IR 05000341/1979017
| ML19250A589 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 09/12/1979 |
| From: | Barrett P, Hayes D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19250A586 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-341-79-17, NUDOCS 7910240015 | |
| Download: ML19250A589 (4) | |
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
-
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-341/79-17 Docket No. 50-341 License No. CPPR-87 Licensee: The Detroit Edisoo Company 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48266 Facility Name:
Enrico Fermi Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2 Inspection At: Fermi Site, Monroe, Michigan Inspection Conducted: August 20-22, 1979
/2 79 Inspector:
P. A. Ba.. rett f
Approved By:
D. W.
C fef
- !77 Engineering Support Section 1 Inspection Summary Inspection on August 20-22, 1979 (Report No. 50-341/79-17)
Areas Inspected: Licensee action on previous inspection findings; additional review of design change control; and discussion of the instrument line installation schedule. The inspection involved a total of 20 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance were identified.
N g202 7 910240 0 l
.
DETAILS Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Employees
- R. W. Barr, Project QA Director
- H. A. Walker, Site Project QA Engineer
- C. J. Millet, Senior QA Engineer
- R.
S. Lenart, Startup Engineer
- H. Arora, Startup Director
- J. A. Cartmill, Assistant Project Superintendent
- W. W. White, Assistant Project Manager and Plant Scperintendent
- W. J. Fahrner, Project Manager
- D. Ferenca, QA Engineer
- C. R. Bacon, Field Project Er.gineer Other Personnel
- C.
B. Bliesener, Administrative Assistant to Project Manager, DIC
- G.
V. King, Electrical QA Engineer, DIC
- J. T. Blixt, Project QC Manager, DIC
- K. Dempsey, Assistant Constraction Manager, DIC The inspector also talked with and interviewed several other licensee and contractor employees, including members of the quality, technical and engineering staffs.
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Open) Unresolved Item (341/78-09-15): Measures act established to control reinspection activities necessitated by design changes and performed by L. K. Comstock. Daniel International Administrative Procedure No. AP-V-03 dated June 28, 1979 and L. K. Comstock Procedure No. 4.1.6 dated July 27, 1979 collectively require verification to be made by L. K. Comstock QC to assure that all design changes are accomplished r.nd inspected. The types of design changes that are affected by these procedures are Design Change Notices (DCN), Design Change Requests (DCR), and Field Modification Requests (FMR). The following methods of QC verification of design changes were being implemented. The verification of contractor DCNs and DCRs were being made just prior to turnover to the Detroit Edison Startup Group at which time the applicable QC records would be updated to identify that the latest documents had been used for inspection. The verification of FMRs includes an individual signoff by QC on each FMR. This item remains open pending the fornialization of the above two verification methods into procedures or instructions. This formalization will be completed by September 21, 1979.
-2-
\\h
.
'
(Closed) Unresolved Item (341/79-05-04): Detroit Edisop *tartup Electrical and Instrumentation Test personnel qualification docun:;ntation had not been completed. During this inspection, the RIII inspector reviewed the qualification certification and the substantiating documentation for one Startup Test Technician. The experience and training records appeared to be commensurate with the assigned duties and responsibilities covered by the certification.
Functional or Program Areas Inspected 1.
Design Change Control a.
The RIII inspector reviewed measures which were being used to assure that all design changes were being accomplished and inspected (reference licensee action on item 341/78-09-15 noted on this IE report). The licensee was not able to provide controlled measures to assure that design changes, when initiated and/or received after a system or subsystem had been turned over to the DECO Startup Group, would be accomplished and/or inspected. Systems and subsystems were just starting to be turned over. Therefore, additional control measures for design changer had not been needed. The licensee indicated that controls would be established for design changes initiated and received after turnover. The additional controls will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
(341/79-17-01)
b.
The RIII inspector discussed with the licensee the numerous design changes which had been written against DECO Specifications 3071-128 and 3071-31. The changes were previously discussed in IE Report No. 341/79-05-05. The licensee indicated that essen-tially all of the applicable design changes have been incorporated into the above specificatious. However, measures have not been taken to assure that all of the design changes written against the above specifications and all other specifications have been or will be accomplished and inspected. This matter is unresolved.
(341/79-17-02)
c.
The RIII inspector reviewed letter No. F2S9-730 dated April 17, 1979 from H. A. Walker to W. M. Everett. The letter indicated a significant document control breakdown concerning design changes.
The letter indicated that during a QA review, nine out of thirteen drawings and three out of three specifications, at Wismer & Becker Co., had errors pertaining to design changes.
The RIII inspector was provided with a copy of Daniel International Audit Finding No. AFR 79-03-2D dated March 5, 1979, which indicated a similar problem at L. K. Comstock.
Audit Finding No. AFR 79-03-2D was still open. During the exit interview, the licensee stated that a DECO surveillance report-3-
.
.
was open and was being used to control the design change problem at Wismer & Becker. This item will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
(341/79-17-03)
No items of noncompliance were identified.
2.
Construction Status The RIII inspector discussed the construction schedule for the installation of safety related instrument lines.
Currently, there were no completed lines and less than two percent of the overall activities had been started.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance or deviations. Unresolved items disclosed during the inspection are discussed in paragraph 1.b.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in the Persons Contacted paragraph) at the conclusion of the inspection on August 22, 1979. The inspectors summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
The licensee ackt.owledged tr.e information.
\\2D1-4-