ML18033A616
| ML18033A616 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 06/11/1987 |
| From: | Brown W TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML082340470 | List:
|
| References | |
| 40600, 40600-V04-R02, 40600-V4-R2, NUDOCS 8902150464 | |
| Download: ML18033A616 (65) | |
Text
EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROG VOLTE 4 MATERIALCONTROL CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY REPORT 40600 QUALITYOF MATERIAL UPDATED Rlc a l S>VC 9 TVA NUCLEAR POWER
e
'I 3
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REPORT TYPE:
Subcategory - Material Control (MC)
REVISION NUMBER:
2 lR2 TITLE:
Quality of Material PAGE 1
OF 27 REASON FOR REVISION:
To incorporate Technical Assistance Staff (TAS) comments To incorporate Senior Review Panel (SRP) comments I Rl JR2 PREPA D BY:
PREPARATION G
TURE Fic 7
DATE PEER:
REVIEWS TAS:
SI NATURE, D
E gg,6';bSs, SIGNATURE CONCURRENCES DATE CEG-SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATU DATE APPROVED BY:
S AGER N/A MANAGER OF NUCLEAR POWER CONCURRENCE (FINAL REPORT ONLY)
DATE
~SRP Secretary's signature denotes SRP concurrences are in files.
2489T
0
- Preface, Glossary, and List of Acronyms for ECTG Subcategory Reports HISTORY OF REVISION REV NUMBER PAGES REVISED REASON FOR CURRENT REVISION To clarify that one or more attachments will help the reader find where a particular concern is evaluated
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUlSER:
40600 FRONT NATTER REV:
3 PAGE i OF viii Preface This subcategory report is one of a series of reports prepared for the Employee Concerns Special Program (ECSP) of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA).
The ECSP and the organization which carried out the program, the Employee Concerns Task Group (ECTG), were established by TVA's Manager of Nuclear Power to evaluate and report on those Office of Nuclear Power (ONP) employee concerns filed before February 1, 1986.
Concerns f'iled after that date are handled by the ongoing ONP Employee Concerns Program (ECP).
The ECSP addressed over 5800 employee concerns.
Each of the concerns was a'ormal, written description of a circumstance or circumstances that an employee thought was unsafe, unjust, inefficient, or inappropriate.
The mission of the Employee Concerns Special Program was to thoroughly investigate all issues presented in the concerns and to report the results of those investigations in a form accessible to ONP employees, the
- NRC, and the general public.
The results of these investigations are communicated by four levels of ECSP reports:
- element, subcategory,
- category, and final.
Element reports, the lowest reporting level, will be published only for those concerns directly affecting the restart of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant's reactor unit 2.
An element consists of one or more closely related issues.
An issue is a potential problem identified by ECTG during the evaluation process as having been raised in one or more concerns.
For efficient handling, what appeared to be similar concerns were grouped into elements early in the program, but issue definitions emerged from the evaluation process itself'.
Consequently, some elements did include only one issue, but often the ECTG evaluation f'ound more than one issue per element.
Subcategory reports summarize the evaluation of a number of elements.
- However, the subcategory report does more than collect element level evaluations.
The subcategory level overview of element findings leads to an integration of'nformation that cannot take place at the element level.
This integration of information reveals the extent to which problems overlap more than one element and will therefore require corrective action for underlying causes not fully apparent at the element level.
To make the subcategory reports easier to understand, three items have been placed at the front of each report:
a preface, a glossary of the terminology unique to ECSP reports, and a list of'cronyms.
Additionally, at the end of each subcategory report will be a Subcategory Summary Table that includes the concern numbers; identifies other subcategories that share a concern; designates nuclear saf'ety-related, safety significant, or non-safety related concerns; designates generic applicability; and briefly states each concern.
Either the Subcategory Summary Table or another attachment or a combinatiop of the two will enable the reader to find the report section or sections in which the issue raised by the concern is evaluated.
TVA ENPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUNBER:
40600 FRONT NATTER REV:
2 PAGE ii OF viii The subcategories are themselves summarized in a series of eight category reports.
Each category report reviews the major findings and collective significance of the subcategory reports in one oi the following areas:
management and personnel rel'ations industrial safety construction material control operations quality assurance/quality control welding
~
engineering A separate report on employee concerns dealing with specific contentions of intimidation, harassment, and wrongdoing will be released by the TVA Office of the Inspector General.
Just as the subcategory reports integrate the information collected at the element level, the category reports integrate the information assembled in all the subcategory reports within the category, addressing particularly the underlying causes of those problems that run across more than one subcategory.
A final report will integrate and assess the information collected by all of the lower level reports prepared for the
- ECSP, including the Inspector General's report..
For more detail on the methods by which ECTG employee concerns were evaluated and reported, consult the Tennessee Valley Authority Employee Concerns Task Group Program Nanual.
The Manual spells out the program's objectives,
- scope, organization, and responsibilities.
It also specifies the procedures that were followed in the investigation, reporting, and closeout of the issues raised by employee concerns'
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 FRONT MATTER REV:
2 PAGE iii OF viii ECSP GLOSSARY OF REPORT TERMS~
classification of'valuated issues the evaluation of an issue leads to one of the following determinations:
Class A:
Issue cannot be verified as factual Class B:
Issue is factually accurate, but what is described is not a
problem (i.e., not a condition requiring corrective-action)
Class C:
Issue is factual and identifies a problem, but corrective action for the problem was initiated before the evaluation of'he issue was undertaken Class D:
Issue is factual and presents a problem for which corrective action has
- been, or is being, taken as a result of an evaluation
, Class E:
h problem, requiring, corrective action, which was not identified by an employee
- concern, but was revealed during the ECTG evaluation of an issue raised by an employee
- concern, collective si nificance an analysis which determines the importance and consequences of'he findings in a particular ECSP report by putting those findings in the proper perspective, concern (eee "employee concern")
corrective action steps taken to fix specific deficiencies or discrepancies revealed by a negative finding and, when necessary, to correct causes in order to prevent recurrence.
criterion lural:
criteria a basis for defining a performance,
- behavior, or quality which ONP imposes on itself (see also "requirement").
element or element re ort an optional level of ECSP report, below the subcategory level, that deals with one or more issues.
em lo ee concern a formal, written description of a circumstance or circumstances that an employee thinks unsafe, unjust, inefficient or inappropriate; usually documented on a K-form or a form equivalent to the K-form.
TVh EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIhL PROGRhN REPORT NUMBER:
40600 FRONT lDLTTER REV:
2 PhGE iv OF viii 0
grouping of employee concerns.
~finikin s includes both statements of fact and the judnments made about those facts during the evaluation process; negative findings require corrective action.
issue a potential problem, as interpreted by the ECTG during the evaluation
- process, raised in one or more concerns.
K fo-rm (see "employee concern")
evaluation judgment or decision may be based.
root cause the underlying reason ior a problem.
<<Terms essential to the program but which require detailed definition have been defined in the ECTG Procedure Manual (e.g., generic, specific, nuclear safety-related, unreviewed safety-significant question).
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 FRONT MATTER REV:
2 PAGE v OF viii Acronyms AI AISC ANSI ASME ASTM BFN BLN Administrative Instruction American Institute of Steel. Construction hs Low hs Reasonably Achievable American Nuclear Society American National Standards Institute American Society of Mechanical Engineers American Society, for Testing and Materials American Melding, Society Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Bellefonte Nuclear Plant CAQ CATD CCTS
'EG-H CFR CI CMTR COC DCR DNC Condition Adverse to Quality Corrective Action Report Corrective Action Tracking Document Corporate Commitment Tracking System Category Evaluation Group Head Code of Federal Regulations Concerned Individual Certified Material Test Report Certificate of Conformance/Compliance Design Change Request Division of Nuclear Construction (see also NU CON)
TVh EMPLOYEE CONCERNS
SPECIhL PROGRhM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 FRONT MhTTER REV:
2 PhGE vi OF viii 0,
DNE Division of Nuclear Engineering DNQh Division of Nuclear Quality hssurance DNT Division of Nuclear Training DOE Department of Energy DPO Division Personnel Officer DR Discrepancy Report or Deviation Report ECN Engineering Change Notice ECP Employee Concerns Program ECP-SR Employee Concerns Program-Site Representative ECSP Employee Concerns Special Program ECTG Employee Concerns Task Group EEOC Equal Employment Opportunity Commission EQ Environmental Qualification EMRT Emergency Medical Response Team EN DES Engineering Design ERT Employee
Response
Team or Emergency
Response
Team FCR Field Change Request FShR Final Safety hnalysis Report GET HCI Hvhc INPO IRN Fiscal Year General Employee Training Hazard Control Instruction Heating, Ventilating hir Conditioning Installation Instruction Institute of Nuclear Power Operations Inspection Rejection Notice
TVA EMPLOY'EE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 FRONT MATTER REV:
2 PAGE vii OF viii L/R MhI MI MSPB NCR NDE NPP NPS NRC NSB Labor Relations Staff Modifications and Additions Instruction Maintenance Instruction Merit Systems Protection Board Magnetic Particle Testing Nonconforming Condition Report Nondestructive Examination Nuclear Performance Plan Non-plant Specific or Nuclear Procedures System Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual Nuclear Regulatory Commission'uclear Services Branch NSRS NU CON NUMARC OSHA ONP OWCP PHR PT QAP QC QCI Nuclear Safety Review Staff Division of Nuclear Construction (obsolete abbreviation, see DNC)
Nuclear Utility Management and Resources Committee Occupational Safety and Health Administration (or Act)
Office of Nuclear Power Office of Vorkers Compensation Program Personal History Record Liquid Penetrant Testing Quality Assurance Quality Assurance Procedures Quality Control Quality Control Instruction
TVA ENPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM
, REPORT NUlSER:
40600 FRONT NATTER REV:
2 PAGE viii OF viii QCP QTC RIF RT SQN SI SOP SRP SWEC TAS TLL TVTLC WBECSP WBN Quality Control Procedure
'uality Technology Company Reduction in Force Radiographic Testing Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Surveillance Instruction Standard Operating Procedure Senior Review Panel Stone and Webster Engineering, Corporation Technical Assistance Staff Trades and Labor Tennessee Valley Authority Tennessee Valley Tra'des and Labor Council Ultrasonic Testing Visual Testing Watts Bar Employee Concern Special Program Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Work Request or Work Rules Workplans
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 2
OF 27
-I R2 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
MATERIAL CONTROL CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY REPORT 40600 "QUALITY OF MATERIAL"
SUMMARY
OF THE ISSUES There are ten concerns in this subcategory.
The ten concerns were grouped into three issues to facilitate effective evaluation of similar concerns.
The issues addressed were:
- 1. structural steel of poor quality (i.e., laminated, delaminated, cracked, splitting) had been received for use at WBN; 2. carbon steel pipe of poor quality (i.e.,
lamination cracks, slag pockets, surface slag) had been received for use at MBN and questionable repair practices were used on piping material; and 3. valves were often reused, pitted, and/or remachined.
Two of these issues were determined to be Class C issues and the other was determined to be a Class A issue.
MAJOR FINDINGS 1.
Structural steel shapes that were laminated, delaminated,
- split, and/or cracked had been received for use at VBN.
Procurement document originators (design engineers) were responsible for the selection and specification of adequate quality material (structural steel shapes) and took into account the fact that certain defects were allowable according to the applicable industry standards.
Site procedures were in place which ensured that structural steel material which was received and did not meet contractual requirements was identified and properly dispositioned by NCR(s),
Therefore, this was determined to be a Class C issue.
2.
Carbon steel pipe of poor quality (lamination cracks, slag pockets, questionable repair practices, and surface slag) had been received for use at MBN.
Noninjurious defects (maximum allowable by industry standards) were considered and addressed by the design engineer in the material selection and specification process.
Injurious defects (those that exceeded the maximum allowable standards)
.had been addressed and dispositioned through NCRs.
Linear indications in the Steam"Generator Slowdown System piping had been identified and documented by NCRs;
- however, the piping was subsequently
- replaced, per
Therefore, this was determined to be a Class C
issue.
I I
IR2 I
l
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 3
OF 27 3.
The issue raised was that valves had often been installed at MBN that were "used", pitted, and/or remachined.
Information received from QTC indicated that during 1980-1981 various sizes and quantities of valves had bearing drives which were rusted and were not replaced;
- also, that approximately 2,000 small "used" valves were installed at MBN.
This evaluation failed to reveal any known instances oi valve reuse, pitting, and/or remachining, during the time period of 1980 through 1981.
Therefore, this was determined to be a Class A issue.
- However, in'stances did occur outside the time frame specified by QTC where an indication, a surface defect, and a
crack were identified by NCRs and the valves were remachined or replaced.
COLLECTIVE SIGNIFICANCE OF MAJOR FINDINGS None CAUSES OF THE MAJOR FINDINGS None CORRECTIVE ACTION ON MAJOR FINDINGS None
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 4
OF 27 IR2 TABLE OF CONTENTS MATERIAL CONTROL CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY REPORT 40600 "QUALITY OF MATERIAL "
1.0 CHARACTERIZATION OF ISSUES 1.1 Introduction 1.1.1 Structural Steel 1.1.2 Pipe 1.1.3 Valves 1.2 Description of Issues 1.2.1 Structural Steel 1.2.2 Pipe 1.2.3 Valves 2.0
SUMMARY
10 2.1 Summary of Issues 2.1.1 Class A Issue 2.1.2 Class C Issues 2.2 Summary of Evaluation Process 2.2,1 Contacted QTC for Additional Information 2.2.2 Determined Procurement and Receiving Methods 2.2.3 Determined any Specific Ezamples of Issues 2.3 Summary of Findings 2.3.1 Structural Steel 10 10 10 10 10 2.3.2 Pipe 2,3.3 Valves 2.4 Summary of Collective Significance 12 12
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS
. SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 5
OF 27 2.5 Summary of Causes 2.6 Summary of Corrective Actions Taken 12 12 3.0 EVALUATION PROCESS 3.1 Evaluation Methodology 3.1.1 Structural Steel 12 12 13 3.1.1.1 Obtained Additional Information from QTC 13 3.1,1,2 Determined Procurement Methods 3.1.1.3 Determined Receiving Methods 3.1.1.4 Reviewed NCR Log 3.1.1.5 Conducted Interviews for Information 13 13 13 13 3.1.2 Pipe 13 3.1.2.1 Obtained Additional Information from QTC 14 3.1.2.2 Reviewed NCR Log 3.1.2.3 Conducted Interviews for Information 14 14 3.1.3 Valves 14 3.1.3.1 Obtained Additional Information from QTC 14 3.1.3.2 Determined Procurement Methods 3.1.3.3 Determined Receiving Methods 3.1.3.4 Reviewed NCR Log 3.1.3.5 Conducted Interviews for Information 14 14 14 15 3.2 Requirements of'riteria Established for Individual Issues 15 3.2.1 Structural Steel 15 3.2.1
~ 1 Procur'ement Procedure 3.2.1.2 Receiving Procedure 3.2.2 Pipe 15 15 15
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 6
OF 27 IR2 3.2. 3 Valves 3.2.3.1 Procurement Procedure 3.2.3.2 Receiving Procedure 3.3 Justification of Evaluation Process 15 15 16 16 4.0 FINDINGS 4.1 Structural Steel 4,1.1 Generic 4.1.2 Site-Specific 4.1.2.1 Information from QTC 4,1.2.2 Procurement Methods 4.1.2.3 Receiving Methods 4.1.2.4 Review of NCR Log'.1.2.4.1 NCR 2257 RO 4.1.2.4.2 NCR 5942 RO 4.1.2,5 Interviews 4.1.2.5.1 Laminated 4.1.2.5.2 Splitting 4.1.2.5.3 Cracked
- 4. 1.2. 5. 4 Delaminated 4.1.2.6 Conclusion 4.2 Pipe 4.2.1 Generic 4.2.2 Site-Specific 16 16 16 16 16 17 17 18 18 18 18 18 19 20 20 21 21 21 21
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 7
OF 27 4.2.2.1 Information from QTC 4.2.2.2 Review of NCR Log 4.2.2.3 Interviews 4.2.2.3.1 Lamination Cracks 4.2.2.3.2 Slag Pockets and Questionable Repair Practices 4.2.2.3.3 Surface Slag 4.2.2,4 Conclusion 4.3 Valves 4.3.1 Generic 21 21 22 22 22 23 23 23 23 4.3.2 Site-Specific 4.3.2.1 Information from QTC 4.3.2.2 Procurement Methods 4.3.2.3 Receiving Methods 4.3.2.4 Review of NCR Log 4.3.2.4.1 NCR 2068 RO 4.3.2.4.2 NCR 2932 RO 24 24 24 24 25 25 25 4.3.2.4.3 NCR 3370 R
4.3.2.5 Interviews 4.3.2.6 Conclusion 25 25 26 5.0 COLLECTIVE SIGNIFICANCE 5.1 Management Effectiveness 5.2 Employee Effectiveness 5.3 Technical Adequacy 26 26 26 26 6.0 CAUSES 26
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAN REPORT NUNBER:
40600 REVISION NUNBER:
2 PAGE 8
OF 27
)R2 7.0 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS 7.1 Corrective Actions Already Taken or Planned 7.2 Corrective Actions Required as Result oi Evaluation 26 26 27 8.0 ATTACHMENTS 27 Attachment A - List oi Concerns by Concern Number Indicating Safety Relationship and Generic Applicability:
4 pages Attachment B - List of Concerns by Issue:
1 page Attachment C - QTC response (IN-85-282-001):
1 page Attachment D - QTC response (IN-85-460-001):
2 pages Attachment E - QTC response (IN-85-650-001):
1 page Attachment F - QTC response (IN-85-684-001):
4 pages Attachment G - QTC response (IN-85-754-001):
4 pages Attachment H - QTC response (IN-85-368-001):
1 page Attachment I - QTC response (IN-85-454-002):
2 pages
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 9
OP 27 IR2 1.0 CHARACTERIZATION OF ISSUES 1.1 Introduction There were 10 concerns, all dealing with WBN, in the Subcategory, Quality of Material.
To aid in 'the evaluation effort the concerns were grouped into three major issues as follows:
1.1.1 Structural Steel IN-85-282-001 IN-85-460-001 IN-85-650-001 IN-85-684-001 IN-85-754-001 IN-86-122-001 1.1.2
~Pi e
IN-85-368-001 IN-85-454-002 PH-85-035-006 1,1.3 Valves PH-85-003-024 1.2 Descri tion of Issues 1.2.1 Structural Steel Structural Steel shapes of poor quality (laminated, delaminated,
- cracked, and splitting) have been received for use at VBN.
1.2.2
~Pi e
Carbon steel pipe of poor quality (lamination cracks, slag
- pockets, and surface slag) has been received for use at WBN and questionable repair practices were used on piping material.
1.2.3 Valves Valves were often reused,
- pitted, and/or remachined,
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 10 OF 27 2.0 SUMMARy 2.1 Summer of Issues The basic perceived problems expressed by the CIs and contained within this report were:
laminations, delaminations, splits and cracks in structural steel shapes.
lamination cracks, surface
- slag, slag pockets in pipe, and questionable repair practices of pipe.
- reused, pitted, and/or remachined valves.
There were 10 concerns, grouped into three issues, discussed in this subcategory
- report, two of which have been determined to be Class C
issues and one determined to be a Class A issue.
2.1.1 Class A Issue This evaluation failed to reveal any wholesale quantities of valve reuse, pitting, or remachining, a's related by the concern.
2.1.2 Class C Issues It was determined through this evaluation that both poor quality structural steel and piping material was received at WBN.
However, this material was identified and nonconformed as required by site procedures and did not present a
2.2 Summar of Evaluation Process The concerns associated with this subcategory report were evaluated in accordance with the Material Control Category Evaluation Plan.
The issues were evaluated independently.
Therefore, the evaluation methodology utilized varied according to the nature of each issue.
In general, the evaluation methodology consisted of the following:
2.2.1 Contacted TC for Additional Information Contacted QTC for any additional information to assist in identifying specific items related to these concerns.
TVd EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIJLL PROGRhN REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 (R2 PAGE 11 OF 27 2.2.2 Determined Procurement and Receivin Methods Determined through reviews oi DNE and DNC procedures in conjunction with applicable industry standards and interviews
. with cognizant engineering and warehouse personnel the methods employed to ensure that materials oi adequate quality were procured ior and received at MBN.
2.2,3 Determined an S ecific Exam les of Issues Determined though review of the NCR Log and interviews with cognizant individuals, if specific examples of poor quality material exist or existed.
2,3 Summar of Findin s
Of the three issues raised by the various employee concerns contained in this subcategory, two were determined to be Class C
- issues, (in which NCRs had been initiated to identify the discrepancies prior to this evaluation).
The following is a summary of all the findings and conclusions for each of the three issues contained within this subcategory report.
2.3.1 Structural Steel The issue raised by the six concerns in this group was that structural steel shapes that were laminated, delaminated, split, and/or cracked had been received for use at VBN.
Procurement document originators (design engineers) were responsible for the selection and specification of adequate quality material (structural steel shapes) and took into account the fact that certain defects were allowable according to the applicable industry standards.
Site procedures were in place which ensured that structural steel material which was received and did not meet contractual requirements was identified and properly dispositioned by NCR(s).
Therefore, this issue was determined to be a Class C
issue.
2.3.2
~Pi e
The issue raised by the three concerns in this group was that carbon steel pipe of poor quality (lamination cracks, slag
- pockets, questionable repair practices, and 'surface slag) had been received for use at MBN.
Noninjurious defects (maximum allowable by industry standards>
were considered and addressed by the design engineer in the material selection and specification process.
Injurious defects (those that
TVA ENPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAN REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 12 OF 27 exceeded the maximum allowable standards) had been addressed and dispositioned through NCRs.
This evaluation revealed that linear indications in the Steam Generator Blowdown System piping had been identified by an NCR and dispositioned through an ECN requiring a total piping changeout.
Therefore, this issue was determined to be a Class C issue.
2.3.3 Valves The issue raised by this concern was that valves had often been installed at MBN that were "used", pitted, and/or remachined.
Information received from QTC indicated that during 1980-1981 various sizes and quantities of valves had bearing drives which were rusted and were not replaced;
- also, that approximately 2,000 small "used" valves were installed at MBN.
Interviews with many cognizant individuals failed to reveal any known instances of valve reuse, pitting, and/or remachining, during the time period of 1980 through 1981.
Therefore, this issue was determined to be a Class A issue.
- However, instances did occur outside the time frame specified by QTC where an indication, a surface defect.
and a crack were identified by NCRs and the valves were remachined or
- replaced, 2.4 Summar of Collective Si nificance None 2.5 Summer of Causes None 2.6 Summar of Corrective Actions Taken None 3.0 EVALUATION PROCESS 3.1 Evaluation Nethodolo The various issues raised by the employee concerns within this subcategory were evaluated according to the Naterial Control Category Evaluation Plan.
The following is a summary of the specific evaluation methodology utilized in the evaluation of the issues contained within this subcategory.
0
TVh EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIhL PROGRhà REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 13 OF 27 IR2 3.1.1 Structural Steel This issue was evaluated utilizing the following methodology:
3,1.1.1 Obtained Additional Information from TC Contacted QTC for any additional information to assist in identifying specific items related to these concerns.
3.1.1.2 Determined Procurement Methods Determined through interviews and reviews of industry standards and DNE procedures the methods employed to ensure that structural steel shapes of adequate quality were procured for use at MBN.
3.1.1.3 Determined Receivin Methods Determined through interviews and reviews of DNC procedures the methods employed to ensure that structural steel shapes of adequate quality were received at WBN.
3.1.1.4 Reviewed NCR Lo Reviewed NCR Log to determine if specific examples of laminated, delaminated,
- cracked, and/or splitting structural steel shapes were documented.
3.1.1.5 Conducted Interviews for Information Conducted interviews with various cognizant individuals to determine if specific examples of laminated, delaminated,
- cracked, and/or splitting structural steel shapes exist or existed, 3.1.2
~Pi e
Thi s issue was evaluated utilizing the' ollowing methodology:
TVA EMPLOYEE,CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 14 OF 27 3.1.2.1 Obtained Additional Information from TC Contacted QTC for any additional information to assist in identifying specific items related to these concerns.
3.1.2.2 Reviewed NCR Lo Reviewed
'NCR log to determine if specific examples of lamination cracks, slag pockets, questionable repair practices and surface slag in pipe were documented.
3.1.2.3 Conducted Interviews for Information Conducted interviews with various cognizant individuals to determine if specific examples of'amination
- cracks, slag pockets, questionable repair practices and surface slag in pipe exist or existed.
3.1.3 Valves
'Xhis issue was evaluated utilizing the following methodology:
3.1.3.1 Obtained Additional Information from TC Contacted QTC for any additional information to assist in identifying specific items related to this concern.
3.1.3.2 Determined Procurement Methods Determined through interviews and reviews of industry standards and DNE procedures the methods employed to ensure that valves of adequate quality were procured for use at
- WBN, 3.1.3.3 Determined Receivin Methods Determined through interviews and reviews'of DNC procedures the methods employed to ensure that valves of adequate quality were received at MBN.
3.1.3.4 Reviewed NCR Lo Reviewed NCR log to determine if specific examples of valve reuse, pitting, and/or remachining were documented.
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER; 40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 15 OF 27
)R2 3.1.3.5 Conducted Interviews for Information Conducted interviews with various cognizant individuals to determine if specific examples of valve reuse, pitting, and/or remachining exist or existed.
3.2 Re uirement of Criteria Established for Individual Issues 3.2.1 Structural Steel 3.2.1.1 Procurement Procedure Engineering Design Engineering Procedure, EN DES-EP 5.01, "PURCHASE REQUISITIONS-EVALUATION OF BIDS AND RECOMMENDATION/REJECTION OF CONTRACT AWARD-REVISIONS TO CONTRACTS", Revisions 9, dated August 8, 1979, and 14, dated July 14, 1983, through 16, dated November 27, 1984.
3.2.1.2 Receivin Procedure WBN Quality Control Procedures, WBNP-QCP 1.6, "RECEIPTv INSPECTIONv STORAGEv WITHDRAWALv AND TRANSFER'F PERMANENT MATERIAL", Revision 8, dated December 6, 1978, QCP-1.06, "RECEIPT INSPECTION OF SAFETY-RELATED ITEMS", Revision 15, dated January 20,
- 1984, and WBNP-QCP-1,06, "RECEIPT INSPECTION OF SAFETY-RELATED ITEMS", Revision 16, dated May 10, 1984.
3.2.2
~Pi e
None 3.2.3 Valves 3.2.3.1 Procurement Procedure Engineering Design Engineering Procedure, EN DES-EP 5.01, "PURCHASE REQUISITIONS-EVALUATION OF BIDS AND RECOMMENDATION/REJECTION OF CONTRACT AWARD-REVISIONS TO CONTRACTS", Revisions 9 dated August 8, 1979, through 11, dated March 17, 1981.
TVA ENPLOTEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUNBER:
40600 REVISION NUlBER:
2 PAGE 16 OF 27 3.2.3.2 Receivin Procedure MBN Quality Control Procedure, WBNP-QCP 1.6, "RECEIPT, INSPECTION,
- STORAGE, MITHDRAMAL, AND TRANSFER OF PERNANENT MATERIAL", Revision 8, dated December 6,
1978,.
Note:
MBN Quality Control Procedures MBNP-QCP-1.6, QCP-1.06, and MBNP-QCP-1.06 are different designations of the procedure governing the receipt of construction material at MBN and are hereinafter referred to as MBN-QCP-1.06.
3.3 Justification of Evaluation Process The evaluation process was designed to determine to the extent possible the circumstances surrounding the issues raised by the employee concerns contained within this subcategory and to determine the minimum requirements and procedural controls in place to ensure that material of adequate quality was procured and received f'r use at WBN.
Interviews with cognizant individuals and reviews of corrective action logs were used to ascertain the factuality of the events related by the concerns.
- 4. 0 FINDINGS 4.1 Structural Steel 4.1.1 Generic Not applicable 4.1.2.1 Information from TC The information supplied by QTC relative to the concerns in this element -is summarized as follows:
Re:
IN-85-282-001 Re:
IN-85-460-001 Re:
IN-85-650-001 Re:
IN-85-684-001 Re:
IN-85-754-001 Re:
IN-86-122-001 See Attachment C
See Attachment D
See Attachment E
See Attachment F
See Attachment G
This concern was not added to this subcategory. until April 15, 1986; consequently, no information was supplied by QTC.
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 17 OF 27 IR2 Evaluation of this information in conjunction with that contained in the concerns revealed time frames for the concerns as follows:
Concern Number Time Frame IN-85-282-001 IN-85-460-001 IN-85-650-001 IN-85-684-001 IN-85-754-001 IN-86-122-001 February 1985 February 1985 January-February 1985 March-September 1984 March 1985 April 1980 4.1,2,2 Procurement Methods The quality of structural steel shapes procured for use at WBN was dictated by the specifications contained in procurement documents.
The preparation of these documents during April 1980 and March 1984 through February
- 1985, was governed by EN DES-EP 5.01, R9 and R14 - R16, respectively.
Knowledgeable engineers in DNE'stated that the selection and specifications of adequate quality material (structural steel shapes) was the responsibility of the procurement document originator (design engineer).
This selection and specification process took into account the fact that certain defects were allowed by the industry standards.
These allowable defects include surface indentations, cracks and material laminations, resulting from inclusions, inherent in the manufacturing (rolling) process.
Possible defects other than those allowable were not considered in the selection and specifications process.
The responsibility of the procurement document originator (design engineer) for the technical adequacy and accuracy of the procurement document was not clearly defined in EN DES-EP 5.01, R9; however, this definition was clearly evident in EN DES-EP 5.01, R14 through R16.
4.1.2.3 Receivin Methods Material (structural steel shapes) for use at WBN was received during, the specified time frames in accordance with MBN-gCP 1.06, R8 and R15 through R16.
This procedure required the receiving
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUNBER:
2 PAGE 18 OF 27 individual(s) to ensure that the contract requirements for the material were met.
Measures were provided for segregation and disposition of material not meeting contractural requirements.
Interviews revealed this to be the actual practice of individuals involved in the receiving process.
4.1.2.4 Review of NCR Lo Review of the NCR log during the specified time frames f'r documented examples of structural steel shapes of poor quality (laminated, delaminated, cracked or splitting) revealed the following:
structural steel
- beam, Mide Flange (MF) 33z240, located on the steam generator lower supports.
This work was properly dispositioned on NCR'2257 RO.
Meld repairs were performed and the beam was then determined to be acceptable for use.
4.1.2.4.2 NCR 5942 RO Defective (laminated) structural steel
- beam, Mide Flange (MF) 6x20, found.
This beam was properly dispositioned on NCR 5942 RO.
The subject beam was destroyed and the remaining MF 6x20 beams received on that contract were deemed
- acceptable based on the results of an Ultrasonic Ezamination performed on a
representative sample (approzimately 585 of 4320 lineal feet) of the lot.
4.1.2.5 Interviews Interviews with various cognizant individuals revealed the following information concerning the ezistence of lsminated, delaminated, cracked and/or splitting structural steel shapes'.1.2.5.1 Laminated The laminated structural steel beam (MF 6X20, Heat No. 61403) specified in NCR 5942 RO was the subject of concerns
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 19 OF 27 (R2 IN-85-282-OOI nnd IN-85-460-001.
An adequate discussion of this beam's disposition (see section 4.1.2.4.2) is contained in a report prepared by MBN-Project Manager's Office (PMO) for concern IN-85-460-001 and included herein as Attachment D.
Note:
This subcategory addressed only the portion of concern IN-85-460-001 that states, "POOR QUALITY 6" OR 8" BEAM STRUCTURAL STEEL FROM JAPAN THAT IS LAMINATED." The remnining portions of this concern were addressed in Material Control Subcategory MC-40300, "Installation",
4.1.2.5.2 S~littin In late February
- 1985, a section of large square tube steel was found to have a
split in the longitudin~l i< nm, when it was returned to the hanger fabrication shop from the sandblasting area.
The craftsmen surmised that Lhe split had developed because of Lhe cold weather
(-10'F to -15'F) the previous night.
Upon inspection of the subject tube
- steel, the foreman concluded that the longitudinal seam weld had not been properly fused during manufacture.
The foreman and craftsmen involved stated they had seen many pieces of steel in their careers and this was the only split fusion weld they had ever seen.
They stated the incident was reported to.the hanger engineers but did not know if any documentation (NCR, etc.) ezists.
The subject tube steel beam was cut up and destroyed by them.
An inspection, by the craftsmen and foreman, of the other material in the hanger shop storage area revealed none similarly damaged.
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 20 OF 27 Engineering personnel had no clear recollection of this incident and no documentation relating to it was found.
Based upon the preceding information, this is believed to be an isolated incident that nothing short of a 100 percent Ultrasonic or Radiographic Examination process would have detected.
4.1.2.5.3 Cracked Hanger Engineering Unit and Craft personnel interviewed had no knowledge of instances of cracked 3"x3"xl/4" tube
- steel, during the time frame of concern number IN-85-684-001 (summer of 1984).
Only two instances of problems relating to this size tube steel were discovered and these were documented on NCR 3821 RO (December 2, 1981) and NCR 6757 (March 26, 1986),
both of which were outside the specified. time frame.
This information is consistent with that contained in the NSRS Investigation Report IN-85-250-WBN, prepared on this concern.
0 Another instance of a cracked structural steel shape (MF 33x240 beam>
The proper disposition of this NCR (see section 4.1.2.4.1) is adequately addressed by NSRS Investigation Report I-85-481-WBN, prepared for concern IN-86-122-001.
4.1.2.5.4 Delaminated Interviews conducted with Hanger Engineering Unit and receiving personnel revealed no known instances of delaminated metal plate or tube steel during March
- 1985, as stated in concern number IN-85-754-001.
This information is consistent with that contained in NSRS Investigation Report 1-85-593-MBN, prepared on this concern.
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 21 OF 27 IR2 4.1.2.6 Conclusion The manufacturing processes utilized in the production of structural steel shapes introduce certain material defects that are manifested on the surface as indentations and/or linear indications and internally as inclusions and/or laminations.
Industry standards have been established to minimize these defects via examination and/or repair.
Noninjurious defects (maximum allowable by industry standards) were considered and addressed by the design engineer in the material selection and specification process.
Early revisions of I
EN DES-EP 5.01 lacked clear definition of the design engineer's responsibility to ensure the technical adequacy and accuracy of procurement documents; I
- however, no evidence was found to indicate any IR2 adverse effect on the quality of material procured and received for use, at WBN.
Injurious defects I
(those that exceeded the maximum allowable standards) had been addressed and dispositioned through NCRs.
Therefore, this was determined to be a Class C issue.
4.2
~pi e
4.2.1 Generic Not Applicable 4'.2,1 Information from TC Information provided by QTC for the concerns in this element is summarized as follows:
IN-85-368-001 IN-85-454-002 PH-85-035-006 See Attachment H
See Attachment I This concern was not added to this subcategory until March 27, 1986; consequently, no information was supplied by QTC.
4.2.2.2 Review of NCR Lo Review of the NCR log from January 1, 1971, through April 18, 1986, for documented
- examples, of poor quality (lamination cracks, slag pockets, questionable repair practices and surface slag) as stated on the concerns, revealed the following:
TVh EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 22 OF 27 i.
Linear indications on the Steam Generator Blowdown System pipe were identified on NCRs 3746R RO (October 28, 1981),
Rl (December 30, 1981) and R2 (January 4, 1982).
These NCRs were voided because the piping was subsequently replaced due to the need for increased fluid flow by the following ECNs:
ECN 3371 (unit 1)
ECN 4859 (unit 2)
I IR2 I
4.2.2.3 Interviews Interviews with various cognizant individuals (supervisors, engineering personnel, craftsmen, and a Mestinghouse Representative) relative to specific examples of poor pipe quality (lamination cracks, slag pockets, questionable repair practices and surface slag) revealed the following:
4.2.2.3.1 Lamination Cracks Linear indications in the Steam Ge'nerator Blowdown System piping were noted and subsequently identified by NCR 3746R RO, Rl and R2.
The evaluation of these NCRs was halted and they were voided with the issuance of ECN 3371 (August 23, 1982) for unit 1 and ECN 4859 (May 9, 1984) for unit 2 to effect a total piping change out because of'he need for increased fluid flow.
Individuals interviewed had no knowledge nor were any documented examples of similar problems in the piping system, subsequent to these piping modifications. It is believed that the lamination cracks referred to by the CI in concern number PH-85-035-006 were the linear indications addressed by NCR 3746R RO, Rl and R2.
I I
I I
I I
I R2 I
I I
I I
I 4.2.2.3.2 Sla Pockets and uestionable Re air Practices The interviewees did not recall any examples of large slag pockets and/or questionable repair practices, as stated by concern number IN-85-368-001, on pipe supplied by Mestinghouse for VBN unit 1 and unit 2 Turbo-generators, during their installation periods;
- however, on
TVA ENPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUNBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 IR2 PAGE 23 OF 27 February 22, 1977, backcharge number 2-ME-21 was issued covering work on the unit 1 and unit 2 turbine cross-over and cross-under pipe.
This backcharge was to cover expenses incurred by Mestinghouse in furnishing, labor and material to correct out-of-round, out-of-square, and defective weld preparations on this piping.
It is believed that the CI had in mind these piping problems and their subsequent
- repair, as addressed by this backcharge.
No specific examples of pipe having surface slag, as stated in concern number IN-85-454-002, were discovered, The existence and consequences of surface slag on pipe is adequately addressed by a report prepared by the MBN PMO for this concern and included in this report as Attachment I, 4.2.2.4 Conclusion The manufacturing processes utilized in the production of pipe introduce certain material defects that are manifested on the surface as indentations and/or linear indications and internally as inclusions and/or laminations
~
Industry standards have been established to minimize these defects via examination and/or repair.
Noninjurious defects (maximum allowable by industry standards) were considered and addressed by the design engineer in the material selection and specification process.
Injurious defects (those that exceeded the maximum allowable standards) had been addressed and dispositioned through NCRs.
Therefore, this was determined to be a Class C issue.
4.3 Valves 4.3.1 Generic Not Applicable
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 24 OP 27 4.3.2.1 Information from TC Information provided by QTC stated that this was a
NU CON concern at'BN and that during, 1980-1981 various sizes and quantities of installed valves have bearing drives that were rusted and not replaced; and approximately 2000 small valves installed at MBN were "used" and/or "remachined".
4.3.2.2 Procurement Methods The quality of valves procured for use at WBN was dictated by the specifications contained in procurement documents.
The preparation of these documents during 1980-1981 was governed by EN DES-EP 5.01, R9 - Rll.
Knowledgeable engineers in DNE stated that the selection and specification of adequate quality material (valves) was the responsibility of the procurement document originator (design engineer).
This selection and specification process took into account the fact that certain defects were allowed by the industry standards.
Although, the responsibility of the procurement document originator (design engineer) for the technical adequacy and accuracy of the procurement document was not clearly defined in EN DES-EP 5.01, R9 - Rll; subsequent revisions of this procedure do provide this responsibility definition.
4.3.2.3 Receivin Methods Material (valves) for use at WBN was received during this period in accordance with MBN-QCP-1.6, R8.
This procedure required the receiving individual(s) to ensure that the contract requirements for the material were met.
Measures were provided for segregation and disposition of material not meeting contractual requirements.
Interviews revealed this to be the actual practice of individuals involved in the receiving, process.
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 25 OF 27 IR2 4.3.2.4 Review of NCR Lo Review of the NCR log from January 1, 1980, through December 31, 1981, revealed no wholesale quantities (as indicated by information provided by QTC) of valve reuse, pitting, or remachining.
- However, three instances of valve repair work due to defective material were discovered and are as follows:
4.3.2.4,1 NCR 2068 RO Remachining (grinding) of an indication on a System 3, 4" swing check valve.
This work was properly dispositioned on NCR 2068 RO.
4.3.2.4.2 NCR 2932 RO Remachining (grinding) of surface defects on a System 87 valve.
This work was properly dispositioned on NCR 2932 RO.
4.3.2.4.3 NCR 3370 R
Replacement of valve due to a crack in the body.
This work was properly dispositioned on NCR 3370 R.
4.3.2.5 Interviews Interviews with many cognizant individuals in DNC,
- DNE, and ONP failed to reveal any known instances of valve reuse, pitting, and/or remachining during this time period.
Several interviewees mentioned that possibly the CI had in mind the problems associated with the Kerotest valves, that occurred during the early 1980's.
Research revealed that Kerotest valve problems affecting both units did exist during the time period covered by the concern;
- however, these problems and their solutions are well documented (e.g.o NCR 2501 ROo NCR 2501 Rlo VB-DCR-447, ECN 4061, ECN 4286).
The Kerotest program is addressed for unit 0 and unit. 1'valves in the OPERATIONS category, MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT RELIABILITY/DESIGNsubcategory, KEROTEST VALVES
- element, Report number 301.01.
These interviews also revealed that the Kerotest program for unit 2
is on going by DNC personnel.
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUHBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 26 OF 27 4.3.2.6 Conclusion This evaluation failed to reveal any wholesale quantities of valve reuse, pitting, or remachining, as related by the concern.
Early revisions of EN DES-EP 5.01 lacked clear definition of the design engineer's responsibility to ensure the technical adequacy and accuracy of procurement documents;
- however, no evidence was found to indicate any adverse effect on the quality of material procured and received for use, at WBN.
Therefore,.this was.
determined to be a Class A issue.
I I
I IR2 I
I I
I 5.0 COLLECTIVE SIGNIFICANCE Three issues derived from ten employee concerns have been evaluated and discussed in this report.
Of the issues evaluated, two were determined to be Class C issues and one was determined to be a Class h issue.
Class A issues require no corrective action;
- however, the necessary corrective actions for the two Class C issues were initiated previous to this evaluation.
Therefore, na corrective actions were required as a result of this evaluation.
All material of suspect quality included in this evaluation, was dispositione in a proper manner, except the single incident mentioned in section 4.1.2,5.2.
Although this beam was not addressed and dispositioned via NCR; it was completely disposed of and did not result in a condition adverse to quality.
5.1 Nana ement Effectiveness No management ineffectiveness issues were identified.
5.2 Em lo ee Effectiveness No employee ineffectiveness issues were identified.
5.3 Technical Ade uac No conditions adverse to quality were identified.
6.0 CAUSES None 7.0 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS 7.1 Corrective Actions Alread Taken or Planned None 0
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 PAGE 27 OF 27
)R2 7,2 Corrective Actions Re uired as Result of Evaluation None 8.0 ATTACHMENTS Attachment A - List of Concerns by Concern Number Indicating Safety Relationship and Generic Applicability:
4 pages Attachment B - List of Concerns by Issue:
1 page Attachment C
Attachment D
- QTC response (IN-85-282-001):
1 page
- QTC response (IN-85-460-001):
2 pages Attachment E - QTC response (IN-85-650-001):
1 page Attachment F - QTC response (IN-85-684-001):
4 pages Attachment G - QTC response (IN-85-754-001):
4 pages Attachment H - QTC response (IN-85-368-001):
1 page Attachment I - QTC response (IN-85-454-002):
2 pages
-)
REPORT NlNBER'0600 REV I S ION NINBER' IR2 Page I of 4 ATTACHMENT A LIST OF CONCERNS INDICAtlNG SAFEI'Y RELATINSHIP AND GENERIC APPLICABILI'TY CATEGORY:
HC SUBCATEGOR:
40600 QUALIlY OF NTERIAL CONCERN NNBER GENERIC APPL SUB PLT 8 8 S M
QTC/NSRS CAl CAT LOC F L Q 8 INVLS1IGATION REPORT PE S
R CNCERN OESCR IPl IN REFERENCE SECTION 0 CATEGORY NC SUBCAlEGORY - 40600 IN-85-282-00I NC 40600 MBN N N N N T500I4 REPORT SR A STRUCTURAL BEN MAS CLEARED THROUGH QA/QC RECEIPT INSPECTION AND ISSUED lO lHE FIELD FOR USE.
ONCE, DELIVERED TO FIELD, CRAFT PERSONNEL NOTED THAT THE BEAII MAS LAIIINATED, AND DID NOT INSTALL THE BEAN.
NO FURtHER DETAILS MERE AVAILABLE.
I.I.I, I.2.I, 2.I, 2.2, 2.3.I, 3.I.I, 3.2.I, 3.3, 4. I.2. I, 4.I.2.2, 4.I.2.3, 4.I.2.4>
- 4. I.2.5. I, 4. I.2.6, 5.0, and 8.0 IN-85-368-00I HC 40600 WBN N N N N T50IOI REPORT SR CI CONCERNED ABOUT POOR QUALITY OF WEST INGHOUSE PIPE.
P IPESPOOLS MERE HARD lO WELD OR BEVEL BECAUSE OF LARGE SI.AG POCKETS.
THIS SLAG CAUSED "BLMNTS", AND MUCH GRINDING.
PROBLEII MAS SO BAD THAT WESTINGHOUSE REPRESENTATIVE (UNKNNN)
HAD lO MllNESS REWORK FOR BACKCHARGE PURPOSES.
NE CASE INVOLVED GOING I3"-l4" INtO BASEIIETAL.
(PIPE CNES OFF OF A 45 DEGREE EL8N, BOTTCH OF HEAIER.
LINE RUNS DUE NORTH, UNIT 2).
ALSO, 36" SCHEDULE 80 PIPE IN UNITS I ll 2 HAD SLAG POCKETS.
Cl HAS NO NORE INFORNATIN.
I. I.2, l.2.2, 2.I, 2.2, 2.3.2, 3.I.2, 3.3>
4.2,2.1, 1.2.2.2, 4.2.2.3.2, 4.2.2.4, 5.0, and 8.0
AfTACHHENl A LIST OF CONCERNS INDICATING SAFETY RELATIONSHIP AND GENERIC. APPLICABILITY CAlEGORY:
HC SUKATEGORY:
40600 QUAL I TY OF NATERIAL REPORT NNBER:
40600 REV IS ION NNBER:
2 IR2 Page 2 of 4 CONCERN NUNBER GENERIC APPL SUB PLT 8 8 S W QTC/NSRS CAT CAT LOC F
L Q 8 INVESTIGAllON REPORt ps S
R CONCERN DESCR IPl ION REFERENCE SECTION 0 CAlEGORY - HC-SUKAlEGORY - 40600 IN-85-454-002 HC 40600 WBN N N N N IN-85-454-002 NO T50030 REPORT CARBON STEEL PIPE OFTEN HAS ALOf OF SLAG ON SEAIILINE.
TOLD TO ACCEPT THE PIPE AS IT IS IIILL SCAI.E.
1.1.2, 1.2.2, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3.2, 3.1.2, 3.3, 4.2.2.1, 4.2.2.2>
4.2.2.3.3, 4.2.2.4, 5.0, and 8.0 IN-85-460-001 HC 40300 WBN N N N N IN-85-460-001 T50035 HC 40600 REPOHt SUKAfEGORY 40600 ADDRESSES ONLY THE PORTION OF THE CONCERN THAT IS UNDERLINED IN-85-650-001 HC 40600 WBN N N N N T50061 REPORT SR POOR ALITY 6" OR 8" BEAII STRUCTURAL-STEEL FRN JAPAN THAT IS LNINATED.
THIS STEEL WAS BEING USED IN NON-CODE SYSTEII WHEN THE LANINATIONWAS DISCOVERED.
ALL OF THIS SfEEL NAY NOt HAVE BEEN IDENflFIED AND REHOVED.
SR CI OBSERVED THAf TUBE STEEL OR OtHER TYPE OF STEEL PURCHASED FOR HANGER FABRICATION SPLIT AT THE SEAHS WHEN EXPOSED TO COLD WEATHER IN STORAGE YARD.
STEEL IN StORAGE YARD WAS GOTTEN RID OF BUT SNE COULD HAVE BEEN USED tO AClUALLY HAKE HANGERS.
I.I.I, 1.2.1, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3.1, 3.1.1, 3.2.1, 3.3, 4.1.2.1, 4.1.2.2, 4.!.2.3, 4.1.2.4,
- 4. 1.2.5. I, 4.1.2.6, 5.0, and 8.0 I.I.I> 1.2.1> 2.1> 2.2>
2.3.1, 3.1.1, 3.2.1,
- 3. 3, 4. 1.2. I, 4.1.2.2, 4.1,2.3, 4.1.2.4, 4.1.2.5.2,
- 4. 1.2.6>
5.0, and 8.0
ATTACHNENT A LIST OF CONCERNS INDICAtlNG SAFE1Y RELATIONSHIP AND GENERIC APPLICABILITY CAfEGORY:
HC SUBCATEGORY:
40600 QUALITY OF IIAIERIAL REPORT NINBER:
40600 REVISION NUHBER:
2 IR2 Page 5 of 4 GENERIC APPL CONCERN SUB PLT 8 8 S M NlNBER CAT CAT LOG F
L Q 8 QfC/NSRS INVESTIGATION REPORT r
IN-85-754-OOI IIC 40600 WBN N N N N I 59$ -MBN T50I>9 REPORT IN-85-684-00 I HC 40600 WBN N N N N I-85-250-MBN f5006)
REPORT Pl S
R SR IN MARCH l985, FAULTY IIETAL PLATE AND TUBE SIEEL MAS RECEIVED FOR USE.
BOTH PLATE AND TUBE SfEEL APPEARED TO BE COLD ROLLED AND SEPARATING WITH DELAIIINATIONS.
CI HAS NO FURTHER DETAILS.
CONSTRUCTION DEPT.
CONCERN.
NO FOLLOW UP REQUIRED.
CONCERN DESCRIPTION SR IN 1HE SOAR OF l984 A SHIPIIENT OF 5" X )" X I/4" TUBE S1EEL MAS RECEIVED AND INSTALLED THROUGH-Nt THE SITE.
1HIS NATERIAL MAS DETERHINED 10 BE DEFECTIVE.
(CRACKED) AND NO EFFORT MAS NDE TO LOCAfE AND/OR REPLACE IT.
THE WHOLE IIATTER MAS "HUSHED UP" AND NOTHING NNEiMAS EVER HEARD.
At ONE TINE, SNE OF THIS HAT'L MAS SEGREGATED AT THE HGR.
FAB SHOP.
REFERENCE SECTION 0 CA'fEGORY - IIC SUBCAfEGORY - 40600 I
I I
I 2 I ~ 2 Iy 2 2y 2.$.1, ).I.l, $.2.I,
$.$, 4. 1.2. I, 4. I.2.2, 4.I.2.$, 4.I.2.4, 4.I.2.5.$, 4.I.2.6, 5.0 and 8.0 I.I.I, I.2.I, 2.1, 2.2 2.).l,
$.I.I, $.2.l,
$.5, 4.I.2.I, 4.I.2.2,
- 4. I.2. 5, 4. I.2.4, 4.1.2.5.4, 4.I.2.6, 5.0, and 8.0
REPORT NNBER:
40600 REV IS ION NUNBER:
2 IR2 Page 4 of 4 AITACHIIENT A LIST OF CONCERNS INDICATING SAFETY RELATIONSHIP AND GENERIC APPLICABILITY CA)EGORY:
HC SUBCATEGORY:
40600 QUALITY OF IIATERIAL GENERIC APPL CONCERN SUB PLt 8 B S M NlNBER CAT CAT LOC F
L Q B IN-86-l22-00 I HC 40600 MBN N N N N T50I2I REPORt PH-85-003-024 HC 40600 WBN N N N N T50107 REPORT PH-85-035-006 HC 40600 MBN N N N N T50259 REPORT iPSR CODES:
SR - NUCLEAR SAFETY-RELATED SS NUCLfAR SAFETY SIGNIFICANT NO -
NUCLEAR SAFE TY-RfLATED QTC/NSRS INESTIGATION REPORT I W5-48l-MBN Pl S
R SR SR SR CONCERN DESCRIPTION CRACKS MERE NOTED IN A MF 33 BEAN.
CI IS UNSURE IF THESE CRACKS MERE EVER FIXfD.
BEAII LOCATION IS BLTMEEN 0 DEGREES AND 337 DEGREES 30't ELEVATION 723',
UNIT I REACTOR.BLDG.
(APPROXIMATELY 37'ADIUS).
STANDING AT 0 DEGREES RADIAL AND LOOKING TNARD STEAN GENERATOR $4, ONE MOULD BE LOOKING At THE MF IN QUEStlON.
DETAILS KNOMN tO QTC, MITHELD DUE TO CONFIDENTIALITY. Cl HAS NO FURTHER INFORHATION.
VALVES ARE OFTEN RE-USED, PITTED, AND/OR Rf-IIACHINED.
CI HAS NO NORE INFORHATION AVAILABLE.
NO FOLL% UP REQUIRED.
CI IS CONCfRNED ABOUT'HE QUALITY OF THE IIATERIAL THAT IS USED IN THE STEAN GENERATOR BLOMDOMN PIPING.
CI STATED THAT THE PIPf USED HAD LANINATIONCRACKS.
Cl HAS NO FURTHER INFORHATION.
NO FURTHER INFORHATION IN THE FILE.
CONSTRUCTION DFPARTHENt CONCERN.
NO FOLLOM-UP REQUIRED.
REFERENCE SECTION N CATEGORY - lK SUBCATEGORY 40600 I.I.I, I.2.I, 2.I, 2.2, 2.3.l, 3.I.I, 3.2.I,
- 3. 3, 4. 1.2. II 4. I.2.2I 4.I.2.3, 4.I.2.4,
- 4. I.2.5.3, 4. I.2.6, and 5.0 I
I 3 I 2 3 ~ 2 Ii 2 2i 2.3.3,
- 3. I.3, 3.2. 3, 3.3, 4.3.2, and 5.0 I.I.2, 1.2.2> 2.II 2.2, 2.3.2, 3.I.2, 3.3, 4.2.2.I, 4.2.2.2, 4.2.2.3.l, 4.2.2.4, and 5.0
REPORT NUMBER:
40600 REVISION NUMBER:
2 IR2 Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT B List of Concerns by Issue IN-85-282-001 IN-85-460-001 IN-85-650-001 IN-85-684-001 IN-85-754-001 IN-86-122-001 IN-85-368-001 IN-85-454-002 PH-85-035-006 PH-85-003-024 STRUCTURAL STEEL STRUCTURAL STEEL STRUCTURAL STEEL STRUCTURAL STEEL STRUCTURAL STEEL STRUCTURAL STEEL PIPE PIPE PIPE VALVES
/e/ I ~
e ~
'PJ /i 4$4Q
~I~
3 ATTACHMENT C
Page 1 of 1
QTC QUESTIONAIRE I
e g
e Subcate ory ~L'o~
Pa"e ~
of SuI<<eaeeaeey
~l'.-aaa Ouality of Materials Material Control
~'
~
Wk et I
1,
~ I
~:
I
.'I<<'I
~ hl C1 1
~
! fs
..1 a
~t Oj Concern No. W 7-Date:
z7 Without revealing the identity of the CI, can a tiraefrane for he conce=..
ty0 ming F~G sF'Gz.t Ft
~ t 2.
Without revealing the identity of the CI, can scecifcic !4~1 be identizied, if so %hen.
~g~g gp~F:]~
3 ~
t Without reveal ng:he identity of the C, can any specif:c 'locations be identi:ied, if so ~hat are they.
5.
W thout revealing the identity of the CI, can ary ot"er ndi'":duals be ident'f.'ed, ig so
-'."."'. c/g ~~ ~~
+gpss Q]gQR-M.rp'g L p 5'p i~oaA~ ~o~venopJ RcLFPnV6'r Without.evealing he dentity or the C
, is the e ary othe" 'nCo=ation in the QTC c.'le that "ay be of aid n this investigat on (suc!i as,
- QTC, INSETS, NRC, Construct.'on, Nuc'ear Poser i."::estigat on, etc.),
- so <<hat?
~
~
I
~ l L' I V e'
i 'I ~II i ra
~
~ ~
~
$t 5 ~
1, I<<<<
<<0Iks']
e'CC
~s th s
a concern or the 0. ice ot Nuclear Powder, Constr ct cn, or both Qg+S~~~OA ~o I. ~rd~Al >
Additional Co....ents:
7 gg codceR~o
~D(v(L)~~ FoR- ~s con)c~~
~ t o~w em-K o~ mm =~bavrM
~
~
/Vo Foe o'm
.uA codex'o~M ga TV &G-HOQl rlofuWL. l)WllS.
i
~t
. i
~
~ I at
~ee<<Mfa
<<m
~
~,e e
A
~~
~
I I
ATTACHMENT D
Page 1'of 2 ski /
Subcategory Page
< of Subcacetory MO-BOO Oualfty of Materials Material Control QTC QUESTZONAIRE Concern No. 2A'-24 4bd-dO~
Bat e:
S<</ 7/pd l.
without revealing the identitv oE be identi=ied, if so f<<hen?
t~e C'an a t'..e=r~"e:or the conce=..
5~ ~~~0 2.
without revealing the identity. o-.
ident:~ied, ir so.<<hen?'he CT, can s ec'fic i4~S be 3.
Mithout reveal'.".
identi= ed,
". so
~ dsas t i~y o-s sayf
~ ri
~ ~
can any speci=:c
'oca icns be 4.
'without -revealing the 'centity of the C'., can any other ndividuals be identi"ied, ig so
<<ho?
5.
6.
M thout reveal'n~
"e dent'ty o
"".e C., is the.e any othe.
in""o=...a:ion in t¹ QTC f le that
-..ay be c: aid in his invest gat'cn (s ch as,
- QTC, NSPaS, NRC, Ccnstr cticn, Nuclear Power
".::estigation, etc.),
- = so +hat.
mBP pRo ~v~t.-r=.~ 'yfoto oouce>ev, Es "is a concern o
'".e 0: ice oz 'luc'ear Pc~et, Ccnstructioae o
'-o:h ~
o Aml u Dae.
o
'w.
Cc~" s
~(5 cou<~~
+~g-p5'- ttfco-Qo)(
LvM ocos~
(z-t8-8c, i%A Gv8 P PM 0 ~~~~id/n~o fffs
,.:. COPE.eF III IK AiQO~ tS WI7~~
a
~~ ~g'1 Qw P g~a g ga fQt Quality of Matt"'ala Material Control 1~- Q an, ~
ATTACH."KNT D
Page 2 of 2 t
I Ef-g5-d f.D-(-;
CONC~I:
you 1au'uatad.
l~atioa vas ideat~~ied and qual y
6 or 8 bee>
s ructu zl s eel f oa Japan t-z This s=eel vas be'ng used in non-code systea vhea the d'scovered.
All of this steel azy not have beea re oved.
RZSPONSi: Ms concern as stated did not con-ainsu ic'est info.wt oa
'o be evaluated.
A request vas vade of BillKe~,
QTC, and the follo~~g additional informtioa vas provided by hia: MA~L: 6-inch I bea=,
INSTALLATIONLOC'TION:
Tu='oine generator building, DATi OF OC~RXC:- ~
April 1985 (approved-tely) CC~IT: ".
~ neve" ac ually sa aater'al
. heard that it (1za'"ated azterial) had alreacy beea used...
do ao" kaov vnea the aater'al vas aetna'ly identi ied as being noacca c.'ag.
The invest gzt" on of th s concern vas conducted through iate~-ievs v"th engineer'ag,
'aspect'on, aad craft personae, resezrch o
vzrio s types doc=eatatioa aad v'suzl inspection ia the
~ eld.
The rest ts -ere zs follows:
or u
~
~ ~
The. oal'y I bez= azterizl found vh'ch has eve" been
'".. varehouse stock 's heat n~er U02266.
- 64823, U40472 and 46236:C.:nis
'aterial vas purc~med as
(<A Level 1 on purchase recuisitioas; 73233-3 (received 240 ft.), 65338-2 (received 240 ft.), 531633-1 (rece'ved 180 ft:fI and 543371-2 (received 300 ft.).
At present 180 fr. is left ia vzrehouse storage.
Noae of t"..'s wterizl has bee" pu""."aased ron v"renouse storage s="ce Nove=ber 2, 1981.
The material as smted ia th's concern vas not 6-'ach I be.
The aterial ia ouestion vzs neat nu ber 61403 WSX20 0:.
This cond't'ca has bee" doc'=ea ed aad tracked c" NCR 5942 (czted Febr. zry 2, 1983).
Th's NCR is attacned v'th the Oi evaluation approv="g a use-zs-'s d'spos In cepth invest gat" on proviced the fo lo "g info=at oa:
For neat a'=ber 61403
~
1 ~ 755 1 'aez f
s uaaaccounted for a.".8's zss'=ed to be '"sca'ed.
585 1'aear ft. vas tered by U.T. ee~datioa and no ac'=t'caz
~='"at oa vas detected.
No >l6X20 br vhich vas ~"st~~ed has bee" located or re="ved (re er to Oi aeao attzched to NCR 5942, th's report).
Ou" of 4,320 "ear ft. vhich hac bee" recedved on'y oae 40 ft. st.ck vzs act z y cere='".
to have la='aat'cn.
'The aa er'zl vzs ceteraiaed to oe o
do=estic =za"-
facture ron Sis~d Stee'.
Your corcera about possible a"'azt c"..s bern s apprec'aced.
If you have add't onal quest'cas or concerns, please accress the= to yo = supervisior.
~ 1
~,
I Pr'nc'pally prepared by Bruce Ma5ors, extension 509.
a
~ ~
d 4
t
~ ~
a
~
I
~
~
~
a
~
~
f
~ ~ a
~
~
a 8
~
~,
~
~
~
~
d'
~
~
~
~
~l'a
ATTACHMENT E
Page 1 of 1
QTC QUZSTIONAIRE Subcategory ~~og Par e ~
oc SubcateFory H(~
Quality of Mate ials Material Control Conc rn No. Bee' o-Date:
Without revealing
!he iden!i!v of the CI, can a t'reframe d'or !he concern be ident i ied, i" so '<<hen. ~
/
Iq8~
2 ~
Without reveal rg the id ntity o". !he CI, can spec'.=ic i4~S be identi:ied, i: so
<<hen?
3.
Without revealing the denti!y o= the CI, can any speci"ic loca! ons be identi=.ed, i". so Mhat are they?
+am t.oCaraP BeHIND ~.~08< FM ~ ~~
Without revealing
.he
.'dent ty of the CI, can any o her,incividuaLs be identieied, ig so
<<ho?
u~rr> g~~ Cc/i ms ~a au <<(i i~).
5.
6.
Without reveaL.:rg
!he ident ty of !he C's there any ot".er 'n=or-...a!:on in the QTC :"ile that
."..ay be o". aid in !his invesr
~ac on (such as,
- QTC, N RS, NRC, Cons!r c!icn, Nuc'ear Power investigation, e!c.),
- so +hat?
~S ~Y~~~u, Is :..is a concern c:.he 0.:ice o".
N clear Po~er, Ccns!r c!ion. or both t 004~~% oA ~~
C.oNC~W Add !icnzl Cc... en!s:
h/0 F=~W~~
~~RM~oa ts pYAIt-R8~i
I)M~
Saaccte"ccy
~~C-ATTACHMENT F
Page 1 of 4 QTC QUESTIONAIRE Pae 7 of San cec enemy
~r.-ann Quality of Materials Material Control Conc rn No.
N-
/
~ f Jf f
J
~
~ f yet V
~ e v v ~ ~ I
~ ~
~\\
~
~
~
~I J
~ ~ V
~
>> f J J J I~
e ~
~'I JV
'L 3.
Without reveal no the identity or the CI, can any spec.
c 'ocat ons be ident
= ed, i": so what are they.
Without reveal ng the identity of tahe CI, can any other nd.'vidua's be identi"ied, ij so e<<ho?
5.
6 ~
Without reveal ng.he.'dentity o8 the CI, s there any other n=or=ation Lhe O.C ".ile that
- ..ay be o". aid in this nvest.gation (such as,
- OTC, NSBS, !8C, Construct.ion, Nuc'ear Powe investigation, etc.),'."
so what?
Y~g3~ ~~ ~~~ M, SE=
s t"is a concern o".
~ 0: ice o". lluclear ?overf Constr 'ct'"n, or both 7 Coa~~mo&
DaPT, CoAC~,
Add t onal C"....en:s:
~ (~~ Bs. $ 8-5mo)i myles ~&~Ty~i=-v
~9 ccmep Sp /vs'.<
~
I
~ e
~,I, c ~
e
~
~
P,
~ -.r
~
. ~.
~J
~
e
~
ATTACHMENT P
Page 2 of 4 1
Subcategory
" )~~@30 Quality of Materials Material Contxol
~
~
~
~
~
V
~
0
~
e VMSSr='ALL Y AUTHORITY e
~
I
-.%CD SALTY PBBS STQZ '"'".
INSTIGATION RroORT N. 250-%R
~
~
~
~
~
0
~ ~
e
~
~ ~
~ e
~
SP~=~~:.
0
/
I
- .wT COhC:.~Jz NO'N-85-684-001, "3)e ec='ve Tube Ste I" I:6 Z. J.'
~
SL'LK
~
~
~
~
DAT:.
~ ~ ~
e e
&BESTIRTOR: R.. C'v~4Vi PZPROVM:.
lij".. ~RPZSOJ
~
~
~ ~
~
A
~
~
e
~ ~
~
~ \\
j ~
e
~
~
- ...:.... FiNAL
~
~
e
~
e
~
~
~
~ ~
~
e
~
~
~
4
~
e
~ ~
' e ee e
~ 1
~
~
~
~
I ~
~
~
~
~
It
~
~
~
~ 0 W
ATTACHMENT F
Page 3 o 4
Quality of Hateria3.s Haterial Control I
~
~
~
~ ~
~
~
I BACKaRO~D 0
" The Nuclear Safety RevieM Sta (NSRS) investigated q~loy No. IN-85-684-00l vhich Quality Technology Company
{QTC)
'. fied during the Vatts Bar Employee Concern Program.
The conce worded as follows:
P' P)I In the summer of 1984 a shipmeat of 3"x3"xl/4" tube was
~ received and installed through-out the site.
Th. s
--.material was
. determiaed to. be defect ve (cracked)'. and no
. effort was made to locate:and/or replace 'it.
The whole
- "-- matter vas "hushed up" aad nothing more was ever heard.
,At oae time,.some of t"'s material was seoreoated at the hang-abriczt'oa shop..
IX. SCOP:-
'-3
- ~
~
B.
Int rvi vs
%Geom' def c"'ve
-'c'once=.
with perso" e'ssociat d
wi">>
ha=g "
i"spec-.'on r vezled ao r cord o"
m=-o=..
tuoe st>>
1 zs descr'bed in the subjec-ma>>e al a>>
c p 0'ye e
~ 0
~
NSRS 'as contacted a
number of people associated w.th hz
~
zbr.cat.on aad hanger mater'al iacom ag inspection aad hzs
- physicz>>y
'"spec-d the
.. ar a
zround the ha" g
=
fabricz-.'on shoe.
~ ~
III. SEIGY 0::227GS
~
~ ~.-.--"
~
~
~
(
~
~
~
A. " -'Tate=:iews with 'perso"'"
1 assoc'zted v.'t'z g " fabricat. on
'revealed no howl age,.or
. m o=~
of d
ctive."t"o '
as descr'bed in the subject e'ploye conc =.
~
~
~o ~'
1 C..
A phvsical im~ectioa of the hang " fzbr'cat.. on shoo z" z re-vealed no defec"ive t be ste 's aesc"'bed
=
subjec" e p>>oye coacc
~
~
~.
i,
~: ~,-
0 "Aa at apt was made th"ough QTC'to'obtain additio z '" a=a=
oa the conce=ed individual;
. The concerned ina.viduz" agz'n aescribed the tube s-el as'pr se"'ted '"
he subjec e plove conc rn znd ide"-.
ti=ied z spec.'f>>c e~loye a- --'z g "
a r.'c ='o" shop t a" mig' have knowledge of thc de~ c--'ve tube ste l.
This ewiove>> vas coa-tac" d
and had ao.'-k:owledg'f any d fective 't be" s-l.
Th co"-
" c m d -mcividmX-did no't prov'ae a y '1ocztion when t"is a =ec"-v tube steel vas ut. lized in haag r 'construction.
I ZV. 'OHCLUSIONS/3".COEGNDATIOHS
~
~
Conclusion The ezloyee concez was not.
substant'ated.
Lis invest'at. o-revealed a
lack of knowledge of thc defec ive tub ste 1, znd no locat:ons where it was utilized in hanger fabrication.were identi ied.
~ >>y\\
OO
~ ~t
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
l+
rO<<
ATTACHHENT F
page 4 of 4
~'". Oouality of Materials Material Control Reeorraenda tipa Noae
~
1
'SRS3:BB"
~
~
4 PO
~ ~
0
\\
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
C
~
0
<<000
~
~ ~
00
~
~
~
~
~ ~ ~
~ P
~
~
0
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
0 0
0 0
~
0
~
~
OP
'0r ~
0
~
0 P
~
0
~
~
~
~
~
O 0
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ W'I
~
~ l
~ ~
~0
~
~
~
O
~
~
'0
~
~
~
0
'1'
~
0
~
0 0 ~
~
OP H 0
~
~IO
~
~
~
I
~ ~
~
~
1
~
I
~
~
~
~ 0
~
~
~ 0
~
~ P
~
~
~ ~
~
~
0,
~
0
.1-"
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
0
~
e 1
~
0'
~
0 ~
Or
~
~
~
~ ~ ~
~
~0
~
0 0 ~
~ P ~
~
~ ~ P
~
1
~
~
0
~
~
~
~
~
~ 0
~
~
~
'j 0
~,
i ty (j
.;,I'I
'l 6 J 6 t I
~ ~ ~
6 e ~I Subcate"ory ~C - 4> <
ATTACHMENT G
Page 1 of 4 QTC QUESTTONAIRE Dane ~ of 5)
Suboaaelozy 6(c-600 Quality of I(aaeefale Material Control Concern No.
2W-X- 7s a-Oate:
~
41 e
~
( Cee C
u ~C C
v e
(eve ~ ( Ce
~ ~
Ci, can speci=;c i4~S be 3.
Without reveal'rg identi"..ed, i= so t¹ :dent:ty o= ".he
<<hat are they?
Ci, can any spec'=:c ocations be 2.
Without revealing the.'dentity o-.
t'he identiried, ir so '~hen?
ee \\
0
.'l
~
~
~j e
~
)l'.
Without revealing
'.he.'dent ty o" the C', can any other nd.'v cuals be ident'=ied, ig so
-ho?
5, Without reveal ng the identity o the CI, ';s t..e.e any othe-n="o....a: on in the QTC : 'e that
."..ay be o: aid in th.s invest nat on (s ch's.
Q.C,
- NSRS, KRC, Cons:" ct'on, Nuc'ear Power invest gation, etc.),
= so ihat?
~y~g~~
~<
COuce~. S~
6.
is th's a cc..cern o:" the 0-.-. ce c: Nuclear Power, Constr cticn. or both 7 CQV.~~OR
@APT; CO~~
6 AdCl "c"af C" o"
s QgnJ~D r ~ 8f(6-qgq fy0yf) fUha ~YM(f6yf~el I
6
~ e 6
e en ffvyefall laylaeanunann~'7
~
ATTACHMENT G
Page 2 of 4 Subcategory MC-6pp Ouality of Materials Material Control r'
7 I'i >>>>>>
~ I ) ~
I 4 ~ s>>
~
'+ 7 CI'ass>>>>>>
t <<) ~ >>v ta4 I s I'>>
~ t I Y
~l SP I
~ a<<.
>> 0
~
'>>a ~ >>Cl I<< ~
~
~ P>>>>>>
NUC VC>> hl ~'hl ~
~ !
~, ~ r davit
~ hs I
~ I
~tvt )V tl.ls sc'>> t thai f,'hc'>>
Lsh t gc c>>
~.'
~
as ts)s
~ v ~ IQh s s va ~
Ca>>
vFa
~ itvt <<<<>>
vi )
)sall)s vc.s h)rc t ha sr <
. ~ ~ t t ~ c c
~
wp
~
E ~
~. >>vsa>>
Cvstv>>
a ~ ~
s
~ t vv a>> l )ava iNIL vsvhsiE 6
, ~
S>>s I~ t>>h& ~
vvvve v I ~
~ s)vt
~ I
+hs)s>>
t ~ I
~ hs
~ ka'<8
~ jvsa>> I ~ ~
'ha 8
S Sl,
'Ta SC>>
s
~ h a>>
hs)av
~ 4>>
7
~a DAI=- hvF
~ IIsc +t r
'a vt ls)l ~
as)a \\ vv ~ kvh
~ @vs ~ ~
I
~
Sa)
PL <<C>>
C 4>>>>C v ar <<sC'As>>C
~
I ks ~ t v I JCh I IJ)) ~
C.
F;.
Whi"e P V!"'A=DBY'.
DE cmith APPROVED BY:
~(yg gas
~
n ~
Hal I ZS>>A Da>>e a
I
~
s
, r a
~', ~ I,, ~.)'
'a a)
~
~ ~
I
~
I
~ a+ 'I
ATTACHMENT Page 3 of 4 Suiseategety "SIC-500 Quality ef Matetiale Material Control I ~
3@iv t'.55"..'0 Jt4D etre ov o ials i e e e cD Lr va <<Bd tttv a v'yCc've
~ ~ ct Pi i ~ s vv e v<<Vae e Wo s
~
v'ucsi
>a>C 'C L
4
~
~ ~
<<4 J
V f
~
1
~
~
rs<<r>>
1 Tec nGaG Y
Y (QT '
o 1
2
~
712 ut
~,
. 2 I>,'-
CGncel ri Pl vvt oms ~
Thea C Grec at il Wcs Wtr vcC css 7 Gl 1 vWS
~ 4 In t"earC>>
LPBU, faul s
e resaaeal pl a<<2 as-ev r'BC al Yad fGl usa
~
Bv aeo P
4 a. B carid Cuv t:C he C"ld rCl lev a,nc Sa" era=
reg 4f C1.
~ oas riG Tur her da Ra 5
C Isl ruc-04vc D Lcca haa 2 5T.ael avvcal cv d 2i ca > Ie Z Pica aei Cn 5 e el l
Vi ~
Vcae ae ~
~ Viev t
S
~ ~
~
s:
The c "nicarni '
Yarv G
r 414
~
C<<
rasvt 2 oe c r
~ J l e
~ ~
~ >rl
~oaa 4 r '
~
e
~ eve Y a uaa Ts sa SursssoecLl Y I vs
~l
~
~
~ CU
~Lvvs D ~
ora r ~
~
<<4 1n a
~ sc i 'cn
<<vs ID La uaC re
~ r V
l L<<
~ ~
cissv a D e42> c
'Iaaaae c L
~
~ ~ vuvs I
~
~
L V
I eaCLD SeV ~ V U t
<<eec as ca asev ic.
t
~
~
v v
<<41
~ ~
C 4 l l
~ v <<sea<<vsse t'Ll Pl ~
ae C
1 cs eCt 4+ ~
'PI I ~ ~
s 4
I kva
~ ~
~ ~
Llr 4
~ ~ 'e c D '
'U4 ~ vs (v
L I ICIV
~ea VCla I I 'V
~
~ ec ys vvraes
~essa re <<ODU <<D
~ ra clo v
~
~ u4s in"--------d va
~
Iv C'
~\\ ~
ya va
-C
~
VI ~
C'I Ieoov r.V vva ao i&IoY P\\>>
Q
~ ~
ILI Va
~ i sea '
s 4>roe
'TS
~ '1>>
~ r L <<'
I Ae Ta ac yk ass l
~leal ci L Rl wat cs svucc
~ <<>>C lo L ~ ~
, seat voe J
r vv DD 1soaear>et eoecv vp el 4rr Le
~
~
Lo eC
~
~
~ ev>>
~
L ea
~ C Vva ev
~
I I ~
~
~
esse v+4 ~ C 4
~ L4
~
vs
~ >>re Is<<
0 Hav
~L ~ ec fri Gv Sal Yed ocl LG'eoinec assul Oisces d J<<4 l
1 c
Lo ~ c eases
~ <<cl J Lv p k Re I 1
4 J 4 acar
~ sac,r vo ~
~ oe vvo e
~ sv Cvsssc 7 a
~oaa r
'I 4
1 44 oe Lo ~ aC v
DD vr e r <<j 1 oov er VVC L'>y ~
prac SR7 2 L ~
4 J '
<<>>r 4
I vs e vo <<r
~ av Pe va DD ~
~
~ ae 1
4 L
e L>>4 UT r arear i>air vase vcl lett
~
~
es
~
4 r
e l
Ds ~sa alas 4
7 c<<
ores
~
~
1
~
~
~ ~
1 el 4
JL 1
Z o
W avLnC WRD ePi
~ vlvcv ls
~
<<sac tPeav 2
~
W UC
~ C D r ~
~
<<o
~ C WCL v vs
~
a,s C
t'ai i r '
4 I
CL ~ I ~l
~ ~ CLL C VI ~
vsurr r
~ acv a
~ l CLr2 4
I 4
~
~
os <<CU a clvh C a vve ~
~
~
~ tel
~
~ 44 WcoLU ao c D vv Lv Uc e7a
~
5 e O'S CLS C Cl
~
CL e
~
~
1yr CL<<C 4
Oi ~ V ye Ve
~ av 1 1, 1
4 arolvW a as
~ ~ L ~ >Do e ve
~ Di L
save ave f ~
elle av I
1 5<<CCJ
~
r o
ia1>>
l 11
<<1 l
el L ~ ~ I 4
r r<<4 1>>
~
rsl
~savDL al 1 Ur alee aoev aeuve
~ sv Lvo ~ rae
~
a 1 aoasa
~ save va
~
~ '>1<<<<ap Loaica tt a JL
<<4
~
V J
JI
~
r LI e
l
~ 'I ra
<<o ICD2 r 4 vcv
~ IvCa
~ \\
Uo
~
oeo
~ c leDC v 5
~
~ IC I ~aCI' t ae
~
hD aa
~
Boooa
~av 1 C ~
L ~
l 1 ~
V o'<<LLD l L>>4 4
J r r
~
issvs oe v
~
Laic <<r cr uc v
ass ae ~ I
~ ovs e via<<e vo
~
C o rco<<rva VBSS l
ma a
- 7. ".- PLS" 2
"=,", Bins larsxno"'-s.
T..asa ara ac=a-"2 1 2 when i<<el 4,,11 L
~
~14>>4>>
~ ~
Lee 1 l
+
~4414 c'rm'
=
uaua 1$
bc t
P o
~ L c
~
t 4
~l) bc Wi
~ '4 4
v r
~
~
1 4
-s e
L
~
J
~
csc<<cp Lessee 5<<saredcsraos tt7 Rppl f coaea 2 caves as id Tave Daaf Gna Pt" iCB
~ 4 '
e,
~
~
~
a 1
'"~
Ke'hGSa please 2nd aauhf nc r>Oe P aquirf eev 2 losssinaae CilS 7Ct 1 4 fr>ar
~
~
a
'vf DL vns WC 1 d Ca Suv>BC LC t 2 a' at
~
he Dt BRS raatuf rfng we df n-f 7 "ha lamin-i-ns 2::ceeded speci f'a-f"n revuf remen" s.
r E,e' V,aavs ra"uir ntt ul rascnic B::ae",I na ';. hiac an cat Bo ad>DCenL l tt t he w21 d ri-pped ta sh>'w. the 1-ca" 'n Gf 1 amf nar 'f)'csws.
Thasa J4
. tt a e::caad tha acca-"-nca cri ar 'a either have ". 2 ind:ca fons r emGved Ra>U repairs fol'Gw, Gr t. c ro"arfal is scrapped.
~'
~
<<e
~ ~
ro
~
~ ~
~
~,
~ ~
~
o ~
~
o ~
~
o
~ ~
~ t o
~
eo
~
~
E
~
s
ATTACHEI~ST G
Page 4 of 4 Subcategory "ISC-60D Quality of Materials Material Control
~
~
I it&itv C,
~
~
~ I
~
~ v ~
JI ~
~ sr e
~ lvesC'
~
~
~
e C
~
~
J Os ~ ~
~ ~ al f e se>>45 fGUftv
~tgta I
I
~ C C'
~ ~
~
~
~ ~
<<4 v
~
~ J4 vo avt iv >>>>cava
~ ~
l Gl J
~ ~
b>>7 Ce 5
4 e>>
a
~
~
l I Jres>>cvl a i ~
v<
eeoc iea-4 =
I 8oo vv<<V2v
~
<<it<<a
~ ~ ~ 'Cl e
~ ~ S cs ~ ev
~
'I 1
its a J J I tc 4 e V
et c aeii ~
4 l
a
~ ~
io oC vvt ~ ~ J eiv c o>>
I>> &C
~ ~ eti l
~
is te vt ~ c5 he ts o Se>>cle I egC i
4 ei2y at
~
<<I l
l Ie
~
e itIC Ds
~ <<4 i<<t Cla IV.
C ':C= JCI'=
P""0 tateht ps e>>sa H<<e tet It
~ s<<v v e et is o>> e>> Jt
~ J v o e al I
sre M4 4
~
J iee otv 5&eve T vo ~
>>4C D v 'Ct
<< ~
Iloos ~<<7 as av ~ - ~
~ o e ClIJ
~
'I 1
s 4
aaa a
~ JVe
~ 1 J I ~ D
~
~ 'I 4 4
~ ~
I
~ I vl &&Cia>>a J a I
~
l4lsc
~ tcl
<<Dcl>>
~ vo GT 4 tiia iCl IT>>
~
Je ev
~
~ 'Vvi<<S CD l
I iii&a
~ tv 1
~
J
~ &<<i&is ~ I C
~ I I a
~
~
a aiioa
~ oaia vo o<>
a
~
~ D s>>a ve
~ vor Oi<<
l BC<<a r2itiCIiiS VT C
1 t 4
~
e iie e J
~ ei
~
~
~ vvs lv ~
~
sJ ~
~ i J l << <<4
~
~
a o Iv e v4ia v s s D
~ ooVcf
""al, h2 4>> J' J
~ I&iVa
~
V1 OVOJ Joe JC elec Ol'CS USSU Celeste C' a I vv J,
vJaic 4
ieo J
~
Se 4 i'<< ~
a liv ttCS '>>
aS SLlo 2 T
vl ~ D
~ tie
~ I l>>
D&~
I
'"'2 GrC-"12IT. i 5 l cITiGiS ~
Cl ~
~
a Csa Iav J C s
~
1 <<<<a 4
~
Vc c
D s
~ iaa
~ sD ycl oia
~
Uo C'F Ir 4
'I Cl aC 1,
~>>
4 l t J 4
a I i
a D lite a IJ D iC J
~
C'Jo
~ iaa
~
~ D io IB
~l J
&D~
iC
~
~'l Ia a
loe ~ 'it ~
J\\a
~ IV I
~
7 S
car 2 J
Iia soi a
~ IC 252 Cl ~ ~ v 4
~ ~ I t 4 4&&a a v ve ~lva 7 FiCI l
~ I
~
~
~
a v
~
4 vei ee ~ eCa J Ossa>>
~ oar a
J
~
1 4
4 J 6 D o.ido1 IJ
~
Sl l
CaeiS
~
vvl <<reo r2I<<CV2UJ tv steat>>I>> 'Cv ~
VI D
4 J
I e
<<er UC I v isle Joe 4
-f 5-c C -' '--
v>>e J VJ a
~
~
~ vt l<<ae ave
~ 7 iota
~ &I~ ~
~
~ ~
4
<<4 J>>4 vveSDJVCt C>>
~
~
J I IVIID<<&D I Oo
~
~ a 4 I 'BU ~
~
J J
c'
~ e ~ secs aves i
~
D hlC..2 e 0-
~
i
~
~ 'ae I
~
~
s
~
~
s
'. I ~.
'I
~'
e 4 ',
~
~
I'
~.
~
~
~
e
. ~
~
~
I
~
~
rl
~
~
a
~
~
si s
~
~
~
~
~
~
ATTACHMENT Page l oj tope e
~
, i,e
~ !
QTC QUESTIONAIRE Subcategory ~~os Pa e
2 of Suboaeeyoey MC-6M Oualfey of Ma ezials Haterial Control Cor.ce n No. Zb'-
-s ~- o)
Date:
1.
Withou" revealing the ident='ty of the CI, can a t mefrve fo the concern be identi<<ed, if so
<<hen?
go 2.
Without reveal ng t¹ dent ity of identified,:: so
<<hen?
go the CI, can spe
<<.'c i4~S be 3.
Without reveal rg the ide..t ty of t¹ CI, can any speci=ic location be jC',- Pg~
F'o R, L.os~( o45, 4.
Without revealing
.he dentity o. the CI, can any other individuals be identi"ied, ig. so
<<i.o?
gb 5.
6.
Without revealirg the.'dentity or the CI, is the in the OTC <<ele that
."..ay be of aid in this invest
- NSRS, kRC, Corstr ct.'on, Nuclear Power investigat MA('~ M&5 msi&JQD ~
Is this a concern o<< the Office of Nuclear Power, C ~v mo~ 0~
e any other in<<o
.,ation
- gat on (such 'as,
- QTC, ion, etc.),
- =" so ~hat?
ACR.5 mL my~6~~
~
Construction, o
both ?
e ~
I
~
/r Add-'e'ona!
co...en s:
Poov c+cjfg MI.
osfjas f(
'P (aI npIIfsaIIno cfj Ho(s(liielgdll o8Pdec(llvs P
o I u$ ~(
~iMfis 7 ((d
>uRbine 9(dg Voii' f L, ~g ~~ ~~
6(~ c~~
Pvo( (saa fcnc -('ceo(f~
(,sfa( sec s(csdas4c<<a
(
ysv
!dnv! J cvICccIPe i'o
~
7~
se<<e-e+ei" +
en(:vdsy s d
~$~f.gg Q.s 5f~f ~ c 2
~M ~+t ~~
- a(7.7 '~
!ala A d,((en! cp dc!le.Jnafi SN 3 (7'( C- '..
P
?.
v~
~ ~
~,
ATTACHMENT I Page 1 of 2
/o.'fG, Subcategory ~4'.yy y Pa e
16 QTC QUMTIONAuIRE Subcategory MC-600 0uality oi Materiaia Material Control Corcern No.
Date:
Zl I'4
. ~J J
1.
Without reveaLin the ide..titv of the CI, can a tiaefr~~e for the concern be identiried, i so ~hen go g~+t? S ~ ~t~
I j
'i
~e'I 2.
Without revealing idertified, if so 3.
Without reveal ng 1denti ed i
so the identity of the CI, can specif.'c i4~S be eg Qeee 0 No t)~i?.S zu F14%,
the identity of the CI, can any speci=ic ocatioa 5e 1yrat are they?
4 ~
ithout revea'irg he.'dentity of the CIt caei a.y other.ndivid 'als.he identified, if so '-ho?
Without reveaLing the id it:ty in the QTC f'le that
.".ay be of NS'RS, K3C, Corstr c.'on, Nuc'ea of the CI, is there ary othe i..=o=..ation aid in 'this investigation (suc!i as,
- QTC, Pobge invest'.gation, etc.), ;f so Sghat?
~Qp p&o ~Y~i6~~~
~ +tS ~~~
6.
is th s a concern of the Office of Nuclear Po~er, Constructio...
or both CO4~1~ OA DBP7 C,O&GM~,
Additional Co.....e..ts:
88 -~N OO-Z -'ws cl.os~
~,
r Cou~ &
0< ~2-~.~~
~-.
~Yh
~8P PeO
~V~ T?+AvM) weis cowwKAy.: ~f'p dw gePoP=r ts &7~8N,
ATTACH BENT I
Page 2 of 2 Subcategory IIQ-SQQ Quality of Iia aI Yeaterizl Con
~ ~I CONCH.t NMER IN-85-454-002 CONCZP'f:
Carbon steel pipe ofcen has a loc of slag on seamline.
Told.to accept the pipe as it is mill scale.
RESPONSE
~T was concacted on four different dates (July 11, 18, 25, and August 9, 1985) to t~ to obtain additional information, but as of August 9, 1985, has been unsuccessful.
The specifics of 'this concern cannot be investigated without additional information.
Therefore, we can respond only to the general aspects.'a-boa steel pipe having slzg on the seaml~me would hzve to'ave be a welded ut~~
='"g coatee elec rodes.
Theslag foxed, wa ~e not de"r'-
heata'o the aual'cy of the we', would have co be re oved for NDE co be pe ~ormed on the we'a, which is requ'red to be done by the veacor of QA pipe.
scale is a product of heat'"g the pipe after it has beea manufactured, such as would be done ia a heat treating ope ation.
Some m'>> scale does appear "layered," solar to slag.
We do not believe aay pipe received a%ah slag on the sea
~inc would be QA. p'ping used i QA app'~catioas, since
~~
this piping requires NDE.
Even B31..1 piping reauires a
visuz'aspe c'o of the weld which could noc be mace properly i ic were covered with s'zg.
I" a==e rece ving th s general inform""oa the employee has adc'cioaz'etz'ls o-specific inscznces or exznplesg we wi>>
rthoroughly invest'gzce the=.
I I
PriacipaM~y prepared by She'ton Johnson, extension 350 and Doug Spa gler, extemion 440.
yba r
~ 'a r
~
rp ee
~ '
~
e