IR 05000400/1978008
| ML18003A399 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 12/11/1978 |
| From: | Bradley R, Bryant J, Herdt A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18003A390 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-400-78-08, 50-400-78-8, 50-401-78-08, 50-401-78-8, 50-402-78-08, 50-402-78-8, 50-403-78-08, 50-403-78-8, NUDOCS 7901290416 | |
| Download: ML18003A399 (19) | |
Text
gyes ~EC0C Wp
+
Cy
/
"lI*~>>
UNITE D STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTASTREET. N.W.
ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 Report Nos.:
50-400/78-8, 50-401/78-8, 50-402/78-8 and 50-403/78-8 Docket Nos.:
50-400, 50-401, 50-402 and 50-403 License Nos.:
CPPR-158, CPPR-159, CPPR-160 and CPPR-161 Categories:
A2, A2, A2, A2 Licensee:
Carolina Power and Light Company 336 Fayetteville Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Facility Name:
Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant Units 1, 2, 3 and
Inspection at:
Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Wake and Chatham Counties North Carolina Inspection conducted:
November 14-16, 1978 Reviewed by Inspectors:
R.
D. Bradley J.
C. Bryant A. L. Cunningham J.
R. Harris J.
e han A. R. Herdt, Chief Projects Section Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch
/
i. 7y ate Ins ection Summar Ins ection on November 14-16 1978 (Re ort Nos. 50-400/78-8 50-401/78-8 50-402/78-8 and 50-403/78-8 identified items; work performance and gA/gC controls on structural concrete; site preparation; lakes, dams and canals; and the reviev of gA Manual proce-dures for safety related structural steel and supports.
This inspection involved 82 inspector-hours on site by five NRC inspectors.
Results:
Of the six areas involved, no apparent items of noncompliance were identified in four areas; three apparent items of noncompliance were identified in two areas (infraction - failure to calibrate fine aggregate'ieves
- paragraph 4, Details II; deficiency - road dust impact - paragraph 4,
Details III; deficiency - surface water contamination
- paragraph 5, Det,ails III).
7001 290 y/g
RII Rpt.
Nos. 50-400/78-8, 50-401/78-8, 50-402/78-8 and 50-403/78-8 DETAILS I
Prepared by:
R.
.
le
, Principal I ector Projects Section Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch
/
II 7 Dates of Inspec n
N vember 14-16, 1978 Reviewed by:
A. R. Herdt, Chief Projects Section Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch i~gn yg Date 1.
Persons Contacted a.
Carolina Power and Li ht Com an (CP&L)
""E.
""S.
~en
+R.
""N.
G
"B.
- T.
S. Noell, Manager, Transmission Engineering and Construction D. Smith, Manager, Power Plant Construction H. Vyllie, Manager of Nuclear Construction M. Parsons, Site Manager J. Chiangi, Manager, Engineering and Construction QA L. Forehand, Principal QA Specialist M. Lucas, Resident Engineer L. Montague, Director of Project Analysis W. Pritchett, Envirocunantal Scientist b.
Contractor Or anizations (1)
Ebasco Services Inc.
I. Ciloglu, Geologist (2)
Daniel Construction Com an
++W.
D.
Goodman, Construction Manager The inspector also interviewed three other employees during the course of the inspection.
They included a
QA inspector, licensee geologist, and contractor geotechnical engineer.
- Denotes tho'se present at environraental exit interview on November 15, 1978.
~Denotes those present at reactor construction exit interview on November 16, 1978.
++4'Denotes those present at both exit interview RII Rpt. Nos. 50-400/78-8, 50-401/78"8, 50-402/78-8 and 50-403/78-8 I-2 2.
Licensee Action on Previous Ins ection Findin s
3.
This area was not inspected.
Unresolved Items 4.
No new unresolved items were identified.
Inde endent Ins ection Effort a
~
Pro ect Status and Site Ins ection The inspector conducted a walk-through inspection of the site which included observation of the major excavations for Unit 3 and 4 containment buildings; the Fuel Handling Building; Waste Processing Building; Unit 1 Containment Building; the main dam core and conduit trenches and spillway; and the coffer dam and siltation pond on Buckhorn Creek.
Erection of the fourth ring of the wall liner plate for Unit
containment is very near completion and total wall liner erection is approximately 20~ complete.
Concrete, placement in the Fuel Handling Building was active with a 3,000 yard foundation mat being completed at elevation 236'.
The combined work force now totals some 2,750 people.
b.
Concrete Mix Re ro ortionment It was noted that effective November 14, 1978, cement content for mixes M-44 and M-56 have been reduced as provided for in specifi-cation CAR-SH-CH-6, "Concrete,"
and ASME/ACI 359,Section III, Division 2 (1975 edition through Winter 1975 addenda).
Through a
statistical analysis in accordance with specification CAR-SH-CH-6 and ACI-214, it was shown that it is feasible and statistically sound to reduce the cement content of these mixes.. The mixes have been reproportioned to incorporate the cement reduction and testing has been accomplished to assure the validity of statistical results.
5.
Review of A Manual The inspectors reviewed the documents listed below and discussed with responsible CP6L personnel the associated QA program work in the areas of handling and installation related to Safety Related Structures (Structural Steel and Supports).
The review confirmed that adequate QA plans, instructions and procedures for specific safety related
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-400/78-8, 50-401/78-8, 50-402/78-8 and 50-403/78-8 activities have been established in the QA manuals and that these documents conform to the QA program as described in Section 1.8 of the PSAR.
The following Construction QA Procedures (CQA), Construction QC Procedures (CQC), Construction Technical Procedures (TP), Construction Work Procedures (WP),
and Construction Administrative Procedures (AP) were reviewed as typical of the applicable documents:
CQA-1 CQA-2 CQA-3 CQA-4 CQA-5 CQA-8 CQC-1 CQC-2 CQC-4 CQC-6 CQC-7 CQC-8 TP-04 TP-05 TP-17 WP-18 AP-IV-03 AP-IX-04 AP-IX-05 AP-XIII-0
.Personnel Training and Qualification QA Document Control Construction Site QA Surveys QA Records Document Review Material Issue Control Tool and Measuring Device Control Nonconformance Control Procurement Control Receiving Inspection Marking and Tagging Storage Control Calibration of Controlled Tools Inspection of Field Installed Embedded Plates, Penetrations and Anchor Bolts Training and Qualification of Civil Construction Inspection Personnel Construction -Inspection Nonconformance Control Embedded Steel Fabrication and Placement Preparation, Approval and Control of Procedures Request for Clarification of Information (RCI)
Field Change Request
Material Issue No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Exit Interviews The inspector met with the licensee and contractor representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the environmental inspec-tion on November 15, 1978 and at the conclusion of the reactor construc-tion inspection on November 16, 1978.
The purpose and scope of each inspection was summarized and the licensee was informed of the apparent noncompliances discussed in paragraph 4 of Details II and paragraphs
and 5 of Details III.
The licensee acknowledged these finding RII Rpt.
Nos. 50-400/78-08, 50-401/78-08, 50-402/78-08, and 50-403/78-08 II-1 DETAILS 11 Prepared by:
C Q.) 7y R. Harris, Civil E gineer/Geologist ate Engineering Support Section No.
Reactor Construction and Engineering Su port Branch
,J.
. Lenahan, Civil Engineer Engineering Support Section No.
Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch ate Dates of Inspection:
November 14-16, 1978 Reviewed by:
J.
C. Bryan
, Chief Engineering Support Section No.l Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch I5 D te Persons Contacted a.
Carolina Power and Li ht Com an (CP&L)
-R.
M. Parsons, Site Manager-T. H. Wyllie, Manager of Nuclear Construction
"N. J. Chiangi, Manager of Engineering and Construction QA
- S.
D. Smith, Manager of Power Plant Construction-A. M. Lucas, Resident Engineer-J.
F. Nevill, Senior Civil Engineer E. L. Kellog, Senior Civil QA Specialist D. Canady, Geologist
- G. L. Forehand, Principal QA Specialist S. Hinnant, Senior Electrical Engineer T. Pritchett, Scientist b.
Ebasco Services Incor orated I. Ciloglu, Geologist D. Johnson, Geotechnical Engineer S. Harper, Geologist
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-400/78-08, 50-401/78-08, 50-402/78-08, and 50-403/78-08 II-2 c.
Daniel Construction Com an
-'W. B.
Goodman, Project Manager
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Ins ection Findin s
This area was not inspected.
3.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncom-pliance, or deviations.
Unresolved items identified during this inspection are discussed in paragraphs 4, 5, and 6.
4.
Inde endent Ins ection Effort The inspectors examined the following areas:
a.
Overall construction status b.
Partial placement of pour number 1RASL236019 in the RAB Common Building c.
Curing of pour number 1FHSL236017 in the Fuel Handling Building d.
Soils testing laboratory e.
Concrete batch plant and concrete testing laboratory f.
Concrete reinforcement steel storage area.
Observation of work activities at the concrete testing laboratory disclosed the following noncompliance.
Specification number CAR-SH-CH"6 and referenced ASTM Standard C-136 require that sieves used for grain size analysis conform to ASTM Standard E-11.
Contrary to the above, discussions with responsible engineers indicated that sieves used for grain size analysis of fine aggregate are not checked for conformance to ASTM Standard E-11.
Failure to perform test activities as required by documented instructions is contrary to Criterion V of Appendix B to
CFR 50 and was identified to the licensee as Infraction 400-78-08-03 and 401-78-08-03.
Observation of work activities at the soils laboratory, examination of procedures, and discussions with responsible engineers disclosed the following unresolved item.
CP&L procedure CgC-1,
"Tool and Measuring Device Control",
states the requirement for periodic
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-400/78-08, 50-401/78"08, 50-402/78-08, and 50-403/78-08 II-3 calibration of testing equipment used to control safety related work activities and lists the equipment which requires calibration.
Procedure CQC-1 appears to be in conflict with the requirements of ASTM standards referenced in specifications CAR-SH-CH-4 and CAR-SH-CH-8 in that CQC-1 does not require calibration of soils laboratory equipment such as liquid limit devices and drying ovens.
This wys identified to the licensee as Unresolved Item 400-78-08-04, 401-78-08-04, 402-78-08-04, and 403-78-08-04.
Site Pre aration - Review of ualit Assurance Im lementin Procedures Units
2
and
The inspectors performed a follow-up inspection of QA-QC controls for site preparation.
The following procedures and specifications were examined to determine if work activities and quality control and quality assurance functions were provided for as stipulated in NRC requirements and PSAR Section 1.8 and Appendix 5E.
a.
Specification CAR-SH-CH-8,
"Excavation, Backfill, Filling, and Grading" b.
CPEL Procedure TP-08,
"Soil Control Program - Class I Dams, Fill, and Backfill" c.
CPRL Procedure CQA-9, "Soil Control" Examination of the above procedures disclosed the following unresolved item.
Specification CAR-SH-CH-8 needs clarification on moisture control requirements for backfill at time of compaction as it does, not appear to meet the requirements of PSAR Appendix 5E, paragraph 2.6 for moisture control.
The inspectors did not have sufficient time during this inspec-tion to determine if moisture content was actually being properly controlled.
This was identified to the licensee as Unresolved Item 400-78-08-05, 401-78-08-05, 402-78-08-05, and 403-78-08-05.
No items of deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
Lakes Dams and Canals
- Review of ualit Assurance Im lementin Procedures Units
2 3 and
The inspectors performed a follow-up inspection of QA-QC controls for dam embankment fills.
Acceptance criteria appears in PSAR Section 1.8 and Appendix 2E.
Procedures examined were those listed in paragraph
and Specification CAR-SH-CH-4, "Embankments, Dams, Dikes and Channels".
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-400/78-08, 50-401/78-08, 50-402/78-08, and 50-403/78-08 II-4 Examination of the above procedures disclosed the following unresolved item.
Specification CAR-SH-CH-4 appears to be in conflict with moisture requirements specified in Appendix 2E of the PSAR.
Paragraph 0.4.2.4 in Appendix 2E of the PSAR specifies that moisture contents of core fills at time of compaction be controlled to within plus or minus 2 percent of optimum.
Referenced methods cited in the specification permit use of field stoves, microwave ovens, and "speedy" moisture tellers for deter-mination of moisture content which could result in moisture contents of plus or minus 4 percent of optimum at time of compaction.
Also, the specifications are not clear regarding test procedures to be followed using referenced methods.
No Category 1 work has been done under this specification.
This was identified to the licensee as Unresolved Item 400-78-08-06, 401-78-08-06, 402-78-08-06, and 403-78-08-06.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were ident'ified.
7.
Lakes Dams and Canals
- Observation of Work and Work Activities Units
2
and
The inspectors examined subsurface preparation on the main dam and west auxiliary dam.
Acceptance criteria examined by the inspectors were:
a.
PSAR, Appendix 2E b.
SER, Section 2.7 c.
CAR-SH-CH-8, "Excavation Backfill Filling and Grading" d.
CAR-SH-CH-11, "Drillingand Grouting" e.
CAR-SH-CH-4, "Embankments and Dams, Dikes and Channels" f.
CAR 2167-G-6270, 6272, and 6273,
"Reservoir, West Auxiliary Dam, General Plan, Profile and Typical Sections" g.
CAR 2167-G-6274,
"West Auxiliary Dam, Grouting" h.
CAR 2167-G-6280,
"West Auxiliary Dam, Spillway, Plan and Profile" Observations included results of excavations, cleaning, mapping, drilling and grouting in the foundation of the auxiliary and main dam.
Observations also included examinations of anomalies in the main dam area.
Anomalies examined were schistose zones in the upstream west wall of the diversion conduit and two faults in the west core trench between stations 2+90 and 3+90.
The schistose zones were examined by NRR geologists and discussed in a CPKL letter to NRR dated October 17, 1978.
The faults in the core trench were reported to NRR by telephone on November 9, and 16, 197 RII Rpt.
Nos. 50-400/78-08, 50-401/78-08, 50-402/78-08, and 50-403/78-08 II-5 The two faults in the core trench are manifested by offsets along a
joint striking north
degrees east and a joint striking north
degrees east.
Faulting on the north 34 degree east joint is shown by 3 to 6 inch offsets of northwest trending granite dikelets and an epidote filled fracture.
Faulting on the north 15 degree east joint is shown by 4 to 8 inch offsets along two northwest trending epidote filled fractures.
The inspectors also observed several northwest trending joints crossing the faults and showing no offset.
The undisturbed northwest cross joints tend to indicate jointing and faulting are of similar geologic age.
Observations and discussions with responsible engineers and geologists indicate that site preparation and unusual conditions such as faulting are being handled in accordance with licensee commitments and NRC require-ments.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
8.
Licensee Identified Items (50.55(e))
Prior to this inspection, the licensee identified several items under
CFR 50.55(e).
Items reported are:
(Open) Item (400/78-08-07):
Containment drawings -- details omitted.
The licensee notified RII on November 3, 1978, that concrete placement drawings for containment liner erection do not contain details which require use of a 1" X 3/8" foam strip to be installed on top of the 5" vertical liner backing ring.
The inspector examined Design Change Notification-550-112 with attached detail and results of installation of the 1" X 3/8" foam strip and a bond breaker on the Unit 1 containment liner.
This item remains open pending RII review of the licensee's final report and modification of pertinent drawings.
b.
(Open)
Items (400/78-08-08, 401/78-08-08, 402/78-08-08, and 403/78-08-08):
Studs separating from steel plates during handling.
The licensee reported the subject potential deficiency on October 27, 1978.
Erico studs welded to steel plates were separating during handlings at the site.
The inspector examined plates with Erico and Nelson studs being installed, results of inspection and testing and discussed the subject item with responsible engineers at the site.
Results of inspection and testing to date indicate less than one percent of studs have failed.
On November 21, 1978, the licensee notified RII via telephone that further evaluation of the matter disclosed that the subject item was not reportable under
CFR 50.55(e).
This item remains open pending NRC review of the licensee's final evaluation of the subject ite RII Rpt. Nos. 50-400/78-08, 50-401/78-08, 50-402/78-08, and 50-403/78-08 II-6 (Open)
Item (400/78-08-09):
Water membrane leakage in Unit
Containment.
The licensee reported the 'subject potential defi-ciency on October 27, 1978.
Water is accumulating at the rate of approximately 90 gallons per day in Unit
RAB sumps, indicating possible leakage of 'ground water through Unit 1 Containment membrane waterproofing.
The inspectors examined installation of the membrane and backup underdrain system and discussed
<he subject. item with responsible engineers.
The subject item is being evaluated by CPGL and Ebasco engineers to determine if the backup drainage system has the capacity to handle the measured volume of leakage and thus prevent hydrostatic head on the containment liner.
This item remains open pending NRC review of the licensee's final report.
9.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with the licensee representatives (denoted in para-graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection.
The inspectors summarized the scope and findings of their examination of QA-QC controls and work activities on structural concrete, site preparation, lakes and dams and licensee identified items.
The licensee acknowledged the one item of noncompliance and three unresolved item RII Rpt.
Nos. 50-400/78-8, 50-401/78-8, 50-402/78-8 and 50-403/78-8 III-1 DETAILS III Prepared by A. L. Cunningham, Env~
ental Scientist Environmental and Spe al Projects Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch ate Dates of Inspection:
ovember 14-15, '1978 Reviewed by:
u3 J.
E Fu acyl x.t a
W. Hufha ironment l F
'
ief d Special Projects Section d Materials Safety Branch ate All information in the following Details applies equally to Units 1, 2,
and 4.
1.
Persons Contacted R.
M. Parsons, Site Manager-G. Forehand, Quality Assurance
- B. Montague, Director, Projects Analysis A. Fuller, Senior Civil Engineer
"T. W. Pritchett, Scientist (Site Environmental Engineer)
-A. Lucas, Resident Engineer-Denotes those pre'sent at the exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Ins ection Findin s
No previous environmental enforcement matters were within the scope of this inspection.
3.
Unresolved Items No unresolved environmental items were disclosed during inspection.
Dust Control Section F(5) of the Construction Permits required the licensee to take necessary mitigating action, including those sumnarized in Section 4.6 of the Revised Final Environmental Statement, during construction of the station to avoid unnecessary adverse environ-mental impacts from construction activities.
Inspection of site construction activities at Units 1 through 4 power block disclosed the following: (1) excessive road dust resulting from routine vehicular traffic, (2) no apparent dust abatement and control through use of water sprinklers.
Licensee representatives were
s RII Rpt. Nos. 50-400/78-8, 50-401/78"8, 50-402/78-8 and 50-403/78-8 III-2 appraised of the above findings and were informed that failure to implement road dust abatement and control constituted an item of noncompliance (78-08-01).
During discussions, a licensee repre-sentative stated the water truck generally used for road dust control had, at that time, been out of service for approximately two weeks.
During this period, no dust control or mitigating action was taken.
The licensee representative stated that no effort was made to rent or otherwise obtain ahd use water sprinklers during the above period; however, it was stated that efforts to mitigate the excessive road dust would be implemented forthwith, as required.
b.
Observation of the concrete batch plant disclosed no apparent dust problem associated with its routine operation.
5.
Erosion and Siltation Control Section 4.6 (4.6.l.l.e) of the Revised Final Environmental Statement, as referenced in Section F(5) of the Construction Permits, requires, in part, minimized contamination of surface waters by erosion and soil runoff.
It further required during early construction of the main dam, use of silt traps, collection ditches and intercepts to reduce the silt load to such waters.
Surface waters affected were the sectors of Buckhorn Creek draining the construction area and the outfall to the Cape Fear River.
The inspector conducted a detailed inspection of the main dam construction site and that sector of Buckhorn Creek draining the site.
Inspection also included a tour of Buckhorn Creek from the point immediately southwest of the relocated Norfolk Southern Railroad to it's outfall to the Cape Fear River.
Inspection at the site disclosed the following: (1) the major sediment basin required repair, and, in no manner, retained, reduced or otherwise minimized silting of that sector of Buckhorn Creek; (2) the two check dams downstream of the silt basin were inadequate and did not retain or otherwise minimize the silting condition.
Inspection of selected sectors of Buckhorn Creek down to and including its outfall to the Cape Fear River disclosed excessive silting and contamination tracable to main dam construction site runoff.
The inspector informed licensee representatives that the above finding constituted an item of noncom-pliance (78-08-02).
Licensee representatives stated that this finding would be reviewed and appropriate mitigating action would be imple-mented.
Section F(7) of the Construction Permits required that the licensee establish a control program to provide periodic review of all construc-tion activities to assess compliance with the environmental conditions
RII Rpt.
Nos. 50-400/78-8, 50-401/78-8, 50-402/78-8 and 50-403/78-8 III-3 W
and commitments set forth in the Permits.
The inspector reviewed Shearon Harris Power Plant environmental protection control procedures; however, inspection time did not permit a detailed review of the licensee's implementation of the control requirements.
This item will be addressed in a subsequent inspection.
7.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)
at the conclusion of the inspection on November 15, 1978.
The inspector summarized the scope of the inspection and discussed the findings listed herein.