IR 05000498/1979010
| ML19249B232 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 06/26/1979 |
| From: | Crossman W, Hubacek W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19249B230 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-498-79-10, 50-499-79-10, NUDOCS 7909040144 | |
| Download: ML19249B232 (4) | |
Text
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEBENT
REGION IV
Report No. 50-493/79-10; 50-499/79-10 Docket No. 50-498; 50-499 Category A2 Licensee: Houston Lighting & Power Company Post Office Box 1700 Houston, Texas 77001 Facility Nate:
South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2 Inspection at:
South Texas Project, Matagorda County, Texas
'
Inspection conducted: June 12-15, 1979 Inspector:
-
d
W. G. Hubacek, Reactor Inspector, Projects Section bate b/ 4/79 Approved:
_z
- _-
W. A. Crosstan, Chief, Projects Section Date'
Inspection Su= mary:
Inspection on June 12-15, 1979 (Report No. 50-458/79-10; 50-499/79-10)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of construction activities including observation of work related to concrete placement for Unit 1; review of records related to polar crane testing; and review of previous inspection findings. The inspection involved twenty-eight inspector-hours by one NRC inspector.
Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
190904a(qq
?
004,q
- o ~. u
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Ecoloyees
- L.
D. Wilson, Site QA Supervisor
- R.
L. Ulrey, Senior QA Spec 4alist
- T.
- M. H. Smith, Plant QA Supervisor C. L. Grosso, Associate Engineer
- A.
C. Nozer, Construction Coordinator Other Personnel
- G.
T. Warnick, Site QA Manager, Brown & Root (B&R)
- G.
F. Ewert, Site Internal Surveillance Supervisor, B&R
- S. A. Rasnick, Discipline Manager, Contrels Engineering, B&R
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Infraction (50-498/78-16-1; 50-499/78-16-1):
Failure to Provide ProcedyyesforHousekeepingInspection. This matter was previously re-viewed-but left open pending completion of corrective action related to definition of require =ents in the Brown & Root housekeeping procedure.
Brown & Root has issued Procedure GCP-4, " Housekeeping," Rev. 3, dated June 6,1979, which defines responsibilities for planning and implementa-tion of housekeeping requirements and defines requirements for Safety Departtent inspection of zone IV and V areas.
In addition, corrective action in response to the Brown & Root QA housekeeping surveillance report dated March 22, 1979, has been completed. This matter is considered re-solved.
(Closed) Infraction (50-498/78-16-2; 50-499/78-16-2):
Failure to Provide Acceptance Criteria for egger Testing of Class IE Motors.
This tatter
was previously reviewed and corrective action was found to be acceptable except that a Brown & Root review of existing plans and procedures for inclusion of acceptance criteria had not been completed. The Brown & Root review of inspection plans and procedures for acceptance criteria was conpleted on April 25, 1979.
This matter is considered resolved.
3.
Site Tour The IE inspector toured various areas of the site to observe construction activities and to inspect housekeeping and equipment storage.
No itens of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
1/IE Inspection Report No. 50-498/79-04; 50-499/79-04 2C f,13'd 2/IE Inspection Report No. 50-498/79-05; 50-499/79-05-2-
4.
Polar Crane Load Test The IE inspector was inforced that a load test of the Unit 1 Reactor Containment Building (RCB) polar crane was completed on May 5,1979.
The main and auxiliary units were tested at 522.28 and 19.09 tons, respectively.
The IE inspector reviewed records related to the load test to ascertain if the requirements of Brown & Root Procedure CCP-10,
" Rigging," were cet.
The following docucents were reviewed:
Construction Operation Traveler Rigging Test Data Form i
Polar Crane Examination Check Certificate of Rated Load Test Erector's Daily Report Magnetic Particle Test Records Minor inconsistencies related to documentation of electrical QC inspections and recording of crane beam deflection measurements were observed in the traveler and supporting documents.
During discussions with licensee repre-sentatives, it was pointed out that the load test records had not yet been submitted to the QA vault for acceptance and, therefore, had not undergone a final review for adequacy and completeness.
Since the documents had not received a final QA review, the matter concerning the electrical QC inspec-tions and deflection ceasurements is considered to be an unresolved item and will be reviewed during a subsequent IE inspection.
No itets of noncocpliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Observation of Concrete Placement on June 13, 1979, the IE inspector observed selected activities related to placecent of concrete in the containment shell of the Unit 2 RCB at elevation 37'0" to 47'0" to ascertain if the requirecents of Procedure CCP-4, " Concrete Placement and Finishing," and B&R Specification No. 2A010CS028, " Concrete Construction," were met.
The Concrete Pour Card for the placement, designated as CS2-W6, specified the delivery of 700 cubic yards of nix design A-1-3-20 concrete.
The IE inspector observed delivery, testing, placing and consoli-dation of concrete during the first lif t and portions of the subsequent third and fourth lifts of the placement.
The IE inspector was unable to evaluate the cleanliness of the construction joint at elevation 37'0" due to poor visibility caused by congestion of rebar, tendon sheaths and penetrations in the area.
The IE inspector also noted that direct observation of the work area from vantage points on the work platform was difficult due to the congestion particularly during the first lifts placed.
302.13,;
The IE inspector also reviewed the Concrete Pour Card for placement CS2-W6 and attached documents including the Special Prepour Checklist, Prepour Examination Check, Concrete Placement Examination Checks, and Presion Inspection Records.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Unresolved Ite=s 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 dis-cussed in paragraph 4.
7.
Exit Interview The IE inspector met with licensec representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on June 15, 1979.
The IE inspector sn-rarized the purpose and the scope of the inspection and the findings.
A licensee representative acknowledged statements of the IE inspector concerning the unresolved item.
-
-4-90ttq
~ L* s.u, M_x