ML20212K704

Ack Receipt of 870109 Petition Seeking Immediate Suspension of OLs Due to Deficiencies in Safety,Design Control & Qa/Qc. Shutdown of Plant Denied.Review of Allegation Re GE Components Continuing

ML20212K704
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	03/05/1987
From:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Schlemmer D WESTERN RESERVE ALLIANCE
References
CON-#187-2730 2.206, IEIN-83-80, NUDOCS 8703090396
Download: ML20212K704 (14)

Text

.

2 73d I i pnam

[g g UNITED STATES

, c. g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g, f W ASHING TON, D. C. 20555

% # March 5, 1987 cfy a

Occket Nos. 50-440 b 50-441 MAR-61987sk  ;

(10 C.F.P.-9 2.206) ed gj Mr. Donald L. Schlemmer Western Reserve Alliance 1616 P Street, N. W. ci/Tr$$ ,

Suite 160 Washington, D.C. 20036 ,

Dear Mr. Schleniner:

This is to acknowledge receipt of a Petition dated January 9, 1987 directed by you on behalf of Energy Probe and Western Reserve Alliance (Petitioners) to the Commissioners of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The Petition has been assigned to my Office for a response. The Petition was submitted pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 9 2.206 and sought imediate suspension of the cperating license '

for the Perry Nuclear Power Plant of the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, et al. (Licensees) due to alleged safety deficiencies. The Petition alleged deficiencies in the pipe clamps used at the Perry facility and sought an independent design review with respect to these components. The Petition further alleged programmatic deficiencies at the General Electric Company, San Jose, California facility in the areas of Design Control and Quality Assurance /

Quality Control. The Petition alleges that such deficiencies potentially impact General Electric components supplied to all power plants including the Perry facility. The Petition claims that the NRC has been informed of this matter in letters of October 1985 and October 1986 from the Government Account-ability Project. 1/.

With respect to the Petitioner's request for immediate action, specifically shutdown of'the Perry facility, based upon the allegations contained in the Petition, I decline to take such action.

~1/ The Petitfor,also alleges fraud on the part of the Licensees and the NRC in the preparation of a Director's Decision issued with respect to the seismic adequacy of the Perry facility in light of the January 31, 1986 earthquake in the vicinity of that facility. See, Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, et al. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 & 2),

DD-86-4, 23 NRC 211, (1986). The Petition requests that the NRC withdraw that Director's Decision based upon Petitioners' belief that the NRC Office of Investigations has documented fraud in the preparation of that Decision. The allegation in the Petition is incorrect. I am unaware of any investigation which calls into question my earlier Director's Decision.

Consequently I decline to withdraw that Decision based upon the informa-tion provided in this Petition.

8703090396 870303

{DR ADOCK 05000440 PDR '

1)So7

-o o:

The allegations in this petition relative to pipe clamps are similar to allegations received ear'ier by the Commission concerning pipe clamps supplied by Vestern Piping and Engineering (WFE) for several power plants, including Perry. As indicated in the enclostf copy of NRC's letter to WPE dated Septenber 30, 1986, and the attached Inspection Report No. 99900302/86-01,to items cf nonconformance with perchase specifications have been identified. The clamps in question are sometimes called stiff pipe clamps to differentiate them from conventional pipe clamps which have been used for many years in high-pressure piping applications. In considering the earlier allegatiors, the staff reviewed stiff-clamp designs byAs architect-engineers. several vendors reported andNotification in Board their applications 82-105Aby(various reference 1.b.

of your Petition), the staff concluded that .these relatively new clamps can result in localized piping stresses significantly higher than the stresses fron conventional pipe clamps. Piping designers who are accustomed to neglecting-these localized stresses because of the low magnitude stresses associated with conventional pipe clamps might incorrectly assume that such stress 6 may be neglected with these new clamps. For this reason, the staff issued IE Information Notice No. 83-80 on November 23, 1983, calling attention to this pessibility.

Subsequently, the NRC staff requested the licensee to provide specific information relative to the use of stiff pipe clamps at Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 by letters dated March 19, 1984, February 19, 1985 and April 24, 1985. The licensee's responses to those requests were provided by letters dated October 1,1984, March 18,1985 and June 14, 1985 respectively.

The NRC has reviewed the information submitted by the licensee and determined that no further action is required because the licensee has adequately addressed

., the concerns described in the IE Information Notice No. 83-50. Therefore, the immediate action requested by the petition is not warranted.

Regarding your other alleaation concerning General Electric components, the staff first reviewed Mr. Milam's primary concern, the issue of deferred verifi-cation, in 1983 and did not identify any significant safety issues. Subsequent to receipt of the October 5,1985 letter from the Government Accountability Project (GAP), the staff has reviewed additional docunents in GAF's offices and conducted inspections at GE's facility in San Jose. The purpose of these actions was to review further Mr. Milam's allegations and to review issues

, raised by Mr. Charles Stokes, a consultant for GAP. The NRC has not yet completed this review; however, no issues have been identified to date which warrant the actions requested by the Petition.

The NRC staff will continue to review the Petition and I will issue a formal decision with regard to it in the reasonably near future. Please be advised that the Fetition has also been forwarded to the NRC's Office of Inspector and Auditor (01A). CIA is responsible for ccrsidering allegations of NRC wrongdoing.

A copy of the Notice that is being filed for publication with the Office of the Federal Register is enclosed for your information.

Sincerely,n Harold R. nton, ctor

! Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

1. Letter to WPE from R. Peishman, NRC, dtd 9/30/86 with Inspection Report No. 99900302/86-01

2. Federal Reoister Notice cc w/ enclosures and incoming:

Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co.

Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge i

l I

m 77--

c.

1 CC*

JMr. Murray R. Edelman,'Vice Presider.t-Nuclear Operations' Group .

The Cleveland Electric.111urir.ating Company P. 0.~ Box 5000.-

. Cleveland 0 bio :441011 Jay E. Silberg, Esq.

Shaw, Pittman,. Potts tr Trowbridge 2300 N Street, N.W.

Washington, D. C. -20037 4

i

,.\*'

UNITED STATES

[,+a aen,8, ,

-g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y W A5HINGTON. D. C. 20555

pl s .s ,pf^

a ...

! September 30, 1986 i Docket No. 99900302/86-01 Western Piping and Engineering ATTN: Mr. Kenneth A. Friedman President 1485 Yosemite Avenue San Francisco, California 94124 Gentlemen:

This refers to the inspection conducted by R. P. Correia of this office on August 11-12, 1986, of your facility in San Francisco, California and to the discussions of our findings with you and members of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.

The purpose of the inspection was to examine Western Piping and Engineering records related to allegations concerning the Qualification of personnel performing certification activities for pipe clamps and materials supplied by Western Piping and Engineering. Areas examined during the inspection and our findings are discussed in the enclosed report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of an examination of representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations by the inspector.

The Commission's enforcement policy applicable to vendors states that prcducts or services provided for use in nuclear activities are subject to certain requirements designed to ensure that the prooucts or services supplied that coulo affect safety are of high quality. NRC inspections of vendors are a part of the effert of ensuring that licensees fulfill their chligations ir.

determining that their vendors are meeting contractual cbligatiens with regard to applicable requirements including 10 CFR. Part 50, Appendix B.

During the inspection it was determined that the certifying engineer of pipe clamps manufactured by Western Piping and Engineering, was not a registered Professional Engineer in the state of California. liowever, as discussed in the enclosed report, these clamps met the requirements of the ASME code

~specified on purchase specifications for certificatior., ranufacturing and In testing which were to be used in specific United States nuclear plarts.

addition, the same results were found in representative records of dir. ilar pipe clamps supplied by Western Piping and Engir.eering for customers prccuring ciocps for unspecified United States facilities and for foreign nuclear plants.

- - .~ . .... _ . . ... . . . _ .. ..

Western Piping and Engineering September 30, 1986 The specific findings and references to the pertinent requirements are identified in the enclosed inspection report.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.

Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.

Sincerely, CD

/ d' Robert F. Heishman, Chief Vendor Program Branch Division of Quality Assurance, Vendor and Technical Training Center Programs Office of Inspection and Enforcement

Enclosures:

1. Appendix A-Inspection Report !!o. 99900302/86-01

2. Appendix B-Inspection Data Sheets (1 page )

cc w/ enclosures:

Gulf States Utilities Company ATTN: Mr. William J. Cahill, Jr.

Senior Vice President River Bend Nuclear Group Pcst Office Box 2951 Beaumont, Texas 77704 Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company kr. Murray R. Edelman ATTN:

l Vice President, Nuclear Operations Post Office Box 5000 l Cleveland, Ohio 44101 Texas Utilities Generatinc Company ATTN: Mr. W. G. Counsil Executive Vice President LOO N. Olive Street, L.B. 81 Dallas, Texas 75201 Philadelphia Electric Company

' ATTN: Mr. Edward G. Bauer, Jr.

Vice President and General Counsel 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101

~ '- - ,m,_,, _

...2...

- c. .

6' Western Piping and Engineering

- 3- Se tember 30, 1986 cc w/enclosdres: (continued)

Public Service Company of New Hampshire ATTN: Mr. Robert J. Harrisen President and Chief Executive Officer Post Office Bcx 330 Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 General Electric Company Nuclear Energy Group ATTN: Mr. J. Fox, Senior Program Manager

~

175 Curtner Avenue San Jose, California 95125 Paul-Munroe Hydraulics, Inc.

Energy Division ATTN: Mr. John M. Cabe 1701 W. Sequoia Avenue Orange, Califctr.ia 92668

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

, ,, , ~-,.,.,n...,- ..,.,.,a .~. , . -~

l ORGANIZATION: WESTERN PIPING AND ENGINEERING SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA INSPECTION INSPECTION 11 REPORT ON-SITE HOURS-DATE: 8/11-12/86 NO.: 99900302/86-01 CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS: Western Piping and Engineering ATTN: Mr. K. A. Friedman, President 1485 Yosemite Avenue San Francisco, California 94124 ORGANIZATIONAL CONTACT: Mr. G. Pappas, Quality Assurance Manager TELEPHONE NUMBER:

(415) 822-6464 Design and engineering of vessels, appurtenances, NUCLEAR INDUSTRY ACTIVITY:

component supports, piping subassemblies, and material supplier of ferrous forgings, plates and welding materials.

_s n 7 ((

ASSIGNED INSPECTOR: ate

/{. P. Correia, Special ProjQts Inipection ' Section (SPIS) r APPROVED BY: ate

{ctin W. Craig, Chief, SPIS, Vendt Program Branch 1

INSPECTICM EASES AND SCOPE:

A. BASES: 10 CFR Part 21, and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B.

B. SCOPE: The inspection consisted of an examination of quality assurance and engineering records related to allegations concerning the certifi-cation and manufacturing of pipe clamps supplied by Western Piping and Engineering to various U.S. nuclear plants, a foreign plant, and other U.S. customers.

l River Bend (50 458); Perry (50-440); Comanche Peak PLANT SITE APPLICABILITY:

(50-445); Peach Bottom (50-277); Seabrook (50-443); and Cofrentes (Spain).

l .

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

ORGANIZATION: WESTERN PIPING AND ENGINEERING SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA REPORT INSPECTION RESULTS: PAGE 2 of 4 NO.: 99900302/56-01 A. VIOLATIONS:

There were no violations identified during this inspection.

B. NONCONFORMANCES:

There were no nonconformances identified during this inspection.

C. UNRESOLVED ITEMS:

No unresolved items were identified during this inspection.

D. STATUS OF PREVIOUS INSPECTION FINDINGS:

There were no open items from previous inspections.

E. OTFER FINDINGS OR COPMENTS:

The inspection at Western Piping and Engineering (WPE) was performed in response to allegations concerning the certifications of.the engineer who performed either the design calculations or the certification of such' calculations for clamps manufactured by WPE. The allegation was that the engineer was not a registered Professional Engineer (PE) in the State of California. Also an allegation concerning the use of illicit materials in the clamps for the River Bend Nuclear Plant was addressed.

1. Pipe Clamp Certificaticn Activities The NRC inspector reviewec the WPE files of the engineer who perfortred design calculations and/or certification of su'c h calculatiens. The files examined were of a recent WPE 0A audit (dated 6/21/E6) in which a resume of the engineer was included as-well-as an audit question-naire which followed the guidelines for demonstrating PE oualifica-tions established by Appendix C of the ASME Code,Section III, as required by Section 2 of ANSI /ASME N626.3 " Qualifications and Cuties of Personnel Engaced in ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Ccde, Secticn III, Divisions 1 and 2, Certifying Activities." In particular, l

paragraph 2.2 of ANSI /ASME N626.3 requires, in part, that personnel l engaged in ASME certifying activities be a registered Professional l Engineer in at least one state of the United States or Province of Canada with specified years of experience in certifying activities as delineated in paragraphs 2.3 through 2.6 of the aforementioned l

l standard.

w ORGANIZATION: WESTERN PIPING AND ENGINEERING SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA INSPECTION REPORT RESULTS: PAGE 3 of 4 NO.: 99900302/86-01 Also, maintenance of current knowledge of Code requirements and continued professional development in his or her speciality field The standard also requires in through various means is required.

part, that the Owner, Designer, or N-Certificate Holder, as applicable, must review the qualification of the PE at least once every three years to assure that his/her qualifications have been maintained with a continuing record of all such activity included in the qualification records of the PE. The records demonstrated that the engineer identified in the allegation was at the time period in question, and is currently, a registered Professional Engineer in the states of Pennsylvania and New York but not in California.

The allegation specified that the following nuclear power plants have had clamps designed and manufactured by WPE and were certified by personnel not having a PE registration in the state of California:

River Bend, Perry, Peach Bottom, Comanche Peak, Seabrook and Cofrentes (a Spanish nuclear plant). The NRC inspector examined the WPE WPE record has files for each cf these nuclear pcwer plants except Seabrook.

no record of having designed or manufactured a clamp which was to be used in the Seabrook facility. All purchase orders and technical specifications for these nuclear plants indicated that the clamp assemblies, as a minimum, be designed, in accordance to the require-ments of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Subsection NF, Class 1. In addition, the record files for purchasers of WPE clamps by the Paul Munroe Hydraulics Company, which did not specify the facility in which they were to be installed, also required the same ASME design certifications.

The file examined curing the NRC inspecticri included all requirements set forth in the ANSI /ASME standard referenced above.

10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, Section VIII states that NRC inspections of vendors are conducted to determine whether they are meeting their rentractual obligations to licensees. There were no requirements identified in any of the examined record files which indicated that the design engincer certifying the clacps procurad frcm WPE be a registered PE in the state of California. This allegatior. wes not substantiated and no nonconferrances fcund during this part of the inspection, since the certifying engireer dio meet the ASME requirements as required by procurement specifications.

e r . _ m -___ _ . . - - . _ , . . - . . . - . _ , - _ . . ~ _ .,, , .-, ,.- , , ,

. : . =. . . . . . .,

ORGANIZATION: SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA WESTE9N PIPING AND ENGINEERING INSPECTION REPORT RESULTS:

PAGE 4 of 4 NO.: 99900302/86-01

2. P.aterials in Pipe Clamps supplied for River Bend The allegation that pipe clamps supplied for the River Bend Nuclear All WPE clamps Power Plant contained improper materials was reviewed.

designed and manufactured for the River Bend facility were purchased by General Electric (GE) (ref: GE PO No. 205 AM 674). GE require-ments for certifications, data sheets, drawings, codes and standards were examined and found in WPE QA records including GE QA certifica-tion that their requirements were met. All materials, their respec-tive certifications for compliance to P0 specifications, both non-destructive examinations and destructive testing requirements, chemical analyses and results were reviewed. All WPE nonconformance reports (NCR) written during the design and manufacturing of the River Bend clamps were reviewed. Of the twelve total NCR's written, ten were dispositioned with appropriated approvals for acceptance or rejection. Two NCR's were voided upon discovery that the suspected nonconformance was not valid. All nonconformances disposition "use-as-is" were justified by either being within code requirements or included an engineering analyses with results being acceptable without compromising code requirements. Based upon the documents reviewed, pipe clamps supplied by WPE were manufactured in accordance with the utility's purchase specifications.

The allegation was not substantiated and no items of nonconformance were identified.

F. PERSONS CONTACTED K. A. Friedman, President, WPE M. Wright, Project Mar.ager, WPE G. Pappas, Quality Assurance Manager, WPE

ItJscr.c.To R 8.8 (oftREIA onc.y.c_r eso. W I't 0 0 5 0 2.

St.tPE d6 DOCOMENTS E WAt4 WED Rcroe.T e4a. 6 G _ - Of ense I op I a..m umou pocvHaWT Ho, r M V. D8WE Ten.E sus,)acT eas.

(g.g _.

Q. A. %wDof_ WOAt.t er(ATION FILE Fort, tigp6t.y TilAT LtDT ENGINEN./ZW 3 g _ __

] .

.r - .- Bw WEM EE Ar .. i Pi oG - An.n-_EN.G trua-R. wet.__Ga.. A.

w ote Pi pevc. t e.~G =axm rite Foe. Et9 tat es,oD 7,q P. o .

• 205 AM G74ou c.tA,ng> pe v. 7 . )N<tuisetu)

( C EF. GE .

WESTEEsu Pt F# i ( G;oGr>a.Aivei EtLC ON Rivat. GreO + l C

• fs24o Vj 3 Fttt:

3 z,c oou gy . g 3 ,,1 m _

1 (J PE F tt E ' on wrT ir e en tios

~

rme aos se Ft P G C L A m p I. D ,v o .

l A

m f \ L G_ ~

~. ~

t 'L> t - o n - Z4 L 2 o - 05 __

wPE Ft t_E o'u FC.f 8ty Z. Orl0C'l ' ipa tFi'AT'0" .% $ 2 60 8v/ i?_9 o- = . /

4 to pG, FILE eu C a. .n en dAA ** E PEAv . SPErtNNAriou 'L 3 4 3 -mS - it., A j (o {~ l L E j - _, .. .._ W E. FtLG erJ 9da 60 nom 2. - $PEL t FiC ATsus (Gs \ 23 A40ta\ (2 cv ? -

~~[ t- l Lt. --

ta p p_ (_ t t.gE orJ PAut saiuN ezuG. . p-jpgAv icj - P o . 4 Et,,4- _ _3q 6

, F t t_t_ -

ot ogl 4 y,pg . g og /g / g g o,g. <ourgtw u (3pm v.g u,,t we,L T Ac.iisiy )

i _ . - - _-

P-# q.Hi%G

_ ~

F ort. THE. S VPt.y Ot: N UM 5 >/% t s *4 Llov.gW ei edT~ -

I , GGNon A u ('u~0iTiuus  ;-

bed -

en a; 0c_ A .. . .g s' . r5.sv..E_ __'3Arw Av., I , I'l ~7 5_. . . ._ ...._ _ ... . ._____

e l '}

i - - - _ . _ _.. ._.. .. . . . . . . . .

t i

\ _ _ _ _ . _ . _

t __ .. _ . . . . - _ - _ _

i I. TVPE of DOC; -~

(

i DWr. - tmod mG t.T R. - 1.E T T E R.

, syrc- sPrictricnicod _ _ _ .

j g.gn - g>cocc onee.

l gp htt - 9 8% 81 A 'J d....e,-

A L. _.

s

p ~

.+

[7590-01]

r NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[ Docket Nos. 50-440, 50-4411 CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLlHINATING COMPANY, ET AL.

(PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS 1 & 2)

RECEIPT OF PETITION FOR DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C.F.R.-2.206 Notice is hereby given that, by a Petition pursuant to 10 C.F.R ! 2.206

~

~

dated January 9,1987 Energy Probe and Western Reserve Alliance (Petitioners) requested that the Perry Nuclear Power Plant of the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, et al. (Licensees) be shut dcwn for alleced safety violations. The Petition al'leged deficiencies with certain plant components, specifically pipe clamps, and scuoht an independent design review of this component for the Perry facility. The Petition further alleged programmatic deficiencies in Design Control and Quality Assurance / Quality Control at the General Electric facility in San Jose, California. The Petition alleged that such programmatic deficiencies potentially impact upon General Electric components supplied to the Perry facility.

The Petition is being treated pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 5 2.706 of the Commission's regulations, and accordingly, appropriate action will be taken on I

--7%c %e-

. n- - , - . -

f y,, .

j '; .~-

Ec}-

. .x - ,:

I, ,.

. 2:.

- the request within-a.rea'sonable time.- A copy of the Petition is availab1'e .for-inspection >in:the Commission's Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W.,

Wa s hi no ton',' D.C.

'20555 Land.at the. Local Public Document. Room for the Perry Nuclear Pow'er Plant located at the. Perry Public Library, 3753 Main Street.

- Perry. Ohio 44081.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION --

fM . A N FrankJ.Mhaglia.ActinoDirector Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Dated'at'Bethesda,' Maryland this 5 day of March , 1987 n.

)

J

-