IR 05000425/1987031
| ML20236J596 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 07/28/1987 |
| From: | Livermore H, Sinkule M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236J563 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-425-87-31, NUDOCS 8708060216 | |
| Download: ML20236J596 (17) | |
Text
UNITED STATES em at o oq{o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[4)*.
n
,
REGION 11 g
j 101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
AT LANT A, GEoHGI A 30323
\\...../
Report No.:
50-425/87-31 Licensee: Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Docket No.:
50-425 License No.:
CPPR-109 Facility Name: Vogtle 2 Inspection Consucted: June 19 - July 23, 1987 Inspector:
C
-
28h 7 g H. H. Livermore, Senior Resident Inspector,
' Date Signed Congstrcion
/
.
-
F 7/28/87 Approved by: M. V. Sinkule, Section Chief Date Signed Division of Reactor Projects SUMMARY Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed Resident inspection in the following areas: fire protection, structural concrete, containment and safety related :tructures, safety related components, auxiliary systems, electrical equipment, raceways and instrumentation, quality programs and administrative cc..trols affecting quality, and allegations.
Results:
No violations or deviati:ns were identified.
%B0gg g
G
- - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
_
_
_
.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- P.-D. Rice, Vice-President, Vogtle Project Director-I
'
- R. H. Pinson, Vice-President, Project Construction
- C. W. Whitney, General Manager, Project Support R.~ M. Bellamy, Quality Assurance Manager, Corporate
- C. W. Hayes, Vogtle Quality Assurance Manager-E. O. Groover, Quality Assurance Site Manager - Construction.
- D. M. Fiquett, Project' Construction Manager - Unit 2
- G. A. McCarley, Project Compliance Coordinator C. L. Coursey, Maintenance Superintendent (3tartup)
M.'P. Craven, Nuclear Security Manager
- H. M. Handfinger, Project _ Start-up Support Manager F. D. 'Kuester, Project Field Engineering J. A. Bailey', Project Licensing Manager A. W. Harrelson, Construction Electrical Manager C. W. Rau, Construction Mechanical Manager L. N. Brooks, Construction Civil Manager L. B. Glenn, QC Manager i
- R. W. McManus, Readiness Review Manager J. E. Sanders, Assistant Project Manager W. C. Ramsey, Project Engineering Manager
- L. D. Harless, Manager,' Quality Concerns D. Janecki, Quality Concerns W. C. Lyon, Quality Concerns S. D. Haltom, Quality Assurance R. Folker, Quality Assurance Engineer D. W. Smith, Superintendent, Nuclear Operations.
l i
Other licensee employees contacted included craftsmen, technicians, supervision, engineers, inspectors, and office personnal.
Other Organizations C. Markham, Westinghouse Project Manager D. L. Kinnsch, Project Engineering - Bechtel D. W. Strohman, Project Quality Assurance Engineer - Bechtel T. E. Richardson, Project Engineering Manager - Bechtel B. Edwards, Site Manager, PPP
- T. Frey, Quality Assurance Manager, PKF
.'
- H. W. Holcombe, Assistant Project Manager, PKF
- Attended exit interview L_ _ _
__
.
.
2.
Exit Interviews - Unit 2 (30703C)
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on July 23, 1987, with those persons indicated in paragraph I above.
The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results.
No dissenting comments were received from the licensee.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspection. Region based NRC exit interviews were attended during the inspection period by a resident inspector.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters - Unit 2 (92702)
Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items - Unit 2 (92701)
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to determine whether they are acceptable or may involve violations or deviations.
No unresolved items were identified during this inspection period.
5.
General Construction Inspection - Unit 2 (92706)
Periodic random surveillance inspections were made throughout this reporting period in the form of general type inspecti ms in different areas of the facility.
The areas were selected on the basis of the scheduled activities and were varied to provide wide coverage. Obser-vations were made of activities in progress to note defective items or items of noncompliance with the required codes and regulatory require-ments. On these inspections, particular r.ote was made of the presence of quality control inspectors, supervisors, and quality control evidence in the form of available process sheets, drawings, material identification, material protection, performance of tests, and housekeeping.
Interviews were conducted with craft personnel, supervisors, coordinators, quality control inspectors, and others as they were available in the work areas.
The inspector reviewed numerous construction deviation reports to deter-mine if requirements were met in the areas of documentation, action to resolve, justification, and approval signatures in accordance with GPC Field Procedure No. GD-T-01.
No violations or deviations were identified.
l 6.
Fire Prevention / Protection and Housekeeping Measures - Unit 2 (42051C)
The inspector observed fire prevention / protection measures throughout the inspection period. Welders were using welding permits with fire watches and extinguishers.
Fire fighting equipment was in its designated areas throughout the plant.
_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ __-__________ - - -
_
J s
'
.
The inspector reviewed and examined portions of procedures pertaining to the fire prevention / protection measures and housekeeping measures to determine whether they comply with applicable codes, standards,. NRC Regulatory Guides and licensee commitments.
. The inspector observed fire prevention / protection measures in work areas containing safety ~related equipment during the inspection period to verify the following:
Combustible waste material and rubbish was removed from the work
-
areas as rapidly as practicable to avoid unnecessary accumulation of s
combustibles.
Flammable - liquids were stored in appropriate containers and in
-
designated areas throughout the plant.
Cutting and welding operations in progress have been authorized by
-
'an appropriate permit, combustibles have been moved away -or safely covered, and a fire watch'and extinguisher was posted as required.
Fire protection / suppression equipment was provided and controlled in
-
accordance with applicable requirements.
No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Structural Concrete - Unit 2 (47053C)
a.
Procedure and Document Review The' inspector reviewed and examined portions of the following proce-dures pertaining to the placement of concrete to determine whether they comply with _ applicable codes, standards, NRC Regulatory Guides and licensee commitments.
-
CD-T-02, Concrete Quality Control
-
CD-T-06, Rebar and Cadweld Quality Control
-
CD-T-07, Embed Installation and Inspection b.
Installation Activities The inspector witnessed portions of the concrete placement indicated i
'
below to verify the following:
I (1)
Forms, Embedment, and Reinforcing Steel Installation Forms were properly placed, secure, leak tight and clean.
,
-
-
Rebar and other embedment installation was installed in accordance with construction specf fications and drawings, secured, free of concrete and excessive rust, specified distance from forms, proper on site rebar bending (where applicable) and clearances consistent with aggregate size.
_ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ - _..
..
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
l l
I l
-
'
4
\\
l I
I
.
(2) Delivery, Placement and Curing Replacement inspection was completed and approved prior
-
to placement utilizing a Pour Card.
!
Construction joints were prepared as specified.
-
-
Proper mix was specified and delivered.
Temperature control of the mix, mating surfaces, and
-
ambient were monitored.
Consolidation was performed correctly.
-
-
Testing at placement location was properly performed in accordance with the acceptance criteria and recorded -on a Concrete Placement Pour Log.
-
Adequate crew, equipment and techniques were utilized.
Inspections during placements were conducted effectively
-
by a sufficient number of qualified personnel.
Curing methods and temperature was monitored.
-
No violations or deviations were identified.
8.
Containment (Steel Structures and Supports) - Unit 2 (48053C)
Periodic inspections were conducted to observe containment steel and support installation activities in progress, to verify the following:
Components were bei r,g procerly handled (included bending or
-
straightening).
Specified clearances were being maintained.
-
Edge finishes and hole sizes were within tolerances.
-
Control, marking, protection and segregation were mainteined during
-
storage.
Fit-up/ alignment meets the tolerances in the specifications and
-
drawings.
No violations or deviations were identified.
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
___._
--.
[
-
-
\\
l 9.
Safety-Related Structures (Structural Steel and Supports) - Unit ' 2 (48063C)
Periodic inspections were conducted to observe construction activities of safety-related structures / equipment supports for major equipment outside the containment to verify that:
Materials and components were being properly handled to prevent
!
I
-
damage.
Fit-up/ alignment were within tolerances in specifications and drawing
-
requirements.
-
Bolting was in accordance with specifications and procedures.
Specified clearances from adjacent components were being met.
-
No violations or deviations were identified.
10.
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary and Safety Related Piping - Unit 2 (49053C) (49063C)
Periodic inspections were conducted to observe construction activities of the Reactor Coolant Boundary and other safety-related piping installations inside and outside Containments.
Verifications incluaed but were not limited to the following:
-
Material and components were being properly handled and stored in order to prevent damage.
-
Fit-ups and alignments were within tolerances per specifications i
and drawings.
-
Specified clearances from pipe to pipe and adjacent components were met.
I Piping was installed and inspected in accordance with applicable j
-
drawings, specifications, and procedures.
-
Those people engaged in the activity are qualified to perform the applicable function.
l
<
-
Drawing and specification changes (revisions) are being handled and used correctly.
No violations or deviations were identified.
)
l i
!
i l
_
j
-_ -_
_
<
.
11.
Reactor - Coolant Pressure Boundary and Safety Related Piping Welding -
Unit 2 (55073C) (55083C).
Periodic ' inspections were conducte'd during daily plant surveillance on-safety-related. pipe. welding at various stages of weld completion.
The purpose of the inspection was to determine whether the requirements of-applicable specifications,. codes, standards, work performance procedures and QC procedures are being met as follows:
Work was conducted in accordance with a process sheet which identi-
-
fies the weld and.its location by system, references procedures or-instructions, and provides for production and QC signoffs.
Welding procedures, detailed drawings and instructions, were readily
-
available in the immediate work area and technically adequate for the welds being made.
Welding procedure specification (WPS) were in accordance with 'the
-
applicable Code requi rement's and that a Procedure Qualification Record-(PQR) is referenced and exists for the type of ' weld being made.
-
Base metals, welding filler materials, fluxes, gases, and insert materials were of the specified type and grade, have been properly inspected, tested and were traceable to test reports or certifica-tions.
-
Purge and/or shielding gas flow and composition were as specified in the welding procedure specification and that protection was provided-to shield the welding operation from adverse environmental conditions.
Weld joint geometry including pipe wall thickness was specified and
-
that surfaces to be welded have been prepared, cleaned and inspected in accordance with applicable procedures or instructions.
-
A sufficient number of adequately qualified QA and QC inspection personnel were present at the work site, commensurate with the work in progress.
-
The weld area cleanliness was maintained and that pipe alignment and fit-up tolerances were within specified limits.
Weld filler material being used was in accordance with welding
-
specifications, unused filler material wat separated from other types of material and was stored properly and that weld rod stubs were properly removed from the work location.
That there were no evident signs of cracks, excessive heat input,
-
sugaring, or excessive crown on weld __ ___ ______
.
.
Welders were qualified to the applicable process and thickness, and
-
that necessary controls and records were in place.
No viola +.lons or deviations were identified.
12.
Reactor Vessel, Integrated Head Package, and Internals - Unit 2 (50053C)
(50063C)
The inspection consisted of examinations of the Reactor Vessel installed in containment, the Reactor Vessel head with the installed control rod drive mechanisms that are located on the refueling floor, and the upper internals in their designated laydown area.
Inspections also determined that proper storage protection practices were in place and that entry of foreign objects and debris was prevented. During this inspection period, the inspector also monitored a fit check installation of the reactor vessel head and the reactor vessel.
No violations or deviations were identified.
I 13.
Safety Related Components - Unit 2 (50073C)
The inspection consisted of plant tours to observe storage, handling, and protection; installation; and preventive maintenance of safety related components to determine that work is being performed in accordance with applicable codes, NRC Regulatory Guides, and licensee commitments.
During the inspection the below listed areas were randomly inspected at various times during the inspection period to verify the following as applicable:
Storage, environment, and protection of components were in accordance
-
with manufacturer's instructions and/or established procedures.
l
-
Implementation of special storage and maintenance requirements such as:
rotation of motors, pumps, lubrication, insulation testing (electrical), cleanliness,etc.
-
Performance of licensee / contractor surveillance activities and documentation thereof was being accomplished.
-
Installation requirements were met such as: proper location, place-ment, orientation, alignment, mounting (torquing of bolts and expansion anchors), flow direction, tolerances, and expansion clearance.
Appropriate stamps, tags, markings, etc. were in use to prevent
-
oversight of required inspections, completion of tests, acceptance, and the prevention of inadvertent operation.
f
. _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -.
.
.
Safety-related piping, valves, pumps, heat exchangers, and instrumentation were inspected on a random sampling basis throughout the plant.
No violations or deviations were identified.
14. Safety Related Pipe Support and Restraint Systems - Unit 2 (50090C)
Periodic random inspections were conducted during the inspection period to observe construction activities during installation of safety-related pipe supports to determine that the following work was performed in accordance with applicable codes., NRC Regulatory Guides, and licensee commitments:
Spring hangers were provided with indicators to show the approximate
-
" hot" or " cold" position, as appropriate.
No deformation or forced bending was evident.
-
Where pipe clamps are used to support vertical lines, shear lugs were
-
welded to the pipe (if required by Installation Drawings) to prevent slippage.
Sliding or rolling supports were provided with material and/or
-
lubricants suitable for the environment and compatible with sliding contact surfaces.
-
Supports are located and installed as specified.
The surface of welds meet applicable code requirements and are free
-
from unacceptable grooves, abrupt ridges, valleys, undercuts, cracks, discontinuities, or other indications which can be observed on the welded surface.
No violations or deviations were identified.
15.
Electrical and Instrumentation Components and Systems - Unit 2 (51053C)
(52153C)
Periodic inspections were conducted during the inspection period to observe safety-related electrical equipment in order to verify that the storage, installation, and preventive maintenance was accomplished in accordance with applicable codes, NRC Regulatory Guides, and licensee commitments.
During the inspection period inspections were performed on various pieces of electrical equipment during storage, installation, and cable termina-ting phase in order to verify the following as applicable:
-
Location and alignment Type and size of anchor bolts
-
_ _ - __-__ - __ - ______
_
.
.
Identification
-
Segregation and identification of nonconforming items
-
-
Location, separation and redundancy requirements
-
Equipment space heating Cable identification
-
Proper lugs used
-
-
Condition of wire (not nicked, etc.), tightness of connection
-
Bending radius not exceeded Cable entry to terminal point
-
Separation
-
No violations or deviations were identified.
16.
Electrical and Instrumentation Cables and Terminations - Unit 2 (51063C)
(52063C) (53053C)
a.
Raceway / Cable Installation The inspector reviewed and examined portions of the following proce-dures pertaining to raceway / cable installation to determine whether they comply with applicable codes, NRC Regulatory Guides and licensee commitments.
-
ED-T-02, Raceway Installation ED-T-07, Cable Installation
-
Periodic inspections were conducted to observe construction activities of Safety Related Raceway / Cable Installation.
In reference to the raceway installation, the following areas were inspected to verify compliance with the applicable requirements:
-
Identification Alignment
-
-
Bushings (Conduit)
-
Grounding Supports and Anchorages
-
. _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ - _ -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - _ - - - -
_ _,
l
.
-
,
,
I
- L i
I In reference to the cable installation the following areas were inspected to verify compliance with the applicable requirements:
,
Protection from adjacent construction activities (welding, etc.)
-
i Coiled cable ends properly secured
-
j
-
Non-terminated cable ends taped.
I i
-
Cable trays, junction boxes, etc., reasonably free of debris Conduit. capped, if no cable installed
-
,
Cable supported
-
Bend radius not exceeded
"
-
s
-
Separation b.
Cable Terminations
- The inspector reviewed and examined portions of the following proce-dures pertaining to cable termination to determine whether they comply with applicable codes, NRC Regulatory Guides and licensee commitments.
-
ED-T-08, Cable Termination In reference to cable terminations the following areas were inspected to verify compliance with the applicable requirements.
Cable identification
-
Proper lugs used
-
-
Condition of wire (not nicked, etc.)
-
Tightness of connection
-
Bending radius not exceeded
-
Cable entry to terminal point N
-
Separation No violations or deviations were identified.
.
_
_ _ _ -
__
-
_ _ _ _ _ - _ - -
__
. - _.
_. =
._.
.. _.
,
.
.
.i
,11
.
17.
Containment and Other Safety Related Structural Steel Welding - Unit 2 (55053C) (55063C)
- Peri
- >dic inspections were.~ conducted during daily plant surveillance.on safety-related steel welding at various stages of weld completion.
i
=The purpose of the inspection was to determine whether the requirements of..
applicable specifications, codes, standards, work performance procedures and QC procedures are being met as:follows:
l
' Work was ' conducted in accordance with a process sheet or drawing
]
-
which identifies ~ the weld and its location by system, references,
- procedures or instructions, and provides -for. production and/or. QC signoffs.
Welding procedures, detailed drawings and instructions, were
-
readily available. -in. the immediate work area and technically adequate for the welds being made.
,
Welding procedure specification (WPS) ;were in accordance with
-
the. applicable Code requirements and that a
Procedure.
Qualification Record (PQR) is referenced and exists for the type of weld being made.
,
Base metals and welding filler materials were of the specified
--
,,
type and grade, were properly inspected, tested, and were
!
traceable.
Protection was provided to shield the welding operation from
-
adverse environmental conditions.
Weld joint geometry including thickness was specified and that
-
surfaces to be welded were prepared, cleaned and inspected in accordance with applicable procedures or instructions.
A sufficient number of adequately qualified QA and QC
-
inspection personnel commensurate with the work in progress were present at the work site.
Weld area cleanliness was maintained and that. alignment and
-
fit-up tolerances were within specified limits.
Weld filler material being used was in accordance with welding
-
specifications, unused filler material was separated from other types of material and was stored and controlled properly, and stubs were properly removed f rom the work location.
'There were no visual signs of cracks, excessive heat
-
input, or excessive crown on weld.
.
.
Welders were qualified to the particular process and thickness;
-
and that necessary controls and records were in place.
No violations or deviations were identified.
18.
Inspector Followup (92701)
a.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item (IFI) 50-424/87-32-07 and 50-425/
87-23-07:
Complete training for all Unit 2 construction personnel and Georgia Power Company (GPC) personnel outside the Unit 1 protected area boundary (PAB) regarding the Unit 2 Emergency Response Procedure GDA-A-55.
A review of records by the inspector indicates that all personnel outside the Unit 1 PAB have read and understood procedure GD-A-55, Rev. O.
This procedure provides instructions for construction non-manual, manual, subcontract, project engineering and GPC personnel outside the Unit 1 protected area boundary to carry out an orderly, rapid, and safe evacuation of the Unit 2 construction site.
The inspector notes that subsequent to the training, a full Emergency Response Unit 2 drill was performed successfully on June 18, 1987.
All Unit 2 personnel (approximately 4200) evacuated the power block, assembled on site as directed, and were fully accounted for within 25 minutes.
For drill details, see IR 50-425/87-26, paragraph 16.
b.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (URI) 50-425/87-19-01:
Identification of combustible scaffolding exposing the temporary fire barrier between Units 1 and 2 Control Rooms.
The inspector has performed surveil-lances of the Unit 2 control room wall. Unnecessary wood, equipment and trash have been removed, and sufficient fire extinguishers are available and accessible in the immediate wall area. A 24-hour fire watch has been established for this area and is in place and operational.
19.
Site Activity a.
An ASME N-Stamp Survey Team was on site July 13-15, 1987, to review Bechtel's QA Manual, procedures, and method of doing business. The ASME team has recommended that Bechtel's N-Stamp be renewed for another three years, b.
Combustion Engineering is on site performing Pre-Service Inspection (PSI) of the Unit 2 Reactor Vessel. Activity is expected to conclude the end of July.
A management meeting between NRC and GPC was conducted at the Vogtle c.
facility on July 1,1987.
The meeting was held to discuss Unit 2 status and included a guided tour of the Control, Auxiliary, Nuclear Service Cooling Water (NSCW), and Containment Building, and the Auxiliary Feedwater Pump Rooms.
I
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-.. -
-.
.,
i i
i
'
l
.
j 20. Allegations a.
RII-86-A-302-001, Maintenance of HVAC Equipment was not conducted in i
accordance with ANSI.
Concern Past maintenance performed by the contractor, PKF, on HVAC equipment was wrought with problems. Procedures were vague and contradictory, l
maintenance work orders were incomplete and incorrect, individuals were not qualified, and some deviation reports were incomplete and
,
remained open for an excessive time period.
Discussion The allegations are general in nature. The inspector agrees that there were, in the past, numerous problems with procedures and maintenance work orders.
These were recorded on Deviation Reports (DRs) with the exception of sample maintenance problems.
The inspector could find no cases where problems were no identified and dispositioned on DRs-It appears that as a result of these problems identified by the alleger and QA engineers, GPC took over and is now managing the site equipment storage and maintenance, which includes PKF equipment.
The program is controlled and implemented by GPC procedures CM-T-02 through -04 supplemented by some 12 Work Instruc-tions.
All deficiencies, except minor maintenance, are recorded on DRs.
Equipment previously under the PKF program has since been installed in the Power Block and has undergone successful "wringout" acceptance testing, therefore demonstrating its operability.
The resident and regional inspectors have performed numerous equipment cleanliness and maintenance inspections 'on Units 1 and 2 with favorable results. Inspection 50-425/87-32 was recently completed by Region II and gave GPC high marks on their storage and maintenance of equipment and material.
The program roeets the requirements of ANSI N45.2-1977.
Conclusion The allegations of previous problems with the PKF storage and main-tenance program were true in most cases.
The problems have been corrected or proven out by system testing.
The storage and main-tenance of equipment has since been managed by GPC successfully.
The inspector could find no examples of storage and maintenance inspectors or workers not being qualified for the jobs at which they are working.
The allegation of deviation reports being incomplete and remaining open for excessive periods of time is discussed in 86-A-302-005.
Allegation 86-A-302-001 is closed.
.. _ _ _ _ _ - _.
- _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
_
.
.
_
. --
i
..
.
.
.
b.~
RII-86-A-302-003, PKF QA Department is not independent.
I-Concern-The'PKF QA Department is not independent and is constantly pressured to meet production efforts that have resulted in. producing a QA Department that is basically a " rubber stamp" for production.
Discussion The. inspector performed a review and surv_eillance.'of the PKF - QA Department.
Personnel were interviewed f and. records, procedures, audits, deviation. reports, and the QA. Manual were reviewed. Some 57:
procedures dealing with Receiving and Inspection (R&I), Document Control, Welding, etc.,
implement the QA Manual into everyday operation.
Each department manager is instructed to implement the requirements of the QA Manual'.
This appears to be taking place.
Organization charts were reviewed and indicate a complete separation of-QA and QC from production..The QA Manager reports directly' to a
- corporate QA Manager with a dotted line (coordination) to the. site
,
- Project Manager. As-a result of inspector interviews with personnel, it appears there were some'very hectic days of production and quality coordination during peak construction periods.
This is_ to be j
expected during any construction schedule. The inspector could find
!
no breakdowns in the Quality Assurance systems that would indicate that the QA Department was a " rubber stamp" for production The
.
" checks-and-balances" of the system worked.
Conclusion This allegation is unsubstantiated, and therefore, is closed.
c.
RII-86-A-302-005, PKF and GPC programs for reporting / controlling i
deviating conditions does not meet the intent of 10 CFR 50.
J Concern PKF and GPC have permitted deviations to go unresolved for over a year and in some cases over three years.
The number of these deviation reports are approximately 1000. The Production Department routinely disregarded QA attempts to have the overdue deviations closed.
GPC is unable to identify all deviations that have.been
written against PKF systems. PKF makes a disclaimer on the turnover
{
stating that they are not responsible for any GPC Deviation Reports
'
not identified to PKF. GPC Turnover Group routinely accepts liVAC system for turnover without associated deviation reports being included or reviewed by GPC.
-. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. -. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _
-_J
,.
-
._.
!
-
l
j t
1
'
!
Discussion The alleger is correct in that there were numerous Nonconformance Reports (NCRs) and Deviation Reports (DRs) still open by the end of 1985.
Some were up to two years old.
In November 1985, PKF Audit P-022 identified the problem and listed the open DRs. The inspector
]
reviewed some 60 DRs listed in the Audit Report.
PKF action for closure was taken on the DRs and NCRs beginning in 1986 and ending in the first quarter of 1987.
The inspector-was able to track the closure dates through 1986.
At the present time, all the audit
listed DRs and NCRs are closed.
A review of the present computer q
printout (PKF) of open DRs indicated approximately four GPC and some 23 PKF open DRs.
Of this number, only two are pre-1987; but, also have valid reasons to remain open. The inspector reviewed the PKF DR logs for all 3700 through 4096 series DRs.
For the most part, all those that have been closed have been done so within a month to a month and a half, certainly in a timely manner. The inspector also reviewed the content of the 60 DRs listed in the Audit Report PKF P-022. Most of those left open for long periods of time were of a non-essential nature such as ID tag removal, duct distorted, lock does not work, arc strikes, etc. The inspector does not condone or excuse the actions of PKF leaving these DRs and NCRs open for long lengths of time, but does understand how this can happen during the time of peak production.
The alleger is also correct in that PKF makes a disclaimer on system turnover stating they are not responsible for any GPC Deviation l
Reports not identified to PKF.
There is no regulation prohibiting this practice, The inspector notes that GPC has identified and is aware of all outstanding GPC and PKF DRs at the time of system turnover.
Numerous system walkdowns are performed up to 12 weeks prior to system turnover. All open DRs are entered in the Master Tracking System (MTS) and also on a separate open DR lis:
Prior to system turnover all the open DRs are discussed and decisions are made to work the items or pass them over with the turnover to the punch list. This process is controlled by procedures GD-A-48 through
-
-50.
This process is acceptable.
The alleger is incorrect in i
assuming GDC accepts system turnover without knowledge of associated DRs.
Final turnover of completed PKF records is not required at turnover.
Conclusion The alleger was instrumental in triggering corrective action to close open DRs.
The GPC and PKF programs for reporting and controlling deviating conditions meets the requirements of 10 CFR 50 Appendix B.
This allegation is closed.
d.
RII-86-A-302-006, GPC Quality Concern Program lacks the expertise and/or authority to adequately address problems that are not routine in nature.
_
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -. _ _ -. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ _
. - - -
- _ _ -
- _.
_ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
.
16 Concern The alleger's concern is as stated above. His distress is with the handling and disposition of Quality Concern 86V0277 and the problems associated with Deficiency Reports CD 8384 and PK-2919 in regard to faulty seam welds in HVAC tube steel.
Discussion The. inspector reviewed the qualifications of the six GPC Quality M
Concerns investigators and managers.
All have college degrees - plus N
numerous years of experience in engineering and quality assurance.
Their backgrounds and experience appear to uniquely qualify them for the parts they play in the GPC Quality Concerns Program. The inspector also notes that for the past two years, he has reviewed numerous cases ' dispositioned by GPC - Quality Concerns and has not
.,
found any that lacked expertise or were dispositioned incorrectly and were in violation of NRC regulations.
The inspector reviewed Quality Concerns 86V0610, 86V0277, and 86V0116,.
j all having questions in regard to the disposition of DRs CD 8384 and
'
PKF 2919. The inspector reviewed the historical chronology and the actions taken in regard to some faulty PKF HVAC tube steel. These actions took place from February through November 1986.
The inspector notes that the Quality Concerns investigation was concluded and an agreement, with minor exceptions, was received by GPC from the alleger on November 14, 1986.
The inspector has reviewed the findings and does not find any violation of NRC requirements. Since the original Quality Concern and the NRC allegations were in essence the same, there does not appear to be any value in a rehash of these items in this report. The inspector notes that the alleger through his perseverance was certainly instrumental in bringing this problem to closure.
Conclusion For the reasons stated above, this allegation is closed.
i i
)
___