ML20027A410
| ML20027A410 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 10/18/1978 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17195A407 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-482-78-11, NUDOCS 7811270178 | |
| Download: ML20027A410 (2) | |
Text
-
a STil 50-482/78-11 Appendix A fiOTICE OF VIOLATION Based on the results of the tiRC inspection conducted on September 18-21, 1978, it appears that certain of your activities were not conducted in full compliance with the conditions of your NRC Construction Permit tio.
CPPR-147 as indicated below:
c:
A.
Failure to Follow Specifications for Adjacent Cadweld Stagsering 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V states in part, " Activities affecting quality... shall be accomplished in accordance with
... instructions, procedures, or drawings."
Bechtel Technical Specification tio.10466-Cll2(Q), paragraph 8.5 (Change 10,12/8/77) states in part, "For rework of reinforcing steel either lapped or mechanical splices may be used provided that... mechanical splices are staggered by at least one foot fro:n splices on adjacent reinforcing bars."
Daniel Construction Procedure QCP-IV-102, Revision 4(9/13/78),
paragraph 4.2.9 states, " Inspect the location of additional Cad-welds for compliance to reference 2.2. (Bechtel Specification 10466-Cll2(Q))...."
Contrary to the above:
During the inspection on September 18-21, 1978, the IE inspector identified two instances of rebar rework in the reactor contain-ment wall involving: (1) Cadwelds F14V8 and F14V9; and (2) Cadweld P14H38 where the staggering of adjacent Cadwelds was less than one foot by approximately 4-5 inches. These Cadwelds had been inspected by QC personnel.
This is an infraction.
B.
Failure to Document Housekeeping Inspection 10 CFR, Appendix B, Criterion XVII states in part, " Sufficient re-cards shall be maintained to furnish evidence of activities affecting quality."
Daniel Procedure AP-XIII-05, Rev. 1 (6/20/78), Section 3.9 requires that housekeeping inspections be conducted on a monthly basis and the results documented.
i 7 8112 70 /70 q
l r
e Contrary to the above:
Although inspections for August and September,1978 of the Aux 11-liary Building, Control Building and Reactor Building had been made, as confirmed by the Project Safety Engineer, they were not documented as required.
This is a deficiency.
C.
Failure to Have Fork Lift Loading Certifications 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVII states in part, "the records shall also include closely related data such as qualification of
... equipment.
... Records shall be identifiable and retrievable."
SNUPPS PSAP, paragraph 17.1.17 requires that records shall include data such a: qualifications.of equipment and that records shall be identifiable and retrievable.
Work Procedure WP-IV-110, Rev. 2 (4/14/78), paragraph 3.1.1 states in part, "... hoisting equipment used for handling shall be certi-fled by the manufacturer. The certification shall indicate the various parameters for the maximum load to be handled."
Contrary to the above:
On September 21, 1978, maximum load parameter certifications for two fork lift units were not in the possession of either the licensee or the contractor and consequently were not retrievable.
The two fork lift units used in the warehouse area, were identified as: Yale, Model No. GP-050 (6000 pound capacity), P0 No. 7158-NS-28021 and Pettibone Super 8 Carylift, Model No. 8-4A (8000 pound capacity), P0 No. 7158-NS-28039.
This is a deficiency.,
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _