ML20236E304
| ML20236E304 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 06/03/1987 |
| From: | Grill J, Walters R TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236E191 | List: |
| References | |
| 204.8(B), NUDOCS 8710290171 | |
| Download: ML20236E304 (24) | |
Text
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _
1 TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 204.8(B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REPORT TYPE: SEQUOYAH ELEMENT REVISION NUMBER: 1 y TITLE: ORGANIZATION OR OPERATING PROCEDURES Communication and Interface Control PAGE 1 0F 17 i4 REASON FOR REVISION:
l 1. Revised format of text to improve clarity, deleted CATO 204 08 SQN 01, and added Section 10, Corrective Action.
'{
n N
L; H
PREPARATION h PREPARED BY:
N YY /)$ p/
5#2?- El DATE
() SIGNATURE Yo '
REVIEWS JEE' . REVIEW COM TTEE:
'~
$ 0]
q SIGNATURE /DATE '
q TAS: V SIGNATURE DATE N
- .j CONCURRENCE 5 W
8710290171 871023 dhYfN -
Y3 ?
gDR ADOCK 0500 7 CEG-H:
O
'N 63 -N W
y SRP:
DATE SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE *
[,;.
APPROVED BY:
M.
ECSP MANAGER DATE MANAGER OF NUCLEAR POWER DATE i CONCURRENCE (FINAL REPORT ONLY)
- SRP Secretary's signature denotes SRP concurrences are in files.
?!
o
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: -204.8(B).
SPECIAL PROGRAM-REVISION NUMBER:. 1 R PAGE 2 0F 17 l 1
- (i.
l
. 1. CHARACTERIZATION'0F ISSUES:
Concern: Issue:-
WI-85-100-052 a' . There is a lack'of effective commu-
" Lack- of effective communica . nication and interface control among .
tion and-interface control the branches in EN DES,'and between l g- among organizations within EN DES and the projects and.other i b EN DES . Branches, Projects, divisions.
Procurement, etc. CI.has
- no further information. 1 Anonynous concern via letter.."
k.
n k
- 2. HAVE ISSUES BEEN IDENTIFIED IN ANOTHER SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS? YES X NO-o- Identified by. Institute of Nuclear Power Operations' l f
(
Date 08/14/86' Documentation Identifier: TVA memo from Jackson to Those Listed,- ..4
- h. * " Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INP0) . Corporate Evaluation
' Responses," (A02 860813 012) ,
o Identified by TVA Employee Concerns Special Program (ECSP)
A Date 01/30/87 b Docurnentation Identifier:- ECSP Report 71000, R3, Management and Personnel, " Productivity" l f~i u
- 3. DOCUMENT NOS., TAG NOS., LOCATIONS, OR OTHER SPECIFIC DESCRIPTIVE 4
3 IDENTIFICATIONS STATED IN ELEMENT:
J l
1 No specific identifications.
a
{, 4. IP'TERVIEW FILES REVIEWED:
Expurgated file for WI-85-100 was reviewed, and no additional N unreviewed information was found.
t 05420-8 (05/29/87)
.1 TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS' REPORT NUMBER: 204.8(B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION' NUMBER: 1 PAGE 3 0F 17 l( i
- 5. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED RELATED TO THE ELEMENT:
'See Appendix A.
- 6. WHAT REGULATIONS, LICENSING COMMITMENTS, DESIGN REQUIREMENTS, OR-OTHER APPLY OR CONTROL IN THIS AREA?
L H See Appendix A.
- 7. LIST REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION, MEETINGS, TELEPHONE CALLS. AND OTHER DISCUSSIONS RELATED TO ELEMENT:
I See Appendix A.
k W
- 8. EVALUATION PROCESS:
{
- a. Reviewed available transcripts of NRC . investigative interviews to gain additional information regarding the concern.
>l [
Q .
Reviewed the hierarchy of applicable documents (e.g.,
i b.
10CFR50, Appendix B, ANSI N45.2.11, UFSAR) to establish l1 criteria requirements and TVA commitments pertinent to the issues in Section 1.
j
- c. Reviewed engineering department procedures and ractices relative to communications and interface contro to determine k
if they meet requirements.
b d. Reviewed applicable practices for compliance to procedures; reviewed results of program audits by TVA, NRC, and INPO as applicable.
- 9. DISCUSSION, FINDINGS, AND CONCLUSIONS:
d Chronology:
g "I Late 1960s: Sequoyah (SQN) plant design begins 10/15/68: SQN issues PSAR to obtain construction permit A
05/70:
AEC issues construction permit for Units 1 and 2 s
l 05420-8 (05/29/87) i l
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 204.8(B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM ,
REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 4 0F 17
(
06/27/70: 10CFR50 Appendix B formally issued 01/70- SQN-QA Manual, through R12, Constitutes Engineering 12/75: Design Procedures in effect 09/73 - Division of Engineering Design (EN DES) Engineering 06/85: ' Procedures (EPs) in effect 06/06/74: ANSI N45.2.11-1974 issued ;
i r 1975: Topical Report TVA-TR75-1A initially issued >
06/76: TVA commits to Regulatory Guide 1.64 which endorses ANSI N45.2.ll-1974 l
3 09/27/80: Operating License (OL) issued for SQN Unit 1 09/15/81: Operating License (OL) issued for SQN Unit 2 g
06/85 - Office of Engineering Procedures (OEPs) are-in effect; i
06/86: supersede EN DES EPs TVA voluntarily shuts down SQN Units 1 and 2 f 08/85:
SQN Project Manual (SQEPs and SQEP-AIs) in effect T 09/85 to
- present:
i '
11/01/85: TVA. presents SQN Nuclear Performance Plan (Draft) and its Corporate Nuclear Performance Plan (Draft) to NRC
$- - 11/14/85: TVA receives employee concern WI-85-100-052 03/10/86: TVA Corporate Nuclear Performance Plan (CNPP) Volume 1, R0, submitted to NRC y
07/14/86: Secuoyah Nuclear Performance Plan (SQN NPP),
., Vo'une 2, revised and issued as R1 a
07/86 to Nuclear Engineering Procedures (NEPs) are in effect; g present: supersede OEPs N TVA CNPP Volume 1, revised and issued as R2
$ 08/13/86:
H l l
- , 05420-8 (05/29/87)
( )
1 c
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS ~ REPORT NUMBER:- 204.8(B)
'SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: '1 PA6!. 5 0F 17 f;
Discussion: j
.9.1
'. BACKGROUND ;
- Sequoyah is a two-unit nuclear power plant. Each of-the two i units employs a pressurized water reactor'(PWR) nuclear' steam l supply system (NSSS), with four coolant. loops, furnished by ;
Westinghouse Electric Corporation. The plant has been -l designed, built, and operated by TVA.
-The Sequoyah plant design was begun in the late 1960s when implementation of regulatory requirements was not required to be well documented. The majority of the SQN licensing commitments _were made in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and p
< some of the present day regulatory requirements do not '
i pertain to Sequoyah. It is not necessary to update the i' Sequoyah plant to include all of the new guidance published by NRC, unless there are specific requirements or commitments ,
[- to do so.
Although the Sequoyah Preliminary Safety Analysis Report )
l (PSAR) was released prior to issuance of 10CFR50 Appendix B, '
l
{ the Sequoyah engineering organization began to comply with the applicable regulatory criteria upon its issue as _a draft i
document in nid-1969. Upon their subsequent issuance, 10CFR50 Appendix _B, ANSI N45.2.ll, and Regulatory Guide 1.64
) were also complied with by TVA.
l TVA engineering quality assurance program policy directives 4 and Engineering imple' mentation procedures for the Sequoyah
[ Nuclear Plant specify requirements to comply with the applicable regulatory criteria and are comparable to those- 4 l used by other utilities in the nuclear power industry.
' The issues identified in this element refer to the alleged l lack of communication and interface control within the TVA organization.
l 9.2 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
}
The requirements applicable to this issue are contained in L
the following:
I o 10CFR50, Appendix B, " Quality Assurance Criteria for l Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants,"
l l
- ( App. A, 6.a), Criterion III, " Design Control:"
05420-8 (05/29/87)
5 TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: '204.8(B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: .1 PAGE 6 0F 17 J
- [
- " Measures shall-be established for the identification and control of design interfaces and for coordination among h participating design organizations. These measures shall include the. establishment of
' procedures among participating design e organizations for the review, approval, L
release, distribution, and revision of F
documents involving design interfaces . . ."
o ANSI N45.2.ll-1974 " Quality Assurance Requirements for I- the Design of Nuclear Power Plants," (App. A, 6.c),
Section 5, " Interface Control," contains regulatory 8 requirements pertaining to the identification of .
g interfaces and the establishment of systematic methods g1 of-communication. 'These are applicable to Sequoyah.
[ 9.3
~
TVA COMPLIANCE PROGRAMS AND ENGINEERING PROCEDURES
]
O The Sequoyah Updated Final . Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR)-
(App A,'6.d), including Topical Report TVA-TR75-1A i* ( App. A, 6.e) commits to compliance with the criteria of 10CFR50 Appendix B and ANSI N45.2.ll-1974 for communication '
and interface control.
f The evaluation team first reviewed the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant ;
g Quality Assurance Manual (SQN-QAM App. A, 5.g) and then the past and present engineering procedures'(EPs, OEPs, and NEPs) q
$ to determine which ones dealt with communication and
?
interface control. The procedures reviewed cover the period ,
i of time from the development of the Division of Engineering 1
1 2,
Design Engineering Procedures (EN DES-EPs) in 1973 through the current Division of Nuclear Engineering (DNE) Nuclear g Engineering Procedures (NEPs) issued on 07/01/86.
a All design engineering for the TVA nuclear power plants prior f to 09/73 was performed by the engineering branches in the 2 Office of Engineering Design and Construction. These-gg engineering discipline groups designed several nuclear plants
& concurrently, beginning in the late 1960s. In 09/73, an t' organization change at TVA resulted in the establishment of the Division of Engineering Design (EN DES). At that time a
$i project system was established that assigned engineers from the various engineering branches (Civil, Electrical, and e Mechanical) to work exclusively on a specific project, such W as Sequoyah. The Sequoyah project engineering team menbers, M- 0542D-8 (05/29/87) q
, .TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 204.8(B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER:- 1 PAGE 7.0F 17 b
under a project manager, were assigned responsibility.for maintaining the design activities related to Sequoyah,
. including any needed design changes.
Concurrent with establishment of the project system concept, new division-wide procedures, called EN DES-EPs, were established and were in effect from 09/73 to mid-1985. 'The EPs were .quite detailed .and prescriptive, and included many administrative controls in addition to.addr.essing quality assurance requirements. The EPs-that were reviewed in detail for'this evaluation are listed in Appendix A, 5.j.
In 06/85, new Office of Engineering _ Procedures (OEPs) became effective. The new OEPs reduced or eliminated most of the f.'
administrative details previously found in the EPs. In place of a stand-alone procedure with many instructions, the OEPs
): referred.the reader directly to other. procedures that
)- controlled ^ individual activities. The end result was a i series of single sentences that provided anyone unfamiliar with the process minimal direction on how to accomplish a k given activity.' The OEPs reviewed in detail for this evaluation are listed. in Appendix A, 5.1.
[ In 07/86, the reorganized Division of Nuclear Engineering
~ Procedures (NEPs) became effective. Although these-procedures closely resemble the OEPs issued a year earlier in content, format, and brevity, there are some exceptions.
.These current procedures require the active use of other 4
references, including the sequoyah Engineering Project Manual l (App. A, 5.n), for full understanding of what is to be done.
h - The NEPs reviewed in detail for this evaluation are listed in Appendix A, ~ 5.m.
g 9.4 INVESTIGATION l
b A review of the transcript of an investigative interview i
( App. A, 5.s) revealed that while the concerned individual
, referred to the interface between the various organizations in EN DES, he emphasized the interface between design
$ engineers and procurement personnel.
3 Procedures Applicable to the Issue TVA's interface control commitments for SQN, which are contained in the quality assurance program description Topical Report TVA-TR75-1A ( App. A, 6.e), fully address the regulatory criteria requirements. To meet these interface control connitments, TVA has issued both upper- and 05420-8 (05/29/87)
s s
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 204.8(B)
REVISION NUMBER: 1 f
1 PAGE 8 0F 17
\
(
L lower-tier administrative instructions and procedures addressing the subject (App. A, 5.f through 5.n).
With regard to coordination between the engineering branches, the procedures describe a " squad check" process wherein drawings and other design documents are routed to the other disciplines working on the project, for signature and/or information.
[
H
' With regard to coordination between design engineers and purchasing personnel, both 0EP-09 and NEP-4.1 state that the i engineering organization 1) documents the requirements for L procured material and equipment, 2) coordinates with the-contract engineer, 3) reviews the bids, and 4) performs interface and approval reviews on vendor documents. Hence, these procedures did not (and do not) authorize the purchase
%- of construction materials and equipment without engineering l
involvement (as was alleged in the investigative interview Q [ App. A, 5.s]).
F ~~
Substantiation of Issue A review of the Office of Engineering Design and Construction h'
L (0EDC) in 1978 (App. A, 5.t) found that " communication among
- the multiple organizations involved in procurement [was] not controlled for maximum effectiveness." For example, there were four organizations in contact with the vendors and six t
TVA groups coordinating'with each other on purchases. To better coordinate purchasing object'ives, the investigating y team proposed the formation of an OEDC/ Purchasing / Division of a Law steering committee. A followup investigation in 1981 (App. A, 5.u) found that "overall coordination between Purchasing and EN DES had improved. The face-to-face meetings which EN DES had with purchasing . . . resulted in a
" better understanding [of] each organization's role, y
responsibilities, and limitations in the procurement a function."
In early 1984, the NRC Systematic Assessment of License Q
m Performance (SALP) Board (App. A, 5.p) found that ". . .
timely corrective action continues to be a problem when 9 interdivisional coordination is required for resolution of 9
i issues." The Board also cited TVA for " failure to establish measures to control design interfaces between participating d organizations."
s 05420-8 (05/29/87)
}
.1
REPORT NUMBER: 204.8(B) j TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL' PROGRAM- 1 REVISION NUMBER:
PAGE 9 0F 17
( l
- j In 1984 and early 1985, TVA audit reports and memoranda i (App. A, 5.x through 5.aa) disclosed disparities between Responsibilities, documented and actual organizations.
authorities, and organizational interfaces identified in procedures and organization charts for design and design change control were not revised in a timely manner to
- delineate organizational interfaces and lines of communications. Furthermore, organizational vacancies were not filled in a timely manner.
A', 5.w) found the following Finally, in late 1985, INP0 (App. ;
communication and coordination deficiencies: I
" . . . many TVA reorganizations have been implemented o
without needed policy document revisions, with the '
result that effective communications and smooth coordination are not occurring."
o " Communications and teamwork between the OE and Nucl Operations need improvement, especially at the nuclear
> plant sites. [ Work changes and misunderstandings] have
)
contributed to mistrust between the two organizations t j and, in some cases, led to duplication of effort."
i On the basis of the above statements made by other investigators, the evaluation team decided that there were significant communication and interface coordination problems This is confirmed between TVA's nuclear power organizations.
by the fact that in 1986 TVA began planning corrective actions, including programmatic improvements and an This procedures system h integrated nuclear procedures system.
will contain policies, directives, and standards to establish f management interface responsibilities within the Office of Nuclear Power (ONP). The programmatic improvements and the N
" development of these upper-tier documents (as well as implementing procedures and instructions) are described in
_ the Nuclear Performance Plans (App. A, 6.f.and 6.g).
9" Findinas_:
g-.
- a. Despite the existence of applicable procedures, there N were communication and interface problems between EN p DES and the Division of Purchasing and between the OE W and Nuclear Operations. Responsibilities, authorities, d - and organizational interfaces identified in procedures j and organization charts for design and design change control were not revised in a timely manner to !
l 05420-8 (05/29/87) \
y ,
l 4 ..
1 l
. l I
REPORT NUMBER: 204,8(B)
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1
' PAGE 10 0F 17
( l t I j
delineate organization interfaces and ifnes of communications. Furthermore, organizational vacancies i 1
were not filled in a timely manner.
To improve communication and interface control between l
organizations, TVA is making programmatic improvements and is developing new corporate-level nuclear directives and procedures to govern its nuclear activities. Plant-specific procedures will be revised or written on a site-by-site basis to assure conformance with the corporate-level directives and procedures.
Conclusions:
5 Issue "a" is valid. Although organizational interfaces and '
ifnes of communication were addressed in quality assurance program manuals and engineering procedures, the programmatic f controls necessary to keep the procedures current were not implemented. There were also interface problems with j vendors, and between the OE and Nuclear Operations.
Programmatic and procedural improvements to deal with these 8
problems have been initiated by TVA.
E 10. CORRECTIVE ACTION: t d TVA has submitted a corrective action plan (CAP - App. A, 5.bb) to G' address the finding identified in Section 9 of this report.
A CATD 204 01 NPS 01 (formerly 204 01 WBN 01)
N CATD Description. Effective communication and interface control was k5 not maintained by EN DES. Responsibilities, authorities, and S,
organizational interfaces identified in procedures and organization charts for design and design change control were not revised in a timely manner to delineate organizational interfaces and lines of communications. Furthermore, organizational vacancies were not filled in a timely manner, and requests for engineering information were not responded to in a timely manner.
9 d Committed Action. CAP TCAB-345 (05/29/87)
D "The issues described in this CATD reflect a number of the root e problems that ultimately resulted in the shutdown of TVA's nuclear plants. TVA has formulated and is implementing corrective action plans in the areas of organization structure, management staffing / responsibility / accountability, and design / change control to
' disposition these matters. The action plans have been described to
- 0542D-8 (05/29/87)
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 204.8(B)
SPECIAL PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 11 0F 17 1
the NRC in the Nuclear Performance Plan, Volume 1 (Sections III, j IV.B, IV.C, IV.E.2, and VI.E.4), Volume 2 (Sections II.1 and II.3), j j
, and Volume 3 (Sections II.1 and III.2). Additional details on the 1 design / change control progran as it relates to WBN will be included in Volume 4 of the Nuclear Performance Plan. Also, DNE Policy Memorandum PM-87-35 has been issued to clarify the comparative range of responsibilities between branch chiefs, project engineers, and 1 L
lead engineers." I The evaluation team concurs with the TVA corrective action plan.
$ 1 n
k
$(
R wi 9
l l
k' 05420-8 (05/29/87)
-a .
TVA'EMPLOVEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 204.8(B) j SPECIAL PROGRAM' '
REVISION' NUMBER: 1 l PAGE 12 0F 17 f- j l
APPENDIX A_
- 5. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED RELATED TO THE ELEMENT:
.a. ' Title.10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part'50 (10CFR50), Chapter 1, Appendix B, " Quality. Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants" Criterion III, " Design Control"
- b. Regulatory Guide 1.64, " Quality Assurance Requirements for the Design of Nuclear Power Plants," R2, (06/76)
- c. ANSI N45.2.ll-1974, " Quality Assurance Requirements for the Design of. Nuclear Power Plants"i Section 5, " Interface f- Control"
)-L
- d. SQN Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) through 3
Amendment 3, (04/86)
?
- e. TVA-TR75-1A, " Quality Assurance Program Description.for the p Design, Construction, and Operation of TVA Nuclear Power i
(
P1 ants,"R8,-(04/09/85) g x
r . TVA Nuclear Quality Assurance Manual (NQAM), (11/14/85)-
f.
9 Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Quality Assurance Manual (SQN-QAM),
R12,(12/03/75)
TVA NPP, Volume 2, Sequoyah Nuclear Performance Plan, R1, 1
{ (07/17/86) 9, j. TVA Division of Engineering Design (EN DES) Engineering _
Procedures Manual:
EP 4.01, R10 " Signature / Initials," (04/25/85)
{- EP 4.25, R8 " Interface Coordination," (04/24/84)
$ EP 5.01, R17 " Purchasing / Transfer Requisitions," (05/23/85) f) EP 5.07, R5 " Contract Engineering for Civil Items,"
y (10/13/82) i e
T ;
05420-8 (05/29/87) p.
..-i TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS. REPORT NUMBER:- 204.8(8)
"SPECIAL PROGRAM .
REVISION NUMBER: 1 PAGE 13 0F 17 i I
APPENDIX A (Cont'd)
EP 5.11, Ril- " Vendor Orawings," (04/24/84)
EP 5.15, R4 -InterfaceControl,NSSS,";(04/06/81).
~
EP~5.20, R7, " Processing'ProcurementRequests,"-(11/05/84)~
t.. ' k. TVA office of Engineering (OE) Organization Manual, .(04/26/85) i TVA Office of. Engineering' (OE) Proce'dures Manual:
1.
OEP-09, R0 " Procurement, (04/26/85)
OEP-10, R0 " Review," (04/26/85) }
r OEP-15, R0 " Interface Control,".(04/26/85)
.. m . - TVA Division of Nuclear Engineering '(DNE) Procedures Manual:
I
-NEP-3.3, R0 " Internal Interface Control," (07/01/86) h- .
NEP-4.1,~R0 " Procurement " (07/01/86)
[
o NEP-5.2, R0 " Review,"(07/01/86) s
.- 'NEP-5.3, R0 " External Interface Control," (07/01/86) )
y
- n. Sequoyah Engineering Project, Project Manual, R0, (09/27/85) b o. Letter from W. J. Dircks, NRC, to C. Dean, TVA, SALP Board Report,
[B45 850919 826], (09/17/85)
{ :
.p. Letter from R. C. Lewis, NRC, to H. G. Parris, TVA, SALP Board 3
!,! Reports, [ NEB 840614 612], (06/12/84)
- Reports, [A02 830415 001], (04/13/83) w f,i !, r. Letter from R. C. Lewis, NRC, to H. G. Parris, TVA, SALP Board- '
Reports, [A02 820823 010], (08/20/82)
@?
an Q
05420-8 -(05/29/87) a s
i --.___'____ _
.kU TVA' EMPLOYEE CONCERNS REPORT NUMBER: 204.8(B) I SPECIAL-PROGRAM REVISION NUMBER: 1
, PAGE 14 0F 17 d APPENDIX A (C'ont'd) p .-
s.. Letter from J. B. Youngblood, NRC, to S. A. White,:TVA,. with d the attached transcript of the' investigative interview conducted.by the NRC on 02/21/86 'at the First Tennessee Bank '
^
Building in Knoxville, TN, [B45 860714 832], (06/23/86) g r-
- t. Theodore Barry & Associates-Report, " Management Performance-Review of OEDC," (12/78)
N u. Theodore.Barry & Associates Report, " Review of OEDC P. Implementation Progress," (03/81) h.
$ v. TVA Report " Recurring Findings, Recommendations, and Good Practices from INPO Operating Plant Evaluations," (05/84) g w. TVA memo from L. L. Jackson to Those Listed, " Institute of g Nuclear Power. Operations (INPO) Corporate Evaluation .
- Responses," [A02 860813 012] (08/14/86). Relevant findings ;
include 1.lA-2 and 2.5A-7.
h[ ;
Wj .x . TVA Audit No. D00-A-84-0005, " Program Management - Quality 6 -( ' Assurance Program and Organization," for audit conducted e April 9-27,1984 -
- y. TVA memo from E. Gray Beasley to F. W. Chandler,
Subject:
g ' Audit Deviation Report No. D51-A-84-0006-D0ll, " Inadequate r Systems to Ensure Calculations Are Updated to Support Design ad Changes Made after Plant Operations," [B05 850402 004],
h (04/02/85) k z. TVA memo from E. Gray Beasley to R. W. Cantrell, " Quality Management Staff Assessment of Problems Associated with Discipline Staffing," [B05 850402 005], (04/02/85)
. aa. TVA memo from E. Gray Beasley to G. L. Dilworth, " Quality N Management Staff Assessment of Problems Associated with
.q . Discipline Staffing," [B05 850417 003), (04/17/85)
N Q bb. TVA letter from G. R. McNutt to G. L. Parkinson, Bechtel,
" Employee Concern Evaluation Program - WBN - Corrective Action p]
Plan" [TCAB-345], (05/29/87) y .
l
(
p 05420-8 (05/29/87) .
.-n 3
1 REPORT NUMBER: 204.8(B)
TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS .
l SPECIAL PROGRAM l REVISION NUMBER: 1
)
PAGE 15 0F 17
[
APPENDIX A (Cont'd).
6.
WHAT REGULATIONS, LICENSING COMMITMENTS, DESIGN REQUIREMENTS, APPLY OR CONTROL IN THIS AREA?
- a. 10CFR50 Chapter 1, Appendix B, " Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants"
- b. Regulatory Guide 1.64, " Quality Assurance Requirements for the Design of Nuclear Power Plants," R2, (06/76)
- c. ANSI N45.2.ll-1974, " Quality Assurance Requirements for the Design of Nuclear Power Plants" j
Sequoyah UFSAR, updated through Amendment 3, (04/86) d.
I
- e. TVA Topical Report, TR75-1A, " Quality Assurance Program {
Description for the Design, Construction, and Operation of TVA Nuclear Power Plants," R8, (04/09/85) j f.
TVA NPP, Volume 1, Corporate Nuclear Performance Plan, R2, 3
4
[
- (08/13/86) g.
TVA NPP, Volume 2, Sequoyah Nuclear Performance Plan, R1, l (07/17/86)
- 7. LIST REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION, MEETINGS, TELEPHONE CALLS, AN j
DISCUSSIONS RELATED TO ELEMENT _:_
@ 1
- a. Telecon D. Popham, R. Wolters, Bechtel, with T. Clif t, TVA, i N IOM 517 (11/7/86)
Meeting of D. Popham, Bechtel, with T. Clsit and P. Duncan,
" b. ,
TVA, in Knoxville, Tennessee, regarding Sequoyah Engineering 517,(11/19/86)
Policy and Quality Assurance documents, IOM l u
- c. Meeting of 0. Popham, Bechtel, with 0. Williams, TVA, in Knoxville, Tennessee, regarding Sequoyah PSAR, IOM 517, i
@4 (11/19/86) d N
- d. Meeting of D. Popham, Bechtel, with 0. Williams and
- 7. > P. A. Schrandt, TVA, in Knoxville, Tennessee, regarding TVA CA commitment for Sequoyah compliance with Reg. Guide 1.64, IOM 517, (11/20/86)
{
s 05420-8 (05/29/87)
g- .
- i. . , i.
REPORT NUMBER:. 204;8(B).' -j
' TVA EMPLOYEE CONCERNS SPECIAL PROGRAM ..
REVISION NUMBER:: 1 PAGE 16 0F.17 APPENDIX A'(Cont'd).
- e. Meeting ofl W. E. Troutt, TVA,' with D..' Popham, Bechtel, . ~!
regarding audit: reports pertaining-to communications and interface control, IOM 517,(11/20/86).
J
..{
( i p
i i-u !
d , '!
.h 4
p.
1
, . _- -(
N' 4
' 'A 05420-8 (05/29/87) f 1
mw , _ - - .g(
. Nl[ '
'p:
, k _3c ^ -
m% - ?,
9;' . 7. . 3
_.)f ~ REPORT /NOMBER;;1204;8(B)-
l NM TyALEMPLOYEE CONCERNS o ' j@ SPECIAL PROGRAM:!'f REVISION NUMBER: J1-C .t' g;w
, y< ,
-L g V
ij u,
T f -
y : PA'3E! ,57LOF 171 a.
m - e_: --
,- .,s w
! hy i , > ,
p[ ,
- r. CAT 0' LIST. , .c
-q: ,
icCAT6$piicable'toSQNSas.issuedwith' Watts
- .The following gener identifiesLand provides
Bar Element Reporti204.01(A). '.Iti .
' corrective' actions for the' findings:in-this..'SQN) .
{',_' report;
,b.
', + , . , . ,
'f'
(.
05/26/87)e (1 P,04 011NPS Oli(Issue "a";<03/02/87;-CAP revised
? --B;!).
. r 1
...a e :go ;
7 ' 1,; . ;v-( 41 if '
g-m: '
n I;.'
l ;-
t
.r-u,.
x r
I e ~
+ . .
1
' . ' j ,. -
U.*' , , ,
l , . . 4 6 d I .f g.
.l)
(
) '
hJ '/ ( I~ .
Si ! .., , l; 5 i 3- .1 44 W
, i 4p
-Q - >
,r j
njl -
a i
t .
s sk .
A a 5
05420-8 (05/29/87)
/ .
1 _ _ _ _ ._ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
un ow w.. -
/
T 25 870603 856 m . n as.s u , n 4 m cxm:n .m.ms conm.eusr TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY V[cmoyand um James L. McAnally,' Corrective Action Program Manager, A108 208
.TO ONP, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant W.,R.
Brown, Jr., Program Manager, Employee Concerns Task Group, FROM. :
ONP, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant DATE :
JUN03E87 - EMPLOYEE CONCERNS TASK GROUP (ECTG)
SUBJECT:
SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT (SQN) ELEMENT REP l ACTION PLAN (CAP)
The category evaluation grcap leader, Engineering, concurs with the CAP presented in the attached report.
Report No. Transmittal RIMS No.
204.07 SQN S03 870501 852 a is a CATD for Also attached per your request (S03 870326 810),The category evaluation grou Element Report Number 223.02 SQN. leader, Engineering, has report (T25 870521 979).
.~;
9 p W. R. Brown, Jr.
GRH:KDH Attachments .
cc (Attachments):
RIMS, MR 4N 72A-C H. L. Abercrombio, ONP, Seguoyah
' R. C. Denney, DSC-P, Sequoyah l
5181T 1
1 l
1 l
j
%{ __
m a .. ]
y- ,
3/:
. y
-- ;y-v
-=3--- - ---
V ,' w y y..
^
g O1[0j 8;7j{5 2 6' - v' O 1 kx' [ c v.
f# .
.Be.chtel Westerin . Power. ' Corporation
.S' Engineers - Constructors 4j i' p
- . Fifty Beale Stfcet '
/
c San Francisco. Cal!ornia'! .
Maul A%eits' PO Boa 3366. San F*arcsco CA 91119 x ') . ().
May'22,y1987, 1 'BLT-219 a
y .a 3 .
' 1 / .
f.,
2MrCGe_ofge_R4.MgNutt a-y *
/{ngineering105G'H Wennessee Valley Authority -
^ Knoxville, Tannesse'e "37902
.e 3
- s gy--n
Subject:
SequoyabuclearP1 ant-Employee Concerns Evaluation' Program Tennessee. Valley Authority
.-] -
0 b4 N CAP Concurrence w.
M;g
Dear.Mr. McNatt:
a
-:< L y E'- In the CAP: for CATO 20407; SQN 01 as. transmitted by TCAB-093, TVA has committe j to, implement the Sequoyah Engineering Procedure, SQEP-39,'" Review 'and Appro !
j.. .. of Vendor Manuals / Revisions.!' This effort is committed to be' complete,by -
- February' 1988.
- t The aforementioned CAP-is acceptable to the Evaluation Teain and will be 1
M incorporated into the subcategory report.. ^ *
?. ,
Very truly yours,
- p. v
^
'a ,4>
.{f
,J- ,
~
. i) : " G. L. Parkinson '
Project Manager I
- . 4 LP/wo/23210 e
' .l m < ..; i 5/26/87---GRM:RMW q
?:
D..T. Clifc, 9-162 SB-K 1
j i
4
'A w l.
t
^'
- 4al/ J26y g6) ;,,,,,,, ; , =; ; ,;; --- , , , ,;,,,,,,,,; g; _,, , ,
. i;
$l ' ,_
"
- 803 870'roi 35'
~
. ; .w, ...e -
- i t'NITED' STATES GOVERNMENT
. 6 M em'orandton TENNESSEE VALLEY: AUTHORITY To :
I a g s ] g g tive Action prosram nan FROM --
L. Abercrombie. Site D r, OfPS-4, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant.
o^Tc z a MAY:041987:
l st:BJECT: CSEQUOYAH' NUCLEAR PLANT-(SQN) - ExpLOYEE CONCERNS: TASK GROUP (ECIG)-
. ELEMENT REPORT 204.07 SQN - ENGINEERING CATEGORY - CORRECTIVE ACTION; PLAN
'(CAP) nr
Reference:
-. W. R. Brown's memorandum to you dated April'1,~1987,:
" Report 204-7(B)(Draft) and Non-Restart Justification o Summary-(T25'870401 971)-
t p ..+.
e I acknowledge receipt'of ECTG's element report and in:accordance with 4 their request:(see_ reference), Element Report 204.07:SQN has been. .
- - revietsed for applicable corrective action.
. .g ,
'By way_of this1 memorandum I am endorsing the site line organization. CAP,
' returning your Corrective Action Tracking' Document No. 204.07 SQN'01, and.
<* attaching the CAP for your review / concurrence.- This CAP is not a restart
_j.
,g_ requirement.-
.- - .y .
If you: agree with the proposed CAP, please have ECTG sign the ECTG concurrence space below item 9 on the CAP tracking checklist and' return the CAP tracking checklist.
L 2.N .
-4}
- Original Signed By -
9, H. B. Rankin
- 11. L. Abercrombie.
3' ~
P.ECElVED g RCD:JDS:JB:TC
[ ,/
s Attachments cc: RIMS, MR AN 72A-C-(B25 '870429 022)
N V W. R. Brown, Watts Bar (Attachments) )
' Empicye Cct.c.m:s Task i l
' Croue WB'l ~
027 @ ,,,,9,,,,, , , , , , ,
WR8 DM
-% Moa
,e -
MSM W .= 2 Otner 15 CO MC OP
' NE QA .-
A 4, en yy w r.w
.\-
-~
1AS
$RP
/
JE K L*) MCR_ .XY t - . _ - . . . Cr' ~ ~ "
=v - -.;- .
h _
.I I-i
- I;7C C.3
??~
A t t a c t.ne n t. A -
Pat. I et 1
~ - -
E. vision ? . t ..
ECOP COE!! CIVE- \
Actiot Tractint Do e wme n t
~ 1 ACATD) ~ t
\
?
IW:TIAT!ON i
i
- 1. Ic=ediate Corrective Action Required: O Tes
- 2. Stop Vert Recor=enced: D Tes lf., No k Wo
- 3. CATD No. .O D 6' 0 7 RdA/ O/ 1 l
- 5. EESPONS! ELE ORGAh!21~ ION: INITIATION DATE 4 - / 7. D 7 6.
DM - S$/V PROB 1.EM DESCRIPTION: O QR p' WQR TVA 1 n P-R7" J-/A 7 NN7~ Frilt Y //v)PJ 5/riSNTWn \
R & /FbJ AND APPPF) VAL Of" - (
\&//On R _MbA/UAL9/ D.-V/ C/nt/s << .
/. . -- ~
1 I ..
m Aul et i O A; A:HyEuTs
- 1. PLEFARED E?: i
- 8. CONCURRENCE:
NLP.E D. A. W PMD/Y/ M D.I DATE: Ar ~ tc?-n 7
- 9. APPROVAL:
CE C-R" >W d F -W/ 4'/# /M P ' DATE: '3 - E t - F l ECTG PROCf.AM MGE. __ J O M e V ., _ E.'.T E ' _ 8/?/ /#7 q iP'EC"!VE ACTION Gr RA.&bbs. * ' '
(
. 10. PROPOSED CDRRECT!YE A0!!DN ELAN:
i ca/be/s.Y C O
_fe .e i
~
i k
. , t
- 11. PROPOSID EY: DI?.E;7DF MGR: O A""!ACMVINTS
- 12. DATE:
CONCUT.RENCE: CEG-H: 4Ac & DATE: 5 2c-& 7
- SRP: JU /C DATE:
e 13. A;;r o ve:: corrective i::p ' e rno r. t e c . actices have been verified as saticiactorily
)
5:GNATUEE I!!; E I DA!i
. l.
a
/
./. .
.. [*' . -
Standard Practice Page 8 I
(
SQA166 Revision 9 '
'j
~ ~
Attachment A Page 1 of 2
~
Corrective Action Plan of Employee Concern Investigation Tracking Checklist ,
ECTG Report /CATD Number' E W 0 7 S T J WEO '2807mCA) O l '
Lead Organization Responsible for Corrective Action Plan era /Gs * (
Initiation Date M '/d' T 7 l
[ CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (CAP) _y 1 1.-Does this report require corrective action? Yes V No (If yes, describe corrective action to be taken, if no, provide justification)'
} /MPLEMfff* Srt2t/pY/1// deswarr/sK Arevsoas- /SGEM st2CP- 79 l
- fRVinal /?//D APPLth/AL />f l'6/rMo AMAlcu?&' //114sstWS ". ,
\
l i l
- 2. Identif ys ilar item / instances and corrective action taken.
(
( ._.
- 3. Will corrective action preclude recurrence of findings?'
Yes V . No
- 4. Does this_ report contain findings that are conditions adverse to cualltv (CAQ)!
as defined by AI-11 or NEP 9.l? . YES No t/
- 5. IF a CAQ condition exists,.what C1( document was initiated? -
SY ;
l 6. Which cite section/organi::ation is responsible for corrective action?
L S!dt/$YAH Esh*M / rff/A
/ A /LA/&/~~ ,
- 7. Is corrective action requiled for restart? Yes No p/ q (ThicdeterminationistobemadeusingAttachmentCofSpA166.) ]
j* 8. P2 cone nu:nber for restart corrective action? Zone N8 l
- 9. Esticate completion date for correction action. /Eg#t//7# V /f#Si _ . . , ,
\ Completed Dy $'
D,#"//hM6/
& Date jfff/4 j!f, /f N Approved By Date //f'#// d /f8/ 7 ,
ECTG Concurrence V,Wu flrycI @ Date /?,4 2 t.' ! /117 i O $
t '
I
~
02065/nl:
1 9 _ _ - _-_____ - .. >
- , y' 4
ECTG Corrective Action Tracking Document (CATD)
INITIATION Applicable ECTG Report No.: 74.3.1[8]
- 1. Immediate Corrective Action Required: O- Yes h( No.
- 2. Stop Work Recommended: O Ye's % No
- 3. CATD No. '2.13 O2 - S Q tJ - O l - 4. INITIATION DATE C4 ~
Il- 87
- 5. RESPONSIBLE ORGANIZATION: T \/ A D M E -. 5 otJ ~
- 6. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: f(QR O NQR h heavy fra Mic a re o s b fe% - re inte) ivistru m eM W ra c k ets 'o re s u f cco4-i bl e h cansie + rcetm em t- re su ll-i m c<
in clo un 'ca
+O to co e k r t s .
o\ O ATTACHMENTS
- 7. PREPARED BY: NAME YUMld WS #(# ) DATE: 4- Il- 8 7
- 8. CONCURRENCE: CEG-HF *"G E vn9 & A / h DATE: 4 - to - t
- 9. APPROVAL: ECTG PROGRAM MGR. [# & #M 4 M DATE: 6/2 Af 7
-/
l
.,, CORRECTIVE ACTION
( ) i
- y. 10. PROPOSED CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN:
l i
O ATTACHMENTS
- 11. PROPOSED BY: DIRECTOR /MGR: DATE:
- 12. CONCURRENCE: CEG-H: DATE:
ECTG PROGRAM MANAGER DATE:
VERIFICATION AND CLOSEOUT f- 13. Approved corrective actions have been verified as satisfactorily implemented, i
- SIGNATURE TITLE DATE l
9686T i )
l l
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ )
- n. -.
! i. '3
+ - ~
,~
Y
~
, m, .a t
. l16. hl { CL .H f LL. >:J ' I, s. FH.i) . , P.53-
- 4 j .
' $b 1 .
lBechtel Western Power' Corporation
- .9 Erpnoers - Constivetore :
F;fty Bea:e Street'- i t-San Francisco. Cahlornia -
Meit Aapees. PC tem 3066. $46 Franuca CA 9@9 - W May 22.1987 BLT-219-
. Mr'.' George 'R.'~ MdNutt -
Engineering CEG-H.
Tennessee Valley. Authority 4- Knoxville, Tennessee 37902
Subject:
Sequoyah Nuclear ~ Plant .
Employee Concerns Evaluation Program.
. Tennessee Valley Authority-Job'No. 16985-0261
. t C_ATO 20407 ' 50N 01~.- CAP Concurrence L :
Dear Mr. McNutt:
In the' CAP for CATD 20407 SQN 01 as transmitted by TCAB-093, TVA has commit'ted to implement the Sequoyah En ineering Procedure. SQEP-39, " Review and A of' Vendor' Manuals / Revisions.g' This effort is' committed to'ba complete y gproval-L February 1988.-
The aforementioned CAP'is acceptable to the Evaluation Team and will be ..
incorporated into the subcategory report..
Very truly yours,
/
G. L. Parkinson Project, Manager LP/wo/2321D
- . _ . - . . - _ . - - . - - .