ML20087C868

Forwards Closed Qar RT-00021 Which Provides Complete Response to Nonconformance Identification Rept NIR-008 Re Training Matrix

ML20087C868
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	02/29/1984
From:	CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
To:	STONE & WEBSTER, INC.
References
CSC-7397, NUDOCS 8403130210
Download: ML20087C868 (6)

Text

--

v-h s

CONS.UMERS POWER COMPANY

. 'g 'gf9

~-

MIDLAND ENERGY CENTER M

.$'[

Transnittal No:

CSC-7397 Date: February 29, 1984 To - Stone 6. Webster P O Box 1963 Midland, MI 48640 l O R4CIPAL STAFF Qld,)criTP!!?

Attached Is Partial Response To

[B7 0914 g

Complete Response To pgg ggi

/

43 For Your Information 3,rg-R~

h i3A

.g;,g Other Description ~

NIR-008: Attached is closed QAR RT-00021 which provides a complete response to NIR-008.

Signatures

,[

JGKepplergiNRC: Region III

.w/a, cc JJHarrison, NRC Region III w/a RJCook, NRC Site w/a R. Wells, 'MPQAD w/a

-BHPeck, MEC w/a NIReichel, MEC w/a ggg 7%

DDJohnson, MEC w/a 8403130210 840229 DRADOCK05000g g

I

. ;~

6 QAR NO.

MIDLAND PROJECT RT-0002' QUAliTYASSURANCEDEPARTMENT OUALITY ACTION REOUEST 7.

DATE ISSUED:

5 REY:

[? jdtI:n nP.3, a pr3 gy 12/29/63 0

f

..m 2 ". E. T L ? M 1.

PEQUIREMENT:

........ ~.

9-PAGE 1 0F 3 FPC 2.000 identifies the requirements for, and the approvals 10 ASME RELATED i

rcquired for training matrices. Various people generate and tpprove the matrices but the one common factor is i. hat CP Co O TES O no SMO gives final approval to all of them.

2.

CEFICIENCY:

Stc,ne and Webster NIR #008 identified five inadequacies in the system team training matrix in a sample of 50 which represented 318 job assignments.

4

11. POTENTIA @.SS(e) )

YES _

NO 3.

QAR ORIGINATED BY:

4.

DISCIPLINE / DIVISION /SECTION 5.

RESPONSE DUE PATE

12.. REPORTED TO MPQA l'

MANAGER:

DMTurnbull QSD 1/6/84 DATE N/A

13. ACTION ITEM NO:

15. ITEM PRIDRITY:

17. S/U CODE:

19. ACTION ORGANIZATION 20 QAR REVIEWED BY:

SO4124 3

PGM00 CP Co Site Management

'14. DISCIPLINE:

16. TREND CODE:

18. RESB CODE:

Organization

21. DATE:

l

/MJy[gg

'N/A DNT CPCO SM

22. CAUSE:

23 PROPCSED CORRECTIVE ACTION:

Sse Bechtel Letter No. BCCC-8838 See Bechtel Letter No. BCCC-8838 dated 12-29 attached.

dated 12-29 attached. In addition CPCo SMO will conduct a thorough review j

of the new revisions to ensure consistency j

in the assigned training levels.

l n

n 24 RESPONSI IZATION/ PERSON:

25. PROPOSED COMPLETION DATE i

l p

Complete.

~ f""""FISPOSITION CONCURRENCE:

2 Wn z/z der N/A MfCauky

' QAR REVIEWER g g g f g -

DATE PQAE (ASME ONLY)

DATE

(

27. DISPOSTION ACTION TAKEN:

The BPCo review committee referenced in the last paragraph of letter BCCC-8838 completed their review and submitted the Bechtel trainin; matrixes to CPCo SMO for approval on i

Jcnuary 30, 1984.

SMO conducted a thorough review for consistency in assigned levels of training and approved the training requirements on Febryary 8 1984.

Yk

. 2 ~ k!'zt

28. METHOD OF DISPOSITION VERIFICATION M. QAR CLOSED BY Verified that the CP Co engineer who approved Rev 3 of the Bachtel Training Matrices had made a point of verifying A

7 that all the changes asked for had been incorporated into MADdFEVE#T DATE Rav 3.

N/A PFQCE ( ASME ONLY)

DATE X n'NACCEPTABLE O SUPERCEDING QAR -

ACCEPTABLE

-n

Pags 2 of 3 STONE AND WEBSTER ' ENGINEERING CORPORATION QCI 15.01

NONCONFORMANCE' IDENTIFICATION REPORT.1 Revision 2 PAGE 1 0F 2 DATE OF NONCONFORMANCE

NIR NUMBER onR NOVEMBER 8, 1983 IDENTIFICATION / LOCATION OF ITEMS:

SYSTEMTEAMTRAININGMATRIX,. REY.1,5ATED. JULY 20, 1983 DESCRIPTION OF NONCONFORMANCE:

During the review of the adequacy of the construction training matrices,a sample size of 50 training level assignments., representing a lot size of 318 assignments, five unsatisfactory conditions were observed in the training level assignments.

' The Syt, tem Team Training Matrix of the Construction Training Program was utilized to perform the review.

~

See the attached for unsatisfactory conditions observed.

The five unsatisfactory condition,s reported represents a reject condition for this 'Iot size of 318.

/

dissf/ ' -

-c c.~ - PROGRAM MGR

~

INITIATOR DATE MMr /#,M DATI.

//

83 CORRECTIVE ACTION BY:

IDENTIFY ORGANIZATION TAXING CORRECTIVE ACTION VERIFICATION SAT UNSAT NEW NIR#

CONCURRENCE

- fINITIATOR PROGRAM MGR OATE DATE DATE REMARKS i

I

4 QAR No. RT-000'21 NIR #008 Pags 3 of 3 PAGE 2 0F 2 '

1.

• FP6 9.700, " System Team Charter"

'FPG 9.700 appears on the " System Team Training Matrix" as a Level "0"

(no training required) for the system team field engineer, mechanical.

Paragraph 5.2.7 of this procedure identifies the job responsibilities an'd reporting relationships for the system team field engineers. As such,- s level of training of "0" (no training) is not satisfactory.

2.

FPO 1.201, "Bechtel Assigned Post-Turnover.'(PTO) Work".

FPO 1.201 appears on the;" System Team. Training Matrix". as a Level "O" (no training required) forthe system team field engineer, mechanical. '.

In discussion with.the Team #5 supervisor, itwas noted that the Team members do get involved in' Post Turnover Work. Because of this involvement by the Team.meinbers, a-level of training of "0" (no training) is not satisfactory.

3.

FIG '1.400 " Preparation, Review and Routing of Field Engineer's ' Reports."

~

FIG 1.400 includes responsibi'lities for several disciplines, le; mechanical, civil, welding, and instrumentation as well as including responsibilities for 'the electrical discipline. The following conditions were noted as -

~

being unsatisfpctory; (a) The " System Team TrainingMatrix" under the column' entitled " Responsible j,

Discipline." shows tt)i.s procedure. to be an electrical. discipline-..

DM..

procedure.,

(b) The " System, Team Training Matrix" recuires the field engineers of the mechanical and the. instrumentation d'isciplines to receive a level "2"

. training whereas the field engineersof the electrical and welding disciplines receive a level "3" training. There is an inconsistancy of training levels being assigned..

4. ' Specification M-214, " Piping System Erection Fit-up Control Requirements."

M-2i4 appears on 'the " System Team Training. Matrix" as a level "0",.(no training required) for the system team field engineer, welding.

Specification pages 3, 5; 7B and 8 address welding. Also, weld fit-ups

- are addressed throughout this specification. As such, a level of training of "0" (no training).is not satisfactory.

5.

Drawing E-039

" Seismic Wireway Supports."-

E-039 appears on the " System Tdam Tra'ining Matrix," as a level "0" (no training required) for the system team. field engineer, welding.

Tliis drawing contains weld ' sizes and wcld symbols for typical wireway supports. As such, a level of training of "0" (no training) is not satisfactory.

It is recommended that the disposition to this NIR include a committ:nent

^

to verify the adequacy of all training matrices.

9 e

m. u r..n.

1 Bechtel Power Corporation -

/ !1 0, lo,g '

Site ME.

Post Omce Box 2167 Midl.and Proiect D*

I December 29, 1983 nr l Jun l Consumers Power Company-vu.s j

-,_. P.O. Box 1963 if.,a l Midland, MI 48640 arn j

• I Attention:

D. L. Quamme I

Site Manager

' I-

' Job 7220. Midland Project NJs NIR-008, OBSERVATION #34 W-/vjf.

UNSATISFACTORY CCNDITICilS r.ts wo, ON TRAINING MATRIX BCCC-8838 JFI

Dear Mr. Quame:

.. The review of a. sampling of the training matrix by Stone & Webster

~ ~ ~ uncovered five possible unsatisfactory conditions.

The conditions are inconsistencies between the levels and areas of Orientation and Indoc-trination (0&I) Training that,the systems teams receive.

The assignment of the level and area of O&I training is based on judge-ment as to what the requirements are for bringing a qualified employee up to speed to accomplish the CCP.

This judgement was made by various groups who established the levels 'for their respective areas, using some general guidelines.

With this approach, there is a chance for inconsistencies 'due to difference of op. inion and judgement.

One item sited by Stone & webster was the lack of O&I training foi a welding engineer on the electrical support drawings (E-039).

Even though these drawings have welding symbols and sizes on them, the group establishing the levels of training made the determination that these drawings, as well as many other drawings, do not have to be included in the O&I training for welding engineers.

Another item involved an inconsistency between some members of a team '

receiving a-level 2 (read only) and others having level 3 (read and review with supervisor) on the same procedure (Prepar,ation, review and routing of' Field Engineer's Report). This is an inconsistency though not serious <, and the matrix is presently being reviewed to eliminate this, type.

The other three unsatisfactory conditions involved leaving off some members of a team from an O&I training requirement of level 2 (read

+

only) on two general procedures and failing to require O&I training for the welding engineer on piping specification M-214 (Piping system erection fit-up control requirements).

-r

~_.-.,,-.,-,,,-..._,--w,-%,,-.,

+,-.,.r--.-.

..e,_ _ _,

--.,,c-

DUUI litfl i UVVci UUI pVIi:1((UI1

'~

D. L. Quamme

- BCCC-8838 Page Two

~

In regard to the piping specification, it has almost no involvement with welding or welding fit-up and is a pure judgement cal'1 as to whether welding engineers should be required to have O&I training on the speci-

. Of the other two procedures, one obviously should have been fication.

included as a systems' team requirement (FPG-9.700, System Team Charter) and the other is a matter of judgement as to who requires O&I training on the "Bechtel Assigned (PTO) Work" procedure.

.In summary o.f the five items noted by Stone & Webster, two are clear inconsistencies'. and' the other three fall ~ into an area of subjective opinion.

To eliminate our inconsistencies in levels and areas of O&I training, we have a committee reviewing the entire matrix with the goal of issuing the next revision by mid January 1984.

Very truly yours, Jw a adya G. A. Hierzer Site Manager

~~

GAN/EK/jke Written Response Requested: Nor O

9 e

e e

O e

G e

0 w

e, n,-

.n.

,.., _,. ' -~..,, _,