ML17273A077

to Procedure EVP-001/SL-2, Engineering Verification Program.

ML17273A077
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	06/23/1982
From:	FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML17212B718	List: ML17212B717 ML17273A077
References
EVP-001-SL-2, EVP-1-SL-2, NUDOCS 8207130211
Download: ML17273A077 (17)

Text

PROCEDURE NO. EVP-001/SL-2 REV. 0 06/23/82 FLORIDA POWER 6 LIGHT COMPANY ST LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGRAM 8207130211 820709' PDR;ADOCK 05000389

( P PDR

EVP-001/SL-2 REV. 0 06/23/82 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY

"

ST LUOIE UNIT NO. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGRAN TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title ~Pa e Introduction........................ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 Selection Process........'............................ 2 Engineering Verification Process.................. ~ .. 3 A Task Force Activities.............'.............. 3 B Review Committee/Project Team Activities........ 4-5 IV Documentation/Reports.............................. ~ . 5 A'ttachments Al.l Organization Chart Task Force A1.2 Organization Chart Review Committee A2 Engineering Verification Process Flow Chart A3 Independent Design Review Flow Chart A4 Independent Installation Verification, Flow Chart A5 --Independent Start-up Operation Verification Flow Chart

EVP-001/SL-2 REV. 0 06/23/82 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST LUCIE UNIT NO. 2 ENGINEERING VERIFICATION PROGRAM I Introduction A program has been developed to conduct an in-depth (deep cut) engineering verification of Florida Power & Light Company's St Lucie Unit No. 2 Nuclear Power Plant. This engineering verification will be accomplished by Ebasco and Combustion Engineering Task Forces independent of the St Lucie Project teams. (See Attachment Al.l for the Task Force Organization Chart)

The program is divided into the following tasks:

A - Selection of items to be reviewed in accordance with Section II of this procedure B Independent verification of the existing designs for the selected items in accordance with Section procedure.

III of this C In-place examination of installed components to verify conformance with the drawings in accordance with Section III of this procedure.

D Comparison of component design against actual performance based on startup testing completed to date in accordance with Section III of this procedure.

The independence of the verification Task Force is maintained in several ways:

1 The Ebasco and CE personnel performing the verifications will be individuals who have had no prior involvement in the design,.

installation, or testing of the items being reviewed or in the review selection process. Resumes of Task Force members will be included in the program documentation.

2 Task Force members will be located separately from the regular Project teams and will communicate with the Project teams only through the Program Coordinator.

3' The existing design will not be available to the Task Force during preparatioq of the independent design.

4 Regular status reports documenting progress of the verification program will be submitted in parallel to the NRC, FPL, Ebasco and CE.

1 EVP-001/SL-2 REV. 0 06/23/82 II Selection Process

-

The selection of items to be reviewed by the Task Force will consist of the following steps:

1 A determination by FPL of all candidate items (components or isolated sections of a system).

2 An appropriate division of the candidate items into separate groups by FPL, as outlined below.

3 A random selection by FPL, from these groups of candidate items, of eight (8) specific items to be verified by the Task 'Force.

The candidate items include all "major components" which:

1 are important to safety, and 2 have multi-discipline interfaces The candidates will be divided into A/E and NSSS items, and at least two (2) NSSS items will be chosen.

The candidates will also be divided by major disciplines as follows:

1 Civil/Structural 2 Mechanical 3 Electrical 4 Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) 5 Instrumentation and Control At least one item from each discipline will be selected.

The general boundaries of the items to be reviewed will include:

1 The component support and/or foundation system including its interface with the building structure.

2 Piping up and down stream to the first support locations.

3 Local power supply, instrumentation and controls.

Specific boundaries will be established by the Task Force after the items have been selected, and'omponent-specific boundary sketches will be prepared.

III En ineerin A Task Verification Force Activities Process t EVP-001/SL-2 REV. 0 06/23/82 The Task Force will determine the design inputs considered necessary to perform an independent design review for the items selected. Utilizing the latest design inputs, inde-pendent calculations and sketches will be generated and compared with the existing calculations and drawings.

Differences between the independent and existing designs will be documented and analyzed. If the differences are determined to be acceptable, the rationale will be docu-mented and the design review phase considered complete.

If the differences cannot be resolved, the procedure out-lined for unresolved items in Section III.B.1 hereunder will be followed.

Upon completion of the design review phase for a specific item, the independent field installation verification phase can proceed. The Task Force will obtain copies of the latest drawings and other design documents used to install the item and will perform an in-place examination to verify the as-built installation, against those drawings and documents. Differences will be documented and analyzed. If the differences are

.determined to be acceptable, the rationale will be documented and the field installation verification phase considered com-plete. If'he differences cannot be resolved, the procedure outlined in Section III.B.1 will be followed.

Upon completion of the field installation verification phase for a specific item, the independent start-up operation verification .phase can proceed. The Task Force will obtain all applicable performance documents not previously provided in addition to pertinent start-up procedures and start-up test data completed to date. A comparison will then be made of the design requirements versus actual performance based on the start-up testing completed to date by Plant Operations.

Differences will be documented and analyzed. If the differ-ences are determined to be acceptable, the rationale will be documented and the start-up operation verification phase considered complete. If the differences cannot be resolved, the procedure outlined in Section III.B.1 will be followed.

4 Task Force activities outlined above are depicted on the flow charts ( Attachments A2 through A5).

EVP-001/SL-2 REV. 0 06/23/82 B Review Committee/Pro'ect Team Activities Any item for which the differences cannot be resolved by the Task Force whether in the design review phase, field installation verification phase, or start-up operation veri-fication phase will be classified as an unresolved item (discrepancy), documented, and transmitted to the Review Committee for resolution.

The Review Committee will consist of the FPL Engineering Project Manager, FPL Program Coordinator, Ebasco Project Engineer, CE Project Manager, and the Task Force Managers.

Technical support will be provided as necessary'y FPL, Ebasco and CE Project team personnel. (See Attachment A1.2)

Should the Review Committee determine through its own review supplemented as necessary by support from the Project team that the unresolved item (discrepancy) is actually acceptable, the rationale will be documented and the item recycled to the Task Force for its agreement and continuation of the verification procedure.

Should the Review Committee determine through its own review supplemented as necessary by support from the Project team that the discrepancy is not acceptable; the rationale will be documented and the unresolved item i.dentified as either a ~findin or an observation.

Any unresolved item which could affect the safety of the plant will be identified as a ~findin . An nnresolved item which results from either a generic technical process flaw or generic procedural program flaw will also be identified as a ~findin An unresolved item not affecting plant safety but resulting from either an isolated technical process flaw or isolated procedural program flaw will be identified as an observation.

The Review Committee will document all findings and obser-vations before transmitting them to the Project team for its review and further processing.

Following Project team determination of, the corrective action to be taken for each finding, and observation, but prior to actual implementation, Task Force concurrence will be obtained.

This will enable'the Task Force to assure itself that all aspects of the unresolved item it originally identified have been accounted for.

t EVP-001/SL-2 REV. 0 C

06/23/82 B Review Committee/Pro'ect Team Activities (Cont'd) 9 At the same time 'the project team implements the necessary

'corrective action for a finding, it will determine report-ability. Reportable findings require preparation and submittal to the NRC of the appropriate 10CFR 50.55(e) or 10CFR 21 reports.

10 Documentation of item closeout by the Project team will follow implementation of corrective action for each find-ing and observation.

ll - Review Committee/Project team activities outlined above are depicted on the same flow charts illustrating Task Force activities (Attachments A2 through A 5) .

IV Documentation/Re orts The engineering verification program will have a high degree of visibil-ity, with all process steps in each phase being properly documented for record purposes and the NRC being kept fully apprized of progress via regular status reports.

The following reports will be generated during the program:

1 Meekly status summaries of the overall program 2 Minutes of all Review Committee meetings 3 Reportable findings, if any 4 Component completion reports as the verification process for each selected item is completed 5 A final report upon overall program completion Copies of telephone conversation logs will be included in the weekly status summaries.

Distribution of correspondence will be made concurrently to the NRC, FPL, Ebasco and CE.

r L.utch VV ~umph>C q uSH'f COMPhltlg ATTAcHQE'g T gl;i.

5T. LUG(E UNA NO- 2 EBS/QTERIHG VFRt FlCATlOM PROSRAM j7AYE ~4

OPGttI,MIZATlON CHART- TASK FORCE TA5K FORCE CHh)CKMhOJ TAStC F4Rcl TASK Fbi.C Aha k AOfk HALtAlgrQEZ V-'wopOR P. HI L.LS'R Pckav PL.Au T Res.H Ct VlL EATERS APPpgATOS DESI&~

%%HERS ghJQWQ oTwen,s As tgTtC I AS 8 cmC. 84)'.

EBASC.O SERVtC ES J NC l OMBUST(OQ Eh!&(NEER'1WG lMe NOTE - Communication, Adiuinistration, Project InterEace

'Ries Exist Between Task Force and FPL Kngrg Pro)ect Hgr, EBASCO Prospect Engr, and C.E. Project Ngr.

~ ~

V ~

. 'RBVtRA ....QQMfht'T.TBK WFCa~tCAt.. SuPt oav

~ << ~ ~ ~ As H~cassAR Y FL.ORtDA .Pawpp. 4 t.!GHl p~gtyg f5Lv6R g ktGHT gMSJMESttlNQ PRcQRCT MAM468R . Prole,cy TFAM UV SOTSO N

~ ~

Ft.oRt9h Mwcm, $ l.tcHy osaAH aoORotvAmR H R,AN@I 6.%

~ ~

FSPQCD QQRvtCCS gplg 8'PASCCt SERVlCSS th4C PRO~acv e~s tweed P f@Pd EL%'shM I

~~ (~ ~ ~

~ ( ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

caMSUS'AOQ EN&fvE6RtMS,INC ~MEUMAg EQQQFERWS,l PR'OJ 8 C'l fvi*gp 46.5t paoaac.T -TFA.M 4 C lvloL'Tee@

~ ~ ~

~ ~ w(, ~.

I

~

p9ASCO SGRv<cBS,thkc GVP TAgK, FbRCS klAQASS

~ & \ ~ ~

........ J.ESSkD 8VP, =. EustHEQRtNt" QplhSVSTtOQ EN6tNQBRWS, )HE , VERÃghTtOyur pRO&RAhh .

BVP TASK, PORES QAMAGGR ..

DD Mtwt KQ. .

~

~ ~~ ~~ ~

~ ~ ( a ~ ~

( ~

EBASCO SERVICES IHCORPORATED AHCCT~ OS~

ATTACKMENT A2

~

CLICOT OAOJ ~ CT ~~~jL 'ATC ADO/CCT

( Rf VIEWS DOCUMENT VERIFIED RATIDVA VEICI PY PNNITTSE ITEII APPlorAL E

C.E. fND OF pfAND c/DAN C

ESEIECTI ON( ISO RICE lvfI LNSTALL Eaaauo AT I DN AT i PROCESS I DCSIC/I ) INPUT DI VfATION RIFI START.UP DOCUMENT LClLCS J Ul TIDNllE VERIFY FIEI.D DOC UMEN ANALYZE

~ J H* E EN'D OF INSTALL DIFFER DIFFER DESIGLI ENC'&S EMCEE Rf VIEW ATIDN DDCVN VT IDfNTIST COMPILE PERFORM COur ARE ANALYZE P HAS E 'RATKAIAL DCCVIIfNT ITEN FOR DOCUME LATEST IN Df Pf ND WITH END OF ENGRG DIFFER- R 4 START VP DIFFfR DESIGN ENT ET ISTINO DIFFER-VfRIFI (NPQTS CA I.CS ENCES ENCES VRRIFI CATIO N E S CATION DESIGN I->~ o 'PHASE Sa DOCUMEN IL C

~ RESOI.

ITEK V (DISCRfli IF AIOT READII Y IF ROAD LY ANCT> ACcf PTAELE /ICCSPTAOL'E ANALYZE TO REVIEW COkk/TT DIFFER-ENCES

'TASK CO(CCE ACTIVITIES REVIEW COMMITTEE PROJECT ACRE&M- TEAAE ACTIV/TIES SOD NLT RECYCLE P',. DETERNUI IOCFR SLSS(6 TO 'TASIC C RfPORT IcfFoarhal Olr V ADILITY PART gl FORCE STACTl/I FOR REPORT a

K ENTT ul Qf VIEW 4 O I

DOCUM EN O IIURESOLVED Rf VICIV I D CNTI PROI &tT TAKE DOCVMfN ITEN CCNNIITEE AS IJ FINDING CORRR CT (DISCREP ANCT) RATIONAL TEALI IVE 1TE,M AND I(

DOCVkfNT REVIEW ACTION CIOSE OVT ENGINEERING a OSTAIN~

O ATEOORI I TASK I 4

POTEN TIA FORCE ) VERlF[CATlON PROCESS CONCUR )

PRILIECT I FNIDVI6 ACNCE E TEALI O

IDENTIFY AS PRO/ EC J TAKE. DOCvIIE FLOW CHART SUPPORT OSS ERV TEAM CORRECT ITEM A'I ho N IVf AND REVIEW CLOSEOV DOCVNENT ACTION NIO/I N

EBASCO SERVICES IIICORPORATED ~ <<tA'F~ OF I r

A'TTACHI/LIGHT A3 CL>a<<r '

~ 'I>0> ~ CT UC le vL>>r Llo. ,.~or a e.

>>/I/SC'> F>L GM &INE ERIN 6 I/ Fl AT>OH I

SL 2 Pap SEC T TEAM PROGRAM CCORDLNATLDR TAS FORC B I >>I PREPARE Llsr>NG or TR/LLISIULLT SPECIFIC X)ETERMINE DESIGN INPoTS COMSIDE R-CALID>bATG LTCHS AND LIST FOR INITIAL ED HECESSAILY TO PERFORM LHDEPEHD-PERFORM RANDOH SELECT- EHT EHGIHEERIN 6 lLESLEH CALCVLATLOHS.

ION OF SPEC lFlC ITCH S SLILS/>LIT WRITTEN >EGO<ST FOIL TRANSMIT SPECIFIC LIST LATEST DESI4H INFVTS ASSEMBLE LATEST DES>6M INPUTS FEIL REQOE.ST TRAHSNLT 'TO PRUAECr PERfoRNL INDEPENDENT EH4IL6.

DESIGN CALCVt AT>OILS SKETCHES I:

TRANSMIT DESIGN LN POTS Ill*MS>/LLT To 'TASK FORC SuBMIT WRiTTEN 'RECLUEST'OTL RETRIEVE EXISTING 'DH'LL>H TRAHSMLr7o PRO JEC,T EXLSTIN6 DESLGH CALCS D WAS

/

CALCS D W6 5 FRUM F. ILKS

'TRANSMIT 'ID TASK FORCE 1RANSNLT CALCS DWGS

'OMPARE IHDEPENDEQT DE'5LEN TRANSMIT'VERIFIED> 'TRANSNlT To TASK FORCE WITH ELLLSTLH6 DESIGN A C.Ee INPUT> AS VERIFIED C.E. IHPor APPLICAQLE FoR ITEMS SELLLCTED DOCONEL>T ALID ANALYZE D>FFEILENCE IF REAL>>LY ACCEPI h'>L.E, DOCUMENT RAT>O>>ALE A>/D E>/D Dgs>ON &Ev>CW P//ASE IF Hor 'READ>AY AccEPrASLE,bocUNc>LT V@RESOLVE'b ITE>L (D>SC<f PANC Y)

AMP'rRANSM>r rO RE>/LEw'o>>>L>rr6 I MDEPEWDEMT. DES IGN R EVI EV/ FLOW CHART

>>}D/I >I

EBASCO SERVICES IKCORPORATEO ~ NccT~ OF~

anZCVMEur A 4.

I G'ttT

"

cL<av LOP ID POW 0 QNIPAL)

~ Ioi ~ cc tUIJCC'l IVE'EK V Rtt=t AT om DATC ~~~~ rP SL 2 PROJBCT T'EANI PRO&RAM Cao&Dlhl AToR. l-AS V Fo Rc 6 I C I EtID OF %6stott tREvtew PHASE Foa ~

SPEcIFIC I'TFM L.

S08thIT WRITTEt4 tZESII EST Fct A.

ASSEMBLE 'REQUESTED TRANSMIT To PRcVEC COhlTlzoLLED CbPIES OF LA'rf~T I NST'AI.LATIOt4 DWGS AQD OTKfR MSIOH DIICUMENS All D OTttfA. DESI'~ 'USED rO IIISTAI L SPECIFIC ITEM DOCVME II'TS TRRHSAIIT COLITROt.LED TEAIISerr Vo TASlt: FoacE COP I R> I LOCATE (t45TALLE,D'TEM, PERt +RM AAI IH- PL*CE EXAMINATI4H AND

<ERIF'0 THE AS-SIIILT I HSTALLATIoN AGAINsT THE DW&S AIID OTHER.

56 SIGN QOcl+4E hl'TS, 30CUNEQT Akj) AltALYZE DIFFEREIICES IF READIL'r ACCEPTABLE, DOCUMENT RATttttdALE i4I4D RttD FIELD INSTALL-ATIDII VERIRICA'Troll PHASE, IF IIOT WRADILY ACCEPTAQLS, POCUttfltT IINQES>LVEP ITEM PDISCRf FANCY) AND fRAM5 HIT TO 'R4VIGW C OMMtYTEE ttlc/I t4 INDEPEhJPEKJT FIELD INSTALLATION VERIFICATION FLON CHART

'C EBAKO SEIVICH IIICORPORATED SH ~ cc~ op~

ATTACHMENTA5 J

oscar OR POPE T COM g

~ aozccv

~ Uclccc S OC ULII EIZ IP mt Ohl oivc ~<~~

Sl. 2 PRO)ECT 'TEAM SL 2 PLAHT OPERA'TtONS PROGRAM C&RDINATOR. 7Ase Fog.c6 QNb OF FIEl-D !INSTALLATION VERIFICATIOnl l 'PHASE FOIZ S PECIFIC I TEAl I

ASSEMSL6 QPPLICABL

$ IIBMIT INRITI'EH KEOIUEST FOR ALL A'PPLICABLE PERFORMAHCE, ~RAIOSMn TO PROJ ECT PERFoRAtAQOE CK)CUMEHTS HOT F'REVIOUSL'f DOCUMEHTS Ne T SoRE-PROVIDEP FO< 'S PGC)PIC tTBM, SUcH AS PIOUSLY PROVIDED VENDOR SHOP 'TltST 'DA'TA, TlCANSMt T PERFO&f $ 5$ EMQL'E %'EQUEJTE'P

-AHCE DOCU+EIHTS 5TART-UP PROCEDURES TRAHSltll W OPERaTiaVS $ U EMIT %Ill'1TTE+ Q6CIUE g'P FOR STAItT-VP HD COMPLEtKD TEST DATA PROCEDURES AND START'-UP. VEST 'DATA TRAHSNIT PROCEDURE S COMPLETED TO bATE FOR SPECIFIC ITEM AIID TE ST bhTh V'ghNSMIT TO CASK FOtac6 COI4PhRE,. 'QELSIQ t4 Wlc'CLQ IQ,I IA6+TS vs AC,VVAI P ERFORMIjt,QC6 5TART QP TESTIN 0 COMPLETES 70 'DhT8 I

'DOCIIMEHT AUD ANALYZE >IFFQILS'HCES 1P SEA'PILY ACCEI'TATILE, DOCUMEHT RATIOHAL AHP EHD STAItT.UP OPEItmloU VERIF tchttoH PvASE IF HOT RKADILT ACCEr I ABLE,DoctttcEHT UNttEsoLVEV ITEM{DISCE6PAICY)AMO mANSW7 14 ItEV<EW COH<tzygE NIO/MI JMDEPEN9EHT START-UP OPERATION AERIFICATION FLOW CHART