IR 05000413/1980020
| ML19338E268 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 08/22/1980 |
| From: | Conlon T, Harris J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19338E266 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-413-80-20, 50-414-80-20, NUDOCS 8009250343 | |
| Download: ML19338E268 (3) | |
Text
e
,
C)jamarrog%,
UNITED STATES
"t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
a REGION 11
e 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 k
-
ATI ANTA GFORGIA ?O1fl3 n.,*
z..s
....
Report Nos. 50-413/80-20 and 50-414/80-20 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Facility Name:
Catawba Nuclear Station Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414 License Nos. CPPR-116 and CPPR-117 Inspection at Catawba site near Lake Wylie, South Carolina Yt 974ffff
./s g _
h"E N ~EO Iasyect 6
e J. R. Harris
Date Signed Accompanying Personnel:
N. Merriweather Approved w
h 2 E80 T. E. Conlon, Secti ter, RCES Branch Date Signed SUMMARY Inspection on August 4-8, 1980 Areas Inspected This resident, announced inspection involved 68 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of structural concrete, storage and preventative maintenance, and construc-tion progress.
Results Of the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
v-
_
__
..
.
.-
.
-.
e
,u.
,
.
4:
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- D. Beam, Project Manager
- D. L. Freeze, Construction Engineer
- S. W. Dressler, Senior Construction Engineer
- H. D. Mason, Civil QC Engineer L. Wilmoth, Civil QC Engineer I. W. Pearce, Principal Engineer, Design Engineering T. Love, Watehouse Supervisor D. Haney, Electrical QC Engineer H. Hirland, Civil QC Engineer P. Eberhalt, Civil QC Engineer Other licensee employees contacted included 6 construction craftsmen, 5 tech-nicians and 4 office personnel.
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on August 8, 1980 with those persons indicated in Paragraph I above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to determine whether they are acceptable or may involve noncompliance or devi-ations. New unresolved items identified during this inspection are discus-sed in paragraph 5.
5.
Independent Inspection This inspection covered an overall inspection of ongoing work activities, examination of the preventative maintenance and storage program, and an examination of the licensees controls on structural concrete.
Examination of the preventative maintenance and storage program included a.
observation of coatings being applied to hanger steel for category I components, inspection of A, B, C and D storage facilities and preventa-tive maintenance on electrical penetrations and motors. Applicable procedures examined by the inspector were:
~
p v.
,
r.
i 6'
-2-
'
M-20, " Protective Coatings" CP-371, " Site Storage" M-28, " Housekeeping" L-72, " Inspection of Housekeeping" P-3, " Storage and Handling of Equipment" P-1, " Receiving Inspection" Examination of storage requirements for electricai penetrations disclosed that the licensee is having difficulty meeting the specified internal gas pressure requirement of 15 psi at 72 degrees fahrenheit because the pressure fluctuates with climatic conditions.
Discussions with responsible engineers and examination of storage disclosed that nonconforming equipment is being tagged and that areas Duke design is evaluating the problem and consulting with the manufac-ture regarding need for the specified pressure and tolerances. This was identified to the licensee as Inspector Followup Item 50-413/80-20-01 and 50-414/80-20-01, " Internal Pressure on Electrical Penrations".
b.
Examination of controls on structural concrete included inspection of the soils and concrete laboratory, observation of Cadweld splice numbers DlulQ B-2 through DIDIQB-19, in the unit 2 doghouse, installation of reinforcing steel in main steam support numbers 3 and 4, handling of honeycomb repair and curing controls.
Controling specifications and procedures examined by the inspector are M-2, M-5, M-14, CP-68 and CNS-1109.00-1.
Examination of the above and discussions with respon-sible engineers disclosed that L&M curing compound is and has been used on construction joints and is not removed prior to placing addi-tional concrete on top of the joint.
Specification CNS-1109.01, paragraph 5.7, states concrete shall be cured and protected in accordance with chapter 12 of ACI 301-72.
Chapter 12 of ACI 301-72 states curing compounds shall not be used on any surface against which additional concrete or other material is to be bonded unless it is proven that the curing compound will not prevent bond, or unless positive measures are taken to remove it completely from areas to receive bonded applications. Responsible engineers in the Duke design 8roup stated their design does not take credit for bor. ! and that construction joints are designed with shear keys or by shear friction methods. They stated that their response to infraction 491/80-07-06, 492/80-06-06 and 493/80-06-06 on the same problem at Cherokee will clarify the matter. The inspector identified the use of curing com-pounds at Catawba to the licensee as Unresolved Item 50-413/80-20-02 and 50-414/80-20-02, " Curing Compounds on Construction joints".
No deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
u