IR 05000391/2008007
| ML082110474 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Watts Bar  |
| Issue date: | 07/29/2008 |
| From: | Haag R NRC/RGN-II/DCP/CPB3 |
| To: | Bhatnagar A Tennessee Valley Authority |
| References | |
| IR-08-007 | |
| Download: ML082110474 (18) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
uly 29, 2008
SUBJECT:
WATTS BAR NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 2 CONSTRUCTION - NRC INTEGRATED INSPECTION REPORT 05000391/2008007
Dear Mr. Bhatnagar:
On June 30, 2008, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection of construction activities at your Watts Bar Unit 2 reactor facility. The enclosed integrated inspection report documents the inspection results, which were discussed on July 10, 2008, with Mr. Masoud Bajestani and other members of your staff.
This inspection examined activities conducted under your Unit 2 construction permit as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commissions rules and regulations, with the conditions of your construction permit, and with fulfillment of Unit 2 regulatory framework commitments.
The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel.
Overall, we found that your oversight of construction activities was generally effective with only minor discrepancies identified. Based on the results of this inspection, no findings or violations of significance were identified.
TVA 2 In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRCs Rules of Practice, a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRCs document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
Sincerely,
/RA/
Robert C. Haag, Chief Construction Projects Branch 3 Division of Construction Projects Docket No. 50-391 Construction Permit No. CPPR-92
Enclosure:
Inspection Report 05000391/2008007 w/attachment
REGION II==
Docket No.: 50-391 Construction Permit No.: CPPR-92 Report No.: 05000391/2008007 Applicant: Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
Facility: Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2 Location: 1260 Nuclear Plant Rd Spring City, TN 37381 Dates: April 1 - June 30, 2008 Inspectors: W. Bearden, Senior Resident Inspector, Construction Projects Branch 3 (CPB3), Division of Construction Projects (DCP)
Region II (RII)
T. Nazario, Resident Inspector, CPB3, DCP, RII H. Abuseini, Resident Inspector, CPB3, DCP, RII Approved by: Robert C. Haag, Chief Construction Projects Branch 3 Division of Construction Projects Enclosure
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2
NRC Inspection Report 05000391/2008007 This integrated inspection included aspects of engineering and construction activities performed by the applicant associated with the Unit 2 construction project. This report covered a three-month period of resident inspector inspections in the areas of quality assurance; identification and resolution of problems; construction activities; engineering activities; and training and qualification of plant personnel. The inspection program for the Unit 2 Construction Program is described in NRC Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 2517. Information regarding the Watts Bar Unit 2 Construction Project and NRC inspections can be found at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/plant-specific-items/watts-bar.html.
The inspectors concluded that the applicant continued to implement adequate controls to conduct ongoing procurement, design, and construction activities. The inspection did not result in any findings of significance.
Inspection Results
- Adequate management and Quality Assurance (QA) oversight was in place commensurate with activities in progress. The inspectors noted a significant portion of the oversight continued to be performed by TVA personnel, but that the level of oversight by Bechtel at the site and at the Knoxville engineering office had increased from the previous inspection period. (Section Q.1.1)
- The applicants and contractors processes for identification and resolution of problems continued to be adequate. The inspectors observed the newly created process for handling of potential trends and determined that the guidance was adequate.
(Section Q.1.2)
- The applicants program for performing physical walkdowns of systems, structures, and components continued to provide adequate detail and guidance to allow walkdown personnel to determine the accurate status of construction completion for Watts Bar Unit 2. QA oversight in this area was adequate. (Section C.1.1)
- Ongoing construction activities associated with the applicants planned modifications to the Auxiliary Building Secondary Containment were adequate. Some of the engineering packages required for the modifications have not yet been issued. (Section E.1.1)
Table of Contents I. Quality Assurance Program .............................................................................................. 1 Q.1 Quality Assurance Oversight Activities........................................................................ 1 Q.1.1 Quality Assurance Oversight (IP 35061) ............................................................ 1 Q.1.2 Identification and Resolution of Construction Problems (IP 40504) .................... 2 II. Management Oversight and Controls .............................................................................. 3 C.1 Construction Activities................................................................................................. 3 C.1.1 System Walkdowns (IPs 35061, 46053, 49063, 51053, 51063).......................... 3 E.1 Engineering Activities .................................................................................................. 4 E.1.1 Engineering Organization and Design Control (IP 53053) .................................. 4 T.1 Training and Qualification of Plant Personnel ............................................................. 4 T.1.1 Craft Training (IP 35061) .................................................................................... 5 T.1.2 Training of Engineering and Supervisory Personnel (IP 35061) .......................... 5 V. Management Meetings.................................................................................................... 6 X.1 Exit Meeting Summary.............................................................................................. 6
REPORT DETAILS
Summary of Plant Status
During the current inspection period, the applicant continued to develop construction procedures and work instructions. The number of engineering design activities and physical plant walkdowns to determine existing status of structures, systems and components (SSCs)increased from the previous inspection period. Additionally, manning of key management positions and training of personnel continued. An additional NRC construction resident inspector was assigned to the site during this period.
I. Quality Assurance Program Q.1 Quality Assurance Oversight Activities Q.1.1 Quality Assurance Oversight (IP 35061)
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors monitored the applicants and contractors management and QA oversight activities to assure adequate oversight of construction activities was in place.
This included review of oversight and audit plans and schedules; surveillance, assessment, and oversight results; and reports to management. Specific documents reviewed are listed in the attachment.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
The inspectors observed applicant and contractor management and QA oversight of ongoing physical walkdown and construction activities. A significant portion of the oversight continued to be performed by TVA personnel. However, the presence of contractor QA personnel noticeably increased at the site and at the Knoxville engineering offices during the inspection period. Although the applicants QA organization performed oversight of a broad range of engineering and construction activities, the primary focus was on performance of walkdowns. That emphasis was appropriate as it was the major ongoing field activity during the reporting period.
Additionally, the inspectors reviewed selected assessment reports issued by the applicants and contractors QA organization to document observation of ongoing work activities. Minor work package documentation and other errors identified by the applicant during the QA oversight activities were documented in the corrective action program.
c. Conclusions
Adequate management and QA oversight was in place commensurate with activities in progress. The inspectors noted an increase in the level of oversight by Bechtel at the site and at the Knoxville engineering offices. However, a significant portion of the oversight continued to be performed by TVA personnel.
Q.1.2 Identification and Resolution of Construction Problems (IP 40504)
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors monitored the applicants and contractors programs for identification and resolution of problems (PI&R). The inspectors observed Management Review Committee (MRC) meetings and reviewed the classification and disposition of selected Problem Evaluation Reports (PERs). Specific documents reviewed are listed in the attachment.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
Management Review Committees have been established by the applicant and the contractor. The Project Management Review Committee (PMRC) was implemented by Bechtel and the Construction Completion Management Review Committee (CCMRC)was implemented by the applicant to oversee the respective PI&R processes. In addition, the CCMRC was the primary tool for applicant management oversight of QA activities and Bechtel design and construction work. The inspectors noted that MRC personnel in both organizations exhibited a good questioning attitude, defined proper PER classifications, and appropriately identified deficiencies in PER documentation.
During the previous inspection period, inspectors had noted that Bechtel management had highlighted the fact that multiple PERs had been initiated in the areas of training and documentation errors. Since that time detailed trending guidance has been established by the applicant. The inspectors attended special MRC meetings to address potential trends. The inspectors determined that the recently implemented program provided adequate guidance on handling of potential trends.
c. Conclusions
The applicants and contractors processes for identification and resolution of problems continued to be adequate. The inspectors observed the newly created process for handling of potential trends and determined that the guidance was adequate.
II. Management Oversight and Controls C.1 Construction Activities C.1.1 System Walkdowns (IPs 35061, 46053, 49063, 51053 and 51063)
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors monitored the applicants program for conducting physical walkdowns of SSCs to determine the current status of construction completion at Watts Bar Unit 2.
Areas inspected included walkdown procedures, qualification and experience of walkdown personnel, management and QA oversight of ongoing walkdown activities, review of walkdown documentation, and direct observation of selected walkdowns in the following areas:
- electrical panels
- control room design review
- cable vertical drop
- ice condensers
- small bore isometric for Auxiliary Feedwater System
- small bore isometric for Chemical and Volume Control System The inspectors also observed selected portions of general walkdowns performed to support DCN 52283, ABSCE Boundary Modification. This modification is discussed in more detail in Section E.1.1.
Specific documents reviewed are listed in the attachment.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
The applicant initiated a series of physical walkdowns of SSCs to determine the current status of construction completion. The walkdown results will be used as design input for planned analysis and design activities. The walkdown teams utilized walkdown packages developed from information and criteria provided by the engineering organization. The teams collected and recorded field information on the as-constructed condition of components in accordance with the applicable walkdown packages and procedures. Results of completed walkdowns were recorded on applicable data forms and/or drawings which were reviewed by the walkdown review team for completeness, accuracy, and compliance to engineering acceptance criteria prior to submittal to design engineering. The walkdown program required walkdown personnel to document non-conforming conditions and discrepancies in the Corrective Action Program (CAP).
Additionally, components which required maintenance (e.g. missing bolts, clamps, etc.)
were identified in the walkdown packages.
During this reporting period the applicant performed walkdowns in the areas of mechanical system flow diagrams, large bore isometric, small bore isometric, conduit supports, heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) ducting and supports, embedded components, control room design review (CRDR), cable attributes, cable pullby, miscellaneous Class 1E cables, electrical panels, ice condensers, and cable vertical drop (cable installation and supports). The inspectors determined that the experience level for personnel performing the walkdowns met the applicants procedural requirements. QA oversight was adequate.
c. Conclusions
The applicants program for performing physical walkdowns of SSCs provided adequate detail and guidance to allow walkdown personnel to determine the accurate status of construction completion of Watts Bar Unit 2. QA oversight in this area was adequate.
E.1 Engineering Activities E.1.1 Engineering Organization and Design Control (IP 53053)
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors reviewed ongoing design and construction activities associated with the applicants plans to modify the Auxiliary Building Secondary Containment Enclosure (ABSCE) boundary. The inspectors reviewed documents, interviewed cognizant personnel and walked down applicable areas associated with engineering design change request (EDCR) 52621, ABSCE Rollup Door. The inspectors also observed ongoing mechanical seal installation activities of the containment penetrations in support of the ABSCE modification, EDCR 2591, Mechanical Penetration Seals (El 782).
Specific documents reviewed are listed in the attachment.
b Observations and Findings No findings of significance were identified.
This modification would relocate the ABSCE boundary and create construction openings to allow materials, equipment and personnel /access to Unit 2 containment during the Watts Bar Unit 2 completion project. The modification consists of one design change notice (DCN) 52283, Relocate ABSCE Boundary to Support Unit 2 Completion and several EDCRs. The DCN has not been issued; however, the EDCRs are being implementeted and some have been completed.
c. Conclusions
Ongoing construction activities associated with the applicants planned modifications to the ABSCE were adequate. Some of the engineering packages required for the modifications have not yet been issued.
T.1.1 Training and Qualification of Plant Personnel T.1.1 Craft Training (IP 35061)
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors observed activities associated with new employee indoctrination and training. The inspectors monitored craft classroom and Dynamic Learning Center training sessions. Specific documents reviewed are listed in the attachment.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
New employee indoctrination and training for management expectations on procedural compliance, Safety Conscience Work Environment (SCWE), and work rules were required before newly hired employees were released for work. The inspectors noted that the applicant had not yet developed training plans for specific task-related requirements to support future construction activities. The inspectors determined that the applicants program for training of newly hired personnel was adequate commensurate with the current level of activity.
c. Conclusions
The applicants program for training of newly hired personnel was adequate for the current level of construction activities being performed.
T.1.2 Training of Engineering and Supervisory Personnel (IP 35061)
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors observed selected training activities associated with engineering and supervisory personnel. Training sessions were monitored at the site and in the applicants Knoxville engineering offices. Training monitored included sessions on handling of operating experience information, use of the applicants Electronic Corrective Action Program (ECAP), and seismic design requirements. Specific documents reviewed are listed in the attachment.
The inspectors also attended a special training session conducted by Hartford Steam Boiler which addressed American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)Section III Code requirements. This training was required of all TVA Unit 2 personnel and any Bechtel engineering and supervisory personnel responsible for ASME Code activities.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
b. Conclusions
The applicants program for training of supervisory and engineering personnel was adequate.
V. Management Meetings X.1
Exit Meeting Summary
On July 10, 2008, the resident inspectors presented the inspection results to Mr. Masoud Bajestani and other members of his staff. Although some proprietary information may have been reviewed during the inspection, no proprietary information was included in this inspection report.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
KEY POINTS OF CONTACT
Applicant personnel
- G. Arent, Licensing Manager, Unit 2
- J. Atwell, Project Director, Bechtel
- M. Bajestani, Vice President, Unit 2
- M. Bali, Electrical Design Manager, Bechtel
- P. Byron, Licensing Engineer
- G. Caul, Project Quality Assurance Supervisor, Bechtel
- R. Esnes, Engineering Manager, Washington Group, Inc
- T. Franchuk, Quality Assurance Manager, Bechtel
- E. Freeman, Acting Engineering Manager, TVA, Unit 2
- W. Goodman, Procurement Manager, Bechtel
- J. Hannah, Corrective Action Coordinator, Bechtel
- S. Loofbourrow, Quality Manager, Bechtel
- J. McCarthy, Licensing Supervisor, Unit 2
- R. Moll, Preop Startup Manager, Unit 2
- D. Olcsvary, Contracts/Procurement Manager, TVA, Unit 2
- D. Osborne, Lead Civil Engineer, TVA, Unit 2
- J. Robertson, Acting Engineering Manager, Bechtel
- S. Sawa, Training Manager, Bechtel
- J. Schlessel, Construction Manager, TVA, Unit 2
- D. Soberski, Quality Control Supervisor, Bechtel
- P. Theobold, Radcon Supervisor, TVA, Unit 2
- D. Webster, Acting Construction Manager, Bechtel, Unit 2
INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED
IP 35061 In-depth QA Inspection of Performance
IP 40504 Part 52, Identification and Resolution of Construction Problems
IP 46053 Structural Concrete Work Observation
IP 49063 Safety Related Piping Work Observation
IP 51053 Electrical Components and Systems Work Observation
IP 51063 Electrical Cable Work Observation
IP 53053 Containment Penetrations
LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
None