ML20214Q601

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Insp Rept 50-344/87-09 on 870330-0403 & Notice of Violation.Effectiveness of Corporate QA Group,Qc & Trojan Nuclear Operations Board Limited in Several Areas
ML20214Q601
Person / Time
Site: Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date: 05/12/1987
From: Pate R
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To: Cockfield D
PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
Shared Package
ML20214Q605 List:
References
NUDOCS 8706050088
Download: ML20214Q601 (3)


See also: IR 05000344/1987009

Text

-

. _ . - - -

-

,$

1

,

.

MAY 121987

Docket No. 50-344

Portland General Electric Company

121 S. W. Salmon Street

Portland, Oregon 97204

Attention:

Mr. D. W. Cockfield

Vice President, Nuclear

Gentlemen:

Subject:

NRC Inspection of Trojan Nuclear Plant

This refers to the special inspection conducted by Messrs. J. L. Crews,

S. A. Richards, R. P. Correia, J. F. Melfi, and W. J. Wagner of this office on

March 30 through April 3, 1987, of activities authorized by NRC License No.

NPF-1, and to the discussion of our findings held with yourself and'other

members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.

Areas examined during this inspection are described in the enclosed inspection

report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations

of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and

observations by the inspectors.

Based on the results of this inspection, it appears that one of your activities

was not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements, as set forth in the

Notice of Violation, enclosed herewith as Appendix A.

Your response to this notice is to be submitted in accordance with the

provisions of 10 CFR 2.201 as stated in Appendix A, Notice of Violation.

The intent of this inspection was to assess the effectiveness of the various

groups within your organization performing quality verification activities.

To perform this assessment, the inspectors focused on the performance of the

Nuclear Quality Assurance Department, including the Performance Monitoring /

Events Analysis (PM/ n) group; the Trojan Nuclear Operations Board (TNOB); and

the Plant Review Board (PRB).

Our review indicates that the effectiveness of

the onsite Quality Assurance group, in conjunction with the formation of the

PM/EA group, has improved significantly.

Reviews and audits appear to be more

technical and performance oriented in nature, rather than focused on

administrative compliance with regulatory requirements. We encourage you to

continue in this effort.

With regard to the corporate Quality Assurance (QA) group, the Quality Control

(QC) group, and the TN08, our inspection indicated that the effectiveness of

these groups was limited in several areas, as summarized below.

8706050008 B70512

PDR

ADOCK 05000344

G

PDR

7

-,

o

,

MAY 121987

'

-2-

The technical capability and therefore the depth of audits conducted by

the corporate QA group appear limited.

The need for in-depth independent

reviews of the conduct of engineering work appears to be particularly

warranted in light of the concerns raisea in the engineering area during

the past two years.

The total resources available to the corporate QA group appear limited,

considering that the group audits the Nuclear Plant Engineering

Department, the Nuclear Safety and Regulation Department, and Nuclear

Division vendors.

Reviews of TNOB documentation indicate that the TNOB's oversight of the

Nuclear Quality Assurance Department is not of a demanding critical

nature.

TN0B deliberations of broad industry-wide problems and how your facility

is addressing these problems appear limited.

The predictability of your QC group in performing surveillances of-

Periodic Instrumentation and Control Tests (PICTs) only on Tuesdays would

appear to limit the benefits that can be derived from the surveillance

activity, in contrast to conducting the surveillance in a random manner.

We request that in addition to your response to the enclosed Notice of

Violation, you address the above observations in your written response.

Additionally, we anticipate discussing the effectiveness of your quality

verification organizations with you during future management meetings.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790(a), a copy of this letter and the enclosures

will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.

Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be glad to

discuss them with you.

The response direci.ed by this letter and the accompanying Notice are not

subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as

required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.

Sincerely,

.

Robert J. Pate, Chief

Reactor Safety Branch

Enclosures:

A.

Notice of Violation

B.

Inspection Report No. 50-344/87-09

f

cc w/ enclosures:

C. A. Olmstead, PGE

!

J. W. Durham, Esq., PGE

l

W. Dixon, DOE

e.

,

.

MAY 121987

-3-

bec w/ enclosures:

RSB/ Document Control Desk (RIDS) (IE01)

Project Inspector

Resident Inspector

G. Cook

B. Faulkenberry

J. Martin

F. Hawkins, NRR, LQAB

Docket File

bec w/o enclosure B:

LFMB

M. Smith

,

Region V

/Y

N

]

JMelfi/ norma

@jfrews

SARichards

RPCo reira

WJWagner

g

5/ "/87

5/jl/87/

-

5//r/87

5/

5/i4/87

[ REQUEST -

] RE EST COPY ]

/

[ YES /

0

]

S / NO

]

V

[ 5E

TO PDR ]

[

/ NO ]

AJo

on

RJPatef'Nle-

S/ l

7

5/tV87

,

i

_.

_

.

_ . _ _ ,

. . _ _ . _ . , - _ . . _ _ _ . . _

_ _ _ . .

_

. _ _