IR 05000424/1982007
| ML20053B364 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 04/26/1982 |
| From: | Brownlee V, Sanders W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20053B362 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-424-82-07, 50-424-82-7, 50-425-82-07, 50-425-82-7, NUDOCS 8205280335 | |
| Download: ML20053B364 (4) | |
Text
1
.
.
pMaz uq'o UNITED STATES
+!~
7/ ~,,n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
O, f., e REGION 11
F
g..%./ [o 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 o,
ATLANTA, G EORGIA 30303
...
Report flos. 50-424/82-07 and 50-425/82-07 Licensee: Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Facility flame: Alvin Vogtle and 2 Docket flos. 50-424 and 50-425 License flos. CPPR-108 and CPPR-109 Inspection at Vogtle uclear Station Waynesboro, Georgia Inspector:
t +. 7, W@
y/7//52-
-
Wff. Sanders
/ t/
f Date Signed
//h/?[V2_
Approvea by:
Mr
/ cus V. L./Brownlee, Section Chief, Division of Oste Signed Project and Resident Programs SUf1 MARY Inspection on flarch 11 - April 10,1982 Areas Inspected This routine, announced inspection involved 164 inspector-hours on site in the areas of piping installation, containment erection, concrete pouring, structual steel installation, and electrical record review.
Results Of the six areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
g205280% W O
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
_
_ _ _ _
. - -. _
-__
.
-
-
..-
..
_- _
-_
_ - -
-
.
.
I
i
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
,
H. H. Gregory, III, Construction Project Manager i
11. H. Googe, ihnager of Field Operations
L. N. Brooks, Civil Engineer W. R. Evans, Project Section Supervisor-liechanical E. D. Groover, QA Site Supervisor
.
,
'
B. C. Harbin, Project Section Supervisor - Civil
C. W. Hayes, Project QA lianager R. W. ficManus, Ibnager of Quality Control
<'
J. C. Payson, Field Engineer, llechanical C. E. Rand, Jr., Assistant Construction Project Ibnager J. E. Sanders, Project Section Supervisor I
Other Organization Bechtel Power Corporation H. R. Reuter - Resident Engineer 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on April 8,1982 with
-
those persons in paragraph 1 above. The inspector described the areas inspected, observations made, and discussed in details the inspection
,
findings listed below. No dissenting comments were received fram the licensee.
,
.
(0 pen) Unresolved Item - 424/82-07-01:
"Hydrotest of lebsdded Pipe"
!
paragraph 4.
l 3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item 424/82-06-02:
" Discrepancies in N.D.E require-ments." This item was related to the N.D.E requirements for the primary
<
shield s> >Tcture sub assemblies that were shop fabricated with a requirement l
for magnct : particle examination of all welds per Bechtel specification X2AG05 whereas the welds made in the field to join the sub assemblies required a visual examination per specification X2AP01. The resolution is i
based on a letter of thrch 18, 1982 from Bechtel Project Engineering which reaffirms the design and the adequacy of the less stringent inspection requirement of the specification as stated: The primary shield liner plate systems does not see cyclic operating loads as do the NSSS s:Jpport imbeds;
,
therefore, fatique is not a primary design consideration.
The liner plate
>
system is adequately designed, however to withstand LOCA pressure."
+
-.. _, _. - - - - - - -
.,.
-,..
-.,
. - - >, - - _,,
- _.
--
.-
,,.
_,
e
.
4.
Hydrotest of Imbedded Pipe A review of the requirements for the pressure test of pipe prior to the imbeddment in a concrete structure show a difference in the test requirements betweem ASitE section II and ACI 318-6.3.2.4.
Specifically ASi1E III requires that a minimum hydrostatic test pressure of 1.25 times the system design pressure be applied and held for a minimum of 10 minutes, whereas ACI 318 states "all piping and fittings shall be tested as a unit for leaks immediately prior to concreting.
The testing pressure shall be 50 percent in excess of the pressure to which the piping and fittings may be subjected, but the minimum testing pressure shall not be less than 150 psi above atmospheric pressure.
The pressure test shall be held for 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> with no drop in pressure.
This has been discussed with the licensee when it became apparent during the pressure tests of welds in the spent fuel cooling and purification system 1-1213. This is considered unresolved pending
.
further information and evaluation.
(424/82-07-01)
5.
Plant Tours Site inspections throughout this reporting period were periodically made of the power block and other sections of the facility to inspect the work in progress for obvious defects or non compliance with applicable codes, i
regulatory requirements and licensee conditions.
Particular note was made of the presence of quality control inspectors and quality control evidence such as inspection records, material identification, nonconforming material identification, material protection and housekeeping.
The inspector interviewed craft personnel, supervision, quality control inspectors as such people were available in the work area.
The facility inspections included unit 1 and unit 2 primary containment construction sites, auxiliary building, control building, fuel handling building at all levels, primary containment dome fabrication area, material storage and laydown areas, river intake structures and the Category 1 backfill and compaction activities.
Specific observation included optical inspection to measure radial dimen-sions of the polar crane supports in the No.1 containment, Construction of new access opening in No.1 containment, installation of vertical structed stab in No.1 primary containment, observation of hydro test activities on the spent fuel cooling and purification system. Within the areas examined no violations were identified.
6.
Non Conformance Report (NCR)
An inspection was made of nonconformance records related to electrical equipment and installation as required by Vogtle Quality Assurance fianual, section 15.
This was done by randomly selecting 18 NCR's and reviewing them for clarity in describing the condition, required references to the specification on procurement and installation requirements, disposition recommendation, corrective actions, and required approvals. No items of non-compliance were identifie e-
'
O
7.
Unresolved Items Unresolved Items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, Items of non.
compliance, unresolved item disclosed during this inspection is discussed in paragraph 4.
.
I