ML20076E495
| ML20076E495 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 08/12/1983 |
| From: | Dise D NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP. |
| To: | Starostecki R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| References | |
| 10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, 7171, NUDOCS 8308240509 | |
| Download: ML20076E495 (2) | |
Text
'
M V NIAGARA RUMOHAWK NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION /300 ERIE BOULEVARD WEST, SYRACUSE. N.Y.13202/ TELEPHONE (315) 474-1511 August 12, 1983 (7171)
I Mr. R. W. Starostecki, Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I Division of Project and Resident Programs 631 Park Avenue l.
King of Prussia, PA 19406 Re: Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Docket No. 50-410 _
l
Dear Mr. Starostecki:
i Enclosed is a 10CFR50.55(e) interim report for the problem concerning W. J. Woolley Company's quality assurance documentation. This condition was reported via telecon to Mr. H. Kister of your staff on May 4, 1983 as a potentially reportable deficiency. A 30-Jay interim report was submitted via our letter dated May 19, 1983.
Very truly yours, l
0 I
D. P. Dise Vice President Quality Assurance SFM/TL:ja Enclosure xc: Director of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 Mr. R. Gramm, Rcsident Inspector 8308240509 830812 PDR ADOCK 05000410 S
PDR O@q i l 4
l
NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION NINE MILE POINT - UNIT 2 D0CKET N0. 50-410 Interim Report Concerning W. J. Woolley Company's Quality Assurance Documentation Description of the' Problem A review of the welding and inprocess records available at W. J. Woolley Company's Canton, Ohio, facility was performed during the week of April 4, 1983. The review indicated discrepancies in the quality assurance documentation records for the fabrication of certain equipment manufactured by Irwin Steel Company. The Irwin Steel Company was subsecuently acquired by W. J. Woolley Company. The following eauipment was manufactured by the Irwin Steel Company and supplied to Nine Mile Point Unit 2:
1.
Combination equipment hatch and personnel airlock 2.
Equipment hatch 3.
Escape airlock 4.
Control rod drive removal hatch 5.
Suppression pool access hatches (2)
All of the equipment, with the exception of the personnel airlock, has been installed and is embedded in the primary containment concrete structure.
The available records were reviewed for compliance to Irwin Steel Company's Quality Assurance Manual, Revision 8, dated May 5, 1978, which was the manual in effect during fabrication.
The following types of discrepancies were indicated:
1.
Contrary to the reauirement in Irwin Steel Company's cuality assurance manual, weld cards were not available for certain components.
2.
Welder qualification maintenance records were not available to show that the welders maintained their cualification by performing the welding process within a six month period prior to the use of the welding process in certain applications. The welder's original qualifications were on file except for one welder.
3.
Inconsistencies were observed between weld maps, developed to coordinate the various parameters (e.g., weld number, welder number, weld procedure used, nondestructive test [NDT] report number), and the cross-referencing documents.
4.
From various magnetic particle test reports, it appears as if the testing was performed on a date prior to the date of the weld cards.
The matter is still under investigation, and a final report will be submitted by March 30, 1984.
i
. _,.~.
,