ML20134B187

Special Study of Nuclear QA (Long-Term Review)

ML20134B187
Person / Time
Site:	05000000, Marble Hill
Issue date:	11/16/1982
From:	Altman W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To:
Shared Package
ML20132B505	List: IR 05000546/1982007 ML20132B496 ML20132B590 ML20132B595 ML20132B776 ML20132B783 ML20132C068 ML20132C164 ML20132C652 ML20132C657 ML20132C860 ML20132C867 ML20134A877 ML20134A894 ML20134A915 ML20134A940 ML20134A966 ML20134A968 ML20134A982 ML20134A999 ML20134B019 ML20134B058 ML20134B080 ML20134B096 ML20134B110 ML20134B149 ML20134B160 ML20134B183 ML20134B187 ML20134B208 ML20134B226 ML20134B243 ML20134B259 ML20134B308 ML20134B336 ML20134B339 ML20134B358 ML20134B372 ML20134B385 ML20134B406 ML20134B432 ML20134B445 ML20134B461 ML20134F700
References
FOIA-84-293 NUDOCS 8508150541
Download: ML20134B187 (5)

Text

'

NRC'S QUALITY ASSURANCE INITIATIVES SPECIAL STUDY OF NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURANCE (LONG-TERM REVIEW)

BRIEFING SLIDES FOR PRESENTATION NOVEMBER 16, 1982 AT MARBLE HILL NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION DR. W. D. ALTMAN, PROJECT MANAGER 1

kok83fgfjl 85061o LEIGHTOB4-293 pon F-o ( A 2.ar3 4 Io1 1

TEAM MEMBERS MARBLE HILL CASE STUDY NRC WILLARD D. ALTMAN SENIOR QA ANALYST, IE NRC PROJECT MANAGER, SPECIAL STUDY OF NUCLEAR QUALITY ASSURANCE BATTELLE PNL HAROLD HARTY SENIOR STAFF ENGINEER, ENERGY SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT SCOTT HEABERLIN SENIOR RESEARCH ENGINEER ENERGY SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT EG&G IDAHO KEN CARROLL MANAGER, QUALITY PROCUREMENT PROGRAMS & CONSTRUCTION BRANCH LARRY KUBICEK MANAGER, QUALITY STANDARDS AND SYSTEMS BRANCH KIST AND ASSOCIATES RICHARD XLECKNER VICE PRESIDENT, N.C.

KIST & ASSOCIATES t .

1

. l 1

i l

I l

4 a l l i J

NRC t

I 8

4 COM4ISSION t

t 1

i i

i.

i s.

I 8

EO  !  :

1 1,  ;  !

l DIRCKS l. ,

i 4

i i

i f'

NRR NMSS '

i RES IE  ;

DENTON DAVIS MINOGUE j DEYOUNG

.i l 1,

]

i f

4 I

)

l- .,-...-..----.,--,,,,,.,--,-----w,.,- , , , - . , - - . _ . , , - , , , . . , , ..-.-_ ,n c.,--,

l l

IE DIRECTOR DEYOUNG DEPUTY SNIEZEK

.s-l  !

I I REACTOR DEQA FFMS EFERG.

PROGRAMS JORDAN COBB PREP.

LOR GRIMES ENGR. QA EVENTSANLI BAER HARPSTER MILLS l

BACKGROUND OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS THERE HAS BEEN A SERIES OF WELL PUBLICIZED PROBLEMS REGARDING THE QUALITY OF CONSTRUCTION AT SEVERAL NUCLEAR POWER PLANT PROJECTS PLANTS RECEIVING WIDESPREAD ATTENTION INCLUDE:

MARBLE HILL MIDLAND ZIMMER SOUTH TEXAS DIABLO CANYON THE PERCEIVED SEVERITY OF THE QUALITY PROBLEMS AND THE ATTENDANT PUBLICITY AND PUBLIC INTEREST HAVE CAUSED THE CONGRESS AND THE NRC COMMISSIONERS TO QUESTION THE ABILITY OF INDUSTRY TO CONSTRUCT NUCLEAR PLANTS IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH PUBLIC SAFETY THE ABILITY OF THE NRC STAFF TO PROVIJE ASSURANCE THAT INDUSTRY HAS CONSTRUCTED PLANTS IN A MANNER CONSISTCNT WITH PUBLIC SAFETY AS A RESULT, THE INDUSTRY AND THE NRC ARE JOINTLY FACING AN EROSION IN THE PUBLIC'S CONFIDENCE IN OUR ABILITY TO BUILD, LICENSE, AND l

OPERATE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH PUBLIC SAFETY I

'I

,, ..  : : ..a t

( 7.'/j# '

.; , 6. .b e r 27, 1981 sy ,

.... 5' CH AI A MA N ;q: (

MEMORANDUM FOR:

William J. Dircks Executive Director for Opera tions 1

FROM:

Nunzio J. Palladino

SUBJECT:

QUALITY ASSURANCE NRC needs to take actions that will result i n improved quality assurance a t nuclear power plants.

Steps we are could be taking or planning, as well as other steps that Co ng re s s m. ta k e n , were brought up dur'ing our testimony to an Udall's Subcommittee last week. A list of corrective measures would include improvements to our inspection and enforcement program as well as considerations such as third party audits, strict sanctions against non-performers, approved bidders lists, and certified indepen-dent performance audits of each utility's QA activities I would like you to p0ll that could be taken to strengthen qual'ity a'ssurancetogether , and the va provide the Commission a preliminary evaluation of the ones _

that appear most promising from an effectiveness and cost standpoint.

I believe it i recommenda tions by December 1981. 11,s desirable to have an initial pape then focus on The Commission can further study by the Staff.the areas deemed worthy of implementation for cc: Commissioner Gilinsky Commissioner Bradford Commissioner Ahearne Commissioner SECY Roberts OGC OPE -

ACRS P S QM31;6 O'f. 6. -m' b[\

77pp ^ ~~

y.;

p.,yv - , - , , _ m.~#, -yy- ai

--w w v- --,c---w- , - - -

- ..: c..:..a:.:G A: VE5 4,

COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT OVERSIGHT EEARING ON QUALITY ASSURANCE AT THE ZIMMER NUCLEAR STATION STATEMENT OF TEE EON. MORRIS K. UDALL

N Tuesday,, September-14, 9

45 A.M.

On June 10 of this year the Subcommittee held an oversight hearing to consider the quality assurance (QA) breakfewn at the Simmer nuclear powerplant. In this case and possibly others there has been a widespread failu're to adhere "a the NRC's quality assurance requirements. At Zimmer, the severity of the problem was recognized only after construction was virtually complete. My primary concern now centers on the NRC's ability to determine that a reactor can be safely operated following a QA breakdown like that at .

Zi==er.

To give some idea of the extent of the Zimmer problem, I will indicate briefly the nature of some of the . issues that must be addressed prior te issuance of an operating license.

-Deficient weld procedures.

- Apparent falsification of weld procedure test data.

-Insufficient documentation to demonstrate that many of 1

1 the 2000 welders who have worked at the Ilmmer sits were qualified for the work they performed. The NRC has informed me that, "The potential impact of the (inadequate) welder qualification rec =rds is that a

{ es

-The chemical and physical properties of certain safety related piping cannot be do.cumented. The NRC staf f has stated that, "The potential impact of the loss of traceable piping is that a substantial amount of such piping may have to be rep 1' aced. " i

-Significant quantities of safety related materials i were purchased from vendors not qualified to supply such materials. The NRC has stated. that, "The potential impact of the material purchases is that installed materials may have to be replaced. "

While the June 10 hearing yielded useful qualitative information, NRC staff were vague with regard to specifics.

Testimony at the hearing and subsequent correspondence cause me to question whether the NRC staff is on top of the problem. Today's hearing is a direct result of my not being  ;

satisfied with information that we have been provided to date.

In addition to our having been provided incomplete information, there are other disturbing aspects of this matter. I an concerned, as I said on June 10, that the NRC staff has not required an independent audit of the Zimmer plant. It seems unrealistic to have confidence that the company' that neglected quality assurance for so many years will on its own fully uncover the deficiencies resulting

~

from its neglect. An independent audit is even more important in view of the NRC suggesting that they have

, insufficient staff to address the important'Zimmer issues in a timely fashion.

My intent now is to compile a record that gives a much better picture than has,been presented to date of the status and prognosis of the Zimmer project. I hope to get an idea of the =ajor corrective actions now known to be necessary prior to plant operation. I also want to know what will be i required if existing uncertainties cannot be resolved through ongoing reviews.

The belatad discovery of the ZLamer problem, the ranner in which it came to light, and subsequent Commission actions '

create doubt that the NRC is willing and able to make sure that the Zi==er deficiencies ara found and co' erected. I -

hcpe therefore that the NRC witnesses will take advantage of this and subsequent opportunities to establish confidence ~

that they are fulfilling their responsibility to protect the i public health and safety.

In addition to the NRC, we will hear today from representatives of the City of Cincinnati Environmental Advisory Council, the Cincinatti Gas & Electric Company, Kaiser Engineers, the State of Ohio Division of Boiler Inspection, and the Government Accountability Project.

1

g '. UNITED STATES 5 b ; 3 ,i NUCLEAR REGOLATORY COMMISSION

• NW#I t

Office of Public Affairs

'.....J .

Washington, D.C. 20555 No. 5-14-82 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Tel. 301/492-7715 Remarks by Nunzio J. Palladino, Chairman U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• at the INPO Conference of Chief Executive Officers of -

Nuclear Facilit'ies Atlanta, Georgia "

October 5, 1982 ~

" MEETING THE CHALLENGE FOR A NUCLEAR FUTURE" Your utilities need public confidence to survive and prosper.

It seems to me that confidence in civilian nuclear activities requires two things to happen:. first, f

nuclear power plants must provide reliable, affordable electricity without accidents for a long period of time; -

and, secand, tnere must be a broad public perception that the nuclear industry maintains the highest standards, virtually unsurpa: sed anywhere else in busines's and the professions. Said in another way, I think con ~fidence in ,

civilian nuclear power requires solid indications of a genuine determination by you to.run a very tight ship and to take firm responsibility for public safety.

For today let me concentrate oniconstruction quality I assurance. '

I continue to be concerned that some of you need to do more to shore up your own and the public's confidence in the quality assurance of your c'onstruction operations.

l Quality assurance, or QA, should be the central focus now for all the utilities building nuclear plants. The Commission has considered quality assurance to be a key factor in the design and construction of nuclear power plants for many years. The proglems that have been identified recently indicate th'at the fundamental cause of most design and construction deficiencies is the l'ack'of total management commitment to quality.

If senior managers such as you have a strong commitment to l quality, and if you indoctrinate" capable project management teams.with that commitment, then these teams will be able l' to communicate that commitment to all other involved parties. Specificall L tho Altainggw m 1

CONGRESSIONAL AND COMMISSION INTEREST 4 A NUMBER OF CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS AND COMMISSION MEETINGS HAVE BEEN HELD RECENTLY ON THE SUBJECT OF QUALITY ASSURANCE IN THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY. RESULTS OF THIS HIGH LEVEL ATTENTION INCLUDE:

1 4

CONGRESSIONAL LEGISLATION (FORD AMEN 0 MENT) REQUIRING NRC TO CONDUCT AN INDEPTH STUDY OF QUALITY IN CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING A PILOT PROGRAM TO TEST SEVERAL fLTERNATIVES COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A SERIES OF NRC INITIATIVES DESIGNED TO ASSURE QUALITY IN CONSTRUCTION AND NRC'S ABILITY TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE IT I .

)

.i i

FORD AMENDMENT AT LEAST ONE RESIDENT INSPECTOR AT EVERY CONSTRUCTION SITE GREATER THAN 15%

COMPLETE (END FY 82)

STUDY OF EXISTING AND ALTERNATIVE PROGRAMS FOR IMPROVING QUALITY ASSURANCE MORE PRESCRIPTIVE APPROACH FOR PRINCIPAL ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING CRITERIA CONDITIONING CP ON DEMONSTRATION OF QA MANAGEMENT CAPABILITY -

USE OF AUDITORS / INSPECTORS FROM ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONALS IMPROVEMENT OF NRC ORGANIZATION AND PROGRAMS FOR QA CONDITIONING CP ON LICENSEE USE OF INDEPENDENT INSPECTORS TO AUDIT ITS QA PROGRAM PILOT PROGRAM REVIEW AND EVALUATE AB0VE CONCEPTS INDEPENDENT INSPECTORS FOR AUDITING QA AT LEAST THREE CONSTRUCTION SITES REPORT TO CONGRESS 15 MONTHS AFTER ENACTMENT ACCOMPANIED BY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS TO INCLUDE INPUT RECEIVED FROM PUBLIC, LICENSEES, ACRS, AND PROFESSIONAL GROUPS

i 1

I?;ITIATIVES ARE DESIGNED TO: .

1 1

9 ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL CONFIDE!fCE IN THE QUALITY OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IMPROVE THE MANAGEMENT CONTROL 0F QUALITY l

IMPROVE THE NRC CAPABILITY TO EVALUATE THE I!1PLEMENTATION OF LICENSEE PROGRAMS.

. l SATISFY THE DIRECTION PROVIDED THE NRC IN AN AMENDMENT ACCEPTED BY THE HOUSE AND SENATE CONFEREES IN THEIR JOINT CONSIDERATION OF TH$ ,

NRC'S FY 82-83 AUTHORIZATION BILL.

1 l

[

I

\

INITIATIVES FALL INTO THE FOLLOWING CATEGORIES:

{

A. MEASURES AT NEAR-TERM OPERATING LICENSE FACILITIES

1. SELF EVALUATIONS

2. REGIONAL EVALUATIONS

3. INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEWS B. INDUSTRY INITIATIVES

1. INPO-EVALUATIONS

2. UTILITY AND THIRD PARTY EVALUATIONS C. CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM CHANGES

1. REVISE PROCEDURES AND INCREASE RESOURCES 2.

CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT TEAM INSPECTIONS (CAT) . -

3.

INTEGRATED DESIGN INSPECTIONS (NRC) 4 EVALUATION.0F REPORTED INFORMATION D.

DETERMINE FEASIBILITY OF DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES (LIKE FAA)

E. MANAGEMENT OF QUALITY

1. MANAGEMENT SEMINARS 2.

QUALIFICATION & CERTIFICATION OF QA/QC PERSONNEL l 3. CRAFTSMANSHIP F. LCNG-TERM REVIEd

LEAD NRC STAFF RESPONSIBILITIES FOR CA INITIATIVES NTOL , SELF EVALUATION NRR NTOL - REGIONAL EVALUATION REGIONS NTOL - INDEPENDENT DESIGN REVIEW NRR INDUSTRY INITIATIVE IE CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION PROGRAM CHANGES IE CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT ... TEAM INSPECTION IE INTEGRATED DESIGN INSPECTIONS IE EVALUATION OF REPORTED INFORMATION IE DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES IE i

MANAGEMENT ... PROGRAMS IE CERTIFICATION ... PERSONNEL IE I CRAFTSMANSHIP IE LONG TERM REVIEW IE

-,.--.,.-w- . ,

- - ,,cw , _ _, .. ,m- - w,--

PURPOSE OF VISIT THIS TEAM OF NRC AND CONTRACTOR SCIENTISTS, ENGINEERS, AND QUALITY PROFESSIONALS IS HERE AS A RESULT OF BOTH THE CONGRESSIONAL MANDATE TO STUDY QUALITY IN CONSTRUCTION AND THE NRC INITIATIVES IN QUALITY ASSURANCE THE PURPOSE OF OUR VISIT IS TO STUDY YOUR PROJECT MANAGEMEhT .

AND QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMS AS ONE OF A SERIES OF CASE STUDIES AT NUCLEAR PLANTS ACROSS THE NATION O

e l

1

i LONG-TERM REVIEW STUDY MANDATED BY

1. SECY 82-352

2. NRC'S FY 82-83 AUTHORIZATION BILL (FORD AMENDMENT)

OBJECT

1. COMPREHENSIVE LOOK AT PAST QUALITY PROBLEMS TO DETERMINE ROOT CAUSES

2. REVIEW OF PROGRAMS IN WHICH QUALITY PROBLEMS HAVE NOT BErN IDENTIFIED TO DETERMINE REASONS FOR APPARENT SUCCESS

3. PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE NRC QA PROGRAM

4. SATISFY REQUIREMENTS IN FORD AMENDMENT

LONG-TERM REVIEW APPROACH '

l.

DEVELOP SERIES OF QUALITY A'SSURANCE CASE STUDIES AT SELECTED LICENSEE PLANTS. VISIT SEVERAL UTILITIES HAVING HAD SERIOUS QUALITY PROBLEMS AT SEVERAL THAT HAVE NOT.

2. FRCM THE CASE STUDIES, DETERMINE ESSENTIAL UNDERLYING CHARACTERISTICS OF SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL PROGRAMS. ALSO, DETERMINE WHAT ACTIONS NECESSARY TO SOLVE PROBLEMS AND VALUE/ IMPACT OF SOLUTIONS.

3.

INTERGRATE RESULTS OF PARALLEL. SUBSTUDIES WITH SERIES OF CASE STUDIES.

DEVELOP FINDINGS, RECOMMEN0TIONS, REPORTS.

4 t

_ _ , . . _ . . , . , - e-- "~^' ' ' " ^ ' '

LONG-TERM REVIEW LTR SUBTASXS

1. QUALITY ASSURANCE CASE STUDIES (INCL. SITE VISITS)

2. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF NRC'S QA PROGRAM

3. REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF OUTSIDE PROGRAMS ,

4 ETUDY ON QUALIFICATION / CERTIFICATION 5.

ANALYSIS OF FORD AMEN 0 MENT ALTERNATIVES (INCLUDING PILOT PROGRAM)

6. PILOT PROGRAM

7. ESTABLISHMENT OF ADVISORY PANEL

8. STUDY OF CONTRACTS AND PROCUREMENT PROCESS

9. INTERFACE WITH OUTSIDE GROUPS

10. WRITING OF REPORTS

4 SCOPE 4

• TWELVE TO FIF, TEEN SITE SPECIFIC CASE STUDIES, INCLUDING BOTH , PLANTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION, AND IN OPERATION EFFORT: NRC 3-4 MY CONTRACTOR 10-12 MY DURATION: 15-18 months

( .

1 ADIVSORY PANEL INPUT FROM PUBLIC, LICENSEES, ACRS, PROFESSIONALS, ETC.

4

)

l O

f r

LTR TASKS

1. QUALITY ASSURANCE CASE STUDIES PRE FIELD ACTIVITY DEVELOPMENT OF ASSESSMENT PLAN AND METHODOLOGY DEVELOPMENT OF-REPORT FORMAT PLANT VISITS MUST CONSIDER LTR ISSUES AND FORD ISSUES SCHEDULING FAMILIARIZATION WITH PLANT AND PLANT QA PROGRAM AND HISTORY FIELD ACTIVITY VISIT TO REGIONAL OFFICE VISIT TO CORPORATE OFFICE VISIT TO PLANT SITE DISCllSSIONS WITH REGIONAL AND RESIDENT INSPECTORS DISCUSSIONS WITH LICENSEE PERSONNEL, CONTRACTORS REVIEW 0F QA PROGRAM, SELECTED RECORDS PLANT WALK THROUGH POST FIELD ACTIVITY ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS POSTULATION AND EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT APPROACHES INPUT TO GENERIC REPORT

NEED FOR UTILITY INPUT AND ASSISTANCE THE GENERIC RESULTS OF THIS SERIES OF SITE SPECIFIC CASE STUDIES AND PARALLEL STUDIES OF GERMANE TOPICS WILL FORM THE BASIS OF REPORTS TO THE NRC COMMISSIONERS REPORT TO CONGRESS NRC'S FUTURE POLICY AND PROGRAM IN QUALITY ASSURANCE THE EMPHASIS OF OUR EFFORT WILL BE TO DETERMINE UNDERLYING PROGRAMMATIC CHARACTERISTICS OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY ASSURANCE THAT EITHER CONTRIBUTE TO THE OVERALL SUCCESS OF THE PROJECT CONTRIBUTE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF RESULTS THAT FAIL TO MEET THE STANDARDS OF THE INDUSTRY, THE NRC, AND THE PUBLIC FOR QUALITY IN A HUCLEAR POWER PLANT THIS IS NOT AN INSPECTION. WE ARE NOT HERE TO INSPECT OR AUDIT OR SECOND GUESS. WE ARE TO LEARN AND TO DEVELOP REAL WORLD INFORMATION TO HELP STRUCTURE CONGRESSIONAL, NRC, AND INDUSTRY POLICIES FOR QUALITY IN THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY FOR THIS DECADE AND BEYOND TO BE SUCCESSFUL, WE NEED YOUR HELP, COOPERATION, AND CANDOR.

WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THIS MAJOR NRC POLICY STUDY

SUMMARY

LONG-TERM REVIEW REASON COMPREHENSIVE STUDY TO DETERMINE ROOT CAUSES OF QUALITY PROBLEMS AT PLANTS WITH IDENTIFIED DEFICIENCIES DETERMINE UNDERLYING CHARACTERISTICS OF SUCCESSFUL QUALITY PROGRAMS DEVELOP BLUEPRINT FOR FUTURE FOR NRC AND LICENSEE QUALITY PROGRAMS SCOPE NRC STAFF STUDY PERFORMED BY NRC STAFF LED BY HQ, ASSISTANCE FROM REGIONS, CONTRACTORS EXAMINATION OF EXISTING PROGRAMS AND PAST PROBLEMS WILL INCLUDE REVIEW OF EXISTING DOCUMENTATION (PLANS, INVESTIGATIONS, ETC.)

VISITS / DISCUSSIONS WITH REGIONS AND RESIDENTS VISITS TO PLANT SITES (TWELVE TO FIFTEEN)

EMPHASIS ON GENERIC IMPLICATIONS INCLUDES BOTH PLANTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATING SITES WILL EXAMINE NRC QA PROGRAM AND POLICIES AS WELL AS LICENSEES / VENDORS /

CONTRACTORS WILL LOOK AT OUTSIDE QA PROGRAMS (NON-NUCLEAR AND FOREIGN NUCLEAR)

WILL INCLUDE COST / BENEFIT OF VARIOUS ALTERNATIVES i

SUMMARY

LONG-TERM REVIEW OTHER REVIEW WILL SE RESPONSIVE TO FORD AMENDMENT -

FORD AMENOMEMT SETS FIFTEEN MONTH TIME FRAME WILL SOLICIT INPUT FROM PUBLIC, LICENSEES, ACRS, PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES, UNIONS PLAN TO ESTABLISH ADVISORY PANEL c-EXPECTED RESULTS CHARACTERIZATION OF SUCCESSFUL AND UNSUCCESSFUL PROGRAMS, ROOT CAUSES RECCMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGES / IMPROVEMENTS IN NRC AND LICENS IDENTIFICATION OF NEEDED LEGISLATION REPORT TO CONGRESS TO SATISFY REQUIREMENTS OF FORO AMENDMENT

", m-v e w-w --w,- we gmmw -- - ~ w

CHRONOLOGY CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT HEARINGS ON CA HELD IN THE HOUSE OF REPRES SUSCCMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT; CCMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS - NOVEMBER 19, 1981 SUSCCMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY, AND NATURAL RESOURC,ES; CCleITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS - DECEMBER 14, 1981 NOVEMBER 27, 1981 - CHAIRMAN DIRECTED STAFF TO ASSEMBLE APPROACHES TO STRENGTHEN QA DECEMBER 1, 1981 - CHAIRMAN PALLADINO, IN A SPEECH TO AIF, CHALLENGED THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY TO REEXAMINE AND UPGRADE ITS QUALITY ASJUR J5NUARY29,1982- NRC STAFF BRIEFED COMMISSION ON PRELIMINARY E OF VARIOUS OA INITIAT.IVES FEBRUARY A, 1982 - INPO BRIEFED COMMISSION ON INDUSTRY ACTIONS FEBRUARY 10, 1982 - STAFF DIRECTED TO PREPARE MORE DEFINITIVE PLAN, INCLUDING SCHEDULE AND RESOURCES MARCH 4, 1982 - QA PRESENTATION TO ACRS APRIL 12, 1982 - MEETING WITH INPO TO EXCHANGE QUALITY ASSURANCE INFORMATION MAY 19, 1982 - SENIOR AGENCY MANAGEMENT MEETING TO DISCUSS QA STRATEGY

4 . . - .

4 i

s l

I CHRONOLOGY JUNE 10, 1982 REGION III ADMINISTRATOR TESTIFIES BEFORE CONGRESS JULY 15, 1982 NRC STAFF BRIEFED COMMISSION ON STAFF PLANS FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE AUGUST 20, 1982 ED0 SENT STAFF PAPER ON ASSURANCE OF QUALITY TO THE l COMMISSION (SECY82-352)

SEPT. 14, 1982 , REGION III ADMINISTRATOR TESTLFIES BEFORE CONGRESS SEPT. 20, 1982 IE BRIEFED COMMISSION'S ASSISTANTS, CHAIRMAN ON QA INITIATIVES IN SECY 82-352 i

SEPT. 29, 1982 COMMISSION BRIEFING ON SECY 82-352

! OCT. 5, 1982 CHAIRMAN PALLIDINO SPEAKS BEFORE INPO CONFERENCE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, SAYS QA SHOULD BE CENTRAL F00US FOR UTILITIES BUILDING NUCLEAR PLANTS i OCT. 13, 1982 CHAIRMAN PALLIDINO SPEAKS BEFORE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF QC.

INDICATES EFFECTIVE QA NECESSARY TO RESTORE PUBLIC i

CONFIDENCE IN NUCLEAR POWER OCT. 18, 1982 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE SPEAKS BEFORE ANS EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE ON QUALITY ASSUPANCE i

DWislON ~

~^

. NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS Disf eiCf j , Pi.blec, sev.ce Coa peay o' lad one lac Nt' CLEAR l s' 96 7Mi 1 s'  ;

THE ATT ACHf D ctlPPING Was PUBttsHED IN THE, _I_Olii_ SVil le. COurie r Jolirnn1 s

h_1L_ DEL _ n _

Zimmer fiasco spotlights nuclear risk TO HEAR the industry's lobbyists dumbfounding. In a plot a TV produe- replied the nuclear industry. Its 0 tell it, nuclear power's worst enemies er might have rejected as far-fetched, chestnut, that the risk of serious nu are environmentalists. That's because private investigator Thomas Applegate, ar accident is akin to that of the latter keep saying that this form of working on a divorce case, discovered by a meteorite, popped up ag electric generation poses risks no pri- evidence that many time cards had Unfortunately, however, meteoriti vate insurer <is willing to underwrite, been falsified. That led to further in ' do sometimes hit people. Just the othe produces malignant has yet decided how wastes to get ridthat of, nobody and vestigation by Mr. Applegate and oth- day, almost as if to answer some nt other such unpleasant facts. ers, to discovery of falsified quality clear salesman's pitch, the small Cor Not so. A more effective enemy assurance records and harassment of necticut town of Wethersfield was h could be found as close as the nearest quality-control inspectors and, finally, by a meteorite for the second tiro mirror. The Zimmer nuclear plant NRC to enough from itsnoise to arouse a reluctant within 11 years. A grapefruit size slumber, across the river from Kentucky near chunk from outer space crashe The latest news about Zimmer fol- through a ceiling and wound up be Cmcinnati in point. It's is 98only onecomplete, percent of several cases lows a new government study saying neath the dining room table as a and, as the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Com- that the worst possible accident at tied family was watching M*A*S'H Marble Hill could cost 12.000 deaths The unlikely can occur. That's why mission indicates in something broader within a year, 150,000 cases of radi- if we must have nuclear powe than a hint, may never getisanso shoddily operating built that it ation disease, and more than $87 bil- shoul! settle for anything less license.

Now, several years too late, the NRC lion in property loss. Most unlikely, strict and honest safety standards.

has halted all safety-related construc-on because " problems have been fund at a rate faster than they can be redressed." As much as half the weld-ing at Zimmer is said to be of doubtful quality, and that's only the beginning.

This doubtless says something unfa-vorable about America's construction indastry - at least when it's confront-ed by a proyect where all the work must be of high quality. But it says more about an industry that spends so much of its time complaining of over-r:gulation and so much of its money on propaganda. In fact, nuclear con-struction has been so underregulated that mistakes which could make the i

$1.7 billion Zimmer plant a total loss weren't found until it may be too late to remedy them.

That's not peculiar to Zimmer. De- l fects that forced a long construction l delay at Public Service Indiana's Mar- e, -

ble Hill plant were discovered chiefly because of (1) a concrete worker who blew the whistle and then (2) the ef-forts of private citizens who had to complain long and loudly to get any  :

official attention.

The case at Zimmer was even more pwt4 -2.f 3 M (61. l

\