ML20024C993
| ML20024C993 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 07/15/1983 |
| From: | Davidson L DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20024C992 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8307210272 | |
| Download: ML20024C993 (8) | |
Text
mw
...~--
.a--
.. ~
i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
DUKE POWER COMPANY, et al.
)
Docket Nos. 50-413
)
50-414 (Catawba Nuclear Station,
)
Units 1 and 2)
.)
AFFIDAVIT OF L. R. DAVISON PALMETTO ALLIANCE'S CONTENTION NO. 6 1.
My name is L. R. Davison.
I am employed by Duke Power Company as Catawba Project QA Manager.
I have been employed in this position since 1982.
My professional qualifications are contained in an attachment to this affidavit.
2.
In the position that I hold, I am responsible for Quality Assurance at Catawba.
As a part of that responsibility,1 am also responsible for the quality of work, for assuring that QA requirements are fulfilled, for detecting defects in the quality of work and assuring that such is corrected, for assuring QA inspectors receive proper training, testing and supervision.
- 3.
- The purpose of this affidavit is to address some of the concerns raised by. Messers.
McAfee and Hoopingarner in support of 111ance's Contention No. 6., which ' reads:
"Because of systematic deficiencies in plant. construction and company pressure to approve faulty workmanship, no reasonable assurance exists that the plant can operate without endangering the health and safety of the public."
4.
_ Mr. McAfee alleges (MD Tr.13) that concrete poured on the wall
. above what is called the interior doghouse of Unit 1 containment (MD Tr. 72)
~
w B307210272 830715 PDet ADOCK 05000413 O
(
is of concern because it was poured while it was raining.
" Specifications for Structural Concrete (as referenced in Catawba Concrete Specificatiori CNS-1109.00-1) permits the pouring of concrete during rain.
A review of concrete records for the period of January-March 1978 reveals two instances that could possibly fit the description of the allegation.
In both instances, the pours were found to be acceptable.
5.
Mr. McAfee alleges that QA waived requirements on concrete forms in order to let Construction Department make pours.
MD Tr. pp. 13, 73-7.4.
There are a number of requirements in preparing for a concrete pour depending on the various items that are embedded from rebar and plates to piping and conduit.
Some of these requirements can be waived with authorization without compromising public health and safety.
For example, in a concrete pour which has no embedded electrical components the electrical inspection can be waived.
6.
Mr.
McAfee alleges that leakage of rain in to control room from the roof compromised control room boards.
MD Tr. pp. 17, 86-88.
The incident in
- question, which occurred in 1978, was written up by the QA Department as a non-conforming item.
The condition was evaluated by an electrical engineer and a civil, engineer.
They determined that the control room boards were not damaged.
Correctiye action to dry the equipment and repair the roof was expeditiously completed.
7.
Mr. McAfee alleges that pulled cables were not properly protected.
MD Tr. pp 18, 88-89.
Inspection instructions for cable pulling require that cable ends be protected from damage due to construction activities or
- moisture.
M-41B SIN 9 Rev 0 Step 5.
In the event unprotected cable ends are l
discovered, corrective action is taken.
1 j
r o '-
H
e~ -m :.. a.
w
..- a u w. =.
- w. = _ w = - -.. ~
- a.. e
, __ a I
The cables at Catawba have armor to protect them from damage.
Cables _ are inspected to assure that the armor is not damaged.
In the event tests or in~spections uncover damaged cable, such will be resolved before i
operation.
8.
Mr. McAfee alleges that he received second-hand training.
MD Tr.
p.
20.'
At the time Mr. McAfee was trained and certified as a Level I i
Inspector, the QA Departments' electrical. inspector trainer (qualifying individual, Ken Schmidt,) had delegated the performance of the training for Level I inspector at Catawba to Jim Allgood.
[
This delegation of training was allowed by QA Procedure J-1, Rev 5, l,
14.3.2.
Mr. Allgood is a highly qualified electrical engineer. Mr. Allgood was provided outlines of classes that were being used by Mr. Schmidt at other Duke sites so that he could pattern his classes after - those of Mr. Schmidt.
i j
Mr. Schmidt also provided Mr. Allgood with tests for other sites and instructed Mr. Allgood to rewrite and adapt these test for Catawba.
QA Procedure J-1, Rev 5, 14.4.1.
Mr. Schmidt discussed the training program with Mr. Allgood at various times while Mr. Allgood was developing and r
f teaching classes and modifying tests.
This dialogue was designed to assist Mr. Allgood in resolving any problems that he was having.
It also served a_s a means, for Mr. Schmidt to keep informed of what Mr. Allgood was teaching the inspectors and satisfy himself that proper training was being given.
I am satisfied,,and have been so informed by Mr. Schmidt, that Mr.
Allgood's training program was full and complete.
9.
Mr. McAfee alleges that there was inadequate testing of his class of
. A electrical inspector candidates because the class was in effect told what the Q
test was going to_ be.
MD Tr. _ p. 95.
Mr. McAfee's class was not provided
.with the questions - to the test beforehand.
-Rather, the training. classes.
s u
- -. a.
.-.2..-
__. _.c.c. _ _
1 consisted of both theory and practical information.
The most important part of the information given in classer; to candidate inspectors is what they will use everyday during the inspecticn process - items such as what to inspect, how often to inspect, what are the acceptance / rejection criteria are stressed.
These items were emphasized in classes as important to know.
These items are also the ones that constituted the majority of the test questions.
Mr. McAfee also alleges that Mr. Richard Bunton did not appear to be qualified to be a certified QA electrical inspector. 'Mr. Bunton has many years experience in electrical and instrumentation construction type work. He has worked for Duke for approximately 5 years and has performed satisfactorily during that time.
Based on his successful completion of Duke's Training program for certification and on the job performance Mr. Bunton is considered fully qualified.
He also has the respect of craft personnel as someone who knows what he is doing.
- 10. Mr. Hoopingarner alleges that because of shaky scaffold, welders performed faulty welds.
HD Tr. Vol.
1, p. 13; Vol. 2, pp. 5, 7, 9, 1~1-13.
Depending on the class, pipe welds receive various inspection.
Higher class welds (i.e., class A, B, and C) receive a cleanliness, fit-up and final visual inspection.
Non-destructive examinations (NDE) are performed on Classes A and B.
The above inspections are performed cn all welds of these classes regardless of where they may be located and corrective action is taken as o
necessary.
- 11. Mr. Hoopingarner alleges that scaffold boards were improperly placed on pipes and unistrut.
HD Tr. Vol.
1, p.
19; Vol. 2, pp. 34, 63-65.
The inspection proce, dure for piping.
(QA procedure M-8) details requirements for inspection personnel
.to use which would detect any s
u o
q abnormal bends or dips in piping.
Corrective action would be taken in instances of excessive damage.
- 12. Mr. Hoopingarner alleges the contact of carbon steel and stainless steel compromises the integrity of the materials.
HD Tr. Vol. 2, p. 67.
Duke practice is not to store carbon steel in. contact with stainless steel items.
"In general, there is no harm whatsoever in contact between carbon steel and stainless steel materials."
Construction procedure 170.
The basic reason for minimizing contact is to reduce superficial rusting and the cleaning that rusting would cause.
Metallurgically no harm will occur due to superficial rusting resulting from carbon - stainless steel contact.
4 S
4 4
O e
G
+
o<
I, L. R. Davison, of lawful age, being duly sworn, state that I have reviewed the foregoing affidavit, and that the statements contained therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
L. R. Davison Subscribed and sworn to before me this 15 4 day of July,1983
%cwnandti C. (mms l,na (Meec)
O NothryLPublic 8 My commission expires: T N t
e e
i!
e e
e w
h
+.
RESUME
.,0 F LARRY R.
DAVISON July 1983 EDUCATION:
1)
Graduate of Cedartown High School Cedartown, GA, 1963 2)
Graduate vf Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, with the degree " Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering", 1967
~
3)
Completed 6 months th'eoritical and 6 months practical training on Naval Nuclear Propulsion Plants, 1968 4)
Completed 6 months Naval Submarine School, 1969 E XPE RI ENCE :
1)
U.S. Navy, Ensign to Lieutenant, 1967-1971.
Attended 18 months schooling and served 2-1/2 years on board the nuclear ballistic missile "USS Nathaniel Greene", SSBN 636.
Served as Auxiliary Division Officer, Damage Control Assistant and Communications Officer.
Qualified as Engineering Officer of the watch and as 00D.
2)
Duke Power Company, 1971 - Present 1973 Assistant Field Engineer-1971 Worked in the welding technical support group of the Contruction Department at the Oconee Nuclear Station construction site.
1973 - 1974 Associate Field Engineer-In charge of welding and NDE inspection in the Construction Department at the Oconee Nuclear Station construction site.
l 1974 - 1981 Senior QC-Engineer-In charge of' all QC inspections in the Construction Department at the Catawba Nuclear Station construction
~
l site.
. Includes one year assignment-to the Quality Assurance Department
~
workin g -in in-service ' inspe ction for-Oconee. Nuclear ~ Station during a l
delay in the construction of Catawba Nuclear Station.
w.
f.
.1981 - 1982 -QA Manager Projects-
[;
- Responsible for.all QA activities'at I'
three construction _ sites;:
I McGuire Nuclear Station, cCatawba Nuclear =
~
.tL m
4 1
Rasuca!of 1.arry R. Davison-tPage.two-1982.- PrYsent Project QA Manager-Responsible _for all QA activities at the Catawba Nuclear Station construction site.
PROFESSIONAL: 1) Registered Professional Engineer in the states' of North and South Carolina.
- 2) Member of.the._ American Society of Mechanical
' Engineers.
4
,9L e
4+.
4
~..
+
e s
- q.
4 e
i 1
1
- - {i
~l 1
..g.
, -,g_.
y e
)
[_ $
4