ML20039G624

Design Verification Program for Power Ascension - Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant - Unit 1

ML20039G624
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	01/09/1982
From:	ROBERT L. CLOUD ASSOCIATES, INC.
To:
Shared Package
ML16340C207	List: ML16340C206 ML20039G624 ML20039G629
References
PROC-820109, NUDOCS 8201180524
Download: ML20039G624 (66)

Text

-

ENCLOSURE 1 "Design Verification Program for Power Ascension -

Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant'- Unit No. 1" Robert L. Cloud Associates, Inc.

I 4

I I

l l

I t

l l

i l

l

('

I L

l i

8201190524 8201'13'

?PDR-ADOCK 05000275 i

9

~

PDR

'----'r W

v-t'e.y-gy--we tww--

y-eM ya-gy-^>9sp-wy Ng tqtyeww+,-w-w w--e q+ mm 4e g, w g 4 eyyvr 9 ye-m ty y q,--e

-ywgy4y e-- g g mgW-gy,,

g yt w-y 9 9-w- 'ye gne%9 e-W*-y'WeyF g-evsv + wy-ar emry?

l

'f U l

2 l

DESIGN VERIFICATION PROGRAM FOR

-POWER ASCENSION i

6 DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT - UNIT I 3

i e

i January 9.,1982 l

PROJECT.P~105-4 1

i I

Robert L. Cloud Associates, Inc.

I

.125 University Avenue Post Office Box 687

^

Berkeley, CA 94710 West Falmouth, MA 02574 (415) 841-9296 (617) 540-5381 e

r---

\\

DESIGN VERIFICATION PROGRAM FOR POWER ASCENSION

~

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1-1.1 Scope and Program Description 2

1.1 Scope and Program Description 2

1.2 Technical Scope 4

2.0 -QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEW 5

2.1 Controlling Documents 5

2.1.1 Specific Documents to be Reviewed 5

2.2 Review 6

2.2.1 Design Control 7

2.2.2 Instructions, Procedures and Drawings 8

2.2.3 Document Control 8

3.0 VERIFICATION OF IMPLEMENTATION OF QUALITY 10 ASSURANCE CONTROLS 3.1 Development of Audit Plan 10 3.2 Audit Scope and Depth 10 3.3 Design Activities 12 3.3.1 Design Input 12 3.3.2 Design Process 13 3.3.3 Change Control 13 3.3.4 Interface Control 13 3.3.5 Documentation and Records 14 3.4 Instructions, Procedures and Drawings 14 3.5 Document Control 14 3.6 Audit Standards 14 4.0 DESIGN VERIFICATION 15 4.1 Design Verification of Non-Seismic Service-Related Contracts Prior to June 1978 16

t Page 4.1.1 Review of Quality Assurance Procedures t

and Controls 16 4.1.2 Development of Non-Seismic Safety-Related Design Chain Prior to June 1978 16 4.1.2.1 Design Chain fl7._

4.1.2.2 Non-Seismic Safety-Related 17 Design Chain Map 18

'4.1.3 Subject Review of Contracts 4.1.4 Contractor Quality Assurance 18 Implementation Review 4.1.5 Independent Sample Calculations 18 4.1.6 Provision for Selecting Additional Samules 20 4.2 D'esign Verification of PGandE Internal 21-Activities 4.2.1 Review of Quality Assurance Procedures 21-and Controls 4.2.2 Development of PGandE Internal 21 Design Chain 4

4.2.2.1 Internal Design Chain 22 4.2.2.2 Internal Design Chain Map 22 4.2.3 Quality Assurance Implementation Review 23 4.2.4 Independent Sample Calculationc 23 4.2.4.1 Provision for Selecting Additional Samples 25 i

4.3 Design Verification of Safety-Related Contracts Post-January 1978 25 4.3.1 Review of Quality Assurance Procedures and Controls 25 4.3.2 Development of Safety-Related Design Chain 26 4.3.2.1 Information to Design Chain 26 4.3.2.2 Safety-Related Design Chain Map 2'7 I

4.3.3 Contractor Quality Assurance 27 l

Implementation Review l

s

3 s

v Page 28 4.3.4 Independent Sample Calculations 4.3.5 Provision for Selecting 28 Additional Samples 5.0 FIELD VERIFICATION 29 1

t 6.0 RESPONSIBILITIES, REVIEW, AND

~

REPORTING 30 6.1 Responsibilities 30 6.1.1 PGandE t

30 6.1.2 Robert L. Cloud Associates 30 6.1.3 R.F. Reedy, Inc.

31 6.1.4 Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation 31 6.2 Review 32 I

6.3 Reporting 32 6.3.1 Biweekly Report 32 6.3.2 Final Report 33 33 6.4 NRC

7.0 CONCLUSION

35 APPENDIX A:

Service-Related Contracts Diablo Canyon Unit I APPENDIX B:

Error and Open Item Classification Error and Open Item Report Form m.

5 DESIGN VERIFICATION PROGRAM FOR POWER ASCENSION

1.0 INTRODUCTION

~

On September 28, 1981, Pacific Gas and Electric Company reported that a diagram error had been found in a portion of the seismi,c qualification of the Diablo Canyon Unit I Nuclear Power Plant (DCNPP-I).

This error resulted in an incorrect application of the seismic floor response spectra in the crane wall-containment shell annulus of the Unit I Containment Building.

The effects of the error were being rectified and a reverification program was initiated and underway during the months of October and November.

The NRC Commissioners met during the week of Novem-ber 16, 1981 to review the situation.

On November 19, the Com-mission issued an Order Suspending License, CLI-81-30, which sus-pended License No'. DPR-76, issued to the Pacific Gas and Electric Company to load fuel and conduct low power tests up to 5% of rated power at the DCNPP-I.

In Attachment 1 to the order, certain ac-tions were specified that would be required before the suspension would be revoked.

These actions consist primarily of an indepen-dent design verification program and completion of a technical recovery program.

The description of a Design Verification Pro-gram on Seismic Service Related Contracts prior to June 1978

~

which is responsive to the-requirements of Attachment 1 to the Order Suspending License CLI-81-30, was presented to the NRC on ~

December 8, 1981.

Hereafter this program is termed Phase I of the Design Verification Program..

e v

t When the Order Suspending License was issued, a letter was written to PGandE (Mr. Malcolm Furbush) from the NRC (Mr. Harold Denton) on November 19, 1981.

The subject of this letter was "Diablo Can-yon Unit I - Independent Design Verification Program", and require-ments for additional design verification were given.

The addition-al requirements were addressed to 3 separate categories of safety related design activities:

1.

All Non-Seismic Service-Related Contracts Prior to June 1978 2.

PGandE Internal Design Activities 3.

All Service-Related Contracts Post-January 1, 1978 1

Design verification of the above safety-related activities is required prior to power ascension above 57. of rated power.

The program presented in this document " Design Verification for Power Ascension, D*.chlo Canyon Unit I" contains a description of the design verification program that will be conducted on Diablo Canyon engineering work prior to power ascension.

Hereafter it is termed Phase II of the Design Verification Program.

The pro-gram is responsive in all respects to the requirements for design verification presented in the NRC letter and enclosures of Novem-ber 19, 1981 (Denton to Furbush),

1.1 Scope and Program Description The scope of the design verification program for power ascension includes the design work and analysis performed in the following three categories:

J.

~

\\

• All non-seismic safety-related contracts prior to June 1978

• PGandE' internal safety-related design activities

" All service safety-related contracts post-January 1, 1978 The design verification program for power ascension is structured to systematically review the above design activities.

The requirements for design verification of the above design work contain several steps that are common to each activity.

Two par-ticularly common requirements are:

• Review of quality assurance and design control documentation.

• Review of implementation of quality assurance procedures and controls Both requirements are common to each of the review activities.

The approach to be taken in the 2 above areas will be discussed from a general viewpoint, since the actual steps in the review of each activity are quite similar.

Following the general discussion of the Quality Assurance related reviews, a specific description of the work is presented in Sec-tion' 4.

Approaches to be taken in the determination of samples for independent calculations are discussed.

Provisions have been made to augment samples for independent calculations when results from the Quality Assurance reviews indicate inadequate Quality Assurance or design control.

T 1.2 Technical Scope Che reverification program is based upon the considerations listed below.

These considerations were developed based upon the NRC letter (Denton to Furbush, November 19, 1981) and the reverification effort completed as part of Phase I.

All technical work that is specifically related to seismic qualification of structures, systems, and eauipment including the development and use of design response spectra is con-sidered part of the Phase I program.

Design work that has been done by equipment vendors in sup-port of the sale and licensing of their equipment is ex-cluded from the scope of the reverification program, since these are not service-related contracts.

Design inputs furnished to equipment vendors by PGandE or service-related contractors will be considered in this Phase II part of the reverification program.

_4_

1 l

l 2.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEW t

The objective of this portion of Phase II of the Design Verifi.

cation Program is to evaluate the appropriate Quality Assurance Program against the requirement of 10CFR50, Appendix B for con-.

trol of design and design-related activities.

J

.The review shall encompass the Quality Assurance Manual and the-3 design control procedures implemented during the time design activities were performed.

The~ review will include, but is not limited to, the following:

i Quality Assurance Program control Audits of design activities Nonconformances and corrective actions Engineering procedures 2.1 Controlling Documents The review team shall review the controlling Quality Assurance manuals from each of the organizations responsible for any

{

design activities at Diablo Canyon.

In addition, those proce-L dures which pertain to design or design-related activities I

shall be reviewed.

These documents shall include the applicable revisions used in design control for the systems, structures and components selected for design review.

Revisions to documents which change methods or controls will be reviewed for adequacy.

f 2.1.1 Specific Documents to be Reviewed i

The specific documents to be reviewed during this phase of I l

t review shall, as a minimum, include:

(a)

The Quality Assurance manuals and Quality Assurance procedures of each o'f the organizations (b)

The applicable procurement and design specifications issured by PGandE and used by each of the organiza tions In addition Quality Assurance related material in the Safety Analysis Report will be reviewed.

2.2 Review l

The review team shall conduct the review of the documents listed i

in Section 2.1.1 for compliance with the requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix B, applicable to design control and the re-lated criteria (e.g., NRC Regulatory Guides, NUREGS, ANSI, etc.)

for instructions, procedures, drawings and document control.

The primary purpose of this review is to determine whether PGandE internal and subcontracted design services were adequate-ly controlled.

However, it is also required to determine that the general Quality Assurance Program and organization was adequately structured to assure that proper implementation of the Program with regard to design related activities could be maintained, and that the status and adequacy of the Quality Assurance Program is regularly reviewed and brought to the attention of the proper level of management.

Also, it may be necessary to review some organizations to greater depth than normally associated with design activities.

Such.a situation would occur in auditing a test' lab which per-formed verification testing of design aspects.

The 18 Criteria of Appendix B of 10CFR50 will be used to select the appropriate controls to be reviewed.

An example of such controls is control of measuring and test equipment..

2.2.1 Design Control The review of the Quality Assurance manual and Procedures shall determine whether they provide for:

(a)

The design of the equipment to be checked by ~PGandE for assurance that the specified design bases are used for design (b)

Drawings approved for construction to be reviewed to assure compliance with the design (c)

Design documents to be reviewed to assure that adequate quality standards are identified (d)

Deviations from specified criteria to be reviewed and controlled (e)

Design interfaces to be controlled to assure verifi-cation and review of all transmitted data between design groups and equipment suppliers and contractors (f)

Control measures to be provided for verifying or l

checking the adequacy of design, such as by the per-formance of design reviews, by the use of alternate or simplified calculation methods or by the performance of a suitable testing program l

(g)

Provisions to be.made for determining the qualifica-tions of personnel performing design activities (h)

The verification or checking process to be performed l

by individuals or groups other than those who per-formed the original design i

l 7-

~

t (i)

Design changes to be subject to control measures com-mensurate with those applied to the original design, and approved by the organization which performed the original design.

2.2.2 Instructions, Procedures and Drawings The Quality Assurance manual, procedures and instructions shall be reviewed to determine whether acoivities affecting design were required to be prescribed by documented instruc-tions, procedures, or drawings of a type appropriate to the circumstances and accomplished in accordance with these in-structions, procedures or drawings.

2.2.3 Document Control The Quality Assurance manual and procedures shall be re-viewed to determine whether measures were established to control the issuance of design documents, including changes.

The manual and procedures shall be reviewed to determine whether measures were provided for the review of design documents with regard to adequacy, and for approval for release and distribution by authorized personnel.

Such measures include controls for:

(a)

Identification of design documents (b)

Identification of personnels positions, or organiza-tions responsible for preparing, reviewing, approving i

and issuing documents (c)

Review of documents for adequacy, completeness, and correctness prior to approval and issuance o

(d)

Assuring that the organizations reviewing significant changes have access to the pertinent background data or information upon which to base their approval.

e 0

I

_9_

1 3.0 VERIFICATION OF IMPLEMENTATION OF QUALITY ASSURANCE CONTROLS The objective of this portion of the Design Verification Program is to evaluate the implementation of the Quality Assurance Pro-gram and procedures reviewed in Section 2.0.

3.1 Development of Audit Plan The review team shall conduct verification audits to assess the design control implemented by each contractor.

The audits will follow checklists which are based upon the con-trols required by the Quality Assurance manuals, procedures and the applicable requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix B, for design.

Where the review of the Quality Assurance manuals, procedures and instructions shows a method of controlling design activities in an organized and documented manner which meets the requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix B, the audit will consist of a review of the objective evidence to verify that the program was adequately implemented and documented.

Where the program review team con-siders that the contractor's program does not contain the controls of 10CFR50, Appendix B, the audit will consist of a review to determine if the design activities were controlled in a manner l

consistent with the criteria requirements of Appendix B.

3.2' Audit Scope and Depth l

[

The scope of these audits will include a review of the implemen-tation of Quality Assurance procedures and controls used by and for:

I l

(a)

PGandE internal design groups that interfaced with the service contractor or consultant (b)

Each service contractor's or consultant's design group j

C (c)

Transmittal of information between PGandE and each contractor or consultant (d)

Transmittal of contractor or consultant developed in-formation within PGandE (e)

PGandE Internal Design. activities It will be necessary to review certain df the calculations and analyses of each-design service contractor or consultant.

The results of each audit will have a direct bearing on the type and depth of sampling of design.

If any design service contracts or consultants sublet design activities, it will also be necessary to review those subcontrac-tors and their interfaces with others.

Design interfaces will be reviewed whether they are internal or external to the group.

Again, the depth of review will depend upon the results of the implementation audit.

Some of the specific items to be addressed during these audits

• Documentation of design assumptions i

• Applicability of quality requirements I

i

• Identification of applicable codes, standards and regula-tory requirements e

• Adequacy of design interfaces i

9 1

11 -

9

• Verification that acceptance criteria was met 3.3 Design Activities The audit shall evaluate the appropriate design input and output for Diablo Canyon.

3.3.1 Design Input The review team shall determine whether:

i (a)

Applicable design inputs, such as design bases, per-formance requirements, regulatory requirements and codes and standards were identified, documented, and their selection reviewed and approved (b)

The design input was specified and approved (c)

Drawings approved for construction were reviewed ty PGandE to assure compliance with the design (d)

Drawings approved for construction were checked for accurate representation of the "as-built" condition (e)

Design documents were reviewed by PGandE to assure that adequate quality standards were identified Deviations from specified criteria were reviewed and (f) controlled Procedures were established and audited for the re-(g) view, approval, release, distribution and revision of documents by participating design organizations 12 _

s (h)

Provisions were made for' determining the qualifica-tions of personnel performing design activities (i). The verification or checking process was performed by1 individuals of groups other than those who performed the original design 3.3.2 Design Process

~

The review team shall determine whether design control measures were applied to verify the adequacy of design, such as by one or more of the following:

(a)

The performance of design reviews (b)

The use of alternate calculations (c)

The performance of qualification tests 1

3.3.3 Change Control t

4 The review team shall determine whether changes to final de-l sign were justified and subjected to design control measures commensurate with those applied to the original design, and i

approved by the same affected groups or organizations which i

reviewed and approved the original design documents.

3.3.4 Interface Control l

The review team shall determine whether design interfaces were identified and responsibility defined, lines of commu-i nication established, and the design efforts coordinated j:

among the participating organizations.

3.3.5 Documentation and Records The review team shall determine whether design dncumentatio^n and records, which provide evidence that the design and de-sign verification processes were properly performed, were collected, stored and maintained in accordance with docu-mented procedures.

3.4 Instructions, Procedures and Drawings The review team shall determine whether activities affecting de-sign were preceribed by documented instructions, procedures or drawings of a type appropriate to the circumstances, and accom-plished in accordance with these instructions, procedures or drawings.

Engineering design documents, specifications, and drawings will be audited for compliance with the governing instructions and procedures.

3.5 Document Control The review team shall determine whether measures were established to control the issuance of design documents, including changes.

The audit shall determine whether the design documents were re-viewed for accuracy and approved for release by authorized per-sonnel, and were properly distributed.

Compliance with document control procedures will be established.

3.6 Audit Standards This design verification audit will be performed to determine compliance with the Quality Assurance Manuals and Design Control procedures that were in force during the time period the work was performed.

As described in Section 2.0', the standards are reviewed separately for compliance to the requirements of 10CFR50, App. B.

14.

^

4.0 DESIGN VERIFICATION In this section the specific design verification measures to be applied to the thrce areas safety-related design work below are presented:

• Non-Seismic Service-Related Contracts Prior t'o June 1978 PGandE Internal Design Activities After.1970

• Service-Related Contracts Post-January 1978 This is the design verification scope requested by the NRC in the November 19 letter (Denton to Furbush).

Although different in detail, the general steps of the verifica-tion effort for each of the above activities contain the following common steps which are outlined in the enclosures to the November 19 letter (Denton to Furbush):

1.

Review of Quality Assurance procedures and controls 2.

Development of a network for the safety-related design chain 3.

Review of the implementation of Quality Assurance pro-cedures and controls 4.

Development of criteria for selection of suitable sample calculations 5.

Performance of sample calculations to verify the design process particularly in areas of QA deficiencies and weakness

_ 15 -

4.1 Design Verification of Non-Seismic Service-Related Contracts Prior to June 1978 4.1.1 Review of Quality Assurance Procedures and Controls' The review described in Section 2.0 is applicable to the pre-June 1978 service-related contracts.

The details of this review need not be repeated here.

Appendix A contains a list of all PGandE service-related contracts applicable to Diablo Canyon Unit I including both the pre-and post-June 1978 periods.

These contracts are designated as safety-related and/or seismic related.

The appropriate non-seismic safety-related contractors will be selected for review.

One additional criterion implied in the NRC request will also be used to select the contractors for review.

There were many contractors who contributed an individual or minor effort in some area whose work product did not affect the design of the plant.

All contracts will be l

screened to ensure only those with a final product that af-fected the design will be included in the review.

For ex-ample, an individual consultant that perhaps attended some meetings and offered advice, but produced no report or whose work did not affect the design capability of the plant to perform safety-related functions,will be omitted from con-sideration.

4.1.2 Development of Non-Seismic Safety-Related Design Chain Prior to June 1978 The term "non-seismic design chain" designates the separate but linked process of providing non-seismic design for a nuclear plant.

Each step in the process is usually linked 16 -

to another step via flow of information.

The design results obtained in one step may affect the design of systems or components in another step of the process.

For example, the speed of a micsile affects the design of containment to im-pact forces.

The non-seismic safety-related design chain applicable to, the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant will be developed by the following approaches:

4.1.2.1 Design Chain The information necessary to develop the desi'gn chain for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant is as follows:

Names of PGandE's contractors involved in the non-seismic safety-related work prior to June 1978 Commencement and ending dates of each contractor's work Design groups within PGandE responsible for the work of contractors

• Interfaces of design groups within PGandE

• Scope of work 4.1.2.2 Non-Seismic Safety-Related Design Chain Map The map of the non-seismic design chain involving safety-related contracts prior to June 1978 will be developed using information described in Section 4.1.2.1.

This map will illustrate all interfaces, describe the information passing between interfaces, and list the responsibilities of all

_ 17 _

contractors at each step of the non-seismic design process.

When the entire chain has been mapped,-it will facilitate the review of' all interfaces when design information was transmitted between PGandE internal design groups and each contractor.

4.1.3 Subject Review of Contracts As discussed in 4.1.1, it must be determined if the scope of work involved in the contract is'directly related to the safety design of the plant.

Thit step will determine if any further action will be required.

An engineering review will be made as to the nature of the work performed in the con-tract.

Based on this documented review, a decision will be reached whether the contract has a real effect on the safety-related plant design.

4.1.4 Contractor Quality Assurance Implementation Review The implementation of Quality Assurance procedures and design control is discussed in Section 3.0.

This part of the veri-fication program will deal with those contracts related to the actual safety design of the plant.

i 4.1.5 Independent Sample Calculations For all contracts impacting the plant's safety-related de-l sign, a sample of each contractor's work will be indepen-dently verified by calculation.

Depending on the nature of the work performed by the contractor, it may be impractical to perform independent calculations.

Such work will be veri-fied by a detailed, in-depth review rather than calculation samples.

In selecting a sample within the contract, engineering judge-ment will be utilized to bias the sample towards the more important safety-related items, suchas those required for safe shutdown of the plant.

If an error is found in a given sample, then a second sam-ple will be chosen, and independent calculation performed of the second sample. If furthe_r errors are found, addition-al samples will be taken as described below.

The sampling philosophy or sampling plan is technically des-cribed in inspection theory as " Multiple Sampling"*.

In a general way, when applied to_ inspection of arbitrary lots of some product, multiple sampling is described as follows.

A certain sample of the general population is chosen and in-spected.

If there are no rejects or the rejects are fewer than a predetermined acceptance criteria, the lot is said to be acceptable.

If rejects exceed the acceptance criteria, then a second sample is chosen and inspected and so on.

Since the product at hand consists of a wide and varied range of safety-related work, the formal procedure described above requires modification and interpretation.

Nevertheless, the general philosophy behind the formal procedure can be followed.

Actual errors will -be fcund by a study of the engineering work, and by acquiring an understanding of the sources of errors.

For example, if an error is found, is it due to choice of method, arithmetical discrepancy, carelessness, or poor understanding?

By means of engineering interpretations of error sources, and the conduct of repeated samples, it will be possible to determine any errors in the plant design.

• Guide for Sampling Inspection, Quality and Reliability Assur-ance Handbook H53, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense, Washington, D.

C.,

June 30, 1965.

_ 19 _

The sample calculations will involve at least one sample from each contractor's work.

When a large amount of work was done by a contractor, the sample size will be approximately 10% of the work done.

When small amounts of work were done by the contractor the percentage sampled will be larger.

For example, if 100 units of work were done, 10 units, or 10%, will be independently -

redone.

If only, say 3 or 5 units of work were done, one unit would be redone, that is 33% or 20% respectively.

If errors or inconsistencies are found, they will be classified as described by the procedure in Appendix B.

An " Error and Open Item Report" will be filled out and reported immediately to PGandE.

These reports will then be appended to the bi-weekly progress reports that are submitted to the NRC.

At this stage of the evaluation process, results of the quality assurance review will be considered.

Using results from both the independent calculations and the quality assurance review, an assessment will be made as to the overall quality and consistency of the work performed under that contract.

4.1.6 Provision for Selecting Additional Samples If the results of the QA implementation audit described in Section 3.0 show that inadequate QA has been applied, or errors are found in the independent calculations, additional independent calculations will be performed over and above the basic sample.

These samples will be repeated as necessa'ry to develop complete assurance that all safety-related design requirements have been met. -

{

4.2 Design Verification of PGandE Internal Activities An independent design verification program will be performed on PGandE internal design activities related to (performed on) Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant Unit I related to safety-related struc-tures, systems or components.

This program will involve only those activities which materially affected the design of safety-related items in the plant.

It is proposed to carry out this portion of the overall program in several phases.

Each phase of the program is described in the following sections.

4.2.1 Review of Quality Assurance Procedures and Controls The review of QA procedures and controls is described in detail in Section 2.0 for PGandE internal design activities.

4.2.2 Development of PGandE Internal Design Chain The term " internal design chain" designates the connected steps of the process of performing design within an organi-zation.

Each step in the process Is usually linked to another step via flow of information.

The design results obtained in one step may affect the design of systems of com-ponents in another step of the process.

For example, the

'i,

l

~

qualification of valves by Department B is affectcd by the results of piping analyses by Department A.

The internal design chain within PGandE applicable to the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant will be developed by the following approaches:

4.2.2.1 Internal Design Chain The information necessary to develop the internal seismic

~

design chain for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Po'er Plant is as, w

follows:

Names and responsibilities of design groups within PGandE performing safety-related design activities

• Design procedures of each design group

• Scope of responsibility for each group Interfaces of design groups within PGandE 4.2.2.2 Internal Design Chain Map The map of the internal design chain involving the safety-related design of the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant will be developed using information described in Section 4.2.2.1.

This map will illustrate all interfaces, and list the respon-sibilities of PGandE's design groups.

1.

.y s.

1

.3

..s i

1 g.

ma

,s g a y,+

m m.

\\

?-

• c~

-. o s

s o

l.

\\.,

l i

~

'l

~,,,

.4.2.3 Quality Assufanc,e Implementation Review 3

-s The contro"lled' Quality Assurance documents for internal PGandE s

safety-relt$ed design activitiestwill be reviewed.

The ob-jective Of this 'revietwill be c.ol determine whether 'the over-4 5

~

',.,g' s,

t all PC..a..ndE qus,lity nssuranc'e procedures and controls des-y 2

2 c

. - 7, crib,ed in its Quality Assurance Manual and associated pro-

~

~

lJ Q./

cedures since 1970 have@een fully sand effectively implemented

,o

. ~-

\\

4 vith*respecttoPGandEinternalsa(ety-relateddesignacti-N4 a

<, g J s

x

• i.

viti es.

Audits will be perfoimed to assess and verify the y

<c design centrol exercised by PGandE with respect to its in-1 4

[

' w.<.

terna). 'ihlyt.y-related desi.gn activitiep. 'The specific ap-proach to $hevq}:mi, tty < assurknee linplementation review has y

~.--~~.

been des,cribc), $$ b,ection-3. 0,.',,

g

(

y g 4-g.

(

s 4

. h..

/a,'42.4 Indchendbnt SvinplerCalculptionh '

i

- y y y.,,

y m

s

%In this 'plase of the revfc of. the.?.G.andE. internal safety-N

.x s.,.--

7 relatedidesigg activities,;,.a generic sample of independent l

J .'dalculhtions GIlhbe performtjd'ori[ selected safety-related

., r x

.i/

systems or componer3t,s..' x

-structures, 9

f-s,.

s

.t

- y

,y

./

Qv

the term gener3.c.+$s.-takert

. an that'12he sample will be m

w a

y selected indepen'dently'o~f'the findEngs of'the previously j

1 - '.e

.ddscribed quality assurance reyiew and. audit.

3 8

. ;a

> It h.as been observed-that des.'gn related responsibility with-1 s

g in 'PGand2 has been delegated to' t.he variour internal engin-i

.y

.f.

3.

/ eering disciplines.

These, disciplines are:

, *1

• ~

n u

7 e

--N 1)

Civil. Engineering]

,,s yu, '.

l si

\\.,

2)

Jiechanical,and' Nuclear Engineering

~

s

.f.,,

o=

4 4

3 s

~

f 1

.b.

N q

(

+

. N

)

E ct ical Engineering:

Yg s.

x s

i

,r\\,

-i.y a

s y

x x="% %

g <_.

i

\\

\\

~

f c- -

Y We v.,

_A

-- =.

aT

It is proposed that the generic sample of independent calcu-lations will be chosen to reflect the division of design res-i pensibility among the various disciplines.

Specifically, the selection of the minimum sample shall be conducted by choosing a particular safety-related system or components within the responsibility of each of the above disciplines.

For these particular samples, independent calculations will be performed to verify the adequacy and accuracy of the PGandE internal design process.

By choosing a complete system within each engineerinF. disci-pline for the sample independent calculations, a broad overview of the design process within each discipline shall be obtained.

Safety-related calculations for a complete system from the be-ginning to conclusion of the design will permit detection of

+

}

weaknesses or deficiencies within the whole design process.

In this manner, key systematic deficiencies applying to the safety-related design process can be detected and identified.

1 As discussed previously, in certain situations it can be fore-l seen that detailed review of existing design work may orovide for a better verification than independent calculations.

This circumstance is most likely to occur in the area of safety-related systems design.

When and if such situations are judged to occur, documentation will be provided for this judge-mer e., and the verification will be done by detailed in-deoth review of the original design work.

1. - _.

Errors and Open Items will be classified and reported as discussed in Appendix B.

4.2.4.1 Provision for Selecting Additional Samples Additional, specific samples shall be chosen for separate,

independent calculation should the need be dictated.

This need will arise if deficiencies are discovered in the QA re-view of QA audit of PGandE internal safety-related design activities.

Also, additional samples will be dictated if the initial sample of independent calculations shows discrepancies.

These additional sampics, oriented toward finding other de-ficiencies within the initial problem areas, will allow a determination of the significance, depth and root cause of the initially discovered deficiency.

Criteria for selecting additional samples shall follow the procedure of multiple sampling with provision for modification and engineering interpretation because of the nature of the complex structures and systems involved.

This methodology will permit systematic deficiencies in the safety-related design process to be determined.

4.3 Design Verification of Safety-Related Contracts Post-January 1978 4.3.1 Review of Quality Assurance Procedures and Controls The review of QA procedures and controls.is described in detail in Section 2.0 for post-January 1978 Service-Related contracts. L

-=

4.3.2 Development of Safety-Related Design Chain 1

i The term " safety-related design chain" designatas the connected steps of the process of providing seismic and non-seismic safety-related design work for a nuclear plant.

Each step in the process it usually linked to another step via flow of information.

The design results obtained'in one step may affect the design of systems or components in another step of the process.

For example, the floor response spectra 4

obtained in building analysis are used as inp'ut to the-analysis of the piping system of the particular floor.

The piping analysis provides piping support loads which are in turn used for the design of piping supports.

The safety-related design chain applicable to the Diablo I

Canyon Nuclear Powar Plant post-January 1, 1978 will be L

developed by the following approaches:

4.3.2.1 Design Chain Information The information necessary to develop the service safety-related design chain for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power l

Plant is as follows:

i

• Names of PGandE's contractors involved in the g

safety-related work post-January 1, 1978

• Work scope of each contractor i

r -

• Commencement and ending dates of each contractor's work

• Design groups within PGandE responsible for the work of contractors

• Interfaces of design groups within PGandE 4.3.2.2 Safety-Related Design Chain Map

• The map of the design chain involving safety-related contracts po.ct-January 1, 1978, will be developed using information described above..

This map will illustrate all interfaces, describe the information passing between inter-faces, and list the responsibilities of all contracts at each step of the design process.

When the entire chain has been mapped, it will facilitate the review of all interfaces when design information was transmitted between PGandE internal design groups and each contractor.

The scope of the design verification will be determined by the review of the design chain.

All work that materially affects the safety design of the plant will be design verified.

Any contracts which are deemed not to impact the safety de-sign will have a documented review justifying their exclusion.

4.3.3 Contractor Quality Assurance Implementation Review This part of the verification program will deal with those contracts deemed related to the actual safety design of the plant.

The details of this phase are included in Section 3.0.

4.3.4 Independent Sample Calculations For all contracts impacting the plant's safety-related design, a sample of the contractor's work will be independently veri-fled by calculation.

Depending on the nature of the work performed by the contractor, it may be impractical to perform calculations on a sampling basis.

Such work will be verified by a detailed, in-depth review rather than calculation samples.

2 The same sampling philosophy and sample sizes will be used for these past 1977 contractors as were described for the earlier j

contractors in Section 4.1.5.

Errors and Open Items will be classified and reported as discussed in Appendix B.

In selecting a sample within the contract, engineering judge-ment will be utilized to bias the sample towards the more important safety-related items, such as those required for safe shutdown of the plant.

1 4.3.5 Provision for Selecting Additional Samples If the results of the QA implementation audit described in Section 3.0 show that inadequate QA has been applied or errors are found in the independent calculations, additional independent calculations will be performed over and above the basic sample.

These samples will be repeated as necessary j

to develop complete assurance that all safety-related design requirements have.been met.

i

5.0 Field Verification In Phase I of the program related to the reverification of seismic related activities, a substantial sample of piping and equipment was inspected in the field to verify.that i

the installation was according to design.

In this Phase II of the Verification program, field verification Will

~

be performed only on an as needed basis.

In general, field installations will be verified to be consistent with design, when it is necessary to do so to validate-the i

design work.

i W

l 8

e 1

l i

Y ji I

l i

i,

i

6.0 Responsibilities, Review, and Reporting 1

6.1 Responsibilities 6.1.1 PGandE 4

The program is conducted under the overall responsibility of Mr. George'Maneatis, Senior Vice President, Facilities Development, Pacific Gas and Electric Cempany.

PGandE responsibilities include:

furnishing design information including calculations, drawings, and reports as required, furnishing Quality Assurance information, including manuals, procedures, etc. as required, facilitating access to the Diablo Canyon Facility for review team members, facilitating ac' cess to contractor facilities for review team members developing and implementing any required plant improve-ments that result from this review.

6.1.2 Robert L. Cloud Associates, Inc. (RLCA)

RLCA is responsible for the development and program management of the review program.

These responsibilities include:

preparation of the program document, i

development and updating of schedules,

[

i I

assignment of responsibilities and technical manage-l ment of organizations participating in the review, development of the design chain, review of structural and piping design work, preparation of bi-weekly progress reports, and preparation of final report.

6.1.3 R.F. Reedy, Inc.

(RFR)

RFR is responsible for the review of Quality Assurance manuals and Design Control activities.

These respon-sibilities include:

review of manuals and design control procedures for PGandE and contractors, conduct of audits to determine implementation of Quality Assurance measures, and contributors to the bi-weekly reports and the' final report.

6.1.4 Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation (S&W)

S&W will be responsible for the review of safety related design with the exception of structural review and the structural aspects of piping and equipment design.

This will include safety related designs and programs performed by PGandE and contractors.

Specific 31 -

1

responsibilities includer fluid system review, electrical system review, instrumentation and control system review, review of nuclear systems and shielding calculations as applicable, other safety-related design work that affects the design of safety-related structures, systems, or components will be reviewed consistent with the requirements of the letter (Denton to Furbush, November 19, 1981),

contributions to the bi-weekly reports and the final report.

6.2 Review The overall design verification program will be continuously reviewed by Dr. W. E. Cooper of Teledyne Engineering Services.

Dr. Cooper will have a free hand to review and audit the work as necessary to assure it is being done in an independent manner and is technically adequate to verify the safety of the plant.

Dr. Cooper will report directly to Mr. Maneatis.

6.3 Reporting 6.3.1 Bi-weekly Report As errors or Open Items are discovered, they will be classified and reported according to the classification -

I and report form of Appendix B. When found, the error or open item will be classified within one day and the report forwarded to PGandE.

All error and open item reports will be appended to the bi-weekly progress re-ports that are submitted to the NRC.

In the open item report, the reviewer must classify the-error or open item and provide a complete description.

If sufficiently well understood, the significance of

)

the item shall also be reported and recommendations for further investigation or resolution may also be made.

The paragraph on final resolution is to be completed when the resolution has been made at a later time.

The open item reports will be numbered and logged by the program management office.

6.3.2 Final Report The final report will be prepared first in draft form.

It will be submitted to PGandE for a final review of factual content and to permit PGandE the opportunity of a final review of all findings.

In this way, the response to the findings can be presented with the final verification report.

When complete the final report will be submitted to the NRC and PGandE in parallel.

6.4 NRC All results of the design verification program will be submitted to th e-NRC in the manner outlined

~

above.

It is also understood that the NRC may review any work in progress as necessary to fulfill their respon-sibilities.

O i -

f

7.0 CONCLUSION

The Design Verification Program presented in this report is de-signed to be responsive to each point of the three-part request listed in the November 19, 1981 letter from Mr. Harold Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation to Mr. Malcolm Furbush, Senior Vice-President-General Counsel of Pacific Gas and Electric Co., Docket No. 50-275,

Subject:

Diablo Canyon Unit I-Independent Design Verification Program.

This verification program is designed to establish the correct-ness of the safety-related design of Diablo Canyon Unit I.

It will detect errors in the design process that arise in the gen-eration of data, in the transmission of data, or in the use of data.

This will be accomplished by an in-depth review of Oual-ity Assurance practices, independent sample calculation, n review of the implementation of Quality Assurance and Design Control procedures, and, as necessary, field verification.

Bi-weekly reports will be submitted as requested.

A final report will be prepared and submitted upon completion of the program.

The significance of errors found will be evaluated.

If any errors are found to be significant, recommendations will be made.

This will include a description of the error; the cause of the error with a statement as to whether it is generic or not and a justification.

Errors determined to be insignificant will be explained, consistent with the reporting and classific-ation procedure that has been presented..

.JPENDIX A SERVICE-RELATED CONTRACTS i

DIABLO CANYON UNIT I l

A

December 5,1981 SERVICE RELATED__C_0J4TRA,qT_S p e'..g,

ITRACT N0.

DATE CONTRACTOR ~

BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT SAFETY SEIst11C OPEN/ CLOSED YES NO RELATED RELATED

_YES N0' YES N0 1971 Bethlehem Steel Breakwater Permit X

X-1970 Blume, J. A.

Geological & Seismological X

X

}

Investigations 1975 Crocker Nuclear Sample Analysis X

X

{

I Lab., VofC 1971 General Electric 500 kV Shunt Reactors X

X 1970 Hydro Research Hydraulic Model Study X

X 1969 Marljave & Jahns Geological Investigation X

X 1971 Scale Models Construction of a Model X

X l

(Breakwater) 1970 Stoller, S. M.

Hydraulic Model Study X

X l

1970 U.C. Berkeley Cadwell Reinforcing Bar X

X Splicing Tests 1980 John A. Blumes &

Design Turbine Bldg. Q@[k(({

X Assoc. Engs.

I

@'s Ltr.

1-22-75 Omar J. Lillevang Study Damage to East S l Q lg8l X

X Breakwater L

I g

@'s Ltr.

3-23-79 1980 URS/ John A. Blume Turbine Building X

X

& Assoc.

Medifications vg-py4gb.g j

!@'s Ltr.

1977 URS/ John A. Blume Seismic Research Program X

X 10-27-77 (5-6-80)

& Assoc.

f@'s Ltr.

2-5-69 1975 Hydro Research Hydraulic Model Study X

X Science l

PREUMINARY

U V

~

December 5,1981 SFRVICE RELATED CONTRACTS v

CONTRACT NO.

DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC OPEN/ CLOSED YES NO RELAUD RELATED l

YES NO YES NO

,V

FFM s Ltr.

2-27-75 1976 David W. Rice, Jr.

Larval Fish, Taxcnomic X

X Identification FM's Ltr.

4-25-75 1981 Winton H. Frey Final Planting Plans X

X l

4-23-75 1978 Mason L. Hill Geological & Seismological X

X ffM's Ltr.

l Report ffM'sLtr.

3-27-75 1980 Stewart W. Smith Seismological Consultant X

X fFM'sLtr.

2-28-74 1977 Basil W. Wilson Tsunami Consultant X

X 12-15-76 liarry Bolton Seed, Soil-Structure Interactions X

X fFM'sLtr.

l Inc.

/FM'sLtr.

1-19-77 UCBerkeley, Prof.

Soil-Structure Interactions X

X H.B. Seed Study

/FM'sLtr.

10-16-74 URS/ John A. Blume llosgri Seismic Evaluation X

X 1974

& Assoc.

IFM'sLtr.

3-10 -78 1979 Professor Ray W.

Seismic Response Analysis X

X Clough, Sc.D.

of Storage Tanks

@FM's Ltr.

12-24-76 1981 Dr. C. Allen Cornell Seismic Risk Analysis X

X

@FM's Ltr.

7-19-77 Dr. Bruce Bolt Seismological Consultant X

X

@WS's Ltr.

9-23-66 1972 Richard H. Jahns Geological Exploration X

X

}WS'sLtr.

6-18-68 1974 Omar J. Lillevang Assessment of waves on-X X

intake & discharge structures & f easibility of breakwater development

@WS's Ltr.

6-12-76 1976 Sylvia Murray Zoo Plankton & Phyto X

X Plankton Taxonomy PRELIMINARY

_2

CONTRACT N0.~~

OPEN/ CLOSED REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION YES NO RELATED RELATED YES NO YES NO

.fj J0S's Ltr.

3-17-68 1977 Omar J. Lillevang Design of Breakwaters X

X J0S's Ltr.

3-12 -68 KMC, Inc.

Action Plan Utility Group X

X 1980 lJOS'sLtr.

2-28-80 1981 NUS Corporation Utility Group Report of Investigation 1 J0S's Ltr.

12-29-80 Westinghouse Electric Westinghouse Owner's Group X

X 1980 Corp.

l l J0S's Ltr.

5-6-81 KMC, Inc.

Qualification of Reactor X

X 1981 l

J0S's Ltr.

12-5-80 Porter Consultants, Emergency Planning X

X 1980 Inc.

Consulting Services JBH's Ltr.

12-4-80 1981 Qualification Administer Typical NRC-Type X

X Evaluation System Reactor Operator Corp. (QES)

Written Examination Verbal Agr.

1974 Nuclear Environment Consulting Services Services 22-A-0741-0 1972 Bechtel Constr. of Scale Model-X X

Containment Vessel Eng.-7142 1972 U.C. Berkeley Plate Bucking Testing in X

X Reactor Cavity & Spent Fuel Pool Stainless Steel Liners at DC 1 l

PRELIMINARY _

December 5, 1981 l

SERVICE RELATED CONTRACTS CONTRACT fi0.

DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC OPEN/ CLOSED YES NO RELAI,ED_

RELATED YES NO YES f40 Eng.-7138 1972 U.C. Berkeley Testing of Containment Structure Reinforced Concrete Beam JFB's Ltr.-65 1968 Wiegel, R.L.

Ocean Engineering-Cooling X

X Water System JD WHR 7-1-66 1969 H. E. Crammer Meteorological Consultive Services JFB's Ltr.-66 1970 Smith & Benioff Seismological Consultants X

X l

Eng. 13-66 1969 Edward & Fred Harmon Marine Transportation X

X Eng. 17-66 1972 Marine Advisors Oceanographic Consulting X

X Service Eng. 2-67 1967 Bechtel Nuclear Fuel Cost Study X

X Eng. 3-67 1970 Wurster, Bernardi Architectural Consulting X

X

& Emmons, Inc.

Services Eng. 4-67 1972 Prentiss French Landscape Consultant X

X Eng. 7-67 1967 White, James T.

Marine Transportation X

X Services l Eng. 10-67 1967 Spicker, Robert Marine Transportation X

X Services Eng. 11-67 1970 Montedero Meteorological Instrument X

X l

Corporation Maintenance l Eng. 15-67 1969 Towill Corporation Ocean Topography X

X 2-14 -67 1969 Dr. Edinger Temperature Studies X

X Ltr.-67 1970 Frey, W. H.

Soil Collecting PRELIMINARY December 5, 1981 SERVICE _R,E_L_ATED _C_0NTRACTS ED REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC CONTRACT NO.

DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION ~

YES NO RELATlT ED RELATED

~

OPEN/ CLOSED YES N YES NO DDW's Ltr.8-13-67 1974 Salo, E. O.

Radioecological Consulting Services JDW'sLtr.9-68 1971 Berrigan, Paul D.

Architectural Services X

X ng. 10-68 1972 Central Calif.

Exploration of X

X l

Archaeological Archaeological Sites i

kng.11-68 1968 Harding-Lawson Soil Investigation X

X j

Associates

[ng. 12-68 1969 Central Coast Lab.

Exploratory Drilling X

X l

Reception Center at Visitor's ing. 26-68 Closed S.M. Stoller Fuel Contract Reviews-X X

4 Associates

.$-5-69 1973 Westinghouse Engineering Consulting X

X Services Prepare QA Plans

.$-6-69 1971 PC Exploration Rock Drilling, Placing of Explosive Charges &

Blasting Near DC 1 3-11-69 Kennedy, U. H.

Periodic Audits & Inspection X

of W (Tampa, FL) Plt. QA Procedures for DC 1 & ?

I Steam Generators & DC 2 Pressurizer

)-11-69 Dr. Jahns Geological Exploration X

X PRELIMINARY BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC CONTRACT N0.

DATE CONTRACTOR ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "

YES NO RELATfED

RELATED, OPEN/ CLOSED YES NO YES fi0 1972 Dept. of Fish & Game Ecological Study X

X f0-28-69 1971 Bellopsahi, Pietro Design Type AVL & HVT Towers X

X f-31-69 B-4-70 1974 Calif. State Oceanographic Studies X

X Polytechnic 5-6-70 1974 Woodward-Clyde Seismic Surveys X

X b-9-70 1971 Lowney & Kaldveer Foundation, Soil &

Geological Investigations 5-13-70 1972 R. W. Hunt Inspection of Containment Structure Liner, Penetrations, Tanks &

Pipes for DC 1 S-18-70 1975 Westinghouse Corp.

Consulting Services 5-19-70 1974 Garretson-Elmendorf Engineering Services X

X 5-20-70 1974 Earl & Wright, Review Heavy Equipment Consulting Engs.

Handling Activities at DCPP JDW's Ltr.-10-70 1972 Blume, J. A.

Engineering Assistance X

X (66158) 5-15-71 1976 Intersea Research Marine Biological Surveys X

X Corp.

5-25-71 1979 EDS Nuclear Piping Systems Analysis X

X l

10-4-71 1975 Wildlife Associates Terrestrial Ecology Studies X

X JDW's Ltr.-71 1973 Blume, J. A. (67000) Seismic Testing of X

X Electrical Equipment PRELIMINARY ___

December 5,1981 SERVICE R_ELA_T_ED_ r0hTRACTS

' CONTRACT N0.-

OPEN/ CLOSED

- ~ ~

YES NO RELATED RELATED DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC YES N(T~

YES N0 3-24-72 1972 Roberta S. Greenwood Publication of X

X Archaeological Report 5-1-72 1974 Garretson-Elmendorf Engineering Services X

X 1

1 5-9-72 1975 Jim J. Stillman Marine Transportation X

X l

Services 1

5-13 -72 1974 Robert V. Spicker Marine Transportation X

X l

Services f5-16-72 1974 Smith-Emery Co.

Inspection Services X

'5-25-72 1972 Earth Sciences Geologic Investigations X

X Associates 22-243-72 1975 Jersey Nuclear Co.,

Nuclear Fuel Management X

X Inc.

& Computing Assistance 5-1-73 1977 Environmental Cooling Water Studies X

X Quality Analysis 5-5-73 1977 LFE Ce poration Trace Element Analysis on X

X Sea Water Samples 5-8-73 1979 Garretson-Engireering Services X

X Elmendorf-Zinov-Reiben, Architects 8 Engs.

5-16-73 1973 Calif. Poly. State Marine Biological Studies X

X Univ. Foundation PRELIMINARY

December 5, 1981 SERVICE RELATED CONTRACTS i

fCONTRACTNO.

DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC OPEN/ CLOSED

--'~~

YES NO REMTED RELATED_

t (ES NO 1CS NO 5-17-73 1979 Nuclear Services Engineering Analysis of X

X Corp.

Postulated Pipe Failures at DC 1 & 2 5-26-73 1974 Annco Steel Corp.

Thermal Analysis of X

X l

l Machinery Containment Penetrations Equip.

5-28-73 1973 State Dept. of Fish Marine Biological Studies X

X j

l

& Game j 5-55-73 1979 Patrick Whittle, Prepare Environmental X

X i

I Associates Technical Specifications 5-56-73 1979 Stafco Associates Licensing Consulting X

X Services 5-60-73 1977 Bolt, Beranek &

Offshore Geophysical Survey X

X j

Newman, Inc.

l5-2-74 1977 Robert V. Spiker Marine Transportation X

X f5-5-74 1974 EDS Nuclear Design Review Services X

X 5-8-74 1975 Ralston & Dwyer, Design Consulting Services Consulting Eng.

in Connection With

{

Electrical & Security l

Systems at DC 1 5-12 -74 1974 The Regents of Thermal Physical Modeling X

X of UCBerkeley Studies j 5-30-74 1975 Aquatronics Marine Geophysical Studies X

X l

International, Inc.

PREUMINARY i

_8_

l e

December 5, 1981 SERVICE RELATED CONTRACTS CONTRACT NO.

DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC OPEN/ CLOSED

~~~~~~

YES NO RELA (E_D RELATED YES N0 YES NO 5-40-74 1976 Battelle-Northwest Infrared & Traced Dye X

X Studies 4-42-74 1977 Teknekron, Inc.

Seismological Error Analysis of Local Earthquake Hypocenter Determinations at DC 1 & 2 74 1975 Kaiser Engineers Engineering Services X

X

%-51-74 1976 Tetratech, Inc.

Wave Response Calculations X

X 1975 Battelle-Northwest Remote Sensed Dye Test Data X

X h-52-74

@-5-75 1981 Nuclear Services The Effects of Postulated X

X Corp.

Pipe Failures

@-8-75 1977 Teknekron, Inc.

Earthquake Source Modeling X

X

@-9-75 1975 Western Geophysical Offshore Seismic Survey X

X Co. of America Data

@-11-75 1979 State Dept. of Fish Marine Biological Studies X

X

& Game

@-13-75 1981 Hydro Research Discharge Structure Model X

X Scier.ce Studies

'@-19-75 1977 Tera Corporation Environmental Studies X

X

@-22-75 1978 Nuclear Services Feastoility Study of X

X I

Corp.

Development of a Reactor Vessel Inservice Inspection Tool PRELIMINARY l :

December 5, 1981 S_E,P((ICE RELATED CONTRACTS BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC CONTRACT NO.

DATE CONTRACTOR ~~~~

~

TES NO RELA [E'D RELATEli OPEN/ CLOSED YES HlT~

YES NO 5-2-76 1976 Intersea Research Ecological Studies X

X Corp.

5-5-76 1976 American Aerial Intra-Red Aerial X

X Surveys, Inc.

Photography 5-7-76 1976 Kaiser Engineers Program Management, X

X Division of Engineering & Consulting Kaiser Industries Services Corp.

l 5-12-76 1981 Lambert & Company Design & Fabricate a Reactor X

X Vessel in Service 5-22-76 1977 The. Regents of the X-Ray Diffraction Analysis Univ. of Berkeley In Connection With Compound Identifications of DC Core Sediments DVK's Ltr.-76 Dr. Normal M.

Corrosion Product Sample X

X Hodgkin Analysis Micrographics 5-16-77 1977 Earthquake Seismic Re-Analysis of X

X Engineering System, Piping Systems & Design Inc.

5-26-77 1977 State of Calif. Dept. Marine Biological Studies X

X of Fish & Game PREUMINARY

_1g_

December 5, 1981 SERVICE RELATED C0rlTRACTS QNTRACT NO.

DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT SAFETY SEISf4IC OPEt!/ CLOSED YES f40 RELATE _0 RELATED

" " ' ~ ~ ~

YEStIO YES NO 48-77 1977 Westinghouse Long Term Seismic Reanalysis X

X l

Electric Co.

of Containment & Reactor Coolant System, Interface With Blume Assoc.

49-77 1978 Science Applications, Earthquake Initiated l

Inc.

Associated Evaluation at DC 1 & 2 r54 -77 1977 Sygnetron Security Consulting Services X

X 58-77 1977 Tera Corporation Source flodeling Studies X

X l

l59-77 1981 Garretson-Elmendorf-Design Security Building X

X 5

Zinov-Reibin, Architects & Engs.

r60-77 1979 NUS Corporation Aircraft & flissile Impact X

X Studies L61-77 1977 Wyle Laboratories Seismic Re-evaluation of X

X Safety Related Electrical Equipment

+65-77 1977 EDS Nuclear Design Review of Piping X

X Anchors 66-77 1977 Wyle Laboratories Seismic Studies X

X h68-77 1979 Applied tiucleonics Seismic Testing Studies X

X Cc,, Inc.

581-77 1979 Battelle Memorial Aerial Photographs X

X Institute PRELIMINARY

-n_

l December 5, 1981 SERVICE RELATED CONTRACTS DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC NTRACT NO.~

OPEtyCLOSED_

_ RELATER

_RELATED_

YES N0 YES NO YES NO

>82-77 1980 Applied Nucleonics Seismic Testing X

X Co.

E6 -77 1980 Westinghouse Electric Analyze Reactor Vessel X

X f

Corp.

Support System l8-78 1978 NUS Corporation Review & Modify Fire X

X

~

Protection Plans 17-78 1981 KMC, Inc.

Assist with Fire Protection X

X Testimony 21-78 1980 EDS Nuclear, Inc.

Furnish Valve Qualification X

X j

1 Program

!26-78 1980 General Electric Co.

Sei smic Design X

X Modifications

>28-78 1980 Wyle Laboratories Perform Valve Operability X

X Tests r31 -78 1979 NUS Corporation Decommissioning Study, X

X Phase 1 35-78 1978 NUS Corporation Spent Fuel Storage Capacity X

X r

L38-78 19C1 URS/ John A. Blume Fire Protection System X

X

& Assoc.

L39-78 1980 Grinnell Fire Design Automatic Fire X

X Protection Sys.

Sprinkler System r40-78 1981 Stafco, Inc.

Prepare "Q-List" X

X L43-78 1978 Dr. Richard H. Jahns Geological Consultation X

X Services PRELIMINARY. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

SERVICE RELATED CONTRACTS 1NTRACT NO.

DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPT10N REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC

"'~~

VES N6 RELATED RELATED OPEN/ CLOSED---

YES NO YES N0 c45-78 1980 General Electric Co.

Electrical Penetration X

X Consultation Services al-79 1981 Dr. John D. Stevenson Provide Rebuttal Testimony X

X Concerning Operating Basic j

Earthquakes for DC 1 & 2 NRC Seisnde Hearings 29-79 1979 NUS Corporation Decommissioning Study, X

X Phase II c15-79 1981 Reinhart & Associates Nondestructive Exainination X

X Services h19-79 1979 Peabody Testing Nondestructive Testing X

X Services L20-79 1979 Abbot A. Hanks, Inc. Testing Laboratories X

X 1

423-79 1980 Dynacon Systems., Inc. Prepare Specification for X

X l

Reactor Vessel 627-79 1981 Mr. H. H. Honeggar Metallurgical & Welding X

X l

Engineering Services b28-79 1979 Geri Engineering, Modifications to Reactor X

X Inc.

Vessel in Services b31-79 1980 Dr. Robert L. Cloud Review of RLpture Restraint X

X

& Flued Head Designs at DC 1 & 2 1

PREUMHiARY i _

.f

D:ccmber 5, 1981 SERVICE RELATED C0]{TRA,C,TS

0NTRA.CT NO.~

OPEN/ CLOSED,

~ ~ ~

REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION ED RELATEii RELAT,F YES NO YES N YES f40 t-40-79 1979 EDS Nuclear, Inc.

Assist Engineering X

Department in Various Activities in Connection with DC 1 & 2 t-57-79 1979 Radiation Research Shielding Design X

X Assoc., Inc.

Consulting Services

-59-79 1979 EDS Nuclear, Inc.

TMI-2 Accident Engineering X

X Services

-60-79 1979 EDS Nuclear, Inc.

Control Rm. Consulting X

X Services EDS Portion 3-64-79 1979 Applied Physical Review Radio Analytical X

X Technology, Inc.

Equipment 3-70-79 1979 Garretson-Elmendorf-Design of Admin. Bldg. &

X X

Zinov-Reibin Archi-Warehouse techts & Engs.

5-3-79 1979 Earthquake Engineer-Evaluate Piping Seismic X

X ing Sys., Inc.

Analysis i-77 -79 1979 Effects Technology, Weld Metals Tests X

X Inc.

3-80-79 1979 Bechtel Corporation Provide Engineering X

X Assistance 5-86 -79 1979 Robert L. Cloud System Interaction Study X

X Assistance for DC 1 & 2 PRELIMINARY,

December 511981y

~

' SERVICE RELATED CONTRACTS

'/

<.,p Y ', SEISMIC' NTRACT NO.

DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT s S'AFETY,

/,

RE f di OPEN/ CLOSED

~ " " -

YES NO w BELAT[D~

VEili{_

f,,.

/,lES NO

+-

y so i

B7-79 1981 Western Canada Vertex Consulting Services s? X

' k T./,, 7,,j f

f 8-a a

Hydraulic Lab., Lt'o.

< t.

4-79 1979 Management Analysis ManagementReileyofitha

~

7, y

'l

/

1

(

s s,;

.,5 Co.

Class I Damper Programp.

I 28-80 1980 KMC, Inc.

Support Effort by KMC; Inc.

/ ',

S Y X

TMI Lessons Learned s4

'/

.s No

/

+

X

.-. X. + * :q 29-80 1980 R. E. Monroe

' Develop Welding Procedure

^

t';

r

,1 f 4i

.& Control Manual

/,

/

'.,1, S6-80 1980 Nutech Develop Welding Procedure X

d s

f,.

1 t

/1 3

& Control Manual f-if,.,

D1-80 1980 Kaiser Engineers Manpower Assistance-d, /, j X

X

.[,,

.s

• X -,

X ty 21-79 1979 Lambert, McGill, Testing Services 6

t

./

L u.

Thomas t,s B-80 1980 Wyle Laboratories System Interaction Study X

y" ;

,X j

I/

4-80 1980 Teledyne Engineering NRC I & E Bulletin 79-02 X' -

-X e

Services 7)-80 1981 Management Analysis Development of a Commitment X'

X Co.

Control System 2-80 1981 Fredric D. Anderson Assistance with response to NRC requests related to j

10 -80 1980 KMC, Inc.

Anticipated Transients X

X Without Scram PREUMINARY :

December 5, 1981 SERVICE RELATED CONTRACTS ONTRACT NO.~~~

OPEN/ CLOSED

~ ~ ~

BRIEF DESCRIPTION ~~

REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC DATE CONTRACTOR YES NO RELAT(D RELATE]Q YES NO YES NO

=11-80 1981 Dr. William K.

Reliability & risk analysis X

X Brunot for DCPP in connection with NRC submittals & testimony preparation 80 1980 Raymond R. Maccary Review Inservice Inspection X

X Plan

>15-80 1980 Arremony Associates Non-destructive Testing X

X Services 218-80 1980 EDS Nuclear, Inc.

Technical Support Center X

X Pressurization

=21-80 1980 Keith, Feibusch Provide technical support X

X Assoc. Engs, services for various activities in connection with DC 1 & 2 (S&R)

=23 -80 1980 Federal Signal Off-Site Early Warning X

X Corp.

System Studies

=24 -80 1981 Pickard, Lowe &

Feedwater System Relia-X X

Garrick, Inc.

bility Analysis 80 1981 Wes tinghouse Qualification of Steam X

X Electric Corp.

Generator Repair Weld Procedure

=29-80 1980 Dr. Robert L.

Suitability study of scismic X

Cloud stops at DC 1 & 2 PRELIMINARY D::cember 5, 1981 SERVICE RELATED CONTRACTS

0NTRACT N0.-

OPEN/ CLOSED

~

- - - 'BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC DATE CONTRACTOR YES NO RELATED RELATED YES N0 YES NO i-30-80 1980 James Jay, Z.

Engineering Assistance X

X

,-33 -80 1980 Keith, Feibusch, Establish a System Inter-X X

Assoc., Engs, actions Program i-41-80 1981 Wyle Laboratories Evaluation of Radiation &

X X

Aging Effects i-51 -80 1981 Alan M. Voorhees Population & Traffic Studies X

X

& Assoc.

i-60 -80 1980 Allied Nuclear, Health Physics Support X

X Inc.

Services 5-61-80 1980 URS/ John A. Blume Seismic research studies X

X

& Assoc.

to demonstrate ability of DCPP to withstand severe ground motions as result of recent CA carthquakes (S/R) 5-66-80 1981 Woodward-Clyde Evaluation of Supplement X

X Corporation Seismic Instrument Study 5-67-80 1980 Cal Poly Provide Radion Analytical X

X Services 5-73-80 1981 Bechtel Power Curp.

Control Room HVAC Engineer-X X

ing Services 5-74-80 1980 Stafco, Inc.

Update FSAR X

X 5-78 -80 1980 EDS Nuclear, Inc.

Emergency Planning Assistance X

X 5-79-80 1980 Roger dett Operation Training Assistance X

X PREUMii4ARY 1

December 5, 1981 SERVICE RELATED CONTRACTS ONTRACT NO.

DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC OPEN/ CLOSED

- ~ ~ " '

Y_E_S NO RELAT(D_

RELATED YES NO YES NO 80 1980 Dr. William K.

Licensing Consulting Services X

X Brunot 80 1981 Management Analysis Energency Planning X

X Co.

Corporation 80 1980 Dr. William Brunot Reliability & Risk Analysis X

X 80 1980 EDS Nuclear, Inc.

Prepare of Nuclear Power X

X Generation Manual 80 1980 Wyle Laboratories Qualifications Assessment X

X of Class I E Equipment

=99-80 1980 Tera Corporation Emergency Planning Manage-X X

ment / Technical Coordination Services OS Ltr 12-24-80 1980 Westinghouse-Snupps Simulator Retraining X

X OS Ltr 8-10-80 1980 Pacific Telephone Alternate Route Telephone X

X Co.

. Facilities out of Diablo Canyon a90-80 1980 Westinghouse Fuel Assembly Thimble TubeX X

.X Surveillance Program OS Ltr 12-29-80 1931 Westinghouse Owner's Group Expenditures X

X 1S Ltr 3-2-81 Westinghouse Operator Certification X

X Training Program IS Ltr 3-8-81 Stone & Webster Emergency Preparedness X

X Assistance PRELIMINARY.

December 5, 1981 SERVICE RELATED CONTRACTS CONTRACT NO."-

OPEN/ CLOSED

"~

REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION YES_t@

RELATED RELATED YES NO

_Y_ES NO 5-1-81 National Safety SLO Medical Emergency X

X Consultants Training 5-3-81 1981 Tera Technology, Supplemental Seismic X

X Inc.

Recording System Cali-bration & Records Processing 5-6-81 1981 EDS Nuclear, Inc.

Control Room HVAC Design X

X Review 5-7-81 1981 Science Appli-Calibrate Liquid Radiation ~

X X

cations, Inc.

Monitors 5-8-81 1981 Steven E. Traisman Fire Protection Program X

X Licensing Stapport 5-9-81 1981 Nuclear Date, Inc.

Perform maintenance on X

X nuclear instrumentation at various PGandE locations 5-12-81 1981 EDS Nuclear, Inc.

Systems Interaction Program X

X Assistance 5-13-81 1981 Omar J. Lillevang West Breakwater Camage X

X Studies 5-14-81 1981 EDS Nuclear, Inc.

Corporate Emergency X

X Planning Assistance 5-15-81 1981 EDS Nuclear, Inc.

Radiation Shelding Review X

X 5-16-81 1981 Tera Tech.

Analyze the Oct. 15, 1979 X

X El Centro Earthquake PRELIMINARY

~

December 5, 1981-SERVfCE RELRTED CONTRACTS CONTRACT N0.

DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC OPEN/ CLOSED _

~

~~~~~~

YES NO RELMEp_

RELATED_

_YES NO YES NO 5-20-81 1981 EDS Nuclear, Inc.

HVAC System Interaction X

X Assistance 5-22-81 1981 Wyle Laboratories Seismic Qualification X

X Testing of Post Accident Monitoring Panel 5-23 1981 Terra Technology Maintain Seismic Recording X

X Equipment 5-27-81 1981 EDS Nuclear, Inc.

Radiation Shielding Design X

X Review 5-31-81 1981 Bio Systems Rare Plant Survey X

X Analysis 5-35-81 1981 Giuli Micropro-Non-destructive Examination

.X X

processing,.Inc.

Engineering Services &

Materials 5-40-81 1981 Nuclear Consulting Laboratory Testing of X

X Services, Inc.

Absorber Media 5-41-81 1981 Chemrad Corp.

Radioanalytical Services X

X 5-42 -81 1981 Forecasting Development of Off-Site X

X System, Inc.

Forecasting Models 5-44 -81 1981 Helgeson Nuclear Emergency Medical Consul-X X

Services, Inc.

tation Training & Exercise 5-52 -81 1981 Associated Tec h-Operator Training Assistance X

X nical Training Services PREUMINARY December 5, 1981 SERblCE RELATED CONTRACTS

)NTRACT NO.~ ~ ~

OPEN/ CLOSED

~ ~~

~~

REPORT SAFETY SEISMIC DATE CONTRACTOR BRIEF DESCRIPTION YES rid RELATED RELATED YES NO YES NO 81 1981 Dr. Robert Wiegel Breakwater Engineering X

X Services 81 1981 NUS Security Guard Training X

X Certification

)S Ltr 6-2-81 Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactor X

X Info. (Pwr) Course

)S Ltr 6-2-81 Westinghouse

'ix-Day Integrated Reactor X

X (Pwr) Info. Operation (IPP0) Training Program 2-162-81 Westinghouse Instrumentation & Controls X

X (I&C) Training

)S 8.tr 3-19-81 Westinghouse Mitigating Core Damage Course X

X DS Oral F.uth Torrey Pines Enviror. mental Qualifications X

X 3-20 -81 Technology File Audit 2-38-81 Hewlett Packard Radiation Monitoring Equipment X

X 2-85-81 1981 Hewlett Packard Radiation Monitoring Equipment X

X l

2-102-81 1981 Hewlett Packard Mobile Lab Time & Material X

X Maintenance 2-104-81 1981 Energy Consultants, Shift Technical Advisor X

X Inc.

Training Program 2-223-81 1981 Dr. Ruth Yaffee Radiation protection training X

X Course PRELIMINARY !

l

a File No.

ERROR AND OPEN ITEM REPORT 1.

Classification

[] Error

[) Class (A,B,C, or D)

[30 pen Item 2.

Description a

l i

I i

3.

Significance 4.

Recommendation 5.

Reported PGandE Ref. & Date

[] NRC Ref. & Date 6.

Final Resolution Signed /date Checked /Date

APPENDIX B ERROR AND OPEN ITEM CLASSIFICATION AND ERROR AND OPEN ITEM REPORT FORM

-j

APPENDIX B

,o e.-

ERROR AND OPEN ITEM CLASSIFICATION 1.0 Definitions 1.1 An error is an incorrect result that has been verified.

as such.

It may be due to any of several reasons:

.' mathematical mistake use of wrong analytical method omission of data use of inapplicable data

- 1. 2 An Open Item is an apparent error or inconsistency that has not been verified, fully understood and its significance assessed.

1.3 Class A An error or Open Item is considered Class A if de-sign criteria or operating limits of safety related equipment are exceeded as a result, and changes in operating procedures are required.

1.4 Class B An error or Open Item is considered Class B-if design criteria or operating limits of safety related equip-ment are exceeded, but are resolvable by means of more realistic calculations.

1.5 Class C An error or Open Item is considered Class C if incorrect engineering or installation of safety related equipment is found, but no design criteria or operating limits are exceeded.

1.6 Class D An error _cn: Open Item is considered Class D if safety i-related equipment is not affected.

i

(.

B-1 1..

.o rf File No.

ERROR AND OPEN ITEM REPORT l

l 1.

Classification

[] Error.

Class (A,B,C, or D) 2.

Description

\\

3.

Significance 4.

Recommendation 5.

Reported

[] PGandE Ref. & Date NRC Ref. & Date 6.

Final Resolution Checked /Date Signed /date.

ENCLOSURE 2

" Qualification Document Design Verification Program For Power Ascension Diablo Canyon Power Plant Unit 1 Pacific Gas and Electric Company" Volumes 1, 2, and 3 Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation

- _ _ _ -. - _ _