ML20094G530

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Submits Issues to Be Addressed at Forthcoming Evidentiary Session on QA & QC Matters
ML20094G530
Person / Time
Site: Midland
Issue date: 08/10/1982
From: Paton W
CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
To: Adensam E
NRC
Shared Package
ML19258A087 List: ... further results
References
CON-BX15-019, CON-BX15-19, FOIA-84-96 NUDOCS 8408130348
Download: ML20094G530 (6)
v • d • e


Text

~

t

?

Q.-

-4 i

4 8-g

,._i

)

4

.j A s

~

August 10, 1982 Note to:

Elinor G. Adensam From:

. William D. Paton

Subject:

Quality Assurance Issues to be Addressed at an Evidentiary Session in the Midland Proceeding Attached to this note is the July 7,1982 Memorandum and Order (hereafter

" July _ Order") by the Midland licensing board in which they comment on issues they wish to have addressed at the forthcoming evidentiary session on quality assurance and quality control matters.

Those issues are:

1.

As discussed on page 3 of the July Order, Str.' testimony should discuss "in detail" the basis for the Staf f's position set forth in our_ June 29, 1982 letter in which we expressed -our conclusion that it was necessary to supplement the testimony previously submitted with respect to quality a s su ra nce.

The Board suggests that not only Mr. Keppler be available but 'also any QC inspntors who might have more detailed knowledge of significant matters dult with by Mr. Keppler to the extent that their presence might in assist creating an adequate. record. We will have to consult with Mr.

Keppler to determine precisely what he had in mind when he concluded that it was necessary to supplement his previous-testimony, but it appears at this-point that one of the major factors was the apparent discrepancies in the facts set forth in our_ recent SALP report and Consumers' response to -that report.

2.

Qualifications of QC inspectors.

(July Order, p.4) b-

~

3.

Questions asked by the Board concerning the adequacy of the QA <-

M program for underpinning activities.

(JulyOrderp.4) 4.

"Certain matters" discussed in the Licensing Board's April 30, 1982 Memorandum and Order (hereaf ter April Order),

(I also attached a copy of the April Order).

A.

The coverage of the QA program for soils related activities.

8408130348 840718

^

PDR FOIA RICEB4-96 ppg gp,^

h-

...s

.o

. e

-B.

The matter referred to by the Licensing Board beginning a't page 16 of its April Order concerning a 42 inch diameter hole that was drilled to a depth of 40 feet within the "Q" fill area apparently without proper authority without the development of or adherence to written procedures without the participation of the onsite geotechnical engineer and without adequate ~QA/QC surveillance.

C.

The matter referred to at page 17 of the Board's April Order concerning loose sands.

D.

Staff inspection reports 82-05 (Detp) and 82-06 (Detp).

If0 ? 'f-t-o ot M*l-T-1-o33 f.

.NCRiS01-9-2-051(April;21,.1982),

~

Bechtel Non-Conformance y' E.

Reports Nos. 4199 (including Stop Work Order FSW-22) and 4245.

F.

The suggestion in the interim ACRS report of June 8, 1982 that there be a broader assessment of Midland's design adequacy and I:

construction quality.

G.

The results of the Staff evaluation of Drawing 7220-C-45 (See-Memorandum and Order of May 7,1982).

The above -subjects were addressed by the Licensing Board in its April 30, and July 7, 1982 Orders.

There are other QA matters that will have to be L,

addressed.at the evidentiary hearing.

One' is f airly extensive testimony concerning the impact of _the subject matter of the " management meeting" that is to take place with CPC sometime within the next 3 weeks.

If Mr. Keppler believes that the outcome of that meeting remedies CPC's QA problems, he will have to explain that to the Board.

We may also haveEto address the subject of recent affidavits provided NRC by GAP and-other_ documents provided Region III concerning ZACK (provided by

.T.Howard).

- Region III confirmed yesterday that they expect to be able to prepare their QA-testimony by October 31, 1982.

W ia D. Paton Midland Counsel

Enclosures:

July Order April Order cc w/e'nclosures:

Robert F. Warnick (Reg. III)

-Ross B. Landsman (Reg..III)

Darl Hood

COMRS POWER CO.

RECEIVED 1

{'

y g

To section seads nQ e

sa. ner.

\\

r.

consumers war.aaproi.s, Date December 2, 1982 pgggp Ccmhanf

~

==scer MIDim TECHNICAI. DEPARTMEFI -

Q-WORK INTcRNAL ConacspomocNec cc M

GTPollard GBSlade BHPeck ADKowalczuk Effective December 3,1982 authorization in my behalf for Q (CWR) release and closeout requires my signature or my designee's if I am off site. This is to insure that no Bechtel Power Company Q work proceeds without proper authoriza-tion. The major concern that needs to be addressed is that any new work does not cover up past problems. In order to meet this objective no Q Turnover Exceptions should be assigned to Consumers Power Company Maintenance for close-out, again, without my signature.

At the present time we are working with the NRC to allow the release of GSO work. Therefore be it TOES, DCPs etc until this item is resolved all work to be released will require my signature if it is on Q equipment.

e y.

/

O"

\\. - M...

^r -

-%:}

Ti L..

.:;z....

i.

.p U'

~~~ 's

  • ~

/,.-\\

(

D

,,-w

,e~

~wa

-t-w - - -. -, - -

1 CCNSUMERS POWER CO' To RAWells, Midland flE0EWED

(

JWCook, Jackson, P-26-336 Cr h FEB0 31983

.raou consumers 04tc February 1,1983 Site Mgr.

power Midland Proieet COEpany su.acer JDS/JWC TELFCON To KEPPLER REGARDING IPINS INTC=NAL

^

Co m at s ponot uc t L/DBMiller, Midland ;

cc e

o John Selby and I called Jim Keppler yesterday to respond to a question from the Region regarding practices at other Bechtel sites regarding IPINS. As part of that conversation, John Selby informed the Region of our decision to discontinue the use of IPINs and to complete all inspections once'QC has been called by construction and tq document.any findings of those inspections via NCR's.

John also indicated that'it was cur plan to review all outstanding closed IPINs; and, if the completeness of the final inspection record cannot be certified directly from the existing IPIN and QCIR, then all QCIRs in this category will be specifically addro.s'se'd in the verification portion of the Construction k'

Completion Plan (CCP).

Please make sure that.all those working on the detailed implementation of the related parts of'the CCP are aware of this conversation and properly fulfill these connitments.

4 k

D ?s crs Gr _*

4 i

T !.

p45-t 4

4 j

e se Q

D

CCNSUMERS POWER CO.

. s To ~

GWEwart,' MPQAD, Midl..

E0ElVED f

f From

-DFRonk, P-14-21 CON k

-JAN 211983 P0

- - " ~

Date January 20, 1983 COMPAN F E

sie. msr.

J.:.T

~

Subject MIDI.AND ENERGY CENTER PROJECT -

Internal MPQAD TRAINING SCHEDUI.E Midland Project Correspon'dence;..T ~

FILE 0650 SERIAL 19327 Reference

~

CC

.RAWells, MPQAD, Midland DJShooks, P-14-222 DBMiller, Midland WGTabb, HPQAD, Midland 1

ARMollenkopf, P-14-209A NVanDonsellar, MPQAD, Midland i t

R0berle, MPQAD, Midland j

In our discussion of January 18, 1983, we acknowledged the need to develop a schedule or status tracking method for the process of revising PQCIs. Our discussion with Jack Norris indicated that his staff of five or six people were able to revise PQCIs at the rate of one PQCI per staff member per week.

~

With approximately 50 PQCIs to be revised, it's not clear to me how an April 1, 1983 completion of Training & Certification can be maintained unless the revision rate increases. Furthermore, to optimize the completion of certification, the order in which Jack's group selects PQCIs to revise must be based on criteria compatible with the criteria established to optimize the training schedule. Otherwise the training scheduling effort will not be an

. optimization effort but merely a reactionary monitoring effort.

k Norm VanDonsellar and Willie Tabb have prepared a long term (three month) plan to perform training classes in a manner that supports the priorities and assumptions as we currently understand them. At this point it is appropriate for the MPQAD organization to review that plan.

If the priorities and assumptions have been properly interpreted, it is important that MPQAD

. formally endorse the plan and get the word back to Jack Norris' group to establish their priorities and staffing levels in a manner consistent with the training plan.

Once agreement is reached at that level, we can begin working with Jack to establish a tracking method or schedule for his work.

I have asked Norm to lobby for completing the review discussed above on Tuesday, January 25 so that the formal endorsement can be relayed to the troops by Wednesday.

I will be at the site'on Friday, January 21 and Tuesday, January 25 if you wish to discuss the matter further. Additionally I can be reached on Monday in Jackson at 81699.

i

(

ic0183-0010a144

...n.

6 To Distribution List rm JWCook, P-26-336 N

{

g g

hic December 9, 1982 power Suener REGULATORY INTERFACE -

CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION PRCGRAM INTE=NAL e

CoastsponoCNCC 4

'CC

l

=

.,V ',

The Midland Project has made a majot ccamitment in undertaking the Construction Completion Plan. One of the objectives of this plan is to improve our. regulatory iperformance and respond to a number of cngoing NRC concerns. 'As such, our plan has -incorporated several prior commitments to the NRC and certain other aspects 3

of the plan imply potential new commitments. A great deal of short-term planning vill be required to fully implement this plan.

Those of us invc1ved in carrying cut this planning vill endeavor to document and communicate our decisions as fully as possible.

e Because of the broad nature of the plan and the nicber of key personnel involved in the plan, there is an immediate and obvious need to properly coordinate our

,(

presentation of 'various a'spects of this plan to the NRC. It is imperative that we ensure that all infor ation given to,the NRC is correct information and that no erroneous commitments are made.'

Therefore, until sdeh time'as the construction completion program has been planned to the level of detail that vill avoid mis-

)'

understandings or miscommunications, any project team member, Consumers Power or Bechtel, who needs to communicate soma aspect of this plan to the NRC, is required to review that presentation with me prior to his discussion with the NRC. This

,y is necessary in; order te assure that our communications to the NRC represent the i

correct project information and policy regarding this new program.

U' j.

Also, since the evolution of the program planning vill be rapid and complex, com-munication to the NRC regarding the plan vill initially be required to include either myself, Roy Wells, Don Miller or John Rutgers. We vill, of course, utilize whatever project personnel are required to make the specific presentation, but to ensure proper project coordination, I am requesting the direct participation

, of one of the. senior project management team.

Inquiries from the NRC to any other project members abcut the plan should be referred to one of the above with the comment -that we request that initial discussion of the plan be limited to

~

these individuals in order to minimize the communication difficulties that can arise during a change of this magnitude and complexity.

. ;L i

u a-

~

we

- - + -

p,..

u..

u'.'it: sia:Et i.'. : :. f a r c ! 7 ' _ t C -

c.,-

j

]

~

.k i -

~ A-Q

  • j'j wy, ir * ::: n. c.
6. : :

3.1% t..-*

.....: 5 g: :-

January

, ' 9 :^ 3 NOTICE OF SIGNIFICANT LICENSEE MEETING Na=e of Licensee:

Consumers Power Company Name of Facility: Midland' Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos.:

30-329; 50-330 Date and Time of Meeting: January 18, 1983 at 10:00 a.m.

Location of Meeting:

C. S. Nuclear Regulatory C:= mission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Purpose of Meeting:

Enforcement Conference to discuss the results of the special team inspection of the Diesel Generator Building i

Region III Attendees:

James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator Others as designated by Regi;n III.

NRR Attendees:

.D.-Hood, Licensing Project. Manager

-Others as designated by FRR IE Headquarters Attendees:

J. H. Sniezak, Deputy Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement

Others as designated by IE Headquarters Licensee Attendees:

J. W. Cook, Vice President, Midland Project Others as designated by the licensee Distrubution:

J. M. Taylor, Director, Division of Quality Assurance.

Safeguards, and Inspection Programs E. L. Jordan, Director, Division of Emergency Preparedness and Engineering Response

'J. Axelrad,' Acting Director, Enforcement Staff

'J. P. Murray, Jr., Director, Rulemaking and En:creement Division, ELD D. Hood, LPM, NRR E. L. Adensam, Chief, L34, NRR

'R. L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licensinc, NPR W.' D. Paton, US (J. W.'Gilray, QAB, NRR R. C. DeYoung, Director, Of fice of Inspection and Enforcement OO l

m:>,1 o

li

y -

U*. T E O ET ATE 5 6 J ld*

'fiUCLE AR F.E GUL A O F C Cr * " * ~i ' '.

r

. :- 3. p

' asciore in

, j., (;,,,,d
r tes noossvs3 mo e.c

'c Q f,5 ote~ s t.vs, iets ois so :-

January 11, 1983 NOTICE OF SIGNIFICANT' LICENSEE MEETING

-Name of Licensee:

Consumars Power Company

.Name of Facility: Midland Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Docket No.:

50-329; 50-330 Date and Time of Meeting: February 8, 1983 at 1:00 p.m.

Location of Meeting: Quality Inn Meeting Room E 1815 South Saginaw Rd.

Midland, MI Purpose of Meeting: To discuss the licensee's integrated Construction Completion Program and third party assessment effort Region III Attendees:

'Ja=es G.-Keppler, Regional ~ Administrator Others as designated by Region III OIE Headquarters Attendees:

Ja=es H. Sniezek, Deputy Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement Others as designated by OIE'

-NRR Attendees:

D. Eisenhut, Director, Division of Licensing Others as designated by OIE Licensee Attendees:

J.-W. Cook, Vice President, Midland Project Others as designated'by the licensee NOTE: ' Attendance by'NRC personnel at this Region III/ licensee meeting should be made known by 9:00 a.m. before January 24, 1983, via telephone call to W.

D.'

Shafer, Region III, FTS 384-2656.

Time will be scheduled to answer questions from members of the public'at the conclusion of the NRC/ licensee meeting.

-Distribution:

See attached list

% 0 1 n e i i. t -4 m b

h) U L

. 2.

January 11, 1983

.-,>. V i =

. Distribution:

'J. M.-Taylor, tirector, Division of Quality As'surance, Safeguards, and Inspection Programs E. L. Jordan, Director, Division of Emergency Preparedness and Engineering

-d. Response-

~

' Axelrad, Director, Enforcement Staff J...P._'Murray, Jr., Director, Rulemaking and Enforcement-Division, ELD R. Hernan, LPM,.h%

E. L.~Aden~ sam, Chief, LBl., SW T. Novak, Assistant Director for Licensing r Division of Lice.. sing R. A.~ Purple, Deputy Director, Division of Licensing, NRR

[

t J

1 e

O f

r_.:

r -.. -w

,-..,,,c~_---,~g

,.y._.

1 e

/p@2"G%,k UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

--f y 3-

[ ^g RE31tNlll E

799 ROOSEVELT moAo C,

GLEN ELLYN, ILLJNolS 60137

,5 e

March 9, 1983 NOTICE OF SIGNIFICANT LICENSEE MEETING Name of L'icensee:

Consumers Power Company Name of Facility:

Midland Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Docket No.:

50-329; 50-330 Date and Time of Meeting: March 15, 1983 at 1:00 p.m.

Location of Meeting:

U. S. N. R.

C., Region III Office 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Purpose of Meeting:

To present the INFO findings to the NRC stsff Region III Attendees:

James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator Others as designated by Region III Licensee Attendees:

James W. Cook, Vice President, Midland Project Others as designated by the licensee NOTE: Attendance by NRC personnel at this Region III/ licensee meeting should be made known by 9:00 a.m., March 14, 1983, via telephone call to W. Shafer, Region III. (FTS) 384-2656.

Distribution:

J. M. Taylor, Director, Division of Quality Assurance, Safeguards, and Inspection Programs E. L. Jordan, Director, Division of E=ergency Preparedness and Engineering

Response

bl Axelrad, Director, Enforcement Staff J. Lieber=an, Director, Regional Operations R. Hernan, LPM, NRR E. L. Adensam, Chief, LB4, NRR T. Novak, Assistant Director for Licensing, Division of Licensing R. A. Purple, Deputy Director, Division of Licensing, NRR D.~ Hood, Midland Project Manager, NRR R. C. DeYoung, Director, Office of Inspection and Enforcement

.J. H. Sniezek, Deputy Director, Office of Inspection and Enforce. ment W. D. Paton, ELD J. W. Gilray, IE J. Stone, Chief, Construction Pr'ogram/ Construction Appraisal Team Section l

7

  • -({.['

.S th '~af7&tt W illiv UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY'COMMTSSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of

)

)

CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY

)

Docket Nos. 50-329 OM & OL

)

50-330 OM & OL (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)

)

TESTIMONY OF JA'IES G. KEPPLER WITH RESPECT TO QUALITY ASSURANCE Q.1 Please state your name and position.

A.1 My name is James G. Keppler.

I am the Regional Administrator of the NRC's Region III office. My professional qualifications have been previously submitted in this proceeding.

Q.2'.Please state the purpose of your testimony.

A.2 In my testimony to the Board in July 1981, I testified on the more significant quality assurance problems that had been experienced in connec-tion with the Midland project and the corrective actions taken by Consumers Power Co=pany and its contractors.

I stated that, while many significant quality assurance deficiencies have been identified, it was our conclusion that the problems experienced were not indicative of a breakdown in the implementation of the overall quality,. assurance program.

I also noted that while deficiencies have occurred which should have been identified earlier, the licensee's QA program had been effective in the ultimate identification and subsequent cer ection of thes. deficiencies.

Further= ore. I d?<cust OMiti in (

vv e

.the results of Region III's special quality assurance inspection of May 18-22,

~1981, which reflected favorably on the effectiveness of the Midland Project Quality Assurance Department implemented in August 1980. The thrust of my testimony was that I had confidence that the licensee's overall QA program for the remedial soils work and the remainder of construction would be

-implemented effectively.

~ItLwasn't until April 1982 that I was made aware of additional problems with the effectiveness of implementation of the QA program.

The problems

came to my attention as a-result of the April 1982 meeting between NRC and Consumers Power Company to discuss the Systematic Assessment of Licensee Perfor=ance (SALP) report for Midiand and the discussions held within the Staff.in preparation for_that meeting.

The SALP report addressed the Midland site activities for the period July 1, 1980 through June 30, 1981.

During this period, the soils work activities were rated Categcry III, the

-lowest' acceptable rating given by the SALP review process.

During the April, 1982 public meeting on the SALP findings, Mr. Ronald J. Cook, Midland Senior Resident Inspector, stated that as cf that date he would rate Consumers Power Company soils work Category III.

'the same rating as it received for-the SALP period.

He.had similar com-ments on other wcrk activities.

Based on my July, 1981 testimony, I expected Consumers Power Company would be rated a Category I or II in the soils area, as well as other areas, by April, 1982, and I was certain that

- my.1981 testimony had left that impression with the Board.

e 4

2 e

,.v, a-~..

,--~m.,.-.a

.,,,,n, n

~--+w,,

2 On,'the basis of the at-ve, I' decided it was appropriate to sup' plement =y

' July, 1951 testimony.

Q.3 What actions have been taken by Region III in response to the infor-mation contained in your previous answer?

A. 3_

I met with the NRC supervisors and inspectors who had been closely

.~

it.

Linvolved with Midland during the past year to get a better understanding of

+

their concerns. As a result of these meetings, I concluded that the problems being experienced were ones of program implementation rather than problems with the QA program itself.

~

Because of my concerns, I requested the Region III Division Directors most f:.

~:;

actively involved with the Midland inspection effort to try to identify the

. fundamental problems and their causes, end to provide me with their recom-mendations to resolve these problems.

They provided me with an assessment

- of technical and communications problems experienced by the licensee an'd made recommendations with' respect to the licensee's workload, institution of independent verification programs, and QA organization realignments.

~

This response is included as Attachment A.

(Memorandum from Norelius and Spessard to Keppler, dated June 21, 1982.)

In July 19821 recognized that more NRC resources were going to have to

.be provided in overseeing activities At Midland and created the Office of A

4 3

1

i "

Special Cases (050) to manage NRC field activities at Midland (and Zimmer).

'~

Mr. Robert Warnick was assigned Acting Director.

A Midland.Section was formed ce= prised of a Section Chief, two regional based inspectors, and

'two resident inspectors (the second resident in;pector reported onsite in August 1982).

.+

Before~ meeting with representatives of..the.. Office.of Nucimar React:ot Regulation (NRR) to discuss options for NRC action in connection with Midland, Mr. Warnick requested Senior Resident Inspector Cook to provide a su==ary of the indicators of questionable licensee performance.

Mr. Cook provided a memorandum documenting a number of problocs and concerns, which is included as Attachment B.

(Memorandum R. J. Cook to R. F. Warnick, dated July-23, 1982.)

Mr. Warnick and I met wi.th representatives of. NRR on July 26,1982 to discuss Consumers Power Company's performance.

This meeting resulted in recommended actions concerning third party reviews of past work and ongoing work which are described in Attachment C.

(Memorandum, Warnick to Files, dated August 18, 1982.)

Fo11 cuing the meeting with NRR, Mr. Warnick discussed with members of the Mid1'nd Section positions concerning third party reviews developed at a

the meeting with NRR.

The members of the Midland Section were not convinced the reco= mended actions were the bestesolution, since the causes of the problems had not been clearly identified.

Instead, they proposed a somewhat r-different approach consisting of an augmented NRC inspection effort coupled 4

. - -., _ ~, -

~

with other actions to strengthsn the licensee's QA/QC organization end management.

This proposal is documented in Attachment D.

(Memorandum, k*arnick to Keppler, dated August 18, 1982.)

In response to these suggestions, Mr. Darrell Eisenhut, Director - Division of Licensing, NRR. and I met with top corpo, rate management representatives

-from Consumers Power Company on August 26, 1982 and again on September 2, 1982, to discuss NRC's concerns and possible r_ecommended solutions.

Because it was not clear to the NRC staff why Consumers Power was having difficulty implementing their.QA program, we requested them to develop and su=b'it to the NRC actions which would be i=plemented to improve the QA program imple-mentation and, at the same time, provide confidence that the program was

- being implemented properly.

~

Consumers Power subsequently presented its proposal for resolution of the identified problems in two letters dated September 17, 1982, which are included as Attachments E and F.

(Letters Cook to Keppler and Denton, dated September-17, 1982.)

These proposals were lacking in detail, particularly with respect to the plant independent review programs.

Following a meeting between NRC staff members and Consumers Power Company in Midland on September 29, 1982 Consumers Power submitted a detailed plan to NRC on October 5, 1982 concerning the planned third party activities (Attachment G).

Consumers Power Company's preposals (Attachments E, F and G) are currently under review by NRC.

I' 5

e

-'t-- * * ' * * * * ' -

r 3

'Q.4 DoyoubslichethatconstructionoftheMidland' Plant should ba

_ permitted to' continue?

A.4 Yes...This portion of my testimony discusses what has been accom-plished and what will be - accomplished in the near future to provide a basis for continued construction of the Mid, land plant.

' Consumers Power Company will have independent. third. party assessments of...

the Midland construction' project. 'These_ assessments will include reviews of safety related work in progress and of completed work activities.

Stone and Webster has been selected by Consumers Power Company to perform the

! assessment of the remedial soils work.

The scope of, and contractors for, the remaining assessments are presently under review by the NRC staff.

Along with' the independent third party reviews, the Office of Special Cases, Midland Section; has expinded its inspection'eff6rt And'has taken actions to assure compliance with the Licensing Board's April 30, 1982 requirement that the remedial soils work activities receive prior staff

-approval.

Specifically, the Midland Section has established a procedure t

'for staff authorization of work activities proposed by Consumers Power Company (Attachment H, Work Authoritation Procedure, dated August 12, 1982); and has caused a stop of the remedial soils work on two occasions:

. August, 1982 and September, 1982 (Attachments I and J, Confirmatory Action Letters dated August 12, 1982, and September 24, 1982, respectively).

The Section has also started an inspection of the work activities which have

.been accomplished by Consumers Power Company in the last twelve months in 6

g...-

the diosal gsnsrator building, tha service' water building, and other safety related areas.

This inspect on was started during October 1982 and is continuing as of the filing date of this testimony.

Based upon (1) the third party assessments of the plant which will be performed, (2) the increased NRC inspection, effort, and (3) the work authorization controls.by the NRC, I believe that work on,the Midland Plant may continue. As demonstrated by the previous stop-work effected *in the remedial soils drei, the stiff will take whatever action is necessar to assure that construction is in accordance with applicable requirements and standards.

9 9

e a e d

e v

0

.c CIVIL PE:ALTY ACTION EA No.

83-3 CP No.

EN No.

icensee:

CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY Rec'd HQ 1/7/83 fm Reg. III

^

1945 WEST PARNALL ROAD Assigned to: ES ELD JACKSON, MI 49201 Type License:

Reactor (const.)

[3 Facility:

MIDLAND Reactor (oper.)

[3 Docket No.

50-329, 50-330 Materials

[3

a.. cense !!o.

Fuel Facility

[3 Other:

Preposed~ Penalty: $

Date:

Imposed Penalty:

S Date:

ype ase:

Exposure

[3 Pavment:

Date:

False Statement

[3 Close Out:

Date:

Operator

[3 Remarks:

Physical Security [3 Quality Assurance

[3 Radiation Safety

[]

Reactor Safety

[3 Transportation

[]

Other:

Summary:

e D

G b

e e

w------

ww-w-" + * " " ~ ^ ~ ' * * ' " ' " " ^ ' ' ^ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ~ * '

.. v -~

. _ s ' r,7

_ kn.

,j

e. C t he,'e.

' f ',f I

I, s

UNITED STATES gi,,Tw ;)

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y

[,g y,3g REGloN til

/

/

.e

oe moosavstr meAo

- o, "A ,' ',8

. cLas sLLYN, ILUNolS 60137 h

,, u.,

J JAN 1 1 G8f MEMORANDUM FOR:

James G. Kappler, Regional Administrator FROM:

R. F. Warnick, Acting Director, Of 51ce of Special Cases

SUBJECT:

MIDI.AND MONTHLY STATUS RIPORT EncJ osed is the monthly status report for the Midland Project.

The report is for the period of December 1,1982 through December 31, 1982.

RFW A R. F. Warnick, Acting Director Office of Special Cases

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/ encl:

D. G. Eisenhut, NRR

~J. H. Sniazak, IE l

8 6

6 l

g o l n I t / dvA c' /

~o 01 & I I WQW O

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

4 U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III MIDLAND MONTHLY STATUS REPORT DECEMBER 1 - DECEMBER 31, 1982 9

0 l'

S-4 4

SUMMARY

OF SIGNIFICANT MIDI.AND ISSUES 1.

Heating, Ventilation'and Air Con'ditioning (HVAC)

The licensee, as a result of audits of HVAC work activities,

' determined that welder certifications and welding procedure qualifications were-inadequate.

All safety-related welding on HVAC was stopped by the licenses en Novemlier 30, 1982, and 151 craft workers were laid off. PNO-III-82-130 was issued.

~

During this reporting period the licenses has begun developing a new set of welding procedures.

2.

Electrical The licenses continued electrical cable reinspections. Two (2) additional improperly substituted cables have been identified.

- A total of six '(6) substituted cables, of approximately 4000 cables reinspected, have been identified. Approximately 5000 cables remain to be reinspected.

3.

- Remedial Soils Work Authorization On December 9, 1982, the NRC authorized the licensee to commence construction work on piers 12 East and 12 West under the Turbine Building. On December 13, 1982~, Consumers Power Company began work on the piers. During excavation for pier 12 the licensee ras into concrete fill. The chipping and removal of the concrete has caused the work to proceed slower-than the licensee had previously expected.

4.

Consumers Power Company Construction Completion Program On December 2, 1982, consumers Power Company presented to the Region III staff a plan to establish confidence in the adequacy of safety-related work at the Midland Site.

The licensee's initial Construction Completion Program (CCP) required a substantial reduction in most of the safety-related work activities and a subsequent reduction in the workforce involving approximately 1100 people.

Implementation of the CCP required removal of construction equipment from the work spaces and building cleanup in preparation for a complete QC inspection of every safety-related system in every area.

PNO-III-82-131 was issued.

Region III has prepared a draf t report of the October-November team inspection.. Escalated enforcement action is being considered.

An enforcement conference with the licensee is scheduled for January 18, 1983 in RIII.

9 9

)

4 y

-.,m..m.--

_,-m.-

o.-

.--..-,-w-

r A menting was hcid on D cembcr 7, 1982 with IE, NRR, cud ELD to

~

discuss the findings of the RIII October-November team inspection and the licensee's proposed construction completion program.

A meeting with the licensee to discuss the CCP is scheduled for February 3, 1983 in Midland.

It will be open to public attendance.

O 4

O 9

m W

b 9

I e

e 9

f 3_,

97

-y-m+-v-g---e ve*Wv**-

~"'-#V"*

'**-'* '- ~"* ~'" "

. ;,. y W

s3 *8Cg UNITED STATES o

y 4

o, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION h

-f.')

v*~ " g. -

'REGibNlil I#g L

l C

799 mooSEVELT RoAo S,

GLEN ELLYN, ILUNotS 60137 j

MAR 1 4 G83' MEMORANDUM.FOR: James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator FROM:

R. F. Warnick,' Director, Office of Special Cases

SUBJECT:

MONTHLY STATUS REPORT FOR FEBRUARY, 1983 Attached is the status report for the Midland Froject for tha period of February 1-28, 1983.

-Should you h' ave any questions regarding this information please contact W. D. Shafer of my staff.

[7F4) &

R. F. Warnick, Director Office of Special Cases

Attachment:

At stated cc w/ attachment:

D. G. Eisenhut, NRR J. H. Sniezek, IE A. B. Davis, RIII

+

C e

4 e

I Bn i n lurh I l t

- o ; /

o-v%g 4

4 O

4 l

E.

"C S

O UNITED STATES -

+

0, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

8..
, ' ' 't REGloN 111

. {.7

}r -

7ee moosEv5LT moAo

.8, 4'

QLEN ELLYN, ILLJNolS 80137

s. 7 f March ' 3, 1983 (c

MEMORANDUM FOR:

W. D. Shafer, Chief, Office of Special Cases, Section 2 FRCM:

R. J._ Cook, Senior Resident Inspector, Midland Site

SUBJECT:

MONTHLY STATUS REPORT Attached is the status report for the Midland Nuclear Construction Site

~ covering the period of February 1,1983, through February 28, 1983.

The status report contains the input frcm each member of the Midland Inspec-tion Site Team of the Office of Special Cases.

~

[s.

I w.

R. J. Cook Senior Resident Inspector Midland Site Resident Office

'cc/ attachments R. F..Warnick R. B. ~ Landsman.

R. N. Gardner

-B.

L. Burgess

+

9 6

S*!

Ill,h ti/

n O J/ * '

'Ytty s-u h

.m.

SUMMARY

OF SIGNIFICANT MIDLAND ISSUES 1.'

Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC)

= Qualification of welding procedures commenced on February 14, 1983, and to date, approximately 115 coupons for sheet metal welding have

'been completed. Two welding procedures have been sent to MPQAD for

-final review prior to qualification.

In addition, the Zack Company and Bechtel Power Company held a meeting on February 22, 1983, to i

establish connitments for procedures review and approval prior to restart of work activities.

'The NRC review of the Zack welding tequalification program, addressed

-in the Construction Completion Program (CCP), is expected to take place by March 18, 1983.

2..

Electrical Installed cable reinspection continued with one additional improperly substituted cable found. Currently,.seven substituted cables of approximately 7,300 cables inspected have been identified. Approxi-mately 1,800 cables remain to be reinspected.

Evaluation of the safety significance continues through the use of

. a nonconformance report.

'-/

3.

- Remedial so'ils Work Authorization Concrete pours for Pier ~12 East and West were completed during this report period, and load transfer to the piers is expected during the second week of March.

Four point jacking of Units 1 and 2 Feed Isolation Valve Pits (FIVPs) was completed on February 12th and 19th respectively. After jacking of each FIVP, new cracks were found and one crack under the top slab of the Unit 1 FIVP reached the alert level of 10 mils.

The NRC has requested the licensee to perform an engineering evalua-

^

tion to determine the cause of FIVP top slab cracking prior to excava-tion underneath the FIVPs.

. Authorization for Pier 11 East and West was provided to the licensee by the NRC on February 22, 1983, and Pier 9 East and West was authori-zed on February 24, 1983.

4.

Construction Completion Program Public Meeting A public meeting was held on February 8,1983, between the NRC and Consumers Power Company to discuss the licensee's proposed Construction Completion Plan and to allow public comment on the program.

1 eve-,1

-w,,--

,--,-----+-w---.-..-,-,,

-.3,v--r,r-

.--,---..,,,-.,,c,..------,---,v--

.-,,..---we

.y----,----w-,-,,.e

-w-

C 'M "I_,

=

~

. j $" '%,

UNITEo STATES jg, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

/

[ :\\. ['

RECloN 111

-r/

j 799 ROOSEVELT Ro AQ

'

  • Se /f GLEN ELLYN, ILLjNolS 60137

$EB l' 4 g33

...=

MEMORANDUM FOR: Janes G. Keppler, Regional Administrator FROM:

R. F. Warnick, Director, Office of Special Cases

SUBJECT:

MIDLAND MONTHLY STATUS REPORT Enclosed is the status report for the Midland project for the period of January 1, 1983 through January 31, 1983.

Should you have any questions regarding this report please contact W. D. Shafer 932-2656.

Ri= loa,wU R. F. Warnick, Director Office of Special Cases

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/ encl:

D. G. Eisenhut, NRR J. H. Sniezek, IE e

i e

e a

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20094G530&oldid=4325370"