ML18017A800
| ML18017A800 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 12/21/1979 |
| From: | Howe P CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18017A799 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8002060373 | |
| Download: ML18017A800 (5) | |
Text
~
~
~
\\
CPKE
~ I Carolina Power & Light Company
- Raleigh, N. C.
27602.
~i,,') g-December 21, 1979 Yir. James P. O'Reilly United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, Northwest Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Dear Hr. O'Reilly:
In reference to your letter of December 5, 1979, referring to RII:
RDB 50-400/79-23, 50-401/79-23, 50-402/79-22, and 50-403/79-22, the attached is Carolina Power
& Light Company's reply to the deficiency identified in Appendix A. It is considered that the corrective and preventive actions taken are satisfactory for resolution of this item.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Yours very truly,
~
~
NZA~e~
- f. Howe Vice President Technical Services NJC/jp cc:
l1r. J.
A. Jones
I,
DEFICIENCY
~
~
Condition Re orted:
As required by Criterion V of $ppendix B to 10 CFR 50 and implemented by PSAR Section 1.8.5.5, activities affecting quality shall be accomplished in accordance with procedures.
1.
CPEL Shearon Harris Procedure AP-IX-02, paragraph 3.5, requires that all documents be received, distributed, and otherwise controlled by the Document Control Section.
Contrary to the above, preliminary drawing 5-SK-119 was observed in the QA unit files without the required document control stamping.
2.
CPhL Shearon Harris procedure AP-IX-06, paragraph 3,2,3, requires Permanent Maivers to be processed and approved prior to star ting work on an item.
Contrary to the above, repairs were accomplished to damaged rebar in the Unit 2 reactor auxiliary building interior wall number 4 prior to obtaining the architect-engineer's approval.
Corrective Ste s Taken and Results Achieved:
'The referenced
- drawing, 5-SK-119, was obtained. from the Vendor for information only, inadvertently bypassing established routes through Site Document Control.
The subject drawing was destroyed and a
stamped controlled copy was obtained from Document Control.
The un-controlled document was never used to control quality or fabricate items.
2.
No changes to AP-IX-06 are considered necessary.
Cognizant personnel are aware of the procedural requirements and the deficiency resulted from an Engineering Decision made on site with verbal concurrence from Ebasco.
The 84 bars bent less than 10 were (after field straightening) approved by Ebasco in a Permanent'(<aiver.
Guidelines as specified'y A.C.I.-318 requiring Design Engineer concurrence prior to straightening a cold bent bar will be adhered, to in the future, regardless of the number or extent of the bending.
A survey has been completed to document any additional bars. bent in other areas of which were documented on Dis-crepancy Report No. DR-'C-552.
Corrective Ste s Taken to Avoid Further Noncompliance:
1.
Site management issued a memorandum (MS-6780) reminding site personnel of the criticality in following established site Document Control procedures in the handling of drawings.
Personnel were directed to process all drawings through document Control in the future and to additionally acquire appropriate
'Document Control stamping for any other drawings or other controlled documents
~
received directly from the Engineer.
-continued-
Corrective Ste s Taken to Avoid Further Noncom liance - continued 2.
All field bending of rebar will be addressed in procedure form and approved by Ebasco.
Test data and control methods are being prepared by the CP&L Site Engineering Discipline Group for incorporation into a procedure to provide instructions to field personnel.
The procedure will,identify'he scope of design allowances and personnel responsibilities.
The other example identified as 400/401/79-23-01 for failure to follow AP-IX-02 will be addressed separately.
Date Nhen Full Com liance Mill be Achieved:
1.
Full compliance is considered to have been achieved with the Site Management directive emphasizing the requirements of Document Distribution and Control.
The situation in concern is considered to be an isolated incident.
2.
January 31, 1980.