IR 05000358/1981023
| ML20010J082 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 08/22/1981 |
| From: | Daniels F, Davis A, Spessard R, Warnick R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20010J061 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-358-81-23, NUDOCS 8109290576 | |
| Download: ML20010J082 (4) | |
Text
.
-
_
_
.
.
i U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-358/81-23 Docket No. 50-358 License No. CPPR-88
.
I Licensee: Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company 139 East 4th Street Cincinnati, OH 45201 Facility Name:
Wi. H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Station Meeting Location: Region III Office, Glen Ellyn, IL Meeting Date: August 19, 1981 RYW &
Meeting Attendees:
F. T. Daniels 7-/#- #/
Senior Reactor Inspector, Zimmer R fidmE24
'
R. F. Warnick, Chief 9-/8-8/
Reactor Projects Section 2B b
A A. B. Davis kil/f'/
'
'
Deputy Director W
R/12/6\\
Approved By:
R. L. Spessard, Director Division of Resident and Project Inspection i
Meeting Summary Meeting on August 19, 1981 (Report No. 50-358/81-23)
Meeting Subject: A meeting was held in Region III in which the licensee described their plans to bring in an experienced nuclear maintenance contractor (Catalytic, Inc.) to perform selected Engineering Change Requests, punchlist i tems, and maintensuce work. The licensee described their proposed QA and management control of this activity and requested partial relief from the 100% reinspection of all QC inspections performed by contractors required by the Immediate Action Letter of April 8,1981. The meeting involved a total of six NRC manhours.
>
'
0107290576 810923
'
.
PDR ADOCK 05000358
G PDR
- -
-
-
--
-
-.-
-
a
._
-
.
_.
._-..
. _ _
-
. _. -
..
_
t
,
.
,
,
Results: Region III agreed with the licensee's plan of action to monitor and control the work of Catalytic. The licensee will initially review all work packages and witness all QC inspections by Catalytic. They will phase into reviewing and witnessing one out of four and then one out of ten. In addition, one licensee reprceentative will be given full time responsibility for all of the work performed by Catalytic, i
!
i i
n k
a i
a l
I i
l
i
).
i
i e
4
- 2-
.~,
. _, -.. _., _..
-,_,,
_,_...,,,,,,m....
.,, _,,
...
,,,..._,r_.,_._.,,,.,_,_,.,,.
, _... _. _,
, _ _..,_.,,,,, _..,.,
~
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons In Attendance Cincinnati Gas and Electric Compan _ (CG&E)
B. K. Culver, Manager, Generation Construction Department H. R. Sager, Manager, Quality Assurance Cata]ytic,Inc.
L. E. Newhart, Jr., Vice President of Pcwer Projects U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission A. B. Davis, Deputy Director R. F. Warnick, Chief, Reactor Projects Section 2B F. T. Daniels, Senior Resident Inspector, Zimmer 2.
Background As a result of the probleos identified during the NRC investigation at Zimmer which began in January of 1981, Region III issued an Irmediate Action Letter on April 8, 1981, to document corrective actions initiated or planned by the licensee at the NRC's request. One of the corrective measures was that CG&E would conduct 100% reinspections of QC inspections conducted by Kaiser and other contractors. The 100% inspection require-ment was to take effect after April 8,1981, and was to continue until the CG&E audit program was revised and implemented by qualified indivi-duals and Region III released the licensee from the requirement.
The meeting of August 19 was to discuss the licensees proposal to sub-stitute surveil.1ance and audits of the work performed by one contractor (Catalytic, Inc.) in lieu of the Immediate Action Letter requirement for 100% reinspection.
3.
Proposed QC Monitoring of Work by Catalytic, Inc.
The licensee reported that they have signed a contract with Catalytic, Inc. to perform some selected Engineering Change Requests (ECR's),
punchlist items, and maintenance work. The licensee estimates Catalytic will have approximately 10 management, planning, scheduling, and admin-istrative personnel; 50 to 100 craftsmen; and approximately 10 QA/QC personnel onsite for this work Catalytic will prepare a work package for each separate job which will include proper work procedures and quality control inspection procedures and checklists.
-3-
.
-
-
-
,
..
Initially CG&E will review all work packages and CG&E will also initially witness 100% of the QC inspections. After completing the first 10 to 12 work packages, providing the system is working well, CG&E will review one package out of every four and will witness one out of four inspections.
If problems are identified, the licensee will resume 100% review of the work packages and will witness 100%
of the QC inspections.
If the work control system is functioning without problems, CG&E will review one package out of ten and will witness one inspection out of every ten. The licensee will audit the work control program in addition to the surveillance outlined above.
The NRC representatives concurred with the proposed phased reductions in work package reviews and QC inspection witnessing provided the licensee would designate one CG&E employee to have full time responsi-bility for overseeing the work by Catalytic, Inc. and the implementa-tion of the CG&E surveillance and audits of Catalytic.
The NRC decision to relax the ILL equirement for 100% reinspection
-
of QC inspections by contractors was based on the successful work experience of Catalytic, Inc. at eight other nuclear power stations, CG&E's increased QA staff (now at 85 as compared to six earlier this year), improved QA staff expertise, improved QA/QC procedures, CG&E's improved QA performance observed by NRC inspectors, and the phased reduction in monitoring the work by Catalytic.
The NRC stated that 100% reinspections were still required of CG&E for all QA inspections performed by other contractors.
-4-
-
- -
. - -.