ML20078A484

Affidavit of MR Edelman in Response to ASLB 830818 Memorandum & Order Re QA Advisory Committee.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20078A484
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	09/15/1983
From:	Edelman M CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20078A470	List: ML20078A467 ML20078A472 ML20078A484
References
NUDOCS 8309230286
Download: ML20078A484 (16)

Text

e 9 AFFIDAVIT OF MURRAY R. EDELMAN

)

?

l 8309230286 830919 PDR ADOCK 05000440 PDR 0

. i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

)

THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ) Docket Nos. 50-440 ILLUMINATING COMPANY, et al. ) 50-441

)

(Perry Nuclear Power Plant, )

Units 1 and 2) )

AFFIDAVIT OF MURRAY R. EDELMAN County of Lake )

) ss:

State of Ohio )

Murray R. Edelman, being duly sworn, deposes and says as follows:

1. I, Murray R. Edelman, am Vice President, Nuclear Group, of The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company. My business address is 10 Center Road, Perry, Ohio 44081. My professional qualifications and experience are described in Ap-plicants' prefiled testimony, following Tr. 1031 (Edelman/

Leidich Testimony), at 2-3. I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein and believe them to be true and correct.

a 3

2. I have reviewed the Board's Memorandum and Order (Motion to Reopen), dated August 18, 1983 (Memorandum and Order), and am addressing in this Affidavit the matters raised by the Board at pages 9-10 of the Memorandum and Order concern-ing the Quality Assurance Advisory Committee (QAAC or Commit-tee).

3. The QAAC's functions are described in the Edelman/

Leidich Testimony at 16 and 24. A further discussion of the QAAC is contained in the Affidavit of Cyril M. Shuster, dated August 4, 1983 (The Shuster Affidavit), which was attached to

" Applicant's Answer to OCRE Motion to Reopen the Record on Issue #3," dated August 4, 1983. The Board has requested addi-tional discussion of the " significance [which) should be attached to the QAAC." Memorandum and Order at 10. The Memo-randum and Order indicates that the Board is interested in ad-ditional details concerning the nature of the QAAC reviews that have been conducted, so the Board can " assess their seri-ousness." Memorandum and Order at n.20 p.9.

4. The Shuster Affidavit discussed concerns raised by tl.e NRC Staff in NRC Inspection Report No. 50-440/83-13(DE);

50-441/83-12(DE) (Inspection Report), which was transmitted to CEI by letter dated July 25, 1983. At the time the Shuster Af-fidavit was prepared, CEI was still preparing its formal re-sponse to the Inspection Report and accompanying Notice of Vio-lation. See Shuster Affidavit, 12. I transmitted CEI's 1

response to the NRC by letter to Mr. J. F. Streeter, dated August 8, 1983 (Inspection Response). I am attaching a copy of the. Inspection Response to this Affidavit, and hereby adopt the Inspection Response and incorporate it by reference as a part of this Affidavit.

5. As indicated in the Edelman/Leidich Testimony, at 15-16, CEI established the QAAC as an advisory committee to CEI's Vice President, System Engineering and Construction Group (now the Vice President, Nuclear Group) as one of a number of QA programmatic changes following the comprehensive QA program reevaluation by management in 1978. Another programmatic change was the institution of quarterly QA Program assessments.

The QA quarterly assessments (Board Exhibit 2), and CEI's monthly Performance Analysis Reports (PARS) (both of which are discussed in the Edelman/Leidich Testimony at 16 and 23-24),

are the principal means by which CEI fulfills the intent of 10 C.F.R. Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion II, regarding regular review of the status and adequacy of the quality assurance pro-gram. CEI did not create the QAAC as a means to comply with Criterion II, or any other regulatory requirement. See Inspec-tion Response at 1. The QAAC, created in June 1978, grew out of a special QA task force formed in February 1978 following the NRC's February 1978 Immediate Action Letter (IAL). The QAAC has always functioned independently of CEI's monthly and quarterly QA review process. The QAAC does not attempt to i

duplicate these comprehensive reviews. Although the QAAC reviews a wide range of documentation, it does so to advise senior management, er significant QA policy issues." See

! Edelman/Leidich Tose'. mony at 24. In short, although the QAAC is a positive element in CEI's overview program, CEI, like the

NRC Ctaff, considers the QAAC to be "an extra, a plus for this project and not anything mandatory." Tr. 1783 (Maxwell).

6. Although the'NRC's Inspection Report and Notice of Violation focused on the 1981 period, for the Board's informa-i tion I will attempt to summarize the nature and extent of QAAC reviews since the inception of the Committee.

7. QAAC formal meetings have generally consisted of site A

tours, interviews, and formal discussion of identified agenda items. In addition to these forrsal meetings, Committee members review significant QA program documentation in their home offices on an ongoing basis. Set Shuster Affidavit, 11 3, 6.

' This has occurred since the Committee's inception in 1978. In addition, correspondence, phone discussions and office visits

have occurred regularly among Committee members during the time l between scheduled formal meetings.

i

8. As originally constituted in June 1978, the Committee was composed of CEI's QA Manager, and a senior corporate QA manager from each of the two Project Organization consultants, Gilbert Associates, Inc. (GAI) and Raymond Kaiser Engineers (RKE). The QAAC has never included site contractors. From 1

4 9

, - ,+m..,-,- , , m,y1 ,~-. .% -,-r-_m-----e v-w , w. -. .- . , . _ , - , , . - - -

ey ,c--, --~,~,-y---

e -

o June-December 1978, the Committee held six formal meetings.

The primary purpose of the meetings was to review IAL-related program issues. For example, in June 1978, the Committee members spent two days at the site and in Cleveland inter-viewing all senior CEI managers and numerous mid-level manage-ment personnel. Topics discussed included: CEI surveillance /

inepection program improvements; audit program and schedules; consolidation of the QA organization at the site; the philoso-phy and approach to the corporate QA program manual; the indoctrination and training program; and organization of the QA Department. The Committee presented a summary of their find-ings to the Vice President, System Engineering and Construction Group. The other five meetings conducted in 1978 were of a similar nature. In late 1978, the QAAC membership was expanded to include CEI's Manager, Nuclear Engineering.

9. There were eight QAAC meetings held in 1979. In the first half of 1979, the QAAC's primary focus continued to be on post-IAL changes to the QA program. In May 1979, the QAAC reviewed each specific IAL finding and the corresponding cor-rective action that had been taken as of that time. The Com-mittee concluded that all IAL-related items had been satis-1 factorily addressed. Consequently, beginning with its June 1979 meeting, the Committee began to change the direction of its reviews in order to focus on current and anticipated QA program issues. Examples of issues receiving special emphasis

by the committee in the last half of 1979 include:

organization and methodology of the operational QA program; audit corrective action effectiveness; the manufacturing assur-ance program; ASME Section III "N" Stamp and certification re-quirements; document package review philosophy; procedures im-plementing NRC deficiency reporting requirements; and the testing and records programs. In the December 1979 QAAC meeting, the Committee determined that, based on the stability of the Perry QA program, it would be appropriate for the Com-mittee to begin meeting on a quarterly basis. Also at this meeting, in light of the increasing emphasis on operations QA, the QAAC expanded its membership to include the CEI Manager, Perry Plant Operations.

10. The QAAC held four formal meetings in 1980. As part of the-first meeting, which lasted two days, QAAC members conducted a special audit of the piping contractor, Pullman Power, to sample the implementation of the QA program. The audit results showed effective program implementation. Exam-i ples of issues covered in the second and third meetings in 1980 include: indoctrination and training, audits, contract team responsibilities, the turnover program, streamlining of project procedures, and design controls. In the last meeting in 1980, the QAAC emphasized the pre-operational testing and operations QA prograras, and industry and NRC quality assurance trends re-sulting from Three Mile Island lessons learned.

s s

w N

11. The QAAC's activities during 1981 ar'e' generally de- s ,

T' scribed in the Shuster Affidavit and in the Inspection Response -

\

n attached hereto. Supplementary details are as follo~ws.

12. The first QAAC meeting in 1981 was held at the site on March 5 and 6, 1981. The focus of the meeting was on the pre-operational testing program. On March 5, Comniittee members reviewed applicable procedures and documents and held discus-sions with supervisors, engineers and inspectors in the QA Department, as well as supervisors and engineers in the Con-struction Department Testing Section. On March 6, the Commit-tee members discussed their findings and made detailed recom-mendations to the Vice President, System Engineering and Con-struction Group, in the areas of QA procedures, staffing, and interaction between the Quality Assurance and Testing organiza- '

tions, including QA reviews of testing procedures.

13. The next QAAC meeting in 1981 was held at the site on June 11 and 12. Prior to this second meeting, the newly  ;

appointed CEI QA Manager, Ronald L. Farrell, spent three days at the GAI corporate headquarters in meetings with the GAI QAAC representative, Norman B. Barker, and members of Mr. Barker's -

, staff. Mr. Farrell was briefed on general QA program require-i l ments, as well as Perry-specific QA organization, staffing, and program developments. At the second formal QA meeting in June, the QAAC continued to focus on pre-operational testing and ,

operations QA. At the request of the Vice: President, System n .

t i s

, m +

a  ;

+

! h

u. . .y .  %. '

i 3 t s.

'~. ,

Engineering and' Construction Group, plans were developed for visits by QAAC members to review operating nucl. ear plant QA programs. The June meeting also included discussions of recent QA organizational and personnel changes, and a, detailed review of the system turnover program. -

(

14. Subsequent to the June 1981 meeting, several QAAC members visited the Salem and,McGuire nuclear plants in June and July 1981, and the LaSalle nuclear power plant in August 1981, and reviewed their QA programs for applicability to Perry. The individuals who conducted these reviews presented their results and recommendations'to the Vice President, System Engineering and Construction. In' addition, although again not

, s y

s performed as part of a formal QAAC meeting, there were meetings, discussion'an'dc'orrespondenceduribgthelasthalfof 1981 among Mr. Farrell and the GAI and RKE QdAC representatives concerning the objectives of the QAAC, and need'.for a formal QAAC charter. Another significant development in the last half of 1981 was the decision to add an outside QA regulatory expert l

to the QAAC. Mr. Boyce Grier, a quality assurance expert who had 1ecently retired after 21 years of experience as an NRC regul'ator (and a former Director of the NRC Region I office),

was recr61ted in late 1981. '

Mr. Grier attended the meeting s

that was scheduled for Dpcember 10-11, 1981 but which was postponed until January 18-21, 1982. See Shuster Affidavit l 1 4. During the January meeting, the QAAC discussed a number

\

k A

~-

c T

. . .*f of issues, including the turnpver program, the pipe hanger

, I inspection program, operations QA, QA Department personnel changes, and other issues. It was decided at this meeting that a formal charter would be, draft'ed under the supervision of Mr.

4 )

Grier. In addition, as part of the January, meeting the QAAC

~,,

- 9 members attended a Perry Project quarterly meeting, attended by Senior Project Organization managers an,d CEI executives including the CEI Executive Vice President.' <

15. In addition to the January 1982 meeting, the QAAC met seven times in 1982. The Committee has; met seven times in 1983. Inasmuch as the Inspection Report and the Board's Memo-

.$randum and Order do not raise questions about the significance or seriousness of QAAC reviews in the 1982-1983 timeframe, I will not discuss these reviews in detail. Briefly stated, in

-- '1982 and 1983, the QAAC has continued, and indeed, intensified

/ its focus on the turnover, pre-operational and operational as-

?!

i ipects_of the QA program. In addition, the QAAC has spent con-siderable time evaluating the recent industry and NRC changes 1

in the quality assurance area. The QAAC has also thoroughly reviewed the findings of the NRC's 1981-82 410 trical investi-gati'on, and the Project's desponses the.o o, , nally, the QAAC adopted a formal charter in June 1982, which describes the function, duties, composition, and procedures of the Committee.

_g.

p*

• g,;

i

r

16. As indicated in this Affidavit, and in CEI's previous filings as referenced herein, CEI management has relied on the QAAC to perform an important consultation function as part of CEI's overview program. The QAAC was a voluntary creation of CEI, not a response to any requiatory requirement. Nonethe-less, the QAAC's reviews have been wide-ranging and serious, and have benefited the Perry QA program. The mere fact that CEI voluntarily created the QAAC in 1978, and perpetuated and ,

increased its use even beyond the implementation of responses to the 1978 IAL concerns, is evidence of management's commit-ment to quality assurance at the Perry Plant.

w i

Murray RUEdelman f

Subscribed and sworn to before me this /( # ayd of September, 1983.

j%L # NL)

NOTARY PUBLIC My Commission Expires

/ /- /}&J

, . , - - . , ~ . .-- ,,,---.m.--.

- - - - . - - - - r.,_--,, . . , . , ,. - , _ . . --__.,__--------,w, - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - . ~ , -

7_ ., _-- ,  ; _ -

T P.o. Box S000 . CLEVELAND. oHlo 44101 .

TELEPHONE (218) 622 9800 . ILLUMINATING 8LDG. - 55 PUBLICSoUARE Serving The Best Location in she Nation MJRRAY R. EDE. MAN VICE mtSIDENT August-6, 1983 Nucutan -

Mr. J. F. Streeter, Chief Engineering Branch I-Division of Engineering U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 ,

RE: Perry Nuclear Power Plant Docket Nos. 50-440; 50-441

Dear Mr. Streeter:

This letter is to acknowledge receipt of Inspection Report Number 50-440/

83-13; 50-441/83-12 attached to your letter dated July 25, 1983. This report identifies areas examined by Messrs. J. N. Kish. T. E. Vandel, and G. F.

Maxwell during their inspection conducted April 4-8, 13-15, May 10-13, and June 15, 1983, at the Perry Nuclear Power Plant.

Attached to 'this letter is our response to the one (1) Severity Level V Violation described in th 2 Notice of Violation dated July 25, 1983. This response is in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.101 of the NRC's

" Rules of Practice", Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations.

Our response has been submitted to you within thirty days of the date of the Notice of Violation as you required. If there are additional questions, j please do not hesitate to call.

Very - truly yours, , ,

b '

l M. R. Ederman Vice Pr.esident Nuclear Group MRE:pab Attachment cc: Mr. M. L. Gildner ,

, USNRC Site l

Mr. R. C. Knop, Chief Projects Branch 1 Division of Project and Resident Progra=s U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co==ission, Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 l

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission c/o Document Management Branch Washington, D.C. 20555 i

. I. . .. .s -

RESPONSE TO ENFORCEMENT ITEM Below is our response to the Notice of Violation appended to United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission I.E. Report 50-440/83-13; 50-441/83-12.

Noncompliance 440/83-13-01; 441/83-12-01.

t A. Severity Level V Violation 10CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion II, requires a quality assurance program be documented by written policies, procedures, or instructions and shall be carried out throughout plant life in accordance with those policies, procedures or instructions and that the applicant regularly review the status and adequacy of the program.

The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (CEI) Corporate Nuclear Quality

~

Assurance Program Manual (QAM), Section 0200, Revisions 0 through 3 (in -

effect until September 15, 1982), requires that the Quality Assurance.

Advisory Committee perform quarterly reviews of the program and to . report -

the results of these reviews, in writing, to upper level CEI management.

Contrary to the above, this committee conducted only two meetings during 1981. Additionally, the meeting documents did not include any review of ongoing program activity as required even though several significant program deficiencies were reported during 1981 by the monthly performance analysis reports. Furthermore, a formal charter was created and approved in June 1982 for the Quality Assurance Advisory Committee activities.

This charter prescribed semiannual meetings to be conducted contrary to the then current Revision 3 of the QAM.

B. Background Information The Quality Assurance Advisory Committee (QAAC) is established to conduct regular review and evaluation of the Quality Assurance program and advise ,

the Vice President-Nuclear on the adequacy of the scope, imple=entation, and effectiveness of the Quality Assurance program. The QAAC is able to fulfill this function by conducting reviews of the Corporate Nuclear Quality' Assurance' Program (CNQAP) and major changes, overviewing the development and implecentation of NQAD procedures and reviewing documenta-tion such as internal audits, NRC Inspection Reports, assesscents of Quality Assurance Program Effectiveness and Perfor=ance Analysis ' Reports.

The QAAC was not established in response to the regulatory requirecent to periodically assess the adequacy of the Quality Assurance progra= but was

. established to provide advice to management on quality assurance catters.

{ Management does assess the adequacy of Quality Assurance program quarterly

via a docusented " Assess =ent of Quality Assurance Program Effectiveness".

This quarterly. assesscent has been described by and performed in accordance l

with Project Administration 0204, since February 1979. Perfor=ance

-Analysis Reports and Assess =ents of Quality Assurance Program Effectiveness have continually addressed QA proble=s. These reports are management tools 'and 'are supported by separate administrative syste=s to track, monitor and control the' status of any deficiencies discussed. Each conth

- the Manager of NQAD prepares a Perf ormance -Analysis Report to the Vice

-President-Nuclear.

e.... e Although the attachment to this monthly report discussing each contractor's performance was deleted in April of 1982, monthly assessments of each contractor continue to be maintained and are used as input for the NQAD Performance Analysis Report and the quality Assessments of Quality Assurance Program Effectiveness. This was done to better focus canagement attention on contractor performance that was out of the ordinary.

C. Response

1. Corrective Action Taken and Results Achieved In response to the noncompliance cited above, the following explanation is set forth.

In 1981, the QAAC had scheduled four meetings. The March and June meeting were held on site. The June meeting e=phasized the need to evaluate the Operations QA p,rogram and during the third quarter of 1981, three members of the QAAC (including the Managers of Quality Assurance and Perry Plant Departments) visited three operating nuclear power plants. The December 1981 meeting was postponed until January of 1982. The QAAC met four ti=es in 1980, eight times in 1982, and has met already six times in 1983.

The charter for the QAAC existed as a paragraph in Section 0200 of the CNQAP until June of 1982 when a separate, more detailed charter was d eveloped . The revised charter required a semi-annual QAAC meeting frequency. The CNQAP requirement of quarterly QAAC meeting was not revised until September of 1982.

2. Corrective Action Taken To Avoid Rec :rrence The charter of the QAAC was revised '.n July of 1983 to again require

. quarterly meetings.

3. Date When Full Compliance Will Be Achieved Full co=pliance has been " achieved.

i

O O' D September 19, 1983 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

)

THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ) Docket Nos. 50-440 ILLUMINATING COMPANY, ET AL. ) 50-441

)

(Perry Nuclear Power Plant, )

Units 1 and 2)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that copies of the foregoing "Appli-cants' Response to the Licensing Board's ' Memorandum and Order (Motion to Reopen)'" were served by deposit in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, this 19th day of September, 1983, to all those of the attached Service List.

1Ts1 i W Har "H. Glasspieged DATED: September 19, 1983

I

~

I 1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

)

THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ) Docket Nos. 50-440 ILLUMINATING COMPANY ) 50-441

)

(Perry Nuclear . Power Plant, )

Units 1 and 2) )

SERVICE LIST Peter B. Bloch, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Appeal Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conunission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Jerry R. Kline Docketing and Service Section Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Glenn O. Bright James M. Cutchin, IV, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Office of the Executive U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Legal Director Washington, D.C. 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Christine N. Kohl, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Ms. Sue Hiatt Appeal Board OCRE Interim Representative U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8275 Munson Avenue Washington, D.C. 20555 Mentor, Ohio 44060 Dr. John H. Buck Terry Lodge, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing 618 N. Michigan Street, Suite 105 Appeal Board Toledo, Ohio 43624 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Donald T. Ezzone, Esquire Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Gary J. Edles, Esquire Lake County Administration Center Atomic Safety and Licensing 105 Center Street Appeal Board Painesville, Ohio 44077 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission W ashington, D.C. 20555 John G. Cardinal, Esquire Prosecuting Attorney Atomic Safety and Licensing Ashtabula County Courthouse Board Panel Jefferson, Ohio 44047 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

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