ML19221A598

Provides Summary of QA Practices Associated W/Facility Mods Reviewed to Date

ML19221A598
Person / Time
Site:	Crane
Issue date:	04/16/1979
From:	Gilray J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML19221A596	List: ML19221A595 ML19221A598
References
NUDOCS 7905230287
Download: ML19221A598 (5)

Text

f A

ENCLOSURE 7 j#

%p UNITEo STATES L.

r 4

NUCt. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

=

f, [0',, !f

]

WASHINGTON, De C.20sss

's%1!L11 g v4j MEMORANDUM FOR:

T. Novak FROM:

J. Gilray

SUBJECT:

QA PRACTICES ASSOCIATED WITH THI-2 MODIFICATIONS in regards to reviewing proposed modifications by the NRC Technical Review Group QA considerations has been given as to the extent QA practices, normally associated with 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B (Seis-mic Category), should be applied to each modification. 'Due to the uniqueness of the TMl situation (i.e. urgency to get modifications complete and to within a short time ~ frame) trade-offs to tne tradi-tional QA practices have been oetermined necessary but not to the extent that confidenc.: is lost in meeting end use requirements.

Accordingly the following is a QA summary of the QA practices associated with the modifications that have been reviewed to date.

1.

Vestinohouse Backuo DHR Systems A.

During 4/7/79 meeting with Vestinghouse I met with QA personnel from GPU (T. Scal a i te ) and V_ (V. Meyer and J.

Cowfer) to discuss QA controls that would apply to the DHR backup system.

It wc-determined that a prac-t ical QA program approach is being applied to this effort.

Highlights are as follows:

1.

Pullman (a code shop) is fabricating the piping and welding components to ASME - Section Ill, Class 2; welds will be nondestructive tested in

~

accordance with this code.

Velde rs will be qualified to Code; work will be procedurally cont rolled.

2.

In most cases there will be material test reports and tracability to heats.

Where quality standards cannot be cet, these events will be documented as nonconform-inc and a disposition made as to acceptability.

79052302F7 165 244 e

e a

?

. - a m.'. as wh '

e e-a h ammeneemew WT*su are 84hre beme was *ruuhd*4emendpM\\M'*ee IkId ' de(W maneree=SWPh 4

8'8* nam."% man usara w ed es M w e M m

f r.

. _. ~

"Y T. Novak

+

3 Receiving inspection and Storage will be controlled by QA personnel.

'4.

GPU QA will be involved with the DHR backup system activity as an overview QA control.

5 As design and specifications are matured they will be provided to the NRC Review Group for evaluation and ccament.

11 A.

GPU Svstem Criteria for the Steam Generator Cooldown System Quality Standards will not be to ASME Section lit due to the activity being confined to secondary side and schedule con-straints.

Controls applied will be to ASME Section Viti, ANSI B31.1, ANSI Bl6.5 and.'3f:.

QA practices will be coupled with this modification which will include cont rolled proce-dures and disciolines in the areas of design, fabrication, installation and testing of systems.

11 S.

Modifications for Rad Waste Storace Tanks A detailed evaluation of the Modification for additional Rad Vaste Storage Tanks is not complete as yet.

As a result of a preliminary review it appears that these tanks will meet:

Nuclear waste storage tanks standards ASME Section Vill During the coming week of 4/16/70, a detailed evaluation and inspection of this modification will take place in-cluding weld s and installation of pipes.

~

The modi fications are under close GPU QA cont rol.

The tanks were Found unacceptable by GPU QA because of lack of a hydrotest and i ncompl e te eeer wel ds.

The tanks were returned to supplier for additional work.

I understand they are now back onsite and are acceptable.

165 245

..,".f,3 g g,, g g.

Q __

m--

[-

• .k

^

T. fiovak

~3~

E v.

1 -:'.-

~

111.

l&E Insoection At the request of the NRC Technical Review Group, IEE was brought in on 4/13/79 from Region I to insoect the activities associated with implementing the TMI-2 Modi ficat ions.

Special attention will be g.ven by l&E to welding practices including the nondestructive testing of welds.

IV.

Meetinos aetings were held on 4/13/79 with Vestinghouse (V) and GPU c

Qx personnul to discuss their QA practices applied to modi fications and control s.

ICE attended these meetings.

Summary of the two meetings are as follows:

1.

Heeting with Westinchouse on 4/13/79 - SAM Attendees:

J. Vright,.GPU, QA Mgr; B.

E"uce, V, QA Mgr; D. Cowfer, V, QC Engr; L. Tripp and G. Val ton, NAC - ICE; J. Gil ray, NRC, NRR.

The QA scope and efforts of Vestinghouse in the Desi,,,

Procurement, Fabrication, inspection, Receiving, in-stallation and Tests associated with the D.HR modifica-tion were discussed.

Vestinghouse has established a QA program plan to con-trol the above effort and will be commensurate with 10 CFR 50 Appendix B.

A draft copy is attached as Enclosure #1.

I find this document providinc oractical QA guidelines for the DHR modification acceptable.

Significant aspects of the cbove QA program were also discussed.

Highlights are described in attached En-closure #2.

The V QA organization responsible for DHR modification was discussed.

Presently there are 4 V QA Engineers assigned to this Hod. qualified in 4 disciplines (Design and Design Cont rol; Material and Comoonent Traceability; QA for the Skid and Skid Components; and Velding and Installation).

An additional QA Engineer will be assigned to this staff in the r.c a r future qualified in QA for l&C and Electrical systems.

I find this organization and staf fing acceptable.

The QA activities accoqolished to date were discussed.

Highlights arc described in the attached Enclosure #3.

!65 246 O

b WW. Wm.*

gMe en-.

. ease m 5 * % w.* +.eMW /M W 4e8tum44eysm.

^*

W--

M W'.8 M.-

8@ WW

1. =*

r T. Novak *y

~ *

.~

o

==

Conclusion:==

Based on a review and evaluation of W's QA practices, controls and organization it is concluded that the W QA program for the DHR system is sufficient to assure adequate QA controls and practices will be applied to this modification.

2.

Meeting with GPU on 4/13/79 - IPM Attendees:

J. Wright, GPU, QA Mgr; Earl Allen, GPU, QA Mgr: George Trofer, Meted, QA Mgr; Terry Mackey, Meted, QC Supervisor: T. Scalaite, Meted, QA Engineer; L.

Tripp and G. Valton, NRC - IEE; and J. Gilray, NRR, NRC.

The QA Scope and Ef fort of GPU and Meted associated with the TMI-2 modifications were discussed.

The GPU/ Meted QA organization responsible for the TMI-2 modifications were discusse'd.

A team of 12 QA engineers managed by J. Wright of GPU were brought in from the Forked River facility to be specifically responsible for the QA activities for the TMI-2 modi-fications.

This team has talent in all QA disciplines including welding and nondestructive testi.ng.

I find this organization and staf fing acceptable.

This team has established a QA program specifically tailored for the TMI-2 Modifications and is expected to be approved by GPU and Meted for use by 4/20/79 This program will be compatable with the Meted Operational QA program previously accepted by NRC.

GPU QA has demonstrated their QA involvement by in-specting all incoming structures systems and components designated for the modifications to determine their classification and quality.

Those items where the quality is unknown are tagged accordingly and if used controls are implemented to maintain tracability.

Nuclear waste storage tanks were returned to supplier because they were not hydro-tested and all welds were not completed.

QA activities on TMI-2 modification being ocrformed by G?U/ Meted QA personnel were discussed.

Highlights are described in the attached Enclosure #4 165 247 s

N-'

~

.M*Ma==La w w*.eAs

.-i.m

.~.mm'.e d..;e.s

.s

[.sh wiwos.ma.'.d M % d

.A a

=s'.=%,

e. we.

• . g.'=t u '

___-m'

s r,

w, " '.

• T. Novak

• n_.

==

Conclusion:==

Based on a review and evaluation of GPU/

Meted's QA practices, controls, and organization, it is concluded that the GPU/ Meted QA program for the TM!-2 modifications is sufficient to assure adequate QA con-trols,and practices will be applied.

V.

Conclusions Based on the above discussion, the QA programs and imple-mentation of these programs by V and GPU/ Meted are considered acceptable to assure compliance wit 5 10 CFR 50 Appendix B and the design and specification requirements for TMI-2 modi fica t i ons.

1 G l. i ray cc:

R. Mattson e

O 165 248

~~

h he ge s

= ~ a. :s n m _ a._,.

_ m W., _, u n,,, _ __,

, _,, w;, __

_a

S.-.

~

i r

.= s **

E... _

ENCLOSURE 8 Primary Makeuo and Pressure Control Svstem

~&L-c..

Burns and Roe has a conceptual design for providing a standby

-L primary makeup and pressure control system in the event further d egradation occurs to the existing systems.

The system con-sists of five 900 gallon tanks in series connected to tha

-04 pressurizer spray piping.

The Lst tank (furthest from spray piping) will ba p.essurized with nitrogen.

The multiple tank

[

concept minimizes the diffusion of nitrogen into the primary N

d7 system.

Two positive displacement puInps of variable 2: ;

capacity (10-90 GPM) will take suction from the first tank

.. /.

(closest to spray piping) to provide makeup.

Level controls I

.'.2,

are Installed on the tanks for cycling the pumps on and off.

SbY This system is scheduled to be operational in 20 days.

Burns and Roe recognizes the dif ficulty in identifying an I

acceptable tie in for overpressurization protection.

They are currently proposing relieving into the 18 inch line that e

9oes to the reactor building sump.

We do not believe that this line should be opened for this purpose.

Based on B&W analyses, the maximum vessel pressure for NDT considerations should not exceed 1000 psi.

Several alternative paths for manual relief were identified during a meeting with B&R, B&W and GPU on t.pri1 15, 1979.

They included:

165 249

.e

.g

.. 7

~

~~ l

~

., J.

n.

M4h93'me'.A7.9 h= v Mb mM4Ia===

e m.. =

s.

.- % *. E

..,ma=s.4 4 m O* N

'T 4

• e..'e.

. ' '. ' r. :.- '. _..,

~ r e

s. :-.....

i

.~ i Letdown to makeup tank (outside containment) 1.

Relief valve on DHR system (inside containment) 2.

(inside containment)

Electromagnetic pressurizer relief valve 3

4.

Pressurizer vent line valve (inside containment) line appears Letdown to the makeup tank and the pressurizer vent

~

In addition, to be feasible but will require further analyses.

i a n analysis has to be performed to determine the most limit ng in the natural reci rculation mode to overoressurization transient d

establish the time before operator action is necessary.to respon The limiting transient i s probably one of 1

to these transients.

of the following:

Loss of electrical power on secondary side.

1.

Loss of naturai circulation 2.

Inadvertent makeup pump operation, 3

in to be performed witn the pri-Sensitivity studies would also have various pressures to establish limit-mary system operating at GPU and Br4 plan to perform these ing operator action times.

~

c al cul a ti ons.

identified.

Two questions requiring further consideration were They were:

Vould the letd&sn system be operational du, ring the natural 1.

65 250.

recirculation mode?

the schedule as Does the operability of this system effect

-2 2.

into the natural circulation mode goes

_vf, $_

to when the plant.

~

of operation 7

r......

_-}

• , 3;.,'

~~ m d

• ** -== w e,e m, -

- om