IR 05000498/1980020
| ML19337A765 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 08/12/1980 |
| From: | Crossman W, Randy Hall, Tomlinson D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19337A761 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-498-80-20, 50-499-80-20, NUDOCS 8009300102 | |
| Download: ML19337A765 (3) | |
Text
-
.
g U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION IV
Report No. 50-498/80-20; 50-499/80-20 Docket No. 50-498; 50-499 Category A2 Licansee:
Houston Lighting & Power Company Post Office Box 1700 Houston, Texas 77001 Facility Name:
South Texas Project, Units 1 & 2 Inspection at:
South Texas Project, Matagorda County, Texas Inspection Conducted: July 28-29, 1980 Inspector:
f////rD
. P. Tomlinson, Reactor Inspector, Engineering Support
'Date
,
Section Approved:
_;----
W. A. Crossman, Chief, Projects Section
' Date
R. E. Hall, Chief, Engineering Support Section
'Date Inspection Sucmary Inspection on July 28-29, 1980 (Report No. 50-498/80-20; 50-499/80-20)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of construction activities pertaining to the issuance and disposition of Noncomformance Reports (NCRs).
The inspection involved eight inspector-hours by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
800930010 4
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Employees R. A. Frazar, Site, QA Manager
- L. D. Wilson, Project QA Supervisor, NDE/ Mechanical
- T. J. Jordan, Quality Systems Supervisor
The IE inspector also contacted other licensee and contractor employees including members of the QA/QC and engineering staffs.
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
2.
Review of Previously Issued and Dispositioned NCRs The IE inspector selected NCRs No. S-M1354-A, S-M1355-A, S-M1356-A, and S-M1357-A for review.
All four were issued against activities that occurred in the B&R fabrication shop and all four involved structural supports for the steam generators.
The four NCRs, all written during November 1979, were complete, legible and appeared to have been properly dispositioned.
NCR No. S-M1357-A, however, was examined more thoroughiy than the others as it was one of the items mentioned in RIV Investigation Report No. 50-498/80-14; 50-499/80-14.
The NCR states that the B&R QA surveillance inspector assigned to the fabrication shop was not notified by subcontractor construction personnel of a mandatory " Hold Point." QAP 5.5, 4.2.2 requires subcontractors to
,
notify B&R QA when approaching a " Hold Point," and to proceed no further
'
without B&R QA being present.
The only exception to this is that QA may waive the " Hold Point" in writing.
The QA inspector, notified of a " Hold Point" that had been passed, performed the parts of the inspection that could be accomplished after-the-fact and signed off the " Hold Point."
,
He did this partial inspection on November 11, 1979, but recorded it as
'
being done on November 10, 1979.
The QA inspector informed his supervisor of these facts on November 12, 1979, and NCR No. S-M1357-A was generated shortly thereafter. All B&R QA inspectors were reinstructed in the require-
ments of the " Hold Point" on the Fabrication Check List (FCL).
Construction personnel employed by subcontractors were also reinstructed in the importance of " Hold Points," " Notification Points, and " Hold Tags."
)
Investigation Report No. 50-498/80-14; 50-499/80-14 contains an allegation of record falsification and cites this FCL and " Hold Point" as an example.
This allegation was substantiated in the NRC investigation report and was
.
-.. - - -
.
.
.
o..
admitted to by the B&R QA inspector. No citation was issued, since the NCR was issued promptly following the violation becoming known to the supervisor and well before the IE investigation.
The allegation of falsificati7n was not presented to the NRC until May 1980. Prior to the beginning of the investigation, all corrective action had been accomplished and the cognizant QA inspector was moved to another position within the QA organization which involves no accept / reject responsiblity.
No additional items of noncompliance or deviations were noted.
3.
Exit Interview The IE inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in para-
-
graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on July 29, 1980.
The IE inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
.
9