IR 05000491/1980002
| ML19305E010 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cherokee  |
| Issue date: | 03/24/1980 |
| From: | Murphy C, Rausch J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19305D996 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-491-80-02, 50-491-80-2, 50-492-80-02, 50-492-80-2, 50-493-80-02, NUDOCS 8004220134 | |
| Download: ML19305E010 (3) | |
Text
___
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
,
...
. _..
--
.
-
'
.
es e ntu
o UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
n
$
,E REGION 1
f 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 og
/
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 3o3o3
,
MAR 2 41980
-
Report Nos. 50-491/80-02, 50-492/80-02 and 50-493/80-02 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Facility Name: Cherokee Nuclear Plant Docket Nos. 50-491, 50-492 and 50-493 License Nos. CPPR-167, -168 and -169 Inspection at Cherokee site near Gaffney, SC and Duke Corporate Office in Charlotte, NC
--
Inspector: /
..
,
ru m d ~ l " - 50
}
Date Signed
. K. Rausch Approve
C. E. Murphy, Chief, RC&ES Branch Date Signed SUMMARY Inspection on February 26-29, 1980 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 24 inspector-hours on site in the areas of QA program implementation, construction program changes, and QA audits performed by the corporate office.
Results
'
Of the areas inspected, no items or noncompliance or deviations were identified.
.
.
_
e
,
=
.
gco4e2013
l
.
-__.
....
_ _. _. _
.... _
.. _
_
.
.
,
,
'
\\
)
~.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- C. 3. Aycock, Project Engineer
- A. R. Hollins, Senior QC Engineer
- K. W. Schmidt, QA Engineer
- J. W. Willis, Senior QA Engineer W. H. Lindsay, Geo-Technical Engineer W. H. Bradley, Manager, Engineering & Services, QA J. Frye, Senior Supervisor of Audits Division B. L. Wood, Field Purchasing Supervisor B. B. Justice, QA Engineer
.
Other licensee employees contacted included technicians, and office personnel.
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on February 29, 1980 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.
5.
Construction Program Changes I
Duke power Company has reduced the total personnel work force (inclusive of
all guards, maintenance, office workers and professionals) from approximately 1800 to 800 people.
In the areas of quality control, the personnel count
-
-
'
has been reduced from approximately 80 to 35 people. On site QA personnel
,0 count has been reduced from 13 to 9.
Placement of concrete has been reduced about 50 percent. Although most welders have been retained, the installation j
of the steel containment liner will be slowed down because of a reduction
'
in support personnel. Dam construction, stopped because of winter weather is to be resumed in mid-March. At that time Duke will begin uncovering the
filter in zone 2 of the dam.
.
b n
!
..
E
-
g
l
- e
!
?
'
i
. _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _._
__3
,.
.
..
' \\
-2-
'
.
6.
Site Prepared Nonconformance Reports i
An examination was made of the Cherokee listing of nonconformance reports.
This report identifies the status of the NCR's, a description of the condition identified and a category coding that could enable personnel to identify undesirable trends. The following specific safety related nonconformance reports were selected for examination from the 291 safety and nonsafety related NCR's written between October 16, 1979 and February 21, 1980.
1.
QIA Serial No.1240, Welding, Construction - Tracer improperly applied.
'
2.
QIA Serial No.1230, Welding, Construction - Weld not to procedure.
3.
QIA Serial No.1207, welding construction - Repair work not documented.
4.
QIA Serial No.1086, Incorrect hole size on drawings.
5.
QIA Serial No.1075, Incorrect pipe thickness on drawings.
l 6.
QIA No.1057, Concrete cylinders not to strength.
i i
7.
QIA No.1033, Improper coating material used.
Each of the NCR's (QIAs) are identified in the status list with a symbol to i
show whether the corrective action is being determined, established or already i
taken. The inspectors review determined that all NCRs were being handled
'
according to procedures and in a timely manner. No items of nonconformance
'
or deviations were identified.
7.
QA Audits Performed by Corporate Office The inspector visited the Charlotte Office and examined the 1979 corporate
[
audit which was conducted by a joint utility management team on the Duke i
quality assurance department divisions. The audit was performed in accord-ance with a pre-approved plan and schedule. The purpose of the audit was to
.
determine Dukes effectiveness in meeting the requirements of their topical I
report, Duke 1-A and their quality assurance department procedure, QA - 160.
t The team reported that their audit revealed no major discrepancies.
'
' i
>
In addition, the inspector examined the QA audits made during 1979 at Cherokee
-
by the Audits Division located in Charoltte. These audits made in accordance with Duke procedures QA - 210 and 220 examined personnel training, welding activities and cold weather concrete placement. No items of nonconformance
.
or deviations were identified.
'
,
8.
Independent Inspection Effort
.
~
The inspector examined the common areas of Units 1,
, and 3 inclusive of the pump structure and auxiliary dams throughout the site..In general the inspector examined various areas of the site obs'erving construction work
,
and related activities in progress, the general state of housekeeping and
,
storage conditions of materials. No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
.