IA-84-293, Revised Testimony of Wp Haass on Governor Deukmejian & Joint Intervenor Contentions 6 & 8 Re QA Design

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Revised Testimony of Wp Haass on Governor Deukmejian & Joint Intervenor Contentions 6 & 8 Re QA Design
ML20136E554
Person / Time
Site: Diablo Canyon, 05000000
Issue date: 10/12/1983
From: Haass W
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To:
Shared Package
ML20136B092 List:
References
FOIA-84-293 NUDOCS 8311030367
Download: ML20136E554 (5)
v • d • e


Text

m A 4

.~

UN.ITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING APPEAL BOARD I.

In the Matter of -

. PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY

) Docket Nos. 50-275

~~ )~ 50-323 (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant )

Units 1 and 2) )

NRC 5TAFF TESTIMONY'0F WALTER P. HAASS ON GOVERNOR DEUKMEJIAN'S AND JOINT INTERVENOR'S -

CONTENTIONS 6 AND 8 r -

- Q1. Please state your name, by whoni you are employed, and in what capacity.

A1 -1;y name is Walter P. Haass. 1 am employed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, A the Office of Inspection and Enforcemen' ,t as Deputy Branch Chief of 'the Q,;ality Iisurance Branch. I am also Acting Section Leader of the Licensing iection in.the Quality Assurance Branch. ..

Q2. Wh&t were your responsibilities under the IDVP for Diablo Canyon, Unit I?

~

A2. I was responsible overall for reviewing and evaluating the quality ass'urance progransnatic controls established 'for the performance of design and modi- '

fication activities for safety-related s,tructures, systems and components by PG&E and its contractors as audited by Roger F. Reedy, Inc. under the IDVP. I was assisted in' this effort by J. G.. Spraul, a reviewer in the Licensing Section.

  • Q3. Have you prepared a statement of professional qualifications? ..

A3. Yes. A copy is attached to this testimony.

~;

speg oN)

~

l -

2 l

Q4. What subject matter does this testimony address?

. A4. This testimony addresses a portion of Contention 6 and the initial portion -

of Contention'8' which state the following: *

"6.

_. The verification program failed to verify that the design

! of safety-related equipment supplied to PG&E by Westinghouse met icensing criteria.* .

"8. The ITP failed to develop (and implement) in a timely manner a design quality assurance program in accordance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B to assure the quality of the recent design modifi-

.- y cations to the Diablo Canyon facility."

l s

Q5. With regard to Contention 6, was the design quality of all the safety- f l related equipment supplied to PG&E by Westinghouse' assured b,y a QA l  :. .. .

Program or programs which met each and every requirement of each and  !

~

every criterion of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 (see Contention 6)? f L

AS. No. ,

Q6. How was the design quality of such equiknt assured? ,

1 A6. The' construction permit for Diablo Canyon Unit I was issued in 1968 prior l l

} to the promulgation of the Appendix B criteria. At that time, design work j on safety-related equipment supplied by Westinghouse was already underway.

Governing this work was the quality assurance connitments described in the' f

4 PSAR, Supplement No. 5, response to question 3.4. ,

In mid-1970, the QA

  • ~

. l

. (

9,.,

3. i 1

l criteria in Appendix B to 10 CFR were promulgated and the NRC (then AEC) required conformance to the new regulation for all new and on-going design _  !

activities (i.e., Appendix B was required to be applied to Diablo Canyon I-

~

Unit l'in a prospective manner). PG&E comitted to meeting the requirements m.

-- of Appendix B to the extent possible, noting that much design work had already been accomplished. This comitment is described in the FSAR (p.17.0-1). l

~

The NRC staff review of the proposed program for acceptability at the PSAR I stage utilized " Division of Reactor Licensing, Quality. Assurance Program -

j i

Review Checklist for Nuclear Power Plants" dated October 27, 1970. j

{ Q7. With regard to Contention 8 did the ITP comit to utilize a design quality assurance program satisfying the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50,  !

Appendix B, in a timely manner to assure the quality of the recent design modification's to Diablo Canyon?  !

- i j

. A7. .Yes.. PG&E and its contractor, Bechtel, as. Completion Manager, developed

{

l a' quality assurance prog' ram composed of the NRC-approved QA Programs of

~ r

{

. PG&E for the operations phase of Diablo Canyon, and of Bechtel for design -

't activities. These QA Programs satisfy the requirements of Appendix B to

~

10 CFR 50 and include controls for design engineering, modifications, .

procurement, and construction completion *. Prior to the retention of i Bechtel as the Completion Manager, activities nece'ssary to correct design ,

deficiencies at the Diablo Canyon facility as identified by the IDVP and l ITP were controlled by PG&E's Q'A Program for the operational phase. All l comitments to develop the necessary 'QA Programs to control these activitiAs for Diablo' Canyon were made to the NRC staff in.a timely manner.

e

--, -.,r---- n - , -

-,,,w. . .. ,,w,. - - , . .--,,.-,w eva. ,,, -,,-,t+-s, ,,,,,,,w-

a

. 4 4

Q8. Identify the documents relied upon to support your response to Q7 and indicate how the documents support your testimony.

! A8. The documents relied upon are as follows: r

! =

, (a) . FSAR for Diablo Canyon, Chapter 17, through Amendmen 85 (9/3/,80);

describ,e.s. the, PG&E QA program for operations.

(b) NUREG-0675, Safety Evaluation Report, Supplement No.13 for the

__ .  : . operations phase of Diablo Ca.nyon, dated April 1981, pp.17-1 to 17-4; presents the staff's evaluation of PG&E's operational QA program.

~

(c) Bechtel Topical Report on . Quality Assuranci, BQ-TOP-1, Rev. 3A; dercribes Bechtel QA program for design activities.

(d) Letter, W. P. Haass to R. M. Collins, "NRC Acceptance of Revised Bechtel' Topical Report on Quality Assurance," dated October 16, 1980.

. (e) Commitment to apply the QA Program for operations, approved by the '

. NRC as satisfying Appendix B, to the modifications required for Diablo Canyon Unit 1, " Transcript.of Meeting with PG&E to Discuss Seismic Design Review, Diablo. Canyon Unit 1," dated February 3, 1982, Bethesda, Maryland, pp. 185-186. .

(f) Letter, P. Crane to F. Miraglia, describing commitment to apply the i

Bechtel Topical Report on Quality Assurance, BQ-TPO, Rev. 3A for the remaining project work on Diablo Canyon, dated June 18, 1982.

(g) Letter, P. Crane to G. Kni!ghton, describes final QA Program (Rev. 2) for completion of Diablo Canyon -consisting of Bechtel QAP fo'r design,"

and PG&E QAP for procurement and construction, dated 12/21/82.

n-g,---- , , - - - - - - - , ,- , , , - y -,-,,,,,, , ---,---,,wa ,, ,- , - - -,-n,, ,_, - , ,,,,, , - _ , , , - . , , - _ , , , - , , , - , - - , ,n-w w-

. t I

(h) -Letter, D. Eisenhut to P. Crane, indicating acceptance of the '

combined Bechtel and PG&E QA programs for completion of the l

Diablo Canyon project work, dated 1/26/83. I i

- - :-- : (i) NRC staff guidance documents for the review of the operational QA r

j, program for Diablo Canyon are:

WASH-1584,

  • Guidance on Quality Assurance Requirements During l

l the Operations Phase of Nuclear Power Plants," dated October -

26, 1983.

. t WASH-1309, " Guidance on Quality Assurance Requirements During [

the Construction Phase of Nuclear Power Plants," dated May  ;

s' . i 10, 1074. -

?

WASH-1283, " Guidance on Quality Assurance Requirements During  :

". . Design and Procuremnet Phase of Nuclear Power Plants," Rev.1,  !

?

dated May 24, 1974.

i

. h i

4

. , . . , , . , - - ~ . . , . . - - , - , , . . _ . n. . --, e nww-- n wn ,,,

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=IA-84-293,_Revised_Testimony_of_Wp_Haass_on_Governor_Deukmejian_%26_Joint_Intervenor_Contentions_6_%26_8_Re_QA_Design&oldid=2938855"