ML20125D881
| ML20125D881 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 05/31/1984 |
| From: | Naymark S QUADREX CORP. |
| To: | Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20125D664 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-84-740 NUDOCS 8506120495 | |
| Download: ML20125D881 (1) | |
Text
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
N
<i LLj d s l
Quadrex Corporation GUADAEX,p 1700 Deli Avenue. ComODell. CClifom C 95005-6986 408 866 4510 TWX 910 590 243E TELEX 35-2031 TELECOPY 408 370-4391 Sherman Noymork President May 31, 1984 Nunzio J. Palladino Chairman United States-Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I am in receipt -of your letter of May 18 wherein the Commission has requested personal discussions with.me to develop a..better understanding of the Nuclear Services Corporation audit of the - Pullman-Kellogg -
piping work at the Diablo -Canyon Plant in-1977.
~
I could meet with the Commission at a mstudlly conve-
~
~ ~
~
nient time ~ to, talk informally on ;this' issue, 'if it"is
~
,your desire.
I.would suggest. a date _in,. late ~ July since prior corp 6 rate commitments and an overseas trip will not allow a Washington visit before that --
date.
Please advise me of an acceptable date for an informal discussion.
Sincerely,
'?
/
~
'v herman Naymar SN:dk 3
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
to e
6 5
e
=
8506120495 850201 g3' PDR FOIA DEVINEB4-740 PDR
<f. pmq'e UNITED STATES
, - [)3 h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, O. O. 20553 Copy placed in DiablO
- g g
S,.6T /
Canycn File w/backgrTr.d
%,=
May 18, 1984 CHAIR MAN Dr. Sherman Naymark President, Quadrex Corporation 1700 Dell Avenue Campbell, California 95008
Dear Dr. Naymark:
The Commission has received your letter of April 9,1984, in which you responded to the invitation extended to you by our Region Y Administrator to address us on_ matters related to-the Nuclear Service Corporation audit of the Pullman-Kellogg Company in 1977.
You letter persuasively states that.a number of years have passed since that audit, and your records and the current unavailability of employees originally ~ involved in the audit make it difficult to reconstruct details.
Nevertheless, we believe that personal discussions with you would assist us in. developing a better understanding of that issue. Therefore, the Comitis-sion would like to re' eat its invitation for you to meet with us on this p
'~
Please advise me of your decis. ion.
subject in the near future.
~
~
~
!iincerely,-
i
}
Nunzio
. Palladino i
/,
ec: Mr. L.'M. Gustafson Pacific Gas & Electric Co.
$9
- e m
e m n p
e. <
y
- 6 9
e O
O o
s 1-trumEx' i
f April 9,1984 Mr. J. 3. Ma rti n Regionni Administrator U.S. Nucles.: Regulatory Cec =;ission, Region V 1450 Maria L.an e, Suite 210 i
W inut Creek CA 94596 Dea r Mr. Ma rti rn I
Over the fee
- days, members of your s ts.ff and you have
~
conrocre.d.past ma with respect to the cuality assurance audit that Quadrex Corporation. - formerly Nuclect Se rvi c es Corporation (ESC),-
performed fur the Full man-Kellogg Company in August-and erection work ut..?GandE's Diable Canyon Faci $ninE constru: tion September 1977. Thi s audit covered Pullman's pi tty. Additional-ly, your letter to me of April 4.
1984, s=pple=ented rhe prior telephone-conversations we had and asked if Quadrex could reviev repor.ts of the NRC audit.(7.eport Nos 50-275/83-37 and 50-323/83-25 dated February 29, 1986) which reviewed Quadrex's gudit dated October 27,-
- 1977, and i f we vould determine the iessons for the different findings of the two reports.
inf o rmstion,
Quadrcx vos contracted by Pull =an-Tor backgroun$ y August Relloga PK
'tr of 1977 to perform an audit of the ?K perforE.an(ce )at the Diablo Conyon Kuclear Facility. An abbrevi-i ated audit was requested which commenced on August 22. 1977, at the Dicblo Canyon. site and~ extended through September 20, 1977, i
eith 3 to e cuul.ity assurance engineers from Quadrex participat-i int. Since th'e audit scope was g catly limited by the client as to' time, funds, and investigatt ve. scope and.was an "ir!-pro:ess" sudit taking a snapshot. look at :.he QA proccoures ano cocumenta-tien r.ade av' il able to the auditors by the. client, the findings a
were based only en - presented documentation plus some interviews l
l vith appropriate ?K PeoP e-4 manu ement revi ewed the initial audit findings shortly Quadrex g
after the audi.
started und al s o
.h e final repcrt befero t rcnsmi t ral.
Quadrcx menc r.,cment directed
.i t s cedit tegn to r pe,r t its ' findings di re:tly Lc ellent's r.ac.agement and Nandl m:nogement as the audit proceeded, as well as in its final j
nuh.:ittal,
30 that thin client would be fully cognicant of our fi ndi ngs at. the cerliest time, and also of the reccrds bein5
_,w,audi':ed on which the finding,s were based.
,~.m g
a w onex P.r.
.). 1!. tiartin
?tge 2 April 9, icB4 After our audit ens subr.i tted en the clien:,
we believe there vere reviews of its contents by Pullman-Kellogg and ?GendE, but we do not have records to indicate that reports of any of these reviews or subsequent actions were supplied to us.
You have advi s ed Quadrex that the 1GC has jus:
completed a r evi.aw of the NSC audit and n:te =any findings at vs.rience with cur report.
Your reviev va.s made in late 1983 and 1984 to i nf ormati on, documentation, and personnel interviews made avail-able to you et Cne time.-
You have asked if Quadrcx can review the recent h7C findings, them to the 1977 NSC findi ngs and discuss the differ-compara You have also asked i f I would appear before a Co=missien ences.
hearing vir.h this evaluatien or any other responses.
Quadrex' perf ormed the i nI ti al nudi t under eon:rac: to PK with PGendF.'s approval.
The resul t s were based on information made available to us by the clien: a: that time. The findings.were reviewed' with the 'c-lient as the' audit progressed and when :he final reocrt was issued.
We have not been' advised of any cctiens she client or PGandE took a.s a consequence of the audii:
findings, 'n=r in the normal course of completing the constru:-
~
tien v=rk.
Therefore, we are not aware of how the 1977 condi-tiens have changed in the intcrim peri od nor of any additional pcrtinent documentation that has been gathered responsive to the issues rai sed.
i Quadrex is n1so' not.
cognir. ant that the same information was cvsilabl e for review by both parties (seven years apart),
interviews were held, and what the differences whe:her the same were in the respective audi:nts' evaluation of the presented
. hEs vnuld recuire reconstituting the ' original 6:te.
To do
- e:hnical
- team, or nn equivalent o.n e,
and re-evaluating the ce=:,a reb] e date',
i ncluding any addi:icnal data gathered by PK, si:er the 1977 audit was compl e t ed,
as they did their own review of the Quadrex findings.
The three principa.1 auditors ehe' di d the verk in 1977 nre not now in the c= ploy of Quad:cx and their availability would have to be established. 0:., another eteam cf Quadrex auditors coul d be consti tuted which would have l
- n
- ace the presented data and evaluati=ns of both
- teams,
- c us '.nt in;;
the.selves by reference end int ervi ews with the earlier auditers' wcyk.
Cuadrex bcs not been requested to undertake this effert by its r-fgtnal client.or by
?GendE, nor would we undertake this ef f e.rt' withcut odecuate enntractural arran5ements acceptable to 3'.. :he part?c.s involved.
ca.==ex e
Mr. J. 3. P.artin Page 3 Kpril 9,1954 Quadrex cennot, t.herc.Eore, at this time' add substantive inferma-tien.at a Cc= mission hazzing regarding the dif:erences in tne sudi t.s cenducted by different teams many intervening yez;s and On t.h at basis, e see no merit. to apper. ring or testifyind at the April 1984 Co=y, conditions snart.
=:.s s:.=n hearings,
t Sincercly ygurs,
, mr=anx.y=rx <f"e N
E.Q-
}
~
,.. n w,
\\
President
~
SN:dk 4
e D
e f
1 9..
S O
g y 4
e d
]
8 e
o i
I
^
1 1
~
i j
D 9
i
?
m y
v
,.e
,,---,,__,--_,,.v.
-,4,_
,--.,r.3-.
--- - - -..,, - - - - -,. - - - - -., - - - -