ML20207S467

Rev 2 to Unauthorized Work/Undocumented Work Re Const

ML20207S467
Person / Time
Site:	Sequoyah
Issue date:	03/10/1987
From:	Huff G, Stewart D, Worthy J TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
To:
Shared Package
ML20207S465	List: ML20207S464 ML20207S467 ML20207S470 ML20207S473 ML20207S481
References
C011206-SQN, C012206-SQN-R02, C11206-SQN, C12206-SQN-R2, NUDOCS 8703190502
Download: ML20207S467 (4)

Text

_ _ ______________ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ __ _

TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: C011206-SQN SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT TYPE: Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Element REVISION NUMBER: 2 (Final Report)

TITLE: Unauthorized Work / Undocumented Work PAGE 1 0F 4 As Related to Construction REASON FOR REVISION: -

To incorporate Technical Assistance Staff comments and finalize report Rev. 1 To incorporate NRC comments Rev. 2 A

PREPARATION

.:. PREPARED BY:

2-25-87 0 m/ ' ' g GNATURE DATE 3

REVIEWS

.; PE5R:

1 Let6mkrsr 24c/s7

{ SIGNJJURE / DA/E

$$ 3ld7 "

' 5 $9 SIGNATURE DATE CONCURRENCES CEG-li / ,

IJY-8[

SR h gA. 3'"9*8]

SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE

• DATE

" ~

APPROVED BY:

M.S .Mhk 350/87

'DATE R/&

MANAGER OF NUCLEAR POWER DATE ECSP MANAGER CONCURRENCE (FINAL REPORT ONLY)

• SRP Secretary's signature denotes SRP concurrences are in files.

1778T l

B703190502 870316 PDR ADOCK 05000327 p PDR

TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUNBER: C011206-SQN SPECIAL PROGRAN REVISION NUMBER: 2 PAGE 2 0F 4 SUPPLEMENT FOR SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT I. Introduction This report addresses one concern, 11-85-077-I04 that states: " Drawings Have Been Falsified."

II. Summary of Perceived Problems The concerned individual (CI) felt that his supervisor was signing as-built drawings that the CI had refused to sign-off on before transfer for preoperational testing.

- III. Evaluation Nothodology k

A. Reviewed expurgated files and other available files to gain i additional information regarding this concern.

j B. Reviewed Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN) Construction Standard Operating Procedure No. 308 Revision 5, dated April 18, 1980, j " Configuration Control."

g C. Reviewed SQN Construction Procedure No. P-15. Revision 3, dated 1 October 15, 1976, " Transfer of Permanent Features and Associated Documentation to the Division of Power Production."

IV. Summary of Findings

- A. Review of the expurgated files revealed an NSRS Report No.

I-85-860-SQN. The NSRS Report I-85-860-SQN revealed the following information

1. The SOP 308. Revision 5, was written to provide a common method of marking drawings required for a system transfer. The procedure utilized a common method within TVA of cognizant working level individuals performing the tasks and then the unit supervisor reviewing that work. The assignment of a responsible reviewer within a unit is made by the unit supervisor.

l

~

-TVA ENPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: C0ll206-SQN SPECIAL PROGRAN REVISION NUMBER: 2 PAGE 3 0F 4

.2. Within the Construction organization, the unit supervisor is the person responsible for assuring that cognizant engineers are qualified and are performing the assigned work in a satisfactory manner. -

3. The unit supervisor, by position, education, and experience, is considered to be qualified to initial that a drawing is marked correctly and, in fact, is called by procedures SNP SOP 308 and SNP Construction Procedure P-15 to do so. Technically, the cognizant engineer would initial the construction revision block

. in the appropriate space, and the unit supervisor should initial in the designated space.

. 4. No objective evidence of drawing falsification was found in this investigation,

t. .

l S. The CI said when he refused to sign an as-built drawing status sticker his boss would take a look at the draw!ng and sign it.

' This supposedly occurred on electrical drawings around 1980 at the time of systems transfer before preoperational

testing.

q 6. The CI said this was no longer a concern.

3 B. Review of SQN Construction Standard Operating Procedure 308, S Revision 5, dated April 18, 1980, " Configuration Control" revealed the construction responsible engineer as the individual to mark current configuration and initial the construction revision block.

This procedure also showed that the construction unit supervisor as being required to affix his initials on the construction revision block.

i C. Review of SQN Plant Construction Procedure P-15. Revision 3 dated October 15, 1976, " Transfer of Permanent Features and Associated i

Documentation to the Division of Power Production" revealed the responsible engineering unit is responsible for identifying incomplete work and that the section unit supervisor signs the Incomplete Work Item Form.

D. No attempt was made to contact the CI in accordance with the l commitments made by QTC and by the ECTG program manual to maintain l the confidentiality of the CI. The review of the expurgated files l did not reveal the reason for the CI's refusal to sign the lR2 drawings. Since contact with the concerned individual was not made, I the question with regard to the reason for refusing to sign the l drawings can not be answered. l h '

r

. . j l

TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: C011206-SQN SPECIAL PROGRAN REVISION NUMBER: 2 PAGE 4 OF 4

/

Conclusion

' l' This evaluation agrees with the NSRS Report that drawings of this type had not been falsified and misunderstanding of the procedures *by the concerned individual led to the concern. No further evaluation was deemed necessary.

V. Root Cause None VI. Corrective Actions a

f None i

VII. Generic Applicability None d

I g VIII. Attachments M Attachment A - Listing of concerns indicating Safety Relationship and Generic Applicability.

1 d

50 a

l

.. g l

l y, ,- ,e---<------_-,,-,,,---,--.% -,- ,-p- _ ,-- er _-,ww-- --------ycm-g-----,-,---,m. - - - -,--------w '-m,-