IR 05000498/1979002
| ML19274E416 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 02/12/1979 |
| From: | Crossman W, Randy Hall, Hubacek W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19274E409 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-498-79-02, 50-498-79-2, 50-499-79-02, 50-499-79-2, NUDOCS 7903260056 | |
| Download: ML19274E416 (8) | |
Text
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION IV
Report No. 50-498/79-02; 50-499/79-02 Docket No. 50-498; 50-499 Category A2 Licensee: Houston Lighting and Power Company Post Office Box 1700 Houston, Texas 77001 Facility Name:
South Texas Project, Un:ts 1 and 2 Inspection at:
South Texas Project, Matagorda County, Texas Inspection conducted: January 23-26 and January 30 - February 2, 1979 Inspectors:M', D h b/b b
&// R/>9 W. 'i. Hubacek, Reactor Inspector, Projects Section Date (Paragraphs 2, 8 & 9)
l'
l R. E. Hall, Chief, Engineering Support Section Date (Paragraphs 3 & 5)
,
'. %
uf&
2'l7*7R
.
J. I. Tapi \\ Reactor l'ns'pggtor, Engineering Support Date Section aragraphs 1, 4)& 6)
9/U/5$
i L. D./ Gilbert, Reactor Inspector, Engineering Date Support Section (Paragraph 7)
2[/Z[79 Approved:
W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section Date 2 l'bf R. E. Hall, Chief, Engineering Support Section Date'
79032600 9
.
Inspection Summary:
Inspection on January 23-26 and January 30 - February 2, 1979 Report No. 50-498/79-02; 50-499/79-02)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of construction activi-ties including observation of work and review of records related to safety related piping; observation of concrete placement and Cadwelding activities; review of reported 50.55(e) items; and review of previous inspection findings.
The inspection involved sixty-four inspector-hours by four NRC inspectors.
Results: Of the four areas inspected, one apparent item of noncompliance was iden49fied in one area (infraction - failure to control superseded drawings - paragraph 3).
.
-2-
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Employees
- R. A. Frazar, Manager of Quality Assurance
+*F. D. Asbeck, Construction Supervisor
- W. N. Phillips, Projects QA Manager
+*T. D. Stanley, Project QA Supervisor
+*M. H. Smith, Plant QA Supervisor
- T. R. Alford, Site Manager
+*L. D. Wilson, Site QA Supervisor
+*T. J. Jordan, Lead Engineer
+*D. G. Long, Lead Engineer S. Smith, QA Specialist M. M. Johnson, Senior Engineer C. L. Grosso, Associate Engineer Other Personnel
- G. T. Warnick, Site QA Manager, Brown & Root (B&R)
- C. W. Vincent, Project QA Manager, B&R
+T. B. Schreeder, Site QC Supervisor, B&R
+*J. Salvitti, Construction Assistant Project Manager, B&R
+*A. Smith, Construction Quality Engineer, B&R
- E. P. Shows, Consultant, Management Analysis Committee R. N. Jennings, Geotechnical Field Engineer C. Singleton, Lead QC Inspector, B&R
+S. A. Rasnick, Construction Chief Engineer, B&R
+R. W. Bass, Assistant to QA Manager, B&R The lE inspectors also interviewed other licensee and contractor employees including members of the QA/QC and engineering staffs.
- denotes those attending the exit interview on January 26, 1979.
+ denotes those attending the exit interview on February 2, 1979.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings, (0 pen) Unresolved Item (50-498/78-18; 50-499/78-19F Storage of Permanent Plant Equipment.
The IE inspector observed that action has been initiated to determine and implement in-place storage requirements for permanent plant equipment.
Heated enclosures-3-
nave been erected around the two charging pumps and the positive displacement pump located in the Unit 1 Mechanical-Electrical Auxiliary Building.
This matter will remain open pending speci-fication of maintenance requirements for these pumps during in-place storage.
3.
Plant Tour The IE inspectors toured the construction site to observe work activities in progress and to assess site housekeeping.
During this tour, blueprints in use in various field construction areas were sampled.
A random selection of twenty-three blueprints from Control Record (CR) copies No. 004, 038, 088,103 and 109, which were in field use, was compared with the document control center records to determine if all were of the proper revision.
It was determined that for CR No. 038 and for CR No. 103, blueprint K7024-E302, being used in the field, was to the C revision; how-ever, document control records indicated that the D revision should have been effective.
An expanded sample of prints from CR No. 004 and CR No. 038 re-vealed an additional print K7024-E23 and an additional copy of K7024-E302, which were of outdated revisions.
Criterion VI of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B requires that changes to construction documents be distributed and used at the work location.
Brown and Root Quality Control Procec'ure A040KPDCP-5, " Recovery and Destruction of Superseded Documents," requires distribution of print revisions and return of superseded versions (or retention for record use if marked as superseded).
Failure to maintain current revisions to the noted blueprints in use at work locations is considered to be in noncompliance with these requirements.
4.
Review of Items Reported Under 50.55(e)
A review was conducted of items previously reported under 10 Cr'R 50.55(e) in order to identify the status of their resolution.
As a result of the review, the following three items are considered closed:
a.
Unconsolidated Concrete in Fuel Handling Building Slab Documentation of the repairs performed on the under-consoli-dated areas identified in the bottom surface of the six feet thick concrete slab at elevation +21'-11" in the Unit 1 Fuel Handling Building was reviewed for consistency with the 10 CFR 50.55(e) Report dated September 18, 1978. Technical Reference Document No. 2F80K0001-B, " Fuel Handling Building Slab Investigation and Repair Criteria," specifies the engi-neering requirements for the repairs which were performed.
-4-
Seven " Concrete Repair Cards," dated April 21, 1978, through May 2, 1978, were reviewed and found to reflect repairs made in accordance with the Technical Reference Document material requirements.
A total of 176 gallons of epoxy was injected into the repair areas. The repairs to the concrete have resulted in restored structural integrity. This item is considered closed.
b.
High Head Safety Injection Pump A review was conducted of pump test data which were used to identify a previously reported potential construction defi-ciency as being nonreportable under the context of 10 CFR 50.55(e). The retest of the High Head Safety Injection Pump resulted in a flow three percent less than the minimum accept-ance identified in the Engineering Specification.
The safety analysis, however, assumed seven percent ss flow than the minimum acceptance criteria of the specif. cation.
This four percent margin indicates that there would be no safety impact for init.ial operation of the pump. The seven percent design value is included in the safety analysis to account for pump degradation over the life of the plant.
The pump will undergo periodic testing, as controlled by the plant technical speci-fications, in order to identify flow values such that the pump may be refurbished when required. This item is considered closed.
c.
Contaminated Backfill The potentially reportable construction deficiency concerning the contaminated backfill in the Unit 2 Mechanical-Electrical Auxiliary (MEA) Building area has sulssequently been identified as nonreportable under 10 CFR 50.55(e). The basis for this determination rests on the engineering evaluation of data obtained from boring samples.
The results of the Standard Penetration Tests performed during the boring program and the consolidation tests on the material were used to calculate the compressibility of the layer of contaminated backfill. The test reports and the computations were reviewed and found to sunport the estimate of maximum differential settlement between the MEA Building and the Diesel Fuel Storage Building. This evaluation supports the nonreportability of this item and is considered closed.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
-5-
.
5.
Cadwelding Activities Cadwelding activities in progress for both Unit I and Unit 2 were observed.
Specifically, the following Cadwelds were observed being formed by the indicated Cadwelders:
Cadweld Cadwelders 38 H 92 38 and 43 32 V 916 32 and 64 27 H 805 27 and 36 Additional partial Cadwelding operations were also observed to ver-ify conformance with procedural requirements.
Other Cadwelds in the vicinities of those noted above were also examined.
No procedural discrepancies or unacceptable Cadwelds were observed.
During the inspection, Brown and Root Procedure A040XPCCP-ll,
"Reihlorcing Steel Mechanical Splicing (Cadwelding)," Rev. 7, No-vember 9, 1978, was reviewed.
It was observed that paragraph 3.2 of the procedure had been modified to permit Cadweld Helpers to perform significant portions of the Cadwelding procedere. This appears to be contrary to the guidance contained in Regulatory Guide 1.10, paragraph C.1, which requires crew qualification if individual crew members are not qualified.
Since this item had been ider.tified at another site, the construction contractor had self-imposed the requirement to only use qualified Cadweldars pending a review of the specific commitments applicable to this project.
The licensee representatives have also committed to a resolution of the requirements and to modification of CCP-ll to be consistent with these requirements if necessary.
In the interim, the licensee committed to continued limitations on the use of uncer-tified helpers pending resolution of the requirement.
This item is considered unresolved pending completion of the scensee's evaluation.
6.
Concrete Placement Concrete placement in two safey related structures was observed.
Placement No. CIl-W45B involved the three walls that will enclose one of the two nuclear steam supply system pressurizers in Unit 1.
The six feet high section of wall required approximately thirty-seven cubic yards of concrete.
Five walls in the Essential-6-
.
.
Cooling Water System (ECWS) intake structure were placed monolith-ically as placement No. E10-W7, 13, 14, 40 and 41.
This twenty-two feet high lif t of concrete was composed of approximately one-hundred and n nety cubic yards of concrete.
The placement and consolidatioa activities which were observed were found to conform to tne applicable requirements in Brown & Root Specification No.
2A010CS028-F, " Concrete Construction," and with Brown & Root Quality Construction Procedure No. A040KPCCP-4, Revision 8, " Con-crete Placement and Finishing." The latter document prescribes the methods for concrete placement in Category I structures to assure compliance with the specifications, ACI 301-72 and ACI 318-71.
The procedure also establishes the methods for inspection and docu-mentation by Quality Control personnel.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Safety Related Piriing a.
Observation of Work - Unit 1 The IE inspector observed the repair of a butt weld in the Containment Spray system.
The weld was identified as Weld No. 000! of Line 1102-PB on Drawing 2F361P, Sheet 1, Revision 0-D.
The repair was documented on a Weld Data Repair Card.
The two repair excavations were liquid penetrant inspected prior to repair welding. The argon purge, oxygen content and filler metal type were monitored for compliance with Weld Procedure Specification 52.02-900Rl.
It was verified that the welder was qualified to Section IX of the ASME B&PV Code.
In the areas inspected during repair of the weld, no dis-crepancies from the requirements of Section III of the ASME B&PV Code were noted.
b.
Review of Records - Units 1 & 2 (1) The IE inspector selectively reviewed the following pipe spool receiving and vendor manufacturing records for the Essential Service Water piping system:
Unit 1, Line 1202-WT Pc. AE Unit 1, Line 1305-WT Pcs. K & L Unit 2, Line 2 J2-WT Pcs. E & F-7-
.
.
The pipe material and welding filler material certifications were reviewed for compliance with Section II of the ASME B&PV Code.
The fabrication and nondestructive examination methods were reviewed for compliance with the requirements of Section III of the ASME B&PV Code for Class 3 piping systems.
In the areas inspected, no discrepancies from the require-ments of the ASME B&PV Code were noted.
(2) The IE inspector selectively reviewed the folluwing weld records for the Essential Service Water piping system:
Unit 1, Line 1202-WT Weld No. 0025 Unit 1, Line 1305-WT Weld No. 0005 Unit 2, Line 2102-WT Weld No. 0002 Unit 2, Line 2305-WT Weld No. 0017 Welding and nondestructive examination documentation re-viewed was found consistent with Section III of the ASME B&PV Code.
Records of involved welders were reviewed to verify that they were qualified consistent with the re-quirements of Section IX of the ASME B&PV Code.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviations. An unresolved item disclosed during the inspection is discussed in paragraph 5.
9.
Exit Interview The IE inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on January 26 and February 2, 1979.
The IE inspectors summarized the purpose and the scope of the inspection and the findings. A licensee representative acknowledged statements of the IE inspector con-cerning the item of noncompliance and the unresolved item.
-8-