ML20132G053
| ML20132G053 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Waterford |
| Issue date: | 02/11/1984 |
| From: | Alleman S LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML082320156 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-84-206 UNT-3-003, UNT-3-3, NUDOCS 8510010458 | |
| Download: ML20132G053 (28) | |
Text
.
WATERI:ORD 3 SES
- -.s PLANT OPERATING MANUAL Vp LOUISIANA
~
POWER & LIGHT NSNhrN PCM 70LCfE 1
Inr!-3-001 POM SECTION 3
REVISION 1
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCED*JRE GCIRAL C!PLOYEZ TRAIITING L W3 RC-Com NLON
= >>e uw,s TRoi 1 D CO PY.
< ~ m m c u. g ; ; g y5g., g *u n
.g c
PORC Haecing No.
TY-O,d
' "CTlVITY
(
Reviewed [ d d # Mn PORC airman Approved:
L II Planc M.anager-h diear Approval Dace
(
Effective Dace 8510010450 850227 PDR FOIA BERNABE84-206 PDR N'lj03 **"1* **
Att*ch"*nc 6.8 (t se 1)
. r., a ~
PLANT OPERATING MANUAL CHANGE / REVISION / DELETION REQ UEST ocedure No.
MMS--6d Title d d 2 d h M M M [l A / M M ffcetive Date (if different frc= approval date) y,elete A.
9.
er C Change No.
UN Revision No.
/
DolGtion OM EASON FO R CH A NG E.
MM/TSTON. OR DEL ETTO N
~{D h M C & & /W '7~ W $ bY W A S W fE 0~)
Yb 2E)3=2mics / MG- /Al2 CGS JBMA/A14 MAdue io EOUTRED SIGNATURES
-iginatot-YI#Dt#L.
M Date
/E!27[83 achnical Review nate AFETY EVALUATION sas this change, revision, cr. deletion:
YES NO Chenge the facility as described in the FSAR7 Chenge the procedures as described 'in the FSAR7 Conduct tests / experiments not described in the FSAR7
/
o Crcate a condition or conduct an operation which.ex-o coods, or could result in exceeding, the limits in l
Technical Specifications?
ftheanswertoanyoftheaboveisyes, complete and at-pcha10CFR50.59SafetyEv1 tion checklist.
%foty Evaluation A
Date
/
ZI
. M,N1/
foup/Dop't. Head Revtew Date
/NNY hmporaryApproval*
Date (NOS) e=parcry Approval
- Date fRovicw f rt' ?
_ /-
Date
/ - # 7- "
pRC Review g 'b 6 M 1 =
Date
/~}f f y Meeting No.
WW bant M na ger-Nuclear-Approval M/A Date 'M l
fcmporaryapprovalmust be followed by Plant Manager-Nuclear approval
% thin 14 days.
E-1 -003 Revision 6.9 (1 of 1)
1 '
Administrativo Proccduro UNT-3-003 Oc' cral Employee Trainink Revision 1 n
x TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PURPOSE i
3
2.0 REFERENCES
3.0 DEFINITIONS
^
4.0 RESPONSISILITIES 5.0 PROCEDURE 5.1 General 5.2 Scope j
53 Schedule 5.4 i Trainee Evaluation 5.5 Documentation 5.6 Program Evaluation 6.0 ATTACHMENTS
~
s 6.1 Acknowledgement Form, Instruction Concerning Prenatal Radiation Exposure (Form GET-2) (1 page) 70 COMMITMENTS AND REFERENCES i
LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES Title Revision 1 1-9 Revision 1 4
1 1
Administrativo Procodure UNT-3-003 Gon0ral Employee Training Revision 1-1.0 PURPOSE 1.1 This procedure delineates the responsibilities associated with, and I
provides instructions fer the administration of, General Employee l
Training at the Waterford 3 SES.
Implementation of the program will ensure that all site personnel are properly indoctrinated and 1
instructed in the safe and proper conduct of their general duties.
1.2 This procedure is applicable to all permanent and temporary employees, as defined in Reference 2.1, who require unescorted ac-cess to the plant's protected area.
2.0 REFERENCES
i 2.1 10CFR19, Notices, Instructions and Reports to Workers; Inspections 10CFR20, Standards for Protection Against Radiation 2.2 2.3 10CFR73, Physica'l Protection of Plants and Materials i
l 2.4 Regulatory Guide 8.13, Instructions 'for Women in Restricted Areas Concerning Prenatal Radiation Exposure j
2.5 Regulatory Guide 8.15, Acceptable Programs for Respiratory Protec-tion 2.6 Regulatory Guide 8.27, Radiation Protection Training for Personnel at Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants 2.7 Regulatory Guide 8.29, Instruction Concerning Risks from Oc-cupational Radiation Exposure 2.8 NUREG-0041, Manual of Respiratory Protection Against Airborne Radioactive Materials J
l 29 NUREG-0654, Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation,of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear l
Power Plants t
l 2.10 LP&L Safe Work Procedures and Operating Instructions 2.11 CSHA Safety Requirements l
(
2 i
_. -,. _,._ _ _ - - _ - _ _ _, ~ -.
l Administrativo Procoduro UNT-3-003 Gonorcl Employso Training Revision 1 a
i j
2.12 LP&L Waterford 3 Training Manual l
2.13 LP&L Female Radiation Exposure Policy 2.14 UNT-3-002, Training Records and Forms l
2.15 Waterford 3 FSAR, Section 13.2.1.4 2.16 UNT-3-020, Training Waiver Request and Approval / Disapproval 30 DErrurTross l
3.1 course 1:
An introductory course which is designed to f amiliarize station personnel with Station Quality Assurance, Station Emergency Plan, Industrial Safety, Station Security Plan, Fire Protection Plan, Radiological Health Safety, and General Orientation.
3.2 course 2:
A course which is designed to instruct individuals in the specific responsibili, ties and obligations of a Ra'diation Worker.
i-i 3.3 course 3:
A course which is designed to provide ' training in the donning, use, and fit-testing of respirators to ensure that each individual can safely and effectively operate such equipment.
I 4.0 REsponsinrtrTirs 4.1 PLANT MANAGER-NUCLEAR Plant Manager-Nuclear is responsible for ensuring that all permanent
]
Waterford 3 personnel and any temporary personnel or LP&L personnel who require unescorted entry into Waterford 3's protected area l
complete General Employee Training prior to entering Waterford 3's 1
l protected area.
4.2 PLANT TRAINING MANAGER-NUCLEAR
)
Plant Training Manager-Nuclear is responsible to the Plant Manager-I Nuclear for the conduct and the content of the General Employee Training progran.
l l
l l
3
Ad2inistrativo Procoduro UNT-3-003 Gonoral Employee Training Revision 1 43 GENERAL TRAINING SUPERINTENDENT-NUCLEAR 431 The General Training Superintendent-Nuclear is responsible to the Manager-Plant Training-Nuclear for the conduct and administration j
of the General Employee Training program.
He shall provide direct j
supervision of the training group personnel who implement the l
General Employee Training program.
4.3.2 In the General Employee Training program, the General Training Superintendent-Nuclear shall be specifically responsible for the j
following:
1 j
4 3.2.1 The program's annual evaluation and the implementation of cor-rective actions 4 3 2.2 The initial program development and regular updating as determined by the annual evaluation I:
4 3 2.3 Approving the General Employee Training schedule and any I
proposed changes 4.3.2.4 Reviewing and approving remedial training based on the employee's demonstrated knowledge at the completion of the i
program i
L 4 3 2.5 Evaluating all inputs about the program from interested groups 4
or individuals and deciding which comments are valid for use in preparing the program's annual evaluation j
4.4 RADIATION PROTECTION SUPERINTENDENT-NUCLEAR The Radiation Protection Superintendent-Nuclear is responsible for the following:
i 4.4.1 Reviewing and approving the radiation protection-related section of the program 4.4.2 Keeping the General Training Superir.tendent-Nuclear informed of changes to the radiation protection program, as well as other topics which impact the content of the program 4
l
1 Administrativo Procoduro UNT-3-GG3 i
i i,Gnnoral Employee Training Revicion 1 1
I I
i l
{
4.4 3 Providing feedback to the General Training Superintendent-Nuclear
{
concerning the effectiveness of the program, as well as plant i
radiation protection problems l
4.4.4 Assisting in the program's annual evaluation and the implementa-tion of corrective actions 4.5 INSTRUCTGRS 1
4.5.1 The Instructors ar.e responsible to the General Training i
Superintendent-Nuclear for the conduct and quality of Genera.1 Employee Training.
]
4.5.2 The Instructors' specific responsibilities in the General Employee l
Training program are:
4.5.2.1 Reviewing and becoming familiar with the lesson, plans utilized i
during General Employee Training i
i 4.5.2.2 Preparing the General Employee Training program schedule and 1
submitting it to the General Training Superintendent-Nuclear for f
approval j
4.5.2 3 Coordinating the administration of applicable examinations and j
practical demonstrations i
4.5.2.4 Ensuring that candidates have successfully passed Respirator Medical Screening prior to commencing Course 3 4.5.2.5 Providing adequate means of feedback concerning trainees to the General Training Superintendent-Nuclear for determining the need for remedial training 4.5.2.6 Coordinating and forwarding the evaluation inputs of the trainees, concerning the General Employee Training program, to j
the General Training Supervisor-Nuclear i
4.6 DEPARTMENT / GROUP HEADS 4.6.1 Department / Group Heads are responsible for:
1 l
I l
5 l
-____-~.__ _
1 '.
'Administrativo Proccduro UNT-3-003
)*G:n0ralEmployeeTraining Revision 1 l
4.6.1.1 Evaluating the course content for the General Employee Training j
program's annual evaluation j
4.6.1.2 Developing a required reading list of job related procedures and instructions 4.6.1 3 Ensuring that employees in their Department / Group have satisfactory knowledge of job related procedures and instructions 4.6.1.4 Forwarding to the Training Department appropriate documentation i
of an employee's satisfactory completion of the required reading identified as a result of step 4.6.1.2.
4.7 IMMEDIATE SUPERVISORS 4.7.1 Immediate Supervisors are responsible for:
i j
4 7.1.1 Making their people available for required training and retraining 4
) 4 7.1.2 Determining appropriate action for their subordinates who are having difficulty meeting the minimum competency level of the General Employee Training program i
5.0 PROCEDURE 5.1 GENERAL l
5.1.1 The programs and administrative controla established by this procedure shall be enforced in a continuous manner throughout the life of the plant.
i 5.1.2 All permanent waterford 3 personnel and any temporary personnel i
who require unescorted entry into Waterford 3's protected ares shall complete Course 1 of the General Employee Training program.
I T
6
.'idninistrativo Proccduro UNT-3-003 Gcncral Employco Training Revision 1 5.1.3 All personnel requiring unescorted entry into radiation controlled areas shall complete courses 1 and 2 of the General Employee Training program.
5.1.4 All personnel whose job duties might require him/her to wear a respirator shall have the Radiation Protection Superintendent's j
approval and complete courses 1, 2, and 3 of the General Employee Training program.
5.1.5 Exempted Participants Certain participants on a case-by-case basis may be exempted from portions of the Radiation Worker and/or Respirator Training l
courses (courses 2 and 3 respectively) based on previous ex-perience, education, and/or training, per Reference 2.16.
These' participants shall be trained on the portions that contain plant-specific material using an abbreviated course and shall be tested 4
by a written examination coverin's all the material.
5.*2 scope
-1 The General Employee Training program consists of the following courses as described in the Training Manual.
5.2.1 Course 1, Introductory 5.2.2 Course 2, Radiation Worker 5.2 3 Course 3, Respiratory 5.2.4 Annual Refresher Training 5.2.5 Course 21, Advanced Radiation Worker 5.3 SCHEDULE 5.3.1 General Employee Training shall be scheduled and/or conducted as necessary to facilitate completion of the procram, as required in section 5.1.
5 3.2 Annual Refresher Training shall be scheduled and/or conducted as necessary to facilitate completion annually.
7
.,'Adminictrativo Precoduro UNT-3-003 G;noral Employco Training Rcvicion 1 5.3.3 The General Employee Training progra= quarterly schedule shall be approved by the Plant Training Manager-Nuclear.
Once approved, any changes shall require similar approval.
5.4 TRAINEE EVALUATION 5.4.1 Upon completion of the General Employee Training program, the student competency shall be evaluated by a written examination.
The examination shall be comprehensive in nature and composed of objective questions.,
Minimum competency shall be indicated by a j
grade of 70%.
Trainees failing to exhibit minimum competenc'y shall undergo an appropriate remedial program before a retake of the examination is given.
5.4.2 Upon completion of Annual Refresher Training, the student competency shall be evaluated by a written examination.
The ex-amination shall be comprehensive in nature and composed of objective questions.
Minimum competen'cy shall be indicated by a grade of 805.
Failure to exhibit minimum competency on Annual.
Refresher Training shall require the trainee to attend the initial General Employee Training Program.
5.5 DOCUMENTATION 1
Documentation of General Employee Training shall be maintained in accordance with UNT-3-002.
5.6 PROGRAM EVALUATION To ensure continuing the high quality and validity of the General Employee Training program, an annual evaluation of the program shall be conducted in accordance with the Training Manual.
l 6.0 ATTACHMENTS 6.1 Acknowledgement Form, Instruction Concerning Pranatal Radiation Ex-posure (Form GET-2) i 70 coMMITurNTs AND REFERrncEs 8
f -l FORM GET-2 I
- j LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY WATERFORD 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM INSTRUCTION CONCERNING PRENATAL RADIATION EXPOSURE i
NAME DEPARTMENT / COMPANY (Print Full Name) i-I have received and' read a copy of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 8.13, and the Louisiana Power and Light Company Female Radiation Exposure Policy.
I have received instruction on the intent and limits of both, and was given an opportunity to ask questions concerning them.
I understand my responsibilities concerning Prenatal Radiation Exposure.
i SIGNATURE DATE 1
1 l
t i
l 1
I 1
l 1
i UNT-3-003 Revision 1 9.1 (1 of 1) i
,A
- ATTACHMENT I.1-COMMITMENT CLOSURE i
VERIFICATION FORM COMMITMENT I.D.
U" 3Y-ol?
(!/D 8d DATE OF CLOSURE MEANS OF CLOSURE (PLEASE ATTACH CLOSURE DOCUMENTATION IF APPLICABLE
!.E., LETTER, PROCEDURE, ETC.):
.Qv omnw l
BY SUBMITTAL OF THIS FORM THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN VERIFIED
" CLOSED" BY THE ABOVE "MEANS OF CLOSURE" i
h&^
)
W,9 a
COGNIZANT M DIVIDUAL AUTHORIZEDS!hATUREg gg (SUPERVISOR / MANAGER)
OATE op REctasT:
"//o/sw M / f//WJWA/or.5z<,6/
7 I QUlSIANA REcterTED sY:
sawga&(scar hi T f8 /// h /)) k CtPARTME%T
$$s%$
CCMwTMOT TYPE CEvt3E0 / UPCJrE CoeHTMENT CATA I
i REQULATCRY AGOCY (NTRY FCRM i
l IMCEPARTMO%
l.
CCMMITMOT ICOTIFICATICN NLas0G :
$3s sg 2.
APPUCASLE DATES:
FMCM 70 gg RESULATCMY AGOCY CUE CATE
/
/
/
/
Mas 00 YY MM 00 YY IXENSING CUE DATE:
//_
/
/
LPSL CCMPLETE DATE
[
/
3.
RESPCNSISLE GRCUP5r CJ,q[
pgCg 70 NUCLEAM UCENSING Ql NUC'J.AA TECNNCL SERVCES C2 NUCLEAR TRAINING 03 CCOE/3UPOV13Cet/INCtVIOUAL CCCC/SUPavt3Cft/INCfVIQUAL PLANT CPCtATICM4 04
... PLANT MAINTENANCE,,
OS PLANT TEctNICAL SUPPCRT 04 CCCE/sJPOVt3CM/IMCMOUAL CCCE/3UPOVISCM/INCivlCUAL P ANT STARTUP 07 CPUATICNAL L%WEERtNG Qg HCALTH PMYSIC3 0g CCCE/SUPUtyt3CR/INCIVCUAL CCCE/SUPOVISCM/WeCMCUAL CuauTY A330AAMCE 10 CThe N/A t
(SPECIFY)
A COMMITMGT
SUMMARY
- 5. COMMOT3:
i W ere~ 7 2A/U'/d6 # A o -
4 2 4 M M L/P T)6 M'S A U O l
tMMaoE MirrexiMiAl Twdid4 MwwL o mTu.:
hklYlYk hkDL kY Yh5b h
- &z.+mo AN4) 77bc,,f/AeeMiM lMTetudL l
}i w e a u x o e, k, n w w s M a a u L i
,r,
._..___6
.r' 4.
LOUISIANA P OW E R & LiG H T/ INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE wuuem W /
gh 23 TO: Margit Triggs FROM: Jay O'Hern
SUBJECT:
Deletion Of Program Descriptions Please delete the following Program Descriptions:
PMD-TR-001 Fire Protection Training PMD-TR-002 General Employee Training PMD-TR-004 Licensed Operator Replacement Training PMD-TR-005 Licensed Operator Requalification PMD-TR-006 Non-Licensed Operator Training PMD-TR-007 Non-Licensed Operator Requalification PMD-TR-008 shifc Technical Advisor Training PMD-TR-009 Nuclear Training Group Organization PMD-TR-010 Nuclear Operations Department Training Program PMD-TR-013 Computer Training PMD-TR-021 Health Physics Training PMD-TR-025 Hechanical Maintenance Training PMD-TR-026 Electrical Maintenance Training PMD-TR-027 I & C Maintenance Training PMD-TR-028 Chemistry Training Relevant information contained in the above PMD's is now incorporated into Training Course Descriptions.
d" O'H H/viv cc: D. Packer. D. Simpson
?
l 9
a
. ' m uses.
M LOUISIANA P OW E A & LiG H T/ INTEA-OFFICE CO A AESPONCENCE mais:
Jam:ary 23, 1984 TO:
Margit Triggs FROM: Jay O'Hern
SUBJECT:
Deletion of Program Descriptions Pleas'e delete the following Program Descriptions:
PMD-TR-003 Emergency Plan Training PMD-TR-014 Engineering Training Relevant information contained in the above PMD's is now incorporated into Training Course Descriptions.
- v. -
,g
. i j - H/viv cc:
D. Packer, D. Si=pson e
1 LOUISIANA P OW E R & LiG H T / INTEA-OFFICE CC ARESPONDENCE UIOSIssOsY$
November 7, 1983 W308 3-0267 TO:
T.F. Gerrets FROM:
R.P. Darkhurst
SUBJECT:
USNRC Inspection Report 50-382/83-26 (Op n Item 48326-01)
PIFERE3CE: W3K83-1548 dated October 13, 1983 In response to the above reference,.the open item discussed in paragraph 8 of the subject report will be closed as follows:
1.
A Task Force responsible for Control Room Design Review and lluman Engineering Deficiencies has been organized and will consist of Engineering, Operations and Training representatives.
2.
This Task Force will review the " Actuation Legend" enhancement and provide a format submittal for this enhancement.
3.
The Task Force will also review future enhancements as part of the overall human engineering offort.
If you have any questions or desire additional information concerning this item, please advise.
d) r R.P. Darkhuro*.
RPD/ODil/eao cc R.S. Leddick, W.A. Cross, S.A. Alleman, L.F. Stors, W.M. Morgan, L.L. Dass, M.J. Wise, C.J. Decareaux, G.D. Rogers, " '
ble, W.F. Axtman, II.J. Kunis, R.F. Durski, K.R. Iyengar, R. A. SLvoie, M.I, Meyer, J. Nrru.t R.J. '411hicer, Licenring Library, Nuclear Records, 0.'t.
Ilaye e,
fo/d h-Ed 4 6/7f
.t KiV Nees u 74.s A-/edt vie d by Lt+L ds**n POINTS OF DISCUSSION g
7, gg T.F. Gerrets e Intent of Diso.tssion
- Address concerns of N gnj Ameri'can;pr1~diiE:
e Background
- As a result of EA 82-109,Ifa instituted / upgraded several areas
- 'Ibrnover/doctmentation review upgraded
- Surveillance group within Ebasco instituted to follow in-process work
- A task force was set up to provide a "look-see" at other contractor activities to assure installation activities are adequate e As a Result of Mtc Concerns of Septecter 1,1983, QA has
- Coupiled a duwelogical listing of documentation to show sequence of events
- Brought together involved IEE persomel to answer questions that may be asked
- Explains various activities which were happening just about simitaneous
'Ibrnover Review QAIRC (Ebasco) Reviews
- Task Force Audit R.G. Bemett - Task Force Audit e Intent
- A limited scope audit to determine on the frmt-end the adequacy of various contractor & activities that were not, at the point in time, in the normal turnover status review cycTi
- Was to be a separate audit under LP&L's QA pregram
- Was geared as cuch as possible to the physical verification n design drawings
o As noted in lcttcr of March 14, 1983, to Mr. Gerrets, we felt the need for additional insight as to if we had a problen with A/B and the extent of the problen.
At the time of the su:rary letter, as stated, the area exxdned and the scope of the exa=fr.ation within the confines of the task force audit, did not reveal rajor pmble::s.
%ix ^ ^ ^ ^ -. -.
1emusuteuGT therefore, it sas determined to be unnecessa,ry to restate this. At the time of the task force su:rary letter, a dete=::ination had not been rade as to the extent of the problem.
As stated previously, the task force audit kas to be pipcessed IAW the IP&L QA Pmgram. On Sept s.ber 1, 1983 Ebasco subnitted the response to reaudit 2 and LP&L is presently verifying the adequacy of this response. Assu:dag we are able to close the task force audit, it has been expected that we said issue a supplanental audit sim,ry to the NRC updating the results of the audit.
0 I
l 1
t
^
LON BASS:
DOCUMENTATION REVIEW PROCESS a.
System reviews are done based on SUS.
Each contractor is reviewed separately.
LP&L accepts or rejects the SUS based on the total review results.
b.
This process was in effect' in May of 1982 when the problems were identified with both Mercury and T-B.
c.
A status review was completed on $US's prior to Pre-op testing being started.
Some 60 + systems have gone through this process, d.
There are a number of contractors whose documentation is being reviewed in bulk.
These include:
CB&I, A-5, J. A. Jones, GEO, Nooter, and Sline.
e.
The bulk review is done by Ebasco QAIRC and then LP&L QA does a sample review for acceptance.
f.
Problems have been identified with some of these contractors.
It is possible that additional problems will be found.
g.
Ebasco completed the review of A-B on April 22, 1983.
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS There were three separate areas of activity that were in place in early 1983.
- 1) NRC I & E Activity Claude Johnson identified a problem with Ebasco's work on the MSIV missile protection structural steel in August of 1982.
Because of this, he also looked at the A-B documentation which revealed problems.
This finding was made on URI in December of 1982 and was subsequently up-graded to an infraction in April 1983.
2)
LP&L QA Task Force Audit The Task Force audit included A-B review. This review began in February and ended in March 1983.
Because of availability, the scope of the review was limited. The Task Force Audit identified some problems.
3)
Ebasco QAIRG Review QAIRG began reviewing A-B documentation in September 1982.
By November 1982 the first NCR was written which stated problems identified during the review.
There were about 40 NCR's written on A-B f rom the documenta-tion reviews.
In addition, the personnel performing the paper reviews participated in a QA surveillance on the installed A-B structural steel.
These surveillances revealed deficiencies in the installed hardware.
This process came to a head around the first of March.
n
. -.. - - - -_..__=._
s.e
.e 4
i
. SEQUENCE OF EVENTS (Continued) j Tho above items had impact on the A-B problem and on March 11, 1983 LP&L j
j ecported a 10CTR50.$5(e) FRI on A-B in the containment building.
Shortly i
th3reaf ter another PRI was reported on the welding problems in the RAS.
i Th se two have been combined into one SCD (#78).
I I
i l
Carrective action included a reinspection program that is now (9/2/83) complete.
]
Th3 rework which resulted from the reinspection has been completed for the bolted c:nnections and the welding protion is scheduled to be completed by mid-October, t
4 LP&L feels that the A-B probles has been addressed and adequate corrective action tchen.
i i
l l
l 4
i 1
4 I
a j
i%
i l
1 i
i 1
i a
i l
l l
1 i
i 9/6/83 y@e G
W3 SES-3 AMERICAN BRIDGE CHRONOLOGY DATE j
OPENED REF. NO.
ACTION CLOSED /COMPLI 4/26-29 NRC 77-05-1 URI-QA Program Inadequacies 77-08 5/25-27/77 i
i t
l 8/2-5/77 NRC 77-07-3 UR*.-certs of Special Tools 77-10 l-j 2/14-16/78 NRC 78-02-A3 Deficiency - Inspection Documentation 78-06 4/4-7/78 NRC 78-05-A2 Infraction -Tailure to fully inspect Struct-78-07
[
ural Welds L
i 9/5-4/78 NRC 78-11-01 Infraction - Weld repair lack of procedure.
78-13 1
l 9/19-2278 NRC 78-12-01 Infraction - Failure to properly inspect struct-78-16 E
j ural Welds
]
10/7/78 NCR W3-1072 Weld Deficiencies - By EQA based on documen-3-20-79 j
tation review and random inspection.
I
)
8/16-20-82 NRC 82-18 Infraction - Ebasco Force Account - Welding 83-17 l
Defictencies l
i 9/82 QAIRC Review of documentation of A/8 begun by j
QAIRC l
l 11/10/82 NCR W3-5077 Ebasco QAIRC (Records Review Croup) identi-5/23/83
[
1 fies document deficiencies.
l l
12/6/82 NRC EA-82-109 Civil Penalty Open l,
i 12/13/82 NRC 82-29 URI - lack of As supporting documentation.
Uparaded to i i
Reference 83-17 infr. 83-17 1
1 1/4/83 W3183-0001 LP&L Response to EA42-109, cosmited Task See 4/8/83 ;
Force Audit (QF 19.1)
W3183-0115
[
i j
2/7/83 QF 19.1 American Bridge portion of Task Force Audit 3/30/83 2/7/83 QSE 431 Ebasco Surveillance Report written identify-3/8/83 j
ing weld deficiencias - References NRC W3-1072 a
NOTE:
Ebasco Surveillance Group was instituted l
l as result of EA-82-109.
't i
i
l i
i 9
l 1
3/11/83 FRD 106 Fotential Reportable Deficiency on AB Welding See SCD 73 Deficfencies in RC8 initiated by Ebasco QA.
i 3/14/83 W3K83-0311 Memo from R.C. Bennett to T.F. Correts See 3/21/83 recommending further reinspection of A/B activities to determine adequacy.
]
3/16-18/83 LP&L & Ebasco joint visit to American Bridge N/A records center to review records.
]
)
3/21/83 LP&L Site Manager directs Ebasco to perform See 3/23/83 i
}
3/23/83 LW3-369-83 Ebasco response to LF&L Site Manager out-l lining activities to be performed.
r j
3/29/83 PRD 111 Potential Reportable Deficiency on A/B See'SCD 78 welding deficiencies in RAB initiated by l
Ebasco 4/8/83 W3183-0115 Task Force Summary letter issed to NRC.
4/8/83 4/11/83 SCD 73 FRD 106 Upgraded to Significant Construction See SCD 78 Deficiency.
I i
4/18-21/83 NRC 83-17 URI (82-29) upgraded to violation - response Open submitted 7/19/83; awaiting NRC closure.
4/28/83 SCD 78 FRD 111 upgraded to Significant Construction See SCD 78
]
Deficiency Below l
j 5/25/83 SCD 78 SCK 73 incorporated into SCD 78 E
i i
i i
i i
t i
t
e LoulSIANA P OW E R & LiG H T/ INTE A-OFFICE COR AESPONDENCE UsRaiam January 2/*,
1984 W3K84-0160 Q-3-A35.02.01 TO: Distribution W/ l $W Y
FROM:
W. M. Morgan /
Nuclear Operations Quality Assurance Manager
SUBJECT:
Waterford SES Unit No. 3 Exit Interview Notes NRC Review of Security Inspection 84-08 January 16-20, 1984 NRC EBASCO LP&L L. Constable S. Horton L. Bass C. Johnson M. Harris W. Baldwin J. Pertuit C. Hooper C. Bishop (0//) - /Y'E 0 0 Ofil
7 _
bd?
NRC Exit Intervicw Notes Inspection 84-08 Inspection Report USNRC (Region IV) 84-08
Purpose:
Closure of Inspection Report Open Items and Significant Construction Deficiencies (SCD)
Mr. Claude Johnson inspected the SCD packages and toured the site inspecting areas of the plant addressed in SCD 56 " Liner Plate Nuclear Coatings Failure".
He stated SCD 56 remains open pending receipt of additional information on DBA testing by Ebasco New York.
Mr. Johnson also stated Inspection Report 83-17. Item 1(a) remains open. The wrong NCR was addressed in LP&L response.
The correct NCR is NCR-5594 There were no additional violations and/or deviations opened during this inspection.
WMM CNHtVBR cc:
R. S. Leddick. F. J. Drummond R. P. Barkhurst. R. W. Prados.
S. A. Alleman T. F. Carrets. C. J. Decareaux. L. L. Base.
G. L. Constable. W. M. Morgen. W. F. Axtman Z. A. Sabri. R. F. Burski, K. R. Iyengar. R. A. Savoie. M. I. Heyer R. J. Milhiser. M. J. Wise.
O. D. Hayes D. Clark LP&L Site QA File. N. S. Carns. D. E. Dobson.
A. M. Cutrona. B. Marshall. L. Storz. J. Portuit. S. Horton, C. Bishop.
Central Records. Nuclear Records. Licensing Library
i t~
- -m 1
l 0UISIANA P O W E R & LIG H T / lNTER-OFFICE CO ARESPONDENCE UuSN sysM April 24 1984 W3K84-0925 Q-3-A35.02.01 TO: Distriburton 6 '.k. *
',,,g,,
V.' H. 'Hdrgasr,
y, FROM:
Nuclear Operations Quality Assurance Manager
SUBJECT:
Waterford SES Unit No. 3 Exit Interview Notes NR,C laview-cLJi1 nificant Construction Deficiencies d3tcrian 84-LL April Ib-gu, iW NRC EBASCO LP&L T. A. Flippo J. Portuit J. Woods R. Itall J. T. Crillo N. Carns J. Boardman H. liarris C. Pittman M it,tlesey, H. J. Wise R. B. Pathek H. I. Heyers R. Bennett T. F. Garrets P. V. Prasankumar W. J. Baldwin C. N. Ilooper
[o/A-[y-2,o4 6 / 10
f NRC Exit Intervicw Notes Review of Significant Construction Deficiencies (SCD)
Inspection 84-17 1.
The Inspection was conducted by Mr. R. Hall and Mr. J. Boardman on April 16-20. 1984.
Inspection report will be 84-17.
2.
The following SCD's were closed.
SCD 77 - Inadequate Containment Purge Valve Closure Time and Flow Rates SCD 85 - Damage to Incore Instrumentation Guide Tubes SCD 87 - G.E. 480V Breakers AKR-4A-50 Wiring Errors SCD 89 - G.E. AK-50/AK-30 Switchgear Breaker Camshaft Bearing Retaining Ring SCD 91 - C.E. AKR-20/AKR-50 Circuit Breaker Service Advise SCD 81 - Shelf Life Exceeded on Cable Splice and Termination Tape SCD 98 - Measuring and Test Equipment 3.
The following SCD's remain Open.
SCD 68 - Spurious Actuation of ESFAS - J3109 Connections.
(Reason) one broken bolt not addressed and failure of CE to initial wiring connections as required by procedure.
SCD 70 - C.E. 480V Switchgear Trip Coils Do Not Drop Out Af ter Breaker Trips.
(Reason) 6 breakers failed to be documented.
SCD 75 - Station Battery Equalizing Voltage Exceed Coil Ratings.
(Reason) Need to verify proper 125V valves are installed in the system.
SCD 79 - Unqualified Components in Hydrogen Analyzers (Reason) Are new motors 1E qualified.
SCD 95 - HPSI Pumps A&AB Failed to Start c1 SIAS (Reason) One CIWA 005554 insufficient documentation and one question are non-safety 4160V breakers interchangeable with safety related, if so, what provisions are being made to inspect and/or prevent their use in safety systems.
4.
Both Inspectors identified the need to better identify the corrective action paper trail in the packages.
WHM CifH VBR cc:
R. S. Leddick, R. P. Barkhurst, F. J. Drummond. T. F. Cerrets.
D. E. Dobson, N. S. Carns, L. Storz, S. A. Alleman, L. L. Bass, A. D. Jones, K. Cook, M. Wise, J. Woods, O. D. Hayes, D. Packer, W. J. Baldwin, Central Records, Nuclear Records,
l o
LOUISIANA P OWER & LIG H T / INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE UEEO:Ys EsS March 5, 1984 W3K84-0475 Q-3-A35.02.01 TO: Distribution V&dW FROM:
W. M. Morgan d Nuclear Operations Quality Assurance Manager
SUBJECT:
Waterford SES Unit No. 3 Exit Interview Notes NRC Review of Significant Construction Deficiencies (SCD's) and Previous Inspection Findings and Structural Steel Projects Inspection 84-11 February 26 thru March 2, 1984 NRC LP&L Ebasco L. Constable L. L. Bass S. Horton
_ - - _v m -
R. G. Pittman J. Pertuit C. Johnson R. L. James J. Bess C. N. Hooper S. C. Petty C. Toth K. B. Johnson
[d/A - f y,2,0C O/8(
i
e i
NRC Exit Interview Notes Review of Significant Construction Deficiencies (SCD's)
]
and Previous Inspection Findings and Structural Steel Projects i
1.
Inspection conducted February 26 thru March 2,1984.
Mr. Bess stated:
j SCD 42. HMA Relays (GE) - closed.
SCD 53. HFA Relays (GE) - closed.
SCD 66. GE Breaker (C-Clips) - closed.
SCD 76 Pressurizer Heaters - closed.
No violations or deviations were opened as part of this inspection.
t Mr. Claude Johnson stated that inspection item 83-17-01 for the east and west missile shield protection in the Reactor Auxiliary Building is the only item closed.
4 No violation or deviations were opened by Mr. Johnson during this inspection.
I SCD 78 remains open due to NCR 5076 not closed and problem with weld rod qualification.
Mr. Constable stated that any item that was corrected during the course of a test must still be evaluated for Significance LAW, Part 50.55(e).
e 1491:CNH:VBR 1
cc:
F. J. Drummond, R. P. Barkhurst, W. A. Cross, S. A. Alleman, T. F. Gerrets, M. Wise, C. J. Decareaux, L. L. Bass W. F. Aztman, d
H. J. Kunis, L. A. Stinson, Z. A. Sabri. D. E. Baker, R. F. Burski, K. R. Iyengar, R. A. Savoie M. I. Meyer, Central Records, Nuclear Records, Licensing Library Esasco - R. J. Milhiser j
NRC - G. L. Constable
,I I
i 1
l 4
s-.,-
,,,,.t
-.r.
- -.. -., _ -. _ -.,. -.., - -