ML20003F051
| ML20003F051 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 02/12/1981 |
| From: | Conlon T, Lenahan J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20003F045 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-321-80-48, 50-366-80-48, NUDOCS 8104200045 | |
| Download: ML20003F051 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000321/1980048
Text
-
</" D ucgk
UNITED STATES
- f'
p'l
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
2
/ .. E
REGION 11
"
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W.. SUITE 3100
[
ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30303
.....
Report Nos. 50-321/80-48 and 50-366/80-48
Licensee: Georgia Power Company
270 Peachtree Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
Facility Name: Hatch Nuclear Plant
Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366
Inspection at Hatch site near Baxley, Georgia
M
h
c4
/
[/
Inspect h
-
J. J. Lenahan
Dite Signed
'
Approved C
M
d;7 - / $ - 9 /
T. E. Co'nlon, Section Chief, RC&ES Branch
Date Signed
SUMMARY
Inspection on December 10-12, 1980
Areas Inspected
This special, announced inspection involved 18 inspector-hours on site in the
areas of follow-up IE Bulletin 80-11, backfill replacement for support of RHR and
service water piping at the intake structure, and licensee action on previcus
inspection findings.
Results
Of the three areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified in one
area; two violation were found in two areas (Inadequate procedure for placement
of intake structure backfill
paragraph 3; Failure to follow procedures in
amending design change and writing nonconformances
paragraph 6).
810420006
~-
,
.
.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Licensee Employees
- C. E. Belflower, QA Site Supervisor
- J. M. Watson, Senior QA Field Representative
- C. R. Miles, QA Field Supervisor
- M .Manry, Plant Manager
- D. A. McCusker, QC Supervisor
- R. M. Herrington, Senior QC Specialist
- J. Rearden, Junior Engineer
- T. Green, Assistant Plant Manager
- C. E. Rand, Manager, Field Operations Construction
M. Meeks, Civil Engineer, (telephone conversation)
J. Jordan, Licensing Engineer, (telephone conversation)
Other Organizations
T. Morrison, Electrical Engineer, Southern Services Company
- L. Young, Geotechnical Engineer, Law Engineering
- A. Lancaster, Senior Geotechnical Engineer, Law Engineering
G. Kosi, Civil Engineering Group Supervisor (telephone conversation)
R. Gladsby, Project Engineer, Bechtel (telephone conversation)
C. Feltmar, Electrical Engineering Group Supervisor (telephone conversation)
- Attended exit interview
j
2.
Exit Interview
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on December 12, 1980 with
those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above. The violations described in
paragraphs 3 and 6 were discussed during the exit interview.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
(Closed) Unresolved Item 321/80-26-01 and 366/80-26-01 " Plant Service Water
and RHR Service Water Intake Structure and Associated Piping Backfill
Controls". The inspector reviewed the procedures which addressed placement
of backfill around the intake structure. The procedure did not specify the
l
j
required QC test frequency, and permitted fill placement in lifts of
'
thickness which were excessive for good compaction control. The results of
the detailed investigation conducted by the licensee on the backfill
l
materials under the RHR and service water lines showed that the placement
and quality control testing of the fill was inadequate.
There were no
i
l
records of any QC tests being performed on fill materials below the RHR and
service water piping. This item is closed as Unresolved Item 321/80-26-01
and 366/80-26-01 and upgraded to Violation Item 321/80-48-01 and
366/80-48-01," Inadequate Procedure for Placement of Intake Structure
l
Backfill".
-- .
-
.
.
.,
2
4.
Unresolved Items
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to
determine whether they are acceptable or may involve noncompliance or
deviations.
New unresolved items identified during this inspection are
discussed in paragraph 6.
5.
Independent Inspection Effort
There was no idependent inspection effort conducted during this inspection.
6.
Licensee Identified Item (LER): Settling of Fill Under Plant Service Water
and RHR Service Water Piping
a.
Background
On June 12, 1980, the licensee notified Region II that an investigation
into the cause of pavement deflection beneath a crane outrigger pad
disclosed that settling of backfill from under the RHR and Service
l
water intake lines had occurred. This was reported to Region
.'I as LER
l
50-321/1980-062. The settlement was observed under an approximate 12
foot continuous section of the pipelines.
After discovering this
problem, the licensee initiated an extensive investigation to determine
I
the extend of this problem. This investigation included soil borings,
I
test pits, installation of piezameters, and field and laboratory soils
testing. The investigation, which was performed by Law Engineering,
'
disclosed that the fill materials supporting the RHR and service water
!
lines did not meet design requirements from the intake structure to a
point approximately 100 feet south of the structure. The licensee and
f
its Architect-Engineer, Bechtel, prepared plans and specifications
detailing the method for correcting the problem. A contract for the
repair work was awarded to Spencer White and Prentis, Inc..
During
this inspection, the inspector reviewed drawings, quality control and
work procedures, the work completed to date, and quality records
>
associated with the repair work.
The details examined are stated in
the following paragraphs.
,
b.
Review of drawing and procedures for accomplishment of Intake Backfill
Repair Work
The repairs to the backfill are being completed under a Design Change
Request number DCR 80-279.
The inspector examined the following
l
documents which control the backfill repair activities:
(1)
Law Engineering: " Procedure for Field Quality Control
for
Construction and Backfilling of a Braced Excavation for the Intake
Structure Service Water Piping and Utilities for E.
I. Hatch
Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2".
l
l
--,= -
.
.
.
3
(2) Bechtel: " Technical Specification for Design, Construction and
Backfilling of a Braced Excavation for the Intake Structure
Service Water Piping and Utilities for E. I. Hatch Power Plant
Units 1 and 2".
(3) Bechtel: "Proceoure for Monitoring Horizontal and Vertical
Movement".
(4) Georgia Power procedure: " External Surface Coating of Underground
Metallic Pipe".
(5) Bechtel: " Technical Specification for External Surface Treatment
of Underground Metallic Pipe".
(6) Spencer White and Prentis, Inc.: drawing number 2654-1 through
2654-6, " Intake Structure-Utility Underpinning".
(7) Design Change Request number DCR 80-279.
Review of the above documents disclosed the following unresolved item:
Paragraph 17.5 of the Bechtel specification for design, construction,
and backfilling of the excavation states that the K-Krete shall have a
minimum unit weight of 120 to 130 pcf and a minimum 7-day unconfined
compressive strength of 10 to 30 psi. This requirement needs clarifi-
cation to specify the acceptability of K-Krete with unit weights
greater than 130 pcf and unconfined compressive strengths greater than
30 psi. Also the maximum elasped time between batching and placing of
the K-Krete is not specified in the specification. Law engineers stated
that the time limit they are currently using is one and one-half hours,
which is the same as for concrete.
The apparent unclear acceptance
criteria in the specification was identified to the licensee as
Unresolved item 321/80-48-04 and 366/80-48-04, "K-Krete QC Require-
ments", pending further review by NRC and the licensee.
c.
Examination of Intake Backfill Repair Work Completed to Date
The inspector examined the excavation and K-Krete placed as of the
inspection date.
K-Krete had been placed to within 1 foot of the
bottom of the pipe on approximately 50 linear feet of the west lines
cnd 40 linear feet of the east lines. The inspector observed wrapping
of protective coating material on the west lines and discussed the
methods of application of the protective coating materials with
craftsmen performing the work.
The inspector also discussed QC
inspection of the work with Law engineers and licensee QC personnel.
During the examination of the completed work the inspector noted that
the details of the excavation and the temporary supports for the pipes
were different than shown on the construction drawings. The inspector
discussed the justification for these changes with Bechtel and licensee
engineers and reviewed a memorandum and attached sketch showing the
details of che changes. These above discussions and review of
- - - - -
y
.
,
o
4
completed work disclosed the following examples of failure to follow
procedure:
Georgia Power procedure number HNP-809 requires that changes to Design
Change Raquests (DCR) be reviewed by the Plant Review Board (PRB)
before being implemented. The repair to the intake backfill is being
pe-formed under DCR-80-279.
Discussions with licensee engineers
disclosed that the change to DCR 80-279 concerning the details of
excavation and the method of temporary support of the pipes had not
been reviewed and approved by the PRB.
During inspection of the exposed pipes the inspector noted the
following apparent deviations from original design requirements;
(1) The protective coating materials were improperly applied on pipe
joints on the RHR and service water lines during the original pipe
installation.
(2) Protective coating materials were damaged at several spots on the
RHR and Service water lines.
(3) During the original pipe installation two 2-inch pipe lines were
supported by pieces of angle iron which had been welded to one of
the 18" RHR lines.
Discussions of these problems with licensee personnel disclosed that
these problems had not been documented on a Nonconformance Report as
required by procedure HNP-801.
Failure to obtain approval prior to implementing a change to a DCR and
failure to initiate a nonconformance report on deviations to design
requirements was identified to the licensee as violation Item
321/80-48-02 and 366/80-48-02.
d.
Review of Quality Records Related to the Intake Backfill Repair
The inspector reviewed the following quality records relating to the
intake backfill repair:
(1) Results of the investigation performed to determine the extent of
the backfill problem, including soil borings and test pit logs,
piezometer data, and soil testing data.
(2) Results of the testing program which was performed to determine -
the properties of the K-Krete backfill replacement material.
(3) Daily shift QC Inspector Records for November 20, November 24-26,
December 1-5, and December 8-10, 1980.
--
.
,,
s
5
(4) Subgrade Inspection Sign-off Sheet.
(5) Unconfined compressive strength and bulk unit weight data for 3 x
6 inch K-Krete cylinders from pour numbers 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.
This LER remains open pending completion of the intake backfill repair.
No deviations were identified.
,
7.
(0 pen) IE Bulletin 80-11, Masonry Wall Design - Units 1 and 2
The inspector examined Southern Company procedure, " Surveillance Procedure
for Concrete Masonry Walls for Georgia Power Company for E. I. Hatch Nuclear
i
i
Plant - Units 1 and 2".
This procedure addresses the work to be performed
t
in the Field to complete IE Bulletin 80-11 requirements. The inspector also
discussed methods used to identify masonry walls in proximity of safety
related equipment and preparation of masonry walls as-built drawing with
l
i
Southern Company engineers. This bulletin remains open.
No deviations or violations were identified.
I
4
,96
i
t
l
!
,
I