ML20134B110

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Congressional Briefing for Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station
ML20134B110
Person / Time
Site: 05000000, Marble Hill
Issue date: 02/25/1983
From: Harrison J
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20132B505 List:
References
FOIA-84-293 NUDOCS 8508150518
Download: ML20134B110 (9)
v • d • e


Text

-

. . -- ~ L., .- E g.. ;[f -

~_

l l

l U.S. NUC', EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III 1

CONGRESSIONAL BRIEFING FOR MARELE HILL NUCLEAR CENERATING STATION _

February 25 . 933 J. J. HARRISON 1 Senior Resident Inspector fyOI B 05061o ho / A 7-$3 .

LEIGHTD64-293 PDR

r.

- % w - . ~ . e _ 4 ..q.s , ._ '

,. -A.,  :, - - -

Public Service Indiana Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station Chronology of Events LeadinF to the CAL of February 2 1983. on Problems in the Areas of Electrical Work April to June. 1982 The licensee and the electrical contractor, Commonwealth-Lord Joint Venture (CLJV), both identified numerous quality problems during this time period involving electrical safety related activities. As a result of these problems the electrical contractor imposed a stop-work on these activities effective June 4, 1982.

Problems identified included for an example workers not following procedures and work proceeding without travelers (work instructions) being issued.

June to October. 1982 The electrical contractor made extensive revisions to his overall QA program including: ,

Reorganization of the project and corporate structures, including QA/QC Evaluating and rewriting the QA Program

  • Evaluating and rewriting QA/QC procedures and work procedures ...

Contracting an outside consultant to evaluate the overal,1 QA/QC program Evaluating and inspecting of work and inspection activities completed prior to the stop-work Hiring additional and more qualified QA/QC personnel

_ _ _m_____ ---------

C -[ . ;'a~ -'.Te; q.p. Q ,.,,,g, q- 4.pgs ..

..N ~5 & :_-il..,.:. gg'4 %.t.; _

'.' - - iT .= .

. Retraining of all project personnel, including craft As various tasks were completed the work activities were allowed to increase until on October 29, 1982, the normal construction activities were allowed to resume. All the program changes

, were approved and monitored by the Ifcensee.

1 July 19-31. 1982 The NRC 'k. Resident inspector reviewed the stop-vork order and corrective actions being take'n and found these actions to be adequate (NRC Inspection Report Nos. 546/82-13; 547/82-13).

September 14-17, 1982 Inspection by a Region III Electrical Inspector revealed no ,

problems with traveler control or material traceability; no ,

noncompliances were issued (NRC Inspection Report Nos. 546/82-17; 547/82-17).

J anuary 21, 1983 -

. ~

Mr. T. Dattilo (Attorney for Save-The-Valley) and the alleger contacted Region III C. Williams, Chief Electrical Section and made four basic allegations:

Loss of material traceability and not processing nonconform-ance' reports Travelers (work instructions) were routinely altered and notes added withoet proper review and approval The licensee failed to submit Construction Deficiency ,

Report (a 50.55(e)) for documenting the deficiency. This is required by Title 10 Law. ,

~

.. - ~

~: 1- - :, q:_ ...LQQQ).;&'kpi QQ

', - n s. . .:. n . :: ~ . . .. -

. The alleger was fired because he had written nonconformance reports on the above concerns January 24, 1983 The NRC Sr. Resident Inspector (J. Harrison) and two RIII Electrical Inspectors (R. Love and R. Mendez) met with Mr. Dattilo and the alleEer in Mr. Dattilo's of fice. The meeting began at 11:15 and lasted until 12:45; approximately 1.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />. The following basic allegations were made: -

1. Traceability cf material not being maintained; many examples were given.
2. Traveler (work instructions) were being improperly revised without proper review and approval; many examples followed.

Note:

The above allegations were detailed in a memo to Region III files dated February 11, 1983, for NRC tracking purposes a total of thirteen allegations were identified and reviewed.

January 24-28, 1983 A NRC special inspection was conducted, confirming in part the allegations. The inspection (NRC Inspection Report Nos. 546/83-01; 547/83-01) identified five potential items of noncompliance violating 10 CFR 50, Appendix B:

Criterion V - Procedures were not properly impicmented Criterion XV - Nonconforning items were not tagged

. Criterion XVI - Positiva corrective action was not taken to I correct the problem or to prevent recurrence, similar probicas .,

were identified from April to Ju'ly,1982 ,

. . -~ . . .

...n . . . .

. -~

~~ Q. -w.. gga

- n -

-.~a..-. .

.;; , y.y, . u ..g.. y g

. x

.a: -

.:4 . . c y.;;a. ;.. .x . -si

. Criterion III - Design requirements, including some specification and regulatory, were not passed on in procedures and other requirements were not properly documented.

. Criterion XIV - Failure to establish suitable measures to assure inspection and/or test status of items or equipment.

i January 28, 1983 The licensee issued a Stop-Work Order on the electrical contractor. .

Commonwealth-Lord Joint Venture.

February 2, 1983 The confirmation Action Letter (CAL) was issued to PSI management by the NRC en this date.

l February 3, 1983 .

Mr. i. Dattilo contacted Region III, C. Williams, and gave permission to reveal the allegers name to the licensee for the purpose of allowing personnel corrective measures to be initiated. .

~~

~

I notified Mr. B. Petro Vice-President Nuclear ' Services, of the

. allegers name Mr. Nelbert u nders.

February 7-9, 1983 -

1 Mr. T.' Dattilo (Mr. M. Landers Attorney), Tublic Service Indiana and Commonwealth-Lord attorneys had several separate discussions to resolve Mr. Landers dismissal and/or reinstatement. The issue remains unresolved to-date and continues to be under,further _

4 consideration by all parties. ,

~~...4 *i g +-. q - p-.

., . , i.3.

February 2-11, 1983 The licensee conducted an in-depth audit of Co=monwealth-Lord JV quality program. This four man team audited for eight days resulting in the following findings:

. Eleven program deficiencies

. Nine nonconformances to the program I

. Four concerns This audit further confirms the allegations and also identified

] additional problems.

February 11, 1983 The licensee reported a potential 50.55(e) Construction Deficiency Report, based on the independent internal audit of this problem area.

This audit af forded suf ficient information to define the problems and depth of each to be evaluated and was deemed reportable.

Februa ry 25, 1983 The licensee presented their Action Plan in Response to NRC Confirdatory Action Letter to members of the Region III staff at the Marble Hill site. The plan was'found to be generally acceptable; major changes to be included were (1) timeliness of licensee audits and (2) establishment of NRC hold points.

1 4

The Region III staff is avalting licensee action to proceed in j accordance with the Confirmation Action Letter.

S-0 e

c.'....-- -. .

._-~;~.. - ~5 . . . ,

3. % Caw %. . - + '
  • k .,

.<qr Results-Some Problems were Identified:

1. Problec Perspective:

.The proble= is isolated to some activities in the electrical area.

. Activities affected are only in segments of the electrical work.

. Problems duration was for a limited amount of time; approximately four (4) months or less.

. Actions that were taken are extremely timely for percent of i

activities inprocess versus the total to be accomplished, for example; Safety Related Activities Items To be installed Inprocess inspected Hangers 5.550 1,250 800 Cable Tray (L.T.) 67,000 6,200 600

2. Problem Cause:

. Revised program, as a result, was somewhat inadequate; i.e.,

, training .

.The written program, although somewhat cumbersome, could have been successful if it had been properly implemented

. Corrective action on previously identified problems that was taken by the contractor was inadequate

. Increase in work activities, just prior to and following the total restart (October 29, 1982), lacked proper quality program implementation that was commensurate with the additional l ,

constructio'n activities; i.e., schedule prevailed over quality l . Numerous personnel changes caused instability; managers were dismissed; replaced managers ,were largely contract employees; i

"We r' A. $tirl'?&f;- - - %.-r g - -- -r W ,

- . . ~ . . . . . , . u 9

some reduction in contract e=ployees occurred prior to program becoming stable; positions vacated were not adequately filled but left open

. PSI failed to adequately control the overall process; that is, allowing work to resume without corrective action being completely implemented

3. Allegation Status Two major allegations were subdivided into thirteen specific allegations for tracking purposes. Of the thirteen total allegatiou the NRC special inspection substantiated only two and the licensee's indepth-audit substantiated also the same two. The NRC however identified some additional problems and issued a total of five noncompliances. The licensee's audit identified an additional eiE hteen problems for a total of twenty and four additional concerns. In addition several ellegations were confirmed;however, these allegations had no

. technical merit, that is a regulatory, design or quality program requirement was not violated since dt did not exist.

t l

l

)

l

sg? ' % . . ._- - E ..s ---e

~,

,7 , - : _ . , , -

.fMQ-T#

. -m

/I Su==ary:

AlthouEh numerous problems were identified by the alleFer, the NRC, and the licensee, the NRC continues to have confidence that the quality assurance program at Marble Hill is sound. These identified problems were isolated to some activities of one contractor and early detection and correction is really the key issue. We are confident that the NRC's inspection program would have detected these problems in an inspection that was scheduled in the same time frame as the allegations, in f act the i

same inspection team would have been performing that inspection. The NRC will assure through the Confirmation Action Letter and additional inspections that these problems are properly resolved.

The licensee has committed to positive philosophy on quality assurance and has provided additional assurance to the NRC that corrective action will be r_nepicte; to correct the problem and to prevent recurrence. public Service Indiana has been very responsive to NRC concerns and as well as their own quality problems assuring total dedication to a quality constructed and safe plant.

~

It should b,e noted that when building something as large and complex as a nuclear plant mistakes will be made and these problems are compounded by the human element. The key point is.that these problems be properly

, identified and appropriate corrective action is taken.

Our ultimate goal is offcourse to protect the health and safety of the .

public and we the NRC will strive to achieve that goal.

t e

._

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20134B110&oldid=2916430"