ML20207P895
| ML20207P895 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 01/08/1987 |
| From: | Carey P TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207P893 | List: |
| References | |
| 80303-SQN, 80303-SQN-R01, 80303-SQN-R1, NUDOCS 8701200379 | |
| Download: ML20207P895 (17) | |
Text
=.
\ \
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER:
- REPORT TYPE SPECIAL PROGRAM 80303-SQN Element Report REVISION NUMBER:
TITLE: 1 QA Personnel - Personnel-Training and Experience PAGE 1 0F 12 REASON FOR REVISION: Rewritten to comply with Writer's Guide, incorporation of SRP and TAS comments, and addition of new concern.
Note: Sequoyah Applicability Only PREPARATION PREPARED BY. P. Carey
'Y'M w_w /
?
SIGNATURE f / DATk
}
REVIEWS PEER:
) . lALk l f ' $1GRATURE ' 6AT8 TAS:
ifje1
'l i C7 ((l h r/
SIGNATURE
////77 DATE CONCURRENCES
/ $ 1 h< n
- M N /I Vl - l /- 7 9 ~7 SRP : _ _ . _
. f ~" /~ 8~ 87 SIGNATURE DATE NATURE
- ft DATE APPROVED BY:
N/A ECSP MANAGER DATE MANAGER OF NUCLEAR DATE POWER CONCURRENCE (FINAL REPORT ONLY)
- SRP Secretary's signature denotes SRP concurrences are in files.
i 8701200379 870113 PDR ADOCK 05000327 P PDR
4.
\ , T'
. REPORT NUMBER:
'PEPORT. TYPE: , 80303-SQN Element Report REVISION NUMBER:
TITLE: _
1 Personnel-Training land Experience- PAGE 2 OF 12
- 1. 0 CHARACTERIZATION OF ISSUE 1.1 Introduction The issues _ described in this . Element Report was derived from employee concerns generated ;as .a. result of 'the Watts Bar Employee Concern Special Program (ECSP).. These concerns were_ determined to .be applicsble ..to the Sequoyah _ Nuclear (SQN) . Plant and were ' investigated and evaluated on that basis. Two of..the concerns were determined to
? be Sequoyah specific, the other concern was generically. applicable.
1.2 Description of Issues
- - The issues' reported by . concerned employees (Attachment A), and as noted below, were grouped by issue ~ under this element -- Personnel-Training and Experience.
A. SQN procedure for handling safety concerns,not being followed.
Concerned Individual- (CI) did not- receive. written . feedback pertaining to a condition reported by the CI on a TVA form 45. -
~
(I-86-211-SQN, dated January 30, 1986) 4 B. ' Training _and experience of selected Quality- Assurance (QA) l personnel. (SQM-86-009-008, dated February 12, 1986)._
l NOTE: Employee concern as described in Attachment A also addressed Management lying to the Power Operations Training Center (POTC) with regard to training and experience of selected QA personnel, however, that ~ portion of the concern is addressed by the Management and Personnel Category Evaluation Group.
i C. Engineers in the Electrical Design Branch are not being trained l in the preparation of electrical calculations. This is a multi-part - concern which is assigned to the Engineering Evaluation 4
Group. However, the Quality Assurance Category Evaluation Group
( (QACEG) has been assigned to evaluate the training portion of that concern. (I-85-128-NPS, dated February 18, 1986) 2.0
SUMMARY
2.1 Sununary of Characterization of Issues The issues disclosed by concerned employees are: SQN procedure for handling safety concerns not being followed in relation to feedback to l- the Concerned Individual (CI), Management lying to POTC regarding i training and experience of selected QA personnel and electrical engineers are not being trained in the preparation of electrical
(- calculations.
l
_,_- _ - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _m . _- _ _ ___ - . _ . . - . _ _ __._ _ ._ _ -- _. _. -
( \
REPORT NUMBER:
REPORT TYPE:. 80303-SQN Element Report REVISION NUMBER:
TITLE: 1 Personnel-Training and Experience PAGE 3 0F 12 2.2 Sumary of Evaluation Process The Quality Assurance Category Evaluation Group (QACEG) evaluation consisted of reviewing applicable procedures, audit reports, correspondence, and training records. Discussions were held with cognizant personnel to gain further facts and insight to each issue.
2.3 Sumary of Findings The conclusions reached as a result of the QACEG evaluation of these issues are:
The issue of "SQN procedure handling safety concerns not being followed," could not be verified as substantiated or unsubstantiated since reference to the original concern information (TVA form 45) was unobtainable.
The issue of " Management lying to the POTC," was addressed in a report issued by the Division of Quality Assurance (DQA) and will not be evaluated by QACEG. The DQA evaluation determined that the concern was a management issue.
However, the issue of experience and training by POTC of selected QA personnel was evaluated by QACEG utilizing Nuclear Safety Review Staff (NSRS) reports, QA audit reports, and the evaluation conducted by Division of Quality Assurance as documented in their report. This issue was found to be substantiated.
The issue of " Electrical Design Branch Engineers not being trained in the preparation of calculations," was found to be unsubstantiated. However, the QACEG investigation indicated training had not been accomplished to the latest issue of Nuclear Engineering Procedures (NEP) NEP-3.1, Revision 0, dated July 1, 1986 and NEP 9.1, Revision 0, dated July 1, 1986.
2.4 Corrective Actions Taken And The Results Achieved To Date I
2.4.1 1ssue - " Training and experience of selected QA personnel."
SQN Corrective Action Request (CAR) 86-01-003 was issued January 31, 1986, noting five deficient areas pertaining to inadequate control of training and certification of Quality Control Inspec tor s . A follow-up surveillance was conducted and verification of c losure was per formed and documented in Quality Inplant Survey 21-86-S-026, dated July 30-31, 1986.
Subsequent to closure of CAR 86-01-003, the NSRS conducted an investigation (Report I-86-109-NPS) of this concern and issued six recommendations. Four of tr e recommendations were closed either after the investigation, or determined that no action j
I
\ l REPORT NUMBER:
REPORT TYPE: 80303-SQN Element Report REVISION NUMBER:
TITLE: 1 Personnel-Training and Experience PAGE 4 0F 12 was required, or action was required and scheduled to be implemented at a later date.
Two of the recommendations from NSRS were re. viewed and evaluated by the Division of Quality Assurance for validity of the concern. Any deficiencies identified during the evaluation were corrected as they were found.
2.4.2 Issue - " Electrical Design Branch Engineers 'are not being trained in the preparation of electrical calculations."
QACEG's review of training records for the engineers assigned to the Eequoyah Project Office at Knoxville indicated they were trained to the requirements of NEP 3.1, " Calculations" and NEP 9.1, " Corrective Action" which pertains to revision of calculations. The QACEG evaluation of training records for the Electrical Design Branch Engineers located at the SQN site indicated the engineers were not trained to the latest procedures. As a result, QACEG issued ECSP Corrective Action Tracking Document (CATD) Nos. 80303-SQN-01 and -02 (Attachments B and C).
3.0 LIST OF EVALUATORS P. A. Carey W. E. Bezanson 4.0 EVALUATION PROCESS 4.1 General Methods of Evaluation The evaluation process consisted of reviewing procedures relating to the issues, applicable audit reports, training documentation, correspondence, NSRS investigation reports, Division of Quality Assurance investigation reports, and outside contractor assessment reports to determine the requirements, extent of the issues, and corrective actions taken. Discussions were held with re sponsible personnel pertaining to the issues described within this Element Report.
4.2 Specifics of Evaluation 4.2.1 Issue- SQN Procedure for handling safety concerns not being followed.
QACEG's evaluation process consisted of reviewing procedures pertaining to the Employee Concern Program at Sequoyah. These procedures are as follows:
\ \
REPORT NUMBER:
. REPORI TYPE: 80303-SQN Element Report REVISION NUMBER:
TITLE: 1 Personnel-Training and Experience PAGE 5 0F 12 Nuclear Safety Review Staff Of fice Procedures 0207 " Handling Employee Concerns", Revision 1, dated Jul) 25, 1985 0307 " Employee Response Team Program", Revision 3, dated November 6, 1985.
0308 " Employee Response Team Program Administration",
Revision 2, dated September 16, 1985.
Sequoyah Standard Practice SQA 178 "TVA Of fice of Nuclear Power Employee Concern Program Line Organization Procedure", Revision 0, dated February 6, 1986.
The above procedures pertained to past methods used for conducting investigations of employee concerns at Sequoyah.
QACEG reviewed NSRS Report I-85-135-SQN, dated February 18, 1986, documenting an investigation of ano the r concern which identified the same issue as described in Concern SQM-6-009-008. Discussions were held with a former NSRS investigator to obtain additional information pertaining to the noti fication of the NSRS evaluation results.
4.2.2 Issue- Training and experience of selected QA personnel.
QACEG evaluation process consisted of reviewing NSRS Report I-86-109-SQN pertaining to this issue. The evaluation process encompassed investigating and verifying two areas of concern:
(a) formal training was provided by POTC for QC inspectors as required; and (b) experience obtained through on-the-j ob instruction and performance that satisfies minimal experience requirements prior to certification.
In addition, based on two recommendations made by NSRS, QACEG reviewed an evaluation report issued by the Division of Quality Assurance addressing the validity of this concern.
QACEG .tnd NSRS evaluations included reviews of procedures, instructions, and various documents such as certification records at POTC, and SQN Site Quality Control (QC) Files, QC Daily Work Logs, personnel history records, QC Inspector Training Manuals and On-The-Job Training Manuals. These documents we re reviewed as they identi fied the requirements
t .
\ \
REPORT NUMBER:
REPORT TYPE: 80303-SQN Element Report REVISION NUMBER:
TITLE: 1 Personnel-Training and Experience PAGE 6 0F 12 and commitments for the issue. In addition, discussions were held with POTC personnel, QC management personnel and QC inspection personnel pertaining to this issue.
4.2.3 Issue- Engineers in the Electrical Design Branch are not trained in the preparation of calculations.
QACEG evaluation process consisted of reviewing applicable procedures pertaining to the Electrical Design Branch Training at Sequoyah. Those documents were reviewed as they reflected the programs in ef fect when the concern was addressed
! Of fice of Engineering Procedures (OEP)
OEP-06, " Design Input", Revision 0, dated April 26, 1985 OEP-08, " Design Outputs", Revision 0, dated April 26, 1985 OEP-18, " Training", Revision 0, dated July 1,1985 OEP-07, " Calculations", Revision 0, dated April 26, 1985 Nuclear Engineering Procedure (NEP)
NEP-1.2, " Training", Revision 0, dated July 1,1986 NEP-3.1, " Calculations", Revision 0, dated July 1,1986 NEP-9.1, " Corrective Action", Revision 0, dated July 1, 1986 NEP-6.1, " Change Control", Revision 0, dated July 1, 1986 The OEPs were changed to NEPs to reflect new organizational changes within TVA. QACEG 's review of the procedures indicated they were basically the same, with the new procedures re flec ting only minor editorial and organization title changes.
The following Engineering Assurance (EA) audit reports were reviewed, as they addressed the above calculation and training procedures:
Audits EA-86-17, dated March 10-17, 1986 Sequoyah EA-86-23, dated August 4-8, 1986 Sequoyah TVA Division of Engineering Design EEB-EP 22.31 - Electrical Engineering Branch Training Procedure, Revision 0, dated March 7, 1986 Training records were obtained for personnel in the Electrical Engineering Branch in Knoxville and Sequoyah. These were o
\ \
I REPORT NUMBER:
REPORT TYPE: 80303-SQN l Element Report. REVISION NUMBER:
TITLE: 1 Personnel-Training.and Experience PAGE 7 0F 12 1
reviewed to determine what training was conducted during the period of 1985 to 1986.
Discussions were held with the Assistant Electrical Branch Chief within the Electrical Engineering Branch in Knoxville and the Lead Electrical Branch Chief at Sequoyah to determine the reasoning behind the deficiencies in the Electrical Design Calculation Program, as identified in the EA Audit Reports.
5.0 FINDINGS 5.1 Issue- SQN Procedure for handling safety concerns not being followed.
5.1.1 Discussion Research for this concern revealed that NSRS performed an 1 investigation (Report I-85-135-SQN, performed November 26 through December 12, 1985) of the Welder Certification Update Program as a result of Concern Numbers XX-85-049-001 and XX-85-049-X03. The issue derived from those two concerns is the same. issue identified in Concern Number I-86-211-SQN and described in this Element Report.
The results of the NSRS investigation (per NSRS Report I 135-SQN) were forwarded to Quality Technology Company (QTC) on February 18, 1986, at Watts Bar (via carbon copy and attachment of letter to H.L. Abercrombie, Site Director, SQN, from K.W. Whitt, Director of NSRS). It was not NSRS's practice to respond directly to the Concerned Individual (CI)
, beyond September, 1985. Their reports were distributed to QTC and it was QTC's responsibility to submit results of the investigation to the CI.
5.1.2 Conclusion Since QTC records are unavailable for QACEG review, a determination of whether Concern I-86-211-SQN was substantiated or unsubstantiated cannot be determined since a reference to the original concern number was unobtainable.
As the specific issue addressed within Concern I-86-211-SQN, was with feedback to the concerned individual, QACEG does not consider this to be a problem that would potentially impact safety.
\ \
REPORT NUMBER:
. REPORT TYPE: 80303-SQN Element Report REVISION NUMBER:
TITLE: 1 Personnel-Training and Experience PAGE S OF 12 5.2 Issue- Training and experience of selected QA personnel.
5.2.1 Discussion NSRS Report I-86-109-SQN documented inconsistencies within the certification files at POTC and the QC certification files at SQN. In particular, a lack of documentation supporting waiver of previous experience, certi fication, and incons is tent on-the-j ob training (0JT) documentation. Previously, a SQN Inplant Survey Checklist No. 2-28-S-001, performed January 25-28, 1986, reflected several related deficiencies that were later documented on CAR 86-01-003, issued January 31, 1986, by QA. CAR 86-01-003 documents expired certifications and inadequacies in the continuity of certification documentation.
SQN Master List of NDE certified inspectors re flec t s inaccurate certification expiration dates and eye examination due dates. Eye enaminations had expired and some inspectors were still performing inspections. Certification forms were not properly completed in some instances, and previous experience waivers were not signed by the Field Quality Engineering (QE) Staff Chief.
An appraved carrective action plan was submitted to R. B.
Kelly, Director of Nuclear Quality Assurance, providing a summary of corrective action status on June 1, 1986. It was noted all corrective actions were complete for CAR 86-01-003, with the exception of response to NSRS Report I-85-373-NPS.
Response to I-86-373-NPS was subsequently submitted July 29, 1986. Verification of corrective action was conducted through Inplant Survey 21-86-S-026, conducted July 30-31, 1986.
As a result of NSRS's evaluation and recommendations, a detailed review was performed by the Division of Nuc lear Quality Assurance, in August 1986, to verify the validity of training and experience of selected QC personnel at SQN.
Specifically, the Division of Quality Assurance addressed recommendations I-86-109-SQN-02 and -04. (Recommendations I-86-109-SQN-01, -03, -05, and -06 had been previously closed out by responsible organizations) Letters from C. C. Mason to R. K. Seiberling, dated May 23, 1986, and from H. L.
Abercrombie to R. K. Seiberling (no date) document closures.
The Division of Quality Assurance review was conducted to determine the following with regard to QC Certification Files of inspectors presently at SQN:
- a. Determine if the program described in NQAM, Part II, Section 5.3A was met.
i
I
\ \
REPORT NUMBER:
REPORT TYPE: 80303-SQN Element Report REVISION NUMBER:
TITLE: 1 Personnel-Training and Experience PAGE 9 0F 12
- b. Establish on-the-job training (0JT) practices that were used to certify individuals in areas where little or no opportunity for OJT existed.
- c. Determine if the OJT time period was waived on initial certifications. In these cases, supporting documentation will be obtained and included in the certification files at the site.
5.2.2 conclusion The issue of training and experience by POTC of selected QA personnel is substantiated based on the findings identified in previous NSRS reports, the Division of Quality Assurance report, and this Element Report. However, improvements in the training and experience of QA personnel is presently underway on an in terim basis per Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual (NQAM) Part II, Section 5.3A, until the New Quality Control Inspector Training Program is developed and proceduralized by the Technical Support Branch in Chattanooga. CATD 80303-SQN-01 was issued to incorporate a tracking method to ensure that this new training program becomes implemented and evaluated as effective.
5.3 Issue- Engineers in the Electrical Design Branch are not trained in the preparation of electrical calculations.
5.3.1 Discussion Procedures were reviewed as referenced in Section 4.2 of this Element Report. It was determined that procedures for preparation and control of calculations were in place, however, engineers were not complying with the procedures.
This is evident based on the results of the Engineering Assurance audits described within this element report.
Audit Report EA-86-17 conducted in March 1986 cited eight deficiencies, four pertaining to calculations. Calcula t ions were not retrievable, independent reviews of calculations were not performed, calculations were no t prepared in accordance with procedures, calculation logs we re not up to date, drawings issued prior to issuance of related calculations, and training records were not complete. The report also stated all training had been conducted, but documentation had not been submitted to the Electrical Engineering Branch - Document Control Section. All of the deficiencies cited pertaining to calculations and training of engineering personnel remain open as of this investigation.
i 4
i
7
~
( \
REPORT NUMBER:
REPORT TYPE:- bO303-SQN Element Report REVISION NUMBER:
TITLE: 1 Personnel-Training and Experience PAGE 10 0F 12 Audit Report EA-86-23 conducted in August, 1986 cited eight deficiencies pertaining to preparation .and control of elec trical calculations; calculation logs not being maintained, drawings do not reference applicable calculations, and no. documented evidence of training to applicable procedures was available. This report also stated that the TVA employees had been trained to the OEPS. Three of the deficiencies pertaining to calculations remain open as of this investigation.
Those open deficiencies identified in the above reports will not be addressed in this repcct, as they will be resolved per the EA Audit Program.
Training records that were obtained from the Electrical Design Branch for the Sequoyah Project in Knoxville and the Sequoyah site were reviewed as per requirements of EEB-EP 22.31, Revision 0, dated March 7, 1986. Personnel were trained to Office of Engineering Procedures (OEP) 06, " Design Input",
! OEP-08, " Design Output", and OEP-07, " Calculation", and tested in all three procedures under training session QA 103 during 1985 and 1986.
Subsequent to the OEP training, the Office of Engineering Procedures were revised under the new organization of " Nuclear Enginee ring". The engineers were now required to be trained
! to the requirements of NEP 1.2, " Training", Revision 0, dated July 1, 1986, NEP 3.1, "Calcula tions", Revision 0, dated July 1, 1986 and NEP 9.1 " Corrective Action", Revision' 0, dated July 1, 1986 as it pertains to the revision of calculations. As a result of these revised procedures, the training should be documented as per the requirements of NEP 1.2. Based on the QACEG investigation it was established, that as of October 27, 1986, the personnel in the Electrical Design Branch for Sequoyah, located in Knoxville had been trained in the requirements of NEP 3.1 and NEP 9.1. l The QACEG's review of training record for Electrical Design Branch Engineers, located at Sequoyah, indicated they had not 3
been trained in the requirements of NEP 3.1 and NEP 9.1. This was due to the priority of the system walkdown effort being per formed at SQN. As a result, CATD 80303-SQN-02 is being issued to ensure that Electrical Design Branch Engineers at SQN, will be trained to the NEP 3.1 and NEP 9.1 requirements.
4 Through discussions between this evaluator and the Assistant Electrical Branch Chief, in the Electrical Engineering Branch c in Knoxville, and evaluation of those documents de scribed within this element report, indications are that the engineers 4
, . , . . ,.,,,e _ - , , . - _ . _ _ , - _ _ y._,__,,--.r- -.,,--,,--.m. ,7,, --- -_ __- - -_ --.. -
( (
'=
- REPORT NUMBER:
REPORT TYPE: 80303-SQN Element Report REVISION NUMBER:
TITLE: 1 Personnel-Training and Experience PAGE 11 0F 12 were trained. However, the results of-the EA audits indicate '
the training was inadequate.
An independent assessment was conducted by Sargent .and Lundy of TVA's Electrical Calculation Program, and .the results indicated that this program was deficient. As a result of the assessment by Sargent and . Lundy, corrective action is being implemented to improve the Electrical Calculation Program.
A separate effort is being conducted by the Engineering Concern Task Group pertaining to the technical aspects of this Concern.
Through the assistance of Sargent and Lundy, TVA Electrical Engineers will undergo formal training utilizing new procedures and technical guides currently being written by TVA with the assistance of Sargent and Lundy. In addition, TVA has contracted through Sargent and Lundy, a new computer database for use in the preparation of calculatiens. The intent is to train the Electrical Engineers in the use of this program, along with new revised procedures and technical guides. This new training program is tentatively scheduled for implementation the first quarter of 1987.
5.3.2 Conclusion Based on QACEG's investigation and the review of all documents referenced within this report, the issue is unsubstantiated.
Training was performed to the OEPs which was the program in effect during the time period the employee concern was issued.
However, based on the results of the audits and the fact that some of the site Electrical Design Branch Engineers have not been trained to to the new requirements of the NEPs, CATD No.
80303-SQN-03 was issued to ensure implementation of an improved Training Program. Also, CATD No. 80303-SQN-02 is being issued to ensure site Electrical Design Branch Engineers are trained to the present requirements of NEP 3.1 and NEP 9.1.
r Until the commencement of the new training program and assurance of its implementation and effectiveness, the issue of electrical engineers preparing electrical calculations without adequate training is considered potentially safety significant.
Attachment A identified the concerns as potentially safety-l significant. However, QACEG evaluation concludes that only concern I-85-128-NPS is potentially safety-significant, but the concern is not considered detrimental to the safe or reliabic operation of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant. A separate investigation has been conducted
(
4
c----- . - - _ , - - -
,..n ,, - - - - - - - - - _ . - . , - ,,, . - - , _ - ~
\ \
REPORT NUMBERt
+ '
. REPORT TYPEt >
80303-SQN Element Report REVISION NUMBER:
TITLE: 1 +
Personnel-Training and Experience , PAGE 12 0F 12 by the Engineering Concern Group pertaining to the integrity of the calculations ' and the results will be documented in their report .on Concern No. I-85-128-NPS.
6.0 ATTACHMENTS A. Employee Concern Program System (ECPS) List of Employee Concern In formation.
B. Corrective Action Tracking Document (CATD) No. 80303-SQN-01 C. Corrective Action Tracking Document (CATD) N'o. 80303-SQN-02 D. Corrective Action Tracking Document (CATD) No. 80303-SQN-03 6
+
h
e - * . m ATTACHMENT A I
REFEREt!CE - ECPSI20J-ECPSI22C TEtlilESSEE VALL EY AUTHORITY PAGE - I.046 F REQUE tJCY - REQUEST OFFICE OF flUCLEAR P0HER RUll tit 1E - 12:50:50 OilP - 1555 - Ript EMPLOYEE C0ftCERM PROGRAM SYSTEN (ECPS) RUll DAIE - 12/02/86 LIST OF El-IPLOYEE CollCERil INFORMATI0tl CATEGORY: QA GA/QC PROGRAlls S GEllERIC KEYl!ORD A 11 APPL QTC/flSRS P KEYll0RD B C0!ICEFil SUB R PtT h B S tl INVESTIGATI0tt S. CollCERil KEYI!ORD C liuttBLR CAT CAT D L OC fLQB REPORT R DESCRIPTIOld KEYll0RD D SQti-86-009-008 ft? 70601 S 5Q13 YYYY I-86-109-SQN SS MAllAGEMENT (Kiloitti) 1845 LIED TO THE P - tiollcot1FORitAllCE 150267 QA 80507 K-FORT 1 .0.T.C. ( ACR0tlYt1 110T DEFIllED Ill MAIL T R Altal tlG ER) AtID, BY DOIllG SO, 10 Tile flRC AS QUALITY llELL, REGARDIllG THE TRAltilt1G AtlD EXP Et!PLOYEES r
ERIEllCE OF SELECTED QA PERS0tillEL. Il UCL EAR P0llER DEPARTMElli C0!!CERil. Il0 FURTilER IllFORIIATIOli Ill FILE.
I-86-211-SQt3 QA 80303 H SQN NNNN NO DURING THE COURSE OF INVESTIGATItlG A REPORT NOTHER CONCEYU, ilSRS RECEIVED THE F0 LLONING AS A SY-PRODUCT OF Cat 1 TACT H ITH THE CONCLRt1ED IllDIVIDUAL (CI).
SON PROCEDURE HANDLI t-EN 20106 S BFN YYYY SS AN INDIVIDUAL FROM BFN HROTE 11SRS EX I-85-128-11PS REPORT PRESSING HIS CONCERN THAT THE CONTRO EN 20411 . L AND QUALITY OF DE'S DESIGN EFFORT EN 20501 IS INADEQUATE. THE CI SENT SEVERAL Ett 20502 ROUGHLY HRITTEN PAGES DETAILIrlG AND EN 20601 SUMMARIZING HIS EVALUATION AND C0t1CL QA 8030S USION OF THREE MAJOR AREAS: (1) D
- \ \
ATTACHMENT B ECSP CORRECTIVE Action Tracking Document (CATD)
INITIATION
- 1. Immediate Corrective Action Required: d/ Yes /[/ No
- 2. Stop Work Reconsnended: /[/ Yes /X_/ No
- 3. CATD No. 80303-SQN-01 4. INITIATION DATE 11/26/86
- 5. RESPONSIBLE ORGANIZATION: Technical Support Branch
- 6. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: /X/ QR /[/ NQR As identified in Element Report 80303-SQN, TVA Quality Control Inspectors are currently being trained per the requirements of NQAM Part II, Section 5.3A, Revision 0, dated October 1, 1986.
NQAM Part II. Section 5.3A states that these requirements are on an interim basis until the new Quality Control Inspector Training Program, to be conducted by the Technical Suppert Branch in Chattanooga becomes effective. No date for implementation by TVA has been committed.
// ATTACHMENTS
- 7. PREPARED BY: NAME Patricia A. Carey /Zis DATE: 11/26/86
- 8. CONCURRENCE: CEG-H R. K. Maxon QE/J'M. -/- DATE: /7. -/O VG
- 9. APPROVAL: ECTG PROGRAM MGR: Mj& saner DATE: / /WF'/
CORRECTIVE ACTION
- 10. PROPOSED CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN:
/ / ATTACHMENTS DATE:
- 11. PROPOSED BY: DIRECTOR /MGR:
DATE:
- 12. CONCURRENCE: CEG-H SRP DATE:
ECTG PROGRAM MGR: DATE:
VERIFICATION AND CLOSEOUT
- 13. Approved corrective actions have been verified as satisfactorily implemented.
TITLE DATE SIGNATURE L.
, \ \
O ATTACIMENT C ECSP CORRECTIVE Action Tracking Document (CATD)
INITIATION
- 1. Immediate Corrective Action Required: /X/ Yes // No
- 2. Stop Work Recommended: /-/ Yes /X/ No
- 3. CATD No. 80303-SQN-02 4. INITIATION DATE 11/26/86
- 5. RESPONSIBLE ORGANIZATION: Electrical Engineering Branch at SQN
- 6. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: /X/ QR /;/ NQR As identified in Element Report 80303-SQN, Sequoyah Electrical Engineers located at Sequoyah have not been trained in NEP 3.1
" Calculations" and NEP 9.1 " Corrective Action. NEP 1.2
" Training" states personnel shall be trained to the requirements of NEPs.
/ /ATTACINENTS
- 7. PREPARED BY: NAME Patricia A. Carey //2/~ DATE: 11/26/86
- 8. CONCURRENCE: CEG-H R. K. Maxon A / /E//P/ M DATE: / 2-to- W
- 9. APPROVAL: ECTG PROGRAM MGR: O(4APfamwr DATE: Pfy[p?
CORRECTIVE ACTION
- 10. PROPOSED CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN:
l
/ / ATTACHMENTS
- 11. PROPOSED BY: DIRECTOR /MGR: DATE:
- 12. CONCURRENCE: CEG-H DATE:
SRP: DATE:
ECTG PROGRAM MGR: DATE:
VERIFICATION AND CLOSE0UT 1
- 13. Approved corrective actions have been verified as satisfactorily l implemented. ,
l l
SIGNATUlm TITLE DATE l
,..Y
. Q' x
. ATTACHMENT'D ECSP CORRECTIVE Action Tracking Document (CATD)
. INITIATION
- 1. Immediate Corrective Action Required: /X/ Yes / / No
- 2. Stop Work Recommended: /j Yes /X/ No
- 3. CATD No. 80303-SQN-03 4. INITIATION DATE 11/26/86
- 5. RESPONSIBLE ORGANIZATION: Electrical Engineering Branch
- 6. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: /X_/ QR - /;/ . NQR As identified in Element ' Report -80303-SQN, a new revised training program is being developed by TVA and Sargaent and Lundy for the I Electrical-Engineering Branch with restrd to preparation review, and control of electrical calculations. A verbal committment date of January 1987 has been noted by Assistant Lead Electrical Engineers in Knoxville for implementation of this new - training program. However, the actual - dates for program completion - and .
' initiation.- of training has not been established by management.
// ATTACHMENTS
- 7. PREPARED BY: NAME Patricia A. Care.y /d/~ DATE: 11/26/86
- 8. CONCURRENCE: CEG-H R. K. Maxon e/(K//k/4 - DATE: / 2-/o -S
- 9. . APPROVAL:' ECTG PROGRAM MGR Wh DATE: -1/#fp? -
CORRECTIVE ACTION
- 10. PROPOSED CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN:
i
/ / ATTACHMENTS
- 11. PROPOSED BY: DIRECTOR /MGR: DATE:
- 12. CONCURRENCE: CEG-H DATE:
SRP: DATE:
ECTG PROGRAM MGR: DATE:
i VERIFICATION AND CLOSEOUT l'
! 13. Approved corrective actions have been verified as satisfactorily implemented.
i I
SIGNATURE TITLE DATE i
f D
.,--c. 3 e-w. ~.,y.,..-.,r._..-* --
r--a**v-we--*- - ' ~ - ~ ~ ' * " - - e vwwe* ,e e-'7'-' e '-' wen--e-*=---=-e - - - - - ~ - ' ' - - ' ~ ' ' -
e-O Enciogy,, 4