ML20132F937

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Rev I to Procedure TBP-18, QA Records Control
ML20132F937
Person / Time
Site: 05000000, Waterford
Issue date: 01/10/1983
From:
TOMPKINS-BECKWITH, INC.
To:
Shared Package
ML082320156 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-84-206 TBP-18, NUDOCS 8510010439
Download: ML20132F937 (21)
v • d • e


Text

~

a m

a I

o V

4 M,-

TOMPKINS SECKWITH, INC.

M (-

Waterforc S.t.S. Unit 3

!M!

Louisiana Power & Lic.nt Co.

! b b,I Killena. Louis;ed:

I "I"

l I

P x Nc.

"3 P-13 g g.,.

Page No.

O cf 5 Tit!e:

Of*!d.!"*? ASSURANCE RICORDS CONTROL (TB Doc. Contro! Stamo)

PROCEDURE COVER SHEET Changes DAie COMMENTS Concurred By.

1 01/10/S3 Revised Exhibit 8./. Eistory File Index E3V::0 SERVICES

' m s'i.[,1)

INCCRPORATED i

OUA M

's.)'~

ASSURAhTE E.NGINFERNO This 0ocumer.t ir 7eYwe4 '.Woout Commems y Pe.anwed We Commams se N otea; trecrp ora!e C'. -mee ts, and Res,somit; Proce.s A t's o

  • d se.

C Re;ected; Pestse atid Ressomit s

t'OTE:

c.

Rev. ave of th.s deeunwrW. wt.h ce w thout cmments..s 'c' saattan corif or tat oed with twe a:-tica9.e vecff K.atsons oeiv nad r eo may uf ctu e' ce con-s ti; eves '.Ja man r

reacC rit *si..tv 'ef 8

ff ectCF f'OM foie

.., m e..v,..'.

.ca o.

e e,w ea, of

,, ea c.

,m.s.no e oc ur.n....n in st rics,cc.,w. m i,. e ew.

ce ce.

s 8510010439 850227 Data Mded PDR FOIA fy BERNABE84-206 PDR I

PREPARED BY:

APPROVED BY:- - -

t ), J r3 Q.A. Superviser

^

SIGN A~

RE

'D TE TITLE

/

' //-

p Proiect Encireer IGNATURE

/ DATE TITLE

/'/O 4 1 0.A. Site Manager

  • e

/

SIGNATURE DATE TITLE SidNATURE DATE TITLE 0/y[

fo/ A

/Y-2o G

~-

^

.S;;

W L @}

hoc *

{=

TOMPKINS BECKWITH, INC.

No, TSP-18 Jacksonville. Florica R ev. _ -

  1. W QUA1.~.TY ASSURANCE RECOPJS CONTROL 1.0 PCP. POSE 1.1 This procedure establishes the receiving, reviewing and filing of To=pkins-Beckwith Quality Assurance Records.

2.0 SCOPE 2.1 This procedure applies to all Quality Assurance Rac-ords generated by Tompkins-Beckwith which are retained by the Company cs permanent plant records until turn-over to Ebasco for subcategorization.

3.0 REFERENCES

3.1 ANSI N45.2.9 -1974 Requirements for Collection, Stor-age and Maintenance of Quality Assurance Pacords for Nuclear Power Plants.

3.2 Tompkins-Beckwith, Inc. Quality Assurance Manual 3.3 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division I, (1974, Issue through Summer 1976 Addenda) 3.4 Code of Federal Regulations,10CFR50 Appendix B 4.0 DEFINITIONS 4.1 QA Document Index: A listing of QA Records to be util-ized at Waterford #3. The Index shall be prepared prior to receipt of records and will indicate QA Records which will. be required to be retained in the Master File.

4.2 Master File: The systematic collection, at the site, of one copy of completed work documents, certification data, etc., that is required to define the work per-formed and to document compliance with the require-ments of the contract documents and the Code.

t

-m.

~W

_a

N \\)

$ 9-M pro"-

d d^ j TOMPKINS SECKWITH, INC.

ho'

~3P-18 Jacksonville, Florida t

~

t

.y.

Rw.

TITLE:

5 o

o'

~

'og,~

QUALITY ASSCP.ANCE PICCROS CONTROL 4.3 Master File Log: A listing of the Quality Assurance Records received for the Master File. A seperate log is initiated for each type of docu=ent on the QA Doc-ument Index and reflects the documentatien identific-ation, date of receipt and review and the file number within the storage facility.

NOTE: Records which are maintained in the Master File but do not furnish documentary evidence of the as-built configuration cf the plant, are not required to be entered oc a Master File Log, For= GF-723-33. These records will be identified by an asterisk on the QA Document Index.

4.4 Eistory File Index: A status checklist used during the receipt of cocpleted QA Records to ensure that the record is identified and filed by System and Isometric cu=ber. The History File Index, also pro-vides the as-built configuration status of items required by the Traveler Packet.

4.1 Quality Assurance Records: Those records which fur-nish documentary evidence of the quality of items and of activities affecting quality.

4.6 Company

Tompkins-Beckwith, Inc.

5.0 RESPONSIBILITT 5.1 It is the responsibility of the Q.A. Document Control-1er to receive all Q.A. documents and maintain the Master File of all completed records.

5.2 The Q. A. Supervisor shall prepare a Q.A. Document Index which shall include all Q.A. documents expected f or '4aterford SES #3. (See Exhibit #1).

e

2 0

M@I l

Proc.

I W) g!g TOMP KINS-B EC K'NITH, INC.

No.

I3?-I3 Jacksonvil;e, riorida ficv. ---

A TITLE:

3 5

QUA*.ITY ASSURANCE LECORDS CONTROL J

~

NOTE: The Q.A. Do cument Index attached to this pro-cedure is a sample only. The Master Copy of this Index will be maintained by the Q. A. Docu=ent Controller and revised as necessary to account for additional Q.A. records expected.

6.0 INSTRUCTIONS 6.1 Upon receipt of a co=pleted document, the QA Docu-cent Controller or his desigree shall:

A. Conduct an independent review of the document to ensure that all required sign-off s, approvals, reviews, etc., have been performed.

1. Documents found incomplete, incorrect or illegible will be returned to the responsible discipline f or corrective action, if required.

NOTE: Corrections =ade to documents shall have the original copy lined through, initialed and dated by the individual making the correction.

2. If the document is acceptable, the reviewer shall stamp it with the "T-3 Racords Reviewed" Stamp (Exhibit #5).

NOTE: Each stamp is individually numbered and shall be.lssued to a reviewer and a log shall be maintained. Numbered stamps shall be issued only once and destroyed upon termination of the employee to which that number is assigned.

B. Record the accepted documents on the Master File Log, as applicable.

C. Initiate or update the History File Index, as Opplicable.

D. File the document by system and isometric, as appli-cable, in the Master Vault File.

g Y

qw

  • h%

Pro:.

g TOMPKINS SECKWITH, INC.

N o.

73F-18

)

Ja:ksonville, Florida t

R ev, "I'

I TITLE:

4 5

Paga of

~

QUALIH ASSURANCE 22COPOS CON ROL 6.2 The QA Supervicor shcIl publish a list of all individuals who shall have access into the Master File. Individuals who desire to review docunents maintained in the vault vill be provided the documents on a need-to-know basis in accordance with the following:

A. The individual will verbally request from the docu-ments from QA Docu=ent Control personnel.

B. The docenents will be retrieved from the Master File Vault and presented to the individual for review within the vault. Copies of docunents will be provided upon request, when needed.

C. Docunents removed form the Master File vault shall be transmitted on Form 3005. The QA Docusent Con-troller retains the green copy of each transmittal for his records. The yellow copy of the transmittal acknowledgen receipt by the recipient and is re-turned to the QA Master File Vault where it is s

placed in the file. A copy of each docunent trans-mittal is placed in the file of each document being transmitted out of the Master File. Upon return of the docu=ent, the copy in the file shall be removed and replaced by the docunent being returned.

6.3 Quality Assurance records shall provide sufficient information to permit identification between the record and the item.

6.4 Supplemental data to QA Documents will be proceased into the Master File per Paragraph 6.1.

6.5 All Quality Assurance Records are subject to audit by:

A. Authorized Nuclear Inspectors B. Ebasco Quality Assurance Audit Personnel C. Owner's Quality Assurance Audit Personnel l

-y e

+v"-

~ _ __

l-Wd 4

=e o.-

4

((

TOMPKINS-BECKWITH, INC.

' jo',

!3P-18 t

Jackanville, Ficrida Rev.

~

TITLE:

3 5

pag.

of QUALI~T ASSUFM CE EECORDS CONIROL l

i i

~

e D. NRC Representatives 4

E. Company Quality Assurance Audit Personnel 6.6 The Quality Assurance Master Files shall be kers in a locked vault at the construction site. Tbc vault i

shall meet the facilities requirements of ANSI N43.2.

9Property "ANSI code" (as page type) with input value "ANSI N43.2.</br></br>9" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process. including forced air circualtion with filters, and a P.alon Fire Extinguishing System.

6.7 Final Turnover of Cc=pleted Records will be in accor-dance with the requirements of T3P-20.

7.0 AUDITS 7.1 The implementation of this procedure vill be audited by Quality Assurance in accordance with Tompkins-l Beckwith, Inc. Procedure TBP-8.

8.0 EIHIBITS 8.1 Quality Assurance Document Index (Exhibit #1) 8.2 Master File Log (Form GP-723-33 with Forms Guide attached 8.3 History File Index (Typical) (Form TBP-18-3) 8.4

. History File Index-(Typical) (Form TBP-18-4 Rev. 1)

I 8.5 History File Index (Typical) (Exhibit #4) i 8.6 Transmittal Form (Form 3005) with Forms Guide Attached 1

1 l

8.7 "T-B QA Racords Reviewed" Stamp Exhibit #5 4

.t f

e w-m 11

-w y

vy--w<

t=

-vv

=vt v" ' ' - -

r

~'

- - > - = = - - ' -

va 4--m-

-e

-we--w<vwwe

-tv-ery?'+v,t-'

vr -w

-eve-vireww-r--T-*-

=. -.

~, -. - -....

n l

Tc: kins 3e:r.witn, *nc.

hality :surance 00:=en: In:ax i

'a?.:: M er: S. E.3. L'nt : 3 W:-NY-il Leu :iina ?:wer & Lign: 00=any

.?

3e-e 3 _

1 1.1 00- 2::endance 1.2 QA/;C Fers nnel 1.2.1 Jeb DescH ;tiens 1.2.2 Cualifica:icn Rec:rds 1.2.3 Training Rec:rds i

1.3 Calibration Oa.a

'~

1.3.1 Central Tect Files 1.3.2 Calibration & Insca:: Ten Senedule 1.3.3 Calibratien Car es:encence 1.4 Audits 1.4.1 T-3 Audits 1.4.2 Basco Audits 1.4.3 L*1L Audits 5

1.5 N:nconfor:a.nces.

-3 1.5.1 Etsco Generated NCR's 1.5.2 T-3 Generated NCR's 1.6 Discrepancy Notices

1. 5.1 Basco 1.6.2 T-3 Mechanical 1.6.3 T-3 Welding 1.7 Infoma':f on Requests - 1.8 Housekeep'ng Reports T.9 Valve Insimetion Reportz 1.10 Welding Data 1.10.1 Welder Qualification 1.10.2 Weld Procedures 1.10.3 Weiding Surveillance Reports 1.10.3.1 Tureine Building 1.10.3.2 Fabrication Shoc 1.10.3.3 Containment Building 1.10.3.4 Auxiliary Building 1.10.3.5 Yard Areas.

1.10.4 Weld Rod Requisitions m

Exhibit #1 Page 1 07 1

=

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.-

~

~.

~

4....

..X.:

-...2.....4..,

....,4..., :.....,....... _..

-. 4..

.. a.. - :

v.

i.

.. i

..,.u<..,4.a.,

.wm..

.s.

4....:....

, n.y

,.3.. s 5

.....,ee v,.

6

...e n.o...

. e.. i..,,

.. 3, u.,.,...e.,.....4.

.~.....m....4...,

t :_.., s.... 4 e.. s...

3.1 Ocd.e Cata.s..Re:cets

.e col.

i 4.

s.iaives e

I "a.i '. i r d.M'. 'i 1 Ta e

  • Ra .o. -

3.2 Certiff

as of ;rifance 4.0 Ins.211atien C00: entat en d

s I

4.1 Piping Travelers 4.2 Hanger Travelers 4.3 Khip Eest: lint Travelers a.

4.4 Hydrostatic-Tes:- Cata D

4.5

!afst::10 I Ancher Occu:nentation 4.5.1 Ex:ansfon Anchor Log 4.5.2 Anener Tension Tcs: Recorts 4.5.3 Failed Ancher Kaperts 4.5.4 Ancher Equipment Reports t

9 v

Exhibit #1 Page 2 of Z' -

e.

M e

--nw,-

~

R e

{

'.. J.* 2: ~- : C;7* "-*, 2:0.

}

C:%. * -

l I

  • .0_0 70.2 l0. _

1

_'h*.I h

l 007C

.[$. 3'l!

00 N---C i

6 OC...s.:.'O ::l O C.. :."COi i

I e

.--- i v._

.m.

l.:

f r

1 i

il 6

i l

I

.1 l

l l

l I

l I

I J

l l

t l

l i

1 I

I i

1 I

l' 3

I:.

I i

l I

I I

I I

i l

1

. l l

I --

I i

l i

l 1

I I.

I I

i i

l i

i I

F l

1 I

I I

I I

I l.

I i

2 i

l l

l t-D I

I I

I l

i 6

e I.

i l

i l

li I

Q s'

G.77.3 33 MM_

o m e..

m m

7 1.4 0

e.uw

  • ~
  • 4..

w

/

7. m..w v.

7.

e..

,= 3., e a a, * ]

4

  1. .J

.w..

y,..

..?

.a.

..W.

.v

.-=....

e..,.,.

. 6. 3

=....

s f.

44

  • a... a~S.

.z

..I sea.

r.. - c a *

..v.

~...

.... +...

hien.

DC u,...--

,..~:.........

.,. a., :

a........

w,. a..~e... --..

.s.-

s..

of :na :::*.::le:-

cesived, f

i 1

i

-s s.

.m..

1..a.a...w.n

.,i e.wi na

w. e. dw -..=v..s q *. wi l l a.n ta r a.e n*5 ini;13iS &nd OS 23:2 00 Signif;/ Oe COCamrt als Nvle'.ve0

.c...Nr

.s C. s e., %. *t 2

4.. P J. 4 *A.

34

.o.

w 6..y m.

M m

e.

8

1-

"'.._..,y

-- s, ; y.. ; c,.........,

--....g-.

..a i;..? / -

.a. r.e-- -v. -.,-..lnea se&.

r

. 6wa

(?i:in-Travelers) 7 reelar :10.

Revisien 'l0, Sys a :

ile No.

,,C,s..-

..e i..-.,h 5

.a.n

...2 2

00"*.:' tit ".SCR::T:CM IN CILE N/A REMARXS I,

l l

l

! i. Trtveie' Ind=x Sheet l

l' 4

E. ISO *etMC

, 3. 3fii of Fate-ial l

l

. Wald Control Ree:rt l

l l

g

_ 5. Trtveier Eme-icn Sheats l

l

~

' ~ ~

, Q' t '

.l l

6. 'Jeld MateMal Rae. (2009) 1 l
7. 'deld Recair/NCR Index l

l l

_ 3. NCR's l

s

9. Hvdrestatic Test Data Sheet i

T0. NCE Dece-:

l l

11. Cleenifness Recert l
12. Code Cats Reeort(s) l l
13. Other A.

B.

C.

l t

i i

1 Final Traveler Reviewed By:

Data:

v i

Fons TBP-18-3 g

r R

~

=

F.!3 ORY F_I INCEZ

.v. rk 'le.

Reviewer Revision Oste 3.U.S.

Checked 37 IN Fil.I N/ A Recuired Doc.:sen:s - all hangers i

1)

L1:es: Eseger Orawing

  • leid Con:rol Record (Fern GP-723-91 or 11008)
)

i e

~ 3)

Field Inspec:1cn Checklis: ( For=.0P-723-38)

Recuired Docunents - as applicable I

1)

Previous Crawing Revisions i

2)

Supplemen:cl Inspec:1on Shee: (Forn GP-723-114) 3)

E=pansion Anchor "orque Repor: (Form GP-723-42) i

1. )

Failed Anchor Repor (Fors GP-723-45)

5) 01screpancy No:1ces,

i 4

6) Eacger Cut-Down Repor: (Form GP-723-37)
7) Eanger Re= oval Faque's:/Au:horization (Forn GP-723-116)

No:e:

Filler =etsi requisicion forms (8009) shall be re:urned to che vaul: to file as bulk docunen:stion. All c her docunents shall be returnad to the Package Con:rol Ces:er for fillng'in as-buil: file.

For.s "'3P-18-4 Rev. 1

-= ___

=O O

em 9

,..-:.~.

~..

=.

t

^

l l

-.n.,.

...a- : -.~....;,

w r.. a......

.v.

.n wc

~

'.;3:G*- 11 ns.

=.s..

~

C*eldc: Q*e. '.i.fi:st':-)

    • ider S:=m tio.

'Jeldi Ji; ? =cedure :c.

-e

,. A., A

_.... _.. s

/

m r

c"XII Isa'= N
n r-z N/A p_m;:t.s....

l.

l l:..

.u: %ed j:.

".1d Zec=:t l

l l

l2. Zad.ios:2pu Reper:

l l

l 1

c-h:

1.

o l

l g

3.

_i I

l 1

c.

1 I

l i

Inviewed 4:

Daca:

Exhibit #4 s

.\\---.-.,...apy g

l s

L6)

.N hl *H48AOCl39-SNDessMm

^

0I "e azarr:- '

'BWh&A A9Aa6A Aaf 3A

  • 33ststed TV ASAmercase tv *W55mecy B Acey Data SA suasr.43m Omv 77 AAssememA senA so 4Asc3 acamA) 3473rien: 3e64 Mes 387344

.e

.Shavn&m

'vne==nv noe u=ensa l-sen..oi. % = C mouwsonarc wC mouneaume O 4umun C Asanon..noa vs. c 37.

, 3,.w a

.,v D aouv===oco C eswervzw oma:moe zwa woe noA e. Awas l

l l

l

~

l l

1 l

i i

I i

i

~

I i

l i

l l

I I

l I

I I

l l

l l

E.

1 I

I l

C.

i i

l i

I I

I I

i i

I i

I i

~

I I

I I

l m

l l

1 I

I I

I I

I I

I I

I i

r W

l i

I W

l W

  • {5 y.

n y;

.O > M a c i

NC;.88W t3 C l

f t3ie n reassac*t7cm 3 m. 3 4,g ging nCA GA Dest 0W38 E uv 3a A338"30W,. ~.

egwig syge

  • 18ya **v" A3 m h ang e 3 e =g ".

m

A32 f S n3

..)

m 2 9 423 53 m s t: C. [

O/

m rwa sn a. r: ;

O

.u, e 3 Ani vg N3.f 3y W}sn...,,

a.

o GMC.LDYGNCC '1Y;tNYHDSM

, a ^.. a.

~

.-,v.Ams.,va.

LE Cl. .9 *I"7 tANH7H d

Oe-x05 'o *d "D N j *K1 N.XO20-5N;SciHOI e a.se eees esse l

~

t.

A l

.*s *.*.t. t.o J.? a ?...s a

1

. : i.,nCa-To :e :=cleted 5/ OA Rec:.-::: Personnel h Enter trans :ittzi.=::er w

h Enter de::a-:: tent recuesting ecc.nen:

h 6:ar ca e dec=ent releasec h h ar type of dcenents being released (Ref. Hanger *so's, i

Pi;;ing hs's, et:.)

h Enter name cf person re:uesting doc:nents

@n B:er cuantity cf each dec=en being releasad

@ =.ntar d::cmen; number

@ h a-e cm er. :1:ie h QA Rac=rds personnel trans:::10:ing reccrds shall sign with signature

~

43 h Recipient of released doc =ents shall sign and retu n yellcw copy tw

s QA Records e

d e

1 I

i d

P e

f f

D e

6 e

e e 4 3.Om D

O*

M D

9 6-

~

- = aus.

emm e. me e.

om

-

  • es.. emas y

_y

~

c 7,,

n

m b

  1. [3 a

C 6 -- \\

/f Sg

/ wars maa3 c/

Exhibit f5 "I-3 CA Rec:Ms Reviewee gg, a

~

o

,d' w*

m m

.m B

S N ** %

- - = - -.- --_. -

- - +.,

/H O.

v' g.W g

ke_e4 LOUISIANA,

L suras P O W: R & L iG H T / INTE A-OFFICE CO A AESPONDENCE L.. qd scum yp a st s rtv MEMORANDUM August 27, 1932 W3IS2-0014 3-A.1.01.09 3-A12.05 TO:

File FROM W.A. Cross SU3 JECT: =rOWmtbaFa75NMENdi.desagee,eg August 20, 1982 LP&L J.W. Wyatt, Chair =an of the Board a Chief Executive Officer G.D. McClendon, Senior Vice President D.B. Lester, Plant Manager F.J. Dr ond, Project Mausger T.F. Gcrrets, Quality Assurance Manager L.V. Maurin, Vice-President - Nuclear Operations G. Rogers, Site Director L.L. Bass, Project QA Engineer W.M. Morgan, QA Engineer R.W. Prados. Licensing Engineering Supervisor W.A. Cross,27?SG Licensing - Onsite NRC J.B. Henderson, Senior Enforce =ent Specialist, IE J.E. Gagliardo, Director, Distsion of Resident, Reactor Project &

Engineerir.g Progra=s, RIV E.H. Johnson, Director, Enforcement Staff, RIV G.L. Madsen, Chief, Reactor Projecc Branch 1, RIV W. A. Cross:::an, Chief, Project Section B G.L. Constable, Senior Resident Inspector J.E. Cn--ins, Resident Reactor Inspector W.B. Jones, Engineering Aide fC //9'N' Oef4 L

r-

,W 4

.p s

....,~s.c m

, r -.

e. w

. ~

=A.v. f.

)

w.

.J s v.~

.r... ; m.... -...

c C v..._..

r.

The purpose of :he Enforcemen: meeting as stated by Mr. J.E. Cagliarde was to discuss-4-

"equscies in subcontractor turnover documen:a::ca reported pursuant to 10CTR30.55(e), ac:fons :cken by LP&L and its centracters to ccrrect the proble=,

and ac:icns :aken or planced to preclude recurrance.

Mr. Las Ocastable,'a'a:erford 3 Senic: Resident NRC Inspec cr characteri:ed deficiencies in :he Mercury and To= kins-3eckwith (T-3) turnover documentatica as a significant breakdown in the Quality Assurance ?crgran. He also sta:ed that Mercury and T-3 workers in :he. plan: including 0A and QC personnel see=ed unsure of : heir job responsibili:ies.

Additionally, Mr. Cens:able =en:tened ha: LPSL had placed a heavy reliance en E3ASCO, and as he pu: 1:, E3ASCC has le: L?&L down. He evidenced this by :he fact that syste= turnover documentation was approved by the subcontractor and E3ASCO QA and it was not until LP&L Ccnstruction QA perfor=ed a docu=ent review on a sa=ple basis : hat the proble=

was discovered. On a positive note he referred to the good turn arcund =ade by the LP&L Quality Assurance and Startup groups in taking corrective actions on these rroble=s.

Mr. Lon Sass, LP&L QA, presented response to the NRC by su==aricing actions taken and planned c ccrrect the Mercury field-work and QA progra= deficiencies.

LFSL identified :he Mercury problem to the NRC on 5/26/82 as a potential 10CER50.55(e) ite=.

After taking a closer look it was deter =ined that t.hera were proble=s with Mercury's work and their QA progra=.

In order to correct this situation, the following =easures were taken:

i 1,

1)

LP&L/I3ASCO me: with Mercury Management (5/31/82)

2) Directive issued to Mercury by E3ASCO (6/30/82)
3) Retraining of Mercury personnel (6/26/82)
4) Reinspection of SUS 59, 60A, 603, & 60C
5) Mercury s:aff increase to support Docu=e=r Review Process 6)

LP&L assigned 3 QA Engineers to Mercury 7)

E3ASCO personnel (12) integrated into Mercury 8)

Established realistic turnover schedules

9) Increased QC inspection group staff.

Mr. Gagliardo of NRC questioned Mercury's plans for periodic retraining.

This question ste= sed from NRC concern that a 4-day training program was not considered adequate to correct a problem of this magnitude.

Tc= Garrets, LP&L QA Manager, committed to provide details of the Mercury retraining program and stated that ecm=anication breakdown was a contributor to the problem.

In addition, Mr. Gerrets e=phasi:ed the need for craf t and inspec: ion personnel to have so=e depth of understanding of QA requirements.

Mr. Gagliardo questioned the methods by which equipment installed in accordance with instructions but inadequately designed would be discovered. The LP&L response was that installation reviews by Mercury, system walkdova and testing by Startup and design evaluations by plant staff were means by which problems of this. nature would be identified.

k

%.M

..s.

su;us:

P2ge 1 As cen:iered previously E3A5CO persc:.nel were in:e;ra:ed inta the Mer:un-Organ :a:i:n to enhance the OA review of Systs: turncver de:unenrati:n.

'::. M: urin spoke of the raplaccren: cf I3A200 personnel wi:hin '::rcury as cc:pe:en Mercury perscnnel became available and also addressed the schefule for pnase cc: Of Mercury c; prior o faal load.

He es irated that the Mercury installati:n and rework ef fort was apprcximately 900 cc=plete.

All code (N-starp) installa:1cn and rewcrk is being perforced by Mercury since E3ASCO is not qualified :c perfor: Code werk.

A: the conclusi0n cf discussions cf Mercury, Mr. Len 3 ass presented response to deficiencies dis:cvered in Tc kins-Beckwith's installa:1cn of pipe hanger supports. LPLL iden:ified the T-3 proble: to the NRC en 7/1/S2 as a potential 10CER50.55 (e) 1:e=.

This pr:ble: was simila to the Me---

.oblem in tha:

the decuren:2:ica reviewed was no: 7.dequate and :here were problems with the physical werk d:ne by T-3 in the plant.

The cajor concern in this case was the adequacy of hanger (support) welds and the adequacy of QA inspecticas en these welds.

Corrective action taken by L?&L was as fellcws:

1)

LP5L/Ebasco set with T-3 upper =anagement.

2) The corporate QA Manager on site.

3)

Retraining program was instituted for Engineering & QC.

4)

Reinspection of hangers - in process (4400).

5) Adequate staff to conduct document review.

6)

Qualify the A*a'S weld procedure for fillet welds using s= aller size ueld rods.

7)

T-3 QA sa=pling audit of hanger reinspection.

3)

Ebasco has. retrained the QA reviewers of T-3 hanger docu=entation.

9)

LP&L QA assigned 3 QA engineers to T-3.

10)

Ter=isatica of QC personnel 11)

Intezration of E3ASCO people into T-3.

Les Ccnstable questioned the nu=ber of hangers which required rework and/or engineering evaluation.

Mr. Len Bass co--4tted to provide these details.

IncdditiontothecorrectiveactiontakenwithMercuryandT-B,thefollow[ng steps were taken to i= prove LP&L's QA program:

1)

Establish =ent of an E3ASCO QC Surveillance Group (8 inspectors) conduct phys 1 cal inspection.

2)

Ebasco increased the staff responsible for reviewing the turnover documentation.

3)

Ebasco QA audit program re-evaluated and improved through reassignment of personnel and additional personnel.

4) Assignment of three N.Y. Supervisory people to head site g cups.

5)

L= prove turnover review process.

6)

Corporate QA Manager (Ebasco) and assistant on site to participate in handling proble=s and i= proving progra=s.

)

k.-m pe wwm > w Auzus: 17, ;is;

? age 3 7) i?iL QA continued involvtren with site ac:ivities affe in; quality.

3) increased L?iL Operaticas and Ccnstructica QA audits and surviellances.

9)

Inspecticas will be perfer=ed on other contractors.

10)

Personnel en loan frc= MSS and other groups.

When questioned by Mr. Ji= Henderson of NRC concerning plans for reviewing

aining and qualifications in areas other than QA/QC personnel, the LPSL r2spense was that training was ccacentrated on the par:icular proble areas

(:urnover docu=enta: ion) but overall QA training was provided.

The NRC reco== ended expansion of the retraining scope beyond the QA/QC area.

Mr. Ji= Cagliardo a2xed how L?&L could assure SRC that observed weaknesses in E3ASCO QA did not go beyond the currently identified proble=s to uncoverable areas such as rebar and concrete installations.

Per Mr. Tom Gerrets :he weshnesses in the E3ASCO QA progra= are limited to only the last I to 2 years and that ESASCO's QA prcgra= during steel erection and concrete pours was excellent.

Mr. To= Gerrets also co==ented that the root proble=s associated with E3ASCO's present QA prcgram can be contributed to attrition of the highly qualified E3ASCO QA persennel and a weak training progra=.

To provide a higher degree of assurance that field work is acco=plished in accordance with require-

=ents, LP&L QA/QC will accompany E3ASCO in the field. To relieve LP&L QA cf the ad=inistrative burden of NRC Inspection Reports and Significant Construction Deficiency (50.55(e)) reporting, Licensing vill assume responsibility

'for these areas. This action will per=it QA to increase review and audit related activities.

Eric Johnson, Director, Enforce =ent Staff, Region IV, discussed the March 1982 NRC Enforce =ent Policy. The NRC concept for the Enforce =ent Policy is to

=ake non-co=pliance =uch more expensive than co=pliance.

The difficulty expressed was, the ability to assure co=pliance.

Per Mr. Johnson, enforcement actions are based on the following criteria:

safety significance, nature of acticas taken, ti=eliness of reporting, and past compliance history.

It was pointed out that no decision has been =ade on the particular issues relative to enforce =ent actions, however, f ailure to turn the proble=s around in these areas would certainly result in an escalation of enforcement action.

Mr. Lon Bass asked the NRC, in their opinion, what was done wrong in the particular case in question. The NRC responded by discussing that it is the licensee's responsibility to assure that centractors and subcontractors are carrying out their progras responsibilities and in the case of EBASCO, Mercury, and T-B there was apparently a breakdown at these sub-tier levels.

In conclusion the NRC stated that Manage =ent, Qualifications, Quality Assurance, and Training are all fac: ors that " build in" quality and quality cannot be audited into the prccess.

i WAC/keh G.D. McLenden, L.V. Maurin, T.F. Gerrets, LP&L Site QA File, S. Alleman, ec:

F.J. Dru==ond, Nuclear Records (2), Central Records, L. Constabl'e, D.B. Lester B. Cross, W. Morgan, R.W. Prados, Licensing Library, George Rodgers 1

Proc. No. QP 19.1 Rev. 0

')

01/07/83 TASK FORCE INSTALLATION VmFIC1. TION 1.0 Aceroval

/ 4.I

[M

, MP'"

Prepared By:

Date QA Engineer 7'

/ /// [88 Approved By:

C~>ff s

Date Project QA Engineer AA

&f Approved 3y: Y [N M k 84ASN

/-//-f3 Date QA Manager 2.0 Furcose To establish the methods to be followed in the physical verification and the quality records review of selected acrivic'ies perforced by 1

centractors prior to June 1, 1982.

The task objectives are to verify that safety-related work cc=pleted prior to the identification of the breakdcr.rn with Mercury and Te=pkins-3eckvich identified in NRC Repcrt No. EA 32-109 was properly acco=plished.

3.0 Secee This tad shall include a review of s fety-rels.ted work perforced by The task shall be acco=plished by verifying the installed contractors.

conditions and reviewing the related quality docu=entation.

01/07/S3 QP 19.1 Page 1 of 3

[o /A -8 7"Mb O/V7

I

)

LOUISIANA P011ER & LIGHT COMPANY WATERFORD SES UNIT 3 TASK FORCE ACTION PLAN AND PROCEDURES FOR INSTALLATION VERIFICATION

)

Precared By:. onM f 7/

/ f3 QA Engineer Da$

Approved By: M d,

//7 //

Date Project QA Engineer Approved By:

dvf wE

/ 8.5

~~

Date QA Manager Jh,

, /N ' p w&

/ f 3 Approved By:

Cate Sr. Vice-President, Operations Action Plan Page 1 of 7 01/07/83 kb

-h Y

fo/t4-$Y'E05 c/w

ACTION PLAN F0ri TASK FORCE REVIEW h

0F INSTALLED STRUCTURES / COMPONENTS Introduction As a result of the USNRC Enforcement Action EA 82-109, a management decision was initiated by LP&L to develop an aggressive plan to establish methods for quality records review and applicable physical verification for selected activities performed by contractors who performed safety related activities prior to June 1,1982.

The schedule for completion of the Action Plan is as follows:

)

Janu ry 7, 1983 Complete walkdown and records review, procedures and checklist January 10, 1983 Commence records review and walkdowns March 15, 1983 Complete records reviews and walkdowns; compile results The Task Force assigned the implementation of the Action Plan will be cceprised of personnel of normally independent groups, Quality Assurance and Engineering.

(Reference Figure 1, Organizational Chart.) As such, the Task Force Action Plan will be approved by the Senior Vice President, Operations.

Action Plan Page 3 of 7 01/07/83 l

t 4

Develocment s

In developing the Action Plan to be used in reviewing the installed structures and/or ccmponents to assure the compliance to requirements, the following factors were consioered to be pertinent.

A.

Contractors currently involved in the installation of structures and components are:

Gulf Engineering NISCO Ebasco Force Account Tomokins-Beckwith Mercury i

Waldinger/Ebasco HVAC

)

B & B Insulators These contractors, by procedural requirements, document the inspection of the installed structures and/or components prior to submitting the Startup System to Ebasco.

Prior to acceptance by LP&L, a records review is perforced by Ebasco.

Concurrently with the Ebasco Review, the LPSL i

Startup Group and LP&L Construction QA review the SUS package.

The LFSL Ccastruction QA review is comprised of a documentation review and installation verification performed on randomly selected documentation of the structures and ccmponents, contained within the S/U System, as part of the status review prior to turnover. All safety-related startup systems recuire this status review prior to preoperational testing.

I

'Actien Plan Page 4 of 7 01/07/83

Due to this on-going review of structures and components, the Task Force will not review the installations and documentation being reviewed by the LP&L Construction QA and LP&L S/U Group.

B.

The type of activity performed by J. A. Jcnes (Soils / Cement) and Fegles (Shield Wall and Done) limits the availability of installed areas which 4

could be examined.

Selected documentation will be reviewed to verify adequacy of these installations.

C.

Significant Construction Deficiency No. 56 was reported to NRC on

~

October 1, 1982. The SCD addressed cortings in the Reactor Containment Building, as installed by Sline. The final report on this SCO has not been submitted.

The task force will review Sline activities performed cutside of the RCB.

~

0.

Peabody Civil and Peabody NDE performed no activities directly related to the installation of components, as both perform testing functions. Task s

/

Force will review documentation supporting qualifications of personnel, quality records, etc., to assure adequacy of activities performed.

E.

La. Industries was responsible for supply of concrete, other contractors "placed" cencrete.

Concrete was tested to assure compliance to specifications. Task Force will review test results obtained for concrete as supplied by La. Industries.

Based on conditions examined above, items A through E, the Task Force will examine tne following contractors for compliance to installation requirements:

1.

Combustien Engineering - P.eactor internals and alignment 2.

American Bridge - Structural stael erection 3.

Neoter, Inc. - Pools / liners 4

Chicago Bridge & 'ren - Containment s

Acticn Plan

- Page 5 of 7 01/07/83

5.

Sline - Coatings outside of P.CB 6.

F&M - Supports and separation 7.

La. Industries - Concrete supplier 8.

Peabody Civil and Peabody NDE - Testing

)

Actier. Plan Page 6 of 7 C1/07/33

l

.ll 1

/

)

) s sg S

)t n M

l si i et 3

A E

vT a 12 8

T i( o 8

/

C C

E/

7 L

( e(

R8 0

A g

U2

/

I nd n G/

1 C

ii a I2 0

E arm F1 P

sdt S

snt uai i

SP l

)

3

(

)

L E

T E

(

R n

T l

ro i

R T

e s 'e A

nk Sl M

k ct 7

MCl t

A cie A

R t

E i rh f

EL E

e T

RES o

TA D

n A

n 7

l f

0 E

e i

1 L

B e

l v

ET g

IA K

a VZ S

n P

El A

o Rl T

R i

AG R

O

)

)

2 Le

(

Tl (l

O i

W t v T

t u ee M

nns A

t ae E

rl m T

aea dJ l

l

)

)

1 L

(

T

( n a

E i

s l

oa o

f O

rm l

d o~

c M

nR e

A u

ss E

i.so n

i T

ot or a

MSRG l

P no i

tc A

1

1 i

ijI4 iie l

!I4{!i

.I1i)!}

.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20132F937&oldid=4244713"