IR 05000424/1986046
| ML20213G421 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 11/05/1986 |
| From: | Conlon T, Novak T, Sinkule M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20213G396 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-424-86-46, NUDOCS 8611180097 | |
| Download: ML20213G421 (33) | |
Text
-
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
UNITED STATES
/p2 Kfcg#'o k
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
["
REGION 11 n
$
j 101 MARIETTA STREET.N.W.
'*
ATLANTA. GEORGI A 30323
\\...../
Report No.:
50-424/86-46 Licensee: Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Docket No.:
50-424 Construction Permit No.:
CPPR-108 Facility Name: Vogtle Unit 1 Module:
No. 6, Electrical Equipment Reviews Conducted: June 10, 1986 through August 14, 1986 On-Site Inspections Conducted: June 23-July 2, 1986; July 21-25, 1986 NRC Offices Participating in Inspections / Reviews:
_
[
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), Bethesda, MD
'
Region II, Atlanta, GA Reviewer: John Thompson, Project Engineer, NRR Inspectors: Milton D. Hunt, Reactor Inspector, Region II A. Norton Chaston, Consultant, Region II (EG&G Idaho, Inc./
Scientech,Inc.)
Charl G. Bruch, Consultant, Region II (EG&G Idaho, Inc.)
Approved
_
/mcB1U
//*f-76
^
T. E. ~Conlon, Chief (Module--All Sections)
Date Signed Plant Systems Section Division of Reactor Safety, Region II ll [
M. V./ Sinkule, Chief Ddte 61gned
~
Projects Section 3C Division of Reactor Projects, Region II
/ / S' &
b
'
L L*
w T. Novak, Deputy Director //
Date' Signed Division of Pressurized Watkr Reactor Licensing-A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR)
8611180097 861110 PDR ADOCK 05000424 O
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
CONTENTS Topic Page Summary iii 1.
Scope of Review
2.
Methodology
3.
Evaluations
4.
Findings
5.
Conclusions
6.
References
Tables
l l
l
!
l
l l
l
{
l
__
..
_
-_..
__
_
_
_
-
.
V0GTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT UNIT 1 READINESS REVIEW PROGRAM MODULE 6 ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT SUMMARY
,
Georgia Power Company (GPC) is conducting the Readiness Review Program to assure that all design, construction, and operational commitments have been properly identified and implemented at the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Unit 1.
Module 6, which reflects the GPC review as of April 1985, presents an assessment of the compliance of the Electrical Equipment contained in Category I structures with
'
i Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) commitments and regulatory requirements. The NRC evaluation was conducted to determine that the results of the program review of
,
Electrical Equipment design, procurement, and installation presented in this Module represent an effective and accurate assessment of the requirements, that the requirements were properly implemented, and that the resolutions of the findings were appropriate.
The evaluation was performed by NRC inspectors from Region II, along with reviewers from the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR). An additional evaluation of the Independent Design Review (IDR) is being performed by the Office of Inspection and Enforcement (IE). The NRC Region II and NRR evaluations were accomplished through a detailed examination of all sections of Module 6 including:
1.
Verifying that the Electrical Equipment commitments identified in the Module are correct and in accordance with FSAR commitments and regulatory requirements.
2.
Verifying that a sample of these commitments were implemented in design and f
construction procedures, specifications, and design criteria.
.
3.
Checking a representative sample of the licensee audits and the other documents l
reviewed by the Readiness Review Staff along with an independent sample of l
documents selected by the NRC inspectors.
4.
Inspecting a representative sample of electrical equipment currently installed in Unit 1.
5.
Reviewing results from previous NRC inspections at Vogtle Unit I that pertain to Module 6.
6.
Reviewing the Module 6 findings and the licensee resolutions.
,
During this examination, it was apparent to the NRC reviewers and inspectors that (
GPC management supported the Readiness Review by active participation in developing j
and implementing the program.
This evaluation also indicates that the licensee's program review was comprehensive and provides adequate assurance that plant
'
electrical equipment will perform in accordance with NRC requirements and FSAR commitments (except for the findings which were identified by the NRC reviewers and 111
_ _
_.
..
.. _
_
.
._
-
..
-
_.
_ _ _
- - -
_ _ _ _. __ -
.
.
!
inspectors). These findings are subject to continuing review until proper resolution has been reached. The findings identified during this evaluation are summarized in the one item listed below:
o Inspector Followup Item - Interference between flexible conduit and valve position indicator (IFI 50-424/86-61-09).
This item was closed out during the inspection.
Inspector Followup Item - Review the NESC Requirements for Off-site Power i
o Source Ice and Wind Loading, FSAR Section 8.2.1.1 (IFI 50-424/86-46-01).
I j
This item does not appear to represent significant programmatic weaknesses. This conclusion is made on the basis that the foregoing open item for Vogtle 1 has been
.
satisfactorily closed out.
Resolution of all matters concerning items that remain
!
open from previous inspections will be handled during future Region II inspections.
I
!
'
,
t
!
!
!
!
l l
iv
,
,--,-.m...
, _ -.,
-.-.r..-m
,,,_..-,.._,n,,
,-
n
,,
_.
.a.._,_.n,.
. _., - - _ _ _ -.., _,, _, -... _. -,
,,.,,
,,, - -., -.,.,, _ _
.
.
.
.
.
-
.. --.
n.
_
'm-
,J'
)
_54
'
'
,
--
i,
p
.
.
.
'
.
\\
f
=
.g '
V0GTLE ELECTRIC CENERATING PLANT UNIT 1 READINESS REV7EW PP0 GRAM
.
MODULE'6 ELECTRICAL EQUIPNENT
1.
Scope of Review l
. This review consisted of an' examination of each Isection of the Module and was gerformed-by reviewerrifram.the Office of.'Nuclece Eeactor Regulation (NRR) and the 0,ffice of Inspection and Enforcemept (IE) along with inspectofs from Region II. The Region II review was ass-isted by two consultants from-i EG&G Idaho, Inc.', a prime contr actor to: the U.'S. Department of Energy at the Idaho' National Edgineering Laboratory.
Module Sections 1.0, 2.0, 4.0, 5.0, and 8.0. presented data on Module organization,' project organization, program description, audits and special investigations, and conclusions. These did no.t require the review depth given to Module Sections 3.0 and 6.0, which cpvered Commitmentk and Program Verification. The review of Module Section.7.0,
.
I Independent Design Review, is the subject of a,saparate report.
Sections.3,0 and 6.0 provide the mbre significant aspects concerning licensee commitments
along with adequacy of' commitment carry-throudt3 into both program implementation *
and design execution.
Rd iew of these two sections included an examination
~
of content; review.of fin ings, concerns,-and observations; ' review of a sample of items reviewed by the Georgia Power Company (GPC) Readir.ess Review?
Team (RRT); and an examination of an independently selected samples of records and field construction. The methodoTogy used and an evaluation of s
each section are presented in the following.
,
2.
Methodology
'
-a.
NRR Review
,
'4 The review and evaluation by ths'0f fice of Nuclear Reactor Regy3ation focused on the adequacy and accura ~cy of the commitmer ts contained in
~
Section 3.0 of the Module.
This involved reviewing she Module Sections 3.5, 4.0,' 6.0, 6.1, and 6.2 for' ccmmitment invdivement, and making a
-
detailed examination of Module Subsections 3.4 (Cominitmer? Matrix)
'
and'3.5 (Implenentation Matris). The objective of thi.s eeview was to determine the extent that the licensee complied with licanst,g s
commitments for Class 1E electrical equipment and to deter:aine whether r
all li-sted commitments were properly within the' scope of Module 6.
The
"
primary review criteria for the foregoing included the acceptance criteria of NUREG-800 Standard Review Plan (SRP), the Vogtle Unit 1 l
Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), and.the Safety Evaluation Report,
(SER).
Other criteria used. included se]ected letter correspondence,
'
NRC Regulatory Guides, ar.o'related NRC 3taff positions.
'
>
,
.
~
-
,
m k
.
4 m-
'l
s
%
.%
4 f
\\
-
-
.
_
-
.
.
b.
IE Review l
The review and evaluation by the Office of Inspection and Enforcement focused on the Independent Design Review (IDR) product which was not included in Section 7.0 of the Module. This will be reported in i
s Module 22 as a part of the integrated IDR.
The results of the review of this by IE personnel are the subject of a separate report.
c.
Region II Review The NRC review performed by Region II inspectors was concerned with all sections of the Module except Section 7.
Most of the review focused on
,
Sections 3.4, 3.5, 6.1, and 6.2.
The total Module was reviewed for
organization and content. The review included two on-site inspections at the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP) Unit 1.
k Prior to the first on-site visit, a sample of 33 commitments (see Table 1) was selected from the 190 commitments listed in Section 3.4 of the Module. The RRT had verified all 190 of the total commitments for first-order documentation and summarized the results in the Section 3.5 of the Implementation Matrix. A sample of 133 commitments was combined into 47 groups in the Commitment Verification Matrix of Table 6.1-1.
The NRC inspectors selected 26 commitments from among the 47 groups as a verification sample. An additional seven commitments not reviewed by the RRT were selected by the NRC inspectors for first-order review.
The RRT verified design responsibility for all 190 commitments and construction responsibility for 18 of the 190 commitments.
Three (3)
of these eighteen (18) were included in the NRC total sample of thirty-three (33).
Simultaneously, the commitment sample was selected to include the following equipment categories:
o Transformers o
Bus systems (including penetration assemblies)
-
o Switchgear o
DC systems o
Motor control centers o
Boards and paaels
!
o Distribution equipment
!
o Inverters
!
During the first visit, a verification and walkdown sample was selected consisting of nine items of electrical equipment (see Table 2) and one penetration (see Table 3).
The sample was intended to provide the basis for verifying the data reported in Sections 3.0, 4.0, and 6.0 of
,
the Module and to spot areas or items needing review depth.
'
l l
. -, - -..
_ -.. -. _ -.
_..
, -.-_
.
..
- _ -...., -,., -
-
.. - -
_
__
.
f
.
.
Y
'3
'
3,
,
s.
The first inspection was conducted at Vogtle Unit 1 during June 23 through July 2, 1986. The following activities were conducted and the findings were documented in Inspection Report No. 50-425/86-61:
i
\\
o Determining the RRT organizational element responsible for Module 6
,
and interviewing key staff members o
Verifying the Module 6 review boundary Making a general inspectidn of the Containment, Auxiliary, and
o
'
Diesel Generator Buildings to assess project status and to view
examples of Module 6 hardware o
Obtaining supplemental documentation copies required for review use Conducting a walkdown of the ten items of electrical equipment o
n i
hardware i
The first-order commitment verification was completed after the first
,,,
'
on-site visit.
The second-order commitment verification was completed during the second on-site visit.
'
,
Si Data were gathered during the first inspection trip for office review.
Thi sample commitments were traced backward into' source documentation f,
,
which was typically the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
This was
'
'
Ai to check for proper RRT recognit:on of the actual commitments.
The commitrents were traced forward into the Subsection 3.5 Implementation Matrix to verify the implementation reported in the Module. Additional tracing of the sample commitments into the first-order implementation
'
documents (design criteria and procedures) and into second-order implementation documents (calculations, drawings, specifications, and vendor submittals) was made to the extent possible with the naterials gathered during the first inspection.
The second inspection at Vogtle Unit 1 was conducted during July 21-25,
,
1986. This inspection involved the following activities and is documented as part of this report:
>
i
'o Continuing' general Module 6 review activities
[
g o
Completing commitment tracing
)
Performing Design Program Verification review o
i
'
k.
i
- ,
o Performing Construction Program Verification review
,
o Performing 1an equipment, document review The commitment sample was' traced into selected design calculations and into actual hardware. This was done both for those items within the
,
sample similarly traced by the RRT and for the additional items specifically
!
selected outside of those looked at by the RRT.
t ks i[
._m m,.._
.. ______,_,
_.
--
_ _ _ _ _
-. _. _
__
.. -.
--
-
_ __
__
-
.
3.
Evaluations The evaluation of each Module section is provided below using a Module section-by-section format.
Included are a description of the section, subjact matter reviewed, the basis for acceptance, and a statement of any required followup or evaluation.
a.
Section 1.0 - Introduction
(1) Review Introduction and Section Examination This Section of the Module provides a description of the contents of Module 6.
Also provided is a description of the Vogtle Unit 1 hardware covered within the Module, an overview of the project status, and an outline of the Module organization. This section was examined by the NRC Region II inspectors for content, background, and accuracy of information.
(a) Boundary Definition. The information given on Module page 1.1-1 was reviewed with the RRT counterpart to verify the correctness of the boundary definition information presented. The information gained during the review did not disclose verification error.
(b) Project Status. Module 6, Section 1.3, states that the design of the electrical equipment was essentially completed by April 1, 1985, and the overall Unit 1 major electrical equipment installation was 90% complete by March 1, '045.
(c) Module Organization.
The Module description portion of the section was examined by the NRC inspectors, and no additional inaccuracies or need for clarification were found.
Inquiry was made concerning any significant changes that had been made subsequent to the March 1, 1985, cutoff date.
The RRT counterpart responded that no changes had been made except that the equipment installation is complete with some minor testing remaining to be done.
The response provided by the RRT correlated with other information reviewed by the NRC inspectors.
(2) Inspection Results The examination did not disclose significant verification errors or a basis for programmatic concern.
Followup or additional evaluation of Module Section 1.0 is not required.
e 1e,
.
. - -. - - _ ~ -
,e
-
.
.__,4..--.._%,__.,,_wr c.,~,....._%._-- - -.. -
..,_, m
-. _,, _, - _ ~,. _. _,. _
.
.
_
_
_
-
.
l
b.
Section 2.0 - Organization and Division of Responsibility (1) Review Introduction and Section Examination This section of the Module provides a description of the organizations employed for project activities including design, field construction, installation, quality assurance, training and
'
certification programs, and procurement. A set of management matrices for these activities is provided.
This section was examined by the NRC inspectors for content and background information and agrees with that obtained by NRC inspectors during past inspections at Vogtle Unit 1.
No variance from the Section 2.0 information was found during the total Module review.
(2)
Inspection Results The examination did not disclose significant errors or a basis for
'
programmatic concern.
Followup or additional evaluation of Module Section 2.0 is not required.
c.
Section 3.0 - Commitments
.
(1) Review Introduction and Section Examination This section of Module 6 contains a listing of commitments and implementing documents which are displayed in two matrices.
Section 3.4, entitled " Commitments," identifies the Module 6 commitments for Vogtle Unit 1 along with the source document reference for each commitment.
Section 3.5, entitled "Implemen-
,
tation Matrix," is a listing of source documents and requirements
referred to within each commitment along with the first-order
.
document reference. The NRR identification review was directed at t
assuring that all required technical and regulatory requirements relating to electrical equipment had been included in the Module 6 Commitment Matrix listed in Section 3.4.
The NRC Region II review was directed at verifying the proper implementation of the commitments.
This verification was accomplished by selecting a sample of
l 33 individual commitments out of 190 that reflected the full range
~
of commitment topics. The sample was examined by carefully checking the commitment source (typically the FSAR) for the exact requirement and verifying (within the documentation listed in the Implementation Matrix) that the requirement was accurately carried through into first-order documents.
(2) Commitment Identification Review.
The NRR examination of Section 3.4 started by reviewing the Module for commitment involvement.
The review consisted of a comparison of the commitments listed in Section 3.4 and with the guidance contained in the Standard Review
-
Plan (SRP) and other regulatory documents (SER, FSAR and Generic l
Letters).
The staff also reviewed the commitments to ensure that l
all commitments necessitated by the Standard Review Plan were l
included in the Readiness Program (all modules).
Formal responses to staff questions were provided by Georgia Power.
The applicant satisfactorily responded to these questions or modified the commitment matrix to reflect the correct SRP position.
.
.
- -.
- _
.
-- -
._
__
- - -. ~ -. -.. -
- - - -,
-
.
Each commitment was examined to determine if it properly reflected the source (FSAR or other document) requirement and was properly within the scope of Module 6.
Also, the sources were examined to assure that all required commitments were properly reflected in the Commitment Matrix.
(3)
Implementation Review. The NRC Region II inspection consisted of reviewing Sections 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3 for content and evaluating the sample of 33 commitments for proper implementation. These commitments represented a range of commitment topics and sources presented in Module 6.
The examination of the sample consisted of:
o Verifying correspondence between Section 3.4 Commitment Matrix and Section 3.5 of the Implementation Matrix for each commitment.
It was observed that the RRT had verified 190 commitments.
o Reviewing the referenced commitment source documentation for a clear statement of requirement for each commitment within the sample.
Checking the documents listed in Section 3.5 of the o
Implementation Matrix, for proper first-order imple-mentation of the requirements to meet the commitment.
The individual commitments examined along with the verification results are listed in Table 1.
Anomalies regarding Commitments 37 and 83 are discussed in Paragraph 3.g(2).
(4)
Inspection Results The NRR staff has reviewed Section 3.4 and has determined that the i
commitment matrix contains no omissions and is within the defined scope of Module 6.
The examination of Section 3.0 did not disclose substantial
!
verification errors, other than noted above, or programmatic concerns.
Followup or additional evaluation, other than noted j
above is not required.
i d.
Section 4.0 - Program Description (1) Review Introduction and Section Examination This section of the Module describes work processes and control for design, procurement, site materials control, installation, and inspection of electrical equipment. The section was examined by the NRC inspectors for content, background information (especially Module Section 6, Program Verification), and for the accuracy of the information presented. The material contained in this section was largely descriptive and was not examined in detail.
.-,--
.
-
..
.
_
.
-. _ _.
_
i
-
.
i (a) Design Section 4.1 describes the preparation and use of design criteria, drawings and documentation, design control and review, design change control, field change requests, and deviation reports.
Eight tables are included in this section which list (1) Interdiscipline Design Criteria, (2) System Design Criteria, (3) Electric Studies, (4) Electrical Calculations, (5) Failure Modes and Effects Analysis, l
(6) Procurement Specifications, (7) Construction Specifications, and (8) Design Verification Review.
The interrelationship of these is illustrated by three flow charts.
,
,
General agreement was found among the Module description, procedures, and observed practices for all other matters examined that related to Section 4.1.
(b) Equipment Section 4.2, entitled " Procurement," describes the method for procuring electrical equipment for Vogtle Unit 1.
The
description covers supplier surveillance, procurement activity
controls, and methods of deviation from procurement
.
specifications by the vendor through Supplier Deviation l
Disposition Requests (SDDRs).
Section 4.3, entitled " Site
.
~
Material Control," refers to the receipt, storage, and issue of electrical equipment.
This section refers to Module 21,
,
!
General Appendix E, which describes the GPC program for receipt, receiving inspection, document review and acceptance, storage inspection, and maintenance of warehouse controlled material.
l The implementation of these programs was found to be adequate for Sections 4.2 and 4.3 (c)
Installation and Inspection Section 4.4 describes equipment installation and inspection.
,
It was examined by the NRC inspectors for content and general
'
agreement with the Module 6 Commitments selected for review.
In addition, the flow charts contained in this section were reviewed for logic and accuracy. General agreement between commitments and the activities covered by the Installation and Inspection Program appeared to be adequate.
(2) Inspection Results The Section 4.0 examination did not identify any verification errors or further programmatic concerns.
Followup or additional evaluation is not require..
_
_
.
_
_
_
.
.
e.
Section 5.0 - Audits and Special Investigations This section describes the audits of the Module 6-related activities and documents made by Georgia Power Company (GPC), Southern Company Services (SCS), and Bechtel Power Company (BPC) Quality Assurance personnel, along with those performed by NRC, the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) and the Licensee's Self-Initiated Evaluation Team. Also included are discussions of design and construction problems
,
resulting from these audits.
This section was examined by the NRC
]
inspectors to confirm the various processes and correspondence of i
reporting agreed with that observed in the past by NRC inspections.
The examination did not disclose significant errors or a basis for
programmatic concern.
Followup or additional evaluation of Section 5.0
"
is not required.
f.
Section 6.0 - Program Verification This section of the Module describes the activities that (1) to ascertain whether the design and construction work processes have been i
adequately controlled to ensure implementation of licensing commitments
and (2) ensure the results of these work processes conform to project procedures and design requirements. The section is further divided into two subsections covering Design Program Verification and Construction Program Verification.
Both subsections received a
<
detailed examination by the NRC inspectors and are included under separate headings subsections (3.a and 3.h).
g.
Section 6.1 - Design Program Verification
,
(1) Review Introduction The Design Program Verification section of the Module focused on
~
the programmatic aspects of design with the objective of determining whether the design control process functioned effectively and properly implemented the licensing commitments.
The RRT verifi-
,.
cation was performed in three parts.
'
i Part I consisted of verifying implementation of the 190 technical commitments that were within the scope of the Module.
These were reviewed for proper implementation into the project design criteria
'
and the procedures which were referred to as first-order design
,
documents. A sample of 133 of the commitments were reviewed
!
further by the RRT for implementation into specific second-order design documents, including calculations, drawings, specifications, and vendor submittals.
l'
Part II consisted of the RRT review of 18 categories of design i
documents for compliance with project procedures along with assuring that the technical requirements had been correctly
,
'
incorporated, coordinated adequately, and controlled changes
properly.
r
{
. - -.
,,,,,,. ------
-n.,,-,o
-,,
n - -., -, - -,, -.,
n---
. - -,, - - -,, - -,
- -., -.,. -,. - -., - - -. ~.. ~ ~. -. - ~, ~ - - -
,
.
.
Part III consisted of a field walkdown of seven items of electrical hardware and one penetration ta determine if selected features of the design were properly reflected in the as-built installation.
(2) Part I Examination - Design Commitment Verification Part I of the Design Program Verification examination consisted of the NRC inspectors selecting a sample of 33 commitments from the 190 listed in Module Section 3.4 for verification.
The selection is described in Paragraphs 2.c and 3.c(1). The commitment sample and the results of the review are listed in Table 1.
Two commitment anomalies were discovered and are described in the following paragraphs.
(a) First-Order Commitment Verification. The NRC inspectors selected a sample of 33 of the 190 individually numbered commitments listed in Section 3.4 of the Commitment Matrix.
Twenty-six of the 33 commitments were taken from Module Table 6.1-1 that listed the commitments that the RRT
-
reviewed, and the remaining seven were selected by the inspectors as an independent review sampling.
1.
Commitment No. 37 required the off-site sources of electric power to meet the requirements of the National Electrical Safety Code (NESC). The Implementation Matrix listed DC-1826 as the first-order implementation.
Examination of the second-order document, entitled "High Voltage
" Switchyard" disclosed that it references the NESC as a requirement to design " buses" to meet the NESC specified combined ice and wind loads.
No evidence was found to support the FSAR 8.2.1.1 statement that:
"The transmission line structures of both the 230-kV and 500-kV systems are designed to withstand light loading conditions as specified in the National Bureau of Standards Handbook No. 8 (National Electric Safety Code Part 2)."
.
The NRC inspectors noted that the FSAR does not reference l
a particular edition of the National Electrical Safety i
Code (NESC).
This item will require further review and l
is identified as as Inspector Followup Item 50-424/86-46-01.
Review the NESC Requirements for Off-site Power Source
>
j Ice and Wind Loading (FSAR Section 8.2.1.1).
!
I l
. - -
..
..
--
-
.
.
..
.
.--- -
.
.-
--
.
.
.
.
__.
-
<
.
.
J
l 2.
The NRC inspectors noted that 83 commitments were referenced in Module Table 6.1-1 but only 82 were listed
'
in the Commitment Matrix (Module Section 3.4) and in the Implementation Matrix (Module Section 3.5).
The RRT advised that Commitments No. 82 (spatial separation)
and 83 (barriers) were listed originally as separate i
commitments and were later combined into a single commitment (No. 82) with No. 83 being deleted. Module Table 6.1-1 had been prepared prior to the change being i
made in the Commitment Database, and the change was not
^
carried through to the Implementation Matrix. This
.
accounts for the total number of commitments being listed as 134 rather than 133 in the Module Executive Summary and Module Section 6.1.3.1.
3.
The following typographical errors were noted by the NRC
inspectors in the Module 6 Report.
After reviewing these errors, the NRC Inspectors concluded that they did not reflect potential verification errors requiring resolution, but appeared to reflect an inadequate review of the Module by the RRT staff.
Table 6.1-1
!
Sheet No.
Corrections Required C
ap s DC-1007 rt i
to " Category 1E" electrical I
equipment.
15, 16, 17, 20 DC-1805, change 9/23/84 to 9/23/83
!
21, 21, 27, 28
!
i
Ref. No., change 2369 to 2368 f
Ref. No., change 2320 to 2370 l
21, 25, 32 DC-1816, change 3/16/84 to 3/6/84
Change "Elemenmatic diagrams" to i
l
" Elementary diagrams" under i
" Design Document, Type" column
Ref. No. 83, delete as this commitment was combined with No. 82.
l_
11, 12, & 13 Commitment 35 has several errors.
Corrections are given l
in Table 4 of this report.
I r
l l
-
_. _ -. _, _
_ _.__,,_.,
,,_ ___ _._.,
. _ _ _ _., _ _ _ _ _ _.. _ _ _. _, _
.. -
.
.
. ~
...
..
.
-
.
1 (b) Second-Order Verification. The second phase of the examination of Part I involved commitment verification for five commitments in second-order documents. The results are listed in Table 1.
No significant second-order verification or commitment errors were found by the NRC inspectors within the commitments sampled.
(3) Part II Examination - Design Document Review Part II of the RRT Design Program Verification involved a detailed review of the following project documentation categories:
o Design Criteria o
Calculations o
Drawings o
One-Line Diagrams o
Equipment Locations o
Drawing Change Notices (DCN)
o Procurement Specifications o
Vendor Drawings and Documents
o Supplier Deviation Disposition Requests (SDDR)
l o
Electrical Qualification Data Package (EQDP)
'
j l
o Construction Specifications Construction Specification Change Notices (CSCN)
o o
Field Change Requests (FCR)
j I
o Field Equipment Change Orders (FECO)
o Change Control Packages (CCP)
'
o Deviation Reports (DR)
[
o Failure Mode and Effects Analyses (FMEA)
!
o Hazards The examination of Part II included reviewing the predeveloped RRT design document checklist formats for each of the above documents against the description of the checklist attributes listed in Module Section 6.1.3.
General conformance was found for this.
The NRC inspectors also randomly sampled the foregoing documentation and the related filled-in checklists and found both to be adequate.
I I
.. _ _ _ _
.
.
The NRC inspectors examined the following document samples to verify that the document checklists had been properly used:
o Design Criteria--DC-1806 (Rev. 4), "DC System, Class 1E" o
Calculations--Calculation X3CC02, (Rev. 4) entitled "480-Volt Breaker Short Circuit Sizing." (Calculation was reviewed by NRC inspector and found to follow ANSI C37.13-1973 and IEEE Std 141-1975 procedures.)
o Drawing Change Notices (DCN)--DCN for Drawing IX30 AA A01A (Rev. 11)
Equipment Location--Drawings 1XDE313 (Rev. 8), 1XDE322 o
(Rev. 11), AX5DS2A02 (Rev. 10), and 1XD01J013 (Rev. 10)
o Vendor Drawings and Documents--Drawing IX3AC02-271-5 o
Construction Specifications--Specification X3AR01-E3 (Rev. 3)
o Construction Specifications Change Notices (CSCN)--
CSCN No. 82 for Construction Specification X3AR01-E2 Change Control Packages (CCP)--CCP No. B10017E for o
Equipment 1AA02 o
Electrical Qualification Data Packages (EQDP)--Checklist for EQDP for Procurement Specification, X3AC02, 480-V,
,
Load Center i
o Field Change Requests (FCR)--Checklist for FCR No. 5315 l
for document 1X4DE322 (Re/. 9)
.
j o
Drawing--Drawing 1X40E313 (Rev. 8)
One-Line Diagram--Drawing IX3D AA B03 (Rev.1)
j o
i l
o Field Equipment Change Orders (FECO)--FEC0 No. 2-E-B for 480-Volt Motor Control Center (MCC) 1ABA and Procurement Specification X3AC03
,
i l
o Procurement Specifications--Specification X3A02 (Rev. 70), entitled " Specification for 480-Volt Motor Control Centers..."
!
Supplier Deviation Disposition Requests (SDDR)--Request j
o SDDR No. 1289 pertaining to 480-Volt MCC 1ABA l
o Deviation Report (DR)--DR No. ES00523 for the MCC per l
Purchase Order X3A03 i
!
.
.-
-. -
-
. _.-
~
_
.- -
.
.
.
.
I I
!
(4) Part III Examination - Walkdown I
Part III of the RRT Design Program Verification involved a field walkdown of safety-related electrical equipment (Table 2) and the electrical penetrations (Table 3) located in the Containment,
,
Auxiliary Building, and Diesel Generator Building.
The walkdown did not reveal any design problems. The construction walkdown
'
j examination is discussed in Section 3.h(3).
(5) Findings. Module Section 6.1.4 presented details on the 33 RRT findings resulting from the design verification and classifieo the
'
findings as follows:
!
Violation of licensing commitments, project procedures, Level I
-
or engineering requirements with indication of safety concern--3 findings Level II -
Violation of licensing commitments or engineering requirements with no safety concerns--2 findings
Level III -
Violation of project procedures with no safety
'
concerns--28 findings.
A following sample of 5 of the 33 RRT design verification findings was selected, comprised by the three Level I and the two Level II
'
findings that were reported in Module Section 6.1.4:
6-32 Inadequate clearance exists between cable tray support and
,
!
480-V switchgear (Level I)
i 6-37 Seismic separation requirements were not identified for
'
certain electrical equipment and other hardware (Level I)
l 6-60 Cla:s IE regulating transformers were not specified or i
identified as isolation devices in certain design documents
!
(Level II)
<
i
!
6-68 480-V switchgear was set in place without removing shipping pallet bolts from foundation channels (Level II)
l 6-87 Maximum voltages during normal operation and minimum voltages j
during transient loading steps were not analyzed (Level 1)
These findings were analyzed for attributes that included:
o Problem statement clarity
!
e o
Backup documentation completeness i
i o
Response statement adequacy
,
l o
RRT conclusion logic
.
!
i i --... _ _,. _ _ _ _.
_._.. _ ~..__.,_- _ _ _ _ __. _._
_, -,. _ _ _ _,,
-
.
o Finding conflict with other NRC information l
The examination of the five RRT findings did not disclose any verification errors.
The finding sample selection disclosed several gaps in the findings numbering scheme. Module 6 presents 56 findings within a numbering pattern from 1 through 93.
Examination of the RRT files revealed that all 93 numbers had been used for preliminary findings.
The RRT review process eliminated 47 as not meeting the criteria for a Level I, II, or III classification. The following sample of 7 of the 47 eliminated preliminary-findings was examined to verify the RRT determination:
6-8 Battery system capacity 6-9 undervoltage setpoints 6-10 Equipment design verification traceability 6-11 Qualified life verification in documentation 6-12 Equipment separation per Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.75 6-13 Final battery voltage 6-14 Emergency lighting transformers No verification errors were found, and the inspectors concurred with the determinations.
(6)
Inspection Results Except as noted, the section examination did not disclose any substantial verification errors or programmatic concerns.
Followup or additional evaluation is not indicated.
h.
Section 6.2 - Construction Program Verification i
(1) Review Introduction
,
i The Construction P_rogram Verification section of the Module l
focused on the programmatic aspects of construction. The objective was to determine whether the construction control
!
process functior,ed effectively and whether it ensured proper
!
implementation of licensing commitments.
The RRT verification was performed in two parts.
The first part consisted of verifying the implementation of the 18 construction commitments within the 190 total commitments.
These were reviewed for proper implementation in the appropriate construction process
.
.
-documentation.
Two findings were reported by the RRT from the first part of the review.
The second part of the review was an assessment of 18 pieces of installed hardware and 300 records to verify that the installation was in conformance with design requirements and verify that the associated documentation complied with specification and procedural requirements.
Twenty-one findings were reported by the RRT for this second part.
The NRC inspectors observed that the references made to the number and type of findings on Module pages 6.2-1 and 6.2-2 were inaccurate.
The RRT representative concurred these should have been listed as
"23 Findings:
one Level I, five Level II, and 17 Level III."
This would agree with the itemized findings in Module Table 6.2-1 and with the findings actually described in the Module narrative.
(2) Commitment Implementation Assessment Examination The commitment part of the Construction Program Verification was examined by the NRC inspectors using the three-commitment sample described in Paragraph c.
This sampling had been selected from the 18 commitments listed for construction cognizance within Module Section 3.4 of the Commitment Matrix.
The NRC examination did not disclose any other verification errors.
(3) Construction Assessment Examination The second part of the RRT Construction Program Verification involved verifying the procedures and documentation for the following Category 1E electrical equipment and penetrations listed in Module Tables 6.2-2 and 6.2-3:
o Transformer o
Switchgear o
DC Systems (Battery, Battery Rack, and Charger)
o Motor Control Center o
Panel o
Distribution Panel o
Inverter The RRT Construction Team also conducted a construction walkdown for the 11 items of electrical equipment and the seven penetrations included in the abov.
.
The examination of the RRT construction assessment included documentation checks and field walkdown for an eleven-item hardware sample.
This sample was selected to include a broad range of electrical equipment and included seven items independent of the 18-item RRT sample.
The specific items and the results of the examination are as follows:
(a) Load Center, 4160V Switchgear, 1AA02, Tag No. 1-1804-S3-A02--The NRC inspector noted that the terminal strip covers were laying on the shelf and that considerable dust was present.
The NRC inspectors did not observe any verification errors in the documentation files and did not observe any other discrepancies during the walkdown.
(b) Load Center, 480V Switchgear, 1AB04, Tag No. 1-1805-S3-B04--
Documentation was not found in the file to support the seismic qualification of this item subsequent to approval of the SDDR that allowed delay in the qualification.
Proper evidence of the qualification was found during the NRC review of Appendix J (Equipment Qualification), however.
(c) Motor Control Center (MCC), 480V, 1ABA Tag No. 1-1805-S3-ABA--
The NRC inspectors did not observe any verification errors in the documentation files and did not observe any discrepancies during the walkdown.
(d)
Inverter, IAD1II, Tag No. 1-1807-Y3-182--The NRC inspectors did not observe any verification error in the documentation files and did not observe any discrepancies during the walkdown.
!
(e) Battery,125V dc,1AD18, Tag No.1-1806-83-1-- Investigation j
disclosed that a Deficiency Evaluation Report (DER) had been issued addressing the replacement of these batteries. Thus, this unit was not walked down.
!
(f) Battery Chargers, 125V dc, 1ADICB and 1ADICD Tag No. 1-1806-B3-CBB--The NRC inspectors did not observe any verification errors in the documentation files and did not observe any discrepancies during the walkdown.
(g) Area Termination Panel, Tag No. 1-1601-03-T27--The NRC r
l inspectors did not observe any verification errors in the documentation files and did not observe any discrepancies i
l during the walkdown, t
(h) Cable Bus, Tag No. 1-1804-W3-CB700--The NRC inspectors did not observe any verification errors in the documentation files and did not observe any discrepancies during the walkdown.
- _ -.
_. _ _-, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. - _
_ _ _ _ _
-
.
_ _ _
__
._.
_
_
_
._ _
._ -
..
_,
_
i i
-
.
l T
(i) Regulating Transformer, Tag No. 1-1808-T3-01--An SQVDL-SED was observed to have been submitted to delete the environmental and seismic qualification reports.
The NRC inspectors did not observe any verification errors in the documentation files and did not observe any discrepancies during the walkdown.
(j) Penetration Tag No. 1-1818-H3-P07, P08, P15 and P19--The NRC
!
examination of the equipment documentation files revealed i
several deviation reports (DR's) relating to leak tests.
These had been appropriately closed out.
During equipment walkdown, the NRC inspectors examined the construction of one unsealed electrical penetration and did not observe any
,
external discrepancies.
The remaining electrical penetrations-
were sealed and ready for the Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS) hot functional tests. The NRC inspectors noted that pressure gages were in place and did not observe any external
discrapancies. The seismic calculation required by DER-122
pertaining to the additional bracing in the penetration
enclosures had not been completed by the end of the second
inspection.
The NRC inspectors did not review this situation i
further in that the addition of cable support bracing was
previously identified in IE Report No. 50-424/85-16.
(k) Miscellaneous--During the NRC walkdown, an interference was i
observed between the flexible conduit and the valve positica j
indicator for Limitorque Operator 1-HV-2583-B.
Inspector
!
Followup Itea (IFI) 50-424/86-61-09 was opened for this.
!
Similar deficiencies had been identified by Operations for j
all eight containment air cooling units on Operations Deviation i
Report (ODR) T-1-86-2007, dated June 14, 1986.
The IFI was
,
closed after noting the positive followup action under way l
with the 00R.
!
!
(4) Findings Examination
,
The 23 RRT findings were categorized as follows in the Module:
o Commitments
Paperwork
o Verification
-
!
o
-
Hardware
1 o
-
Programmatic
j A sample of 3 of the 23 was selected which included one Level I and two Level 11 findings reported in Module Section 6.2.
These j
were: 6-16 Regulated transformer wiring separation criteria violations (Level I)
-
i i
!
l l
l
--
- -
--- - - -
.- ----
. _ _
__ _
. -. _
- -
.. _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _
. _ _ _
_
_
_
-
.
.
l
l 6-17 Incorrect foundation welding pattern (Level II)
6-27 Incorrect permanent identification tagging (Level II).
These findings were analyzed for attributes that included:
'
o Problem statement clarity
!
]
o Backup documentation completeness
o Response statement clarity
o RRT conclusion logic i
o Finding conflict with other NRC information The examination of the foregoing three findings did not i
disclose any verification errors.
!
(5)
Inspection Results
!
The section examination did not disclose any substantial verification
,
l errors or further basis for programmatic concern.
Followup or additional evaluation, other than noted above, is not required.
t f
i.
Se: tion 7.0 - Independent Design Review
,
i
!
The results of the Independent Design Review (IDR) were not included in l
Module 6.
A brief narrative of the IDR process was provided. This i
included a statement that an independent engineering consulting company had made a review of the design documents (such as design criteria,
,
!
calculations, specifications, and drawings) to ascertain whether these I
documents correctly implemented licensing commitments. A team of technical and professional experts assessed the design adequacy for this Module while assessing the design adequacy for the other Modules.
The review results are included in Module 22. A specific review of the adequacy of electrical equipment was made.
The integrated Independent Design Review has been examined by the NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement.
The results of this NRC examination are the subject of a separate report.
J.
Section 8.0 - Program Assessment / Conclusions (1) Review Introduction and Section Examination This section of the Module provides a summary of 10 open corrective actions, 5 certifications from review managers and participants, and mini-resumes for the various RRT members.
No introductory paragraph was provided to explain the significance of the information as had been given in the other Module section.
.
The examination of Module Section 8.0 by the NRC inspectors involved a reviewing this section for content and background information. The open corrective action section presents finding summaries, responsible organizations, and completion dates.
The status reported as of July 24, 1986, by design project personnel is as follows:
6-34 Revise DC-1000-E to reference AISC and AISI codes; due date was March 28, 1986.
This was accomplished by Design Manual Change Notice 1000-E-1, dated November 11, 1985.
6-37 Issue Change Control Package (CCP) to modify drip shields on six panels; due date was May 1, 1986.
CCP B10278E was issued on May 23, 1986.
6-85 Issue EE-400 as a complete calculation with cover sheet including a statement of purpose and source of data; due date was March 28, 1986.
This was issued as Calculation X3CE400 on April 22, 1986.
6-86 Issue Calculation X3CH01 and provide additional training on calculation preparation to Electrical System Group personnel; due date was March 28, 1986. Calculation X3CH01 was issued on June 27, 1986. The required training was documented in Interoffice Memo 8848274 dated March 13, 1986.
6-87 Item 1--Revise Calculation X3CA03-1; due date was March 15, 1986; calculation was issued on July 1, 1986.
Item 2--Complete evaluation and disposition of DER-122; due date was March 15, 1986; final concurrence was given on the DER-122 evaluation / disposition on July 11, 1986.
Item 3--Complete investigation of transfer of non-Category 1E buses, and simultaneous starting of Category 1E loads during an accident; due date was April 15, 1986; status not available.
l Item 4--Initiate Licensing Deviation Document / revised design criteria per final bus transfer design; due date was May 1, 1986; LDD-108 was issued on July 24, 1986.
The design criteria revisions were made as follows:
Criteria Revision Date
,
i l
DC-1000-E
7-24-86
DC-1801
Undergoing final concurrence review DC-1804
7-16-86
,
l DC-1825
7-10-86 i
.
.
6-88 Item 1--Provide Electrical Engineering personnel with document classification; due completion was documented in dated March 13, 1986. Item 2--Revise Project Requirements Manual to assure adequate interface control of calculations; due date was April 18, 1986; completed by Change Notice C947, dated June 26, 1986.
Item 3--Revise classification of six selected calculations to to be safety-related calculations; due date was May 15, 1986; was reported as having been completed but no documentation was cited for this.
6-91 Revise Design Manual Preface and Section 3.4.5 to require references to main interfaces only; due date was March 28, 1986. This was accomplished by Design Manual Change Notice PRFF 3-10, dated June 5, 1986.
6-93 Provide additional training to electrical design personnel responsible for preparing Field Equipment Change Order / Change Control Packages; due date was March 28, 1986.
Completion of this was' documented in Interoffice Memo BB48274, dated March 13, 1986.
6-16 Evaluate Deviation Report ED-8533 and DER-125; due date was May 15, 1986.
This was documented as completed in Report BS6509, dated May 19, 1986.
6-39 Revise DC-1816 to indicate that use of polyvinyl chloride is not restricted for terminal lugs; due March 28, 1986.
This was accomplished by Design Criteria Change Notice, issued March 31, 1986.
(2)
Inspection Results
.
The section examination did not disclose any substantial verification l
errors or programmatic concerns.
Follow up or additional evaluation, other than noted above, is not required.
'
l l
4.
Findings
,
!
The following Inspector Followup Item (IFI) was identified during the NRC
!
evaluation of the Module. This was considered to have minimal safety l
significance at this point of review and will not require further evaluation l
to preclude safety problems.
Inspector Followup Item - Interference between flexible conduit and o
valve position indicator (IFI 50-424/86-61-09).
This item was closed out during the inspection.
,
o Inspector Followup Item - 50-424/86-46-01.
Review the NESC Requirements for Off-site Power Source Ice and Wind Loading (FSAR Section 8.2.1.1).
_ _ _ __ __ _._ _._, _
-
-
_
-. _
-
-
_
.- -
._
-
.
.
21
5.
Conclusions
!
!
The NRC has reached the following conclusions for electrical equipment at
{
Vogtle Unit 1 based on the review of Module 6.
t j
a.
Summary of Specific Conclusions
-
I
_The following Module sections have been determined to be acceptable with the exception of items and areas discussed earlier in this report.
'
1.
Section 1.0 - Introduction--The boundary between Module 6 and the i
related Modules is generally clear and well defined as presented in Module 6, Section 1.0.
The Module Organization and Project-Status were correct as of the date of Module publication.
,
2.
Section 2.0 - Organization and Division of Responsibilities--The j
organization description and responsibilities presented in Module 6, Section 2.0, were reviewed and verified as being correct.
l 3.
Section 3.0 - Commitments--The commitments listed in Module 6, l
Section 3.0, were reviewed and determined to be complete and correctly identified (to be confirmed by NRR) except for
'
i Commitment 37 which was incorrectly verified in first-order i
documents as discussed in Section 3.g(2)(a) in this report.
i I
4.
Section 4.0 - Program Description--The design prog.am description presented in Module 6, Section 4.0, was verified as being correct.
t 5.
Section 5.0 - Audits and Special Investigations--The audits and special investigations information presented in Module 6, Section 5.0, was reviewed and verified.
6.
Section 6.0 - Program Verification--The design program verification reported in Module 6, Section 6.1, was verified as being adequate.
,
The construction program verification performed by the licensee is l
considered to be sufficient to provide a conclusion of adequate l
program functioning.
i 7.
Section 7.0 - Independent Design Review--The licensee engaged the I
Stone and Webster Company to perform an independent design review.
l This review was made in conjunction with the design review of
=
other related Modules.
The results of the integrated IDR were i
published as Module 22 and were not incorporated into Module 6.
l The results of the NRC examination of Module 22 is the subject of l
a separate report.
i 8.
Section 8.0 - Program Assessments / Conclusions--The summary of l
corrective actions presented in Module 6, Section 8.0, was examined,
!
and the current status was determined.
The report of pending actions was verified with information contained in the earlier l
sections of the Module.
The certifications and mini-resumes did l
not conflict with information contained elsewhere in the Module.
l The section did not have an introductory statement to define the
!
significance of its contents.
!
I
.
.
r
.
b.
General Conclusions The examination performed by the NRC indicated that GPC management supported the Readiness Review by active participation and adequate resources. No evidence of coercion or attempt to dilute either the effort or the findings was disclosed. The RRT displayed the requisite competence and professionalism for a review of tnis nature.
The licensee's program was comprehensive and provided adequate assurance that the plant electrical equipment will perform in accord with NRC requirements and FSAR commitments.
The foregoing evaluation comments do not appear to represent significant programmatic weakness provided that the licensee response is sufficient to enable closure for all related and currently open NRC items for Vogtle Unit 1.
The NRC concludes that the GPC program for electrical equipment complies with the NRC requirements and FSAR commitments.
This conclusion is based on information currently available to the NRC inspectors and reviewers.
Should subsequent contradictory information become available, it will be evaluated to determine its effect on the above conclusion.
6.
References (1) Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Unit 1, Module 6, Electrical Equipment.
(2) March 19, 1986, letter from D. O. Foster, Vice President and Project General Manager, Vogtle Project, Georgia Power Company forwarding Module 6 to the NRC for evaluatio.-
-
._
_ ~ _ -
__
.
TABLE I C000 TITE NT VERIFICATION Verified Verified Conenitoent Conesitoent Ftrst order Second Order Ref No.
Source Section Consmitment Sub. ject Document Feature Document Document
FSAR 8.1.4.3 Design Criteria, Regulatory Guides and IEEE Standards.
10 CFR 50. App. A, GDC 5 Yes Sharing of structures, systems and components.
,y
FSAR 8.1.4.3 Design Criteria, Regulatory Guides and IEEE Standards.
RG 1.22 Yes
+
'A
-
Periodic testing of Protection System Actuation
'
Functions.
ISAR 8.1.4.3 Design Criteria, Regulatory Guides and IEEE Standards RG 1.30 Yes Quality Assurance requirements for the installation, inspection, and testing of instrumentation and electrical equipment.
IR F SAR 8.1.4.3 Design Criteria, Regulatory Guides and IEEE Standards.
RG 1.75 Yes Yes Physical independence of electrical systems.
F SAR 8.l.4.3 Design Criteria, Regulatney Guides and IEEE Standards.
IEEE 336-1971 Yes Installation, inspection and testing requirements during construction.
F SAR 8.1.4.3 Design Criteria, Regulatory Guides and IEEE Standards.
IEEE 384-1974 Yes Yes (Note 2)
Criteria for independence of Class IE equipment and circuits.
,y ca
ISAR 8.2.1.1 Offsite sources ANSI C2 Note 1
FSAR 8.2.2.4 Conformance to criteria (preferred electric power 10 CFR 50, App. A. GDC 17 Yes sources).
FSAR 8.2.2.5 Standards and Guides. General requirements for ANSI C57.12.00-1973 Yes distribution, power, regulating transformers, and shunt reactors.
FSAR 8.3.1.1 Design Criteria for Class IE Equipment.
F SAR 8.3.1.1 Design Criteria for Class IE Equipment. Low voltage ANSI C37.13-1973 Yes or power circuit breakers used in enclosures.
FSAR R.3.1.1 Design Criteria for Class IE Equipment.
NEMA AB1-1975
FSAR 8.3.1.1 Residual heat removal isolation valve power supply.
IEEE 323-1974 Yes 981 FSAR 3.7.8.1.3 Seismic damping values.
3.8.2.4 Electrical penetration asseelles.
ASE III, NE3000,1977 Yes Yes through Sunener 1979 Addenda
.
.-
t
- _
-
.
TABLE 1 (continued)
CopMITM NT VERIFICATION Verified Verified First Order Second Order Commitment Commitment Ref No.
Source Section Commitment Subject Document Feature Document Document 1213 FSAR 3.10.8.2.2 Means of seismic qualification testing by multi-freq.
RG 1.100 Yes or single-freq. inputs.
1217 FSAR 3.10.8.2.2.3 Method of qualification of Class IE equipment.
IEEE 344-1975. Sect. 7 Yes
Combined analysis and testing.
1253 FSAR 3.11.8.1-2 80P EQDP sunsury-qual. sequence. Electric penetration IEEE 317 (daughter std.)
assenhlies in containment structures.
1269 F SAR 3.11.8.2 Environmental qualification tests and analysis.
NUREG-0588 Yes 1552 F5AR I.9.53 Application of single-failure criteria to protection IEEE 379-1972 Yes system.
1553 ISAR 1.9.53 Application of single-f ailure criteria to protection IEEE 279-1971. Sett. 4.2 Yes systems.
1601 FSAR I.9.6 Independence between redundant standby (on-site)
RG I.60 Yes Yes sources and their distribution systems.
2188 FSAR 1.9.Gl Damping values for seismic design.
RG 1.61 Yes
$
2372 FSAR 8.1-1 Acceptance criteria / guidelines for shared emergency RG 1.81 Yes and shutdown electric systems.
2382 FSAR 8.1-1 Acceptance criteria / guidelines for electric power 8fP IC58 21 Yes systems.
2383 F5AR 8.1-1 Acceptance criteria / guidelines for electric power BIP P58-1 Yes systems.
4114 F SAR 3.1.1 Conformance with Nuclear Regulatory Commission General 10 CFR 50. App. A. GDC 2 Yes Design Criteria. Design basis for protection against natural phenomena.
4280 NRC Quest.
Q 430.64 MOV OL Protection per RG Pos. CI(a).
RG l.IO6 Yes Corres.
4310 NRC Quest. Q 420.10 Guide for switchgear with standard capability tests.
IEEE 472-1983 Yes
%
..
.
. _. _. _ _. -.. _
__
_. _.... _. _.. _ _
.___ _ ___..
___.-
__. _ _. _ _ -. -. _ _ _ _. - _
_
. _ - __.. ____.
_s
.. _. _
_
-
.
.a TABLE I (continued)
!
COIelliMNT VERIFICATION
.
!
.
Verified Vertfled
)
Conaltaent Com itaent First Order Second order I
Ref No.
Source Section Commitment subject Document Feature Document Document i
'
I 4824 FSAR 8.3.2.1 125 V de safety features for Class IE power systems.
IEEE 308 Yes I
4839 FSAR 8.3.2.1 125 V dc power system--charger voltage tolerance.
IEEE 450-1915 Ves
,
,
5020 IEB corres. C-77/11/11 Westinghouse type AR relay.
No Idestinghouse type Yes
"AR* relays util be
',,,"i
'
,
'
used in the B.O.P.
safety circuits i
!
holL5:
1.
A proper first orcer Commitment verification Could not be accomplished for Commitment 31. See Section 3.g(2)(a) for more details.
l l
7.
See Section 3.g(5) for a listing of typographical errors.
i, t
,
.
d i
m
l
!
!
l
"
,
i
!
.
f'
I
$
'
a
i t
,
l I
i
l
t
.
J
,
..
!
-
t i
n i
.
t; i
,
._
,
,
.
.
.
.
.,p.
eV TABLE 2
-
VERIFICATION AND WALKDOWN LIST FOR ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT Equipment Category Tag Number Description RRT NRC Switchgear 1-1804-53-A02 4160 V Switchgear 1AA02
/
/
1-1805-S3-B05 480 V Switchgear IAB05
/
1-1805-S3-804 480 V Switchgear IAB04
/
Motor Control 1-1805-S3-ABA 480 V Motor Control Center 1ABA
/
/
Inverter 1-1807-Y3-182 120 V Vital AC Inverter 18D1I2
/
1AD1Il
/
-
Batteries 1-1806-B3-BYD 125 V de Battery 1001B
/
'
1AD1B
/
,'
Battery Pack 1-1806-83-RYD Battery Pack for 10D18
/
Chargers 1-1806-83-CBB 125 V dc Battery Charger IBD1CB
/
1ADICB
/
Transformers 1-1807-Y3-04 Regulated Transformer IBBC09X
/
Area Termination 1-1601-03-727
/
Panel
Cable Bus 1-1804-W3-CB700
/
t a
.
I
!
!
I
'
u
--
,
~
.
.
~
TABLE 3
~
VERIFICATION AND WALKDOWN LIST FOR PENETRATION i
Equipment Tag Number Service Class RRT NRC*
1-1818-H3-P04 Low Voltage Power
/
1-1818-H3-P07 Control
/
.
,
1-1818-H3-P08 Medium Voltage (13.8 kV) Power
/
/
1-18181-H3-P11 Low Voltage Control / Instrument
/
1-1818-H3-P13 Medium Voltage Power
/
-
1-1818-H3-P15 Instrumentation
/
[.
,
1-1818-H3-P16 Low Voltage Control / Instrument
/
1-1818-H3-P19 Instrumentation
/
1-1818-H3-P53 Low Voltage Power
/
1-1818-H3-P69 Low Voltage Control / Instrument
/
A construction document review was completed by the NRC inspectors for
i.
these penetrations.
,
I l
i i
-
.
%
TABLE 4 TYP0 GRAPHICAL CORRECTIONS TO TABLE 6.1-1 COMMITMENT 35
,
The following is a corrected listing for the right hand four columns of Table 6.1-1, pages 11, 12, and 13.
Design Document Design Criteria Control Number Type Number Comments DC-1000-E, rev. 5, 4/3/84 Equip.
IX2001J013, rev. 10 Drawings were reviewed DC-1804, rev. 4, 9/14/83 loca-IX4DE313, rev. 8 per Figure 6.1-6 check DC-1805, rev. 4, 9/23/83 tion IX4DE322, rev. 11 list for compliance with DC-1806, rev. 4, 12/12/80 draw-AX5D52A02, rev. 6 IEEE 384 separation DC-1807, rev. 2, 4/18/83 ings.
requirements.
See DC-1816, rev. 2, 3/6/84 Finding 6-64.
DC-1821, rev. 5, 5/2/83 DC-1823, rev. 3, 2/3/84 Pro-X3AA04, rev. 9, p 2 Design criteria and cure-X3AC02, rev. 9, p 2 procurement specific-ment X3AD01, rev. 5, p 2 cations were reviewed to specs.
X3AE06, rev. 3, p 2 verify reference to and X3AF01, rev. 8, p 2 implementation of IEEE X3AQ03, rev. 4, p 2 384.
See Findings 6-60 and 6-61.
IX4DJ2116, rev. 9 Reviewed equipment AX4DJ2101, rev. 9 location, piping, IX4DJ2109, rev. 11 architectural, civil /
IX4DJ2103, rev. 13 structural, HVAC, and IX4DJ2110, rev. 5 conduit and tray drawings IX4DJ4115, rev. 8 to verify that equipment AX4DJ2107, rev. 10 was not subjected to the effects of pipe breaks, or seismic and flood hazards.
Piping IX4DL2F02, rev. 9 draw-IX4DL2A04, rev. 6 ings.
IX4DL2802, rev. 5 IX4DL4803, rev. 8 IX4DL4804, rev. 7 IX4DL2A00, rev. 8
r
.
-
...
~
.
4.
. _
-
American Institute of Steel Construction
',.
.
-
American Iron and Steel Institute r
,
ANSI
-
American National Standards Institute American. Society of Mechanical Engineers.
-
..
'
Balance of Plant B0P
-
BPC
-
Bechtel Power Co,mpany, Western Power Division
.
Branch Techiiical Position
-
-
,
Change Co.ntro,1< Packages CCP
-
_ :~-.
USNRC, Code.cf Feder'ai Regulttions CFR
-
Construction Specification Change Notices CSCN
-
,
'
Design Criteria (Bechtel)
-
_
,
Design Control Check List
,',
DCCL
-
Drawing Change Notices DCN
-
Design Document Register DDR
-
Deficiency Evaluation Raport DER
-
'
Deficiency Items DI
-
Design Manual DM
-
Design Manual Changes' Notices DMCN
-
'
Deviation Report DR
-
Document Review Notice DRN
-
,
Design Verification Review DVP
-
Equipment Change Approsal ECA
-
-
Elementary Drawings ED
-
EQDP
-
Equipment Qualification Data' Package
,
j i
".
.
-
FCR
-
Field Change Request FEC0
-
Field Equipment Change Orders
.
-
Failure Mode and Effect Analysis FSAR
-
Final Safety Analysis Report FSRB
-
(on DR)
l GDC
-
General Design Criteria [ contained in 10 CFR 50, App. A Georgia Power Company GPC
-
HOE
-
BPC, Home Office Engineering IDR
-
Independent Design Review
{
(
-
NRC, Office of Inspection and Enforcement IEB
-
Inspection and Enforcement Bulletin IEEE
-
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
IFI
-
Inspector Followup Items INP0
-
Institute of Nuclear Power Operations MCC
-
Motor Control Center NEC
-
National Electrical Code, ANSI-C1, NFPA-70 NEMA
-
National Electrical Manufacturers Association NESC
-
National Electrical Safety Code, ANSI-C2 NRC
-
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRR
-
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation NSSS
-
Nuclear Steam Supply System
1 PRM
-
BPC, VEGP, Project Reference Manual PSAR
-
Preliminary Safety Analysis Report QA
-
Quality Assurance QC
-
Quality Control i
.
.
-
Regulatory Guide RIR
-
Readiness Information Request RRF
-
Readiness Review Finding RRT
-
Readiness Review Team SCS
-
Southern Company Services, Inc.
SDDR
-
Supplier Deviation Disposition Requests SER
-
Safety Evaluation Report SQVDL-D -
Suppliers Quality Verification Documental List--Detailed SRP
-
Standard Review Plan URI
-
Unresolved Items VEGP
-
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant