IR 05000424/1979018
| ML19263F388 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 12/27/1979 |
| From: | Cantrell F, Conlon T, Harris J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19263F382 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-424-79-18, 50-425-79-18, NUDOCS 8001280067 | |
| Download: ML19263F388 (3) | |
Text
.
.
/
UNITED STATES o,,
3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS310N o
{
E REGION il
-
'
o 101 MARIETTA ST. N.W., SU:TE 3100 Y
ATLANTA, G EORGIA 30303
o
.....
DEC 2 71979 Report Nos. 50-424/79-18 and 50-425/79-18 Licensee: Georgia Power Company 270 Peachtree Street Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Facility Name: Vogtle Nuclear Plant Units I and 2 Docket ilos. 50-424, 50-425 License Nos. CPPR-108, CPPR-109 Inspection at Vogtle Site near Waynesboro, Georgia Inspectors: C e4 v
r
/8 -J 7-79 J. R. Harris Date Signed
~
H
,JA l
h A9 i
<
F. $. Cantrell
/
'/
' Date Signed Accompanying Personnel:
T. Johnson, NRR O. Thompson, NRR Approved b
.Mpa gj
/f,7 7-79 T. E. Conlon, Section Chief, RC&ES Branch Date Signed SUMMARY Inspection on December 4-6, 1979 Areas Inspected This special inspection involved 32 inspector-hours onsite in the area of structural backfill.
Results Of the one area inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
.
1817 085
.
8002a80 p
.
-
,
,
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- K. M. Gillespie, Project Manager 0. Dutton, Project General Manager
- H. H. Gregory, Assistant Project Manager
- E. Groover, QA Site Supervisor
- B. Harbin, Civil Project Section Supervisor
- R. R. Allen, QC Supervisor
- N: Lankford, Civil QC Inspector
- C. Hays, Project Quality Assurance Manager
- H. Googe, Assistant Manager of QC
- S. Matthews, Engineering Supervisor
- R. Duncan, Area Engineer, Civil
- V. Lopes, Surveyor Other Organizations M. Perovich, Civil Engineer, Bechtel J. Lovecamp, Civil Engineer, Bechtel R. Kiser, Geologist, Bechtel F. R. McCarty, Project Engineer, Walsh Construction Co.
G. Wisen, QC Coordinator, Walsh Construction Company W. Ferris, Chief Soils Engineer, Bechtel
- V. Srinivasan, Soils Engineer, Bechtel
- J. Mah1meister, Site Resident Engineer, Bechtel M. Thakar, Assistant Project Engineer, Bechtel
- D. Armstrong, Resident Civil Engineer, Bechtel
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on December 6, 1979, with those persons indicated in Paragraph I above.
-
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
'
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
I817 086
.
.
.
.
-2-
.
5.
Licensee Identified Item 10CTR 50.55(e)
(Open) Item 424/79-18-01 and 425/79-18-01: Erosion of Category I Backfill.
The licensee reported a potential CDR regarding erosion of Category I back-fill on November 14, 1979, (see RII:IE inspection report number 424/425-79-17). Region II:IE issued a confirmation of action letter dated November 15, 1979, James P. O'Reilly, IE Region II to J. H. Miller, Georgia Power Company in which it wes understood that the licensee will not continue with backfill placement in or around the powerblock area or concrete placement on affected structures without the concurrence of NRC.
.
The inspector acccmpanied by F. Cantrell RII:IE, O. Thompson, NRR and T. Johnson, NRR met with the licensee and licensee consultants and discussed the licensees proposed response to the NRC confirmation of action letter dated November 15, 1979, the confirmation of concurrence letter dated November 15, 1979, the con-firmation of concurrence letters dated November 23 and 29,1979, and concerns listed in RII:IE report number 424/425-79-17.
The licensee requested NRC's concurrence for resumption of work on the following four items in their proposal (1) piezometer installations (2) installation of a supplemental dewatering system (3) installation of settlement monitoring program and (4) restoration of the turbine building south backfill slope. They indicated that work on items 1, 2, and 3 must be completed before they can continue with their response to NRC concerns. The inspector indicated that plans for items (1),
(3), and (4) appeared acceptable but that item (2) would need further examination by NRC. The inspector stated that concurrence for resumption of work would be contingent upon NRC's examination of the official copy of the final plans for the above listed items.
.
1817 08;7