ML19254D058
| ML19254D058 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinch River |
| Issue date: | 10/19/1979 |
| From: | ENERGY, DEPT. OF, CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLANT |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19254D056 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910220111 | |
| Download: ML19254D058 (300) | |
Text
. Amendment 52 Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (Docket No. 50-537)
This fifty-second amendment to the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant PSAR includes the annual Quality Assr-ance update and other section updates and revisions. Verticai egin lines on the right hand side of the page are used to identsfy question response information, and margin lines on the left are to identify new design information.
A page replacement guide appears following this list of updated responses to NRC Questions.
Q120.28 Q310.48 li^i 009 791022 0 \ h
PAGE REPLACEMENT GUIDE FOR AMENDMENT 52 CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLAN' PRELIMINARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT (DOCKETN0.50-537)
Transmitted herein is Amendment 52 to the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Preliminary Safety Analysis Report, Docket No. 50-537.
Amendment 52 consists of new and replacement pages for the PSAR text and Question / Response Supplement pages.
The following attached sheets list Amendment 52 pages and instruction for their incorporation into the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report.
liCl Oi'
Amendment 52 PAGE REPLACEMENT GUIDE REMOVE THESE PAGES INSERT THESE PAGES Chapter 1 1.1-11 thru 14 1.1-11 thru 14 1.1-17 thru 20 1.1-17 thru 20 1.3-3, 4 1.3-3, 4 1.4-15, 16, 17, 17a, 18, 19 1.4-15, 16, 17, 17a, 17b, 18, 19 1.4-20, 21, 21a, 21b 1.4-20, 21, 21a, 21b 1.4-24, 25, 26, 26a 1.4-24, 25, 26, 26a 1.4-37, 18 1.4-37, 38 1.5-42, 43 1.5-42, 43 Chapter 4 4-i, ii 4-i, ii 4-xv, thru xviii 4-xv thru xviii 4-xxiii, axiv 4-xxiii, xxiv 4-xxxv thru xLii 4-xxxv thru xlii 4.2-1, 2 4.2-1, 2 4.2-5 thru 12 4.2-5 thru 12 4.2-19 thru 22 4.2-19 thru 22 4.2-25, 26, 27, 27a 4.2-25, 26, 27, 27a 4.2-40 thru 47 4.2-40 thru 47 Chapter 5 5.3-20c, 20d 5.3-20c, 20d Chapter 7 7.5-34, 35 7.5-34, 35 7.9-5, 6 7.9-5, 6 Chapter 9 9.2-8, 9.3-9, 9.3-9a* 9.2-8, 8a, 9*
9.3-9, 9a* 9.3-9, 9a*
9.3-22, 23 9.3-22, 23
- Page replacement corrections from Amendment 50.
A !! ! 0\\
REMOVE THESE PAGES INSERT THESE PAGES Chapter 9 (Continued) 9.6-37, 38 9.6-37, 38 9.7-11, 12 9.7-11, 12 9.8-3, 4 9.8-3, 4 9.8-10, 11 9.8-10, 11 Chapter 1:
11.3-1, 2 11.3-1, 2 11.3-20, 21 11.3-20, 91 11.4-3, 3a 11.4-3, So Chapter 12 12.1-3, 4 12.1-3, 4 12.1-11, 12 12.1-11, 12 12.1-23a , 24 12.1-23a, 24 12.1-48, 49 12.1-48, 49 12.1-101 12.1-101, 102 12.3-3, 4 12.3-3, 4 12A-5, 6 12A-5, 6 Chapter 15 15.2-1, 2 15.2-1, 2 15.2-4a -
15.2-59, 60 15.2-59, 60 15.3-1, 2, 3 15.3-1, 2, 3 15.3-6, 7, 7a 15.3-6, 7, 7a Chapter 17 17.0-i, ii, iii 17.0-1, ii, iii 17.0-3, 4 17.0-3, 4 17.1-5, 6, 6a thru 6d 17.1-5, 6, 6a thru 6d 17.1-7, 8 17.1-7, 8 17.1-11, 12 17.1-11, 12 17A-15, 16 17A-15, 16 17A-23, 24 17A-23, 24 17A-43, 44 17A-43, 44 17A-60 thru 65, 65a, 65b 17A-60 thru 65, 65a, 65b 17A-66, 67, 68, 68a thru 68f 17A-66, 67, 68, 68a thru 68f 17A-69 thru 72 17A-69 thru 72 17A-75, 76, 77 17A-75, 76, 77 17C-41, thru 44, 44a, 44b 17C-41 thru 44, 44a, 44b 17C-45 thru 50 17C-45 thru 50 B
11^1 012
REMOVE THESE PAGES INSERT THESE PAGES 17C-51b, 52, 52a, 53 17C-51b, 52, 52a, 53 17C-56 thru 60, 60a 17C-56 thru 60, 60a 17F-i 17F-i 17F-5, 6 17F-5, 6 Appendix 17I (Including Titl e Page Appendix 17I (Including and Table of Contents) Title Page and Table of Contents)
Appendix 17J (Including Title Page Appendix 17J ('icluding and Table of Contents) Title Page and Table of Contents) ii'i 0i3 C
Amendment 52 Question / Response Supplement This Question / Response Supplement contains an Amendment 52 tab to be inserted following Q-i (Amendment 51, September 1979). Page Q-i (Amendment 52, October 1979) is to follow the Amendment 52 tab.
Replacement pages for the Question / Response Supplement are listed below.
Replacement Pages Remove These Pages Insert These Pages Q120.28-1 Q120.28-1 Q310.48-1, 2 Q310.48-1, 2 11"i 014 D
TABLE I EVALUATION OF APPLICABILITIES OF EXISTING NRC REGULATORY GUIDES TO THE CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLANT l Discussed Further in No. Title Rev. PSAR Section(s) 1.1 Net Positive Suction Head for Emer- - NA gency Core Cooling and Containment Heat Removal System Pumps (formerly Safety Guide 1) 1.2 Thermal Shrck to Reactor Pressure - NA Vessels (formerly Safety Guide 2) 1.3 Assumptions Used for Evaluating the - NA Potential Radiological Consequences of a Loss of Coolant Accident for Boiling Water Reactors (Revision 1, 6/73, of Safety Guide 3) 1.4 Assumptions Used for Evaluating the -
NA Potential Radiological Consequences of a Loss of Coolant Accident for Pressurized Water Reactors (Revision 1 6/73, of former Safety Guide 4) 1.5 Assumptions Used for Evaluating the -
NA Potential Radiological Consequences of a Steam Line Break Accident for Boiling Water Reactors (formerly Safety Guide 5)
, 1.6 Independence Between Redundant Stand- 0 3.1. 3.1, GDC 15, 8.3 by (On-site) Power Sources & Between Their Distribution Systems (formerly .
Safety Guide 6) 1.7 Control of Combustion Gas Concentra- - NA
+1ons in Containment Following a Loss of Coolant Accident (formerly Safety Guide 7) 1.8 Personnel Selection and Training -
13.1.3 (formerly Safety Guide 8)
Amend. 44 ii 1 015 April 978 1.1-11
TABLE I (Continued)
Discussed Further in No. Title Rev. PSAR Section(s) 1.9 Selection of Diesel Generator Set 0 3.1. 3.1, GDC 15, 8. 3 Capacity for Standby Power Supplies (formerly Safety Guide 9) 1.10 Mechanical (Caldweld) Splices in Re- 1 If #14 or #18 reinforcing inforcing Bars of Category I Concrete bars are used, mechanical Structures (Revision 1,1/2/73, of splices will be specified former Safety Guide 10) in design & construction documents to meet the re-quirements of R.G.1.10.
1.11 Instrument Lines Penetrating Primary 0 7.1. .' . 4 Reactor Containment (formerly Safety Guide 11) 52 1.12 Instrumentation for Earthquakes 1 3.7.4.1 I (formerly Safety Guide 12),Rev.4(4-74) 1.13 Fuel Storage Facility Design Basis 0 9.1 (formerly Safety Guide 13) 1.14 Reactor Coolant Pump Fiywheel Integ- -
NA rity (formerly Safety Guide 14) 1.15 Testing of Reinforcing Bars for Cate- 1 3.8 gory I Concrete Structures (Revision 1, 12/28/72, of' former Safety Guide 15 1.16 Reporting of Operating Information -
16.6.7 (Revision 1,10/73, of former Safety Guide 16) 52l 1.17 Protection of Nuclear Plants Against 1 13.7 Industrial Sabotage, (Revision 1, 6/73, of former Safety Guide 17) 1.18 Structural Acceptance Test for Con- -
NA: CRBRP Containment crete Primary Reactor Containments selection is steel.
(Revision 1, 12/28/72 of former 44 Safety Guide 18) li"1 016 9
Amend. 52 1.1-12 Oct l!79
TABLE I (Continued)
Discussed Further in No. Title Rev. PSAR Section(s) 1.19 Nondestructive Examination of Primary 1 ASME III, Division 2 provi-Containment Liner Welds (Revision 1, visions will be followed for 8/11/72, of former Safety Guide 19) the bottom liner in the con-crete base.
1.20 Vibration Measurements on Reactor 1 3.9.1.3 Internals (formerly Safety Guide 20) 1.21 Measuring & Reporting of Effluents I 11.4.1, 11.4.2, 11.4.3
'from Nuclear Power Plants (formerly Solids act specifically called Safety Guide 21) out but discussed in 11.5.
1.22 Periodic Testing of Protection System 0 7.1.2.4, 7.1.2.8 Actuation Function (formerly Safety Guide 22) 1.23 On-site Meteorological Programs 0 Environmental Report Sections (formerly Safety Guide 23) 6.1. 3.1.1, 6.1. 3.1. 2, 6.1. 3.1. 3 1.24 Assumptions Used for Evaluating the -
NA Potential Radiological Consequences of a Pressurized Water Reactor Gas Storage Tank Failure (formerly Safety Guide 24) 1.25 Assumptions Used for Evaluating the -
NA Potential Radiological Consequences of a Fuel Handling Accident in the Fuel Handling & Storage Facility for -
Boiling & Pressurized Water Reactors (formerly Safety Guide 25) 1.2E Quality Control Classifications & 2 3.2.2 Standards (formerly Safety Guide 26) 1.27 Ultimate Heat Sink (formerly Safety 1 5'6.1.1.1, 9.9.4 44 Guide 27)
Amend. 44 April 1978 l.1-13 1 i ,
- n, i 0,i/,
TABLE I (Continued)
No. Discussed Further in
]tle Rev. PSAR Se tion (s) 1.28 Quality Assurance Program Requirements 0 3.8, 17.1, Question 411.2 (Design & Construction)
(formerly Safety Guide 28) 1.29 Seismic Design Classification (Revi-52 3 3.2.1 sion 3, 9/78, of former Safety Guide 7.1.2 (Table 7.1-2)
- 29) 3.7-A, 3.8 1.30 Quality Assurance Requirements for the -
17.1, Question 411.2 Installation, Inspection & Testing of Instrumentation & Electric Equipment (formerly Safety Guide 30) 1.31 Control of Stainless Steel Welding '
3.8 (Revision 1, 6/73, of former Safety Guide 31) 1.32 Use of IEEE Std 308-1971, " Criteria 1 7.1.2 for Class IE Electric Systems for (Tables 7.1-2 and 7.1-3)
Nuclear Power Gereration Stations" (formerly Safety Guide 32) 8.3 1.33 Quality Assurance Program Requirements -
Question 412.3 (Operation) (formerly Safety Guide 33) 1.34 Control of Electroslag Weld Properties 0 Note 2 (12/28/72) 1.35 Inservice Surveillance of Ungrouted -
NA Tendons in Prestressed Concrete Con-tain. cent Structures (2/5/73) 1.36 Nonmetallic Thermal Insulation for 0 5.3.3.10.4 Austenitic Stainless Steel (2/23/73) 5.4.3.10 5.5.3.11.5 1.37 Quality Assurance Requirements for -
17.1, Question 411.2 Cleaning of Fluid Systems and Asso-ciated Components of Water-Cooled 44 Nuclear Power Plants (3/16/73) 11"1 018 O
Amend. 52
), 9 74 Oc t. 1979
TABLE I (Continued)
Discussed Further in No. Title Rev. PSAR Section(s) 1.52 Design, Testing & Maintenance Criteria -
NA: The Containment Cleanup for Atrosphere Clean-up System Air System described in Section Filtration and Absorption Units of 9.6 is not provided for any Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Design Basis Accident to which Plants (6/73) the Guide is applicable. Con-trol Room Cleanup is discussed in PSAR section 6.3.
1.53 Application of the Single-Failure 0 7.1.2.10 Jriterion to Nuclear Power Plant r'. otection System (6/73) 1.54 Quality Assurance Requirements for -
17.1, Question 411.2 Protective Coatings Applied to Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants (6/73) 1.55 Concrete Placement in Category I 0 3.8 Structures,(6/73) 1.56 Maintenance of Water Purity in Boil- -
NA ing Water Reactors (6/73) 1.57 Design Limits and Loading Combina- -
NA tions for Metal Primary Reactor Con-tainment System Components (6/73) 1.58 Qualification of Nuclear Power Plant -
17.1, Question 411.18 Inspection, Examination & Testing Personnel (8/73) 5 ,#
1.59 Design Basis Floods for Nuclear 2 3.4 and 3.8 Power Plants (8/77) 1.60 Design Response Spectra for Seismic 1 3.7.1.1 Design of Nuclear Power Plants (Revision 1, 12/73) 1.61 Damping Values for Seismic Design of 0 3.7.1.3 Nuclear Power Plants (10/73) (Table 3.7-2) 1.62 Manual Initiation of Protective 0 7.1.2.11 44 Actions (10/73) i} l O l knend. 52 1.1-17 Oct. 1979
TABLE I (Continued) i Discussed Further in No. Title Rev. PSAR Section(s) 1.63 Electric Penetration Assemblies in 0 3.8 Containment Structures for Wete -
Cooled Nuclear Power Plants (10,/3) 1.64 Quality Assurance Program Re" ements -
17.1 for tne Design of Nuclear P. er Plants (10/73) 1.65 Materials & Inspection for Reactor -
NA Vessel Closure Studs (10/73) 1.66 Nondestructive Examination of Tubular 0 Note 5 Products (10/73) l1 1.67 Installation of Over-Pressure 0 5.5.3.1.5 Protection Devices (10/73) 1.68 Preoperational & Initial Start-up 0 Chapter 14 lest Program's for Water-Cooled Power Reactors (11/73) l 1.69 Concrete Radiation Shields for Nuclear 0 3.8 52 Power Plants (12/73) 1.70 Standard Format and Content of Safety -
Note 6 Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants - LMFBR Edition 1
1.71 Welder Qualifications for Limited 0 Note 7 44 Accessibility Areas (1/74) 1.72 Spray Pond Plastic Pipine (1/74) -
NA: There will be no Spray Pond in the CRBRP.
)
' . 73 Qualification Tests of Electric Valve 0 7.1.2 Operators Installed Inside the Con- (Table 7.1-2) tainment of Nuclear Power Plants (1/74) 1.74 Quality Assurance Terms and Defini- -
17.1 44 tions n ;g 3i i) e, .I 616 U O
Amend. 52 1.1-18
TABLE I (Continued)
Discussed Further in No. Titia Rev. PSAR (Section(s) 1.75 Physical Independence of Electric 2 8.3 52 Systems (9/78) 1 1.76 Design Basis Tornado for Nuclear Power 0 3.3 and 3.8 Plants 1.77 Assumption Used for Evaluating a Con- -
NA trol Rod Ejection Accident #or Pres-surized Water Reactors 1.78 Assumptions for Evaluating the Habit- 0 6.3 ability of a Nuclear Power Plant Control Room During a Postulated Hazardous Chemical Release 1.79 Preoperational Testing of Emergency -
NA Core Cooling Systems for Pressurized Water Reactors 44 1.80 Preoperational Testing of Instrument -
NA: This guide describes at:
Air Systems acceptable preopera+ anal testing program for verifying the operability of safety-related instrument air systems.
On the CRBRP, except those portions penetrating the con-tainment & being considered as parts & appurtenances there-of, safety-related instrument air system parts are yet to be identified.
1.81 Shared Emergency and Shutdown Electric -
NA Systems for Multi-Unit Nuclear Power Plants 1.82 Sumps for Emergency Core Cooling and -
NA Containment Spray Systems 44 l} } i]2 l Amend. 52 1.1-19 Oct. 1979
TABLE I (Continued)
Discussed Further in No. Ti tle Rev. PSAR Section(s) 1.83 Inservice Inspection of Pressurized -
NA Water Reactor Steam Generator Tubes 1.84 Code Case Acceptability ASME Section -
NA III Design and Fabrication (4/75) 1.85 Code Case Acceptability ASME Section -
NA III Materials (4/75) 1.86 Termination of Operating Licenses for -
Environmental Report, Nuclear Reactors (6/74) Section 5.9 1.87 Construction Criteria for Class 1 0 Chapter 5 Components in Elevated Temperature Reactors (Supplement to ASME Section III Code Cases 1592, 1593, 1594, 1595 and 1596) (6/74) 1.88 Collection, Storage, and Maintenance -
17.1 41 of Nuclear Power Plant Quality Assurance Records (8/74) 1.89 Qualification of Class IE Equipment 0 7.1.2.12 for Nuclear Power Plants (11/74) 1.90 Inservice Inspection of Prestressed -
NA Concrete Containment Structures with Grouted Tendons (11/74) 1.91 Evaluation of Explosions Postulated 0 2.2.2 to Occur on Transportation Routes Near the Nuclear Power Plant Sites (1/75) 1.92 Combination of Modes and Spatial 0 3.7.2.1.2 Components in Seismic Response Analysis (12/74) ii t i } ON O
Amend. 44 April 1978 1.1-20
1ABLF 1.3-1 COMPARIS0N OF THE CRBRP WITH SIMILAR FAST REACTORS CRBRP l FFTF SNR 30u l Prf*!X PFR MONJU BN 350 Thermal Output 975 MW l 400 N 736 N 563 N 559 Mw 714 N 1, "A N Net Electrical j l 150 N + 120.0uo toris Output 350 N , 0 282 N 233 * = l 248 N 24 N ! f resh mater per day Pot / Loop Loop { Loop LD )p Pot Pot cp Loop l i humber Primary I 5 Operational loops l
3 I 3 3 I 3 1 Standby l 3 l
3 Doppler Equilibrium Core - *
-0.003f, id6 /d7 1 r '
Eq;ilibrium Core . l -0.J032 Tdn/ of i
-0.0061 Tda/d7 . 0035 Tok/d7 l Coef fic ient EOL i IOL i .
[
-4.0087 Tat /dT feel eaa 61antets 0.0055 Tda/d7 I l
51 ,
-e.sa:4 ra=/ar. f ei ea'e <
i l I
.i ..
Con ta inmeet l Confinenent/ Containment, , iin91e containnent. ! Double containment. Single conta mment . . Single containment. ho containnent butid-Conc ept ~
i A Concrete confinement Steel cylindrical irr= r containa-ent - Conc rete, rectangu. Double containmert c or f i g ;ra t ion . { Reliance on l Rectangular steel .
ing.
with an annulus air P"55"
- 5'I i C" ' * ** C t "'
l*"
C 0" #C l l'd ' d" b"' Ipanel concrete
- 9 " s!tn ! !ar>+r con ta i nment f uel element, reactor with hemi- t system is con- leah'a le Nil ding. I t il radioactive vesst i and pl ug.
space surrounding a ellipsoidal too I tained in a con- Ing, sea?ed .ith id-elements except i
w Building is 85 *t. -
Secondary contain-Steel cylindrical pres- an' bctton heads. c rete wa sit with a by 138 e t. ; poif -s a i ch i ae , spent fuel are
. , ment aroso reactor Sure vessel with heniis- 13s f t. t : steel liner on the 115 f t. higm. Con- Lesign leak rate of conta med in steel we sel and piping. i
, pherical done and flat 187 f t. top to i n s i de . iraaits are crete . alls 10 in. !' 50: per day at lined nitrogen Reac tor and plug, l w botton. 186 ft, dia. bottom. Steel ni t rogen i ne r t e d . thick. steA rein- l +0.14 5 ps i g . filled concrete twx and pumps are i snell is 1-3/8 in.
160 ft. bottom to spring. Outer containnent i f orces c onc rete vavits. Out r in sealed steel line- Steel shell is t#Ck- C "C t ' I P' ' *1 u l t s l r_ o f. Op* rated at c on t a i nmen t is a '
lined. i ne r t ga s shielding below are centained in a stee, c ylinder approx. 1-1/2 in. thick. grade. Leak rate rectangular con- l4 -0.0725 pressure of Can psig. with a hec-i filled cells.
Concrete shielding beloW at design pressure c ete building withstand pressare scherical dome on 1
grade. Leak rate of of 10 psig ts 0.11 with steel liner on of +0.57 psig witn i top. 155 ft. dia. f steel containment at vol . per day. outside. A closed a negligible leak ! Concrete cyltader i design pressure of 10 toop wentilarej gap rate. .
su rroun ds entire i psig is 0.1% vol. per . be'.een the t.o i s ! containment. {
day. The annuius is y maintained at Design pressur e is i 0 p AMows maintainad at a neptive ; f 9 ,.
a ps 4 l j pressure during norm.s1 i 7,1,,s, i n j m .
operation and exhausted , ate post-accident l through filters in the
- tine period.
event of an accident. j Design pressure is ,
, a ps49 i 18 -
$ @\jY w li cE
?F -
9 pd l u z Q G u w
- m
@ e-*
a N N.
D rv4
TABLE 1.3-1 (Cont)
COMPARISON OF THE CRBRP WITH SIMILAR FAST REACTORS CPBRD { FFTF SND 300 f FwE9tX PFR ! M0%J'J l BN 350 y Shutdoisn l Three sys tems.
j terw. long ter1r and
+
Short l Pony me ter pre i v i de s flow in e vent Inderendent eaer-gency cooling sys-9 3 redes of erergency j 3 indepeedent sys-cooling. Prira ry ters 54p!v 3 %K/
3 independ*et aum- ! Total decar heat Heat i iliary systems I back up system. 5%cet ' of primary / inter- tem operates on peps can operate a i r ( oo ?
- r s =h i r * ! estrac t heat f rom l renoval capatitity
, Pe uva t ter* rejects heat to i mediate cu rt outage. relies natural natural circulation. On bettertes for . est ract
- eat f roe the N 's . Second- ' c irc ulat ion in Sceeme atricsphere via diret t ' %st trarsport system 6 coolers are wb- 5 Murs. Natural I t** Iw1. lach cir- ary loops of auw '
i steam up f roso steem , desi geed ta natur- ' ,
rea: tor and steam mergM tet=*en shield c i rc ula t ior is tre t t.
- t is c e tatie c4 'liary cociant g*eerator. Design c r .ri . ** eat rejecting [ ally circulate in tane in 1 reac t or ves- second mode. Third rero. ing 5 %. sys tems have [M capability a; prom { ebeat cf IOtel purr
, ph t icsopny promote s se l . EaCh CO"ler has 9 49 i s We** sodi # ' 0"If 5 Mw %s t tw Ppps to wair.tain raturai e trtut at ten
. 183 M,.! Lting term loss. t reat hes 700'C coc! remo.e4 tu .#1- "I is horizorital
! system condenses steam; tto a:rrasphere through: neatcooling re.'ected ; auseparate c i rc i t .a i c h ser tr-g r ury circuit outside l ciertly l circ latica. i
' cool reactor J and above reactor f rom steam drue in an : tne our, ae.t h. .e Ea pu*s. Toc.i j reactor tani rei.e.es - '
, air cooled v -ws. cere. hor i ter E r Nrpr cacaci+f is f N. residual heat ry ra d. levels *n ste m j Lortg term caDr e is
'at130 f rom the taeb . '
gepr a tar (On st i-g about 4.55 vi id , j CaCac t ty of tM ed I 5
power. Bac k -up t ur e one hot - of I
- mode is 2 %.
l system cools sodin I !
l 1
I f'
i evaporative water.
AMt ttoaal water f rom reactGr overfloss a
vessel via a Na/kan aM*d l ater. {al-f cula ted heat resuval l heat enchanger. Mar 8 ,
rejec ts hea t to ! , ! carability is 4-5; of neat in primary I atmosphere via a ! ,
hat / A ir hr-at s t e rcut t .
f
. , i ecanger. ,
m 4
i i i I ( 4 l l
- l l 42 shutdown aesd h !'
T-2 completely inde-I 5 Ta control ron ! 3 requiatory I
! Mor,1 operational control System) diverse systems.fiso i systems. 3 safety fadependent
, pencert and ] Two.l independen*
and civerse 6 identical rods are used controt indis- in certptery e+ 1 rsos ' nat urai cortrel i s ac c oe~ j
- Primary system has
, rods in inner region.: systes inc luding se.-i c r ma t el y f or opera- e lone I. 5 B.c i 54G 9 snim plished by 6 Nrn uu 6 catrcl am u sors ud trip ' j mts. 4 th,sel ca ucl. s. rs sm tu rcd c red ( s l i p i tj rus. 2 rep!atcr l j 9 rods. collapstbie side Pruwry rods lowered c a pa b i l i ty , shie con- peripnery u* er,r ? hed $4C; g
rads, and I tee-roller nut arives. of saf All have etj crods.
roller ut f f rts top t>y a relier trol, etc. 9 eiluents,g wer tore.
- t I perature co'v-meter t
spring assisted . Jrive m eanises i ret mechanism- l 4 Se !n1 ety red- ted '
gravity insertion. 1 Either s ys tee 3 safety red in
' 's enrit r r.,d . Sc ra.c c apa-g secondary mds are l center of core. et I t,i l i t y is t. rov ided
, Alternate shutdown imerted frem botton a Rod di5(oa- i 3t wup sNt- l t y three unt, 51
. system has 6 reds.
! They ha,e s,parat, f' carstle Scr**-
t at t* oiierc* reactor ty re; ease os ima g -
~ t -e ac i ds de c. ,
i r
- res (righty c 84
- )
, reds.
- i rods has iaoepen-
[ata ce the
- i * " " **'5 l 8ensors. transmit- t
'6"" '*9
' ' : DI' *" "" li l d' *"#
I j
. ters comparators l' \ t'eteserted irto - 1 eMtmic 5' ctrtu I'u s l and logic, ball nut l si t eD y def or*w d )
I aad sensor Any i screw drive, hydrau i aannel, l t o rocs are tea- i 1 lic assisted inser ' E j !' i t1e of reac ter l l f 52 l tion, below the head' release. Primary I i
I s hu t down .
rods release at i l i roller nut. Either l
system capable of i I
" Og reactor shutdown l hm
. 5 with most reactive red stuck.
, O a,-
w N.
PBfA ,--~
4 O O O
Project Opera tions Mar.ager The Project Operations Manager reports to the Project Manager and is responsible for the administrative, business, planning, scheduling, cost engineering and contractural systems of the Prcject. For the administrative and business systems he is responsible for Project cost control and reporting, manpower control, commitment control, and the formulation and monitoring of the Project data bank. He is also responsible for the Management Information Center and for development, custody and control of Project procedures together with the required indoctrination of Project personnel. For the p.anning, scheduling and cost engineering systems he provides the necessarj controls and monitors overall Project progress and plant capital costs.
Under these systems he is also responsible for the preparation and maintenance of all Project schedules. For the contractural systems he is responsible for contractural administration matters, compliance with contract approval provuions, cost controls, negotiation of contract changes, subcontracts and all related matters, and invoice monitoring. He is responsible for all Project personnel training related to the above systems as required.
Procurement Manager The responsibi tities of the Procurement Marager who reports to the Proj ect Manager are governed by the scope of work included in Burns and Roe's contract with the CRBRP Project Office. Where Burns and Roe has procurement support responsibility, the Procurement Manager is responsible for the preparation of the potential bidder's lists; review of technical specifications e in the bidding process;for adrprocurement
.nistration ofsuitability; Burns andproviding assistance Roe support to the procurem responsibilities for each subcontract and provides Burns and Roe contact with vendor subcontract administration personnel. Where Burns and Roe has complete procurement responsibility, the Procurement Manager is also responsible for the conduct of the bidding process including negotiations and award of subcontracts, and administration of subcontructs.
Quality At ;urance Manager
. le resporsibility and authority of the Quality Assurance Manager is discusse- in Section 17E-l .3.
Project Office - Resident Manager The Project Office Resident Man ger reports to the Project Manager and coordinates all Burns and Roe operations in Tennessee. He interfaces as ,
45l necessary and as directed with DOE, PMC, the LRM and the General Constructor.
He is supported by a Systems Integration Manager, Planning and Construction I Liaison Manager (future Site Manager), Program aanager, and a Licensing and Environmental Representative. He is responsible for the activities conducted at the Project Office and at the construction site, other than Quality 45lAssurance. He shall keep the DOE Project Director advised on as frequent a basis as necessary of status and problems. He is empowered to speak and act for the Burns and Roe Project Manager where necessary. 25 Amend. 45 1,4-15 July 1978
O 1.4.2.5.3 General Electric Company / Figure 1.4-8)
The Advanced Reactor Systems Department ( ARSD) is a part of the Energy 40 Systems and Technology Division (ES&TD) of General Electric Co. (GE). The 5,
General Manager of the GE-ARSD reoorts to the General Manager of the ES&TD 40 and is responsible for organizing the resources to carry out such pro-grams and for Jeveloping corporate programs that will lead to the even-tual cocmercialization of LMFBR technology.
52l The GE-ARSD General Manager conducts review of progress being made on projects within the department and provides direction and guidance to the Section Managers reporting to him. He has the responsibility and authority to issue Department policy and to establish quality goals and objectives. (See Chapter 17, Appendix I for details of the General Managers' QA responsibility).
40 l 52l The GE-ARSD consists of ten sections ar.d the Legal Operation. Each section is headed by a Section Manager who reports to the General Manager and is responsible for cn assigned m. ea of responsibility as defined in the following paragraphs.
Clinch River Project Section The manager of the Clinch River Project Section is responsible to 52] the Department General Manager, GE-ARSD, for performance of work related 28 O
to contracts on the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Project. Major functional responsibilities (engineering, design, and supply) include engineering of the intermediate heat transport system, steam penerator system, and decay heat removal system, as well as primary and Mrmediate 45l sodiut pump develo,nment, steam generator development, trace heating, IhTS control and instrumentation, SCRS projects, safety evaluations and licensing 52l support activities. The Clinch River Project Section serves as the GE-ARSD 25 45l interface with all other CRBRP Project participants. Functionally, the Clinch River Project Section is divided into five subsections (Figure 1.4-8),
each with specific assigned responsibilities. Project management respon-52l sibilities include functional work performed in other GE-ARSD Sections, sub-contractors, ano vendors.
Design Engineering Section The Manager of the Design Engineering Section is responsible to the Department General Manager. The responsibilities of the Design Engineering Section in support of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor 28 45I! Plant Project include providing analytical and design engineering ser-vices in the areas of structural and thermal hydraulic analyses, 45l safety analyses, reliability engineering and SCRS Design. The Design Engineering Section also provides nuclear engineering support primarily 40 related to the evaluation of critical experiments for the Clinch River Core. 25 Amend. 52 O
Oct. 1979 ll !bb
Development Engineering Section The Manager of the Development Engineering Section is responsible to the Department General Manager for planning, organization and management of major programs of research and development, engineering test support, and experimental facility design and construction for LMFBR programs. Such programs include work in support of assigned projects as well as the develop-40 ment of new systems and components for future LMFBR product lines.
Procurement Section The Manager of the Procurement Section is responsible to the Department General Manager for procurement of material, hardware and services.
Procurement locates and maintains adequate vendor sources of supply, executes all vendor relations in a fair and equitable manner, conducts vendor negotiations, awards and manages procurement subcontracts and insures proper executim of all contractual matters consistent with applicable General Eleccric policy, DOE / Government procurement regulations and other customer requirements as they relate to purchasing activity.
Product Assurance and Services Section The Manager of the Product Assurance and Services Section is responsible for an acceptable level of quality in all GE-ARSD products and services. It is the responsibility of Product Assurance to assure that all technical activities of the Clinch River Project, including those performed by subcontiactors, is consistent with the cMtomer quality requirements, company qua',ity policy and division quality policy (see Chapter 17, Appendix I for further detail). He also provides leadership and coordinates development of management systems and procedures, to guide and control all Department activities; and provides centralized engineering, technical and administrative support services for the Depart-ment.
S1 stems Engineering Projects Section The Manager oi the Systems Engineering Projects Section is res-pensible to the Department General Manager for providing Systems Engineering expertise to support Sf,tems Engineering capability of GE-ARSD. He will 52 also accomplish specifi; System Engineering tasks as directed by the GE-ARSD General Manager.
Applications Engineerirg and Planning Section 40 The Manager of Applications Engineering and Planning Section is responsible to the Department General Manager for recommending goals and objectives and formulating and implementating strategies and action plans relating to the marketing of current Department services and products and related contract negotiation and administration and the market development 28 for the Department's new products and sarvices. Applications Engineering and Planning is also responsible for the negotiation and administration of 25 40 all contractual matters related to the Clinch River Project.
1.4-17 Amend. 52
) -; p Oct. 1979 i ,
Technoloay and Special Project Section O
The Manager of the TecMology and Special Projects Section is responsible for coordinating and directing the overall management and 521 execution of all projects undertaken by the Gr-ARSD with the exception of those specifically assigned to other secth 1s in the department by 40 the Department General Mar.ager. Similarly, he is responsible for coor-dinating the funding, reporting and measurement or progress of the department Overhead Program Authorizations (0PA's) and Development Aut prizations (DA's). He provides the primary cechnical and programna-tic interface between the Department and the Department of Energy (DOE) and other customer organizatians on projects and related matters. He also provides technical and programmatic leadership and assistance to the Applications Engineering and Planning Section on project proposal and contract activities, product planning, product applications, and market 45 development.
28 GE-ARSD Legal Operation 52 The GE- ARSD Legal Operation is staffed by the Department Counsel who is responsible to the Department General Manager for advising and counseling department management regardi -g legal implications of contracts and other 45 arrangements which legally bind the Company. In addition, Counsel par-c^'
ticipates with other members of the staff in the general operation of the business, advises on antitrust, labor, government regulatory, e ;ual employment and other matters of legal significance. Counsel is assisted by patent counsel on matters involving patents and data.
S2l GE-ARSD Financial Section The Manager of the Financial Section is responsible to the Depart-nient General Manager for reporting financial results of the Department, 20 establishing the financ.al policies of the Department and providing financial 521 service and counsel to the other GE-ARSD sections. In addition, the Financial Section is responsible for interpretation of financial contract language, establishment and negotiation of. overhead rates, and development of 25 operating budgets and long range forecasts of GE-ARSD.
l GE-ARSD Employee Relations Section 52l40 The Manager of the GE-ARSD Employee Relations Section is responsible to the Department General Manager for idt 'tifying, dcveloping and implementing relations programs responsive to the Department needs; for establishing goals, objectives and assuring timely emi 'yment of qualified personnel. It also 28 provides coordination, counseling ' d direction for all Department components in relations areas including Manpower Development and Equal Employment Oppor-tunity and Minority Relations and maintains procedures and records and to assure compliancc with federal and state laws in the areas of fair employment practices.
1.4-17a Amend. 52 O
Oct. 1979 } O20
1 4.2.5.4 Rockwell International Corporation (Fiqure 1.4-9) The LMFBR Program is being undertaken at Atomics International (AI), a division of the Energy Systems Group of Rockwell International Corporation. 52l The principal organizational entities directly involved in this program 5 21 at ESG are described below. Atomics International Division Vice President and General Manager The Atomics International Division Vice President and General Manager is responsible for the management of the CRBRP Program and related LMFBR Programs. Rr'ated LMFBR Programs include LMFBR Base Technology Program activities and d steam generdtor development and manufacturing 41l progrf,m. Therefore, the responsibility for ESG's overall performance on 52 the CRBRP is vested in the General Manager. CRBRP Program Director 52 The C'iBRP Program Director is responsible for the management of the CRBRP Program at ESG. In this capacity, he is responsible for managing the CRBRP Program work in accordance with the contract requirements and providing direction to the functional organizations within ESG for CRBRP development, 31 design and procurement with exception of the Steam Generator Program. CRBRP Steam Generator Program Director 52 The Steam Generator Program Director is responsible for the management of the Steam Generator Program at ESG. In this capacity, he is respon-sible for managing the program work in accordance with the contract require-52 l ments and providing direction to tne functional organizations within ESG y for steam generator development, design, procurement and fabrication. N^1 029 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 1,4-17 b
O O O
Quality Assurance Director The responsibilities of the Quality Assurance Director are 41l discussed in Chapter 17, Appendix J, Section 2.2. Research and Engineering Vice President 25 The Research and Engineering Vice President is responsible for the 52 management of ESG's centralized engineering activities. On the CRBRP Program, engineering work in support of conceptual design, preliminary design, and final design is assigned to the Engineering Department. 41l Engineering and design work conducted by the Engineering Department includes: Mechanical Design, Drafting and Checking, Electrical and Control Engineering, Materials and Process, Piping and Structural Design, Thermal and Process systems Pressure Components Stress Analysis, Struc-tural Systems Stress Analysis, Specifications and Manuals, Engineering Assurance and Data Management and the verification of design through
,25 41 developmental and acceptance testing.
Operations Director The Director of Operations is responsible for the product 41 l manufacturing, material purchasing and warehousing in support of the CRBRP in accordance with the controlling programmatic documents. The material purchasing function is responsible for selecting scurces, procurement, subcontract administration, assuring adherence to work statements, prices and delivery schedules, receiving, inspection, storage, issuance, payment of invoices, and observing the performance quality of the articles purchased. The manufacturing manager is responsible for reviewing engineerina and design work performed by ESG to assure manufac-52 turability. On the CRBRP Program, as with other programs, the Manager of Manufacturing Engineering is responsible for conducting on-the-board ~ reviews, parti-cipating in design reviews, reviewing vendor design information and. assuring com-ponent designs can be fabricated and assembled expeditiously and a' minimum cost.
Finance and Administration Vice President and Controller The CRBi
p a ma=U' Civai G ua.CaGle 051,l ., f.t Gi.iER Lis tit if.y G a,u,n,t,l,e
- t y C00R0isaf0R I
CoefROL & ICHE DUL E a0VamCf 3 f t$1munist a110e patastuint E EGIBIE RiaG SVlf tuS il sysflus L C0mP0ater RIOuint ut NTS 0151G5 o .m it CNuiCat n pg te t t Ga a?iO4 . 5 _.m 5Picialist
- a. .
i e ___. Ps0Gaam initGmat On N t.J1 @N Stt tialt1T JansueAT 9919 ~. 3 x, O Figure 1.4-8. General Electric Organization ~ . . ..~.t. .+o.~. . . . . . ~ , . .. ... .. .. ~ . . .....a... ,,, j.m......~... . ~ ~... . ~ , . . . ~. ... .. . .. .. ..o,,..,,, u..,.... . . ~ . . ..m. ...~ .. . ... - . . ~ ' - + -
- co.... .~ . . . . -.-
.u..~. .......e. o.,. **".o'~.'-' o- <.....~. o ..... =... gg.=,.; .u.~.,. , o. . ..c .... . . . . . . . . , , , . _ ~ , .. . . . .. u .o ~ ... n. . y - - . . . . ~...~2 .. -o . - . " . ~ . ,,,0 ;, ..;.2, '" n., , T = - , .~. . . ., . .~... n I w co c. .u..,. . ..~~ ... . ~ . . ...o.,. . , . , , ,.. _ . . ,.~ .. < . . . .. .....,. -- . . . . .~. . .u.. O ";;;.,ny; . . ~ . . . . . ;=.,..,,;;,. . '7"."'".'. -- *2:7';'l$. *"!'?" ,E 7i' .::"* .. l . . . .....c ~.m...~.. m.'..==c. m%, .".f..'.." .~u. ,,. ..~~...... .e... .-. . ,. . -- .~,..c. ...,., M . ~ . . ~ on oa r n>- c"3 u:> -"gg Figure 1.4-9, Rockwell International - Energy Systems Group N n O O O 1.5.2.5.5 Fallback Position a Flexibility is provided in the on-going critical experiment program described above to provide the best available mockup of the safety-related features and components during the final design phase of the CRBRP. In this way uncertainties in these parameters should be reduced and the confidence level in the final safety analysis increased accordingly. If any of these experiments are not successfully completed, the information used in the safety analysis would have to be based on previous critical mockups that may not be consistent with the final design parameters. If this is the case, larger design margins to fully accommodate these uncertainties would have to be applied to the safety analysis and to the design of the control systems. 1.5.2.6 Source Range Flux Monitoring (SRFM) System Experiments 1.5.2.6 1 Purpose The SRFM System is the instrumentation that will monitor subcritical reactivity during reactor shutdown and refueling operation. Experiments at the Zero Power Plutonium Reactor (ZPPR) facilities will be used to verify the l analysis of the ex-vessel low level flux monitoring system and to calibrate 41 the instrumentation prior to use in the CRBRP. The following information is required to meet these objectives: o The SRFM neutron count rate as a function of subcritical reactivity, e The SRFM neutron count rate as a function of both reactor geometry and detector environment, o Performance test of detectors and instrumentation. 1.5.2.6.2 Programs The SRFM experiments will be performed at ZPPR operated by the Argonne National Laboratory at the National Reactor Test Facility near Idaho Falls, Idaho. The following specific experiments will be performed in support of the analysis of the ex-vessel SRFM. 41
- a. Count rate as a function of subcriticality,
- b. Count rate as a function of the number of fuel assemblies stored in-vessel ,
- c. Count rate as a function of core and blanket geometrv and refueling patterns,
- d. Count rate is a function of the detector environment.
1; qa. Amend. 41 1.5-42 : i i U92 Oct. 1977 Experiments, using detectors and instrumentation which duplicate the actually installed Source Range Flux Monitoring System (SRFt1S) equipment, will be performed to verify equipment performance in the expected gamma and neutron fields corresponding to the selected detector locations in CRBRP. These tests may be perfonned by the FMS equipment supplier at reactor test facilities where suitable gamma environments for the detector can be produced. Information from the foregoing critical experiments will be applied to plan these tests. 1.5.2.6.3 Schedule 41 CY 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 Count rate as a function Preliminary Final '52l of subcriticality (ZPPR) A Intering A Count rate as a function of Final reactor geometry, detector environment and stored fuel In'i ti al-h a 52 SRFM performance test (ZPPR) 47 41 , t a 1.5.2.6.4 Success Criteria The test will demonstrate that the monitoring of subcritical reactivity can be obtained in accordance with the prescribed relationship to guard against inadvertent approach to criticality. The monitoring system should detect gross refueling errors without being overly sensitive to changes in core geometry and refueling patterns. The tests should confirm that measurements at two of the three detector locations should not be affected by fuel assemblies stored in the in-vessel storage. Tests of the installed FMS equipment will verify its suitability for use in monitoring shutdown, refueling and startup reactor operations. 1.5.2.6.5 Fallback Position SRFM is the essential instrumentation to mon' tor the suberitical 52 l reactivity. In the unlikely event that the in-vessel stored fuel assemblies affect the measurements of the monitors the locations of these monitors and/or shielding arrangement will be modifed. Additionally, if the expected ganma dose rate at the detectors adversely affects the sensitivity of the instrumentation, shielding will be modified to reduce the effect of gamma dose. Amend. 52 Oc t. 1979 1.5-43 il"l 0 4.3. CHAPTER 4.0 - REACTOR TABLE OF CONTENTS Page j a 4.1
SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION 4.1.1 Lower Internals 4.1-1 4.1.2 Upper Internals 4.1-3 4.1.3 Core Restraint 4.1-4 4.1.4 Fuel, Blanket and Removable Radial Shield Regions 4.1-4 4.1.4.1 Fuel and Axial Blankets 4.1-4 4.1.4.2 Inner and Radial Blanket 4.1-6 4.1.4.3 Removable Radial Shield 4.1-7 4.1.4.4 Control 4.1-7 4.1.5 Design and Performance Characteristics 4.1-9 4.1.6 Loading Conditions and Analysis Techniques 4.1-9 4.1.7 Computer Codes 4.1-10 4.2 MECHANICAL DESIGN 4.2.1 Fuel and Blanket Design 4.2-1 4.2.1.1 Design Bases 4.2-1 4.2.1.1.1 Functional Requirements 4.2-1 4.2.1.1.2 Operational and Design Requirements 4.2-2 4.2.1.1.2.1 Operating Conditions 4.2-2 4.2.1.1.2.2 Design Requirements 4.2-5 4.2.1.1.2.2.1 Fuel and Blanket Assembly Structural 4.2-15 Component Design Criteria 51 Amend. 51 4-1 , Sept.1979 11'l 044
TABLE OF CONTENTS Continued Page No. 4.2.1.1.2.3 Requirements for Design Features 4.2-17 4.2.1.1.3 Environmental and Material Consicerations 4.2 18 4.2.1.1.3.1 Irradiation Induced Creep and Swelling 4.2-19 4.2.1.1.3.2 Creep Rupture Properties and Thermal Creep 4.2-19 4.2.1.1.3.3 Tensile Properties 4.2-20 4.2-20 4.2.1.1.3.4 Cladding Wastage 4.2.1.1.3.5 Effects of Fuel and Cladding Swelling 4.2-23
- 4. 2.1.1. 3. 6 Environmental Effects-Blanket 4.2-26 Assemblies 4.2.1.1.3.7 Fission Product Redistribution 4.2-26 4.2.1.1.3.8 Performance of Defected Fuel and Blanket 4.2-27 Rods 4.2.1.1.3.9 Fission Gas Release 4.2-35 4.2.1.1.4 Surveillance and Post Irradiation Examination of Fuel and Blanket Assem- 4.2-37 blies 4.2.1.1.4.1 General Surveillance and Examination Plan- 4.2-38 Fuel Assemblies 4.2.1.1.4.2 General Surveillance and Examination Plan- 4.2-39 Blanket Assemblies 4.2.1.1.4.3 Typical Examination Requirements-Fuel and 4.2-40 Blanket Assemblies 4.2.1.1.4.4 Evaluation of Results Fuel and 4.2-41 Blanket Assemblies 4.2.1.2 Design Description 4.2-41 4.2.1.2.1 Core Design and Operation 4.2-41 51 4.2.1.2.2 Fuel Assemblies 4.2-42 4-ii Arr.end. 52 Oct. 1979 1
i 1,
- j Ilk b
TABLE OF CONTENTS Continued Page No. 4.4.2.8.9 B C Linear Thermal Expansion Coefficient 4.4-35 4 4.4.2.8.10 B C Density 4.4-35 4 4.4.2.8.11 Fuel Theoretical Density 4.4-35 4.4.2.8.12 Fuel Melting Temperature 4.4-35 4.4.2.8.13 B C Melting Temperature 4.4-37 4 4.4.2.8.1/ Fuel Linear Power-To-Melt 4.4-38 4.4.2.8.15 Fuel Restructuring Parameters 4.4-39 4.4.2.8.16 Fission Gas Release and Fission Gas Yield 4.4-39 4.4.2.9 Thermal Effects of Operational Transients 4.4-42 4.4.2.10 Plant Configuration Data 4.4-44 52 l 4.4.3 Evaluation 4.4-45 4.4.3.1 Reactor Hydraulics 4.4-45 4.4.3.2 Uncertainties Analysis 4.4-46 4.4.3.2.1 Introduction 4.4-46 4.4.3.2.2 Power-To-Melt Uncertainties 4.4-52 4.4.3.2.3 Nuclear Uncertainties 4.4-53 4.4.3.2.4 Plenum Pressure Uncertainties 4.4-55 4.4.3.3 Steady State Perfomance Predictions 4.4-57 4.4.3.3.1 Plant Conditions 4.4-57 4.4.3.3.2 Linear Power 4.4-59 4.4.3.3.3 Assemblies Mixed Mean Temperatures 4.4-59 4.4.3.3.4 Rod Lifetime C1 adding Temperature / Pressure 4.4-61 Histories 51 4.4.3.3.5 Core Assemblies Duct Temperatures 4.4-62 4-xv Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
'I~j () / I;
O TABLE OF CONTENTS Continued Page No. 4.4.3.3.6 Power-To-Melt Analysis 4.4-63 4.4.3.3.7 Control Assemblies Thermal-Hydraulic 4.4-65 Performance 4.4.3.3.8 Preliminary RRS Thermal-Hydraulic 4.4-66 Analysis 4.4.3.4 Analytical Techniques 4.4-67 4,4.3.4.1 Fuel and Blanket Assemblies 4.4-67 4.4.3.4.2 Primary Control Assemblies 4.4-72 4.4.3.5 Hydraulic Instability Analysis 4.4-74 4.4.3.6 Temperature Transient Effects Analysis 4.4-74 4.4.3.7 Potentially Damaging Temperature Effects 4.4-75 During Transients 4.4.3.8 Thermal Description of the Direct Heat 4.4-75 52 l Removal Service (DHRS) 4.4.4 Testing and Verification 4.4-75 4.4.4.1 Feature tiodel Test 4.4-7E 4.4.4.2 Reactor Assemblies T&H Testing 4.4-78 4.4.5 Core Exit Ins'rumentation Requirements 4.4-80 Table No. LIST OF TABLES 4.1-1 Reactor System Design Performance Parameters 4.1-11 4.2-A Design Proced:ce for Steady State Creep Analysis 4.2-331 4.2-B Comparison of Design Lifetime Predicted by 4.2-332 Strain Criteria with Actual Lifetime 4.2-C 316 Stainless Steel Fretting and Wear Data in 4.2-333 51 Sodium Amend. 52 4-xvi Oct. 1979 sr l, o s, 047
LIST OF TABLES Continued Page No. 4.2-D Over-Temperature Transient Experiments 4.2-334 Rapid Reactivity Insertion Experiments 4.2-335 4.2-E Densities of Compounds in the U-Na-0 System 4.2-336 4.2-1 Calculated and Experimental Isothermal Oxygen 4.2-337 4.2-2 Contents Fuel and Sodium for Fuel Sodium Reaction Typical Surveillance Examination Plan 4.2-338 4.2-3 Comparison of CRBRP and FFTF Fuel Assembly 4.2-339 4.2-4 Details Nominal Radial Blanket Assembly Design 4.2-343 4.2-5 Parameters General Plan for Verification of Fuel Design 4.2-345 4.2-5A Analysis and Criteria 4.2-6 Deleted CRBR Core Assembly Structural Inelastic 4.2-347 4.2-7 Criteria and Limits Summary of Design Loading Conditions for Fuel 4.2-348 4.2-8A Assembly Structural Analysis Design Seismic and Core Restraint Loads of the 4.2-349 4.2-8B Fuel Assembly ACLP Seismic Loads in Vertical Direction 4.2-350 4.2-8C 4.2-9 Testing for Load Follow 4.2-351 4.2-10 Steady State CDF Value for the Hot Rod of 4.2-352 Blanket Assembly 201 of the First Core 4.2-11 Worst Fuel Assembly Hot Rod Steady State 4.2-353 Ductility Limited Strains at Hot Spot 51 Amend. 51 4-xvit Sept. 19'i9 i!"1 048
LIST OF TABLES Continued O Page No. 4.2-llA Characterized Cladding Breach Summary 4.2-354 4.2-12 Summary of Design Loading Conditions for Blanket 4.2-355 Assembly Structural Analysis 4.2-13 Design Seismic and Core Restraint Loads at the 4.2-356 Blanket Assembly ACLP 4.2-14 E0L Steady State Cladding Strains Due to FCMI 4.2-357 and Plenum Pressure 4.2-15 CRBR First Core Wire Wrap Perfomance Summary 4.2-358 4.2-16 Fuel Assembly Bounding Margin of Safety Summary 4.2-359 4.2-17 Blanket Assembly Bounding Margin of Safety Sumary 4.2-360 4.2-18 Assessment of Applicability of FFTF Design 4.2-361 Verification Tests 4.2-19 Planned CRBRP Fuel Assembly Design Verification 4.2-363 Tests 4.2-20 Planned CRBRP Blanket Design Verification 4.2-364 52 l Tests 4.2-21 CSS Minimum Margin of Safety and Fatigue 4.2-365 Damage Summary 4.2-22 Support Cone Buckling Evaluation Summary 4.2-366 4.2-23 Primary and Primary Plus Secondary Stress 4.2-367 Evaluations Section 1 4.2-24 Primary and Primary Plus Secondary Stress 4.2-368 Evaluations Section 2 4.2-25 Primary and Primary Plus Secondary Stress 4.2-369 Evaluations - Section 11 4.2-26 Fatigue Damage in the CSS Perforated Plate 4.2-370 at Section 1 4.2-27 Maximum Fatigue Damage in CSS for Sections 2 4.2-371 to 11 Except Section 6 4.2-28 Summary of Stresses Through Sections A-A and B-B 4.2-372 51 4-xviii Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 n
LIST OF TABLES Continued Page No. 4.3-29 CRBRP Primary Control System Requirements and 4.3-128 Minimum Control Worths (% AK) 4.3-30 CRBRP Secondary Control System Requirements and 4.3-129 Minimum Control Worths (% 6K)
- 4. 3-31 CRBRP Summary of Control Rod Interaction Effects 4.3-132 4.3-32 Minimum Shutdown Margins (% AK)for CRBRP Primary 4.3-133 and Secondary Control System 4.3-33 ZPPR Critical Eigenvalve (Keff) Predicted by 4.3-134 CRBRP Design Method and Data 4.3-34 Maximum Parameter Values During a Reactor 4.3-135 Inherent Response Transient at a Reactor Startup Operating Point (8% Power, 40% Flow) 4.3-35 Ex-Core Neutron Flux at Beginning of Cycle 4.3-136 Three 4.3-36 Group Structure of 30, 21, and 9 Group Sets 4.3-137 4.3-37 Comparisons of W-ARD Calculations with Pin and 4.3-138 52 l Plate Measurements 4.3-38 ZPPR-4 Critical Eigenvalue Predicted with CRBRP 4.S 139 Design Method and Data 4.3-39 ZPPR-4 Reaction Rate Summary 4.3-140 4.3-40 ZPPR-4 Control Rod Worths 4.3-141 4.3-41 ZPPR-7 & 8 Critical Eigenvalue Predicted with 4.3-142 CRBRP Design Method and Data 4.3-42 ZPPR-7 Reaction Rate Summary 4.3-143 4.3-43 ZPPR-7 Control Rod Worth Calculation-To- 4.3-144 Experiment Ratios 4.3-44 Comparison of Nuclear Parameters for CRBRP 4.3-145 51 Amend. 52 4-xxiii Oct. 1979
!!"i 050
O M cT OF TABLES Continued Paqe No. 4.3-45 Comparison of Reactvity Coefficients for CRBRP 4.3-149 and FFTF 4.4-1 CRBRP Core Loading During Cycles 1 Through 5 4.4-87 4.4-2 Summary of Strain Equivalent Limiting 4.4-88 Temperature Calculations for Second Core Fuel Assemblies 4.4r3 Coolant Limiting Temperatures for Telt 4.4-89 Calculations 4.4-4 Core Orificing Zones Flow Allocation 4.4-90 4.4-5 Fuel Assembly Component Pressure Drop Data 4.4-91 Linear Regression Analysis 4.4-6 Fuel Assembly Component Hydrualit Correlations 4.4-92 4.4-7 Blanket Assemblies Component Hydraulic Correla- 4.4-93 tioas 4.4-8 Bases for Reactor Internals Pressure Drops 4.4-94 4.4-9 DetailedPressureDropBreakgownapdPlant 4.4-95 52l THDV Conditions (41.446 x 10 lb/hr) and Maximum Uncertainties 4.4-10 Melting Temperatures for Unirradiated Mixed 4.4-96 Urania -Plutonia 4.4-11 Effects of Burnup on Melting Point of Mixed 4.4-97 Urania -Plutonia 4.4-12 Principal Parameters of EBR-II Irradiated 4.4-98 Pins Used to Calibrate Fission Gas Release Model 4.4-13 Principal Parameters of EBR-II Irradiated 4.4-99 High-Burnup Pins Used to Verify Fission Gas Release Model 4.4-14 Principal Parameters of EBR-II Irradiated Pins 4.4-100 at High Cladding Temperature Used to Verify 51 Fission Gas Release Model Amend. 52 4-xxiv Oct. 1979 3
) r i, 0,5. }
LIST OF FIGURES Continued Pace No. 4.2-103 f.ower CRD Assembly, Extension Nozzle and Lower 4.2-602 Shroud Tube 4.2-104 Primary Control Assembly (PCA) 4.2-603 4.2-105 Secondary Control Rod System Schematic 4.2-604 4.2-106 Secondary Control Assembly (SCA) 4.2-605 4.2-107 Secondary Control Rod Driveline (SCRD) 4.2-606 4.2-108 Secondary Control Rod i' rive flechanism (SCRDM) 4.2-607 4.2-109 Lateral Misalignment Load Model 4.2-608 4.2-110 Predicted Inner /0 uter Duce Bow-PCA 4.2-609 4.2-110A PCA Clearance (Lateral f,isplacement Due to Themal 4.2-610 and Radiation Bowing Rea 7 Corner for 1 Cycle) 4.2-111 Primary Control Assembly Duct Bowing Configuration 4.2-611 4.2-lllA Pe.iet Swelling and '., lad Gap 4.2-612 4.2-111B Primary Control Rod Axial Burnup Profile 4.2-613 4.2-112 Primary Control Rod System Scram Insertion 4.2-614 Distance vs. Time 4.2-113 Comparison Analysis Tests for FFTF Control 4.2-615 Assembly (Misaligned Conditions) 4.2-114 Preliminary PCRS Scram Insertion Performance 4.2-616 (Non-Seismic) 4.2-115 Deleted 4.2-116 Configuration Assumed in Driveline Model 4.2-618 4.2-117 Primary CRDS Driveline Seismic Model 4.2-619 4.2-118 Typical PCRS Total Contact Forces vs. Time 4.2-620 During SSE 4.2-119 Heterogeneous Core PCRS SSE Seismic Scram 4.2-621 Predicted Performance 4.2-120 Absorber Assembly Scram Impact Dynamic Model 4.2-622 51 4-xxxv Amend. 51 Sept. 1979 1 1 052
LIST OF FIGURES Continued Page No. 4.2-120A CRDM Primary Pressure Boundary Seals 4.2-623 4.2-121 SCRS Rod Displacement vs. Time 4.2-624 4.2-122 SCRS Scram Reactivity Insertion vs. Time 4.2-625 4.2-123 Secondary Control Rod System 4.2-626 4.2-124 Secondary Control Rod System 4.2-627 4.2-125 Collet Type Latch 4.2-628 4.2-126 Total Actuation Force vs. Friction Coefficient 4.2-629 4.2-127 Deleted 4.2-128 Typical Sequence for Reference fuel Transient 4.2-631 Testing 4.2-129 Porosity / Fuel Rod Ring liistories for Experi- 4.2-632 mental and CRBR Fuel Assemblies 4.3-1 Clinch River Breedte Reactor Core Layout 4.3-150 4.3-2 Power Distribution Calculational Method 4.3-151 4.3-3 CRBRP Assembly Numbering Scheme 4.3-152 4.3-4 Peak and Average Radial Power Factors BOCl 4.3-153 4.3-5 Peak and Average Radial Power Factors EOCl 4.3-154 4.3-6 Peak and Average Radial Power Factors BOC2 4.3-155 4.3-7 Peak and Average Radial Power Factors E0C2 4.3-156 4.3-8 Peak and Average Radial Power Factors BOC3 4.3-157 4.3-9 Peak and Average Radial Pawer Factors E0C3 4.3-158 4.3-10 Peak and Average Radial Power Factors BOC4 4.3-159 4.3-11 Peak and Average Radial Power Factors EOC4 4.3-160 4.3-12 Peak and Average Radial Power Factors BOCS 4.3-161 51 4-xxxvi Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 1
)") Obb
t.I_ST OF FIGURES Continued Page No. 4.3-13 Peak and Average Radial Power Factors E0C5 4.3-162 4.3-14 Peak and Average Radial Power Factort BOC6 4.1-163 4.3-15 Peak and Average Radial Power Factors EOC6 4.3-164 4.3-16 Normalized Axial Power Distribution Clean Fuel 4.3-165 52l Zones (Power Normalized To 1.0 Over 92.04 cm Core Height) 4.3-17 Normalized Axial Power Distribution Fuel Zones 4.3-166 With Control Rod Influence (Power Normalized to 1.0 Over 92.04 cm fuel Height) 4.3-18 Normalized Axial Power Distribution Inner Blanket 4.3-167 Rows ?.4 (Power Normalized to 1.0 Over 92.04 cm Central Regicn) 4.3-19 Normalized Axial Power Distribution Inner Blanket 4.3-168 P,ows 6,8 (Power Normalized to 1.0 Over 92.04 cm Central Region) 4.3-20 Normalized Axial Power Distribution Radial Blanket 4.3-169 (Power Nomalized to 1.0 Over 92.04 cm Central Region) 4.3-21 Normalized Axial Power Distribution, Axial Blankets 4.3-170 (Typical) 4.3-22 Peak Linear Power Distribution (KW/FT) 4.3-171 4.3-23 Peak and Average Rod Burnup (MWD /KG) Cycles 1-2 4.3-172 4.3-24 Peak and Average Rod Burntp (MWD /KG) Cycles 3 .1 4.3-173 Peak and Average Rod Burnup (MWD /KG) Cycles 5-6 4.3-174 4.3-25 4.3-26 Flow Chart for Doppler Calculations 4.3-175 CRBRP Doppler Constant by Assembly-Beginning of 4.3-176 4.3-27a Cycle One CRBRP Doppler Constant by Assembly - End-of- 4.3-177 4.3-27b 51 Cycle Four 4-xxxvii Amend. 52
,, Oct. 1979
LIST OF FIGURES Continued O Page No. 4.3-28 Flow Chart for Sodium Voiding Reactivity 4.3-178 Worth Calculations 4.3-29a CRBRP Sodium Void Worth By Assembly-Beginning 4.3-179 cf Cycle One 4.3-29b CRBrtP ' adsum void Worth By Assembly-End of 4.3-180 Cycle Fv. 4.3-30 Radial Row Numbering Scheme for CRBRP Bowing 4.3-181' Model 4.3-31 Control Worth Calculational Sequence 4.3-182 4.3-32 Control Rod Interaction Effects as a Function 4.3-183 of Depth of Insertion of the Row 7 Corner PCA Bank at Beginning of Life 4.3-33 Control R-d Integral Worth 4.3-184 4.3-34 Control Rod Bank Withdrawal History - Cycle 1 4.3-185 4.3-35 Control Rod Bank Withdrawal History - Cycle 2 4.3-135 4.3-36 Control Rod Bank liithdrawal History - Cycle 3 4.3-186 4.3-37 Control Rod Bank Withdrawal History - Cycle 4 4.3-186 4.3-38 Control Rod Bank Withdrawal History - Cycle 5 4.3-187 4.3-39 Control Rod Bank Withdrawal History - Cycle 6 4.3-187 4.3-40 Criticality of Fuel Assemblies (Immersed in 4.3-188 Sodium and in Air) 4.3-41 Schematic of Feedba.ck Effects 4.3-189 4.3-42 Transfer Functions for Various feedback 4. 3-190 Reactivi ties 4.3-43 Transfer Functions for Various feedback 4.3-191 Rcactivi ties 4.3-44 Transfer Functions for Various Feedback 4.3-192 51 Reactivi ties 4-xxxviii Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 11 i 055
LIST OF FIGURES Continued Page No. 4.3-45 Bowing Reactivity Function for Stability Analysis 4.3-193 4.3-46 Reactor Power Response to Inherent Reactivity 4.3-194 Feedback Following a 2c Step Insertion 4.3-47 fuel Assembly Maximum Fuel Temperature Response 4.3-195 To Inherent Reactivity Feedbacks Following a 2c Step Insertion 4.3-48 Fuel Assembly Maximum Cladding Temperature 4.3-196 Response to Inherent Reactivity Feedbacks Following a 2c Step Insertion 4.3-49 Fuel Assembly Maximum Coolant Temperature Response 4.3-197 to Inherent Reactivity feedbacks Following a 2c Step Insertion 4.3-50 Assembly Average (36 Inch) Total Flux (10 15 n/cm 2 4.3-198 sec) and Fast Flux Fraction at the Beginning of Cycle One 4.3-51 Assembly Average (36 Inch) Total Flux (10 15 n/cm 2 4.3-199 sec) and Fast Flux Fraction at the End of Cycle Four 4.3-52 Axial Distribution of the Total Flux in Clean Fuel 4.3-200 6t the 50C1 and EOC4 4.3-53 Axial Distribution of the Fast Flux Fraction in 4.3-201 Clean Fuel at the 50Cl and EOC4 4.3-54 Calculational Scheme for Analysis of CRBRP 4.3-202 4.3-55 Calculational Scheme for Evaluation of ZPPR 4.3-203 Critical Experiments 4.3-56 oin Zones and Central Plate and Pin Cells for 4.3-204 ZPPR-2 4.3-57 Core Layout for ZPPR-3, Phases 1B, 2 and 3 4.3-205 4.3-58 Reference 632 Drawer Sodium Void Configuration 4.3-206 for the Modified Phase 3 Core of ZPPR Assembly 3 4-xxxix Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 11^1 056
LIST OF FIGURES Continued O Page No. 4.3-59 ZPPR-3, Modified Core, Two-Dimensional (R,Z) 4.3-207 Calculation Model 4.3-60 Measured Sodium Void Reactivity Effect in ZPPR-3 4.3-208 Modified Phase 3 as a Function of the Void Radius 4.3-61 Sodium Void Worths in ZPPR-3, Phase 3 4.3-209 4.3-62 Sodium Void Worths in ZPPR-3, Phase 3 Modified Core 4.3-210 4.3-63 ZPPR Assembly 4 Phase 1 Reference Configuration 4.3-211 4.3-64 ZPPR-7&8 Heterogeneous Core Layout 4.3-212 4.3-65 ZPPR-7 Phase B Midplane Calculated-To-Experimental 4.3-213 Ratios for 239 Pu (n,f) 4.3-66 ZPPR-7 Phase C Midplane Calculated-To-Experimental 4.3-214 Ratios for 239 Pu (n,f) 4.4-1 Typical Axial Temperature Profile in CRBRP Fuel Rod 4.4-127 h 4.4-2 CRBRP Flows and Hydraulic loads 4.4-128 4.4-3 Inlet Module Map, Showing Orificing Requirements 4.4-129 of Reactor Assemblies 4.4-4 Modular CSS Assembly: Flow Paths 4.4-130 4.4-5 Elevation of Typical Lower Inlet Module 4.4-131 4.4-6 Lower Core Support Plate Low Pressure Manifold 4.4-132 System 4.4-7 Radial Shield Orificing Flow Path 4.4-133 4.4-8 Upper Internals Structure Concept Feature 4.4-134 U 4.4-9 CRBRP Core 60 Symetry Sector and Asemblies 4.4-135 Numbering Scheme 4.4-10 Typical DELT Detennination for First Core fuel 4.4-136 51 Assemblies A 4-xl S
. 79 ,
it 1, " i 0#
LIST OF FIGURES Continued Page No. 4.4-11 Typical DELT Determination for First Core Inner 4.4-137 Blanket Assemblies 4.4-12 Typical DELT Determination for Second Core Fuel 4.4-138 Assemblies 4.4-13 Typical DELT Determination for Second Core Inner 4.4-139 Blanket Assemblies 4.4-14 Typical DELT Determination for Radial Blanket 4.4-140 Assemblies 4.4-15 Individual Assemblies Limiting Temperatures at 4.4-141 First Core 4.4-16 Individual Assemblies Limiting Temperatures at 4.4-142 Second Core 4.4-17 Individual Assemblies Minimum Flow Rates at 4.4-143 First and Second Core Necessary to Satisfy the Constraints 4.4-18 Core Orificing Scheme 4.4-144 4.4-19 Flow Ma1 distribution in the Five fuel Assembly 4.4-145 Orificing Zones at a Power-To-Flow Ratio of 1.0 4.4-20 Flow Maldistribution Factors in the Four Radial 4.4-146 Blanket Orificing Zones and the Control Assemblies at a Power to Flow Ratio of 1.0 4.4-21 Flow Maldistribution Factors in the Hot Assembly, 4.4-147 Average Fuel Assemblies, and Average Radial Blanket Assemblies at a Power to Flow Rate of 1.0 4.4-22 Flow Maldistribution Factors in the Hot Assembly, 4.4-148 Average Fuel Assemblies and Average Radial Blanket Assemblies at a Power to Flow Ratio of 2.0 4.4-23 Effect of Buoyancy on Hot Channel Enthalpy Rise in 4.4-149 in the Hot Assembly at Low Reactor Flow Rates 4.4-24 Typical CRBR Fuel Assembly Orifice Stack Cavitation 4.4-150 Data 51 4-xli Amend. 51 Sept. 1979 11^1 058
LIST OF FIGURES Continued O Page No. 4.4-25 Fuel Assembly Inlet Nozzle-Orifice-Shield- 4.4-151 Pressure Drop for Orifice Hole Velocity Limit of 40 Ft./Sec. 4.4-26 Map of CRBRP Lower Inlet Modules (1/3 Symmetry 4.4-152 Sector) 4.4-153 4.4-27 Phase Diagram for U0 -Pu0 2 2 4.4-28 Effect of Burnup on Melting Point of (U,Pu)0 4.4-154 2x 4.4-29 Power-To-Melt / Cold Gap Size Relationship from 4.4-155 P-19 Data and Uncertainty Band 4.4-30 Comparison of Measured and Predicted Fission 4.4-156 Gas Release 4.4-31 Graphical Illustration of Semi-Statical Method 4.4-157 4.4-32 Core Assemblies Linear Power Ratings @ B0Cl 4.4-158 4.4-33 Core Assemblies Linear Power Ratings @ E0C4 4.4-159 9 4.4-34 Core Assemblies Mixed Mean Outlet Temperature 4.4-160 at B0Cl 4.4-35 Core Assemblies Mixed Mean Outlet Temperature 4.4-161 at E0C4 4.4-36 Lifetime Cladding Temperature / Pressure History 4.4-162 in Fuel Assembly #10, First Core, Orificing Zone 1 4.4-37 Lifetime Cladding Temperature / Pressure History 4.4-163 in Fuel Assembly #101, Second Core, Orificing Zone 1 4.4-38 Lifetime Cladding Temperature / Pressure History in 4.4-164 Fuel Assembly #2, Second Core, Orificing Zone 3 4.4-39 Lifetime Cladding Temperature / Pressure History in 4.4-165 in Fuel Assembly #52, Firs t Core, Orificing Zone 4 4.4-40 Lifetime Cladding Temperature / Pressure History in 4.4-166 Assembly #98, Ftrst Core, Orificing Zone 6, Row 6 Alternating Position 4-xlii Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
; 1, i OM
4.2 MECHANICAL DESIGN 4.2.1 Fuel and Blanket Design 4.2.1.1 Design Bases The fuel and blanket assemblies shall be designed to satisfy the general performance and safety criteria presented in Section 3.1 by per-forming their respective functions in a safe and reliable manner over their design lives. The functional requirements, design and operational require-ments, environmental and material considerations, and surveillance and examination requirements to achieve this objective are delineated in the following subsections. 4.2.1.i.1 Functional Requirements The primary functions of the fuel assembly are:
- 1. Provide, protect and position the nuclear fuel of the fast breeder reactor core type to produce heat for the Reactor Heat Transport System.
- 2. Provide neutrons for breeding plutonium in the fuel and blanket assemblies.
- 3. Breed plutonium in the upper and lower axial blankets.
The primary functions of the blanket assemblies are:
- 1. Provide, protec, and position the fertile material in and around the core for convr sion to plutonium.
- 2. Produce heat for the Primary Heat Transport System.
Both assemblies shall also be designed to:
- 1. Provide a compact structural unit that can be moved in and out of the reactor by the refueling machines.
- 2. Provide a controlled path for the primary sodium coolant of the Reactor Heat Transport System.
- 3. Provide shielding to protect the core support structure from excessive radiation.
- 4. Interact with the other core assemblies, core restraint system and lower internals structure to assure safe and predictable reactor core 51 geometry.
Amend. 51 4.2-1 Sept.1979 1 1 1 0 '/.0
4.2.1.1.2 Operational and Design Requirements 4.2.1.1.2.1 Operatina Conditions The initial core fuel and inner blanket assemblies for CRBRP have a maximum required residence time of 328 full power days corresponding to the first two cycles of operation. (This results in a peak fuel pellet burn-up of less than 80000 MWD /T in the peak power fuel assembly.) The initial core radial blanket assemblies have an 878 day (cycle 1-4) lifetime in the inner row, and an 1153 day (cycle 1-5) lifetime in the outer row. First-core physics data and thermal hydraulic data (Sections 4.3 and 4.4) are generally used as the basis for the PSAR design analyses. For certain specific analyses, simplified enveloping environments are used to reduce the complexity of the calculations. It is primarily the initial core data needs that are being supported by the LMFBR fuel technology programs. The scope and scheaule of the steady state fuel irradiation program, transient fuel irradiation program and reference cladding and duct irradiated materials program are provided in the references 164, 168, and the Reference Cladding and Duct Test Plan (provided to NRC 6/7/76) respectively. When the data from these programs supporting later cycle operation are available at will be incorporated into the CRBRP FSAR. During actual reactor operation, the long term damage accumulated by the fuel and blanket assembly components is expected to correspond to the damage which would be calculated using time averaged nominal temperatures. However, in assessing the effects of steady state operation and anticipated faults (normal and upset conditions), fuel and blanket assembly component temperatures shall be based upon maximum expected plant operating conditions and upper 20 level semistatistical hot channel factors. At this level, there is a 97.5% probability that the corresponding temperatures will not be exceeded. This is conservative since the calculated damage accumulation generally increases with temperature (for example, see Figure 52l 4.2-18, described in Section 4.2.1.1.2 below). For the single unlikely and extremely unlikely faults (emergency and faulted conditions), and upper limit on plant conditions (T&H design values) and the 3a uncertainty level shall be utilized. At this level, the probability of exceeding the calcu-lated temperature is approximately 0.1%. Because of the life limiting nature and safety consequences of these types of events coupled with their aw probability of occurrence, this extreme degree of conservatism is felt to be warranted at this time. During the life of the fuel and blanket assemblies they will be subjected to non-operational shipping and handling loads. The fuel assembly shipping loads shall be based on 69 axial and 29 lateral accelerations. These limits were selected as the basis for FFTF fuel assembly design; sub-53 sequent shipping tests have shown that the expected values are much lower
'than this.
Amend. 52 4.2-2 Oct. 1979 h
! l l O W
In addition to items 3 to 6 above which produce interacting forces with the assembly structure, the following events shall be considered for evaluation of the fuel and blanket assembly structures. Again, these are based upon a review similar to that performed for the rods.
- 1. Restraint of assembly bowing (due to di. aantial growth rates across the assembly) and interaction with other core ucmblies and the core support structure, including seismic loading, tnrough the core re-straint system.
- 2. Forces induced by sodium flow cnd the corresponding pressure drop through the assembly. This would include axial lift forces counterbalanced by assembly weight and hydraulic holddown and pressure differences across the duct wall, inlet and outlet nozzles.
- 3. Secondary stresses due to the steady state and transient temperature gradients through the component thickness. Irradiation induced stresses in the duct are included in the core restraint loading mechanisms.
- 4. Maximum push, pull and lateral loading applied through the refueling equipment.
As in the case of the fuel rods, these loadings shall be the current mimimum basis required for evaluation. 4.2.1.1.2.2 Design Requirements For the CRBRP fuel and blanket assembly fuel rod operating con-ditions and loading mechanisms identified in subsection 4.2.1.1, the following criteria shall be satisfied on a conservative basis, i.e., assumption of the maximum expected loading conditions and enviror. ment and the appropriate material properties of subsection 4.2.1.1.3. These criteria were selected so that the fuel rods will satisfy their functional requirements and performance objectives in a safe and reliable manner based upon current LMFBR technology. Further information on the bases of these design requirements are given later in this Section. Tne same limits apply to the wire wrap. It should' be noted that the following design requirements are preliminary estimates based upon available LMFBR technology. These estimates are currently being evaluated through extensive LMFBR Base Technology and 52l FF1F development programs which are summarized in subsections 4.2.1.4 and 4.2.1.5 respectively. As data from these programs becomes available, the following design requirements may change or the magnitudes of limits associated with these requirements could change. Ultimately, there may be a single criterion developed for the FSAR based on the best correlation with the experimental data. The true measure of performance potential will be deter-51 mined by the results from FFTF and CRBRP surveillance and post-irradiation testing. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 4.2-5 11*l 062
- 1. During steady state operation, the primary and secondary thermal O
creep strain in the circumferential (hoop) direction shall be less than 0.2% for a 2 to 1 stress biaxiality ratio. This criteria applies primarily to fuel rc .ladding and with appropriate stress biaxiality corrections for ot' )d components. This strain limit was selected for the design of fuel rods in FFTF in 1970. They were based on available strain-rupture data for 20% cold worked and irradiated Type 316 Stainless Steel cladding material with a 0.230 inch outside diameter and 15 mil wall thickness. The alloy compositionofthematerialtestedwasprototypic(seeReference74}C, Templug information indicated an irradiation temperature of 525 +25 but structural studies on other material irradiated in the g experiment suggest the temperature could have beeg as high as 700 C. All post-irradiation testing was done at 5501 1 C. The cladding was tested using internally pressurized tube segments with hoop and axial stresses (2 to 1 biaxiality ratio) calculated consistent with the thin-walled approximations of the design procedure. The true circumferential (hoop) strain which must be uniform through the cladding thickness, was calculated based upon diameter measurements at four circumferential locations using the expression: r=ln(dj /dg) Where, d = original mean diameter after irradiation, but before O testing, and dj = mean diameter after irradiation and testing. Therefore, any deformation occuring in the reactor, which would be expected to be insignificant for the low levels of irradiation, would be obviated by utilizing d in the ratio rather than the as-fabricated diameter. For the maximum measured strain of 2.5%, the true circum-ferential strain within an accuracy of 1.2%. Figureis4.2-1 approximated by (dj-d shows diametral rupt8r)/de 9 trains plotted as a function of rupture time. The figure includes the original data ob-0 tainedfrommaterialirradiatedataboutlgg0Figthe.Dounreay{ast 2 Reactor (DFR) to a total fluence of 3 x 10 n/cm or s2.6 x 10 n/cm 2 for E > 0.1 Mev. The dashed curve shows an extrapolation of the data to a fuel rod lifetime of approximately 10000 hr. At this maximum time, the diametral creep rupture strain would be 0.7 percent. Based on this 0.7 percent limit, a value of 0.2 percent hoop strain was selected to cover steady state operation. Within any reactor (DFR, EBR-II or CRBRP) thermal creep can only be distinguished from irradiation creep if one fonn of creep is essentially nonexistent. This could occur in a high temperature very low flux environment, where thermal creep predominates, or in a low temperature high flux environment where irradiation creep predominates. With re-gard to the data of Figure 4.2-1, the creep strain shown is only the amount of thermal creep measured during post irraciation testing. More 51 details are provided in the following paragraphs. Amend 51 4.2-6 Sept.1979]}e'j qg}
Since the reporting of the above DFR information in 1968, more biaxial rupture strain data has been obtained for prototypic FTR cladding from EBR-II irradiaticre These data in Figure 4.2-1 show that the long term creep rupture points in general still indicate that steady state strains of up to at least 0.3% could be attained at maximum fuel burn-up without failure and indicate a safe margin against failure for the design limit of 0.2% hoop strain. A preliminary indication that the 0.2% thermal creep strain limit in conjunction with the strain calculation procedure described in Section 4.2.1.1 and summarized in Table 4.2-A, is conservative relative to life-time prediction is given in Reference 75. This reference used a pro-cedure similar to that of Table 4.2-A to calculate the design life-time of 20% cold worked 316 stainless steel clad fuel rods irradiated in EBR-II over a temperature and burnup range encompassing CRBRP opera tion. The prototypicality of the design and oper.3 ting conditions of the EBR-II experimental fuel pins is demonstrated in Table 2 of Reference 75. The major differences in the procedure used for experi-mental verification and the design procedure of Table 4.2-A are: Nominal, rather than hotspot temperatures were utilized, r^ rain due to radial temperature gradient was neglected, and no fuel loading was considered. Even with these assumptions, the procedure and the corresponding strain limit, were shown to be conservative as summarized in Table 4.2-B. In the last two cases where the post irradiation examination is in-complete, preliminary evidence suggests that cladding fretting and wear may have been significantly in excess of the design wastage allowance. This was because these EBR-II experimental assemblies had bundle to duct porosities well in excess of the current design given 521 in Section 4.2.1.2.2. To determine the primary and secondary thermal creep strain limit for other stress biaxiality ratios, the curves on Figure 4.2-1 A are being utilized for preliminary design. Only the largest component of strain, hoop or axial,is considered. For a given stress biaxiality ratio, the strain correction factor for the largest strain component is read from Figure 4.2-1A. This factor is then multiplied times the 0.2% strain limit to obtain the limit for the maximum strai . component for the given biaxiality ratio. For example, for a rod component in pure axial tension, the axial strain component is the largest. For this stress biaxiality ratio (0/l), the strain correction factor is m3.0. Thus, the limit for the primary and secondary thermal creep strain in the axial direction for this component is 3.0 x 0.2% or 0.6%. The curves in Figure 4.2-1 A are discussed in Reference 95. For a thin, internally pressurized cylinder, the circumferential to 51 axial stress ratio is 2 to 1. See, for example, Reference 96. Amend. 52 4.2-7 Oc t. 1979
- j} } Obk
For the purpose of fuel rod performance analysis, the calculated cladding strain is not directly related to the measured cladding strain at any given time. Instead, for a given set of environmental conditions, the cladding strain is calculated as a function of time to determine the time required for the cladding to reach the appropriate strain limit. This time is considered to be the maximum fuel rod design lifetime as determined by the strain criteria for the given conditions. To verify this performance evaluation method, calculated fuel rod lifetimes have been compared to the actual lifetimes of fuel rods exposed to a particular environment. These comparisons hay 1 indicated this technique for calculating fuel rod cladding lifetimes to be con-servative. The radial blanket rod cladding experiences a lower stress level over a longer period of time, resulting in a lower cret s rate than in the fuel rod cladding. Figure 4.2-2 which was used in selecting strain limits shows the diametral strain at failure as the function of the average deformation rate. The deformation rate of radial blanket fuel rods is only 20% of the deformation rate of the core fuel rod. Assuming that the core fuel rods will fail with 0.7% diametral strain then Figure 4.2-2 shows the radial blanket with a 20% lower strain rate will fail with 1/2 this strain of 0.35%. The maximum allowable steady state ductility limited strain is set at 0.1% for the radial blanket rods. For the inner blanket rods a 0.2% strain limit is utilized since the inner blanket rod lifetime does not exceed that of the fuel rods. To maintain fuel rod cladding integrity during the faster acting transients, the design limit of subsection 15.1.2.2 must also be satisfied. That is, the total thermal creep strain and plastic strain accumulated during steady state operation, all operational (upset) events and the worst minor incident (emergency event) shall be less than 0.3% at a 2-to-1 stress biaxiality ratio. Plastic strain accu-mulation shall be calculated using the bilinear stress strain curve approximation described in subsection 15.1.2.2. In keeping with the lower design limit for radial blanket rod steady state cladding strain, the design basis strain limit for radial blanket red steady state and transient operation shall be 0.2%. Again, the fuel rod design limit (0.3%) is applied to the inner blanket rods since their life-time does not exceed the fuel rod lifetime.
- 2. During steady state operation, the power (and corresponding fuel temperature) in the peak power fuel and blanket assembly rod shall be less than the minimum value for incipient fuel melting with a 15%
overpower margin. The purpose of this requirement is to provide some margin between the nonnal operating power level required to produce incipient fuel melting. This is not meant to imply that incipient fuel melting is, in itself, detrimental. Rather, by providing such a margin, tne task of terminating severe transients, in which gross fuel melting can be important, becomes easier. 51 O Amend. 51 4.2-8 Sept. 1979 il 1 065
I One of the design guidelines to assure conservative design of the CRBR core and operational margins is no inception of fuel melting under steady state operation up to 115% of rated power. Conse-quently, the Plant Protection System and the Control System limits are established to assure that the above criterion is not violated. In fact, the CRBRP power can increase by a minimun of 7% and a maximum of 15% over the rated level (975 MWt) without causing reactor trip. At 115% power level, the reactor will be tripped over a high flux signal. Therefore, fuel temperatures and linear power ratings have been calcu-lated under the maximum possible overpower conditions to assure that the no-melting criterion was satisfied.
- 3. Ductility limited strain components include only thermal creep strain (covered in item 1) and plastic strain. Therefore, to maintain a total ductility limited strain of less than 0.2% consistent with item 1, no plastic strain is allowed during steady state operation. The design limit for steady state operation is that the primary equivalent stress must remain below the proportional elastic limit or alternatively 90 per-cent of the yield strength.
Irradiation induced creep and swelling are currently believed to be super plastic phenomenon and thus not ductility limited. Although LWR experience with Zircaloy-2 cladding indicated that irradiation creep strains on the order of 10% were achievable without failure, it had been postulated that there might be a limit on either total cladding strain (as measured by profilometry) or on inelastic strain which is total strain less one-third the volumetric change due to swelling (as measured by immersion density). However, as of this time no unique limit or sets of limits can be identified for total strain, swelling induced strain or inelastic strain which is primarily irradiation induced creep. Table 4.2-llA summarizes the failures of EBR-II irradiated fuel pins clad with 300 series austenitic stainless steel which have been characterized. These failLres are described in Section V.E of Reference 101 and Reference 158. Table 4.2-11 A shows a wide variation in both total and inelastic strain at breach, probably due to the lack of consistent breach causes. Furthernore, Figure V.E.2 (for PNL 5-1) of Reference 101 and Figures 7, 8, 9, and 10 (EBR-II Driver Fuel) of Reference 158 clearly show that cladding breach did not occur at the axial locations with either maximum total strain or maximum inelastic strain. Finally, recent results from the Reference Cladding and Duct Irradiated Materials Program, Task A, Mechanical Properties, reported in Reference 159, support the design position that prior irradiation creep is superlastic and thus not damaging. Simulated transient testing was com-pleted at 1500 F on 10 spgcimens from X-157B and X-1570, woich had been irradiatgat7g0to1000Funder0to60,000psistresstofluencesof 1.1 x 10 n/cm . The failure strengths during the postirradiation transients for the unstressed specimens were not significantly different than those of the stressed specimens which had accumulated up to 1% irradiation 51 l creep strain. Amend. 52 79 4.2-9
) ) #' } OI)b
O
- 4. While irradiation induced fuel rod and wire wrap deformation is not ductility limited, it is deformation limited uy the following re-striction. Flow channel closure due to fuel rod Dowing and differential radial growth of the fuel rod, wire wrap and duct shall be limited by the flow area reductioh used to derive the thermal hot spot factors of Section 4.4. This requirement is necessary to preclude locally damaging hot spots in excess of those considered in the design basis of subsection 4.2.1.1.2.
The hot spot factor referred to here is the statistical factor on coolant subchannel flow area where a subchannel is the region between 3 adjacent fuel rods. Therefore, the effect at 3c confidence of the statistical combin: tion of fuel rod bowing, nominal geometry variations and differential radial growth variations along the length of the sub-channel shall not produce a variation in the hot subchannel coolant temperature rise at the core outlet grea+.er than the value accounted for in the hot channel factor. It would be inappropriate to provide only a maximum value of irradiation induced defonnaticn which would account for the full hat spor uncer-tainty. The coolant temperature at the core ou'.let is the result of integrating all geometric and thermal variation over the lower length of the rod bundle in both the hot channel and in neighboring channels. 1.ierefore, the irradiation induced deformation must be evaiuated with all other geometric and thermal variations considered. Fuel rod bowing in combination with irradiation induced deformation and other geometric and thermal variations such as manufacturing tolerances shall be evaluated against this limit.
- 5. To insure structural integrity up through an unlikely fault the cumulative mechanical damage function (CDF) for the fuel and blanket rod cladding shall be limited by M N al)
+
[ [ aL j ,5 + LLE*E 1 # I (1) j=2 . i=1 where AL) = CDF increment due to steady state operation, M-1 = number of different types of upset events, N = number of oc.urren es of the j tb type upset event, th occurrence of the j ALJ,1
. . = CDF increment due to the i type event, E = total uncertainty in the CDF, ]1"l i
'16; o /'
7 51 AL = CDF increment due to the single unlikely f ault E Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 4.2-10
As shown, the CDF considers normal steady state operation, the ex-pected number and types of upset events and the life limiting emergency transient. A description of the CDF procedure and the related criteria is given in subsection 15.1.2.1. An example CDF analysis is illustrated in Figures 4.2-18 through 4.2-23. For this example analysis, a fuel rod was subjected to a hypothetical steady state environment, and a transient duty cycle which included the transient cladding temperature histories shown in Figures 4.2-19 and 4.2-20. The CDF due to the steady-state environment and the combined upset events, which essentially give no additional damage at the three levels of uncer-tainty, are shown in Figure 4.2-18 for the example problem. At the design level, excluding any emergency events, the expected failure would occur at 540 full power days. However, at the lesser leveis of uncertainty an 800 day lifetime is achievable. This example cladding CDF evaluation assumes the upset transients are applied at equal time intervals throughout cladding life, with the emer-gency event applied at end-of-life. Cladding temperature increases during all transients were set equal to the maximum beginning-of-life values. Degradation of the cladding materials properties due to the environment at the time of transient occurrence was included in all CDF calculations The transient limit curves (TLC's) for the case in question are shown in Figures 4.2-21 and 4.2-22. The TLC's in Figure 4.2-21 are for any under-cooling emergency event within the indicated time envelope of Figure 4.2-20, i.e., a 25 seconu +ransient followed by a 2 minute coastdown to equilibrium. The curves show, at the three levels of uncertainty, the time dependent peak cladding temperature expected to cause failure during undercooling event. The family of TLC's shown in Figure 4.2-22 are for any rapid reactivity insertion <1 second in duration. These curves show, at the maximum level of uncertainty, the combinations of peak cladding temperature and fuel-cladding contact pressure expected to cause failure. As discussed in Section 15.1.2.1, the general time dependence of the TLC's results from the combined effects of the following continuing phenomena: (a) the build-up of fission gas, (b) the degradation of mechanical properties caused by interstitial loss, (c) the effective clad thinning caused by the growth of the depleted substrate (ferrite layer) and the fuel-clad reaction zone, (d) the degradation of mechanical properties due to prior mechanical history including that from steady-state operation and the 51 , umbrella upset events. 4.2-11 ej g68 p )g g
(e) the steady-state temperature change due to burn-up and control rod movement with residual time. It must be emphasized that the above TLC's are restricted to: (a) the fuel rod steady state environment assumed in this example problem; (b) the classification of the upset events in the derivation; (c) the time envelope considered. The generality of the TLC's not withstanding, a specific emergency event was analyzed via direct application of equation (22) in Section 15.1.2.1. In this case the limiting emergency event was taken to be that given in Figure 4.2-20 (notably, this is the identical time envelope used for the TLC's). Importantly, the analysis of this particular event is not meant to imply that it is the most limiting in its category; rather, the intention is to provide a benchmark solution to which other emerger.cy events may be compared, in the future, vis-a-vis the TLC's. The example combined CDF's from steady-state operation, from the upset events and from the above emergency event are shown in Figure 4.2-23. As shown, the umbrella emergency event would cause failure, at the design level, at 485 full power days *, this includes 26 slow reactivity insertions and 18 undercooling (upset) events. For nominal material properties, a 700 day lifetime is readily achievable. Thus, as measured in operating time, the total uncertainty for this event exceeds 200 full power days. This uncertainty is the effective design margin associated with this particular analysis (i.e. , s 28%) and is indicative of the design margins typically obtained through the CDF pro-cedure. It is emphasized that this CDF analysis is an example for illustrative purposes only; the CDF analysis of the CRBRP fuel rods is presented in Section 4.2.1.3.1.2.1.
*At this time the peak clad temperature at the end of the transient period is 1505 F. Thus, the above expected failure time would have been obtained directly 51 ,
from the TLC in Figure 4.2-21. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 4.2-12 11"! 069
Thus, for an actual irradiation period, the damage is R t DR =1 /
= 1 T E0L dt =
[E0L ACT RACT(t) dt T f o T 2 using the assumptions given above. However, for performance analysis studies, the design basis de-gradation determined from post-irradiat#on testing corresponding to residence time t is assumed to be:
= R RDES(t) EOL Thus, for design performance analysis studies, the damage ratio is:
DR " 1 T =R EOL DES T
/
O Rdes(t) dt utilizing the assumptions given above. Figure 4.2-1B shows the comparison of the actual and derign basis damage ratios. The design basis cladding damage ratio at end of life is twic2 that actually accrued assuming time linear degradation. Using the same logic, similar results can be derived with any non-linear in-reactor de-oradation which increases. Thus, the application of irradiated materials properties in this manner to design performance analysis gives conservative results. 4.2.1.1.3.1 Irradiation Induced Creep and Swelling The stress free swelling equations used in the CRBRP fuel and blanket assembly analyses are shown in Figure 4.2-3, while the irradiation induced creep and stress enhanced swelling equations which were used are given in Figure 4.2-4. In the cladding ana jsis, irradiation induced creep is considered as a significant deformation mechanism. However, it is not currently considered to be ductility limited as stated in fuel rod design requirement 4 of Section 4.2.1.1. To date, there has been no evidence that prototypic cladding material will breach when a certain level of irradiation induced creep is exceeded. 4.2.1.1.3.2 Creep Rupture Properties and Thermal Creep Creep rupture properties include primary and secondary thermal creep rates and rupture stress as a function of time. They are used primarily 4.2-19 Amend. 52
}l } [][(,j Oct. 1979
O 1 to evaluate cladding integrity either by inelastic strain accumulation or cumu-lative damage analysis (see Section 15.1.2). Thermal creep is an insignifi-cant deformation mechanism when compared to irradiation induced creep and swelling. For conservatism, the thermal creep correlation for solution annealed 316SS is also used for 20% cold worked material for evaluation against the strain criteria. The thermal creep correlation is given in Ref. 1. The rupture strength-time correlation used for cumulative damage analysis is described in subsection 15.1.2.1. 4.2.1.1.3.3 Tensile Properties Tensile properties used in the evaluation include the modulus of elasticity, proportional limit and ultimate tensile strength. The unirra-diated modulus of elasticity is reported for both solution annealed and 20% cold worked 316SS in Re f. 153. The proportional limit and ultimate strength variation with temperature and irradiation are given in subsection 15.1.2.1. 4.2.1.1.3.4 Cladding Wastage Cladding wastage is a broad term used to denote both material loss and degradation of properties due to the high temperature, high energy neu-tron flux, and sodium environment. Various mechanisms that have bean identified include:
- a. Loss of material and surface depletion (chromium and nickel) due to sodium corrosion.
- b. Internal cladding attack by redistributed fission products.
- c. Loss of material due to fretting and wear,
- d. Degradation of material strength due to loss of carbon and nitrogen.
- e. Decrease in time to rupture and material strength due to irradiation.
- f. Manufacturing tolerances and defects.
The wastage associated with inelastic strain analysis is as follows:
- 1. Sodium corrosion allowances (item a) are consistent with the time and temperature dependent material loss of the LIFE 'II National Fuel Rod Performance Code (see following subsection).
- 2. Allowances for fission product attack (item b) are consistent with the burnup and temperature dependent material loss of the LIFE-III code.
51 Amend. 52 4.2-20 Oct. 1979 ll l f7I
I
- 3. Tolerance and defect allowances (item f) are consistent with CRBRP cladding drawing tolerances and inspection techniques.
- 4. Other allowances (items c, d, and e) are simulated by an additional 2 mil material loss at 80,000 MWD /T peak burnup, use of solution annealed rather than cold worked thermal creep equations and a factor of s3 on rupture strain. These allowances are consistent with FFTF fuel rod analysis assumptions.
In the context of fuel rod design, cladding wastage rates are utilized in the various analytical models which are used to evaluate fuel rod performance under a variety or expected environments. If the various para-meters used in these analytical models are inadequate (including cladding wastage), the experimentally determined fuel rod performance will be less than that predicted by the models. Thus, the ultimate adequacy of the cladding wastage allowances are determined comparing experimental fuel rod performance and fuel rod performance calculated by the criteria of PSAR Section 4. 2.1.1. 2. 2. In this manner, the comparison of the analytical and experimental fuel rod performance presented in Section 4.2.1.1.2.2 confirms the adequacy of the cladding corrosion and wastage allowances. If these allowances were inadequate, i.e., if the cladding corrosion and wastage rates were appreciably greater than assumed, the fuel rods subjected to steady state tests would have failed sooner than predicted by the analysis. However, as noted in Sectiori 4.2.1.1.2.2 for the cases where the experimental fuel rod assembly porosities were prototypic of CRBR values, the burnups attained by the fuel rods under steady state test conditions were well in excess of the calculated burnup. Further verification of the adequacy of the cladding wastage allow-ance is found in the results of FFTF fuel rod transient tests. These tests are described in detail in Reference 57; the pertinent results are given in Tables 4.2-D and 4.2-E. For these tables the cladding strain limit criteria and the calculational techniques outlined in Reference 57 were used to calcu-late the expected rod failure limits. Cladding wastage effects were included in these calculations. Again, if the assumed cladding wastages would have been adequate, the tested rods would have failed at levels below those pre-dicted by analysis. As shewn in Tables 4.2-D and 4.2-E, only one of the rods tested failed below the predicted levels. This single failure appears anomalous, since a rod subjected to the same pre-transient environment but twice the transient stress level than this rod failed at higher temperatures. Thus, both steady state and transient test results indicate the design wastage allow-ances are adequate. Neutron hodoscope data from HUT tests 5-3A and 5-5B, and a very re-cent LASL experiment (PINEX) qualitatively demonstrates that the time for fuel pin cladding failure as indicated by the thermocouples in the capsules corres-ponds directly with actual, real time observation of cladding failure. De-tailed analyses of these data which quantitatively supports this conclusion 51 is included in Reference 173. Amend. 51 4.2-21 - Sept. 1979
/ ')
For cladding cumulative damage analysis, the treatment of wastage O is reported in subsection 15.1.2.1. Fretting and Wear The fuel rod cladding design-basis wastage allowance for fretting and wear referred to above is as follows: e 0.5 mil at beginning of life. for either fretting and wear or cladding scratch. e 2.0 mils per 80,000 MWD /MT burnup linearly applied during life for fretting and wear. Although the 2.5 mil wastage at end of life would be localized cir-cumferentially near the w1re wrap interface, it is conservatively applied to the full 360 degrees of cladding outside circumference. The magnitude of the fretting-wear wastage allowance was based upon 316 stainless steel pin-disk tests performed in sodium at Westinghouse Research Laboratories (Reference 76). The oscillatory pin (6 cyclv.s per minute) was 0.25 inch in diameter and ground to a 4-inch hemispherical radius. The disks were machined from bar stock with a flat test face dimension of 0.67 inch by 0.75 inch. Sodium oxygen content was less than 5 ppm. Average wear depths for prototypic loads and sodium temperatures are aiven in items 1 to 4 of Table 4.2-C. Similar tests at Karlsruhe with higher loads and cycles subsequently indicated a similar wear depth, see Reference 77 and item 5 of Table 4.2-C. The above data are nonprototypic with regard to geometry; the pin-disk tests were primarily intended to simulate fretting wear between fuel rod cladding and a spacer grid support system. However, fretting-wear tests utilizing prototypic cladding and wire wrap geometry have been performed in sodium (3-5 ppm oxygen) at LMEC (Reference 78). As the data (items 6 to 11 of Table 4.2-C) are similar to the preceeding 1000 cycle data, it is believed that the major portion of the wear depth occurred during the early stages of the test and that it is not extremely sensitive to geometry. The major driving force for fretting and wear in wire wrapped assemblies has been ascertained to be a combination of individual fuel rod and overall rod bundle flow induced vibration. This premise arises from the behavior of loosely packed rod bundles irradiated in EBR-II. For a given fuel rod geometry, flow induced vibration is in turn controlled by coolant flow velocity, wire wrap axial pitch and the amount of porosity per fuel rod ring in the rod bundle. The following features are being incorporated into the fuel assembly design to minimize flow induced vibration and the potential for fretting and wear:
- 1. The CRBRP utilizes 6 discrete flow orificing zones within the fuel assemblies so that overcooling (flow velocities higher than necessary) 51 is minimized.
Amend. 52 4.2-22 Oct.1979 i! ! t) / j
c) The steady state FCMI pressures calculated by the LIFE code are adjusted to account for the differences in cladding wastage between the LIFE III code predictions and the fuel rod design code predictions. These restrictions and adjustme.ats will be re-examined and modified, if necessary, for later versions of the LIFE code. For the fuel rod, analyses were performed for steady state FCf1I loads at axial locations 12,18, 27 and 36 inches above the bottom of the fuel pellet stack (i .e. , at X/L = 0.33, 0.5, 0.75 and 1.0, where L is the fuel pellet stack length of 36 inches). For the blanket rods, these calculations were performed for axial locations 29, 40 and 50 inches above the top of the rod lower end cap (i.e., at X/L = 0.46, 0.62 and 0.78 where L is the blanket pellet stack length of 64 inches). Prior experience indicated that the most signifi-cant FCMI effects occurred at these locations. Item b) abeve notes that the LIFE III models are mathematically capable of predicting steady state FCMI in blanket rods. They can also pre-dict effects of mid-life power increases which occur over time periods on the order of tens of hours or longer in both fuel and blanket rods. However, LIFE III calibration and verification has not included either of these considerations. Thus, while the LIFE III code was utilized in this study to investigate both blanket rod FClil and effects of mid-life power increases in blanket rods, these results are preliminary and subject to changes in magnitude as more advanced versions of LIFE become available. To compensate for this uncertainty, the following procedures were followed in this study: a) The steady state FCMI adjustment noted in item c above which compensates for the conservative design cladding wastage was not apalied to the blanket rods. This results in considerably higher calculated F f1I lcads in the blanket rod cladding. b) In the LIFE III analyses, the rods which experience a mid-life power in-crease were brought to power at varying rates during the startup of the second cycle. As discussed in Section 4.2.1.3.1.1 below, this indicates the effects of programmed startup on FCf1I loads, and suggests a method whereby excessive FCMI (if present) due to the mid-life power increase experienced by blanket rods may be minimized. Also power junps greater than those actually calculated to occur are assumed in these evaluations. Thus, the calculated power jump effects on cladding performance are con-servative, based on current models. By taking this approach, the LIFE III results may be used to formulate qualitative conclusions about blanket rod behavior under certain conditions 51 for which this version of the code has not been specifically calibrated. 4*2-25 Oct. 1979 il 0/4
4.2.1.l.3.6 Environmental Effects - Blanket Assemblies O The effect of operating environmental conditions in the blanket assemblies will be similar to those for the design equations and considerations for fuel appearing in Section 4.2.1.1.3. Four areas are different, however.
- 1) Because of low sodium flow in the radial blanket assemblies, the corrosion rate on the cladding will be lower than that for t. fuel rod cladding.
It has been noted that there is a linear flow rate dependency when the velocity is less than 10 f t/sec (subsection 15.1.2.1). Hence, corrosion values may be variable in the various orificing zones of the radial blanket.
- 2) cue to the chemical nature of the UO , its initial 0/M ratio, and the tission product spectrum in the blanket rods, it is anticipated that there will be less fuel-clad reaction for a given temperature con-dition and temperature gradient than for mixed oxide fuel rods.
- 3) Based on present CRBRP nominal and specification values of oxygen in sodium and blanket UO , the theoretical uniform volume expansion would be 2%
AV/V for extrebe reaction conditions after a failure late in life (sub-section 4.2.1.1.3.8).
- 4) As noted in subsection 4.2.1.1.3.5, the LIFE fuel rod performance pre-dictions including the effects of fuel cladding interaction are based upon comparisons with actual rod peformance determined through irradiation tests in EBR-II. These tests are prototypic of CRBRP fuel rod design conditions and may not apply to the blanket rod. (See subsection 4.2.1.4 Irradiation Experience.)
Further information on these differences is provided in the response to Question 241.74. 4.2.1.1.3.7 Fission Product Redistribution The primary fission product which may affect the in-reactor perfor-mance of fuel rods is cesium (Ref. 2). Cesium can lead to the formation of low-melting mixed oxide compounds at the fuel-cladding interface and these compounds increase the intergranular attack of the cladding. Cesium can also react with fission-product molybdenum to form cesium molybdate. Under the radial thermal gradient in the fuel, this compound can transport molybdenum and oxygen to the fuel-cladding interface by vapor-phase transport. Cesium can migrate. axially and react with axial-blanket urania pellets to form cesium uranate. This reaction leads to swelling of the pellets. However, in cases where sufficient voidage is available near the insulator, failures should not occur even though extensive reaction may be observed. Some cesium reaction with the axial blanket is anticipated in the CRBRP fuel rods; therefore voidage must be available in the gap to preclude significant interaction with the cla M ng. 51 Amend. 52 4 2-26 Oct. 1979 1]"1 075
Axial migration is observed in fuel rods in which the initial 0/M ratio of the fuel is <2 (i.e., sl.95). In fuel pins with initial 0/M ratio closer to 2, the fission product cesium is observed to remain as Cs2 o04 M and not migrate to the insulator pellets. The formation of Cs2UO4 in blanket pellets also depends on the stoichiometry of the urania. Formation of significant amounts of Cs2UO4 is expected only if the urania is hyperstoichiometric. Electron microprobe studies (Ref. 3) of radial cross sections of fuel rods have shown that fission-product cesium tends to corantrate in the cooler region of the oxide, especially in the region of the Jel-cladding interface. Also highest concentrations of fission-product molybdenum are found in the noble-metal alloy inclusion and in the cooler region of the fuel adjacent to the fuel-cladding interface. The CsMo04 is ov erved to be stable under conditions of low temperatures and high oxygen potentials (Ref. 4). Low oxygen partial pressures and/or high temperatures decrease the tendency to form gaseous Cs2Mo04 in the hot region of the fuel and thus hinder the migration of molybdenum. Under these conditions, the cesium will migrate axially to react with urania blanket pellets to form cesium uranate. Evaluation of the potential and magnitude of this effect is reported in item 5 of the Fuel Rod Steady-State Evaluation (Section 4.?.l .3). This evaluation also refers to the irradiation tests which will be used to update the migration phenomenon and associated understanding of fission product cladding reaction and interaction effects. 4.2.1.1.3.8 Perfonnance of Defected Fuel and Blanket Rods The CRBRP is being designed for operation with limited amounts of failed fuel, as described in Chapter 11. Fuel or blanket rod failures which exhibit only fission gas releases will not be removed from the core as they present no safety problem provided design basis limits are not exceeded (see Chapter 15.4). Fuel assembly failures having concurrent or subsequent indications of fuel exposure to sodium by a defined limit, are to be removed from the core. Development of this limit is dependent on the development of appropriate technology which will assure the benign nature of operation with limited fuel-sodium contact (see response to NRC Question 241.76). Failed fuel assemblies characterized as having gross fuel losses or exposure to sodium in excess of the limit are to be removed from the reactor vessel on a priority basis. When the Delayed Neutron Detectors (DND's) indicate that there are gross fuel losses or excess sodium exposure, suspect assemblies which have been identified by the Fuel Failure Monitoring System will be removed from the core. Verification that the correct assembly has been removedThe will frequency be obtained by reactor startup and monitoring of the DND's. of inspection will be controlled by the frequency of failures that exhibit gross fuel losses or excess sodium exposures as indicated by the 51 DND's. Amend. 52 Oct.1979 4.2-27 l1 076
O This subsection reviews the availabie information concerning operation with fuel or blanket r.iterial exposed to sodium. Out-of-pile and in-pile tests (GETR and EBR-II - References 5-9) have shown that both UO 7 and (U,Pu)20 will react with sodium, M0 where is U orthe [U,reaction product Pu]}. These hasand tests the isothermal generic formula, Na$tibn(where equilibr tests atM Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) (Reference 10-14) have indicated that this compound forms in the presence of excess sodium under conditions where the oxygen activity is sufficient to stabilize the compound. Oxygen, which is the limiting specie, may come from either fuel, sodium or both, 077 O i!^l Amend. 51 4.2-2 7a Sept. 1979
Operation Without Failure Schedules of assembly discharges for examination should be planned to maximize the usefulness of the data obtained and to minimize the per-turbation of the surveillance program on reactor and plant operation. Special reactor shutdowns or fuel handling activities should not be utilizad solely for discharge of surveillance assemblies. Blanket assemblies should be re-moved at a minimum of two different (and adequately spaced) increments of exposure between initial insertion and the end of assembly life. The first blanket assembly should be rernoved shortly after the first cycle. Operation With Failure Surveillance and examination plans in CRBR will be prepared to handle the presence of failed rods which can occur during all periods of reactor operation. Unexpected failures occurring prior to reaching the design end-of-life burnup include rods suffering from " infant mortality" generally caused by undetected defects in material or workmanship, and rods experiencing transient conditions in the reactor. Failed assemblies may be discharged from the re-actor at the next refueling after detection to determine the cause and nature of the failure. However, experiences from previous test programs should provide sufficient guidance to indicate safe operation can be achieved with such failures in reactor. It may be possible to allow surveillance assemblies to be operated to and beyond failure once the Demonstration Phase of the reactor operation is completed. 4.2.1.1.4.3 Typical Examination Requirements - Fuel and Blanket Assemblies A typical example of a surveillance examination plan for fuel and blanket assemblies, rods, ducts and assembly end pieces.is shown in Table 4.2-3. Following discharge, a visual examination and dimensional character-ization of the assembly should be performed. Provisions should be available for shipment of the assemblies to hot cell facilities for detailed non-destructive and destructive examinations noted in the table. Visual examination and bow and length measurements on the rods should be performed prior to removal of the spirally wrapped wire. In addi-tion, the rods should be visually examined after wire removal for signs of wear or reaction on the cladding caused by the wires. Dependita on the burnup and condition of any rod at the time of examination, more or less detail will be included in the items listed in the table for the rods. In particular, the extent of sectioning and cladding property tests may be varied as required by non-destructive test results. Similarly, destructive testing of ducts and end pieces will be accomplished only when observations and exposure conditions indicate the need. Care must be taken throughout the examinations to be able to re-51 late in-reactor orientation to component behavior. Amend. 51 4.2-40 Sept.1979 i!"1 078
4.2.1.1.4.4 Evaluation of Results - Core Fuel and Blanket Assemblies The data obtained from this surveillance program will be analyzed in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of current conditions in the assemblies and to provide guidance for the extrapolation and estimation of behavior to higher exposure conditions. Test results from each incremental examination will undergo a timely evaluation to identify satisfactory per-formance to the next examination point or the possibility of a problem developing which could impact on assembly operation. Examination results will be compared and related to similar findings from experiments in test reactors to assist in the prediction of subsequent operation. The data will be utilized to improve design codes and oehavior models which are actively used in the design of reactors. The proper execution of a surveillance program on core fuel and blanket assemblies and rods in CRBRP will provide a sound basis for improving design lifetimes of assemblies and the overall fuel management and economics of the reactor. Timely data and immediate implementation of results will accelerate the schedule for improved operation of the reactor. Experiences and information developed from this program will also benefit the design and future operation of LMFBRs beyond the CRBRP. 4.2.1.2 Design Description
- 4. 2.1. 2.1 Core Design and Operation The Clinch River Breeder Reactor fuel is a mixed (Pu-U) oxide. It is cooled with sodium. A schematic of the reactor is shown in Figure 4.2-36 to pro-vide orientation for the fuel and blanket assembly locations. The core support plate and the core barrel torm the principal locators for the fuel inside the vessel. The fuel, control, blanket, and removable shield assemblies rest on the core support structure. Hydraulic balance is employed to offset the upward forces resulting from the coolant flow through the fuel and blanket assemblies. Each of these reactor assemblies has two load pad areas which match the elevation of the core restraint former rings. The rings are supported by the core barrel which rests on and is attached to the core support plate.
The upper internals structure is located above the core. The structure laterally stabilizes the primary and secondary control rod shroud tubes and also provides secondary holddown for the fuel, most blanket and control assemblies. The four support columns of the upper internals have jacks for lifting the upper internals clear of the removable reactor assemblies for refueling. The in-vessel transfer machine (IVTM) rotates with the upper internals structure for removing and replacing of reactor assemblies at re-fueling. Fuel transfer and contingency storage positions are provided in 51 the annulus formed between the core barrel and the reactor vessel thermal liner. 4.2-41 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
- 1"i 079
The active length of the core is 36 inches and the equivalent dia-meter of the fuel and inner blanket region is 79.5 inches. The fuel region initially consists of 156 fuel assemblies with a total fissile plutonium loadir.g of 1502 Kg. The reactor core also initially contains 82 inner blanket assemblies, 132 radial blanket assemblies, and 306 removable radial shield assemblies. The total number of fuel and blanket assemblies varies slightly from cycle to cycle as described in Section 4.3. During initial reactor heat-up and sodium fill, the reactor core is completely occupied by core special assemblies (CSA). These core special assemblies are also utilized during special refueling operations (i.e., lower inlet module replacement) to support the core array while the spent core active assemblies are being replaced. The special assemblies are not utilized during normal refuelir.g operations. The reactor control systems include 9 primary and 6 secondary control assemblies. The two systems are independent and diverse. Both systems are capable of shutting down the reactor from full power to hot standby conditions. A core map is shown schematically in Figure 4.2-inA, while the fuel and blanket numbering scheme is shown in Figure 4.2-10B. The reactor system is being designed to withstand the various loadings which result from the CRBRP steady state and transient duty cycle events. Details of the steady state nuclear, thermal-hydraulic and mechanical load environments during. reactor operation are given in Sections 4.3, 4.4 and 4.2.1.3 respectively. The umbrella transient duty cycle for the initial CRBRP core is described in Sections 4.4 and 4.2.1.3. This duty cycle covers the current categories of normal, upset, emergency, and faulted conditions as defined in Appendix B. 4.2.1.2.2 Fuel Assemblies There are six different types of CRBRP fuel assemblies corresponding to the six flow orificing zones as described in Section 4.4.2.5. Coolant flow is controlled by orifice plates within the assembly. The CRBRP fuel assembly design is based upon the FFTF driver fuel assembly design and LMFBR development experience with modifications necessitated by the breeding, operational and cost requirements of the CRBRP. A detailed comparison of the CRBRP and FFTF fuel assembly design details is given in Table 4.z-4. Welded into a compact structural unit, the fuel assembly can be handled by the refueling machines and provides a controlled path for the primary sodium coolant. As shown in Figure 4.2-11, each fuel assembly is comprised of the following subassemblies: A. 217 fuel rods that contain the fuel pellets, B. An inlet nozzle, 51 C. A shield and orifice region, 4.2-42 Amend. 51 Sept. 1979
D. A rod attachment assembly, E. A duct, and F. An outlet nozzle. The fuel rod design is illustrated in Figure 4.2-12. The mixed plutonium-uranium dioxide sintered powder fuel pellets supply heat and neutrons for breeding, the uranium dioxide axial blanket pellets above and below the fuel enhance breeding, and an upper plenum containing fission product gases generated during operation. Plenum volumes larger than FFTF,s are required to allow for the higher fission gas pressures caused by some-what higher operating temperatures and by potential operation to higher equilibrium burnup levels. Pertinent safety features of the CRBRP fuel rods, similar to those in FFTF, are:
- 1. Normal high level quality assurance will be supplied to prevent mixing of the fuel pellet enrichment types or interchange of fuel and axial blanket pellets inside a fuel rod.
- 2. The fuel pellet column is retained " position during preirradiation shipping and handling by a preloadeu nelical compression spring made of Type 302 Stainless P. eel. After insertion of the fuel rod into the reactor, the spring is flexible enough that it will not restrict the axial expansion of the fuel pellet column.
- 3. Each fuel rod contains a gas tag capsule which identifies failed fuel rods by a unique gas mixture for each assembly.
- 4. A wire wrap spacer system is employed to maintain required lateral spacing during normal and transient operation.
The fuel assembly inlet nozzle is designed to support and locate the assembly in the lower internals inlet modules, furnish a mechanical dis-criminator, provide a hydraulic balance system and allow the primary coolant flow to enter the assembly. These design features are accomplished by using the FFTF inlet nozzle design, except: a) the bypass flow is restricted by piston rings in both directions, and b) six discriminator posts are re-quired to identify the six flow zone assembly types. A detailed description of the discriminator's geometry and functions is given in Section 4.2.1.2.5. Fuel column holddown spring design calculations were performed following the standard, industry accepted analysis techniques in References 148 and 149. The following requirements were satisfied by the fuel pellet holddown spring (made from type 302 Stainless Steel): o Prior to insertion into the reactor, the spring shall maintain pellet 51 position during a maximum axial shipping and handling load of 6g. Amend. 52 O 4.2-43 Oct. 1979
)! } 00
e After irradiation and thermal induced changes of the spring pro-perties, the spring shall accommodate a pellet column growth of 1.0 inch before compressing the spring to 90% of its solid height. e The maximum material volume of the fission gas plenum components shall be equal to or less than 15% of the total fission gas plenum volume. The difference between the minimum and the nominal spring preload provides allowances for: a) spring preload deviations at the specified deflection; and for b) variation of the compressed spring length caused by manufacturing tolerances. The torsional wire stress in the spring at the maximum preload was verified to be less than the allowable value. In addition, the following requirements were satisfied: e A minimum coil-to-coil clearance during pre-irradiation shipping and handling loads shall be maintained; 'nd e The spring outside diameter increase due to compression shall not inter-fere with the minimum cladding inside diameter. No tests of the fuel column hold down spring are planned except for the required QA tests during fabrication. lie primary coolant flows from the lower internals through slots in the recepta'.le side walls that match with slots on the side of the inlet nozzle into the fuel assembly. This coolant path is designed to prevent passage of foreign objects that may cause total or partial coolant flow blockage to a fuel assembly. In the lower internals the primary ficw is strained to preclude passage of particles greater than 0.25 inches in diameter. The total area of the six inlet nozzle slots is 3.5 times greater than the assembly internal flow area. The geometrical configuration of the inlet s'ob pre-cludes total blockage and disperses gas bubbles. Hydraulic and gravity forces acting on the fuel assembly determine the net hold down force which is used to keep che assembly seated in the receptacle and maintain correct axial location of the f.el. The FFTF-type piston ring seal and inlet slots con-tinue to sustain the hydraulic holddown even if the fuel assembly should be lifted a maximum of 2.5 inches to contact the upper internals structure. In the context of CRBR fuel assembly design, the term " hydraulic holddown" refers to the design features which assure that the hydraulic forces when acting in conjunction with gravity forces, keep the assembly seated in the lower inlet module. These design features are illustrated in Figure 5 '- 4.2-ll A and are explained below. 1'l OI7 ^**" ' 4.2-44 ; i dd' Oct.1979
The fuel assembly is designed so that the hydraulic forces acting on it remain unchanged cven in the event that the assembly is lifted from its seated position in the core. The inlet nozzle at the lower end of the fuel assembly is insarted into the cup-lika rece p.acle of the lower inlet module (LIM). The fuel assembly cannot disengage from the LIM in an assembled reactor because it is trapped by the upper internal structure. How-ever, sufficient clearance is provided between the fuel and upper internal structures to allow for axial expansion of the fuel assembly caused by thermal and fluence effects. Coolant flow enters the inlet nozzle of the fuel assembly radially from holes in the " des of the LIM. A piston ring is used to seal the annulus between the nozzle and LIM to prevent this flow from entering the core interstitial region. Although nominally the sealing requirement is for a static seal, a piston ring type dynamic (moving) seal was selected. This piston ring is fitted inside a finished cylindrical bore in the LIM where borelength is greater than the clearance at the top of the fuel assembly. This arrangement ensures continuous sealing even if the fuel assembly s^ould lif t up from its seated position in the LIM. Necessarily, this piston ring is located above the nozzle inlet holes and the finished bore is located above the LIM radial flow holes. Reduction of the hydraulic pressure load acting upward on the inlet nozzle is accomplished by venting the space it the lower end of the inlet nozzle to a low pressure region. A second piston ring seal is used near the bottom of the nozzle to separate the high pressure inlet fiow from the vented space. This seal has the same requirements as does the other seal used between the inlet flow and the core interstitial space, with the exception that the piston ring and its mating bore must be located below the inlet flow paths. The sum of the various vertical forces acting on the fuel assembly determines the net holddown force which keeps the assembly seated in the receptacle and maintains correct vertical location of the fuel. The weight of the assembly in air is approximately 450 lb. , but it weighs only about 390 lb, when submerged in sodium because of bouyancy effects. Small differ-ences in diameter between the top and bottom piston rings combined with the differential pressures acting on the assembly result in a net upward hydraulic force of about 50 lbs., which reduces the seating force of the assembly to roughly 340 lb. Because of the seating arrangement distussed above, this net seating force exists even if the assemblies are raised by some hypotheti.al mechnism to bring them into contact with the UIs. In addition, the inlet nozzle and LIM is designed to provide adequate codant flow regardless of whether the assembly is seated or in contact with the UIS. Coolant flow control and attenuation of damaging neutron fluence to the lower internals structure is provided by the shield block and orifice plates. The five flow rates required for proper cooling of the fuel assemblies 51 are accomplished by varying the number of orifice plates and the number 4.2-45 Amend. 51 Sept. 1979 li 1 083
and size of the holes in a plate. Staggering of the holes between the plates and shielding provide the maximum flow control by preventing flow streaming and limits the maximum length of foreign particles. Only objects smaller than the orifice holes in the individual orificing zones can enter the shield block. Axial grooves and numbers on each orifice plate assure hole staggering and plate identification when the plates are welded together to form a subassembly. Recent nuclear experiments at ORNL indicate that one shield block with sufficiently long, straight through holes (or hole) will reduce the neutron streaming and flux to acceptable levels. The lower internals lifetime is longer than FFTF's, requiring more nuclear shielding provided by the lower axial blanket and longer shielding effective length. The shield block exter-nal geometry and the connection of the rod attachment assembly, duct and inlet nozzle to the shield block are the same as in the FFTF. The proper assembly of these components is done with normal high level quality control. When completed, the shield and inlet assembly can be inspected visually to confirm proper assembly. When all the attachment rails have been pinned in place a plenum is formed between the attachment rails and shielding, providing mixing and uniform flow to the fuel rods. The attachment rails divide the flow. Only objects smaller than the sub-channel flow area can pass through the bundle. No over-heating of fuel rods will occur even if a large portion of the flow area at the attachment rails should become blocked by loose objects because flow redistribution will take place beyond the rails prior to the fueled section. Similar to FFTF, a closed hexagonal duct surrounds the fuel rads and directs the primary coolant flow. The assembly duct wall also prevents the adjacent assembly from being in direct comunication wi+h molten fuel and/or coolant pressure resulting from fission gas ejectior, and possible interaction between molten fuel and the sodium coolant. It provides a means of absorbing the damage due to local pressure pulses caused by fission gas ejection and provides a delaying mechanism against melt-through to the assembly adjacent to the failed one. The load pads, thicker than FFTF's be-cause of the larger core, are capable of transmitting the radial core re-straint loads and assure that adjacent assembly ducts contact only at the pads to prevent hangups during refueling operations. Large contact areas minimize local bending stresses and reduce the probability of self-welding. The across flats clearance between the fuel rod bundle and the dact will be controlled through selective assembly. The selective assembly will be as follows.
- 1. 217 fuel rods and a fuel assembly duct are selected from inventory.
51 l The fuel rods are not wrapped with the spacer wire at this point. 4.2-46 Amend. 52 1 1- 1 i nop UO1 Oct. 1979 i i
- 2. The diameter of each of the 217 fuel rods is measured at a number of O
axial locations.
- 3. The flat-to-flat inside dimension of the duct is measured at a number of axial locations.
- 4. From the measured dimensions obtained in steps 2 and 3, the arithmetic average rod diameter of the 217 fuel rods and the arithmetic average duct flat-to-flat inside dimension is calculated.
- 5. These average dimensions are entered into the graph of Figure 4.2-12A to determine the diameter of the wire wrap.
- 6. The wire wrap of the required diameter is attached to the fuel rods.
Next the rod bundle is assembled, strip-by-strip onto the rod attach-ment assem'oly on the shield block. The duct outlet nozzle subassembly is then slid aver the completed bundle and welded to the shield block. The location and number of axial measurements on the rod and duct will be specified in the CRBRP fabrication requirements when sufficient statistical data from FFTF fuel assembly fabrication is accumulated. The outlet nozzle is designed to guide the flow from the fuel assembly into the flow collector and instrumentation in the upper internals, to pro-vide refueling features, and with the inlet nozzle and load pad, provide fuel assembly radial positioning and support. The outlet nozzle inside sur-face controls the coolant exit velocity to minimize the potential for outlet nozzle vibration and directs the flow into the proper flow collector and associated instrumentation. Design features of the outlet nozzle and inlet nozzle will be provided to preclude fuel rod damage in the unlikely event of an assembly entering an occupied position. The outlet nozzle geometries that assist refueling are:
- 1. An inside surface groove to receive the refueling machines' grapple fingers.
- 2. A large exit diameter to guide the grapple nose into the nozzle when the IVTM and outlet nozzle are misaligned,
- 3. An external diameter that does not prevent a discrimination post on a neighboring assembly that is misaligned from being inserted,
- 4. Assembly tapers to guide a fuel assembly in and out of its receptacle 51 or to guide neighboring assemblies during refueling, and 4.2-47 Amend. 51 Sept. 1979 il"i 085
Values of (C + N) can thus be estimated and these values substi-tuted into the appropriate equations,1 throut 6, in 5.3.2.2.1 in order to determine mechanical property changes arising from interstitial transfer during sodium exposure. 17 5.3.2.3 Component Des:riptions The primary sodium pumps are free surface, single stage, vertically mounted, drawdown type centrifugal pumps driven by a variable speed 5000 hp squirrel cage induction motor. An auxiliary 75 hp pony motor, on each pump unit, provides low flow capability (<10%) for decay heat removal and other low power standby conditions. Variable pump speed is achieved by the main drive motor supplied with variable frequency power from a fluid coupled MG set. Each pump is designed to deliver 33,700 GPM of 9950F sodium ata 453 foot head. 33 The design envelope for the primary pump is shown in Figure 5.3-14. The pump tank incorporates a 36 inch side suction nozzle. Pump discharge is through a 24 inch nozzle. Sodium flow enters the pump tank through the horizontal 36" diameter nozzle on the equator of a spherical tank. From the nozzle the flow splits and enters the inlet guide structure into the upward and down-ward facing impellers. The flow leaving the impellers is joined and the combined flow passes through a triple volute pump casing. The flow isthenchanneledthrouggthe24"horizontalexitnozzleonthepumptank equator at a location 90 clockwise from the suction nozzle as viewed from above. A 20 inch diameter balancing pressure port is located on the high 33 pressure side of the pump, 120 degrees away from the discharge opening. 49 This feature is included to reduce any creep enhanced rachetting and to prevent excessive loss of bearing clearance. Separation of the suction and discharge pressure in the pump tank is achieved by controlled clearances between the impeller, pump casings and ducts which are fastened to the inside surface of the pump tank sphere. The impeller and impaller shaft assembly is supported in the pump casing by dual sodium lubricated hydrostatic bearings above and below the 49l impeller. The bearings are supplied with sodium at near pump discharge pressure. The sodium flows through the hydrostatic bearing pads and returns through the bearing clearances to the low pressure side of the pump. 33 Pump design is based upon a concept for sodium level control using a standpipe bubbler system in which a continuous flow of argon gas is supplied to the pump cover gas space above the sodium free surface. During pump shutdown or low sodium flow conditions, the gas supply pressure is sufficient to depress the liquid sodium level to the standpipe nozzle elevation and gas will bubble up the standpipe to the reactor cover gas 33 Amend. 49 5.3-20c April 1979 l}"! O bl]
41l system. During higher sodium flow rates, normal drawdown will almost uncover the standpipe nozzle, purge gas will further lower the sodium 49 level, and gas will flow (bubble) into the nearly empty standpipe to the cover gas system. The standpipe is essentially one leg of a manometer which auto-matically balances the gas pressure in the pump tank. The standpipe-bebbler will automatically perform the function of a pump cover gas vent and relief valve to the cover gas system, and will not rely on the signal 49 of a liquid level sensor for 'evel control. Level sensors are available for alarm. 41l The standpipe bubbler nozzle location is shown on Figure 5.3-14. Since the standpipe bubbler is physically just a pipe connect-ing the pump tank to the gas equalization line between the reactor and the overflow tank, there are no identifiable malfunctions which could result in overpressuring the cover gas region of the pump such that the sodium level in the pump would drop to a point which would permit this gas to enter the hydraulics of the pump. The vent line from the top of the IHX to the pump tank enters the pump tank at an elevation about 30 inches below the standpipe bub-bler nozzle. A trip in the IHX vent return line prevents pump cover 52 gas from flowing to the IHX should the pump sodium level drop to the IHX vent return nozzle elevation. During full power operation, 200 gpm of sodium flows from the IHX to the pump to vent any gas tending to accumulate at the top of the IHX through the vent line to the cover gas system of the pump. During rapid flow changes such as a scram, the flow from the IHX to the pump through this line decreases with the speed of the pump. Since the vent line connection to the pump is located above the hydraulics of the pump, any gas entering through this line will bubble up to the free surface rather than enter the main sodium pump. In the case of bubbler system, the standpipe is 6 inches in diameter connected to a 2-inch gas equalization line which is more than adequate to vent all of the gases which could inadvertently enter the primary pump tank. Therefore, there is no way that this gas could be bled to the core. Even if gas entering the pump should get into the pump hy-draulics and into the main sodium piping, it would accumulate at the top of the IHX and be vented from the heat exchanger back to the pump gas system via the IHX vent line. Therefore, any gas introduced into the PHTS from the pump is precluded frcin entering the core of the reactor. 25 The gas blanket in the pump tank will serve as a damper on level swings - for example during pump trip the sodium level will tend to rise from the 100% flow, drawn-down level to the normal system level. During this event the sodium fluid will rise to a level somewhat above the gas-bubbler nozzle working against the entrapped and compressing gas in the pump upper tank ullage. As the gas supply contiques to enter the pump tank, the liquid level will stop its rise, then fall until the 33 bubbling action through the standpipe is re-initated. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 5.3-20d 3; goii no/ UU f
TABLE 7.5-1 INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEM FUNCTIONS AND
SUMMARY
Measured System Parameters Instrument Measurement location Purpose 52l Flux Monitoring Source Range BF 3 Thimbles on periphery of guard Determines: vessel
- 1. Flux status at shutdown, Uide Range
- Fission Chambers Thimbles on periphery of guard startup and power levels vessel
- 2. Signals to PPS logic Power Range
- B-10, Compensated Thimbles on periphery of guard (except source range)
Ion Chamber vessel
- 3. Signals for reactor and plant control (power range only)
N 4. Signals for display, y annunciation and recording w - Heat Transport Primary / Reactor Inlet Pressure Element Cold leg pri. nary loop PPS and display 50l Intermediate Pressure
- PHTS performances Loops Primary and Inter- PM Flowmeter Cold leg of primary and inter- PPS, Plant Control and Display, 501 mediate Flow
- rediate loops (hot leg in inter- PHTS performance tr.ediate loop 2)
IHX Primary Outlet Thermocouple Cold leg piping nearest to IHX Plant Control System (PCS), FPS, Temperature
- primary outlet and Display Primary and Inter- Resistance Primary and Intermediate hot and Surveillance, display and use to rg y ~~,
mediate Hot and Teraperature cold leg calorimetrically calibrate PM Cold Leg Tempera- (RTD) flowmeters 3 ture Drimary and Inter- Pressure Elements Drainline from discharge piping of Surveillance, display and 13 trediate Pump the loops's sodium pump nonitor differential pressure y Disharge Pressure between primary & intermediate 501 loops PHTS performance g Intermediate Pressure Elements . Intermediate between IHX & Surveillance, display & monitor IHX Cutlet Superheater differential pressure between Pressure intermediate loops 50 l ON r8
TABLE 7.5-1 (Cont h-fed)
..easurec System Para-ate s Instru ent Measure-a9t tocation Purpose Heat Transport Inte mediate Pu p Pressure Elements Pipes between evaporator and pu p Display pu p perforr.ance Pri.ary/ Inlet Pressare inlet Inter.ediate Leo;s (cont'd) Inter ediate Expan- Level Probe Inter ediate expansion tank sien Tank Scdiu- Display-intemediato loop sodium level inventory and alam Evaporator Sodium Themoccuple Downstream where the two evaporator PPS aad display Cutlet Temperature
- outlets join into tne header Sodi e Pu ps
- Sodiu- Level Level Probe Pu p Tank Display-used for sodium inventory and purp protection (alam)
Prirary/ Inter m Tachometer Main Shaft of each pu.p diate Pu p Speed
- PPS display, pump speed centrol, perfomance 49 Pony V.ctor Panning Speed Switch Pumps Display, perfomance D'a;nostic Instru- Various Pu ps Display, pump performance y ecntatien 4
un Steam Generator Seditn Flow Venturi Superheatersodiumoutlet(1 loop) Display & superheater & evapo-rator perfomance Sodium Terperature Themocouple Superbeater evaporator outlet Display & steam generator (3 loops) performance evaluation Sodium Pressure Pressure Ele ent I loop-superheater inlet, outlet Display & steam generator 49 (both legs) and evaporator outlet perfomance evaluation (oneleg) Feedwater Flow
- Venturt Inlet line to steam drum FPS display & steam generator (feedwater) perfomance evaluation Superheat Steam Venturi Outlet of each superheater Flow
- PPS. display & steam generator (steam) performance evaluation
}
Steam Drum Drain Orffice Steam Drum Drain line for each Perfomance evaluation Flew steamdrum Evaporator Inlet Venturi Inlet to one evapcrator (1 loop) Performance evaluation a Flow 03
- 2. 2 9m e
e G G
Section 8 - Generator System This section contains: e Exciter and machine field controls e Machine synchronization instrumentation and controls Section 9 - Plant Electrical Dis _tribution System This section contains: e Graphic arrangement of high voltage AC e AC bus circuit breaker controls e Voltage, phase and other instrumentation associated with the buses e CRT and demand keyboard for instrumentation and alarm readout Certain Instrumentation and Control Panels, while not a part of the Main Control Board, demand rapid operator response and for this reason have been arranged to permit operator scanning from the Main Control Board and rapid l access. Such panels as Leak Detection, Fire Zone Indication, Emergency Diesel 41 Generator, and Switchyard Panels are in this category. The layout of Section 3 of the control board is designed to minimize the time required for the operator to evaluate the system performance under accident conditions. Deviations from predetermined conditions are alarmed so that corrective action may be taken by the operator. The control room also includes electronic equipment and displays which are used infrequently or for which access control is desirable. Logic and comparator racks for the Containment Isolation System and Reactor Shutdown System, termination racks, Nuclear Instrumentation electronics, Radiation Monitoring and others are located in the control room area behind the Main Control Board. By locating this equipment in the rear of the control room, the provisions for ready access and effective access control are maintained while the Main Control Board remains compact to retain effective operational characteristics. 7.9.2.4 Main Control Board Design The Mair Control Boaru is an L-shaped, stand up vertical panel as shown in Figures /.9-1 (plan view) and 7.9-2 (side view). There are 3 significant features of the control board mechanical design: seismic capabil-ity; separation of redundant safety related equipment and wiring; and modular construction of switch, indicator and control equipment. Amend. 41 Oct. 1977 7.9-5 11'1 090
Since the Main Control Board includes safety related equipment, the 52 l sections including this equipment are designed to Seismic Category 1. Struc-tures, wiring, wireways, and connectors are designed and installed to ensure that safety related equipmant on the cont rol board remains operational during and af ter the SSE. The Main Control Board is constructed of heavy gauge steel within appropriate supports to provide the requisite stiffness. Within the boundaries of the Main Control Board Sections, modules are arranged ar. cording to control functions. Fire retardant wire is used within the module and between the module and the first termination point. Modular train wiring is formed into wire bundles and carried to metal wire ways (gutters). Gutters are run into metal vertical wireways (risers). The risers are the interface between external wire trays feeding the panel and Main Control Board wiring. Risers are arranged to maintain the separated routing of the external wire trays. (3ee Figures 7.9-3 and 7.9-4). Mutually redundant safety train wiring is routed so as to maintain a minimum of six inches air separation between wires associated with different trains. Where such air separation is not available, mechanical barriers are provided in lieu of air space. It is anti..ipated that the safety features section of the Main Control Board will require extensive use of separation. However, other sections of the main control panel will require less use of distance and mechanical separation features. 7.9.3 Loul Control Sta, os Local control panels are provided for systems and components which do not require full time operator attendance and are not used on a continuous basis. Examples of such systems are the Waste Disposal System and the Turbine Generator Hydrogen Cooling System. In these cases, however, appropriate alarms are activated in the Control Room to alert the operator of an equip-ment malfunction or approach to an off-normal condition. 7.9.4 Communications Communications are provided between the Control Room and all operating or manned areas of the plant. The Communications System is energized from redundant and diverse electrical sources to assure continuity of operation. 7.9.5 Design Evaluation Safe and continuous ot:upancy of the Control Room during nonnal and off-normal conditions is provided for in the design of the Control Building. The probability of the Control Room becoming uninhabitable due to fire or other cause is considered extremely remote. However, in the event the Control Room must be vacated temporarily, the reactor plant can be brought to and main-tained in a hot shutdown condition for an extended period of time from outside the control room. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 7.9-6 ,- 11 ! 091
Additional information on controlling and disposing of hydrogen follows. Hydrcqen concentration in the Primary Sodium Removal and Decontamination (PSR&D) System is controlled bv: Regulating water vapor concentration in the water vapor nitrogen (WVN) raixture introduced to the cleaning vessel. Regulating nitrogen purge rate. In the normal sodium removal process, (1) the vessel is purged with N2 until the 0 level is below 15, and (2) caturated steam at 15 psig is meteredintbthenitrogenpurgingstream. The steam and N7 gas are mixed in a mixing tee and then introduced into the cleaning vessel where it reacts with the Na on tSe component. Water vapor concentration is controlled to be between 5-157, by means of remotely operated flow control valves. The lower limit is provided 50 that Na will effectively react with Hp 0 vapor, the upper limit of 157 is provided to preclude condensation of water vapor v1 the WVN mixture at 1500F, which is the component temperature. The normal operating coidition maintains the hydrogen, which is a 'eaction product of Na and H,0 in the vessel, to below 1 v/c. WHen the 7H concentration increases indicating a faster Na-water reaction, the steam t,upply introduced to the mixing tee is throttled down and the nitrogen purge. rate is increased. Both of the flowrates are controlled remotely from the control panel. The H2 concentration is monitored by a H9 meter installed in the vent line for the effluent gases. Should the H7 concentrition exceed 4 v/o, the meter sensor will set off a high H, alarm and ai. the same time activate a control interlock which automatically shuts off the steam si pply flow control valve while the nitro'len purge continues. The steam flow may be resumed when the excess hydrogen is reduced to below 1 v/o by continuing nitrogen purging. In addition to the nitrogen purge feed and bleediq_g of the gas effluent, the gas mixture in the cleaning vessel is circulatea by a blower through the cooler at the rate of 2,000 cfm during the WVN Na removal cycle. Although the primary purpose of the circulation is to remove the heat of reaction, it also promotes uniformity of the mixture of gases in the cleaning vessel. The pressure in the vessel is kept at 5 psig during operation by means of a back pressure valve. The positive operating pressure is provided to prevent air infiltration into the PSR&D system. Since the maximum hydrogen concentration in the vessel is 4 v/o, any leak ef the LCCV gas mixture will be diluted by air to below the hydrogen flammability limit in air which is 4 v/o. The Primary Sodium Removal and Decontamination System is desi finuclear safety in accordance with PSAR Section 3.2.2.4; namely, (1) gnated as nilure of system will not result in exposures at the site boundary or beyond in excess of 0.5 rem whole body or its equivalent, and (2) failure of the system will not damage any in-service safety class components or the plant shutdown capability. 25 9.2-8 Amend. 25 Aug. 1976 ii'l 092
35 l O 9.2.2.3 Design Evaluation The Sodium Removal and Decontamination System is designated non-nuclear safety because the accidental release of radioactive effluent would not result in exceeding the permissible site boundary dose rates, and its failure will not affect the plant shutdown capability. The ;ystem is designed, analyzed, fabricated, and tested per the requirements of ASME Code, Section VIII, Div.1. In addition, the process equipment and structures are designed to Category III seismic conditions. The processing of components to remove sodium via the moist nitro-gen gas process results in the release of hydrogen gas. The control system is designed to limit the evolution of hydrogen gas to 4 vol. %, by control-ling the amount and rate of water vapor addition. If an advertent release of hydrogen gas to the process cell should occur, an explosion would not result, as the resultinq concentration of hydrogen gas in air is less than the lower flammability limit. Ventilation is provided to the cell to assure dilution and mixing of the hydrogen gas with the air rather than collecting in one location. Also, all electrical equipment is 35 explosion proofed and grounded to minimize any sources of ignition. The major source of liquid radwaste in the PSR&DS would come from the decontamination of a PHTS pump. A spill of the liquid rad 43 tulated and it is assumed that the volatilized fraction is 10 gaste is pos-of the total inventory. The volatilized activity is released into the Large Component Cleaning Cell (LCCC) where it can in turn vent into the RCB. The design leakrate of the RCB is 0.1 Thus, the integrated dseislessthan1.0x10gol%perdayat10psig. rem at the site boundary. Furthermore, the 43 l pressure buildup in the RCB will be negligible as a result of failure in the PSR&D System, which will further reduce the expected site boundary Jose. The failure of the PSR&D System can be oostulated to occur when H 2 overpressure exists as a result of accidantal process fluid reactions for both Na & Na~k operations, when the pressure.1s 85 psig in the LCCV. The resultant pressure in the LCCC is less than the 10 psig design pressure of the cell. Therefore, no damage would occur to any safety-related components of the CRBRP. into the airIfinside the failure of theisLCCC, assumed the to occur and reaction result of 200 lb ofinsodium
.he release with of H2 water does not produce H 7 concentratjonsinexcessof4%(flammability limit is 4% in air) in the C7,000 ft volume of the LCCC. The cell is ventilated at a rate of 700 cfm, which further limits the buildup of H2 ' 25 Amend. 43 9.2-8a Jan. 1978 1
l 1^j i fi:) f)
, 1,)
9.2,2.4 Tests and Inspection The Sodium Removal and Decontamination System will be tested and inspected according to the applicable code requirements. Also, all make-break double-buffered gas seals will be rr .tinely leak tested prior to system operation. Regular inspection of valves, filters, and process equipment will be employed as part of the routine station maintenance program. 9.2.2.5 Instrumentation Requirements The instrument and flow diagram of the PSR&D System is shown in 49 Figure 9.2-5. The primary system cleaning process is operated remotely from the RCB operating floor, where all operating parameters are either indicated and/or recorded, and the process is monitored and controlled with remotely-operated control valves. Most of the intermediate system cleaning process is operated with local manual controls. Only the critical parameters are indicated and/or recorded at the control panel. The instrument and flow diagram of the ISR System is shown in Figure 9,2-4. 49 The following critical cleaning parameters are recorded and monitored:
- 1) Temperature of inlet and outlet moist nitrogen
- 2) Vessel Wall temprature . top, middle and bottom
- 3) Gas temperatures - top, middle, and bottom 49 l 4) Hydrogen content of outlet moist nitrogen
- 5) Water vapor content of inlet and outlet moist nitrogen
- 6) Nitrogen gas steam ratio of the feed flow
- 7) Radiation monitoring of all effluent 49 To preclude the development of explosive gas mixtures in the cleaning vessels and cells, the generation of hydrogen gas is controlled by the amount and rate of water vapor introduced, so that the hydrogen content is <4 vol. % in the vessels and <1 vol. % in the cells during cleaning opera-tions. These parameters are monitored; and, if they are exceeded, alarms will be initiated and the control system will reduce the water vapor concentration.
Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 9.2-9 jl^l O c/ /i
The equipment of the Primary Sodium Storage and Processing System is mounted in cells that have an inert atmosphere, but are accessible af ter system or component shutdown for inspection af ter de-inerting cells and radioactivity decay. The equipment is mounted or supported so that inspection of vessels, pumps and piping can be accomplished. 9.3.2.5 Instrumentation Requirements Instrumentation and controls (I&C) are provided for operation, performanca evaluation and diagnosis of the Primary Na Storage Liu Processing System. These functions are required for off-normal as well as for the full range of normal operation. Details of the I&C for the sub-system are shown in the piping and instrumentation diagram, Figure 9.3-2. 26 DHRS instrumentation is discussed in Section 5.6.2.1.6. The following I&C is required to ensure safe operation of and to prevent extensive damage to the Primary Na Storage and Processing System. Temperatures at the inlet and outlet of all heat source and sink components, in conjunction with loop flow measurements are provided for all systems to monitor their status. Critical temperatures and ficws are alarmed to alert the operator to off-normal operations. All EM pumps 461 are provided with winding temperature measurements and winding coolant low flow indication. These measuremente .re alarmed for off-normal conditions and interlocked to automatically shutdown the pump to prevent damaging it. Storage tanks are provided with level measurements, which are alarmed for abnormal low and/or high level. This information, in con-junction with leak detection data, is required to diagnose external liquid metal leaks. The operator is alerted to NaK to sodium leakage by NaK expansion tank high-low pressure alarms. Differential pressure sensors and 50l 46 I flow meters are provided to alert the operator to possiole plugging of the cold traps or insufficient cold trap flow. All the bellows seal valves are provided with leak detectors (Section 7.5.5.1). All valves are provided with position indicators. The stem portion of the sodium valve is monitored and alarmed for low temperature to ensure free operation and 46l protect the valve sodium seal from damage. To provide for continued operation and prevent possible system damage resulting from control system failures, hand controllers are provided for all controllers. The 50l hand controller allows the operate .o manually operate the system while the defect is repaired. Redundant temperature sensors are provided for each primary cold trap. High temperature conditions in either cold trap are indicated and alarmed in the Control Room to ensure that the cold trap is isolated prior to plant cooldown to refueling temperature. Thus plugging from high impurity content in the PHTS is precluded. 36 Amend. 50 June 1979 9.3-9 i 1, " 1, QsoOE
O 9.3.3 EVS Sodium Processing 9.3.3.1 Design Basis See Section 9.1.3.1.1. 9.3.3.2 Design Description See Section 9.1.3.1.2. 1 i i^) 096 g Amend. 46 9.3-9a Aug. 1978
I j n 'g D E.T M L 5 g M. G
,a%"
T? i y.....<,.........- m mm=s,w.>.=er.-
, * (U
r- '
'~
~ ....... ____ 7****
q ,
@te 5
6' I '"* ' M' '"'
- i 9 ! . .
s c-a . E3 .
--- ! 'T.*% I's
' I y,q., gvfis ,
f 3* 4 J ,.,.,wa g' s.,' is, J k s ,s DETAIL 3 3 k, WS r, cat coe rLOw colet.0L vat v tg o,.s .,, f LOOP O3 A s J.d.L I e
,Ds.C...
a.t . O O. s
- o. - on
,,,c,D J _
p18 y ;;,* < u me ce
,_ ,,-,. . -a y$ vd4 9's&
i e'. r ts,.
' -' @ wrt s :
'. . ,,tt
- e . 2 g - ,- > (9 .t.t. . m.
. ~. .u r .o.,.w. . . . .u... ,. .e.e a,., ,
T?. rar.v. c o . .a.v w o c.o. uem u .,..
- m. o .,
@ r.4 e c .<.s. .=..m
. . s e o..e. .s.., .. . . c . ., w-....
. .. . ..c,.s.~. m . .... .. =
. .o i . ..
s~ mo., c....... %a.'s -- m (u s.\_, W
/
g u .;g,,.sn >~ O " 2s ' W 1 % .% % ~2 n *.h % I
~- e , _ . -... ... . .....,
k r s @ e ots" * " c.
" ' ' ..ts
,o u r.:mit.'
DE TAI L I
= a ,.;;.,. -. -.~u. .. sc. ..,u v co. .
d. NUCLEAR WETi
, RLLATLD @
,s < ri m.m .. -
g Figure 9.3-2 Primary Sodium Processing Storage System (Sheet 1 of 3) 9.3-22 Amend. 5? Oct.1979 11^1 097
?00R BRIBlui .
. .=.
o*z 2 C },
,L O /" 3-m 'l
; .~
[-J
. "f' ..l. . . an e- --
c- - - ~ - * - - ( , ge y-- l .=,
<==**
i l. .. l ;i. . % .- : ~;,g , i : l 7-;,2 s 6 l :l I [ l l I s J l s l
\, -- -
9 F s h.-j . . . _ ,
% _, / ~ ..- '
too o a Loop oa too,m a g g R>m P a n M W c, u '$' t (?.
.~)
~
*L
, +3 Y .r . . .
@ _.r..:._ .
h N
,, -i A
[3 COssTaisent ent J F f aa/74/4eava n/7 onennet %geq m lyg AE 'ad A & f 3 0a ru ed
\g\>
{ On, NA sw.<a .e m s \ )@ a r--- >>> m Q l @ s
}
i.; j i
," g% LS h g/ . II g
LS
!= --
g 8 g Scat . (ME
- ' T. 3
;<
l Fb" , so u.. . n...m .
- l : 2 6 l:.
(l..b.. ... , r
\_
.-l ~,
tw.. , ut * . sc: =
.~
( .-
. n p ..- , < si , . . ; . .
r - . ,- (n.. ) c v hl
?
r._ . . _._i 1 b r-I h .
-r --r-1 P J k m-.., em -
W
- M% I (T t r [*'s Figure 9.3-2 Primary Sodium Processing
-f e Storage System (Sheet 2 of 3) 9.3-23 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 11,"1 t
099
?00TORGIML 8
l M e= I .. W,...6 .- J ' Lh e f;, c.f ~7
. s- {- - -
, ~ __
e5 , egne,o, wa nts i , l -- I lI .; l l l I [' (/ l Ji i l b a
.j w '3@ Ta
-. /
s,
' Y N >
$1*'
_7, 4hw - a 1-a
/
; c (*$.
y 1 , ws , ~<,. . m _. = - O . . . y l __.f\?*If i 4
!l b d
,e %
st ., u 7 o 4- _ 9 il E
'f %f %f ' I ~
v
- - . , ~ . ,
I. ** *
- tow va t *A f ,"~,%
/
-,, - s_O
!!^1 100
ABHX Cells Unit Coolers Annulus and RSB Filter Cell Unit Coolers
- 3. Loss of Cooling from the Normal Chilled Water System The unit coolers serving the ABHX Cells, the Annulus and RSB Filter Cells will be connected to the emergency chilled water system.
Upon the loss of normal chilled water, the unit coolers will be switched to the emergency chilled water system.
- 4. Occurrence of Fire in the Building In the event of a fire in the building, a signal from the Fire Protection System will start the Stairwell Pressurization Fans to prevent the smoke from entering the stairwells.
The Smoke Vent Fan shall be started manually to provide smoke venting from the areas containing safety related equipment. 9.6.3.4 Testing and Inspection Requirements All components are tested and inspected as separate compo-nents and as integrated systems. Velometer readings are taken to ensure that all systems are balanced to deliver and exhaust the required air quanti ties. All water coils are hydraulically tested for leakage prior to being placed in service. Capacity and performance of the fans are tested according to the Air Moving and Conditioning Association requirements prior to operation of the plant. The RSB Filter Units of the Containment Cleanup System will be periodically tested in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.52. The RSB-RWA Exhaust Filter Unit will be periodically tested 52l in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.140. 9.6.4 Turbine Generator Building Ventilation System 9.6.4.1 Design Basis The objective of the ventilation system for the Turbine Generator Building (Figure 9.6-16) is to circulate the air in order to control the building air temperature. The system provides the required environment to ensure operability of the equipment and personnel accesses of the building. The system is not designed as a safety related system. The ventilation system for this bt.ilding is designed to:
- a. U Limit maximum air temperatures to the followfng: 75 F in the secondar; plant sampling rom, and 95 F in the 49 remainder of the building.
Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 9.6-37 } I, 1 101
- b. To provide filtered outside air to reduce dust and air-borne particles within the building.
- c. To provide air movement from the lower elevations of the building to the final exhaust located under the building roof. The exhaust air is not filtered prior to discharge to the atmosphere.
- d. To deliver the air to the building roof exhaust fans.
9.6.4.2 System Description This section describes the major design features and the normal operation of the system, to satisfy the operational requirements. Two (2) Recirculating Air Handling Units, each with two (2) 50% capacity supply fans, provide conditioned supply air to all levels of the Turbine Generator Building. The minimum fresh air flow provided by this system is established on the basis of the ventilation require-ments. The supply air is distributed to the various areas by the supply ductwork to satisfy the temperature requirements. The filters provided in the Air Handling Units maintain the cleanliness of the supply air. Modulating outside air and return air dampers, the heating coil and the cooling coil provided in the air handling units, along with their in-strumentation and controls, maintain the discharge temperature downstream of the supply fans. The cooling coils are supplied with chilled water and the heating coils are supplied with hot water. The two (2) recirculating air handling units, each with two (2) 50% capacity supply fans, are located in the NW corner at El. 892'-0" and in the NE corner at El. 862'-0" of the TGB respectively. One (1) Air Handling Unit is connected directly to a fixed louver in the north wall of the building. Each air handling unit consists of outside air and return air dampers, a roll type filter, heating and cooling coils and access sections. Downstream of the cooling coil section a sufficiently long front access section is provided fcr the connection of the 50% capacity supply fans. The length of the front access section is de-termined to pemit equalization of the air flow through the cooling coils required by the off-center location of the fans. The length of the other access sections is determined by the maintenance requirements of the individual components. The flexible sections are connected to the front access section and are followed by manual dampers (normally locked open), fan inlet bell sections, fans, flexible connections and motor operated isolation dampers. The two (2) motorized damper sections are joined together by a "Y" duct section. Amend. 49 April 1979 9.6-38
!!"! 102
override to the control valve is provided which auto-matically opens the control valve when the outside U temperature drops below 34 F, thus permitting the required amount of chilled water to flow through the coil 44 to prevent coil freeze-up.
- 5) In addition to the above system features, the duct routing and design provides inherent protection from water carryover. The usually tortuous duct routing with its turns, valves, dampers and other system com-ponents, inhibits the transport of water and prevents water contact with sodium or NaK containing components. l44
- 6) The Recirculating Gas Cooling System (RGCS) coil circuits are fabricated to ASME Section III Class 3 requirements, from finned copper tubing. The high quality of the coil '44 fabrication required by the ASME Code minimizes the probability of leakage due to tube wall failure.
Each coil nozzle is provided with an automatic butterfly {44 gas isolation valve (fail closed). The supply and re-turn water lines to each cooler unit are provided with an automatic isolation valve (fail closed). One dew point detector and one water detector are provided for each cooler. Redundant drain valves are provided in the bottom of each cooler. The actuation of any one of 44 the detectors will alarm and annunciate in the Control Room, close the gas and water isolation valves and stop the fans. The location of the leak will be displayed 52 l n the Recirculating Gas Cooling System back panel in the Control Room and on the local water leak detection panels. The water which has leaked prior to closure of the water isolation valves is drained away through the redundant drain valves. 52 In the event that all isolation valves and drains fail, the orientation of the RGCS components are such that a 14 4 leak rate postulated in accordance with USNRC-SRP 3.6.1 and 3.6.2 would require approximately one hour to fill the RGCS components to a point where water would start to spill into the cell being serviced. The above amount 44 of time is sufficient to take corrective action. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 9.7-11 11^1 107-
9.7.4 Secondary Coolant Loops (SCL) Dowtherm J physical properties are described in Table 9.7-6. Figure 9.7-3 shows the piping, valving and equipment schematic of a typical secondary coolant loop.
- 1) Secondary Coolant Loops, containing Dowtherm J as the heat transfer fluid, are provided to isolate water from the sodium in those areas where the measures, described in Section 9.7.3 cannot be met. Secondary Coolant Loops are used as follows:
o Fuel handling cell secondary coolant loop (2 redundant loops). Equipment located in RSB cells 321 and 322 at elev. 779'-0". Each loop contains approximately 500 gals. of Dowtherm J. o Primary fla cold trap flak cooler secondary coolant loop. Equipment located RCB cell 168 a t elev. 752'-8". The loop contains approximately 600 gals. of Dowtherm J. Each secondary coolant loop contains a Dowtherm J to Water heat exchanger, a circulating pump, an air separator, an expansion tank, piping, valves and instrumentation. In addition, each coolant loop is fabricated to high quality standards from schedule 40 pipe. The Primary fla Cold Trap flak cooler piping loop is constructed to ASf1E Section III, Class 3 requirements. The Fuel Handling Cell cooler unit piping loop is constructed to AflSI B31.1 requirements. All secondary coolant loop piping is designed to the requirements of Seismic Category I. Maximum system pressures will be 150 psig. The design pressure of systemUcomponents is 250 psig. The design temgerature is 150 F. The working pressure (-20 F to +650 F) of schedule 40 pipe varies from 906 psig for 2" pipe to 839 psig for 14" pipe. The quality and conservative design makes the possibility of any Dowtherm J leak extremely unlikely. If a leak should occur leak detectors actuate valves which isolate the water side of the Dowtherm J/ Water heat exchanger from the chilled water system and isolate the flak cooler or Fuel Handling Cell cooler unit from the secondary coolant loop in order to prevent Dowtherm J leakage into either the water system, flak loop of Fuel Handling Cell. In addition, the leak detectors shutdown the secondary coolant loop circulating pump. 44 0 9.7-12
}1"} }Q4 Amend. 44 April 1978
45 l36 l Operation of the Primary SSP is manual, and requires remote opera-tion. Master-slave manipulators are provided. Typical laboratory information obtained from these samples are:
- 1) Total coolant impurity levels
- 2) 0xygen, hydrogen, and carbon activity
- 3) Tritium level
- 4) Fission product levels
- 5) Corrosion product levels
- 6) Particulate impurity levels 45 l36l27l 7) Other impurities as considered necessary 9.8.2.2 Primary Cover Gas Sampling and Monitoring Subsystem The Primary Cover Gas Sampling and Monitoring Subsystem is shown 52 in Figure 9.8-1. Primary cover gas samples in shielded, gas sample bottles are provided by the Fuel Failure Monitoring System. These samples will be processed in the gas chromatograph in the analytical services laboratory to determi - &ities (helium, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, methane, and cart Samples are also taken for detennination of ir:puri t' er< ' the gas chromatograph such as tritium.
50, Amend. 52
. '*- 979 05 9.8-3
9.8.2.3 EVST Sodium Characterization Subsystem The EVST Sodium Characterization subsystem is shown in Figure 9.8-2. O 45 As EVST sodium is circulated by either EVST sodium pump in the Auxiliary Liquid Metal System, a portion of the sodium is diverted to the EVST
] sodium characterization subsystem components.
j The ex-vessel plugging temperature indicator (EVPTI) is identical to the primary PTI (Section 9.8.2.1) in design and function. In parallel 45 with the EVPTI is the ex-vessel sodium sampling package (EVSSP), identical in function to the primary SSP; only one multi-purpose sampler is provided. Since EVST sodium will become contaminated with radioactive sodium and/or fission products, provision is made for remote operation of the EVPTI and EVSSP. Master-slave manipulators are provided for the remote manual 45 operational requirements of the EVSSP. 9.8.2.4 IHTS Sodium Characterization Subsystem 45l As shown in Fi ure 9.8-3, the three loops in the Intennediate Heat Transport System (IHTS are sampled and monitored by a three intermediate sodium characterization package (ISCP), each containing a plugging tempe-rature indicator module and a multi-purpose sampler. The inlet to each characterization package is connected to the outlet of the cold trap pump in each IHTS loop and the return line is connected to the return line of the IHTS loop. Sampling and monitoring can be perfonned only while the cold trap pump is functioning. Since the sodium in the three IHTS loops 49 is not radioactive, this subsystem is not designed for remote operations. 9.8.2.5 EVST, FHC, and IHTS Cover Gas Sampling 45 Provisions are made in the EVST and FHC cover gas systems and in the IHTS pump-expansion tank pressure equalization lines, to obtain cover gas grab samples, using evacuated gas sample bottles whose contents will be analyzed in the laboratory. Since fission gases can be present in the EVST and FHC cover gas samples, these gas bottles will be shielded for 45 l operator protection. Shielded sampla bottles will not be required for IHTS cover gar samples. 9.8.2.6 Analytical Services Laboratory 45 Space and equipment will be provided in the hot laboratory in the Plant Service Building for out of loop analyses of sodium and cover 45 g s samplers. Due to the radioactive nature of many of these samples, the i1"i i 106 O Amend. 49 9.8-4 Apr. 1979
TABLE 9.8-1 IMPURITY MONITORING AND ANALYSIS SYSTEM STRUCTURAL DESIGN CRITERIA Desian Code - , Seismic System Component Code Class Category Primary Na Charac- Piping to/from Auxiliary Liquid Metal ASME Section 1 I terization System and isolation valves III Sampling loop piping and valves ASME Section 3 I
.III 48 Primary plugging temperature indicator ASME Section 3 I 45 III e
h 45l Primary sodium sampling package ASME Section 3 I E 48 III 36 Electric Hoist Comi - III Master Slave Manipulator Comi - II ~ 48 Radiation Shielding Coml - I 45l
" 36 cp N
S$ 8e m ". 50 36
TABLE 9.8-1 (cont'd.) IMPURITY MONITORING AND ANALYSIS SYSTEM STRUCTURAL DESIGN CRITERIA I Design Code System Seismic Component Code Class Category 50 Electric Hoist Com1, - III EVST Na Character- Piping to/from Auxiliary Liquid Metal Sys. ASME Section 3 I ization III 52l 47l45l Sampling loop piping and valves ASME Sec.III 3 I Ex-vessel plugging temperature indicator ASME Section 3 I III e 49 48 io 36 Ex-vessel sodium sampling package ASME Section 3 I L - III Electric hoist Coml. - III Master-slave manipulator Coml. - Il Radiation shielding Com1. - II 36 EVST Ar Sampling Ar sampling piping ASME Section 3 I III RN rg 1 A e e~ s M M J CD e 9 9
11.3 GASEOUS WASTE SYSTEM 11.3.1 Design Base The design objective of the Gaseous Waste System is that the levels of radioactive materials in the plant effluents to the environment shall be kept as low as reasonably achievable. Extensive efforts shall be directed toward the development of system designs that will result in minimizing or eliminating planned releases of radioactive material to the environment during normal plant operation. Plant design objectives include conformance with the requirements of 10 CFR 20. The design base and the expected values of the annual activity release for each gaseous radionuclide are listed in Tables 11.3-11 and 50 1 11.3-12, respectively. The sumed annual dose at the site boundary from gaseous radioactive effluent for the design base conditions is approximately 4.5 mrem total skin dose (which includes both y and s), and 50 0.66 mrem whole body gamma dose (see Table 11.3-18). This annual dose is well below the requirements of 10 CFR 20 for unrestricted areas. Dose rates within accessible restricted areas are below the requirements of 10 CFR 20. The Radioactive Argon Processing Subsystem (RAPS) shall maintain the primary sodium system cover gas at an acceptable level of radioactivity and shall provide a source of low-radioactivity gas for use in reactor seals. The cover gas is to be contained within the RAPS circuit during its radioactive decontamination and reuse, except for laakages and cover gas samples taken for failed-fuel and impurity monitoring. The Cell Atmosphere Processing Subsystem (CAPS) shall process plant effluents that contain or might potentially contain radioactivity, in order to reduce the radioactivity to levels that are as low as reasonably achievable during the normal range of routine plant operations. During off-normal operations, the CAPS function is to continue to prevent, to as great an extent as is practicable, the release of radioactivity. 11.3.2 System Description 11.3.2.1 Process Flow The origin, flow paths, and release points of the gaseous radioactive waste system are shown schematically in Figure 11.3-1. The radioactive gases generated in the reactor (see Sections 11.3.2.2 and 11.3.2.3 for composition, flow rates, and concentrations) consist of tritium and noble gas isotopes. The latter, and some of the tritium, migrate to the reactor and Primary Heat Transport System (PHTS) cover-gas spaces. The Radioactive Argon Processing Subsystem is an essentially closed internal system which continuously processes the cover gas to reduce its activity and then returns the " recycle" argon to the seals and cover-gas spaces. An expanded schematic diagram of the RAPS is 49 shown in Figure 11.3-2.
.3-1 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
*\"{
\
' )[]
No significant quantities of iodine nor particulate forms of radioactive isotopes, excluding those daughter products associated with noble gas decay, are expected to be present in the Gaseous Radwaste System. Although some vaporization of nongaseous isotopes from the liquid sodium into the reactor cover gas may occur, all cover gas entering the system is processed through twc vapor traps, which are expected to remove essentially all nongaseous isotopes, including trace quantities of sodium iodide. Continuous radiation -lonitoring of the gases is provided by the process monitoring of RAPS and CAPS and monitoring of the CAPS exhaust. Radioactive gas leakages into the inerted cells of the Reactor Containment Building (RCB) and Reactor Service Building (RSB) are collected and processed through the CAPS before release to the environment. An expanded schematic diagram of the CAPS is shown in Figure 11.3-3. 50 l M st (99.8%) of the tritium generated forms a hydride in the sodium; it is then partially removed from solution in the sodium by cold trapping. A very small portion diffuses into the cells of the Intermediate Bay of the Steam Generator Building. A detailed description of all the identifiable leakage and discharge paths is given in the following paragraph. In Figure 11.3-1, certain paths have been assigned " numbers" that correspond with the following discussion: Path la. Reactor cover gas is conservatively estimated to diffuse through the reactor head seals at the rate of 0.012 scc / min. This leakage diffuses into the head access area and is discharged to the atmosphere through the RCB heating and ventilating exhaust duct. Path lb. The buffered head seals are expected to leak (to the head access area) a maximum of 7 scc / min of recycle argon cover gas. Pa th 2. Although the cover gas lines connected to the reactor and other components in the Primary Heat Transport System are not expected to leak, a leakage of I scc / min has been assumed, for the purpose of conservatism, in the design basis evaluation. Also, tritium dissolved in the sodium in this system will diffuse through the hot pipe walls into the RCB cells. These two leakages are considered to diffuse into the RCB cell atmospheres, which are collected and processed by CAPS and are discharged to the CAPS heating and ventilation exhaust. Path 3. Although the RAPS and CAPS piping and components are also not expected to leak, a leakage equivalent to 1 scc / min of RAPS Cold Box influent gas has been assumed, for the purposes of conservatism, in the design basis evaluation. This assumed leakage is considered to diffuse into the RSB cell atmospheres, which are processed by CAPS and are discharged to the CAPS 49 heating and ventilation exhaust. Amend. 50 June 1979
$ 3 11.3-2 l I ,. .'I I I {J
TABLE 11.3-2 GASEOUS RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATION IN REACTOR COVER GAS *
=
Isotope Inventory Concentration (Ci) (pCi/ scc) 131m Xe 8.6 0.74 l33m 50 l Xe 2.8E+2 24. Xe l33 5.0E+3 4.3E+2 135m Xe 1.2E+3 1. l E+2 Xe l35 2.3E+4 1.9E+3 Xe l38 2,0E+3 1.8E+2 Kr 8D 7.5E+2 64 85m Kr 1.8E+3 1.5E+2 85 Kr 0.16 1.4E-2 87 Kr 2.0E+3 1.7E+2 88 Kr 3.4E+3 2.9E+2 Ar 39 9.09** 0.783** Ar4I 49 14.4 1.2 23 Ne 8.9E+5 7.7E+4 3 49l H 1.7E-4 1.5E-5
- For the design condition 49l ** After 30 years' operation il } ))
Amend. 5^ 11.3-20
TABLE 11.3-3 ACTIVITY INVENTORIES IN RAPS PROCESS VESSELS RAPS Vacuum RAPS Surge Recycle Ar90n Vessel Vessel RAPS 'Crycstill Vessels Isotope Design Expected Design Expected Expected ' Des 19n Design Expected (Ci) (Ci) (Ci) (Ci) ( (C1) (Ci) (Ci) (Ci) 131m Xe 1.2 0.12 28 2.8 1.9E+3 1.lE-3 133m 1.9E42 1.lE-4 Xe 38 3.8 8.2E+2 82 1.lE+4 1.lE+3 3.lE-2 3.lE-3 Xe l33 6.9E+2 69 1.5E+4 1.JE+3 4.7E+5 4.7E+4 U.61 6.1E-2 l35m Xe 24 2.4 32 3.-2 2.0 0.20 6.6E-5 6.6E-6 Xe 2.5E+3 2.5E+2 4.0E+4 4.0E+3 8.8E+4 8.8E+3 1.1 0.11 Xe I30 35 3. 5 44 4.4 2.5 0.25 8.2E-5 8.2E-6 d 83m Kr 50 5.0 3.6E+2 36 1.6E+2 16 3.9E-3 3.9E-4 85m Kr 1.7E+2 17 2.0E+3 2.0E+2 2.lE+3 2.1E+2 3.8E-2 3.8E-3
" 85 Kr 2.2E-2 2.2E-3 0.52 5.2E-2 7.2E+2 87 72 2.lE-5 2.1E-6 Kr 1.lE+2 11 6.0E+2 60 1.8E+2 18 5.0E-3 88 5.0E-4 Kr 2.7E+2 27 2.5E+3 2.5E+2 1.7E+3 1.7E+2 3.7E-2 3.7E-3 Ar 39* 3.5 3.5 81 81 28 28 49 49 Ar 4I 1.1 1.1 7.9 7.9 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.3 23 Ne 17 17 0.97 0.97 3.4E-4 3.4E-4 1.3E-3 1.3E-3 52 H 6.6E-5 6.6E-5 2.4E-3 2.4E-3_ 3.0E-2 3. 0 E 2 1.6E-3 _1.6E-3 50 49 .
Total 3.9E+3 4.lE+2 6.2E+4 6.3E+3 5.8E+5 5.8E+4 52 50 gp
- After 30 years' operation F@
_. .. P $2 M 9 9 8
three gas monitors. Their output will also be provided to the PPS for initiation of containment isolation when a preset radiation level is reached by two of the three detectors. A particulate filter will be in-6 stalled in line with the gas chamber to prevent buildup in the sample chamber. The monitoring system will be designed to comply with IEEE 279-1971. The overall containment isolation system design and protection logic is discussed in Section 7.3. Figure 12.2-1 shows a typical block 6 diagram of these channels and Figure 7.3-1 shows the trip logic configur-ation. 11.4.2.2.3 Building Ventilation Exhaust Monitors The building exhaust plenums from which potentially radioactive plant gaseous release may emanate are: one in the Intermediate Bay, three 49 in the Steam generator Building, one in the Plant Service Building, twelve 18 in the Turbine Generator Building, one in the Radwaste Building, Reactor Service Building exhaust (s), the common RCB H&V and Annulus Pressure Maintenance and Filtration System exhaust and the Containment Cleanup System and Annulus Air Cooling System exhaust. Continuous monitoring will be performed at those exhausts which could conceivably undergo a signifi-cant increase in detectable levels in radioactivity. The remaining 28 exhausts will be sampled periodically. 18 The exhaust plenum located in the IB receives ventilation exhaust air from the Intermediate Bay area. A continuous air monitor (CAM) will be provided to detect particulate, radiciodine and gaseous activity in the effluent stream. The air sample will be obtained isokinetically from the exhaust, on a continuous basis. The operation of the three-channel CAM unit is described in Section 12.2.4.2.1. The RSB exhaust (s) will be continuously monitored for radioactivity 18 releases. i The three SGB exhausts receive ventilation exhaust from the indi-491 vidual steam generator cells, and IHS cells in the Intermediate Bay. Each exhaust will be sampled for tritium activity using silica-gel dessicants; and analysis of samples will be performed by liquid scintilation techniques. The exhaust samples will be obtained isokinetically, and flow through the silica-gel column will be maintained constant by a regulated pump assembly. 49 The exhaust fans in the TGB receive ventilation from the various Turbine Generator Building operating areas. These exhaust points will also be sampled for tritium activity as described above. 49 The exhaust in the PSB receives ventilation from the combined Samples will be collected isokinetically by a parti-6 laboratory.culate (and iodine, if required) filter and analyzed for isotopic conte l32 I - Anend. 52 Oct. 1979
6 l in the Counting Room. The Containment Cleanup System and Annulus Air Cooling System exhausts at the top of the the Reactor Confinement Building. Particulate, radiciodine, gaseous and plutonium activity in the effluent stream will be monitored continuously. The common RCB H&V and Annulus Pressure Maintenance 27 and Filtration System exhaust will be continuously monitored for particulates, radiogases, and radiciodine in the effluent stream.
', 1 ~ } i)O r Amend. 50 11.4-3a June 1979
12.1.2 Design Description 12.1.2.1 General Shielding Design Criteria Occupancy requirements and access controls determine what radiation dose rates will be allowed in all in-plant and on-site areas in order to assure that the design objectives will be met. Each area, where plant associated radiation fields are expected to exist, is a restricted area, and is classified as one of five types listed in Table 12.1-1. Areas where plant associated radiation is expected near background levels during normal operating conditions are unrestricted areas, and are controlled by general plant security. Unlimited access of plant personnel and authorized visitors is permitted in these areas. Scaled plan views of the plant showing the radiation zone 4d classifications for buildings containing significant radiation sources or equipment for the treatment of radioactive fluids are presented in Figures 12.1-1 through 12.1-21. The legend on Figure 12.1-1 provides 45 necessary descriptive information. Where access to the plant area is required, either on a continuous 4c' or a periodic basis (Zones I through IV), shielding is provided to obtain the dose rate in the range specified in Table 12.1-1. For example, the Reactor Containment Building operating floor, shown on Figure 12.1-2, is shown as Zone I and the shielding design objective is to permit a dose 2d rate of 0.2 mrem /hr. The cooler cell (cell 152) is shown as Zone II and the shield is designed to permit 2.0 mrem /hr. The area around the reactor 49 cavity shield shown on Figure 12.1-5 is a Zone III and is designed to permit a dose rate of 10 mrem /hr even though the range of pennissible 49l dose rates for this zone are 5.0 to 100 mrem /hr. Zone IV would be designed for 100 mrem /hr with the permissible dose rate range 100.0 to 15 5000 mrem /hr. The cells and/or areas not shown in Figures 12.1-1 through 12.1-21 are unrestricted. The penetration shields will be designed so that the general area dose rate at the nearest work location will not be increased by more than 20%. Peak dose rates at penetrations in normally accessible locations will not exceed a factor of 3 greater than the area design dose rate. 49 A discussion of shield design procedure to include bias over and above the "best estimate" source terms is provided in Section 12.1.3. The total anticipated design bias, as it effects the biological dose rates in most areas of CRBRP containing primary sodium sources, is conservative by a factor of approximately 2.5. 12.1-3 Amend. 49 April 1979
)i') \\b
Although these figures are to scale, the reduction in size of these drawings preclude accurate scaling of the thickness of the shields' walls. Some shielding wall thicknesses are listed on Tables 12.1-2 through 12.1-5. In general, the largest sources of radioactivity are located in the reactor containment building (RCB) and the reactor service twilding (RSB). Portions of these buildings are restricted areas under 10 CFR Part 20 provisions. Additional shielding arrange-49l ment views are shown on the figures in Section 1.2. The intermediate building will be an unrestricted area during nonnal operations, except for the penetration vaults where the inter-mediate sodium piping penetrates the reactor containment shell, the 52 49 confinement building and enters the intermediate building. The interior of the vaults will be designated Zone V during normal operation; however, the general area exterior to these vaults will be unrestricted. The intermediate building also has a shielded cell which contairs primary sodium storage tanks. On an infrequent basis, primary sodium which has decayed 12 or more days after reactor shutdown will be stored in these tanks. This cell can be locked, and is separately cooled with an isolation ventilation system. During use of this vault for primary sodium storage, this cell will be posted as a high-radiation area, but the area external to the cell walls will be an unrestricted area. The location of the main access control point to restricted 49 areas is at the health physics station in the plant service building. All personnel and visitors entering and leaving restricted areas of the plant will normally be required to pass through this control point. 1 Several cells of the plant service building will be restricted areas. These cells will be utilized as radiochemical laboratories, 49 counting rooms and associated offices. Other principal buildings, the control building, steam generator building, and turbine generator building will be unrestricted areas during normal operation. 12.1.2.2 Shield Design Primary Heat Transport and Auxiliary Systems This section presents the criteria and design for the shield walls, roofs and floors for primary heat transport and auxiliary system cells. The criteria and design description for shield penetrations, valve and sampling operations are also given. The thicknesses of most shield walls are set by shielding require-ments with the thicknesses of the remaining walls defined by structural requirements. The shielding walls are mainly constructed of ordinary concrete and erected according to + Regulatory Guide 1.69 and 49 ANSI-N101.6-1977 for the constructi: of concrete shields. In some local areas, other shielding materials, sutn as steel, are used. Shield walls constructed of blocks were avoided for seismic considerations. Those shield walls or portions of shield walls, that arc subject to removal to permit access for equipment repair or replacement, are designed to be knocked out and replaced, or provided with removable access plugs. Amend. 52 12.1-4 Oct. 1979 ll l llb
Penetrations in the HAA are listed in Table 12.1-2. By limiting the size of gaps provided for mechanical or structural reasons, by eliminating straight-through streaming paths with stepped design configurations, pro-viding mechanical seals and the use of purified purge gas, the need for local penetration shields in the HAA will be minimized. The primary heat transfer and auxiliary system shield design param-eters are sunmarized in Tables 12.1-3 and 12.1-4. During full power oper-ations, all areas in the RCB above the operating floor at elevation 816 feet - 0 inches are accessible on an unlimited, full time basis (Zone I). The main access stairways, elevators and corridors to levels below the operating floor, located in the NE, SE and SW corners of the RCB are Zone II radiation areas. Equipment below grade requiring periodic checking or maintenance are generally located in areas where the design radiation dose rates are 10 mrem /hr or less (Zone III). The cells in the RCB containing significant radiation sources are not accessible during power operation, except for cells such as the sodium makeup pump cell which can be isolated from the radiation source during plant operation. The RCB shielded cell closures have been designed based on accessibility requirements, personnel occupancy 52 factors, and the ALARA guidelines. The shielding surrounding the primary heat transport inlet and outlet piping as it penetrates the reactor cavity shield (see Figure 12.1-4, view at elevation 780, flowmeter cells) is designed to control the gamma dose rates in the HAA and Primary Pump Motor Cells and to minimize the neutron flux in the adjacent primary heat transport system cells. The neutron flux will be reduced to approximately 1 x 103 o/sec-cm2 in order to preclude significant activation of the intermediate sodium. The dose rate on the surface of the intermediate heat transport system components will be less than 0.2 mrem /hr. The radioactive argon processing system (RAPS) compressors, together with the RAPS vacuum, surge and recycle argon tanks are located at elevation 733. The cell arrangements and required shielding are shown on Figure 12.1-7. Shield design parameters associated with these components 49 are summarized on Table 12.1-4. Reactor Service Building Shielding in the Reactor Service Building (RSB) protects personnel during nonnal operations and anticipated operational occurrences, from radiation sources contained in the components and piping of the following systems and facilities: 4cl a. Radioactive Argon Processing System Cold Box
- b. Cell Atmosphere Processing System (CAPS)
- c. Ex-Vessel Storage Tank (EVST) and supporting systems
- d. Fuel Handling Cell
- e. Nev Core Component Storage
- f. Radioactive Waste Disposal System The cell arrangement and the required RSB shielding is shown on Figures 4d 12.1-8 through 12.1-17.
Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 12,1-11
)n t '
jjJ
The radiation zoning criteria allows for continuous access (Zone I) on all elevations 816 feet - 0 inches and above (except for the decontamination facility of the waste disposal system), in the main stairwell and elevator shaft, and in the fuel handling cell operating gallery and mass spectrometer cell. The principal corridors and accessible areas outside of % equipment cells below the 816 feet - 0 inches elevation level are designed for
, 2.0 mrem /hr (Zone II). Areas requiring infrequent access are designed for 10 mrem /hr(ZoneIII). The RSB shielded cell closures have been designed based 52 on accessibility requirements, personnel occupancy factors, and the ALARA guidelines.
The gas processed by CAPS can be radioactive. The principal source of radioactivity is the gas sampling system. 45 The RSB systems shield design parameters are summarized in Table 12.1-5. For additional information on the functions performed by these systems s.ee Sections 9.5 and 11.3. Plant Service Building The combined laboratory is located within the radiological restricted area of the plant service building. The radiation zone for these facilities is Zone 1, which limits the radiation level to 0.2 mmm/hr or less. There are no significant sources of radiation in adjacent areas of the plant service building during normal operation, which will be detectable in the combined 52 laboratory facility. The radiation level will be controlled by the size and nature of the radiochemical sources. The samples will be shielded, allowed to decay, or limited in mass (i.e., source intensity) to control the 49 radiation levels within the facility zoning criteria. Intermediate Bay and Steam Generator Building Normal radiation areas in the intermediate bay are confined to the intermediate piping penetration cells. These cells contain two 24 in a diameter intermediate sodium pipes near the 800 feet elevation which penetrate into the primary heat transfer cells of the RCB. With insulation and trace heating, the penetrations are approximately 50 inches in diameter. The shielding of these penetrations requires a labyrinth arrangement of shielded compartments. These compartments are not accessible (Zone V) except when the plant is not operating (Zone III). Primary sodium can be stored in the primary storage tanks on the 733 feet elevation. This sodium will have been decayed 12 or more days before transfer. When primary sodium is stored in this cell, the area will be treated as a high radiation area. The arrangement of these cells is shown on Figures 12.1-18 through 45 12.1-20. All other portions of the intermediate bay and steam generator building are unrestricted and do not require radiation shielding. Control Room The control room shield and heating and ventilation system are designed to limit the radiation exposure of operating personnel to 5 Rem following and durina duration of a postulated major radioactivity release. 4d The basis of this design is to meet the intent of Criterion 17 of CRBRP GDC.
]1 } }}8 Amend. 52 12.1-12 Oct. 1979
These monitors will be permanently mounted and directed towards the personnel airlocks and will be expected to detect, measure, and alarm high gamma dose rates in containment following high accidental releases of radioactivity. The monitoring system complies with CRBRP General Design Criteria 19, and 64. The basis for location of the various monitors shall consider the following factors:
- 1. The anticipated radiation level under operation, shutdown maintenance, and abnormal conditions.
- 2. The frequency and duration of occupancy, and the flow of traffic under normal and accident conditions.
- 3. The proximity of high radiation sources.
- 4. The consequence of an undetected increase in radiation level.
The locations of the area monitors provided for the CRBRP are sht #n on Figs.12.1-1 to 12.1-19C and are listed in Table 12.1-43. 12.1.4.2 Monitoring System Description Each area monitoring channel consists of a gamma detector, local indi-cators, alarms, signal conditioners, and Control Room indicators. The ganna detector energy dependence will be flat within i 20% for incident radiation above 100 Kev. Local monitor display includes loss-of-signal, high and high-high radiation indicator lights, high and high-high radiation audible alarms and mR/hr rate meter. Also, an essential feature of each monitoring channel will be its ability to avoid "foldover" following saturation in high radiation fields. Three detect consisting of 0.01-10gr rangesand
, 0.1-104 are0.1-107 employed, as indicated mR/hr. in Table The detector ranges12.1-43, are chosen to provide continuous monitoring of gamma radiation levels ranging from one decade below to three decades above the design background level (in mR/hr) at each monitor location (reference: Figures 12.1-1 thru 12.1-19C). The detector signal is also continuously transmitted to a ratemeter located on the Radiation Monitoring Panel in the Control Room.
All ratemeters indicate exposure levels on a suitable multi-decade logarith-mic scale. Each ratemeter which is mounted on the Radiation Monitoring Panel in the Control Room also contains loss-of-signal, high and high-high radiation indicator lights. Group annunciation (for all area monitors) for each of the events noted above, is also provided on three (3) respective annunciator windows 1 on the Main Control Board. 12.1-23a Amend. 1 July 1975
}I") ll9
Each area monitor will contain a built-in solenoid actuated shielded check source which can be actuated from the Radiation Monitoring Panel in the Control Room. All monitor components will be modular, commercially available units designed for rapid replacement upon failure. Electronic components will be exclusively solid-state, as available; and power will be supplied from the Instrument AC (120V, 60H z) busses for the non-PPS monitors. Area monitors performing containment iso-lation functions (PPS) will be supplied with Class lE power from re-dundant vital AC busses. 49l The high radiation alarms of all area monitors are transmitted from the Radiation Monitoring Panel in the Control Room to a Remote Data Aquisition Terminal unit within that vicinity. The Plant Data Handling and Display system will display and log all high alarms. 49 1 49l Figure 12.1-22 shows a typical schematic type diagram of an area radiation monitor. Locations, design dose rates and ranges of sensiti-49l vities of the monitors are provided in Table 12.1-48. 12.1.4.3 Maintenance and Calibration On completion of the monitoring system installation, each area monitor will be checked for proper operation and calibrated against a radiation checksource traceable to the National Bureau of Standards or from an equally acceptable source. The initial calibration and subse-quent calibrations at six month intervals will utilize a minimum of two source strengths to verify the linearity of detector energy dependence. In addition, each monitor is supplied with a built-in check source to provide a rapid functional test at periodic intervals. No " keep-alive" 1 sources are required since each detector's lower range of response is a minimum of one decade below the design dose level to the area of location. 12.1.5 Estimates of Exposure Peak External Dose Rates and Annual Doses at Unrestricted Locations The peak dose rates and annual doses at the site boundary 45 and control room due to direct plant radiation are low and considered small relative to the natural background radiation. These doses have been 4% estimated and are shown in Table 12.1-49, Parts I, II, and III. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 12.1-24 , e j 'y
TABLE 12.1-17 RADI0IS0 TOPE INVENTORY IN RAPS N0BLE GAS STORAGE VESSEL 49 l RAPS Noble Gas 9 el Activity Isotooe l31m Xe 1910
- 1.06 x 104 Xe 4.67 x 10 5 l35m Xe 1.92 gg l35 8.53 x 10 4 25 l38 Xe 2.33 Kr 00*
146 85m Kr 1960 85 Kr 707 Kr ol 170 00 Kr 1550 Ar 39+ 28.5 49 Ar41 ) 2.29 x 10 -4 23 Ne
-5 1.11 x 10 al 5.69 x 10 5
- Daughter isotopes of the rate gas activities should be in-cluded in shield calculations. Predominant daughter pro-ducts in Rb88 and Cs 38 which are present at the same s
activity levels as Kr88 and Xel38,
+for 30 years of reactor operation ,
"1 121 Amend. 52 12.1-48 Oct. 1979
TABLE 12.1-18 49 f TRITIUM REMOVAL UNIT RADI0 ISOTOPE CONCENTRATIONf Tritium Removal Unit Isotope (pCi/ scc)* gg l31m
O X 10' yg l33m 5.4 x 10-3 133 Xe .117 l35m Xe 1.8 x 10-135 Xe .32 Xe l38 2*2 X 10'4 g7 83m 45X 10' g7 85m 2.0 x 10 -2 85 Kr 2.1 x 10-3 87 Kr 7.8 x 10 -3 88 Kr 2.9 x 10 -2 Ar 39 2.4 x 10 -4 41 9.9 x 10 -5 23 Ne 3.0 x 10-8 3**
1.2 x 10 -4
- All inputs are for reactor operations with 1% failed fuel.3
**The H inventory is estimated as 1.0 Ci after one year of service.
~
*1") kL 12.1-49 Amend. 49 April 1979
DETECTOR ASSEMBLY R ATEMETER r , r , PRE-AMR POWER GAMMA 4 SUPPLY DETECTOR CHECK SOURCE SIGN AL CONDITIONING ACTUATOR
- PLANT DATA HANDLING AND < .
, SET DISPL AY SYSTEM POINT COMPARATOR DIS P L AY
- METER g
g c VISUAL ' m 9 ALARM DISPL AY METER U 2 AUDIBLE
+- VISUAL ALARM ALARM N
LOC kbLk MOUNTED PANEL MOUNTED IN CONTROL ROOM
$(
~ E.
d~. _ Figure 12.1-21. Functional Illock Diagram of an Area Radiation Monitor
PLANT DATA HANDLING Af;D DISPLAY SYSTEM C _ [pgj e .
-(CAIN ,
GAMMA tf sH -i[[I Y DETECTOR ~"h'r" ~ >- :/ [ SEI k VOtIAGE SiG ,~" , SIGNAL ( rnoron tlouat to 5 t0:40 1 - > cauun naon
;
Hn. >- vicNino pac,4.og
, ng.
yc t n e 7-] q s LOCAL PANEL l
!* ! toss tv-7-
, IP :- nAf *4 SIL w i : : hM-
~ > -
> J 4
n ;. . ~ < r unc t iota 4% 09 -<> b " '- FUfJCilON o OtECK o i ; " N e , f Hi-iH e SusTCH \ / 4 - n . - g, CONTROL ROOM PANEL
~
n --.- - - -gq; y q---
- 1
' LOSS -
l :- n er SIG' "/_ _a , s' g- aun CONTROL e }' atanu
/A-PANEL ANNUNCIATION s anos- o CAION l
{A re J FIGURE 12.1-22 TYPICAL SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM 0F AN AREA RADIATION MONITOR
$!G .~ -eM ,-95 O O G
(g) Determines trends in the exposure of station personnel in order to permit actions to be taken to correct adverse trends. Reports of the findings of the ALARA committee are promptly conveyed to top-level management staff along with appropriate recommen-dations for improvements in the design of new plants or corrections in operating plants. 12.3.2 Facilities and Equipment The health physics facilities necessary to monitor and control the routine radiological condition of the plant is shown on the Plant Service Building General Arrangement drawing in Section 1.2. The focal point of control is the assembly area. All personnel entering or leaving the controlled (restricted) area must pass through this area. All other 52 doors are for emergency use only. The general entry control requirements will be coordinated with industrial security. The control point is equipped with the following: a) A health physics work station for routine counting and assignment of required equipment to workers entering the restricted area. b) Mask-Protective clothes issue and storage area. c) Male / female lockers, toilet facilities shower station d) Mask cleaning station e) Combined laboratory f) Chemical storage room g) Counting room h) Hot instrument shop The main personnel monitoring station is at the Reactor Service Building entrance from the Plant Service Building. This entrance / exit door will be equipped with all necessary monitoring equipment. Contamination control, within the Plant Service Building control area, such as entering and exiting from counting room, hot instrument shop, mask cleaning area, laboratory area, radwaste area, will be accomplished by use of local survey equipment located at the accesses to these areas. Contaminated laundry will be bagged, surveyed, and shipped 49 off-site for laundering. Amend. 52 12.3-3 Oct. 1979
)) k BYE
For radiological purposes, all other areas, i.e., outside the RCB, RSB, Intermediate Bay and the cells in the PSB are uncontrolled (unres t -i c ted ) . Portable and laboratory equipment located in the health physics work station will allow the health physics personnel to measure dose rates and contamination levels throughout the plant in all routine and emergency situations. The portable health physics survey instrumen-tation is listed in Table 12.3-1 with the operational characteristics for each instrument. The fixed health physics laboratory counting sys-tems are described in Table 12.3-2. All potentially contaminated liquid drains in this area will be routed to the radwaste system and all potentially contaminated gaseous exhausts will be HEPA filtered. Portable survey instrumentation will be checked and calibrated routinely with standard radioactive sources at the TVA central laboratory in Muscle Shoals, Alabama. Accurate records on the performance of each instrument during each calibration will be maintained at this laboratory. Calibration and maintenance procedures specific for each instrument are written and routinely used. Each laboratory counting system is checked at regular intervals with standard radioactive sources for proper counting efficiencies, background count rates, and high voltage settings by health physics personnel at the plant. TVA will provide protective clothing for use in radiation areas. Clothing required for a particular instance shall be prescribed by the Health Physics Staff based upon the actual cr potential radio-logical conditions. Protective clothing available for use are:
- a. Coveralls
- b. Lab coats
- c. Gloves - plastic and/or latex in light and heavy weights
- d. Gloves - cotton in heavy weights and light weights
- e. Head covers - skull caps and hoods
- f. Foot covers - shoe rubbers and plastic booties
- g. Plastic suits Tape will be provided so that openings in clothing and between 49 pieces can be sealed.
12.3-4 y )}6 Amend. 29 Apr. 1: 9
12A 3.1.4 Health Physicists ALARA Reviews The other level of review is performed by health physicists from TVA and Commonwealth Edison. There are three health physicists involved in these reviews, cwo from the TVA ALARA committee and one from Commonwealth Edison. The two TVA health physicists on the CRBRP ALARA committee satisfy the TVA commitments in P3AR Section 12A.3.2. The health physicist's ALARA review meetings are conducted twice a year. The health physicists review system / component design, maintenance procedures, and the radiation exposure data and provide recommendations to further reduce radiation exposure based on their ALARA experience at operating nuclear power plants. The specific personnel involved in these reviews by position title, including their health physics training and experience, are listed below: Ti tle Training / Experience Staff Environmental Engineer (a) Certified Health Physicist Plant Engineering Branch (b) 20 years of technical and Division of Power Production management experience in Tennessee Valley Authority health physics. Health Physicist 20 years of experience in applied Radiological Hygiene Branch and technical aspects of health Tennessee Valley Authority physics. Equipment Specialist 15 years experience in health for Demineralizers, physics Radiation Monitors and ALARA Commonwealth Edison 12A.3.2 CRBRP Operations Stage ALARA Program The purpose of TVA policies and procedures is to guide the official actions expected of TVA employees. A policy or a required procedure will not serve that purpose unless it is known to all those it affects and is understood, interpreted, and applied consistently. Continuing guides of this nature in TVA are published and distributed in such a way as to be available to all employees concerned. They are known as " administrative releases". The TVA Administrative Release System is composed of Orga-nization Bulletins, TVA Codes, TVA Instructions, and TVA Announcements. With regard to information that occupational radiation 49 exp sures are low as is reasonably achievable, the following quotation is excerpted from TVA's Administrative Release Manual: 12A-5 ,, 7 Amend. 49 Apr.1979
O This instruction supplements tha TVA Codes under VIII HAZARD CONTROL and VIII lEALTH SERVICES. It describes general respon-sibilities and administrative arrangements of ionizing radiation arising in connection with TVA's work. The detailed administra-tive arrangements ir, the instruction apply to all activities involving ionizing radiation. TVA management is committed to maintaining radiation exposures to its employees and the general public, and tha release of radioactive matarials to unrestricted areas a3 low as is rea-sonably act ievable (ALARA), as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. For the protection of its employees, TVA also subscribes to the ALARA philosophy set forth in the Nuclear Regulai.ary Commission Regulatory Guides 8.8 and 8.10 in the design and operation or' all facilities utilizing radioactive materials or radiation sources. ALARA Program - In view of the commitment in the TVA Admini-strative Release Manual, TVA has established a formal program to ensure that occupational radiation exposures to employees are kept as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) and will apply this program to the CRBRP. The program consists of. (1) full management conmitment to the overall objectives of ALARA; (2) issuance of specific administra-tive documents and procedures to the TVA design and operating groups that emphasize the importance of ALARA throughout the design, testing, startup, operation, and maintenance phases of TVA nuclear plants; (3) continued appraisal of inplant radiation and contamination condi-tions by the onsite radiation protection staff; and (4) " 4-member cor-porate ALARA committee consisting of management representatives from the TVA design, operations and radiation protection groups, whose purpose is to review and appraise the effectiveness of the ALARA program on a plant-by-plant basis, including the CRBRP. In developing its ALARA program, TVA has closely followed the recommendations of NRC Regulatory Guides 8.8 and 8.10. The respcasibility for implementing the ALARA philosnphy in the operation of TVA nuclear power plants is assigned to two divisions. The Division of Power Production has the responsibil;ty of implementing the operational procedures tescribed in Section C.4 of Regulatory Guide 8.8. Further in the implementation of Section C.4, the Division of Environmental Planning provides the radiation protection staff for TVA nuclear facilitier and has the ultimate responsibility for determining that TVA maintains radiation exposures as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) as 52] defined in 10CFR Part 20. The radiation protection program management and staff in the Division of Environmental Planning will, as a minimum, meet the qualification and training guidelines set forth in Regulatory 49 Guides 8.8 and 8.10. 12A-6 Amend. 52 O bct. 1979
}} } l20
15.2 REACTIVITY INSERTION DESIGN EVENTS - INTRODUCTION In the design approach to safety discussed in Section 15.1.1 it was stated that the design in the second level empasizes the need to insure and confirm the high reliability of the protection systems and of any component or system whose failure could lead to severe core damage. In keeping with this philosophy this section of the PSAR will examine the response charac-teristics of the reactor to a series of postulated reactivity insertion events. The reactor response to these events is identified through the resultant hot spot fuel pin cladding temperature. For these accident events either; 1) the resultant cladding temperature will be presented, or 2) it will be shown that the Plant Protection System will limit the reactivity insertion to a value less than a specified enveloping insertion. 51l Based on the discussion presented in Section 15.1.2, the severity of these events can only in-part be discerned by examining the resultant hot spot cladding temperatures. The overall severity of the event, as it effects the cladding integrity, is a function of the sum total of all the accumulated strains imposed on the cladding during its lifetime. There-fore, the severity of any event should be evaluated on a case by case basis using the cumulative damage function. In order to minimize the evaluation process and provide a ready determination of the relative severity of the event, the transients generated in this section can first be compared to the umbrella transient described in Sections 4.2.1.3.1 52 51 l and 15.1.2.4. If the accident transient falls within the time and temperature confines of the umbrella evcnt, the conclusion can be drawn that the design life and safety objectives of the fuel assemblies have been attained. If, however, the resultant clad temperature are beyond the time-temperature confines of the umbrella, then supplementary analysis is required to determine the severity of the event. The following conservative assumptions and conditions were used for the specific purpose of generating the worst case reactivity insertion tran-sients for this section.
- 1. All full power cases are for the reactor operating at thermal hydraulic design conditions with a power generation of 975 MWT at 3 loop operation. (Power uncertainties are discussed in Section 4.4.3.2).
- 2. Since the highest power fuel assembly and smallest Doppler coefficient occur at the beginning-of-equilibriun, cycle (B0EC) the transients are analyzed for this particular worst period in core life.
- 3. With burnup, the power generation and steady state temperature decrease (flows are constant) in the fuel assemblies and conse-quently, the temperatures due to the transients would decrease.
] 1 } }[ Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 15.2-1
- 4. The nominal Doppler coefficient for B0EC is - 0.0062 (see Sec-tion 4.3.2.3) however, for overpower transients it is more con-servative to take the lower bound value cf the 20% uncertainty on this value. For studies in this section, -0.005 was used for the Doppler coefficient except where noted. (The exceptions being those cases where a larger Doppler yields more conservative results.)
- 5. Figure 4.2-93 of Section 4.2.3.1.3 of the PSAR includes 0.1 second unlatch time delay between start of CRDM stator current decay and start of the primary control rod motion. For preliminary Plant Protection System transient evaluation, a 0.2 second overall scram delay (see Section 15.2 and 7.2.1.2.3) has been assumed. This scram delay includes PPS logic, scram breaker and the unlatch time delay, leaving sufficient margin on overall PPS response time to assure conservative analysis.
6. The rod worths used to predict oost trip negative reactivity insertions are the design expected values for the primary control rods and the minimum expected values for the secondary control rods. (See Section 15.1.2 for further details. ) For both sets of control rods the single most reactive control rod is assumed to be stuck in the withdrawn position. At 80EC the primary con-trol rods negative reacti'. ity insertion capability is less than any later time in the cycle. The purpose of these assumptions is tc provide a realistic minimum prediction of shutdown reactivity and hence the slowest rate of power decrease. This provides a conservatively high prediction of reactor temperatures after shutdown. 51l 7. Three sigma (3o) hot channel factors were used for all the analyses and the temperatures shown are the inner surface of the hot pin cladding at the highest temperature position, both axially and circumferentially on the fuel rods. (Position is under the wire wrap). The possibility of additional fuel-cladding mechanical interaction > during rapid reactivity insertion events is acknowledged as indicated in Figure 4.2-22, subsection 4.2.1.3.1.1, subsection 15.1.2.1, and subsection 15.1.2.4. However, present models for transient fuel cladding mechanical interaction are admittedly lacking phenomenologically at prototypic CRBRP design conditions, and therefore, are not used for PSAR analyses. The fuel models in codes used to calculate the effects of core disruptive accidents (e.g. SAS3A), are designed to give initial conditions for cal-culations of fuel motion from a ruptured rod, rather than to calculate detailed cladding responses to a terminated transient. These codes assume during thethat cladding loads are simple functions of fuel properties transient. Such assumptions are acceptable for determining gross fuel rod behavior during a severe transient (e.g., fail-no-fail), but are insufficient for calculating time varying cladding strain on cummula'tive damage function during a typical upset event. 25 O Amend. 51 15.2-2 Sept. 1979 n
}g
15.2.3.2 Gas Bubble Passage Through Fuel, Radial Blanket and Control Assemblies 15.2.3.2.1 Identification of Causes and Accident Description The neutronic characteristics of the CRBRP core are such that voiding of the coolant in the central core region creates a positive reactivity effect, whereas voiding at the core periphery creates a negative reactivity effect. The reactivity worth of the central, positive worth region is greatest at the end of the equilibrium cycle. Table 15.2.3.2-1 shows the worth of various rows of the core as a function of axial position for tnis time in core life. The void worths shown in this table and the uncertainties in these values are dis-cussed in Section 4.3.2.3.2. As can be seen, the last row of fuel assemblies (Row 9) and all the radial blanket rows have a negative void worth for all positions. Voids in portions of the core may be postulated to arise from sudden large ruptures of fuel pins releasing fission product gases, or from bubbles which originate in the heat transport system (e.g., argon cover gas) and enter the reactor. Voids from each of these sources are either extremely unlikely or inconsequential or both. As will be discussed in detail in Section 15.4, Local Failure Events, the failure of a pin releasing a large burst of gas is unl i kely. Bubbles of any significant size cannot be formed in the heat trans - port system since entrainment and hold-up of gas in the primary system is inhibited by the design. The heat transport system incorporates design features to preclude gas bubbles from entering the core. These include:
- a. Vents provided to eliminate possible gas pockets that may form during sodium fill,
- b. A low cover gas pressure which reduces gas entrainment.
- c. A continuous bleed from the top of the IHX to prevent accumulation of gas during operation is provided.
- d. The Primary Pump is designed to eliminate vortexirg and gas entrainment.
- e. A high fluid velocity in the piping between the pump discharge and the vessel inlet minimizes the possibility of gas entrainment.
- f. A vortex suppressor at the optimum depth to prevent gas entrain-ment is located in the outlet plenum.
- g. One or more holes with special pressure reducers will be pro-vided in the core support cone to vent gas from underneath the cone.
15.2-59
}i"} }3}
Experiments have shown (Ref.1) that in the FFTF, if a significant size bubble were to reach the reactor inlet plenum, turbulence would result in dispersion of the bubble into small bubbles before entry into the core and that large coherent bubbles entering the core are impossible. These small bubbles could only slightly reduce the coolant density with very little effect on reactivity. Due to the similarity in the inlet plenum design it is expected that similar results would be obtained for CRBRP; however, tests as described in Sec-tion 1.5 will be made for the CRBRP design. 9 Despite the demonstration of bubble breakup, and the design features outlined, which results in extremely low probability of a void of significant size occurring in the core, an analysis of bubble effect has been performed, covering a range of bubble sizes which are well in excess of any credible bubble size. 15.2.3.2.2 Analysis of Effects and Consequences An analysis was performed to determine the effects of postulated coherent bubbles of given initial height (treated as a parameter) which occupied all of the fuel assemblies in Rows 1 to 4 or Rows 1 to 8 (also treated as a parameter). Radial sizes were conservatively assumed not to extend beyond Row 8 since this is the last row of positive void worth. The gas slug was assumed to form at the bottom of the lower axial blanket and move uni-formly through the core with a speed equal to the average flow velocity. It first passes through the negative void region, then into the positive region and finally into the top negative region (see Table 15.2.3.2-1). Since the highest power fuel assembly occurs at the beginning-of-equilibrium cycle (B0EC), the transient was analyzed for this particular worst period in core life. Justification for the use of this " worst" sit-uation is found in 15.2.1.4.2. A minimum value Doppler coefficient of 25
-0.005 was used for this core condition. As indicated earlier, the worst case void worths are for the end of equilibrium cycle; thus, these conserva-tively used for the study. Analyses were performed for both primary and secor.dary control rod shutdown. Scram with the primary control rods was taken at 15% overpower and at a power-to flow ratio of 1.30 for the sec-ondary control rods. For both systems, 2e maximum worth control assembly was assumed to be stuck and the shutdown worth was decreased by the appro-priate amount. Figure 15.2.3.2-1 shows .he transient void reactivity that would be 52 l experienced by the core for various size bubbles. Figures 15.2.3.2-2 and 15.2.3.2-6 show the variation in reactor power for primary scram and second-ary scram, respectively. Figures 15.2.3.2-3, -4, -5, -7, -8 and -9 show the maximum fuel, cladding and coolant temperatures for the fuel assemblies with the respective scrams. These maximum temperatures occur at the center of active mre for the fuel, at the top of active core for the cladding and at the exit from the upper axial blanket for the coolant temperature. These temperatures occur due to the effect of the reactivity insertion of the bubble Amend. 52 15.2-60 Oct. 1979 g 02
15.3 UNDERC00 LING DESIGN EVENTS - INTRODUCTION Of particular importance to the safe operation of the CRBRP is the determination of the response characteristics of the reactor to a group of postulated undercooling events. The reactor response to these undercooling events is characterized, in this section of the PSAR, by the resulting fuel rod hot spot cladding temperature. For these accident events either,
- 1) the re.sultant fuel rod cladding temperature will be presented, or 2) it will be shown that the primary or secondary Plant Protection System trip will shut down the reactor before resulting plant temperature changes can be transported to the core. The impact of these Accident Events on Plant Systems and components is less severe than the events presented in the Plant Duty Cycle List. Plant components have been designea to provide 30 year life for the Plant Duty Cycles.
51l Based on the discuss on presented in Section 15.1.2.4, a measure of the severity of these events can only in-part be ascertained by the resultant cladding temperatures of any one event. The true severity of the event on the cladding integrity is a function of the sum total of all the accumulated strains imposed on the cladding during its lifetime. Therefore, the severity of any event should be evaluated on a case by case basis using the cumulative damage function. In order to perform the evaluation process, the transients generated in this section are first compared to the guidelines 52151 l described in Section 4.2. established in Section 15.1.2.4 and when necessary to the If the accident transient falls within the time and temperature confines of the umbrella event, the conclusion can be made that the design life and safety objectives of the fuel assemblies has been conserved. If however, the resultant cladding temperatures exceed the 5261 I guidelines limits of Section 15.1.2.4, then supplementary analysis is required to determine the severity of the event. The following is a list of the Thermal-Hydraulic initial conditions used for the accident events presented in this section; Thermal Hydraulic Conditions Thennal Power (MWT) 975** Primary Flow (LB/Sec/ Loop) 3842 Primary Hot Leg Temperature ( F) 1015* Primary Cold Leg Temperature ( F) 750* Intermediate Flow (LB/Sec/ Loop) 3555 Intermediate Hot Leg Temperature ( F) 956* Intermediate Cold Leg Temperature ( F) 671* Hot Spot Clad Midwall Temperdture ( F) 1365
*These values inclJde an additional 20 F over their nonnal value to allow for instrument error and control dead band allowance.
** Power uncertainties are discussed in Section 4.4 for 3 loop operation.
Amend. 52 15.3-1 Oct. 1979
}i"} }3)
Supplementing the above parametces, the following additional conservative assumptions and conditions were used for the analysis;
- 1. Maximum Decay Heat - The decay heat for the end-of-cycle condition corresponding to long term power operating history at full power was used. This included an added 25% conservative 2a bias to cover uncertainties. The purpose was to provide maximum post-trip heat input to provide a conservatively high prediction of core maximum temperature and a conservative evaluation of heat input to the decay heat removal system.
- 2. Most rapid flow coastdown - The minimum vendor specified sodium coolant pump inertia and maximum system pressure drop are combined to generate a conservatively fast rate of flow reduction following a coolant pump trip. The purpose of this assumption is to provide a minimum prediction of net reactor coolant flow during the period from pump trip to the time of reaching pony motor flowrate. This results in minimum heat removal from the reactor during this period and hence a conservative maximum prediction of core temperature.
- 3. Full power thermal hydraulic design condition operating points - The full power thermal-hydraulic rated condition is at 975 MW reactor power. The thermal-hydraulic design operating temperatures have been conservatively increased by 20 F to allow for instrument error and the control dead band.
The purpose of this assumption is to assure the most conserva-tive prediction of severity for the events analyzed. The additio,al temperature bias for instrument error increases the conservatism of predicted reactor temperatures.
- 4. Shutdown Rod Worths with Maximum Worth Single Stuck Rod - The rod worth used to predict post trip negative reactivity insertions are the design expected values for the primary shutdown system control rods and the minimum expected values for the secondary shutdown system control rods (see Section 15.1.2 for further details). For both sets of control rods, the single most reactive control rod is assumed to be stuck in the withdrawn position. The purpose of this assumption is to provide a realistic minimum prediction of shutdown ~ reactivity and hence the slowest rate of power decrease. This provides a conservatively high prediction of reactor temperatures after shutdown.
- 5. A conservative 200 millisecond delay between the trip signal and the control rod insertion was used for these analyses.
In Section 4.2.3 of the PSAR the requirement for the scram speed is that this delay be less than 100 milliseconds. The additional 100 plus millisecond delay over the required value results in higher clad temperatures and thus a worse condition. 15.3-2 n a a4
- 6. Since the highest power fuel assembly and smallest Doppler coefficient occur at the beginning-of-equilibrium cycle (B0EC) the transients are analyzed for this particular worst period in core life. With burnup, the power generation and steady state temperature decrease (flows are constant) in the fuel assemblies and consequently, the temperatures due to the transients would decrease.
- 7. Three sigma (3a) hot channel factors were used for all the analyses. The temperatures shown are at the midwall of the hot rod cladding at the highest temperature position both axially and circumferentially on the fuel rori (position is under wi re-wrap ) .
In addition to the above conservative initial conditions assumed for the undercooling event analysis, additional conservatisms have been applied and are described under the specific cases presented. Also noted are those special cases for which the conservative assumptions stated above are not applicable. The following is a Sunmary Table of the events considered in this section. Table 15.3-1 identifies; 1) the event, 2) the maximum midwall clad temperature resulting from a primary or secondary scram, and 3) comment on the severity of the event. 52 1, 1 1t j7C JJ Amend. 52 Oct.1979 15.3-3
15.3.1 Anticipated Events 15.3.1.i Loss of Off-Site Electrical Power 15.3.1.1.1 Identification of Causes and Accident Description The off-site power supply to the 13.8 KV buses is available from the generating switchyards and the reserve switchyard both of which are powered by outside sources as described in Chapter 8.0. Hence, the postulated loss of power would result only from simultaneous, multiple failures. The loss of all off-site power trips all primary and intennediate sodium pumps, commencing a flow coastdown. It also initiates starting of the emergency diesel generators. Action of the Plant Protection System (PPS) trips the control rods thus limiting core over temperatures from reduced flow. 44 l Either emergency diesel provides power to t'le primary and intermediate sodium pump pony motors and SGAHRS Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps for decay heat removal . Additionally, a third power supply (250 VDC Diverse Battery and Inverter) 44 provides power to the third loop pony motors. io provide conservatism in the analysis, the most rapid core flow coastdown was assured by using the minimum pump rotating kinetic energy and the maximum core flow resistance specified ir, the design. The action of the Primary and Secondary Shutdown Systems (SDS) are as follows:
- a. Primary trip - Loss of electrical power trip occurrinn in 0.5 seconds. The 0.5 se~cond delay includes mea'surement and trip function lags.
- b. Secondary trip Plux-Total Flow trip occurring 2 seconds after loss of electrical pumping power. This lag includes time for the flow to coastdown as well as the measurement lags.
15.3.1.1.2 Analysis of Effects and Consaquences The loss of off-site electrical power event was analyzed with the DEMO computer code. The overall results of the analysis are summarized in Figures 15.3.1.1 -1 and 15.3.1.1-2. As shown, the Primary PPS loss of electrical porar trip limits the maximum core hot spot temperature to 1410 F. 51l 52 In the event the primary shutdown system does not operate, Figure 15.3.1.1-1 shows that the secondary shutdown system limits the worst case clad hot spot temperature to 1630 F. While the transient temperature exgeeds the design basis emergency transiet envelope temperature by 31 l 30 F, the time above the normal operating temperature is only 6 second as 52 1 i
' ljb 15.3-6 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 -
compared to 150 seconds for the design basio transient (see Figure 15. 3.1.1 -3) . Consequently, the cladding damage due to the transient is less than that due to the design basis transient for which, as shown in Section 4.2, cladding integrity limits are satisfied. The capability of ohe CDF procedure to conservatively predict the results of Fuel Clad Transient Test (FCTT) is demonstrated below. The range of the FCTT temperatures and fluences considered exceeded the data base of tt FURFAN CDF computer code. Despite this, the CDF analyses conservatively predicted the test results with peak cladding temperatures in gxcess gf 19000F, and cladding fluence exposures in excess of 3 x 10c2 n/cm . The quantitative criteria in terms of Temperature versus Time for transient events which do not affect cladding integrity is shown in Figure 4.2-31. The shape of the emergency transient considered in this plot envelopes the loss of off-site electrical power with scram by the secondary PPS event. The minimum cladding lifetime is determined by the intersection of the peak transient cladding temperature versus time curve and the transient limit curve with maximum design temperatures and maximum uncertainty in 3roperties. Note that the maximum peak cladding temperature occurs at beginning-of-life, and the cladding temperature increment due to the transient is assumed constant throughout life. Thus, for an emergency transient with a maximum peak cladding temperature of ' 16300F, the peak clad temperature versus time curve would lie parallel to and 30 F above the peak clad temperature versus, time curve shown in Figure 15.3.1.1-4. The intersection of this curve with the minimum transient limit curve gives a cladding lifetime of $450 days or m35 days less than the 16000F peak cladding temperature transient. In all calculations involved in generating Figure 15.3.1.1-4, cumulative cladding damage is continuously accounted for in the cladding property considerations. It should be noted that the anticipated time temperature curve for the loss of off-site electrical power is conside" ably less than the time envelope used to develope the transient limit curves Therefore, the above loss of
$35 days due to the additional 300 F is believed to be on over estimate of the transients actual effect. This not withstanding, the design lifetime based on the above analyeis for the loss of offsite power is still in excess of the 411 day goal lifetime. 25 K _-
As discussed earlier, the most realistically severe combination of possibilities allowed in the design specifications were selected to analyze this event. Figure 15.3.1.1-2 shows the effects of a possible longer flow coastdown, enhanced secondary control rod dynamics, and using " minimum required" instead of " expected" primary control rod shutdown rates. Lower possible core flow resistances and higher pump rotating kinetic energies, decrease the core hot spot temperature 10 F for a primary PPS trip and 15 F for the secondary shutdown system trip. Additionally, increasing the initial secondary control rod insertion rate to match the primary rates decreases the clad temperature 35 F for the secondary trip. 3j j jj/ Amend. 25 15.3-7 Aug. 1976
The effect of using " minimum required" primary control rod shutdown rate values instead of the " expected" values (both having the highest worth rod assumed to be stuck), is also shown in Figure 15.3.1.1-2. As indicated in Section 15.1.2, the core temperatures described in this chapter for the primary system have been based on the expected rates of shutdown worth which give the more realistic evaluation of the transient. The secondary rod insertion rates used are the minimum rates. Figure 15.3.1.1-2 shows the hot spot cladding temperatures for the two cases. As can be seen, there would be about a 10 F increase from using the minimum rates. Thus, using minimum instead of expected primary rod insertion rates does not significantly change the nature of or effects of the transient. 15.3.1.1.3 Conclusions The loss of off-site electrical power results in a simultaneous loss of sodium pump power and the consequent reduction in core flow. The primgry shutdown system limits the clad midwall hotspot temperature to 1410 F. In the unlikely event that the primary shutdown system does not operate- the secondgry shutdown system limits the hot spot midwall clad 52 temperature to 1630 F. This is an acceptable result because analysis of the transient has shown that the cladding damage (cumulative damage function) 51l does not exceed the limit for an emergency event. 1 1 } }30 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 15.3-7a
CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT CHAPTER 17 - QUALITY ASSURANCE CONTENTS PAGE NO.
17.0 INTRODUCTION
17.0-1 17.0.1 Scope 17.0-1 17.0.2 Quality Philosophy 17.0-1 17.0.3 Participants 17.0-2 17.0.4 Project Phase Approach 17.0-3 17.0.5 Applicabili ty 17.0-3 17.1 QUALITY ASSURANCE DURING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 17.1-1 17.1.1 Organization 17.1-1 17.1.1.1 Organization of Participants 17.1-1 17.1.1.2 Responsibility and Authority 17.1-1 17.1.1.3 Communications 17.1-2 17.1.1.4 Interface Control 17.1-2 17.1.2 Quality Assurance Progran. 17.1-2 17.1.2.1 Program Requirements 17.1-2 17.1.2.2 Transfer of Requirements to Lower Tier Participants 17.1-3 17.1.2.3 Overall Quality Assurance Program Concept 17.1-3 17.1.2.4 Organization of Quality Assurance Program Participants 17.1-3 17.1.2.5 Organization of Quality Assurance Program Elements 17.1-4 44 17.1.2.6 Scope of Quality Assurance Program Application 17.1-5 17.1.2.7 Status of Project Work and Program Application 17.1-5 Amend. 44 17.0-1. April 1978
)l } lJI
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) PAGE N0. 17.1.3 References Referred to in the Text 17.1-6 Acronyms used in Chapter 17 Text and Appendices 17.1-6a 17l 17.1.4 FIGURES 17.f-l CRBRP Overall Quality Assurance Program Elements 17.1-7 17.1-2 Organization of the CRBRP Overall Quality Assurance Program 17.1-8 17.1-3 Correlation Matrix of 10 CFR 50, App. B, Requirements 52 l Versus RDT Standard F 2-2, 1973 Requirements 17.1-9 17.1-4 CRBRP Quality Assurance Program functional Organi-zation of Program Responsibility 17.1-12 10 17.1-5 Major Elements of the Owner Program 17.1-13 10 Major Elements of the Fuel Supplier Program 17.1-14 4J52 l17.1-6 17.1-7 Major Elements of the B0P Supply Program 17.1-15 17.1-8 Major Elements of the LRM/RM Programs 17.1-16 17.1-9 Major Elements of the AE Program 17.1-17 17.1-10 Major Elements of the Constructor Program 17.1-18 , Appendix A A Description of the Owner Quality Assurance 10 Program 10 27 l Appendix B A Description of the Fuel Supplier 34 Quality Assurance Program g Appendix C A Description of the Balance of Plant Supply Quality Assurance Program Appendix D A Description of the ARD Lead Reactor Manufacturer Quality Assurance Program 52 Appendix E A Description of the Architect Engineer Quality Assurance Program Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 17.0-11
,; 3, - 1, 1t0 4
Appendix F A Description of the Constructor Quality Assurance Program Appendix G RDT Standard F 2-2, 1973, Quality Assurance Program Requirements Appendix It A Description of the ARD Reactor Manufacturer Quality Assurance Program Appendix 1 A Description of the GE-ARSD-RM Quality Assurance Program l10 52 Appendix J A Description of the ESG-RM Quality Assurance Program l l l '$ l Amend. 52 17.0-iii s
27
> P003 018K .
Westinghouse Electric Corporation Advanced Reactors Division (ARD) - is the Lead Reactor Manufacturer (LRM) and is responsible for the overall design and manufacture of the Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS). ARD also participates as one of the three Reactor Manufacturers 40 l (RM) and is responsible for the design and manufacture of reactor and reactor enclosure systems, primary sodium heat transport system, and related components and controls. 5d General Electric Corporation Advanced Reactor Systems Department (GE-ARSD) is a Reactor Manufacturer (RM) and is responsible for the design and 40 I manufacture of the intennediate heat transport system, steam generator system and related systems and controls. Rockwell International Energy Systems Group (ESG) - 52l is a Reactor Manufacturer (RM) and is responsible for the design and 40l manufacture of fuel handling systems, auxiliary sodium systems, reactor plant maintenance, and related systems and controls. Burns and Roe Corporation (B&R) - is the Architect-Engineer (AE) 10 for the overall plant including B0P and portions of the NSSS. Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation (S&W) - is the Plant Constructor and will function as both a construction manager and a construction contractor including Procurement of Construction 27 materials and services. 17.0.4 Project Phase Approach The Project Quality Assurance Program is planned and executed to match the phases through which project work activities will progress. These are design, procurement, manufacturing, construction and operation. parts. The first part includes +50se program practices that will be executed during design and construction where construction includes procurement, manufac-turing and installation. This part is described in this PSAR. The second part 27 will cover plant operation including preoperational testing, start-up and normal operations which will not be described until submittal of the FSAR, however, this part will be executed under a Quality Assurance Program which complies with Appendix B of 10 CFR Part 50. 34 The Owner program has been described to cover all Project phases and therefore includes practices applicable to design, construction, testing and operation. 17.0.5 Applicability THe described Quality Assurance Program contained in this chapter, including its Appendices, is intended for application to those safety-related structures, systems and components described in Sections 3.2 and 7.1 and also to the reactor core and reactor vessel internals. The wording of the descrip- 34 tions of the major participant programs in the Appendices to this chapter have not been restricted to this application alone. Thus, the practices described may be broader in scope and may be aoolied to areas or the plant other t'un Amend. 52 17.0-3 I 'l knd Oct. 1979
O those identified in Sections 3.2 and 7.1 or to the reactor core and the reactor internals. 10 l34 40 The Quality Assurance Program description contained in this chapter including its Appendices will as a minimum be reviewed and updated annually as appropriate and resulting modifications and updates will be reported to 31 NRC. 28 1 1 ~1 143 g Amend. 40 July 1977 17.0-4
P001 E L AE Program - Major clements of the AE Quality Asscrance Program are shown in Figure 17.1-9. These include the manage ent practice complemented by those practices applicable to design procurement 45 and manufacturing. This program is descri$ed in Appendix E to this chapter. CONSTRUCTOR Program - Major elements of the constructor Quality Assurance Program are shown in Figure 17.1-10. These include managtment practices complemented by those practices unique to construction. This program is described in Appendi; F to this chap ter. , 10 17.1.2.6 Scope of Qualitv Assurance Program Application The overall Quality Assurance Program described in this section is, or will be applied to the planning, design, procurement, manufacturing and 45l 3.2 construction and 7.1 and ofalso the to safety-related partsand the Reactor Core of the plant identified the Reactor in Section Vessel Internals. The elenents applied and the extent to which they apply will vary but all (10 safety-related structures, systems and components listed will be covered. 17.1.2.7 Status of Project Work and Program Acplication On July 25, 1973, agreements were signed by the principals in the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant (CRCRP) Project, the U. S. Atenic Energy Commission, Commonwealth Edison Company of Chicago, and the Tennessee Valley Authority officially forming the two, non-profit organizations created in 1972 to carry out the project: The Breeder Reactor Corporation, representing the sponsoring utilities; and the Project Manayment Corporation, representing the principal electric industry and government cgency partners. On November 14, 1973, Project Management Corporation entered into the first of two prime contracts for demonstration plant design services with Westinghouse Electric Corporation which covers the design, ranufacture, furnishing, and testing of the Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS) for the 350 to 400 megawa tt breeder demonstration plant. Under the provisions of the contract, Westinghouse and its Advanced Reactors Divi . ion are being assisted by the General Electric Company and the Atomics International Division of Rockwell International as subcontractors who are presently under letter contract only. The second prime contract for demonstration plant design services, with burns and Roe. Inc. as architect-engineer was signed January 25, 1974. This contract covers management, engineering, design and drar ting services for the overall plant and site layout, nuclear-island building arrangements and general plant systems and structures. Actual project work was started by Westinghouse and Burns and Roe in February 1973 under interim arrangements. In March 1973, Westinghouse Environmental Systems Department was assigned responsibility (with input from Project participants) for preparation of the CRBRP Environmental Report. In early 1973, site investigation activities commenced in order to gather data for the PSAR. In January, 1974, study contracts were initiated with Combustion Engineering and Fnster Wheeler Corporation for major plant components. This same month, specifications were prepared for the turbine-generator and requests for proposals were sent to manufacturers. In March 1974, evaluations of the submitted turbine generator proposals were begun. Since the. , a letter of intent has been signed with General Electric Company for this procuro.ient. In Amend. 45 17.1-5 July 1978 1,1"} }kk
June 1974, Westinghouse issued a report on the reference design for the plant. Preliminary site investigations were also completed during this month. Commencing in October 1974, purchase orders for long lead materials were issued for reactor vessel shell plate material, IHX tube sheet forgings and stainless steel plate material, stainless steel forging for the core support structure, a forged f!ange and bar forgings for the IHX and stainless steci piping for the core support structure. RFP's for the steam generator plant units were issued and proposals have been received from Atomics International and Foster Wheeler Corporation, which are being evaluated at this time. Also, on October 15, 1974, the CRBRP Construction Permit and Operating Licensing Application, supported by the Environmental Report, Chapter 2 of the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report, Statement of General Information and Description of Site Preparation Activities, was tendered with AEC Regulatory. For quality assurance in particular, contract AT(49-18)-12 established the requirements for the quality assurance program as RDT Standard F 2-2, quality assurance program requirements. The program was established in 1973 with participation organized into a three level structure as shown in Figure 17.1-4. In early 1974, the elements of the overall program that should be in place to cover early project design and procurement activities were identified. Major participants were required to have these practices in place by mid-May to cover the design and early procurement activities. Audits commenced in July and August to determine if the requisite quality assurance program has been implemented, and to insure the requirements of RDT F 2-2 are being met with respect to design control. Audit efforts will be on a continuing basis in accordance with specific quality assurance plans and where a need may be determined by PMC and/or the NSSS-LRP. 17.1.3 References Referred to in the Text e RDT Standard F 2-2, " Quality Assurance Proaram Reauirements", with 27 Amendments), December 1973, 2, March 1974 and 3, July 1975. e 1C CFR 50, Appendix B, " Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants." e Green Book, " Guidance on Quality Assurance Requirements During the Construction Phase of Nuclear Power Plants." WASH 1309, Rev. O. e Gray Book, " Guidance on Quality Assurance Requirements During Design and Procurement Phase of Nuclear Power Plants." WASH 1283, Rev. 1. e ASME Code, "ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code," Section III, Nuclear Power Plant Components,1974. e ANSI N45.2 - 1971, "American National Standard, Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Power Plants." Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 17.1-6
}I' l lkb
e RDT Standard F 1-2T, " Preparation of System Design Descriptions," March 1972, with Amendment 1 (F 1-2T). o RDT Standard F 1-3T, " Preparation of Unusual Occurrence Reports," February 1974 with Amendment I and 2 (F 1-3T). e RDT Standard F 3-2T, " Calibration Program Requirements," February 1973 (F 3-2T). 17.1.4 Acronyms used in Chapter 17 Text and Appendices ADM - Administrative Procedures (WARD) AD/PR - Assistant Director for Procurement l34 AE A/E - Architect Engineer AEC - Atomic Energy Commission 52l AMEND - Amendment ANSI - American National Standards Institute ANS - American Nuclear Society APP - Appendix ARD - Westinghouse Advanced Reactors Division ARSD - Advanced Reactor Systems Department (GE) 52l ASME - American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM - American Society for Testing Materials BOP - Balance '4 Plant B&R - Burns and Roe, Inc. BRC - Breeder Reactor Corporation BRD - Breeder Reactor Division CAR - Corrective Action Request CEC 0 - Commonwealth Edison Company 17 Amend. 52 17.1-6a Oct. 1979 I, I l llb t
I CFR - Code of Federal Regc!ations CINDT - Controlled Information Data Transmittals CRBRF Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant 0 - Design & Draf ting Procedures (B&R) DCC - Document Control Center (GE) DEC - December 17 DOC - Document 45 l DOE - United States Department of Energy E - Engineering "E" - Equipment ECN - Engineering Change Notice ECP - Engineering Change Proposal EDL - Engineering Drawing List e.g. - For Example (exempli gratia) EM - Environmental Monitor O EMP - Engineering Management Procedures (ESG) 52 l ENG's - Engineering Procedures (GE) ERM - Engineering Review Memorandum (GE) 52l ESG - Energy Systems Group (Rcckwell International) E-Specs- Equipment Specifications etc - and so forth (et cetera) FFTF - Fast Flux Test Facility FS - Fuel Supplier (FFTF Project Office of DOE) 40 FSAR - Fir.a1 Safety Analysis Report F8TP's - Fabrication and Test Procedures (GE) GE - General Electric 52 GE-ARSD- General Electric (Advanced Reactor Systems Department) 37 17.1-6b Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 11l }/,]
ICD - Interface Control Drawings i.e. - that is - (id est) IEEE - Institute of Electrical & Electronic Engineers L - Licensing Procedures (B&R) Lki. - Lead Reactor Manufacturer (Westinghouse) LRM/RM - Lead Reactor Manufacturer - Reactor Manufacturer Relationship LRP - Lead Role Participant LX - Project Internal Procedures (WARD) M&MM - Manufacturing Manual Procedures MDM's - Material Division (Purchasing) Manual 52\ Procedures (ESG) MPI's - Manufacturing Process Instructions (GE) MP0 - Manufacturing Production Orders MPS - Management Procedures System MR - Material Request NDE - Nondestructive Examination NIR - Nonconforming Item Record (GE) No. - Number NRB - Nonconformance Review Board NSSS - Nuclear Steam Supply System 40 l OPDD Overall Plant Design Description OPR - Operating Procedures (WARD) PC - Project Control Procedures (B&R) II l
' } l} 8' PMC - Project Management Corporation PMD - CRBRP Program Management Directives (ESG) 52l17 P0CN' - Purchase Order Change Notice l34 17l PPL'S - Program Planning Instructions (GE)
PRCN - Purchase Requisition Change Notice l34 Amend. 52 17.1-6c Oct. 1979
O PSAR - Preliminary Safety Analysis Report PSC - Project Steering Committee PUR - Purchasing Procedures QA - Quality Assurance QA0P - Quality Assurance Department Operating Procedures (ESG) 52 QAP's - Quality Assurance Acceptance Procedures (ESG) QAPI - Quality Assurance Program & Procedures Index (GE) 52l QAPP - ASME Code Section III Quality Assurance Procedure (ESG) QA/QC - Quality Assurance Quality Control QCI - Quality Control Instruction (GE) 52l QCPP - ASME Code Section VIII Quality Assurance Manual (ESG) QMP's - Quality Method's and Procedures (WARD) QSI's - Quality Standing Instructions (GE) RDT - Reactor Development & Technology (Former Divisior: of Atoi.nc Energy Commission superseded by RRD of USERDA - Standards Still Maintain RDT Title) REF. - Reference REV - Revision RFP - Request for Proposal 52l RFQ - Request for Quotation RIP - Receiving Inspection Plan-(GE) 52l RM - Reactor Manufacturer (ARD, GE, ESG) RRD of - Reactor Research & Development Division of USERDA United States Energy Research and Development Administration SAR - Safety Analysis Report SDD - System Design Description SNT - American Society for Nondestructive Testing SNT-TC- American Society for Nondestructive Terting Recommended Practice 1A q" ]4g SOP's - Standard Operating Policies (ESG) Amend. 52 17.1-6d Oct. 1979
L. .. **%..e L ,, C = . , e g w ,cr..,, W . s.6,.s.
..s n.
..Ts.. es .a .,,6 .
,t . . . n .p ..( , .. ,. . p . 9 Wes- . * . . .w . * . ( D*..t
- e . r t ' c. ..e . . . .es s
. ... .. . . s ,.o. ; . . . . ] s rep. .s .. ..o.. .e on . . . .4.- 9,,,,,,, ,c c y..,,g g
~'
, . . , , .,.m..... , _
... ....s
,<..s....,
ho
?
- a. ..-
.3 M,s ... M ., L w., ,,.0b. LE2 ? a. .w. .( 'i . . . s . . r t. ' M t. t , et , s . . ' am t. ' i .
p..C. E .? P1L .A.,.,s. H51 PL.. Pt. e 75 ' M F , . ., t .C.' L P u.fl.f ? $. . .. . ' $ ' C . ,, 9, P t. C . '..C . a , .tS t . C . ,T, . i . .r ., . , t s. . , .1, s , e e.t..... a 1.
- i t. , s . . C r.m C ,'.et t i . Pt .
- 5. . . s ... .C , ,C, 9 .,e.
%J , . C
,..a.'i . 3,Lat, .s P La., .. Co. '.h 8 P u s,, C. '. h .e C.s 3 . . . . . . . 1,.. , 5
. 3"
- ......, .,,,,.<,..nm .-a .
, ' . ".. '",'. ...o...~.""$ c..,..-->
, c .. , . . - , . a . c . . -
~ ..n~,-
, o , ...
. ........a...
~ .. ........uo,......
, ........o1
. . . , . . ..,,m.,.,..,,,,,,
<,.,.........,c.,...,.
,,o.,,.,,.o.,.,.,.,...
,......o u. . c,- .-.... , -- n
, c a,... ,.....u. . n,
, ,,,,.,o,...,,..,,.,
- ..,.n.....<.,.- ,
,.c.,.......
.,,,,,,....o,.. ,. .......,....,...o,. , , . , , , , , , _ , , , , , , , , , , ,
* " ' " ' . ........o...c....-
-- ;: ::::::: ::::::' ,..,o...............
.- - c.'-
- - + '
.. .. . .. . . . v .1 . . . . . . . . . . . . < , . .
- _ . .n,..,
.",a-..
.u.,......u..,<..
.. , . . . .... +~>a..'..-'*-$
<..,.~
. n~
x....u........
- o ~ ~n..
.u.....u...
...,,,......u...u,.. ,,. ., ., ,, ,., .. ,, ,. ,,, ., , , , , . , , . . . . , c,u., . . . , , .....u...
. o.......... . ..,........m...
c,.....-....., ,,,<....... . , , , , , , , , . , , , , , , , , , , . , ...,,,,.a u, ....u....,,,., ...,,,..,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,....,,,.,,,,..,.,,, , , , , , , , , ,
, ~ ~a n=
CD c....c...3,,...
, ..".....'..'.'......a e..a.....
. r. 3 . . . , . . . . .c....
,,...u......
, ..n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
oc- g
-.m
<=a g- Figure 17.1-1. CRBRP Overall Quality Assurance Program Elements
@ (.J1
OVERALL PROGRAM CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLANT PROJECT OFFICE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DIRECTOR, CRBRP PROJECT CHIEF, QUALITY ASSURANCE BALANCE OF PLANT SUPPLY FUEL SUPPLIER j CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLANT FAST FLUX TEST FACILITY PROJECT OFFICE PROJECT OFFICE DIRECTOR, CRBRP PROJECT DIRECTOR, FFTF PROJECT CHIEF, QUALITY ASSURANCE . ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, QUALITY ASSURANCE O ARCHITECT-ENGINEER LEAD REACTOR MANUFACTURER CONSTRUCTOR 43 BURNS & R0E, INC. WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP. STONE AND WEBSTER BREEDER REACTOR DIVISION ADVANCED REACTORS DIVISION ENGINEERING CORP. VICE PRESIDENT, BREEDER REACTOR DIV GENERAL MANAGER, ARD PRESIDENT CRBRP PROJECT MANAGER VICE PRESIDENT, QUALITY ASSURANCE QUALITY ASSURANCE MANAGER MANAGER, QUALITY ASSURANCE QUALITY ASSURANCE MANAGER
- PROJECT QUALITY ASSURANCE
' MANAGER
; - _ _ _
l L] REACTOR MANUFACTURER REACTOR MANUFACTURER REACTOR MANUFACTURER GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP. WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP. ADVANCED REACTORS SYSTEMS DEPT. ENERGY SYSTEMS GROUP ADVANCED REACTORS DIVISION RE PRESIDENT, ESG GENERAL MANAGER, ARD F@' GENERAL MANAGER, ARSD _,. PRODUCT ASSURANCE MANAGER DIRECTOR, QUALITY PRODUCT ASSURANCE MANAGER g ASSURANCE FIGURE 17.1-2 ORGANIZATION OF THE CRBRP OVERALL QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM O O O
i REQUIREMENT OF 10 CFR 50 APPENDIX B CORRESPONDING REQUIREMENTS OF RDT F2-2 TITLE SECTION NUMBER
- CRITERIC1 XV NONCONFORf11NG MATERIALS, PARTS OR 2.7, (3.7), 4.10, 5.6.1, 5.6.3, 5.10, 6.7.5 COMP 0NENTS XVI CORRECTIVE ACTION 2.6, 2.8, 3.7, 4.8, 4.10, 5.6.1, 5.11, 6.7.5, 7.5.6, 8.8 XVII QUALITY ASSURANCE RECORDS 2.3.3, 2.4.2, 2.4.3, 3.8, (5.6.1), 5.13, 6.10, 7.11, u 8.7 XVIII AUDITS 2.5.1, 3.9, 4.17, 5.14, 6.11, 7.12, 8.2, 8.3, 8.4, 8.5,
$3 8.6, 8.7, 8.8 =4 )
- NUMBERS IN ( ) HAVE ONLY MINOR REFERENCE TO THE
$$. LISTED CRITERIA t;, , N FIGURE 17.1-3. (Cont.) Correlation Matrix of 10 CFR 50 App. B Requirements Versus RDT Standard F2-2, 1973 Requirements (Sheet 3 of 3)
?E rg m ."
D WN
_ y _ _ t _ _ ] i l i O
. p e.
b i s a.
,. _ n
. . o
_ p
.e .
. ,o
. . . s
_ ,u :
. . u ,. , c .. e
. i l _ ,
.o .u % ,
R A
, s .
. s u . .
_. i. . ,a . m
- i. ro N _ ~ .u _
u u
. ~ ,
a r g I l' .
. _ o B _
y - s i P r I R _ _ f o O _ _ n _ _ o R i _ t a 0 _ _ i z 0 _ u a _ n a P _ o. g
., r M .
. _ O u.
, n. g S i u.
_ l u .. - a n q 9 a . _ o
. i g ..
_ t c n _ u F y . m _ . F p _ a
, r g
_ a. . _ o u .. r O u P a.
.. + u.
u ,m . e c c n _. u. .
. _ a
.. r u
_ s y y i..
,. s
. _ A
_ _ y i_ t i _ , . l u u o _ a u
. m ,
_ Q u
. P J" , 4 u .. .
_ R B
y y a R
_ C [ _ . I L, 4 S s .
. 1 L
IL 1 S- o . .
- i. ', L n. _
t a _ 7 L a t s u . 1 R r , _
, m u
R w _ e y I I s . _r, " u a r m
=
_ u g _ i F &4*a 9* t,
>Bm,o. bO cc w ae%N O
Mu.a:" , J .- M"
3.0 DESIGN CONTROL 3.1 OWNER IMPLEMENTATION The Owner performs no design in the project but has assigned the design responsibility to other major participants in the project. The Owner has established and specified the design, guidelines for the CRBRP. In addition, the Owner has established and specified the essential major plant parameters to be incorporated into the design by the cognizant design participants. The Owner monitor: the development of the plant design through participation in design planning, review, and development meetings with the appropriate design organizations. The Owner has established a project-wide design control system that is based primarily on a family of System Design Descriptions (SDD) as the major vehicle for design documentation, review and approval. Through the SDD, the cognizant design contractors are responsible for the development and definitizing of the Plant systems and components design for which they are assigned responsibility. All SDDs are approved by the Owner. The Owner, therefore, maintains the technical supervision and administration of overall aspects of the CRBRP design. As such, the Owner has the responsibility, authority, and accountability for all aspects of the CRBRP design and design control within the specified design, cost and schedule constraints for the Project. To implement the design control function, the Owner has established design review and approval requirements based upon a four-level classifi-cation system as listed below, and has provided for both external and 17[ internal design interface controls. Externally, the Owner has defined interfaces and provides direction to the responsible design organizations 10 as follows: Type 1 Data - Requires Owner Approval Type 2 Data - Requires LRM and/or AE Approval Type 3 Data - Requires RM or AE Approval Type 4 Data - May be Supplier Approved 17 e Lead Reactor Manufacturer - The Owner provides direction directly to the Lead Reactor Manufacturer (LRM). For systems and equipment for which the LRM has design responsibility, the LRM recommends approval of Type I Dai.a directly to the Owner and the Owner takes approval action. The LRM provides Type 2, 3, and 4 data to the Owner for information and the Owner reviews and takes action only as appropriate. 10 Amend. 52 17A-15 Oct.1979 l'^1 154
l e Reactor Manufacturer - The Owner provides direction to the Reactor Manufacturers (RMs) through the LRM for Type 1 systems and equipment data. The RMs submit these data to the LRM and the Owner in parallel, and request approval from the LRM. The LRM in turn reviews and comments on these data, and submits a recommendation to the Owner for approval. The Owner approves or disapproves after receipt of the LRM recommendation. The RM initiates implementation of the activity upon receipt of the Owner approval. In parallel, the LRM issues a coafirmatory authorization for the RM to proceed on the basis of the Owner Approval Action. The RM provides Type 2, 3, and 4 Data to the Owner for information and the Owner reviews and takes action only as appropriate. (Normally, no Owner action is required). e Architect-Engineer - The Owner provides direction directly to the Architect-Engineer (AE). For systems and equipment for which the AE has design responsibility, the AE recommends approval of Type 1 data directly to the Owner ar.J the Owner takes approval action. The AE provides Type 2, 3, and 4 data to the Owner for information and the Owner reviews and takes action only as appropriate. 10 The Owner has established an overall Design Interface Control System for the Project. The system provides for control of system and equipment functional, parametric, and physical interface requirements for all portions of the CRBRP. Each design contractor is required to assure the accuracy and completeness of interface data partaining to systems and equipment under his cognizance. Functional and parametric interfaces are controlled through the SDD's. Physical interfaces are controlled by Interface Control Drawings (ICD) or appropriate vendor documentation. The ICD's identify physical interface characteristics that are necessary to ensure com-patability between the overall equipment and its surrounding structure / facility (including mechanical, electrical and fluid requirements). In the Project Design Interface Control System the LRM is responsible for assuring that system-to-system interfaces are established and maintained current and for approving ICDS. The LRM is responsible for assuring that the required System-to-Structure / Facility interface data are provided to the AE and for approval of its use. The AE is responsible to identify and schedule needed equipment to structure / facility interface data for design of interfacing systems, equipment and structures under its cognizance. The AE has the same responsibility for B0P system-to-system interfaces as described above for the LRM. Each design contractor is responsible for managing, scheduling, preparing, maintaining, and updating interface data and applicable ICD's for mating equipment, systems and structures under his cognizance. The responsibility for perfonning interface coordination is assigned to the cognizant engineers of the responsible design organizations. The cognizant engineer assures that: a) Adequate interface control is exercised for his area of cognizance. 17 Amend. 52 17A-M Oct. 1979
]1n1 l
] L;;
J-
5.0 INSTRUCTIONS, PROCEDURES AND DRAWINGS 5.1 OWNER IMPLEMENTATION The Owner has established and implemented a practice of prescribing in documentary form the required quality of plant structures, systems, and components and necessary activities to assure attainment of requisite quality through work activities. This practice includes specifying division of work responsibilities and the project-wide practices to be implemented in execution of those responsibilities. Through this practice, the following documents have been prepared: 10 e Plant Design Guidelines e Management Policies and Requirements e Contract Statements of Work e Environmental and Safety Analysis Reports e Policies, Procedures and Instructions e Reports e Records The Owner has prepared his procedures and instructions in accordance. with procedures that prescribe the fonnat to be followed and the identification system to be used. These procedures cover all activities of management, engineering and design control, document review and control, procurement, surveillance act.!vities, audits, and records management. These procedures prescribe methods for performing quality-related activities in conformance with the requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix B. The Owner procedures are organized under a Management Procedures System which is administered by a procedures coordinator from within the Owner organiza-tion. The procedures coordinator is assigned the function of controlling the issuance of procedures to assure coordination and consistency in format, content, etc. The procedures system itself is organized along divisional lines (Engineer-ing, Procurement, Construction, Quality Assurance, Public Safety, Operations, 45l Project Control, Administrative Services, and others) which give the responsible 27 managers the responsibilities for: o Assuring that policies of a continuing nature are incorporated in the Management Procedures System (MPS). e Incorporating applicable laws, standards such as 10CFR50, Appendix B, Executive Orders, decisions and directives of the Project Steering Committee (PSC) into the procedures to the extent necessary to show the requirements placed upon the Owner. 10 17A-23 Amend. 52 Oc t. 1979
1 156
e Determining tha coverage and content of management directives necessary to carry cut their assigned functions, assuring the accuracy and currency of the procedures, and arranging for the cancellation of those that become obsolete. e Approving procedures for which they are responsible. Obtaining review and comment by other organizational units when appropriate. e Submitting to the Procedures Coordinator:
- a. Draft Procedures for Review of Format
- b. Final Procedures for Director Approval, Issuance and Distribution.
27l e Determining, with concurrence of General Counsel, what portions of procedures, if any, shall be communicated to the contractors. Furnishing to the Procedures Coordinator the names of contractor personnel to whom such material together with any appropriate supplementary eylanation or instructions should be distributed. The Procedures Coordinator is the prime control officer for procedures and as such he: e Assures that style, format, and numbering sequence conform to the requirements of the Management Procedures System. e After approval, overseeing printing and distribution of the final procedures, e Maintains a master file containing the originals of all approved CRBRP Project Office procedures and a iog of issued procedures and their 27 revision. 2 71 e Prepares and maintains an index of procedures. e Distributing promptly all revisions and changes to existing procedures, according to the distribution in the master file. Organization Unit Managers are responsible for writing and implementing the procedures necessary for their division. General Administration procedures cover policies and procedures which apply to all employees. The Project Director approves for issuance all CRBRP Project Office procedures. The individual division procedures are approved by the responsible Division Manager and 27 recommended to the CRBRP Project Director for final approval. Each new procedure oc revision of existing procedure is prepared using the Management Procedures System aumbering code and format. 10 17A-24 Amend. 27 Oc t. 1976 O 11'1 157
15.0 NONC0fiFORMING MATTRIALS, PARTS OR COMP 0NEttrS 15.1 OWNER IMPLLMEt1TATION The Owner has established and implemented practices for control, review 10 and disposition of nonconforming materials, parts or components. These practices are designed to assure that measures are established to control materials, parts, or components which do not conform to requirements in order to prevent their inadvertent use or installation. The nonconformance control practice includes the following elements: e Establish Disposition Responsibility c Documentation and Reporting e Review, Evaluation and Disposition All reports of nonconformances affecting safety or utility of items that are proposed to be dispositioned "use as is", "use as repaired" or "use as modified" are forwarded to the Daner for approval. These reports are part of the documentation required at the plant site. Errors or deficiencies reported to, or discovered by the Owner which could adversely affect safety-related structures, systems or components identified in design documents subsequent to their formal release or issue are 52l ev luated by Engineering, Public Safety, and Quality Assurance for consideration as a reportable deficiency under Paragraph 50.55 (e) of 10CFR50. If it is concluded that the error or deficiency comes under this paragraph, the deficiency together with the proposed corrective action is reported to the fluclear Regulatory Commission according to regulations. The deficiency, whether reportable or not, is further evaluated against the procedural requirements that should have prevented the occurrence. When the procedural system is deficient, the affected organization is required to take whatever steps are necessary to achieve appropriate corrective action to the system to preclude recurrence of the error or deficiency. The deficiency is reported within the project via an unusual occurrence report as described in Section 16. The Owner Quality Assurance organization also participates in and 10 monitors the execution of the nonconformance control practices and periodically audits or arranges for independent audit of the control practices to assure implementation and adequacy. 15.2 REQUIREMENTS OF OTHER PARTICIPANTS Each participant, who is assigned responsibility for procurement, manufacturing, or construction of items of the CRBRP, is required by contract to establish and implement a practice for the control of non-conforming materials, parts or components. These nonconfermance control practices will include the following elements: 27 e The identification, documentation, segregation where practicable, review, disposition, and notification of affected organizations of nonconforming materials, parts, components, or se.* vices is under-taken. 10 17A-43 Amend. 52 Oc t. 1979 4 1,1 158
e Documentation identifies the nonconforming item; describes the nonconformance, the disposition of the nonconformance, and the inspection requirements; and includes signature approval of the disposition. e Provisions are established identifying those individuals or groups delegated the responsibility and authority to approve the dispositioning of nonconforming items. e Nonconforming items are segregated where practicable, from acceptable items and identified as discrepant until properly dispositioned. 17 e Acceptability of rework or repair of materials, parts, components, systems, and structures is verified by reinspecting the item as originally inspected or by a method which is at least equal to the original inspection method; inspection, rework, and repair procedures are documented. e Nonconformance reports dispositioned "use as is" or "use as repaired" or "use as modified" are made part of the inspection records and forwarded with the hardware to the Owner. e Nonconformance reports are periodically analyzed to show quality 10 trends, and the results are forwarded to management. These practices will assure that nonconforming items are reviewed and accepted, rejected, repaired or reworked in accordance with documented pro- & cedures. They will include measures which control further processing, delivery W or installation pending proper dir. position of the deficiency. The Owner monitors the major participants nonconformance control practices and periodically audits the major participant's nonconformance [0
'1 control practices to assure implementation and adequacy.
16.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION 16.1 OWNER IMPLEMENTATION 10 The Owner has established and implemented a system for corrective action wherein conditions adverse to quality such as failures, nonconformances, malfunctions, deficiencies, deviations and defective material and equipment 27 l that to theare required Owner fornonconformance through reliable and safeandoperation of the plant unusual occurrence are reported reporting procedures. 10 Quality assurance activities found deficient by Owner reviews and audits of the participants are also reported. The corrective action system includes the following elements: 10 Amend. 45 July 1978 17A-44
$ EG
) 1 . 3, \ .s !
9 ba Y u. O Peoness i.aea . er Obat tiv allwesett pe06sas essas sl a'ite 00Cve fe'a t i0e 4 04'$ ae3 ef eif e1 C9esiC T iel aC f ees te6'ai te t e6 metal
- e. Ptase454 4. Af SP0el . 9 L TV ae0 sh 'e s t ?' l Pet C tS ses peeCIDueEl 9. 9046 s tt ad e T3 unduas occuentact
#t PO4'l 2 Quat tYT a15usseCE P90 dam 2 v es s e e6 ase i aC K it esi rca 2. g6at.T v a tC905 2. mese6f ad el et eif es
'E' 3. P te$0sett gLat ir . Cat is 3 guesi tt l'a 'y1 ag aOS 'S asp ee 9 se 0 DE I' 68 a# D DE VE LD8t(RY P9Q(Ot [ sit e me esd a( 'b8 eG S ay 'Ca' 3 sed altt uk 7 9($ tle PLaM ies PeoC6df ast a? P tans ,e6 0
. .. . . . , s . . . a.0 C o. s .0, P. e. . , e s i .. . e. ,
-K,,.e,0--.....',e a
O
- 3. f ett ett a is. 5?tt'E 5
''"'s"'"
SMCi
' i. .f al Ba t Ritu '#f ell eT5
- 6. S*tCli tCaf tees. Dese,ess sep 3 acCle'al f 50ueCE L 37 3 Pe g neses a vai va t :0e s et 'eut t ites e raff accambt On 50ueCE Capaa Lif f
% resp (C ties amp TElf 5
. se pain t i s M
a se 0C the'9 00C uest e? ef e if e ae9 Can'80L
- 4. DOCued e f G E U ' f e3
- 2. 90Chall ef C0e'80t
& .. re.. ei . i .. .. se . e. < i s ,s a .is , .e .i e i - o> ma om
*3
_a .c. to y_ mo Figure 17A-ll Major Elements of the EM Program
OF DD REQ IRE IMPLEENTING ECCUMENT TITLE !%STPUCTICNS SECTION TITLE D00. NO. N'S'BE R REF. 00C. . ETC. 2 Maaageeent & Planning 2.2 Quality Assurance Program Quality Assurance Program Description Quality Assurance Charter 2.2.1 Planning Quality Assurarce Program Description CRP-EN-09 Preparation and "ainterance of the Project level 1 Schedule CRP PC-02 Prepaeation and Mafntenance of the CPBRP Project Level 0 Schedule CPP PC-05 Preparation and Maintenance of the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) CRP-QA-02 Activity Planning w 2.3 Organization G 2.3.1 Responsibility and. Authority Quality Assurance Program Description
- Quality Assurance Charter Responsibility All Procedures Sections CRP-DR-02 Organization Plan and Functional Statements 2.3.2 Training and Indoctrination CRP-QA-24 Perscnael !rdoctrication 2.3.3 Personnel Qualification CRP-qA-25 Administration of Personnel Certification and Records CRP-QA-26 Personrel Certificatio9 2.4 Documentation 2.4.1 Policies and Procedures Opality Assurance Program Description All Procedsres Policy Sections CR3RP Management Policies and Requiremnts CRP-AA-01 "anasement Precedures CRP-AA-03 Preparation of Corre w e-ee- &
CRP AA-11 Control cf Project Office Procedures Manual
~
[p".gA N [pN t n Ma t nonce and control of Project Office Quality Assurance Manual Qu'LITY ASSUFANCE PR00Wi INDEX VERSUS PEQ'JIPE"ENTS OF PDT F 2-2 RE Figure 17A-12 OWNER QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX Pg _ _ . A e
%m )
c ro - O O O
REQUIREMENT OF IMPLEMENT 7NG 00Ct9*ENT REMAAKS RDT F 2-2 SECTION IMSTR'XTI m s NR DOC. NO. TITLE REF. 00C., ETC. TITLE 2.4.2 (uality Records CRP-AA-02 Filing Procedure for Of ficial Project Files CRP-QA-07 Quality Records 2.4.3 Quality Status Reports CRP-AA-07 Reports Cor. trol Program CRP-PC-03 CRSRP Project Monthly Progress Report CRP-QA-01 Quality Assurance Program Managewent Review Meetings CRP-QA-08 Qaality Assurance Program Progress and Status Revtew and Reporting
- 2.5 Audits and Reviews See Section 8
$ 2.5.1 Quality Audits b
N 2.5.2 Manage ent Reviews CRP-QA-01 Quality As% -ance Program Management Review Peetings CRP-AA-06 Centrallred Action Correspondence Control System 2.6 Corrective Action Corrective Action Requests CRP-QA-04 CRP-QA-05 Processing of Unusual Occurrence Reports CRP-QA-06 Noncorformance, Unusual Occurrence and Corrective Action Analysts CRP-QA-09 Quality Trend Analysis CRP-Q A-2 7 Unusual Occurrence Report Preparatton and Disposition - " Design Control Partially 2.7 Engineering Holds CRP-EN-01 Processing Principal Design Documents Delegated
-* CRP-EN-02 Unusual Occurrence Reporting CRP-QA-05 Processing of Unusual Occurrence Peports
} 2.8 Unusual Occurrence Report Preparation and Dispositten
- CRP-QA-27 - QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEI vtRSUS REQUIRENENTS OF RDT F 2-2 N RN P@ Figure 17A-12 (Cont'd.). Owner Quality Assurance Program Index _ ct e N U1 WN
RI?; Piv!NT CF # ENT frPLE*ENTINC' DOC' ENO RDT F2-2 5ECTION 00C. NO. TITLE INST WCTIONS TITLE c'3 E'4 REF. 00C.. ETC.
- 3. Design and Develetrent Partially Celegated 3.2 Design Planning CFP-AA-07 Reports Control Pregram CRP-EN-09 Preparation and Paicterance of the Project Level 1 Schedule CRP PC-03 CPSRP Project Monthly Progress Report CRP-PC-05 Preparation aad Mainterance of the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
Y ' 3.3 Design Definition and Control CRP-CR-01 Chaeges in Project Scepe or Pajor Deviattoas from TPe Re'erence y Cesign Oesign Control cn CRP-EN-01 w CRP DC-05 Pre 9aration aad Faintenance cf the Work Breakcoe Structure (W35) 3.4 Document Review and Control CRP-AA-03 Preoaration of Corresponderte CRP-AA-08 Irccmieg Mail CcP-AA-07 Reports Coritrol Program C'P- AA-11 Coetrol of Droject Of fice Peccedpes "anual CRP- AA-14 Controlled Documents CRP-CN-01 Processing of Construction Data submitted by the Constructor CRP-EN-02 Processing Principal Design Doc e nts CRP-EN-04 Processing Engineering Changes CRP-EN-05 Conf tguratton Control Board Actions CRP-EN-07 Technical Control cf CPERP Test Progran's CRP-EN-10 Design Docu'*rt Control CRP-OP-02 Operatiors Division Peview and Concurrence with Engineering Design Cata CRP-CP-03 Operations Division Review and Concurrer.ce with Licensing Data CRP-PC-05 Pevisien to the CRBRP Project Managetent Policies and Raq ui ren*9 t s C2P-PS-01 Preparation of Amendments to and Maintenance of the PSAR and ER CPP-PS-02 Preparation of Responses to nuclear Regulatory Corsiission Questions QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX VERSUS CE7J!9EwCNTS Cr ROT F 2-2
', FIGURE 17A-12 (Cont'd) OWNER QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX nm -
- 3 CL s
ta O O O
mM pgg11 $$"b'\. RZ;):2.I?:I*.T OF :..pge:.t;,- ,9 3;;;y;. . T RE*JAKS ROT F 2-2 SECTh0N hSIEUCIIONS
.h;MBER TITLE CCC. NC. TfTLE REF. CCC.. ETC.
CR P-P S-03 Prc:arati n and Ac:rowal of Pessceses to Pequest fcr Licensing and Safety Info mation COP-PS-04 Preparatic*i and Compliance with Non-NEC Per tits. Licenses. and A;provals CRP-PS-C5 *ainter.arce of Corsistency Betwee i tre PSAR and the Project Baseltre C,cu ertaticn CRP-CA-10 C ality Ass rance Peview and A; proval of Ergineerins Occuments CRP-CA-ll Quality Assurance Peview Cf Procurenent Cocarents CRP-QA-12 Feview of Cortractor 0 ality Ass.rance Plans and Procedures CRP-CA-20 Preparatice. Saintenance and Centrol of Prcject Office C ality - Assurance Fan.al N p 3.5 Oestgr Review CRP-EN-03 Cesign ceviews $ 3.6 Develc; rent CRP-EN-06 Cevelcment Progra.9 Technical *anagerent CRP-PC-C5 Preparation and Faintenance of the Work Breakdown Structure (W35) N "Jo-CA-10 CRP-CA-12 Quality Assurance Review and A,: proval of Engineering Doc.r.ents Review of Cor.tracter Quality Assurance Plans and Procedures 40
)
~ 10
;;r,ITY ASSUUNCE PROCRM !!.0EX VERSUS CJ:EI" Dis CF P.0T F2-2 b
&F
-~
X 3
-." FIGURE 17A-12 (CONT'D.) OWNER QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX e
N Zu NO
CF .,m,p.g ;.;. g;yp:7 gyg RE7):# RCT F .ewe [-2 SECT:CN l 35 MONS m;qta TITLE 000 40 T'*CE : FE*. 00;-. ETC-l
- 4. Procurement { Dartially CeTe:nted 4.2 Prccure7 9t Plae9frg C U-E*:-C9 Preparatien aed "aiate aare c' the Frc.'e'.t Cevel 1 Sc"et;'e (c % :-C3 0;C3P Prefect "o-t*1y F*e;*ess :cocrt
- C R iC-05 Feroaeatica aed Vainteaance of tae Lcri S-eabc>a Str.ct're. (h?S)
CCD-CA-C2 Activity Flaecir9 4.3 Procurerient recuirements CE E-C's-C: Frccessirg cf Constructior Cata $2,rf tted ty tre Cc structcr Co?- S-C2 Frocessing Frtecigal .esi;" Oct rents PD2- M-C4 Precess +ac In9i reerlF1 Chances r ..N - Cc ar ca '
- mi Se*d -ctior.s
[ r CC .. Control of Modifications to Principal Project Agreements 3= CF?-CP-02 Ne stir-= ? vis r" :n i w a-c Cenc.crence . ta Creinee ring M en Ctr Pt-C3 Cesite Dste Cen racc a-c d.tecr.tre t ceview ;ctfe s C U-Ci-10 Ct ality Asss*aace Deview a-d A*;-cva' Cf tegi9ee-19C CCC?e*ts 4.4 Procurement Cocnnt Review CRP-CN-01 Processfe; c' Coastrsctice Cata 5.tritted by t"e Ceestructer (??-:N-C2 Frecessia rei cfral Cesne Cec re-ts C'P . *: rrecessi-: E r e.-i-e C * :-c e s CD-E'i-C5 Cen " a -atien Cces e! Beard a c ti es CFP-FR-03 Centract ard htc:9 tract Fesiew Actic-s CEP-;A-11 Cuality Assuraace Fewfew cf Frccare eet Cecu vFts 4.5 Evaluation aad Selection of frecurer ent Sources C:? FR "3 I Cor* rec
- 4-c 52cen* act Fc ic tcticas l l w a T u ss m :E n:m :n . ::s.s : ..u.
. .. s v .,. r z.2 Gg 2 ea3 =
CL T
~w
- FIGURE 17A-12 (CONT'D.) OWNER QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX LO N
-.,s (31 O O O
~
REQUIREMENT OF REPARES RDT F 2-2 !"PLEwENTf9G DOCt*ENT I 14STRUCTIONS SECTION D0C. to. TITLE REF. D0C.. ETC. N'JMBER TITLE 4.6 Crntrol of Configuration 4.6.1 contract Change Control CRP-CN-02 Processing of Field Charge Requests CRP-EN-04 Processing Engineering Changes CRP-Er-05 Configuration Control Board Actions CRP-0C-01 Control of Podifications to Principal Project Agreements CRP-PR-03 Contract and Subcontract Review Actions [ 3= s 4.6.2 As-hilt Verification CRP-CM-04 Construction Testing and Turnover O CRP-QA-02 Activity Planning P?rfo, nance of Project Surveillance [ CRP-0A-13 CRP-GA-16 inspet sion. Examination and Test 4.7 Measuring and Test Equipeent Caitbration and Control CRP-QA-17 Neasuring and Test [quipr3nt Calibration and Control 4.8 Source Surveillance and
- Inspection CRP-QA-02 Activity Planning CRP-QA-13 Performance of Project Surveillar.ce CRP-QA-14 Processing of Respor.ses to Naclear Regulatory Comission
- Inspection Reports and Their follow-L'p During Design and Ccnstruction CRP-0A-15 Arranging for Nuclear Regulatory Comission Inspections CRP-QA-16 Inspection. Examination and Tast m
QUALITV ASSURANCE PROGR.8N INDEI VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF RDT F 2-2 R3I e co
- 3 ,
F e mm
@N Figure 17A-12 (Cont'd.). Owner yuality Assurance Program Index
REQUIRDtENT OF RDT F 2 2 IMPt(MfNTING LOC'JMiNT REVARt5 SECTION INSTR'XIIONS Ff93ER TITtt 00C. NO. TITLE RES. D0C.. ETC. 4.9 Receiving Inspection 4.9.1 Planning and Inspection CRP-QA-02 Activity Planning CRP-QA-16 Inspection, f aaetnation and Test 4.9.2 Docuuentation CRP-AA-04 Incorr%g Mall CRP- AA-14 ContrJ 1e1 lhcurents CPP-CN-01 Processing of Construction Data Gubmitted by the Constructor CRP-CR-02 Processing of Field Change Requests Ed CRP-CN-C4 Construction Testing and Turnover j CRP-[N 02 CRP-CP-02 Fro;essing Principal Design Documents Operations Division Review and Concurrence with e cn Engineering Design Lata
- CRP-OP-03 operations Civision Review and Concurrence with Licensing Cata CRP-rR-03 Contract and Subcontract Review Actions CRP-QA-10 Quality Assurance Review and Approval of raatneering Dociram ts CRP-QA-11 Quality Assurance Review cf Procuremens Docwwnts CRP-QA-12 Review cf Contractor Quality Assurance Plans and Procedures 4.9.3 Disposition of Recef ved Items Delegated 4.10 Control of Nonconforring items CRP-CA-03 Control of Nonconformanco 4.11 Control of Received Items Delegated 4.12 Quality Audits See Section 8
- 5. Manufacturing. Fabrication , miep s and Assembly (
gg QUALITt ASSURANCE PR INDCI VERSUS REQUIRCMENTS OF RDT F 2-2 P@ C
~m eN Figare 17A-12 (Cont'd.). Owner Quality Assurance Program Index M
M N O O O
!;, NG DOCUMENT PEMARKS REQUIREMENT OF 10 CFR 50 APPEN0!X 8 TITLE DCC. NO. TITLE INSTRUCTIONS CRITERION RL/. DOC. . ETC.
! Organization Quality Assurance Program Description Quality Assurance Charter CRP-OR-02 Organization Plan and Functional Statements CRP-QA-24 Fersoneel Indoctrination CRP-QA-25 Administration of Personnel Certification and Records (RP-QA-26 Personnel Certification Quality Assurance Program Description
[ !! Program Quality Assurance Charter 7
$ CRP AA-01 Manaccrent Procedures Centralized Actic,n Correspondence Control System CRP-AA-06 CRP-AA-07 Pecorts Control Program CRP-AA-ll Control of Project Of fice Proceduri Manual CRP- AA-14 Controlled Documents CRP-0C-01 Control of Modifications to Principal Project Agreesents .-. CRP EN-09 Preparation and Maintenance of the Project Level 1 Schedule CRP-PC-02 Preparation and Mainte9ance of the CRBRP Project Level 0 Schedule }
-' CFP PC-03 CRBRP Project Monthly Progress Report CRP-PC-05 Preparation and Maintenance of the Work Breakdown Structure s (WBS) Revision of the CP8RP Project Management Policies and Requirements @ CRP-PC-06 @ QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX VERSUS REQUIREwENTS OF 10 CFR 50. APPEND!K 8 Figure 17A-13 OWNER QUALITY ASSURANCE INDEX RN nm
- 3 a.
O N U1 WN
0 10 PN XB INSTRUCT 1CNS l CRITERION TITLE 000. NO. T!TL; n:r. CCC. ETC. l CRP-QA-01 Quality Assurance Program Managerent Review Yeetings CRP-QA-08 Quality Assurance Program Progress and Status Review and Reporting CRP-QA-12 Review of Contractor Quality Assurance Plans and Procedures CRP-QA-14 Processing of Responses to Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspection Reports and Their Follow-up During Design and Construction CRP-QA-15 Arranging for Nuclear Regulatory Comission Inspections CRP-QA-20 Preparation. Maintenance and Control of Project Office Quality Assurance Manual N
> III Design Control CRP-CN-01 Processing of Construction Data Submitted by the Con-cn structor N
CRP-EN-01 Design Control CRP-EN-02 Processing Principal Design Documents CRP-EN-03 Design Reviews CRP-EN-G4 Processing Engineering Changes CRP-EN-05 Configuration Control Board Actions CRP-EN-07 Technical Control of CRRRP. Test Programs QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR 50, APPENDIX B R $" FIGURE 17A-13 (Cont'd. ) OWNER OVALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX na cr-g e O O O
'A REQUIREMENT OF IPPLEMENTINS 00CU'ENT REw. ARKS 10 CFR 50 APPENDIX B CRITERION TITLE D0C. NO. TITLE INSTRUCTIONS REF. D0C.. LTC.
CRP-EN.-09 Preparation and Paintenance of the Project level 1 Schedule CRP-EN-10 Design Occurent Control CRP-CP-02 Operations Division Review and Concurrence with Engineering Design Cata CRP-OP-03 Operations Division Peview and Concurrence with Licensing [ Data 7 m CRP-PS-01 Preparatio:1 of Arendments to and Maintenance of the PSAR and ER CRP-PS-02 ' Preparation of Responses to Nuclear Regulatory Comission Ques tions CRP-PS-03 Preparation and Aporoval of Responses to Requests for Licensing and Safety Infomation CRP-QA-10 Quality Assurance Review and Approval of Engineering Documents
!Y Procurement Document Control CRP-CN-01 Processing of Construction Data Submitted by the Constructor CRP-EN-02 Processing Principal Design Documents
, _ , . CRP PR-03 ' Contract and Subcontract Review Actions CRP-QA-ll I, Quality Assurance Review of Procurement Documents 3 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX VER$US REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR 50. APPENDIX B
~ Figure 17A-13 (Cont'd) OWNER QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX ca o>
b
*3 a
N
REQUIREMENT OF IMPLE"ENTING DOCU"ENT REMARKS 10 CFR 50 APPENDIX 9 CRITER!ON TITLE DOC. NO. TITLE INSTPUCTIONS REF. 00C.. ETC. V instructions. Procedures and CRP-AA-01 Pana9ement Procedures Drawings CRP-AA-03 Preparation Correspondence CRP-AA-11 tetrol of tha Project Office Procedures Manual CRP-AA-14 Controlled Docueents CRP-PC-06 Revision to the CRsRP Project Management Policies and Requirements CRP-PS-01 Preparation of Arenhnts to and Maintenance of the PSAR and ER CRP-QA-20 Preparation. Maietenance and Control of Project Office Quality Assurance Manual VI Docurert Control CRP-AA-01 Paragerent Procedures CRP-AA-02 Filing Procedure for Official Project Files CRP-AA-03 Preparation of Correspondence CRP-AA-04 Incoming Patl CPP-AA-ll Control of the Proje:t Office Procedures Manual CRP-AA-07 Reports Control Program Controlled Deciments y CnP-AA-14 Revision to the CRBRP Project Managemant Policies and h m CRP-PC-06 Requirements
- CRP-TS-01 Preparation of Amendments to and Maintenance of the FSt.P.
and ER 1 CRP-QA-20 Preparation. Maintenance and Control of 'roje .t Of fice Quality Assurance Manual CRP-AA-01 Management Procedures CRP-AA-02 Filing Procedure for Official Proje:;t Files
~
CRP-AA-03 Preparation of Correspondence CRP-AA-04 Incoming Mail CRP-AA-07 Reports Control Progra:n y Control of the Project Office Procedures Panual
- CRP-AA 11 CRP-AA-14 Controlled Documents CRP-CN-01 Processing of Construction Data Submitted by the Constructor CRP-EN-01 Design Control CPP-EN-02 Processing Principal Dasign Docts'ents CRP-FN-10 Cesign Document Control ik D CUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM !NOEX VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR 50. APPENDIX B
- d. (3 cr si P00R ORGM FIGURE 17A-13 (Cont'd) OWNER QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX O O O
REQUIREMENT OF REMARKS IMPLENENTING DOCtMENT 10 CFR SO APPENDIX 8 INSTRUCTIONS REF. 00C., ETC, TITLE 000. NO. TITtt CRITERICN CRP-PC-06 Revision to the CRBRP Project Management Policies and Requirements CRP-PR-03 Contract and Subcontract Review Actions CRP-PS-01 Preparation of Men &ents to and Maintenance of the PSAR and the ER CRP-PS-02 Preparation of Responses to NJclear Regulatory Comission e.-4 N Q*stions CRD-PS-03 Preparation and Approval of Responses to Request for cn Licensing and Safety Information g CRP-QA-20 Preparation. Maintenance and Control of Project Office Quality Assurance Manual CRP-AA-03 Preparation of Correspondence VII Control of Purchased Materials Equipment Incoming Mail and Services CRP-AA-04 CRP-CN-01 Processing of Construction Data Submitted by the Constructor
" CRP-CN-02 Processing of Field Change Wsts 3 CRP-EN-01 Design Control
~ CRP-ER-02 Processing Principal Design Docurnenth
-. QUALITY ASSURAMCE PROGRAM VERSUS RIQUIRDENTS OF 10 CTR 50. APPENDIX 5
~a N
RE re _. P w Figure 17A-13 (Cont'd.). Owner Quality Assurance Program Index e ro
10 N X5 II'- =0 UT E' INSTRJ"TIONS CRITERICN TITLE l D;C. NO. TITLE RIF. 00: , ETC. CRP-EN-03 Cesign Reviews I CRS-EN-07 Technical Control of CRSRP Test ?-c;-a s 47 CRP-PR-03 Contract and Subcontract Review Actions CR -QA-01 Quality Assurance Program Menagrent Review t'eetings CRD-QA-02 Activity Planning CRP-0A-07 Quality Records
.RP-QT-C3 Quality Assurance Program Prog-ess and Status Review and y R??crting En CRP-QA-10 Ouslity Assu-ance Review and Approval of Engireering R Deceents CRP-QA-11 Quality Assurance Review of Pecture e,t Occure-ts
'CRD-CA-12 Review of Centractor Ovality Assurarce Flaa.s a-d r eccedure:
CRP-QR-13 Perfo--ence of Prefect Surveillance CPo-QA-16 Inspection. Examination ar.d Tes* VIII !dentification aad Control of - I Materials. Parts and Co pcaents (Oelegated) I: Centrol of Special Processes (Delegated) 4ci 10 QU;UTY ASSURECE PR09E' !NOU VERSUS REQU:REDTS OF 10 CFR EO. A2?B0:M 3 u
*3 c.
P00R BRER e FIGURE 17A-13 (Cont'd.) OWNER. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX .> N 4 CD N .a
)
M L,4 0 9 9
IMPLEMENTING DOCUMENT REMARKS 10 A N XB I INSTRL'CTIONS CCC. NO. ' TITLE REF. C00., ETC. CRITERION TITLE X Inspection CRP-QA-02 Activity Planning CRP-QA-14 Processing of Responses to Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspection Reports and Their Follow-up During Design and Construction CRP-QA-15 Arrangir 'or Nuclear Regulatory Comissicn Inspections CRP-QA-16 Inspection, Examination and Test XI Test Control CRP-EN-07 Technical Control of CRBRP Test Prografrs U CRP-OP-02 Operations Division Review and Concurrence with Engineering Design Data i-cn CRP-QA-02 Activity Plar.ning CRP-QA-13 Performance of Project Surveillance CRP-QA-16 Inspection, Examination and Test ~~ ^ CRP-CN-04 Construction Testing and Turnover XII Control of Feasuring and Test CRP-QA-17 Measuring and Test Equip-ent Calibration and Control
- Equipment (Delegated)
____. XIII Handling, Storage and Shipping
- -J XIV Inspection, Test and Operating (Delegated) # Status QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR 50, AP:E'C'X B RE F@
P FIGURE 17A-13 (Cont'd.) OWNER QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX
10 0 F N XB IMPLEMENTING DOCUMENT REMARKS INSTRUCTIONS CRITERION TITLE D0C. NO. TITLE REF. C0;., ETC. XV Nonconforming Materials, Parts CRP-AA-04 Incoming Mail and Components PRP-CN-01 Processing of Construction Data Submitted by the Constructor CRP-CN-02 Processing of Field Change Requests CRP-EN-02 Processing Principal Design Documents CRP-OP-02 Operations Division Review and Concurrence with Engineering Design Data
, CRP-CN-04 Construction Testing and Turnover f CRP-QA-03 Control of Nonconformances h CRP-QA-05 Processing of Unusual Occurrence Reports CRP-QA-14 Processing of Responses to Nuclear Regulatory Comission Inspections Reports and Their Follow-up During ::esign and Construction CRP-QA-15 Arranging for Nuclear Regulatory Comission Inspections CRP-QA-27 Unusual Occurrence Report Preparation and Dispositien XVI Corrective Action CRP-CN-02 Processing of Field change Requests CRP-EN-02 Processing Principal Design Documents CRP-0P-02 Operations Division Review and Concurrence with Engineering Design Data QUALITY ASSURANCE PR00 RAM INDEX /rXUS REQUIREFEr.TS OF 10 CFR E;, A?:EN :X 3 rg -
2 - e, FIGURE 17A-13 (Cont'd.) OWNER QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX em - N LJ'. O O O
REQUIREMENT OF IMPLEMEKTING 00CtMENT REMARKS 10 CFR 50 APPEN0!I B INSTRUCTIONS TITLE 000. NO. TITLE REF. 00C.. ETC. CRITERION CRP-QA-03 Control of Nonconformances CRP-QA-04 Corrective Action Requests CRP-QA-05 Processing of Unusual Occurrence Reports
>* CRP-QA-06 Nonconformance, Unusual Occurrence and Corrective y Action Analysis Quality Trend Analysis M CRP-QA-09 Unusual Occurrence Report Preparation and Disposition CRP-QA-27 IVII Quality Assurance Records CRP-AA-02 Filing Procedures for Official Project Flies CRP-AA-04 Incoming Mail '^
CRP-QA-07 Quality Records 3 IVI!! Audits CRP-QA-19 Adninistration of Quality Assurance Auditing - CRP-QA-21 Conduct of Product Audits CRP-QA-22 Conduct of Programatic Audits N @ QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEI VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR 50, APPEN0!I B on oa F$ P n u, e ro Figure 17A-13 (Cont'd.). Owner Quality Assurance Program Index
ATTACHMENT 1 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURE DESCRIPTIONS Management Procedures (CRP-AA-01) 27 This procedure defines the responsibilities and actions for the preparation, review, approval, distribution and revision of CRBRP Project Office proce-dures. This procedure establishes the framework for the dissemination of basic policies, information and procedural practices. 37 Filing Procedure for Official Project Files (CRP-AA-02) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for establishing a Project Office-wide file identification, collection, maintenance and retrieval system. The procedure details the particulars for handling and filing all official Project documents. Preparation of Correspondence (CRP-AA-03) This procedure describes the approved format for the preparation and handling of Project Office correspondence. Incoming Mail (CRP-AA-04) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for receipt and control of mail incoming to the Project Office. The procedure also des-cribes the measures to be effected for preparation, distribution and main-tenance of controlled documents. Centralized Action Correspondence Control System This procedure covers the establishment of action correspondence identifi-52 cation and control and the access of action correspondence status infor-nation. Reports Control Program (CRP-AA-07) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the evaluation of the usefulness of inter-Project Office reports. The procedure also describes the process for approval of new reports and establishes a 40 Projact Office Reports Directory. 10 Control of Project Office Procedures Manual (CRP-AA-11) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the prepara-tion, maintenance, and control of the Project Office Procedures Manual which contains copies of all Project Office Procedures including those 45 for quality assurance activities. Controlled Documents (CRP-AA-14) This procedure defines the responsibilities and actions of Project Office 52 Divisions for controlled documents generated by Project participants. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 17A-69 '1^) )JJ
Processing of Construction Data Submitted by the Constructor (CRP-CN-01) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities associated with 40 internal review and/or approval of data submitted by the Constructor. 10 52l Processing of Field Change Requests (CRP-CN-02) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for control of field change notices for the construction base line. The procedure also describes the Project Office review process and coordination for approvals. Construction Testing and Turnover (CRP-CN-04) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities of the Project Office to effect an orderly transfer of custody from the constructor to the operator for pre-operational and start-up activities. Changes in Project Scope or Major Deviations from The Reference Design CRP-DR-01) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the identifi-cation of major changes in scope or deviations from reference design. The procedure also describes the process whereby the Project S*.eering Con...ittee passes such information to the Boaro of Directors of the Project Management Corporation. Organization Plan and Functional Statements (CRP-DR-02)_ This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for maintenance of functional statements for Project Office organizational elements, dele-gations of authority and organization charts. The procedure also describes the process for , curing approval for proposed changes. Design Control (CRP-EN-01) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities necessary to pro-vide for a planned, disciplined approach to CRBRP Project Office control of design data. Processing Principal Design Documents (CRP-EN-02) This procedure defines the actions and responsitdlities for conduct of internal reviews, reconciliation of comments and final action on Data 45l Type 1 documents. This procedure also covers the internal review of Data Type 2, 3 and 4 documents submitted for information. Design Rcviews (CRP-EN-03) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities associated with the Project Office monitoring of formal design reviews conducted by the design contractor. This procedure also describes the documentation of 40 design review activity by the Project Office. 10 27 I
\ \?S 17A-70 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
Processing Engineering Changes (CRP-EN-04) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for review and approval of Class 1 Engineering Change Proposals (ECP) through the 45l mechanics of a Configuration Control Board (CCB). Configuration Control Board Actions (CRP-EN-05) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities of the Configu-ration Control Board in handling and disposing of Engineering Change Prcposals (ECP). Development Program Technical Management (CRP-EN-06) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for managing and coordinating the CRBRP contributing and applied base development programs. The nocedure also describes the process of Project Office approval of I 45l Deve Spes.iopment ficationsActivity (DRSs .) Descriptions (DADS) and Development Requirement Technical Control of CRBRP Test Programs (CRP-EN-07) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for planning and performing preoperational, start-up, surveillanct and inservice inspection testing of CRBRP systems and components. The procedure also describes the necessary documentation requirements. Preparation and Maintenance o ~ the Project Level 1 Schedule (CRP-EN-09) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for preparing and maintaining the Level 1 schedule. The procedure also describes the pro-cesses for monitoring, controllic.g, and documenting progress and changes. Design Document Control (CRP-EN-10) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for control of principal design documents to assure use of current, approved design infornntion. The procedure also describes the handling system for other reference design and guidance documents. 27 52l Control of Modifications to Principal Project Agreements (CRP-0C-01) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the adminis-tration of the four party agreements. The procedure specifically addresses the process of change contt 01. Operations Division Review and Concurrence with Engineering Design Data (CRP-0P-02 This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the review and concurrence for engineering data by the Project Office Operations Division. The ' procedure also describes the method used by the Operations Division for securing TVA Operations review and comments. 10 17A-71 4 3-
} }/D/
Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
Operations Division Review and Concurrence with Licensing Data O CRP-OP-03) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities of the Project Office Operations Division for the review and approval of licensing data prior to subnission to regulatory agencies. Preparation and Maintenance of the CRBRP Project Level 0 Schedule CR )- PC-02 ) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for preparation, review, approval and maintenance of the Project Level 0 Schedule. CRBRP Project Montt.ly Progress Report (CRP-PC-03) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the pre-paration, review, e.pproval and distribution of the Project Monthly Progress Report. Preparation and Maintenance of the Work Breakdown Structures (WBS) CRP-PC-05) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilit.es for preparation and maintenance of the Project Work Breakdown Structure (PWBS); the review and integration of contractor extension of structures (CWBS) as well as the WBS Dictionary. Revision to the CRBRP Project Management Policies and Requirements 52} (CRP-PC-06) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the preparation and maintenance of all sections of the Management Policies and Requirements Manual. The procedure also describes the actions for coordination, review and approval of amendments thereto. 52l Contract and Subcontract Review Actions (CRP-PR-03) i This procedure establishes the framework for Project Office implementation 45 l of required DOE procurement regulations. 27 Preparation of Amendments to and Maintenance of the PSAR and ER (CRP-PS-01) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for preparation of periodic amendments to both the PSAR and ER. The procedure also details the actions for coordination, review and approval of PSAR or ER 10 40 documentation forwarded to NRC.
,,.I' \SC O
Amend. 52 17A-72 Oct. 1979
Processing of Responses to Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspection Reports and Their Follow-up During Design and Construction (CRP-QA-14) This procedure defines the responsibilities and acticas for the review of NRC Inspection reports by the CRBRP Project Office. The procedure also details the actions for preparation and coordination of the formal CRBRP Project Office response to NRC. Arranaing for Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspections (CRP-QA-15) This procedure defines the responsibilities for internal handling of notification of NRC inspections that are to be conducted. The pro-cedure also describes the communication links and coordination channels for the necessary arrangements. Inspection, Examination and Test (CRP-QA-16) This procedure defines the responsibilities for the preparation for and performance of quality assurance inspections, examinations and tests during design development, procurement, construction, installation, start-up, operation, raaintenance and modification of the CRBRP. Measuring and Test Equipment Calibration and Control (CRP-QA-17) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the verification that measuring and test equipment used for inspections, examinations or tests are properly calibrated and controlled. Administration of Quality Assurance Auditing (CRP-QA-19) This procedure defines the responsibilities for the planning, conduct, follow-up, and close out of quality assurance audits. This procedure also details the actions of the quality assurance audit administrator in documenting the audit activit',. Preparation, Maintenance and Con + ol of Project Office Quality Assurance Manual (CRP-QA-20) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the pre-paration, distribution, maintenance and control of the CRBRP Quality 10 40 Assurance Manual. ,
'i^) )0\ Amend. 52 17A-75 Oct. 1979
O Conduct of Product Audits (CRP-QA-21) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the pre-paration, conduct and reporting of quality assurance product audits by the CRBRP Project Office. The procedure also details the actions of the audit team in the course of the eva}uation of selected products for conformance to quality requirements. Conduct of Programmatic Audits (CRP-QA-22) This procedure defines the responsibilities for the preparation, conduct, and reporting of quality assurance programmatic audits by the CR3RP Project Office. The procedure details the actions of the audit team in the course of the evaluation of programatic practices for conformance 45 to the quality assurance program requirements. Personnel Indoctrination (CRP-QA-24) This procedure defines the responsibilities and actions to provide for the indoctrination of CRBRP Project Office personnel who carry out duties affecting the quality of CRBRP Plant structures, systems and components. Administration of Personnel Certification and Records (CRP-QA-25) This procedure defines the responsibilities for the administration of certification for Quality Assurance Division personnel directly in-volved in quality verification, testing, evaluation or audit activities. The procedure also details the actions associated with collection and mainterance of records pertaining to personnel certification. Personnel Certification (CRP-QA-26) This procedure defines the responsibilities and actions necessary to identify areas of quality importance for which qualification or certifi-cation o' personnel are required. The procedure also details the actions for veritying the adequacy of personnel training programs, certification practices and documentation. Unusual Occurrence Report Preparation and Disposition (CRP-QA-27) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for documenting , an unusual occurrence observed during the course of work on the CRBRP Project. The procedure also details the action related to evaluation of the reportability of the event to NRC as well as the channels for 10 40 reporting to NRC. O Amend. 45 17A-76 July 1978 l l lb2
ATTACHMENT 11 PROCEDURE RELEASE SCHEDULE CRP Procedure Number Title Scheduled Release Date 52l CRP-CN-02 Processing of Field f.hange Requests July 1, 1980
, l lb) 45 40 Amend. 52 17A-77 Oct.1979
REQUIREMENT OF IMPLE. VENTING 00C M NT PEW (5 10CFR 50 APPENDIX B CRITERION TITLE D0C. NO. TITLE INSTRUCTIONS REF. D0C.. ETC. I Organization BCP Supply Program Description CRBRP Quality Assarance Charter CRP-DR-02 Crganization Plan and Functional Statenents CRP-QA-24 Personnel Indoctrination CRP-CA-25 Adninistration of Personnel Certification and Records CRP-QA-25 Personnel Certification
!! Program BOP Supply Program Description CRBRP Quality Assurance Charter CFP-AA-01 Management ProcedJres N CRP-A.1-05 Centralized Action Correspondeace Control System 7
a Ch?-AA-07 CRP-AA-11
- h. a co-tru erwram reetrC of Project Office Procedures Manual
- CRP-AA-14 Controlle.1 Documents CRP-PC-03 CRSDP Pro;ect "anthly Progress Report CRP-QA-01 Quality Assurance Program Managernent Review Meetings CRD-CA-03 Quality Assurance Program Progress and Status Review and Reportieg CRP-QA-12 Review of Contractor Quality Assurance Plans and Procedures CRP-QA-20 Preparation. Maintenance and Control of Project Office
" Quality Assurance Manual
.. BRD-PC-7.1 Indoctrination and Training
!!! Design Control BE-qA-1.18 Trainin) and Certification of QA Personnel Delegated
- IV Procurement Document C6ntrol CRP-EN-02 Processing Principal Design Docwents CRP-PR-02 TVA Purchases of CRBRP Ite75 tRP-CA-ll Qaality' Assurance Review of ProcuremEct Documents CO BRC-E-2.4 Vendcr/ Contractor Cocuments Document Status Reports BRD-PC-3.5 3 BRD-CA-1.21 Bid Review for Ouality Reauiremeats QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CPR 50. APPENDIX $
Rb' e co i Figure 17C-3 BALANCE OF PLANT (B0P) SUPPLY QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX
REQUIRCwEMT OF 10 CFR 50 APPEN0!X 8 IwPLEMENTING COCl?ENT REMARKS CRITER10N TITLE D0C. NO. TITLE INSTRUCTIONS REF. 00C.. ETC. V Instructions. Procedures and CRP-AA-01 Maragement Procedures ___ Crawings CRP-AA-03 Preparation of Correspondence CRp-AA.ll Control of Project Of fice Procedures Manual CRP-AA-14 Controlled Documentt CRP-QA-20 Pre:aration. Maintenance and Control of Project Office Quality Assurance Ma9ual BRD-PC-1.5 Procedure Preparation BRC-PC-1.6 Procedare hu-bering ERD-PC-3.6 Distribution B0.0-0A-1.2 Preparation. Control and Distribution of QA Instructions BRD-;* ' 1 Preparnien of QA Procedures e* BR3-QA-1.19 Procedsre W*iting Format y BR3-QA-3.1000 Project Su-veillance BRD-0A-3.1000-1 Preparation of Project Surveillance / Acceptance Checklists. .c. Su rary & Report Toms N VI Document Control CRP-AA-01 Fanagerent Procedares CRP-AA-02 Filing Procedure for Official Project Files CRP-AA-03 Preparation of Ccrrespondence CRP-AA-04 Inconing Mail CPP-AA-11 Cutrol of Project Office Procedures Manual CRP-AA-07 Peports Control Preva9 CRP-EN-02 Processing Principal Cesign Documents CRP-PR-01 TVA Purchases of CFERP Ite"s CRP-QA-20 Preparation. Maintecance and Control of Project Office Quality Assurance Manual BRD-E-2.4 Yeador/ Contractor Docurents BRC-PC-1.5 Pro <.edare
- reparation DRO-PC-3.6 Distribution V!! Control of Purchased Mate-rials. Equipment and Service . CPP-AA-03 Preparation of Correspondence
_. 1 Q'JALITY ASSURANCE ROGRAM IN0EX VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR $0. APPEN0!! 8 3mF
- "3
~
Fir re 17C-3 (Cont'd) BALANCE OF PLANT (B0P) SUFPLY QUALITY J , ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX e - N ui WN Ln O O O
REQUIRDi!NT OF 10 CFR 50 APPENDIX B IMPt[MENTING 00CtNENT
!!!SIRUCTIONS CRITER!ON TITLE D0C. fl0. TITt! 'Ei 00C.. ETC.
CRP-AA-04 incoming Mall CRP-EN-02 Processing Principal Deston Documents CPP-PR-02 TVA Purchases of CRBRP Items CRP-CA-01 Quality Assurance Program Management Review Meetings CRP-0 A-02 Activity Planning CRP-CA-07 Quality Records CRP-QA-08 Quality Assurance Program Progress and Status Review end Repor tir.g CRP-CA-10 Quality Assurance Review and Approval of Engineering Documents CRP-QA-ll Quality Assurance Reviev of Procurement Documents CRP-Q A-12 Review of Contractor Quality Assurance Plans aad Procedares
- CRP-QA-13 Ferformance of Project Surveillance
$e CRP-QA-16 CRP-QA-18 Inspection, Enarination and Test Qaality Assur nce Participation in Preparation of A Approved Source Lists
" BRD-E-2.2 Prequalif tration of Bidders BRD-E-2.3 Technical Evaluation of Bids BRD-E-2.4 Vendor / Contractor Documents BRD-CA-1.11 Vendor Qaality Assurance Prequalification Program BRD-Qa-l.11-1 Evaluation of Prequalification Questionnaire BRD-QA-l.12 Vendor QA Qualification Survey BRD-QA-1.12-1 Perfornance. Eysluation and Reporting of Preaward Surveys
_, BRD-QA-1.16 QA Review of SuNtittals BRD-QA-1.16 1 Review of Design / Document Submittals BRD-QA-1.21 Bid Review of Quality Requirements y ERD-CA-1.25 Nonconformar.ce Review Board (NRS) BRD-QA-3.2 Post Award Quality Survey ~ BRD-QA-3.101 Source Surveillance BRD-QA-3.101-2 Quality Assurance Completton Record QUALITY A55tlRANCE PROGRAM INDEX VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR 50. APPENDlI B crs Figure 17C-3 (Cont'd.). Balance of Plant (B0P) Supply Quality Assurance Program Ir.dex oF n r+ (D e 3 s e N (Fl WN
RiQUIRE. MENT OF REMARKS 10 CFR 50 APPEN0!I g IMPLEPENTING DOCUMENT INSTRUCTIONS DOC. NO. TITLE REF. 00C.. ETC. CRITERION TITLE BRD-CA-3.101-3 Contractor Nonconfomance Control B RD-QA-3.101-4 Source Surveillance Planning BRD-C A-3.101-5 Source Surveillance Checklist BRD-QA-3.101-6 As-Built Verification of Equipment VIII Identification and Control of Materials. Parts and Compo-nents BRD-QA-3.2 Post Award Quality Survey Delegated IX Control of special Processes X Inspection CRP-G A-02 Activity Planning k" CRP-QA-16 Inspection. Examination and Test Source Surveillance
$a BRD-QA-3.101 B RD-Q A-3.101-4 Source Surveillance Planning A BRD-QA-3.101-5 Source Surveillance Checklist CRP-QA-02 Activity Planning /
XI Test Control Perfomance of Project Surveillance CRP-QA-13 CRP-Q A-16 Inspe.? ion. Examination and Test BRD-E-2.4 Vendor / Contractor Documents BAD-QA-1.16 QA Review of Sutaittals XII Control of Measuring and Test Equipment cmp-QA-17 Measuring and Test Equipment Calibration and Control Delegated. XIII Handling. Storaye and Shipping Inspection. Test and Operating BRD-QA-3.101-2 Quality Assurance Completion Record XIV Status QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR 50. APPENDIX B on RM Figure 17C-3 (Cont'd.). Balance of Plant (B0P) Supply Quality Assurance Program Index
*3 Q.
_a
- D 3
wj O O O
REQUIPEPENT OF 10 CrR 50 aPPE O!X 8 IPPtEMENTfMG DoctMNT REMARTS INSTRUCTIONS CRITER!ON TITLE DOC NO. TITLE REF. 00C.. ETC. IV Nonconforming Materials CRP-AA-04 Incoming Mail Parts and Components CRP-EN-02 Processing Principal Design Documents CRP-0P-02 Operations Division Review and Concurrence with Engineering Design Data CRP-PR-02 TVA Purchases of CRBRP Items CRP-QA-03 Control of Nonconformances CRP-QA-05 Procesting of Unusual Occurrence Reports CRP-04-27 Unusual Occurrence Report Preparation and Disposition BRD-E-2.5 Vendor / Contractor Waiver Requests BRD-QA-l.13 Corrective Action Request (CAR) [ o BRD-QA-1.25 B RD-Q A- 1.1000 Nonconformance Review Board (NRS) Deviation Reporting and Control g BRD-L-2.3 Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance
$ IV! Corrective Action CRP-EN-02 BRD-CP-02 Frocessing Principal Design Documents Operations Division Review and Concurrence with Engineering Design Data CRP-QA-03 Control of Nonconfonnances CRP-QA-04 Corrective Action Requests CRP-QA-05 Processing of Unusual Occurrence Reports , CRP-QA-06 Nonconformance. Unusual Occurrence and Corrective Action Analysts CRP-QA-09 Quality Trend Analysis y CRP-0A-27 Unusual Occurrence Report Preparation and Disposition BRD-0A-1.13 Corrective Actio1 Request (CAP)
BRD-QA-1.25 Nonconfonr.ance Feview Board (NR9) BRD-QA-1.1000 Deviation Reporting and Control O QUAT!TV ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR 50. APPEND!I B CO o> Balance of Plant (B0P) Supply Quality Assurance Program Index gg Figure 17C-3 (Cont'd.).
*3
-4 .
D
% U1
@N
REQUIRfMNT OF 10 CFR 50 APPEN0ft 8 IMPtfMNTING 00CtMENT REMARKS INSTRUCTIONS CRITERION TITLE 000. NO. TITLE REF 00C.. ETC. XVII Quality Assurance Records CRP-AA-0? Filing Procedure for Official Project Files CRP-AA-04 incoming Mail CRP-04-07 Quality Records CRD-QA-1.18 Training and Certification of QA Personnel BRD-PC-3.1 Filing BRD-E-2.4 Vendor / Contractor Documents W Audits IVIII CRP-QA-19 Administration of Quality Assurance Auditing y CRP-QA-21 Conduct of Product Audits e CRP-QA-22 Conduct of Programatic Audits A BRD-QA-1.13 Corrective Action Request (CAR) p BRD-QA-3.2 Post Award Quality Survey BRD-QA-4.2 Audit of Home Office QA Activities BRD-QA-4.3 Project Audit BRO-QA-4.3-1 Project Audit Checklist BRD-QA-4.3-2 Preparation of Project Audit Matrix Record BRD-QA-4.4 Quality Assurar.ce Audits at Contractors / Suppliers QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX VER$US REQuiFMNTS OF 10 CFR 50. APPfle!X 3
? L' F@a.
g- Figure 17C-3 (Cont'd.). Balance of Plant (80P) Supply Quality Assurance Program Index
~w
._.s N
-a N
a wO G O O O
REQUIREWENT OF IMPLEMENTING DOCUMENT REMARKS
~
RDT F2-2 SECTION TITLE 00C. NO. T!TLE INSTRUCTIONS N'JMBER REF. DOC. . ETC. 2, Management & Planning 2.2 Quality Assurance Program Quality Assurance Program Gescription Quality Assurance Charter 2 BRD-PC-1.4 Quality Assurance Plan 2.2.1 Planning Quality Assurance Program Description 27 BRD-PC-1.4 Quality Assurance Plan CRP-QA-02 Activity Planning 10 [ 2.3 Crganization 2.3.1 Responsibility and Authority Quality Assurance Program Cescription 3 27l Cu'11ty ^55uc' Ch*rt'r All Procedures Responsibility BRbPC-1.4 Quality Assurance Plan Sections Cft?-DR-02 Organization Plan and functional Statements
, 2.3.2 Training and Indoctrination CRP-CA-24 Persorrel Indoctrination BRD.PC-7.1 Indoctrination and Training 10 2.3.3 Personnel Qualification CRP 'A-25 Administration of Personnel Certification and Records
" CRP-LA-26 Personnel Certification BPD-(R-1.18 Training and Certification of Quality Assurance Persor....! ___. 2.4 Documentation d 2.4.1 Politics and Procedures Quality Assurance Program Description CD All Procedures Policy Sections CRERP Management Policies and Requirements 27l CRP-AA-01 CRP-AA-03 Macagement Procedures Preparaticn of Correspondence 45l40 CRP-AA-:l Control of Project Of fice Procedures Manual 10 QUALITY ASSURM.c PF;' GRAM INDEX VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF ROT F 2-2
~ <o xg Figure 17C-4 BALANCE OF PLANT (B0P) SUPPLY QUALITY co u ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX
+
REQUIREMENT OF ROT F 2-2 1MPLEMENTING DOCUMENT REPARKS SECTIOM INSTRUCT!DNS NUMBER TfTLE 000. NO. T!Ttt REF. 00C.. ETC. CRP-AA-14 Controlled Documents CRP-QA-20 Preparation. Maintenance and Centrol of Project Office Quality Assurance Manual ERD-PC-1.4 Quality Assurance P16n BRO-QA-1.2 Preparation. Control and Distribution of Quality Assurance Instructions BRD-PC-1.5 Procedure Preparation ERG-PC-3.6 Distribation BRD-QA-1,3 Preparation of Quality Assurance Procedures ERD-QA-1.19 Procedure Writing format C O 2.4.2 Quiity Records CRP-AA-02 filing Procedure for Official Project Files Quality Records CRP-QA-07 1 cn BRD-PC-3.1 Filing 2.4.3 Quality Status Reports Ci<P- AA-07 Reports Control Progrse CRP-PC-03 CRBRP Project Monthly Progress Report CRP-QA-01 Quality Assurance Program Management Review Meeting CRP-QA-OS Quality Assurance Program Prcgress and Status Review and Reporting ORD-PC-1.4 Quality Assurance Plan 2.5 Audits and Reviews 2.5.1 Quality Audits See Section 8 2.5.2 Management Reviews CRP-QA-01 Quality Assurance Program Panageme.it Review Heettegs 2.6 Corrective Action CRP-AA-06 Centralized Action Correspondence Control System CRP-QA-04 Corrective Action Requests CRP-QA-05 Processing of unusual Occurrence Reports QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRMI INDEX VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF RDT F 2-2 RE n ro 15- Figure 17C-4 (Cont'd.). Balance of Plant (B0P) Supply Quality Assurance Program Index w 3 mm M O O O
REQUIREMENT OF RMU IMPLEMEWIM3 DOCUMENT RDT F 2-2 SECTION INSTRUCT!CNS NUMBER TITLE D00. NO. TITLE REF. DOC. ETC. CRP-QA-06 Nonconformance, Unusual Occurrence and Corrective Action Analysis CRP-QA-09 Quality Trend Analysis CRP-QA-27 Unusual Occurrence Report Preparation and Disposition BRD-QA-1.13 Corrective Action Request (CAR) 2.7 Engineering Holds Delegated 27l 2.8 Unusual Occurrence Reporting CRP-QA-05 Processing of Unusual Occurrence Reports Unusual Occurrence Report Preparation and Disposition l10 CRP-QA-27 45 40 cesign a Developeent Delegated 3. C
?
O A so N QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX VERSUS REQUIREENTS OF RDT F 2-2 pg Figure 17C-4 (Continued) Balance of Plant (B0P) Supply Quality Assurance Program Index E@ 2
REQUIREMENT OF ROT F 2-2 IMPLEMfMTING DOCtMNT REMARKS SECTIM NUMBER INSTRUCT!0h5 TITLE 000. NO. TITLE REF. 00C.. ETC.
- 4. Procurement Partially Delegated 4.2 Procurement Planning CRP-EN-09 Preparatton and Maintenance of the Project Level 1 Schedule CRP-QA-02 Activity Planning 4.3 Procurement Requirements CRP-EN-02 Processing Principal Design Documents CRP.EN-04 Processing Engineering Chancies CRP-EN-05 Configuration Control Board Actions w
CRP-0P-02 Operations Division Review and Concurrence with Engineering Design Oa'a y CRP-PR-02 TVA Purchases of CRBRP ltems e
-A-CRP-QA-10 Quality Assurance Peview and Approval of Engineering Documents 4.4 Procurement Document Review CRP-EN-02 Processing Principal Design DocuMnts CRP-EN-G1 Processing Engineering Changes CRP-EN-D5 Configuration Contro! Board Actions CRP-QA-11 Quality Assurance Review of Procurement Documents BRD-E-2.3 M hntcal tvaluation of Bids BRD-PC-3.5 Document Status Reports BRD-QA-1.21 Bid b tew for Quality Requirements 4.5 Evaluation and Selection of Procurement Sources CRP-PR-02 TVA Purchases of CRBRP ltems CRP-QA-18 Quality Assurance Participation in Preparation of Approved Source Lists BRD-QA-1.12 vendor Quality ? urance Qualification Survey BRD-QA-1.12 1 Perforr:ance. Eva uation and Planning of Pre-Award Surveys BRD-QA-l.ll Vendor Quality Assurance Prequalification Program BRD-QA-1.11-1 Evaluatien of Prequalification Questionnaire BR3-E-2-2 Prequalification of Bidders QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEI VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF RDT F 2-2 8
n ro
- :s c1.
{ WN Figure 17C-4 (Cont'd.). Balan'.e of Plant (B0P) Supply Quality Assurance Program Index _s M
) \
U e O O
"e
-m REQUIREMENT OF RDT F 2-2 IMPLEMENTING 00CtMNT REMARKS INSTRUCTIONS TITLE 00C. NO. TITLE REF. 00C.. ETC.
Control of Configuration Partially 4.6 Delegated 4.6.1 Contract Change Control 4.6.2 As-Guilt Verification CRP-QA-02 Activity Planning CRP-QA-13 Performance of Project Surveillance CPP-QA-16 Inspection Examination and Test y BRD-QA-3.101 Source Surveillance 4 BRD-Q A-3.101-2 Qualtty Assurance Completion Record As-Built Verification of Equipment p BRO-QA-3.101-6 A 4.7 Measuring and Test Equipment
- Calibration and Control CRP-QA-17 Measuring and Test Equipment Calibration and Control 4.8 Source Surveillance and Inspection CRP-QA-02 Activity Planning CRP-Q A-13 Perforamnce of Project Surveillance CRP-QA-16 Inspection. Examination and Test BRD-QA-3.2 Post Award Quality Survey
_.2 B RD-QA-3.101 Source Surveillance BRD-QA- 3.101-4 Source Surveillance Planning
) BRD-QA-3.101-5 Source aurveillance Checklist BRD-QA-3.1000 Project Surveillance BRD-QA-3.1000-1 Preparation of Project Surveillance / Acceptance Check-lists, Sunnary and Peport Toms - B R D-QA-3.101-3 Contractor f:onconfonnance Control .ps QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEX VERSLF WEQJ1REMENTS OF RDT F 2-2 RE e ro Figure 17C-4 (Cont'd.). Balance of Plant (B0P) apply Quality Assurance Program Index 15.
e N U1
@N
REQUIREMENT OF RDT F 2-2 IMPLtMNTING DOCt,*ii4T (A9KS SECTION INSTRUCTIONS NUMBER TITLE D0C. NO. TITLE REF. 00C.. ETC. 4.9 Rece.ving Inspection 4.9.1 Planr.ing a d Inspection CRP-QA-02 4ctivity Planning CRP-QA-16 Inspection. Emamination and Test 4.9.2 Documentation CRP-AA-04 Incoming Mail CRP AA-14 Controlled Documents CRP-EN-02 Processing Principal Design Documents CRP-OP-02 Operations Division Review and Concurrence with Engineering Design Data w CRP-PR-02 TVA Purchases of CRBRP Items N CRP-QA-10 Quality Assurance Review and Approval of Engineering 9 m CRP-QA-12 Documents Review of Contractor Quality Assurance Plans and c3 Procedures BRD-E-2.4 Vendor / Contractor Documents B RD-Q A-l .16 Quality Assurance Review of Submittels BRD-0A-1.16-1 Review of Design / Document Submittals 4.9.3 Disposition of Received Items 4.10 Control of Noncorforming II'"5 CRP-QA-03 Control of Nonconfomances Delegate! BRD-E-2.4 Vendor / Contract 'r Documents BRD-QA-1.25 t!onconfcnnance Review Board (NRB) BRD-QA-1.1000 Deviation Reporting and Control BRD-E-2.5 Vendor / Contract Waiver Requests BRD-L-2.3 Reporting of Defects and honcompliances BRD-QA-1.13 Corrective Action Request (CAR) 4.11 Control of Received Items De wgated 4.12 Quality Audits See Section 8 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEI VERSUS REQUIREMENTS OF RDT F 2-2 on oa F@
.2 m Figure 17C-4 (Cont'd.). Balance of Plant (B0P) Supply Quality Assurance Program Index em a
A M N (. D. O O O
REQUIREMENT OF RDT F-2 fMPitNENTING DOCtMNT RD wtK5 IftSTRUCTIOn TITLE DOC, NO. TITtt RF. TOC. . ETC. BRD-QA-4.3 l'roject Audit l BRD-CA-4.3 1 Project Audit Checklist 8RD.QA-4.4 Quality Assurance Audits at Contractor / Suppliers 8.8 Reporting and Corrective Action CRP-QA-21 Conduct of Product Audits g CRP-QA-22 Coeduct of Programatic Audits N BRD-QA-1.1) Corrective Action Request (CAA) O BRD-QA-1.1000 Deviation Reporting and Control Audit of Horie Of fice Quality Assurance Activities M u ERD-QA-4 2 PRD-QA-4.3 Project Audit c~ BRD-QA-4.3-1 Project Audit Checklist Quat m ASSURANCE PROGRAM INDEI VER$US REQUIRCMENTS OF WT F F 4 c w RN P$a-G' Figure 17C-4 (Cont'd.). Balance of Plant (B0P) Supply Quality Assurance Program Index 5A
ATTACHMENT 1 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURE DESCRIPTIONS 27l Management Procedures (CRP-AA-01) This procedure defines the responsibilities and actions for the pre-paration, review, approval, distribution and revision of CRBRP Project Office procedures. This procedure establishes the framework for the dissemin-17 ation of basic policies, information and procedural practices. Filing Procedure for Official Project Files (CRP-AA-02) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for establishing a Project Office-wide file identification, collection, maintenance and retrieval system. The procedure details the particulars. for handling and filing all official Project documents. 54 Preparation of Correspondence (CRP-AA-03.) This procedure describes the approved format for the preparation and handling of Project Office correspondence. Incoming Mail (CRP-AA-04) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for receipt and control of mail incoming to the Project Office. The procedure also des-cribes the measures to be effected for preparation, distribution and main-tenance of controlled documents. Centralized Action Correspondence Control System (CRP-AA-06) This procedure covers the establishment of action correspondence identifi-cation and control and the access of action correspondence status infor-52 mation. Reports Control Program (CRP-AA-07) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the evaluation of the usefulness of inter-Project Office reports. The procedure also describes the process for approval of iew reports and establishes a 40 Project Office Reports Directory. 10 Control of Project Office Procedures Manual (CRP-AA-11) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for preparation, maintenance, and control of the Project Office Procedures Manual which contains copies of all Project Office procedures including those for 45 quality assurance activities. Controlled Documents (CRP-AA-14) 52 This procedure defines the responsibilities and actions of Proje:.t Office Divisions for controlled documents generated by Project participants. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 17C-52 j ]g/
]1
O Organization Plan and Functional Statements (CRP-DR-02) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for maintenance of functional statements for Project Office organizational elements, delegations of authority and organization charts. The procedure also 40 describes the process for securing approval for proposed changes. 10 1i 198 g 17C-52a Amend. 45 July 1978
Processing Principal Design Documents (CRP-EN-02) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for conduct of internal reviews, reconciliation of comments and final action on Data Type I documents. This procedure also covers the internal resiew of Data Type 2, 3 and 4 documents submitted for information. 3 Processing Engineering Changes (CRP-EN-04) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for review and approval of Class I Engineering Change Proposals (ECP) through the mechanics of a Configuration Control Board (CCB). Configuration Control Board Actions (CRP-EN-05) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities of the Configuration Control Board in handling and disposing of Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs). Preparation and Maintenance of the Project Level 1 Schedule (CRP-EN-09) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for preparing and maintaining the Level I schedule. The procedure also describes the pro-cesses for monitcring, controlling, and documenting progress and changes. Operations Division Review and Concurrence with Engineering Design Data (CRP-0P-02) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the review and concurrence for engineering data by the Project Office Operations Division. The procedure also describes the method used by the Operations Division for securing TVA Operations review and comments. CRBRP Project Monthly Progress Report (CRP-PC-03) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the preparation, review, approval and distribution of the Project Monthly Progress Report. TVA Purchases of CR3RP Items (CRP-PR-02) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities associated with CRBRP Procurement activity assigned to TVA. The procedure also describes the review and approval requirements. Quality Assurance Program Management Review Meetings (CRP-QA-01) This procedure defines the responsibilities and actions for planning, scheduling, conducting and the reporting of results of the bi-monthly, 40 Project-wide quality assurance program management review meetings. 10 4 3
. Amend. 52
, I 1I/Q r/ Oct. 1979 17C-53
Preparation, Maintenance and Control of Project Office Quality Assurance Manual CRP-QA-20 This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for the preparation, distribution, maintenaace and control of the CRBRP Quality Assurance Manual. Conduct of Product Audits (CRP-QA-21) This procedure defines tre actions and responsibilities for the preparation, conduct and reporting of quality assurance product audits by the CRBRP Project Office. The procedure also details the actions of the audit team in the course of the evaluation of selected products for conformance to quality requirements. Conduct of Progranmatic Audits (CRP-QA-22) This procedure defines the responsibilities for the preparation, conduct, and reporting of quality assurance programmatic audits by the CRBRP l Project Office. The procedure details the actions of the audit team in the course of the evaluation of programmatic practices for conformance to quality program requirements. Personnel Indoctrination (CRP-QA-24) This procedure defines the responsibilities and actions to provide for the indoctrination of CRBRP Project Office personnel who carry out duties affecting the quality of CRBRP Plant structures, systems and components. Administration of Personnel Certification and Records (CRP-QA-25) This procedure defines the responsibilities for the administration of certification for Quality Assurance Division personnel directly involved in qualitv verification, testing, evaluation or audit activities. The procedure also details the actions associated with collection and main-tenance of records pertaining to personnel certification. Personnel Certification (CRP-QA-26) This procedure defines the responsibilities and actions necessary to identify areas of quality importance for which qualification er certifi-cation of personnel are required. The procedure also details the actions for verifying the adequacy of oersonnel training programs, certification practices and documentation. Unusual Occurrence Report Preparation and Disposition (CRP-QA-27) This procedure defines the actions and responsibilities for documenting an unusual occurrence observed during the course of work on the CRBRP Project. The procedure also details the action related to evaluation of the reportability of the event to NRC as well as the channels for reporting 40 to NRC. 10 17C-56 $ 2 Amend. 40 July 1977
AE PROCEDURES Procedure Preparation (BRD-PC-1.5) This procedure establishes the method for preparation, review, approval and updating of all Project procedures except those numbered "BRD-QA-xx". 52 Filing (BRD-PC-3.1) This procedure establishes the methods and categories to be used in Project files; it contains provisions for a QA history file in compliance with Criterion VII of 10CFR50, Appendix B. Document Status Reports (BRC PC-3.5) This procedure establishes the types, content and frequency of technical document status reporting. It includes drawing lists, specification lists and vendor document lists. Distribution (BRD-PC-3.6) This procedure establishes the method for maintaining distribution re-quirements of Project documents. Indoctrination and Training (BRD-PC-7.1) This procedure establishes the requirements for indoctrination of Project personnel in the goals, policies and procedures of the Project, training in the Project work methods and provides documentation of accomplishment of the procedure activities. Prequalification of Bidaers (BRD-E-2.2) This procedure establishes the method of prequalification of prospective bidders for technical and financial capability. It also provides for generation of a prospective bidder's list using the above information and data accumulated via BRD-QA-1.ll. Technical Evaluation of Bids (BRD-E-2.3) This procedure defines the methods to be used for engineering review and 40 evaluation of bids. 10 1 " 1, 2Ol Amend. 52 17C-57 Oct. 1979
Vendor / Contractor Documents (BRD-E-2.4) This procedure provides the methods for receipt, logging, review, processing and return of vendor / contractor documents. 52 Vendor / Contractor Waiver Requests (BRD-E-2.5) This procedure provides the method by which vendor / contractor waiver requests are received, evaluated, dispositioned and the vendor notified of the results. Reporting of Defects and Non-Compliance (BRD-L-2.3) This procedure establishes the method for review of defects or non-compliance as defined by 10CFR21 and significant deficiencies as defined 52 by Paragraph 50.55(e) of 10CFR50. Pre)aration, Control and Distribution of Quality Assurance Instructions BR)-QA-1.2) This procedure establishes the guidelines for preparation, issue, control and use of quality assurar.ce instructions by QA personnel. Preparation of QA Procedures (BRD-QA-1.3) 52l This procedure establishes the method for preparation and control of "QA" designated procedures. Vendor Quality Assurance Prequalification Program (BRD-QA-1.ll) The procedure establishes the method of prequalifying a prospective bidder's quality assurance program tor a bidder's list. Vendor Quality Assurance Qualification Survey (BRD-QA-1.12) This procedure establishes the method and criteria for conducting a preaward survey and evaluation of a prospective vendor's or subcon-tractor's quality assurance / quality control system. Corrective Action Request (CAR) (BRD-QA-1.13) This procedure establishes the methods and documentation used in re-40 questing corrective / preventive actions via a system of graded requests. 10 17C-58 41
^i 202 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
Quality Assurance Review of Submittals (BRD-QA-1.16) This procedure provides guidelines for a standard approach to quality assurance review of submitted documents. Training and Certification of Quality Assurance Personnel (BRD-QA-1.18) This procedure establishes the training and certification methods for quality assurance personnel who perform nondestructive examinations and inspection of materials, parts, structures or systems. Procedure Writing Format (BRD-QA-1.19) This procedure provides a guide to the s+ 3ardized format to be used in writing procedures for the BRD. Bid Review for Quality Requirements (BRD-QA-1.21) This procedure provides guidelines for a standard approach for quality assurance review of bids. Nonconformance Review Board (NRB) (BRD-QA-1.25) This procedure provides guidelines for the composition, operation and generation of documentation by the Nonconformance Review Board. It provides for membership of the Authorized ASME Inspector when con-sidering items under the jurisdiction of the ASME Code. 52l Deviation Reporting and Control (BRD-QA-1.1000) This procedure establishes the methods and documentation required to report and disposition deviations. 52l Post Award Quality Survey (BRD-QA-3.2) This procedure provides a uniform approach in determining a vendor's ability to comply with quality assurance requirements in procurement documents. Source Surveillance (BRD-QA-3.101) This procedure establishes the scope, guidelines, responsibilities and control of source surveillance activities, from initial planning 52l through release for shipment. Project Surveillance (BRD-QA-3.1000) This procedure provides a means and guidelines for examining the effective-ness of the Project Quality Assurance Program on a less formal basis than auditing. 10 40 17C-59 y\ m Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
Audit of Home Office Quality Assurar e Activities (BRD-QA-4.2) This procedure provides a uniform approach for conducting audits of home office quality assurance activities. Project Audit (BRD-QA-4.3) This procedure establishes the guidelines for auditing Project activities for conformance to established procedutas and assessing the effectiveness of the procedures. Quality Assurance Audits at Contractor / Suppliers (BRD-QA-4.4) This procedure establishs the guidelines for auditing activities of vendors and contractors for conformance to approved quality assurance program plans and the implementation and effectiveness of established 27 procedures that execute those plans. Evaluation of Prequalification Questionnaire (BRD-QA-1.ll-1) This instruction provides direction for evaluating a Q. A. Prequalification Questionnaire when considering the suitability of a vendor as an acceptable sou rce. Performance, Evaluation and Reporting of Preaward Surveys (BRD-QA-1.12-1) This instruction defines the actions required in planning, performing and reporting the results of a preaward survey. Review of Design / Document Submittals (BRD-QA-1.16-1) This instruction provides the checklist that defines the minimum QA review of design documents and vendor submitted documents. Preparation of Project Surveillance / Acceptance Checklists, Summary and Report Fonns BRD-QA-3.1000-1) This instruction defines the requirements for a surveillance checklists, methods of summarizing the results and reporting them. 52l . Quality Assurance Completion Record (BRD-QA-3.101-2) This instruction provides for recording ne condition of a component and its documentation immediately prior to aipment. 52 40 10
204 1
17C-60 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
Contractor Nonconformance Control (JRD-QA-3.101-3) This instruction provides the method of surveillance and assessment of a vendor / contractor nonconformance control system. Source Surveillance Planning (BRD-QA-3.101-4) This instruction provides the requirements for planning a source surveillance 52l activity. Source Surveillance Checklist (BRD-QA-3.101-5) , This instruction provides for generation of checklists to be used in source surveillance. It requires reviews and approval of the checklists prior to use. As-Built Verification of Equipment (BRD-QA-3.101-6) This instruction provides guidelines for verification of Vendor / Contractor as-built configuration. It documents the activity by generation of a 52l QA Completion Record. Project Audit Checklist (BRD-QA-4.3-1) This instruction provides for the preparation of checklists to be used in Project and home office QA activities audits. Preparation of Project Audit Matrix Record (BRD-QA-4. -2) This instruction provides instruction for the preparation and maintenance of an audit matrix record to be used as a guide in determining required 40 audit areas.
.10
'1
} LO'a O
Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 17C-60a
CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLANT A DESCRIPTION OF THE CONSTRUCTOR QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE N0.
0.0 INTRODUCTION
17F-1 0.1 ORGANIZATION 17F-1 0.1.1 Organizational Arrangement 17F-1 0.1.2 Responsibility and Authority 17F-2 0.1.3 Qualification Requirements of the Project 17F-3 QA Manager 0.2 PROGRAM 17F-3 FIGURES 17 F-1 Company Organization for Quality Assurance 17F-4 17 F-2 Ouality Assurance Department Organization 17F-5 17 F-3 Quality Assurance Interrelationships 17F-6 17 F-4 Scope of Constructor Quality Assurance Program 17F-7 Participation 52 17 F-5 Major Elements of the Constructor Program 17F-8 15
; 1 206 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
E r i R E ED NN
~s o I AC '!
G N T NTI N C s ESTOI O u E FCT E I AA L Tm S O B N a C s RQ O , C C STi - R C E T R m UT A Q r D C A E E R E NTr R M E o N s T N s I N o CTO i DI DNS
- c i
T R A FAVI C EQI o HI C D - t E C r
- r o
F F T mA A C . t T t S R T A A T S Q ! P o RE! TR NO - S EDI ERV NUI ACD - o MO RA FQ . E C N N I T O O I T E
- r u
C E A A E Y C R TC T N I J O F R NN E A DR I LE AC R A GR MU
- 2 C O I U UN S F R C S S QA TS o ES R NA 7 T
N E G N I R RA P ET Y RU E$ E$ A A TY ST
- M o
1 WTECE CI N II SL T C T e I L A SA s r REN AJI POG ERN VA U Q M A' 4 - E JF OF RA u o N g u DPE S FT R S i EPR A O F F CRE NET ARS QMT AA TRR _ RA BQ R RCB CGT C U Y EOS JRI S S A & W E T PN I M D _ n C Y E A R T N T CR , U I O s L A U F f _ GEEE J N o r s T Q P N T T FA 1 M r _ P R l[ m t C BA D n QF RQ u aAT F C F n. im c t E$ - F A r o D I F T S T rm wo mN TI EC y"E l E0
. CV EL D
N N
,R I _ JA E o F$1 T NI m.
O I T RVI EI R P I A T C 'g
',C EN ED NC
_ Rw E r u E r s c N AQ s i M S _ - E . - CI _ V - R c E N S T N _ r T s E S
- ] E I T RN LI L
C
)
S N [ ET ll O NSM S I IYO N T T G SI ORR A N E YV S I _ I EO TT P ANP C O L FTI REU EID ECS R IL . P E HA ! _ o R CU _ T Q U ( N O T S O B
- g,8 .
wN Q H R ,] ws@ qg
* , , ,NO w
O U ALI T Y ASSURANCE I NT E R R EL ATIO N S HIPS CRBRP PROJECT STONE a WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPOR ATION ASSIST SENIOR PROJECT c
!% NAGER PROJECT VANAGERS SENIOR SITE CONSTRl!CTION W ASSIST g /L > REPRESENTATIVE ,
E b 8 ;; 8 G II ' ASSISL CR P .ROJECT MANAGER QUALITY ASStRANCE CRBRP DIRECTION
, QUALITY CLIENT CONTACT PROJECT C MANAGER ASSURANCE a OA STAFF VICE PRESIDENT, QA 4 ? gj j POLICY AND MANAGER, QA STAFF QA AUTHORITY PROJECT MANAGERS 5
t DEPARTMENT ' AUDIT ' PROJECT QA MANAGER SERVICES U riririfnN kE iE ASSIST /AtoIT lf SUPERINTENDENT, m FIELD QC b b If 4 ASSIST AUDIT QUALITY SYSTEl15 B i nivlsin4
- SUPERINTENDENT PROCUREMENT FIELD QUALITY CONTROL QUALITY CONTROL $ DISTRICT CHIEF AUDIT $$
$ h ik bb ASSIST ASSIST POLICY PROCUREMENT
- h$
AUTHO"lTY QUALITY CONTROL *E 4 NDT 4 yg "
~'
DIVISION FIELD QUALITY 7 o
} CONTROL DIVISION 4--
- 35. ..
aa rv Q CO FIGURE 17F-3 O O e
THE CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLANT PRELIMIllARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT CHAPTER 17.0 - QUALITY ASSURANCE APPENDIX I 52l A DESCRIPTION OF THE GE-ARSD-RM QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY 52l ADVANCED REACTOR SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT SUNNYVALE, CALIFORNIA 1 ' 1
. 209 Amend. 52 Oct.1979
CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLANT 52 l A DESCRIPTION OF THE GE-ARSD-RM QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
0.0 INTRODUCTION
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171-1 1.0 ORGANIZATION. . . . . . .................. 171-2 2.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 9 3.0 DESIGN CONTROL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171-12 4.0 PROCUREMENT DOCUMENT CONTROL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171-17 5.0 INSTRUCTIONS, PROCEDURES AND DRAWINGS . . . . . . . . . . . 171-19 6.0 DOCUMENT CONTROL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17I-21 7.0 CONTROL OF PURCHASED MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES. . . 171-23 8.0 IDENTIFICATION AND CONTROL 0F MATERIALS, PARTS AND COMPONENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17I 26 9.0 CONTROL OF SPECIAL PROCESSES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i7I-27 10.0 INSPECTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171-28 11.0 TEST CONTROL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171-29 12.0 CONTROL 0F MEASURING AND TEST EQUIPMENT . . . . . . . . .. 17I-30 13.0 HANDLING, STORAGE AND SHIPPING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171-31 14.0 INSPECTION, TEST AND OPERATING STATUS . . . . . . . . . . . 171-32 15.0 NON-CONFORMING MATERIALS, PARTS OR COMPONENTS . . . . . . . 17I-33 16.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171-35 17.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE RECORDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17I-36 18.0 AUDITS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171-38 FIGURES 171-1 Organization of Quality Assurance Program 52 Pa r t i c i pa ti o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171-40 41
, Amend. 52 171-1 .;,1
. c 0 Oct. 1979
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) PAGE 171-2 GE-ARSD-Quality Program Management Organization. . . 171-41 171-3 GE-ARSD Product Assurance Organization . . . . . . . 171-42 171-4 Major elements of the GE-ARSD-RM QA Program. . . . . . 171-43 Tables 171-1 GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Program Index Versus Requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix "B". . . . . . . . 171-44 Attachments 171-1 GE ARSD Quality Assurance Document Descriptions. . . 17I-54 41 52 171-2 Schedule for Issuing Unreleased Procedures 171 69
]I' } 2ll Amend. 52 O
Oct.1979 171-11
APPENDIX I CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLANT 52l A DESCRIPTION OF THE GE ARSD-RM QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM n.0 INTRODUCTION A Quality Assurance Program has been estab.lished by the Genei al 52l Electric (GE) Company's Advanced Reactor Systems Department ( ARSD) to assure conformance to contractual requirements for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant (CRBRP). The contractual requirements invoke Quality Assurance Program Requirements by means of the U.S. Department of 41lEnergyStandardRDTF2-2throughAmendmen.3. GE-ARSD is a major participant o'i the CRBRP in the role of a 52 Reacter Manufacturer (RM), having been delegated by Westinghouse ARD-LRM, the execution of responsibility for the desigr, procurement and manufacture f NSSS systems, components and services, including a portion of the 45 Project's Quality Assurance Program as shown on Figure 171-1. The QLality Assurance Program established to meet contractual requirements contains those elements necessary to comply with the re-quirements of Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50, Appendix "B",
" Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Processing 5d Plants" (10CFR50, Appendix "B") for GE-ARSD scope of work. This appendix describes how the Quality Assurance Program meets the applicable criteria of 10CFR50, Appendix "B".
The practices described herein will be applied to the planning, design, procurement, and manufacture of those systems, components, and 45 52l tostructures defined GE-ARSD and in inSections covered 3.2Scope the Contract and 7.1 of the PSAR that are assigned of Work.
} 2i2 171-1 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
1.0 ORGANIZATION 52l 1.1 GE.-ARSD PRODUCT ASSURANCE ORGANIZATION GE's organizational structure for perfonning quality-related activities associated with management, design engineering, procurement, and manufacture of NSSS systems, components and services, and the respon-sibilities and authorities of key positions within the GE organization, are described in Section 1.4 of the PSAR. GE's organization chart is shown on Figure 1.4-8. The Management organization structure having res-ponsibility for GE's quality program is presented in Figure 171-2. Their responsibilities are described below: The Department General Manager of GE-ARSD reports directly to the Vice-President and General Manager, Energy Systems and Technology Division and has overall responsibility for the GE-ARSD Quality Program. These responsibilities include: (a) Report promptly significant quality problems to the Division Vice-President and General Manager, Energy Systems and Technology Division, for communication through appropriate channels to the Sector Executive. In addition, when these problems involve significant legal and/or reputation risks, communicate the problems to Corporate Legal Operation and/or Corporate Public Relations Operations (Corporate Relations Staff). (b) Establish and issue supporting procedures and take other actions for fulfilling the requirements of the Corporate Product Quality Policy. (c) Notify the Staff Executive, Product Quality, Technical Resources Staff (Corporate Technology Staff) of any situation which entails field replacement or rework of a substantial nature. (d) Provide for an annual independent review and assessment of the 52 effectiveness of the Department Quality Assurance Program, including its compliance with 10CFR50 Appendix B and other implementing quality standards (e.g., RDT, ANSI, etc.). This review and assessment will include identifying, documenting, communicating and tracking corrective action for areas deemed necessary. The Department General Manager has responsibility and authority to issue and implement a Department Product Quality Policy. Authority to deviate therefrom is reserved to the General Manager. He has delegated the execution of the following responsibilities: (1) The Section Managers, Clinch River Project, Technology and Special Projects, Design Engineering and Development Engineering have the responsibility 52 ar.d authority to: (a) Define the quality requirements and standards for the products associated with the project (s) assigned by the Department General Manager to the Section and insure that all customer needs and reasonable expectations are recognized and defined consistent with Department and Company policy. Approve the quality program to be employed on Section products. (b)
?'~l 213 Amend. 52 17I-2 Oct. 1979
(c) In conjunction with Product Assurance and Services Section, assure that Section work is accomplished in compliance with the applicable quality program and that each product meets the established quality requirements. (d) I'. conjunction with Product Assurance and Services Section, insure that supplier's work is accomplished in compliance with the appli-cable quality program for those projects assigned to the Section. (2) The Section Manager, Applications Engineering and Planning has the responsibility and authority to: (a) Convey the customer's quality requirements and standards as defined by contract, for each product to each responsible section. (b) Assure that the quality of product service rendered after sale and delivery meets reasonable expectations of the customer. (3) The Section Manager, GE-ARSD Financial Operations has the respon-sibility and authority to provide sound financial information, consistent with quality objectives. (4) The GE-ARSD Legal Counsel has the responsibility and authority to: (a) Keep Department Management apprised of current laws and regu-lations applicable to the achievement and maintenance of product qudlity for products of the Department. (b) Assist Department management in formulating product quality requirements in light of laws and regulations applicable to Department products and advise management regarding potentially significant legal and/or reputation risks involved in identified product quality problems. (5) The Section Manager, Procurement has the responsibility and authority to: (a) Convey to the supplier, the Department's quality requirements and standards for each procured product. (b) In conjunction with Product Assurance surveillance, assure that supplier work is accomplished in compliance with contract imposed quality requirements. (c) Assure that administrative specifications applied to the supplier meet all quality needs and requirements by obtaining appropriate reviews and approvals prior to incorporating the specification into a contract. (6) The Manager, GE ^RSD Employee Relations, has the responsibility and authority to: (a) Insure the creation and maintenance of a Department environment in which employees at all levels will have an attitude of striving for excellence in the performance of their work. (b) Conduct suitable programs to ensure employee motivation. 52 41 (c) Insure the employnent of professional employees who are qualified for the high technology work in the Department. Amend. 52 171-3 Oct. 1979
'E 9l4
I l The organization of GE-ARSD's Product Assurance and Services Section is presented in Figure 171-3 and is described below: (7) The Manager, Product Assurance and Services, has the responsi-42 bility and authority to: (a) Assure that each Department product delivered tc a customer meets the specified quality equirements. (b) Identify quality problems in the multifunctional Quality Assurance Program Activities and ensure their satisfactory resolution. (c) Insure that all new work proposals conform to applicable codes and standards, and that appropriate quality requirements are defined. (d) Insure that significant risk to the Company quality reputation are detected, reduced to an acceptable level, and/or after notifying the Project Manager comunicated to the Department General Manager for his information and/or action. (e) Design and maintain a Quality Assurance Program for each Department product. (f) Obtain customer based Quality Measurement Data. (g) Furnish the Staff Executive, Product Quality Technical Resources Staff (Corporate Technology Staff) with the Department Product Quality Policy and revisions as issued. (h) Prevent shipment of unsatisfactory products. (i) Insure, by appropriate verification activities, that Department work at the supplier's plants is accomplished in compliance with the applicable quality program. The Manager of Product Assurance and Services reports at the same organizational level as the highest line managers having direct responsi-bility for performing quality-related activities, and has the organization-al freedom and authority to identify quality problems and ensure satisfac-tory resolution, and to control further processing, delivery, installation or operation of an item having a deficiency or unsatisf9ctory condition until proper disposition has occurred. The Manager, Clinch River Project-Product A:, urance reports to the Manager, Product Assurance and Services with reporting lines to the Manager, Clinch River Project, the Department General Manager and the Vice President and General Manager of the Energy Systems and Technology Division. He has, therefore, the organizational freedom and authority to identify quality problems and ensure satisfactory resolution and to control further processing, delivery, installation or operations of an item having a deficiency or unsatisfactory condition until proper disposition has occurred. The authority to stop work is retained by the Department General Manager. The Manager of Product Assurance and Services and the Manager, y Clinch River Project-Product Assurance are authorized to prevent shipment 52 of unsatisfactory products, Amend. 52 Oct. 197? , 171-4 , I}O
The Manager of Product Assurance and Services and the Manager, CRP-Product Assurance are responsible for immediate notification to affected management, of conditions, that, in his opinion require the stopping of engineering or manufacturing work in-process. Affected management, upon notification by the Manager of Product Assurance and Services of conditions that he (Manager of Product Assurance and Services) feels require the stopping of work, shall immediately evaluate such conditions and inform the Manager of Product Assurance and Services of the actions to be taken. The affected manager may, or may not, at his discretion, stop work activities in his area of responsibility until conditions are corrected to the satisfaction of the Manager of Product Assurance and Services and the Manager, CRP-Product Assurance. If the affected Manager elects not to stop work. and the Manager of Product Assurance and Services feels that the plaaned corrective actions are insufficient to warrant the continuance of work, the Manager of Product Assurance and Services has the authority to require that the affected manager immediately justify his actions to the Department General Manager. The Department General Manager will convey his decision regarding the actions to be taken to both the affected Manager and the Manager of Product Assurance and Services, and the Manager, CRP-Product Assurance. The Department General Manager is continually involved in appraising the status of the quality program and the accomplishments of the Product Assurance and Services organization. This is accomplished by means of Monthly Quality Status Reports and Management Review Meetings. 41 A Monthly Quality Status Report containing quality assurance progress and a complishments, current problems, non-conformances and failures with their analysis and corrective action status, quality trend data, and results of program audits and manageri; tot reviews, is prepared and transmitted to the LRM, the Department General Manager, and the Vice Presi-dent and General Manager of Energy Systems and Technology Division. The Manager of Product Assurance and Services and the Manager, CRP-Product Assurance meet with the Department General Manager on a regular basis to discuss the status of the Department's quality program and accomplishments of the Product Assurance and Services organization. The GE-ARSD General Manager will also have an independent review and assessment of the effectiveness of the GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Program performed annually. This review to determine the adequacy of the QA program and its compliance with RDT F2-2 and 10CFR50, Appendix "B" will be preplanned, documented, and will identify necessary corrective actions. These corrective actions will be communicated to the responsible organization 52 and tracked to assure completeness. i'") 2b Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 171-5
The responsibility for assuring compliance with the quality assurance requirements of CRBRP is delegated by the Manager of Product Assurance 52l and services to the Manager, Clinch River Project - Product Assurance. The Manager, Clinch River Project - Product Assurance has the respon-42 sibility for planning, funding, definition, coordination, and the effective execution of product assurance activities on CRBRP. By defining appropriate sur-veillance, audits, reviews, and inspections, he will assure that program activities are conducted in accordance with the GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Program for both GE-ARSD and vendor activities. In performing his function, he 52 utilizes the staff and resources of the Product Assurance and Services Section. The Manager, Quality Assurance Support,is responsible to the Manager 52l Of Product Assurance and Services for Quality Assurance Engineering, Quality Control, and Quality Systems. In response to requests (i.e., task definitions and schedules) from the Clinch River Project - Product Assurance Manager, he assigns appropriate tasks to his Managers, controls cost and 52l schedule, and supports ongoing programs at ARSD. He is responsible for maintaining an adequate staff capable of meeting the Clinch River Project Quality Assurance Support requirements. The Manager, Quality Control, is responsible to the Manager, Quality Assurance Support for the quality control engineering and quality control inspection of items fabricated and tested by GE ARSD. He is responsible for performing source and receiving inspection of materials 52 for use in GE-ARSD manufacturing and test facilities and for all Product Assurance activity associated with preparation for and performing veri-fications specified on shop planning. The NDE Level III Examiner and the QC Inspections report directly to him. The Manager, Quality Assurance Engineering,is responsible to the Manager, Quality Assurance Support for assuring that engineering and procurement activities are conducted in accordance with the CRBRP Quality Assurance Program requirements and that appropriate quality requirements are specified in engineering and procurement documents. He is responsible for assuring that GE-ARSD supplier's activities are conducted in accordance with the applicable imposed GE ARSD CRBRP Quality Assurance Program re-52 quirements, and that supplier performance is in accordance with the specified quality requirements defined in the procurement documents. He is responsible for surveillance and source inspections at supplier facilities for major procurements and for final quality acceptance of supplier-furnished items. The Manager, Quality Systems, has been assigned responsibility by the Manager of Quality Assurance Support to maintain supportive quality assuraiice systems. He is responsible for issuing and controlling the QA 52l Section ASf1E Code fianuals, and for assuring that related Department Manuals meet QA requirements. 45 The Manager, Product Assurance Audits,is responsible to the Manager, 52l Product Assurance and Services for conducting an internal and external audit program consistent with the CRBRP Quality Assurance Program requirements. In response to requests from the Clinch River Project - Product Assurance Manager (i.e. task definitions and schedules), he develops audit plans and schedules to meet Clinch River Project needs. He is responsible for conducting an internal audit program on CRBRP Engineering and Procure-ment activities, including the preparation and issuance of audit schedules, Amend. 52 171-6 i1"} 2l/ Oct.1979
the assembly of a qualified audit team, the preparation of corrective action requests and the follow-up action required to assure effective corrective actions are implemented. He is also responsible for conducting an external audit program of supplier activities including the preparation and issuance of audit schedules, assembling a qualified audit 4 21 team, preparing findings and soliciting corrective action through contractual channels and the follow-up action required to assure effective corrective actions are implemented. 52 Management Review Meetings of the CRBRP are held regularly by the Manager, Clinch River Project. The CRF staff and the Manager, Clinch River Project Product Assurance, present the status of the Project for their areas of responsibility at these meetings to the GE-ARSD staff. The 52l Manager, Clinch River Project Product Assurance, discusses the status of the quality Assurance Program at these meetings. In addition to these project review meetings, management review meetings are held periodically by the Manager of Product Assurance with the Manager, Clinch River Project - Product Assurance to evaluate the overall CRBRP Quality Status. Product Assurance personnel receive programmatic direction for performing Clinch River quality assurance tasks from the Manager, Clinch River Project - Product Assurance. Technical direction is provided by the Manager, Quality Assurance Support and the Manager Product Assurance Audits. Administrative control of position assignment, is exercised by 52l the manager to whom that position reports, with approval. required by the next higher management ievel. The collection and maintenance of Product Assurance generated quality records is the responsibility of the Manager, Clinch River Project - Product Assurance, the Manager, Quality Assurance Support, the Manager, Product Assurance Audits, and the Manager, Management Systeins. 1.2 PRODUCT ASSURAtlCE AtlD SERVICES MAtlAGER's'QUALIFICATI0tlS The Manager, Product Assurance and Services and Managers, Quality Assurance Engineering, Produce Assurance Audits, Quality Assurance Support, Technology and Special Projects - Product Assurance and Clinch River Project-52 Product Assurance, shall have the following minimum qualifications: Education - Shall be a graduate of a four-year accredited Engi..eering _, 3 College or University with a degree in Engineering or Science. 33 ,, Amend. 52
;
5I-7 ' ' /f- Oct. 1979
Experience - General : Shall have a minimum of 10 years experience in quality engineering, or manufacturing, associated with nuclear facilities or other high technology product areas. Specialty: Shall possess a broad knowledge and understanding of Industry and Government Codes, Standards and Regulations defining quality assurance requirements and practices. Shall have a working knowledge and understanding of quality assurance methods and their application. Managerial: Shall be experiencedin organizing, directing and admin-istering an overall program or activity, or a major por-tion of an overall program having broad scope and appli-cation. Shall have experience in the supervision of personnel and planning and management of other resources needed to conduct an extensive quality assurance program. The Manager, Quality Control, shall have the following minimum qualifi-cations: Education - BS Degree, Industrial Engineering preferred. However, suitable industrial experience is acceptable. Experience _- General : See Product Assurance Managers' Oualifications above. Specialty: See Product Assurance Managers' Qualifications above. Managerial: See Product Assurance Managers' Qualifications above. The Manager, Quality Systems shall have the following minimum qualifications: Education - BS Degree, Engineering or Science preferred. However, suitable industrial experience is acceptable. Experience - General: Shall have a minimum of ten yecrs experience in quality, engineering and/or quality systems involving high rigor quality hardware. Specialty: Shall have a working knowledge of applicable Industry and Government Codes, Standards and Regulations defining quality assurance program requirements. Shall have specific know-ledge of quality assurance methods as applied to design, manufacturing, assembly, test and supplier control activities. Managerial: Shall have experience and training in management planning, organizing, integrating and measurement of quality systems or similar functions. 41 Amend. 52 ct M 171-8 ]1') 2)If
2.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM 52l GE-ARSD's Product Quality Policy states:
"It is the policy of the Department that; a) All products offered be consistent with the public interest and applicable laws and regulations.
b) All products offered be such as to validate buyers' selection of the price-performance combination involved and thereby contribute positively to the Company's product quality reputation. 52l c) In every market segment served, the Department pursues the objective of achieving a reputation for product quality that either equals or exceeds that of any competitor servir.g the same segment." This policy is implemented by the Department General Manager within the Department by assignment of prime and contributing responsi-bility for Management of the Quality Program as described in Section 1.0 28 of this Appendix. The GE-ARSD-CRBRP Quality Assurance Program Index (QAPI) de-scribes the Quality Assurance Program and identifies procedures which implement the contractual requirements. The GE-ARSD-CRBRP Project Manager has directed implementation of, and compliance with, the QAPI. The Department policy requires that written procedures will 28 be established and issued to fulfill the requirements of the Corporate Product Quality Policy. Authority to deviate from the Quality Policy is reserved to the Department General Manager. Prime responsibility 15I for implementation verification is assigned to the Manager of Product 28 Assurance and Services to monitor and measure the performance of the 41 management and implementation areas to ensure their performance is in 24 compliance with the program. The GE-ARSD CRBRP Quality Assurance (QA) Program is established to comply with the contractual requirements of RDT Standard F2-2 which 2d is applicable to GE-ARSD's scope of work on CRBRP. This program, established to meet the contract requirements, also contains those program elements necessary to comply with the criteria of 10CFR50, Appendix "B" as applicable to GE-ARSD's scope of work. The major elements of the GE-ARSD CRBRP QA Program are shown in Figure 171-4 and are applied to the safety-related structures, systems, 24l and components as listed in Sections 3.2 and 7.1 of the PSAR within GE's scope of work. Each of the program elements as shown in Figure 171-4 is executed by GE-ARSD. GE-ARSD delegates the execution of these elements, when appropriate, to suppliers, however, GE-ARSD retains responsibility 52 for adequate implementation and performance by their suppliers. 3t Amend. 52 17I-9 : i 910 LL Oct. 1979
52l The GE-ARSD CRBRP QA Program is documented in the CRBRP Quality Assurance Program and Procedures Index (QAPI). The QAPI is a document 52l which provides a listing of those GE-ARSD Procedures, Instructions, or other Documents, to be utilized in implementing the specific quality assurance requirements for the program, and includes an organizational chart that identifies key personnel and their functional responsibilities and authorities for quality assurance activities. The QAPI is issued with implementation direction by the Clinch River Project Section Manager to those functions and/or individuals having the responsibility for imple-mentation of quality-related activities. The QAPI is reviewed and revised as necessary to reflect audit corrective actions and procedure changes. The QAPI is approved by the Manager, Clinch River Project-Product Assurance, and is 41 52lsubjecttoreviewandapprovalbytheLRM. The initial issue and all revisions of the QAP re distributed both internally and externally under controlled dist ?bution with acknowledgement receipt required. Table 171-1 shows a matrix correlating the Quality Assurance 45 Program implementing documents to the criteria requirements of 10CFR50, Aopen-41 . dix "B". Attachment 171-1 provides a synopsis of the GE-ARSD QA Program 52', Documents . The measures describing how GE-ARSD meets the criteria of 10CFR50, Appendix "B" are contained in the other sections of this appendix. 524 GE-ARSD establishes personnel requirements through the use of position guides. Qualified personnel with formal training and/or experience are assigned to the established positions. A periodic formal performance evaluation of each incumbent by his next higher level of management is documented. A Department-wide personnel training program is utilized to insure a knowledge and understanding of Deparanent policies, instructions, 521 and procedures. Corporate and Nuclear Energy Business Group job-related train-ing programs are also utilized. For NDE and Control of Special Processes, personnel are trained and qualified in accordance with applicable codes, standards and procedures. 52l GE ARSD has established training and indoctrination programs to assure that personnel performing quality-related activities understand the requirements and applicability of QA Program requirements. Nsw employees are required to attend an orientation session which includes a familiari-zation of the technical requirements of CRBRP and engineering and quality program practices. Trainino sessions are also conducted to provide instruction in the Policies and Procedures to be employed to project / program personnel, quality assurance engineers, designers, procurement, and manu-facturing personnel. Personnel who perform inspections, tests, and non-destructive examinations are required to be trained and qualified for each area of specialty before they can perform the activity. Training is con-ducted in accordance with appropriate procedures. 3-}
?.?
- }
Ament 52 Oct. 1979 171-10
2l Inspections and tests perforned at GE-ARSD are conducted in accordance with prescribed instructions prepared for the soecific item under consideration. The preparation of these instructions, int!uding the criteria considered, is 52l discussed in Section 10.0 of this apoendix. GE-ARSD does assure for all acceptance tested and deliverable CRBRP equipment, that cuality-related activities are performed with specified equipment and under suitable environ-r' ental conditions, and that pre-requisites have been satisfied prior to inspection and test. 52l GE-ARSD procuremer o documents implement pertinent reouirements of 10CFR50, Appendix "B" bi identifying the QA Codes and Standards, or portions thereof, contractually imposed on GE-ARSD and other contractual requirements 5,3 which must be complied with by the Supplier and describeu in the Supplier's QA programs to insure that the contract requirements imposed on GE-ARSD properly passed on to the Supplier rd are traceable. In some instances, depending on the item being processe ., extracts from +he applicable Codes and Standards and other contractual requirements are included verbatim in the procurement documents. 52l GE-ARSD reviews ss :ontractor and supplier QA Programs against the GE-ARSD contractually imposed por'. uns of applicable Codes and Standards and any addi tional QA rerluirements included in the contractual document. The principle objectives of the QA program and key functions and elements which it contains are not expected to change over the duration of this project. However, circumstances may nake advisable changes in the organ-ization, or in the implementing details, and such changes will be made in accordance with normal management practices. This PSAR OA description will be reviewed annually to assure that all required changes have been documented, 24 and it will be updated as necessary.
- '^i 222 171-11 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
3.0 DESIGN CONTROL 53 CRBRP design activities at GE-ARSD are per irmed within Clinch River Project, Development Engineering, and Design Engineerin, Sections. Control, approval, and management of the design activities is exercised by Clinch River Project Section. Assignment of design responsibility is made by the Clinch River Project, Development Engineering, and Design Engineering Section Managers to appropriate subsection managers, who in turn assign the design responsibility to a functional or technical discipline unit manager. The unit manager makes individual assign-ments to a remoonsibl? engineer for performing the effort. The unit manager assigned respnsibility is supported by the other functional and technical units as required. The contractual design basis is defined to the responsible design organ-45 l 52l izational units by means of a Project Master Plan and Work Breakdown Structure Dictionary issued by the Clinch River Project Section which provides the delineation of the program work scope, identification of each item to be delivered, and assignment of responsibility. Interim direction to accomplish tasks or other work 45l eff rts not specifically identified is accompliched by means of the issuance of Pro. ject Directives. System Design Descriptions (SDD's) provide the principal means of design 52l definition and control for each CRBRP system for which GE- ARSD has responsibility. The SDD is a comprehensive technical document utilized to: define and integrate the various technical, operational, and safety considerations involved, icentify interfaces; and serve as a common technical basis for projec.t activities. The SDD's are responsive to the Overall Plant Design Description (0PDD) requirements and provide a technical reference and control for detailed ccmponent spccifica-tions, operational test procedures, and safety analysis. The Equipment Specifi-cations ("E" Spec's) similarly provide the control for components, and define the design, fabrication, quality assurance, testing, handling and shipping require-ments. The "E" Specs are responsive to the SDD requirements. The SDD's and "E" Specs are prepared and issued as specifications. Where required, principal design data are submitted to the LRM for approval prior to project use. Design definition and control is established through a technical docu-mentation structure such that the approved document set, when issued, provides assurance that applicable design criteria, code, standards, practices, and requirements for materials, structures, components, systems, facilities and processes, are defined and correctly translated into specifications, drawings, and work procedures t.ad instructions. Each level in the design definition structure provides requirements that constrain and control the next lower tier of documents. During the conduct of the design effort, the responsible engineer con-ducts a study to determine what codes and standards, and their specific require-ments, are applicable to the system or component under consideration, and the adequacy of such codes and standards. When existing codes and standards are judged to be inadequate, he initiates appropriate action to improve the code or standard. The applicability of the codes and standards is specified in the appropriate design documentation. An element of each document review and approval, is the consideration and application of the code or standard to the 41 design. Amend. 52 17I-12 ]1' } 22} Oct. 1979
Measures have been established to assure: that appropriate quality requirements, codes and standards are specified in desigt. documents; that parts, materials, and processes are selected on the basis of experience and qualification for the intended service; that design interfaces within 52l GE-ARSD, and with other Project participants, are defined and controlled; 45l that designs are verified by appropr: ate methods and personnel', that design definition documentation is approved and issued by appropriate organizations; and that design changes and deviations are subject to the same measures as applied to the original design. The responsible engineer defines the quality standards that are appropriate for his design, and documents those standards in the specifi-cations, drawings, or other technical documents. These documents are reviewed in accordance with established procedures, and changes or deviations from the quality standards are identified and contrciled. Changes to quality standards are handled in the same manner as any other technical changes to the affected documents. Deviaticns are classed as changes if they apply to the full set (or lot) of production items. If deviations dpply only to a specific item of hardware, they are identified and controlled 52lwithin'theProductAssuranceandServicesSection. Each deviation is documented as a non-conformance item and is resolved with participation of the appropriate technical, management, and supporting organizations. The reonsible engineer identifies and includes in appropriate planning, those engineering studies necessary to substantiate the adequacy of the design for its intended application. Engineering analysi"; studies focus on those aspects and considerations involved in the intended services; such as, operation, maintenance, in-service inspection, reliability, availability and safety. The studies are based on analysis of reactor physics, structural stress, thermal, hydraulic, environmental, and other effects, and other applicable technical considerations. Engineering studies are documented in engineering memoranda and formal reports and are included among the engineering work cecords. The results of the engineering studies and analyses produce criteria to be satisfied by the design. These criteria are defined and documented within design specifications and design layout drewings. The design criteria include performance objectives, operating conditions, regulatory re-quirements, safety and availability, materials, fabrications, construction, testing operation, maintenance, and quality requirements. Design documentation includes specifications, drawings, and instructions, as necessary, to define the specific requirements for detail design, materials, fabrication, ccnstruction, installation, testing, in-lspection, maintenance, cleaning, packaging, shipping, storage, operation, and quality assurance. Design documentation is reviewed by competent specialists in many different fields to assure design producibility, manufacturability, inspectability, and testability in accordance with the established technical requirements for the design. Acceptance criteria for inspection and test are developed by the responsible engineer during the design chase and are identified in the design definition documentation. The acceptance criteria provide the basis for acceptance or rejection of each designated quality characteristic and, when appropriate, specify the points at which compliance will be 41 accomplished and verified. Amend. 52 171-13 3 j g}4 Oct.1979
Identification and control of design interfaces is accomplished by the responsible engineer and documented by means of SDD's, "E" Spec's and Interface Control Drawings (ICD's). The fundamental control document for functional interface data is the SDD which identifies the system interfaces including referencing supporting control documents, i.e. , ICD's, and together with ICD's, completely defines requirements for every interface within a system. The "E" Spec is similarly utilized to define the functional interfaces for components. ICD's are drawings that identify the physical interface character-istics necessary to ensure compatibility between mating pieces of equipment. ICD's are distributed to, and used by project participants for assuring compatibility of systems and/or componcnts. Interface requirements are transmitted to interfacing organizations and concurrence is obtained prior to issue. Proposed changes are coordinated with inter' acing organi-zations orior to implementation. For the CRBRP Project, the Manager, Project In-tegration and Control has been delegated the responsibility for coordinating the control of interfaces within GE-ARSD's scope of responsibility, and 52 for providing liaison between GE-ARSD and other project participants concerning interfaces. Prior to the issuance of SDD's and "E" Specs, Controlled Infor-mation Data Transmittals (CInDT's) are used as a control method for trans-mitting and receiving working level design data. Distribution and control of design documents and their changes is described in Section 6.0 of this Appendix. The Managers of the responsible design organizations within 52l GE-ARSD are responsible for detennining the degree and extent of design verification necessary to assure the adequacy of finished designs. Each discrete design or design aspect, or change of design for, or having an effect upon a system, equipment, component or service, is, as appropriate, verified for design adequacy by a design review, independent calculation, or qualification testing program. The factors utilized in determining the extent of design verification are the relative importance of the design action to safety and reliability, the uniqueness of the design, and the complexity of the design. The Manager of the responsible design organization designates an independent reviewer or review team to perform 52l the independent calculation or perform the design review. GE ARSD pro-cedures require that inspection and test specifications be a subject for design review, and they are included on the design review checklist. 1 Reviewers are technically competent individuals who have no direct res-ponsibility for the design under consideration, but may be from the same 5l organization (Section, Subsection or Unit). Design reviews and indepen-dent calculations, and their subsequent documentation, are planned, conducted and documented in accordance with written procedures. Design reviews are shown on Project plans and schedules which are sub;ect to LRM approval. The responsible manager is required to resolve the rev lew team findings. When qualification testing is utilized as the verification method, the test pro - 41 gram includes requirements for testing under the most adverse design con-171-14
)I } 2 2 b Amend. 52 Oct.1979
ditions. All pertinent operating modes are considered in determining these adverse design conditions. The control measures appliea to qualification test are described in Section 11.1 of this Appendix. 52l GE- ARSD drawings, specifications and instructions are reviewed, approved and issued in accordance with established procedures. An Engineering Review Memorandum (ERM) is utilized to record the review and comments of individuals having competence to determine whether the document under con-sideration adequately conforms to applicable contract and standards require-ments within his assigned areas of review. This review is conducted prior to approval for issue. The ERM is used to designate and record areas of review, reviewers, document status, configuration control level, comments and signatures. Review areas include interface compatibility 42l Producibility code compliance, materials engineering, verification of liesign 52 adequacy, calculation verification, System Design Description (SDD) conformance, quality requirements, and safety (and licensing) conformance, and others as appropriate. The responsible engineer with the concurrence of his manager, determines the areas of review required for the particular document. The review always includes a review of quality requirements by Product Assurance engineers to evaluate quality characteristics and requirements, and verify that the document contains or references the appropriate require-ments to achieve and verify required quality. The Manager - Licensing a.d Reactor Systems identifies those documents requiring his review to evaluate requirements essential to safety and/or licensing. The responsible engineer evaluates and resolves the comments received during the review process. The responsible engineer reviews the final document with the prior reviewers when there is a significant 45 change or a significant comment is not included in the final document. The Manager assigned responsibility for preparation of the document is res-ponsible for verifying that technical requirements and objectives have been met, necessary reviews completed, and comments resolved prior to approving the document for issue. 4 21 All changes to design data which have been baselined (i.e., approved by LRM or equivalent) are initiated by an Engineering Change Pro-posal (ECP) which is the vehicle for identification of the change, docu-mentation of the impact of the change, and for obtaining approval of the change. The Engineering Change Notice (ECN), is the vehicle for making precise changes to specific design documents and implements the ECP. The review, approval, and release is accomplished in the same manner as the original design document. Discovery of a design defic,'ency or error in issued, or released, design documents, that if undetected would have adversely affected safety-related structures, systems or components, are documented and corrected by utilization of the Unsatisfactory Condition Record which includes unusual occurrence reporting, if necessary, as discussed in Section 16.0 of this Appendix. 41 Amend. 52
}1 } 22b Oct. 1979 171-15
Parts, materials and processes are selected by the re.;ponsible engineer no the basis of proven experience or qualification for the in-tended sercice. For CRBRP,a common set of material data, extrapolaticn, and interpretations contained in the Nuclear Systems Materials Handbook are the basis for design definition. However, for items designed to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, the Code data takes precedence. Application reviews are conducted for essential parts, materials, or processes, and include, as applicable, (1) evaluation, analysis and trade-off studies, (2) coordinating and interfacing with other participants, (3) document reviews, and (4) design reviews. Design documents inc% ding changes, and review and approval and verification records, are collected, stored, and maintained as described in Section 17.0 of this Appendix.
\ ?27 c-O
-15 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
4.0 PROCUREMENT DOCUMENT CONTROL Procurement actions are initiated by a Material Request (MR). The MR identifies the material, equipment, and services to be purchased, references the applicable technical documents and quality requirements, and contains approval signatures. Procurement actions are initiated by the responsible engineer for procurement of plant hardware, or by a procurement specialist for the Fabrication Shop materials. Preparation of technical documents (i.e., drawings and specifica-tions) for use in the procurement of material, equipment, and services is the responsibility of the responsible engineering manager having technical cognizance over the material, equipment, and services to be purchased as discussed in Section 3.0 of this Appendix. Included (or referenced) in the technical documents are design basis technical requirements, including the applicable regulatory requirements, components and material identification requirements, drawings, specific;tions, codes, standards, test and inspection 42l requirements and special process instructions, as appropriate. The requestor prepares the MR in accordance with documented proce-dures assuring that the recorded information is accurate and legible; refer-enced documents are included with the procurement package; end product identi-fication is recorded, and vendor and sub-vendor quality requirements are specified. 42 41 The Qualf ty Assurance Engineer reviews the procurement nackace to verify that QA Program requirements are correctly stated, inspectable and controllable, that there are adequate acceptance and rejection criteria. In addition, by audit, the QA organization verifies that procurement docu-ments have been prepared, reviewed and approved 'in accordance with the Department procedures. The MR is required, as a minimum, to be approved by the requestor's manager, an authorized Product Assurance representative, and an authorized financial representative. The MR, completed and approved, provides direction to Purchasing to prepare a purchase document (Purchase Order, Subcontract, etc.) which 52l becomes the " contract" between the supplier and GE-ARSD. Purchase documents contain the requirements as approved on the MR.
- ' 1 228 171-17 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
4 41 l Purchase documents are reviewed by the Quality Assurance Engineer ta verify that the MR requirements were correctly included as specified by the MR. Material Request Changes are reviewed in accordance with the same procedures and are subject to the same review and approval requirements as the original documents and provides direction for change to the purchase docu-ment. MR's and purchase documents for spare or replacement parts, of safety-related structures, systems and components, are subject to identical controls as applicable to those used for original equipment. GE-ARSD procedures require that prior to contract award, each contend-41l52 ing vendor of safety-related, complex and high cost materials, equipment and services, be evaluated by Product Assurance (and other Department functions as appropriate) to determine the capability of the supplier to meet the procure-ment quality requirements. An approved supplier list is maintained current and used by Purchasing to determine that each supplier is an acceptable source prior to placement of the purchase order. A check to verify approved vendor status is also made when the Quality Assurance Engineer reviews the purchase 41 l order. Procurement documents are collected, stored, and maintained as des-cribed in Section 17.0 of this Appendix. O
- '~i 229 O
Amend. 52 17I-18 Oct. 1979
5.0 INSTRUCTIONS, PROCEDURES AND DRAWINGS 52l The GE Policy Procedures system is structured to conform with the criteria of IUCFR50, Appendix "B" as described herein. The 45 system includes Department Policies and Instructions (BR's), Engi-neering Procedures (ENG's) Quality Standing Instructions (QSI's), Fabri-cation and Test Procedures (F&TP's), Project Guides (PG's). Also where 45 l appropriate, functional routines are used by Management to control his or 52 her area of responsibility. The Department Policies and Instructions are prepared, maintained and published by the Manager, Management Systems. A Policy and Instruction Board, which is chaired by the Manager, Management Systems is comprised of representatives of ea.ch Section, including Product 52l ' Assurance and Services. The Board reviews and concurs in the Department Policies and Instructions, with final approval reserved to the Department General Manager. Amendments are treated in a like manner. 52 Department Policies and Instructions (BR's) delineate the sequence of actions to be accomplished in the preparation, review, approval, and control 45l of instructions procedures and drawings,and they provide overall direction 52l for the conduct of Department business. Because of their broad coverage, authorization is provided therein for the oreparation of other derivative documents, such as Engineering Procedures, Quality Standing Instructions, etc.,which cover specific fields of interest in more detailcd form. The responsibility for the preparation, maintenance and publication of the Department Policies and Instruc-tions is assigned to the Manager, Management Systems. Al' new, revised or amended procedures are approved by the Genera! Manager %l following internal evaluation. Engineering Procedures (ENG's) provide authority to do engineering work in a disciplined manner. They give direction in critical areas such as, design reviews, control of engineering changes, design verifi-cation, use of codes and standards, and other aspects of engineering work. Engineering Procedures are approved by selected representatives of Sections invohed in design, development, quality assurance, and program control activities. The responsibility for the preparation, maintenance and publication of these documents is assigned to the Manager, Engineering Services. 45 l Quality Standing Instructions (QSI's) delineate Product Assurance instructions for planning and performance of Quality Assurance activities such as, design control, procurement control, fabrication and assembiv control, process control, inspection, non-52l conforming items, corrective actions, auditing, etc. Department Instructions authorize the preparation of Quality Control Instructions that delineata quantitative and qualitative acceptance criteria. The responsibility for the preparation, maintenance, publication and approval of Quality Standing Instructions is assigned to the Manager, 41 52l Product Assurance and Services. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 171-19 i'^1 230
Fabrication and Test Procedures (F&TP's) delineate requirements for Sodium Test and Fabrication Engineering personnel in the planning and performance of fabrication, processing, assembly, test, and 45 shipping of manufacturing items and the operation of the Sodium Test Facilities. The responsibility for the preparation, maintenance, pu-blication and approval of Fabrication and Test Procedures is assigned to the Manager Fabrication Engineering. Project Guides (PG's) are utilized to reflect unique customer require-ments to the extent that such requirements are consistent with existing 45 Department Practices. The responsibility for the preparation, main-tenance, publication, and approval of PG's is assigned to the Project Manager. Drafting Routines, included within the Drafting Manual, implement Engineering Procedures to the extent of prescribing specific practices 45 affecting engineering documents, e.g., drawings, associated lists and specifications. The responsibility for the preparation, maintenance and publication of these documents is assigned to the Manager - Drafting and Documentation. Manufacturing Process Instructions (MPI's) are prepared to define con-trol instructions and parameters for complex or repetitive fabrication processes. MPI's are approved by responsible managers in the fabrication and product assurance organizations prior to issue and are referenced on the Work Order Record (WOR). The Engineerina Procedures provide quantitative and qualitative acceptance criteria to verify that important activities have been satis-factorily accomplished. Quality Standing Instructions assign the responsibility to the Quality Assurance Engineer for reviewing drawings, specifications, and fabrication documents to ensure the inclusion of quantitative and quali-tative acceptance criteria prior to release for fabrication. Instructions for the fabrication oi items manufactured by ARSD on (WOR's). These WOR's are prepared for each manufactured item and, in conjunction with Manufacturing Process Instructions (MPI's) and Quality Control Instructions (QCI's) define fundamental processes (suei as welding, standardized inspections, and non-destructive examination) to be used in fabricating any item. The WOR delineates the scquence of fabrication, references applicable technical documents, identifies inspection and customer or Authorized Inspector hold points or witness points. Each operation is required to be signed and dated to provide evidence that the 45 operation has been completed by an authorized individual. 52 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 171-20
^'
, } 2_ b l
6.0 DOCUMENT CONTROL GE-ARSD drawings, specifications, instructions and procedures are 52l reviewed, approved and issued in accordance with established procedures. 52l GE-ARSD utilizes instructions and procedures to ensure that approved changes are properly documented prior to implementation. These procedures are appli-cable to changes; such as, customer, design, procurement, fabrication, test-ing and changes required due to non-conformances. An Engineering Review Memorandum (ERM) is utilized to record the review and connents of individuals having technical competence to determine whether the drawings, specifications, and test procedures, under considera-tion, adequately conform 4to applicable standards within his assigned area of review as discussed in Section 3.0 of this Appendix. Engineering Change Proposals (ECP's) and Engineering Change Notices (ECN's) are utilized in accordance with established procedures to initiate and approve changes to issued drawings and specifications. The ECP is a document that describes a proposed change to issued engi-neering documentation, and which when approved, authorizes the implementa-tion of the change to the documents. The ECN is a document that records in detail, the changes to an issued engineering document and which initiates implementation by the Draf ting and Documentation Unit. The issued ECU is delivered to the affected organization, e.g. Manufacturing or Procurement, for immediate change in the technical requirements. Revision of the affected document is concurrently accomplished by the Draf ting and Documentation Unit. Procedures require that all changes excepting those of a clerical type be reviewed and approved, as a ninimum, by the same organization that reviewed and approved the original document. Change authority and approval is achieved by means of ECP's which contain detailed descriptions of each document to be changed. Following the ECP approval, 45 the change implementation utilizing the ECN is directly accomplished in the affected documents, which are then i eleased in revised fonn to the users. Records are maintained on the approval status of changes in-process and this information is readily available. Standard distribution lists are prepared and maintained to provide for internal and external distribution with required quantities for issued drawings and specifications. Document distribution and control is effected by two functional groups - A Communication Document Control (CDC) and a Technical Document Center (TDC). The CDC maintains files on correspondence, both internal and external. The TDC files and controls technical documents; such as, specifications, drawings, procedures, etc. Distribution lists are maintained to provide revised or changed documents to responsible personnel. Additionally, a library facility maintains files on general information and technical reports of a general nature. Amend. 52 1 j Oct. 1979
}}}
171-21
O An Engineering Drawing List is prepared and maintained as a complete and current list of drawing and specifications, including supplier drawings which are applicable, and is distributed as a minimum to Responsible Managers. The Responsible Managers disseminate the information to assure that proper and current documents are utilized. Documents controlled in accordance with the above procedures include: design specifications and design, manufacturing, construction and installation drawings . The review, approval and issue controls for the CRBRP Quality Assurance Program and Procedures Index (QAPI) was previously discussed in Section 2.0 of 521this appendix. The GE-ARSD procedures and instructions referenced in the QAPI are reviewed, approved, and issued in accordance with established procedures as discussed in Section 5.0 of this appendix. Section 4.0 of this appendix describes procurement dccument control. 52 GE-ARSD receives controlled distribution copies of the licensing and principal design documents, i.e. SDD's issued by the Project. These copies 41 l are received in the Document Cont' m Center (DCC), where they e logged and then distributed to Responsible Managers. The Responsible Manager receiving the document is required to acknowledge receipt in writing to the DCC. The DCC acknowledges receipt to the issuing organization. Revisions to these documents are received and acknowledged in the same manner. Manufactt'ing, inspection, and testing instructions are included or referenced on the shop traveler as discussed in Section 5.0 of this appen-dix. The Work Order Record (L'OR) specifies the applicable revision of the referenced MPI or QCI . All revisions to WOR's are controlled and require 45 approval by the same organization that originally approved the WOR's. Revisions to MPI's or QCI's require a corresponding revision to the 47 WOR prior to implementation. The Work Order Record will normally remain with the item being fabricated until the final inspections are completed to assure that the proper revision of instructions are utilized. For special 52l cases where the item is sent outside of GE-ARSD for vendor operations (e.g.' special NDE), the item is identified with its Work Order Record Number, but the Work Order Record itself stays with the Manager, Fabrication Engineering, or 45 his delegate, until the item is returned to GE-ARSD and they can be reunited. 52 Document control, relative to source and receiving insnection of purchased items, is described in Section 7.0 of this appendix. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 171-22 f 233
7.0 CONTROL 0F PURCHASED MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT, AND SERVICES Procedures and practices are established and documented to provide assurance that purchased material, equipment, and services, whether purchased directly or through subcontractors, conform to the procurement document requirements. These measures include provisions, as appropriate, for the following: o source evaluation and selection, o review and approval of supplier work plans and procedures, o appropriate objective evidence of quality furnished by the contractor, o inspection, surveillance, and audit at the source in accordance with written procedures during design, manufacture, inspection and test to verify compliance with quality requirements, o examination of items upon delivery in accordance with written procedures, and o review and acceptance of quality records required to be delivered with the item to the plant site. The measures described here are applied to all safety-related structures, 52l systems and components not fabricated within GE-ARSD's facilities. In the event another General Electric Company Division or Department is awarded a contract 52l to be a supplier to GE ARSD, the measures described here are applicable. Source evaluation and approval activities are initiated during review of the Material Request (MR) by the Quality Assurance Engineer as discussed in Section 4.0 of this Appendix. Instructions are entered on the MR, defining to the purchasing organization the approval level to which a supplier must be quali-fied. Approved Supplier Listings contain infomation such as the product or ser-vice for which the supplier has been approved, and the quality level (inclu-ding ASME Code) for which they are approved suppliers. The method of suppliei evaluation may include past perfomance, supplier Quality Assurance Program 45 l1anual review, and/or on-site survey. Whenever Purchasing proposes to use a supplier that is not listed on the approved supplier list or is listed with a lower approval level, a request for evaluation is initiated by Purchasing to Product Assurance, who is responsible for performing the appropriate evaluation of the supplier's Qurlity Assurance Program. When appropriate, qualified Engineering, Manufacturing, Procurement, etc. , personnel participate in the supplier evaluation to ensure that a supplier possesses specific capabilities. Results of supplier evaluations are documented and 41 52l maintained on file at GE-ARSD. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
l 234 171-23
l The Quality Assurance engineer following review and approval of the procurement package, discussed in Section 4.0 of this Appendix, directs the preparation of Source Inspection Plans (SIP's) or Receiving Inspection Plans (RIP's). The SIP or RIP specifies the characteristics to be verified by inspec-tion or test and the point at which the inspection will be performed. 45 The SIP or RIP is approved by the Product Assurance Management. 41 The SIP or RIP includes provision for verification sign-off of each requirement speci fied. Supplier-generated documents, including design and manufacturing drawings and manufacturing and inspection plans for complex equipment, are rvaluated to determine those characteristics, and supporting documentation, to 52l ae verified by in-process inspection or witness by GE-ARSD. Notification of these inspection and witness points is made to the supplier. Source inspection 41 is performed at these points (prior to release for shipment) upon notification by the supplier. Source inspection may not be required wh.a all quality charac-teristics to be vecified are accessible for inspection upon receipt, or the quality of the items can be verified by review of test reports, or by performance of acceptance test. The SIP's or RIP's define where specific characteristics are to be 41 verified or inspected. Source and Receiving Inspection Plans define applicable inspection criteria, quantitative and qualitative. Receiving inspection of supplier-furnished material, equipment and services is performed in accordance with predetermined RIP's prior to use or installation to verify that:
- 1) The material, component, or equipment is properly identified and corresponds with receiving documentation.
- 2) Required inspection records, or certificates of conformance which attest to the acceptance of material, components, and equipment are available and acceptable. These records are supplied to the LRM or site in accordance with contract requirements.
- 3) Items accepted and released are identified as to their inspection status prior to forwarding them to a controlled storage area, or releasing them for installation or further work.
- 4) Nonconforming items are segregated, controlled and clearly identified until proper disposition is made as discussed in Section 15.0 of this Appendix.
The results of source surveillance, inspection and receiving inspection are recorded on the SIP's or RIP's and provide appropriate objective evidence 41 along with the certifications of conformance statements of the quality of material, equipment and services furnished by the supplier. Source surveillance and inspection is performed or controlled by 45 Product Assurance personnel. For major procurements, resident representatives may be assigned to the supplier's f acility. Receivinq inspectica is performed by QC Inspectors. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 171-24 , ,7
- _l GJJ
Personnel performing inspection, test and surveillance functions are qualified as described in Section 10.0 of this Appendix. A Vendor Case Record routine is specified as part of the quality requirements and is utilized by the supplier to report nonconformances to procurement requirements dispositioned " accept as is" or " repair," as described in Section 15.0 of this Appendix. Suppliers' certificates of conformance are verified as follows: g (a) liaterial overchecks are periodically performed on selected mate-ials to verify the accuracy of the supplier's certificates of confcrnance. (b) NDE suppliers' inspection and test report results are verified by l 451 41 comparing results obtained with test specification requirements and/ or by verifying their NDE results (e.g. by reading of X-ray films). For processes such as welding, suppliers' weld qualification samples may be independently verified when appropriate to achieve the required level of quality. 45 52l GE-ARSD plans and performs , as appropriate, in-process surveillance and inspections, final source inspections and/or receiving inspections to 41l verify conformance with specified requirements. Quality audits are scheduled and performed by Product Assurance Audits to 52lv erit.)aupplier compliance with specified quality requirements. These audits are performed as described in Section 18.0 of this Appendix. Requests for corrective action are submitted through Purchasing to the Suppliers for areas determined to be deficient. 1 52t The controls for spare and replacement parts procured by GE-ARSD are 42I identical to those described in this section of this Appendix.
}' \ ? b[3 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 171-25
8.0 IDENTIFICATION AND CONTROL OF MATERIALS, PARTS AND COMPONENTS Procedures are established to define engineering require-ments for identification of materials, parts, and components. The identificacion requirements include such items as model or part number, 52l marking method, and nameplate location. The LRM has provided GE-ARSD the CRP equipment identification numbering structure for use in estab-lishing identification requirements in specifications and drawings. The identification requirements for materials, parts and com-ponents are established by the responsible engineer during the initial design. Identification of materials, parts and components is maintaired as required thr0ughout manufacturing, fabrication, assembly, test and shipment to the astomer. Identification and control of materials, parts and components 5d fabricated by GE-ARSD are specified by procedures. These procedures pro-vide the means for assuring that only correct and acceptable items are used during manufacture. Physical identification is specified and utilized to the maximum extent practical. Identification is made either on the item or on records traceable to the item. Where identification marking of the item is used, the marking is applied in a manner that will not affect the item's function or quality. Raw materials are identified by tagging or other specified means. Identification includes Purchase Order Number, item number, appli-cable specification number / drawing number, material type, size, heat, etc. Materials are introduced into the fabrication process utilizing the Work Order Record / shop traveler which provides traceability and material identification requirements throughout fabrication, assembly, testing and shipping. 52 l The QC Inspector verifies that specified materials are being used and are correctly identified with the Work Order Record number. As fabri-cation of parts, subassemblies and assemblies progresses, re-identification is accomplished as prescribed by the shop planning. The QC Inspector 41 verifies such re-identification operation. Nonconforming materials, parts and components are identified and segregated as described in Section 15.0 of thi: Appendix. Requirements for identification of purchased items are identified in procurement documents in Section 4.0 of this Appendix. Purchased materials, parts and components are verified when received to assure that the identification conforms to the requirements specified by the Purchase Order, drawing or specification as described in Section 7.0 of this Appendix and is traceable to certifications. Only those materials, parts or components that conform to their identification requirements are accepted and released. Records that provide traceability of mats. rials, parts or com-ponents quality history are accumulated and maintained as described in 41 Se: tion 17.0 of this Appendix. Amend. 52
,, , Oct. 1979 171-26 'Jl
9.0 CONTROL OF SPECIAL PROCESSES Special process requirements are specified as part of the technical documentation as described in Section 3.0 of this Appendix. 52 l Special processes performed at GE-ARSD, such as welding, heat treating, nondestructive examination and cleaning, are accomplished under controlled conditions. Personnel performing special processes are quali-l fied (in accordance with written procedures) and certified as required by codes or other contractual documents.
! Special process operations are identified on the Work Order Record 45; ' WOR) and specify the specific procedure or instruction to be utilized.
Nondestructive examination procedures are prepared by a Level III examiner to define nondestructive examination requirements. The pro-cedures define the methods, equipment, acceptance standard and final examination record requirements. A nondestructive examination report is completed for each examination performed which documents the technique used, the examination results and identification of the certified examiner, who performed the inspection by signature, level and date. In addition, 45 l the certified examiner signs and dates the WOR. NDE personnel are qua-lified and certified in accordance with ASNT, SNT-TC-l A. Personnel are 45 l periodically recertified. Records that substantiate nondestructive examination personnel qualifications are maintained by the Pro eus As s u r-ance Level III Examiner. j
;
Welding procedure specifications are prepared by a weldirig engineer 52 l and are maintained in a GE-ARSD welding manual. Welding procedure specifi-
! cations contain the methods and the essential and non-essential variables.
Welding procedures and personnel are qualified in accordance with appli-i i cab'e codes, standards, or other contract requirements. The welding precedure specifications, the record of welding procedure qualification
;
teuts, welder performance qualification tests, and the certified test reports are maintained as quality records. Heat treatment operations, including post weld heat treatments, I specified on the Work Order Record when subcontracted to heat treat suppliers are controlled as described in Section 4.0 of this Appendix. Heat treatment records in the form of time temperature charts, with furnace identification, are obtained for each operation and are maintained as quality records. Cleaning and other special processes when used are documented 45 l in written procedures prepared by Fabrication Enjineerina and aoproved by
'>roduct Assurance prior to issue.
41 Control of special processes for purchased items is specified on procurement documents as described in Section 4.0 of this Appendix and verified as described in Section 7.0 of this Appendix. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 171-27 i' i 238
10.0 INSPECTION Inspection and acceptance testing is performed by Quality 52 l Assurance personnel who are organizationally independent from organizations responsible for performance of the activity being inspected. Inspection and testing are performed to written procedures by trained and qualified Qualification is based on demonstration of p.aficiency, skill, 52 lknowledge personnel. or experience. It is the responsibility of Quality Assurance management to assure that personnel under their direction receive appro-priate training, maintain qualifications current and receive remedial training when quality trends indicate the need for retraining. Inspection planning, defining the characteristics to be in-
, spected, drawing acceptance and rejection criteria and requirements for j recording of 4nspection results are documented or referenced as a part of the Work Order Record as described in Section 5.0 of this appendix.
45 ; For ASME code items, the WOR is reviewed with the Authorized Inspector I for his designation of mandatory hold and check points. All inspection operations are signed and dated as verification of completion. Inspection 45 and NDE reports of the results are referenced on the WOR along with the Nonconforming Item Record number when applicable. 41 , Personnel who perform nondestructive examinations are qualified and certified as described in Section 9.0 of this appendix. Whenever direct measurement is not possible, process surveillance 45l is utilized as specified on the JOR. Modification, repair, rework and replacement operations are specified on Work Order Records, and such operations are completed and inspected the same as the original item. Inspection results are reviewed by Quality Assurance personnbl
! 52 l prior to release of a product for shipment to provide assurance that ! inspection requirements have been satisfied and that proper records have 41 } been prepared.
Inspection of purchased items is described in Section 7.0 of this Appendix. O Amend. 52 11~1
' ' ?7Q
'J' Oct. 1979 171-28
11.0 TEST CONTROL Test programs are identified and documented in accordance with established procedures. The test programs cover all required tests, including, as appropriate, prototype / qualification tests, hydrostatic tests of pressure boundary components, in-process tests of manufactured items, and proof and acceptance tests prior to installation. Technical documentation in the form of specifications and drawings 41 define the requirements for in-process tests, acceptance tests, and verification tests of performance characteristics. Operating and Test Procedures are prepared by Engineering and issued as specifications to define the operational requirements and test procedures for conduct of prototype / qualification, proof and acceptance testing. These procedures: (a) define the test objectives, (b) describe the test item and interfaces with the test facility, (c) describe unique handling requirements and equipment, (d) describe the test details, including acceptance and rejection criteria contained in applicable design documents, and environmental limitations, (c) itemize the parameters to be measured, accuracy requirements, instrumentation response characteristics, range of variables to be measured, error analysis requirements, (f) provide instructions for data collection, reductien, analysis, and retention, (g) describe facility and facility equipment requirements, and (h) Quality Assurance Inspection and check points. Test items fEiling to meet specified performance requirements are documented on a Nonconforming Item Record and dispositioned by a Material Review Board
- , 41 52 l consisting of representatives from Engineering and Quality Assurance, and for rework and repair dispositions a manufacturing engineer.
The Material Review Board is responsible for determinina that items repaired and replaced are tested in accordance with the original or acceptable alternative design and test requirements. Resoonsibility for acceptance of prototype / qualification test results is assigned to t.1e responsible engineering manager. Tests required to be performed during the manufacturing process are identified on the Work Order Record, the prime controlling document for all manufacturing operations, inclu'ing testing. Quality Control Instructions (QCI's) prepared by Product Assurance are referenced on the Work Order Record and provide detailed instructions for in-process and final acceptance testing of items, including (a) instructions for test method, equipment and instrumentation, and (b) test prerequisites, such as calibrated instrumentation, equipment, personnel qualifications, condition and status of item to be tested, environmental conditions, acceptance criteria, and documentation requirements, for acceptable and nonconforming items. The Work Order Record contains nrovisions for designating and sign-off of HOLD and CHECK POINTS by the Authorized 5spector or customer representative. Responsibility for review and acceptance of in-process and final acceptance test results is assigned to the delegated Product Assurance Manager. Amend. 52 171-29 Oct. 1974'
,91240,
12.0 CONTROL OF MEASURING AND TEST EQUIPMENT Tools, gauges and instruments used in measurement, inspection, and monitoring for product acceptance are calibrated and periodically recalibrated and controlled in accordance with established procedures. Procedures require that calibt:ation standards have an uncertanty (error) requirement of no more 41 than 1/10 to 1/4 of the allowable tolerance of the equipment being calibrated, unless limited by State-of-the-Art. Measurement and test equipment is calibrated utilizing standards whose calibration is traceable to the U.S. National Bureau of Standards, accepted values of natural physical constants, or derived by ration type of sel f-calibration techniques . Responsibility for calibration of test instruments is assigned to the c2 IGE-ARSD Sodium Test Engineering unit. Responsibility for calibration of tools and SI 9auges is subcontracted. Included within this raponsibility is performance 41 I of initial and periedic calibration, establishent of calibration frequency, calibration standaros, calibrution procedu.ws, records and notification of Product Assurance when equipment is found to be out of calibration, and identification of calibra tion status. The assurance that tools, gauges, and instruments used for product acceptance are of the proper range, types and accuracy to verify conformance to l design requirements is the responsibility of Quality Assurance. Surveillance is maintained of tools, gauges, and instruments being utilized by inspection and manufacturing to assure that they are within current calibration. If a tool, gauge or instrument is found to be beyond its calibration due date, it is removed from use by the Quality Control Inspector affixing a Quality Hold Tag. When a tool, gauge, or instrument is fcund to be out-of-calibration during periodic recalibration, 41 Quality Control is immediately notified by the source performing the calibration and informed of the nature and extent of the error. An investigation is conducted to determine the materials, parts or components affected by the error reported. Based upon the investigation results, re-inspections are made to verify the validity of the previous readings obtained. Unacceptable materials, parts, and components are 5 submitted to the Material Review Board on a Noncomforming Item Record for disposition as described in Section 15.0 of this Appendix. 52l GE-ARSD utilizes procedures for control of measuring and test equipment 5 which conform with the requirements of RDT F3-2T, Calibration Program Requirements, and the Measuring and Test Equipment Calibration and Control Requirements of RDT F2-2. These procedures require the use of identification labels to indicate next calibration due date. 88 GE-ARSD's najor subcontractors and suppliers which have RDT Standard f2-2 imposed, are required to meet the applicable requirements of RDT Standard F3-2T, Calibration drogram Requirements, and the Measuring and Test Eouioment Calibration and Coatrol Requirements cf RDT Standard F2-2. All other suppliers are required to meet other calibration standards established by government or industry. Vendor surveys and audits verify that these requirements are being 5 complied with. O Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 171-30 }1~j 2 /, }
13.0 HANDLING, STORAGE, AND SHIPPING Procedures and instructions are established to provide control of handling, storage, cleaning, packaging, preserving, shipning release and shipping of material and equipment as necessary to orevent damage, deterioration or loss during manufacture and shipment. When necessary for a particular item, special coverings, special equipment, or soecial environmental con-ditions; such as, inert gas atmosphere, specific moisture content levels, and temperature levels are soecified by Enqineering and verified by Product Assurance. As required, special markings or instructions are used to idertify, maintain and preserve a shipment, including indication of the presence of special enviro 1ments or the need for special control, Technical documents, such as s. ecifications, speci fy the reovirements applicable to special handling, preservation, storage, cleaning, nacking and shippirg. The shop traveler is orepared by Fabrication Engineering to 41142 provide instructions for performing these activities. 52l For both GE-ARSD manufactured items and for direct-to-site procured equipment, Product Assurance verifies that identified quality requirements have been completed prior to product shipment release. These verification activities are discussed in Sections 7.0 and 10.0 of this appendix. Necessary instructions or guidance for Site insnection, handlinn, preservation, storage and special controls are prepared and are delivered to the Site prior to or at the time of component shipment. 52 l GE-ARSD engineering personnel establish the requirements for special handling preservation, storage, cleaning, packaging and shipping. Personnel accomplishing these activities are hired to fill job descriptions which include job qualifica-tion requirements. Performing personnel utilize documented procedures to accom-plish these activities. For any unique task of this type for which a procedure doe not exist, an instruction or procedure is prepared and proper training is 24 accomplished prior to use. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 171-31
) 2 0+ 2
14.0 INSPECTIO_N, TEST AND OPERATING STATUS The Work Order Record is the prime controlling document for all 52 lin-process manufacturing inspection and test operations at GE ARSD The Work Order Record delinaates the sequence of operations to be per-formed and is used to document completion of machining, assembly, welding, inspection, examination, testing, preparation for shipment, and other operations. The Work Order Record accompanies the item throughout the manufacturing process. It identifies the item at all stages of manu-facturing and provides the status of manufacturing inspection, examination and testing status. As each sequential step is accomplished, verification of complet son is made by the performer, affixing his signature, date and pay number to the Work Order Record. Application of welding stamp is made directly on the part or on weld maps, referenced on the Work Order Record. By-passing of inspection, test, and other critical operations can only be accomplished by revision of the Work Order Record and approval of the Quality Control Engineer. At completion of the manufacturing cycle, the Quality Control Engineer verifies that all sign-offs required on the Work Order Record are completed. During the manufacturing process, any item found to be noncon-forming is segregated from conforming items and identifiej with a Quality Hold tag. The control of nonconforming items is discussed in Section 15.0 of this appendix. 52l GE-ARSD imposes requirements on subcontractors and suppliers for identification of witness and hold points in des gn, fabrication and test cycles for GE-ARSD participation and specifies cat audits will be con-ducted by GE-ARSD. Suppliers are required to submit for approval a program 52 schedule including manufacturing and test activities. GE-ARSD then identifies witness and hold points within the schedule. 41
,4
- 1, ?m /, T Amend. 52 O
Oct. 1979 17I-32
15.0 NONCONFORMING MATERIALS, PARTS OR COMP 0NENTS GE- ARSD controls materials, parts, components, and services 52 l whi::h do not conform to specified requirements in accordance with docu-mented procedures in order to prevent their inadvertent use, further processing, or shipment. Procedures provide for identification, docu-mentation, notification, segregation, evaluation, and disposition of non-conforming items. Nonconformances are identified during inspection operations performed by GE-ARSD or by supplier notification. Nonconformances are 45 l 52 documented by GE-ARSD Quality Control personnel on a Nonconfonning Item Record (NIR) or by the supplier on a Vendor Case Record (VCR). These documents describe the item identification, reference the applicable drawing, specification, or standard, and describe the details of the nonconformance. 52 l GE-ARSD fabricated items found to be nonconforming during manufacturing inspection operations are removed from the production flow, segregated in a quarantine area (size permitting), identified by attachment of a Quality Hold Tag prepared by the QC Inspector and recorded on a Non-conformance Record (reverse side of the Work Order Record). Nonconformances which cannot be reworked to the drawing or specification using Standard Shop 52 Practices and Procedures are further documented on an NIR for disposition by the M.R.B. Purchased items found to be nonconforming at Receiving In-spection are identified with a Quality Hold Tag prepared by the QC Inspector. The NIR serial number is recorded on the Quality Hold Tag and Receiving Inspection Plan to provide cross reference identification to the document submitted for MRB disposition. A Material Review Board is established to evaluate and de-termine disposition of NIR's for items that cannot be reworked and for VCR's. The Board consists of authorized members representing Engineering and Product Assurance. The Material Review Board's disposition and directions are recorded directly on the NIR or VCR. When the noncon-52 j formance is associated with an ARSD manufactured item and the item disposition involves rework or repair operations, the concurrence of a 45l Manufacturing Engineer is also required. Material Review Board disposi-tions of " Repair or " Accept as is" for end items are submitted to the 45l LRM for approval, as required by contract, and on ASME Code materials, parts or components are also submitted to the Authorized Inspector for 41 his review and concurrence. Items dispositioned as rework or repair are reprocessed and re-inspectec' using the Work Order Record to assure that the reworked items confonn to drawing or specification requirements and repair items conform to the repair procedure requirements. Amed. 52 Oct. 1979 171-33 : 3 j q4
/.
O Items dispositioned as reject are quarantined and ultimately disposed of either by scrapping or returning to the supplier. Manufactured items, when scrapped, are marked or deformed to preclude their use. To provide assurance that all actions are complete on each Nonconforming Item Record processed, a final review and close-out of the document is 52l performed by signature of the Quality Assurance MRB Representative. Copies of NIR's and VCR's are made part of the inspection records 41 which support the quality of the material, part or component. Copies of NIR's and VCR's are also forwarded to the customer as part of the records package as required to fulfill code, specification or contractual require-ments. NIR's and VCR's are analyzed to detennine quality trends and categorized by responsible function, fault code and fault category. As adverse trends are identified, corrective action is initiated. Quality Trend Reports are generated and forwarded to affected management for information and action. O nm Amend. 52 O Oct.1979 171-34
16.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION 5 21 GE-ARSD identifies, documents and implements corrective actions to prevent recurrence of conditions that could adversely affect quality 41 in ccordance with documented procedures. Corrective action requirements result from evaluations of purchased and fabricated item nonconfomances as described in Section 15.0, design errors and deficiencies as described in Section 3.0, and audit results as described in Section 18.0 of this Appendix. The Unsatisfactory Condition Record (UCR) and Corrective Action Request (CAR) are used to document requirements for corrective action and 52l follow-up. UCR's are initiated by GE-ARSD personnel who become aware of 41 a problem outside of any fomal audit activity. CAR's can only be initia-45 ted by Project Assurance personnel as a result of internal audit activities. 41 UCR's and CAR's are directed to responsible organizations des-cribing the adverse conditions and requesting corrective action to alle-viate the problem. Responsible managers are requirea to respond to the reques t Nithin a predetennined time period. The recipient completes and returns the document to issuing section foi review and acceptance with
- 4) follow-up perfonned to assure that actions committed are implemented and 45 effective. Upon determination that the action taken has been implemented and is effective to preclude recurrence, the CAR or UCR is closed out.
52lAll CAR's and UCR's issued by Product Assurance Audits which have overdue response or action dates are listed on a Monthly Status Report and distri-buted to Management. UCR's may identify problems that require reporting by other 41 reporting documents; such as, Failure and Unus0al Occurrences .eports. 52lThese reports assure that appropriate GE-ARSD Management and customers receive notification of failures and unusual occurrences requiring technical evaluation or corrective action or that impact safety. l /)li b 171-35 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
17.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE RECORDS Sg GE-ARSD collects, stores, and maintains records necessary to provide documentary evidence of the quality of items and services in accordance with Procedures and Practice. The Manager, CRP is responsible for establishing a Quality Records Management System and its implementation through the Department's procedural system. The Quality Records Management System will be responsive to applicable requirements and regulations and will pro-vide: A. for the identification, declaration and indexing of records to be preserved as Quality Records for the CRBRP Project. B. a method of positive identification and correlation of each record with the item or activity to which it applies C. the requirements for establishing and maintaining a Quality Records Center including provisions for storage, retrieval and transfer of Quality Recnrds D. a method of timely transfer of Quality Records to the Owner. The Manager, Technical Operations Support is responsible for estab-lishing a Records Management Organization and the operation of a Quality Records Center as required by the CRP Quality Records Management System. Activities to support the implementation of the System will include: A. Coordination of a Record Identification System B. Coordination of record files / storage as maintained by the 41 responsible organizations and guidance in the establishment and operation of working and reference files. C. Maintenance of a listing, as furnished by the CRP Section, of all indices and/or logs of quality records. D. Coordination of the transfer of records to the customer (owner) as required. Assure preservation and safekeeping of the records. E. Retrieval services for those records in storage and provide 52 disposition direction consistent with Department Instructions. 171-36 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
.e3 m
GE-ARSD records include inspections, test, audits, and material analyses; monitoring of work performance; qualification of personnel,
' procedures, and equipment; and other documentation; such as, drawings, specifications, procurement documents, calibration procedures and reports; rion-conformance reports; and corrective action reports.
GE-ARSD inspection and test records for acceptance and delivery for CRBRP contain: A. A description of the type of observation. B. Evidence of completing and verifying a manufa.turing, inspection, or test operation. C. The date and results of the inspection or test. D. Information related to non-conformance. E. Inspector or data recorder identification. 52 F. A statement as to the acceptability of the results. The requirements and responsibilities for record transmittals, re-tention, and maintenance subsequant to completion of work, are consistent with procurement documents and applicable codes and standards. When documents are declared a record, they will be stored in facilities constructed, located, and secured to prevent destruction of the records by fire, flooding, theft, and deterioration by environmental conditions; such as, temperature or humidity. As an alternate to special facilities duplicate, 41 secured remote storage may be employed. 1 l
?dh t 6 J Amend. 52 171-37 Oct. 1979
18.0 AUDITS 52 l QA Program requirements have been developed, documented, and effect implemented and complied with. The audit program is applicable in those 52 l quality program activities conducted directly by GE-ARSD as well as those delegated to suppliers. Responsibility for conducting the audit pro-gram is established in Section 1.0 of this Appendix. Internal and external audit plans are issued annually and updated on a quarterly basis. The audit olans delineate the activities, organizations, processes or products to be audited; the work scope to be audited, i.e. , pro-45 ject management, planning, design, procurement, manufacturing, records, training, 4 etc.; and the planned schedules for conducting the audits. 52 l include an objective evaluation of:GE- ARSD internal and external audits, as w
- a. Work areas, activities, processes, and items, and the review of documents and records.
- b. Quality-related practices, procedures, and instructions and the effectiveness of implementation.
In developing the audit plans, the frecuency, scope and activities to be audited are based on importance and status of the activity. All applicable functional areas are audited at least once during the contract 45 for all systems or major components. The audit team leader is selected on the basis of his experience, training, demonstrated capability to perform audits and familiarity with the methods, procedures and codes and standards applicable to the audit scope. The members of the audit team are selected on the basis of their familiarity with the methods, procedures, and codes and standards applicable to the audit scope. No member of the audit team can have had any direct assigned responsibility for the activity being audited. Prior to conducting audits, the lead auditor prepares a specific audit plan identifying the subject of the audit, purpose and scope of audit, audit dates, audit team and audit criteria; and an audit checklist which identifies the functional areas to be audited, the audit contact, the reference docu-ments, and characteristir- to t,e evaluated. The specific audit plan is approved by the responsibie Product Assurance Audits Manager. The audit 47 52l checklist is utilized by the audit team to record their findings and observations. At the conclusion of the audit, an exit review is held with the management of the functional areas audited to review the findings and corrective action requirements. Corrective Action Requests (CAR's) are prepared for internal audits to document each significant discrepancy found and are directed to appropriate management as discussed in Section 16.0 of this Appendix. An audit report is prepared to document the audit results. Internai audit reports are distributed to the audited Managers; Manager, Product 52 l Assurance and Services Section; Manager, Guality Assurance Support: Manacer Clinch River Project Product Assurance; Manager, Clinch River Project Section; 41 and other responsible Sect'on and Subsection Managers. Amend. 52 lI l 2 49 Oct. 1979 171-38
External audit reports with all significant findings are distributed to the appropriate internal management and are submitted to the ourcha;;ng organization for distribution to the supplier along with a request Ja-corrective action. Information concerning audit results is provided to 45 41 the LRM. When results from a number of audits or other surveillance activities indicate that a generic adverse trend is developing, a Quality Trend Report is prepared and distributed to appropriate management. Follow-up audits are conducted as appropriate to verify the effectiveness of corrective action performed. Audits confirm compliance with established procedures for interface control. These audits cover interfaces with the LRM, other RM's and with subcontractors and suppliers. Activity audits, both internal and external, verify the implementation and effectiveness of indoctrination and training programs. A complete file of records to support each audit conducted is main-tained.
~1 250 Amend. 52 17I-39 Oct. 1979
O OWNER LEAD RE ACTOR MANUFACTURER GE-ARSD RE ACTOR M ANUF ACTURER SYSTEMS SERVICES COMPON ENTS SUBSERVICES SERVICES SERVICES M ATERI A LS M ATERI ALS I CJMPONENTS I MATERIALS SERVICES Figure 17I-1. Organization of Quality Assurance Program Participation
..-4 ~ r-l []3I O
Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 17I-40
GE ENERGY SYSTEMS & TECHNOLOGY DIVISION I ADVANCED RE ACTOR SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT I i I w N ~ APPLICATIONS PRODUCT SYSTEMS ARSD CLINCH RIVER S W FIN ANCI AL PROJECT ENGINEERING
& PLANNING ASSUR ANCE
& SERVICES ARSD-LEGAL ENGINEERING PROJECTS SECTION
.4
( s
#N TECHNOLOGY & DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PROCUREMENT SPECI AL PROJECTS ENGINEER lNG ENGINEERING L IONS ro W l N
hgF Figt2 171-2. GE-ARSD Quality Program Management Organization " " " mP
ADVANCED REACTOR SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT PRODUCT ASSURANCE AND SERVICES l ~ l l M PRODUCT PRODUCT g AT,S UR AN CE ASSURANCE QUALITY PRODUCT MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL DRAFTING AND N CLINCH RIVER ASSURANCE ASSURANCE TECHNOLOGY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT AUDITS SYSTEMS DOCUMENTATION PROJECT SPECIAL PROJECTS
- SUPPORT QUALITY SYSTEMS RECORDS TECHNICAL ASSUR NCE QUALITY CONTROL PUBLICATION MANAGEMENT INFORMATION ENGINEERING SERVICES
'Does not make direct contribution to Clinch River Activities (supports base programs and other work)
January 1979 oE ~, I{ .. Figure 171-3. GE-ARSD Product Assurance Organization WW " Ui U e O O
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM ORG ANIZA TION DOCUME NT ATION AUDITS AND REVIEWS CORRECTIVE ACTION ENGINE ERING HOLOS
- 1. Planning 1. Responsibehty and Authonty 1. Policies and Procedures 1. Qualety Audits
- 2. Quahey Assurance Program Index 2. Training and Indoctrenation 2 Quahty Records 2. Management Reviews UNUSUAL OCCURRENCE REPORTING
- 3. Personnes Quahfication 3. Quahty Status Reports DESIGN . .ND DEVE LOPME NT PROCUR E MF NT MANUF ACTURING. F ARHtCATION AND ASSE MRL Y .
Design Planning Procurement Planning Planning Des *9n Defenstion and Centrol p,acy,ement Requerements inspection and Test Pian
- 1. Des.gn Cntena
- 2. Codes, $tandres and Practices Procurement Document Reviews Matenal identification and Control
- 3. Enyneenne Studies E valuateon and Selection of Procurement Control of Processes
- 4. Parts. Matensas and Precesses Sources
- 1. Fahrecation and AssomtAv Processes
- 5. Des.gn Descnoteens 1. General Requirements 2. Process Quahhcation 6 Specificaneens. Drawings and 2. Acceptable Source Lost 3 Nondestructive E semination Instructions 3. Pee- Award Evaluation 4 Cleaneng
- 7. Identification 4 in,erchange c,f Source
- 8. Acceptance Critens latem ed Tests Capatahty information g g enterf ace Control 1. General Requerements y Control of Cent, ration
% Document Review and Control 2 Proceres
- 1. Contract Change Contros 3 Compiered item inspection and Test h
w
- 1. Document Reviews
- 2. Document Controa
- 2. As sweet venficat.on 4 inspect.on Status Indication Equipment Cahbrateon and Standards 5. Certif. cat.c n
- 3. En,neenng Drawing Lests
' S urce Surweil ance a d Inspection Docuenent Control Desy Rw
. Receive g I spection Equipment Cahtwat:on and Standards dew w
" 1. Equipment Evaluation Failure Reportmy and Correcteve '
"'"O* ' "
- 2. Documentahon 2. Control of inspection Measunng and Test i
Action E quipment
- 3. Dispositioneng of Rece ved items Control of Nonconformeng items 4 Discrepancy Equipment Control of Received leems Statistacal Quahey Control and Anarvs.s rg Control of Nonconformeng items p;.a Corrective Action o>
Og Handhng. Preservation. Packmpng. Storap and Sheppeng
.a m 3 1. Handhng CL 2. Preservation. Packagmg and Stoeage e 3. Shipping w
D N Figure 171-4. Major Elements of the GE-ARSD-RM QA Program
10CfR50 App B Criteria Title Implementing Document
- I Organization Organization List GE-ARSD Product Quality Quality Assurance Program Index (Section 1.3, " Organization and Responsibilities")
II Quality Configuration Hanagement Assurance Fabrication and Test Procedure Program Fabrication Engineering Hanufacturing System: Noncoded items Fabrication Parts List and Haterial Ordering Sheet Failure Reporting and Management Identification and Processing of Nonconforming Items issue and Control of GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Manuals Manufacturing and Sodium Technology Process Instruction Z Material Review Honconforming Item Record 7* Personnel Training, Indoctrination and Qualification 2 Policy and Instructions GE-ARSD Product Quality Prolact Reviews Quality Status Reports QA Hanual for Compliance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Division 1 (Refer to Section 4.0)
. Quality Assurance Program Indexes
-Quality Control Instructions and Product Assurance Instructions Special Tools Control Training and Orientation unplanned Events - Reporting and Management Unusual Occurrence Reporting and Management Vendor Case Record 45 Work Order Record "See Attactment 171-1 for description of Implementing Docuaents.
P 52 e m TABLE 171-1 GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Procedures Index Versus
- N
[ Requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix "B"
> (Sheet 1 of 10) t Ln O O O
P Implanenting Document
- Title r er
~ffl Design Control Baseline Management Change Control Board Codes, Stand'ards and Practices Configuration Hanagement Cost Account Planning Cost and Lead Time Control of Computer Codes Control of Transmitted Working Level Design Data CRP Configuration Management System CRBRP Document iloids CRBRP Preparation of Developnent Activity Description (DAD)
CRBRP Preparition of Developncnt Requirement Specification (DRS) Design Criteria Design Data iloid Z Design Description 7 Design Definition Documentation Structure g Design Review - Customer Oriented Design Review - Internal Design Verification Engineering Changes Engineering Change Authorization Engineering Change Notice
~"
EngineeringChangeNotice(CRBRP) Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) Preparation Engineering Configuration Definition Systen (ECDS) Engineering llolds Engineering Henoranda N tr Engineering Release Instructions
& Engineering Sketches Engineering Studies op Engineering Work Records Sm Fabrication Engineering Hanufacturt;c; System: Noncoded Items g 45 Functional Classification 3'
gg *See Attachment 171-1 for description of Implementing Documents. TABLE 171-1 GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Procedures Index Versus Requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix "B" (Sheet 2 of 10)
10CFRSO App B Criteria Tital Implementing Document
- Ill contd... Llesign Control d " "
in$"r e n!ro Make/ Buy Evaluation Material Review Board Material Review flonconforming item Records Parts, Materials and Processes Preliminary Engineering Change IPEC? Preparation of Equipment Specif (cat on (CRBRP) Preparation of System Design Descriptions Project Baseline Definition and Documentation Project Directive Pro ect Scheduling Pro, ect Status and Control Syston Document ilolds Quality Assurance Requirement Guidelines QA Manual for Compliance with ASME Doller and Pressure Vessel Code, Section 111, Division 1 (Refer to Section 11.0)
% ' Quality Verification Planning Criteria i
Receiving Inspection - Purchased, Material Control RDT Standards Review, Approval, and Issue - Drawings, Specifications and Standards Review of Engineering Documents RRT Computer Coding Safety Analysis Report NRC Question / Response Preparation Safety Analysis Report Preparation Safety Analysis Report Updating Source Inspection at Vendor facilities Specification,ibutionDrawings Standard Distr and Instructions Supplier Documentation Technical Documentation Technical Documentation - Drawings Technical Documentation - Specificrtions (and RDT Standdrds) R $" Technical Documentation - ICD Fg Veador Case Record F 45 Walver Requests e Work Status Determination __
*See Attaciunent 171-1 for description of Implementing Documents.
52 TABLE 171-1 GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Procedures Index Wrsus _ Requirements of 10CFRSO. Appendix "B" rv (Sheet 3 of 10) W N e 9 9
10CfR50 App B Criteria Title Implementing Document
- Baseline Hanagement IV Procurement Business Managed Procurement Document Configuration Management Control Contract Award Engineering Release Instructions Interdivisional Work Orders Letter Order Material Request Procurement Procurement Contract Charroe Hanagement Procurement Contract Preparation Procurement Provisions Procurement Requirements
- Purchasing Action Approval % Purchase Review Board i Quality Assurance Program Indexes " Request for Proposal or Quotation Supplier Documentation V Instructions, Acceptance Criteria
" Procedures, Configuration Hanagement
- and Drawings Fabrication Engineering Hanufacturing System: Noncoded Items Fabrication Parts List and Haterial Ordering Sheet
- Identification and Processing of Nonconfonning Items Material Review Nonconforming Item Records l'J Policies and Instructions LD Product Quality CO QA Manual for Compliance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Division 1 (Refer to Sections 4.0 and 11.0) 4c
~
Quality Control Instructions and Product Assurance lustructions op Record Control 3to Technical Documentation
- 3 - -
k . . _ . - _ . _ . _ _ _ _ - - - - .--- lG 'See Attachnent 171-1 for description of Implementing Documents. 52 TABLE 171-1 GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Procedures Index Versus Requirements of 10CIR50, Appendix "B" (Sheet 4 of 10)
_ _ _ - _ . . - - - w Criteria Title Implementing Document
- V contd... Instruction;, Technical Documentation - Drawings Procedures, & Technical Documentation - Specifications (and RDT Standards)
Drawings Work Order Record VI Document Change Control Board Control Configuration Management Control of Computer Codes Control of Transmitted Working Level Design Data Cost Account Planning CHP Canfiguration Management System Document Control Engineering Changes Engineering Change Authorization Engineering Change Notice - Engineer Change Notice (ECN) (CRBRP) M Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) Preparation (CRBRP)
- Engineering Configuration Definitinn System (ECDS) os Engineering Manoranda Engineering Release Instructions Engineering Sketches Engineering Mark Records Fabrication Engineering Manufactur.. 3 Systen
- Noncoded items Preliminary Engineering Change (PEC)
QA Manual for Compliance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. Section Ill, Dision 1 (Refer to Section 2.0) RDT Standards Review, Approval, and Issue-Drawings, Specifications and Standards Review of Engineering Documents Safety Analysis Report Preparation Safety Analysis Report Updating RE " Safety Analysis Report NRC Question / Response Preparation .$ 45 Standard Distribution -. Supplter Documentation e _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. __ e ro
^See Attaciunent 171-1 for description of implementing Documents.
52 TABLE 171-1 GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Procedures Index Versus
~~
Requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix "B" (Sheet 5 of 10) f s e G 9
10CFR50 App B Criteria Title Implementing Document
- VI contd Document Technical Documentation Control Technical Documentation - Drawings Technical Documentation - Specifications (and RDT Standards)
Waiver Requests VII Control of Advise Price Purchases Purchased Business Managed Procurement l Material, Competitive Procurement Equipment and Configuration Hanagement Services Contract Award Cost / Price A'elysis Cost or Pr't:ng Data Engineertio Changes Engineering Change Authorization C Letter order 7 Naterial Request a Procurement
- Proposal Evaluation Proposal Evaluation Plan Purchasing Action Approval Purchase Review Board Receiving Inspection Purchased Haterials Receiving Purchased Haterial
~
Source Inspection at Vendor Facilities Supplier Contract Administration Supplier Documentation [d Supplier f{egotiation a~ Supplier Qualification 45 Supplier Shipment Vendor Quality System Evaluation and Rating O@ r2
,2 - - . - - - - - . - - - - - . - _ --- - * ^See Attachnent 171-1 for description of Implementing Documents.
52 1ABLE 171-1 GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Procedures Index Versus Requirements of 10CFRb0, Appendix "B" (Sheet 6 of 10)
10CFR50 App D Criteria Title Implementing Document
- VIII Identification Configuration Management and Control of Fabr8 ation Engineering Manufacturing System: Noncoded items Fiaterial s , Final Inspection - Accetance Stamps parts and Handling, Preservation, 'ackaging Storage and Shipping Components Identification System Material Identification and Control QA Manual for Compliance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section Ill, Division 1 (Refer to Sections 3.5, 4.4, 4.5, and 5.3)
Receiving Purchased Material Supplier Contract Administration Technical Documentation Technical Documentation - Drawings Technical Documentation - Specifications (and RDT Standards) IX Control of Configuration Management 2n Special Fabrication and Test Procedure Processes Fabrication Engineering Manufacturing System: Honcoded items Failure Reporting and Management Identification and Processing of Nonconfonning Items Inspection and Test Personnel Qualifications Manufacturing and Sodium Technology Process Instruction Material Review Nonconforming item Record Nondestructive Examination Personnel Ceritification Requirements QA Manual for Compliance with ASME Boiler and Pressui e Vessel Code, Section Ill Division 1 (Refer to Section 4.0) Special Tools Control Unplanned Events Reporting and Management 45 Unusual Occurrence Reporting and Management Vendor Case Record R 3" g a. g- - - - - - - - - - -
^See Attactsaent 171-1 for description of Implementing Documents.
m TABLE 171-1 GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Procedures index Versus
- Requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix "B"
] (Sheet 7 of 10) N ? O O O
10CfRSO App B Criteria Title Implementing Document
- X Inspection Fabrication Engineering Marufacturing Systen: Noncoded Items Fabrication Parts List and Material Ordering Sheet Identification and Processing of Nonconforming items Inspection Report Material Review Nonconforming Item Records Non-Destructive Examination Processes Organization List (ARS0)
Product Quality QA Manual foi Compliance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Division 1 (Refer to Section 9.0) Quality Assurance Program Index (Section 1.3, " Organization and Responsibilities") O Quality Control Instructions and Product Assurance Instr uctions T* Shipping .m. Work Order Record XI Test Control Design Verificatloa Development and Qualification Testing Development Review Engineering Work Records
^
Fabrication Engineering Manufacturing System: Noncoded Items fabrication Parts List and Material Ordering Sheet Identification and Processing of Honconforming Ituus
~
Material Review Norconforming Itan Records QA Manual for Compliance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, y Section III, Division 1 (Refer to Sections 4.0 and 11.0) 3 Quality Control Instructions and Product Assurance Instructions m Technical Documentation - Drawings Technical Documentation - Specifications (and ROT Standards) R @' Test Authorization and Record (TAR) - Documentation of Test Results
.r* @ Test Procedure (CRBRP) o- 45 Work Order Record . -
m _ _ 5 *See Attachnent 171-1 for description of Implementing Documents. 52 TABLE 171-1 GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Pracedures Index Versus Requirenents of 10CFR50, Appendix "B" (Sheet 8 of 10)
10CfitS0 App B Criteria Title Implementing Document
- Configuration Managensnt XII Control of Fabrication and Test Procedure Measuring and Fabrication Engineering Manufacturing System: Noncoded items Test Equipment Fabrication Parts List and Material Ordering Sheet Manufacturing and Sodium Technology Process Instruction Measuring and Test Equipment Calibration and Control QA Manual for Compliance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Division 1 (Refer to Section 4.0)
Special Tools Control Work Order Record XIII Handling. Fabrication Engineering Manufacturing System: Noncoded Items Storage and llandling, Preservation, Packaging, Storage and Shipping Shipping QA Manual for Compliance with ASME Boiler and Press.ce Vessel Code, Section III, Division 1 (Refer to Section 4.3) M Shipping 4, Shipping Plan m Supplter Shipment XIV Inspection, Fabrication Engineering Manufacturing System: Noncoded items Test and Fabrication Parts List and Material Ordering Sheet Operating Final Inspection - Acceptance Stamps Status identification and Processing of Nonconfonning Item. Material Review Nonconfording Iten Record QA Manual for Compliance with ASME Boiler and Pressu.e Vessel Code, Section III, Division 1 (Refer to Sections 4.2 and 11.2) Receiving Inspection - Purchased Materials Control Receiving Purchased Material Vendor Case Record 45 Work Order Record OI y
;- _ _ _ _ * *See Attactment 171-1 for description of Implementing Dot .ents. ~ TABLE 171-1 GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Procedures Index Versus e Requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix "B"
. _ _ (Sheet 9 of 10) N G O O
10CFRSO App 8 Criteria Title Implementing Document
- XV Non-Conforming fabrication Engineering Manufacturing System: Noncoded Items Materials. Final Inspection - Acceptance Stamps Parts or Identification and Processing of Nonconforming Itans Components Material Review Board Material Review Nonconfonning Item Record QA Manual for Compliance with ASME Doller and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Division 1 (Refer to Section 11.0)
Receiving Inspection - Purchased Materials Control Receiving Purchased Haterial Source Inspection at Vendor facilities Vendor Case Record XVI Corrective Failure Reporting and flanagement Action Identification and Processing of Honconforming Items Material Review Nonconfonning Item Record 03 Quality Audits l' Quality Trend Analysis 8] Unplanned Events Reporting and Management Unuiual Occurrence Reporting and ibnagement Ver dor Case Record Vendor Quality System Evaluation and Rating XVII Quality Configuration Hanagement
^
Assurance Policies and Instructions Record s Record Con:rol 4E Quality Audits XVIII Audits r~J
-R.
L __ _ _ .
^See Attacivnent 171-1 for descriptinn of Implementing Docus.c.,*s.
52 c337 TABLE 17.I-I GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Procedures Index Versus Sm
, i,l Requirenents of 10CFR50, Appendix "B"
{ggn (Sheet 10 of 10)
ATTACHMENT 171-1 GE-ARSD QUALITY ASSURANCE DOCUMENT DESCRIPTICNS
- 1. Acceotance Criteria This document establishes the requirement of specifying in the design definition documentation tne acceptance criteria and the points during the wrk at which characteristics will be verified.
- 2. Advise Price Purchases This instruction establishes guidelines for purchasing activity for fabrication, servic ts or repair under $500,
- 3. Baseline Manaasnent This instruction describes requirements for managing and controlling changes to the Perfomance Measurement Baseline to ensure traceability and current status.
- 4. Business Manaced Precurement This instruction defines. the objectives, application, individual responsibilities and general approach to operation of a procurement team.
- 5. Chance Control Roard (CCBI (CRBRP)
This instruction identifies the various CCB-related actions required to disposition proposed changes to the design documentation.
- 6. Codes, Standards and Practices This document provides guidance for the selection of the appropriate codes, standards and pract. ices for application to a particular product.
- 7. Ccmoetitive Procurement This instruction defines adequate price competition, single source, sole source and inadequate price competition,
- 8. Conficuration Manaaement This policy establishes the guidelines for configuration management as a discipline that provides a system to certify that the product confornc exactly and on a continuing basis to its related documentation package.
- 9. Contract Award This instruction defines the requirements for executing this contractual document.
- 10. Control of Comouter Codes 5245 This instruction provides basic infomation for the control of computer g
codes used for design purposes. Amend. 52 1
'l 7bD Oct.1979 17I-54
- 11. Control of Transmitted Workino Level Desion Data (CRSRP)
This document applies to the preparation, control, and release of non-baselined technical infomation not impacting cost or schedule.
- 12. Cost Account Plannino This instruction describes the requirements for the content, preparation and responsibilities for Cost Account Planning.
- 13. Cost and Lead Time This instruction provides requirements for preparing and processing cost and lead time infonnation en items which may be purchased.
- 14. Cost or Pricino Data This instnaction provides the means for compliance with Truth in Negotiations Act, and its principals as stated in federal regulations.
- 15. Cost / Price Analysis This instruction defines essential tems used in cost / price analysis, provides for the perfomance of cost / price analysis and establishes responsibility.
- 16. CRP - Conficuration Manacement System This instruction identifies the overall requirements and organizational responsibilities for Configuration Management and related activities.
These requirements include those actions and responsibilities necessary to define and implement systems and procedural instructions to control the activities related to Configuration Identification, Configuration Control, Configuration Accounting and Configuration Inspection / Verification.
- 17. CRBRP Document Holds This instruction outlines responsibilities for:
a) making a management decision to issue a document with infonnation on " hold" - b) the proper identification and reporting of " holds" c) a continued effort toward the resolution and elir.: nation of document " holds" 16 CRBRP Precaration of Deveicoment Activity Descriotion (DAD) This instruction provides the fannat for preparing, issuing and 52 45 revising Development Activity Description (DAD) applicable to Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Development work. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
- 171-55 1 266
- 19. CRBRP Jrecaration of Develocnent Recuirament Scecifications (DRS)
This instruction provides the format for preparing, issuing and revising Cevelopment Requiremencs Specification (CRS) applicable to Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant development work,
- 20. Desien Criteria This document establishes the requirements for dccumenting the criteria address areas such as perfomance objectives, reliability and safety requirements, applicable codes and standards, etc.
o
- 21. Desion Data Hold This document provides irstructions for identifying and munitoring Design Data Holds on Department drawings, specifications and standards.
- 22. Design Definition Documentation Scructure This instruction defines tne hierarchical series of documents that provides control of and direction to a design as it evolves frem the initial general contract requirements to the specific characteristics and requirements necessary for fabrication and use.
- 23. Desion Descriotions This document establishes the Design Description as a means of defining and integrating, for an essential component or system, the various technical, operational and safety considerations involved; maximizing application of past experience, related research, etc; and establishing a common technical basis for other project activities.
- 24. Design Reviews-Customer Oriented The purpose of ?his document is to provide general guidelines for fonnally reviewing a procesed design in response to a customer requirement or direction.
- 25. Desian Reviews - Internal This document establishes the requirements for planning, conducting, and documenting one type of design verification; namely, Design Reviews.
- 26. Desian Verification This document defines the acces e methods for the verification of the designs prepared for GE-ARSD products and provides guidelines for the deternination of the degree and extent of verification required for various types of products.
- 27. Develocment and Qualification Testino This document establishes the requirements for, and of, development and 52 45 qualification testing, as necessary to demonstrate, evaluate and substantiate the fulfillment of the design objectives.
Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 171-56 _, 1 26/
- 23. Develocment Review This document specifies the requirement for conducting and documenting management reviews for the purpose of integrating, guiding and evaluating criterf4, testing and the application of development results.
- 29. Document Control The purpose of this procedure is to describe the method used for distributing and controlling issued documents, during fabrication.
- 30. Engineering Change Authorization (ECA)
This instruction establishes the Engineering Change Authorization (ECA) as the vehicle for evaluating and approvin<, iroposed engineering changes unless otherwise directed by the Project Manager.
- 31. Engineering Chance Notice (ECN)
This instruction estaolishes the Engineering Change Notice (ECN) as the vehicle which defines and authorizes changes to all issued Department engineering documents, i.e. drawings, specifications and standards.
- 32. Engineering Chance Notice (ECN) (CRBRP)
This instruction details, for the CRBRP Projxt, the procedures and organizational responsibilities for the preparation, review, approval and processing of ECN's.
- 33. Engineering Change Procosal (ECP) Precaration (CRBRP)
This instruction identifies the requirements and organizational responsibilities for the preparation of Engineering Change Proposals (ECP's) to the CRP baseline design. 34 Engineerino Chances This instruction describes the requirements and responsibilities for initiating and approving engineering changes to all Department drawings, specification and standards,
- 35. Enoineerino Conficuration Definition System (ECDS)
This document establishes the Engineering Configuration Definition System 52 45 as the way to maintain a complete and current listing of all engineering drawings, specifications and standards, including the supplies. 171-57 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
*'~1 ') f. p
- 36. Encineerino Holds This procedure has been issued to establish and implement procedures for the identification, reporting and management of engineering holds imposed during design, development, procurement, fabrication, construction and installation, and operations activities. The purpose
' of an engineering hold is to flag or control an item for which additional l
information must be :.ade available before the item can be released for further prccessing.
; 37. Enoineerina Memoranda This instruction summarizes the engineering reutines for preparing and issuing Engineering Memoranda,
- 38. Encineerina Release Instruction (ERI)
The purpose of this document is to establish the Engineering Release Instruction (ERI) as the vehicle by which Er.gineering authorizes and releases engineering documents for their intended project application,
- 39. Engineering Sketches This instruction provides for the prepara+ ion, use and control of engineering sketches and describes the purpose and control of engineering sketches and their application for test and development work.
- 40. Enoineering Studies This doctr1ent describes the methods for conducting and documenting engineering studies that are performed to support a design definition ,
effort.
- 41. Engineerina Work Records This instruction describes the two alternatives methods for the retention of Engineering Work Records that substantiate a design and provide the basis for, or are subsequently included within, engineering memoranda or reports. The requirements are stated herein for the retention of engineering work records by either the Engineering Work Book or Engineering Subsection File method,
- 42. Fabrication and Test Procedures (F&TP's)
This document establishes the F&TP as the type of document utilized to define the responsibil1 ties of manufacturing and test facility personnel for performing quality-related activities. The requirements for preparicg, reviewing, approving and issuing FLTP's are specified.
- 43. Fabrication Enoineerina Manufacturina System-Non-Coded Items This document authorizes the ASME Code Quality Assurance Manual for 52 45 non-coded items and provides modification instructions for use on non-coded items.
Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 171-58
- 1 269-
- 44. Fabrication Parts List and Material Orderina Sheet The purpose of this document is to define the completion and usage of the Fabrication Parts List and the Material Ordering Sheet.
- 45. Failure Recortinr and Manaaement This document establishes the requirements for reporting, documenting, and correcting items which fail to function as planned after final acceptance.
! 46. Final Insoection-Acce ance Stamos s
This instruction provides the detailed requirements that are to be compiled with by the stamp-issuing function and the stamp holder.
- 47. Functional Classificatien This procedure defines the GE-ARSD system for establishment of the functional classification of program /)roject tasks and products.
This procedure provides for the ideni.1 fication of a potential work affort impact on* GF-ARSD and the establishment of the appropriate effort necessary for control and verification of the work effort by GE-ARSD personnel responsible for task and product completion.
- 48. Handlino, Preservation, Packaoinc, Storace and Shicoino This document establishes the requirements for the handling, preserving, packaging, storing and shipping of raw, in-process and completed parts and assemblies.
- 49. Identification and Processina of Non-conforning Items The purpose of this dacument is to establi'sh the procedure and assign responsibilit, for the identification and processing of non-conforming purcnased and manufactured items.
- 50. Identification System This document provider an identification system which provides a method to reference and index a product and its documen'tation and, where appli-cable, provides traceability of the product's constituents to their source.
- 51. Insoection and Test Personnel Oualifications This document establishes requirements to assure that only qualified personnel are authorized to accept materials, products, processes, and systems by requ red inspections and tests.
- 52. Insoection Recort This document establishes the Inspection Report as the document utili:d 52 45 to record inspection data, when required by the shoo traveler, Receiving Inspection Plan, etc.
Amend. 52 171-59 2/ Oct. 1979
- 53. Interdivisional Work Orders This instruction establishes the requirements for conducting procut ement activitj with other General Electric Divisions or Departments.
- 54. Interface Control This document establisl es the methods for definition and control of design interfaces between GE-ARSD design organizations and other project participants, and where appropriate, within GE-ARSD.
- 55. Issue nad Control of GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Manuals This instruction describes and explains the distribution, control and format of the GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Manual. This QSI defines and describes the GE-ARSD Quality Assurance Manual, as it applies to GE-ARSD Product Assurance and to all custodians of any such Manuals.
- 56. Letter Order This in:truction defines policy and procedures to govern issuance and definitization of undefinitized orders or subcontracts which i are to be documented on a purchase order or a subcontract form.
! 57. Make/ Buy Evaluation This instruction describes the process of determining make/ buy O alternatives and responsibilities to effect this process.
- 58. Manufacturina and Sodium Technolocy ?rocess Instructions This document establishes the Manufacturing Process Instruction (MPI) and Scdium Technology Process Instruction (STPI) as the type of docuanent utilized to specify instructions for performing a process step in manufacturing or sodium 1000 oceration when required.
t 59. Material Identification and Control
; This document establishes the metnods and control utilized in the manufacturing area to insure suitable material identification throughout ; processing.
i 60. Material Review Board (MRB) This document establishes the Material Review Board and defines the i responsibility and authority of the Board for the review and disposi-tion of non-conforming items for which GE-ARSD has procurement fabri-tion, manufacture or testing responsibility.
- 61. Material Review Non-Conformino Item Record 52 45 The purpose of this document is to define the responsibility and procedure for the preparation of Material Review Non-confonning Item Records.
*i
, } 2 Amend. 52 171-60 Oct. 1979
- 62. Material Recuest This instruction provides for the preparation and processing of a procurement action except for specialized items which control is already established.
- 63. Measurine anr. Test Ecuianent Calibration and Control This document establishes the requirements for the calibration, adjustment, maintenance and control of all measuring and test equipment used to accept GE-ARSD products.
- 64. Non-Destructive Examination Personnel Certification Recuirements This document establishes the requirements for the qualification and certification of non-destructive examination personnel within GE-ARSD.
- 65. Nondestructive Examination Processes This instruction establishes the controls for nondestructive examination processes within the Decartment.
- 66. Orcanization List GE-ARSD This instruction defines the function, title and name of Management personnel for GE-ARSD.
- 67. Parts, Materials and Processes This document establishes the methods for selection, standardization, identification and application review of essential parts, materials and processes that are included in the project's design definition effort.
- 68. Personnel Train ;:'c, Indoctrination and Qualification (CRBRP)
The purpose of this document is to establish the procedure and the organizational responsibility for the Clinch River GE-ARSD personnel training, indoctrination and qualification program as required for the Clinch River Project.
- 69. Policy and Instructions fGE-ARSD)
This document establishes the policy and hierarchy of the GE-ARSD procedural system.
- 70. Preliminary Enoineerina Chance (pEC)
The purpose of this document is to pennit the preparation of PEC's for expediting the innediate implementation of on-the-spot-changes to 52 45 developmental hardware and test facilities. PEC's are not applicable to prototypes, production work or products intended for customer shipment. 171-61 Amend. 52 t Oct. 1979
\ qln c i
- 71. Precaration of Ecuicment Saecifications (CRBRP)
This instruction covers all aspects of equipment specification preparation for the Clinch River Project.
- 72. Precaration of Svstem Desian Descrictions This instruction covers all aspects of System Design Description preparation, for the Clinch River Project.
- 73. Procurement This document defines the requirements for performing procurement activities such as the purchase of material, equipment and services required by the department.
- 74. Procurement Contract Chance Management This instruction states the requirements fcr preparing, issuing and fnanaging changes to any executed contractual document with a seller.
- 75. Procurement Contract Precaration This instruction defines a method for preparing purchase orders or subcontracts for approval and execution.
- 76. Procurement Provisions This instruction establishes a unifonn method for conditions of purchase applicable to contractual documtat types.
77'. Procurement Reouirements (CRBRP) This instruction defines general procurement criteria to be applied to Clinch River Project procurements.
- 70. Product Ouality This document establishes a quality policy for GE-ARSD. It defines the broad structure of the quality system to be used in implementing the policy; identifies prime and contributing responsibilities, relationships, and checkpoints for managerial reviews and actions; identifies relation-ships with customers, vendors and government agency representatives and identifies supporting document systems for measuring product quality.
- 79. Project Baseline Definition and Documentation This instruction establishes a project Baseline, including the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), the Project Master Plan, Project Budget Baseline and Project Schedule Baseline.
- 80. Project Directive 52 45 This instruction describes the use of the Project Directive form and attachments which are the means used to convey budget, funding, work scope and schedule airection to.the project participants.
Amend. 52 171-62 Oct. 1979
} 2[3
- 81. Project Reviews The purpose of this document is to provide management with meaningful reviews of projects; how such reviewr will be conducted, with whom and their form of documenta'.; <
- 82. Project Schedulino This instructi m defines and establishes requirements for the preparation, application and control of Project Schedules.
- 83. Project Status and Control System Document Holds This instruction defines the procedure for reporting engineering design data hold infomation pertinent to CRBRP.
- 84. Procosal Evaluation This instruction defines the requirements for opening proposals, safe guarding proposal information and evaluatirn of proposal infomation.
- 85. Procosal Evaluation Plan This instruction defines the requirement for preparing and establishing a proposal evaluation.
- 86. Purchase Action Acoroval This instruction provides the requirement for obtaining review and approval of a proposal purchase action including the purchase contract.
- 87. Purchase Review Board This instruction describes the activities and responsibilities of the Purchase Review Board in the review and control of critical item procurements.
- 88. Quality Assurance Manual for comoliance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code - Section III Division I This manual describes the QA Program and documents the controlled manufacturing system utilized by GE-ARSD to comply with the ASME B&PV Code, Section III Division I requirements.
- 89. Quality Assurance Procram Index (CRBRP)
This document describes the QA Program and identifies procedures which GE-APSD shall implement to assure confonnance to contractual requiremen u for the assigned GE-ARSD scope of work on CRBRP.
- 90. Quality Assurance Pecoram Indexes 52 45 This document describes the procedure and responsibility for generation and issuance of a quality Assurance Program Index for a project, program or area of work.
Amend. 52
,, Oct. 1979
- 91. Quality Assurance Recuirement Guidelines This instruction is to define a baseline for quality assurance programatic requirements that are censistent with the overall Project Quality Program and provide guidelines for identifying that baseline.
- 92. Quality Audits This instruction defines the procedure and responsibility for establishing and implecenting Internal and External Audit requirements.
- 93. Quality Control Instruction (OCI) and Product Assurance Instructions (PAI)
This instruction authorizes preparing, issuing and applying of QCI's and PAI's including defining their fam1at and subject matter.
- 94. Quality Status Recorts This instruction defines the procedure for preparing and transmitting Quality Status Reports by Product Assurance when required by contract.
- 95. Quality Trend Analysis This document de 'nes the requirements for the preparation, approval and distributfor, of Quality Trend Analysis Reports.
- 96. Quality Verif# cation Plannina Criteria (CRBRP)
This instruction defines the requirements for quality verification planning on the Clinch River Project, presents detail instructions for the generation of required documentation, and places the responsibility for the execution of the quality verification
- activities on a specific manager within GE-ARSD.
- 97. RDT Standards The purchase of this document is to establish the criteria, procedures and responsibilities for the use and development of RDT Standards of US DOE-Reactor Research and Technology (RRT) funded programs.
- 98. Receivina Insoection - Purchased Materials This document establishes the requirements for receiving and Source inspections and specifies the Receiving Inspection Plan as the document utilized to plan receiving and source inspections, and to l record inspection results and verification sign-off.
- 99. Receivina Purchased Material This document establishes the recuirements associated with the flow 52 45 of purchased materials from the time of GE-ARSD receipt to its in-plant destination or return.
Amend. 52 171-64 Oct. 1979
;1 1 17 :- .
< l /_. / J
100. Record Control This document establishes the GE-ARSD Records System and identifies the required quality assurance records, the record custodian, the record location, and retention period. 101. Recuest for Precosal or Cuotation This instruction establishes methods for obtaining procosals and quotations frcm suppliers. 102. Review, Accroval and Issue. Drawines, Soecifications and Standards This document establishes the requirements for conducting reviews of technical documentation prior to initial issue. Additionally, it specifies the requirements for resolving coments made by technical personrel representing various disciplines (i.e. safety and licensing, l QA, etc.) and the approval level required for issuance. The requirements for documenting the above sequence are also identified. 103. Review of Ercineerino Documents This document defines the responsibility for conducting Quality Assurance reviews of engineering documents, Additionally, it specifies the minimum scope of such reviews and the documentation requirements. 104. RRT Comouter Codino This document establishes guidelines concerning Cepartment of Energy (00E) sponsored computer code preparation, documentatica and distribution. 105. Safety Analysis Reoort (SAR) NRC Ouestion/Resconse Precaration (CRBRP) This instruction identifies the procedures and organizational respon-sibilities for preparing responses to NRC questions on those sections of the SAR for which the GE-ARSD Clinch River Project is responsible by their contract scope. 106. Safety Analysis Recort (SAR) Precaration (CRBRP) This instruction outlines the procedures and identifies organizational responsibilities for maintaining the parts of the CRBRP SAR, for which GE-ARSD is responsible. 107. Safety Analysis Recort (SAR) Vodatino (CRBRp) This instruction identifies the procedures and organizational respon-sibilities for maintaining the parts of the CRBRP SAR, for which GE-ARSD is responsible, consistent with approved desian documents. 108. Shiocina 52 45 This document establishes the recuirements which must be met prior to shipping an item including Product Assurance sign-off. Amend. 52 171-65 1 2/6 oct. 1979
109. Shiccing Plan (CRP) This instruction provides direction for preparation of shipping plan and related activity to CRP site. 110. Source Insoection at Vendor Facilities This instruction d' scribes specific criteria for the application of source inspection and assigns the respensibility for planning, scheduling, ccmpletion, and documentation, 111. Soecial Tools Control This procedure is established to provide records and controls on the numbering and storage of all special tools used by the ST&FE Subsection. 112. Soecifications, Drawinos ar.d Instructions This instruction establishes the methods for documenting specific designs. 113. Standard Distribution This procedure establishes the use of pre-establishM listing for the identification of distribution for issued drawings, specifications or reports. 114. Supolier Contract Administration This instruction provdes unifonn routines for administering purchase contracts from point of execution until beginning of tennination or closecut. 115. Sucolier Documentation This instruction provides the requirements for establishing supplier document submittals and the processing, controlling and reviewing and/or approving of supplier document transmittal packages. 116. Sucolier Necotiations This instruction describes methods to be used in negotiating contractual documents and changes and defines documents which do not need to be negotiated, 117. Sucolier Qualification This instruction provides system for evaluating and approving potential suppliers of materials, components and services to be purchased. 118. Sucolier Shioment 52 45 This instruction establishes requirements for effecting shipment from a supplier. Amend. 52 171-66 Oct. 1979
,'\ 217
119. Technical C;cumentation This document defines and describes the various types of design definition documents utilized within GE-ARSD and the recuirements which must be met to ensure these documents are suitable for their intended use. 120. Technical Decumentation-Drawines This instruction describes the various categories of drawings which are generated and issued by GE-ARSD as formal engineering control documents. 1 21. Technical Documentation - ICD (CRBRP) This instruction describes various categories of Interface Control Documents which are prepared and issued by GE-ARSD as formal engineering control documents for the Clinch River Project. 122. Technical Documentation-Scecifications (and RDT Standards) This instruction describes and provides the requirements and responsibilities for the generation of various types of specifications within the Department. 123. Test Authorization and Record (TAR)-Cocumentation of Test Results This procedure describes the preparation and use of the Test Authorization and Record. 124. Test Procedure (CRBRP) This instruction describes the requirements for writing Test Procedures for the Clinch River Project. 125. Trainino and Orientation This document provides the policy and direction for orientation and training of GE-ARSD personnel, 126. Unplanned Events Reportino and Manacement This document establishes the requirements for reporting, documenting, and correcting the type of unplanned events known as an " Unsatisfactory Condition". 127. Unusual Occurrence Recortino and Manacement This document, ir resconse to RDT Standard F1-3T, establishes the requirements for reporting, documenting and correcting the tyce of unplanned events known as " Unusual Occurrences". These events have 52 45 by definition an impact on safety and/or a significant programr.atic effect. 171-67 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
i 278
128. Vendor Case Record This document establishes the system to be followed for the decumentation and processing of unplanned events which occur at a supplier's facility during the fulfillment of a contract with GE-ARSD. The Vendor Case Record is the form utilized. 129. Vendor Quality System Evaluation and Rating This document establishes the requirement for evaluating a supplier's QA Program and capability against the contract requirements sad, as a result, assigning a quality rating. 130. Wafver Requests This instruction defines a method for waiving a requirement on a specified component / components without making a change to approved documentation. 131. Work Ord'e Record This document establishes the requirements for preparation, review and approval of the shop traveler utilized by GE-ARSD; namely, the Work Order Record, 132. Work Status Determination 52 45 This instruction describes the procedures for reporting cost and schedule status. 1 - [)_] () O Amend. 52 171-68 Oc t. 1979
Attachment 171-2 Schedule for Issuing Unreleased Procedures Item Title Schedule 45
.' } 20$
171-69 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
THE CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLANT PRELIMINARY SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT CHAPTER 17.0 - QUALITY ASSURANCE APPENDIX J 52 A DESCRIPTION OF THE ESG - RM QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM 52 ENERGY SYSTEMS GROUP A DIVISION OF ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP. i' 1 281 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLANT 52l A DESCRIPTION 0F THE ENERGY SYSTEMS GROUP MANUFACTURER QUALITY ASSURANCE FROGRAM CONTENTS Page No.
0.0 INTRODUCTION
....................................... 17J-l 0.1 SC0PE............................................... 17J-l 0.2 BASIS............................................... 17J-l 0.3 APPLICATION......................................... 17J-l 1.0 ORGANIZATION.................................... ... 17J-2 2.0 QUALITY ASSUxANCE PR0 GRAM........................... 17J 0 3.0 DESIGN CONTR0L................ ..................... 17J 13 4.0 PROCUREMENT DOCUMENT CONTR0L........................ 17J-16 5.0 INSTRUCTIONS, PROCEDURES, AND DRAWINGS.............. 17J-17 6.0 DOCUMENT CONTR0L.................................... 17J-18 7.0 CONTROL 0F PURCHASED MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT, AND SERVICES............................................ 17J-20 8.0 IDENTIFICATION AND CONTROL 0F MATERIALS, PARTS, AND COMP 0NENTS...................................... 17J-21 9.0 CONTROL 0F SPECIAL PROCESSES........................ 17J-22 10.0 INSPECTION.......................................... 17J-23 11.0 TEST CONTR0L........................................ 17J-25 12.0 CONTROL 0F MEASURING AND TEST EQUIPMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . 17J-26 13.0 HANDLING, STORAGE, AND SHIPPING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17J-28 14.0 INSPECTION, TEST, AND OPERATING STATUS.............. 17J 29 52 , 15.0 NONCONFORMING MATERIALS, PARTS, OR COMPONENTS....... 17J-29a
't ' 1' 0 L82 17J-i Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
CONTENTS (Continued) Page No. 16.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION............... .................. 17J.31 17.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE REC 0RDS.......................... 17J 32 18.0 AUDITS............................................. 17J 33 18.1 EXTERNAL AUDITS............. ...................... 17J 33 18.2 INTERNAL AUDITS.................................... 17J-33 18.3 ACTIVITIES AUDITED................................. 17J-34 FIGURES 17J-l Overall Energy Systems Group Reactor Manufacturer Quality Assurance Program Functional Organization of Program Participation. . . . .......... 17J-35 17J-2 Energy Systems Group Quality Assurance Depa rtment Organiza tion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17J 36 17J-3 Major Elements of the Energy Systems Group Reactor Manufacturer Quality Assurance Program. . . . . . . 17J-37 17J-4 Quality Assurance Procedure Index vs Requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix B . . . . . . . . 17J-38 ATTACHMENTS 52 17J-1 Quality Assurance Program Manual Procedure Descriptions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17J-51 ii'} N) Amend. 52 17J-ii Oct. 1979
0.0 INTRODUCTION
0.1 SCOPE This appendix provides a description of the Quality Assurance Program conducted by Rockwell International Energy Systems Group (ESG) as a Reactor Manufacturer (RM) for portions of the Nuclear Steam Supply System. The practices described herein are those actions on the part of ESG to 52 assure the quality of systems, components, and structures. 52l ESG procedures provide for an annual review of the Quality Assurance Program description contained in this appendix, and modification as 17 necessary to keep it current. 0.2 BASIS 52 l The program defined herein is based on ESG having been assigned execution responsibility for the Quality Assurance Program applied to design, procurement, and manufacture of systems, components, and structures 52 l as shown by Figure 17J-1. ESG is not assigned responsibilities for site construction and installation. 0.3 APPLICATION The practices described herein will be applied to the planning, design, procurement, and manufacture of those systems, components, and structures defined in Section 3.2 and 7.1 of the PSAR that are assigned 52l to the ESG scope of work. i 284 Amend. 52 17J-l Oct. 1979
1.0 ORGAtlIZATION 52l Energy Systems Grcup, a division of Rockwell International, has been assigned RM responsibilities for the systems, components, and structures defined in Section 0.3 of this Appendix. TM crganization of individuals and groups performing quality-related activities is shown and defined in Section 1.4 of the PSAR. Figure 17J-2 depicts the organi-52l zational structure of the ESG Quality Assurance Department. This orga-nization chart shows only lines of administrative control (salary review, hire-fire, position assignments). The separation of the organizational elements of Engineering, Procurement, Manufacturing, and Quality Assu-rance (which includes all inspection functions), with separate lines of 52l administrative control from the Energy Systems Group President, provides the authority, independence, and frer ;om for each to effectively perform quality-related activities. 52l Within the Energy Systems Group Quality Assurance Department, the division of functions is as follows: CRBRP Quality Assurance Project Manager - The CRBRP Quality Assurance Project Manager is responsible to the Quality Assu-rance Director for defining and assuring that the Quality Assurance Program for CRBRP Reactor Manufacturer activities 52 assigned to the Energy Systems Group is effectively executed within ESG. This responsibility also extends to assuring that subcontractors define and implement contractually applied quality assurance programs. He is also responsible for cost, schedule and technical performance of the Quality Assurance 52l45 cost accounts of the Energy Systems Group Performance Measure-ment System. Steam Generator Quality Assurance Project Manager - The Steam Generator Quality Assurance Project Manager is responsible to the Quality Assurance Director for defining and assuring that the Quality Assurance Program for CRBRP steam generator development, design, procurement, fabrication, and test is 52 effectively executed within ESG. This responsibility also extends to assuring that subcontractors define and implement contractually applied quality assurance programs. He is also responsible for providing Quality Assurance Department work package management to maintain Quality Assurance Department activities on schedule and within budget. Quality Assurance Audits and Controls Mrnager - The Energy Systems Group Audit Program responsibilities of the Quality Assurance Director are implemented through the Manager, Quality 52 Assurance Audits and Controls. The Manager, Quality Assurance Audits and Controls, is responsible for: 17J-2 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 t ^
}g}
- 1) Maintaining and administering the Quality Program Audit 52l System by preparing and maintaining audit schedules.
- 2) Arranging for checklists; conduct or arrange for audit teams to conduct audits.
- 3) Insuring preparation of audit reports.
- 4) Follow-up to verify corrective action implementatien.
- 5) Maintenance of audit case history files.
- 6) Development, issuance, control, and revision of Quality Assurance Manuals and procedures.
- 7) Review of operating procedures, and revisions thereto, prepared by other quality-affecting organizations, to assure compatibility with overall ESG Quality Assurance Program requirements.
- 8) Perform supplier quality surveys of procurement sources for materials and fabrication services and maintenance of the approved list of such supplies.
- 9) Administer a Material Review System for nonconforming items.
- 10) Administer a Corrective Action System to assure prompt and 52 effective correction of conditions causing nonconfdrmance to technical requirements / procedures.
~! 286 17J-3 Amend. 52 Oct.1979
Quality Assurance Engineering LMFBR Programs Manager - The 52 Quality Assurance Engineering LMFBR Programs Manager is responsible to the Quality Assurance Director and provides quality assurance engineers to support the CRBRP Quality Assurance Project Manager. Quali ty Engi-neering personnel perform the following activities:
- 1) Quality Assurance Program administration for specific portions of the CRBRP activities, to monitor and assure effective implementa-tion of quality requirements, from design through procurement and fabrication.
- 2) Quality engineering support for change control boards, design reviews. and design document review and approval.
- 3) Nonconforming item review board coordination.
- 4) Develop and implement statistical test programs and analyses as 52 requi red.
- 5) Evaluate inspection and test data and report quality trends.
52l 6) Review and evaluate bid invitations and returns for quality impact.
- 7) Participate on capability evaluation teams for prospective suppliers of major items.
- 8) Procurement document review and supplier quality survevs for materials and fabrication services and maintenance of the approved list of such suppliers.
- 9) Source inspection, planning, and surveillance of suppliers of 4hl materials and fabrication services.
- 10) Receiving inspection planning.
- 11) ESG fabrication inspection planning.
l'_) A quality data and records collection and storage system for procured and ESG-fabrica'.ed items.
- 13) Data packages for ESG-fabricated items.
Quality Assurance Engineering Utility and Utility Programs Manager - The Quality Assurance Engineering Utility and Energy Programs Manager is responsible to the Quality Assurance Director and provides a limited function to the CRBRP Project Manager. That function is to: Se,
- 1) Provide source inspection, planning, and surveillance of suppliers of materials and fabrication services.
Amend. 52 O 17J-4 Oct. 1979 , i ^ 1, ,8/
/.
Instrumentation and Technical Support Unit Manager - The Instrumentation and Technical Support Unit Manager is responsible to the Quality Assurance Director, and provides:
- 1) Qualification and certification programs for equipment, per-sonnel, and procedures for nondestructive examination, welding, brazing, and other special processes.
- 2) Nondestructive examination technical support and consultation 52 to ESG organizations and suppliers.
- 3) Quality Assurance instructions for complex inspection, test, and process control operations.
- 4) Chemical, physical, and mechanical property testing services to support other Quality Assurance Department units.
- 5) Development of nondestructive examination methods for the In-spection and Test Unit.
- 6) An instrumentation calibration and repair operation for mass, pressure, electrical, flow, acaustic, radiation, and time measurement instrumentation.
Inspection and Test Unit Manager - The Inspection and Test Unit Manager is responsible to the Quality Assurance Director and, along with his Sub-unit Managers, is responsible for:
- 1) Performing receiving inspection of procured items and services, identifying and documenting nonconforming conditions of these items and services, and assuring prompt conformance to the es-tablished nonconformance dispositions.
52l 2) Performing inspections and tests of ESG fabr' cation and sub-assembly operations, final inspections, anc' performing or wit-nessing performance of acceptance and qual .fication tests of 52l ESG-fabricated items. 52l 3) Performing nondestructive examination and acceptance of ESG-fabricated items. 52l 4) Making inspection acceptance and release acceptable ESG-fabricated items for delivery to the next operation. Reject and withhold non-conforming items. Document nonconforming conditions for Material Review evaluation and assure prompt conformance to Material Review disposition. 52l 5) Performing inspection of purchased or ESG-manufactured tooling.
' Amend. 52 17J-5 [ 288 Oct. 1979
- 6) Performing surveillance of warehouse areas and manufacturing control stations to assure that only acceptable items, properly identified, and protected from damage and deterioration, remain in storage. Assure corrective action on unsatisfactory conditions observed.
- 7) Performing inspection of packaging, preservation, and identifi-17 cation of items prior to shipment.
- 8) Maintaining a system for calibration of dimension measurement instruments used for product inspection and test, including applicable procedures and records. Performing periodic cali-bration of dimension measuring instruments, in accordance with established requirements.
Quality assurance policy originates with the President of Rockwell International, through the issuance of a Corporate Policy statement covering Product Quality, ReliabiM ty, and Safety. The Quality Policy is issued to each division of Rockwell International with a Corporate Directive, prepared and authorized by the Senior Vice President, Corporate Staffs, which directs each division to take action to implement the 52l Corporate Quality Policy. The President of the Energy Systems Group implements the Corporate Quality Policy Directive through Standard Operating Policies, which provide quality assurance direction 52l Program consistent with Corporate requirements Policy,toasESG applicable wellbusiness as the Quality Assurance objectives and contract requirements. The overall Quality Program is implemented in the operating manuals of the quality-affecting organizatonal units by the managers of these units. The Quality Assurance Director reports directly to the 52l Energy Systems Group President and verifies compliance of the quality-affecting organizations to the Quality Program, under the authority granted in the Standard Operating Policies. Tha Quality Assurance Director, by virtue of being at the same level of management as the highest level manager of other major Energy 52 Systems Group functions, has the necessary unimpeded communication path to bring quality matters to the attention of the president and executive level management. 52l Quality as ,rance functions implemented within ESG are defined in Standard Operating orocedures. All functional organizations (Program Offices, Enaineering, Purchasing, Quality Assurance, and Manufacturing) cre assigned responsibility for:
- 1) The preparation and issuance, in their operating manuals, of written instructions and procedures which establish the methods and responsibilities for perfcrming quality-related activities, and for verifying satisfactory performance of such activities.
- 2) The indoctrination and training of their personnel in these procedures, as applicable to their work assignments.
In addition, the Quality Assurance director is assigned the following specific qualiti assurance functions: 1'{ }89 Amend. 52 17J-6 Oct. 1979
- 1) Identifying those procedures which cover the performance and verification of quality-related activities 40l 2) Conducting audits of the implementation of such procedures
- 3) Identifying quality deficiencies and problems in the Program and reporting them, with any recommendations, to the responsible 52 l ESG executive, functional, and program managers.
- 4) Verifying that solutions to reported quality problems or defi-ciencies are achieved
- 5) Stopping nonconforming work and controlling further processing, fabrication, and delivery of nonconforming items 40] 6) Submit overall status reports on the ESG Quality Assurance Pro-52 grams to the ESG President, as well as concerned program and functional managers.
52l Communications flow directly between the ESG Quality Assurance Depart-ment and the Quality Assurance organization of subcontractors, and are documented, as appropriate, by the Purchasing organization buyer assigned for each subcontractor. The lines of communication are defined in internal procedures, and in procurement and quality assurance administrative speci-52l fications contractually applied to each subcontractor. The ESG Contract Data Management organization tracks and provides management reports of 52l all communications requiring action, on either the part of ESG or subcon-tractor, to provide a means of insuring timely resolution of problems. Verification of conformance to established quality requirements is the responsibility of the Quality Assurance Department, through the actions of review and approval of design documents (specifications and drawings), pro-curement documents (purchase requisitions and purchase order, along with their referenced documents and attachments), and manufacturing documents (travelers and processing procedures). Additionally, the Quality Assurance Department is responsible for verification of conformance to quality re-52l quirements of hardware items during source inspection / surveillance, receiving, in-process, and final inspections and process surveillance. As shown by the 52l organizational structure and the functional descriptions of the ESG organization in Section 1.4 of the PSAR, the Quality Assurance Department is divorced from the quality-affecting organizational units performing the design, procurement, 40l and manufacturing activities, with the Quality Assurance Department having a a hierarchal position at the same or higher level than the performing organizations. The authority and responsibility for stopping unsatisfactory work, or the control of further processing, delivery, or installation of noncon-forming material, is an explicit function of the Quality Assurance Director in the Standard Operating Policy covering the ESG Quality Assurance Program 52 and issued by the ESG President. 2 The ESG Quality Assurance Department reporting level,' and the Standard Operating Policy covering the ESG Quality Assurance Program, are structured and explicitly provide for the Quality Assurance Director to: Amend. 52 17J-7 Oct. 1979 1 290
- 1) Identify quality problems.
- 2) Initiate, recommend, or provide solutions to quality problems,
- 3) Verify implementation of solutions.
40l The qualification requirements for the Quality Assurance Department management positions are as follows:
- 1) Minimum qualification requirements for the Quality Assurance Director and the CRBRP Quality Assurance Project Manager are (a) a Bcchelor of Science degree in Engineering, Science, or Technology from an accredited college or university, (b) 15 years experience in quality assurance or engineering in an advanced technology industry, of which at least five years will be in quality assurance; and, of this five years, at least two years will be in the nuclear area, (c) experience; in the direction of personnel, and the planning and management of resourcer needed to conduct a Quality Assurance Program, and (d) posseas a knowledge of industry and government codes, standards, and regulations defining quality assurance requirements and practices; quality assurance administrative methods and technology and their application; and be experienced in planning, defining, and performing quality assurance practices and application of procedures.
- 2) Minimum qualification requirements for the Steam Generator QA Project Manager are (a) a Bachelor of Science degree in Engineering, Science, or Technology, or equivalent training plus experience in quality technology; and (b) five years experience related to the design or manufacture of complex components, of which at least two years will have been as quality engineer involved in fabrication of nuclear pressure boundary components.
- 3) Minimum qualification requirements for the Quality Assurance LitFBR Program Manager, Quality Audits and Controls flanager, 52 Quality Assurance Engineering Utility and Energy Programs Manager, and Instrumentation and Technical Support Unit Manager are (a)
Bachelor of Science degree in Engineering, Science, or Technology from an accredited college or university, or equivalent training plus experience, (b) five years experience in or related to the field of his educational major, of which at least two years will have b< en in quality engineering or technology; and (c) possesses a know' edge of at least two of the following areas of specialty: statistics / reliability, nondestructive examination, physical / mechanical properties measurement, metal fabrication, measurement technology, instrument and control fabrication and testing, chemical processing and analysis, failure analysis, and quality program development and implementation.
- 4) Minimum qualification requirements for the Inspection and Test Unit Manager are (a) ten years experience in a manufacturing industry, of which five years will have been in quality control /
assurance; and (b) have a general knowledge of manufacturing and inspection methods and tachniques including dimension and electrical measurements, nondestructive examination, quality 17 plannino, and fabrication and assembly methods. 17J-8 Amend. 52
,,m Oct. 1979
2.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM The Quality Assurance Program described herein complies with the requirements of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50, Appendix B, 52l " Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," for the ESG scope of work as a CRBRP Reactor Manufacturer. The elements of the CRBRP 52l This program is issued and made mandatory by direction of the Pres 52l of Energy Systems Group by Stan& rd Operating Policies that reouire the 17 issuance of operating procedures, and provides for verification of their 52l enforcement through a system of quality program audits. ESG delegates execution responsibility of appropriate Quality Assurance Program e'ements to suppliers of material, equipment, and services, but retains respons1bility for their implementation by these suppliers. Management assessment of the scope and effectiveness of the Quality Assurance Program is accomplished by two independent audits. One of these 45 is performed at yearly intervals, and specifically addresses the 10CFR50, Appendix B, requirements as they are implemented through that portion of 52l the Quality Assurance Program that addresses Section NCA-4000 of Section III 45 of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. The second av ait occur ' at 18-month intervals and is conducted by senior officials from other divisions of Rockwell International. This latter audit is to assure compliance with contractual and statutory quality assurance requirements. 52l Continuing involvement of the ESG President in Quality Assurance 40l m tters is achiesed by three routinely scheduled interactive associations , with the Quality Assurance Director. These are: (1) periodic staff meetings, during which each member of ',ne President's staff, which includes the Quality Assurance Director, must report on significant problems, accomplishments, and status of activities, (2) periodic Executive Council Meetings, in which ~ormal and in-depth reports are presented by Program Managers, and during which time the Quality Assurance Director addresses significant quality problems, with recommendations for corrective action, and (3) submission of a nnthly quality status report to Executive Management that covers quality progress accomplishments, problems, and audit results, and to the customer as required by contract.
, Quality policy originated a* Rockwell International, with the Issuance of a " Product Quality, leliability, and Safety" policy statement, in which the President of the Corporation states .... "It is the policy of the Corporation that its products will meet or exceed applicable standards and requirements for quality, reliability, and safety." The Senior Vice President, Corporate Staffs, issues a directive, applicable to all Division Presidents of the Corporation, which requires actions to be taken to implement this Corporate Policy, including:
- 1) Provisions for a competent and professional quality organization for each manufacturing activity, and reliability and product safety organizations at the appropriate levels in his operations.
- 2) Evaluation of existing and new products, with respect to quality, r_ liability, and safety.
~'
g Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 17J-9
- 3) Attainment of quality, reliability, and safety, through proper design, development, materiils, and parts procur ement, manu-facturing, testing, product inspection, marketing, and servicing of the product.
- 4) Timely and effective investigation and analysis of any accident claims, and complaints, and maintenance of appropriate records of same.
- 5) Utilization of proper descriptions of products, and their application in the following: (a) advertising and sales literatures, (b) proposals and contracts, (c) service, instruction, and technical manuals, (d) product labeling, and (e) customer advisories.
The Corporate Quality Policy is implemented at En- u tems Group 52 through Standard Operating Policies issued by the President, Energy Systems Group. This Group Policy states: "The managers of Engineering, Material (Purchasing), Manufacturing, Quality Assurance, and Program Offices will be responsible for:
- 1) The preparation and issuance, in their operating manuals, of written instructions and procedures which establish the methods and responsibilities for performing quality-related activities and for verifying satisfactory performance of such activities;
- 2) The indoctrination and training of their personnel in these procedures, as applicable to their work assignments;
- 3) The instructions and procedures covering quality-r? lated activities will meet the Quality Assurance Program require-ments of the applicable government regulations and/or contract provisions;
- 4) Each individual is responsible for performing quality-related activities in accordanct with the a plicable instructions and procedures."
Based on the previously described quality policy, the department managers provide procedural coverage in their department manuals for quality-affecting act.ivities. The Quality Assurance Director has overall responsibility for assuring caformance to the rocedures of the Quality Assrrance Program Manual. He has the further responsibility, authority, and organizational freedom to stop nonconforming work, and control further processing, fabrication, and delivery of nonconforming items. If differences of opinion occur that cannot be resolved, these are referred to the 52 President of Energy Systems Group for final resolution. Changes to department manuals may be proposed by any individual or organization, but final review and approval rests with the department manager. Changes to ESG ASME Code Manuals (ASME Section III and ASME Section VIII) and 40 52l the basic Quality Assurance Department Manual receive final review and approval by the Quality Assurance Director. Amend. 52 17J-10 Oct. 1979 ' i } ]}
Provisions for controlling the distribution of Department and Quality Assurance Manuals are addressed in each manual. These provisions provide for serialization of each manual in use and a record maintained of the recipients of each manual. Revisions of prcedures in the manuals are distributed to each manual holder of record along eith an updated table of contents. The CRBRP Q Jality Assurance Project Manager identifies the procedures from Department and Quality Assurance Manuals that constitute the Quality 52l Assurance Progr Am for the ESG CRBRP Project Reactor Manufacturer scope of work. These procedures are documented in a Quality Assurance Program 52l Index that is approved by the ESG Quality Assurance Director and the CRBJP Frogram Manager. The Index is is "ed for use by managers and key personnel in organizations performing activities that affect quality. 521 Changes to this Index must be approved by the ESG Quality Assurance Director and the CRBRP Program Manager. Responsible individuals are made aware of the mandatory requirements to be implemented by the Quality Assurance Program Index through its distr %ution. In addition to this distribution, personnel performing quality-affecting functions receive formal training and indoctrination into the purpose, scope, and implementation of the policies and procedures in accordance with defined requirements. A review is made periodically to identify new personnel, and these receive the designated CRBRP training and indoctrination. Personnel are assigned to quality-affecting activities based on job requirements that specify minimum levels of education and experience in specific fields. Also, before new personnel are assigned to activities affecting quality, first level managers conduct qualification interviews to assure adequate knowledge of the principles and techniques involved in these activities. Individuals are given yearly proficiency reviews 17 by their managers. A brief synopsis of each procedure contained in the CRBRP Quality Assurance Program Manual is given in Attachment 17J-1 of this appendix. The safety-related structures, systems, and components tasks controlled 52l by the ESG Quality Prcgram during engineering, design, and procurement are defined in Section 0.3 of this appendix. Contractors of component designs and/or fabricated items are required to submit their quality assurance program descriptions for these items for review and approval. This review is made against contractually applied 17 Caality assurance progrcm requirements. Additionally, audits of these 52] program activities are onducted by ESG. The requirements for quality assurance program descriptior submittal, and notification of the right of audit, are contained in quality assurance administrative specifications, which are made part of enn component contract. In addition to the aforementioned training and indoctrination requirements specific to the conduct of CRBRP Reactor Manufacturer activities, selection of personnel performing quality-related activities is based on job descriptions for specific areas of responsibility, and Amend. 52 17J-11 } 294 Oct. 1979
these require minimum levels of education in specif k fields, and minimum levels of experience in related fields. 'ob assignments are made, based on these backgrcund criteria, as well as the judgement of the responsible manager as to each individual's ability to satisfactorily perform in that field. In the area of nondestructive examination, personnel are trained, qualified, and certified in accoroance with a 52l written practice reflecting American Society for tion-destructive Testing Practice SNT-TC-1A. Personnel assigned to determine that func+ ions delegated to suppliers are properly accomplished, are quali on the basis of background and experience for the function delegated. All personnel performing quality-related activities receive annual performance reviews. Procedures that provide instructions for quality-related activities such as cleaning, welding, nondestructive examination, inspection, and test, specify equipment and facilities to be used as well as any appropriate environmental conditions to be maintained during these activities, c.g., temperature, humidity, and cleanliness. The sequence of events to be followed is specified in the work instruction documents (Test Procedures and Manufacturing Travelers), and verification of conformance to this sequence is performed to assure prerequisites have 17 been met prior to successive operations. The Quality Assurance Program described herein is reviewed and revised 52 annually as appropriate. O
~
l 2' 9 E' O Amend. 52 17J-12 Oct. 1979
3.0 DESIGN CCNTROL ESG utilizes a Cognizant Engineer concept to assign engineering respon-52 sibility for the various systems and subsystems for which ESG is the Reactor Manu facturer. Each Cognizant Engineer, under the directio:. of his manager, has the responsibility for planning, directing, and controlling all effort in conformance with the contract work scope for the system, subsystem, or com-ponent under his jurisdiction. This responsibility includes the coordination and integration of all activities related to systems requirements definition, system engineering, component design, interface control, and change control. The Cognizant Engineer is supported in this effort by the functional engi-neerMg groups, such as the structural, electrical, and design groups. Written procedures describe the methods to be used in carrying out these ' activities. Applicable regulatory requirements and design bases are defined in principai design documents. The top level design requirement document is the Overall Plant Design Description (0PDD-10). This document des-cribes the overall CRBRP technical, functional, and quality parameters. OPDD-10 is written, released, and controlled by the Lead Reactor Manu-facturer.
/ stem Design Descriptions (SDD's) provide the principal roeans of design 52l definition and control for each CRBRP system for which ESG has system res-ponsibility. The SDD's reflect the OPDD-10 requirements and are used to define the various technical, operational, and safety considerations in-volved, identify interfaces, and serve as the basic technical document for the system.
Component specifications are prepared to define the requirements for the design, fabrication, quality assurance, testing, handling, and shipping of components and structures in compliance with the SDD and all approved baseline documents. Engineering drawings are developed to meet the requirements of the SDD, approved baseline documents, and component specifications, and to further define and establish engineering parameters, characteristics, and design functions. Engineering documents containing quality acceptance criteria are reviewed by 52l Quality Assurance prior to release to ensure that the appropriate qual and requirements are specified. If deviations or changes from these quality standards are found in the manufactured item, action is taken as specified in Sections 15.0 and 6.0 of this appendix. l The Technical Services Manager , through a system of engineering manage-s l ment procedures is responsible to assure that suitable design controls are 45 applied to such disciplines as seismic, stress, therml, hydraulic, radi-ation, and material compatibility. Design reviews Ue held at various design milestones to verify design adequacy, and to insure that: Amend. 52 17J-13 1
) 29b Oct. 1979
(1) design characteristics can be controlled, inspected, and tested, and (2) inspection and test criteria are identified. Identification and control of desian interfaces is accomplished by the Cognizant Engineer and documented by means of System Design Descriptions 45 (SDD's), Component Specifications and Interface Control Documents (ICD's). The fundamental control document for functional interface data is the SDD, which identifies the system interfaces including referencing supporting control ducuments (e.g., ICD's) and together with the ICD's, completely 45 defines requirements for every interface within a system. ICD's are drawings or documents that identify the physical interface 45l characteristics necessary to ensure compatibility between mating pieces of equipment. ICD's are distributed to, and used by, project participants for assuring compatibility of system and/or components. Interface re-quirements are transmitted to interfacing organizations, and concurrence obtained prior to issue. Proposed changes are coordinated with inte.-facing organizations prior to implementation. Verification of the design is performed to provide assurance that it meets the design requirements. The verification is performed by competent individuals, other than those which performed the orignal design, and can be accomplished by design review, checking of analyses 45] and calculations, checking of engineering drawings, and qualification testing. Design reviews are organized and scheduled by an independent group within the Engineering Department. Design reviews are conducted at various stages of the design, to insure that all significant factors affecting performance, reliability, safety, operability, and maintainability of a component or system are properly considered. The Design Review Board is established on an ad hoc basis to provide an expert evaluation and is comprised of a Chairman and specialists in Design, Materials, Safety, Quality Assurance, and 45 l other disciplines. Members of the board are selected from any organization on the basis of their knowledge of the subject but are not responsible for the work. Action items are assigned during the meeting, and the follow-up is provided by the Design Review Board Administrator to assure that the action is taken and the action items closed out. Analyses and 45l calculations hav ing significant effect on the design are subject to verification. The completeness, adequacy, and appropriateness of assumptions, input data, and analytical or calculation method used are evaluated. Verification is achieved by independent duplication of results or by comparison with alternate means of calculation or analysis. Engineering drawings are checked by an independent design checker. A checking layout is prepared, showing the calculations used to check fit and function. In those cases where the adequacy of a design is verified by a qualification test, testing is identified and documented. Testing is conducted using a prototype unit under the most adverse design conditions 45 l 17 for which an item is required to perform its safety function. The results of O 17J-14 , Amend. 52 l ? r) 7 t / Oct. 1979
design verification are clearly documented, with the verifier identified. Documentation of the results is auditable against the verification methods identified. Design and specification changes are reviewed and approved by the same disciplines as the original issue. A method is used by the releasing function to check the approvers and the functions they represent to 17 assure all'the same disciplines review and approve revisions. One of the basic purposes of the design review system is to find and correct errors and deficiencies, prior to the release of the engineering document, that could adversely affect safety-related structures, systems, and components. Documentation of the deficiency, and the resulting corrective action, are included in the records of the design review. The methods for the collection, storage, and maintenance of design documents, review records, and related engineering data are described in Section 17.0 of this appendix. The design engineer, assisted by the materials process, and quality 45 engineering, is responsible for determining the applicability of materials, oarts, and equipment used in the design. This selection of hardware is reviewed during the design review. 1 298 17J-15 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
4.0 PROCUREMENT DOCUMENT CONTROL 52l ESG uses a system of procedures which describe the sequence of actions to be taken in preparing, reviewing, approving, and controlling procurement documents. The basis for all procurement actions is the Purchase Requisition, which is prepared by the organization requiring the material, service, or component being purchased. Each Purchase Requisition is reviewed and approved by qualified Quality Assurance Department personnel to assure that correct and complete quality requirements are stated or referenced. This review is documented. Drawings, specifications, design reports, and other documents which are referenced in the Purchase Requisition are reviewed and approved as described in Section 6.1 of this appendix. The requirements of the Purchase Requisition are transferred to a Purchase Order, which is offered to the supplier. Purchase Orders are reviewed by Quality Assurance Department personnel to assure no changes of requirements from the Purchase Requisition. Purchase Orders for structures, systems, and components identify appropriate requirements, which must be addressed in the supplier's quality assurance program description. The supplier's program is 17 reviewed against contract requirements and approved by qualified Quality Assurance Department personnel prior to start of activities affected by the Quality Assurance Program. The Purchase Order and its referenced documentation contain all necessary design basis technical information. They additionally identify 5d all documentation to be prepared, maintained, and submitted to ESG for review and approval. The Purchase Order also identifies those records which must be retained, controlled, maintained, or delivered to ESG. 52 Provision is made in the Purchase Order to ensure ESG's right of access to the supplier's facilities and records for source surveillance and audits. The Purchase Requisition - Purchase Order cycle described here is also used to process changes and revisions to the contract. The same review and approval is required of changes as that which is required of the original Purchase Requisition and Purchase Order. Procurement documents pertaining to spare or replacement parts are treated in the same manner as that used for initial production parts. Applicable elements of 10CFR50, Appendix B, are applied to suppliers by invoking government or industry Quality Assurance standards in whole or in part, or by inserting specific quality requirements in the Procurement Specifications. Procurement specifications contain the design basis technical requirements; identification requirements of components, subcomponents, and materials; applicable codes, standards and specifications; test and inspection requirements; and appropriate special process requirements covering critical processes such as welding, brazing, heat treatment, electroplating and thermal surface coating, cleaning, and nondestructive examinations. Applicable regulatory technical requirements are included in the procurement specifications rather than specifying these by 17 reference to regulatory documents. 1 299 17J-16 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
5.0 INSTRUCTIONS, PROCEDURES, AND DRAWINGS Policy procedure and instruction documents are prepared to cover activities affecting quality. These quality-affecting activities include management, design and engineering, procurement, quality assurance, and manufacturing. Policies, procedures, and instructions are collected and issued in operating department and quality assurance manuals. The manuals contain provisions for preparation, review, control, and revision of procedures and instructions comprising the manual. The manuals containing procedures and instructions for 52l quality-affecting activities at Energy Systems Group are: Standard Operating Policies Manual CRBRP Program Management Directives Manual Engineering Management Procedures Manucl Material (Purchasing) Procedures Manual ASME Code, Section III Manual 40 ASME Code, Section VIII Manual Quality Assurance Operating Procedures Manual Manufacturing Manual Methods for complying with quality assurance criteria applicable 52 l to the ESG scope of work are defined in the preceeding manuals. A correlation of procedures, policies, and instructions from these manuals with the criteria of 10CFR50, Appendix B, is given in Figure 17J-4, and a summary description of the contents of each document referenced in this figure is given in Attachment 17J-1 to this appendix. Acceptance criteria for important activities defined by the aforementioned procedures and instructions are a part of each pro-cedure, as applicable. For example, document formats and content are spec' 'ed, as are release, approval, and distribution control requirements. The requirements for activities affecting quality, as well as appropriate quantitative and qualitative criteria for determining that important activities have been satisfactorily accomplished, are specified in instructions, procedures, and drawings, including the following types of documents: (1) Design Specifications, (2) SDD's, (3) Procurement Documents, ard (4) Test Procedures. Provisions for preparation, content, ouantative and qualitative requirements review, revision, and control of drawings are contained in Sections 3.0 and 6.0 of this appendix. These provisions for manufacturing and inspection instructions and procedures are con-tained in Sections 6.0, 9.0,10.0, and 13.0 of this appendix. 17J-17 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
6.0 DOCUMENT CONTROL Documents, such as design specifications, design drawings, manufactu- O ring drawings, equipment specifications, test specifications, material 451 processing specifications, and nondestructive examination procedures, are prepared, reviewed, approved, and issued in accordance with written proc-edures. Review methods may vary from a series of formalized reviews by a Design Review Board to individual reviews by personnel from involved organizations and the Quality Assurance Department. Organizations responsible for review and approval functions for a specific type of document are identified in a written procedure. Originals, prints, and/or reproducibles of these documents are controlled by the Engineering organization, which releases, distributes, stores, and maintcins files and records of these documents. Document changes are prepared, reviewed, and approved in accordance with applicable procedures, only under the authority of the organization or function that prepared, reviewed, and approved the original. Drawings and drawing changes distributed to Manufacturing and quality Assurance for items being fabricated by 52l the Energy Systems Group require return of a document receipt to Engin-eering, as evidence that the documents were received by those organi-zations. Drawings for manufacturing and inspection purposes are further controlled through the Manufacturing Production Control Station. The personnel of this organization insure that correct drawings and revisions thereto are available for manufacturing and inspection planning, as well as for the subsequent manufacturing and inspection operations. 45 Periodic audits are condpcted..to verify that active documents are in use and obsolete issues have been removed from use. A list of the latest issues of drawings, specifications, and design basis documents is also periodically issued by Engineering to assist in assuring that obsolete issues are not used. Procurement documents are controlled as described in Section 4.0 of this appendix. Source and receiving inspection documents are controlled as described in Section 7.0 of this appendix. 52 ESG Quality Assurance Manuals and department operating procedure are distributed and controlled in accordance with a procedure contained within each manual. Manufacturing, inspection and testing instructions, and testing pro-cedures are designated in MP0's by instruction or procedure number and by applicable revision letter or revision number. The instructions and pro-45 l cedures either accompany the MP0 or are maintained available at the loca-tion where the work is performed. Changes to MP0's, necessitated for any reason, require the prie review and approval of Quality Assurance, as do changes in manufacturing inspection and test instructions, and test procedures.
'e l 301 O
Amend. 52 17J-18 Oct. 1979
A listing is periodically issued of design documents and their revisions which includes system design descriptions, drawings, specifi-cations, engineering reports, engineering orders, nonconformance reports, manufacturing process procedures, test procedures, and nondestructive examination procedures. The administrative policies and procedures listed in Figure 17J-4 are contained in the CRBRP Quality Assurance Program Index. These listings are used to assure that obsolete issues of the aforementioned documents are not used. Assurance that receiving and source inspection is performed to the latest purchase order change is achieved through a system that routes purchase requisitions and orders and changes thereto to the Quality En-52 gineering Department Function. At the time that a change is received by this organization, it is reviewed for quality requirements, and the source or receiving inspection instructions are revised as necessary. Copies of revised inspection instructions and the change orders are sent to the Receiving and Source Inspection functions. Assurance that approved changes are included in specifications, drawings and procedures prior to their implementation is achieved through review and approval of the oslementing documents (purchase requisitions and manufacturing travelers) by Quality Engineering Department personnel and enforcement actions of the QA Department Inspection functions. Quality 52 Engineering Department personnel review and approve purchase requisitions and manufacturing travelers prior to their release to insure that the correct revisions of specifications, drawings, and procedures are given therein. After issuance, purchase orders are reviewed to assure that there are no unauthorized changes from tb purchase requisition. Source, Receiving, and In-Process Inspection inspects to the requirements document 17 revision given in the purchase orders and travelers. 1 302 17J-19 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
7.0 CONTROL OF PURCHASED MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT, AND SERVICES Each supplier of materials, structures, systems, and components is evaluated to assess his capability to provide acceptable services and products. Evaluation of major item suppliers is performed by a team, consisting of representatives of Purchasing, the Program Office, Quality Assurance, and Manufacturing Departments. Representatives of Design Engineering, Materials and Processes Engineering, and other units of the Engineering Department participate in the evaluation as necessary. The details of the evaluation include reviews of past performance, evaluation of procedures and capability descriptions provided by the supplier, surveys of the supplier's facility and Quality Assurance program in operation, and/or experience of other CRBRP participants witn the supplier. The evaluation considers the supplier's capability to supply a product which satisfies all requirements. Results of this 52l evaluation are documented and retained on file at ESG. 52l ESG Quality Assurance Department personnel perform surveillance of suppliers during fabrication, processing, inspection, testing, and shipment of products. These surveillance activities are planned and performed in accordance with written procedures. The plans provide instructions which specify the characteristics or processes to be witnessed or verified, the documentation required, and the acceptance criteria which must be met. Sufficient surveillance is performed to verify that quality is achieved in items which cannot be inspected upon receipt. 52l This surveillance ends with written approval to ship the item to ESG or the 45l construction site, given by appropriate Quality Assurance Department personnel. 52l Receiving inspection is performed on products delivered to ESG to assure their acceptability prior to use. This inspection is carried out in accordance with written inspection plans. The product is evaluated to determine that it is properly identified, that it meets inspection criteria, that necessary inspection and testing records are included with the product, and that the accepted product is identified as to its acceptability before being released for use or storage. Nonconforming items are segregated, controlled, and clearly identified pending proper disposition. ESG Quality Assurance Department personnel provide written 52 instructions for receiving inspection of items purchased by ESG and delivered directly to the construction site from the supplier. 52l ESG requires that the supplier furnish, as a minimum, certifications that identify the product and the specific requirements met by the item. The supplier is further required to submit a report, identifying any requirements which have not been met, and indicating his disposition of such nonconformances. Certifications and test reports are reviewed and approved by appropriate Quality Assurance Department personnel. The same controls are used for spares and replacements that are 17 used for initial plant items. 17J-20 }1 j Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
S l Suppliers' certificates of conformance are validated by an established program of audits, independent inspections and surveillance and overchecks. This is accomplished using itinerant or resident Quality Assurance site representatives or source inspectors, hold point release, and supplier audits. Additionally, procurement specifications require supporting 40 technical data for certificates of conformance, and this data is reviewed 17 i fo. completeness before use of any item. 8.0 IDENTIFICATION AND CONTROL OF MATERIALS, PARTS, AND COMPONENTS 52l For purchased items, ESG delegates execution responsibility for activities of identification and control of materials, parts, and com-ponents to suppliers and assesses the effectiveness of these supplier activities, as described in Section 7.0 of this appendix. 52l For items fabricated by ESG, procedures and instructions establish identification and control requirements of materials, parts, and com-ponents, from design through final assembly. Identification requirements begin with specifications and drawings. 45 l Draf ting procedures require that notes and location indicators aopear on drawings that specify identification information and exact location. Specifications describe how the identification is to be accomplished (e.g., name plates, impression stencil, electrochemical etching). Identification requirements from drawings and specifications are referred to on the Manu-facturing Production Order (MPO). Traceability of parts, assemblies, components, and structures to drawings and specifications is achieved through the practice of the drawing number becoming the part number. Completed component and structure name plates reference the design or component specification number. In manu-facturing and assembly, the MPO, which references drawings and specifi-cations and directs the identification to be applieo to the items, provides data for traceability to nonconformance reports, special process procedures, inspection procedures, purchase orders, and mill test reports. Any adverse effect of the location or method of identification on quality 45 l or function of items identified is prevented by specifying these requirements in engineering drawings and specifications. These documents are reviewed and approved by specialists in stress, materials, processing, manufacturing, and quality assurance, to assure identification markings do not affect quality and function. Verification of the correct identification of materials, parts. and components is performed by the Inspection function of the Quality Assurance 45 l 521 Department. Quality E- ineering Department personnel are responsible for issuing instructions L Inspection for this verification to appear on the MPO. Upon completion of fabrication and assembly, Quality Engineering 52 Department personnel review the MP0's to assure the steps specifying identification and its verification are initiated and stamped to show completion of these operations. Amend. 52 17J-21 Oct. 1979
9.0 CONTROL 0F SPECIAL PROCESSES 52l For purchased items, ESG delegates execution respont ibility for special process control activities to suppliers and assesses the effectiveness of supplier special process control activities, as described in Section 7.0 of this appendix. I For items fabricated by ESG, special processes, such as welaing, brazing, 45 52l heat-treating, cleaning, and coadestructive testing are contro led to the ' degree required by applicable codes, standards, specifications, and regula-tions. This control is accomplished by several means:
- 1) Fabrication Procedures are written by M:nufacturing Engineering, and reviewed and approved by Design Engineering and Quality Assurance. Nondestructive examination procedures are reviewed 45 and approved by certified NDE Level III Examiners.
- 2) Detail instructions ;n the Manufacturing Production Order (MPO),
52l which serves as ESG's shop traveler, are written by Manufacturing 45l Planning and reviewed and approved by Quality Asnurance. When Processing Procedures are used. they are made part of the MP0 by reference. Procedures, equipment, and personnel performing special processes are 45l qualified or certified by Quality Assurance Department personnel. Quali fi-cation is accomplished in accordance with applicable codes, standards, snec-ifications, or internal requirements. Qualifications are reviewed and approved by Quality Assurance. Special processes are performed by trained, qualified personnel working to written instructions. Evidence of performance or verification is recorded on the MP0 which accompanies each structure, system, or compone" during manufacture. Evidence of performance is either recorded or veri fied by qualified Quality Assurance personnel. Qualification records of procedures, equipment, and personnel for per-forming special processes are established, filed, and maintained current in 52l compliance with written ESG procedures. Periodic audits of these records are performed by Quality Assurance to ensure their adequacy. Amend. 52 17J-22 Oct. 1979 i J
10.0 INSPECTION 52l For purchased items, ESG delegates execution responsibility for inspection activities to suppliers and assesses the effectiveness of these inspection activities, as described in Section 7.0 of this appendix. 52l For items fabricated at ESG, inspections, examinations, and quality verifi-cation testing of systems, structures, and components are performed by Inspec-tion and Test Unit personnel of the Quality Assurance Department. The manager of this function reports directly to the Quality Assurance Director, who re-52l ports directly to the President of Energy Systems Group, thus providing the inspection function freedom to effectively perform its respansibilities. The shop traveler for the control of manufacturing and inspection acti-vities is the Manufacturing Production Order (MPO). The MPO is a single document that authorizes and directs both manufacturing and inspection activities. For inspection, the MPO serves as the test and inspection check-list. The MP0 specifies the characteristics to be inspected and the specific point in the manufacturing process where the inspection must be accomplished. It also specifies, by line entry, the specific department and group res-ponsible for performing the operations, including inspections and tests. Acceptance and rejection criteria and the description of the method of inspection are specified on tLe MF0 or are contained in documents specifi-cally referenced by the MPO. The inspector who performs the inspection operation stamps the MP0 entry when he completes an inspection activity. When the manufacturing and inspection effort on the MPO is completed, the MP0 is reviewed by the 52l Quality Assurance Engineering personnel of the Quality Assurance Department to verify and certify acceptable completion of all specified manufacturing, inspection, and test operations. Each system, structure, component, or subtier detail is fabricated against an individual MP0. Established procedures require that a copy of each drawing and procedure referenced on the MP0 be at the manufacturing 45 and inspection work station for use by personnel during the work operation. Inspectors are trained and indoctrinated, as required, to assure pro-ficiency in their assignments. In addition, nondestructive examination per-sonnel are formally trained, qualified, and certified to SNT-TC-1A. Modifications, repairs, and replacements are fabricated under the same Manufacturing-Inspection control system as new items, and receive the same reviews and approvals as original item fabrication.
}]6
l Amend. 52 17J-23 Oc t. 1979
Hold points for witness by the authorized Code Inspector and/or cus-tomer representatives are provided for and established, as required by these agencies, on the MP0 by Quality Assurance Engineering personnel, 52l prior to release for fabrication. Procedures require Quality Assurance Department p .sonnel monitoring of special processes, where direct inspection is not possible. Pror.ess procedures are used which specify control measures and acceptability r equi rements. 1 507 9 Amend. 52 17J-24 Oct. 1979
11.0 TEST CONTROL 52l For purchased items, Energy tystems Group delegates execution responsibility for test programs to suppliers, and assesses the effectiveness of these programs through surveillance actions, as described in Section 7.0 of this appendix. 52l For items produced by Energy Systems Group, test programs are identified by Design Engineering, as appropriate, to demonstrate that items will perform satisfactorily in service. Testing is accomplished in accordance with written and controlled procedures. These procedures are prepared by Engineering or Quality Assurance Department personnel from the group or unit responsible for conducting the test. They are reviewed and approved by the cognizant Quality Assurance Department personnel having responsibility that quality and quality assurance requirements are met and by Program Office cognizant engineers having responsibility that technical requirements are met. Test procedures include appropriate requirements for test article identification, test purpose and objectives, test condition limits, instruments and calibration, equipment, environmental warnings and cautions, authority for test restart after interruptions, data type, method of documentation, and records collection and storage requirements, Quality Assurance Department authorized inspection or customer witness requirements, personnel qualification requirements, and step-by-step procedure requirements with provision for performer signoff and Quality Assurance Department witness verification signoff or stamp. Test data are analyzed by qualified personnel and a written Deport prepared in which results are documented, evaluated, and the acc".ptability of the item for performing its function satisfactorily in servic' stated. Tested items that have subsequently been modified, repe#.ec.1r have been replaced in whole or in part are retested to the original test requirements. If tne repair, modification, or replacement involves a design change and modified testing requirements, all design and cast documents are revised prior to this work in accordance with tne procedures 17 and control described in 3.0, 5.0, and 6.0 of Appendix J. 1 308
]7J-25 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
12.0 CONTROL OF MEASURING AND TEST EQUIPMENT 52l For purchased items, Energy Systems Group delegates execution responsibility for control of measuring and test equipment to suppliers and assesses the effectiveness of these activities, as defined in Section 7.0 of this appendix. 52l For items produced by Energy Systems Group, procedures define the requirements and responsibilities for calibration, calibration standards, and inspection. and control of measuring and test equipment used for fabrication, testing, The Quality Assurance Department has the responsibility for implementing and maintaining the program for calibration and control of measuring and test equipment, as well as conducting the calibration operations. Each item of measuring and test equipment is given a unique serial number, and the records containing calibration and test data are identified and filed by that serial number. The calibration system procedures require that measuring and test equipment be calibrated at specified intervals and that these intervals be based on usage, stability, accuracy, and history. When discrepancies from accepted tolerance are found for measuring and test instruments during calibration, this finding is reported to the 45 l Manager of Inspt:ction and Test who initiates an investigation of items inspected since the previous calibration. The validity of previous inspection performed with the suspect instrument is evaluated, and the results, along with appropriate actions, documented for the record and follow-up. Calibration procedures specifically state that the calibration standards against which the measuring and test equipment is calibrated have an error no more than one-tenth of tolerance of the instrument being calibrated, unless prohibited by the state-of-the-art. A greater error is permitted in this latter instance. The complete calibration status of measurement and test equipment is maintained, using a computerized calibration inventory and recall system, which provides the basic calibration system control, by forcing a listing of equipment requiring calibration and the periodic recall notification to the instrument user and calibration function. Measuring and test tools and instruments are labeled to show calibration status, i.e., out of use, indication only, and next cali-bration due date for in use equipment. Out of use tools and instruments 17 are labeled " Calibrate Before Using." 4 1 309 O 17J-26 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
l Energy Systems Grcup maintains working standards against which 45 measuring and test equipment are calibrated. Working standards are calibrated for traceability to the National Bureau of Standards. This is accomplished by procuring standards or calibration services directly from the NBS or from suppliers which, in turn, can demonstrate NBS traceability. Where NBS standards do not exist, calibration of standards is accomplished by such methods as inter-laboratory comparisions or internal development of a standard. 23 1 1 71D i JlU Amend. 52 17J-27 Oct. 1979
13.0 HANDLING, STORAGE, AND SHIPPING 52l For purchased items, Energy Systems Group delegates execution res-ponsibility for handling, storage, and shipping activities to suppliers, and assesses the effectiveness of these activities, as defined in Section 7.0 of this appendix. 52l For items produced by Energy Systems Group, special handling, pres-ervation, storage, packaging, and shipping requirements are specifiea by packagin't engineering specialists. Operations involving these activities are acc; ;lished by qualified individuals, in accordance with written work and im ]ection inst"uctions. Handling instructions are detailed in procedur.: eferenced in the Manufacturing Production Order (MPO). 45 All specifications and instructions coverine handling, preservation, storage, packaging, and shirping reflect design and specification require-ments of the material, comp]nents, or system being processed. Special attention is given to prevention of loss, damage, or deterioration due to adverse environmental conditions, such as temperature or humidity. By the time of shipment to the construction site, instructions for handling and storage are transmitted to the Contruction Contractor. O
. c 3 3n Amend. 52 17J-28 Oc t. 1979
14.0 INSPECTION, TEST, AND OPERATING STATUS 52l For purchased items, Energy Systems Group delegates execution res-ponsibility for identifying and maintaining inspection, test, and operating status. Assessment of the effectiveness of inspection, test, and operating status is obtained from surveillance activities described in Section 7.0 of this appendix. 52l For items produced by Energy Systems Group, the inspection and test status of structures, systems, and components, throughout manufacturing, is identified by the utilization of a shop traveler, known as a Manufacturing Production Order (MPO). The MP0 is a comprehensive manufacturing, inspec-tion, and testing planning documents, written by the Manufacturing Planning Unit of the Manufacturing Department. It is reviewed and approved by Quality Assurance Department personnel to -issure that adequate inspection and test controls are included. Inspections and tests are performed or witnessed by qualif'ed Quality Assurance Department inspection personnel, and the status of the inspection or test is indicated on the MP0 with the inspector's stamp. Finished items also receive the Quality Assurance Department inspector's stamp; or, if too small to be stamped, are bagged and tagged with the status indicator applied to the tag. Quality Assurance Department personnel perform periodic and final reviews of the MP0, to assure that all inspections and tests have been performed and their status properly indicated. Thus, bypassing of inspec-tions, tests, and other critical operations is precluded. Application and removal of inspection status indicators, such as tags, markings, labels, and stamps, are performed or witnessed by Quality Assurance Department personnel. Welding stamp indications are applied by the welder, a_s re-45l quired by the MP0 and are verified by Quality Assurance Department personnel. The status or nonconforming, inoperative, or malfunctioning structures, systems, or components is identified by Quality Assurance Department per-sonnel, to prevent inadvertent use. Details of the control system are described in Section 15 of this appendix. 1 312 Amend. 52 17J-29 Oct. 1979
15.0 tiONCONFORMING MATERI ALS, PARTS, OR COMPONENTS 52l For purchased items, Energy Systems Group delegates execution res-ponsibility for nonconforming materials, parts, or components control measures to suppliers. Assessment of the effectiveness of these measures is obtained from surveillance activities described in Section 7.0 of this appendix. Nonconformances that affect safety-related functions or utility that are proposed for " accept as is" or " repair" dispositions are sub-52l mitted to Energy 5/ stems Group for approval, and if ESG approval is granted, then to the customer for approval. 52l For Energy Systems Group fabricated items, procedures are imple-mented whereby nonconforming item identification, documentation, segre-gation, review, and disposition are performed. The administrative system for nonconformance control routinely provides for notification of appro-priate affected organizations (Manufacturing, Purchasing, Engineering, 5a Quality Assurance Engineering LMFBR Programs) of the existence of non-conforming conditions. The shop traveller, or Manufacturing Production Order (MP0), des-cribed in Section 10 of this appendix initiates identification of a non-conformance of in-process items, with the Quality Assurance Department inspector affixing his discrepancy stamp to the line items on the MP0 for the inspection operation. This identification of the item, the nonconformance and the acceptance criteria myolved are transferred to a nonconformance report form by Quality Assurance Department personnel, and the serial number of this report is transcribed onto the MP0. The nonconformance report form, and the procedure controlling its use, provide for documen-tation of the disposition of the nonconformance, signature approval of authorized individuals, and distribution of the report. A similar approach is used for supplier nonconfonnance detected at receiving inspection. 45 Nonconformance procedures defire the individuals and groups responsible for the disposition of nonconforming items. Nonconforming items are physically segregated from acceptable items in contrulled access hold rooms. The hold rooms are controlled by the Quality Assurance Department Inspection Unit. Items too large to be placed in the rooms are prominently tagged to identify their hold status. Release from hold areas or removal of hold status tags can only be performed by appro-priate Quality Assurance Department personnel, after receipt of an approved nonconformance report. Repair and rework operations of materials, parts, components, systems, and structures is accomplished by a revision to the original MP0. This revision of the MP0 is prepared, reviewed, and approved in the same manner as the initial issuance, which is described in Section 10 of this appendix. This revision specifies the repair, rework, and inspection procedures to be used. The inspection methods used are, as a minimum, those used for the original inspection. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 17J-29a I' } 31)
Approved nonconformance reports, with the dispositions, " accept as is" or " repair", are maintained by Quality Assurance, and are submitted with the item at the time of shipment, in accordance with contract requirements. Nonconformance reports are summarized at least monthly by Quality 52l Engineering, and the summary i- distributed to managers of Quality Assura Manufacturing, and PurcFasing. Summaries of nonconformances are submitted to the customer as requ.. ed by contract. Nonconfonnances that affect safety-related functions or utility of the items that are proposed for " accept as is" or " repair" dispositions are submitted to the customer for approval.
} bl4 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 17J-30
16.0 CORRECTIVE ACTIO1 52l For procured items, Energy Systems Group delegates execution res-ponsibility to suppiiers for establishing and maintaining corrective action measures. Assessment of the effectiveness of these measures is obtained from the supplier surveillance activities provided for in Section 7.0 of this appendix. 52l Fr ctivities within Energy Systems Group, a (.xumented corrective action system, under the control of the Quality Assurance Department, is established in accordance with procedures for handling nonconformance to technical requirement.; and technical procedures. Technical requirements are those contained il /.esign drawings, specifications, fabrication pro-ced;res, and inspectior. and test procedures. Technical requirement non-conformances, therefe.e, are reflected by hardware nonconformances. Tech-nical procedure reqr trements are those that guide the general processes of documenting and disseminating design, performance, configuration, procure-ment, manufacturing, and inspection requirements. These technical pro-cedures are those in the Quality Assurance Manuals and f>nctional manuals of quality-7,fecting organizations. Corrective action for technical requirement violations are an integrcl part of the nonconforming item system described in Section 15 of this appendix. Corrective action for technical procedure nonconformance are defined in procedures covering audits and the basic corrective action system. Corrective action is initiated during nonconformance evaluation ard resolution. Appropriate completion periods are assigned as parts of the corrective action commitments. To assure timely resolution. corrective 45l action completion dates are monitored by theQuality Assurance Audits and 52 Controls function; cnd, in the event of a delinquency, these facts are brought to the attention of the management of Quality Assurance and the affected organizations. Implementation of corrective action is verified by Quality Assurance, and this is the basis for close out of corrective actions. All corrective actions are based on conditions that do or may adversely affect quality. These conditions and thir causes are summarized in monthly reports to management, along with status of the corrective action implemen-tation (i.e. , conplete, on-schedule, c.- delinquent. ).
} blb Amend. 52 17J-31 Oct. 1979
17.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE RECORDS
- 52) For procured i', ems, Energy Systems Group specifies the records to be furnished by supplia.s and delegates execution responsibility to suppliers for preparation of these records. Supplier records requirements 45 l 52l established by Energy Systems Group are described in Section 4.0 of this appendix.
52l For Energy Systems Group internal activities, procedures are implemented which i & +1fy records which are maintained to provide documentary evidence c f the quality of items and activities affecting quality. These procecires provide specific organizational respot ibility for record collection and retention. The list of records identified for 401 retention meets the requirements of ANSI N 45.2.9, and the ASME Boiler and pressure Vessel Code, Section III. Records which relate to a specific deliverable end item by Energy 52 Systems Group are identified and retrievable by the end item part number. General records, such as audit reports and training recnrds, are maintained and retrievable by generic groupings. 32 Written procedures assign responsibility to specific Energy Systems Group departments for record retention and maintenance which are consistent with codes, standards, and procurement documents. Specific record transmittal requirements are as required by the plant owner. 52l Completed inspection and test records of Energy Systems Group fabricated items are part of or referenced by the Manufacturing Production Order (MPO). These records contain the following information:
- 1) A description of the type of observation or inspection required.
- 2) A signature or stamp of the individual comp'eting or verifying a manufacturing, inspection, or test operation.
- 3) The date ar.d results of the inspection or test.
- 4) Notification that nonconformances exist, information reiating to nonconformances, and disposition of the nonconforming item.
- 5) A statement of the acceptability of the item, and signatures or stamp or the inspector making final acceptance.
52l ESG Engineering Department records are stored in a vault in the En-gineering Dapartment until the plant owner directs that they be sent to the plant site. The remainder of the quality assurance records are stored in a
- 52) vault at the ESG De Soto facility, or in duplicate files, until the plant 17 owner directs delivery.
~
i 316 17J-32 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
18.0 AUDITS 18.1 EXTERNAL AUDIiS 5 21 Energy Systems Group has an audit program for auditing suppliers of. structures, system 3, and components. Quality Assurance Department personnel perform audit planning, scheduling, audit team selection, audit coordination and contact, report issuance, and follow-up to verify implementation of effective corrective action. Audits are planned on an annual basis. Unscheduled audits may be performed when deemed necessary. Audits are 5 21 scheduled, based on supplier activity status, to evaluate the effectiveness of supplier Quality Assurance Programs. Checklists are prepared to guide the conduct of audits. Personnel experienced in the conduct of audits are selected as audit team leaders. The responsibility for the execution of audits within their own and subtier suppliers' is delegated to suppliers in procurement documents. 18.2 INTERNAL AUDITS Internal quality assurance audits are conducted in accordance with
,~e-established procedures and checklists. Personnel experienced in the conduct of audits perform the audits, or are team leaders when the team approach is used. Audit personnel are selected to prevent their having direct responsibilities in the areas being audited.
Auditors document their findings, and these findings are reviewed with managers having responsibility for the area audited. At the time of this review, the affected manager accepts a commitment to implement corrective action for deficiencies, and a specified date when implementation will be complete. Upon notification of completion of a corrective action conmit-ment, that area is re-audited to assure the corrections nave been accom-plished. Audits are conducted of systems and procedures, processes, and products. The procedures audited are first evaluated against code, standard, and contract requirements; and then the effectiveness of their implementation to on-going work effort is established during audits. A review of documents and records is an integral part of all audits. Quality audits are performed by personnel from the Quality Assurance Department, or, in the ir. stance of team audits, under the direction af a 45, lead auditor certified to the requirements of ANSI N45.2.23. 17 Audits are scheduled yearly, in advance, to cover all these elements where there is on-going activity. The audit activity is initiated concurrent with initiation of conceptual deugn and is conducted throughout the life of the program. Audit results and status are reported monthly to program and functional managers. A summary report of problems affecting timely corrective action 5 21 is sent to the ESG President and executive level functional managers monthly. 1 317 17J-33 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
18.3 ACTIVITIES AUDITED Activities audited are those Quality Assurance program elements 17 indicated in Figure 17J-3. 1 318 Amend. 52 17J-34 Oct.1979
O OWNER LE AD RE ACTOR MANUFACTURER REACTOR MANUFA' - ENERGY SYSTEMF ,,
.+,
1 SYSTEMS SERVICES COMPON ENTS SUBSERVICES SERVICES SERVICES MATERIALS MATERI ALS COMPON ENTS MATERIALS SERVICES I Figure 17J-1. Overall Energy Systems Group Reactor Manufacturer Quality Assurance Program Functional Organization of Program Participation Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 O 17J-35 1 m'
ENERGY SYSTEMS GROUP PRESIDENT GUALITY ASSURANCE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR CRBRP QUALITY ASSURANCE QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT MAN AGER NGINEERING - W3R PROGR AMS M AN AGER 8T ^M E ^T QUALITY ASSitRANCE 0U 1 Y SURANCE ENGINEERING - UTILITY AND ENERGY PROJECT MANAGER PROGR AMS MANAGER QUALITY ASSURANCE INSTRUMENTATION AND AUD1TS AND CONTROLS TECHNICAL SUPPOHT UNIT MANAGER MANAGER INSPECTION AND (EL SEG N O) INSPECTION AND TEST UNIT MANAGER MANAGER INSPECTION AND INSPECTION AND TEST SUBUNITS TEST SUBUNITS ASSISTANT MANAGERS ASSISTANT MANAGERS Figure 17J-2. Energy Systems Group Quality Assurance Department Organization Amend. 52 17J-36 1 520 oct 1979
PROGR AM MANAGEMENT QUALITY ASSUR ANCE PROGRAM ORG ANIZ A TION DOCUM E N T A TION AUDITS A.dD REVIEWS CORRECTIVE ACTION FNGINEERING HOLDS
- 1. Planning 1. Responsebelity and Authonty 1. Pos cies and Praedures 1. Qisahty Audits
- 2. Quahey Assurance Program endes 2. Traming and Indoct mation 2. Quahty necords 2. Management Reviews UNUSUAL OCCURRENCE REPORTING
- 3. Personnel Quahficarica 3 Ou.hty Status Reports DE SIGN AND DEVE LOPMENT PROCUH E ME NT MANUF ACTORING. F AFIRICAilON AND ASSE MRL Y Design Plann,ng Procurement Pfanning Flanning Design Definetson and Control Peaturement Requerements inspection and Test Plan
'- U"'9" "I*"*
- 2. Codes, Standards and Practices Procurement Dos ument Reviews Matenal identification an 2 Control
- 3. Engen enne Studies Evaluation and Seicetion of Pracu<ement Control of Processes
- 4. Parts, Matenals and Processes Sources 5 Design Descnotions t , ,nc,,,o, ,no 4,3,, meg, p,oc ng,,
- 1. Gene,ai Respirements 2 Peocess Qualificeveon
- 6. Specdications, Drawings and 2. Acceptable Soon e Lest instructions 3. Nondestructive E =ammation 3 Pre Award Evaluat.on 4 Cleanmg
- 7. Identification
- 8. Acceptance Cntena
- 4. Interchm of Source imp,c,,on and Tnts Capabihty informanon
- 9. Interface Contros 1. General Requerereents Contece of Confewration a Document Revievv and Control 2. ProcArn
- 1. Contract Change Control 3 Completed Item Impection and %t
- 1. Document Reviews
- 2. As Built Venfication 4. Inspecteon Status indicat on y 2. Document Control
- 3. Engmeenne Drawing Lists Equipment Cahtsstion and Standards S Cer ti fication DMign Reviews Source Surveillance and inspection Document Conteel Development Receiving Inspection Equipawn Cahbravion and Standards
'"***" 1. Equipment Evaluanon Failure Reporting and Corrective *""'"9""
Action 2. Documentation 2. Control of Inspection Measurmg and Test 3 Disposetiorsing of Received items Equipment Control of Noncon'orming iteims 4 Dis, renancy Equipment Control of Receer tems Statishcal Quahty Conteol and Analyps Control of Nonconforming items Corrective Acteon Handhng Preservetion, Packaging. Storage and Shepping
- 1. Hanritmg
- 2. Preservation, Pack aging and Stoeage-3 Shipping o
n 6. r*g Figure 17J-3e Major Elements of the Energy Systems Group Reactor Manuf acturer mP Quality Assurance Program e N U1 . . O TV M 4,N N O O O
Appendix B ESG Implementing Document or Procedere Criterion Number Title I. Organization 50P M-10 Program Management 50P Q-10 ESG Quality Assurance Program QA0P N1.21 Quality Assurance Plans II. Quality S0P A-01 ESG Policies and Procedures Assurance 50P M-10 Program Management S0P Q-10 ESG Quality Assurance Program S0P N-50 Quality Assurance (QA) - Program Support Functions S0P Q-12 Quality Assurance Program Audits S0P N-54 ESG Quality Records PMD No. 16 Quality Assurance Management Reviews PMD No. 11 CRBRP Document Hold Status System C PMD No. 20 CRBRP Training and Indoctrination i' PMD No. 27 CRBRP Document Status System
$ EMP 3-1 Engineering Documentation Process CMP 2.126 Case File Documentation QA0P N1.00 Preface to Quality Assurance Manual QA0P N1.01 Quality Assurance Department Functions QA0P N1.03 Vision Requirements for Quality Assurance Personnel
" QAOP N1.21 Quality Assurance Plans QA0P N1.23 Quality Status Reports
_ QA0P N6.02 Qualification and Certification of Nondestructive CS3M2.4 Examination Personnel u QA0P N7.02 Qualification and Certification of Dimensional na Inspection Personnel na QA0P N8.00 Statistical Quality Control Program QA0P N13.02 Quality Assurance Data Packages CS3M2.3 Training RE Figure 17J-4. Quality Assurance Procedure Index vs F$ Requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B gF (Sheet 1 of 13) 5E
Appenaix B ESG Implementing Dorument or Procedure Criterion Number Title II. Quality CS3M17 Records and Data Reports Assurance Program PMD-13 CRBRP Licensing Administrator (cont'd) III. Design Control 50P M-10 Program Marigement 50P M-20 Configuration Summary Reports PMD No. 1 CRBRP Correspondence Control PMD No. 11 CRBRP Document Hold Status System PMD No. 15 Schedule Development and Control PMD No. 19 CRBRP SDD Preparation and Revision PMD No. 21 ;RBRP Development Activities y PMD No. 25 CRBRP Parts Standardization
? PMDIM. 26 Use of Controlled Information Data Transmittal (CINDT) g PMD No. 27 CRBRP Document Status System PMD No. 30 CRBRP Procedure for the Identification of Revisions to ESG Specifications PMD No. 32 CRBRP Design Reviews and Release PMD No. 34 Application of Additions to ASME Code Requirements PMD No. 36 Engineering Drawings PMD No. 37 CRBRP Open Items List PMD No. 40 Materials and Processes for CRBRP PMD No. 41 Baselining of Documents EMP 1-0 Preface to Engineering Management Procedures Mcnual EMP 2-8 Engineering Studies EMP 2-9 Design and Acceptance Criteria EMP 3-3 Limited Release System EMP 3-5 Star.dard Release System EMP 3-9 Preparation and Control of Specifications EMP 3-12 Systrm and Subsystem Specifications , pg EMP 3-17 Component Specifications r+g EMP 3-18 Material Specifications
- . o. EMP 3-19 Process Specifications w N Figure 17J-4. Quality Assurance Procedure Index vs U Requi.ements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B (Sheet 2 of 13) O O O
Appendix B ESG Implementing Document or Procedure Criterion Number Title III. Design Controi EMP 3-21 Engineering Change Control (continued) EMP 3-22 Interface Control EMP 3-24 Control of Engineering Drawings EMP 3-25 Engineering Orders EMP 3-26 Preparation and Control of Supporting Documents EMP 3-28 Component Traceability EMP 3-29 Engineering Requirements for Serialization EMP 3-32 Material Substitutions EMP 3-46 Document Release and Control Systems EMP 3-47 Material Processing Specifications EMP 3-48 Material Processing Procedures EMP 3-51 Weldment Checklist EMP 3-52 Engineering Release Plan of Action
- EMP 3-53 Preparation of "E" Type Specifications s EMP 3-62 Documentation of Scientific and Technical Computer i Programs o EMP 3-63 Documentation Formats for Scientific and Technical Computer Programs EMP 5-3 Design Reviews EMP 5-17 Checking of EngineerinP Drawings EMP 5-21 Materials and Processes Control System
.- EMP 5-24 Application of Standards CS3M 3, 6.2 Design and Document Control w r0 IV. Procurement 50P J-12 Preparation and Processing of the Purchase Requisition A Document 50P M-10 Program Management Control PMD No. 22 Use of CRBRP Administrative Specifications in Procurements PMD No. 23 Subcontract Preprocurement Planning PMD No. 24 Preparation, Review, Approval, and Processing of R 3" Purchase Requisitions F@ AIMP 1.1.1 Procurement Policy m ." AIMP 3.109.1 Procurement from Appre t Supplier Figure 17J-4. Quality Assurance Procedure Index vs Requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B (Sheet 3 of 13)
Appendix B ESG Implementing Document or Procedure Criterion Number Tide IV. Procurement CMP 2.14 Changes to Purchase Orders and Other Direction to Document Suppliers Control QAOP N4.00 Procurement Document Review (continued) QAI N4.00A CRBRP Procurement Document Review CS3M 4 Procurement Documents CS3M 6.3 and Procurement as an Engineering Organization Appendix A V. Instructions, S0P A-01 ESG Policies and Procedures Procedures, 50P Q-10 ESG Quality Assurance Program and Drawings 50P M-80 Unusual Occurrence Reports - RDT Programs 50P N-54 ESG Quality Records PMD No. 35 Change Control O PMD No. 36 Engineering Drawings
? PMD No. 48 Unusual Occurrence Reporting ;": EMP 2-9 Design and Acceptance Criteria EMP 3-1 Engineering Documentation Process EMP 3-5 Standard Release System EMP 3-9 Preparation and Control of Specifications EMP 3-12 System and Subsystem Specifications EMP 3-17 Component Specifications EMP 3-18 Material Specifications EMP 3-29 Engineering Requirements for Serialization EMP 3-53 Preparation of "E" Type Specifications S0P L-12 Laboratory and Engineering Notebooks EMP 4-4 Test Procedures EMP 4-5 Test Reports CMP 2.126 Case File Documentation gg QA0P N1.21 Quality Assurance Plans r*g QA0P N1.22 Quality Assurance Acceptance Procedures " f QA0P N1.23 Quality Status Reports c
20 Figure 17J-4. Quality Assurance Procedure Index vs V4 Requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B rv (Sheet 4 of 13) (_n e G G
Appendix B ESG Implementing Document or Procedure Number Title V. Instructions, CS3M 9 Control of Fabrication Processes Procedures, QA0P N6.01 Qualification of Welding Procedures and Welding and Drawings Personnel (continued) QA0P N6.02 Qualification and Certification of Nondestructive CS3M 2.4 Examination Personnel QA0P N6.05 Qualification of Special Processes CS3M 5.4 Qualification of Welding and Brazing Procedure Specifications and Personnel CS3M 9.3 Control of Welding and Brazing Operations CS3M 5.5 Control of Heat-Treating Processes CS3M 5.9 Nondestructive Examination Procedures CS3M 7.7 Control of Nondestructive Examination Operations CS3M 10, 11, 5.10, In-Process and Final Examination and Tests G 14.5
? CS3M 2.5 Authorized Inspector
# CS3M 17 Records and Data Reports MM M-3-15 Control and Maintenance of Welder Performance Qualifications VI. Document Control S0P J-12 Preparation and Processing of the Purchase Requisition
, PMD No. 1 CRBRP Correspondence Control PMD No. 36 Engineering Drawings
- PMD No. 12 Ouality Assurance Review and Approval of Ergineering hequirements Documents u PMD No. 35 Change Control re o' Figure 17J-4. Quality Assurance Procedure Index vs ap Requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B Rm (Sheet 5 of 13) 8. G' al0
Appendix B ESG Implementing Document or Procedure Criterion Number Title VI. Document Control EMP 3-9 Preparation and Control of Specifications (continued) EMP 3-21 Engineering Change Control EMP 3-24 Control of Engineering Drawings EMP 3-25 Engineering Orders EMP 3-26 Preparation and Control of Supporting Documents EMP 3-36 Request for Document Change EMP 3-46 Document Release and Control Systems EMP 3-48 Material Processing Procedures EMP 3-52 Engineering Release Plan of Action CMP 2.14 Changes to Purchase Order and Other Directions to Suppliers QA0P N2.03 Document Control CS3M 3, 6.2 Design and Document Control b VII. Control of Pur- S0P J-12 Preparation and Processing of the Purchase Requisition a w chased Material, S0P J-58 Receiving and Inspection of Incoming Material and Equipment and Equipment Service 50P J-59 Warehousing of Direct-Charged Purchased Materials by Traffic and Warehousing S0P J-60 Handling and Storage of Project Critical Hardware S0P K-78 Procurement and Control of Supplier Data PMD No. 23 Subcontract Preprocurement Planning PMD No. 43 Review of Supplier Data CMP 3.21 Source Selection QA0P N4.01 Supplier Evaluation and Approval QA0P N4.02 Procurement Quality Assurance - Inspection Planning QA0P N4.02B Use of Procurement History Form QA0P N4.02C Receiving Inspection og Figure 17J-4. Quality Assurance Procedure Index vs e <n Requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B
]R (Sheet 6 uf 13) 0E N
N O O O
Appendix B ESG Implementing Document or Procedure Criterion fiumber Title VII. Control of Pur- QA0P N4.03 Procurement Quality Assurance - Source Inspection chased Material, QA0P N4.04 Procurement Quality Assurance - Receiving Inspection Equipment and QA0P N4.04C CRBRP Receiving Inspection Overcheck Requirements Service (cont'd) QA0P N4.08 Inspection and Testing of Welding Electrodes and Uncoated Filler Wire CS3M 7.2 Approved Procurement Sources CS3M 4 Procurement Documents CS3M 5.5 Procurement Inspection Instructions CS3M 7.3, 7.4 Procurement Inspection CS3M 8.2 Identification and Control of Materials and Items VIII. Identification 50P J-58 Receiving and Inspection of Incoming Material and and Control of Equipment y Materials, S0P J-59 Warehousing of Direct-Charged Purchased Materials by p Parts and Traffic and Warehousing g Components 50P J-60 Handling and Storage of Project Critical Hardware EMP 3-28 Component Traceability "MP 3-29 Engineering Requirements for Serialization QA0P N4.02 Procurement Quality Assurance - Inspection Planning QA0P N4.04 Procurement Quality Assurance - Receiving Inspection QA0P N5.01 Manufacturing Production Order QA0P N6.04 Weld Material Control 14.3, 14.4 Issuance, Use, and Control of Stamps 1 Figure 17J-4. Qutlity Assurance Procedure Index vs Requiremen:s of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B
} (Sheet 7 of 13)
RF -- ceo. u
$ N aiG co
Appendix B ESG Implementing Document or Procedure Criterion Number Title VIII. Identification QA0P N9.02 Serialization of Hardware and Control of QA0P N10.0 Nonconforming Materials, Parts, and Components Materials, Parts CS3M 4 Procurement Documents and Components CS3M 5.3 Procurement Inspection Instructions (continued) CS3M 7.3, 7.4 Procurement Inspection CS3M 8.2 Identification and Control of Materials and Items CS3M 8.4 Material Checklists CS3M 9 Control of Fabrication Processes CS3M 8.3 Control of Welding and Brazing Materials CS3M 15 Nonconforming Materials and Items MM M-2-4 Control Stations MM M-3-6 Material Control b IX. Control of EMP 5-21 Materials and Processes Control System
- 1. Special Processes QA0P N3.02 Control of ESG Tooling QA0P N5.01 Manufacturing Production Order CS3M 9 Control of Fabrication Processes QA0P N6.01 Qualification of Welding Procedures and Welding Personnel QA0P N6.02 .
Qualification of Certification of Nondestructive CS3M 2.4 Examination Personnel Figure 17J-4. Quality Assurance Procedure Index vs Requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B (Sheet 8 of 13) RF F2
.2
$10 N
O e G 9
Appendix B ESG Implementing Document or Procedure erion Number Title S ec 5 N nd structive Examination Procedures Processes QA0P N6.05 Qualification of Special Processes (continued) CS3M 5.4 Qualification of Welding and Brazing Procedure Specifications and Personnel CS3M 9.? Control of Welding and Brazing Operations CS3M 5.5 Control of Heat-Treating Processes CS3M 7.7 Control of Nondestructive Examination Operations MM M-3-15 Control and Maintenance of Welder Performance Qualifications X. Inspection 50P J-58 Receiving and Inspection of Incoming Material and Equipment QA0P N1.21 Quality Assurance Plans
- QA0P N1.22 Quality Assurance Acceptance Procedures 2 QA0P N4.02 Procurement Quality Assurance - Inspection Planning j QA0P N4.028 Use of Procurement History Form QA0P N4.02C Receiving Inspection QA0P N4.03 Procurement Quality Assurance - Source Inspection QAOP N4.04 Procurement Quality Assurance - Receiving Inspection QAOP N4.04C CRBRP Receiving Inspection Overcheck Requirements
, QA0P N4.08 Inspection and Testing of Welding Electrodes and
, Uncoated Filler Wire QA0P N5.01 Manufacturing Production Order Figure 17J-4. Quality Assurance Procedure index vs a
] Requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B (Sheet 9 of 13)
?N r*a
.a N
Appendix B ESG Implementing Document or Procedure Criterion flumber Title nt nti ) S 9 fl ndestructive Examination Procedures QA0P fi6.05 Qualification of Special Processes QA0P fl7.00 Product Acceptance Tests QA0P f47.01 Proof Pressure Testing of Pressure Vessels CS3M 5.3 Procurement Inspection Instructions CS3M 7.3, 7.4 Procurement Inspection CS3M 9 Control of Fabrication Processes CS3M 10 In-Process and Final Examination and Tests CS3M 2.5 Authorized Inspector XI. Test Control S0P L-12 Laboratory and Engineering flotebooks EMP 4-4 Test Procedures
- EMP 4-5 Test Reports y
[ XII. Control of S0P K-68 Calibration cf Measuring Instruments and Equipment N Measuring and QA0P f13.00 Calibration Measuring and Test Equipment Test Equipment QA0P fl3.02 Control of ESG Tooling CS3M 12 Calibration of Measurement and Test Equipment XIII. Handling, Storage 50P J-60 Handling and Storage of Project Critical Hardware and Shipping S0P K-44 Shipping S0P K-50 Material Handling Equipment (MHE) Figure 17J-4. Quality Assurance Procedure Index vs Requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B (Sheet 10 of 13) RN P2 D V kN e O O
Appendix B ESG Implementing Document or Procedure erion Number Title XIII. Handling, QA0P N12.00 Packaging and Shipping Inspection Storage and CS3M 13, 5.7, 5.8 Handling, Preservation, Packaging, Storage, and Ship-Shipping ment (continued) MM M-2-4 Control Stations MM M-3-10 Packaging and Shipping XIV. Inspection, 50P J-58 Receiving and Inspection of Incoming Material and Test and Equipment Operating S0P J-59 Warehousing of Direct-Charged Purchased Materials by Status Traffic and Warehousing S0P J-60 Handling and Storage of Project Critical Hardware 50P N-54 ESG Quality Records QA0P N1.21 Quality Assurance Plans y QA0P N3.02 Control of ESG Tooling
? QA0P N4.04 Procurement Quality Assurance - Receiving Inspection g QA0P N5.01 Manufacturing Production Order CS3M 9 Control of Fabrication Processes QA0P N6.04 Weld Material Control QA0P N7.00 Product Acceptance Tests QA0P N7.01 Proof Pressure Testing of Pressure Vessels 14 14.3, 14.4 Issuance, Use, and Control of Stamps . QAOP N9.02 Serialization of Hardware QA0P N10.00 Nonconforming Materials, Parts, and Components
- QA0P N10.00 Summary of Nonconformances N Figure 17J-4. Quality Assurance Procedure Index vs Requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B g (Sheet 11 of 13) Om 1 W
Appendix B ESG Implementing Document or Procedure Criterion Number Title XIV. Inspection, CS3M 7.3, 7.4 Procurement Inspection Test and CS3M 8.2 Identification and Control of Materials and Items Operating CS3M 8.4 Material Checklists Status CS3M 8.3 Control of Welding and Brazing Materials (continued) CS3M 9.3 Control of Welding and Brazing Operations CS3M 5.5 Control of Heat-Treating Processes CS3M 10, 11, 5.10, In-Process and Final Examination and Tests 14.5 CS3M 15 Nonconforming Materials and Items CS3M 2.5 Authorized Inspector MM M-2-4 Control Stations MM M-3-6 Material Control XV. Nonconforming S0P J-58 Receiving and Inspection of Incoming Material and Material s, Equipment O Parts, or S0P N-54 ESG Quality Records
? Components QA0P N5.01 Manufacturing Production Order 8 QA0P N10.00 Nonconforming Materials, Parts, and Components QAI N10.000 CRBRP Nonconformance Hardware Disposition QA0P N13.02 Quality Assurance Data Packages CS3M 9 Control of Fabrication Processes CS3M 15 Nonconfonning Materials and Items CS3M 17 Records and Data Reports Figure 17J-4. Quality Assurance Procedure Index vs Requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B (Sheet 12 of 13) ?N N
W (A e O O
Appendix B ESG Implementing Document or Procedure Criterion Number Title XVI. Corrective SOP J-58 Receiving and Inspection of Incoming Material and Action Equipment SOP Q-14 Corrective Action System Soo M-80 Unusual Occurrenc Reports - RDT Programs PMD No. 48 Unusual Occurrence Reporting EMP 5-19 Failure Reports EMP 5-20 Incident Reports QA0P N4.03 Procurement Quality Assurance - Source Inspection Qt.0P N4.04 Procurement Quality Assurance - Receiving Inspection QA0P N10.00 Nonconforming Materials, Parts, and Components 0A0P N10.00 Summary of Nonconformances QA0P N14.00 Corrective Action of Nonconforming Products CS3M 16 Corrective Action (I XVII. Quality S0P N-54 ESG Quality Records g; Assurance PMD No. 18 CRBRP Quality Records Records EMP 3-1 Engineering Documentation Process CMP 2.126 Case File Documentation QA0P N13.02 Quality Assurance Data Packages CS3M 17, 7.8 Records and Data Reports XVIII. Audits S0P Q-12 Quality Assurance Program Audits QA0P N1.04 Quality Assurance Audits CS3M 18 Audits Figure 17J-4. Quality Assurance Procedure Index vs __. Requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B (Sheet 13 of 13) (9 c3 Smo 4hw G;' 2s'?
O QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL PROCEDURE DESCRIPTIONS STANDARD OPERATING POLICIES (SOP's) l 52l S0P A ESG Policy and Procedures 52l This S0P defines the types of ESG administrative policies and procedures authorized, and establishes minimum format and distribution requirements for such policies and procedures. It identifies tb- highest level of management, corporate or otherwise, responsible for establishing quality policies, goals, and objectives. A clear path of communication between Quality Assurance organization and corporate management is defined. Positions and groups responsible for defining both content and changes to the Quality Assurance Program and manuals are identi-fied, in addition to the management level responsible for the approval of the Quality Assurance Program and manuals. Provi-sions are established for ccm; rolling and distribution of Quality Assurance manuals and revisions. 40 1 50P J.12 - Preparation and Processing of the Purchase Requisition This 50P establishes methods and policies applicable to the preparation and processing of the Purchase Requisitions (Form N25-R-2). The requisition is used for authorizing procurement, through Purchasing, of materials, equipment, and services from suppliers. Procedures are established that delineate the sequence of actions to be accomplished in pvoaration, review, approval, and control of the Purchase Requisit'.on. S0P J Receiving and Inspection of Incoming Material and Equipment Receiving inspection of supplier-furnished material and equipment is performed in accordance with the following. The material is properly identified and corresponds with receiving documentation. Inspection is performed and judged acceptable, in accordance with predetermined instructions, prior to use. Items accepted and released are identified as to their inspection status, prior to rel ea se. Nonconforming items are segregated, controlled, and identified until proper disposition is made. O Amend. 52 17J-51 Oct. 1979 .
;4 }
N,3 ,
S0P J Warehousing of Direct-Charged PurcSased Materials by Traffic and Warehousing Methods are specified to identify and control materials. Verification of correct identification of material, orior to release, is required. Material shall be protected against loss, damage, and deterioration from environmental conditions. S0P J Handling and Storage of Project Critical Hardware Special handling, preservation, storage, packaging, and shipping re-quirements are specified and performed by qualified personnel under predetermined instructions. 50P K Shipping Special packaging and shipping requirements are specified and accom-plished by qualified individuals, in accordance with predetermined instructions. Procedures are prepared in accordance with design and specification requirements which control the packaging and shipping of materials, components, and systems to preclude damage, loss, and deter-iora tion. 45l S0P K Material Handling Equipment Special handling requirements are specified and accomplished by qualified individuals, in accordance with predetermined instructions. Procedures are prepared in accordance with design and specification requirements which control the handling of materials, components, and systems, to prevent damage. 45 l S0P K Calibration of Measuring Instruments and Equipment Procedures describe the calibration technique and frequency, mainten-ance, and control for all measuring instruments and test equipment which are used for obtaining data, where traceable calibrations are required. Measuring and test equipment is identified, and the cali-bration test data is identified with the associated equipment. Measurement and test equipment are calibrated at specified intervals, based on the conditions affecting the measurement. When measuring and test equipment is found to be out of calibration, any items measured with this equipment are withheld until the accuracy of the results is evaluated. The complete status of all items under the calibration is recorded and maintained. Reference and transfer standards are traceable to national standards. If national standards do not exist, the basis for calibration is documented. Amend. 52 Oct.1979 17d-52
;4 1 336
S0P L Laboratory and Engineering Notebooks It is the policy of the company to record all scientific and laboratory research and development activities in laboratory and engineering notebooks to be used by scientific and engineering personnel, primarily to record results of scientific studies and lab work whether company or customer oriented. Innovations, inventions, discoveries, and improvements will be recorded for the purpose of fulfilling contractual obligations and protecting 40 company interests. 52l S0P K Procurement and Control of Supplier Data Procedures are established for preparation, review, and control of instructions, procedures, drawings and changes thereto. These documents and changes thereto are procedurally controlled to assure adequacy. Provisions are established, identifying the personnel responsible for these activities. Changes are reviewed by the same organizations that performed the original review, unless delegated by the applicant to qualified responsible organizations. Approved changes are promptly included in the appropriate documents. 50P M Program Management This S0P sets forth principles and guidelines for the managements of 52l Energy Systems Group Business Programs. The Guidelines include organizational framework, program management processes, performance monitoring, and reporting systems. S0P M Configuration Summary Reports This S0P establishes the policies, methods, and responsibilities for the preparation, issuance, and use of Configuration Summary Reports. The primary purpose of this report is to aid the Manufacturing, Quality Assurance, and Engineering functions in determining configuration and effectivity requirements for product hardware. 52l S0P Q Corrective Action System Evaluation of nonconformances and determination of the need for corrective action follow established procedures. Prompt corrective action is initiated, following the determination of nonconformance to procedural or technical requirements Adverse conditions signi-ficant to quality, their causes, and corrective actions, are reported to the appropriate levels of management. Amend. 52 O 17J-53 Oct. 1979
\ U1
52l S0P Q ESG Quality Assurance Program This procedure defines the Quality Assurance Program to be applied 521 to all ESG products and services, in compliance with applicable contract, federal, or state requirements. Management (above or outside of Quality Assurance and to the highest corporate level) regularly assesses the Quality Assurance Program effectiveness. The establishment of indoctrination and training progress review is specified. S0P M Unusual Occurrence Reports - RDT Programs This S0P establishes methods and responsibilities for reporting to 52l the customer of unusual occurrences affecting ESG programs under I the requirements of RDT Standard F 1-3T. The purpose of this SD' is to comply with requirements of 10CFR21 including requirements to adopt procedures to 1) provide for: a) evaluating deviations or b) informing licensees or purchasers of deviations; and 2) assure that a responsible officer is in-formed of . a) failures to comply with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or any applicable rule, regulation order or license of NRC relating to Substantial Safety Hazard, or b) defects in the construction or operation of a facility or activity licensed or otherwise regulated pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. 52l This S0P designates the President, Energy Systems Group, as 52l the responsible officer to be informed and provides methods for informing the President, Energy Systems Group, and provides for 45 delegating his authority for reporting to the NRC. 50P N Quality Assurance Program Support Functions This procedure establishes policy on the utilization of ESG Quality 52 Assurance Department functions on ESG programs and describes the Quality Assurance Department functions and interfaces with other 52l ESG departments. It summarizes the provisions for resolving disputes arising from a difference of opinion between Quality Assurance - Quality Control and other department personnel. The procedure outlines the safety-related structures, systems, and components controlled by the Quality Assurance Program, and the respective organization executing Quality Assurance - related functions on those items during the design, engineering, procure-Amend. 52 17J-54 Oct. 1979 t 338
O ment, inspection, manufacturing, construction, and testing phases. Quality-related activities (inspection and test, etc.) performed with appropriate equipment and under suitable environmental conditions are described. 52l 45 SOP Q Quality Assurance Program Audit Procedures and responsibilities for assuring the adequacy and effec-tiveness of the ESG Quality Assurance Program through audits of 52 procedures, standards, methods, and practices used in producing ESG hardware or software products are established by this SOP. Audits are preformed in accordance with pre-established written procedures or checklists and are conducted by trained personnel not having direct responsibilities in the areas being audited. The audits include an objective evaluation of quality-related practices, procedures, and instructions, and the effectiveness of implementation and conformance with policy directives. Audit data are analyzed and reports indicating quality trends and the effectiveness of the Quality Assurance Program are provided to management. The audit results are documented and then reviewed with management having responsibility in the area audited. Subsequently, responsible management takes the necessary action to correct the deficiencies revealed by audit. 52l45 l S0P N ESG Quality Records 52l ESG Quality Records are defined, and responsibilities for their retention are established by this SOP.
- Its purpose is to establish 52 standards for meeting ESG and customer requirements for filing, storing, and retrieving of quality history information on ESG products and services.
Quality Assurance records include: 1) operating logs, 2) results of reviews, inspections, tests, audits, and material analyses,
- 3) monitoring of work performance, 4) qualification of personnel, procedures, and equipment, and 5) other documentation, such as drawings, specification, procurement documents, calibration procedures and reports, and nonconforming and corrective action reports. The records are to be readily identifiable and retrievable.
Requirements and responsibilities for record transmittals, retention and maintenance subject to work completion must be consistent with applicable codes, standards, and procurement documents. Record storage facilities are to be constructed, located, and secured to prevent loss or destruction of the records or their deterioration by environmental conditions. 11 ~ } 339 ' Amend. 52 17J-55 Oct. 1979
CRBRP PROGRAM MANAGEMENT DIRECTIVES (PMD's) PMD CRBRP Correspondence Control This procedure delineates the method for identifying, controlling, and accounting for all incoming and outgoing correspondence, and for capturing 52l comaitments on the Centralized Action Correspondence Control System (CACCS). 45l PMD CRBRP Document Hold Status System This procedure applies to holds and TBD's on all released (for 52l project use) Principal Design Data for which SSG is responsible. The current status of each Hold and T3D in ths ,e documents which impacts Level 2 or Level 3 activities is maintc,ned in the Document Hold system as described in this directive. l PMD Quality Assurance Review and Approval of Engineering j Requirements Documents i
! This directive establishes the requirement and procedure for formal 52l review and approval by Quality Assurance personnel of ESG-generated
- 1) drawings, 2) specifications, 3) specification amendments,
- 4) Engineering's Change Proposals, 5) System Design Descriptions (SDD),
40 l and 6) Engineering Orders. PMD CRBRP Licensing Administrator This directive defines the responsibilities of the ESG CRBRP Licensing Administrator for implementing and controlling licensing criteria in accordance with Section 9.0 of the Management Policies and Requirements 52 (MPR). PMD Schedule Development and Control This directive delineates the method for development, processing, 52l approval, maintenance and change control of the ESG schedule hierarchy which defines the CRBRP effort within the requirements of ESG Program Management System. This directive defines both the vertical integration of schedules for CRBRP from the contractual interface to the detailed work package structure and the horizontal breakout over the time of the various schedular levels and documents. 17J-56 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
;' 1 .540
PMD Quality Assurance Management Reviews This procedure implements a Quality Program requirement for periodic quality assurance management review meetings to assess CRBRP Project quality accomplishments, discuss program quality audits, and resolve management problems affecting quality. PMD CRBRP Quality Records This procedure specifies quality record accumulation, retention, maintenance, and storage requirements for the CRBRP Project. PMD CRBRP SDD Preparation and Revision This procedure defines the methods for preparation and maintenance of CRBRP System Design Descriptions. O
- } .3 0+ l 171-57 O
Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
PMD CRBRP Training and Indoctrination This procedure implements CRBRP Project requirements for training and indoctrination of personnel whose activities may have an effect on quality. PMD CRBRP Development Activities This directive defines the methods for initiating and controlling development activites required for the CRBRP Program and includes directions for 1) preparation, review and release of development activities, 2) revision and control of approved development activities, 3) review and control of development activities, and 40 4) control of development hardware. PMD Use of CRBRP Administrative Specifications in Procurements This procedure describes the use of administrative specifications for Quality Assurance administration of purchase orders between 52l Energy Systems Group and the sellers of services or items. PMD Subcontract Preprocurement Planning This procedure provides the guidelines required to accomplish a thorough subcontract preprocurement planning function by the Purchasing Department. It outlines purchasing policies that are consistent with requirements established in the Management Policies and Requirements (MPR) for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant (CRBRP), and with policies delineated in the Rockwell Corporate Material Procedures (CMP's). PMD Preparation, Review, Approval and Processing of Purchase Requisitions This directive describes the procedura for preparing, reviewing, approving and processing Purchase Requisitions. These instructions augment those in SOP J-12. The directive applies to Purchase Requisitions for CRBRP items pre-pared by the CRBRP Program Office or the Engineering Department. It does not apply to Purchase Requisitions prepared by Manufacturing 45 in support of hardware "make" items. PMD CRBRP Parts Standarc'ization 52l All CRBRP design activities performed within ESG will utilize the ESG parts standardization system as described in " Preferred Parts and Design Stan-dards", published by the Checking and Design Standards function. Changes to tha t publication will be applicable to the CRBRP Program immediately 52 upon release for general ESG use and will not require revision to this 40 directive. Amend. 52 17J-58 Oct. 1979
, 1 54,)c t
PMD Use of Controlled Information Data Transmittal (CINDT) This procedure establishes a method for the controlled dissemination of CRBRP technical information and to assure that information used as a basis for design is obtained only from controlled sources. 45l PMD CRBRP Document Status System This procedure defines the operation of the Documentation Status 52l System (DSS) module (WARD-D-0059) and the ESG responsibilities and interface with the Westinghouse ARD computer. The DSS assures that principal design data is identified, measured and statused 40 to provide information required to manage said CRBRP Program data. 521 PMD CRBRP Procedures for Identification of Revisions to ESG 52l This procedure modifies the requirements of the standard ESG specifi-cation revision system to certain specific requirements of the CRBRP Project. 52l PMD CRBRP Design Reviews and Release This procedure implements the CRBRP policy relating to design reviews 52l of systems and components, to supplement the standard ESG design review practice. PMD Application of Additions to ASME Code Requirements This directive covers all CRBRP components including piping systems designed and constructed under ASME Section III, ASME Section VIII, and ANSI B31.1. PMD Change Control 52l This procedure provides direction for revision of all ESG documents 45 40 PMD CRBRP Engineering Drawings This procedure defines the methods to be used for release and revision of CRBRP engineering drawings. PMD CRBRP Open Items List l This procedure defines the method for tracking items of preliminary or missing information in CRBRP Principal Design Data which are not included in the Document Hold System Module of the Documentation 40l Status System. 17J-59 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
- ! M3
PMD Materials and Processes for CRBRP This directive is established to ensure that all CRBRP design work will be based upcn one common set of materials data as well as on consistent extrapolations and interpretations of these data. PMD Baselining of Documents This procedure gives the method for defining documentation as part of the CRBRP baseline. PMD Review of Supplier Data This directive establishes specific requirements for the review of supplier data and augments the general requirements of S0P K-78. PMD Unusual Occurrence Reporting fhe purpose of this procedure is to provide for DOE Unusual Occurrence Reporting and for identification of those occurrences which require special consideration as deficiencies reportable 52 under 10 CFR 50.55(e) and 10 CFR 21. l 3'i k 17J-60 Amend. 52 Oct. 1379
ENGINEERING MANAGEMtNT PROCEDURES (EMP's) EMP 1 Preface to the Engineering Management Procedures Manual This procedure describes the scope of the Engineering Management Procedures (EMP) Manual. 40! EMP 2 Engineering Studies This procedure establishes the requirement for conducting studies to establish that the design meets the design criteria, is based upon proven practices or analysis, and is adequate for the intended service. It describes the method for preparing, releasing, and controlling Engineering Studies. EMP 2 Design and Acceptance Criteria This procedure delineates the need for design and acceptance criteria to be defined and published in the appropriate design basis documents. EMP 3 Engineering Documentation Process This procedure describes the scope of the procedures which control the preparation, release, and control of specifications, drawings, and reports by Engineering. EMP 3 Limited Release System This procedure provides instructions for the preparation, numbering, approval, release, and control of drawings requiring less stringent control than the Standard Release System. EMP 3 Standard Release System This procedure provides instructions for the preparation, numbering, release, and control of drawings for the Standard Release System, and provides guidelines for application of the standard release. EMP 3 Preparation and Control of Specifications This procedure describes the format and methods of preparation, numbering, and control of specifications. 17J-61 Amend. 52 O Oct. 1979
'i
} 3kb
EMP 3 System and Subsystem Specificaticns This procedure gives the format for System and Subsystem Specifications. EMP 3 Component Specifications This procedure gives the format for Component Specifications. EMP 3 Material Specifications This procedure gives the format for Material Specifications. EMP 3 Process Specifications This procedure establishes the format for Process Specifications. 45 l EMP 3 Engineering Change Control This procedure defines the method for requesting, evaluating, approving, and executing engineering changes. EMP 3 Interface Control This procedure establishes the criteria for interface definition and the methods for describing and controlling the interface in appro-priate documentation drawings and specifications. EMP 3 Control of Engineering Drawings This procedure describes the methods for control of drawing originals and prints, released by both the Standard or Limited Release Systems. EMP 3 Engineering Orders This procedure describes the preparation and use of an Engineering Order to release drawings or specifications, and defines requirements.
- 45) EMP 3 Preparation and Control of Supporting Docunents This procedure establishes the types of supporting documents and defines tne requirements for their preparation, release, and change.
EMP 3 Component Traceability This procedure describes the elements and responsibility for es-tablishing item traceability. Amend. 52 17J-62 Oct. 1979 1 346
[MP 3 Engineering Requirements for Serialization O This procedure sets conditions under which Engineering requires serialization of components or parts for traceability purposes. EMP 3 Material Substitutions This procedure establishes the method and conditions under which , substitute materials, in place of those called for on engineering 40 drawings, may be used. EMP 3 Request for Document Change This procedure describes the formal means for requesting a change to a released drawing or specification and the approval and pro-cessing of that request. EMP 3 Document Release and Control Systems This procedure describes the Engineering Order Release System, the Supporting Document Release System, and the Technical Data Trans-mittal System. EMP 3 Material Processing Specifications This procedure gives the format for Material Processing Specifications. EMP 3 Material Processing Procedures This procedure gives the format for Material Processing Procedures. EMP 3 Weldment Checklist This procedure provides the checklist to be completed for critical weldments, and the system for its implementation. EMP 3 Engineering Release Plan of Action This procedure gives the format .and requirements for a plan describing the means of preparation and release and approval of program documents. EMP 3 Preparation of "E" Type Specifications lnis procedure gives the format for Equipment Specifications. 17J-63 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 i 347
EMP 3 Documentation of Scientific and Technical Computer Programs This procedure reflects government, industry, and corporate guidelines and provides a frame of reference for those involved with design, development, programming, and operation of scientific and technical computer programs. EMP 3 Documentation Formats for Scientific and Technical Computer Programs This procedure describes the documentation formats for sciertific and technical (S&T) computer programs used and/or produced within the Research and Engineering Department. Those S&T progr.ms that are 52l developed outside of ESG shall also be documented to the same extent specified by this EMP allowing for vendor documentation formats. 40 Ei1P 4 Test Procedures This procedure gives the format for preparation of Test Procedures. EMP 4 Test Reports This procedure gives the format for preparation of Test Reports. EMP 5 Design Reviews This procedure establishes the requirements for independent design reviews, and the means of their scheduling, conduct, and reporting. EllP 5 Checking of Engineering Drawings This pracedure establishes the responsibilities for checking of all engineering drawings. EMP 5 Failure Reports Failure Reports are to be used when a component or system under test has failed or deviated from expected conditions, 45 EMP 5 Incident Reports Incident Reports are to be used when an incident or failure occurs in a test other than on the component being tested, 45 40 EMP 5 Materials and Processes Control System This procedure establishes the policy and responsibilities for control of materials and processes. Amend. 52 17J-64 } ) 4 {) Oct. 1979
EMP S Application of Standards This procedure provides guidance and direction for the application of codes and standards. It categorizes various types of standards and establishes responsibilities for their collection and application. MATERIAL DIVISION (PURCHASING) MANUAL PROCEDURES (MDM's) 45 40l AIMP 1.1.1 - Procurement Policy This procedure describes the procurement policy of Rockwell International, and supplements it to cover procurement 45 l reflecting DOE requirements. 521 CMP 3.21 - Source Selection This procedure defines Rockwell International's practice concerning selection of procurement sources and making commitments. 52l C:1P 2.14 - Changes to Purchase Orders and Other Directions to Suppliers This procedure establishes standards for accomplishing changes to purchase orders and effecting other direction to suppliers. 40 l CMP 2.126 - Case File Documentation This procedure establishes the documentation required to be accumulated in procurement case files. 52I AIMP 3.109.1 - Procurement from Approved Suppliers This procedure requires procurements to Code requirements, to ensure that Quality Assurance-approved suppliers are obtained. 40
,4 gg 17J-65 en 52 9
Oct. 1979
QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUALS
- PROCEDURES 40 QA0P N1.00 - Preface to Quality Assurance Manual The preface to each Quality Assurance Manual delineates the purpose and authority of the manual.
QAOP N1.01 - Quality Assurance Department Functions This document outlines the functions of the individual groups within the Quality Assurance Department. QA0P N1.03 - Vision Requirements for Quality Assurance Personnel This procedure establishes vision standards for Quality Assurance Department personnel and defines responsibilities for administering an eye examination program. 40 b2l QA0P d1.04, CS3M 18 - Quality Assurance Audits These procedures outline the Quality Assurance responsibilities for implementing and maintaining an audit program to determine the over-
- 52) all effectiveness of the ESG and supplier quality programs and to identify areas where corrective prevent' action is required.
QA0P N1.21 - Quality Assurance Plans This procedure defines Quality Assurance Department responsibilities for participating in the preparation of Quality Assurance Program Plans or Quality Assurance Program Indexes and for preparing Quality Assurance Functional Plans. QA0P N1.22 - Quality Assurance Acceptance Procedures This procedure defines requirements and responsibilities of the Quality Assurance Department for the preparation, relear nd control of Quality Assarance Acceptance Procedures (QAP's). QA0P N1.23 - Quality Status Reports This procedure establishes Quality Assurance Department requirements and responsibilities for preparation of periodic Quality Assurance 52 Program Status Reports and for submittal of the reports to Energy Systems Group customers. 5'2
- Energy Systems Group Quality Assurance Department Procedures (QA0P)
Energy Systems Group ASME Code Section III Manual (CS3M) 40 4 1
' ~B0 Amend. 52 17J-66 Oct. 1979
- 45) QA0P N2.03 - Document Control This procedure provides direction for the control of engineering and shop drawings, including customer drawings applicable to products to 52l be fabricated in the ESG Manufacturing Shops. The purpose of such control is to assure the fabrication, processing, inspection, and testing o' products to the proper drawings.
52l QA0P N3.00, C33M 12 - Calibration of Measuring and Test Equipment These procedures define requirements for calibration contral of tools, gauges, instruments, and test equipment used by Manufactuting and Quality Assurance to measure products (materials, parts, components, and appurtenances) or to control processes related to the product. 521 QA0P N3.02 - Control of ESG Tooling This procedure defines the requirements and responsibilities for control of tooling used by Manufacturing and Quality Assurance De-partments in product fabrication. 521QA0P N4.00, QAI N4.00A, CS3M 4 - Procurement Documents These procedures define requirements and responsibilities for pre-paration, review, and approval of procurement documents associated with the purchase of materials, parts, and services. 52lQA0P N4.01, CS3M 7.2 - Approved Procurement Sources These procedures define Quality Assurance Department requirements for evaluation and approval of procurement sources (suppliers) of 5 23 material, parts, and services used in ESG products. 52lQAOPN4.02,QA0PN4.02B,QA0PN4.02C,CS3M5.3-ProcurementInspection Instructions These procedures define Quality Assurance Department requirements and responsibilities for preparing inspection instructions applicable to procured itemt and services. QA0P N4.03 - Procurement Quality Assurance - Source Inspection This procedure defines Quality Assurance Department requirements and responsibilities for inspection of procured items and services at a suppl n r's facility. QA0P N4.04 QA0P N4.04C - Procurement Quality Assurance - Receiving Inspection These procedures define Quality Assurance Department requirements and responsibilities for inspecting and testing incoming procured items and services. Amend. 52 17J-67 ,4 1 351
QA0P N4.08 - Inspection and Testing of Welding Electrodes and Uncoated Filler Wire This procedure defines Quai ty Assurance Department requirements and responsibilities for inspection and testing of procured coated weldina electrodes and uncoated filler wire. QA0P NS.01 - Manufacturing Production Order This procedure defi;.e: the requirements and responsibilities for the preparatior, and utilization of the Manufacturing Production Order (MPO). 52l CS3M 9 - Control of Fabrication Processes These procedures define the guidelines used to authorize and control the process, fabrication, installation, inspection, examination, and testing of components, parts, and appurtenances. 52l QAOP N6.01, CS3M 5.4 - Qualification of Welding and Brazing Procedures and Personnel These procedures establish requirements and responsibilities for qualifying welding and brazing procedure specifications and welding and brazing personnel (walding, welding operators, brazers, and brazing operators) employed in fabrication of Code items. 54 QA0P N6.02, CS3M 2.4 - Qualification and Certification of Nondestructive Nondestructive Examination Personnel These procedures establish requirements and responsibilities for the training, examination, qualification, and certification of 52l Energy Systems Group personnel engaged in the following nondes-45 l tructive examination processes: Radiographic Liquid Penetrant Magnetic Particle Eddy Current Ultrasonic Leak Detection 45 i Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 17J-68 1 352
52l QAOP N6.03, CS3M 5.9 - Nondestructive Examination Procedures These procedures establish requirements and assign responsibilities for preparing and controlling nondestructive examination (NDE) pro-cedures used for determining compliance of products to requirements of applicable codes and standards. QA0P N6.04 - Weld Material Control This procedure defines requirements and responsibilities for issuance and control of welding materials (electrodes, rods, spools, and flum). QA0P N6.05 - Qualification of Special Processes This procedure defines requirements and responsibilities for qualifi-cation of special processes used during fabrication or inspection of 52l products at Energy Systems Group. QAOP N7.00 - Product Acceptance Tests This procedure defines requirements and responsibilities of Quality Assurance Department personnel in performing acceptance tests, or witnessing acceptance tests performed by otner on parts, material, subassemblies, assemblies, subsystems, and systems (items) that require acceptance by Quality Assurance. QA0P N7.01 - Proof Pressure Testing of Pressure Vessels O This procedure defines the requirements and responsibilities for per-521 forming hydrostatic or pneumatic tests of ESG-fabricated ASME Code or other products QA0P N7.02 - Qualification and Certification of Dimensional Inspection Personnel This procedure defines requirements and responsibilities to provide a mandatory program of training, examination, and certification for personnel performing dimensional inspection. The program will provide periodic updating to accommodate changes in requirements and maintain the level of knowledge necessary to perform dimensional inspection assignments. QA0P N8.00 - Statistical Quality Control Program This procedure establishes Quality Assurance Department requirements and responsibilities for implenenting and maintaining a Statistical Quality Control Program. 17J-69 Oct. 1979
} 3bb
521 QA0P N9.00, CS3M 14.2, 14.3, 14.4 - Issuance, Use, and Control of Stamps These procedures define the requirements and responsibilities for the issuance, application, and control of stamps used for markings that identify personnel performing examination, inspection, test, weloing, and brazing operations. 0A0P N9.02 - Serialization of Hardware This procedure defines Manufacturing and Quality Assurance Department requirements associated with the serialization of parts and assemblies that are fabricated or procured by Manufacturing.
' QA0P N10.00, CS3M 15 - Nonconforming Materials, Parts, ane Components Tnese procedures defina requirements and responsibilities for control ano disposition of nonconforming materials and items in the product manufacturing /procuremen1 p 4 esses.
QAI N10.00D - CRBRP Nonconformance Hardware Disposition This instruction supplements Procedure N10.00D by providing specific details for CRBRP nonconfonnance items in accordance with LRM and 5? Owner requirements. QAOP N12.00 - Packaging and Shipping Inspection This procedure defines Quality Assurance Department responsibilities for inspecting and packaging and the preparation for shipment of ESG products. It applies to products requiring Quality Assurance acceptance that are shipped from ESG, to an ESG construction site, 52 ia an ESG customer, or to an ESG supplier. QA0P N13.02 - Quality Assurance Data Packages This procedure provides format requirements for the preparation of Quality Assurance Data Packages for transmittal to the customer. Contractual requirements take precedence over this procedure, in case of conflict. i 354 Amend. 52 17J-70 Oct. 1979
52] QA0P N14.00, CS3M 16 - Corrective Action for Nonconformance Products a, These procedures establish requirements for taking action to correct conditions causing nonconforming material, parts, and components. 52l Its purpose is to provide increased assurance that ESG products will meet design, configuration, and performance requirements. 52l CS3M 2.3 - Training This procedure defines requirements and responsibilities for trainina and indoctrination of personnel performing activities affecting quality or Code compliance, as necessary, to assure that suitable proficiency is achieved and maintained. 52] CS3M 3, 6.2 - Design Documentation Control These procedures establish the requirements and responsibilities as an Owner's Agent, and for the control of design activities and docu-ments associated with items being constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Code. 52l CS3M 7.3, 7.4 - Procurement Inspection These procedures define requirements for source and receiving in-spection, examination, and test of procured materials, parts, and services. LS3M 8.2 - Identification and Control of Materials and Items These procedures define requirements and responsibilities for implemanting and maintaining material checklists required by the Code. 52 CS3M 6.3 and Appendix A - Procurement as an Engineering Organization This procedure define the requirements and responsibilities when 521 Energy Systems Group, as an Engineering Organization, assumes responsibilities, in addition to the design, for purchasing and con-tracting activities. It establishes quality assurance interfaces with the manufacturer, material manufacturer, material supplier, or installer involved in the activities of the Engineering Organization. 52l CS3M 13, 5.7, 5.8 - Handling Preservation, Packaging, Storage, and Shipment These procedures establish measures for handling, preservation, packaging, storage, and shipping to prevent damage to Code items. CS3M 8.4 - Material Checklists This procedure defines requirements and responsibilicies for imple-52 menting and maintaining material checklists required by the Code. Amend. 52 17J-71 Oct. 1979 i bb
52lCS3M 8.3 - Control of Welding and Brazing Materials These procedures defire requirements and responsibilities for control of Code welding and brazing materials (electrodes, filler wire, fluxes, gases, and weld insert materials) used in fabrication and assably of Code i tems. 40 52lCS3M 9.3 Control of Welding and Brazing Operations These procedures define requirements and responsibilities for con-trolling production welding and brazing operations on Code items. 52 1CS3M 5.5 - Control of Heat-Treiting Processes These procedures define iequirements for controlling heat treating 521 processes performed by Energy Systems Group. It is applicable to heat-treating processes other than weld preheat and interpass temperature, which are controlled in accordance with methods specified in qualified weld procedure specifications. 52lCS3M 7.7 - Control of Nondestructive Examination Operations This procedure defines requirements and responsibilities for control 52l of nondestructive examination operations performed on Code materials and items. 52 lCS3M 10,11, 5.10,14.5 - In-Process and Final Examination and Tests These procedures define requirements and responsibilities for examina-tions and tests of Code items, during fabrication and upon completion of fabrication to assure their compliance with Code requirements. 52 lCS3M 2.5 - Authorized Inspector 52l This procedure defines Energy Systems Group requirements and responsibilities for assisting the Authorized Inspector in performing his duties, in accordance with Code requirements. 52lCS3M 17 - Records and Data Reports This procedure defines re.quirements and responsibilities for accumulating records generated during design and/or fabrication of 52l Code items at Energy Systems Group, transmitting records to the owner or customer, and retention of records by Energy Systems Group. 45 1 556 17J-72 Amend. 52 Oct. 1979
O MANUFACTURING MANUAL PROCEDURES (MM's) M-2 Contr c' Stations This procedure defines the activities of the Control Stations under the jurisdiction of Manufacturing. The function of a Control Station is to ensure an even flow of materials and components through the Manufacturing areas, in accordance with an approved schedule and instructions on the Manufacturing Production Order (MPO). 52l M-3 Material Control This procedure provides direction for the control of material whose fabrication or initiation of procurement action is under the juris-diction of Manufacturing. 45] M-3 Packaging and Shipping This procedure delineates the responsibilities for, and the methods of assuring, proper packaging of components, materials, assemblies, and tooling when special in-plant handling containers are required, or when the items are prepared for storage or shipment to the cus-tomer. M-3 Control and Maintenance of Welder Performance Qualifications This docunent defines the procedura and responsibility for initiating, controlling, and maintaining welder and welding ooerator performance qualifications, in accordance with the applicable codes, standards, and specifications. 1 5 7C7 I IJ/ Amend. 52 O 17J-73 Oct. 1979
9 e w
- h. , -
l: y
< #'p t:- .-
F yi
' ' !; *
. i 358 o
. t :
l;; g;. e -- e ~.w-h' e p. p r
?'
%g 9
N g .
Amendment 52 List of Responses to NRC Questions There are no new NRC questions in Amendment 52. i 359 Q-i
Question 120.28 (5.2.3.4) Describe .nethods that will be used to verify the integrity of the core support structure of the vessel during service life..
Response
The integrity of the com support structure during service life will be verified by material surveillance. The CRBRP material surveillance program provides for core support structure material specimens and will include tensile specimens. These specimens will be placed in surveillance locations having a higher flux than in the region of the component whose material pro-perties are being verified. Verification of the expected material behavior in conjunction with analysis is the best known means of verifying the integrity of the core support structure. The material behavior, as determined from the surveillance specin.ans, will lead the actual component neutron exposure. 52 The core support structure tensile specimens are selected on the basis of a minimum total residual ductility of ten percent. The first measurable loss of ductility in austenitic stainless steel occurs at 1 x 1021 n/cm2 < 0.1 MeY.with increasing loss of ductility at higher fluence levels. Thus, tensile specimens are selected for all regions of the core support structure whem the end of life fluence is equal to, or greater than 1 x 1021 n/cm2 Notch ductility degradation, as well as strength changes, are also progressive with increasing fluence above 1 x 10gropertzI n/cm . Amend. 52 Q120.28-1 Oct. 1979
.' 1 360
Question 310.48 (15.7.2) We have performed an evaluation of the radiological consequences of the failure of a RAPS surge vessel assuming credit for the cell being a controlled release environment and using a leak rate of 50% per day (assuming a satisfactory leakage test program in compliance with Appendix J of 10 CFR 50). We calculate that the two-hour dose at the exclusion boundary would be well in excess of the 0.5 rem acceptance criterion given in Standard Review Plan 15.7.1. Since we believe that the radiological consequences of a radioactive ~ waste gas system failure for the CRBRP should not be greater than that for an LWR, it is our position that either the design leak rate of the tank cell should be reduced or else the activity placed in more than one tsak such that a failure of any one component will not result in a whole body dose at the nearest exclusion boundary in excess of 0.5 rem. In this regard, indicate what action you plan to take.
Response
Standard Review Plan Section 15.7.1 " Waste Gas System Failure" was written to guide the review of accidents involving failure of LWR waste gas systems. Specifically, the Plan specifies that offsite doses greater than 0.5 rem, whole body, should not result from single failure of a component of a system "that (complies) with the current staff position on seismic and quality group design requirements". Standard Review Plan Section 11.3 " Gaseous Waste Management Systems", subsection II.3 states that "the seismic and quality group classi-fication of . . . the gaseous waste treatment system . . . should conform to the guidelines of Branch Technical Position (BTP) E' 5B 11-1 (Rev.1)". BTP ETSB 11-1 (Rev.1) Section II.a states that the system should be designed to industry codes for Quality Group D (non-Safety Class); and Section V.a.(1) requires the system be designed to withstand loadings from the OBE (Seismic Category II). The requirement that a single failure in a non-Safety Class Seismic Category II system result in offsite doses no greater than 0.5 rem is consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.26 " Quality Group Classifica-tions and Standards for Water , Steam , and Radioactive-Waste- con-taining components of Nuclear Power Plants". That Reg. Guide (Section C.2.e) requires that components "whose postulated failure would result in conservatively calculated offsite doses . . . that exceed 0.5 rem to the whole body . . ." should be constructed to Qualify Group C (Safety Class 3) standards. The CRBRP Radicactive Argon Processing System (RAPS) has been de-signated a Seismic Catagory I Safety Class 3 (Quality Group C) sys-tem. The PSAR Section 15.7.2.4 provides a conservative analysis of
- O #ety Class system which shows that accidental offsite doses will N v atained below (2.5 rem wholebody) for failure of such a system.
Amend. 36 Q 310.48-1 March 1977 1 %1
O The RAPS circuit has been relocated with the RAPS surge vessel relo-cated in the Reactor Containnuent Building (RCB). Two interconnected vessels are used, but with a total effective volume equal to the original. The RCB has a leak tightness specification of 0.1% per day at a pres-sure differential of 10 psid, so that the rupture of either of these RAPS surge vessels within the RCB is estimated to result in a maximum 0-2 hr site boundary dose of 0.001 rem. Therefore, this postulated accident is no longer the most serious one in the inert gas receiving and pro-cessing system. 52 The revised RAPS circuit has the cold box located in a Reactor Service Building (RSB) cell adjacent to the RCB. A postulated failure of the process gas boundary within the cold box could result in not only t!.e re-lease of absorbed gases from the cryogenic charcoal beds; but also, part of the surge vessel contents could be released into the cold box cell. As a consequence, this cell must have a leak tightness specification with a test program in compliance with Appendix J of 10 CFR 50. For the postu-lated accident in the cold box cell, the cell tightness required to limit the site boundary dose to 2.5 rem is 40% per day at 11.0 psid. Because the postulated rupture of the surge vessel in the RCB does not constitute a site coundary dose hazard, and because the postulated cold box rupture in the RSB is potentially the most serious accident in the inert gas receiving and processing system, Paragraph 15.7.2 is retitled and replaced by a description of the cold box accident. Amend. 52 Oct. 1979 Q510.48-2
'i l hb2}}