IR 05000466/1978003
| ML19289C567 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 12/05/1978 |
| From: | Crossman W, Hubacek W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19289C563 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-466-78-03, 50-466-78-3, NUDOCS 7901170340 | |
| Download: ML19289C567 (5) | |
Text
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AtlD ENFORCEMENT
REGION IV
.
Report No. 50-466/78-03 Docket No. 50-466 Category Al Licensee:
Houston Lighting & Power Coinpany Post Office Box 1700 Houston, Texas 77001 Facility Name:
Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station Inspection at:
Houston, Texas Inspection conducted:
November 14-17, 1978, Inspector:
' _ 2 74 M4-N
'
N'. GTHubaceIc,-Reuctor Inspector, Projects Section Date /
Approved:
bV
/2/5 /78
--
W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section Date Inspecticn Summary:
Inspection on November 14-17, 1978 (Report No. 50-466/78-03)
Areas Inspected:
Special, announced inspection of applicant's responses to previous IE inspection findings and review of the quality assurance records management system for the Allens Creek project.
The inspection involved twenty-seven inspector-hours by one NRC inspector.
Results: One deviation from a commitment was identified in one of the areas inspected (failure to include a method of verification of QA re-cords in written procedures - paragraph 4).
79 0117 o gg
.
.
~
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Principal Applicant Employees
- W. N. Phillips, Project QA Manager
- F. W. Stoerkel, Project QA Supervisor
- T. K. Logan, Site QA Supervisor
- P. A. Swearingen, General Supervisor, QA Records Management System L. D. Richards, Project Licensing Egineer
- denotes those attending the exit interview 2.
Applicant Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Deviation (50-466/78-02-A):
Failure to Provide Approved Procedure for Processing Field Construction Contracts.
The IE inspector observed that Ebasco Procedure ASP-4, " Field Construction Contracts," Rev. O was reviewed and approved for use in accordance with HL&P Procedure PP-3, " Site Procurement," and Ebasco Procedure ASP-1, " Preparation of Site Procedures." Appropriate action has been taken to preclude the future use of unapproved procedures.
This matter is considered resolved.
(Closed) Deviation (50-466/78-02-B):
Failure to Prescribe Vendor Surveillance Report Format.
The IE inspector observed that HL&P Procedure QAP-3, " Procedure for Vendor Quality Surveillance," Rev.
3 includes attachments A, B & C, which prescribe the format to be utilized in preparing vendor surveillance reports. This matter is considered resolved.
(Closed) Deviation (50-466/78-02-C):
Failure to Provide Training Requirements in Departmental Procedures. The IE inspector observed that departmental procedures have been revised to include the re-quirement for quality assurance indoctrination training.
Section 1.5.3 of the Quality Assurance Program manual has also been revised to reflect the method of technical training to be used within HL&P.
An office memorandum, dated November 2,1978, documented the pres-entation of a QA indoctrination seminar which was attended by personnel from the Power Plant Engineering & Construction Depart-ment, the Quality Assurance Department, and the Engineering De-partment, Civil Division.
This matter is considered resolved.
-2-
.
(Closed) Deviation (50-466/78-02-D):
Failure to Provide Approved Procedures.
The IE inspector observed that procedures utilized for design document review, approval and release contained in the Civil Division Procedures manual have been approved and. issued for use.
Procedure PP-152, " Design Review," (replaces procedure PP-5.0) was observed to include the Document Review Sheet as At-tachment 152-3. Appropriate action including monitoring of project activities by QA has been taken to preclude recurrence.
This matter is considered resolved.
(Closed) Deviation (50-466/78-02-E):
Failure to Provide Procedures.
The IE inspector observed that procedure NDP-90, " Procedure for the Maintenance and Use of Design Review Worksheets," Rev. O has been developed and issued by the Nuclear Division.
The IE inspector was informed that the Systems Engireering Division (SED) is no longer responsible for items requiring the use of design review worksheets, therefore a procedure prescribing their use by SED is not required.
Appropriate action including increased monitoring of project activi-ties by QA has been taken to preclude recurrence.
This matter is considered resolved.
3.
Review of Ebasco Site Proceudres The IE inspector reviewed Ebasco site procedures which have been approved and issued to ascertain whether their development was consistent with PSAR requirements and the status of the project.
The following Administrative Site Procedures (ASPS) were reviewed:
ASP-1, " Preparation of Site Procedures," Rev.1 ASP-2, " Organization and Responsibility," Rev. O ASP-3, " Purchasing," Rev. O ASP-4, " Field Construction Contracts," Rev. O ASP-5, " Material Control," Rev. O ASP-6, " Document Control," Rev. O ASP-7, " Safety Program Implementation," Rev. O ASP-ll, " Qualification of Bidders," P,ev. O No deviations were identified.
-3-
'
.
.
~
4.
QA Records Management System The IE inspector reviewed the Houston Lighting & Power Company QA records management system (RMS) for the Allens Creek project.
A computerized modular RMS is being developed with assistance from a consultant and will be implemented in approximately three months.
Procedures have been developed and programs written for ten of some twenty-four planned modules.
Pending implementation of the computerized modular RMS, QA records are being maintained in accordance with the following Records Man-agement System Procedures (RMSPs):
RMSP-1-1, " General Flow of Nuclear Correspondence Within the Records Management Center," Rev.0 RMSP-2-1, " Document Logging," Rev. O RMSP-2-2, " Log Maintenance," Rev. O Ri1SP-2-3, " Document Distribution," Rev. 0 RMSP-2-4, " Storage and Maintenance of Nuclear Records," Rev. O RMSP-2-5, " Document Checkout Procedure," Rev. O RMSP-2-6, " Correspondence Serial Number Assignment," Rev. O RMSP-2-7, " Correspondence Serial Number Corrections," Rev. 0 RMSP-2-8, " Subject File Number Assignment," Rev. O During review of the Pf1SPs, the IE inspector observed that they failed to address the requirements contained in the Allens Creek Project Quality Assurance Plan (ACPQAP) in paragraph 3 of Section 7.4.2, which states that these procedures will include the method to verify that the records received are in agreement with the transmittal document and are in good condition. This finding was confirmed during discussions with a cognizant applicant repre-sentative.
The IE inspector informed the applicant that failure to include the above requirements in the RMSPs constitutes a deviation from commit-ments contained in Section 17.1.5A of the PSAR and Section 7.4.2 of the ACPQAP.
-4-
-
,.
.
5.
Exit Interview
-
The IE inspector met with applicant representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on November 17, 1978.
The IE inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and the findings.
An applicant representative ac-knowleged the inspector's findings concerning the deviation (pararaph 4).
-
-5-