ML20134A619
Text
e V
s f
.f TCRREY PINES TEOHNOLOGY
/
z e
Ro. Box 85608
/
y san Diego, Cahfomia 92138
/
Te.ephone: (619.) 455-2654 c
A Deon of GA Technologies Inc.
2485.700 TFT:006:FSO:83 July 20, 1983 I@. James M. Taylor, Director Division of Quality Assurance, Safeguards, and Inspection Programs
^rfice of Inspection and En'orcement U. S. I?uclear Eegulatory Comission
'lashir6-ten, D. C.
20555
Subject:
Independent Constructicn Review cf Varble Hill I!GS Units 1 and 2 Mar !@. Aylor:
Per Id. Paul Keshishian's request, transmitted herewith is a copy of bi-weekly status repcrt #3 on the subject independent construction review, covering the
' period July 1 - 15, 1983 Ccpies of bi-weekly status repcrts #1 and #2 were prcvided to ?6. George Gower by Public Service Indiana while he was at Marble Hill site July 6 - 13, 1983 If you have any questions regarding the contents of the report, please call me at 812-289-3000, Ext.1475 (Farble Hill Site) or 619 455-2528 (TFT, San Diego).
Sincerely,
/
F. S. Cple hoject F2 nager FSO:mch Enc 1csure cc:
(w/o Enclosure)
J. U. Bott (PSI)
S. '.l. Shields (PSI)
G. L. Wecsman 8508150362 050703 FOIA-N49 GH
--293 PDR L, 2.%
5
2485.700 TFI:005:FSO:E3 July 18,1983 Mr. S. W. Shields Senior Vice President, Nuclear Division 1:arble Hill IMelear Station Pcblic Service Indiana-P. O. Box 190 1;ew Washington, Indiara 47162
Dear Mr. Shields:
'Ihe enclosed bi-weekly status report #3 on our Independent Construction Review of Parble Hill Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 and 2 covers the period July 1 to July 15, 1983.
If you have'any questiens regarding the contents of the report, please call re.
Sincerely, J.-S.rOple "-
Project Manager Enclosure.
bec:
E. Bak R. Dahlberg M. Dunlap L. Johnson S. Koutz G. Wessran 9
'17 S K C - PIB'SICT2. IIEECI' ION - hWJJXIN
'Ihe identification of rechanical and structural features within the selected safety systers and structures to be subjected to the three levels of verificaticn has been completed (Subtask Cl).
Tne projected total nurber of rechanical and structural walkdown decurentation packages is 115.
Preparation of walkdcwn packages is approxi-rately 80 percent complete; actual walkdcwn of packages is approxirately 65 percent co=plete.
Walkdown of rechanical features is essentially complete except for a section of the FER System which is te:qorarily inaccessible due to painting in the area and portions of the Component Cooling System in Unit 2.
Walkdcwn of structural concrete features is cc=plete except for Unit 2 containment; still to be ccTpleted are walkdcwn of structural steel and cable tray supports (Subtask C3).
T7SK D - 'JESI'IIU Subrask D1 - ACME Pipina Weld Insoection Review of applicable procedures for inspection of welds prepared by Cherne and I'IT Grinnell was completed.
D:amiration of radiographs from 54 welds,
consisting of 30 field wolds and 24 shop welds, was completed. A total of 442 pieces of film was reviewed.
Fourteen welds were visually exarined and cc. pared with the original inspection recorda.
Actual radiography of 4 welds perforced by Cherne KDE personnel was witnessed. A surrary report was issued.
Suhtask D1 is complete.
'IVo Potential Finding Reports resulted from this review of ASME welds.
Subtask D2 - Concrete Insrection Results of compressive strength tests using the rebound ha.rcer at 50
~
locaticns in 5 selected concrete structures were evaluated and cc= pared with ccncrete st.ength records for the applicable concrete pours.
A su ary report was issued.
2.
S6 task D2 is corplete.
No Potential Finding Report was issued.
T75K E - COtNCICI' ION DCKI2IENT REVIIW Egbtask El - AS'E Picino Material Certification Review Piping and weld filler material vendor's certified test data reports were identified and obtained for the selected pipe spools.
Review of these reports is in progress.
Subtask El is 35 percent complete.
Subtask E2 - Concrete Test and Inspectica Review Review of testing and inspection records cbtained frem the sa:ae portions of concrete structures selected for examination in Subtask D2 has been completed.
Subtask E2 is essentially co.iplete except for the Su=ary Report which is.
in draft form.
Subtask E3 - Welder Oualification Records Welder gr.lificatica records of 11 welders ( 8 frca Cherne and 3 fram ITI Grinnell) were cbtained and reviewed for compliance with the ASME Code and applicable Marble Hill specification requirements.
Tne welder's names were identified frem the group that performed the selected welds for which their radiographs were examined in Subtask Dl. A su: mary report was issued.
Subtask E3 is complete.
One Potential Finding Report resulted frcm this revicv.
3.
Phrask E4 - Safety-Peleted Eculpm=nt Paintenance and Stcrase i
Farble Hill procedures for naintenance of installed equipaent and for storage of equipment on site were revised.
Checklists have been prepared for use in checking inglerc.entation of the requirenents of the procedure.
Subtask E4 is 50 percent complete.
T75 F - PCTIETfIAL FINDEG M9EG Tne procedure for processing of potential findings was issued.
Copies of the procedure were transmitted to PSI (Subtask F3).
As of July 15, three Potential Finding Reports were filed and transmitted to PSI for review for accuracy (see attached Potential Finding Report Status Table).
TnSK G - AND7ISIRATICU ISD PIPORIS Tne overall effort is essentially on schedule per the Program Plan.
It is nw projected that all Parble Hill site-related effort will be cc pleted by July 29, 1983.
Pertinent nanpower applied to the proje'ct is shown in Figure 1.
4.
v i s <,on-t MAtill00R STATUS AS OF:
PROJECT:
INDEPENDENT RE IEW 0F MARBLE IIILL 1 AtlD 2.
7/15/83 9
d
g y
7 l
wS
>o 6
UO
/
'm 5
9sj
/
=
4
- c 3
/
/
2
/
s' BUDGET 1
/
ACTUAL --------
p
..e 3
10 17 24 1
8 15 22 29 S
12 19 26 2
9 16 PERIOD ENDIrlG J utlE A
JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER
\\
f
[_
A.
PL ANNED (!!!c;.)
116 506 1296 2296 3320 4440 5540 6540 7260 7460 7660 7840 8050 8210 11290 B.
ACTUAL (111e:, )
206 578 H10
' 'H' '
TI :':'
11:'B'/
i C.
V AR I AflC E(lilCI. )
< 90)
C/:') (l@
lI 193 15i D
e
__w
", f 3
STIM!S O? N? PIAL PDCE73 ILN (PE)
_AS_O? iTULY 15. 1983 PFR Issue C - ts imber Subject Date 2485:001 PJIR Sys.-Weld Film Exposure 7/13/83 Transmitted to PSI on 7/15/23 2465:002 ATd Sys-Weld Locaticn rerker 7/13/83 Tranritted to PSI on 7/15/83 2485:003 ITJ Sys-Welder Qualificatica 7/13/83 Tranmitted to PSI on 7/15/83 e
e J
e-
~
TORR 2Y PINES TECittf0 LOGY j f f.,',
g----
Po. Bar E5CO3 Al L'?
San D go, ca*.fornia 9213"
- -J Tete;:none: (619) 455 2E54 A Dics.on of GA Technologies Inc.
l 2485.700 TPr:002:FSO:83 July 5,1983 Mr. S. W. Shields Senior Vice President, Nuclear Division Marble Hill Nuclear Station Public Service Indiana P. O. Box 190 Ncv Washington, Indiana 47162
Dear Mr. Shields:
The enclosed bi-weekly status report #2 on our Independent Construction Review of Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 and 2 covers the period June 18 to July 1,1983.
If you have arrf questions regarding the contents of the report, please call me.
Sincerely, D
F. S. Ople Project Panager Enclosure, bec:
E. Bak M. Dunlap L. Johnson S. Koutz G. b'ess:1an Fo# A -N-193 L- / 15'7
6*
8 INDEPEEDD7f CDNSTRUCION REVISi OF MAFDLE HILL IUCLEAR GENERATDU STATION DNITS 1 AND 2 (Project 2485)
BI-WEELY STA'IUS REPORT #2 PERIOD ENDIPU JULY 1,1983 INIRCIUCION Starting with this report, proj ect status will be reported at the task level.
TASK A -
LVALUATION OF QA DIGNIIZATION AND PRUGEPRTf PCLICIES TCHARD QA The reviea procedure is in draft form; release is projected by July 8.
The revies team will be at Parble Hill site July 12-22, 1983.
TASK B - CDNSTRUCION DESIGN 00t7fRCL Se re/iew procedure and checklists were completed.
PSI's Farble Hill procedures for control and issuance of approved design cbcuments, design changes, and field changes have been obtained and are being evaluated.
TASK C - IEEICM, INSPECION - WALKDCHN We mechanical and structural features to be walked down within the selected safety systens and structures have been identified for Level 1 (system verification) and Level 2 (installation verification).
Identification of fea-tures for Level 3,(detailed itcm verification) walkdown will be cxxnpleted by July 6,1983.
Procedures for walkcbwn of mechanical and structural features were ccrupleted.
Five Level I walkcbwn documentation packages have been cxxapleted and actual walkdown of these packages is in progress.
1.
1
TASK D - TESTDG Subtask D1 - ASME Piping Weld Inspection The review procedure and checklist have been cmpleted.
Applicable proce-dures for inspection of field welds have been obtained frm Cherne and are being reviewed.
Procedures for inspection of shop welds have been requested frce ITr Grinell.
Selection of welds frm piping segments within the safety systes selected for walkdown in Task C is in progress.
Radiographs of a minimm of 50 welds will be reviewed.
Subtask D2 - Concrete InsDection The procedure for performing the concrete testing and inspection was completed.
Visual inspction and rebound ha:mer tests were cmpleted on representative areas of concrete structures selected for walkdown in Task C.
Results are being evaluated in conjunction with the examination of applicable concrete strength records for the same representative areas.
TASK E - CDNSTRUCPION DOCDPIENT REVIDf Subtask El - ASME PiDino Material Certification Review The review procedure and checklist were completed.
Pipe spools for whic_ h._.
material certificates will be reviewed have been selected frm piping segments to be walked down in Task C.
Subtask E2 - Concrete Test and InsDection Review The review procedure was ampleted.
Concrete testing and inspection records frm the same portions of structures selected in Subtask D2 have been identified and are being reviewed for compliance with applicable codes and spcifications.
2.
1
Subtask E3 - Welder Oualification Records The review procedure and checklist were completed.
Welder's names are being identified from the group that performed the welding of welds selected for review in Subtask Dl.
Subtask FA - Safetv-Related muirraent Maintenance and Storace The review procedure was completed, ne start of actual review of equip-ment in storage has been re-scheduled from June 24 to July 11.
Bis re-scheduling will not affect the overall completion of the project.
TASK F - POIE2TfIAL FEDIIG PROCESSDG The procedure for processing of potential findings is in draf t form.
Criteria for classifying and assessing impact of potential findings utilized in previous TPI independent reviews will be applied to this project.
No potential finding report numbers have been issued to date.
TASK G - ADMINISTRATION AND REIORTS The overall effort is about one week behind the sctiedule shown in the Program Plan.
Recovery is anticipated in the next four to five weeks with the full revicw team now fully operational at the Marble Bill site.
Pertinent manpower applied to the project is shown in Figure 1.
3.
1
FID2re 1 MANHOUR STATUS AS OF:
7/1/83 PROJECT:
INDEPENDENT REVIEW 0F MARBLE HILL 1 AND 2.
9 8
y p.
^7
/
v,
$S 6
7 T
/
gg 5
88
/
N 4
/
/
3
/
/
2 A
/
BUDGET 1
, s' ACTUAL --------
j 3
10
'!17 24 1
8 15 22 29 5
12 19 26 2
9 16 PERIOD ENDING JU iE DULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER c
A.
PLANNED (Ims.)
116 506 1296 2296 3320 4440 5540 6540 7260 7460 7660 7840 8050 8210 8?o0 B.
ACTUAL (1933 )
206 578 1310 2285
,C.
(90)
(75) (1Q 11 A
t
~
m --
TORiiEY PirJES TECHMOLOGY
.S.ji ':,'
Ro. Box utes
.4 4 '
San D.c;:c. Catfynia 9 21345
'-*~~ l Teleph:,ne: (G'.'; 455 2551 A D.. Son of GA Technologies Inc.
2465.700 TPZ:001:FSO:83 June 20,1983 Mr. S. W. Shields Senior Vice President, Nuclear Division Marble Hill Nuclear Station Public Service Indiana P. O. Box 190 Ncw Washington, Indiana 47162
Dear Mr. Shields:
The enclosed bi-weekly status report il cn our Independent Construction Review of Ibrble Hill Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 and 2 covers the period ending June 17, 1983.
If you have any questions regarding the contents of the report, please call me.
Sincerely, n
~
o
/
P. S. Ople Project Manager
- ~. _ _
?.
Enclosure.
bec:
E. Bak M. Dunlap L. Johnson G. Wess:n1n poi A-SV-143 L,, tGS 3
i a
R3DEFINDINf TESTMICEIOli PRIHF C? PMELE i'.ILL WQr/R GEE ~mTEI; STATIOt1 UNITS 1 ISD 2 (Prcject 2485)
BI,WELY STICUS REPORT el PTRICD FNDEG JUNE 17, 1983 RTTR37)CTIOti This is the first cf a series of bi-weekly status reports on TPT's Independent Construction Reviw of Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 and 2.
The progran was of ficially started on June 3,1983.
%e program scope and schedule are presented in detail in a Program Plan (GA-C17143),
copies of which were transnirted to Public Service Indiana (PSI) and NRC on June 10,1983. The progran consists of seven tasks as follows:
Task A - QA Organization cad Managenent Policies Tward Quality Assurance Task B - Construction Design Control Task C - Physical Inspection -- Walkdown Task D - Testing Task E - Construction Doct:meh;. Review Task F - Potential Finding Processing Task G - Adninistration and Reports Kick-off (orientation) meetings were held with PSI personnel on June 9-10, 1983 at the Marble Hill site.
Topics covered included PSI's docunent control systen, Marble Hill proj ec-L, QA, and engineering organizations, contractor relationships, and status of completion of safety systens and structures.
1.
+
QUILITY I6SURNiCE PROGR/R DOGM.WP Docment No.
QAPD-2485, Quality Assurance Program Doctruent for the Independent Construction Review c,f Marble Hill !GS Units 1 and 2, was cunpleted and approved by TPf.
Tne doctrent will be transitted to PSI for sign--off.
All work performed under thic project will be carried out in accordance with the OA prograu defined in this OAoD.
PROCEEDRES AND GECILISTS (Tasks Tr-F)
'IVelve procedures, required for the performance of Tasks.A to F, are in various states of completion. Nine procedures are in the approval cycle.
WALKDGiN FEA'IURE SELECPION (Task C)
Four major safety systes and four structures have been identified as the primary systms and structures fran which specific features have been tenta-tively selected for the mechanical and structural walkdown.
%e 'four safety syst e s are:
(1)
Reactor Coolant Systen
- (2)
Ccraponent Cooling Systen (3)
Residual Heat Removal Systen (4)
Auxiliary Feedsater Systen ne four major structures are:
(1)
Reactor Containment and Internal Structures (2)
Auxiliary Building (3)
Fuel Handling Building -
(4)
Ultimate Heat Sink The walkdown features will be finalized during the week of June 20, 1983.
2.
F31DDES RE!Il2 OT2irITEC (Task F)
The Findings Review Cmmittee has been formed and is composed of:
S. L.
Toutz (01 airman), F. D. Carpenter, P. O. Hall, A. M. Harris, T. E. Northup, and R. G. Wunderlich.
CDST IND SGEIELE The overall effort is about three days behind the schedule shown in the Program Plan.
The Progrm Plan Sdiedule is based on a start date of June 1, 1983.
The first project cost information will be included in the next bi-weekly status report.
e t
0 e e.gueg.
en e
B 3.
]
8
)ss V4.
- Gres Page 1 of 4 Notes from NRC's Proposed Opinion, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order In Form of Partial Initial Decision Dated October 4, 1982 Violation a
Issued when fabricated, constructed, testing or operation of Safety Category 1 system was such that the function or integrity
^
of that system was lost".
N6ne issued to HL&P prior to 79-19.
Infraction '
Safety-related Category 1 system impaired.
30 infractions issued prior to 79-19.
Deficiency -
Possible, though remote, threat.
11 deficiencies issued prior to 79-19.
6 years of design and construction before. 79-19 -- 78 NRC site and. corp. inspections or investigations.
~
Corrective etion by HL&P in timely manner - action found acceptable by NRC.
Inability of HL&P to effect a programmatic and permanent solution resulted in 79-19 investigation.
Similar problems continued to resurface.
Procedural and programmatic inadequacies in HL&P and B&R organizations had resulted in a failure to systematically identify QC problems and to routinely correct.and prevent recurrence of problems.
It was concluded that lack of detailed involvement by HL&P in total scope of con-struction activities was an apparent major reason behind programmatic inadequacies.
HL&P aware of allegations of harassment and inordinate amount of friction between B&R QC inspectors and construction personnel for more than a year before 79-19.
HL&P unable to effectuate a solution to this tension.
Oct. 1979 - Jan. 1980 HL&P in continuous noncompliance with 10 CFR 50 Appendix B:
Pressure from construction for QC inspectors to rush through or overlook their inspection function QA/QC site supervisors continuous siding with const. during disputes between const. & QC inspectors.
General lack of support for QC Inspectors from their site supervisors.
Physical threats from const. personnel against QC inspectors.
Concluded QA/QC function in Civil was not sufficiently independent from con-struction, QA/QC personnel did not have sufficient authority and QA/QC personnel did not have sufficient freedom to resolve problems.
HL&P aware of problems in 77 & 78 and formally called to their attention in August, 1978.
For A 2u L/259
a e
Page 2 of 4 HL&P failed to implement effective resolution to problem as late as Spring of 1980.
Problems were permitted to continue due to inexperienced management and an un-usually long chain of command from the site to upper management, thereby mask,
ing critical information.
~
HL&P initiated corrective action relative to concrete placement procedures had not prevented rec ~urrence of poor concrete practices which at times resulted in
~'
voids in structural concrete.
~
~
v 79-19 also revealed backfill placement procedures were not uniform and backfill may not hav'e been sufficiently compacted to meet required densities.
Serious problems in safety related welding controls, welder qualifications and NDE performance & interpretation.
Audits Necessary checks to provide feedback to management concerning effectiveness of QA program were improperly implemented and at times not performed.
- 1-No effective program had bee'n implemented to perform continuous and effective trend analysis of HL&P and B&R generated noncompliance reports.
~
Overall lack of aggressive and effective QA/QC Program -- failure of both HL&P and B&R to effectively implement.
NRC issued show cause order - 10 actions NRC levied $100,000 fine against HL&P Investigative team did not find a total breakdown in STP QA/AC Program.
In many instances the program was working very well and exceeded minimum requirements of NRC.
HL&P had good attitude.
Problems not result of irresponsible corporate management, but HL&P's and B&R's inexperience in nuclear design and const.
HL&P failed in assuring contractors carried out duties per requirements.
Primary cause was inexperience of all levels of HL&P and B&R management and an attenuated chain of command from site to upper management.
Jordan not sensitive to how complex a nuclear project could be until 79-19.
Nothing in Jordan's conversations with Oprea prior to 79-19 indicated QA/QC was experiencing the significant problems identified in 79-19.
Upper management failed to receive type of information needed to make informal decisions.
Resulted from long chain of command between relatively inexperienced individuals with HL&P.
There were too many layers of supervision between site supervisor and upper management.
'a e
- }
Page 3 of 4 Audit reports were not issued beyond the level of org. audited.
HL&P failed to perform audits and trend analysis.
HL&P' performed oversight function and provided programmatic direction to B&R on the implementation of the STP QA Program requirements.
Prior to 79-19, HL&P did not have clearly defined idea of what was involvad in providing programmatic direction.
Early 78 HL&P hired MAC to determine progress ~ of STP. "Later Gibbs & Hill to evaluate B&R.
Not result of lack of HL&P confidence in B&R - desire to assure work was pro-gressing per HL&P's understanding.
B&R site management - unusually high turnover in key site positions.
STP General Manager - 6 in position from Jan. 77 to testimony (79-19) - Ave, change every 8 months.
B&R Site" Manager in position f rom Jan. 77 - Ave. change o'f every 7 months.
Cause of turnover - revised cost and scheduling plans necessitated removal of certain managers and other managers received more lucrative offers elsewhere.
HL&P imposed stop work order on placement of safety related concrete in June, 1979.
l December 21, 1979, Turner & Oprea met with Seyfrit - Dir. of NRC, Region IV to discuss preliminary findings of 79-19.
In December, 1979, again imposed stop work order as above.
79-19 -- resulted in HL&P Nine Point Program.
Revamping and upgrading B&R salary admin. program for QA/QC, More open communication Jordan initially suspicious of whether all the findings in 79-19 had in fact transpired but was convinced after HL&P's investigation and Bechtels.
Within one week after December 21 meeting, HL&P again met with Region IV -
Nine Point Program.
January 24, 1980, investigative team held. exit meeting with HL&P.
HL&P did not wait for Staff enforcement action to correct problems.
Exit meeting -- 13 Point Program -- Letter dated Feb. 7, 1980.
August, 1978 -- NRC had meeting with HL&P discussing problems.
After 79-19, HL&P acquired 12 MAC people to fill position.
/~ :
Page 4 of 4 Geiger joined HL&P in June, 1981, as Project QA Manager reporting to Oprea -
was previously QA Supervisor and Project QA Manager for Bechtel at San Onofre.
July, 1982 - Geiger became Corporate QA Manager Exp. - 18 years QA/QC, 9 years Nuclear Al Walker became Project QA Manager
~'
HL&P screened experience and quality of B&R persons hired for key positions.
Down to site supervisor level.
~ ' -
.a r
B&R hired Vurpillat as Site QA Manager.
Exp. - 16 Comm. plants + 7 which did not go past CP stage HL&P - Hired Briskin - Manager Houston Operation Direct Project Management Team - Eng, Procurement, proj. control, project administration, 20 years experience, including 10 nuclear.
- =.
1 So-tG T S HH 4/8/83 TENTATIVE ROOT CAUSES 1.
The licensee was not in control of the project.
Either the licensee did not have a commitment to quality or the understanding to implement a quality program, or both.
2.
There was inadequate staffing of the licensee and its contractors to ensure quality, with respect to experience, numbers, and know-how.
3.
The licensee and its contractors had inadequate procedures for controlling the quality of construction.
Further, what procedures there were had not been promulgated throughout the organization.
4.
The licensee did not know what was transpiring at the site with respect to quality of construction.
5.
There was inadequate training of QA/QC staff and the construction workforce (and its management / supervision) in quality assurance matters.
6.
There was inadequate involvement and backup of QA/QC staff in the construction process. There was inadequate follow-up of instructions and procedures.
7.
There was a failure on the part of licensee management to take corrective actions when identified.
I; O Fot A-19493 L %D
O O
O Sou l'il TEXAS PitOJEC f -
~
COfJSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT ORGAHlZATION MAhA68ROf (Ch51 RUCl!0h p AG M CI
- UAI8II A55utt AsitC OtfulVMANAGth MAstAELR Of Cou1Inucitou 1
I 1
I 1 Pm3Jt CI FRO Jt CI 3Drt RVl50H &tlt FuadCI5thVnt5 FNOM CI fit t o C051Aku CokSIRUCllom CQu1RACI ODAtt1T 5 bra mV150s t hGingt R SCHtoutsNG MANA&ts ADMist5tu AIO R ASSUHAhCE Surt avi10 A ASSUN AhCE I
Auptl5 OUA Lll V SURV4at1ANCE f it t 0 5AftIV
,33,,,,gg i
FMOCukiMthi SurimVt50m satt a visOn g,g, g,p i
OUAttIV IN AlbikG C0h5t EUCIt0N SUPE R%3504 '
C 0458 RUCl40 N CON 58 Hut t:0N
~
r MANAGIN*
Eggma g g u a
VAHO & 5 As unti 8 u,,, g 3HOF I
"U (Staael AR 50 Uhlt 13 th0C seks A un Surt R vii04 SurtttvascM ANDill/Sullviltt ANCE l
l SICHitt Suttt it RS Asat Afspot usek Amt Attutt0sh6 ARE Aleutt elhG
,,',j,",8,,
,,'f,737,"83
,7,7y,'3,,'
j Surt ove5ea surt avalen Suria vi10 a g
j g
CONIR ACI Cggi gagggg g H1 ADMinillR AIGNS 3CHiputtal g,yg Mt CH Ah3 cal thpCli AR l
FiFiesG
~ ~ ~ 46Nt3 05 C00RolhAllom l
tit Cl asC A t th51a uMt hl Alenis agy 3 l
l FIGURE 11 PAGE S
(
9 s
The folicwino is a acdtfication to Appendix "A* of :ne tcpical which describes Secntel's position on Regulatory Guice and ANSI stancares:
0 Reg. Guide 1,58 Rev. 0, 3/73 Plus positions C.5, C.5, C.7, C.3 ANSI Na5.2.5, 1973 anc C.10 of Rev.1 Rec. Guide 1.144 Rev. 1, 9/80 AN I N45.2.12, 1977 Full Ccmpliance - No Exceptions Reg. Guide 1.146 Rev. O, S/80 ANSI N45.2.23, 1978
, Full Ccmpliance - No Exceptions O
G 6-
~~
O O
O EXECirflVE VICE-PitliSIDEtTF, e
illlCI. EAR GitollP VICli-PitliSIDEffr PRO.IECT FIANAGliR NilCl.!!All QA FlANAGER QUAI.
ASSURANG t!
'l 11 : It FIANAGlilt Pito.ll!Cr QllAI.1TY SYSTliFIS/
OPliRATIONS Solrill TliXAS QA GENERAL.
Al411NISTRAT10N Pit 0. LECT SilPl!RVISolt SUPERVISOR QA F!ANAGER SilPlittVISING QllAl.lTY CottrR01 DESIGN OFFICli/
llollSTON 3
litlGINiilin, PILOClliti!>lEllr I.lClillSillG SilPliltVISolt QA SilPliitVISUR QA FlANAGliR FIAtlAGlitt Pit 0 JECT FIANAGElt, I!NGilllitiRiflG SITE FIANAGliR SilPPORT SERVICES I
Figure ?
111.6P 9tiMivg mei,eq liPC/liliSTIiJGilollsE (CotflitACTultS )
\\
\\
EXEClif!VE 11PC/nliiSTit4Gil0llS!!
s V1CE-I'l!ES I DEtiT, (C0ffritACT0llS) 1411C1 EAlt Gl(OllP
\\
!!AllAGEllEllT Jt
\\
A
\\
\\
\\
VICE-l'IlliSIllEllT lil!CI.EAll EtJGittliEltitJG b
NA QUAI.ITY ASFUltAf1CE l'ROJI!CT
(-
Allis CollS1Itlk!!1011 l!ANAGEll
\\
l!AtJACEMiitJT MAllAGEl-!!:f4T Jw N
a
^
A
\\
\\
Solr I 'I XAS IItc. LECT QA l'It0 LECT SilPEltVISOIt(S) a n
\\
\\
1
\\
N
..s 1.1111 S 01: Colfillfl1 CAT 10ll
. lit.4P anal 11PC/111iSTlilGilullSli (C0ffi'itACIO!!S) 1:ICllitE 2 4
m.
9 0
~
l 4
i Ebasco Servic:s incorporct:d OPERATIONS AND ADVANCED TECllHOLOGY ORGANIZATION Sil0 WING QUALITY PROGRAM COMMilTEE REPRESENTATION
~
Pfl154t>LN I
&ILCullWE VICE FAISIStal (RitullVI ADVANCES VICE PR1520f tl IECM4060EV &
Ort uATIONS 371CIAL FROMCIS h4 l
& G1 i
JE T5 EssG6htthDhG AND CONa[R 180N th aa& N t
- yg Se4 WICE FMEEaDtNI 8EI #" I
'I Puts DENT WM.4PRL&4Dthi WBCE fut&6DENI V40E PMt5D&tNI
$4AltNIALS WKt PhileDahl WK4Pnt1sDENt
- IA"I G NvemosPHt ML CON 5ut TING ENG6NE EklNQ &
ADVAhCED D
Ai, ODNS EllWCi tO88 ENGlAst&M4NG injAt tif FMUCuni tAk N I 14 CaeseQt DG T t
COmaPAkT LNGehilh1NG A31uhAhti 1
i a 1
t
_i_
_i _
_i_
i 1
mf UP UP EJP w
UP W
OP ur ur
$j COname lot.the L(some
( 0 8484 Lonese COM comme Losana 44mese i-mir Mar Sie alp REP REP Air ALP mar R4 99 99
i Elesco 6..vic:s inc:rpore.ted MATERIALS ENGINEERING & QUALITY ASSURANCE ORGANIZATION EXECUIIVE l
VlCE PREE10ENT l
ME R ATIONS l
I VICE PME14DINI WAI(RIA11 INGlEllRlhG &
i OUAtlTV AS$URAkCE l
CONbOLI4NG Out F Casstr GUALIIY OtaEFVtkDOR mal &8dat8 A&&uRANCE QUAtlTV A$$UAANLE QUAtlIV A&&URANCE E htetht t a ENGIN11R REFMi&tNI AllVE
$NG4N1E R MANAGER PMOJECT Oua18TV QU At eIV eAAItRIAL&
A31UttANCE FROGRAas
&LFS RVi&Oh6 SNGeht E MENw ENGabs t hiNG
$4It LADURAIDRV EuPERVi& ORE RAAMAGER$
FNOJLCI QU At SIV ESIL WEhlM)R
&&AItHI AL &
A&6UHANCE QUAL BIV QUAL IIV (kGaha t h$
tNG4kiEMS AhD PROGNAas A&&UH AACt SIAtF SIAfF RE Fatt &d NIAltVEE 44ANAG(R QUAtlIV ma s p4hG A&&uMANCE S4lt t eeG4hE E R6 LNG 48e(ERANG QUAL SIY 6FECIAtlbl6 A114setAMt A55'tI Ahl CautF OtsAtIIV A&buRANL'E OtlAtlIV A&&tHt ANCS StatnVthons
&N4 INitM ANG 8h&tRVaCE 8k&FEClaON EIAff$
s Edst
$C buP& RV8MJM&
83
IO O CO 00 m
EBASCO SERVICES INCORPORATED QUALITY ASSURANCE ENGINEERING CallE F QUALIIY A$S13 HANCE.
E NGINE E R I
~
r---------
7 I
I l
1
&lJFt HVISINti g
l th44 Nit HS e
Ass 35f ANI Cittif AUD8IING y
nag l
EUPE RV110R l
818dM
- "U E CI OUALIIY 5 IE ASSUH ANCE MANAGER $
ASE A Cil l
l l
l l
l 1
I i
l l
NON VENDOR DESIRUCityt EV ALUAIION
=
1 E k AM8NAllO98 PROGAAM g
i I
l l
5418 OUAtlTV FHO JE CI g
'A
'I#
OtsAt eT V l
GUAllIV A 5$11R ANCE CONih0L elf CCHUS A154 &M AN(1 l
GN 5t HVICg SNILHNAL B
A15tJitANCE gg gg I'#I"VIION E NG434L E R I
, 4NSPECTION AutHIING l
EUFL HVISOAS
$UttRVi& OMS
~
u PHOGHAM a
l I
I I
I I
fiEGtn AIOleV OUAtlTV l
ht tJulAIME N TS rfthGHAM g
l AtastNi&IRAllON ADatiNISIMATION l
i i
i 1
I g 7 0
OU^IIIT
'"IIII Ht COno usa 30lf LW1HAllON At CA t IV A51'"IANCI t NusNi t H11 A$11 sit AN(L l
"# 8 A' 8 I T f,a g ag g
gt t ORDS ASEUH ANCE l
E NGsNi t!IS/
I
'"II II (N64 Nit a$
SYSIEMS HirHt11 NI Af tVE S F1PR15ENT AIIVt 8 g
h4Pht $tNI ATIVES e
Os l
I 1 && L tuCC1 L EHNG CtSAH I lQ A SPt CSA t $$1 El IOil 1)EI Alt $
r______________________
- ___ _ _ q 1
ll1 I
111 4
(~
it; i
l Il l
h I
j
,1 i
i i
g i
i 1
l
'li i
,1 i
i i;.
i Il lll.I,
. 1,[ i l Il..,
i i
i i
i f
i i
i t
l i
i 1
l il i
tl l
I i:!
Pl l Il I
3 I
1
.l, I
l:
l l
il j
i l
i 1
I 2
i E
Il l,i i
sp i
I cG.
ggg
,a g
i 8
EPF
'j hh
,I,
\\
a l
Ogt
'! g' l
E sl-I i
l l
i
=
i i
ii
- iii, i
l ;.
ll jilli 1
l l
\\
l l
l1ll I
11 i
i:
,!ll l.l n.
l I,-i i
!II!
I i
i l
- i' ;
lI-l,1:
.g O
ll!
- ll,
i
3
.d, I
t%.)
EDASCO SERVICES INCORPORATED OUALITY ASSURANCE ENGINEERING OUALITY ASSURANCE SPECIALISTS Citif f GU AL tl Y ASStif4AP4CE LtJGirali11 I
I g'y AUutItadG gggg SAFE RVl1GR 11RvtCE5 E
~d r
l I
I I
g,o,g yg ggggg SNItMNAL IN &dMVSC4 44$IROCisVE
&V AtU A180N A006I#NG ON'.Ft C Ia68B 1M AMINA 34CN PROGRAM 88MI8 "*8 EUPt RVliUR SurtRVISOH GMOUP15ADER GHM t t ADt B l
I
_I I
_1_
1_
I I
_I I
-I I
I--
I PHE ese hDE ND4 hDE NUE REG NV IME ND O' M Sa uvert M mVsLE IR AshtNG
$31 -
SPE-
( A AAA LMAM AND CIA 48185 CI At tSIS IIst s ACCT 1 Ipsalaufs
NV
& lit 1
I I
I GuA188V ouAggIV OPERAf tOtt41 i
AssuMA3eCf st1GUE AIO86V A 5543R ApsCE QUAllIV Alt.)HC5 ME uutRE ME NIS PHOGjtAA4 A11UH ANCE M AN AGE M(NI AE44tNI55 A Al0034 Ag4JtN353 R Algord M Afs4Q1R SurtRVt1GR I
I
-I I
I~
I l
~
l
- U ng Ort R AlluM AL dG t' Ouat tI V PftDCIEMant1 IM A8f43NG EXJ 4 tlIV
- . F4 A15u06Alect A&M4 A
ANia
,s $,ssag AND AND A$$URANCE RLCE4 ADS senC Ay, gg gi
$ID'S Cggg MANAGEMENI SIAhDAMU$
UUAlsf 4CA300N1 t hGINE E R$1 g
gg RtrM181NI AI4Vt1 5Ft C8A4 8115 1
g
_.a
s
~
4 s t eun.n essa 1 av 55Asco SERvic2s NUCLEAR CUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM MANUAL stCT10N incomponArso QA-I-2 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT C)
{
ELECTRIC GE?tERATItiG STATIO!1 newsionAddendum i
- b.......... m...........
ORGAliIZAT Oil AfiD RESP 0tlSIBILITIES
- ^78 1.
Paragraph 2.3:
- a. Tourth line:
Delete " Engineering"
- b. Fir'st sentence, second line: Delete " design, engineering,"
- c. Third sentence: Change to read from "The Project Depar=ent..." to "The Construction Ceoar=ent..."
- d. Fifth line:
Celete reference to Figure I-2.3.
2.
Paragrapn 3.1.1.1:
- a. Delete the paragraph in its entirety.
- b. Add the above deleted suoparagraphs (b) tnrougn (h) as part of para-graph 3.1.1.3.
3.
Paragraph 3.1.1.3.1:
- a. Add a subcaragraph.(i) to read as follows:
Od (i) The Quality Assurance Site Supervisor has stop work authority.
I I
4 Paragraph 3.1.1.3.2:
- a. Add a subparagraph (h) to read as follows:
(h) The Quality Control Site Supervisor has stop work authority.
5.
Paragraph '4.0. 6.0, 7.0, 8'.0, 9 O'.and 11.0: Celete in its entirety.
6.
Paragraph 5.4:
- a. Add the folicwing sentence: The Project Superintendent has stop work authori ty.
7.
Paragraph 5.7:
- a. Add the following sentence: The Senior Resident Engineer nas stop work au thori ty.
V l
a v-
<^
s 61094/1=72 PgGE oF
!BASCO SERVicki HUCLEAR CUALITf ASSURANCE PROGRAMiAANUAL SECTION mcompea4 ras QA-I-2 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT l
ELECTRIC GENEPATING STATION navisio,. Addendum 1 i,A;.m.r..f................
M
~^'8 -- 3/a/co ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES 8.
Figure 1-2.3:
Celete 9.
Figure I-2.4:
- a. Celete Figure *-2.4 Rev. 4.
- b. Use Figure I-2.4 revised for Scuth Texas Project. (Copy Attached)
- 10. Figure I-2.2:
Celete
- 11. Figure I-2.9: Add Figure I-2.9 Revision 0,vnien indicates the interface be-tween HL&P and BPC.
(Copy Attached)
O 9
O
+
6 4
St:1 4/2 75 CAg': 3 er f
esAsco senveces NUCLEAR CUAUTY AS$URANCE PROGRAM MANUAL SECT 10M i,.co m po n Ar no QA-I-2 SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT 7
T ELECTRIC GEllEPATIfiG STAT!0tl (ef Acvisie,. rddendum 3_
..[.MNc+)
f
..........y.....A........
ORGANIZATICil At10 RESP 0tlSIBILITIES
- ^
3/4/co i
Ebasco. Services incorporated ORGANIZATION FOR CONSTRUCTION FC1 SOUTH 'U1$ 200;i-*
VICE PRE 310ENT CF CONSTRUCTION
_ ___ _ _____ _ _ __ +_ _._ q i
CO.1$78UCT!01 l
AOI A O' CONSTRUCT!CN MANAGER SERVICE 3 I
l I
i 8
l l
1 MANAGRAQF h4ANAGER07 g
CONSTRUCTfCN
- CUALITY l
INGINt tRING CONTROL Y10E3-nELO StTE
. MANAGER I
~
MANACIA
$UPt RINTENCENT l
l l
MA ftRf AL ARfA CCN1TRUCTfCN SINIOR Rtst0tNf
~
AcueNe$f Raf 04
$UPERINitNotN f3
$UPE RIP 4TENGEN T ENG4 Nil A 1
I l
AD eNe f R ATOR l
l t
i
'w AS STCP WORit Auf HCR4 7V I
CONTRACT 0dt CONSTRUP.TIGN i
..R.,
,_Rt,..
E
~
Ill1LitFACE BLlutE
- Il0llS10ft L(G!!TlilG Aflu.
..t,
L LCillEL l'UWER CORP., Afill LBASCO SERVICES, IllC.
.}
Al'9* 0eOV A L.
e t
E a
s iW l x 6%:JLCl Q4 SgIC nh
~ ~ - ~ ~ - - - - '
stA:stia stA14att a E
a 110U5T0!4 LICitTING & &OWIR i
g yy DECill[L POUCR CORPORA 110N I
ag O u
Col;PORAIE QA r
. OfsILH IISII*IIRIIiG I
HAtlAGER OF Con 51kuCIID:4 pgojc(; gA
~I,lPU W ilAi4AC(H~
anracgg OF Cot:51HUCilot
~1 C
I 2
9 FiltD 2;
l12 N
m If4Itaf!Rl!4G O
t's N
l'8 Cm 8 ULf!!I[Lf 9W!! CORR _
dj
,o n 2-
- c C ED ASCO SERVICtTIr4C.
-4 O$ g o
Clliff Q4 VICE PRE 510tter o
flCl!4tfR CONSTRUCilOri y
m -i L.
gM Q U I
C
's m) u u
O!
SIIE IGliAGER
--$l)(fGilAGER 23 $ j u
QUAL 111 FROGRAlt C0!451HUCII0ti 11GR.
gra 5
m?A N
+-.
-t n o us 3 po en
-t IS o"
k' SII[ SUPinV150R quAtily tortil;0L Fit 0JtC1 GAAtIII Astuu.
r SITE SUPIRVISOR SUPlitir41[nuf tli p
m Os g6 to I
5
.0 ap?l 1I e i t(01 L5 00 raikuCl f on sintoa ktstLIn!
'l
s '
50l'i n lif
- Sui'! Hint 1840f t415
[141t;I LR I*
N h Q
a a
c,z A
a-n
.9 e-o O
I)
.1 g
N O
IM h
4
e HHP Gk 12efourias sr/duerue krone 27-19 E)(fcvTive L//cf //2f s/ Dew 7~
ll90/1-04 4
AJo A20ChiAA
[A lj,"7,6f' 1/uf. $kfR h&T QOSSTAUCTjo^l + NC//4/ofL S6MWics.s-Housros g
MrNof GXftAlsace #
^ljl7g,,$f,$*AA C O 2 fo4A76-GA R40k662 H00tred "C
hfoyScrf.$A RA.4AM2 N00r7*"
f20dfc r G/1 Suf62Viso2 Hoorrea J. Ace op /2ofre*
sxkgtrace Stre GA Sufft vis ere SITS y
,A14 4 &(e5 teIThI" Bf2 G A $6/7i it?626 l^>SXf6Af160csD,
- 14)? Sirl GAA'4xndv4 (wARAIiek) wAs purgh,MrA.mso 6y clos sos Obus ivd) 6EfoeD ///M.
4cF 9.o-25' SUP62Vt.$DMy fostrtwr utTHiJ HM/ Aan MA tfd ASArs;y JY A26 t".AbsD GP cl/Aw es.
1 1
___