ML19305E588

Forwards Response to NRC 800305 Ltr Re Violations Noted in IE Insp Rept 50-458/80-02.Corrective Actions:Previous Aggregate Test Repts Have Been Reviewed for Errors & Incomplete Entries

ML19305E588
Person / Time
Site:	River Bend
Issue date:	04/10/1980
From:	Weigand J GULF STATES UTILITIES CO.
To:	Seidle W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
Shared Package
ML19305E582	List: ML19305E588
References
FOIA-80-322 RBG-7482, NUDOCS 8005200080
Download: ML19305E588 (3)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

8005200 (jg e GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY POST eFriCE box 2951 .BEAUVoNT ?ExAS 777C4 AAEA CCDE 713 8386E3'.

April 10, 1980 RBG - Th82 File No. G9.5 G15.h.1 Mr. W.C. Seidle, Chief Reactor Construction & Engineering Support Branch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co=ission Region IV Office of Inspection & Enforcement 611 Ryan Plaza Drive Suite 1000 Arlington, TX 76011

Dear Mr. Seidle:

River Bend Station Unit 1 Refer to: RIV Docket No. 50 h58/ Report 80-02 This letter responds to the infractions contained in your I&E Report No. 50 h56/80-02 as required by 100FR 2.201. This inspection of River Bend construction activities was perfomed by Messrs. C.R. Oberg and G.B. Beach on January 31, 1980 and February 12-15, 1980.

We trust that the enclosed response satisfactorily ansvers the concerns raised in your report. We shall be glad to discuss any further points that you may have.

Sincerely, v.G. Weigand Vice President Operations & Technical Systems JGW/JEB/WJE/mb Enclosure

ENCLOSURE 1 NRC Findings 50 h58/80-02 River Bend Station Unit 1 Criteria V of Appendix B to 100FR 50 requires that activities affecting q 2ality shall be in accordance with prescribed instructions, procedures, and drawings. Additionally, Criterion X of Appendix B to 10CFR 50 re-quires that "A program for inspection of activities affecting quality shall be . . . . . executed . . . . . to verify conformance with the documented instructions, procedures and drawings for accomplishing the activity."

It also requires that tests of material shall be performed where neces-sary to assure quality.

A. Failure to Perform and Failure to Identify Aggregate Tests Procedure QAD-11.2, Revision A, " Testing of Concrete", requires that tests be conducted in accordance with procedures as defined in Construc-tion Specification 210.361, " Concrete Testing services". Procedure QS-lh.2, Revision C, " Inspection Report System", delineates that FQC shall perform their required inspections in accordance with appropriate specifications, drawings, and procedures. Thus it is required that:

1. Coarse aggregates be tested in accordance with ASTM C235, " Standard Test Method for Scratch Hardness of Coarse Aggregate Particles", and are to be reviewed and documented in accordance with QA-14.2, Revision C,

" Inspection Report System." QS-1k.2 requires that Stone & Webster FQC review the test results to determine whether the test has been conducted in accordance with the appropriate test procedure. FQC should then document, as applicable, whether the test results reviewed have met the appropriate criteria.

2. Coarse aggregates must also be tested in accordance with ASTM C131, "Stindard Test Method for Resistance to Abrasion of small size coarse aggr gate by use of the Los Angeles Machine", periodically every six months.

3 Fine and Coarse aggregates are to be tested in accordance with ASTM C88, "6tandard Test Method for Soundness of Aggregates by use of Sodium Sulfate or Magnesium Sulfate", periodically every six months.

Contrary to the above:

1. A review of Inspection Report 9001508 indicated that the test results documented did not meet the requirements of the ASTM C235 test for scratch hardness; specifically, the values on the test report for the weight and number of particles of each size of each sample tested and I the minimum sample weights as required by ASTM C235 Paragraph 5.1.1 could not be correlated by Stone & Webster FQC. This notwithstanding, the test results had been reviewed and documented as " satisfactory".

2. Tests in accordance with the ASTM C131 Los Angelos Abrasion Test were not performed within the six-month prescriEe~d' frequency as required.

Test results were due December 1979, but were not completed until February 1h,1980.

I 1

April 10, 1980 W.C. Saidle paga 2 3 Tests in accordance with ASTM C88 test for soundness were not per-formed within the six-month prescribed frequency as required. Test results were due in December 1979 but were not ec=pleted until February 14, 1980.

This is an infraction.

GSU Response to A-1:

Action Taken and Results Achieved:

All previous aggregate test reports have been reviewed for errors and incomplete entries. Test for=s with incomplete entries or inadequate sample sizes (such as IR #9001508) are in the process of being evaluated and dispositioned on a case by case basis.

A review of test for=s has been conducted to determine their adequacy and revisions to six forms are being made.

Corrective Action Taken to Prevent Further Noncompliance:

Additional training and supervision vill be provided for the 1sboratory personnel. All laboratory test forns will be periodic-ally monitored for accuracy, completeness and adequacy.

Date When Full Compliance Will Be Achieved:

May 15, 1980 GSU Response to A-2 and A-3:

Action Taken and Results Achieved:

As noted in the finding, the samples were obtained at the required time and sent to Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory on December 27, 1979 However, due to delays, the results were not transmitted to the site until February. The results of the test vere satisfactory and therefore, no immediate action is applicable to this particular case Corrective Action Taken to Prevent Further Noncompliance:

As previously stated above, there has been an organizational change '

to increase the supervision in the test lab so that timely sampling of materials and timely reporting of test results vill be achieved.

In addition, response time vill be greatly reduced when the on-site laboratory is fully operational. The use of the Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory for these tests has been an interim measure. Any remaining tests to be run by the Pittsburgh Testing Laboratory vill be closely monitored to ensure that results are supplied in a timely manner.

Date When Full Comuliance Will Be Achieved:

May 30, 1980 L