ML20138B869
| ML20138B869 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 10/08/1985 |
| From: | Varela A, Wiggins J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138B865 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-412-85-20, IEB-79-02, IEB-79-2, NUDOCS 8510220061 | |
| Download: ML20138B869 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000412/1985020
Text
.
% *
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-412/85-20
Docket No.
50-412
License No.
CPPR-105
Priority
Category A
---
Licensee: Duquesne Light Company
Post Office Box 4
Shippingport, Pennsylvania 15077
Facility Name: Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 2
Inspection At: Shippingport, Pennsylvania
Inspection Conducted: August 26-30, 1985
Inspectors:
p h
dhrt/I' [
/o-Ffs
M
Varela,Ae'ad/ Reactor Engineer
date
Approved by:
M ] ,/ x ex A
,,/ M -81
J./} . ' Wigg f6s [jCgief
date
MaYerials andT66 cess Section, EB, DRS
Inspection Summary:
Inspection Report No. 50-412/85-20 on August 26-30, 1985
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by one region based inspector
of construction requirements and controls pertaining to concrete construction
for closure of the temporary construction opening in the containment building's
,
exterior wall, of licensee response to NRC/IE Bulletin 79-02 relating to
installation of drilled-in concrete expansion anchors for pipe supports, review
l
of previously identified inspection items relating to the above bulletin and,
review of settlement monitoring records. Additionally, licensee's.QA/QC
interactions pertaining to the first two items identified above were reviewed.
The inspection involved 37 inspector hours at the plant and 4 inspector hours
of in-office review.
Results: No violations were identified.
!
8510220061 851011
ADOCK 05000412
l
'O
!
.
-
. ._
.
.
.
.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Duquesne Light' Company (DLC)
L. E. Arch, Senior Project Engineer
- J. A. Bajuszik, Director Construction Engineering
- P. A. Cadena, Senior Project Engineer
- R. Coupland, Director Quality Control
- C. R. Davis, Director Quality Assurance
- D. W. Denning, Assistant Director Quality Control
- C. E. Ewing, Quality Assurance Manager.
- D. C. Morgan, Senior Structural Engineer, QC
~*D. P. Price, Construction Engineer
M. Smart, Quality Control Supervisor
- J. W. Waslousky, Quality Assurance Supervisor
G. Wargo, Quality Control Supervisor
F. Zaffina, Quality Control Engineer
Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation (SWEC)
- W. Baranowski, Assistant Project Manager
~
A. A. Dasenbrock, Senior Construction Manager
- R. J. Faust, Principal Structural Engineer
~ M. Lyons, Principal Engineer
- J. G. Novak, Superintendent of Construction
- R. C. Wittchen, Licensing Engineer
P. Talbot, Project Structural Engineer
A. Wong, Structural Engineer
Dick Corporation (DC)
P. Dufala, Quality Control
H. Jones, Quality Control
R. Hill, Offsite Batch Plant Inspector, Rochester, PA.
~
- G. A. Walton, Senior Resident Inspector
- L. Prividy, Resident Inspector
- Attendees at Exit Interview
2.
Concrete Construction for Closure of Containment Building Temporary -
Construction Opening
The inspector observed ongoing work performance of reinforcing steel
reinstallation for closure of the construction. opening on the north side
L
F
.
.
3
of the containment's exterior wall.
The reinforcing bars were observed to
have been cut and marked for replacement after the temporary construction
opening was no longer of use. Cadweld splicing of number 18 rebar was in
process for the hoop bars. The work observed was'noted in conformance to
SWEC engineering drawing number RC-49N.
This drawing details the forming
of the concrete in the 4'6" thick wall, the dimension and shape of the
temporary opening and length of the extension of all rebar from the.inside
surface of the formed concrete. The inspector took particular note that
the number 18 marked reinforcing steel was being cadwelded with adjacent
splices, but the splices were not being staggered in accordance with the
commitment identified in the PSAR. This exception was discussed with DLC
and SWEC QC and structural engineers.
The inspector expressed his concern
that the exception to the exterior wall cadweld splice stagger at the
construction opening appeared to present a structural weakness that.
requires engineering justification.
This is addressed as an unresolved
item in paragraph number 2.1.
The cadwelding process otherwise was being
performed as required by engineering specification number 904 as revised
by EDCRs number 3105-DC and 3098-DC and quality control was as required
by specification related implementing procedures. Quality control inspec-
tion records were reviewed and discussed with cognizant DC and DLC
engineers and inspectors.
2.1 Non Stagger of Cadweld Splices
The reactor building's temporary construction opening was constructed
as required by SWEC engineering drawing number RC-49N, revision 3.
Wall reinforcing was detailed and installed as if the construction
opening was non existent in the building's exterior wall. The
construction opening was accomplished by forming the wall opening and
subsequently cutting the rebars. Cut rebars were carefully marked
and are now being replaced using Cadweld mechanical splices since the
opening is no longer of.use. Due to cutting of rebar the number 18
reinforcing steel,12" on center horizontally and vertically, and the
number 14 diagonal bars are being reinstalled with only 12" stagger
of the Cadweld splices between adjacent rebar. Cadweld splice
stagger in the building's exterior wall prior to rebar removal for
the construction opening adhered to the licensee's PSAR commitment:
horizontal bars have splices staggered 3 feet and vertical bars, in
groups of 20 bars, are arranged so that no adjacent group in the same
or opposite face of the wall has splices closer than 6 feet apart.
The exception taken to Cadweld splice stagger for the construction
opening which is a 23'-6". horizontal by 23'-3" vertical opening is an
unresolved item. The inspector expressed the following concern at
the exit meeting to the licensee.
The exception to the reactor
building exterior wall rebar splice stagger at the construction
opening should be supported by engineering analysis that addresses
excess deflection and the potential- for concrete crack opening. The
inspector identified to'DLC and SWEC at the exit meeting also that
i
1
-
i
t
r
.
.
.
4
concrete wall deflection and concrete crack opening at the construc-
tion opening could be incorporated into the SAT. Pending licensee
response to the inspector's concern this is unresolved item #85-20-01.
2.2 Batch Plant Activities
Preparatory requirements for concrete placements were reviewed.
Changes necessitated by concrete mix design, concrete ingredient
changes, and qualification of an offsite commercial batch plant were
verified by the inspector.
These were reviewed and discussed.with
cognizant contractor and licensee engineers. Additionally, the
inspector visited the offsite batch plant in Rochester. There he
reviewed the plant's controls required by SWEC specification 907
Addendum No. 3, Mixing and Delivering of Concrete from Offsite Plant,
noted the plant's certification by NRMCA and observed adequate
storage of concrete ingredients.
~2. 3 Licensee QA/QC Interactions in the Concrete Area
The following DLC. quality assurance audits of SWEC, DC and DLC's
site QC were included in the inspector's review of category I
~
concr.ete activities and for concrete supplied by the offsite batch
plant.
DLC/QA Audit No1 DC-2-84-09 of February, 19P4 on DLC/ site QC
activities;
DLC/QA Audit No. DC-2-84-19 of June,1984 of site structural
activities;
DLC/QA Audit No. DC-2-85-02 of January,1985 of site quality
control;
,
DLC/QA Audit No. DC-2-65-19 of July,1985 of site QC activities
!
relating to the offsite batch plant fo'r supply of concrete to
close the temporary construction opening.
The above audits were observed to use detail check lists containing
I
criteria identified in engineering specifications and required
i
controls implemented in DLC site QC procedures. Audit findings,
,
responses required, corrective actions and verifications of correc-
!
tive actions were noted to be adequately addressed,' responded to and
appropriately closed out.
'
t
l
No violations were identified in the above activities.
!
i
.
i
-
--
-
--
.,
- _ .
,
,,
_y- , -
_
.,,_-w.-y
- -- --- ,
.
r
.
4
.
.-
~
5
3.
Previously Identified Inspection Items
3.1 NRC/IE BU 79-02 - Installation of Drilled - In Concrete Expansion
Anchors for Pipe Supports
Previous inspection reports progressively identified the licensee
responses, corrective actions and open items relating to the subject
. bulletin.
Inspection report 83-09 identified unresolved item
83-05-06 as remaining open. This relates to loosened expansion
anchors which required QC inspection of retorqued bolts.
In July
1983 DLC committed QC to implement a program to assure that any
future base plates which are loosened by construction would have
anchor bolts retorqued and witnessed by QC.
The licensee's site QC
also initiated a retrofit inspection and retorque program to assure
that all base plate expansion anchors on pipe supports previously
loosened by construction were documented by QC for adequacy of anchor
bolt torque. The above conditions have been satisfied.
UNR 83-05-06
for pipe support base plates with expansion anchors is closed.
The
,
'
NRC/IE BU 79-02 responses by the licensee, SWEC engineering design
coordination for quality control and DLC's implementing control
procedures were found acceptable.
The NRC inspector verified the
above in his review and discussions with DLC's QC director, site QC
supervisor and site QC engineer.
Their detailed records were
reviewed. The retrofit inspection program was generically applied,
also affecting HVAC and electrical supports with expansion anchors.
Records on pipe support retrofit inspection were observed completed.
The criteria established in SQC surveillance. inspections on pipe
supports were found satisfactory and consistent with SWEC latest
field construction procedure. Additional documentation relating to
DLC's site QC reinspection program was reviewed. Based on DLC Site
QC inspection procedure IP-10.1, Backfit Inspection Program / Pipe
Supports, revision of April 17, 1984, a statistical sampling was
undertaken of installed pipe support base plates with concrete anchor
bolts. The inspection program segregated base plates installed and
inspected at different dates. The conclusions reached by June 1984
,
of the statistical sampling determined the following action.
It was-
decided that a program for 100% reinspection of supports, excluding
Hilti concrete anchored supports, would be undertaken commencing
August 20, 1984. A special construction repair team was available to
provide repairs where the special QC team identified deficiencies. A
significant number of I'pe support plates anchored by cther than
Hilti bolts were repaired. NRC inspection reports 84-14 and 85-09
report on field obervations and verification of DLC/SWEC activities
ongoing in reinspection / repair activities of this program. Based on
the above observation NRC/IE BU 79-02 is closed.
3.2 Licensee QA/QC Interactions
DLC quality assurance audits of SWEC site activities relating'to
installation of piping and mechanical installation were reviewed and
discussed with cognizant DLC and SWEC engineers.
.
I
e;
5
6
No violations were identified in the above activities.
4.
Review of Construction Phase Building Settlement Monitoring
Selected raw data an building / structure settlement monitoring through
December 1984 was reviewed by the inspector.
SWEC report on the subject
will be updated in Supplement #4 to-its settlement report. The settlement
report will be revised and reissued in 1987 prior to turn-over of the
system to DLC.
Settlement monitoring will continue in the interim and the
results will be revised on an on going basis.
The raw data reviewed
indicated settlements through December 1984 are within the magnitude of
predicted settlement. DLC has committed to a settlement monitoring pro-
gram for Category I structures as identified in its letter to the NRC of
August 8, 1984.
The inspector had no further questions.
5.
Unresolved Items
Unresolved. items are matters about which information is required in order
to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, violations or deviations.
An unresolved item identified in this inspection is discussed in paragraph
2.1.
6.
Exit Meeting
An exit meeting was held at the construction site on August 30, 1985, with
members of the licensee and contractor's staff as denoted in paragraph 1
of this report. The inspector discussed the scope and findings of the
inspection. The licensee acknowledged the inspector's comments. At no
time during this inspection was written material provided to the licensee
by the inspector.
I
i
!
.
!
l
l
,
I
i
L_