IR 05000280/1986009
| ML18150A292 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry, North Anna, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 05/06/1986 |
| From: | Belisle G, Runyan M, Michael Scott NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18150A291 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-86-09, 50-280-86-9, 50-281-86-09, 50-281-86-9, 50-338-86-09, 50-338-86-9, 50-339-86-09, 50-339-86-9, NUDOCS 8605200413 | |
| Download: ML18150A292 (8) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 Report Nos.:
50-280/86-09, 50-281/86-09, 50-338/86-09, and 50-339/86-09 Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company Richmond, VA 23261 Docket Nos.:
50-280, 50-281, 50-338, and 50-339 Licensee Nos.:
DPR-32, DPR-37, NPF-4, and NPF-7 Facility Name:
Surry and North Anna Inspection Conducted:
March 24-27, 1986 Inspectors:
}~V\\A,\\Cv<--
M. F. Runyan 1:"1. i!L. '$.,c,,~. C Scott*
Date Signed 5/s/ o{c Date Signed Approved by:
0/J//£=- 0
G. CBe~ting Section Division.of Reactor Safety Iljp/£0 Chief
SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, announced inspection was conducted at the corporate office in the areas of offsite support staff and offsite review committe Results:
No violations or deviations were identified.
- -~-~---------
---
--- - -- ~,
- 8605200413 860508 I PDR ADOCK 05000280
- G PDR
REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees B. Bocchicchio, Manager, Systems Maintenance Support
- R. Calder, Manager, Nuclear Engineering W. Cameron, Director, Health Physics
- B. Choate, Supervisor, Special Projects
- N. Clark, Manager, Nuclear Operations and Licensing
- W. Clark, Quality Assurance (QA) Staff Engineer
- R. Collins, Supervisor, QA Administrative Support D. Cruden, Manager, Performance Services L. Curfman, Staff Engineer J. Davis, Manager, Projects (Nuclear)
- G. Helm, Manager, QA Engineering and Vendor Surveillance R. Jordan, Supervisor, Purchasing (Surry)
E. Kube, Director, Operations and Maintenance Support Administrative Services
- F. Moore, Manager, Purchasing J. Ogren, Director, Operations and Maintenance Support R. Owens, Director, Purchasing (Engineering and Construction)
- D. Rickeard, Supervisor~ Independent and Operational Event Review
- J. Rhodes, Senior Vice President, Power Operations R. Schaffer, Supervisor, QA Engineering T. Snow, Supervisor, Nuclear Fuels Operations
- W. Stewart, Senior Vice President, Power Operations T. Tarkington, Supervisor, Vendor Surveillance A. Treece, Director, Purchasing (Power Station Support)
K. Tuley, Staff Engineer
- J. Waddill, Executive Manager, QA J. Wilson, Manager, Nuclear Operations Support L. Wood, QA Lead Auditor J. Wroniewicz~ Supervisor, Nuclear Project Engineering Other licensee employees contacted included office personne *Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on March 27, 1986, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 abov The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection finding No dissenting comments were received from the license The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspectio.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspectio.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during the inspectio.
Offsite Support Staff (40703)
References:
(a)
{b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
10 CFR 50.54(a)(l), Conditions of Licenses VEPCO Topical Quality Assurance Program, VEP 1-4A
{Updated)
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants Regulatory Guide 1.33, Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Operations)
ANSI N18.7 - 1976, Quality Assurance for the Operational Phase of Nuclear Power Plants Technical Specifications, Section 6, Administrative Controls The inspector visited the corporate office to determine whether the offsite support staff functions are performed by qualified personnel in accordance with 1 i censee approved admi ni strati ve contro 1 s, regulatory requirements, industry guides and standards, and Technical Specifications (TS).
The following criteria were used during this review to assess the adequacy of the offsite staff:
Administrative controls were established to assign departmental responsibilities, authorities, and lines of communication in confor-mance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, and the licensee's approved QA progra Managers, group leaders, and staff members understood their responsi-bilities and authoritie The above personnel were qualified for their related wor QA audits of offsite support staff activities were conducted satis-factorily and corrective actions for identified deficiencies were completed in a timely manne The documents listed below were reviewed to determine if the previously listed criteria had been incorporated into the licensee's offsite support staff operatio QAEI Orientation and Training of QA Engineering Personnel, Revision 2
QAEI 5.1 QAEI 1 QAEI 1 FQAI FQAI 1 FQAI 1 NDCIM 1 NDCIM 3 NDCIM 5 NDCIM 7 NDCIM 9 NDCIM 10
Instructions for the Preparation and Processing of External and Internal Correspondence, Revision 2 Qualification Program for Auditors and Lead Auditors, Revision 3 Review of Engineering and Project Engineering Activi-ties, Revision 0 Fuel QA Training Program, Revision OA Control of Fuel QA Reports, Revision 0 Preparation.of Fuel QA Reports, Revision 0 PO-PSE&C Project Interface Procedure, Revision 1 Nuclear Design Control Policy and Interface Procedure, Revision 2
Nuclear Document and Drawing Control Interface Proce-dure, Revision 3 Engineering and Construction/Fuel Procurement Interface Procedure for Nuclear Fuel Engineering Support, Revision 1 Nuclear Operations -
Nuclear Engineering Interface Procedure Directive and Utilization of Systems Specia-lists, Surry and North Anna Power Station, Revision 1 Interface Procedure Site Engineering Support of Surry and North Anna Power Station, Revision 2 Purchasing Department Procedures Manual Procedure 22 Purchase Order Documentation, Revision 1 Procedure 31 Purchase Order Administration, Revision 2 Procedure 52 Purchasing Department Training Program for New Employees, Revision 2 Maintenance and Performance Services Department User's Guide, Revision 3 Sec ti on 1. 0 Section Section Department Organization Request for Special Training Request for Training Development Support
The inspector reviewed the following corporate QA audits of various offsite support activities:
85-08, Nuclear Operations Department, Nuclear Operations Support, April 5, 1985 85-27, Procurement, Nuclear Fuels Procurement (NFP), Purchasing Contracts, August 21, 1985 85-30, Project Engineering - Nuclear, August 9, 1985 85-33, Engineering and Construction (E&C) Nuclear and Civil Engineering, July 17, 1985 85-58, Nuclear Operations Department, Nuclear Fuel Operations, Nuclear Operations and Licensing, November 12, 1985 Audit findings were significant in scope and depth, containing such items as lack of necessary procedures, inadequate training files, and failure to follow procedure Corrective action for identified deficiencies was timely and well documente The inspector interviewed the following VEPCO personnel:
Quality Assurance W. Clark, QA Staff Engineer R. Collins, Supervisor, QA Administrative Support T. Foster, QA Lead Auditor G. Helm, Manager, QA Engineering and Vendor Surveillance R. Schaffer, Supervisor, Quality Assurance Engineering T. Tarkington, Supervisor, Vendor Surveillance L. Wood, QA Lead Auditor Corporate Operations and Maintenance Support W. Cameron, Director, Health Physics E. Kube, Director, Administrative Services (Acting)
J, Ogren, Director, Operations and Maintenance Support T. Snow, Supervisor, Nuclear Fuels Operations J. Wilson, Manager, Nuclear Operations Support Nuclear Engineering
- R. Calder, Manager, Nuclear Engineering J. Wroniewicz, Supervisor, Nuclear Project Engineering Construction and Project Engineering
Construction and Project Engineering B. Choate, Supervisor, Special Projects Maintenance and Performance Services J. Davis, Manager, Projects (Nuclear)
Maintenance and Performance Services B. Bocchicchio, Manager, Systems Maintenance Support D. Cruden, Manager, Performance Services Purchasing R. Jordan, Supervisor, Purchasing (Surry)
F. Moore, Manager, Purchasing R. Owens, Director, Purchasing (E&C)
A. Treece, Director, Purchasing (Power Station Support)
The interviews referenced above were conducted to assess the administration, indoctrination, and training of the corporate staff. All employees appeared to understand their responsibilities and authorities and could identify the procedures which delineated this informatio These procedures, also referenced above, provided a high degree of detail pertaining to organiza-tional structures, interface pathways, and employee trainin All employees had received some form of training, which mostly consisted of genera 1 employee training and required reading list Forma 1 technical training was held mostly in-house in lieu of using outside consultant This deemphasis on formal technical school usage is the result of hiring individuals with high experience levels and the licensee's confidence in the on-the-job training proces A majority of the techni ca 1 staff are degreed engineer Registration as professional engineers is encouraged by the licensee's assumption of associ-ated fee However, only minor restrictions to advancement are posed by an individual's professional statu Based on the interviews, the inspectors concluded that corporate staff members frequently visited the sites to augment their support functio In Engineering, this included the practice of walking down systems prior to design initiation to verify system function and configuratio Onsite support was apparently equally a 11 ocated to the two nuclear sites, Surry and North Ann Interfaces and communications between various offsite support groups were clearly delineated by procedur The inspectors determined that all groups had a close working relationship which has resulted in coordinated support to the site Each group appeared to understand the methods of operation and areas of purview of other corporate group The corporate staff exhibited a high degree of professional is The knowledge level and experience was noticeably high as well as the level of awareness and conversance regarding ongoing technical issue "'
'
..
Within this area, no violations or deviations were identifie.
Offsite Review Committee (40701)
References:
(a)
10 CFR 50.54(a)(l), Conditions of Licenses (b)
VEPCO Topical Quality Assurance Program, VEP 1-4A (Updated)
(c)
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants (d)
Technical Specifications (TS), Section (e)
Regulatory Guide 1.33, Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Operations)
(f)
ANSI N18.7-1976, Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance for the Operational Phase of Nuclear Power Plants The inspector reviewed the licensee's equivalent to the Offsite Review Committee as delineated in the Standard Review Plan (NUREG 0800).
This equivalent organization was called the Independent and Operating, Event Review group (IOER) which was directed by the Safety Evaluation and Control Section (SEC).
The review ensured that IOER and SEC performed activities as required by references (a) through (f).
The following criteria were used during this review to assess the overall acceptability of the established program:
The IOER and SEC membership and qualifications were as required by T The IOER and SEC held meetings at the required frequency with the required quoru The IOER reviewed those items specified in T The SEC had cognizance of audits performed in the areas specified by T SEC meeting minutes were prepared and issued within the required timeframe The documents listed below were reviewed to determine if the previous listed criteria had been incorporated into the licensee's TS driven procedures:
NODPS*-LR-04 Independent Review, Revision 0 SEC-ADM Indoctrination and Training of SEC Personnel, Revision O SEC-ADM SEC Status Reports and Meetings, Revision 0
. '
..
SEC-ADM SEC-ADM SEC-ADM Processing and Criteria for Independent Reviews, Revision O SEC Independent Review of the QA Program, Revision 0 Independent and Operating Event Review (IOER),
Revision 0
- NODPS - Nuclear Operations Department Standards Manual The inspector reviewed the monthly meeting reports generated by the SEC from 1985 to presen The reports detailed items reviewed by the IDER/SEC during the previous month including items not tracked by the IDER but of interest to management personnel on the distribution list for the report The inspector compared open items in the monthly reports with items contained in the IDER I s tracking system which exhibited a one-to-one correspondence between the tw The inspectors determined the impact on and interaction with other corporate personnel and site groups by the SE The inspectors reviewed several SEC evaluations of modification package The inspectors discussed SEC activi-ties with other corporate group Since the SEC's review of TS is over-viewed by the NRC, the inspector did not examine this proces The SEC/IOER reviewed condensations of site deviations and site review staff meeting minutes but primarily relied on the site to perform these functions; the meeting minutes contained the site generated procedures revie The IDER obtained a new manager early in 198 Under new leadership, monthly reports, reviewed documents, and TS driven QA Program overview will chang Discussions with the manager indicated that these changes included a new evaluation depth on certain subjects and streamlining or curtailing of reviews and information dissemination in other area Utilization of a computer in tracking and trending TS required document reviews will be implemente Virginia Power has instituted a Nuclear Overview Committee (NOC), which, according to their by-laws, overviews several areas; one of which includes the SE This NOC body is above and beyond TS requirements, but it fulfills a function more closely akin to the Offsite Review Committee detailed in NUREG-080 The NOC was made up of upper level management and consultant(s)
who meet on a quarterly or more frequent basi The inspector reviewed three sets of meeting minutes from 1985 and found that the meeting minutes reflected the NOC functions as indicated in the by-law The SEC and other utility groups had made presentations to the NOC during these meeting From the meeting minutes and by-laws, it appears that NOC does not directly review any TS required material reviewed by the SE Within this area, no violations or deviations were identified.