ML20209E229
| ML20209E229 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 06/27/1986 |
| From: | Engelhardt J, Lagergren W TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20209B481 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8702040617 | |
| Download: ML20209E229 (10) | |
Text
Wv A!!AOPJ'.EN! E Reeisier. '
..e.r n..e..e r e yA. e.v. A...,10 E. v.
.o-.
CE!! EIC C0i!C"E: !ASE F0ECE e
$ (,;,(( ~ Q ( 'D )
G;:F E:nployee concern tJumber: II;-05-463-006
^
Subjec;: !ypical Drawings f er Instr :nentaticn' D ta of Investigation: June t.,
1986 v'
(
Cho !i ~~'%&:.::.
lN
,6 (
2-2nvestig;;cr:
-. E..im.elbr.:d:
Dt:s
~
h.D 4 / ll Reviewed Ey:
MS"d sC/
MA/
d-~ f o#b GO!F liccoer Dr..e
%.C.O
- s WW%
(e'-2L t.pproved Ly:
e fe.li. E. l.ctergren D:te
~p
.m i*
('-,'!
. l;.?
' / fi
.o'
,. s.:.,7 4 e s e,.: -
,(
. s.
liRG iiemoor Ds:s t!DE;7G Lc:e 0724:
370204061{ Q h 27 PDR ADOC PDR P
m._
_y__
.--_____________________.__..____7-__________._______._____.____
Eev;s!Cn 1 I.
Background, An investigation was concutted at Seguoyan *c ce: ermine the valicity cf
(
an expressed concern as received by Outli:y Technoloty Company (Q7C)/ Employee Response Team (ET.7) for Va::: bar Nuclear Plan:.
The concern was determined o be generic for Sequoyah by the Ua :s Sir Concerns Response Test Force. The concern of record, as su==tri:ed en the Employee Concern Assignmen Request form from QTC and icentified as IN-ES-463-006, stated:
Unit 2 systems have many problems with instrumentation insts'lt:fon (e.g. with interferences) because until recently, there was no typical installation detail drawings.
Ins:ruments installed per Drawing 2-TS-30-74 A/B (both units) had no ":ypicals" and thus had no specific inspection acceptance criterit. One drawing was recently revised to provide installation typical mounting cri:eria but many instruments were installed before :his revision (47W610-30).
No further information was requested from the EF.T follow-up group.
II.
Scope A.
The scope of this investigt:fon was determipe6 from this concern to be one specific issue.
Are adequate " ypictl" drawings provided for safe:y-reitted instrument insttilations.
E.
To accomplish the investigt:fon, interviews were conducted with Office of Engineering's (OI) Seguoyth Preject Instrument and Control Superviser, former Construction Instrument Superviser t:
Watts Bar Nucletr Plan: and Instrumen:ction personnel.
Scme Wt::s Bar site instrument " ypictl" drawings, the results of the unccmpleted electrical qutlifications "wtit couns" cnd the Gilber:
Ccmmonwetith F.epor were reviewed.
III.
Summary ef yindings Io help tecess the problem rtised by the concern individut1 the initici review was completed c: Watts her Nuclear Plant.
From conversetiens with a former Wt::s Etr Construe:ica Ir.strumen:t:fon Superviser !: was de: ermined that scme safe:y related instrumen:s were inettliec a: the discre !on of the Construction Field Engineer. These in:;ruments cre shown on the 47W 610 drawings as lectlly mounted instruments.
Freiious to :he early 1980s the Construe:!cn Field Engineer had to determine how the lecc11y mounted instrument was to be insttiled. After r.is time 47A050 series drawings were changed to incluce ":ypictis" fer seismi:
noun:ing of instrumen:s.
The ins:rumen: cf recort. (1-FS-30-74 A/3) en lower con:cinmen: cocier A-A, is one of the lectily mounted ins:ruments. A field verifict:fon of :his instrument Page i cf 3 O.
4
F.evision 1 1;;. Sc=mtry of Findings (continued)
N was completed E:
E::s Bar.
!! was ceterrined int; the safe;y.relt;ed
=
- (*'
instrumen; was ins tiled on E mount as shown on crewing 47AC50-19E cated
"~
retruary 4, 19E:. wnich is a ':ypictl" Catescry : support fer ins;ruments.
During :he instrument qualifications for harsh environmen: "wtikdowns" at Sequoyah some generic problems were discovered with instrument mountings.
1.
18 out of 56 "model 764" Larton transmi::ers had their mounting brackets reversed.
2.
Fosboro transmi::er mounting brackets did not have the required 75-ft/lb torquing.
3.
S:stic "C" ring temperature switches were mounted with 2 U-bolts, instead of 3.
There were tiso some other isciated cases of incorrect instrumen; mountings.
Gilbert /Cemmonwetith Report (Keference 1), wri::en ef ter a technical review of Seguoyah modifict:f ons, determined thts thtre is a problem (technical issue da:t sheet number 10) with the' mounting of so.ge instruments. This was due to e itch of design dettils provideetn the design drawings showing how the instruments mounting pittes were to be" mounted to the instrument rachs.
~
Trem interviews with the OE I&C Supervisor it was determined the OE does presen:1y provide " ypictis" for safety-reitted instrument mountings but :here is still a problem with proticing adequate de:til of
.the cceplete mounting to assure correct instt111:icn. This was pointed out by :he Gibert/Commonwetith report (Reference * ).
!T. Conclusions The issue cf adeque:e typical drawings was verified fer the fellowing ressent:
1.
There were not " ypictl" drecings fer lect 11y mounted stf e:y reisted ins:rumen:s before early 1980s.
2.
The environmen:ti qualifice:icn "wtikdowr.s" have shown tht: there tre problems with instrumen; mountings.
2.
The Gilber /Cemmonwegith report showed tht: there tre distrepenties with instrument moun:ings due to inadequate cesign drsvings.
- .Ege 2 cf 3 k
-.,... 3 Kevisier. 1 v.
Rece=mendations
~~~'
before Restert
"*'altdowns," to verify prcper installatier., should be ecm;;e ted en 1.
=
all ~.'A installed safety-related instruments required fcr safe shutdown. mitigate core camage or to prevent releases in excess of 10 OTR 100 limits with any discrepancies found corrected.
l 2.
OE should provide adequate drawings for all TVA installed safety-related instrument mount,ings required for recommencation 1.
/.fter Reste-t "Utltdowns," for all remaining TVA installed safety-related 3.
instruments not completed in recommendation 1 to verify proper installation should be completed.
OE should provide adequate drawings for the remaining 771 insttiled 4.
safety-related instrument mountings required for recommendation 3.
VI.
References 1.
Gilbert /Commonwetith Report, " Technical Review ~of Sequoych Nuclear Plant Modifications " dated Mt:ch 3, 1986 (G/C report 2614) 2.
Watts Bar }{utlear Plant Drawing 47A051-195 Revision 2 l
3.
Watts Es: Nutlear Fitnt Procurement Contract 771:11-E21157, " Vender inf ormation f or Dwyer Differential Pressure Switches"
4 llemorandum from P. E. Wc11 ace to E. L. Abercremble dated l
April 30, 1986, (S53 860418 999) f 4
l-
_.--....w.-.-
y.
1 A~! ACID'ENT C.
/
PAGE / OF 6 M <rtire;.
.r ~.e. o. e O n~ t.r.~..., \\.r.
-Action ~ act.ine lioet. ment t
- - -( C;. D )
~ -
IN TICIO!;
1.
Immediate Corrective Action he9uired:
// Tes /N/ lio 2.
Stop Mork Reconnended:
// Tes
/.7 / No 3.
CCDNo.
80501-S01:-l 4.
5.
FISP0!iSIBLE ORGAN 1;C10N:
IN!!!C10N DCE 9/23/86 6.
PROELIM DESCRI?! ION:
/3/ QR /~/ HQE
~
Inere is no evioen=e na: the reconznenca tions ioentifiec in the Generie Cone n Task Force heoor: f or En:olovee Concern IN-D-46: -
006 had ever been addressed.
A tachment te Element heocr: 80301-SON. hevision 0
/ /A CACH".ENTS
- 7.
?72?AFID EY:
NA".E.
J. E. Mann DA~I.:
E.
CONOUR72NCE:
CIG-E R. R. Maxon DCE:
C.
APPROVI~: ICTO PROOFM. MOR:
DCI:
CORPICTI\\'E AC ION 10.
PROPOSED COT.F20!!VI AC 10N PL/Jt:
Sc--s-^ C/ 7 '7&V1,.*S M IT75'D 3 V /fDfM/s)D v/A S // ? b/10 T C* C i
- ;,...g
- m.. i..y...c --
11.
IF.0?OSED II: D;?iOTOF/MOR:
V. R. 's Wh DCE: " H: 8 t~r A
C0b.
l,,.
C,.
+
, ur.: :. i :..
- .v r DA..: :
SF.?:
DA~I. :
E C T O P P 0 0 7 M. M O P.:
DCE:
TII TIC CION AND C1.CSIC7' 13.
A;; roved ccrre::ive actions i=plemented.
have been verified as satisf a::crily
.e. A h.....
r. :.:.
Dr..s-4 g
k*
....__. - ~
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ ' ' ' ' ~ ~ ~.,, _,
%..------e--~
"~
~, _
_y_
.__,,e ev---="*
~ '
~
r
- 3. rm 's: cts cover.xxr.v-S 8 6 1 1 0 ~4 zS03 A CACW.ENT C.
/ Of 6 Mcm0TCndim TENh ~ - V..LI.EY 3"%QoR L'. E. Erown, Program Manager, Employee Concerns Tast Group, ONP, We :s har
-70
).uclear Plant TROM H. L. Abercrombie, Site Director, ONP, OLPS-4, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant November 10, 1986 pgg s nJrCT:
SEQU0rAE NUCLEAR PLA1.7 (SON) - EMPLorEE CONCEPJ.'S TLSI GROUP (ECTG) ELEMEf.T REPOEI 805.01 SQN - QA/QC CLTEGORY - CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (CAP)
References:
1.
Tour memorandum to r.e dated October 2, 1986, " Watts Bar Nuclear Plant - Employee Concerns Iast Group (EC7G) Element Report 80501-SQN - Engineering Documen: Qur.lity (Sequoyah)"
(725 861002 873) 2.
E. E. McGuire's memorandum to E. C. Denney dated November 5, 1986, "Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SON) En ployee Concerns Inst Group (ECIG) Elements Reports - Repor:
805.01-Review and Corrective Plan (CAP)" (Ell 86*.105 801--
copy attached)
I acknowledge receip of your element report and in accordance with your reguest (see reference 1), Element Repor 805.01 SQN has been reviewed for ".?y:.','.
applicable corree:ive. action.
i.* tl../.
M,-~..-
By this memorandum I an endorsing the site'line organi:r. tion CAPS, returning?
~.
your Corrective Action Iracking Document No. 80501-SQN-1, and r.:: aching the CAPS f or your review / concurrence.
One of these CAPS is required fer restart.
' If you agree with the proposed CAPS, please sign the ICTG concurrence space below item 9 on the CLP tracking chechlist and return the CLP tracting checklists.
0.R. h> 5 0vro
-ve.,./ F.. L.1Dercrorcig. 1 )y pw l
l ECD:JDS:JS:CS
' E :lem *c.:t ns Task 1::achments Cf 0 WBN cc (Attachments):
'Now.e.a.g EIES, EE 4N 721.-C E3
- 1. G. Debbate, ONP, ECTG Erilding, k'3N QP C2E':
,~rw
,~
y ra y
y n:
- 5 i
y h-S::
c r
s a
e
/7': e - -e v/,
--j e
" ' nu f
-k.
o c
i 7
s E::r U.S. Sn:ine Eond.c Rc:::!cr!v cr: 0:c.=: ol! Se:& ~ =b
.,,,,a. s ea na sows u SJJ l 10. O tm en s ;. :s covenNxcN
~..=.'i.'i.=..c.~.=..= w..s.,
.g.,_ ;,
i
,h C111 0 T G il C U ill o
- .=. v..: u...u. o s.. m..
~
m H N//4 a
E C D'""'F' E
IOJ** E0" '""5 52'Oi'I E"
- I "8"0E*"'
TO FROM M. t'.. M:Guire, Configura-ion Con:rol Manacer, ONP, O&PS-2, Secuoyah DATE November 5, 1956
SUBJECT:
SE000YAH NU LEAR PLANT (SON) EMPLOYEE CONCERNS TASK GROUD (E;TG) ELEMENTS REPORTS - REPORT S05.01-REVIEW AND 00RRICTIVE PLAN (CAD)
Reference:
Your memorandum to me dated 0:tober 10, 1986 "Seouoyah Nu: lear Pian: -(50H)
Employee Con: erns Task Group (ECTG) Eiemen:
Resorts - Repor 805.01 - Review and Corre::ive A:: ion Plan (CAP) Initiation" (503 851010 802).
I have evaluated the referenced employee con cen report and your CATD a tached to tne recort. Tne CATD prediem cescrip-ion rea:s "Tne e is no evioen:e tna; the re:ommenda-ions ioen-ified in the Generi Con:ern Task Force (G TF) report for.IN-25-453-005 emaioyee con:ern his ever meeri ac-oressed." I have seen trackino a:: ions beine taken to acoress IN-E5-463-006 in my files. Main enan:e personnel (Ron Giaaney) had indi:ated hey were adoressing the emaioyee con:ern IN-E5-465-005. SMi-0-317-26 was accroved on May 23, 1985 and revised on August 7, 1985 for the purpose of field verification of the interface (installation recuiremen s) of CSS: Foxcoro iransmitters., Tne maintenance se:: ion indicated these walkdowns have been compie ed but all hems have not been esolved. Tne maintenan:e se:: ion indicated they were no: certain their walkdowns aodressed :ne entire G TF re:o=nenda-ions.
DNE has co=oie:ed wo corre::ive a:-ion plans E-a:hed (pre-restar and pos;-res art). The ore restart oian will accress the.G TF re:c=ientations and wiii ensure any remaining walkcowns-no: previous'iy cone oy maintenan:e are s:heduled.
Tne cest restart a:: ion olan is to be s:ne,uiet at a inter date. Inese corre::ive a:: ion plans oy DNI ao:ress IN-25-463-005.
I would like to draw your E-er.-ion o se:: ion 5.2.6 of your recort and m:he a clarifka ion of :ne its: otragraon in nat se:: ion that reats "A Corporate configuration program manager nas been named and TVA has :c=.itted o deveios an ke-eyed pregram for aii :W.Jy July,1S85".
ineshe is awakino the issue d
~ ------ e pian. Tnis pian nas no: Deen issued
- o the she as of tniY cy$E,L It E. R ANKIN uan,w at enam
\\
(
ciu)w. L
/ OAs.
I 13 00..&
n
- g. ce:3r.
(R-WP.:JH A::acnment l
4 t
ec: See list on page E.
I ! i mp i i t i
.n n
- .5 j
p 6M r-tjp:
c!D
A IAOF#.IN C.
/
PACI 7 OT 6 W 'ed u/;
R. C. Denney SE000YAH tiu :A PLAr., (5g;;) : 3, ny..
n r.:..o,.
5 - REpog7 805.01-ret'IE[l'd3 k,ot,, _
w..
15 7.5 GRDF T*) Ei9 a 3 IO:
ELMS, MR 4ti 72A-c h.[..Anorews.OfiPy.. AcercromDie. OfiD O&DC-4. Seouoyah
'~
O&ot ~' 5 II. Buchanan. OtiD R. v. 01 son
- Dti:. c:2. Seouoyan.ONC 5
'*"*!*h u.
'5 a
3U)iivan, Otip po:-g S D. W. Wilson. DriE, hSt.[. Seouovak e
e 9) e W
b e
8 s
e.
99 P
.A I
J l
i
--w g---yp
,-.+--m, o
r-p w+
y mv-7 3
I
.j
=
A*!ACHME!;! -C
{~.
IA 3
Standard Practice Page E SQA166 r
7,ev:: ion E Attachment A Page 1 cf 2 Corrective Action rian of Irnployee Concern Inve ti Tracking Checklict gation,.
s D:~G Report /Ch:D Nw ber 2C GOI c ggQ 4g Initiation Date.I.ead Organization Responsible for Corrective A:
cr-n # 70' 01-Sons. I
\\*v'n L v h o w M S.8 m
1 Ir:-tm ec
- ion Plan ",..,,,c.yre
,.e r ea n.
COTJ".'~~VI AC ION F;.AN (CAP)
- 1. Loes this report required corrective action?
(If yes, describe corrective action to be t k t) no~m e Yes -Y No l
tart = J-f *:., A re n a en. if no, provide pustificatzen) e L r5# cf s' pA *~r t r !"
m uen s n---
_~> \\ n e rvErs !
D r>rc-p r m s ve !-r 1
(* g c u r f>c e, ver r> e vne ta r ot r o-,we ps n e n u t. e snec~rou ce c~$t)({
r D ~ u e-c sec mc nw tr. T-f ve c:r:-
_ v ont r# Dow st
~
s b ar...,e t u \\ p ec e-c }
11 n CL E m ver,er r r.
we a: e e r e, n ? son ppge re v r e-o v e ~.eu tnev*
re! Des!
- F ont ' M
?) av m * ~2
_ ~ _ -
1 A*T nL L # ~"', o *J cceet#moc C hv.* s e-r
- e r o r.*! r- : r,r=oobc:
2.
rs*<*p1 ! n r>rJ frn-R uc,ea-
..z.
c = rJ n oe e v'r c c Icentify any si=11ar item /instan=es and corr nirem ~e ADEcog.
,_R ootprlfeb m Asoc E re erse mic-c
\\
J. P VrMEYD!n %
er-' t'Aled S o n u) c-T *,e ~ ee :ive attaen tasten.
- c_A b:
PEc (sw*
"M F em 73 crru cob i
to ~rD r
mFr.w D/***'t")
- - t - 7:
f or: -G cac4 oc:
- 2. Eill corrective action preclude recurrence cf fi i
- 4. Does this report centain findings that a ndings?
Yes Y
No i
as defined by Al-12 or 1.7.? S.17 re cenditiens adve-se to euniity
. IT a CAQ ceniition enists, what CAQ document was initiat d?
~ No ~ (CAg) i t.
II5 y
/J/s e
- 6. W..::n site section/ organization is responsibl
~.
_prJ::-MSP ~ E t e fer cor e::ive a :icn;
~
- 7. Is corrective a : ion required der restart?
~
f n... as determina:ica a.s to be n.ade u:..
Yes y
No
~
S. Istinate cenpletion date for corre::icn actiE. F1 cen n; A::achmen: O cf SQA166.s n
Cene ~o s e S-Cc=ple'et by o n. _!f. - 3 s-5 0 Ayproved by
? !! s w. - th,% : 4
~. Date
_/ c h..: ff.',~(-
.'.~:G Con:urrence _[n.J% e ) n'te.Cr;;g 2n e 1 %:, p..
, - T* i t
- nze _
~
q 7
l C20ES/nl:
w h
O f
s
I n..A H.gr.!. C FAZ e M 6 l
Stancard Practice face E
., y,.
6 6 kev:::en E
\\
1 Atta:r.nent A Tage 1 cf 2 i-Corrective A:: ion Plan of Deployee Concern investigation
- aching Checklis:
EC~ Kepo:t/~.A!D Nu:-be: ?- f".e r 5>,JMe-~85 Pc: ~ Re: M-I,ead Organization Responsi le for Oo:re::ive A:;2cn Plan f poreo. L% t-I Initiation Late _ 40.res.
is/4.e, D m' /r e t T t
r;
.o.. e,r. r e r:. a /~ s r1.
m CCRT.0:~~C AC !O: F*AN (CAP)
- 1. Loes this report zen 8:ed corrective action?
i (If yes, describe corre::ive a : ion to be taken Yes Y
No h M ero_lx
-,e sace-v. oc t e s n i
if no, provide Justifica son) s-, e es o n.* v o o = p
.c
=vra,
.a c e -. e. e. m--.e c = n...gg p re.~n. r
,r r -
- 5 Deve e*
- m--e p,o c u re me,m.
ce - c n. s e e
- nc e
.n.s ic.e -e. s au e n --
nuo e,p 2,.. sos ve
- a. c= r
.,s
.,. c o e escu. >. --- De
- r>e. r.=-
s, e t r to e *-
...- e,,,
,-3, e
- e.., e. e _.
- m, Ar,, e -
er,c. ne >. c
&& e c
_c t
es >r Cfo.
e on = -....
s.
c o -,.- e-,,
o n vaca a mnes
- \\ r rr. e =
.n e m,..o = -
c,e
,,..,.,,,, n._ e 7 c-e e 4.covnoe 2.
loentify any sic.ila
., s c _,
, _ _ o
,c ne_e. i,--w_
l
- es/instan:es and corre:::ve a:::p, p,._,,,,
- swi,
,.,e y n o en a r e l
n t -.*,s-r cc sm e-f se C \\ c
.cn taker..
r m.ew.e e - - an fswe ft,inewpo -
.o.-e=
s pu cd ea
/. -- - r. e cs.- - or-c c
.+. v r. t c-e v; c:c: e>e:O f
- 3.
- dill ec:re::ive
- 4. Does this reper., action pre:1ude recurrence cf find.nes?
l l
as -defined by AI
'.2or 2:IP c.1?centain findings that are _cenditions adverse t Yes
- Y No S. IT a CAQ conditien exis:s, what CAQ de:umen:
Ty3 No y s.
Ar/c was initiated?
1' E. Wnier. site se::ics/c: Fan.:t-ica is respentirle ic:
~
Daf r - S o c e - r i ec::Retive a:::.cr.?
7.
~.s ccrre: ive a :icn required fer restart?
~
(~n..is dere:xnatten yes No y ~
E. F2 :ene nt:-ber.f c s o be n.ade using A::achmer.- O cf SQA166.)
~
restar: ecere::ive a::icn?
- 5. ?.stic.L:e cc=ple:Lc= da:e fe:
- ene _
NA corre:: ice, a::icz. -~ pr se =not e
. x.-a.,
Cc=pletet by
/T.$r-Irrv.*5~~ M Y N
\\t App:oved 3r Yf*-2. / J,. v Da:e l& lr- ;.
-~!G Cc= urrence _
in%5.G.
Da:e ta r/ 2. 's G.
Date -_ /
~
\\
i C2 DES /el:
r 1
l l
l l
i I_
i
.,.-