IR 05000410/1980010
| ML19345E081 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 10/16/1980 |
| From: | Robert Carlson NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Rhode G NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19345E083 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8012230073 | |
| Download: ML19345E081 (2) | |
Text
[fc/
<
.
/
%,k UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'
~
f 3$)j
REGION I
e
./
g 631 PARK AVENUE f
MING OF PRUS$l A. PENNSYL VANI A 19406
.....
OCT 16120 Docket No. 50-410
'
Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation ATTN: Mr. Gerald K. Rhode Vice President System Project Management c/o Miss Catherine R. Seibert 300 Erie Boulevard, West Syracuse, NY 13202 Gentlemen:
Subject:
Inspection No. 50-410/80-10 This refers to the routine inspection conducted by Mr. S. K. Chaudhary of this office on September 23-26, 1980 at Corporate Offices in Syracuse, New York of activities authorized by NRC License No. CPPR-112 and to the discussions of our findings held by Mr. Chaudhary with Mr. J. Bartlett at the conclusion of the inspection.
Areas examined during this inspection are described in the Office of Inspection and Enforcement Inspection Report which is enclosed with this letter.
Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the inspector.
Within the scope of this inspection, no items of noncompliance were observed.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.
If this report contains any information that you (or your contractor) believe to be proprietary, it is necessary that you make a written application within 20 days to this office to withhold such information from public disclosure. Any such application must be accompanied by an affidavit executed by the owner of the information, which
.
identifies the document or part sought to be withheld, and which contains a l
statement of reasons which addresses with specificity the items which will be considered by the Commission as listed in subparagraph (b) (4) of Section 2.790.
The information sought to be withheld shall be incorporated as far as possible into a separate part of the affidavit.
If we do not hear from you in this regard within the specified period, the report will be placed in the Public Document Room.
,
8 012230 CD
-
.
.
,
Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation
>
No reply to this letter is required; however, should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
Sincerely,
,
hertT.dar'l Chief
,
Reactor Construction and Engineering
/
Support Branch Enclosure: Office of Inspection and Enforcement Inspection Report Number 50-410/80-10 cc w/ encl:
Eugene B. Thomas, Jr., Esquire
,
e m-c-n--o
-. - - - -
m r--
-
,
n--r-p g
n
-
,w
,
p e,
,
.s.my-e
+m
-
w-
-n
,y
-
-
,
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No.
50-410/80-10 Docket No.
50-410 License No. CPPR-112 Priority Category A
'
--
Licensee:
Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 300 Erie Boulevard, West Syracuse, New York 13202 Facility Name:
Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2 Inspection at:
Syracuse, New York Inspection conducted:
September 23-26, 1980 dag44 esArt/
/o//
Inspectors:
U.
'
S. K. Chaudhary, Reactor [spector d' ate 's i gned date signed i
,
date signed M
/O[/[ (O Approved by:
S. D. Ebnetd/, Chief, Engineering Support date/ signed
Section No. 2, RC&ES Branch I
!
Inspection Summary:
Inspection at Corporate Offices on September 23-26, 1980 (Report No. 50-410/80-10)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by a regional based inspector of the corporate QA program of licensee.
The inspector reviewed the QA'organi-zation structure, controlling QA procedures, corporate and site QA interface, and design assurance activities of the licensee. The inspection ~ involved 28 inspector hours at the corporate offices by one regional based inspector.
Results:
No items of noncompliance were identified.
,
i
'
Region I Form 12 l
(Rev. April 77)
.
.
..
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation
- J. Bartlett, Executive Vice President
- 5. F. Manno, Manager, Nuclear Generation Projects R. A. Norman, Assoc. Senior QA Engineer G. K. Rhode, Vice President-System Project Management
- C. Terry, Manager, Generation Projects-Engineering (Personsdenotedbyanasteriskattendedexitinterview)
2.
Review of QA Program a.
Organizational Structure The inspector reviewed the licensce's documented QA program for the design and construction phase of Nuclear Projects, and held discussions with management personnel responsible for the imple-mentation of the program.
Following documents were reviewed:
QA Manual Nuclear Design and Construction P,hase QA Procedures Manual Based on the review of above documents and discussions with management personnel, the inspector determined that no substan-tive change in the QA organization has occurred.
~
No items of noncompliance were identified.
b.
Adequacy of QA Staff l
The inspector reviewed the qualification and assigned responsibility
!
of personnel on corporate QA staff, and held discussions with QA and corporate management regarding the numerical adequacy of presently assigned staff.
In view of recent personnel losses in the QA organization, the inspector questioned the effectiveness of this' organization should the project activity increase in the near future..The inspector was informed by the licensee that the licensee management is cognizant of these losses and their impact on effectiveness, should the project activity increase.
The management is considering ways to staff the QA organization on
'
short notice should the need arise.
One of the options being considered is to have a subcontractor provide qualified QA personnel l
l
>
.
on short notice for short term staffing.
However, the licensee indicated that there has been no decision made as to the increased level of construction in the spring of 1981.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
c.
QA Procedures The inspector reviewed the following QA procedures to verify that changes were approved at appropriate management level, the document control reauirements were complied with, and changes were effectively implemented.
Change Notice No. 1, April 1980 to QAP No. 2.30, Revision 2, February 78, " Review of NMPC Quality Assurance Program for Status and Adequacy."
Change Notice No. 1, April 1980, to QAP No. 10-20, Revision 1, May 1978, " Performance, Reporting, and Follow up of Surveillance Activities for Design, Construction and Modifications."
Based on the review of above change notices and quality assurance procedures, the inspector determined that the changes were properly
.
approved by appropriate management, were properly documented, distributed, and implemented.
l No items of noncompliance were identified.
l d.
Licensee Reviews of QA Program Effectiveness The inspector reviewed documents and held discussions with licensee management to verify that licensee management regularly reviews and examines the status and effectiveness of the QA program.
The following documents were reviewed:
QA Manual, See Section 4.2.
Monthly Status Reports to Senior Vice President by QA Manager.
Combined Utility Assessment Report of Adequacy of NMPC QA Program, September 12, 1980.
Based on the review of above documents and discussions with licensee management the inspector determined that the corporate management of the licensee regularly receives briefings on the j
status of QA program from the QA Manager.
Additionally, the
'
management has initiated a program of independent management audit of QA program effectiveness of NMPC by other utilities.
.
,--y_ye-m
-
w
%
--%+--
m
.
.
The report of the recent audit was submitted to the management on September 12, 1980, and currently the findings and recommendations are under review and evaluation for follow-up actions.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
e.
Corporate QA Site QA Interface The inspector reviewed the reports submitted by site QA to cor-porate QA, and held discussions with licensee personnel to deter-mine the structure of the interface, the responsibility, and the authority of each organization.
The following documents were reviewed:
Site QA Monthly Status Reports for January 1977 through August
_
1980.
Site QA Summary and Site QA Plan for July 1980 and August 1980 respectively.
Audit Reference Index, May 28, 1980.
Based on the document review and discussion, the inspector deter-mined that the above reports are being submitted to corporate QA under the regirements of various QA procedures.
However, there is no formalized procedure detailing the authority, responsibility, and the interface requirements between the two separate organiza-tions. The inspector expressed his concern on this informal interface arrangement.
In response to the inspector's concern, the licensee stated that NMPC has initiated an effort to develop and formalize the authority, responsibiity and interface requirements i
between corporate and site QA organization.
The licensee committed (
to the inspector that these formalized requirments will be imple-
!
mented either by revising an existing procedure or by implementing
,
a new procedure before the NMP-2 site goes on full construction.
l l
No items of noncompliance were identified.
f.
Quality Assurance Trend Analysis The inspector reviewed the procedure requiring an analysis of quality assurance trends at the construction site, and held dis-cussions with licensee personnel.
The following procedure was reviewed:
l l
NMPC QAP-240, Revision 1.
i l
l l
-
eMe
.
-
Based on the review of the above procedure and discussions with licensee personnel, the inspector determined that currently the trend analysis is not being performed.
The licensee informed the inspector that the present levels of site activities do not lend themselves to a meaningful trend analysis, and an effort is underway to revise and upgrade the procedure.
The licensee informed the inspector that a trend analysis pro-cedure will be fully implemented before full construction activities are resumed at the site.
g.
Review and Control of Field Design Changes To determine how the licensee assures himself of the adequacy of A/E design, and the changes initiated in the field, the inspector held discussions with licensee personnel.
The inspector was informed as follows:
The Manager of Nuclear Projects-Engineering, is responsible for review and approval of designs, and changes thereto.
A design coordination meeting is held monthly to review and provide comments on design by A/E.
The meetings are now held in the Syracuse, New York office of the licensee.
Previously, these meetings were held in A/E's office at Cherry Hill, New Jersey.
The licensee QA reviews and audits the status and process of design reviews by licensee engineering.
After a design is reviewed and approved by the licensee, the design is" frozen", and any subsequent change to this design is individually reviewed and approved by the licensee.
The licensee provided the inspector with documentation of such meetings and r
post design review change notices submitted by A/E for inspector's review.
Based on the above review of documentation, and discussion, the inspector determined that the licensee has adequate control over primary design, and changes to such design.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection.
The inspector summarized the purpose, scope and findings. His findings.were acknowledged by the licensee.
.
-
.