Text

Insp Rept 50-424/86-41 on 860505-09 & 0519-23.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Onsite Selected Functional QA Areas Contained in Readiness Review Module 7, Plant Operations & Support
	ML20211G040
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	06/09/1986
From:	Belisle G, Moorman J; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20211G029	List: IR 05000424/1986041; ML20211G025;
References
	50-424-86-41, NUDOCS 8606190264
	Download: ML20211G040 (9)
	v • d • e

. _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -. _ _ _ _ _

.

-_

_

o UNITED STATES

[op Qsc

'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

-

[\\

R EGION 11.

n y

,, j 101 MARIETTA STREET.N.W.

,-

's ATL ANTA, GEORGI A 30323

'+4

,o

_

....

-

_

Report Nos.:

50-424/86-41 Licensee: Georgia Power Company

'

i P. O. Box 4545 (

Atlanta, GA 30302

-

Docket No.:

50-424 License No.: CPPR-108

'

-

Facility Name:

Vogtle Inspection Conducted: May 5-9 and May 19-23, 1986 Inspector:

. l! h(Duk b 0 - 0(o J. H Moor a III~

Date Signed e

_[

6 M

-

Approved by:

.c i

G.iA'. Belisle7 Acting Section Chief Dat6 Signed

'

-

Division of Reactor Safety

.

SUMMARY

=

-

Scope:

This routine, announced inspection was conducted on site in selected functional Quality Assurance areas contained in Readiness Review, Module 7, Plant

,

Operations and Support.

Results: No violations or deviations were identified.

,

-

m-

~

-

_

-

_

I m

-

_

-

8606190264 860612

--

PDR ADOCK 0b000424 G

PDR

-

E

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.......

_

.

REPORT DETAILS

.

1.

Persons Contacted Licensee Employees

- - C. Belflower, Quality Assurance (QA) Site Manager, Operations

G. Bockhold, General Manager, Nuclear Operations

S. Bradley, Operations Readiness Review Team Leader W. Copeland, Procurement Review Section Supervisor

C, Cross, Commitment Tracking Supervisor M. Durban, Quality Control (QC) Supervisor D. Glover, Materials Supervisor S. Goff, Commitment Tracking Coordinator G. Grey, Superintendent of Materials

E. Groover, QA Site Manager, Construction W. Helwig, Instrumentation and Controls (I&C) Technician C. Miller, Superintendent of Plant Engineering and Services T. Mundy, Senior I&C Technician S. Preist, Project Procurement Supervisor

W. Ramsey, Manager, Readiness Review L. Richardson, Maintenance Foreman W. Wagner, Quality Control Superintendent

- - H. Walker, Manager, Unit Operations NRC Resident Inspectors

H. Livermore, Senior Resident Inspector, Construction

J. Rogge, Senior Resident Inspector, Operations

- R. Schepens, Resident Inspector

Attended exit interview on May 9, 1986

- Attended exit interview on May 22, 1986

- - Attended both exit interviews.

2.

Exit Interview l

The inspection scope and findings were summarized on May 9 and May 22, 1986, l

with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The inspector described

!

the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings.

The l

licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspection.

l 3.

Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters l

Not inspected.

l The following abbreviations are used throughout the report:

I

!

I L

.

,

GPC - Georgia Power Company M&TE - Measuring and Test Equipment MWO - Maintenance Work Order NPPM - Nuclear Procurement Policy Manual, Rev. 2 4.

Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during the inspection.

5.

Plant Operations and Support, Module 7, Readiness Review a.

Section 3.3, Implementation Matrix The inspector selected various commitments from the Implementation Matrix to determine if the referenced procedures delineated the corresponding requirements. The following commitments and implementing documents were selected for review.

Source Document Section Implementing Document ANSI N45.2.2-1972

00850-C, Rev. 2 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 2.1 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 2.2 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 2.3 00850-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 2.5 00208-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 2.6 00851-C, Rev. 2 00254-C, Rev. 1 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 2.7 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972

00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 3.2 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 3.3 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 3.4 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 3.5 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 3.6 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 3.7 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 3.8 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 3.9 00851-C, Rev. 2 00853-C, Rev. 4 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 4.1 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 4.2 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 4.3 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 4.4 00851-C, Rev. 2 00853-C, Rev. 4 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 4.5 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 5.1 00850-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 5.2 00850-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 5.3 00850-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 5.3.1 00850-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 5.3.2 00850-C, Rev. 2

.

ANSI N45.2.2-1972 5.3.3 00850-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 5.4 00850-C, Rev. 2

'

ANSI N45.2.2-1972 5.5 00850-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 5.6 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 5.7 00850-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 6.1 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 6.2 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 6.3 00851-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 6.4 00851-C, Rev. 2 00853-C, Rev. 4 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 6.5 00853-C, Rev. 4 ANSI N45.2.2-1972 6.6 00853-C, Rev. 4 ANSI N45.2.2-1972

00850-C, Rev. 2 00100-C, Rev. 3 ANSI N45.2.13-1976 3.1 00800-C, Rev. 4 ANSI N45.2.13-1976 3.2 00800-C, Rev. 4 ANSI N45.2.13-1976 3.3 NPPM 00800-C, Rev. 4 00203-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.13-1976

'

ANSI N45.2.13-1976 9.3 NPPM

'

ANSI N45.2.13-1976 10.1 00850-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.13-1976 10.2 NPPM ANSI N45.2.13-1976 10.3 00850-C, Rev. 2 ANSI N45.2.13-1976

00850-C, Rev. 2 During the review of the above commitments, the inspector determined that a portion of the implementing documents listed in the matrix did not completely implement the corresponding commitment.

GPC representatives stated that the Implementation Matrix was not intended to be a complete listing demonstrating detailed compliance with project I

commitments, but rather to identify documentation showing evidence of

.

,

.

GPC awareness of the commitment or implementation of commitments as appropriate.

The inspector did not identi fy any examples of commitments which GPC was not aware of.

.

The ins.pector reviewed the commitment tracking system to determine if GPC had a method of identi fying, implementing, and verifying implementation of commitments.

Guidelines for this function were delineated in procedure 00405-C, Commitment Identification, Tracking, and Implementation, Revision 1.

Commitment tracking was performed by personnel in the Regulatory Compliance Department using a computerized data base.

These personnel were responsible for identifying and listing commitments. Management policy dictates that a commitment must be identified by two independent reviewers.

This helps insure that a commitment will not be overlooked. Once the commitment was identified, it was entered into the data base and a printout of the commitment was generated and forwarded to the responsible section.

The responsible section was determined by Regulatory Compliance personnel.

Each different plant section had a coordinator to interface with Regulatory Compliance for commitment tracking.

The responsible section verified that the commitment was implemented and forwarded the printout listing the implementing documents back to Regulatory Compliance.

Regulatory Compliance acquired implementing procedures and verified that the commitment was implemented. This verification was sometimes done on a sampling basis due to the number of commitments involved.

When commitment tracking was originated, one person identified commitments for implementation.

With only one person identi fying commitments and a heavy work load, the possibility existed that some commitments might have been omitted.

Commitment tracking personnel went back and identified commitments that were previously identified by only one person and were rereviewing and reverifying these commitments.

Commitments involving ANSI N45.2.2 and N45.2.13 were included in this reverification process.

Based on the above, the inspector determined that the implementing procedures reviewed appeared to acknowledge the awareness of commitments and that methods appeared in place to insure commitment implementation.

b.

Paragraph 4.2.3, Measuring and Test Equipment This section of the module described calibration, issuance, identification, and tracking of M&TE.

The following procedures implemented commitments pertaining to the above areas:

Procedure No.

Revision Title 00208-C

Control of Measuring and Test Equipment

.

20230-C

Control of Instrument Shop Measuring and Test Equipment 20405-C

Control of Maintenance Shop Measuring and Test Equipment The inspector toured the I&C and Mechanical / Electrical M&TE calibration labs and issue stations to determine if M&TE was being controlled and calibrated in accordance with established procedures.

Each lab retained copies of records that traced their calibration standards back to nationally recognized standards. Original copies of these records were maintained in the document control vault. Offsite calibrations were performed by approved vendors from the Qualified Suppliers List.

Sensitive items were packaged individually for shipment to offsite calibration labs.

Environmental conditions were monitored and were within the required range in the I&C calibration lab.

The Mechanical / Electrical calibration lab had provisions to monitor these conditions if required by a calibration procedure.

Each item of M&TE was uniquely identified with a GPC serial number and had either a calibration sticker listing date calibrated and date due or a hold tag to prevent usage.

Those items with hold tags were segregated from calibrated items to prevent inadvertent use.

Calibration status was checked for an item at time of issue and this check was documented. Each lab has a tracking system to insure that if a piece of M&TE was found out of calibration, all work performed using that piece of M&TE could be evaluated to determine whether or not the work was affected by the out of calibration condition. Calibration intervals could be changed based on calibration history if approved by a supervisor. Based on this review, the inspector determined that the M&TE program appeared to meet commitments.

c.

Paragraph 4.2.5.1, Procurement Activities This section of the module described the initiation, review, and approval of purchase requisitions.

The following procedures implemented requirements pertaining to procurement of goods and services:

Procedure No.

Revision Title 00203-C

Requisition Review for Technical and Quality Requirements 00800-C

Requisition of Materials and Services Nuclear Procurement Policy Manual, Revision 2

.

Purchase requisitions could be initiated by anyone needing to acquire material or services.

Technical and quality requirements were specified by the initiator and the requisition was reviewed by the initiators supervisor.

The requisition was reviewed for inclusion of technical and quality requirements by the Procurement Review Section.

After all technical and quality requirements were verified, the requisition was typed onto a purchase order and sent out to an approved vendor.

If competitive bids were solicited, the bids were compared to the original requirements of the purchase requisition to determine if the supplier had met all applicable requirements.

Any discrepancies between a bid and the purchase requisition were resolved by the Procurement Review Section.

From this review, the inspector determined that commitments in this area appeared to be implemented.

d.

Paragraph 4.2.5.2, Receipt of Material This section of the module described the process by which materials received at the Nuclear Operations Warehouse were processed through Receipt Inspection either to be stored in the warehouse or issued immediately.

It also described the process by which materials were conditionally released.

The following procedures implement requirements pertaining to the above areas:

Procedure No.

Revision Title

,

00853-C

Material Identification, Control, I

and Issue

!

85307-C

Quality Control Receipt Inspection i

l l

85100-C

Quality Control Inspection Plans, l

Reports, and Documentation l

l The inspector reviewed the receipt inspection process to determine if receipt inspections were being conducted in accordance with project I

commitments. The inspector also reviewed the system for conditional release of materials from the warehouse. The inspector determined that controls for conditional release of items were in place.

These controls involved a review of the conditional release request by the

'

Quality Control Department and the Procurement Review Section. After approval, the conditional release was documented in a conditional release log and on a discrepancy report which was traceable to the MWO.

l This assured that the conditional release was cleared up prior to the

!

system being declared operational.

l

..

.

7 During this review, the inspector determined that personnel conducting receipt inspections were knowledgeable of their duties as well as their interface with other departments.

The inspector reviewed training records to determine if receipt inspectors had been trained and that training had been documented.

From this review, the inspector determined that commitments in this area appeared to be implemented, e.

Paragraph 4.2.5.3, Storage, Handling, and Shipping This section of the Module described levels of storage, maintenance of items in storage, warehouse inspections, methods of handling materials, and shipment of items from the plant.

The following procedures implement commitments pertaining to the above areas:

Procedure No.

Revision Title 00850-C

Materials, Receiving, and Inspection 00851-C

Storage, Handling, and Shipping Requirements 00853-C

Material Identification, Control and Issue The inspector toured the operations warehouse facility to determine if storage levels were being maintained in accordance with approved procedures and items were being stored properly.

The warehouse facility consisted of a Level A and a Level B storage area.

It also contained a separate Level B storage area for chemicals and oils, a separate Level B area for receipt inspections, and provisions for outside storage (Level D). Sprinkler systems for fire suppression and provisions for rodent control were in all of the facilities.

A calibrated temperature and humidity monitor with a chart recorder was monitoring environmental conditions in the Level A storage area.

f Limits for temperature and humidity were conspicuously posted near the

'

monitor.

At the time of the inspection, the humidity in the storage area was barely within the allowable limits.

A GPC representative stated that they were aware of this and that arrangements had been made to install dehumidifiers.

Provisions had been made for maintenance of items in storage. Reviews of procurement documents identifed items requiring maintenance while in storage.

This information was entered into a computer data base and a

,

MWO was generated when the maintenance was due. Shelf Life items were

'

.

tracked on a computer data base capable of providing a report on those

!

items whose shelf life expiration dates were approaching. Although GPC l

currently does not have any items in storage requiring the use of l

i:

.

L

desiccants; a program was in place for control of desiccants. GPC conducted periodic inspections of the warehouse facility to determine

~

if items were being stored properly and were in good condition.

A monthly inspection was documented in accordance with GPC procedures, however, additional' inspections were performed. The licensee also had one person assigned to conduct a continuous inventory of stored items.

Most items in the warehouse were of a nature such that they could be handled using standard material handling practices.

However,- if an item was determined to need special handling due to size or sensitivity, written instructions were provided.

'From this inspection, the inspector determined that commitments m'ade in this area appeared to be implemented.

f.

Paragraph Section 5, Audits The inspector reviewed audit GD06-84/02, Nuclear Operations Control of Measuring and Test Equipment, to determine if the audit was conducted in accordance with requirements and the findings were appropriate. The audit was conducted using an approved checklist and documented in the

. proper format. Audit findings were valid and thoroughly documented.

Responses from the audited organizations addressed root causes and stated the specific actions taken to correct deficiencies.

The responses were provided within the required time frame.

Corrective actions taken fort deficiencies identified in the audit were verified by the Quality Assurance Department and properly documented.

GPC activities for this audit appeared to meet commitments.

g.

Section 6.2, Findings and Responses The inspector selected thet? findings for review to determine if

findings were valid 'and O co rrective actions adequately addressed root causes.

Findings 7-J,

'O and 7-20 were reviewed for the above attributes and appetre,pr

.tc.

,

IR 05000424/1986041

Text

Navigation menu

Search