ML20207E013

Notice of Deviation from Insp on 860601-30

ML20207E013
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	12/22/1986
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20207E000	List: ML20207D995 ML20207E006 ML20207E013 ML20207E034
References
50-445-86-15, 50-446-86-12, NUDOCS 8701020037
Download: ML20207E013 (3)

Text

'

"' ^ ~ ' ^ ~ ~ ~ ' '"

hW n:

~

~

.2,.  % .

F

~ 3, K Mqy ;, z "L " Q +

mWgga, _3 -n

- 1

, .y g;way* w c* -'- . wq :.

• n 3 [ .

• e-

:. x ~~

> g,, ,~ s '^.c f'9' ' -

p M; '

M]Q[%;! Leg 7g 2

IAPPENDIX-B.

r f $_ NOTICEOFbEVIATION:

N&

Q w Ym Ql4 V Ma .- 7" z __

,Q JTexastUtilities Electric? Company ~

-Dockets: 50-445/86-15 M4 % { Comanche 1 Peak Steam-Electric Station ' 50-446/86-12

1. s _ ' 't units > It and ,2 :

,NiG j f "i P -7 n Permits: CPPR-126- '

N.m ns ~ . ,

CPPR-127 nw. - .> -

w k r,'; .y [ ,'

r  ; _[

• f# !Basedionsthe results'of 'an:NRClinspection conducted on' June _-1-30,~1986, four W 6 .1 deviations- from commitments were identified. The deviations consisted of- i f ( ?; { Evaluation Research Corporation-(ERC) failing(to identify electrical inspector- '

.. Acertification errors during,the1 Phase I review required in ISAP'No.' I.d.1; ERC

%[f < f Ninspectors'not: m 1dentifying errors during independent' inspection of Unit 1

~

7 <f 3 ; diesel. generator: control panel; an ERC overviewiinspector's experience not M %" ibeingsverified as meeting requirements;;and' ERC cverview inspectors failing to .

$ didentify3(1)' errors made11n an ERC deviation report covering parallelism of

@:> . ' pipe; clamp halves, ,and )(2)Lan' error made .concerning:a' pipe clearance violation.

e ' O In accordance~withlthe " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC (W W EnforcementiActions,";10 CFR'Part 2. Appendix C (1986), the~ deviations are ' '

M% >=-/ ? listed below:1 -

.k* [A.[L Attachment?6.4,'" Inspector Educatiion and-Experien ce Requirements and Capabilities.torstevel;II Inspection,- Examination and Test Personnel" of

'CPP-003,;Revisioni3.. states,inpart,thattheexperience'requirementsfor 1

'r

~

~

~ Jcertificationf of:a high school graduate are ". . L.53 years of related

~

experience .in equivalent inspection, examination', ~

or . testing s

F 1 _

activities:.,. , ."- ,

- my . . _

In deviation from the above, a certified Level'II-overview inspectohs experience was found.not to meet the requirements of Attachment 6.4. -The

~

~

1 3 years experience used as a basis for certification'was , verified as'a ~

t

~

'"Projec't Receipt Inspector," which Ldoes- not, appear to be equivalent

' i f related experience for the certified position of " Level. II Mechanical / i M Welding Inspector";(445/8615-D-01).

~. B. ;Section 4 'of. Revision 4 to ERC Procedure CPP-009 for Issue-Specific Action

' l Plan No. VII.c. states, in part, " Qualified QA/QC Review Team personnel  :

L perform field reinspections of specific hardware items and reviews of

, appropriate documents in accordance with approved instructions . . . ."

KSection'4'of Revision-2 to ERC Quality Assurance Procedure ERC-QA-28,

- '" Performance of Overview Inspections," states, in part, " Qualified QA/QC 4

Review Team personnel assigned to the onsite QA Representative perform

" , ~

. ' Overview Inspections of work performed in accordance with Reference 3.1 4 (CPP-009).. . ." Section 5.4.2 of ERC-QA-28 states, in part, " Based

-_upon each acce t/ reject-crite:-ion specified in the referenced QI/ Effective

.Chan

(un)ge Notice. (. .),."the OI (Overview Inspector) denotes whether the item

- acceptable

" e7010 g h $ $$$45

- PDR PDR

-  : G U ,, . l . -_,. - ._-- . . . _ _ _ _

y n p p 3 / m :.  : z -Y .

.h ,w d y_N h 6 ' 'N y ..f j.

m

. , A e, ..&. -

r. <

~

[$4k,;a s

A ,

%; ~ ,

L _

gg y % - - - ~

L; _

'2' 4e c ,

, 1 w.

1  ;

g- ;_ , ,

p m . ~. ,

7" 7 5ectioiS13of-ERCQA-28 states,in'part,:"The.01comparestheresults 9: A g  ;& ' ' [oflthe Overview' Inspection.with th.e:results of the initial reinspection /1 documentation'reviewfto, identify anylapparentJinconsistencies;. . . .'

>In deviation from tNe-ab$ve, the.following errors were identified

~

/

4

. ~

'"4 'y

,; concerninglthe results of overview-inspectio's:

=

n

. O .:a' . c 4? 1.- Overview inspection (0I) Package N'o.12-I'-14-SBC0-078 failed toi ~

v.

~

, 11dentify an unsatisfactory -decision-m'ade' by the>init1al; ERCS 1 Einspector.' ! During .an:NRC inspection, one conditio'n;wa's11dentified'of. ^ ~

jpipe to pipe clearance in violation of Section 5.2.6.2'of'ERC Qualityi

1. " - , Instruction.(QI)QI-026, Revision 2.fHowever,theinitialERC. ~

reinspection as~ well as the overview inspection, failed (to identify'

[~ '

v- + _ this: deviating condition (445/8615- D-03). N ' q 4 T

.g -

u

- 2.: iParagraph.5.2;l in.Section 5.0 of QI-037,nRevision 1,+ states,,in part,E" Verify -thatLpipe clamp halves are; parallel . . . .'" 'In -

Laddition, Attachment-1.of QI-037 states,.in~part,!' S' dimensions on

~

t .

the same side of.the' clamp at points ~1,-2 7 ano 3.shall be.within 1/16" p

f of each other to be acceptable. Also,1the clapp shall be not more'

'than 1/16" out of parallel from side-to side at points 1, 2 and 3' to

.be/ acceptable."'

' Meas'urements for S1 recorded by the initial ERC inspector showed a 2

~

differe'nce between points 1 and 3 of 1/8", which was 1/16" out of v o> .. tolerance. . Similarly, measurements recorded for S2 showed a 1 difference between points 1 and-3 of 5/32", which was 3/32" out of 7, , ' tolerance. The corresponding values for the out of tolerance conditions recorded on ERC deviation report I-S-PS7H-095-DR1 were

+@ 31/32" and 1/16", respectively. The deviation report incorrectly

> identified the degree of being out of tolerance. The overview 4 cinspection' failed:to identify and resolve these discrepancies

(445/8615-D-04).

C. Section 4.1 of ISAP No. I.d.1, Revision 2, states that for Phase I, n

" Training. qualification,-certification and recertification files for a11 Lelectrical QC. inspectors, for all current ASME inspectors, and for the

.reaiaining current non-ASME inspectors will be reviewed against project requirements . . . ." to identify those inspectors whose certifications or qualifications were questionable.

e

- In ' deviation from the above, the ERC Phase I review failed to identify

. lapses in recertifications of TUGCo electrical inspectors. ERC Phase I

- review also failed to identify that an electrical inspector's o recertification to CP-QP-11.3 did not specify the activities or x restrictions which were applicable to the recertification (445/8615-D-05;

.446/8612-D-G6).

k t

m

3

?

=

D. Section 5.2 of QI-010, Revision 3, states, in part, " Verify that the field z assembly / modifications are complete and in accordance with the applicable drawings."

In deviation from the above, NRC inspection of Verification Package No. I-E-EEIN-075, a Unit 1 diesel generator control panel, revealed that ERC inspectors failed to identify the following:

1. A jam nut was loose on one of the six floor mounting bolts.

, 2. Sheet 2 of component layout Drawing 52383 did not delineate installed relays R12A and R12B (445/8615-0-10).

Texas Utilities Electric Company is hereby requested to submit to this office, within 30 days of the date of this Notice, a written statement or explanation in reply, including for each deviation: (1) tne reosor.s for the deviations if admitted, (2) the corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved; (3) corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further deviations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achie/ed. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the response time.

Dated at Arlington, Texas, this 22nd day of December 1986 i

.z_

=

e E

_ _ . _ , . . . . . .