ML20094P734
Text
.m
]
cao _
i
/
Ut:lTL D Us C;Lt 8 ' y. q ' ;
NUCL E AR REGULATOTIY COrat.3SION t
- .g \\ p / gl c,, y.c;.Hu _
REGIO!? lit 79S h005 EVE L1 ROAD
%,.....,g s.;"
GLEN ELLYN, ILLINOIS 60137 January 18, 1984 MEMORANDUM FOR: Pearl T. Smidth, RIII FOIA Coordinator FROM:
R. F. Warnick, Director, Office of Special Cases
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE TO FOIA REQUEST 84-24 REGARDING THE MIDLAND NUCLEAR PLANT FOIA Request 64-24 has been reviewed. The below listed documents are submitted in response to this FOIA. Please reproduce them and return them to me.
A total of two manhours of professional time (1 - R. L.
- I - J. H.)
were spent in the retrieval of these documents.
Documents Supplied / Withheld by J. J. Harrison 1.
Memorandum, J. C. Keppler to Region III Files dated October 31, 1983; 2 pages, copy attached 2.
Enforcement Action Notice dated October 20, 1983; I page, copy attached 3.
Letter, M. Miller to S. Burns, dated November 23, 1983; 13 pages, copy attached 4.
CPCo handouta from Fuforcement Conference; 5 pages, copy attached 5.
Memorandum, W. H. Schultz to J. A. Axelrad, dated October 19, 1983, forwarding proposed civil penalty package; 10 pages, copy attached 6.
NRC list of CPCo concepts of approval to excavate below deep "Q" duct bank, no date; I page 7.
Notice of Significant Licensee Meeting, dated November 14, 1983; 2 pages D408170360 840710 PDR FOIA RICE 84-96 PDR
D
. h rs e Pearl T. Smidth 2
January 18, 1984
. Documents Supplied by R. B. Landsman i
1.
Meeting notes of October 25, 1983; two pages; copy attached 2.
Document prepared for November 15, 1983 meeting; one page; copy attached 3.
Meeting notes of Nove.mber 15, 1983; 13 pages; copy attached The above documents are all the documents that existed at the time of this search, to the best of my staff's knowledge.
"Origing c,.; -
,n, p,;2:n!ck" R. F. Warnick, Director Office of Special Cases
Enclosure:
Documents supplied by Region III personnel cc w/o enc 1:
A. B. Davis 4
i lentaman/Is Harrison Wa ick 01/1'8/84-ogll6f$[
/ /[
3 m '- empt u,
[pd g e os q.,
Omit D M t.1ES
-f
,}
NLIC L F Al: REGULAlORY COMMISSION I
-[ f ; f Q
rratou ell
$g
,vpP 3
799 POOSE VELT ROAD s
0, $
[
CLE N ELLYN. ILLINOl5 60137 2e
=..<*
January 25', 1984 NEMORANDUM FOR:
D. G. Eisenhut, Director, Division of Licensing,
/
FROM:
R. F. Warnick, Director, Office of Special Cases
SUBJECT:
RECOMMENDATION FOR NOTIFICATION OF LICENSING BOARD In accordance with present NRC procedures regarding Board Notifications, the following information is being provided as constituting new information relevant and material to the Midland OM/0L proceedings. This information deals with' the licensee's January 19, 1984, lifting of the soils remedial stop work order; the licensee's December 14, 1984, reporting of a potential 50.55(e) condition involving differential settlement between the diesel pedestals and the diesel building itself; and a followup of the crack monitoring issue.
A.
The pertinent facts that relate to the lifting of the soils stop sark are as follows:
1.
On October 22, 1983, the licensee issued stop work number FSW-38 on all remedial soils work because of problems with referencing of drawings and specifications in the Bechtel FCR/FCN process. Thfe created an indeterminate condition with respect to work that has been or could be performed.
2.
This stop work was one of nine stop work orders which halted all safety-related activities at the Midland site. They were issued as the result of a quality assurance audit of the design document control system (Board Notification dated October 25, 1983).
3.
The licensee reviewed potential impact of hardware and plant equipment to ensure it was built to the proper drawings. No significant construction problems were found in the review and the drawing change and review process has been changed to improve the processing of the engineering documents.
4.
Project corrective actions were reviewed by Stone & Webster, the independent assessment organization, and were found to be acceptable.
5.
Stop work was lifted in the soils area on January 19, 1984.
~
6.
Mergentine and Spencer, White & Prentis will begin rehire of construction workers as work resumes.
7.
The Region III staff plans to follow up on this issue as a matter of routine inspection.
e-VY t.,/ W/ n n.p &
D. G. Edaenhut 2
January 25, 1984 I
B.
The pertinent facts that relate to the 50.55(e) are as follows:
1.
On October 14, 1983, RIII received an allegation by the way of a GAP affidavit that Bechtel had not taken into account the effect that the anticipated differential settlement between the diesel pedestals and the diesel building itself would have on associated connecting equipment.
2.
On November 3, 1983, RIII requested NRR assistance in pursuing this allegation.
3.
On December 2, 1983, CPCo was notified of the allegation for the j
purposes of obtaining design information for NRR's review of the l
allegation.
4.
On December 14, 1983, CPCo notified RIII of a potential 50.55(e) on this matter.
5.
On January 13, 1984, the licensee issued the official 50.55(e) report to the NRC.
6.
The 50.55(e) report states that Bechtel discovered this deficiency during a system review of the diesel generator on November 21, 1983.
7.
A meeting is tentatively scheduled for February,1984, to pursue this issue.
8.
Furthermore, the licensee's 50.54(f) response to Question 18 Revision 5, dated February 2,1980, states, " Piping vill be designed to accomodate the expected future differential settlement", between the diesel pedestals and the building structure. In the 50.55(e) report the licensee states, " requirements for differential settlement between the Diesel Generator Building Structure and Diesel Generator Pedestals were not accounted for in the design of the piping equipment conduits, and pipe supports."
9.
The Region III staff plans to follow up on this matter as a routine inspection item.
C.
The pertinent facts that relate to the crack monitoring issue are as follows:
1.
The NRC staff during the Stone & Webster public meeting on November 10, 1983, imposed a hold point on resuming soils remedial under-pinning until the crack monitoring issue was resolved.,This resulted from the NRC's' review of Stone & Webster's weekly reports which indicated some problems in the crack monitoring area.
( --
'.g, r
D.-G. Eisenhut 3
January 25, 1984 2.
On November 30, 1983, the licensee provided RIII with an update of the crack monitoring issue.
In summary, the licensee indicated that QA/QC inspections and overviews were incomplete for crack mapping.
This resulted in the issuance of 59 NCR's and 11 QAR's that included a magnitude of problems for example:
/
Inadequate specification, procedures and Project Quality Control a.
Instructions (PQCI's) b.
Some cracks were not being monitored c.
Some cracks were not identified d.
QA/QC iv:pection functions not completed I
Crack mapping issues were not being resolved in a timely manner e.
j 3.
During an ASLB hearing session on December 3,1983, Mr. D. Hood, NRR Project Manager, verbally notified the ASLB of this, condition.
4.
On December 6, 1983, RIII documented this as a formal hold point in a letter to CPCo.
5.
On December 23, 1983, corrective actions taken on crack mapping were reviewed by Stone & Webster.and were found to be acceptable.
6.
On December 29, 1983, a letter to CPCo from Rill documented the completion of the review of the corrective actions taken, found them to be acceptable, and released the NRC hold point.
7.
The NRC Hold Point was released prior the licensee releasing its stop work of October 22. 1983, and therefore, the NRC hold point had no impact on the licensee's schedule.
If you have any questions or desire further information regarding this matter, please call me.
" Original siLv.:J L;.T. T. \\hrnick" R. F. Warnick, Director Office of Special Cases h
R11 RI RI RIII Landsman /1 Car nerhV Ha is.on rn m
g 4 35lSY
/pf 01/25/84
\\
- - - - - - - - - -