ML20203M929

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Rev 0 to SQN Implementation of QAE-80-2, Welding Project Generic Employee Concern Evaluation Rept
ML20203M929
Person / Time
Site: Sequoyah  Tennessee Valley Authority icon.png
Issue date: 09/03/1986
From: Bateman R, Lynskey R, Rose J
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
To:
Shared Package
ML20203M897 List:
References
WP-10-SQN, WP-10-SQN-R, WP-10-SQN-R00, NUDOCS 8609050184
Download: ML20203M929 (32)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:-____ u. a .c - ..w.. .+ , ~; w.n., . ~. ? h f,,.. Y. ..s c. w.w .. f? .E a, .Y - ' %..'W.)._.':. .N h,,;.. f l.. .l.5'. ' (' ' : ',' - f. i ".- .~ >;..c-

8. -;

. ~.(.%. 6

i':

' ; {.+. '. ' ". ? L ' ' '- , _' ; ;;' i l nj[).i.: < l:s(lk[.. 1.:: % s..- gij.. J f ~ J.))f., : Y,

%.- _ I' ',} Q l
  • - Q i.h... ',.,'.. j. '. " 'l ' l: : - - & q. ;..

' g,..' :g- ~ /.- ]v:, p.,,r .w ~.,.. ;; w> ' ~.1.,' si s .. c .'.,..4 . a.,. 2. ~ <z . - ), 3.Vft.., y y,. +n 3 p,&.' y%.,f., . ; 'o ' t. y 2 :, i l : ~,. s r

  • ~:...

.y: e n

t f.V.,.. -fr:(*e t'
..,.. g '; y. h, p,.} g: 1.;6

' f i :};.. '}. % d5.&q% p; ., '.s e-y - .. 1 '.: .w: aw W t

=

. R ' ' : - q? -

w.. J i.

1 M M M M(.ED...@MNA Y fN hY .i. ?,.

l.}V{. Q _.4f,f*W,. }..;y.l k,'

.. f'.W?yff Qf, +_W.l%.,Z ' S'? _f,l l$N. e QQ.'.&+,,. c.ff, :f y

.
l.r

?' Q j ,n -..s. - 3 w3 .e )Q, _& ? - 'f(p }. Q .t.? ' Q. M.~7.J'2 - 4 WELDING PROJECT A.pg' ?m/fd .,.3 g..; ()~>Q.,.+'g 8 4 % p.- foJ .E. N i . ' M.? - v:' % dl ' I ,,, M x ? <;-, i t 'e 55 GENERIC E"PLOYEE CONCERN Q [.];] [.*(.l.. L y }.y 1. -[%.. k EVALUATION REPORT .c k j', hs k..f... ~ ..3 m.; 4. a r w.:<.. -,a-m.-n). a ..ac ; z ., %+rp,, i.m4 l;(.:.gj 'a;. o... : wP-10-s0N M?N O..,. s - 9%...,g?c.,.'., pg. y. .s ,g 1 - .n,.w ~, 1 Q d..,'7. y ; t.,, y,.x ; 4.m.r ".* J7 o a.. 4.71. -. sqS IMPLEMENTATION OF QAE-80-2 { }.cf YG @., i. : ~ f. ......M %'s.11.- ',a 4 y-.. a. m .s. i M i 5 1 y&.,.h^.Y A.,. 'j s ?. - l l, ; {?:.;--l L.q. A.. l 9, ' ' -. -L '. -l. ; f, ' ' %,' I.. .' ' f o' z':'Q,34 f.

i. ',

.l, ~

.-. ;., 4,,:.

..? %. y < 4 *., ~n sm 5 c. q ... '. y. ;ld '* - ..$.. k < #..

  • h f f.f n

.',.- o .M .4 ., ;f A. -, i 1 .-,; h , '.-: ' :+, ,, 4<L' +'/* g-f,. .f,- W.3,f. pu ,',,1 4: .s --

  • q:

't.. , ]* 3.4 g 4.- J... ' c. y, M i '.. p - L .p y .',.%,. 3 ) s s .l q: f< ,.-,:, s-w,.$h

wy

,.myy. w+., - w.p, J.,., . + 4 .:.f.4.m- ,.c. w !.:'; ~h;f f &,f,. ,f f.. s[# ~.', ,4.' .. -: e. . /.,. c, . o.. ;; .x y% *a,,. ,.c,. re. ;:> .e ..;. : :n ;; 7.,..... i s -

.
.y' c. f'e;;y'a~:',,.

..h . 4 . - '. ?-' y' M . ;i - h- - - <> L ,.;. L _ .s L ' ' [1. ' ; ~>.: y: j.> K. '* 4-> .i 8. 3 t" e L y,; q." h Y,.... ' ;~ ' M_ c:M:. '..J.. : h l ' f. .U., ? i -O. > '. ~..b : ; =) :p - i.,. M,...L J i . j.h. k ' L. ? %:F ?,: :/,.' h... "\\ ..;,.: : :. f ' ',: n .:.,, ~ ..M, i... ' l M L.- ' ; ' :- 3 2 N* ' Y ~~ i b,W 4 ; [ i i, i.;% J,. ;J.;, '.f,? ~.L J :.6..* c,3 : . -... '.'., x

y. ]

... ' ' f....,,. :.g.e. - ' :: P. e+- ( .'.z.." yc.. - ;x ...k,:. -T.,.,> g.g. ,2. 3q:

  • z.

~- ,,. g, %.. b.,..eg : 6.,-..,.. ;,. m. ~2.. ,,..r...p.,...'..a _c s. ' ' '..... ~. ,2 v 1,., .....,.g , y. 2**... '.-*. .-s. . ^... :. '*,..F ,, *{,.,y* V * '. ' ;. .);,'> ',,.,,.N 4,.] ?, 'l. ~ - ,{'

  • e

. * ' _. ( ? ; *,t*% ~ ll.ys ';; h Y..'{ e'*.h i', ': }: :

j. - 1

.r: r r _-y', ' "(.

T

. : {. .;f. f f >y_ -.. j -{y. ;.*l.., ;.a ' . I (.2 l, ' r .. u -, 4 - <;., : - n. -..'?. . '.m' QS  :. :l.l, Y ::s.. wh,: 4,,;,.. AL . < ~ e:.L. 3 :- ' R Q.; * !' .[' s (&y~ e,e

    • ll :.? ?'.' ' 'v

' ~ ;- - W: ~Q* A **p. j; .\\ L ' 1p ' i,, n[. : *, 1. ~s '...: a n.'.' '..3 7.* -.., '..

. 2

.R' .[* 1 ..p. . >, _, i ',, 3N ,:.' f.t,$. '.. I ),* l1 . (.T 4" ,( ,f c 3 .v: x. t. f. ' '

  • 3.4 f,"

I,' Yy w.,C ~f I

.,, '; ;... +

<<...,.',.,'5 _,.4, i f, s,;'% ;J, _p', s -'2.,,,.-.1 =: f >a . ; j.,p ;.'.;y y = h :. ;..':l

  • 1

%l i

  • g-
- : :q ;..Jr-J+
y,. _; /

f..L [..? l 1, , %.y '[.9 ' ; :s. ;. ;V..;h; _ :.

f. n

,....!,, +p#.. g;;.,3.n.9 y . i... =.:'..: *;

. 3 :-.

s.n -.- :

?

c:

.. L;; '. o.-

,.s4.w. ..u:.a. tu.,.. w. <.- ~.. :.. . s. c .. :. 7.. : o., .2.s.# %' t.. .... w.., e c. ;: - ?. m. 3 m,, +4%W.:;% 4.,,a,s; N..:4..L -Q:g+, g y _ 4.,. :,. ~.c. + ?..., '... c ~y i..'(,,L* _.:; T ::. l.i +.. y. ::-y., q M. ~. J ;* e h. m... n.;:. ,o., b..y.~. i~. <.- $s.... ,5 l

4..

W, _s-f., .s:.- v. ,g- .a .V 3 e t. ,a igq....... . *Q

r g*g.x. c.

' -a ',>,w..u..s.

  • r

+ . *e.

. _. %; y $.., i. ( ',. h y. 4.

+.? ..'. '., *.,R,. -i ..M.., ,s ~ j s f..' ' N6.:#'Q

% :.,_, e p. j - ) L '

? r +:i y - =' y - c .. ~ ,.. ; f @ a., i 6,L. +;,.,,,,w.)., .s.; r. p' i.,.. i P T, *_....., -e , {.c Q ! h C O V V.;' b P,. h. [Q .;, p 6. . A 3; w My -~ .a 4.3 g n. o.g <so;. y. 5.:,.a.,%.v. .w. n, y 2.. : .,,m 3 3.6a af.{ E ll. ' -(,\\ g ; ;; --..c.g :- ?.,;. ; l-E.[. ^,N .y m, ~ ga _ n.9... ..g: ,...v. n :r, s .4 y 3% &h/' Y sh j&;_l n.1 r : 2;.l, ,k .i f,f,{q ^{- ! $ ; %.$y& y m v,:.a :. w%.: y :. Y W. W.

.. r

%.44 @W g 2ih &. R %m m. f W] @x. 7 ca..W p.{g M .w ww . s s.v

~..

m bff : wn f l f

k l f f.h hfy f..

Y, ' kW%l$.,l ff n..A%n,hj ffl,%n,ev A y.ng w n. n w& n h M M M sWM i. k na rus f + ~y a J g M M g j4 g;.~ w w % w% ' g% b nh sn% gM&wh. e \\ R,, 5 y;.[ p .Q b k.,N' Q W _W.fL,,f f h,. .,Q .., l i;?A r . (

~ C O WELDING PROJECT l GENERIC EMPLOYEE CONCERN L._; EVA$UATIONREPORT REPORT NUMBER: WP-10-SON. R0 DATE 04-08-86

SUBJECT:

SON IMPLEMENTATION OF OAE-80-2 CONCERN CONSIDERED: *WI-85-030-010

  • THIS CONCERN REPLACED WI-85-030-001 PREPARED BY original Signed by J. E. Rose 4/3/86

, OC, WP REVIEWED BY Original Signed by R. Bateman 4/3/86 , OC, WP Original Signed by R. P. Lynskey 4/3/86 , QA, WP REVIEWED BY Y 7% A , CEG-H WELDING REVIEWED BL y,, w ~ A b / , PROGRAM MANAGER APPROVED BY i; i 1 00290

s GENERIC EMPLOYEE CONCERN

SUMMARY

SHEET Report Number: WP-10-SON, R0 Report

Title:

SON IMPLEMEhIATION OF OAE-80-2 I. CONCERN CONSIDERED: *WI-85-030-010

  • This concern replaced WI-85-030-001 II.

ISSUES INVOLVED 1. The corrective actions specified in QAE-80-2 of September 1980, may not have been implemented at SQN. III. STATEMENT OF CONCERN / ISSUE VALIDITY Validity: Y X ,N , Substantiated: Y X ,N IV. EFFECT ON HARDWARE AND/0R PROGRAM None V. JUSTIFICATION ( QAE-80-2 was a study of the overall Office of Construction welding [ program. It was not an audit of quality affecting activities. SQN construction was essentially completed when the study was done. VI. RECONMENDATION AND/OR CORRECTIVE ACTION NEEDED None VII. REINSPECTION NEEDED: Y ,N X VIII. ISSUE CLOSURE Based on this report. IX. ATTACHMENTS 1. Text of the Employee Concern 4 2. May 27, 1980 meno to Those listed from H. H. Null and M. N. p Sprouse (QAM 800528 003) 3. Report QAE-80-2 Page 1 of 1 b 00290

r GENERIC EMPLOYEE CONCERN ,z Report Number: WP-10-SON.' R0 Report

Title:

SON IMPLEMENTATION OF OAE-80-2 I. SCOPE OF EVALUATION This engineering analysis covers WBN Employee' Concern Number WI-85-030-010 (this concern replaced WI-85-030-001) which was determined to have possible generic implications at SQN. II. ISSUE ADDRESSED BY THE CONCERN The concern was analyzed to determine the issue voiced by the concerned individual. The issue is as follows: The corrective actions specified in Report Number QAE-80-2, " Review and Evaluation of the OEDC Welding and NDE Program," dated September 8, 1980, may not have been implemented. III. CONCERN VALIDITY OR SUBSTANTIATION On May 27, 1980, authorization was given by H. H. Null, Director of Construction, and M. N. Sprouse, Director of Engineering Design, to perform a review of the implementation of the welding program in CONST and EN DES and to provide recosunendations for improvement (QAM 800528 p: 003, attached). The evaluation was performed during the time period from June 16 to July 31, 1980, and covered Watts Bar and later nuclear construction sites which were active at that time. A copy of the report is attached. The report identified recommended improvements that would make the overall welding and NDE program more effective. Among the. recosunendations was one deficiency which had been previously reported as an audit finding. SQN was specifically not included in this evaluation since the construction effort with regard to welding was nearing completion at SQN at this time. Based on the above analysis, the issue addressed in the concern is substantiated. However, it was not intended to implement the recommendations at SQN, and many of the recommendations would not have been feasible to implement at SQN due to its completion status. No impact on SQN hardware can be identified. Based on the foregoing analysis, this concern is closed. t i Page 1 of 1 k,, 00290 l l

Attichamt 1 04/02/85 (EMPLOYEE CONCERNS) Page 1 cf 1 15:24:28 " LOC STATUS RESP -QTC-PPP CFR INSP TC ------C.ONCERN------- PROBLEM io SR WI-85-030-001 XXXXX {, X: W Y: C 2: N. = AJrWORDS: NOT WELD RELATED WELDING AND NDE PRCGRAM CORRECTIVE ACTION, AS IDENTIFIED IN DEDC QUALITY i ASSURANCE EUALUATION NO. GAE-2, DATED SEPTEMBER 1980, MAY NOT HAVE BEEN IMPLE-NENTED FOR WATTS BAR AND OTHER PLANTS; THE SAME/ UNCORRECTED PROBLEMS WERE FOUND TO EXIST YEARS LATER, AND MAY STILL EXIST TODAY.- CI HAS NO FURTHER INFORMATION. 1 TECHNICAL COMMENTARY: CHANGED DUE TO CLARIFICATION OF APPLICABILITY. SUBJECT CONCERN TRANSFERRED TO WI-BS-030-010 CWB) AND XX-BS-110 COTHERS). LOC STATUS RESP -QTC-PPP CFR INSP TC ------CONCERN------- PROBLEM ID F7 SR WI-BS-030-010 WCPIF KEYWORDS: MISCELLANEOUS IMPLEMENTATION AUDIT X: W Y: N 2: N WELDING AND NDE PROGRAM CORRECTIVE ACTION. AS IDENTIFIED IN DEDC QUALITY ASSURANCE EVALUATION NO. QAE02, DATED SEPTEMBER 1980 MAY NOT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED FOR WATTS BAR NUCLEAR PLANT. THE SAME UNCORRECTED PROBLEMS WERE FOUND TO EXIST YEARS LATER AND MAY STILL EXIST TODAY. NUC. POWER DEPT. CONCE '" CI HAS NO FURTHER INFORMATION. kJNICALCOMMENTARY: ISSUES CONSIDERED: THE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS SPECIFIED IN GAE-R OF SEPTEMBER 1 MAY NOT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED. i l 4 e e I I \\ l

Attachme __ _page l__ l l l 1 T* 4r OJ. 4 =>r' 2 +- Qiu ',80 0528 0 0 3 , em _ 5-.== emoYandum EMSSEE VAU2Y AUMORrrY 800530A0258 l '= = m-t- ~ 2aad*1"

n. n. mu, M. nager of C-str-ti, rraa C-E M. N. Sprosse, lenager of Engineering Design, MLIA9 C-E Mar 27, 1980 DATE :

SUSEBCT: IETIEN AED ETAIIIATICE OF (IB8T MELUING AED NDE PROGRAM - MAITS BAR AED IATER PIANTS t You have been selected as a member of the subject review team. ' Ibis is a very important review which needs continuity and you have been assigned to devote your attention continuously during the month of June and part of Jtaly. Please refer to the attached mano,14:11 and Sprouse to Pm ject Managers and Branch Chiefs dated May 27, 1980. 1Ao Hebert is the teen leader and you should be available to meet l vith him and other teen members.hane 2 to make plans for the review, j which should be couplete by early Jttly. Purther direction in the

l i

details of the review will be provided by W. R. Brown and J. P. Enight j - at the first meeting. f The objectives of the review are to look at the adequacy and effectiveness j .of the w=1 ding and NDE program and report to us on your findings with appropriate recomendations for i@, nt. + Y - ag/ W s C;2b A /s_ AW a.a mu p. n. spro e I R. L Earris, E7DIA C-K L 0. Hebert, M12BW C-K R. & Jessee, MioD183 C-K e l L C. Borthard, Matts Bar, CCNST M. L Turnbow, Bartsville, 03tsr MRB JFKtLF Attachment W. R. Brown, E7B23 C-E cct R. W. Dibeler, M5360 C-E

0. F. Dilworth, M10C126 C-E i
0. Farmer, FTB23 C-E
0. H. F1 - a, M12A9 C-E J. P. Enight, M12B30 C-E J. L Perris, M11C126 C-E J. E. Wilkins, Watts Bar, (INST t

ISDS, E4837 C-E \\ l i ~. ' e a \\

  • g Buy U 1. Seeingt Reed: Regularly en the Payroll Saeisp Plae

8 Page 1 of 26 L*NITED STATES GOVERNMENT Qs '80 09 0 8 0 01 Memorandum TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY H. H. Mull, Manager of Construction,"E7524 C-K yn M. H. Sprouse, Manager of Engineering Design, WilA9 C-K FROM E. Cray Beasley, Quality Assurance Manager, OEC, W12526 C-K DATE September 8, 1980 80090980330 d(* MNECT: REVIEW AND EVA1,UATION OF OEDC WELDING AND NDE PROCRAM QAE 80-2

Reference:

Memo, H. H. Mull and M. N. Sprouse to Those listed JSTI) dated May 27, 1980 (QAM 800528 002) and Memo H. H. Mall and M. N. Sprouse to Review Team g4 dated May 28, 1980 (QAM 800528 003) Attached is a copy of the final report dated September 4, 1980, for the subject report. P 5 4' ' E. C;'ay Beasley }. 14H:AH i Attachment cci (Attachment) l R. A. Costner, W11D190 C-K 1 R. W. Dibeler ESB60 C-K L C. H. Kimmons, W12A9 C-K Evaluation Team Members 1EDS. E4R37 C-K File QAE 80-2 I r Buy U.S. Savings Bands Regularly on the PayrollSavings P n

i Page 2. of 26 s 4 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY QUALITY ASSURANCE STAFF Office of Engineering Design and Construction l a QUALITY ASSURANCE EVALUATION N o. QAE-2 Rev. 0 Applise ts: Ustts Bar and later nuclear plants Tids- '-vi=w aad P'='"a**a" a' " " U-'d'a* -'ad 'm' '"a-**- June 16 to Julv 31. 1980

  • s't

~ e ? J I, t L. G. Habert E. L. Barris / K. A. Jiastig ODC-QA CONST - Knoxville CONST - Knoxville k h. 1r r e u Y !.z1 ~- L. C./ orthard R. M/Jessee

n. L. Turneow N

CONST - WBN EN DtS - NEB CONST, QA - HTN September 4, 1980

Page 3 of 26 g ~- I. I i Coffittrt_s - I 6 i A. Scope i Criteria for a Welding Program c 3 i, I C. Management w ry f i Evaluation Team and Schedule D. Attachment - Questions Answers, ad Reependamns E. e%N, P f g. t e:.. ' t t i r P k, t ( b n t >n c.,- ,,7m w,,_pp,g~ w ,m-7wg-

Page 4 of 26 l i 1 w ~ l i A. SCOPE l A review of the Of fice of Engineering Design and Construction l welding program was conducted due to the concern of J. C. Killian and W. R. Brown of CONST and at the request of H. H. Mull and M. N. 27, 1980 (QAM 800528 002). The review and I Sprouse, meno dated Mayevaluation was conducted at EN DES and CONST, Knoxville, and at W A detailed scope of review was 31.M, HTN, FBW and YCN Projects. furnished to the review team, containing detailed questions that were These questiens, answers, and recommendations where to be answered. appropriate, are outlined in Attachment A. i l 5. CRITERIA FOR A VE1DINO PROCRAM The basic elements for a welding program would necessarily include a the PSAR/FSAR coammitments for the nuclear plant, assignment of safety classification to the various systems of the plant, code and standard 4 requirements (including issue and addenda), proper welding and inspection requirements, constructability review of design drawings, and the implementation of these requirements through procedures, E l instructions, shop travelers (or automated process control), work It would also include dissemination of necessary i packages, etc. it information to all concerned in a clear, concise maquer so that The i ane requirements [- Is readily available, understood, and applied. should be applied equally to subcontracted components and l sub-assemblies as is applied to TVA fabrication and installation. j g.g Performance of the work shouls be accomplished by personnel qualified a [ for the particular task, who have the necessary procedurst and inspection requirements, understand all neessaary aspects of the ~ j requirements, and apply them in a consistent manner. The above criteria was the basis of the review and evaluation of the l welding and NDE program. n !~ l -w-aw-e m-sp-ewW--'

==vNN===yT --~P-

J Page 5 of 26 .j ~ ) i /.f - I 2 c. MANActxENT SUMMART This report is the result of an indepth review and evaluation of all The objective of the review was facets of the welding and NDE program. d HDE to identify improvements that would make thc overall welding an The reconsendations deal with improvements i Program.:=ve ef fective. to the program as well as corrective action for specific and generic I concerns identified during the evaluations. l This evaluation report has been reviewed for deficiencies. One is already covered as finding deficiency was identified; however, itSince an audit finding already exists, No.1 on Audit BN-W-80-08. tracking as a separate item is not required and no response is The following recommendations are for the usa of the Corrective action other than the necessary. Managers of CONST and EN DES. recommendation may be just as ef fective in achieving the improvement. NRC Region II is aware that the cara1uation is being made and may ask about the implementation of the recommendations. All nuclear project management personnel should continuously emphasise implementation of QA/QC procedures including holdpoints 1. Disciplinary with a system of feedback from lower level employees. action should be taken assiest welders who bypass holdpoints, foremen who allow holdpoints to be bypassed and craft, engineering Craft and inspection personnel who f ail to fellow procedures. W responsibility for meeting QA/QC requirements for both (, safety-related and non safet.y-related work, and the role of the should be inspector as assuring that QA/QC requirements are met, emphasised. l

2. - A more structured and comprehensive training program addressing the requirements and coussitzents applicable to particular crafts including craft supervision and inspection personnel, should be established.

A CONST qualification / certification program for visual weld 3. inspection, similar to that required for NDE, should be e s tablished. A more detailed training and certification program for certifying I 4. Level II Radiographers to 1,evel II Film Evaluatora needs to be developed. l 1 Additional supervisory and technical personnel should be supplied 5. to the Project Welding Engineering Units. The Project Welding Engineering Units should supply craft and inspection personnel with information on weld sequercing. l l ( 1

Page 6 of 26 ~- 4 3 l ~ 1 l l l l Information needed to produce welds of acceptable size, configuration and quality should be furnished to welders. Workmanship samples should be provided to welders and welding inspectors. The Project Welding Engineering Units should select welding processes and equipment to provide optinua quality and enhance CONST should establish a welding applications cost factors. facility to support this activity. Complete welding procedure specifications should be c.c the foreman's station. CCNST nuclear projects should be supplied with welding fit-up procedures. A concerted effort should be ande to provide a checklist on i E operations involving multiple procedures. A standard weld monitor system should be developed to provide more 6. information and to relate to cost and schedule. All necessary tools, gauges, and inattusents necessary to determine 7. l weld acceptance should be more readily available to welders, j. q',, foremen and inspectors. More surveillance ettecks should be made on*in process velding 8. operations. i A standardized system for continuity of welders' qualification [ 9. and. a welding procedure / performance qualification cross-reference should be developed and applied to all nuclear projects. An improved systes for making minor changes to welding operation 10. control documents at the nuclear projects need to be developed. A study of manpower utilization of welders at all nuclear projects 11. should be made. A complete rework of distribution, control, content and utilization 12. of G-29 welding and fabrication specifications should be made jointly by EN DES and CONST. Improvement should be made to the review and application of requirements of STRIDE specifications. EX DES welding personnel should review all drawings for constructability, standardize requirements for subcontracted and field f abricated items, and clearly define requirements by system classification. 3 Positive action needs to be taken to preclude defective itens from being shipped to the projects. ...----------e-w -e- "'e-r=

'-e

-5

Page 7 of 26 ..,o 2 4 4 n A review of the interfaces betven EN DES and Cor$T and within both 13. EN DES and CONST 12 needed. The scope, depth, and frequency of CONST audits of weldiag and Auditors performing these 14. NDE acti*ities needs to be evaluated. audits should have additional training in these activities. The CEP/ SOP and QC1/C-29 progr.m at RTN and later plants neads 15. s tandardization. A review of NRC OI&E reports and interactions with their inspectors indicate NRC's major concern in the welding ard KDE areas is out owoThe review team contend failure to follow established requirements. i that areas addressed in this report concerning training should be g ven highest priority to alleviate this problem area. I NOTE l The items stated above are discussed in detail in report section E, I. l Questions, Answers, and Recommendations. d / 1 -s l G w i

~ Page 8 of'26' I l S I i D. EVA1.UATION TEAM AND SCMIDUL4 , Team Members L. C. Robert - OEDC QA, Team Leader L. C. Forthard - CONST R. L. Harris - CONST

1. M. Jessee - EN DES M. L. Turnbow - CONST K. A. Hasting - CONST (PSN and TCN only)

Schedule June 16-20, 1980 - Bellefonte Nuclear Plant June 23-25, 1980 - EN DES /CONST Knoxville June 30-July 3,1980 - Watts Bar Nuclear Plant July 7-11, 1980 - Hartsville Nuclear Plant July 14-18, 1980 - Phipps Bend Nuclear Plant July 22-25, 1980 - Yellow Creek Nuclear Plant July 28-31, 1980 - EN DES Knoxville i ?( r",'= en e O ~

Page 9 of 26 l. l ? r t 't k i ATTACHMENT ? L i QUESTIONS, ANSVERS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Personnel Manstement and Supervision a. 1. Upper Manatement Do they demonstrate by word or deed suf ficient QA a. commitment to the people they supervise down to the lowest level? ANSku Upper sanagenent.at each nuclear project demonstrates their quality assurance / quality control commitment to the pe-sons they supervise, however, this information does not appear to be transmitted to lower All nuclear level personnel in their organizations. project management; project manager, construction engineer, and construction superintendent have their own method of conveying commitments to those they supervise. Some indicated the need for developing ,s. methods for assurir.g that this information reaches ':.t i'. their lowest level of persennel. p RECOMMENDATION f All nuclear project management should continously demonstrate the need for implementing QA/QC commitment to all their project personnel. The system for communicating this information should include a l feedback from personnel to assure management that requirements are being properly interpreted and j I problems identified. l I 2. Craf t Supervisors / Foremen l Are craf t supervisors kr.ovledgeable of QA/QC s. requirements? t I ANSWER the foreman / general foreman level Craft supervisors at have a general knowledge of QA/QC commitments, but need additional training in the specifics of their area of responsibility. It was observed that the percentage of plant completion had a direct relationship i to the level of QA/QC knowledge. This would suggest i l l l ~ - _ _ -, _. _ _...

Page 10 of 26 .i x 4 4 2 l l that such knowledge is acquired through negative I experience rather than a positive training program. The amount of formal QA/QC training in this area is i disproportionate to that provided in other areas, i.e. The training varies from a 30 minute QC Inspection. crier.tstion to an unstructured program where specifics ars covered at approxi:nately 10-week intervals. RECOMMENDATION It is recomended that a structured training program be implemented at each site. The program should address the general requiremer.ts and comitments applicable to all craf ts and in addition, the specifics . for each craf t and/or type of activity, i.e. stesafitters, ASME; ironworkers, AWS. f I b. What is their comitment? Quality, production, or quality production? Which of these provides their motivation? ANSVER Direct craf t supervision is placed in the position where they must satisfy both quality and production. The balance between these is dictated by the acceptability of the work. In essence, the supervisor is attempting to achieve an acceptable quality level This results with the lowest expenditure of man-hours. in a quality level which is directly associated sich the degree of inspection. How do supervisors assign velders to specific work? c. ANSVER 1 Although all craft welders are cualified to standard f tests in accordance with applicable codes it is [ recognised that various skill levels exist between Individuals. These skill levels are generally i l recognized by imediate craft supervision and I assignment is made accordingly. d. What instructions are given for specific work? l ANSVER l The type and detail of instructions given to the welders vary from site to site and activitrto activity. These do not always appear to be connensurate with the required quality level. It was the general opinion of crafts that more specific information would be of benefit. _----,_,---mw w n o w-- 's-

. _ ~ ~ _.. _. Page 11 of 26 = r. 3 i RECOMMENDATION 1 It la recommended that the information needed to I produce a weld of acceptable size, configuration, and quality be determined and made more readily available to the welder. 3. Welding Engineering /QC Unit Suoervisor a. What are his qualifications? ANSWER In general, the Welding Engineering /QC Unit Supervisors have sufficien background and experience in TVA to function as unit :apervisors, but need additional technical support from qualified welding engineering acd NDE personnel. b. What is his span of supervisory control? ANSWER

Q With the exception of Phipp's Bend, where Welding Engineering /QC has been separated, there are too many personnel in the unit to -be,ef fectively supervised by one individual. All projects are understaffed in the Welding Engineering function.

Does this arrangement (welding engineer and QC I c. inspection) provide suf ficient flexibility and i independence to be effective! ANSVER The arrangement of Welding Er.gineering/QC can work either way (in the same unit or separate) provided l there is sufficient management personnel and technical support. All projects are under staffed in one or both f of these areas. EECOMKENDATION The Welding Engireering/QC Unit should have additional qualified technical personnel. Also, there should be an M grade supervisor in the Welding Engineering and the QC functions to relieve the unit supervisor from some of the administrative duties which he now 1 performa. /

m. ~-. Page 12 of 26 I 4 l b. Velding Engineering 1. Ze the interface between EN DES and CONST effective? ANSVER There are many areas where the interface between EN DES and CONST is not effective. There are also areas within EN DES and CONST where interf aces are not effective. Present rules require nuclear projects to interface through EN DES Project Management. This arrangement is too time consuming and inefficient. RECOMMENDATION These interf aces should be reviewed to provide for uniformity and improved efficiency. 2. Do we have adequate welding engineering coverage in CONST and EN DEST l ANSVER w ', - -[ There is inadequate welding engineering coverage in both CONST and EN DES. RECOMMENDAT!ON EN DES should supply CONST with a list of s} stems for the l ( particular project, defining system classification, nuclear safety-related itema, code and standard (with applicable ), exceptions), inspection requirements, etc., for ready reference by CONST. EN DES welding personnel should review all drawings for constructability, weldir.g inspection and NDE information, review specifications for subcontracted items so that f abrication requirements are comparable to TVA field fabrication, upgrade QE8 welding EN DES inspection activities for vendor supplied items. should clearly define requirements of codes and standards on fit-up, inspection, etc., for each system and special requirements for duct, drain lines, and other non-critical fabrication. 3. Are the CONST site welding engineers qualified to be 1 welding engineers? ANSVER Approximately 50 percent of the site welding engineers i have insuf ficient background, experience and education to perform as qualified welding engineers. I l 1

Attacnment .) Page 13 of 26' I S The Welding Engineering Units should have additional qua1Lfied technical personnel. 4. Are the CONST welding engineers functioning as welding engineers or as a technical sdvisor/ assistant unit supervisor to the welding inspectors? ANSVER The CONST welding engineers spend the majority of their time as Technical advisor / assistant unit supervisor to the welding inspectors. This situation results from inexperienced welding inspection personnel, and the amount of research needed to determine requirements for the systes. 5. Do CONST welding engineers have the ability to sequence welding operations so as to control shrinkage, distortion, cracking, etc.? If so, do the craf ts abide by this sequence? ANSWER In many cases, welding engineers have the ability to sequence welding operations to control shrinkage, (ic distortion, cracking, etc. There is very little evidence of this type of information being provided to the cra f t s. The crafts generally follow such information when provided. RECOMMT.NDATION CONST Velding Engineering Units should supply craf ts with welding sequence for those applications where required by code and where considered necessary for other applications. 6. Do welding engineers have a system to monitor the accept / reject rates with respect to cost and schedules? ANSVER The weld monitor system at the CONST projects serves as a status indicator and is not related to etet and schedule. There is little uniformity of weld monitor systems from one project to another. i r

-- a accacumeau a Page 14 of 26 ~~~ ', i l i 6 l l l What actions do welding engineers take to improve acceptance rate of welds (review procedures, sethods, weld 7. configuration, manual / auto process, etc.)? ANSVER Little, and sometimes no action is taken to improve This condition results mainly from acceptance rates. understaf fing of the velding engineering units. RECOMMENDATION CONST should establish a standard weld monitor system which defines weld type and size, volume of weld metal, weld process and position of welding, type of NDE (surf ace or volumetric), and a system which will relate information on acceptance / rejection rate to cost and schedule. How do welding engineers interf ace with crafts? 8. ANSVER interface with crafts, In general, there is insuf ficientto understaffing of welding engineering unit. due in part process to be used, which may not be the most cost ., n _ In other cases, effective nor produce the highest quality. ~ decisions on welding process and equipment are overruled There is also by higher engineering or craf t management. failure by craf ts to follow instruction in work packages and other documents, and to bypass hold points. i f i RECOMMENDATION t The CONST Welding Engineering Unit at each nuclear project I should select the most cost effective welding process consistent with the quality level required for theto be application and should select velding equipment purchased compatible with the welding process, in conjunction with the CONST Velding Engineering Staf f. CONST should establish a Welding Applications facility to qualify welding procedures and to "de-bug" machine and automatic weldtog equipment. c. CCNST Inspectors _ What is the background and qualifications of these 1. peoplef ANSVER The background and qualifications of CONST welding lospectors ranges from 25 years of continuous related asperience, to new hires with no previous work experience i

_ l

m. wuuuuu u s Page 15 of 26

~~~ i / I 7 and nonstructured on-the-job training. (0JT). The mix is not weighted toward the more experienced. As a group, approximately 80 percent of the individuals did not have previous experience in this field prior to employment by TVA. Almost all of these individuals attended the Training and Technology School, Oak Ridge National Laboratory and were recruited directly from there. The ravaining 20 percent had experience in military service or with priente companies. 2. Do they receive adequate training from within TVAT 3. Do they know the procedural requirements, criteria and techniques? ANSWER The requirements of ASNT-TC-1A establish the basis for training and qualification of CONST inspection personnel in the area of NDE. The criteria established by QAP 2.3, Qualification, Training, and Certification Requirements for Nondestructive Examination Personnel, provides reasonable assurance that the individual has received adequate training prior to conduct of activities in s. this area. Training for other duties of welding inspection, i.e., ficup, purge, visual inspection, and surveillance o'f welding procedure conformance which are not addressed by ASNT-TC-1A need more emphasis. l rec 0K4ENDAtt0N It is reconsended that a structs. red training program be established to cover other duties of a welding inspector which are presently not adequately addressed.

4. Do they have adequate tools of the trade to perform the required inspection functions?

ANSVER At the present time, inspection personnel are not always provided with the baric tools needed to perform the inspection functions. Certain tools, such as protractors for checking angular dimensions and weld reinforcement gauges are not readily available. rec 0MMEFDAft0N Tools such as protractors and reinforcement gauges be made more readily available to inspectors. _n,_ _,m

Attacrunent 3. ~ - ~~ Pc2e 16 of 26 l l t l 1 l l 8 5. What is the ratio of inspectors to welders?.Is,this ratio adequate to cover the job? ANSVER The ratio of active welders to inspectors ranges from 20 + to 1 to 24.2 to I with an average of 22.2 to 1 for all sites. If the inspection program is to be fully implemented in nonsafety-related areas, this ratio is not adequate. 6. How do they interface with welders? ANSVER The relationship between inspectors and welders is generally good. The basic problem in this relationship is that the ins pector, in mos t instances, must pass judgment on workmanship that has not been evaluated by cra f t supervision. 7. Do inspectors direct work by crafts? -1 .a ANSWER As indicated in I.c.6 ab*ove, when craft supervision does not evaluate work for acceptability prior to requesting ins pection, the inspector is placed in the position of directing work. In the case where an activity has been performed incorrectly, procedures not followed, or acceptance criteria not met, the inspector must provide the necessary information to the craf t to correct the situation. A genatal attitude exists that it is the function of the inspector to provide the craf ts ' ith the w necessary QA/QC information to perfers an activity. With the exception of KDE activities on safety-related systems, i associated welding inspection activities, i.e.,

ficup, purge, weld configuration, and profile are not normally

" rejected" in the sense that a record is generated. The condition is not accepted by the inspector and such rework I as necessary to provide an acceptable condition la performed and then reinspected to determine acceptability. RECOMMENDATION It la recommended that craf t responsibility for meeting QA/QC requirements be emphasized for both safety-related and nonsafety-related work and the role of the inspector be ( defined as assuring these requirements have been set. l l i ve,----- -.--,--n.--- _., - ~ _ _, -

I nq.gb aeuaCAA b J Page 17 of 26 s 9 d. CONST velders 1. What is their experience level? ANSr.1 All construction craf t welders are required to be qualified in acwrdJnce with the applicable codes. The experience level of craft personnel is normally based upon attainrient The number of journeyman velders of journeyman status. varies from 80 percent of the active welders at one site to 40 percent at another site. The remaining welders are apprentices enrolled in a formal program or permit welders norually having approximately six months of formal welding training. What skills training do they receive within TVAT 2. ANSVER Welding skills training is provided by the craft on an This normally constitutes such training as-needed basis. as required to enable craf t welders to qualify in The content and format of ' additional welding processes. this training is determined by the craft. Do they receive adequate training in the ares of QA/QC7 3. MISVER The amount and type of QA/QC training provided to welders varies from site to site. As a minimum they view a 30-minute orientation film on welding QA/QC. Add itional training is at the option of the site which may consist of repetition of the film at specific intervals, formal orienestion sessions, etc. RECOMMFNDATION It is recommended that a standardized structured training per, gram be implemented at all sites. 4. Do they receive on-the-job training (0JT)? ANSWER Ulth the exception of the apprentice program, OJT for This is due to the requirement welders is not provided. that all welders must be quallfled prior to perfiirming any welding activity at a TVA construction site. s ..,_m.,

i Page 18 of 26 ~ i 10 Are detail weld Pfoduf** *,4 ,,adily available to 5. the welderst ANSVER Detail welding procedures are made available to welders The systes varies from the applicable DWP at all sites. beint, posted in the insediate work area to all assigned j the foreman's work DVP's being maintained in a folder at It should be noted that the DWP provides only process parameters and the general welding procedure station. specification must be available to provide theWith one exception, the general additional requirements. ( welding procedure is not readily available. [ RECOMMENDATICH_ C-29 Ceneral Welding Specifications should be at the foreman's work station. Are the quality control and standard operating procedures made readily available to the welder? 6. .. n ANSVER ~ Other than the Deth(1 Weld Procedures, welders are not provided with quality control and standard operating pro:edures. Are the velders knowledgeable of the procedural 7. requirements of the job? AN!VER Velders are knowledgeable of the procedures they are provided and in general adhere to these requirements. Has are welders certified /recertified? 8. AN SWER_ All TVA welders are qualified / certified to the applicable This i codes and processes they utilise. qualification / certification is supervised and evaluatedRequalification by welding engineering unit personnel.is required if a specific proces All sites have lastituted a within three months. gullfication/ verification procedure to assure thisThis verification la made requirement is set. by observation and documentation by welding Inspection i I

attactnent. J Page 19 of 26 l l 'l \\ 11 personnel. All other sites utilize the filler metal requisition to verify that the individual has welded with the process durin the verification interval. This practice is questionable for maintenance of qualification. RECOMMENDATION A standardized system for continuity of qualification should be developed. 9. How do they interface with the inspectors 7 i ANSVER Relationship between inspectors and welders is generally good. The basic problem in this relationship is the inspector, in most instances, must pass judgement on workmanship that has not been evaluated by craft supervision. e. Trainint

b..

1. Wt.at is the scope of training for welders and welding supervisors?

  • ANSVER Training classes vary in content, in duration (1/2 hour to 4 hours) and in frequency.

2. How are these training courses developed, presented, and evaluated? ANSVER Training courses are developed by the welding engineering units and most are presented by the training officer. Some are updated periodically. Most courses are not I evaluated by testing nor are they given periodically. 1 RECOMMENDATION There needs to be a standardized and improved welder and welding foreman training program. e 3. How are inspectors and inspection supervisors trained / qualified / certified? ANSVER Scheel, Oak Ridge National Laboratoy, without previous industrial esperience. They are assigned to work with a \\

Page 20 of'26 ~ [. i f a., m 1 l t f t In aces level II NDE inspector for some period of time. cases, the experience requirements of CEP 2.05 have not been set. All inspectors receive NDE training at Eartsville and are certified in specific NDE methods. At Watts Bar and Bellefonte, inspectors for visual examination are trained and certified by the project. I At Hartsville, Phipps Bend, and Yellow Creek, visual examination inspectors receive training at Martsville for Training courses have been evaluated by CONST i one week. and EN DES personnel. No special training is given to inspection supervisors. RECOMMENDAff0N A standard division vide qualification / certification Program for visual veld inspection should be established similar to that of the NDE program. This would require each individual to complete a sinimum 3 month on the job training program under the supervision of a certified inspector prior to an individ4a1 being certified. Areas in welding such as filler wetal control, welder qualifications, process specifications, etc. should be covered during this period. At the completion of the CJT , the individual would attend the NDE training facility at Eartsville for class room training and certification. The wishal weld' inspection training course at Hartsville should be structured to coincide with the NDE e j qualifiestion/ certification program. NDE inspectors need additional training in examining and This should be accomplished at the site I evaluating welds. prior to certification as specified in TVA's written practice (CEP 2.0$). II. PaocEDtntES a 1. Are the authors qualified? l r t ANSVER Tes l l Free wtere is the acceptance criteria obtained? For STRIDE 2. projects is the C. F. Bree. specification consulted or does G-29 only apply as for other projectsf r ANSWER The acceptance criteria is estracted from the codes and standards TVA is cousitted to follow. The C. F. Braua specifications are consulted and the G-29 procedures are modified accordingly. l 1 w--,

Page 21 of 26 I i I 1 2 l } 13 1 3. Have our NDE and detailed welding procedures been approved j by CE/C.F. Braun? (STRIDE only) MMR No - all procedures with the exception of ASKE Section NE have been excluded from this requirement. 4 Do the EN DES Welding Engineers review the C. F. Braun j specifications and prepare / revise detail procedures of C-29 appropriately? (STRIDE only) ANSWER i STRIDE specifications are not reviewed by EN DES for inclusion of requirements in C-29 procedures and specifications. The Nuclear Project Welding Engineering Units must review STRIDE i specifications to determine procedures needed and request them free E!! DES. EN DES nuclear codes, standards and material secties changes C-29 specifications at the request of the l nuclear projecta. RECOMMENDATIONS

c.. s l

h ' CONST should either set up a welding and fabrication group l for KTN and PSN Projects to review welding, inspection, NDE, and faorication requirements, or the review should be made g by EN DES, so that procedures are available and proper for the application in a timely manner. s S. Is C-29 adequately controlled? ANSWER i Yes - It is controlled within EN DES and CONST by approved document control procedures. 6. Does C-29 supply suf ficient information for the implementation of fabrication operations, inspection, and tests of nuclear safety-related welding? ANfUER Yes - Provided the proper requirements are speciflad in other document s. 7. Does C-29 supply suf ficient information for the implementation of fabrications, inspection, and test for other than nuclear safety-related welding? I

Patie 22 of 26 ~~ 14 ANSWER Yes - Provided the p' roper requirements are specified in other documents. 8. Does C-29 receive an adequate review for conformance with OEDC QA Program Requirements? ANSWER C-29 does not receive a specific review for conformance to the OEDC QA Requirements; however, it is prepared and controlled in accordance with EN DES EP 3.13 which has been reviewed for conformance to the OEDC QA Program and accepted as meeting the appropriate requirements. R ECOMMEND ATION A complete review of the distribution, control, content and utilization of C-29 should be made jointly by EN DE3 and CONST. CONKENT M .Information providing the requirements for fabrication operations, inspection. and teating in accordance with ASpE Section III is adequately defined in Supporting documents. For work not in accordance with ASME Section III, the specific requirements for implementation of the referenced codes and standards and for non-code work are not adequately defined in supporting documents. 111. KATERIALS 1. Who procures weld filter material? 2. How is weld filler material controlled at the site? Is this adequate? ANSWER Weld filler materials are normally procured by indefinate quantity term (lQT) contract and each nuclear project requisitions filler materials as needed. All nuclear projects basically control filler materials in the same manner from receipt on site to issuance to the welders. Occasionally each project has the need to requisition filler material on an emergency basis. This is accomplished by the nuclear project contacting EN DES, QE8 QA Audit Section to verify the m

/ Page 23 of 26 4 l 15 j l acceptability of a specific supplier's'QA program and/or parc QA performance. If the supplier is acceptable the project procures the material. Again each project basically procures this material in the same manner, i RECOMMENDATION None. There does not appear to be any problems in this area. OSSERVATION Jur nuclear projects are constantly cited by the Nuclear i Aegulatory Cormaission (NRC) for the lack of control of filler ] mate rial, i.e. loose electrodes, on the floor, laying in cable trays, or behind vent ducts. This has and will be a problem considering we are working with " people" and the turnover of cra f t forces is considerable. For the amount of filler material consumed at each project in comparison to the amount found by the NRC inspectors, this does not constitute an uncontrolled conditions however, all project management should I continue to emphasize to those concerned the importance of controlling filler materials until consumed or returned i to storage. 3. Are the specifications of GE/Braun reviewed with respect to weld filter material used? (STRIDE only) l ANSl#.R Yes. For STRIDF. projects (HTN-P8N) the specifications (CE/3raun) are reviewed by the Welding Engineering Units with res pec t to weld filter material to be used. This is required to Jesure the appropriate material in conjunction with the appropriate velding procedure contained in General Specification C-29 is used. IV. Welding and NDE Processes 1. How are welding and NDE activities planned? ANSWER Work is initiated by shop traveler or work package. Welding, NDE information is entered by the Welding Engineering Unit. .i I 2. How are welders and inspectors assigned? ANSWER Both welders and inspectors are assigned by qualificatj,on status. I i

l Page 24 of'26 4 16 3. Who assigns welding and NDE procedures to specific welds? ANSVE R Velding Engineering Units assign welding and YDE procedures to specific welds. Safety-related systems within the scope of the Nuclear Components Manual ( ASME III) have a welding and NDE procedure assignment drawing issued by EN DES and the information is entered on the shop traveler or APC card. For other systems and features, the information is entered in the work package or AFC cards by the Welding Engineering Unit. 4 Who determines whether manual or automatic processes are utilised? ANSVER in most cases, there is joint effort between craft and engineering. S. Do the processes utilised re flect the best acceptance rate of welds? AN SWIR Cenerally not. There is not enough evatustion performed by "i the Weldf.ng Engineering Unit on acceptance / rejection rates. V. Audits of Welding an1 NOE Activieles 1. How ef fective are CONST audits of welding and KDE activities? ANSWER In most cases the audits conducted at each nuclear project developed for each audit. However the plan should be more detailed and their implementations should require more thorough evaluations. The number and frequency of audits vary at each nuclear project due to the stage of construction. The number of audits that have been conducted within the last year directly related to welding and NDE (W-audits) for each nuclear project is as follows: WBN - 7, BLN - 10, KTM - 7, PBN - 2, and YCN - 3. RECOMMENDATION The scope, depth, and frequency of audits for welding and KDE activities at each nuclear project needs to be evaluated. It is stao recommended that a training course (s) be developed (or utilise the existing courses) at the HTN training facility for those auditors who are conducting audits in the-welding and NDE discipline to improve their familarity with the requirements of these attivities.

Page 25 of 26 + 17 OTHER RECOTfENDAf t0NS 1. RES needs additional authority, training and personnel to inspect items for which they have inspection. responsibilities. and welding inspectors to penvide guidance and prevent over-reaction on surface finish requirements. 2. Workmanship samples should be provided to project welders and welding inspectors to provide guidance and prevent over-reaction on surftce finish requirements. 3. Disciplinary action should be taken against welders who bypass hold points, foremen who allow hold points to be bypassed and craf t, engineering and inspection personnel who fait to fallew procedures. Ch ality levels on civil structural drawings are 4. i con fusing--need some type of re solution. S. C-29 Ceneral specification needs to be at work stations--it is part of the welding procedure. 6. A Welding Procedure - Performance Cross-Reference (condensed version) needs to be supplied to project and should be standardised.

g, 7.

Foremen and welders need inspection gauges to determine that work is ready to be inspected. 8. Welling of sheet metal needs to be more clearly defined. 9. CONST needs fit-up proce.dures. There is a number issued in CONST QC!, but procedures have not been issued. First, there must be a commitment to either follow AWS DI.1 and 831.1 visual examiniation requirements as specified on drawings or list exceptions for specific applications. Following issuance of these procedures, inspectors on visual examination should be given additional training on joint design and fit-up requirements.

10. On large structures subject to tamellar tearing, TVA should purchase special steel rather than gouge metal and redeposit weld metal to prevent lamellar tearing.
11. A concerted ef fort should be made to provide check lists on operations where multiple procedures are referenced, to avoid having multiple procedures on hand for reference.
12. Redundancy in QCI and C-29 on NDF, procedures should be eliminated at KIN, P8N, and YCN projects.
13. More surveillance checks should be made on welding conditions.

.y. maw.m_.As..As- .---___h =- -.4 l Attachment J l - "~- Page 26 of 26 l.' l l i J I. s.. 18 j l 14 There needs to be a faster system for making minor changes to APC and SCC cards at projects, rather th.in having I foremen travel to the Welding Engineering' Unit. 13. Improvements need to be incorporated for veld equipment j procurement, separation for particular craft use, and for r.alntenance. j 16. Requirements for stamping of welds, prior to performing the welding operation, should be removed where they are now specified. I

17. A more detailed training and certtfication program for i

f certifying level 11 radiographers to level 11 film I evaluators should be developed. Example Film evaluation I experience under supervision of certified film evaluator I knowledge of welding processes, defects, joint designs, etc. l 18. A study needs to be made on utilization of welders at al nuclear projects.

19. CEP/50P Program for HTN and later plants should be reviewsd for standardisation.

11 6 I I a. G -}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20203M929&oldid=4071215"