ML20236L624

Summary of 870928-1001 Audit of Comanche Peak Response Team third-party Review of Cable Tray/Supports at Ofcs of Tenera in Berkeley,Ca.List of Persons Involved in Audit & Attending Exit Meeting Encl

ML20236L624
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	11/05/1987
From:	Terao D NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To:	NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
References
NUDOCS 8711100474
Download: ML20236L624 (8)

Text

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

.a, 7

.V

..[h E.Nf*

'~

I i ,

+ 'j k- [pDCEO o UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20666 y h November 5, 1987 ,

..... 1 Docket'Nos. 50-445  !

and 50-446-I APPLICANT: Texas Utilities Electric Company (TV Electric) ]

FACILITY: Comanche' Peak Steam Electric Station,- Units .1 and 2

SUMMARY

. 0F AUDIT ON SEPTEMBER 28-0CTOBER 1,1987 - COMANCHE: 'l

SUBJECT:

PEAK RESPONSE TEAM THIRD-PARTY. REVIEW.0F CABLE TRAY / SUPPORTS .

l On September 28 - October 1,1987,. the NRC staff and-its consultants conducted i an audit of the Comanche Peak Response Team (CPRT) third-party _ review of cable tray / supports _ at the offices of TENERA, L.P. .in. Berkeley, California.

A list of those persons involved in the audit and attending the exit meeting is included in the enclosure to this summary.

The. purpose of the audit was to review the overall1 adequacy of the CPRT l

third-party (TENERA) activities associated with their overview of the Comanche.

' Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES) cable tray / support design. The audit-included 1) a review of the scope okthe overview activities completed by TENERA, 2) a review of.the CPRT Design Adequacy. Program report entitled

" Discipline Specific Results-Report: Civil / Structural - Cable Trays and Supports," DAP-RR-45-001, Revision 1 dated September 25,1987(hereafter referred to as the " Cable Tray / Supports Results Report"), 3) a review of the supporting engineering evaluations and checklists, 4) a. review of the Discrepancy / Issue Resolution reports (DIRs) associated with the cable tray /

support issues identified in the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) hearings on the CPSES-operating license, and 5) a review of ~the qualifications of TENERA personnel involved with the cable tray / support. overview.

The following is a summary of the staff's findings as discussed at the exit meeting.

1) Scope of CPRT Third-Party Review During the eudit, the staff discussed with TENERA the extent of the cable tray / support reviews completed by TENERA as described in the CPRT Program' Plan Discipline Specific Action Plan-(DSAP) VIII,Section 4.1.2. The TENERA' overview activities completed included external source issues-identification,-

design criteria identification, as-built procedure review, design validation i procedures review, special studies review, test programs review, and issue resolution review. The review of the implementation of the Ebasco and Impell procedures in the design validation and as-built procrams.has been

' transferred to the TV Electric Technical Audit Program TAP) and is now part of the TV Electric Corrective Action Program-(CAP)(. , The TE as completed. is consistent with the scope of the. third-party design review activities-for cable tray / supports as defined.in Section 4.1.2 of DSAP VIII of the CPRT Program Plan (Revision 4). Because of the complexity o,f the 8711100474 871105 PDR ADOCK 05000445 .

A .PDR l

c . .. .- .

_ _ - _ ._ - - - ._ =

, , u

,s P

{

i Summary of Audit on 9/28 - 10/1, 1987 ' issue resolution methodologies, the ctaff recommended that TENERA compile a list of specific areas where implementation review by the TV Electric TAP should be focused. The staff will continue its review in this area and will follow up on the review activities conducted by the TU Electric TAP.

2) Review of Results Report The staff review of the Cable Tray / Supports Results Report finds it to be a well-written and well-organized document. The sections in the main text are technically straightforward and concise, and. the attachments provide a practical and useful aid for tracking the sources.of the issues and their resolutions in project and third-party documents. . Overall,

, the Results Report'provides an adequate description of the findings resulting from the TENERA overview of the' CPSES cable: tray / supports design. The basis for the TENERA findings, however, are' provided in the supporting engineering evaluations and review checklists. Thus, the' staff evaluation of the conclusions reached in the Results Report is contingent upon staff review of the engineering evaluations and review checklists.

3) Review of Engineering Evaluations and Review Checklists The TENERA review of Ebasco and Impell documents resulted.in either an The reviews conducted by I

engineering evaluation or a review checklist.

TENERA of the Ebasco and Impell'special studies for cable tray / supports were documented in engineering evaluations. The reviews. conducted by TENERA of the Ebasco and Impell design procedures were documented in i review checklists. In total, there were 81. engineering evaluations and 8 review checklists issued by TENERA associated with the review of Ebasco and Impell cable tray / support documents. TENERA questions.on Ebasco and .

Impell design procedures were documented in. Type C DIRs. l The staff review of the TENERA engineering evaluations finds.a disparity in the technical quality between those engineering evaluations completed I prior to June 1987 and those engineering evaluations completed since June 1987'. The bulk of engineering evaluations completed recently lacked sufficient technical detail for the staff to fully understand the extent and depth'of review performed by TENERA. Based on subsequent discussions with TENERA personnel, the staff concluded that the extent and depth of TENERA's review was adequate, although several engineering evaluations  ;

did not document the communications aiid interactions between TENERA and Ebasco/Impell in order for TENERA to complete its review.

l The staff review of the TENERA review checklists' finds they provide a systematic method to ensure the completeness of the Ebasco and Impell design procedures with respect to addressing code requirements and licensing commitments.

The staff is continuing its review of selec'ted engineering evaluations-and review checklists. Upon completion of'our review, the staff will i provide its findings in a safety evaluation.

1 Summary of Audit on 9/28 - 10/1, 1987 3-

4. Review of DIRs Related to ASLB Hearinos The staff reviewed eight DIRs which documented the cable tray / support concerns identified in the May 1984 ASLB hearings on the Cygr.a Independent.

Assessment Program. The staff also reviewed the corresponding text from the transcripts of the ASLB. hearing to verify the accuracy of issue descriptions <

and to ensure the completeness of.the issue resolutions. In general, the staff. finds that the resolution' methodology provided :in the Cable. Tray /

Supports Results Report adequately bounds the issues presented in the ASLB hearing. In one instance, the issue from the hearings was not specifically.

addressed. However, according to TENERA, each DIR is in the process of final review and closure. Thus, the ffnal review'by TENERA of alllDIRs will ensure a proper closure for each DIR.

5. Review of TENERA Personnel Qualifications

~

During the audit, the staff reviewed the resumes of the CPRT third-party reviewers.who participated in the cable tray / supports overview. The cable tray / support reviewers, consisting of personnel .from both TENERA and Jack Benjamin Associates (JBA), were found to.be qualified academically to perform their' respective technical reviews...Where e resume did not reflect sufficient experience in a specific area of review, the staff-further discussed the qualifications of the reviewer with TENERA to ensure-that the reviewer's background and technical competence were appropriate l for the' assigned area of review./ In general, the staff finds the technical qualifications of the CPRT third-party reviewers involved. with 'the overview of cable tray / supports to be appropriate for their assigned areas of-review. However, due to the combination of a lack of sufficient technical detail in some engineering evaluations (as previously discussed) and i a lack of specificity in certain personnel resumes, a supplemental review.

will be conducted by the staff to focus on selected ~ areas.to ensure that an adequate level of review has been performed. The selected arehs include the limitations of the 1.25 multimode response method,' the development of '

K-factors in column buckling, use of overlap method, the consideration of inaccessible as-built attributes, and the use of the Visual Weld Acceptance Criteria. The staff will report its findings in_these. areas in a future audit report or safety evaluation.

As a result of its review of the TENERA engineering evaluations and of the transcripts of the ASLB hearings, the staff has identified a. concern l

regarding the need for staff approval of special studies which justify design deviations from codes, standards, and regulatory guides. . The overall technical acceptability of the special studies has been reviewed by TENERA in their engineering evaluations. However, similar tp'a concern raised in the ASLB haarings on- the Cygna Independent Assessment Program, staff approval ,

l- of the technical justification for deviations'from codes, standards, and regulatory guides applicable to cable tray / supports has notfyet been' ,

explicitly sought by TV , Electric. Although the staff recognizes,that,'in many instances, the special studies may have been performed to qual.ify .

I construction deviations and not to avoid requirements in codes, standards, l

and regulatory guides, the staff found that the-results of the special l

studies have already been incorporated by Ebasco/Impell into overall design l criteria being used to assess generic hardware conditions in.the plant. 'As such, those design criteria being used to evaluate generic non-compliance should be treated as deviations from codes, standards, and regulatory guides.

l '

L 1

. Summary of Audit on 9/28 - 10/1. 1987 .  !

Each deviation should be submitted to the staff for specific approval.. Thus,-

the staff requires that TV Electric identify all such deviations from the design requirements specified in the appropriate codes, standards, and regulatory guides for cable tray / supports and submit.each deviation with Lits

' technical justification to the staff for approval. Staff approval will be l provided in future' safety evaluations upon completion of its review. ' This is considered an open item.

B A' total of 80 hours9.259259e-4 days <br />0.0222 hours <br />1.322751e-4 weeks <br />3.044e-5 months <br /> was involved in this audit.

r b i ' -crwo_ /

s

. -David Terao., M chanical Engineer j t, Comanc e Peak' Project Division.

Offic'e' of Special Projects y

Enclosure:

List of Attendees i cc: See next page

.e t-l l

7 1

,i L'

-l Comanche Peak: Steam Electric Station i W. G. Counsil Texas Utilities Electric Company Units 1 and 2 j 0

t .

cc:

Thomas G. Dignan, Jr. Asst. Directorifor Inspec. Programs Ropes & Gray Comanche Peak Project Division.

225 Franklin Street U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission-Boston, Massachusetts'02110 P. O. Box 1029 Granbury, Texas, 76048 Robert A. Wooldridge, Esq. Regional Administrator,-Region IV Worsham, Forsythe; Sampels & U.S. Nuclear Regulatory. Commission 3 Wooldridge . 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 2001 Bryan Tower, Suite 2500- Arlington, Texas 76011 1 Dal1as, Texas ~'75201 Lanny A. Sinkin j

.' Christic ' Institute -

Mr. Homer C. Schmidt j Director of Nuclear Services 1324 North Capitol Street j Texas Utilities Electric. Company -Washington, D.C. 20002 Skyway Tower l ^]

400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 Ms. Billie'Pirner Garde ~, Esq.

Dallas, Texas -75201 Government. Accountability Project - a

. Midwest Office  !

Mr. Robert-E. Ballard, Jr. 104 East Wisconsin-Avenue Director of Projects Appleton, Wisconsin 54911 1

- Gibbs and Hill, Inc.

,e j

11 Penn Plaza l New York, New York 10001 David'R. Pigott,'Esq.

Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe l l

600 Montgomery Street Mr. R. S. Howard San Francisco, California 94111 Westinghouse Electric Corporation -.

P. O. Box 355 . Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Suite.600 1401 New York Avenue, NW-Renea Hicks, Esq. Washington, D.C. 20005.

Assistant Attorney-General Environmental Protection Division Robert Jablon'.

P.'O. Box 12548, Capitol Station Bonnie S. Blair-Austin,-Texas 78711 Spiegel & McDiarmid 1350 New' York Avenue,.NW L Mrs. Juanita Ellis, President Washington, D.C. .20005-4798-Citizens Association for Sound Energy .

i 1426 South Polk George'A.. Parker, Chairman Dallas, Texas. 75224 PublicLutility. Committee Senior Citizens' Alliance Of:

Ms. Nancy H. Williams . Tarrant County, Inc.

CYGNA Energy Services .

-6048 Wonder Drive 2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 390 Fort Worth, Texas'. 76133 Walnut. Creek, CA 94595 I

d

> . I 4

ii 1 :I

. _ _ _ _ ~__-__.-_-_-_-_--__.---_-_-_-_n . . . - - _ . - _ _ - _ - . - - - _ - _ - - - - - - _ _ _ - ~ - - _ -

F 1..s-

. t.

-s s' , ,

1

-};

C

\w y.y - m .

' . \ -~,' ._ ,2 l I' , ,

i

.g , ,  ;.; .

,'$'. .4

.f . s r,., it '

' 1; , '/

t I' .l' . . . )

W. G. Couns11~

- ! 2, ' . Comanck,lbt IMtric Station i

>l Texas Utilities Electric Company ' '

Unitsj.pd;t' a- 3 .,

4 'if

.cc: .

. .. .1 ,

Joseph F. Fulbright. i j

'Fulbright & Jaworski j N' 1301 McKinney Street ,

j  !

Houston, Texas 77010

..H 1

8

" Roger D. Walker ..

, .) I Manager, Nuclear Licensing.: ..

'3 i Texas Utilities Electric Companj l.

l' Skyway Tower c .

400 North. Olive. Street, L.B..81 '

a '4

. Dallas,~ Texas 75201

.' Mr. Jack'kedding .

l c/o'Bethesda' Licensing  ; <

Texas Utilities Electric Company j

3 Metro Center, . Suite 610. i Bethesda, Maryland 20814- ,

William'A.:Burchette. Esq. .

j '

Counsel for Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas a Heron, Burchette, Ruckert & Rothwell.' l Suite 700 l 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW l Washington, D.C. 20007. ]

James M. McGaughy .

'j-GDS Associates, Inc. ,

1 1

Suite 450 2525 Cumberland Parkway Atlanta, Georgia 30339 Administrative Judge Peter Bloch '

U.S. Nuclear-Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.- 20555 i

Elizabeth.B.' Johnson Administrative Judge' ,

Oak Ridge National Laboratory P. O. Box X, Building:3500 -

Oak Ridge,. Tennessee. 37830 -i Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom.

1107 West Knapp .

Stillwater, Oklahoma 74075 ..

Dr.. Walter H. Jordan Administrative' Judge 881 West Outer Drive Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830:

i 1,

r s g- .y-j 3 ,

rc ljC.l y

g_

f, ,i n

e n- jei; l

ENCLOSuid .-

, ./

< - - .: ,,< ,9 ,.

' Exit Meeting (Cable Tray Hangers) .

^ '

TENERA'(Berkeley,)CAI10/1/87 4'

.v .,

a

- List of Attendees -

l  ?

' /

TV Electric ,

i <

'[ ]

'I John Finneran i M, .

Steven Karpyak ':4

h/-fl ,

- !j TENERA

, , j I

Frank Dougherty i -d

'4 Charlie Kircher ',.S ,

c H Tim Snyder, en , l Brookhaven National Laboratory (NRC Consultants- Ar .t .

l

, r / . .e . ',

),'

/ d Gerry Breidenbach '

s '/

Paul Bezier ,

Walter Grossman* . !- /j . '!

', u USNRC David Terao ' '

a i ,

i ,t . ,: 2

\'lr,

\

..'N^

(a' .i;

., o i.,,\.,

s . .; , .

.c y.e  ;

t.

,8 (Y ,

p ' s, ) 1 ,

q

.q .

[ .(

. \

I .g ,1 l .h J'.j

< , l ,' / <!

A'

.3 i

I

• Not present at exit meeting 'although! participated in audit.

i

,p

• t  ;/

s  !, ,. ,

. /] ^

.y ,

J_y

._ , g#

7 m , c

. ys

=, 1 ..

. E,.I\. ! -.

2 J

( g,

-' y'

,;. . 3;

+ .g , . , . _ . _

[

[ -

'/.-

~

Sumanrkof Aud.it ' yeh*

l on 9/28 - 10/16 31987 -c5 .Novembe,rL5F1987- ,

ij i . f .' , ;# -

i. ' (. i

, , . ^ . Distribution: 1- h 1

[ / ' Docket File - 1)1 - \-

d

('

NRC-PDR

-LPDR j CPPD Reading; '

q OSP Reading- .

• . .1l J. Keppler/J. . Axelrad ud C. Grimes:- '

,. ' ,/ aj

- P. McKie

, 1

-J;'Lyons 9 9

-R. Warnick .. d A..Vietti-Cook y e .M. Malloy. R L D. Terao d h .3 'l' u' CPPD-LA OGC.Bethesda d

.t

• nQ

%G' 'L/'

F.'Hiraglia T

' " -9, g' E. Jordan r J 4

3 f' r J.Pdttlowj[..

ACRS'(10)/ r s

, o.. J q

\

r, .. },

i if 91 l

j.

\ .,,i

. ,' 4 l

. t.! _ }

J l

f.

, 1/( ,

d'1 y; i '

1 y-i

' di .

, o f 1

-j

,j c(/_

c

/ '!;

yt y j

}{q

((( j .

( ,m 9

, :1 g H

( - /.

t g i,, f)y h ,( ,l

f. .

[- .\

l f .8.hi (g- x! ,

'} g(

t i f 't u ,

,'h'

.- s s

' : 1, . -

J-4,.

./

-K :05P: ll 1  : SP: :PP :A/D:0SP:CPPD

_W.... ..

[j . f ,rjftJ5P:CPPD g e

c..

F ...g/r

,,q . . . . .. . . . . . . . : . . . ..

f(' sTerco:cb/cm -:Avi . Cook :M 1 oy-

.:.... . .... ..:..............:............ 3

JLy , j-

.............:..............:............,1 3 .:....... ........:..............:........... .

B.D.NYE ' :10/2a/87- .

10/.tk/87 :10Bld87 :10/fl/87- Y : _

H 1 . .h ~

' d '

./ , .f' \

.: L } jl ,

},y\ yw l- 4  : .,it4 k, ' ' )f . ( u/ gl>/V - '

.j. g, g ,Y ,

/{

3 i

s  :!

,./ ..y .

c, c, s t f

. . . .