IR 05000566/1980007
| ML19323J097 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yellow Creek  |
| Issue date: | 04/23/1980 |
| From: | Conlon T, Harris J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19323J071 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-566-80-07, 50-566-80-7, 50-567-80-07, 50-567-80-7, NUDOCS 8006170768 | |
| Download: ML19323J097 (5) | |
Text
.
o'/ -.%
4't UNITED STATES
!
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.
$
E REGION 11
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUlTE 3100
,
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
.....
Report Nos. 50-566/80-07 and 50-567/80-07
.
Licensee: Tennessee Valley Authority 500A Chestnut Street Chattanooga, TN 37401 t
Facility Name: Yellow Creek Docket Nos. 50-566 and 50-567
,
,
License Nos. CPPR-172 and CPPR-173 Inspection at Yellow Creek site near Iuka, Mississippi Inspector
,
gfM Wy
[
M Zf/ [C)
'
-
"
J. R. Harris pate Signed Accompanying Personnel: M. Thomas Approved by gg)2/
[F_$ [o T. E. Conlon,1e'Rion ' Chi'ef, RCES Branch Kate signed SUMMARY Inspection on April 1-4, 1980 Areas Inspected
This routine, unannounced inspection involved 62 inspector-hours on site in the areas of structural concrete, previously identified items, licensee identified items and site preparation.
Results Of the four areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identi-
'
fled in three areas; one item of noncompliance was found in one area (Deficiency -
'
Documentation of materials in concrete mix paragraph 7.a).
-
.
_ _,
.
s 8006170 76 &
Q
_
.. _ - - - - - - - - -
-
.
,
't
._
<
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted-
-
Licensee Employees
- M. Jf. Price, Project Manager
- L. S. Cox, Construction Engineer
- C. G. Wages, Assistant Construction Engineer, QC
- R. G. Delay, Supervisor, Materials & Civil QC Unit
- C. M. Freeman, Civil QC Unit
- J N. Holladay, Supervisor, Project QA Unit'
- S. E. Alge, Supervisor, Document Control Unit
- S. R. Watson, Document Control Unit
- K. S. Stamphill, Document Control Unit Other licensee employees contacted included two construction craftsmen, four technicians, operators, mechanic, security force members, and office personnel.
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on April 4, 1980 with those persons indicated in Paragraph I above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (566/80-01-01 and 567/80-01-01):
" Documentation of' water content in concrete batches" examination of records for pour number Al-J1 showed that recorded water contents are not compatible with recorded test slump data. This item is closed as unresolved item 566/80-01-01 and 567/80-01-01 and upgraded to noncompliance number 566/80-07-01 and 567/80-07-01, " Documentation of materials in concrete mix".
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 566, 567/79-12-01 " Batch Plant Scale Zeroing During Concrete Production", examination of batch plant operations indicate that scales are being adjusted as needed. However, it is not clear that the cause of improper zeroing is being properly addressed. This item is' closed and upgraded to Unresolved Item 50-566, 567/80-07-02 and,
" Concrete Controls".
-
.,,
. - -
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to determine whether they are acceptable or may involve noncompliance or deviationc. New unresolved items identified during this inspection are discussed in paragraph 7.b.
.
,-
-
,,
-. -,,, --
.w~
-m-,
,-
, e
__
_
- _ - - _ _.
_ _ _ _ _ _ -
"
4r
+',,%b.ei4'-
_4,
-
.
L*
-
-
,
V-2-5.
Independent Inspection Effort
"
The inspector examined the following areas:
'
a.
Construction Status.
b.
Excavation for spray ponponds.
Concrete soils laboratory and currentness of calibration of laboratory c.
equipment.
d.. Level D storage areas 6.
Containment (Structural Concrete II) - Observation of Work and Work Activities, Unit 1 The inspector observed partial placement of concrete pour number A-R20, W-C17, W-C33, 34, 36, 37,-38 and Al-S17. Acceptance criteria examined by the inspector appear in the following documents:
a.
Section 3.8 of the PSAR.
b.
TVA Specification G-2, " Plain and Reinforced Concrete".
Procedures QCI C-201, C-202, C-204, C-205, C-208 and C-12, and drawing c.
numbers 4AN101-9-R0 and 4RE 0417-5R-1.
Forms were tight'and clean and rebar was properly installed and clean.
Preplacement inspection was indicated by the signed pour card. Place-ment activities pertaining to delivery time, free fall, flow distance, layer thickness and consolidation conformed to specifications. Activi-ties were continuously monitored by QC personnel. Samples for tempera-ture, slump, air content, unit weight and test cylinders met frequency and acceptance criteria. An examination of the batch plant indicated
- proper mixes were being delieverd to specified sites. However, the inspector observed that the batch plant scales and the batch plant recorder of quantities of ingredients in batch mixes require frequent adjustments to insure.that mixes are being accurately batched and recorded. Also, there does not appear to be clear guidance with regard to the amount ingredients can exceed mix design. These items were identified to the licensee as part of an unresolved item which is discussed in paragraph 7.
No deviations or items of noncomplia ce were identified.
- - -
"
,
n
.*
-.~-
.~a ---=
< - -
-
- -
-
- -, - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
>
> :..
-
._
_
-
.g
.
-3-7.
Containment (Structural Concrete I) - Review of Quality Records, Units 1 and 2 The' inspector examined records on pour number A2-D5, D16, AL-P3 and 41-J1.
Acceptance criteria. examined by the inspector are the same as those '.isted
.in paragraph 6.
Records examined included:
a.,
Results of.7, 28 and 90 day concrete compressive strengths b.
Results of inprocess testing of plastic concrete, including slump, air content, unit weight and temperature c.' Concrete batch records for batches on which inprocess testing was performed i
d.
Gradation tests on fine and coarse aggregate Examination of the above disclosed the following noncompliance and unresolved
.
'
item.
Criterion XVII of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50, which is implemented by a.
Section 17.1A.17 of the PSAR states, " Sufficient records shall be maintained to furnish evidence of activities affecting quality".
'
(1) Records on pour number Al-J1 show that recorded water contents are not compatible with recorded slump test data. Test number
1302 shows the batch contained 980 pounds of water and a slump of lig inches while test number 1304 shows a batch which contained only 720 pounds of water had a larger slump of 2 inches.
(2) Records produced by the batch plant recorder for pour number A-Pr i
are inaccurate in that the batch times are unreadable, numerous scale lines are missing and several curves showing batch ingredient
-
quantaties begin several increments above the zero reference line.
,
These items were identified to the licensee as Deficiency number 50-566, 567/80-07-01, " Documentation of Materials in Concrete Mix".
,
b.
The following areas in concrete controls were identified to the licen-see as Unresolved Item 50-566, 567/80-07-02, " Concrete Controls".
(1) There does not appear to be any written guidance for a slump
-
, retest when a slump test shows results that are out of.specifica-
,,
tion.
!
(2) Written guidance is not clear asfo an acceptable amount that six ingredients can vary from the current mix' design.
(3)- There does not appear to be an acceptable method of tracking the time intetval between when concrete is mixed and loaded on a
~
.
.-_
-
-
. - - -
-..-- -- --
- - - -l
--
--
--
.-
- ---.- - _ _
~-
-
.
.
w
'
y-4-truck crd when the concrete is placed. Also written guidance is not clear with regard tc acceptance or rejection of concrete that has exceeded the time interval between mixing and placing.
'
(4) Observations show that batch plant scales and the batch plant recorder of ingredients in the mix frequently do not zero out from batch to batch. The inspector observed that the QC inspec-tors were~ zeroing the scale and recorder as required, but it does
'
not appear that the cause of the problem is being properly addressed.
8.
Licensee Identified Item 10 CFR 50.55(e)
a.'
(0 pen) Item 50-566/80-07-03: Defective Concrete Pour in Auxiliary Building.
The licensee reported a CDR regarding concrete placement Al-P3 which failed to obtain intial set in normal time. Singleton Laboratory preliminary analysis indicate excessive air entraining or water reducing admixture as the most probable cause. A written report is due April 23, 1980.
b.
(0 pen) Item 50-566and 50-567/80-07-04, " Improper Documentation and Utilization of TVA Computer Program Inertia".
The program is specifically designed for use with closed wall sections, but it was used for open wall sections also. Dynamic structural response caliculations are unconservative when used for the above structural members and foundation anchor rod designs in the control building.
9.
Inspector Followup Item (0 pen) Item 50-566 and 50-567/79-09-01, " Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
QA Review".
The site QA unit has conducted a review of site originated SOP's in accor-dance with Quaility Assurance Staff Procedure (QASP) 4.6.
The SOP's are used to augment higher tier project quality assurance / control program documents (Construction Engineering Procedures (CEP) and Quality Control Instructions (QCI) in support of construction activities.
Even though the SOP's are being reviewed by the site QA staff, this review does not take place until after the S0P has been issued, thus, they do not received the same degree of review at the site level as the CEP's/QCI's receive at a higher level to ensure that the SOP's do not conflict with the higher tier documents' prior to issuance. This item remains open pending further review by the inspector.
.
"
.-
,
,
I i
l