ML19296F580
| ML19296F580 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 05/23/1978 |
| From: | Brickley R, Hale C, Jablonski F, Mattia J, Schweibinz E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19296F572 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-QA-99900519 NUDOCS 8010210840 | |
| Download: ML19296F580 (20) | |
Text
9
(
VENDOR INSPECTION REPORT U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT REGION IV Report No.
99900519/78-02 Program No.
44090 Company:
Bechtel Power Corporation
~
Gaithersburg Power Division 15740 Shady Grove Road i
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20760 l
Inspection Conducted: May 8-12, 1978 Inspectors:
R b
77 R. H. Brickley, Principal Inspector, Vendor Date Inspection Branch I
L 5
3 g
F. J. Jabronski, Reactor Inspector,iiRC: III Date f
Y f
J. C.14altia, Reactor I'nsl1ector, NRC:
I Date M'
b 5
E. R. Sgibinz, Reactor / Inspector, NRC:
III Date Approved by:
b C. J. Hag) Chief, Projects Section, Vendor Date Inspection Branch Summary Inspection on May 8-12, 1978 (99900519/78-02) 8010210 ppo
N 1
D
==.
% Areas Inspected:
Implementation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B criteria, including supplier nonconformances and corrective action,10 CFR 21 report follow up, aciton on previous inspection findings, design i
change control, design process management, and design interfaces.
The inspection involved one hundred twenty six (126) inspector-hours b
on-site by four (4) NRC inspectors.
5 i
Results:
In the six (6) areas inspected there were no unresolved items identified in any of the areas, no deviations identified in four (4) areas, and the following were identified in the remaining two (2) a reas:
Deviations:
Design change control and design interfaces - three (3) mples of failure to follow procedures as required by Criterion V L
of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50.
m O
e
7
. DETAILS SECTION I (Prepared by R. H. Brickley) i A.
Persons Contacted D. L. Hauglum, Project Supplier Quality Representative
- R. E. Merriman, Supervisor, QA Programs j
C. L. Miller, Civil Group Supervisor A. G. Pecora, Reactor Building Group Leader
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
B.
Action on Previous Inspection Findings 1.
(0 pen) Deviation (Report No. 77-01, paragraph II.B.3.c.) QA management audits had not been conducted of the QA records systems on tro projects reviewed. GPD committed to the conduct of these audits within ninety (90) days following issuance of the applicable revised procedures.
The inspector verified the entry of this item on the NRC Action Item Log (#78-01-1B-17) and transmittal of the revised procedure (EDPI 5.32-08) to the licensee on May 8,1978, for final approval.
2.
(Closed) Deviation (Report No. 77-01, paragraph II.B.3.d) The Project Central Files, classif.ied as a duplicate QA record file, did not centain superseded design documents. GPD revised EDPI 5.32-01 to specify that the master file and security file (a remotely located duplicate of the master file) comprised the duplicate record systems. In addition the procedure also specifies that superseded revisions of QA documents shall also be retained as QA records.
The inspector examined the results of an audit of two hundred ninety five (295) records in the master and security files that were generated between July 1973 and May 1977.
All of the records selected were found in both QA record storage locations.
3.
(Closed) Deviation (Report No. 78-01, Enclosure A) The follow-up to verify timely corrective action to NRC inspection findings was not being taken.
The inspector verified that the commitments contained in Bechtel's response to the inspection report had been completed i.e. the reassignment of follow up responsibilities, obtaining written commitments for realistic dates for resolution of NRC deviations, escalation of open corrective action commitments to appropriate managers, establishment of provisions formally requesting schedule
1
[ extensions from NRC, and providing management visibility of open corrective action item status through publication of reports (fiRC Action Items List).
In addition the inspector verified the corrective action status of the following items contained in Enclosure A.
Enclosure A.l.(a) - (Closed) Deviation (Report No. 77-02, a.
paragrpah I.B.3.a) The EDPs were revised on March 31, 1978.
b.
Enclosure A.2.(c) - (Closed) Deviation (Report tio. 77-01, paragraph II.B.3.a) The GPD Purchasing Manual was recinded on March 15, 1978, and the engineering anc QA department procedures were revised, Enclosure A.2.(e) - (Closed) Deviation (Report No. 77-01, c.
paragraph I.B.3.a) The configuration reviews have been completed.
4.
(Closed) Deviation (Report tio. 78-01, Enclosure B.1) The Design Control Checklists (DCCL) had not been revised twice a year as required by procedures.
The inspector verified that the commitments contained in Bechtel's response to the inspection report had been completed i.e. the DCCLs and Section 6.2 of the Project Engineerir.g Procedures Manual (PEPM) have been revised, and the Project Engineering Group Supervisors have been directed by their management to adhere to the requirements of the PEPM.
5.
(Closed) Deviation (Report tio. 78-01, Enclosure B.2) A specification did not identify supplier requirements for certian permanent QA records.
The inspector verified that the commit-ments contianed in Bechtel's response to the inspection report had been completed i.e. the~ specification and others found deficient have been revised, and Project Engineering Group Supervisors have been directed by their management to adhere to the requirements of the PEPM.
C.
10 CFR Part 21 Follow up 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to deter-mine that:
The report accurately described the defect or failure a.
to comply and satisfied the reporting requirements.
i
. b.
The item was properly evaluated as required, i.e. the i
reported safety hazard was logical; factual, and complete j
data was used, an assessment af generic implications was made, and procedures governing notification were followed.
~
c.
Actions tr. ken or established and scheduled to correct the item were appropriate, accurately reflected in the report, and corrective action was adequate to prevent recurrence; if generic items were identified, corrective actions incorporated appropriate preventive measures.
[.
I 2.
Method of Accomolishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by an examination
[
of:
i, Engineering Department Procedure (EDP) 4.66 (Reporting a.
Deficiencies and Noncompliances to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission) to determine the methods established for the
[
evaluntion and reporting of 10 CFR Part 21 items.
t b.
Supplier Deviation Disposition Request (SDDR) No. C202-2-6 i
received at GPD on December 15, 1977, from Teledyne Brown Engineering, Management Corrective Action Report (MCAR) No. 5 dated December 22,1977, and 10 CFR Part 21 i
Report No. 77-025-001 to NRC: III dated December 27, 1977, to determine that the report accurately described the defect i
and satisfied the reporting requirements.
The documents listed in b. above and the " Final Report on c.
Reactor Coolant Pump Tie Rod Embeds for the Callaway Plant, Unit No 1 of the Union Electric Company" dated March 14,1978, to determine that the item was properly eval uated.
d.
The final report listed in c. above and technical specification No.10466-C202-(Q) (Purchase of Pipe L.1p Restraints, j
Pipe Whip Restraint Embeds, and Nuclear Steam Supply System Support Embeds for the Standardized Nuclear Unit Power Plant System), Quality Surveillance Reports (QSR)
No. 31 through 34 on Teledyne Brown Engineering corrective action activities, Drawing Change Notice C-052946 (Q) l Revision 3, and Teledyne Brown Engineering heat treat
~
records for January 9,1978, to determine that the j
actions taken to correct the item were appropriate, accurately i
reflected in the report, and were adequate to prevent recurrence.
(~
e.
The Teledyne Brown Engineering welding procedures PWT flo.
3-3-E-1-ST and PWT fio. 3 A-1-ST for the E-100 electrodes and PWT fio. 3-3-A-1-S for the E-70 electrodes for consistency and assurance that the reworked assemblies meet the original t
requirements.
l 3.
Findings There were no deviations or unresolved items identified in this area of the inspection.
D.
Supplier Nonconformance and Corrective Action i
1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that procedures have been established and implemented for:
a.
Disposition of nonconformances that provide for:
(1) fleasures by the purchaser and supplier for identification, control, review, and disposition of items or services that do not meet procurement document requirements.
(2) Submittal of nonconformance notice to purchaser by supplier which shall include recommended disposition and technical justification.
(3) Submittal to the purchaser for approval of dispositions containing one or more of the following nonconformances:
(a) Technical or material requirement violated.
(b) Violated requirement in supplier document approved by purchaser.
(c) Nonconformance cannot be corrected by continuation of the original process or by rework.
(d) Original requirement is not met but the item can be restored so that its function is unimpaired.
(4)
Purchaser disposition of supplier recommendations, verification of disposition, and maintenance of records of nonconformance.
~
a it i
,. b.
Corrective action that provides for:
(1)
Identification of and timely corrective action for conditions adverse to quality which occur during the procurement process that are the responsibility of the purchaser.
(2) Review and evaluation of conditions adverse to quality to determine the cause, extent, and measures needed to correct and prevent recurrence.
(3)
Reporting these conditions and the corrective action to management.
(4) Assuring that corrective actiun is implemented and maintained.
(5)
Verification of supplier's corrective action system.
2.
Method of Accomolishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by an examination of:
a.
Sections 17A.l.15 and 17A.l.16 of Chapter 17A.0 (Bechtel Quality Assurance Program for Nuclear Power Piants) of the Standardized Nuclear Unit Power Plant System PSAR to identify the requirements for control of supplier non-conformance and corrective action.
b.
Engineering Department Procedures (EDP) 4.60 (Procescing Corrective Action Reports), 4.61 (Nonconformance Rcports),
4.63 (Supplier Deviation Disposition Requests), and Engineering Department-Project Instruction (EDPI) 4.63-01 (Supplier Deviation Disposition) to determine that these procedures implement PSAR requirements and cover the activities specified in paragraph C.1 above.
c.
Supplier Deviation Disposition Requests (SDDR) Nos.
C-202-2-1 through C-202-2-19 submitted by Teledyne Brown Engineering and Nos. E-009-2-5 through E-009-2-9 submitted by General Electric to determine that they were sub-mitted, processed, and dispositioned in accordance with EDP 4.63 and EDPI 4.63-01.
d.
Nonconformance Reports Nos. 2-2531-C-A, 2-2669-C-A, 2-2483-P-A, 2-2503-C A, 2-2685-M-A, and 2-2603-E-A (the last two (2) presently in process), submitted by site
1
. personnel at Callaway, to determine that they were sub-mitted, processed, and dispositioned in accordance with EDP 4.61.
i Management Corrective Action Reports Nos. QAM-1 and I through e.
5 submitted against the SNUPPS project to determine that they were submitted, processed, and dispositioned in accordance with EDP 4.60.
3.
Findings There were no deviations or unresolved items identified in this area of the inspection.
E.
Exit Interview An exit interview was held with management representatives on May 12, 1978.
In addition to those individuals indicated by an asterisk in each Details Section, those in attendance were:
C. E. Bald, Vice President and Division Manager J. M. Amaral, Division OA Manager W. M. Mendus, Supervisor of Quality Engineering The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
Management comments were generally for clarification only, or acknow-ledgement of the statements by the inspector.
F
1
. DETAILS SECTION II (Prepared by J. C. Mattia) i A.
Persons Contacted t
- J. Milos, Project Quality Engineer - SNUPPS H. Mumford, Grup Leader - Piping & Valves D. Quattroicchi, Group Leader - Electrical i
C. Miller, Group Supervisor - Civil E. Thomas, Deputy Group Supervisor - Civil D. Munday, Plant Design Supervisor
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
B.
Design Change Control 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area of the inspection were to verify that:
a.
Procedure have been established and implemented for controlling changes to approved design documents.
b.
Design Changes are:
(1) P,eviewed for the impact of the change, (2)
Documented as to the action taken, and (3) Transmitted to all affected persons and organiza-tions.
c.
The design changes are justified and subjected to review and approval by the same groups or design organizations (see d. below for exceptions).
d.
When responsibility has been changed, the designated organization shall have access to the pertinent information, competence in the specific area of design, and an under-standing of the requirements and intent of the original design.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives were accomplished by:
, =
- ne I
I
?
b a.
Review of SNUPPS Preliminary Safety Analysis report, Chapter 17A.0, Bechtel Quality Assurance Program for Nuclear Power Plants.
((
L b.
Examination of the following Bechtel SNUPPS Engineering
[
Department Project Instructions (EDPI):
L p.
I' (1)
EDPI 4.34-01, Revision 3, off-project design review.
s (2)
EDPI 4.41-01, Revision 0, SNUPPS level of review of base design documents.
(3)
EDPI 4.46-01, Revision 10, Project Engineering Drawings.
(4)
EDPI 4.49-01, Revision 8, Project Specification.
L.
(5)
EDPI 4.47-01, Revision 5, Drawing Change Notice.
(6)
EDPI 4.61-01, Revision 6, Nonconformance Reports.
(7)
EDPI 4.62-01, Revision 4, Field Change Request and Construction Variance Request.
(8)
EDPI 4.65-01, Revision 2, Design Deficiency Processing.
c.
Examination of the following design documents and associated documents to verify that the design change control procedures are being properly and effectively implemented:
(1) Mechanical Design Documents
- Specification M-204, piping-fabrication and installa-tion of piping and pipe supports; Field Change Requests 2-0072-P for M-204 Field Change Requests 2-0050-P for M-204 Field Change Requests 1-0005-W for M-204 Field Change Requests 1-0016-M for M-204 Field Change Requests 1-0018-M for M-204
- Drawing M-03EJ02, RHR System Auxiliary Building B Train:
~~
Design Change Notice M-03EJ07-3-1 m
1 Design Change fictice M-03EJ02-0-1 Design Change fictice M-03EJ02-2-1
~
- Drawing M-03Ef101, Containment Spray System Auxiliary Building A Train Design Change fictice M-03EtiOl-3-1
- Drawing M-03HB01, Liquid Waste System Auxiliary Building Design Change Notice M-03HR01-3-1 (2)
Electrical Design Documents.
- Drawing E-02 fib 04, Class IE 4.16 KV System reviewed &
discussed revisions (flos. 0-4) for this drawing.
- Drawing E-02NB02, Logic diagram for ESF, XFMR, XtiB02 feeder breaker, reviewed and discussed revisions (fios. 0-4) for this drawing.
- Drawing E-03NE01, Standby generatcr system.
Reviewed and discussed revisions (Nos. 0-3) for this drawing.
- Specification E-018.0 Motor control centers.
Reviewed and discussed revisions (Nos. 0-8) for this specification.
(3)
Control Design Documents
- Specification J-601A, Nuclear Service Control Valves.
Reviewed and discussed Revisions No. 1-10 to this specification.
- Specification J-705Q, Nuclear Service instrument valves and manifolds reviewed and discussed revisions No. 0-6 to this specification.
- Drawing J-02ALO3, Auxilary Feedwater Pumps Discharge Control Valves.
Reviewed and discussed Revisions No.
0-2 to this drawing.
(4)
Civil / Structural Design Documents
1
. - Specification C-101, Provide onsite Batch Plant, and Furnish concrete.
p Field Change Request No.1-0004-C for C-101 p
Field Change Request No. 2/5-0012-C for C-101 Field Change Request No.1-0094-C for C-101 Field Change Request No. 2-0124-C for C-101 i
Field Change Request No. 2-0132-C for C-101 i
Field Change Request No. 2-0034-C for C-101
- Specification C-122. Erection of Structural Steel.
3 i
Field Change Request No. 2-0080-C for C-122.
Field Change Request No. 2-0101-C for C-122.
3.
Findings a.
No unresolved items identified, b.
During examination of revisions to civil drawing C-0C2316 the inspector requested to see the " Check Print" for revision 6 of the drawing, which was issued on April 4, 1978.
The inspector was informed by Bechtel representatives that a " Check Print" was not used to check the changes to the drawing.
Bechtel was informed that this was contrary to their commitment in section 17A.l.3 of the SNUPPS PSAR and their Engineering Department Project Instruction 4.46-01 and this was included as an example of the generic deviation.
(See Enclosure - Notice of Deviation, Example 1).
i:
7
, DETAILS SECTION III (Prepared by F. J. Jablonski)
A.
Persons Contacted E. Thomas, Deputy Group Supervisor (Civil)
J. Wang, Responsible Engineer, Diesel Generator Buildings (Civil)
T. Killen, Group Supervisor (Electrical)
D. Quattroicchi, Group Leader (Electrical)
J. Robertson, Physical Group Leader (Electrical)
M. Shah, Conduit and Tray Group Leader (Electrical)
N. Goal, Group Supcryi n. (Mechanical / Nuclear)
R. Radlinski, Group Leader (Mechanical)
C. Herbet, Senior Engineer (Mechanical)
K. Corbitt, Quality Engineer B.
Design Process Management 1.
Objective The objective of this area of the inspection was to select two or more design disciplines and examine the implementation of quality related procedures for the design process to verify that; a.
Design inputs are properly presrc ibed and used for translation into specifications, drawings,.nstructions, or procedures.
b.
Appropriate quality standards for items important to safety are identified, documented; their selection reviewed and approved.
c.
Final design can be related to the design input with traceability documented, including the steps performed from design input to final design.
d.
Design activities are documented in sufficient detail to permit design verification and auditing.
p.
The methods are prescribed for preparing design analyses,
. drawings, specifications, and other design documents so that they are planned, controlled, and correctly performed.
1
- 2.
Method of Accomplishment a.
Review of the Standardized Nuclear Unit Power Plant System (StiUPPS) Project Engineering Procedures Manual to identify design process management procedures which include requirements for:
criteria; calculations; interface control; drawings; specificatons; and review.
b.
Review of sections 3, 6 and 8 of the Preliminary Safety l
Analysis Report (PSAR) (Sf;UPPS Library copy) for the SNUPPS, to identify design inputs for the stand-by diesel generators, containment spray, and electrical raceway systems.
Review of the following documents to assure that design c.
criteria had been established in accordance with procedure EDPI 4.1-01:
(1)
Civil Design Criteria No.10466-C-0 (Diesel Generator Building).
(2) Mechanical Design Criteria No. 10466-M-000 (Containment Spray System).
(3)
Electrical Design Criteria No.10466-E-0 (Diesel Generator and Raceway).
(4)
Standby Generator System Description No. 10466-E-00.
d.
Review of the following documents to assure that design criteria had been translated to project design specifi-cations and reviewed in accordance with procedure EDPI 4.49-01:
(1)
Specification No.10466-fi-038 (Containment Spray Pump and Motor).
(2)
Specification No.10466-M-225 (Motor Operated Valves).
(3)
Specification No.10466-M-2018 (Containment Spray Piping).
.(4)
Specification No.10466-E-091.0 (Diesel Generator-Seismic).
I if 1,
. (5)
Specification No. 10466-M-018 (Diesel Generator).
(6)
Specification No. 10466-C-lll (Reinforcing steel for the Diesel Generator Buildings).
e.
Review the following caluclations to assure that they were performed in accordance with procedure fio. EDPI 4.37.01:
(1)
Civil calculation No. 06-01-F (Diesel Generator Building Analysis and Reinforcement Concrete Design of Basemat).
(2) Mechanical calculation fio. EN31 (Containment Spray Header Balance).
(3) Mechanical calculation No. EN32 (Cortainment Spray System Head Curves).
(4) Mechanical calculation fio. EN33 (Containment Spray Pump Net Positive Suction Head).
(5)
Diesel Generator Load Calculations drawing E-010005 (list of loads supplied by diesel generator).
(6) Short Circuit Calculation No. A-1 (Sizing Start-up Transformer; 4.16 kV Switchgear).
f.
Review of the following drawings to assure that design input was translated to design drawings in accordance with procedure EDPI 4.46-01:
(1)
Drawing Nc.10466-E-OiNE01 (Stand-by Generator System Meter and Relay Diagram).
(2)
Drawing No.10466-C-0CSill (Diesel Generator Building Plan-Base slab elevation 2000.0').
(3)
Drawing No.10466-M-02EN01 (Piping Instrument Diagram for Containment Spray System).
(4)
Drawings No.10466-M-03EN01 (Pipir; Isometric -
Containment Spray System - Auxilbry Building "A" Train).
(5)
Drawings, E-0E Series (Electrical Raceway).
1 A
, (6)
Drawings No. E-0R5901-A and No. E-0RS112-A (Diesel Generator Buildings) (co-ordination only).
3.
Findings In this area of the inspection, no deviations from commitment or unresolved items were identified.
O e
h b
62 w
, DETAILS SECTION IV (Prepared by E. R. Schweibinz)
A.
Persons Contacted
- B. K. Kanga, Project Manager - SNUPPS E
- D. C. Kansal, Project QA Manager - SNUPPS
[
- J. A. Gardner, SNUPPS Quality Assurance Engineer
- J. Milos, Project Quality Engineer - SNUPPS Project
- J. L. Turdera, Project Engineering Manager
- Denotes those present in the exit interview.
The inspector also contacted other Bechtel Power Corporation personnel including QA, technical, and administrative staff.
B.
Design Interfaces 1.
Objectives The objectives of this area cf the inspection for both internal and external interfaces were to determine that procedures have been established and implemented that:
a.
Require that design organizations identify, in writing, their interfaces for managing the flow of design information.
b.
Define and document the responsibilities of each organizational unit for the preparation, review, approval, distribution, and revision of documents involving design interfaces.
Establish methods for systematically communicating needed c.
design information, including changes thereto, across design interfaces as work progresses.
d.
Require documentations of information transmitted between organizations which identified the status of the design information or documents and incomplete items which require further evaluation, review or approval, Require that design information transmitted orally or by e.
other informal means is promptly documented, and the documentation confirmed and controlled.
'a.
, f.
Identify the external organizations providing criteria, designs, specifications, and technical direction.
g.
Identify the positions and titles of key perscnnel in the communications channel and their responsibilities for decision making, problem resolution, providing and review-ing information.
2.
Method of Accomplishment The preceding objectives with regard to determining that procedures have been established were accomplished by examination of the following:
Engineering Department Project Instructions (EDPI):
EDPI 4.1-01, Design Criteria, Revision 3 EDPI 4.25-01, Design Interface Control, Revision 1 ED?I 4.34-01, Off-Project Design Review (Design Control Checklist and Design Review Notice), Revision 3 EDPI 4.46-01, Project Engineering Drawings, Revision 10 EDPI 4.49-01, Project Specifications, Revision 8 EDPI 5.1-01, Communications Control, Revision 3 EDPI 5.16-01, Supplier Documert Control Procedure, Revision 6 In regard to the above subparagraphs in paragraph B the following documents were reviewed:
a.
EDPI 4.25-01.
b.
EDPI 4.1-01, EDPI 4.25-01, and EDPI 4.16-01.
c.
EDPI 4.1-01, EDPI 4.1-01, and EDPI 5.16-01.
d.
EDPI 5.16-01.
e.
EDPI S.1-01.
f.
EDPI 4.25-01.
g.
EDPI 4.1-01.
The preceding objectives with regard to determining that procedures have been implemented were accomplished by examination of the following design documents:
5
, Specification Nc.10466-M-072.0 (Q), Component Cooling a.
Water Heat Exchangers.
b.
Drawing No. 10466-M-02EF01 (Q), Essential Service Water System P&ID.
c.
Drawing Nn.10466-M-02EF02 (Q), Essential Service Water System P&ID.
i d.
Specification No. 10466-C-103A (Q), Installation of Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts.
Drawing No.10466-C-0C3311 (Q), Control Building - Area e.
1 Concrete Neat Lines and reinforcement.
f.
Drawing No.10466-C-0C3511, (Q) Control Building - Area 1 Concrete Neat Lines and Reinforcement.
g.
Bechtel Supplier Print No. M018-0026, Supplier Drawing No.
23:00, Bechtel Equipment No. KKJ01, Document title, Hydrostatic / Pneumatic Testing Procedure, h.
Bechtel Supplier Print No. M018-0077, Supplier Drawing No.
01761386, Bechtel Equipment No KKJ01, document title, Electrical Schematic Diesel Generator Control, Sheet Number 2.
i.
Bechtel Supplier Print No. M018-0060, Supplier Drawing No.
01761390, Bechtel Equipment No. NE107 (106), Document Title, Outline Drawing Generator Control Panel, Sheet 1.
j.
Bechtel Supplier Print No. Clll-0016, Document Title, Suppliers Shipping Procedure, Paper Calmensen Company (PACAL).
k.
Bechtel Supplier Print No. Clll-00154, Supplier Drawing No. R-0241-100, Document Title, Reactor Building Vertical Wall Bars to Elevation 2083.
(PACAL) 1.
Bechtel Supplier Print No. Clll-0156, Supplier Drawing No. R-0252-102, Document Title, Reactor Building Horizontal Wall Bars to Elevation 2083.
(PASCAL) 3.
Findings In the area of this inspection no unresolved items were identified, however, two (2) examples of the single generic deviation were identified.
(See Enclosure - Notice of Devaition, Examples 2 and 3.)
Q J kQGn!b.L
%$nS$1[!?4_.,_
~ MM 43uMGs NK~ fos.M56
" ' ' " " ' ' ' ^ ' " " ' ^ ' " ' " " ' ' ' " "
2" 1--
TION ITEM CONTROL FORN -
INITIATING OFFICE TRACK NUMBER
^
SENDING SEQUENCE RCVNG.
PRIORITY INITIAL ENTRY DATE TYPE G. W. Reinmuth OFFICE NUMBER OFFICE H
1 0
1 4
2 F
4 N
9 0
0 2
,0 7 - 7l8
^"'""##
ACTION ITEM TITLE P
A R
T 2
1 R
E P
0 R
T 7
7 0
2 5
0 0
0 P
U M
P T
I E
R 0
D E
M B
E D
S H
A D
N Nd I
B E
E N
S T
R E
S S
R E
L I
E V
E D
FACILITY REQUESTED COMPLETION DATE REQUESTOR 0
6 3
0 7
8 T
R I
P P
ACTION REQUESTED Follow up on next sake scheduled inspection.
REFERENCES:
Memo, Reinmuth to Howard 2/3/78 w/part 21 report attached.
ACTION OFFICE PERSON ASSIGNED ESTABLISHED COMPLETION DATE 3[7i REGIONAL
- I(
ll U /V Al l C (/ T 'I*
l 1
USE l
l l
l 2
[
l 3
r ACTION TAKEN ACTION DATE CLOSEOUT ACTION TRANS-OE 2.5 7 K l
CLOSE FER
/
fy f p g { j- /
O N l
C O M P k
L= TGD C
CLOSEOUT METHOD Ou 6 h*
Qs 3
'M (MW Obph W
-) L L A}1~
'n meaa -m n w Rq' 3ew t0&&
x%u I, s
&EpSc4 Elg au.2(zr4TA, sqped WiO0E/9/7S-02,;
p-ees A
C 9
t ~ r-t u S h o I E ! Al Q p x c m. p h k u,
0197 E.
NicFORu 56 PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE TO BE SENT TO RECElVING OFFICE AND 2 77 OBSOLETE AND EX!STANG STOCKS SHOULD BE