ML20058E879
| ML20058E879 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 01/22/1982 |
| From: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Deyoung R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058A387 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-82-206 NUDOCS 8207300240 | |
| Download: ML20058E879 (5) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
g s
/
k w
)
January 22, 1982 R. C. DeYoung. Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement EDTE TO:
FROM:
James C. Keppler, Regional Administrator, Region III
SUBJECT:
ZIMMER BRIEFING PAPER Per your request, the enclosed paper was prepared to assist you in your briefing of Chairman Palladino regarding the status of the Zimer construction project.
James C. Keppler Regional Administrator
Enclosure:
as stated 8207300240 820609 PDR FOIA DEVINE82-206 PDR emc >.R..I..I..I.................
.... R sum m e).S.t.
Ke ple,r/jr 3.......
.....g..
mn>....g..........
us= =-su.*
RC fDam 8 toGuMELas
_ _ _ _ _ _ OFFICIAL RECORD COPY g j
c
I William H. Zimmer Nuclear Station PLANT NAME:
Moscow Ohio, 24 miles southeast of Cincinnati LOCATION:
Cincinnati Cas and Electric Company LICENSEE:
REACTOR:
810 megawatt (electrical) boiling water reactor (General Electric)
ARCHITECT-ENGINEER:
Sargent and Lundy CONSTRUCTOR:
Kaiser Engineers CONSTRUCTION STARTED:
June 1971 PROJECTED FUEL LOADING DATE:
Licensee estimate - July 1982 i
Region III estimate - mid to late 1983, depending on results of quality confirmation program.
Testimony on some contentions has been completed.
HEARING:
Further sessions expected to resume in February 1982.
I
s I
The NRC staff has proposed a $200,000 fine against the licensee as a f
result of an extensive investigation of allegations of quality assurance problems at the construction site. The fine was proposed for three basic violations:
i l
(1) false quality assurance documents (2) harassment and intimidation of quality control personnel, and (3) numerous examples of failure to implement an adequate quality assurance program.
The investigation was conducted January through October 1981 after allegations were received from a former quality control inspector and from the Additional l
Government Accountability Project on behalf of Thomas Applegate.
t l
allegations were received during the course of the investigation.
The problems identified were attributed largely to the utility's failure to exercise adequate oversight and control of its principal contractors.
Consideration was given early in the investigation to the possible need to suspend construction activities. Work was not stopped, however, because the problems found were largely related to the quality assurance program itself and because the ongoing work would not compromise the ability to determine the l
l adequacy of completed construction.
Region III (Chicago) did require the utility to substantially upgrade its quality assurance program for the continuing work and, in addition, prepare a program to determine the adequacy of existing construction.
Ihe quality assurance improvements, which were documented in an April 8, 1981, confirmatory action letter, included a significant expansion of the utility's quality assurance staff, more detailed inspection procedures, retraining of quality control personnel, and -- most importantly -- a 100 per cent duplication by Cincinnati Gas and Electric of subsequent safety-related quality control inspections performed by site contractors.
1
o b
- The utility has also undertaken a quality confirmation program to determine the adequacy of systems and components where there are deficiencies in the quality assurance documentation. (Limited independent tests were performed by NRC contractors in selected systems during the investigation in an attempt to characterize the actual safety significance of the quality assurance deficiencies. Although a few problems requiring corrective action were identified, the majority of the tests disclosed no hardware problems.)
Additional NRC examinations are planned, as appropriate.
Region III is closely monitoring the continuing construction work and the quality confirmation program.
Some possible concerns raised by the resident inspector about the adequacy of the utility's control of ongoing work are being carefully reviewed by Region III. The two resident inspectors are being supplemented by personnel from the regional office to maintain a heightened inspection effort.at the site.
Some portions of the investigation remain open, and additional allegations were received from the Government Accountability Project as the November 1981 report was being prepared.
These new allegations and open topics from the previous investigation will be documented in a subsequent report after the investigation is concluded.
A separate section has been established in Region III to conduct the remaining investigative work, monitor the Quality Confirmation Program, and inspect ongoing work.
As a result of the quality assurance breakdowns in the construction program, the ACRS has decided that it may need to reassess the utility's capability to operate the plant with due regard to safety. In this regard, l
an ACRS Subcommittee intends to convene in mid-February to be briefed on the construction QA problems and to reexamine the utility's staffing i
I
~
ccpabilities and management attitudes as they relate to operations of Based on the Subcommittee's findings, a decision will be made a nuclear plant.
I en whether the project should be reassessed by the full Committee.
The licensee management has stated that it hopes to be able to load fuel We believe a more realistic date for plant completion.
)
by the end of 1982.
at the earliest, is the Summer of 1983.
i j
I i
l l
- - ~ - - - -
i