IR 05000460/1985001
| ML20127J326 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Satsop, Washington Public Power Supply System |
| Issue date: | 06/06/1985 |
| From: | Dodds R, Kirsch D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20127J317 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-460-85-01-MM, 50-460-85-1-MM, 50-508-85-01, 50-508-85-1, NUDOCS 8506260554 | |
| Download: ML20127J326 (21) | |
Text
_
.--.__......- - -.
i.
-
-
'
l l
!
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION s
REGION V
Report Nos:
50-460/85-01 and 50-508/85-01
- Docket Nos:
50-460/and 50-508 Construction Permit No: CPPR-134 and CPPR-154 Licensee:
Washington Public Power Supply System 3000 George. Washington Way Richaland, Washington'
99352
-
Facility Names:
Washington Nuclear Projects 1 and 3 Meeting at:
Region V, Walnut Creek, California Date:
Ma,y 22, 1985 Prepared by:
l^
R. T. Dodds,4hief, Reactor Projcet, Section 1
@at( Signed Approved by:
.k
~d4I[
. F. Kirlich,- Acting Director, Division Reactor Irat( Signed l
Safety & Projects Summary:
Meeting on May 22, 1985, to discuss the Supply System proposed readiness review program for Phase I for the subject facilities, including the l -
preservation program for Unit 3.
l
,
I i
l 8506260554 850607 PDR ADOCK 05000460
0 PDR i
\\
'
,
';
J
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-
,
.
.
,
Details l.
Personnel Attending Meeting
'
RV-NRC D. F. Kirsch, Acting Director, DRSP R. T. Dodds, Chief, Reactor Project Section 1 NRR-NRC F. J. Miraglia, Deputy Director of Licensing T. S. Michaels, Project Manager IE-NRC G. T. Ankrum, Chief, Quality Assurance Branch W. M. Hill, Sr. Engineer, Quality Assurance Branch WPPSS R. B. Glasscock, Director, Licensing and Assurance L. J. Garvin, Manager, Construction Quality Assurance D. I. Hulbert, Assistant Program Director, Engineering 2.
General The Supply System's January 31, 1985, letter to Region V outlined a proposal for a series of Readiness Reviews at the WNP-1 and WNP-3 projects. The Supply System has met with members of the staff of Region V, the Office of Inspection and Enforcement and most recently with members of both the NRR and I&E offices. The topics of discussion included the future of the delayed projects, preservation plans and how the Supply System plans to implement the Readiness Review concept during the construction delays and after construction resumes.
In a March 20, 1985, letter the Supply System provided Region V and members of the staffs of NRR and I&E with a commitment to complete the delayed projects and to complete the Readiness Reviews, along with an outline of the schedule for Phase Ilof the Readiness Review.
Phase I, for WNP-3, will begin approximately July 1, 1985, and be
'
complete prior to resumption of construction. This phase of the reviews would focus on the des'an and construction completed to date.
It would assess the design and construction processes and sample the products of both processes so that conclusions can be drawn about the adequacy of the completed work. Phase I of the Readiness Review process for WNP-1 will begin after the Supply System has gained experience from the performance of reviews at WNP-3.
Phase II of the Readiness Reviews will begin following resumption of construction and will include all aspects of new or changed design and construction, and readiness for operations. The goal of. Phase II will be to give additional assurance that the projects are ready to operate by
_____________ _ _ _ -
.
.
-2-conducting a series of reviews that address the adequacy of the design and the design construction processes used to compete the projects.
Closely related to the Readiness Review, which affirms adequacy of design and construction, is the program used to control preservation of equipment and structures at the delayed projects.
In mid-April, 1985, the Supply System submitted a working copy of the Preservation Program in effect at WNP-3 to Region V for review prior to meeting with Region V and other concerned NRC offices. Following the meeting the Supply System will formally submit the Preservation Program for NRC review and approval.
Since March, 1985, regional power planning has progressed with indications that both WNP-3 and WNP-1 are still being considered a potential future power source, and both projects remain a cost effective source of power. According to the licensee, all indications are that the projects will be completed.
As discussed above, the Supply System has been implementing a Preservation Program and is totally committed to perform a series of Readiness Reviews at the delayed projects. The results of these programs will enable the Supply System to finish construction and bring both projects to successful operation status. The Supply System is requesting that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission agree to review the program descriptions of the Readiness Reviews at WNP-3 and WNP-1 for approval, agree to participate in the Readiness Review at WNP-3 and WNP-1, and review the Preservation Program Description for approval.
Attached is a copy of the slides used by the licensee during the presentation of the proposed program.
The licensee agreed that the first order of business will be to formally submit the Preservation Program and Design Review Program to the NRC for review.
.
L
.
.
.
.
READINESS REVIEW PROGRAM WHAT IS IT:
,
e A SERIES OF REVIEWS TO ASSESS THE ADEQUACY OF AN ACTIVITY.
e FOR THE SUPPLY SYSTEM THE SERIES OF REVIEWS ENCOMPASS THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ALL ASPECTS OF DESIGN. CONSTRUCTION AND PREPARATION FOR OPERATIONS.
e PROGRAM HAS SUPPLY SYSTEM MANAGEMENT INVOLVEMENT.
ALONG WITH NRC PARTICIPATIO.
.
.
.
i l
WHAT DOES THE PROGRAM ACCOMPLISH 7
.
.
e GIVES MANAGEMENT ADDITIONAL ASSURANCE THAT QUALITY-RELATED PROBLEMS HAVE BEEN DETECTED.
e PRO 6 RAM 6IVES CONFIDENCE AS THE WORK PROGRESSES.
e PRECLUDES SURPRISES AT THE END OF CONSTRUCTION.
,
<
!
-,.. -, - -_
-.. _...
. _ _.
. _ _. _. _., _ _ _ _..
_ _. _ _ _ _,,., _. _ _ _,, _,. _ _... _,,. _, _ _,.. _ _,, _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _,. _ _ _ _. _ _ _
_ _ _ _. _ _, _ _ _ _ _ _, _
_, _ _,. _.
_
.
.
.
.
l
!
!
i READINESS REVIEW PROGRAM GOALS
.
.
i e
WHEN A REVIEW IS COMPLETED AND ACCEPTED. ALL
.
ISSUES RELATED TO THAT SUBJECT WILL HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED AND ANSWERED.
t i
e FSAR AND SER QUESTIONS FINISHED.
!
i i
i
_ - -. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ - - -
9
CURRENT ACTIVITIES
,
,
e NO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY - SOME SMART WORK TO HELP PRESERVATION e
SOME DESIGN ON-GOING e
DESIGN STATUSING BEING CONDUCTED e
PRESERVATION PROGRAM IMPLEMENTED e
NO PREPARATION FOR OPERATION
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
.
SUPPLY SYSTEM READINESS REVIEW PROGRAM
,
SINCE OUR PROJECTS ARE NOT CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION,
.
OUR REVIEW PRO 6 RAM MUST BE DIVIDED INTO TWO PHASES.
e INITIAL PHASE TO BE ACCOMPLISHED BEFORE
-
RESUMPTION OF CONSTRUCTION.
e SECOND PHASE BEGINS FOLLOWING RESUMPTION
-
OF CONSTRUCTION AND IS COMPLETE BEFORE OPERATING LICENSE.
..
, _. _ - - - _ - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
.
.
.
-
,
r INITIAL PHASE
.
!
I e
REVIEW OF WORK COMPLETED TO DATE.
e FOCUS ON DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PROCESSES.
e SAMPLE PRODUCTS OF THESE PROCESSES AND DRAW CONCLUSIONS FROM THE RESULTS OF THE REVIEWS.
.
,
.
.
.
,
i DESIGN REVIEWS e
SELECT REVIEW TOPIC e
SELECT ITEMS FOR REVIEW BASED ON TOPIC. COMPLEXI-BILITY. RESOURCE AVAILABILITY. FEEDBACK FROM CONSTRUCTION REVIEW AND OTHER DESIGN REVIEWS.
.
.
DETERMINE LATEST "PR000CT" DOCUMENTS I
EXAMPLES:
DRAWINGS
-
LISTS (I.E.. INSTRUMENT. SETPOINT. ETC.)
-
VENDOR MANUALS
-
DESIGN REPORTS
-
PROCUREMENT / FABRICATION SPECIFICATIONS
-
UNINCORPORATED DESIGN CHANGE DOCUMENTS
-
e DETERMINE APPLICABLE CRITERIA / INPUT DOCUMENTS EXAMPLES:
i
'
LICENSING (SAR. QUESTIONS. POSITIONS. OTHER)
-
DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
'
-
CALCULATIONS
-
DTHER DESIGN BASES
-
VENDOR MANUALS
-
INTERFACE DOCUMENTS
-
I
,
STANDARDS. GUIDES
-
CODES
-
,
---y
. --
--
.-
m.--
, -
. - - - - - - - - - _ - -.. - - - - - ~, _
_ - - - -..,, - -. ~
. _ - - - - _ _ - -
,,
_
. _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
.
.
.
,
o PREPARE CHECKLISTS APPROPRIATE TO SUBJECTS.
SUCH AS:
APPLICABLE CRITERIA INCORPORATE 07
-
CORRECT DESIGN INPUT 7
-
VALIO ANALYTICAL N00ELS7
-
-
AS-BUILT FEEDBACK 7
DESIGN CHANGE CONTROL WORKING 7
-
EQUIPMENT CLASSIFICATION ADDRESSED PROPERLY 7
-
DESIGN DATA INTERFACE WORKIN67
-
SYSTEM INTERACTION CONSIDERED 7
-
DOCUMENT CONTROL WORKING 7
-
e REVIEWS WILL BE CONOUCTED BY GUALIFIED ENGINEERS THAT ARE INDEPENDENT OF THE ORIGINAL DESIGN.
e MANAGEMENT AND TEAM LEADERS lJR REVIEWS WILL BE CORPORATE (NON-PROJECT) ENGINEERS.
e TEAM LEADERS FOR REVIEWS WILL HAVE EXPERIENCE IN CONOUCTING OTHER SIMILAR REVIEW EFFORT.
.
.
'
l
,
i
,
e FINDINes DOCUMENTED
,
!
e MANAGEMENT REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF REsULTs
,
.
e FOLLOWue ACTIONITRACKING
-
-
DIRECTIVES
-
COMMITMENT TRACKING
-
e FEEosAcx TO SussEQUENT REVIEWS I
e REPORTS OF REVIEWS SusMITTED TO NRC FOR REVIEW /
APPROVAL.
i e
'
I
,
l
.
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
CONSTRUCTION REVIEW e
SAMPLE EACH CONTRACTORS WORK
.
.
e SAMPLE SIZE DEPENDENT ON NATURE AND AMOUNT OF WORK.
HISTORY OF CONTRACTOR AND THE RESULTS OF ANY SPECIAL PROGRAMS.
e REVIEW WILL CONSIST OF REINSPECTION /WALKDOWNS USING THE SAME CRITERIA AS USED FOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTIONS.
e WALKDOWNS INCLUDE DESIGN ENGINEERS -
TO ASSESS EFFECT OF OTHER CONSTRUCTION.
DEFICIENCIES WILL BE DOCUMENTED AND RESOLVED.
e THE NEED FOR INCREASED SAMPLING WILL BE BASED UPON THE NUMBER AND SIGNIFICANCE OF DEFICIENCIES.
u
--
--.-.------
-- -
..g.
-.s s
-
a mu..
a a
-
....
.
-
x
,
,
>
.
.
.
.,
.
-
,
.
..
,
,,
-
i N
'
s...
'
,
b
'
y., 3
,y J'
'
s
g a.
,
,
.
,
ht
.l y '
.
'
i
%.~
,
.
,
.
.
J,..
INITIALJPHASE -'G0AL
,
, _
t
.
N
"
.,
.
.
REVIEW.F0!t1CCEPTANCE.THEDESIGNd.ND, CONS.T,RUCTION
,
.,
,
%J
,
THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED'TO DATE.
THExRESULTS OF THE INITIAL PliASE WILL BE THE FIRST INCREMENTAL ACCEPTANCE.
.:
t OF THE PROJECT.
'O
.
's
-
J
,\\
'
s N-
,
,
%
,
.
\\
, _,%
o
i.F.
D q
,i g
%.
k
'
t
'.'
, $.\\,~.
.
,
..
>
-
?
,
>
' %
\\
s
!
^
l I
(
.
+
l
i-4
.
a 5,
+.
\\,
'
l
.
I l'
s.
<
r i
'
,b s
i
'
.
e
{
s aY - -
.
_
_
_
-
_
. _ _.
. - -
_ _ -.
- -
.
.
.
.
n PRESERVATION
.
.
e PRESERVATION PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN IN PLACE SINCE DELAY BEGAN.
e EQUIPMENT AND STRUCTURE CATEGORIZED BY ENGINEERING.
e PRESERVE AT ALL COSTS e
MINIMAL ATTENTION NEEDED e
LEFT AS IS
e EQUIPMENT GROUPED BY GENERIC TYPE.
e PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE WERE ESTABLISHED FOR GENERIC TYPE AND BASED ON THE EQUIPMENT'S CATEGORY.
.
h
.
.
.
.
e SPECIAL MAINTENANCE FOR EQUIPMENT WERE IDENTIFIED BY EXCEPTION TO THE GENERIC TYPE.
.
.
e THE PRESERVATION PROGRAM IS NOW IN PLACE AND IS BEING MONITORED FOR EFFECTIVENESS.
e ADDITIONALLY. THE SUPPLY SYSTEM HAS A CORROSION MONITORING PROGRAM ESTABLISHED AT EACH PROJECT TO FEED CHANGES TO THE PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS.
e WORKING COPY OF WNP-3 PRESERVATION PROGRAM SENT TO REGION V ON APRIL 26, 1985.
e REQUEST EARLY MEETING TO DISCUSS DETAILED COMMENTS.
. _.
-
_
---
_
..
..
.
.
.
.
SECOND PHASE COMPLETE THE READINESS REVIEW PROGRAMS
,
.
e REVIEWS WILL INCLUDE CONTROL SYSTEMS PUT IN PLACE BY CONTRACTORS AT THE RESTARTED PROJECTS.
,
e REVIEWS WILL INCLUDE ALL OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS AND PUNCH-LISTED ITEMS FROM THE INITIAL PHASE.
e REVIEWS WILL BE CONDUCTED TO INCREMENTALLY ACCEPT THE PROJECT WORK AS IT PROGRESSES TOWARD LICENSING AND FUEL LOAD.
e DETAILS OF THE SECOND PHASE WILL BE DISCUSSED l
BEFORE RESTART OF CONSTRUCTION.
e GDAL:
COMPLETION OF THE SERIES OF REVIEWS WILL RESULT IN AN SER WITH NO OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS.
l l
l l
,
-
,
-.
-,.
.
.
.
SCHEDULE
.
NEAR TERM (APPROXIMATE DATES)
.
WEEK OF MAY 27, 1985
-
SUBMIT DRAFT PROGRAM DESCRIPTION OF DESIGN PORTION OF READINESS REVIEW.
WEEK OF JUNE 10, 1985 MEETING TO DISCUSS:
-
o PRESERVATION PROGRAM e
DESIGN REVIEW WEEK OF JUNE 24, 1985 SUBMIT FINAL VERSION OF
-
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION OF l
DESIGN REVIEW WEET. OF JULY 1, 1985 SUBMIT FINAL VERSION OF
-
PRESERVATION PROGRAM
-
BEGIN IMPLEMENTATION OF DESIGN REVIEWS l
!
L
.
.
.
.
NEAR TERM SCHEDULE (CONTINUED)
WEEK OF JULY 22, 1985 MEETING TO DISCUSS:
-
e CONSTRUCTION REVIEW
,
PORTION OF READINESS REVIEWS WEEK OF AUG. 12, 1985
-
SUBMIT INITIAL DRAFT OF PROGRAM DESCRIPTION OF CONSTRUCTION REVIEW WEEK OF SEPT. 9, 1985 MEETING TO DISCUSS:
-
o COMMENTS ON CONSTRUCTION REVIEW PROGRAM DESCRIPTION WEEK OF SEPT. 30, 1985 SUBMIT FINAL VERSION OF
-
CONSTRUCTION REVIEW PROGPAM DESCRIPTION l
I WEEK OF JAN. 2. 1986
-
BEGIN IMPLEMENTATION OF CONSTRUCTION REVIEW
,
,
,
t
SCHEDULE LONG TERM
.
DESIGN REVIEW
JULY 1. 1985 START
-
FIRST REPORT TO NRC -
JANUARY. 1986 REVIEW REPORTS SUBMITTED TO NRC EVERY 3-4 MONTHS i
THEREAFTER.
CONSTRUCTION REVIEW START
-
JANUARY. 1986 r
FIRST REPORT TO NRC -
JULY 1986 REVIEW REPORTS SUBMITTED TO NRC EVERY 2-3 MONTHS l
THEREAFTER.
l'
.-
,
,
BUDGET 12a5 1216 128Z CALENDER
-
YEAR GIB1
_1_
_1_ _2_
4
_1_ _2_ _3_
DESIGN
5
6
6
6
6 REVIEW CONSTRUCTION
2
5
8
8
8 REVIEWS MANAGEMENT /
1
1
2
2
1 QA COSTS:
TRAVEL $K
15
12
9
9
9 NRC
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
...