IR 05000425/1988041

Insp Rept 50-425/88-41 on 880718-25 & 0801-05.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Verification of as-built Const Conditions & Licensee Action on Previous Insp Findings

ML20155A829
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	09/16/1988
From:	Belisle G, Moore L, Wright R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20155A821	List: IR 05000425/1988041 ML20155A817
References
50-425-88-41, NUDOCS 8810060092
Download: ML20155A829 (12)

Text

_ _ - . _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

l

.

'

~

,p uoug l

f*. .

'; UNITED STATES

.

. ; NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o, 8 A E GIO N 11 l

%,

.....

[ 101 MARitTTA ST ATLANTA, Of 9AOIA 30323 I i

d l Report No.: 50-425/88-41 ,

'

Licensee: Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Docket No.: 50-425 License No.: CPPR-109 Facility Name: Vogtle 2 l Inspection Conducted: July 18-25 and August 1-5, 1988 Inspectors: I D E d7 R. W. kright ~~ Date Eigned

• ///F/88

{

NY . Lkh e 9 lN ///

L. R. Moore 7 0(teddiigned Approved by:

G. A. Belisle, ChicF NN.[mh Date Signed 9!/V/98 QualityProgramsSeciton Operations Branch ,

-

Division of Reactor Safety 1 SUMMARY Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection was conducted in the areas of  !

verification of as-built construction conditions and licensee action  !

,

on previous inspection finding [

Results: Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were  !

identifie l

!

!

!

I i l

l l

l

!

l l

i 8810060092 8S0919 PDR ADOCK 0500042 O PDC

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ ______-______________________________ -______-_- _ ______________-____ _____ -

. .

. .

t (

!

,

! REPORT DETAILS

'

< Persons Contacted l l Licensee Employees  ;

.

J. Boddie, Document Control Supervisor

,

P. Brown, Unit 2 Control Room Drawing Clerk

• E. Groover, QA Site Manager - Construction '

C. Harpole Civil QC Inspector Hayes Vogtle QA Manager

'

• C <

t J. Menghi, Electrical Engineer i P. Patel, Stress Group Leader 1 Ramsey, Project Engineering Manager

'

] * *D. Smith, Construction Engineer i i *C, Wreath, Nuclear Operations Superintendent

4 Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included 1

] craf tsmen, engineers, various disciplined GPC and contractor QC inspection i personnel, technicians, document control, and administrative personnel.

l Other Organizations  :

,

! Becthel

0. Niehoff, Civil / Structural Engineering Supervisor l j} S. Thomas, Civil Engineering Building Group Supervisor (

'

O. Strohman, Project QA Engineer

, W. Uhouse "N" Stamp Manager -

"

J. Valder. Quality Engineer  !

i

!

.

_P_ ullman Power Products

}  !

J. Miller. QA Manager  ;

i Southern Company Services j

• J. Bailey, Licensing Manager (

Westinghouse - VSAMU l M. Beer, Technical Assistant I D. Shaw, Project QA Engineer NRC Res .nt Inspector l

,

,

'

R. Schepens, Senior Resident Inspector - Construction I i

• Attended exit intervies  !

I i

! Acronyms and initialisms used throughout this report are listed in the ;

i last paragrap '

I~ i l

. '.

.

O

'

i l

l 2. Verification of As-8uilts ( 37051)

l This inspection was conducted to verify, by sampling, that current design f and construction drawings and specifications correctly reflect the "

as-built plant conditions, that changes from the original design were properly reviewed and approved, and that the plant seismic and other stress calculations are based on as-built conditions. Supplemental review l

'

in thir inspection area was conducted by other Region !! based inspectors *

and the SRC as documented in NRC Inspection Report Nos. 50-425/86-02, 86-36, 87-45, 88-05, 88-10, 88-12, 88-13, 88-19, 88-27, 88-29, 88-30, and 88-38 ,

They inspected various piping, electrical, and structural systems to :

assure that the Vogtle Unit 2 as-built facility is as described in the I FSA , As-Built Program l PP&PM, Part B. Section 5, As-Built Program, deteribes the Vogtle i Project program for developing as-built record '

!

There are two processes by which drawings achieve as-built status, the Atailed dimensional process, wnich is utilized for pipe support and isometric drawings, and the more widely used FCR/DCN/0R proces During the latter process, drawings are periodically updated for i changes during construction based on DCNs/FCRs/0Rs and design i evolution Once construction has completed each system or structure they are turned over to Nuclear Operations. The construction turnover process '

includes applicable walkdowns of systems and structures as required i by the Finalization (walkdown) Programs. The walkdowns are performed i to check that systems and structures are complet These ;

installation coafigurations are also verified against the design t drawings. Any construction work remaining is completed to the !

engineering design documents and any necessary changes are reconciled !

through the FCR/DCN/OR process as appropriat Discussions with l responsible personnel and examination of the August 2,1988 Unit 2 1 l Finalization Programs Status Report revealed that those activities,

,

!

which were scheduled for completion in January 1989, were either on t or ahead of planned schedules.

! i l Governing Procedures i

! The following VEGP manuals and procedures wer: reviewed during this i

! inspection to verify that the licensee had adequate controls over ;

I drawings and change requests and for assuring that seismic and other (

stress calculations were based on the asduilt plant condition:

Plant Vogtle Field Procedure Manual  ;

!

'

CD-T-16, R10. Structural Steel and Q-Decking  !

DC-A-01, RIS, Drawing Control  !

,

i l

_ _ - _ - _ _ _ . _ - - - - _ _ _ _

_

. '.  !

. l

t L

l DC A-03, R16. Change Requests and Notices  !

'

EO-T-02, R13. Raceway Installation E0-T 07, R13, Cable Installation i ED-T-08, R11, Cable Temination i

GD-T-01, RIS, Nonconformance Control QC-T-05, 29 Visual Inspection YEGP Nuclear Operations Procedure 00101-C, R5, Drawing Control l

'

00103 C RS. Document Distribution and Control 70408.C. R3, Controlled Document Distribution 91701-C, R1, Preparation and Control of Emergency Planning l Documents l l

VEGP Project Policy and Procedure Manual Part B l Section 5. As-Built Program l Addendum 2, As-Built Matrix VEGP Project Reference Manual. Part C, Engineering [

Section 4 Bechtel Drawings Section 8 Specifications and Procurement Section 9. Design Calculations e

'

Section 26. Construction Specifications Section 35, Change Control Packages j VEGP Project Reference Manual Appendix 2, Engineering Field Procedures Section 17, Final Design Verification for Safety-Related Piping ;

Systems i i

VEGP Finalization /As-Built Program Manual  !

l FP-4, High Temperature Pipe / Electrical Recovery Separation i FP-5, Electrical Raceway and Cable l

'

FP-6, Cable / Wiring Separation in Multi-Train Panels l FP-7, Final Design Yerification for Safety Related Piping i Systems l FP-9, Structural Integrated Verification and Evaluation l l

PPP Procedure Manual 1 X-24, R 8/6/87 As-Built Piping Systems and Related Components The inspectors conducted discussions with personnel responsible for the design and final evaluation of the as-built condition for the Unit 2 ASME Class IE raceway and cable and for Seismic Category I structure Based on these discussions and review of the above

_

.

.

4 ,

l control procedures, the inspector concluded the licensee has  !

~

developed an adequate program to assure that current drawings reflect the as-built status of the plan Examination of the above procedures verified that administrative j controls and responsibilities had been established to assure the ;

following:  !

!

Interim basis design change documents were properly reviewed i approved and safeguarded until they were incorporated in the i drawing ,

i

'

Programs required users to employ the latest design document and applicable change ;

,

When design changes were incorporated in drawings, these ;

I drawings were issued and distributed in a timely manner, i

<

(1) Piping Systems (

l Verification of piping system as-builts was accomplished by I l a piping fabricction isometric drawing field verification ,

I sampl The sample content was 12 latest revision i isometric drawings encompassing 6 safety-related system l The piping system portions reviewed were ASME Classes I, !!, [

or !!!, Seismic Category 1, and were located in the !

auxiliary and containment buildings. No deviations between i the field installations and the current revision of the i fabrication isertetrics were identified, i

The ASME Class ! piping examined by the inspectors was [

located in the containment building. The greater majority t of this piping had completed the licensee's as-butit }

l reconciliation process and was insulated. The ASME Class j

'

!! and !!! safety related piping examined was located in i the auxiliary buildin Some ASME class !! small bore l piping which was examined was located in containment. The i majority of this piping, approximately 90 percent, had also i corepleted the licensee's as-built reconciliation progra Licensee verification activity for as-built conditions with !

design conditions was evident due to recent revisions to the isometrics and actual dimensional measurement!. f

,

incorporated into the drawing l l

The inspectors reviewed piping system supports, welds, and ;

piping to verify that the as-built drawings reflected the [

physical installation in the plan The piping support locations, types, and configurations were; examined for confomance to the piping support drawings referenced in the j fabrication isometrics. Each piping system portion examined !

contained 10 to 20 pipe supports and the specific pipe support i drawings provided locations, dimensions, and a configuration j sketch for each support. All pipe supports identified on the i

!

.

5 current revision isometrics were verified and each confonned to the applicable referenced pipe support drawing. Pipe welds were verified for location and identification. All welds indicated '

on the fabrication isometric were located and identified in the field. Piping was generally reviewed for configuration, size, component location and orientation, labeling, proper ASME Class r designation, and type. Component configurations and dimensions in the field were as identified on the isometric drawings. The !

following piping system fabrication isometrics were utilized for l this as-built verification inspection:

Drawing Revision System 2K4-1201-022-02 5 RCS

'

2K4-1201-023-02 5 RCS 2K3-1202-002-01 7 NSWS 2K3-1203-001-01 5 CCS 2K3-1203-011-01 4 CCS 2K3-1204-002-03 4 SIS 2K4-1204-024-03 9 SIS 2J4-1204-143-01 2 SIS 2K3-1208-316-01 3 CVCS 2K3-1208-316-02 4 CVc5 2 K3-1302-020-01 8 AWS 2K3-1302-029-01 5 AFWS Based on the sample of this as-built review, it appeared that the licensec as-built reconciliation program has been effective in assuring as-built design and construction drawings correctly reflect the as-built plant conditio (2) Electrical Cables Electrical cable as-built review was accomplished by verifying l

cable routing for a sample of safety-related component Each component selected was verified to the applicable wiring diagran or drawing from the motor control center to the component terminatio The verification included cable routing, identification, protection, isolation, and termination, No discrepancies between current drawing revisions or termination cards and the ;

physical installation were identified by this revie The following safety-related component's Class IE cable routings were verified:

2HV 8105 2HV 8116 2HV 8835 RHR Purp, motor train Pump, motor train A.

l l

,

.

.

l

. .

!

!

The cables were traced from the component thru the junction ;

! boxes, where applicable, to the motor control centers via conduits and cable trcys (raceways). The following layout I drawings and wiring diagrams were utilized: i D'rawing Revision Drawing Revision 2X3DF454 12 2X3DCH1070 0

, 2X3DF42E 3 2X3DCAF178 1 2X3DF444 11 2X3DCHH07N 1 ,

l

'

2X3DF455 10 2X30CHH078 1 2X3DF456 7 2X3DCAF16C 1

'

'

2X3DCAF160 1 Cable terminations were as designated in the applicable drawings and termination cards. Cable trays and runs were as identified on layout drawings. Cables, trays and conduits were clearly labeled. The inspector verified that the cables contained in raceway 2AE454RL134 were as designated in the Cable and Conduit Routing Lis The listed cables for this conduit were i consistent with the cables which were actually installed. The !

sample of electrical cables examined indicated that as-built electrical drawings reflect actual installed condition (3) Structures FSAR, Section 3.8.3, Concrete and Steel Internal Structures of Concrete Containment, and Section 3.8.4, Other Category I l

'

Structures, describe applicable codes, standards and specifica- i tions for the design, materials, fabrication, construction, ;

inspection, and testing of these structure l

.

The inspectors randomly selected the following listed internal ,

s tructural steel assemblies located in Unit 2's containment, '

auxilihry, control, and diesel generator buildings for inspection. These structural steel assemblies were inspected to ;

verify that their erection was accomplished in accordance with l the latest approved applicable drawings. The subject assemblies I were examined for proper member sizes, joint location, I orientation, material type, bolting, and welding, to confirm that i these structures were acceptabl Additionally, the NRC l inspectors had the GPC QC inspector verify the acceptability of i I the existing torque (1475-FT-LBS required) on the 1 1/8 - inch i l diameter, A-490 high strength bolts located in containment beam l l

connection No.10.

l Containment - Beam to Beam Connections Nos. 7, 10 l i Building Elevation 220. Loop 1

,

-

I

,

. .

Containment - Orawings 2X2048F209, R0 Building 2X2048F201, R2 i

'

2X2048F215, R2

Auxiliary - Room pA-103. Steel Framing Building Connection Nos. 95, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101 Drawing AX2008G025, R9, Detail B Control - Room RB-05 Steel Framing Plan Building at Elevation 200 Connection Nos. 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151 Drawing AX2011F007,RI!

Diesel Generator - Stairwell Framing Building Drawing 2X2007F001, R3

'

2X2007G002. R1, Section C AX94V019, R34

- Fuel Oil Day Tank Structural Steel Support Drawing 2X2007A001

2XD07A005 R2  ;

C-FCRB-19908; C-FCRB-20147

,

No problems were identified with the Unit 2 structural steel as- ;

built program. The inspector examined the STRIVE Unit 2 Final l

'

Report which was prepared in accordance with Finalization r

.

Program FP-9 .?equirements . This program provides a documented !

I and verifiable record of the reconciliation of existing loads and structural configurations for selected potentially critical structural components existing in Unit 2's containment, l auxiliary and control buildings. The limited number and minor i i nature of structural modifications necessary as a result of the (

study attest to the adequacy of existing design assumptions, t

'

'

design change controls, and conservatism exercised in the

, structural steel are ,

,

c. Review of Design Changes l (1) In-process Changes  ;

The inspector examined five pisn: changes (FCRs) CFCRB-23506, !

'

CFCRB-23510 CFCRB-23511 MFCR6 '.8759, and YFCRB-7164 that were in the review process. These Fs'Rs were in various phases of engineering discipline review, hait not yet received the project Engineer's approval, nor had th9y been incorporated into j as-built drawings. The repor. for the subject change, its '

impact on the original design and other disciplines, the status '

of review and approval, and the potential need for drawing !

! changes were discussed with the C/S Building Group Superviso l l

'

l l

--

.,

i

'

I .

.

l The inspector concluded that these FCRs were being properly processed in accordance with the licensee's procedure (2) As-Built Changes The inspector compared 15 changes (DCNs and FCRs) to the fabrication isometrics (as-builts) to verify their incorporation into the drawings, input into the stress and seismic calculations, and review approval proces The field changes consisted primarily of configuration changes due to interferences and piping support deletions or addition All changes reviewed provided adequate documentation of the review and approval process and incorporation into drawings and calculation Changes were initiated via FCRs er DCNs which were attached to drawing These changes were eventually incorporated into drawings by subsequent drawing revisions. Stress calculations were accomplished via a computer program utilized by BPC which maintains an up-to-date piping system model. Programatic controls required all FCRs to be reviewed by the stress calcula-tion organization for potential impact on stress calculation The computer model was periodically updated with the drawing revision and these revisions received a more in-depth review for impact on stress and seismic calculations. Stress calculations for the as-built piping portions reviewed in the previous paragraph utilized the current applicable drawing revision which indicated that the as-built plant condition was used as an input to the system seismic analysis. Field changes, MFCRB-16455 and 16557 to drawing 2K4-1201-022-02, were reviewed to examine the process for incorporating field changes into stress calcula-tions. These FCRs reduced the weld size and weld leg length on various 2-inch pipe welds and were incorporated in revision 4 of the drawing. This revision was transmitted to the Westinghouse Pittsburgh organization responsible for stress calculations by the Vogtle Lead Engineer, Reconciliation Group via 1,ransmittal.,

BB-02-60 An acknowledgement letter from Westinghouse, Pittsburgh to the onsite Westinghouse group V-SAMU, dated January 20, 1988, indicated that this revision had been incorporated into the applicable stress calculatio The following changes were reviewed for physical field installation, drawing and document revisions, and adequacy of review process:

Drawing 2K3-1203-001-01 MFCRB-7234F, changed component cooling vent valve piping due to interference

. - - . - - - _ - - _ - - _ - .. - - _ _ _ , _ _ .- ,

____ _

.

.

9 ,

!

,

'

Drawing 2J4-1204-143-01

,

MFCRB 8822P, coupling added to piping

'

run to facilitate installation DCN 3, added and deleted piping supports [

t Drawing 2K4-1201-022-02 i MFCRB-6849F, changed piping configuration due to '

l interference NFCRB 18243 F, changed piping configuration due f to interference l DCN 3, deleted a support  !

Orawing 2K3-1204-002-03 MFCRB-7131F, translated piping run due to interference DCN 2 removed piping support l

Drawing 2K3-1302-029-01  !

'

MFCRB 1796F, change in size of flow element DCN 1 of revision 1, added elevation notation ,

to drawing l DCN 3 of revision 4 deleted piping supports t

Drawing 2K4-1204-024-03 l DCN 8 of revision 0, deleted piping supports i

DCN 7 of revision 7, corrected drawing discrepancy l MFCRB 7015F, changed spoolpiece configuration f

!

Orawing 2 K3-1203-011-01  !

MFCRB-7399F, changed piping configuration l

No discrepancies were noted with respect to physical installation, !

document incorporation, review process, or stress calculation input f for the completed as-built drawing changes reviewed during this !

inspectio j d. Operations Interface PP&FN, Part B Section S. Addendum 2, The As-Built Matrix, describes the license's comitment for proYiding as-built documentation to l satisfy the needs of site operations and maintenance personnel when l

,

i l

I

- _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

.

-

r

,

commercial operations are initiated. This operational comitment specifies the as-built drawing types that must be available and i necessary to support routine operations and for abnormal and/or emergency operation Nuclear Operations Procedure 00101-C Drawing ,

, Control, specifies that the Docuntnt Control Supervisor is l responsible for assuring that records (listed in Table 1 of Procedure 91701-C) which pertain to the as-built conditions of the plant are stored and filed at the site and are accessible to emergency response facilities under emergency condition Based on the current status of the Unit 2 Finalization Program it appears the licensee will [

complete the required as-butit documentation prior to comercial i operatio ; Action on Previous Inspection Findings (92701) (92702) l (a) (Closed)VIO 425/80-28 01, Failure to Utilize Certified Field Level

!!! Inspectors as Comitted to by ANSI N45.2.6-197 !

The licensee's response dated July 19, 1983, was considered i acceptele by Region !!. The inspector examined the licensee's draft

'

amendment to Section 1.9.58.2 of the FSAR (Exception No.5) which  !

discusses the Unit 2 use of Level !!! Administrators and describes j their res ponsibilities , functions, and minimum education  :

requirements. This FSAR change currently carries change number (CN)

GN-1474 and is scheduled to be incorporated in Amendment A-38 around i October 7, 198 The inspector concluded that the Unit 2 QC  :

inspector program was now properly described in the FSAR, that the  !

licensee had determined the full extent of the violation, taken l action to correct the condition and prevent recurrence of similar >

problem The corrective actions stated in the licensee's respo.ise ,

are being implemente (b) (Closed) UR! 425/88-34-01, Missing Project Engineering Organization  !

Training Documentatio *

The NRC inspector examined the actions Engineering has taken to date l and plans to take in the future to resolve CAR-VS-88-231 resulting i from DFC QA audit No US-1-8 Discussion, with the QE and i examination of records verified that the missing training records for  :

the nine personnel identified in the subject CAR, and by the NRC  !

l inspec tor, have either been retrined from other sources, the personnel have been retrained, or are scheduled for retrainin Engineering has comitted to perform a 100 percent training record i review for all current, permanently assigned engineering personne l Additionally, they have de) eloped a computerized tracking system to be applied to each permanently assigned person in engineering to assure that required training is provided and maintained, i

_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _

t . ,

.

'

i i

11 l l

i  ! Exit Interview j r

,

The inspection scope and results were summarized on August 5,1988, with  !

i those persons indicated in paragraph I. The inspectors described the

.

areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results listed l l belo l 1 Proprietary information is not contained in this repor Dissenting I

'

! conants were not received from this licensee.

i l

,

Licensee management was infonned that the one VIO and one URI discussed in  !

paragraph 3 were considered close [

!

j Acronyms and Initialing i

AFWS - Auxiliary Feedwater System  !

ANS! - American National Standards Institute  !

! ASME - American Society of Mechanical Engineers j

! BPC - Bechtel Power Corporation l j CAR - Corrective Action Request [

] CCS - Component Cooling System j

! CVSS - Chemical and Volume Control System l i DCN - Design Change Notice j i DR - Deviation Report  ;

) GPC - Georgia Power Company

,

FCK - Field Chang 6 Request i 2 FSAR - Field Safety Analysis Report  !

j WC - Nuclear Regulatory Comission

, N WS - Nuclear Service Water System j PPP -

Pullman Power Products -

1 PP&PM - Project Policy and Procedures Manual i OA - Quslity Assurance

! QC - Quality Control j QE - QuaVity Engineer i

, RCS - Reacto,- Coolant System  !

RHR - Residual Heat Removal (system)

!

SIS Safety injection S,' stem '

) SRC - Senior llesident intpector - Construction j STRIVE - Stru>:tural Integrated Verification and Evaluation  !

]

URI - Unresolved Item i j VEGP - Vogtle Electric Generating Plant  !

] Y!O - Violation i W -VSA.MU - Westinghouse - Yogtle Structural Analysis

, Mobile Unit j 1

<

!

l j

l l

1