manner.

.No items of noncompliance or deviation were identified.

7. Base Mat Un lanned Construction Joint S.E. uadrant 10 CFR 50.55 e A meeting was conducted by Ebasco's Senior Resident Engineer and their New York design engineering representative to brief the RII inspector, site manager and FP&L QA personnel on the latest proposed plans for completing the subject aborted placement. Cross sections of existing concrete profiles were displayed and details involving proposed lift thickness, consolidation of the concrete and the documentation of the repair work was discussed. Ebasco determined that no additional rebar must be added nor are shear keys necessary to meet the intent of original design. Ebasco's evaluation report of the subject matter is presently being submitted to FP&L's corporate QA for comments and should be received by the NRC soon in accordance with requirements.

The RII inspector examined the subject placement and observed corrective action consisting of chipping and cleaning operations in progress.

No items of noncompliance or deviation were identified.

8. Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in para-graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection and summarized the scope of inspection activities and findings relative to: the independent inspection effort (denoted in paragraph 4); the CBI QA Manual review (paragraph 5); the FP&L site audits examined (para-graph 6); and discussed the licensee's actions taken relative to the previously identified noncompliance (paragraph 2) and the reported 50.55(e) item (paragraph 7). The inspector stated that there were no new noncompliances, deviations or unresolved items found during this inspection.

The licensee had no questions or dissenting comments.

' ~ g 0" p