ML19289C646

Interim Rept Re Component Qualification Test Documentation re-review.Attachments Describe Deficiency,Status of Corrective Action & Administrative Procedure Which Describes re-review Program.Related Correspondence

ML19289C646
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	01/17/1979
From:	Howell S CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
To:
References
HOWE-17-79, NUDOCS 7901220059
Download: ML19289C646 (14)

Text

4 N

,-i[\

r A',u CU!IS!!!T!0f8 i /?~'1)p6 Car

\ W// 1

,9 me (ul1hbaja Stephen H. Howell N ,i ,// J Senior Vice President M

General O f fices: 1945 West Parnall Flosd, Jackson, Michigan 49201 . (517) 798 0453 January 17, 1979 lioue-l'( '(9 Mr J G Keppler, Regional Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement Region III -

US IIuelear llegulatory Commission

'(99 Ecocevelt Rocd Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 MIDLAI!D I;UCLEAll PLAI!T -

U: LIT I:01, DOCl3f I:0 50-329 UI;IT I:0 2, DOCKLT I:0 50-330 CC.:PCI!FI;T QUALIFICATI0:T TEST DOCII2172ATIO:1 RE-RLVIEW

Reference:

Letter, S H Howell to J G Keppler; Midland I!uclear Plant; Unit I!o 1, Docket I!o 50-329; Unit 1:o 2, Docket I!o 50-330; Component qualification Test Documentation Re-Review; Serial Rowe-252-78, dated I!ovember 28,19'(8 The referenced letter was en interim 50 55(c) report as is this letter. The attachnunts provide a description of the deficiency, the status of corrective action, r*-J the administrative procedure which describes the re-review program.

Another report, either interim or final, will be cent on or before March 9, 1979

~ . . . . ~

'] , .[ k_' -) (y . p-# dk.

\

sj Attachments: A. O.uality Accurance Program, Management Corrective Action Report, MCAR-1, Hepori; 25 B.  !! CAR-25, Interim Report //1, Seicmic cnd Environmental Component Q,ualification, dated January 5, 1979 C. Letter, P A Martinez to G S Keeley, BLC-6934, Component Qualification Review, dated December 22, 1978 CC: Director, Office of Inspection & Enforcement Att: Mr John G Davis, Acting Director, USI:hC (15)

)irector, Office of Mcnagement Information and Program Control, USIntC (1)

(

790122 coS9 O

g MC/dt Report No. 25 Page 2 Description (continued)

The project has identified all Q-corponents requiring seismic and environacntal qualification testing with approximately 267 qualification test documents re-quiring re-review. Inadequacies identified during the cource of this re-review progran vill be identified and documented in attachtents to this report, and follow-up action taken and documented. A report on the first component identi-

~

fied with questionabic qualifications is attached.

Attachment _:

1 7220-J-204 Model E 10 Transnitter Summary e

4 0

6 V

Attachnent A

. . }Iouc~17 -(9 p  % -

w OUALITY A',5UH Ar.'CE PROGR AM -

1. MAf!AGEMEfJT CORRECTIVE ACTIOtJ REPORT

. j -

MCAR 1 REPORT f 40. ' 'i JOB tJO. 7??O OtJO.Y2riou- D ATE __"orr.& r 15. 1078 I* DESCRIPTION tir:NJmg references):

'Ihe Midland Project initiated a components qualification re-revicu progran in August 1978 of the seisnic and environnental qualification test requircrents, procedures and report.s which have been processed by Ecchtcl. The purpose of this re-revieu progran in to provide additional assurance on a corprehensive basis that adequate document-ation has been submitted by the vendors regarding their qualification test prograns, to re-evaluate such information systematically to detemine if applicable requircrents have been satisfied, and .to take appropriate corrective action where necessary.

(continued on page 2)

• RECOMMEtJDED ACTION (Cptional)

1) Complete the re-review progran.

2) Resolve component qualifications which are questionabic regarding requirencnts, test tethods and/or evaluatJon of test results. :Any' inadequacies found during this re-review are and will be discucced nr.' resolved with the respective vendor ,

3) Continue to report qui stionab]e qualifications.

4) . Investigate and identify the cause of questionabic qualifications and take appropriate corrective action to preclude recurrence.

CCNSTRUCTION OA M AN AGEMEtJT REFEnnED TO [ Et GifJEERING PROCUREMENT ISSUED CY_

' '* I b

g Pro;eckhA Erpr.eu [

Potentially Reportable d.% T. A. Droin er?1 P h .' -

t l ' I' O M 11 REPORTABLE DEFICIENCY 8 flDYlflE D CLIENT I YES "  !" 5 14 0 I h enct e.una,er Qa e /

s/

Ill CAUEE , ,, -,s .. -.

!.Q'

~,.\ .. '.a !l $

e. - .Nf ,d{y (n - C, ,

o

.! :,. tis /v CORRECTIVE ACTIC'J TAKEt1

.m , s r n e r . ~ n r (a )

AUTHORIZED BY Date oisuu n u r ie n rm . c a u .n...<

a t' . c ' c ^- i r o FORMAL REPORT TO CtlENT oats E1.[#.',*.'.*,"""' tit acuan is apenen c,,,,,,<,..,,,u....., '

.i.,,,.,....4v.a....

. . . . .~'m...

1. seg* set / 'c a. C s s* s t *J p o r

..c, ,,

connCCTtvE ACTicN iuettMEt1TED I.C.T

. . . ,73...l,s*,'".L,"'J, r..,m..,

u , . . ,mc..,..c c s.

t .i, . u.cs .. o w.at, v <a ,

L3 A beerwiser u .. c, s VERiflED BY I'roget oA trsga eer D. t o

• e . . < , .. . .a . i . , e e , c . s . . , . 3 . . . . ei . . + . . . a c e e r . . - . a s 58,211J0

SCO'. ART OF 4

! ~

FOXEORO MCOEL E10 SERIES TRANS"IT ER CL'ALIFICATICN CONCERNS _AT'ACtrsT 1  :

FURCE*.SZ CREER 7220-J-204 .

Standard Requirement Fenboro Tent Docunent _Cenecrns IEEE 323-1971 Testing shall si=ulate Test Report No. T3-1058, During irradiation test of 8 units there Sec. 5.2.3.5 DEA environnental con- page 4 verc 4 unexplained failures where the out-ditiens. put of the transmitter either vent to 0 or went to 0 and returned to 507. value af ter a period of tine. In all cases the rad level at time of failure was below the Midland requirencnt.

Midland spray chc=istry Test Report No. T3-1013 8 units were run through LOCA (MCA) environ-requirc:ents consists of Section 6.0 rental testing. Actual testing period of a solution of sodiu: hy- 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, with a spray solution lacking dronide, sedium thio- sodiur thiosulfate. Test chanbcr pressure sulfate and boric acid was 60 psig, whereas Midland LCCA pressure for a 30 day period. was 70 psig.

IEEE 344-1971 Seistic qualification Test Report No. T3-1091 A crack in the force cotor essc=bly of one Sec. 1.0 shall verify that per- Section 3.0 unit was found after the 10g test. Cause formance requircrents of the crack and the effect of the crack are tet.

on transmitter function under a LOCA en-vironrent ucre not explained.

IEEE 344-1971 Testing at natural Test Report ro. T3-1091 '

natural frequencies in the 1-33 Ez range Sec. 3.2.2.4 frequencies. (Action Test Report 10486 vere identified during resonant survey.

page 4) ro unique testing at natural frequencies was performed.

Tech Spec Perfor=ance shall be de- None Documentation was not available to show that 7220-J-204 constrated under con- one unit can withstand composite test ' ' '

• Sec. 6.0 ditions simulating in- conditions for installed life.

stalled life.

• The supplier has been advised to pince thesc Q-listed items on HOLD.

Attachment B

. Howe-lT-79 Bechtel Associates Professional Corporation

SUBJECT:

MCAR 25 (issued 11/20/78)

Seismic and Environmental Component Qualification INTER 111 REPORT l_

DATE: January 5, 1979 PROJECT: Consumers Power Comp,c.y Midland Plant Units 1 6 2 1:echtel Job 7220 Deccription of Potential Discrepancies In responce to MCAR 25, investigation by project engineering into the adequacy of data submitted by suppliers to fulfill the applicable requirements confirmed that there are questions concerning the acceptabil-ity of suppliers' environuental and seisuic equipment qualification test documentation. The investigatton has been expanded to include all caf ety-related itens which require seismic and/or environmental testing or analysis.

Safety Implications MCAR 25 was considered potentially reportable because a safety problem could exist if the equipment does not meet the specified scismic and environmental qualification requirements.

Corrective Actions Taken and Inprocess

1. Engineering personnel responsible for reviewing supplier-submitted seismic and environmental qualification documents have attended special training sessions to ensure that adequate reviews to the applicabic requirements are performed in a timely manner. An administrative procedure entitled Components Qualification Review has been developed and implemented to reflect the controls and actions bcIng taken by the project.

2. Seismic and environmental qualification procedures and resulte submitted and accepted prior to November 16, 1978, have been additi-oually reviewed by project engineering to ensure that the equipment

< @$d@ 9 JAN 161979 QURliY ASSU!!AUCE

Bechtel Associates Professional Corporation MCAR 25 ,

Interin Report 2 January 5, 1979 Page 2 meets the applicabic qualification requirements. Because of problems experienced in obtaining cenplete packages, these previously accepted documents were additionally reviewed to a greater depth than the original submittal. At this point in time, 58 orders have been found to be indeterminate because they contain questionable arcas.

The following actions have been taken.

The qualification test status report (QTSR) was developed by project engineering to create a status list on all purchase orders requiring seismic or environmental qualification. The report is issued approximately monthly to reflect the current documentation status.

~

Qualification test review (QTR) forms arc completed by engincering uhen questions arisc with regard to previously accepted qualification documents. Currently, engineering's initial review of previously accepted documents is 98% complete. At present, coordination mectirgs are being held to resolve any questionable areas noted from the initial revicu as documented on the QTR form. When further action is required, engineering is taking action as delincated in the procedure. -

3. Attachment 1 to the MCAR identified qualification problems cssociated with the Foxboro Model E10 series transmitter (P.O. 7220-J-204).

The Q-listed transmitters (Model E10) have been placed on hold, pending a decision to convert the Q-listed transmitters to non-Q services.

Engineering is presently obtaining informat ion on an alternative supply of Q-listed transmitters from another supplier. The final decision of a source of Q-listed transmitters will be made after the evaluation is completed.

Proj ec t engineering is coordinating questionable areas with the respective suppliers for resolution or positive identification of any deficiencies. Deficiencies will be reported in subsequent report's. At tached is a QTR form which is a typical example of the type of questions and actions completed (see attachment A). Concur-rently, the following controls have been 1titiated:

Bechtel Associates ProfessionalCorporation

!! CAR 25 Interim Report 2 January 5, 1979 Page 3

a. If the supplier has started shipment of Q-listed material, the site has been notified so that appropriate action can be initiated to identify and control the item (s).

b. If the supplier has not started shipment of Q-listed material, procurement has been requested to hold release for shipment until cither resolution is obtained or a supplier deviation disposition request (SDDR) is initiated by the supplicr.

Submitted by: /.*D,c 8 Approved by: W /_. Y v 2 [ / re/

Concurrence by: b f CD/j s 12/29/12

) &

ytst.I.l \c ;tto.. ',.:.s . r :s. ll t t .- g 11: / Sl'l:C , [ A - )(_Y U ._... . Ih v ___1 _.

11Ni l: 1:!:V il.i.' S'l A! Tl.4 _ /O - / 7- 78 Ven: lor 1)orir.ent 1hvicued Title or 11encript inn Yemf or l'r int !:oriN r l$.~.$ 'l 2 .' l *~ l __ W lSRioC_. Ap/D__5p/vt/dof$1Ga*h)L 121i* OAT 1 - - -

-0 j_ __

4-

.o /

Sl'l:CI FI C/.710". l'EQUIPJ.: 'J :TS (Include l'ev and/or 1) ate)

. I ' P {T c n _. . 5 - I'] - 0 I

.I ECE _323 2tL ._.

.r z w .._ .2el!)-.?.T --

lu.v 1 r ' r,i _7, 'y._ P. ,_____.1)a t e f a /qc/;7g n"sotuno:, i,Y ,f. C. C Date /o/g/73

l. TESr ,?VPolC Do53 N or -

/. & 13 7 11 e a IrJ G D A *n 9 5u FPo(? M dl' A op,2 f.rs App 4 /c n L'L6" t PEc A Z PGe n 5y v. pnos, t/gn twa vc

$ 7'b. S - I'l- Of

2. 75s 7~ o cc u M Gy ra nct) boVS 2. cBrnimMG Oocu Ma r.v7ad

rfloca C (2 sTIc A!. 'Ontut pts & S of^ WA D 0D '~

jV o c

fma , l'c GE5 TW s DA*rSW !!l6l7E2 f7ltS P,>cttch/ /S fttiEW %)

Do c o su GhtTS / AVE G56e)

O u Y u foM &>M FLG'nricoV ) (2EuiS u 50 Aab II c e G o l'D G D i

c. .a: ):. ..n.; . T. J. 2. n/cchf r .i. u u i

Attachment C Move-17-79

- Bech.1el Power Corporation 777 East Eisenhower Parkway ,, 9 Ann Arbor, t.Schigan (,

us,f Ames:- P.O. Box 1000. Ann Arbor, Michigan 4010G December 22, 1978 BLC-6934 lir. G. S. Keeley Project Manager CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY 1945 Uest Parnall Road Jackcon, !!ichigan 49201 Midland Units 1 and 2 Consurers Pouer Company Bechtel Job 7220 COMPONENTS QUALIFICATION REVIEW Files 1506/2801

Dear lir. Keeley:

The attached Components Qualification Review, dated Dececher 22, 1978, Revicion A, process deceription is a sutmarization of the various procedurco used by the Project to review corponents qualification testing docurentation.

Further definition beyond those procedures has been added for some actions particularly with regard to tining.

Until the next Midland Project Procedures Manual revision is issued to include this, this document will be followed by the Project in the Components Qualification Testing Program. Please advise if you have any questions on the attachment.

Very truly yours,

<  % MW f/

P. A. Martinez Project Manager P/II/pp cc: Mr. R. C. Bauman Mr. W. R. Bird Mr. J. L. Corley "jih@b. .. . ., d,,7 '3O.

'E Mr. B. W. Marguglio /

Mr. D. B. Miller b ,.

DEC 2 o 19/8 Attachment OEUlYASSU.WCE

, COMPONE!iTS QUALIFICATION REVIEU 12/22/78 Rev. A PUPJ'OSE The purpose of this doct: ment is to describe the process for the review of qualification requirements and data for:

1) Consiste ny of the procurement package with the FSAR (Reference EDPI 4.1.).

2) Consistency with qualification test requirements in procurement documents.

3) Consistency uith procurecent requirements in submitted test procedures.

4) Compliance to procurement package requirements for test data submittal.

5) The issuance of a Qualification Test Status Report to document the status of the above review.

Initial reviews of procurcrent package qualification test procedures, and data are perforned in accordance with MED/EDP 4.58.

DEFI!!ITIONS

/

2.1. Ot311fication Test Status Renort (OTER) - Exhibit 1 A statur report used to provide pertinent infortation concerning the traceability of the qualification test data such as MR/ Specification nunbers, original P.O. date, iter' and manufacturer, applicable standards, specification reference, test procedure, test results, and revicw/re-review status.

2.1.1 QTSR Qt atus Innud Input Definition a) Start ship: a) ,

Start of shipnent of Date (actual or forecast) Q-listed caterial that requires qualification, b) Turnover: b) Scheduled date for turnover Date (actual or forecast) of Q-listed caterial frca Bechtel to Concurer Power Co.

c) Re-review status:

Inconplete QE rereview not yet completed.

In-process QE re-review completed and contents awaiting resolution. Site or supplier notified (Date).

Complete QE re-review completed and commenta if any, are satisfactorily reso]ved.

Re-review not required by QE Qualification data to be reviewed by cognizant discipline upon init.ial receipt.

CO:' PONE:iTS QUALIFICATION REVIEW - continued Page 2 2.2 Qualification Test Review (QTR) Forn - Exhibit 2 A docunent review form containing pertinent information such as l'R/Speci-fication, date reviewed, doeunent revic0cd, specification requiretrent3, comments and resolution from the re-review of qualification test data for input in to the status colunn of the QTSR.

3.0 CEtn:RAL 3.1 Review of New Iterns (Not Released for Shipment)

Qualification procedures and data are reviewed and evalus': cd by the cognizant discipline in accordance with EDP 4.58. The cognizant n'nscipline advises the Licensint; Engineer of the acecptability of the data r the Licensing Engineer nahes the appropriate entry into the QTSR at the next nonthly issue.

These items vill not be reviewed by Quality Engineering. Copies of the QTR's uhich have completed engineering revicu and indicate further action are to be forwarded to CPCo QA. Distribution of the QTSR vill be as follows:

CPCo ,

_Dechtel R. Bauman E. Rumbaugh W. Bird -

J. Milandin J. Corley L. Dreisbach P. Jacobsen W. Moring B. Marguglio R. CasticDerry J. Pastor M. O'Mara M. Schaeffer K. Wiedncr D. Sctmers L. Sokol J.:Ecugen W. Barclay Group Supervisors Chief Engineers 3.2 Revicu of Old Items Re-review of all previcusly subnitted and accepted qualification data as delineated in Revision 1 of the QTSR dated 10/27/78 is the pritary responsi-bility of Quality Engineering with input as necessary from the ccanizant discipline. The basis of re-revicu by Quality Engineering is as stated in the purpose and to the latest procurc=ent packaga revision.

Quality Engineering establiches revic u priority insed on difficulty of trecu ng the items (i.e. hulh items), date of turnover, and supplier deUvery daten of Q-List items to ulnitine any schedule de]ay. The QTSR is innued conthly to reflect changes to information contained therein. Quality Engineeri.ng docunents conr.cnts generated during re-revicu on Exhibit 2 and coordinates the cor. nents with cognizant engineering discipline for resolution. The cogr.1zant discipline engineer documents the resolution of the comments on Exhibit 2 and returns the QTR and any attachemnts to Quality Engineering. The resolution shall describe or refer to documents uhich provide adequate rational for resolution or action taken. Thenc aspects should, as appropriate, address: -

C0!!PO:ll: HTS QUALIFICATICN REVIEW- continued Page 3 .

1) What is to be done

2) To what criteria

3) Justification of the neu criteria When all actions are completed the Quality Engineer subnits a copy of the completed QTR forn and attachments to Licensing for incorporation into the QTSR.

3.3 Corrective Actions Uhen the Quality Engineering revicu of the docunents disclo<:cs conditions which are questionable'regarding requirenents, test cethods and/or evaluation of test results the following action will be taken by the cognicant engineering discipline:

1) If shipment has been rade, the field will be notified of the QTR comments by the Project Engineer. The notifications will be sent to the field (Construction Superintendent, PFQCE and PQ/;E) so that appropriate NCR action can be initiated.

The cognizant group supervisor or designec vill be responsible for keeping the QTSR updated on actions taken.

2) If shipment has not been nade, the suppIier and PSQR will be notified that shipnent is to be held until questions are resolved. The cognizant discipline shall obtain resolution from the supplier prior to shipnent or an SDDR will be initiated by the supplier requesting a date extensien for data subnittal

- so release for shipnent can be granted.

In such cases, a copy of the approved SDDR (EDP 4.63) will be sent to the field in addition to the norcal distribution.

NCR action may be taken as described in 'aragraph 1) above.

Uhen the Quality Engineering revleu is complete, the QTL and attachments will be foruarded to the Licensing Group for QTSR input.

3) NCRs will be transmitted to the Project Er gineer for disposition as required by SF/ PSP G.3.2. UCRs issued ill be closed by site

-QC based on receipt of notificatien by P7 ,ect Engineering that the Qualification Test Requirements hav on satisfied as noted on the corp]eted QTR fron.

3.4. NCR condi_tfonal Ecicase

'Jhen naterial has been shipped to the jobsite and found to be nonconforming because of unacceptable qualification test data, an NCR nust be initiated.

A conditional release may be implemented if the iten is critical to the 2nstallation schedule. NCR and conditional release vill be issued in accordance with SF/ PSP C-3.2.

0

nevicica 1 9/15/78 .

M?/ '

pecification .

(Cricinal Iten and yen Test Procedure Tect Result : Status

?.O. Oste) Manufacturer A;;1icab'le Standard, specificatien geference Paragrapha 2.2.3, 2.3 , 5:c : Ship:C5*577A

-C13/O-18, Field crected Scismic - AS:C Code, Tu=over: 1:'10757

/:v 6 tanks (Craver Section III, Sub- (Design RCTaircrents);

Article 4.0 (Ast: code, 1/25/75) Tan %) cection ::C Section III, Subcection -

C )

Environmental er nonc

/

/

Star: Ship:CO O7??

-042/C-42, 1cv and spent Scicnic - ASIC Code, Subparagraph: 3.D2, 5.3.12, Appendix 3.*.//j 2u=over: C9I2737

.cv .1 fuel racks Section III (Wachtcr) (design rc7 irencnts)

(6/C/78) c

\\

Environmental Article 6.2l\Appendik i.one (criticality'and therfdl- .

hydraulic criteria.)

/ T' '\ - ,- .

Star:5hi;:01017$7 Tucl pool Scismic ' Art:cle b,.4 (G,-7l'O Rev 5 C-44-24, C-44-24,

.-044/O-44, 7/27/78, 7/27/76, Tu=over: C?:2737

.cv 2 gates (W.J. IES Std 344-75 and\IEEEf'Std 344-75)

Level 1 Level 1 Re:ev:Cocplete

(')/6/77 ) Wcoley) ef C-44-25, C-44-25, CN s 7/27/73, 7/27/78, YN' \.

Level 1 Leve). 1 k\ .

rti Ic S.2 (rad do:cs)

Environmental none I .

C-503-12-4, Staitship:0Il072A C-0505/C-50, Reactor Scicnic - e b Code, Articic 7.4 (ASBE_; Code, C-50D-12-4, Tumever: 1:01737 2/26/74, 2/26/7,4, 7.cv 13 building lock: Section IIId, \, 'Section III, and design Level 2 Level 2 . Rerev:Inp :te:S recairements)

(6/5/G9) and hatche \ff\ (50?. 1003-(W.J. Wooley) Y C-503-13-6, C-503-13-6, cend. 7.cl.)

1 C 6/14/74, 6/14/74, g g ,

Level 2 g Level 2 C

6 C-5CD-17-10, C-300-17-10,

^

5/31/73, 5/31/78, Level 4 Level 4 -if -

. . w ~'Z. W ' M W C-503-10-G, C-503-18-6, 5/31/73, jyb.c 1 5/31/70,

((C],

• Level 4 Level 4 g,g [

• '#

• C-503-138-4, C-503-138-4, 1

• CCOf 6/14/74, 6/14/74,

, Level 2 Level 2

. - tv -

a Revicica 1

. .1 9/15/7s l'x h l h ! : 1

l!P./Sl'i:C Rev DATC REVIE11 STARTED Vendor Document:.1:eviewed Vendor l'rint !!uuher , fitic or Description I

SPECIFICATI0:! REQUIREME!'TS (Include Rev and/or Date)

E\'IEl? BY Date RESOLUTIO:I BY Date l

~

,- 4 @k f)\, b 9; s b

, Colo:aen t s: Resolved - . . -

Exhibit 2 I

.