ML19323A399
| ML19323A399 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 02/29/1980 |
| From: | Rich Smith, Westerman T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19323A396 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-445-80-06, 50-445-80-6, 50-446-80-06, 50-446-80-6, NUDOCS 8004210179 | |
| Download: ML19323A399 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000445/1980006
Text
_
_
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION IV
IE Inspection Report Nos. 50-445/80-05
50-446-80-05
Docket Nos.
50-445 & 50-446
i
Licensee:
Texas Utilities Generating Company
2001 Bryan Tower
Dallas, Texas 75201
Facility:
Comanche Peak Electric Station, Units 1 & 2
Inspection At:
Glen Rose, Texas
Inspection Conducted:
February 20-21, 1980
l
,
Inspector:
h-
.
R. Smith, Reactor Inspector
Date
i
.
Reviewed By:
k6
)'?f'PL'
-
T. F. Westerman, Chief, Reactor Projects Section
Date
Inspection Summary
Inspection conducted during period February 20-21, 1980 (Report No. 50-445/80-06;
50-446/80-06)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of the licensee's program for
'
preoperational testing, quality assurance and operational staffing. The
inspection involved 15 inspector-hours on-site by one (1) NRC inspector.
Resul ts: Within the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations
were identified.
i
i
!
8004210 7q
..
l
.
.
-2-
DETAILS
1.
. Persons Contacted
J. C. Kuykendall, General Superintendent
- R. A. Jones, Assistant General Superintendent
- R. B. Seidel, Operations Superintendent
- R. E. Camp, Lead Startup Engineer
- G. Smith, Startup Engineer
'
C. L. Turner, Training Coordinator
- D. Deviny, Quality Assurance Supervisor
- Attended exit interview.
2.
Quality Assurance Program for Preoperational Testing
The inspector reviewed the administrative procedures and interviewed selected
individuals who will be performing QA activities.
The scope of the review is
outlined below for the four areas examined:
Management of the QA Program
a.
Verify that fomal requirements relating to authorities and responsi-
bilities of individuals or groups managing the quality assurance program
or perfoming quality verification functions are in accordance with those
set forth in the application.
b.
Verify that formal responsibility has been delegated for periodically or
regularly auditing the status and adequacy of the QA program,
c.
Verify, by direct questioning, that personnel in the applicant's organi-
zation understand their basic responsibilities.
QA Surveillance Inspections / Audits
a.
Verify that requirements have been established and procedures or check-
lists developed to review and monitor the following activities on a
regular basis:
Conduct of testing
-
-
Tracking of test deficiencies
-
Test documentation
Document control
-
-
Control of measuring and test equipment
-
Cleanliness control
Field changes and modifications
-
Maintenance during preoperational testing
-
-
QA records
__
\\
!
-
-3-
I
b.
Verify that responsibilities for the QA surveillance activities
identified above are specified in writing.
c.
Verify that formal controls have been established that will assure
notification of responsible individuals or groups when significant
deficiencies are identified during surveillance inspections.
d.
Verify that responsibilities have been assigned in writing for
assuring that corrective actions are taken for deficiencies
identified during inspections.
!
e.
Verify that requirements have been established for reinspecticn of
deficient areas where appropriate.
f.
Verify that QA surveillance activities were carried out in accordance
with the above requirements.
QA Audits
a.
Verify that responsibilities have been assigned in writing for the
following:
Overall management of the audit program.
-
Approving audit procedures.
-
Determining the adequacy of the qualifications of audit personnel.
-
Determining the need for special training for audit personnel.
-
Determining the independence of audit personnel.
-
-
Assuring corrective actions are taken for deficiencies identified
during audits.
Determining when reaudits are required.
-
Issuance of audit reports to management.
-
Periodic review of the audit program to determine its status and
-
adequacy.
-
b.
Verify that subject areas to be audited and audit schedules have been
defined.
c.
Verify that methods have been defined for taking corrective actions when
deficiencies are identified during audits.
d.
Verify that requirements have been defined to require independence of
audit personnel.
e.
Verify that distribution requirements for audit reports have been
defined.
f.
Verify that the people assigned responsibility for audit functions
understand their defined requirements.
g.
Yu rify that the preoperational test program has been audited by review-
ing available audit reports.
i
.
-
-
.
.
-4-
h.
Verify that personnel performing the audits were not involved in
either the performance or the inspection of the activity audited:
Training and Qualification of QA Personnel
a.
Verify by review of established adninistrative controls including job
position descriptions, that educational, experience or qualification
requirements have been established in writing for the following
positions:
Offsite QA Supervisor
-
Onsite QA Supervisor
-
QA Inspector
-
QA Auditor
-
b.
Verify by review of personnel records that the above personnel meet
the minimum educational, experience and qualification requirements
established for the assigned positions.
c.
Verify that a training program has been established for QA auditors
and inspectors which includes the following as a minimum:
Overall company policies, procedures and instructions which
-
establish its QA program.
Procedures or instructions which implement the QA program.
-
d.
Verify that responsibilities have been assigned in writing for the
training activities identified in c. above.
e.
Verify that the quality assurance inspectors / auditors have received
the training identified above.
.
The inspector noted that although most of the elements listed above are
in the overall administrative procedures, they have not been implemented
at this time. The inspection of these activities will be accomplished by a
subsequent inspection.
The inspector did not identify any items of noncom,.liance in this area.
3.
Operational Staffing
The objective of this inspection effort was to determine if all of the
staff positions indicated in the FSAR are filled and to determine that the
individuals assigned to these positions hold the requisite qualifications.
a.
Scope of Inspection
The inspector interviewed selected management personnel and reviewed
,
selected personnel records to verify that:
(1)
The organizational structure is in accord with the FSAR and
the Administrative Procedures.
.
_ _ _ _
.
,
.
.s.
(2)
All staff positions are filled, or that there are plans to
fill them prior to issuance of the operating license.
(3)
The technical support organization is in accordance with the
FSAR.
(4)
A quality assurance staff has been designated as indicated in
the FSAR.
(5)
Selected personnel satisfy the minimum qualification require-
ments.
This area of the inspection will be further inspected during a subsequent
inspection.
The inspector did not identify any items of noncompliance in this area.
4.
Exit Interview
An exit incerview was held with R. A. Jones, Assistant General Super-
intendent, and other members of the Texas Utilities Generating Company
staff at the conclusion of this inspection.
.
4
i
s