ML20138F987

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Allegation RV-94-A-0004,Songs Vendor Manuals. Licensee Reviewed Allegation,Concluded Unfounded & Notified NRC for Conclusion by
ML20138F987
Person / Time
Site: Palo Verde  Arizona Public Service icon.png
Issue date: 08/03/1994
From: Wong H
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To: Huey R
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
Shared Package
ML20138F913 List:
References
FOIA-96-341 NUDOCS 9610180136
Download: ML20138F987 (4)
v • d • e


Text

_ . . . . - _ ._. _ _ . . _ , _ _ . - _ .._ _ _. . _ _ _ _ _

e

. # *N UNITED STATES t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

  • d S REGION IV e

8 Walnut Creek Field Offica

,,,,. 1450 Maria Lane Walnut Creek, California 94596-5368 4

August 3, 1994 (0: R. Huey, Allegation Coordinator FROM: H. Wong, Chief, Reactor Projects Branch F

SUBJECT:

ALLEGATION RV-94-A-0004, SONGS VENDOR MANUALS 4

The subject anonymous allegation stated that, "The problem I'see is that the  !

vendor information collected for the last year and one half is not being )

issued by C. D. M. SONGS for evaluation and assessment......The vendor information that is obtained by warehouse receiving personnel and sent to C. D. M. SONGS, is not being issued. As a result the vendor documents for items installed during the last two plant outages have not been evaluated in the field for information required to support operation or maintenance procedure updates.

This allegation was sent to the licensee for its assessment. The licensee  !

reviewed the allegation, concluded it was unfounded, and notified us of their i

conclusion by letter dated February 28, 1994. In addition, the resident inspectors reviewed the licensee's vendor manual program, and provided the results of this review in Inspection Report (IR) 50-528/529/530/94-12 '

(pertinent section attached).

Based.on the licensee's and our review, the allegation was not substantiated.

In our inspection, we sampled vendor information for the reactor coolant pumps

' and noted some weaknesses in the overall vendor manual program, including the failure to properly process vendor information administratively. We found that the vendor information was being evaluated appropriately.by system l engineers, but the vendor information was not forwarded to CDM for formal tracking and processing. Although the licensee noted that 200 vendor information items wers currently awaiting evaluation, the backlog was prioritized and bein; managed.

This memorandum completes our review of Allegation RV-94-A-0004.

H. Wong, Chief 9

Reactor Projects Branch F

Enclosure:

IR 94-12, Section 11.4 cc: B. Beach R. Wise '

K. Perkins 7 y

1 j) 9610180136 961011 PDR FOIA c MILLS96-341 PDR i

e Mb 5 [/S 1N1 Specifically, the motor lead lugs. broke off while electricians removed g . electrical tape from the connections. The licensee preliminary conclusions

! were that the termination had probably been incorrectly secured during either initial installation or at the factory. The licensee initiated NCR 9405003201 to document and evaluate the. condition observed and concluded that Cooling Unit ME454 was operable prior to.the electricians removing the tape. The inspector noted that the licensee appropriately evaluated the condition in similar components in both units.

l 11.4 Implementation of Vendor-Information Pr ram ,

! -The inspector concluded that, overall, the licensee appropriately evaluated and incorporated vendor information. However, the methods by which the )

l information was reviewed and dispositioned were not always in accordance with management's expectations.

)

11.4.1 Processing of Vendor Information The inspector reviewed the licensee's vendor information program governing Prucedure S0123-XIV-4.1, " Configuration Document Change Control For Vendor Information," TCN 4-5. The inspector noted that licensee's program required that station division managers ensure vendor information, which was received outside of normal program distribution' channels (i.e., directly from vendors),

was-forwarded to the Corporate Documentation Management (CDM) department.

Once the vendor information was sent to CDM, the formal review and documentation of the review would be initiated. However, the inspector noted that the licensee's program did not specify timeliness reiuirements l with which division managers had to ensure that vendor information was forwarded to CTM.

The inspector considered that the absence of time requirements was a weaki.ess.

The licensee stated that their program requirements were currently under review and that the inspector's observations would be evaluated as part of the review. The inspector considered the licensee's proposed corrective actions as adequate.

The inspector requested the licensee's evaluations for vendor technical bulletins received from Byron lackson Company (reactor coolant pump vendor).

l In the process of responding to the inspector's request, the licensee discovered that several of the technical bulletins had not been forwarded to i

CDM. However, the licensee stated that the bulletins had been previously l evaluated for. impact to station equipment by present and previous reactor l coolant pump system engineers. The inspector reviewed a sample of six Byron Jackson technical bulletins to assure they had been properly evaluated. The inspector concluded that the licensee had evaluated and taken appropriate action where applicable. The inspector noted that the licensee's program

! indicated that.the system engineer would evaluate the technical bulletin after i it had been forwarded to CDM. The technical bulletins which were not in CDM i were forwarded to CDM. The licensee acknowledged that the reason the j

bulletins were not forwarded to CDM was because not all system engineers consistently forwarded vendor information to CDM. The inspector considered that a contributing factor was that program requirements had not been -

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

e

'n and incorporation of vendor technical information in drawings, procedures, and instructions. The licensee indicated that the audit was scheduled to begin in July 1994 so that it could assess the effectiveness of the reassignment of responsibility to the Nuclear Construction organization. This reassignment occurred in April 1994. The inspector will review the audit results in a future inspection.

The inspector concluded that the licensee's oversight activities and plans were appropriate, 11.5 Maintenance Backlog

, The inspector reviewed the licensee's maintenance order backlog. As_of May 9, l 1994, the backlog consisted of approximately 494 maintenance items. The inspector noted that the licensee had aggressively worked down the total i

number which was approximately 1170 in December 1993. The inspector concluded that the licensee was making reasonable efforts to address outstanding i maintenance for plant equipment.

1 11.6 Conclusions The inspector concluded that the licensee's control of maintenance activities resulted in reliable and safe operation of the plant. However, problems identified with effectiveness of corrective actions, compliance with procedures, and implementation of management's expectations related to the vendor information program indicated that additional management attention was warranted in these areas.

l l

l i

4 l

l l

--- . - . - . . . - . - - . - - . . ~ - - - . - - - - - - - -~

i o

l A L L E G'A T-I O N MANAGEMENT SYSTEM-ALLEGATION NUMBER - RV-94-A-0004- 'RUN DATE: 08/04/94 c

o DOCKET / FACILITY / UNIT: 05000361 / SAN ON0FRE 2 /2

. DOCKET / FACILITY / UNIT: 05000362 /. SAN ONOFRE 3 /3 L DOCKET / FACILITY / UNIT: / /

DOCKET / FACILITY / UNIT: /- / l ACTIVITY TYPES - REACTOR MATERIAL LICENSES -

l FUNCTIONAL AREAS - OPERATIONS l

I DESCRIPTION - NEW VENDOR INFORMATION NOT BEING EVALUATED FOR IMPACT ON PLANT

[

l CONCERNS -- .

1

! WCF0 l 8/3/94 DRP/F MEMO REC'D - BASIS FOR CLOSURE '

SOURCE.- ANONYMOUS . CONFIDENT - N0 l' RECEIVED - 940120 BY - J. SLOAN / RV

l. ACTION OFFICE CONTACT - H. WONG RESPONSIBLE PGM 0FFICE - 0 VIOLATION SECTION 210 ALLEGED - NO l

l STATUS - CLOSED SCHED COMPLETION - 940620 DATE CLOSED - 940804 ALLEGATION SUBSTANTIATED - NO ALLEGER NOTIFIED - NO l OI. ACTION - 01 REPORT NUMBER -

! REMARKS - ABM OATE: 01/21/94 INITIAL LETTER TO ALLEGER: N/A

! FINAL LETTER TO ALLEGER: N/A CLOSURE DOCUMENT: DRP/F MEMO 8/3/94 REFER TO LICENSEE: 02/01/94 LICENSEE RESPONSE: 02/28/94 L 8/3/94 DRP/F MEMO REC'D - BASIS FOR CLOSURE' 8/4/94 FILE CLOSED 1/21/94 ABM i 4 DRP-ACTION: FILE CLOSED

{

ENTERED SYSTEM - 940121 -CLOSED SYSTEM - 940804 RECORD CHANGED - 940804 <

f-

- - . , -_ , - - - , - ,, ,

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20138F987&oldid=3369926"