Text

IE Inspec Rept 50-389/78-08 on 780912-15 During Which No Items of Noncompliance Were Noted.Major Areas Inspected incl:safety-related Structures,Postweld Heat Treatment Containment & Major Equip Supports
	ML17206A535
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	11/14/1978
From:	Economos N; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	;
Shared Package
ML17206A533	List: IR 05000389/1978008; L-78-360, Ack Receipt of IE Inspec Rept 50-389/78-08 on 780912-15.Does Not Consider Any Info Therein to Be Proprietary; ML17206A534;
References
	50-389-78-08, 50-389-78-8, NUDOCS 7811290325
	Download: ML17206A535 (78)
	v • d • e

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION II

101 MARIETTASTREET, N.W.

ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 Report No.:

50-389/78-8 Docket No.:

50-389 License No.:

CPPR-144 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 12-15, 1978 Inspector:

N. Economos Reviewed by:

T. E. Conlon, Chief Engineering Support Section No.

Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch r~ z.c yg ate Ins ection Summar Ins ection on Se tember 15-18 1978 (Re ort No. 50-389/78-8)

Areas Ins ected:

Safety-related structures; postweld heat treatment con-tainment; major equipment supports.

The inspection involved 28 inspector-hours on site by one NRC inspector.

Results:

No items of concompliance or deviations were identified.

~81%2'

J

+LE

RII. Report No.: 389/78-08 DETAILS I

~-/

Prepared b~~

'.Economos, etallurgical Engin er Engineering Support Section No.

Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Date Reviewed by Dates of Inspection:

September 12-15, 1978 T. E. Conlon, Chief Engineering Support Section No.

Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Dat 1.

Persons Contacted a.

Florida Power and Li ht Com an (FPRL)

"B. J.

Escue, Site Manager

""N. T.

Weems, Assistant QA Manager

-"W. M. Hayward, QA Engineer J.

W. Adams, QA Engineer, Mechanical

='E.

W. Sherman, QA Engineer, Electrical

'"J. L. Parker, QC Site Supervisor Tom Page, QA Engineer Don Roberts, General Superintendent, RAB b.

Contractor Or anization Chica o Brid e and Iron Com an (CBSI)

"C. L. Fields, Project Welding and QA Superintendent D.

M. Swann, QA Engineer

"J. L. Routh, Welding QA Engineer In addition to the above, the inspector interviewed other licensee and contractor personnel.

Denotes those present at the exit interview.

RII. Report No.: 389/78-08 2.

Licensee Action on Previousl Identified Ins ection Findin s

Actions on previous findings were not reviewed during this inspection.

3.

Unresolved Items No new unresolved items were identified on this inspection.

4.

Inde endent Ins ection Efforts Postweld Heat Treatment of Containment Vessel The postweld heat treatment of the containment vessel will be performed by CBSI in accordance with requirements of the AS('K Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, NE-4320, 1971 Edition with addenda through winter 1972 and commitments set forth in the PSAR, paragraph 3.8.2.13.

Instructions to the field are contained in CBSI postweld heat treatment Procedures HTP-(73-7302)-11B, Revision 1 and HTP-11B, Revision 2.

The inspector reviewed the above procedures to determine whether the technical contents were consistent with NRC and Code require-ments.

Heat input will be provided by six (6) vertically positioned kerosene type burners mounted in designated ports provided at, the botton of the vessel.

Vessel temperature will be monitored by forty-two (42)

thermocouples located strategically on the vessel walls.

During a walk-through inspection, the inspector inspected the vessel insulation, the burners including the fuel supply system, and the thermocouple attachment welds.

At the time a

number of thermocouples were checked against layout drawings to verify whether their position and vessel elevation were as required.

Heating, holding and cooling rates together with temperatures will be recorded on strip charts.

These will be,

'eviewed by this office at, a later date.

The post. weld heat, treatment was scheduled to start. on/or about. September 20, 1978.

Safet -Related Structures (TANKS) - Observation of Work Activities Certain safety-related tanks including t.he condensate, gas decay and spent.

resin tanks had been inst.allied at.

the time of this inspection.

One of the gas decay tanks S/N 2649-02, the spent resin S/N CCE-60100 and condensate tanks S/N 6625-2A and 2B were

e I

RII. Report No.: 389/78-08 selected for work observation and record, review in order to determine whether applicable requirements, as well as work and inspection procedures had been met.

Within these areas the inspector reviewed applicable engineering drawings and verified location/

orientation and elevation.

Reviewed gA/gC records including receipt inspection, storage, code data reports and certificates of equipment.

gC had not signed-off on the installation at the time of this inspection.

c.

Concrete Pour On the morning of September 14 the inspector witnessed the receipt inspection of a concrete load used, in part, to top-off the fire wall of the start-up transformer.

The inspector witnessed the slump, weight, air and temperature checks made by gC personnel and recorded on Form 4310-71-1, Revision 1/77 "In Process Testing of Stress Concrete Report".

Within the areas inspected no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

Containment (Steel Structures and Su orts) - Observation of Work and Work Activities Field installation/welding of the polar crane support structure had been completed at the time of this inspection.

The controlling document for this work was CBRI's Drawings 36 and 37, Revisions 7 and 5, respectively, under Contract Number 73-73020.

Requirements for the work performed, welding, NDE, etc.,

were established by the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Subsection NE, 1971 Edition with addenda through the winter of 1972 and the CBRI Nuclear equality Assurance Manual for ASME III Products.

In order to ascertain whether applicable requirements, work and/or inspection procedures had been met, the inspector selected sections of the support structure listed under Hark Numbers 37-5, 37-A and 37-B R/L for work activity and/or supporting record review.

This included a review of the following:

a.

"Shop Release For Shipment Check Lists," Nos.

25, 29, 32, 34, 36, 38 and 40 b.

receipt inspections c.

Record Drawing Tables 61, 62, 63, and 64 d.

Record Drawing R15, Revision

Report No.: 389/78-08 e.

Magnetic Particle Reports 209 and 211 I

f.

NDE personnel qualifications (MT)

Results of checks for elevation and levelness of the crane girder, conducted in accordance with Procedure DC1N, Revision 0, paragraph 4.9 and recorded on Form FD-5, Document No. 4, folder 7.2.1 were reviewed.

The data showed all positions to be within tolerance except for positions

and 19 which exceeded the +1/4" over 25'-0 and positions 10 and

which were on the low side of the +3/4", -1/2" tolerance at the 129'-1/4" elevation.

Both findings had been identified and recorded under nonconformance list number 52.

Both items had been submitted to Ebasco Engineering for disposition.

In addition the inspector reviewed Field Change Request Number 2-499 generated to permit the rerouting of line number I-4-CV-20 which interfered with a vertical girder stiffner at the 137'-27'zimuth.

Within the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

k Containment (Steel Structures and Su orts) - Review of ualit Records equality records for crane girder supports were reviewed to determine whether they reflected material characteristics consistent with applicable requirements.

See paragraph 5 for the applicable code requirements.

"Shop Release for Shipment Checklist" which documents receipt inspection shop inspections and material certifications were reviewed for material under Mark Numbers 37-5, 37-B R/L and 37-A.

For these items the inspector verified by record review that construction/

erection drawing specifications were met; sections/assemblies were located as specified and that testing requirements were met as applicable.

Inspection personnel appeared to be adequately trained to perform their assignments.

Within the areas inspected no items of noncompliance or deviations were ident,ified.

Containment (Structural Steel Weldin

) - Review of ualit Records equality records of selected welds in the crane girder supports were reviewed to determine whether they were in conformance with established procedures, design specifications and applicable code requirements.

See paragraph 5 for applicable code requirements.

Cr

RII. Report No.: 389/78-08 Melds selected for this record review were identified as follows:

assembly B, Sections 1, 3, 4, 6, 7,

and 8; assembly 1-B, seam 1-B, 3-A, 3-B, 4-A, 6-B, 7-A, and 8-B.

For these welds the inspector reviewed QA/gC records covering dimensional checks; weld history including preheat and interpass temperature as applicable; RT reports; weld material control, including cerficiations receipt inspection and storage conditions; welder quali-fication records, updates and nonconformances as applicable.

In addition the inspector reviewed the following radiographs of crane girder support and assembly welds:

Crane Girder Su ort Section Seam Nos.:

1-A) 1-B 2-A) 2-B 3-A, 3-B 4-A, 4-B 5-B 8-A, 8-B Assembly D, Ring C

Assembly D, Ring B

Assembly A

Assembly 2G 2-D position 2-3 3-D positions 0-2, 4-7, 16-19 1-A position 0-1 2-G position 0-2

RII. Report No.: 389/78-08-7-Crane Girder Su ort Section Seam Nos.:

(Continued)

Assembly I, Ring 6 Assembly B, Ring C

Assembly

3-I positions 1-4, 15-17 2-B positions 4-6, 11-19-21 40 positions 0-2, 6-8 42 positions 0-2, 5-7 Within the areas inspected no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

8.

Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives, denoted in paragraph 1,

at the conclusion of the inspection.

The inspector identified the areas inspected which included work observation and record review of the polar crane girder supports; work observation and record review of safety-related tanks and review of containment postweld heat treatment procedures/activities.

P. O. BOX 013100, MIAMI, FL 33101

+Q)(It/~

FLORIDAPOWER & LIGHT COMPANY Mr. C. E..murphy Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia

. 30303

Dear Mr;- Nurphy:

Re; RII:BRC

'50-389 78-7 September 1 1, 1978 L-78-296

~ -SINAI Florida Power 8 Light Company has reviewed the subject inspection report.

There is no proprietary information contained in the report.

Very

'ly yours, Robert E. Uhrig Vice President REU/BJE/bb CC:

Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Region II Harold F. Reis, Esq

~P,g REC0 fp

~4

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION II

101 MARIETTASTREET, N.W.

ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 AUG 29 578 In Reply Refer To:

RII: BRC 50-389/78-7 Florida Power and Light Company Advanced Systems and Technology ATTN:

Dr. R. E. Uhrig, Vice President P. 0. Box 529100 Miami, Florida 33152 Gentlemen:

This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. B. R. Crowley of this office on July 18-21, 1978, 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 reported unresolved items.

The status of these items is discussed in the enclosed 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 it is claimed that the information is proprietary, and should be prepared so 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 AUG 29 578 Should you have any questions concerning this letter, we will be glad to discuss them with you.

Sincerely, Charles E.

M rphy, Ch ef Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch

Enclosure:

Inspection Report

No. 50-389/78-7

REGION II==

101 MARIETTASTREET, N.W.

ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 Docket No.:

50-389 License No.:

CPPR-144 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:

July 18-21, 1978 Inspector:

BE R. Crowley Reviewed b

.

T. E. Conlon, Chief Engineering Support Section No.

Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Da e

Ins ection Summa Ins ection on Jul 18-21 1978 (Re ort No. 50-389/78-7)

Areas Ins ected:

Followup on unresolved items; structural steel containment; major equipment supports.

The inspection involved 25 inspector-hours on site by one NRC inspector.

There were no Part 21 or 50.55(e)

items included in this inspection.

Results:

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-7 DETAILS I Prepared by:

B. R. Crowley, Metallurgi al Engineer Date Engineering Support Section No.

Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Dates of Inspection:

July 18-21, 1978 Reviewed b

T. E. Conlon, Chief Engineering Support Section No.

Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Dat 1.

Persons Contacted a.

Florida Power and Li ht Com an (FPSL)

+B. J. Escue, Site Manager

+N. T. Weems, Assistant QA Manager

+M. M. Hayward, QA Engineer

+J.

W. Adams, QA Engineer, Mechanical

E. W. Sherman, QA Engineer-R. E. Vaeth, Area Stores Supervisor B. M. Parks, Quality Engineer, Mechanical H. D. Averbach, QC Pipe Welding Supervisor J.

R. Behres, Mechanical Area QC Supervisor b.

Contractor Or anizations Chica o Brid e and Iron Co an (CBGI)

C. L. Fields, Project Welding and QA Superintendent

G. E. Rowe, QA Engineer K. A. Franz, Welding QA Engineer In addition to the above, the inspector interviewed other licensee and contractor personnel.

+Denotes those present at the exit interview.

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-7 I-2 2.

Licensee Actions on Previous Ins ection Findin s (Closed) Unresolved item (77-07-03):

Surface rust on stainless steel i e in stora e.

The licensee has determined that the rust was most likely caused by improper handling by the piping vendor.

Corrective action has been taken as documented by licensee memo to file dated 7/18/78.

This item is closed.

(

en) Unresolved item (78-06-03):

Control and Handlin of Discre ant Conditions.

The inspector observed storage conditions in warehouse G-2 and the southwest field storage area.

"Inspection Hold" areas are well defined and material on hold and material pending inspection is well segregated from accepted material.

However, the procedure controlling these activities is being revised.

This item remains open pending final procedure revision.

3.

Unresolved Items No unresolved items were identified during this inspection.

4.

Inde endent Ins ection Effort The inspector observed the welding activities described below relative to containment structural steel welding to determine whether the requirements of applicable specifications and procedures were being met.

Welding is being performed in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Subsection NE, 1971 Edition with addenda through the winter of 1972 as implemented by Ebasco Project Specification No. FL0-2998-757,

"Ebasco Specification Steel Containment Vessel."

a.

Seam B to C, "90 degrees - 180 degrees" on the bottom head was observed during in-process welding.

Weld appearance, use of the correct weld material, preheat, and welder qualification were examined.

b.

Ring 9 to 10, "90 degrees

- 180 degrees" and "180 degrees

- 270 degrees" welds were observed in the finished weld condition after preparation for NDE.

Weld surface condition was examined.

C.

In-process Helium Leak Rate Testing of bottom head, ring A, seams 1A and 2A was observed.

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-7 I-3 In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

5.

IE Bulletins (

en)

IEB 78-05: Malfunctionin of Circuit Breaker Auxilia Contact Mechanism-General Electric Model CR 105X The licensee responded by letter (L-78-219) dated June 26, 1978, stating that FPSL has requested from all suppliers of electrical equipment with a potential for use of the GE CR 105X auxiliary contact mechanisms a response in writing concerning its use. If these contacts are found in equipment to be supplied to St. Lucie Unit 2, the contacts will be replaced or modified in accordance with the GE service letter.

The results of this investigation will be available by September 1,

1978.

6.

Containment (Structural Steel Weldin ) - Review of ualit Records The inspector reviewed the quality records described below relative to containment welding to determine whether thh records were in conformance with established procedures and whether the records reflected work accomplishment consistent with applicable requirements.

In addition to the code and specification noted in paragraph 4. above, the records were compared with the requirements of CBRI implementing procedures specified in CBI "Nuclear equality Assurance Manual for ASME III Products, Division 4, Construction."

The following records were reviewed:

a.

Records relative to visual and dimensional inspections, weld history, preheat and interpass temperature,,NDE, weld material control, welder qualification and inspector qualification were reviewed for the following welds:

Ring 2-3, 90 degrees - 180 degrees Ring 3, Seam B

Ring 6-7, 180 degrees

- 270 degrees Ring 10-11, 270 degrees - 360 degrees Ring 11, Seam A

Ring 7, Seam F

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-7 I-4 Records reviewed, as applicable to the above welds, included:

(1)

CBRI Record Dwgs.

R8 and R9 (2)

CBGI Record Dwg. Table (RDT) Nos.

85, 83, 97, 96, 109 and 107 (3)

"Performance Qualification Test" forms for welders (4)

"Record of Nondestructive Examination Performance,"

"NDE Certification Data," and "Individual Training and Indoctrination Summary" for inspection personnel (5) 'adiographic film - reviewed RT reports and a sample of film for each weld (6)

"Work Record" for fitup, preheat and interpass temperature checks b.

"Welding Material Authorization and Release Report" Nos. 26, 28, and 29 were reviewed.

These reports document receipt inspection and material certification.

c A sample of "Daily Weld Material Distribution Log" sheets covering the dates for the above welds wepe reviewed.

CBSI "QA Program Audit 1978-2" and FPRL Audit No.

QAC-PSL2-78-12 were reviewed.

The corrective action for the finding of paragraph 6.2.1 (MT inspection not on master checklist)

of the CBSI audit was reviewed for timeliness and adequacy.

d.

CBRI "Nonconformance Control List" for nonconformances 36, 34, 30 and 20 was reviewed to determine if the records of the nonconformances were complete, legible, retrievable and properly closed out.

In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

7.

Containment Steel Structures and Su orts) - Review of Quality Records.

Quality records for containment plate were reviewed to determine whether records reflected material characteristics consistent with applicable requirements.

See paragraph 4.

and 6. for the applicable code, specification, and QA procedures.

"Shop Release for Shipment Checklists," which document receipt inspection and material certification, and "Material Heat No. Sheets,"

which correlate plate serial numbers with plate heat numbers, were reviewed for the following plates:

Shell Plates - Serial Nos. 12-4-15, 18, 33, 34, 31, 35> 36, 37, 79, 81, 80, 87, 78, and

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-7 I-5 Roof Plates - Serial Nos. 11-4-1, 2, 3, and

Top Head Plates - Serial Nos. 11-3-10, 14, 16, 12, 13, and 11-15"1 In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

8.

Containment Structural Steel Weldin

- Review of ualit Assurance I lementin Procedures.

The inspector reviewed the quality assurance implementing procedures listed below, related to major equipment support welding, to determine whether adequate procedures are included or referenced in the QA manual.

Design, fabrication and erection of class 1 structural steel equipment supports is being accomplished in accordance with Ebasco Specification FL0-2998-761.

Welding and NDE will be in accordance with AWS Structural Welding Code Dl.l-74.

Within the areas of nondestructive examination, calibration of welding equipment, control of preheat and interpass temperatures and control of repairs, the inspector reviewed the following procedures:

CSP 32, Rev.

1 - Field Welding Control CSP 10, Rev.

1 - Weld Repair Procedure QI 9.2, Rev.

1 - Inspection of Field Welding QI 9.3, Rev.

1 - Radiographic Inspection QI 9.4, Rev.

1 - Magnetic Particle Inspection AQR 10.2 - Nondestructive Examinations AQR 15.4 - Weld Repair Data In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

9.

Containment (Steel Structures and Su orts

- Observation of Work and Work Activities The inspector observed partially completed work and work records for the polar crane girder to determine whether activities relative to this structure were being accomplished in accordance with applicable

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-7 I-6 requirements.

The girder is being installed in accordance the code, specification and QA procedures referred to in paragraphs

. 4.

and 6. above.

The following work activities and records were examined:

a.

In-process fitup work was observed on partially fit assembly

"0 degrees

- 90 degrees."

Evidence of QC inspection and sign off of fitup was noted.

b.

Locating assembly

"270 degrees

- 0 degrees" in place on the containment shell was observed.

c.

For Seam 8-A on assembly

"270 degrees

- 0 degrees",

RDT 63 and RT report 16 were reviewed.

d.

For Seam 4-A on assembly

"0 degrees

- 90 degrees,"

RDT 62 and RT report 11 were reviewed.

e.

Training and qualification records for personnel involved in inspection and NDE of above activities were reviewed.

l~

f.

Record dwg. R15 was reviewed.

g.

"Shop Release For Shipment Checklist" and "Material Heat No.

Sheet" for plates Serial Nos. 37-A-4, 10, 12, and 13 were reviewed.

In the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

10.

Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives denoted in paragraph 1 at the conclusion of the inspection and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.

In addition to the general scope of the inspection, the licensee action on the two unresolved items of paragraph 2 were discussed.

The licensee had no dissenting comments.

FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY June 5,

1978 L-78-.194~M

Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director, Region II Office of Inspection and Enforcement U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 230 Peachtree Street, N. W., Suite 1217 Atlanta, Georgia 30303

Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

Re:

RII:ALC 50-389/78-5 Florida Power

& Light Company has reviewed the subject inspection report.

re is no proprietary information contained in the report.

Very truly yours, Robert E. Uhrig

Vice President REU: BJE:sl cc:

Harold F. Reis, Esquire PEOPLE... SERVING PEOPLE

I

<a~ "aalu (4

~o

)

<7 kg*~+

In Reply Refer To:

RII:ALC 50-389/78-5 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION II

230 PEACHTREE STREET, N.W. SUITE 1217 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 NAY 2 6 1978 Florida Power and Light Company Advanced Systems 6 Technology Attn:

Robert E. Uhrig, Vice President P. 0.

Box 529100 Miami, Florida 33152 Gentlemen:

This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. A. L. Cunningham of this office on May 3, l978, of activities authorized by NRC Construction Permit No.

CPPR-144 for the St. Lucie 2 facility, and to the discussion of our findings held with Mr. B. J.

Escue at the conclusion of the inspection.

The area examined during the inspection was confined to the concrete batch plant and related activities associated with its operation.

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 enforcement matters.

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 it is claimed that the information is proprietary, and should be prepared so 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.

tO

~

'

MAY 8 6 1978 Florida Power and Light Co.

Should you have any questions concerning this letter, we will be glad to discuss them with you.

Sincerely, J. T. Sutherland, Chief Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch

Enclosure:

Inspection Report

No. 50-389/78-5

REGION II==

230 PEACHTREE STREET, N.W. SUITE 1217 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 Report No.:

50-389/78-5 Docket No.:

50-389 License No.:

CPPR-144 Licensee:

Florida Power and Light Company 9250 West Flagler Street P. 0.

Box 013100 Miami, Florida 33101 Facility Name:

St. Lucie Unit 2 Inspection at:

St. Lucie Plant Site, Hutchinson Island, Florida Inspection conducted:

May 3, 1978 Inspector:

A. L. Cunningham A

Reviewed by W. Hufham, Chief Environmental and Special Projects Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Date Ins ection Summar Ins ection on Ma

1978:

Re ort No. 50-389/78-5)

Areas Ins ected:

Routine unannounced inspection of environmental protection confined to followup on previously identified enforcement item; concrete batch plant and related activities associated with its operation.

The inspection involved 2 inspector-hours on-site by one NRC inspector.

"

Results:

No items of noncompliance or deviations were disclosed.

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-5 DETAILS I Prepared by:

A. L. Gunn ngham, E

nmental Scientist Environmental and Special Projects Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Dates of Inspection:

May 3, 1978 Reviewed b

J.

W. Hufham, Chief Environmental and Special Projects Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Date 1.

Persons Contacted

B. J. Escue, Site Manager W. M. Hayward, Quality Assurance Engineer Construction

W. R. Truew, Environmental Control Engineer (EBASCO)

C. A. Moore, Chemical Supervisor (St.'ucie Unit 1)

Denotes those present at exit interview.

2.

Licensee Action on Previous Ins ection Findin s (Closed)

Noncompliance (50-389/77-2):

Control Procedures.

Inspec-tion of the concrete batch plant disclosed that adequate corrective actions were implemented to comply with Administrative Site Procedure ASP-9.

There were no further questions regarding this item.

3.

Unresolved Items No unresolved items were disclosed during this inspection.

4.

Plant Site Ins ection a ~

Section 3.G(2) of the Construction Permit requires the licensee to establish a control program to provide for periodic review of all construction activities to assure that such activities conform to the environmental conditions defined in the permit.

The licensee's Administrative Site Procedure ASP-9, entitled

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-5 I-2 Environmental Protection Control, was developed to implement the following: (1) conditions and commitments defined in the Construction Permit to minimize adverse environmental impact; (2) assignment of responsibility for assuring implementation of the procedure (ASP-9)

and all of its requirements; (3) specific procedures for control of construction activities, e.g. solid, chemical and sanitary waste disposal, dredging, site dewatering, and area surface drainage;(4)

surveillance and reporting concerning active areas of construction; (5) maintenance of daily surveillance logs and submission of monthly reports generated therefrom to the site manager; (6) corrective actions with regard to environmental impact problems; (7) orientation and t'raining.

b.

ASP-9 Procedure No. 8.4.3 requires that concrete truck wash-out be conducted in an area of the site designated for future filland that additional batch plant liquid waste be disposed of via percolation/evaporation.

Noncompliance with the above procedure was the subject of the enforcement item referenced in paragraph 2.

Inspection of the concrete batch plant and surrounding area disclosed the following: (1) batch plant area was regraded to control and divert drainage into the designated mangrove area reserved for future fill; (2) concrete truck wash area was relocated to divert drainage to the designated zone;',(3)

batch plant liquid waste was diverted to the above cited zone for disposal via percolation and evaporation.

The inspector informed licensee representatives that the corrective actions observed appeared adequate.

This item was formally closed out at the exit interview.

Exit Interview I

The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)

at the conclusion of the inspection on May 3, 1978.

The inspector summarized the scope of the inspection and discussed the findings contained herein.

P. O. BOX 013100, MIAMI, FL 33101 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY June 7, 1978 L-78-198 Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director, Region II Office of Inspection and Enforcement

,'/

U.

S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission I'30 Peachtree Street, N.W., Suite 818 Atlanta, Georgia 30303

Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

Re:

RII:RWW My letter to you of May 8, 1978 (L-78-166), advised you that

~~were processing a revision to our procedures to correct the 5%consistency found in the subject report.

That revision has now been approved and a copy of the revised procedure is attached for'your information.

The revised procedure will be issued within the next few weeks.

Very truly yours, Robert E. Uhrig Vice President REU:MV:sl Attachments cc:

Harold F. Reis, Esquire

~PS Af'.00 Wp0

+***+

In Reply Refer To:

RII:RWW 50-389/78-4 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION II

230 PEACHTREE STREET, N.W. SUITE 1217 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 ggf," r 574 Florida Power and Light Company Advanced Systems and Technology ATTN:

Dr. R. E. Uhrig, Vice President P. 0.

Box 529100 Miami, Florida 33152 Gentlemen:

Thank you for your letter of May 8, 1978, informing us of steps you have taken to correct the item of noncompliance concerning activities under NRC Construction Permit No.

CPPR-144 brought to your attention in our letter of April 12, 1978.

We will examine your corrective actions and plans during subsequent inspections.

We appreciate your cooperation with us.

Sincerely, Charles E.

r y,

C 'ef Reactor Construction

& Engineering Support Branch cc:

Mr. C.

M. Wethy, Plant Manager St. Lucie Plant P. 0. Box 128 Ft. Pierce, Florida 33450 Mr. Nat Weems, Assistant QA Manager P.

O. Box 128 Ft. Pierce, Florida 33450

~~l C

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

F LORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY May 8, 1978 L-78-166 Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director, Region II Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.

S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 230 Peachtree Street, N.W., Suite 818 Atlanta, Georgia 30303

Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

Re:

RII:RWW 50-389/78-4 Florida Power

& Light Company has reviewed the subject inspection report and a response is attached.

There is no proprietary information contained in the report.

ry truly yours, rgb

/X~~~

Robert E. Uhrig Vice President REU:BJE:MV:sl Attachment

cc:

Harold F. Reis, Esquire

ATTACHMENT RII:RWW 50-389 78-4 Construction Quality Control Procedure CPL:

QI 2.1, Revision 3, Section 4.3 authorized Level 1 Inspectors to perform work functions (reporting of-inspection and test results)

not permitted by FPL's Quality Assurance Manual, Procedure QP 2.9, Revision 0.

~Res onse:

Florida Power

& Light Company has reviewed the identified deficiency item No. 78-04-01 and agrees that corrective action is necessary.

Corrective Action:

procedural inconsistency does exist between QP 2.9 and CPL:QI 2.1.

A revision is being processed to correct. this inconsistency.

The next meeting of the QA/QC Coordination Committee, to be held at the end of May, will address this revision.

A copy of the revised procedure will be subsequently forwarded to your office.

N l

,I g

gyes REC0

~a*+~

In Reply Refer-To:

RII:RWW 50-389/78-4 UNIT E D STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION II

230 PEACHTREE STREET. N.W. SUITE 1217 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 APR 1R 1978 Florida Power and Light Company Advanced Systems and Technology Attn:

Dr. R. E. Uhrig, Vice President P. 0. Box 529100 Miami, Florida 33152 Gentlemen:

This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. R. W. Wright of this office 'on March 27-31, 1978, of activities authorized by NRC Con-struction 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.

We have examined actions you have taken with regard to previously reported unresolved item.

The status of these items is discussed in the enclosed report.

During the inspection, it was found that certain activities under your license appear to be in noncompliance with NRC requirements.

This item and references to pertinent requirements are listed in the Notice of Violation enclosed herewith as Appendix A.

This notice is sent to you pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.201 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations.

Section 2.201 requires you to submit to this office, within 20 days of your receipt of this notice, a written statement or explanation in reply including:

(1)

corrective steps which have been taken by you and the results achieved; (2) corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further noncompliance; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved.

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

APR 12 1978 Florida Power and Light Company 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 it is claimed that the information is proprietary, and should be prepared so 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.

Should you have any questions concerning this letter, we will be glad to discuss them with you.

Sincerely, C. E. Murp

, Chief Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch

'nclosures:

l.

Appendix A, Notice of Violation 2.

RII Inspection Report No.

50-389/78-4 cc w/encl:

Mr. C.

M. Wethy, Plant Manager St. Lucie Plant P. 0. Box 128 Ft. Pierce, Florida 33450 Mr. Nat Weems, Assistant QA Manager P. 0. Box 128 Ft. Pierce, Florida 33450

APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Florida Power and Light Company License No.:

CPPR-144 Based on'the results of the NRC inspection conducted on March 27-31, 1978, it appears that certain of your activities were not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements as indicated below.

These items have been categorized as described in our correspondence to you dated December 31, 1974.

Criterion II of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, as implemented by the FP&L Topical Quality Assurance Report, Section 2. 2.2 specifies, in part, that "Each quality procedure shall be written to address criteria contained in the Topical Quality Requirements."

Contrary to the above requirement, Construction Quality Control Procedure QI 2.1, Revision 3, Section 4.3 authorizes Level I inspectors to perform work functions (reporting of inspection and test results)

not permitted by FP&L's Quality Assurance Manual Procedure QP 2.9, Revision 0.

This is a deficiency.

<<,<<<<<<I

~P,R RECT

'y

~**<<+

UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION II

230 PEACHTREE STREET, N.W. SUITE 1217 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 Report No.:

50-389/78-04 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:

March 27-31, 1978 Inspector:

R.

W. Wright Reviewed by:

A. R. Herdt, Chief Projects Section Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch D te Ins ection Summa Ins ection on March 27-31 1978 (Re ort No. 50-389/78-04)

Areas Ins ected:

Followup inspection of an unresolved item; qualifica-tion of inspection, examination and testing personnel; contractor gA program; containment steel structure activities; construction status; and handling of IEBs.

The inspection involved 34 inspector-hours on site by one NRC inspector.

Results:

Of the six areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in five areas, one apparent item of noncompliance (Deficiency - Level I procedural discrepancy)

was identified in one area.

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-4 I

DETAILS I R.

W. Wright, Principal Inspector Projects Section Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch 9Jli gg ate Dates of Inspect on:

March 27-31, 1978 Reviewed by:

A. R. Herdt, Chief Pro)ects Section Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch

'/~ r8 Date 1.

Persons Contacted a.

Florida Po~er and Li ht Com an (FPL

B. J.

Escue, Site Manager

W. M, Hayward, QA Engineer Construction

R. A. Symes, QA Engineer Construction

J. W. Adams, QA Engineer

, Construction

D. R. Cooper, QA Engineer Construction

E. W. Sherman, QA Engineer - Design

D. R. Stone, Superintendent, Construction QC

J. L. Parker, Project QC Supervisor N. T. Weems, Assistant QA Manager Construction B. M. Parks, QA Engineer Construction 0. J. Karch, QA Engineer Construction b.

Contractor Or anizations (1)

Bi e Power Constructors (BPC J.

G.

Campos, Site Manager C. E. Ward, Assistant Site Manager (2)

Chica o Brid e and Iron Com an CBI

C. L. Fields, Pro)ect Welding and QA Superintendent

Denotes those present at the eRit interview conducted on March 31, 1978.

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-4 I-2 2.

Licensee Actions on Previous Ins ection Findin s en) Unresolved Item 77-07-03 Surface Rust on Stainless Steel Pi e In Stora e

The inspector examined the storage condition of the type 304 stainless steel containment spray piping previously discussed in RII Rpt. No. 50-389/77-7 and the licensee's actions to close the item to date.

This deficiency (No.

1048R)

was upgraded to a Non-conformance Report No.

431R whose disposition approved by site, design and power plant engineering recommends that'the subject spools be handled in accordance with the memo Petrick to Borchardt April ll, 1974.

The above memo recommends that the subject piping be stored as i.s, the piping capped at the ends.

Prior to spool installation, each piece is to be cleaned internally using a high pressure potable water jet flush.

The exterior is to be scrubbed with a stainless steel wool, washed with a tri-sodium phosphate solution, rinsed with potable water and dried.

No grinding of the

. exterior should be attempted.

This item will remain open pending RII's further examination of the matter.

3.

Unresolved Items No new unresolved items were identified during this inspection.

4.

Inde endent Ins ection Effort ualification of Ins ection Examination and Testi Personnel Section 10.2.3, "Inspection Personnel" of the FPL Topical Quality Assurance Report (TQAR) requires inspection personnel to be qualified, certified and be kept current in accordance with appropriate codes, standards and/or company training programs.

a.

FPL Personnel The licensee's QA Manual (QAH) Procedure No.

QP 2.9 describes the education, experience and requirements" for the qualifica-tion and certification of individuals who perform Quality Control inspection activities other than NDE.

This procedure follows the guidance provided in ANSI Standard N45.2.6-1973.

Appendix C to the TQAR specifies that where special training is not required to perform a function certain personnel may be trained only to the extent necessary to perform the assigned function.

Personnel who perform NDE functions are required to be certified in accordance with SNT-TC-lA and supplements.

Construction Quality Control Procedures Nos. QI 2.1, "Certifi-cation of Plant Construction QC Inspection Personnel, Rev. 3"

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-4 I-3 and QI 2.7,

"NDE Personnel Qualification and Certification Rev. 2" implement the above QAM requirements.

The RII inspector examined the licensee's commitments in the TQAR and QAM versus the implementing QIs and actual qualifications and certification records for 13 various disciplined inspector and NDE qualified personnel.

One Level II, Civil-Concrete Inspector was found lacking approximately 13 months QA experience as recommended.

Since education and experience requirements specified in ANSI N45.2.6 are not to be treated as absolute and the subject individual deficient in job experience had a

BS degree in Civil Engineering this position could be justified.

Except for the above mentioned example FPL inspector qualifications and certifications examined were found to meet or exceed ANSI N45.2.6 requirements.

While cross referencing the FPL commitments made in the QAM, QP 2.9, Rev.

0, with those in the implementing Construction QC Procedure QI No. 2.1, Rev.

3, the RII inspector found that Section 4.3 of the above QI authorized Level I inspectors to, perform reporting of inspection and test results; work functions not permitted by QP 2.9 nor ANSI N45.2.6.

The Superintendent of Construction QC discussed apparent reasons to support the FPL work function levels as permitted by the subject QI when one takes into consideration the overall FPL QA Program.

RII inspector observations of previous work and discussions with responsible QA/QC engineers revealed that on most occasions a

Level II or Level III inspector has either executed, supervised, or performed surveillance over Level I activities to date; therefore, this noncompliance can be considered a procedural disagreement of minor consequence.

For these reasons this finding is categorized at the severity level of deficiency in lieu of an infraction.

The licensee was informed that this matter would be identified as Deficiency Item No. 78-04-01,

"Level I, Procedural Discrepancy."

b.

CBI Personnel Section 2.2.4 of the TQAR permits FPL to delegate to other organizations, such as CBI, the work of establishing and executing any portion of the QA Program although FPL retains overall responsibility for the program.

CBI is errecting, welding and performing required NDE for Unit 2's steel con-tainment vessel.

CBI's NDE personnel are trained, qualified and certifie'd in accordance with CBI's QAM Division 4, Section 9.3 and their manual entitled "Nondestructive Examination

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78<<4 I-4 Personnel Training, Qualification, and Certification" which conforms to the requirements of SNT-TC-1A and its supplements.

The certifications of two CBI NDE inspectors were examined and found satisfactory.

Within the above areas of CBI inspection no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

5.

Review of Contractor A Pro ram a.

A Manual Review Bigge Power Constructors (BPC), is providing the services for the transporting, rigging, hoisting and setting of power plant structures, equipment, and components.

FPL is providing QA/QC contractor surveillance in accordance with approved contractor operating procedures.

The RII inspector reviewed the "Bigge Power Constructor QA Manual, Revision 6, dated April 1977 and

"Contractor Operating Procedures',"

COP-5-1, thru 5-6 to assure adequate plans and procedures had been established for the scope of work.

This review included site organization, provisions for, 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.

b.

Contractor Audits FPL's TQAR Section 2.2.4 xequires the QA Department to review and approve contractor QA Programs and to audit the implementa-tion of the contractor's program.

The RII inspector reviewed FPL audit No. QAC-17-18(A), "Bigge Power Services QA Manual,"

and reaudit No. QAC-17-18(B) which eventually resulted in no unsatisfactory findings and a

QA manual responsive to FPL's quality program.

The RII inspector also examined audit No.

QAC-77-74, "Quality Assurance Construction Audit of Load Testing of the Bigge Barge Facility" conducted January 5,

1978, resulting in a clear audit.

C ~

Contractor Facilities The RII inspector conducted discussions with Bigge site personnel and visually examined Bigge's lifting and trans-porting facilities. The recently delivered reactor vessel and reactor vessel head storage conditions were inspected.

Within the above areas of the contractors QA program no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-4 I-5 6.

Containment (Steel Structures and Su orts The below listed drawings and records for the partial and completed work observed for containment plate sections designated by serial numbers 22 and 38 connected by vertical weld joint I in ring C; plate serial numbers 26 and 21 connected by vertical weld joint J in ring C; and penetration assembly 18-A which was in the fit-up phase to be welded to plate serial number 9 were examined by the RII inspector.

These records were examined to ascertain that applicable CBI QA manual requirements were followed in the areas of receipt inspection and storage, installation/errection, testing and NDE, inspection, qualifications of NDE and inspection personnel, and calibrations of test equipment.

Records Examined Form GO 681,

"Shop Release for Shipment Check List" Form GO 830, "Material Heat Number Sheet" Purchase Contract No. NY422501, "Steel Containment Vessel Supplement No. 6" (All ANSI N45. 2. 9 records shall be turned over to FP&L upon completion of the work)

CBI Drawing R5, Revision 3, "Final Vessel Bottom Head Plates" Form No. 73-7302,

"Record Drawing Table" (Fit-up, record welding procedure specification used, repair procedure used, weld checked, finish joint checked)

Form GO 827, "Report of Radiography Examination" Randomly selected radiographs for viewing film density to evaluate radiographic quality and calibration of RT test equipment Certification of RT NDE personnel with requirements of NE-5500 - (SNT-TC-IA)

Within the above a'reas of inspection no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

7.

Construction Status St. Lucie Plant Unit 2 is estimated to be approximately 15X complete based on procurement expenditures and construction efforts expended.

CBI is currently hanging the fourth ring of a total of twelve to be fitted-up and welded prior to post heat treating tentatively scheduled to begin around September-October 1978.

J. L. Parker formerly a FPL site QA Engineer has been designated Project QC Supervisor effective March 27, 1978.

'0 RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-4 I-6 8.

IE Bulletins a.

(Closed IEB 77-04 Controllin H of Containment Sum Water Followin a LOCA FPL submitted an interim response to the subject IEB on January 6,

1978 (L-.78-10) and a final letter of response (L-78-55) dated February 14, 1978.

The licensee has identi-fied Section 6.2.6 of the PSAR as the pertinent section which contains design criteria and system description for a spray additive system which will establish the containment pH.

The final system design to assure control of the containment sump pH under all operating conditions will be provided in the St. Lucie Unit No.

2 FSAR.

RII has no further questions regarding this matter at this time.

b.

(Closed)

IEB 77-05 77-05A Electrical Connector Assemblies FPL's letter of January 27, 1978 (L-78-33) states that safety-related connectors to be used on Unit No.

2 will be environmentally qualified in accordance with IEEE-323, 1971.

A composite listing of safety-related connector qualifications will be provided in the FSAR.

RII has no further questions regarding this matter at this time.

Co (Closed)

IEB 77-07 Containment Electrical Penetration Assemblies The licensee submit ted an interim response to the subj ect IEB on January 6,

1978 (L-78-9) and a final letter of response (L-78-96) dated March 17, 1978.

The St. Lucie Unit No.

containment electrical penetrations are not the GE Series 100 or a similar design as described in the subject bulletin.

Unit 2 plans to utilize electrical, penetrations manufactured by Conax.

Nitrogen pressurization for the Conax penetration is required only during assembly leakage testing and never during normal operation.

Section 3.11.1.1 of the PSAR describes the LOCA environmental conditions these Conax penetrations will meet.

This will be verified by a design review of the Conax qualifications report supplied with the assemblies and through testing which will be described in the FSAR.

RII has no further questions regarding, this matter at this time.

h

RII Rpt. No. 50-389/78-4 I-7 d.

(Closed)

IEB 77-08 Assurance of'afet and Safe uards Duri an Emer enc Lockin S stems The licensee responded by letter (L-78-75) dated February 28, 1978, stating the St. Lucie Unit No.

2 plant security system is being designed in accordance with 'the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55.

FPL plans to incorporate the design bases outlined in IB 77-08 for Unit 2's plant security system to the extent they are practicable and do not conflict with other requirements.

The St. Lucie Unit No.

2 Plant Emergency and Security procedures, when finalized, will take into account the concerns addressed in the subject IEB. RII has no further questions regarding this matter at this time.

e.

(0 en)

IEB 78-01 Flammable Contact-Arm Retainers In GE CR120A Rela s

The licensee's letter (L-78-97) dated March 17, 1978, advises that his A-E needs more time to adequately evaluate and respond to the subject IEB and states he will submit a response by April 14, 1978.

f.

(0 en)

IEB 78-02 Terminal Block uglification The licensee's interim letter (L-78-64) dated February 22, 1978, states FPEL plans to submit their response by March 31, 1978.

9.

Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)

at the conclusion of the inspection on March 31, 1978. The inspector summarized the scope of the inspection as follows: Followup inspection of unresolved item 77-07-03; review of qualifications of inspection, examination and testing personnel; Bigge's QA program; containment steel structure activities; con-struction status; the handling of IEBs; and described the details concerning a new item of noncompliance identified {discussed in the last paragraph in section 4a).

No dissenting comments were received from the licensee.

~

FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY March 22, 1978 L-78-101 Mr. James P. O'Reilly Director, Region II Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.

S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 230 Peachtree Street, N.W., Suite 818 Atlanta, Georgia 30303

Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

Re:

RII:RNW 50-389/78-3 lorida Power

& Light Company has reviewed the subject spection report.

There is no proprietary information contained in the report.

Very truly yours, robert E. Uhrig Vice President REU:BJE:sl cc:

Robert Lowenstein, Esquire

f

'1,-)t'g8 RE0(

Cy C

C O

'

++*++

In Reply Refer To:

RII:RWW 50-389/78-3 UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION II

230 PEACHTREE STREET, N.W. SUITE 818 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 MW

1978 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 February 6-10, 1978, of activities authorized by NRC Con-struction Permit No.

CPPR-144 for the SI, Lucie Unit 2 facility, and to the discussion of our findings held wit. Hr. 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 enforcement matters.

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 it is claimed that the information is proprietary, and should be prepared so 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.

Sincerely, C. E. Murp

, Chief Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch

Enclosure:

RII Inspection Report No.

50-389/78-3

REGION II==

230 PEACHTREE STREET, N.W. SUITE 818 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 pl.p

', 878 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. N. Economos of this office on January 30 to February 2, 1978, 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.