IR 05000546/1980001
| ML19294B776 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Marble Hill |
| Issue date: | 01/22/1980 |
| From: | Schweibinz E, Williams C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19294B775 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-546-80-01, 50-546-80-1, 50-547-80-01, 50-547-80-1, NUDOCS 8003050640 | |
| Download: ML19294B776 (8) | |
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0t!!!ISSION
.
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEt1ENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-546/80-01; 50-547/80-01 Docket No. 50-546; 50-547 License No. CPPR-170; CPPR-171 Licensee:
Public Service of Indiana 1000 East t!ain Street Plainfield, IN 46168 Facility Name:
flarble Ifill Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At:
Flarble Hill Site, Jefferson County, Indiana Inspection Conducted: January 2-4, 1980 b
'
Inspector:
E. R. Schweibinz
!
b Y~
Approved By:
C. C. Wifliams, Chief
/
z A - 2.-C Projects Section 2 Inspection Summary Inspection on January 2-4, 1980 (Report No. 50-546/80-01; 50-547/80-01)
Areas inspected: Surveillance of the site to verify that activities in progress complied with the order confirming suspension of construction of safety-related areas dated August 15, 1979; and followup on previously identified items.
This inspection involved a total of 24 inspector hours on site by one inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8003050 e/ UO pi
.
.
DETAILS Persons Contacted Public Service of Indian) (PSI) and Management Analysis Company (MAC)
S. W. Shields, Vice President - Electric System L. A. Crews, Vice President Construction F. R. Ilodges, Supt. of Procurcment, Quality Engineering S. K. Farlow, Construction Engineer
- R. E. Turner, QA Manager (MAC)
- C. E. Chmielewski, Supt. of Quality Systems
- R. L. Iland, QA Electrical Supt. (MAC)
J. Bott, Licensing Manager The inspector also contacted and interviewed other licensee and contractor personnel, including craftsmen, QA/QC, technical and. engineering staff members.
ADenotes those attending exit meeting.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) unresolved item (546/79-28-01; 547/79-28-01):
Item of Concern Raised by the Subcommittee on Environment, Energy and Natural Resources.
During the hearing by the above subcommittee on November 27, 1979, Congressman Moffett introduced into the record the Marble 11111 Project Monthly Quality Assurance Progress Report for May, 1977, dated June 16, 1977.
(A copy is attached to this report as Exhibit 1).
This report stated in part, " PSI has not yet issued a Purchase Order or Letter of Intent to Newberg Marble Ilill. Although all work has been accomplished under the same conditions that would be expected had the issuance been accomplished, undue criticism may be expected. The potential for a possible Citation from the NRC, if discovered during an audit, is greatly compounded because Newberg has continued the practice and has not issued Purchase Orders to their sub-contractors.
In any case, all work both technical and quality, has been controlled and could be substantiated if required."
The RIII inspector contacted and interviewed Mr. F. R. Ilodges, PSI's QA Manager and the author of the above report (Exhibit 1); Mr. R. Peterson, who was the PSI Site QA Construction Supervisor; and Mr. J. Cof fman, who then worked for Mr. Peterson.
The results of these interviews are as follows:
1.
Field Corrective Action Request (FCAR) No. 16 dated April 1, 1977 (a copy is attached to this report as Exhibit 2) states:
" DESCRIPTION OF DISCREPANCY:
Safety related activities are-2-
.
.
currently being performed by organizations acting as subcon-
.
tractors to Newberg Marble Hill for which no subcontracts, purchase orders or letters of intent have been issued in accordance with QAPN-7, Rev.
1.
Activities being performed at this time are QA Program, QA Procedure and Work Procedure Preparation and Revision." The response to this discrepancy was made on April 7, 1977 (on the same form i.e. FCAR No. 16)
and states:
" CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE TAKEN: Newberg-Marble Hill and its' subcontractors are not violating any provisions of Specification Y-2722 or Procedure QAPN-7 by preparing QA plans and procedures. All activities being performed at this time are in strict accordance with Specification Y-2722, since these plans and procedures must be submitted within six weeks of award of Purchase Order to Newberg-Marble Hill."
2.
A PSI letter to Newberg-Marble Hill, in response to FCAR No. 16 dated April 13, 1977 (a copy is attached to this report as Ex-hibit 3) states:
"Please be advised that your response of April 7, 1977 to the above referenced FCAR is acceptable.
I would like to take this opportunity to restate our concern that no safety-related work beyond that called out in FCAR #16 can be performed by your subcontractors without a formal con-tractual agreement stating the appropriate QA a'irements bet-ween yourselves and your subcontractors.
Your atinued atten-tion to this matter is necessary.
Should you have any questions, don't hesitate to call."
3.
The underlying intent of the June 16, 1977 memo appears to have been one of motivating the issuance of purchase orders by PSI to Newberg-Marble Hill. The licensee was requested to document the ibove information in the form of a letter to RIII.
It was fur-ther requested that each of the three individuals interviewed indicate their concurrence by signing the letter to RIII. This letter, dated January 7, 1980 is attached to this report as Exhibit 4.
This item is closed.
(0 pen) Noncompliance (546/79-18-03; 547/79-18-03):
Some nonconformance reports had not received the proper design organization evaluation.
During this inspection, the licensee requested an additional 3 weeks for the date when full compliance will be a hieved. The new date was January 23, 1980, but per a telephone conversation between the licensee and the RIII inspector on January 22, 1980, the date is February 8, 1980.
(0 pen) Noncompliance (546/79-02-02):
Failure to have special storage instructions for safety-related pumps and motors.
An insulation resis-tance check was made on the residual heat removal purp motors, identified-3-
.
as being improperly stored in inspection report No. 546/79-02.
This check was made to determine if there had been excessive moisture absorption in the windings of each motor. The results of these checks indicated that excessive moisture absorption did not occur. This item remains open pending review of the licensee's procedures for storage of safety-related equipment.
Functional or Program Areas Inspected Construction Activities Surveillance of construction activities at the site indicated that all Category 1 (i.e., safety related work) had been terminated except for the protection of installed or in place components. Work is being performed in non-safety related areas of the plant.
Exit Meeting The inspector met with site staff representatives (denoted in the Persons Contacted paragraph) at the conclusion of the inspection on January 4, 1980. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
-4-
I 'l.
' -
O Qpl7770004
,
,
- * g
/ccationj CENERAL HEADQUARIERS are: JUNE 16, 1977 MAR 3LE HILL PROJECT d -0E~O)
Wf
"ig sub/ect: MONTHLY QUALITY ASSUPWiCE v
anotANA PROGRESS REPORI 70R MAY 1977 r-
/
O s
attention: H. A. BARKER V. R. REEISTROM J. COUGHLIN W. E. GEORGE g
S. W. SHIELDS R. W. RINK
-
t f f, I.
ITEMS FOR MANAGEMENT AITENTION
- PSI has not yet issued a Purchase Order or Letter of Intent to Newberg Marble Hill.
Although all work has been acce=plished under the sa=e conditions that would be expected had the issuance been acco=plished, undue criticis= =ay be expected.
The potential for a possible Citation frc= the NRCr Lf discovered during an audit, is greatly co= pounded because Fevberg has con-inued the practiet and has not issued Purchase Orders to their sub-contractors.
In any case, all work both technical and quality, has been controlled and could be substantiated if required.
The Nuclear Project Design Group is aware of the condition.
- S&L prepared procurement specifications continue to. Indicate a high degree of non-unifor=1ty in requests for vendor sub=itted documents; i.e. operations and =aintenance =anuals, test results, etc.
This presents a proble: at receipt inspection *ue to the inability of inspection personnel to determine exactly what records constitute acceptance of the physical product and exactly who has the records; i.e. the vendor, PSI CHQ personnel or S&L personnel.
The problem, although si=ple on the surface, has a tre=endous potential to i= pact the construction schedule because =aterial cannot be turned over to the contractors for storage and installation without the required records.
The Nuclear Project Design Group is aware of the condition.
II.
SLM'.ARY OF ACTIVITIES
- Initial discussions with the Environ = ental Section has produced a basic understanding of the duties and responsibilities of the environmental conitoring activities.
Based on the infor=ation, quality assurance techniques are being prepared for the critical aspects requiring control.
- Planning for develop =ent of the proposed Reliability Progra= is centinuing.
Flow charts and critical paths have been prepared.
- Westinghouse has agreed with the PSI position on calibration.
As a result, aestinghouse Tarpa is revising their total calibratice
progrs= and is retro-fitting all acticus necessary to cocply with PSI's request.
PSI considers this as one of the most oositive actions Westinghouse has taken in i= proving their over't cuality assurance
}(fhyfh proSram.
JUN2 0 977 EXHIBIT 1 Page 1 of 2 FJCifM QUJUIY a sfunci
....
-.
Q
'..
MAR 3LE HII.L PhtOJECT-2-JUNE 16, 1977 MONTHLY QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRESS REPORT FOR MAY 1977
,
III. THE ACTIVITIES OF THE INDIVIDUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE GROUPS ARE DETAILED ON THE ATIACHED PAGES
.
Attachment 1 Program Development Group Attachment 2 Design & Procure =ent Group Attach =ent 3 construction Group Attach =ent 4 Audit Group Attach =ent 5 Operations Group QUALITY ASSUPE CE SECTION h'
F. R. Hodges FRH:jb'
AttacF= cots
-
cc:
L. A. Crews W. E. Ward
<
EXHIBIT 1 l
Page 2 of 2
.Y ~L-E
-
(
g
- -
-
- - - - -
3.
..
.
.,
.
.
E CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMDiT hANUAL N* /,p
-
c'.
' *
i i (-
. - - - _
'
FIELD CORRECTIVE ACTION REOUEST
, ~~~ f
%
.
_-
.
%
- "
,
--
-.
-r y
_i
/. */ 7 TCAR 50.:
/d,'
(__,.-k--
< --- T, ACTIVITY: fee.rce i--on10nl 0
<> uv l?r ln b n.1 W 1r** o cs. er
-~ ~~,"
CONTRACIOR: / /p e d e* r e - A f o, d le' $ /t l
~ ~ ~ " *
v
...
.,
T'. 6. NO. :
WPS WO.-
- ',. _. _..5.SCRB550N OF DI5CREPANCT: &yl-.... - -..
..
.. _
,
rerslc)-fpeql <c es$'rs, / W.1 e.
ar i. p.
e,.,.r. n,'/n der %-
$I,ed /v o ~ an: m 4,,,,,
nee c e k,,,.
n d' c!-, /ecie /c., r
/c ' A /e 1. L -,.. A / e,. 1 /- M#
'
L dd.ced - s<,dec, + d'peL'n n4,w
.s. w <C., J -,,-/
,< ~ e L-e.,
, w c, nf,.,.- A-ea
/
w.V/ Q APA/- 7. 5% i De4,,.%
/r hu, oc.d L-d
/
./d:.c
/.m c,.-> N D A A~e,,.-o m OA) NdeeenAa ee <a wf'
' w <,,- 4 L e e < A, - e usv%~ h,.
m,a/ s e a:s:n..
/
'
d /- YY 0,
& }. W
- - -
DATE TBf QC DiGINEER #
CORRECTIVE ACTION TO.BE IAEDI:
&
Z# '
// #>M!('
< h m 'c t*/)it cc'h6 i
/0 tt./]wl,1. < $6 $t H A., up olks " 2 e h ',./)nie cA)pc'h *Att #2n ht$ 4 Y n L.cr a e md,
.,,a# lMet kraw t-r n a,; < <
c' L -
<
.
'
.h/,41/t bst c t d $4 ff211Jos)94l'CEktttt n ys t s.1 fl4< n, ed '!/mi uvi%mdh 7', Mw'-/<WBauhf//
il G 'M L k '~< l a
'l A >/
V
$ w '.. $ < l '
4x:/ 2ia.n
.
DATE CONTRACTOR'S QC REPRESEStai1VY.
ne? /R /~7 77
W 8$~
.'
~
,F$1 QC dig 1NEW CORRECTIVE ACTION VERIFIED BY:(I M "@g//_,j EXHIBIT 2ar,/
b
.
.
7e e' /,./-/w f51 QC ENGINEtR A' gI'/ oV/3 "/7. Tor' T NMH 1904/7'0'11
c
.
n
.
-
--
_..
-
..y
.
.
.
j
,
p.
.
...,
.
.
-
.
.
,
PUBLIC SERVICE INDIANA April 13, 1977 P.O. Box 190 Ncv Vashington, IN 47162 l
n A jc
-
_
i ni
.
,. Q + \\
yt l
j >
- '
\\
l( '
'
1 cwherg -Marble 11111 n
0-
'
P.O. Box 40 G'~
p tg 7 Q q
Ncv Uaohington, Ili 47162 l
ATTD? TION:
Mr. T.L. Rucck l
Dear Tcen:
RE:
Marbic 11111 Nuclear Generating Station Specification Y-2722 Field Corrective Action Request l'16 P1 case be advised that your response of April 7, 1977, to the above reicrenced FCAR is acceptahlc.
.
I would like to take this opportut.ity to restate our concern that no safety-related work beyond that called out in FCAR l'16 can be perf orr.cd by your subcontracters without a formal contractual agrec2cnt stating the appropriate QA requires.cnts between yourselves and your subcontractors.
Your continued attention to this raatter is necessary.
Should you have any questions, don't hesitate to call.
'
Sinccrely,
.
. S kw,
.
R.S. Peterson QA Construction Supervisor cc F.R. Itodges L.A. Crews M.E. Ward
,
R.M. Brown pr g q g'
_h
,
bll u S i r Ll Ju
' -
i J
6w aaul
.
Qv l
\\a U
EXHIBIT 3
,
.
.
l*
r pu.
! r) 9. *1 7_7 n, p
"'
,,, _ \\ 8 : e p3.
'
f v >
- - -
-,.., _., _,, _,
,
,,
_---_L
,
,