ML20154D071
| ML20154D071 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 01/08/1986 |
| From: | Conlon T, Harris J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20154D050 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-338-85-28, 50-339-85-28, NUDOCS 8603050487 | |
| Download: ML20154D071 (7) | |
See also: IR 05000338/1985028
Text
j@ 1849'o
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
UNITED STATES
~ f
[N-
REGION li
p
g
j
101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
ATL ANTA, GEORGI A 30323
\\,
/
- .*
Report Nos.:
50-338/85-28 and 50-339/85-28
Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company
Richmond, VA 23261
Docket Nos.: 50-338 and 50-339
Facility Name: North Anna 1 and 2
Inspection Conducted: October 28 - November 1, 1985
Inspector:
Qbb
/-i-Y4
J. W. Harris
Date Signed
p/
/- f'- Ph
Approved b
y
T. E. Conlon, Section Chief
Date Signed
Engineering Branch
Division of Reactor Safety
SUMMARY
Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 35 inspector-hours on site
in the areas of modification to the service water intake structure.
Results:
Four examples of a violation of licensee requirements were identified -
Failure to control temperature of concrete test cylinders, failure to control
moisture content of select fill, failure to meet specified test requirements for
slump, air, concrete temperature and aggregates, and document correct quantities
of concrete mix ingredients on batch tickets, and failure to have a procedure
which implements current specifications.
l
l
l
,
G603050407 060221
DR
ADocg 05099339
g
-
-
. -
-
-
-
- .
-_ -
~.
i
.
1
l
REPORT DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
'
Licensee Employees
- J. R. Adams, Project Manager, Engineering
- S. B. Dzidzo, Project Manager, Engineering
- M. W. Gettler, Project Manager
- L. N. Hartz, Operations Supervisor
- G. E. Kane, Assistant Station Manager
- J. Leberstien, Licensing Coordinator
A. McGilvray, Quality Control (QC) In?pector
- A. O. Parker, Senior Staff Engineer
- D. Roth, Quality Assurance (QA) Manager
- E. R. Smith, Assistant Station Manager
l
- F. Terminella, Supervisor QC
NRC Resident Inspector
- M. W. Branch
- Attended exit interview
2.
Exit Interview
{
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on November 1, 1985, with
those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
The inspector described the
areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings listed
'
below.
The findings are four deficiencies which constitute a violation of
the licensce's requirements for concrete and soil compaction activities.
No
,
dissenting comments were received from the licensee.
Deficiency 338, 339/85-28-01, Failure to control temperature of concrete test
cylinders, paragraph 5.
Deficiency 338, 339/85-28-02, Failure to control moisture content of select
fill, paragraph 5.
Deficiency 338,319/85-28-03, Failure to meet specified test requirements for
'
slump, air content, concrete temperature and aggregates and document correct
quantities of concrete mix ingredients on batch tickets, paragraph 5.
Deficiency 338; 339/85-28-04, Failure to have a procedure which implements
current specifications, paragraph 5.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided
to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspection.
-
-
-
.
- - -
. -
-
- -
.
_ _ - -
.
..
,
l
~
.
2
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters
This subject was not addressed in the inspection.
4.
Unresolved Items
Unresolved items were not identified during the inspection.
5.
Modifications to Service Water Intake Structure.
This inspection covered examination of specifications, procedures, work
activities, and records for ongoing modifications to the Service Water
Intake Structure in the areas of structural concrete and foundations.
Controlling specifications and procedures examined by the inspector are as
follows:
Specification NAS2014, Rev. 3, Supply of Materials, Batching, Mixing
and Delivery of Ready Mix Concrete
Specification NAS2029, Rev.1, Placement of Concrete and Reinforcing
Steel
"
Specification NAS3003, Rev.1, Excavation, Fill and Backfill, Service
Water Buried Piping Installation
Work Procedure WP-106, Rev. O, Excavation and Backfill
"
Work Procedure WP-105, Rev. O Construction Work Procedure, Concrete
"
QCl 10.1 Rev. O, Civil Inspection
Work examined included completed concrete walls and slabs in the intake
structure and ongoing concrete placements.
The inspector also examined the
concrete and soils testing laboratory for currentness of calibration of test
equipment and environmental controls of the concrete curing room. Concrete
records examined included qualification tests for the cement, aggregate,
water, admixtures and reinforcing steel used in the concrete placements;
batch tickets; strength results of the concrete test cylinders; and environ-
mental control data for the concrete test cylinder curing room.
Foundation
records examined included laboratory proctor test data (standard used for
field compaction controls), field density tests, and moisture controls used
for compaction of select fill in the service water reservoir buried pipe
trench.
Examination of the above resulted in the following deficiencies being
identified which constitute a violation of licensee requirements:
Specification NAS2029, Placement of Concrete Reinforcing Steel,
requires concrete test cylinders to be controlled in accordam:e with
ASTM C31, Making and Curing Concrete Test Specimens in the Field. This
ASTM requires cylinders which are initially cured in the fiald to be
maintained at a temperature of 60"F to 8QiF for rhe, first 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> and
i
e,g , +
,
_ . .
__.___________]
.
3
indicates that a temperature record of the test specimens may be
established by means of maximum-minmum thermometers.
Following the
initial 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> curing period, the ttst cylinders are then required to
be stored in a moist condition at 73.4 F i 3 F until the moment of
test.
Contrary to this requirement, no temperature data is available to
verify that the test specimens which are initially cured in the field
meet the temperature requirements.
Also, examination of temperature
test data for those test specimens cured in the laboratory curing room
showed that the 73 F
3*F temperature requirements were not being met
during this inspection and numerous times since the batching of
Category 1 concrete for modifications to the service water structure.
The civil QC inspector issued an NCR on July 1,1985, reporting curing
room temperature violations.
Disposition instructions stated that as
i
l
long as the test cylinders break was within the allowable range no
'
further action will be required and to accept as is. Discussions with
the QC inspector indicated that he interpreted this to mean that as
long as the test cylinder breaks met strength requirements, that out of
.
specification temperature variations of the curing room could be
l
tolerated. This was identified to the licensee as deficiency item 338,
339/85-28-01, Failure to control temperature of concrete test
cylinders.
Specification NAS3003, Excavation Fill and Backfill Service Water
,
Buried Piping Installation, paragraph 3.5.2 requires select fill
moisture to be controlled to !3 percent of the optimum moisture as
determined by ASTM D 698, Moisture Density Relations of Soils Using
5.5 lb Ramer and 12 inch Drop,
Contrary to this requirement examination of records for select fill
placed on August 27, 1985, September 18, 1985, September 19, 1985, and
September 5,1985 showed that select fill was placed at -7.4,
-6.7,
-4.9,
-4.1, and -3.9 percent of the required optimum moisture.
This
was identified to the licensee as deficiency item 338, 339/85-28-02,
Failure to control moisture content of select fill.
Specification NAS2014, Supply of Materials Batching, Mixing, and
Delivery of Ready Mix Concrete, specifies that tests for slump, air
content and concrete temperature shall be made for each truck
delivered, that the amounts of fine and coarse aggregate and water
shall be shown on the batch tickets, that aggregate gradation tests
shall be performed daily and that 5.4 ounces per cubic yard of concrete
or 44 ounces for an 8 cubic yard load as the maximum amount of air
entraining agent for the current design mix.
,
Contrary to these requirements, tests for slump, air content, and
'
concretc temperature were not being made consistently for each truck of
concrete delivered; the amount of fine and coarse aggregate was not
shown on batch ticket invoice numbers 31876 to 31885, and the amount of
water and fine and coarse aggregate was not shown on batch ticket
invoice numbers 32021 to 32023; samples for daily gradation tests are
l
-
-
-
-
- -
-
-
.
-
.
-
i
.
4
being taken, but testing is about one month behind schedule; and the
maximum allowable amount of air entraining agent shown on the batch
j
tickets is 48 ounces for an 8 cubic yard load instead of the 44 ounces
specified by the design mix.
This was identified to the licensee as
deficiency item 338, 339/85-28-03, Failure to meet specified test
requirements for slump, air, temperature and aggregates, and document
correct quantities of concrete mix ingredients on batch tickets.
Procedure QC 10.1 Civil Inspection, is being used to control the
inspection and documentation of work related to civil modifications of
the service water intake structure.
This procedure was written to
,
implement specifications used for construction of Unit 3 which has
j
l
been cancelled.
This procedure is not appropriate for the circum-
stances in that it does not reference the current specifications being
i
used to control the ongoing modifications.
Discussions indicated that
applicable procedures are still being drafted.
This was identified to
the licensee as deficiency item 338, 339/85-28-04, Failure to have a
procedure which implements current specifications.
During this inspection, the inspector observed that there was only one QC
inspector for the ongoing modification work.
The inspector concluded that
,
this did not constitute adequate staff for the level of activity involved
and that many of the above listed deficiencies were attributed to the fact
that the QC inspector did not have enough time to do a thorough inspection
job.
6.
Enforcement Confr.ence
On December
'8,
1985, W. L. Stewart, Vice President Nuclear Operations,
Virginia Electric and Power Company and members of his staff met with
A. F. Gi b on, Director Division of Reactor Safety and other members of
the Region II staff to discuss the findings identified at the exit interview
on November 1, 1985 and in a telecon discussion held on November 22, 1985,
with members of the licensee and NRC Region 11 staff.
Attendees at the
enforcement conference are listed below.
Licensee Attendees:
W. L. Stewart, Vice President, Nuclear Operations
R. J. Hardwick, Jr., Manager, Nuclear Programs and Licensing
J. W. Waddill, Executive Manager QA
E. W. Harrel, Station Manager, North Anna
N. E. Clark, Director Safety Evaluation and Control
'
B. Saunders, Station Manager, Surry
M. W. Gettley, ESC Project Manager, North Anna
C. M. Robinson, Manager. Civil Enginet. ring
,
D. Roth, Manager, QA
'
J. M. Davis, ESC Nuclear, Projects
J. MacCrimmon, Supervisor Civil Engineering
. .
--
_
- _
-.
.
_
. _ -
,
'
.
5
,
NRC Attendees:
A. F. Gibson, Director, Division of Reactor Safety (DRS)
'
G. R. Jenkins, Director, Enforcement and Investigation Coordination
Staff (EICS)
A. R. Herdt, Chief. Engineering Branch, DRS
T. E. Conlon, Chief, Plant Systems Section, DRS
S. A. Elrod, Chief, Reactor Projects Section, Division of Reactor Projects
'
(DRP)
'
K. D. Landis, Chief, Technical Support Staff, DRP
,
M. W. Branch, Senior Resideat Inspector, North Anna
'
t
S. Guenther, Project Inspector, DRP
J. R. Harris, Civil Engineer / Geologist, DRS
'
J. J. Lenahan, Civil Engineer, DRS
l
L. P. Modenos, Enforcement Specialist, EICS
!
During the discussion, the licensee discussed management issues and
technical issues which were related to the deficiencies identified during
the NRC inspection conducted from October 28 to November 1,1985.
The
'
,
licensee indicated work activities had ceased in this area and that they
I
would not resume until all the issues were resolved.
.
During the presentation of the management issues, the licensee discussed the
'
i
proximate and root causes of the deficiencies and the corrective actions
being taken to resolve the deficiencies.
Proximate causes identified were
deficiencies in procedures, documentation, pre-work planning, manpower
coverage, and equipment problems.
The proposed corrective actions were:
to issue revised procedures, emphasize procedural compliance, review and
disposition existing record errors and omissions, issue procedures address-
ing conduct of job readiness reviews, increase number of QC inspectors,
determine test equipment status and requirements and determine curing room
,
l
and laboratory equipment status and requirements. Root causes identified
were deficiencies in management involvement, personnel communications, the
QC inspectors role, and the QA audit program.
Proposed corrective actions
are:
re-emphasize management role in work activities, increase supervisory
!
'
involvement, establish a testing group, monitor testing activity and
increase periodic audits.
l
)
In the discussion of the technical issues the licensee indicated that
although there were deficiencies in their QA program, they felt the quality
of the concrete and backfill were acceptable.
L
Supporting evidence for the concrete quality was that although the frequency
for slump, air, and concrete tests did not meet the once for each truck
frequency specified by the specification, they did satisfy the testing
requirements of ANSI Standard N45.2.5-1974.
This is the Standard which
provides supplementary requirements for installation inspection, and testing
of structural concrete and structural steel during the construction phase of
Nucleat Power Plants.
The frequency specified by ANSI N45.2.5 for these
tests is the first batch produced each day and for every 50 cubic yards
placed.
Review of their test data for slump, air concrete temperature, and
strength results from the test cylinders showed that they met or exceeded
specification and design requirements.
l
,
. . .
- - .
__.
_
-.
-
.
6
In discussion of the technical issue regarding the backfill, the licensee
indicated that review of the design criteria for the backfill indicated that
the compaction and meisture content were not significant. This design data
was not provided during the licensee's presentation.
At the conclusion of the discussion, the licensee connitted to providing the
design data supporting their position on the backfill and to inspect the
concrete of the service water intake structure to verify that there were no
defects in the concrete.
,
,
l
l
l
!
,
,
t
.
I
i
!
.
. . - - -
-
- -
-
- -
- - -
- -
- - - -
. .
.
-
- - - -