IR 05000458/1985061

Insp Rept 50-458/85-61 on 850823-25.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Allegations of Improprieties on Part of Certain Licensee Contractor &/Or Subcontractor Personnel

ML20133L865
Person / Time
Site:	River Bend
Issue date:	10/15/1985
From:	Chamberlain D, Johnson E, Mcneill W, Renee Taylor NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20133L850	List: IR 05000458/1985061 ML20133L847
References
50-458-85-61, NUDOCS 8510240347
Download: ML20133L865 (4)

Text

g,, - - -

-,

-

-

- #

.

, .

.

APPENDIX U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION IV

s NRC Inspection Report: 50-458/85-61 Construction Permit: CPPR-145 Docket: 50-458 Licensee: Gulf States Utilities Post Office Box 2951 Beaumont, Texas 77704 Facility Name: River Bend Nuclear Generating Station Inspection At: River Bend Nuclear Generating Station Inspection Conducted: August 23-25, 1985 Inspectors:- /

ief, Reactor Projects Branch

////S/f5 Date /

g ' ff. Johnson, E

(SWaalu ahder-R. G. Tfylor, Project Inspector, Project Difte/

Section A, Reactor Projects Branch L }{

W. M. McNeill, Reactor Inspector, Operations

/* Y Ddte Section, r eactor Safety Branch

,

BfEd. Cliamberl , Se~nior Resident Inspector 9de /_

8510240347 851018 PDR ADOCK 05000458 G PDR .

,

t f ' 3

-

"

_

_

( =

- -

.

,

-

. - ~.

.

. .

-g-Inspection Sununar Inspection Conducted August 23-25,1985 (Report. i=50-458/85-61)

Areas Inspected: -This was'a Region IV special-inspection of allegations of improprieties on the part of certain licensee contractor and/or subcontractor persons. : The inspection involved 100. inspector-hours on-site by four NRC inspector ..

Results: No violdtions or deviations were identifie '

,

n s

r I' s

7 $c

! 9

..-

% L -*

L r I

'

w

.

e

'

%

4

+

4

>

>

^

.* C k

T

m

. . .

-3-Details Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Personnel

• W. J. Cahill, Senior Vice President

• J. Deddens, Vice President, River Send Nuclear Group

• T. C. Crouse, QA Manager Stone & Labster Engineering Corporation (S&W) Personnel

• R. L. Spence, Resident QC Manager The NRC inspectors also contacted a substantial number of other licensee and SWEC personnel during the course of the special inspectio * Denotes the principal management personnel attending the exit intervie . Inspection Scope and Findings This special inspection was conducted to review the licensee's response to certain concerns over the quality of work perfomed by several people at the River Bend Statio The NRC special team determined that the work perfomed by 11 people were in question. This group consisted of I laborer who worked for a subcontractor,1 person who worked-in an engineering capacity, 3 craft workers and 6 field quality control inspector The NRC inspection team closely followed the on-going activities of the licensee in determining what work these people had performed. It was determined that none of the first five individuals performed work which could have reasonably impacted quality. The laborer perfomed only manual work involved in handling insulation materials at the job site. None of the three craft were qualified welders, two were apprentices who worked under direction of jo'urneymen craft and all three were involved only in moving pipe, etc., into-place for subsequent fit-up and welding by qualified welders. The engineer worked in a capacity as a planning engineer preparing construction status and planning reports for management. During the last 6 months at the site, this person worked in the construction test group on some construction acceptance testing-(prior to preoperational tests) on nonsafety-related equipment drains and a portion of the fire protection system, where this person observed system flush.es and hose station flushes. These areas went through subsequent prooperational test The NRC team reviewed personnel files, interviewed supervisors, and some GSU personnel, and reviewed job descriptions to confirm the licensee's conclusion that these persons did not perform work that would have an impact on safet . . .- -

-

. ..

-4-The remaining group of six persons all worked as FQC inspectors in the piping / hanger group as level II inspectors. By reviewing FQC logs, the licensee determined that these individuals had performed over 14,000 inspections of various types during their employment. These inspections consisted of fit-up, final visual and some liquid penetrant. A random sample consisting of at least 60 piping and 60 hanger inspections was selected for each inspector, covering the total period of each person's employment selected. For each of these welds, the weld data sheets were pulled and examined. In over 40% of the cases, the inspector did not perform the final inspection of that weld. Of those welds that were final accepted by one of the inspectors in this group, the licensee selected 10%

at random for reinspection. An NRC. inspector accompanied the licensee's QC inspectors and did an independent inspection for 9 of the 57 welds in this categor The licensee also reviewed the NCRs and unsatisfactory inspection reports written by these six people to determine, qualitatively, if they were similar in nature ;o those produced by other inspectors. The licensee concluded they were. The NRC team reviewed the. rate of reject on inspections for the six QC inspectors in the piping / hanger group and determined that there rates were nearly identica The NRC team also retieMed the personnel. files for these individuals for indications of problems and noted that four of the six had been terminated for excessive absenteeism during the last month of employment. Using this data, the team reviewed the personal field log books for these inspectors (not all log books were available for one inspector) to determine what type of inspections had been performed and what patterns of work were apparent. The nandwritten log book entries did not raise any questions in the minds of the NRC team. Using the periods of greater absenteeism as a guide, the NRC team selected additional welds to add to the licensee's sample for review, and where appropriate, for reinspectio Of the 57 reinspections performed, one 3/4" hanger weld was found 1/8" i undersized.. This' weld was determined suitable upon evaluation by site

,

engineering. In addition, for one weld,-a liquid penetrant exam showed a i linear indication at the toe of the weld where the weld abutted another socket weld. This was confirmed to be caused by the valley between the two well' toes and was removed by light' surface filin The NRC team concluded that the~ licensee performed an adequate review of the concerns over the work of these individuals and determined that their work was of suitable quality a'nd did not impact the quality of construction at River Bend.

, Exit Interview l ~ An exit interview was conducted with Mr. Cahill and members of his-staff following the inspection. The scope and findings of the. inspection as

'

noted above were discussed.

r

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