ML19225A936
| ML19225A936 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/03/1979 |
| From: | Brickley R, Hale C, Jerrica Johnson NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19225A927 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900519 NUDOCS 7907230074 | |
| Download: ML19225A936 (19) | |
Text
U. S. NUCLEAR REGUL\\ TORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEF.NT REGION IV Report No.
99900519/79-02 Program No. 51200 Company:
Bechtel Power Corporation Gaithersburg Power Division 15740 Snady Grove Road Gaithersburg, Maryland 20760 Inspection Conducted: April 9-13, 1979 Inspector:
- 7. /d, Me
/'[z-6/s/'79 R. H. E;-ickley, PringJ' pal Inspector Date Vendor Inspection Branch 9, th h#
f/b/ 71 J[/ M. Jo4nson, Contractor Auditor Date f
Vendof Inspection Branch N
Approved hv-b
':. Gle, Chief, Program Evaluation Section Date Vendor Inspection Branch Summary Inspection on April 9-13, 1979 (99900519/79-02)
Areas Inspected:
Implem_ntation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, i-the areas of design verification, procurement source selection, evaluation of suppller performance, and training. The inspection involved sixty (60) inspector-hours on-site by two (2) NRC inspectors.
Results: One unresolved item was identified in one area and seven (7) deviations were identified in three (3) of the areas as follows:
Unresolved Items: Procurement source selection - a further review is needed to verify that a purchase order (including the design specification) is revised to clearly identify applicable ANSI N45.2 daughter standards and that the vendor's QA man"al has been approved.
41'a Q 79'072300h m[
g
+-
2 Deviations: Design Verification - a log for ur, resolved issues and a positive closure system had not been estab]ished as reqt ired by project procedures, procedures have not been issued goierning a key design document (System Description), an audit report had not been issued within thirty (30) days as required by ANSI N45.2.12, procedures governing design verification do not exist on two (2) projects as required by their SARs, and nine (9) drawings had both controlled and non-controlled stampings on them; Evaluation of supplier performance - revisions to vendor design drawings were not verified or checked by control measures commensurate with the original; Training - two (2) project personnel did not complete required indoctrination training.
412 k~lf
3 DETAILS SECTION I (Prepared by R. H. Brickley)
A.
Persons Contacted C. W. Andrews, Civil Group Supervisor L. Bonn, QA Supervisor of Audits J. W. Fay, Assistant Project Engineer T. B. Jarboe, Assistant Mechanical Group Supervisor K. S. Jolly, Assistant Project Engineer D. C. Kansal, Project QA Manager V. Malafeew, Senior Engineer J. J. Milos, Project Quality Engineer H. C. Nelson, Project Quality Engineer D. K. Satpathy, Nuclear Group Leader A. A. Vizzi, Project EngiR_er W. E. Wilson, Project Quality Engineer B.
Design Verification t
1.
Objectives The objectives of tais area of the inspection were to determine that procedures have been established and are being implemented that:
a.
Identify individuals or groups who are authorized to perform design verification reviews.
b.
Require the results of the design verification effort to be clearly documented, with the identification of the verifier clearly indicated, and filed so they are identifiable to the document reviewed and can readily be retrieved.
c.
Require that the extent of design verification take into con-sideration the importance to safety, complexity, degree of standardization, state of the art, similarity with previously proven designs, applicability of standardized or previously proven designs, known problems and their ef fects, and changes to previously verified designs.
d.
Identify and document the method by which design verification is to be performed.
e.
Identify the items to be considered during design verification by reviews including selection and incorporation of inputs, necessary assumptions, quality and QA requirements, codes,
k } 2.
4 standards, regulations, construction and operating experience, interfaces, design metLod used, comparison of output with input, item application suitability, material compatibility, and maintenance features (See Section 6.3.1, N45.2.11).
f.
Prescribe the requirements for perforuing design verification by alternate calculations which shall include performance by a person or persons other than those who performed the original calculation, the revieu of appropriateness of assumptions, input data, and code or other calculation method ised. The selection of method sha? ' orovice tec tlts consistent with the original calculation.
g.
Prescribe the requirements for perforains design verification by qualification testiag which shall include requirements:
(1) For the identification, documentation a demonstration of the adequacy of perfa-1..nce und tr the mast adverse con-ditions, and consideration of all pe, tinent operating modes. Where the test is only intenced to verify a specific design teature, the other features of the design shall be verified by other means.
(2) That testing be performed in accordance with written test procedures which incorporate or reference the test require-ments, acceptance criteria limits and include provf.sions for assuring that prerequisites for the given test have been me_, adequate instrumentation of the required range and accuracy is used. cad that necessary monitoring is pe rfo rmed.
(3) That test results be documented and evaluated by the responrible designer acd, if test results indicate that modifications to the item are needed, these modifications shall be documented and the item modified, retested, or otherwise verified.
s (4) That scaling laws be established and verified for tests performed on models or mock-ups and the test configura-tioas clearly defined and documented.
(5) That the re ults of model test work be subject to error analysis, where applicable, prior to use in final design.
2.
Metnod of accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by an examination of the docuaests listed under each project.
412 326
5 a.
Project No. 10467 (1) Engineering Department Procedure Nos. EDP-4.26 (Interdisetplinary Design Review), Revision 0, May 31, 1978; and EDP-4.27 (Design Verification), Revision 0, May 31, 1978, of the Engineering Department Procedures Manual that implement the requirements of Topical Report BQ-TOP-1 to verify that they addressed the items listed in B.l. above.
(2) Engineering Department Project Instruction (EPPI) No.
EDPI-4.35-00 (Engineering Management Design Review),
Revision 1, dated June 30, 1976, of the Project Engineering Procedures Manual to verify that it addressed the applicable items listed in B.1. above.
(3) Engineering Management Design Review Schedule, Revision 1, dated July 28, 1978, rad Revision 2, dated September 21, 1978; and Design Control Check List - Mechanical / Nuclear, Revision C, dated February 12, 1979, to verify implementa-tion of the applicable requirements of the documents listed in B.2.a.(1) and B.2.a.(2) above.
(4) Drawing Nos. 10467-M-033A (P&ID - Decay Heat Removal) Low Pressure Injection, High Pressure Injection and Containment Spray System Suctions), Revision A, dated January 25, 1978; 10467-M-033B (P&ID - Decay Heat Removal / Low Pressure Injection System Discharge), Revision A, dated January 23, 1978; and 10467-M-033C (P&ID - High Pressure Injection System Discharge), Revision A, dated January 25, 1978, to verify that they were reviewed and approved in accordance with the applicable requirements of the documents listed in B.2.a.(1) and B.2 a.(2) above.
(5)
IOMs File Nos. 2-M-517, 2-3360 (Design Review) dated August 11, 1978, and 2-3695, 2-3652, 2-3660 (Management Design Review Meeting Notes - Decay Heat Removal, High Pressure Injectica and Component Cooling Water Systems) dated August 17, 1978, to verify implementation of the requirements of EDPI-4.35-00.
(6) Calculation No. 2.3.1 (Decay Heat Removal System - NPSH Available from CTMT E=ergency Sumps to DHR Pumps), Revi-sion B, dated January 20, 1979, to verify implementation of the applicable requirements of the documents listed in B.2.a.(1) above.
f)}
b
6 b.
Project No. 9645 (1) Policy QGG-3.3 (Design Verification), Revision 0, November 1976, of the Project Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual; and Section 4.5 (Specifications), 6.2 (Design Control Check List), and 6.3 (Design Review Notice) of the Project Engineering Procedures Manual to verify that they addressed the items listed in B.1. above.
(2) Specification Nos. 9645-E-009.1 (350 MVA 4160 Volt Metal-Clad Switchgear), Revision 8, dated April 27, 1978, and the Design Review Notice (DRN) for the Chief Engineers review of Revisions 0 and I; 9645-E-018.0 (480 - Volt Motor Control Centers), Revision 11, dated October 23, 1978, and the DRNs for the Chief Engineers review of Revisions 0, 1, and 2; and 9645-E-019.1 (125 Volt D-C Batteries), Revision 6, dated December 9,1976 and the DRNs for the Chief Engineers review of Revisions 0, 1, and 2 to verify implementation of the applicable requirements of the docu-ments listed in B.2.b.(1) above.
(3) Memorandum (Special QA Management Audit of Reprographics and Micrographics and the Project Interface) dated March 9, 1979, to determine if the legibility of the QA records maintained on the documents examined in B.2.b.(2) above had been audited and the resultant findings.
c.
Project No. 5177 (1) Licensee Administrative Procedure No. 0190.15 (Plant Changes and Mouificatiens) dated Februar: 28, 1977, which this project is commt'.ted to follow, to 2termine the additional procedural requirements governing the projects design activities (Project is committed to BQ-TOP-1).
(2) Plant Change / Modification No. 77-54 (Containment Modifica-tions for Steam Generator Repair for Units 3 and 4);
Drssing No. 5177-07H-C-25 (Units 3 and 4 - Containment General Arrangement for Removal and Replacement of Concrete, Rebar and Steel), Revision 0, dated August 29, 1978, and its DRN; and Specification 5177-074-C112 (Technical Specification for Subcontract ')r Placing Reinforcing Steel), Revision 0, dated July 11, 1978, and its DRN to verify implementation of the applicable requirements of the EDPs identified in B.2.a.(1) and the procedure identified in B.2.c.(1) above.
412 328
7 d.
Project No. 10466 (1) EDPIs No. 4.37-01 (Design Calculationr.), Revision 6, dated January 15,1979; 4.46.01 (Project Engineering Drawings), Revision 11, dated Juiy 21, 1978; and 4.49-0 (Project Specification * ), Revision 8, dated March 9,1978, of the Project Engineering Procedures rianual to verify that they addressed the applicable items listed in B.1. ahave.
(2) Calculation Nos. 03-09-F (Aux. Bldg. Column Base Plates),
Revision 0, dated April 18, 1975; 03-08-F (Aax. Bldg.
Columns), Revision 1, dated August 4, 1975; and 03-01.8F (Aux. Bldg. Intermediate Pipe Support Steel @ El.1989'-8"
& 2015'-0"), Revision 0, dated July 21, 1976, to verify implementation of the applicable requirements of EDPI-4.37-01.
(3) Specification Nos. 10466-C103 (Technical Specification for Contract for Forming, Placing, Finishing and Curing of Concrete), Revision 16, dated February 16, 1979.
(4) Two (2) cticks of drawings pertaining to the Auxiliary Building.
e.
Project No. 7597 (1) The project FSAR to identify program commitments.
(2) The Project Engineering Procedures Manual to verify that procedures address the applicable items of B.1. above.
3.
Findings a.
There were no unresolved items identified in this area of the inspection.
b.
There were five (5) deviations identified in this area of the inspection.
(Enclosure, Items A., B., C., D., and E. )
C.
Exit Interview An exit interviev was held with management representatives on April 13, 1979.
In addition to those individuals indicated by an asterisk in each Details Section, those in attendance were:
412 5d26) 3M
8 W. N. Adams, Manager of Engineering J. M. Amaral, QA Manager C. E. Bald, Vice President and Division Manager E. C. Fratz, QA Engineer B. K. Kanga, Project Manager M. Malcom, Project Engineer J. E. Malone, Purchasing / Contracts Manager W. M. Mendus, Chief Quality Engineer B. L. Meyer, Assistant Project Manager A. J. Palmer, Reprographics P. M. Peyten, Engineering Manager R. Rosenthal, Project Manager J. C. Turders, Project Engineering Manager A. Zaccaria, Project Engineer The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
Management comments were generally for clarification only, or acknowl-edgment of the statements by the inspector.
412 IMB4B 330
9 DETAILS SECTION II (Prepared by J. M. Johnson)
A.
Persons Contacted P. R. Britnell, Quality Assurance Engl.neer D. Denison, Mechanical Supervisor-Systems E. Duda, Project Supplier Quality Representative J. Fay, Assistant Project Engineer
- T. I. Gillespie, Project Quality Assurance Manager
- W.
C. Hesselbein, Quality Assurance Staff S. Johnson, Responsible Engineer (Mechanical)
- D. C. Kansal, Project Quality Assurance Manager M. J. Kaplow, Project C'ality Engineer A. Martines, Project Qu;11ty Engineer - Training A. Menendez, Mechanical Engineering Group Supervisor J. J. Milos, Project Quality Engineer
- 0. D. Moran, Quality Engineer
- H. C. Nelson, Project Quality Engineer D. K. Satpathy, Nuclear Group Leader T. Simpson, Cognizant Engineer M. F. Stutchfield, Manager Materials and Quality Services W. Turner, Quality Assurance Engineer D. E. Trapold, Division Supplier Quality Manager
- Denotes those present at exit meeting.
B.
Procurement Source Selection 1.
Objectives The objectives of th# s area of the inspection were to verify that procedures have been eatablished and implemented for the selection of qualified suppliers of services, materials, and components that provide for:
a.
Requirements and methods for evaluation of the potential supplier's capability to provide items or services in ac-cordance with the technical and quality assurance specifica-ticas of the procurement documents; methods are consistent with applicable regulatory, code and contract requirements and include source evaluation audits, review of historical performance, and/or review and evaluation of the supplier's QA Program, manual and procedures.
b.
Qualification requirements for personnel performing source evaluation and audits (See DetailsSection II D., Training).
10 c.
Periodic re-evaluation of suppliers, maintenance and dis-tribution to purchasing of an up-to-date listing of the evaluation status, and contract awards made only to companies designated in these documents.
d.
Measures to assure that the supplier's bid conforms to the procurement document requirements and/or has been evaluated for acceptability of exceptions taken of technical or Quality Assurance nature, and resolution of unacceptable conditions identified during bid evaluation prior to contract award or commencement of work.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by in examination of:
a.
Bechtel Topical Report No. BQ-TOP-1 (Applicable to Project 10467),
Sections 1.3 (Procurement), 1.5.6 (Division Procurement), 1.6.1 (Prcject Quality Assurance),1.6.2 (Project Engineering),1.6.4 (Project Procurement), 7.1 (Supplier Evaluation and Selection),
7.4 (Supplier Audits), and Appendix A.
These were examined to determine program commitments.
b.
Gaithersburg Power Division Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual, Procedures PG-7 (Procurement) and QG-7.1 (Source Evaluation and Selection) to determine procedural requirements.
c.
Thermal Power Organization Quality Program Policy, Policies TP0 Q-7 (Source Evaluation), and TP0 Q-4.2 (Requirements for Suppli,er and Subcontractor QA Programs) to determine Bechtel policy.
d.
Project Procure ent Procedures Manual for Project 10467, Parts II (Qualification of Bidders), III (Bid Evaluation),
and VIII (Supplier Quality) to determine specific project procedural requirements.
Project Procurement Procedures Manual for Project 9645, e.
Sections 2.0 (Bidding) and 3.0 (Procurement Department) to determine specific project procedural requirements, f.
Project Procurement Procedures Manual for Project 104a6, Pact II (Qualification of Bidders) to determine specific p.toject procedural requirements.
g.
Documents related to procurements for Project 10467 (Note:
Bechtel performs supplier evaluation, qualification, and recommendation to the client, who issucs the actual purchase order):
412 33 D-
11 (1)
Durchase Order (P. 0.) 1048 dated August 21, 1978, incorporating Design Specification M-47Q, for Contain-ment Spray Pumps to Bingham-Willamette:
(a) Evaluated Supplier List (ESL) dated March 2, 1979, and weekly updates showing status, rating, audits performed, etc.
For the audit dated December 1977 the one finding has been closed.
(b) Bechtel bid evaluation letter dated May 26, 1978, to the client recommending Bingham-Willamette.
(c) QA Manual Review dated November 29,1978 (for ASMI Code QA lianual and QA Program for noa-Code safety-related parts). Omission Reports indicate that all daughter standards invoked by the purchase order are not met by the manuals. These Omission Reports are being evaluated by project engineering.
(2)
P. O. B1051 dated August 21, 1978, incorporating Design Specification M-103Q, for Shop Fabricated Tanks (Radwaste) to Richmond Engineering Company (RECO):
(a) Shop audit dated March 31, 1977, record.
(b) Bechtel bid evaluation letter dated May 24, 1978, to the client recommending RECO.
(c) Current ESL. The last audit as dated April 20, 1978, and the one AFR (Audit Finding Report) is closed.
Another audit is scheduled for April 12, 1979.
(d) Telecopy dated October 3,1978, for the client concerning upgrading the Waste Gas Surge Tank to withstand full vacuum.
(e) QA Manual review dated October 5,1978, with Omission Reports (ccacerning ANSI daughtet standards) which have been sent to project engineering.
(f) Bechtel letter to the client dated April 2, 1979, recommencing deletion of caughter standard require-ments except for N45.2.2.
h.
Documents related to prccurements for Project 9645 (Note:
Bechtel performs supplier evaluation, qualification and recommendation to the client, who issues the actual purchase order):
412 3325
12 (i)
P. O. Q9645-M-632.0 dated August 29, 1974, for Standby Gas Treatment System to CVI Company (Note:
this is still an active order):
(a) Bechtel recommend 2d bidder list sent to the client on July 11, 1974.
(b) Bechtel bid evaluation and recommendation sent to the client on July 11, 1974.
(c) QA Manual review and approval on January 31, 1975, (Code 3) and June 11, 1976 (Code 1).
(d) Vendor audit record dated February 3-9, 1973, (closed April 1973) and September 1974 (closed September 1975).
(e) ESL showing most recent audit dated March 17, 1978.
(2)
P. O. Qo645-E-009.2 dated May 10,1974, for 7200v Metal-Clad Switchgear to ITE/Gould:
(a) Bid evaluation letter.
(b) ESL showing audit June 1977.
(c) Records of audit d ted November 10, 1978.
(3)
P. O. Q9645-M-143.0 dated October 26, 1976, for Restricting Orifices (for Residual Heat Removal, Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC) Systems, etc.) to Vickery-Sims (a Material Requisition purchase):
(a) ESL showing Material hnufacturer and Material Supplier status and a.utts dated Janurary 1977
' o ANSI).
(to NA3700) and February 197'/
(b) Records of audit to ASME Code Section NCA 3800 dated December 13, 1978.
(c) QA Manual review and approval dated October 1978.
i.
Documents related to procurements for Project 10466:
(1)
P. O. 10466-J-110 for Control Panels for 5 units to Foxboro:
412 33
13 (a) ESL showing audit dated January 5, 1979, and "x-rating" as future vendor as of September 29, 1978.
(b) Audits dated September 1976, September 1977, October 1978 (imposing a restriction: Ifold on Shipment),
and January 1979 (Hold on shipment remains in effect).
(c) QC Program for Mansfield shop approved la April 1975.
3.
Findings a.
Deviations No deviations from commitments were identified in this area of the inspection.
b.
Unresolved Items Relat.ive to P. O. 10467-M-45Q (for Containment Spray Pumps),
the vendor QA manual has not yet been approved. By report, Revi.sion 1 (not yet issued), to the specification and purchase order will clarify and more clearly define:
(1) QA program requirements and the applicability of the ANSI daughter standards.
(2) Requir-ments and the method of identification of essential (safety-related) non-ASME Code parts.
Further review will ce made at a later date to verify that the vendor's QA program has been approved, and that Revision 1 clarifies the above requirerents.
C.
Evaluation of Supolier Performance 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area af the inspection ::ere to "erify that procedures have been established and implemented that assure:
a.
Initiation of pre and post-award activities, as necessary, to assure that purchaser and supplier understand requirements of the procurement documents.
b.
Identification of platning techniques and processes, and hold and inspection points.
c.
Identification and review / approval of supplier genarated documents.
]h
14 d.
Control of changes and their processing.
e.
Establishment of exchange method of document information between purchaser and supplier.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished oy an examination of.
a.
Bechtel Topical Report No. BQ-TOP-1 (applicable to Project 10467), Section 1.3 (Procurement, 1.5.6 (Division Procurement),
1.611 (Project Quality Assurance, 1.6.2 (Project Engineering),
1.6.4 (Project Procurement), 7.4 (Supplier Audits), 7.2 (Surveillance Inspection), and Appendix A.
These were examined to determine program co:tmitments.
b.
Gaithersburg Power Division Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual, Procedure PG-7 (Procurement) to determine procedural require-ments.
c.
Thermal Power Organization Quality Program Policy, Sections TP0 QG-4.2 (Requirements for Supplier and Subcontractor QA Prcgrams) to determine Bechtel Policy.
d.
Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual for Project 9645, Procedure QGG-7.3 (Review of Supplier's Documents) to determine proce-dural requirements.
Project Procurement Procedures Manual for Project 10467, e.
Part VIII (Supplier Quality) to determine specific project precedural requirements.
f.
Project Procurement Procedures Manual for Project 9645, Section 3.0 (Procurement Department) to determine specific project procedural requirements.
g.
Project Procurement Procedures Manual for Project 10466 to determine specific project procedural requirements.
h.
Documents related to procurements for Project 10'267:
(1) Documents related to P. O. B1048 (Containment Spray Pumps):
(a) Supplier Evaluation Report dated May 10, 1978.
(b) Hold points including performance test designated in Specification M47Q.
(c) Ccnference motes from proposed clarification meetings dated June 26, 1978, and July 28, 1978.
412 33b
15 i.
Documents related to procurements for Project 9645:
(1) Documents related to P. O. Q9645-M-632.0 (Standby Gas Treatment System):
(a)
Inspection and Hold point identification in Specification M-632.0.
(b) Approvals for Revisions 1 through 10 to Design Specification M-632.0.
(Note: it was Professional Engineer (PE) sealed through Revision 2; Revision 4 makes it non-ASME Code and hence subsequent revisions are not PE sealed.) Rev.ision 14 to the P. O.
incorporated Revision 10 of the Design Specification.
(c) Bechtel Approvals for Supplier Deviation Disposition Requests (SDDR) Nos. M-632.0-005 and M-632.0-006.
(d) Vendor Drawings B 193-5900 (initial drawing and revisions A, B, and C) and B 193-6001 (revisions C and D) and Bechtel review and designation of category of approval.
(2) Documents related to P. O. Q9645-E-009.2 (7200 v Metal-Clad Switchgear):
(a) Engineering and Quality 7erification Document Trans-mittal List (Form G321c) - Appendix to Specification.
(b) I.pprovals for revision 7 to Design Specification 9645-E-002.2 which was incorporated in Revision 16 to the P. O. dated May 4, 1978 (c) Bechtel letter to Gould dated March 9,1979, concerning cracked auxiliary switches (potential 50.55(e) notifica-tion by client to NRC on March 2,1979) and request for vendor response.
(d) Gould letter dated March 30, 1979, in response.
(e) Management Cor;ective Action Request (MCAR) GG-NS-47 concerning hair-line cracks in auxiliary switches.
(f) Seismic Certifica*'on Report (No. 33-50470) and Bechtel approval dated No, ember 16, 1976.
412 337
16 (g) Vendor drawiags and Bechtel review and designatica of category of approval:
33-50470-D-161, Revision 2; 33-50470-E-52, original issue and Revisions 1 through 7; 33-50470-D-362, Revision 0; 33-50470-E-70, Revision 5; 33-50470-B-68, Revision 4; 33-50470-E-70, Revision 7; 33-50470-B-168, Revision 0, and 33 s0469-E-132, Revision 6.
Note that Gould original issues have signatute fot- "by" and
" checked" and " approved", whereas revisions show only "by."
This finding was identified, corrective action approved, and closed by Bechtel auditors.
However, several general arrangewent drawings issued af ter vender ccrrective and preventive action had been implemented still showed only "by" on revisions.
(3) Documents related to P. O. 9645-M-143.0 (Resticting Orifices):
(a) SDDR M-143.0-001 concerning paddle handles, and Bechtel approvals.
(b) Revision 11 to the specification eliminating welding by Vickery-Sims for ASME Section III Orifice Plates per Code interpret 2' ion II-1-77-87 (correction dated September 13, 1977).
J.
Documents related to procurements for Project 10466:
(1) Documents related to P. O. 10466-J-110 (Control Panels -
for 5 units):
(a) Supplier Performance Evaluation Report dated September 29, 1978.
(b) Appendix R to the specification listing hold and witness points and Standard QA attachment 10466-QA-1 requiring 5 days notice for test and check points.
(c) SDDR J-110-2-8 and Bechtel disposition.
(d) Vendor Drawings FP-1 and rD-2, Sheets 1, 2, and 3 and raview by Bechtel.
l (e) QA Manual approvals for Highland Plant and Neponet Plant dated July 10, 1978.
m 412 33g
,g M
M "'
17 3.
Findings a.
There were no unresolved items.
b.
There was one (1) deviation identified in this area of the inspection (See Enclosure - Notice of Deviation, Item F).
D.
Training 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that procedures have been established and impleme' ted that provide for:
Formal indoctrination and training or retraining programs for a.
new employees and reassigned employees.
b.
Training of inspection, examination and testing personnel.
c.
Training of audit personnel.
d.
Training programs for other personnel performing quality-related activities.
Documentation of training and qualifications / certifications, e.
.3 applicable.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives we--
amplished by an examination of:
a.
Bechtel Topical Report ho. BQ-TOP-1, Seccions 2.3 (Personnel),1.5.2 (Quality Assurance),1.5.3 (Engineering),
1.6.2 (Project Engineering), and Appendix A.
b.
Gaithersburg Power Division Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual, Policy No. QG-1.3 (Indoctrination and Training), QA Department Procedure No. 2.2 (Indoctrination and Training of QA Department Personnel), and QA Department Procedure No. 2.22 (Qualification
.f Auditors).
c.
Bethtel Thermal Power Organization Quality Program Policy, policy IPO No. Q-13 (Indoctrination and Training).
d.
Engineering Department Procedures, Gaithersburg Poaer Division, procedure No. EDP 5.34 (Project Quality Program Indoctrination and Training) which is applicable to Projects 9645, 10466, and 10467.
412 337
18 e.
Printout indicating qualifications of Procurement Supplier Quality audit and surveillance personnel (Note: formal records of training and certification are maintained in the San Francisco office, and will be examined there at a later date):
(1) Auditors for Bingham-Willamette audit:
Lead auditor certified November 1977 and requalified October 1978; auditor certified December 1978.
(2) Auditors for RECO audit:
Lead auditor certified February 1977, requalified February 1978 and October 1978; auditor certified March 1977 and requalified March 1978 and October 1978.
(3) Surveillance representative for CVI:
Certified to Level II on October 1978.
(4) Surveillance representative for ITE/Gould:
Certified to Level II on October 1978.
(5) Surveillance representative for FoxLc.ro:
Certified to Level I on October 1978.
f.
Training records for project personnel:
(1) Project 10466: Training records examined for Control Systems Engineer, Supervising Engineer, Control Systems, Project Engineer, and Project Quality Engineer.
(2) Project 10467: Training records examined for Project Engineer, Assistant Project Engineer, Nuclear Group Leader, two Supervisors, and Project Administrator.
(3) Documenced outline of content examined for two sessions.
g.
Training records for Quality Assurance personnel:
(1) Pro ect 10466: Training records examinad for Project QA Manager.
(2) Quality Assurance Staff: Training records examined for one member of the QA staff.
h.
Audit Finding dated July 21, 1978, from Audit do. 16 (concerning Project 10467) which identified training deficiencies, and records of its closure.
bb A til
19 3.
Findings a.
There were no unresolved items.
b.
There was one (1) deviation identified in this area of the inspection (See Enclosure - Notice of Deviation, Item G).
412 3'#