IR 05000491/1979013
| ML19208A827 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cherokee  |
| Issue date: | 07/31/1979 |
| From: | Bryant J, Rausch J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19208A721 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-491-79-13, 50-492-79-13, 50-493-79-13, NUDOCS 7909170573 | |
| Download: ML19208A827 (4) | |
Text
-
.
[ga ar%,
-
'o, UNITED STATES 8\\
_
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'
, ' /.!.' 'j, REGION il o,h hl
[
101 MARIETT A sT., N.W., SUIT E 3100 g-AT L ANT A, GEORGI A 30303 5g'A
.....
Report Nos. 50-491/79-13, 50-492/79-13 and 50-493/79-13 Licensee: Duke Power Company Post Office Box 422 Gaffney, South Carolina 29340 Facility Name:
Cherokee 1, 2 and 3 License Nos. CPPR-167, CPPR-168 and CPPR-169 Inspection at Cherpkee P t near Gaffney, South Carolina Inspector:,
/
- <[
T f / - /f x.
,
y
, 7 J. p ausch'
Date Signed Approved by:
[ji
[ h ;fm _
d 7 / ?f / 7 51 J. C Bryant, 6b'ction' Chief, R'CES prancT
' D4te Si/gned SUMMARY Inspection on July 16-18, 1979 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 16 inspector hours onsite in the area of Quality Assurance Program implementation as related to containment con-crete, containment, steel liner welding; warehouse storage; personnel organization and housekeeping practices; IEB status and reporting of 50.55(e) items.
Results No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
79091'70 h q = w. 5O d I 1.D a)*
.
.r
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees J. T. Moore, Project Manager
- A. R. Hollins, Senior QC Engineer
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on July 18, 1979, with those persons indicated in Paragraph I above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings a.
Closed Deficiency 491/492/493/78-08-03, Vault fire centrol. Duke Power Company has completed the installation of the Eslon fire protec-tion system in the QA records vault. The inspector examined the installation and has no further questions. This item is closed.
b.
Closed Inspector Follow-Up Item 491/492/493/79-03-01, Construction procedure for containment welding process control, CP-CKP-2 Revision 0 has been approved by Duke Power construction and qualit;' assurance management for issue. This procedure was reviewed by an IE inspector on a previous inspection but held on an open basis pending approval by Duke. This is closed.
c.
Closed Infraction 491/492/493/79-03-04, Control of concret? cylinder curing room temperature.
Duke Power Company response to this item was forwarded to the NRC March 28, 1979 with corrective action.
The corrective action was reviewed and the IE inspector has no farther questions.
This item is closed.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection, o.,
t r3 ud e mJ -
.
.
.
.
-2-5.
QA Program The inspector utilized the following procedures in checking the work and assuring that current procedures were in use.
The procedures were also checked to assure that each had been approved by QA.
a.
CKD-13 Rev. No. 1, Required Inspection Hold Points for ASME Weld-ments - QA Approval 4-18-79.
b.
CKD-7 Rev. No. 4, Requirements for Nondestructive Testing for ASME Code Work Procedures and Techniques - QA Approval 5-11-79.
c.
M-1 Rev. No. O, Process Control and Inspection of Containment System and Liner Plate - QA Approval 4-12-78.
d.
CKD-26 Rev. No. 2, Nondestructive Testing Requirements for Reactor Building Containment Plate (ASME Section III, Subsection NE) - QA Approval 3-6-79.
6.
Independent Inspection The inspector observed the pre-assembly operations and NDE Testing of containment plate pieces for Unit 1.
These pieces were located in their fitup location on the pre-assembly platforms. These pie shaped sections had been cleaned, ground and tack welded in preparation for welding to Specification P81S-144.10-00-0001, " Specification for Field Welding and Erection of Containment Vessels".
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
IE Bulletin Status a.
Closed IEB 79-03, Longitudinal Weld Defects in ASME SA-312 Type 304 Stainless Steel.
Duke Power replied on April 20, 1979 that piping of the type identified in IEB 79-03 was purchased from Youngstown Welding and Engineering Company and that the required NDE testing was performed.
In addition Duke Power advised that they have inspected the Youngstown shops and have determined that the ASMI Code is being met.
The inspec-tion has no further questions regarding this matter.
b.
Closed IEB 79-04, Incorrect weights for swing check valves manufactured by Velan Engineering Corporation. Duke Power replied to this bulletin on May 29, 1979 with a statement to the effect that Duke Power does not use Velan valves at the Cherokee Nuclear Station. The inspector has no further questions regarding this matter.
c.
Open IEB 79-07, Seismic Stress Analysis of Safety Related Piping.
Duke Power responded to this bulletin on May 29, 1979 advising that in answer to items (1), (2) and (3) both EDS Nuclear, INC and Combustion Engineering have confirmed that their programs do not use algebraic summation methods for combining responses.
In answer to item (3) of W?.15.50-
.
..
-3-this IEB, Duke identified the method by which verification of the computer program was dona. This item is being reviewed by NRR.
d.
Open IEB 78-12,12 A and 12 B, Atypical Weld Material in Reactor Pressure Vessel Welds. Duke Power Company replied on July 2, 1979 tbat they have reviewed the Combustion Engineering report which was submitted to the NRC on June 8, 1979.
Duke Power advised IE that they are sat.isfied that the generic report adequately represents data for the reactor vessels of Cherokee 1 and 2.
This item to be reviewed by NRR.
8.
Personnel The QA staff at Cherokee has been increased from seven to ten people in preparation for handling the additional work in all disciplines.
Duke Power Company provided a press release on June 18, 1979 announcing that Cherokee Units 1 and 2 were rescheduled from the 1985 and 1987 comple-tion dates to 1987 and 1989 respectively.
On this basis the programmatic staf fing within the construction craf ts will be reevaluated to determine whether the present labor force is adequate.
352.$.$5