IR 05000346/1987005

Safety Insp Rept 50-346/87-05 on 870210-12.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Allegation & Licensee Action on Previous Insp Findings

ML20212M018
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	03/02/1987
From:	Choules N, Jablonski F NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20212M016	List: IR 05000346/1987005 ML20212M014
References
50-346-87-05, 50-346-87-5, NUDOCS 8703110032
Download: ML20212M018 (6)

Text

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

.

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION III

Report No. 50-346/87005(DRS)

Docket No. 50-346 License No. NPF-3 Licensee: Toledo Edison Company l Edison Plaza, 300 Madison Avenue-Toledo, OH 43652 Facility Name: Davis-Besse-1 Inspection At: Oak Harbor, Ohio Inspection Conducted: February 10-12, 1987 Inspector: . '3h/N Date

- -

O Approved By: F. blonski, Chief 3/2/P7 Quality Assurance Program Section Date Inspection Summary-Inspection on February 10-12, 1987 (Report No. 50-346/87005(DRS))-

Areas Inspected: Special unannounced safety inspection of licensee action onpreviousinspectionfindings(92701,92702) and review of an allegation (99014).

Results: .No violations or deviations were' identifie jFJ TSE ESEd??

O

___

..

DETAILS Persons Contacted Toledo Edison Company

'*B.Beyer,NuclearProjectsDirector M. Beyer, Vendor QC Supervisor

• T. Chiles, Nuclear Materials-Management-C. Daft,_QA Manager, Operations L. Dorhman, Nuclear Materials Supervisor

'

J. Faris, Material Control Supervisor

• J. Moyer, Quality Verification Manager D. Rhodes, Vendor QC Inspector

• S. Smith, Assistant Plant Manager, Maintenance K. Spencer, QA Auditor

• J. Strudavant, Licensing Specialist S. Zunk, Ombudsman Other licensee personnel were contacted during the course of the inspectio USNRC

• P. Byron, Senior Resident Inspector

• Kosloff, Resident Inspector

• Denotes those attending the Exit Interview on February 12, 198 . Licensee's Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Violation (346/86026-01): Failure to provide documented instruction for changes to Raychem insulation specifications. The inspector verified by review of records and interviews that as stated-in the licensee's response to this item dated December 15, the practice of providing verbal instruction to changes to 1976,fications s)eci has ceased, and QC inspectors have been instructed tlat oral instructions contrary-to established instructions,

,

procedures, or drawings are unacceptabl This item is close (Closed)UnresolvedItem(346/85007-06): Resolution of audit finding I' AFR 132/-6 regarding traceability of materials listed on work order As stated in Inspection Report No. 50-346/86026, this item had been

'

upgradedtoacorrectiveactionrequest(CAR 86-03). The CAR remained open pending the engineering department's evaluation of an audit about traceability of parts associated with maintenance work orders. Review of the audit was completed by the engineering, department; no problems were identified and CAR 86-03 was closed. This item is close <

,

,

.

..

c.- (Closed) Open Item (346/85007-08): Operability test of main steam

• *

isolation valve TM5;V) solenoid did not ensure that each solenoid

was functional. As stated in Inspection Report No. 50-346/86002,_

the licensee developed a procedure to functionally test all solenoids in each MSIV actuation train; however, the test had not been performed.

'

~ '

.The inspector verified from review of com)1eted test procedure

, TP 851.11.00, "MSIV Response Time Test" t1at.the MSIV solenoids ha'd~

-

been successfully tested on December 12, 1986. .(The original

. procedure.was identified as ST 5031.20 in Inspection Report No. 50-346/86002). The ins ite .This item is closed.pector has no further concerns abo'ut this-I (Closed) Open Item (346/84019-05): Procurement and purchasin procedures were ineffectiv The licensee had written,, approved,'

and issued Nuclear Mission Procedure NMP-NA-400, " Material -

'

Management" for the control of procurement and purchasing. This

' ~

procedure superseded previous related procedures.- The procedure appeared to-be adequate. This item is closed.

,

3 .' ' Review'of' Allegations

' ~

(Closed) Allegation (RIII86-A-0193)

The NRC received'an anonymous letter on November 26, 1986, about three concerns with warehousing activities at the Davis-Besse Plant. The

,

concerns are discussed below.

-

-Concern No. 1

'

TheNuclear. Materials-Manager's.(Manager)warehousingexperiencewas mostly obtained at a grocery stor .NRC Review

'

-The inspector reviewed the Manager's resume and the requirements

'

established:by;the licensee for the position of Nuclear Materials

! Manage ~

Based.on the review of the Manager's resume, the inspector determined

.that the Manager had been employed as an assistant manager in a grocery

"

store from 1965-to 1966. The inspector also determined that the Manager had been employed in materials management by various companies including most recently at

.

13 years the Waterfordexperience in thePlant Nuclear Power commercial from 1983nuclear to 1985.industry,icensee L experience L' requirements' for the position of the Nuclear Materials Manager included at least seven years in procurement or equivalent experience with at least two years experience in a nuclear power station performing work in the area of purchasing or materials management. The Manager exceeded

<

the-experience requirements established by the licensee for the position

.of Nuclear Material Manager.

b

,

-

.

t

.

Results The concern was not substantiate Concern No. 2 For equipment stored in the warehouse, the Manager was not knowledgeable of: (1) plant. locations where the material was used; (2) the procurement quality level of material when purchased; (3) the storage level required for material, and (4) receipt and storage of documentation for material NRC Review The inspector toured the warehouse with the Manager, and conducted interviews with the Manager, the Vendor Quality Supervisor, a Vendor QC Inspector, the Nuclear Material Supervisor, the Material Control Supervisor, a QA Hanager, and a QA Auditor. Results of these activities are as follows:

Item 1 It was not the Manager's responsibility to kncw the plant locations where material was actually used. Engineering and maintenance personnel had that responsibility; however, the Manager was somewhat knowledge-able of locations in the plant where material was use Item 2 The Manager was fully aware of the procurement quality levels of materials when purchased. Materials stored in the warehouse were identified with a green tag by the Vendor QC section, and the Fbnager fully understood the requirements that were specified in Procedure NMP-NA-400, " Material Managenent."

Item 3 The Manager was familiar with the requirements specified in ANSI N45.2.2 " Packaging, Shipping, Receiving, Storage and Handling of items for Nuclear Power Plants" including the four categories (levels) of storage and type of materials stored at each leve Item 4 The Manager was aware that documentation for Q (safety related)

naterial was transferred with the material to the licensee's Vendor QC section after an initial receipt inspection was completed by material management. The Manager was also aware that the Vendor QC section was responsible for transmitting documentation to records management for storage.

,

A walk through the warehouse indicated that material was properly tagged as Q or Non Q as applicable. Storage locations were marked, a Class A storage room was maintained, and nonconforming material was segregated from conforming material. The storage of materials met the requirements of ANSI N45.2.2. The inspector selected six Q items that were stored in the warehouse and requested the licensee to provice the purchase orders and supporting qualification documentation. All required documentation was available in the vendor QC office for recently purchased items or in docurient control for older item Results The concern was not substantiate ..

.

.

Concern No. 3 New positions created by the Manager were filled with relatives and friends with absolutely no previous nuclear experienc NRC Review The inspector conducted interviews with the persons identified under Concern No. 2 and reviewed personnel qualification record Based.on the interviews, the inspector determined that the relationship of certain personnel was comon knowledge of warehouse personnel and some other plant personnel. The personnel hired were in some way personally linked to the Manager in at least nine instances; however, five of those persons were no longer employed at Davis-Besse. Those four cases that remain are outlined below:

Manager's daughter hired as a sumer student clerk and then as a permanent QC clerk;

• Work associate at Waterford hired as a contractor for establishing a computerized inventory of material in the warehouse; Work associate's brother hired as a contractor to supervise operations of the maintenance staging warehouse;

Work associate's stepfather hired as a spare parts superviso Only the work associate's stepfather actually reported directly to the Manager. The brother reported to a supervisor who reported to

. the Manager. The Manager was married to the work associate on February 14, 1987. The licensee was in the process of reviewing and changing reporting responsibilities in accordance with company policy regarding employment of relative Based on the interviews with supervisors and a review of pertinent qualification records for those personnel identified above, the inspector detennined that in all cases the personnel were qualified for the positions held. Regarding the concern about no previous nuclear experience, with the exception of the spare parts supervisor there were no requirements for nuclear experience; however, the work associate had some experience at Waterford. For the spare parts supervisor, the stepfather, the licensee had originally specified four years of nuclear power plant experience as a requirement. The spare parts supervisor did not have any comercial nuclear power plant experience; however, the spare parts supervisor had 31 years nuclear weapon systems experience with the U.S. Navy including design engineering, material and equipment engineering, procurement, and material control. In the judgement of the inspector, this experience more than compensated for the lack of comercial nuclear power plant experienc ~

..:

-l

...

Results This concern regarding filling new positions with. friends and relatives was substantiated; however, there is no .NRC rule or' requirement that' restricts the employment of relatives or friends, or mandates lines of authority that are free from influence by friends or relatives. 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion 1.only requires that the persons and organizations performing QA functions shall have sufficient authority and organizational freedom to

' identify quality. problems; to. initiate, recommend, or provide solutions; and to verify. implementation of solutions." In all cases, the personnel were qualified for the position held; therefore, that aspect of the allegation regarding nuclear experience is not relevan The anonymous letter dated November 26, 1986, did not_ identify any-instance of impropriety that would have any impact on the radiological health and safety of the public, nor were there any such instances made known to or identified by the inspector.during the inspectio No violations or deviations were identified during the inspection of the above concerns.- This matter is close . Exit Interview The Region III inspector net with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) on February 12, 1987, and summarized the purpose, scope and findings of the inspectio On February-19,1987, the inspector discussed with Mr. B. Beyer by -

telephone the likely informational content of the inspection report with regard to documents or processes reviewed by the inspector during the inspection. Mr. Beyer did not identify any such documents or processes as proprietar .

__-- - . - _ . _ _ - _ . - - _ - . _ . . . . - _