ML17213B193
| ML17213B193 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 03/25/1983 |
| From: | FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17213B192 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8303300230 | |
| Download: ML17213B193 (177) | |
Text
CORRECTIVE ACTION PLANS PAGE Discrepancy No. EVP-U-14 25.1 Discrepancy No. UIR-46 25.2 Discrepancy No. UIR-47 25.3 Discrepancy No. UIR-48 ~ . . 25.4 Discrepancy No. UIR-49 25.5 Discrepancy No. UIR-50 25.6 Discrepancy No. UIR"51 25.7 Discrepancy No. UIR-52 25.8
' 8303300230 830325 PDR ADGCK 05000389 A . PDR
0 (l
~
0 DISCREPANCY NO. EVP-U-14
-25.1-
UNRESOLVED ITEM (DISCREPAti'CY REPORT REV($ (OPJ EVP- u.- t+
EHGIHEERIHG VERIFICATION PROGRAM-SL2 A. PREPARATION BY C-E TASK FORCE INITIATOR AFFECTED ITEM: % 2 ) V(cl(-v6 V-3(et+ MRXIMuht CHI-ORIDC Cdd'TE'N'l OF S f/'(el<.Klnl(> MA'Tgg,l pll AVrncH HAUNT I (g FI'4I- S(rE QuAw~y.P((occouo(6'o. SQP-IX RKVC rR(VZ PQCJ4(MCP ++POR< Q 3(O(9 ( PWCP(FO $ 8%)
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS: (0-) R6'cdIP1 gP(S Pgcw(o~ II 6 Po(Er R-8(-<C '(
3-(0- 8 i ( I= I'4 I-'}
(3) RFC&Or QF(f PECTIOA( R6'POa< R-8(- (I~I DTD DIFFERENCES TO BE RESOLVED:
DESIGN RELATED Q FIELD INSTALLATIDN RELATED Q START-DP PERFDRNANCE RELATED V Pg t HAS F~~(DE'D CE'R<<I I(-Rv loN5 OF HAxlMHM CH<<R1Dc Co~zeey 56'PC0 Mt- +4+0 ~No GRAFO(I I cR Ai TEACH~(."-NT5 (z.), (3),(+), (5') Ado (Q.
A(-T'Hou.('li THGSc CMv'(I=I<ATIQN5 30 END Ichzc TAAv t H~ Phd<I gg MIArTcglp( 5 I~A<g A CH(OR(Di CCPtJ rCaf'F l c S5 WEAN 200 I PM(
XT QgNrLIo7. 3A~ CouP(A~Go T~T &HE PR<v(H6 HA7'GclAI 4~CD IN i'HG VA(.v(= (Arr~cH<~r (t)) wp 5 oF 7 It< DAHN' o7 OR lOCScR.IGc D 'Qq ~$ 65 g (" ER7 (P'I(. g 7 Iop(5.
PREPARED BY: DATE: ('< 8 2.
A<%A(k(AFmT,'s) pM<<PP M)Pter(o4 Rgf'or(7 R- 8(" IRxs DT B. PEVIEW BY C-E TASK FORCE S-I7-Sl (F eat.)
(Q) yacc I p-, 7ggpcc.zvrP4 R(.'Pa(ET g-8l- l5"IQ DTD COB'IEHTS/RATIONALE: II-2-9 I (FP Cl-)
Ts P Pf J (ROD(Dg C~v'(I-r('.e re>S
~H lC.H A pp( ~
~~, t r(I ('c(N 5, Qp WgR,(g( + Sc 0 IQ
~n( Vg Q~ g~~(O~D Py Q'fT(DICE H+~T'l ) ~
C3 DIFFERENCES RESOLVED Q RE-REVIEW RE(UESTED DiFFERENCES UHRESDLVED.
DISCREPANCY TRANSMITTED TO REVIEW COt'AITTEE.
DATE'~ 9 ez.
1
- l ~
P~D RXR !'o. Q ltS
.r Construction QualitY g-8/- 2(u 0 Seismic Oct ol !ERR No.: ASHL' Yes L
': 'L~~. Receipt Inspection wyos4 Sect.
+No IOl PO" KR Cs tlGHT CO:.LP*NY Report Unit: Class A pTMHH6'h)T (>) jo EVP- U.- (+
RGV. 3- Page I of
!<aterial Description ypcvE Supplier P.O. Number Supplements Pdo 4A~M C <p OO ub Supplier Sub. P.O. Number Sub Supplements Supplier's Address , Supplier Approved Source Inspection Qo/AVIDLY g$
I Performers gkp z/m/pg
)
Yes No Yes No t Permitted, H wrA N/A O Vot Permit.ted.
Spec tic tice Ncn@er Drawing Number uzacture Documentation: Accept/Reject Criteria Source "QU1R:-D g N/A Q Y~eS NO
. oc J. j EhCIPIb'L~ Cgiorrods 6W 'P- P-g.Z. 7-/
PPg Lj R'r. Cr.IVr"D Pg YPeS NO Accept/Reject Inspection Items Requirements A R VgA Remarks Ident i.fication 6 Markings /jw,7. f7 4 ~c.
!'anufacturer Documentation Protective Covers 6 Seals rid~' C Coating 6 Preservatives Inert Ga Blanket Desiccant Fhy ical. Damages Q.Z /
Cleanliness 6~2.Z ./
Chemical Properties lt1 'Ht c}1nnical Prouorties
~ 4 ~ ~ e ee ) <<ee 'Ie' e ~ .' 9 Y eii" fr~ r eee r ~ ~ I~ e rt, v'Np
~ ~
1, Accept/Reject xnspcct on Items Reauirements R 8/A Remarks Dimensions 12 t!eld Pre~aration 13 Workmanship Luh icant & Oils 15 Elect".ical Insulation Special Inspection Checklist Approved For Use: QCS S
Title Signature Date Release Info: Full Release Mat'1. Release
~ No.:
~
0 Partial Release Mat'1. Release No.:
0 Other Related RIR:
All Items On Hold Inspector's Signature Date Discrepancies Remarks N/A DR NOs.
RM B-y~Pg Approved By: SW~d Title Signatu Date
Cl
. DMI ~
MRN NO. SL- ~(7 Construction Quality Control wm go.:
FLORIDA POPOVER 5 LIGHT COilIPANY Haterial Release Notice g-h'/- Z4'P page W af P.O. No.
Partial Release
~I~ yp, Q Full Release Items Inspected: (P.O. Line Item No.)
vszv~=
Item A R Qty Item Lc5' L. ]It %Rod
/oo /0 m ~ r ~or ) ~ wa,lc
- r. AI oM PrIG~
SToQ,S g~ ~ +dan 0 /OC JP ~ s-kg~ o /Po g r" C
~Tot< Sdo - go
~ .
Additional Information on Back No Additional Information on Back
, The material marked as acceptable above is authorized to be
,releas'ed:
Title Signature D te
P.O. BOX )OS46 BIRMINGHAM, ALA. 35202 ~ PHONE 205 663 225l ~ HIGH'sYAY 3l S..PELHAM, IQ.
Rat" ZiVZD February 20, l981 MAR 9 ]98t EBASCO SERVICES OOCUQEHT INSPECTOR ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 GRAFOXL CERTiFZCATZON CERTIFXCATE Ne hereby certify that the Nuclear Grade Grafoil material, .
furnished Florida Power and Light, on Purchase Order Neer 7740325402SSLl~989$ Lhas less than 50 parts per million of leachable chlorides and a sacrificial anode was furnished.
SFPCO Corporation 1
7: ss)l
~ ~ s sI t s As. ss D'on Donnelly Assistant Custom~er Seryices Hanager Q
~
) /t IsI+IsI UF/ CT(IRERS OF FLUID SE. t LINC PRODUCTS
~ st ~ ~ tssr tt tttt tltsls sst ~ Sststsstas' ss ~ tssst ts tf+mtsst Clsslst t'oil(sssl Attttt'IttltSSl
L IQO i~/))-,, RIR No. QNS Con,truction Quality Seismic Control ttRR N ASNE Q Yes I' E A POWER EI LIGHT COMPANY Receipt Inspection Report:
3E//< Sect.
QNo 5 GYAc.HHZt4Y (3) Tg 5v P-U.-~+ Unit: 'Class
'3 P3L" 2 Ctlo/P Cit A.c V.
N/A Ilaterial Description Q/Q'goAI / ~kl/I/fC Supplier P.O.,Number Supplements Sub Xd'Id'~ DPd-WS Supplier
- & zc- P9'd'ub.
P.O. Number Sub Supplements Supplier's Address Supplier Approved Source Inspection Pd~k /< d'-C P
Performed '/7N'p//m Yes No Yes No Pe~tted H N/A 0 8/A lwaived Not Pe Itlia,ted cification Number Drawing Number
.. nufacturer DocuIRent;ation: Accept/Re ject Criter'a Source Required Received po.
H g 0 erwrdd~ pr Q.S- P/
Q HA Accept/Reject Inspection Items Requirements A R N/A Remarks Identification & Narkin s Ni-/2, 'fC' < d S O ~
manufacturer Document:ation v~
I 3 Protective Covers a Seals f"8'87/VF PIC ~dr Coatings 6 Preservatives 5 Inert Gas Blanket 6 Desiccant 7 Physical Damages Cleanliness 9 Chemical Properties 10 Nochanical Pro erties
S 0
Accept/Reject Reauirements A R N/A Remarks Dimensions 3:2 Held Preoaration 13 Horkmanshio . //
Lubricant 6 Oils 15 Elec"rical Insulation 3.6 Special Inspection 17 ,fitness and Hold Points Checklist Approved For Use; QCS Title Signature ate Release Info: g pull Release Hat'1. Release So.: $ -g9fg Partial Release Mat'1. Release No.:
Other Related RIR:
All Items On Hold Remarks:
~ ~
s In pector's Signature ate f:iscrepancies Remarks N/A DR NOs-I NCR NOs. Wppsovea sy: AGCY Title "- ' '
'ignatur D te
Cl
)+D lhRll NO. SL- P 3 P g s2 wP),r~
Construction Quality Control FLORIDA I'0'aVrfI 6 LIGHT CO'.If'ANY llRR NO.: gg'/gg llaterial Release Notice Page W of Z CVO/PC>< Partial Release g Full Release Items Inspected: (P.O. Line Item No.) QAll Items on Hold g/ggg~ +~~/A/
Iy, Item R Qty Item P ff(eg Ro-ao Pp roj IO~ 'P~0 Ifa -g O 4:CS' If rH dd-M cO ll w rL
.V PAf'8 4 ~ 87K dwo~ 8 a z Iz< ow zx Qo e lj -3of Additional Information on Back No Addi tional Information on Back material marked as acceptable above is autforized to be released:
e ~ Ti tie Signature
Pi@-rigel P.O. SOX ]CS46 SIRIAIIIGHAM, AUt. 35202 ~ PHOHE 205.663.2251 ~ HIGHWAY 31 S,.PQ.HAM, ALA September 1, 1981 MATERIAL CERTIFICATION CERTIFICATE he hereby certify that. the Nuclear Grade material furnished Florida Power 6 Light, on Contract Number 77403-25402-SL 18989, Release Number 5381, has less than 50 parts per million of leachable chlorides.
SEPCO CORPORATION Don Donnelly Inside Sales Supervisor DD/tf
' '>> ',' ~ > p > g'>>"
hfANUFACTURERS OF FI,UID SEhLINC PRODUCTS National Assoclatlon of Manufacturlntt
~. ~ ~ 'Y >
'>' n> ~'~">" '>'
CS Menso~t Flulc Sssllntt Assoclatlon
<>'>', ' ' + >" '(' ~ ~ ~ ~ > ~,' >
v '0
.i)
I(
oqg ~AII'lc.
Constr'jfgQ g;rani ty /,j.'l- /J 77 g Seism'Q".S S
t,;:='- r'.,;..'i.-- i'
~h, t.: rz g~M.'en trol ! lMi No.: ASSS Q~yag Receipt Inspection 5'~0.7~ Sect.
H!o PO't'er.R C LIGMZ CO:r!PANY Report
)gal(gH(gy +) 7o BP-tA." t f R.cv B Onit:
CIAO/PC' jUI "0 Class N/A Page / of "}
vw teria 1 Description vier vw p~winrc S
J o3ier P.O. Nurser Supplements ai;-/PK 7Z Sub Supplier Sub: P.O. Number Sub Supplements Supplier's Address Supplier Approved Source In-pectimn Perfox med
+SI Ate >QN Vc-QQ.iQ R, Yes No Yes No Permitted p
c'fi'ation Numb r 2 II/A Il/A Q IIetved DraiIIing Incur &w ufacturer hme. entation: ccept/Re ject C" iteria Source-.
Required .Received ns g'o Ctz<Isaccm o+ Co<<ItI I<I<>md Xaanecwon Items Accept/Reject Requirements R N/A Remarks Icentii cation 6 !Iarkings
>anu acture" Documentation Protective Covers & Seals Coatings 6 Preservatives Inert Gas Blanket Desiccant Physical Damages Cleanliness Chemical Proper ties 10 t!cchanical Prooer ties
Accer~t/Rej ct Inspection Items Roc uircmrnts R 7 j//.4 Dimensions eR 5" 4, 12 ';.'eld Preparation
)3 '~workmanship 14 lubricant 6 Oils 15 Elect"ical Insulation 16 Special Inspection 17 2itness and Hold Points Checklist Approved For Use:
Title Signature ygP Release Info: ul'elease Hat'1. Release No.:
Parti'al Release Hat'1. Release No.:
Other Related RIR:
Ho' .-
Q All?tems On Remarks; Inspcc tor ' S~.ihture Date Discrepancies Remarks N/A O DR NOs.
NCR NOs. Aopxovec'y: K.Q.Ws~ QJn Da te Title Signa tare
Mechanical Packings, Seals and Gaskets Harch 16, 1981 Florida Power 5. Light C/0 Ebasco Sacs Inc.
P..O..Box 1117 Densen Beach, Fl'a. 33457 ATTEHTION: D. L. Pari er equality Control Supervisor CERTI FI CATION CERTIFICATE Me hereby certify that tha packing material
-furnished Florida Power and Light on Pur'chase Order >77403-24986S-SL'-:18573 has less than 100 parts per million of leachable chlorides.
SEPCO SALES CORPORATION Do ce 5'cuderi-Account tianager DS/al s P:D.'pox 47819 / 3234 Oakcliff industrial Street / Doraviile, Georgia 30362 / (404) 451.8667 e
H%3 HO. SL- Q3'Q)
I.~
'l Fl.OAIDA PO',vEh 6 Li4iiT Cc.'. v wv I
Constructio~i Puality Control Haterial Release 1'otice HRR 110.:
tiO.:
gP.D 7P'IR rP-dV- ll- 7 page Z of~
C,s'"/PC) Partial Release
'-/8'5 ,. 1 g Pull Release Inspected:
73'tems (P.O. Line Item No.) QA11 Items on Hold vw~v<
ty. Item A R Qty Item 5 il
~
Li. P ( c C g ~
ll L 5 KlW v= Pwc<<<<Le Additional Information on Back No Additional Information on Back
,aterial marked as ptable above is authori zrd to be I
rrl eased:
~
Ti tie Signature
RIR No. Qs 3 Q~g,' 4r. )
Con s t r Llc t 3 0 n Pu pig'Lv R-F/-/~~a. Q'o ism t.(:
L Cong gw'I. ~ ASNt,"
Q Ycs L' RQQ~kj) It)!:po"tion 'ZZ'S/P Sect. I3 No r ' r 0'vcKA rI. UcHr cof <pAN~ Repor t mHwCw< 4 ). <o Qf'-U.-ie ~A 3 PS'~- >, Class C'pCH pFjX/
t!aterial D scription yg l'pe- f'gclc/hf C Supplier P,O. Number Supplements'O S~< ~
Sub Supplier Sub. P.OS Number Sub Supplements h'8 Supplie 's A dress Supplier Ap;."oved Source Inspection BIZNOo4, FC..
I
'I Perforrreg ~m"'y/r</~
Yes . No Yes No Permi tecit Sp"c' ication Nu-..her Y
2 N/A Drawing Number
,N/A waived Not Perm'ted t dA acturer 12ocumentationr Accept/Reject C iteria Source Requir ed Peceived 'P,'d.
vms. '.
El L A'PiFIMd-pp gypped/A ICE 8-X 7~/
'NO NA Accept/Reject Enspection Items Reguirements R N/A Remarks Identification & Harkinqs -p 6ra~~t(o 5iza-Narrufacturer Documonta tion Sc8 ps v'~
Protective Covers ( Seals ov c~8i 'r>k'A Preservatives
~N'oatings 6
Inert Ga Blanket Desiccant Pixy..ical Damages dZ ./
- an1 lrress 2-Zl homical Properties lo tech Jn leal Pr'0 or tie's
f Accep t/R<. )ec t
~ ~ Xnsp ction Items Reonireir .rts R Penar!:s ll Dimensions r-e. R0 d Prewar at). on 13 Nor!:nnnshin Q.S. g. /
Lubricant 6 0 ls Electrical Insulation Special Inspection" 17 .0itness and i!old Points Checklist Approved For Use: QCS Title Signature Da e Release Info: .<<ull Release Hat'1. Release Ho.: 5/ +4~/
Partial Release Mat'1. Release No.:
Other Related -RIR:
All Itens On Hold Remarks:
Insp ctor's Signature date Discrepancies Remarks jvos.
JJCR NOs. ~
Approved By: AQcS Title Si<jnatul'c ' te
$ /
j)ml !!O. Sj'~
~
"T" Cons t.rue tion Oua 1 i ty Control HO.:
~<>WP'lRR
~ P~/-'-
g.'a FLOAIDA f'0'e'o'a".n a LIGH!'O: rAWY RIR j!0 Hotice Mat.": .".l . Release
+-6"- l 2 z~
Pac3e Z of 0 No: ~QI,:,l1 I P r ti a 1 Rc'ase
~
P pg7g I'ull Release g All Item'nspected: (P.O. Line Item No.", Q Items on. !!o'd yPL,V L Sty. Item R Qty
~c.ic P~e8i/are .'Ed<-sis j
I I
Mditional Information on Back t!o Additional Information on Back aterial marked as acceptable above is
..u t nor i meri to be re] eased:
Yi.tie SignaLurc Date
Sl- PQQ SR~i. ES CF)F.P'QLZE4 t] llQI'4 Mechanica'I Pat.kings, Seals 'and Gasf<ots t"arch 16, 1g81 F'lorida Power 8 Light C/0 Ebasco Sacs Inc.
- P. 0. Box 1117 Fl'a. 33457 Jensen Beach,equality
~
ATTEHTIOH: J. L. Parker Control Supervisor CERTIFI CATION CERT I FI CATE Ne hereby certify that the pack" ng material'urnished Florida Power and Li'ght on Pur'chase Order -'77403-24985S-SL'-:18573 has less than 100 parts per million of leachable chlorides.
SEPCO SALES CORPORATIO'A Jo ce 5'cuderi-Account tianager JS/al s
~ ~ ~
p.p. Box 47819 / 3234 pakcliff industrial Street / Doraville, Georgia 30362 / (404) 451 6667
8 Con.: true t inrr p:Tel i gy r"- =I- /W/8" Sc t.smic Control I I RI< No ~: ASIIId Q. ve e>
RIPrh PO'LaER (a LIGHT CG eIPA!<Y RccSQNJ Ins;rL et)on Ref!Ol t sf 79/ Sect.
'.'o EVf'-Q." I+ REV Unit:
CHIC P~ 4 WO B Cl ass 0/l Page I tcrial Description Lrp L Lrc f Jcf-/&/=
".""" Ger.do S'a/ed Corer P.O. Number Supplerrents .,
OO b Supplier Sub. P.O. Number Sub Supplements
//'L P'/rL upplier's Address Supplier Approved Source Inspection
'jPXFfj~i/e Sea Jo- 8 Yes 'o Performed Yes No Permi" ted g rr/A g N/A Waived pecifica tion Nu.-aber f//P Drawing Number py~
an u e uccueanaacicn! Accept/Reject Criteria Source
.uired Received
'FS L
Q Accept/Reject Inspection Items Requirements R N/A Remarks 1
Identification & I/rarkinc s /Yo. <ice er'anufaCtule DOCumentatiOn oVE, Protective Covers 6 Seals 7ie~ePK Coatings 6 Preservatives Inert Gas Blarl)lct Des iccaal t Physical Damages a nl iness C micall PrOPert) eS PerT . D.
IO Nr c)lnnical Plnr>crtics
I
~ I AcceptfReject X>>s)!< etio>> Items Rcc uirements A R I</A Rema k me I ls 1 0 n s
.ld Preparation 13 ii'orkmanship 1I'i Lu'irica>>t C< Oils 15 Electrical Insulation 16 Special Inspection I <'
17;.'itness and !fold Points
~
Checklist Approved For Use: QCS Title "'ignature Release Info: Full Release Hat 1. Release No.: S'275 Partial Release Hat'1. Release No.:
Other Related RIR:
All 'cetera On Hold
,~
Remarks:
nspect r's Sip .ature Da e I'A Discrepancies Remarks Approved Bp ~
Title Signatur a e
HRH 1/O. SL- Q PQ f Con" true t'n Quality Control 5!RR NO.: P g /cJ t FLORIDA I 0 VFH 5 LIG)IT COle VARY Ha teria 1 Re 1 ea se Notice PBCJQ . ~ of P.o. No.:>~ CMO PCi~t Par tial Release g Full Release Items lnsJ>ected: (P.O. Line Item No.) Q All Items on Hold Va.l~e 7ecA(~g -Sfe~ Z ty. Item A R Item
~,~ s 31 5'~
5 oo/s ~ed I>l'~e PaeKi~o S1 -goo 3lD-Pet'. lS It 6 'ZSehO ~e
'exial Additional Information on Back No Additional Info~ation on Back marked as acceptable above is authorized to be released: I Z.Pi Title Signature Di e
~EiPCO $ $4LES COPPORATiloN Mechanical Packings, Seals and Gaskets Harch 16, 1981.
Florida Po'rier 8 Light C/0 Ebasco Sacs Inc.
P. 0. Box 1117 Jensen Beach, Fl'a. 33457
~
'TTENTION: J. L. Parker equal ity Control Supervisor I
CERTIFICATION 'CERTIFICATE
~ ~
He hereby certify that he packing r:,aterial furnished Florida Power and Light on Purchase Order 877403-24986S-SL-:18573 has less than 100 parts per mill ion of 1 eachab1e chlorides.
SEPCO SALES CORPORATION Jo ce 5'cuderi.-Account
- JS/al s Yianager'.Q.Box 47819 / 3234 Qakcliff Industrial Street / Doraville,Georgia30362 / (404) 451.8667
gWii AC 0vn'.,rJ <
M< JAiN 151983 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGRAH Project Response to: EVP-U-14 Revision B Verification Item: >'/2, Valve V-3614, Maximum Chloride Content of Stem Packing Haterial On October 27, 1982 the EVP Task Force issued EVP V-14 which requested documentation showing chloride content of stem packing to be less than 200ppm. Valve V-3614 was repacked by using SEPCO M. 4444 and GRAFOIL packing on April 28, 1982 (documented in EVP-U-14, Revision A) .
Attachments to EVP-U-14, Revision B provided certification of maximum chloride centent of SEPCO kiL 4444 and GRAFOIL packing. Tne EVP Task Force comment in EVP-U-14, Revision B further requested confirmation that the packing material used in repacked valve V-3614 was of the same lot and size described by the certi&ications provided in EVP-U-14, Revision B.
An historical review revealed that the same type problem was tne subject of a QA audit report (audit report attached). Subsequent to that audit correct've actions ia the form of a QC site procedure was written.
The procedure required certifications be rovided during valve revacking.
In as much as the EVP Task Force found a potential flaw in the 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.
0 I
'TER.OFFi:":
FF 0 0 CORRESPONDFNCF E 2 QAC-PSL2-82-06 File: 03.06 LOC*TION To L. Pa ker/ J. R. Hartin OATS April 8, 1982
'SL-2 F Roe copjss To R. F. EnglmeieM B. J. Escuo A""it o Control of !1echanical Assembly D. P.. Coooer A ='vi"ies @AC-PSL2-82-06 N. T. >>eems R A. Garramore D. R. Stone 1'7. B. Derrickson Attached is a copy of the activitv aud't reoort fo" a Qualitv Assu ance Audit conducted bv a rep esentative of FPL/OA Construction.
Cor "ctive actior. for Pindinc No. l is the responsibility of the Project gc-.lity Cont"ol Supervisor and co"rective action for Finding No. 2 is the responsibility of the Resident Fngineer.
Please provide a written response to the finding or which you are resoon-sible by April 23, 1982f Th's response shall include the following:
(a) Corrective 'action taken, or planned to be taken, to correct and prevent recurrence of the 'deficiency.
(b) Da-e :~hen corrective action was or will be imo emente".
(c) The person (s) responsible for assuring that corrective action was or will be implemented.
>>e appreciate the cooperation of personnel contacted 'during tne audit, and the positive at"itude taken toward correcting the noted deficiencies.
Principal Auditor J. R. Luke T. >>eems S t xn ende nt St. Lucie Projects QA I!I)!:JRI,: 1jd
$ )t" achm)=nt f O .'.j tC:a)8 Ffa J. j 'vi
F LOB IOA PO",)ER 6 LIGHT CO:.IP~igY R:->OAT OF QUALITY ASSU>aIa<CE DEPARTah'.EitT AUDIT Audit Yo I QAC-PSL2-82-06 Control o Hechan'al Insta 1 '"ion Activities Audit Scooe:
An Ac ivit Audit of control of Ilechanical Instal 1 ation Activities was conducted at St. Lucie Unit No. 2 to veri y selected requ'ements in designated Se te Quality Procedures ~
Aud i SunrIIarv:
=valuate on of QA Pro am. Ef fectiveness.
Except as noted in the findings, the QA Program is ef fective in al 1 otne" a"eas audited.
A review o the audit findings in previous audits indicated two tre..ds, as follows:
(1 ) Documentation (of the servicinc and maintenance of valves) submitted hy FPL/QC to the QA Records Center is not always cosolete. (Rey: Audit QAC-PSL2-80-29 Finding 1 ) ~
(2) barking 'of completed (high strength) bolted field connections fo" ins-pection is not always accomplished. (Ref: Audit QAC-PS 2-79-42 Finding
- 5) ~
Satis factorv Conditions:
s 1- Rotation of Limitorque Operators on Va ives I-hV-14-1 7, 1 8, 19 and the inspections thereof .
Unsatis facto Conditions:
- 2. Construction bolting crews are not mar):i ng completed (high strength) bolted field connections. for inspection. ( Re f: SQP" 45)
Pa,ge 1 of 5 IaEOIIL c ScRVI."'G I +C LC
4 II
I
~r FLORI5* >O'VER 6 LIGHT CO'IP~VY R:-PORT OF QUALITy ASSURANCE DEPARTS!EiVT AUDIT Au" it ho I QAC-PSL2-82-06 . Control o Y>echani cal Installa" ion Activities As dit Scooe:
An Activit Audit of control of Ysechanical Installation Activities was conducted at St. Lucie Unit No. 2 to verify selected requirements in designated Site Quality Procedures.
Audi" Su~harv:
=-valuat'on of 9A Pro am.Effectiveness.
Except as noted in the findings, the QA Program is effective in all othe" a eas audited.
A review of the audit findings in previous audits indicated two trends, as follows:
(1) Docunentation (of the servicinc and maintenance of valves) submitted by Fob/Qo to the QA Records center is not always cooplete. (Ref: audit QAC-PSL2-80-29 ." inding 1) ..
(2) 11ar3:ing of completed (high st ength) bolted field connections for ins-
,pection is not always accompl'hed. (Ref: Audit QAC-PSL2-79-42 Fincing 5).
Satisfactory Conditions:
- 1. Rotation of Limitorque Ooerators on Valves I-hV-14-17, 18, 19 and the insoections the eof.
Unsatisfactor Conditions:
- 1. QC Inspectors are not attaching Valve Packing Report Forms to General Inspection Reports and transmit ing them to the QA Records Center (Ref: SQP-12).
- 2. Construction bolting crews are not marking completed (high strength) bolted field connections. for inspection. ( Ref: SQP-45)
Page 1 of 5 rFOrI c iPXI C r< LE
Department/Group A Jordan Lead Engineer X Raver System Engineer X Sariles Construction Superviso X D. Lightfoot Construction Supervisor X M. Garcia Resident Engineer X Slpos Construction Test Engineer X X K. Crosby QC Suoervisor X H. Shannon Assistant Superintendent X X C. Carlo Mech. Q.C. Supervisor X D. Ricley Civil QC Supervisor X C. Ellison Test Mech. Supervisor X J. Cape==a Resiaent Engineer X J. Hartin Resident Engineer X Kev:
A Attended Pre-Audit Conferenc 3 Inte viewed or Contacted During the Audit C Attended Post-Audit Conference Pre-Audit Conference Not applicable (activity audit)
Post-Aud't Conference Location: St. Lucie Unit N2 Date: March 23, 1982 Summa. of Post-Auait Conference Tne first audit finding was discussed and QC agreed that the Attachment (4.4) in SPP-12 which documented the valve acking was not being processed per p ocedural reauirenents. i i
'yThe thesecond audit finding was Pesident Engineer.
not discussed as it had been previously agreed to Other matters discussed included items pertaining to'SQP-12 which were deemed not to be quality violations but were of concern and .are recorded as follows:
(a) The timeliness of notifications to QC that necessa y venao" representa-tion is on site for puma/valve work.
(b) The backlog of Pump and Valve Construction Process Sheets awaiting incorporation.
(c) The Constru" ion Test Program for statusing packed valves at turnover.
(d) The lack of instructions for the disassenbly of certain types of valves p ior to welding.
(e) The total lack of Construction activity on Attachment 4i13 items, particularly the staking of locking nuts on Limitorqua Operators per NRC-1E Circular i
79-04 and CE letter F-CS-600. (These nuts have caused Page 2 of 5
S:,...,a .v n: Pos"-Audit Con erence Con't (e) problems at =ort Calhoun, Davis-Besse, Brown's F -rry 2, Three l!ile
.Island 1 and other plants.)
he lack of construction activity as evidenced by the lack of Inspection Reports for Contromatics Ball Valves, the Rotation of l1otor Ooerators on Target Rock Valves, the ja~zed jacksc ew on I-HCV-14-9 and the requi ed moto" pinion key modifications on Limito que Operators.
Aucit D tails:
lnv ln ito ~ 1 Cr'teria: SQP-12 (Rev.6) Attachment 4.6 (Se . 10.0)
"The packing installer shall complete and sign a Valve Packing Report (Attachment 4.4) for each valve which has been packed. QC shall attach th's form to their General Inspection Report for transmittal to the (QA) Records Vault." ~
~in."'in": Q is not attaching Valve Packing Resorts to General Znsoection Reports and " ansmitt'. ng them to the (QA) Records Vault.
Discussion- Last fall, QC decided to institute a general su veillance prog am fo" valve packing activities instead of the program required by SQP-12. QC accordingly created a Revision Request (11/24/81) to 'have the SQP prog am changed to be compatible 'with the new QC program. Unfortunately, the Revision Request
~'as never incorporated into SQP-12 and based on discussions at the Post Audit Conference probably won't be unless rewritten. The Revis'on Request only covers Grafoil packing henc other (braided) packings were not included.
a The status at the present time is'that QC's general surveillance program is in v'olaticn of he inspection/transmission requirements "f the SQP and ha" bean since last fal'. It is also possible that had the SQP-12 program been inplemented, some DRs for leaking valves .during integrity testing might have been avoided.
Recommendations:
()) QC to obtain all tho existing Attachment (4.4) Valve Packing Reports and:
(a) Co:pare =them with the list prepared by the Senior Resident Engineer showing valves to be packed and oacking requirements and identify any missed val-es/missed requirements per JPC:QI 15.1.
(b) Tra..smit them with accompanying Gene al Inspection Reports to the QA Records Vault.
(2) QC to follow the requirements of SQP-12 until such time as QC is successful in changing the recuirements.
Page 3 of 5
C:teria: S9P-45 (Rev.l) Attachm nt 4.3 (Se . 3.4)
"Bo'ing crews shall mark each connection as i" is completed to ensure tnat no connection will be overlooked."
Finding: Bolting crews are no marking each connection as it is completed to ensure tha no connection will b overlooked.
Discussion: 'basco Specification 501-76 (High Strength Bolted Field Connec 'ons "or Structural Steel) recuires such marking and SQP-45 provides implement'ng ins ructions.
The purpose o= the marking is to make Q aware of which connections are 100%
co..piete and ready xor inspection in that QC inspections may lag cons ruction and also may only sample the bolts in a connection (i.'n FPL's case, the JPC:QI 10.15 allows a 10t sample size of bolts per connection) ~ ~
was observed during the .erection o the Fuel Cask Craneway h t the QC inpec-tions were lagging the construction and that the bol ed connection were not being marked as completed by the bolting crews.
Discussions with cognizant personnel provided the in ormaiion t that rather t than mark completed connections, construction was verbally notifying QC.
FCR 6478E was initiated to change the Specification to permit this alternative method e of notification.
Recommendations (1) Resident Enginoering to enhance FCR 6478E to ensure that the no"'ice 'on to QC be a documented statement from Construction that the connection was comolete (to take the place of physical markings).
(2) Resident Engineering to review all connections in the Fuel Cask Craneway with QC to assure that QC has not sampled 10~ of the bolts in incompletely t'ghtened connections.
(3) Resident Fngineering to review other sample (high strength) bolted structures with QC for similar assurances.
(4) Resident Engineering to arrange for a change to SQP-45 to implement FCR 6478E as enhanced.
Dates of Audi : February 1- tlarch 23; 1982 Location of Audit: St. Lucie Unit No. 2 Page 4 of 5
Qz~C- PSL2- 8 2-05
References:
SQP-12 (Rev.6) 11/8/81: "Servicing and Naintenance o Pumps and Valves" SQP-16 (Rev.6) 1/11/S2: "Pipe Support =-rection" S~P-32 (Rev.4) 3/12/Sl: "Permanent Plant Eau'pment Installation" SQP-46 (Rev.l) 4/22/81: "High Strenght Bolted Field Connection for St uctu al Steel".
SQP"46 (Rev.0) 4/13/7g: "Fabrication of Class 1 Structural Steel" Pri neigh 1 A-d'o (j' 2.
J. R. Luke Date Quality Assurance Engineer Accomoanving Auditor: N. F. >>cGayic Date>
Review and A~9 oval H. T. Neems Da" e S ntendent of QA St. Lucie Projects Page 5 of 5
Cl I ~
7-FLORIO> PO'V!II 6 LIGHT COMP NV QAC-PSL-82-250 R.Q I- t'CE COB R ESPOIND ENCP File: 12.13.02 LocATloN PST~2 To R. Sipos oATs Parch 29, 1982-FRoM J. R. Luke coPIEs To M. E. Deck G. E. Rock-el'I sUBJEcT: S P-12 (Rev. 6) para. 8 5 7 3 For record purposes in our audit file l az confirning our recen conversation to the effect that none of the valves covered oy ihe subject paragraph have undergone Turnover to Startup and that Construction est vi>> be perfoming functions reouired 'by the paragraph concerning packed valves prior to such Turnove s.
in that connection nay X.suggest that Construction Test arrange for another column in .~hich the reouired information could be recorded for its use on, ei her page 10 of 22 or page 16 of 22 of SQP-64 Appendix B.
J. R. Lu3te i /I,
~
Approved: i. "~~ H. T. Ueems r
I
/Iv ~ 'Pw vJ I
~
/
(~
pLQItrQ PQv'f R 8 LIGHT CQMPANY TER-OF F ICEE COR R ESPOMD ENCE LOCATION St. Lucie Plant To D. R. Cooper DATE April 21, 1982 FM-2-82-4130.
FROM R. A. Garramor e To COPIES Listed Below
SUBJECT:
AUDIT QAC-PSL2-86-06 FINDING NO. 2 MZ ~ I Memorandum to J. Parker//J. R. Martin for J. R. Luke dated 4-8-82 Audit QAC-PSL-2-86-06 The following is Construction Engineering's response to your Audit QAC-pSL2-86-06 Finding No. 2. The item numbers correspond to your item numbers in Finding No. 2.
- 1. FCR 2-6478E was generated and approved to permit an alternative in noti ving Quality Control that a bolted connection is complete and reacy for inspection. The original recuirement of FLO 2998-761 and 501-76 reauired only an acceptable marking of the completed join" to signify the connection was reacy for inspection. The need for a cocumented statement rom Construction signifying that
.the connection is complete is considered unnecessary and an over-cormtitment considering the current status of const uction. Tnere is no basis for providing Quality Control with a written notification from Construction and the QC inspection report will provide the necessary acceptance and documentation.
- 2. NCR 3347C has been issued documenting nonconformances in the bolting of the structural connections in the Fuel Cask Crane Structural S eel. The engineering disposition reauires a 100% inspection of the bolted connections in the structure to assure adeauate inspection.
The Structural Steel Specification FLO 2998.761, 501-76 High Strength Bolted Field Connections for Structural Steel parag aph 15.02 and AlSC Section 5, Specification for Structural Joints (dated 4-26-78) paragraph 6.5 reauires inspecttion of only "104 of the bolts or two bolts, which ever is greater". This inspection provides for a random inspection of any of the bolts in a connection. Quality Control has the option to perform a 100~ inspection of the bolts in any connection if deemed necessary.
PEOPLE. ~ . SERVING PEOPLE FOrm 1008 fStodktd) Rev. 8/81
D- R. Cooper AUDIT QAC-PSL2-86-06 FINDING NO. 2.
PAGE TWO
- 3. As stated in item 2, a random sampling of the bolts in any connection is the minimum requirement of the project specification and A1SC.
Quality Control should have the necessary documentation to verify the acceptance of the bolting in any structure.
PR4
- 4. A procedure revision request to SQP ~Attachment 4.3 paragraph 3.4 was generated on March 30, 1982. The next revision to the SQP Mill reflect the change as indicated by FCR 2-6478E.
P Please advise us of any questions.
RAG/ JRM/cl cc: B. J. Escue tl. A. Garcia C. W. Bailey J. L. Parker T. Geissinger
fo.
A
(
f I.ORI0* POiYf R 6 LIBN ~ COSIPAhY NT ER.OF F I CC CORRESPONDENCE SIQ-82-l59 LOC AT ION PSL-1 Qril 22, j
TO J. Luke DATE 1982 F ROtA J. L. Parker COPIES TO D- R. Stone B. J. Escue svBJEcT: A~~t QAC-PSL2-82-06 Activities" N. T. Neems "Ymchanical Assembly 3'e request an e><ension of thirty (30) days b granted on our reply to we subject audit. Ke are concerned ~~i> the completeness of the inforfration provided in the valve packing reports as prepared by con-strucmon. Vne problem is b ing addressed by interested parties and resolu"'on is needed before v can complete our response.
FP2 ~ 1982 Jl o/CC/db 5, Floral ~ Pu)I
'f Ollhf.it 4 >C.':
-: i
-'l'LO CFF:C PEOPLE... SERVING PEOPLE FORb1 f008 REV. 1/76
0 FLORIDA POM,'ER 8 LICIT COMPANY TER-OFFlCE CORRESPONDENCE QA=-PSL-82-<os File: 03.06 LOCATION PSL-2, To J. L. Parker DATE May 24, .1982 FROM J. R. Luke COPIES TO N. T. Neems
SUBJECT:
Audit @AC-PSL2-82-06 Control of Mechanical Assembl Activities 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 reports prior to transmitting them to the QA Records Center.
Please respond to the audit at this time including a statement's to QC's position with regard to Attachment 4.13 of SQP 12 per letter QAC-PSL-82-377.
J. R. Luke Approved: ~~ N. T. Heeee HTNIJRLcld PEOPLE... SERVING PEOPLE Fotm 1008 (Stocked) Rev. 8/81
' ~ I l2.
v ~ ~ ~
LOAIOA POPOVER Ee LIGHT COMPANY QAC-PSL-82-377 ERNF F ICE CORRESPOi CADENCE Pile: 03.06'O LOCATION PSL-2 J. L. Parker DATE Hay 13, 3.982 FROM J. R. Luke COPIES TO Audit 82-06 AUDIT QAC-PSL2-82-06 Control of Mechanical 'As'sembl 'ctivi:ties Further to your letter SLQ-82-159 requesting an extension for your reply, an extended date of 1Iay 23, 1982 is satis-factory.
At the time of the audit, construction forces had not per-formed any work requiring documentation on (SQP-12) Attachment 4.13, a form which, like Attachment 4.4,. must be transmitted by QC to the QA Records Center.
In order to prevent recurrence of the problem of lack of transmittal of (SQP-12) attachmients to the.QA Records Center,
~le~se confirm in your audit response that QC. will be trans-mitting all Attachments 4.13 to the QA Records Center.
J .. Luke Approve T. Wee s NT97l JRL: ec PEOPLE ~ ~ ~ SERVING PEOPLE Form 1 OOS ISIoCI edI Rev. 0/II1
~ l '
(
l I QAC-PS};82-424 CR/oagiR8 ilCHrCO.P~Y Pile: 12.13.02
'p"-F)C F CORilQS)'Oi~.'DSACc LOCATION PSL-2 To Jo"dan OAT E curie 1, 1982 F 3. R. Luke CO& I~M To R. A. Garramore RO:v'VBJE.CT: Pile SPP-12 (Rev. 7)
Servic'nq -nd ))aintenance of Pum s ana Vrilves Thc subject revision of the above-refcrericed procedure has been r."viewed against the FPL/QA Hanual ancl the PPL/AS!}=- QA hanual and the following comments are offered:
A. Quali y Affecting Comments to be resolved prior to procedure issuance.
- 1. Attao)ments 4. 2. 3. A
The p:oposed changes to Attachments 4.2.3.A and 4.2.3.B re not consistent with this long-stand'ng requirem nt which (editorially) should also have its own 10-Series Number p"ragraph.
Also, op n audit 82-06 has identified that QC has not been reviewing anQ sendinc the Valve Packing Reports to the QA Records Vau) t and has recommended that thc procedure be followeQ.
It is, thcreforc, proposed tha" the fol.lowing intermediate wo Qirig be used i:i Attachn )it 4.2.3.A (Para. 1.10) and At"achm nt 4.2.3.B (Para. 10.0) .
"Thc foreman hall coirplctc anQ sign a, Valve Pac)'ing Report (Attac)imelit 4.2.5.A) for each valve w)rich has bee}i pac) ed and trar.smit the completed Rcport to QC for its review and tr arlsmittal to t)ie QA Rccol:r s Vault."
Form rOOO ('Ao:L"iJr Aev. 8/8r
~ 2 l er'>'" 1" (Rev. 7)
S.:rv.'. -.i ng and llaintcnancc of Pumps and Valves Pclgc Tnis wording avoid problems which wouM occur were to send thc Reports to th Vault such <>pliance.
- 2. ALtachment 4.2.5.A Thc Valve Packing Report requires ncw signature (and dating) lines as follows:
(a), Foreman/Date (Required because existing and proposed pa.'.graphs rc.-,uire him to sign but no place c>'.ists.)
(b) 9i Review/Do-te (Re:oui rcd because p."o".:o "ed 'se agre>'>)ls revui e 9C to sign for a Review instead of e>:is ting paragra>>hs which 1e 'uirc an Xnspectioli Rcj>ol. t )
E.diLo"'l C>>.">m nts
- 1. li';:.",bcr 'the revision block continuation sheet as 2 o 2.
- 2. Pc,ra. c. 2 and 8. 2. 1.
Change "from <<re ted systems" Lo in crccted systems."
- 3. Para. 8.3.1 Chctn< fc factor)'eprcsE: ltastiv, to facL'orv 1 cprescntative" 7 a". a. a. 6. ( (Rev. 6)
/
Snow as b."ing dcleLed in th. revision bin k continuation sheet.
". c . '3 . 2. 2. A Grii>n. !,1 J>i ap)'>ragm Valve> sh~>uld he in Scq. 4.2.1.3 " ries al so dc -cribc the di::as<<:~>rbly before w<<lding. 'nd G. Att:hach:. nt d. 0. 3, $ }>ec t 3.
CPS Slg>)at uJ e Sh~'t L should rc:f>>>.::>N.v Valves as wc 1l as pumps.
c >'.i ! 0 (!w',v 7)
S.>> v)ca.r>g ann Viai>>te>>ance of Eu:n}>s ar>J Valve:
3 ll B. Edi tor ia 1 Co:-.i~en t.s contin>>ed:
- 7. Attach-...ent 4.0.1, Shc et 2 (Seq. 4.2.1.1.A)
Change "Cromatics" to "Contromatics" (Also Attacl>ment 4.2)
- 8. At.tach:::>nt 4.0.1, Sheet 3 (Scqs. 4.2.1.2.A 6 B)
Change "!:cro 7'est" to "Kerotc sL" (Also Attachment 4.2)
- 9. Attach:.". >>t 4.0.1, Sheet 4 (Sec!s. 4.2.1.7, 4.2.1.7.A, 4.2.1.7.B)
Cha>>ge "Limatorqu " to "I.imit'orcue"
- 10. A"'t>>ch:;.cnt 4>.0.1, Sheet 5 (Sec!. 4.2.2)
Cancel this sec!uence number and put thr Cri>>nell Valves into Scc,. 4. 2. l. 3 l>cr Co~me>>t 5.
- 11. Atl " 'n: >n" 4.2.1.5.>:, Shoat >)
S?>o~; valve ident.ity in heading (Rockwell Glo)>e Valves Cat. 2 through 7) l2. l cstinghousc Chcc>; Valve.. and l>acific Chcc): and Gate Valves a>'>d 7'I. % > lvcs D>>vcloz ...>ccific Construction Process Sheets for inclusion in S>)v-12 R> v 8
- 13. PiJ>. >, ( '.> 3: Pm'. dc ai> Aj>','andi v. tn t ke Sg" listing thc items a>> >ro .'>" d ) >y i'>:. Sc>>i or Pcs 'c> t 1'><gi >>ce 1 R. 1u> c
r Cl lt +
/6.
J L
(.
I PLOII,Gg. FO1q'TII L LIGHT COMPANY TER.OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE S Lg-82-201 LOCATION PSL-II TO J. R. Luke OATE Hay 28, 1982 FROM J. L. Parker COPIES TO SU8JECT1 Audit - i(AC-PSL2-82-06 Control Of tJIechanical Assembly Activities SQP-12 is in the final review/signature cycle. Appropriate sequences were rewritten to have valve packing documentation forwarded directly to the vault by Construction. Since they're holding numerous valve packing reports, you should expect receipt of these in the near futures
~nsferri ng of the valve packing reports becomes .construction's reponsi bility.
JLP/CC/db PEOPLE... SERVING PEOPLE
~
~
~i It i ~>
/7..
fI ORIg~ POVV1II tI UGHT CO.'A&ANY QAC-PSL-82-485 '-:.
ER~FFlCE CORRESPONDENCE Pile: 16.02 11
'SL-2 LOCATION To -.'J.. R,'-'Luke/6- E. Rockwell DATE June 24, 1982 D. R. Cooper (Meeting Attendees)
~
FROM COPIES TO ~
H. B. Lee SUQJECTi R-SLI TS OP 2QNAG~iZHT MEETING TO J. D. Ki k "
RESOLV" OP:"N AUDIT ITEMS T. D. Ge:ssinger ~
B. J. Escue R. F. Eng~ier .
J. E. Vessely J ~
A meeting. was held with the Directors of Construction and Nuclear Affaixs on June 22, 1982, at PSL-2 to resolve open audit items in accordance with QP 16.1, Paragraph 5.5.l.d.
Based on this meeting, the following action is to be taken for each of the items discussed:
- l. Audit AC-PSL2-81-14 '(Control of HDE)
~ I
~
..Open'tems 51 and 02 are waiting on comoletion of 'a Dual Records
~ .'to age Facility, and correction of Inspector Qualification Records.
These items are to be completed by QC by June 30, 1982, at which time J.,R. Luke is to verify the completion and close the audit.
- 2. Audit AC-PSL2-81-35 (Torauin of Flan ed Connections) .
Ooen Item 54 is to be closed immediately by G. E.. Rockwell, based on the determination that the general requirements of QP 10.2 on 'assembly
.verification do not specifically apply to flanged connections. In addition, it was determined that the requirement for inspection of flanged connections, and other similar quality-related activities, may be deleted or 1udified by QC if requirements.
they are self-imposed and not based on other specific QA program I
- 3. Audit AC-PSL2-81-36 (Protective Coatin s)
Open Item Il is waiting on a revision to JPC:QI 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 time J R Luke is to close out the audit.
Audit QAC-pSL2-82-02 (Control of'onstruction p Instructions)
Construction QC letter GF21.4.2, dated llay 20, 1982, did not address open audit Item gl. J. D. Kirk is to immediately provide a response to QA memo QAC-PSL-82-40$ , dated Hay 24, 1982. Based on the response received, J. R. Luke is to close out the audit, or request that it be foa'arded to QA management for resolution.
PEOPLE .. ~ SERVINC PEOPLE Fotm 100S (Sto7eems Nsv7:DRC:ec
QUALITYASSURANCE DEPARTMENT FlORIDA POWER h LIGkT Cob(PANY CORRECTIVE ACTION STATUS f~
1.0 ITEM IDENTIFICATION:
Report/Letter MOO I -Q. +%tern No: ,., viz/zz.
2.0 ACTION REQUESTED BY:
3.0 ORGANIZA'ITON/INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBLE FOR RESPONSE: ~ C.' ~~ k C.P 3.1 Response Due Date: r~ Z 3 P-4.0 QA ENGINEER RESPONSIBLE FOR FOLLOW-UP:
5.0 RE PORTABILITY:
The Item identified above is/is not m potentially reportable in accordance with 10CFR50.55(e), 10 CFR21 or y a o ortable occurrence (LER).
t Lead Auditor See Parag aph 5.2.of QI 16 QAD 4 for instructions if the item is potentially reported in accordance with any of these requirements.
6.0 STATU S:
p e s- av PZ, e c+ p e a ('u - CeP,~ ~C- 2,"/a5
& Kv 2 R&k~)
/ 8 Ar "h)SAe-LW r-e oHXC ) pcs/UQ f I4)fO g P JZ
. Fal~u C, Z I'k'4k)
/o~u '+a 2. C W)
~.>
2- 9PS am < CS~P- /2 A~W dW~
7.0 7.1 Closed By: By.'(rI FINALDISPOSITION:
Date:
7.2 Reviewed Date:
Form QI 16 QAD 4-1 (11/81)
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLE'HNG FORM OI 16 OAD 4-1 (11/81)
Identify item, enter date of report/letter.
2.0 Id'entify who issued the report/letter.
3.0 Identify 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 if the item above is or is not 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/Z8/77) and end with the signature o. initials of person making the entry. NOTE: Refer to Figure QI 16 QAD -'-1 for'mxidance 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 Engineer who closes the item signs and dates.
7.2 Assistant I>>anager or designee sign and date indicating his review.
'I I
6.0 STATUS
(Continued from the front) i &C ji
+
~~r~
=mA~ cr
= ~C Ha 1
cp/ Q>> pp'5 3 ~ ZZ QUALITYASSURANCE DEPARTMENT fgog~og, ppwER L LIGHT coMPANY CORRECTIVE ACTION STATUS ITEM IDENTIFICATION:.
A->( ( gZ.-e 1.0 Report/Letter No:/4-/~4-g - 2. Item No.
2.0 ACTION REQUESTED BY: Qe jP s 3.0 ORGAN1ZATION/INDIVIDUALRESPON SXBLE FOR RESPONSE:
3.1 Response Due Date: 5 73 @PE 4.0 QA ENGINEER RESPONSIBLE FOR FOLLOW-UP:
5.0 RE PORTABILITY:
The Item identified above is/is not + potentially reportable in accordance with 10CFR50.55(e), 10 CFR21 or a~ a ~p rtable occurrence (LER).
Lead 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 STATU S:
c5 ~~~ YU& @cd Zv M ~
A>> 2'- ~2-Vl e R 1 ( ~ (
~en ( la t
~ lK 7.0 FINALDISPOSITIONr 7.1 Closed By: nate: s l4 /pa 7.2 Reviewed By. Date: S Form QI 16 QAD 4-1 (ll/81)
0 22 ~
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 Identify 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 Fnter the name of the QA Engineer responsible for follows-up.
5.0 Indicate if the item above is or is not potentially reportable. The )ead auditor signs in the indicated location.
6.0 indicate status of the item. All entries shall begin upwith the date (e.g., 1/28/77) and end with the signature or initials oi person making the entry. NOTE: Refer to Figure QI 16 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.
7.0 Final Disposition 7.1 QA Engineer mho closes the item signs and dates.
7.2 Assistant Manager or designee sign and date indicating his review.
6.0 STATUS
{Continued from the front)
~y ~ I 4m')
'IGINEERIHG VERIF I CATION PROGRAM MBUSTION ENGINEERING, IHC.
000 PROSPECT HILL ROAD WINDSOR, CT 06082 January 28, 1983 EVP-529/SL2 Mr. D.L. Christian; EVP Review Committee Chairman Power Plant Enqineering Florida Power 5 Light Company 700 Universe Blvd.
Juno Beach, FL 33408
Subject:
Engineering Verification Program, St. Lucie Unit No. 2 Unresolved Item (Discrepancy) Report EVP-U-14, EYP Task Force Concurrence wi th Project Team Action.
ear Mr. Christian:
EVP-U-14 was issued by the EVP Task Force during the Design Verification phase of the program on October 27, 1982. Documentation was requested to in-dicate that chloride content of Valve V-3614 (Verification Item -,'2, Safety Injection Tank Isolation Valve) stem packing is less than 200 ppm.'he 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 confi rmation that packing material used in the repacked valve was of the same lot'and size described by certifications 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 EYP 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 certifi-cations be provided during valve repacking. Since the EVP Task Force identifi.ed a potential flaw in the gA/gC procedures, as confirmed by project investigation, a review team is being assigned to resolve the concern expressed in EVP-U-14, Revi.sion B. The project review team evaluation will cover the following:
- a. Safety impact
- b. Impact on the (}uality Assurance Program
- c. Reportabi lity per 10CFR50.55(e)
8 Hr. D.L. Christian January 28, 1983 aoe Two A review of the Project Team response, made jointly by the Task Force engineer L.l<. Hack and the writer on January 14, resulted in Task Force concurrence with the planned actions regarding EVP-U-14.
Ver truly yours, D. D. Hiller C-E EVP Task Force hianager DDM/dm cc: EVP Review Committee llembers E.!1. Dotson, FPL J.C. Moulton, C-E E.Z. Zuchman, Ebasco T.H. Blodgett, Ebasco
i DISCREPANCY NO. UIR-46
-25.2
S
UNR" SOLV:-': s~,', '. 'CREP/.NCY) REPORT ENGINEERi'.::. VERIFICA ION. PRl'-RP"i SL2 A. PREPARATION BY EBASCO TASK FORCE INITIATOR A. FECTED ITr~:
6 /nJ ccPron ~~p
+s ~e
+c'~+
Pressure I I')J P'"8-'"~'.kJ REFER".NCE DOCL'NEbiS:.
Fi e IJ I4>
IR-I-ZZ
/ P n ~o m/a ~r s on <,",~e
~x(- j,na Qa-ron. ~D ~ D~~~ ~~ q g g ghee/S S8 DIFFERENCES TO BE RESOLVED:
gC vJ'=i'-
rdenflrrCa Trans " g~r n P ro glj~g o A r rre na <~~ pea jos m-
<o ( <<d' o Z.. k. H~~ ~+r ~<<e > ( <ec
~ DESIGN RELATED gg FIELD INSTALLATIOh RELATED ~ START"LP PERFOR~diNCE RELATED PREPAID BY: C M G>rZ DATE: /2 2 $ 2 REVIEW BY EBASCO TASK FORCE COUNTS WTIOhALE'i y roB Ite +e C'rr c.-~ r
~~ PcJ nC PIdm rcpt P+> y g> ~gPnec I
~
r/pr77 r Pg QcL g q qg g gg+'Shp>+
gev. I Izll4 8~
'Fsese j)eel ~-r /~yes W>'TH VH6 4'T'TA <HMe N r
~]~3 E cw f c~ laic spoQsg QEvZ ol 2 83 DIFFERENCES RESOLVED (gsg FonCe CO~CuaS W)VH 4CTleNS I Rodt" ~
~ RE-REVIEW REQUESTED I t=~,&<<A~vae
- HveoT'
~'DIFFERENCES UNRESOLVED. DISCREPANCY TRANSNITTED TO REVIEW COMMITTEE"
,r 17 DATE /Z P Z
C. RESOLUTION BY REVIEW CONNITTEE COUNTS/RATIONALE:
9 P'DDRCsr > A y Dt=c. l g PEVlcry CDMMin r'co
/gal T>H 6 ~ ~CS 35CLOW QA- WIS P<SIiI,>+
DISCREPANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE.
DISCREPANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.
TRANSHITTED TO PROJECT TEAN
~ AS OBSERVATION AS FINDING BY ~
DATE: Z D. REVIEW AND PROCESSING BY PROJECT TEAN OBSERVATION ~ FINDING CO%ANTS:
Ac ic,oJicQ. ciycuAnq c0 power paneIr o f&xeb' n o ycoAcw ca, col n PD Q Ivl Q~
~ be oboe'eqc~~ey on/+
L 2~I ~<O< ~~ '3 CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE T q
Not i~4v'~ MN'ms~y CCt grea3Cc,<e Po~e,e Pcu e.(S m>W tken+ifqin'q nu~bcrs. 1rovi&p4ofoqynpki'e c4c~entnILrn.
TASK FORCE CONCURRENCE OBTAINED BY: DATE: 2d SW
~ gg~t ~~ gQ~~
CORRECTIVE ACTION INPLEHENTED:
ktlcokn ont 2 k&34 Tonuosq Ta~~~g
<, l~a~
Z4; Ar pko~o~rq.Ilute ttocuuwd~.
'lR8~4 r~as'kRgca. c ~roe ce..
FINDING 'REPORTABLE UNDER FINDING NOT REPORTABLE 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21 BY: DATE:
~
C.~ RESOLUTION BY REVIEW CO. 1ITTEE CO.-ZNTS/RATIONALE: ~
ALinzsIFCJ> 4w 'Dec i.io Qev>e~ CcAewn~ea g<~-Ti 9 6, Sr-a EC'LOW 9R. QiS Pog<ViOH.
fS AC'CEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE.
LL'ISCREPA!BEY e
e DISCREPANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.. ~ AS OBSERVATION
~
~
'eL r /
TR."eeSNITT D TO PROJECT-'TEAN AS FINDING DATE: Z D. REVIE" AiD PROCESSING BY PROJECT TEA.f OBSBBUAIIDN ~ FINDING COUNTS:
As-insiLLll+Q 'ciecL LFrq LLC geicee tDc ck'OLLeibc LRLCI L'ULCQ" BL~ LLLO"'<<'r J,r '> I O.'Ff1ieCk lie OACOOrlleOLCLc LLLI ~ 'PP Le teS DOALL SLOTS ICLSLAjeCU e'f CORPZCTIVE ACTION TO BE T
+~Spy"g +ho,C jz4yg LOLtli I il CeereFgll Ll MN'
'C~.
LSILLLLbcrS, I I7'fga3Q~f reic!4L p40fOLled D P>~~<
lelLLC P~<j> ~O~
O~ceL LAiLee
~ TcLe l1 TASK FORCE CONCURREhCE OBTAIheED BY: DATE: 2@7 CORRECTIVE ACTION EMPLEHENTED'-
S ktlccl o t Z RAATas~)S,l~a~krpl 4)r iL' g gA~ Ta+~rg 24 )98%4ir~o 5'4 Fpyca. ~curv~ce,.
FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21
~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE
~ DATE:
FLORIDA PO'HER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE PLANT UNIT NO. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGRAM PROJECT RESPONS": . UIR-46 I
VERIFICATION ITEN l- HIGH PRESSURE SAFETY INJECTION PU.'$P .NO. 2A There is no design document that requires a feeder directory within electrical panels. However, complete directory assis-tance is provided by the use of the PDM sheets (2998-B-33S) which identifies each circuit and i"s respective load. The circuits are clearly numbered at the panels. Some panels may contain a di ectory developed by the Construction Dep rtment fo" the'" own ease of installation anc testing. This'ocument is not a recuirement.
i
~--ine r'rg Verifica ion ask Fo.ce Ebasco Serio s "ncorvora ed Two World ade Center New York, IQ'0048 Januot ~ 2l. 1 o~,
nO. E Z Zuci=..an/T Feigenbaum >>n sco Pro)ect earn FROM: n ~lo"gett roasco ~ Task ro. "e bwana"e-"~
<<t' r >
i~~y~cf f7'>
SO~a "CT:
S
~
'C EllG:iiE~ <<N>> VZ~ ="CAT1OIt l<<I WVw<<3 PlZ IiO. 2 yg ~<<(
~',e y A<<vb PA ~
PBOG=-""
~h<<'l<<w
~ Ay )
),<<<<' <<<<A<<At W~Aa<<A O v /t ~
1,( ~
~ t A .<<>>
I '
~ -A) gC AAi I
'tv t<<'I I "<<'I << ~ 6<<<< I ~
~
t a< ~ <<to
<0 t~+~ot'
/'s
<g <<ot o [re qo> <<t ~ ~ <<ac: Ao Tps V <<<<C V V',
'Ins ai a Io ve icp ion h se of >>
e ro p V Tt ~ AW a Un: 2 )ovsi e '. ear:. 3ecet-e 10zc. At tne ~ece. <<
Rev'w Co=-..': e m Se hesca, t~aryland, those sev -..
classi ied as Observationsby the co=it ee and t ans=itted t" he Pro)ect T<<ea~ fo" rev'ew and nt oAos<< ' ps eq igovAod .a C o eAcn UZB.
- 2. Memo EZZ-ST=2-83-003, dated January 5, 1983 (.. o Feigenba'-'o 31o"g --.)
transmitted. a description of the Pro)ect Teu actions'o be implemented for UZBs 47, 48, 49, 50 and 52, all o which are concerned with elec.rical eouipment color coding. A review of that memo and attachments, made
)ointly by E7r engineer C'h Ruiz and the ~viter on January 5, resul ed Task Force concurrence with the proposed ac ions for those five Ul:Bs.
- 3. Memo EZZ-SL-2-83-003 also transmit ed photographic documentation (per aini..g to UIR-46) of identifying tag n znbers affixed to Po~er Panels 201 and 202.
A rev'ew of the memo and attachments, made Jointly by ETF engineer C N Rui" and the writer on January 5, resulted in Task Force concurrence with the actions taken by the Prospect Team regarding UlR-46.
trans.-.itied hotoara"hic doc"~entation (perta-'ndn~ .o '-".l) c.
iden:ifyin~ taa, n"".)U rs af ixed to "==V DC Po.>>.er Panel "-A.' -. vi-"
of the le.-er a~d a ac."~ en s, rade Jointly bv " e-.."ineer C Y. Hui=
~
and the ~'riter on Janu ry 10, resu"ted in Tas> :o ce concurrence ":4 tne ac.ions a~en by he Pro)ect Te~= re-ardi .c. U"R-5l.
- 5. All ask Force activi-ies in connect. on .-' U:~s h6 hrough 5"- are consdered o be cc="le e.
J C Moul o", C-:-
D D t.'
$ -.>3 a~ I Zuc n ~l 04$~-o I v
E FLORIDA PO)>ER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCXE PLY>T UNIT NO. 2 ENGXN" ERING X ERXFXCATION PROGRAM PROJECT RESPONSE: UIR-46 (REVISION 1)
UIR-51 (REVISION 1)
VERIFICATION ITEN 1 - HIGH PRESSURF SAFETY INJECTXON PUNP NO. 2A On December 3, 1982, the EVP Task Fo 'ce issued UIR-46 which s ated the following difference to be resolved as a resul" of their field inspections:
"No nameplates or identification have been provided in power panels 201 and 202 for the services (feeders)".
On December 10, 1982, the Project, Team responded as ollows:
"There ' no design document that requires a feeder directory w'hin elec" rical panels. However, complete directory assis-tanc is provided by the use o the PD&YiD sheets (2998-B-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 Construction Department for thei" own ease of installation and testing. This document is no t a r equireme nt. "
Subsequently, on December 14, 1982, the EVP Task Force supple-mented UIR-46 with the following comment:
"During the field installation verification by the Ebasco Task Force no circuits or feeder were numbered at the panels as per PD5TD Sheets 2998-B-335. The subject PDND Sheets show the feeder directory (number and load) and this design document must be implemented for,identif ication purposes. "
4
The EVP Task Force designated this item as an observation to be included in the final report, which should be addressed and d'spositioned by the Project Team.
The Project Team has reviewed this item with appropriate per-sonnel from, Cons"ruction, Construction Test, ESSE Engineering and NYO Engineering Groups and has concluded that sufficient in ormation al eady exists at the power panels to identify the, as-'nstalled circuitry in conjunction with the PD&M Data Sheets (2998-B-33S Series).
The Project Team has verified that the individual circuit bre'akers at PP 201 and 202 are tagced with an identifying numbe" (1, 2, 3, 4...,,,etc.) to aid personnel that are re-quired to work on the panel. Photographs of the subject power pane's a e attached to document this verification.
is the Project's opinion that no signi icani advantage exists in having the feeder directories located at the power panels. Whether personnel are using the PD&N Data Sheets or directories mounted at the panel, they must coun" .down the rows or circuit breakers to locate the desired service. En fact, as the PD6MD's a e controlled documents, thev provide the most accurate information 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.
r Qr. ~A%Q A k,
~ l\ .-~; '!(0 l n(~ C4
~C
~~~wE~m)pI q Rg
~ <, lP"..Q>>, e
'( ~Cq
- U~
~ +
Cl
<Z glsH SeE.<
(Pgglg
~> ry'i7/Sz /2/j T/I'Z
,~ ~ (\
c C
l I ~A+wg
~g \ ~$ .
P~l I I
.a ~ J ~
' I
~
~
~r ~
~"
p
(
.~4 hl
'n'P'S "i g I ts
@+%/II g" p- %0 e Pl ~>~ E
~ ~.
vg e e
<<+'t Qv ~kg~>
V a.L.a I j r- 2a'c. Zr r < rpj)r ]=i Zw( l- l6/-'7 5/8=.
i.< ~r=.(.is~ rc". 4'rr7/gz J'%weHE~ <le-4c (zz<.i i
3 VLQ-5 QZZUi L
DISCREPANCY NO. UIR-47
-25.3-
UNRESOLVED IT&'i (DISCREPANCY) REPORT ENGINEERING 4'ERIFICATION. PROGRAM SL2 UI R-47 A. PREPARATION BY EBASCO TASK FORCE INITIATOR AFFECTED ITM:
gg~, jlCa7 (0/1 RE:-R""NCE DOCUMENTS:
/ndepenc4n~ ~~~49~
g pl~ (rnid z) ~~rgn,
'g a.)
~
2 A.-
p pD ~ +a g'y pr ssui<- +< ++ gy
~
g // pa p I p p
/ geneAt/
/ng ec Hioo gg g)@ger~ on ~h c~(~/==~~
~.~ je~P~
gn p~ //~
><F' 4 5 5Q @grid ++
7 ron.
DIFFEPZNCES TO BE RESOLVED: b) ~ /Bc 4 r + 7-I ~ j'~~ 7, g-27I sh.ey
/$ y (J mdiv> g p] g3 8 z4,-
~ I DESIGN RELATED ~ FIELD INSTALLATION RELATED ~ START-LP P RFOR~NCE RELATED PREPS".D BY: C' Z DATE:
REVIEW BY EBASCO TASK FORCE CO% .NTS/RATIONALE:
X Z/~Jr~< Wa>~ ~>>'~ Qi or~re 4 Q pg/7 4'e (g<h e<<-
I-o tin
/e Jeff i2ev. 4 (o i/24./83)
~~Sg PORC/ Co Nco A.5 XITQ ACT<oMS Ic BE l+ IcCH Bf pfEad~cT Tc.AQ p 7E'R A'TTAc HM ~T
~ DIFrERENCES RESOLVED ~i l?~
~ RE-REVIEW REQUESTED fjg DIFFERENCES UNRESOLVED. DISCREPANCY TRANSMITTED TO REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE:
C. RESOLUTION BY REVI CO."MITTEE V'OUNTS/RATIONALE:
H~gw'~rr~p /~ad ~c ac+>~. chal~ 4'//
Ms f yc SC'~P c'~ <z~ ~c~
DISCREPANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE.
DISCREPA'.TCY IS, NOT ACCEPTABLE.
TRANSMITTED TO PROJECT TEAM
~~ AS OBSERVATION AS FINDING BY: DATE: /g /S Z D. REVIEW A%) PROCESSING BY PROJECT TEAM OSS:"RVATION FINOING
)
CORCBTS u.s~, of c pp~pY)d,~ c04)r-c.o~I i gs, pa.>~ t. or ta.pe..
CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE TAKEN:
Eevceco safe+-
4~s.
rd&Co pM +~ rev>~ ~
c44lrc4JL ocOlilpcee+
Cd\
Ca Mcucre. tccopccr Ye@u.ire9 ~eL4~~s Gclor oo~
prie'r oP U~it 2. Cov ~e.~M opero+vr'OO QmgFSf 2 ~tkfL 3~IA CORRECTIVE ACTION IPZL~NTED: ~Q )Q QQ ~r ~~k Q~ Q,~~T'Y ~W, f
FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21
~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE BY; DATE:
C. RESOLUTION BY REVIEW CO. KITTEK CO~NTSIRATIONALK: gPgig ~7+ rl r PagVierragr ACED e'C ch v~ ~//'/ ar//~re >~r 8r/-"y
'-/-/.-"
Fr C <6'af pz
DISCREPANCY TR.kN SMITTKD IS 10 PROJ"CT TEA%
r NOT ACCEPTABLE ~
+~.
AS OBSER)'nZION FQ;DZQ
~ Q IF DATE: /'2 /S Z D. RKVIK" AND PROCESS NG BY PROJECT TEAN OBSERVATION ~ PIhDING 4 S~V - .>~ e~ l < 'S"'""
U 0'F G4ppropY<d C0 ter-c e ~~-"~ <
~ i,~ ~<<<<or 4a.p~.
CORM~C IVE ACTION TO BE TAKEN:
Reve~ Safe+- ralM %.44lr<A ~alps+ co~
l P~
un<i 2 c o'~me.~M jg,"; C~P~ i~ l Vl~
oparo+
~l
~ a3't Co '~cure.
YCQ.UArQ5L
'pAper W~<i~~g J P CoLoY Priar c.
Se,e Alta'e~t 2 554- ~m~~ 24; CORRECTIVE ACTION IKL-ANTED:
I% 83 d'or'Tmg R ~ c ~ur~~~ ~
PINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 1Q CPR 50.55(a) or 10 CFR 21
~ FIVHNG hOT REPORTABLE DATE:
~ I I
FLOP.IDA PO'wr R 6 LIGHT COYZAi<Y ST. LUCIE PLANT UNIT NO. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGRAM P ROJEC ~
RESPONSE: UIR-47 (R=VISION 1)
UIR-48 (R"VISION 1)
UIR-49 (REVISION 1)
UIR-50 (REVISION 1)
UIR-52 (REVISION 1)
V RIFICATION ITEMS 1g 2 g 3 g 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 proper identification clearly indicated.
Although not specifically required by Regulatory Guide or Industry Standard,'he St Lucie Unit 2 FSAR does specify that safety re-lated electrical equipment must be identified by color coded 'tags, pain or tape according 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 conta.ining the correct equipment 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 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.
The only purpose of the color code scheme for electrical panels is to provide easy recognition of equipment for individuals not familiar with the plant layout, and color codes are never used as a subst'tute for nameplates when performing maintenance or testing on electrical equipment. However, as we are not in con-formance with the FSAR, the Project will recommend that a total review of sa ety related electrical equipment be performed to ensure proper color coding of equipment tags in accordance with the FSAR criteria. The review and all required modifications will be completed prior to commercial operation.
E.".gineer'.,g Verification sk For'ce Ebascc Septic incorpora.ed Two World Trade Center Hew York, R'004B Ja.".ua~ 24, loB3 TO: E Z Zuchman/T Feigenbaum - Eb sco ProJect Team FROM: T H Blodget - Ebasco ~ P Task Force Manager~,~~g~N rf fl SUB J:".CT: ElfGiV ERTIiG V:Ri?iCATXOIi ?ROGR:"-'~i ST LUCTE UNiT NO. 2 CO"CU - '"= ."' '"'
UbRESOL'~:"D iTEM (D~SCRE?AGCY) RE?OR "i'" " 0 S (U~~-46 T:"~U
'iO" L ",-52)
- 1. UiRs 4o through 52 wer genera.ed oy the fiasco Task Force u i.ig t ie
+iel d ins al 1 pt 'r ve 'icatio~ gbasD o ne grog pm p he c Luci Unit 2 Jobsite in early December 19~2. At .he December 15 19:2 ~::-
Re'view Commi zee meeting in Be hesca kaQ p .d those se've.. 's we classi iec.as Observationsby .he co=i ee and trans=it-ed t' th P."oJect Team or rev'ew ard processing, as evidenced on ?a": C of eacn UiR.
- 2. Memo EZZ-S~ 2-83-003, dated January 5, 1983 (from Feigenbaum to 3lodge- )
transmitted a descrip ion of the ProJect Tem actions to be implemented for UiRs 47, 48, 49, 50 and 52, all o. wh'ch are cOncerned ~ath elec ricpl eouipment color coding. A revie~ of that m mo and attachmen+s, made Jointly by ETF engineer C M Ruiz and the miter on January 5, resulted in Task Force concurrence with the proposed actions for those five UiRs.
- 3. Memo EZZ-S~~2-83-003 e,'so transmitted pho ographic documen+ation (pertaining to UiR-46) of iden ifying tag numbers affixed to Power Panels 201 and 202.
A revie~ of the memo and attachments, made Jointly by ETF engineer C M Ruiz and the write on January 5, resulted in Task Force concurrence with the actions taken by the ProJect Team regarding UiR-46.
A Speed L t er da ed Janu ry ln, lg63, fro.", Fei>enba -., to halo<<brett, transmitted photographic doc" ~entation (pertaining to U:5-5l) of identi g ng tae, numbers affixed to l=5U DC Power Panel =A. A revie'-
of ha le ter and a tach.-.ents, made )ointly by TF enrireer C '8 ~ui=
and the vriter on January 10, resulted in Task Force ccrcurrence "ith the actions taken by the Prospect Tea~ regarding UiR-5l.
- 5. All Task Force activi es ir. connect'on .-.ith UZHs b6 through 5= are considered to be co=p"ete.
P::3: r>h
~l cc: D L lhT Do son, FP J C Houltor., C-:-
D D Yiiller, C-:-
E Z Zuch ar.
T H Blod<e t
0 C)
C'2'd~idC' zs-. ~-
l'
UhRESOLVED ITEM (DIS;.P:iPANC'. ~ REPORT ENGINEERING X'ERIFI CATION PROGRAM SL2 UIR-WS A. PREPARATION BY EBASCO TASK FORCE INITIATOR AF. ECTED ITB".:
Z Pem 7 - ~~ ~e6 ~G'c ... ...s i./-~"- ~-~'"
6/'F- ~'-g P ~ she=7'al-~~i REFER"-NCE DOCUMENTS:
- 5 ' ~ /J /AS AS y~ f/% 8/OO
(, /,~~pendbn p g /2 z p2 Z,- E) iSAgg Ve~rga. ~/e~kr / p ) ~pm TO BE RESOLVED:
gg'IFFER"NCES
(~ v imago n A) <ino
~$ ~ ~~~ep/~re~ <~ / gxj. p~~ be~n l='</4'~ ~~~e~
(<rtQ'Q~ 2 8-~ <<~ ~
~
(Q i Lg/N/OA
~, ph /i q'g 2 green /<4'c g + .~~hgrcronc(, %VAN~=
~ DESIGN RELATED ~FIELD INSTALLATION RELATED ~ START-UP PERFORMANCE R LATED PREPARED BY: C I
~ 'C IZ DATE:
/z- s'z.
REVIEW BY EBASCO TASK FORCE r
'4V (
Qo'Bn co ~
gi uisi~n>>
~. lm 12av 201./2 0/8 5)'
ASK FORCE CONCVRS 4/1TH jE~TLON< ~< +4 lAKGN DIFFERENCES RESOLVED lay 7ga~~t w TGAH, ~leak AvTAcHwFNT X.
n)t i7~
RE-REVIEW REQUESTED DIFFERENCES UNRESOLVED. DISCREPANCY TRANSMITTED TO REVIEW COMMITTEE
' /g~- Z z
s C. RESOLUTION BY REVIEW COMMITTEE CONVERTS/RATIONALE: ggesN Z 7P/s I jQQfl/NvM/ peÃ/ l'or /Pv r 1 ry~ Ãc r 72/m 4J/(rr ~/r A4'~ <>S+i
Jr P8SrP'm ~ ss r ~ +H ~cp~Ars- Cp r~w DISCREPANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE. DISCREPANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. TRANSMITTED TO PROJECT TEAM ~ AS OBSERVATION AS FINDING BY: DATE: '. REVIEtvs AtvD PROCESSING BY PROJECT TEAM FINDING gg OBSERVATION CO%ANTS speci'lies i&hlic&~ epsom'e+-eel~ el&n& <equip~~ E'SAIC use ot pp~pv~ co@ v co~ ~s pcuo4 or ta pc., 'ORRECTIVE ACTION Tg&g: tpcwe~ so+e+- TO BE r 4dik aleotv~ co, W ~ or,sure p~pev coLo co~ ez~t ~~Y tgz. C~pl~ f4. r ev<~ p M o3L ~+~ K QNSTQ 2 CO~gyg~ TASK FORCE CONCURRENCE OBTAINED ScL IflcLck~cBBW CORRECTIVE ACTION 2, M~ IMPLANTED: 'Y: OQY~4tlYFBBo +0.EBEA,SS,~ W Q+ )QQ'3 ~+~ ~cE gQ ~u,>rA .vv P H~ DATE: Z AS FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21 ~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE BYE DATE: I RESOLUZIQN BY REVIEW CO. fITTEE ~ ~ CO'NESTS/RATTONABE: CvtggrSv Z fgvS'F - /QSSAY4'iwvF Pit/Fcr /PFvsI t QCPfy<. Pi y ZCC l +&~ ~2/(( 8s's A4'< <>SÃj
TNG COLHENTS: s N'SAtE speci< a's ih kilic& 'fsa4'e+ noM& clsJn& cauip tcsc ck ~pvopr~ coL v coW.-~s, pcioQ cv ss.pc., CORRZCTIVE ACTION TO BE T~: 'Pcyiotu soft+- ro47c8. clcotr~ coutpr stat, bs cnsuxc ptopcr 'f ~VCL TgZ. O C~Pl~ f4. t"eVt~ ~ OBJET, ~u,\F-W ~CLED cohv cosuoul ~s.: P<~T-TASK FORCE CONCURRENCE 5~ iaCk~<% g MM OBTAINED BY: 8 24; l983 ~e .nt I &~ DATE: C >.S/I CORRECTIVE ACTION IMPLANTED: 4EBBA,ES.~ Ta,5 IS.'FCFT ~ C~CEA.yB.~C . ~ ~ FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER FINDING NOT REPORTABLE 10 CFR 50.55(e) ~ or 10 CFR 21 BY: DATE: FLORIDA POKER & LIGEiT COYiPAXY ST. LUCIE PLANT UNIT NO. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGRAM PROJECT R" SPONSE: UIR-47 (REVISION 1) UIR-48 (REVISION 1) UIR-49 (REVISION 1) UIR-50 (REVISION 1) UIR-52 (REVISION 1) VERIFICATION ITEMS: 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 The cable tray/raceway system at St Lucie Unit 2 is properly color coded, howeve , certain MCC's, switckgear, power panels, etc may not be similarly color coded although all equipment has the proper identification clearly indicated. Although not specifically required by Regulatory Guide o Industry Standard, the S" Lucie Uni" 2 FSAR does speci y that sa ety re-lated electrical equ'pment must be identified by color coded tags, paint or tape according to the appropriate color schemes code providedo The color coding has no effect on safe 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 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 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. ~(~%) The oniv purpose of tne color code scheme for electrical panels is to provide easy recognition of eauipment for individuals not familiar with the plan layout, and color codes are never used as a substitute "or nameplates when performing 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 safety related electrical eauipment be performed to ensure proper color coding of ecuipment tags in accordance with the FSAR criteria. The review anc all reouired modifications will be completed prior to commercial operation. L".gineering Verification Task Force r.oasco Se~ice ncorpor .ed Tvo World Trade Cer. er Ile~ York, A'0048 Ja>>ug>>y 1083 Z Zuchman/ Feigenbaum - H sco Protect ea FROM: T H Slodgett -:" sco P~ Task Force i'anager~ r IA SU J"CT: +gQIg ~I/)0 Q I CATIO,j PO~~") ST LUCIZ KiIT PO. 2 UliR-SO ~I . -'. ( IS 8-.-.".: "Y) .-."?OH S (U".".-46 T:"-.U "-".=-52) UIBs ~6 through 52 vere generated oy .he s~~asco Task ?cree d':=".;- the - 'ld install '.. ve i ation <hase o the Qro . am a>> the -uci e )obsi e in ea>>1 december lo, A he ~eca be>> 19=2:..:" ?evie- "o~" i:-.ee >>ghp >>g v\ ge Ppscg . I J 'r%( a>>t <oso st) c5 classi.ied as Obse~ationsby .he co~ittee and trans..i -ed -o t".. ?ro feet Team for review -and processin", as evidenced on ?a"". C o. each UIH.
- 2. Memo ZZ- L-2-83-003) dao ed Janua g 5, 1983 ( o Feigenbaum .o ""lo"get )
transmit ed a descr'ption of the ?."o)ect Tea= ac ions to'be imple=en.e" or UIBs 47, 48, 49, 50 ard 52, all of vhich are concerned math ele .rical eouipm nt color cod'ng. A review of that me o and attachmen.s, ace Jointly by ETF engineer C M Huiz and the ~ iter on January 5, resul ed 'n Task Force concurrence vith the proposed a" ions for those ive UIBs.
3~ Memo "ZZ-SL-2-83-003 also transmitted photographic docmen;a ion (per:aining to UIB-46) of identifying tag numbers affixed to Power Panels 201 and 202.
A review of the memo and attachments, made Jointly by ET."" engineer C M quiz and the vriter on January 5, resulted in Task Force concurrence vith the actions taken by the Prospect Team regarding UIR-46.
<<2
- 4. A Sue " ~~tt r dated Janu-~y p0 1a"'q trans=)ttec photograph=c documentation (pertaining to U"~-51) of identifyin< a~ nu".;hers affixed to 125V DC Po"er 'Panel 2A. A review:
of that le ter and a tacn..en-s, ede )oint y by =F en@neer C M Rui=
and the <<.ite" on January 10, resu" ed in Tas'2:orce cc""u""e""e v'-"
the actions, taken by the Pro3ect Te= re>a ding U"R-5
- 5. JQ.1 ast Force ac ivi ies in connec.'on "ith U:~s 46 L hrpu<' awe considered to be cc"pie e.
<<h
~ I
~s
~
cc: L C.) <<)'ssv'c D ~ )
$) Dot son )
J C Moulton) C-:-
D D Mi'er, C-:-
E Z Zuch=an Pl J~ lpd
1 v
DISCREPANCY NO". UIR-49
-25.5-
UNR"..i'. ':g I'! EM (DISCREPANCY) REPORT ENGINEER'G VERI ICATION PROGR!M SL2 A. PREPARATION BY EBASCO TASK FORCE INITIATOR A:FECTED ITW:
b? jc)!
'LJQ fs fi'c c 4 i on Z '4 n"
~~ /g~ / p ~ v'- 25 I'4" REFERENCE DOCUMENTS: . z y p y g g (psych S/?<~'7 (
/p~app<Qen 8 ~e~(g'?
g~g~g. tz-i-82"
~
W.-g <~~p-9-2,'7I
- p. --+XI f ln< Qa g/g . Q/gg g'gccf /
g/~ef 7
/ Z 76'e7 7
/a~/all~/ion 8
')
DI:FERENCES TO BE RESOLVED:
(.~, p~,~ c~lm csZeJ ~ t~ I~Z(~Z'ck a('0<!d Q789$ // a n4
~ DESIGN RELATED ~FIELD INSTALLATION RELATED ~ START-H'ERFORMANCE R".LATED PREPARED BY: C M Gu iZ
~
DATE: / Z 8Z REVIEW BY EBASCO TASK FORCE COK'ANTS/RATIONALE: gg ~ Ir ~
(ygQ~ show /
nd aa'oH 5 P~ua urn co dive< ion~ 4 W~m e co /m-e v. 1 ( 0 I /z 4./p g)
/g S/C
~~ ~W~ecv kg DIFFERENCES RESOLVED
~ RE-REVIEW REQUESTED
~ DIFFERENCES UNRESOLVED. DISCREPANCY TRANSMITTED TO REVIEW COMMITTEE
/> P>.
~//P +
ATE:
/>(oP 8+
~ 0
C. RESOLUTION BY REVIEW COMMITTEE CO~NTSi>>ION<<: O/<~ Zr~/~~ - A@~i~i~g
~'/~~ r~~~ ~ i8/g/' +4'~~ ~ os/.Fr Mesc
/7 + b<N
<~~y~'C:~~~~,
g y </p p vi DTSCREPANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE.
DISCREPANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. ~ AS OBSERVATION TRANSMITTED TO PROJECT TEA"f ~ AS 'FINDING BY: DATE:
D. REVIEV AND PROCESSING BY PROJECT TEA.f OBSERVATION FINDING CO%ANTS:
iM+ifxM~ sd+e~ - 1"e)~ w(t ctviM lBp&l )~en~i p'5'Q( ~ pKciFi<z u.ce og ~pvapy i Co/OY Ga ~ oF 1
g~ PEs ERE+ Or 4~g, Review safe/ F(~
CORRECTIVE ACTION TO 'BE TAKEN:
.-elect M eg,'p K rem,~ n pev c,o4r conc o'
~F 4r eC +e4Y'CA
'UVRE 2. COW~
C~p.Q EBPC YEE~
a,r
~ o h.mica.~ t.."r
~
g
<'os'ATE:
TASK FORCE CONCURRENCE 0 T Ih D BY: ( J /Sd// '
S~ A4~~ 0 ~
CORM~CTIVE ACTION IMPLANTED:
~~~~ 24; lRs'3 -4 or~ ~~v~c.e.
FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21
~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE BY: DATE:
C. RESOLUTION'Y REVIEW COiKITTEE CO. ANTS/RATIONALE:
8c'qua, ~r~('4u le>~ ~irr 8'i ~44'w ~ ></jr/ P~~sc~ 8 J/st < y ~ pp 4"$ C'cr Pic'p c A)~'1 DISCREPANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE.
DISCREPANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.
TRANSMITTED TO PROJECT..TEAM .. ~
~ AS OBSERVATION AS FINDING .
,N h
I' BY: DATE:"
D. REVIEW AND PROCESSING B'f PROJECT TDD gg OBSERVATION FINDING t
COHKhTS:
Fs'Wa ~P~~~+<<C i4 +if'iM~ oW S~+e+w-7C)~ wtccCviM ega(~~e~l WCe o'P
~pa py'(. 'co(ar-c ~+s,( '+ o t~c CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE TAKEN:
Rcv~cw sAfep'-rc(rucQ clca<i~ cat AAQLIP can +4 C01 PQ4J 0 u~s4 2 COm~e~rP sperm~
% I c vl aw ~
pic<<+ M Ans~rc cJJj V4.+VA r~pr per TASK YORCE CONCURRENCE OUT/I D BY: C J DATE:
~MIA4p'q 24983 Qg 7y Vidlr'40 AttA4k&%vugg 2 gk' CORRECTIVE ACTION IMPLEMENTED:
FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21
~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE BY: DATE:
/
1 FLORIDA POP'ER G LIGHT COMPiYi'i ST. LUCIE PLANT - UNIT NO.- 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGRAM PROJECT R SPONSE: UZR-47 (REVISION 1)
UIR-48 (REVISION 1)
UIR-49 (REVIS ION 1)
UI R-5 0 (REVISION 1)
UIR-52 (REVISION 1)
VERIFICATION ITEMS: 1 ~ 2, 3, 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 s'milarly color coded although all ecuipment has the proper identi ication clearly indicated.
Although not specifically required by Regulatory Guide or Industry S and rd, the St Lucie Unit 2 FSAR does spec'fy that safety re-lated electrical ecuipment must be identified by'color coded tags, paint or tape accord'ng to the appropriate color schemes code provided'he color coding has no effect on safe operation, or 'design of 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 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 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
The onlv purpose of the color coce scheme for electrical panels is to provide easy recognition of equipment for individuals not amiliar with the plant layout, and color codes are never used as a .substitute for nameplates when performing maintenance or testing on electrical equipment. However, as we are not in con-ormance with the FSAR, the Project will recommend that a total review -of safety related electrical equipment be performed to ensure proper color coding of equipment tags in accordance with the FSAH criteria. The review and all required modifications will be completed prior to commercial operation.
~
~
Engineering Veri ication Task Force Ebasco Se. .ices Incorpora.ed Tvo World Trade Center Nev York, NY 10048 January 24, 1983 TO: E Z Zuc? an/T Fe'genbeum Eb sco Pro)ect ee FROM: T H Blodgett Eb sco EVP Task Force Manager Sb+JECT: E?IGI?i ERING VERI."ICATION ?BOG?~"i ST LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 U? RESOLVE 1 >l (~ISCREPAN"Y) BE?0? S (UIR-46 THBU ":.=.-5 )
- l. UIRs 46 throu-h 52 ver genera ed oy, he =besco Tesi ."orce d ring field inste a ion ve ificetion phase o the program e: the St " cie Unit 2 Jobsite in eer'y Decemoe>> 1982 At the December 1=, 19-"2 :-.:"
~evie" Co.==':.ee me ing in -e hesce, ?~e~ e"", t"os sev -. U =s "- r clessi iedas Observationsby the cr it ee end transmit ed t" Prospect Teem .or revie<<end processing as evidenced on Pe>>t C o eacn UIB.
- 2. Memo EZZ-SL-2-83-003, da ed Je .uery 5, 1983 (f om Feigenbe"- to "-'o"" "z ),
rensmit ed e desc"iption of the P."o)ect Teem ec ions o be impl en.e" for UIBs 47, 48, 49, 50 end 52, all of <<'hich are concerned <<5th elec."ical eouipment colo" coding. A reviev of that memo and ettac?'ents, =ade Jointly by ~r engineer C M Buiz'nd the writer on January 5, resul ed 'n Task Force concu>>rence vith the proposed ac ions or those five UIBs.
- 3. Memo EZZ-SL-2-83-003 also transmitted photogrepnic doc~entation (per.aining to UIB-46) of identifying tag numbe. s af ixed to Pover Panels 201 end 202.
A revie~ of the memo and attachments, made Jointly by ETF engireer C M Buiz end the vriter on January 5, resu1ted in Task Force concu=rence <<ith the actions taken by the Pro)ect Team regarding UIR-46.
A Speed w+te dated ~~~us~ 10, transzitted "ho oaraphic docvn ntation (pert ning o UZR-~l) of identi ying ta> n"-.3ers affixed o 125V DC Po-er Pane "-A. A revie-of tha le-ter and at ach-..cuts, rade Jointly by =sr engineer C M Rui=
and the wi e" on Janu ry 10, resul ed in Task =o ce cc..curr .." <<i-.h the actions .taken by the Progec e~= e>ardinr. U"R-51.
- 5. All Task ."orce activities in connec 'on vi h U:Rs 46 hrough 52 are considered to be co=piete.
~>~ g ~
@AD a
DOYrsony r Pw J C Moul:cn C-:.
D D C-=
Z Z Zuch=.an Q1 ocy o~
DISCREPANCY NO. UIR-50
-25.6-
y,
'.~ ..::SC V:.D ITEM (DISCREPANCY) REPORT Ei'i ":ZT'PING VERIFICATION PROGRAM - SL'2 A. PREPS WTION BY EBASCO ":ASK FORCE INITIATOR AFFECTED ITrW:
V p o p o Z/e~ a Fyl>r~gen Need
](~/e,c/.)- / S 2 REFERENCE I.
DOCPZNiS:
/f)gGpcender,H Desgi n- Fie/8 Intel<///a
)(,s4,ng ~es ign.- Z'Iecdric,a / <e+~r~
o
<<<</
n o P n@g~
insk//~~ton "'" " gp c f 8'7 sh~ef v-i z6m 7 TO BE RESOLVED:
8'IFFER".NCES
~)~~)- / 1a Pe= ~ P g) /+ g Qgpn co/~
DESIGN RELATED ~ FIELD INSTALLATION RELATED ~ START-UP PERFOR~WNCE RELATED PREPAID BY: C ~ /+ ~ i- >i > 'C'.+ @ DATE:
REVIEW Bv EBASCO TASK FORCE CO.~ANTS/RATIONALE:
<Ao ~ 7'>> ~,
o /d p /a jc?S C'0 de/. W ~ ~g g ~~me cd l~
'Rev. 5 Ot 24-89 I +5/c QiZCG Co pJCuiZ S W> TH 13y 'Ill>JQQ+ l6'AM, Pt=g. ATTA<HNc~T 5.
')7 DIFFERENCES RESOLVED
~ RE-REVIEW REQUESTED DIFFERENCES UNRESOLVED. DISCREPANCY TRANSMITTED TO REVIEW COMMITTEE BY:~~+ DATE:
j / . g2 o3 62
C. RESOLUTION BY REVIEh'OMMITTEE co~NIBSATIONAIE:
p(Cyan, j G<~+~
roj ZC
~ <+r'7 72+~
@+<+'rA'r '/ <
&pre ~ ypgzC rgg Jl
~/+'~
~
'9 r'~r..:r' 'j g(gP ~ g~ Pg kF -5 S. /78' C +7VC QC+SM DISCREPANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE.
DISCREPANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. QQ AS OBSERVATION TRANS. fITTED TO PROJECT TEA".f ~ AS FINDING BY: 'DATE: g2 l~ i5 D. REVIEh'ND PROCESSING BY PROJECT TEA.f OBSERVATION ~ FINDING CO."PANTS:
FEAR Sfe.cia lee' Mtl'Ft~~ o ~ - Yi'(g~ e.lac,ii:~
I
+
< Sn i use of shepsofss 'OLor- coU. s, p~C or l-ye.
~[~ ~r u.re.~Xiii
. CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE TAKEN:
'e( &sseaQ CIEoA lor proper ooLov ootj<q of ~~yw,<nI, 6 p~~ Y'evi~ reesur4- ~~.~ prior' BY'.c,
- s. Cov cxU V~ 2 ~~c~~ oy~ea~.
TASK FORCE CONPJRREN(E OB A NED
$ 'c O'&~~~X 2 Z~uoq ZAp )fQ$ $ r+<fQ RTcc,~~vl ~cc.
CORRECTIVE ACTION IMPLEHENTED:
FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21
~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE BY: DATE:
RESOLUTIOh BY REVIEW CO~AITTEE 0
CO~NTSIRATIONALE: ~
fir,(r,.'gw rj ( wcg'p. v mrs rvs P ( P( p~ /+ >~ gC
/t'A'L'<
~
pc/S Zj B
~Q 6'H . 4 c: ~rvC rg Ch ~<
DISCP-""PANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE.
l DISCREPAhCY TRA'BSMITTED TO IS h'OT ACCEPTABLE.
PROJE& YEAH
~
~
AS OBSERVATION AS FINDING BY: DATE: 8< <~ 8'<
D. REVIEts AND PROCESS1NG BY PROJECT TE' OBBBBVAYSOB ~ BSBOLSG CO. ANTS:
~t $ ~
I
~
%1 gL~~ +(QC)+;~
'oLor-Cc& +s, P~C or '<-
F$ pR g g 0 5'O y eQ AIQBoS,~ LLf i
use of ofPro~rs 4.~[~M ~
CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE TAKEN:
oZ 4
Brl~ Swg
~m)w ~CA r. Coi VwX 2. ~me,y~
Ya&~ ctsc~rs~
p~M ape.ro~
Ye,v<Qv
~
~ M
~s'ur
~r4- a propov co@>v cocbnq
~~~.r Prior',
TASK FORCE CON@RREN+E OB A NED ,L.
5'C" g'aC4mt.X< 2 D'E ACTION IiPLEHENTED:
Z~uag ZCf )<83 +B ~PgQ Fui CC ~~B B mCW.B
'ORRECT FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21
~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE
FLORIDA PO'P!ER & LIGHT C"YsP~X'i ST ~ LUCIE,PLANT UNIT NO.. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGM~f PROJECT R" SPONSE: UIR-47 (REVISION 1)
UIR-48 (REVISION 1)
UIR-4 9 (REVIS ION 1)
UIR-50 (REVISION 1)
U IR-5 2 ( REVlS ION 1 )
VERIFICATION ITEMS 1 g 2 g 3 g 4 g 7 The cable tray/raceway system at St Lucie Unit 2 is properly color coded, however, certain MCC's, switckgear, power panels, etc may not be similarly color coded although all equipment has the prope" identification clea ly indicated.
Although not specifically required by Regulatory Guiae or Industry Standard, the St Lucie Unit 2 FSAR does speci y that safety re-lated elec" ical ecuipment must be identi ied by'color co"ec tags, pain or tape according to the appropriate color schemes code providedo The colo" coding has no effect on sa e operation, or 'design of 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 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 equipment tag numbers that the cable is to be routed to/from and the colo" coding scheme is not relied upon for installation purposes nor do the pull cards even refer to a color code scheme.
,~(gal) 0
S The only purpose of the color cooe scheme for elect-ica panels is to provide easy recognition o equipment o" in"ividuals not familiar with the plant lavout, and color coces a e never used as a substitute for name~lates w¹n performing main enance or testing on electrical equipment. However, as we are not in con-formance with the FSAR, the Project will recommend that a total review o safety related electrical ecuipment be performed to ensure proper color coding of equipment tags in accordance with the FSAR cr'teria. The review and all required modifications will be completed prior to comme cial operation.
ATTACHMC>> i I Qgjneer1 >g Vq 1 ica ion Task Eb sco Se=.'ce Zncorpora ed Two World Trade Center Ilew York, R 10048 Januar ~
24 1 c83 cPO E Z Zuchman/T Fe genbaum - =o sco Prospect earn OM: T H 31odgett - r.-"asco .VP Task:orce 'janage"~
r( ffi SlJBJ CT: E IG7Ã:":.-.7NG V:.HiF7CATZOH P.".OG:~'l S LUC:2 UIii'O. 2 P Q ISO'Mt) 7 II ~
(>>I7$ I P ~ ~ ay ) <<gg<<( U<<
- 1. U"Rs 46 through 52 were genera.ed oy he =basco .
ask Force durin- =he
~ield installation veri 'ation -hase of <<'>>o>>>>o <<a<< ~ v T ~cl j>> Do<<$ Qe<<e<<<<D<<Q 1 1llr -he Dece."..ber A 1 Q 2 PIevi e ot <<i ee meet ng n <<e hest
. 1 Ma~ and, .hose s>v~ ~ I class1 iec as Observationsby the co i ee and .ens-.,i ted .c th P."object Team for rev'ew and processing, as evicenced on Pa<<z C o."each U7.B.
- 2. Memo FZZ-SL-2-83-003, dated Janua~> 5, 1983 (from Feigenbaum to "-lo"=et:)
ransmit ed a aescription of tne Pro'ect Team ac ions .o be impl for UXBs 47, 48, 49, 50 and 52, all o which are concerned <<5th elec.r:cal eouipment colo cod'ng. A review o that me o and attachments, =ace Jointly by ZTr" engineer C M Buiz and the writer on January 5, resu'ed 'n Task ."orce cor cu".ence with the proposed ac ions for those five Ul'Rs.
3~ Memo ZZZ-$7~2-83-003 also transmitted photographic doc~~entation (pertaining to U78-46) of identifying tag numbers affixed to Power Panels 201 and 202.
A review of the mero and attachments, made Jointly by Ki~ engineer C M Ruiz and the writer on January 5, resulted in Task Force concurrence wi h the actions taken by the Prospect Team regarding UIH-46.
>I
~sanua~.,J 1O 'I ~
'rQ,.o ) ~~o 'i ip:lq
~a 4vs ~ vv 4 J os( vv ans.~i teQ ho oQ an ic jocu:Beni '.. ( e ai.. n to U' af fixeQ to 125V DC Po~'er Panel ZA ~ 4 <<ev>> ev of that letter and at ac'~ments, ra~~e )ointly by Z'r engineer " M 'Rui=
and -
he ~.iter on ~anu ry 10, resu ec in Task:cree the ac.ions aken by .he Prospect e~- e~ar~~inz UZB-51.
- 5. ~l Task ."orce ac i".ies in co..n c='on vith U:~s 46 throu"h 5"- are considered o be cc=ple e.
L"3:i".h cc: D L C. vq sv an) 1 Dotsoa j
D D C !Coulton, C-:-
C 2 Zuch .a..
Sloc~ett
DISCREPANCY NO. UIR-51
-2507"
Al 1
UNRESOLVED ITB) (DISCREPANCY) REPORT ENGINEERING V:"RIFICATION PROGRA."f SL2 A. PREPARATION BY EBASCO TASK FORCE INITLKTOR AFFECTED ITW io n V'u /Ve.
,cv oe Qg f'/P/ c~ t ion Z ' y~y ~in Steam
~,n sg <y r <</~c/)
R"-:=RENCE DPClPZh S:
p /g /ns1ai'l+ ion Coi y P<
><~~. g3 3+~ S/7e P. - E)(Is hog DeSign; PD ~~
DI:..EREhCES TO BE RESOLVED:
c vc=. ~ in G na ii'r ~to fc-. ~ iZen fi yea flonW $ a ve Seen P~ /he wer uices ( Qe cter ). -~"fein B.
I
+one /
~ DESIGN RELATED ~ FIELD INSTALLATION RELATED ~ START-UP PERFOR~WXCE RELATED PREPA~""D BY: DATE: /2- Z-Z2 REVIEW B: EBASCO TASK FORCE COUNTS/RATIONALE:
~ DIFFERENCES RESOLVP.' i2e.v.
TASQ O I 24 R'3 Q,CQ Co NC RS' T'H 4 RE-REVIE'Q REQUESTED P><ODBCT WHAM~T ER QTT'ACHfrtE'hJT 2.
gf DIFFERENCES UNRESOLVED. DISCREPANCY TRANSHITTED TO REVIEW COMMITTEE
C. RESOLUTION BY REVIEV CO.KITTEE CO. ANTS/RATIONALE:
p /AYC Sg 4Q N 3E . lE 12Cvy~
. S~ ~ r)asi DISCREPANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE.
DISCR"PANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.
TRANS".IITTED TO PROJECT TEP f
~
~
AS OBSERVATION AS FINDING BY: DATE: (Z l' D. REVIE'W AND PROCESSING BY PROJECT TEA".f
~
CO.
OBSERVATION ANTS a54>x
[~gt~ [(Q FINDING g
c<rcu<Tvq t~ a.e.cod@
oi (ou>er '"
p~~n,"~ i~~ b..+X,,0
~ ~iW 75) 4 >~Shet't rt'-Qa<~me+fs
' "l CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE TAWN:
Ensnare W~g ~'~Qvi~ ccrc bie Jcev.r 04 I'2~ V >< 'Uu~ 'Po er ~~~4. -'~
y,ra f~q~ m<C )Mt'qcvj au~ +Y'S'. 7nVAe )4ÃgraPn(C TASK FORCE CONCURRENCE OBTAINED BY: v'-N~ DATE: /c'/<le ZHPL~NTED:
CORPZCTIVE ACTION s~ Ac+.l <<t z. ~ ~'i'<<> < ~44q~h~ Ro~u~~
t S~ Attend ~erg 3 ~3CW~24; !AS~ y lask R)v~ Co~~~~~
FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER '
FINDING NOT REPORTABLE 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21 BY: DATE:
RESOLUTION BY REVIEV CO.MITTEE E CO~K S/RATIONALE:
A king+ $ I'4 ~ tI~ I5 Harv>~ ~a~ i~ j I
DISCR"PANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE.
DISCREPANCY, IS NOT ACCEPTABLE., -"gg AS OBSERVATION TRA!tSHITTED TO PROJECT TEP
~
t"',~
g e AS FIh&ING
- DAi=: /Z l D. REVIE" AND PROCESSING BY PROJECT TEA't
'BSERVATION ~ FINDING CO~NTS:; y J
\
O.-",4'<X tn a.CC,OVM~ ~tW
~
)
~)Q >~S'het'-t rl'-QV.tW~e~ t COR!KCTIVE ACTION TO BE TAKEN:
E~suv-e Wu.t )x4v~44 c<~ gt<~~g of lK V DC. t3us 'Pokey lo.<v. "A gt-a, faqqak wi"tent t~f>$>t~ nu~bcys.7cvA )47qra,p~tc 4=~~<>'
'7 TASK FORCE CONCURRENCE OBTAINED BY: DATE:
~
CORPS CTIVE ACTION IMPLANTED:
S~ Ati'a I 'e i Z Z~~ ~ 'o, I<~> ~ ~4 4qrap4~ kobu.~eh~
S~ Atto.ck~exi' Tax~ 2+ 1'tS~ ~ ties t For~ Ccx~~~
FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21
~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE BY: DATE:
~
~
0
A~ACWmGtJT g io UT p FLORIDA POWER 6 LIGHT CO~~ANY ST. LUCIE PLANT UNIT NO. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PBOGRA>
PROJECT R-SPONSE: UIR-51 VERIFICATION IT"~f 7: HAIN STEAN ISOLATION VALVE I-HCV-08-1A There is no design document that requires a feeder directory within electrical panels. However, complete directory assis-tance is provided by the use of the PDN sheets (2998-B-335) which identi ies each circuit and its respective load. The circuits are clearly numbered at the panels. Some panels may contain a directory developed by the Construction Depar"ment for their own ease of installation a..d testing. This doc .,ent is not a requirement.
I FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE PLANT - UNIT NO. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGRAM PROJECT RESPONSE'. UIR-,51 (REVISION 2)
VERIFICATION ITEM 7: MAIN STEAM ISOLATION VALVE I-HCV-08-lA The project team has verified that the individual circuit brea-kers at the 125V DC Bus 2A are tagged with an identi ying number to aid personnel that are required to work on the panel. Photo-g aphs of the subject equipment are attached to document this veri ication.
The project team has reviewed this i"em with appropriate personnel from Construction, Construction Test, ESSE and NYO Engineering G"oups and has concluded that sufficient information already exists at the electrical panel to identify the as-installed cir-c i- y in conjunction t with the PD&M Data Sheets (2998-3-335 Series).
Based on tne above, tne project team concluded tna" no action is requ'red on this EVP'bservation and none is anticipated.
pwTgC ~wc>> . p >o v-i~- I i- F 2~
W~i&C ~042 >4 y ~ < '$ c > l ( PFV2)
-;-.~)%>~~~~4~~gee
'I \
lZ~ V D~ Bus ZA
~<<V Dc so~ z~
6 i
0
>gineer-'ng Ve ificatfon 'psfi cree ibas o Se~i~e'"""-o"~~~"
Tvo Vorld rad Ceo er Ne- York, NY 10048 Jan a~ 24 lc83 TO: = Z Zuchman/T Fe'genbau. Zc scc ProJect Tea~
FROM: T H Blodgett ""asco GAP .-ask:cree IIaneg-~tv~ ".~ i <~g+
SUB J" CT: :-.fG:ii:-~lIlG V:"RZF CATlOIi PROP.;-"'.
S; LUC"'. UIiiT I<0. 2 (D Sg g ~v) Pgw (]t>> ),g I, ~u Q 5~)
I t I~I A P
I
~
0 UZRs 4o t} ou h 52 vere generp ed by >o casco Tpsk ot co 1 v ', y
~
+'e-.o
~ ~ p. '- 0 v c" io~ + s o the D~o <<2~ a V ~%6 V T ~
11 ~
v,'e'd ae44, ss W
A::he Dece".3 ."
ov ~Co-..
. evr-'. ~
P~ ~ ~ >> zzee et nc i i a~ o~ Pl~~ ~ p thoso seve Uv s 0 g class'ec as Observationsby the c=i:.ee and trans-i.-ed ProJec Te"- for eviev pnd processing, as evidenced on Part C o- each U'ZR,.
- 2. Memo EZZ-SL-2-83-003, da ed January 5, 1953 ( rom Feigenoa ' to Blodg - ),
trans it ed a description of the ProJec. Team actions to be irple=en.e" for UXRs 47, 48, 49, 50 and 52, all o vhich a.e concerned iath elec r'ca.
eouipment co"or coding. A reviev o that memo and a tach.-.ents, =ade Jo'n.ly by ZT7 engineer C M Ruiz and the smiter on January 5, resulted ir.
Tpsk Force concurrence vith the Proposed ec.ions for those five UERs..
- 3. Memo ZZZ-SL-2-83-003 also transmi ted photographic documen.ation (pertaini..g to UZR-46) of i.dentifying tag numbers affixed to Pover Panels 201 and 202.
A reviev of 'the memo and attachments, made Jointly by ETF engineer C M Ruiz and the vrite" on January 5, resulted in Task Force concu. rence vith the actions taken by the ProJect Te'am regarding UXR-46.
A + - Ip te \ at>c t.~ns~'-.
+% ea photo< aohic doc"zen a.io.. (pe~~-'--~~ bb I o p"i-c>>
~
tag n embers aNwi~eg P ~F
~ 1 o tha't 1 tte~ a. 8 a a">~egts r,a"e go -.. ly bv "-": e.".-.'n ana the writer on January 10, resulteo in Task :o ce irv h1 VOh+D~ \ 1 ~ t the actions taken by the Progec Teo" regar=inc ~~ B-"1 .
- 5. All Task ."orce activities in connec.ion with '-' is h6 hrou~h 5"- are considered. to be co=pie e.
L~~:E..h c
Dovson )
J C Moul o. C-.
D DH'.Yiller, E Z Zuc?~a>>
C-:-
T Bio Qee tt
DISCREPANCY NO. UIR-52
-25.8-
S e <
i UNRESOLi~D IT~~ (DISCREPANCY) RE>ORT ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGRAM"i - SL2 UI R-sz A. PREPARATION BY EBASCO TASK FORCE INITIATOR AFFECTED IT&i: Hc J ~~
/
c i VQ i g 5 I C cZ l"~O < ~g 7 fv/own ~4<~
'~
P~:rRENGE DocUHEhrs:,
/p~~nH~n 2 Qe ig n ~
~ py Fi g ~P //~ g<>~ +y~Pare~an hc.=-< C~
DI FERENCES TO BE RESOLVED: + 8 8- 8 3$
7 he name p/'<~< ~+~ ~~ + j<<gqr ounce.- Zgerrt
/~ ty<(< oue
~ DESIGN RELATED Qg FIELD INSTALLATION RELATED ~ START-UP PERFORYu'FACE R"LATED PREPARED BY: ~ ~ DATE:
REVIEW BY EBASCO TASK FORCE CO~i:NTS/RATIONALE:
y/ f Q P g 'H 7 ~lg(S/0 r gptqD'~~
l
~e, j(oi/Z4/ss) TT'ACHING'A/7 l Asg @oscar govcv25 Wivh' erioNs /o 3~ jA~<+
Qy tt0J~Cy le'AAf, Pe'g. A 1. )
~ DIFFERENCES RESOLVED I
~ RE-REVIEW REQUESTED 1
~DIFFERENCES UNRESOLVED. DISCREPANCY TRANSMITTED TO REVIEW COMMITTEE
, BY:
/Z ~'>.
iz/os/ez.--
C. RESOLUTION BY REVIEW COMMITTEE CO. ANTS jj RATIONALE; D,~C rd ~ / F~<< r P~
/ ic/ / /// 8 // /'/-.
C g
~+ j
/c:rd, Po Cs uv p4 /r 8 ~~ Wrr'w; km'C DISCREPANCY IS ACCEPTABLE. RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE.
DISCREPANCY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. ~ AS OBSERVATION TRA!BSHITTED TO PROJECT TEAH ~ AS FINDING BY: DATE: c Z D. REVIEW AND PROCESSING BY PROJECT TEAN OBSERUATION ~ FINDING COUNTS:
j-"5'*jE sjcccipies ~Wgjf ~M~ cfsefap-v'el~ e4ctslcak ee!4I u.se og gj~j>s~ o j s-c P~,~ se<e+ <<<~ ~5<<M e~~ij CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE TAKEN:
~4 e,q~ij~< t.~s. C~pm 9~ r~<~
~MM e a'll s~se. j~~Fe<<oj=
r~~ vR ~jjt M UwA 2 Cjo+me.~~ opera~
TASK FORCE CONCURRENCE OBT INED BY: + / DATE: >re/de S~ O'Rachw <4 2 CORRECTIVE ACTION XHPLEHENTED:
~~~ jj4; (Qpp ~~q,gk g~
FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21
~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE DATE:
RESOLUTION BY REVIEW CO.-fITTEE CO~NTS/RATIONALE: ,~CD ~ j+g l4 /; ~~ ~~ @JAN/C I~
y Jf aide I IF<< Pr /n q cg~ (~it/ Eir/ipse.. )>sA W~(..~~ 2 jg QF <re~; lr~r DISCR"-"PANCY IS ACCEPTABLE.,RECYCLED TO TASK FORCE.
DISCREPANCY T~S.tITTED IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.
TO PROJECT TEA.f
~
~i AS OBSERVATION AS FINDING e% 'g
/Z Z D. REVIEW AND P'ROCESSING Bv PROJECT TE OBSERVATION ~ FINDING CONK'.B TS:
FSA R, spo<<6l.< I Wtl. f \ M~ o F ~~+<~- I ~
Y<~~ 4 lt.ctv(~ 44~)j"'~
a4 eg~ij~~<
SlllgEA pAh~ W&ll~ ECll Ep CORRECTIVE ACTION TO BE TAKEN:
t~S. C~P~ 9~ r~E~
~WM C
~FLEUVE l~
ll r~uly W<L~ m~~ t'E ier M UnA 2. comme.vc,~ ape>~~
TASK FORCE CONCllRRENCF OBT INED Ss Anzac.t e,4 2 "~~ BY:
Z4; (qPP
+~~~P,gk lc g~ C DATE: Z gw fa3 CORRECTIVE ACTION IMPLEHENTED:
FINDING REPORTABLE UNDER 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21
~ FINDING NOT REPORTABLE BY: DATE:
FLORIDA POVvER & LIGHT COMPANi ST. LUCIE PLANT UNIT NO. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGRAM PROJECT RESPONSE: UZR-.47 (REVZB ION 1)
UIR-48 (REVISION 1)
UIR-49 (REVIS ION 1)
UIR-5 0 (REVIS ION 1)
UIR-52 (REVIS ION 1)
V" RZFICATION ITEMS: 1 g 2 p 3 g 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 proper identification clearly indicated.
Although not specifically required by Reg"latory Guide or Industry Standard, the S" Lucie Unit 2 FSAR does specify tha" sa ety re-lated electrical- equipment must be identif'ed by color coded bags, pain or tape according to the appropriate color schemes code' divided The color coding has,no effect on safe operation or design of'he ecuipment. 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 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 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 ref er to a color code scheme.
~(~%)
.0 g'7TACH ihFM<<( 0 lg, I
(+DC << /
The only purpose of the color code scheme for. electrical panels is tto provide easy recognition of equipment for individuals not familiar with the plant layout, and color codes are never used as a substitute for nameplates when performing maintenance or testing on electrical equipment. However, as we are not in con-formance with the FSAR, the Pro j ect will recommend that a total review of safety related electrical equipment be performed to ensure proper color coding of equipment tags in accordance with the rSAR criteria. The review and all required modifications will be completed prior to commercial operation.
AT iPCHWc'NEST 2 lo )II -=.('vc.
Engine 1 ing Veri. 'etic. ask Fo Eoas"o Se~ices ncorpora ed T"o World ~x. ade Cen.er Iie- Y~"I'~ 10048 Janu ry 24, l983 TO: Z Zuc?man/T Fe genbaum =" sco Prospect Tea FRO<<: T H lodge Ebasco EP T sk =orce l'lanager~ j~
c IA Sb~~ "CT:, Ei'tGZIl'"=~:VG V:.RZF"'CATlON PROGF "'.
ST LUCRE UI1 T 1<O. 2 UIRESO 'i:-3 1:~'. ! lSCRE:-A:iCv) (Uwg T<ZU i..= -52)
U Rs
~
46 th ough 52 were gene a.ed cty t ie Ebasco Task "o ce A) ~'r ~
in+ 4L~
4 iield ins.all"= 'on ve"i "'cation pnase of the program a-. -he St Lucie Unit 2 )obsite in early December A-:he Dece."ber l5, '9"2:-",=
Rev'w Co....'e I ee 'g i.. bethesda '!";>> a d those sev~ U s - ~ c, ~
classified as Ocservationsby the co. i ee and rans..it e to the Pro)ec Tea~ or review a, d process as evid ncec on Pa" C o. each U R.
- 2. Memo EZ"-SL-2-83-003, da.ed Je .uary 5, 1983 (from Feigenbaum to "lodg vt),
transmitted a descrip ion of the Prospect Temm actions o be imple=ented for UlRs 47, 48, 49, 50 and 52, all of which are concerned math electrical eouipment colo". coding. A review of that memo and attachments, made goin ly by ~r engineer C M Ruiz and he writer on January 5, resul ed in Task Force concurrence with the p.oposed ac ions for those five UZRs.
- 3. Memo EZK-SL-2-83-003 elso transmitted pho ographic documen ation (per aining to UlR-46) of identifying tag numbers affixed to Power Panels 20l and 202.
A rev'ew of the me-,o and attachments, made )ointly by E r engineer C M Ruiz and the writer on January 5, resulted in Task Force concurrence with the actions taken by the Pro)ect Team regarding UXR-46.
A ~peec getter deteo January lQ 1 GSR 4r~< .. "e. sQr o~b~'
~ a bQvaa o J oake M4 trans'.itted photographic Qocu~entati on (pertair.in'o >J'T
iden~i.z"in'ag n"-.bers affixed to l"$U DC Po~.er Panel "-" A revie=
of the le ter and attachments, made )ointly bv>>xr engineer C !~ Rui=
an the ~~ite on Janu r> 3.0, resulted, in Task:orce cc..cur nce =i ~i ".
I ~
the ac.ions aRe.", by t?:e Progect T o= re-ardin- UZR-jl.
- 5. Al" Task force activities in connec on vith U:~s ~6 through ).-" are consiLe ed to be co=pie e.
I i."3: r";h cc: D C""'.'".
W Dotson )
J C l!oulton, C-:-
D D hlille , C-:-
Z Z Zuc? -.a..
)oV4$ o~l v