ML17213B180

Suppl a to Independent Verification of Design & Const for St Lucie Unit 2 Nuclear Generating Station,Resolution of Discrepancies & Corrective Action Plans.

ML17213B180
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	03/31/1983
From:	FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML17213B181	List: ML17213B180 ML17301A027
References
NUDOCS 8303280090
Download: ML17213B180 (220)

Text

+~ ~

INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTIOh'OR ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 NUCLEAR GEh'ERATING STATION SUPPLEMENT A RZSOLUTIOh'F DISCREPANCIES AhD CORRECTIVE ACTION PLANS Prepared for FLORIDA POWER 6 LIGHT COMPANY kiARCH 1983

TABLE OF .CONTENTS CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION STEP PROCEDURE FOR RESOLUTION OF DISCREPANCIES, FIGURE 1 A SutPARY OF ACTIONS RESOLVING 84 DISCREPANCY "REPORTS CORRECTIVE ACTION PLANS Discrepancy No. EVP-U-14 Discrepancy No. UIR-46 Discrepancy No. UIR-47 Discrepancy tlo. UIR-48 Discrepancy No. UIR-49 Discrepancy'No. UIR-50 Discrepancy No. UIR-51 Discrepancy No. UIR-52

.L

<< ~

Ih'TRODUCTIOil Supplement' is issued to provide clarification of the review and decision p'rocess leading to resolution by corrective action, where required, of all Engineering Verifica-tion Program (EVP) Discrepancies.

Figure 1 is a step-by-step procedure demonstrating, in flow chart format, the process used for resolution of differences between the independent and existing design along with discrepancies noted in installation and testing of verifi-cation items. The six-step process shows how the EVP Task Force, assisted bv the Review Com=ittee and the St. Lucie Unit 2 Project Team, carried the program from design comparison through approval of corrective actions now under~ay.

A tabular summary of actions by the EVP Task Force, Review Committee and Project Team is included to provide a more basic description of the resolution process.

Included, as a supplement to Volume 3 of the Engineering Ver'fication Program Report (January 1983), are completed discrepancy reports for. the eight program observations. The P.oject Team in processing the observations has identified the corrective actions planned and/or completed. The Task Force has formally concurred with all corrective action plans.

P This additional information is provided in support of the EVP Task Force conclusion that the small number of observations (no findings) resulting from this extensive verification program confirm:

Design, procurement and construction is in accord with good engineering prac:i.cc.

Demonstrated product quality indicates the ef~octiveness of QA measures.

bo Generic process or procedural problems'af ecting plant safety vere detected.

I'x(iuRI," .l.

I'.HGLHI'.I'.RING Vf'.RI 'ATION I'1(OGIIA>l STI P PROCEDUII RI',SOI,UTXOH DF DISGR .xrs I'.NGxNvrl<IHG COMPARISON LIHI'. ITI ffs (l 296)

CoffPAI(ISON ITEHS RLSOLVED WITIIIH TASK I'ORCE (1212)

DOCUHrNTI'.n DxrFi:.REHcEs DXSCRI'?PANCY REPORTS (8')

RESOLVED Tlflfoucll ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION WITIIIH TIIE (~i 1) REQUIRI'.D DEVELOPS lENT TASK FORCE (17) .& TRANSHITTAL OF ADDITIONAI.

Tl.'CIINICAL INFORHATIOH DY RrHhxNIHG UNI(rsoLVED TIIE PROJECT TEAH [RESOLVED ArTrR ADDITIOHAI, PRO.IE( I',-;

wllrN rvp ThsK roRcr; coNcuRRrn] TEAII XNFOIPlATXON ACQU I Rl'.

(EIGIIT)

!uNRrsox,vrn WITIIXH RESOLVED TIIROUGII cf.Ass IFIEn TASK FORCE DxscvssxoH AHn CLAI<IFICATION As FIHDTHGS (67) WITIIIN 'I'IIE RI:.VIEW COHHITTEI'. (I8) (NoNr)

[Rl?CYCI.LD FOR TASK FORCI'. CONCURRI NCE)

(TWO) CORRECTIVE ACTION IIY CLASS IFXI?D AS PROJECT TI'.AH IS COHPI.ETE 0IIS I'.RVATIOHS

[TASK I'ORCE CONCURRENCF, To PROJrcr Tl;.Alf OIITAINEDj (VIGIIT)

CORRI?CTIVL ACTION PLANS IIAVI'?

RECEIVED .TASK FORCE COHCURRI'.HCI.

(sxx)

CORRI:.C I xvi'. A(:T ION P I'.HUT NG (SIX)

Page I of 22 A 5UMMARY OF ACTIONS OY Till:. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE AND I'lt03L'CT TEAM R ESOLVING B4 DISCREPANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITININ STATUS OY ASSIGNED OY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

EVP-U-I Resolved.

The Sl Tank Isol Valve was specilicd to f974 edition olASME III Code, a morc recent edition than specified by the independent design.

EVP-U-2 Unresolved.

Transmitted to review Resolved alter recycle with commit tec. additional information indi-cating marginal possibility ot valve submcrgcncc, llowcvcr valve is In open (sale) con-dition during maximum flooding.

EVP-U-3 Resolved.

Project max. speci lied valve opening time ls acceptable.

EVP-U-4 .Rcsolvcd.

Thc existing valve C is acceptable since it exceeds that specllicd by both Independent project design.

EVP-U-5 Unresolved.

Transmit tcd to review Resolved alter recycle EVP Task commit tcc. Force agrccd to cxaminc site operational test records lor liow and Delta p. Confirmed during field verilicatinn phase by task force.

II Page 2 of 22 A SUhtMARY OF ACTIONS BY,TIIE EVP TASK FORCE ItEVIEW COhlhTITTEE AND Plt03ECT TEAhl RL'5OLVING B4 DISCREI'ANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY ~

PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WiTiliN STATUS BY ASSIGNED BY ACTION PRCPOSLD CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMhllTTEE COh1htlTTEE PRO3ECT TEAh1 (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

EVP-U-6 Resolved.

The valve operator (actual) qualilication test cycles cxcccds'ndc-pendcnt spccilication numbers. Thc cquip-mcnt is, thcrcfore, acceptable as delivered.

EVP-U-7 Unresolved.

Transmit tcd to review Resolved alter recycle.

commit tee. Although the valves werc procured as duplicates ol St. Lucic ff I valves. Later vendor tests qualilicd tire Iimitorqrrc operator to meet gcncral standards for Class IE cquiprncnt.

EVP-U-B Unrcsolvcd Resolved af ter recycle.

Although thc valve operators werc not rcquircd (as originally pro-cured) to bc scisrnic qualified as II= equipment. Thc SQItT evaluation concluded scisrnic qualification.

II l

I 0

Page 3 ol 22 A SUhlMARY OF ACTIONS BY TIIE EVP TASK I.ORCE REVIEW COhlMITTEE AND Pit03ECT TEAhl RI!SOLVING 8't DISCREI'ANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCF REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITI IIN STATUS BY ASSIGNED BY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COhlhllTTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

I EVP-U-9 Unresol vcd.

Transmitted to review Resolved af ter recycle.

I commit tce. Although the existing valve design did not require diverse and redundant position indication it was concluded both designs assure thc plant can enter into cold shutdown I

I w/o overprcssurlzation.

EVP-U-IO Resolved:

Adequate number ol limit switches which are diverse and redundant are available.

EVP-U-I I Unrcsolvcd.

Transmitted to rcvicw Resolved after rccyclc by commit tee. correction ol sctpoint typo-graphical error to absolute Instead of gauge prcssure in spec. revision II03.

EYP-U-l2 Resolved. There is no rcquire-mcnt to actuate thc valve after time dclaycd spray.

~ l I

rAi Page 0 ol 22 A

SUMMARY

OF ACTIONS OY TIIE EVP TASK I'ORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE AND Plt03ECT TEAM Rl SOLVING 80 DISCREI'ANCY REPORTS CATFGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITHIN STATI/S IIY ASSIGNED DY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TFAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE) 1 EVP-U-l3 Unresolved Rcsolvcd after recycle.

Although not included in the existing specification thc ~

project team rcfcrenccd EMD Imposing thc same contact rating to which the vendor provides a letter ol com-pliance.

EVP-U-l0 Unresolved Not acceptable. Transmit ted Observation Observation A review team has bccn Thc EVP Task Force Transmit tcd to to project team I2/I5/82. assigned to resolve the concurs with the rcvicw commit tcc. Project Team to investigate concerns cxprcsscd by Project Team and take corrective action EVP-U-l0 (Rcv. 0). Their response and planned as required. evaluation will address action. Transmitted safety impact, impact on QA to D.D. Miller on program and r cpor tab llity. I/II/83.

(Ref. Trans. to D. Miller dated I/II/83) (Rcl. EVP-$ 29/SL, dated I/28/83)

EVP-U-I3 Unresolved Resolved after rccyclc to Transmitted to Phase 2 for vcrllication ol review commit tce. field packing ccrtilication.

Valve manulacturer packing was replaced nn all valves.

Scc EVP-U-I0.

1 EVP-U-16 Unresolved. Rcsolvcd alter rccyclc to I Phase 2 for field vcrili-4 1

Page 0 of 22 A

SUMMARY

OF ACTiONS OY TIIE EVP TASK FORCE itfsVIEW CGMMITTL'" AND I'!!03FCT TEAM RESOLVING B4 DISCREPANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITHIN STATUS fIY ASSIGNED GY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERFNCE)

EVP-U-16 (cont.) cation. Although system condition prohibited hand-whcel operational test. The Project Team provided accept-able limitorque handwhccl sizing criteria.

EVP-U-ll Unresolved. Resolved after recycle.

Transmitted to Project Team supplied review committee environmental qualification rcport which projects a 40 year intcgratcd dose well within the existing specifi-cation level.

EVP-U-IB Unrcsolvcd. Resolved after recycle. Thc Transmitted to Project Team supplied cvidcncc review commit tcc. to the review commit tcc assuring a morc benign Chemical cnvironmcnt than existing speci-fication level. Project speci-cation will bc updated.

EVP-U-I9 Unresolved. Rcsolvcd after rccyclc. Thc Transmitted to valve manufacturer received review committee CE approval of an equivalent cleaning class prior to delivery.

8

,P ~ ~

Page 6 ol 22 A

SUMMARY

OF ACTIONS OY TIIE EVP TASK I ORCE REVIEW COMMITTEI: AND PRO3ECT TEAM RESOLVING BO DISCRLI'ANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITI IIN "-STATU5 IIY ASSIGNED OY ACTION PROPOSED CONCUI<RENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

EVP-U-20 Unrcsolvcd. Resolved alter rccyclc.

Transmit tcd to Rcvicw commit tcc discussion review commit tce confirms that either lock open sctpoint could have bccn sclcc-ted to provide a safe operational condition.

EVP-U-2l Rcsolvcd.

S.l. Tank Isolation Valve design loads and'stress limits specified in both the indcpcndcnt and ori-ginal equipment were found to equivalent.

EVP-U-22 Resolved.

Original design specified cooling water temperatures arc higher resulting in a more conservative design.

EVP-U-23 Unrcsolvcd.

Transmitted to Rcsolvcd after recycle.

review committcc Further investigation of FSAR seismic accelerations rcvcalcd that original spccilication seismic levels arc correct.

-B-

III Pape 7 ol 22 A SUh'IMARY OF ACTIONS OY TIIE EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COhtMITTLL'NDI'lt03FCT TEAh1 Itl SOLVING 80 DISCI<EPANCY ltEPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITHIN STATUS GY ASSIGNED DY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

EVP-U-20 Unresolved. Resolved after rccyclc.

Transmitted to The HPSI pump manufacturer review committee. provided a critical speed analysis assuring that the critical speed/

operating speed difperence exceeds 2096.

EVP-U-2) Unresolved. Resolved af tcr recycle.

Transmitted to A summary of loads and stress review commit tec. limits by the Project Team proves the original specification values arc correct.

EVP-U-26 Unresolved. Rcsolvcd af tcr rccyclc.

Transmit tcd to It was detertnined that thc review commit tcc number of thermal transients spcclficd Is not sufi icicnt to rcqulrc cyclic operation analysis.

EVP-U-27 Resolved.

Int'erlcrence with pull space requirements was found during thc Iield installation phase.

This is a maintcnancc-related item (not safety-related).

Transmitted to Project Team for inlormatlon only.

Page 8 ol 22 A SUh'IhtARY OF ACTIONS DY TIIE EVP TASK I.ORCE REVIETT COhhhRTTEE ANO VROTLTCT TEA h RESOLVING 8O DISCRD ANCV REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITIIIN STATUS OY ASSIGNED OY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE ItEVIEW COhthtITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

UIR-I Unresolved. Rcsolvc af tcr recycle.

Transmitted to NRC stall has revicwcd review commit tcc. previously and found the clean-up system valve installation complics with single failure criterion.

UIR-2 Unrcsolvcd. Rcsolvcd alter recycle.

Transmitted to The Project Team supplied review commit tcc. rcfercnces to industry standards spccilicd, and gcncric qualifi-cation reports covering these requirements.

UIR-3 Unrcsolvcd. Resolved alter rccyclc.

Transmitted to Thc Project Team supplied review commit tce. rcfercnccs to industry standards and generic qualifi- 'pccilicd, cation reports covering.thcsc rcquiremcnts.

UIR-0 Resolved.

Since thc installation has already been completed the discrepancy is Irrelevant.

Confirmed in the field.

-l0-

Page 9 ol 22 A

SUMMARY

OF ACTIONS 0Y THE EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE AND PRO3ECT TEAM it f;5OLVING 80 DISCRI'.I'ANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITIIIN RFSOLVED WITHIN STATUS OY A55IGNED IIY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

UIR-f Unrcsolvcd. Rcsolvcd after recycle.

Transmit tcd to No vendor requircmcnt Ior rcvlcw commit tec. failure mode. IIVAC plant installation spec. idcntifics lail "as is".

UIR-6 Unresolved. Rcsolvcd after recycle.

Transmitted to Cyrllng tests arc not required review committcc. for Infrequently used clean-up system values. Howcvcr prc-op testing was pcrformcd.

UIR-7 Unrcsolvcd. ~

Rcsolvcd alter rccyclc.

Transmitted to The clean-up system has bccn review commit tcc. previously rcvlcwed against single failure criterion and approved by NI<C staff.

UIR-8 Unresolved. Rcsolvcd after recycle.

Transmit ted to It was dctcrmlncd by thc Project rcvlcw committe'e. Team and agreed by thc Task Force that thc i)2 rccombiner electrical load need not bc in-cluded in thc first block D-G Loading Scquencc.

~

Page IO of 22 A

SUMMARY

OF ACTIONS OY TIIE EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEI; AND PI403ECT TEAM R F5OL VING 80 DISCRLPANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITIIIN STATUS IIY ASSIGNED OY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

UIR-9 Unresolved. Rcsolvcd af ter rccyclc.

Transmit tcd to Backup protection for the elec-review committee. trical pcnctration (pcr it.G !.63)

~

has been previously agreedby the Project Teatn as a back!it cornmit-mcnt.

UIR- IO Unrcsolvcd. Resolved after recycle, Transmit tcd to The project supplied acceptable rev!c>> committee. relcrcncc to all applicable standards requirements.

UIR-ll Resolved.

The Task Force dctermincd that operating prcssure specification is not essential since design prcssure ls indi-cated.

i UIR-l2 Unrcsolvcd. Rcsolvcd after rccyclc.

Transmit ted to Thc clean-up system valve design rcvlcw committee. prcssure, as stated in thc data shcct (Appendix D, Shcct 60),

provldcs thc rcquircd prcssure dillerential information.

-I 2-

Page I I ol 22 A 5UMMARY OF ACTIONS DY TklE EVP TASK FORCE ItEVIEW COMMITTEE AND PIIO3ECT TEAM RFSOLVING 80 DISCREPANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITI.IIN 5TATUS GY ASSIGNED fkY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. - EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (Rr;rcRcNcc)

. UIR-l3 Unresolved. Rcsolvcd alter rccyclc.

Transmit tcd to No vendor spec. Rcquircmcnt review commit tcc. for lallurc mode. HVAC plant Installation spec. Identities fail llas Istl UIR-Itk Rcsolvcd.

The outdoor rclativc humidity level is not csscntial to thc design and/or safety function of the clean-up system valve.

UIR-Ij Rcsolvcd.

Indoor ambient pressure is not essential to thc design and/or function of this component.

UIR-I6 Rcsolvcd.

5pccilicatlon of a flow test ls not essential to thc valve safety function.

UIR-Iy Resolved.

Prcssure prop across thc open valve at design liow Is provided by thc vendor. Not a design spec. requirement.

-l3-

Page l2 ol 22 A

SUMMARY

OF ACTIONS OY TI.IE EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE AND Plt03ECT TFAM IIESOI VING 80 DISCRLPANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATI.GORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITI IIN STATUS OY ASSIGNED IIY ACTION PROPOSF D NO. CONCURRENCE EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

UIR-lg Unresolved. Resolved after recycle.

Transmitted to Thc offsltc release, in the review commit tcc. absence of humidity control, is below IOCFR I00 guidclincs.

UIRr19 Rcsolvcd.

Thc dust-holding capaci t y of thc HEPA filter, though short, does not affect the safety function.

UI R-20 Resolved.

The outdoor rclativc humidity is not spccilied for thc I.IEPA, since it is not essential to thc safety function.

• UIR-21 Unrcsol vc d. Resolved after recycle.

Transmitted to review Existing design, though I commit tce. swing door in front

'ouhle J

dif ter lng from independent design, satisfies requircmcnts.

Confirmed during field veri-fication phase.

UIR-22 Unrcsolvcd. Rcsolvcd af tcr recycle.

Transmit tcd to rcvicw Rationale for applying clasto-commit tce. plastic analysis to missile barriers Is acceptable. Yield stress limitation docs not apply.

-IO-

I'agc l3 of 22 A

SUMMARY

OF ACTIONS IIY TIIE EVP TASK FORCE RLVIEW COMMITTEE AND Plt03ECT TEAM RESOLVING BO DISCREPANCY ItEPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITII IN STATUS OY ASSIGNED DY ACTION PROPOSED NO. CONCURRENCE EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

UIR-23 Unresolved. Resolved alter recycle.

Transmit tcd to review Thc ductility factor lor commit tec. flexure, as utilized in design, ls acccptablc and in accord with FSAR.

UIR-20 Unresolved. Resolved alter recycle.

Transmitted to review 5upplementary calculations commit tee. supplied by thc project team dcmonstratc that shear rein-forcing plates are not required.

EVP Task Force concurs.

UIR-25 Unresolved. Resolved after recycle.

Transmitted to review Thc code ellcctive date commit tcc. was dctcrmlncd to be in error. Thc FSAR and oflicial design documentation were however found to bc correct.

UIR-26 Unresolved. Resolved alter recycle.

to review

'ransmitted ANSI document requircmcnts, commit tcc. though not completely listed in the specification arc listed in thc standard spec's and purchase documents. EVP task force Invcstigatcd and concurs.

-I 3-

~ ~

Page l4 ol 22 A SUMhtARY OF ACTIONS BY TIIE EVP TASK I'ORCE l<EVIEW COMMITTEE AND Plt03ECT TEAM It ESOLVING 84 DISCRF PANG Y I<EPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM Evf TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITkllN RESOI.VED W! TI~IN STATUS ftY A55IGNED BY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COhthtITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

UIR-27 Unrcsolvcd. Rcsolvcd alter rccyclc.

Transmitted to review Rrfcrcncc regulatory commit tee. guides though not speci fied were complied with wherever applicable.

UIR-28 Unresolved. Rcsolvcd after recycle.

Transmit tcd to review Though omitted from thc

~

committee. original spccllication the requirements ol IOCFR2I werc imposed by subscqucnt P.O. Supplement No. 8.

UIR-29 Unresolved. Resolved af ter recycle.

Transmit ted to Impact test requircmcnts required rcvicw commit tce. for Safety Class 2 components is covered by Ebasco standard spccilication. EVP Task Force concurs.

UIR-30 Unresolved. Resolved af ter recycle.

Transmitted to Though not Included In the rcvlcw commit tee. existing design spec. fracture toughncss was reviewed and acccptcd to ASME III require-ments.

Page I 3 ol 22 A SUMhtARY OF ACTIONS fIY TIIE EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COhtMITTEE ANI3 PRO3ECT TEAh'I RESOLVING 80 DISCRLPANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITI.IIN STATUS OY ASSIGNED fIY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMhtITTEE COhthtlTTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

UIR-3l Unrcsolvcd. Resolved alter recycle.

Transmit ted to Closed bases on resolution review commit tcc. of UIR-38.

UIR-32 Unresolved. Resolved after rccyclc.

Transmitted to No requirement for closing review committee. thc MSIV from outsitic control room since thc turbine and reactor arc tripped prior to exit.

UIR-33 Unresolved. Rcsolvcd af ter recycle.

Transmitted to Design acceptance to NRC pcr review committee. SER. MSIS signal on turbine stop valve is tbc acccptablc solution to single MSIV failure.

UIR-30 Unrcsolvcd. Resolved after rccyclc.

Transmitted to Same resolution as U)R-33.

review commit tec.

UIR-33 Unresolved. Rcsolvcd af tcr recycle.

Transmitted to same resolutions as UIR-33.

review committee.

UIR-36 Unresol vcd. Resolved after recycle.

Transmitted to same resolutions as UIR-33.

.review committee.

-l7-

Page I6 ol 22 A SUMMAltYOI'CTIONS IIY TIIE L'VP TASK FORCE REViEW COMMITTLr ANDTitojECT TEAM RESOLVING 80 DISCREI'ANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITIIIN RESOLVED WITI IIN STATUS OY ASSIGNED OY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FOItCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REI'ERENCE)

UIR-37 Unresolved. Resolved alter recycle.

Transmit tcd to Valve fails open on loss of elec-rcvicw committee. tric power, consistent with FSAR Chapter IO, p. I0.3.0. FSAR table 6.2->3 is incorrect and will bc corrected to read open.

UIR-38 Unresolved. Resolved after recylcc.

Transmitted to A rpmlificd accumulator provided review commit tee. for each valve holds valve open in event of air-supply failure.

UIR-39 Unresolved. Rcsolvcd after rccyclc.

Transmitted to A brcakcr and fuse in series rcvicw commit tec. provides back-up protection to the electrical penetration.

UIR-00 Unresolved. Resolved af tcr recycle.

Transmit ted to Opcratlon at thc scrvicc factor review committee. rating is not considered thc normal mode of operation.

UIR-tt I Unresolved. Resolved af tcr recycle.

Transmitted to SIT isolation valves mcct thc

. review committee. guidclincs criteria spccilicd in Rcg. Guide I.22.

-l8-

V f'agc 17 of 22 A

SUMMARY

OF ACTION5 OY TIIE EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COhlMITTEL'ND PII03ECT TEAM RESOLVING 80 DISCRI PANCY I<EPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RE5OLVED WITHIN STATUS DY ASSIGNED IIY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFr'RENCE) (REFERENCE)

UIR-02 Unrcsolvcd. Resolved alter recycle.

Transmit tcd to Project Team supplied infor- .

review commit tee. mation regarding thc redundant position indication available during normal operation. Scc EVP-U-9 for resolution.

UIR-03 Unresolved. Resolved af tcr recycle.

Transmitted to Alarm Indication is not rcvicw commit tec. required to initiate normal operator actions. EVP Task Force concurs.

UIR-00 Unresolved. Resolved after recycle.

Transmit ted to Isolation switches are available.

review committee. Closing of thc Sl tank Isolation valves can bc accomplished by use of auxiliary Bldg. switches.

UIR-05 Unresolved. Rcsolvcd after rccyclc.

Transmitted to It was determined by thc Project review commlttcc. Team and agreed by thc Task Force that thc ll2 recombiner electrical load nccd not be in-cluded in the lirst block D-G loading schcdulc.

-l9-

Page 18 ol 22 A

SUMMARY

OF ACTIONS BY TIIE EVP TASK FORCE REViEW COIIMiTTEE AND I RO3ECT TEAM RESOLVING 84 DISCItEPANCY ltEPORTS CATEGORY. CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAM EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN Rl SOLVED WITI.IIN STATUS BY ASSIGNED BY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

UIR-46 Unresolved. Not acceptable. Observation Obser vati on Corrective action has been The EVP Task Force Transmitted to Transmitted to Project Team completed. Identification concurs with Project review commit tee. 12/15/82. tags for individual circuit Team response. (Rcf.

breakers arc in place. Memo-Blodget t to Photographic evidence was Fcigenbaum dated provided. (Rcf. Trans. to I/24/83.)

T. H. Blodgct t dated I/O/83).

I.IIR-47 Unresolved. Not acceptable. Observation Observation The FSAR specilics identifi- The EVP Task Force Transmitted to Transmitted to Project Team cation of salety-related concurs with Project rcvicw committee. 12/10/82. Open Item requiring clcctrlcal equipmcnt by Team res ponsc and project justllication of present appropriate color coded planned corrective design or corrective action. tagging, paint or tape. action. (Ref. Memo T.H. Blodgctt to Distrtbut>on dated I /24/83.)

The Prolcct Team will review rclatcd cqulpmcnt to cnsurc proper color coding prior to commercial operation. (Rel.

memo Feigenbaum to Blodgctt).

UIR-48 Unresolved. Not acceptable. Observation Observation Thc FSAR specifies identifi- Thc FVP Task Force Transmit ted to Transmit ted to Project Team cation ol salcty-related concurs with Project rcvicw commit tec. 12/13/82. Open item requiring clcctrical equipment by Team response and project justification of present appropriate color coded planned corrective design or corrective action. tagging, paint or tape. action. (Ref. Memo T.ll. Blodgctt to Distribution dated I/24/83.)

~ Page l9 of 22 A SUMhIARY OF ACTIONS DY TIIE EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COhtMITTEE AND Pl<03ECT TEAM f<ESOLVING 84 DISCI EPANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PROlECT TEAhl EVP TASK FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITI-IIN STATUS BY ASSIGNED DY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COhthtITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

. UIR-48 (cont.) Thc Project Team will rcvicw related cquipmcnt to ensure proper color coding prior to commercial operation. (Rcl.

memo Fcigcnbaum to Dlodget t).

UIR-49 . Unresolved. Not acceptable. Observation Observation The FSAR specilics idcqtifi- 'hc EVP Task Force Transmitted to Transmitted to Project Team cation of safety-related concurs with Project review committee. I2/13/82. Open item requiring electrical equipment by Team response and project Justification of prcscnt appropriate color coded planned corrective design or corrcctivc action. tagging, paint of tape. action. (Ref. Memo T.ll. Dlodgctt to Distribution dated I/24/83.)

Thc Project Team will review related equipmcnt to cnsurc proper color coding prior to commercial operation. (Rcl.

memo Fclgcnbaum to Dlodgct t).

I 4

Page 20 of 22 A 5UMMARY OF ACTION5 DY TIIE EVP TASK FORCE REVIL'W COMMITTEE AND PRO3ECT TEAh'I R E5OL V ING 80 DISCRL'FANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAhl EVP TA5K FORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITItIN STATUS GY ASSIGNED DY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRFNCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

UIR-30 Unresolved. Not acceptable. Observation Observation The I SAR specifies idcntili- The EVP Task Force Transmitted to Transmitted to Project Team cation of safe ty-r clat cd concurs with Project review commit tcc. I2/I3/82. Open item requiring electrical equipmcnt hy Team response and project justification of present appropriate color coded planned corrective design or corrective action. tagging, paint or tape. action. (Ref. Memo .

T.ll. Dlodgctt to Distribution dated I /20/83.)

Thc Project Team will rcvicw related equipment to ensure proper color coding prior to commercial operation. (Rel.

memo Feigenbaum to Olodgct t).

UIR-31 Unresolved.. Not acceptable. -Observation Observation Corrective action has been The EVP Task Force Transmit tcd to Transmitted to Project Team complctcd. Identification concurs with Project review commit tce. I 2/I 3/82. tags for individual circuit Team response. (Ref.

brcakcrs arc In place. Memo-Dlodget t to Photographic cvidcnce was Fcigcnbaum dated provided: (lief. Trans. to I /20/83.)

T. H. Glodgct t dated I/3/83).

Page. 2 I nf'22 A

SUMMARY

OF ACTIONS IIY TIIE EVP TASK I'ORCE REVIEW COhlMITTEE AND I'II03ECl TEAM R ESOL VINO 80 DISCRI.PANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3FCT TEAh1 EVP TASK I ORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITII IN STATUS f1Y ASSIGNED DY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COh'IMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAM (RFFERENCE) (it EFERENCE)

Ullt-52 Unresolved. Not acceptable. Observation Observation Thc FSAR specifics idcntili- The EVP Task Force Transmit ted to Transmitted to Project Team cation ol safcty-rclatcd concurs with Project review commit tcc. l2/I >/82. Open item requiring electrical equipmcnt by Team rcsponsc and project justilication ol present appropriate color coded planned corrective design or corrective action. tagging, paint or tape. action. (Rcf. Memo T.H. Glodgctt to Distribution dated I /24/83.)

The Project Team will review related equipment to ensure proper color coding prior to commercial operation. (Rcl.

memo Feigcnbaum to filodgct t).

I.IIR-53 Unresolved Resolved alter recycle.

Transmitted to The "true h level" finish review commit tee. condition is within industry standards.

UIR-$ 0 Unresolved Resolved af ter recycle.

Transmitted to Installation ol thc ratliation review committee. monitor using floor mounted frame, while not per initial plans, ls in conlormancc with a correctly proccsscd FCR.

~ ~

Page 22 of 22 A SUhlhtARY OF ACTIONS OY TfIE EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COhlhtlTTEE AND I'lt03ECT TL'Ahl RESOLVING Wt DISCREPANCY REPORTS CATEGORY CATEGORY PRO3ECT TEAh'I EVP TASK I ORCE REPORT RESOLUTION WITHIN RESOLVED WITI.IIN STATUS fIY A55IGNED OY ACTION PROPOSED CONCURRENCE NO. EVP TASK FORCE REVIEW COhtMITTEE COMMITTEE PRO3ECT TEAhl (REFERENCE) (REFERENCE)

UIR-H Unrcsolvcd. Rcsolvcd af tcr rccyclc.

Transmit!cd to MSI valve leak test had bccn review committee. per lormcd (rcversc I low) utilizing cquivalcnt NZ Flow rates.

UIR-56 Unrcsolvcd. Resolved after recycle.

Transmitted to Valve closing time tests had review committee. been performed. Results were furnished to and acccptablc to EVP Task Force.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLANS PAGE Discrepancy No. EVP-U-14 25.1 Discrepancy No. UIR-46 25.2 Discrepancy ho. UIR-47 25.3 Discrepancy No. UIR-48 25.4 Discrepancy No. UIR-49 25 '

Discrepancy No. UIR-50 25.6 Discrepancy No. UIR-51 25.7 Discrepancy No. UIR-52 25.8 DISCREPANCY NO. EVP-U-14

-25.1-

Cl UNRESOLVED ITEM (DISCREPAt'CY REPORT RCviSIoa,~

EtlGIHEERING YERIFICATION PROGRAM-SL2 EVP- Q.>> l+

A. PREPARATION BY C-E TASK FORCE INITIATOR AFFECIED 'ITEM: 0 2, Vicl'<V6'-3( I+ MAxlHuILl l"-HI.0RIDE'clnlvdNT QF 5'f5+ PR C.K IN& MCI'ric'RISHI ATTRcsM6+r l (Q Fl'll- sire @LENA<<<q.PRoccoupEe Ko. sa&-n. Rave Vague" PgcgiaCP RePoRT g~lq. (Qcg(P $ -gg BZ)

REFERENCE DOCUMENTS: (2) RE'c&PT 'Zgs p<ctlou Rceoiet R-gl- c.4s I ~

DtD 3-)o-Ss (FP6I.)

(3) gpcceip t ZYO $ PEctiom R GPoIEt R-8 I DIFFERENCES TO BE RESQLYED:

)PAL DESIGN RELATED + FIELD INSTALLATION RELATED Q START-UP PERFORNAllCE RELATED F Pg t HAs t ~~EDD Cca rlelcwrloN5 OI- HaxIM(AM cHt oRIDc Co~GE.hJ'p 56'PCQ Ml- ++'t0 ~D ~RAFoil I e:R Ai rhcH~<~T5 (Z), (3),(+), (S') A~o g).

AEV<<cuC.H T'HeS< Can'iC'ICAL lOWc, 3< 'ZuOrc Are TgaV TH< PWCe<eg Hav<zlpl q Igpvz A CHaoaio~ Cc ~7c~r oF L~ gz <qpN 2@a PPH, CAhl rJOT ai" 'Ccs<<<~HT=cs Tf41 ~HZ PR~IcING HA'rGRI&I '~CD IN T'Ac v+I vc ( pn.nc.H~e r (I)) IM+s oF TH6'gg6'o r 0R 5 t4c 2~5CRI8E'D 'Qq "'HC=SE 6 CIZTIF'!CA 7 iymS.

PREPARED BY Lc3 DATE: l~ 82.

AttAciIH~t (S) RM<<P< <pi tIO~ a,eeoRt R et l?2S Dto B. P,EVIEM BY C-f TASK FORCE l-l7-SI (FP Zl.)

"(t'.) age ip- ~FSgP~c.tlirt RCPaFET R-at- IS >8 COl"'lEHTSIRAT IOHALE's II-2.-0 I (,FPItl-)

R.cc'ci&H 5PJ0<P ~NRl ~t 4 L R,OEIl go, C6Z.TIr=r~T<<<S WHICH APPc.q ~o, ~~c'-Ic <<C 'A~E'mimic. US~O IQ I pg Vgl.y P Q~~ 5c- pig p pq $ 7'TACHHQgr (I ) ~

El DIFFERENCES RESOLVED E3 RE-REYIEM REQUESTED DIFFER"NCES UNRESOLYED.

DISCREPANCY TRANSYIITTED TO REVIEM COt"'lITTEE.

BY: t Ld DATE: /~ V Sz

bLH ~

RIR No. Qhb Constr'l.on Quali ty R-El- 2G '7 Seismic Cont ol No.:

ERR ASHh; Q Ycs

~ ~

'N Receipt Inspection Sect.

A Poo ~ 'ER d L GHT CO 1PANY Repo t Unit:

R<<~CHHG~T (L) Ta EVP -U. PS L" 2 Class R6V. 2 w~ea i ar.

Iw tcri al Description vlcvh pate~<~~<

Supplier .O. Number Supplements adO CAL~ C XP Zc-/~ gZ OO Sub Supplier Sub. P.O. Number Sub Supplements Supplier's Address Supplier Approved Source Inspection po~YILLF gp >

Performed g5'/~/PZ Yes No Yes No Permitted g Ny.~ N/A O Not Permit.ted.

Soeci fica tion Number Draving Hu 3er NA fac"ure Docu.-.,en"ation: Accept/Reject Criteria Source R-QUIR:-D

, oC'. g g8CfC/IEc c C gia<IOCS /IZED T- P-Qg YJ'S Q NO d.c.. 7-/

Lj N/A Pf+

Rr. Cr.IVr D Q Yr'S Q NO Accept/Reject Inspection Items Requirements N/A Remarks l Ident i.ficatinn R Hark inc;s fr~.2 . /I 0 =c.

5-z C

Nanu facturer Documentation Protective Covers & Seals 4 Coating & Preservatives Inert Ga Blanket Desiccant 7 Physical Damages Q.X. 7/

Cleanliness ca. Z -/

Chcmica.'roper ti es Ni~chnnical Pronerties

t Accept/Pcject.

xnsjcction Items Rccuircmcnts N/A Remarks Dim nsions 12 Pe1d Preoa at'on'3

>lorkmanshio .7 ./

14 Lubricant & Oils 15 Electrical insulation 16 Special Inspection Checklist Approved For Use:

Title Signature Date Release Info: Full Release Hat'l. Release No.:

Partial Release idaho'1. Release Ho.:

Other Pelated RIR:

All Items On Hold Inspec tor 's Signature Date Discrepancies Pemarks DR NOs.

ming Title Signatu Date

8 t~g e

~D ~i r ~:F-~"t Q8 Construction Quality Control MRN NO. SL-llRR PO: 3$ Q+Q ORIOA PO1YER a LIGHT COMPANY Material Relehse Notice g-h"f- Zt'P Page W of Partial Release.

I'.O.

No. ~I yp. Q Full Release Items Inspected: {P.O. Line Item No.)

~acQlw C ty- Item A R Qty Item ccN f ore.. ]Pf mRoA A IOG /0 ~ t ~Or r 8 ~ P-d./C H

S - 6493 S- r..iZ ZOO-SOS'O Inc. c ( gw g 8 o+ POr'lC 84, 6~% Soyez geo-3~l:

ID@ fcoc.c s w~+<yr1

/PI> oy gi" 8 ~

( g fpp S~dg+ +05 - +0 Addi'tional Znzormation on Back No Additional Information on B,.ck

< The material marked as

acceptable above is authorized to be released

I Title Signature D~te

P.O. 60X'1CS46 BIRMIHCH'M, All. 35202 ~ PHOIIK 205 663 2251 ~ HICH'h" T 31 6. O'EI,H'M, /Q.

RECEIVEO February 20, 1981 NOR 9 ]ge]

EBhSCO SERVI~"."8 QDCUkiNT fi"'."P:ETOH ST. LUClE DtilT 2 GRAFOXL CZRTIFICATZON CERTIFICATE Ve,hereby certify that the Nuclear Grade Grafoil material furnished Florida Power and Light, on Purchase Order Neer 7740325402SSLlS989$ 1-has less than 50'arts per million of leachable chlorides and a sacrificial anode was furnished.

SEPCO Corporation I'4 x. /(~7.. I'.'rl D'on Donnelly Assistant, Customer Services Ãanager DD/g-lIjgPgUFg CTURPRS OF FL UlD SEA Llht'C PRODUCTS QqO(Areal Qq\ ill isa sl t)ihll St' +~<'0 + tf+Oktt Clttld C+llll~tl AIWlltllttl

~ ~ <~

l I 8

II

7~0+.)'i',' -.

RIR No. S QNS

~i';id>r Con .truction Quality z-No.:sr- w/', Seismic Control HRR AStlE Q Yos i' 3E/1< gl;o l~ Receipt Inspection Report Sect.

A PQ'IVER L t.lQHZ COMPANY Unit:

0

'/A wYac.Hater (3) 70/PC~i llaterial Description T'o 6'v F'- U.-l+

A.c.V. 3

'Class Ql g zone Qjgckyzrc Supplier .O. Number Supplenents XA'co do~us zc- PFP Sub Supplements ub Supplier Sub. P.O. Number Supplier's Address Supplier Approved Source Inspection Performed 'j'jN"'/~/~

Q y~f v't t. c,//-- egg Yes No Yes No Pe wtted g N/A H >/> '4'aived i icatior~~er A Drawing Number lianufacturer Documentation: Accept/Reject C iteria Source Required Received P.o.

ms g g O~eri~imn= p~ 0o+/'~~~a~ .5: 7-'/

~n Q Accept/Re ject Remarks Inspection Iterm Requirements A R N/A Identif'cation a Harkin s lanu acturer Documentation I

3 Protective Covers a Seals P~razr/v- Pr,/ ~sr /-

Coatings & Preservatives Inert Gas Blanket D siccant Physical Damages Cleanliness Chemical Properties lo Mechanical Prooerties

1 Accept/Reject tion Items Recuirements R N/A Retmrks Dimensions 0

2 field Preoaration 13 Rorkmanshio .7. 7-'t 14 Lubricant 6 Oils 15 Electrical Insulation 16 Soecial Inspection 17 <itness and Hold Points Checklist Approved For Use: P c-"/

Title Signature ate Release Zofo: g Full Release Nmt'1. Release So.: 5 -g9f4 Partial Release Mat'1. Release No.:

Other Related RXR:

All Items On Ho3.d Remarks:

s s

ZnSpcctor' Signature ate Eiscrepancies Remarks Y/A DR NOS.

)6~

NCR NOs. Approved By:

Tit3.e'ignatur D te

URN NO. SL- P3 P Q' Construction Quality Control FLORIDA POP'ill a LlGHT CO."iPANY tiRR NO.: 3'P/fg RIB NO.:

F)aterial Re)case Notice -0'I-/s-/

Paga M af Crt/PC>< Partial Release ii/y Pg Full Release Items Inspected: (P.O. Line Item No.) QA11 Items cn Hold g/8Eo~ r MK'lAJ&

Item Qty Item

$0 s' ZLfhg. ROLL gpss! 0/

10~ P~d /

lf

~~ - > o ~x.x~

dc-N

+g+a,r - Zl /'

w 87/

Additional Infor=ation on Back No Additional Zn forma t ion on Back material marked as acceptable above is authorized to be re)eased:

~ Title Signature Date

f "Q~Q p. ' g/-f/~/

Pg, BOX ICSC6 BIHMlHGHAM, Atk 35202 ~ PHONE 2056632251 - HiGHWAY 31 6. Pg,HAM, AiA.

September 1, 1981

-MATERIAL CERTIFICATION CERTIFICATE be hereby certify that the Nuclear G ade material furnished Florida Power G Light, on Contract Nu;.her 77403-25402-SL 18989, Release Number 5381, has less than 50 parts per million of leachable chlorides.

SEPCO CORPORATION

?

Don Donnelly /

Inside Sales Supe visor DD/tf hfhNUFhCTURERS OF FI UID SEhI.IÃC PRODUCTS ptatlonal Sassoclatlon ot Manutacturlnp ~ Mamoar Flulo Saallnp Assoclatton

i e.-, ~ < "/'. 'e~..i '

ops gS Q::S i.ht. r

~ ++.'a'n C ro1 h

constrLl p lj0>u Quail ty '- (.J-RZR g!o.

1/77 ASe'I}e

. l'Sm C"

} Qs Q

Rcccipt Inspection ~'g c'7~ Scca; Q:;o

<<'POALR G LIGNT CCMPANY Rcport l'1+cQ M g}4'f 9) 3 cl KiIP-u-t+ RCv 3 Unit: Class F L,"P Ci(0/r C'i N/A

Peaterial DCSCrip"iOn VJL. VE p~K.g ~c S 'lier P.O. Nunber s~-/e.< 7Z Supplements ChL Sub Supplier Sub; P.O. Nunber Sub Supplements Supplier's Address Supplier Apprclved Source Inc"-ection Per orl"Ied ~cd'/~/sz acumen Yes No Yes No Pe . itted

.g nZe I:/'I

~

Q ti'-ived

~

~

fi<<~ 4 CZ 'LeuI<<po ee DraNing Num~~

/c nu fac" u e ta" 'n: '

ccept/Reject C"'te=ia Source-"

Required .Received YES CAR'IVIceM oI- QoIHPI-IeIqg- P. o.

0 L<C<V.QG La PW P,pe= C.'6WA,-

'HQ 502 << CCl >'i'V, NA o Accept/Reject Raaaection Items Requirements N/A Remarks

~e Tdenti."ication & !!arkinqs 4>~ LP, SK

>znufacture" Documentation Pro ec ive Cove s & Seals Coatings & P escrvatives Inert Gas Blanket Des iccan Physical Danae;es Clcanl incss Chemical P oper ties 10 Nechanical Properties

I I

~

l Acccp /Reject Inspection Ite;..s ~

Pct:uircm~nts RC)ilare',

im"nsions e.R E- u, 12:.'eld Preparation 13

'cant 6 Oils 15 Electrical Insula tion 16 Special Inspection 17 .<itness a..d Hold Points

~ 0 Checklist App oved For Use:

Title Signature Release Zafo: g =-ol'elease Ha"'1. Release No.:

Parti:al Release .'tat'1. Release Yo.:

Other Related RIR:

All Items On Hol Remarks:

s Le ~

Inspector' S~ lattire Date Discrepancies Remarks DR NOs.

O ?ACR NOs. 5DDroL eI'lt'itle K.Q.&~i'i Signature

~

9J@

~

Pl ~a 4 ,i: ) ~ ~

-Qp(-55 7

~ ~ '....S 7- "I ere lj pQI o QC. Q $ ~QC~ CP! FpQ rP r9, ~j,p j..

1$

Mechanica'I Packings, Seals and Gaskets Harch 16, 1981 Florida Power & Light C/0 Ebasco Sacs Inc.

P..O. Box 1117 Jensen Beach, Fla. 33457

~

ATTENTION<: J. L. Parker equality Control Supervisor CERTIF I CATION CERT IFI CATE 0

Me hereby certify that he packing itaterial

-furnish d Florida Power and Light on Purchase Order ;.77403-249865-SL'-.18573 has less than 100 parts per million of leachable chlorides.

SEPCO SALES CGRPORATIOil Jo ce &'cuderi-Account hanager JS/als PQ. Box 47SI9 / 3234 Oakcliff Industrial Street / Ooraville, Georgia 30362 / (404) 451 8667 e

t%lQI hQ SL + g j'~

~'--..-tj.

p Construction I

Pub 1 i ty,Control HRR llO.: gP g7+

FlOAIOA PQ'so'Ftw a LICjhlT CC ANY RIR NO.:

~ I Pat('.rial 3elcaso .iiotlcc ./p-8'I'- //P7

,G '"/PC)1 page Z- o f~

Partial Release P.O. tlo.: Q Full Release Insoected:

'tems (P.O. Line Iten No.) QA11 Items on Hold V A~ue r ~~I ty. Iten A R Qty Item

~L~, = P lu C I

Al=~~~ Sih.

Additional Information on Back t:o Additional Information, on Back ate ial marked as acceD table above is authorized to be released: te

~

Ti tie Signature

FIR No. Qs j':s

> ~ y ".~./-S>.) Con~ true t) on pung S

tv g-r'I l-/Xa~ Se

[

j ram i.f Conggml cabtch, Q Xcs L

L> iA r

Re~4 ) t Ztl'l'llc"tlon Report gpss/f Sect.

.3 l;o PQVlr R t LICKS tet IPAt4T v~HH<w< (h ) To CvI'-u.-.1q, Rtq 3 0>>it: Class V:O/r C.l

/t/a l'~terial D scription yg L yp f'gc/c/A/5 Supplier ..O. Number

~C4 s z-/P~

Supplements'ub Supplier P.O. Number Supplements 79'ub.

Sub hIa Supplier's Address Supplier Ao. -oved Souxce Inspection Performers GPRNoo,J, Fc.. t Yes No Yes No I'

Permitted Q N/A N/A Waived pot Per~iite"d Spec'xcation l'u-.,"er Drawing Numbe dA actuxer ~ci-.;en "ation: Accept/Re j ect C iteria Source Rec;uixed Received p.'o.

L8/'t >rclMr- roc Py/rpllkrlcs. , .~Pl hO 0 Accept/Reject Inspection Items Reauirements N/A Remarks Xd en tiEica tion & l!ark inqs wp br~~c th) Sizc-H"riufact re" Documentation 8D V'~

P otcctive Cove s 5 Seals or~~cI '~ ~~~@A Preservatives

~4'oatings S

Inert Gas Dla>>ket

.'6 Desiccant Pi i/8 1. ca l Damages

. 4-Z../

Chemical Properti s r

10 cNh cicccal Prc crhic-'

I aJ ~ /','a'..i I e~ ~

.1 Accept/+v'gc'ct Xfl"pcc tion Items Rco I li7 el 8 ~ n t' P.  !!/Ta Rema r'rs

..cns n 10ns r-e, Ro T2 d Prc"-.aration

'rhmnnshin Lubricant G 0'ls Elect ical Insulation Speci l Xns".,ec ion"

.fitness a..d:-!old Points I

Checklist A"proved For Use: QPtS Title Signature Gate R elease In o:

g Partial

=-ull Release Hat 1. 'Release No.: Sl $ 4~8 Release Pat'1. Release Yo.:

Other Related RIP.:

g s

All I a:.s On Bold Remari s:

Inso t.o"'s Signature date

'.screpancies Rem:arks

!lCR 1"Os. ~

hnprovcd By: AQcS Title

'b.Q Mz~~

signatussg '

I te s

s

Cl II

Ql,) .,c", llfU'O. SJa-g Lf~l (+)

(

~ 4

~

I

~

Con" t.r v f tio>> Oua lity Control eae NQ.: ~ p~/-'-

FLGBlori i re;:-n ~ eicHr cO:.:i Ai;v Mat~: 'n>, Release ttotice RIR HO.:

Page 2 of g

~CEo! PCil I }'artial.Rc'ease Q/Ipa aa~

gQhll Xte-...s Full Release Items Inspected: (P.O. Line Item on.!Po'd j MKl~>

No;,'PL.ve ty. Item A R Qty Zte...

,(iS %~~8idb I c s4"d'-a/9

~ .%

Additional Inf'o rat-on on Back Vo Additional Information on Back The .aterial marked as acceptable above is eutnoriz<d to be released:

Ti tie Signature

~i~ Date zi

Cl

~ k I

b 0

5[- PCQ 5"-". '-5 CC':RPQL~P7>ok Mechanica'I Pat:kings, Seals 'and Gaskets March 16, 1gB1 1

Florida Poorer 8 Light C/0 Ebasco Sacs Inc.

P. 0. Box 1117 Jensen Beach, Fla. 33457 ATTEHTIO'l: J. L. Parker equality Control S pervisor CERTI FI CATIOH Cii'.TIFI CATE Ve hereby certify that the packing material furnished Florida Pov.'er and Light on Purchase Order:77403-249855-SL'-:18573 l'as less than 100 parts per million of leachable chlorides..

SEPCO Sf'S CORPGRATIG'A

~ ~

Jo ce f'cuderi-Account tianager JS/a1 s P.Q. Box 47819 / 3234 Oakcliff Industrial Street / Doravule, Georgia 30362 / (404) 451.6667

8

'a 11I4r Constructiorr p:raligy Control eh)CQ MI ~

/~/g'ei"mic A:1'8 WRING leO ~:

Q Yus

~l e~ re r, rrgrdr r Q. r APIY .

pe RccQ W los;iec tion Report r 5'7'// ~T Sect. K Unit: ~

4 7o CVF'-u-I+ REM B Class'ago

>/PCii ~ ~ / od

./

tcrial Description UC Hckvn/G P.O. Number Supplemen s do v Supplie Sub. P.O. Number Sub Suppler,.ents P'w /r//A pplier's Address SuPPlier Approved Source Inspection Sampling

>ga~Jo-w p't~

~ ~ W

,Performed o"P~ )0jP /)P.

Yes No Yes No tt Permi" ed N/A N/A Viaived ec ficat or. Nr ".."er

////A Drawing Number pg+

=e Doc '... eta= cc: Accept/Rcjec" Crite ia Source eieed Peceived as g 3 C o55 C Q

.Cl Accept/Reject Inspection Items Requirements N/A Remarl:s Xdentification G e'!arkines go <i=a franu fac turez Documenta tior.

Protective Covers & Seals Ro - frKe PK~

Coatings 6 Preservatiies Inert Gas 81anlret Desiccant Physical Damaqes liness Chemical Props. x ti es 7eR Necharr ical Prouerties

~<<

~ l Accept/l:.~ joe t X>>s)'l ction Items Bceuf rononts Rema k .

.>>sIlons 12:!old Prcpara t ion 13 'i'kr.".on hip 14 LulIrica>>t r>> Oils 3,5 Z)ectrical Insulation 16 Special Inspection 17 :litness and ltold Points r

Checklist Approved For Use: QCS I Title Signature J DaesIe Ralaesa Zofo: @ Full Release <<we'1. Release .'.'o<<r Sf- g./5 Partial Release l!at'1. Release i'.o.:

Other Related 'RIR:

All Zterm On Hold P,erma rks: '

a

/b Qg nspcct r's 'ig,nturc Da&

>i cropancies Remarks NOs.

HCR IiOs. Approved BY:

Title t Signa tur a

HRN tiO. SL- Q Pg l Construct'on Quality Control j.RR Li t:O.:

ft.OAIDAPO'+YAH 6 LIG)IT cotelPANY. Material Release Notice RlR llO.:

7 p~ I> I Page .~ of P.O..tlo.:yg ( g g p3 PCi~1 Lj Par"ial Release 8'HO g A11 Full Release Items Inspected: (P.O. Line Item No.) Q Ttems oa Hold gzl~e 'PacAI g -5~e~

ty. Item R Qty Item oo/s 'e S 8~~8:- ~ oo4'ge M4e . 57 8'cg~lod kg 47Rebo ce.

Additional Information on Bac}c Nn Additio..al Info ...a ion on Back terial marked as accc ptable abave is authorized to be released: /Z ePl Title Signature ~ D

i I g-e'i- IA 8'

.M Q I

~L= "'ji"'Q SAKI-"5 Coj; POF~~~TIIQN Mechanical Packings, Seals and Gaskets Harch 3.6, 3.981.

Florida Power & Light C/0 Ebasco Sacs Inc.

P.. 0. Box j.117 Jensen Beach, Fla. 33457

~

ATTEHTIOH: J. L. Parker equality Control Supervisor CERTIFICATION CERTIFICATE

- he hereby certify that he packing I".,aterial furnished Florida Power and Light on Purchase Order 877403-249865-SL-.18573 has less than 100 parts per million of Teachable chlorides.

SEPCO SALES CORPOP~TION Jo ce gcutteri.-Account Yianager

. 'S/als P.o. Box 47819 / 3234 Oakcliff Industrial street / Doravilie, Georgia30362 / (404'51.8667

S 4+i*Ctl~ aJ ( A EEL JAiS 1>]cSS ENGIHEERIFG VERIFICATION PROGRAM Project Response to: EVP-U-14 Revision B Verification Item: 82, Valve V-3614, Y~xi=um Chloride Content of Stem Packing twterial On October 27, 1982 the EVP Task Force issued V/P V-14 which requested documentation showing chloride content of stem packing to be less than 200ppm. Valve V-3614 was repacked by using SEPCO ~Q. 4444 and GRAFOIL packing on April 28, 1982 (documented in r~-U-14, Revision A).

Attachments to EVP-U-14, Revision B provided certification of mazimum chloride centent of SEPCO HL 4444 and GRUOIL packing. The EVP Task Force comment in EVP-U-14, Revision B further requested confir-ation that the packing material used in repacked valve V-3614 was of the same lot and size described by the certiFications provided in EVP-U-14, Revision B.

An historical review revealed that the same type proolem was the subject of a QA audit report (audit report attached). Subsequent to that audit correct've actions in the form of a QC site procedure was written.

The procedure reouired certifications be nrovided during valve re~eeking.

In as much as the ~c. Task Force found a potential flaw in tne QA/QC procedures, the project determined that more positive corrective actions were needed. As a result of our investigation into the EVP comment the project is establishing a team assigned to resolve the concern described in EVP-U-14, Revision B. The review team will be providing an evaluation which will cover the following:

A. Safety impact B. Impact on the Quality Assurance Program C. Its reportability per 10CFR50.55e.

l

~ <<e

~<< ~

~, ~

e ~ s s agQ<<<<<<<<e<<<<IP ~ <<t ER.PF.=:-= CORRES?ONDLNCE QAC-PSL2-82-06 File: 03".06 LOCATION PSL-2 To L. Pa ke / J. R. Hartin OAT E April 8, 1982 Fee<<l a COPIES To R. F. Englmeie'r

'B. Escue sUo <<sc,, A'it '"

o Cont ol o Ifechanzcal Asse~klv AC-PS'-82-06 J.'.

P.. Coope>>

'ems A= ies N. T.

R A. Garramore D. R. Stone Ll B Der ickson A"-ached is a copy of the activitv au"' re or for a Quality Assurance Audit c n"ucted bv a representative o FPX/QA Cons"ruction.

Cor ct'--'ve actin.". for -=iodine No. 1 -'s the zesoonsihiiity oi he Project g =iity Con="ol g-nervisor an<> will be imp emente". ~

(c) The person (s) resoonsible fo assurirg that corrective action was or will be implen nted.

tje appreciate the coope ation of oersonnel contacted during the audit, and the csitive at-'ude aker. toward correcting the noted deficiencies.

/g. () ~<< // +as Principal Audi or J. R. Luke A., ro. ed: N. T. beems S . zntende:It St. Lucie Projects - QA NTil:JRL:ljd At achment

?-pz'" e '. R'll::Ga ?cCVL.C ea<<<<e ~ ~ S a 4<< ~ << ~

t

'i

~

I. <<.2 FLOR<9<<PO .'"R 6 'GHT w.'P~';y R:-PORT OF QUALITY ASSURANC~~

D:-PART-'::-NT AUDIT'u"it No: QAC-PSL2-82-06 Control o Mechanical Irsta 'a ion Act'vities Au<<lt Scooe

'n Ac ivit Audit of control o f !mechanical'nstallation Activities was conducted at St. Lucie Unit No. 2 o veri y selected recu'ments in designa"ed S'te Qual'ty Procedures.

Audit Su..harv

-valuat on of gA Pro aa.=f ectiven ss.

-xcept as noted in the findings, the QA Program is effective in all otne" a"eas audited.

review o the audit findings in previous audits inc'cated two trends, as follows:

Documentation (of the servicinc and maintenance of valves) submitted by FPL/Q to the QA Records Center is ..ot always complete. (Ref: Audit QAC-PSL2-80-29 Finding 1).

(2) Marking 'of comoleted (high st encth) bolted field connections fo" ins-pection is not always acco..,pl'shed. (Ref: Audit QAC-PSL2-79-42 Fin=ing 5).

Satisfactory Conditions:

1. Rotation of Limitorque Op rators on Valves I-?V. 17, 18, 19 and th inspections thereof.

Unsat's acto Conditions:

1. QC nspectors are not attaching Valve Packing Report Forms to General Reports and transmit ing them to the QA,Records Cente" (Re  : SQP-12)

2. Construction bolting crews are not mark ng completed (high strength) bolted field connections. for inspect 'on. ( Ref: SQP-45)

Page 1 of 5

Ws s r rAA.~t eY, FLORIDA PO's'eER a LIGHT (.G.,'.F~i]y R:-PDRT OF QUALITY ASSUBWNCZ D:-PABTa"~'t T AUDIT Audit No: QAC-PSL2-G2-06 Control of Yechanical Insta '-ion Activities A'it Scooe:

Aa. Activity Audit of control of mechanical Installation Act'vities was conducted at St. Lucie Unit No. 2 to ve iry selected recu'rements in designated S'te Quality Procedures.

Aud it S ~

. ~a v:

valuation of 9A Procram Zffectiveness.

Except as noted in the findings, the QA Proc am is effectiv'e in all othe a"eas audited.

A treview of the audit findings in orevious aucits indicate" two trends, as follows:

DocIstIIentation (of the servicinc and ma'tenance of valves) submitted by ypL/QC to =be QA seconds Cen er is.not always cotolete. (Se: 'orbit QAC-PSL2-80-29 F'nding 1)..

I (2) liar) ing of completed (high strength) bolted field connections fo" ins-p ction is not always acco-...pl'hed.

5) .

( Be f: Au it QAC-PS 2-79-42 Fincing Sa is actorv Conditions:

1. Rotation of Li-.oitorque Ooerators on Valves I-l'V-14-17, 18, 19 and the inspections the eof ~

Unsatisfactor Condit'ons:

1~ Q- Inspectors are not attaching Valve Packing Report Forms to General Zns-ecion Reports and transmitting them to the QA Records Center (Ref: SQP-12}.

2. Construction bolting crews are not marking completed (high strength) bolted field connectiOns.

I for inspection. ( Ref: SQP-45)

Page 1 of 5 sacra>s c e s:ot:ie r. C C.~s, r.

3.

~ ~,,Ac Department/Group A r'.. Jo ":n Lead Engineer X S Re"e System Engineer X D. Sa nes Construction Superviso X D. Ligh"foot Const uction Supervisor N. Garcia Resident Engineer X R. Sipos Const uction Test Engineer X X K. C osby QC Supervisor X X H. Shannon Assistant Su=erintendent X X C. Carlo Mech; Q.C. Supe visor X D. R'clay Civil QC Supervisor X C. Ell'son Test Hech. Supervisor X J. Cape==a Resia nt Eng'neer X J. Hartin Resident Engineer X Kev:

A>> Attenaed Pre-Audit Conferenc B interviewed or'ontacted During the Audit C Attended Post-Audit Conference Pre-Audit Con exence Not applicable (activity audit)

Post-Auc't Conference Location: St. Lucie Unit N2 Date: 5!arch 23, 1982 Sugary of Pos'Auait Con erence Tn first audit finding was discussed and QC agreed that the At" chme..t (4.4) in S~P-12 which documented the valve cack'ng was not being processed per p ocedural recuirements.

The s'econd audit finding by the Pesident Engineer.

was not discussed as it had been previously agreed to Other matters discussed included items pertaining to'SQP-12 which were aeemed not to be quality violat'ons but vere of concern and.are recorded as follows:

(a) The timeliness of no ifications to QC that necessa y vendor represen a-tion is on site for pump/valve work.

(b) The backlog of Pump and Valve Construction Process Sheets awaiting incorporation.

(c) The Construction Test, Program for statusing packed valves at turnover.

(d) The lack of instructions for the disassembly of cextain types of valves px'ior to welding-(e) The total lack of Construction activity on Attachment 4.13 items, particularly the staking of locking nuts on Lim'oraue Operators p r NRC-ZE Circulax'9-04 and CE letter P-CS-600. ( ne e nuts have caused E

Page 2 of 5

)tuba l1

i Ih 4

i

~ ~

4' ~ VI ~

g-: "4"ia: 3()e-45 (Rev. 3) attach.:.ect 4. 3 (Sec. 3. 4)

"Bo'ting crews shall mark each connection as i" is completed to ensu e tnat no con.ect'on will be ove looked."

Fincinc: Bolting crews are no" marking each connection ensu e that no connection will b overlooked.

as it is completed to Dis 'ssion: =hasco Speci ication 501-76 (High Strength Bolted Field Connec 'ons

=o ="" uctu a'teel) re uire's such marking ard SQP-45 provides i-.,plementing ins=ruct'ons.

The purpose of tne mazking is to make Q aware of which connections are 100%

complete and ready =or inspect'on in h t QC inspections may lag constzu"tion and also may .only sample'he bolts in a connection (in'FPL's case, the JPC:QX 10.15 allows a 10% sample size of bolts p z connection)-.

Zt was observed during the .erection of the Fuel C sk Craneway ha the QC inpec-ions were lagging the construction and that the bol ed connection were no heing marked as co;,.pleted by the bolting crews.

Discussions w'h cognizant personnel provided the informa"'ion tnat rather than ma k comp eted connections, co..struction was verhall}> notif}'ing QC.

FCR 6478E was initiated to change the Specification to per...it this alte native method of notification.

Recommen ations

(] ) Resident E.,gine'earing to enhance FCR 64478E to r.nsuze that ..e no" ' '.c -'n to QC he a documented statement from Construction that the connection was complete (to take the place of physical markings) .

(2) Resicent Engineer'g to review all connections in the Fuel Cask Czaneway with Q" to assu=e that QC has not s~~.pled 10~ of the bolts in incompletely t'gh ened connections.

(3) Resident Engineering to review other sample (high strength) bolted s ructures with Q- for similar assurances.

(4) Resideni Engineereng to azrange fo" a change to SQP-45 to implement FCR 647SE as enhanced.

Dates of Audi  : February 1- llarch 23; 1982 Location of Audit: St. Lucie Unit  ?:o. 2 Page 4 of 5

P ~

'.AC-: S. 2-8 -O6

References:

SQP-12 (Rev.6) 11/8/81: "Servicing and Yaaintenance o Pumps and Valves" SQP-16 (Rev. 6) 1/11/82: "Pipe Suopor" =rection" SQP-32 (Rev.4) 3/12/Sl: "Per-.ianenz Plant E u'=...ent Installation" SQP 43 (Rev.l) 4/22/81: "High Strenght Solted Field Cornection or St uctu al Steel".

SQ?-46 (ReveO) 4/13/79: "rahrication of Class 1 Structu al Steel" e w ease

~ ~I Waa 1 J. R. Luke Da'te Qua'ity Assurance Engineer Acco;..oarvin=

<<tuclthr.

Ma~&/~

N. Pe l'cGavic Ddtea Review;

"-a=oval and, 7 8 ~~~~+

Ã. T. beeves Date S ~ ntendent of QA St. Lucie Projects Page 5 of 5

i

~ g ~ ~

~ ~

'.s-

• PQ'A'KA 4 LIGHT COMPwhY QAC-PSL-82-250 OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE

~

File: 12.13.02 LocaTloN pS~T To B. Sipos oaTa Ymrch 29~ 1982 FaoM J. R. LWe cowes so V. E. Deck G. E.

sUBJscv: S~ -12 (Rev g) para 8 5 7 3 Rock:el'or record purposes in our audit file I a= con ir ing our recen- conversation to the effect that none of the valves cover d by "he sub]ect -ar ph have undergone Turnover o Startup a d that Cons =uc ion est <<ill b -e=:o=-in" functions recured by the paragraph concernin- packed valves prio= to such Turnovers.

In that connection may I.sug-est that Cons ruction Tes arrange for ano her col~ in -which the reauired. 'nfo ation could. be ecorded. for its use o" e ner page 10 of 22 or page 16 of 22 of SQP-64 Jppendix B.

J. R. Luke-4 ~

- y+(.

Approved: g: -~~ ki'. T. Esteem "i;,':JBL:lgd PEON . 5 RV'i~Q I" Oi'I.E

Cl

~~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~

~

asB POv.tR 5 ua>< CONPaNY ER-QF FICE CORRESPONOENCE LOCATION St. Lucie Plant:

To D. R. Cooper DATE April 21, 1982 FM-2-'82-4 130, FROM R. A. Garramoze COPIES TO Listed Below SUBJECTi AUDIT QAC-PSL2-86-06 FXihDING O'.O. 2 Mererandum o J. Parker/J. R. Martin for J. R. Luke dated 4-8-82 - Audit QAC-PSL-2-86-06 The following is Construction Bnginee ing's response to you Audit QAC-PSL2-86-06 Finding No. 2. The item nu'~ers correspond to your item numbers in Finding No. 2.

l. FCR 2-6478E I'as cenerated and approved to permit an alternative in not'ing Quality Control that a bolted connection is complete and reacy xor inspection. The o icinal ecuirement o FLO 2998-761 and 501-76 recuired only an acceptable marking of the completed joint to signify the connection was <<eacy fo" inspect'on. The need fox' cocumented statement rom Cons" uction s'cni ying that

.the cermet-ion is conolete is considered nonaccess~ and an ove"-

co::zitment cons'dering the cuxrent status of const"uction. Tnere is no basis for px'oviding Quality Cont ol with a wzi ten noti 'cation fzom Construct'on and the QC inspect'on report will provide the necessary acceptance and documentation.

2. N& 3347C has been issued documenting nonconformances in the bolting of the structural connections in the Fuel Cask C ane Structural S eel. The enginee ing disposition recuires a 100% inspection of the bolted connec ions in the st uctu e to assure adecuate inspection.

The Structural Steel Specification FLO 2998 761, 501-76 High Streng&

Bolted Field Connections for St uc u"al Steel parag aph 15.02 and AlSC Section 5, Specification for Stru" tuzal Joints (dated 4-26-78) paragraph 6.5 reauires -inspectt'on of only "104 of the bolts or two bolts, which ever is greater". inis inspection provices for a rancom inspection of any of the bolts in a connection. Quality Control has the option to per orm a 100% inspection of the bolts in any connection if deemed necessary.

PEOPLE... SERVING PEOPLE ~ ~h y,. e I a vw h e

Cl

'I 4

D- R- Cooper AUDII QAC-PSL2-86-06 FINDING NO. 2 PAGE -WO

3. As stated in item 2, a random sampling of the bolts in any connection is the minimum recuirement of the project specification ana AlSC-Quality Control should have the necessary documentation to verify the acceptance of the bolting in any structure gR4,

4. A procedure evision request to SQP~Attachment 4.3 paracraph 3.4 was generated on Narch 30, 1982. The next revision to the SQP will reflect the change as indicated by FCR 2-6478E.

Please advise us of any questions.

RAG/JR'/cl ccsB. J. Escue M. A. Garcia C. W. Bailey J. ~ . Parker T. Geissinge"

y ~ ~

~ 4 J

TER.OPPiCE CORRESPONDENCE SZO-82-159 LOCAT>ON PSL-EE TO J. Luke DATE Zgril 22, 1982 J. L. Parker COPIES TO D. R. Stone B. J. Esn~

SUBJECT:

A~~ t QAC-PSL2-82-06 "IwWanical Assembly N. T. heerrs Ac&v1t1es 7'e request an e> ~ension of arty (30) days b Orant d on our reply to U.e subject audit. he are concerned ~'iD tn completeness of ~".e inforrration provid d in ~he valve packing report as prepared by con-s~a won. Ine problem is bing a"dressed by in rested parwes and resolution is n~d d bfore ~'e can complete our response.

/

HEI.E TV==.D JLP/CC/ab s

yogi t F<=LO Cf',:t

'EOPLE SERVING PEOPLE

~ rs ~ e ~ a ~ ~ ~

I I~ ~ ~

flORIOA POttttErr t UCHT COMPANY ER.OF F1CE CORRESPONDENCE QAC-PSL-82-405 Pile: 03.06 LOCATION PSL-2 To J. L. Parker 6ATK May 24, 1982 FROM J. R. Luke COPIES TO N. T. Heems Audit AC-PSL2-82-06 Contxol o f Mechanical Assembl Activities At QC's request, an extension in due date was granted until May 23rd so that QC could evaluate the completeness of the information provided in the valve packing repo ts prior to txansmit ing them to the QA Records Center.

Please respond to the audit at this time including a statement as to QC's position with regard to A achment 4.13 of SQP 12 per let er QAC-PSL-82-377.

J. R. Luke Q-.a. 8 Appt:ottett: ~~ N T." Weems NTV<:JRL:ld PEOPLE... SERVING PEOPLE Form 1008 {SIocked) Rev. 8/81

N i

Ic

~ ~

~ ~ ~

ID* PGdeeR h

&~

LIGHT COMP'ei4Y QAC-PSL-82-377 ERWFFlC CORRESPOiVDENCE Pile: 03.06'SL-2 I OCATION TO J. L. Parker OATK Hay 13, 1982 FROM J. R. Luke COPIES TO Audit 82-06 5LIBJEcTi AUDIT QAC-PSL2-82-06 .

Control of Yechanical Assembly Activi'ta.es Further to your letter SLQ-82-159 requesting an extension for your reply, an extended date of lfay 23, 1982 is satis-factory.

At the time oj the audit, construction forces had not per-for .ed any work requiring documentation on (SQP-12) Attachment 4.13, a form which, like Attach-.ent 4.4,; must be transmitted by QC to the QA Records Center.

'Xn order to prevent recurrence of the problem of lack of transmittal of (SOP-12) attachments to the QA-Records Center,

~lapse conf'rm in your audit response that QC wi11 be trans-mitting all Attachments 4.13 to the QA Records Center J. . Luke App-eve  : T. Wee e Q

NTRT: JRL: ec PEOPLE ~ .. SERVING PEOPLE 'C8 he 'Y C a 1@lie Iel ~ A% 8

Cl f

I h

~ a e

~ w ~

I

~ I 1 QAC-.PSL-S2-424

~ O.ee}R r I~C+> co" ~ "Y

};xlc. 12.13.02

~,.p; F,CCORI t".'I'0".OSAGE LOCATION PSL-2 To a'.. Jo dan DATE June 1, 1982 F RO'v e

J. R. Luke COPIES TO R. A. Garramore Pile sumac Tr SQP-12 (Rev. 7) sa-v-'--'>>c and !laintc.".anna or nnm s and v yves.

Thc subject revision of the above-referenced procedure has been r:viewed again"" the PPL/QA manual anrl the PPL/AS!:~ QA Yanual and the folio'~ing comments are offe ed:

A. Quali.ty Affecting Comments to be resolved prior to procedure issuance.

l. Attac! ments 4.2.3.A 4.2.3.B 9.'. Records (Pa a: 10.1) rer uires the docur::ents gc.Ieratcd p r Para. 8.5.7.2 to be rcvieu:ed and seri" to the QA Records Vault by QC. These documeI>ts include the Valve. Packing Reports.

The p ooosed changes to Attachments 4I.2.3.A and 4.2.3eB are no" consistent ~!ith this long-stand'ng rec,.uirem nt ~;hich (e'itorieally) should also have its o;In 10-Series !Iumber pear ctgraph ~

Also, open audit 82-06 has idcntif'ied that Q has no been review'ing and sending the Valve Packing F .ports to the QA

'Records Vau) t and has reco..zIended that thc procedure be followed.

i It , th=re=ore, proposed that the folio ing intermcdia vordirIg be used in AttachIIau>>t 4.2.3eA (Para. 1.10) and e

Attachment 4.2.3.B (Para. 10.0).

"Thc foreman hall co'.~plate and sign a Valve Pac);ing Report (httac)Iment 4.2.5.A) fox each valve @hi.ch has been packed and transmit the co:;Z~l=tcd Rcport to QC fo its reviews and traIIsrIi ttal to the QA R corr!s Vault."

I'I.'C)"" I..... r I.I!VINU I'CQi'Lr a Form )oos IsI r:i ioI nsv. alai

Cl c:iv~- ' (Pev. 7) r,'::rv.'..-ing and I):;intcnancc of Pumps and Valves page 2 Tnis ':;ore'.ing avoid problems whicn would occur. if the fcgeren v.'e'-e to send the Rc:ports to the Vault such ';s the loss of the Q . Revic:; to Site Criteria and thc! inability of gA to audit the forericn for compliance.

2. Attachment 4.2.5.A Thc Val'e Packing Report requires ncw signature (and dating) lin s as follows:

(a). Foreman/Da e (Rer>>ired because e%ist'g and propose:d pa.agraphs re.",uirc him to sign but no place exist .)

(b) QC Review/Date (Rc:Iuircd because pro-.:o "ec);.aragraphs rec)uirn g to sign for a Review ins-.cad of e>:isting paragraphs which rc-uirc an Tnspection Rc)ewart. )

I".iLorial Cc>-..r.. nts

l. Incumber "..hc. revision bloc!: continuation sheet as 2 o 2.

2 Pc a. c.2 and 8.2.1 Change "from c:rested systc!m.1" t.o "in crci:.tcd systems."

3 Pal a 8 3 1 Chani)c "factory rc)>rose!ntastiv!." to "factory representative"

~i. Para. 8 6 f, (Rev 6)

I Sho':: as being deleted in th.. revision bio k conti>>uation sheet.

c: a. 'l.2.2.A c'rinnc:.1 Iaap)irngm Valve.s slioulc) b in Sc g. 4.2.1.3 eries ani'. also dcscri!>c t)ie dinnss>>r3>ly before i;.elcling.

l G. At t 'ic) i~~nt 4. 0. 3, S)ieet 1 CI's Sic>>iaturc Sh"cl. s)iould rc:fi".:>>ic!r Valv.s as well as pumps.

) ('t~ v 7.)

J "% ! 1 ng ct d &la i>>t I,'clnce vf E u:ops and Va ives B. Fditoria) Co."...c>>t.s - continued:

7. Attach-. nt 4.0.1, Sheet 2 (Scg. 4.2.1.1.A)

Ch.-ngc "Cronatics" to "Co>>tro!aatics" (I~iso Att"c'.>:ncn 4. 2)

8. 't.tach:::'nt 4.0.1, Sh'et 3 (Soqs. 4.2.1.2.A 6 B)

Chang "Nero 'J'est" to "L'erotc st" (Also Attach..."nt 4.2)

9. Attach..", nt 4.0.1, Shoot 4 (He(is 4.2.1.7, 4.2.1.7.A, 4.2.1.7.B)

Cha>>ge "Lir.:ntorque" to "Linitnrcuc"

10. Iittac)n.-.c>>t 4.0.1, Shcct 5 (Seq. 4.2.2)

Cancel th's senucnce number and put thc Grinnell Valves into Sc.-~. 4.2.1.3 pcr Cc~wve>>t 5.

11.;,t:.a.'.v.",cn 4.2.1.5.R, Sncet 1)

Shot valve ident.ity in heading (Rockwell Glohe Valves Cat. 2 through 7)

12. t".cstinghousc Chccl; Valves and 1'acific Chcc): and Gate Valve and [;c'.!:. V!.lvcs Develop:.. ccific Construction I>rocess Sheets for inclusion in Supp 12 ~ Rev Q ~

13. Para. A..i.3: Prov.dc an Ap~ andi>. to the S listing thc items a.",;roved b~ th:: Senior Rcs'dc>>t L'<<gincer.

I '

~ ~ ~

8 i ~ ~~

II,C~ POgqgR d LICH'I COMI'ANY QR.O ff/CEE CORRESPONDENCE

,S Lg-82-201 LOCATION PSL-1'I TO J. R. Luke OATE May 28, 1982 FROM J., L. Parker COPIES TO SVS>ECT: AJdit - (AC-PSL2-82-06 Control Of tlechanical Assembly Acti vi ties S'gP-12 is in the final review/signature cycle. Appropriate sequences were rewritten to have valve packing docum ntation forwarded directly to the vault by Construction. Since holding numerous valve packing reports, you should expect they're.

receipt of these in the near future.

'~nsferring of the valve packing reports becomes construction's reponsibility.

JLP/CC/db PEOPLE... SERViNG PEOPLE

Cl

~" Y ' 70 t

FLORIO* POW1II g LIGHT COMP*NY QAC-PSL-82-485

~PFICE CORRESPONDENCE 26 02 'ile 11'SL-2 LOCATION

. J.. R--"Luke/G. E. Rockwell DATE June 24, 1982 p+oM D. R. Coope COPIES TO (Mee~g At endees) 8 B Lee RESULTS OF P~QG~~Pi'T ?%TING PZ3 TO J D Ki. k T. D Geissinger "

SLI~KCTs RESOLVE OP:-H AUDIT Z~YiS. ~

B J Escue R. F.. Eng~ier .

J E Vessely A meeting, was held with the Directors of'onstruction and Nuc" ear Affai s on June 22, 1982, at PSL-2 to resolve open audit itens in accordance with QP 16.1, Paragraoh 5.5.1.d.

Based on this r:.ecting, the following act:on is to be taken for each o the itens discussed:

l. Audit AC-PSL2-81-14 (Cont ol of hDE)

..Open items Il and

- ~ ..'to'ge Facility, 82 are wa'ting on completion of a Dual Records and cox ection of Ir;spector Qualification Records.

These items are to be completed by QC oy June 30, 1982, at which ti=

J. R. Luke is to veri y the completion a,nd close the audit.

2. Audit 9AC-PSL2-81-35 (Torauing of Flan ed Connections)

Open Item N4 is to be closed immediately by G. E.. Rockwell, based on the deternination that the general requirem nts of QP 10 2 on 'assembly

.verification do not specifically apply to flanged connect'ons. In addition, it was deternined that the reaui ement for inspection of flanged connections, and other similar auali y-related activities, ray be deleted or rwdi ied by QC if they are self-inposed and not based on other specific QA program reauixements.

3 Audit 9AC-PSL2-81-36 '(Protective Coa .'n s)

Open Item Nl is waiting on a xevision to JPC=QZ 9.7, based on the fact that the requirements of the Ebasco Specification were relaxed This revision is to be completed by June 30, 1982, at which tine J. R. Luke is to close out the audit.

4. Audit 9AC-PSL2-82-02 (Control of'onstruction Instructions)

Construction QC letter GF21.4,2, dated Hay 20, 1982 ~ did not address open audit Item ~dl. J. D. Kirk is to it".mediately provide a response to QAC-pSL-82-406, dated IIay 24, 1982." Based on the response received, QA nemo J. R. Luke is to close out the audit, o request that it be forwarded to QA management for resolution.

PEOPLE... SERVING PEOPLE FOItn 1OOS {SIOCLvOI Itev. biv

8 0

QAC-PSL-82-485 Results of Ymaagerent Meeting he1d to Resolve .Open Audit Items page 2 f~

\

5.--.Audit 9AC-PSL2-82-06 (Control of mechanical Asser."Slv

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Activities) ~

Open Item 01 is waiting on revis'on of SQP-12, which will transfe t

.responsibility for checking valve packing from Construction QC to Cons"wc ion. Specifically, the s'te P'ping Directo will eview all past and, fu ure docu~en s verifying valve packing at PSL-2 and forward thea to the QA Reco ds Cen er. It was deterred.ned that this will satis y the QA.P ogre> recuirerents for records authentication. Hhen SQP-12 is issued, J. R. Luke is to close opt the audit.

D. R. Coo er

.A p'roved= N; T. Heems L-Nial:DRC:ec 1" 5

i IV.

QUALITYASSURANCE DEPARTMENT gLoRIoA powth b L>GHt coMl +Mt CO.RRZCTXVE ACTION STATUS W>r. g<-a 4 1.0 ITEM IDENTIFICATION=

n-

-r~Q.- V~+A t Report/Letter No~ +7u6tete N'e: Date:

I Z.Q ACTION REQUESTED BY:

3e0 ORGANZZATION/INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBLE FOR RtESPONSt. ~ C.e P ~~ k K) 3.1 Response Due Date: rt 2 3 a P-4.0 QA ENGINEER RESPONSIBLE FOR FOLLOW-UP:

5e0 'EPORTABILTI'Y:

The Item identified above is/is not n potentially reportable in accordance ~vitn 10CFR50.55(e), 10 CFRZ1 or oaortable occu."rence (LER)-

qa Lead Auditor See Parag"aph 5.2 of QI 16 QAD for instructions if the item is potentially reported in accordance with any of these requirements.

&.Q SE'ATUS:

z," Z

~ ~/a~ ~ a P Oe ] ee ]bI~ - Ce~~ 8 C" 2" YO5 7.0 FINALDISPOSITION=

7.1 Closed By: ~

h Date:

7.Z Reviewed By: Date:

Form QI 16 QAD 4-1 (11/81)

~ ~

INSTRUCTIONS 'FOR COMPLETING FORM OI 16 OAD 4-1 (11/81) 1.0 Identify item, enter date of report/letter.

2.0 Identify who issued the report/letter.

3.0 Identifr the organization/individual responsible for. generation and transmittal of the initial response to party in Block 2.0.

3.1 Enter the date the initial response is due.

4.0 Enter the name of the QA Engineer responsible for follow-up.

5.0 Indicate i. the item above is or is not potentially reportable. The lead auditor signs in the irdicated location.

6.0 Indicate status of the item. All entries shall begin with the date (e.g.>> I/28/77) and end with the signature or initials of person making the entry. NOTE: Refer to Figure QI 16 QAD -'-1 for guidance on completing this section. This section may be continued on the back of the form or on a referenced sheet.

7.0 Final Disposition 7.1 QA E..gineer who closes the item signs and dates.

7.2 Assistant "..a=ager or designee sign and date indicating his review.

6.0 STAx QS: (Cont:nued from the front)

/ 5- 4 .~ f'oe

)

~irj'.AJ

~~r~ Air A'~

u ) e~)

l~ ) c +r U~ ktdW~ T~

POPOVER QUALI'IYASSURANCE DEPARTMENT f QO6IIO @, a LIGHT COM(eAMY CORRECTiVE ACTION STATUS ITEM IDENTIFICATIO¹ g2 ~Q 1.0 Report/Letter No:<4-P~Q gg/ Item No: Date:

2.0 ACTION REQUESTED BY: Vf )Pe Ls 3.0 ORGANIZATION/INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBLE FOR RESPONSE: . W~ V r t4 3.1 Response Due Date: W Z3 cP2 4.0 QA ENGINEER RESPONSIBLE FOR FOLLOW'-UP:

5.0 RE PORTABILITY:

The Item identified above e

is/is not ~ potentially. reportable in accordance ~ith 10CFR50-55(e), 10 CFR21 or a~ a <<op rtable occurrence (LER).

'ead Auditor See Paragraph 5.2 of QI 16 QAD 4 for instructions if the item is potentially reported in accordance with any of these requirements.

6.0 FZATIJ6

~~~ VV~M Zv cn ~

A>> 2-P2- r(1 a R 1 ( ~+(

t

<<eee ~ e<<aI ( ~

KcP VJ 5 P o 4 SAP 9S WCV( roe 0- ve VCR'

/M

7.0 FBlALDISPOSITION

7.1 Closed By: Dace: Sl 0 /8'2.

7.2 Reviewed By. Date. S Form QI 16 QAD 4-1 (11/81)

. 22.

INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING FORM OI 16 OAD 4"1 (ll/81) 1.0 Identify item, enter date of report/letter.

Z.O Identify who issued the report/letter.

3.0 Identify the organization/individual responsible for generation and tra smjttal of the initial response to party in Block Z.O. I 3.1 Enter the date the initial response is due.

4.0 Enter the name of the QA Engineer responsible for follow-up.

5.0 L>dicate if the item above is or is npt potentially reportable. The lead. auditor signs in the indicated location.

6.0 Indicate status of the item. All entries shall begin with the date (e.g., 1/ZS/77) and end with the signature or initials of person making the entry. NOTE: Refer to Figure QI 15 QAD 4-1 for guidance on completing this section. This section may be continued on the back of the form or on a referenced sheet.

(.0 Final Disposition 7.1 QA Engineer who closes the item signs and dates.

Assistant Manager or designee sign and date indicating his review.

6.0 STATUS

(Continued from the front)

I tlE ER IHG I VE R I F CATION PROGRAM MBUSTION E ENGINEERING, INC.

1000 PROSPECT HILL ROAD WINDSOR, CT 06082 January 28, 1983 EVP-529/SL2 Hr. D.L. Christian, EVP Review Committee Chairman Power Plant Enqineering Florida Power E Light Company 700 Universe 'Blvd.

Juno Beach, FL 33408

Subject:

Engineerina Verification Prooram, St. Lucie Unit No. 2 Unresolved Item (Discrepancy) Report EVP-U-14, EVP Task Force Concurrence with Project Team Action.

r Mr. Christian:

EVP-U-14 was issued by the EYP Task Force during the Design Verification phase of the program on October 27, 1982. Documentation was requested to in-dicate tha chloride content of Valve V'-3614 (Verification I.em -;.'2, Sa ety Injection Tank Isolation Valve) stem packing is less than 200 ppm. The dis-crepancy was unresolved and was carried over to the Field Installation phase as EVP-U-14, Revision A,8 B, dated December 2 and 9 respectively. Revision B requested confirmation that packing material used in the repacked valve was of the same lot and size described by certi;fications provided on-site.

At the December 15, 1982 EVP Review Committee Meeting, the discrepancy was.

classified an an Observation and transmitted to the Project Team for review and further processing.

A written response, transmitted to the EVP Task Force on January 11, 1983, indicated that the same problem was the subject of a previous gA audit. The new. gC site procedure resulting from that audit finding required that certi'fi-cations be provided during valve repacking. Since the EVP Task Force identified a potential flaw in the gA/QC procedures, as confirmed by project investigation, a review team is being assigned to resolve the concern expressed in EVP-U-14, Revision B. The project review team evaluation will cover the following:

a. Safety imoact

b. Impact on the guality Assurance Program

c. Reportability per 10CFR50.55(e)

Mr. D.L. Christian nuary 28, 1983 ge Two A review of the Project Team response, made jointly by the Task Force engineer L.ll. Mack and the writer on January 14, resul.ed in Task Force concurrence with the planned ac ions regarding EVP-U-14.

Ver truly yours, D. D. Miller C-E E'/P Task Force Manager DOM/dm cc: c.'/P Review Committee. Members I>

Ootson, FPL

j. C. Moulton, C-E E. Z. Zuchman, Ebasco T.H. Blodgett, Ebasco

'i DISCREPANCY NO. UIR-46

-25.2"

Cl 0

lHRESOLV:-': r..'. SORE?~'CY) REPORT ENGIh ERI'5;. %'ERIFTC4-ION. PRP -Pd2') <<SL2 UX R-46 A' PREPARATION BY EBASCO TASK FORCE INITIATOR ccrc AFFECTED Ii~c .:

jn on rnid +o ~

Pres~mr e I

REF=R:.NCE DOCL~iS: rd /gal%/la ) ron ~on'r . rso n.- .P(e

/ /n j%p4'r) d~4 l gz few pZ-/-~ 2.

D~-ion.~D < D+l+ pqqg @ gag SheelS S8 p, - < xi= 5ina DIFFE Rca"NCES T0 BE RESOLUED:

ng n;e pr'amos o7- rddnI r I.rcaD rrd>> "<<ue

<>>C rceZers deen

~ P rouide8 < j <

'Zo I wing ~02.. g~ gpss ~+r mice ( I Q DESIGN PZATED gg FIELD INSTALLATIO~h R~~ ED ~ S ART-IP P" RFOR~MXCE R:-LATED PP=-PA.==-D BY:C & Car Z DATc-. lZ-<- P 2 REVI:~ BY EB'SCO TASK FORCE

/RATIONALE: I'OUNTS

+oo gh~e, Igo&er P

&pm ~o reer~ f'r Pg

~ /q/ / gs < c,nne r <cP.

gEv. I /zlzz~ e~

g~~ g~qg ~~ gagP6 WtwH IH6 AT'TAc MHEM GC.W Te~ RES'P~<S6 T')gu3

'j2cv.g o( 2 83

~ DI:FERENCES RESOLVED /As+ FoAcc CoHcoR'E W(TH )cga)hfdf I~~FAr 8'y I <<a-'~"

~ RE-RZVIZV, REqUESTED I t:AM,7i=R A+Acvvsuv 2.

MjI3

~'DIFFEPZNCES UNRESOLVED. DISCREPANCY TRA'lSMITTED TO REUIEV COMMITTEE t

/27 .s 8 DATE: /2

S C.~

~

I RESOLUTION BY REUI:->> CO.HITTEE CO~NTS IRATIONALE:

~

g'DPECLreD A '7 L)cc. l 5 216vi&v ~AIMrr"rEF g<Fw>H 8 . SCG ECLOw 9R. W~SPos<Z<ohJ.

DISCR:-PANCY IS ACCEPTABL". RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE.

DISCREPANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. ~ AS OBSERVATION TRAXSNITTED TO PROJECT TEAN Q AS FINDING EY: DATE: Z D. R V E'XD PROCESSING BY PROJECT TEAN

~

MN'M OBSERVATION FIhDING COe hiS:

As iusicjlcQ.cire~~~q cC geueee pe <4 ~le<<~tiki~ bq eu'F'Fex~ I& A.ecu~uu eul ~ P30 ee tvl Quiuu Sleseg yeqeure eeu l

cure CORPZCTIVE ACTION TO BE T Pgggy u'itt q

+of jggyg ikaui ccrc. 4ypJQ.Ys 0 f04)Qc Ep~c.($ eni0u qnu~'bers, 'Pr vi&p4tg~~pl 'e eu Zo1 M'202 o.n Vga TASK FORCE COHCUREKhCE OBTAIhc.D BY: DATE:

ACTION LPL KhTED: 2'ORRECTIVE SaL Jiff'aekw eut 2 Rute% Juueuu'qS, l.a~ 4r pka~efra[lue 4euvwd~.

gQ~p~~ 3Q~~ T4H~vq Z4; (593+p~o <4%YcsL ~~rv~ce" FINDING REPORTABLE UhDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21

~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE BY: DATE:

S 4

FLORIDA PO's'E'ER & LIGHT CON AN ST. LUCIE PLANT - UNIT ?~O. 2 ZNGINc.ERING V:"RIFIC.-.TIO.". PROGR.='0 PROJECT RZ SP ONS ": 0 IR-4 6 VZRIFICATION ZTZi1 l o HIGH PBZSSURZ SAFETY INJECTION PU '?P NO ~ 2A There is no design document that recuires a feeder directory within electrical panels. Howeve , complete directory assis-tance is provided by the use of the PD!0 sneets (2998-3-335) which identifies each ci cuit and i"s respective load. The circuits are clearly nuWe ed at the panels. Some panels may contain a directory developed by the Construction Dep ..ent fo" thei" own ease of installation anc testing. Th's document is not a recui ement.

~ w ~ ra ~

Ebzscc Se~ice~:nc rzcra ed vo Mcrld = ce Cen er Bev York,:i~ 1004C Jea >> D>>aa

~ J 2l' Cc E Z Zucha"./ Feigenbaw =c scc Prc Je"t ecx a

FRQiv . aa C>>ari v\

V SP~ =CT: PROD."="'.

>>i'w >>v'r i ~ ~  !, w vv ra ~ ~ a rare b~ ~~

iJ. ~

~

'.. i c ', i'v

)

'. r. -v ~

v ~ 5D 0 ia a v ~ 'i ~

ia.D>>D a'>>

g D<<DV Dra <<~ ~

~

~ ~

a<<

aaDC vC ~ ~ 'CC C>><<rg v ~

f'e i>d a<<cs a ' Dv,s>> vD>>'-a ccvv'. <<>><<DDD c > <<D>> rv+

~ ~

'c <<>>c av I i D Cc T ~ r<< r

't >>

~

'+ C a

Cia+ 'DD JoaaD v '<<Do>>

e ~ >>>>v icaac>><<D>> t C C q ~

4>>D 4 Daac>>

LV val v ar r ) riv ~

<<a. e hDS da V rVle . th classi ied es Qb ~e 'cns cy t a 5='= ed +1 v D Q>>o l e aa+

vV ~iD vW for ev- e" a" d g>>caaDSS n+ equi D<<aac C<<<

> Dcaa<<

2. ¹mc EZZ-S:-2-83-003, it ca ed Janua=g 5.

e" a, cescr-p on of he P.-cJect Tea ec icns to be or Ups 47, 48, 49, 50 e".d 52, ell of vh'ch are concern d with elec. rica l9 3 ( rc= FeiSenba 'rans 'l n=era equip- .". co o coding. A reviev of the nemo and e eel=.er..s, -a Jointly by . r engineer C'N Buis asd the vriter on Jenua~ 5, resul=e" ~ Task Force ccnczrence vith the proposed actions fo those five UIRs. 3- Memo EZZ-SL-2-83-003 also transmit ed pho ogrephic doc~en ation (per.ainine to UIR-46) of iden ifying tag rufbe s ef ixed to Pcver Panels 20l end 202. A reviev of the me-o end ettachmen s, made Jointly by ET" 'engineer C M Rui" end the vrite on January 5, resulted in Task Force concu.rence vi h the actions taken by 'the ProJect Tea regarding UIR-46. ~ K ~ ~ (" oC=) 4, gs te ~ e Qa. a-a ~ vh 4 s 4G 40vg4 vv ~ vv y tv ar S '>to <<Wn>C a ' QOA heat a4 ( Vsse h k O ~ ~ / brach r v w>> l¹'GvL a) ~ ~ heh ~~ Xea to S av ~ vh4 l)hv Ove ae ho h v gv g ~ reset o tha le.-e." a";6 a. ac."= .".-s aa"e V~oi.-.tie V h V +v V ~ =: e.... e. i .. Hv. and ho <<.i e= o~ Ja=.wry-l0 .ec ia as~ :c=ce WAC 'hhV WV O <O V I ~ ~h I ~ the actions ta'~e."~ hy h P. o'ec Te~= "e~a"~i.".- U"P.-> . ~

5. A l ask ro c actini:ies ir. co"..nec-.ic= =-h .";s ~

c& ~ Ch='s: a 7 v ~ Z V GctsQ.. ~ ht ~ la o. J C ..o~ h C-= D D (->" o~ ~ ~ ~% ev Z ~ihV hVvs~ I~ vl OGe Ov~ FLORIDA POKER & LICH; CO~/PA'iY ST. LUCE:" PLV~T; UNZ .'iO. 2 ENGINEERING % "BZ ZCA 04 PBOGB~i PROJECT RESPONSE: UIR-46 (REVISZO.i 1) UIR-51 (REVISION 1) VERZFZCATZOV ITEN 1: HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION PUTZ NO. 2A On Decembe" 3, 1982, the EVP Task Force issued UIR-46 which stated the ollowing difference to be resolved as a resul of their field inspections: "No namepla es or identification have been provided in powe panels 201 and 202 fo the services ( eeders)". On December 10, 1982, the Project Team responded as ollows: "The e 's no design document that requires a feeder directory w'thin elec rical panels. However, complete di"ectory ass's-tance is provided by t?:e use o the PDa?'.D sheets (2998-3-335) which identi ies each circuit and its respective load. The circuits are clearly numbered at the panels. Some panels may contain a directory developed by the Construe ion Depa, "went for thei own ease of installation and testing. This document is not a requirement." 4 Subsequently, on Decker 14, 1982, the EVP Task Force supple-mented UZR-46 with the following cogent: "During the field installation verification by the Ebasco Task Force no circuits or feeder were numbe ed at the panels as per PDH D Sheets 2998-B-335. The subject PD~D Sheets show the feeder directory (number and load) and this design document must be implemented for identification purposes." < v'.,~ The EVP Task Fo ce cesignated this item as an observation to be included in the inal.'report, which should be addressed and d'sposition c 'by the Project Team. The Project Team has reviewed this item with appropriate per-sonnel from Cons"ruction, Construction Test, ESSE Engineering and NYO Engineer'g Groups and has concluded that su icient in ormation already exists at the power panels to identify the as-installedI ci cuitry in conjunction with the PD&M Data Sheets (2998-3-335 Series). The Project. Team has verified tha" the individual circuit breakers at PP 201 anc 202 are tacced wi h an icentifying number (1, 2, 3, 4...,,,etc.) to aid personnel that a e re-cuired to work on the panel. Photographs o the subjec powe pane's are attachec to document this veri ica ion. is the Projec 's opinion that no signi=ican a"vantage exists in having the feeder di ector'es 'ocated at the power panels. Whether personnel are using the PDaM Da a Sheets or di ectories mounted at the panel, they must cou."." down the rows or circuit breakers to locate the cesi ed. serv'e. Zn fact, as the PD&MD's are controlled documents, thev provice the most accurate in ormation source since a power directory is not nor-mally considered controlled in ormation and could be outdated following a plant modification. Based on the above, we conclude that no action is required on this EVP observation and none is anticipated. I* I S~ ~ ~ r wj4 PP gg z /PI6H i 5'/3E, ~ ~ ~ we+ i. V' Pi +Ca et' h DISCREPANCY NO. UIR-47 -25.3- UK%SOLVED ITEM (DISCREPANCY) R:"PORT ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGR4.'f <<SL2 UI R-47 A. PREPA-"=~TION BY EBASCO TASK FORCE INITIATOR "CT D ITc .. c id'am Are ~a- Fels /nJec-Hioa amp 4 pyre pfessure ~ ~ jy Ca y'O n / 2 A.- RZFER NCE DOCL~TS: ~ ] (a-/-82, y yf P ~ ~a~~~gg~ y~ ~he&7 /ndep~nc4ng De=go.-+ g. p 4 c ggcrnJ5< g,- +xi>ging De~i~n, a) PD ~ ~ p~//~ Peony. 6 < >~~ ~ /8 c k geneia/ g DIF <<PZNCES TO 3E RESOLVED e b) ~ + g / Z7f ~7 7$ n fjy n)c pl@/@ ~@ates haze ning 6~~ co/~ wo p /hee a p+e.P p one/S ~r'8 4g /a /+. Vee5 I Pj <. S z4,- ~ J DESIGN R- ATZD f/) FIELD INSTALLATION RELATED ~ START-UP PER:OP ~XCE RELATED PqEPP ~D Pv. C ~ h~ VU / Z DATE: VI=Bv EBASCO COUNTS/RATIONALE: / TASK FORC / ~gr)oraA /Ii/res'r 8<<~~~ ~ a'$ l X~ 1/ Pjo~ Wo+ ~ /got ~one. zo -= ~~ /m Qev. f (G f/24-/833 ~ASK FOAC'6 CONCURS FATH 4CVfo~ca TEAM, PE'R p~lAc HMEh) T' DIFFERZNCES RESOLVED ~ RE-R VIEN REQUESTED ~ DIFFERZNCES UNRESOLVED. DISCREPANCY TRANS. fITTED TO REVIHJ COMMITTEE . DATE: /Z 'Z;~ ~ C.~ RESOLUTION~ BY REVIEW CO'.MITTEE COUNTS/RATIONALE: dd g f g'<c ch Pr~]'r'<C /WE are Zd'~gSZ u>S'h/y d ddSC~H gexrj M w ~ 2~~+4 g~w&zcAvw ~c~~ DISCREPANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE. DISCREPANCY TR.PRISM ITTED TO IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. PROJECT T~t ~~ AS 0 SERVATION AS FINDING ej EY: DATE: /2 lS Z D. REVIE'>> AND PROCESSING BY PROJECT TE<3 OESERVATIOR, ~ TIAIIRG CO. ANTS: of ~~ ~, ~qoq ~- f color-cohZ'~s, t 'jj,~ giwcirh A 6qw'jaime w 4' usa a.japrapv<ojhjRj p" ivy cv popo. CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE TAKiN: peA~ e.hc.lrcw +wpew+ Co. wcure. prapc,tI colal Y co~ ~ (. 7evc~ 4 sER te.~- ~ ~~jg~ 'E "4~:. Cc~j p4- ~ r v>~ Un<0 2 j.owl's.r M opera-.~v a3( reQai~ ~~~i~~q prI~r PI I ~ TAsK TGRGE coscoRREKGE GETAIhED Sejo Nl<4~~~t 2 ~M- ~~~~ RY: 24; tR 83 4 Y-L r 7~k, W Fj DATE: r~ t-~u-<<~<. %cd'& CORRECTDE ACTION L~L~NTED: FINDING FEPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(a) or 10 CFR 21 ~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE BY: DATE FLORIDA PO'Ar R Q'IGHT CO~~gA'qg ST." LUCZE PLANT UNIT NO. 2. ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGP9'41 PROJECT RESPONSE: UZR-47 (REVISION 1) UZR-48 (REVISION 1) 'UIR-49 (R:"VISION 1) UIR-50 (REVISION 1) UIR-52 (R" VIS ION 1) VERIFICATION ITEMS: 1, 2, 3 i 4 g 7 The cable tray/raceway system at St Lucie Unit 2 is properly color coded, however, certain MCC's, switchgear, power panels, etc may not be similarly color coded although all equipment has the prope identification clearly indicated. Although not specif'cally required by Regulatory Gu'de or Industry Standard, the St Lucie Unit 2 FSAR coes spec' that safety re-lated electrical ecuipment must b ident'fied by colo coced 'tags, pain or tape accord'ng to the appropriate color schemes code provided ~ The color coding has no effect on safe operation or design of the ecuipment. All electrical panels/equipment are provided with name-plates containing the correct equipment tag number which includes I'afety channels. This method of identification readily distin-quishes between redundant Class ZE Systems and ndn-class ZE systems. During routing of the cables to and from equipment, Elec-tricians utilize cable pull cards which designate the equipment tag numbers that the cable is to be routed to/from and the color coding scheme is not relied upon for installation purposes nor do the pull cards even refer to a color code scheme. <<(gykX) ~v S QTTACHhhE N l a V (=<<=) The only purpose of the color code scheme for electrical pane' is to provide easy recognition of eauipment fo" incividuals not familiar wi h the plant layou"', and color codes are never use" as a subst'tute for nameplates when performin'g maintenance or testing on electrical ecuipment. However, as we are not in con-formance with the FSAR, the Project will recommend. that a total review of sa ety related elec rical eauipment be pe" ormec to ensure proper color coding of eauipment tags in accordance with the FSAR criteria. The review and all recuired modi ications will be completed prior to commercial operation. i R:ginee ing Veri ection sk Force 2 asco Septic 'ccrporated Tvo world Trace Ce...e Ãev Yo k, NY 10048 Ja=.u ry 2L, lc83 TO: ~ Z Z Zuchman/T Feigenbam - c." scc Prc)ec earn FBOM' T H 3 oage - - ccasco =P T sk =c.ce liana" < SUB J:-CT: ST LUCI. TPiiIT NO. 2 . "0'~ I t li (U:B-46 i."~U i:."-. -52) I. CO>i vs ~ . is@ .~ ' ~ 4u ' w w "v

1. UIBs 4o hro -h 52 vere genera.e'y the ="asco Task =cree "'u-'-..- t.ie e 6 ~ s " 'a ve ca ic ~s c z a~ a V~Lo 0

~ ~ 14 ~Ca Unit 2 Jobsi e i" early Dec AmA0% ~v C ~ he ece e Cc 04 t'OD io~'~ oe oi J '5 ~ ) I htV cD co'%lpga' ~ ~ i . cs P 0~4 classi ie= as Obse=,a cns3y co=i .e an" transmittec t" P"object Team or rew=ev a..d, processing, as equi nc 6 on C of each

2. Nemo =ZZ-SL-2-83-003, aatec January 5, 1983 (frc=:eigen a"- to Zlo"gett),

trans itte6 a description of the P."c'.ec: Tem acticns .o 3e impl n=e" for UIBs 47, 48, 49, 50 ana 52, all o -hich are concerned <<='th ele" colo co"irg. A reviev of that m =o a".c.a tac;-.ents made -ica'cuipmen )ointly by ~i engineer C M Buiz snQ he vri.er on Janus~ 5, resul e6 'n Task Force concurrence vith the prcposec act c-s for those five UIBs.

3. Memo EZZ-SL-2-83-003 a'so trans ittec pho.c"re;hic aoc~entation (pertaining to ~i,-'46) of icentifying tag nu=bers a.fixed. to Pover Panels 201 an6 202.

A reMev of the me-o and attach ents, rale Join ~~ by ETF engineer C N Buiz an6 the vrite on Janu ry 5, resulted in Task Force concurrence vith the actions taken by the P.object Tes regar"ing UIH-46.

4. A Speed Lct.er de ed J=iu ry 10, 198~, fro= .=ei-"-b = to 7'od-tra~s=it ed photc~ra"..ic doc--en a 'on (perte'ing to 'pe q-<1) identi g ng taa, ncabers affixed o }"-5V DC Pose Panel -A. k review of tha,. let er aad.attic".=ants, a,de.)ointly by = 'z e n-'neer C Rui= /

and the vriter on Janu ry 10, resu'ted 'n Tasl'orce h 4%41JV4 I ht tl t t gl 4 0 ~ ~ the ac ions taken by the Prospect Te= rema= i.".g L~B-"1.

5. All Ta.sk Force activities in connection <<Cth UZHs 46 i 5c are considered to be cc= 'e.

cc: D L ~ V Dotson ) c'. J C Moul on, C-:- D D Yiller, C-:- L Z Zucl- ". T H Bloc>ett e zs-. 4-W lW ~ ~ UhRESOLXcD ITEM (DIS:.P:=8~"C'! 'p REPORT ENGINEERING VEcRIFICATIO'.l PROGP~M - SL2 'A. PREPARATION BY EBASCO TASK FORCE INITIATOR AFFECTED ITB".: r 2 < g~ I Zd'em c.- S'ePeg Jp'egee/,gg g-Gal Con7P d r.rso 4 SAc~ 7 (E~l+ 7. REFcR=NCE DOCL~TS: Q e /rJ /~ p< f/% &an Jnwf< / x DIFFER:NCES TO BE RESOLVED: p7g Sg~e re~ Z g W end ZA- (g.v oslo n A) cine 1 i visi uisl dd /i/Q CS' J-~ ~ng P f3- (~~or r c <a~en le+@ = ug l<<Aan/zg-P Q DESIG( 2% RELATED ~FIELD INSTALLATION RELATED + START-UP PERFORM'FACE RELAT D PREPAID BY: C'+'+>>> 1Z-8 $ 'Z REVIEW BY EBASCO TASK FORCE 'l7e.v.f O(/Z4/SS) As@ Forzcp Case.uxor ~iT'H Ac.T'ioN z l~ 'E~ tkxcH F~ I Ug 7g04c,C.l TF pfvf > I cg. ATTACHE E'HT ( DIFFERENCES RESOLVED ~ RE-RVIEW REQUESTED DIFFERENCES UhRESOLVED. DISCRE ANCY TRANSMITTED TO REVIEW COt9jITTEE DATE. 12~- I + RESOLUTION BY REVI~'OMMITTEE r CO;- ENTSlRATIONALE: DPS~ ~7++o+ (84 + +v (94'~/uM, P~~ jq 7+A~ j S gg// 8r t A4'R 4>5+i 4P /~5/i Z Da m~w cPi~w 'c&~'~. DISCREPANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE. DISCREPANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABL AS OBSERVATION TRANSAITTED TO PROJECT TEA.f ~ AS FIX)ING DATE: COMMENTS: DE REV E~ I"BD PROCESSING BY PROJECT TEA".f [g OBSERVATION ~ EIAI>ING FSAR spec<< ~es l ~<<W>cM~ oT Sa+eQ- Yc,~~ c.4cXvl~ <~ai~~~ bq Mso 0'f cppvopr~ ool v co~ ~o p Q or fg po T~: Qootr~ ro~ e.aors~& ~ cr scvc ~roper coLev co~ CORM~CTIVE ACTION TO BE tpcviooo soke+- cpm)~~~ >go. C~PL~~ eVC~ M ~u>V.~ ~~~~.: ~ ~ p ~ t ~ I: P '.rv aWk t P~~T-K VSSE' Co gy ~ 0 & l o TASR SORCE CONCURRENCE OBTAIhVD Nitkck~hhk 2 MM+4.nis.sE,~ Q+, B ~ DATE: Z + 2 ~s ~g gQ pe~ l'LL )QQ'3 CORRECTIVE ACTION LPL~B RED: FINDING REPORTABLE RiDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21 ~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE BY: DATE: FLORIDA PGL"ER & LIGHT CO!ZANY ST. LUCIE PLANT - UNiT NQ. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGRAM PROJECT R" SPONSE: UIR-47 (REVISION 1) UIR-48 (REVISION 1) UIR-49 (REVISION 1) UI R-5 0 (REVISION 1) UZR-52 (REVISION 1) VEPZFZCATZON ITEMS: 1~ 2~ 3J 4J 7 The cable tray/raceway system at St Lucie Unit 2 is'propert color coded, however, certain MCC's, switchgear, power panels, etc may not be similarly color coded although all equipment has the proper identification clea ly indicated. Although not specifically required by Regulatory Guide or ndus ry Standard, the S Luc'e Uni" 2 FSAR does speci y that sa e y re-lated electrical ecu'pment must be identi ied by colcr coced tags, paint or . ape according to the appropriate color schemes coce provided. The color coding has no effect on sa e operation or design of the equipment. All electrical panels/equipment are provided with name-plates containing the correc ecuipment tag number which includes safety channels. This method of identification readily distin-quishes between redundant Class IE Systems and non-class IE systems. During routing of the cables to and from equipment, Elec-tricians utilize cable pull cards which designate the ecuipment tag numbers that the cable is to be routed to/from and the color cocing scheme is not relied upon for installation purposes nor do the pull cards even re fer to a color code scheme. ~M ~ I "a: The onlv purpose of tne color coce scheme or elec" ical panels is to provide easy recognition o eauipment for individuals not amiliar with the plant layout, and co'or coces are never used as a substitute =or namep3.ates wnen performing maintenance or testing on electrical ecuipment. However, as we are not in con-formance with the FSAR, the Project will recommend hat a total review of safety related electrical ecuip-.;ent be perfon"ed to ensure prope" color coding of ecuipment tacs in accordance with the CESAR cr'te ia. The review and all recuired mocifications will be completed prior to commercial operation. 2:gine ring Verification T..sk Force Ecasco Service ncorporat c T"o Vorld Trade Cen er Sew York, hY 1004" Ja>>~,~>>y Ol. 3 CC <<w T0 I Z Zuc~a."./ Feigenbaum - <<c sco Prc'ec-rBOM: T ii "='odget -:.=asco R~ ~ask Force l'.anager ~ "+CP I SU>> ~<<I<< <<Lr J ~~ EG sG ll .- 1XIlG G 'v-" v ~ '<<n,4 '+1 3UAI ST LU Z<< Fi" HO. 2 (U -46 ~ IV 4V ~ <<+el<>4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I" I, Il ~ PL I ' U Bs 46 field +"-o gh 52 were genera ed cv irstal~a-'c" ver-'~'"aticn ""ase c~ th "rc-""~=. a: zhe =- Ae ~asco ask Force>>'"-'n- 4>> U t<< 'Le o<<o <<o>> 1 << <<0 <<J,a ~ Pevie << '- o ~ Z ecL oo c 'I e 1 0 l "' ag l <<Sse c~q e ~~ e g class' ed as 0b e=.a: '.".s by <<'4 II a Pro)ec Tea o" review.a d proc ssing, as evi¹nc c on Pe: Oll <<<< ULH.

2. M~~o =ZZ-Si.-2-83-003, dated Ja".ua 5, 1983 ( ""- Fe 'enba= o ="~ c"g z:)

transmi ed a descr'p ion of the P."o'ect Te ac icns to be imple= nte" for U>>Ps 47, 48, 49, 50 and 52, all o which are concerned i-'th e'ectr'cal eouipm nt colo coc rg. A review of ha me=o and attac2 .en.s ce )oint)y by EZr enginee. C M quiz and the ~ iter on Janua~ 5 esul.e" n Task Force concu rence with the propose" ac ions for those .'ve b~Hs.

3. Memo ZZZ-SL-2-83-003 also transmi ed photographic doc en -.icn (peraining to UZB-46) of'dentifying tag nu=bers a ixed to Power Panels 201 and 202.

A revie~ of the me=o and attachments, =.ode )ointly by <<T= engineer C . Bui and the writer on Janua~ 5, resul ed in Task Force concu rence with .he actions taken by the Prospect Team regarding UEH-46. Cl 4 A Soee Le+ ver gate+ ~ ~gg~~. }Q > cc4 r vs ~ vC Oayetv > <Kc"v- a -c- fJ ~, il ) of 10e svv 6t natavv ag,g v vag aov'v 5 a. ixec to ve i{ eg of that 1e ter ~-." a-tach.=e"-s, =e,= o Jo + y by w e, ear M Rlli: and the ~viter on Jane ~Pro'es@.1 10, e6 in es'.. =o"ce cc.-.rre"..Ce ith he ac.ions ta.'.en b- the ec. Te= re=ar-inc ~ P,-p

5. A'1:ask Porc act vities in consi< re6 o be CC"C1ete.

7 ~'Lv4 5e v ~ I Dots 0.. ) Z C C-:. 3 D Yii11er, Z Z Zuc."-. ".. Pl P "1oc~e DISCREPANCY NO. UIR-49 -25.5- UNR~.i '.:9 .'21 (DISCREP ":') REPORT ENGINEE~';G VERIFICATION PROGPaif SL2 A. PREP'+'ON AFr ECiiD REFiRENCE IT~'/7ggr V'err t-r Cc BY EB:SCO TASK FORCE INITLATOR DOCL~TS: ton 2- ~n- . 3 <onVro/ Dr ./4~ng -~ r'~~>< / / 7'C V 25- I t /I2-I-8~ P (/ y ~ ~ ~OP >'+/g~ ~/july t-(~ e'< c /hP+pen Jf 6g +e~ Ig < . P e P (c=,r--a Z7'( Z. -'Q~'- ~fr.." DIFrrR NCiS ~ ign,-. TO BE R:-SOLVED: ~/ea Pic< / ~encra/ z/e~ 78 /n ~ //~p /on Ta ~ $ ~~P a ro<rA ~ fen:~ // ~< ~2 ~- ~ Dr.SIGN M~~TED ~FIELD INSTALLATION RELATFD ~ START-UP PERFOR~~iCE R:-LATiD PREPAR=-D BY: C M. Gc iZ ~~< '5 DATE: EVIKV BY EBASCO TASK FORCE CO~ NTS/RATIONALE: ~I V'I-'- 'iv s<<n @ f g +en <otw o c <+~+ J IV I< ld << ~~mp C'o /c7 . Rc-v. 5 (oil<<I~A /gq~ QlzcG'c ~res RITh'cTI ~S I a Z TA )c6'A'y 'PiZozec7 7i~g,g~g, ArrpcH~eWr i. DIFFERENCES RESOLVED. ~ RE-REVIE~ REQUESTED Qxg DIFFERENCES UNRESOLVED. DISCREPANCY TRANSMITTED TO REVIEW CO.KITTEE ~~ non ATES /2-g ~ PZ-IZ.+ ya(a3/8 ~ ~ >> 0 ~ ~ RESOLUTION 3Y REVIEt: CO.BITTE 4 P>/l ~ ~ CO'&NITS/RATIONALE: 0+ < Z/l /4 o 7 g >/ ~ ~ g)r Crgi ~44'4 v't l rc +4< ~ CJS) f+ /<C'gV P' y Hyp p DISCREPANCY IS ACCEPTA3LE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE. DISCREPANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. ~ AS OBSERVATION TRANSMITTED TO PROJECT TEAN ~ AS FIR)ING BY: DATE: D. REVIE" 'XD PROCESSING BY PROJECT TT'4 f OBSERVATIOE ~ FIhDIBG CORKNTS: P 559. 7 I ccwfat.c ~4wCl K~M~ o F sCLFe ) c)~ Attic.l vsM tsp~l nMc~: rAse ot rhppvopvs+ colov-co~ F p>>oo or l.>>pe. CORRECTIVE ACTION TO 'BE TAKEN: 5'c'Fey-yet~ c,lcm',lr~ c,q 'p g roper c,o Loy- ~ph>>hY'Yhd Q>> COYOOpQ4 9W Y'C Vg Cud o mOh.km~ t.-.'V;C ~ 0~4 + Cowm Lrc~ opcrKc~ g ( ~ TASK FORCE CO.MCORRENCE 0 TQIhoD BY: DATE: her r ' $ 44o A tt Mh>>sr %,he 4 2 CORRECTIVE ACTION LPLBKNTED: JCLrSR~) Q$ [Q +3 ~r +ST ~Q 0v~ ~~y ~c,+ FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21 ~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE BY: DATE: LORIDA POi ER '5 LIGHT CO A'~Y ST. LU IE PLANT - UNIT NO. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGRA s PROJECT R"SPONSE: UIR-47 (PZ:vIS ZON 1) ~ UZR-48 (REVISION 1) UIR-4 9 (REVZS ION 1) UIR-50 (REVISION 1) UIR-52 ( REVZS ZON 1) VERIFICATION ITEMS: 1p 2) 3( 4 ) 7 The cable tray/raceway system at St Lucie Unit' is properly color ) coded, howeve, ce tain MCC's, switchgear, powe panels, etc mav not be similarly color coded although all equipment has the p oper icenti ication clearly i.;dicated. Although not specifically required by Regulatory Guide or Industry tand rd, the St Lucie Unit 2 FSAR does spec'fy tha" sa ety re-la ed elec rica'c'ipment must be icen i ied by'colo co"ed tags, pa'nt or tape accorcing to the app opriate colo schemes code provided \ The color coding has no effect on sa e operation or design o the equipment. All electrical panels/equipment are provided with name-plates containing the correct equipment tag number which includes safety channels. This method of identification readily distin-quishes between redundant Class ZE Systems and non-class 1E systems. During routing of the cables to and from equipment, Elec-tricians utilize cable pull cares which designate the equipment tag numbers that the cable is to be routed to/from and the color coding scheme is not relied upon for installation purposes nor do the pull cards even refer to a color code scheme. ,~(gal) 0 rt The only purpose of tne color co"e scheme for electrical panels is to provide easy recognition o ecuipment or individuals not amilia with th plan" layou , and color coces are neve= used as a substitute for nam plates w¹n per..orming ma'ntenance or testing on electrical equipment. However, as we a e not in con-omance with the FSAR, the Project will recommend that a total review of safe y related electrical equipment be performed to ensure proper color coding of equip...ent tacs in accordance with the FSAR criteria. The review anc all recu'red modifications will be completed prior to commercial operation. 8 I I, <

> A Sneer ~wtter 3atec Z ".usw 10, A1 A th b o>>s vo Jo>>yes>> 1~ i 44 t- ans11 te>> p'otc>>raghic coc~>>entat on (~ew~c>>4 g <o ftT>> cl) a 1 iaenti~in~ ta~ n=.hers affixe" o 125V '"" 2o=er 2ane A evx e'a o tha ~e:er a=." a. ac"-e-.. s, a"e <ointly 5y =.c en-'ne r C M zui-a.".d. the ~miter on ~~".uary 10, resulted in Tasi'. 2orce concurrence ~ .the ac ions taken h~ the 2rogect = e~a="in- U:3-51.

5. Al as. ."orce ac-iv t~es in connec 'on <<--h 1

U:Hs 46 hroa-.'". 5"- a e consi" re" to 1e co=".le.e. N>> ~~ >>'4 4 0>> ~ Dotso.-., j c Youltor. D D 4~1 o>> C-:- E Z Zuc>=an >> oboe DISCREPANCY NO. UIR-50 "25.6- SC VED IT~ (DISCREPANCY) RKPOR K~'l $ 'KPING VERIFICATION PROGRAM SL2 ur R- ~o PREPS"- TIPN PY ZPASCO ".A~i .ONCE INITIATOR AFFECTED ITw~: Veri Pico r i r'ic,n ~g~~ g +/ugr~a~n Vecambi/ref ~/g~g, I - f- S Z p-'f ~ RKF:.K~NCE DOCL~NTS: p p pep g+g 7 g PQ ) ~ ' ' g zi~4ina C)ea ign ~ ~lecdrico i 6<ne aiiie,e+ 7- I sIc DIFrrP=NCES TO 3E RESOLVED: (QI9/BIO fl A) 2 B 6 pgg~< ~g- ~n)='gian = ~ ~ ~ c) / ~zg scen p <<~~a -.~A I~~<g'~ ~ ~ I 0 ~n J ~ f8'at% (i a ncP I Z. + DESIGN RELATED + FIELD INSTALLATION RELATED ~ START-UP PERFOR~~XCE RELATED. PREPS-D PY: C /9 +o'i w DATE: ' ~- 2-RZVI 'Y ESASCO TASK FORCE l COUNTS P~TIONALE: %Ad/ I gpan f8 a~id'~~ <<~ g. heave P g ~~me cd (~ QOd8J. w i ~g 'Rev. i ol 24. 89 'jgs'~c feiMg CouuRS'ITH gcT<~S le lR 7h~hi I3y ~l JQQT ~++~p Pi=-R Ai++cHP BUT g. M(P DIFr EPZNCES RESOLVED ~ RE-MVIEW REQUESTED DIFFZPZNCES UNRESOLVED. DISCREPANCY TRANSMITTED TO REVIEW COMMITTEE ~C .fj DATE: P - ~ Z. / /. ]3Y ~ I2 cy 8Z ~ '\ ~ ~ - Wy ~ C.~ RESOLUTION BY REVIEW COh fITTEE COUNTS/RATIONALE:~ ~ y Xiii g<qOprrr"rr.ir ( r'zip'r l ~ ~ +( 4/4'~, ~ ~~ui'ZC i 4 gy y gp'g /( ) c/ s Zi w; 8+5rg ~ o' ~a >~.C r.-.ir.~'Ze ~r vC DISCREPANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE. DISCREPANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. TRANSMITTED TO PPOJECT TEAM ~~ AS OBSERVATION AS FINDING BY: DATE: iZ lK gZ-D. REVIEV AND PROCESS NG BY PROJECT TE' QQ OESERUATIOÃ ~ 'FjhOLhG ITS: c'MCifl~~ ~'P~'tr +cr 8i~c r~ +~~" ~~ CO. o S'wi YctdJ ~ f FSP,g. 5)e.c<fir s usg of aPPnPec~ GOLor-ccjtQ. Q c, sic,'ORRECTIVE pm,~ ofgw)r ACTION TO BE TAKEN: G~a~ <~i 6 re~

r. Co~pe i~

c'Ihc~~~ a~p~M e<<g Wt'.vicuv- M cxL ~r@ ~~~ u.re. proper ~@ Actus- ccLii= r p 'or Q Q~ 2 ~~~~~ TASK FORCE CONCURRENCE OB A bED 5'c'acLh <~Z 2 CORRECTIVE ACTION LPLRKNTED: 0)gYo~ ~mme ZA. ~ (<83 Ii*,r +r +as( %rcpt c m~rrwc<. FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21 ~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE OY: DATE: j ae r FLORIDA.,POL';=R & LIGH C , ST. LUCIE PLANT - UNIT NC. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PRQG~~4 PROJECT R" SPONSE: UZR-47 (REVISION l) UIR-48 (REVISION l) ll) ~ UZR-,49 (REVIS ZON ) UIR-50 (REVISION UZR-52 (REVIS ZON l) VERIFICATION ZT" 4fS: l, 2, 3, 4, 7 The cable tray/raceway system at St Lucie Unit 2 is properly colo coded, however, certain MCC's, switchgear, power panels, etc may not be similarly color coded although all equip...ent has he prope" identification clea ly indicated. Although not specifically required by Regulatory Guice or Zndust y Standard, the S" Lucie Unit 2 FSAR coes speci y tha" sa=ety re-lated electrical ecuipment must be identi ied by'color co=e= tags . pain" or tape according to the appropriate colo+ schem s code provided. The colo" coding has no effect on sa e operation o cesign of the equipment. All electrical panels/equipment a e proviced w'th name-plates containing the correct equipment tag number which includes safety channels. This method of identification readily distin quishes be"ween recundant Class ZE Systems and non-class I= systems. During routing of the cables to and from equipment, Elec-tricians utilize cable pull cares which designate the equipment tag numbers that the cable is to be routed to/f om and the colo" coding scheme is not relied upon for installation purposes nor do the pull ~ ~ cards even re er to a color code scheme. ~(gq4X) The only purpos'e of the color code scheme or elect -ica panels is to provice easy recogni ion o ecuipment or in"'viduals not familiar with th plant layout, and co'or coces are ne:er used as a substitute for namepla es wh n performing maintenance or testing on electrical ecruipment. However, as we are not in con-formance with the FSAR, the Project will recommend that a total review o sa ety related electrical ecuipnent be performed to ensure proper color coding of eauipment tacs in accordance with the FSD criteria. The review anc all recuired moci"ica"ions will be completed prio to co~e cial operation. I Ebasco Se=.'ce c' Tvo world . ad Cer er Ãev York, IP. 10043 Tee e~ Jl ~ ~ AJC<y+yJ ~< 1 cc') T0 \ E Z Zuc~an/T Fei~enbau. - =casco Pro'ec>> ~ea= FROM: H ~ o~-s ~ c.~as~0 '~= i ok "o ~e aaana~ eI g SRu. CT: 'a ews I~ ~ ='c g I . ~ 4C' .e ~ ~ ~ .V~ r.vA ~ PP ~

l. UIi?s 46 through 2 vere generate 'cy .he oasco "ask Force = '" n> -".

haec qie~a +~ale ~ sv%volcvkvvcQ'U~ ~ >a~'s~ pro~'>'~a'~~ ~'i eo rw g ~ <<g cv 'I u J T ~,49 c 9v)GL ~ I U 2 -"~ "ece--~" 1jo s4 e~ ~o. ~ 04 l 4I a as 0 <<Cl 1t vc ~ a ~ I cs classified as "bse~ntionsby the c='.tee ~".d tran~."it-ed =" th ~object Tea= for reviev anc p.oc ss='n~, as evicenc d on =e=: C o e UIB.

2. Meno EZZ-Si.-2-83-003, dated Je"ua 5, 1963 (frcn Fei>enbaun =o = cd=a=:),

ra.".i-...e" a cescription of th P."o'ect em acticns .o be inpl for Ups 47, 49, 49, 50 e".d 52, all o vhich are cence ".. " ii h elec. color co"'n-. A reviev o that nano and at ac?~.en s =ade rice'auipnent )ointly by Z r engineer C M Bui" and th vriter on Janua~ 5 resu'" in Task Force concu"rence vi.h the proposed a" ions for hose ive b 2s.

3. Mono ZZZ-S~~2-83-003 also rans=i ted hotographic doc.=en at'c" .(=e .ainine, to R-46) of iden i ying tg nunbers a fixed to Pover Panels 20'nd 202.

A reviev of the ne=o a.".d attach ents, vade Join ly by =~c engineer C M H = and the vrite on January 5, resulted in Task orce concurrence vi h the actions taken by the Prospect Teazn ree,arding UIR-46. Cl ~ ~ C<<naA Ta>> 4'o<<Aq>> n Tqe q<< i1 4 6 ~ ~ Io~ <<v<<>>v ~ >> u t AR' 0 <<4 Co ~ Ar 5 v (: eC o>>e 'je ~ <<5 ~ l~ ~ a".6 he ei e o.". JG Qa p 30y ."esv. ec ='.". I as~:c"ce ~ cc.".c" "..".ce ~"-" t:".e ac.io.".s ~e.-. >>>> ~ e>>v)bv 4l%D I W<<h ~ >>>>I >>'D -e-a-"- 5>> ~1 ask "c>> ce acv s in conga>> ~ < ~<<>1k v'4 ~~ t,. Ls 6>>>>>> v<<>> ="- a"e coaside.eQ .o oe cc=v e. I S Ih ~ Cl <<'g >>icvsc>>. e J C Yo'-ga ) C-:- C-:- D 0 Z Z ZQ T 2 3'oc-- DISCREPANCY NO. UIR-51 -25.7- IRRESOLVED ITBi (DISCREPANCY) REPORT ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGR>~ - SL2 lily,"5'I A. PRE?P3.'TION BY EBASCO TASK FORCE INITIATOR AFFECTED ITEM: v' 7 ~iy < n ~P ~% /o/ Veri<i c< Compo ji orI g/peeP on E.e P =/ec/) /7 P/0/J. //574f//4 y jo/7 e 3SS She~ 2 S~ oj~ Cga fc. Z95~- Z DIFFERENCES TO BE RESOLE': 8'c na nj" pro Fc ~ j Hen ~ji gj~oe Per Aon~ wn.e been P-c= v >. ~ ~ >/pi s. < / pp gge weruioes ( Pc )-". +]el'. ~ DESIGN R:"LATED ~ FIELD INSTALLATION RELATED ~ START-UP PERFOr~'FACE R LATED PR-P v-D BY ~ C 6 ~ ~+Ol 2 /2- Z-Z2 REV' BY BASCO TASK PORC CO~X S/RATIONALE: -/o ~bee 1 l2ev. I IE ~ DIFFERENCES RESOLVE ol 2,4 8'3 ~AS+ WR,C E CouCuRS R>VW A~V) ouS WAKEÃ PY ~ao ~ RE-PZVIEV REQUEST%) TRo~ec:r M~AM.,Fere A~TAc~~e~v 2. ~ DIFFERENCES UNRESOLVED. DISCREPANCY TRANSMITTED TO REVIEW CO.KITTEE DATE: IZ/oJ 8'Z. ~ ~ ~< ' C. RESOLUTION BY REVE:.>> CO~ITTEE COUNTS/RATIONALE: Jl. kY + f f 4. cL 6c" ~ > 5 Q(cv)~ DISCREPANCY ES ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE. DESCP"PANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. QQ AS OBSERVATION ~ TRANSMITTED TO PROJECT TE AS FINDING DATE: /Z j'. REVIE>> AND PROCESSING BY PR03ECT TEkf g 0>SKRVAT>ON ~ FZM)IEG CO. ANTS: g 0 ~f'Lx& (yL 4.ccQY LE@.~ ~5M W g 4 3~ S'he~i rea<<w~e~ i~ CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE TAMPON: Ensure Wag ~~++I,~ ~~V gye~~g of l'2S Y DC. Qu.g 'Pp>> eg la.n~ cLya. 4+q~ m<4 tk+t>4q>~ numbers. Fi=vAe- ~~<grap~~c M~~e> '-'>~ TASK FORCE CONCURRENCE OBTAIhcD BY: DATE: . /Z X

~~+>>~~++~qrapkco kocu~~ Saw ARa.&~ex' >M'Ta-~~ ~+ 1'tS> v IaS k R)>'~ Coxe~~~q. FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21 ~ 'FIhDIhG NOT REPORTABLE BY: DATE: S P FLORIDA PO'iiER 6 LIGHT .CO>~ANY ST. LUCIE PLANT M IT NO. 2 ENGINEERIAG VERIFICAT-O;~ PRO~g~v PROJECT R:"SPOUSE: . UIR-51 VERIFICATIO'8 ITEM) 7: MAI."l STZAYi ISOLATION VALVE I-HCV-08-lA There is no design document tha" requires a feeder directory within electrical panels. However, complete directory assis-tance is provided by the use of th 'D?I sheets (2998-B-335) which identi ies each circuit and its respective load. The circuits are clearly numbered at the panels. Some panel's may contain a directorv developed by the Const"uction Depa "~ent or thei own ease o=. installa ion an" tes=inc. Th's d"c' ..e."." is not a requirement. I C 4 FLORIDA POP R & LIGHT CO<&ANY ST LUCIE PLANT UNZT NO. 2 ENGINEERZ'5'G'ERIFICATION PROGRV3 PROJECT'ESPONSE: UZR-.51 (R VISION 2) VERIFICATION ITE i 7: '.IN STEAN ISO ~'ION VALVE I-HCV-08-lA The project team has verified that the individual circuit brea-kers at the 125V DC Bus 2A are tagged with an identi ying numbe to aid personnel that are required to work on the panel. Photo-graphs of the subject equipment are attached to document this veri. ication. The project team has reviewed th's i"em with appropriate personnel fro;.i Construction, Construction Test, ESSE and NYO Engineering Gro's and has concluded that suf icien information alreadv exists at the electrical panel to identify the as-installed ci=- c"'t=y in conjunc 'on with the PD&; Data Sheets (2998-B-335 Series) . Base" on ine above, tne project team concluded tha= no act'on is rec'red on this EVP'bservation and none is anticipated. Z A,vtAcor .c).' Z. >v ~-: - W<iAC~.ii~Ei~ . I '23 ~o '~ p s( i?gyes) -gA ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '\>> ~kw I $ Z5 V gg. gag p p ~ Z5 V D c gi vg z p,. 4' 1 R i ee>>g Cii~C>>o>> T v>>>>iiv O Tvo worl" ra" Ce>>+ a>> Be" Yo k, ?~ 1 00-'" a~ 24 1 TO: E Z Zuc~a."./T Fe'genbau= - .casse Prospect ee FnOM Sv~.CT: IV ~ li qadi ~ v ( ~vev \f 'i >>ji j g >>>>+ ~, \ ~ ~ . Iv A U qs 4o i'g>>+ <<c2 vD>>is gii>>D>>aveA>>v bA a c as/ >>>>>>O c 1 f'e.8 'a 8 i>>e~ Ie>> ~ v v>> ~ S 'y>> v v iris>>'>C>>a+4>>>>>>e <<4 v 0 0va v + J'Ln \ v Vk 0 Cv a T~ >>\ U>>cv C ihr ~ vv v gosJc v p>> ai>> e wq>>a>>dt 1 ~v J 4e ~~ ~ Qadi' ~ v <r>> MC 'a>>Oai '>>Ca W v>>O+' ~ ~ >> v<<5$ 5+Vii>> v 4 r 4 ~ class'e" as "bse~ationsby he c=i=t e ~".~ t".ar. mitted -" t" Pro)ec .e"- or re;-ev e"." nr'cessing, es ev'cene P. on Pe"" C o. e UIH.

2. Nemo =ZZ-S~2-c -003, aa ea Je".ua= 5, 9""3 ( rc= Feige"ba= o 31o"g - ),

tra>>ismit e" a Gescription of the P"o'ect ea- ac.'ns o be imple=en=eve for UIHs 47, 8, 49, 50 a".6 52, a"' <<hich are ccncerne" <<5th electr'ca. equipment cclor co"ing. A revie<<. c hat memo and a tac?:-.eats =aa )ointly by ~r enginee C Mi Hu.'" en6 .he <<-.iter cn January 5, resul ea in Task Force concu ence vith the p.c"ose ac.ions for t?:cse ive KHs. 3; Memo FZZ-SL-2-83-003 also transmi ea pho ographic aoc=er. ation- (pertairing to UIH-46) o. ilenti y'ng tag nwberd a fUe6'o Pover Panels 201 and 202. A reviev of the me o ant attachmen.s, maKe Jointly by ~ TF engineer C N Huiz an6 the vrite on January 5, resul eL in Task Force concurrence vi h the actions taken by the Progect Te'am rega" ing UIH-46. 1 II 4, A So " L te= i .e" Jmv ~ 0 -0<i y <<p JO v~ es aw go v olag v 4v ~ t ans~ .tee. photc~r -"'c 6"v I ~~ o l RVi DC Pone P e A . A ~ 4, ~~ C J, o t..at letter a"." a:tac".=ents, A gt ~ ani. the i-.i e". on Jane ry 10, resnltec in Task:-c ce l p Ihl4 r4r i& the actions taken by .he Pro3ect Woo ~a o gas, 4 \I g '

5. ~l m asky 'Force Z activit~es in connect.'orn ~i-" ': =s 46 "o-="i

?~ M~J are conside ed. to be co=ale e.

w.h c L C 1~C qi Psr C

~ ~ Dc So.. ) J C Roe .c.-., C-:- D D z Znc ~an Pt P 3loget ~ II DISCREPANCY NO. UIR-52 -25.8- 'I lJNR:-SOLI D IT~ (DISCREPANC:) RE ORT ENGINEERING VEPIFICATION PROGiV f - SL2 A. PPEPAHATION BY EBASCO TASK FOPCE INITIATOR AFFECTED ITEM: HC'J j. g<ojn ~4~~ ~~" ( ~ ( ~ r Veri yc jcat.ion ~g'7 ~~< DOCL~TS: g~ ~ ~y~pc r'ra04. <e =, + ~ jac 'REFERENCE yg g p g/ I genera( ln~ a DIFFERENC S TO BE RESOLVED: ' a g g 8 3S' Pje name ala f< j j" ~~~ po~gqr outed.- ~ Terr< < ~ h/ 4 / gC- j'< OVer ~ DiSIGN RELATED ~ FIELD INSTALLATION RELATiD ~ START-LP PERFOL~~XCE P".LAT:.D PREPARED BY: ~ ~ <>'~ DATE: I 2 Z- 8 REVIEV BY EBASCO TASK FORCE ~ ~~~~ / CO~ANTS /RATIONALE: / y /n a t~ /le rio n Paw hQerj c/~ c" oak, v' ~ a c, e 7'he z'rani-c o o gn /j g g qreqrj 6<ckqrouM-Qgv. 5 (ot/24/ss) F~Dc6 Co jJcMgs W[ TH g qg)gNg ~Y llloaF c7'eAM~ Pgg. g TTAqH<<jtj7. J p ~ r ~ DIFFERENCES RESOLVED ~ RE-REVIZV REqUESTED ~ DIFFERENCES UNRESOLVED. DISCREPANCY TRANS..ITTED TO REVIEW COMMITTEE j Z S'Z. Iefos/pz. ~ ~ C.~ RESOLUTION BY REVIEt: COMMITTEE E COUNTS/RATIONALE: Q,~CA'~ ~ 7 F~<< fF'F y +~ P~/)'de rt ~ Pwe '8 t < . r raroo rural/ Er/fir: r ~ >rr cr r W~( ~~~ / wry~; Cr ~p ~@+i:~ DISCREPANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE. DISCREPANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. TRANSMITTED TO PROJECT TEA.f ~~ AS OBSERVATION AS FIABDING BY: DATE: r' D~ REVIEW AND PROCESSING BY PROJECT Tt~v. OBSERVATION ~ FTNDZNG CO~TS: t=sA'R. Bpooifioo IASR of Gtiptoj>v ikwti$ i oot ~Bi oY so+a&-vo'I~ I ~ e4ctvioJ, <~~i i~'~- CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE TAKEN: f2oiriooo so.ftDA-Ok C,QUIP~ 4 +5 C~P~ L oA (v~ ~ M M Ve. Y I ~<~,~ p ~ ~ ~o vo pn aII 1'~u, V'd F h~t VXOLC ~um. B E'lo Y- +~ S t UA)ti L COAl~g~i+ QPg'fCR,~ BY: 1 >tv rr3 TASK FORCE COSCORRENCE OBTAThED S~ O'Hac.h CORRECTIVE ACTION < 4 2 ~4 ~~~ LPLZKNTED: 'L4; (Qp$ DATE, I FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21 ~ FIhDING NOT REPORTABLE DATE: FLORIDA ?OKER & LIGH. CQ:&ANY ST. LUCZE PLANT UNIT NO. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGM~I PROJECT R:"SPONSE: UIR-.47 (REVIS ZGN 1) UZR-48 (R"VISION 1) UZR-49 (REVISION 1) 'UIR-5 0 (REVISION 1) UZR-52 (REVZS ION 1 ) V RZFZCAT ON ITEMS: 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 The cable tray/raceway system at St Lucie Unit 2 is proper'y color coded, however, certain MCC's, switchgear, power panels, etc may not be similarly color coded although all ecuipment has the proper identif'cation clearly indicated. Al ho "h not specifically recuired by Reg"'tory Guide or Industry Sta.."a"d, the S" Lucie Unit 2 FSAR does specify tha" sa e v re-la"e elect ical e uipment must be identi 'ed by color co"ed "ags, e paint or tape according to the appropriate color sche. es code p vicec ~ The color coding has,no ef fect on sa e opera"'on or design of'he ecuipment. All electrical panels/ecuipment are provided with name-plates containing the correct equipment tag number which includes safety channels. This method of identif'cation readily distin-auishes between redundant Class IE Systems and non-class ZE systems. During routing of the cables to and from equipment, Elec-tricians utilize cable pull cards which designate the equipment tag numbers that the cable is to be routed to/f om and the color coding 'scheme is not relied upon for installation purposes nor do the pull cards even refer to a color code scheme. ~(gx) The only purpose of the color code scheme or electrical panels-e . is to provide easy recognition of equipment for individuals not familiar wi"h the plant layout, and color codes are neve used as a substitute for nameplates when performing maintenance or testing on electrical equipment. However, as we are not in con formance'ith the PSALM, the Project will recommend that a total review of sa etv related elect ical ecuipment be per ormed to ensure proper color coding of eq'ipment tags in accordance w'th the rSAR criteria. The review and all required modi ications will be completed p"ior to commercial operation. ~ % t t 4 2:gine ring Ve i.ice.='cn Force Zbasco Septic " ".." .-ora-e T<<c )'c."'ld Trade Cer. o= Nev vo i i) 10043 Jar)" ry 24, 1983 %0 ~ Z suer ..e", re'geno m =" s"c "ro'.ect Tea '\ rBOM' H 3 odg ." - ="asco EP T sk Fcrce .'!=".ager I C ifP+Q) <<Q th r' ) )I SP~ "C , 2aVF- 1; S LUCK= Ki iiO. 2 r )~ i V4vv ') lv l (v'. i <C Cv svt',, ~ I ) v ~ 1 ~ UTES 45 ) O1, R2 -a1>>ne~ 'd C; - r~ - r SCO <aS'g O~ga ol e A r vc ) cl hv% d 1 Pic>r O )td'v Ve >1 Areal Ccv1Cr i vrt cD C' p 4 <<0 t'vr vr vs vrc w av I '1 Fsrc, Cr vv T ~ vvsl 4 va. 4I 20 g~ovs 4 r '<g v 'v.. e gv )1ty 5o v c ol 14>> ) 4 O v Ora~ka>> ~ ce p ) 7v2 ~ ve 1 ) p 4l r ) ~ ~ 'I ~ ~ 1 ov) rCO vr4V C4v D>>~ ~ v v r 0'vs clas-i i ec e s 0" e=:at ions by +) I o ProJec Tea= o rev'ev and urocessi.-.-, as evidenced on :art C o ecch UTB.

2. )ceno ZZ-S: 3-003, da ed Je".ua=5, 1963 (fro- F 'genoa .o "-lodg tt),

transw~tted a descrip ion of the Prc'ec Tea acticns .o be i=pie=anted for UTBs 47, 48, 49, 50 e".d 52, all of <<hich are concerned <<4th colcr coding. A revue<<of hat a -o end at ach en.s, ace electrica'ouipven )ointly by ZTr" eng neer C Yi quiz and .he <<-.i er on Janua~ 5, resul ed in Task Force conc '"rerce vith the proposed a" ions for those five 4~Bs.

3. Y)e-o EZZ-S~2-83-003 elso ransnit ed pho og ephic doc~'en ation (per-.eining i

to UXR-46) of iden ying tag nu= ers a ixed to Pover Panels 201 and 202. A reviev of the ~ o and attachments, rade Jointly by K ~ engineer C Y) quiz and the vrite on January 5, resulted in Task Force c'oncurrence vith the actions taken by the Prospect Tea regarding UEH-46. 8 J ~ I e datec J J ~jns~ ~Q 1 c4 g f'r a was ~-<<yp~ ~~~ ~ <<o >oa~o trans;.z e" p.".oto~ anh c 6ocv= ".ta 'or (pe~a.'--'- ~ ~ I n J iden..>" ng tag .":," rs a ixed o 3.="5U DC ~o~e" Pane1 "-~A " r vie.- I ~ of that 3.e er a=." a -a.c"-en s, ra."e <oint'v b; ='r - -- r C > and th ~.~.e on ~a.a r3.0, res ~~ed xn Task:orce m.".cv"r nce " -" M~ 4 the actions a'<en by ?:e Pro~e"t wv I re-~ ""'."- +8 Pa~ sg V L~ )'

5. 'ask bl 1 Force ac vit'es xn connec 'on ~' .

' ~" "ro"-'" ..ro consi"e=e" to be cc=p3.e e. cA ~ ~ v ~ ) J C h!ouitcn, C== D D Zl'c+s san r o% 4 V ca~\ v Cl l P. O. BOX 14000, JUNO BEACH, FL 33408 Qa FLORIOA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY March 30, 1983 L-83-193 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations Attention: Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Eisenhut:

Re: ST. LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-389 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALIFICATION PROGRAM NEW RULE 10CFR50.49 Florida Power & Light Co. (FP&L) letter L-83-152 dated March 18, 1983;-

provided the results of analyses'n response to the requirements of 10CFR50.49, . concerning the environmental qualification of electric equipment important to safety at nuclear power plants. The staff has reviewed this submittal and requested additional information which will supplement the original submittal. At this time, FP&L is evaluating the request and expects to provide a final response to these additional concerns before exceeding 5% power'. In the interim, justification for operation is required pending resolution of these issues.

FP&L believes that operation of the plant, up to 5% power, with these issues unresolved is justified, since the only activity planned during this period is low power physics testing. The reactor coolant system nuclear fission inventory and residual heat will be sufficiently low to preclude any significant effects on the electrical equipment in question should an accident occur. In addition, FP&L 'has previously submitted its Environmental Qualification Report & Guidebook documenting the extent of environmental qualification of all remaining electrical equipment and thereby has demonstrated that the majority of electrical equipment in this facility is qualified.

For the above reasons, FP&L believes that operation up to 5% power can be accomplished safely during this interim period and that such operation will not affect the health and safety of the public.

Should you have any questions regarding the submittal please contact us accordingly.

Ver truly yours, Vice President Advanced Systems and Technology REU/RJW/PPC/rms cc: J.P. O'Reilly, Region II PEOPLE... SERVING PEOPLE

, Harold.F. Reis. Esauire,,,<

/%.

(~

4 I