ML20134A568
Text
v
!(). ""$,,
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
\\,. /.1/
Office of Public Affairs Washington, D.C. 20555 No.
83-94 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Tel.
301/492-7715 (Monday, June 13, 1983) l NRC AUTHORIZES FULL POWER OPERATION OF FLORIDA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT The Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation on June 10 amended the operating license held by Florida Power 5 Light Company and other owners to authorize full power operation of Unit 2 of the St. Lucie Plant located in St. Lucie County, Florida.
The other owners are the Orlando Utilities Commission of the City of Orlando and the Florida Municipal Power Agency.
Unit 2 of the St. Lucie Plant uses a pressurized water reactor and at full power will have an electrical output of about 810 megawatts.
The plant is located on Hutchinson Island on the east coast of Florida about midway between the cities of Fort Pierce and Stuart and about 34 miles north northeast of West Palm Beach.
On April 6 of this year, the NRC Staff issued a license for Unit 2 which permitted fuel loading and low power testing up to five percent of full power.
Full power operation requires the approval of the Commission itself which was granted on June 10.
The adjacent Unit 1, of similar size and design, has been licensed to operate since March of 1976.
l l
t 8509150344 050703 ggg teios?8ht-293 Po" L., l135
NRC'S QUALITY ASSURANCE INITIATIVES SPECIAL STUDY OF NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURANCE (CONGRESSIONAL AMENDMENT STUDY)
BRIEFING SLIDES FOR PRESENTATION JUNE 27, 1983 AT FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT ST. LUCIE 2 PROJECT DR. W. D. ALTMAN, PROJECT MANAGER E5 e s 4
I W
-e W
TEAM MEMBERS ST. LUCIE 2 NRC BILL ALTMAN NRC PROJECT MANAGER, SPECIAL STUDY OF NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURANCE BILL BRACH SENIOR QUALITY ASSURANCE ENGINEER, NRC HEADQUARTERS BATTELLE PNL HAROLD HARTY SENIOR STAFF ENGINEER, ENERGY SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT MILES PATRICK MANAGER, PROJECT MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES AND TRAINING IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING LAB KEN CARROLL MANAGER, CONSTRUCTION AND PROCUREMENT QUALITY BRANCH DAVE ROSS QUALITY ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR, QUALITY DEPARTMENT KIST AND ASSOCIATES JOHN HEIDENREICH VICE PRESIDENT, N.C. KIST & ASSOCIATES a
DELLON ASSOCIATES B0B DELLON VICE PRESIDENT, DELLON ASSOCIATES L
NRC ORGANIZATION COMMISSIONERS h
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DIRCKS d
NUCLEAR NUCLEAR MATERIAL NUCLEAR INS PECTION REACTOR REGULATI0ft SAFETY AND REGULATOW AND SAFEGUARDS
^
DENTON DAVIS e
OI-HCE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT H.C. DeYOUNG, DIRECTOR J.ll. SNIEZEK, DEPUTY DIRECTOR TECHNICAL TR A!NING CENTER C.W. THAYER, DIRECTOR PROGR AM SUPPORT BRANCl1 J.L. BLAHA, CHIEF ENFORCEMENT STAFF J.A. AXELR AD, ACTING DIRECTOR DIVISION OF QUALITY ASSURANCE, DIVISION OF EMERGENCY SAFEGUARDS, AND INSPECTION PREPAREDNESS AND PROGR AMS ENGINEERING RESPONSE J.M. TAYLOR, DIRECTOR E.L. JOR D AN, DIR ECTOR B.K. GRIMES, DEPUTY DIRECTOR S. A. SCllWARTZ, DEPUTY DIRECTOR QUALITY ASSUR ANCE BRANCll ENGINEERING AND GENERIC VACAtiT. CllIEF COMMUNICATIONS DRANCH R.L. BAER, CillEF REACTOR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS EVENTS ANALYSIS BRANCH BRANCil W.R. MILLS, CHIEF R.F. IIEISilM AN, CHIEF OPER ATING REACTOR PROGRAMS INCIDENT RESPONSE BRANCH BRANCil K.E. PERKINS. CHIEF J.G. PARTLOW, CHIEF SAFEGUARDS AND MATERIALS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAMS BRANCH BRANCH L.I. COBB, CillEF F.G. PAG ANO, ClllEF
BACKGROUND 4
l
{
OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS THERE HAS BEEN A SERIES OF WELL e
l PUBLIClZED PROBLEMS REGARDING THE QUALITY OF CONSTRU AND ENGINEERING) AT SEVERAL NUCLEAR POWER PLANT PROJECTS PLANTS RECEIVING WIDESPREAD ATTENTION INCLUDE:
e
-MARBLE HILL
-MIDLAND ~
-ZIMMER
-SOUTH TEXAS
-DIABLO CANYON i
THE PERCEIVED SEVERITY OF THE QUALITY PROBLEMS AND THE A e
PUBLICITY AND PUBLIC INTEREST HAVE CAUSED THE CONGRESS A NRC COMMISSIONERS TO QUESTION i
-THE ABILITY OF INDUSTRY TO CONSTRUCT NUCLEAR PLANTS IN A CONSISTENT WITH PUBLIC SAFETY 1
-THE ABILITY OF THE NRC STAFF TO PROVIDE ASSURANCE THAT IND HAS CONSTRUCTED PLANTS IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH PUBLIC SAFETY AS A RESULT, THE INDUSTRY AND THE NRC ARE JOINTLY FACING AN EROSION e
IN THE PUBLIC'S CONFIDENCE IN OUR ABILITY TO BUILD, LICENSE, AND OPERATE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH l
i SAFETY
\\
t
9 Novemlier 27,1981 i.
l MEMORANDUM FOR:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
)
FROM:
Nunzio J. Palladino i
O.U ALITY ASSUR ANCE l
l NRC needs to take actions that will result in improved quality assurance at Nuclear Power j
Plants Steps we are taking or planning, as well as other steps that could be taken, were brought up during our testimony to Congressman Udall's Subcommittee last week. A list of corrective measures would include improvements to our inspection and enforcement program as well as considerations such as third party audits, strict sanctions against non performers, approved bidders lists, and certified independent performance audits of each i
utility's QA ac,tivities.
I I would like you to pull together the various approaches that could be taken to stcengthen Quality Assurance, and provide the Commission a preliminary eval'uation of the ones that appear most promising from an effectiveness and cost standpoint l-I believe it is desirable to have an initial paper on your recommendations by December 11, l
19S1. The Commission can then focus on the areas deemed worthy of implementation for further study by the staff i
_.4 COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT OVERSIGHT HEARING ON QUALITY ASSURANCE AT THE ZIMMER NUCLEAR STATION i
STATEMENT OF THE HON. MORRIS K. UDALL TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14,9:45 a.m.
On June 10 of this year the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing to consider the quality assurance (QA) breakdown at the Zimmer nuclear powerplant. In this case and possibly others there has been a widespread failure to adhere to the NRC's quality assurance requirements. At Zimmer, the severity of'the problem was recognized only af ter construction was virtually complete. MY PRIMARY CONCERN NOW CENTERS ON THE NRC'S ABILITY TO DETERMINE THAT A REACTOR CAN BE SAFE OPER ATED FOLLOWING A QA BREAKDOWN LIKE THAT AT ZIMMER.
j To give some idea of the extent of the Zimmer problem, I will indicate briefly the nature of some of the issues that must be addressed prior to issuance of an operating license.
l l
-Deficient weld procedures I
-Apparent falsification of weld procedure test data
-insufficient documentation to demonstrate that many of the 2000 welders who have l
worked at the Zimmer site were qualified for the work they performed. The NRC has informed me that, "The potential impact of the (inadequate) welder qualification records is that a l
1
-The chemical and physical proporties of certain safety related piping cannot be documented. The NRC staff has stated that, "The potential impact of the loss of traceable piping is that a substantial amount of such piping may have to be replaced."
-Si nificant quantities of safety related materials were purchased D
from vendors not qualified to supply such mat'erials. The NRC has stated that, The potential impact of the material purchases is that installed materials may have to be replaced."
While the June 10 hearing yielded useful qualitative information, NRC staff were vague with regard to specifics. Testimony at the hearing and subsequent correspondence CAUSES ME TO QUESTION WHETHER THE NRC STAFF IS ON TOP OF THE PROBLEM. Today's hearing is a direct result of my not being satisfied with information
~
that we have been provided to date.
In addition to our having been provided incomplete information, there are other disturbing aspects of this matter. I am concerned, as I said on June 10, that the NRC staff has not required an independent audit of the Zimmer plant. IT SEEMS UNREALISTIC TO HAVE CONDIFENCE TH AT THE COMPANY TH AT NEGLECTED QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR SO MANY YEARS WILL ON ITS OWN FULLY UNCOVER THE DEFICIENCIES RESULTING FROM ITS NEGLECT.
An independent audit is even more important in view of the NRC suggesting that they have t
-. - - -...__^ __.__
TeI. 301 E492-7715 REMARKS BY l
NUNZIO J. PALLADINO, CHAIRMAN U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATTHE INPO CONFERENCE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES ATLANTA, GEOR GI A October 5,1982
" MEETING THE CHALLENGE FOR A NUCLEAR FUTURE" Your UTILITIES NEED PUBLIC CONFIDENCE TO SURVIVE AND PROSPER. It seems to me that confidence in civilian nuclear activities requires two things to happen:- first, nuclear power plants must provide reliable, affordable electricity without accidents for a long period of time; and, second, there must be a broad public perception that the nuclear industry maintains the highest standards, virtually unsurpassed anywhere else in business and the professions. Said in another way, I think confidence in civilian nuclear power requires solid indications of a genuine determination by you to run a very tight shi,p and to take firm responsibility for public safety.
For today let me concentrate on construction quality assurance.
I continue to be concerned that some of YOU NEED TO DO MORE TO SHORE UP YOUR OWN AND THE PUBLIC'S CONFIDENCE IN THE QUAllTY ASSURANCE OF YOUR CONSTRUCTION O PER ATIO NS.
QUALITY ASSUR ANCE, OR QA, SHOULD BE THE CENTRAL FOCUS NOW FOR ALL THE UTILITIES BUILDING NUCLEAR PLANTS. The Commission has considered quality assurance to be a key factor in the design and construction of nuclear power plants for many years. The problems that have been identified recently indicate that the fundamental cause of most design and construction deficiencies is the lack of total management commitment to quality.
CONGRESSIONAL AND COMMISSION INTEREST A NUMBER OF CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS AND l
COMMISSION MEETINGS HAVE BEEN HELD RECENTLY ON THE SUBJECT OF' QUALITY ASSURANCE IN THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY. RESULTS j
OF THIS HIGH LEVEL ATTENTION INCLUDE:
i
)
o CONGRESSIONAL LEGISLATION (FORD l
AMENDMENT) REQUIRING NRC TO CONDUCT AN INDEPTH STUDY OF QUALITY IN CONSTRUCTION l
(DESIGN AND ENGINEERING) INCLUDING A PILOT PROGRAM TO TEST SEVERAL ALTER N ATIVES o COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A SERIES OF NRC INITIATIVES DESIGNED TO ASSURE QUALITY IN CONSTRUCTION AND NRC'S ABILITY TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE IT l
9
FORD AMENDMENT AT LEAST ONE RESIDENT INSPECTOR AT EVERY CONSTRUCTION SITE GREATER THAN 15% COMPLETE (END FY 82)
STUDY OF EXISTING AND ALTERNATIVE PROGRAMS FOR IMPROVING QUALITY ASSURANCE MORE PRESCRIPTIVE APPROACH FOR PRINCIPAL ARCHITECTURAL AND e
ENGINEERING CRITERIA CONDITIONING CP ON DEMONSTR ATION OF QA MANAGEMENT CAPABILITY l
USE OF AUDITORS / INSPECTORS FROM ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONALS e
IMPROVEMENT OF NRC ORGANIZATION AND PROGRAMS FOR QA e
CONDITIONING CP ON LICENSEE USE OF INDEPENDENT INSPECTORS e
TO AUDIT ITS QA PROGRAM PILOT PROGR AM REVIEW AND EVALUATE ABOVE CONCEPTS e
INDEPENDENT INSPECTORS FOR AUDITING QA e
AT LEAST THREE CONSTRUCTION SITES e
REPORT TO CONGRESS 15 MONTHS AFTER ENACTMENT e
ACCOMPANIED BY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS e
e TO. INCLUDE INPUT RECEIVED FROM PUBLIC, LECENSEES, ACRS, AND PROFESSIONAL GROUPS
INITIATIVES CONTAINED IN SECY-82-352, PAPER ENTITLED "ASSUR ANCE OF QUALITY,"
[ AUGUST 29,1982)
INITIATIVES ARE DESIGNED TO:
ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL CONFIDENCE IN THE e
QUALITY OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IMPROVE THE MANAGEMENT CONTROL OF e
QUALITY IMPROVE THE NRC CAPABILITY TO EVALUATE THE e
IMPLEMENTATION OF LICENSEE PROGRAMS SATISFY THE DIRECTION PROVIDED THE NRC IN e
AN AMENDMENT ACCEPTED BY THE HOUSE AND SENATE CONFEREES IN THEIR JOINT CONSIDER ATION OF THE NRC'S FY 82-83 AUTHORIZATION BILL
INITIATIVES FALL INTO THE FOLLOWING
~
CATEG O RIES:.
A.
MEASURES AT NEAR-TERM O'PERATING LICENSE FACILITIES
~
1.
SELF EVALUATIONS j
2.
REGIONAL EVALUATIONS 3.
INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEWS B.
IN DUSTRY INITI ATIVES 1.
INPO EVALUATIONS 2.
UTILITY AND THIRD PARTY EVALUATIONS j
C.
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM CHANGES i
1.
REVISE PROCEDURES AND INCREASE RESOURCES 2.
CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT TEAM INSPECTIONS (CAT) j 3.
INTEGR ATED DESIGN INSPECTIONS (NRC) j 4.
EVALUATION OF REPORTED INFORMATION l
D.
0ETERMINE FEASIBILITY OF DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES (LIKE FAA)
,1 1
E.
M ANAGEMENT OF QUALITY j
1.
M AN AGEMENT SEMIN ARS 2.
QUALIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF QA/QC PERSONNEL l
3.
CR AFTSM ANS HIP l
F.
SPECIAL STUDY OF NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURANCE I
l l
LEAD NRC STAFF RESPONSIBILITIES FOR QA l
INITIATIVES l
NTOL - SELF EVALUATION NRR NTOL - REGIONAL EVALUATION REGIONS NTOL-INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW NRR IN DUSTRY INITI ATIVE IE 1
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGR AM CHANGES IE 1
CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT... TEAM INSPECTION IE INTEGRATED DESIGN INSPECTIONS IE EVALUATION OF REPORTED INFORMATION IE DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES IE M ANAGEMENT... PROGR AMS IE 4
l CERTIFICATION... PERSONNEL lE CR AFTS M ANS HIP IE LONG TERM REVIEW IE i
\\
SPECIAL STUDY OF NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSilR.RNCE STUDY MANDATED BY e
NRC'S FY 82-83 AUTHORIZATION BILL (FORD AM EN DM ENT)
OBJECT 1
o COMPREHENSIVE LOOK AT PAST QUALITY PROBLEMS TO DETERMINE ROOT CAUSES O
REVIEW OF PROGR AMS IN WHICH QUALITY PR.OBLEMS HAVE NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED TO DETERMINE REASONS FOR APPARENT SUCCESS O
PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE NRC QA PROGRAM O
SATISFY REQUIREMENTS IN FORD AMENDMENT i
t
)
i f
i I
j APPROACH DEVELOP SERIES OF QUALITY ASSURANCE CASE e
i STUDIES AT SELECTED LICENSEE PLANTS. VISIT SEVERAL UTILITIES HAVING HAD SERIOUS 4
I QUALITY PROBLEMS AT SEVERAL THAT HAVE NOT
)
e j
FROM THE CASE STUDIES, DETERMINE ESSENTIAL UNDERLYING CHARACTERISTICS OF SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL PROGRAMS.
i ALSO, DETERMINE WHAT ACTIONS NECESSARY TO SOLVE PROBLEMS AND VALUE/IMPACTOP SOLUTIONS i
j
=
l INTERGR. ATE RESULTS OF PARALLEL SUBSTUDIES WITH SERIES OF CASE STUDIES. DEVELOP FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS, REPORTS i
l l
i
i PURPOSE OF VISIT:
TilIS TEAM OF NRC AND CONTRACTOR SCIENTISTS, ENGINEERS, AND QUALITY PROFESSIONALS IS HERE AS A RESULT OF $0TH THE CONGRESSIONAL MANDATE TO STUDY QUALITY IN CONSTRUCTION AND THE NRC INITIATIVES IN QUALITY ASSURANCE THE PURPOSE OF OUR VISIT IS TO STUDY YOUR PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMS AS ONE OF A SERIES OF CASE STUDIES AT NUCLEAR PLANTS ACROSS THE NATION i
i e
9
S,PECIAL STUDY OF HUCLEAR QUALITY ASSUPR!CE l
i 1.
QUALITY ASSURANCE CASE STUDIES 2.
REVIEW OF NRC, INDUSTRY. AND GOVERNMENT QA PROGRAMS 3.
STUDY OF QUALIFICATION / CERTIFICATION OF QA/QC l
PERSONNEL 4.
PILOT PROGR AM AND ANALYSIS OF FORD ALTERNATIVES 5.
REVIEW PANEL c
6.
STUDY OF CONTRACTS AND PROCUREMENT 7.
CONTACT WITH OUTSIDE GROUPS 1
8.
ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS AND WRITING OF REPORT 1
OTHER RELATED ACTIVITIES 4
9.
HOLDPOINT/CEP.TIFICATION STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT 10.
DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT l-i l
1 i
QUALITY ASSURANCE CASE STUDIES e
PRE FIELD ACTIVITY
-DEVELOPMENT OF ASSESSMENT PLAN AND METHODOLOGY
-PLANT VISITS MUST CONSIDER LTR ISSUES AND FORD ISSUES
-SCHEDULING
-FAMILIARIZATION WITH PLANT AND PLANT QA PROGRAM AND HISTORY e
FIELD ACTIVITY
-VISIT TO REGIONAL OFFICE
~
-VISIT TO CORPOR ATE OFFICE
-VISIT TO PLANT SITE
-DISCUSSIONS WITH REGIONAL AND RESIDENT INSPECTORS
-DISCUSSIONS WITH LICENSEE PERSONNEL, CONTRACTORS
-REVIEW OF QA PROGRAM, SELECTED RECORDS
-PLANT WALK THROUGH
~
e POST FIELD ACTIVITY
-ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS
-POSTULATION AND EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES
-lNPUT TO GENERIC REPORT 1
I NEED FOR UTILITY INPUT AND ASSISTANCE THE GENERIC RESULTS OF Tills SERIES OF SITE SPECIFIC CASE STUDIES AND PARALLEL STUDIES OF GERMANE TOPICS WILL FORM THE BASIS OF
- REPORTS TO Tile NRC COPHISSIONERS REPORT TO CONGRESS NRC'S FUTURE POLICY AND PROGRAM IN QUALITY ASSURANCE THE EMPllASIS OF OUR EFFORT WILL BE TO DETERMINE UNDERLYING PROGRAMMATIC CilARACTERISTICS OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY ASSURANCE THAT EITHER
- CONTRIBUTE TO Tile OVERALL SUCCESS OF THE PROJECT
- CONTRIBUTE TO Tile DEVELOPMENT OF RESULTS THAT FAIL TO MEET THE STANDARDS OF Tile INDUSTRY, THE NRC, AND Tile PUBLIC FOR QUALITY IN A NUCLEAR POWER PLANT TilIS IS NOT AN INSPECTION. WE ARE NOT HERE TO INSPECT OR AUDIT OR SECOND GUESS. WE ARE HERE TO LEARN AND TO DEVELOP REAL WORLD INFORMATION TO HELP STRUCTURE CONGRESSIONAL, NRC, AND INDUSTRY POLICIES FOR QUALITY IN Tile NUCLEAR INDUSTRY FOR THIS DECADE AND BEYOND 4
TO BE SUCCESSFUL, WE NEED YOUR HELP, COOPERATION, AND CANDOR. WE TilANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION IN TilIS MAJOR HRC POLICY STUDY l
SUMMARY
SPECIAL QA STIJDY REASON
~
COMPREllENSIVE STUDY TO e
-DETERMINE ROOT CAUSES OF QUALITY PROBLEMS AT PLANTS WITH IDENTIFIED DEFICIENCIES
-DETERMINE UNDERLYING ~ CHARACTERISTICS OF SUCCESSFUL QUALITY PROGRAMS
-DEVELOP BLUEPRINT FOR FUTURE FOR NRC AND LICENSEE QUALITY PROGRAMS SCOPE e
NRC STAFF STUDY
-PERFOIIMED BY NRC STAFF
-LED BY 110. ASSISTANCE FROM REGIONS, CONTRACTORS EXAMI, NATION OF EXISTING PROGR AMS AND PAST PROBLEMS WILL INCLUDE e
-REVIEW OF EXISTING DOCUMENTATION (PLANS, INVESTIGATIONS, ETC.)
-VISITS / DISCUSSIONS WITH REGIONS AND RESI, DENTS
-VISITS TO PLANT SITES EMPI! ASIS ON GENERIC IMPLICATIONS e
INCLUDES BOTil PLANTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND OPER ATING SITES e
WILL EXAMINE NRC QA PROGRAM AND POLICIES AS WELL AS e
LICENSEES /VEN DORS /CONTR ACTORS WILL LOOK AT OUTSIDE QA PROGRAMS (NON-NUCLEAR AND FOREIGN e
NUCLEAR) i i
~
4 S U M M A R Y (continuto).
OTHER REVIEW WILL BE RESPONSIVE TO FORD AMENDMENT e
FORD AMENDMENT SETS FIFTEEN MONTH TIME FRAME e
WILL SOLICIT INPUT FROM PUBLIC, LICENSEES, ACRS.
e PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES, UNIONS PLAN TO ESTABLISH ADVISORY PANEL e
EXPECTED RESULTS CHARACTERIZATION OF SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL e
PROGR AMS~, ROOT CAUSES RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGES /IMPROVEME,NT.S IN NRC e
AND LICENSEE QA PROGRAMS IDENTIFICATION OF NEEDED LEGISLATION e
REPORTTO CONGRESS TO SATISFY REQUIREMENTS OF FORD e
AMENDMENT l
.~.
CHRONOLOGY CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT HEARINGS ON QA HELD IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:
e SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT; COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIR,S - NOVEMBER 19,1981 e SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY, AND NATURAL RES'OURCES:
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS - DECEMBER 14,1981 NOVEMBER 27,1981 - CHAIRMAN DIRECTED STAFF TO ASSEMBLE APPROACHES TO STRENGTHEN QA DECEMBER 1,1981 - CHAIRMAN PALLADINO, IN A SPEECH TO AIF, CHALLENGED THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY TO REEXAMINE AND UPGRADE ITS QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMS JANU ARY 29,1982 - NRC STAFF BRIEFED COMMISSION ON PRELIMINARY EVALUATIONS OF VARIOUS QA INITIATIVES FEBRUARY 4,1982 -INPO BRIEFED COMMISSION ON INDUSTRY ACTIONS FEBRUARY 10,1982 - STAFF DIRECTED TO PREPARE MORE DEFINITIVE PLAN, INCLUDING SCHEDULE AND RESOURCES MARCH 4,1982 - QA PRESENTATION TO ACRS APRIL 12,1982 - MEETING WITH INPO TO EXCHANGE QUALITY ASSURANCE INFORMATION MAY 19,1982 - SENIOR AGENCY MANAGEMENT MEETING TO DISCUSS QA STRATEGY
~
.'. a s
CHRONOLOGY (CONT?
JUNE 10,1982 REGION lil ADMINISTRATOR TESTIFIES BEFORE CONGRESS JULY 15,1982 NRC STAFF BRIEFED COMMISSION ON STAFF PLANS FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE AUGUST 20,1982 EDO SENT STAFF PAPER ON ASSURANCE OF QUALITY TO THE COMMISSION (SECY 82-352)
S EPT.14,1982 REGION 111 ADMINISTRATOR TESTIFIES BEFORE CONGRESS S EPT. 20,1982 IE BRIEFED COMMISSION'S ASSISTANTS, CHAIRMAN ON QA INITIATIVES IN SECY 82-352 S EPT. 29,1982 COMMISSION BRIEFING ON SECY 82-352 OCT. 5,1982 CHAIRMAN PALLIDINO SPEAKS BEFORE INPO CONFERENCE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, SAYS QA SHOULD BE CENTRAL FOCUS FOR UTILITIES BUILDING NUCLEAR PLANTS OCT.13,1982 CHAIRMAN PALLIDINO SPEAKS BEFORE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF QC. INDICATES EFFECTIVE QA NECESSARY TO RESTORE PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN NUCLEAR POWER OCT.18,1982 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE SPEAKS BEFORE ANS EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE ON QUALITY ASSURANCE
ST. LUCIE #2 SITE VISIT JUNE 27 JULY l,1983 FotA -9+ -1.13 Ll137
V r
5
$e=
w O
E O
u a
w
1 8
Esctncal 80rlG q
Directory 1982-1983 g[
91st EDITION
\\
Electric Utilities i
CONTENTS Index l
United States i
Unites States Possessions l
f Canada Pools and Coordinating Groups l
Consulting Engineers l
Associations international Conference on Large High Voltage Electnc Systems--CtGRE Commissions T4'4 4 3db'l3 Published ucor..all Pubite eioni ca.
Annually 1221 Avenue of the Am"i
t Price S195.00 New York. N.Y.10020 t' Ct.:t l 1
- T
- 2. 2.
' ?)14.s* 8,
- L.% I
_ _ _. _. _ _ __ _ -.. -.. _ _. -,... _. ~ _. -.
.. =_
o s
'e same ow= 's 6 *
- M 134 es westf(
Car 'ea. We les (D
- 15 ee
- et wr.. -.
- _. - G G Cact C regraeres:
82.
!!* o.
W Pa Gaa filt;)..._
6 353 let 500 te
- Gew,a N, a 43, 240 4 loo se per tsow(as L 166 000 se Os a
- st sew 'e Em Syre 10 313 I*J e
- Unit 1 783 000 se Unt 2 183 000 e.
C' LIA. Cere* f a J
Its1 Ne la.ae'.r 47 a32 ;35 0c0...
Nee mars,2 !$C 4*4 se*
P89 Yt'.. ~ _. _ _ _ 4 I 8 emes 1941 $ael t M 46 263 04% 000 e Ne Ya Gea 1111b
. O seae
%es 5i 3514 414 fM s.e 47 069 415
$ fee'" IWD'e Gen us. _--..... 264 00W so I'em UG1 $4 !!1 133 2414 500 et 19e W49 4 ]S7 04 6 N8t G81
- tivbe vet ree weg 19 2];
wet 5 67 000 to ted 6 130000 to a
N Cate wei 12'7
,A8ICEA M fM 'e saa as *'.an i 198.12 541000 a
- l 5et eene slutamer 9 731000 se (*'wer) te til 000 se W 9a W 4 W
... ( G JDast o(Ni co's staa8 Fir W1 8"d#---~-***-
-4 m M 000 m as p g,eg yo, y, ast caosesiiry haa isye Gen Cas 129000 **
Os 4 Na Gas
$4mpoe3. Sam 8 a W 1 347 000 se und 2 + 342.000 no 8'aat VF.. _. - - _..,.....114 041000 esar e,e vp,_,.
__ j u (,,,,,
. 0 0 $**#
ggpq
%=t Su Gea fI!Ih. - _ l l'ea1e fWerg Gen Cao..., -
le1000 se g,iu Gea t t 910 442?577000eene
'u'."t f b0..
0, 5~ '-
- w
!= = b-
-,4 i. u =.e ee
- i rn= t-
~ 2 in= ~
,,u,4..., n,,n,,,,,,,,,
PaatUr. -.
_ Q F Couras
- pe(f o0Nf pumf Net $14 Ge9 e198!)
O soar Sant up. _
M 2 y,ege.
$sern fWgias Get Ces_
- 101000 to Nog $ts Gen t}g[p.
4 424 Ost 000 near 04 0 A8 088 l'esin TWtsie Gen Cas 141500 he Unit i. 32 000 to' L*t 2. fl 000 ***
Cd & Not Gas und I 161000 he und 2 347000 to MJrNaae P>ema 4 Cement unt. Il 500 to Peat v6 -
.. O 4 ueis
%st 5ra Geu19eiL_ _
414 Sc6 000 eea, NuCit44l#sti
$1sent fwtpre Gen Cao
,446 000 se g
une i. 223 000 he Omt !. 223.000 he
- "' I"8L J 8 S Not 5ts Gen tlH D -
- 1416137 000 near rf uvi rt u,n g sissai fesse Gen cas 1.2H 000 no Peat vy _..
_. _. 5 t Gses,ien Nesse w Net 52 Goa(IM D 3 C46154 0C0 eea, W 3 644000 he W 4 644000 -
Steeri fwtwo Gen Cao M4 000 es g g,,
- i. m m..
- 2. m m..
- ,,hr,c 4,4,40,'at r
aw m=e a,g*g7g,,
.:,(-t,rt e.s.. e, n
>snt va. _..
.._....... e swaws Not$rsGeee198D I 449 I330c0 near sisem fesaw Gen Cao ull 500 **
G454,80h(1 Od 4 het Get unno 12 204 000 te se unns 14. MF 000 ne es uusseme Pet Creest W L3.500 se Not tu Gen U NI) i15001000 near Getrepe hee Gen Cao.
g32 Oc0 ne uu0ts04LL Osr4 N to wws 35 500 ne sesn 8ient wqr.. --.
._. W I legers Not fra Gen ilH D 142.146 000 near M l9sesi men lessen tw,ae Gen C40 214 000 te
%st w Gen t lHil ---
Fill 2 000 near Os 4 mm Gee G86f**ae w Gen Cse
- 426 000 he w 4 637 000 se Une i. I17 000 he 12 woes. 35.500 se essn I
ftuvert mug
- 8 l
'est $ss Gen iLHil 101331000 teae su Genif5'6 2 694 ld Ga6fwere w Gsi Cao til = ne
- f-Go.D i2 ~ H = =
C.e _
_ m m..
08 & met Gas w. 40 000 no w 3 212C00ta fount IIMO emo popuufleie l
W 2 44000se W 4 212.000 to artsee 4 002. Go acrest 2.175. scene I $26. Ispiereur u
!32 1
e 1
l 1
i
4 FLORIDA 4lai ta, SNre Gen 9Ill ticav e Gans $000 6xav e ir W. Cas secs & Gen Coun 1 A tranemme a
n Pro 3 ass saa taton 49 %5 tomia saress 6 932. loseton
$r # Fe $=w, as 9 951. Mar, woos 117148.
Dr. let Pan.
Gi usras n
nosaes kn 4 02 L Perestese 20 664. 'ec.manac 2 881 mean Dr Ac:'s Sc 4 0 $ Meet motor b l967. Inom'o.n 2 283 June Part 3 080. Aoter Dr. Pe.
W 7 Flammg w
W leaps 9 864 sendas il417. newg'on Pwn 3134 sev encavee Or Gen" pass _.
4(Srewme 4 %Q La inne 2 287. Lee 6,uer t i30 Lee Cfy 9 257. Lee Dr. Pat A Cas Snores 3174Tme Fornt i 214 Lee Port 6 909 Lantana or Cansu ur $c
_J1 Croupesee i
r W 6 Jennsen 1044 tuercaeLane 25 426 Lauosr%d 37 271 Laise t 000.
O,r As wils O s res t w aanse Luersae or troies 2 631 Lno e Cfy 4 500. tne can 6 732.
e r
L reosa Pont 9 071 Larg toat Kev iIM Macc=any 3 451.
Or tem trate _
f C Wes=er Wesee 16044 weeourg 44136 venourne kn 2 711 Or. Omr lag & Oor P L Peorian unto e Mrs e !!1. Us*on's 3 207 MerMt 's 29 231 uan Or Asi & SostPm.
O J Aomund 346 911 Een b 96 298 Yan Lanes 3 000 han snares De tave 4 La Apers
- W $ 01re j
1244 urn $crvas 62.3% udea, 2 040. uras t309.
Or Ar 4 stores._
J V usens, Wra*w 12 til Naces 17 581. 940es Port L $22. Narre Dr, la'ry 4 5scunty 0
- Acmend 2 509 Nosarms 2 240 N 84, asage 4 920 N Laudertae 18 479.
Dr.pPaoysms Q t Odse 4 Ear's 42 Se6 i San b 36 48' N Nacies 3 204, m Pawn Dr..eca bcs W 4 Fasy a b 11344 4 Port CPanc e 6 205 Norweed to173 Ca.ane Dr. Foud our
- w knessy a
Pan 21139 Oresa sege 1074 ces 2 000 Opeetticese 4 221 War. Suesta 4 tot C mit A 4 Gurese Onste 1246 Cmans 14 460 Ormond ha 14 Gli ormone Wy kosta 4 Oms Meet.
W 4 Imost h votes 6 W2 Osorey I 1118arones 5 661 Psama 9 444.
Wy. besta tag.
1I Crees a Pam la,11160 Puma laia 1 f el Pam kn 9121 Pawn b Wy. fransm lag.
I 4 Maior Girs is 407 Pewn b Veres i 232. Peree 4 437. Pam Wy (norty Contris f 4 pane s J 4 the Scregs #own 8sa.n Cal 8164 Paa $creas 4 3 000 P eorose Uy Lose Wet.
- L tron a t
PFS 4 III Pe*erome P'nes 35 716 Perae to 257 Pesuam we toad Forer.ait 12C4 Pro $nores I11% Pantsten 48 %t. Pamoane kn Ugr. ame, A W eestfaf 12 818 Pom;are ha maaianos 1014 P rf Chanotte 10169 Vr Sche & Caore G t Cavton P'rt Gorge L8 754 Pmce'on 1800. Anta Goros 6117 Vy Cor Aes & Statt.
G F Osmar(
semond M's 4 66) *43ewood Ms 2 528 Arnere kn 26 lit.
WF. Not Sets
_ W l barren va re Ooes. _ _._
L 4 van Fouen u
a,eage 11377.it A p.nes 12 352 temosee 4 070 taniorg n
23176 Sasiota 44les tarswia laness 4 40$ taresaa kn we f4Jvarerss_
.- J f Geeer 1161 tese ser 4 460 $ mons 1284 So# tav 18861 Wy Per sat We enst 1 #etier Cartona 9 %4 $ Eaw 10 4841 usau ats 101st $ Pernca Up fes & Pestatures _.. _. f usasse wy e s wym...
J 0 Frotat 1 mores 10 313 $m,trare 6 til i ven.ce 1000. Siarie 1304.
n
$ Net 4 820 kame il 64L br's.de 31431.eeweer 4 ill.
Wy Oc 1.cs......
J 4 5teenens farest 21142. fegma 3 til fee 1254 f.n.saw 31110 f rsaar tu 4 719 veta 2 %0. vows il til Wence Gers t $M I#88'8 0"'Il ess & C' erveur-a evgaa Gors I 742 arerican 1624 **u Gate 3000 W
-(%ncoat Sv)C A Caset #
6seamon 4162. # tau Gme 2 705 4 Wetmurae 9078 W Want 6C?6 4 8 m km 62130 enrecoe imes 12 8li, t
- Wee tu 1362. Man Manors 12142 gag gnto g, gg g q gi p,,,,,,g g 33;i3 p
Catag4Qurup (1e kncoast) 0 Q ustCadum Wy Dit our..,__.
tie kncoeul a v Irnoen ROA104 PowH C04P vs tag 6 Oct.
,_ (se Pearseurt) L 4 Gdr*s'n 8
04 SL S P 0 Sea 14042. II, Petersburg, My Eng 6 our (wl e J Cro fet 866-llll Area Code 813
- ertn karoest 904 C>merd IL Clanweier he allti-A was at Nrea Nyes Cars omup _.
. Cse kncoeul e G 1ae wy trg 6 Ocr.
..... ICearneseri e f Stone Pm & Cn Iass ONet Aaese a nret a wy tre & Cw_.
Cason toregs! A N ufanad I13
.,~
i i
i i
n i
.i i}
J j
l l
l l
e i
l I
i l
I t i !
r i t
i
,t t
'il I
t liI llI l!
l l
l t i
.il i
i l
i I
l t
i l
I l
l i
i i
3 l
l l
i- !'i l l I ih i
s gg Wi t
I i
t a
l ~-
i l
i 3,e
.~
si lfI
!I
}l fi
.,ii!
i
'i:
i i
i i
n i,:
b,,, e,.
f,.i !..,.l '" f.!hJ L..I i
..t..}.
l3, ls,,E. L,
11 f E
i 4
,i
,.,ii,,
i 1
!)iI.i!n!}l!
2 l
'[
k
!, [: !!II ! l5 !! !! ! !
E L. l f
I 3.1 i
s.
i.
i f
8
't j
,l E
.I '
i A Et t
=
l fi
!,l !y $ I
!}u,43:iiasa!$i}
a!
li ll i!)lIlI!I b l L !!.. !ll fil. d !!
!i,4e i a.
I 1
j.
i i
l l
i I
I i
I.
I i
i i
l l
j i
I l
.i i
I 4
.I i
i l
lel l
I Wi i
~
ll!
I hi
!E!!:
,0 i
!ii;hI i l i
i I '8 !
f i
l I-5 :
I
,ilsl$b,i! ! !! !! !$ l$ ! f l I t i' i l. j I .i p } i 2 d i, ! { .. m m a,4 1, l, ;f., !&. !!. L'$,, f t } }lj!=.r,f.!j l} } 'E ..:.e I i I l l 1 l i I i, f I f a t I l l 1 i I Lj.. e.' $ j ,1 1 E i! j f., ;i{ i. !E IlE :., l "l I r4 m.o 4 :4 . =.. u I l J' l (e, ,i lt o, ;g.o m 2 n .j,. e.J m......O.. r, J. r. u. 13 n ,,i I I l
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 COMPLETED MILESTONE ANALYSIS ITEM SCHEDULED ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT JUNE,1977 START RC8 8ASEMAT CONCRETE 07/06/77 07/07n7 START INTAKE STRUCT BASEMAT CONCRETE 10/15/77 10/01n7 START T.O. PEDESTAL MAT CONCRETE 12/15/77 10/25n7 START ERECT STEEL CONTAINMENT 01/1898 12/21n7 START RA8 8ASEMAT CONCRETE 02/10/78 02/10n8 COMPLETE POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT 12/0608 01/22n9 START M.S.T. STEEL ERECTION 12/2808 02/12n9 START RC8 INT. CONCRETE 01/1799 11/0708 STAR'T FHB 8ASEMAT CONCRETE 06/05n9 06/0509 START PREOPERATIONAL TESTING 04/20/80 03/19/80 START SETTING NSSS MAJOR EQUIPMENT 06/18/80 06/22/80 COMPLETE RC8 OPER FLOOR CONCRETE 09/23/80 10/17/80 SET CONTAINMENT VESSEL DOME 09/26/80 10/04/80 COMPLETE RAB CXT. CONCRETE 12/15/80 12/18/80 COMPLETE LOOP LARGE SORE PIPING 03/14/81 02/06/81 J COMPLETE REFUELING WATER STORAGE TANK 04/30/81 04/28/81 COMPLETE RCS EXTERIOR SHIELD WALL CONCRETE i 09/06/81 08/11/81 INTAKE COOLING WATER INT. MTR RUN 09/25/81 09/23/81 COMPLETE OCEAN DISCHARGE PPG (KlEWIT) 12/25/81 10/14/81 TURSINE ON TURNING GEAR 12/15/81 12/16/81 CHART 1 ,-l
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 COMPLETED MILESTONE ANALYSIS ITEM SCHEDULED ACTUAL ECCS FLOW TEST 01/04/82 01/13/82 SECONDARY HYDRO 02/04/82 02/04/82 COLD HYDRO 03/17/82 05/18/82 HOT FUNCTIONAL 07S3/82 10/21/82 ILRT 08/11/82 11/24/82 CHART 2 D O e 0
i FLORIDA POWEH & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 COMPARISON OF CONSTRUCTION START TO COLD HYDRO NUMBER OF PLANT MWE MONTHS BYRON 1 1120 75 DI ABLO CANYON 1 1084 84 FARLEY 2 829 82 McGUIRE 1 1180 84 NORTH ANNA 2 907 101 SALEM 2 870 125 SAN ONOFRE 2 1140 79 SEQUOYAH 1 1128 114 SEQUOYAH 2 1148 133 ST. LUCIE 2 842 59 SUMMER 1 900 79 WATTS BAR 1 1165 105 AVERAGE TIME (MONTHS) 95 CHART 4 o I i o 0 ~
35 Ill-al q]. li si -bh l!pj ij ..g il i ijl !s 11 3 .i- .t. g y-p i <p Ej 15 a i 1 I j* g. {I u '"\\ jp l'I I i ill (" {i 1!! 5*!j 5 t 1= l i O 1 e a 4
o FLORIDA POEWER & LeGHT COesPAa.Y ST. LUCIE UNIT NO.2 SITE ORGANIZATION CHART I asTE -2 I I 1 I I l l l 1 C.S., so. ~ WCast#ff, feGACT WAVICES
- tST an mage OC Consipet me m esT'-
Nimi Meuff8MDSW Mem hrthessiteS Or, e4 3.Ptavisont supteessitaastaff DeGaastig, l _s_ _ _.1. e.. I I i ttGEne-COST casussagtieens' . SAPthyt304 gggpgggggyggggagy ggg,, j
- WE FPet ADEAufeOSIRA '-
a teAsco ~ e FIPelet ye ammanan aseo .seases, tason a.ce40a= nasc -ui-l L ASEA DIntC10A5tel l CHART 7 b 9 l
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 INGREDIENTS FOR A SUCCCESSFUL PROJECT e MANAGEMENT COMMITMENT e FINANCIAL RESOURCES e REALISTIC & FIRM SCHEDULE e CLEAR DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY e FLEXIBLE PROJECT CONTROL TOOLS e TEAMWORK-INDIVIDUAL COMMITMENT
- ENG. AHEAD OF CONST.
- EARLY STARTUP INVOLVEMENT e ORGANIZATIONAL FLEXIBILITY e ONGOING CRITIQUE OF THE PROJECT e BETHESOA OFFICE FOR LICENSING e OWNER TAKES THE PROJECT LEAD CHART 10 0
t 4 NRC'S QUALITY ASSURANCE INITIATIVES SPECIAL STUDY OF NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURANCE (CONGRESSIONAL AMENDMENT STUDY) BRIEFING SLIDES FOR PRESENTATION JUNE 27, 1983 AT FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT ST. LUCIE 2 PROJECT 4 DR. W. D. ALTMAN, PROJECT MANAGER i s e l
TEAM MEMBERS ST. LUCIE 2 NRC BILL'hlTMAN NRC PROJECT MANAGER, SPECIAL STUDY OF NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURANCE BILL BRACH SENIOR QUALITY ASSURANCE ENGINEER, NRC HEADQUARTERS BATTELLE PNL HAROLD HARTY SENIOR STAFF ENGINEER, ENERGY SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT MILES PATRICK MANAGER, PROJECT MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES AND TRAINING IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING LAB KEN CARROLL MANAGER, CONSTRUCTION AND PROCUREMENT QUALITY BRANCH DAVE ROSS QUALITY ENGINEERING SUPERVISOR, QUALITY DEPARTMENT KIST AND ASSOCIATES JOHN HEIDENREICH VICE PRESIDENT, N.C. KIST & ASSOCIATES DELLON ASSOCIATES B0B DELLON VICE PRESIDENT, DELLON ASSOCIATES l 1 1
NRC ORGANIZATION 1 COMMISSIONERS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DIRCKS d a NUCLEAR NUCLEAR MATERIAL CEAR WSPECTION REACTOR REGULATI0rl SAFETY AND R A ORY AND SAFEGUARDS ^ DENTON DAVIS 0 l
umt,t ur snidi't-UllON AND ENFOHCEMENT R.C. DeYOUNG, Dil1ECTOR J.ll. SNIEZEK, DEPUTY DIRECTOR TECilNICAL TR AINING CENTER C.W. THAYER, DIRECTO R PROGRAM SUPPORT BRANCH J.L. BLAHA, CHIEF ENFORCEMENT STAFF J. A. AXELR AD. ACTING DIRECTOR DIVISION OF QUALITY ASSURANCE. DIVISION OF EMERGENCY SAFEGUARDS, AND INSPECTION PREPAREDNESS AND PROGRAMS ENGINEERING RESPONSE J.M. TAYLOR, DIRECTOR E.L. JORDAN, DIRECTOR B.K. GRIMES, DEPUTY DIRECTOR S. A. SCHWARTZ, DEPUTY DIRECTOR QUALITY ASSUR ANCE BRANCH ENGINEERING AND GENERIC VACANT CilIEF COMMUNICATIONS BRANCH R.L. BAER, CHIEF REACTOR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS EVENTS ANALYSIS BRANCH BRANCll W.R. MILLS, CHIEF R.F. HEISHM AN, CHIEF OPER ATING REACTOR PROGRAMS INCIDENT RESPONSE BRANCH BRANCll K.E. PERKINS, CHIEF J.G. PARTLOW, CHIEF SAFEGUARDS AND MATERIALS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAMS BRANCH BRANCH L.I. COBB, CillEF F.G. PAG ANO, CHIEF
BACKGROUND OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS THERE HAS BEEN A SERIES O e PUBLIClZED PROBLEMS REGARDING THE QUALITY OF CON AND ENGINEERING) AT SEVERAL NUCLEAR POWER PLANT PROJEC PLANTS RECEIVING WIDESPREAD ATTENTION INCLUDE: -MARBLE HILL -MIDLAND' -ZIMMER -SOUTH TEXAS -DIABLO CANYON i i THE PERCEIVED SEVERITY OF THE QUALITY PROBLEMS AND e PUBLICITY AND PUBLIC INTEREST HAVE CAUSED THE CONGR NRC COMMISSIONERS TO QUESTION -THE ABILITY OF INDUSTRY TO CONSTRUCT NUCLEAR PLANT i CONSISTENT WITH PUBLIC SAFETY -THE ABl(ITY OF THE NRC STAFF TO PROVIDE ASSURANCE THA HAS CONSTRUCTED PLANTS IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH PU SAFETY AS A RESULT, THE INDUSTRY AND THE NRC ARE JOINTLY FACING AN EROSIO IN THE PUBLIC'S CONFIDENCE IN OUR ABILITY TO BUILD, LICENSE, AND OPERATE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN A MANNER CONSISTE ) SAFETY e
f November 27,1981 MEMORANDUM FOR: William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations FROM: Nunzio J. Palladino QUALITY ASSURANCE NRC needs to take actions that will result in improved quality assurance at Nuclear Power Plants l Steps we are taking or planning, as well as other steps that could be taken, were brought up during our testimony to Congressman Udall's Subcommittee last week. A list of corrective measures would include improvements to our inspection and enforcement l program as well as considerations such as third party audits, strict sanctions against non performers, approved bidders lists, and certified independent performance audits of each utility's QA ac,tivities. I would like you to pull together the various approaches that could be taken to stcongthen Quality Assurance, and provide the Commission a preliminary evaluation of the ones that appear most promising from an effectiveness and cost standpoint I believe it is desirable to have an initial paper on your recommendations by December 11, 1981. The Commission can then focus on the areas deemed worthy of implementation for further study by the staff e
COMMITTEE ON INTErtlOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT OVERSIGHT HEARING ON OUALITY ASSURANCE AT THE ZIMMER NUCLEAR STATION STATEMENT OF THE HON. MORRIS K. UDALL i TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14,9:45 a.m. On June 10 of this year the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing to consider the quality assurance (QA) breakdown at the Zimmer nuclear powerplant. In this case and { possibly others there has been a widespread failure to adhere to the NRC's qual assurance requirements. At Zimmer, the severity of the problem was recognized only { af ter construction was virtually complete. MY PRIMARY CONCERN NOW CENTERS ON THE NRC'S ABILITY TO DETERMINE THAT A REACTOR CAN B OPERATED FOLLOWING A QA BREAKDOWN LIKE THAT AT ZIMMER. To give some idea of the extent of the Zimmer problem, I will indicate briefly the natu some of the issues that must be addressed prior to issuance of an operating license. -Deficient weld procedures -Apparent falsification of weld procedure test data -insufficient documentation to demonstrate that many of the 2000 welders who have worked at the Zimmer site were qualified for the work they performed. The NRC has informed me that, "The potential impact of the (inadequate) wpider qualification records is that a l
-The chemical and physical properties of certain safety related i piping cannot be documented. The NRC staff has stated that, "The potential impact of the loss of traceable piping is that a substantial amount of such piping may have to be replaced." -Significant quantities of safety related materials were purchased from vendors not qualified to supply such mat'erials. The NRC has stated that, "The potential impact of the material purchases is that l installed materials may have to be replaced." i While the June 10 hearing yielded useful qualitative information, NRC staff were vague with regard to specifics. Testimony at the hearing and subsequent correspondence CAUSES ME TO QUESTION WHETHER THE NRC STAFF IS ON TOP OF THE PROBLEM. Today's l hearing is a direct result of my not being satisfied with information ~ that we have been provided to date. In addition to our having been provided incomplete information, there are other disturbing aspects of this matter. I am concerned, as I said on June 10, that the NRC staff has not required an independent audit of the Zimmer plant. IT SEEMS UNREALISTIC TO H AVE CONDIFENCE TH AT THE COMPANY THAT NEGLECTED QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR SO MANY YEARS WILL ON ITS OWN FULLY UNCOVER THE DEFICIENCIES RESULTING FROM ITS NEGLECT. An independent audit is even more important in view of the NRC suggesting that they have
I..S-14-82 Tol. 301/492-7715 FOR IMMEDIATE HELEASE REMARKS BY NUNZIO J. PALLADINO, CHAIRMAN U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATTHE INPO CONFERENCE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES ATLANTA, GEORGIA October 5,1982 " MEETING THE CHALLENGE FOR A NUCLEAR FUTURE" Your UTILITIES NEED PUBLIC CONFIDENCE TO SURVIVE AND PROSPER. It seems to me that confidence in civilian nuclear activities requires two things to happen:- first, nuclear power plants must provide reliable, affordable electricity without accident.s for a long period of time; and, second, there must be a broad public perception that the nuclear industry maintains the highest standards, virtually unsurpassed anywhere else in business and the professions. Said in another way, I think confidence in civilian nuclear power requires solid indications of a genuine determination by you to run a very tight ship and to take firm responsibility for public safety. For today let me concentrate on construction quality assurance. l~ continue to be concerned that some of YOU NEED TO DO MORE TO SHORE UP YOUR OWN AND THE PUBLIC'S CONFIDENCE IN THE QUALITY ASSURANCE OF YOUR CONSTRUCTION O PER ATIO NS. QUALITY ASSURANCE, OR QA, SHOULD BE THE CENTRAL FOCUS NOW FOR ALL THE UTILITIES BUILDING NUCLEAR PLANTS. The Commission has considered quality assurance to be a key factor in the design anti construction of nuclear power plants for many years. The problems that have been identified recently indicate that the fundamental cause of most design and construction deficiencies is the lack of total management commitment to' quality.
l CONGRESSIONAL AND COMMISSION l INTEREST A NUMBER OF CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS AND l COMMISSION MEETINGS HAVE BEEN HELD RECENTLY ON THE SUBJECT OF' QUALITY ) ASSURANCE IN THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY. RESULTS l OF THIS HIGH LEVEL ATTENTION INCLUDE: o CONGRESSIONAL LEGISLATION (FORD AMENDMENT) REQUIRING NRC TO CONDUCT AN INDEPTH STUDY OF QUALITY IN CONSTRUCTION 4 l (DESIGN AND ENGINEERING) INCLUDING A l PILOT PROGRAM TO TEST SEVERAL ALTER NATIVES l e COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A SERIES OF NRC l INITIATIVES DESIGNED TO ASSURE QUALITY IN CONSTRUCTION AND NRC'S ABILITY TO ) MONITOR AND EVALUATE IT
FORD.' MENDMENT i AT LEAST ONE RESIDENT INSPECTOR AT EVERY CONSTRUCTION SITE GREATER TH AN 15% COMPLETE (END FY 82) STUDY OF EXISTING AND ALTERNATIVE PROGRAMS FOR IMPROVING QUALITY ASSURANCE MORE PRESCRIPTIVE APPROACH FOR PRINCIPAL ARCHITECTURAL AND e l ENGINEERING CRITERIA 4 CONDITIONING CP ON DEMONSTRATION OF QA MANAGEMENT CAPABILITY o i e USE OF AUDITORS / INSPECTORS FROM ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONALS IMPROVEMENT OF NRC ORGANIZATION AND PROGRAMS FOR QA e e CONDITIONING CP ON LICENSEE USE OF INDEPENDENT IN.SPECTORS i TO AUDIT ITS QA PROGRAM PILOT PROGR AM REVIEW AND EVALUATE ABOVE CONCEPTS e INDEPENDENT INSPECTORS FOR AUDITING QA e i e AT LEAST THREE CONSTRUCTION SITES 4 REPORT TO CONGRESS 15 MONTHS AFTER ENACTMENT e e ACCOMPANIED BY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS i i e TO. INCLUDE INPUT RECEIVED FROM PUBLIC, LECENSEES, ACRS, AND i PROFESSIONAL GROUPS
INITIATIVES CONTAINED IN SECY-82-352. PAPER ENTITLED " ASSURANCE OF QUA LITY," JAUGUST 29,1982? i INITIATIVES ARE DESIGNED TO: l ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL CONFIDENCE IN THE e QUALITY OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES e IMPROVE THE MANAGEMENT CONTROL OF QUALITY e IMPROVE THE NRC CAPABILITY TO EVALUATE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF LICENSEE PROGRAMS f e SATISFY THE DIRECTION PROVIDED THE NRC IN AN AMENDMENT ACCEPTED BY THE HOUSE AND } SENATE CONFEREES IN THEIR JOINT CONSIDERATION OF THE NRC'S FY 82-83 )' AUTHORIZATION BILL l e
INITIATIVES FALL INTO THE FOLLOWING CATEG O RI ES:. A. MEASURES AT NEAR-TERM O'PERATING LICENSE FACILITIES 1. SELF EVALU ATIONS 2. REGIONAL EVALUATIONS 3. INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEWS B. INDUSTRY INITI ATIVES \\ 1. INPO EVALUATIONS 2. UTILITY AND THIRD PARTY EVALUATIONS C. CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM CHANGES 1. REVISE PROCEDURES AND INCREASE RESOURCES 2. CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT TEAM INSPECTIONS (CAT) 3. INTEGRATED DESIGN INSPECTIONS (NRC) 4. EVALUATION OF REPORTED INFORMATION D. 6ETERMINE FEASIBILITY OF DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES (LIKE FAA) E. MANAGEMENT OF QUALITY 1. M AN AGEMENT SEMIN ARS 2. QUALIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF QA/QC PERSONNEL 3. CR AFTS M ANS HIP F. SPECIAL STUDY OF NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURANCE
LEAD NRC STAFF RESPONSIBILITIES FOR Q.A ~ INITIATIVES NTOL-SELF EVALUATION NRR l NTOL - REGIONAL EVALUATION REGIONS NTOL-INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW NRR IN DUSTRY INITI ATIVE IE j CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM CHANGES IE l CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT... TEAM INSPECTION IE INTEGRATED DESIGN INSPECTIONS lE EVALUATION OF REPORTED INFORMATION IE DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES lE MANAGEMENT... PROGRAMS IE CERTIFICATION... PERSONNEL IE ) CR AFTSM ANS HIP IE I' LONG TERM REVIEW IE l i
SPECIAL STUDY OF NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURAf!CL STUDY MANDATED BY e SECY 82-352 0 NRC'S FY 82-83 AUTHORIZATION BILL (FORD AM ENDM ENT) OBJECT O COMPREHENSIVE LOOK AT PAST QUALITY PROBLEMS TO DETERMINE ROOT CAUSES O REVIEW OF PROGRAMS IN Wi-ilCH QUALITY PR.OBLEMS HAVE NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED TO DETERMINE REASONS FOR APPARENT SUCCESS e PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE NRC QA PROGRAM e SATISFY REQUIREMENTS IN FORD AMENDMENT O
APPROACH d DEVELOP SERIES OF Q.UALITY ASSURANCE CASE e STUDIES AT SELECTED LICENSEE PLANTS. VISIT SEVERAL UTILITIES HAVING HAD SERIOUS QUALITY PROBLEMS AT SEVERAL THAT HAVE NOT . FROM THE CASE STUDIES, DETERMINE ESSENTIAL UNDERLYING CHARACTERISTICS OF i SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL PROGR AMS. ALSO, DETERMINE WHAT ACTIONS NECESSARY TO SOLVE PROBLEMS AND VALUE/ IMPACT OF SOLUTIONS i e l INTERGR. ATE RESULTS OF PARALLEL SUBSTUDIES j WITH SERIES OF CASE STUDIES. DEVELOP FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS, REPORTS l i
PURPOSE OF VISIT: THIS TEAM 0F NRC AND CONTRACTOR SCIENTISTS, ENGINEERS, AND QUALITY PROFESSIONALS IS HERE AS A RESULT OF 50TH Tile CONGRESSIONAL MANDATE TO STUDY QUALITY IN CONSTRUCTION AND THE NRC INITIATIVES IN QUALITY ASSURANCE Tile PURPOSE OF OUR VISIT IS TO STUDY YOUR PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMS AS ONE OF A SERIES OF CASE STUDIES AT NUCLEAR PLANTS i ACROSS THE NATION l I a l i
SPECIAL STUDY OF HUCl. EAR QUAL.ITY ASSilRAt!CE 1. QUALITY ASSURANCE CASE STUDIES 2. REVIEW OF NRC, INDUSTRY, AND GOVERNMENT QA PROGRAMS 3. STUDY OF QUALIFICATION / CERTIFICATION OF QA/QC PERSONNEL 4. PILOT PROGR AM AND ANALYSIS OF FORD ALTERNATIVES 5. REVIEW PANEL 6. STUDY OF CONTR ACTS AND PROCUREMENT 7. CONTACT WITH OUTSIDE GROUPS i 8. ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS AND WRITING OF REPORT i OTHER RELATED ACTIVITIES j 9. HOLDPOINT/ CERTIFICATION STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT 10. DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT e J
QUALITY ASSUR ANCE CASE STUDIES e PRE FIELD ACTIVITY -DEVELOPMENT OF ASSESSMENT PLAN AND METHODOLOGY -PLANT VISITS MUST CONSIDER LTR ISSUES AND FORD ISSUES -S CH ED U LIN G -FAMILIARIZATION WITH PLANT AND PLANT QA PROGRAM AND HISTORY t e FIELD ACTIVITY -VISIT TO REGIONAL OFFICE -VISIT TO CORPOR ATE OFFICE -VISIT TO PLANT SITE l -DISCUSSIONS WITH REGIONAL AND RESIDENT INSPECTORS l -DISCUSSIONS WITH LICENSEE PERSONNEL, CONTRACTORS l -REVIEW OF QA PROGRAM, SELECTED RECORDS i -PLANT WALK THROUGH a e POST FIELD ACTIVITY -ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS -POSTULATION AND EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES -lNPUT TO GENERIC REPORT e
NEED FOR UTILITY INPUT AND ASSISTANCE THE GENERIC RESULTS OF THIS SERIES OF SITE SPECIFIC CASE STUDIES AND PARALLEL STUDIES OF GERMANE TOPICS WILL FORM THE BASIS OF REPORTS TO THE NRC COMMISSIONERS - REPORT TO CONGRESS NRC'S FUTURE POLICY AND PROGRAM IN QUALITY ASSURANCE l THE EMPHASIS OF OUR EFFORT WILL BE TO DETERMINE UNDERLYING PROGRAMMATIC CliARACTERISTICS OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY ASSURANCE THAT EITilER - CONTRIBUTE TO THE OVERALL SUCCESS OF Tile PROJECT CONTRIBUTE TO Tile DEVELOPMENT OF RESULTS TilAT FAIL TO MEET THE STANDARDS OF Tile INDUSTRY, THE NRC, AND Tile PUBLIC FOR QUALITY IN A NUCLEAR POWER PLANT TilIS IS NOT AN INSPECTION. WE ARE NOT llERE TO INSPECT OR AUDIT OR SECOND GUESS. WE ARE HERE TO LEARN AND TO DEVELOP REAL WORLD INFORMATION T0 llELP STRUCTURE CONGRESSIONAL, NRC, AND INDUSTRY POLICIES FOR QUALITY IN Tile NUCLEAR INDUSTRY FOR THIS DECADE AND BEYOND TO BE SUCCESSFUL, WE NEED YOUR HELP, COOPERATION, AND CAND0R. WE TilANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION IN TilIS MAJOR NRC POLICY STUDY L e
SUMMARY
SPECIAL QA STilDY REASON I COMPREHENSIVE STUDY TO e -DETERMINE ROOT CAUSES OF QUALITY PROBLEMS AT PLANTS WITH IDENTIFIED DEFICIENCIES -DETERMINE UNDERLYING' CHAR ACTERISTICS OF SUCCESSFUL QUALITY PROGRAMS l -DEVELOP BLUEPRINT FOR FUTURE FOR NRC AND LICENSEE QUALITY I PROGRAMS i SCOPE e NRC STAFF STUDY -PERFORMED BY NRC STAFF -LED BY 11Q. ASSISTANCE FROM REGIONS, CONTRACTORS EXAMINATION OF EXISTING PROGRAMS AND PAST PROBLEMS WILL INCLUDE e -RE\\/IEW OF EXISTING DOCUMENTATION (PLANS, INVESTIG ATIONS, ETC.) i -VISITS / DISCUSSIONS WITH REGIONS AND RESIDENTS, [ -VISITS TO PLANT SITES EMPHASIS ON GENERIC IMPLICATIONS e INCLUDES BOTll PLANTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATING SITES e WILL EXAMINE NRC OA PROGRAM AND POLICIES AS WELL AS e LICENSEES /VEN DORS /CONTR ACTOR S WILL LOOK AT OUTSIDE QA PROGRAMS (NON-NUCLEAR A,ND FOREIGN e l l NUCLEAR)
S U M M A R Y (connnurn) 1 OTHER REVIEW WILL BE RESPONSIVE TO FORD AMENDMENT FORD AMENDMENT SETS FIFTEEN MONTH TIME FRAME e WILL SOLICIT INPUT FROM PUBLIC, LICENSEES, ACRS. e PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES, UNIONS PLAN TO ESTABLISH ADVISORY PANEL = EXPECTED RESULTS CHARACTERIZATION OF SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL e PR OGR AMS', R OOT CAUSES RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGES /IMPliOVEMENT.S IN NRC e AND LICENSEE QA PROGRAMS IDENTIFICATION OF NEEDED LEGISLATION e REPORT TO CONGRESS TO SATISFY REQUIREMENTS OF FORD e l AMENDMENT
CHRONOLOGY CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT HEARINGS ON QA HELD IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: . SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT; COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIR,S - NOVEMBER 19,1981 e SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY, AND NATURAL RES'OURCES: COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPER ATIONS - DECEMBER 14,1981 NOVEMBER 27,1981-- CHAIRMAN DIRECTED STAFF TO ASSEMBLE APPROACHES TO STRENGTHEN QA DECEMBER 1,1981 - CHAIRMAN PALLADINO, IN A SPEECH TO AIF, CHALLENGED THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY TO REEXAMINE AND UPGRADE ITS QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMS J ANU ARY 29,1982 - NRC STAFF BRIEFED COMMISSION ON PRELIMINARY EVALUATIONS OF VARIOUS QA INITIATIVES FEBRUARY 4,1982 -INPO BRIEFED COMMISSION ON INDUSTRY ACTIONS I FEBRUARY 10,1982 - STAFF DIRECTED TO PREPARE MORE DEFINITIVE PLAN, t INCLUDING SCHEDULE AND RESOURCES MARCH 4,1982 - QA PRESENTATION TO ACRS i l a APRIL 12,1982 - MEETING WITH INPO TO EXCHANGE QUALITY ASSURANCE INFOR M ATION MAY 19,1982 - SENIOR AGENCY MANAGEMENT MEETING TO DISCUSS QA STRATEGY i l
CHRONOLOGY (CONT) JUNE 10,1982 REGION 111 ADMINISTRATOR TESTIFIES DEFORE CONGRESS JULY 15,1982 NRC STAFF BRIEFED COMMISSION ON STAFF PLANS FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE AUGUST 20,1982 EDO SENT STAFF PAPER ON ASSURANCE OF QUALITY TO THE COMMISSION (SECY 82-352) S EPT.14,1982 REGION lli ADMINISTRATOR TESTIFIES BEFORE CONGRESS S EPT. 20,1982 IE BRIEFED COMMISSION'S ASSISTANTS, CHAIRMAN ON QA INITIATIVES IN SECY 82-352 SEPT.29,1982 COMMISSION BRIEFING ON SECY 82-352 OCT. 5,1982 CHAIRMAN PALLIDINO SPEAKS BEFORE INPO CONFERENCE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, SAYS QA SHOULD BE CENTRAL FOCUS FOR UTILITIES BUILDING NUCLEAR PLANTS OCT.13,1982 CHAIRMAN PALLIDINO SPEAKS BEFORE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF OC. INDICATES EFFECTIVE QA NECESSARY TO RESTORE PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN NUCLEAR POWER OCT.18,1982 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE SPEAKS BEFORE ANS EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE ON QUALITY ASSURANCE
9 / LaJ MDW O NO O CC
4 CASE STUDY "E" CONTENTS ROOT CAUSES i GENERIC IMPLICATIONS IMPLICATIONS FOR NRC QA INIT.IATIVES IMPLICATIONS FOR FORD AMEN 0 MENT ALTERNATIVES 6 + G-t 4 4 0 4
v ( e CASE STUDY "E" ROOT CAUSES OF SUCCESS 1. PRIOR NUCLEAR EXPERIENCE EVOLUTION CORPORATE MATURING 2. GOOD PLANNING ENGR. & PROC. AHEAD OF CONST.
- 3.
- STRONG MANAGEMENT OF PROJECT STRONG OWNER INVOLVEMENT EFFECTIVE INTEGRATED ORG.
4. CORPORATE COMMITMENT TO PROJECT MANAGEMENTBACKkNG AVAILABILITY OF RESOURCES 5. EARLY START UP INVOLVEMENT HELPED FIND PROBLEMS EARLIER 6. PROBLEM IDEN. & SOLUTION l CLIMATE THAT ENC 0URAGED LOOKING FOR PROBLEMS l FIXED PROBLEMS AS THEY AROSE l l
CASE STUDY "E" ROOT CAUSES OF SUCCESS 7. STAFFING l EXPERIENCE CAPABILITY I KNOW HOW 1 8. TEAMWORK PROJECT ORIENTATION INTEGRATED PROJECT 9. MINIMAL NUMBER OF INTERFACES ONE QUALITY PROGRAM 10. ADJUSTED TO CHANGING ENVIRONMENT EVENTS REGULATION NRC 11. PUT AUTHORITY AT LEVEL WHERE KNOW HOW WAS 12. EMPHASIS ON DOING IT RIGHT FIRST TIME TO SUPPORT SCHEDULE 13. INNOVATIVE TEC'HNIQUES SLIP FORMING, STAIR STEPPING
- 14. LOW LEVEL OF INTERVENTION
CASE STUDY "E" GENERIC IMPLICATIONS 1. PRIOR CORPORATE NUCLEAR EXPERIENCE VERY HELPFUL INDIVIDUAL EXPERIENCE CAPITALIZE ON PREVIOUS LESSONS MATURING PROCESS NO MONOPOLY ON GOOD IDEAS LOOK FOR PROBLEMS EARLY STARTUP INVOLVEMENT FEW INTERFACES ONE QUALITY PROGRAM FOR SITE ABILITY TO COPE WITH CHANGING ENVIRONMENT 2. STRONG MANAGEMENT OF' PROJECT NECESSARY i STRONG OWNER INVOLVEMENT 3. DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT COMMITMENT HELPFUL i WILLINGNESS TO COMMIT MONEY INTEGRATED 0RG. TEAM ATTITUDE ABILITY TO OVERCOME ADVERSITY FEW CONTRACTORS e
5 CASE STUDY "E" i GENERIC IMPLICATIONS 4. NEED QUALITY PEOPLE MANAGEMENT PROJECT STAFF CONTRACTORS QUALITY FUNCTION 5. QUALITY AND SCHEDULE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE EMPHASIS ON DOING IT RIGH THE FIRST TIME MEETING QUALITY OBJECTIVES ENHANCES SCHEDULE OBJECTIVES 6. NUCLEAR PLANTS CAN STILL BE BUILT IN THE U.S. COMBINATION OF INNOVATION INSIGHT, PLANNING COMMITMENT, KNOW HOW, RESOURCES, PEOPLE . ~ - - - --
CASE STUDY "E" IMPLICATIONS FOR NRC INITIATIVES WHICH INITIATIVES MIGHT HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE HAD IT BEEN IN PLACE AT THE TIME A. MEASURES AT NEAR-TERM OPERATING LICENSE FACILITIES 1. SELF EVALUATIONS YES 2. REGIONAL EVALUATIONS SALP, YES 3. INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEWS N0 B. INDUSTRY 1. INP0 EVALUATIONS DONT OVERLAP
- 2. - UTILITY AND THIRD PARTY EVALUATIONS YES C.
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM CHANGES 1. REVISE PROCEDURES AND INCREASE RESOURCES YES 2. CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT TEAM INSPECTIONS (CAT) EARLY 3. INTEGRATED DESIGN INSPECTIONS (NRC) EARLY 4. EVALUATION OF REPORTED INFORMATION YES .D. DETERMINE FEASIBILITY OF DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES LIKE INP0 - (LIKEFAA) HOW MUCH IS EN0 UGH E. MANAGEMENT OF QUALITY 1. . MANAGEMENT SEMINARS NRC ACTIVE PARTICIPANT 2. QUALIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF QA/QC PERSONNEL YES 3. CRAFTSMANSHIP NEED TO LISTEN, YES A e .m
e.-- w - l CASE STUDY "E" IMPLICATIONS FOR FORD AMENDMENT ALTERNATIVES WHICH FORD ALTERNATIVE MIGHT HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE HAD IT BEEN IN PLACE AT THE TIME A.. MORE PRESCRIPTIVE A/E CRITERIA NO B. DEMONSTRATION OF MANAGEMENT CAPABILITY NO C.. AUDITS BY ASSN OF PROFESSIONALS NO~ D. IMPROVEMENTS IN NRC'S PROGRAMS YES E. THIRD PARTY AUDITS NO S 9 e J y----_, ..-g. n, ,,-c-ma-_ y r.-e e
i 4 7.s (. -... 7 ROOT CAUSES OF SUCCESS 1. The Licensee has an experienced design, construction and construction 1 management team. 2. The Licensee has an orientation toward and an attitude supportive of quali ty. 3. The Licensee manages the project and it has clearly defined the responsi-bilities and authorities of the participants and has provided adequate procedures to ensure compliance, especially at the interfaces. 4. The Licensee supports his assurance of ouality program with adequate resources and backing. 5. The Licensee is knowledgeable on the requirements of NRC and maintains a satisfactory relationship with NRC through adequate resolution of NRC requests / requirements. 1 1
Page 1 of 4 NRC QA CASE STUDY TYPICAL INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AND APPROACH Attempt to set interviewee at ease with some preliminary conversation (about comon acquaintances, interests, backgrounds, etc. perhaps gleaned from previousinterviews). Give brief background to interview (i.e., Commissioners' concerns about quality and the Staff's responses to those concerns, which includes these site specific assessments). Obtain some information about interviewee; e.g., present position, time with licensee or other affiliation related to project, size of organization, etc. All of the following questions are not appropriate to ask of all interviewees: Lead-In Questions (. develop follow-on questions based on responses) 1. What is the scope of your activities? That is, who do you interface with, what information do you receive and pass on, and what is it you do (.in your group) to the infonnation you receive? 2. What are your most important sources of information about the quality of work that is done in your group, or that you are responsible for? 3. What is the most important " message" concerning quality that you receive from your management? How is it conveyed or made manifest to you? 4. What is the most important " message" concerning quality that you convey to your staff? How do you convey it to your staff? 5. What problems do you have in maintaining a balance among cost, schedule, and quality? 6. What is your perception of the source of the emphasis on quality that this project has? How is it maintained?
Page 2 of 4 7. Do you have any control of input into the quality of work you receive into your area of responsibility? 8. Do you interface with NRC in any way? With their QA program? (Ifyes, follow up with how, when, where questions.) 9. What do you attribute your lack of major QA deficiencies to in your own group? 10. In what ways has the emphasis on quality changed over time on this project? 11. By what means does the quality assurance organization or the utility management for that matter, ascertain that the QA Program is effective and not suffering from major hidden progrannatic deficiencies? 12. For utilities that have used QA consultants: a. For what reasons were the consultants hired? b. What information were they able to provide that you were having difficulty obtaining internally? 13. How would you characterize the involvement the utility has with the NRC at the a) headquarters level, b) regional level and c) resident inspector level? What has been of great benefit and what does not appear to work as well as it should? 14. Please tell us about yourself, your background, education, etc.
- 15. What do you consider your responsibilities to be on this project?
16. What routine interface or interaction do you have with other organizations on the project and with whom? l .-,w-...
Pag @ 3 of 4 17. How are workers instructed as to requirements? Does this include process travelers or data sheets?
- 18. What happens if a workman proceeds past an inspection hold point without the inspection being performed?
- 19. Why do you feel quality is emphasized on this project or why do you feel quality is important on this project?
20. How do you like working on a nuclear job? 21. Describe your design change control process for field changes to a design. When can you proceed with work when need for a design change is identified? 22. How do you know when working in the field that a drawing on a stick file is the latest revision and reflects all field changes? 23. Describe your stop work authority and how it is imposed. 4 24. What is your perception of your QA/QC personnel or organization as a professional discipline?
- 25. How would you describe the interface between QC and construction crafts or construction engineers and are their problems over inter-pretation of nonconformances?
Questions on the Ford Amendment Describe briefly the Ford Amendment. All questions may not be appropriate for all interviewees. Develop follow-on questions as appropriate. 1. Would it be helpful to you in assuring quality in your area of activities, or the project in general, if NRC were more prescriptive in defining principal architectural and engineering criteria for construction of nuclear plants?
s Page 4 of 4 2. Do you think it would be helpful to the nuclear industry if construction permits were conditioned on a demonstration by the licensee that it is capable of mounting an effective QA program? 3. Do you think it would be helpful to you or to the project to have evaluations, inspections, or audits of construction conducted by organizations which are completely independent of the project? 4. Do you think NRC's organization, methods, and programs for QA, as they impact on you or the project, could be improved? What ways? 5. If the NRC requirements for a CP required the licensee to have independent inspectors to audit its QA Program, would you perceive that to be of help? Other Questions Important to NRC Not for all interviewees. 1. What would you think about al an inspection program similar to the FAA inspection method, one with designated individuals representing NRC interests, and b) the use of QA holdpoints similar to those used in the aircraft industry? 2. What has your experience been with nuclear QA standards (e.g., ANSI, ASME, NRC, etc.) or the national standards process? ,--w---- n-.
,.--,,-,w
U Om LaJ m e @O Hz Nm ON Q. ) LAJ Q N Q
- LaJ (A Z Mm W
O. H < CD Q. O
e_. . ? _l_ _QUA t.tT.y. kSf0AADCE. 5^! T*tATt@S TsA'W Vli/T l-/Z7/83 / A weabers c)OMMW fa~'c%H___ A&F f $.C S;te 4r:el*J. Gr/tch< fA.XJOd.... l K..E'.Dste.or!- Deu." 4Ssac. co n uers e b.s b $0N$ -0.. b. E n h e /e r -.--. -.. .-.. Yl...-..-.-..... _ 5) 4 St12 /9wk -... A RL..--.-- Q)7 /17auey<. .0Lett C. s-4 r-2 L. Al.a cu.Sytw.s ~ 75cwl:x. ~ 0I)CaCb --- - -..-.-/VSC ..-.0/). /?e wCd.. 6% G., ' FETA.L CJh~.------. ... -.B p kJ. G .QR /rvirw MovAA Nayh 3_W .._..-.. &.ve hh. verv Le.s.c k I bM/ EMS - __.. E P L.._ NOGLM. bCE4MG _ __l:h hr/* W E f.l % Io h. /?1 4 m.t * /V / kb~h /'73 WL .. & le. b + 4 1 7 7 i k.T ~ W$k,,yd .. --.$Gf4' lo b / s....- - ...... Q A. A w e d 3 t w a-jr,A- -.w Et,1 hL-. . 3 Q.,t, %. e..., d a d C}lA) k, GI$ 6 0 A G M ll st)_,Lk]'JJ'f_ AssDc i!)ef_ft!fsiMo7-- c!.de.9/ .. f}! ....-..llf'b r.t"[$fostYC.. ) -tu/-.. -- -. -Ob. 0f accer/ f ffkfttc i .-0~ E-VL35 E t x . - EEr.. -..--. _.. - Dia. x.hici.aie Awer. Ms,D A/ W ......... /4R C. -...-79. /ltyr spJ/.cyf..QLly a . gi.umumm. . 4 e. eneh gge. e .g .g . pe .,.,p. e p. g q. eee.e, ..es e. e.a... nk .e .....,i -...w. ., ew.,. e es.a. ge a e ..w ge e. egg.ne g..e w, ..m e me e.,,,y,,gggm .gw., ,m .N a ..66 6 6. 6 g a w .ee4 m 9 -e.. e w ew a.. 6 e ge .M $.M M. ..M. -N.= h.Mhe e.g esh..D. $....M h. .eb M Ge.. W ...W M-
- 64h.
g.
- s. e.
.e .m.-g gag w. .-e e e.4e w me e .a.im. =weg. m p me r.. M-M .u.
- 6 6e
..m a ew. ee.a. 4.Guip. m ..mp. .6 .u .Neuluu.D. -N 6-s. . em. m-m em.e. ..a. 9
Atomic Ind:rtri:I Forrm,Inc. yw hange roepuired ly 7101 Wisconsin Avenue Postel resulations: Washington, D C. 20o14 Telephone: (301) 654-9260 71o1 Wisconsin Avenue TWX 7108249602 ATOMIC FoR DC 8ethesda, Maryland 20814 Arthur Rivens Manager, Reactor Construction and operation May 19, 1983 T0: Participants, AIF Workshop on Achieving Excellence in Constructing and Operating Nuclear Power Plants, San Francisco, California, January 16-19, 1983
SUBJECT:
Additional Paper from AIF Workshop The enclosed paper "The Spirit of St. Lucie", which was pre-sented by Jim Dager at the AIF Workshop on Construction and Operation, has been released for distribution by Florida Power 6 Light Company. Bill Derrickson, the St. Lucie #2 Project Manager, and author of the paper, has included a supplement covering the time since December 1982. Included also is an entry in the May 3, 1983 Congressional Record by Congressman Don Fuqua of Florida entitled "A Job Well Done". Sincerely, / / AB:eu Enclosures s
i "THE SPIRIT OF ST. LUCIE" The Planning, Engineering, Construction and Start-Up of the St. Lucie Unit #2 Nuclear Plant by: W. B. Derrickson Project General Manager Florida Power & Light Company
.g One measure of success in building any power plant is how well the project sticks to its schedule. At Florida Power & Light Company's St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant Unit No. 2 (890 MWe) construction is proceeding according to the original schedule and plan called for when its construction permit was issued in May 1977. Since I construction started in June of 1977, we have virtually been on target for every major milestone (Chart 1 & 2). Furthermore, St. Lucie 2 achieved an annual rate of 27 percent completion in 1980, 23 percent in 1981, and completed 5 significant milestones in 1982 -- a record for any nuclear plant now under construction in the United States. As can be seen on Chart 3 (Progress Versus Industry Performance), the accomplishments at St. Lucie 2 are equal to those achieved in the early 1970's, despite the many regulations imposed by the NRC, such as Nu Reg 0737, Appendix R, numerous bulletins, etc. As of the end of 1982, construction was approximately 92.0 percent complete with comercial operation targeted for the summer of 1983. St. Lucie 2 is being constructed on Hutchinson Island, about 45 miles north of West Palm Beach, Florida. It is an extension to and a duplicate slide-along arrangement of St. Lucie 1. St. Lucie 2 has achieved a 59 month time span from start of concrete to completion of cold hydro, 36 months better than current industry averages (Chart 4). St. Lucie 2 is an 890 MWe Class Nuclear Power Plant which utilizes a Combustion Engineering Pressurized Water Reactor with associated nuclear steam supply and auxiliary systems. Ebasco Services, Inc., is the Engineer / Constructor. HISTORY Originally, construction of both St. Lucie 1 and 2 was planned to proceed concurrently, but then FPL decided to delay construction of the second unit due to a reduced load forecast. St. Lucie 1 started with construction forces moving on site in late March 1969. The Atomic Energency Comission, issued the construction permit on June 30, 1970, and first concrete placement for the reactor containment building took place a week later. Installation of the,
nuclear steam supply system began in September 1973 and core loading in March 1976. St. Lucie 1 began commercial operation in December 1976. Work began on St. Lucie 2 in 1971, with initial efforts directed toward preparing the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR), Environmental Report and antitrust information required by the NRC before construction start. Although the PSAR was submitted for review in April, 1973 (Chart 5), subsequent meetings and site visits were conducted with the NRC staff to resolve such questions as site characteristics, radiological assessment, hydrology, geology and seismology. Other discussions probed emergency planning, industrial security and design features of the nuclear power plant. In response to these requests and discussions, an additional 44 amendments were eventually docketed to the PSAR. The NRC issued its Safety Evaluation Report in November 1974, and in March 1975 awarded the Limited Work Authorization. Construction work started in June 1976, after receiving State Site Certification and was limited to excavation and foundation work up to existing grade level. Four months later, however, construction work ceased and the work force was laid off. A regulation specified that the NRC must study a number of potential sites before allowing any work to begin, whereas the staff of the licensing board had studied a hypothetical alternative to the St. Lucie site. After various appeals and site hearings, the NRC eventually granted a construction permit in May 1977, but not before $60 million was added to the plant cost as a result of the work stoppage. MANAGEMENT COMMITMENT In the early stages of the Project, FPL established a Project Management organization to direct, inspect, survey, monitor and audit the performance of all services performed by FPL contractor personnel and/or any subcontractors (Chart 6). This organization is the contact with FPL on all contract-related matters and has the right of approval of all services and work performed. A Project General Manager, through a project team organization, is FPL's designated representative having the responsibility and authority for the total management of the Project.,
In 1977, completion of St. Lucie 2 on schedule and within budget became one of FPL's corporate objectives. Thus, through the Management By Objectives Program all department objectives were required to support the project. Project objectives have been established annually to support completion of the project on schedule and within budget. Results are reported to management semi-annually and Corporate Management assistance is prov'ded when required. PROJECT PLANNING During the period October 1976 to March 1977, a team of construction supervisor's under FPL direction, developed what was to become the Project Master Schedule. A 65-month schedule for the project (start of concrete to start of fuel loading) was established and major milestones were identified and fixed. This set the stage for all future planning. This schedule consists of an integrated engineering and construction plan and includes sumary start-up logic. The schedule philosophy adopted by the project was to schedule and monitor all activities and material delivery dates to the "early start" date requirements. This approach provided some valuable additional margin which proved useful in minimizing impact to the construction schedule caused by factors outside project control. Special priority was placed on engineering, design and delivery of piping and hangers. These were scheduled for delivery a full 18 months prior to the "early start" dates. The result was that hanger installation preceded pipe erection and minimized the need for temporary pipe support devices to a large degree. This resulted in an orderly pipe installation program. Although uncertainty existed about St. I.ucie 2's future when the limited work authorization was withdrawn in October 1976, a bold decision was made to continue in accordance with previously established engineering, design and procurement schedules. As a result, when the constrtiction permit was granted in May 1977, approximately 75 percent of the original scope of engineering and design was completed and 40 percent of the engineered materials were.
delivered. In retrospect, this decision typified the total comitment and support this project has received from its inception from FPL's executive management. Another factor which contributed to the success of the construction effort at St. Lucie 2 was a detailed review of the design from St. Lucie 1. The objective of this review was to recommend areas where design enhancements could be made to improve construction productivity and costs. As a result, approximately 250 items were addressed and incorporated into the design. In addition, a Design Problem Review (DPR) program was initiated. This was a comprehensive review by engineering of all St. Lucie 1 changes, i.e., backfit changes, operations enhancements, regulatory requirements, etc., in order to ensure their consideration and disposition for St. Lucie 2. Over 1000 items were considered with approximately 350 incorporated into the St. Lucie 2 design. CONSTRUCTION SITE ORGANIZATION The construction site organization utilizes an integrated approach which has proved quite effective (Chart 7). It consists of both FPL and Ebasco personnel integrated into one organization. In this organization, Ebasco's supervisory construction staff, under the overall direction of the FPL site manager, manages and directs construction activities of craft work forces and subcontractors according to the schedules established. The organizational functions which FPL wishes to influence directly are under FPL supervisors, reporting also to the site manager. These include quality control and quality assurance; construction cost control, planning and scheduling; and support services, such as area stores, site purchasing, contract and office administration. CONSTRUCTION PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION The optimization of the construction effort was the result, to a large degree, of the early planning and innovative thinking that went into the formulation of the overall construction plan and schedule for this project. -
. - = Reactor Auxiliary Building " Stair Stepping" Concept One of the innovative ideas that went into the initial plan and schedule was the " stair stepping" concept for the construction of the reactor auxiliary building. In this plan, the building was constructed with emphasis placed on early completion of the west end of the building. The philosophy being that early completion of this end of the structure provided an early start to installation of the more critical areas of equipment installation in the reactor auxiliary building; i.e., the control room and the reactor auxiliary control boards, the cable vault area, and NSSS auxiliary equipment. As a result, the building during construction took on a " stair step" appearance, and as each elevation was completed, all major equipment and appurtenances were moved into that level prior to the roof being installed. Considerable amount of Q deck construction was also utilized in an effort to minimize forming and shoring requirements. The net result was that critical areas were completed earlier and key crafts could start their work sooner. Reactor Containment Building Foundation design considerations were finalized when plant called for both St. Lucie 1 and 2 to be built simultaneously. Subsurface exploration borings indicated poorly consolidated sand with thin layers of clay to a depth of 65 feet below existing grade. To meet seismic criteria, a plant island was constructed by excavating the unsuitable material, back-filling with wel'l-graded sand and then compacting to required specifications. This plant island resulted in a compacted Class I fill measuring 780 by 920 feet and 78 feet deep. The plant island was sized as small as possible by spacing the plant structures at minimum distances apart. When we decided to delay construction of St. Lucie 2, these plans were technically feasible, but subsequently they did require unique design and construction efforts for the second unit. One of these special provisions, we believe, was the first nuclear safety Class 1 cofferdam ever to be engineered and constructed. It was necessary to protect the safe shutdown ability of St. Lucie 1 under all foreseeable circumstances, including earthquakes.,
A circular sheetpile cofferdam for the reactor containment building was braced with internal compression beams and sized to allow excavation, concreting of the base mat and walls up-to-grade elevation, and subsequent back-fill operations. The 180 foot diameter circular cofferdam was constructed by driving 500 tons of sheetpiling in 72-foot lengths through compacted sand with electrical vibratory hammers. The 900 tons of horizontal bracing (walers) consisted of wide-flange beams 36 inches deep and weighing 230 pounds to the foot, installed every five feet on vertical centers. To allow dewatering of the cofferdam, 18 deep wells were installed along the periphery. Driving of the sheeting started in June 1976, and the mudmat (working sirface) was placed in late September of that year. Slipforming Another inovative construction accomplishment at St. Lucie 2 was the "slipforming" of the concrete containment shield wall for the reactor containment building, in lieu of the traditional " jump" method. This concrete cylinder has a three-foot-thick reinforced wall, approximately 190 feet high with an inside radius of 74 feet. It is supported by a ring wall (9 feet thick and 4 feet high) which, in turn, rests on a 10 foot thick base mat. The shield wall contains more than 1000 tons of reinforcing steel with another 23 tons of embedded materials such as electrical conduits, grounding cables and anchor bolts. Wall placement through slipforming of 10,000 cubic yards of concrete averaged 11-1/2 feet per day, and the operation took place without interruption in only 16-1/2 davs in November 1977. Manpower for slipforming averaged 398 craft workers, and the crafts worked three shifts a day, seven days a week until completion. Inmediately after completion of slipforming, construction on the steel containment vessel started inside the shield building. I.
HURRICANE DAVID When the project was 26 percent completed, a severe storm seriously jeopardized our ability to meet objectives and be ready for start of fuel load in November 1982. The high winds of Hurricane David struck (on September 3, 1979) toppling a 150 ton construction derrick being used to supply materials into both the reactor containment building and the reactor auxiliary building. The storm completely destroyed the derrick, composed of a 180 foot tower with a 256 foot mast resting on top of the tower, and a 200 foot boom. More importantly, the falling derrick severely damaged the reactor auxiliary building under initial construction. Lost schedule time to repair the damage and replace equipment was estimated at 13 weeks. ^ Immediately engineering and construction supervisors formulated recovery plans. A task force of construction and site engineering personnel pinpointed all damage on design drawings. Engineers assessed this damage, developed repair procedures and determined the extent of necessary nondestructive testing of adjoining areas. Concurrently, equipment damage was reviewed with vendor representatives and orders were expedited for replacement equipment. Construction plans called for additional overtime of crafts and construction supervisors to make up the additional hours required for repairs. As the recovery operation proceeded, site activity unaffected by the derrick collapse maintained its previous schedule. NSSS INSTALLATION An important benchmark in the NRC's assessment of nuclear plant construction is the installation of the nuclear steam supply system's major equipment; i.e., reactor vessel, steam generators and pressurizer. The project was able to meet this milestone on a progressive schedule by adopting two innovative ideas. First was early planning and the decision to erect the containment steel vessel utilizing the " tops-off" approach. Basically, this method provides post weld heat treatment of the vessel before setting the dome. Because of.
thinner plates the dome did not require heat treatment and could be erected at a later time. As a result, interior concrete work started months earlier than otherwise possible and ensured that support structures were ready for NSSS installation. Secondly, the interior concrete was not brought up to the operating level before setting the nuclear vessel. Instead, engineering and construction personnel, in conjunction with the heavy rigging subcontractor and the polar crane manufacturer, simplified the " posting" arrangement for utilizing the polar crane in setting the vessels. Using a two-shore (instead of six-shore) polar crane girder support system saved considerable schedule time and enabled construction forces to meet the target date of June-July 1980 OCEAN DISCHARGE PIPE Construction of St. Lucie 2's discharge headwall and installation of a 3,345-foot-long ocean discharge pipe was completed as scheduled in October 1981. The discharge headwall is located just south of Unit l's headwall at the dune line to the Atlantic Ocean. The structure funnels circulating discharge water into a discharge defuser pipe which measures 16 feet in diameter. This pipe connects at the discharge headwall under the beach dune line, and running beneath the ocean floor stretches 3,345 feet into the Atlantic Ocean. To disperse the discharge water evenly and at a constant rate of flow, the last 1,368 feet of pipe contain fifty eight 48-inch diameter risers which project 'through the ocean floor at 24 foot intervals. START-UP PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION One of the major contributing factors in the completion of St. Lucie 2 at or near schedule has been the ability to turn over components and systems to our operating department in an orderly and timely manner. The success of this phase of the project was due to the early planning scheduling and implementation of a start-up program, and probably more importantly to FPL's overall philosophy concerning acceptance and testing of equipment and systems. This overall philosophy had as its primary objective the earliest possible acceptance of equipment, components and partial systems, in order to enable early testing and problem identification. First, we developed an overall start-up program plan and schedule which required early on-site presence of operating department personnel 35 months prior to the scheduled " start of fuel load" date. This was not just a token work force, but rather a sizable commitment of manpower numbering approximately 64 people. Their early work consisted of a number of tasks, the highlights being to: a) Define start-up system boundaries. b) Prepare preoperation test procedures. c) Establish construction turnover sequence. d) Establish preoperational test requirements. e) Determinestart-up(constructionandoperations) manpower levels. f) Establish target milestone dates. CONSTRUCTION / START-UP SCHEDULE INTEGRATION The detailed start-up schedule and logic was then integrated with the construction schedule to develop one combined schedule that the jobsite worked to and engineering and design supported. IMPLEMENTATION With the establishment of the target milestones for start-up, the " SCAT" Program (Start-up/ConstructionAcceleratedTurnoverProgram)wasinitiatedto expedite the turnover of systems from construction to operations. .g.
Essentially, this program identified portions of total systems PTO's (Partial Turnovers)whicharethencompletedandturnedovertoOperations, allowing early testing and problem identification of system components. Approximately 488 " packages" were identified and scheduled for turnover in priority sequence to support established start-up milestones. In addition, a computerized listing of all system components was developed and used by the construction test group to "punchlist" the systems for completeness. In addition, to the PTO's, CTO's (Conditional Turnovers) were also established, whereby operations accepted systems on a conditional basis, with an agreed upon list of exceptions, but sufficiently complete such that testing and checkout could proceed. Again, this was in keeping with the start-up philosophy, by which early acceptance of components and partial systems enabled sufficient time to identify and resolve equipment and start-up test performance problems with minimal impact to the overall scheduled core load objective for the project. In the course of the start-up phase of the project, the construction organization objectives gradually shifted from a bulk quantity installation effort and area concept of control to total support of start-up turnover requirements and work performed on discipline basis. CHANGE REVIEW BOARD It was decided to establish a change review board comprised of project team management personnel of both companies from engineering, construction, operations and project management. The objective of this group was to review changes arising out of licensing connitments, system enhancements and operations improvements. This review was to determine whether it was best to implement the item prior to enre load or defer to a backfit status (post core load)inordernottoimpactconstruction,turnoverandstart-upschedules.,
FSAR PREPARATION AND REVIEW CYCLE BY THE NRC A significant threat to the project schedule occurred in 1980 during the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's caseload forecast panel review of the site and project schedule. The NRC estimate of project completion generally follows a statistical schedule model shown in Chart 8. This model was developed prior to TMI and includes three curves showing the lower, medium and upper quartile. Using the model and other data obtained during their on-site visit in February and September of 1980, the NRC projected a fuel load date of December 1983, which was 13 months later than that established by the project. Since the NRC schedule for review of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) was based on this later date, it was necessary to convince them that the project could meet our schedule. Through concerted FPL upper management efforts, the NRC accepted the project schedule and completed the FSAR review in a record time of 9 months. Presently, the project has successfully completed Advisory Committee for Reactor Safety (ACRS) hearings and all Safety Evaluation Report (SER) supplements have been written. To insure that the licensing effort was supportive of the project objectives an overall plan was developed for this phase of the project. As a result licensing was removed from the critical path of the project j by reducing the time span of " Docketing of FSAR" to ACRS letter recomending operating license to 9 months verses 19 to 21 months pre-TMI days. i CONCLUSIONS l I have presented just some of the highlights of the project and a sumary overview of the means by which these things were accomplished. The results l are quite evident. We have been able to essentially maintain our progress in j accordance with the schedule established at the start of construction in June 1977. Presently, the project cost is estimated at $1.42 billion including interest during construction. Start-up and initial preoperation of systems have shown a minimum of problems, a strong indication of a quality effort.. l i
REASOP Ct .y the careful planning, scheduling and innovative thinking that went into the project contributed to its success. The execution of these plans is attributed to the excellent teamwork and personnel associated with this project. By using control tools such as: Project Quantity and Manpower 4 Report (PQMR); Material Tracking System; Level II and Level III Schedule; Electrical Management System (EMS); Bulk Connodity Curves and the Trend Program we had close and timely communications which enabled us to identify potential problem areas early and take corrective action with project resources. The net result is that the customers of Florida Power & Light Company will begin to realize a fuel savings of $20 million/ month and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. 12 - 4 m _ _ _, - ,,_-.__.y--_ y._
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 COMPLETED MILESTONE ANALYSIS ITEM SCHEDULED ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT JUNE,1977 START RC8 8ASEMAT CONCRETE 07/06n7 07/0707 START INTAKE STRUCT BASEMAT CONCRETE 10/1597 10/01/77 START T.O. PEDESTAL MAT CONCRETE 12/1597 10/25n7 START ERECT STEEL CONTAINMENT 01/1898 12/21n7 START RAB BASEMAT CONCRETE 02/10n8 02/10/78 COMPLETE POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT 12/0608 01/22n9 START M.S.T. STEEL ERECTION 12/2898 02/1299 START RCB INT. CONCRETE 01/17/79 11/07R8 START FHB BASEMAT CONCRETE 06/0509 06/05n9 START PREOPERATIONAL TESTING 04/20/80 03/19/80 START SETTING NSSS MAJOR EQUIPMENT 06/18/80 06/22/80 COMPLETE RC8 OPER FLOOR CONCRETE 09/23/80 10/17/80 SET CONTAINMENT VESSEL DOME 09/26/80 10/04/80 COMPLETE RAB EXT. CONCRETE 12/15/80 12/18/80 COMPLETE LOOP LARGE BORE PIPING 03/14/81 02/06/$1 COMPLETE REFUELING WATER STORAGE TANK 04/30/81 04/28/81 COMPLETE RCB EXTERIOR SHIELD WALL CONCRETE 09/06/81 08/11/81 INTAKE COOLING WATER INT. MTR RUN 09/25/81 09/23/81 COMPLETE OCEAN DISCHARGE PPG (KIEWIT) 12/25/81 10/14/81 TUR8INE ON TURNING GEAR 12/15/81 12/16/81 CHART 1
9 e O FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 COMPLETED MILESTONE ANALYSIS ITEM SCHEDULED ACTUAL ECCS FLOW TEST 01/04/82 01/13/82 SECONDARY HYDRO 02/04/82 02/04/82 COLD HYORO 03/17/82 05/19/82 HOT FUNCTIONAL 0743/82 10/21/82 ILRT 08/11/82 11/24/82 l CHART 2 e D G s 9 8 ee e ~, _ _. _ _.. _ _ _,.., _., _.. _. _. _.. - _ _ -. - ~.... _., _. _. _, -,. - -. _ -.
FLORIDA POwen a LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUDE UNIT NO. 2 PROGRESS VS. INDUSTRY PERFORMANCE 30 1980 1967-1970 ~ 2.5 1981 / = 25 2.0 g 1979 1972 a. \\ g I 1982 - li \\ 1974
- S j 20
\\ 1.5.E ~ o / ~ o 1975 15 \\ industry Averages f 1.0 E. g 1978 { St. Lucie 2 Construction Status g December 1982 0.5 5 g 81 _ _ 82 _ _ 78 _ 79 80 o i e i a i i i 10 20 30 40 50' 60 70 80 90 100 Percent Complete (Average for the Year) CHART 3
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 COMPARISON OF CONSTRUCTION START TO COLD HYDRO NUMBER OF PLANT MWE MONTHS BYRON 1 1120 75 DI ABLO CANYON 1 1084 84 FARLEY 2 829 82 l McGUIRE 1 1180 88 NORTH ANNA 2 907 101 SALEM 2 870 125 SAN ONOFRE 2 1140 79 SEQUOYAH 1 1128 114 SEQUOYAH 2 1148 133 ST. LUCIE 2 842 59 SUMMER 1 900 79 WATTS BAR 1 1165 105 AVERAGE TIME (MONTHS) 95 i CHART 4 a
l FLORIDA pot. d O LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 HISTORY OF ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 1 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Preliminary Safety Limited Work Construction Full Safety Analysis Evaluation Authorization Work Started Construction Report (PSAR) Report \\ /(LWA) Under LWA Permit Received Y (Apri 1973) (Nov 1974) (March 1975) (June 976) (June 1977) Construction Work Halted Via Order of Federal Circuit Judge (October 1976) i CHART 5 i 1
FLORIDA PL 4 O LIGHT COesPANY ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 PROJECT ORG ANIZATION CHART PROJECT GENE RAL MANAGER DenECTOR COST AND CORPORATE OF SE RVICE S SCHEDULE NUCLEAR ST AF F FOR PRORCT AF FAIRS STAFF SUPPORT I I QA A/E NSSS MANAGER PROMCT PROXCT MANAGER MANAGER I I ENGINE ERING PURCHA$ LNG EICENSING PROJECT TEAM TE AM teANAGER MEMBE R MEM8ER STE MANAGER 1 e I I I i 1 SUPERefeTEfeDENT M TE M SUPE IN E ENT SUPE INTE M M R D NT SUP V T D NT I I l IPL AREA ORES PdRCHASING LEGENO: FPL 1804.FPL CHARTS
Vm. T t t l f 4R WM. C W EM h' S R t 0 CIE S 1 I 9M e oet I V l W s me D** s s e FR rD O i M
- r. A A.
A T T N M (N MI e TM '= N W T AR C C 9E 0 A UT T EO T l OM RI 8 RT
- u AC S
R TI P sR L< t e e m( a f oP f CU O T Y R NA A P H R M R T O C O ( 'F C 2 N a
- "A I
I E G 'l N TO S 90 HN O ( G T I I I T R 7 L N A T E &U EG ~ Z TA R ISN A RE I E I N IA C T H W U A R e N o C s OL o R sG s oL. A T. G p O e Ae P T l C S TI R U SV a0 S s I D O l R OR s0. s I T CE et Ac-R S P se sp O E N E U O P S LS L T C U P F I S S l ~ I M TC E E J O R EP P US TNA TS ISSA oc L s N u I e e O 1 N T E N N G O E E I D T I L l S C E U I R TE e E D fP C E s
FLORIDA POWER 8 LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 NRC NUCLEAR PLANT CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE MODEL 8,3 7,9 7,5 7,1 6,7 6,3 5,9 5,5 5,1 4,7 4,3 3,9 3,5 3,1 2,7 2,3 1,9 1,5 1,17 3 0 7,3 6,9 6,5 6,1 5,7 5,3 49 4,5 41 3,7 3,32,9 2,5 21 1,7 1,3 9 4 10 6,1 5,7 53 4,9 4,5 4,1 3,7 3,3 29 2,5 21 1,7 1,3 9 5 10 65 77 87 I"U ~ Comp F.L. F.L. F.L. C.H. \\ 2 90 N 80 1 Year o ~ NSSS Y s Start N (\\ g 60 NSSS 5 50 Start Start s 40 RPV \\ N Pre Op Set Test 30 - ~ 20 - Legend : i
- i 10 -
O Model Milestone t { 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68 72 76 80 84 88 Elapsed Time From First Concrete i CHARTS 1 i k i l i
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 PROJECT LICENSING SCHEDULE 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 Tender FSAR & ER Complete Application to NRC issue issue FSAR & ER Preliminary for Acceptance Review SER FES Preparation Draft of FSAR (Mar 1980) (Oct 1981 (Apr 1982) i f (Jan 1978) (June 1979) FSAR & ER Docketed Begin (Feb 1981) ACRS Application Meeting Preparation (Nov 1981) for FSAR & ER (Dec 1979) CHART 9 1 i i
t FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 INGREDIENTS FOR A SUCCCESSFUL PROJECT e MANAGEMENT COMMITMENT e FINANCIAL RESOURCES e REALISTIC & FIRM SCHEDULE e CLEAR DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY e FLEXIBLE PROJECT CONTROL TOOLS
- TEAMWORK -INDIVIDUAL COMMITMENT e ENG. AHEAD OF CONST.
- EARLY STARTUP INVOLVEMENT e ORGANIZATIONAL FLEXIBILITY
- ONGOING CRITIQUE OF THE PROJECT e BETHESDA OFFICE FOR LICENSING e OWNER TAKES THE PROJECT LEAD CHART 10 9
9
MAY 10, 1983 SUPPLEMENT TO "THE SPIRIT OF ST. LUCIE" "The Spirit of St. Lucie" was written in January, 1983, and describes the St. Lucie Unit 2 project and progress to the end of 1982. Since January significant progress has been made including receipt of the 5% power license from the NRC. Fuel loading was completed on April 10, the reactor head installed, CEDM extension shafts installed, rod drive and incore detector cables connected, the primary system filled and vented and heatup began on April 24, 1983. We will perform about 20 days of hot functional testing and plan to make the reactor critical by the end of May. We expect to receive the full power license in early June, and barring. any unforeseen circumstances the unit should be placed in commercial operation in mid summer, only two months (3%) after our 1977 target scheduled date. In parallel, our engineering and construction forces completed required " conditions of license" enabling us to proceed with the startup program. Attached is a Post Core Load Schedule. e w-
i FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 i l POST CORE LOAD TEST PROGRAM i i 4/27 5/20 5/23 6/1 7/30 t i HOT INITIAL LOW PWR. POWER 100% OP'S 11 CRIT. PHY'S ASCENSION POWER i ) 4
y-a .. r. 2 i -c ' Mag 3, U83 tCNGRESSIONA L RECORD - Exfasiorrs of Remarks E tels based saede is the har eiseneet in truurins people and actually can retard the this surysvaWe fores. The conferwes are in Mlle taland, scheduling foul ups and the ese-acrosament that providias a survivable asing process A study conducted by barrassins cost spiral the dominate the 4 system shouW met be omnesemined tw eno Dr. Aaron Katcher, a psychiatrist for-headunes. basing; that asne of this prestesa's fumis merly at the University of Pennsylva-B" trace" **han Wn busy esplaining their ""' "'I' ""IN ""d ""* abau be empended h ftsed er suo teeing for nia, concludes that heart patients who Mx. ud ma none of tu prestum reduc. own peta !!ve longer than those who problems, a tishur kidt seem working out en uen chau redues the Department's pro. do not. Other studles show that the. Island off the east ooast of Florida has been pused invesugauens of anchue deployment." calmness s.ssociated with strokins and busy solving theiro. The result at et. Luew Senator John Warner. March 34. 1942' unit two will be completnoe of Flortda "The atX wouM be tes vulnerable to a taktng to pets can lower blood pres-Sortet first strthe under that arrensement sure rates. Power as IJaht Co.'s SIO Me pressurtmed water reactor, at a cost of $1.42 btulos, kt [MZ h esistems sneel and the Subcommit* The emotional and physical benefita June. esacur alz years after its construcuan
- '*w me point h bundans me missiles to seniors who own pela are tremen. permit was issued.
unut me pomanent beatng decialon was dous. Unfortunately, however, many That's a benchmark km the nuclear son. anade " ship of a pet rent their homes and areolder P'OPle who wish the compa Senator John Tower. October 3.1901: "I aan enervementy skepucal to the point of prohibited from having one. California pleted since the Levinning or 197s-one festing that this plan (MZ in Minuteman alles! desert s19e us enough added moabill-has recognised this problem and en. P ' fore the Three heale Island aMd==L in ty for the mener bwolved and kann us acted legislation allowing the elderly htarch. it'is, and thr rest sanoe teso-base santched out frorn se to 144 monum with a lushly vulnerable land besad to have peta in public housing. Similar 'F'""~ legislation la pending in a number of "when rou compare this hot to the rest of the bustmas. were number one." says wu. Senator Mark Andrews. December S.1981: other States and my colleague. Repre-Isam a. Dmsekson, project senma manneer "If we spend over $3o0 mullon to harden a senutive Masto BIAccf of New Yom. for y'P&I. "and we un sull do better." launch et sGee, to put a 10 warhead m! istle has introduced a bftl in Congrt"es to Of the plants under construcuen now. Arl. h a ftsed potnt became we are afraid snat vtake this Federal law. sons Publ6c Service Co.'s Palo Verde unit the Runnians are tersets 3 warhead missiles in a ftsed point all we do is step up the op-Studies shoF that people who live one, a 1.270 Me power reactor designed and portunity for there to take out le warheeds alone suffer pacmature death rates. being built in the desert west of Phoenix sy at a urne instead of 3 warheads at a time." Now that there is proof that pela actu-Bechtel Power Corp., San Franelseo is run-Senator Alan Dison, December 2.1981: "I ally can extend the lhes of the lonely nins a respectable second to at. Imese, where Ebeaco services Co., ine, New Yort ' PP "h* " I "A"II* I 'hI"" D'##'"I E and sick, my great hope is that older City, is handling design and contrucues. s"i the elles in permanent basing modes,"as Americans living in all forms of hous, Palo Verde's cons presently echtemplated, invites disaster and ing will be allowed to own peta ao their in May 19'le, and full power is scheduled for b a terrible mistake " final years may be longer, happier. the Combusuon Engineering reacter this Adantral Stansfield Turner, former Diree-and healthier ones. We owe them that August. seven years and two months later. ter of the CIA. March 13.1983: "Por several much.O In many ways st. Lucie two set up for yeare now, the immediate problem with the speed; MX has been how to base it. Placed in4xtst-ins altos, it would be vulnerable to surprtne It is a near twin of unit one an Ste INr s attact Dy the Soviet Union's beefed-up stra* A JOB WFLL DONE Combustion I.ngineertas remeter, mampieted by Ebasco and PP&L on a henth actme. legte foremo-Just as vulnerable as our present senersuae of land-based missiles." HON. M NQUA ule-from construcuen perm 88 to commeer= ciai operauon-in December. IMe. Ooneral Ellis, then Comreander in Chief or Ptne 34 Doeten of the second usut was nearly Tgg af the strauene Air Counmand. Petruary Is. IN TME house or REPRESENTAT1vsa complete before the start of constusados. last: 'We usuet oorrect our vulnerability by deploytag the MX In a mobile basins m Tuesday. Afar J. JHJ and th prepmuon m'tually begas k h 1918. under a limited wort notherentase. figuration.... e Mr. FUQUA. Mr. Speaker. while it is That was suspended by the Necker msgula. Senator, if we had the mobility in the popular today to criticise nuclear tory Commisalon (NRCl four smenths later. Minuteman force that we are butiding into energy and utility companies I believe her, kuume a new rule required M th) MX force we wouldn't need an MK such criticism has been carried to ex* of MurpmenualeMas. IIreere tremes. Por example, there is a lot of PP4L was one of the early entreets in the Intelligent hard work that goes into nuclear power business with its two Seehtet. wollt Turkey Point plants seeth of ammaan, pgg. FACILITATED building powerplants that provide which were brought en une h IMS and PSTCHOTHERAPT electricity for ottr needs. but we tof a. plus at. Luew ene, se it has esportesess seldom hear about the good things truilding nuclear planta. HON. HENRY A. WAXMAN th**ghf It is ume to f*C88"tse 2""d 8"e'n*d*** ""*"*w' ". e'm"m"ee* when sane on e caLrpoessa t _. _~fW TWs II0tres or atrsessNTATlves athlevementa and estend our appre* PP&L b back same to 7%eeday. Afay J. H83 clation to the people who are produc-planned 1.140 Mw reactore la IMG. As a live in our society. I wotild like to result, except ior replacing the steem sener-O Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker. ' 7.7 share an article entitled. Nuclear stors in the two Westinshouse steese auspay million Americans aged N and older Construction-Doing It Right" which eyetems at Turkey Point and ner safety backftts at St. Luete one. PPenL's muelear cre living alone. Many of them have appeared in the April 21.1943. Issue of staff has been able to aaaamatrate heavily been forced into seclusion through the ENR-fo Tnerly Engineering News on St. Lucie two construeuen. loss of their loved ones and endure Record' This article presents insight Because constructlee started W es unit lonely, isolat esistences. As the conshcHon M a poWant one was tWns completed, eices to es% et in l number of soll elderly persons in-called St. Lucie No. 2. built by the the aktlled laborers and half of the seaman. crtases and depression and desponden-Florida Power & Light Co. My sincere ual staff stayed on le butid the second con plant. cy become more common among them son.gratulations to William B. Derrick-Where Seabrook had les OsmaheD Cenu. doctors are beginning to suggest that project general manager for a job pela can improve their conditions. The well done and to ENR for document. uon and Diablo Canyon its Abalone Allianse resulta have literally been lifesaving. Ing the information. stormins the fences, only a few aroan son The article follows. turtles have shown much eartmeny about " Pet facilitated pnychotherapy." a the construction at at. IAle08. "Ihe stallog ls recently coined term 11]ustrating the (Prom the ENH.'Apr. St. Iss31 locatel ta miles north of West Paisa Senah 'fficacy of pet therapy. has changed N'C18^s Copersuctroe-Dosse IT Rsew? in a remote area on Mulchinson Island. near u lives of elderly pe sons who previ. In the frustrauns world of nuetear oon-the retirement communnies areend Pert cualI felt theI had nothing to live for* structica the losers sat all the staantion. If Pieree. The senerally senservauee residenes Dr. Boris Levinson. a peoneer in the M's not the five construeuen-guality.amuur-ta the area have supported the slant. Demand growth for electrtetty In Pterten study of the hutaan/ animal bond at anm fanures cited by Nuclear Resulatory Yeahlva University. says that antsnal Commiselon Chemnan Nunmie Palladino in had been stowins at 11 to ID% a year be the his Dutch-uncle lecture last year, it's the early 1Mos. 'That has dropped to about 3.4% companionship is crucial to older WPPSS flanco in Washington State. Three a year in PP4L's servtse area. but M to secat well above annaami averesen, so there bas OVER -
s \\ E 2014 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-&remifmf ofRenunrdi &y J, #33 \\ mover been any relasing on the critical path wide flange bearns. 38 in. deep, that were in. "We've been working together since we were seward osmpletion And, while most ut!!stles stalled esery a ft on vertical centers. kids." Tsaktria quips. "We each know what have found themselves in a cash bind-Af ter ester stre preparations, the concrete the other is going to any before he says it." unalnly because of ambitious construction containment shleid wall for the reactnr was Another factor in the sucosesful construe. programs durtna a period of hash interest silpformed in a contmuous pour lasting 16 % tion effort, ears R. W. Zalst. Ebaaco project sutes and alack desmand growth-FPAL has days. The cyltndrical. heavily reinforced -iana-8 les fiscal fitness over the years. concrete wall 3 ft thick.191 ft high and 74 supertntendent, is the return to baales at St. Tus fous rarsg it in diameter, required 10.000 cu yd of con Lucte two. " Plan your work, get the amaters. At St. Imele one, says Derrtekson. "ae dis, crete placed around hundreds of embedded al here and give the crews solid guidance. A severed that turned out to be the real criti, condialts. groundmt calles and anchur bolta. not of people have gotten oveiwhelmed with est path." Despite industry esperlerwe to Contentional step-formung of shield walla the nest best computer systern or manage. the contrety, he figurse that sin years *La can take frt,m l' to 13 months ment philosophy. What happena is that all J what it ought to take to do this jwb. In 1977 To get an early start on the Mmeconsum-the mariagere arid submanagers get so busy tith their own businees that they forget the we looked at the man hours, the aork and ing concrete work inalde the reactor con-guy in the field." the legte and came up with a 35 month tainrrwnt. Ebasco cNee to heat tMan the echedule for unit two that put the start of lower sections of the steel containment UTILI71r comTso& fuel ineding on Oct 3a.1982 - vessel by capping it with a temporary dia. Where a number of utillues have handed Crews were telting the head on the loaded phragm rather than valt until Llie perma. snanagement of nuclear projects over to resetor oore last weet, and Derrtetson es. nent steel dome could be placol on the tog their architect <ngineers. PP&L umanagers in poeta to be at 6% power in three aceta and of the vemmel. The lower portion of the adaarnt and at the site took control of St. at full power la mald June. The slip in the vessel there the plates are thickest must be Lucie and assumed rwamuty for their schedule le mainly due Le post Thil safety heated in place to relieve stress that bullds declasona "If artybody's get a protloon een hadrlas and other dealgn changes regulfed up during erection. The thinner dome plates this job. Overybody's got a problems." gapt by NRC se destred by PP&L. To hold slip. do not need heat treatraent. Derfickson. page to a alnimum, a number of changee Construcdon of the reactor autillary The uneet important osercise af Unnt een-aet regwered by MRC er for operation of the buildmg was done in a phased process that tml has cosne in PP&L's aggreenive start-up plant-e condensate polishing system, for let Craflamen get started installing the een-program as St. Lucle two. Plant agorauens saample-have been held ever for backfit. trol room, electrical cable vault and other staff were brought in during lpfe, as Umg hefere and duttng the reactor *a first re. crtlical equipment while other sections of months prior to the scheduled fuet.need fueltna outage la early 193g Derrickson es. the structure acre still being built. The date, to bestn accepting erstems er compe. Lismaaes the seat of that work at about Ses building went up in a stalr-step fashion. As nents of systems se they emeld be tested and sallites. each elevation maa. completed, all major flsed if necomenry. The start-up esew was Aa Isaportant eteenent la enaking the equipment for that level was ttited in before gradually increased to 34 eperataeas tenhat-start up target was the atleut effort made the roof was placed, clans, who assussed enere and onese sentret by PPeil. Conakustaan Engineertna and finassa. I suas Tuar of construction as work prostumed toward Ebasse anstneers in assotlauens with MitC over the final asfety analysis report. Get' During eenstruction of the aualliary comptedon. EventuaHF FPaL's flae tuners ting the safety checkoff needed for an oper-building, on sept. 3.1978. Harricane David took one project sannagement. amatlas Idt the alte, knocking doen a 160 ton der-son 4 tena a etween sunstructeen and sting heense generally takes about le ""*"'8"" says. T a good teW.A But, as months. It took nine monthew mon risk being uord to lift matertala into the containment and ausillary building. The thaa 43 acrorwLhe table sneeunsa betaeen WRC and project technical staffs-toget the 130 ft toner 350 ft maat and 300 iL boom A total of 433 separate spotecas een iden-regulatory blanalas for SL Lucie two-were destroyed. But enore important, large UN and eMuled M tumewr in a prierb "Norreally we se back and fortfl with acetions of the auxillary building mere badly used sequence to meet majoe pmject mue. forssa! letters asking new quantions and re-damased The Inlllal enumate of lost time to stones. To support that effort, a semputer-quesung detailed esplanatjons of anseera." repair the damage and replace equipment imed punch het of componente and work espe Vissor Nerans. NRC senior project man- ,,,g3,,,g, iteras was developed-including a cheektlet aamr fer St. Lucas two. "We cut through a Af ter une initial shock. hos ever. the effect of Inspection schedules for the resident lot of selecenceptions and falsunderstand-of the accident was to shake the project up MC Inspect 4Nto keep track of daHy lar-Ings by sitting across the table. Our engt-and put everyone into high sear. "The der-8'I8-neers were talking with their engineers and rkt coalapse maa probably the turmns point FPaL's aggressive style contrasta sharply l we emme en sy understanding that everyone in the project." says Iso Taektria. Ebaaco with scene other utilities that have handed was salains about, project reanager. *It pulled everyone to-management of their nuclear projects to ar. Also, the negottadone were conducted, for selher chitect-engineering firms. A pusaber of a the meest part, without lawyers "Tm eu.pi-Ebmaco engineers deseloped repair proce. those planta are in trouble now. Derrickson Gieus of laayers, says BE. James Dager tice dures and expedited ordtra for replacement points out. "You can build aH the fancy president of engineesing, project manage-equiptr.ent. Crews and supervi no put in ad. domes and une the best models and comaput. ment and construccon for FP&L "Once diuonal overthne to make up for hours er programs in the world." he says. "but if you put thines la their hands, you get a lot spent on repair projecta Bk the following the utility doesn't get inrolved la start up ' el legalass God an adwmary relattenship de* November, tne 13 meek loss on the calutal, and make sure the plant is built to run . "M - path schedule nas made uw rtsht, all Utat fancy stuff dessn't sehe a The kry ingredient in the rebound from hoot of difference."e coestnocrsos arTacs the crane collasse and in overcuming all Completing the construction and liccialns wort in 13 esenthe-els months in.ter than other construcuon problema. Tsakista says, has been the open and enay communication CITY OF COMI'rON, CALIF., COM. unit one-Is no snean achievement. Even between his staff and utilar managera. The - MEMORATES 95TH YEAR OF though the two units are totns urut two is pecultar, matris.etthin a. matrix site organa-INCORPORATION much heefter. It is essigned to meet highrt sauon is partly responsible. Ebasco's con. seismic and missile-impact criteria, for ex-struruon supervisors raanage craft workers ample, and all updated doelen requiremenLs. and subcontractors, making sure that sched-b In materials alone. that has resulted in ules are snet. Where FP&L wants direct con-placensent of a4 additlenal 16.000 eu yd of trol and responsibility-In the areas of qual. ce cat.sroastia concrete.1.000 tons of structural steet. I Ity assurance, cost cor. trol. contract admin-
- III T3Eg NoUsg 0F BErnESE3rTaftm milhon ft of emble.1.000 ft et large diameter letradon and start up. for example-sta man Tuesday May 2. JNJ 78 ping and 4.000 more we9ds on unit two.
heads up the mostly ELasco ataff. In other A number of scheduling and construction areas. Ebasco managrre take the lead. Ev. e Mr. DYMALLY. Mr. Speaker I ass innovattens used at St. Imete two helped eryone, in.-luding Tsaktris, i.lumstely re, proud to inform any colleagues in the creas to get more work done fester. To es. ports to Derrickson. however. Congrees that this usonth of May. esvate and pour the foundauon mas for the The comraunication is butit on trust. "If rnkrk.s the 95th anniversary of the in-reactor sentainment muuding without af. alu tells me so ahead, that's all I need." hundred feet away. Ebaare designed that it says Teantris. "I don't have to keep looking corporation of the city of Cosapte facting the operauen of unit one only a few over my shoulder au the ume." And the Calif. We in Compton have chosen to claims is the first nuclearealety cleas cof-trust is built on the long associauon be-celebrate this speelal occasion by ded!- fordam. The 100stt.dia elinatar cell placed by drtving See tons of sheetpiling in tween Ebasco and PPaL managera, saany of cating the oldest house in Cosnoten. was whom have moved up the ranka together on We esll this home, built originally in 13 ft lengths using electrical vibratory ham-the St. Lucie station and other PPaL power. 1968 by A. R. Imounts. Heritage House. mers. The sheets were traced with intemal planta. Derrteamon and Tsaalits. for esam. It stands now as a tribute to the early esapression riass made up of 800 tons of ple, have been associates for 13 years, asttlers of the 00minunity.
...,. ~ .+ - 1 8'1 pi \\ t .. ~ ~ h:.~. 4-(EEEEEi m. 4,, 1 ;::- '?"*i.. , ~_J._~.2C d-u+ - m_w (,' ..:~~ 7M 7 '~ P v j g $Q[1 xf, ~ y' V 4(t {, g DR W M 2 p~ ?,A Y b-.'M-l n . s s 3$ C 4 L. -, - lL w,.. ~ i, T-A g $,7 g$. 3 . s, t',f i i ,;. 1._._. n a p
- r.w -
N1 5' kk (3 j, P l -'j; [ h""""*""- i- ;, .-4 -- l'; -- ', -- l .:,ea, }_ Q s, k W' 2 n[f f M b I- ... -- - +a a w z' r.,. 3 - Nk [ 't 2 - (c ; [rM y'. m9s / C ~ T )q'f%%%7.P!Qy 4(V . f t. p,, ;, 4, ] 5e [ ' 7 ~ h l . 'L 'M f.4 M 9.2 1". E ? f-L '+
- y. Q
-1*C. ,pg - fjgg f. i !b ? . __ _ J ^ .~ Six year schedule o. c: a ;;.s.: s Lrt v : Etas ,: S: _ s r - --'i-Jo ds n n u n.n; i :, .I innh-.o ..,n ni in.,n thi m: s i h o o! i l' au t s I :.h' ( s. 'o s ii' \\l., ct ii - act,!I t he o, oa s i.a da-tn e ..nsn:n n n,;;a.a. n.t s .u tc. 'ai +,;s u ais..ni r ; . min.a a c :.oh u i < ni ia %n h a R c';nian d ', t < ann;na l u.n .i r i ni n n ;,. .s s n s u ;( i i i h.ornian b u-l'ill.n ia n. :n hn lluh inuni h in n u c l ni 1h.a s la n !nn a k .o d.c nm i a: iinnuin.in h nas NUCLEAR CONSTRUCTION m _- _ l Lind si hnia!.n oi-oi s ' d ' hc < noi o u n; i os spn al . nq a u I nr U.c l.. ;:: ;un;.a l o T -.. : c ,' n t h.a b.nunaic thi la a.i',a cs 1 H,, \\l.h I l not. ii o h :s ;n \\L. h ! "!' i nei 1, c i i un, l\\ui w hih nn i ,ha nuhues o u t..nu :. o o hau la e n l o'n-h.n c sui n heil.au in rn Iii nsa.d's \\\\ h. '. 'n n. hun esplann., da a pn.i 'a ins i n;h' Lunaon'uoun;.n u.a i.n:p oc 'ha 1 o 'he n s
- 'ia ha nc,
.s e i .o:n- .nll IslJiit! i.l! flu t tsi ,1 I ' d l Ia ii 9 I i !1.is Iq t ll !sta se < h l!!; IH I dic.'sats \\\\ :Jl'l 1::l l5 lh i f 's i si > t t jd*+4<l ;cl u ' t [ 11 L t1 *. 4 4-iheus l he n suh.a N 1 ui te innt ns, u til f,e i, :nph n,n..t er t. q IN ' uni oc ian solld,hr"c: N ERR a ' >.' is) c ~
A Ex asg.. ..w.< w e. ~A W^ v*" y- '.W Q. I 4 N Q: I .~ - ,l T.... _ _ ' ? i.3...
- gh s,
j ,h(' k. h l k'l ' ll ',...) A,s,f. J - p q.C. C.. A;. M A M.. ~ a;). , _ g...,g .w m 7 .+ 7
- r-
. ~,. 7 .T _ e.s ., g.,..~ g gg a 1 N 9,, -- c 4 4 n ~% 7-- ^~ .,y-f P - ^? "D ' ~. --N 4 , d' @.. - - ~ ~ ~ , f-s m l d M. [h]$FA,.,a f, % - M ;.. '
- 4 1
4 A.. t N {, N EY nwfR JM, IDsk_ 4 M,ygj m W v - --o& 3 ~ I M^
- fr t
w + rL%. m .o 2
- r. m --c.
.T l ,;l -pt . g..
== 3 , F--._=>\\ l ..h. r 9 { b n M), J't I.E I Eint._. [ Q') %Y ', 2,[ td{
- ~~~"
- w..' sam m .. j_. .. Q1
- a. x
,a w kkM l g Nh d E 4 +
- y 34%f-7y"[n
[ - S*N if51$; . ;;.e t -- - t- - -- t -- s '3, \\h / i~ hgh3.k
- z. ;
s e O ~ Q._ 8!p %% C." % m- ~w n =t n q l'y y y -- '-+ g d 1, % h[ \\ h s.- tt f. f i d "- t ( Adki.'mM&} b3 Oceans.de plant. -n
- w " *. ::4 1
< n i!m pl ants nn.tn...nsnu n-n .a im.au Iw, t i hic u mn n:2 .a. ,. r : 1, ,,1 ! I l u s. .nvi t re m. 1 P d \\ i oh una..:m. i l _'To E ru R bm;:.r !.u.o m.: a h s. in e hde-n..m .n n u. t...n ;, r :n ) as u, e t.. s he n; hinh m ihe ih u n acq. it l'h r as in lin hu i P..u c i er ir o n-tn 1)c< < nd e Ui.o j t ( op '* m l i a ni ni i o rumun; i o < i uhlc n.n! . 'i r e lles.;n..t ti mu u-m.u ! M ,ss i <.n u i 9 'e !: fin- ! tt f 4 E ..t'.- i e i -DOING IT RIGHT RMF ~. , (( s n % ! \\ bi I. s 6,4 4 l I [t t s l1# I % I'l i$ \\. !s If "(,Il \\ I l l(*b\\ fYl 1 l3 ,I[ \\ '* {f 4.!1 [,( } l .l p ne han !M. < h ten im !. n n ui n..n l '. d. \\ i ofc s <..n st r o o..n oird us..nc m t ti c o n < nn mi .n ria nu h e i ar s n su< il m \\!n PCn un! IMI pouct pi i n u' n si ht iuh ! husums, u nh 's , l',i o n hum !! :Lt-l '. i i ! io-n an
- t. o du a mhn-o.n I n;nn i nn; i: one r!us \\ncou scu n
..t \\lunn uhn h anc to .,m .n !u. m 1 " _'. e !
- u-an-s r.o s.ualtu..nuunhs i urr si ! r a ic..nr h.n cs;ai m nii '. o ?.. i: n.
h.a ;l o ' .t 4. a;- In nunt s n- 's i Iu,m noi u.n set up r pcc. t
- \\\\ h n u.nm of 4 h ;,cm! cut uni. ors u m a,. 1 nr.. '!.c
- o-
- hn a ni a nun
.t uno "i n..m sin \\la (. onhusu.n . lc.a n a u:th h. o h in r.1 :s t br! ! lu. L - r .m,ihn; nu. ENR :~ J' *W 2' ---P
4 pl. inned 1.110 Alu rc.ators m .n rat i hi si n im kna our.c;c m E P.M.\\s a resuh. em pt toi car h IN lh nnison e n. repkn ing the sicam ;cner aion maics the t osi of Jui woik ai in the nu, h estmuhouse sicam almut 5 N m.!!ain uipph s\\ slerin at 1 In ke\\ Pond \\n un pl b W ch' Wen! W li'tl l \\ll sJlel\\ hJi k hl s al 51. ilukillO llic I.n !-41l
- l.il';t I w as 1.in ic one. l istfs not le.n stall j
y the all-om ctioit ineli hs i Ni. lias 1,ceri allle bl < lim eilt rale "IJ' I I li&I)tist i'ill ( II;n't t Illig ,n pl b e.1 \\ i h oli St. 1.uoc lM r Ib M
- P
( n,Wn i s m negou.e gf7" consuuttna nous w oh NRi our the !nu! e lic<.nise s onso m non suri-w ulets.nuluis i cpoi t. (;cnin; cd pot as unit one we heing mmpleted. ilme in *% of the /., Ihc siten iln i ki !! nce< led tu ,%~y an opci.unig hiense acnci &. skilled lahoicis and lult of the takes about 3n m..m h t it to< 4 .j' nonnuniul siall sta\\cd on to k JL ~ [f nine mont hs-and more than hmid the set ond plant. k j in.aio m ihcaable meetinus o u here scabr ook had it s y ps s bet w een N m .u n i po qci t icih. Clamshell Coahuon and Duhto
- ,4Q naal stall -to uti ilie icanla-
,cs @ e - ion hicuin; lor Nr I.m ic t w o Cain on as.\\lulone.\\lham e stoiming the feiacs, onh a icw, g,ey. lonh unh toim.il Icner s ekin" "Lrmaih we ao h.u k.nid nicen sea inrtles h.n c sh< m n p du?[d una h i tiiii, sits ainiui Ilic o rn-I j iiew <iiicsrii,in.nii! it quesiiri; P su m tion at St. I.uue. 'l he sta-4 W-detailed espLmations 01 .m - tion is loiated D nules nonh p sw er s." sau Viuor Nerses. NR< of West Palm Beadi in a re-gl i semor piolet t nuru;cr f or Ni. more aiea on liutt hinson Is-land, near the retireniclit
- ' 9._a #
1.n u e tw o. "We i ni ihrough a '. i lot of min oni epn'>tn and mn-Lg. t oniin nliilies aiutind I ort tinderstJmbnD h\\ sMtmq i Pierte. ~l he eencralh musena-P auoss the tahic ( hir engineers i uma = n\\e leudentA in the a Ca hd\\c .~ 4 w et e ialking wHh theit engi- { suppiined the plant. neers and we <ame awas under-o Denund utouth for e!ce-stamhne what e\\ en one we t r icit \\ in Ilorida had been talking aboutf crowing at 11 to 13'% a \\ car in .\\ho. the negotunons were the carh 1970s. l' hat has h o eniha ted. h >r the mmt p.u t, ~' diopped to about 3.5% a scar Containment shield wall shpformed in 16'2-day pour wuh<iut Ltw \\ cts. "I'm suspi-n listN senne area, but it is tiotn of lawsers sass 11 sull well abuse tunotul a\\er-James Dager. si< c preudent of ages. so there lus neter heen.nn iclasing on the o nical path enginecrme. proict t management and mosn uinon for 1-Ist. t tow ard -t ontplenon..\\ml winte mmt unlities ha\\e found "()me you put dunas m their hands \\ou get a lot ot legalese ) themsches m a ush hind-m.nnh because of ambitious mn-and an adscrsan relationship des clops." snu(tion programs durm; a period of high mterest rates and Construction attack. (:ompleung the (onstt ut tion and h. sl.u k dem.nni Qrok t h-IlM has EN+" .., ~ t ensmq work in 72 months-us nuintained us incai hinew o\\cr the ~ .3 months teier than innt one-k n. \\ ears. .. V *f.' ' ' ;.; h D two tunts are tums. innt two n mut t f 9p[d[ g(, mean.h luc \\ement l'.\\ en IlP > ugh the The true path..\\t St. 1.uc ie one. 'l hMJg ' x-1* c.' ennm san Der r u kson. "we dix m eied w hat 7# qup becher. It n designed to meet highe: turned out to be the real inrical .,..'E and missle-onpact unene path " Despue industn expenente to dyQ$Q F "'. j,A(. tor es.unple. and all upd.ned deue the t ontran. he hones that sis scars .;- g= '* g g.g>~ icipiirementy in nutriuk alone. tha "n w hat a ought to take to do ihn -. ~.J 't. u-lus icsuhed m p!at ement ot an add ioh. In 1977. we looked at the nun-W - 1.1. 7 - rN nonal 13.uno iu \\d ot i onu ci: ? .~ houh. the work and the logic and wh ~ E- [., ' % Q ' I Mt 1.nnO O ns of struuural stecL l un: J YY' hon it ot uhle. 7.nnn u of larac d ume up with a ti3-month whedule for tant two that gut the start ot inel - ;_' %g 4 ameter piping and 1.100 more welo loadmg on Ott. 5.1%2/ p,f3.' 4 on tout two. 1 (:r ew s were boltmq the head on ~ %g .\\ inunhci..t w hedulnic and t o; the loaded reador core last w eek. ..-( r 3 y snia non ummanons used.a I; g and Derntkson expeds to be at Y% f. j'% ; d ue two helped ocu s to get mo g power in three weeks and at inll pows .f -'.g/p N,,. w., 3' work done telet l 'o esutue m 3 er in nuddune. lhe shp m the xhed-ule h mainh due to pmt l\\tl salets [g(f i. f., pour the tonndanon nut toi the it a { 'r 3 tot mutanunent hmbhng wHhout bac khh and other deugn (hanges ie. " di7 f xf /./, -
- tei tma the opcianon ot inni one on 3
apmed h\\.N R L : or deured hs ll%L. 'Nkh 4 a icw luindled lect an.n.1.luu si i 'lo hold shppage to a nunnnum, a I [ i # 9, /% A v ugned what u clanus n the in n i. number of dunges not icapmed hs 'l{t. - pI t leai -salet s -(la w t olt ei d.nn. l' NRL. or lot operanon ut the pl.mt-a ,[ 4 - ' - [- dining 340 tons of shecipihng m E \\r' 131Lh-dia (in ular iell uas plated j 3, s .ondensate poinh ng o stem, for es-ample-h.n e been held m er for I '*
- ~Os -
it 4 li lengiln unnu eletinul sihraw hat khtung beinte and dunng the te-Power eqwpment checked out in start-up campaign lummel t the sheet s u ci e hi m - 28 FNRW 21.1993 5 j-E3-I }.
..n k wnh mtcinal vanprewa,n unas nude up of 900 torn of wide-flange be.uns. % m. deep. dut wer e msu^' led O- (n a f t on < ontroI. comrau adnunntration and stan-up. f or exans os p n nun heads up the mosih Ebauo stati. In otha anm teon al < emen .IIIer exlef on e l pr epa t 'it ti,[1s' t h. ' "nu-uhunawh repous to Dern(kson. howeser. C UI I ' 'IIC-linitiffilla 'l sahll! I onLunme shielt!w$i lep I i.. l h< < slnidund. heauh reinf on ed he u>niinunnanon n btuh on utnt "h Ihll telb me"'o di 10: th ^l un o u ous pom le n,. ahead. that s.dl I need'" e Ibkim' I d[l irlr' "'i l nr E ll < t\\, ing osa nn shoulder all the ome. An e is I "' \\"I' I" long auonanon bens een Ebec o and Iist managen. embedded [onduitt uroomfli\\ [3bn'in.d step-lornung of sinchi walb an $[Le [$ on i 3 IE ' i- 'b"b$ "r "I the r. rt all r r il e t er i l l iri I
- > get an c.uh st.ut on the time-uinuumng umuete wmk l ukirn. for example. he e been auouares for f
1'1s.$ "Weie been workmg together smte we were kuls
- lNL f [.In b'n u.i' i."P (h know what the other is going to ie btiore l
lower i i f h yr w th a temporan chaphrag n rather than wan untd the penna- .\\nother factor in the succcuful construuion edon' sau It' n(m stetl dome u>uid be plac ed on the to > of the seuel the W-1ow(r pornon of dic sewe1 where the plaies are thi(kest must uno project supentuendent, is the return to I mt-heirs at St. Lucie two. " Plan sour work. get the material here I x heated m place to rehese and ghe the crews sohd l j strew that budds up dunng gmdam e. A lot of people _ m m ;.,....~- ~ l ercuion. t he thinner dome hae gotten merwhehned ;;;, eJJ-g, g; plates do not need heat wah the next best (omputer v j r. q i f n eat ment. sutem or management phi. -4 l ; Con nia tion of the reac-lou >phs. What happens is g "NI ~ t tor auxdian budding was that all the managers and p done in a plused process submanagen get so buss NM that !ct ualtsmen get started unh their own business thai B % ' .O u j fg. insulling the control room, ther thrget the guy in the V Qg' 1-eleurical cable unit and ticid." ] other (ntical equipment utility control. Where a 3 =Y"'M i' whde other sc< tions of the number of utilities hae r st r uc t ur e were still being hamled management of nu- .g \\'k's. e h i hudt. lhe hinbling went up (lear projeus mer to their .I I in a stair-step fashion. As a rchit ec t-en gineers, nw1.
- *y I
s ca(h clesanon wa c omplet. managers in.\\fiami and at E. - i ed. all nujor equ iment for the sue took control of St. jM'% that lesel we htte in before f.uae and auumed responsi-n. h n the tool um placed. bihn for their deusions. "If 1 I Ir Thanks, I needed that. amborh's got a problem on b N.'J/. mamign Ikm< bm During (onstruuion of the thik ob, esenbodCs got a Ebawo mai ager Enkuu m ausdun buddmg. on Sept, proh em." ses Denit Lson. ik "I o>uhl do one more of these 3.1979. Ilurncane Daid nit The most important exer-There me be mme people I m nn hic and then I'd be rea<h the site. knocking down a the of that control has come who see a prohr trom deles to for a ni< c soh de,k p.bf 130-ton derritL bemg used in Hs!!s aggreone sun.up I'hafs neser been our weJ' he a sau l the 13-se.u -ohl proju r ( hiel. to hit nuteriah into the con. program at St. Lucie aso. san. adthna. "wc ukes the th_ Tohues hee to run the show ununent and auxdian budd. Plant opeunons sulf w ere brum of the blum for delau dr in ihn budocu and the plants mg. l'he 180-it tower, 230-ft brought in dunne 1979. 33 but thene been made a scapc I, l hee to be bmh to operate / nust and 200-f t boom were monihs pnor to the whed-go.a in a lot of suuanons." In zwir.raxw m r me_ destrmed. Ilut more impor-uled fueldnad date, to begin l
- a.. _.a
- ,m po-unr. large seuions of the a(cepong miems or compo-
- ns I
anuhan budding were badh danuged. ~I he initial esumate of nems of etems so thes (ould he tested and hxed if nete, s lost tune to repair the danuge and icplace equipment was 13 sa n. The start-up crew was gradualh inoceed to tu a 3-w eek s. oper nions technicians who esumed more and more tonun ue" Aher the initi.d shotk. honeser. the effect of the accident of comtruoion as work progrewed toward complenon. fuen .Jain [ was to sluke the pngeu up and put esenone into high gear. rualh. Hst/s hnc-tuner took mer podert nunagement, cre-to i "lhe derrick collapse we probahh ihe turning point in the ating some tension between comtrucnon and surt up suth l projectf sms Leo Tsakins. Eban o pnyect nuruger. "It But, a Tsakins sap. "h's good iension? ht n nan pulled esenone together? A toul of IM separate miems were identified and uhed. bs Ebeco engineers deseloped repair procedures and expeda-u!cd for turnmer m a pnonu/ed sequeme to meet m.um the ed orders for replaement ecpnpment. Crews and supenison pn> ject mdestones. To support that cifon. a computen/ed Pb put m additional mertune to nuke up for hours spent on pumh list of componenh and work items we deseloped- 'I t repair projeus. Ih the followmg Nmember, the 13-week loss imludmg a che(Llist of in peuion whedules for the reudent I whs ' on the oincal path whedule was made up. wc impeuor-to keep tre k of daih urgets. ! i Wa ~Ihe Les inziedient in the rebound from the crane collapse asifs aggressise snle contreh sharph u nh some oth> r 4for i and in mercoruing all other comirucoon problems. Tsakins unhoes that hae handed nunagemem of their nuclear prm l p hn t san. hm been the open and ces c ommurucanon between his cas to anhiteu-engineenne htmt A number of ihme dam- .nue, stall and utilin marugers. 'I he peculiar, nutrix-within-a ma-are in trouble now. Derri(Lson pomis out. "hu can bu hl ai bene-ins sue orgam/ation n panh respomible. Ebano's construc. the f.mo domes and me the best modeh and (omputo mem on supennors maiuge (r.dt worLers and subomtractors, programs in the world." he saw. "But d the unlja docso i ge ' the L malmg sure that uhedules are met. Where ust wanh direct unohed m sian-up and nuke c ure the plam n budt to run 'and control and responubihn-in the aiem of quahn anurance right, all that fann stuff doesn't nuke a hoot of ddlerente a bacLI 30 ENR/Apnt 21.1983 r l 'd 4
l l 1 i l i l Olity .Imp ment ProgrQm 4 4
' w ~. b ' '.r > 3 a.4F;WCrJP,"Pa;N.MPWJW.CgWMW. FM7cyvy/F."F.'Wys:y :Pcri:P.:v%A'.s%'P4PQVF2Ps:Fm:PJPNPi:P.P, f AG Jq 4' '. -s , ' 4. r m. 4 - ,.m i y l s-- ,,a r n ^,=e-. - s -a 4 e , s m.t \\ l,.,.(* i < - e ' #'-v' c :. 1^ cb 4 ..s., "1-n NE,OhG#. 4 l ' ti Fe P1.#.9 ( C (J . ~, - i+.~ cs, k'% B y - J i ~ ~ ' L." _. + ~%.r jg 1 m., ,+ y./, ,t s qA m, p ,,s c.. . 3.. u g O g3 j 4 4 a l .{,-.- a " gs "g g v.r M ' + -, M... .Ly .gx. y s .y. e... w. r! a
- .e.
=uu., s-l +w_' {-S -M '). .O' .a d y g. g .4.f* f,. M l. J- # 4 '. r.1 $ g, ,;7 f gA '. sr - a a '*t J' -f,
- L ', e d
- =.
..~ * - - }.b3 7Q -.. n,i. : . 5:~ l * .c,.,. .m. :I ll . :W. J^ - w "d :Z WL~ - - ~ ~- ~ \\ ' Y v. 1,; ',,,.".s.,7,.,f - ~ + -. w lA.a,,. ".') T
- .w
,,.o. '. i. ~r, g - g - m + l e' ' ),t .n .a.- w; pp. _a l g - ,m,,.a,'.\\ ,, j ,i "Y V p s .v--..,4 %i W ~.,s 3 ~ ^, - a , - -g .t; a a A u> e.: s ..,:~-.,w,=* l te
- c. s
.+~;% -.!*., c'. * .{ f. a,.a _p 4 - ' ; >., i,' n L * '_ ,.L p !)_*; } x :dy'..$ i. w 3c
- c
-L+,' -m:?;.my. ..m,~ . + ... -a ,.k.g}_a .c..x, ; _ r x. ..,os.. e + ,.y1 -. - *4. e 4 $ W^t. bY. 3 4 a 1 - , g p.,,, T O '.* ? + -. ? ?. t',.y( ,.'[ - .,; y., y. L -p,M, 7-m.., i m j.
- m.,, y
. h * '.-. ~ _.g Q f'f.:.;. m. .. 6 s .,,.s g-4
- s r wm er.:e
, r. ;s' %, c_. 1 hy. ,s..e.w.,.,,~-.. m.6 '~ * * - , ~-.,.,,.,_.,_.,.,. -,, ,e e ,2, sz 4e ,g; = ",yw* r '".t,. e m, e'- [. p~,,y -,,.., u ~; g -... - '.w.+ - y seR .s y m. o ? n.a.4. -
- e,___..,m,n.
v. ~ ny ,4 y,, n qf_ p c. &,g.-s s-v n, s.ep,_ ;. s k ,_a w W m ,a'"* &*'""".'A.
- A e.g '.
2 4-g' gy ~..,... & g.f.. f y g.-. ~ n r.v. ,.g c a y.w. f P ' y - ,,w. w . r
- ,.-~
- .- v-',
. w* ' ' sso :- - ~. 3 y '_N;[- - ' '7
- s
~-,,,ma* <s. ,e... 4i... 4 e ..J.,., y :, d,.z,_, _'). n,. J s ( s., . m.. .'J t-' n ~
- s..g#q
+ . j. - g. g ,-<_3..>,,e .. &,,e .w 1_,.;. nz.3.. s-y *.e ~ g' p g..M..,4 ;y - ,.3.1, .m %e,_w.,,7v..,,, g, 6m.6. 4 .+( - '- '4N w,,o =A E + w. ,'N ,-,,,..n sr, ., y-_ s ...-sy y_ xQ., 4 .s eg a, 3 g-
- g 2+ z,m;. y n ; _,,
- _,3.,,,
f u x; e ? ;. e ,, q;,, ='t' i
- %. *~,3._,., ?
'a. n _ w a.;.
- _ w f%.
1_ %..e%,. g. ". - L gm e qa;.>
- >s_
_;. ;.~ ; ,Au'm-v ugx 1, g . ;u $y/,g\\
- d.7.%.f.j'r *
's. q Y,,a.J. :, lp@3 + ,3. c, s~ m"
- D M # ;< a,,c. '
u" Q.N,7,;, [, ".. y-_ ',,_,.! J.,' ; ~ . *," A T J . rt S.y n 3, <,.*
- 1
.. i'Y..M W. :. * " ' q:: ~a 4
- ,;y,
$a':n.,g~. a% : {" ' k $iP[ ."DY .y.-p x,n -.... 'm -, r +,, v y
- n -
, ; ; ~- - m.,. -J,. -.,, w _..& y,
- (_
y B sJ: .n / : j 2 x_ o.e. " ny, M"m e =ds...em2" m, w* e _,,y"*n,w'w'} n' y yn ~ ~ s-x se 'I __',-_.M- [,,, (, ( V'*-r- .De', -e;=n' ^ h wm...w4'. +. m- .t r. ,, m...s 7* W. g- ..w..- c m + u
- f*'d.o..., a +- A, s 4
+ m ~-*w , y r i 3 _.
- , _: [ d.:, m..' Q $. y/,g
- _t'([ -- T m.c a - g + j K,. - L. . J ^#f.A.f.>.. il '. -6 8. ]* ' ',** } Q 1g 9%. :g p,.},8 5[ ..".h 1,. *Z* '.. ",-2,- % +f*j,,... ,y b ...,._) ( i yr,,.t m..=, F(~e"g-r[ D-W'g n,. n' '. .w. h,*'. n'.,',.'I',N.,,.,;g y,. g. ~u - kn, - - %' b,u. _N b '.. -h , y, u: n.p. = - -- A. Wed, 45 '. ".***#"5N**&** ','.,t,.g Q . p s I ".h. t. m f, r* -. [ ,5, [_ e v w y' ',1',. 4. mr q' * *e.w y,.'p;f g4. , ;,. '.e"e, ~y > y
- N '
- eg. ;. ';,,, y w,.4 A
.r+ ,_e,.n r 4, s - c t y s pp .-g %. a( , w%q g,.,; -g .c m,+. s, y.w., ~. -w, we W 6 a < n
- m. p a 2 f,
L.- q.:l'? Q::*'?"ey ; n L { ' m. ' G * -' t.+M e i._M pf.a f q. g'. q f* s v -9: : wm-wn.. :,..p.w , J s M.sh.-. + y *..y v..* 3,.4u v. _.. e.g.me m, ..ais. _. qm 7:s ;.y? w,,d.a., j q,,. - - . mm q ,c y,,._\\,y /. r g % k.p >_a nn. p, s ew.4., x._a.. m n,_:r. 7 m_ a.? +.w.s u, mem... : o a w i m. .u. p6 u m-V *. %.9q t e$ x w g.4 -n n3. w r & 44 ^ -r.,- m ;.. c. -- c ,4 s. ' p.W'%
- wu m y
_.j.-.. '-4. xi . n.[p
- 09..
Wc W.p 1.m. m. p '.. ;,.
- W, e
- .p ~.%. A c.gr
- g.,. 4 'R' 4..n' ge..;_ &. ',
'i? ? y,s#. #. ~. f W m.. e.m.'.W1.M.'. ' P;=P'.m.vy .y ' TW's* s 4 M fe.-g* *, %y .We4.,m. g
- kj y
a *33 S. l %y' s * % M 4 e e# 4 A - M_ #4, { A* . w.- m n% g*.a. -J ~~s&, < * * ;. ( b. ' c. 3..,c,.},.x wD, l4*%e w.gv 3' +.-W u, - r m. - r. a. , ~...- mO s.1 s.. . e ! e v s r%% : +s, %i4 n r ., q' :.:_&:.l_{ W 6 s$ *- jl. l.h, *m$.0 R ' A " v ' N [ Q ^ " 4 M 7.:-A g-Jy - g? ', < ~ ^ e.cy.v; - 52., '.. p J.. <.+ n 4 e~- y w W a p.-~ ~1 p gs ';.Q M Q. Y - .y ;., 4'_d,'k ww. 2 ,,,,,4.,- ' tw i f_ E i1 eY-n _ c?,.,, A D I. i N. 4,n %.' f'.'.' '.. 1 )- g. /,., 1 .+m ., =. Q, . e ' < <~c -. g.e. s ,..~s-v. 2,.,tw.m. sy. ,..n .m 4,,,<f.. g m , S.w/ sd-LL %
- f. [Q (. 2..'
m 7l ,.,-,.c -m-. ",., h r w. m..',%, w a.;.w M. 4 .,7v.., ..e t +- . m.a a..
- yy
, ~,. w ,c,, /.~ : -- um-1, ~r 4 b. c.a -. " O y ^ **.F > 7"
- 4J.
..- m e Q Z' *y g(i
- T.'7 '* *i.i.' Q.
4 ,s...s - %,",' ^_.q 3 %@ [4+;a;j %b'.:#m,' V, %g?,.a p y ',.gg/. w..f gy. - - > udg%g t_; p. -13.. t ^ p ['- u,,, v76 -W d, : - 2 _,.,ug -3 i 1 4m ( ,,w e, n .. ;f,.e+. ~. .. -_n :, : r . n a.,...,. .n m.. - e - w n .y E -. w9
- .xwxm n nm us ~wy;m.pt;&wwog&p a.QQ.-\\;AM >.w+as.y%
o ..m s w.w
- , w 7 y w m. w.; L qq
- s,*,.p n,.z u.,
.u n ~, u,,34 m ;e..,,,4 ',
- {'*"'gy f,
- w.. 4:,
c 1' ws n y y s_ , m + +.w , & r: ; y. 3., - y _; -g ? . l !. < * "", ds.e r' r' -* ~ Y ,_y_,
- fd*'
n._--. f yr,w J r- -1 ,y y
- k p,;---
x, a -6 f k h./4'-9 AP'e"' pc - S E^-Y.\\ f. E ~ .f 49.,,,"* ,;fi ,'gga.a t' _*,j,,., E# -4., -s*,,7++-" vwe.r.4. M. - @,. 4, g.i.. 4..w<. w-9 :g.'.C,r, { =*w".q %.am 1 %=.es6 .~#e 2-4 J.,.e#,- . S e ,, Ar% y. m ,,s, -w b,. s M '.'.,'Q.e t% .L + j ,s.M.vglvfer.w.# %.u..v-7 .: f. O,. 9 'A, m,g,.. ,.i. w.w'y ~ p: ** ~^ :, m.e ._.i.s.,.W.wa, g t .. Pf **W ?**,- G;ggg K_; ;,% ^ybap" _ ~ m c . %.A W W' 7'*WW ,y. %g,. w.es -1
- ~
g i,r?me-W"***4 ask a ,Q w'?-.L_
- . 9 %. 6 y ;.
A -g d,-d %;,~+% ~ - +- p% y N ** a ,hw, . 6
- <v, s en
%+u'*.,^- % s
- m. s a r. ;
-.. ~L '.,M, p. f.M..".k. h.,.m.,, %;%. 4..-- M., e m..e m..h t ..'e,?- 2 M a ?i ? ? %.- Nd. vM, W 4 s.,..J, D i,, 4 - ~ m- ~ n y4 -%v%z. ,+.n., ~.. w w..... A..-
- . w,,
, a s. e, f x.~ ~ a,, 3.#41.,!,. e, % w' q m v..,,.~. g ,A e ~ * .A, 4gw ~ A*
- s
,tm> ) _ q 3, ~,,.,., 6, N '_,,, d ',", % ;{.1,._'-j, h % %'-j i m%'.'.PC.L,T% id.", -g;, h'['p, p"a 4? D b $M".,4*eg*.g 4 W. ,h $ D C ['7'5 4.h p -k [ =.Ig%4..- ' Iy Q Q '? f * @ # =$ og[;;fr '!k.? y& :m.;y;n.' ~s,p m y ~ ~ +.+a:; g y m w L3 g,;m,s.. z a, ; y.,.% K l 'y *.,Y,3 ~,. ..' ' %* A m ".. ~ ,a %w:9 - 9 M w w, -a
- t.,a y y a o - 3 we
-,;< a q.,.,w,lW ..g n T_ , +n- -,- : s, h, . + -. -. ~. u% .. db-s.es e.j$.f.. g.Q S..*, *,%. ;,ffs,. u.;L'.rW O.-_',,"., _:3,.,?- -,~ W
- s -N
%w., $4. \\
- n.. - s
.s_ w e h *; % m,pLn g y %6d.9 % C.CF M My E ^ _ , ?..V. W"%! 5'~n j -> ~ g ~" - c* .:lL, m. n
- s y n.C. *.g &: %_*,..
m-- . g
- me,sq L....
+" y q. 4-. m s g .. - ~ .L-a S Y ((,E 4 v a ?.* W .' ilQ k.')4 O- ' ^ A f.,.:."' 'as;.W." ' v r-x:v~ 1 ,E ~;, - s .g - - v + y p p.4 m g -- y W*mongy f[m'ff { Y " _ g,, Q @ +- M#1 ~ ypg pf s .cs ~.~ h w-n. -w w a ...,..m. r. e E J ' T.ws,> ww?. anW 4 w N.,M. i e; E # 1, %y -rs .x s,,wnsup
- w N,,7 " 7 C C ?e,,_d, T,. I. 3,
U T
- t. m,.; M. f, E j
~ w; Wm i. c y,, ~a~a-- ~ _ 2 - W :e + - - y c; .,, m.. _., y~- 5 n r nn +. w.. - .m u wo g -- + m - n! Asb ,a m mmv, Q v.n ' a @~ _ ya .p w,}-Qucm win,. 9 4 A _Y' y a,ig + ah h, a c .-i m:{*- 2 .. 3 g= ', p. 3 g +,a., a 1 7.
- t r p A
,,,m,,. n~w w e ~ ~~~ g.~m cwuc.m.,,mnw.. mass @umu ~ m, m 'L.. zw. 6,i. w ww &. ker:. 2 *.,, t - ~e ~o-3 w m, ~ j ,M s,W.,v '& t
- ~ &n. $p,
%s ~% M'* T WWWE%*?***&, $j., -+_W -+:gjg4,,jggggy !#:; VsXe ;% Q ' .<.M. w. y... -Tl 'f k , t - A4d. V? 'y Qr - ,,t O W> ~- 8 e v n't ;;. ? 1" ~-@- *A,s.agsm' ' a,-),. wg L, .. n. e b4* ~ - - - . ~ s"v" 'w e r" ^ c - b $+- i +;1 A, ;.- - yn
- s~
>4 .~n.*ne-xt~r:p"*Q
- C - = 4 L "29T*WT%
V'*-
- n L L
~h,.a...m, v-.ma eg w< yppu-amavw.ikm> L u ~~ ~y ; t a n. . A l'hg g 4
- a. ' 9 4.N,J'a. -He*5y,g? m.4 n
y 4 - e %.-a.n, 7 g% ' e e 4 .@.qua- - ? g -- s c,., y fg% .n. + m g. w 3.J er,,,... nc 4 7-3 w m. w,~ .>.G M,,a.,. y. ,w m - hm w ,,, w, r a o -^.; s et. ,._2, w, -4. ': m$ c.. . 91.t.y. , %_,y ~- - -.-wom-Te -v s,_y m ., ~. ~ ~., 4-9m m.w ~.n. m .~a.nh%,s,yj$,4 Le -hww ~d * > 'w'* 1, ,e' %.. n _,.. ~ x
- a m.
y,n. 4 ma m m L...m.ye,j t.* m n.- h~= 4.m.m . e., ,au -g hA
- w., m rc:. m t %
m2 -w 4xgr ,eM p jg a 7 y -l, 1 gn a , w; c,p; ow e=es.T s %um*' v,em** **N.'T**'"* > Fj%.,,.,g.y :,,- x% P,,7 '.t i . ~, -1.. ~ f ss o. y .. - e :. b... g ty
- n, fy' a ut NM Y.,&.l$'th$ *h..
v. m,s.h - .n e 7 m 9-s s.. d,m e o m A u-i Q:* .Q%M..:;YL. b5. 05&. b. &.,fu?,. g ' ,Nm m. i u .'t.f8% ' NGEW #55Yf'"# ..~ G ~" ^l % hKT! O ?% - '? " -~ t v-s $j:Y.?W',? (#$Y ~ T ~[? SV. ~' UO.5d, '~ T,'%CU T+ W-a m.- - ~ l,l 5't.;hM. ZW;"aD.W~ WW),5g~,5 &&,CGnn?f? ~.-~ fk.$ .50,.,, ~,r< %.t V. ~ l. 9,s v .. 1 a w ,;nk Qa,.. m,.:w-*, ~Q g*+ 7 m.f*% ?*#MT _.a.a.a m,, w;y-.n m',:^** y' v, A, ^ ' .,.,.n_... ;~Q 1 -. J- , 7.. g w e,., ~ a
- g v,; -
+ me ~v w-m.u w ~ n-e..,.e , y[. ww 4 n.,3..& y(w; p.3 }; n _.) ~ r d 2 _l " -'\\- y'myR '[f e y - '" g ..*g43. 7 _ g} w -, fj f,, y 1 a; L-o j
- ^'.*;.Q q Q
-. c. q ; - a, - e.. g} . db . h, +- ~.. _ ' w _ j^f .s >,,.,; } ; .p . a. ; q y .. ~ _ _ -s j,w.. ..... '.,.[h gr - -%Mr W xy myg.s; g.y.m.;w;gg g w % ; n.qfmg<w.
- m. ', w y W C..
n %$,.,_
- 5m
'l O ~.
- }y.m., ;,,', q4pa s
.w.y ,.~h- - a_0 Qin.. ~ Ji. <m e N > WP V:{j A % * - ~ My.iv ' W ms,- - a. f f(M,?w: A,, w,,er -. - ~,w~m..y z. :.
- x... M. n a
m w - - - s, ~;~ g. n ;, _, - i - =.n v .~ ): W s (; c %. s. m.. = n n wg, p.,a ....:+,=. w: cm:1.- r . p' *,L '. > g. "~s
- 3. -.... s s,., A.
a g...- w ~. n.r a y a s n n).,. r ,q 9,,.v wt '. n.a n, y c% .m g#..s.f".,y_..- ..r- ,,>.a,;' . - x.,n,.q) ' < f.91e ,., p o p ~ a,,.ae 9 j <. g,, r...,. v s y s.n,(,, e ;,.. ;y ,*M-- + - \\ wwf %
- A 1..,
~,# .,,,, ; g q 4, .y ,.4mn Me n ZW,.e,,%,.,2 fi, e c,. m.,7.x G <, V we A. q qw.s' wsg q w >m, ' g.. o,. . p.; ~ m. ; * <93 a:q ~. m. ,,,. u ;. 3, p-n,e~.g g, 4 .d~ e4 p,n r - a,.
- . w
[y. c ,y ..e w p'T.m.y 3 e / cM%u*i.',i.,,i.l*!.QP yc Wl$'f-( M *y '< g*1 %..?u*C,.- Q.,D,. ;d2N 2[,. ':%e. p q[ #% ' @ - x .-a L "MN< v g hddN2i%dMbJ%k;N.%k.wy?id; we seg . n - +wm 3u w M3G h y,M 6%m%p;g$ A:%.c' W 3.4h ~w $ m; % Ms4 " " " g p .a ~ . e ; z. w r m. a'L R: 6 4
The most comprehensive quality improvement program in the history of our company is under wav. Over the years, all of us at Florida Power & Light have been proud that our people and service are the best anywhere. We've ahvays held high standards for quality. But in these times of national economic crisis, we must become even more demanding of ourselves. When the Quality Improvement Program is fully operational, we - and that includes every one of you - will be saving millions of dollars for our -p ^7 []' O company and our customers. With your full participation, even more than that will happen. You'll see new ways of doing your jobs, ,p g and doing them right the nrst time, every time. Old-fashioned team spirit will grow in your departments b A4 g-and divisions. l ( The reason you'll see these things is that this Quality improvement Program is your program, yours j ,(.- e}, ' l to develop, revise and operate as you see fit. Something you can be proud of. ~ Top management is totally committed to this / quest for the best and the highest that is in us. And from your resporwe so far, I'm pleased to see that all ,il ~' of you are rising to the challenge. [? f / l A il ,l At 4'f)J V Niarshall NicDonald ) ii Chairman and Chief Executive Officer 6 4 I Chairman, Quality Council
-h Introduction There are many different ways to implement a What's in it for me? quality improvement procram. In determining which Everythine' For example: Do vou Ji<like doing program would work best, the type of operation, the same job twice? Da veu dislike fixing someone organi:ation, product, and other factors must be else's m6take>? Are vou intere<ted in finJine wav< of considered. We have reviewed many Programs and increa<ine job satisfaction? If you answered ves to put together here the guidelines which delineate the any of these, then thi< Procram may Provide the steps necessary for success at FPL. Each step includes means to achieve vour goals. The major objective of its objective and certain recommendations for the Quality Improvement Procram is to identify our reaching it. There is a wide variety of functions most sienificant problems and prevent their within FPL and there will be many approaches to recurrence. Teams creani:ed on different levels have implementation. For this reason, maximum local the tiexibility to choole their own ProHems and autonomy is encouraged regarding the specific attack the root causes. These quality improvement application of the<e guidelines in vour area. A cuidelines provide a <ystematic approach and <ome training program is al<o available which provides techniques to help teams cet statted. details relating to the material covered in this The program's team approach will open booklet. communication channels among rarticipating What is Quality? group <. This often has a beneficial etYect before the At FPL, qualits means conformance m tulid first problem is even attacked. The ultimate goal is to improve the quality of requirements. That is, if we conform to vali9. work and thereby reduce costs. Thi< will affect j clear-cut and simple to understand. There is no low, evervone throuch < elf esteem, job satisfaction, and, h requirements we have quality. This dermition is n the long run, the cost of electricity to our medium or high quality. customers. However, this defmition places upon us the responsibility to establish requirements where we hiember< of the Quality Auurance tatiare have none, to review their validity where they d adbHe to advise you in the development of vour exist, and in all cases to make sure that the needs or-procram. But remember, quality is vour respon<ibility the user are clearly understood and incorporated and only you can Jo that job. into the requirements. [Qg What is a Quality Improvement ( Program and why is it necessary? C4-It is a systematic approach to improve the quality of work, improve productivity, and reduce costs. It identifies ways of working smarter, not harder. This J. E. Vesselv type cf program has had great success in other Director, Nudear Affair < companies, so certainly, we can succeed also. Quality Secretary, Quality Council improvement will reduce costs when the job is done better thefirst time. Quality improvement is brought about through determined effort by all of us at FPL, by sharing ideas and working together for our mutual benefit. 8 I l
.e STEP s MonogementCommitment Objective: Obtain support and active participation of management at all levels in FPL's Quality Improvement Program. This first step is probably the most important in establishing and maintaining a truly effective quality improvement program. Top management at FPL already is firmly committed to quality improvement. But without management support at all levels. it is unlikely the program will be taken seriously throughout the FPL corporate structure. Management should accept the fact that even within the best-run organi:ations there are opportunities for quality improvement. With management support and adJitional training, instruction and materials, errors can be slashed, reliability improved and productivity increased. Studies show that only 20oo of errors are totally within the control of workers. So the bulk requires management attention. For management to fully recognize the need for quality improvement, preliminary economic analysis may be required. Examples are covered in STEP 4 of this lxxaklet. Ale, reviewing the successes of programs operating in other companies may be helpful. Once committed, management must demonstrate that quality is their top priority. This includes support by their active participation in problem solving, prevention and quality improvement. In addition, management commitment should be demonstrated by careful analysis of the departmental product, its use, and by development of clear objectives for the Quality Improvement Program. These objectives should be communicated clearly to all concerned as concrete goals of the program.
I STEP g' QualityimprovementTeams Objective: To guide the implementation of the Quality Improvement Program within an organizational unit. i i l The senior level team in a department's or Cross Functional Team < serve in a similar division's organi:ation is called the Lead Quality manner; however, team members repre<ent different 1 Improvement Team. A Lead Team should be work groups or departments. These members brine organized in every division or similar level group broader points of view to the team effort, because of which intends to implement a Quality Improvement their varied work skills. Program based on this procram descrirtion. Task Team < are usually formed to solve 'recific The Lead Team should review the eicht steps in problems. Upon comrletion of their Project thev this booklet and decide how their own department either are disbanded or left intact to pur<ue other or division will tit them into their program. problems as a rermanent team. Task Teams may be j Generally, Lead Teams are chaired by the Functional or Cro<s Functional in their l department head and are composed of department membership's background, JerenJine on the task for managers who represent each of the functions within which they were assembled. the organi:ational group. All teams <houlJ meet regularly and < elect a They should attend the training seminars and Team Leader anJ Secretarv. Expenence shows it is read extensively to become familiar with the subject beneficial for the manager or supervisor to be the a of quality improvement. Team Leader due to his traditional decision makine W If desired, Quality Assurance Department staff authority. The Secretarv, for Lead Teams oniv, may members are available to help in developing plan <, also be the organi:ation's Program Facilitator. ] and to assist in providine listings of additional The Facilitator will be the orcani:ation's in-house reading materials and seminars. expert on quality improvement techniques and the The formation of a Lead Team is essential in FPL Quality Imrrovement Procram. order to best handle the majority of problems which Facilitators need exten<ive trainine. Their major lie within the control of management. h is also this functions incluJe training and a-isting the Lead team that plans the organi:ation of the program, its Team in Procram orcani: anon. Facilitators also link scheduling and its implementation. other teams, functional area <, anJ levels of The Lead Team addresses the problems ofits management. own members, and deals with problems Facilitators determine when terresentatives of recommended to it by lower level teams. other work function < need to be called in on a The Lead Team may form these lower level problem. Thev also Jetermine when a problem teams at their discretion when organi:ation or should be presented to a higher team for resolution. geographical considerations require it. Facilitators serve as advisors and do not become Lead Teams in different areas of the company involved in inve<tientine team problems or have utili:ed three primary types of subordinate measuring the results of team solutions. teams, depending on the functions they perform or types of problems they wish to address. They are called Local / Functional Teams, Cross Functional Teams and Task Teams. They usually are composed 9 or volunteer members. 1 The Localor FunctionalTeam's responsibility is to i identify and solve problems in their individual work k3 cations with the assistance of others when needed 4 1
{ STEP Monogement Orientation & Training Objective: Develop and maintain management understanding of the Quality Improvement Program philosophy and techniques. To participate effectively in a quality improvement program, manacement must understand the concepts and methods invoked. To accomrlish this, they should become familiar with the management aspects of a quality procram throuch trainine course attendance or extensive j +tk o reading. ,/,. -) T',\\ ' h I The Facilitator and each Team LeaJer should 'y D.\\ ( Q {'-)' #,jP O 1,[ g. j p abo attend a comprehensive trainine course. The FPL Facilitator course material has been packaged jr. ) specifically to prepare the Facilitator to serve a3 a '. h 4 ?. .--k .4', resource for the Lead Team. He or she will ako M teach the took and techniques the team needs to (s %p assemble and execute a successful quality procram. l .;t AS I, p,f'8i The training program components include: ' ' {" i,L k ..\\lethods for determining and analv:ing root [ -cv. causes of problems, M a s j e croup Jynamics considerations, ~Q 4.4 e techniques for analy:ing information for team / 7 decision-making, and . others. Until the Facilitator is trained, the Lead Team should conduct their own orientation. .,.l4 6 d During this orientation, philosophy should be discus-ed first. It is the basis for the entire program. f( The Lead Team should discuss each point presented in Appendix A until a consensus is reached on their meaning and validitv. 9 l s a Ak[g,j*l((h(, Questionine and skepticism are encouraged since discussion usually brings forth new concepts and / f l creative thinkine. [: ~ > ') l Only if the Philosophy of the program is J understood by all and is incorporated into the t group's shared value system will management be able to lead an effective, successful program. j r j Following the initial dixussions, participants are stronelv encouraged to read the materials listed in ,J Appendix D. They have been written by authorities in quality improvement, and will give participants a i ( broader appreciation for the subject. 1
STEP e Economic Analysis Objective: Identify and select the most significant opportunities for improvement, justify them,and i measure quality improvement effectiveness. I The " Cost of Quality" is the cost of actual necessary to start a Program moving. These estimates failures plus the costs associated with avoiding them. are intended simply to identify the most expensive To Perform an accurate economic analysis it is problems. I necessary to determine what the Cost of Quality is Next, a sequence of priorities is established for in your department. attackine the problems. Particularly in the ear!v The classic indicators of the Cost of Quality are: phases of implementation, an improvement i INTERNAL FAILL!RES: Costs associated with opportunity may be selected based on <ignificant cost nonconformance to requirements, but prior to the savings, ease ofimplementation, or quick pavback. delivery of a product to the customer. IncluJed are Performing this analysis i< a "must" requirement scrap, rework, downtime, re-engineering, lost time, for each Quality Improvement Team, regardless of its and others. level. And, at this early stage, the economic analveis EXTERNAL FAILL'RES: Costs associated with need not be a formal one. nonconfermance to requirements, but after the A word of caution. The results of this survey product has been delivered to the customer. Included may be sensitive and should be treated as suth. t are field service, lost revenue, decreased good will, Some inJividuals involved may incorrectiv consider g customer complaints, and others. survev results as a negative renection on their PREVENTION: Costs amiated with reventing Personal performance. In reality, however, P defects, including design review, tool control, management ability is demonstrated in a pmitite preventive maintenance, and others. manner bv exposine problems <o they can be -elved. l APPRAISAL: Costs ofinsrectione, tests, and The <olution may po<t substantial Jollar savings other activities to assure conformance to for the company, thu provine the value of requirements, including receiving inspection, status uncovering these expen<ive problem <. The3e efforts checks, work order checking, and others. uill be recoeni:eJ. a< exrlained in STEP $ - Appendix B contains a more complete listing of Recoenition. Cost of Quality indicators. Recoenition will u<ually follew enlv protcn For the department just beginning an solutions. Preliminarv nnJinus of savince should be improvement program, the failure costs should be tested anJ conormed over a perioJ of time before considered first. Later, with more experience in widespread announcement of <uccess is made. conducting this analysis, the prevention and It is recommended that economic analvcis be appraisal components can be included in the process performed at periodic, 'recific interval <, such as for a better perspective of the cost benefit ratio. annually or <emiannually, to help iJentifv new / Most departments or other organi:ational units opportunities for quality imrrovement. j perform many functions, and each can be examined After findine problems and deciding in which for failure costs. This inform:aion may be readily order thev are to be ohed, the next <tep is to And available in dollars from budeets or management their not cause<. estems already in place. At the outset a high degree of accuraev is not needed and " ball park" figures are all that are 0 I
{ STEP Identify Root Causes 4: Objective: l Gather data needed to identify root causes. l The Cost of Quality analvsis is too ceneral to be able to tell the team the actual root cause of the problem. g To find the root causes, the team must know a product's requirement 3. Teams may then monitor a .r ~ ' i Product's or service's operations to find the deviations r l from requirements that are creating Problems. Once deviations are identified, the frequency of 2 r *_ i deviation is tracked. This record establishes a baseline measurement stanJard for future d.' ' b evaluated. This reinforces the Cost of Quality t -, - G- ',' comparison so results of corrective actions can be t analysis completed in STEP 4.
- i, r Examples of problems resulting from a Product's jf" '-
h ( nonconformance to requirements include, but are g f" ]i,d . ',(( not limited to: 7 b M,. \\ds o htisread meters, i d . accidents and injurv, = k eg,e 4 . customer complaints, s \\ . rework, and g service interruption <. h ? T I If the team finds that a Product conforms to its requirements vet 3till fails or involves excessive costs, t the requirements may not be valid. The glossarv in ) Appendix C contains the definition of valid requirements. After the team elects a Problem for quality improvement, the types of Jefects that contribute to the problem should be cateuori:ed. Then, the 8 frequenev with which thev occur should be
- T
~~ measured and their as<ociated costs estimated. s This trackine shows clearly how much each tyre F of defect contributes to the total cost of the Problem. This way the most expensive defects can be identitled. This Process may have to be repeated several times to identify all contributing Jefects. Next, identify the root causes of expensive defects and formulate solutions for each. Remember that ( preventine Jefects is the coal. Thu<, corrective action 4 must eliminate ames and not just symrtoms.
STEP Corrective Action Objective: Select solutions, implement them, and track their effectiveness. When root cau3es have been iJentified, an Once the <olution is fullt under wrv, track the effective, permanent and achievable solution mu t be re ult < for effectivenes-Do this bv takine selected to solve the problem. Performance mea <urements anJ comparinu them Some considerations about which solution with the baseline measurement, established in steri. succe3tions the team adopts mieht include: If the corrective action does not proJuce the
- Co-worker recertivity - Jo others like it?
expected results, review and pouibly cercat STEPi.
- Cost benefits - how much will it save?
In some problem area <, the team will not have
- Probability of success - will it work?
the rond control necessary to elect anJ execute
- Capability to implement - how hard will it be solution to problems. When thi occur 3. the team toJo?
shoulJ brine in tho<e with direct re<ponsibilitt m Once the team has identified the rmt causeN that area. In some cases as-istance from a hiuher level and selected a <olution, it is time to implement team may be required. corrective action. Implement this on a trial basis at first to see how t, ,a effective the solution really is under actual work y conditions. h 4 c (g Then, upon arrropriate approval, pr xced to j,,j S. r . y implement the vlution wherever neeJed. g. t d
- < 9,.,
f, 'a.$ f .1 s,1 s. ,A NY, M M. t i$N,f .--/ I. i e, / %,'J 5 e,;: .tei s l l,4 _A s f,I - ti [, I 6~ e. l I 7/ a 4 \\ '/ \\ If Y = d ;, y g {\\ .t i ,n i h t; ..k. V. at'
- L i
)ft4 \\ x-F ,-.c i \\.l ~ dx i I } h (4 p e s
c =r7 Awareness Objective: Create and maintain a high level of employee interest in quality. Or.ce all details are finali:ed and management is firmly committed to launching a Quality Improvement Program, the program should be formally introduced to employees in the department or other organi:ational unit. This can be done with a "kickmff' presentation. This opportunity should be used to explain the program in detail, discussing ways emplovees can participate, and be recogni:ed. The importance of quality to the department and to FPL can be reinforced by a member of management outlining their support and enthusiasm. These efforts will heighten employee awareness and support of the program. To maintain a high level of employee support, { program goals and achievements should be communicated to them on a regular basis. Examples of communication methods might include articles in employee publications, and notices on employee bulletin boards. Routinelv sharing results on quality indicators helps maintain emphasis on program goals. These messages should also stress that without everyday attention to quality, FPL's chances to improve quality at every level will be diminished. An added benefit of involved, enthusiastic employees will be that everyone will be motivated to improve the y,lity of our products and services. This broadens the innovative and creative employee thinking needed to locate problems and find solutions. As the FPL Quality improvement Program progresses into the future, attention to awareness will assure that employees will become more and more quality conscious.
STEP fiscognition ~ Objective: Recognize those who make outstanding contributions to quality improvement. Individuals or teams who exhibit exemplary efforts on quality improvement projects should be recogni:ed for their contributions. This way, outstanding contributors are rewarded and FPL demonstrates that quality improvement efforts are encouraged. Recognition is a very important part of the f c'~$ s program, and should be taken very seriously. The 'O' Lead Team should ensure that appropriate 47 recognition is given for team achievement "i i ~ ' ' . f 7' hj[/s Studies show that the most effective forms of recognition increase esteem among peers and co- / A Y workers and are oflasting value. / Money generally was found to be of least value as an award, and will not be used in this program. I)y ). '. Examples of awards include: 0*
- Certificate, plaque, or trophy presented by a 4 I' I
- [
re ' N/7 manager - especially in front of co-workers, / ' Of h
- photograph and article published in " Sunshine
!j'fi > Service News," L. jp p' I. h
- luncheon or dinner with managers.
s. The Facilitator and the Lead Team should j jA ~'pNe, a W administer the recognition program in their 4J ,/ department or organi:ational unit. /, t -) ; ji , ') # if the team's achievements are of significant impact. ,k..3 \\
- f g J M,D)
Wider, corporate recognition of teams may result [- \\ i s_ \\, j,1 t'n n 9 e f../y n ..t . !L k/ 1 944 .,,, ~. x <..q ~ l t o 4 i r l l
j C Appendix A Appendix B The Florida Power & Light Quality improvement The following items fit the categories of Prevention, Program's basic philosophy is: Appraisal, Internal and External Failures: I
- 1. The definition of quality is conformance to PREVENTION valid requirements.
- 1. Specification Reviews This means that though vastly different in
- 2. Training price, Timex and Rolex watches are both
- 3. Nianuals & Procedures quality products provided they are built
- 4. Vendor Review & Approval according to their requirements.
- 5. Interviewing job Applicants
)
- 6. Cost Benefit Analysis
.. Quality is equally as important as cost or
- 7. Improvement Projects schedule.
A job done improperly always costs more when APPRAISAL it has to be fixed, reworked, or replaced. Repair
- 1. Job Checking (by Supervisor) costs will exceed the cost of doing it right the
- 2. Audits / Evaluations first time. Furthermore, the combined time of
- 3. Personnel Arpraisal installation and repair will exceed the time
- 4. Tests / Pilot Programs necessary to have done the job correctly the
- 5. Inspection Programs l
first time.
- 6. Vendor Surveys
- 7. Attendance Tracking
- 3. Prevention is much less expensive than dealing
- 8. Trend Charting l
(/' with symptoms. A problem will recur ifits l cause is not identified and eliminated. INTERNAL FAILURES
- 1. Redesigns
- 4. Eighty percent (80%) of problems are under
- 2. Corrective Actions management control.
- 3. Tracking of System Failures Employees can only do a quality job if given the
- 4. Purchase Order Rewrites proper training, materials, instruction and tools.
- 5. Turnover Rates
- 5. A small number of problems accounts for most
- 6. Expense of Controllable Absences 3f the trouble.
- 7. Invalid /Obmlete Procedures The most effective use of our efforts is to EXTERNAL FAILL'RES identify the significant problems and eliminate
- 1. Travel & Time on Problems their causes.
- 2. Billing Errors
- 3. Excessive Ntaintenance
- 6. Direct feedback to employees on work performance
- 4. Service Liabilities will reinforce good quality work and inform the employees of areas forimprovement.
- 3. Equipment Failures (Premature)
- 6. Customer Changes This willbe most effective when handled discreetly
- 7. Products do not meet user requirements
- 7. The only acceptable level of quality is conformance to valid requirements.
Everyone's goal should always be to "do it right the first time." Nianagement should accept nothing less.
- 8. People actually doing the work very aften can see and suggest improvements not visible to
( management. Their suggestions and participation should be encouraged, then considered seriously.
7 I M l Appendix C Glossary for FPL's Quality Improvement Program Cross Functional Team: Includes members of User: A product's immediate destination, whethu different functional backgrounds who meet to discuss for intermediate processing or end consumption, and obstacles common to their functional areas. either inside or outside the company. For example, a Lead Team: The highest level team in a major user could be a data entry group that might receive organi:ational unit, such as a division or department. nd enter mformation sent from the producing The Lead Team sets the scope and framework for department. The end user may be the department the Quality improvement Program in which that obtains and relies upon the output report subordinate Functional and Cross Functional Teams mf rmation. operate. Valid Requirements: Procedures, specifica: ions, Functional Team: Represents a single work plans, or processes that yield quality products when function. Usually, members are people who work c nf rmed to. Valid requirements always include together, as in a Service Center, Power Plant, or the necessary correct technical components as well as group in a district office or G.O. department. Typical careful consideration of the us:r's needs. If a product l team si:e is five to seven members, never to exceed fails frequently, yet is found to conform to its t ten. In large departments, several teams may be requirements, then its requirements should be necessary. reviewed to ensure they are indeed tulid. l Product: Any output (product or service) that l results from the execution of recular job responsibilities, such as a typed letter, an assembled Appendix D premolded splice, maintenance of a valve, design of a service work order, or the preparation of standardi:ed report. Nonconforming products nearly Sources of Related Information always incur preventable costs.
- 1. Crosby, Philip B.
Quality Council: The company's Lead Team, Quality Is Free. composed of senior managers who set corporate New Jersey: The New American Library,1079 objectives for the Quality Improvement Program. .. Dewar, Donald L. Task Team: Formed usually to solve a specific Quality Circles - Answers to problem. Upon completion of their project they 100 Frequently Asked Questions. either are disbanded or left intact to pursue other California: Quality Circle Institute,1979. problems.
- 3. Juran, J. hl.
Team Leader: Usually the senior person to whom Upper hianagement and Quality. team members normally reoort. For example, team 3rd Ed. New T,ork: J. J. Juran,1982. members from a Service Center would report to the
- 4. Sterett, W. K. and Ferrel, J. C.
Service Center Supervisor who might also be the " Quality - A Utility's Team Leader. The Team Leader may also serve as a Way to Improved Productivity." member of a higher level team. h!iami: Florida Power & Light Co.,1932. I
I s -A 11 ii ! I II ! $[h 2 , u, "' s a
- f.
l-1 e= ! :.s l l i !! u_: 1 T i ? s si I, .si i 18 i E s I: 1 1 =I f I i
- l 3
j:i ,e 3 Ig s g I I r Oe b \\ I j 11g-j gri [.: s 8 l 9. s I:I I 's i r l: 1 I f 1. i! f. j! i -i I ' lI. In 1: a 8 .f ( ; r .g 8 g
- f I-4; i
1 4 1., e-k lf: i. l 8 f ,= .av !!,!e ,f u 4 2 s .-3 g: I I r m I! 4 E I gi } E 'I M 3
- j 1
c-t g 1 I E I. $. ;1 ~ I g I ..re [ r : - I t j t 1l:3 t s ~
- 0 j
[ 5 I 2 : I l I i g 1* g
- 1
.y_ a -t gg E t t Si J 6 I di y 1 e i 1 g =g r 5
- t l
f 3-3 Ei i t l:i Ej I i 5 1 I t t t W t e i
- t t
I g ?! l. I 'I t y 'I E 1 I. p
- t:
"1 ,s. .I p .t1. ..a gj q = V I.
- r 39 5!
f a
- I S!*
3 i. i ? t i 1* I 2 O. g
- i 3
.4 1L ) i 1 )
t O s ll ..a,. 2 1.: : s ? I)- i a .g 8 i: j'::: !: i.. -ZF t 4' E g i \\ l !!j 1 i r ,i I s gI : 1:: 1 = 1 - j 1 88 il lj
- )
1 [! f f a si.
- l l li: l si
!i I: I i: .II.I .I-I
- I ti.
- i.i
[i. !i' ? i .t lI l EIi (
1 9 !e: L:. r. i 1. s w.. a i 1 8: w 8 i r i; ; 5 qz
- I
/
- :L.
{d 8 En 5 i 8 -I .= g w I. i [I 5 i 6 E! m I
- I.
2 f.i.8 1 .1 a l i., .i: y-a e I I .I I 11 1 3
- s i
s J e e. I
- 1 I
d ? g h .3;; w
- II.
p!I = .g. 'l e t. 2 1
- t w
I.n. I. =.i j., 4 I t e
l a ' ~ 3.y. g 90 C
- ,r..
i 1 i 5 2 ! i i I ~1
- 2 1
?'. e 2
- it 3 :
V 31; it- . = y E o
- i.,::
~ .l g. I'
- 8v.,
s' l I k 5 f II f I f. ( 3_t :: F.- =. i in -g uj
- ..l I. i
] i.
- i-o; 1.
in::, gg ! 3 4 >= n a. g:
- i vi ';
i;,' pl g j-l-i i= 8 l i i 4 I 1 l l l 8 F e ..r j.i
- r,ig. l I! if t!!-
21 i-1 t I i I
- '.I, !!
.i
- 1..!
8 i. si t!- J I;!! i - 2:. 3. I, {'. g E I b l 1 4
i O w 11 i M :g i1. ; !! !j E. i 5.! l. I i Ej .1 Iij t ~ 3 1 5.. s: I t. i;" je f*=~ -. 8-I h I h i 1 si l3 -i
- ;s ii !
-- 5 !! g. Ej - 1 I .E . 3 = e 1 ft-g .;I V I fj1 = ,i 5* lt l !i si I' II ije '. I! I I d j4 i!. i j!. k .I ~ %s 6
T t w fIf .w l1
- n
.j p :I f*n t t g; 1: ,g. .e ( -.a
- La j,.
gi : = j i i+ ;* i. e .,e,, a 9g 1:.3 .i l e- - 3 := it. 8 ~ i
- : I C
I I I I I t i i i tl
- i i
i I. ,0 Et i '. i l-l
- g ;
r lt
- .. I
. I.I 18 ;
- s !!
'[ j ', i' 2: s i .in.! s i lE.1 <!!i ri. as ,j. 4 s E 3
- (1-3I
- ' =,
l3
- g s '.s
..i. ll g 3' g l 18 I s} t '* I i. s ili i as l*:g ". '.hk si-zy s I v. s is ; '?. f s. (( '~ r N e v I I !. l Istl' si l' !ll' a, l i- 'L .s )
- I 4
6 "k S. $k \\ i \\ s i I I* I i. i: : i 1 i! 1:.I
- i.,
1*3 in 1- . ;l I
- r l,' *
- s
- s. :
.s
- 8 l-i r,
ii a as 1 8 l l l l s i I I s I '. I
a . a + O M O Q. W - CE: LaJ Z HM ZJ ta & ED sn O MW LA M
- C l
l i I ) l l k-
PROPOSED TABLE OF CONTENTS I.
SUMMARY
A. Introduction 1 B.
Background
C. Summary of Findings 3 II. ROOT CAUSES OF THE LICENSEE'S SUCCESS WITH QUALITY IN CONSTRUCTION 8 III. REMEDIAL ACTIONS TAKEN TO' CORRECT QUALITY PROBLEMS 26 IV. GENERAL IMPLICATIONS 29 V. IMPLICATIONS OF THIS CASE STUDY FOR NRC QA INITIATIVES 32 A. Measures for Near-Term Operating Licensees (NTOL) 33 i B. Industry Initiatives 34 C. NRC Construction Inspection Program D. Designated Representatives 36 E. Management Initiatives F. Certification of QA/QC Programs 37 G. Management Audits VI. IMPLICATIONS OF THIS CASE STUDY FOR THE FORD AMEN 0 MENT ALTERNATIVES 38 A. More Prescriptive Architectural and Engineering Criteria B. Conditioning the Construction Permit (CP) in the Applicant's Demonstration of His Ability to Manage an Effective Quality Assurance Program 39 C. Audits, Inspections, or Evaluations by Associations of Professionals Having Expertise in Appropriate Areas - Management Audits D. Improvement of NRC's QA Program 40 E. Conditioning the CP on the Applicant's Commitments to Submit to Third-Party Audits of His QA Program 41 Appendix A - Evaluation of Generic Key Indicators for Case B Study i Appendix B - Definition of Levels of Quality Failure Causes 9
U a l l W HO ew ZH mm E WO Em o W EU b-e L}}