ML20151U148
| ML20151U148 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone, Nine Mile Point, Palo Verde, Perry, Harris, Byron, Braidwood, Columbia, Seabrook, River Bend, Waterford, Clinton, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 04/21/1988 |
| From: | Grimsley D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM) |
| To: | Connor L DOC-SEARCH ASSOCIATES |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151J031 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-87-866 880421-2, NUDOCS 8804290275 | |
| Download: ML20151U148 (4) | |
Text
M('
.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION hac eoa psovist huwstusi
/'*
pm:e f C I A - S.J, Q. ~.'6 e.
l i
HESPONSE TO FRE DOM OF l"
XI ""
\\,,
INFORMATION ACT IFOIA) REQUEST M 21 N wcsit.waia 5, -
Lt0VIS T E R, e _ W PARf 1.-RECORDS RELEASEJ OR NOT LOCATED ISee cAecked bo_ses)
No agency records 6wtwet to the roovest have been located No additonal ac96cy records sub,ect to the tsamt have been ic<ated Agency records subrect to tht r9avest that are contded an Appendia are already avalab6e for pwbiec mspecten and copeng m the NRC Publ< Oocumer t Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washegton, DC X
Agency records sobrect to the roovest that are deeld.ed m Appendu are berg made avadabe for public ospecton and cocyeg m the NRC Pubhc Documer+t ficom.1717 H Street. N W. Washegton. DC, e a c lder under the FotA number and reowester name o
=
]
The nonpropretary versan of the proposa4sl that vow eg eed to accoot in a te6ecAcna corwo sawn wth a member of my sta*f e now being made awaiable for public inscecten and coymg at the NRC Putoc Docume1 F.oom,1717 H Street. N W. Washeston. DC. m a toider under tne FOi A rurrber and roovester name.
Enciosed e eformaton on how ycw may obtae access to and the charges for cocyeg records otaced e the NRC Pwpc Document Room 1717 H Street, N W. Washegton, DC.
Agency records subset to the re@est a o enclosed %'y applicable charge for cocies of the records prov4ed and payment procedu es are noted m the comments secten r
Records subact to the request have been refee'ed te another Federal agencybest for reve* and direct ressorse to vow.
In www of NRC's response to the roower., no further action a t+ng taken on appeal letter dated PART 11 A-INFORMATION WITHHELD FROM PUBUC DISCLOSURE Certaa eformaton in the reavested records e torg wrthheld from pubhc disclosure pursvant to the FOIA enemptons descrd>ed e aM for the reasons stated m Part it. sec.
tons B. C. and D. Any reieased portens of the documents for ww h ordy part of tres record e beeg ethheks are bemg made avaAsbie for pupc especten and copying e the NRC Pubhc Ducument Room,1717 H $treet. N W., WasPaston. OC. in a folder under thes FOIA number and reovester name Comments i
8804290275 880422 PDR FOIA CONNORB7-866 PDR b(.,h ATun g
, rom Drv$80h Or ES AhostComps
)
e
$1, v
1 dh NIC FORM 464 <*en n k
is ao D.
7 w
Re: F01A-87-866 APPENDIX A-RECOR05 MAINTAINED IN THE PDR UNDER THE AB0VE REQUEST NUMBER Items 1 through 4 are copies of same memo to multiple addressees in Region I, III, IV, and V.
The enclosures are different.
The staff was unable to locate any records for Region Il for the period of 1984.
1.
5/31/84 To Richard W. Starostecki, Region I from J. Nelson Grace, subject: Assessment of Implementation of Regional Inspection Program for Reactor Construction. (3 pages) 2.
5/31/84 To Charles E. Norelius, Region III from J. Nelson Grace, subject: Assessment of Implementation of Regional InspectionProgramforReactorConstruction.(3pages) 3.
5/31/84 To Tom Bishop, Region V from J. Nelson Grace, subject:
Assessment of Implementation of Regional Inspection Program for Reactor Construction. (2 pages) 4.
6/1/84 To Richard P. Denise, Region IV from J. Helson Grace, subject: Assessment of Implementation of Regional l
InspectionProgramforReactorConstruction.(3pages) 5.
6/19/85 To R. W. Starostecki, Region I from J. G. Partlow, subject: Assessment of Implementation of the NRC Inspection Program by Region I at Millstone Nuclear Power Station Unit 3. (33 pages),
+
6.
6/19/85 To R. D. Walker, Region II from J. G. Partlow, subject:
Assessment of Implementation of the NRC Inspection Program by Region II at Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant. (11 pages) 7.
6/19/85 To C. E. Morelius, Region III from J. G. Partlow, subject: Assessment of Implementation of the NRC Inspection Program by Region III at Braidwood Station. (26 pages) 8.
6/19/85 To D. F. Kirsch, Region V from J. G. Partlow, subject:
Assessment of Implementation of the NRC Inspection Program j
by Region V at Palo Verde Unit 3. (10 pages) l 9.
6/21/85 To R. P. Denise, Region IV from J. G. Partlow, subject:
Assessment of amplementation of the NRC Inspection Program by Region IV at River Bend Station. (13 pages)
- 10. Undated To C. E. Norelius, Region III from J. G. Partlow,
{
subject: Assessment of Implementation of the NRC Inspection Program b Station. (27 pages) y Region III at Clinton Nuclear Power j
Re: F01A-87-866 APPENDIX A (continued)
RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE PDR UNDER THE A,BOVE REQUEST NUMBER Items 11 through 15 are copies of the same memo to mu?.tiple addressees in Region I, II, III, IV, and V.
The enclosures are different from each meno.
11.
3/17/86 Memo to Regional Division Directors, Region I from IE Division and Staff Directors, subject: Integrated Interim RegionalAssessment.(13pages) 12.
3/17/86 Memo to Regional Division Directors, Region Il from IE Division and Staff Directors, subject: Integrated Interim Regional Assessment. (14 pages) 13.
3/17/86 Memo to Regional Division Directors, Region III from IE Division and Staff Directors, subject: Integrated Interim Regional Assessment. (13 pages) 14, 3/17/86 Memo to Regional Division Directors, Region IV from IE Division and Staff Directors, subject: Integrated Interim Regional Assessment. (11 pages) 15.
3/17/86 Memo to Regional Division Directors, Region V, from IE Division and Staff Directors, subject: Integrated Interim Regional Assessment. (11 pages) 16.
5/30/86 Memo to D. F. Kirsch, from J. G. Partlow, subject:
Assessment of Implementation of the NRC Inspection Program by Region V at Palo Verde Unit 3. (27 pages) 17.
S/30/86 Memo to C. E. Norelius, Director, DRP, Region III from J. G.
Partlow, Director,IP/IE, subject: Assessment of Implementation of the NRC Inspection Program by Region III at Byron Unit 2 Station. (23 pages)
Items 18 through 22 are copies of the same memo to multiple addressees in Region I, II, III, IV and.Y. The enclosures to each memo are different.
- 18. 6/6/86 T. Thomas E. Murley, Region I, from James M. Taylor, subject: AssessmentofRegionIPerformance.(20pages)
To J. Nelson Grace, Region II from James M. Tay(19 pages)
- lor, 19.
6/6/86 subject: Assessment of Region II Performance.
20.
6/6/86 To James G. Xeppler, Region III from James M. Taylor, subject: AssessmentofRegionIIIPerformance.(19pages) 21.
6/6/86 To Robert D. Martin, Region IV, from James M. Taylor, subject: Assessment of Region IV Performance. (19 pages)
,, _ ~ - -
,g
. -~_ _ _-.
l q
Re: F0!A-87-866 APPENDIX A (continued)
RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE PDR UNDER THE AB0VE REQUEST NUMBER To John B. Martin, Region V from James M. Tay(lor,18 pages) 22.
6/6/86 subject: Assessment of Region V Performance.
Items 23 through 28 are copies of the same memo to multiple addressees in Region I, II, III, IV, and V.
The enclosures to each record are different.
- 23. 2/11/87 Memo to Division and Staff Directors, Region I from IE, subject: Integrated Division and Staff Directors,(Concurrence copy (1 page)
Interim Regional Assessment.
The enclosure to this record is a duplicate of the enclosure to record #24 in this appendix.)
24, 2/11/87 Memo to Division and Staff Directors, Region I from IE, subject: Integrated DivisionandStaffDirectors,(11pages)
Interim Regional Assessment.
2S. 2/11/87 Memo to Division and Staff Directors, Region II from Division and Staff Directors, IE, subject: Integrated Interim Regional Assessment. (12 pages)
- 26. 2/11/37 Memo to Division and Staff Directors, Ragion III from DivisionandStaffDirectors,(12pages)
IE, subject: Integrated Interim Regional Assessment.
27.
2/11/87 Memo to Division and Staff Directors, Region IV from IE, subject: Integrated DivisionandStaffDirectors,(10pages)-
Interim Regional Assessment.
28.
2/11/87 Memo to Division and Staff Directors, Region V from IE, subject: Integrated DivisionandStaffDirectors,(9pages)
Interim Regional Assessment.
N T
DOC SEARCH ASSOCIATfS P.O. Box 7 Cabin John, MD 20818 December 23, 1987 FREEDOM OF INFORMAT'ON D.irector pg)Tr RE UEW'f$g 6 y AC Division of Rules and Records as ing on, D 55
(?"t
/ "E 8 ~? 7
Dear Sir:
Pursuant to the F Jom of Information Act would you please place the following docuiiients in the Public Document Room:
Office of Inspection and Enforcement Regional Assessments (I believe these are done annually) and rankings by Region in the area of construction inspection activities and any supporting clarification and documentation of these rankings, from 1982 to the present.
Thank you.
Sincerely, Lynn Connor 2h
'4 May 31, 1984 s
l l
MEMORANDUM FOR: Richard W. Starosteckt. Of rector Division of Project and Resident Programs, Region 1 FROH:
J. Nelson Grace. Utrector Division of Quality Assurance. Safeguards, and Inspection Programs Office of Inspection and Enforcement
SUBJECT:
ASSESSMENT OF IMPLEMENTATION OF REGIONAL INSPECTION PROGRAM FOR REACTOR CONSTRUCTION The enclosed assessment report is based upon a CAf inspection conducted by !E at the Nine Mile Point facility.
I would appreciate your conrnents, it any, by June 6. 1f possible.
call
. lio BY.
JAMLS G. PARTLOW 4ou J. Nelson Grace Director Division of Quality Assurance. Safeguards.
and Inspection Programs Office c f Inspection and Enforcenent
Enclosure:
Assessnent Report DISTRIBUTION:
.4DC5 &
QASIP Reading RCPB Reading JNGrace JGPartlow RHeishnun ABBeach JTaylor I)E:DIR/QASIP fpf)> - 7 ?" $
IEIRCPB IE:0D/QAS RHeishnun JGPartlow! ssp JNGrace g/
5/p/84 Sg /84_
p/84 h*?dentet Cl
.s.,
o
7 y,,
REGIONA.CONSTRUCTIONINSPECTIONPROGRN4A55E55HEhi.NKP2(REGION!)
An NRC Construction Appraisal Team (CAT) inspection was performed in November -
December,1983 fcr the Nine Mlle Potot $tation. Unit 2 (NKP 2) at Scriba. New York. As part of this inspection, records of the NRC Region 1 inspection program were reviewed to identify those portions of the construction program that were being performed. The results of this review indicated that the construction inspection program was generally being satisfactorily implemented I
at HMP-2. considering the current construction status.
Approximately 1200 l
man-hours of direct inspection effort was performed by HRC Region 1 each year l
during 1982 and 1983.
This amount of ir,1pection effort is typical of HRC inspection time expended for a construction site which does not have signifi-cant probicms.
l A nuaber of the deficiencies identified during the CAT inspection had been previously identified at least in part by'the regional inspection program, particularly with regard to the Applicant s Quality Assurance program.
These findings included QA program deficiencies identified by a Regional Inspection Team in 1981 which indicated "an inappropriate and ineffectively executed QA program " The NRC CAT inspection discovered an audit program that was not fully ef fective in problems related to the applicant's procurement QA program I
that involved materials and equiprent that were installed and did not comply with purchase documents.
In addition, several deficiencies were identified by the Regions) program regarding the Applicant's corrective action programs. While evidence that some progress had been nade related to these corrective action systen deficien-cies, it now appears, based on the results of the CAT ef fort, that more actions should have been taken with regard to the ineffectiveness of the Applicant's QA program. However, the results of the CAT inspection is supportive of the Region's earlier findings in this area and now provides the Region with the basis for persuing more vigorous licenset corrective actions.
Several problems were identified by the NRC CAT in the Electrical and Instru.
I mentation Construction area.
The most significant problem identified in this area involved vendor utring in the Power Generation Control Complex (PCCC)..
Sinitar discrepancies were identified by NRC Region I prior to the CAT involv-ing the PGCC installation) howevers the applicant had not fully implemented adequate' actions to the NRC identified concerns. Other problems in the electrical area were basically reflective of a quality control program that was not effective in preventing probims as construction progressed a weakness i
also previously identified by MRC Region 1.
No significant prcblems were identified by the NRC CAT in the Civil and Structural area. The Tem noted during its review that ssveral significant findings were identified by HRC Region 1 in this area.
Results of the CAT inspection indicate that the Region hp.6 aggressively monitored activities in this area, and that the appitcant had taken adequate corrective actions to the identified findings. With regard to the Hechanical Construction area, again i
nost of the problens identified reflected a quality control program that was 1
not effective as construction progressed.
ch '
q.9 Q,
Several unagement meetings with the applicant had been held by NRC Region 1 to review problems identified involving the piping and pipe support contractor.
[
ITT Grinnell.
It was evident to the Team that corrective actions had been i
initiated; however, discrepanciel were identified which indicated more correc.
tive actions were necessary, Similar def tetencies were identified with regard to Reactor Controls, incorporated activities. These findings by the NRC CAT inspection appear to complement previous NRC Region I findings in these areas.
The llelding and Nondestructive (seninetion area is an area where Region I may have been somewhat deficient in their inspection program; specifically, more attention should have been devoted to the review of ITT Grinnell radiographs.
A review of inspection reports indicate that a minimm amount of inspection effort was applied to this area, problems had been previously identified by the applicant involving enhancement of radiographs (reported in accordance with 10 CFR50.55(e)).
However, the NRC CAT does recognize that this program is still at an early stage where many of the radiographs have not completed the entire review process.
Regional inspection Reports were written to the appropriate depth and scope.
Findings were properly addressed and assessed in accordance with their effect op public health and safety.
A system for tracking and closecut of open items was being effectively utt-lized.
Regional unagement involvement with tho' construction inspection program was evident from the Section Chief through the Regional Adninistrator.
The resident inspector was knowledgeable of the inspection program and was ve?y helpful to the CAT in their activities.
l o
4 I
e I
e I
h.
I I
ik.,5 i
~_
' l e, May 31, 1984 7 ;.
HEMORhiDUH FOR: Charles E. Norelius, Otractor Division of Project and Resident Programs, Region !!!
FRON:
J. Nelson GraceItty Assurance, Safeguards, Olrector Olvision of Qua and Inspection Programs Office of Inspection and Enforceswnt
SUBJECT:
A$$E55 MENT OF IMPLEMENTATION OF REGIONAL INSPECTION PROGRAM FOR REACTOR CONSTRUCTION The enclosed assessment report is based upon a CAT inspection conducted by ;E at the Perry factitty.
I would appreciate your comments, if any, by June 6, if possible, omixAt :,::lto Bfi guts u, PARTLOWgv J. Nelson Grace, Director Division of Quality Assurance, Safeguards, and Inspection Programs Office of Inspection and Enforcement
Enclosure:
Assessment Report i
OlSTRIBUTION:
aET QAstPReading RCPB Reading JNGrace JGPartlow RHetshman ADBeach JTaylor l
l 1/
\\
f IE:kCPB
!!DD/
IP IE.
IP M g _ g 7, /44 RHe shman
._. JGLartlowielp JNG a e
'/ @
lhyS4
$/
a' G;..
b n/.1 a406M0440 Q* crk
/j sa
-n v
. cis
~b i
$.c;*,d
'\\
Q
- M.1 1
. v-1-
~
Q}lt(
j REGIONAL. CONSTRUCT!0HINSPECTIONPROGRAMASSESSMENT-PERRY (REGION!!!)
1
[-
An NRC Construction Appraisal Team (CAT) inspection was performed in August-September,1983 for the Perry Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 and 2 (PNPP) at N
Perry, Ohio. As part of this inspection, records of the NRC Region !!! inspec-tion program were reviewed to identify those portions of the construction program that were being performed. The results of this review indicated that the construction inspection program was being satisfactorily implemented at PHPP, considering the current construction status. Approximately 2000 man-hours of direct inspection effort was performed by NRC Region !!! each year during 1981 and 1982. This amount of inspection effort is typical of NRC inspection time expended for a construction site which does not have signifi-cant problems.
A number of the deficiencies identified during the CAT inspection had been previously identified at least in part by regional inspection program, particu-larly with regard to the Applicant's Quality Assurance program.
The NRC CAT noted that findings had been identified regarding QA program deficiencies.
These had been identified by Region !!! early in the construction process. The URC CAT inspection discovered a Quality Assurance program that demonstrated an aggressive attitude in the identification of problems through the applicant's project organization. This was further reflected by the applicant's management involvement at the PHPP site.
Many of the problems identified by the NRC CAT inspectors at PHPP were typical of problems experienced at other facilitta). Many of these problems had been previously identified by the applicant's project organization. Timely management attention was being given to findings identified by both the NRC CAT inspectors and the PHPP project organization. Thus, this is indicative of appropriate corrective actions taken to earlier identified program l
deficiencies that have been effectively assessed and monitored by Region !!!.
Some problems were identified by the NRC CAT in the Electrical and Instrumentation Construction area. The more significant problems identified in this area involved quality procedural contracts for barrier installations in the Power Generation Control Complex (PGCC) and raceway installations which had received quality inspections that did not satisfy separation requirements. Another problem in the electrical area was identified where sketches were used to install conduit and conduit supports in the Unit I containment drywell area without appropriate document controls.
Similar problems to these had been previously identified by the NRC Region !!!
inspection program.
,No significant problems were identified by the NRC CAT in the Civil and Struc-of numerous concrete anchor bolts in the drywell wall. g the installation tural area. However, a concern was identified involvin The number of intended c
installations, and the real potential for cracking of the drywell wall as a result of normal.. transient, and accident loadings lead the NRC CAT to question the ability of the.drywell to maintain the s>ecified lenktightness throughout 1
to service Itfetime. With regard to the Mectanical Construction area, most of the problems identified. involved'the quality control inspection and the program "as built" verification program'for piping and pipe supports / restraints.
y.
N.4 These programs did not ensure that installed items conformed to design require-
<4.V ' ments. Again, similar,isolatedtinstances had been identified by Region !!!.
?, *,,,. -
,,.. '. g.e;.
1 ph[fh:M..',;(o
' h. }; W'N. p i p.
% j ' 1 l. =
n.
n 3'
[,'3.
?Y.
-./ k.8hd;h.: E i
l l
~
L., i h b ',
- t,
~
in eneral, weldin and nondestructive 4xamination reviewed by the NRC CAT exhkbited work performed in accordance with requirements. This is reflective both of an effective program established by the applicant and effective roni-toring by NRC Region !!!. Some problems were found, however, in the appit-cant's welder qualification program.
Regional Inspection Reports were written to the appropriate depth and scope.
Findings were properly addressed and assessed in accordance with their effect on public health and safety.
A systen for tracking and closecut of open items was being effectively utt-lized. Regional management involvement with the construction inspection
[
program was evident from the Section Chief through the Regional Administrator.
[
The resident inspector was knowledgeable of the inspection program and was very j'
helpful to the CAT in their activities.
l 4 %
!1 b
I l
?
.t
%,' s
^)
f '
6
. e,g'3 7j f'
]
gn p
6 q
g y
1