IR 05000400/1980016
| ML18017B221 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 08/12/1980 |
| From: | Conlon T, Walters D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18017B219 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-400-80-16, 50-401-80-14, 50-402-80-14, 50-403-80-14, NUDOCS 8009100258 | |
| Download: ML18017B221 (8) | |
Text
gAg RECC
+~
po C
/
V/
++*<<+
UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTAST., N.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 Report Nos. 50-400/80-16, 50-401/80-14, 50-402/80-14 and 50-403/80-14 Licensee:
Carolina Power 8 Light Company 411 Fayetteville Street Raleigh, NC 27602 Facility Name:
Shearon Harris Docket Nos. 50-400, 50-401, 50-402 and 50-403 Iicense Nos.
CPPR-158, CPPR-159, CPPR-160 and CPPR-161 Inspection at Harris site near Raleigh, North Carolina Inspector:
I D.
.
Wa ters Approved by:
F~v T
E. Conlon, Section Chief, RCES Branch SUMtfARY ate Signed C
D te Signed Inspection on June 23-27, 1980 Areas Inspected This resident, announced inspection involved 34 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of containment structural concrete; safety-related cable raceway support installation; receiving and storage of safety-related pump motors, valve operator motors and cable; electrical procedures review; and licensee identified items.
Results Of the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie DETAILS l. ~Persons Contacted Licensee Employees-P.
W. Howe, Vice President (VP), Technical Services Division-S. D. Smith, VP, Construction-R.
M. Parsons, Site Manager-A. M. Iucas, Senior Resident Engineer
M. Simpson, Principal Construction Specialist
"-A. Cockrill, Project Electrical Engineer-J. F. Nevill, Project Civil Discipline Engineer Other Organizations
="W. D. Goodman, Daniel Construction Co.
Project Manager-Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on June 27, 1980, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Independent Inspection Effort The inspector toured the site and observed concrete placement preparation activities at the main and west dams.
Concrete forms were observed to be secure, and cleaning activities were in progress.
Receiving inspection activities and warehouse number 3 storage facilities were inspected for compliance with American National Standard Institute (ANSI) N45.2.2.
Safety-Related charging safety injection and component cooling water pump motors were observed to have visible oil levels, heat applied to windings and openings capped or sealed.
Safety-Related valve motor operators were observed to be stored on pallets and to have heat applied to the motor The following procedures, which are applicable to electrical and instrumenta-tion activities, were reviewed for conformance to the licensee's PSAR commitments in the areas of receipt inspection, storage and handling, installation, and inspection.
a.
Administrative Procedure (AP) - X111-02, R2, "Material and Equipment Receiving".
b.
AP-X111-03, R9, "Receivi'ng Identification and Inspection".
c.
AP-X111-05,R8, "Material Storage".
d.
AP-X111-06, R8, "Receiving Reports and Documentation".
e.
AP-X111-07, R12, "In-Storage Inspections and Maintenance".
f.
Construction Quality Assurance (CQA) procedure CQA-8, RO, "Material Issue Control".
g.
CQA-21, RO, "Storage Control Surveillance".
h.
CQC-6, R2, "Receiving Inspection".
i.
CQC-8, R3, "Storage Control".
J
~
k.
QCI-6.1, Rl, "Receiving Inspection Statistical Sampling".
Construction Work Procedure (WP)
203, Rl, "Installation of Seismic Class I Electrical Cable Tray, Tray Supports, Conduit.
and Conduit Supports".
l.
WP-205, Rl, "Documentation and Control of the Installation of Conduit and Cable Tray".
m.
WP-206, RO, "Documentation and Control of the Installation of Electric Cable" n.
WP-210, RO, "Installation and Termination of Wire and Cable".
o.
Technical Procedure (TP) 38, RO, Inspection of Safety-Related Electrical Cable Pulling and Termination p.
TP-42, RO, Inspection of Safety-Related or Seismically Installed Electrical Raceways and Components" Although the inspector was informed that revisions were being prepared for many of the procedures reviewed, the procedures for material receiving inspection, storage and handling, and for cable tray support installations (currently in process)
were adequat Work activities associated with the installation of cable tray supports on elevation 236'f the Reactor AuxiliaryBuilding were observed.
The installa-tion of the supports was being performed in accordance with procedure WP-203 and the following drawings.
a.
EBASCO Dwg. No. 2168-G-7042, R4, "Reactor Auxiliary Building, Plan "D" EL. 236.00 HVAC and Cable Tray Restraint Structures SH.2, Units 1 and 2tt b.
EBASCO Dwg. No. 2168-G-7045, R4, "Reactor Auxiliary Building, Plan "D" EL. 236.00'VAC and Cable Tray Restraint Structures Details SH.3, Unit 1 and 2".
c.
EBASCO Dwg. No. 2168-G-7047, R3, "Reactor Auxiliary Building, HVAC and Cable Tray Restraint Structures, Typical Connection Details, Units 1, 2, 3 and 4".
Within the areas inspected, there were no items of noncompliance or deviations identified.
6.
Iicensee Identified Item On June 16, 1980, the licensee notified Region II by telephone that contrary to drawing requirements, 12 reinforcing steel dowels had been left out of a column in the reactor auxiliary building, The licensee's written report of this matter was provided in a letter, dated June 18, 1980, entitled
"Investigation and Corrective Actions Following Ommission of Rebar in Reactor Auxiliary Building - Unit No.
Interior Wall", which documented both the results of the licensee's evaluation and the proposed corrective actions to prevent recurrence which are listed below.
a
~
Independent drawing reviews by the construction inspector and field engineer/rebar checker will determine and tabulate quantities of each type of rebar required in the placement.
"Design quantity" tabula-tions are compared, and discrepancies are resolved prior to field inspection.
Independent field inspections to count and record "actual quantity" for comparison with design quantity will then be performed.
Discrepancies willbe documented with "individual notified" and correc-tive action verification.
This rebar verification program will b'
applied to all class I structures.
b.
Cognizant architect-engineer class I civil design engineers will conduct refresher review on reinforcing steel drawings with construc-tion inspectors and key craft supervision.
C ~
Conduct management review of deficiencies identified by corrective action "a" above to identify necessary training program modifications and to determine establishment of sufficient controls to allow a
reduction of 100 percent checks of all class I structures except those which are "highly stressed and complex".
d.
During the ensuring three month period, continue to apply the 100 percent verification checks to other class I structures for a minimum of 5 percent of all placements to determine that the necessary levels of control are being maintained.
During this inspection, deviation notice number I to procedure WP-05 R15 t Concrete Placement" and deviation notice number I to procedure TP-22, R4
"Inspection of Rebar Installation" were reviewed to verify implementation of corrective action "a" above.
On June 24, 1980, the inspector attended site training on reinforcing steel drawings which was conducted by cognizant EBASCO design engineers for CPSL site field engineers, construction inspec-tors, area engineers, discipline engineers, QA inspectors and craft supervisors.
The manangement reviews of corrective action item "a" as discussed in corrective action item "c" above will continue for at least one month and until sufficient data is accumulated to justify implementation of the corrective action item "d" sampling verification program.
When sufficient data is obtained, CPSL will notify Region II in writing of the justification for implementing the 5 percent verification program discussed in corrective action item "d" and of the date that the program will be implemented.
Documentation supporting the licensee's evaluation of this matter was provided by site management for review by Region II civil engineering personnel.
Pending completion of the corrective actions identified above and region II review of documention provided by the licensee, this matter is identified as Licensee Identified Item 400/80-16-01,
"Omission of Rebar in Reactor Auxiliary Building".
7.
Containment (Structural Concrete) - Observation of Work and Work Activities.
Concrete placement 1CBSL 261001 was observed to assure compliance with the following procedures.
a.
TP"15, R5, "Concrete Placement Inspection".
b.
TP-22, R4, DN I, "Inspection of Rebar Installation".
c.
WP-05, R15, DN I, "Concrete Placement".
d.
QC1-13.3, Rl, "Concrete Field Tests".
The following documentation for placement 1CBSL 261001 was reviewed.
a.
Field Inspection Report for Reinforcing Steel (prepare by Field Engineer)
b.
Field Inspection Report for Reinforcing Steel (prepared by Construction Inspector)
I'.
Concrete Placement Report No. 1CBSL261001 d.
Concrete Test Repor e.
Discrepancy Report C-780 Discrepancy report C-780 documented a
4 1/2 inch slump for the first 8
~yards placed (ticket number 57182)
which exceeded the 4" maximum slump specified by Concrete Placement Report 1CBSL261001.
The slump test for the second 8 yards placed (ticket number 57183) met the 4" maximum slump require-ment.
Test cylinders were made for the placements of ticket numbers 57182 and 57183.
The batch plant was notified of the high slumps, and placement was continued.
Within the areas inspected, there were no items of noncompliance or deviations identifie ~
~,
b 0