ML20072B203

Engineering Program Plan,Project Instruction PI-3201-009, Midland Independent Design & Const Verification Program, Project 3201. Corrected Pages Encl

ML20072B203
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	02/09/1983
From:	TERA CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML20072B187	List: ML20072B196 ML20072B203 ML20072B212
References
PROC-830209, NUDOCS 8303040032
Download: ML20072B203 (80)

Text

_________ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

O ENGINEERING PROGRAM PLAN PROECT INSTRUCTION PI-3201-009 MIDLAto INDEPEtOENT DESIGN Ato CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM PROECT 3201 O

FEBRUARY 9,1983 Ok_,,_ _

REVISION: I COPY NO.  ;

l O

8303040032 830222 PDR ADOCK 05000329 A PDR

TERA CORPORATION QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM g

'd 1 Midland Independent Design and Construction Verification Program Engineering Program Plan 3201-009 DOCUMENT REVISION RECORD REV DATE DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES Pg.1 - Update status of NRC approval of TERA Corporation:

1 2/9/83 deleted "and approved by the NRC",

replaced with, " subject to NRC approval" Pg. 24- Update reference to P&ID M439:

added, " revision 9" after 3A and changed rev. 9 to rev. 10 after 3B Pg. 25- Add System Selection Boundary for HVAC:

add, "AFW pump room fan coolers and associated O auct ork e#8 s#PPorts" O

TERACORPORATION

~

TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE I.0 GENERAL i

1.1 BACKGROUND

AND PURPOSE I l.2 OVERVIEW OF IDCV SCOPE 2 1.3 SYSTEMS SELECTION CRITERIA 7 1.4 INDEPENDENCE REQUIREMENTS 8 2.0 ORGANIZATION AIO CONTROL 10 2.1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION 10 2.2 AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITY l2 2.3 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL 13 3.0 ENGINEERING PROGRAM PLAN METHODOLOGY I4 3.1 INDEPENDENT DESIGN VERIFICATION IS METHODOLOGY 3.1.1 CATEGORIES OF REVIEW: THE DESIGN 16 CHAIN 3.1.1.1 Review of Design Criteria and 17 Commitments 3.1.1.2 Review of implementing 17 Documents 3.1.l.3 Check of Calculations and 18 Evoluotions 3.l.l.4 Confirmatory Calculations or 19 Evoluotions 3.l.l.S Check of Drawings and 20 Specifications 3.1.2 BASES FOR SAMPLE SELECTION 20 3.l.3 DEFINITION OF REVIEW SCOPE FOR THE 21 AFW SYSTEM 3.l.3.1 AFW System Performance Criteria 27 3.l.3.1.1 System Operating 27 Limits - Topic 1.1-1 3.l.3.1.2 Accident Analysis 27 Considerations -

Topic 1.2-1 0 3i3i3 si"9'e reii"re -

Topic 1.3-1 28 3.1.3.1.4 Technical Specifico- 28 tions - Topic 1.4-1 DC-82-13 i

1 l

1 I

n

-V TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

I PAGE SECTION 3.1.3.I.S System Alignment / 28 Switchover - Topic I.S-1 3.1.3.1.6 Remote Operation and 29 Shutdown - Topic 1.6-1 3.l.3.1.7 System isolation / 29 Interlocks - Topic 1.7-1 4 3.I.3.1.8 Overpressure Protec- 29 tion -Topic l.B-1 3.1.3.1.9 Component Functional 29 Requirements -

Topic l.9-1 3.l.3.1.10 System Hydraulic . 30 Design -Topic I.10-1 3.1.3.1.1 i System Heat Removal 30 Capability - Topic 1.11-1

.'O 3.l.3.i.12 Cooling Requirements -

Topic 1.12-1 31 3.1.3.1.13 Water Supplies - 31 Topic 1.13-1 3.l.3.1.14 Preservice Testing 31 and Capability for Operational Testing -

Topic 1.14-1 3.1.3.1.15 Power Supplies - 31 Topic 1.1S-1 3.1.3.1.16 Electrical Chorocter- 32 istics - Topic 1.16-1 3.1.3.1.I7 Protective Devices / 32 ,

Settings - Topic 1.17-l 3.l.3.1.18 Instrumentation - 32 Topic l.18-1 3.1.3.1.19 Control Systems - 33 Topic l.19-1 3.1.3.1.20 Actuation Systems - 34 Topic I.20-1 3.l.3.I.21 Nondestructive Exam- 34 inotion Commitments -

Topic l.21-1 O 3.i.3.i.22 Materials Selection -

Topic 1.22-I 34 DC-82-13 il

. (} ' TABLE OF CONTENTS 1

l (continued) 1 l

PAGE SECTION 3.I.3.2 AFW System Protection Features 35 l

Seirmic Design - 35 3.1.3.2.1 Topic 11.1-1 Seismic Design / Pressure 35 3.1.3.2.2 Boundary Integrity -

Topic II.2-1 Seismic Design / Pipe and 36 3.l.3.2.3 Equipment Support -

Topic 11.3-I 3.1.3.2.4 Seismic Design / Equip- 36 ment Qualification -

' Topic 11.4-1 3.I.3.2.S High Energy Line Break 37 Accidents -Topic II.5-1 3.l.3.2.6 HELBA/ Pipe Whip - 37 A Topic 11.6-1

. U 38 3.l.3.2.7 HELBA/ Jet Impingement -

^j Topic II.7-1 38 3.1.3.2.8 Environmental Protec-tion - Topic 11.8-1

~

3.1.3.2.9 Environmental Enve- 38 lopes - Topic l1.9-1 3.l.3.2.10 Environmental / Equip- 39 1

ment Qualification -

Topic 11.10-1 3.1.3.2.1 i HVAC Design - 39 Topic 11.11-1 3.1.3.2.12 Fire Protection - 39 Topic 11.12-1 3.l.3.2.13 Missile Protection - 40 Topic 11.13-1 3.l.3.2.14 Systems Interaction - 40 Topic II.14-1 Structures that House the AFW 40 l 3.1.3.3 System i

3.l.3.3.1 Seismic Design / Input to 41 Equipment - Topic 111.1-1 Wind and Tornado 41

, O

' 3.l.3.3.2

V Design / Missile Protection - Topic lll.2- 1 DC-82-13 iii

O TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

SECTION PAGE 3.1.3.3.3 Flood Protection - 42 Topic 111.3-1 3.1.3.3.4 HELBA Loads - 42 Topic 111.4-1 3.1.3.3.5 Civil / Structural Design 43 Considerations -

Topic 111.5-l 3.1.3.3.6 Foundations - 43 Topic 111.6-1 3.l.3.3.7 Concrete / Steel Design - 43 Topic 111.7-1 3.l.3.3.8 Tanks - Topic ll1.8-l 44 3.l.4 DEFINITION OF REVIEW SCOPE FOR 44 (Second System - to be supplied) 3.1.5 DEVELOPMENT OF IDV PROGRAM 44 CHECKLISTS O 3.i .5.i Deveiegment of Checkiists for Review of Design Criteria and Commitments 45 3.1.5.2 Development of Checklists for Reviews 46 of implementing Documents 3.1.5.3 Development of Checklists for Checks 47 of Calculations and Evaluations 3.1.5.4 Development of Checklists for Checks 48 of Drawings and Specifications 3.1.6 PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL SAMPLING AND 49 VERIFICATION 3.2 INDEPENDENT CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION 49 METHDOLOGY 3.2.1 CATEGORIES OF REVIEW: THE CON- 50 STRUCTION CHAIN 3.2.1.1 Review of Fabrication Documenta- 51 tion 3.2.1.2 Review of Storage and Maintenance 51 Documentation 3.2.1.3 Review of Construction / 52 Installation Documentation 3.2.1.4 Review of Selected Verification 52 Activities 3.2.1.5 Verification of Physical 53 Configuration DC-82-13 IV

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(~'

d (continued)

PAGE SECTION

. 53 3.2.2 BASES FOR SAMPLE SELECTION 54 3.2.3 DEFINITION OF REVIEW SCOPE FOR THE AFW SYSTEM 54 3.2.3.1 Mechanical Systems and Components Mechanical Equipment - 54 3.2.3.1.1 Topic 1.1-Ic ,

o 56 3.2.3.1.2 Piping -

Topic 1.2-Ic 57 3.2.3.1.3 Pipe Supports -

Topic l.3-Ic 57 3.2.3.2 Electrical Systems and Components Electrical Equipment - 57 3.2.3.2.1 Topic II.1-Ic Cable Troys and Supports - 58 3.2.3.2.2 l

Topic II.2-Ic 59 O 3.2.3.2.3 Conduits and Supporis -

Topic II.3-Ic 59 3.2.3.2.4 Cable -

Topic II.4-Ic 3.2.3.3 Instrumentation and Control Systems 59 and Components 60 3.2.3.3.1 Instruments -

Topic ill.1-Ic Piping / Tubing - 60 ,

3.2.3.3.2 Topic ill.2-Ic 60 ,

3.2.3.3.3 Cobie -

Topic lil.3-Ic 61 l 3.2.3.4 HVAC Systems and Components 61  !

3.2.3.4.1 HVAC Equipment -

' Topic IV.1-Ic HVAC Ducts and Supports - 62 l 3.2.3.4.2 '

Topic IV.2-Ic e 62 3.2.3.5 Structural Components  :

62 3.2.3.5.1 Foundations -

Topic V.1-Ic Concrete Components 63 l 3.2.3.5.2 l

Topic V.2-Ic 63 3.2.3.5.3 Structural Steel Components -

Topic V.3-Ic V

DG 82-13

v' TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) l SECTION PAGE 3.2.4 DEFINITION OF REVIEW SCOPE FOR THE 64 (Second System - to be supplied) 3.2.5 DEVELOPMENT OF ICV PROGRAM 64 CHECKLISTS 3.2.5.1 Development of Checklists for Review 65 of Supplier Documentation 3.2.5.2 Development of Checklists for Review 66 of Storage and Mainteno,'ce Documen-totion 3.2.5.3 Development of Checklists for Review 67 of Construction and Installation Documentation 3.2.5.4 Development of Checklists for Review 68 of Selected Verification Activities 3.2.5.5 Development of Checklists for Review 69 J of Verification of Physical Configuration PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL SAMPLING, 70 3.2.5 VERIFICATION, AND TESTING 4.0 DOCUMENTATION 71 4.1 DOCUMENTATION OF ENGINEERING EVALUA- 71 TIONS, CALCULATIONS, AND FIELD VERIFICA-TION RESULTS 4.2 DOCUMENTATION OF EXTERNAL COMMUNICA- 72 TIONS 5.0 PROGRAM REPORTING 73 5.1 TYPES OF REPORTS 73 5.2 REPORTING PROCESS 75 5.2.1 REPORTING SYSTEM 75 5.2.2 REPORT PREPARATION AND DISTRIBUTION 78 5.2.3 INTERCHANGE OF INFORMATION 79 5.3 IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF DESIGN 79 OR CONSTRUCTION DEFICIENCIES DC-82-13 vi

" O~ TABLE OF CONTENTS d

(continued) 1 -

4 SECTION PA&

6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE 80

{

i '6.1 APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS 80 6.2 VERIFICATION OF COMPUTER CODES 80 4

i a

a 1

t i~

IO j

4 4 ,

.I l

i i

I i

i i

i i l i

1 1

f iO I

DC-82-13 vii

___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .. _ _ . . . . _ _ - . . _ _ _ _ _ _ , . . _ _ . - ~ . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . . . , _ . , , _ . . _ -

g PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Program Plan PI 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

M*dland independent Design and REV.: 1 DATE: 2/9/83 C,on truc) tion Verification Progr,om

- 1 PREPARED BY: ' I/

-ygg APPROVED BY@

[

l PAGE 1 of 80 _

W l.0 GENERAL

1.1 BACKGROUND

AND PURPOSE The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued a letter on July 9,1982 which requested that Consumers Power Company (CPC) provide for on independent assessment of the design adequacy of the Midland plant. CPC responded to this request on October 5,1982 by submitting on outline of the scope of a proposed independent review program. A public meeting was held on October 25,1982 at the NRC's Bethesdo, Maryland offices to discuss details of the proposed program.

d,o During this meeting, the NRC requested that the scope of the independent design assessment program be expanded, including on assessment of the quality of construction.

TERA Corporation has been selected by CPC, subject to NRC approval, to scope, manage, and implement the Midland independent Design and Construction Verification (IDCV) Program. The selection of TERA is based upon the firm's 1 technical qualifications, experience, and independence from the Midland project including all individuals who may contribute to the IDCV Program.

This project instruction, or Engineering Program Plan (the Plon), has been established to outline the scope, philosophy of review, methodology, inder ndence requirements, organization, control, documentation, repciling, and quality assurance requirements for the Midland IDCV Program.

The IDCV approach selected is a review and evoluotion of a detailed " vertical l

slice" of the Midland project with a focus on providing on overall assessment of l p i d the quality of the design and the constructed plant. Therefore, the primary emphasis of the IDCV evoluotion is on the end results of the design and DC-82-13

j PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Program Plan

SUBJECT:

q Pl 3201_. 009 - Midland Independent Design and DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program 0 r I REV.: APPROgYg 2

PREPARED BYg or 80 __

y lPAGE ,

s construction process and not on on evoluotion of the process itself which is typical of the more common quality assurance audit. The " vertical slice" constitutes a carefully selected sample of two safety systems from which the results of the IDCV may be extrapolated to other similarly designed and constructed systems. Thus, the IDCV is intended to provide the necessary assurance to CPC, NRC, and the public that the Midland Plant is designed and constructed such that it is capable to function in accordance with its safety design bases and that applicable licensing commitments have been properly implemented.

l.2 OVERVIEW OF IDCV SCOPE

(]

w The Midland IDCV consists of two major components: the Independent Design Verification (IDV) Program and the Independent Construction Verification (ICV)

Program. The Unit 2 auxiliary feedwater (AFW) system and the (second system -

to be supplied) have been selected as applicable samples of the design engineering and construction efforts at the Midland plant. These systems were selected based upon the system selection criterio discussed in Section I.3 of this Plan.

The scope of review corresponds directly to the design and construction chains, addressing major activities and outputs of the various contributing engineering and construction disciplines. Accordingly, the design pnd construction process, from concept to installation, hydros, functional and preoperational testing will be evaluated. Interfaces between CPC, Babcock and Wilcox (B&W), the nuclear steam system supplier (NSSS) vendor, Bechtel, the orchitect-engineer (A-E), and other contractors will be identified and evoluoted relative to such items as the proper transfer and interpretation of design or construction information.

{')

DC-82-13

g l O INTER-RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE MIDLAto DESIGN AlO CONSTRUCTION PROCESS AlO THE MIDLAFO IDCV PROGRAM ii l 50 CFR 50. APPEtO!X A l 4 .

.n r$AR APO OTER REVIEW OF DE51CN e Reg Guides CRITERIA APO e Inemtry UTILITY COMMITMENTS COMMITMENTS Stasards e N555Criterte o

1 DESIGN NPUTS l f

REVIEW OF IMPLEMENTING A.E.N555 VEtOOR DOCUMENTS ENGNEERING - IMPLEMENTNG 'l STAtOARDS, DOCUMENTS < ,

4>

PROCEDURES DESIGN PROCESS e Desi Control - e Engineering Evolustions CECK OF COPEIRMATORY e QAf CALCULATIONS APO C ALCULATIONS OR e Coteviations EVALUATIONS EVALUATIONS l DESIGNCHANGES l i

0 IDV "

d' CHECK OF DE51CN OUTPUTS '

e Drowings DRAWNCS APO

, SPECIFICATIONS e Specifications i lO If If ICV CHECK OF SUPPLIER FABRICATION A I E5 DOCUMENTATION I I if 1, SITE CONSTRUCTON ACTIVITIES C t 3 & REVIEW OF STORACE i C T ON/

o OA/X e Erection.lrutel. AND MANTENANCE INSTALLATION lation. etc. DOCUMENTATON DOCUMENTATION e POE 1f I rlELD CHANGES _ j s

1 INSTALLED STRUCTURES, VERIFICATION / VERIFICATON OF OVER.NSPECTION  ? SYSTEMS AFO PHYSICAL ACTIVITIES COMPONENTS COPEICURATION k VERIFICATION ACTivlTIES 4 TURNOVER FOR O- FurCTONAL TESTNG

'r If

>! OPERATIONS l MIDLAND IDCV PROGRAM

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PROCESS O

FIGURE I.2-1 J

4

G(h INITIAL SAMPLE REVIEW MATRIX FOR THE AUXILIARY FEEDl I

MIDLAND INDEPEbOENT DESIGN VERIFICATION PROGRAM f SCOPE OF REVIEW l1L  !!

e ,e es Eh A U or DESIGN AREA '

s g! >[! i s of 85 E! 8

.* 4 82 8 8 8

5'2 e l'

1. AFW SYSTEM PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS X X X SYSTEM OPERATING LIMITS X

ACCIDENT ANALYSIS CONSIDERATIONS X X X

SINGLE FAILURE X X

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS X X SYSTEM ALIGNMENT /SWITCHOVER X

REMOTE OPERATION AND SHUTDOWN X X SYSTEM ISOLATION / INTERLOCKS X

OVERPRESSURE PROTECTION X X X X

COMPONENT FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS X X X SYSTEM HYDRAULIC DESIGN X X X SYSTEM HEAT REMOVAL CAPABILITY X

COOLING REQUIREMENTS X X WATER SUPPLIES PRESERVICE TESTING / CAPABILITY FOR X OPERATIONAL TESTING X X POWER SUPPLIES X

ELECTRICAL CHARACTERISTICS X X X PROTECTlVE DEVICES / SETTINGS X X X X

INSTRUMENTATION X X X CONTROL SYSTEMS X

ACTUATION SYSTEMS X

NDE COMMITMENTS X X MATERIALS SELECTION O

! FIGURE I.2-2a l

l

INITIAL SAMPLE REVIEW MATRIX FOR TFE AUXILIARY FEEDWA MIDLAFO INDEPENDENT DESIGN VERIFICATION PROGRAM (

SCOPE OF RENEW i

i E1 e DESIGN AREA ME b gal gb k &c N

78 d4

• b b? $8 &

N98 2 s yv T e'

E O

II. AFW SYSTEM PROTECTION FEATURES X

SEISMIC DESIGN X X X X X

e PRESSURE BOUNDARY X X X X X

e PIPE / EQUIPMENT SUPPORT X X X X

e EOU1PMENT GUALIFICATION X

HIGH ENERGY LINE BREAK ACCIDENTS X X X X

e PIPE WHIP X

e JET iMPlNGEMENT X

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION X X X X X e ENVIRONMENTAL ENVELOPES X X X X e EQUIPMENT GUALIFICATION X

e HVAC DESIGN X X X FIRE PROTECTION X

MISSILE PROTECTION X X X SYSTEMS INTERACTION 111. STRUCTURES THAT HOUSE THE AFW SYSTEM X X X X

SEISMIC DESIGN /1NPUT TO EQUIPMENT X

WIND & TORNADO DESIGN / MISSILE PROTECTION X

FLOOD PROTECTION X

HELBA LOADS X

CIVIL / STRUCTURAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS X X X

e FOUNDATIONS X X X X e CONCRETE / STEEL DESIGN X X X e TAtKS O

i FIGURE I.2-2b I

INITIAL SAMPLE REVIEW MATRIX FOR THE AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM 4

MIDLAbD INDEPENDENT DESIGN VERIFICATION PROGRAM SCOPE OF REVIEW d dd a s e

SYSTEM /COMPOtENT 9s a b<

5

$ og

~

+5 b$ $ g e "I h e 1

%n i 2 r

, I. MECHANICAL X X X X X e EQUIPMENT X X X X e PIPING l( e PIPE SUPPORTS X X X X II. ELECTRICAL X X X X X i e EQUIPMENT X X I e TRAYS AND SUPPORTS X X e CONDUlT AND SUPPORTS

X X e CABLE X X X l

lli. INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL X X X X X e INSTRUMENTS X X e PIPING / TUBING X X o CABLE j

IV. HVAC X X X X X e EQUIPMENT X X e DUCTS AND SUPPORTS l

1 V. STRUCTURAL j

e FOUNDATIONS X X X X X e CONCRETE X X X

' e STRUCTURAL STEEL 4

• FIGURE I.2-3

PROJECT INSTRUCTION l Engineering Program Plan pl 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midland independent Design and DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program l REV.: o of 80 PREPARED BY: {jj 'ps APPROVED BY:yQ IPAGE 7 j the Midland design and Figure 1.2-1 shows the inter-relationship between construction process and the Midland IDCV program. Figures 1.2-20,1.2-2b and 1.2-3 present the IDCV scope in the form of matrices which identify the initial level of review and evoluotion in each design or construction area respectively.

It should be noted that the scope of review is dynamic and subject to change os more emphasis will be given to any items which are suspect to the review team or to identify the extent and root cause of identified findings. Accordingly, these matrices represent the initial IDCV "somple".

l.3 SYSTEMS SELECTION CRITERIA O

" The selection of the auxiliary feedwater system and the (second system - to be supplied) was based upon the following six criterio:

e importance to Safety - The system should have a relo-tively high level of importance to the overall safety of the Midland Plant.

e inclusion of Design and Construction Interfaces - The system should be one which involves multiple interfaces among engineering and construction disciplines os well as design and construction organizations, such as the NSSS vendor, architect engineer, constructor, and subtier con-tractors. The system should also be one where design or construction changes have occurred and thus provide the ability to test the effectiveness of the des,ign and con-struction process exercised by principal internal and external organizations or disciplines in areas of design or construction change.

e Mility to Extrapolate Results - The system should be sufficiently representative of other safety systems such that the design criteria, design and construction control and change processes are similar so that extrapolation of findings to other systems con be undertaken with confi-Q,, dence.

DC-82-13

l l

PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Program Plan h pg_ 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midland independent Design and 4

I DATE: 11/29/82 Consf ruction Verification Program REV.: 0 PAGE 8 of 80 PREPARED BY:

/

j y- APPROVFD BY:

6, /14 l ,

e Diverse in Content - The major engineering and con-struction disciplines should all have input to the design of the system.

e Sensitive to Previous Experience - The system should be one which includes design or construction disciplines or interfaces which have previously exhibited problems and thus a test of the system should be indicative of any generic condition.

e Ability to Test As-Built Installation - The system con-figuration should be sufficiently completed that the as-built configuration con be verified ogo*nst design.

Each system was selected offer consideration of a number of other condidate systems. The Midland Plant probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) was utilized as a

{;

tool to assess the importance to safety on the basis of the contribution to overall plant risk. The profile for this criterion as well as each of the other five criteria was sufficiently high for the auxiliary feedwater system and the (second system -

to be supplied) to justify their selection.

l.4 INDEPENDENCE REQUIREMENTS The Midland IDCV program will be conducted in accordance with the

" independence" criterio documented in a letter from Nunzio J. Pollodino, Chairman, NRC, to the Honorable John D. Dingell, Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, United States House of Representatives, dated February 1,1982. The following criteria are excerpted "from Enclosure 3 of this letter:

n s'

DC 02-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION o

v

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan PI 3201. 009 - Midland independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program PREPARED BY: APPROVE 9 of 80 PAGE e

i "The competence of the individuals or companies is the most important factor in the selection of an oudhor. Also, the companies or individuals may not have had any direct previous involvement with the activities at Diablo Canyon (Midland) that they will be reviewing.

In addition, the fo!!owing factors will be considered in evoluoting the question of independence:

1) Whether the individuals or companies involved had been previously hired by PG&E (CPC) to do similar seismic (delete seismic) design work.

2) Whether any individual involved had been previously employed by PG&E (CPC) (and the nature of the employment).

3) Whether the individual owns or controls significant amounts of PG&E (CPC) stock.

4) Whether members of the present household of individuals involved are employed by PG&E (CPC).

5) Whether any relatives are employed by PG&E (CPC) in a management capacity.

in addition to the above considerations, the following procedural guidelines will be used t > ossure independence:

l

1) An auditable record will be provided of all comments on draft or final reports, any changes made os a result of such comments, and the reasons for such changes; or the consultant will issue only a final report (without prior licensee comment).

2) NRC will assume and exercise the respo sibility for 1 serving the report on all parties." l l

The individuals taking port in the Midland IDCV program meet the preceeding criterio and have signed a statement of testing to this fact.

I DC-82-13 1

j PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Program Plan

SUBJECT:

PI 3201_. 009 - Midland Independent Design and Const'fuctlon Verification Program

}I REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 PREPARED BY:

i

} APPROVEg in of 80 _ v lPAGE u

TERA Corporation is under contract to CPC to provide the engineering services necessary to complete the Midland IDCV program. Prior to this contract, TERA .

has never been under contract to CPC.

The contract requires TERA to maintain on auditable record to document the process leading to findings os well as meetings to discuss findings. Section 4.0 of this Plan oddresses documentation requirements which have been developed to meet obligations of the contract.

Section S.0 of this Plan oddresses the report generation process, during the IDCV program to report findings and at its conclusion as a final report. TERA will g

kJ maintain on auditable record of all comments on the draft final report.

2.0 ORGANIZATION AND CONTROL 2.1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION The project organization is addressed in Section 2.I of the Project Quality Assurance Plan (PQAP), Midland independent Design and Construction Verifico-tion Program, Project 3201. Figure 2.1-1 provides the project organization chart.

Technical and administrative personnel (not shown) receive assignments directly from the Project Msnoger (PM). The PM serves os the point of contact with CPC. The Project Quality Assurance Engineers report, to the Executive Vice 1 President, TERA, but will work with the PM in resolving deficiencies or making recommendations.

DC-82-13 1

PROJECT ORGANIZATION MIDLAtO INDEPENDENT DESIGN Ato CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROG NUCLEAR REGULATORY CONSUMERS POWER COMMISSION COMPANY I I I I 1

I a _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .J l

I

' ' *

• SENIOR REVIEW TEAM

~ ~ ~ 'g g f fgfl$ $ 7 PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE -. Donald Davis John Beck William Hall

""" g/ggfgE( NT Robert Wilson or moxcn O PROJECT QA ,,,,,

PROJECT MANAGER Chuck Lemon Howard Levin SYSTEMS REVIEW ELECTRICAL REVIEW STRUCTURAL REVIEW Richard Snaider Lionel Bates Curt Staley O " MECHANICAL REVIEW yER CAT N Fr nk Dougherty Curt Staley i

O FIGURE 2.1-1

$ PROJECT INSTRUCTION pj. 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland Independent Design ond REW 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Const'uction Verification Program I

PREPARED BY: APPROV PAGE 12 of 80 Mi &

2.2 AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITY The project authority and responsibility is addressed in Section 2.2 of the PGAP, Project 3201, as augmented by various projcet instructions and engineering control procedures which are referenced in the PGAP.

The Principal-in-Charge (PIC) is responsible for helping establish the general philosophy of review, setting forth guidance to the Project Manager and the Lead Technical Reviewers (LTR), assisting as on interface with the Senior Review Team (SRT), NRC and Consumers Power Company and reviewing / concurring in

,A)

L all final reports.

The Project Manager is responsible for planning and direct supervision of all in-house activities undertaken as required to fulfill the contract requirements. All documentation, correspondence, reports, calculations, etc., issued to Consumers Power Company are to be issued under his signature or otherwise receive his approval as required by the applicable Engineering Control Procedure or Project Instruction.

The Project Manager is responsible for planning and overall management of all outside activities performed by subcontractors or Associates, but may delegate responsibility for supervision to other individuals within the project. This delegation of authority and responsibility is documented /by issuance of a Project Instruction. Documentation may be issued to the subcontractor or Associate under the signature of the designated individual, but shall receive prior approval of the Project Manager.

(M As requested by the PIC, the Senior Review Team (SRT) is responsible for the review of Open, Confirmed or Resolved (OCR) Item Reports, Finding Reports, Finding Resolution Reports and Final Reports to assess the technical validity and DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Program Plan h pg_ 3201. 009 -

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and DATE: 11/29/82 Construct'on Verification Program REV.: 0 PREPARED BY: / y APPROVE @D BYr ah_

PAGE 13 of 80 ,

~ >

significance of project team conclusions and the proper classification of OCRs and Findings. (These reports are defined in Section 5.0 of this Plan). The SRT may at any time recommend to the Principol-in-Charge that the Project Manager expand the scope of review, provide clarification or reassess elements of the review.

The Lead Technical Reviewers (LTR) are responsible for management and implementation of all review octivities within their discipline of review, including supervision of individuals on the project and outside activities performed by Associates. The LTRs report to the Project Manager. The LTRs g are responsible for the classification of OCRs and Findings, the preparation of V Finding Reports and Finding Resolution Reports.

The Project Quality Assurance Engineer is responsible for verification of the implementation of the PGAP and will perform audits of applicable procedures and instructions implementation in accordance with Section 6.3 and ECP-5.6.

2.3 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL The pr'oject administrative control is addressed in Section 4.0 of the POAP, Project 3201, as augmented by various project instructions and engineering control procedures which are referenced in the POAP.

Procedures and instructions are addressed which will be implemented to control documentation generated on the Midland IDCV project which is subject to quality assurance and control measures or is required to provide on auditable record of the IDCV review process leading to Findings. The following documents are

/7 controlled; engineering r voluotions, documents and reports, calculations,

'O onalyses, computer analyses, PQAP, quality assurance documents, personnel DC-82-13

j PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Program Plan

SUBJECT:

q Pl._3201_. 009 Midland independent Design and 0 DATE: 11/29/82 C9nst(uc} ion Verification Program lREV.: PREPARED BY:

I APPROV 14 of 80 -

lPAGE i->

qualifications, correspondence, Open, Confirmed and Resolved item Reports, Finding Reports, Finding Resolution Reports, Engineering Program Plan and external communications. l 3.0 ENGINEERING PROGRAM PLAN METHODOLOGY This section provides the overall method of opproach for the IDV and ICV portions of the IDCV with porticular emphasis on those features of the methodology which are common to both. Specific details of the methodology for the IDV and ICV cre addressed below in Sections 3.1 and 3.2, respectively.

The initial review step includes the identification and review of pertinent documents to permit on understanding of the design and construction chains including the interrelationships between the organizations and suborganizations porticipating in the Midland project. Next, the design bases in the form of regulatory requirements and design criteria are identified and reviewed in parallel with a review of project design and construction related experience.

The design bases review will provide on overall understanding of the plant and system design. The project design and construction experience review will be conducted to ensure that the IDCV program encompasses previously identified problem creas to verify that these have been adequately addressed and that they do not exist elsewhere in the some or similar form.

For the systems, components, and structures identified in Sections 3.l.3 and 3.2.3, detailed information which documents the implementation of the design and construction commitments will be identified, reviewed, and evoluoted. The IDCV review and evoluotion process will be documented in accordance with the procedures addressed in Section 4.0 of this Plan. The reporting of findings DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Program Plan  !

PI 320L._ 009 --

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and l REW 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Con struction Verification Program  ;

PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY PAGE 15 or 80_ -

yv Including the disposition of items potentially leading to findings will be reported in accordance with the procedures addressed in Section 5.0 of this Plan. The IDCV will be conducted in occordance with applicable provisions of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, which are addressed in Section 6.0 of this Plon.

3.1 INDEPENDENT DESIGN VERIFICATION METHODOLOGY ANSI N45.2.ll defires design verification as the " process of reviewing, conform-ing, or substantiating the design by one or more methods to provide assurance that the design meets specified inputs." Design inputs include design bases or O criterre, reseietorx reavirements, codes end steederds, eed other desion commit-ments. The IDV includes a determination of the design inputs; on evoluotion of their occuracy, consistency, and adequacy; and on evoluotion of the implemento-tion of these commitments. The emphasis will be on making a determination of the overall quality of the design and on ossessment of its compliance with licensing commitments. The review approach has been designed to be introspective in making this overall quality assessment by integrating the many design inputs and licensing commitments. This integrated assessment will ensure that all parameters have been considered which are important for the system in meeting its functional requirements.

The IDV methodology will utilize the applicable guidelines of ANSI N45.2.ll.

The methodology will include diverse opproaches such as checking original calculations, conducting ulternative confirmatory calculations, or checking design ouputs including drawings or specifications. Where independent calculo-tions are utilized, the may incorporate methods which are either similar to or different from the original design. In certain instances these independent O ceiceietiens wiii he "hiind ia ihet ihe eristeei deston ceicerefrees wiii he 1

DC-82-13 l

PROJECT INSTRUCTION l Engineering Program Plan pl_ 3201_ .009

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and DATE: il/29/82 Construction Verification Program I

l REW 0 PREPARED BY , 3 APPROV g lPAGE 16 of_80 V

\V compared to the independent calculations upon their completion, without prior review by the IDV onalyst.

The categories to be reviewed for certain design creas include review of design criteria and commitments, review of implementing documents, checks of calcu-lotions and evaluations, confirmatory calculations or evaluations, and checks of drawings and specifications. These categories are defined in Section 3.l.l. As a rule, all design creas will not be reviewed in each of the preceding categories.

For example, a design crea for the AFW system is " heat removal capability."

This item would not typically have drawings and specifications associated with it as o direct output. In other instances, it may be the judgment of the review teom hesed egen experiencetheremahestsisnotaeededincerreia ceteseriesfor O each design area.

The bases for sample selection are presented in Section 3.l.2, and the definition of the scope of review is provided in Sections 3.1.3 and 3.1.4 for the AFW system and (second system - to be supplied), respecti.ely. The IDV will be conducted utilizing detailed checklists which are described in Section 3.1.S. Additional sampling and verification that may be conducted as a result of the IDV cre discussed in Section 3.1.6.

3.1.1 CATEGORIES OF REVIEW: THE DESIGN CHAIN The categories of review selected include the major design activities identified in the design chain. The IDV review categories included are:

e Review of design criteria and commitments

(

e Review of implementing documents n

b DC-82-13

o PROJECT INSTRUCTION v pl 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan

, Midland Independent Design and DATE: 11/29/82 Cons 1rucilen VerifJcot:en Program REV.: 0 PREPARED BY:' APPROVED BY:

PAGE 17 of 80 _

/,

e Os ay i

e Check of calculations and evoluollons e Confirmatory calculations or evoluotions e Check of drawings and specifications Each of these categories is described in detail in sections 3.l.l.1 through 3.l.l.5 l

respectively. Checklists have been prepared for each Sf these categories to aid lDCV reviewers in the implementation of their tr (?w. These checklists are discussed in section 3.1.5. -

3.1.1.1 Review of Design Criteria and Commitments An identification and review of the design criteria and commitments conceming each specific design crea will be~ perfcrmed. This review category pravides the assurance that all necessary design inputs are considered in the IDV. The asults of this review of design criteria and commitments are then used in subsequent stages where oppropriate. The review of design criteria and commitments begins with on identification of appropriate criteria for the system. Such criteria may be determined from sources such as the FSAR, the docket file, 10 CFR 50, Appendix A, criteria suppplied by the NSSS vendor, industry codes and standards, and other documents which provide criterio for system design.

3.1.1.2 Review of implementing Documents I implementing documents are those design documents which translate the design ,

inputs into working level documentation. Typically, implementing documents include design criteria documents, project procedures, standard design practices,

' b,)

v specific plant design basis documents, drawings, and calculations. Most fre-DC-82-13

t PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Program Plan pl_ 3201,.009 -

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and DATE: 11/29/82 Const.ruction Verification Program REV.: 0 PREPARED BY- .

APPR Bg , ,

PAGE 18 of 80 v o

quently, implementing documents are intermediate steps in the design process which are subsequently used to produce design outputs. It is important that design inputs are properly interpreted and documented in implementing docu-ments. Therefore, the objective of the review is to determine the existence and general reasonableness of the documentation and whether the documentation correctly reflects the design inputs.

Design outputs are defined as documents such as drawings, specifications, and similar materials defining technical requirements for the fabrication, installa-tion, or construction of the system. in some cases, the design process may reduce design outputs with intermediate documentation. In these cases, the p'

'- design output documents are reviewed for the opplication of the design criteria and commitments as part of the check of drawings and specifications.

3.l.l.3 Check of Calculations and Evoluotions When specified, a detailed check of calculations and evaluations is made (i.e.

inputs, assumptions, methodology, outputs, etc.). This activity follows the review of design criteria and commitments and the review of implementing documents. The check may take several forms, ranging from a number-by-number detailed mothematical check to a review and evolvation of outputs for reasonableness. The overall presentation of the sampled calcuic'ains and evaluations will also be reviewed to verify that all steps are c'early presented and consistent throughout. The IDV reviewer may, at his discretion, choose to conduct on alternative calculation as a means of confirming his judgment on the adequacy of the design calculation or evaluation. Where computer programs were used in the analysis, the reviewer will verify that oppropriate inputs have q been used in the calculation, and that the appropriate outputs have been

' identified. Additionally, it will be necessary to determine that the computer i

1 DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION  !

Engineering Program Plan

- pl 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design ond DATE: 11/29/82 Cpnstruction Verification Program REV.: 0 i

' ' j 19 of 80 PREPARED BY:

, g,ee o; Q APPROVED BY: .

PAGE u -

programs used have been verified in accordance with appropriate verification procedures.

3.1.1.4 Cor.firmatory Calculations or Evaluations For selected areas, confirmatory calculations or evoluotions will be performed.

Generally, these evoluotions will be made to confirm judgements relative to the review of creas which are suspect to the IDCV reviewer; however, " blind" confirmatory calculations will be undertaken in pre-selected creas to Such confirmatory independently verify the original design calculations.

evoluotions will be performed by obtaining the necessary input dato and

' independent specification of calculation or evaluation objective. The reviewer will select and apply the oppropriate techniques to ochieve the end results. Such calculation methods will be performed without benefit if first reviewing the existing design calculational method. In order to preserve the " blind" nature of this approach, it will be necessary that a person other than the reviewer of the implementing documents perform the confirmatory calculation or evaluation.

The confirmatory calculation or evoluotion will be performed under procedures oppropriate for the type of calculation or evoluotion being performed. To the extent, appropriate, the calculation or evaluation will be equivalent to that initially performed. Af ter completion of the confirmatory calculation or evaluation, a comparison between the original calculation and the confirmatory methods will be made to determine whether differenc.es exist. If differences occur, o determination will be made to assess whether 5hese differences are due to the inherent rature of the calculation methods chosen or due to errors.

For example, differences may result due to the selection by the originator of simplifying or conservative assumptions. In the event that the original calcula-O- tion is more conservative than the confirmatory calculation and meets lesign

! DC-82-13 l

l l

l PROJECT INSTRUCTION l

Engineering Program Plan PI 3201_ .009

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program REV.: 0

. APPROVE  :

80 PREPARED BY:

20 og PAGE '

Yw J basis acceptance criteria, no further action will be necessary. On the other hand, if the confirmatory calculation uses more conservative methods, o check of the original calculation will be made to determine whether the difference in degree of conservatism is appropriate.

3.l.l.S Check of Drawings and Specifications Where oppropriate, design outputs such as drawings and specifications will be reviewed and checked to assure that they occurately and consistently reflect that which has been colled for in design documents such calculations. Drawings and specifications will also be reviewed to determine whether design change p

d notices and field change notices have been incorporated. In cases where several related drawings exist, o cross-comparison among drawings will be made.

Additionally, o review will be made of correspondence with vendors to determine the existence of deviations from the specifications and the approval by the design organization of such changes.

3.1.2 BASES FOR SAMPLE SELECTION The crlteria which have been applied to the selection of the AFW system and (second system - to be supplied) also apply to the selection of specific structures or components to be reviewed within each design area of the IDV, including the depth of review in each design area. As a rule, the. selection is based upon engineering judgment, as statistical techniques are considered to be largely inappropriate for o design verification program. Senior members of the project team with requisite experience are responsible for selecting the sample and determining its size. This process provides greater assurance than a random sampling plan since the initial IDV sample is purposely biased towards typical b

d problem areas. Furthermore, the initial sompte is considered broad enough to DC-82-13 l

g PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Program Plan Pl 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midland independent Design and REW 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program PAGE 21 of 80 PREPARED BY: p APPRO Y

y v

ensure that significant deficiencies could not propagate through the AFW system or the (second system - to be supplied) without being detected.

In the course of designing a nuclear power plant, numerous reviews and evoluotions are typically performed. These reviews and evaluations may result in 'the identification of creas requiring odditional work. These reviews and evoluotions reflect the project's design experience and are a valuable input to the refinement of the IDV scope and sample selection. In order to make use of this information, a review was made of the ongoing inspection programs, 50.55e reports, NRC inspection reports, audit reports, and similar documentation.

O Three criterie are used to modifx the initieisampie. The first criterion is that areas experiencing repeated design related problems would receive on increased level of review in the IDV program in order to verify that these problems have been adequately addressed and that they do not exist elsewhere in the same or similar form. The second criterion is that those areas which have not previously received extensive review activities would also be subjected to a higher frequency of sampling in order to achieve o sufficient degree of assurance of the adequacy of the design. The third criterion is that those areas where potential findings have been identified, additional sampling would be considered if appropriate to fully assess the extent and root cause.

3.1.3 DEFINITION OF REVIEW SCOPE FOR THE AFW SYSTEM Section 3.1.1 identified the categories of review which essentially correspond to major activities of the design chain. When combined with o listing of each of the design areas, o matrix is formed which con be utilized to direct the conduct of the IDV effort for each system in the program. This matrix is shown on Figures

() 3.1-10 and 3.1-lb for the AFW system. A set of "X" marks are shown which indicate the review scope applicable to coch design area. The criterio discussed DC-82-13

l l

O V

INITIAL SAMPLE REVIEW MATRIX FOR THE AUXILIARY FEEDWA MIDLAND INDEPENDENT DESIGN VERIFICATION PROGRAM.

I SCOPE OF REVIEW 5 9 i 1 eg -

N is DESIGN AREA ~ *vvg

,b J~s s 88 E! b t, l P l" l

1. AFW SYSTEM PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS X X X SYSTEM OPERATING LIMITS X

ACCIDENT ANALYSIS CONSIDERATIONS X X X

SINGLE FAILURE X X

' TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS X X SYSTEM ALIGNMENT /SWITCHOVER X

REMOTE OPERATION AND SHUTDOWN X X SYSTEM ISOLATION /lNTERLOCKS X

OVERPRESSURE PROTECTION X X X X COMPONENT FUNCTIONAL REOUIREMENTS X X X SYSTEM HYDRAULIC DESIGN X X X SYSTEM HEAT REMOVAL CAPABILITY X

COOLING REQUIREMENTS X X WATER SUPPLIES PRESERVICE TESTING / CAPABILITY FOR X  !

OPERATIONAL TESTING X X POWER SUPPLIES X ]

ELECTRICAL CHARACTERISTICS X X X PROIECTIVE DEVICES / SETTINGS X X X X

INSTRUMENTATION X X X CONTROL SYSTEMS X

ACTUATION SYSTEMS X

NDE COMMITMENTS X X MATERIALS SELECTION l

FIGURE 3.1-1a

INITIAL SAMPLE REVIEW MATRIX FOR THE AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM MIDLAIO INDEPENDENT DESIGN VERIFICATION PROGRAM (CONTINUED)

SCOPE OF REVIEW Ey "y

a C li 2 4

DESIGN AREA o" 65

~

E

J~3 ^v b si 2

El s

y< E s

- g &

i II. AFW SYSTEM PROTECTION FEATURES 1 X

SEISMIC DESIGN X X X X X 4 e PRESSURE BOUNDARY X X X X X I e PIPE /EQUIPt'8ENT SUPPORT X X X X e EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION HIGH ENERGY LINE BREAK ACCIDENTS X

X X X X e PIPE WHIP e JET IMP!NGEMENT X

X

, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION X X X X X

e ENVIRONMENTAL ENVELOPES X X X X 4 e EQUIPMENT GUALIFICATION e HVAC DESIGN X X X X

< FIRE PROTECTION X

i MISSILE PROTECTION X X X

SYSTEMS INTERACTION ll1. STRUCTURES THAT HOUSE THE AFW SYSTEM X X X X SEISMIC DESIGN / INPUT TO EQUIPMENT WIND & TORNADO DESIGN / MISSILE PROTECTION X

X FLOOD PROTECTION X

HELBA LOADS X

CIVIL / STRUCTURAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS X X X e FOUNDATIONS f e CONCRETE / STEEL DESIGN X X X X X X X .

e TAM <S f

f FIGURE 3.1-lb l

PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Program Plan pg_ 320L. 009-

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and Construction Verification Program REV.: 1 DATE: 2/9/83 PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY PAGE 24 of 80_

W in Sections 1.3 and 3.1.2 of this Plan were incorporated to develop the initial matrix. The design areas of the IDV review matrix for the AFW system are divided into three major divisions: AFW system performance requirements, AFW system protection features, and structures that house the AFW system. The design areas addressed within each of these major divisions are discussed in Sections 3.l.3.1, 3.l.3.2, and 3.l.3.3 of this Plan, respectively. As previously mentioned, the identified review scope is subject to change depending upon the IDV program findings.

Because the AFW system sompte selection interfaces with other systems, it is necessary to define the boundaries for items within the scope of the IDV. In general for the AFW system, the selection was made to include all components identified as being part of the AFW system on Bechtel P&lD drawing M439 )

sheets 3A, revision 9, and 38, revision 10. Specific interface points are os fo!!ows:

l

/N, DC-82-l3 .

l PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Program Plan PI 320L. 009 -

SUBJECT:

Midland independent Design and DATE: 2/9/83 Cont t ruction Verification Program IREV.:1 PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY:

l PAGE 25 or _ 80 m

AFW SYSTEM SAMPLE SELECTION BOUNDARIES interface Point (component Interfacing System included in AFW)

Main Steam Valves 074 and 077 I NSSS Steam Generator Nozzles Service Water A Valve 283 Service Water B Valve 282 Unit 2 Condensate Tonk (from) Volve 008 Condenser Hotwells Volve 006 Unit I Condensate Tonk (return) Valve 019 Volve 017 Cooling Pond (return)2 Brecker or fuse interfacing AFW

! oc/dc Power System components with power source ESFAS AFW octuation sjstem and FOGG Main FW Loop A Volve 303 f)

Vents and Drains First Valve HVAC AFW pump room fan coolers and associated ductwork and 1 supports NOTES:

1. P&lD M-432, Sheet IA, Revision S

2. Power supplies dedicated to AFW system are within sompte selection boundaries.

l n

V i

DC-82-13 L - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

O PROJECT INSTRUCTION G pg_ 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland independent Design and l

REV.: 0 DATE: II/29/82 Construction Verification Program PREPARED BY: s PAGE 26 of 80 /w p APPROVEDp BYrb -

v in view of the fact that the design process involves a great number of individuals and organizations who may have contributed to the project engineering activi-ties, it is necessary to define o reasonable set of limits on the scope of the IDV.

Criteria were established by the project team to define the end points of the design chain opplicable to this project. The majority of the design was performed by Bechtel. However, portions of the design may have been performed or affected by work performed by other organizations including, but not limited to, Bobcock & Wilcox (B&W), engineering contractors, and equipment vendors. For the purposes of the verification program, the following limitations were opplied. The information obtained by Bechtel from B&W does not receive, 4

O as part of the IDV program, on independent evoluotion of the process by which V B&W developed its dato. The verification program verifies that dato obtained from B&W ore consistent and reasonable based upon engineering judgment.

! Equipment vendors are reviewed to verify that the documents with which they f

were supplied are occurate and current and that the results of their design efforts conform with the specified requirements given to them by Bechtel or CPC. Vendor documentation will be reviewed to determine that his product does, in fact, meet applicable requirements of the specifications. In the event that deviations are determined to exist, the appropriate IDCV Program reporting procedures will be opplied. For engineering contractors, the scopes of work applicable to these contractors will be determined and, in general, they will be treated as if they were part of the Bechtel design organization. That is, they will not be treated like o vendor who is given a specification and is expected to deliver a product in conformance with that specificatio'n. They will be treated as part of a design organization which has similar responsibilities to other parts of the Bechtel project organization.

The following sections discuss the initial scope of review for each of the design creas.

I i

DC-82-13 l

1

j PROJECT INSTRUCTION

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan q p;_ 3201. 009 Midland Independent Design and 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Const5uct'on Verification Program I REV.:

PREPARED BY: APPROVEg p PAGE 27 of 80 -

x/

3.1.3.1 AFW System Performance Requirements The AFW system will be reviewed to assess its copcoility to perform os required by the design criteria and commitments. Included in the scope of this portion of review are design areas such as system operating limits, single failure, compo-l nent functional requirements, electrical, instrumentation and control, and hydraulic design.

3.l.3.1.1 System Operating Limits - Topic l.1-1 The specified system operating limits will be reviewed to determine whether they have been appropriately specified in consideration of functional

' performance requirements during normal (startup and shutdown), transient and f occident conditions. These performance requirements will be generally based j

upon NSSS considerations. Specified limits such as heat removal requirements, f

pressure requirements, time constraints, and system logic will be rev.ewed. To j l

accomplish the preceding, the review will consist of a design criteria and l commitments review, a review of implementinq documents, and a check of calculations and evoluotions.

3.l.3.I.2 Accident Analysis Considerations - Topic l.2-1 The FSAR occident analyses will be reviewed to ide,ntify those occidente in which the AFW may be involved either os a contributor or as on engineered safety system which helps mitigate the consequences of an accident. An evoluotion will be made to determine if the system has been oppropriately considered in these analyses and otso to provide feedback into Topic l.1-1 to assure that system operating limits appropriately reflect occident analysis O considerations.

DC-82-13 M

~

Q O

PROJECT INSTRUCTION

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Pl 3201. 009 Midland independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program PREPARED BY- APPROV BY PAGE 28 of 80 --

l 3.l.3.1.3 Single Failure - Topic 1.3-1

. All " active" components (e.g. pumps, motor-operated volves etc.) of the AFW l system will be reviewed to determine whether the failure of one component con incapacitate the system or whether the system has sufficient redundancy, including power supplies, to withstand a single failure. (This will include a review of the flow logic "motrix" (FOGG system) that is designed to prevent AFW flow to a depressurized steam generator, and provide stearn flow to the turbine-driven pump only from the " good" generator). Automatic and manual 3

initiation of the system will be reviewed. To accomplish the preceding, the review will consist of a design criteria and commitments review, a review of implementing documents, and a check of design evaluations.

3.l.3.l.4 Technical Specifications - Topic I.4-1 The technical specifications will be reviewed to assure that important plant operating limits associated with the AFW system are appropriately and occurate-ly specified, consistent with the intent of the NRC's Standard Technical Specifications.

3.l.3.1.S System Alignment /Switchover - Topic l.S-1 )

System alignment criteria and commitments under all m, odes of operation will be reviewed along with P&lDs and other implementing dccuments. Additionally, since the AFW system incorporates substantial switchover capability between Units I and 2 available water sources, all switchovers and potential alignments will be reviewed against applicable procedures (if available) to determine whether the system con meet design objectives. Any switchovers designed to occur automatically will be reviewed against single failure criteria as discussed DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION P!

v p;_ 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program PREPARED BY: APPROVED PAGE 29 or 80 ,

s previously. Switchovers requiring manual activities will be reviewed by determining time required versus time available to accomplish necessory actions.

3.l.3.1.6 Remote Operation and Shutdown - Topic 1.6-1 The criteria and commitments for safe shutdown from outside the control room will be identified and reviewed. Selected components employed to meet the remote operation requirements will be reviewed as described under Topic 1.9-1, Component Functional Requirements. Other design features applicable to remote operation will be reviewed under Topic l.16-1, Electrical Characteristics and Topic I.18-l, Instrumentation.

3.1.3.1.7 System isolation / interlocks - Topic 1.7-1 The AFW system criterio, commitments, and implementing documents will be reviewed to determine the adequacy of all isolation requirements and interlocks which have been designed to implement system performance requirements. The ,

single failure review in Topic 1.3-1 will address these items os well.

3.1.3.1.8 Overpressure Protection - Topic 1.8-1 The AFW system criterio and commitments will be reviewed to assess the need for and incorporation of protective devices which may. be required to prevent

( system overpressurization for modes of operation. This review will serve os input into Topic l.10-1, System Hydraulic Design.

3.l.3.1.9 Component Functional Requirements - Topic 1.9-1 Selected mechanical, electrical, instrumentation and control (E,1&C) compo-nents specified and used in the AFW system will be reviewed for compliance to DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION c)

Engineering Program Plan PI 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: il/29/82 Construc$ ion Verification Program PAGE 30 of 80 PREPARED BY:

s ~

p/ p s

s APPROVE @D BY:[ ;

2 their functional requirements. The development of the functional requirements will be traced from the AFW system design criteria os dictated by licensing commitments, industry codes and standards, plant environmental conditions, and system performance requirements for the intended operating modes. The design criteria and commitments used for the AFW system will be checked to ensure the inclusion of all required design inputs. Component functional requirernents design criteria include factors such as flow rate, allowable pressure drops, NPSH,

, voltage, device settings, and similar chorocteristics. The design process (calculations or analyses) used to translate the overall system design criteria into specific component specifications will also be reviewed. Finally, the validated O compenent functieneirequiremeets -iii he compered to the cemnonent grecere-ment specifications. Equipment seismic and environmental qualification will be considered separately, i

3.l.3.1.10 System Hydraulic Design - Topic 1.10-1 A review of criteria and commitments and implementing documents will be made for the system hydraulic design. The system hydraulic design review will also include a detailed check of calculations and evoluotions of the system hydraulic j parameters. This activity will incorporate results obtained from the configura- l tion verification effort which is part of the ICV. For example, line sizes, ler.gths )

of pipe, and numbers of pipe fittings will be checked in the ICV effort. These quantitles will then be compared against the basis forfcolculations of pressure drop in various portions of the AFW system.

3.l.3.1.11 System Heat Removal Capability - Topic I.I l-l iO Calculations and ev lu tions performed to demonstr te the adequacy of the system's heat removal capability will be checked. The scope includes a DC-82-13

l PROJECT INSTRUCTION

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan PI 3201. 009 Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: II/29/82 Consfruction Verification Program PAGE 31 of 80 PREPARED BY: _/

,a j APPROVE j

comparison between the results of the hydraulic design evoluotion and the system requirements for heat removal.

3.1.3.1.12 Cooling Requirements - Topic 1.12-1 Cooling requirements for AFW mechanical and electrical components will be checked and a determination made that these heat loads have been considered as design criteria for the interfacing systems.

3.l.3.1.13 Water Supplies - Topic 1.13-1 O The criteria established for water supply, from both safety and nonsofety sources, will be identified. A review will be made of implementing documents for proper use of these criteria.

3.1.3.1.14 Preservice Testing and Capability for Operational Testing -

Topic 1.14-1 .

A determination will be made of the design criteria and commitments which exist for preservice testing and the capability for operational testing. The results of this determination will be used in the ICV portion of the IDCV, which will verify that the system has been constructed such that it con function in accordance with its design criteria and commitments. .-

3.l.3.1.lS Power Supplies - Topic 1.15-1 The power supplies functional requirements will be reviewed as described under Corr.ponent Functional Requirements. As defined by the sompte selection boundaries described in section 3.l.3, the consideration of power supplies will be l

t 1

DC-82-13 l l

I

i PROJECT INSTRUCTION b)

PI 3201.009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program 32 80 PREPARED BY /

pgy.~~.

APPROVED BY:

%8f PAGE of v

\

~-

limited to the sizing of circuit breakers, fuses and oc or de power to AFW instrument loops. The power supply implementing documents will be checked to verify the proper consideration of system design criteria and commitments which dictate the required power supply ratings or sizing. The AFW system design requirements for separation, redondoney, and single-failure will also be determined for power supplies and the implementing documents reviewed for compliance, i

3.l.3.1.16 Electrical Chorocteristics - Topic l.16-1 The AFW system electrical chorocteristics as determined by design criteria and commitments will be reviewed to verify that all required commitments and criteria have been addressed. This will include o consideration of rating and fire protection properties of cable, cable separation, system electrical separation, cable sizing and voltage drop, and the sizing of electrical motor storters.

3.1.3.1.17 Protective Devices / Settings - Topic I.17-1 Protective circuit breakers and fuses will be reviewed on a component basis os described above. The review process will identify the technical basis for fuse and selected breaker trip settings. The process will include o review of design criteria and commitments, component specifications, and implementing docu-ments specifying the protective device settings for ,the selected protective devices.

3.l.3.1.18 Instrumentation - Topic 1.18-1 The instrumentation and alorms required to operate, monitor, and protect the AFW system; as determined by design criterio, commitments and expected plant DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION

.o

."; Engineering Program Plan PI 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midland independent Design and REW 0 DATE: 11/29/82 C nstruction Verification Program 9

PREPARED BY: APPROV  :

33 og 80 PAGE .,

operations, will be reviewed against that specified for the AFW system to verify adequacy. The calculations to determine instrument ranges and occuracies for normal plant operations, anticipated operational conditions, and for accident conditions will be checked for several representative instrument types to verify the odequacy of the specified ranges. Instrument circuit design will also be checked to verify proper circuit configuration for a sample of instrumentation loops.

Calculations for alarm set points or time delays for several representative devices (e.g. steam generator water level trip point) will be reviewed for compliance with design criteria. The implementing specifications or lists

~

documenting the consideration of all the above factors will be reviewed to verify that the original design criteria are reflected in the devices chosen for review.

3.l.3.1.19 Contro. Systems - Topic 1.19-1 Design criteria and commitments governing the steam generator water level and AFW turbine control systems will be checked to verify the inclusion of necessary regulatory, industry, system performance requirements. Design specifications or other implementing documentation will be reviewed to verify that the necessary requirements were used as input to the control system design. This review will include a check of calculations or evoluotions relative to control system performance, time response, component chorocteristics, and separation from actuation systems. Failure Modes Effects Analyses will be reviewed to verify that system failures are in the safe direction. Control system circuitry design (voltages, currents, polarity) will be reviewed to verify that selected components will function as intended in the control circuit.

O DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION o

\ Engineering Program Plan pl_ 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program PREPARED BY:

I

/ APPROVED BY:

PAGE 34 of 80 N # Ou/

c ~j 3.1.3.1.20 Actuation Systems - Topic l.20-1

. The auxiliary feedwater actuation system (AFWAS - which includes FOGG, feed only good generator) design criteria and ommitments will be reviewed to verify the proper consideration of regulatory commitments, industry codes and standards, plant operational requirements and operator actions. The criteria will be opplied to the octuation system from the sensors required for inputs relative to the AFW system to the octuation system output devices (relays).

3.l.3.1.21 Nondestructive Examination Commitments - Topic 1.21-1 O' A determination will be made of the design criteria and commitments which exist for NDE of AFW system piping, components, and structures. The results of this determination will serve as input to the ICV portion of the IDCV which will review NDE records to verify quality construction.

3.l.3.1.22 Materials Selection - Topic l.22-1 This activity will include the review of criteria and implementing documents related, to establishing the basis for the material specification process of selected structural elements, components, and a portion of the AFW piping system. Included will be a review of material selection rec arements related to such factors as strength, toughness, hardness, compotabiljty, electrical insulation properties, protective coatings, corrosion resistance, fire protection, and other chemical and physical requirements appropriate to the particular structure, component, or system.

O l

l DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION

() pj_ 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Const uction Verification Program l

PAGE 35 of 80 PREPARED BY. APPROVEg v

3.1.3.2 AFW System Protection Features in addition to the review of the copobility of the AFW system to perform its required functions, o review will be made of external factors which could offect the copobility of the system to achieve these functions. Included in the scope of this portion of the review are factors such as seismic design, high energy line break accidents (HELBA), environmental protection, fire protection, missile protection, and systems interaction. The following sections address these and other design creas related to system protection.

l 3.l.3.2.1 Seismic Design - Topic 11.1-1 g

V Seismic design criteria and associated commitments related to the AFW system will be reviewed, and the establishment of the proper basis for the associated design process will be confirmed, included will be the review of seismic design parameters and methodologies which were utilized in the seismic design process for structures, systems, and components associated with the AFW system.

3.l.3.2.2 Seismic Design--Pressure Boundary - Topic II.2-1 This activity will include o review of the commitments, implement' i9 docu- t ments, calculations, drawings, and specifications associated with the seismic design of a selected portion of the AFW piping system,, The utilization of the proper design input, such as response spectro, piping and component weights, and other piping chorocteristics, will be verified. The ASME code evoluotions will be reviewed to verify that pertinent acceptance criteria are met. Drawings and specifications will be reviewed for consistency with design calculations.

Included will be on independent confirmatory seismic analysis of a selected O pertiee ef the pipie2 system besed open indegeedeetix verified es-beiit DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION o Engineering Program Plan V PI 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midland independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construccion Verification Program 36 of 80 PREPARED BY: /

/w^~ OLJ APPROVED BY:

PAGE  %, v dimensions utilizing a verified computer program. Pipe stresses and support loods will be calculated. To preserve the " blind" nature of the confirmatory calculation, the individuals who perform the calculation will not have prior benefit or knowledge of the specific calculational approach followed by the original analysts. Upon completion, o comparison will be made between the original design and IDV calculated forces and stresses at key locations. Any discrepancies will be identified and their cause determined.

3.1.3.2.3 Seismic Design--Pipe / Equipment Support - Topic 11.3-1 A review of a selected portion of the AFW system will be conducted to verify

^

that selected pipe supports have been designed and specified in accordance with criteria and commitments. Included will be the review of design loads, load combinations, and the methods of analysis utilized. The associated design drawings and specifications will be reviewed for consistency. The support loods calculated during the confirmatory piping analysis of Topic II.2-1 will be compared to the design 'oods for all supports in the selected portion of the AF,W system. Several support types (e.g., snubber, rigid restraint, anchor, spring hanger, etc.) will then be sampled, and an independent confirmatory analpis will be made to verify the capability of the original design organization to properly design and size these supports given the design loads. This analysis will be based upon independently verified as-built dimensions. In addition, the design calculations, drawings and specifications associated yvith the anchorage and support of selected AFW system equipment will be reviewed for conformance to requirements.

3.l.3.2.4 Seismic Design--Equipment Qualification - Topic 11.4-1 0 This activity will include the review of commitments, implementing documents, l calculations, drawings, and specifications associated with the seismic qualifica-l DC-82-13

o PROJECT INSTRUCTION

('/ Engineering Program Plan 4 PI_ 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program PREPARED BY: APPROVE PAGE 37 of 80

- j tion of selected equipment. Qualification requirements including response spectro, load combinations, and equipment functional criteria will be reviewed.

The review will include the following types of AFW system equipment of representative complexity such as: electrical-motor control center, motor-

^

operated volve, and electrical panel; mechanical-AFW pump, motor-operated valve and heat exchanger.

3.l.3.2.5 High Energy Line Break Accidents - Topic 11.5-1 HELBA criterio and associated commitments related to the AFW system will be reviewed, and the establishment of the proper basis for the associated design process will be confirmed. Included will be a review of HELBA design parameters and the methodologies which have been utilized in the HELBA design process for structures, systems, and components associated with the AFW system.

3.l.3.2.6 HELBA/ Pipe Whip - Topic II.6-1 Design criterio, implementing documents, calculations, drawings, and specifico-tions associated with pipe whip resulting from postulated high energy line breaks will be reviewed. Included will be the review of the definition of the methodology employed in determining postulated pipe break locations, the magnitude of associated pipe whip loods, and the techniques utilized for pipe restraing design. In addition, calculations for selected AFW system pipe rupture restraints will be reviewed, including the associated drawings and specifications for consistency with these calculations.

O I

DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION (o PI 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan i I

Midland independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Cons' ruction Verification Program

/' s APPROVm By: n PAGE 38 of 80 PREPARED BY:

y gy WK,4 1 w 3.l.3.2.7 HELBA--Jet Impingement - Topic 11.7-1 The design criterio and commitments applicable to preventative protective measures taken to assure acceptable consequences due to postulated jets will be reviewed. This topic will be reviewed in conjunction with Topic II.6-1, Pipe '# hip, and Topic 111.4-1, HELBA Loads, and will be considered in the evoluotion of Topic 111.7-1, Concrete / Steel Design.

3.l.3.2.8 Environmental Protection - Topic 11.8-1

(] The design criterio and commitments applicable to all issues related to tLa plant's environmental protection will be reviewed.The environmental protection review will consist of a determination of the appropriate environmental envelopes, the qualification requirements for equipment to these envelopes, and the HVAC design criterio which are necescry to assure that the environmental envelopes will not be exceeded.

3.l.3.2.9 Environmental Envelopes - Topic 11.9-1 The environmental envelope design criterio will be determined by a review of I

existing criterio and commitments and a review of the system arrangement.

These environmental envelopes will be verified by a review of implementing documents and a check of calculations and evoluotions which were used to determine the environmental parameters. Drawings and specifications for AFW equipment will be checked for consistency with the environmental envelope specified. In addition, o confirmatory calculation or evoluotion will be per-formed to verify the environmental envelope specification for one portion of the AFW system.

l l DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION o/

C pj_ 3201 .009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Cons truction Verification Program PREPARED BY: APPROVE 39 of 80 PAGE -

i -s To preserve the " blind" nature of the confirmatory calculation, the individuals who perform the calculation will not have prior benefit or knowledge of the specific calculational approach followed by the original analysts. Upon comple-tion, a comparison will be made between the original design and IDV environ-mental envelopes at key locations. Any discreponcles will be identified and their cause determined.

3.l.3.2.10 Environmental / Equipment Qualification - Topic II.10-1 Equipment qualification requirements will be reviewed to determine whether the Q correct enviornmental envelopes were specified and given these envelopes, whether the qualification methods specified were adequate to demonstrate that the component would meet its functional requirements. The review will include the following types of AFW system equipment of representative complexity such as electrical insulation, connectors, transrnitters and motor-operated volves.

3.l.3.2.11 HVAC Design - Topic 11.11-1 ,

Requirements imposed upon the HVAC system design as a result of the need to j meet evironmental envelope or equipment qualificotton parameters will be checked. This will be achieved by a verification of the design interface between the AFW system design and the HVAC's system design.

i l 3.l.3.2.12 Fire Protection - Topic 11.12-1 1 The opplicable fire protection criteria will be determined for the AFW system.

A review will be made of fire protection evoluotions to determine whether the

(] fire protection system meets the necessary requirements for the AFW system.

Included in the review will be the designation of fire zones, rating of barriers, DC-82-13

- PROJECT INSTRUCTION

1

'" Engineering Program Plan l pj_ 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midiond independent Design and l REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Progrom l

~

PREPARED BY: / g APPROVEDg BY:h PAGE 40 of 80 _

I ~J combustible content of zones and the existence of detection and suppression capabilities for on AFW pump room. The scope of this review includes fires within the AFW room and fires external to the room which would effect the function of equipment in the room.

3.l.3.2.13 Missile Protecton - Topic 11.13-1 A review of criteria and commitments will be made of the potential missiles which could affect the AFW system and the protection provided for those systems. The review includes missiles external to the AFW system and those that could be generated within the AFW system and will serve as input to Topic lil.7-l, Concrete / Steel Design.

4 3.l.3.2.14 Systems Interaction - Topic 11.14-1 As part of the overall systems review, the potential for systems interaction and means of prevention thereof will be reviewed. .The review will include on examinc+ ion of criteria utilized to analyze potential systems interactions, whether they be physical (electrical, mechanical, hydraulic), or spatial (thermal, fluid, rnechanical, radiation). The procedures and results for the Midland systems interaction walkdowns will also be reviewed and, if possible, ongoing walkdowns 4

will be observed. Human factors or inherent failure modes (common manufacturer, similar technology, equal aging or wear),will nat be considered a part of the systems review.

1 3.l.3.3 Structures that House the AFW System l

Many safety-related plant structures such as the containment, auxiliary and O diesel generator buildings, and the intake structure support the functioning of DC-82-13

p PROJECT INSTRUCTION

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan PJ 3201.009 Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 1I/29/82 Construction Verification Program PREPARED BY: ./

PAGE 41 of 80 l

~ gy ~~ APPROVE v (DJY:oLM

.w the AFW system or its support systems. The overall criterio and commitments applicable to the design of these safety related structures will be reviewed and evoluoted. Selected features and design areas from one or more of these structures will be isolated for o more in-depth review in the following topics.

3.1.3.3.1 Seismic Design / Input to Equipment - Topic 111.1-1 This activity will include the review of commitments, implementing documents, calculations, drawings, and specifications related to the development of seismic design input for o portion of the AFW system and components in the auxiliary O building. Included will be o review of seismic input p rometers such as seismic design spectro, domping, material properties, and boundary conditions, including soil-structure interaction. The methodology utilized for the location of the mass points and the computation of masses and equivalent member properties will be reviewed. Parameter variation studies will also be reviewed to verify that the variance of important input parameters and modeling assumptions has been oppropriately considered. The scope of this activity will include the review of the dynamic analysis of the building, the time history analysis and the generation of floor response spectro for both horizontal directions and the vertical direction. The utilization of proper floor response spectro for the specification of selected AFW system components and the selected portion of the AFW system will be verified.

3.l.3.3.2 Wind and Tornado Design / Missile Protection - Topic lll.2-1 Criteria and commitments for wind loading, tornado effects, and missile protection will be reviewed to verify the proper basis is established for the O design process. Included will be the review of the criteria associated with wind pressure loading, tornado wind fooding, tornado depressurization effects, tornado

, DC-82-13 l

l l 1

PROJECT INSTRUCTION l o

V Engineering Program Plan 1

l j Pl_ 3201 009 -

SUBJECT:

Midland independent Design and l

REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program PREPARED BY: APPROV PAGE 42 of 80 4

- , a missiles, and other related requirements. Loading combinations, methodologies of analysis, associated allowable stresses or conditions, and other specified

. criteria will be included in this review activity. The results of this review will be considered in evoluotion of Topic 111.7-1, Concrete and Steel Design.

3.1.3.3.3 Flood Protection - Topic Ill.3-1 This octivity will include the review of criteria and commitments related to establishing the basis for flood protection from sources both external and internal to the plant. The criteria associated with the specification of the design flood level and the methods to be utilized to provide the necessary flood C protection will be reviewed. Included will be the review of the criteria associated with the determination of postulated pipe break locations, the methodologies to be utilized in determining flow rates and resulting water levels, loading combinations, o!!owable stresses or conditions, and other related criteria.

The results of this review will be considered in evoluotion of Topic Ill.7-1, Concrete and Steel Design.

3.l.3.3.4 HELBA Loads - Topic Ill.4-1 Criteria and commitments for high energy line break occident loads will be reviewed to verify that the proper basis is established for the design process.

included will be the review of the criteria for jet imp,ingement and pipe whip loading on structures and components related to the AFW system. The review will address loading combinations, methodologies of analysis, associated allow-oble stresses or conditions, and other related criterio. The results of this review will be considered in evoluotion of Topic 111.7-1, Concrete and Steel Design.

/^)

v DC-82-13

i 1

1 l

PROJECT INSTRUCTION

/D Engineering Program Plan V p;_ 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and REW 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Progrom 43 of 80 PREPARED BY: / i y APPROVED & BY: 74 PAGE _

-a v 3.l.3.3.5 Civil / Structural Design Considerations - Topic 111.5-1 Civil / structural design criteria and associated commitments related to the AFW system will be reviewed, and the establishment of the proper basis for the associated design process will be confirmed, included will be the review of design parameters and the methodologies utilized in the design process for structures and affected systems and components associated with the AFW system.

3. l .3.3.6 Foundations - Topic ill.6-1 O Included in this activity will be the review of criteria, implementing documents, and calculations associated with the design of selected foundations associated with structures housing the AFW system. The review will address design criteria, methodologies of analysis and calculations associated with each type of foundation loading including dead, live, tornado and seismic loadings.

3.l.3.3.7 Concrete and Steel Design - Topic 111.7-1 This activity will include the review of criteria, implementing documents, calculations, drawings, and specifications associated with the reinforced con-crete and structural steel design of selected structural elements associated with the AFW system. Structural elements, including a major load bearing shear wall and a floor diophram will be selected that require consideration of a broad spectrum of loadings such as dead, live, wind, tornado, seismic, flood, and HELBA loads. The review will address design criteria, methodologies of analysis and calculations associated with each type of loading with emphasis on a verification that these items have been considered in a realistic manner.

Loading combinations, allowable stresses or conditions, and other applicable l

DC-82-13

I PROJECT INSTRUCTION o

J

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan l

j PI 3201. 009 Midland independent Design and REW 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program 44 of 80 PREPARED BY: / APPROVED N# BY:' 0 PAGE ~ /W

.)

criteria will be reviewed. Drawings and specifications for the selected structural elements will be reviewed against design calculations for consistency.

3.l.3.3.8 Tonks - Topic ll1.8-1 This activity will include the review of criteria, implementing documents, and calculations associoted with the design of a selected AFW system tank. All applicable loadings will be reviewed, such as dead, live, wind, tornado, seismic (including fiuid dynomics effects), flood, and HELBA loads, as applicable. The review will address tank design criterio, methodologies of analysis, and the O essocioted ceicuietions. Leedine ce m bimetiees, oiiewabie stresses or conditions, and other applicable criteria will be reviewed.

3.1.4 DEFINITION OF REVIEW SCOPE FOR (second system - to be supplied) 3.1.5 DEVELOPMENT OF IDV PROGRAM CHECKLISTS Ceneric checklists were developed for each of the review scope categories discussed in previous sections utilizing guidance contained in ANSI N45.2.ll and the construction review program guidelines published by INPO. For each of the scope design areas shown in Figure 3.1-1, the reviewer develops a specific checklist incorporating generic checklists as appropriate. In most cases, the specific checklist is derived from the generic checklist by addition of specific requirements applicable to the design area being reviewed. In some cases, it may be appropriate to use only a portion of the generic checklist or to develop a unique checklist.

O in each case, the checklist prepared by the reviewer will be checked by the lead technical reviewer for the area. (Note that if the lead technical reviewer DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Program Plan V pj 3201_.009

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Progrom PREPARED BY: APPRO 45 W 80 PAGE prepares a checklist, it is permissible for him to both originate onEl check the contents of the checklist). During their review process, the leod technical reviewers examine the checklist for interfaces with other IDV orcos and perform a general review of the completeness and adequocy of the proposed checklist.

The LTR's review is to be coordinated with the project manager as necessary to resolve questions which cut across discipline lines. In the event that the Project Manager or Lead Technical Reviewers have comments on the checklist, the checklist preparer and those having comments will discuss the comments and reach on oppropriate resolution. Af ter reaching concurrence in the adequacy of the checklist, the LTF. will indicate his opproval o:id the checklist .will be ovalloble for use by the reviewer.

The reviewer, having on approved checklist, con then proceed with the reveiw process for this specified area, in accordance with Project instruction PI-3201 -001, Engineering Evoluotion Preparation and Control. In performing the engineering evoluotion, the reviewer will document the information which he used in order to complete the checklist. Such information will include the data or revision number of the document, the document number, on indication of the source of the document (e.g., whether the document was obtained from on individual, a file, or the records center).

3.l.5.1 Development of Checklists for Review of Design Criteria and Commitments ,

The generic checklist for review of design criteria and commitments was developed considering questions such as:

e What are the design inputs for the design area under review?

e Do any of these design inputs offect other design oreos?

DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION O PI 3201 009.-

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midinnd independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Cpnstruction Verification Program PREPARED BY: APPROV .

PAGE 46 _ of 80 e Do any of these design inputs offect systems outside the scope of AFW or vice verso?

e Are the design inputs for this design area complete?

e Are the identified design inputs for this design crea consistent?

e Are the design inputs odequately defined to allow implementation for the design area?

For each design area the lead technical reviewer will supplement the generic checklist with appropriate additional questions.

O 3 '.5.2 Development of Checklists for Reviews of implementing Documents The generic checklist for reviews of implementing documents was developed considering questions such as:

e What is the identity of the implementing document being reviewed? (List document identificotton such as title, revision number, date, etc.) .

e Which design inputs does the document implement?

e Arc design interface requirements specified?

e Have the design inputs been correctly interpreted and incorporated in this implementing document?

e is this implementing document consistent with other implemen'ing documents being reviewed for this oreo?

e Are assumptions and limitations on the use of the document adequately defined?

e Were appropriate quality assurance requirements specified?

f DC-82-13

O PROJECT INSTRUCTION O

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Pl- 3201 -009 -

'<- Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Constlruction Verification Program PREPARED BY: APPROV Y PAGE 47 of 80 _

For each design area the lead technical reviewer will supplement the generic checklist with appropriate additional questions for each implementing document.

3.I.5.3 Development of Checklists for Checks of Calculations and Evoluotions The generic checklist for checks of calculations and evaluations was developed considering questions such as:

e What is the identity of the calculation or evoluotion being checked?

O e whetisthe purpese orthe ceiceietree oreveiuetiee2 e Are the data sources identified?

e Are the assumptions listed?

e Have the assumptions been verified?

e Was the calculation or evaluation checked and approved within the originating organization in accordance with '

procedures?

e Are the equations and methods specified?

e Are the equations and methods appropriate for the intended purpose?

, e Were verified computer programs used?

e Are the calculations or evaluation results reabnable?

e llove design outputs been compared to the occeptance criteria to allow verification that design requirements

have been satisfactorily accomplished?

O DC-82-13

i i

i . PROJECT INSTRUCTION

' vn Engineering Program Plan l pl 3201 . 009

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and l REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construcitun Verification Program f

f PAGE 48 of 80 _

PREPARED BY:

p -

APPROVg:

For each design area the lead technico! reviewer will supplement the generic f

checklist with appropriate questions for each calculation or evoluotion checked. 1

(

3.l.5.4 Development of Checklists for Checks of Drawings and Specifications The generic checklist for checks of drawings and specifications was developed considering questions such as:

e What is the identity of the drawing or specificotton (e.g.

number, revision number, date)?

'O e Dees the drewies er specificetion refiect the desion inputs?

e is the drawing or specificotton consistent with related calculations or evoluotions?

e Hos this drawing or specification been checked by the originating organization in accordance with procedures?

e is the drawing or specification complete?

e Where oppropriate, have otequate handling, storage cleaning, and shipping requireroents been specified?

e Where appropriate, has adequate allowance been made for l Inservice inspection, maintenance, repair, and testing?

l For each design area, the lead technical reviewer will supplement the generic checklist with appropriate questions for each drawing or specification being reviewed. l l

l DC-82-13

o O

PROJECT INSTRUCTION Pl 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program 3 PREPARED BY: / APPROV  :

PAGE 49 of 80 r w

3.1.6 PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL SAMPLING AND VERIFICATION Additional sampling or verification within the scope of the IDV or outside the scope into other systems will be conducted if discrepancies are found. The level of odditional sampling or verification will be based upon the nature of the discrepancy. In all cases when discrepancies are found, on introspective evoluotion will follow to identify the extent and root cause. The rcot cause may either be .andom or systematic (generic). The odditional review will attempt to verify whether the discrepancy is restricted to the specific system, component, or structure under review; restricted to work by a specific design organization; O or if the discregencx cots ecress m eax referreces end engites to simiierix designed systems, components, and structures. As a rule, mothematical errors will not precipitate additional sampling and verification unless these are found in significant numbers, leading to significant deficiencies or o compounding of errors. Judgement in making this assessment will be required on case-by-case basis.

3.2 INDEPENDENT CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION METHODOLOGY The Independent Construction Verification (ICV) Program will consist of a review and evoluotion of the quality of construction of selected components and structures associated with the AFW system and the (second system - to be supplied). The construction octivities to be reviewed include the major activities of the construction chain. These include the fabrication, storage, maintenance, installation or construction, and verification activities associated with the acceptance of the system or component, as further defined in Section 3.2.1 herein. The emphasis will be on making a determination of the overall quality of construction and on assessment of its compliance with licensing commitments.

DC-82-13

l PROJECT INSTRUCTION g Engineering Program Plan PI 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midland independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program PAGE 50 of 80 PREPARED BY: / APPROV  :

s <

The review will be conducted to varying stages of construction completion depending upon the specific system, component, or structure under review. The l methodology will include diverse opproaches such as checking of records, hands-oi. inspection of hardware, or possibly confirmatory testing, if required.

The basis for the sample selection is presented in Section 3.2.2, and the I definition of the scope of review is provided in Sections 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 for the AFW system and (second system - to be supplied), respectively. In many I instances, included will be o complete verification of the as-built configuration l

l ogainst design documents and other applicable requirements. Where possible, systems and components selected for the Independent Design Verificotton

~N Program will be utilized for review in the ICV Program, thereby providing (G verificotton of the complete chain from criteria and commitmerits through to the constructed and verified product.

The ICV Program will be conducted utilizing detailed checklists described in Section 3.2.S. Additional sampling, verification, and testing activities that may be conducted as a result of the ICV Program are discussed in Sectron 3.2.6.

, 3.2.1 CATEGORIES OF REVIEW: THE CONSTRUCTION CHAIN I

l The categories of review include the major construction activities identified in '

the construction chain. The ICV review categories included are:

e Review of supplier documentation 1

e Review of storage and maintenance dromentation e Review of construction / installation documentation e Review of selected verification octivities DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION O Engineering Program Plan PI _3201 - 009.-

SUBJECT:

Midland independent Design and REW 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Coni truction Verification Program

\ APPROVED BY:

PREPARED l}Y s -/

- p_~~ gj PAGE 51 or 80 - -

e Verification of physical configuration Each of these review categories is described in further detail in the following sections.

3.2.1.1 Review of Supplier Documentation For those components requiring fabrication or manufacture, selected supplier documentation and other associated information including shop inspection documentation will be reviewed against design output documents to ensure p conformance with requirements. Supplier documentation will include such items os drawings, calculations, test reports, certified material property reports, storage and installation requirements, operations and maintenance requirements, and other major supplier documentation and dato applicable to the component.

For selected components, included will be the review of supplier seismic and environmental qualification documentation against requirements defined in the design process.

3.2.1.2 Review of Storage and Maintenance Documentation A review of site documentation will be performed to verify that requirements related to storage, including both in-storage and in-place maintenance have been met. Included will be the review of receipt inspection documentation.

Requirements to be reviewed will include such poromeJers os temperature and humidity, cleanliness, lubricotton, shaf t rotation, energization, etc. Where possible, existing warehousing and maintenance documentation will be reviewed and associated activities observed to provide additional verification that compo-nents have been properly stored and maintained during the construction process.

1 DC-82-13

n PROJECT INSTRUCTION U Pl. 3201 009 .

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midiond Independent Design and REW 0 DATE: 11/29/82 C,onst uction Verification Progro.m PAGE 52 of an PREPARED BY:

m g/ .~

APPROVED BY:

&v _ __ j ,

, J 3.2.l.3 Review of Construction / Installation Documentation A major factor in the evoluotion of the quality of construction is the review of those items constructed or installed on site. The review of documentation associated with the construction / installation process will be conducted to verify that the opplicable requirements have been met, included in this review will be verification of the utilization of proper documents in the process such as design output requirements, erection specifications, installation requirements, construction procedures and other specified construction codes and standards, as applicable. Design changes, field modif%otions, and other input related to final as-built drawings will be reviewed. Included will be the review of documentation associated with such items os concrete materials, concrete, the welding process, bolting activities, NDE, etc. Inspection requirements, including personnel qualification and training, reports, and associated documentation will also be included in the review. Where possible, selected on-going construction / installation activities will be observed to provide additional information for the evoluotion of this process.

3.2.l.4 Review of Selected Verification Activities Verification activities conducted subsequent to the construction / installation /

inspection activity will be reviewed and evoluoted. included will be over-inspection activities ossociated with cable separation verification, bolt hardness testing verification, the pipe support reinspection pr'ogram, the Construction Completion Program; os well as routine cold hydro testing, functional and preoperational testing, and other specifieJ preservice system and component testing programs. Associated requirements, plans, test reports, etc. will be (3 reviewed and, where possible, these verification activities will be observed in order to provide additional information and data to support evoluotions.

DC-82-13

p PROJECT INSTRUCTION O Engineering Program Plan Pl 3201_.009

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Consttuc3 ion Verification Progrom PAGE 53 of an PREPARED BY: /  ; APPROVE  :

s e 3.2.1.5 Verification of Physical Configuration Field verification of the as-built configuration of selected components of a portion of the AFW system will be conducted to ensure conformance with requirements. Verification will address such aspects os identification, opproximate physical dimensions, location, orientation, nome plate dato, grounding, use of proper materials, insulation, weld quality, and other features of the configuration as opplicable to the component or system. Configuration verification will range from the review of general features for some components or systems to a 100% detailed dimensional verification of other selected components or systems, as defined further in subsequent sections herein.

3.2.2 BASES FOR SAMPLE SELECTION The selection of a sompte for the ICV will generally follow the criterio discussed in Section 3.1.2 of this Plan for the IDV; with the exception that certain ICV octivities may utilize statistical methods. These methods may be applied in establishing sample sizes and statistical levels of confidence for the assessment of repetitive production activities such as concrete and steel properties or welding records. This program will be developed and documented during the preparation of the associated detailed review checklists.

The primary means of sample selection will be engineeping judgment of the ICV reviewers. As with the IDV, the initial sompte will be biased towards problems that have previously crisen in the industry. This sample will be refined by incorporating specific Midland project information to verify that the ICV encompasses previous problem creas and, thereby, serve os a verification that associated problems have been or are in the process of being adequately addressed and that they do not exist elsewhere in the some or similar form.

DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION pl_ 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland independent Design and REV.: o DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program N

PAGE 54 of 80 NNWi_ y h 3.2.3 DEFINITION OF 11EVIEW SCOPE FOR THE AFW SYSTEM The ICV review categories corresponding to the major activities of the construc-tion chain were defined in Section 3.2.1. Presented in this section is on identification of the selected components and the associated level of construc-tion completion of each to be reviewed. For the AFW system the scope of review is defined in the matrix in Figure 3.2-1, where the "X" designates the review scope opplicable to each component. The criterio discussed in Sections 1.2 and 3.2.2 of the Plan were utilized to develop this initial matrix. The review arcos of the ICV are divided into major divisions by componcnt type: mechant-V col, electrical, instrumentation and control, HVAC and structural. The initial scope of review of each component within these major divisions is discussed in the sections that follow. As previously mentioned, the identified review scope is subject to change depending upon the ICV program findings.

3.2.3.1 Mechanical Systems and Components An evoluotion of the quality of construction of selected mechanical systems and components will be conducted. Included in the scope of this portion of the review are selected mechanical equipment, piping and pipe supports associated with the AFW system.

I 3.2.3.1.1 Mechanico! Equipment - Topic 1.I-lc -

A review of the complete construction chain including verification of the physical configuration will be conducted for the three major mechanical  ;

components selected for detailed review in the IDV. The fabrication docu-

) mentation review will encompass all major supplier documentation, including functional requirement and environmental and seismic qualification documents.

DC-82-13

h I

O l INITIAL SAMPLE REVIEW MATRIX FOR THE AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM MIDLAND INDEPEbOENT DESIGN VERIFICATION PROGRAM SCOPE OF REVIEW SYSTEM / COMPONENT dda<

• E fl i e sf a

6El k; w e g

l 4 2 l

1. MECHANICAL X X X X X e EQUIPMENT X X X X e PIPING X X X X e PIPE SUPPORTS

!!. ELECTRICAL X X X X X e EOUlPMENT X X e TRAYS AND SUPPORTS '

X X e CONDUlT AND SUPPORTS X X X X X e CABLE

!!!. INSTRUMENTATlON AND CONTROL X X X X X e INSTRUMENTS X X e PIPING / TUBING X X e CABLE IV. HVAC X X X X X e EOUIPMENT X X e DUCTS AND SUPPORTS V. STRUCTURAL e FOUNDATIONS X X X X X e CONCRETE X X X e STRUCTURAL STEEL O

FIGURE 3.2-1

PROJECT INSTRUCTION

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Pl. 3201 . 009 Midland independent Design and l DATE: Il/29/82 Cpns}ruction Verification Program l l REV.: o of 80 PREPARED BYq APPROVg:

lPAGE56 a v 1

Included will be the review of the stresses in equipment and supports, including anchorages, as applicable. Storage / maintenance and construction / installation documentation will be reviewed and, where possible, selected associated activi-ties will be observed. Verification documentation associated with o!! major preservice equipment and related system testing programs will be reviewed and where possible verification activities including actual tests will be observed.

The as-built configuration review will include verification of equipment identity, principal features, nome plate dato, location, orientation, and support choroc-teristics, os applicable. Conformance with design documents (including P&lD's, isometrics and equipment location drawings), supplier documents and associated

) installation requirements will be verified.

3.2.3.1.2 Piping - Topic 1.2-Ic This activity will include the review of all major piping fabrication documen-totion associated with the portion of the AFW piping system selected for review in the IDV. Vendor drawings, material certification, shop welding and NDE documentation, as applicable will be reviewed. All major construction /installo-tion documentation will be reviewed including installation specifications, welding and NDE documentation and all associated inspection reports. Verifi-cation documentation related to all preservice testing programs will be reviewed and where possible associated activities will be observed. A field survey of the os built configuration of the selected portion of the AFW system w.ll be conducted to verify routing, location (to tape measure occuracyi, piping diameter, cleanliness and other major piping chorocteristics. Conformance with the applicable design, supplier and other installation requirements will be confirmed.

,m f i N)

DC-82-13

o PROJECT INSTRUCTION s

(

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan PI 3201. 009 -

Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 C9nstruction Verification Program PREPARED BY:

e je

/ . APPROVED B . ~

W /_ >

PAGE 57 of 80 -

s 3.2.3.l.3 Pipe Supports - Topic l.3-Ic A review of the quality of construct:on will be conducted for the pipe supports associated with the portion of the AFW piping system selected for detailed review in the IDV. For those supports selected for review in the IDV, fabrication and installation documentation will be reviewed. Verification documentation including that associated with the pipe support reinspection program will be reviewed and where possible these activities will be observed. Verification documentation associated with all major preservice system testing will also be reviewed and will be observed where possible. Physical verification will include e ioo* veri' ice'ie" er 'he ide"*i'x. iece" ", e"d eriemietro" er eii aine seanor*=

50 j within the selected portion of the AFW piping system. In addition, complete dimensional verification of design details will be made for those supports selected for detailed review in the IDV. Dimensional verification will encompass weld size, quality and location, base plate size and thickness, anci$or bolt size and . location, and other principal features, as applicable.

3.2.3.2 Electrical Systems and Components An evajuotion of the quality of construction of selected electrical systems and components will be conducted. Included in the scope of this review are selected electrical equipment, cable trays and supports, conduits and supports, and electrical cable associated with the AFW system. ,.

3.2.3.2.1 Electrical Equipment - Topic II.1-Ic A review of the complete construction chain including verification of the physical configuration will be conducted for the major electrical components Q (e.g. motor control center, motor operated volve, electrical panel) and cable DC-82-13

n a

PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Progrom Plan pl. 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midiond independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program PREPARED BY: APPRO B PAGE 58 of 80 -

v selected for detailed review in the IDV. The fabrication documentation review will encompass major supplier documentation, including functional requirement

. and environmental and seismic qualification documents. Included will be the review of the stresses in equipment and supports, including anchorages, as applicable. Storage / maintenance and construction / installation documentation  !

will be reviewed and, where possible, selected associated activities will be l 1

observed. Verification documentation associated with major preservice  !

equipment and related system testing programs will be reviewed and, where possible, verification activities including actual tests will be observed. The as-built configuration review will include verification of equipment identity, U principal features, name plate dato, location, orientation, and support character-istics, as applicab!e. Conformance with design documents (including single line diagrams, P&lD's, and equipment location drawings), supplier documents and associated installation requirements will be verified.

3.2.3.2.2 Cable Trays and Supports - Topic II.2-Ic This activity will include o review of all major fabrication documentation and as-built verification of a selected portion of a cable troy and support system associated with a major AFW electrical system. Layout and installation drawings, material cerifications, and other applicable documentation will be reviewed. A field survey of the selected portion will be conducted to verify location (to tape measure occuracy) routing, tray char,acteristics, and support location and configuration. Conformance with applicable design, supplier and other installation requirements will be confirmed. Proper cable assignment to trays, troy cleanliness and tray fill will be selectively verified.

p

, V DC-82-13

1 l

l 1

1

(, PROJECT INSTRUCTION pg_ 3201,.009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Censtruction Verification Program PREPARED BY: / - APPROVID BY:

CLJ/

PAGE __51._. of 80 -e vte s -

3.2.3.2.3 Conduits and Supports - Topic li.3-Ic This activity will include o review of all major fabrication documentation and a field verification of a selected portion of a conduit and support system associated with a major AFW electrical system. The scope of review will be similar to that of the electrical troy and support review discussed in the preceding section. The conduit size and fill will be selectively verified.

3.2.3.2.4 Cable - Topic II.4-Ic O A review will be conducted of all major supplier documentation associated with U

the cable of a selected portion of a major AFW electrical system. The fabrication documentation review will encompass cable material certifications, insulation certifications, stronding and color coding chorocteristics and other applicable documentation. The os-built configuration of a selected portion of the system will be verified including identification, visual inspection, routing, separation, tiedown, terminations and other principal chorocteristics as applicable. The cable terminations will be reviewed for proper lugging and lugging tool docunientation. Cable pull documentation will be reviewed to verify compliance with pull tension limits. Cable meggor and continuity checks will be reviewed to verify installed cable integrity. Conformance with applicable design, supplier and other installation requirements will be confirmed.

3.2.3.3 Instrumentation and Control Systems and Components A review of the quality of construction of selected instrumentation and control (I & C) systems and components will be conducted, lhis review will include selected instruments, piping and tubing, and wiring associated with the AFW system.

DC-82-13

I o PROJECT INSTRUCTION s ,

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan PI 3201. 009 Midland independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Const ruction Verification Program PAGE 60 og 80 PREPARED BY: g APPROV 3.2.3.3.1 Instruments - Topic ill.l-Ic A complete review of the construction chain including verification of the physical configuration will be conducted for selected instruments of a major AFW I&C system. All major documentation will be reviewed including that received from the supplier, storage / maintenance (including calibration) and installation instructions. In addition, the verification documentation associated with preservice l&C system testing programs (e.g. calibration, response time, circuit continuity, trip set points, etc.) will be reviewed and activities observed where possible. The as-built configuration will be verified including instrument O identitx, eeme niete dete, iecetion, meuetie9 conditroes, end other princinoi characteristics, as applicable. Conformance with design documents and specifications, supplier requirements and installation requirements will be verified.

3.2.3.3.2 Piping / Tubing - Topic ill.2-Ic This activity will include o review of all major fabrication documentation and on os-built verification of piping and tubing associated with a selected portion of a major AFW l&C system. Material certifications and other opplicable documen-tation will be reviewed against design requirements. A field survey of the selected portion will be conducted to verify routing, supports, size, slope and volve types. Conformance with applicable design, supplier and other installation requirements will be verified. Preservice hydro test results will be reviewed.

3.2.3.3.3 Cabie - Topic ill.3-Ic

(~'

Q A review will be conducted of all major supplier documentation associated with the cable of a selected portion of a major AFW l&C system. The fabrication DC-82-13 1

o PROJECT INSTRUCTION l pj. 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland Independent Design ond REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Congtruction Verification Program PREPARED BY:I 1

/ -

APPROVED BY:bj __

PAGE 61 of80 c gy, m,

documentation review will encompass cable material certifications, insulation certifications, stranding and color coding chorocteristics and other applicable documentation. The os-built configuration of the selected portion of the system will be verified including routing and terminations (correct tools for lugging,

( proper crimp and lug size). Conformance with applicable design, supplier and l

l other installation requirements will be confirmed. Continuity test results will be reviewed to verify circuit integrity.

3.2.3.4 HVAC Systems and Components O An ev luotion of the quality of construction of selected HVAC systems and components will be conducted. Included in the scope of this portion of the review are selected HVAC equipment, ducts and supports associated with the AFW system.

3.2.3.4.1 HVAC Equipment - Topic IV.1-Ic I

A review of the complete construction chain including verification of the physical configuration will be conducted for a major HVAC component, one of the three major mechanical components selected for detailed review in the IDV.

The fabrication documentation review will encompass all major supplier docu-mentation, including functional requirement and environmental and seismic qualification documents. Included will be the review of the stresses in equipment and supports, including anchorages, as applicable. Storage /mainte-nonce and construction / installation documentation will be reviewed and, where possible, selected associated activities will be observed. Verification documen-totion associated with all major preservice equipment and related system testing programs will be reviewed and where possible verification activities including actual tests will be observed. The as-built configuration review will include DC-82-13

i n PROJECT INSTRUCTION Engineering Program Plan j Pl. 3201 009

SUBJECT:

Midland Independent Design and l REV.: 0 DATE: ll/29/82 Consi ruciion Verification Program PREPARED BYg APPROV .

PAGE 62 d 80 v i

verification of equipment identity, principal features, nome plate dato, location,

orientation, and suppurt chorocteristics, as applicable. Conformance with design documents (including P&lD's and equipment location drawings), supplier documents and associated installation requirements will be verified.

3.2.3.4.2 HVAC Ducts and Supports - Topic IV.2-Ic This activity will include o review of all major fabrication documentation and os-built verification of a selected portion of a duct and support system associated with a major AFW HVAC system. Vendor drawings, material cerifications, and O etser eeniicesie oecementerren wiii se revie-ea. A rieia servex er '8e seiectea portion will be conducted to verify (to tape measure occurocy) routing, duct chorocteristics, and support location and configuration. Conformance with applicable design, supplier and other installation requirements will be confirmed.

3.2.3.5 Structural Components The quality of construction of plant structures will be evoluoted based upon a review of selected structural components. Included in the scope of this portion of the review are selected foundations, concrete structural elements and structural steel components of the structures which house the AFW system.

3.2.3.5.1 Foundations - Topic V.1-Ic .-

This activity will include the review of fabrication and construction / installation l documentation associated with building foundations selected for detailed review in the IDV. The fabrication documentation review will encompass all major l O senniier dec"me"'e'ie" i"ciear"9 meterrei ce< >irice t te"s. reder ei eeme">

drawings, and other opplicable documentation. Construction / installation DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION

< /m PI- 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland Independent Design and REW 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Const ruc, tion Verification Program

/ s APPROVED BY:

PAGE 63 of 80 PREPARED BY:

O / te CLeR a

~

J documentation to be reviewed will include concrete materials documentation, concrete cylinder test results, inspection reports and other opplicable documentation. Conformance with design documents, supplier requirements and associated construction / installation requirements will be verified.

3.2.3.5.2 Concrete Components - Topic V.2-Ic A review of fabrication and construction / installation documentation will be conducted and the as-built configuration will be verified for major concrete structural elements selected for detailed review in the IDV. The documentation f

(] review will encompass all major supplier and construction / installation documen-totion associated with reinforcing steel, inserts and penetrations, and concrete documentation of a selected portion of each component. A field survey will be conducted to verify overall element dimensions (including thickness), location and size of major openings and selected penetrations, and principal chorocter-istics of selected inserts. Conformance with opplicable design, supplier and  ;

other installation requirements will be confirmed. l l

3.2.3.5.3 Structural Steel Components - Topic V.3-Ic This activity will include the review of major fabrication and construction / installation documentation and on as-built verification of the structural steel components selected for deloiled review in the IDV. The f abrication documentation review will encompass shop detail drowings, material certifications, welding documentation, and other major supplier documentation.

Construction / installation documentation will address field welding, botting (torque) and other applicable documentation. A field survey will be conducted tc, verify, where possible, major element chorocteristics including member size, plate thickness, weld size, and bolt pottern ind size for a selected connection of DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan PI- 3201. 009 Midland Independent Design and REW 0 DATE: 11/29/82 C9nstruction Verification Program PAGE 64 of 80 PREPARED BY:

m

/

f s

y~ APPROVEDy-BY:h each member. Conformance with applicable design, fabricator and other installation requirements will be confirmed.

3.2.4 DEFINITION OF REVIEW SCOPE FOR THE (second system - to be supplied) 3.2.5 DEVELOPMENT OF ICV PROGRAM CHECKLISTS Generic checklists were developed for each of the review scope categories discussed in previous sections utilizing guidance os applicable contained in applicable ANSI documents, the construction review program guidelines published by INPO and other industry standards. For each of the construction review scope areas shown in Figure 3.2-1, the reviewer develops a specific checklist incorporating generic checklists os appropriate. In most cases, the specific checklist is derived from the generic checklist by addition of specific requirements opplicable to the construction area being reviewed. In some cases, it may be appropriate to use only a portion of the generic checklist or to develop a unique checklist.

In each case, the checklist prepared by the reviewer will be checked by the lead technical reviewer for the creo. (Note that if the lead technical reviewer prepares a checklist, it is permissible for him to both originate and check the contents of the checklist). During their review process, the lead technical j reviewers examine the checklist for interfaces with other ICV areas and perform o general review of the completeness and adequacy of the proposed checklist.

The LTR's review is to be coordinated with the project manager os necessary to l

(')

U resolve questions which cut across discipline lines. In the event that the Project l Manager or Lead Techncial Reviewers have comments on the checklist, the checklist preparer and those having comments will discuss the comments and DC-82-13

o PROJECT INSTRUCTION

Engineering Program Plan Pl. 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midland independent Design and REW o DATE: il/29/82 Const,ruction Verification Program PREPARED BY: / . APPROVED BY: o PAGE 65 of 80 - aw wv /% J -

- s reach on oppropriate resolution. Af ter reaching concurrence in the adequacy of the checklist, the LTR will indicate his approval and the checklist will be available for use by the reviewer.

The reviewer, having on opproved checklist, con then proceed with the review process for this specified creo, in accordance with Project Instruction PI-3201-001, Engineering Evoluotion Preparation and Control. In performing the evoluotion, the reviewer will document the information which he used in order to complete the checklist. Such information will include component identification, the date or revision number of the associated documents, the document number,

(] and on indication of the source of the information (i.e., where dato and any associated documents were obtained).

3.2.5.1 Development of Checklists for Review of Supplier Documentation The generic checklist for review of supplier documentation was developed considering questions such as:

e What is the identity of the supplier documentation being reviewed (including P.O. number, supplier name, component nome and identification number)?

e Hos the documentation been reviewed and accepted by the oppropriate organization in accordance with procedures?

e is the documentation complete?

e Does the documentation comply with purchase specification  !

requirements? '

O DC-82-13 l 1

l o PROJECT INSTRUCTION i k f l

PI 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland independent Design and REV.: o DATE: 11/29/82 C9nstruction Verification Program PREPARED BY: / s APPROVED BY 66 80 PAGE of a, v N-e Where oppropriate, does seismic and environmental qualifica-tion documentation comply with purchase specification require-ments?

e Have the necessary shipping, handling, storage, installation, and maintenance requirements been specified by the supplier and are these consistent with purchase specification requirements?

For each type of system, component or structural element the lead technical reviewer will supplement the generic checklist with appropriate additional questions, as applicable.

O 3.2.s.2 Deveienmeet ef Checkiists fer neview er ste,eoe eed meietenence Documentation The generic checklist for review of storage and maintenance documentation was developed considering questions such as:

e What is the identity of the storage and maintenance documen-tation being reviewed, including document type (receipt inspection, in-storage /in-place maintenance records, etc.) and document identification (document title, revision, date)?

e What is the identity of the component being reviewed (nome, identification number)?

e Does the documentation for the receiving process include component review against purchase specification requirements?

e Are nonconforming items properly identified, processed and closed out?

e Does the maintenance program meet the necessary require-ments specified for the componeni relative to humidity, q ciecoliness, lubrication, shaf t rotation, energization, etc., os

/ opplicable?

DC-82-13

I PROJECT INSTRUCTION PI 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland independent Design and REV.: o DATE: 11/29/82 Construgtion Verification Program PAGE 67 of 80 PREPARED BV:

g

/

gg APPROVEDy BY: b

\ <

\

l l

For each type of system, component or structural element the lead technical reviewer will supplement the generic checklist with appropriate additional questions, as applicable.

3.2.5.3 Development of Checklists for Review of Construction and installation Documentation The generic checklist for review of construction and installation documentation was developed considering questions such as:

e What is the identity of the construction / installation documento-tion being reviewed, including type (concrete, welding, bolting, t

'") NDE, etc.) and identification (title, revision, date)?

l e What is the identity of the system, component or element and j its physical location in the plant? '

e Are all appropriate construction / installation procedures and instructions identified?

e Are the current revisions of drawings, specifications and other ,

requirements utilized in the work?

e Does the documentation include verification that the work has been performed by properly qualified personnel?

e For those activities observed, do the construction / installation activities conform to requirements?

e llave the necessary inspections been performed?

e Hos the work been performed utilizing the proper tools / equip-ment? } { ave such tools / equipment been properly calibroted in accordance with procedures?

e llove the rework activities been performed in accordonce with p requirements?

O DC-82-13

m PROJECT INSTRUCTION I

'" Engineering Program Plan PI 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midignd independent Design and REV.: o DATE: 11/29/82 Constr'uction Verification Program N APPROVED BY:

PAGE 68 of 80 PREPARED BY:

a/.

~.-

Im m f7 , f e Have deviations from design / supplier requirements been properly documented, processed and closed out in accordance with procedures?

For each type of system, component or structural element the lead technical reviewer will supplement the generic checklist with appropriate additional questions, os opp!!coble.

3.2.5.4 Development of Checklists for Review of Selected Verification Activities The generic checklist for review of selected verification activities was C developed considering questions such as:

e What is the identity of the verification activity being reviewed (cable separation verification, pipe support reinspection, bolting study, pre-service test, including type, etc.)?

e What is the identity of the system, component or element (s) included in the verification activity under review? .

e What is the identity of the verification activity documentation being reviewed (program plan, procedures, instructions, etc.)?

e What is the quality-related objective of the verification activity and does the activity as specified/ documented meet the objective?

e Where verification activities are observed,' do the activities comply with requirements and are they properly documented?

e Are nonconformances properly identified, processed and closed ,

out? l DC-82-13

g PROJECT INSTRUCTION k PI 3201_. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland independent Design and REV.: o DATE: 11/29/82 Ccnst{uction Verification Program PAGE 69 of 80 PREPARED BY: / APPROVgY:{

,y For each type of system, component or structural element the lead technical reviewer will supplement the generic checklist with appropriate additional questions, as applicable.

3.2.5.5 Development of Checklists for Review of Verification of Physical Configuration The generic checklist for review of verification of physical configuration was developed considering questions such as:

e. e What is the identity of the system, component or structural

( element being reviewed (nome, identification number, location in plant, reference design documents)?

e Has the system, component or element been properly tagged / marked for identification in accordance with requirements?

e On the basis of visual inspection, hcs the component been properly constructed / installed and has it been maintained and protected during the construction process in accordance with requirements?

e Does the configuration comply with design requirements, including physical dimensions, location, orientation, name plate dato, grounding, use of proper materials, insulation, routing, etc., as applicable?

e Have deviations from design requirements been properly identified, processed and closed out in accordance with procedures?

For each type of system, component or structural element the lead technical reviewer will supplement the generic checklist with appropriate additional questions, os applicable.

DC-82-13

,o, PROJECT INSTRUCTION PI- 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland independent Design and REV.:o DATE: 11/29/82 C9ns1 ruction Verification Program

~

PREPARED BY: /

80 APPROVED BY:h PAGE 70 of . yy @

v -

l l

3.2.6 PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL SAMPLING, VERIFICATION, AND TESTING The initial sampling and verification within the scope of the ICV is based upon on evaluation of documentation to verify the quality of both inaccessible (e.g. rebor j placement) and accessible systems, components and structures. The quality of )

accessible items will be further verified by visual inspection or measurement as appropriate.

Additional sampling or verification within the scope of the ICV or outside the Q scope into other systems will be conducted if discrepancies are found. The level of additional sampling or verification will be based upon the nature of the discrepancy. In all cases when discrepancies are found, on introspective evaluation will follow to identify the extent and root cause. The root cause may either be rondom or systematic (generic). The additional review will attempt to verify whether the discrepancy is restricted to the specific sy: tem, component, or structure under review; restricted to work by a specific construction organization; or if the discrepancy cuts across many interfaces and applies to similarly constructed systems, components, and structures.

At first, the additional sampling and verification will be directed at on evaluation of additional documentation; however, if this documentation is incomplete or insufficle'nt to identify the extent and root cause of discrepancies; inspection or testing will be considered, as appropriate. If required to supplement internal resources, TERA may consider subcontracting a portion of any required inspection or testing services (e.g. non-destructive examination, materials testing, etc.) to a qualified organization that meets the independence requirements of Section 1.4 of this Plan.

DC-82-13

I PROJECT INSTRUCTION Ch Engineering Program Plan V pj 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Midland independent Design and DATE: 11/29/82 ion Verification Progrom REV.: 0 Construc1 PREPARED BY: / . APPROVED BY:-

m/2 PAGE 71 of 80 -

_ -m -

4.0 DOCUMENTATION Auditable records must be maintained to document substantive elements of the IDCV review and evoluotion process, to document technical conclusions including the status of disposition of items associated with the review process leading to findings, to document the revision of records, and to establish quality assurance measures necessary to provide adequate confidence and assurance of the quality of services. The following sections establish documentation requirements for engineering evoluotions, calculations, field verification, and external communications. Section 5.0 of this Plan establishes the requirements for reporting documentation. Section 6.0 of this Plan establishes the GA d documentation requirements.

4.1 DOCUMENTATION OF ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS, CALCULATIONS, AND FIELD VERIFICATION RESULTS Engineering evoluotions, calculations, and field verification results provide the bases for all substantive conclusions reached in the IDCV. These items provide the " trail" of information which supports IDCV conclusions; both positive and negative, whatever the case may be. While the reporting mechonism established in Section S.0 of this Plan addresses the documentation of reporting require-ments which are generally applicable to negative conclusions, it is equally vital that positive conclusions be justified and documentedlin on auditable form os well.

The requirements for preparation and control of engineering evoluotion docu-mentation required for the Midland IDCV ore contained in Project Instruction PI-3201-001, Engineering Evoluotion Preparation and Control. Engineering DC-82-13

i l

PROJECT INSTRUCTION l g PI 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Cons)rucJion Verification Program PREPARED BY: < APPROVED BY '

PAGE 72 of 80 _ - -f- x v Cks S -

i y

evoluotions are required for tasks such as design criteria evoluotion, commit-ment compliance evoluotion, design evoluotion, construction records evoluotion, and field verification.

The requirements for preparation and control of calculation documentation, including computer analyses documentation, required for the Midiond IDCV are contained in Engineering Control Procedure ECP-5.2, Calculation Preparation and Control. Calculations are prepared as required to verify designs, design parameters, design criteria, performance parameters, evoluote dato, and other-wise provide quantitative information in accordance with accepted analytical and mothematical methods. Calculations are intended to assist IDCV reviewers in reaching necessary conclusions relative to the quality of the Midland plant design.

4.2 DOCUMENTATION OF EXTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS The requirements for the preparation and control of documentation for external communications are contained in Project instruction PI-3201-010, External Communicottons: Preparation of Contact Log Sheets. Under prescribed circumstances, oral communications and meetings that include discussions with parties external to the IDCV review organization must be documented to provide on auditable record of information which may have on impact on IDCV conclusions and the preservation of an independent pr6 cess in reaching these conc!usions. Accordingly, external communications which address the following subjects should be documented consistent with the provisions of PI-3201-010:

e IDCV scope of review e Confirmed items (i.e., potential findings)

DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION p;_ 3201.009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Progrom Plan Midland independent Design and REV.: 0 DA%: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program

%LA APPROVED BY-PAGE 73 og 80 PREPARED BY;. ,jg /

~ & <.)

e Findings s e Findings resolution b Additionally, any information or data having a bearing or potential L: earing on IDCV conclusions which may be obtained verbolly during telecons or meetings should be documented consistent with the provisions of PI-3201-010; however, the IDCV reviewer is encouraged to subsequenity seek written documentation to the some effect from the external party. ,

Findings and findings resolution shall not be discussed with external porties without the consent of the Project Manager. The project manager is responsible for notifying CPC at least one week prior to meetings where findings or findings resolution must be discussed. This is required so that NRC con be notified tFot such meetings will be taking place.

5.0 PROGRAM REPORTING

/

5.1 TYPES OF REPORTS The following types of reports will be prepared in the IDCW e Open, Confirmed, and Resolved (OCR) ltem reports e Finding reports e Finding resolution reports e Final report f) v DC-82-13

1 PROJECT INSTRUCTION I cT c

V p;_ 3201.009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plon '

Mid"ond Independent Design and DATE: 11/29/82 Cons < ruction Verification Progrom REV.:. O PREPARED BY: / '

APPRNED BK -

g PAGE 74 of 80 c.

,s

-W,- NKo s

OCR reports document the disposition of the IDCV review process leading to

'either findings or the resolution of items which have surfaced during the review, but have been resolved of ter considering additional information.

Finding reports document verified deviations in the implementation of design criterio, design, or construction commitments and design cr construction proce-dures in areas such as quality assurance, design or construction control, analysis, design, engineering evoluotion, specificotton, design or constro- tion x implementation or field installation. Findings may fall into two cat < . ties:

those offecting the ability of systems, components, or structures to rrect their O

V Intended safety function and those without on impact to safety functions.

Finding Resolution reports document the conclusions of the review process which hos been undertaken to resolve findings and completely close out any concern about the findings. Finding resolution may require additional analysis, design, or construction changes or procedural changes. Full resolution requires the identification of root cause and extent and a plan for corrective action .if required.

The IDCV Final report documents all substantive conclusions reuched in the IDCV, including the process leading to these conclusions. Both positive and negative conclusions will be identified to provide a balanced perspective and to document a complete record. While the overall IDCV objective is to verify the quality of the Midland project design and construction efforts identifying any deficiencies, it is necessary to have a record which documents items that have

,, been dismissed (i.e., positive conclusions) os the bases for these conclusions are equally imporiont.

l l

i

! DC-82-13

. o PROJECT INSTRUCTION J pg_ 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland independent Design and REW 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Const ruction Verification Progrom

~

PREPARED BY: / -

APPROV(EDLsr BYNa _

PAGE 75 of 80 / fru -

5.2 REPORTING PROCESS 5.2.1 REPORTING SYSTEM The system for IDCV reporting is shown graphically in Figure 5.2-1. This figure provides a diagram or flow chart of the report generation process and a summary of the sequence.

Upon initial technical review, Potential Open items may be identified by on O IDCV reviewer. This determination will be based upon his judgment that a potential deviation exists in implementation of design criteria, design or construction commitments, and design or construction procedures, thus requiring additional investigation or confirmotory analysis by the IDCV review team.

Upon documenting his determination, the IDCV reviewer forwards a preliminary OCR report to his Lead Technical Reviewer (LTR) who reviews it with the project team (Project Manager and all LTRs). If the prcNt team concurs wi.th the reviewer's determination, the Potential Open item becomes on Open item which is formally controlled. The project team may resolve the Potential Open item, .thus requiring reclassification of the item os a Resolved item and modification of the OCR report reflecting this change which is then formally controlled. I l

l The Open item will be reviewed further by the review team until such a point that available information has been depleted. At this time, the IDCV reviewer will prepare a Resolved item report or o Confirmed item report which documents his determination offer further review. A Confirmed item is judged to be. on opparent finding by the review team and requires further action to provide

(] documentation that may not have been available to the IDCV review team. His DC-82-13

REPORT FLOW CHART MIDLAto INDEPENDENT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM O TE CHeC AL A REVIEW BY REVIEW TEAM REVIEW &

RER@ CLA55tFICATON I BYLTR4, POTENTIAL OPEN ITEM y PM v

i r FROPJC RWlEW &

MN RESOLVED CL A55FIC ATON ITEM BY LTR 5. v 1 r

/Ol5POSITON 8Y Plc

• OPENITEM 1 r 1 r 1 r CPC/ORICNAL B R 1W NRC NTERVENOR$ ORCA -

~

ACTION PL AN PREPARATION q y EM CLAS CAION BY LTR'5, F RE LU ON w

r i r COtFIRMED ITEM REVIEW &

RESOLVE ryogyc .D. CLASSIFICATION BY LTR'5,

[ PM DISPOSITON BY Plc

• FitOING PREPARATON OF RESPONSE BY CPC/ORICINAL REV Ew ORCA Z TON IhNA 1 P RE5FONSE FINAL REPORT **

g 1 P 0 0A KEYS PM . DROKCT MANAGER LTR . LE AD TECHJIC AL REVIEWER PIC . PRINCIP. ..IN. CHARGE NOTE:

• Plc TO DETERMINE $RT REVIEW AtO COtaCURRENCE REQUIRED 5RT . SENIOR REVIEW TEAM

• • Dl5TRIBUTED TO CPC, talc APO NTERVUORS CPC . CONSUMERS POWER COMPAt#

FIGURE 5.2-1

PROJECT INSTRUCTION O pl. 3201_ .00'1

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Cpns' ruction Verification Program PAGE 77 of 80 PREPARED BY:

/ p' APPRO

/

recommendation is forwarded to his LTR who reviews the classification and makes o recommendati.on to the project team. The project team may agree with the LTR's recommendation at which point the Resolved item report or Con-firmed item report becomes final. Alternatively, the project team may review the classification and require further work by the IDCV reviewers. All final OCR reports are forwarded to the Principol-in-Charge (PIC) for his concurrence, disposition, and determination whether a formal review is required by the Senior Review Team (SRT). In all cases, the SRT receives o copy of the OCR report irrespective of whether they are requested to undertake a formal review.

(i The PIC may agree with the project team's classification and recommend that v

the Project Manager forward Confirmed item reports to CPC with carbon copies to the appropriate design organizations, or he may reques t a review by the SRT to assist him in making his determination. Alternatively, or in parallel, he may request that the project team or review team conduct further review.

ihe LTRs and IDCV reviewers will then review the additional information received from CPC/ original design organization and make o determination whether the item becomes o Resolved item or a Finding. The LTRs will make the rec.ommendation to the project team who will review the classification. The project team may ogree with the LTR's recommendation, at which point the Resolved item report or Confirmed item report becomes final. Alternatively, the project team may review the classification and require further work by the IDCV reviewers. Upon completion of this process, the OCR report or Finding report is forwarded to the PIC by the Project Manager for a similar review process os has been previously described. Af ter his review and any required review by the SRT, the PIC will direct the Project Manager to forward Finding (l reports to CPC/ original design organization, recognized intervenors, and the t/

NRC.

DC-82-13

q PROJECT INSTRUCTION

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan PI 3201. 009 Midiond Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Const uction Verification Program PREPARED BY: / APPR B PAGE 78 of 80 CPC/ original design organization will respond with cn action plon for resolution of the issues identified. The project team will review the response and determine whether the issue has been resolved. If so, o Finding Resolution report will be issued by the project team for review by the PIC in a similar l fashion as has been previously described. Alternatively, the Finding may not be resolved, at which point it will remain open and documented in the Final report.

It must be noted that this eventuality is not anticipated since closure must be sought by the involved organizations. The final report will document all IDCV conclusions os discussed previously.

5.2.2 REPORT PREPARATION AND DISTRIBUTION The preparation and control of OCR reports, Finding reports, and Finding Resolution reports is oddressed in Project Instruction PI-3201-008, Preparation and Control of Open, Confirmed, and Resolved item Reports, Finding Reports, and Finding Resolution Reports. Section 3.0 of PI-3201-008 provides instructions for report preparation, and Section 5.0 addresses the distribution of these reports.

The Final report will include documentation of all conclusions, including refer-ences to applicable documents that support these conclusions. A draft Final report will be transmitted to CPC and NRC for their review. Resolution of their comments will be documented in on auditable manner. A copy of the draf t Final report will be sent to recognized intervenors. It should be noted that CPC and NRC comments are intended to be of a clarification nature or to correct misinformation. Upon TERA resolution of the comments, the Final report will be issued and distributed to CPC, NRC, and recognized intervenors.

O DC-82-13 l

PROJECT INSTRUCTION h p;. 3201.009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construcjion Verification Program PAGE 79 of 80 PREPARED BY: APPR p 5.2.3 INTERCHANGE OF INFORMATION The requirements of Section 4.2 are not intended to prohibit the informal interchange of information between IDCV personnel and external parties. These communications are essential to the IDCV review process. However, the items in Section 4.2 require documentation for the reasons cited. Furthermore, to preserve the independence of the IDCV reivew process, it is important that IDCV personnel maintain discretion in the dissemination of information bearing on findings to outside F.orties until such a time that this information is final. This procedure will prevent confusion and foster credibility to the IDCV review g process.

v.)

5.3 IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF DESIGN / CONSTRUCTION PROBLEMS It is the duty of oil IDCV personnel to identify any deficiency known to him that may be significant to the public health and safety. He shall be permitted to conduct all reasonable evoluotions necessary to make o determination of the significance of suspected items. IDCV personnel are responsible for presenting their conclusions in a manner that other technically qualified personnel may understand and independently verify. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of IDCV personnel to assess the significance of their conclusions and ottempt to understand the extent and root cause of findings. Any deviation of the above should be brought to the attention of the Project Manager.

O k.

DC-82-13

y PROJECT INSTRUCTION P

d Pl. 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Progrom Plan Midland Independent Design and REV.: 0 DATE: il/29/82 Construcsion Verification Program PREPARED BY: / s APPROVED Byo PAGE 80 of 80 m -j (b/h s s 6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE

~6.1 APPLIC ABLE REQUIREMENTS The Midland IDCV shall be performed in occordonce with opplicable quality assurance requirements of the NRC's regulation 10 CFR 50, Appendix B.

Furthermore, the IDCV will comply with:

e NRC Regulatory Guide 1.28 (6/7/72) including Sections I, 2,3,5,7,17, and 18 of ANSI N45.2-1971 e NRC Regulatory Guide 1.64 (Revision I, 2/75) including d, Sections I,2, and 6 of ANSI N45.2.11-1974 These requirements are implemented by the TERA Corporate Quality Assurance Plan (QAP), Revision 3 (January 1,1980) and the Midland IDCV Project Quality Assurance Plan (POAP), Revision 0 (November i1,1982).

6.2 VERIFICATION OF COMPUTER CODES All computer codes utilized by IDCV onalysts shall be verified as follows:

e Program Verification - The quality of the code should be determined from o comparison of the code generated solutions with known solutions of selected pr6blems.

e Facility Verification - Given that the generic quality of the code has been determined, the capability to reproduce known results utilizing hardware and software available to TERA must be determined.

O erearem verifcettee mex be cemnieted bx extermei nerties, however, feciirtx verification is the responsibility of TERA and must be so demonstrated.

DC-82-13

4 9

ENGitEERING PROGRAM PLAN PROECT INSTRUCTION PI-3201-009 MIDLAND INDEPENDENT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM PROECT 3201 i

I NOVEMBER 29,1982 O/8 l REVISION: O COPY NO.

4 1

l 1

7 PROJECT INSTRUCTION pg_ 3201. 009

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Midland Independent Design and ,

l REV.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Congtruction Verification Program APP D PAGE I of 80 PREPARED BY:) '

l WJ l.0 GENERAL

1.1 BACKGROUND

AND PURPOSE The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued a letter on July 9,1982 which requested that Consumers Power Company (CPC) provide for on independent assessment of the design odequacy of the Midland plant. CPC responded to this 1

request on October 5,1982 by submitting an outline of the scope of a proposed independent review program. A public meeting was held on October 25,1982 of the NRC's Bethesda, Maryland offices to discuss details of the proposed program.

During this meeting, the NRC requested that the scope of the independent design assessment program be expanded, including on assessment of the quality of construction.

TERA Corporation has been selected by CPC and approved by the NRC to scope, manage, and implement the Midland Independent Design and Construction Verification (IDCV) Program. The selection of TERA is based upon the firm's technical qualifications, experience, and independence from the Midland project .

including all individuals who may contribute to the IDCV Program.

l L

This project instruction, or Engineering Program Plan (the Plan), has been established to outline the scope, philosophy of review, methodoiogy, independence requirements, organization, control, documentation, reporting, and quality assurance requirements for the Midland IDCV Program. l The IDCV approach selected is a review and evaluation of a detailed " vertical slice" of the Midland project with a focus on providing on overall assessment of the quality of the design and the constructed plant. Therefore, the primary emphasis of the IDCV evoluotion is on the end results of the design and DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION

SUBJECT:

Engineering Program Plan Pl 3201.009 Midland independent Design and REY.: 0 DATE: 11/29/82 Construction Verification Program PREPARED BY:' / \ APPROVED BYo PAGE 24 of 80 y ,

yV i

NM

,s

\

In Sections 1.3 and 3.1.2 of this Plan were incorporated to develop the initial matrix. The design areas of the IDV review matrix for the AFW system are divided into three major divisions: AFW system performance requirements, AFW l system protection features, and structures that house the AFW system. The design creas oddressed within each of these major divisions are discussed in Sections 3.l.3.1, 3.1.3.2, and 3.l.3.3 of this Plan, respectively. As previously mentioned, the identified review scope is subject ', change depending upon the IDV program findings.

Because the AFW system sample selection interfaces with other systems, it is necessary to define the boundaries for ite.ns within the scope of the IDV. In genercl for the AFW system, the selection was mode to include all components identified as being part of- the AFW system on Bechtel P&lD drawing M439 sheets 3A and 3B, revision 9. Specific interface points are os follows:

i i

DC-82-13

PROJECT INSTRUCTION

$UBJECT: Engineering Program Plan PI 3201. 009 Midland independent Design and REW 0 DATE. I1/29/82 Const[uction Verification Program 25 og 80 PREPARED BY: APPROVE g _j PAGE -

v AFW SYSTEM SAMPLE SELECTION BOUNDARIES Interface Point (component Interfacing System included in AFW)

Main Steam Valves 074 and 077 I NSSS Steam Generator Nozzles Service Water A Valve 283 Service Water B Valve 282 Unit 2 Condensate Tonk (from) Valve 008 Condenser Hotwells Valve 006 Unit I Condensate Tonk (return) Valve 019 Valve 017 Cooling Pond (return)2 Breaker or fuse interfacing AFW oc/dc Power System components with power source ESFAS AFW actuation system and FOGG P Main FW Loop A Volve 303 Vents and Drains First Valve HVAC NOTES:

1. P&lD M-432, Sheet IA, Revision

2. Power supplies dedicated to AFW system are within sample selection boundaries.

l DC-82-13