IR 05000424/1990003
| ML20006G130 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 02/14/1990 |
| From: | Jape F, Matt Thomas NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20006G129 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-424-90-03, 50-424-90-3, 50-425-90-03, 50-425-90-3, NUDOCS 9003050119 | |
| Download: ML20006G130 (8) | |
Text
'
>
..
a.'_ ! 'a f'
-
- UNITED ST ATES j/pa Mo q'o -
101 MARIETTA STREET,N.W.
-
n o
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,,t REolONil
'
'-
l
.g
= g ATLANT A, GEORGI A 30323
.*
's
%.. - [
- Report Nos.: 50-424/90-03 and 50-425/90-03 Licensee: Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 1295
' Birmingham, AL 35201 Docket Nos.: 50-424 and.50-425.
License Nos.: NPF-68 and CPPR-109 Facility Name: Vogtle 1 and 2
- Inspection Conducted: January 22-26, 1990 Inspector:
k A > bs M-/M-96 M.- Thombs'
O Date Signed r52 /'// [8 kpproved'by:
_
4+t
~
Date Signed F. Jape, Section Chief
/
-Quality Performance Section(/
Operations Branch Division-of Reactor Safety
'
SUMMARY Scope:
-This routine, unannounced inspection was conducted in the areas of QA for the-startup test program (Unit 2); document control (Unit 2); and design changes andmodifications(Units 1and2).
Results:.
In: the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not. identified.
The-
- audits and evaluations' of startup activities performed by the SAER group were thorough ' and = detailed.
The audit reports reviewed indicate that the SAER
. group is agressive in identifying problems.
During the review of document control activities the inspector identified weaknesses concerning updating controlled drawings in the TSC, and measures for tracking safety evaluations performed for procedures and/or revisions that are transmitted to the SRB for review.=.The administrative controls for the design change program are considered good.
A weakness was identified during review of MDDs concerning
' the amount of detail provided in the safety evaluations performed for some of the MDDs reviewed.
The weaknesses concerning updating controlled drawings and
= the level of detail for safety evaluations were identified in audits prior to this inspection by the SAER.
-
9003050119 900214 D
PDR ADOCK 05000424 P
O PDC i?
i
-- -
_-_-___ -
'
..
[
,.
.;
,
.
.
..
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- J. Aufdenkampe, Technical Support Manager
- H Beacher, Senior Plant Engineer
- G. Bockhold, General Manager Nuclear Plant Vogtle
- J. Cash,OpeiationsSuperintendent(Unit 2)
C. Dixon, Senior Clerk, Document Control i
R. Folker. QA Engineering Support Supervisor I
- G. Frederick, Safety Audit and Engineering Review Supervisor
- M. Horton,, Engineering Support Manager
- W. Kitchens, Assistant General Manager Plant Operations i
L. Mansfield, Plant Engineering Supervisor
- G.. McCarley, Independent Safety Engineering Group Supervisor
- A.'Mosbaugh, Assistant General Manager Plant Support
R. Moye, Plant Engineering Supervisor Electrical
- B. Quick, Document Control Supervisor i
T. Webb, Senior Plant Engineer Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included j
engineers, operators, technicians, and administrative personnel, i
i NRC Resident Inspectors i
- R. Aiello, Senior Resident Inspector (Acting)
'
- R. Starkey, Resident Inspector
!
- Attended exit interview 1=
QA:fortheStartupTestProgram(35501)-Unit 2
!
The inspector reviewed selected QA audits and evaluations performed i
during Unit 2 startup -test-activities in order to ascertain whether the j
licensee's QA program which covers operational activities was implemented.
for the startup and power ascension test program. The audit reports were
reviewed to determine'if they were performed in accordance with the QA program and to assure that identified deficiencies have been resolved.
The following audit reports were reviewed.
OP09-89/03, QA Audit of Surveillance Program / Technical-Specifications Compliance, February 1, 1989 OP26-89/04, QA Audit of System / Area Turnovers, February 3,1989
!
OP18-89/06, QA Audit of-Unit 2 Procedure Control / Review, February 6, 1989 i
i
,
-
s
.
[....
-'
'-
.
-
.
E
OP08-89/07, QA Audit of Quality Control (Units 1 and 2), February 27, 1989 OP16-89/08, QA Audit of Fuel Handling and Special Nuclear Material Control (Unit 2 Initial Fuel Load), March 6,1989
OP19-89/13 QA Audit of Records Management and Document Control-Records
,
- Turnover, April 3,1989
'
OP10-89/14. - QA Audit of Measuring and Test Equipment, -(Units. I and 2)
April 7,1989
,
OP20-89/17, QA Audit of Fire Protection Program, April 7,1989 OP15-89/19, QA Audit of Maintenance Program (Units 1 and 2), May 5, 1989
,
OP02-89/20, QA Audit of Health Physics and Radiation Protection, May 3, 1989 OP07.-89/23, QA Audit of Materials' Control (Units 1 and 2), May 18, 1989 OP06-89/26.- QA Audit of Reactor and Plant Operations (Units 1 and 2),
June 7, 1989
OP13-89/27,. QA Audit of Design Char,ge and Plant Modification Control (Units 1 and 2), June 13, 1989 In addition to the above audits, the inspector also reviewed the following audits which were performed subsequent to completion of the startup and power ascension test program, but involved activities reviewed by the inspector during this inspection.
OP19-89/33, QA Audit of Document Control and ' Records Management, August 9, 1989 OP13-89/49, QA Audit of Design Change and Plant Modification Control, December 6, 1989 OP19-89/55, QA Audit of Records-Management and Document Control, December 28, 1989 OP13-89/60, Special QA, Audit of Temporary Modification Program, December 13, 1989 In addition to performing the audits listed above during the startup test i
program, the SAER group also performed over 75 Quality Assurance Activity Evaluations during the Unit 2 startup and power ascension test program.
The ~QA activity evaluations were performed in accordance with the QA Evaluation Plan for Unit 2 Startup Testing Program (Initial Fuel Load through Power Ascension Testing) dated February 2,1989.
The inspector reviewed the following QA activity evaluation reports.
A0E-89-61, Entry to Mode 4 Heatup to 250 Degrees F, March 4,1989
s,
,
~j ;
.
-
...
L'-
?
.
.
'
A0E-89-68. Heatup and Initial Mode 3 Entry in Accordance with VEGP
_,_ "
12002-C, March 14, 1989
.
A0E-89-103, Operations.from Remote Shutdown Panels, April 12, 1989
$
A0E-89-105, Loss of Offsite Power Test at Greater Than 10 percent Power April 17, 1989 A0E-89-133, Large Load Reduction Test from 78 percent Reactor Power, May 11, 1989 There were no adverse findings identified in the QA activity evaluations
reviewed.
The inspector reviewed selected audit findings and the associated responses to determine if the findings were resolved.
The
inspector determined that acceptable responses had been received and the audit findings had either been closed or were awaiting implementation of
. proposed corrective actions prior to closure.
Based on review of the above audit reports and QA activity evaluations, the inspector determined that the-QA activity provided a thorough review of activities and major evolutions performed during the startup and power ascension. test program.
There were no violations or deviations identified in the areas inspected.
2.
DocumentControl(35742)-Unit 2 The inspector reviewed document control _ activities to verify implementation of the document control program.
This review included selected controlled drawings, procedures, and documentation associated
with design changes issued by the document control section to various locations in-the plant.
The drawings listed below were reviewed in the
-
Unit 2 MCR, clearance and tagging office, TSC, and the engineering
'
support office to determine if the revisions were consistent with the document control office records.
2X4DB111, Rev.17, Reactor Coolant System 2X4DB112, Rev. 20, Reactor Coolant System 2X4DB118, Rev. 12 Chemical and Volume Control System 2X4DB121, Rev. 28, Safety Injection System 2X4DB122 Rev. 23. Residual Heat Removal System
-
AX4DB123-1, Rev. 31, Boron Recycle System 2X4DB133-1, Rev. 25, Nuclear Service Cooling Water System
.
-
2X4DB136, Rev. 15, Component Cooling Water System 2X4DB140, Rev.~21 Nuclear Sampling System - Liquid 2X4DB160-1, Rev. 12, Main Steam System 2X4DB161-2, Rev. 20, Auxiliary Feedwater System 2X4DB168-1, Rev. 12, Condensate and Feedwater System While reviewing the drawings, the inspector noted that drawing 2X4DB160-1 was a Rev.11 in the TSC rather than Rev.12.
Actions to replace the drawing'with the correct revision were taken by the license.
-.
..}
'
y;
,
,
.
,
b This -discrepancy was discussed with the document control supervisor who stated that the drawings in the TSC are normally updated once or twice a
-
week because of 'their. infrequent use.
During further review of this item, the inspector found that drawing legibility and incorrect revisions
.
had been previously identified by the NRC resident inspectors and~ the licensee's SAER group.
Licensee personnel stated that they were still in
,
the process of responding to the previous findings and developing
appropriate corrective actions.
The inspector considers this drawing
,
discrepancy to be another example of a problem previously identified and corrective actions are being taken.
The inspector reviewed controlled copies of the procedures listed below to determine if the revisions in Engineering Support Department were consistent with the Document Control records.
The following procedures were reviewed.
0056-C, Rev. 9. Safety and Environmental Evaluations 00307.-C, Rev. 6. Temporary Modifications 00400-C, Rev. 10, plant Design Control 50004-C, Rev. 3, Certification of Engineering Support Department Qualified Reviewers 50016-C Rev. O Minor Departure from Design (MOD)
g
.
' The inspector did not identify any revision discrepancies between the
'
Engineering Support Department and Document Control.
While reviewing other document control department activities.-the inspector noted that all safety evaluations are required to be transmitted
'
to the SRB for review.
The inspector reviewed implementation of this document control function and found that the safety evaluations were being i
transmitted to the SRB, The inspector did note one minor weakness where-
!
there was no formal mechanism for transmitting or tracking safety-l evaluations performed for procedure changes and/or revisions that were
'
J transmitted. to the SRB.
This weakness was identified to the document control supervisor who took immediate actions to establish controls to j
track and transmit safety evaluations performed for procedures that are i
sent to the SRB.
No. violations or deviations were identified in the areas inspected.
3.
DesignChangesandModifications(35744,37700)-Units 1and2 i
The inspector reviewed the DCPs and MDDs listed below to verify that the safety evaluations performed in connection with the design changes were
technically adequate; the design changes were field verified (where
>X possible) to ensure installation was in accordance with applicable design documents; and post modification test requirements and test acceptance criteria were specifie n
,c
,
/Ym
,.
?
.
,
a.
DCP'- 89-V2E0008, Rev. O, Unit 2, CBCR Emergency HVAC System, Flow Switch 2FSL-12045.
This design change revised the setpoint of the
flow switch so it would trip within 30 seconds of starting the train
_
L B control room emergency fan.
The flow switch setpoint was changed and tes.ted under TMR 2-89-008.-
This DCP made the temporary-modification a permanent change.
b.
'DCP 89-V2E0009, Rev. O, Unit 2, Vibration Damper for NSCW Transfer Pumps. _ This DCP involved adding supports to NSCW transfer pumps -
2-1202-P4-007 and 2-1202-P4-008 in order to reduce the vibration levels of the pumps.
,
c.-
_MDD 89-V2M011, Rev. O, Unit 2, Addition of One Lanyard to Pressuizer Surge Line.
This MDD involved installing an additional lanyard in order to monitor snubber movement of hanger V2-1201-053-H006 which was revised to_ meet the requirements of NRC IEB 88-11.
d.
MDD 89-V2M039, Rev. O, Unit 2, Remove Boric Acid Input to the SSMP.
l This MDD involved removal of the indication from the' control switch of the boric acid transfer pumps on the SSMP.
This change was made j
based on engineering's review of NRC bulletin IEB 88-04.
e.-
MDD 89-V2M041, Rev. O, Unit 2, Transfer Switch 2HS-5106C Contact.
!
Exchange.
This MDD involved utilization of a spare contact in place of the original contact on transfer switch 2HS-5106C which was found faulty. -The contact provides positive potential for control and indication when the switch is in the control room position.
This
'MDD closed TMR-2-89-013 which installed and tested the modification.
f.
-MDD 88-V1M013, Rev. O, Unit 1, 125 VDC Setpoint Changes. This MDD involved changing battery breakers and panel feeder breakers - time i
delay setting to provide proper coordination for. the 125 VDC Class
IE circuit breakers.
j i
i g.
MDD 89-V1M005, Rev. O, Unit 1, Change Wiring to D/G Voltage Balance j
Relay. This MDD involved changing the wiring of the relays such that phase A and phase C are exchanged. This MDD replaces TMR 1-88-030.
- h.
MDD 89-V1M020, Rev. O, Unit 1 Revise Breakers in AFW System from
)
15A>to 30A.
This MDD involved changing breakers ICD 1M01, 02, 03, i
c 04, 05 from 15A thermal magnetic breakers to 30A thermal magnetic
breakers.
Per Design Criteria 1823, the thermal magnetic breakers m
p".
for the 125 VDC MCC M0Vs should be sized 2.5 times the full load
.
current.
1.
MDD 89-V1M029, Rev. O, tinit 1, NSCW A Tower Spray Valve IHV-1668A.
This MDD involved replacing the torque switch in order for valve
1HV-1668A to open to the required position.
The previous torque switch had a #2 limiter plate with the valve set at the maximum valve of 2.
The present torque switch has a #3 limiter plate which allows the valve to be set at a value of 3.
>
,
p D
T
!
,
, + _.
.
....
-
,
,
g
,
?
j.
MDD 89-V1M065. Rev. O, Unit 1, RWST Modification to Reduce Leakage.
This MDD-involved threading the RWST sample connection and adding a cap; revising the RWST seismic floor joint to prevent leakage from the room; and adding a curb inside the RWST valve room to prevent leakage from the room.
,
The inspector reviewed the licensee's administrative controls for
handling design changes and considered the controls to be good.
"
T There is involvement by the Engineering Support Department throughout-the design change process for DCPs, MDDs, and TMRs.
DCPs are prepared by the A/E (SCS,.Bechtel).
MDDs and THRs are prepared on site by the Engineering Support Department.
In addition.to being approved by-the Engineering Support Manager, all safety related MDDs are approved by-the PRB prior to implementation.
While reviewing the above MDDs, the inspector observed a weakness-
-
where some of.the safety evaluations performed did not provide an adequate -level of detail to support the "yes" or "no".onswers checked on the safety evaluation forms.
During further review and
_'
discussion of this concern, the inspector found that this concern, as well as others regading the MDD program, had been identified by the SAER -group during an audit of the MDD program (audit report OP13-89/49).
The Engineering Support Department is in the process of developing corrective actions in response to the QA audit findings..
The inspector noted that the-above MDDs-were implemented prior to the QA' audit and prior to Revision 9 to procedure 00056-C, which provided additional guidance and enhancement for the safety evaluations prepared by the Engineering Support Department.
The inspector will review-the corrective actions and further implementation of the MDD -
program during subsequent inspections.
No violations or deviations were identified in the areas inspected.
'
4.
- Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on January 26, 1990, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1.
The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results.
Proprietary information is not contained in this report.
Dissenting comments were not received from the licensee.
5.
Acronyms and Initialisms A
Amperes A/E-Architect Engineer i
CBCR Control Building Control Room l
DCP Design Change Package
!
D/G Diesel Generator L
HVAC Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning L
IEB Inspection and Enforcement Bulletin MCC Motor Control Center l
-. -
-
-
-
-
-
-....!~
.;c -
,
'
.
...
,
MCR Main Control Room MDD-Minor _ Departure-from Design MOV.
Motor Operated Valve NSCW Nuclear Service Cooling Water PRB Plant Review Board QA Quality Assurance Rev.
Revision RWST.
Refueling Water Storage Tank SAER Safety Audit and Engineering Review SCS Southern Company Services SRB Safety Review Board SSMP System Status Monitor Panel-TMR Temporary Modification Request TSC Technical Support Center
,
VDC Volts Direct Current.
VEGP Vogtle Electric Generating Plant
__.
... _ _
_ _ - - - - -- - - - - - -- ------ - ~ - ~
-~
~