IR 05000341/1982012
| ML20212J813 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Fermi |
| Issue date: | 08/30/1982 |
| From: | Little B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Konklin J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212J657 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-86-202 NUDOCS 8701280310 | |
| Download: ML20212J813 (5) | |
Text
..
...
UNITED STATES
o,,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,
I REGION lli
)
o
% *.... c[
790 ROOSEVELT ROAD e,
r GLEN ELLYN. ILLINOIS 80137
'
AUG 3 0 82 MEMORANDUM FOR:
J. E. Konklin, Chief, Projects Section IA i
FROM:
B. H. Little, SRI, Fermi 2 SUBJECT:
INVESTIGATION OF FERMI-2 ALLEGATIONS Reference:
Memorandum from J. E. Konklin to J. E. Foster, dated July 30, 1982, same subject.
On July 23, 1982, I was informed of a number of allegations which had been received by Region III concerning deficient construction activities at Fermi-2 by a site contractor, Reactor Controls Inc. (RCI).
Subsequently, during a phone conversation with J. E. Foster, I obtained additional information on this matter, including a list of the specific allegations identified in the above referenced memo. Foster advised me that the alleger had stressed the importance of maintaining his anonymity, therefore, I did not inform the licensee of the allegations but, instead, factored them into my routine inspections.
Inspection of the activities or conditions alleged to be deficient was performed during the period July 25 through August 12, 1982, and resulted in items of noncompliance. The inspection findings will be documented in Region III Inspection Report 50-341/82-12. Attached are my findings for the specific allegations.
-
Bruce ittle, SRI Enrico Fermi-2 Attachment: As stated 8701280310 870116 PDR FOIA GARDE 86-202 PDR
..-
ALLEGATIONS AND FINDINGS Allegation 1: The head was set on the reactor vessel without the proper paper-work, and did not meet the tolerance requirements.
An additional concern was that RCI crafts stood on the head during leveling.
Findings: The placement of the Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) Head was accomplished by Reactor Controls, Inc. (RCI) on July 21, 1982. The inspector reviewed the Process Control Sheet (PCS) No. RPV-51 Rev. 17, which provided the procedure for " Lifting, Leveling, and Placement of the RPV Head."
The inspector also discussed the operation with RCI personnel, who were present during the leveling and placement of the head, including the RCI OC inspector.
The QC inspector stated that the PCS was on station during the operation and he had witnessed the leveling and placement of the head. He said that men stood on the head to adjust lif ting turn-buckles; however, no one was on the head when he took his final level measurements and verified them to be within the GE supplied specification of.002" per foot.
The inspector verified that the PCS for this operation contained the required reviews and approvals, and that QC hold points contained QC inspector's initials and dates. The two steps in the procedure which were voided were done before the PCS was issued. This change was in accordance with RCI Quality Control Manual Section 7.4 " Revision to the PCS."
The inspector was present during the RPV hydro and conducted an inspection of the head to vessel area. There was no visible leakage. The inspector was present during the subsequent removal of the RPV head. This operation was performed using PCS-RPV-53 " Detention and Removal of the RPV Head. The lift was made using the lifting strongback as adjusted during placement of the head. The removal operation went very smooth, free of any head-to-stud binding.
(
Although the inspector was not able to substantiate the above allegation,
'
this review identified an existing procedure deficiency,in that RCI QA Manual section 7.3.6 permits the lead engineer to initial and date the
" Performed By" column after completion of the entire operation.
Section 7.3.6 states in part, "The performed block shall be filled in by the responsible Field Engineer for each operation. For welding operations he shall place the welders symbol in the performed block and date to signify completion of a particular welding operation. For operations other than welding he shall initial and date the column upon completion of that operation. All operations and processes shall be signed off in this manner."
This practice results in inaccurate QA records i.e., the records do not indicate the correct person, or date, the activity was performed. The
!
licensee was given an item of noncompliance for failure to provide appro-l priate procedures. This item is documented in inspection report (341/82-l 12-02).
l
'
-.
.
-
-. _
-
_ _ - _
.
.
.
Allegation 2:
There is a lack of proper veld rod con *rol by RCI.
There is heliarc wire at the bottom of the vessel.
(Based on a subsequent discussion with NRC (Foster) the alleger stated he had removed the wire stub. This was given only as an example of the lack of weld red control in item Q).)
,
Findings: The inspector observed RCI weld rod crib activities including the maintenance of weld rods in rod areas, issuance and return of weld rods and rod stubs. Weld Material Requisition Forms (WMR) provide record of all weld rods issued to the field and the number of rods and stubs ~ returned.
The inspector reviewed the WMR's for July 16 and 21, 1981. This review identified the following activities which were not being accomplished in I
accordance with existing RCI procedures:
1.
Noting of Discrepancies on WMR Data from WMRs Weld Rods Drawing No.
Issued Date Total Rod Stubs / Rods Returned f
51-721 2113-125
7/16/82
c 9G8G7
7/21/82
,
$
61721 2113-26
7/21/82
I The above discrepancies. Total Rod Stub / Rods Returned to weld rods l
issued were not noted on the WMRs as required by RCI Procedure WP-127A
-
Section 7.6 which states, "The lead engineer or his designee shall record the number of rods returned, stubs returned and note any dis-crepancies on the WMR."
2.
Processing of WMRs WMRs issued from 7/16/82 through 7/28/82 were stacked on the RCI Lead Engineer's desk. These forms had not been processed in accordance with RCI QA Manual Section 6.5 (Issue of Materials) which states in part, "The Lead Engineer shall retain the original copy of the Weld Material Requisition until the end of the shift or completion of the weld joint when he will record the material returned by the welder.
The Weld Material Requisition shall be included in the PCS file at the end of each shift by the Lead Engineer."
The above are 2 of the 3.. examples documented in inspection report (341/82-12)
I as an item of noncompliance (82-12-01).
Allegation 4:
The RCI superintendent does not know what he is doing (In a subsequent phone conversation with NRC (Foster), the alleger stated that this allegation was made in anger and wanted it withdrawn.)
- '
Findings: Not evaluated.
!
-2-
,
-
l
- - - -
.-
.
.
..s.
,
i Allegation 5:
RCI personnel are taking PC5s to the field, then taking them back to the office and changing them.
Findings:
Process Control Sheets (PCS) provide step-by-step work instructions for field activities. RCI QC Manual Section 7.4 contains the following:
Revision To The PCS 7.4.1 The preparation, review and approval of revisions to the PCS shall be the same as those for the original PCS. The Site QC Supervisor shall review the revised PCS with the ANI, so he may indicate his Hold Points. The original PCS shall be attached to the revised PCS in cases where some operations have been signed-off.
>
7.4.2 For PCS's which revisions are issued and some operations are already completed on the original:
I (a) A line shall be drawn on the original PCS, initialed and dated with a reference to the revised PCS, to indicate the last op-eration completed on that PCS.
(b) A line shall be drawn on the revised PCS, initialed and dated with a reference to the original PCS, to indicate the start of sequences on the revised PCS.
The inspector reviewed procedures relating to the following RCI tasks:
Process Control Sheet (PCS) #CS-26 (RPV Internals Core Spray Sparger)
PCS #RPV-19 (Installation and alignment of RPV Top Guide Assembly and related Deviation Disposition Request DDR #M-8017 and FDDR #KH1-281 PCS-RPV-52-RPV Hydro Test (RCI)
.
PCS-RPV-50-Bolt up and Tension of the RPV Head Studs PCS-RPV-53-Detension and Removal of RPV Head The inspector found that revisiodYchanges to PCSs were made in accordance with RCI QC procedure and found no discrepancies relative to the above allegation.
,
Allegation 6:
The top guide does not fit properly on the reactor vessel head.
l
!
!
Finding:
The inspector reviewed the following quality records:
PCS #RPV-19 (Installation and alignment of RPV Top l
GuideAssembly)andrelatedDeviationDisposition Request DDR #M-8017 and FDDR #KH1-281 dated March 16 and April 19, 1982 respectively.
.
RCI identified and documented the deviation on DDR No. (M)8017.
.
"During visual inspection of the TOP CUIDE Eccentric Heads, it was noted that r
l the eccentric heads are projecting outside the TOP Guide maximum diameter by l
3/16"."
l l-3-l
-
. - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -
- -.
-
- -. - -
-.
.
--
os.
r.
.
The proposed disposition by RCI "use as krf was not recommended by GE Site j
Engineering nor approved by DECO Field Engineering. The final disposition is to repair by grinding off the material that extends beyond the top guide (o.d.).
The above allegation is substantiated, however, this matter was appropri-ately documented and dispositioned.
Allegation 7:
Welders dropped a 440 V line on the refueling pool gate about two years ago.
Repairs were made without proper documentation. This apparently refers to the access
.
opening to the north fuel pit.
Finding:
Inspection of the fuel pool liner was not performed because of water in the fuel pool. The fuel pool is scheduled to be drained by September 1, 1982. The inspector had puncK' listed this as an action item and will document the inspection findings in a subsequent inspection report.
Allegation 8:
RCI documents are not being kept in a fireproof vault or in fireproof filing cabinets.
Finding:
The inspector reviewed RCI's procedural requirements and current practices relating to the storage of QA records. Weld material req-uisitions (WMRs) were found stacked on the RCI Lead Engineer's desk, (some for periods up to two weeks), were not protected from deterioration and damage. Those WMRs which had been processed were being stored in non fire-retardant drawers. Project QA Manual (QAP-18, Attachment A) lists veld material reports as " Lifetime QA records." RCI QA Manual Section 9.3 states in part; " Permanent Records shall be stored in locked fire-retardant cabinets, or a space providing equal or better protection from deterior-ation and damage."
This is another example of RCI's noncompliance with procedure and substantiated the above allegation. This item is documented in inspection report 82-12 as an example given for the item of noncompliance (82-12-01).
-4-