ML20004F499

Responds to NRC 810410 Ltr Re Violations Noted in IE Insp Repts 50-553/81-03 & 50-554/81-02.Corrective Actions: Computer Program Developed to Control Receipt & Issuance of Drawings & Other Documents

ML20004F499
Person / Time
Site:	Phipps Bend
Issue date:	05/07/1981
From:	Mills L TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
To:	James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML20004F496	List: ML20004F499
References
NUDOCS 8106180483
Download: ML20004F499 (6)

Text

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

~~2NNEZGZ5 4 A-.c.Y$80',~

1

0. < - , . , . . ,

'- 400 %~s tnut Street Tower II

, .. May 7, 1981

. i l'iY il "l). .

Ia Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Caunission Region II - Suite 3100 101 Marietta Street Atlanta, Georgia 30303

Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

Enclosed is our response to R. C. Iewis' April 10, 1981 letter, which transmitted Inspection Report Nos. 50-553/81-03 and 50-554/81-02 recarding activities at our Phipps Bend Nuclear Plant which appeared to have ,een in violation of NBC regulations. If you have any questions, please get. in touch with Jim Dcmer at FIS 857-2014.

To the best of my knowledge, I declare the statements contained herein are conplete and true.

Very truly yours, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUIHORITY (mI T ,1.i ' g, p.//

=

L. M. Mills, Manager Nuclear Regulation and Safety Enclosure 8106180kQ

u- ,

e .

ENCLOSURE PHIPPS BEND NUCLEAR PIAfff RESPCNSE 'IO NIC-OIE T LE. IER FR34 R. C. LENIS 'IO H.1. PARRIS DATID APRIL 10, 1981

Reference:

Report Numbers 50-553/31-03 and 50-554/81-02 h is report responds to the Notice of Violation described in Appendix A of the OIE reports referenced above. 'Ihis is our final report on this item of noncompliance.

Norcu mliance Item 553/81-03-01 and 554/81-n2 Severity Ievel V Violation - Drawim Control 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, requires that activities affecting quality shall be prescribed and m lished in accordance with procedures. 'IVA procedure CEP 6.01, paragraph 2.2, requires the Document Control Unit (DCU) to issue drawing revisions and the appropriate engineering units and craft foremen, upon receipt of a drawing revision, to return the superseded drawiny or title block of the superseded drawing to DCU. '

Contrary to the above, control of revisions on drawing numbers Rl-AM01-1, R7, and 3TE1426-RF-01, R2, were not met in that:

a. For drawing Rl-AM01-1, R7; superseded revisions 5 and 6 were not returned to DCU by the steamfitter sketch foreman; revision 7, the current revision, was not issued to the ironworker structural foreman, irorrerker .

rodbuster foreman, and the reinforcing bar yard foreman.

b. For drawing 3TE1426-RF-01, R2; the turbine building steamfitter foreman returned the title block on revision 1 to DCU on January 22, 1981, under a lost document request and had not received revision 2, the current revision.

Response

1. Admisrion or Denial of the Alleged Violation

'IVA admits the violation cited in paragraph "a" cccurred as stated.

TVA denies the alleged violation cited in paragraph "b." We have no documentation to substantiate the steamfitter's claim that the title block .

for revision 1 of the drawing in question was returned on January 22, 1981. Drawing distribution is made from a ledger card for each drawing. A copy of the ledger card for drawing in question 19 attached (Attachment A) . As shown on the ledger card, the turbine buiMing steamfitter foreman was not issued revision 0, nor revision 1 of th.o drawing. However, our records indicate that one full size drawing of revision 2 was issued to him on January 29, 1981 and another on March 6, 1981. Drawings are forwarded to the requesting crafts via a transmittal memorandum. Both transmittals were signed, dated, and returned to the Document Control Unit which signifies that all drawings annotated on the transmittals had been received (Attachments B and C). At no time was work being accmplished to an out-of-date or superseded drawing.

. /

We have not been able to determine why the steamfitter foreman did not have or could not produce revision 2 of the drawing at the time of inspection.

Se folicwing discussion applies only to paragraph "a" of the violation as WA does rot concur with paragraph "b" of the violation as indicated above.

2. W e Reasons for the Violation It has been determined that the failure to follow proper distribution procedures was the cause of the violation. Se error occurred when requesting organizations were not properly identified for the issuance of revision 6 of drawing RL-AM01-1. h is error was then propagated through revision 7 when distribution was made in accordance with revision 6. Se t transmittal sheets were not reviewed upon return of old drawings for the purpose of issuing lost h = nt forms, thus accounting for revisions 5, 6, and 7 being in use at the same time.

3. Corrective Steps Taken and Results Achieved Concrete pour schedules were determined to be required as controlled for the following five units only: Quality Control-Civil, Electrical, Mechanical, Welding, and Project Engineering-Civil. Other organizations are to receive uncontrolled concrete pour schedules. We personnel responsible for the error in distribution were required to perform a ,

em:plete audit of the concrete pour schedules to ensure that the ledger cards are correct, that all holders of controllad drawings and uncontrolled drawings have the correct revision, and that established procedures are understood and implemented. his activity was ccrnpleted April 3, 1981. No work was acccznplished in accordance with a superseded drawing. m is problem does not indicate that the entire drawing control program is deficient.

4. Corrective Stecs to be Taken to Avoid Further Nonce.pliance Efforts have been underway for approximately two years to reduce the human error involved in the maintenance of drawing files. A computer program has been developed to control the receipt and issuance of drawings and other h w nts. Scrre hardware is onsite and the software is scheduled to be loaded into the site conputer in May 1981. Implementation of this program will greatly reduce the number of human errors in the drawing '

distribution program.

5. Date' When Ebil Cmpliance Was Achieved Full conpliance was achieved on April 3,1981.

Attach:: nt .i

,,-.~....c __

i ll lj i 11 lOS .e m ."m w-s '*el l i i 15 5 ) i f Ii  !

)I -

1( t c.a. e I o t i

j l _

+5"o W rM I 'i, i I l

• I "7,' 2}

l l 4I l

}

• t

_Cw War: S%

4 i l

t%l q  ; j rumswe ;s j [ {l  ;

3 r

i i'im ia n l 4 % < l i it i > ' '

~

j j -

^3*MI 1 l l w o'on i 1 l l l 1l }~ j i j i )

~

3'3'01 i i i il  ! i

~

f lhl 1 l i

l '3'b l ) i  !

3 I l l 'i fg 3*'3'01 i

{

EF 2 I liiI l 4 I I i

O L W3'D I ill i IM l T 9 se mi,' i  ! l t

$ H

'w , j i. 7 -"- .

!S

/

w*s foa t J - .

[" ( ,

W fo w i j 1 ( { ( j >

' ~c  !

1  !

5%113 i ii j i

(- i

,d

[h 104 d W 3^83 3d 0 10l'E4 IW I l ) $

8:

i C

I w h lW':S i l 1% 1 RS! s I TdG 3d l 1 i i ; 6 ( " ,

p

{W. *No 3d l l l l l$$ l l j i o

z I 5c0 ~3d 1

! I i i e i 1 ; I

( 2 5didcol s t l } l l 1 j l i

'm

\;  ::

s,

'**3

• *l ! I i t j l c '.

{ 3 } i t451wweWlE $

l i i i i 1 E

• L$C 5d*n i l i i j - '

I3$

~

i y- w4 t i i i 1 sa~c==J11 l l i l t l l q , i I g-i Q- *8nd tuol uddi ( '

iN t j ;- ~

t g'l 19 5'*Pl4MG l i i '

j it

\ ,

l t i

ens acoa ~l l '

N( '

l I i i g g

'd e Muco 1 I l i i i i t i ;

M .

_- sa=ro w FEf i isi1i rl u ma3:ce gi .I l-gg , ; g n{i

,5 w

W P.W W ,

g,l, m; ,

l a Si

. w* @wccc w 2 ,

5 BT - we ,

3 H  ;

J '. o gfj C b T s N 4 i

B;;

5p3p S

e

_, A4h mse.~QM M ,

w as Qi o,is s i ; ,

i j4 i

b-000R ORB M J' T'.-i"  :

e e .' I

.$, y ) *,

i'.

AHschwort L6

1e

' 4..

f

"'kh hhh -

Dept: h_

! - L-D

e. TO: m / W%h#

Sj.- ~

OV _ _.

FROM: Bob Sloce. Supervisor, OccumMt Control, Phipos Bend Nuclear Plant. CONST

@d I

(,UpjBJECT: ,,.OOCUME NT TRANSMITTAL.

R Strka ['"~'l SM.:ficatko { jFCRs Controlled a

TVA End*s vender Dfawings j } ECNs W Uncontrolled jj J l Npir>;Iwnetric p -

l } Vender Documefrts R FDs W information i.

[ R Costruction P'mt [ Cthw

'i FULL perum

.LC 3CUtdENT![UuBE A AEVISION 0*J ANTITY SIZE: . H_A l f' AEVISIONS 41- '

- 2reiln-LP -o I y

CL / 1 hhL a

OA / T h t<,

Oa e2 Mk if.- /

i oro 4 / _

/' Tau,., ell ,

$ 09 a  % 22

~

1

/ .

?,t; i

_._ lD _ $ f ($

G.

.?

A -

?s _

-9

b. -

E 3 - - _ _ _

.g

.,3,

'h

[,j --- ------ _ - __ _. ._,,

,V. '

1

??$ -- 2 ,- ,__

r

.s

. . \  !

4 --

i n

[ 1 lI l

Pf;ase spn to a&c.ow ge receipt of the above documents. P!we return all e.d revisions within '

'S s g -l~ S Date:

e

Atecch::an:e e  ! ' ,;

c i.: ,a _ C, ._ p /

c . .

,p ,. w a l1 P00R 3RENA

• T0: <0 A - . O.hA 1 l

f Bob Slone, Supervisor. Document Control, Phipps Bend Nuclear Plant, CONST FROM:

f C-VBJECT: DOCUMENT TRANSMITTAL

] Specification R FCRs I s--t-Controlled

[ Stride [ Uncontrolled l.

g AE%s ] Vendor Drawings [ ECNs

] N;;h; *::n:t !c [ Vender Docurnetts [ FDs [ Information j j O CWruciion Plant U Other ps7Upn !l FULL

SIZE: HALF PEVistCr6 ,e AEVISION GUANTITV pOCOUENT NUMBER '

g i

L -)-hM, - I STsWcA REei 1 ..

~ g,

> I&

. _Q I

h >

,1

~

a L

?. l

.}

r  ;

l  ;;

t .

jl '

. 'k 1g 1

io

. 1 .i . :

/

L'

j., E[

t  !!

4 I -

i 1'

I 1  ;

i _ t , i i L h

o uments. Pfesse return all old revisions within {

I ~ Piene shn to acknowledge receipt of the abo' oate: 3 ' [ ' d 4

---

i ,

--,