ML20205J805
| ML20205J805 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Sequoyah |
| Issue date: | 02/12/1986 |
| From: | Kemp W, Thero O QUALITY TECHNOLOGY CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML082340195 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8602260446 | |
| Download: ML20205J805 (4) | |
Text
..
t
(
QUALITY TECHNOLOGY COMPANY gg
.~
P.O. BOX 600 Sweetwater. TN 37874 (615)365-4414 ERT INVESTIGATION REPORT PAGE 1 OF 2 CONCERN NO:
PH-85-052-X03, IN-85-533-X11 CONCERN:
See Below INVESTIGATION PERFORMED BY:
William Kemp, Jr.
DETAILS CONCERN NO: PH-85-052-X03 CONCERN:
Welder recertifications have been falsified.
CONCERN NO:
IN-85-533-X11 CONCERN:
Welder's certification have been falsified,. as an individual has maintained current certifications and has not welded in over 10 years.
DOCUMENTATION / PROCEDURES REVIEWED:
QCI 4.01 and 4.02 (All Revisions)
AWS D1.1 1972 ASME Section III & IX 1971 Summer 1973
SUMMARY
OF INVESTIGTAION:
The concerns"*dre unsubstantiated.
The concerns addressed specific individuals and a review of their welder qualification /requalification records revealed no evidence of falsification..
B602260446 e60220 ADOCKOSOOOg7 FINDINGS:
PDR P
PH-85-052-X03 addressed the same welder referenced in WI-85-035-007.
This report discusses the records falsification aspect as opposed to the quality aspect.
Welder X 's personnel
- records, welder 's qualification records and recertification records were found to be in accordance with applicable requirements.
Qualification and renewal of qualification documents reviewed with no discrepancies noted.
Concern IN-85-533-X11 addressed welder qualification of a
specific individual.
A review of the individual's personnel records indicated that:
4 ERT INVESTIGTAION REPORT PAGE 2 OF 2 CONCERN NOS. PH-85-052-X03, IN-85-533-X11 DETAILS, continued gualified to weld in the early 70's.
1)
The individual was
- However, by the mid 70 s, the qualifications had been revoked for not welding in the processes within the prescribed time frame.
2)
From the mid 70's to present, the individual has been in a
position
'o f authority / responsibility which does not require welding qualifications.
3)
There were no records showing reinstating of qualifications after they were revoked in the mid 70 's,
as the qualifications were not required for the position held.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the investigation of these concerns and the documentation reviewed the falsification aspect is unsubstantiated.
~
2AJW gd 4
~
- .' as
-as 4
)
{
/ f(
' DKTE REVIEWED BY:
?/o/J6
- DATE a
P t
~
' ~= r i
]
.l / C 71
-\\
t REQUEST FOR REpORTABILITY EVALUATION l '.
Request No.
IN-85-511-XII (ERT Concern No.)
(ID No.,
if reported) 2.
Identification of Item Involved:-__-_______
( Nornencl at ure, system, manuf.,SN, Model, etc.)
3.
Description of problem (Attach related documents,
- photos, sketches,etc.)
Welder recertifications have been falsified.
4.
Reason for Reportabilitys (Use supplemental sheets if necessary)
- u.....-.
A.
This design or construction deficiency,- were it to have remained uncorrected, could have affected adversely the safety of operations of the nuclear power plant at any time throughout the expected lifetime of the plant.
No - X Yes ___-_ If Yes, Ekplains--___
ANO B.
This deficiency represents a sinnificant breakdown in any portion of the quality assurance program conducted in accordance with the requirements of Appendix B.*
X Yes -__-_ If Yes, Explain:-______--_------_
No
= - _ _ _,
--J'a----------
e OR C.
This deficiency.rporesents a pianificant_ deficiency._in. final design as approved and released for construction such that
- the, design does not conform to the criteria bases stated in the' safety analysis report or construction psemit.
No - JL Yes. -___
If Yes, Explain:-_-_-_--_---------_----_----
QH ERT Form M h
i I
REQUEST FOR REpORTABILITY EVALUATION D.
This deficiency t'eoresents a
significant deficiency in construct ton of or significant damace to a structure, syntem or component which will renutre extensive evaluation.
ewtensive r e d e r.i g n.
or tuxtensive repair-to meet the cetterna anc haneo stated in the safety analysis report or const ruct tore oprmit or to otherwise establish the adecuacy nf the structure, sy s t ern, or component to pertform'its intended safety function.
Nn
__X__Y es __ __ _ If.Yes, Explain:
QS E.
This deficiency represents a sinnificant deviation from the perfornience specifications which will require owtonsive evaluation, extensive
- redesign, or ewtensive repair to establish the adequacy of the structure,
- system, or component to perform its intended safety function.
No X
Yes __ _ _ If Yes, Explain AND 4B Q_R,4C QR_ 4D QB 4E ARE MARKED "YES".
.I_MMEDI ATELY IF ITEM 4A, R
HAND-CARRY THIS REQUEST AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION TO NSRS.
m q
This Condition was Identifled by: ___,(M
[#
W__% _______
ERT Invest gato phone Ext.
__b_ '
' 6>
ERT project Manager.. Phone Ext.
Acknowledgmentsof receipt by NSRS
' b ! _ s _<.-=_ w _-_-__________
Dat= 2 ')_{G______ Time,0.k(.
/
Sig d
ERT Form M
.