ML20009H580

Final Deficiency Rept Re Reactor Controls,Inc Issuance of Drawings Prior to Verification of Design Adequacy,Initially Reported on 800925.Stop Work Order Issued Until Design Adequacy Verified

ML20009H580
Person / Time
Site:	Grand Gulf
Issue date:	08/03/1981
From:	Mcgaughy J MISSISSIPPI POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
References
10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, AECM-81-240, NUDOCS 8108100268
Download: ML20009H580 (4)

Text

u ,

e ...t'M

{ liI$ _

Tj , .

MISSISSIPPl! POWER & LIGHT COMPANY

] Helping Build Missisp EdhMhladd5 P. O . B O X 16 4 0, J A C Kg OBISSIPPI N ,3 fyll&ypi 39205 3\ fF

1. a EsU.r$ Y NsN I Of fice of Inspection & Enforcement August 3,

• M,%

O)

[ff U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission g Region II w-(k

=

o nuc o r % F gx ;ge Sueet. '

Atlanta, Georgia 30303 ,

Attention: Mr. J. P. O'Reilly, Director

SUBJECT:

Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-416/417 File 0260/15525/15526 PRD-80/60, Final Report RCI Design Drawing Verification AECM-81/240

References:

1) AECM-81/110, 3/16/81

2) AECM-81/32, 1/15/81

3) AECM-80/266, 10/27/80 On September 25, 1980, Mississippi Power & Light Company notified Mr. M.

Hunt, of your office, of a Potentially Reportable Deficiency (PRD) at the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station (CCNS) construction site. The deficiency concerns Reactor Controls, Inc. (RCI) issuance of drawings prior to verification of design adequacy.

Because an extensive engineering effort would have been required to determine if this deficiency could have adversely affected the safety of plant operations if it had remained uncorrected, this condition has been determined to be reportable under the provisions of 10CFR50.55(e). It is not reportable under the provisions of 10CFR21, since the af fected systems had not been turned over to MP&L for acceptance.

Yours truly, y . JP. McGaughy, Jr.

KDS:scb ATTACHMENT cc: See page 2 8108100268 810803 sf o

/

PDR ADOCK 05000416 7'/

S PDR Member Middle South Utilities System

Mr. J. P. O'Reilly AECM-81/740 NRC Page 2 I

cc: Mr. N. L. Stampley Mr. R. B. McGehee i Mr. T. :B. Conner Mr. Victor Stello, Director Office of Inspection & Enforcement U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. G. B. Taylor South Miss. Electric Power Association

P. O. Box 1589

) Hattiesburg, MS 39401 i

i 5

I f,

I l

t l

i

bbe: Mr. D. C. Lutken Mr. J. Letherman Dr. D. C. Gibbs Manager of BWR-6 Licensing Mr. J. N. Ward General R'ectric Company Mr. J. P. McCaughy, Jr. 175 Curtner Avenue Mr. W. A. Braun San Jose, Ca. 95125 Mr. R. Trickovic Mr. J. W. Yelverton Mr. L. F. Dale Mr. D. M. Houston Mr. C. K. McCoy U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. T. H. Cloninger Division of Licensing Mr. R. A. Ambrosino Washington, D. C. 20555 Mr. R. C. Fron Mr. G. B. Rogers Mr. M. R. Williams Mr. L. E. Ruhland Mr. D. L. Hunt Mr. A. G. Wagner Mr. P. A. Taylor PRD or Inspection Report File File I

1

e e

. . , Attachment A to AECN-81/240

/ .

• Pag 2 1 of 1 Final Report for PRD-80/60 I. Description of the Deficiency Drawings on component and piping supports were approved and issued by' {

Reactor . Controls, Inc. (RCI) for construction prior to receiving ver-ification of. design adequacy from their design authority, EDS Nuclear.

This deficiency was discovered during an audit by our Constructor 'of RCI's home office activities. The affected drawings concern only the Control Rod Drive Hydraulic System (C11) and the Neutron Monitoring System (C51). It was later determined that all RCI drawings, where RCI was the design agency, did not have objective evidence of design adequa-cy.

The deficiency af fects both Unit I and Unit 2. The cauce of this condi-tion was that RCI did not have a program requirement for providing objective evidence of design adequacy verification. This condition does not apply to the NSSS vendor.

II. Analysis of Safety Implications Since RCI did not have any program requirements for providing objective evidence of design adequacy, any design activity performed by RCI could i have been involved.

Because an extensive engineering effort would have~ been required to determine if this deficiency could adversely af fect the safety of plant operations if it had remained uncorrected, this condition has been determined to be reportable under the provisions of 10CFR50.55(e). It is not reportable under the provisions of 10CFR21, since the affected systems had not been turned over to MP&L for acceptance. .

III. Corrective Actions Taken -

Our Constructor issued a Stop Work Notice on any safety related work -

performed by RCI until verification of design adequacy has been substan-tiated. RCI has issued an internal Stop Work Order establishing an action plan to be completed before work is resumed..

To preclude recurrence RCT has .also issued an addendum to their QA Manual which requires design verification and states in part:-

"All RCI drawings requiring ~ stress analysis shall be approved by the Stress Analysis Manager to verify the adequacy of design prior to issuance...shall be documented by. a sign-off on the drawing."

In the future RCI will perform their own design verification-activities. They no longer have a contract.with EDS Nuclear. .RCI has also issued a new controlled manual, Quality Assurance Instructions, which supplements their QA Manual. RCI personnel. have received indoctrination and training on the new Quality Assurance Instructions.

I i

l.

, - a ~ , ,--.., - ,---. n - - n-, ..~,-----n., , ,-,- ,-, , - ,- - --,.... .,. ,--- .- - . , - , - , . , - ~ , - . - .