IR 05000400/1979004
| ML18003A482 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 03/07/1979 |
| From: | Bryant J, Swan W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18003A477 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-400-79-04, 50-400-79-4, 50-401-79-04, 50-401-79-4, 50-402-79-03, 50-402-79-3, 50-403-79-03, 50-403-79-3, NUDOCS 7903270287 | |
| Download: ML18003A482 (7) | |
Text
~8 RE00, fp
~4
e
~c N Q g
++*a+
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORYCOMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTASTREET, N.W.
ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 Report Nos.:
50-400/79-4, 50-401/79-4, 50-402/79-3 and 50-403/79-3
'Licensee:
Carolina Power and Light Company 336 Fayetteville Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Facility Name:
Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Station, Units 1, 2, 3 and
Docket Nos.:
50-400, 50-401, 50-402 and 50-403 License Nos.:
CPPR-158, CPPR-159, CPPR-160 and CPPR-161 Inspection at Wake and Chatham Counties, North Carolina Inspector:
W. B.
Swan Approved by:
J.
C r ant, e
ion Chief, RCESB
-% -7f Date Signed Date Signed SUMHARY Inspection on. February 5-8, 1979 Areas Ins ected This routine inspection involved 25 inspector-hours on-site in the areas of dams, foundations, Unit 1 containment concrete, Unit 1 containment penetrations, schedule milestones, construction progress and revisions to control documents.
Results Of the seven areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
V9032yp~gg
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Em lo ees-S. D. Smith, Manager, Power Plant Construction-R.
M. Parsons, Site Manager
~N. J. Chiangi, Engineering and Construction QA Manager
>G. L. Forehand, Principal QA Specialist A. M. Lucas, Resident Engineer A. Fuller, Principal Site Civil Engineer, Dams E. Kelly, Senior Civil QA Specialist J. Nevill, Civil Engineer F. Strehle, Civil Design Engineer, Raleigh office Other Or anizations
"-V. D.
Goodman, Daniel Project Manager I. Cilogl, Geologist, EBASCO Services, Inc.
C. Pait, Daniel General Concrete Superintendent F. Clawson, Site QA Representative, EBASCO Services, Inc.
+Attended exit interview.
2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on February 8, 1979 with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Ins ection Findin s Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Inde endent Ins ection Effort The following areas were examined:
a.
Unit
containment concrete:
Installation of the reinforcement matrix and embedments for the internal concrete base mat was inspected.
Completed rebar and cadwelds for the second containment wall concrete placement were inspecte j ll
b.
Unit 1 containment penetrations:
The inspector observed openings cut into the wall liner by CBSI and inspected the curved wooden form prepared by Daniel for use in positioning penetrations prior to placement of wall concrete.
c.
Construction progress:
Progress of construction of structures and systems was inspected during a walking tour of the four-unit power complex.
d.
Schedule Milestones:
A review was made of published schedules of construction and equipment receipt.
The licensee was asked to notify the NRC Project Inspector when certain activities requiring NRC inspection are to start and when additional major penetrations for Unit 1 are expected to be received.
e.
The inspector reviewed control documents which have been produced after the first of October, 1978 and also those procedures revised since then.
Documents reviewed in these categories included civil work procedures WP-01 and WP-04; technical procedures TP-08, TP-ll, TP-14, and TP-31; QC Instruction QCI-13.5; Construction QA procedure CQA-1 and CQA Appendix A; and Construction QC procedure CQC-6 and CQC-13.
In the work inspected and the documents reviewed, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Lakes Dams and Canals - Observation of Work and Work Activities At the site of the main dam, the inspector inspected the completed concrete pad under the two diversion channel CM pipes and the curing measures taken on concrete placed the previous evening, placement MDD-049 totaling 291 cubic yards to complete encasement of the diversion pipes between stations 2+28.60 and 2+73.
Adequate measures had been taken to protect the fresh concrete from freezing and to assure proper curing.
The inspector observed excavation for the easterly shoulder of the dam.
The overburden rock was being fractured by bull dozer dragon tooth.
At the site of the west auxiliary dam, the inspector observed clearance of mud and other debris deposited by a rainstorm on previously cleared dam foundation rock areas.
At the EBASCO goelogist's field trailer progress of geologic mapping and grouting of the foundation rock was reviewed with the geologis Acceptance criteria set out in PSAR Appendix 2E, SER Section 2.7 and specifications CAR-SH-4, -8, and -ll are impelemented by the construction drawings, work procedures'WP-04,
-05, -11, and -17; technical procedures TP-15, -22, and -31; and CQC-13.
These documents were referred to where pertinent to the work observed.
In the work observed no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Lakes Dams and Canals - Review of ualit Records The inspector reviewed the placement authorization records, placement inspection records and the initial curing records for placement MDD-049 for encasement of the diversion pipes at the main dam.
The 291 cubic yard placement was for seismic Class I.
The inspector reviewed drawing CAR 2167-G-6235 and with the EBASCO geologist reviewed updated versions of the geologic maps and the record drawings for core drilling and foundation grouting for the main dam and west auxiliary dam.
,
In review of these documents, where pertinent to the control documents listed in paragraph 7,
no items of noncompliance or deviation were identified.
Foundations - Review of ualit Records - Units
2
and
A follow-on inspection of operations and a review of quality records were performed, for seismic class I structures, for foundation preparations including drilling, grouting, groundwater control, installation of seal and protective concrete, and installation of fill concrete and Category I concrete applied directly to the foundation rock.
Foundation related activities are essentially completed for the power block structures for Units 1, 2, and 4.
Some fill concrete has been placed in Unit 3 and mucking was underway to permit installation of a fillconcrete working slab at the base of the Unit 3 excavation.
PSAR and license requirements for foundations were detailed in speci-fications CAR-SH-CH-01,
-02,
-06,
-08,
-11, and-12.
Construction implementation and quality control for these requirements are implemented through procedures WP-03, -04, -05, <<12, -13, -14, and 17'P 03)
15)
-21, and-31; CQA-6; and CQC-13.
As described in paragraph 5(c),
pertinent sections of these documents were reviewed.
The inspector reviewed a sampling of the'uality records for foundation work, principally for fill, seal and Category 1 concrete placed over the foundation rock in the power block area.
The file folders contained as appropriate, the following recqrPs:
a.
Concrete placement report b.
" Concrete test report c.
Preplacement check list d.
Placement check list, Exhibit 2, TP-15 e.
Postplacement check list, Exhibit 3, TP-15 f.
Batch plant tickets g.
28 day test reports h.
Field test report The available records were reviewed for the following listed placements:
1 UPSM201007 Unit 1 Waste Processing Area 1 FHSM 206008 Unit 1 Fuel Handling Area 2 TGSM 235008 Unit 2 Turbine Building Area 03021D120551 Protective Coating, F.H. Area 03022L40552 Protective Coating,, F.H. Area 3 RASM 226002 Reactor Auxiliary Building, Seal Mat 3 RASM 206002 83 RA Building 4 TGSM 235003 //4 T.G. Building Area For each of these placements, the design strength of the concrete was 2,000 psi at 28 da'ys.
The test cylinders for placement 2 TGSM 235028 averaged 2,775 psi at 28 days.
Results for the other placements averaged double the required strength; 4000 plus; 4265; 4740; 4000 plus; 4,210; 5440 and 3980 psi These results and the other records reviewed reflected conservative design and consistent quality control.
In the records reviewed no items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie Ck lf
'