IR 05000461/1980022
| ML19295G095 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 11/12/1980 |
| From: | Fiorelli G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19295G094 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-461-80-22, NUDOCS 8012180590 | |
| Download: ML19295G095 (9) | |
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-461/80-22 Docket No. 50-461 License No. CPPR-137 Licensee:
Illinois Power Company 500 South 27th Street Decatur, IL 62525 Facility Name: Clinton Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Meeting At:
Decatur, IL Meeting Conducted:
October 28, 1980 RIII NRC Personnel Present:
J. G. Keppler, Director G. Fiorelli, Chief, Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch R. C. Knop, Chief, Projects Section 1, RC&ES H. H. Livermore, Senior Resident Inspector H. M. Wescott, Project Inspector Approved By:
G. Fiorelli, Chief MdYf Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch Meeting Summary Management Meeting on October 2P. 1980 (Report No. 50-461/80-22)
Areas Discussed: Management meeting held at the NRC's request to discuss the regulatory performance of the activities at Clinton Nuclear Station Unit 1 as concluded in the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SAI.P) program.
Results: A summation of the licensee performance evaluation was presented.
Areas of concern were discussed with corporate management. The performance at Clinton, Unit I was considered to be adequate.
.
8012130
,
5 90
- DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Illinois Power Company Personnel Present W. C. Gerstner, Executive Vice President L. J. Koch, Vice President J. O. McHood, Vice President J. Geier, Manager, Nuclear Station Engineering A. J. Budnick, Director of Quality Assurance T. F. Plunkett, Clinton Plant Manager 2.
Areas Discussed A summary of the SALP program was presented, including the a.
development, the basis for evaluation, and its purpose.
b.
The results of the NRC's evaluation of the licensee's performance were discussed.
(A copy of the evaluation is enclosed).
Several topics related to enforcement, the inspection program, c.
and regulatory planning were discussed with the licensee.
3.
Major Observations Within the areas reviewed during this appraisal period, the a.
noncompliance history appears to be average when compared with other facilities at approximately the same stage of construction.
The severity level of the noncompliances is relatively low.
b.
One half of the construction deficiency reports of problems reported by the licensee in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e)
requirements were considered to be within the control of the licensee, The recent assignment of the A&E personnel, hiring of consultants c.
at the site, and reorganization of Illinois Power Company appears to be having a positive effect on the licensee's regulatory perfo rmance.
d.
Review and analysis of the noncompliance items and 10 CFR 50.55(e)
reports indicates a need for improvement in the following areas:
(1) Communications within the licensee group and interface with cont ra ctors.
(2) Timely and adequate QC inspection.
-2-
(3)
Improved procedures / instructions.
.
Management effort should be devoted toward trending regulatory per-e.
formance during the next appraisal period as the NRC's inspection program progresses.
f.
Management should increase its sensitivity for maintaining the proper separation between production / cost consideration and QA/QC.
g.
The overall attitude of responding to the results of NRC inspections is poor.
Improvement is necessary in the area of responsiveness to problems presented by the NRC.
4.
Overall Assessment The overall performance of Illinois Power Company during the appraisal period, as related to the Clinton Unit 1 plant, is considered adequate.
5.
Planned NRC Actions Increased inspection effort is planned in the areas of quality assurance, management, and training.
Enclosure: SALP Evaluation
.
-3-
.
REGION:
III LICENSEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (CONSTRUCTION)
Facility: Clinton Unit 1 Licensee: Illincis Power Cenpany Unit Identification:
Docket No.
CP No./Date of Issuance Unit No.
So L61 CPPR-137
Febrt try 23, 1976 Reactor Information:
Unit 1 Unit 2 NSSS GE MWt 298L t.ppraisal Period:
July '.,1979 through June 30, 1980 Appraisal Completion Date: October 28, 1980 Review Board Members:
J. G. Keppler, Dfrector, RIII G. F?orelli, Chief, Reactor Construction and Engineering Support Branch, RIII R. t ! Knop, Chief, Projects Section 1, RC&lS, RIII H. M. Wescott, Project Inspector, RIII E. 3. Gallagher, Reactor Inspector, Engineering Support Section 2, RC&ES, RIII J. Hughes, Project Inspector, RIII J. H. Neisler, Projcet Inspector, RIII
,
H. Livermore, Resident Inspector, RIII F. Hawkins, Reactor Inspector, Engineering Support Section 2, RC&ES, RIII
.*
A.
Nudber and ('sture of Noncompliance Itees Noncompliance Category:
" nit 1 Unit 2 Violations
Infractions
Deficiet cies
Areas of Noncompliance:
Unit 1 Unit 2 (Points)
(Points)
1.
Measures not provided to control obsolete or superceded documents agains t inadvertent use.
2.
Excessive NCR's prior to taking corrective action to preclude recurrence.
._
3.
Inadequate instructions and failure to correctly translate PSAR com=itments.
4.
Inadequate procedure for preservation and maintenance of equipment stored in place or installed.
5.
QA program did not provide for control of the site settlement monitoring program.
6.
Measures not established to assure conformance to procurement documents.
7.
Annual audit of QA program not performed.
8.
Foreign material stored in weld rod holding ovens.
9.
Incorrect weld prep (fit-up).
-
10. Incorrect veld bead width.
.
.
11. Welaers not aware of welding parameters of WPS.
12. Improper segregation of material.
13. Inadequate inspection of concrete activities.
14. Activities being performed without procedures / instructions, traveller, or design changes.
15. Improper segregation of material (electrical).
TOTAL POINTS 143 B.
Number and Nature of Deficiency Reports (10 CFR 50.55(e)
4 - Involved defective equipment, parts, etc. from vendor (50.55(e) reports)
4 - Involved direct licensee controlled activities (50.55(e) reports)
C.
Escalated Enforcement Actions Civil Penalties None.
Orders None.
Immediate Action Letters Non.
-
s D.
Management Conferences Held During Past Twelve Months Septenber 10, 1980 meeting at RIII at licensee's request to discuss IPC's reorganization.
E.
Justification of Evaluations of Functional Areas Categorized as Requiring an Increase in Inspection Irequency/ Scope (See evaluation sheet)
- 1. Increase quality assurance, management and training inspection.
Justification 1.
50.55(e) report (RHR heat exchanger embed plates - inadequate inspection)
2.
50.55(e) report (containment spray systen support veld defe c ts -
inadequste inspection)
3.
50.55(e) report (cracked clip angles - inadequate inspectien)
L.
50.55(e) report (CRD tubes poor velding - inadequate inspection)
SC.55(e) report (inecrrect soil cberacteristic - breakdown in QA)
6.
Nonco=pliance 80-06-02 (inadequate instructions)
Nonce =pliance 80-06-05 (maasures not established to assure confor.ance with procurement docu=ents)
8.
Nonen=pliance 80-05-06 (no annual audit of sub-contractor)
Noncompliance 80-07-02 (inadequate inspection of veld fit-up)
10. Nonco=pliance 80-09-01 (inadequate inspection of concrete work)
.
%
A.
Number and Nature of Noncompliance Itees Noncompliance Category:
Unit 1 Unit 2 Violations
Infractions
Deficiencies
Areas of Noncompliance:
Unit 1 Unit 2 (Points)
(Points)
1.
Measures not provided to control obsolete or superceded documents against inadvertent use.
2.
Excessive NCR's prior to taking corrective action to preclude recutrence.
3.
Inadequate instructions and failure to correctly translate PSAR commitments.
4.
Inadequate procedure for preservation and maintenance of equipment stored in place or installed.
5.
QA program did not provide for control of the site settle.'snt monitoring program.
6.
Measures not established to assure conformance to procurement documents.
7.
Annual audit of QA program not performed.
8.
Foreign material storei in weld rod holding ovens.
9.
Incorrcet weld prep (fit-up).
10. Incorrect weld bead width.
-.....
-
.
.
.
.
Inspection Frequency and/or Scope FUNCTIONAL AREA 1.
ease No. Change Decrease
.
1.. Quality Assurance, Management & Training X
2.
Substructure & Foundations X
,
3.
Concrete X
4.
Liner (Containment & Others)
X 5.
Safety-Related Structures X
6.
Piping & Hangers (Reactor Coolant
& Others)
X 7.
Safety-Related Components (Vessel.
X Internals & HVAC)
8.
Electrical Equipment X
9.
Electrical (Tray & Wire)
._-
_
X
.
10.
InstrumentatTUn
]~
x 11.
Fire Protection X
12.
Preservice Inspection X
13.
keporting X
.
'
s
!
i
/
//
IDesTg6ated Regipal Manager l
Date
/ /jf