ML20205Q747
| ML20205Q747 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 02/05/1985 |
| From: | Livermore H NRC - COMANCHE PEAK PROJECT (TECHNICAL REVIEW TEAM) |
| To: | Noonan V NRC - COMANCHE PEAK PROJECT (TECHNICAL REVIEW TEAM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20204J134 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-85-59 NUDOCS 8606030048 | |
| Download: ML20205Q747 (450) | |
Text
. _. . - .-_ _
Y)o wj u t - -T- 3' Decluk Ce n ro - 4 ~t c,/ c,t. 4 c,.
k esHcascoan Fat : lb u cuc;I S. L)~ , Di x-te c
&as LL %gur l
& t{6% : t .& Lsvtnu.cn QA-/gd 6o dicc]gy ;
0nustekt. Isa]e d I tb, ascEl $s0t+t.0 isici.
t l
. b o h lech .* C/r5F l t it a. e i c C ear E IMigu.a o .
n
,4U i kt. r-h et v O.t y d .
64.
ct cue L % g _ ,c( l Mr 4 pe-f% ,L.. J 19. iss dmx, [L /& ,4 4_ l do & p'f LE i
- r. -l 4s prsaf J .t ef +wcan w 5$p&
d
\
l 3,i 4 L i c f i o r e. }
w ~ g _ _e g l Te_T - 4 w L ,. 4 , m - r f .4_.
bw s. k Pcd , '7% & gai a ~ s s/ a % -u. Asca a d de l J
,di m M ~/ a&%w u:e 9iaia,+La.L x= M ad R -
"J I La. T e 'r Q A-A a tc./ % p. /qc -, funp <w/
,A s du~ fn -,. J w e- ( ,
6u.T & g 27eyyiK.
dr m',.
LJ-w &, N M're.czM
<a J N a d - fe _
~ eC. e ,.. <-a / / u y &a-o . Thi "8R' i!8?!" "' "PDR GARDE 85-59
" 01p.153 ult.,
e
%G W% k zt_ vser J% a'~ JlW%tt f g L ~~+ y . -1 p .
~ t o a.a. x x a M s z w,
.Me N, m Sfc m] 4AJ :
q=4h
% [.
c ,--
_ = .
(QA-/qcu . . 1 i 4 NUl C 0 A %A u da ,
Od b I A "~~ Ib d W ggco o s. m~t y l du Tu_te i ddm Ma 3 1
&M A g f, q %, a y =,4 k l
- mtc M. M TV
%- TW R*/
,4-u c eg(s t.s)
M2 o e/
4 <..s Waf dwL ad J M & n = L e e p a<cl Y
~.A A .- %. m s Asc 4 s,enue
-d m-;A~d ~W : zL=-,,
9 pgg/ - cs v Aiw s
l l ~ 7L. *c/ d,my s 'vS es
& sk et,,,
"u/!d my nJa . "c) :V
% ~ LLad & ~ ~ ~ J.
( -
'4/.s tmpucrs
~7 A.T gyype 647 l ee(et l
l _ _ . _ . . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . . _ . . .
. u .. d ,
)
ATTACHMENTS Summaries:
ANI REPORTS - ARC STRIKES PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DESIGN, ETC.
DOCUMENT CONTROL VIOLATION OF HOLD POINTS INTIMIDATION MINIMUM WALL TESTS TRAINING WELDING FSAR pages (discussed on page 3 of summary on ANI REPORTS - ARC STRIKES):
17.1-39, May 31, 1979 17.1-39, Amendment 41, July 11,1983 17.1-40, May 31, 1979 17.1-41, August 7, 1981 CASE I
EXHIBIT NO. DESCRIPTION AND
SUMMARY
TO WHICH EXHIBIT IS APPLICABLE 1,023 ANI SIS Record 939 314, 10/14/82 DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL <
VIOLATION OF HOLD POINTS (
INTIMIDATION l WELDING MA-85-59 H f 6s
~.. _ -
1 . . -
1,024 ANI SIS Report 932 11-006, 10/14/82 and 11-006-1, 10/27/82 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DOCUMENT CONTROL MINIMUM WALL
, TRAINING WELDING 1,025 ANI SIS Record 939 3221, 11/11/82 VIOLATION OF HOLD POINTS INTIMIDATION 1,026 ANI SIS Record 939 327, 11/18/82 ARC STRIKES PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DOCUMENT CONTROL MINIMUM WALL TRAINING WELDING 1,027 ANI SIS Report 932 10-016, 12/20/82 DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL WELDING 1,028 ANI SIS Report 932 18-005, 1/10/83 DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL WELDING 1,029 ANI SIS Record 939 334, 1/13/83 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL 1,030 ANI SIS Record 939 339, 3/1/83 l PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL 2
= we g - - y,p- ,
-- -- ma - --w --
_. _..I . _. . . . . . . . _ . . . . _ _ .
1,031 ANI SIS Record 939 341, 3/8/83 DESIGN TESTS
. 1,032 ANI SIS Record 939 346, 4/21/83 DOCUMENT CONTROL TESTS 1,033 ANI SIS Report 932 9-002A, 4/21/83 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL WELDING 1,034 ANI SIS Record 939,347, 4/21/83 DOCUMENT CONTROL TRAINING WELDING 1,035 ANI SIS Report 932 G-044, 5/26/83 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMNCES DESIGN l DOCUMENT CONTROL TRAINING WELDING 1,036 ANI SIS Record 939 353, 6/2/83 !
PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES 1,037 ANI SIS Record 939 355, 6/7/83 DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL 1,038 ANI SIS Report 932 4-003-2, 6/22/83 DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL WELDING 3
- , _ - , -- -,m
. . _ . - _ . . _ _ _ .. 1 ' .
1,039 ANI SIS Report 932 G-051, 6/29/83 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL INTIMIDATION
, WELDING 1,040 ANI SIS Report'932 10-022, 6/30/83 DESIGN -
DOCUMENT CONTROL 1,041- ANI SIS Record 939 356, 7/1/83 DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL 1,042 ANI SIS Record 939 357, 7/2/83 DESIGN
. TRAINING WELDING 1,043 ANI SIS Record 939 362A, 8/3/8-3 VIOLATION OF HOLD POINTS INTIMIDATION .
1,044 ANI SIS Record 939 361A, 8/11/83 DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL 1,045 ANI SIS Record 939 363A, 8/18/83 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION'0F NONCONFORMANCES DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL INTIMIDATION
, TESTS TRAINING 4
, . - . - r- ~,--. - . . , . . - . - - . . _ ,-, - - - - , , , , - - - , 7 ,-, ,.-- - ,, .. ,n-.,
~
._ . _ - . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ._1
. . . . *. ~.
1,046 ANI SIS Record 939 364,'8/23/83 (follow-up to CASE Exhibit 1,032, ANI SIS Record 939 346, 4/21/83)
DOCUMENT CONTROL TESTS TRAINING I
1,047 ANI SIS Report 932 16-009, 9/27/83 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DESIGN ,
1,048 ANI SIS Report 932 10-024, 10/5/83 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DOCUMENT CONTROL WELDING 1,049 ANI SIS Record 939 365, 10/7/83 DOCUMENT CONTROL e WELDING 1,050 ANI SIS Record 939 366 and 366A, 10/21/83 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DOCUMENT CONTROL TRAINING 1,051 ANI SIS Record 939 369, 11/9/83 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL
, WELDING 1,052 ANI SIS Record 939 367-A, 10/31/83 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL INTIMIDATION WELDING 7
- _ _ __ c . .._- _ 6
- . .- . 0 ,
1,053 ANI SIS Record 939 367-B, 11/18/83 l
PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES s DESIGN l
DOCUMENT CONTROL l
) INTIMIDATION '
WELDING 1,054 ANI' SIS Report 932 10-030, 1/5/84 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES
^
DESIGN 1,055 ANI SIS Report 932 10-031, 1/24/84 DOCUMENT CONTROL v
1,056 ANI SIS Record 939 371, 2/6/84 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DESIGN ,
DOCUMENT CONTROL TRAINING 1,057 ANI SIS Report 932 5-002 and 5-002A, 1/23/84 and 2/10/84 j PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES i
DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL TESTS WELDING 1,058 ANI SIS Report 932 10-032, 2/17/84 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DESIGN l DOCUMENT CONTROL t
TRAINING WELDING 1,059 ANI SIS Report 932 10-033, 4/13/84 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DOCUMENT CONTROL 6
= ,._ - , . . .
E
- . . ; .- . c , ,
1,060 ANI SIS Report 932 10-034, 4/18/84 PROMPT IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMANCES DESIGN DOCUMENT CONTROL VIOLATION OF HOLD POINTS TESTS .
WELDING A
NOTE: The preceding is not an all-encompassing listing of categories into which each document falls; it is intended only to give a quick overview of the applicability of the Exhibits.
s
't l
t e
1 4
i e 7
-- , - + - - = , , , - - - -- . . - - - - - -- -- .-- -, , - - ,v -, -- w o- e----e = -+-e- - -- w , --- - - +- w e- - - - -
____ _ _.. _ _ . _ _ _ . , _ . _ l_ .. . A ._ _ . _ . . - - _ . _ . l l
- . e e, l ANI REPORTS - ARC STRIKES Arc Strikes represent a continuing problem at Comanche Peak which i
Applicants have not corrected (or have not been able to correct) over a 9
period of several years.
)
In addition to representing a continuing problem in and of itself, r.he 1
fact that this problem has continued to recur over a period.of many years, I when combined and trended with other recurring problems, also indicates a breakdown in the Applicants' QA/QC program in that they have failed to take proper measures which would prevent recurrence (in violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI). As such, it is one of many possible examples which are important in the context of the global issues regarding Applicants' noncompliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B (see discussion in Board's 3/15/84 Memorandum (Clarification of Open Issues), bottom of page 4 continued top of page 5). This is also the type of information which would be included,as part of CASE's Trends or Patterns of Non-Conforming ,
Conditions (see discussion in CASE's 4/2/84 Motions Regarding Board's 3/15/84 Memorandum (Clarification of Open Issues), pages 18 and 19).
Also, this problem is relevant to portions of CASE's proposed new contention which we will be filing in the near future.
This problem cannot be viewed in a vacuum from other related information already in the record, and it is necessary to include enough of it here for the Eoard to understand the reason CASE believes the recently obtained ANI documents are important.
A brief scanning of CASE Exhibit 38 (admitted into evidence 6/9/82, at Tr. 1349), the Brown & Root Quality Assurance Department Nonconformance Log, FO A-85-59 9/e
- - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ - _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ - -w.,, n-er - , , - , , - -
T ._
~
. _ . - . . . . - b reveals that this has been a continuing problem identified on Nonconformance
, Reports (NCR's). In addition, we call the Board's attention to CASE Exhibit 510, 12/18/78, NCR C-1296R1, especially pages 1, 3, and 4 (This is one of the exhibits which were accepted into evidence in accordance with the ,
Board's 12/7/82 Order (Proposed Findings of Fact; CASE Exhibits) fellowing ,
submission of CASE's 10/18/82 Response to Board's Directive Regarding CASE Exhibits; these exhibits were accepted into evidence in the May 1982 hearings.) This do'cument indicates one of the reasons it is so important to control are strikes, at least in regard to rebar. It states thst according to the "CRSI Handbook for Placing Reinforcing Bars," Handbook Section 10-11 states:
"' Simply starting a spark against a bar . . . or any similar operation that concentrates high heat at one peint of a har creates what is '
called a ' notch' effect. Tests have shown that this can rednee the strength of a bar to 35 to 40 percent of its capacity'." (Emp nasis added.)
The information contained in Reports and Recorda of the Authorized Nuclear Inspector (ANI) obtained by' CASE in the Texas Utilities Electric Company (TUEC) rate hearings indicates the ANI's eencetus regarding this continuing problem. The fact that the ANI had spch strong comments a
regarding this problem increases its importance, since these items should have already been inspected, checked, and verified under Applicants' QA/0C program.
As indicated below, this problem also indicates a failure in Applicants' training program and has serious implications because of the 2
__ _ , - _ .y . -.-_ , _..r .- - , , - - , - - . . - , .,.
-. - . . - . _ .' ..~ . . - -. L. ,
l
. .. l continuing receipt and use of pipe which has or is near to having minimum vall violations (see discussion in ANI REPORTS - MINIMUM WALL, included herein).
Further, Applicants' proposed handling of the problem by use of IR's and punch lists in some instances in effect removed this problem from the established program of using NCR's to report nonconforming conditions (which was in effect until 7/11/83; see attached page 17.1-39, 5/31/79,'and the revision to it, page 17.1-39, Amendment 41, 7/11/83, and pages 17.1.40, and 17.1-41 which were current as of 7/11/83), and is relevant to another portion of CASE's proposed new contention, use of inadequate or less restrictive (than NCR's) methods of dealing with nonconformances. ,
From ANI Reports and Records: -
ANI: "Since surface defects no deeper than 1/16" need be repaired and these areas were ground upon, they must have been more serious defects of are strikes." .(See CASE Exhibit 1,024, ANI SIS Report 11-006, 10/14/82, and 11-006-1, 10/27/82.) (Closed with CASE Exhibit 1,026, ANI SIS Record 939 327.)
B&R 1/7/83 Answer: "In the past year or so, are strikes have been a asior nonconforming condition as evidenced by the number of IR's and NCR's issued to identify and correct them." (Emphasis added.) (See CASE Exhibit 1,026, ANI SIS Record 939 327, 11/18/82.)
a 3
. - - - , _ . _ _ . _ _ - . , ., , , - - . . , - - _ . . _ , _ . - _ . - . _ - - , - _ , _ . , -, , -,,.y , , .g y ,.,--9 ..g.-..
ANI, page 2: "It is very evident that the training and indoctrination program outlined in Section III of the QA Manual is not being implemented, due to the number of are strikes and base metal non conformances being found by ANI's and 0.C. Inspectors during walkdowns and at non destructive examinations...Due to numerous sections of pipe being received that are so close to minimum wall at time of receiving, it becomes even more critical that all are strikes and base metal non conformances are reported and documented promptly." (See CASE Exhibit 1,026, ANI SIS Record 327, 11/18/82.)
1/7/83 B&R Answer: Arc strikes and base metal defects shall be handled as follows (see CASE Exhibit 1,026, ANI SIS Record 327, 11/18/82):
I (1) Discovered on N-stamped components, ID'd and documented on NCR; (2) Discovered prior to system walkdown by QC, documented on IR (Inspection Report);
(3) ' Discovered during system walkdown by QC, entered on system punchlist and documented on an IR; (4) Discovered after system pressure testing, documented on NCR. ;
l 1
)
I 1
4 l
l O
___A. ._..______J -. -
.. s s . .
ANI REPORTS - VIOLATION OF HOLD POINTS The violation of hold points represent a continuing problem at Comanche Peak which Applicants have not corrected (or have not been able to correct) over a period of several years.
In addition to representing a continuing problem in and of itself, the fact that this problem has continued to recur over a period of many years, when combined and trended with other recurring problems, also indicates a breakdown in the Applicants' QA/QC program in that they have failed to take proper measures which would prevent recurrence; this is a violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion IVI. An additional aspect of this particular problem is that it constitutes a subtle but continuing intimidation and harassment of QC inspectors and ANI inspectors at the plant; this is a violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion I. (See discussion in ANI REPORTS - INTIMIDATION.)
This is one of many possible examples which are important in the context of the global issues regarding Applicants' noncompliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B (see discussion in Board's 3/15/84 Memorandum (Clarification of Open Issues), bottom of page 4 continued top of page 5).
This is also the type of information which would be included as part of CASE's Trends or Patterns of Non-Conforming Conditions (see discussion in CASE's 4/2/84 Motions Regarding Board's 3/15/84 Memorandum (Clarification of Open Issues), pages 18 and 19). Also, this problem is relevant to portions l of CASE's proposed new contention which we will'be filing in the near future.
, R 10
= -
_. . . -. . ._$ .~ - - - - + - - - - - - -
._ M.
Further, because of the continuing nature of this problem,' CASE believes that it should have been factored into Applicants' factors of safety as a reduction in those factors; we do not believe Applicants have done this. This is therefore applicable to Applicants' Motion for Summary Disposition on safety factors.
A brief scanning of CASE Exhibit 38 (admitted into evidence 6/9/82, at Tr. 1349), the Brown & Root Quality Assurance Department Nonconformance Log, reveals that this has been a continuing problem identified on Nonconformance Reports (NCR's). As indicated in the following, this has also been identified as an area of serious concern to the ANI's.
From ANI Records and Reports:
1 ANI Access -- not given opportunity to review for hold points; not provided with information that defines the scope of the work (see CASE Exhibit 1,023, ANI SIS Record 939 314, 10/14/82).
ANI Access -- ANI not given opportunity for involvement in installation or inspection activities re: snubbers (hold points); "If Brown & Root intends to present quality records documenting ASME inspection activitie s to the ANI at the time of execution of N-5s those records that did not provide for ANI involvement will be considered unacceptable." (See CASE Exhibit 1,025, ANI SIS Record 322A,11/11/82.)
i o
0 2
r
. . _ . . _ _ _ -. 4 . . .
. r <L
)
ANI Access -- on many occasions, refused access to areas in which Code related work was being performed: Reactor Bldg.1, Diesel Generator Bldg.1, Fuel Building several tisse (effect of this is that construction decides when ANI's may have access). (See CASE Exhibit 1,043, ANI SIS Record 939 362A, 8/3/83.)
(Note by CASE: Obviously, ANI hold points could not have been followed if the ANI's could not even get into the buildings.) ,
Impact Testing -- welded attachme.nts to Latge Bore Main Steam and Feed Water Piping; "Dce to repeated identification of non-compliance with Design Specification requirements for notch toughness material to be used in above applications request that all packages on these systems be re-presented to the ANI for establishment of hold points." (Second emphasis added.) (See CASE Exhibit 1,060, ANI SIS Report 932 10-034, 4/18/84.)
5/8/84 Answer (attached to CASE Exhibit 1,060, ANI SIS Report 932 10-034): W. E. Baker, Pipe Welding Engineer, has instructed his personnel to route the subject packages to ANI.
5/16/84 (attached to CASE Exhibit 1,060, ANI SIS Repoort 932 10-034):
Acceptable for closure; PSE is in process of reviewing all affected supports.
t l
l i
I 3
L
._ _.. _. _ 1 _- - -__
~ .
., .. . .o .3
\ .
ANI REPORTS - INTIMIDATION The following ANI Reports and Records were identified by Mr. Gordon Purdy during his recent deposition in the intimidation portion of these proceedings. Since it concerns the intimidation hearings,'we will not elaborate at great length here upon the significance of these documents.
However, as stated previously, we believe that they indicate very subtle and finally more direct harassment and intimidation of the Authorized Nuclear
! Inspectors (ANI's) at Comancit Peak. Additional inportance and significance should be accorded these documents due to the fact that these are not only inspectors, but inspectors who review items which should have already been inspected, checked, and verified under Applicants' QA/QC program. The fact that this has occurred recently is also of importance. .
From ANI Records and Reports ANI Access - not given opportunity to review for hold points; not I
provided with information that defines the scope of the work (see CASE Exhibit 1,023, ANI SIS Record' 939 314, 10/14/82).
ANI Access - ANI not given opportunity for involvement in installation or inspection activities re: snubbers (hold points); "If Brown & Root intends to present quality records documenting ASME inspection activities to the ANI at the time of execution of N-5s those records that did not provide for ANI involvement will be considered unacceptable." (See CASE Exhibit l
1 1,025, ANI SIS Record 322A, 11/11/82.)
F0iA,85-59
, S t
- , _ , . . s, _ .. . - ~ , - - _ - - _ _ . - . . , . , . - - . . - - , < _ - - . , - . . , , , - , - . - - . , , _ _ , _ , -.p,, .. ,. _ _ - , --...<r- ..~- -..-m,-,
,_ . : .. w.. .
, ,o Intimidation of ANI's: ANI stated that pipe support engineer
' " questioned the integrity and knowledge of Brown & Root personnel and t
myself. If this is to be a continuing situation, perhaps it would be best not to explain reasons for our (ANI's) actions, since this is'not the first time that an ANI has taken harsh verbal abuse from Engineering people.
. . . At this time, I as requesting that if Engineering has a problem concerning the ANI,'s they contact you (Gordon Purdy, B&R QA Manager) or your designee (s), and do not communicate directly.to us." (Emphases added.)
(See CASE Exhibit 1,039, ANI SIS Report 932 G-051, pages 2 and 3, 6/29/83.)
8/1/83 Answer from G. R.'Purdy, Site QA Manager: "
I share your concern over the rather flippant response provided by Engineering . . . the Project environment is currently conducive to frustrations. . ." (Emphases added.)
! (See 8/1/83 attachment to CASE Exhibit 1,039, ANI SIS Report 932 G-051.)
ANI Access - on many occasions, refused access to areas in which Code related work was being performed: Reactor Bldg. 1, Diesel Generator Bldg. 1, Fuel Building several times (effect of this is that~ construction decides when ANI's may have access). (See CASE Exhibit 1,043, ANI SIS Record 939 362A, 8/3/83.)
ANI Access - ANI's are consistently being denied access (hydro tests; N-5; vault); incorrect interpretation of program was cause (Attachment 3, from Gordon Purdy). (See CASE Exhibit 1,045, ANI SIS Record 939 363A, 8/18/83.)
2 l
_._ _______ - c-....-. _ - . . , . --, ,.,m__- , ._.g .,%. -,.y.m ,, ,-,,--_,..-.,y9 ..y+~_-._-. . ~ . . ~
i .
..... L --. .-._... -- . .. ... . . . . . .- . .
,.s = .
Intimidation of ANI - ANI: "I cannot comprehend the animosity and facetious of a response that makes reference to the (ANI) Inspector's
' personal assumptions'. ' misconceptions' and ' blind-siding'." (Emphases added.) (See: CASE Exhibit 1,053, ANI SIS Record 367-B, 11/18/83, page 2; referring to CASE Exhibit 1,052, ANI SIS. Record 367-A, 10/31/83 and attached 11/8/83 response to M. Coats, ANI, from J. T. Blixt, QC Group Supervisor.)
l .
e i
e I
1 I
l l
1 l
l 3
l
s, ',
s ,* O ~~ ..
i ANI RFPORTS - TESTS l
The following ANI Reports and Records were initially planned for other I
use (as indicated elsewhere in this pleading). However, they also raise serious questions regarding: Applicants' compliance with their own r
procedures during tests; the adequacy of such tests; and Applicants' 1
commitment to quality (rather than speed). ,As such, CASE plans to include these as part of our answer to Applicants' 8/7/84 Motion for Authorization to Issue a License to Load Fuel and Conduct Certain Precritical Iesting.
Tests - hydrostatic tests held at 16wer' PSIC than design pressure.
(See CASE Exhibit 1,031, ANI SIS Record 939 341, 3/8/83.)
Test Control - procedures inadequate. (See CASE Exhibit 1,032, ANI SIS Record 939 346, 4/21/83.)
ANI's are consistently being denied access (hydro tests; N-5; vault);
incorrect interpretation of program was cause (Attachment 3, from Gordon 4
Purdy).
Testing - pretest concurrence declined by ANI's. (See CASE Exhgibit 1,045, ANI SIS Record 939 363A, 8/18/83.)
1 I
FGA-85-59 1
r/>
O + ,
Impact Testing - Supports found which have welded attachments which require impact testing but the detail sketch does not specify this as a requirement. (See CASE Exhibit 1,057, ANI SIS Report 932 5-002A, 2/10/84.)
(Subsequent revision of Design Specifications mandates material meet impact requirements. Deficiencies were not ID'd until completion or near completion of fabrication. Some are being racertified; Answer 2/17/84, attached to CASE Exhibit 1,057, ANI SIS Report 932 5-002A.)
Impact Testing - welded attachments to Large Bore Main Steam and Feed
' Water Piping; "Due to r,epeated' identification'of non-compliance with Design Specification requirements for notch toughness material to be used in above applications request that all packages on these systeme be re-presented to the ANI for establishment of hold points." (See CASE Exhibit 1,060, ANI SIS Report 932 10-034, 4/18/84.)
5/8/84 Answer (attached to CASE Exhibit 1,060, ANI SIS Report 932 10-034): W. E. Baker, Pipe Welding Engineer, has instructed his personnel to route the subject packages to ANI.
5/16/84 (attached to CASE Exhibit 1,060, ANI SIS Repoort 932 10-034):
Acceptable for closure; PSE is in process of reviewing all affected supports.
i l
1 i
2
..l
. . . ~.-.e .... ~
9 s,'.~ Q ;' ~' ; _ . * . . . . . _, l- ,. '.' '
- s w Ar fp6 d.3- t Lmt tu&'
Ib LV d M:, Mbt,wU* uk Lkrj8
.8
.. _ . . __ ... ._=- .
Alla
=-
A Y Y&N MC.R,,, wb b toh . . l. . A coo 1 T+<. cl sj'w ~
j
) ._
. .. n %d ._ .. .
J 1
1 a'
- . s "A
,N
'i
- ~ ~ - --
4 l
_ . . - - . . . . - . - - - e t
i e
j . . ~ .
4 i
I i
- i. .
1 t
8
-j F0iA-86-59 ,
"a y @ 8"
~. . - _ , - . . .. . , _ __.
' ' ~
./ '
'i- ...-.,-x-
__ .-z . d- ' . _ . ~- - -
O tw
- me taz, .. J . .u ~ & ;
l L44 ~-f ~Lwa L f de 4 0,
eef t~ bw c.M M q{
g,u.M - Q.~g .. .
!l-- o o ro "i
a cay ,/
Ts- As n w/o d; & n l l'
- c. g e. , n A / ,
1n-
' b'/ 'f ~ d d u _ -m
, J.-. & -y 7 e1f.
] r. 4 /4. g ~ u _ - j x M 4 -4,p # 4
-._ . . ._ _ i s m + .
j .__ - t_
i _lUe e_ - : == E%-c .
l i
st s 3 a.7 die = e' - 4/ dk ,
b / ( .
4*1'. -
3, 3
- , e . eam . _.t n a'* A_. 9p -a ..
j _. -
h & M Nf ^'# f 54
' ~-
i ni va, se. .,nf
=)
upu Qn.f ~4 %.-y(s~ &Jy94 j
ch Q .
- m. - ./ A r t,j i l o - o t (. N M M (_ w .
E IO2 7 -
QC wb $ f wn ,su h &
-m me J ,,i gl c
I
't -
j
4-4 s _ g -- - w - --,- - _- -
- '-,,. T a -- . . .. .
- .u .__ ..~ . 4. k- - -.
)
l
,/ 5f ~
N l030
./f 88 <. .,
1%+d+ ucr - & w i , L QQ wc mss Q ca {aa 1 .
.. n - L e ac;fa cA. y- ew-s4
=
(s c .Q-p-L 4 46 ~s d' p a Lad
_3 l ge g ' - A y la .
- - 7 W o.e
'W L3 S &c. -- i , .es & ,
_;&~' '
y ... - .-
l
(' -
M De H YWpcyn da_ .
- '**3
.- rg .: E < J<,&M ~ M/d Ao &n -A /uuc f%/~f re;co n % Q ,
j (* E ) :7 4 L%
j-%+.y}s~ _~ <Z/y.JJai L M k..wA i d . . JUo P 7-
.1 Ce-c Ic 34 _ 6 .._--_ , M ,
l' ._
A.DO l
S
&w L- p/m
~
A
- ,,,- 4,ssc w. ~cs .e-uf ~-
p_~- : O,s ,
PI'L .co pnet, O ~ stL.. ~ & M
<f /
M,
- u. a : ,
a r~ e m (J m) , .
s LAL L A.
um .
I
- . ~ . .__.
n=mo
_--g M #"' **'*h
.,yyw_
.. . .. .u ;;.. . . .
. + . ..: .
g ,
=
,,p :*-
k _'-
/_ _L'_-
O C [2as Que n, m. m/ f.w# %f, w
a u .-f f A . S y u.-r*e is.1 S d.
g -
$l p .
TH -u 4 g ,
i M i a- ,. 4 ._y~+-+ - ~ utfm.
L tass 4 .5 t L ij 1 ' Y$" J A ,
v A M y % gy-~.
a l . .
- 3. ,A fi + A/g [
] ..._.
g g
) , _rs t s. .,, 4 : s
_ - y ~ au ,
b W j
{ % lo31 J. u'c o & - Ncf2 eca_hiccf-L_
s.
]~ p.. ,
ww g P .
.i t c-on- Len n,d J ,/ J ,/aC l
bl L iou n ~.49 6-af, m,t-w 4 A ,<p c-A .
nef%ddAN ,
1 l .
QWaMQ Y
+ ve -
p -
w 7
.- , E #
am _ie+(
- ~b# - 1. o c f. ,d x c.
3
$sh = =/ l? q.a. & J a wk
/ 4 /sssyfe / af-
.j' . - - _ . _ _ _ . . . _ . . _ $ ace.yy 9. f
.i 1
- L t-w p ph2 i Ta d %.c._ %
- - . - w h u 6 sc.. L L Q J s/,) c.u.!/
g g d /4 M d y.
)) *G asc - sdA+- 5 }m- e-l
-d .
&/,
- l 1
.JMdPf- {
W . ..
I-l 3 T~1 i 7 Snyd n .frn y l
L O * '- ~ .- gd.b.f 80 = ,/ ,
j .
qc. g%y- w.
=
- -susA gn[s.
p 1
j L+< & = _- J . ~
f L =g LeYL z-i .
?i RQk
~
yl 1 % 2. -
Qe t._oj 4v., u_,
.-j 1 C'+3 Q, 9
f ~W lh g/V} v A .
Y N__
. ~%s4 A% .o . c.,7 og
- t 04[
Q 4uP x / acn gd 9 mL. m aL/*.
i:
&~-a:l~ Vdu V pa%Id q
UF b c .s uds@ L f (-/ qu b._ 4 e y e d g# f# A.b - S t s c4 -c%)
lh e
v _
4'~jy 4/d fnee 9 e 4 - p s..tn
,ns ~ V
&W
, . . . M h d=td a z'6~,t . , . . - ..=.
- - _ - __ --~,.. ~ _..._ _ _ . . _ . - - - - _ _ _ . , , _
. .. _ .. ,. . . c ..
, l
. 1 e
h 0 j tGoq te+ , ..hu t. p , .k. % A '-6L 4 / d -
1 . -.
. ..a 4 9
.. .-..-e. . .
V j
2c.u't to-o w %u.wm~pGL ed&fS df n it jeb ,
to+r %, (fuJJ%
! c t='? 'i .
9 ~ pd9. ~
T
. . _.. [ $_ _ E-p , --asummmeur m.jA t yn . fa y, gyce g e;
.i *-
=1 .
_rLs b ll ~ , ,g a;)
j Oc .Y e ye:-e. .
i -
9 = v7er el 1. f.
+f g . . _ . _ _
O.,
c.gdy.
,1
,,n-- J e ou s2 lo bl
-b . b *( W c. Q G' . h [m( Le < $-L p. ,
a u a. a.
g(
': .)n
__S's_ p . .
~~~K
- 9 un4 ion V~G d ax - a ^Jd yp ~ SK: .z G ng 0 bueF citwl Ahi o - - m. 44I l
jj > .. .. .
'"fy'gnem, 367 k . -
/ .-
9 e*d %'k -*kE d j--g,i _N N
,-,-..,,..---....--,._._-.-.,,--,,----9'88** .- .. - ,
.y*. . a l, ' :.,.. .. .=. .* w - - . - . . . , . . . .
. f .
L,
- e Q
Line 76 pc4v6 unw:acc.
lo rs l P m d Leu.s es k #w Ndf, R n ln y a A L c.
O _ . . _ ._ ..
. . .kh h 's i .. 0 4 -
h *"
j t oss ,% .
d~ . tygmf, 4% M4 gg 3
~
ga .
~
f4'
%w%Q.abdL fp so - 0 o-i< ,
. s . m gr- _
wa
~1
- -) -
6 1
{
?!
u>ss
.-x
.cm. .ws,,
s-& M/ -
a 4ddA % y,/
y.
3 ._
uo wL 4 y m% ,
W c(( S w J I .,
p ..
s'
'l . . . . _ .
- .9
+
L*, .
9ll
\
~
p .
. . , , . t *- ~ " ' .
' "'h 11 s ..
.r; . . . . . . . .
,,- . , . -J*
0 -
Y yen p +J3 A. sg
- s.y .~.
y
.. - u .Qs a -@. n A.fcn - - ,,i
_x y .
.. .. - . . . . . . . . . . l
>e - m te rp q c e Mn t-u_ / 4.
.ww u& w g Ap
.. p e g x qo. n--
acad ~
Y eLda. h
,AC d6 y.
x -- . . .. ..
ie-o2s .re_ n ya, % C %.
.) ,o n _ . .s vr - M.
l
.. A 54 F e- e .
401. s.d r)J . ,
k l- O - 0 3 1- -.
_ p_ . __
. _b A l m M.5 lfw '
6
& du ik.1, 5y a f nkl ;4,g ug L
W4 .- -t.c .
Au r
}: s~fis / d.
6 5
f ,-m lP .
[~( . . _
y
___- _ .w -.. - -
w-
. , . ~ - . , - . , . . - . - ,
1
-.W w 3
d iL-4)ARW
_gih.B;F@w-gf%.#
r c kWG f ] /% - j,q i
- f.
.1
=' .
-y r -. - ,~ sm J
~'
'5 -. . . . . .
y y'yN NTATION INN
%$*~$""j%FW{gl[ $$[$ # /57 ~
i DN TlfE LAKE a:.
.w X r "
.- 1
/ 817-573-8846 ip~~ g'I ec.i*I.e .pgw..>g.-M~..e-
.n.D. . . .
[g w ~ygjg, ongamew:m #ps 2 ,
7,
' W _ _
,?e r .
.. ,U*'
~/ . '*/ g 3g
, , ir.,'[-
.w Mh , $$4'Mr9 3/ 3 g - - - . .
~
j c ..
- - = . ..
- j~- __
i ~ ce z - .. _ _ Q l 0-.t 5< 4 1
.A i n ? Uml V v 'u yi f-_ y# LA fi gQA' QY
- nx g ~ ~ ~ ~_ w ,.g_,-
~ n a ~
- y -
r i y- -
3 fl
~
A
- e. ,
g .
- e # F0lA-85-59 (p=
)l..
t 79, p.
C!ewd w ;m 'l31 - CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,024
.:.. ., .' ~ f^ 327
~
SIS REPORT b. b'. .
&n,.
THE HARTFORD STEAM 110ll.ER INSPECTION sna ll- 00 6 nAunown.coNsurtict r u ur.: 'SilRANCE COMPANY TO: 7 . -
6 ,,, ,o o #/, , , /c OATE PT.OM:^ /
G #< #1ec 4 /// \ /d - d-P2.
. SHEET
/ lOF/
.J.-ev Lvple AA/ 7"
\ H.O./8 RANCH OFFICE ORGA IZATIOP/ ~
f a a' e e, LOCATION STREET CITY COUNTY
(* Ps cs Ales Pn e L , .<.,:/4 STATE ZIP C:
F ERSON CONTACTED (GivE NAME AND OFFICIAL TITLE) 7X Tct.,e e, < c b o </ - CON TRACT / P.O. .
REASC FOR VISIT , _ .
lll lrs- e fe nft'd e. /
COPIES SENT TO:
O H.C. Ea, o. . sis O ch..< ta .... , GR.,..a.i u.a.. sis %c i,., (s..<* >: /fA/J rC/e_
l in.s.ne,.h'as fe 'n O _,, r,' nf__p,_.g no h'a, t!<wb r -C d we A / ,- co :/ cs in sn. / 102 n,~; EI< ( /
. e j~
/
abe f s Ye s s6' er -
sf '
/
w . _ a n ~ s nl,a n. c .. _n T/~ o h b h v e ,- :s ). ',, e . I -
l
\
i '
/ J ra w & C! ) e f$ k,Y. $s?u.t lb. sYo Ye3 b a S C-
_,,- - A /
L c d= ,n:// La ;d. /. L i '
J <4 u - . A d.
~f k. 0 A d f*& . T o e .$ af e 1" e o, ,,e * *
/s d. /4 /lo, ~. ; // 6 N </c e'., n , J - d _
- 4. l'P- i&n 4 7 0 ,
- s. ca. 3. /f A J r A k ,~. ,,. c e/. iC. A- a ,l H 4 e t~e me ve l h y ,- r l n N,'., e km pue r- mlnlm,,m w // g x f- le N$.i. 6 d N h d-s o NJe d s <wa w - w p , e, p pr,, w - / ,,,;,.: _ ..
n ,,, // fu e A ,, L r y r &< Al-e
/ de r 'kes -
b t # h- /*lWI
{ 9 A , u r<t ? lff(5 b 7'es c [e,_fa :e e l 4_rtw,//
ke es ehe.d_b
'l f,4) /%._ds.y c_,.i,,,e QM. 4 ko -Z' w,A s ,'h/,w&} #b(hc_"
h-:,,. n .s_ C , d <s,,e-rs: , Mcs c. <y :< t _
mo,,,phb_e_d_pr:o e to <<4e.s.uf,m7'-e, u/ 6 2/</
(k) 72- < e a ce +a,s (a)_a ee.s_sf 61s mes/ dd Le bee n
- n d ov. h clase b l P [ V 1~ s.c._n, s;,n most we//acla}s_c.u,_!.'
ckd..e,s rey)e _be ->C c/- s,cl. d ne_da:u~M
\
n f) w 6u./ / p qu 7 c0lA-85-59 .
.c.~._
- _ _ __.._ - _ -. N_.. ._ _ ___. _____N.
8 _ C.o n e.lasaosr.: _ 1 % a e. r< p : n . .c c.s.. - -d e.e .s mAu_,. e < . '+ - is
_'; 6 C n A fcc A ~, se 4?fd.d_iut me} Ala a, e~ r s x/
c do e a J +),e -
Lce d :e_rp e e k a_n a e hc, d D - e.
s a <S e.e- J L.h es o_
- el da' up_4 c/c ep c .f ,,..hha ed' b < -
<ep.i.ee.d [p_c C P- cftr7 4.. ?_D p ra_1)E g. 3)_.a a d +fes e gxea s_w e e e f.c.eu o_cl
<>p.o.,_.tb ep._i>10d bs ue le.e.<r ..m.o.ce- sudo.es dsee2.L s e a _c.c_.
v fr. ,le.1 --_. .- _ _ . - - - .
8dter--...re.w:wL.ny Ae c .-
o <l [n el ng_n a > e_. aExbkic.b u.a. 1 y a. dam m.e2, &-.d"c.
M ^ /Ae.- bs a ir:c6/ u
- hed o P dit_kye4 #L f +Aec.s- /x- a.- xe ccon a bee <k dew.e ,a '
i n J r. e.c./ a s. - L, E N'
.usaaae.l cssee.cziaq +d 's a ec ~ edh-
_p.es.e.s n psA nA.'.1 + reJ_. fica.ob. , -fd- 66a I; a e d.pacut6 ..
w oL&nc e .
i _
Se f' CP-CPM A % pets.3. 1 I ..
$1-9AP /t. /-2 ._
i
'lkl- p i
_Ab t
- l--
s 4D.--N 8'.MD h-- em.m.e - _ee 4 m.
. - - - a - - .- , , - ,. , e
~.~..
t . BROW & ROOT, INC.
i CPSES, 35-1195
! + INTEROFFICE MEMO IMi 24,384 jg3 TO: Jerry Lytle , (((, , j;,4 j DATE: Occober 19, 1982 FROM: G.L. Morr'is SilBJECT: SIS Report #11-006 In response to your SIS Report #11-006, it was observed that grind-ing was perfomed prior to QC notification. NCR #M-4194 has been issued for violating CP-CPM-6.90, Paragraph 3.19.4.2. Since grinding was performed prior to QC notification, checking of minimum wall and documenting VT/PT was obviously not performed by QC. This shall be performed, as applicable, in accordance with the disposition of the NCR. ,
f.'
h2-G.L. MORRIS /
Site Mechanical Level III GLM/jku cc: G.R. Purdy P.C. Lahoci p
..t y'
i c
- . 6-;'h. g.. SIS REPORT %n/ u a ..s .a N n r w i-O THE H ARTFORD
,,A,u..o cossa nctr STEA.\t
~ ~ 110lLER INSPECTION snd INST lRANCE CO.stPANY
// g (, ._ / I
.I t*,t:
- d. L. TYh t ,'s 'Ge n .. . L- ./ nr CATE I/o-a 7-n ISHEET / lCF/
M.O/8 RANCH QFFICE Ja <co Laele Alr s
..i.%NiiA T!ON
/ HAl !
i
. . . L. -
. ,/. TION cJ L t- STREET
.;)ses Al CITY Ase COUNTY
% cvi/h STATE ZIP CCCE
:CN CONTACTED (GIVE AME AND OFFICIAL flTLE) n 76ces ,
[ .'-(1 m e_ as roe ve CONTRACT /P.O. NO.
l
.503 FOR VISIT
. .Yull' fo'M t d SH1 rac r:ES SENT TO:
y;H.O. Ea, o..m. sis O ow.tia.. ., 6r I u ..,. sis Mc+., rs ..iM: f9,0 _r C /r
$ul,:- eel ' 7~Aa #24,324 h>.s
~ /v.<ftit-est.),) _
l~Ae h ee<pizse sis fe,r.: ef J)_g.s k __c / a 0 e s wkt
's h h c- on L J h a.ns +A. s.A h d oc u f --
y L1 M l? de/Yaar h _t b .l-kY Ab] bra su l.nc, j C$= 2 ~$$ 69/) em
. V r s s
'3 An Y ubln,s aeen>f e lt _d < +o e f' a e $ o'e_yhe y en 7"A <
~.sp ,,a 1 ) . l Ge ln Ca. f.' , <D a f ' A ,, a d. L f1 ggj_h,,n /
'.s 4e yp.co ve. d - +L. d ky ~ L ic1 .._ t / ..: pat ,gt h _a_ pe n ~+ J 7-4 c. neusaly4;e. Li, % .w. , a.4,/ n
_drvdin s i A.4 d yL 4..wcn J v1(e ;
".M-4 M '
Z^ni) /$ A g,, ,., 4t_ __ pay _ g , ,. ,,. /d ;
mc
.n I L- 4 .. ,
ya_s,ue_,,, L_._,s _;_ s.a \
. . / fen l-lc n .
E.hG.- e l
../
__ s. _
cover
- L.... ,. ..... ,,,
a s. 2 2 4 ,
- l
.. * . . = - - -
h SIS REPORT THE HARTFORD STE.1Ls1 BOILER INSPECTIO:
(
a INSI.;RA.NCE CO.stPA.NY C ll_ g -. j HARTFONO. ( ONNb3lTl(!L*T LMi&J
.).
OM:
- 0. L. lY7or-r ts 'Gfe n%L L-n/ X CATE
/o .27 SHEET
/ Il CF
>RGAN 3 rro T10Nd Luele
/
AAIr N.QJBRANCH CFFICE MA r A a_ 19 CY c.o
- CATION STREET CITY COUNTY
' STATE ZIP COC' "9528 Alv fas e Somervi/le 7< 7 f., o d :-
- ERSON CCNTACTED (GIVE NAME AND OFFICIAL TITLE)
CONTRACT /P.O. Na
_ Set m e_ s. s A Ne ve REASO3 FOR VISIT -
, /~u// N ~,s e o d ea.e & '
OCPIES SENT TO:
CH.C. Eng Co.m. sl$ Oo .# ia.. , 6.,i.a. u.a.. sls MC,*., (s..= 9): // Al 7' .r/,
S.L:eef' a
?~AA ' 2 4, 3 9 4 0/.s
~
JY-.ci- 6/-00 4) 7L re pp h s s.s le e.e f J)-e d a e 4 r . Ce 1 a.oL. t i.'s bh be eru om e )?_e $ e. k h x//e ArLI:'!# Y t T YY 0r*bl~
.i s
o< :t u<-U,, x V
A a /
/
7D_2 V
Den :,,e e s-2 -5.g- as:n a ,, d
/
J s's An ne2 f feNh <ae >% + t) fk.j" fa *= bfobs s a f e e, a.
e pn.f ? ' ~~~
%: . s ,d i,,+ a . ~ _ ns__ _.
pe.si;. %- : ,,
r n +. w A .F R . _ a. S s e.g.4,__y n,f is +he a-pp.co.vs. d n, < L d by < Li& _jf.s y ,.h t _ _. n .. p -t- _
.l
'c e p.r_w.uisL.. ,7~4 e.
i n.skw_ts n e e ess i+y_-Sa. .1Le s Mp ..g.fl < c.
- a ..~ L. J k 7
a 4. ,am ,,_.; ye e
=MaM M*uY.-ljkbo S vfeer,s
+$o.t ,k;.t_p%_g_,_ ,, , /g uLye k..t /A . c - s;<y te ,a ,,n a ,, J _ , .,,, .s _ , . .
YAL- . . - -
r f.'gg:.y, _&&[" gf}
-4GLw.!&J k J N\"".'1."4 j n ,
M \sy w&g-r --
~
~~ay-
. +2m. 7, 2 s~m a _.
~. _
C. _ j..
- ER 1
.CNEDJ . . . &s ~ .
., - , - - - _ - _ - , . _ - _ - - , . - _ - _ - . . _ , , , , , , , , . , , n., ,_ , - _ - , - -
, g'* y, Sid GECORD FOR MONITORING QsAdQ.C. PROGRAMS
. -- V.*/
CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,023 T11E HARTFORD STEAM DOILER INSPECTION .and INSIfRANCE COMPANY
]
n.utTI own, coNSt:ctit:1.T oeio:
,toen . er,,
i314
- l Mr. Gordon Purdy swt pw a
, i cntcastas ::ve u was l October 14 1982 ! 1 l3
.. I Brown & Root, Inc. ginst stoca ca scate Anrar , , ASC404d4 ggg Cat rg rw uus.
f avHnsaamosl Houston l' h,h CC'esed CPSES Glen Rose, Texas 76043 Cthe
~ FietG m Regent /
'r au..wy thn.,uio, C rni.,w.
!!. the undersigned, have monitored your QA/QC manual on:
, o .,. . and find the following sections:
,a enumw,.=or.aus s
! ,., ,,' 34tssfactory:
' L unsatisf actorr.<*e. nary oncc m.m,e, mr n (ns .no r.ae3 on w. nary on. n <>ne nonanserem. u .ao m .o Section 15 " Examination of Process Status" f ,_. .
Section 20 " Authorized Nuclear Inspector ,
Oq
.-l 3 ! -
i
\
cover CUSTOMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESOLUTION ** sect date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: October 23, 1982
, c.,. ,
3Please keep the Original of this form for your records and return a copy to inspector named bjlow.
8 "'"'8 L'5 8*"'".c u r/n$1$,< Fore,gn Inn . ' S'"'8 '"
' " ' " ' ' _ ' ' ( ,/
~
c . n.ntain. CFa.s. 1014-84 / p h , _u
- ><scu.ro w n.cu .rt s - -a .= .
- u.c #www ,ce . e. . .,.e s.e. ., n.u.u,v, l
I <; )
Q f. .
GY g '
-~ -
f /_ ..
=
- t echtgt oce su stAnswtof cart scato cVER seto r e .,, m.e,u ,.m,
- l. the undersigned, have remonitored the above unsatisfactory ccnditions on:
,.,- afyyjp and found them: ~ Satisfactory
- < , c...,
Cunsatisfactory lfspiam colow) 4
.i .
L 7nes.ur}.,..... ,tae ..~..._ _....._.
.a u. ,, w, n n eoresentstne n/pt/tv 0
/d -
a F0lA-85-59 @
6 Page 2 ;f 3 3 ,.
= I lf"
References:
(,1) NA-5241 " Stipulation of Inspections . . . . . . . . . " l i
Prior to issuance of process sheets or controls required by NA-44bl, th'e manufacturer or installer shall review them and l l the applicable drawings with the inspector who shall then ,
- stipulate the inspections he intends to make in order to )
) fulfill the requirements of NA-5210.
(2) NA-4540 " Examination of Process Status;' t Ouring manufacture or installation, measures shall be established to indicate, by the use of markings such as stamps, tags, labels, routing cards, or other suitable means, the Status of Examination and tests perfomed upon individual items. !
These measures shall provide for the identification of these i
items which confonn to examinations and test requirements and ,
those that do not confonn'.
' (3) NA-4452 " Process Control Check List" Process control check lists shall be prepared, including the document numbers and revisions to which the process confonns, with space provided for reporting results of completion of specific operations.........
DISCUSSION:
t
(, , Hundreds of modification hanger process control packages, both in process and completed, are in noncomformance with references 1 thru 3 above.
J.
- equirements requires removal from its installed location. Re-moval will necessitate cutting out welds in order for the l hanger to clear interferences and supported pipe. There is no way to determine the extent of work recuired.
4 Hanger CC-1-057-010-A33R-- This package was presented for ANI prelitninary review. Hanger is to be modified per revisad blue-Itne (BRR Rev. 21. By comparison of BRH Rey,1 (.as amended by CMC 107471 and BRR Rey, 2 it appears that major rework (new
- material, replacement of brace and baseplates, etc.) will re-quire removal of this support by cutting out items presently installed. There is no way to determine the extent of work required. .
EXAMPLE: Completed Work Hanger CS-1-007-015-C52R-- Multiple weld data card states
) e 1
e emeen W*ee 1
- - , _ , - . - - . , . . . . . , - - - - . . , , - . - . - - - - , .-- ._..,..- ,,__ ,..,. _.,-_-., , .- . . _ . . . - . _ . - - - . . , . ~ , ~ ~ - . , - , ,
. . -. Page 3 3
" Modified per IRN 143876". The inspected item removal notice states " Pipe Dept. Reworkt !.ine. Removing box assembly frem pipe". .
This support was fabricatt ;o CMC 33079 Rev. 8. Rework was P.
' inspected to CMC 38079 Rev. 11. The MWDC was submitted to the l
ANI-for rework review. This rework should have been nothing !
i e more than rebolting the hanger and making approximately 3 weldds
' to re-attach tube steel cut loose for the hanger to clear the pipe. However, after reviewing the package it is obvious that
- this support was virtually refabricated with at least 15 welds being made and new material installed.
1 FINDINGS: ,
(1) Contrary to requirements of reference 1 the ANI was not given the opportunity to review, for purposes of stipulating inspec-tion hold points, that scope of work to be performed on hanger CS-1-077-015-C52R beyond that called for to bring the item in compliance with the latest applicable design. If a weld is cut (after statused as acceptable by examination) the ANI must have the opportunity to select an inprocess inspecticn hold point.
(2) Contrary to reference 1 the ANI has not been.provided with in-j formation that accurately defines the scope of work. Drawings, procedures, process control documents, and other documents j
applicable to the extent of work must be clear, understan'dable, and without ambiguity.
, (3). Hanger CS-1-077-015-C52R is unacceptable for final review due
! 7',
to noncompliance with reference 2. The status of material j' '- verification and visual examination of welds is indetermirate.
The actual scope of rework perfonned is not definec or described by drawings, CMC, IRN, or any other document within the package. Since all Quality Control Inspections are final' there is no objective evidence available that the Q.C. inspector was performed. aware of the extent of examinations and verifications to be (4) Contrary to reference 3, all 3 examples listed were or are to "
be inspected to revisions of bluelines anf these revision i numbers are not listed on the inspection document (i.e. MWDC)'.
j In cases where supports are fabricated and installed to typical details (CP-AA-XXX) these drawing numbers are not refer-l ,enced on the inspection document.
l CONCLUSIONS:
1 i
(1) In instances where modification packages are presented to the
- ANI for preliminary review and do not adequately describe all
(2) During final review of hanger packages, those that reflect work
- done beyond the scope of work required by CMC or new revision to blueline must be categorized as being deficient per finding #3.
1 ..... l l l l
n, e ,---- --
n ---,--+-----"---,------,r, ',n e----m- ,w-------r----a---,c. y -,e-es,- w- vd -,<-,m\-e-wr-, +g--m~-w--gv - - - --r -sa-- - - - -~--~m-,-- -~,m-+-
I
_ . - . . . - - - - - - ' ' ^ '
. . ,, s . 35-1195 5.
BrOWnCTRoot.!nc.
i
~
INTEROFFICE MEMO 1
TO: Marvin Coats DATE: November 20, 1982 !
- 1 FROM: P. C. Lahoti
] !
SUBJECT:
35-1195, CPSES l SIS Report #314, dated 10/14/82 B&R Response dated 11/18/82 i l
1auhad The following$ corrective action, in response to the SIS Report #314, is proposed for your concurrence. !
Finding 2: Welding Engineering will list the construction operations re-quired and the scope of the work to be performed in detail on ,
the Wald Data Card so that the ANI will have clear under-standing of the extent of the work involved.
- Finding 1
& 3: The ANI should have been provided the opportunity for pre-14=inary review of the activities performed on hanger r- " CS-1-077-015-CSOR. The ANI shall be given the opportunity for reinspection of this hanger to assure that the hanger has been constructed to the requirements of the applicable drawing. The corrective action for the finding #2 will eliminate any. future recurrence of this non compliance.
Finding 4: As agreed with the ANI, effective December 1,1982 the QC Inspector shall indicate the revision number of the drawing
' or the typical datzil (CP-AA-XXX) used for the inspection of the hanger. The inspections performed prior to this date do not require backfitting for referencing the re-vision numbers. However, the Document Review Group (DRG),
when requested, vill assist the ANI in ascertaining the AccED applicable revisiens of the drawings used for the past inspections.
W l P. C. Lahoti -
Procurement / Surveillance Supervisor
{
PCL/cm ec: C. R. Purdy
. T. Blixt
, Bill Baker (Welding Engineering)
'R. Siever D. Leigh QA File
~
y.,-,--_---..,--w- --g, , ..-e,-- ,,=,, .-w - - - -
- - , , , _ - - .- w-- ..,,,,.--.,-y y -
.. . = m u . :. . . .' A =. .. . . . -. . -
V"' "' SIS RECORD FOR MONITORING Q;AdQ.C. PROGRAMS #322A THE HARTFORD STE.ut BO!LER INSPECTION and INSilRANCE CO3tPANY HAR rFORD. CONNECT!Ct. r oe urJ - CASE EXHIBIT NO.1'025 io , . ., r.,,.,
urs s,.m ,
Mr. Gordon Purdy. 0A Manacer gg a
cwcwas cc-., * = uu.o.
November 11. 1982
= ncsc. c ,cua 2.rn 1 l1 5j qfj La,em,,gs. omr,CClosed Hn Houston "3
- Brown & Root. Inc.
CI'0" "0" .o
~ Field Rep.it/
CPSES Glan Qnse. Ten t 76na3 Sho# U Ass m aty bAlteration Clnsmin I, the undersigned, have monitored your QA/QC manual on: and find the following sections:
C $atisfactory:
,- ar anac yaa ~~~r ~
~t~ r. - ,v.., . .. .-. .,
unsaustacte This. follow up is to clarify the finding identified on 939 #322 dated
, November 5, 1982.
Ig paragraph 11.1 of the Quality Assurance Manuel states:
8R ,
ju .."This section establishes the controls for inspections performed at specific stages in
. Brown and Root fabrication and installation activities to ensure that items meet the
_ applicable design documents and the code." "See attached".
~
cover L CUSTOMER: Pfease describe the resolution of these items in the "CUSTCMER'S RESCLUT;QNsection below, and giv date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: November 19, 1982 Please keep the Original of this form for your records and return a copy to inspector named below.
E,/ fe',,'.I'.Le I'r".' "$o~ ember
.uu.a-avcaca ,.v mac.-<e-
- 11. 1982 b~ '~lM
,~~,. p.7~$ C
\
-.On O k W.1f G W k& U-G 2 .
C5 . . . . . .
l sR 1 23 gg -.
l
- wh. S uA Aq3 c, 4 4 v . % t e 4 b d d i
-a_ -, w wcb. +5c sell h w% iMld,- .4 s.w% s . . - , -
Coven
+4 / f 1 *2 - .. . A1, . ..p. ,(d J
> 7
- 1. the undersigned, have remonitored the above unsatisfactory cohdetions V) on:
- g/yg./
and found them: m s.ti.f.ctory Oin..ii.r.cioryfr.c,.ine.,.; ' # ~ '
.4 FC!A-85-59 2 -
..-- 1,1 ,,,e, ,,
H/2.4 bRet. Wgr Regresentati,e b,,ile -........... -
,a m ,w, a, F /s/y3 /g hM l
- q ..
~ . . . - ,v. .:...... .
.u. . .. ~...
Page 2 of 3
References:
) NA-4451 The ......... installer shall operate under a controlled system such as process sheets,' shoo oracedures, check-
' lists, travelers, or equivalent procedures..............
^
Example: Process sheet - WDC, MWDC, MRS, etc.
Traveler - COT Procedure - QI-QAP 11.1-28A
' Check list- Hanger inspection, form, snubber inspection check list. .
NA-4510 In process and final examinations and tests shall be established to assure confomance with documented instructions, procedures, and drawings.
NA-4530 Check lists shall be prepared, including.........
I with space provided for recording results of examinations, tests, and inspections. The check list shall include space for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tBe inspector's signature , ini tial ,
or stamp, and date for those activities which he witnesses.
NA-5241 Prior to issuance of process sheets or controls recuired by NA-4451, the manufacturer or installiir shall review tnem and the app ~11 cable drawings with the inspector who shall then
- stipulate the inspections he intends to make in order to j L fulfill the requirements of NA 5210.
Discussion: The installer is mandated to establish a method of process control and to establish a method of documenting results of inspections & examinations. Both functions may be accomp-lished by utulizing a process sheet or traveler. NA-5241 requires.that these documents Be presented to the ANI prior to issue and NA-4452 requires that spaces be provided the ANI to sign or initial and date those activities he witnesses.
Alternately, the installer may implement process control in the form of a procedure and inspection / examination verification in the fann of a checklist. In this instance I
the requirements for check lists are delineated in NA-4530.
Again there is a requirement for providing space for the ANI to sign or initial and date those activities he witnesses.
i This recognized alternate is the "other controls" discussed in NA-5241.
It becomes obvious that the installer must provide for preliminary review by the ANI f rregardless of which form of -
l process control / inspection he chooses to utilize.
Conclusions:
(1) Brown and Root had implemented the controls for snubber installation (an installation activity under the NA certifi-cate) by issuance of Construction Operation Travelers. These
! ;. meet the intent ofreview.
ANI preliminary NA-4451 and NA-4452 and were submitted for
< \
. 1
. l i
J
-,,--..------v - - - , - - , - - - , . , , . . , . - - - - - , . . - - %,- + - , - - , , . - , - - - , - - ,
- - - - - - - - - . - - - , . - . -c -
~
~
3' .
I$:'* ~ * ~ Page 3 of 3 i
- 1 (2) Brown & Rcot dis :inued the use of COT'S and I
implemented the contr . s required by NA-4451 and NA-4530 by issuance of a construction work procedure, QA inspection procedure, and QC checklist. These meet the intent of the code except that the ANI has not been given the opportunity for involvement in installation or inspection activities. -
(3) The hanger inspection report (HIR), Exhibit 11.1 of the QA manual, has been utilized by Brown & Root for some time in documenting hanger inspection activities.
However, for purposes of documenting ccde inspection activities this document is redundant in that it repeats all inspection operations performed on the weld data card.
However, the snubber installation checklist, attachment 16 to QI-QAP 11-1-28A contains inspection operations that go far beyond those indicated on the weld data card.
(4) , If Brown & Root intends to present quality records documenting ASME inspection activities to the ANI at the time of execution of N-5s those records that did not provios for ANI involvement will be considered unacceptable.
6 6
L -
4 9
O G e,.
i e
5
3 . . ..
3 BrDWrtffRoot.!ric.
i mmG u- no IM6 24,565 TO: M. Coats, M Isad CATE: Nevertber 19, 1992 FRCM: D. Sande.7.
SCL M : Pasporse to SIS
+
Report #322/322A.
CPSES, 25-1195 The QC Checklist, Attachment 16 to cuality Dwtrxtien QI-CAP-11.1-28A, ,
is an added devire for completing the hold points /inspecticn pcints idenHN4 en the Multiple Weld Data Card. 24 eMcklist is not used by itself, but in conjunc-W with the hold points alniady identified on the Multiple Weld Data Card.
In crder to satisfy the M's .6mts fer es'>hii<h'.ng hold points for Meial Gaw tion installation activities with respect to e+Nm, the following actices are preposed:
( ,
, to wit: ass =++=2 installation.
- 2. 24 ANI may mark the list showing the pipe supports F4 has selec:ed to witness the e4+=2 installatien, or he may rd>-
mit the selecticn en a separate tranmittal. 'Ihe list and/cr the tranmittal shculd be forwarded to the CE Superviscr.
- 3. Ccnstructicn must notify the Quality C:ntrol Superi:e.endent or his designee prior to irstalling a snutter that the MC has eenh14*hma as a hold point.
- 4. Om Quality Centrol Superintendent er his decignee will be respersible for rctifying the M when Ccnstruc*icn is ready to install a snumer listed as a hold point by the RC.
- 6. QI-CAP-ll.1-28A will be revised to identify establ.istrunt cf i
ANI hold points. , ,
f LD5 anders u' t
.-. CS/bn )uperviser
(> cc: G.R. Purdy R. Siew.r G. Tanley D. Iaigh -
T. Blixt GA File SIS File
- e e' i.w v. -p - _ -
- - p-.- - y ..---+--.-- ,-.e
cm. S15 HECORD FOR MONITORING Q A./Q1C. 30 GRAMS
-WMit -
e ,*2** THE HARTFCIIO STE.ut COILER INSPECTION cnd INStJRANCE COMPANY - CASE EXHIBIT NO. I'0
.D *
. , isAu tmuo. crn.wcrt<:t;T onnr.:
- 177
. r o , .. . r.,,. ,
. .i cars sacar s
-e3 v-- /.. am p . ,a._. q Lv;n wo,- I
% ,- % ,10, logy ]
l
(
y Memo s (;waar umt *' ' '
r snacn ;w sic;ca ce scatca cc,,,a:av ra Geom wsa ons,r. 3 4
y j. t2, tag 71 g pCCt. D'ic . e
'ECUStCn I'MOusten
~ Folic. Up
-- t eomr ed Clesed
- 3 W S"L M C' Field Repair /
(*W M aa 9cse , Te__us 76043 T Assenaly CAlteratica laservice
- 1. the undersigned. have monitored your QA/QC manual on: 11 82 and find the fe!Iowing sections:
, c .. . .
- , , a. ~.,, . . e r.,,.. ,
' $atistactory:
-- o n oa:oc a. ,~, a (~ e v. .3 on .~ , on. ..u o.. ~.,-.~. .. ..m. .,
.1 Unsatisfactory- Q. A. Manual Secticn II Quality Assurance Pr: gram.
Faference: NA 4800- Cerrectiw Acticn which states in part "ncn-cenfcmances are 8g crcr=tly identified and repcrted".
{ Feference: Br wn & Pcot Q. A. Manual Sectica 16- Ncn-cenfc=,ing Items Paragraph 16.2 "It is the respcnsibility of all site espicyee's to report iter.s of ncncenfc=ance to their supervisicn or to the Site Q.A. Manager".
See Attached. !I CVER i
CUSTCMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESCLUTION" section below, and give
( cate for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: We*M" ' 108
, c.a., 7 Please keep the Original of this form for your records and return a copy to inspector named below.
- ,, ,,. e ~ * = ~~w>
,i w~~ver/ m i.,e,,,
X tet i
t eores entative Zrile INcv. 19, 1982
- ~
) w.4,e 7 , (./.) . 6 ,, M ua usuca ae xu at=s cuca:us avs as etm vaw.seacon rca a
.s .,7. -n /
- # G
$ w=,
y W WA- v 1.r -
E U CVER oest coast::vs acre .u se cowu: a . . ,_ ,,
lwe swa swa , c.,,,,, , ,,,,,,,,,,,,, -
l' )
I, the undersigned. have remorutored the above unsatisfactory conditions on: I anc found them: C Satisf actory Unsatisfactory (Empiso, esso,j
.u
= .s.". -
l l
f"* 113 rore,gn 13 I s. Gate rass naa.m.,,
!i. net =r/4,o,eemti.e C r,t:a, l ,8'E ICM3 j D
949 Lv lasis @s- -
. 2 .
, ., .. o .
- 327 e Page 2 of 2 Brcwn & Poets procedures CP-GM 6.9D -
3.19.8 ard 3.19.4 ard QI-CAP 16-2 gives directicn to field persennel en Pcw to prc=tly and prepe.rly., report and document' are strikes ard bare retal non cenic=ances.
It is very evident that the training and indoctrinatien pregram cutlined in Secticn II of the Q A Manual is not being i::plemented, due to tM nurber of arc std.kes ard base retal ncn confermances being found by RE's and Q.C.
Inspectors durirgwaD:dcuns ard at ncn destructiw examinations. It is a
.@ement of both Ccde ard O. A. Manual that these ncn conformarces be reported at tra time they are first made or discovered arxi net left *a a charce discomry during a walkde.n or through casual observation as is new happening. Due to nunerous secticns of pipe teing received that are so close to ::tiniru:1 wall at tire of receiving, it becmes ewn acre critical that all are strikes and base metal ncn ecnferrances are reported ard documnted pm. gly.
It is reccgnized by this KE that are strikes ard damages to base metal is inherent during constructica ard that steps haw been taken to prevent this fr:m happening (i.e. CAR S-48), however, even the rest careful welder will rake an are strike at times ard mistakes are made during raterial handling.
This is also recognized by the Code, hence the requirement of NA 4800. Since Brtran & Pcots Q.A. Manual recognizes it also and rakes previsiens for the prcept reperting and dccumnting, all that is needed is for it to be i::plerented.
(
- Dur:ples:
C:'-2-PS-30-3 ?.o are strikes Peperted by M E to Weld Tech.
SI-2-SB-14 Fev. 1 Spcol 102, Pc 1 en base metal with no Q.C. involv: rent. Arc ANIstrikes foundenit base metal arditWding ard reported to Q.C. inspector who decurented it arxi hardled it preserly.
MS-2-F3-20 Arc strikes discovered by ME during PT of keld excavatien.
MS-2-P3-21 Nurercus are strikes discovered by Ml! and brought to Q.C.
inspectors attentien.
Also: NCR nu ers' M41545, M4211S, M4174S, M4177S, M4181S, M4190S, M4203S R1, and M4199S.
being insulated. Cne of these ICR's was disecvered while syste::t was This 939 closes SIS Peport i 11-006-1
, 8
+g
- - .- . - -=.
.s 1
I
!. BrOWilf.TRoot.!!1C.
, IMuu nC. D10 4
IM4 24,969 -
10: Marvin Coats, ANI DATE: January 28, 1983 IKM: D.L. Sanders SL37Er.T: SIS Report 327/327A.
CPSES, 35,1195 Ref: 1. ANI Office Memorandum to P'a=11 Scott /hsty it:rris dated 1-27-83.
I
- 2. B&R Three Part Memo to M. Coats frczn Mssell Scott dated 1-27-83.
Attac.%ents: 1. IM#24,839 dated 1-7-83.
- 2. IM424,935 dated 1-20-83.
i
[To further atplify Mr. Lythle's Offica ih (Reference 1), Mr. Lythle N4*ted to me that he was ncqtotally satisfied with B&R's response to SIS Report 9327, dated 12-30-82.) As a result, IM#24,839 dated 1-7-83 (Attachment 1) was issued to supervisory personral requesting their assist-1 ance in informing personnel of the need to prevent are strikes ard report are strikes and base metal defects prcmptly to the QC Group for proper j i.! identification, h==ntation and w.c.icn.
In addition, on 1-20-82, IM424,935 (Atti.. t 2) was issued by the B&R CPSES Construction Project Marager reinforcing management's sgrt con-
=mim the reporting of noncenformances. Construction's indoctrh.atien .
of Wuel regarding their responsibilities in the prcmpt identification and reperting of nonconfczmances should be ocupleted during the week of 1-31-83 to 2-5-83.
Upon ecupletion of Constructien's irhination, no further action is
- ccmsidered necessary by B&R.
/
1 q.
D.L.
, ~g 4M 5 l Q. S ser ,
DIS /tm cc: G.R. Purdy J.T. Blixt P. Clarke, III SIS File 7
- n. j
$ ~ Ws ie o..f anl ,s ly as e e e f. I a.,n s /,4 ,d ,fL g,,,,,,.qu,.u.,J,,,,,, ,,., y-did in C r , ter. D. GnJ.n +LJ Z :t<~Jod h
. rh AsId s d ao s /.' s the e rsft en th e.',- tra: : o f +k< s t.) .a. FD SGM E AMS y , +A i ON$-
. ) . . .- ), d lo sand o.n s - , J d n s,,. s n - / 5'rS t De I N(, TNd /CIUL Th$$ bl'hl(In .I.
4
.-. ,- - ,,-.,.,,,-_, -.. -- ._ ,,, , - , . , . . --n ,.n - - - , , - - _ . , , , - , , , . ,
_ _ _ $_i_ .__ ___ _ . _ ._ -
t
- Brown & Root.!nc.
m r.u.a.mCE P.DD
. Dit 24,839 "U: Dis W +4 m DME: January 7, 1983 FRCM: D.I. Sanders SCB2B:l': CPSES, 35-1195 Reporting Mw=WM Cbnditicas.
In the past year er so, are strikes have been a major ncnc:r:fc= ring .
crrx!iticn as ev4 A-~
- by the ntzeber of IR's and NCR's isread to 4A= *d'y and correct them.
A : narked i+wv. A has been noticed in the effcets to pra'an are st=ikes by the use of rwhve barriers and covers, prrper suscension of =1Ad7 leads, proper g m =447 , etc., and rei A.sinaticn of s--- --I in the cause and preventicn of are strikes. Ho s mr, there.
are cerunrns that h are strikes are made or base metal f4fsets di - 4 , they may not be %4 prcngtly or be left for t.ance discovery d'Mw QC walkdowns or found e_me casual cbserv :icn.
"Jw ASME CA Manual 4 A= +4'4== that it is the responsibillef all
- . site accicyees to ruscrt itams of noncenfer:nence. CA Instre. .icn CI-CAP-16.'.-2 e *4es the fellcwing conditiens and methcds fcr re- '
pcrting ar= strikes and base metal defects:
- 1. Base metal defects and are strikes disecvered en N-sta::med components shall be identified arxi docunented in accx=:.a=ce with a W""N W (NCR) .
- 2. Arc sh and base metal defects disccvered pric: to system walW.can by CC shall be doe ==m:ed on an Inspec imt i W (IR) . i
- 3. Arc strikes and base metal defects disccvered during systect ;
=1Ldo.c by QC shall be entered cn the systant pu .chlist arxi t do:::2nented en an Inspecticn W.
- 4. l Arc strikes and base metal defects discovered after, system )
pressur; *= sting shall be &W cn a Ncruzzt.cremece d ;
aspcrt. l b=A.ibJT 3.G of d[*d $
superviscry W.uM to assure that their personnel are ware of ret !
cnly the need to prevent are strikes, but also the need to w are I s:::.kes and base metal defects pr:nytly to tt:e CC Grouc fer preeer I identificaticn, dec.runtati::n and m.icn.as i:!ar+44=A abovi. i
, , . ,g - - -
9 - - - , , , . _ . , , , . . . , , , . . . - , - - + . , , . - - , . . , _ , . .
. .- .t , .
. c
- - e.
i 1.
Page 2 of 2 W._::q .ww e C::nditicr.s(Corrt'd)
Your respense i M " *47 that your personnel have been made aware of [
and understand this mano is g t. by I/22/83.
7
, .n As s %
'D.L.
, Q.E timor Distributicn: G.R. Purdy J.T. Blixt R. Siever D. 'Mimia J. Patten J. Regan J. senline '
W. Mansfield J. Shaver .
.' ' . ' D. Doyle F. Przybylski T. Matheny M. Tedd S. Bell' E. @ i=W-_
R. W3 D. Imigh
- v. *-4 ~,--
4 R. Gnty 1
P. Ashcraft
- G. Bennetzen P. Iahoti All Craft SWmx! ants
- )
, I i
I l
i I
I, I e
G O
,e,..-,,, , , , v--,, . - - _ . ---.n.----n.- - - . - - . -
.. i. .
. ,U. !: , ,* 35-1155 1-20-83
' ,BrcwnftRootJnc.
s c (, e MEMORANDUti UMd 24935
. i TO: Djstribution .
DATE: January 20, 1983 .
I FROM:
Dj C. Franktsn
SUBJECT:
Reporting of Nonconfonnances The purpose of this memo is to reinforce management support concerning the reporting of nonconformances. To ensure that all personnel are aware of their responsibility concerning this item, all employees that may have the opcoFtunity to identify a nonconformance shall be incoctrinated in what is expected of them, and the indoctrination documented in accordance with CPM-2.2.
All employees have the responsibility of reporting itens cf nonconformance'to .
their supervisor or to the QA Department. Prompt identification of nonconformances i is required by the QA program, and in necessary for the timely correction of the !,
nonconforming ccndition.
(
Everyone's cocperation in the reporting of nonconformances is expected and appreciated. .
A hnft D. .G7ra m-i FM .
Project Manager CC: All Depart.ent Heads t All Superintendents All Foremen l 5
t I
. ?
I i
.~. ,
=t
. = . -
CASE EXHIBIT NO.1.027 SIS REPORT O h /O-6/d ;
Ti!E H ARTFORD STEAM BOILER INSPECTION anw . it.*RANCE COMPANY lt AN rl alWI). I:t 8N%i.4 TIIs :L I enhra TO: _
s 4 _
CATE
.FROM:
1 lJ l' J' A trb'ELiv / 2')0-5 L
$NEET CF
,4 ' ~
- / l
.4 - -t / . JA H.O./ 04 ANCH crFiCE i LA ,1) I '
YQ r$s'>+ ?
"**"YNL>,A->"W LCCATION STREET CITY COUNW k $
~
TATE Z:P CoCE m d!_
- ERson CONTACT 7 CivE NAME AttQ CFFIC
- A:. TITLE) _,
$$ _. b $ $ $$' $ CCN TA*CT/P O. NC
"'" " '&'ds-w
/><.,t h W ~ ~
COPtES SENT To:
C H o. Ea, c.. . sis O ow.s :... ., f?>=; .-s a. .. . sis h- (s.~ u A E . A/4 _
10 ', ZS O ' . AA- 2-C 7/-O'o g- 4 3 34 _. =__ . . .
& zla_dah ) 4Ly'.cmcGuwl.naju6ef& ' h m..)O '
n sA v %.e..su.k u m a s & M _ ). d e m'a ,tdv._ ,n ,b).n.A s R4 A DY Cf4" IU E A 4 W l'sL i & t'k & .,,fj]#
$$ Y_ean $J (' /N .
"fjs mwnc ,eu s w A A neas u_&b a_d_Aw,4,lu
.w A# 9 b [hm 24 &rik A ~'zb naiod "*YA l'/]d s A 2.a.ar.ci.._
1 Aawls>,n; E 7b nJAk.ad2aAv Abd {[ti.;4 ... . '
n ~ h ,1 a % s; f_ p e 6 a r L x a. u d i.,. .
f l' l w ic N d d ~?ta *1 d:AMw "420LIda6 //sg.<Q M'S6' '" .. .
s96d- -qt-4 *! u bd.y uh/4rd.y.c~_.i2 o o, _Wc~ .-!< / '
AA M -4dp.rl/-. 1Ae!duald.2wu chwi.sw.Luzta&d>&.d . ?.
O'"E" * -
l} .d4 /!wae
- as,14uid,msuly ,Ec.aukwa:p. d ask*.acj.< c/:rA .4.,
iedQ.d..de_e;4u.*4.'.ada% y gf nH and abt. . -
x & s u . fi. & A V As.4he.4 aRdus1A!uieuy .<ta>,
() G.-
ya.p au/at/! ,
')v-c Mp..
'tdw of6m af2n)Auc5s . _ . . .
'R W ~~ ~~
\
Qwd%~, ~~~~
\
p."4,, COVER
" " L t 4' W L enn ni en ivin-oa-un 948
, ~ .
i ,. .
CYRoot.lnc. .
IM u m c' .no Die 24,780
'IC: 'Marvin Coats, ANI DATE: [>ww+=2 27,1982
?!Ot: J.T. Blixt St.R D C : Fespct:se To SIS Report
- 10-016 Dated 12-20-82.
CPS 3 , 35-1195 In .wJe to your questions en this SIS Peport, the B&R CC inscec*ars perfm i the criginal inspecticn and sign-offs on Octcber 21, 1982.
Cn December 13, 1982 a oc was werked as a codificatien package by the i s craft to increase the size of two fillet welds fran 3/16" to h".
On r==+=r 20,1982 a B&R QC ing p-a perf s .d a visual examinaticn cf these two welds as addressed in the modification package, ard fcund them acceptable.
Se reascn operatien 48 addresses all welds .is that it per*ains *w the
! specific welds addressed on the modification MCC, ard therefore not all welds en that specific harger, are being exam 1 rad.
As far as cbjective evidence existing in the field to irdicate all ether welds have been previcusly inspected nothing currently exists, as the criginal package is in the vault. The QC inspectors are inspecting to current modificatien packages, that have been initiated by Welding Engirmering.
To furtrar clarify the welding perfor:ned en a modificatien package, Welding Engineering Will enter in the Wald No. Block at the tcp of tPA WOC "As Per DCA" (Eescriptien of Activities), which is shown en the reverse side of the modification MiDC.
~
~
J.T. Blixt
Vkk ;
cc: G.R. Purdy i i
R. Siever SIS rile curnE b =
li 1
v ,'& M #
_ gf /Jw-en l
l
. l
.. ..---r- s . . . . . , . . , - .e . . .- -
.i.-d ^ ;-
l SIS REPORT /O-d/d
.. THE HARTFORD STEAM BOILER INSPECTION and . it;RANCE COMPANY HAHTFOND. CONNE(TICLT 0510; j i
r TO CATE SN EET OF f 4 C /^Y '
loh>h l1*>] 0-l S l l
MN/M'An "'
N^E"N"
- """MLAed LOCATION STREET C1 COUNTY TATE ZIP COCE kfY M d'522 _ 4 PERSON CONTACTED (GIVE NAME AND OFFICIAL TITLE) CONTRACT /P.O. NO.
- !c SLD' 26&L -
REASON F y a COPIES SENT TO: !
CH.O. En, Co.m SIS OOsieflase.sie, 6" . x' Mane,ee, 515
@*er (5,.cify): /A/..". j 20 *, 150 " AA-2-0 7/-00 +'- A 3 34
- Om zia dek ) bb d e nah-J Acta. k = e~ awne) n A aks ,i,lo_u e,a af } danid4x abbutu Aw- .
e
$.sh J$ &? $?A) A b f D D $ $ /M A !
Y)k m/uhe n~u >LDub h 11ww Ab Aw/dhx2 J Ai-o AEf m Ja,( k xl w ah is J xl/w oeY T), e b 1 A n sJ '
Av)m ibs. 71 A i a A A >;, d a ts n ,i d ,- A A s s
,,~%, n1 o JAn,sJs Ja.Javd'a snk -
ALo
$.f hal,10 h *? u Ac #s aln'm ~anaw.ws&r)"
G cAa /
saklda e // 2 2 0 - r 2..
' //w & J Nk $.0, JA5 W J'
.) /
n w<Yb 21,YJY JLctu f /rA*jd 2.s b / d u d Ot<f b _? l 63,.zw~td4, ; '
l} db aux eas1 scud sveul h nhiaa, -rA nd)i &z/> A:~
AL A u O$ A 4 /T !2M 4 d A.
LM i,A di Afd AnaM And sa L.lJa, ' /?M ll, f *=#d#' W
~
/
/.12. 4 a
/
f.t r
l't* 4
' A8 y pgg y
?N EN AW d Y.)
y a '
)
l t
i OOvtn O'~"'$) f)/
512 m ay, io.rg pr . g .
l
- l
. \
. . . _ . . . . - - .-. --- --- .2
, ,G
- Q, $ Ln CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,020 r..S un naarronoREPORT sTua3 norunusseccnos ma tuscarsca costraxy
, ' II ANT H)M D. CON.Vli4 *f14;LT ut tWJ
' ,f . a 89-005 DATE Mr. Cc d n Purdy Q. A. Manace:.- SHEET
- 1. qqy. _
1-10-83 1 lGF1 Jce C. Hair M.Q./ BRANCH CFFICE ANI
' .tGANIZATION .
Mous en
, ErtL'n & Cec *. Inc.
? GCATION
- STREET .. CITY COUN TY CP M STATE ZIP CCCE Glen poeg E m pfelt
'I a's qs Mod 1 t RSON CCNTACTED (GIVE NAME ANO QFFICIAL TITLE) .
u*. D **m f_ahati CONTRACT /P.O. NO.
PN'**mt Sti'*/ellttnca EN ed er*
\
'EASON FCR YlstT mil
- 4 m m ,-l a m
- mn * -s ,-+- ,
i . 0PtES SENT TO:
i
_2 w.o. E., c. . sis Q ow.s in...m, G R.,.. ..I u.a.,.,. se s 8 c+., <s...Jv): Inso, file.
On this date I was presented NCR M4609 Rl. *his NCR cer"5s to grindi:.c dce .
en a G & I weld ccnnecting.em piping to the centaixent liner. In cis case tha ...
penetratien piping is also the. precess piping. . Upen investigating mis ratter, dere . . _
is no code data report covering the. welds ccnnecting the pipe to tra liner. A letter frem C3 &.I. states that the peratration piping.does not.::eet. the recuire.unts of de ._
1974. Code hecause.cf differences cf NCE requirener.ts.._'Its data report covering..
.g fabricaticn.in the.C3.&_I..shcp is to .the 1971_ Cede Su::rrer 73 addenda.
Attached is.a ccpy of C3 a .I's letter. . _.
Until there.is a resolucien to this SIS Feport, ce tr.1.gs cannct take place; .
(1) _Cicsing of tCR M4609 PJ.. .
(2) .
Signing any data repcrt where a penetratien Ls the prece'ss piping ._
for any system.
/ Hj'O O @? W
.Y.
. . . -~. ,
In
.. . ~* -G
~.
rm } ._. _
. . _ . . .\ . . 9 . . _
,5$f D .. . - . . ....
.c 197.y'i COVER t _ M *
- RE io. f4 tassa _Tt MS
- s mf TO, I OC'l
_~~
gg*- '
=
-F01A-85-59 .
Y
. n. - ** i
. . . . . :.. . . . :. "' ' ?
f:.. y '".' . . l h * ' " ~ . -- . ? ~"
. . ,.e :
n.2T+~ " '* " '"'~.:-=~
- .z * .
~~~~~. * *
""~h*
g.f.' '
t 3- , m T :. '
Chicago Srfdge a fron : ;pany SSCO Faittacks norm Hous:cn read
.:: *
- p o box 40056 Houston, Texas 77040 vsk-1237i g COPY T0 gu,d December 24, 1979 >
- *"hoJcE7BO.8G5Uh95 .
ECElVE '
' M l M)!
JAN 021980 [ h
-fy}
_, .... 2: '
Brown & Root, Inc. -
E C Egg c{
- is(,
P. O. Box 1001 Glen Rose, Texas .l 75043 .
PROJECT M R*
I-Attenticn: Mr. D. C. Frankum PROJECT EHCR.
l 3 u;a~
Project Manager f.*'Q' UIRED READING- l y
iPROJECieCONT. !NGR.lq,.,
g[ RE: 2-135'O CONTAINMENT LINERS
' COMANCHE PEAX STATION yye:g gg l
i y .h ' BROWN & ROOT'FOR TUSI
' , BROWN & ROOT SUSCONTRACT #35-1195-137.
PROJ~C' GER .:0R. l
.::._. . :. GIBBS & HILL PROJECT #2323 4R :3 plf)' GLEN ROSE, TEXAS j7 ,l l
' CSI' CONTRACTS 74-2427/280 <e < -
- u r cir.'Frankum
- CSI LETTER NUMBER HMC-473 J/ h* ' E l--@
~
l/
Your letter BRV-9561 requested that CBI proceed with the certi.% ...;T the sumer 1974 addendum of Section III of the ASME Co After extensive research, our conclusion is that the certification cannot b
.sde within the strict letter of the Code. .
~~
cation and welding procedures, meet theThesumer
to ecmplyThewith ures -
. the 1.
~
- A;pendix IX requires 100 a:ps per ::1: inch of pr::The ameerag .
Se::icn a .d * ~.G Y recuires 90 to 110 amps per irch he :.-ici-.:::e1 c; &.um. .
125 ar- 5 Ter inch tr '.h'Unal!?3 7. P .7/ a in:. . up :: 3/4 inch
- c
tra.
~=~~-
I i-a
. .g; a .: ' - - " - " -
, 6 7757. ' '.~
1
..:. . : - -- I
.-o r . $
. .$. ],,
9-)d;l. chicago Bridge & Iren c- ;any .
.. .......y..
2? N '. .
i c,. . .
'..c.".. .
I ~ J December 28, 1979 !
- ~'
Mr. D. C. Frankum -
. ~.E Page 2 -
. a. .-
.: "y
.u. .. -
_ ,s......
.' ' . ~;
2.
Under Section V, both.MT and PT ' require that the surface preparation
.;r. cleaning extend one inch onto the plate material frem the edge of .
, ,the weld. Appendix only requires cleaning of the weld. ~ ,y.
- b. - -
While cur MT procedure only requires 100 amps per inch minicum, cur actual Q.A. < t.
records indicate.that in most instances we did ccmply with the Secticn V requi e-ments.
The only exceptions were on Unit II penetrations MV-4, MV-15, and MV-19.
Unfortunately the cleaning requirements of Secticn V were not part of the pro-
'. cedures and for' this reason none of the penetrations can actually be certified to
- . the sumner of 1974
- addendum.
.y', <
If we can be r .. of,.;
, .. . additional help on this subject, please let us know.
gg,
'R0 C. ALEXANDER. g[ g g P .0 JECT MANAGER RCA/ln , .
~
cc: Mr. L. A. Ashley .
Brown & Root, Inc. -
- -r--
, c: .
Mr. D. A; Voves ,
Brown & Rcot, Inc. -
Mr. H. R. Rcck -
Gibbs & Hill, Inc.
- Mr. Mcm'er' C.' Schmidt ti. .
Texas Utilities Services, Inc..5.'.
. : .g t
- a. Mr. 'J. T. Merritt. .idY:
" -O -
Texas UtiTitie's Services. Inc.'#07 g.. .a ; "'23'
,.s. y. . v
. k N
.w ' he.
e
~ d-a
.M .Oe.
l
1
.9 ..._. - . . . . , _ . ,, .. .
(
- 3. . . % - ( ;
, , Page H1 of 5 !
. FORM N.2 MANUFACT11RERS DATA REPORT FOR NUCLEAR PART A '
As required by the Provir of the ASME Code Rules Date 7..u-T1 '
u - 95 Chkd - CNG
- t. (si uanut.ciu,ed by Chicago Bridge & Iron C.m::any 81mingham. Alabama (n . . ,. . . 4 m ...a .n u,., .c p.,
(b) Manufacrured foc Brown Root, Inc.
(N .ae ese,... .s u w.n Houston. Texas
, es .
an.4 nues.., e . no
- 2. Identification-Manufacturer's Serial No. of Part 34b*4 None N at'l M. No.
346-2.,347-3, (a)
Constructed Accordias to ora =ias No.3.%-P., 39-?. o, awing P,e,a,ed by CBI Cont. 74-24270 (b) Descriptio. of pa,ilaspected 1 Piece SA333 GR6 6"O Sch 40 Pice x 6'-6 fong w/ attachments (c) Applicable ASM E Code: Secrion !!!. Edicion I97I Sumer 1973
_ . Addenda dace . Case No. 14C3 _ Class 2 3, a,,,,w,,_ Fire Main. Customer Mark MV-16. Item No. 4 thru 18 do not apply.
i s, ., e. . . ien.. ., . . .. . ,., . n n . . . .. . . . .. .. . n..
The 1" thick liner olate marked 346-1 is to be consddered as an attachment. Hydrostatic test of :his cart shall be cerfomed with the ccmoonent hydrostatic test perfomed by others fonas to the rules of conseruction of die ASME Code Section !!!.Te certify thatche staaements e con. mad (The applicable oesiga Specification and Stress Report Manufacturer is responsible for furnishing a separace oesign Specification and Scress Report oif the in the componens oesign Specification and Stress Report.)
appurtenance ncluded one hr _19/.l2L signed Chicaco Bridoe & Iron Cg y m tan .>
d b#
Certificate of Authorization Empires 6/l6/78 - &)
_ c,,, n c.c og 4,cho,;,a,;,, N., N-1090 CER"nFICATION OF DESIGN FOR APPURTENANCE Meri appliesble) oesign informacios on file a N/A l g 3 o Scress analysis report on file se N/A ' I< i b. I Design specifications certified by N/A
- Prof. Eng. Scase Reg.No.
Scress ' analysis report certified by M/S Prof. Eng. Sc ace _ Reg.No.
CER'UFICATE OF SHOP INSPECTION
- 1. the undersigned, holdlag a enlid comunissios issued by che Nacional Board of Dailer and Pressure Ves and/or the since or Province of - T*"n a" a
- and employed bM2M#M Dam Mla" IA IN of l#2M#M- IN have inspected th satt of a pressure vessel described in this Maculacturer's Partial casa Report on
- b-7 _19 . and nace that andDybelief. the Manufacturer has constructed this part in acco< dance with the ASME Code Seesion 111.to the best of my knowledge ing the part described in this Manufacturer's Partial casa Report. signing this certificate. neither th shall be liable in an wish this inspection. y enanner for any personal injury or property damage or a loss of any kind arising froen or case -
19 h b
- _ Commissions #)
p.e.gfg ' -
. s.,es M n..n. 8 *e. sen.. P,., ins e ne N.. '
s u. .. .e i. 6.=
....: .h.n.ius.4an, ..es rem.a..
.e . tin.. .aues..
. a en..e.,4.e,.-i.e.
nw.m ,.e..,
.ad (3) es.. u..e e,..i4.s ( 3. 3e...ts. t. sw".
naen in u...
t 1". (2) s.t.,
a., .t o n.n. t. . i.: eni.
. i. tie. 3. " R . ..,s. '.
e
- SD y w- > --, ---a-Fw-
A
.'....d ~ SIS REPORT C. ' A'v b THE HARTFORD STEAM Doll.ER INSPECTION an t :NSt;RANCE COMPANY n4mowo. cowmrici. r mm S O: . a 10-005 OATE i
Mr. Gcrden Purdy O. A. Manacer ISHEET s
tCM: 1-10-33 l 1 lCF1 M.Q./$RAf4CH CFFICE )
Joe C. Hair ANI
.'4GANIZATION .m Housten ErCWn & RDOt, Inc.
- GCATlON STREET CITY COUNTY cecES STATE ZIP COCE Glen Dese cene > ell '"wa <
- ERSON CCNTACTED (GIVE NAME AND OFFICIAL TITLE) 74M3 h- De Liheti CONTRACT /P.O. NO. '
EASON FOR VISIT W.E&:r at Su"feilmace SN"d e'-
m11 4w, nor.1 o n s.
ma* ne.*
TOPtES SENT TO:
JM.o. En, c. , sis Q oa.t in.. ,
Sa .n.: %.,.,, sis 8C+.,(s...M: Inso. file.
Cn_this date.I.was presented !G M4609.Pl. D.is.NCR per-='a.s to p_a. ding d ne _
en a G :. I weld ccnnecting the piping to the centair::ent liner. In dis case 9a .
Sena.tra*% piping _is also the. precess piping . Cpen investicating this ratter, there ._.
__ is no maa data repcrt covering the w. ids.cennecting the.pice to the liner. A lettaan. _
__from G .& I_ states .that.the.penetraticn piping.does not reet .the requirerenCs of de . . _ .
.,1974 . Code.because.cf_ differences.cf ST2..'.wgairecents . 2e data report covering the .
(e.
%, fabricaticn.in the.G.&..I. shcp is to the 1971 Code St. mer 73 adder.da. Attached is.a....
ccpy of G. & I's letter _.. .
. Until there is a resoluticn to this SIS Peport, two thines cannot take place:
(1) .. Asing of UCR.M4609.PJ.. .
(2)
. Signing any data rescre where a penetratica is the precess piping .
for.any system. .
. . ~ - -
. . - . . .. w= ,s e
.. .. m" ,
,8
-_. T CD . _ . ..
- @ . __ i
. f: -
,AitP i!. .. ._
.... . ._ L ,. -
~ .
.:GNEO -QOVER o
r.. i .
.. w s so.ro asisi Ja n$ , s -f In. 1001
=
.a....... .
1
... . . . .n
. .. . - _ . .c , _. _ . _
- .g(~
. . . . . . _ ~ . . . . . , .,
.....s.....,.,,----.,-..ms.
.. - . s....
'?'..
- . ;. *. . :*.7
,..?. .
llcDn -/M/.
k..h fj, ) J d
<w Gibbs & Eill, !=c.-
"T specificatien 2322-55-12 -
Revisic 2
- Ja=uary, 10, 1979 i
Page 11 shall het relieve the Cc=tracec adequacf cf the ita=s. c f. re: ;c~"
- ti ty fc= the 6.0 MA'"IR 2.13 FCR L. m 3 6.1 MA"'IR'I' *.S TCR L w.S .
"e =1terial.s specified fcr the c
,c=e=ts of the cc=tal==ent
' **er shall he is accordance with the fellcui=g:.
6.1.1 1 u a PI.A=
~
- er plate at the c==*=4 fc==datic: =at, mns walls and dc=e, li=er. plate at the
^
=cted c= the drawi=gs special Has d eke a
=ed insert plates i= the 11=er, special", e=he'dded plates is the
- g. . ,' fec=datic: =at, a=d ethe= steel. =ata=ial, e= cept as ctherwise i=dicated cs the drawi=gs er EA-527, Class ~2 i= this specificatic=,*shall be
- Q. -
6.1. I ?n.:. G-~03 EI.I.m3
- a. C=less othe:vi.se ryecified cu the drawi=gs, the = ate:ial fer penetratic=
pipe fer sleeve sleeves shall ec=fc== tc SA-323 Grade 6 se2M ess dia=eters up to a=d includi=g 20 inches.
7t=etratic=
he sleeves larger, than ,20 i=ches is dia=ete: shall Grade ex;-527, 70 c Class 2.f ahricated fres =clied plate, and shall cenic::n te SAf16, lR All penetratic= slee ves shall
=eet and the requirements of Article NE-2000, A=ticle NI-4000, Article UE-5000, subsec lcu NI, Req.. ire =e=ts fcr Clas.s MC C a e z., ,w a +.. _ r. e=._ts.
. 4. 6 =. 2 =.wwt.L.p orrsas=parc 387.4 c.- : r_
2 g _, __,,,, ,_ , _ _. _ _ , ,
A ,,,_, m . j,. ,.'-ed
~s 4 ~
O '-
.a),+ 1h, ;,, a
- - - - - , - ' %dM2&,ih$ ..
e _ __ n a
, ..,z Mg %,,,, d C w w:_ e., w=~. _ ed- - - -
emettft. _. i ~___ _ --.m~m.:. - _ .
- Ce..erene: ._.~ 9ff'. Where Schsectic:
' e2C.'-
schsectic= NI cc=dlict, r :T_ -- ~ NC a=d ~3e7' .;
.w.- --
- h. Pe=etratic=s Mv-1 a=d %.t.93*C% M7-2 as shewn en NC, s.t n QT drawi=gs s'.all =eet the acceptance criteria, ferthe e=gir.eeri=g V-=ctch i= pact test the Char;y accorda=ce wit.h Asnz sectic=. III 4
c.
W Schsecticn NI and parag.is ra h 6.2 cf this specificatic=.
.. cther prccess .pipi=q ;e=p All p criteria is acccrda=ce with ASP.Ie ratic=s shall =eet the accepta=ce W secticn II- subs ectic NC, '
a=d paragraph 6.2 of this specificatien.
i l .. .
_, . -.w-, "w ' ' ' ' "
. . _ _. 1
- r.=m T#%-"7.C * *.T.L".5C?.C---M
~. .
~~
g f 773 . // Q ,
t ..2., -..v. e W o n,?.:* -
.:".cfpeJC_CLT. -~
n.
[ho. -
,-.9~' MRf et-N [* $
7-d
.. - ..' Y-Y~NSIS
- ~i. '.:i.*f.h.- -m . -RE2rR6_.FOUMONITORING'O'.A.[FROGRAM57/
s* 'Tpetet.94 - -- . ~e-: .- @
.._, - , . - = - -.. - :: _. -- _--_- - - m y....
i!
1 L
rus u-v r icep . . e -- -
.-cs . e -
- pp 7 n ERKE. "'^^!=.. P ... -* .
X '"
, , -..m .
- - IOSEGR
.;r aw.
Q C MA NAGER 'T+Vf<5N;C d
A - 2 8 ~ 2 2
- \
BROWN & ROOT ~.INC --
N vm r;,. , . %~ ...
" ~
~
i
- $$NY DE? HWY 201 NCR$bN?GfF~NROSh"*YEYAS '$50Ni;VELL l SON $
\
7..'.E THE UNDERSIGNEC . . . HAVENCNITORED ASy5 coa.,5
. . . - . .q .
~. p[7.s.,_
}$,O CUAJ.RQASSURANCEMANUh.W
...a.... -
Q GUALiiY ASSURANCE PRCCEUR 0 NCE. . FRCCEDURES,....... MANUAt_. . -- '--- - \ C QUALITY CCNTRCL PRCCEDURET MANUAL. EE.~ DON hIr% 'lYC)ENDTLED $'.:~-m. .M h M 5;' c k C a b C &~b
; :THE. P.25 ULT 5, ARE : .
. .t :.:. .
- - - - -- . i \
T '*~"'= , _' ' ' 0 ' SAM 5AGTCRY'~~NO. CORRECTIVE ACTION REGUIRED t - r
O. ACCE?TAELE- EXCE?T AS USTED EELQW _*
i CORRETIV&~ .tCTION REQUIRED BY - * *
\
f UNSADSFACTORY-INMEDIATE' CORREDVE A
.V . ,
i f ihC Ani=37 Enc-R ,MAA6A/YA AGVW'M -hhM- .
?
G.,?'#crs _
\
;-aD. y-? pus 4ema e.st bs- & a ufne.rugeh ; ;
l
< Mb MSTNIG.h.. ps mnap Ararb % Lhs" C o.h e.'
Sbt TM, \ I \
! wt Aub&rcRy cel +hs- GoHT/M-r. bM Ac -
-A h a r
- GWhWN ~ l?t 1516 Sys& 0 lT~IW25 fE~AUdi~C I i fsN w-to4 9ssc.nh/sc p-s .s c. r.=r;eics. 'c4 inre.ka:cd 1
~f65~5- 9e ' Afju.= sunacs.t " fcQutLEEh
. . ~ crrc-. : rhs pcgerrprr.tod A-smervrh/m to fCCm!T* fnP'M
- 777Aduft4cruA25Cb 7e Sucesx: '7S s~b /De^t o.1syene~ ajnt M
. /hw GowrfodCW7 QOsA>M Sys & ) 14 f -- Q V/ 2 553 ~Z'
- s e riA u ac
'n't:e=
C.-. the abcve'e ._:.-' :s m.,= wa W i&-xui/ww.c . can he v---* *- cd. agin. teen cacted. 7.le.tse r. :* Cy ce in w.'::1:q sc :::::r.:
\
tt.e a.be te } M _ i
.-..~..-..~_.-
g m ut mu N . n w n . . .., c::::can/ws.vun:-sta us c.wr 5,.s - ri ..n ,,... r. nvn.) i
. )
QS t,
. . - - _ _ . - . .1 -.
py'/ SIS RECORD FOR MONITOPJNG Q A,/Q.C. PROGRAMS CASE EXHIBIT N0e 1,029 [g/ THE HARTFORD STE.ut BOILER INSPECTION and INSURANCE CO. iPA HARTFORD. CON.N ECTICt."r 04:02
- 334 s rarnen one r.oieo cart s><tts or
.r:
1 v ._ % A,-- 'My & A. va -a m- .Tet u nf 11. loa 1 1 I
,g=
cusromers ccur.n, uma - - msr snuo msr etc.cn cA ,cato counra, inscicaat usa outri Follow.Up
%g BrCWn & Ibot, Inc. Housten Housten d"r eavited Clos'd 44 = W6PtCia L.CA'*
Field teca6r/ CPSES Glen Bose,. 'rexas 76043 C3hoo 2 Assembly C Altmtion Ulaservic' l
- l. the undersigned. have monitored your QA/QC manual on: and find the following sections:
igm : .ene re**as C $atisfactory: l
,noenner ossoc - - seerson (no. ene reae) on seenary roe aseaseos noneenre,menn en eeeeeeereo E Unsatisfactory:
Ncn c:::plianca with AR.E. Code NA-ll40-(c) _" Effective dates of Code Editions' . . - -
<e
!E Note: . S.is remrt.recrens. 939. 6 51-.(Attac.' rent 4 1) and clcses .. -
85! - l
$E . . ... 932 ! 18-005 (Attaciment 4 3).. .-- - -.- - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - -
l See At*.ac M=4ts. 8
^
CUSTOMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESOLUTION" section below, and give
- k. . date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: **" * * "f 10- ICA' noauen Please keep the Original of this form for your records and return a ec3y to inspector named below.
a s. ar/EeorIEtiv. YF$i. an 13, 1983 g
--o o, n.cs, eo.s clo o o.t ,s o. o, mac:c., ,c: en,e e.e.o, ee - ,
DCA #16,054 to MS-100 and SS-14 has been issued adopting NCA-1140_of_1980 Edition _ . _ _ ,
. . . - Summer 81 Addenda. _
'I'his, provides the Owner _ designating any_, parts ,of the, , Component ,,,,,,
g -. applicable Code Edition and A.dden..da..- 3 :e 2 it SE _. QA Manual will be revised _co include this_ provision _of the Code. p , p 00VER cast constenut on au u ccarttito oart sota re .e ,e nen,e ',,=, hl b e 0 S h 0S 2.,. !!!- L d d 'l
/ /
- l. the undersigned, have remonitored the above unsatisfactory conditions on: M/jp//-[
/
and found them: I sfactory CUnsatisfactory (Esplaitt calow)
~$ ..
]'W o~. h.C...bd. l/M. 9/" . b O .W/ A=o"M -
4h % / W '8 Yf 9-*C 4C5 .. . . . . -. . . - . DCa 0.'5.;"'
.. $1 do. oart solo solo twss iaeseere,i /-
L.am u r/a c 5 oresenua Foreign . 7Fae " 2.-1'f s-/ cit 3 > //) [ f .4 _ y
. _ . . . . _ . . _ . . . . _ . . - . . . 1 ,
SIS IEPOW # 334
*[ - -
^~ P1ge 2 of 2 t
I h i h Findings: HSB 939 # 51-2 was closed 12-16-78 based on initiation of Brown & Pbot NCR M-ll44 (Attachment #2) . However, this NCR was voided on 1-21-30 by the Brown & Ibot Q. A. Manager without ANI notoficat:.on. Mr =4m: Brown & Ibot s justification for voiding NCR M-ll44 Pev.1 is based on fallar inus suppositions. (1) (a) Paragrach 2 of page 3 (NCR M-ll44) states in part that:
"NE-1131 describes the jurisdiction...............
(b) Paragraoh 3 of .eace 3 states that "It's a logical inference from NA-1262 and NE-1)31, that a cenetration assenbly with its attached pipina is part of tM containnent system (the ccx:conent) . Cbntrary to the above, subsection BE is not acclicable (Con +=4=nt liner is non AS"E Ccde)~ and therefore the
" Con *=4=nt System" is not the "Coupenent' of which the penetration assently is a part. Bis part will be listed on the cipina N-5 Cata Beoort and therefore must be certified to the sane Ccde Edition and AddarAm date that the 3.nstallation is certified to.
(2) Paragraph 8 of page 3 states " Piping peratration, as
. fabricated, are in full concliance with the subcon-
,- tract, W d'mtion and ASME Code .6wts. Hence, no NCR condition exists and this NCR is voided.
Cbntrary to the above, the subject earts are not in
" full" cxztpliance with tM ASME Cbde. ney still do -
not neet the _recuirenants of NA-ll40 (c) . 6 6 9 D .. O e
Pa. ,*.- ~ . . , jr SIS RECORD FOR MONITORING Q.A./Q.C. PROGRAMS CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,030 t
! THE HARTFORD STEAM BOILER INSPECTION and Inst;RANCE COMP.
HARTFOND. CON 3 ECTICL*r os10 [ 4 339 re sue.e e , raie,
*9 , cart sa.tti er V* Corden ?urdv us.-w i iaos 1 * ! carcutes ccanar ums .
ease. asance insi ar.ca ce scato coi.ain usa catra tasje a
.gg Brown & Root. Inc. unumenn u,,,.r,n Ceea; ires bC188'd
-l"3 i
~
"'38tCi* N*
p Fi eld u Regaa/ j 1 C?SES Glen Rese. Ten n 7rn41 Shoo asse.s , 04 iter,ti 'm mi..ervic , l the undersigned, have monitorett your QA/QC manual on: ?/94/91 and find the foilowing sections:
.bm, !
4 to e menere one ramo
; C Satisfactory:
1 l 3 Unsatisfactory:teenary omoc meneer moon (meu one rene) on menery me eneaam neeeaua- :,e en soonasseo ' Section VII Docu:nent Control )
,w m E W z ., , -
1
!: s '
(d[ f"b Itd 7 '0f.A^-] w - l
$/ t
. [ *'-- .$7/N OCW
('y CUSTOMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESOLUT date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: 1/f*/8' tcm> Please keep the Original of this form for your reco'rds and return a copy to inspector named below. w~. ' a s-,
,.,,,.e.e., --
Ener. W r/ft[orn'StYuv. Nrlle" i March 1, 1983 h [ = b, esaur as neu atus aucmo 4.cvt as um ununsric on <ce e e no.mo s.ee -, SI-1-SB-022 - new ccpy or'.ered frcm DCC and one destrcyed. FSI-1-2102-16-1-lO3 advise as to w- Im - No reo::rd of this EE ntxter in QA files or in CCC. Please nt:ter. CE . s . Ei . jj Fgrther, it shculd be noted that if a 10 Day CC is issued, the centrol drawing u- is not star @ed but when the centrolled CC is issued it is referenced en the DWG, nart conste:ive act.s= nu as cowstito cars s go A Ccw9 smorc m a .. March 29, 1983 March 28,1983 )
/ ' i
- l. the undersigned. have remonitored the above unsatisfactory ' conditions on: l u, rs in tQA1 I and found them: C satisf actory 3Unsa'isfactory(Esplain colows See page 2 of 2
, e no
*5t** sis eore, 2 i.,,. wt ima M;3/ ~
Res.18tf Represeritative bFire
!tarch 30, 1983 >swa,h,..,ef,.
-, d
._-._-,--s:~---
, .~ , e-em,
, ,, 4 92- ~_=,%.-Q]c;,'"~~a '. -
* .J.-(%"
J ' i SIS REPORT # 339
' Page 2 of 2 }.- ! I '- While nonitoridj"Section IV, I discovered two (2) isometric
{$ 9 drawings with discrepancies: l SI-1-S3-022 Changes to controlled drawings, written in by 1 hand in ink. I FSI i Drawing is illegible. Also reference 932 92102-16-1-1Q37 001A written 2/18/83 (CS-1-AB-213 & CS-i Also 939 #313. This has become h the DRG group, Control #83 drawings. This-~ doss n5c include the Iso's taken back for illegiblility when pri.sented with documentation or missing CMC's in packages. . ew Your attention to this matter' vill-be~ appreciate -a van e of any further assistance, please notify. Response reply: This response is being returned unsatisfactory because:
,- (1) On the SI-1-S3-022 drawing, no correceive action is addressed'concerning this ' - "' (2)
No corrective action is addressed for the correction of illegible-drawing in the files, nor the ones issued from,DCC. (3) There is no mention of 10 day CMC's in this 939. The l problem mentioned here concerns no, CMC with the docu-mentation when presented for final review. A final review cannot be performed if you do not have the correct design document in hand. A response by April 15, 1983 will be appreciated. [ t l
_ g' _ _ . _ . . . _ _ .- - -- - SIS RECORD FOR MONITORING Q,AdQ.C. PROGRAMS
)@,Mp;;%E
' alRTFORD STEA.M BOILER INSPECTION CASEand EXHIBIT INSU NO. 1,031 .bCE C
. s HAH rFOND. (:ONN1:(:TI(:tl*r Oslo: y
/ 9 41 ro , ~-. .-, r.,,e , v ~ :.ri s.ct 4 ha ., N .- J , q< . na v 1cusicastrs wm wa4 e-ee.-
I ue i, q eoq, , I 3 msr samnos .nse atc.on ca s4sto cra,igray (A NA WS3 L T) E5 E *21dL.6_.Do o e . Iae Houst00. _ 3 0M3to" '-*',o : Closed "E "3'"* d"*
.- - Field aesair/
("PSES ru e 5 Rnse. Texas 76043
- 3'' d A$8'*8'Y '""8U*" '"'""
l the undersigned, have monitored your QA/QC manual on:. 3/8/33 . and find the following sections:
< cese s
, . . tGn.e noneeers oms rotsent
._ Satisfactory:
i i treem.or od<oc n em,ao suren (nn see rme; on seenery one wua.e noneenre,mene'ias uno.esa*To
.L unsa:isfactory:
Section 12 Test Control I Rydrostatic test G's ICS-107-1. ICS-108-1. and XWP-102 indicate NX-6124 e sE is not being complied with. ER
$E Hydrostatic test d's ICS-10,8-1 and ICS-107-1 were held at a test pressure of 56 PSIC. The design pressure is 220 PSIC. The basis for this reduction of pressure was " limiting components". The " limiting cotsponents". IPL-lSB and I?l-187 are
~
pressure indicating devices, which do not meet the criteria of components _CVER { CUSTOMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESOLUTION" section date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: Aa"'1 9 I"'1 rosseo Please keep the Original of this form for your records and return a cocy to inspector named below. 15 Foreign wt ao a oinsasno w
!' E'*"C".x,tes. ugr/ teoresentanve insa. Cfii' f / ,A /
March 8, ntsenon or i osa .rtus aucaiuo 4 ant as uma unansric one <cr 1983 h
= en ae-= s.ee a a==<r, W [f#/-& m A CC #72980 has been issued against the FSI drawing changing the Ccde bound:v.
f SIS 12-004 issued en 3-2-83 has resolved the.hydrotest SICS-107-1 and ICS-108-1. g was Hydrotest 5%@-102 was performed to test the entire system, and the test =rassure limited to'll2PSIg. due to allowable maxinun- test pressure of sever 3"5 y cc penents in the system. Therefore it was not necessary to isolate cart of s@
"" the system for testing at higher pressure. This subject has been discuss #
with Mr. Coates and Mr. Tillman by P.C. Lahoti on Mav 16, 1983. ve m w,co un.co It was resolved that the test M@ #10'2 is cceotable. u n ma 7 f OJ, NA wa n, Nfhf$ h .f en
. ..e.e n.. .. a
;~ y
- 1. the undersigned, have remonitored the above unsatisfactory conditions on:
f '2 e hy 3 _ ^" and found them: 3 Satisfactory Unsatisf actory (Erstain cetow) toereo Yr s- .. s . . O-' O') } t..) L 4 ) .t
' S ' l- lls' CYe u.
,) fe i 8 . *s'.. ) JL ('. .i L ~r, Y N
'n k. opt oro f be $ m.1 . aT/aM' j
".)/... a J. $.s . i . . ta < . r z.y r=== sis F.,e,.. ,.g . ,,. wi -o m a , . ,n.e.e,o.,
Etes. ugr Reoresentstsve u File { 2 4. } } . G y'y,,,,,4, ,_,_..j f , .
~" " '
FOIA-Bb-69 m
i
._'l .. ___ _. . ._. __ __ -. . - - . . -
, r,..-
- 1
,'* , y ,%
l SIS REPORT d 341 Page 2 of 2 r' ; h per NA-1210. Hydrostatic test i X'.i?-102 was held at a test pressure of 112 PSIG. The design pressure is 150 PSIC. The basis for this reduction of pressure is also " limiting component". Piping in all four Iso. 's involved are welded to class 5 piping on both ends. The " limiting component" includes several vessels, at least one of which was fab-ricated to the rules of ASME Section VIII. It should be noted that the attached piping on two of the Iso's can be isolated via valves and flanges as installed. - G S e
~
( O 6 . m
=
9 s=
.. .,., i P, , i SIS RECORD FOR MONITORING Q.A./Q.C. ROGRAMS f
! CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,032
'* P 'THE HARTFORD STEASt BOII.ER INSPECTIO. nd INST lRANCE COStPANY stau rn own. t:ossam<x r onio-:
ro in ., r.,,,,
/
v 8 346 . cart s ur sr 5 Cordon Purdv, Site 0. A. ManaRer Acril ?!. 1081 l I. 5$ cus:Catt's cea.nas mast ime.P 3AaNOI msP StGCN oA 8CRtp c0unter
?
gaiGsomat usg omgr)
;S= :: Brown & Root. Inc. -Follow Up p e
Houston treueen " tecuireo Closed S $ pasncrem tocanom _ r; eld se
~
~l CPSES Clen Rose. Texas '--* r pair / q N dAssembly J Alteration Linsnes I Ithe undersigned, have monitored your QA/QC manual on: 6 / H / cti and find the following sections:
I , o . .. . _ to... nwan,e m r.urno , Satisfactory:
~
r .n o our n (no. m r ) on a ary ra. ,m,oa nm.no.re.m. n . u o 3 Unsatisfactory:es. o caroc Section 12 Test Control a 2 :" See Attached. E5 5E u s' I,',,,,"j o f t-CUSTOMER: P! ease describe the resolution of these items in the "CUSTOi.4ER'S RESOLUTION" section below, and give date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitorec. Dy: 5'av 5- 108'
~ c o.s.s Please keep the Original of this form for your records and return a copy to inspecto. named below.
ggs:surc= ggg gy,,,, ,,,, care sots soto inse ,,2nue.,- ~
.3. Reg. Ugr Recrosentative d, File 4/21/83 > M/ [k[,
stscouren w ruost i:tus cascmsta aaove as st.nc t,nsanspac:cer rc n ,n s ..,munurys/ m See Attac:b.ed CCR No.10. ' M F{/ _ M :[. 5I' 23 17Y' $$? -%g h c
** sm ~~-
cart conetcrat ac:ca nu a ccwttria cart soto A [cm ..
^
soto rcqs < s a. May 2, 1983 May 3, 1983 > _< s s-
- 1. the undersigned, have remonitored the above unsatisfactory cr-ditions on:
[.//.f"3 rc.,., and found them- 35atisfactory Unsatisfactory (Espiaen cetow) I I Ys ~ U ~ QAP /2. *2. wf as .s.yhdduJ; }y Q Ctur.so a aQ AAP
" #*"#6
__. 1,,,...... .s ,. _a_. . _ .. s. .. . F01A-85'59 g,, Its. Wgr tegretentative [* M* b ile h (( - - - - -
. - . . - - ..~ . ms :- . -
~
e SIS REPORT # 345 Page ? cf 4 Referruces: ASME Section III NA 4420 Brown & Root Q. A. Manual 113 , Brown & Root Procedure CP-CPM-6.9I Discrepancy: NA 4420 requi$es " instructions, procedures, or drawings of a type appropriate to the circumstances". Brown & Root Q. A. Manual requires that provisions are included which assure s monitoring is performed by QE/QC and that a means for evalua-ting and documenting the test results are provided. CP-CFM 6.9I provides for inspection by QC and tieness by ANI, Pres-sure Test Data Package includes applicable drawings marked to show test boundaries, system flow diagrams will generally be used, and that additional information is recommended but not required. CP-CPM-6.9I is inadequate. for the felicuing: . (1) Systen flow diagrams do not provide 1: cation, elevation, configuration, nor means for identifying Iso's. Brown
& Root Iso.'s are used for all other phases of install-ation, and are used by QC personnel for the actual' ins-pection of hydrostatic casts (copy of ANI file #12-002 attached).
r~ (2) Inconsistencies marked by QC on noted Iso. 's. at time of test walkdown are
. On at least two tests, valves which were shown on the flow diagram and valve lineup sheets as open, were in fact closed. As tso.'s were
! being used- for walkdowns, this was noted on the Iso. 's enabling the test to be continued as opposed to the test being shut down for modification to be made to the flow diagram and valve lineup ' sheets. This ensbled ; only a small portion of the system to be re-tested. (3) l Flow diagrams do not provide Iso, numbers, spool numbers, nor weld numbers. i All Brown & Root insta llation records { including inprocess documents and NS Data Reports ref- ' arence Iso. numbers, therefore, all final review recordg including those maintained by site ANI's provide for tradkng by Iso. numbers. As flow diagrams do not p ro-vide this information, an adequate means for ensuring that all joints and modifications are subsequently tested.ie not readily available. l Thank you, { f SW ' Billy Walker e 0 w
* =
---w., ----+ --w+,
_ . . - , ~, m-. .w- - ..,, - - - , , _ __y-- .- pg ,y -
--y .- -
m
. . .. .- .. n a.1 m __ ~ ~r n_
. .: .. .e 3 .. , G., g c
. ica_
SIS REPORT " " " " n.,a ; N. e,! , 1
- INSPECTION HANTI OND. CONN 4 a .
and,INStJH.'" r MnJ
"^*""" "". :'li CO.\lP.\NY '
pw t. -
.Wmdn, fm).] U .2. C/. #Ln o.s , ,
QATE l SHEET
' h!)nc /' /
/0-/2 d*L / lPF l
* %* j r )AJf H.O./ BRANCH CFFiCE YC/ALl&
~
casAN!z TicN/ Y' . AAum $ fit '1 i LGCATION STREET CITY GMEs idli.,d.ma. COUNTY STATE ZIP CCf-FERSCN CCNTACTED (GIVE NAME AND OFFICIAL T TLE) -n bA s a b M*n o$w AJ - &'b f YAmA > Ja s=*5 CONTRACT /P.O. T REASON FisR VIS T # ' _ VJ & $OY eM!ES SENT TO: OH.O. Eng C.i. sts O cN.' ta...c.,
~~
S .a. u. . sis y 70+.,(s=iM: ,4 -r.// r 2 f , / A . / k h $ Y.s
. =
<0 Ai& AA I f
__1)s d /8-//-P.2 sin Aars Asi ,, o
// JLJ n~21 ci>>>.mf .rss '%d '
- Aff fsd A$akL,/97fidimid/fillnj /),2s.jn d),e)R3
- A, r1
..;das,J o e s ) si.b b b .a_
,i n s n w >AY A Jnf^#a.s,oI/d h} ja c
kn, s,;6d i; a wn n , w n- 1 9 -
.l , ma ds b , sn, - diis 4211 1ss L.a - i.),,.JL/ .),,a. ..
nu , S u o_a s A h m D , ,4 l n j f A i p '
) J r 1 *$ J 0
/ / 0 A9 W t t% )/,P '
J &
< AUA on m A u,, .4 s ,, hi}hl A }(): ,+]i 6 do.o .a, 7A, l J/d.
,i
% ls' j,v : ZSs
- AM-J-S8-al 7 . / W * // N-ci - f1 a s a w s lw ,i, ] w
. !n & mslc} *5~~--JA~ Nnsu 3 asx cJ;tb .z-Q ) n s
,,,,)J esA ZSo "' /5 -/-SB- 0 0 i . lu-1 # ,
/PS-dia - Z.s a mia, 2!ra.m toJ w
.le ;;fij dea d /0 2 tb ium rs.+ ,oM o-/2}i Z1b_.4)1,4 $ ), . sbr:-l* / '
aJN , Ai Aldwa iss a $1BJ adiah Ayda 1T=1"
/ 4 ANA - o / )sso- lw]r,md ' '
o>n /0 8'42 j l/
\
o ,
'H /-S/3-00 '?. 2H-/-SB 00 l>, , 2H /-SB-oItl AN 118A')/-J- SQG
[H-/-32 o 19. AH-/SB-o2 6 /H J-38 0.11. WfH-/ 'A.A/Z 02 L-c/'7, f H /-S B s&< sv o, w' o-10 d wLnaa Ed # 21//2- o I. Cl/b~r > d~c .Oh 2%i~~ N u~u k&
- A Aa, J :du 1 s a skJ/h k -1 $ 1st *i/>! oi . llalnr 5%9 n n+?L lJL-00 t . A l el k w h jeu A'N-/-sB.
< k,, 2m,W) on d/H -/-sa-om neb d> Adf 1
n is-r n , od . ,
\
$ s_ lj f h _/%4e -f v!
- M... .a/ Ylx._. .. 4 i
g * , - -
, " % M "' " " ^
.M,.... .
Q l
- y
- _- e ,esu mp J.:rgr,it:.. ,
ib @ n.o o =
?i ,n Ja.: . ,,
p, f m_ N $ E doblwYlhM dsA N a
&J/e ite?b >>. '
'd. a L +lknPmd10
<. s A n A . ,,,. n M srhi
.i?,r u >Su ,1) {
b..~l5.50$Nish/,aa
.u,. mniJN 14/*f,nl1d- s,>,2Aj y 4 1sa >
0 22Alh M .3 b b. 2* - N6l ' y . . .. Jj&, Jy $
$ N I~ SAMdrA Yi b, $$ 0 $u g-l.I i f.'
111 if /> w s d d ia d j A$ wet >> . MY AY hw$ dabs ' a LA,ci.; 2.,id A x%>,A m,JkJ,a 2, JA. , .
~
} 0
._22%, A 2C i/~h,, eid;;~s L 4n as *a A s,LnA >J 2
/
. /
, =
bW & , fp
) D OAll ** A f ST / 9 J,%,, / Y.m
.,s m 6 E . ,
~4.1
\ .'B m
,h L A d r '
d i 5 .
. .g. -
s-
)f f
;du /.e-n --
f a AM .c u l s ! 1 1 j W
= .M .,
~
I
, .g. =; - - . . _.
y
.... . . . . = . = . - . . = . . . . .-
75
.e .g - - .lI CfRoct.inc.
h Cc7I - n:5. 10 CME: April 27,1983 Sm: QI-CAP-12.2 Pev. 5 Paragraph 4.1 W m tatica of Presst..e Test. Ulis is to clarify PSC Ct21ity 'at:cL's .'tspor=4"Mities fer du ,-=ntatica of presstuu tests. . t, Ten satisfactcry ca:pleticn of the pressu.s ' tect the CC fr.W.,ar shall sign the ' lock stm:;ei " Site CA" en all BrG's t:se fcr 1::xpec-h of the test bet:rt.ary. 2.e abcVe sts:p will be en the face or back of all EFP's used fcr pressu::e test and shall nc ccw.: at:y drawing requirements. * ~ SJ.s e la -"# cation sML1 be usei until pa;a.,.4 4,1 cf QI-CAP-12.2 is revised. t
^
I, . '
. i. -Av/ - <w s n__ -
E. Slaw.r 3-ccGm:,S - r TS/h:1 cc: G.R. Pu::df J.T. Blixt G. Merru , Jr. D. Wocdyard J. Pagan 6 I e# e e -
m I .> . p ~ CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,01
'N
'Q0 h
~
SIS REPORT THE HARTFORD STEAM BOILER INSPECTION an I-d / h ' y M f /77 HA NTI out2. CONN: crit.L r ossa:
.RANCECOMPA - 4 ,i
_va- " CATE 9-CO2A hO :.: e u4m I SHE ET CF
, v. w3.,4-,1 i ..f .1 TTT FROM: 4/?1/93 1 2 -
e H.C.JSP.ANCH OFFICE uf -f4- en,'*._ !_ , A s htT 0%GANIZATfCN Mau s tea. q . , , -, ( e -,, .
'-e_
t,0 CATION STREET CITY
' CCUNTY STATE co crc: ZIP COCF.
r,1e- unge 9e-e-f.11 Taves 76043 FERSON CONTACTED (GiVE NAME AND CFFIC*A1. TITt.E) CONTRACT /P.O. A REASON FOR visir BS 642nn7 T., \ 1 r 4 - e_ e a .* e 2 ,-
- CCPtts stNT TO:
C1H.0. Eso Oem, $15 C CN.I tase.e=, CRepmlma.g.,, sis C Cm., (5,.c M: ANI File. SU? JECT: 'Jelded 4ttachments to Class 1 Piping ~ Rt HSB 932 # 9-002 r' /7 ^ '_
'f i
^'HSB 932 8 9-002-1 ,
IOA ,
^
WM i MfB 932 4 9-002-2 Y [ Y ,, 0 ?
// i 4 .r NCR 4 M4311
,,bW ii n .t % /
NCR 4 M5735 IV 7 V )J/ Per veur recuest this date. I am documenting mv request that accrocriaee
--,.4,.. ,r.4 . s. . s te n,, k ,, w ,. . , t e r, ,, , ,, ,...,s. , , , , s. . . , .,,.. y ;
Ame.- ~e a sn ,. -.c...-
. o19'. a ,, r . , - . ., r . a ., r ., ,. . , , , .s,,,,,,,,..,,,p,-4,,, ,,.. ,,,
s,a b.., .. 14.4
, ievr c1,,. 1 ., 4 , 4 ,, , _ a ,,,x ,,,,,,,,,,
.g g, g f , , g 2 ,, ,, e
...,,$.a 4, 4...,, .. .e vrw vastt ,,s4,s a mcu::. anted sc ,'._ ' _ . -
e s 4 - 2 t 1, 4 - ., s
- ~_ . : .u ._
o n ., .. r ., ., s m , 4 ., , - , , , ,. 4 , 3 4 n., 1/2&/91 7 .4 g .a aea a 4 ,, ,, s,,u jn4.,F= n n _ 'ugs_f a:: _SL-2 -1.Q1.4_03-C4.1,S.. , t - e r s - s. . s. . . , -,,-k.. ,, .s. 3,,,.,,,. 4,1
/F411all_And fulled rhe 112 package 4- r.. s
. .a, ,1 w ..,4 . ., as -s. ev w ...,. 1.a -s,e -ha '
ara-#a' ' ' - a P _hter-
.m lu ,,e t ica',.ly_ v , a A pa- -.q'
- ments cf n 2500 f,1L exanisatica._IA'{_S A-5 71).-
,. , ' --adia t ely..iden tified *e -
the-.QC C: cup Supervisen On_3/30/83_. Inspect:- 3 ' '_-i - ?a r.:_was, notified. fa ?
** ' eld poin _on_tha sa=e lugs... No action had
""' COVER
,,,.c...
i- 0 1 A 0 5 5 9 a w
~
..*:- g,g .
m-O i O ggpog7 .
'~~
l THE HAarTMAD.HARTFORD COMUm0tJT STE.W ee:StBOILER LNSPECT10N and C ".:RANCE CO.MPANY l Tn; 0 002A
- CATE SHEET G. Morris, Mechnical level I*I Fr.QM: 4/21/83 2 lCF 2 Marvin Coats, Lead .Of1 -
M.O./SRANCH OFFICE ; CRGANIZATION r LCCATION STREET - CITY COUNTY STATE ZIP COC *~ PE6 SON CONTACTED (GIVC NAME AND OFF! CIA 4. TIT.I) CONTRACT /P.C. NU REASON FCR Vt537 ~ 1 CortES SENT TC: a ! OH.C. Eng C.iae,313 COued ras ce, On : =' u Co ., (s .si. 4
. sis hee"
- s tr an hv * *-uri t 2 A a r- '
en ere s *nvaher sene nsitz 2ar e . abe n-e ,,,, s a ge j une 44 ernee.A. sr ak4e .4i. ek, -n,_cens,_ ,,re ~ uns 27mfa identified m. d resu1*=d . 4, t g.a. ar e nn as s.v vs7sq l
. +
4 An a re m i - 68 ek, s km. T mm .a ne,. e r d .,, ,inu s-
. seef erm. re en m,.n 314eh awe 1
e an
- S n,.rf , . . *
{ .
~
] %, III 1 *etsf a .r e f fie 4 > 7 4mean?tmed ! i 1 ane ehno i r4 he 4 4 4m>sd on 44eeleep ; uk eka-
- k .. m . s. ,ekov e ne.ner.. ,p et,41e., , .c,. s, .. ,.
(74 n.-me e-se. ., ek. r. m .4 a vr .w. nn. , -, 0 3*. .e , , , n ,. ., g g , ,, . ,
"r*ie'sm *ha* m e kt? wa Pkm f eet smes na e r.m sn r"', f ae t'I s e t I m *
- m e k="* m '*
marerami m na ** sis _ a ?# ' anv ha m8 m e e f ee s, as _ mt.3mes e-nese. vie ma ..eirr ,,m,fe 4 mare. ' i
; I J *
*> mete _g:n_
s ^_ $ J Harvla Coats ' ' I i 9escense requgted b - hv 5. 1993
. eet Cordon Purdy i SIGNED []OVE'
- u <. io-se isisi '
\ .- . . . . - - . )
+
- . _ . . . _ . _ _ . _ - . . . _ _ . . _, . _ _ _ _ . , , . , . ,___ _ . , . , , , . - . . . _ , _ , _ _ , , . , _ . , , , , _ , , . . . . , , . ....-_,c,__y ,.
Brown (5 Root.!nc.
~
TO: Marvin Coats, Lead ANI - DATE: May 17, 1983 FROM: Ted Blixt IM4 25,570
SUBJECT:
SIS Report (932) No. 9-001A As requested, Brown & Root has initiated a total " review of Unit 2 installations..." for " instances of similar non-conformance," but since this review will require a manual search plus Q.C. field
'rerification, we must request a 30 day extension to your requested '
respoose date.
?
id ? J Ted Blixt, / QE Croup Supervisor
. T3/lcn ec: Gordon Purdy '
Ted Blixt SIS File QA File TO: Ted Blixt, QE Group Supervisor May 24, 1983 FROM: Marvin Coats Concur with requested extension. A Piri% Coats,
.. . Lead AFI cW ]
i oe wt rq V fY ., ein i s
4- - . . . - . . . - - _ _ - - --.. Browv5 Root.iric. i INTEROFFICE MEMO IMi 25,676 DATE: June 7, 1983 Toi. Marvin Coats FROM: J.T. Blixt
SUBJECT:
CPSES, 35-1195 SIS /932 No. 9-002A. A review of Unit 2, by B&R QE's has disclosed that there are no other instances similiar to NCR 5735. The present control features of 3rown & Root's CPSES program will assure issuance of conforming Class T, attachment material to the field. J.T. Blixt QE Group Supervisor JTB/ba cc: C.R. Purdy G.L. Morris, Jr. QA File W 1 l 9 -- ., g - - - . - , e _ - g- - - - - -
..c - ..r, or ..- , - - -- - . - . - . .-
_ .. . . ~ . . - . . . . - . . .
.-4 i SIS RECORD FOR MONITORING QzA./Q Ce PROGRAMS - CASE F HIBIT NO.1,034 g/ THE HARTFORD STE.ut BOILER INSPECTION and INSURANCE COA 1PANY HARTFOND. CON %cTICt.T *no;;
4347 ra raeme ene rase, urs saw
,v or J Mr. Cordon Purdv. O. A. Manager Acril 21. 1983 1 ?
gg carcates ccueur u uise samoi ins, etcm ce scato cauarav a e sgo=45 use oatri 5l
3 Brown & Root. Inc.
'NsPECTION L0canGm Reusten Housten m fj,gg Useoveres CCiosed ggggigy
~
CPSES cien Rnne. Tevne 3hof LXJAssemWy Alteration laservice I I. the undersigned. have monitored your QA/QC manual on: & /71/M and find the following sections:
< cere,
_ to..e aumeere one r rseer i 3atisfactory: m treemny asoc menuen mean (as one im) on noenner sne neewane noneenroemenee se eneo.esenes iL Unsatisfactory: ' Section II Control of Inspections. Paragraph 11.2 (c) Definition of Inspection sequence including types of a 5:g characteristics to be measured, frequency of inspection (including in-process ES ' 4
!E survei11ance or monitoring activities), establishment of Q. C. holdpoints, methods of inspection, and acceptance criteria.
See Attached. COVER CUSTOMER: Please describe the resciution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESOt.UTION" section below, and give date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: a v 5 . 1993 coereo Please keep the Original of this form for your recorcs and return a copy to inspector named below.
- msurion sois <=4a sameter,
,,,,, l cars seen fj x.nes. .ar/$33 py,,,
teeressatative I.ac! File i 4/21/83 h Joe C. Hair 7e suoturca ce rnosa atus w asove as sons unsarmcron, seen,noe s. ne.oree s e..,=.<mern
/AJ -
-tUA NCR M6039 was issued to resc1ve the lack of 100% visual examination. t sFolid be noted that back geoging was perfc=ed in ea:pliance with the NPS.
C8
- ji .
- 8 I ax <
s COVEa I et connetttt3 y ' Gart cop #tenyt acrica hen parg 30$02Jb7 i
->fx,h , >sotagc 4e&mera Aee eeA$N, b-
- l. the undersigned. have reponitored the above unsatisfactcry concitions on: l/' J//J" and found them; tisfactory OUnsatisfactory (Espla,n Delo r/
- o. i Eh YN' <r We/fY jJ $4,.ofLP W.r > r,hd 8ce'N'.~Af *; N ij /*JJn & C,'*c A b K l
r- g ~, , . ,-
-.~ o, Ones..,hm,,,,0,e o n,,'e' s.,,
/-/un l o /,=,e/. .m.A.r.
r0lA-854 H /35 m , , e, ,, e.,. .. T' .
,s..*~~
SIS REPORT # 347 Page 2 of 2
! a. .
i On this date .chis inspector was called to the Hanger Fab Shop to witness a final PT of a full penetration veld on support MSB-2634 DCA 7 Unit 4 Upon arrival it was noticed that the weld in question had been welded over on top and bottom by fillet welds. The full penetration
.)' welds have unique weld numbers assigned on separate MWDC. The fillet welds also have unique numbers assigned, and are on separate MWDC's.
Mr. Bill Sims has told me that Civil Engineer, Tom Lyez is going to delete PT because it is not required for a Class 3 place and shall
- support. The concern of this inspector is that there are parts of welds on 4 units which have not been subjected to NDE. 3 units are completed and 1 unit still remains in fab shop. '
The following concerns should be addressed in response of this monitoring activity. (1) The requirements of NA 4111 have not been met for; " controlled conditions include the use of appropiace equipment, suitable environmental conditions for accomplishing the activity, and assurance that prerequisites for the giv,ene activity have _b_een satisfied". (2) NF-4423 Before applying veld metal on the second side to be ,
-s
'.,;; welded, the root of double weld joints shall be prepared by suitable methods, such as chipping, grinding, or thermal gouging to sound metal. There is no objective evidence that this has been done. The configeration of the joint will limit what can be done.
(3) NF-4440 All welds shall be examined in accordance with the
~
requirements of NF 5000.
~ ~~ ~
(4) NF-5231 Class 3 Place & Shell type support uelds. (a) Weld joints over 1 " thick shall be PT'd or MT'd. (b) All other welds shall be visually examined. l l I s l
'=h j
l p --
--w- w,- ,- -- . _ , - - - . , , . - - , -
y- - --- - -. --
,._,,y,.-- - -
'i . b '
q _ ; N
, .c %
SIS RECORD FOR MONITORING Q.A./Q.G. F80W CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,034
,I THE HARTFORD STE.Ot BOILER INSPECTION and 15stRANCE CO.\tP.uT l
HA RTFostD. CoNNECTict.T % W d 3!. 7
. , i re <=en.e e,. r.,,e. art s,tti u
}l Mr. Cordon Purdv. O. A. Manager Aer11 21. 1083 1 2 5
o- h Cs cutts Ciss*sa, eu,g asp spanos I e my stGiCm ca # Cat (.m C:Nargy #AeG.amag g3g Om6r)
@E Brown & Root. Inc. custen IMeuston L-' Follow up pJ C:osed reevues
'd $ *srtnemtzar* l m field Repau/
~
(TcES f:l en Deee. Tevig l Ib8 LKlAssembly Alterat en laservice I I. the undersigned. have monitered your QA/QC manual on:,ce4 M ' / Q ',e, and find tfie following sec* ions: _,_ to nwoure one r.nen 34tisfactory: I m awe wr omcc meaua ennen (us one r.u) on menery one sena,e naase,wermance a eu en,eo J Unsatisfactory: Section II Control of Inspections. . Paragraph 11.2 (c) Definition of Inspection sequence including types of
- a "a
E !! characteristics to be neasured, frequdney of inspection (including in-process
$3 sur raillance or =enitoring accivities), establishment of Q. C. heldpoints, nethods of inspection, and acceptance criteria.
' ' See Attached. I cvER CUSTCMER:
' Please describe the resolution of these items in the CUSTCMER'S RESCt.UTION" section below, and give date ter ecmpletien of corrective action, so that items may be remenitored by: ' 'r 5- 1083 roeses Please keep the Origmal cf this form for your records and return a copy to inspector named below.-
$l! 70fett3 l .x.Res. Wgr Represenutr.e
-Int 3. #"**
C
'.x,, File 4/21/83 h Joe C. Hair
' 815GLullom W lMCsg 6rtms etscatets 4eovt 43 gong unsarspaC;Qh? tceanawe em Aseerse 3.eesamessenerys "
J j[1/
/'-~_
A NCR M6039 was issued to resolve the lack of 100% visual exa:::ination. .t shculd be noted that back getsing was perfcz=ed in c:=gliance with the WPS. E5 55 , 23 E ::: u- e pri CurKrivt ACTICM *% r r W CVER BArt s;0atgi m. - f wn /f>St CCWLITt3 - vi2. tis, >sOED(C=e,e&er a Aeeresp5*
/-:,/ .
- l. the undersigned, have re[ct:itored the above unsa!!sfactory conditions on: I/J//,r
, oe...
and found them: Mtinfactory CUnsatisfactory (Esprata cetow) '
=
~
es 489 Q
- .a angs"t' l * .t
) s'fcd js & c,,ogg,p GA.m.a g>J f,7c,c.go:,4g;,,g ;pg A4, ,_m> g,'a p g,, ,g 4'8 [dMd [ I.ag%J .4 g 1 . . .
E,,,,/ E.',,'e"e'.'t il.. d;'t "" ""'" /-/.rf ,. W "" '~' & y ~ M ,
,,, .t.,,,,, m 9/3s
,_ _.._,- c-- . w% ~e ,,.
! L'
.s/
. ,j/ - $1S REPORT # 347 Page 2 of 2 i
On this data this inspector was called to the Hanger Fab Shop to witness a final PT of a full penetration weld en support MSB-2634 DCA Unit 4. Upon arrival it was noticed that the weld in question,had been welded over on top and bottom by fillet welds. The full penetracien velds have unique wald numbers assigned on separate MWDC. The fillet velds also have uniqua numbers assigned, and are on seperate M7DC's. Mr. 3111 Sina has told me that Civil Engineer, Tem Lutz is going to delete PT bc:ause it is not required for a Class 3 place and shall sup'po rt . The c,oncern of this inspector is chic there are parts of welds on 4 units whlen hsve not bsen subjedted to NDE. 3 units are completed and i unit still remains in fab shop. The following concerns should be addressed in response of this monitoring activity. (1) The requirements of NA 4111 have not. been met for; " controlled conditions include the use of appropiace equipment, suitable environmental conditions for accomplishing the activity, and assurance that prereeuisites for the given activity have been satisfied". (2) N7-4423 Before applying weld metal on the second side to be s (_, welded, the root of double weld joints shall be prepared by suitable methods, such as chipping, grinding, or ther=al gouging to sound metal. There is no objectiva evidence that this has been done. The configeration of t'h e joint will limit s what can be done. (3) NT-4440 All of requirements welds shall be examined in accordance with the NF'5000. ~ ~ (4) NT-5231 Class 3 Place & Shell type support welds. (a) Weld joints over ib" chick shall be PT'd or MT'd. (b) All other velds shall be visually examined. r p i . W e 6
-- -- . , - -m., g - , , -
. _ _ ~ . .
~y
7 A CU K v 3 SIS REFORT @ ^ f_* @ - CASE EXHI IT NO.1,03. f l
.h THE HARTFORD STEAM BOII ER INSPECTION and I' H Ag ronwo. cossarrn::. r onio::
.tANCE COMPANY C-044
- TO: -
'^ DATE l SH EET CF Cordon Purdv O. A. Manager $/26/83 E M: l 1 f2 H.O./8 RANCH CFF'CE Marvin Coats. I.ead ANI Reuston QRGANIZATION Brown & Root . Inc. .
- LCCATION STREIT CITY COUNTY STATE
- C7SES ZIP CCCE.,
Glen Rose Ser.e rvell Texas 76043 PERSCN CCNTACTED (GIVE NAME AND OFFICIAL. TITLE) CCNTRACT/P.O. NO. REASCN FOR VtSIT 3S Ot.2007 Tull time contract , CCPIES SENT TO: Ch.0.EnsC.,,.$15 06 7laspecor @ R.,.nel Menes.c. SIS Q Cih., (!o.cM: ANT file. e nbf.:, e cc=pces-- e up,pa-*, p..
- v. . 4 .,7 c/ycfqt a q,v. e e , , ,. a .
( c-3., n_ g,5v. A_ - .5, ,. ee.-.-r.A -..e4- u, A4 ,r...s ad n ':2:21 AMT c a n ,- . ~ = .kaur -ha --.**--
-.-knds 4., 1,-. -, S ae . < a., .,hte , .,4 e h
. . . gq. , .A .n h , gg . . . .n v - . . .
. 4 .
. . - 1,r o _ - % , , .. us.-s v.. .. .,e.- T ,
A,e.;:n - ou-,e ,-~~.--.,>~^n-y-c.d_... 24,1 ,c-<-- ,,v ..,a.,...,-2 -w,- (1\ 9 -~ - r, n ,. ,, e n_ s %,,
...,7 4-es g .- e ,.4 e A.e4e4.m 4.e 4- eu.--*
a :, h 4 ,. - 4 ~, 3-4_ g u h . ,.. . . . 4-. ..-4~., re g. n ae . , 4 - . ,4 s e t t .. ._.gle_ _,1
~
'e . ggg.f. .-.4-- k, k,.- 4-n!. .= ga g gendu 11_v in cs / nap 12.1
- - - i i<. I ow 4,.w at.....,
llg [ f W (
, c4 1
".. 1 t,a -._ " a ah p pcC'AC 'r a ' 4 # /
1 i/ . e - s e igu ,-4-- . .ei d \
,1 e-pipe ta_hani;er clea ance ect.
! If T'naL hanger
> ' - ._ . p* , c.},2g. ,. . vv..,kv nee and AMT .
W. /,4 bV $ o m / I 4 .-e -- 4 ~, .
*
- e radicated._on _this _documentAi ;e-l Th4, 8 4 -* s i bblx ? S# ! 4 spection.has resul*,Jtd .in_thn3; sands qi NG's d
Q,A unich. causes duelicAt an of valk{qyqt ._and _LJq3s of..peIppestive in. l NCR p.t0ntssicL- ,J.n_vi.ev..cl_ abo.ye , B rown 6. Ro.o c has adop ta4 .a;olj;y. _ _ . . of Weldine Enzineering_tepennpel. J.ty c.c.ing s.u2o ports to 'inal drawings
- far en $e 34-n1 0 c i.'s pec.ti.:n _
1 . l her .than..identi'ied on_NCR 's based _ on a .ra.c.io.nale
. *h* t_.The suppc.rl_,ia_ still.1:wp.g.pceso . .Thit is an (f foII ts redyce .
mam .. . ._ __ cover pl n n 9%, ss 4[37
.,,,,3,,., - = - - - - - _ - -- -
, T-
~
_, . ,,- .m_- . . < .-- -.. _____ _m_ .
,l _
.a . . .4 i -
c-o44. ..$
- e. Page 2 of 2
/
-" 1 j i
/ '
initiation of NCR's and better as. :e that Q C will perfors final I
,, inspections on acceptable fabrication. This policy is understandable but is not supported by the content of Section 16 of the Q. A. Manual.
(2) generated to build up undersize velds are
~
being transmitt to craft u
~
r
. Even thougn en . .- .. . - . . - . Aone and -
. the drawing serves only to provide *ocation & sacerial infor=ation
]
l ed - (3) Full fillet on Class 1 support. pruary mesoars should be 1.dentified in - i process and not left to be identified during. the final walkdcun. ! Tour proposed action of the above is as follows: (1) Prepara a Q. A. M. revision for submittal to the ANIS to provida for policy outlined in ites 1 above. (2) 1.P.S.'s vill be issued with cr.,atrolled drawing attached. (3) Q C I identification of full fillet velds will be proceduralized to assure i=plenentation. Your assistance in resolving the above is appteciated.
/
..o h
I J l u 1 q i j
'ry' SIS RECORD FOR MONITORING Q.AdQ.C. PROGRAMS._
"" - CASE EXHIBIT NO 1,036
/
.. THE HARTFORD STE.ut BOtt ER INSPECTION and INSI;RANCE COMP.OT HARTFORD. CONNECT!CLT 04102 /
ro tu.~. m rm.o
/ 4353 uit so.ar
- ;f or B ca ,-a nn pWv n_i ww e. ,. %e ,
gg cusrowes ccwan =.= - e same - tea, 1 2
'@ =j "3Nf* Loc.no" Brown & Rooc. Inc. '
Houston e enca ca'icata ca.nrev Houston g
]a,,r g . sa,caus
- t eovired Octosed field Regaar/
CPSES Cien Rose. exa 76043 Shop Assemely Alteration Claservice I, the undersigned, have monitored QA/QC manual on: 6/2/83 and find the following sections: aa. : : .no r o J $atssfactory: _ o ar emac a,.nuo (n .no n ) o. oo wr ra. .mm.e. ve-m.a uma o
.Section 1.6 Nonconforming Items Reference paragraph .16.4.6 . . . _ _ . _ . _
a Reference procedure CP-QAP 1 .1 g=5 E g: See accached sheec 2 of.2 . . . . . . . _ ._._ __ .._.._._. ._ .
~
' LJ OVER
' ' ' ' CUSTOMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESOLUTION" section below, and give date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: June 16. 'o83 r ome Please keep the Original.of this form for your records and return 3 copy to inspector named below.
mietsurma gig g,,,,,, urt a seu a sa r.<s 1 Reg. Mgr tegresentative 3 file i,,,, June 2, 1983 ) h J. / , G m uro ,r,ca . : x = .u .s - u or u rent ,c 7 ,, f - . Sc e. e, 4: .. .. _ _. . l
. 1 en = , 1 =g ._. . .. . _ . . - .. . . ... . . . - _ .
33
- a c.rt connecmt acre anA sa ccmuno 004tR.
art soto seu sca . . ,. r m, MM d/. 4. Y-9 f W
.l. the undersigned have remonitored the above unsatisfactcry conditions on: y g3 and found them: k$atisfactory CUnsatisfactory fExplain celow) b.i . Ove. fa esmas~L w. Ad p.i i o pa a.,. ,- Ral dhd Y 4:s eqd i16 he. ch.s<e!. AmLa 0-p p n,.I fus co & lTth;.s Grxe.ss e fec % N-
*N'***'*
j$15 Foresgn las'a uit sota A m teo,esennove %ne. 6- 3 -P3 us eo mr. . souhn :s on mres~ w [ 9)4 - F0s1A.,8 e
-59 248 -
6 _ _ _ _ . . . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _J,...--.....------' . . - .: ~ c' .
*1
~
SIS Report 4 353 i Page 2 of 2 ,l. l
- 1 1
According to the references given, the Q. E. group is responsible for the following: ! i (1) Reviewing NCR's for clarity, correctness, etc. 1 (2) Assigning NCR to " Action Addressee". (3) Reviewing disposition for adequacy and conformance to specification and Code requirements. s 1 A. If everything is satisfactory at this cine, the following
, reviews and approvals are to be obtained: .
1 (1) Engineering. i I (2) TUGCO operations Q.A. (under spagified circumstances). 1 l (3) Q. A. review to indicate compliance. (4) ANI review. Summary: At this time, the ANI's are receiving NCR's which have the Q.A. review signed and dated prior to Engineering signing and dating, resulting in final. documentation being put in the Permanent Plant Records Vault showing that Q. A. review was performed prior to the Engineering review l " ' '
- and indicating the possibility of them being signed prior to disposition.
Since it is Q. A.'s responsibility to assure compliance with the Q. A. program, the Code, and specifications, it becomes inherent they assure Engineering and TUGC0 review prior to their review, ,it being a Q. A. Manual and specification requirement for Engineer approval of disposition of
" Repair or Use As Is". NCR numbers with this problem are numerous and on file.
l i l 1 I f 1 + l 1 I ___,,_--w.,
- O
.y-* ,.
- CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,037 SIS RECORD FOR MONITORING Q.A./Q.C. PROGRAMS
(%~~ rus naarrono srsa3s sortsa issrscrios ana inst:aascu co3tra.sT H ARTFOHD. CONNECTICL T o61o2
- s. /e # 355 t oonene ene r e, cast or r = seats I
t y Gordon Purdy, O . A. Manas,ter June 7. 1983 1 1 2 gq customors ccwaar == - inse. saaacx uise uca on scn.cn amarn g nfj use t rs
@j 3rown & Root. Inc. Touston Houston L -teovired C:osed
** ~3 'asncnon un'* Fieta g ae. air /
q w !hoo CPSES Glen Rose. Texas 76043 :cassembly - Alterat on ' laservics 1 the undersigned. have monitored your QA/QC manual on: 6/7/83 and find the following sections: _ eam nwneere one r,rms _ satiofactory: tseenner omoc menwan seeaen (ns one r,ae] on monary une sensore noneenere.nce as sonnene,*o m1 Unsatisfactory:
.~ .
_m Section 7 Brown & Root Q. A. Manual.
.~-d ,4 o '~.,/
See Attached. ,
== sa w i- . . .
COVER f~ CUSTOMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESOLUTION" section below, and give date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: June 21, 1983
< cares Please keep the Original of this form for your records and return a copy to inscector named ceicw.
y are soto soto rasa saseecrees oistmounc-a ines. uir /E.res'Enve June O'FYe 7, 1983 h 7 usotute or raas atus otscaisto aaovt as u as unsansrac: car scenen.,e en - _ s,ee,,4.e 4n CE E5 23 COVER oart coancnvt acnon nu et ccwtrto cart soto seto rews.e, s e.smen<p hb*M k hmi ei
\
- 1. the undersigned, have remo tored the above unsatisfactory conditions n: o\ . (,/f,o fy_y and found them: satisfactory Unsatisfactory thplain ceiow) d.i F0lA-85-59
- m. -. _ _o \4/31
_ net mir,,,,ne ,.r.i reseounve criie q, ,, p_sf. p"_,g 7 f., 4 *'
. , . - ---r.-
- e ,,
~
SIS Report Il 355 Page 2 of 2 ( Finding: During final review of hanger packages this date, it was noted that the majority of packages included VCD/FRD marked in the
, following fashion: In lieu of the red DCC stamp (indicating controlled copies) these drawings were obviously reproduced , from the original controlled copies with the control number (98) overmarked with red pen. Without benefit of stamping with a centrolled stamp there is no objective evidence that the subject drivings are in fact " controlled".
Additionally, several drawings that were included for taformation were not marked "information only" as required. s ( :. O I e 9 I l t . ' s,* l l , j
~
, J ~
o :..: .
~~
WWW i
~
- (
DATE: JUNE 8, 1983 TO: MARVIN COATES
$UBJECT: SIS # 355 Resoultion of the problem identified on SIS # 355 vill be handled in the following manner.
A. All future prelimintry review documents will have a red DCC stamp with the control
# entered.
- 3. At the time of final review, a drawing that does not have e red control # stamp will be vertitud as the latest Rev. , and a red DCC control stamp will'be applied with 098 control No. entered. Any questions feel free to contact
(,_ ,,), me at ext. 270. M MA% bn,S, stems Supervisor s er*
.-- - -m- ,p-r a w- y -
' ~
, ., . . l
*~
4
.G SIS REPORT O O case ex"tarr no.1.028
. THE HARTFORD STEA.M llOII.ER INS 1'liCTION and : - H ANC11 CO.M P.\N Y s 4x ts smts.cossn:iss t i .w:
~
4-.003-2 70 OF [ , lOATE l SH EET g Gordon Purdy, Site Q. A. Ebnager \ l June 22. 108$ 1 1 5 YROM: H.O./ BRANCH OFFICE Billy Walker, ANI / u,,,,,,,,, Oi.GANIZATION Brown & Root, Inc. LOCATION STREET CITY COUNTY STATE ZIP COCE CPSES Clen Rose Somervell Tm. 7eal PERSON CONTACTED (GIVE NAME AND OFFICIA1. TITLE) CONTRACT /P.O. NO. Ted Blixt, Q. E. Grouo Suoervisor 9e n616n7 REASON FOR VISIT Full time contract. . COPtES SENT TO: l O H.C. Ea, c.. . sis O Ca..# ia ..a, SR. .a.: %. sis 8 C +., ts..: ANI file _.__._ RE:_3rown.&._ Root supports velded to .the contain=ent liner. of Unit 1- . . _ . . _ _ __. ._.. _. .______ Meeting of 6-15-83s.. .. . __ . - Jeeting Qf.6.17-83 _ . _ _ . . _ . . .
. _ _ _ _ . . . My understanding.of..the actio.ns.co be performed c f ve b ens identified .
...in. che meeting of 6-15-83. concerning. vague veld symbol re as,4cil g ; "
.[- __
.(1) _ A teel" . . . _ _ .
_... cons-it"ents fy which welds actually exist. .. . (2). Engineering to per(orm calculations using only the welds designated by .
. _ _.qC'as existing. . ... ._ _ _ . , _ _.
. . _ _ _ _ . _ (3) . Supports failing to meet the design criteria will be addressed on .
NCR.'s , .and. _ .,, , . . _ . , _ , _ _ _ . . .
.. ( 4) Supports for which the wel.ds are accepted "as is" per calculation, .. .
j .the Engineer will revise the drawing to indicate existing welds. . _ . . _ _
,. My understatding of.the, meeting of_6-17-83 with Ted Blixt, Engineering Repre- . ____._
,senatives and myself is that the supports discussed in the meeting do meet the o riginal ...
.,,,__ design criteria, and Engineering does not wish to revise these drawings. ..
, Although the weld symbols are still vague for those supports listed on pages 2,_..._.
, thru 5, QC verification indicates that all the joints .mimilar to the specified joint ,_. __
. indicated on the drawing are welded; therefore, there is no question as to whether de . _
OOVER _a Uly 'ia.Ru - = = __. .N. h ._
1 1
~~ . - - - -
' ~ ' Pcsa 2
-: - 9, p cy 5 tog
- Sd. A-A S e c. A -A
%g I ,
2 __ l 1 M _
%/
)!
e'm . j
. . l T ~ll 6 N l ?0 W IA l.1 Natl &ER.S ARG WELDGb 45 .520 Lad A6Oyg-I C T -/-0 48 - 0 0/- c 9 AR C "l* ~ l 0 6 8 - c o 2 - C 9 2 2 )
C 7- t- o & g . oc3. c,qp g *
.~
n, , ., -
- v. wa- - - - -- ,, ,
w f- t- 0 6 2- 006- c?A g G 7~-/ - o & 9'- 00 7 - C9 A t . O T -/ - ::::, 44' - oo g - c. q.2 /t .
*~b""
=~sm8" tai # =ar g - e./V =
{i,,, y g 4 r s =r - ? , o
-- e n cs s v VG.. Ws e iern%
l
- y i e r .2 .+ _ _ , m s
- vG "V4 o- ., y s yg ,
l G e 5
. .. e . 1 r
. g.. .
9.
.
- i
. .: . . . l
. . . 4
. 1
** . . .e *
. ..l . ,I.. ..
{ *
.. . ?
.. .l .a t l
f/l/V'
~
. f;'b ! bs t
--2-- - - - - - - - - - - - '
- , .. .' : ,S e.c . ,q - A PA_'K$ lO G Page 3 S e c.. A -A P
%& C )
P L--. 3 .
%, =
a w3 2R - C3
- Q3 . C ~D h%
.C }
T?lf foLt-owrp, Hggggg3 ArLE vec.oen AS S yocJ N A bo s/f C.7-I- 06 3 - 03c- C4A R C 7-I 06 3- O M - C 4 a R . d,T-i- ob 8 - 08 3 -C9 A R "T-t- o 63 - 0A.7 -c 9 A R CT-I-ofo / 036- C9 A R C.T-/-0 6 8- 03 5'- C4 A R ' C7-/- 06Y 0A4 - d.9 5t R - 07-/-063-03&-C9 A R CT-I-ofo3- Ol7- C9 A R : CT-/-06h OAl- C 9 A R - i LY-I-obl ogo -c.98 R.~ CT-/-cG8- olb- 61a g C T -/-o G 3 - 0 1 5'- C.4 A R ' CT-/- 068-014- C4a y. - 67-/-0GT-o13-C43.R. ' DT-/-Oo8
- OIA - C9s R.
' CT-/-0 68- 010- C.4 c1R ,
l l
,. l
-i,
~
D OQ s;Af,2 cs a , G/tr/&3.'.' -
~
, Paga 4 ,
, 6Aex sios -
M d: A ~A 56c. A A
> c 4 woe vs. Arac-f g QL%:;$tc.r R h1*f.$
~
~
u C l ~ C3 " I ' ! 9 C] ., 3 D q O , q . 4 -
. \\
l A /Tv
%3 ( / -r rF
}%,V -
y,c, f , x 3
, //E fcu.owst% t/Mt.rdB h ARE LJG.0SO AS 3HowN A 60/G" T-I- 099 aao-C9a R.
C7-t-035-ool- cA Sit. C T-l-09 A-ocl- C92R . . d,7-I 035-Oca- C4A R, CT-I 044 -oog- c42R
. c7-f- oJJ. ooJ - C4a &
l C.T-t - cqa . oos - c 9gg, . _ 't,q -jf 0.f f c o 4 C 4 ; R,
' T l- ohg. o04- c.921t.
C.T-I- 03S- o05~ C 99 L
.LT-/- 013-o05- d 9 a R C 7 ojf.- 0 0(,- dia R '
S'lb' C) - l 17-/- O TA- 00(,- c4 aR , , , d,7-/ .035- 007- C ta K. . . ; ._ ;.,- L7-/-01J - co7-C4 A lt. ; C,1-/ oJ7 00T- C4'd.R . . !
~
c.7-l-oqa .co 3- cqg g , ,, c.g-t. o35 .ogo - C ga L ,
- C 7-/ 09 a- 009- C4 a.R. . . . CT-/-o3f. oil - C 4d. A .. .i c.7-j . 01a- Olo - C-9 A R. ' .
. CT-l 035 0I3 - c 19 R. ,.
'17-/-04A' 011- C9 A R CT-l-031- o13 - C.4 a R ' . .
~
$7-/-01A-ola-C9 a R C.-t-/-031- c 14- CA A R .I 17-l- 0 99-013 C 4 3 R.- -
C'l-l- 031' 015- C.93 L .;
'.7-/- 04 9.-o N -c.9d,R ' c.1-I- 03 f- ol'1- o t3 &
' ' l- 09 A- Olf-C9ak .j.:..
CT-/- 03S- oI3-C 99 R .
. '7-/-09 &- O//, d.f aR t r-/ 055-081- Cta R '
17-l- 093,- Ol7- C99 R. c.1-t ObS-Q?O C9 AR l17-l- O 92 - Ola'-C9a L
. 7-f.09p. -e19 -C93 C<T-/- 035- OSI- C9 A X
' .I-o e ,- -*-- -,y.,---..p y . . _ ._--y,.9 -s -- -w-yy7-,,yy,,.y---
_ - - - . . - - . - .m g y.-- y . , . - . , - - , . . - - -._ m 9 .9
-w.we.ca : 4 ~ H c;2em.
- i. '*
.].*
. ; r, .,--
Psg3 S . s.,
' L':ckmp Cowr4 k / n? L.cckn - vP k /
V 'i+ Y+ V \ igP
, Ehstm R Ar: \ .
,, ,y gg /
h
.0 l
i h& . The -followmp honpey 5 arc wa.lded ets Acwn ar3cvit ro g : 72 M 1 CT- t o 32.- coa- c 911% ' C7 09 l- OA+- c 4 A It. c.7 o9 o - ool- cci A lit cT -1 o 3 2 oo 3 -c 1 A. R cT-t - o 9 ) - o A3 -C 4 A K c.1-i o ro. c coa .cq Ag - C T-I- o 31 -00 l - t-9 z g 6 -t-I -09 I -o AA -C't 3. R.
' . c-7-I- o 9 0 -0 0.5 - C A A A cT-t 03 2. oo 4- C9 A R. C-7-/ 01/- 0 A l- C9 A1. C-T-l - o i o -o o 4. - c 4 A R 27-/-03 2- oo 5 c q1R C -f-/ 0 T I- o a o -C#r A R. c.T -l- o t o -oo S' cq A A LT-/-o3 2 oo 6 - c 4 2 K. C,1-r-O i l-O l 9 C4 AR 4 7 090- oo G c4 A A
' 7-I- o 3.2. - o o 7 - C A 1 R c.7-1 091- ol8-C9 A M c.T-t- 09o oo /- 6 9 AR.
' T-I- o 32 o o 8- C 9 2 K c1-t- 09 n - o l 1 - C'th R c.pt- o90- oo b- Cq az
'7-I-03A.009.cqA&
c.7-t -o9 t o l(o -cet si, A .
'
- t- 03) . 010 C 9 A- (L c.T-t-o f t - 0 IS o A M- .
'7-I- o3A- 011 - C9 A L C.7-I-09I.- Ol4 *C 4 AL
' r-i-o32. o r 2 - C 4 A &
C-7-l 091 - 01.3-c 9 A A
' 67 0,30- oo l- c4 A A
,7-/-o 32 - o i 3 - c 9 A TC.
CT-l-oil- 04-C4 A K cT-t- o3n-oca.- cq A & 7-/ - 0J.1,- o f f c 4 A & CT-i-o81 l- 011 - C9 A & -- v 7f; &,o , '7 u,- e3
, v, m - w , a - I,
),,
- 4. - :
' r -i 03a -ois- c 4 A E C-T- -o 91 -c le -c9 A A
'l 0 3 A - 0 /s - c9A R
. .c 7-i- oSo co3 - C f Alt !. .i _.
T-/ -o.3A- o/7 - c EAR c t-l.09 t 009-C9 A A c.T- t -o91-00$-c 4 AR
.. .c.Y-I- Ob3 - oo +- C 't A S .
C,7 o.50 -ooS'-C.48 K . i:. , 7-/-oba,- oI8- C tax c. t-t -on 1- 0D1 -c 9 A R C T-t- 0 30 -006 - C,9 7 K 7-/-oJJ - o /1 - c4A A c.7 -l-041 - 00/o-C4 3. A C.T'-I-o 30 - 00 '? - c'A' A & . 7-/43J- Oa o - C1 AR c,T-t-cil- 005-C 9 Af( C.,F/-o 30- oo F- C.9 2.lt 7-/-03A- cal - C 9 AA .[. CT-i-o91-004 -C9 Ag . 7-/-03a - o.M. - C,1 a R. CT-1-o91 - oo3 -c9 a19. CT-i-ost - co.1.-c 9 2 8 . CT-t -oql-col -c 4 aR, '
.. jse ..
. i
,, - - - .- - .- . - - - ---,---.---,.--g.v-,, - - - -
. _- . _ . _ . . a . _. __ . . . _ _ _ _
. . .g. s O
j e
,a CASE EXHIBIT NO.1.039
'. W -- - - - -- - - - - -
SIS REPORT - N '
)
THI!IIARTI ORD STli.ut !!OII.EH 1.NSI' lit l' .wi.u 3 t. a.s.w.4. ::0.stI*.\M inw n iun.nissa i ni t i a: 2SL g j0 J51
-'t Gordon Purdy, O. A. Manager g,j ' { f TE SHEET OF FROM:
6/2c/83 1 1 Jerry Lytle, ANI
// '
H.O./8RA H OFFICE Fousten CRGANfZATION ' V l 3rown & Roo t, f Inc. LCCATION STREET CITYj y _ _ QTY STATE ZIP CCCI CPSES ?. O. Box 1001 Clen ac. & A-4c=e-zell Texas 76043 - PERSON CONTACTED (GIVE NAME AND OFFICIAL TITLE) CON TRACT /P.O. TIC BS 042007 LEASON FOR VISIT Full time contract CCPtES SENT TO: O H.O. Eae C..m sis O Cs.* ia.... , S R. .a.: ~...<. sis Se,s., ts..e4): ANI file.
References:
,, ,,,, (1) , Brown & Root, Quality Assurance Manual paragraph 16./.1 - "Defictcnces in characteristics, do.cumentations or procedure,,which renders the quality of an item unacceptaM e_or.in, determinate _,s_ hall ,be ident! fled,and documented ,
by the Site Q. A. Manager using,an ,NCR".
._ ( 2),, NA 335,5
,The,last, sentence r,eads, :'The Stress Report and all, such revised drawings shall be filed and distributed so,that there shall,be_no ambiguity
. ... __ ...... regard,1,ng the correctness of as constructed drawinzs". Note the definition 0 f. 5324_f.actureri, "As used'in this Section, che, term Manufac_turer means the organization or combination of orzanizations,which cc,nstructs_any item to meet the Design Specifications and,c,he_ requirements of this Section". (NA 3310)
(3) NA 4420 - Second sentence; "p,strucci,ons_, procedures, or d,rawings shall include appropriate quantitativ_e,,or quali_cative criteria for de,termining that important, act,1vi,ti,es have_been, sat,1,sfactorily accomplished". , (4)...NA r.510 (a) First. sentence "Ineprocess and final examinations and tests shall be established to assure conformance with docu=ented instructions.
. _ . . . procedures, and drawings. ._ .
.. _. (5) NA 4221 - "It shall be the responsibility of the Manufacturer or Installer of .ite=s to assure that'all personnel perfor=ing functions, including sub-contracted services, within the scope of this Section are qualified as sicN ED _ . _ _ ___ _.- C Ovr..' .
L[g
-~
' i F t J,' =
~ .. .._.
1
- . . _ ._ _ ...1.... . . _ . . _.
' -'- S *
.~ _ _ _
Sis Report C-051 Pags 2 of 3 specified in this Section".
,' (6) NA 5112 Inspectors performing inspections required by this Section shall be the Inspectors who have been qualified by written examination under the rules of any State of the United States or Providence of Canada which has adopted the Code".
(7) Reference NCR M8080S Rev. 1 My note giving my reason for not agreeing
.wi-ch the disposition, and Mr. G. M. Chamberlain's reply.
When reviewing NCR's, there are times when an ANI feels he cannot sign either or both the review or concurrence ~. Due strictly to professional court'sy e and as a service to our customer, we cry to convey our reason (s) for not signing. It is not required by Code or ANSI or any other standard I am aware of to do this, however, as you can imagine, just not signing an NCR and not giving some reason would quickly create a very confusing situation for your people and not answer the ANI's concerns. It was this I had in mind when I wrote a note (attached copy) concerning NCR E3080S Rev.l. The original NCR was written by QC Inspector Fred Evans while revision 1 was written by QC Inspector Thomas Ellis'. Both of these inspectors have been qualified by Brown & Root, and have many years of experience between them and both satisfy the requirements of Reference 5. In this parti-cular instance both of them identified a problem and satisfied the requirements of Reference 1 while they were working to satisfy the requirement of Reference '.. The problem was also discussed with their Lead Inspector to apprise him of the situation and get his opinion. He concurred with their decision. All of this I have first hand knowledge of-since I was there at the time. The disposition to their NCR did not, in my opinion, correct the non-con-forming condition. It states that Engineering had sufficient infor=ation. While this is good for their purpose, it does not satisfy the require =ents of Reference 2 or Reference 3. Also, since Brown & Root must now certify that all requirements ing it, After reviewing the NCR and writing my note giving my reason for not sign-
, the NCR was given back to the Action Addressee. Apparently he did not agree with me and wrote me a letter addressed to me. While some of his reasons are valid, I have to take exception to his last four sentences. NA 3355 does apply, a drawing should be clear enough to satisfy the requirements of Reference 2 and 3, poetry has nothing to do with this situation, and the people involved are in the industry. As stated before, the QC inspectors are qualified and certified and I myself have satisfied the requirements of Reference 6, in addition to formal schools, training, and years of experience in the fabrication and inspection industry.
It is my understanding that Mr. Chamberlains position requires him to ' engineer pipe supports and not give his opinion of people who do not agree with him. He has questioned the integrity and knowledge of Brown & Root personnel and myself. If this is to be a continuing situation, perhaps it would be best not to explain reasons for our actions, since this is not the first time that an m
-4
_ _ - _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _m .
~
. -_' . . ~._-- -- 25
...( .. . _ . . _ _ _ . _ .. _ .. . _ . . . . _... SIS Rtpsrc C-051 Psgs 3 of 3 1
4 I
^
ANI has taken harsh verbal abuse from Engineering people. This does not state my personal preference, since we are all in this together in orde-to accomplish a common goal, just one solution to a given problem. Any help you r.ay be able to give would be appreciated. At this time, I am requesting that if Engineering has a problem concerning the ANI's 4 they contact you or your designee (s), and do not communicate directly to us. I l l
- h. I
. Thank you,
- h. ~7 Jerry W. Lytle, ANI JWL/jah -
Response, requested by'7/13/83. J
.a 9
k
, - -- - . , . , - , ,, - . ,, , . , . . - . , - .._-,..,.-,--,% .n .. .
a mee e
't j
As m e c. de &J. rrr T
=
l sk.Il ~ J be. uz l u J. v l
; i l
E e i j t C h 4 I * ; w wm
vc s
. rm o ' speed Letter. 4
/__Y. nemksw ,A h ,.a, o
, /c-w',< /d x i -g --
- p= up x-n v b- w , u emeq
~
i m =- %g
.3,jeci /'YI-/-f7 Y/- 7W T- dd f/2
.[EbSAGE cate d /!uA/6=19.82.
~
) ' r . n=1_ i_m__ < 8 v m n e_ e, n i 4,w r_ w t s m r-a 2 pt n . Y>J M C /r civtW sw= m >-scp AA/11.g TH,c:vo r'r+A Al T H /= 7 rM tiehi
,,= 7crA T 7 7-1 e t.ve=L n na N mis r i, ,1 me27"~
r .s c - c.,y M t v r_ , _ J.jW P*c= : I h1( /, J/ TH /J/\//R T*W E-f2 % Y A A @ /] l -.,
- 5 ,,==. -w at w c, . =- e=< o =- w, 7- 41< > / r red p= T==O A' 'y' ' '
.I-sJ) /%: T, liv si -(D0 !Ai< emTi,e.u - espic> m i ,
-p rs M a i ( 0 0 ar$) .
M H=>i/ '_md, 0:cevN vc_ cic=1 m_ Q., 0cs<v o hHc'- tm2 l7) &.c, 4p<< #e 1Mr, 'TH e=- _ k Aur3 [A,l e1v<,.:e c . -
- }/N 'D I Y Ic, uo r- 2.=< c= v A p r- iM r s t e, r]A.< =~. bz. >
nw,w mw,.x . n A i,% , . .w /;ayf 0 c=a.,7 i ,ve. -r ~ 2 y.9 A / % == ~ -~ ? b /* O / w .,: =A//-w M R N , Oc ~'.ne t=~
,$i*be vfra i,Ai 7:utc= / Alt i< ney ncWh'/ _n .
C
-t EP LY car. 1s T,,, +l,:s e,a.s o - , ,, o x ic - +L . M-r nA 2- n N+ / 4 c c o.Anm n ,, . ',,f , ~,5 A - o , o L ,, . :/ L U d
-Q < , + L - n <- s
..:n ---</ /
s., Aur
/ J h x ,w . ,
. i-L ; , Ale (? .Z-f i+ ;< <n du e, ho e, , ,,,,,,,,o ,2
... u a : - ~ el n. . r.
a . n n-,. / n Ln 6~ l,1 , .:4 ; R-T-P d ;, A J,._ <C_s . de - , ~+ e., ; + ~n~
/d ~.
. i, - <~ d z . . : ll o ; ,, e ,, t t - n . E n ,,in : 6N$ e A. 1
!Yb. ,, u d , n,, 4 1s ' &. J. i~ ,,, :J ik b < - <} NA et2n
,A.. .
v
. lt r e t cons o sija s n a f Alren . WA n, f, /.2') P'
< i y i i y
- Signed
! .N2 ' REC:PIENT-RETAIN WHITE COPY, RETtJAN PINK COPY
,w. . nw . . n .., , . ~ . ., ~~ . .:. . . .
. - - - . ~ -
SRG"N 1 ROOT, lNC. ASTFORCE j_) gg ggccq - Quality Assura.nce Cepart en: H0s r0 NCR NO.rm 90 905 h/ $ Nonconfon:ance or: (NCR) CPSES-25 .95 , PAGE / OE 3 . x lc;jWING/ IDENTIFICATION TAG /ID NUMSER LOCATICH 03 ELEVATION RIR NO. - Ita v/ Mar L c.c -/-o4/-72.3-M T 4 New -/-& o / s- Ea . 9c--gE/ AL '2. W - - I :0NCONFORMING CCN0! TION # O 8y5% # /CC-G 7)b"/S/ , TREND - DOCUMENT V10 LATE 3: $,.Cs.# A REY. / PARA. L//A:f CATEGOR'Y (~-/4 Rev l WalA e i., W .D. ' S~ elo ' uof cba~6als st,a~-tse.va.lAcm-fu,<.bc49'.*%,'*i 'o ~ . . .c s tus"
%/ eld s *5 fyp. 2. p *cI
- 3 (h<.fi, A ls. a L e de I a t A))ed) h!uwebs t,6 als . wa. cleemdue. -h, weJ<.0 AMsan (i.e. tivi,'c.s/ a ,,wj y, ~
cL lsc. W ifese.s1e.e. aca ta.) nl+A m-re.s le
- fcp -la.at-to l sine. w 4. a.s a gosuA tb Wort-i. ,. Ce, , ) f e. '
f Tic,) t't i C 4 }+ +<, a+ + L e. cymL,ofs ejloiw re, **lm i sG "xy,y_q,)Q;n}",,
'rr y e.se.w
- h uO ., ,fa ,,c
+t. wadd c.<w+-pde'c n.
(2.a.v I - 12, e la.dV A/C K . Ae 1 - L 7 I.r .- .y c'~.. E//,,e e-ru-n , REPORTED 15T: CATE: i REVI- A.9RpvAJ/ OAIE: - L .0 2*veu t C.-lS~-3 5 s-a f. '
- d' st f 7.5 f
ACi10M ADDRESSEE 'N' STAMPEDAC.M.'0)iEN1 n no.: Asy:~ CODE lie :: I'~'.r.si Pits // Tes ' /No /1es tia .
' ~ '
1015P05 LTIon: , A-REWCRK S-REPAIR C-USE.AS IS / 0-SCF.'P E-RETUF't TO VENDOR
- j. 2& **rA W Y. f f- y.g; 46psq -
m : w . 7. z y a 9 % ~
<m's)
/ "$LYs f/ .,, s.
- f -T$ i A 8 e.s
.A 5cs. ,,,/ .
s a.c.c : dc , s/7 / . /// __ TUGC,7/QA REVIEW /APoRQViAL: b s9.T }~ h /1- - 0 ATE: ,fAlil JEVJG: ' OATE: 6 / f# x n'-M '
'QC VERIFICATIONT DATE: F0TEnilALLY AE50RTABLE Yes ric Atti CONCURRENCE: CATE: t!NITIAL/DATE:
WE5illiGHouSE CCriCURRENC4: QA REVIEW / CLOSURE: 0 ATE: jj// g,//-85 O e p - - . ,
1 ytaP i
- * :_- -[- . j ) mt ;
yE
; : g ,
,d 's : M x;O,.;1 :- -~:_.
<i: . .
~~
f g ~ . d'
- s. :'
~~a.- - [ c_2* a t. n-
._ *a- l! IE- . - 1I1L ,
V
'c iD ~ i
- E C olu_ ot - y H
de,6 u-N =o - u l-gd mr3 O uxca ,u > . L. A L a 4-N H c Z 0
-d s.
uw s ,
~~ ,o P ' u-m~
C O m.e ~ ,' J , f8 I A As/ 1 i - I n N o# ~ '- hp T A E n c A . A{ f u c t. P w r ta t n ~ .
- a 0, t#
o cO
- em
" e n"
il A o Ee r,n . I o y ~ m,m "L-I - T 8 R i 1 A 'U n C r t E c. l
=-
ti C 'w. w
- s. H-t 0 S 2 o Ru ~ ' 'M u T g f- co
"' t f
a o a n T
- y. _
E
-r o r E l
D m ^ S u %U-A t 0l
~
f' . - , l* e. I E
> e,.
g-
' P a ,. s
. . fi -
S, '* c.<
- s I
- to. "
N a gN
- n. H- TH Ka-
- it i A n C * .N e
o-c , S n
" a L M u. n le g(l l_et rt 7,,. "' u
- t s
E O ' A~- cc "<3 A i_ ,r o Wj c a e " in N T "' i I o o mw? 6u s "' s . , A "
' i sr d ,.s 4,. .
-Nmu R P m '
m ..# p'-* .,h) Us e er 4 - cs
';, c E S.s.a 7 rp n -
u
- T x a = -P2 p l i -
. m " i. '/,a o.
r . e "- M A 2R S asa l l I'.
- s "
- s. i:.. '6' 6- . N ,a. , "
' t).
e uq/. Mh :
.2 v i.,a .i.' ' A .
- x s c 4_
c /. a'- v
.' l
=
c
" n. f .
A i Mi. u:se -l
'y n u t o
, s c
. c
- ,e .
/
., c.
N s N i- &4 w$,,,v Lv1 y' g. n
. e
- n. -
- f a-8' .
8 i Li ;
- e , s '
m=r.1 -
.m .
N - " n J j,)y
- )7
'1 .
41u-
- 7,E
.,. *.U I
g,. ._' [*E<.Y9.a2 q. 8" . . * , t'- 1 ! . * , C Oe s ;o 0 a' 8 P4 i c> r u ,, n E C 9v - E , , K
,~
t i-ni 8 M cgc u t a n#' 1 4
)" F}lj 6
%mo. 7: E .
I, i rJ f
)s
- c. uW N e
,a 2-2" 3'i.'j.
%i
,2 s.
i j s D1a. 4 , v ( c p '% A ::
!l a=E*4Q z e
, ~- 8 . ,
,nc 5I' }
,g 2 p nsWP1 oftu. 1; 8 t -
. i
,.u rPn i .
- a a. _l w aur . %p.,,8"8**" uou r,oo i J
- C ~
n _ DQ a 2 - s. m(gyd* t T . i n C
- h" 4 V (u /
s r ,%. R' n R, iT3... s . m _ " 1
,f a ~ t, v'
o' ..
,! my 4
v& dX~n i
~
*h -
4 ;t r n
'.r. ~, D'ir lvE a
m_ v o
.. r .
o ' c e s. n B
.b' E
- 6 u 1 r s. -
,n s
c.- 9* c - dpWIb
- c. i' 2 -
e-I yi msH' c 8 . l3s.
.; $ y,
s ug ~
. 't A 1- i. .
S
- a. i N 6 -
e8a 1r cy . Isi T*ie'n_v' i t0o d I . p, e-e #
,_1 , b i e y d " '
ce s.g ~ e. M A y} n0tc-
'3 c t M A
=
s Cu 3 sLc% I '\s i ;lj-r ( 2 "n t )/ 3,I L-lhw.
; $ :eg [ ).
4 si. %.-ltgI. ]c . l1J p }.- $T bo ,,. .
';lg!
y l> i
' sd ; t~.~ ~ U Ig,yf C r.; - -
e. t
*c.Z ,._
^ky-
- 3
) l re*: .
p? .
..<ig}ygsy
- qt u
~ a'".
=
o, qf S. .
.- - l % l.
i t Mx;.. t'n 3 d@k a.
/ .s .
' ' h ; =* ., .
c O t. t. lI _ o Ma l e rWu,q* i ' p k h~m t
.~ i 3 .
- 1 [ < i, W
H .)I t 3M ri ,'
, rA -
f.
\/
d e j g3_.. yew t C [ _. lp. _ t . t ) s 2u i n ..a_p; Qbm$wGd wJw.
. t lI 1 n
- m. D a M yr_ -m c _
.tM s M -
-.t .' l Wl Tr 5t l n ,o n
s
.w., c v
_ [* D. t .lseFt"u 3
~
- l!
E ,]. ?e_' a Fz~T N( L ct c v n s o - 4 , og-l, aL E * ,j. l',l , ', W s i ,
.lC -
P_U ocL _ w ,, - G - _ I T ~ . B mi n z. t 9 - q # s t. ! i.
'q 'l ) .
word ( i r 1 . T,
- S '= 8- - -* "
ou a .
. A O'
- m .4 h.
b
- m_
je gt Cs. .
- Vi ri g s
e no. . s.m= ~ ~ ~ - *
, . .c . .., i ii . ,.,,,.. e i.
l usi ,I ,,,.e e i, ' 1h i
,,,,,,,,,,,.IA,,... _..,~ <.~i~ .' tv:l (U;
, m .. , , z-i ,,,,,,,,-,,,,o., e ... . .-
i ;, - e Aj
,..,... , , , , . , ,,,,~.sm...
y v, - i t ,.
- O y . ,e - -
i .~. U
-,(.
,Ai , - .p. ke - ,
- Iki { o~.
Q g w>.r: c s ., u I .n . ~ .z m.,. . - .
- m o
i u s 3 ;c ( 1 j 4
<i -
. a u <; = ,h t t v v
a e U.' m Qt vJ v
.A .
e t ; g rn y(x , +,,4,, o o .e ; w
- a e >&
+g% . p p@+p- #
a =, e,n; % w 5-W,c
. ._. -r Vl l 3v
- g. h:5 .
a , , l
- 1 :. o.
t
. . ; a E. ,a ,#
W ,n ,
< 4 =
}
- % w o
$ . .~ ,.
o* 3 a .. , y i 2
. I ,. , .. E. <
- i ..
a
. a.n-lit g n _
- i.
i3
. .r ,.I i-
. s $1 3 5 % r ~
- h. ull I! Ill II ::. :
l Y w v
=
y e. zo z ,,, <e a
.a
=o-u si n, J V 11 ym .. ~, . -.
jh A
- O*. 2 s
C1 E J
. guy / ,2.l:,
i .3 C r.---
- v
., - . =
, 2 . e.
, s.
l.ttl r2* e' a C-48
- , - ., l r.:* 3 i3 3 , cy 3
.*Ff 0 *-
a o o C 2 1 w. t s, Cy c: .I: 3 ,. ' 'C .: :'t !! ;1 .s e t1 M g q) .4=W.r.m* ! w,lC h fi 11 al, 8 ** E MC.,5 * ' ~';. *' o se .- 3 M.j . - .D.r C I Z a, .' N ' M M-t- .n. Hi demn4 tg** u' 3 w. o If , V 3 I
- f. y $
in 6
$ H 9 .. t,,,
vt k?m a
.^u.i .o.
.a .
=. 1 e5a
~'
u m tic: -
+4 4 d
- c.
, e h4 .M ? 2 F .o E y : ,~
- l h
E Q d ~1 ,% 0/ ' l - d$i -- - - c, Ed $ 3), .*t,at 5v
$9 5'4 g
{.
=.,-
, .s - .
z53 N. y 4 u .y <., o g- g g .- .- - E I e O 5 o= ci -I i
}, h- o e
L
cl
- h EE {s 4 re JMC V ."' @
$ i $ ;!x1 L.M i =. ? ?
g v. , .e :: w
- s. 24 .*
t . . u 2 er n.. , -t- -t ' . *E i
.e. n3 '?- **-
. 4 U , I. a E
- .-- 4g-.. b yb2 -
~ -4 r.
~ ,
,I .;o i _ __ _ _ _ _ _ . *, } ,
o 3 g i g. 5.'
.f. ,j ur----------.
...__.....u,
- I
- s%2e 7; ,.
2 23 d. 3
=d )
4 = p 4 C , f--
-- 4 '
A ' ul ..- I
-4* 0 I r.s 3
a s y'~e mi *T ::E 8 J 7 3, -
- E e N i g 3
g C 'g; .N w
~
_'I .%84 "l* ga 3 I 9 .
. "$W '.I ,9,4 i *.i -
g en ~ ,- - ..g.. .
< .w ,mu =. = . c . ~ .i jg ..yppl g.- ,
! 9 57. 4
. . $k.'
- - - -- -, , - - , - - - - +
- M7MN '
INTEROFTICE .W.MO TO: J.W. Lytle, ANI DATE: August 1, 1983 1 FRON: G.R. Purdy 1 SUBJECr: CPSES, 35-1195
; SIS Report (932) G-051.
I apologize, for being rather tardy in my response to the subject report; ' there was however, a degree of " footwork" to accomplish prior to completing my response. , I share your concern over the rather flippant response provided by Engineering, relative to your observation on drawing CC-1-041-723-E63R. l I have discussed this matter with Project and Engineering Management, who have reinforced the policy that Quality Engineering is the proper interf;ce between the ANIA and other Project organizations. -l Although the Project environment is currently conducive to frustrations, j I trust that proper implementation of the above interface function will j i preclude the recurrence of venting personal frustrations, and enhance 1 . thg cooperation between interfacing organizations.
. t G.R. Purdy I Site QA Manager cc: J.T. Blixt R. Siever G. Bennetzen M. McBay F. Burgess B. Sims D. Snow B. McNellie M. Coats SQAM File, w/ attach.
1 O t i I e g & a =6m-
- - - , - , -- -a--- - - - - - - - - - - - - , -- . , -, . - - --, - - g - - - - - - -,,------m----w--e--- -- *-- a' - ' ' t e*'-----*-': F
~
, /. % (g CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,040 g $ll - vi> d is- ea s -l
% SIS REPORT d gb) Tmi11ARTFORD STIL\M !!O!!.EH INSI'Irr!ON and .tJR \.NCl? COMi*.\,w naa rtowsi.niw em i . :
// g ,,,.g
* '/ CA:E < sntr Cordon Purdy. Site Q. A. Manager / 6/30/83 It lcrt
- F OM: y .M Q.sSAANCH CFflCE Jerry Lytle, A!!I J ilouston OLGAN!ZATION j / t/
Brown & Root, Inc. v LOCATION STREET CITY COUN TY STATE ZIP Cpt[ CPSES Box 1001 Clan Rose Somervell Texas 76043 ._ EERSON CONTACTED (GiVE NAME AND OFFICIAL TITLE) - CON TRAC!/ P O ' M / / 35-1195-056i CEASON FOR VISIT
/
Full time contract /, - 8/' COP!ES SENT TO: , ON.O. E , Cr.i sis OCN.s ia . , Gir .a.i u.a. <. sis e c'* .- < Al. I file Subj ec,t :__QCWI-23 dated June 16,,,1983_ , _ _ , . , j
--...-.. . .. . =. ..- .- . . ..
The subject QCWI states "that g nubbe.Is_may be 7,e;;;qved and reinstalled by ,, construction with an IRN".,_q C. must witness thts.. operation.and document it on an Inspection Rep, ort. I do not understand how thig, fit.s.,in,with...the,, program _since: , (1) Brown & Root ,gA, Manual does thist Section 10 states "an
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.p,e.,rationa,1 Travel,er shall, be used, for,,non welding installation activities".
(2) CP-CPM 9.17 paragraph,5 stat,es,",the_, operation will be documented
- by ,Q.C. in accordance with ,q.C. pro,cedu,res",._,
(3)._gI-qAP,,1,1 1-28A paragra.ph 10.2 states "the results of snubber , inspections shall be, documente,d,,on ,t_he ,Q,.C.,, check 1.ist'.' (for. , snubber installations). CPM 6.3 paragraph 1.1 "The Operational Traveler .,. . . serves l as a f abrication/ installation / inspection ch,ecklist of operations . l 1
. necessary to achieve a qu,ality end, product",,
According to these references, QCWI-23 falls outside of your program.
- i.
\.:.. . . . . . . . . .
~
b o OOvt : e"'x- o"#* . F0lA-85-59 e
.. .e B OWV1 & Root.inc.
INTEROFFIO .2MO IMi 25,991 DATE: August 10, 1983 TO: Marv!.n Coats, ANI 5 FROM: J.T. Blix:
SUBJECT:
CPSE::, 3S-1195 SIS Report 932 #10-022, 10-022-1. l The following is in response to the referenced 3!$ Reports. QI-QAP-11.1-28A, Revision 4, Para. 10.4. titled W.0 VAL / ' PIINSTALLATION OF SNUB 3ERS providas specific instructions to the ; QCI regarding the documentation which is required your receipt of An IRN for snubber removal. J.T. Blixt QE Group Superviser JTB/ba
~
cc: G.R. Purdy G. L. Mo rris , Jr. QA File
#, y . ap-r,p. DD ff Y losN s g I!lU-0 O
e f
+
I BrOWnG'fR00t.!. T . INTEROFEI7. .J.MO iMi 25,991 Ameaded DATE: A; gust 12, 1983 TO: Marvin Co.scs, ANI TACM: J.T. 311xt SUBJECT! CPsr.3, 35-1195 Sts Raport 932 110-022 & 10-0221
, s _ . - -
QT-QAP-11,1-28A, Revision 4. Pt.ra,10.4, titled Ramovs1/Rsinstallation of Snubbers providas sper.i'ic instruccions to the QCI's regarding i.he documentat' ion which is req;tized upon receipt of an IP3 for situbbar temovs1. Prict to the dato of issue of Lavisien 4. QCI's aere given spect.fic direction to .decument on su IIt only when rework was not in*.oived.
~
J.T. B111t /~ ME Orcup S'Jpervisor JTB/bs ct: G.E. Put dy G.L. Horris, Jr. R, Si aver s e o es
'-_ _ _ ^
~' '. - ~
, 2-Q US RECORD FOS .".10NITORING Q,AdQ... PROGRAMS , . C iE EXHIBIT NO.1,041
. / THliIf ARTFOl4D STE.ut DO!!.ER INSPECTION and,1NSt; HANCE COMP \NY II.\ Mn 0H D. t MS AIA:TM1*f 'in to; y
e...._._,...,
- 4. , . . _ .
. -El ca .acn vue y, u.n a va g- !Julv h 983 [! 2
. :s O cusrcuta s cen same um. w aamc.e inst stece ca scaggc.~.sirr-S 44.ca46 uss castJ P.! ::: r-FoJow.'J p Eg Brown & Rooc. Inc.
Meuec u ue, - i .e.,re e 't:ss.d "3 - asrtcran .ccm" / ~ Fi.id CPSES Clen Re.e '"e m i I"" A'"'near C s. pair /An. ration baunri
- l. the undersigned. have monitored your QA/QC manual en: 7-1-83 ano find the following sections:
<o ~.,-ee, m r.uu, u satisf actory:
,,aa..ar os,oc . a .ur n (no m r,n3 ca ma.,r me .m ~~we=~. n m~an..o
"'*"''7 Sect, ion VII Document Control . . _ .. . . _ _ .
Paragraph 7.2.2 (b) Design documents - Verify presence of a " Release for --- a
=n Construction" letter or that the document contains.the release criteria ..
.85 ._
j provided by the Engineer. ., , , . . _ . Documents not approved for_use. shall _not_be . issued.for. construction, but may . . . _ . . _ . be issued as uncontrolled documents for che, purposes. discussed in Subsection.7.2.5_._.. ' COVER CUSTOMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESot.UTION" section below, and give s Ik date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: '" i t' l'
- i 9so. " '..:
Please keep the Original of this form for your records and return a copy to inspector named below. m 1 *5 *** si 58 ** P._s s. up/n.sor. for.ss
.ntativ.
ing, Trii. 1l 7-I-83 I >* *\'bF '"""'"' l w _ /j 1
) /
_ _-ffy
==. . == m. e . . um...s, .cu, , . .-.. . ., . . - , <
/
- +
]AA Cf Ii n:n
' 4 gg' gums ;
o- i g p /- - COVEF
- ico u w .cr. . u cc.,u u -o , c ...,. . ,
lwi -. > I, the undersigned have remonitored the above unsatisfactory conditions on: [)f/C and found them: h $atisf actory Unsatisfactory fEsplain ceiow)
=
p.c
=
lj 12-c.ec- 0%up 2 > /x-c o n 9.19 " 3 4 . . . 5.
~
2f.~.uc hs,s..,....u,..
,,,,,,, 26, ,.,. ;wi -> rh /3- . .,j M, f- . b, .
= F0lA-85-59 @
I e -
)
, ,... SIS Report 1 356 '
_ Page 2 of 2 i I
; Paragraph 7.2.5 Uncontrolled Distribut.:n Documents may be issued for information purposes (i.e. , training,.
inquiries, and material take-off) . Such uncontrolled distribution shall - be clearly identifi_ed as information type documents and shall not be used for fabrication or installation activi-ies. Information type documents shall be marked as "Information Only", "For Training Purposes", " Bid i Documench, or other phrases which identify the document as an infor=ation ' type document. NA 4430 Document Control , The last sentence states: "These measures shall assure that docu-ments, including changes, are reviewed for adequacy and release by authorized personnel and distributed to and used at the location where the p:sseribed activity is performed". According to Brown & Root's Q. A. Manual, the Document Control Center is the only department authorized to relsase and distribute design , documents for construction, examination, or testing. * ~
\
- not ny- o c er ndication of having en c rough D .~ Most of these rawings have been attached to NCR's to give objective evidence that a drawing has been revised to clear a non ,
conforming condition. This is a generic problem due to tha number of k.. uncontrolled documents found and the time span indicated from following examples: (1) NCR M8728S Drawing CH X-080-004-3 Rev. 1 (6-29-83) (2) NCR M8097S Drawing CH-X-AB-066A-013-3 Rev. 2 (6-24-83) (3) Drawing VA-1-006-005-C52R in hanger package for ANI pre- I liminary review. (6-24-83) (4) NCR M8183 Drawing CC-1-RB-007-002-3 (7-1-83) (5) NCR M8149S Drawing CC-1-RB-0393-003-3 Rev. 2 (7-1-83) (6) NCR M8861S CS-1-RB-059-003-2 Rev. 2 (7-1-83) (7) NCR M83005 Rev. 1 Drawing CS-1-112-722-C51R Rev. 3 (7-1-83) (8) NCR M8193S Drawing CC-l'-RB-007-001-3 Rev. 2 (7-1-83) ' These drawings did not have any stamp on them to indicate they were for "Information only" or any other stamp to indicate compliance with para-graph 7.2.5 of Brown _,& Root's Q. A. Manual. ! l Again, let me emphasize that this situation leaves the status of a drawing indeterminate as to meeting the requirements of Section VII of the Q. A. Manual or NA 4430. "
' ' "-a "
w r.aot}
,, ' ~
l l I __ _ . _. _. _ _ _ . _ _ _ _
.(i.M .)
.a
...=cras n e.namu 703cnem .40Ms7caiswa ursst.wa s-wssu OA,f,wt.a. e ,MZa!AMD CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,042
. . " . * ..... s e n n. .nw
~
u.s u O W. naeu w:s .-w<ee' __f7~~anunsus kUMt'u, assi TL"T~~ c.e ,
- io ,..-. r . '# y Z, r,st& e ' Jt t us w
- j. '.'.'I' I Mr. Cordon Purdy, O. A. Manage *r IJulv 2 1983 g l 4
[W i ut...e s .s.eene n a 8'see j insi us.s. 2, ,cnos cognin a piecas.4 w34 c..,,
. - djl .
B rown 5 R oo t . Inc. , u .r e . ., }u m... If f oli f " a,..c e. ,U,D t._.C:ssaa gr auw- twe 1 CPSIS Cien Rose. Te:cas n DS8
,- Fiels lauemi y
- sesa L.hne,uf
, 3 .. Cinner$ce
, ,,! the undeftigned. have "not fored yOur QA/QC manual on! I~2 S3. c .:.. and find the f;[Jowing SeC! ions: -
_ ,G .
. e reus .
, ._ Satistaatar):
,_ ,- : , c.,oe , . : - - (= r j 2 = w , .. u- . . .. u .,
l unuaistacrg facticn II Inspecci:n Procedures an:t Ins: ructions
References:
I u q S'a SIS Kerort 939 i 311A ! 5, i" I..% # 24,719
!7 5212
, QC:.'T-19 SIS 932 8 C-044A COVEA
~
)
I CUSTOMER: Ptesse desente the resciution of these itemsin the" CUSTOMER'S RESO'.UTICN" section Delcw ; date for com tet:en of corrective action, so that items m'ay be remendored ty: 7-20-83 .
. ,s Please keep the Criginal of this form for your recerds and return a cecy to insgecter carred belcw. ,
- s. . ,, ,,,,, we w.6. : .. u -.
Itet ucr !,,r,gr,e,s,e,n,taties a bfile 7 2 83 ) g etscsv.ic,. u wu cams sisasso .eavs as seas visaw.c:s, r& .. .n.-_ s .y'..',n Q (. _f4 i 1 5 M >* 2.f f*.S* % ~~~
, ,,d84 c.4W:,0 ~~w .. . . ~ u
. .. i e
i . .,e c --
~
*} , ,
3 E. .
, M ]
h \HV I I e %&L.] , .I g y, In t L- __ j 4 sa.: sc.emas acrc - l- *C ) f I l. ... , 7 '
.U OVCR j
. c.cta e sess,
-aa*.#
l Y'S h. ^ - 1 the undersigned, have remot5tored the atove unsatssfactory cortcitioris Gn: g
,,J, gly 17, Igg, j ,
.. and found them: 4 3stisfactory tcmo n
t junsatisfactory Msalam eelow) 3 t
?g,. ~ '"
w F0W85-59 6 115 1 oreigs lass. Acast 6cata uc.se tasa < esw.,a l 8.1' 8 4 tet. Wir .**'" !
#epresentative bcfile l 7/13/23
- h __ _ ,df [.
g 4A
.;'EnR3i;}7p-&,,.Mwwy-
% , . .a cm ,, ; . wrm. .% - : w -mw=bz s. .
w :..ha'm-a %.y~_-**----_ w.r c. N m. i -
i-SIS Raport 1357 Page 2 of 2 } -i . . . . d k on 7-1-83
'or hanger chis inspector was called to witness a PT on a weld buildup C3-1-112-734-C61R.
,' Upon arrival only of the weld was prepared )
for a PT examination. The top half was still covered with paint and met the . requirements of a full fillet. The QC Inspector, James Lloyd did not know l he was supposed to PT that part of the veld. Upon discussion with QCI Lead j j Larry Wilkerson, 'he understands the requirement far MDE'of full fillet welds t is for only inprocass inspections. ! j . Upon researching this subject when 939 #311A was written, A.R.M. Sill Tillman, Sr. Regional Manager Ron Howard, and SIS Manager Don Young were ) i
- consulted for clarification of NT $212 and the opininen of MSR is that if ;
4 . the veld meets the requirements of a full fillet, then NDE aust be perfsrsed. ! Brown & Root Q.A. agreed to this on I.M. #24,719. Since the time 124.719 i j' was written, other inspectors have had ANI hold points for Visual Examinations on Class i hangers. The Q.C. inapactors knew nothing about a requirement for } PT of full fillets. (These are very knowledgeable inspectors such as ) f John Caldwell, Tony Linay, and Russ Hilton). ! l Upon investigation of other hangers on CS-1-RB 029 the following hangers l were found that have had a recent VCD attachment 5 signed satisfactory. } CS-1-112-725-C61R j CS-1-112-738,C715 CS-1-112 727-C613 , . CS-1-112-731 C615 [ j These hangers were signed by a different 1*nspector, Roger Walters. ("}, It is apparent that there is a severe breakdown of communication between l
'- QA, walkdowns. management QC, and the QC inspectors in the field involved in VCD upper
'; Por this reason, and the hangers listed in this 939 ALL Class 1 VCD walkdowns are indeterminate. I an also requesting that ALL QC inspectors
' I Class 1 supports which may have full fillet welds included ;
1 i mis 939 is closed based en the folicwing: . l (1) i
' No Class I hanger packaces have been presented to MI for final acceptance. hhen thev are, they will be kulked down tr/ MI to l establish a cenfidence level that examinaticn requi.,. cnn.v.s hm ;
been met. If any diserscancies are fcurd, this 939 stil he re- , f , opened. *
~
i m is also closes 932 9 cc044A.
- 3 1
3 ; l i ! 2 t - } r l 1 l ! i j 4
-w-w.-,.,-,-.-,y--, , . ,,,--.. , - - . - , . . . - . _ , . ,,,---...._y,,,.m%,._,._.,_..,,.,.---.,_-m., ~ . , , - . , %.,-,.,,---% , -.,m . , , - - - , - - . - , , . , . - - , . ,
~
y INTERC UI MEMO c' . IMd 25,852 DATE: July 12, 1983 TO: J. Hair, ANI FROM: R. Stever SURJECT: CPSES, 35-1195
- SIS Report 357.
RPS 705-404 was prepared to increase west portion of weld 13 on hanger CS-1-112-734-C51R to 4." as required by design drawing. , Weld 13 on the above hanger was PT examined inprocess and documented 4 on MWDC 53214 by J. McConrias on 11/13/31, The only area requiring re-examination by PI is the repatted area. There was no reasca co require the additional work of removing the paint and re-examination of the existing, weld. Mr. James Lloyd was correct. Me did not have to PT that part of the 1 weld that was not repaired. ([ , The QC Lead was also correct. PT examinations of full fillet welds will be done during improcess inspections. i At the time of final hanger walkdown any full fillet velds that have not been PT or.MT exanined will be documented on an unsat IR and Quality Engineering will have Welding Engineering prepare an RPS to clean and PT or MT the veld. , All ASME Class I hanger packages that have had construction and/or *
' QC inspections performed since Occcher 1982 are being reviewed to -
assure the Tequired NDE has been performed. It appears that you have been talking to the wrong people or have been i misinformed in regards to coansunicarlons betveen OA upper management. QC and QC inspectors. All QC inspec: ors and chair t.eads do receive trainir.g and at this time Brown & P. cot does not feel any additional , i i training inspections. it required for Class 1. supports or full fillet veld ' Brown & Root feels *: hat the review of all Class 1 inprocess document ' packages prior to the final VCD walkdows will assure that no full l l fillet wel.ds get through the system withove having the required PT/MT ; examinations performed. I t
/ '
s .. - ~~~~ W b- R. 5 fever qC Cr:up Euperviser l RS/bm * ' ! cc: C.R. Purdy ]
} J.T. Blixt C.L. Morris, Jr. ! M. Coats. AMI a i I i
.a
. r enaccr.o o. au enn .meMit3Od riA c. W MAM2 CASE EXHIBIT N0e 1,042 N.s. - a.M) .,
n...s ..ne. ....eum ,m.:s.us -= sen1.um:ihn,/u%,e viu 1:httuGli uuMfeArte,
#357
[ ;io<. r.~. E- ; Mr. Cordon Purdy. Q. A. Manager l** : ut w IJuly 2, 1983 muc..esa , . e ' saaaca 1 l 3
'ast at:ca :4 scito ca.aser
- g , B rown & Root . Inc. qs agirs
;gim N uii p *'
Huen unune- - teouwee L C!cses 1 CPSSS Glen Rose. Texas n Shco ,- Fiets , aew,/ d anmoir L.J Aneratio. Claservice I1
; . the undersigned, have monitored your QA/QC manual on: 7-2 R3 and find the following sections:
, c.r. ,
_ eo. - . e rme.s - L Satisfactory: M " ' * *Tuwe-~r oasoc - e . um (~s one rae3 on we==rr une .mme -mo~e==~e .. .w . o Section II Inspeccion Procedures and Instructions
References:
7 o I
'5 :e SIS Report 939 3 311A 5,
5 -' 3 I.M. # 24,719 NF 5212 QCwI-19 SIS 932 # C-044A f CUSTCMER: Please describe the resolution of these itemtin the " CUSTOMER'S RES01.UT10N" section date for completion of corrective action, 50 that items m'ay be remonitored byt 7-20-83 Pfesse keep the Original of this form for your records and return a copy to inspector namedtower below. 151***" lass. 8' 5"8 lies. Wgr /$1$ Foreign Representative Efile 5 " 8 8"88 '* ' ' ' ' 7 2 83 st:cturam ce ruosa atas aso eso aeovt as scac uaweiac:;rr te: a m ne h s ., (, g e M eY *
*=%__.,
-- ~
1
. __m A /?4" cnso .w -
.. ~
7
- u. .-
~
- -} r ; ,
bE , bO
\-ff V hl ! l
&&L N L--
l ,,. O h L M~ h L . h J aart cuencret cin- : . _:xto ...n suo _ eaer . memo _ $JW '
.CCVER
~
l V"S h .
" ^
- 1. the undersigned. have remonitored the above unsatisfactory conditions on:
. July 17. 1993 and found them: E satisfactory Cuneatisfactory(Esplain Delow) y.
f1
- 0!A 85 5G - -
*S'**a sis Fo s __.I.we swa swo ensa , . ,,,
R /4s
'x .t. ver/reem<engn tative Gr;teins,, I 7/18/83 ,,
.a c: WrTE
> (# , "df e
, j d
, . * * ~
_ - - -- . - - a _. - ?' ' [ -. , i , . SIS Roport 9357 Page 2 of 2
- 1. .
'(' ' . '
for hanger CS-1.112-734-C61R.On 7-1-83 chis inspector was called to witness a PT on a Upon arrival only of the weld was prepared for a PT examination. The top half was still covered with paint and met the requirements of a full fillet. The QC Inspector, James Lloyd did not know he was supposed to PT that part of the veld. Upon discussion with QCI Lead Larry Wilkerson, he understands the requirement for NDE of full fillet velds is for only inprocass inspections. Upon researching this subject when 939 #311A was written, A.R.M. Bill Tillman, Sr. Regional' Manager Ron lloward, and SIS Maringer Don Young were consulted for clarification of NF $212 and the opininon'of HSS is : hat if the weld meets the requirements of a full fillet, then NDE must be performed. Brown & Root Q.A. agreed to this on I.M. #24,719. Since the time #24,719
- was written, other inspectors have had ANI hold points for Vigual Examinations on Class i hangers. The Q.C. inspectors knew nothing about a requirement for PT of full fillets. (These are very knowledgeable inspectors such as John Caldwell Tony Linzy, and Russ Hilton). '
F Upon investigation of other hangers on CS-1-R5 029 the following hangers were found that have had a recent VCD accachment 5 signed satisfactory,. l CS-1-112-725-C61R CS-1-112-738-C715 { CS-1-112 727-C613 4
, , CS-I-112-731'C61S
~
These hangers were signed by a different i'aspector, Roger Walters. l It is apparent that there is a severe breakdown of communication between ( 7}. walkdowns. management QC, and the QC ' inspectors in the field involved in VCD QA, upper d i VCD walkdowns are indeterminate.For this reason, and the hangers listed in this 939 ALL
! I as also requesting that ALL QC inspectors and their leads receive documented training into the criteria of inspecting Class 1 supports which may have full fillet welds included in the hanger. - -
This 939 is closed based en the following: (1) No Class I hanger packages have been presented to MI for. final : acceetance. When thev are, ther will be walked down by MI to establish been net. a Ifcxnfidence level that examinatien recui.ncents have opened. - any discrecancies are fetrel, this 939 -will be re-
- This also closes 932 i G-044A. - -
e f %
/ e 1
Le ' 4 4 p
-e Oh Ti - y, -,- yw-m , , - - - - , , eer'= -s
fl ' . IfROct.lr1C. -
; INTEROFFIs. MEMO ,
ib - IMi 25,852 DATE: July 12, 1983 l TO: J. Hair, ANI l FROM: R. Siever
SUBJECT:
CPSES, 35-1195
- SIS Report 357.
RPS 705-604 was prepared to increase west portion of weld 13 on hanger CS-1-112-734-C61R to k" as required by design drawing. Weld 13 on the above hanger was PT examined inprocess and documented on MWDC 53214 by J. McConunas on 11/13/31. The only area requiring re-examination by PT is the repaired area. There was no reason to require the additional' work of removing the paint' and re-examination of the existing weld. ' Mr. James Lloyd vas correct. He did not have to PT that part of the weld that was not repaired. (,, The QC Lead was also' correct. PT examitiations of full fillet welds
, will be done during inprocess inspections.
At the time of final hanger walkdown any. full fillet velds that have not been PT or MT examined will be documented on an unsat IR and Quality Engineering vill have Welding Engineering prepara an RPS to clean and PT or HT the veld. All ASME Class I hanger packages that have had construction and/or QC inspections performed since October 1982 are being reviewed to assure the required NDE has been performed.
- It appears that you have been talking to the wrong people or have been
- misinformed in regards to communications between QA upper management, QC and QC inspectors. All QC inspectors and their Leads do receive training and at this time Brown & Root does not feel any additional training is required for Class 1 supports or full fille.c weld inspections. .
Brown & Root feels that the review of all Class .1 inprocess document packages prior to the final VCD walkdown will assure that no full fillet welds get through the system without having the required PT/MT examinations performed. 2 - - - p v K. Stever QC Gr'oup Supervisor RS/bm
- cc: G.R. Putdy J.T. Blixt G.L. Morris, Jr.
M. Coats. ANI
,-,,,,,,-,c-- -
, , - - , , - - - .--,,n.-,-,.-,e- --e. ,.,-,e ---y,- - - - -- -.c, --~, , . - - - - --.,,v,--,.-.,n,-,,, . -
~ ' ~
CPSES/FSAR Procedures define the actions necessary to identify, resolve, and closecut deficiencies in characteristics, documentation, or procedures which render the quality.of an item unacceptable or indeterminate. When required by specific procedures / instructions, items identified as unsatisfactory or incomplete and which can be corrected within a reasonable period of time may be identified on en inspection report and/or deficiency report. A nonconformance report is used to document 41 deficiencies unless another method is prescribed by a specific procedure / instruction. Items identified on a nonconformance report are tagged and segregated where practical as defined in section 17.1.14, " Inspection and Test Status" and Section 17.1.13. " Handling, Storage, and Shipping." Following disposition of nonconformance reports, specified reviews and approvals are procedurally required for 1) "use as is" and " repair," and2) " rework." Upon completion of action required for disposition, repaired or l reworked items are reinspected to verify that specified action and ; requirements are complied with. l procedures require " trending" of deficiencies identified on 41 nonconformance reports, deficiency reports, and inspection reports to identify trends adverse to quality. Procedures require the initiation of a corrective action request for significant or chronically repetitive nonconformances as defined in Section-17.1.16. . l l i 17.1-39 AMENDMENT'41
~
JULY 11, 1983 F0lA-85-59 e
9, O' , CPSES/FSAR 17.1.16 CORRECTIVE ACTION TUGCO/TUSI requires that measures be established to assure that condi-tions adverse to quality are promptly identified, reported, and corrected. Responsibility for perfoming corrective action is assigned to contractors, applicable subcontractors, and vendors so that each .is alert to those conditions adverse to quality within his own area of activity. In the case of significant conditions adverse to quality, which are reportable to NRC under the provisions of 10 CFR Part 50.55 (e), measures are taken to assure that the cause of the condition is determined and corrective action is implemented to preclude repetition. Corrective action procedures placed in effect require thorough investi-gation and documentation of significant conditions adverse to quality. The cause and corrective action is reported in writing to the appropri-
~
ate levels of management and to the purchaser. This corrective action applied is subject to review by TUGC0 and the prime contractor responsible for the original purchase specification. For CPSES, tha Quality Assurance Plan requires that procedures and practices be established and documented which provide assurance that conditions adverse to quality, such as failures, malfunctions, deficien-cies, deviations, defective material ar.d equipment, and nonconformances, are promptly identified, documented, and corrected as soon as practicable, and that appropriate action be taken to correct the cause of the condition. Corrective action documentation and ; request foms er formal letters are used to document the corrective action-related requests, responses, and follow up. The plan requires that measures be established by the prime contractors to assure that f the acceptability of rework or repairs is verified by reinspecting the ! item as originally inspected and that the reinspection is documented. These measures are verified by review and approval of the prime contractors' QA Program and by the subsequent audit for conformance to the approved program. Significant conditions adverse to quality are identified (such as those which, if they had remained undetected, would MAY 31, 1979 17.1-40
CPSES/FSAR have adversely affected safety-related functions), the,cause of the condition is detennined, and corrective action is taken to preclude repetition. Such significant conditions, their causes, and the
~
corrective action taken are documented and reported to appropriate levels of management through established communication systems. Corrective action followup and close-out procedures provide that corrective action commitments are implemented in a systematic and i timely manner and are effective. The occurrence and magnitude of deficiencies and nonconfonnances requir-ing corrective action are evaluated by the purchaser's inspectors during surveillance and at hold point inspection and witnessing. Addi-tionally, these areas are identified for audit purposes. The effectiveness of the vendor's corrective action program is assessed during audits by the vendor, the prime contractor, subcontractor, and by TUGCO. Stop work authority is exercised as requ' ired. 17.1.17 QUALITY ASSURANCE RECORDS The TUGC0/TUSI Quality Assurance program establishes procedures and practices to assure that TUGCO/TUSI and its contractors have a quality records system which provides documentary evidence of the performance of activities affecting quality. Procedures assure or shall require: 1
- 1. That records that are required to be maintained show evidence of performance of activities affecting quality. Typical records I maintained include quality assurance programs and plans, design -- -
data and studies, design review reports, specifications, procurement documents, procedures, inspection and test reports, material certifications, personnel certification and test reports, audit reports, reports of nonconfonnances and corrective actions, as-built drawings, operating logs, calibration records, maintenance data, and failure and incident reports. 17.1-41 AUGUST 7, 1981
- r+-.
Mi ...
" SIS RECORD FOR MONITORING Q.A./Q.C. P .] RAMS lb' nis waarrono sTsA3s sori sn rusescTrox :nd issi.,aaxcs co3traxy
- CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,043 HAltTFOND. CON.N ECTIC1.7 o.io't ro ,.. - r. .
8362 A or ' goet j s ar
; Gordon Purdy, Site Q.A. Manager casrena s c,w.u =< i August 3. 1983 I I hy pu s==cw 2
g B rown & Roo t , Inc. pu nc.c en sento c.t rs,
" "g .= 45712 WsC4 Housto IHouston Cteovered,asga4gn,o,u L jCtosse r,
,ield a373af/
C?SES Glen' Rose, Texas 3k88 Assama *Jtaat er U"*n'*t a t
- 1. the undersigned, have monitored your QA/QC manual on: 8-3-83 and find the fpe.t'.y sectinna:
_ va. ? - . e r.au, i !Satisfactcry:
, l i 1 l
I , m tn. m r.a3 ca w ev an. sm .~e-m u .n u ., l
- 5. Unsatisfactory:eo. wr as.oc . * '
Section 20 Authorized Nuclear Inspectors !
. \
On =any occasions ANIS have been refused access to areas in which Code relatel work was being perfor=ed. These areas are Reactor Building 1, Diesel l
$b
[3 Generator Building 1, and the Fuel Building on dates 1-16-83, 3 17-83, 7-10-33, 7-23-83, and 8-1-83, as well as other occasions not recorded. In some cases, access was subsequently achieved by construction personnel making an orange badge Cot-
- 3. ' CUSTOMER: Pfease describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESOLUTION'* section below, and give .
date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: Au2use 17 Io83 Please keep the Original of this form for your records and return a copy to inspector named below..p < c ., E** /$13 ForeigS las3 I '"# # *****'*#
/
2.rer. v r/eseeresentause Ene. Il 8-3-83 ) jd t sucuita or mau cren etsanno sec,s as ss.us unsucens e - : a us,e..,p uu-if
% t See Attached IMJ26,055 o-3S
' 29 \
4 SE a :
/ .
o
--* ~ ~~
- Qgn, oart eerstejr i acto. t u cowurts h/2 83 oast soroj f 8 / / S / $ ~)
sc.to , c.u -- e a.*u.aec-o h Q _ )f I the undersigned. have remonitored the above unsatisfactory conditions on: 9, 7.f'3 and found them: A$atisfactory ec..u f7 4,v.o ff , CUnsatisfactory (Esclain cetow) Q-- Vl p% .u.1,6a e aw)J;/ u a& gut <.y r u.n ad du a,, i
.pnhy mo ,veka,y >>,ud~4 cf accus o/wd L.QJef.A sidd drJ n
A dat n Luz - nA.uct aea u 2 &LiAs F(,$, AR_RO . ( M:_, xt~.
-t u .o -
%,s.urhs,s,,,,,,,
, .o no, .
e .,,,s. nut . E ,u,,.,' 9 7.n l > . ,-). ... .fgM
- -+~
ww W 1
. s. a'
,,,g-..
' AS . . ' . .
SIS REPORT 1362 A Page 2 of 2 4
,y r .
T-available when ANI's to maythe INI. have The effect access. of this is that construction decidas ' i-Fositive action must be taken to ensure ANI's have access en ai,1 areas anytime Code related work is being performed. In addition, ANIS should have access to all areas regardless of whether or not work is actually being performed. This is the purpose of performing random walkdown of items prior to final document review and to walkdown prior to signing NS Data Reports. ANIS also reserve the right to walkdown systems prior to signing the system N5 even though N5 Data Reports have already been certified for all subsystems. I W Billy W iker h$
~
e
.V J _-
e t e e.
_ , , , . . . , , , , - , ~=.-
; .u
_ _, , _FgRy:_~ lG*: ?,yi c,TT 50 PJCPunURoot.!nc. i INTEROFF't" 7.Mo IM1 26,055 TO: N.C. Smith DATE: August 13, 1983
~
FROM: G.R. Purdy *
SUBJECT:
CPSES, 35-1195
't QA/ANI Access To Areas In Which Code Related Work Is 3eing Conducted.
This memo is issued to confirm our previous discussions on the above subject. In accordance with Section 20.0 of the B&R QA Manual, and Subsection NA paragraph NA-5120 of the ASME B&PV Code, the ANI/ ANIS must have free access to all areas of the site during the period of assembly and testing. By Code ter=inology, this means that the ANI/ ANIS must be permitted free access to areas until construction (i.e., N-5 Certification and Sta.mping) is complete. By our mutual agreement, it is not the intent or requirement of the "RWN" access control program to restrict the freedom of access for QA/ANI/ ANIS inspection personnel to perform inspection or cerification activities. Mcwever, due to incorrect interpretation of the program, t ', several access problems have recently been encountered as outlined on ' {. the attached ANI SIS Report. To preclude recurrence of this problem,
- 7 it is requested that copies of this memo be distributed to personneT responsible for kaple=entation of the "RWN" access control program'.I
,jiL<<$lv/
G.R. Pur'dy / Site QA Manager , cc: 3.J. Murray D. Deviney R.G. Tolson M. Coats 4 o T .. Y 9 .
_.--- --***w.,, , ggravyygga'. -yyMgruom
- n. * .
g4
. SIS REPORT O '
(; o g 9
' Tite 11ANTFORO STI AM llO!!.liH INS!*!!CTION .ar. i :SCH ANCI! COMi*ANY itAM rs t >uis. s:ssNSI 4:s 1s:L r inser.
( f/b. l. i b W ' GE Ansi} E e- 5 .23-73 i l A' A/ th.A nr
. %. -< C M: ' ' /
H.O./ 8 RANCH CFFIC ~ CRGANtZATI Asn - -
. ....* OCATION
.Afdd/>1 k Y .
STREET CIT COUN TY STATE ZIP Ci . *
$bbb
_M.RSON CCNTACTED (CivE NAME ANC CFFICIAL TITLE) bn}# YM Y _ CON TR ACT/ P.O. Rt;ASCN FOR VISIT .. f r
~I n') /$!d4f CPIES SENT TC:
C H.C. Eng Coim, 51s O on.i ia...., Sa+ u ,,. sis 00+., (s...+):
. . . . W A l/* t .
&. VM ... _ . . .
) .. . . .
0 41 S M &$8 $ .. dd.A . .$ (A.,d .6 . - - . A ama% as'ahaad dx.a a u d / d p ?, b _cm 2 k u d_
.wwu7r~ay./ Arts dmac.dat s;/ M.n,.daAlk_w
.W g a.#A M U _ A f d A K . .. .-.-
,' Aa.~ yma..A. A .o p t & d.). .. ....
L fd d . w _.
. s ir e M6 -
i i = w s* - f OCyr. . SIGNED b
[.' '. .
= -- ---
. . m.:31:. N ,=j;;;: hy _p g/s #
' SIS REPORT $ Y 93 9 # 342 4
%u Tus HAaTrono sTsa.si sortca txsrscrios ane : :enasca co.stPANY HARTFCHO. CONN ECrtCt. r o.io
~ bgf1hg>1 h2.l.th s'k f 0. $/!tisgezr., DATE : SHEET OF 7".C M: # '
9-7-$3 / f ~ N.O./ BRANCH OFFICE n/> M. YY YY 0%GANIZATI
/ A$lAt l s. f LCCAT:CN t 3TREET C A L Elm
- -~
COUNTY ' STATI ZIP CJi?~
&'st s PERSCN CONTACTED (GlVE NAME AND OFFICIA4. TITLE) s .
, 'CCHTRACT/?/J. *.
REASON FOR ViSJT , ,
$?rt./ As> 9hd.td COPtES SENT TO:
C H.o. Ea, c.i.. sis O chi.: io...c., GR i u . sis Oc+- (s..c r): a RA 6 , s> a 2. 6 4 m d. n. A%,4 J m J o rnw/ k1, An a.w1A&n sd w z.aa sa ~~ . a w @ d /s m d1 d u 4-. A ,. A up m ,,. A m.s 4 <k,z da_. n1 ~_.saZ4& cry -.
.;~
' %d L.~
. & . G L4
.e. ..
.q.
.O
*N N*.* e e* -
.g .s gu. e.e COVER uCNeg.g. . . . . . , :.,.
~ '
l _ _ . . . . . . . . .- . _ . . . . . re.= - .
. / ., .
' * , 939 AUOf7 Cl.dCK.
l Sheet / of 2 j MANUAL SECTIONS 20 DATE F f3
,'. -'].3
- r. AUDIT # 3 (r 2. I i
! l
' )t 9 0_ i L.Ji -
s 8
/
l ' l We YiM . l l I I i i I hi s n _m a - CM',4
)A'Y d e=<. A dd.4dd CAla.t.
,L n ,a' n ea je~ a L , w .n AA/z'Jaas .Adm.!- && ae]; 9 ac m 2 "e,,1.tts" m ~
; & ** Y & .A Ab, i & .,. .At W .W]r5 Jek.
- dm l m Sy </ rat & <-J W /;.,/,a ,JLdm Ad>< #
^
N
. N N O O Ndd. A I
1.: 14a J n A .a p u.a'v n a x s s z . / ,,-t e m a a, - I-
- 3. .41,s.t d ,$.* Ehd W #1.et.! A,- -
&h 'o l .
@ /)w h 2g f/seay, auary. aem A af d4-"JUJ
' mnN ,od. .upsu A/.J D'r?
y >Jn.ap/1; ~ ,/ vu s sid,u., ca ~ n'~t k i Aati . As A. A A~., r Atl' @~4' .a~// &LA)
,4A a .A ards.-#,4. A -aa. g.ory4 2 n .J 4.+~ h oc -
!,fy,py; x d-t&.gg.anen . Aglau/~dh-a 4ya.H4 '~ m . ,L 2n x As.sg do -
O
).s sxz a<t,did oa ,,,a!g s ad-a .4. Asd' .p.a ~.
yxA/uetA-a.u. .w f /,.uwf a ? _;;; as A- 2 aLay n ssz n .s4 As & H~~s 9Ava si, ns -, an sk. As. an Ed , sat- .-g
.i .h ~- s. AL a h, ,uJ. M i .dd- . . % f .... .*.u 'L E . T . . . ..
s
1
, * *ig@ i,* , . 939 AUDIl GhECXLIST 4- - -
Sheet 2 of *2. l FANUAL SECTIONS .2 o 0 ATE ? j_ f 3 AUDIT # 362
!(3 O; !
?s.
hY #9hk/*>T, %)P t s t of s * *. C ',,$,,.
! /.
, @ ).4 ANE.,b^m $d s d a f & g 8cd w U/ sex.'
; 2 a n a - a n y ai<~s A s o u >, a. u= n .
{ $ & $$ $ lO bhY Y$Y h, ,N . e
!@ ./s Asrf<, A c;dindc.mt, it: .u..wAaf andmu;l, s&t,
.ZA d-ihmb ha, A ebam f.4 dx '?
.ssr" 6 A.s>-~ s ..,&n. p .,..A<- p
.A y, see. ' d4 4
l l
*. t . .
.i * -
y S. l . i 1 I O he t- . 4 . . l
- * ~ -
d t j
? *
%: - -w.g;---
,..cw - , i.:I gg.3m,- - 's.}[ . - .:*****- ~ E- .
'6.*
*} ~ ~ 9 %. w o m == ee wn u na C
- i l
,, _, .._-a6.. , - - . - - --
1 .
. W-fNI -SIS RECORD FOR MONITORING Q,A. ,C. PROGRAMS - CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,044
'Q* b/ THE HARTFORD STE.ut BOILER INSP HARTFORD. CONNECT!Ct.'T 068o:
- ON and INSIJRANCE CO.%1PANY 8361 A
; so unen e r.<>e, use
.. so.sts or
! .. Mr. Co rd n.- N rav 9ie,n i. v arse. n , ,, , e - t1 iao1 1 !*
gg
~
cust:=trs c: win, ==e ase saua l 4ssitr.o= cn sonto ca.nts, egg sagrs l @j Marvin Coats. I.ead ANI Houston Houston L eeoveree U Closed
*g 'asetoon tocar*
,m field a
~
TAssesmy epatr/ qainswee Lq Alteration CPSES Clen Rose. Texas 0 l1. the undersigned, have monitored your QA/QC manual on: 0 1T R1 and find th's following sections:
, <o re, g_ ta , nomeere no r.ueno
{ Satisfactory:
, CA/CC menwen seenen (no. .no rose) on stenary one sneerse noneemormenee as asoneseen J unutisfactory:
Section 7 Docttment Control Requested response date on 939 # 361 was 8/10/83
- a
'g f Findings: (1) As of this date, there has been no response to above nor has 83' s ja as extension been requested.
(2) Car S-54 Rev. I has not been closed nor extended. (3) ANI audit of packages in the field on 8/8/83 & 8/9/83 dis-closed the f e lt et.ri mr . (9.. me s,5 8) (- CUSTOMER: Pfesse describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESOLUTION" section below. and give date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: ofiq/a, e c.... Please keep the Original of this form for your records and return a ecoy to inspector named below.
-las art smo seu rasa ensenters EE"** /$13 Foreign x aes. ugr aeoresentauve rE rii.s, 8/11/83 [g g nuaunca or n. cst irt=s cascuo .aove as was waar.steen, <cenun en ,.s ee.,n.co.4r, See attached IM# 26,015. ,
CE EE 25 E ::: u= COVER pra consterive co ein at cowstits art sono / / seto re asmo, emee,..n,. . Aug. 17, 1983 g// //,S3 . > gM(n /. I, the undersigned. have remonitored the above unsatisfactory conditions on: [j'Jp //3 and found them: btisfactory Unsatisfac*ory (Esplain colowl
=
*} /s ! 5 a.n- M7cm *t-, ~t.'ir l2t**'W<~r ciJ s. v No c.do H r.we.g,g l
=
c,s w >.m m t.y km pmr e 1 e,. am
*s:'*'* sls Foreign u's s=2 r sono ensa en==rer sn et. _s _
- s. Mgr negresentative C g 3')/$
v - hM - 34 -
-- - - - _ - . - -u__.__ ._._ ,.. _ _ , 4_,, ,
- -~ - . c
'** ,5 k*
- SIS Report 4 361 A
+
Page 2 of 2
+
. i
\
~
Twelve hanger packages in Task Force areas contained improperly marked drawings. Fourteen hanger packages in Unit 2 R3 & DG contained draw- . ings that had deficient " controlled" stamps. e e O e O . O 6 Q eumes
- l 0 .
8
- 9'
.s l
l
. _ . _ . . . . ___ ._ _ _ _ .._ _ 1 ..
.. ,5 4
Brown & Root.!re. 1
/,
INTEROFFICE MEMO IM - 26015 August 16, 1983 TO: Gordon Purdy
- FROM: W.E. Baker
SUBJECT:
Response to CAR #54 and SIS #361 Effective August 1, 1983 the new document control and distribution procedures were implemented at CPSES. A description of the new method of handling con-trolled drawings is contained in the attached memo from J.T. Merritt to All Department Heads, dated August 8, 1983. ' In conjunction with this, Document Control Procedure OCP 3 has been revised and all Document Control Satellite Personnel have been indoctrinated to the new requirements. In addition to the above, all Hanger Packages currently in the task force
\
areas or in Welding. Engineering are being reviewed prior to issuance to in-sure that all documents are current and that superceded documents have been removed or stamped Void. - The actions as described here should resolve the problems which were experi-enced with the previous program and have adequately addressed the concerns. expressed by CAR f54 and SIS #361. Y/Y ] ~ W.E. Baker Sr. Project Welding Engineer WEB / alt i cc: 0.C. Frankum ( F. Strand . J.P. Clarke 1 ~
-,,a m,,.., , , - - - - ~ , , , , , - . - . , , , , , , - - . , gn ,
, y. . , m- <. p .: . , . . a.,.
.. . . _ = ..v. . ._.
._ - .2-
.'t . .' 4 -
35-1195 8-8-83 I (s. TEXAS UTILITIEE SERVICES INC.
- p. o. nox im . ci.t.v aosc. rzxas so.2 TO: All Department Heads
SUBJECT:
Occument Control Center Satellites Effective August 1,1983 the DCC Satellites were in place and operational. Presently there are five locations as follows:
- 1. Satellite #300 (North of Const. Admin. Buildino) 301 This Satellite serves TUGC0 Start-Up, 302 Completions and Area Management.
303
- 2. Satellite #304 (Pipe Shoo, Second Floor)
(a. Electrical Engineerin,g b
~ (b. TNE (c. Mechanical Engineering
.(d.) Damage Study (e.) Civil Crafts
- 3. Satellite #305 (Adjacent to Combustible Warehouse)
(a.) Civil Engineering b.) I&C Engineering
' c.) Civil Q.C.
d.) Field Engineering
- 4. Satellite #306 (Mechanical, Adjacent to " Church House")
(a. Pipe Crafts (b. Millwrights (c. Insulation (d. Hanger Dept. (For drawings other than Construction #98 Packages)
- e. Instrumentation Craft
> 1 '
- f. Mechanical Q.C.
! 5. Satellite #307 (Electrical, North of TG #2) ' (a.) Electrical Craft i ( (b.) Electrical Q.C. i. With this transition the old " control number / file custodian system" will be . replaced by the Satellites which are staffed with DCC people. Several control numbers will remain for logistica. or technical reasons but they will be controlled and audited by the DCC monitoring team. i .
, .f .
!j i-7
- ,,- --,y - - , _ - , . .
w
= .-
" w. = : - - --2 , .-- - =-
. e. . ..
j Page 2. August 8,1983 l The ",Information Copy" will no longer be issued. All " Controlled" drawings will be issued and accounted for by the Satellites. The crafts will continue to check drawings in and out as in the past. Aperture cards and viewers will be available at each Satellite for viewing drawings when hard copies are not required. Documents will a'lso be distributed for purposes other than producticn, (physical construction) or QC inspection activities. Issuance of these documents will be as authorized (see OCP-313.1.3.1) by signature of the attached list of authorizing personnel. Documents distributed in this manner will be stamped "For Office and Engineering Use Only". Xeroxed copies of
, authorizing signatures will not be accepted.
All " Controlled" drawings assigned to and issued from the Satellites are stamped with control numbers in the 300 series (300,301,302, etc.) in " red ink". Documents logged directly from the Central OCC will be stamped with the control number "333" in " red ink". Any control documents presently in use, not bearing the control stamp in red ink, are not authorized documents and must be returned to DCC for proper disposition.
~
As with any system change, we expect minor problems and frustration until the
~
(- concept is understood and accepted. Your help and cooperation is essential to phase this new concept into being. Every effort should be made to keep your drawing requirements and requests to an absolute minimum and allow the Satellite: to function as they are designed - reduce the number of drawings at CPSES and tighten the control of drawings. We have made a comitment to the NRC to implement this program and make it work. ' Groups not addressed herein (PSE, Welding Engineering, Production Control, Mechanical Drafting, etc.) will continue to be served from the main OCC. Present exclusions to th:is concept are:
- 1. Procedures
- 2. S-910 Program
- 3. TUGC0 Operations
- 4. Mail out distribution <
- 5. Conduit numbering drawings -
. 1 These will be addresed an'd folded into the System as time permits. !
An internal audit team from DCC will assume the responsibility for auditing l the Satellites and other groups to assure file integrity and accurate drawing status. , ( Authorization forms for " Office and Engineering Use Only" drawings will be distributed through the Satellites and at the main OCC. , t
. l
o
. . . . :._-.=,_. . . _ _ . _ . _ . - - . . ---
, agi, f; -
i page 3. August 8, 1983 Any questions regarding this new concept should be dirceted to Frank Strand at Ext. #263. Your cooperation is not only expected, but mandated. J.T/ Merri tt Ass /;. Project General Manager JTM/tm l e i ~ - g-
.'F F-g *p q - , , , ,- - -, , --- - -p
[ --
~~
~ " 8 i'5-83
; . .p s ,. 35-1195
; m(fug.
.l 1 i
i 1 i f
\
i INTEROFFICE MEMO i TO: Mr. W.E. Baker Augusc 15, 1983 FROM: Frank Strand, OCC Supervisor .
SUBJECT:
Document Control Procedural Training ,
REFERENCE:
CAR-54 Please be advised that Satellite Personnel have been trained in Revision 15 of Procedure DCP-3. Further, the orientation classes have now been organized and are in process. (.. f A Frank M. Stranc
. h&
DCC Supervisor FMS/tm cc: F.M. Strand H.A. Hutchinson l l
. =
9 4
~~.._.:_.-
~~~ ~~~
,f_'s- GIS RECORD FOR MONIT0filNG QA./Q.C. P!.. AMS - - CASE EXHIBIT NO. 1,045
.\
TIIE HARTFOltD STEA51 DO!!.EH INSPECTIC.. and INST lH ANCE CO.stPANY
~ stwraniti. c:: wirriccr emie: I
\ 8dJA l
} .-
to <= . r u.. i dr oGO:1.J i: b ~'8'"" .' b cugicasas c:arsas su.g uts p y hf'.Z Q . //. A4. ~~- asr snsucn l"E ? 17/)] l l n on icstce cm.ntas . t a n c.ona
$$ Rita a ;I [ h r~ l:ny at//J D,*:s uss cnsr1;j* Cc
$5 msrtcnom LGcalen e
O (NN [c,,.4%I /Nf d', N. IAOS b,J.Assently eld Repair / Alterstros 1858**
- l. the undersigned, have .
monitored your QA/QC manual on: and find the following sections:
,0...,
C3atisfactory: eae wr oncc a.m.= sur en ins =* r.=*1 on weary m .n.s neaeuen e.. a nenee.o ~ C Unsatistactory: yLfesJcoP [0 553 EE l$ krH 'r t.): s c. Jy'o ,.io n. / 9 c.t 77-< M JJ A'-@ /. amu .1~N. 4'l.-~lTIL /d Ds(,,4:~ttp JPW H* C .--
~4
\ l* CUSTOMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the CUSTOMERS RESQLUTION" ection below, and gh '
date for completion of corrective acticn, so that items may be remonitored by: ? 2 flN Presse keep the Original of this form for your records and return a copy to inspector named below.
/ / n o...o I
orsia.eures Galt seta ser.Nto ete. Cleg. ugr resa$tati,e C[ife "
//yJ h [res38 8e 4 sisaunca cr nacst atus otscmato ascit as se,ac unsanstac.T.n, rcH : a .. s . ., nn.nuri I
see ecsm st to si3 3S3 1 C5 , E"5 23 M ::: n CG? oast coa.tenyt acnom wu et ccwwta . , cart sento s.t.ato re.,n . a.en <-.o 5 E.E WCt*EC) 26 3 W.E.34ST*5ei - v
- l. the undersigned. have remonitored the above unsatisfactory conditions on:
ff[Af //) , and found them: u satisfactory CUnsatisfactory(Esclain cetow) 1*
~
nJ '--D - f f4 # 543 < c=> c= 25h unh,,,,,,,,o,,,,, 2$s,.l. _r/s.t./ja 4M .
.s .t,. w,s a
,. m u,. .
5.t.x .v'?
> s. ,-.. ..$.,,r i / __~
~
- . . - - - w. - - . , ,
, . - . ,. ,--.~.4 - . - - -e w.
~ - w. =-xv'- m ."
,'" a
- S!S RECORD FOR MONITORiha Q,A./q... Paosa, i
l
- Y EM.*.
Tile IIARTFORD
,,,n.,,,n. n.e.STt".W c u.u IM)!LE.R w Inst'ECTION and Inst.*RANC.c. w..sPANY l
A 363 re une=. m.e tus ' i I ust satt u
, ..[>. P: . Ccrixt Pu.9/. Sita Q. A. M* .acer Aucust 18, 1933 !
-. ; >- . , . .s, ,,m, c. ,c im- ,. , ~ o . , -
1 E M E D t. W . *
'd3) " " ' * * " " "
~
Rcusten Housten b C ' CPSE Glen Ibse. Texas Fi Ea,efs Aeiarr/ ' Ossee . . . .,y 0 4,,,,,,,.. Oi. c~ , ll, th# undersignett. hJYe monitored your QA/QC mant,,3) ca: _8/19/93 i c .... and find the follCWing Sect!Cn2; 00* L 2. d fes.es g y ,,,,,,,4~, a = = --- s n..g. . . ,~ . .. .,... ,
]
See Attached. I l 9 l
*i 2 a5 5: i y=
l \ l l c
. M,
' ,s CUSTOMER: Ffesse describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESOLUTION" section i
, date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be retenitored by- !
s o.... Ffesse keec the Originai cf this form for your records and return a co y to .'nscegor named befew. wsi.scon ' 32et. utr/Ue:res'$tio.. YNIluctss.us nuoca e aes irtus casues .am .: mis uns.nvecer ec t S/13/83 M hsc.uo tess
.. s .,4 .u./r,
>*.awuo k' g m E
l . ..
.522. h s
- o-%C-At;C> Rtt.sPorJS&E - . . . _ _
0E A5 R5 8, 2 mit cas.:ciric moi =u u cemetarto 0i,i J s<.w e <c , . n ,. ..., , NE E. +1TN'++(O Rf 54/r6 art 1EE sr.nie !2 c2 5 > .v
- 1. the undersignad, have remonitored the above unsatisfactory conditions en:
g f7g fg 3 and fcund them: E 3.tist.ctory Qua..ii.e.ci.<y fa,i.,o e.<c., ~
-9 E
j w Brown & Ecot respense to ncn cogliances identified is accep, table except
'a for a fe,i specific concerns. See 932 #G-062.
', utr/afe f U.*n'fe'ri.. ON[. M //;-
., . , v,, ,e ,-
> ,. f
/- -
l
S .
~
.,.s..
--. .c. w ;....'... ~c....m
.cens 7- w v V - . -&'
c, . . - sId ttos=wt # 363
,. - Page 2 ct' 5 r* -s E"JTIQi Ci' N-5 CATA FEFCRr5 ja (1) mis have re , accuracies, a;ccted the . majority of st r-itted N-5's for in-acceptable. :issions, inaccurata hydro pressure, SFP's un-(2)
Ihe Subsystem N-5 for SF-1 was schnitted for ANI sig.ature witn an coen C.A.R. in effect against etr=ccent su:':crts fcr.the Spent Fuel Heat Ex= bangers. ACCESS IER NFdCRI'ZD NLUE.AR INSFECTCR$ mis are ex.sista.ntly being denied access in the process of per-feming their duties (Ref. 939 f 362A) . 2.ree occassiens involved wit?.essing cf hydro tests. har?.sare asscciated with an N-5 I was presented.On 8/17/83 I was denied acce This is unacceptable a.-d is in ncn e:r.nl bnce with NA-5120, Six ANI have subjected the=selves to backgreurd checks ani psyche-Icgical testir.g to satisfy requirments for security access. Three ether ANIS have initiated caperwork to satisfy these requirements.
.MWX2 CF Q'lALITI CCCCMEF3TICN AND AVAILABILITY CF SME 10 'n2 AUIECRIZID !CCIEAR DISPEC"CES (1) 4 , There are nu:rercus instances of changes being made te precess 3.g. ' centrol records, hanger packages,. hydro test cackages, and 7, cther <*&nts after final acceptance by the ANI withcut bene-fit of concurrence of the ANI. Ihis is not accectable.
(2) on 8/17/83 I ebserved A:cna Indexec lurger packag6s in Aux. ' Sidg. Task Fcree that wre retrieved fran the Vault withcut voiding cf the cover sheet signed by C1'S and NII.
~_ _ . . _ .
(3) PrJerd Steam Boiler agreed that when ANI reviea of dor.r enta-tien was necessary for these reconis I the ANI would do that review in file in t".e P R Vault
; ult.
(a) Cn 8/16/83 Inspectcr H requested a hanger cackage for reviea to recencile an attaching lu.ger. He wcs dealed by vault persennel. (b) MI's censistently lack '. pace in the vault area to revied rec:;rds and coglete checklists. On 8/17/83 Inspec cr Hair and rayself had to stard ard e.ttecpt to forrevied recoif.s associated with an N-5 stdmit*d ANI signature. ItLIOCP & VEP.71ICAIICN CF /CCEPTABIE RESCILTICN CF CORRECT VC.AC ES2CESTS (1) A.R.M. Tillman, accer:vanied by myself, identified during his semi annual ANSI N626 Audit of July 13 and 14 deficiencies in
.: . ~
r
. e T
. mme== --
~---.
-_ . . . . . . _ . s. "'
** w:: ..+ :. 2 ~ . . .: l m m s*'*:. .
. ..'e d S Peport s 363 Dogo 3 af 5 I
1 issue, revisien, and fol'. ;p of C.A.R. 's S-54, 5-55, and S-56. Mditicnally 939's 261 and 361A recuested cremt i
- 1. s resolutien to C.A.R. S-54. 2.e status of these C.A.R.'s has
, -not changed as of 8/17/83~ - ~ _
C.A.R. S-55 addressed lack of crogram Centrol of c:rpenent
/
/.[(2) Drawings
- supports identified cutside the secpe of Pachanical Design and Specificatiens (i.e. Civil) .
I
! CPA addressed result was that ASE NF seis:r.ic su=perts for Spent Fuel Heat Exchangers had not been installed. Engirmer-ing respcnded that it ceuld not accect res;cnsibility fer lack l of identificatien of required installatica work. Additicnally Engirdering stated that MS 46A (Pipe Supports) was net appli-~
cable to this secpe of scrk and stated the " Design Drawing" was in the form of sketches to a DCA. (a) If MS 46A is net applicable, what is the apprcpriate design specification? (b) Installatien to sketches outside the secpe of Brown
' & Pect's Q.A. Pr gram is not cemitted.
(c) Subsequent installaticn of these suc;crts did not have y ANI involvement. 2.ey are not acceptable for Code t
' \ Certificaticn. m - = " _
../
RE.N. NUCLFAR Ihr.aTa.ms "O ICEMmru PFCGRMNATIC (ASME) NCN C34PLIANCE BY MMfCRIZED !
;g B 7, and. & Pect has censistently failed to initiate ccrrective acticn \
pcrts respend in a tirely canner to ANI ncnitcring reports and SIS Pe-(939, 932) that identify ncncc:pliance. D.is was identified by A.R.M. Til ban during thefANSI N626 Audits. Since that tire,;ANI's have , initiated fcur (4) follcWup 939's due to lack of rescense. CCNIPCL AND CLCSE CF }EN CNCFMING REFORIS ' j Dare have been several instances of clcsure of PG's by Quality : C:ntrol that were not supported by adequate verificaticn of c::meletien of process centrol documents. Additicnally en 8/11/83 P G M7599 Rev.0 was presented to ANI for closure cencurrence and was signed by the ANI. A revisicn Iavel 1 exists en this NCR and is still cpen. mis is the fourth instance of irproper cicsure of cu-fated NCR's in recent weeb. 24 aheve 1.as resulted in ANI review of "Hard Ccpy Dccunentatien" prior to ccncarring with closure. ' RECCNCILIATICN CF NCN CCNFCRENCES BY GES GRCUP - ANI's have been presented nunercus hanger cackages fcr FINAL PEVIW that still had ccen NCR's against them. These include supports that were ge.rarically identified en ta's withcut reference to rark nuters. When rejected by ANI's these were subsegmntly revised, Included were supper's that involved baseolates welded to, the centalment liner with no ANI involvement, suppcrts (snubbers) that attached to ncn cenfc=drq i Fisher Centrcl valve brackets. Additionally, N 5 Data Reperts have been signed when irpacted by geraric I G 's. Even thcugh these ite: s idencified cn generic NCR's may have been reconciled it is -not acceptable to execute e e _ _ , , , , . -e - * * - - * * * ' ~ ~
1
.-:._ =.
- m ..-
):=~. .. .;,,9
.,, , 3 sfur;g R*.'T5}b _&j l
..- . . - a,pxs e a3 rage 4 of 5 .
. 3 e* Data Frports in this manner. Prior s ANI acceptanc of N-5 Data Paccr:s ALL generic NCR's mest be clcsed. ~
.)
PEESD."A' TICI CF liANER PAC 4Vi' S 10 ANI'S FCR FINAL TCCD4 ,, (1) There have been several ire.;tances of ANI final review and
' acceptance of hanger cackages that were ICMPIrrE. Sub-sertuent to acceptance, Pecair Process Sheets ard other records have surfaced. In ene instance the N-5 Cata Peport had been sigrad.
(2) ANI's have rejected hundreds of packages with discrepancies ranging frem miner to major. Otese include no caterial' identificatien, raterial unacceptable (impacts en FW hanger), NPSI hardware in IIT hanger and vice versa, CCI walked hanger to wr::ng revisien of E. CPAWnG CWrPCL MD CESIC: CENIFCL (1) Site ANI's have receatedly identified Cn 939 Imnitoring reports ncn ec=pliance with dresing centrol. E M revisiens are ' still being cbserved in Task Force areas without precer staro-ing. - (Pef. 939 8 361 and 361A). (2) C/DFD dresings have n:.nercus inconsistencies. (a) .
- Not all drawings identify existing traterial (e.g. erbcd plates).
T. # (b) t, 7, Many drawings identify shi:s as primar'( sucpert re-bers. (c) Shims are not within the secpe of NF per MS 46A. Scre drawings do not reflect other supports (including (d) Class 5) attached to the stru,m. .:re of the su pert. Scme Class 1 drawings identift prirarf neters -(irpaces (e) :aterial traceability rec sirements) while others do net. Scme drawings en Large Scre Main Steam and Main Feed identify impact requirerents while other do not. I (f) Iarge Scre C's reference BEH1's fcr locatien but we are t:1d that BFHL's are net available in centrolled revised status. I (g) ! Small Scre CFD's are centrolled by GiH drawings but the GE does ret reflect the revisien status of typical i SU W s. ; (h) Small Bere dresings with Large Scre ntrbers are rat supported by either GiH or SEHL. ! (1) Suppcrtsidentified for revisien due to Code nca ccnfer- ) rance have not been revised and are still being walked l dcwn (1) and si rtitted fer final revies. Specifically: i Supports whcse baseplates were welded to the cen- ) tainme_nt liner without ANI involvemer.t were tc be l revised to change NF bourdarf. . (2) - St ports ccnnectai to Fisher Ccatrol valves were to. l be declassified to ncn ASME stacus. l
- (3) Diesel Exhaust Sepports were to be declassified to ;
ncn ASME status. ; e 4 e e
. . m. m.. _t. =s ' i I t":.1 @ *'~~~ T tv.r.""+*
-*-a {- ...-.'../5'.w*.,**s.**,'w w* ,_g..g,2 s_'[// N r M*,d
?. , . ,,
~
sI.9 repere a d3
, .- r. . tisco 5 of 5
. l 1
1
. MS CF SUPPCRIS IS$PEC"2'D AND VE~ ' 'ID CN 2CLTIFI2; IC DA A CAPIS i ' - .
sket=es as .- - rformed to Engineering hanger , nen e m fe mance re - mis is a result cf hundads of ! en reports by QCI's identifying en final walkdwr.s to "As Built" VCD/ tRD drawings that de suppert in-stalled does not match the drawing. This ranges frem minor devia icns te instances where c=fiyratica is totally different. ) te csuses inherent in the discrepancies
- e a i ar_ .:nents. "he ABC's can no lcnger accept "inprocess inspecticns a ;
of which have undergene as many as fifteen revisicns.to unintelligible otC's, Additice. ally, a many ' CC that totally danges c=nfiguratien of a supccrt cannet te ==sidered acceptable. ; CNTPCL CF r.SE3 NC's have recently teen forcal to decline ce sign pretast c=cr- i rence 6.'.e te varicus problems. Rece include ne prcvisien fer adecuate venting er viable alternative flushing and atte.'mt to conduct a test with a kncwn hardaare disc:epancy in the presse. test boundan. ' NA-346G u nmCTcICN CF CCNPLIABC
}'; In acc=rdarce vi d above paragraph de sita Audorized Nuclear Inspeccors can no lenger sign Cata Feper s, prelimina w review crocess centrcl dcc:rnentatien, review ar.d accept final records, ner perfc=
inprecess inspectices until Bron & Rect has 1.clenented Cerrective Acticn to reselve de ncn cer:pliances identified in this recert. To ! do so wculd mtit:2te acceptance of activities that d: net c=cly with the ASME Ccde. i e e l I i l e , l
- . - - - - - - - , - - - ,,w-- -----------x- -
~ ~
l
, . -- { .
- Brownf5Roct.Inc.
INTi.R0FyI ~ :EMO j TO: M. Coats, lANI DATE: August 24, 1983 i FROM: G.R. Purdy, SQAM
SUBJECT:
CPSES, 35-1195 Response To SIS #363. A. Execution of N-5 Data Reports (1) " ANIS have rejected the majority of submitted N-5's for inaccuracies, omissions, inaccurate hydro press,ure, BRP's unacceptable". - Response: As of 8/19/83, 73 N-5 Code _ Data Reports have been processed by B&R and the ANI.- Of the 73 however, caly 6 N-5's have been issued to signify the cocpletion of construction (including application of the NA-Symbol Code Stamp); the
! remaining 67 have been, processed to certify ccupletion of of individual isomeprics, regardless of the relationship to Owner defined system / subsystems.
The total certification scope of Unit 1, Ccanon, and Unic 2 within the Unit 1 Security Boundry potentially exceeds 1800 isometric certifica:1cas, 150 subsystem certifications, and 27 system certifications. As such, 3&R and the ANIS have processed less than 4% of the Unit 1 certifications. Our experience to late has precipitated the following ; action: (a) QA Supervision has reemphasized the necessity of completanass and accuracy to personnel involved in the preparation of Code Data Reports (Attachment 1); and (b) A program to review and correct isometries (BRP's), prior to presentation to the ANI for certification, has been implemented from the beginning of the N-5 , ' certification program (3/83). This effort has resulted ! in submitting to the ANI, drawings which 3&R considered adequate definition. The Codet requirements imply however, that a system of checks and balances be established between the Certificate Holder and the ANIA to resolve potential oversights. ; To reinforce the systematic completion of an ASME component, and to assure the proper drawing definition i of ASME components when not completely addressed by the Component Design Specification, Senior QA Supervision has been assigned direct area responsibilities as shown on Attachment 2. This progras is scheduled to s be fully implemented by 8/30/83. b a
. ..,'. Pag $ 2 of 14 i i
- 1 I
i i (2) "The Subsystem U-5 for SF-1 was submitted for ANI signature with an ! open C.A.R. in effect against component supports.for the Spent Fuel ' Heat Exchangers". Response: The root causa of this concern was communicatiocs and the ; thoroughness of QA review prior to submitting the package ' to the ANI for certification. The action described in' # itan A(1) should preclude recurrence and address 6s the l latter. 1 Further discussiens have indicated our interpretation of the Engineering response to C.A.R. S-55 was incompleta. As a result, the following are currently in process;
' a) The Engineering organization has reviewed cia.R. S-55, and has provided QA with a tabulation of design and process control documents for the identified compcuents; -
b) QA vill review the documents for compliance and' accept-ability to the B&R QA Program by 9/2/83. Any precess or document not in compliance with the program u111 be individually identified en an NCR prior to closure of C.A.R. 5-55; and c) CP-QAP-12.3 will be revised by 9/2/83, to require ene - QE~ group to verify that any applicable hardware related C.A.R.'s are closed, prio'r to processing an U.S '. certification. , B. Access for Authorized Nuclear Insoectors
" ANIS are consistently being denied access in the process of performing their duties (Ref. 939 #362A). Three occasions involved witnessing of ..
hydro test. On S/17/83 I was denied access to inspect hardware associated with an N-5 I was presented. This is unacceptable and is in concempliance with NA-5120. Six ANIS have subjected themselves to background checks , and psychological testing to satisfy requirements for security access. Three other ANIS have initiated paperwork to satisfy these requirements". Response: The subject of ANI access has been discussed within our organiza-tions on several occasions. In fact, A.R.M. Tillman has participated in at least 2 of the disetssicas and R.M. Thempson was present in one of these. We and A.R.M. Tillaan have agreed there is a distinct difference between " free access" (NA3120) and " controlled access" (USNRC Security). As also agreed, any- ' ANI access problems should be Lamediately brought to ths attention of myself or my designee in order to arrange access as required
- by NA-5120 and Section 20.0 of the B&R OA Manual. I was_not aware of the above access problems until they were brought to F
my attention via SIS 939 - #362/362A.
)- To resolve the concern of access however, the following action has been taken:
a) For those areas of the project under "RWN-Startup Access Control'!, the previously submitted response to SIS 939 -
#362A (Attachment 3) should resolve any ANI access problems.
4 s
=
r----W w - - - T - -- y -->g4-- to y" - y- - . -y-- - s -- ------- - , # y,y -,e- aq--im - +- - e e-- - ,-- --y---y %- -y
.'.'ega 3 cf 14 I would reemphasize however, that any access problems encountered by the ANI staff, should be brought to the attention of any personnel shown on Attachment 2. ANI utilization of this communication link permita us to resolve problems and preclude an accumulation of " frustration factors".
- b) For the " Fuel Handling Building",'in which total security has been implemented due to the storage of fuel, the Manager, Plant Operations, has provided B&R QA with a limited number of access badges (Attachment 4). Ihese badges are to be used by ANI/QA personnel in the verification, certification, and NA-Symbol stamping of the remaining Fuel Handling Building Sdbsystems (3). These badges do not permit access to fuel storage areas. Due to the sensitivity of fuel storage area susurity, and the linited scope or remaining QA/ANI activity, it is best to limit access. Accordingly, w'e intend to '
l issue access badges to yourself, Mr. J. Hair, or members of the QA staff directly responsible for building completion, C;. _Maistenance Of 0ualit? Documentation And Availability of Same To The Apthn_rfzet, Nucle'ar Inspectors i
-(l) "Thers are sunerous instances of changes being made to process control
- rec 6 tis, hanger packagas, hydro test packages, and other documents 4fger final acceptance by the ANI without benefit of concurrence of the ANI. This is noc acceptable". "
kespets a: E&R QA recognizes that it is unacceptable to change Code relates ANI accepted documentation without concurrence of the ANI. It is a Permanent Plant Record Vault (PPRV) progedure, ths changes to Code documentation must be made by B&R QA vich ANI concurrence..lI"f B&R QA identifies Code related docusents that have been changed after ANI acceptance,
- vichsut ANI concurrence, they will be identified on an NCR ar.d accordingly included in the corrective action program.
It is also 3&R QA's position however, that it is not necessary to icvalve 2&R QA nor the ANI in corrections to QA documents " which are not code related. Additienally, B&R QA does not 02nsider it is necessary to involve the ANI in the addition c; deletion of documents from the Owners PPRV, which will r.ot or have not been used to document final Code compliance of a component. l
' (2) "On 8/17/33 I observed Arms Indexed hanger packages in Aux. Bldg. Task l Terce that vere recrieved from the 7ault without voiding of the cover sheet signed by QES and ANI". ,
j Respotise t When all hanger packages were returned to B5R QA custody in
' early 1983 to implement the VCD/DRD Program, many of the '
3/ pachages had been Arms Indexed. Additionally, with the
" Full Package Concept" discussed in item H, packages may be removed from the PFRV to accomplish non-Code related activities.
_ _ _ , , , , ~ . . _ ~ , ,
l .. ... =-.- .-.:... . . - . -- -
, .Pcgi 4 of 14 To insure proper routing of hanger packages, when review is required, QA in the Task Groups will void the cover sheet previously signed by QES and ANI prior to resubmitting the package for ANI review.
(3) " Hartford Steam Boiler agreed that when ANI review of documentation was necessary for those records on file in the PPR Vault the ANI would do that review in the Vault. a) On 8/17/83 Inspector Harper requested a hanger package for review to reconcile an attaching hanger. He was denied by vault personnel. b) ANI's consistently lack space in the vault area to review records and complete checklists. On 8/17/83 Inspector Hair and myself had to stand and atte=pt to review records associated with an N-5 submitted for ANI signature". Response: As discussed in the response to item H, B&R QA will issue an isometric N-5 schedule by 9/6/83. Additionally, B&R will Laplement the ceardinated N-5 effort (i.e., support, pipe, and equipment) by 8/30/83.
~
It is one of the objectives of this program, to establish an isometric etacus baseline acceptable to B&R and the ANI. By agreement with the PPRV, this review will be done on an isometric basis, with all necessary documents being 'made available in the CDR review area. It is requested that ANI Checklists be prepared at this time, in sufficient detail, to preclude multiple document retrieval cycles from the PPRV. j
,D. Follow-up & Verification Of Acceptable Resolution of Corrective Action Recuests (1) "A.R.M. Tillman, accompanied by myself, identified during his semi-annual i ANSI N626 Audit of July 13 and 14 deficiencies in issue, revision, and I follow-up of C.A.R.'s S-54, S-55 and S-56. Additionally 939's 361 and 361A requested prompt resolution to C.A.R. S-54. The status of these C.A.R.'s has not changed as of 8/17/83". '
Response: As discussed during the referenced ANSI N626 Audit, the ANI concerns relative to issue, revision, and follow-up of C.A.R.'s were to be addressed by changes to the B&R QA Manual and CPSES QA Procedures. Concurrence with our
' proposed resolution to the above concerns was obtained when A.R.M. Tillman approved the QA Manual changes on August 3 1983., Additionally, the Laplementing Revision 5 to CP-QAP-17.1, Corrective '
Action Requests, was issued August 3,1983. 1 With respect to the specifically identified C.A.R.'s: i 1 a) S-54: The original response was rejected by QA following ' discussions between B&R QA and the ANIA (Attachmene 5). Due to the magnitude of the proposed mod-ifications to the Document Control program, the
, " action addressee" requested a response extension (Attachment 6) and, the response to the C.A.R.
was approved 8/19/83 (Attachment 7); we '
, . - --. . + - - . , . , . . - - .,-p , . , ,,_,m.<w .w.- w -. y w a .s%m-w,r -.
' . _ *J, l .. *-
- Pegs 5 of 14
\
. 1 I b) 5-55: This C.A.R. has been previously addressed in my response to iten A(2); and c) .S-56: As previously discussed during the referenced ANSI N626 Audit, this C.A.R. was " Voided" and never issued.
3 To provide a more cinely response to ANI concerns l (3IS 932 or SIS 939 Reports), a new '*Iickle System" has been implemented by the QE Group l Supervisot, which will require response action l 3 days prior to the requested response date. s (2) "C.A.R. S-55 addressed lack of Program Control of cemponent supports . identified outside the scope of Mechanical Design Drawings and Specifi- { cations (i.e., Civil). One addressed result was that ASME NF seismic , supports for Spent Fuel Heat Exchangers had not been installed. l Engineering responded that it could not accept responsibility for lack i of identification of required installation work. Additionally Engineer- l ing stated that MS 46A (Pipe Supports) was not applicable to this ecope )
.of work and stated the " Design Drawing" was in the form of sketches to
.. a DCA.
(a) If MS 46A is not applicable, what is the appropriate design specifi. cation? l (b) Installation to sketches outside the scope of Brown & Root's QA l Program is not permitted. (c) Subsequent installation of these supports did not have ANI involvement. They are not acceptable for Code Certification". Response
- This C.A.R. has been previously addressed in my response to item A(2).
E. Response To Identified Programmatic (ASME) Noncompliance By Authorized Nuclear Inscectors
" Brown & Root, has consistently failed to initiate corrective action and respond in a timely manner to ANI monitoring re, ports and SIS Reports (939, 932) that identify noncompliance. This was identified by A.R.M. Tillman during the ANSI.'N626 Audits. Since that time, ANI's have initiated four (4) follow-up 939's due to lack of response".
Response: A review of ANI initiated SIS Reports (932's/939's) clearly shows that.B&R has not failed to initiate corrective action when required. As indicated in the 7/13-14 ANSI N626 Audit Report (Accachment 8) however, B&R has not always been timely in responding to the reports l to indicate what corrective action was being taken. The concerns expressed by A.R.M. Tillman during the 7/13-14 ANSI
,- N626 Audit were addressed as indicated in our response, Attachment 9, prior to receiving his Audit Report on or about the 12th of August 1983. Currently, there are 6 SIS 939's which have not i
been closed: I e , l O e.s - = m, e , , , - _e
,, -,- ., ._, --n-
.: e.
.. Ptg6 6 of 14 -
s.
; a) 385A - B&R response requested by 8/24 b) 359A - Transmitted by B&R for ANI clos 2re 8/17 c) 360A - B&R response requested by 9/10
, d) 361A - Transmitted by B&R for ANI closure 8/17 e) 362A - Transmitted by B&R for ANI closure 8/18
^
f) 363A - B&R response requested by 8/25 (this SIS)
- Our records also indicate there are six (6) 932 SIS Reports that require response. In order to previde a more timely response to inquiras written on 932 forms, it would aid B&R QA if specific concerns were identified rather than generic observations.
To assure a more timely response however, the "Tf :kle System" addressed in my response to item D(1) will provide more effective tracking of SIS Report closure, or will permit a more expeditious request for extensions to ANI requested response dates. F. Control And Closure Of Nonconformina Reoorts "There have been several instances of closure of NCR's by Quality Control
, that were not supported by adequate verification of completion of process control documents. Additionally on 8/11/83 NCR M7599, Rev. O wa,s presented to ANI for closure concurrence and was signed by the ANI. A revision Level 1 exists on this NCR and is still open. This is the fourth instance of improper closure of outdated NCR's in recent weeks. The above has resulted in ANI review of "Hard Copy Documentation" prior to concurring with closure".
Response: In a conversation during early July 1983, we agreed that an exceptionally large numbers of NCR's were being generated against deficiencies that could be corrected as inprocess repairs in accordance with the.6/20/83 revision to the B&R QA Manual. The major ramifications of controlling inprocess deficiencies as NCR's were massive logistics and tracking problems. To preclude these problems, B&R submitted a proposed change to the B&R QA Manual to clarify inprocess repairs. The proposed change was approved by the ANIA and issued on 8/3/83, along with the necessary revision to the Laplementing procedure, CP-QAP-ll.l. Additionally, the following action is inprogress: a) The QE Group is auditing NCR status to: identify, resolve, I properly status, or submit for closure all open NCR's with an estimated completion date'of 9/16/83; i . b) NCR statusing will be directly provided by area groups commencing 9/16/83; and c) The implementation of the " Full Package Concept" on 8/1/83, further discussed in my response to item H(1), should preclude recurrence of the above concern.
./
I 1 ,' y .. .. _ . . - . . - _ . . . - . ~ . - . M -.~. . - - ~ . . .
-- _ . - _ _ , _ _ . ~ . - , - , _ . - ~_.-.._.,.__m..._......-- _ - . -
s 4b A . _ _ _ . 4.. < - . - .& .. ,. ~--. , ... . . . . .
.. ' itga 7 of 14 -
j .- J 1
.l G. Reconciliation Of Nonconformances By QE's Group i "ANI's have been presented numerous hanger packages for FINAL REVIEW chat i still had open NCR's against them. These include supports that were generically
- identified on NCR's without reference to mark numbers. When rejected by ANI's these were subsequently revised. Included were supports that involved 9
baseplaces velded to the containment liner with no ANI involvement, supports 4 (snubbers) that attached to nonconforming Fisher Control Valve brackets. Additionally, N-5 Data Reports have been signed when impacted by generic _ NCR's. Even though these items i'dentified on generic NCR's may have been reconciled it is not aeneptable to execute Data Reports in this manner. Prior to ANI acceptance of N-5 Data Reports all generic NCR's must be ! closed". ~ Response: With the exception of generic NCR's, all other items are repeated and addressed in response to items E and I. 1 Eight generic or multiple item ASME NCR's are still open at CPSES. The status and action on- these NCR's is as follows: NCR # Component Status / Action 2690 Hanger Packages not reviewed by ANI QE evaluating, but currently required to stay open until and of job by ANI. 3 2807 Unit #1 PDRF's i QE to verify action complace and submic for closure by 9/2/83. 3058 Unit #2 PDRF's - QE to revise CP-QAP-16.1 as required, and breakdown to isometic boundries by 9/30/83. 3597 Redundant PDRF identification QE to clear and submit for closure by 9/2/83. 3134 Mechanical OT's without ANI review QE :o complete research and disposi:1.n action, and submit for closure by 8/26'/83. s 5647 AF/CC repairs Nonconforming welds identified on these thru 5649 NCR's will be reidentified on specific NCR's by 9/2/83. H. Presentation Of Hanger Packages To ANI's For Final Review (1) "There have been several instances of ANI final review and acceptance of hanger packages that were INCOMPLETE. Subsequent to acceptance, Repair Process Sheets and other records have surfaced. In one~ instance the N-5 Data Report had been signed". Response: As you are aware, the program for the design, fabrication and installation of Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 pipe supports has evolved into one of the most detailed and scrutenized programs of any nuclear site. The changes in support criteria invoked through ASME Section III Subsection NF, and the expanded Regulatory Requirements invoked by IE Bulletin 79-14, has resulted in an extensive quantity of design change paper, process control documents and quality documents. ,
-- . . . - - - - . - , - - n - . - . - - - .- - , . - , . - , . . , , -
,,,,,--,.,,.y ,,nn.,.--- - , - . ..n-- ,nn., , .
i
+'
e - l
,- . Peg's 8 of 14 j
In the latter part of 1982, the Project recognized that the j finalization of pipe support design, fabrication and install-I ation had to be orienced to the VCD/DRD program. During the i first half of 1983 this program was implemented for each
.- support as the inicial VCD;*DRD was issued by Engineering.
However, due to the expanded requirements resulting from the copics discussed above many additional deficiencies were identified resulting in numerous process control documents. As a result of ANI, B&R, and scheduled completions concerns, Project General Management has elected to implement an alternative management technique. On 7/20/83, charter was given (Attachment 10) to establish a concentraced effort to complete pipe support installation and inspection by an integrated approach using the same procedures. The involvement of B&R QA, outlining interface functions and objectives, was issued 7/28/83 (Attachment 11) to personnel ' directly involved in the effort. During progran developement, we have attempted to keep the ANI abreast of actions and administrative decisions. As
. lace as the week of August 15, 1983, the " Full Package Concept" was discussed with the ANI, with the concurrent understanding the process would be instrumental in eliminating'some concerns.
Although historical packages are not totally commensurate with the current guidelines for format, these packages do in fact reflect "as-constructed" conditions and considering the referenced attachments - address ANI concern relative to package complete.nass. Prior to this ANI SIS report, Engineering Management and B&R QA have pursued resolutions to concerns of revising items already in the process of certification. Attachment 12 outlines the program intended 'to preclude these issues. In addition, documanced notice will be provided to the ANI of all packages withdrawn from the PPRV. Such notice will enable the ANI to be advised of " voiding" instances and monitor the " Full Package' Concept" program. (2) ANI's have rejected hundreds of packages with discrepancies ranging from minor to major. These include no material identificacion, material unacceptable (impacts on FW hanger) NPSI hardware in ITT hanger and vice versa, QCI walked hanger to wrong revisien of VCD. e D 0
,, e ,*-
- _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ , , - _ , _ , , , . . . . . . _ _ . _ _ . . . , . . . _ . _ _ _ , _ ,,, .p_. , _ . , , . , _
?*E3 9 of 1g 3
1' . . Response: With the implementation of the Hanger Task Groups, package i review by QES is taking place directly in the area. This
, review is conducted in accordance with procedure CP-QAP-18.2, and documented on a checklist, Attachment l3, developed and issued by QE. To establish a consistent package format, and resolve previously identified ANI problems, IMf 25,879 (Attachment 14) was issued 7/18/83, with your concurrence.
We have conducted a statistical studf of the last 660 packages submitted by QES, from the Task Groups, for ANI acceptance. Of the 660 packages, 59 have been returned frem the ANI (8.6%) for the following reasons: 8 Questions not problems 8 Missing load sheets & CPP's 2 588 material 1 Need CMIR's for Class I and impact items 3 Open QC Hold Points 4 Missing documentation 1 Material verified on MIL - not macching VCD - drafting 5 WDC in wrong side of package 2 VCD.- Drafting errors 1 Material not verified 1 Need new VCD - Dvg unclear 1 Incorrect Wald # for weld attachment 7 VT procedure @ and Rev. not on RPS 1 Incorrect Attachment 1 10 Shims verified but no WFML 4 Existing steel Dwgs Although B&R's goal is to provide a 99% acceptance race, it is felt that the problem is primarily documentation and not hardware related. To further minimize packages rejected due to documentation however, Document Reviewers will be retrained in the checklist requirements by 8/29/83. I. Drawina Control And Desian Control (1) " Site ANIts have repeatedly identified on 939 monitoring reports noncompliance with drawing control. VCD/DRD revisions are still being observed in Task Force areas without proper stamping. (Ref. 939 #361 and 361A)". Response: The corrective action taken in response to C.A.R. S-54, l was intended to resolve this problem and preclude further recurrence. It must be pointed out however, that when the C. A.R. S-54 corrective action was implemented, literally thousands of drawings were involved. It is not surprising that isolated instances occur in which hanger packages are found which cent.ain drawings issued under the previous 1 wey em s_ e epreeseo n e. =m
._ __ _ _ _____ " . _ . _ _ . _ , _ . - . , . __ __ . _ _ _ . _ . _ " = -
_ . _ . i . . E _., _, _ _ . . ._ . __ __. -__---.- - - - - - - - - -
, , Peg 7 10 of 14 -
s l l
; program, which had been in use and acceptable for years.
In fact, we have beed anticipating more drawings from the previous program since the changes in the Document Control prograin were implemented in parallel to the new Task Groups implementation, causing massive changes in logistics. Drawings issued under previous Document Control programs will be purged prior to submitting final hanger packages for ANI acceptance, as this item is specifically identified in step 3.C of Attachment 14. Attachment 15 has been dis-tributed to the appropriate Task Group personnel, to preview hanger packages prior to distribution by the Package Flow Control Group. (2) "VCD/DRD Drawings Have Numerous Inconsistencies".
.(a) "Not all drawings identify existing material (e.g., embed plates)".
Response: A DCA has been issued to Specification, MS-100, to reflect that all embed material is A-36 unless noted otherwise on the drawing, by DCA 18475. Engineering will review all drawings where embed material is not A-36 to insure the drawing reflects material type and grade; applicable drawings which do not reflect this will be revised prior to submission to the ANI. (b) "Many drawings identify shims as primary support members. Shims are not within the scope of NT per MS 46A". Response: As the Component Design Specification is the controlling document established by Code, B&R does not consider it necessary to backfic all previously issued drawings which identify shims. As drawings are revised, or new designs issued, Engineering will remove shims which are identified as primary support members, unless they are primary support members. - (c) "Some drawings do not reflect other supports (including Class 5) attached to the peructure of the support". Response: By Engineering Procedure, anything attached,to a safety class pipe support frame must be authorized by design change to permic reanalysis of loads. Supports which have items attached to their frame, that are not identified on the VCD/DRD have been and will continue to be identified as deficiencies by QA in accordance with procedure CP-QAP-il.l. i i
- p. ,.- ese r , w- _ s. p -
.._.s y_____. _ . _ _ _ , - m. .._.. _ _ . . - , _ . . , _ . _ _.
~
,, w -
- - Pega 11 of 14 (d) "Some Class 1 drawings identify primary members (impacts material traceability requirements) while others do not".
Response: As previously discussed, early NPSI designs differentiate between primary and secondary members. The remaining i CPSES designs do not take credit for the increased allowables of secondary members. Accordingly, although beyond Code requirements, material certifications for designs other than NPSI will continue I to be submitted as primary members. (e) "Some drawings on Large Bore Main Steam and Main Feed identify
- impact requirements while other do not".
Response: Engineering is reviewing all affected drawings to identify designs which require revision to indicate , impact test requirements. Additionally, the review will identify which supports contain material accepted by " Appendix G" calculations in lieu of impact. cests. Affected drawings have been reviewed, and will be revised if required prior to submission to the ANI. (f) Large Bore VCD's reference BRHL's for location but we are told that 32HL's are not available in controlled revised status. Response: .Much like a " Piping Composite Drawing, which is referenced on a BRP (isometric), the BREL is referenced on the BRH drawing at the time of final VCD. The piping composite and BREL drawings are for Engineering use only. The BREL is used to reflect support location , which is not required during fabrication and installation 7 since support location is shown on the BRE until the VCD revision is issued. j l (g) "Small Bore DRD's are controlled by GHH drawings but the GHH does not reflect the revision status of typical supports". Response: Small Bore typical drawings are issued by Engineering for incorporation into Hanger Packages by Welding Engineering. Engineering practice has been: (1) Not to revise a typical in a way which would physically impact previous revisions to the i typical; l (2) To issue as a "Special" any single typical which requires a configuration change or different installation criteria; (3) To issue as a new typical, any revision to a previous typical which generically requires changes to support configuration or installation criteria; and 4. f
- - - __ _ - -_ -- - - - - -, - - - . _ . . -. -. , . _ _ - . . , ,,,.,,y_, ,e..,,,_,y_ _ .,_y-., ,e,,--- -,. , , .
' ~
- ,1. . ._ . __ .._ - . . - - . . . - - - _ - - - . - --. --- -
Ptgi12 of 14 j (4) To notify the constructor of any Small Bore Support that has been made unacceptable by revision to a typical. Based on the above, the appropriate typical revision for a Small Bore Support package is the " Controlled Copy" of the typical placed in the Hanger Package by Welding Engineering, as currently issued by Engineering.
. Although generally practiced Engineering has incorp-orated the above practices into MS-46A by DCA 18,453
- Revision 1.
Additionally, QA Procedure CP-QAP-12.1 requires the 4 revision level of both the typical and location GHH drawings to be r,ecorded on the VCD/DRD Inspection Checklist. QES will continue to verify the recording of this data, during document review, in accordance with item 1.A. of Attachment 14. (h) "Small Bore drawings with Large Bore numbers are not supported by eith'er GHH or BRHL".
, Respdase: -GHE-and BRHL drawings are hanger location drawings oniv.
Small Bore drawings with Large Bore numbers are Class 1 supports. The support location is shown directly on the drawing. (1) " Supports identified for revision due to Code nonconformance have not been revised and are.still being walked down and submitted for final review. Specifically: (1) Supports whose baseplaces were welded to the containment liner without ANI involvement were to be revised to change NF boundary. ! (2) Supports connected to Fisher 'antrol valves were to be-declassified to non-ASME status. (3) Diesel Exhaust Supports were to be declassified to non-ASME l I status". l j . Response: Items (i)(1) and (1)(2) were reported on NCR's prior to this SIS. Engineering is completing the required drawing revisions, which will be
. accomplished prior to certification processing.
I Item (i)(3) had been addressed prior to this SIS by Engineering, Attachment 16. l
~
Component Design Specification MS-46A has been , revised by DCA 18511, to reflect that the Diesel Exhaust supports are ANS Class III, and are not subject to the Code certification process. 1 l
. ~. . -
p--,-_m-- ._ r -- - - - - - - . - - - -r ,,-.p ..yy,p y--- - _ , , , . .-. - - *u--y -m*e , '- - - -y--9Aeq iy----t- eewg w -ew--w.
I 1 .. . .- _. . . . - . . . . . . . - - . .
. Pego'13 of 14
.a J. Status of Supports Inspected And Verified on Multiple Weld Data Cards "ANI confidence in inspections performed to Engineering hanger sketches as revised by CMC is zero. This is a result of hundreds of nonconformance reports and inspection reports by QCI's identifying on final walkdowns to "As Built" VCD/DRD drawings that the support installed does not match the drawing. This ranges from minor deviations to instances where configuration is totally different.
The causes inherent in the discrepancies are a combination of inadequate inspections and deficient design documents. The ANI's can no longer accept "inprocess inspections" to unintelligible CMC's, many of which have undergone as many as fifteen revisions. Additionally, a CMC that totally changes configuracion of a support cannot be considered acceptable". Response: The historical aspects of the CPSES pipe support program are a reality, and must be dealt with by the best means available to assure Code and Regulatory compliance. Recognizing that the historical trail would often be confusing and cumbersome, the VCD/DRD program was implemented to: (1) Identify the "as-constructed" condition; (2) . Insure the "as-constructed" condition was properly defined through the Component Design Specification and detailed drawings; (3) Assure the reconciliation of the "as-constructed" condition
, with design' stress and as-built loads; and (4) Correlate a documentation package which properly supports the design, fabrication, and installation of the "as-constructed" support.
Unfortunately, many of the supports dealt with today are 1979 and 1980 vintage design, fabrication and installation. On those packages which are abnormally cumbersome, QES Document Review has been directed to implement a detailed index of documentation references to aid in ANI review of the package. K. Control of Tests "ANI's have r.ecently been forced to decline to sign pretest concurrence due to various problems. These include no provision for adequate venting or virble alternacive flushing and attempt to conduct a cast with a known hardware discrepancy in the pressure test boundary". Response: QA Procedure CP-QAP-12.2 will be revised by 9/2/83 to more specifically address QA and Construction recponsibilities, in accomplishing prerequisites to hydrostatic .rsting, prior to submitting pretest packages for ANI concurrence or requesting ANI support to witness hydrostatic tests. It should be noted however, that the referenced hardware discrepancy (are strike) although within a portion of the system to see test pressure e a "w _ . . _ , - , . ., _ . _ _ , - - , . . _ , . . . - - - --.,_. . . , - - . , _ . . . . ~ .
- - . - . . . . _ l e- .. *'
'Pzg3 14 of 14 i
. l during the retest, was not part of,the boundary for which the .
test was being conducted. Although not the'most efficient practice, the worst casa condition could only precipitate in subjecting the i same portion of the system, with a different area of interest, to 1 an additional recast cycle. L. NA-3460 Certification of Compliance "In accordance with above paragraph the Site Authorized Nuclear Inspectors can no longer sign Data Reports, preliminary review process control documenta-tion, review and accept final records, nor perform inprocess inspections until Brown & Root has implemented Corrective Action to resolve the Noncompliances identified in this report. To do so would constitute acceptance of activities that do not comply with the ASME Code". Response: Clearly recognizing the ANI responsibility and authority to monitor and verify the NA Certificate holders compliance to the Code, and the approved QA Program, neither B&R QA nor Project Management totally concur with the text or implications of SIS 363. Accordingly, B&R, Inc., as the NA Certificate holder, intends to take the following action: ( l. B&R will continue to perform Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 activities which by the Code and contracturally the ANI is expected to continue monitoring as required. Should noncompliances with the Code an/or QA Program be identified, we expect the ANI to specifically report these unsatisfactory conditions as required by the Code, the approved QA Program . and ANI contract; .
- 2. Upon reaching an ANI hold point on process control documents, the ANI is expected to accept or reject the activity based upon compliance with the Code and approved QA Program.
Should the activity be rejected, the ANI is expected to specifically identify the noncompliance; and
- 3. B&R will continue to transmit to the ANI, documentation packages for final and inprocess review; the ANI is expected to accept or specifically reject these packages.
7 G.R. Purdy (/ GRP/ba B&R Site QA Manager cc: J.T. Merritt R.G. Tolson D.C. Frankum B.J. Murray F. Burgess R. Taylor J. Finneran G. Bunt Houston - R.J. Vurpillat. B&R
- J. Ryan J.T. Blixt W.D. Tillman, Hartford J. Dittmar R. Siever B. Baker SQAM File J. Johnson . !
. . - - - . ~ . . _ . . . . . . . .. . - - = . , - , ,.m- , _ . - , , , - .. - _ _ _ . * - - - ,wy. ..- - - - ,
. ,: - Rthockr. ac 3 si w rnea. m
. INTEROFFIC. "DIO IMJ 26,055
'g TO: N.C. Smith DATE: August 18, 1933 FROM: C.R. Purdy .
SU3 JECT: CPSES, 35-1195 QA/ANI Access To Areas In Which Code Related Work Is 3eing Conducted, i This memo is issued to confirm our previous discussions en the above subject. In accordance with Section 20.0 of the B&R QA Manusl, and Subsection NA paragraph NA-5120 of the A$52 36PV Code, the A"I/ ANIS must have f ree access.co all areas of the site during the period of assembly and testing. By Code terminology, this means that the ANI/ ANIS must be permitted f rec access to areas until construction (i.e., N-5 Certification and Sts= ping) is complete. By our mutual agreement, it is not the intent or requirement of the "RWN" access control program to restrict the freedom of access for QA/ANI/ ANIS inspection personnel to perform inspection or carification activities. However, due to incorrect incorpretation of the program, several access problems have recently been encouncer.ed as cintlined on the accached ANI SIS Report. To preclude recurrence of this problem. (dh i it is requested that copies of this memo be distributed to personnei responsible for implementation of the " RUM" access control program.
~J/stc^<dls' G.R. Pur'ay /
~
Site QA Panager GRP/bm * .
\
cc: B.J. Murray
. D. Deviney g R.C. Tolson
- * ' M. Coats t
i e i i 1 l l
%d
. i e
1
. . ~ . . - . . . . . -. . _ . . _ . . . . l
~~
- ..w.
/? H ceen F 5
.. Brown & Root.!nc.
h INTEROFF;;E MEMO
; IM825,747 DATE: June 15, 1983 i TO:
Frank Strand / Bill Baker i FROM: C.R. Purdy
SUBJECT:
CPSES, 35-1195 Unsatisfactory Response To CAR S-54. As required by the Brown & Root, Inc. Quality Assurance Manual, Section 17.3 and TUCCO QA Audit Response Evaluation (dated 6/9/83), CPSES Construction Document Control, QA Audit File: TCP-68 (OTN-714) Concern No.2, "This office recognizes the fact that in accordance with established procedures activities affecting quality cannot be accomplished without controlled documents scamoed with the validating designation. However, had existing procedures been adequately implemented and followed, the document in question could not have existed. TUGC0 QA recommends that an additional refresher course be administered to those personnel whose job activities include the distribution or duplication of controlled documents". h.
'- Also, as required by Section 17.3 of the QAM, the corrective actions implemented to date are unsatisfactory and must be supplemented as recommended by TUCCO QA to include all personnel who distribute or duplicate controlled documents with a copy of the sign-in sheets for closure of CAR S-$4, TUCCO QA Audit File: TCP-68 Open Concern No. 2 and Hartford SIS 939 No. 350. ,
Should you have any questions or comments concerninR chis CAR, please contact Rusty Morris at extension,207 or 743. G3. Purdy oM/ 0 ' Site QA Manager CRP/bm
- 9 cc: ~
D.N. Chapman, TUCCo CA p,w. Mo~criar-vJe 4 JR &R;QL.' V **
., .__ . -.- .~ -
r_
..O .
$ t k hme., r *G
. Brownf5 Root.!nc.
-i A l INTEROFFICE MEMO IM - 25974 . August 4,1983 TO: Gordon Purdy FROM: W.E. Baker 5118dECT: CAR-54 Response Extensive changes in the document program are , currently being made including the revision of the document control procedure DCP-3 which has been issued for corrrnent and approval. I am requesiiing a 10 day extension on the response to CAR-54 pending the approval of the referenced procedure.
~
h/? AW
/W.E. Baker '
Sr. Project Welding Engineer WEB /tn e P.v . h
~
m-
. _ _ . . . . . . . /H fed me,J- 'l . , -
LiG ~~ Brown &P. at.inc. QUAUTY ASSURANC.. DEPARTMENT
~
CPSES CCRRECTIVE ACTION REQUEST
,,, $CJECT: JCB NO 35 1195 UNIT: 1&2 PAGE I C 1
' proutst No S-54 Rev. 2 Gnoup opo ANizAfioN S&R OA age.y out o Af t __ 6-14-83 AEFERENCE cocuMEMr:
CP-DCP-3 Rev. 15 coNoittom otsCm*fioN- . Paragraph 3.1.2 Controlled Coov Stamo and the control number entered in the shaded area of the stamp. Re Contrary to this requirement, the following VCD's (current revision levels) issued . to control number 098 do not carry any stamping nor do they have a control number: ,f (1) DO-1-DG-030-001-3 (2) DO-1-DC-030-005-3 (3) DO-1-DG-030-007-3 - (4) DO-1-DG-030-009-3 , (5) DO-1-DG-030-006-3 : (6) DO-1-DG-030-010-3 (7) D0-1-0G-030-011-3 Rev. 1: To identify additional Action Addressee. i Rev. 2: I To incorporate corrective DCC's and Engineering's revised responses with proposed action. -
-A :
atetv stoutsito smoM Frank Strand / 9. Baker iNittAtto 8v 7' Action AooRissgg - paosttr ca *.t.4:aGta caff 8 b CAust aNo CosalCTIVE ACTION:
. . j The investigation of this subject revealed that . . .
issued to the hanger packages by Engineering and not by the DCCthe . However, uncontrolled drawings !- were lishment of satellite DCC's.recceverence of this type of contr'o1 problem has been elimin trained in Revision 16 of Procedure DCP-3.Perisonnel operating the satellite DCC have bee ' P.S. ' that whenever any copy of a drawing off the originals that existEngine files, that copy is stamped by Cindy Moore's group. .in the PSE.,,,
~; ,,, , ,'l,, "* @.'7 '
f t i MEPaato ev - MV
/ NAME AufkoRf2to 8v AL I _
Naut (/ OAft CopptCfivt ACfrom vima:to 8v _. oef t l
..-oA 8tV'EW CLosuat 8v - ,
ST RIBU floN %y i w e
... _ y = p _- m p w w @ ! E . a . 3 s $ $ % 'L e % 9 W A p Hackment 8
& \
\
Houston Office 11104 West Airp...-- d. Sune 200 The Hartford Stafford. Tc:tzs 75 Sce2m Boder Inspection (713) 530-9883 2nd Insur2 rice Co. taes I August 8, 1983 Mr. Gordon Purdy Site Quality Assurance Manager
- Brevn & Root, Inc.
P. O. Box 1001 Glen Rose, Texas 760h3 tear Mr. P.:rdy: his vill confirm that an Audit vas perfor=ed on your activities at the Cc=anche Peak Steam Electric Station en uly 13 and 14,1983. Bis Audit was perfor ed to meet the require =ents of ANSI-N626.0 and the ASME Code. During the progra= vas Audit, made. a review of varioua phases of your Quality Assurance required. Overall, I feel you are i. plementing ycur program as or clarification:The folleving items, however, vere noted and require correction .. A. Non-Confor:ance Re; orts - (, 1. NCR fM6988S-Revisica 1
- a. This that NCR allows acceptance of a veld size smaller than shown en the 'iendor Certified Draving. "'he veld shown on the VCD is 1/k of an inch, ne actual veld size is 1/8 of an inch. Quality Control verified that 3/16.
three,of an inch is the maxi =:m possible veld size en sides due to flange configuratien. On the re=ain-ing side,1/k inch 1:s possible.
- b. The resolution to this NCR is " use-as'-is." In addit-ion, the NCR states " Design analysis safety factors are i.ple=ented ~
ecces." to acccunt for these di=ensiona.1 differ-
- c. The resolutica does not require a. revisica to the VCD to indicate the " as-built" condition.
In my opinica, paragraph k.h and 16.31 of the CA Manual require revision to design documents anytime the " as-built" condition changes.
- 2. NCR #M788'2S
- a. This NCR referrences a drawing in which piece #1 en the drawing is 1 inch too long. the tolerance referrenced
..- on the NCR is 1/k inch.
- b. The resolutien statec " Use -as -is."
Pne-w..~ 8:e et, ; p n M
,,- w _ ._ _ .-.,
- .vw .m,..9,. p et-.,
-.. . -. .<s..
.] -E~:--p--.;. G ,:dE d b 6 ' Y*
T ' I Houston Office !!10 i Test M p. d.. Suite 200 The Hartford Stafford. Texss 7*
%* Steam Boder Inspecuon (713) 530-9883 1^e mee E and Insurance Co.
i August 8, 1983
. Mr. G. Pardy l Page 2
- c. A6ain, there vas no =eans to facilitate the revision of desi6 n documents in order to shov the " as-built" cen-dition.
As ve discussed, the tolerance referected on the NCR =ay have been incor-rect. If so, this NCR should not have esen generated. If however, the NCR is valid, steps =ust be taken to revise spyropriate design docu=ents. In a discussica with the Site ANI's it was deter =ined that this is not an unce==ca problem. A majority of the NCRs' of this nature that I reviewed vere resolved correctly. k'hile the nu=ber of proble=s cf this nature is being reduced, I vill recc==end that ycu keep stressing to review people , that " as-built" conditions =ust be addressed and specifications cr drav . ings =ust be revised in cases of this nature. B. Corrective Actica Reports *
- 1. CAR-S-36-Revision 1
(-
- a. Neither the original nor Rev.1 vere signed by the Site Quality Assurance Manager. '
- b. Revision 1 of this CAR vas voided.
Vnile it is agreed that revisicas to documents
- are covered in the Docu=ent Control section of the =anue.1, this docu=ent is a special one. There is a description of both revisicus and =ethods for voiding NCRs' and in :::7 opin-icn, there should be a similar =ethod described for CAP.s'.
personnel, they ' revised and/or voided CARS' as they thought best.According to QE
- 2. CAR-S-55-P.evisica 1
- a. The sa=e cc==ent applies to S-55 concerning revisicas and =ethods of voiding as were =ade for S-56.
- b. The due date for reply for Revision 1 was 6-15-83, hov-ever, the Site Quality Assurance Manager did net sign Revision 1 until T-6-83. In ::;r opinion, the due date should have been revised as well as the CAR.
, c. If the due date of 6-15-83 is valid, Mr. coug Franka= is
' 28 days overdue for a response. QA is well overdue for their required follev-up of 10 days after the reply due date has been established.
EtY51 ete
- O
~
' p- Houston Orfice 1I104 Te=t .urport Blvd., Sutre 200 The !!sttfurd M2fford. T.w 7 477
- g,g scearn coder inspection sad Insurance Co.
C1.9 M0 '.'*14 A.igust 8,1983 ~ F.r. Gordon Purdy Page 3 - It is st.ggested c:rfection be made. a review of this CAR be perfor=ed and clarification or C. ANI Monitoring
- 1. De ' following =enitoring for=s must be ansvered or a re-quest for extension be =ade.
- a. Form #347 should have been answered by 5-5-83. nere vas no response as of T-1 -83, nor . ras there a request for extension.
b'. Fors #350 should have been ansvered by 6-1-83 An ex-tension was requested and granted to 6-10-83. There was no response as cf 7-14-83 and no additiona.1 request for extension.
- c. Form #351 should have been ansvered by 5-31-83. nere
' vas no response as of T-14-83 and no request for extens-(- ion.
- d. Form #352 vas to have been ansvered by 6-10-83. nere was ion. no response ss of 7-14-83 and no request for extens-Please respond extensian to these on the response forms as soon as possible or provide a request for date.
.. ,; D. Instructions. Prceedures and Drawings
- 1. In a review of a document called Quality Control *=*erk Instruction, tt.t following items vere noted:
- a. Se QA MLaual requires Quality Control Instructions be placed in mar.ual form vith a table of contents. In a review ef these documents in the with tt.: task force, no man,ual was found. auxiliary building In addition, Quality Control Instructions cust be approved by the QA Manager. No such approval vas fcund.
0
- b. These docu=ents vere not shown on the Controlled Copy Holders Listing.
i ' s . d~
,s- . . t-J :* ** St e .* i , t. . I I-t-
fg { . L .' h. N N 8' N+*"! M 5 W " V -
- ~~
p
% . + = = = #
e e .
.. a.
. H:usc:n Offics !!104 West .urport Blvd.. Suite 200 .
The Hartford Stafford. Tem 7?477 Steam Soder Inspection (713) 530 98m 2nd Imurance Co. 1666 ( '
; August 8, 1983 Mr. Gordon Purdy Page l+
- c. No Transmittals could be found for issuance of these docu=ents.
In =y opinion, these docu=ents snould be controlled in accordance vith Section 6 of your =anual. To ce, a docu=ent that is incorporated into a Quality Assurance Precedure at a later date, is inportant enough to fall under the title of instructions and as such, =ust be controlled in an appropriate manner. In a discussion with Mr. Ted 311xt, it appears *J.at these documents are similar to DC2fs'. If so they should be handled in a si=ilar =anner. If not , it is suggested that a description of these docu-
=ents be provided in the QA Manual.
i Please correct or clarity these ite=s to the satisfaction of Lead AltI Marvin Ccats. He is being notified of these items by copy of this letter. Your courtesy and assistance at the ti=e of this Audit .u greatly appreci-ated. Please thank all personnel involved. (- Should you have any questions or if I can be of further assistance, please not hesitate to call. You s truly, -
/ 4e% &
William D. Ti n Assistant Regiocal Manager SIS Divisica, Ecuston
~.ip..
2 .- p . VI7f/ad - Icc: Imad ANI Harvin Ccats 9 e l m3.* sie
- rs 1
1
. n ......v n . .w w s m . w m . w w = m = + a.
=- -. ---.. l l
. . . . . . . - - - . l
~
l l l
AN6chtnen 9 x BrOWW.fRoot.!rc. INTEROFr* . MEMO
, IMd 26,056 DATE: August 18, 1983 TO: Marvin Coats, ANI FROM: J.T. Blixt
SUBJECT:
CPSES, 35-1195 Hartford CPSES Audic Of July 13, & 14, 1983. After reviewing Mr. W.D. Till$an's letter of August 8, 1983. Brown & Root, Inc. has the following responses: Response A j 1. NCR #M6988S-Revision 1 is dispositioned to rework the under-si:e weld and to revise the VCD.
- 2. NCR #M78825 is dispositioned to rework / remove the excess length of piece #1.
Resconse.B
- 1. CAR-S-56-Revision 1 was never issued as the lack of the Site QA Manager's signature would indicata. This Revision 1 was voided as verbally explained to the ANIS.
- 2. The due date of 6/15/83 for Revision 1 was a typing error.
- It should have been 7/15/83. The follow-up of 10 days, per QAM Section 17.3 and CP-QAP-17.1, paragraph 3.2.5, is for investigation / verification to ensure that the required corrective action has been completed.
Resoonse C
- 1. a. Form #347 was responded to on 4/26/83 by J.T Blixt and was closed on 8/3/83.
- b. Form #350 was responded to on 5/19/83 by J.T. Blixt and ,
was closed on 8/3/83.
- c. Form #351 was responded to en 7/14/83 by J.T. Blixt and was closed on 8/3/83.
- d. Form #352 was responded to on 7/15/83 by J.T. Blixt and was closed on 7/18/83.
Response D
- 1. The use of Quality Control Work Instructions has been dis-continued.
O
- s. '
t
,m*
, ,.--.-~.--e.. .e.----o*~~~--**-~ e ~~ '*
*no
, ., , - ,, - - - ~
y, *. s i
.'- ., ,.IM# 26,056 (Cen:'d) \
Page 2 of 2 1 4 l
.j Should you have any question or if we can be of further assiscance, p. lease q do not hesitate to call G.L. Morris, Jr. at aztension 743.
a
~; e
\ >
V' "A J.T. 311xc QE Group Supervisor JT3/bs ec: G.R. Furdy R. Siever - C.L. Morris, Jr.
- QA File a
s i k d
~ .
F P 4 4 6 i e J g f J
.I 1
- h t
. '3 %
O S
,g,gp.+-
- w w =*- M w*M M'P*M # *- * * * * * * * * *'*
._,s .
**N '* **-"#**-* * "
g * .m 9 n.q
.-}
4 Al k he,e.a .:.Q
., . TEXAS UTILITIES SERVICES INC. ?
OFr!CE MEM 'ANDUM .
~
re Fred Burgess G en Raee. Tesas July 20, 1983
.3 siddece _ COMANCHE PEAK STEAM El.ECTRIC.STATICN ,
1-
.a 1
puroose ' a To establish the Comanche Peak Pipe Support and Oversite Groap whien will be responsible for organizing the Comanche Peak resources into an effective Hanger Team capable of moving hanger packages frem their present location and status to the vault; in the most expeditious mar;ner possible, not foregoing any of the engineering or regulatory requirements. T Charter The Pipe Support and Oversite Group will be headed by Fred Burgess.' He will be assisted in this effort by a full-time representative from engineering, construction, reactor building area manager, safegu6rds/ aur111ary butiding area manager, ASME QA,-non-ASME QA and a secretary. The Group is to define a process and an organizational structure with each function being described by role, scope, responsibility and author- .
. ity. Once each function or position has been described, then the group t, is to. appoint the most qualified persen to that positicn. All of Comanche r Peak is available to fill these positions. The people for any position '
may came from any organization, but once assigned to the position, the pgrson then is responsible only to the Hanger Team. The only exception - to this would be the regulatory requirements. The Group will meet ar. deemed necesrary by Mr. Burgess, but due t'e the i urgency of the pipe support problems, it should initially be a full-time effort. The Graap will be required to establish a sincle job-wide report for t: acking and statusing. Once the Group has been established the Hanger Team, it will be the responsibility of the Group to provide an oversite function for. the hanger effort and . resolve and/or ccrrect any problems. n v I arr. requesting that fir. Burgess recort on progress of- this effort no
. later than July 25,1983 and periodically thereafter as required.
j A 3 . h-
' . T. MerrTtt, Jr.
u f d Asst. Projt.ct General M , i i JTH: pew cc: B. J. .Murray G. Purdy 4 M. R. McBay R. G. Tolson , D. C. Fra-kun J. Oittmar J. C. Finneran R. O. Taylor ;
. F. Burges..
BRJ #1699 e
...a=. . - . _
, . ~ . - - - . - - . . . .
=.=w . .=. . c. .u ua = .= . , . . . . = ... :.. . . .w..
' s ' ' .,
Mfahmen 11 jj ..,f BrcwnO"RoCt.Inc. il'I INTER 07 10E MDiO J ~ 8 DATE: July 29, 1983
.0: Distribution I
~ *
, FROM: G.R. Purdy
SUBJECT:
CPSES, 35-1195
- g. Hanger Task Group (HTC)
,] Assignment.
.I ,
'4 Effactive 28 July 83, three dedicated HTG's have been established to
; cc.mplace safety related hanger design, fabrication, installation, and inspection in Unit 1 and Common. The staffing, objectives, and basic -
, process flow requirements for the HTG's have been developed and/or endorsed by the PS&O Group; this group is ccmprised of all interfacing '
organizations involved in the pipe support program, including QA g managenent. l i j Figure 1, attached, depicts the required QA/QC-HTG interface organiza- i
.; tion. The QA/QC Lead within each HTG will, as normal, be receiving '
- }4 day to day priorities and work scope assignment from Proj ect Management, ,
thru the HTG Lead. As required by 10 CFR 50 Appendix B, and Section
.III Eubsection NA of the ASME B&PV Code, the QA/QC Lead will report directly to the QA organization for implementation of the CPSES/ASME QA Program. Administrative matters will be directed to the QA organiza-
" tion, except for HTG verk schedule and' payroll timesheets which will be coordinated within the HTG's by the QA/QC Lead.
!j Figure 2 attached, provides a Job Description for the HTG QA/QC Lead. .
.. Each Lead shall insure that QA/QC personnel under their direct / indirect
- i supervision has a sufficiently detailed Job Description, endorsed by the j HTG, to assure:
$- a) The ability to meet HTG objectives; '
+
b) Time resolution to deficiencias which require QA/QC action; and c) A primary review of hanger packages in sufficient detail to assure that only satisfactory packages are transmitted from the HIG to QES. i: L'he QES fupervisor shall provide the QA/QC Lead with copies of all applicable transmittals dealing with hanger package processing external to the HTG. Additionally, the QES Supervisor is responsible for providing -any additional information to the HTG which is necessary - for HTG evaluation of package p,rocessing.
' - Av6 /
GRP/bm G3 . Purdy (,) Distribution: sic" OA M*A*E*r
/
T* Blixt B. Sims, (4) 5. Baker
~
, R. Siever B. McNellie, (4) J. Dicemar G. Bennetzen F. Burgess B. Murray D. Woodyard J. Finneran R. Taylor D. Snow, (4) K. Liford G. Bunt
- J. Ryan
> .< . ~4
- . .GIS RECOHD FOR MONIT0filNG QA/Q.C. M.. .aMS - CASE EXHIBIT NO.1.045
' 25) pin a.c.aTrono sTE.bt uolt.cx IssrucTic.. d Inst;nasc ct2 sit ast
, ,,4mm ,. m .ma.nwr ~
- i. gCNEor% "2_ % 7 R.JM i ,, , . . . ... .
. :... ./ .,
g we , n G w -bo v 5-= c.4. n= l .., 1.- I ir/n
....a-.auo ,=
ieI Em a :'17~~~ \ /4 I Cnn:;1* Cc:r 92:mc CN/J g a s / t w y >. n., , _2 . e lOsu. Ow.:,,,r,, u,,,G =- l1. the uncersigned n. ave meni steo your CA/CC manual on: and tend tr e following sections:
,G.e. "--^ . .no ,4s.ss .
b Vasatisf actory:,,...s,m..~..~..-......~..,.,
==-
f CLO4/t',./ [O b$.5
- 2-E-
u as i
$ , l YI (al g gp jg,,, A LL, / &&$ Ar '.b /.s],fod .gg,n.*4, ,
46./7/L /d )., C 40 ' if ,:> dMgM J' N* C;
- CUSTOM ER: .
Ptesse cesente the res:lutico of these items in thr; -CUSTCMER'S RESCLUTION nection teicw. and gi'. - Cate 'Or cam 013t*Cn of Corre *1ve ac*icst so that itgms may be remCrtstgred by: , M d8'/ D no .. i Please kees tat Original of thit form for ycur recorcs and return a cecy to ir sgector namec te!c .
* K ,"a.]5:$ fere.g:n~ Ins #I I*
I f*_a.'s. # t u.,,,, men. t n.s. /,"j /re
,.r > /x'"O ' "'
,au u - cum.a .m ,, unm..,, ec~..
>. .. s.. 80 SC2 2 E5RMS E_ t% s13 ,363 w
n gu
-5 ,
- u m
saa cu.,e .c . a u -nv , - ,
- u. .
ce a av.. . . ......... lma m, s .<.u. .m-%
- s. :. e s ef e/:ur/* c. .
dk0 .
- l. the undersig1ed, have ramenatcred the acove unsatisinte f t,, mgitions on, fffpf,/f_) _ __ 1 and fcunc taem: s s.tisfactory CUnsatisiacorp ffs&asa stow)
)
i s.~ ~ FC:A-85-59 l o,~. j,
- m. , . .
W !So - 2ra ui,/s., n . .,,,.,,,
,, ,,, u,,. _ ra f
,v -
-- f, lwi m.</fcgpU_ms>_/m_g /,',. . .(. _ . _ =
d
.tv. Iters 3,3 __ .
m ;
, 75 b'.a.) 'E!S RECORD FOR MONITORin ; g A./q . paos,1 TIIE li.CTFORD STE.ut SO!!.ER INSPECTION and INST.*RANC.c w..spANY // **
- u.sa n uxsi.rs m at72 JT a w '
[ _ __ 4 363 me. r-. we gu i( p t I Mr. Ger&r: Pt.rdt., Site (). A. ya. : ace:- - I, a
~
gy MW '1 a -- -- * - su enws nv . . , , ,n . , w.. n .nea.c m uss m ro f I' """'#"
- U r?CUSt"*n Ect *S'".cn tu e E'38'
~$
CPSES - Field Aegatr/ Glen TC33. Tar 2s .b3h88 'E A :emsty bAlteration Gie .- I. the undersigned, have men,tered ycur QA/QC manual on: 8/19/93
,c....
and finc tne fellowing secticos: s4=e aw=ews ene rmes L '3atistactory: E Unsatisf actory:ssr=Er ~oa,cc -( ,=.w . j om ..e, a. aea.ver-.=. .. .w >.e See Attac".ed. J IE o3 .
=-
JU p 6 ee 4 ' CUSTOME:t: o!
- P! ease cescribe the resciutzen of these stems in the "CUSTCMER'S RESCt.UTION* sect;en belcw and grv.
date fer completion of corate:ise actica, so that items may be remen:tored by* s om. P! ease kees the Original of this form for ycur receres and return a ecov to .nscec!ct named celcw. o's:me.',zm s.sn., p s a r..swer 3 et. ug/!',*:['s'.'8t,.. [ om,. o, = = um , . GU.* lwt s. cats
--,,,c,, ,c 3/1S/93 e)
. ... u ., 4 M -,,
4.p - 1 .
.S E G". Ai, A c. d .) 7:t.ft.se =cv456 . . . .
. 5E g.
;5 IE wt cr.aststric .cios en sa cr.mettrio 0GJ
,, m .
see am-o and> s.cwo a /2sk ausatsac s
. J.w ,721G,fe. _
- f. the undersigned, have re-'cnitored the above i.nsatisfactory concificr's en:
gf3gjgq and fcund them: m il satisf actory m ramo LJUmsat.sfJetry (Esalaur ceton; 2 - Ercan ti Pr.ct resp:nse to ncn cer pliances identified is accec,tzble e.<ce,:t
! for a few specific cencarns. See 932 #G.062. }
I Eua /E.',I..It.i'* ..
,, a,w, M', "D,/w/e ,-
M.7/M ,{---
i
~
. - . . . . . . ~ - . w:
. . . . :, .v.g _ws
/, . . .
sin twsert # 363
. - rege 2 of 5 l . * . t s E:GCI:~.CI CF N-5 DATA FIPC.tm ' '/
(1) ANIS have rejected the : ajcrity of stinitted N-5's for in-accuracies, cmissiens, inaccurate h'/dro pressure, EPP's un-acceptable. (2)
':he S@ system N-5 fer SF-1 was s.imitted fer RC signature with an ccen C.A.R. in effect against ca. cnent surp::ts fcr .de Spent Fuel Heat Dcchangers.
ICOSS TCR ALT 3.CRIIED NC.CIAR INSFECIOFS f0RCs ringare their cr.sistently being denied access in the peccess cf per-duties (Ref. 939 8 362A). ? ee cc:assiens involved witnessing cf hydro tests. hart.sare associated with an N-5 I was presented.On This is 8/17/83 unacceptable I was denied acta and is in ncn cmmliance with NA-5120. Six AN!s.have shbjected theselves to backgreurd checks and psycnc-icgical tasting to satisfy regairements for security acress. ? ee ethat l@Cs have initiated = aper.c:k to satisfy these regeire: ents. FA*. VIE:WC ALTIECRIZZD Nt:CIAR CFD;S?FJCCF3 CUAL'TY CCC.HENTATICN /G AVAIIABIL'.IY CF SME T D'E (1)
}
?.ere control are nt= arcus instances of Mgrecess
, hanger @, hydro tesc cae.tages, and '
t f c=ncurre. t (2) Cn 8/17/83 I chserved A=s Indexed hanger packages in Aux. Eldg. Task Fcree that were retrieved fr::m de Vault widcut voiding cf the ccver sheet sig .ed by CES and MC. " (3) ; Hartford Stern Sciler agreed that '.#.en ANI reviea cf dccr enta-i tien was necassary fcr these rec:rds en file in the PDR Vault i the M(a)C wculd de dat reviea in d e Vault. Cn a/16/83 Inspecter Harper reecasted a hanger package ' f r revice to recer.cile an attading harger. He was denied by vault persennel. (b) MC's censistently tek space in the vault area to revies records and ccrplete checklists. Cn 8/17/83 Inspectcr Hair and myself had to stand and attept to forrevice :ec:rds asscciated with an N-5 sui::.itted ANI signature. P Il.CWP T&i:ESTS & VERITICATICN CF IC2P"4IE PESCIL'TICN CF C:FTC~"IVE.ICIICH . (1) A.R.M. Till: an, ace::rcanied by =vself, identified during his se:-J. annual RISI N626 Audit of July 13 and 14 deficiencies in 0
- e. e D
~7 7 '._, ___ . _.. -. . . - ... - - - -- -
~
'r,f5 Report s 363 7.
. - ange J of 5 issue revisien, and fol'.
a cf C.A.R.'s 5-54, 5-55, and j (j
,~ S-56. MditienaHy 939's ;51 and 36,lA recuested cr==t l
resolutien to C.A.R. S-54. nct changed as cf 3/17/83. ?.e status of these C.A.R. 's has , ' (2) C.A.R. S.55 addressed lack of Drogram Centrol of w.p.ent supports ider.tified cutside the secpe of Meenanical Cesign - Drawings and Specificaticns (i.e. Civil) . Cne addressed result was that ASPE NF seismic su=ccrts for Spent Fuel Heat Exchangers had not been irstalled'. Engirmer-ing respended that it ceuld not accact respensibilirt for lack i of identificatien of .@ed instanatien wrk. ; ditienany Engineering stated that MS 46A (Pipe Suppcrts) was nct appli-cable to this secpe of wedc and stated the " Design Drawing" was ; in the form of sketctas to a DCA.
- (a) If MS 46A is net applicable, what is the acpropriate i
, design specification?
(b) Instanatien to sketches outside the sc=pe of arcwn
' & Root's Q.A. Program is nct cemitted.
(c) Subsequenn insta11atica cf t!Ase sucperts did not have ANI invcivement. 2.ey are net acceptable fcr Ccde e Certificaticn. , RESPCNSE TO ICDiaru PROGRA49CC (ASSE) DG CCMPIIANCE SY AT.;THORIIED i NGCT.ZAR DEPECICES
?
;g Brown t Roet has censistently failed to initiate su...crive acticn l
7, and
,' ports (939, wai in 932) a timely ranner to ANI nenitcring repcrts and SIS Pe-that identify ncnempliance. D.is was identified by A.R.M. Tillman during the ANSI N626 Audits. Since that t:Lme,. ANI's have ,
faitiated fcur (4) folicwup 939's due to lack cf ruscense. C:2Cact. AND C fS*GE CF NCN 02&CRCiG REPCRIS *
' 2.are have been several instances of cicsure of NCR's by @alief Cmtrol that were not supported by adequate verificaticn o.! cmcletien of process centrol documents. AdditicnaHy en 8/u/83 NCA M7599 Rev.0 -
i was presented to ANI for closure cc.currence and was signei by the ANI. i A revisicn Iavel 1 exists cn this NCR ard is stin cpen. Ihis is A - fourth irstance of irpr per clesure of cutdated NCR. 's in recent weeks. j ?.e to ccccurring above haswith resulted closure. in ANI review of "Hard Ccpy n~=ntr. tion" prior l REIINCII.IATICN CF 1G CCNFCRPANCES SY CES GRCUP s. ANI's have been presented nunercus hanger cackages for FnnI. REVIEN ! that stin had ocen NCR's against them. DAsG include suppCrts that , wre generically identified en NCR's withcut reference to mark nirbers. [
; When rejected 'cy ANI's these were subsequently revised. Included were
- supports that involved baseelates welded to, the centairrent liner with no AN'
! involvement, supports (snubbers) that attached to een ecnfc=ning Fisher Centrol valve brackets. Mditionally, N 5 Data Paports have been 4 't i sigrad when inpacted by generic NCR's. Even ttough these ites identified ; j en ger4ric NCR's may ha1.3 been recenciled it is not acceptable to execute i 1 1 ) j 1 4 m. i,.. , w
- r ~yw-+ ~----n, ,,-a- -
- - , , - , - - - , - , ,r, -,,y n,,,7r,-, ,s s,,.., y~ .,v. , ..--g-ge.--.+n ,_.p.,_~eng.,mp-, e,we- ,g,-- -,,.,og-,y.-
n.
- . _- _. ... y:.m ..
..;;seaa.
*-a
-. .s re,*T.OT.
- s. v.
4(*/YJ
/*. . .
. ~- .
wJ W ec
- Ju3 suge 4 of 5
, i Cau Fepert.3 in this rar.nsr. Pric:
;e' ALL generic 3"R's t":st be clcsed. . MI acenotanca
- of N-5 Cata ?c:crts
/
PFF.5D.TA!!CI C' FAN'GR PACLVES 'nJ MC'S FOR FINAL Tu C' , (1) i " hem have been several instances cf WI final revies a:d
- accepance of hanger cackzges that sure IEC2'.Pr.IIE. Sub-serment to accectance, Pe.: air Precess Sheets and cther records ha m surfaced. In ene instance the N-5 Cata Repcrt had been
! signed.
(2) NC's have ru;ected hundreds cf cackages with discrecancies ranging f:=n mince to najcr. W.ese incluce no material identificatien, material wveceptable (f.gets en FW har.ger), FMI hardeare i;t MT hanger and vice versa, QCI walked hanger to wrcng revisien ci C . CPMDG CChTEL MD DESIGI C;trPcL (1) Site MI's have rereacedly identified en 939 ::enit:: ring raccrts ncn cc:pi.iar.ca with d:rwing centrel. C/DFD revisiens are , still being chsermd in Task Fcree areas withcut preter sta.:> - ing. (Paf. 939 8 361 ard 361A) . (2) C/DFD dresings have rtrrercus inc=nsistencies. (a) .
- Not all draaings identif/ existing caterial (e.g. c ced plates),
T. 7e (b) Pany drraings iden:ift shir:s as primary su=ccrt tre-hers. Shirs are not within the sccpe of NF per MS 46A. (c) - Scre der 4ngs do not reflect other supports (including (d) Class 5) attached to the struc=are of the st. pert. - Scne Class 1 dradeqs identift crir.s y meters (i. pacts (e) racerial traceabiliet regare: ents) while ct'.ers do not.
~
Scre d rsings en Large Scre Main Steam and Main Feed identiff 1:;act requirerrents while other do not. (f) IArge Eore C's reference SFH1's for locaticn but we are told stat
- y. vised that=s.
BTHL's are net available in cent clied ' (g) Small Scre CFD's are centrolled by G d drawings but t'.e GGI dces nct reflect the revisicn status cf e/pical sucpert:3. (h) Strall Scre drrsings with Large Scre ntriers are r.cc sucperted by either GUI or SFi!I.. (1) ScFpertsidentified fer revisicn due to Ccde t.cn ccnfer-i rance have not been revised and are still beine wal'<ad dcut (1) and submitted for final revies. Scscifically: \ to be revised to change NF boundarf. (2) he c='nccteri to Fisher Cent cl valves kure to. (3) were to be F N W e 4 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __m._, - -
i
..~.... ......m.. .
. w. _(..u _. .D CIM'- m?.*
l .'. . .
- sis caper:
- 46.1
. . esce 5 cf S l
, , ST.,*C.'S CF S'JPC.CS I:GPEC;"l3 A O VI- ' ~D CN .\M."*!?2 hT*.3 CATA CAFIS
- i' ncn c
- nfc=ance repor.ts and s 'Ihis is a result of hundreds of final wad:dcw.s to "As Suilt" VO/CFD drraings tha*. .cien re;:cres by CCI's identifying i
s e t 11 . 'e. . The causes inherunt in the discrepancies are a c=binatien of q inadequate inspecticns and deficient design dec:.=ents. 6
- c. wu.cn . ve , rany rg -.e as rany as . Addit:.cnally, a C:C that totally changes ccnfigura .t .. cannet he c=sidered acceptable.
C2CPCL CF ':"!.STS A!C's have .utly been forced to deci.L.e to sign pretest cene.=- rence due to varicus ;.rchles. These include no previsicn for adecuate venting er viable alternative flushing and attet to cenduct a st with a 'ecwn hardware discrepancf in the presst.=e test tor-d.ary. i NA-3460 uuacATICN CF CCMPLIANCE
%' In ac crdance with ahew paragraph the Site Auth=rired thelear Inspect =rs can no icnger sign Cata Pacerts, pruit".1.a::V revies crocess -
c::ntr:1 dec=nentatien, revies and accept final reccrds, ner perf:rm
- 1. process inspecticas until Srewn t. Pcet has 1.plerented Cerrective Acticn to resolve the een c mpliances identified in this reocr.. Tc db se v:uld ccnstitute acceptance cf activitics that do nct ecmly with the ASW Ccde.
t l l l e e
^
. l
, _ _ _ . - _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - ----- - - ~ -'~~"~~" ""-~~~~ ~ ~~'~~~~ ' ~
- j. , *
- BrownCrRoot.Inc.
1 INTEROFTI: MEMO t TO: M. Coats, LANI DATE: August 24, 1983 FROM: G.R. Purdy, SQAM
SUBJECT:
CPSES, 35-1195 i Response To SIS #363.
'l . A. Execution of N-5 Data Reoorts (1) " ANIS have rejected the majority of submitted N-5's for inaccuracies, omissions, inaccurate hydro press,ure, BRP's unacceptable".
Response: As of 8/19/83, 73 N-5 Code Data Reports have been processed by B&R and the ANI.* Of the 73 however, only 6 N-3's have been issued to signify the completion of construction (including application of the NA-Symbol Code Stamp); the remaining 67 have been processed to certify completion of of individual isometries, regardless of the relationship to owner defined system / subsystems. The total certification scope of Unit 1, Common, and Unit 2 within the Unit 1 Security Boundry potentially exceeds 1800 isometric certifications,150 subsystem certifications, and 27 system certifications. As such, B&R and the ANIS have processed less than 4% of the Unit 1 certifications. Our experience to date has precipitated the following action: i (a) QA Supervision has reemphasized the necessity of completeness and accuracy to personnel involved in the l preparation of Code Data Reports (Attachment 1); and ! (b) A program to review and correct isometrics (3RP's), prior to presentation to the ANI for certification, l has been implemented from the beginning of the N-5 ! certification program (3/83). This sffort has resulted { in submitting to the ANI, drawings which B&R considered ! adequate definition. The Code requirements imply 1 however, that a system of checks and balances be established between the Cartifidate Holder and the ANIA to resolve potential oversights. To reinforce the systematic completion of an ASME component, and to assure the proper drawing definition of ASME components when not completely addressed by ' the Component Design Specification, Senior QA Supervision has been assigned direct area responsibilities as shown on Attachment 2. This program is scheduled to be fully implemented by 8/30/83.
. . . . ~
m n .-- --,e- -- - - - - - - ,, , - . - . ,, - ,, - . , , , , , - , , - -
,n,-nn .-
-- 4 . n .,.-,. ..
~ . _ . . - . . . . . . . - - - -- -
. . ptg6 2 of 1c c.
t i (2) "The Subsystem N-5 for S7-1 was submitted for ANI signature with an open C. A.R. in effect against component supports for the Spent Fuel
- H6at Exchangers".
Response: The root cause of this concern was communications and the thoroughness of QA review prior to submitting the package i to the ANI for certification. The action described in 1' item A(1) should preclude recurrence and addresses the j latter. Further discussions have indicated our interpretation of the Engineering response to C.A.R. S-55 was incomplete. As a i result, the following are currently in process:
- a) The Engineering organization has reviewed C. A.R. S-55, and has provided QA with a cabulation of design and process control documents for the identified components; b) QA will review the documents for compliance and accept-ability to the B&R QA Program by 9/2/83. Any process or document not in compliance with the program will be individually identified on an NCR prior to closure of 4 -
C.A.R. 5-55; and c) CP-QAP-12.3 will be revised by 9/2/83, to require the QE group to verify that any applicable hardware related C.A.R.'s are closed, prio'r to processing an N-5 certification. '
- 3. Access for Authorized Nuclear Insceetors
" ANIS are consistently being denied access in the process of performing their duties (Ref. 939 #362A). Three occasions involved witnessing of hydro test. On 8/17/83 I was denied access to inspect ha-dware associacsd with an N-5 I was presented. This is unacceptable and is in noncompliance with NA-5120. Six ANIS have subjected themselves to background checks and psychological testing to satisfy requirements for security access.
Three other ANIS have initiated paperwork to satisfy these requirements". Response: The subject of ANI access has been discussed within our organiza-tions on sevc al occasions. In fact A.R.M. Tillman has participated in at least 2 of the discussions and R.M. Thompson was present in one of thesa. We and A.R.M. Tillman have agreed there is a distinct difference between " free access" (NA3120) and " controlled access" (USNRC Sacurity). As also agreed, any ANI access problems should be immediately brought to the attention i of myself or my designee in order to arrange access as required I i by NA-5120 and Section 20.0 of the B&R QA Manual. I was not aware of the above access problems until they were brought to my attention via SIS 939 - #362/362A. To resolve the concern of access however, the following action has been taken: ~
^
a) For those areas of the project under "RWN-Startup Access 2 Control'!, the previously submitted response to SIS 939 -
#362A (Attachment 3) should resolve any ANI access problems.
, , , . - - - - - - - - . - . . - --7 ,,m- y, -,mm#,._____,.---,w-.---,, , - - ,gy,..,yv,-,,y, ,e v,,p,,,,,---,--+,'y-
,-v,- w,, =- w w-+-
,' css 3 of 14 l
l. I would reemphasize however, that any' access proble=s encountered by the ANI staff, should be brought to the attention of any personnel shown on Attachment 2. ANI utilization of this communication link permits us to resolve 1 problems and preclude an accumulation of " frustration
, factors".
b) For the " Fuel Eandling Buil. ding", in which total security has been implemented due to the storage of fuel, the Manager, Plant Operations, has provided B&R QA with a limited number of. access badges (Attachment 4). These badges are to be used by ANI/QA personnel in the verification, certification, and NA-Symbol stamping of the remaining Tuel Handling Building
-~
Subsystems (3). These badnes do not oermit access to fuel storage areas. Due to the sensitivity of fuel storage area sucurity, and the limited scope or re=aining QA/ANI activity, it is best to limit access. Accordingly, we intend to issue access badges to yourself, Mr. J. Hair, or members of the QA staff directly responsible for building completion. C. Maintenance of Ouslity Documentation'And Availability Of Same To The Authorized Nuclear Inscoctors (1) "There are numerous instances of changes be'ing made to process control records, hanger packages, hydro test packages, and other deemsents af ter finni acceptance by the ANI without benefit of concurrence of the ANI. This is not acceptable". Response: B&R QA recognizes that it is unacceptable to change Code related ANI accepted documentation without concurrence of the ANI. It is a Permanent Plant Record Vault (PPRV) procedure, that changes to Code do,cumentation must be made i by B&R QA with ANI concurrence.. If B&R QA identifies Code related documents that have been changed after ANI acceptance, without ANI concurrence, they will be identified en an NCR and accordingly included in the corrective action program. It is also B&R QA's position however, that it is not necessary to involve B&R QA nor the ANI in corrections to QA documents
' which are not code related. Additionally, B&R QA does not {
consider it is necessary to involve the ANI in the addition . ' or deletion of documents from the Owners PPRV, which will
-not or have not been used to document final Code compliance of a component. -
(2) "On 8/17/83 I observed Arms Indexed hanger packages in Aux. Bldg. Task Force that were retrieved from the Vault without voiding of the cover sheet signed by QES and ANI". Response: tihen all hanger packages were returned to B&R QA custody in
- early 1983 to implement the VCD/DRD Program, many of the packages had been Arms Indexed. Additionally, with the
" Full Package Concept" discussed in item H, packages may
~; .
be removed from che PPRV to accomplish non-Code related activities. 8 *
* ~
-~.;- .
. . _ _ __ . . _ _ _ _ _ . ~ . _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ - - - _ . _
3
, l. .
.Pcgo 4 of 14 i
, To insure proper routing of hanger packages, when review is required, QA in the Task Groups will void the cover sheet previously signed by QES and ANI prior to resubmitting the package for ANI review.
(3) "Eartford Stesa Boiler agreed that when ANI review of documentation was necessary for those records on file in the PPR Vault the ANI would do that review in the Vault. a) on 8/17/83 Inspector Harper requested a hanger package for review to reconcile an attaching hanger. He was denied by vault personnel. b) ANI's consistently lack space in the vault area to review records and complete checklists. On 8/17/83 Inspector Hair and myself had to stand and attempt to review records associated with an N-5 submitted for ANI signature". - Response: As discussed in the response to item H, B&R QA will issue an isometric N-5 schedule by 9/6/83. Additionally, B&R will implement the coordinated N-5 efforr (i.e., support, pipe, and equipment) by 8/30/83. It is one of the objectives of this progr.m. to establish an isometric status baseline acceptable to B&R and the ANI. By agreement with the PPRV, this review will tv done on an isometric basis, with all necessary documents being made available in the CDR review area. It is requested that ANI Checklists be prepared at this time, in sufficient- detail, to preclude multiple document retrieval cycles from the PPRV. D. Follow-un & Verification Of Accentable Resolution Of Corrective Action Recuests (1) "A.R.M. Tillman, accompanied by myself, identified (2 ring his semi-annual ANSI N626 Audit of July 13 and 14 deficiencies in issue, revision, and follow-up of C.A.R.'s S-54, S-55 and S-56. Additionally 939's 361 and 361A requested prompt resolution to C.A.R. 5-54. The status of these C.A.R.'s has not changed as of 8/17/83". Response: As discussed during the referenced ANSI N626 Audit, the ANI concerns relative ~ to issue, revision, and follow-up of C.A.R.'s were to be addressed by changes to the B&R QA Manual and CPSES QA Procedures. Concurrence with our proposed resolution to the above concerns was obtained when A.R.M. Tillman approved the QA Manual changes on August 3, i 1983. Additionally, the implementing Revision 5 to CP-QAP-17.1, l 9 Corrective Action Requests, was issued August 3,1983. '
, With respect to the specifically identified C.A.R.'s: l l
a) S-54: The original response was rejected by QA following ! discussions between B&R QA and the ANIA (Attach =ent l
~5). Due to the magnitude of the proposed mod-ifications to the Document Control program, the
' " action addressee" requested a response extension (Attachment 6) and, the response to the C.A.R.
j , was approved 8/19/83 (Attachment 7); .
. _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ._.__m .._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ..
-1 _ _ - _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . . . _ .
'Ptgo 5 of 14 b) S-55: This C.A.R. has been previously addressed in ny response to item A(2); and c) S-56: As previously discussed during the referenced ANSI N626 Audit, this C.A.R. was " Voided" and never issued.
To provide a more timely response to ANI concerns (SIS 932 or SIS 939 Reports), a new " Tickle System" has been implemented by the QE Group Supervisor, which will require response action 3 days prior to the requested response date. (2) "C.A.R. 5-55 addressed lack of Program Control of compenent supports identified outside the scope of Mechanical Design Drawings and Specifi-cations (i.e., Civil). One addressed result was that ASME NT seismic supports for Spent Tual Heat !zchangers had not been installed. Engineering responded that it could not accept responsibility for lack of identification of required installation work. Additionally Engineer-ing stated that MS 46A (Pipe Supports) was not applicable to this scope of work and stated the " Design Drawing" was in the form of sketches to a DCA. (a) If MS 46A is not applicable, what is the appropriate design specification? (b) Installation to sketches outside the scope of Brown & Root's OA Program is not permitted. (c) Subsequent installation of these supports did not have ANI . involvement. "They are not acceptable for Code Certification" . Response: This C.A.R. has been previously addressed in my response to iten A(2). 1 E. Response To Identified Programmatic (AShE) Noncempliance 3v Authorized Nuclear Inscectors l "3rown & Root, has consistently failed to initiate corrective action and respond in a timely manner to ANI monitoring . reports and SIS Reports (939, 932) that identify noncompliance.. This was identified by A.R.M. Tillman during the ANSI N626 Audits. Since that time, ANI's have initiated four (4) follow-up 939's 'due to lack of response". Response: A review of ANI initiated SIS Reports (932's/939's) clearly shows that B&R has not failed to initiate corrective action when required. As indicated in the 7/13-14 ANSI N626 Audit Report (Attachment 8) however, B&R has not always been ti=ely in responding to the reports to indicate what corrective actica was being taken. The concerns expressed by A.R.M. Till=an during the 7/13-14 ANSI N626 Audit were addressed as indicated in our response, Attachment l 9, prior to receiving his Audit Report on or about the 12th of l August 1983. Currently, there are 6 SIS 939's which have not ' been closed: l
~
.- ..;,_,.. .-r- . _
i . . _ _ . _.... - __. _ .
' .Ptge 6 of 14 I
I l l a) 383A - 3&R response requested by 8/24 i b) 359A - Transmitted by B&R for ANI closure 8/17 c) 360A - 3&R response requested by 9/10 d) 361A - Transmitted by 3&R for ANI closure 8/17 e) 362A - Transmitted by 3&R for ANI closure 8/18 f) 363A - B&R response requested by 8/25 (this SIS) Our records also indicate there are six (6) 932 SIS Reports that require response. In order to provide a more cinely response to inquires vricten on 932 forms, it would aid 3&R QA if specific concerns were identified rather than generic observations. To assure a more timely response however, the " Tickle System" s addressed in my response to item D(1) will provide more effective tracking of SIS Report closure, or will permit.a = ore expeditious request for extensions to ANI requested response dates. F. Control And Closure Of Nonconforming Reoorts "There have been several instances of closure of NCR's by Quality Control that were not supported by adequate verification of completion of process control documents. Additionally on 8/11/83 NCR M7599, Rev. O was presented to ANI for closure concurrence and was signed by the ANI. A revision Level 1 exists on this NCR and is still open. This is the fourth instance of improper closure of outdated NCR's in recent weeks. The above has resulted in ANI review of "Hard Copy Documentation" prior to concurring with closure". Response: In a conversation during early July 1983, we agreed that an exceptionally large numbers of NCR's were being generated against deficiencies that could be corrected as inprocess repairs in accordance with the 6/20/83 revision to the S&R QA Manual. Tha major ramifications of controlling inprocess deficiencias as NCR's were massive logistics and tracking problems. To preclude these problems, 3&R submitted a proposed change to the 3&R QA Manual to clarify inprocess repairs. The proposed change was approved by the ANIA and issued on 8/3/.83, along with the necessary revision to the implementing procedure, CP-QAP-il.1. Additionally, the following action is inprogress: a) The QE Group is auditing NCR status to: identify, resolve, properly status, or submit for closure all open NCR's with an estimated completion date of 9/16/83; b) NCR statusing will be directly provided by area groups commencing 9/16/83; and c) The L=plementation.of the " Full Package Concept" on 8/1/83, further discussed in my response to item H(1), should preclude recurrence of the above ccacern. i I
. . . . - . .1 ....,._.-._.-.;..
. _ ._~ ,
1 . _ . . . _ . _ _ _ . _ .. -- - j/,'s' i legs 7 of 14 G. Reconciliation Of Noncenfor=ances Bv QE's Greuo
' "ANI's have been presented numerous hanger packages for FINAL REVIEW that still had open NCR's against them. These include supports that were generically identified on NCR's without reference to mark numbers. When rejected by ANI's j these were subsequently revised. Included were supports that involved baseplaces welded to the containment liner with no ANI involvement, supports (suubbers) that attached to nonconforming Fisher Control Valve brackets.
)
Additionally, N-5 Data Reports have been signed when impacted by generic ! NCR's. Even though these items identified on generic NCR's may have been
~ reconciled it is not acceptable to execute Data Reports in this manner. l Prior to ANI acceptance of N-5 Data Reports all generic NCR's must be closed". '
Response: With the exception of generic NCR's, all other items are repeated * { and addressed in response to items H and I. l Eight generic or multiple item ASNE NCR's are still open at CPSES. The status and a'ction on these NCR's is as follows: NCR # Comoonent Status / Action 2690 Hanger Packages not reviewed by QE evaluating, but currently required ANI to stay open until and of job by ANI.- 2807 Unit il PDRF's QE to verify action complete and submit for closure by 9/2/83. 3058 Unic #2 PDRF's - QE to revise CP-QAP-16.1 as required, and breakdown to isometic boundries by 9/30/83. 3597 Redundant PDRF identification QE to clear and submic for closure by 9/2/83. 3134 Mechanical OT's without ANI QE to complete research and disposicion review action,'and submit for closure by ! 8/26'/83. r 5647 AF/CC repairs Nonconforming welds identified on these thru 5649 NCR's will be raidentified on specific NCR's by 9/2/83. l H. Presentation Of Hanger Packages To ANI's For Final Review (1) "There have been several instances of ANI final review and acceptance i of hanger packages that were INCOMPLETE. Subsequent to acceptance, ' Repair Process Sheets and other records have surfaced. In one instance j the N-5 Data Report had been signed". Response: As you are aware, the program for the design, fabrication and installation of Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 pipe supports has evolved into one of the most detailed and scrutenized programs of any nuclear site. The changes in support criteria invoked through ASME Section III Subsection NF, and the expanded Regulatory Requirements invoked by IE ) Bulletin 79-14, has resulted in an extensive quantity of design change paper, process control documents and quality documents. l
. . . . . _ .. . . - - . - - . - \
....2.. ;.
1 _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __m_ . _ . _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ . . . _ , _ ____. .- _ _,_, .
i
' 1 - - -
.- Pagh 8 of 14 . . -- - - . -
i In the latter part of 1982, the Project recognized that the ation had to be orienced to the VCDfinali:ation of pipe sup - i first half of 1983 chis program was/DRD program. During the i=ple enced for each support as the initial VCD/DRD was issuedfoy Engineering However, due to the expanded requirements resulting from . the copics discussed above many additional deficienci es were documents. identified resulting in numerous process control Project General alternative management technique. Management has elected rns, to i=ple=
, On 7/20'/83, charter was given (Attach =ent 10) to establish a concentrated. effort to complete pipe support installation and inspection by an integrated approach using the same procedures. The involvement of 3&R QA, outlining interface functions and directly involved in the effort. objectives, was issued 7/28/83 (
ANI. abreast of actions and administrativ's late as the week of August . As decision 15, 1983, the " Full Package understanding eliminating some concerns. the process would be instru= ental i Although historical packages are not with the current guidelines for format, totally co=nensurate the referenced attachments - address package completeness. ng ANI concern e ative to Prior to this ANI SIS report, Engineering Management and already in the process of certification.B&R temsQA have purs outlines the program intended 'to Attachment 12 preclude these issues. In all packages withdrawn from the PPRV. addition, documen monitor the " Full Package Concept" program. enable th (2) ANI's havetorejected from minor major. hundreds of packages with discre These include no material identification,parcies ranging material unacceptable (impacts on W hanger) NPSI hardware in IIT hanger and vice versa, QCI walked hanger to wrong revisi on of VCD. 1 e [ mw .. E q w a m ei e % a y .gm. v44 e'
..__._1___ - -. _ _ . __ . .
. ,,?ago 9 of 14 -
~
l
- i I
4 Response: With the implementation of the Hanger Task Groups, package ' review by QES is taking place directly in the area. This review is conducted in accordance with procedure C?-QAP-lS.2,
, and documented on a checklist, Accachment 13, developed and issued by QE. To establish a consistent package format, and resolve previously identified ANI problems, IMP 25,879 (Attachment 14) was issued 7/1S/83, with your concurrence.
We have conducted a statistical study of the last 660 packages submitted by QES, from the Task Groups, for ANI acceptance. Of the 660 packages, 59 have been returned frem the ANI (8.6%) for the following reasons: 8 Questions not pr'oblems 8 Missing load sheets & CPP's 2 588 material 1 Need CMIR's for Class I and impact items 3 open QC Hold Points 4 Missing documentation 1 Material verified on MIL - not =acching VCD - drafting 5 WDC in wrong side of package 2 VCD - Draf ting errors 1 Material not verified 1 Need new VCD - Dwg unclear 1 Incorrect Wald # for veld attachment 7 VT procedure @ and Rev. not on RPS l' Incorrect Attachment 1 10 Shims verified but no W7ML 4 Existing steel Dwgs Although B&R's goal is to provide a 99 acceptance race, it is felt that the problem is primarily documentation and not hardware related. To further minimize packages rejected due to dccumentation however, Document Reviewers will be retrained in the checklist requirements by 8/29/83. I. Drawing Control And Design Control (1) " Site ANIts have repeatedly identified on 939 monitoring reports noncompliance with drawing control. VCD/DRD revisicus are still being observed in Task Force areas without proper stamping. (Ref. 939 #361 and 361A)". Response: The corrective action taken in response to C.A.R. S-54, was intended to resolve this problem and preclude further recurrence. It must be pointed out however, that when the C.A.R. S-54 corrective action was imple=ented, literally thousands of drawings were involved. It is not surprising that isolated instanc,es occur in which hanger packages are found which contain drawings issued under the previous e = w =hene o -a, a g e ,eg w -g$ =ee shn 6
- - -- -- ,w~, 1-w.e w---- ._-wq % . g g.-i--+-,-. -,-e -
w ---.g--~r--. --- -
I
. - _ . _ .. . .. . - . I - - - - -- !
,' ,. ,,itg; 10 of 14 \
1
\
program, which had been in use and acceptable for years. In fact, we have been anticipating = ore drawings from the l
; previous program since the changes in the Document Control '
program were implemented in parallel to the new Task Groups implementation, causing massive changes in logistics. Drawings issued under previous Document Control progra=s will be purged prior to submitting final hanger packages for ANI acceptance, as this item is specifically identified in step 3.C of Attachment 14. Attachment 13 has been dis-tributed to the appropriate Task Group personnel, to previev hanger packages prior to distribution by the Package Flew Control Group. (2) "VCD/DRD Drawings Have Numerous Inconsistencies". (a) "Not all drawings identify existing =aterial (e.g. , embed plates)". Response: A DCA has been issued to Specification, MS-100, to reflect that all embed material is A-36 unless noted otherwise on the drawing, by DCA 18475. Engineering will review all drawings where e= bed material is not A-36 to insure the drawing reflects =aterial type and grade; applicable drawings which do not raflect this will be revised prior to submission to the ANI.
~
(b) "Many drawings idencify shiss as primary support = embers. Shiss are not within the scope of NF per MS 46A". Response: As the Component Design Specification is the controlling document established by Code, 3&R does not consider it necessary to backfit all previously issued drawings which identify shims. As drawings are revised, or new designs issued. Engineering will remove shiss which are identified as primary support members, unless they are primary su;1 ort members. (c) "Seme drawings do not reflect other supports (including Class 5) attached to the structure of the support". Response: By Engineering Procedure, anything attac,hed,to a safety class pipe support frame must be authorited by design change to permic reanalysis of loads. 1 Supports which have items attached to their fra=e, that are not identified on the VCD/DRD have been and will continue to be identified as deficiencies by QA in accordance with procedure CP-QAP-ll.l. 1
....1._.. . . _ _ . .
_-. . _ _ _ i i-
.' Pego 11 of 14 ]
. . )
)
i l t (d) "Some Class 1 drawings identify primary se=ber.1 (i= pacts =aterial traceability requirements) while others do not". Response: As previously discussed, early NPSI designs differentiate between primary and secondary members. The remaining CPSES designs do not take credit for the increased allevables of secondary members. Accordingly, although beyond Code requirements, material ' carrifications for designs other than NPSI will continue to be suba.f,tted as primary members. (e) "Some drawings on Large Bore Main Steam and Main Feed identify impact requirements while other do not". Response: Engineering is reviewing all affected drawings to identify designs which require revision to indicate impact test requirements. Additionally, the review will identify which supports contain material accepted by " Appendix G" calculations in lieu of impact casts. Affected drawings have been reviewed, and will be - revised if required prior to submission to the ANI.
. (f) Large Bore VCD's reference BRHL's for location but we are cold that BRHL's are not available in controlled revised status.
Response: Much like a " Piping Composite Drawing, which is referenced on a BRP (isometric), the BRHL is referenced on the 3RH drawing at the time of final VCD. The piping composite and 3RHL drawings are for Engineering use only. The BREL is used to reflect support location which is not required during fabrication and installation since support location is shown on the 3RH until the VCD revision is issued. (g) "Small Bore DRD's are controlled by GHH drawings but the GHH does not reflect the revision status of typical supports". Response: Small Bore typical drawings are issued by Engineering for inccrporation into Hanger Packages by Welding. Engineering. Engineering practice has been: ' (1) Not to revise a typical in a way which would physically impact previous revisions to the typical; (2) To issue as a "Special" any single typical which I requires a configuration change or different installation criteria; (3) To issue as a new typical, any revision to a previous typical which generically requires changes to support configuration or installation criteria;
, and 9
.-. - _ _ _ , _ . . ._. _ . _ , . - . , _ _ _ . . . . . . , . -- _. ~ -
_ , 2 _. ____ _ _ __ . . _ _ _ . . m.. .
. C Pf;gn 12 of 14 1
(4) To notify the constructor of any Small Sore Support that has been made unacceptable by revision to a typical. Based on the above, the appropriate typical revision for a Small Bore Support package is the " Controlled ! Copy" of the typical placed in the Hanger package by I Welding Engineering, as currently issued by Engineering. ) Although generally practiced, Engineering has Lacorp-orated the above practices into MS-46A by DCA 18,453 I Revision 1. Additionally, QA Procedure C?-QAP-12.1 requires the revision level of both the typical _and location GER drawings to be recorded on the VCD/DRD Inspection Checklist. QES will continue to verify the recording of this data, during document review, in accordance with item 1.A. of Attachment 14. (h) "Small Bore drawings with Large Bore numbers are not supported by eith'er GEE or SFC.L". Restdnse: GHE and BRHL drawings are hanger location drawings oniv. Small Bore drawings with Large Bore numbers are Class j j 1 supports. The' support location is shown directly - ct the drawing. , (1) " Supports identified for revision due to Code nonconformance have not been revised and are still being walked down and submitted for final review. Specifically: (1) Supports whose baseplaces were welded to the containment liner without ANI involvement were to be revised to change NT boundary. (2) Supports connected to Fisher Control valves were to be declassified to non-ASME status. (3) Diesel Exhaust Supports were to be declassified to non-ash 2 status". Response: Items (1)(1) and (i)(2) were reported on NCR's prior to this SIS. Engineering is completing the required drawing revision' s , which will be accomplished prior to certification processing. Item (i)(3) had been addressed prior to this SIS by Engineering, Attachsent 16. Component Design Specification MS-46A has been revised by DCA 18511, to reflect that the Diesel
~'
,- Exhaust supports are ANS Class III, and are not' subject to the Code certification process.
i
- -.,,,___.-_-----.s --..-,--.-,a... , , , . . ,
_ , , , , , , . - . . . - - . en,... .-
-, A-,-,..,,,. ., . , - . , . , - - ,
_ e_ . . _ . .-.. - - - ---
*I .
' Peg 3 13 of 14 J.
Status of Suceores Inseected And Verified On Multiole 'Jeld Data Cards "ANI confidence in inspections performed to Engineering hanger sketches as revised by CMC is zero. This is a result of hundreds of nonconformance reports and inspection reports by QCI's identifying on final walkdowns , 4 to "As Built" VCD/DRD drawings that the supporr installed does not match { the drawing. This ranges from minor deviations to instances where configuration ) is totally different. 1 The causes inherent in the discrepancies are a combination of inadequate I inspections and deficient design documents. The ANI's can no longer l accept "inprocess inspections" to unintelligible CMC's, many of which have
)
undergone as many as fifteen revisions. Additionally, a CMC that totally ~ I changes configuration of a support cannot be considered acceptable". Response: Ihe historical aspects of the CPSES pipe support program are a reality, and must be dealt with by the best means available to assure Code and Regulatory compliance. Reedgnizing that the historical trail would of ten be confusing and cumbersome, the VCD/DRD program was implemented to: (1) Identify the "as-constructed" condition; (2) . Insure the "as-constructed" condition was properly defined through the Component Design Specification and detailed drawings; (3) Assure the reconciliation of the "as-constructed" condition with design stress and as-built loads; and (4) Correlate a documentation package which properly supports the design, fabrication, and installation of the "as-constructed" support. Unforrunately, many of the supports dealt with today are 1979 and 1980 vintage design, fabrication and installation. On those packages which are abnormally cumbersome, QES Document Review has been directed to implement a detailed index of documentation references to aid in ANI review of the package. K. Control of Tests "ANI's have recently been forced to decline to sign pretest concurrence due to various problems. These ihclude no provision for adequate venting or viable alternative flushing and attempt to conduct a test with a known hardware discrepancy in the pressure cast boundary".
' Response: QA Procedure CP-QAP-12.2 will be revised by 9/2/83 to sore specifically address QA and Construction responsibilities, in accomplishir.g prerequisites to hydrostatic testing, prior to submitting pretest packages for ANI concurrence or requesting ANI support to witness hydrostatic tests. It should be noted however, that the referenced hardware discrepancy (are strike) although within a portion of the system to see test pressure
\ , l
, + . .
- = = * *
,-m.w .-,- t- e,re-- ,,-.v.r----.wr---c-+-,--v - ----r --ww- ye-.-,- -. --- ,.e<--- _, ww.,.
l
' ' [ ' '
'Pega 14 of 14 during the retest , was not part of the boundary for which the test was being conducted. Although not the most efficient practice, the worst case condition could only precipitate in subjecting the l
. same portion of the system, with a different area of interest, to j an additional racest cycle. '
L. NA-3460 Cartification Of Comoliance "In accordance with above paragraph the Site Authorized Nuclear Inspectors can no longer sign Data Reports, preliminary review process control documenta-tien, review and accept final records, nor perform inprocess inspections until Brown & Root has implemented Corrective Action .co resolve the Noncompliances identified in this report. ' To do so would constitute acceptance of activities that do not comply with the ASME Code". Response: Clearly recognizing the ANI responsibility and authority to monitor and verify the NA Certificate holders compliance to th,e Code, and the approved QA Program, neither 3&R QA nor Proj ect Management totally concur with the text or implications of SIS 363.
- Accordingly, B&R, Inc., as the NA Certificate holder, intends to take the following action:
- 1. B&R will continue to perform Safety Class 1, 2, and 3 activities which by the Code and contracturally the ANI is expected to continue monitoring as required. Should noncompliances with the Code an/or QA Program be identified, we expect the ANI to specifically report these unsatisfactory conditions as required by the Code, the approved-QA Program and ANI contract; .
- 2. Upon reaching an ANI hold point on process control doc =zents, the ANI is expected to accept or reject the activity based upon compliance with the Code and approved QA Program.
Should the activity be rejected, the ANI is expected to specifically identify the noncompliance; and
- 3. B&R will continue to transmit to the ANI, documentation packages for final and inprocess review; the ANI is expected to accept or specifically reject these packages.
i 4
' G.R. Purdy ()
GRP/bm B&R Site QA Manager
, cc: J.T. Merritt R.G. Tolson . D.C. Frankus B.J. Murray F. Burgess R. Taylor J. Finneran G. Bunt Houston - R.J. Vurpillat, B&R J. Ryan J.T. Blixt W.D. Tillman, Eartford J. Dittmar R. Siever
- 3. Baker SQAM File J. Johnson
R &Ch r. af 5 Er.RCot.Inc.
- INTEROFFIC.- EMO
- IM# 25,055 I
t. N.C. S.ich
} TO: DATE: August la, 1933 ,
FRCM: G.R. Purdy
- SU3 JECT: CPSES, 35-1195 QA/K:I Access To Areas In Which Code Related 'a'ork Is 3eing Conducted.
This memo is issued to confirm our previous discussions on the sbove subject. In sccordance with Section 20.0 of the B&R QA Manusl, and Subsection NA paragraph NA-3120 of the AS12 B&PV Code, the M!I/Ni!S must have free access to all areas of the site during the period of assembly and testing. Sy' Code terminology, this means that the M!I/ ANIS must be permitted free access to areas until construction (i.e., N-5 Certification and Ses=pieg) is complete. , By our mutual agreement, it is not the intent or requirement of the "R'a*N" access control program to restrict the freedom of access for QA/Mit/ ANIS inspection personnel to perform inspection or cerifiestion activities. However, due to incorrect interpretation of the program, several secess problems have recently been encounte' red as ointlined'on 3 the accached ANI SIS Report. To preclude recurrence of this problem, w it is requested that copies of this memo be distributed to personnel responsible for impicmentstion of the "RUN" secess control program.
)J e.vN G.R. Purify /
Site QA Manager s GRP/bm * ' ' cc: 3.J. Murray
. D. Deviney
. R.C. Tolson 4- S H. Coats t
I I
)
- l
, ,,,,w.,. -
.e- e-e.ee m* . man a e We *e* N *=="**"******~-e* *' '
- - + , w w w -,y . - _ - --, -r y -
~
Bro. . .wn(SRoot.!rr-h INTEROFF. E MEMO IM825,747 - DATE: June 15, 1983 TO: Frank Strand / Bill Baker FROM: C.R. Purdy
SUBJECT:
CPSES, 35-1195 Unsatisfactory Response To CAR S-54. As required by the Brown & Root, Inc. Quality Assurance Manual, Section 17.3 and TUCCO QA Audit Response Evaluation (dated 6/9/83), CPSES Construction Document Control, QA Audit File: TCP-68 (OTN-714) Concern No.2, "This office recognizes the fact that in accordance with established procedures activities affecting quality cannot be accomplished without controlled documents stamoed with the validating designation. However, had existing procedures been adequately implemented and followed, the document in question cor.1d not have existed. TUGC0 QA recommends that an additional refre' sher course be administered to those personnel whose job activities include the distribution or duplication of controlled documents".
'A Also, as required by Sectiot 17.3 of the QAM, the correceive actions implemented to date are unsatisfactory and must be supplemented as recommended by TUCCO QA to include all personnel who distribute or duplicate controlled documents with a copy of the sign-in sheets for closure of CAR S-54. TUCCO QA Audit File: TCP-68 Open Concern No. 2 and Hartford SIS 939 No. 350. ,
Should you have any questions or comments concerning this CAR, plasse contact Rusty Morris at extensiong2 07 or 743. ' s ' \ ~ C 3. Purdy
'A O/
O ' Site QA Manager CRP/bm ' cc: D.N. Cha'pman. TUCCo OA p,s e ocris '.v.Te cur;qE7 - l _.....--.e..
- , ,- -- ,w>- w -- + - - -+.- w . * . -- -mg- e-w-y --+
.r o- r .l ,
A f ft< hmc., r
- G Brown & Root!nc.
A INTEROFFICE ME.% IM - 25974 August 4,1983
~
TO: Garcon Purdy FROM:, W.E. Baker SUEJECT: CAR-E4 Response Extensive changes in the document program are currently being cade including the revision.of the document control ~ procedure OCP-3 which has been issued fer coment ar.d approval. I am requesting a 10 day extension on the response to CAR-E4 pendir.g the approval of the referenced procedure.
^ .
~.
fh/?k/?l W.E. Baker Sr. Project Welding Engineer WEB /tn l 1 i l _, .
]
g g 9 , -- --- --
, - , - -- +
l . " .
.-...---.-~-...-....-.-.---.......0UN .
CE .%
'-_ ~~ =
es/ A CUAUTY ASSURANL . EPARTMENT CORRECTIVE ACT;CN REQUEST
' , , TiCJECT: CPSES 35 1195 JCB NO UNIT: I&2 I I FAGE C:
' a:0u:57 =o S-54 Rev. 2 Cacup cacANi2A;icN B&R OA age.y ces cars 6-14-63 i
A EFERENCI QCCUMENT: CP-DCP-3 Rev. 13 c Ncmcs cascaistcN: . Paragraph 3.1.2 Controlled Coov Stame a Reproduced " Controlled" copies will be identified with the "Centrolled Copy Stamp" and the control number entered in the shaded area of the stamp. - Contrary to this require =ent, the following VCD's (current revision levels) issued . to (1)centrol nu=ber 098 do not carry any stamping nor do they have a control number:
,f D0.-1-DG-030-001-3 (2) DO-1-DC-030-005-3 (3) DO-1-DC-030-007-3 (4) DO-1-DG-030-009-3 (5) DO-1-DG-030-006-3 I (6) CO-1-CG-030-010-3 -
(7) CO-1-DG-030-011-3 Rev. 1: To identify additional Action Addressee. Rev. 2: To incorporate correc*ive DCC's and Engineer 1ag's revised responses with proposed action.
-[ l stot.y stCutS7to snou irank Strand / 3. Bake?
ActiCN AoCRESSgg tNettargo av i' ' N : paoggd c A 4;cga ; A rt i CAUSE ANo CCastC7ivt ActiCN: s I T , The investigation of this subject revealed that .. issued to the hanger packages by Engineering and not by the DCC.the uncontrolled drawings However, ! we reoccurrence of this type of contr'o1 problem has been eliminated with the estab-lishment of satellite DCC's. ' trained in Revisicn 16 of Procedure DCP-3. Personnel operating the satellite DCC have been ' P.S. : Engineering has notified and retrained its personnel (per CPP-12,322) 1 that whenever any copy of a drawing off the originals that exist. in the PSE.,, { i-files, that copy is sta= ped by Cindy Moore's group.
, "~ j . ,';; , ', *f IT f
l l
... A.. ev 3.2 d / NAug Ao ,No.,,,, ,y a e/m/d NAug U cart Co8HECrivt action vfR4ffD av CA stviEw cf.050pf av __ O'It f
mu i
< 7smaurioN i .
.I l
.I l
' i i i
~
1 i a l
.;_r- ~. w ; m % ?.w: ' a[3 W '.u_~.tN.' ?x 3] ,Ak Q QT f W Y A h -
p Hachnnt 8 Houston Office I1104 West Airp., - d..Smce 200 Mrik The H nford W* ' _ ObD See::m Boder Inspecucn 2nd Insur2rce Co. Sc2fford. Tens 7-pl3) 330-9883
- eee - I 1
. August 8, 1983
. l Mr. Gordca Pedy 1 Site Quality Assurance Manager . i Brevn is Root, I:c.
F. O. Rox 1C01 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 Ces.r Mr. P=dy: This vill ccnfirm that an Audit vas perfer=ed en ycur a.ctivities at the Cc=anche Peak Sten.=' Electric Station c: July 13 and ik,1983 Bis Audit was ;erfer ed to neet the require =ents of ANSI-N626.0 and the ASME Ccde. During the progra= vas Audit,made. a review of varioua phases of ycur Qual'ity Assurance required. Overall, I feel you are i=ple=enting *ycur progra= as er clarificaticc: Se folleving ite=s, hovever, vere noted and require correction .. A. Noc-Cenfor=acce Recorcs
- 1. NCR fM6988S-Revisica 1 a..
Eis NCR allevs acceptance of a veld size s= aller than that shown en the */-andor Certified Draving. Se veld shown on the VCD is 1/4 of an inch. The actual veld sice is 1/8 of an inch. Quality Centrol verified that 3/16 of an inch is the ::ax 4 -'- pessible veld size en three sides due to flange configuratien. On the rs=ain-ing side,1/h inch is possible.
- b. Se resolutien to this NCR is " use-as-is." In addit-ion, the NCR states " Desig: analysis safety factors are i=ple=ented to acccunt for these di=ensional dif'fer-ecces."
- c. Se resolutica dces not require a revisica to the "/CD to
- indicate the " as-bui'.t" condition.
In :::7 cpinien, paragraph h.h and 16.3.1 of the QA Manual require revision to design docu=ents anyti=e the " as-buiit" conditien changes.
- 2. NCR /N788'2S
- a. This NCR referrences a dravlag in which piece 11 cn the draving is 1 inch too lcng. the tolerance referre ced t
en the NCR is 1/4 i=ch. ,
- b. Se resciutica state: " Use -as -is."
i \ i ~, , - - ! , n .,... t l
..--+***memwf**.*+F-
~~
. _ _ . . _ . . . _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - ~~- ~~ * ~
1 ,
,. L.7t*.4._f**M hyd'i'f9PD'*3 % ,EW5
. --, .1m.
. - 7 s.,
4* . - Houston O&c 11104 Test .urp:
%d -
The Hinford Ste-ea Boder respec=on SMCM T84 I plM 550.WO J., Suite 30
.1 u%Itsd6 s _ . nc insa.nce cc.
August 8,1983 F.r. G. P.rdy Fase 2
- e. Aeain, there vas nc =eans to fa, cili
- ate the revision of i
.iecign docu=er,ts is order to ahcv the " as-built" ces-dition.
As ve discussed, the 1;olera=ce referenced c the NCR 2s.7 have beeh incer-rect. If so, this NCR shculd not tave bsen gecerated. If hovsver. ha itCR is valid, s eps ;::ast te taken to revise ipprep riate design der.u= cats. I a discussica vith t.he sf.te Idfl's it was deterr.ined tha* this is cet er. u=cc:=ca ;r:ble=. A ::ajority of the NCR2' cf this cature t03.0 I revieved vere resolved correctly. */cile the st=t:er of problet.s of this nature is bei g red:ced, I wil.:. recermend tbit ?.cu keep streesi:g *o reviev ;eople that " as-built" cceditions =tst be adr'.ressed and specifications or dra.v ., ings =tst be revised i= caces of this na,ture. B. I,crrective Action Re':cris *
- 1. CAR-S-56-Eevisica 1
- a. Neither the original nor Rev. 1 vere 3:.g sd by the $ite Quality Assurance Me- 1ger. '
- b. Revision 1 of this CAR uns veided.
'#.ile it is agreed that 00ttrol sectica cf the =anual, this dccurentrevisions to documents' are covered in the Gecu=es is a special one.
descriptica of both revisions and =ed.cd4 B ere is a ics, there shculd be a s'-" * =ethed described for CA?a 'f.1r voiding NC3s' and in =y opin-
. . Accceding to QE perseccel, they revised a=d/or voi'ded CAP.s ' e.s they tacught. test.
- 2. CAR-S-55-P.evisica 1
- a. he same ecc= cat applies to S-55 concerning revisi.::s and =ethods cf voitits es vare =ade for S-56.
- b. Se due date for reply for Re rision 1 vas 6-15 83, hov-ever. the Site Qua'.ity Assuracce $!anager did not sign
; Revisica 1 until 7-6-83. In ./ opinion, the due date "
should have been revised as well as the Cla,
- c. If the due date of 6-15-83 is valid, !!r. Ecus Franku: is 28 da.ys overdue for a respense. QA is vell overdue tcf their reo;.: ired follow-up cf 10 days after the reply duc date has been established.
. l i
.* ifs., ,(9 e lb '
, .. . _ .. .. . ..--. ~ .- ---- - *~ ~ ~ ~~ ' ~ ' ~ ~ ~
,-.:..-. ~~- - , ,_ _ .._.. . - - . -
. j ** "
. .- g.' g Hous:ca Ottict g g.g ford i I IN '4*e4 .ian! art Nvd.. See M
LTo"! I d# T So.:ra Jouca In:pett:on II.9 Yd s -
r- \ arid fry.atst:i.c C Y. i ! Agust 8,1963 Mr. Gcrden Pe.rdy
' Page 3 -
t i
', It is suggesteid a reviev cf this C,G be perferned and cla.rit?catica er correction be =ade.
i
.C. ANI Monitorin
- 1. Se folleving r.:cciteriks for=s =2st be ansvered or a. re-quart for ettensica be nada.
4. Foi :: #3kT should have b4ea sesvered by 5 'k 33- it.cre var no res; case as cf 7-1k 83, =ct '.u there a request, for exten.sion.
- h. For:n #350 shculd Asys been acsvered by 6-1-83 An ex-
' tension Vis requested and grf.n:ed to 6-10.-d3. S.ere w.s to r.M; car.e 4.s nf 7-3k-85 and no additicLal requ;st for extensica.
- c. For:t 1351 sbculd have been ansvered by 5-3*.-63 Sere vas ce res;cese as cf T-14-83 and no req'reat Joe extens-ice.
- d. Form #352 vas to have teen a.:svered by 6-10 33 the:re vu icu.
no.res7 Casa se of T-lk-83 . sad r.c faquest for site:s-01asse respend to !.hese for s es accs sa ;cssible or provide a request fcr ertgsian cc t'e rer;caset date.
. ,. . D. Instructicus, P eeedures and .5viras
- 1. In a review of i documect cal. Led Quality Ccatrol hek
'.rstructica, the .fc11cving ite:::;s vere noted: l
- 4. Se QA Manual requiree Qua?it7 Cqntrol Instructicas be 1 placed in .canus1 fort vith z. table of center.ts. }
review cf thase doccuents, in the In a ; Tith ths task force, n6 :::a.nual vs.s found.6.ux111ary bu.11dizg ) Ta sci *ir. ion, I @ality Centrol Instru:ticus test te approved by the QA luctaer.
-i No pch ap;rc9a.1 vss founf..
- h. These, docu!.ents vere uct s p.e . cr.
Ec1cers Listing,. the Centrol. led Cc'"v
~' '
.5
?.
j-i J ;. P s I j ne n. : 3, I I p ggwmmmymmwww . - .
-~
E
- ~
~
_ _ _ , . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . - -~ - - - - - - - - = - ~ ~ - - - ~ '~' l'
~
l ' s i H:ustin OfScs !II04 Ter: .urport S!vC;Swc 200 l The Hartford Sufford. Tem M .
. - Sce:m Boder Impection Cl3) 530 98m
- nd Imurar.cc Co.
scea August 8, 1983 Mr. Gcrden P.:.rdy Page '4
- c. No Trans=ittals could be fcund for issuance of these documents.
In =y opinica, these docu=ents should be centro 11ed in accordance .-ith Section 6 of your =acual. To =e, a document that is incer; crated i to a ~ Quality Assurance Procedure at a later date, is i=;crtant eceugh to fall under the title of instructions and as such, =ust be centrolled in an appropriate manner. In a discussion with .'t . Ted Blixt, it appears -la-these documents are simile to CCNs'. If so they should te ts.ndled in a si=ilar anner. If not, it is suggested that a description of these decu-
=ents te provided in the QA Manual. ,
Please correct er clarity these ite=s to the satisfactica of Lead ANI Marvin Coats. He is hei g actified of these ite=s by copy of this letter.
. Ycur ccurtesy and assistance at the ti=a of this Audit .as greatly appreci-ated. Please tharJc all personnel involved.
Sheuld ycu have acy questices er if I can be of fur-ler assistance, please not hesitate to ca n. Ycune truly,
/
// f //R Winiam D. S ' t, a n
- Assistant legiocal Ma=ager SIS Diviiic.o, Ecuston
'Opg
. VJf/ad Icc: Imad ANI Marvin Ccats -
l 4
' 1
~
s
.$. h,$
1 d w s's, [G'PF ' 4j g O .% b*I * -"
" N'M
_ ...'-w -- . W"N "B"*
------1 l
I _ _..._.._.m2_. : ._. .
. i......'
.e, Mcckm $
,e BrOWMCTRCCtInc.
IN U.RGFr . :CLO IM# 25,056 OATT: . August 15, '.983 l TO: Marvin Coats, ANI - TRCM: J.T. Blixt SU3 JECT: C?SES, 33-1195 Hartford CPSES Audi: . Of July 13, & 14, 1983. Af ter reviewing Mr. W.D. Till$an's let:gr of August 8,1983, S'covn & Root, Inc. has the folleving responses: Restense A '
- l. NCE #M69885-Revision 1 is disposittened to rewor'A che under-si::e veld and to revise the VCr,.
- 2. NCR #M78825 is dispost:icned t: reveri/ranove the excess length of piece #1. \
Reseense.3
- 1. CAR-S-56-Revision I was never issued as the lack of the Si:e
' QA Manager's signature sculd indicace. This Revision 1 was voided as verbally explained to :he ANIS. i
- 2. The due date of 6/15/83 for Revision I was a typing error.
It should have been 7/15/63 The follow-uc of 10 days, per ' QAM Section 17.3 and CP-QAP-17.1, paragraph 3.2.5. is for - investigation / verification :o ensure that the required ' corrective action has been completed. - Reseense C
- 1. a. Form #347 was responded to on 4/26/83 by J.T. Blixt 'and was closed on 8/3/83.
- b. Form #350 was responded to on 5/19/83 by J.T. Blix: and was closed on 8/3/83. '
- c. Form #351 was responded to on 7/14/83 by J.T. 311x: and I was closed on 8/3/83.
- d. Fors #352 was responded to on 7/15/83 by J.T. 311c: and i was closed on 7/18/83.
Response D $
- 1. The use of Quality Control Work Instruccions has been dis- '
continued.
%r I
a--
l f
', ' ,=Di# 26,056 (Cont'd)
Pago 2 of 2 t Should you have any question or if we can be of .further assistance, please do not hesi: ace to call G.L. Morris, Jr. at extension 7t.3.
*; r
/
J Q' h
- if '
J.T. Blixc
. QE Group Sup'ervisor JT3/bm i ec: G.R. Purdy R. Siever G.L. Morris, Jr.
- QA File t
t 1 i i . i s 4: 1 . k j l . e e.
,l<>._ AHbchmen: .A l l' -?.; ',
- _
t TEXAS UTILITIES SERVICES INC. t
; OFFICE MEM ;ANDUM c.
n Fred Burcess ct.a a , Tu., July 20, 1983 l subi.es COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC STATION
' l l
Purcose l To establish the Comanche Peak Pipe Support and Oversite Grcup which a will be responsible for organizing the Comanche Peak resources into an effective Hanger Team capable of moving hanger packages from their present location and status to the vault in the most expeditious manner possible, not forugoing any of the engineering or regulatory requirements. Charter The Pipe Sucport and Oversite Group will be headed by Fred Burgess.' He will be assisted in this effort by a full-time representative from engineering, construction, reactor building area manager, safeguards / auxiliary building area manager, ASME QA, non-ASME QA and a secretary. The Group is to define a process and an organizational structure with each function being described by role, scoce, responsibility and author-ity. Once each function or position has been described, then the group is to. appoint the most qualified person to that position. All of Ccmanche Peak is available to fill these positions. The people for any position may come from any organization, but once assigned to the position, the person then is responsible only to the Hanger Team. The only exception to this would be the regulatory requirements. The Group will meet as deemed necessary by Mr. Burgess, but due t'o the urgency of the pipe support problems, it should initially be a full-time effort. The Group will be required to establish a sincie job-wide report ) for tracking and statusing. Once the Group has been established the Hanger Team, it will be the responsibility of the Group to provide an ! oversite function for the hanger effort and resolve and/or correct any I problems. l y l I am requesting that Mr. Burgess report on progress of this effort no j later than July 25, 1983 and periodically thereafter as required. '
/
J
$ h ~~
. T. MerrTtt, J r.
Asst. Project General M
,I JTM: pew I
cc: B. J. Murray G. Purdy : M. R. McBay R. G. Tolson ~ i D. C. Frinkum J. Ditt:nar
- J. C. Finneran R. O. Taylor F. Burgess 4
BRJ #1699 m = w+ v - v +e-,---y ,,,+e... -_ - -- -m - . - - - - -- +,-y- - - - - + - -, - ,-
_. _ w. . . . .de x=:,=. ..w. . auv - - .. - -u .... . u.. o ;* ...
- Rtfaken 11 ;- : -a..
EfCWMCTRCCt.!nc. i DCERO. J:22.0 DATE: July 29,.1983 To: Distribution . FROM: G.R. Purdy SU3 JECT: C?SES, 35-1195 Hanger Task Group (HTC)
-Assignmenc.
Effective 28 July 83. Chrse dedicated HIG's have been established to complace safety related htnger design, fabricatien, installation, and inspection in Unit 1 and Cc= mon. The staffing, objectives, and basic process flow requirements for ths HTG's have been developed and/or endorsed by the PS&C Group; this group is comprised of all interfacing organtrations 1:volved in the pf pe support progrs=, including QA Jianage=ent. Figure 1, attached, depicts the required QA/QC-HTG interface crganiza* ' tion. The QA/QC Lead within each HTG v111, as nornal, be receiving ' day to day priorities and work scope assign =ent frem Project Management, thru the HTG Lead. As required by 10 CFR 50 Appendix 3, and Section III Subsection NA of the ASHE 3&P7 Code, the QA/QC lead will report
.- directly to the QA organizatten for implementation of the CPSES/ASME i QA Program. Administrative satters will be directed to the QA organiza- ,
tion, except for HTG work schedule and payroll timesheets which will be coordinated within the EIG's by the QA/QC lead. Figure 2 attached. provides a Job Description for the HTG QA/QC Lead. Each Lead shall insure that Q4/QC personnel under their direct / indirect supervisien has a sufficiently detailed Job Description, endorsed by the HTG, to assure: a) The ability to meet HIG objectives; b) Time resolution to deficiencias which require QA/QC action; and c) A primary review of hanger packages in sufficient detail to assure that only satisfactory packages are trans=1tted from the HIG to QES. The QES Supervisor shall provide the QA/QC Lead with copies of all applicable transmittals dealing with hanger package processing ' external to the HTG. Additionally, the QES Supervisor is responsible for providing any additional information to the HTG which is necesskry for HTG evaluation of package processing. LTMA/ + GRP/bc G Furdy G Distribution: 81** SA M*"*3'# T. 311xt 3. Sims, (,4) 3. Baker
, R. Siever 3. gege111 , (4) J. Dittmar ;
G. Bennetzen F. Surgess B. Merray D. Woodyard J. Finneran R. Taylor D. Srow, (4) K. Liford G. Bunt J. Ryan
- w. . _, e aw.4 > e .-g.- me &a = *
==
, , m e -- .
. ,w..
^ _ - __
._ . v . .n . . . . - - . - . .-- - ~
~
".'.d 'k " SIS HECORD FOR MONITO. RING Q,AdQ.C. PROGRAMS h TIIE IIAltTFORD STE.ut DOII.ER INSPECT!dN and INST l HANCE COSIPANY CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,046 isaursuun.cmwc Ict r maic 4364
,ean -..
pt u j l'ir. Cordcn Purdy, Site Q. A. Manacer l Accust 23, 1983 lsw i 1 l 2
. g g cas cutes ceasema. ust imw w.acw mw swos F.s sNr.m ccus:tr j egCa'6g88/f'A r8 f f's _ Erown & Rect, Inc. bcusten Mcusten lws.ov ree Clas**
Ie }[tstic'e tow * ' r . . Field
~~ I CPSES Glen EcSe, Texas , R e pair / p 89 'e Assamely Ana,ation Jame it.
the undersigned. hava moneterec ycyr QA/QC manual on: 8-23-83 and find the fo: lowing sections:
, om.
tG.e.nwoneers one fenest l _,._ Sari Jactory: I i . s u.~, a72'.C.Mqu .ae er.~; onewo-~w on,D&e.<* -.~* u ~~i.e.o l lJ.uassussweer t - Sectico 12 - Test Centrol l I Cn 4-21-83 site MC issued 939 8* 346 addressing inadequate test precedures. gd ,'Ihis reper;; was satisfactorily cicsed with Bravn & Rect rescense includine exNI ilo i ?. jE issued against QI-GAS -12.2 rev. 5, which was to be used until the crocedure was revised, This crocedure was revised en 5-12-83 i<ithout incorreratien of this ib.structien. _ , Fee Att'tched, CVER
#. CU5TCME8: Ptease cesent',e the resolution of these items in tne -CUSTOMER'S RESOL.UTION" section below, and giv cate for :omc;et3an ci correctwe acticn, so that items may be remonitored by: 9/6/93
,om, f P! ease keep the Original of th:s form for your records and return a copy to inspector named below.
w r 3.neg u ,r/m ,., aien,sentan, Z Fa.
%/23/83 h
,yJ.,d/'(
Q1--QAF-i2.2, Bev. 5 was inicis117 revised on 3/4/83 which is prior to the 4/21/83 MI closure of 939 f 346, but was not issued until 5/12/83. Q1-QAP-12.2 ts now being revi:ed to include provision for. stamping of ISO's
, (? ara. 4 3) pay QC:(! 10.
*h Jy The other icers addressed on this SIS fall within paracecers of CP-CPM-6.9I E
(Pars. 3.6.6. $ 4.2) And should be direct;ed to Brown & P. cots Staf f Engineer.
)
w cw .ci. ~ , mn. -n,. . CovtR ' 9/19/83 9/7/33 p)
.,c e, . . . .
[ k /pW
- p. in. u.nd.rsion.d. nay remon,ic,ed ine at>cve unsatistacto,y cono. con 2 on:
%, 1, . 1 ,, _
l and Found them: C5 st w ory 2 Unsatisfactory (f.ctm cetow) [~ see attacned VC b ^ C- -d- 3 F i g e-2,.s.uohm,,,,,,
. + . ~ .LfmdMR -
~~
,,,,,,,,~.
%.. i nt3/83
- -. . - .. ,14 9 ..m...._/M- '.6.-nw. SM F0lA-85-SS
- f .
l SIS Renort #364 l Page 2 of 2 i
'l me use of a calculatien sheet for deviations in gauge /ciping 1.4 4 4 elevations is not procedural 1:ed.
Se use of a calculatien sheet for " air in solution" is not promduralized. - *A Iso. 's are not readily identified to the test package as test +1 p=de does not list Iso.'s and in many cases test nunbers have not been referenced on Iso.'s. me Iso.'s in many instances are not stanped indicating affected by design changes and OC's which are within the scope of the test are not highlighted (eg test # IVD-616, Iso. # hl-SB-004A & CC #87612 rev.1, and Iso. # Wl-SB-0038 & OC #87202 rev. 1). It is the coinion of this ANI that Brcwn & Poot's test procedure does not ccrtply with NA-4420. Sank you,
)
, , B111ywapr e
0 lh
%.)
-g .w ,s m --o--,e
-m - -m- m ---v,- - o,- ,n - - -- - , - -
--ere - p
I - _ ^
". . t * . .
Attachment 2
.- - SIS Report #364 ' ' . Page 1 of 3 8
('
References:
Ref. # 1'- ASME Code, Section III, Subsection NA ( as adccted) Ref. I 2 - ASME Code, Secticn III, Subsection NX ( as adepted) Ref. # 3 - Brown & Root Quality Assurance Manual Section 3 Ref. # 4 - Brown & Root Quality Assurance Manual Section 6 Ref. # 5 - Brown & Root Quality Assurance Manual Section 12 Ref. t 6 - Brown & Root Construction Drocedure CP-CPM-6.9I Ref. # 7 - Brown & Root Ouality Assurance Procedure Co-oAD-12.2 Brown & Ibot's response to 939 8364 is unsatisfactory as indicated by the concerns listed as items I thru VII. Dlease address these cencerns as scen as possible so that I may remonitor this section of tre Quality Assurance Manual by 9-27-83. I
' Your respense that other items shculd be directed to Brcwn &
Root Staff Engineer is in conflict with and/or is incensistent with ref. 43 (para.3.2.6) , ref.14 (para. 6.3.1, 6.4.1, & 6.4.2) , and ref. il (NA-4210). II The use of a calculation sheet for deviatiens in guage 1 cicing elevations is not proceduralized. Calculation, sheets haw been used on nunerous test. This violates ref. 46 (para. 3.6.6 & 4.3) . Also en many tests the pressure guages have been directly connected to the test manifold, not the ccmpcment being tested. ' mis violates ref. 85 (para.12.2.5), ref. 86 (para. 4.3) , and ref. #2 (NX-6411) . III Ref. 86 (para. 4.1.2) indicates that flow diagrams will generally be used (see IV) and provides for stanping for test sign-off.
'Ihis is unacceptable as previously addressed in 939 #346. Your respense to this is acceptable, but please note ref. #6 is in ecnflict.
IV Ref. 46 (para. 4.2) allows for minimizing air neckets bv flushing
- or by providing calculations to shew that the entrapped air is dissolved. Raf. 87 (para. 3.8.1) also allcws this as an alternative when "it's highest point" is not vented. 'Ihis violates ref. #2 (NX-6211) . 'Ihe verification of establishment of a " solid" system was one of the concerns which led to the issuance of SIS report
#12-002 and subsequently 939 4346. Prior to the issuance of SIS report #12-002 (10-12-82), only flow diagrams were issued with test packages for preliminary review and final acceptance. Since ficw diagrams do not indicate changes in elevatiens, the ANI's weren't provided with adeauate information to evaluate the existing con-ditions to decide whether or not venting was established at all i high points as is required by ref. 82 (NX-6211) . 'Ihe cresent l practice of providing all Iso. 's within the inspecticn boundary still has a potential for error particularly in the case of multiple Iso.'s per test in which case venting may not be shown.
I have provided examples of high points without vents at VIII. l
) _
e
-w--- *2----- - +*+ g - - . -. -
. _ ;--. u , . - - - - -
Attachment 2
- SIS Report #364 Page 2 of 3
'i l
V Ref. 96 (para 2.4) indicates that cnly a Pressure Data Sheet ' and the acclicable drawings are requirai in a Dressure Test : 4 Data Packaga. Ref. #6 (para. 4.1.3) indicates that additicnal information is reccmended. This is in conflict with ref. #7 > (para.12.2) which stipulates additional decanants as being recuired. l VI Ref. 57 (para. 3.4.3) indicates that "other systems" including ! the Diesel Ebe.1011 system may be tested with other test medit=s, ' preferably the operaticns medium. 2e quality cha+1ht (attache ment 2 of the procedure) as referenced by ref. #7 (eara. 2.3) i references attachment 4 for test medium reauirements. Bis . , attachrant 4 delineates seven systems as recuiring a test medium ; of oil. Bis violates ref. #2 (NX-6212) . ' VII Ref. 66 (para. 4.4.1) establishes the Test Engineer as the re- s sponsible party for venting the system. This is incensistent with ref. 95 (para.12.2). VIII Exanple of high points not vented. . A. hat 4 1DC>-007 - D e line on DO-1-YD-008 at al. 806' slepes
+=nani to 805'9" and rises en CO-1-DFr002 to 812' and then droos to 806'6" before rising again. Bare are no vents at either high @t.
B. Test # ISEC-001 1. Valve SIMS-259 at al. 885'1" cn MS-1-SB-047 was clcsed and not vented. .
- 2. N 1-SB-026 rises frem 864'3" to 867'8 9/16' ard drcps to about 850' with no vent at the high point.
3. FW-1-SB-033 rises frca 864'3 3/4" to 869'4 15/16" and drops to 862'6 5/16". At the too of this high point 1 FW-1-SB-037 continues and rises to 869'11 15/16" ard drops to!857'S 11/16" to valve 1FW-245 which was the eressure source. Also, FW-1-SB-033 rises 7" to 1FW-300 which was M m =* and not vented. Dere was no high point vent en FW-1-SB-037.
- 4. On MS-1-SB-005, valve IMS-050 at el. 834'7 11/16" was used as a vent. D e line rises above the vent to el. 841'10 3/16" and continues on MS-1-RB-010 where it drops to 838'10" ard ;
en MS-1 RB-008 to 833'3". It also centinues on MS-1-RB-010A '
.at el. 844' where it drops to 835'11 7/8" and 833'3". mere {
was no vent at high point. 5.
', MS-1-SB-007 rises from 877'5" at MS-14Ful6 to 881'115/16"
- 6. at valve lHV-2452-1 which was closed ard rce vented.
FW-1-SB-014 rises frca 856'3" to 857'6" at valve 1FW-106 which was closed and not vented. A 6 4 auBD
,,-,-r--- ,,v-- - % y.g. - - - -,.-y , - - , - , .,
.i , , , ,
., . .; r -
e j i .
.i Attachment 2 SIS Peport #364 i Page 3 of 3 l
.; s ii.
I 7. MS-1-2-002 rises frcm 883'6" to over 883'11" at valve 1MS-001 which was closed and not vented. '
- 8. ISI-0122-03 Spcol orientaticn not shown en this Iso.
Any of the 8 spools in which the valve run is vertical will apply. I-Billy WajXer ,
.g t
s. e I I l I A l 1 1 1 -' O 5 1 l
. 1
a@ 4eeum M .'N
- .1, .
h'0FFICE NiMORANDUM q_ gy N en '
~ / .0 * $ '.?)
7$ad' &kbL, sr d an .u-r-n jns+ ,A sis.& .s m w, .
. ( .us. r s = . u 2 r 1 r <l.i ) Ar.rfl ,t> azgow.ar.ances p d4 as.<<&
.b/s<a ; .
Onewn E- so &ue,e suacb. .h .nc-Lshy f /- C/ % 4. 7 r /- x
- d e 4 . x & <.<
4..ea/didalk ,4 h ah b7ew ;/<hay -) & & . pauy ef b . 2 V~, A s s J g dy ,a s n y .s i cAs ap.Jse), m .17 4.~,L-uss. .e4 & .. bean
.. tf.tsa t.91n.. i s% -s J .zl /.iy.u'/saA v b. (p g.u)
On1 m bfd A J ad y a8'd / / / 6 2 // e /a b . A a. j /s u f ;. m
. . .. CalCala lim. A d eu a.<: a c4 1sc-d t /, /nao/db>.,dfA.;4e.ed<-
x.d snical 4n uk44 a,,,; ,in.vd. _
&ncun 2 AfA etcuu' a delJ )no..un.1n. A a24- ud, A, / ./ lag.'
Ost .b ckd , l sd.u.8 AL. 'lLEdi t) ac./ Mea -sn. es>,c w 7d' s
.4-l5bi .}b ^2ason ./n .dE 4//mia s. , .ti appu,n u.ev, . .,eEg' 2<
a w a 11 m ', a s. J y n.4 4 / xd e-y & ty .e nn-a Aa4~ .k c;/ y .ekura.,.u g a,,cr d, .a.~J r3 9 J r o e ao'**
'9 ? .l . 1*/ '$ MM
- ". /.1.*Bilown(5 6 / Root.!nc.
INTER 0iMJI MEMO
'(. IMJ 26,257 DATE: October 4, 1983 TO: M. Coats i FRCM: J.T. Blixt
SUBJECT:
CPSES, 35-1195 SIS Report # 364.
!.i 8
This memo is written to confirm our previous discussions and as agreed between Billy Walker, ANI; Pat Clark, E&R Staff Engineer; G.L. Morris, B&R Site Mechanical Level III; and myself, the following responses are made. Concern I " Agreed" -- Concern II All QC personnel involved with the hydro testing program will be reinstructed as to correct use of calculation
, sheets.
Concern III No revisions or changes to CP-CPM-6.9I will be made.
, CP-QAP-12.2, Para. 4.1 has been revised to include provision for ISO's.
i Concern IV Por 1980 Summer Addenda for NX-6211 has been adopted by
!{'
4 - B&R (MS-100, Rev.~6, Para. 4.38.3.C) and CP-CPM-6.9I, Rev. 6, Para. 3.'6.6 has been revised. Concern V -No problem., Concern VI Para. 4.38.3.A to M3-100 i=plements Appendix 6 require-ments. Note: 1983 3X-6212 allows "other tese fluids" as approved by the design specifications (MS-100). Concern VII No changes or revisions necessary.
, Concern VIII "No response nacessary".
Should you have any questions or coc=ents concerning SIS Report #364 please contact G.L. Morris at extension 743. J.T. Blixt QE Group Supervisor JT3/ba cc: G.R. Purdy R. Siever / v b G.L. Morris, Jr. M rY [+ i
- \) uf Gr
~J ,
s l U 1 l0 l l l _ - -.w y , ---, - - .,
*r. .,
IS REPORT O O = mistr "o 1.o47
~ ~ ~ THE HARTFORD STEAM BOILER INSPECTION and ' I.'RANCE COMPANY ; n4xrvouu. cos.wcTu1T onio: 16-009 TO:
CATE SHEET )
,Gordon Purdy, Site Q. A. Manager 9/27/83
. .o 1 lCF 1 !
H.O.18RANCN CFFICE Marvin Coats, Lead ANI - - - ~ l louston -- -- 1 O1GANIZATION Brown & Root, Inc LOCATION STREET CITY COUNTY STATE ZIP COCE CPSES Box 1001 Glen Rose Sonervell Texas 76043
# ERSON CONTACTED (GIVE NAME AND CFFICIAL TITLE) CON TRACT / P.O NO.
REASON FOR VISIT 35-1195-0561 Full time cenermer COPIES SENT TO: CH.C. Eng Cow, sis ' C o.i.e ia. Gn.,4
, i u ,, s S G e +., (s...i sy >: ANI file Subiect: Closure of NCR's Affecting Pioing Deviations (Documented on PDRF's)
Re: Generie NCR M2807 Prio r to closure of subieet NCR's request your assistance in resolvine the followine'ootential orablem. Many of'the documented
.r A mdeviations were identified orter to installation of component suneorts. eemoonents. and orier to hot functional testing. Any of the above mithe have caused further distortion and/or movement of.
the affected oisina creatina a problem of greater magnitude. A reinsoection by Brown & Root or assurance by Design Engineer-
, . ,,, .[. i n r , t h a t this,'does
._. "* ~'
nde pose a problem would-be acceptable resolutions. Q'.. _
'y . ", R Y i
*9( q h t
p SIGNED QCVER A &- , pgg
)
1 1 Brown (SRoot.h::. f, INTEROFF' *
.slE.MO i ~
IMd- 26,295 -
- .' ATE : October IT 1983 - -
TO: M. Coats, LANI FROM: J.T. Blixt SU3 JECT: CPSES, 35-1195 SIS Report i 16-009. In response to your concern addressed ! this SIS report , please see Engineering response attached. If you should have any questions pless. contact me at extension 459. ! l t k ' J.T. Blixt ' ' QE Group Supervisor
% /bs i cc: G.R. Purdy 1 R. Stever -
- G.L. Morris, Jr.
t b
'm .
e ' O
-p
.--...e ..
7- TEXAS UTILITIE5 ;E~ ICES INC.
. d .. OFTICE MEM -: .DUM
.p - .
- ~: .
*o @ "d*" 0""d y Clea Hoea. ' ..S TO/07hrt Subjoet onoc r gm..
... .. ~
RE:' SIS 16-009. dated 9/27/03 R E , The referenced SIS report states a ec. carn by the Atti Mo c dec=eni:*. . deviaticas prior to installation of pemt.nent pipe supper:c and prior
, to het' functional testing. -
I - Engineering is presently ccmpleting the disposition of att Unit 1 POP 5'r
,--- by letter after evaluating each deviatic:: per the latest as-built pipe stress analysis which provides deflectims and mcments of the piping' system.. The As-built (79-14) group is at :o findifzing its dec=entation
~
in Unit i by verifying installation of. rapports which were. not installed
~ ---.-at the time of survey. .
e . ,. :
. . .u .
The intent.cf the Hot Functional Test program was to insure that the . hot piping systems moved as predicted during war =-up. Engineering walk - l
---downs .and evaluations were perfomed prior to HFT to assure the piping T was adequately supported to reduce the pcssibility of binding or over
# stress. .'..
.,,, . :c. ,
'2 y ~,
- It. is therefore our opinien that the ':.RF program is scund and being preperly implemented.
~ '
.,2. +.r. : ._ ,.
. s.Q , ':..... T.*:'
f,. : ~g. ..:; .x - g::m- .. . :gr:. . . . . ' ::;-.. , . ..: q.-
. .. a. :.. . . . , :. . .
, .. _ :.7., 1,.. .-.: .
x.. : ,_ ..g y -,.:..
. -y..,. +.. : . . ...-.:y. .. .
s ... m. e 4:) . . s-4: -..c.:..... .. :.-.
. %st c-n. %;- ;a.- .c. .? .4. . ..* . . e
.g...'.... . : -
?5y=:
- y . ... ..a MQ.;,-yy,;.T
- M " ~. . l. + 4 T Q :. e.'!gg. . , r.; p.h.'w/ .G'.*e: .
,?Y
._ g y ;4,g,g;egay ,,__;,;_,,_ ,
EM i yhydM: - gineering -
~ '
(gpr ':u.;?,5,. { . g.lyC@. 't a:c.:$.f, :t: ~, D'; M Manager
.= -
y=:... HR5: HAM:ema i - N.'.=.ues .- ..
.n. . .....
.: g n: M. . .. v<r;.:.< .. . . .
. -- . . .a. u -
A - . OWJdhinscM ~~ cc: ~ " ~' *
~
h
/
F.G. Surgess l ' 8 H.A. Harris:n I *l g . ..
$1 -
. .> 9'
- p .
,I -
7c. . .. ..
.s . . . . -..
Y. .
/
~ '
S REPORT l~9 , TifE n4x rouwu. HARTFORO cossu rra:t.T univ: STEA.M UO!!.ER INSPECT!i)A :mi "'iURANCE COMs ANY
'6-009 Cordon Purdy, Site Q. A. Manager i oArt jsacET _.cr i
)/27/83
!... '*** l l 1 f
', , Marvin Coacs, Lead ANI 1 H.O./ BRANCH QFflCL
\
*CANfZATION fouston 3rown & Rooc, Inc ;
', f.CCATION STREET CITY ~
CPSES CCUNTY Box 1001 Clan Roac ~ ~A Giff"--- - gu Somervet* Taxas ~i0' n'EH3CN CCNTACTED (GIVE NAME AND CFFICIAA. TITLE) ' " ~ ^ ^ ~ T t4 7RAC7/ f'.- R?.ASCN FOR vlSJT ._ .... .1 i _ [ ! ' $ - t'
~ e,31 1 ef=e cearrace _
. CaptES SENT TO:
OH.O. Eng C.W, sis O chs.s ia.... , 8a.,; i a ..,. s s GC.h scus y): ANI fi1* s Subiect? Closure of NCR's Affecting p g .r in g Deviations (Documented on PDRF's) Re: Generie NCR M2807 ' '
. a.. ,
.h. . .. . :s
.s ..g -( ..
.. pr > -
;.y. .
- Prior to nclosure of subieet NCR's requese vour assistance
.q: ..:
y in Oesolvine the followine ootential oroblem. Many of the d o'eu m e n t e d deviations.. were identified orier to installation of comoonEne sueeerts. comoonents. and orier to het funecional casting. Any
. e.
. r.
of
' ~
t.6. _. the above miehe have _ caused further distortion and /o r move =en t of cm
,.~ the affected oicinz creating a oroblem of greater magnitude.r,m.... .
V.V *
.. *1
. .1' , .
. . . . n. -lrt,y5.a:).t. ! .t
!.7 7 A. ..reinsoeceton bv .. Brown & Root or assurance by Design'En'rineer-
.'. 6 .4 2'- . . . . . . . . . '
'
- 1'n r~ t h a t ' t Ni s ' d o e s n'o 't~
~ .. . ... ? Y .1 i ,e.,~.
ds . c o's'e a Weblem vos21d~be acceoeable r e so'lu c io n s . ' " -
.. .- := '
* - , 6
.s-
' .I i) L {#.
~ ,
u DlD -M - P 1 %Ch u
') -
, ;f-#. !
II3 M M hw P ' O YO (* }O
)l N \I
- M% -
g y-. 7
- ] a .w ...
' .bs, r t . f. .z. 2, .
; q,. ~. . .,.
w..-
"# _.. t f;;l .;.
. .t.
* ; .,, .E l
*/**3.~,'.,.
,[.: . t?. " ., !
- r. ,
., .a
.e iLO .
Covct-
~
p~~ 0
. i .- v e i s .c. , - --- l
-.-__ .y-- .m ..
. u , ...
/_a SIS REPORT- Q s CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,048 TIIE IIARTFORD STE.ut !!Olt.!!H INSI'liCTION and P TR.\NCII CO3 a t Au ri-own. co3sa.c t u rr m ur:
Ny g ,,g y 4 TO: CATE ! SHEET OF Gordon Durdv, Site n. A. Manacer FRCM; 10 /c /c 1 1 . John S. Hareer, ANI /
} H.O./ BRANCH OFFICE ORGANIZATtCN Housten _
Brcwn & Root, Inc. . LCCATICN STREET CITY CCUN TY - "';T,"Tr ~ ~ ~ "
. CO?
CPSES Box 1001 Glen Rose semerve y._ -:j g PERSON CCNTACTED (GIVE NAME AND OFFICIAL TITLE) *
~ ^o;.; 'n'i
~ "~ i 'C*
- b ; * ' '8. . . .
I REASON FOR VISIT ~~~
~_.4_m=_~.- ~-
Full time contract CCP1ES SENT TO:
- OH.C. Eng Coim. sis Ocx;.,ro....., ER.,.e.i u.a...,. sis E c e'i., (s..ci fy): ANI File Centra rJ__to_,y.o.ur._Qnali.ty_. As s uran c.e _Manua L,__10. 4 .5.,_ the_be icy .
supports _were_f abricated_wi.thout_discribed. ". control. of_Qelding i materials"_: T ' H-CHel:EE _al.QA_.00.22.3-- -
^
H=C"A.SB -010 A=.001:3--- - H-CH.l.:SB-01 QA-005-3~ - H .CMd=S32.019A .Q.Q5. 3 _ 4 .CH._l:SB._Q.lD.A-_0 0 7- 3 -
' 1, H. GE. ._3,-S B -010 A-QQ3._]._., --
H-CE-1-EB_ QJ_A.909-3 0 t
,. i R-CH- 1-S B-01.QA.-010 - 3 ,
i H-CH _l S.B_ .9J_0 A _0.11_") .. H-CH-1-S_B 9J_0_A-01,2 .3 H-CH-I-SB-010A-013-3 . . _ _ . _ . - It appears to this inspector that this is.a nonconforming _. con ____s dition and should be recorted as such. - 1 I l
$feSAO M< 3~s4 7 A /S'/ o ~ ce' c A' ,_E,7_9 5 Q.f J _ .
,0 . O.kn _ _ /.o/> c,8'.).. .._.. _
00v&4 W326,~ _ p(1 .A_RRA_Q ll /s3. .,
2 mr c. .
.e m s . m d 6 d.v.i~;A ! F " ~; G R QL.:. j d y . G .; @ . 43 .i. Q .". Q A M . ,; j
..~.
-n/ SIS RECORD FOR MONIT081NG Q.A./ij.C. F..aGRAfrfs THI! H ARTFOltD STli.\.\t IlOII.I!H INS!'!!CTION an ! INST'HANCII CO.st!'.\NY naunown,conirin:tcrm nn l
5 365 1 y rota- r , . Gordon Purdy, site Q. A. Manager lwe .l I c;sicuits cm. air samt 10/7/S3 l >ur 1 j ase saamos ' 47 secc= ce sc.co coin k*. : aa r ..o" *6 uss out . ' Sa g asrtcre touro Brown & RgQ t , _ _Ip.c . Houston -r.' i.r es("if t llan.Ua p JOor i m ;;pg - CD9N Glen Rose. Texas g'in.o
.." ; a p" *". 3.: e .-
1
- l. the undersigned. have monitored your QA/QC manual on: 10 /7 / 9 3d(.,_ .y o ,.,,. .,a . :ri ---
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . - -- _
Os.iis,aciorr:
, .a. . . w r , a, , .. . . -.- . .. aa.: . - --- - - - - - - -
',L unsatisf actory:
Section 10 Paragraph 10.4.5 " Control of Welc. n g * t 7 : m. " Re: SIS Report (932) # 10-024
== s
';'. .~a,
[5 In addition to the objects reported on the above document, the following hangers are in the same category of noncompliance: H-CH-2-A3-009-004-3, H-CH-2-AB-009-007-3, and H-CH-1-SB-024-005 .' Thie_apre m to be a generic ereblem. r- . CUSTOMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the "CUSTOMErTS RES0t.UTION" section below, and :: hg7 cate for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: Octcher 24, 1983 P: ease keep the Criginal of this form for your records and return a copy to inspector named below. lTsmsva Enes, atr /!'or,I$fa'uve i 2Fil ^ wt soto10/7/83 )sois Q,<-s[ese i. i(74 assawa as mestjnas scsame anvt as sisa; wr.srcut ,c . ,.. s .., ....,,,
'yS W' Q939JfoM I~$ ' w/M- S/3 9 .so024. WQg g p&.,t 4
-h* f% & .ar ts-a. 6 * --
~
m , t,i, . m 4p,m. w
^ ",
ey % #~ = Y % f a.a'-~- u
.<<sa.,.,, J . _ _ M -. l'
_,M %f Garn - A Q *W"./& Wi.-& --& w, 'Q'w#-- '-
. J-.we h.h h& -
^
Aa. u
~
c 4 w ) " % <:./ a opn A.Ju./. -< b w& +m M 8 ^^
' y , y eJr.L;, p a e. 4 04em ?'As Ay "' ' =
it w u } & "<.asJ.be. m , b w, 0- C*? wn ea w.,, -o - ,ew.,wa w, w a ,e,a a c . .. . ...- . ,
/s /3, /3 > Nd -
't, tha undersigned. have remonstored the above unsatisfactory conditions on: jgde /y3 T - /
< c ... ,
end found them: " 5atisfactory
. L.Unsai.sfactory (Essiaire cedow) t u f~ - ~
p o r4.' n/is ,9 i so e i o r a s- s .z s n o v,4 nsy (9.n ) Q _ g.
.. aruso) -
j j N 932 mc Q
,.. ;C a i7'L{ cd'f
- c. ...v v-
/ L -Wb""'^' ~'(~~')L i
-h~.:M.:&~ :.rM.x'5% .fdi t %p( SIS RECORD FOR MONITORING Q.A./Q.C. PRUGRAMS
*. Titu li Alm:oun sTu,ut HOH.EH INS!' Err!ON .ind INStJHANCE Cmu'AN). ~ CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,049 n.urrnmn. cow .rnet. r. :
ra<~ .. r , t 3G5 Gordon ourdy, p. ,, , ;: . 3 = caces ccw=> =>< Site Q . A . .atanaj% inuc,. e; /10/7/83 1!
, J.,,:, uc Uj B rown & Root, Inc.
- c. ,c.,a 2,,,,
,,,c..,,y,,,,,,,,,
u-e asnu a scuro Houston *"
.,,$' Cea:
CDSES r;1en Rese. Texas h __--,$ hop
- Fi is LXAssembly a . ,,,,/.
a g e ,i,c. U ++ em
?
- 1. the undersigned, have monitored your QA/QC manyni ca:u.1$M h .?_,H e:no in, 9;r, ,,y;[ * . 4
. - . . . ,.... ~- - = ==:--.y --
b3 ntisfactory:
~
e--gp f . l 3 unsatisraetwy:.. ~r casoc a n .ua n (ns an. r,a,.3 on e or m. nua .~w. -.M.s.W // Secti*cn 10 Paragraoh 10.4.5 /~ e
" Control of Weld:..nF :l" !
Re: SIS Recort (932) # 10-024 ' M'
. ~ --:-- w
~ '
~ ~ r.n..
{s In addition to the objects reported on the above document, the following hangers are in the same category of nonccmpliance: H-CH-2-AB-009-004-3, H-CH-2-AB-009-007-3, and H-CH-1-SB-024-005-3. Thes apcears *o be a ceneric e-eblem. C- 2
,c;9 cate afJSTOMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER S RESOLUTION" section below, and gi :
for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: October 24, 1983
< c a.. ,
Please keep the Criginal of this form for your records and return a cecy to inspector named below, em m a c ri s.: sv.o ,as Enc.up/!'.*er.E.'n'tIuve I ,"l." nsavnen as n.cs,utus aina.au aaon as stas umwatcom, ,c r 10/7/83- h 9,.[, ,,r 7/ __
., .,u s,..., uu... ,,
j p%; gag,,,._ W& D}X"D.p w
- a. /v1 * -
,,,, g, a.,6. . .
;; _,, w % k m j. _ n : ,,u mJ
. ,h i a .
- w'~ & - P " %"
- n ;-~< .M ~ ^m g:$ ,
- w. . ..
/ w .-
.,5 hM M W
- i. % % k # -
n y '
&pda.ds. astofmi
.t-U '
)*
f),,e & .,,.lb. .vw-~21W*s =H d d.M.r"ps w e '. '
&&f u J, h(eA; -*,,4,,M.Jl p.s n h f.,,,f'72,44.*
y aaw.< A A y ' ~ "
.~ *
*!h
-i u u= m. -vu wi s.. s.,_,,.. -
l8lfO h ,
- 1. tha untlersigned, have remonitored the above' unsatisfactory conditions on: jes/
~,,: c. gc ,,
.nd found them: [ Satisfactory Dunsatistsetary (Espia,n Detow) i ,c .,. ,
E
- y pe rs: ruis n uo e<ous us
\__,,-..' (capy a rniesiii) waa r(b.,: ) s/o - o x y ,
M p[. _ **
$1s rergegg ' gg *8't 5 CMG sa.h80 r*,se me ..,, '
e ]t Regressal to. s _ Fil //5 jj/p
,,e.,,,_,,,, - - _ .
, h ,
7 FalA-85-59 'aie
y .
.--- . . e
, , , . = ,, -*
ae4 gr, : v .. = .;
--V. SIS REPORT N - .:p:..; 7 TRii!!ARTFORD STILut flott.En INSI'liCrtON and I.Nst.*RAN(lt!(;o,nt*ANy itMs miesn cc NNt: sit scrr e,w: ,
10-024 '.. . . . 1OATE i i e o ..nc
* *Gorden ourdv. Site n. A. Manacer !o/gfg3 fSHEET ; l Cf. 1 H.O./ 8 RANCH OFFICE John S. Marcer. ANI '
2 QRGANIZATION Meusten ' Brown & Root. Inc. ' . LOCATION STREET CITY 'COdN7V $ tat ry ,
* ' ' - .1P *%,d *;".
l CPSES Box 1001 Glen Rose semer-sc3i~ ~ ~ ~ -
,_ j PER$QN CONTACTED (G3VE 'NAME AND OFFICIAL. TITLE) ' '~ j[g*J:. ,, __ . . a C i.,st ~ ' '." ' . ;'. 1 i
CEASON FOR VISIT
. L. - U id.-L i'. _ I 1
Full tirne contract CCF1ES SENT TC: . { O N o. E, c . w. sis ~ . O ow.' ra ai- Ea .a.1 u- . . sis 00+~(s=ip ANI rile ,_ ,, i l
. _._... :__.l.i _.e .
- 8 i.>. ii i
Cori.trary_.to_y.nur Q.uality_Assuranc.e_ Manual 10. 4.5.,_.'.he below , . .t
. . . i
' 2.*
s.uppor.ts_w.ere_f abricated_wi.thout_discribed_." control. _o f welding cc< materials '.'_ : "
, rv. .
H. ._CH=l:MB-01.Q.A .002:.3 * - H CH-l .SB-010A=.QQ.4-3._ (.. c... - g .C3-1-sn-0_1pA q.ose.3 3--
-. H=.C.H=l:S.B=.Ql.0A .0.0 E=3 . .
H:CH..1= S.B._Q 1&_Q0.7- 3 __ti._GH:1:sB-010A-q91.3. . - 4 H-CE:1:AB QJ.c..A-9.os-3 . 1 H QM-1-SB-Ol&A-0].0-3 .. j
- H-_CH-125.B-010A .Q.1,1 J
- H:.CH:1:S.it_p.LO_Ang.u .a_ )
. T.
A *. H-CNel-SB-010A _013-3
, ,,j_,,,; ; . '
e .. . , . It ap.p a_r_s to thi_3._inapeetpr tha_t_Q}is_is a_p.g_n. con.f_orp.i.ng eon- -
~
. l i .' .
1 dition and should be reco.r_te_d as su.ch. =- - ' D. .
..+.
. Al.:
3 4 b eiAa N< T A 7~ /te~ry o o ge cic 2.y 9
- 3__c.s'
'1.- .>
y 7 0 0 /ohc,de'.) _.__. ?--
. .
- Coit ~
sian -
- -~ n e. .
~'-
- w av. io-n ism . .,
j .- . i- .
. . _ _ _ _. _ ._ = ._
P-?h> ".GN SISTiin RECORD
#306 fy-<
aianTrono FOR sTuA3s MONITORING ao: Q,AdQ. . r>H0GRAMSLex# ixscucTros D '* A ** *#*:,s. ,na d.s tsst.:it6
. IIAN rF43MI) Ct3NN8iCr!Cl,;*r omlsc .
CASE EXHIBIT '4 .1,050 8366 ma~ r , urn mr ,,
.g .j Gordon Purdy, Site O. A. Manac . ocsche 91 3coz 3 lq
- il c,sroutes coa.ean, sent msr ate.cm ca scat.cn ccurar sm soscaat ws4 omtr;
- i. *; - l mi saa.oe P Felice.Up 9
- = Brown & Root, Inc. I trm,q., l.- R ecuire s L.JC:csed
*5
*sPLCfiCm tXAlm / C5 hop
_ g;glg g,ga;gj CPSES- Glen Rose, Texas / 'A Assamtly Alteration tasarvice l the undersigned, have monitored youl QA C manual on: 10/21/83
- and find the following sections:
1 .o a. , U $atisfactory:
<o ....n r-.a g/
V rse ~roaaoc a.-z Lna m r.. 3 oa a,m.. m.o . .~ e. . n . ~ a.., b Unsatislaetcry: Section 16 - Non Conforming Items - The following listed findings were found to be unsatisfactorv. See . h.; attached sheet.
.. s .
Although specific examples are given, the croblems found are not limited to just these examples. LjCVER
' CUSTOMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESOLUTION" section below and give ,
date for completion of ctractive action, so that items may be remonitored by: Nove::ter 7, 1983 , to.r.o Please keep the Original of this form for your records and return a copy to inspector named below. EEW"C" $13 Forests
-laso "''*8
- se m. m ,.,,
f ')
, .X teg. Wgr Repressarative '.1 File 10/21/83 {}so l ,__ Qy / Cp-[,
j .asaare or :ncs aims casca:sta asovt as sonc unsarcracica, sc.mm.. n a s ..,guenny,_/ / i _ hh
& A1
.i .i. )-
c; 6 4tYS- 6
'd 6 . _ e.,
M .- . . . . COVE;t
; cart cosascrivt acnca .u u ccustttta casa sota ,,,.
sotarc . , I k it, the undersigned, have remonitored the above unsatisfactory conditions on: { and found them: Satisfactory O uns.iist.etory f e,oi.,n e.,..; 15 I
.~ -
i e .
; "2 8d h'" $13 Foreign C'4 5**8 lass. sota sasa sma,v, h let. Mgr tegresentative Fde ,h n a. , e. ,.
F01A-85-59 4 ss ;
i _ _ . . . . ,
- SIS R3 port #366 5,
- Paga 2 of 3 i
3 (1) NCR's are being voided that should not be. Examples: M10,136 Rev. 1 - Should have been closed, M10,19.8 - This NCR references another NCR for justification when the two NCR's (and documents attached to them) do not deal with the
~
- same prob 1em and/or area. M10,193 - No dbjective evidence
- given for justification.
(2) 10 open NCR's were picked at random from the log books in each task force area. Only 1 Task Force NCR Coordinator could track the NCR's any further than through ANI review, and his tracking device was not the one prescribed by Brown & Root. (3) NCR's being presented to ANI's for review without having the referenced drawing's revision number. Examples: M_6752S Rev. 1, M 7116S Rev. 1. M 6577S Rev. 1, M 6620 Rev.1, M 71195 Rev. 2, M 6756S Rev. 1, M6619 Rev. 1, M 6188S Rev. 1. , (4) Trend categories for NCR's are inconsistent. Example: Some NCR's written for missing welds were trended C-ll or C-12, whi.le other NCR's written for the same reason were trended C-16. (5) NCR M 7169S Rev. 0 - Action Addressee was Finneran (Engineer-~ l . . , ing) . The review by Engineering was not signed on Rev. O I and the review blocks for Engineering had been NA'd on Rev. 1; therefore, the NCR had never been reviewed by the Action Add-l ressee, making the disposition indeterminate. -
- 16) NCR's being revised by organizations other than the organiza-tion that originally prepared them. Example:
NCR 5803S Rev. 1 - Rev. O was written by Wald Engineering and was revised by the Action Addressee (Engineering) . (7) Additional information being added to NCRs without being re-vised (added af ter initial reviews) . Example: NCR M 11,006S. (8) NCR .* cg books state NCR M 11,003 is void, but 'no date was entered. (9) NCR log books do not give Action Addressee. Examples: M 11,029, M 10,050, M 10,056, and M 10,058.
~ ! (10) NCR log books do not give trend category. Examples:
M 11,029, M 9650, and M 11,441'. i i
; .. _ r - - - - - . .
i .
~
, - _ - . - , -.,.,_--,.._-,c_,.__ . , . . . _ _ _
, _ ,_ __ . . ..L . _ _ .
/
SIS R3 port #366 Page 3 of 3 4 (11) NCR log books state a NCR is closed when it was actually voided. (12) NCR's written in one Task Force area, and entered on that I i
- log book, then transfered to another arei are not being tracked. Example:
M 10,205 logged in Auxiliary Building Task Force, sent to ; Safeguard Task Force on 8-2-83, closed on 9-29-83 by Safe- !
, guard Task Force, and log book in Auxiliary Building Task '
Force shows it to still be open.
'(13) Inspection Reports issued after ANI acceptance of hanger packages. Example:
" CC-1-SB-0358-006-3; CC-1-SB-035B-007-3; CH-1-AB-040-009-3; CH-1-AB-042-006-3. These were found during ANI re-review. (14) CP-QAP 11.1 and CP-QAP 16.1 are inadequate in giving Quality Control personnel direction on what is permitted to be written up on,an Inspec' tion Report and what must be written up on an NCR. Example: AM 03097 written 10-7-83 is,a clear procedural violation, 1 but hasybeen - n<r closed with an NCR as of 10-20-83. (15) Trend Analysis is not being accomplished for Inspection e' Reports. Refer.ence ,CPSES Quarterly Report on Q. A. Depart- -
' ment and Q. A. Program Activities for che Third Quarter of 1983.
~
. (l6) Trend categories given to Inspection Reports are very incen-sistent. Example:
C-16 is. listed for missing welds, incomplete welds, welds needing NDE, undersized welds, slag in welds, etc., and i Inspection Report (AM-00027) is trended C-16 while the re-port has nothing to do with welds or welding. (17) No objective evidence found that Q. C. Leads are reviewing Inspection Reports. Example: ' SafegtXtd Task Force.~ O e ( k 4 4
. 0--M. O em 6 0 e6 e,.
, ,-.m. - -
.,m. , , . - - - - , . _ - - -
y ,,.-,,.-w-, , ..,-,,-,yc.,,,- ,
,_ _ _ . . . . .- . . - .. - - -l Erom10h INTEROFFI '
.EMO IM6 26,404 DAIE: November 8, 1983 4
TO: J.W. Lytle R. Siever P1CM: SU" JECT: CPSES, 35-1195 SIS Report #366. t 1. WCR 10,136 R.1 was void with justification. The above NCR was i written against Suay Struc RH-1-002-013-C41R, Rev. 1. This strut , was .'.nstalled on Hanger CC-1-057-004-A33R, Rev. 4, Which was doctamented on NCR 10,794A. NCK '10,1c3S wars void with justification. Field welds 2 & 3 are full filfat welds by application, not design and as suc,5 are not acacon-forting and do not need Ifr/Pt examination. ' NCR *.0,188S and Ref. NCR 5212S R.2 do reference the same problem. 1 NCR 10,1885 should not have been written on BRP-RC-1-RS-021 (piping). The nonconformance is on hanger lug for suppcrt RC-1-OlS-003-C51S. Justification for voiding NCR 10,1885 will be revised. i 2. NCR b g Books have been updated and Task Force flCR Coordinators l
. ., reinstructed as to their p;ioper uge. *
- 3. Quality personnel have been reinstructed to include revision number of drawings on NCR's.
- 4. Trending codes are subjective and interpretive, the codes you described in this Item C-ll, component supports fabrication (incomplete / incorrect),
C-12 component support installation (iucomplace/ incorrect), or C-16 component suppert welding could all be used for missing welds. Quality personnal have been reinstructed on a more consistent use of trend codes. ! 5. At the time this NCR (71695 R-1) was written, our procedure required Quality Engineering to disposition NCR's "Rewptk", without Engineering approval. ! 6. NCR 5803S Rev. I was prepared to correct the disposition of NCR 5803S I Rev. O. This revision was prepared by the engineer that made an error on his description of the disposition. We find no evidence of a nonconforming condition being revised by other than the action / addressee.
- 7. Quality personnel have been reinstructed.
- 8. Same as Item 7.
- 9. This condition has been corrected and personnel reinstructed.
- 10. Same as Item 9. ~
t
- 1 3
9 S
% - , - , , . , - . - - - - - - - * . . . ,. - _ , - ,.,n , - - - , - - - - - w -, . , , - -r .-m - - - - - - - .-- ,. - , , - - e n - , -..m------ -.
__ _ __ . _ _ _ . . _ _ a Rags 2 of 2 i - SIS Rapsrt #366
- 11. When an NCR is void, it is closed per CP-QAP-16.1, Para. 3.1.1.4
- 12. NCR 10,205 has been closed by Auxiliary Task Force on 9/29/83.
Currently in Safeguard Task Force for tracking.
- 13. As previously agreed to by Hartford Steam Boiler and B&R, any documentation that was generated after ANI review of a package would require the Attachment 1 to be void and the package resubmitted to ANI for review.
- 14. We do not feel CP-QAP-11.1 and CP-QAP-16.1 are' inadequate. IR '
AM 03097 may result in an NCR, but this IR has nor, been answered as of 10/20/83. ,
- 15. An amendment to the Quarterly Report for the Third Quarter of 1983 was issued on November 1,1983 for IR's. All future Quarterly Reports will include an IR trend.
- 16. This is the same finding as Item 4.
- 17. There is no procedural requirement that QC Leads sign IR's to indicate their review.
We feel that most of the above items, if addressed during the Audit, would have been corrected to the satisfaction of the Inspection Agency. We also request an exit meeting to discuss any future findings identified during any of your monitoring actions.
-e ;--
^
W Stfver QC G'oup r Supervisor cc: G.R. Purdy
. J.T. Blixt G.L. Morris, Jr.
QA File I
- l l
l
. - - - --- -- ._ - _ , _.. . . _ _ .. _ _ _ . _ j
'{
D' S.S RECORD FOR MONITORING Q.AdQ.C. PROGRA nS THE H ARTFORD STEA31 Colt.EH INSPECTION and INSL*RANCE CO3tPAN) . 31.4 M TI flH'.1. CO%IMTICVr samler , r ,
-- "Tcc/
.. = lro . out v. .u u 4R REdOn Pu(fV $ h Q,,,Q.21,_,}{3nage,,r . Ncambo* 7 1001 1 l 1 3 g , arautas ccu. ear naut 3s7 saamcn : sw we,cn cm sosto cas:a, t.%ca 6 s is ca6ri o-- i j f 3rown & Root, Inc .-reno .us [- CI'8'8 i housten - te w res --
Wg ~ MCI # l0GAIM ' m field q egast/ 2 p= . CPSES Glen Rose, Texas D*8 h A58'"'687 U Alteration ' 'laurvice I. the undersigned, have monitored your QA/QC manual on: December ,o...,
- 7. 8 3and find the followmg sections:
S Gooe ^ _ e .no retrees {C5atisfactory: This SIS report is issued to indicate satisfactory response to the Remonitorine of SIS Reoort 4 266, u*e.nar e ca.ac =>.n.,an sur en (no .no r.ae } on e wr an. nuw,s.ssn*.ir.=u .* n.~us.* Unsatisfactory:
,i i
o l < b $I =
$ 3:
03 +
'J C%ER CUSTOMER: P! ease desenbe the resolution of these items in the "CUSTOMEiTS RESOLUTidN" section below, and give date fcr completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: N*\
, c.r.o Please keep the Original of this form for your records and return a copy to inspector named betc ,. '
~.
f'"'"'" 3' - -
$1s Foreign ' sua s ia aiw,
.,, ,tet. ugr teoresentanve Chie less. cast suo 10-7-83 h j
nea... , i se ,, s suc, t os ~..s,.a ,c
~~ b l- _+
. ,.. . f ..,,, , -
J 0 E' E5 25 E u.. T
+
COVER sa:t onnective acre au et c:arurta cast sota sotarc ,en..,u ,. ,
- I k
I, the undersigned. have remonitored the above t nsatisfactcry conditons on: e C Sat.sfactory p sceo.o
' a.*d found them: 6..a unsatisla*toey (Esotaen cete-J }
rz
. i N .
dE' {j 8 i1 1*. i 1
- i. . -
u l st$ Fore <gn 'i 'O* E j _n K','". .e te,,eseer,. ;ngasp. i g ,, ,,,, ;,,, _,4e
.m _= r l: son' ib newnows -
p
-w_.____..___..__. ,
~
\
n
** **F*tt9h" "' "" * * " ' '
n._ .- .=_
.f
. m SIS RECORD FOR MUNITORING Q,A./Q.C. PROSRAMS THE HARTFORD STEA.\13CILER INSPECTION and sNStJRANCE QOAtPANY HAMTI 06413. (:ONNt.4*t it.L l :in 1 2
,a an . r.u.,
'^ d366 gcut uu f i Gordon Purdy, Site 6. A. Manacie r ,
d oM c.s:cutas c:m,.av =t asse usiv,
! ce-ee- ?1
. .nsP e(sos os gato ca.or.,
14::s
,memcwd74 onso i l1 '
gg Brown t, Roo:, Ine. J vr mloslebut F W == msPts 10m LOG.IG ,
. , g ., a r..:v;< L i-:ctuc$
8 F,.it 2.ga.r/ CPSES Glen Ros.e, Texas CN8 'AAssiaimr O t...,,ii., Gia .,-
- 1. the undersigned. have monitored your QUQC maeuai on: 10./21/83 and find the following recticas:
a a. .,...,. r., ., 7 unsatisfactory: ,,. , o., oc . .., p r 3 ca . ,, ,.. . c . , . . .. ... .... , U Section 16 Non Conforming Items The following listed findings were found to be ur.satisfacterv. s o.e E. attached sheet. E5 gE Although specific examples are given, the oroblems fcuad are not ' limited to just these examples. GovtR
@ CUSTOMER:
d Please cescribe the resolution of these items in the "CUSTCME*fS RESOLUTION"and sectten give bejow dat.e 'cr completion of corrective action, sc that items may t:e remc.iitored by: Ilovember 7, .933
, o ... ,
Ptease'keec the Original of this form for your recoras ar'd return a copy to .insc:ctor named below. f.li'*'* !!! rot.ign - Ins 0
# 8 '*"** '
.;i4 5 up 2.v intan . x rae .10/21/83 { D#' ' _ '7'[y acatu a a rcu ci.saus.. an .s m #s w cra,,c ,
i ,__m O)
,..s,...g......,,, / /
See accached IM 26,404. dn' l$
-a f SAV Un .,
952/ Govta
. - . ,m .. - m, November 9, 1983
. m. .... . . , . . - Al l
_Nov. 9, 1983 ) 4
/ - - ~_ j _
- l. the undersigned, have remonitored the acove unsatssfactory conditions on:
n 11filfg3 and found them"
' Satisf actory u o...n EUnsatisfactory (ist,te.n metow)
E ' 1 sa
,. *s See Attached. i E
'O
*s=* ,~
, ,0. s.ii ma u s......,,
y Ts.c pc/.::y_. . .v.. .asis e t st...ey1 ,,;ra4 I 11/11/8 _3 D
= , _ - -
.t9 Sit ll,98 999
_ /_. J ,_ j G j _o j l i W ' - .
- n. -. .. . n_
, b. af
( DATE: November 11, 1363 TO: 46rdon Purdy FROM: Cerry W- Lytle SU3 JECT: DeJpense to IMS 25,404 SI.9 Reperc !]66 Lespense giJen, IMt 26,4C4 is acq.sptabl[ except for the ^ fcllowing items: - (1) NOR 10,193S - Hon conforming ccndition as written bv the originator states the filles welds in cuestion
'are full fillets recuiring MT/uT". Custification for voiding would be referenced tc a proceduru. Code inte.r- ,
pretation, etc.. not an evaluation bv a Q.C. Lead. J (6) The ocn confcrming con.dition of Rev. O of NCR $803S
-was misc changed by Rev. 1., uJe just the dis;csition.
b (13) Response as stat'ed is curre.ct; however, this response does not address the oroblem as stated i.e., deficien- t-cies discovered after final accectance it a non ccaferm-
- ing condition per Brown & Rc'ot q. A. Manual.
(14) CD-CAo 11.1 gives directicn to O.C. Insccetor to write an Inspection Recort (unsat) on everything exceat N" " stamped and final accepted items. This is in conflict with Brown & Roots q, A. Manual, 16.4.1, which staten ' (among other things) "a precef. ural violation shall te identified and documented On ac NCR". * (17) Cp-CAP 11 1 - 2.2 states "O,C. Leads vill review Inspection Renorts". Without their initials or some other device, there is no objective evidence of their geview. - Most, if not all, of the listed items vere cddressed to the involved O. A. personnel in the fiald, as exannlified by item 2 of the raport. Additionally, as stated on ch,e original report. the problen.s extend bevond just these excrapies . A 1
+
l . i d
.w
, p .w..-
"^
"'w.
4
. & Root.frie.
INTEROFFIC ' MEMO LMi 26,537 December 5, 1983
- M. Coats, LANI -
FROM: J.T. Blixt
SUBJECT:
CPSES, 35-1195 Unsatisfactory Remonitoring On SIS #366. Finding #1.
"NCR10,1h3S-Nonconformingconditionsaswrittenbytheoriginatorstates the fillet velds in question "are full fillets requiring Mr/PT". Justifica-tion for voiding would be referenced to a procedure, code interpretation, etc., not an evaluation by a QC Lead".
Requirement: Q/.M 16.4.4 voiding an NCR ". . .. he shall provide justification ' for such a disposition on the NCR, and shall sign for closure". , Requirement: C7-QAP-16.1, Rev. 20, Para. 3.1.1.4, Voiding an NCR -
". . . .he shall provide justification for such a disposition on the NCR and shall sign fo r closure. . . .".
B&R disagrees with the inspector's statement that " Justification for voiding would be referen.ted to a procedure, code interpretation, etc., not an evaluation by 4 QC Lead". In fact, if B&R did comply with the inspector's request, it would be in non-compliance with QA Manual Section 16.4.4 which inpart states "Th. QE, ccanizant supervisor or higher authority may, during processing, disposition an NCR to state "Not a nonconforming condition" or similar wording. He "shall provide justification for such a disposition on che NCR and shall sign for closure:. Further, as required by the " Document Violated" QE-QAP-11 1-28. Rev. 22, Para. 4.4.1.1 (ref. " Nonconforming
. Condition" entry NCR #10,1935), "QCI shall evaluate all Class 1 fillet welds to determine if they are full fillet welds", and per the reply to Brown &
Root's ASME code require #N183-092, the QCI's justification that "Not i designed full fillets" is a valid evaluation of the code and procedure requirements. Thus, unless the inspector can provide additional references, there appears to be no valid committments to substantiate the inspectors concern. Since all of the ANI's " specific exsaples" of NCR's being voided that should not be", were correctly voided, B&R feels that NCR's are being processed in compliance with QA program requirements, but to alleviate any further concerns, the B&R Site QA Manager has by IM dated November 17, 1983, restricted the voiding of NCR's to the QC/QE supervisors and the Site Level , III's. a l l l
. . . . : - l
i ANI Findine #6.
' "NCR's being revised by organizations other,than the organization that orginally prepared them". Example: NCR 5803S, Rev. 1 - Rev. O was vricten by Weldisg Engineering and revised by the action / addressee (Engineering) .
- Requirements: QAM 16.4.7 "NCR revisions shall be initiated by the same organization that performed the original preparation pecviding they have a
signature authority. NCR revisions . hall receive the same review and approval cycle as the original NCR", - CP-QAP-16.1, Rev.19, Para. 3.1.5.1 ". . . .NCR revisions can be initiated
' by QE/QC, ANI or Engineering providing they have signature authority.
NCR revision sha'1 receive the same review and approval cycle as the original NCR". - t 33R Response Finding 46.
"NCR 5803S revision was prepared to correct the disposition of NCR $8035, Rev. O. This revision was prepared by the engineer that made an error on his description of the disposition. We find no evidence of a nonconforming condition being revised by other than the action / addressee.
ANI Response Finding #6. . The nonconforming condition of Rev. O of NCR 5803S was also changed by
, Rev.1, not just the disposition.
The NCR #M38035, Rev. I was submitted to the individual who reported the nonconformance for concurrence with the correction made to the condition de.scription. That individual signed the revision indicating his concurrence. . ANI Finding #13. .
" Inspection Reports issued af ter ANI acceptance of hanger pack 25e8-Example: CC-1-SB-0353-006-3 4
CC-1-SB-035B-007-3 CH-1-AB-040-009-3 CH-1-AB-042-006-3 These were found during ANI re-review". Requirements: QAM 5ection 16.3.1: "The final acceptance of supports shall be performed by QC per a Vendor Certified Drawing / Design Review Drawing (VCD/DRD) valkdown, including document review, in accordance with site procedures. The final acceptance of the piping system shall be performed on an N-5 valkdown, including document review, in the same manner. CP-QAP-16.1, Rev. 19, Para. 3.2.2.2, Nonconformances - When a deficiene.y . which can not be resolved by an unsat IR or any deficiency related to an N-Stamped component or any deficiency sdrich is identified ~ af ter final acceptance of piping system or support in accordance with Reference 1-E (CP-QAP-12.1) (i.e., Hydro Release or VCD/DRD walkdown including document i review), shall be reported on an NCR in accordance with this procedure....
. {
CP-QAP-il.l, Rev. 3, Para. 2.3.2 of Attachment 1 - Same as above. l e y a e w - e + y - m mm- % y- i- - -
.. . r <-m.. . . . 9. .. .. ;- . . . . . .
. -c'. .
., n Brown & Koot Response.
The inspection reports'addresse'd in this SIS report were written during August and September. During this time frame, there was no QAM requirement that acequately addressed final acce;.cance and the initiation of an NCR fer this condition. In October (10/10/83) the B&R QAM Section 16, Para. ' i 16.3.1 was revised te clarify this item. Therefore it is felt that the 1R's were correctly implemented and that NCR's were not required. QCI's have received documented classroom training on this subject and are fully ; aware of this B6R QAM requirement. _ANI Finding #14. , CP-QAP-11.1 gives ditection to QC inspector to write an Inspection Report ,
. (unsat) ou everything except "N" stamped and final accepted items. This ,
is in ecnflict with B&R QA Manual,16.4.1 which states (among other things) ! , "A procedual violation shall be identified and documented on an NCR". B&R Rasponse. Attachment 1 of CP-QAP-11.1, Para. 1.0, NOTE: was written to clarify IR's and direct reference to Para. 2.3.2 which identifys NCR's. In CP-QAP-16.1, Par _a. 2.2.1 and 2.2.3 will clarify this inspectors concern. j ANI Finding #17. I CP-QAP-11.1, Para. 2.2 states "QC Leads will review Inspection Reports", without their initials or some other device, there is no objective evidence l of their review.
, l 1 .
B&R Response.
- 1. CP-QAP-11 1, Attachment 1 Para. 2.2 requires in part, that: The QCI shall obtain the serial number for an IR from the QC Lead. Prior to assigning the IR number, the QC Lead shall review the IR.....
- 2. C.R. Purdy's IMf26,019 additionally requires that, "at the time of assigning the serial number...., the responsible QC Lead shall also assign the applicable deticiency trend code.., and document the trend code in tha comments section of the IR log".
Therefore the objective evidence of the QCL'S review was the IR number i itself on the IR and the trend code indicated in the log and on the IR . itself. Bus to help porvide the " objective evidence" requested by the inspector, the QC Leads have received additional instruction to initial the trend code in the IR cosaments section. s I
; I
\
l 1
., - -m**..*.
4, - i ' i It is f al'c by B&R QA Management that with better communications between i ANI and B&R QA personnel, the type of concerns addressed in this SIS Report , 1 would have been corrected or resolved prior to the initiation of many reports. 1 I i Should you have any questions in regards to this response, please contact i me at extension 459. I k i n
~
( J.T. Blixt QE Group Supervisor l JTB/bn cc: G.R. Purdy R. Siever , G.L. Morris, Jr.
- t. .
6 t,* e 4 e O w.
3,;,. . .d s S!S REC 3RD FOR l.ic!!!TCnil'G Q.A./Q.C. PROGRAr,1S
.+ '
.f'".I. .,. - THE HARTFonD STEA31 MHuin INSPECTION and INST RANCE COStPANY CASE
- H 4AT1-().t!) (*.11MIC18:1,*T a.uc ,,, ,
EXHIBIT 1,052 ao,-n p
,r * -
u , [ ras.
',, I :
Mr. Gerden ?trdv'. Eite O. A. Ma.arer . Oe--'be r 21. 10 E *8 - i =se ea =.:a e ac.imouscam. m e- g8* 8. g g g:me;::,,, s
'a':
=i a::wn c nces. In:. inoesten we m e- -a..-<
, c " , ow um - 7 is
- a enin -
MN 3 -3"' '* '*'n vy -- Annanen Jaurnu CPSIS r:len Rese . "'en et s l' and find the following se:tions: i l1. the undersigned, nave monit:ree your QA/QO manual on: 10 /2 5 /E ....
?
,_ eG se es .a. FJ s.
;_ Saustactory: ,-
[, , . -, c, u <;. r j c a =aa'r = -.= am*---.aa = .~.=* - g g. /
. unsaustactory: g,gggg3 ;7 goggggggy, ;;;ig_, .
7,
, ,j g / . ,lfs'. U .
v See ht: ached ) g
) _4. : .
t[ ./ e_ f n g%, v
-f h.
~
> i
.s / . b. :-
e.
.i .
0
}
I Ov'R g t OUST 0MER: Please oescribe tne resolution of these items in tne "OUSTOMER'S RE301.UTION" section ceton, anc pve { 11 # E 'E 3 C t i ca:e for comotetion of corrective a: tion, so that stems may ee remenitorac Oy-
, s, .
g ; F ' Please keep tne Original of tnis form for your receres and return a cocy to insoector namec cetow. I . s:s:a,r e 1 w.i: ms . se e eew. [ : Znes. unrl!.*r'eUfa"im I.;I'.* 9:10/31/83 !h Jg Q . ~~/d g .,-n.-..-C.,.-~r.
< l /
t : I I As verbally discussed with che inspecce; on Nove=ber 2, 1983, no response t necessary. _ --. .
.w 5
c j E: _ _
- El 5 :! l C
L
- k Ovi:
sc
' oast ca.AtC:rvt C04 su M Gasp.11G leML sienG s $@ine,C a.m.e s me.re /
N/A l November 8, 1983 !)
. 1 l .
l1. the unoersigned. have remonitorea the acove unsatisfactory conditsens on: s -
- _ .2 .
} ene found tnum: soustettery ,;unsatisf actory re, ore,n eeso.f E i g e-
= si i N
= =U a .
. m.t'* * , sis e.,. .. __i.... m sw. . w: , -2. . . ..,,
l :n.: ucte.~. mtan . ' u. _ ;L I t l . q I
. . _ . , _ ~ _ -
. l l
8 . '
'- ** ' ~'-
*j -
. SIS Rspert i 367-A
! ', Page 2 of 2
.] .
j l N C
. 4 Since JIS Report 939 6 367 was written, the felicwing i
- i. NCR's have been cresented for RNI disposition cencurrence.
[. They all have C1' ass 2 material, or material that is not I e certified to any Code class installed, on the following Class
"[
a I hangers. ) fy (1) 11,294-S Hyr. RC-1-072-703-C41K HT 416 28 RIR 1631 RIR is unable te be located bv PPRV mersonnel. ' i
; (2) .11,299-5 Hgr. RC-1-161-001-C21K HT _fh,itM./ 00*PPRV
; personnel is unable to locate a R R for this i. -
i l 1 (3) 11,337 ,5 Hgr. RC-1-035-704-C41R HT 41689 Same as (1). 1 { (4) 11,296-S Hgr. RC-1-018-016-CSlK 801P05170 R!R 17061 l 4 Class 2 with CMTE.
-T -
(5) 11,297-5 Hgr. RC-1-0 52-019-C41R 20l?0517C S a=e as (4). E g (6) 11,293-S H;r. SI-1-026-710-C41R 054302 RIR 14508 ( Material not certified to any Class; contains CMTR cnly. t . f (7)- 11,301-S Hgr.. RC-1-146-001-C815 054302 Same as (6). I (8t=-11,338 y Hgr. RC-1-163-009-C815 D27580 RIR 12530 6 Material not certified to any Code Class C cf C does l net list type & grade of material. t * (9) 11,295-5 Hgr. SI-1-090-08-C41K 80l?05170 Same as (4,.
\t (10) 11,343 Hgr. RH-1-001-010-C41K 66190 RIR 17036 Class
[ e 2 with CMTR. - j - (11) 11,344 Hgr. RC 1-161-005-CSix 66190 Same as :10). 7 (12) 11,345 Hgr. S!-1-182-047-C41R 69E706 17036 Same [ as (10). l k
- t .
1_ I h l l _ . 1 3
, e l
l l l l 0 6 M #* e
- *" - ** .e..
a
r- 2.i .~007.3 TOS MCEiT3T.IG3 Q.A./ Q.C. PG0 GRAMS
? *'ba "*
. . y 3.1:n e .nu STE.ut 3011.*IM INSPticTION and 1.Nst.R.ANCF. CC.stPANY
.M * .: :i i::1. 4. .s .irru:t. r u ua ai 2*y*
.j~ s =.-. e : = , ;,,, ,,a
==.=. .=. -
b '
*;r ::. M.;;tr. Site C. A. **n . a e- ;S-*-be-1
;- ~ ~ sessw.
g
.o u. s s .cas..s ** . ' Cm-hac
.e L . r;:.u* w*a3 l .
- . ? :: , -' c . : *3 v s - - *' 2-m-~~ -i te 'o
- 5:
a . _ _ ;im - a esa.c. - 4 G
- e :-
_ "J.c s e . '"e x a s os :emry uteration Jeu
!a h .: ' r e . .a.e mcnitorec your QA/QO manual en: 10/35/o3
. anc fir d tne fellewi's seci r:s:
y - -- c....
- , - ,. r ..
;J .s ==
v
?)
g .- . . . w e .
.- : aa ., ~~~- . . .
~~ ~
Y ~ Secti:n 17 Corrective Acti:n e. t A o . 1 r .. 1- t. See Attached: f l-s, =.=.
.'- .i- 2 . Scheduled monthly monitoring
]
- f. . ,
t ei
- l
!. ~
U CVER 4
. C:.:5 0,MH: P.sase mes::ce t.*ie resoluten of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESQt.UTICN" section Delow. and g've
. .pk : :e :. :: : vet::- c: : rrec:nre ac: ion, so that items may be remonitorec ey: J.1/ 8 / 8 3 uamo.
. : ene ses: :ne ".r'g a. :* 5.: s form for your records and return a cocy to inspector named below.
ygm c ws :.we me errs = mar
- 4 s.
i aans. ucr. a.::en.nu.. . .X 7 ._,a ,10/2s,/83 $ p , fm g q > 3 :u w. xa <= .s..s a w a,w.2c:n ec~ a s . . ...a,o See a:: ached IH i 26.407. we a !
=ei 3
0
-=.
3 al 25 . A I E:l*:!
- 4 w=i i s
f I, D 8
' CVEM cast .:sa : w . *v =t : r.tna a cara soitt. a..,. ..
g >sr.au.c h
' llt IO,l$ ~$ l /l. /d sf] l ef 3 1. the uncers.cned have t'emenstcred the aDove unsatisfactory conditions on:
- A .
1 . - n a. .?
. and 'occ ?'.em: $4stalactory UUnsatisfactory tispleen seiows a
Ee 5 t l .
'id,'*
- si.1 f e.e.gs . insa. twt W , scau sasa ..ww.
e .% t I '. e _ Ett Uff0 ' 9Ef t19At3tf19 % IUt l _T
.__ g=.-
l 4 k , e i ****M- * ' e' =-m e e
- t
).h ,
EIS .~.a: :: a*57 9agO . :I2 f 41 . t, , . ...a.__2..., s..... .. _ l (1) S-5~, S-56-R.1 i These CAR's were net veifed in acccrdance with
~s Section of. the C. A. Manual.
E i
'2)
Material Ciscre ancies
} ( 1.'- :iCR M11,2'4-S Class 2 belting material
+
[ t installed on Class I hanger RC-1-075-054 C6*P. (2) NCR M11,236-5 Same as abcVe C3-1-080-002-0415. L, (2; NCR,M11,237-5 Sane as above RC-1 087-304 C31K. b Chere have been several NCR's issued identifyinc Class 2 f 1.i 3 material installed en a Class 1 item er system.' In these
} s!*s che material was issued frcm the warehcuse and a' Level II A :n.7 ec:ce signed saying the ccrrect material was issued frcm the f
2
.-1:encuse and installed. To this date, no Corrective Acticn has
- : ::n taken.
h y (F) Seccicn 17 states the ANI will receive ec.cies cf a Corrective Action Recuests. This has net been ccmclied g with. 4 . 9 t, _- M f_ ' 1 4 ls
'.e h
d M-B - K d l i 0 l 1 e 'a _J
*e,see* sm .so--- --- -
+ ._ , , ,, , , g m
, - ~ w
- v w W ~ '-
[ .
- * >:.. ir .:e_tr. !NT 22CF7 C; MT_'M
- dl , d
'fg. ; .Z- .
2AII: L: e=ber S.1733
.- M. C:a:s
. !.2 : .7.T. Blin:
I*.* ...2..:: C75Z5, 35-1193 SIS Repor: #367. ! In respense to :he inspector's opinion that "...there is no obje::1ve eviden:s : hat any corrective ac:1on has been :akan as prascribed in :his is:: ion (17.0) of the QA Manual", BrosT. & Roc: feels enat :his inspec':or has :ot comprehended the intent of the first paragraph in See: ion 17.2.
~
Sa Irown & Root Site QA Manag=~ h*- '-- - - - " " " review of identified. nen enforming condi:icns" ijt the Quarterly Repor: "to deter =ine if significant conditions adverse to qualis< exts - ~7ur:her, as s:a:ed ein.
- i. :Lon 17.1 Scoce: "This see:1on as:sblishes the methods (plural) for snauring that condi: ions adverse to quali:7 are promptly evaluated and repor:ed". Culy those "significantly" adverse condi: ions which are identified as such by the Site QA Manager's reviews vill have a CAR orepared. All others sre repor:ed to the appropriate levels of nanage=ent "vi.1 IR's, NCR's, *CIC's, DCA's and the causes of the conditions are corrected".
Itan A nese figures are correctly copied off of the last Brown & Root QA Quarterly Reper: furnished to you as infoma: ion only and since the inspec:or has not identified a speci.fic unsatisf actory ice =, B&R must assume that no response is required.
- a= B Inspection Reports QAM Section 17.2 - A documented review of *dentified nonconforming conditions (i.e. IR's, NCR's, CMC's, DCA's as delineated in Sectica 16.0) shall be ac:cuplished by the Site QAM at leas quarterly to deter =ine if significant condi:1ons adverse to quality are developing and to further assess the adequacy of the QA Program. .
16.3.2...."These deficiences are identified and documented by the QC Croup en an Inspec: ion Reper: (IR: Ey. 16.2). These Inspection Reports are logged, issued to applicable construction discipline, and tracked by the QC depar:-
=ent. At the end of each quarter, the QC depar sent vill forward a copy of the IR los to the OE Crous for Trend Analysis". If the inspector had inf:rned the QE Group that he required the trending results, the trended
- v of the IR los vould have been made available for his review. I: is ;
thi.r2 fore requested that as a courtesy, 3&R QA/QC be offered the oppor: uni:v 1
- o a: lesse prcduce the back up material being monitored prior to receiving j an Casse SIS 939. ;
- 1. Auniliary Building Task Force shows no trending to de: ermine the cause 1 l
of discrepancies. Enamples: s) S*.;-3-17 3-70 2-A3 3 R ) Uns:: IR #1021 - C-li 1
-)
c CC-1-EC-007-Cll-3 Unsat IR 4 5's - C-li c) CS-2-033-CU7-A53R Unsat IK v:t - 0 's.1 C-12 d) CH-2-AB-024-005-3 Uns:: IR #007c - (:his quarter) I l
~~~ 1
_ l l l
y -
... : 0. ' . .b, ., - -
- . ls.u.rd Task yor:e
- ,.r-:
; CC4-0C3-3:2R *:nss: !R # Z 2 - C-is
"; .-0 7-019 R ** 4st 'IR 8 '272 - C-is j, j CS .-i;-043-C0!-I Cnsa: !K fills - C-15 e :i Ay-1-102-011-333R Unsa: IR 81260 - C-5 f -
81 1 .. .. t
; a) MS-1-130-049-CI K Unss: IR # 19 - C-11 C~
b) CS-1-K3-006-003-2 Unss: IR # 1 C-15
- IC-1-07f-Cf3-C61R Unsst IR f 1479 - C-15 RC-1-C75-053-Ct1R Unss: IR ! 101 - C-16
[4 d) SI-1-C39-009-C415 Unsat IR # 2195 - C-16, C-11, C-20 6 8
- Al'. ef :he c=seples above were :: ended (as chevn) in the Qus::erly Tre :.a I ;R Lag saintained by the QE Croup, excep: fo: #3076 which.vas ini:ia:ad f during the present quar:er.
1 . Tha inspe::or's stata=ent tha: "the unsa:isfactory inspac:1on reports ars f1 :e: :: ended to decernine whether original faul:7 inspec:1on or a design j . :hi ps triggered the follow-up unsa:isfsetery IR", is not ::: ally cor:e:: { sinea 219 IR's vers legged against category C-5; that is "Dvg/ CMC (ince:ple:e ' { in::::ec:)". The inspec:or is partly correct, in that some of these "unsa:' s IR's vere writ:en af ter the 1: ems had been acceptably signed off by the A::!'s and as such should have been trended as C-IS, that is "Inspec:icc/ 3 f Survei'. lance". The inspec: ors opinion that "There is no objective l
- evidance that QC inspec: ors are monitored to assure adequate inspecticas
! a:s being perfor=ed to reduce the ntzaber of NCR's generated for velding
}C-discrepancies", is without meri:.
a 1 Cont:sry to the inspector's miseencep: ion, the perfor=ance of QC inspec: ion y personnel is evaluated se=1-annually by the Site Level III's. Tur:her, j :he Si:e Level III's have the authority and responsibility to revoke or
- suspend'cartifications when sufficient reason e is: to question the
{ individual's perfomance or capability. To date the AN!'s have not
, iden:ified specific persennel who they feel are increasing "the number of f NCR's generated for velding discrepancies", and since per QAM Section 20.4 j "The A:II shall be given the opportunity to reinspect and verify satisfactory
# . c:=pletion of the disposition prior to closure on the Nonconformance
{8 Repert", it would be assumed that "the ANI's dated signature on the NCR" veuld subs:ancisce this. The Level III's validate NCR's initiated by a
} Level II after snoche: Level II had previously accepted the itas.
; NCTI: There is not nor has there ever been a require =en: in :he Q AM l v '
Section 16 or 17 requiring "monicering" QCI's to assure adequate 1 5 inspections are being performed. j d l
- e- C hiz is a correct statement and is closed based on ANI re=enitoring.
- 2. ??RV Log is not showing any CAR's af:e: Sa:. 5-43 thru S-56 are
#11ed in the book". QAM Section 17.0 does nc: address F?RV and would
, ie ou: side :he scopo cf this section of the C/Jt. A: present BC.R has nn raquirements for sonizarin, a PPRV Log f:: info n.s:ien er any c: hor
= re:Jen.
E s i s e emusamme e
~
O "* .
.g
- n -
7 - .- . , , - p--,----sa --,a , a- - - - - - - - --. - - - - -
..,,s..
~, e
...:: 4.:7 C -
J.
- as 1.- rec:::s s:ste=er.: : a: "There is no UCI Coordina::: :s = sine in h, 0.a 0 L:;**, is cc:: :: bu: since QA:t See:ica.17.2 (10*;;i33) s:::as d 2. - d2*.ity Inginesring ( .I) Grcur : hall =ar.=: sin a .d.*.:t (? ^iti:
i .'* . ) . . . " Ercun & Roo t is sgsin unab*e to iden:ify a specift: uns:: 1:e=
.[ :: =axa a :ssponse to.
.f s- 3 t-
. 7cided CAR's 5-55 & 5-56 R.1 l
f aroun & Root disagrees vi:h :he inspec:::s c inion -ha ~!hcst CAR's vare not voided in s::::dence with this see:i:= of ::e :J:'. As
, previously s:sted in response to Mr. .*.C. Ti'i=an's Le: a: :a:ed i Augus: 3, 1933, " CAR S-56 R.1 was never issued as t e La:t :f :he
. 5;AM's signa:ure vould indicace", ani :AR S-55 was c::::::1. veidad per
{h the require =ents of the revision in ,eff ect at the 22:a.
)+
y .:e= _-
$ The opening statement is the only par: o f the AN!'s pers==&* as s==p tion
[ :h:: is crue. It would appea: that he has not resesrched.c==: esended g . :ha MOR's (even though he signed : hem), 'eecause these NCl* r d ' --y "cciar c:ded" caterials incer::::1y applied, not incorrec:17 issued sa:erial.
;jr The eriginal nucs were correctly issued on Ma's No. 202954, II- 05 a=d l
I 203093 far inscalla: ion on their respec:ive hangers and vere re 12ced by
- he ::sf: vich the incorrect color coded ones. The inspe::::t * :si:2 _
- s:stament that, "...no corrective action has been taken"; iz re:7 isleading since NCR's have been written in each case. But if the issue: :: is re-quasting a CAR rather than just corree:1ve action, 3&R feels th:: :his is c: a "significantly adv,erse condition". -
Item y This inspection s:acemen: that "See:1on 17 states the ANI vill re:sive ce;ies I of CAR's" is correct. But the stacament chac chis has not bes: ce= plied vi:h is incorrect. B&R has and vill concinue to distribute c=;iss :f CAR's as required by See:1on 17.2. Further, since no proble= ef thia
=a.ure was identified by Ear: ford C?SES Audi of July 13, & 14, 1?E , l B&R must assume that again only this inspector " feels" chis is ::: being c:cplied with. l In clostug, B&R must re-iterate chac as demonstrated in the abeve responses,.
if the inspector had, as a courtesy (if nothing else), offered B&R OA/QC 5 the oppor: unity to at least produce the docu=entacion being =esitorei,
! ;;ior to being " blind-sided" by and "Unsac" SIS 939, alot of :i== a=d en;ense c:uld be saved.
Should you have any question or if we can be of further assis:ance, please do =ct hesitate to call C.L. Morris, Jr. at ex:ension 743. 9 J.T. Blix:
.!: ":= QE Occup Superviso:
8 ..- ::.3. Ti1*:.sn 0.K. Purdy 2 Siever G.L. Morris, Jr.
- 1. -
0
-, N I,13 RECORO FOR MONITORING Q,AdQA PROGRAMS - CASE EXHIBIT NO.1,051
'- :~illi ll.\ H l l OHl) N'l li.\M 11 0 11.1114 INNI'liCI'lON and IMt.'HANCl! COMI'.\NY s e u. s.n.. . owe i se e i . p.:
*369
.:._..=.,.. ,- .
..:.=-a....-. . -- -
ui is m o. 3 Mr. Gordon ourdy, Site. n. A. Manager . Nov. 9, 1983 3 . . . . . . . . by en-.
.[ 1 l 2 w .' . ,, .er o. ... . a... : ,.,c,o... us, o. ,
i . ro 33,. Brown-& Root, Inc. .[ liq \2Atan .fi9us ton . . ._.L a.ue us- ctos.a . ..,.a w g s.a
~
..a e . sa.
. . . ,.eia ,
, aesai,/ ..
CosEs r:len mese. Texas .saos X asuniety '. JaHuuson walasuviu
- 1. ene undersigned, nave monitored your QA/QC manual on: 11-9-9 3_ . _ and find the following sections:
. o... ,
.o.-.-...
Sat.stac,ory:
,,u.ec ; '
X unsatisfactory: E. A rWi o. ~,,, ,, .,- ;a. - .... Section 17 E" o;
=
i; a OyEn I CUSTOMER: Please cescribe the resolution of these items in tne " CUSTOMER'S RESof.UTION'* section below, and give
! date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored t'y: 11 .'6-83
, a. . ,
,l Pfesse keep the Original of this form for your records and return a cocy to inspector named below.
, , , . _ o, . . . , . . . , . , ,
5 2.. . .,.li.,.,,.;A. 2.' j 11 a .3 m .. o, ,mi -a.. .. .~, ,- , o p (a. 4 3 .
- =.
_=-
, ._._m__._._.__ . _ _
au n OE
>,,a OVER s e . ~ ,,a ,,a. .a . -
-,,a......,
)
?I. the undertigned. have remonitored the above unsatisfactory Conditions on:
and found them: Satisfactory Unsatisfactory IE. pia.n a.to.e o -. - 4 - - - - . . . -. . _. H . _ . . . _ , _ . _ ),N y.
~
~
i.io. .': *'s = ~ ' '-- ~~
.'I^.. ..,. .lsrs
. . , . . . . .F.,,,g".
..... ,... f)iF4s
; ,Tia 4.'.. e
. #6 .
O l 1
) \
l
_. _ . . . . . . , .- x t v-r m ,gt
* 'JSIS RECORD FOR M0filTORif1G Q,AdQ,C. PROGRAMS
$ k" Tilh HARTFORD STEA31 DOII.ER INSPECTION and INSCRANCE CO3tPANY su rremo.comertet r =io: 7 , 369/B Response 1
, l o .., . .., r.=, us smtr ,r:
., g ' Gordon Purdy, Site Q. A. Manacer Feb. 1, 1984 1 . 1
,5g cwc.usccwue et ensa sumo. a g $f Brown & Root, Inc. pas, stoc= ce scate.m couvre, q.gangusa of r,
'd a5*tCnca L8c8'e Houston IHouston - te w ree L- C!88d 3- -Field e CPSES Glen Rose, Texas lC3 hop & Assenitty n eosir/ g I U Alternion las"v"' <
l I the undersigned. have monitored your QA/QC manual on: 2-1-94 and find the following sections: a o... , I _ ra : . r.m., l 1 3'"*'*'** Section 17 Corrective Action taken in I.M. 26,729 is acceptable and closes this 939 - '
< w, casac . , .= t,.s r 3 on wr u,. ,,.- w..~. .. . .,
'm Unsatisf actory:
L'l;. w f,,,. _ ts
'/
55 (ln:n ITP
!! %J k~
(jbV 9SM ! .
* ~
._ovt-k, CUSTOMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S R date for comcletion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by:
, o .,. ,
Please keen the Original of this form for your records and return a copy to inspecter named below. I1.Y,tes. tr'** / esis -ins, la't 5*(8 5'caa 'a v r i.re,,,
'aaa'**
m teeresemtive dnie l2-1-84 -- sisaure os is=ost trtus casca.ua aeovi as u:ar, esai.stac:cre rc.nna.
)
swwse s e,< _e.e sey, (. - a5 55 35 ea . 9 0vt* cast casetenvi acre .u u ccmtras cart sots scato ac.v .e m...s .,.e,
~
h I. the undersigned, have remdnitored the above unsatisfactory conditions on: and found them: C satisfaerary CUnsatisfactory fEssia n metowl
'j5 N .
di r .
$E E
*)
81' 'W"'" j$13 Fore.gn p lass. 8 3*t8 **t8'ase,asen,w, tet Mgr/ teoresentative hie h .
/
e
... m. .r.-n.>. ,mwrwwwme . rDGCitsW,*-itir.!I;U UNMC '
. ~ii***i A .2 : .
/ cascune. .
1 1 (. INTEROFFIC; . 3 0 IM) 26,729 January 26, 1984 To: M. Coats FROM: J.T. Blixc
SUBJECT:
35-1195, CPSES SIS #369B. NCR 12,542 was written to identify that Heat #28550 was used on hanger CS-1-112-720-C41R without meeting the requirements of 20-2121 for Class 1 =aterial. In addition, Mechanical QE will perfors an indepth search, both manual and computer, for possible usage on large bore and small bore hangers. If any discrepancies are found, they vill be addressed 7 on individual NCRs. e Further,B&R, QE and Receiving QC will reviewIannotate the " Heat Number-Log" and the heat nusber card file (originated in accordance with C?-QAP-8.1), to include both the ASME Subsection (i.e., NB vs. N7) and the ASME class for places only. This vill include revising Para. 3.12 of CP-QAP-8.1 to require including applicable ASME Code Class (i.e. , (.,' NB-Class 1 or NT Class 1). s J.T. Blixt QE Group Supervisor JTB/bs cc: G.R. Purdy R. Siever G.L. Morris, Jr. QA File e 1
- e
/*. .,
G 4
S . SIS RECORD FOR MONITORING QA/QA PROGRAMS - CASE EXHIBIT NO. 1,053
._.. THE HARTFORD STEA.M BOILER INSPECTION and INSL*RANCE CO.MPANY HARTFORD.CONNECTM 1.7 o4to2
. 367-8 to rnw. ene r. ores so.to E l utt e Gordon Purdy, Site Q. A. Manacer iNovember 18, 1983 1 lu 3 fg 3E cusrcwes ccw , ==
Brown & Root, Inc. air enac= Houston as, uce en rosto can Houston qqsegrs Uteomrea UClosed S f ' insetcfm toute Fisig gegaer/ CPSES Glen Rose, Texas 76043 Shoo 3 Assmary Alteration Cinserwce
- l. the undersigned, have monitored your QA/QC manual on: 11/18/83 and find the following sections:
r o e re, IGnve numeere one roenees _ $atltfactory: Ingentory QAtGC meneer eestmen (No. ene Tone) on reenery one eneestoe nonsenre,mense en eenoneemoep Section 17 Corrective Action See Attached
- E
==
E5 s EE E L 0VER f- CUSTOMER: Please describe the resolution of these items in the " CUSTOMER'S RESOLUTIONsection below, and give date for completion of corrective action, so that items may be remonitored by: 1903 i D e C @ "'E e '* 7 scoreo Please keep the Original cf this form for your records and return a copy to inscejtor named below. g '" cars sea sou <nse >=uw o.st+eura 2 es. ugr /E.*are,s'.'n'tative YS." l1/18/83 h s[j,G eucusa or n.cs: acus cou,ua .eavi a um unse cca, rc.nn,,ee en no.e,.e a.ee.,aeeeuerr/ a t C5 Es See accached IM#26,589 05 UE p , C0vEn att ccent:nvt acnos su u ccwtou ser a me , we e 1/15/84 carsn.soo/2G/8 3 ) ([<cw o #
- l. the undersigned, have remonitored the above unsatisfactory conditions on: Q ej/c / g and found them: I ofactory CUnsatisfactory (Esclain celGw) o (W) l WS S $O U om/) VNY e
? F0A-85-5g=
,,.t.,,,,. zre.=.. e.~ n..
.e m u= w g,
7 .' '" . .** SIS R port 367-B pcge 2 of 5
,e Brown & Root's response to 939 nos. 367 & 367A is not acceptable. It should be understood that the Authorized Nuclear Inspector has a statutory duty uo monitor the Certi-ficate Holder's program for compliance. The above reports
; were initiated by virtue of the Inspector complying with this mandate. I cannot comprehend the animosity and f ace-tious of a response that makes reference to the Inspector's
" personal assumptions", " misconceptions" and " blind-siding".
It should be understood that a 939 monitoring report is not an " indictment" of Brown & Root's program but is a re-quired mecharism for the ANI to assure full compliance with ASME quality 13quirements. While the above reports were not written in the context of " findings" of noncompliance , when one examines the impact of the items identified on Brown & Root's programmatic com-In the future Authorized Nuclear Inspectors will initiate monitoring reports in a format of " Findings" and " Areas of Ccncern" . This should provide clarity for necessary responses. The above reports contained both areas of concern and findings. These are reiterated as follows: FINDING: ASME III NA-4800 requires that " conditions adverse to quality be promptly identified and reported". Additionally " measures shall assure that the cause of the conditions adverse to quality be determined and corrected to preclude repetition". The iden 1-fication, cause, and corrective action shall be documented". In Brown & Root's response to 939 4 367, it is stated that "The Inspector has not com-prehended the intent of the first paragraph in Section 17.2". It must be noted that the use of the term "significant" is Brown & Root's own. The above Code paragraph makes no mention of this term. An identified condition that renders hardware or supporting documentation unacceptable for ASME certification is in every case significant. The aforementioned response also states that "All others (conditions adverse to quality) are reported to the appropriate levels of management via IR's, NCR's, CMC's, DCA's and the causes of the conditions are corrected". This is erroneous in that the noncon-formance is corrected by the above documents but the cause is not addressed.
,f*-
, o . ..
1 SIS Report #367-B Page 3 of 5 FINDING: In items A & B of 939 #367-B the Inspector
, noted the volume of NCRs by condition as listed in Brown and Root's Quarterly Report.
1 Additionally, he listed examples of IR's that, in the manner trended did not identify the cause of the adverse condition. Virtually 1 all the NCR's and IR's were initiated on reverification inspections. The cause can j logically be attributed to one of three (3) 4 circumstances. l (a) Inadequate design drawing and/or interim design change (CMC). , i l (b) Inadequate inspections on initial process 4 packages. l (c) Further work or damage incurred between initial
; , and reverification inspections.
It is difficult to understand how 1727 identified
- welding discrepancies are not deemed significant enough' to warrant corrective action to preclude repetition.
l 1 j
. l l
l 4 i I
,. a n .
SIS Raport # 367-8 Page 4 of 5 i i lt 1 i
'. h i FINDING: The Inspector identified three Class 1 supports i' that were ir stalled with some items not accept-able for Class 1 installation. He subsequently i e identified twelve additional supports with like
- i nonconformances. In addition to the NCRs identi-j J
~ fied, the Site ANI's have repeatedly identified j nonconforumJingClass 1 piping attachment material installed in ene field. In addition to the above, it has been necessary for Engineering to reconcile t
Class 2 pressure retaining material in accordance with NB-3673 after installation in Class 1 fabri-i cation. In addition to the above, the Inspector l who initiated 939 #367 has previously identified non conforming Orifice Flange Plugs installed in . i 4 the field via a previously issued 939. To date, j there has been no documented determination of
,,_ cause nor corrective action'to address issuance or nonconfor==M ay material to the field for in-stallation.
{ ! hAREAOFCONCERN: * (' The Inspector stated that "No objective evidence ) exists that Quality control Inspectors are moni-l j tored to assure adequate inspections are being
' performed to reduce the number of NCRs generated i for welding discrepancies". This statement was ; keyed by the fact that hundreds of welds previously accepted have been rejected by NCRs and irs and subsequently trended in category C-16.
l Root's response states " Contrary to theBrown and Inspector's misconception, the performance of QC inspection personnel is evaluated semi-annually by* Site Level l III's". There is no misconception on the part of ! the Inspector. The Site ANIS have no knowledge of l documented evaluation of MIFI/VT certified QCI's. I I Brown and Root's response that " ANIS have not iden- ' 1 tified specific personnel...... Note: There is not l nor has there ever been a requirement in the QA Manual requiring monitoring QCIs to assure adequate i inspections are being preformed". The Inspector l rf felt that considering the documented rejection of l hundreds of previously accepted welds, Brown and . l l Root QA would be sufficiently concerned to evaluate j those previous inspections. 4 i '\, t 1 I 1 i i :
- i
- _. - - ~
- s '. t. *. .
SIS R3p3rt #367-B Page 5 of 5 l 1 i i i h AREA OF CONCERN:
' Brown and Root has chosen to utilize a program of Trend Analysis to implement the requirements of ASME Section III, paragraph NA-4800. A review of all CARS initiated this calendar year (S-53,
' S-54, S-55, S-57) reveals that S-54 was initiated by an ANI monitoring report, S-55 by a TUGCo audit finding, S-57 by ANI monitoring report /932 SIS Re-ports. It is not considered by this Inspector j
that the only mechanisn available to comply with NA-4800 is a Corrective Action Request. However, I can find no viable alternative in Secti,on 17 of the QA Manual. It is also recognized that* at times Brown and Root Q.A. has utilized Procedural revi-j sion to e'ffect Corrective Action. Again however, i full' compliance with NA-4800 is not evident in that i cause and resultant corrective action is not docu-mented.
)
(., 4 4
)
a . 2 l - . 4 o 1 g e
- . ______ m_-. . - - , - _ . - - . , . - - - - - - , , , . - - , , - , _ - , _ , s , - ~ _ _ . . - _ , . - . - ,_~,m ._.- -- ,
7 -
Bowri& Root.lric. INTEROFFICL J.M0 IMd 26,589
! i TO: M. Coats December 27, 1983 FROM: G.R. Purdy l
SUBJECT:
CPSES, 35-1195 Response To SIS i Reports 367 And 367-B. Although the subjset reports specifically identify three(3) findings and two(2) concerns, I interprete all items to be generically addressing the philosophy and implementation of the B&R Corrective Action Program. After reviewing the data collected to substantiate the findings and concerns, I can understand the resulting conclusions. To establish a permanent record for ANI-ASNI reference, the following is submitted for your review and acceptance: 1,. Implementation of an effective " Corrective Action Program" in accordance with I'A-4800 requires the effective Laplementation of an acceptable "Framination, Tests, and InspeCCion Program" in accordance with NA-4500.
- 2. Due to problems encountered by B&R QA, the NRC and the ANIA, the " Examination, Tests and Inspection Program" began an
(' evolution of upgrading in early 1982, to establish conformance 1 with " todays" environment and criteria; the current procedures are the result of approximately 15 months of evolution. i
- 3. The large number of NCR's and/or Unsat IR's is the direct result of the corrective action taken to upgrade the " Examination, Tests,
; and Inspection Program":
i a.) The cause of nonconformances is ' indicated by the numeric designator in the trend code, as defined on Attachment 4 to CP-QAP-16.1. Should further investigation of an ! apparent trend warrant additional action by QE/ Management, the " root" cause and cortective action are documented in , accordance with Section 17 of the QA Manual; b.) The QE organization determined during Trend Analysis that the cause of the nonconforming conditions were the same causes which precipitated the program upgrading thereby not warranting additional corrective action; c.) The items rejected during final acceptance inspection were predominancely pre-1982 fabrication and installation activities, and not subjected to the current acceptance criteria; and d.) The greater that 50% QC rejection race for pre-1982 verk as compared to less that 10% rejection for post-1982 work indicates that not only is inspection being properly (' conducted but that the action taken to upgrade the program has srecluded recurrence. 4 !
*,,d,.l
._ ^. P^ga 2 cf 2 IMf26,589 J
f' 4 - 4 Following implementation of the "UnSat IR" program, the trend analysis for these dccuments was inadvertently omitted from the following Quarterly Report, although the evaluation had been ; conducted by QE, and had to be issued as a supplement. 5.. A proposed revision to the B&R QA Manual will be submitted to the ANIS for rev.iew by 1/15/84, which will identify alternative
, methods for documenting corrective action.
Should you have any further questions, or if I may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. C;Y. Purdy
~0f&
Site QA Manager ' GRP/ba i ect W.D. Tillman J.T. Blixt R. Siever . C.L. Morris, Jr. ( SQAM File h t l i i 4 h e e t 3
1
}F
- - i qc- ,
ANI REPORTS - TRAINING Inadequate training of QC inspectors and others at CPSES has long been i a concern of CASE's and our witnesses. (It was most recently raised again by CASE Witness in regard to qualifications and training of welders. Portions of testimony on page 3 of prefiled testimony, which was bound in following Tr. 10,333, were stricken l at Tr. 9934/7-9937/12 as being a new issue. Although we have not had time I j to go back and research the past testimony of our other witnesses, we still believe that this was raised by several of them during the July 1982 ) hearings.) Recently, documents obtained for use in the intimidation hearings (in the form of surveys of QC Inspectors done in 1979) indicate that this was a ; strong concern of QC Inspectors in that time frame. Although Applicants were on notice at least in 1979 that this was a serious problem, they failed l to promptly identify and correct it as such, and the ANI Reports and Records indicate a continuing problem with training of QC Inspectors and others at Comanche Peak. Applicants' failure to promptly correct this problem is a ) violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterlon XVI. In addition, we li I ! j expect that this will be an issue raised in our new propor>ed contention il l which we will be filing soon. , l From ANI Feports and Recordat l ANIt Responso does not address the larger problem of instruction to i l field personnel to prevent the came problem in the future. ANI "I would 1 F0lA-85-59 al~
= .
I
. [* . I like to stress that this problem is-or-could be larger than this single instance and warrants immediate attention." (Esphasis added.) (Closed cut
" Reviewed and discussed; no response necessary").
Regarding requirements for base metal repair - p. 2 -- ANIt "Af ter reviewing the requirements for base metal repair and finding none of which have been met, it is the belief of this inspector that there is a serious breakdown in instruction to field personnel concerning this area which poses a potential threat to code. 0A Manual, and procedure compliance." (Emphasis added.) (See CASE Exhibit 1,024, ANI SIS Report 11-006,10/14/R2, and 11-006-1, 10/27/82.)
- Training -- See Serious Breakdown -- Reporting of Nonconformances; ANI s
not totally satisfied with B&R's response to #327; B&R is going to indoctrinate all employees in what is expected of them regarding reporting of nonconformances (1/20/83 Answer). ANI, page 2: "It is very evident that the training and indoctrination program outlined in Section III of the OA Manual is not being implemented, due to the nur'er of are strikes and base metal non conformances being found by ANI's and Q.C. Inspectors during walkdowns and at non destructive examinations...Due to numerous sections of pipe being received that are so close to minimum wall at time of receiving, it becomes even more critical that all arc strikes and base metal non conformances are reported and documented promptly." (First emphasis added; second emphasis in the original.). (Gee CASE Exhibit 1,026, ANI SIS Record 327, 11/18/82.) I 2 ' l
a . . . _ . _.. - - - - 1/7/83 B&R Answer Arc strikes and base metal defects shall be handled as follows (see CASE Exhibit 1,026, ANI SIS Record 327, 11/18/82): (1) Discovered on N-stamped components, ID'd and documented on NCR; (2) Discovered prior to system walkdown by OC, documented on IR (Inspection Report); , (3) Discovered during system walkdown by QC, entered on system punch 11st and documented on an IR; (4) Discovered af ter system pressure testing, documented on NCR. Control of Inspections -- Civil engineer was going to delete PT; concern of ANI is that there are parts of welds on 4 units which have not been subjected to NDE; there is no objective evidence that root of weld 6 joints was prepared properly; welds are not being examined properly. Code requirements not met -- welding and examinations -- (See Control - of Inspections, CASE Exhibit 1,034, ANI SIS Record 939 347, 4/21/83.) Major (generic) problem -- support fabrication and subsequent inspection (e.g., undersized fillet welds). Welding -- check left till final walkdown. NCR's -- thousands. Corrective Action -- on process sheets, not NCR's. Document (drawing) control -- uncontrolled drawings. (See CASE Exhibit 1,035, ANI SIS Report 932 0-044, 5/26/83.) 3 -
.. . _ _ _ . .._ . . _ . . __u . _a -
Control of inspections - welding and examinations. _ Training -- NDE and PT of full fillet welds; All QC inspectors re: inspecting full fillet welds on Class 1 supports. Serious breakdown -- everyone involved in VCD walkdowns; ALL Class 1 VCD walkdowns are indeterminate; lack of training of ALL QC inspectors ret inspecting full fillet welds on Class 1 supports. (Emphases in the original.) (See CASE Exhibit 1,042, ANI SIS Record 939 357, 7/2/83.) Note: Closed because no Class I hanger packages have been presented to ANI for final acceptance; will be reopened if any discrepancies are found at I " * ' - - ' *
- that time.
N-5 -- ANI's have rejected majority of subaltted N-5's; one subsystem = N-5 for SF-1 was submitted for ANI signature with an open CAR in effect against component suports for the Spent Fuel Heat Exchangers. Hanger Task Groups discussed -- p. 8 of answer. ANI Access -- ANI's are consistently being denied access (hydro tests; N-5; vault); incorrect interpretation of program was cause ( Attachment 3, from Gordon Purdy). (See CASE Exhibit 1,045, ANI SIS Record 939 363A, 8/18/83.) Document Control (see CASE Exhibit 1,045, ANI SIS Record 939 363A, 8/18/83,see also Corrective Action): (ANI's can no longer accept inprocess inspections to unintelligible CMC's, etc.); 1 6 t 6 4 4 4
drawings: many drawings.ID'd shims as primary support members (page 10 of answer); drawings: some drawings do not reflect other supports (including Class
- 5) attached to the structure o'f' the support (page 10 of answer);
designe early NPSI designs differentiate between pr' mary i and secondary members, some Class 1 drawings ID , primary members (impacts material traceability requirements) while others do not (page 11 of answer); ANI confidence in inspections performed to Engineering hanger sketches as revised by CMC is zero; hundreds of NCR's and IR's ID'd on final walkdowns to As-Built VCD/DRD drawings (answer, page 13); a the historical aspects of the CPSES pipe support program are a reality...the historical trail would often be confusing and cumbersome (answer, page 14); see also Attachments 5 and 7; design change not changed on VCD to indicate as-built condition (Attachment 8, HSB audit), " Design analysis safety factors are implemented to account for these dimensional dif ference." "Use-as-is." Common problem.
- Manual not found, not controlled, etc. (see Attachment 8, HSB audit);
(manual discontinued, see Answer, Attachment 9.) ANI's semi-annual ANSI N626 Audit, 7/13-14/83, ( Attachment 8). (See CASE Erhibit 1,045, ANI SIS Record 939 363A, 8/18/83.) f 5 4 6
o Testing -- pretest concurrence declined by ANI's. NCR's -- generic (listing of open ones); page 7 of answer; improper closure of outdated NCR's. Corrective Action (see also Document Control) -- ANI's won't sign until corrected; CAR S-54; thousands of drawings were involved (page 9 of answer); CAR's voided (see Attachment 8, HSB audit). Training -- See especially Attachment 5, document control. Established CP Pipe Support and Oversite Group -- new hanger team, l
"due to urgency of the pipe support problems" -- Attachment 10.
~
3 Hanger Task Groups (BTC) established -- nttachment 11. Test Control -- procedure does not comply with NA-4410. (See CASE Exhibits 1,045, ANI SIS Record 939 363, 8/23/83, and ANI SIS Record 939 ; 363A, 8/18/83.) NCR's (see CASE Exhibit 1,050, ANI SIS Record 366 and 366A,10/21/83):- voided which should not be; cannot track; being presented to ANI's for review without having the referenced drawings' revision No.; Trend categories for NCR's are inconsistent; NCR had never been reviewed by Action Addressee; being revised by organizations other than organization that originally prepared them; info added without being revised; I 6
o- 9 do not give required information; state closed when was voided; transferred to other area without being tracked; IR's issued after ANI acceptance of hanger packages; procedure's inadequate re: what is to be written up on NCR as opposed to IR; - IR's not trended; IR trend categories inconsistent; no objective evidence QC Leads reviewing IR's; CP~ QAP 11.1 says write an IR on everything except N stamped and final accepted items; B&R's QA Manual 16.4.1; (August & September, there was no QAM requirement that adequately addressed final acceptance and the initiation of an NCR for the condition; on 10/10/83, B&R QAM Section 16, Paragraph 16.3.1 was revised to " clarify this item; page 3 of 12/5/83 answer.) Training -- Everybody reinstructed (see 11/8/83 answer). Trending -- Amendment to Quarterly Report for 3rd Qtr. of 1983 issued 11/1/83 for IR's; all future Qtr. Reports will include an IR trend (page 2 of answer). (See CASE Exhibit 1,050, ANI SIS Record 366 and 366A, 10/21/83.) NCR's -- voided; used to upgrade supports from Class 2 to Class 1. Major problem (though not specifically identified by ANI as such) -- i 9 7
- g ,1,. . .
I
~
upgrading supports from Class 2 to Class 1; possibly with non-conforming material. Training -- need to reinstruct personnel re: NCR's. (See CASE Exhibit 1,056, ANI SIS Record 939 371, 2/6/84.) Welding -- ret hidden welds on support, in regards to interpass l temperature while welding to embed plates. sdaitted he did not know the thickness of the embed piste he was welding to, nor did he check ! the interpass temperature during welding. (See CASE Exhibit 1,058, ANI SIS Report' 932 10-032, 2/17/84.) 1 Training -- 3/9/84: Welder retrained; GC department instructed to l I monitor preheat and interpass temperatures 2 days per week, to be j implemented by 3/12/84 (See attachment to CASE Exhibit 1,058, ANI SIS Report 932 10-032.) - P Notet Important because this was written up at almost the exact time Applicants' welding witnesses were testifying t'n operating license hearings that they and everybody they ever knew of or Sven heard of always checked the heat input when welding. l r See also Corrective Action, Document Control, etc. 6 I i e 8 _ _~ . u - e..., , . ,
~ L -. ;
i
- .n .
a be e 4
~
ANI REPORTS -- DOCUMENT CONTROL
- The problem of inadequate document control is closely related to the lack of prompt identification and correction of nonconformances.
Criterion VI of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, is specifically titled " Document Control;" however, when CASE uses the term, we mean it in a very broad sense, to encompass other Criteria insofar as they depend upon accurate and adequate documentation in order to be ef fective. These additional Criteria include (but are not limited to): III, IV, V, VIII, X, XI, XIV, XV, XVI, XVII, and XVIII. CASE believes that tht extensive and continuing, uncorrected problems with document control and records retrievability have contributed to the construction and design of Comanche Peak's now being indeterminate at best and deficient at worst. Clearly a breakdown in this important aspect of Applicants' QA/QC program goes to the very heart of CASE's Contention 5. As such, it is important in the context of the global issues regarding Applicants' noncompliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B (see discussion in Board's 3/15/84 Memorandum (Clarification of Open Issues), bottom of page 4 ; continued top of page 5). This is also the type of information which would be included as part of CASE's Trends or Patterns of Non-Conforming Conditions (see discussion in CASE's 4/2/84 Motions kegarding Board's 3/15/84 Memorandum (Clarification of open Issues), pages 18 and 19). Also, this problem is relevant to portions of CASE's proposed new contention which we will be filing in the near future. F0lA-85-59 l l
.a
'. ' *e.
The following summary of information contained in Reports and Records of the Authorized Nuclear Inspector (although only a part of the total picture which we plan to pr,esent to the Board soon) helps to indicate the magnitude of the continuing uncorrected problems with document control. From ANI Records and Reports: Document Control -- hundreds of modification hanger process control packages (both in process and completed) are in nonconformance with ASME NA-5241, NA4540, NA-4452; work done beyond the scope of work required by CMC or new revision to blueline = status of material verification and visual examination of welds is indeterminate and must be categorized as being deficient (see CASE Exhibit 1,023, ANI SIS Record 939 314, 10/14/82). Welding -- repairs accomplished (attempted) by' grinding; no documentation found concerning these repairs being accomplished prior to release of material to field; areas not marked as required and no documentation of PT, UT or minimum wall checked could be found. CP-CPM 6.9D states that minor defects will be removed by grinding; however, minimum wall must be checked and documented; it was not. (see CASE Exhibit 1,024, ANI SIS Report 11-006,10/14/82, and 11-006-1, 10/27/82.) ANI Access -- ANI not given opportunity for involvement in installation or inspection activities re: snubbers (hold points); "If Brown & Root t m 2
intends to present quality records documenting ASME inspection activities to
, the ANI at the time of execution of N-5s those records that did not provide for ANI involvement will be censidered unacceptable." (See CASE Exhibit 1,025, ANI SIS Record 322A, 11/11/82.)
Document Control -- ANI (page 1): ...why does open #8 address all welds, and what objective evidence exists in the field to indicate all other welds having been previously inspected?" 12/27/82 B&R Answer: "As far as objective evidence existing in the. field to indicate all other welds have been previously inspected nothing currently exists, ast the original package is in the vault. The OC inspectors are inspecting to current modification packages, that have been initiated by Welding Engineering." (See CASE R Exhibit 1,027, ANI SIS Report 932 10-016, 12/20/82.) Grinding of CB&I Weld connecting the piping to the containment liner; in this case penetration piping is also the process piping. Document Control -- no code data report covering the welds connecting the pipe to the liner. Code requirements not met -- letter from CB&I (copy attached) states that the penetration piping does not meet the requirements of the 1974 Code because of differences of NDE requirements. (See CASE Exhibit 1,028, ANI l l SIS Report 932 18-005, 1/10/83; closed 1/13/83 by issue of CASE Exhibit 1,029, ANI SIS Record 939 334.) Document Control -- changes to controlled drawings, written in by hand in ink; drawing illegible. (See CASE Exhibit 1,029, ANI SIS Record 939 339, l 3/1/83.) m 3 l I 1
. , . . - . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - . - . . . . . ~ ..
1
;.i. .
F l 1 j Major (generic) problem -- drawing control -- ANI (page 2): "This has _ t 'l become a continuing problem w}}