ML20078A604

From kanterella
Revision as of 05:14, 25 April 2020 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Readiness Review Program Module 17/19 - Electrical Raceways & Supports
ML20078A604
Person / Time
Site: Vogtle  Southern Nuclear icon.png
Issue date: 03/01/1988
From:
GEORGIA POWER CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20078A351 List: ... further results
References
PROC-880301, NUDOCS 9406020252
Download: ML20078A604 (200)


Text

l .

\}

VOGTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PL?dT UNIT 2 READINESS REVIEW PROGRAM q

'v MODULE 17/19 - ELECTRICTL RACEWAYS AND SUPPORTS i

i k

%)

0130q/047-8 I

9406020252 940512 gDR ADOCK 05000424 PDR i

PREFACE

Georgia Power Company (GPC), in order to gain added assurance of the operational readiness of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), conducted a pilot Readiness Review Program for Unit 1. The VEGP pilot Readiness Review Program was a systematic, in-depth self-assessment of work processes and verification of compliance with regulatory commitments. To accomplish the VEGP pilot Readiness Review Program, the work processes and regulatory commitments were divided into manageable segments called modules. There are 22 modules. Each module is a predefined scope of VEGP activities.

Each module provides a brief description of the method of complying with project licensing commitments pertaining to the module scope and is not intended to make further commitments or to revise in any way prior commitments.

Activities common to several modules are defined in General Appendixes. There are seven appendixes. These appendixes, as appropriate, are referenced in the modules and are augmented in each module with module-scope-specific details as needed.

The VEGP pilot Readiness Review Program was conducted on a schedule to provide added operational readiness assurance to GPC management in support of the VEGP Unit 1 operating license.

()

7 Conclusions reached regarding programmatic and technical adequacy through review of VEGP Unit 1 are indicative of Unit 2, since both units are being designed and constructed together under a single quality assurance program; with like management controls, procedures, specifications, and criteria.

The Unit 2 Readiness Review Program extends the results of the Unit 1 review by assessing activities, hardware, and documents within the scope of selected modules and ascertaining compliance with licensing requirements.

The VEGP Unit 2 Readiness Review Program is being conducted on a schedule to provide added operational readiness assurance to GPC management in support of the VEGP Unit 2 operating license.

The VEGP Readiness Review Program is not intended to eliminate or to diminish any authorities or regulatory responsibilities now assigned to or exercised by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission or GPC. Further, the Readiness Review Program is not intended to change the techniques of inspections or assurance of quality program activities. Rather, the VEGP Readiness Review Program is an added program initiated by GPC management to assess the VEGP and to provide additional feedback to management so that they may initiate any needed corrective actions in an

. orderly and timely manner.

t

(-

Ol30q/055-8/1 iii

The work processes and regulatory commitment compliance covered  !

by each module scope will be assessed by, and the module prepared and reviewed by, individuals collectively familiar with the design, construction, and preoperational processes of lll nuclear power plants. It is the collective opinion of the Readiness Review Task Force, Readiness Review Board, and GPC management that, based on their experience, the methodology used in the module process will assess, on a programmatic basis, the adequacy of project commitment implementation.

Readiness Review findings and resulting dispositions are reviewed by the Project Quality Assurance staff and are input into the normal project process for safety significance and potential reportability evaluations in accordance with 71atory requirements.

9 O

9 0130q/055-8/2 iy

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

O kJ This module documents a review process conducted to ascertain whether the design and construction aspects of safety-related Class lE electrical raceways and supports in Unit 2 of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP) comply with licensing commitments and whether compliance is verifiable using existing project documentation. Class lE electrical raceways and supports include items such as cable trays and conduits and their associated supports.

The review program for Unit 2 used the results of the Unit 1 review program as a base, and focused on differences between the units. These differences included added or revised licensing commitments, program changes resulting from project development or corrective actions to Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) findings and project findings, design changes, or hardware modifications. The review consisted of technical and programmatic evaluations of the design and construction processes and results. Project documents such as design criteria and procedures; design output such as specifications, drawings, and calculations; and construction results such as installed hardware and quality documentation were examined during the review.

Discrepancies noted during review activities are issued to the

(-s,) Project as findings. Following receipt and evaluation of the response, the findings are categorized as follows to indicate their relative importance:

Level I - Violation of licensing commitments, project procedures, or engineering requirements with indication of safety concern.

Level II -

Violation of licensing commitments or engineering requirements with no safety concern.

Level III - Violation of project procedures with no safety concern.

The Readiness Review Program electrical raceways and supports evaluation in VEGP Unit 2 consisted of three major activities: ,

Commitment Implementation Review Readiness Review has maintained the listing of commitments for design and construction developed during the Unit 1 Readiness Review through review of Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) amendments and letters to the NRC. The Project Engineering and Construction organizations were

() issued the listing of commitments applicable to this module 0131g/055-8/l y

at the beginning of the review period; and the Project provided Readiness Review with updated implementation information which is presented in section 3.

l Unit 1 Findino Followup During the assessment of Unit 1, the project committed to the performance of certain corrective actions. For Unit 2, Readiness Review provided Project Engineering and Construction with a list of Unit 1 findings and corresponding corrective actions taken. These groups evaluated those applicable to Unit 2 activities and informed Readiness Review as to the action taken. The listing of Unit 1 findings and Unit 2 actions is presented in section 5.

Assessment The Unit 2 assessment consisted of an evaluation of commitment implementation, Unit 1 finding followup, and an assessment of design and construction activities to ascertain project compliance to commitments.

During the assessment, Readiness Review evaluated, by selective sampling, the updated implementation and Unit 1 finding followup information provided by the Project.

During the assessment of design and construction, Readiness h Review chose a sample of design documents and installed hardware and assessed the sample to determine acceptance to specified criteria and conformance to installation and procedural requirements. Over 100 pieces of hardware and the associated documentation were examined.

Five findings were issued during the assessment. Four were classified as Level II, and one as Level III. These findings were judged to be instances of isolated deviations from design requirements, procedure noncompliance, or procedural inadequacies with no safety concern and do not indicate, either individually or collectively, programmatic concerns.

The Module 6 Level I finding, 2RRF-006-Oll, addressed differences between electrical equipment internal wiring separation criteria as stated in the Final Safety Analysis l Report (FSAR) and those listed in the construction specification. Raceway safety train separation criteria, which fall within the scope of Module 17/19, were reviewed as a part of the investigative action for the Module 6 finding.

Implementation of those raceway separation requirements in Construction Specification X3ARO1 were also determined to deviate from project commitments as stated in the FSAR. The Project response to the Module 6 finding also addressed corrective action for the deficiencies which fall within the scope of Module 17/19. Construction specifications and FSAR llh 0131q/055-8/2 vi l

i changes have been initiated as a portion of the corrective action and retrofit requirements are under evaluation by Project

(~ Engineering.

\_/

Readiness Review

Conclusions:

Based on the results of the review and the implementation of offective corrective actions as committed to by the Project, Readiness Review concludes that adequate programs exist to ensure: that the required quality of design and construction has

-boen achieved, objective evidence of that quality has been documented, and the licensing commitments within the scope of this module have been implemented.

(

I l

()  !

0131q/055-8/3 yii

MODULE 17/19 I ELECTRICAL RACEWAYS AND SUPPORTS ,

O TABLE OF CONTENTS l

I Section 1 Introduction 1.1 Scope 1.2 Module Organization 1.3 Project Status Section 2 Organization 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Design 2.3 Construction 2.4 Organizational Changes Section 3 Commitments 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Commitment and Implementation Matrices Section 4 Program Description 4.1 Design

() 4.2 4.3 Construction Program Changes Section 5 Audits and Inspections 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Project Audits  !

5.3 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Activity I 5.4 Reportable and Potentially Reportable Items 5.5 Unit 1 Finding Followup Section 6 Program Assessment 6.1 Introduction ,

6.2 Program Description 6.3 Summary and Conclusions 6.4 Assessment Activities and Results

6.5 Findings

Section 7 Assessment of Module Adequacy Project Quality Assurance Readiness Review Board

() Section 8 Assessment Plan and Checklists s

0132q/055-8 ix

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 SCOPE This module is one in a series of modules that provides an evaluation of the design, construction, and preoperational testing of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Unit 2. It is intended to describe the method of complying with the project commitments found in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and is not intended to make further commitments or revise prior commitments. If any differences exist between the commitment descriptions in this document and the FSAR, those differences are unintentional and the FSAR shall take precedence and shall define the project commitments.

The scope of this module encompasses safety-related (Class lE) electrical raceways and supports. This includes cable trays, conduits, junction /pullboxes and associated supports. Supports for wall-mounted electrical equipment are also within the scope of this module. Floor-mounted electrical equipment is addressed in Module 6.

The checks, reviews, inspections, audits, and verifications performed to ensure the adequacy of design and construction functions are examined. The organizations responsible for performing design and construction activities are identified and

(

the work activities that the organizations perform are described. The project commitments for electrical raceways and supports are identified, the method of implementation is listed, and the results of a review for compliance to the committed requirements are presented.

The effective date of this module is August 1, 1987. This module addresses those project commitments identified through Amendment 34 of the FSAR. Changes to the programs, organizations, commitments, etc., occurring after this date may not be addressed.

0133q/055-8 1_1

0 0

0 0

0133q/055-8 1-2

1.2 MODULE ORGANIZATION l

This module is divided into the following sections:

1. Introduction.
2. Organization - A brief description of the project organizations and their division of responsibilities as applicable to this module.
3. Commitments - Project licensing commitments pertaining to safety-related electrical raceways and supports as  :

found in the Final Safety Analysis Report, responses to l generic letters, and responses to Inspection and i Enforcement Bulletins. This section also lists the documents that demonstrate implementation of these commitments.

4. Program Description - A brief description of the processes for design and construction applicable to the scope of this module.
5. Audits and Inspections - Listings of Quality Assurance (QA) audits and findings and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspections and violations applicable '

to the scope of the module and conducted since the Unit 1 module. The Readiness' Review findings and NRC violations from the Unit 1 module activity are listed, l

(')%

\- the corrective actions are presented, and their applicability to Unit 2 is indicated.

6. Program Assessment - A description of the assessment plan development, plan implementation, and results,  :

including corrective actions.

7. Assessment of Module Adequacy - The evaluations and conclusions by the Project, QA, and the Readiness  ;

Review Board of this module.

8. Assessment Plan and Checklists - The plan and '

checklists used to control Readiness Review assessment activities. I i

1 01339/055-8 1-3  !

O I

O l

I I

I I

I f

9 01339/055-8 1-4

L .

1.3 PROJECT STATUS O As of August 1, 1987, the effective date of this module, the d design of safety-related electrical tray and tray support installation was essentially complete and conduit and conduit l support installation was approximately 80-percent complete.

O 1

l O

Ol33q/055-8 1-5

_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ ~

- - =

2 ORGANIZATION

2.1 INTRODUCTION

Georgia Power Company (GPC), acting on its own behalf and as agent for the Oglethorpe Power Corporation, the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, and the City of Dalton, is responsible for the design, procurement, construction, and operation of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant. GPC administers the overall quality assurance program, provides procurement services, controls materials issue, performs quality control inspections, and provides construction services for calibration, tests, inspections, document control, and nonconformance control.

Bechtel Western Power Company (BWPC) is contracted by GPC to provide architect / engineering (A/E) services for plant equipment / systems contained within the Seismic Category I structures and i. s responsible for the overall design coordination of all plant equipment / systems.

Southern Company Services, Inc., (SCS) provides A/E services for plant equipment systems contained within the Seismic Category II structures (including the switchyard) and provides supplier quality assurance reviews.

Cleveland Consolidated is the installer for all Class 1E raceway

(^/T

s. and support systems and is responsible for installation and l

l field fabrication activity. l l'igure 2-1 shows the overall Project organizational structure.

The following sections contain brief descriptions of the individual GPC, BWPC, SCS, and Cleveland Consolidated groups that perform activities related to safety-related raceway systems.

l i

I l

r:

()

01349/055-8 2-1

O O

e 0134q/055-8 2-2 i

2.2 DESIGN

-() Design of Class lE raceways and supports in all plant areas is the responsibility of Bechtel Western Power Company (BWPC). '

BWPC employs the matrix organization concept with an individual assigned as project engineering manager (PEM) who is assisted by project engineers (pes) and functional group heads. The pes report to the PEM for the performance of functional tasks.

Functional group heads receive project direction from the PE, while functional direction is provided to them by discipline chief engineers.

During the initial stages of the design process, BWPC responsibility for design of raceways and supports was divided ,

between two project organizations; Home-Office Engineering (HOE) and Project Field Engineering (PFE), both of which reported to the PEM. HOE was located in Norwalk, CA and was responsible for the majority of the Class 1E raceway system design. PFE was  ;

located at the Plant Vogtle site and provided field liaison.  ;

PFE was responsible for those portions of the Class lE raceway and support system design which were transferred to them from HOE. In January 1987, the Project began transferring responsibility for functions previously performed by the HOE organization to the jobsite. Personnel were reassigned as necessary from HOE and PFE to perform those functions.

Engineering was reorganized into Design Engineering, responsible

() for the functions previously performed by HOE, and Installation Engineering, responsible for the functions previously performed by PFE. The current Vogtle Project Engineering organization is depicted in Figure 2-2.

2.2.1 RACEWAY DESIGN The design of Class lE raceways within HOE was the principal i responsibility of the HOE Electrical Discipline. Duct bank structural design was the responsibility of the Civil / Structural Miscellaneous Seismic Category I Structures group.

The Electrical Discipline was divided into four groups under the direction of the electrical engineering group supervisor (EGS).

These groups are Systems Design, Controls Wiring, Physical l Design, and Circuit and Raceway. Responsibility for the design of electrical raceways was primarily the responsibility of Electrical Physical Design with assistance provided by Systems Design and Circuit and Raceway groups. In the current Vogtle ,

Project Engineering organization, Electrical Design Engineering has responsibility for design of Class 1E raceways.

The PFE organization was an extension of the HOE and was supervined by the project engineer-field. Assistance in

() interpreting drawings and specifications, resolving F

Ol34q/055-8 2-3  ;

l

field-related electrical problems, and coordinating field activities with HOE was provided to Georgia Power Company and contractor organizations by PFE Electrical Engineering. In the current Vogtle Project Engineering organization, Electrical Installation Engineering has responsibility for the functions previously performed by PFE.

The current Project Civil and Electrical Engineering organizations are depicted in Figure 2-3.

2.2.2 RACEWAY SUPPORT DESIGN The HOE was responsible for the design and analysis of safety-related structures and was supervised by the PE-home office, assisted by the assistant project engineer-design, the civil / structural EGS, the civil / structural building engineering group leaders, the drafting group supervisor, and the chief civil / structural engineer.

The PFE group was an extension of the HOE and was supervised by the PE-field, assisted by the assistant project engineer-physical design, the civil / structural engineering group supervisor-field, the production group, engineering group leader, and other groups. PFE also supported construction contractor groups in the field. The PFE assisted Construction in interpreting drawings and specifications, solving field problems, and coordinating field activities with HOE.

l Electrical supports within seismic Category I structures were originally designed by Bechtel Civil / Structural Discipline in HOE. The production group of the Civil / Structural Discipline in PFE was responsible for maintenance of electrical supports design, and for designing supports added in the field.

In the current Vogtle Project Engineering organization, Civil / Structural Design Engineering has responsibility for the l functions previously performed by HOE, and Electrical Installation Engineering Contractor Support has responsibility i for functions previously performed by PFE. Figure 2-3 shows the relationship of these organizations and their responsibilities.

l l

9 l

0134q/060-8 2-4 l

l

1 5

2.3 E NSTRUCTIOff 6

O Project Construction is responsible for installation, maintenance, and inspection of Class lE raceways and supports. '

This resp"isibility is divided between the Electrical Discipline and Quality Control. These organizations are comprised of personnel from Georgia Power Company (GPC) and contractors reporting to GPC. The overall Project Construction organization is shown on Figure 2-4.

2.3.1 ELECTRICAL DISCIPLINE l

The Electrical Discipline organization, shown in Figure 2-5, is l' divided into four groups under the direction of the electrical discipline manager. These groups are: Electrical Installation Engineering (EIE), Systems Completion, and Cleveland Consolidated. Cleveland Consolidated is the electrical contractor performing the actual hardware installation and is responsible for providing craft and supervisory personnel. EIE performs construction support activities such as approving i

material requisitions, providing the craft with vendor and design document information, initiating and/or revising field  ;

procedures, meeting established schedules and resolving quality l problems. EIE, as described in section 2.2, also performs l' design activities to support resolution of field-identified interferences.

2.3.2 QUALITY CONTROL i

Quality Control is divided into five groups as shown on l Figure 2-6 and is responsible for inspection and acceptance of l the electrical raceways and supports. The Electrical Inspection group is the primary inspection group. The inspectors are qualified and certified as discussed in Appendix F. Table 2-1 gives a summary of the certification requirements for electrical  !

raceway and support inspectors.

i l

t l

O 0134q/060-8 2-5

_.__2 a_ .- .- m_ __ _.a.- 4 .a 2, -_m ..m ._..s ei i

)

I i

4 e.

ll i

i 4

4 j

01349/055-8 2-6

2.4 ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES O In January 1987, the design organization, then comprised of Home Office Engineering (HOE) and Project Field Engineering (PPE) was restructured to better support the construction effort. The major elements of this restructuring were:

o Transfer of personnel from Norwalk (HOE) to the site. )

This onsite group, along with the few remaining personnel in Norwalk, became Design Engineering (DE).

o Relocation of PFE personnel from one central onsite location to individual groups located in proximity to each construction discipline. These groups became Installation Engineering (IE).

o Designation of a single engineering group supervisor for each design discipline with overall technical  ;

responsibility for DE and IE work.

o Design activities in direct support of construction work were assigned to the IE groups. -

o Design activities of a general or oversight nature were ,

assigned to DE.  !

i o Control of Project Reference Manual. Design Manual, and O responsibility for providing technical direction to the IE groups were assigned to DE.

o A pre-engineering group was organized in IE which develops detailed raceway routing information to accelerate installation and reduce installation deviations.

O 0134q/055-8 2-7

TABLE 2-1 I

SUMMARY

OF RACEWAY / EMBEDDED ITEMS INSPECTOR CERTIFICATION Certification in this activity qualifies the inspector in the following areas:

o Grounding (embedded and exposed).

o Raceway inspection.  ;

o Raceway support inspection.

o Cable-bus inspection.

o Cable-bus support inspection.

The following courses are required for certification: i o Basic Math I.

o Basic Blueprint.

o Raceway / Embedded Items (a)

(} - Drawings,

- Codes / Standards / Specifications / Procedures Raceways,

- Grounding.

- Supports,

- Equipment / Tools.  ;

I i

l l

l

a. Certification in visual inspection or an American Welding Society certification is required if weld inspection is performed.

0115q/055-8/1

O O O LEGEND PROJECT DIRECTION

--- ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTION GENERAL PROJECT MANAGER DIRECTOR NUCLEAR OPERATIONS I

GENERAL i MANAGER I QUALITY I ASSURANCE I ASSISTANT I PROJECT h I

MANAGER I

VOGTLE l QUALITY _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , ,

g MANAGER I I

I l 1

! I

, I l I

I l

PROJECT "^

PROJECT PROJECT ENGINEERING VICE PRESIDENT BUDGET AND LICENSING

^^ "

MANAGER NSTRUCTION SCHEDULE MANAGER

" ^"

MANAGER SUPPORT MANAGER Figure 2-1 Project Organization l

l l

t

O O O .

LEGEND PROJECT DIRECTION PROJEC T

.-.-. PROJECT COORDINATION ENGINEE RING

_ FUNCTIONAL, TECHNICAL MANAGER AND ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTION BECHTEL PROJECT -.-.-.-. ..~.-.-.-.- -.

MANAGER I

PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT QUAW ENGINEER ENGINEER ASSURA CE FIELD HOME OFFICE GPC COST AND CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE DISCIPLINES MANAGER r- ---------r---------~-

l  ! l l l I i  !  !

PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT ENGINEER PROJECT PROJECT ENGINEER ENGINEER ENGINEER MECHANICAL ENGINEER ENGINEER MECHANICAL ELEC1RICAL CIVIL CONTROLS & ELECTRICAL flELD INS T AL L ATION INSTALLATION INSTALLATION NUCLEAR DESIGN DESIGN l

l l

l l

I i

l i Figure 2-2 Project Engineering

O C O PROJECT ENGINEER PROJECT ENGINEER E L ECT RIC AL ELECTRICAL AND LEGEND: INSTALLATION civil DESIGN PROJECT DIRECTION

--- TECHNICAL DIRECTION CIVIL /ST RUCTURAL ELECTRICAL

_ - - _ _ . . . ' - - - - - - ENGINEERING p -- ENGINEERING GROUP SUPE RVISOR g GROUP SUPERVISOR I

I e SEISMIC ANALYSIS e RACEWAY DESIGN I

I I

I p_____.__r_____ _,________________J l l I .

I I I ELECTRICAL INST AL L ATION CONTRACTOR PRE-ENGINEERING ENGINEERING SUPPORT e EE580 SUPPORT e TRAY SUPPORT eCONDUlT BRACING P AC KAGING e GREENLINING e ANALYSIS OF e UNSCHEDULED e CONSTRUCTION OTHER COMMODITIES RACEWAY SPECIFICATION ATTACHED TO PACKAGING R ACEWAY SUPPORTS e RACEWAY AND CABLE FCR AND e DISPOSITION OF DR DISPOSITION R ACEWAY SUPPORT FCRs AND DRs e HOT PIPE AND HELBA SEPARATION Figure 2-3 Project Electrical and Civil Engineering

O O O ,

VICE PRESIDENT CONSTRUCTION i

t MANAGER MANAGER REGULATORY LABOR QUALITY ONTROL CONSTRUCTION I

i SYSTEM civil ELECTRICAL MECHANICAL COMPLETION DISCIPLINE DISCIPLINE DISCIPLINE MANAGER MANAGER MANAGER MANAGER Figure 2-4 Construction Organization

1 O O O I

t ELECTRICAL .j DISCIPLINE MANAGER PROJECT SECTION SUPERVISOR ELECTRICAL ELECTRICAL A D ELECTRICAL INSTALLATION ONSOUDATED INSTALLATION COMPLETION PROJECT MANAGER OJECT MANAGER ENGINEER MANAGER SEE FIGURE 2-3

  • EQUIPMENT
  • SYSTEM COMPLETION SUPPORT
  • AREA MANAGERS
  • RACEWAYS
  • AREA COMPLETION SUPPORT
  • SUPERINTENDENTS
  • CABLE AND TERMINATIONS
  • CRAFT TRAINING i

Figure 2-5 Electrical Construction Discipline

O O O MANAGER OF OUALITY t CONTROL  :

DOCUMENT CIVIL / TECHNICAL ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR REVIEW MECHANICAL SUPPORT GROUP QC SECTION QA/QC SUPERVISOR QC SEC ON p SUPERVISORS PROGRAMS O SUPE SOR

  • DOCUMENT STORAGE
  • TOOL CAllBRATION
  • CABLE PULLING = PROCEDURE REVIEW
  • DOCUMENT REVIEW = RECEIPT INSPECTION
  • TERMINATIONS
  • RACEWAYS
  • SUPPORTS l
  • EQUIPMENT l
  • QC RECORDS l

l l

l l

t l

1 Figure 2-6 GPC Ottali ty con trol

3 COMMITMENTS 3.1 _ INTRODUCTION This section contains, in matrix form, licensing and project commitments and the corresponding implementing documents. These j

i are presented in two matrices: the commitment matrix and the '

implementation matrix. .

Commitments A commitment is a written obligation to comply with the described requirements of an industry standard, Regulatory Guide, Branch Technical Position, or owner plan of specific action. For the purposes of Readiness Review, commitments are identified from the following sources:

o Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), including responses to Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) questions.

o Responses to Inspection and Enforcement Bulletins.

o Correspondence to the NRC.

These sources were reviewed and commitments were selected for inclusion in the matrix using the following guidelines:

o Specific design and/or construction requirement.

o Specific standards of acceptance.

o Specific cited technical data used as a design basis and/or unique design methodology.

o Specific codes, standards, or regulatory requirements.

Descriptions, detailed data and/or parameters resulting from design activities, general codes, and regulations are not generally considered licensing commitments. These include:

o Dimensions.

o System operational concepts or operational descriptionc. "

o Design calculation details such as strength parameters, flow rates, etc.

o References to general standards such as 10 CFR 50, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, American Concrete Institute, etc. (specific requirements from such bodies, however, are commitments).

  • O 0138q/060-8 3-1 -

i

Implementation An implementing document is a project document that imposes the requirements of the commitment to a specific activity. lh Implementation of commitments is typically found in the following:

o Design Criteria.

o Material Specifications.

o Construction Specifications.

o Project Reference Manual.

o Field Procedure Manual.

o Startup Manual.

o Drawings Additionally, the Project has a commitment to comply with 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Quality Assurance Criteria, and industrial standards such as ANSI /ASME N45.2 and N45.2.11.

Although they were not identified as specific commitments in this module, Readiness Review considered the applicable requirements of these types of commitments in preparing and assessing the scope of work presented by this module.

Differences, if any, between the commitment descriptions discussed in thic section and the FSAR are unintentional and the commitments in the FSAR take precedence.

l l

l l

l l

l 0138q/055-8 3-2

3.2 COMMITMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION MATRICES l

[

O During the Unit 1 Readiness Review Program, the task force performed a systematic review of licensing documents and identified the project commitments. Once identified, these commitments were listed in a document called the commitment matrix. Readiness Review has maintained the matrix current for design and construction through review of Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) Amendments and letters to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Additionally, during the Unit 1 Readiness Review, the task force identified project controls that implemented the commitment requirements (i.e., design criteria, specifications, construction procedures, etc.) and listed them on a document ,

called the implementation matrix. For Unit 2, the commitment matrix and implementation matrix were transmitted to the appropriate Project organizations for updating the implementation matrix data to reflect the latest implementing documents. Upon completion, the updated matrix was returned to Readiness Review, who verified the accuracy, on a selective sampling basis, as described in section 6.

Changes in module commitments from those presented in the Unit 1 module are identified by a vertical row of X's in the left  !

margin of the commitment matrix.

The commitment and implementation matrices are presented

  • following this section. The commitmen'ts are current through

(} Amendment 34 of the FSAR. l 1

l l

l O

013Bq/055-8 3-3

v p "

pv ,.

PLANT V0GTLE UNIT 2 HEADINESS HEVIEW l'H0G H AM COMMITMENT MATHIX

======== ==at=== =========c

NEF. COMMITMENT COMMITMENT COMMITMENT DOCUMENT / MOD DES CON FSAR HEMAHKS NUMBER SOUNCE SECTION SUBJECT FEATUNE ULE IGN ST AMEN

======= ========== ==================== ==================== ==================== =:: := == === : a..,- - - uu t

i EMPLANATION OF FIELDS REF. NO. - A reference number that corresponds to the approprlate line entry i

In the Implementettom metriz CDMMITMENT SOURCF - The docuseet costelulag the commitmoet (FSAR. Generic Letter, l.E. '

- Bulletin Response, etc.)

COMMITMENT SECTION - Identitles the FSAR section, letter number, or question eueber COMMITMENT S tf B J E C T - The subject of the FSAR section or Generic Letter DOCUMENT / FEATURE - The docuseet discussed i n the FSAR sectice or the plant feature described in the FSAR section e

NODULE - The module for which the commitment is implemented I

t DESIGN / CONSTRUCTION - An X is placed under the heedlag for the orgenlastlos responsible f for leptemoetettom of the commitment i

'FSAR AMENOMENT - FSAR emendeont ammber for revised comalteents la aero (0) is pieced in this coluem for changes- made prior to Amendment 13 istert of Unit i Readiness Revleell l

NOTE: .

I-Cosetteant changes-from those presented in the Unit I module r are ideattfled by'e vertical rou of X's In the left mergin.

I wy m,,,__ _ r ,, .v. r , ..-._,,..y-..-,_ , . , . . m . - , r - - , , -,.~_.4 __n._- , ,, ...-_,.-__,_____._____m______. _ . _ _ _ _ _ - _ _

l'a g e No. 4 Ol/20/H8 PLANT V0GTLE UNIT 2 HEADINESS HEVIEW Pit 0 Git AM COMMITMENT MATHlX - MODULE 17/19

___ :::: __ :::::::;;__ = 22:::=::===

HEF. COMMITMENT COMMITMENT COMMITMENT DOCUMENT / MOD DES CON FSAH HEMAHES NUMBEH SOUHCE SECTION SUBJECT FEATUNE ULE IGN ST AMEN

: 2 :u: ::::;_ _2_  ::=2:==_  ::::::: =====_::==:::::::::  :=====::::=2::: ==== === =2: === ==== =========.,:== ::::::

4370.00 FSAH 3. 7.B. 1-1 DAMPING VALUES FOH PEHCENT OF CHITICAL 17/ X 0 FIXED BASE DAMPING PEN MODE 19 S Tif UC T ullES AND COMPONENTS 4371.00 FSAR 3. 7.B. 1-7 DAMPING VALUES FOR DAMPlNG VALUES FOR 17/ X 0 HEFEli TO FIGUHE CABLE THAYS AND CABLE THAYS AND 19 3.7.8.1-7 SUPPOHT SYSTEM SUPP0 HTS 981.00 FSAlt 3. 7.B. 1. 3 SEISMIC DAMPlNG HG 1.61 17/ X 0 HEFEH TO it E F . ho.

VALUES F0H ITEMS 19 4370 OTHEN THAN CABLE THAYS AND SUPP0HT SYSTEM 14 t# 7. 00 FS Alt 3. 7.B. 1. 3 DAMP!NG VALUES USED MAXIMUM 15% DAMPING 17/ X 0 HEFEH TO F I G uld E IN THE DESIGN OF 19 3.7.B.1-7 CABLE THAY SUPP0HT 1010.00 FSAN 3. 7.B. 3. 1. 2 SEISMIC SUBSYSTEM NODAL HESPONSE 17/ X 0 SEE 3.7.B.3.5 ANALYSIS OF CAT. I SPECTHUM ANALYSIS 19 CABLE THAYS & METHOD OH EQUIVALENT SUPP0 HTS AND HVAC STATIC LOAD METHOD DUCTS & SU"P0 HTS 1013.00 FSAH 3. 7.B. 3. 5 SEISMIC SUBSYSTEM EQUIVALENT STATIC 17/ X 30 USED F0H P L A T FO ttMS ,

ANALYSIS, USE OF LOAD METi!0D OF 19 CABLE THAY &

EQUIVALENT STATIC ANALYSIS S U PPollTS , CONDUlf &

LOAD METilOD OF SUPP0 HTS. HVAC DUCT ANALYSIS & S U PPoliTS . SIMPLE PIPING SYSTEMS.

AMENDMENT 30 CilANGE NOT SUBSTANTIVE WITH HEGAHD TO MODULE 17/19.

1014.00 FSAH 3. 7.B. 3. 5 SEISMIC SUBSYSTEM SEISMIC ACCELENATION 17/ X 30 AMENDMENT 30 NOT ANALYSIS, dSE OF VALUES A llE PEAE 19 SUBSTANTIVE WITil EQUIVALENT STATIC ACCELEHATION VALUES k E G Alf D TO MODULE LOAD METil0D OF MULTIPLIED BY A 17/19.

ANALYSIS FACT 0H OF 1.5 UNLESS A LO W Eli FAC10H IS JUSTIFIED 9 9 9

Q R

(

s L) U Page No. 3 01/20/88 PLANT VOGTLE UNIT 2 kEADINESS HEVIEW PHOGHAM COMMITMENT MATHIX MODULE 17/19

2:==============r_:=======

HEF. COMMITMENT COMMITMENT COMMITMENT DOCUMENT / MOD DES CON FSAH REMARKS NUMBER SOUNCE SECTION SUBJECT FEATURE ULE IGN ST AMEN

=== ========== === ========== ===== ==================== ==================== === === ===

- ====u===============

4115.00 FSAR 3. 1. 1 CONFORMANCE WITli 10CFh50, APP. A. GDC 17/ X 0 NUCLEAR REGULATORY 4 19 COMMISSION GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA, OVEHALL HEQUIHEMENTS.

4116.00 FSAN 3. 1. 1 CONFORMANCE WITH 10CFR50, APP. A. GDC 17/ X 0 NUCLEAR REGULATORY 5 19 COMMISSION GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA, OVERALL HEQUIREMENTS 4118.00 FSAH 3. 1. 2 PROTECTION BY 10CFH50, APP. A. CDC 17/ X 0 MULTIPLE FISSION 17 19 PRODUCT BARNIERS 804.00 FSAN 3. 1. 3 CONFORMANCE WITH NHC 10CFH50, APP. A. GDC 17/ X 0 GDC, PHOTECTION AND 22, 19 HEACTIVITY CONTROL SYSTEMS 806.00 FSAk 3. 1. 3 CONFORMANCE WITH NHC 10CFH50, APP. A. GDC 17/ X 0 GDC PHOTECTION AND 24 19 HEACTIVITY CONTHOL SYSTEMS 843.00 FSAN 3. 2. 2-1 CLASSIFICATION OF NOTE (e): SEISMIC 17/ X 0 TABLE 3.2.2-1 STHUCTUHES, CATEGORY HG-1.29 19 COMPONENTS, SYSTEMS 886.00 FSAR 3. 2. 2 -1 PHINCIPAL AISC-S9 17/ X 0 TABLE 3.2.2-1, NOTE CONSTRUCTION CODE 19 (g)

FOH TABLE 3.2.2-1 693.00 FSAR 3. 2. 2-1 PRINCIPAL CODES AND AISI-68 17/ X 0 STANDARDS FOH 19 T. 3. 2. 2 - 1 i

Page No. 2 01/20/8H PLANT V0GTLE UNIT 2 HEADINESS HEVIEW PHOGHAM COMMITMENT MATHlX - MODULE 17/19

==========================

HEF. COMMITMENT COMMITMENT COMMITMENT DOCUMENT / MOD DES CON FSAR HEMAHES NUMBER SOUNCE SECTION SUBJECT FEATURE ULE IGN ST AMEN

= ======= == ================ === === ================ ==================== === === === ==== ==============

162.00 FSAH 1. 9. 75 PHYSICAL IEEE 384-1974 17/ X X 0 INDEPENDENCE OF 19 ELECTRIC SYSTEMS 4958.00 FSAH 1. 9. 89 QUALIFICATION FOH HG 1.89 HEV. O, 17/ X 0 SEE FSAR 3.11.B CLASS lE EQUIPMENT 11/74 19 174.00 FSAN 1. 9. 92 COMBINING MODAL HG 1.92, HEV. 1, 17/ 3 0 SEE SECTION HESPONSES AND 2/76 19 3.7.B.2.7 3.7.B.3.6 SPATIAL COMPONENTS & 3.7.B.3.7.

IN SEISMIC HESPONSE ANALYSIS X 4973.00 ESAH 1. 9. 94. 2. 9 VISUAL WELDING WELDING VISUAL 17/ X 20 N ACCEPTANCE CHITEHIA INSPECTION 19 X ACCEPTANCE CHITERIA X . IN ACCONDANCE WITH AWS DI.1-75 FOR INSPECTIONS PEHFORMED PH10H TC 12/02/85 AND NCIG-01 HEV. 2 F0H INSPECTIONS PEHFollMED A FTEld 12/02/85.

175.00 FSAH 1. 9.100 SEISMIC HG 1.100 HEV. 1, 17/ X 0 SEE FSAlt 3.10.8.2 QUALIFICATION OF 8/77 19 CLASS IE ELECTHIC EQUIPMENT 7H9.00 FSAk 3. 1. 1 CONF 0HMANCE WITH NHC 10CFH50, APP. A. GDC 17/ X 0 GENEHAL DESIGN 3 19 Cill T Eld ! A , OVEHALL liEQUlHEMENTS 4114.00 FSAH 3. 1. I CONFORMANCE WITH 10CFH50, APP. A, GDC 17/ X 0 NUCLEAH HEGULATOHY 2 19 COMMISSION GENERAL DESIGN CHITERIA.

OVEHALL HEOUIHEMENTS.

O 9 9

> 0 Page No. 1 01/20/88 PLANT VOGTLE UNIT 2 HEADINESS HEVIEW PHOGHAM COMMITMENT MATHlX - MODULE 17/19

==========================

HEF. COMMITMENT COMMITMENT COMMITMENT DOCUMENT / MOD DES CON FSAH HEMAHKS NUMBER SOUNCE SECTION SUBJECT FEATUHE ULE IGN ST AMEN

== ========== ==================== ==================== ==================== === === === ==== =========_= ==

108.00 FSAH 1. 2. 12. I SINGLE FAILURE, IEEE 279-1971 17/ X 0 HEDUNDANCY & 19 INDEPENDENCE CHITEHIA 109.00 FSAH 1. 5. 9 GENERIC PH0 GRAMS OF DAMPING VALUE OF 17/ X 0 BECHTEL CABLE THAY SUPPORTS 19 IN VEGP IS VERIFIED BY THE RESULTS OF BECHTEL TEST PROCHAM.

126.00 FSAH 1. 9. 29 SEISMIC DESIGN HG 1.29 HEt. 3, 17/ X 0 REF. TABLE 3.2.2-1 CLASSIFICATION 9/78 19 131.00 FSAN 1. 9. 32 CHITENIA FOR HG 1.32 HEV. 2, 17/ X 0 SEE REG. GUIDE 1.6, SAFETY-PELATED 2/77 19 1.9, 1.75, 1.81 AND ELECTHic POWEH 1.93. SEE FSAW 8.1 SYSTEMS FOR NUCLEAR AND 8.3 POWEH PLANTS 132.00 FSAH 1. 9. 32 CRITEHIA F0H IEEE 308-1974 17/ X 0 SAFETY-RELATED 19 ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEMS FOR NUCLEAR POWEH PLANTS 133.00 FSAR 1. 9. 32. I CRITERIA FOR 10CFR50, APP. A. GDC 17/ X 0 SAFETY-RELATED 17 19 ELECTHIC POWEH SYSTEMS FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS 2188.00 FSAH 1. 9. 61 DAMPING VALUES FOR HG 1.61, 10/73 17/ X 0 SEISHlc DESIGN 19 160.00 FSAR 1. 9. 75 PHYSICAL HG 1.75 HEV. 2, 17/ X X 0 SEE SECTION 7.1.2.2 INDEPENDENCE OF 9/78 19 ELECTHlc SYSTEMS

%. / s Page No. 5 01/20/H8 PLANT V0GTLE UNIT 2 HEADINESS REVIEW PHOGRAM COMMITMENT MATHIX - MODULE 17/19

========= =====s==========

HEF. COMMITMENT COMMITMENT COMMITMENT DOCUMENT / MOD DES CON FSAR REMARKS NUMBER SOURCE SECTION SUBJECT FEATUNE ULE IGN ST AMEN

= ========== ====_=============== ==================== ==================== === === === ==== ==============

4688 00 FSAR 3. 7.B. 3. 6 SEISMIC SUBSYSTEM COMPONENT EARTHQUAKE 17/ X 0 ANALYSES - THREE EFFECTS COMBINED BY 19 COMPONENTS OF SRSS METHOD (F0H EARTHQUAKE MOTION. QUAL. BY ANALYSIS).

1017.00 FSAR 3. 7.B. 3. 7 SEISHIC SUBSYSTEM BC-TOP-4A. SEC. 4.2 17/ X 0 ANALYSIS, 19 COMBINATION OF MODAL RESPONSES 1018.00 FSAR 3. 7.B. 3. 7 SEISMIC SUBSYSTEM RG 1.92 17/ X 0 ANALYSIS, 19 COMBINATION OF MODAL RESPONSES 1019.00 FSAR 3. 7.B. 3.12 BURIED SEISMIC BC-TOP -4 A Cil APTER 6, 17/ X 0 CATEGORY I ENGINEERING ANALYSIS 19 ELECTRICAL DUCTB ANKS WITH CLASS lE CIRCUITS 1020.00 FSAR 3. 7.B. 3.12 BURIED SEISMIC BURIED ELECTRICAL 17/ X 0 CATEGORY I PIPING DUCT BANKS 19 SYSTEMS AND TUNNELS CONTAINING CLASS lE ELECTRICAL CIHCUITS ARE DESIGNED TO MEET SEISMIC CATEGORY I HEQUIHEMENTS 1021.00 FSAN 3. 7.B. 3.12 BURIED SEISMIC DUCT BANKS AHE 17/ X 0 CATEGORY I PIPING PHOVIDED WITil A 19 SYSTEMS AND TUNNELS SEISMIC SEPARATION AT STRUCTUHE, MANHOLE. AND INTENSECTION INTEHFACP.

X 5025.00 FSAN 3. 8. 4. 5 WELDING OF WELDING OF 17/ X X 25 ADDED BY FSAR AMEND.

X STHUCTURAL STEEL STRUCTUHAL STEEL. 19 25 X MISC. STEEL, HACEWAY X SUPP0 HTS, & HVAC DUCT SUPP0 HTS IS PEHFOHMED IN ACCOND.

WITH AWS Dl.I-1975 OH LATEN

i I

Page Nu, 6 l Ol/20/HH P l. A N T VOGTLE UNIT 2 HEADINESS HEVIEW PROGHAM

( COMMITMENT MATHIX MODULE 17/19

... ==== = =.. =. -. -

HEF. COMMITMENT COMMITHENT COMMITMENT DOCUMENT / MOD DES CON FSAH HEMARKS NUMBEH SOUNCE SECTION SUBJECT FEATUHE ULE !GN ST AMEN

= . . = =======:=- ===== ===== .:.=====- ==================== ==r. =:= .==.;= ===== === =;. === = == ==== =.=. = .

2283.00 FSAH 3.10.B. I SEISMIC QUALIF. AND IEEE 344-1975 17/ X 0 DOCUMENTATION F0H 19 SAFETY HELATED EQUIPMENT AND SUPPORTS 2284.00 FSAN 3.10.B. I SEISMIC QUALIF. AND HG l.100 17/ X 0 DOCUMENTATION FOR 19 SAFETY HELATED EQUIFMENT AND SUPPONTS 2285.00 FSAN 3.10.B. 4. 2 SHP EVALUATION - BOP BC-TOP-4A 17/ X 0 MEETS INTENT OF HG EQUIP. SEISMIC OUAL. 19 1.92 GUIDANCE FOR COMBINATION OF MULTIMODAL RESPONSES 1249.00 FSAH 3.10.N. 4. 2.E STANDARD HEVIEW PLAN BC-TOP 4A USED AS 17/ X 0 MEETS INTENT OF HG EVAiUATION - SEISMIC GUIDANCE FOH 19 1.92, SEE HEF. NO.

QUAllFICATION OF HOP COMBINATION OF 22H5 E Q U I I' . MULTIMODAI. HESPONSE 3.00 FSAH H. 1, 4. 3 UESIGN CHITERIA, 10CFH50, Al'P , A, GDC 17/ X 0 HEGULATORY GUIDES 5 19 AND IEEE STANDAHDS 18.00 FSAN H. 1. 4. 3 DESIGN CHITEHIA, HG 1.75 HEV. 2, 17/ X X 0 SEE TAHIE H.I I HEGULATOHY GUIDES 9/78 19 AND IEEE STANDAHDS 20.00 FSAR H. 1. 4. 3 DESIGN CHITEHIA, HG 1.89, 11/74 17/ X 0 HEGUI.ATOHY GUIDES 19 AND IEEE STANDARDS 22.00 FSAH H. 1. 4. 3 DESIGN CHITEHIA, HG l.100, HEV. 1, 17/ X 0 HEGUI.ATOHY GUIDES 11 / 7 7 19 AND IEEE STANDAHDS O O O

9 O O C Page No. 7 01/20/88 PLANT V0GTLE UNIT 2 NEADINESS REVIEW PHOGHAM COMMITMENT MATRIX - MODULE 17/19

- = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = - =============

HEF. COMMITMENT COMMITMENT COMMITMENT DOCUMENT / MOD DES CON FSAR REMARKS NUMBEN SOURCE SECTION SUBJECT FEATUHE ULE IGN ST AMEN

===== =1======== ============ ======= ==================== ======a:============ === === === ==== ================e

27.00 FSAR 8. 1. 4. 3 DESIGN CRITEHIA. IEEE 30H-1974 17/ X X 0 NEGULATORY GUIDES 19 AND IEEE STANDARDS 29.00 FSAH 8. 1. 4. 3 DESIGN CRITERIA, IEEE 323-1974 17/ X 0 REGULATORY GUIDES 19 AND IEEE STANDARDS 32.00 FSAH 8. 1. 4. 3 DESIGN CRITERIA, IEEE 344-1975 17/ X 0 HEGULATORY GUIDES 19 AND IEEE STANDARDS 35.00 FSAR 8. 1. 4. 3 DESIGN CRITEHIA. IEEE 384-1974 17/ X X 0 REGULATORY GUIDES 19 AND IEEE STANDARDS 95.00 FSAH 8. 1. 4. 3 DESIGN CRITERIA, 10CFHF50 APP.A. GDC2 17/ X 0 HEGULATORY GUIDES 19 AND IEEE STANDARDS 2352.00 FSAH 8. 1. 4. 3 DESIGN CRITTERIA, 10CFH50, APP.A. 17/ X 0 SEE TABLE 8.1-1 NEGULATORY GUIDES GDC17 19 AND IEEE STANDARDS 73.00 FSAR 8. 3. 1. 4. 2 CABLE DERATING AND CONTHOL AND 17/ X 0 CABLE THAY FILL INSTHUMENT CABLE 19 TRAY DESIGN FILL IS 40 PERCENT OF THE AREA 0F TH" TRAY BEING USED.

74.00 PSAR H. 3. 1. 4. 2 CABLE DEHATING AND LOW VOLTAGE POWER 17/ X 0 CABLE TRAY FILL TRAYS AHE LIMITED TO 19 A FILL OF 30 PERCENT OF THE AHEA 0F A 3 IN. LOADING DEPTH THAY.

Page No. H 01/20/H8 PLANT V0GTLE UNIT 2 HEADINESS HEVIEW PH0GHAM COMMITMENT MATHlk - MODULE 17/19

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

HEF. COMMITMENT COMMITMENT COMMITMENT DOCUMENT / MOD DES CON FSAN HEMAHES NtIMBEH SodHCE SECTION SUBJECT FEATURE ULE IGN ST AMEN

====- ========-- ===.== r === =======- ==================== ==================== == === === ==== ==============;====

5062.00 FSAH H. 3, l. 4. 2 CABLE DEHATING AND WHENEVEH THAYS AHE 17/ X X 24 CHANGE NOT l CABLE TRAY FILL FILLED ABOVE THE 19 SUBSTANTIVE.

SIDEHAILS, THE CLARIFICATION ONLY.

REQUIRED H.G. 1.75 SEPAHATION IS MEASURED TO THE UPPERMOST CABLE IN THE THAY.

X 76.00 FSAR 8. 3. 1. 4. 3 CABLE HOUTING WITHIN SPHEADING, 17/ X X 25 I X CONTHOL AND SHUTDOWN 19 X HOOMS, MIN. VENT.

, X SEPAHATION FOR OPEN I

TOP THAY IS 3 FT.,

AND MIN. HOH.

SEPAHATION IS 1 FT.

TESTING / ANALYSIS PERFORMED TO DETEHMINE HEDUCED DISTANCES FOR 480V.

77.00 PSAR 8. 3. 1. 4. 3 CABLE HOUTING THE MINIMUM 17/ X X 0 SEPARATION DISTANCE 19 BETWEEN ENCLOSED HACEWAYS QUALIFIED AS BAHHIEHS IS 1 I NCil .

7H.00 FSAH H. 3. 1. 4. 3 CABLE HOUTING THE MINIMUM 17/ X X 0 SEPARATION DIST. 19 BETWEEN NON-CLASS IE CONDUlf (INCLUDING i ALUM. OH l COPPEH-SHEATED CABLE) AND CLASS IE OPEN TOP CABLE THAYS ,

IS 1 INCH.

l l

l l

l O O O

' J  % J Page No. 9 01/20/88 PLANT V0GTLE UNIT 2 HEADINESS HEVIEW PROGHAM COMMITMENT MATHlX - MODULE 17/19

==================== . =-.....==== ==.

REF. COMMITMENT COMMITMENT COMMITMENT DOCUMENT / MOD DES CON FSAR HEMARKS NUMBEH SOUNCE SECTION SUBJECT FEATUHE ULE IGN ST AMEN

= =========u ==================== ==================== ========= ========== === === === ===z =========.== =

X 79.00 FSAR 8. 3. 1. 4. 3 CABLE ROUTING WITHIN GENEHAL PLANT 17/ X X 25 X AREAS THE MINIMUM 19 X VERTICAL SEPAHATION X IS 5 FT. AND THE MINIMUM HORIZONTAL IS 3 FT. F0H OPEN TOP CABLE THAY.

TESTING / ANALYSIS PEHFORMED TO DETERMINE HEDUCED DISTANCES FOR 480V.

84.00 FSAH 8. 3. l 4. 3 CABLE HOUTING WHERE SPATIAL 17/ X X 0 SEPAHATION 19 HEQUIREMENTS BETWEEN HACEWAYS OF DIFFERENT SEPARATION GROUPS ARE NOT MET, FIRE BARHIERS ARE INSTALLED.

85.00 FSAH 8. 3. 1. 4. 3 CABLE HOUTING WHEHE HACEWAYS OF 17/ X X 0 DIFFEHENT SEPAH. 19 GHOUPS AHE BHOUGHT TO A SINGLE ENCL.,

SEPAH. IS ACCOMPLISHED BY THP USE OF CONDUIT ROUTED IN OPPOSITE DlHECTIONS FROM THE ENCL., USING Tile ENCL. AS A BARHIEH.

86.00 FSAH 8. 3. 1. 4. 3 CABLE HOUTING SEPARATE THAYS ARE 17/ X 0 PHOVIDED FOR EACll 19 VOLTAGE SERVIC3 LEVEL, 13.8KV.4.16KV.480V, 120V AC AND 125V DC, CONTitol AND INSTRUMENT.

Page No. 10 01/20/88 PLANT YOGTLE UNIT 2 HE Al)l NESS HEVIEW PROGHAM COMMITMENT MATHlX - MODULE 17/19

==;=_ === =====:._ ===_=== _====

REF. COMMITMENT COMMITMENT C MMITMENT DOCUMENT / MOD DES CON FSAH HEMAHKS NilMBEH SOUNCE SECTION SUBJECT FEATONE ULE IGN ST AMEN

.=======================-======= ===.==============-=-===========-===================.=============

88.00 FSAR 8. 3. 1. 4. 3 CABLE HOUTING CONDUITS HUNNING 17/ X X 0 BETWEEN STHUCTUHES 19 AHE EITilER CONNECTED W ITil A MIN. OF 2 FT.

OF FLEX 1BLE CONDulT OH AHE PHOVIDED WITH EXPANSION / DEFLECTION FITTINGS.

90.00 FSAN 8. 3 1. . 4. 4 HAZARD PHOTECTION HG 1.75 HEV. 2 9/78 17/ X 25 AMENDMENT 25 CHANGE 19 ADDED NO COMMITMENTS APPLICABLE TO MODULE 17/19. I i

2905.00 FSAN 17. 1. 2 Q. A. PROGRAM HG 1.30 (8-11-72) 17/ X 0 19 2968.00 FSAH 17A. O INTHODliCTION ANSI N45.2.4-1972 17/ X 0 HEF. FSA9 SEC.

(IEEE 336-1971) 19 1.9.30 4273.00 NHC OllEST. 0430. 05-1 MAIN CONTHOL ROOM & FIXTURES MOUNTED PER 17/ X 0 HESPONSE TO NHC COHWES. HEMOTE SHUTDOWN HOOM SEISMIC CAT. I 19 QUESTION 0430.5-1 ILLUMINATION LEVELS HEQUIREMENTS 4327.00 NHC QUEST. 0430. 75 SEPARATION OF CLASS HG 1.75, HEV. 2 9/78 17/ X X 0 HESPONSE TO COHHES. IE CABLES IN CONDUIT 19 QUESTION.

FHOM NON-CLASS lE CABLES IN THAY 4900.00 NHC QUEST. 0430. 75 SEPAHATION OF AT LEAST l-INCH 17/ X X 0 HESPONSE TO OllESTION CONNES. ELECTHICAL CIHCUITS SEPAHATION IS 19 MAINTAINED BETWEEN Tile BAHHIER AND Tile l

CABl.E THnY 1.OCATED ABOVE OH TO THE SIDE OF IT l

9 9 9

O  :

t PLANT Vtx3 TIE UNIT 2 IiEADINESS kEVlkW PHOGRAM IMI'LLMENTATION MATffIX

=====u === ========= = _ _ n= _=====_

DESIGN CONST REF..SOUNCE AND DES CON CUNRENT DESIGN CUkHENT CONSTWICTION NtNBER SECTION SUBJECT DOC 1HENT/ FE ATUltE IGN St. AS OF: IMPLEMENTATION AS OF: IMPIEMENTATION HEMAldS

u===== =============== ==================== ================= == === === ======== ==== ================= ======== ====================== ============r ==

EXPLANATION OF FIELDS REF NO. - A reference number that corresponds to the appropriate Ilme entry in the comaltment metrix. -

SOURCE AND SECTION - The commitment source end section to be Implemented SUBJECT - The subject of the comaltment peregraph DOCUMENT / FEATURE - The document discussed la the FSAR section or the plant feature described la the FSAR sectica. (See Commitment Matrix.)

DESIGN / CONSTRUCTION -1 A a X ls placed under the headlag for the orgenlantion responsible for Implementottom of the comm4taent DESIGN CURRENT - The date that comaltment implementation was vertfled AS OF CONST CURRENT AS OF:

DESIGN - The Project document (s) that were revlemed to worify commitment IMPLEMENTATION Implementatlos CONSTRUCT 10N IMPLEMENTATION v

f k

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - - _ _ _ . _ . - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ . - - . _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ . _ - - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - - . . _ _ _ . _ _ - _ _ - < < - - _ . . - - . - _ _ _ - _ , _ - - _ _ . _. =- ~ , w

"N  %

Pag, No.

02/17/88 PLANT V0GTLE UNIT 2 NEADINESS REVIEW l'H0GHAM I

IMPLD1ENTATION MATRIX - MODULE 17/19

_:r :=====:=== =e= =============:: =

DESIGN CONST HEF. SOURCE AND DES CON CURRENT DESIGN CURRENT CONSTRUCTION N1NDER SECTION SUBJECT DOCUMENT / FEATURE IGN ST. AS OF: IMPl.EMENTATION AS OF: IMPlJNENTATION HDtANKS

=== =============== ==================== ==================== :_: === :::::=== ===================::: = ====:: ::: :========= ====::: =:e==--::==_  :===

3.00 FSAR DESIGN CRITERIA, 10CFR50, AIT. A. GDC X 07-14-87 DC-1000-E, REV. 6 REGULA1VRY GUIDES S. (FSAR 8 85. -C. S.

H. 1. 4. 3 AND IEEE STAND ARDS - 8.1.4.3)- PG.8.1-5 DC-1001 REV. 1 SHARING OF 8-30-83 C.S DC-1810 -

STRUCTURES, SYSTENS, REV. 7, 9-24 C.S AND COMPONENTS 18.00 FSAR DESIGN CRITERIA, HG 1.75. REV. 2, X X 07-14-87 DC-1001, REV. 1, 08-24-87 X3Ak01-E8, REV. 17 REGULATORY GUIDES SEPT. 1978 (FSAR 8-30-83, -C.S DC-1809, (ATT. B), 6-S-85 H. 1. 4. 3 AND IEEE STANDAHDS - 8.3.1.4, is REV. 6, 7-28-H6, -C.S PifYSICAL 8.3.1-33) DC-1810, REV 7, INDEPENDENCE OF 9- 24 C. S ELECTRIC SYSTEMS 20.00 FSAR DESIGN CRITERIA. HG l.89 NOV. 1974 X 07-14-87 SEE RDIARKS DESIGN IMPIINENTED REGULATORY GUIDES ( FS AR 8.1. 4. 3)-it VIA IEEE 323, SAME

8. 1. 4. 3 AND IEEE STANDAHDS - 8.1-6 AS HEF. NO. 29 QUALIFICATION EUR CLASS lE EOUlfNENT 22.00 FSAR DESIGN CHITEHIA, HG 1.100 REV. 1, X 07-14-87 SEE REMARKS DESIGN IMPLEMENTED REGULATOHY GUIDES ARI. 1977 (FSAN VIA IEEE 341.

H. I. 4. 3 AND IEEE STANDAHUS - 1.900, 8.1.4.3) SAME AS REF. NO.

SEISMIC 32 QUALIFICATION OF CLASS IE ELECTHIC EQUllitENT

27.00 FSAN DESIGN CHITERIA, IEEE 30H-1974 (FSAR I 07-14-87 DC-1810. HEV. 7 I

REGULATORY GUIDES 8.1.4.3) PG 8.1-77 9-24-H5, -10.1 H. 1. 4. 3 .7 IEEE STANDAHDS -

Cr 't! A FOR

.: -RELATED oom,iRIC POWER SYS1 EMS FVH NUCI. EAR POWER PLANTS 29.00 FSAR DESIGN CRITERI A, IEEE 323-1974 (FSAR X 07-14-H7 X3AH05, REV. 15, HEGULATORY GUIDES 8.1.4.3) -PG 8.1-7 5 7-H6, - f9. 3 H. 1. 4. 3 AND IEEE STANDARDS -

STANDARD FOR QUALIFYING CIASS lE EQU tINENT

Page No. 2 02/17/88 PLANT UCGTLE UNIT 2 HEAD' TSS HEVIEW PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MA'-- MODULE 17/19

-=============== ============

DESIGN ,7 IfEF. SOURCE AND DES CON CURRENT DESIGN aHENT CONSTHLCTION NIMBER SECTION SUBJECT DOCtNENT/ FEATURE IGN ST. AS OF: IMPLEMENTATION AS OF: IMPLEMENTATION REMARKS

= =============== ==================== ==================== === === ======== ====================== ::======= ====================== ============

32.00 FSAH DESIGN CRITERI A. IEEE 344-1975 (FSAH X 07-14-87 DC-lul0, HEV. 7 REGULATORY GUIDES 8.1.4.3) -ft 8.1-8 9-24-85, -PG.I X3AH05,

8. 1. 4. 3 AND IEEE STANDARDS - HEV. 15, 5-7-86, IM.3 HECOPNENDED PHACTICES fVR SEISMIC QUALIFICATION OF CLASS 1 ELECTHIC EQUllNENT 35.00 FSAR DESIGN CRITEHIA, IEEE 3H1-1974 (FSAR X X 07-14-87 DC-1809. HEV. 6 08-24-87 X3AR01-E8, REV. 26, HEGULATURY GUIDES 8.1.4.3) -fC 8.1-8 7-28-86, -PG.1 (ATT. B), 6-5-85
8. 1. 4. 3 AND IEEE STANDANDS - DC-1810, HEV. 7 PflYSICAL 9-24-85 -PG.1 INDEPENDENCE OF ELECTHIC SYSTEMS 73.00 FSAH CABLE DERATING AND CABLE TRAY FILL: X 07-14-87 DC-1810. REV. 7 CABLE TRAY FILL - CONTHOL AND 9-24-85, -f9.8
8. 3. 1. 4. 2 CONTHOL AND INSTHINENT CABLE PAR.3.2.2D INSTHINENT THAYS THAY DESIGN FILL IS 40 PEHCENT OF TIIE AlfEA OF THE THAY BEING USED (FSAR 8.3.1.4) -19 8.3.1-31 74.00 FSAR CABLE DERATING AND CABLE TRAY FILL: IDW X 07-14-87 DC-1810. HEV. 7, CABLE THAY FILL - VOLTAGE POWER THAYS 9-24 -fl5, -19. 8 PAR.
8. 3. 1. 4. 2 LOW VOLTAGE THAYS ARE LIMITED TO A 3.2.2D FILL OF 30 PEHCENT OF THE AREA OF A 3 INCH LOADING DEPT!!

THAY (FSAR 8.3.3.4)

-19 8.3.1-2*

76.00 FSAR CABLE HOUTING - WITilIN SPREADING, X X 07-14-87 SEE HEM 4RKS 08 24-87 X3AH01-E8, REY. 26, DESIGN IMPIEMENTED MINIMIN SEPAHATION CONTHOL AND SIIUTDOWN ( ATTACINENT B), 6-5-85 VI A IEEE 384.

8. 3. 1. 4. 3 tDR SPHEADING, H00MS, MIN. VENT. SAME AS HEF. NO.

CONTHOL, AND SEPARATION FOR OPEN 35.

SIIUTDOWN HOLNS TOP THAY IS 3 FT.,

AND MIN. HOH.

SEPARATION IS 1 FT.

TESTING / ANALYSIS PEHIVINED TO DETEININE HEDtfCED DISTANCES FOR 480V.

e 9 0

Page No. C'W '

02/17/195 PLANT V0GTLE UNIT 2 READINESS HEVIEW PIf0 GRAM IMPIDtENTATION MATHIX - MODULE 17/19

========================

DESIGN CONST REF. SOUNCE AND DES CON CURRENT DESIGN CURRENT CONSTRUCTION -

NINBER SECTION StrRJECT DOCINENT/ FEATURE IGN ST. AS OF: IMPLEMENTATION AS OF: IMI'LEMENTATION HEMARKS

= =============== ==================== ==================== === === ======== ====================== ======== ====================== ====_=======

77.00 FSAR CABLE HOUTING - TIIE MINIMIN X X 07-14-87 SEE HEMARKS 08-24-87 X3AH01-E8, REV. 26 DESIGN IMPIDE:NTED SEPARATION BE WEEN SEPAlfATION DISTANCE ( ATTACINENT B), VIA IEEE 381.

8. 3. 1. 4. 3 ENCIDSED HACEWAYS BE WEEN ENCLOSED 6-15-85 SAME AS HEF. 35.

HACEWAYS QUALIFIED AS BARHIERS IS 1 INCil. (FSAR 8.3.1.4) -IM 8.3.1-31 78.00 FSAR CABLE HOUTING - TifE MINIMtW X X 07-14-87 DC-1810, HEY. 7, 08-24-87 X3AR01-E8, HEV. 26 MINIMlN SEPARATION SEPAHATION DISTANCE 9-24-85, INN-8, ( ATTACINENT B), 6-5-85

8. 3. 1. 4. 3 BEWEEN NON{ LASS lE BEWEEN NON-CLASJ IE 6-26-86. -PG.5 PAR.E CONDUIT AND OPEN TOP CONDUIT (INCLUDING CLASS lE TRAYS ALIN. OH COPPER-SifE ATIIED CABLE) AND OPEN 10P CLASS lE CABLE TRAYS IS 1 INCH. (FSAR 8.3.1.4) -IV 8.3.1-32 79.00 FSAN CABLE idOUTING - WITIIIN GENERAL PLANT X X 07-14-87 SEE HEMARKS 08-24-87 X3AR01-E8, REV. 26 DESIGN IMPLEMENTED GENERAL PLANT AffEA AREAS TifE MINIMIN ( ATTACINENT B), 6-5-H5 VI A IEEE 384.

H. 3. 1. 4. 3 SEPARATION VERTICAL SEPARATION SAME AS HEF. NO.

HEQUlHEMENTS IS 5 FT. AND THE 35. USE OF MINIMIN IlOHIZONTAL ANALYSI3 (WYLE IS 3 FT. FOR OPEN LABS) ADDED BY TOP CABLE TRAY. AMENDMENT 25. SEE TESTING / ANALYSIS FINDING l'ERIVINED TO 2HiiF- 006- O l l .

DETEININE HEDt0ED DISTANCES FOH'480V.

Hl.00 FSAR CABLE HOUTING - USE 'siHERE SPATIAL X X 07-14-Fi7 SEE Hi} TANKS 08 87 X3 AH01 - E8, HEV. 26 DESIGN IMPIMIENTED OF FINE BARHIENS TO SEPARATION 6- 5-- 85, ED-T-02, HEV. VIA IEEE 384. SAME

8. 3. 1. 4. 3 MEET SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS BETWEEN 12, 12-19-84 AS HFF. NO. 35.

CHITERIA HACEWAYS OF DIFFERENT SEPAHATION GHOUPS ARE NOT MET, FIRE BARRIERS AHH INSTALLED. (FSAH i

8. 3.1. 4 ) - l'G H.3.1-33

Page No. 4 02/17/88 PIANT VCGTLE ITNIT 2 READINESS REVIEW PHCGHfhi IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX - MODULE 17/19

.============== =========.:=====

DESIGN CONST HEF. SOURCE AND DES CON CURRENT DESIGN C1'HRENT CONSTR1X' TION NINDER SECTION SUBJECT DOCUMENT /FEATirHE IGN ST. AS OF: IMPLD1ENTATION AS OF: IMPID1ENTATION HEMARKS

====== ===== ========= ===.m======== ======= ==================== === === ======== ====================== ======== ====================== ============ ===.

l H5.00 FSAH CABLE HOUTING - WHERE HWAYS OF X X 07-14-87 DC-1810. REV. 7, 08-24-87 X34R01-E8, REV. 26, l

SEPARATION AT DIFFERENT SEP GHOUPS 9-24-85, -ft.3 PAR.2 ( ATTACINENT B), 6-5-85

8. 3. 1. 4. 3 ENCIDSURES ARE BROLUliT TO A SINGLE ENCL. , SEP IS ACCOMPLISHED BT THE USE OF CONDUIT RTD IN OPf9 SITE DIR FHOM THE ENCL, USING THE ENCL AS A BARRIER.(FSAR 8.3.1.4)-IU8.3.1.33 EE.00 FSAR CABLE HOUTING - CABLE HOUTING: X 07-14-87 DC-1810 REV. 7 VOLTAGE SERVICE SEPARATE TRAYS ARE 9-24-85. -I9.8
8. 3. 1. 4. 3 1.EVELS PHOVIDED IVR EACH PAR.3.2.2A VOLTAGE SERVICE LEVEL: 13.8RV, 4.16RV, 480V 170 vac AND 125 VDC LONTROL, AND INSTRiffNT (FSAR 8.3.1.4) -PG 8.3.1-33 88.00 FSAR CABLE HOUTING - CONDUITS RUNNING X X 07-14-87 DC-1810. REY. 7 08-24-87 CX3DF002, REV. 14, CONDUIT CONNECTIONS BETWEEN STRUCTUNES 9-24-85 -It.1 3-25-85, CX3DF003,
8. 3. 1. 4. 3 BETWEEN STHUCTURES ARE EITHER CONNECTED PAR.3.1.lB HEV. 12, 8-9-84 WITH A MIN. OF 2 FT.

I OF FLEXIBLE CONDUIT OR ARE PHOVIDED WITH EXPANSION / DEFLECTION FITTINGS. (13 AR

8. 3.1.4 ) IC 8. 3.1- 34 l

l 90.00 FSAR llAZAHD PHOTECTION HG 1.75, HEV. 2, X 07-14-87 SEE REMASKS SAME AS HEF. NO.

( SEPT. 1978 18. FOR DESIGN

! 8. 3. 1. 4. 4 IMPLLMENTATION i

95.00 FSAR DESIGN CRITEHIA, 10CPR50, APP. A. GDC X 07-14-87 DC-1000-E, HEV. 6, HEGULATORY GUIDES 2 (FSAH 8.1.4.3) -lu 8 -29 85, - C.S i

8. 1. 4. 3 AND IEEE STANDARDS - 8.1-5 DC-1000-C, HEV. 3, t PHOTECTION AGAINST 9-30 H3, -C.S DC-1005, NATUHAL PHENINENA HEV. 1, 4 83 -C. S DC-1810, HEV. 7, 9 85, - C. S 4

O O O

g Page No. .

02/17/88 PLANT V0GTIE UNIT 2 HEADINESS HEVIEW PHOGRAM IMPI.EMENTATION MATHIX - MODULE 17/19

=============2=========-

~

DESIGN CONST HEF. SOUNCE AND DES CON CUNHENT DESIGN CUHRENT CONSTRUCTION NINBEH SECTION StlBJECT DoctNENT/ FEATURE IGN ST. AS OF: IMPLEMENTATION AS OF: IMPl.FMENTATION HDtARKS

======= ====e========== ==================2= =============.====== === == ======== ========.============= === ==== ====================== ===- c_-- ==- -

108.00 FSAR SINGLE FAILUlfE, IEEE 279-1971 (FSAR X 07-14-87 DC-1000-E, HEV. 6 REDUNDANCT & 1. 2.12.1) - PG 8 85, - FG.13

1. 2. 12. I INDEPENDENCE 1.2.12-3 DC-1001, HEV. 1, CHITERIA - 8-30-83, -PG !

PHOTECTION SYSTEM DC-1009. HEV. 2, CHITERIA 6-3-83 -19.I 109.00 FSAR GENERIC Plf0GHAMS OF DAMPING VALUE OF X 07-15-87 DC-2166. HEV. 1, BECHTEL - CABLE THAY SUI'P0 HTS 8-9-83 SECT. 3.2.3,

1. 5. O VERIFICATION OF IN VEGP IS VERIFIES DC-1000-C, HEV. 3 CABLE THAY DAMPING BY TIIE HESULTS OF 9-30-83, SECT 5.6.1, VALUES BECHTEL TEST PliOGRAM TABLE 5. NOTE 2. REF.
13. NHC LETTER. SEE REF. NO. 1497 126.00 FSAR SEISMIC DESIGN HG 1.29. HEV. 3, X 07-15-87 DC-2166. REY. 1 CLASSIFICATION 9/78 8-9-83, SECT. 1.0
1. 9. 29 131.00 FSAR CHITERIA EVH NG 1.32. HEV. 2, X 07-14-87 SEE HEMARKS DESIGN IMPLEMENTED SAFETY-HEl.ATED FEB. 1977 (FSAR VIA IEEE 308.

I. 9. 32 ELECTHIC POWER 1.9.32) -PG.I.9-27 SAME AS HEF. NO.

SYSTEMS EUR NUCLEAR 27 POWER PLANTS 132.00 FSAN CHITERIA FOR IEEE 308-1974 (FSAR X 07-14-87 SEE HEMARKS SAME AS HEF. NO.

SAFETY-RELATED 1.9.32) -PG 1.9-27 27 FOH DESIGN

1. 9. 32 ELECTRIC POWER IMPl.EMENTAfl0N SYSTEMS FOR NUCLEAR IVWER PLANTS 133.00 FSAR CHITEHI A l@R 10CFH50, APP.A. GDC X 07-14-87 DC-1000 E, HEV. 6, SAFETY-HELATED 17 (FS AR 1.9.32) -PG 8-29-85, -C.S.
1. 9. 32. 1 ELECTRIC POWER 1.9 27 DC-1001, REV. 1 SYSTEMS IVR NUCLEAR 8-30-83. -C.S DC-1009, POWER PLANTS - HEV. 2, 6-3-83 -C.S ELECTHIC IVWEH DC-1809. HEV. 6, SYSTEMS 7-28-86, - C.S DC-1810, HEV. 7, 9 24-85. -C.S.

i l

t l

t

Pace No. 6 02/17/83 PLANT VCGTLE U.vIT 2 HECDINESS HEVIEW PHCGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX - MODULE 17/19

====== :================

DESIGN CONST HEF. SOURCE AND DES CON CURRENT DESIGN CUHRENT CONSTHUCTION NtMBER SECTION SUIUECT DOCIHENT/ FEATURE IGN ST. AS OF: IMPLEMENTATION AS OF: IMPLEMENTATION Hi}{AliKS

====- ============== =============::=== ==================== === === :::===== ========= :=========== ::::==== 2 ::=============== : --- :2=: =r_ :::

160.00 FSAR FIIYSICAL ItG 1.75. HEV. 2, X X 07-14-87 SEE HEMARKS 08-24-87 SEE REMAHKS SAME AS HEF. NO.

INDEPENDENCE OF SEPT. 1978 (FSAR 18

1. 9. 75 ELECTRIC SYSTEMS 1.9.75) -19 1.9 64 162.00 FSAH PHYSICAL IEEE 384-1974 (FSAR X X 07-14-87 SEE REMARKS 08-24-87 SEE HFMARKS SAME AS IthF. NO.

INDEPENDENCE OF 1.9.75) -PG 1.9-64 35.

1. 9. 75 ELECTHIC SYSTEMS 174.00 FSAN COMBINING MODAL RG l.92. HEV. 1, X 07-14-87 DC-2166, ifEV. 1, BC-TOP A HESPONSES AND 2/76 8-9-83, SECT. 3. 2. 3, I. 9. 92 SPATIAL COMPONENTS DMCN-5, 4 -86, IN SEISMIC RESIONSE DC-1000-C, HEV. 3 ANALYSIS 9-30-83 SECT. 5.6.1.C 175.00 FSAR SEISMIC HG 1.100 (FSAR X 07-14-87 SEE HEMARKS SAME AS HEF. NO.

QUALIFICATION OF 1.9.100) -1U 1.9-78 32 FOR DESIGN

1. 9.100 CLASS IE ELECTRIC IMPLEMENTATION EQUllNENT 7H9.00 FSAH CONIMMANCE WITH NHC 10CFH50, APP. A, GDC X 07-14-87 DC-1000-E, HEV. 6, GENERAL DESIGN 3 ( FSAR 3.1.1) -PG 8-29-85, -C.S.
3. 1. I CRITERIA OVERALL 3.1-3 DC-1810 HEV. 7 HEOUIREMENTS - FIRE 9-24-85, -C.S.

l'HOTECTION 801.00 FSAR CONFOINANCE WITH NHC 10CFH50 APP. A. GDC X 07-14 -87 DC-1000-E, HEV. 6 GDC, PHOTECTION AND 22 (FSAR 3.1.3) -it 8-29-85, -C.S.

3. 1. 3 HEACTIVITY CONTHOL 3.1-17 DC-1001, HEV. I, SYSTEMS - PHOTECTION 8 83. -C . S .

SYSTEM INDEPENDENCE fl06.00 FS AR CONFOINANCE WITH NHC 10CFH50, APP. A. GDC X 07- 14-87 DC-1000 E. HEV. 6 GDC PHOTECTION AND 24 (FSAR 3.1.3) 8-29-85, -C.S.

3. 1. 3 HEACTIVITY CON 1HOL DC-1001 HEV. 1 SYSTEMS - SEPARATION 8 83. -C . S .

OF PHOTECTION AND DC-1810 HEV. 7, CONTROL SYSTEMS 9-21 85, C.S.

O O O

Page No.

02/l7/R8 PLANT YOGTLE UNIT 2 READINESS REVIEW PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX - MODULE 17/19

======= ================

DESIGN CONST REF. SOURCE AND DES CON CURHENT DESIGN CURRENT CONSTRUCTION NIPUIER SECTION SUBJECT DOCINENT/ FEATURE IGN ST. AS OF: IMP 11 MENTATION AS OF: IMPLINENTATION REMARKS

============================================================::============::====================================:============= sen ====== =====

B13.00 FSAR CLASSIFICATION OF NOTE (e): SEISMIC X 07-15-87 DC-2166 REV. 1 STRUCTURES, CATEGORY RG 1.29 8-9-83. SECT. 1.0

3. 2. 2-1 COMIONENTS, SYSTEMS H86.00 FSAR PRINCIPAL AISC-69 X 07-15-87 DC-2166, REV. 1 RACEWAY SUPPORTS CONSTRUCTION CODE 8-9-83, SECT. 2.0,
3. 2. 2-1 FOR TABLE 3.2.2-1 DC-1000-C, REV. 3, 9-30-83, SECT. 2. I 893.00 FSAR PRINCIPAL CODES AND AISI-68 X 07-15-87 DC-2166. REV. 1, RACEWAY SUPIVRTS STANDARDS IUR TABIE 8-9-83, SECT. 2. 0,
3. 2. 2-1 3.2.2-1 DC-1000-C, REV. 3, 9-30-83. SECT. 2.1 981.01 FSAR SEISMIC DAMPING RG 1.61 X 07-15-87 DC-2166. REV. 1 TRAY SUPPORTS VALUES FOR ITEMS 8-9-83, SECT. 1.0 &
3. 7.B. 1. 3 OTHER THAN CABLE SECT. 3.2.3 TRAYS AND SUPPORT DC-1000-C. REV. 3 SYSTEM 9-30-83 SECT. 5.6.1, TABLE 5 & FIG. 12 9H1.02 FSAR SEISMIC DAMPING RG 1.61 X 07-15-87 DC-1000-C, REV. 3, CONDUIT SUPN RTS VALUES WR ITEMS 9-30-83, SECT. 5.6.1,
3. 7.B. 1. 3 OTiiER TRAN CABLE DC-2166. REV. 1 TRAYS AND SUPIVRT 8-9-83. SECT. 3.2.3, SYSTEM DC-1005. REV. 1, 4 4-83, SECT. 3.7.2 1010.00 FSAR SEISMIC SUBSYSTEM MODAL RESPONSE X 07-14-87 DC-1810, REV. 7 ANALYSIS OF CAT. I SPECTRlH ANALYSIS 9 85, PG.
3. 7.B. 3. 1. 2 CABLE TRAYS & MET!!OD OR EQUIVALENT 2.DC-2166, REV. 1 SUPlVRTS AND liVAC STATIC IDAD METilOD 8-9-83, SECT. 2.0, DUCTS & SUPPORTS DC-1000-C, REV. 3, 9-30-83, SECT. 5.6.7 1013.00 FSAR SEISMIC SUBSYSTEM EQUIVALENT STATIC X 07-14-87 DC-1810. REV.7, ANALYSIS, USE OF IDAD METil0D OF 9-24-85, PG.2,
3. 7.B. 3. 5 EQUIVALENT STATIC ANALYSIS DC-2166 REV. 1 LOAD METIIOD OF 8-9-83, SECT. 2.0 3 ANALYSIS DC-1000-C, REV. 3, 9-30-83, SECT. 5.G.8

Page No. 8 02/17/88 l

PLANT VCGTLE UNIT 2 NECDINESS HEVIEW l'HCGRCM IMPLEMENTrTION MATHIX - MODULE 17/19

===========*======================._ .

des'GN CONST REF. SOURCE AND DES CON CURHENT DESIGN CUNHENT CONSTRUCTION NIMBER SECTION SUBJECT DOCINENT/ FEATURE IGN ST. AS OF: IMPLEMENTATION AS OF: IMPLEMENTATION HEMAHKS

======= =============== ==================== =_================== === === ======== ====================== ======== ====================== ==== =====:=-==r=:

1014.00 FSAR SEISMIC SUBSYSTEM SEISMIC ACCELERATION X 07-15-87 DC-1810, REV. 7 ANALYSIS, USE OF VALUES . ARE PEAK 9-24-85, PG. 2 PARA.

3. 7.8. 3. 5 EQUIVALENT STATIC ACCELERATION VALUES 3.1.lE, DC-2166, HEV.

LOAD METHOD OF MULTIPLIED BY A 1, 8-9-83 SECT. 2.0, ANALYSIS - FAC1VR OF 1.5 UNLESS DC-1000-C, HEV. 3, ACCELERATION VALUE A LOWER FAC1DR IS 9-30-83, SECT. 5.6.8 MULTIPLICATION JUSTIFIED FACTOR 1017.00 FSAR SEISMIC SUBSYSTEM BC-TOP-4A, SECT. 4.2 X 07-14-87 DC-1810. HEV. 7 ANALYSIS - 9-24-85, PG.

3. 7.B. 3. 7 COMBINATION OF Ft)DAL 2,DC-2166 HEV. 1 RESIMES 8-9-83 SECT. 2.0, DC-1000-C, HEV. 3, 9-30-83, SECT. 5.6.lc 1018.00 FSAR SEISMIC SUBSYSTEM HG 1.92 X 07-14-87 SEE REMARKS SAME AS HEF. NO.

ANALYSIS, 171

3. 7.B. 3. 7 CONBINATION OF F5)DAL HESIONSES 1019.00 FSAR BURIED SEISMIC ENGINEERING ANALYSIS X 07-14-87 DC-1000-C, HEV. 3, CATEGORY I FOR THE DESIGN OF 9-30-83, -PG.44
3. 7.B. 3.12 ELECTRICAL DUCTBANKS D'IT BANKS IS BASED PAR.6.5 WITH CLASS lE ON THE BURIED CIRCUITS - STRUCTURE ANALYSIS ENGINEERING ANALYSIS PHOCEDURES OUTLINED IN CHAPTER 6 OF BC-TOP-4A (FSAR 3.7.B.3.12) -PG 3.7.B.3-6 1020.00 ISAR BUWIED SEISMIC DESIGN OF DUCT X 07-14-87 DC-1000-C, HEV. 3 CATEGORY I PIPING BANKS: BUHIED 9-30-83 -it.44
3. 7.B. 3.12 SYSTEMS AND TUNNELS ELECTHICAL DUCT PAR.6.5 DC-lH10, REV.

BANKS CONTAINING 7, 9-24-85, PG.7, CLASS lE ELECTRICAL PARA. 3.1.3 CIHCUITS ARE DESIGNED TO MEET SEISMIC CATEGORY I HEQUIHEMENTS (FSAR 3.7.B.3.12) -19 3.7.B.3.6 4

O O O

m l' age No,

~

02/i7/88 PLANT V0GTLE UNIT 2 READINESS REVIEW PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX - PODULE 17/19

========================

DESIGN CONST REF SOURCE AND DES CON CUlfRENT DESIGN CURRENT CONSTRUCTION NIMDER SECTION SUBJECT DOCUMENT / FEATURE IGN ST. AS OF: IMPLIMENTATION AS OF: IMPIEMENTATION REMARKS

======e======== ===========.=== ==== ==================== === === ======== ================ ==== ======== ====================== ======e=====

1021.00 FSAR BURIED SEISHIC DESIGN OF DUCT X 07-14-87 DC-1000 C, itEV. 3, CATEGORY I PIPING BANKS: DUCf BANKS 9-30-83, PG.44 PAR.

3. 7.B. 3.12 SYSTEMS AND TUNNELS ARE PROVIDED WITli A 6.5. DC-1810. REV. 7,

- SEISMIC SEPARATION SEISMIC SEPARATION 9-24-85, PG.7, PARA.

AT INTERFACES AT STRUCTURE, 3.1.3 MANil0LE, AND INTERSECTION INTERFACES (FSAR 3.7.B.3.12) -PG 3.7 B.3-6 1219.00 FSAR STANDARD REVIEW PI,AN BC-TOP-4A X 07-15-87 REFER 1V REFERENCE NO.

EVALUATION 2285 3.10.P. 4. 2 COMB. OF MULTI-MODEL RESIUNSES FOR BOP EQUIP.

1497.00 FSAR DAMPING VALUES USED MAXIMUM 15% DAMPING X 07-15-87 DC-2166, KEV. 1 TRAY SUPlVRTS IN THE DESIGN OF 8-9-83 SECT, 3.2.3,

3. 7.B. 1. 3 CABLE TRAY SUI'lVRT DC-1000-C REV. 3, 9-30-83, SECT, 5.6.1 TABLE 5. NOTE 2, REF.

13 NitC LETTER 2188.01 FSAR DAMPING VALUES FOR IfG l.G1,10/73 X 07-15-87 DC-2166, REV. I, TRAY SUPPORTS SEISMIC DESIGN 8-9-83, SECT. 1.0

1. 9. 61 2188.02 FSAR DAMPING VALUES FOR lic 1.61, 10/73 X 07-15-87 DC-1000-c ItEV.3, CONDUIT SUPPORTS SEISMIC DESIGN 9-30-83 SECT.S.6.1,
1. 9. 61 DC-2166. REV. 1, 8-9-83, SECT. 3.2.3, DC-1005, REV. 1, 4-4-83 SECT. 3.7.2 22H3.00 FSAR SEISMIC QUALIF. AND IEEE-344, 1975 X 07-15-87 CALC. X2CK2.7.1.1 ELECTRICAL DoctNENTATION FOR REV. 1, 3-17-86 EQUllNENT SUPlVRTS 3.10.B. I SAFETY REi,ATED EQUIINENT AND SUPfVRTS

Pude No, 10 02/17/HU P!4NT VC3TLE UNIT 2 READINESS HEt!IEW PHCGHG1 IMPLEMENTATION M4TRIX - MODULE 17/19

================================ ==.

DESIGN CONST REF. SOURCE AND DES CON CUHHENT DESIGN CUNHENT CONSTH11CTION NIMBER SECTION SUBJECT DOCtNENT/ FEATURE IGN ST. AS OF: IMPIINENTATION AS OF: IMPIEMENTATION HI}tAHKS

e===== =============== ==================== ========= ========== === === ======== ====================== ======== ==== =========== .=== ====; ======= = =

2284.00 FSAH SEISMIC QUALIF. AND HG 1.100 X 07-15-87 CAIC. X2CK2.7.1.1, ELECTHICAL isOCINENTATION FOR HEV. 1, 3-17-86 EQUliNENT SUPPORTS 3.10.B. I SAFETY HELATED EQUllNENT AND SUPPORTS 22H5.00 FSAR SRP EVALUATION - BOP BC-TOP-4A X 07-15-87 C AIC. X2CH2.7.1.1, EIECTRICAL EQUIP. SEISMIC QUAL. HEV. 1, 3-17-86 EQUIINENT SUPPOHTS 3.10.B. 4. 2 - GUIDANCE FOR COMBINATION OF MULTIMODAL RESPONSES 2352.00 FSAR DESIGN CRITTERIA, 10CIH50, APP.A. GDC X 07-14-87 SEE HEMARKS SAME AS REF. NO.

HEGULATORY GUIDES 17 (FSAR 8.1.4.3) 133 FOR DESIGN

8. 1. 4. 3 AND IEEE STANDAHDS - -PG 8.1-5 IMPLEMENTATION ELECTHIC POWER SYSTEMS 23G0.00 FSAH ACCEPTANCE 10CFR50, APP.A GDC X 07-14-87 DC-1000-E, HEV. 6, l CHITEHIA/ GUIDELINES 4 (FSAR 8.1.4.3) -PG 8 85, -C. S .
8. 1-1 FOR ELECTHIC POWER 8.1-5 DC-1001 HEV. 1 SYSTEMS - 8 83, -C. S.

ENVIHONMENTAL AND 00-1003, NEV. 2, l

i MISSILE DESIGN BASES 6-29-83, -C.S.

DC-1006 HEV. 2, 7-13-83, -C.S.

DC-1018. HEV. 2, 10 83, DMCN-2, 5-15-85, -C.S.

DC-1810, REV. 7, 9-24-85, -C.S.

2tMi8.00 FSAH INTHODUCTION - ANSI N45.2.4-1972 X 07 87 X3AH01-E8, HEV. 26 EI)-T-02, HEV. 7, INSTALLATION, (IEEE STD. 336-1971) 6-10-87 12-19-84 17A. O INSPECTION, AND (FSAR 17A.0) -PG TESTING HEQUlffEMENTS 17A-3 FOR INSTRtNENTATION AND ELECTRICAL EQUllNENT DURING CONSTHUCTION O O 9

[3 ' m Page No.

02/17/88 k U y

PLANT VOGTLE UNIT 2 NEADINESS REVIEW PROGRAM IMI'LEMENTATION MATHlX - FODUIE 17/19

--===========================

DESIGN CONST REF. SOUHCE AND DES CON CURRENT DESIGN CtfliHENT CONSTHUCTION

'llHilEH SECTION SUBJECT DOctHENT/FEATUHE IGN ST. AS OF: IMPLEMENTATION AS OF: IFD'I EMENT ATION HIMARKS

= - = = = = =============== ==================== ============ ======= === === ======== =======~=========== == ======== ====================== ==

- =========

4114.00 FSAR CONFOHMANCE WITH 10CFH50 APP.A, GDC X 07-14-87 SEE HEMARKS SAME AS HEF. NO.

NUCLEAR HEGULA1VHY 2 (FSAR 3.1.1, 95

3. 1. 1 CONISSION GENEHAL 8.1.4.3) -PG 3.1-2 DESIGN CRITENIA.

OVERALL REQUIHEMENTS

- PHOTECTION AGAINST NATUHAL Pl!ENtNENA 4115.00 FSAR CONFVINANCE WITH 10CFM50 APP.A. GDC X 07-14-87 SEE RtMARKS SAME AS HEF. NO.

NUCLEAR REGULA1DHY 4 (FSAR 3.1.1) 2360

3. 1. 1 CONISSION GENEHAL -IV3.1-4 DESIGN CHITENIA, OVERALL kEQUlHEMENTS

- ENVIHOtNENTAL AND MISSILE DESIGN BASES 4116.00 FSAH CONFOINANCE WITH 10CFH50, APP.A GDC X 07-14-87 SEE ItEMARKS S AME AS HEF. NO. 3 NUCLEAR REGULATOHY 5 (FSAR 3.1.1) -PG

3. 1. I C0tNISSION GENEHAL 3.1-5 DESIGN CRITERIA, OVERALL HEQUIREMENTS

- SHARING OF STRUCTURES, SYSTEMS, AND CMfPONENTS 4118.00 FSAR PHOTECTION BY 10CFH50 APP.A. GDC X 07-14 87 SEE REMARKS SAME AS HEF. NO.

MULTIPLE FISSION 17 (FSAR 3.1.2) -PG 133

3. 1. 2 PHODUCT BARHIEHS - 3.1-11 ELECTRIC POWEH SYSTEMS 4273.00 NHC QUEST. MAIN CONTHOL HOOM & FIXTURES MOUNTED PER X 07-15-87 CAir. X2CQ6.6, HEV. O.

COHHES. HEFMTE SHUTDOWN HOOM SEISMIC CAT. I 6-30-86 0430. 05-1 ILLININATION LEVELS REQUIREMENTS 4327.00 NHC QUEST. SEPAHATION OF CLASS HG 1.75 HEV. 2, X X 07-14-87 SEE REMAHKS 08-24-H7 'iEE HEMARKS SAME AS HEF. NO.

COHHES. IE CABLES IN CONDUIT SEPT. 1978 (FSAR 18 0130, 75 FHOM NON CLASS lE 0430.75) -VOL.34 CABLES IN THAY MAY 31, 1981, -PG 0130.75-4

Pace No, 12 02/17/88 PIANT VCGTIE UNIT 2 READINESS HEVIFW l'H0GHAM IMPLEMENTATION MATHIX - FW)DUI.E 17/19

.===================== ===

DESIGN CONST REF. SOUNCE AND DES CON CUHHENT DESIGN CUNHENT CONSTRUCTION NtG1BER SECTION SULUECT DOCtHENT/ FEATURE IGN ST. AS OF: IMPLEMENTATION AS OF: IMPLEMENTATION HEMARKS

- ===- ===== ========= ==================== ================= == === === ======== ====================== == ===== - ====,=============== -. ====.=====

4370.01 FSAR DAMPING VALUES FOR SEISMIC PEHCENT OF X 07 15- 87 DC-2166, REV. 1 THAY SUPIOHTS FIXED BASE CHITICAL DAMPING PER 8-9-83, SECT. 3.2.3,

3. 7.B. 1-1 STHUCTUkES AND MODE DC-1000 C, HEV. 3 COMPONENTS 9-30-83, SECT. 5.6.1 TABLE 5 t. FIG. 12 4370.02 FSAR DAMP!NG VALUES FOR SEISMIC PEHCENT OF X 07-15-87 DC -1000-C, HEV. 3 CONDUlT SUPP0 HTS FIXED BASE CHITICAL DAMPING l'ER 9-30-83, SECT. 5.6.1,
3. 7.B. 1-1 STRt0TUlfES AND MODE DC-2166. HEV. 1 COMIONENTS 8-9-83, SECT. 3.2.3, DC-1005 HEV. 1, 4-4 83, SECT. 3.7.2 4371.00 FSAH DAMPING VALUES R>R DAMPING VALUES FOR X 07-15-87 DC-2166 HEV. 1 CABLE TifAYS AND CABl.E TRAYS AND 8-9-83 SECT. 3.2.3,
3. 7.B. 1-7 SUPPORT SYSTEM SUPIUNTS DC-1000-C, ifE V. 3, 9-30-83, SECT. 5.6.1, TABLE 5. FIG. 12 4GH8.00 FSAR SEISMIC SUBSYSTE)f COMPONENT EANTIIQUAKE X 07-14-87 SPEC. APPENDIX 'OG
  • ANALYSES - TIIREE EFFECTS COMBINED BY REV. O, 11-9--79 PARA.
3. 7.B. 3. 6 COMPONENTS OF SHSS METilOD (FOR 3.4 EANTilOUARE MOTICN. QUAL. BY ANALYSIS)(FSAR 3.7.B.3.6) 4900.00 NHC QUEST. SEPARATION OF AT LEAST l-INCil X X 07-14-87 SEE HEMARKS 08-24-87 SEE fiEMARKS IMPLEMENTED VIA CollHES. ELECTRICAL ClitCUITS SEPARATION IS lEEE 3H4. SAME AS 0430. 75 MAINTAINED BE1VEEN HEF. NO. 35.

TIIE BARRIER AND Tile CABI.E THAY IDCATED ABOVE OH 'IU THE SIDE OF IT (FS AR 0430.75)

-VOL.34 MAY 31, 1984 -PG 0430.75-4 4958.00 FSAR QUALIFICATION FON HG 1.89 REV. O 11/74 X 07-14-87 SEE liEMAltKS SAME AS IIEF. NO.

CLASS IE EQUlittENT (FSAR 1.9.H9) 20

1. 9. 89 -PG. I . 9 -71 O O O

. s A

Pag No. \

02/17/88 PLANT V0GTLE UNIT 2 READINESS REVIEW PROGIfAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX - MODULE 17/19

============ ,=========:

DESIGN CONST ITEF. SOUHCE AND DES CON CURRENT ITSIGN CURRENT CONSTRUCTION NIHBER SECTION SUBJECT DOctHENT/ FEATURE IGN ST. AS OF: !rtP!DfENTATION AS OF: IMPIDfENTATION REMARKS

=

=============================================================================================================================:

4973.01 FSAR WELDING, VISUAL WELDING VISUAL X REVISED 08-24-87 SPEC. APPENDIX VC, ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA BY REV. 11

1. 9.98. 2. 9 SUBSEQUENT M IS IN ACCORDANCE AMENDMEN 12/02/85 WITIl NCIG-01, REV. 2 7 20 FOR INSPECTIONS PERFVINED AFTER 12/02/85 4973.02 FSAR WELDING VISUAL WELDING VISUAL X REVISED 08-24-87 SPEC. APPENDIX VC, ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA BY REV. 9, 1-23-85
1. 9.91. 2. 9 PRIOR M 12/02/85 IS IN ACCORDANCE AMENDMEN WITil AWS D.1.1 IVR T 20

!NSPECTIONS PEREDINED PRIOR TO 12/02/85 5025.00 FSAR WEISING OF WELDING OF X X 07-15-87 DC-1000C, REV. 3, INCN 08-24-87 X2AF01, REV. 14, Tile AWS Dl.1 CODE STRUCTURAL STEEL - STRUCTURAL 1000-C-8, 6-9-86, 8-22-85, SECT. EDITION EVOKED IS

3. 8. 4. 5 RACEWAY SUPPORTS STEEL. MISCELLANEOUS SECT. 2.1.D C5.1. 6. F THE EDITION ON STEEL, RACEWAY EFFECT AT THE SUPlVRTS, AND HVAC PURCIIASE ORDER SUPfVRTS IS DATE FOR MATERIAL PERtVINED IN SPECS, AND Tl!E ACCORDANCE WITH AWS INITIAL ISSUE DATE DI.1-1975 OR LATER FOR CONSTRUCTION EDITION. SPECS,ttNLESS OTilERWISE STATED IN THE SPEC.

5062.00 FSAR CABLE DERATING AND WHENEVER TRAYS ARE X X 07-14-87 X3AR01-E8, ATT. B, 08-24-87 X3AR01-E8, ATT. B.

CABLE TRAY FILL - FILLED ABOVE REV. 26, 6-10-87 8-19-86

8. 3. 1. 4. 2 SEPARATION SIDERAILS, THE X3AR01-E9 REV. 20, X3AR01-E9 PARA.

MEASUREMENT WHEN liEOUIRED R.G. 1.75 6-10-87 PARA. E9.5.4.2 CABLES ARE ROUTED SEPARATION IS E9.5.4.2 ABOVE TRAY SIDERAILS 'fEASURED TO Ti!E UPPEINOST CABLE IN THE TRAY

l 4 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION O 4.1 DESIGN This section describes the preparation, control and review, and change control of Class 1E raceway and Seismic Category I raceway support design. .

The preparation and revision of the design criteria, drawings, and other design documents are illustrated by the simplified flow diagram presented in Figure 4-1. Design criteria were prepared to provide the bases from which the raceway and support design is controlled. Calculations and analyses were performed to evaluate design alternatives, determine required parameters,  :

and verify design adequacy. Drawings, specifications, and reports were prepared to facilitate construction, procurement, licensing activities, and subordinate engineering design functions.

The design of Class 1E raceways and Category I raceway and electrical equipment supports is based upon the design loads delineated in the Design Manual and described in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). The design work flow process consisted of the following three phases:

P o Development of design criteria, raceway location

() layouts, and support location layouts (raceway routing, equipment locations, identification of concrete penetrations, initial support location and type ,

selection, and three-dimensional interference check).

o Design of raceway supports (preparation of engineering drawings and final support location and type selection).

o Construction support and interface (dispositioning of .

Field Change Requests. Deviation Reports, etc).

4.1.1 DESIGN CRITERIA AND RACEWAY / SUPPORT LOCATION DEVELOPMENT nesign criteria were initially provided in the Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR) which was ,3repared by Bechtel j Western Power Company (BWPC) and submitted to the Nuclear  ;

Regulatory Commission (NRC) in August 1972. Subsequently, [

detailed design criteria were developed and issued as part of the design manual.

Sources of design bases, included and referenced in the criteria, were derived from data provided by Georgia Power Company (GPC), Southern Company Services, Inc., the nuclear steam supply system vendor (Westinghouse), turbine-generator

()

supplier (General Electric), other equipment suppliers, NRC 0117q/055-8 4_1

(regulations, regulatory guides, bulletins, etc.), industry standards, BWPC design guides / standards, and licensing commitments. lh The criteria contained in the design manual are organized into sections as follows:

o General Plant Criteria. The General Plant Criteria were issued as the Physical Plant Design Criteria on December 12, 1974. This document provides the overall plant physical protection, as well as maintenance and serviceability criteria.

The protection criteria provide acceptable design bases for the protection of systems and equipment important to safeguard against postulated events or hazards. -

The maintenance and serviceability criteria define the design bases pertinent to the development of the general plant arrangement.

o Interdiscipline Design Criteria. The Interdiscipline Design Criteria provide design bases naving multidiscipline applicability. The designation number, description, initial issue date, and BWPC project discipline having principal responsibility for interdiscipline design criteria applicable to this module are listed in Table 4-1.

o Discipline General Design Criteria. The General Electrical and Civil / Structural Design Criteria (DC-1000-E and DC-1000-C, respectively) were first issued on June 12, 1973, and February 28, 1974. The electrical criteria is the responsibility of the Electrical Systems Group. They summarize the principal functions and safety design bases pertaining to the functional and physical parameters of electrical raceway design. The civil / structural criteria provides bases for the structural design of raceway supports and underground duct banks and is the responsibility of the Civil / Structural Discipline.

o System Design Criteria. The System Design Criteria provides detailed criteria (e.g., principal function, safety design bases, etc.) for each plant system. The designation number, description, material covered, initial issue date, and project group having principal responsibility for electrical system design criteria are listed in Table 4-2.

O 0117q/060-8 4-2

The design criteria control and review process was performed in accordance with the procedures established in Preface sections

() 1, 2, and 3 of the Design Manual.

listed / controlled via the Design Manual list of contents.

The criteria are Project Administration retains (files) and publishes the design criteria.

Cable Tray Locations Cable tray routing is provided by the Electrical Group. The tray routing is depicted on K-series electrical design drawings. Initial routing is coordinated with Plant Design, Mechanical, and other disciplines to ensure no interferences exist. Concrete wall and floor cable tray penetrations are identified by Electrical Engineering, which coordinates this activity with the Plant Design and the Civil / Structural Disciplines. Final penetration locations are depicted on civil / structural concrete drawings.

The cable trays are purchased by GPC. The vendor statically l tests the cable trays to determine their physical (strength) {

properties. Using the vendor-supplied test results, the BWPC -

Civil / Structural Discipline verifies that the trays meet plant seismic requirements. l Using the cable tray routing drawings, the Civil / Structural Discipline prepares the cable tray support location drawings.

() The location and standard support type of each support is then determined and assigned a unique sequence number, which is depicted on the location drawings by the civil / structural designer. A three-dimensional interference check of the support is performed at this time.

Conduit Locations BWPC Electrical Engineering provides the conduit size and a schematic routing of exposed and embedded conduits. This routing is depicted on F-series electrical design drawings. The Installation Engineering Pre-Engineering group develops installation work packages which provide detailed information concerning conduit routing. This accelerates installation activities and reduces installation deviations by allowing improved scheduling, early resolution of potential interferences, and improved conformance to design drawing and cable routing program requirements.

Concrete floor and wall conduit penetrations are identified by Electrical Engineering, which coordinates this effort with the-Plant Design and Civil / Structural Disciplines. Final conduit I penetration locations are depicted on civil / structural concrete i drawings.

1 0117q/060-8 4-3 I,

_ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ -- - __ - - - - - - _ _ - -- J

_ Cable Tray Support Locations The Civil / Structural Discipline develops a schedule drawing along with the cable tray support location drawing. The schedule drawing lists the support type and all related dimensions corresponding to each sequence-numbered support depicted on the location drawing. Civil / structural engineers design standard (typical) cable tray support types to meet the seismic requirements specified in DC-2166. The standard cable tray support is of the tube-steel braced-cantilever type.

The final support type is determined by the civil / structural designer using such information as the size, number, and relative elevations of the trays. Special supports (deviations from the standards) are reviewed by the engineer for compliance with design criteria.

The equivalent static analysis method was employed in the analyses of cable tray supports.

The NRC-approved damping values of up to 15 percent were used in the design. The percent damping used is dependent on the support anchor point (floor) acceleration and the percent loading of the cable tray. Required seismic bracing is field located to suit field conditions using standard details.

The support location drawings, schedule drawings, and calculations are reviewed and approved, and the drawings are issued for construction.

Conduit Support Locations Civil / structural engineers design standard (typical) conduit and junction box support types to meet the seismic requirements specified in the design criteria (DC-2166). The equivalent static analysis machod is employed in the analysis of conduit supports. DesigI irputs such as conduit and junction box size and weight are pt.,1ded to the Civil / Structural Discipline by Electrical Engineering. The standard conduit support consists of direct attachment to embedded strut, strut trapeze, and braced cantilevers.

The support type calculations and drawings are reviewed and approved, and the drawings are issued for construction.

Cleveland Electric field-routes the conduits and associated junction boxes in accordance with the specifications, using the schematic routing drawings and the standard support drawings issued for construction by BWPC. As the need arises, a special (new and/or deviations from the standards) support type is requested by Cleveland Electric and is designed, reviewed, approved, and issued for construction by BWPC.

Oll7q/055-8 4-4

~ . -- _ __. ._

Wall Mounted Equipment Support Locations

() The electrical layout drawings identifying electrical equipment supports were provided to the Civil / Structural Discipline with the location of the equipment and vendor support requirements.

Final design of electrical equipment supports consists of field determination of the equipment's final location, taking into consideration available space, actual conduit routing, etc. The design inputs are dictated by the vendor / supplier of the equipment. Support detail drawings are developed, reviewed, approved, and issued for construction.

4.1.2 DRAWINGS AND DOCUMENTATION Based on the established design criteria and BWPC design guides / standards, drawings and design documents were prepared to describe the design in detail.

Design documents specifically prepared for electrical raceways and supports covered by this module are tracked using a computer program which maintains a control log of design documents of Bechtel engineering work. The following describes these documents.

Calculations The BWPC Electrical Systems group had principal responsibility for preparation and control of raceway design calculations. The calculations verified design adequacy concerning allowed cable pulling tensions, tray weights, and raceway contribution to zinc content in containment.

The BWPC Civil / Structural Discipline had principal responsibility for preparation and control of raceway support design calculations. The calculations were developed to document Seismic Category 1 raceway support design adequacy.

Raceway supports were designed as a single span support based upon' applicable tributary load. The seismic loads were developed by equivalent static analysis, combining the effects of the three orthogonal seismic components using the square root of the sum of the squares method. Cable tray supports were designed to support 55 lb/ft using damping values provided in '

(civil / structural) DC-1000-C and as committed to in FSAR Table 3.7.B.1-1. Conduit supports were designed to support a given number of conduits using a two-percent OBE damping. Both i cable tray and conduit supports employ AISC-69 and AISI-68 for design methodology.

O 0117q/055-8 4-5

i Calculations for electrical raceway and supports have been j prepared in accordance with the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant )

(VEGP) Project Reference Manual (PRM), part C, section 9, which describes the procedure for preparing, checking, reviewing, approving, issuing, and revising calculations. The calculations are identified and scheduled on the Project Calculations Control Log, which is maintained by Drawing and Data Control.

Procedures require that the supporting calculations be prepared by an originating engineer, checked by an engineer designated by the engineering group leader (EGL), reviewed by the EGL, and approved by the engineering group supervisor (EGS) or his designee. In addition, certain calculations were designated by the EGS to be included in the Design Control Check List (DCCL).

The DCCL is a listing, approved by the chief engineer, of design documents that require the chief engineer's approval prior to issue. Calculations are selected because of their uniqueness, the importance of the design to safety, as a representative of a particular group of calculations, or potential impact on the cost or schedule of construction. The calculations identified on the DCCL were submitted to the chief engineer for review and approval.

Since the design process is iterative, the calculations may require subsequent revisions. Revisions to the calculations are originated, checked, approved, and issued to Drawing and Data g Control for microfilming and record retention in a manner W consistent with the original calculation.

Haz&rds Analyses A basic design objective was to locate Class lE raceways in nonhazardous areas. Nevertheless, detailed analyses of all potential hazards have been performed in accordance with the appropriate interdiscipline design criteria to assure that components required for safe shutdown are not adversely affected. Specific analyses were prepared to study the effects of:

o High-energy line breaks (pipe whip and jet impingement).

o Internally-generated missiles.

o Flooding.

o Seismic II/I interaction.

Additionally, measures have been taken to assure the continued i functioning of required electrical raceways during and after

! tornadoes and fires.

G 01179/055-8 4-6

i Drawings O Raceway design drawings were developed by the Electrical Design Discipline and diagrammatically describe the design of the plant electrical raceway system. Drawings covered by this module

. i' applicable to raceways include:

o Sketches.

o Cable tray layout / support drawings.

o Conduit and tray drawings.

o Underground duct bank drawings. ,

o Raceway general notes and details drawings.

The electrical support design drawings were developed by the ,

Bechtel Civil / Structural Discipline and describe the design of the raceway support system. Drawings applicable to raceway supports covered by this module include:

o Support location drawings.

o Support schedule drawings.

o Support detail standard design drawings.

  • O o Support detail special design drawings.

o Support detail shop fabrication drawings.

Drawings applicable to electrical raceways and supports are listed in the Drawing Control Log.

Design drawing control and review were performed in accordance with the VEGP PRM, part C, section 4. The originating discipline EGS or designee was responsible for the preparation, numbering, coordination, review, and issuance of drawings. In addition, the EGS or designee also provided input to the drawing control log.

Drawings describing Q-list items are identified with the letter "Q" . In addition, Class 1E electrical drawings are marked NUCLEAR SAFETY RELATED. The markings are located in the lower right hand corner of the drawing directly above the title block. These drawings were prepared and controlled by the electrical physical design group. They were checked in accordance with the appropriate electrical group checklist (reference BWPC Interoffice Memo Log No. BB 33958, File No.

X3BK14). Coordination prints were reviewed as applicable, by the Plant Design, Mechanical. Nuclear, and Civil / Structural

() Disciplines, and by the Electrical Circuit and Raceway (EE580) 0117q/055-8 4_7

and Control Wiring groups. The Plant Design and Mechanical Disciplines reviewed the prints for interference with piping and heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning duct systems. The h Nuclear Discipline reviewed the prints for conformance with hazards analyses.

The Civil / Structural Discipline was responsible for raceway support design, duct bank structural design, and coordination of blockout and core drill locations. The EE580 group teviewed raceway routing and sizing, and was responsible for tray sectioning and numbering. The Control Wiring group reviewed the location of junction boxes. Upon incorporation / resolution of comments, the drawings were approved for issue by the Physical Design and EE580 groups, and by the electrical EGS. Support layout drawings and underground duct bank drawings were also approved for issue by the Civil / Structural Discipline. The drawings are listed in Electrical Conduit and Tray Drawing Control Log, which contains the drawing number, description, current revision number and date, quality classification, and drawing change notice status.

Construction Specifications Construction specifications define general construction requirements, the scope of work, governing codes and standards, and provide a complete description of the material required and tasks to be performed. The construction specifications provide specific instructions / requirements for handling and installing h electrical raceways, and the fabrication and installation of raceway supports at the jobsite. Table 4-4 lists construction specifications applicable to raceways and supports covered by this module.

BWPC IIOE Electrical Systems had initial responsibility for the preparation and control of the raceway and support

( X3 AR01- s e r ie s ) construction specifications listed in Table 4-4. The BWPC HOE Civil / Structural Discipline had initial responsibility for steel fabrication and concrete anchor (X2AP01-series) construction specifications listed.

Subsequently, control was transferred to Project Field Engineering (PFE). For Unit 2, the X3AROl-series construction specifications are the responsibility of Electrical Installation Engineering and the X2AP01-series construction specifications are the responsibility of Civil / Structural Design Engineering.

Construction specification control and review were performed in accordance with the procedures established in the PRM, part C, section 26. The specification quality classification is indicated by the project classification number shown on the cover sheet and also shown in Table 4-4. The referenced PBM section addresses specification numbering, review, and approval. The originating discipline EGS was responsible for initially preparing, numbering, coordinating, initiating the 0117q/055-8 4-8

review cycle, obtaining approvals, issuing the specification, and providing input to the specification control log.

Construction specifications are listed under Specs / Material N Requests (MRs) in the control log. This log contains the specification number, description, current revision number and date, and project class'ification.

Procurement Specifications Procurement specifications provide bases for the purchase of equipment and materials. For electrical raceways, bill of material specifications were prepared. This form of procurement specification lists standard catalog or off-the-shelf type materials. This document may also be used to define special equipment when the manufacturer routinely modifies a standard product to meet specific applications.

Procurement specifications have been prepared to describe the requirements for materials and fabrication of steel items used for electrical supports.

The procurement specifications prepared by Bechtel Home Office and Field Engineering Civil / Structural and Electrical Disciplines include instructions to bidders, technical provisions, a proposal form, and quality requirements.

These specifications provide the requirements for furnishing plant labor, supervision, material, equipment, and

{}/

s_ transportation, and for the completion of the operations and incidentals necessary to furnish and deliver the specified materials to the jobsite.

Procurement specifications for raceway and support materials are listed in Table 4-3.

BWPC Electrical Systems Engineering had principal responsibility for the preparation and control of the raceway (X3AH01-series) procurement specifications listed in Table 4-3. The BWPC Civil / Structural Discipline had primary responsibility for the preparation and control of the support procurement specifications listed.

Procurement specification control and review were performed in accordance with the procedures established in the PRM, part C, section 8. The project classification number, indicating the quality classification, is shown on the cover sheet and is listed in Table 4-3.

This PRM section addresses the procurement specification control, review, and approval process. The originating discipline EGS (or designee) was responsible for preparing, coordinating, initiating the review cycle, obtaining all

{} signatures and approvals, issuing the specification, and ,

0117q/055-8 4_9

providing input to the specification control log. Procurement specifications are listed under Electrical Specs /MRs in the control log. TP.e log includes the specification number, description, current revision number and date, project lh classification, and procurement control procedure letter.

Cable and Raceway Schedule (EE580)

The cable and raceway schedule is an online, computerized data base system. It is used by management, Engineering, Procurement, Construction, and Startup for design / construction control and material / status tracking. The program accepts, validates, and stores raceway input data such as type, material, size, tag number, separation group, voltage service level, facility (building), layout drawing number, and connecting raceways / equipment. This raceway data is taken from conduit and tray drawings, and vendor data. The program performs analyses, issues raceway installation cards, and provides reports specifically tailored for the user function / organization.

The computerized EE580 data base was set up and controlled by the Circuit and Raceway (EE580) group. Upon issuance of a conduit and tray drawing, the raceway data was input into the EE580 program data base by the EE580 group. The computer analyzed the data as it was being input into the data base and generated an input response report. This report was reviewed by the EE580 group and appropriate corrective action was taken.

Raceway records with complete and verified information in the h data base were assigned an engineering release status by the program.

Design Verification Reviews Design verification reviews (DVRs) were systematically performed to assure that equipment, systems, and structures were properly designed and that the designs were properly coordinated. They were performed by BWPC in accordance with the criteria established in the Design Manual, Preface, section 4. This section defines the review procedures including requirements establishing the division of responsibility for preparing and reviewing DVR packages, requirements for design review meetings, and requirements for the report documenting the design review.

Generally, only safety-related electrical systems were subject to design verification reviews.

The system 1810, raceway systems, review package was prepared by Electrical Systems Engineering. The package consisted of design I criteria, pertinent PSAR sections, and cable tray layout  !

drawings. The review was performed by the chief electrical l engineer, Nuclear and Control System Disciplines, and QA. The review meeting was held on May 2, 1983.

O  !

01179/055-8 4_10

The chief civil / structural engineer's review of electrical '

raceway supports was conducted on August 3, 1983 (final). A supplemental review by PFE, including electrical supports, was O conducted on May 1, 1985. Action items identified during the preliminary and interim design reviews were reviewed again for completion at ' subsequent design reviews. Action items from the final design reviews were closed in a followup meeting that is also documented by meeting minutes. Design review and followup meeting minutes are filed together.

4.1.3 DESIGN CHANGE CONTROL Design changes for Class lE raceways and supports are realized by directly revising the design documents, by issuing document t change notices, issuing conduit design notices, issuing raceway holds, converting FCRs to Change Notices, or by greenlining raceway installation cards. Changes may be initiated by Engineering or Construction, or may be the result of a nonconformance (deviation) report. Changes may be approved only by the engineering organization having responsibility for the document. As of February 1987, responsibility for the majority of the Class 1E raceway and support design drawings and documents had been transferred to the jobsite. Transferred documents are noted in the control log.

4.1.4 SUPPLEMENTAL DESIGN CHANGES FOR EE580 (GREENLINING)

Greenlining affords a method for Electrical Installation Engineering (EIE) to process field-requested changes to the EE580 circuit and raceway program while work is in progress.

Greenlining is controlled by the PRM, Appendix 2, section 20.

Raceway installation cards requiring changes may be marked up by designated EIE engineers. The EIE engineers are responsible for ensuring that the corrected change is permissible, contacting ,

Electrical Design Engineering if necessary. The corrected card -

is assigned a sequential number and approved for installation by the EIE engineer.

The corrected cards and Greenline Control Log are maintained by the GPC electrical EE580 section.

4.1.5 NONCONFORMANCE (DEVIATION) REPORTS Deviation Reports (DRs) are prepared by GPC disciplines or contractors to report deficiencies in material, documentation, or procedures identified during the construction phase of the project. Within the Design organization, DRs are controlled in accordance with the procedures established in the PRM, part C, section 18.

0117q/055-8 4_11

DRs issued by GPC for Engineering disposition are transmitted to Drawing and Data Control. If the DR cannot be resolved by IE.

it is forwarded to Design Engineering. For dispositions of use-as-is and repair, a justification is provided. Required design documents are prepared and noted on the DR. Their issuance is tracked via the DR Log. Interdisciplinary review is provided as required, and the DR is reviewed against Final Safety Analysis Report licensing commitments. The GPC quality assurance site manager reviews the DR for potential 10 CFR 21 or 10 CFR 55.55(e) reportability. The disposition is approved by the responsible EGS and project engineer. DRs pertaining to Q-class, Seismic Category 1, fire protection in safety-related areas, and radwaste are reviewed by the BWPC project quality assurance engineer.

O 9

Oll7q/060-8 4-12

4.2 CONSTRUCTION This section contains descriptions of the basic processes that O' are used for installation and inspection of electrical raceways and supports. It addresses the applicable-electrical l construccion specifications, field procedures, and design l drawings which govern each installation and inspection process.

The documents used in the installation process are described in <

section 4.2.3. I 4.2.1 FLOWCHARTS I

The flowcharts in this section illustrate the installation, i inspection, and documentation activities associated with cable  !

tray and support installation (Figure 4-2), conduit and wall-mounted equipment and supports (Figure 4-3), and  ;

fire / separation barrier installation (Figure 4-4). The flow- '

charts contain nodes which represent points where preceding activities must be completed in order to continue with the installation process. Interfaces between raceway and support installation and cable pulling activities (Module 12 addresses cable pulling) are shown to clarify overall integration of the l installation process. l Cable Tray and Supports Figure 4-2 illustrates the major activities associated with the installation and inspection of cable trays. Interfaces with Module 12 are also shown. Cable tray installation begins with a walkdown of the proposed raceway route for potential separation violations. If needed, a Fire / Separation Barrier Request (FSBR) is initiated and noted on the installation documents. Vertical and horizontal supports are installed, tray sections are installed, and horizontal support arms adjusted. If horizontal arms are welded, they are installed during initial alignment.

After the final elevations are established, the tray connections are torqued, grounding is installed, and numbers are affixed.

The tray is then statused in EE580 to allow cable pulling through the tray.

The tray is then released to Electrical Quality Control for inspection via the EE580 card. EE580 cards representing sections to be inspected are assigned to inspectors. The tray run is then inspected according to the EE580 card [and any specific instructions; e.g., Field Change Requests (FCRs) and FSBRs], drawings, specifications, and procedures.

}

Conduit and Supports Figure 4-3 illustrates the major activities associated with the

(} installation and inspection of conduits. Interfaces with j

0117q/055-8 4-13

Module 12 are also shown. Conduit installation begins with the development of a pre-engineering package developed on a room basis. Detailed sketches showing routing and support locations h are provided in the package. Routing is based on a review of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning, piping, and civil drawings in order to avoid interferences, to identify core drills, and to achieve train separation. All necessary design changes are processed prior to issuance of the package.

Packages are reviewed approximately two weeks prior to the initial installation to check for construction restraints and then issued to crafts for installation. As conduit installations are completed by crafts, they are reviewed by the field engineer. Conduit installation cards (CIC) are signed by the field engineer, and then transmitted to the pre-engineering group. As all CIC cards are turned in for a particular conduit, the associated EE580 cards, along with the pertinent CIC cards, are transmitted to Quality Control (QC) for inspection. In the course of craft installation and field engineer verification. FSBRs are initiated to document all requirements for barriers.

FSBRs are verified and any discrepancies are identified on DRs.

Upon issue of a DR, conduit runs are accepted with the open DR number referenced as an exception. The conduit run is considered complete when the DR is closed. After cable is pulled through a conduit run, FSBRs originated earlier are retrieved and the barriers are installed and inspected. After a final walkdown, conduit runs are then turned over to Nuclear Operations on an area basis.

Figure 4-4 illustrates the major activities associated with the installation and inspection of fire / separation barriers. The need to install a barrier is documented on an FSBR during the installation process. After raceway initiation, the requests are reviewed, on a sampling basis, by QC to ensure that separation barriers are adequately documented. The forms are then entered into a tracking log and maintained on file until needed to document barrier installation. Prior to area turnover, the FSBR is retrieved from the files, reviewed, and the barrier installed in accordance with the instructions provided. Quality Control inspects the installation and documents acceptance on the FSBR form.

4.2.2 SPECIFICATIONS, PROCEDURES, AND DRAWINGS The specifications, procedures, and drawings applicable to installation of Class 1E raceways and electrical supports i. n seismic Category 1 areas are as follows:

O 0117q/055-8 4-14

o Specification X3AR01, section E8, Raceway Systems

(~N This specification gives Project Engineering

\ requirements for material types, train separation, hot pipe separation, and general installation of conduit, trays, pullboxes, and junction boxes.

o Specification X2AP01 This specification is referenced, as applicable, through the various field procedures and Specification X3AR01, section E8, which are used for the installation and fabrication of electrical supports. Section C9.7 contains requirements for concrete expansion anchor installation and section C9.1 contains specific material requirements for electrical support fabrication.

o Procedure CD-T-08, Field Fabrication Miscellaneous Steel This field procedure establishes the requirements and controls for receiving and storage of materials, heat number tracking, and fabrication and inspection of items produced at the site electrical fabrication facility (fab-shop).

o Procedure ED-T-02, Raceway Installation This field procedure takes the general requirements of

((_~T

) Specification X3AR01-E8 and provides the site construction group with detailed installation, inspection, and documentation requirements.

o GD-A-04, Calibration and Control This procedure establishes the requirements for the calibration, inaintenance, and inventory of measuring and test equipment and specifies the methcd and control measures used.

o ED-T-32, Fire / Separation Barrier Requests This procedure controls the initiation, tracking, and documentation of FSBRs which are used to document conformance to train separation requirements.

o 4 D-T-27, Installation of Concrete Expansion Anchors This procedure establishes guidelines for installation inspection, testing, and documentation of concrete expansion anchors.

O 4 v 4

1 Oll7q/060-8 4-15 l l

I

i l o ED-T-17, Electrical Rework Request This procedure establishes the controls for reworking previously inspected and accepted raceways.

lh o AX2D66N-series drawings l Support type and detail drawings for tray supports. l l

o AX3DG032 through AX3DG039 Lighting and communications mounting details.

o AX2D94V045 through AX2D94V049 Typical wall-mounted equipment details.

i l o AX2D94V050 through AX2D94V058 l

l Cor.duit support detail drawings.

o AX2D11N-series drawings Tray support location and schedule drawings.

o CX3DF-series drawings Conduit and tray general notes, symbols, and details. h o 2X3DK-series drawings i

Conduit / tray plan drawings.

9 0117q/055-8 4-16

i 4.3 PROGRAM CHANGES

/"'}

g v

The major changes affecting the scope of this module since Unit 1 Readiness Review are:

o Revision of the fire / separation barrier program and incorporation in a separate procedure to ensure proper l tracking and resolution of fire and separation  ;

deviations.

o Addition of revised interdiscipline separation criteria to hardware installation and inspection programs to reduce reliance on finalization walkdown programs.

o organization of a pre-engineering group in Installation  :

Engineering to facilitate conduit installation by l developing detailed design layouts from schematic layout  :

drawings and providing for early resolution of potential i interferences.

o Revision of design requirements in the form of increased conduit support spacing for nonsafety-related conduits in Category 1 areas in order to facilitate installation and inspection.

s O

i i

[

i

~!

i l

f h

0117q/055-8 4-17 b

1

  • . 3

- . . C - C 1 - Q .-3

1. .D 3 4 e W

() -

d . Q C@ d' 6 "J

M L

"J L

"3 Q ,

== C

  • L6 J Q d= Q Q @

C - .=. - C Al 9 O > --Q O 1 c - 3 3 3 -

A Ql'l A 2 Q 2 2

=

a , m ->

M 7 > 0 - >

g3 4 6 9 - M 7 I 3 C - C ."3.O 1 > *J = L -@ - *J

==m L *. @

  • Q 3 e. OM yC E - Q-

> 9 3 a 3 =

e .1 - 3 8 u -C -

  • m 5

Q 9 9 W Q == m

==

W W

e c Q* C C.

O

y. -->

L 4 ->

  • U) M O -6 yO Q O a *.
  • T WC g .C. c E@ m > 0 .. 4

@ -0 - 3 0 > - C  % 6 .

L 9 .- == @ W U 'O

  • W Q .i=.- a C 3 3 te C

O

  • .' Q6 3 w J

-p > Q m-L 3 O e=

w 4 0 1 Qd@ W C *= 3

= E A

C

==0

- W C

O Q M w O C = @ *= MO 4

O.

C 1 -C ao u O --

to 1 -

- 0-C ==

. O g m 1 ==O-9 C *. 1 9 .- 1 g 0 3 m -Q ~J A .C.

  • E s-v* > # S - e C FJ w J. -Q, e- Q - - .- C eO b .O 3 my "d =e =

6 Q

3

- 3 .C O -4 J C e i .o 1 J Q u4 - m o e - e 7 0 3 M 2- O - -

u J. gJ Q o ..

mO C

3-

  • 3 U J

, ,a .a @~ ~O O e W O 2 y 9 g u

"J

  • M.

L 2 C Q g

Q

.C Q

4. - p o j

. 3.

W p @C O - - .

~* y y Qm

'O -

W

@ k *-

.- 4 ==

> C O aya -W &

Q y

_ d - . m a U, - a 4

&  ::d y 4. m k> .- ) .$ b b C 1

6 1 .*

[ >@

O w ==O

= A

  • 3 L C 7 3 1

m g O > 9 m

  • g - 3 e - Q Q "J 1 m
  • . M Q. - 6 == 1 e c - <

,S -C C Q U 6 a3

  • m 3 m a 6 -  !

'g' -

Q = =3 0 d- "J ]J C W- 3 QW a *=m 53 C. *1

- e C

~

6 , .O- 5 .=

-J

-eamo g 5 e es 5 .,e -ou-

  • - u o eo i .3.*-w8 *J C

Q 3 C y- Q .C .m 4 '

- = c3 .** m .C -

M 1 .2 . 0 r= >* C - .L i .M.

. 5 >g O p .C - O

.c *J

.-M E M y 4

.m .- i -@ -

J E4

- C -

@ 4 Q-

.M = e- 4

.-W

- 1 -> Q O *=

  • Q l e- =- 2. .c C e- @ M
  • C W . "J

= m e- Q E -

9 j j.,C4 C =W t > 1 C CD m . 3 l J C T Q

C C m J== .b Qt; 7 O L M

  • = #
  • S 9 0 3 r

C g ->0 u V, x

.G- O@

, ..C o- -

E o 3

m, 3- ,3 a

. o

- .. --,, g g-5 - m- - =J m C > -e m -

J .e 5 e C e w3:r 5- C

-E o die v u.. w E 8> m ea c-,3 -

x x ~ > >

~

- ~ ~ 8, ~t ~

t g l l e

=._  !'

  • tr N o @ .A

.- , ~, ,

, 8, ~,

C . - - - ~ -

- -, o o o - 8 o 3 T

~,

, - - s ~ m o

_Ek 8 8 8 $ 8 5_

1

, , _e az 8 8 8 8 8 8 5

m 1

TABLE 4-2 SYSILM DESIGN CR11LHIA Designation Inittal Principal Material Norrix3r __

. Issue Title and FuncIlon HosponsibiIily Covered DC -1809 09-11-73 Cable Sys tem - 1he cable systern providos elec t rical BWPC - Liectrical Power, con t r ol, connections for pwer, cont rol, and ins trunenf at ion. Systems. and i ns t runen -

S tron wire arw ;able.

DC-IBIO 06-12-73 Raceway Systems - The raceway sys tems pr ovido DWPC - Electrical Cable tray, physical suppor t and protection for electrical Systems conduit, under-cables. ground ducts, and boxes.

DC-lBit 09-27-77 Grounding System - lho grounding systern limi ts BWPC - Elect rical Grounding cable and f aul t potentials and providos a f aul t current Systems connector allach-r e t ur n pa t h, trents to raceways.

DC-2166 03 06-78 Raceway Supports - lhis docununt provides design BWPC - Ci vi l/ Cable trays, bus ,

bases for the design of raceway suppoeis. Structural duct, and conduit supports.

L l

i 01184 /047-8/2

h i

I TABLE 4-3

.(f MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS i

t Specification Project .

Desiqnation No. Specification Title Classification [

X2 Alt 01 Miscellaneous Category I Steel OlC X2A1106 Category I and Non-Category I l Anchor Bolt Assemblies 01C i

X2A1117 Category 1 Electrical Cable Tray }

Supports 01C i-X3A1101 Cable tray and fittings llE l

1 X3AlI02 Metallic conduit and fittings llE 62E O X3AIIO3 Nonmetallic conduit and fittings llE X3A1105 Junction boxes (Class lE) 11E X3A1109 Junction boxes (non-Class lE) and llE, pull boxes (Class lE) 62E l X3AJ03 Grounding cable 62E  :

X3AJ07 Cable, wire and raceway markers 625 i

O 0119q/047-8/l  !

TABLE 4-4 (A,) CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS Construction Specification Construction Specification Project Desiqnation No. Title & Description Classification X2AP01-C9.1 Field Fabricated Miscellaneous "O" OlC ,

Class Steel Specification covers the technical and quality assurance requirements for ,

field fabricated and/or modified structural and miscellaneous steel.

X2AP01-C9.7 Furnish, Install, and Test of concrete Olc Anchors specification covers the technical ,

requirements for furnishing, installing, and testing of concrete anchors used for permanent plant installations.

X3AR01-El General Information and Requirements --

Specification not required; no future (construction) issue planned.

() X3AR01-E8 Raceway Systems Specification covers the installation llE 62E of the underground and exposed power, control, instrumentation, and signal ,

cable raceway systems.

X3AR01-E12 Installation Procedures for Electrical llE Equipment 62E Specification covers the general 61E requirements for installation of IlJ electrical equipment. 61J 62J 0119q/047-8/2

E R

A W

O D H

A H r 1

1 D NG

> L E

sEN I REI N s F C R I R E FGLD R

A S I

R T W N NS E s N

E T

F OSG I EI L Y S I

L R

O TCSA P D LM S AA E 0 E

G P O AE I R NF D N A5 8 N U S

S D RL A I

RU D E EC EI R T AR E H TO ON TA C AR OI E Z G MP C DA N m H S a I

R N E

O r _

E I g s s

> N S I I s s s NN a G

N VNNNC EHCDS S C i E RRDCMC D S S w NN o O

I I G OS l T T N F A AI k LCW I i

n UFA g CI R L C D i AE P s O CS D

e y

a .

w e

c NI A a GR R I E k ST EI A

DR 1 C -

4 e

r u

g i

F S

N OS I D .

TRQ AAE L DR UNS G

E TS AS RSN S M T A N R O GE G NM I

T O

R SI NM R P EM A SG A _

CO I _

LC eo

?) f% ~

Q,,

GPC Ds)tX Mt N T RE VIE W SUPPOR T < BR ACING INSPE C TE D E LE C T RfC AL QUAtlTV CONTROL

&N TR AY INSPEC T E D l l lTRANSMtf l SUPPOR1'BR ACtNG RECORDS TO OC l E E S80 C A RDS R ACE W AY E NGINE E R INSPtCTS g(EMHmAND073 ROUTE. 4NITIATES TR AY l (E XH 02)

SE NT TO E OC SUPPOR T INSP FORM #E R H RE VetW INST Al L Af TON AND Obl AND ISSUES F SBRS AS ISSUE F $8R AS REQUtRE D If D T 326 l l RE OutRED tE D T 121 GPC ELECT RtCAL - 'O - -

DSCIPL IN E P E GROUP PUL L C ABL E UPD AT E S C ARD IMOOutf 126

?  ? l 1R ACKING SYST E M g REL E ASING TR AV PRE E NGINE E RING RE VIE WS u FOR CABLE PULLsNG GROUP tNITI ATES DOCUME N T A TION T R ANSMI T BR ACE IS T RU T INST tE N H 07i l TR ANSMIT l EES80 LISTING E E 580 E IS TING OW MNH W AW AND DOCUME NT ATION AND DOCUME NT A TION SENDS TO M ACEWAY (E NH Ob AND OFI TO R ACE W AV E NGINE E R T O CON T R ACTOR E NGINE E R LEGEND WORltFLOW CLEVELAND . - ~ ~ DOCUME N T AT SON F LOW tNSTALE NOTES PROCE DURE ED Y 02 AND T R A VISUPPOR T SPE CIFICA YlON 313AR01 E 8 BR ACE /SIRU T UNL E SS OTHE RWISE NOTE D E XHIBIT (E kHI NUMBE RS 5 ROM E D T 02 Figure 4-2 Cable Tray and Support Installation (Sheet 1 of 2)

m O**S e B 2-og m

  • OM$2 hE E 5 =Es
Stiga

.- zm o h<2 I(oW*

O

  • 5 JL E

U M o

3-

$g- zu'x.m

& " z .I WO

  • g

.$ O e wI .Z O l -

o d _.#

$ h z C) >

$ ^

JL 4 N zg2 O.4 2 M

  • >2- =
  • O c-28

-tm, 3 2 N 2u4- 8 5

  • M y _ _ _ - - _ - - - - - _ - - _ _ .o y Q

JL Z

v b

4L OO EE o w do C 2: oa  :

O 5* 20 e

-H u

  • 2  :"  :

h* t 3

  • c 28 nn = rH

.I *o 2 g a x H.,.

!T g

  • is M

g Q ____'1____ g 8 w $, J O

L O

  • co

("

y

' mE O  !!

.;  !!s= -Oa .

O s2 e

O d2 mE m*3 43 o /

E

  • zcE g l 2 a W g E ** O 2 *O aUO- / O
  • 00 * ,m / E .

D

  • h / l 3 6 00 Es: *E / . 54. x C
2 "
Of 0 / l
sz@>5
  • EE - 2 zb c 5 O 9.s /

- g

st r..

- smo<8 .

s e

o,. _ _ _ . = _0__gy____,

om s3 e

_ _c g

?

OE*O:*

  • i" c5 _

E- M o

9 rise S-l5

=5 ov._8 4

c I 4 o

0 =

i, u m

i C E

% O E W D

Cn

\s\ -H 4

( s 4 O N W *

  • E

- E O *q

-=

( 2o a,

)

.y R. "{O  :

" ., aa

~

(/ :s 58 ysi.

o5 b> " !Su 2W  !!

os uw

(D f% f 8

\

\

LEGEND WO R K f L OW EL E C T RIC AL --- DOCUME NT A TION F LOW OUALITY TONTROL NOTES PROCEDURE E D T 02 AND SPECIFICATION X3AR01 E8 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED-E X Ht Bli (E XHI NUMBE RS F ROM ED-T 02.

R E VIEW INST ALL A TION, INITI ATE LOG (E XH 04),

SEND PACKAGE TO P E GROUP, AND INtil AT E FSBR AS REQUIRE D.

GPC (ED T 32)

E L E CT RICAL 'O ' '

SECTION U PRE E NCINE ER E XPOSED INSPECT ROUTE, CONDUl ( ROUT E . PR E PAR E INITI ATE FS8R l PACKAGE (INCLUDE EXH 09 AS REQUIRED AND 081 AND SEND TO l

tE D-T 32)

R ACEWAY ENGINEE R. l l SE ND PACK AGE SEND PACKAGE TO TO CONTR ACTOR l RACEWAY ENGINE E R I

l l

CLEVELAND CONSOLID A T E D INSTALL E XPOSED CONDUlf AND SUPPORTS Figure 4-3 Conduit / Wall-Mounted Equipment and Support Installation (Sheet 1 of 2)

f% g /'h RE vet W f OR COMPT E T E NE SS fit E E ES80 C ARDS ANDSt6 NATURES AND COND INSI C ARD f it E DR (DC AOb) tE RH 02, ON . AND 096 gg 4GD T Ott p

DeceMENT RE Vet W =o m -O l

I l

SE ND COMPL E 7E D I DR IGO TO T Oli VAULT i I ACCE PT CONDUti. 56GN E E S80 C ARD INSPE C T CONDUa f AND INSP F ORMS IE RH 02 nti. end D91 GPC E L E C T H 5C A L '

7 l OUAE ITY CONTROL TR ANSMit TO VAULT l\ \ l l i l l

T R ANSMI T l l

\ COMPL E TE D DOCUME N T A 7tDN l RE JEC T CONDUt T.

IE AH 02 AND 08 INITIATE DR k DR TO OC l T R ANSMt T DOCUME NT A T BON l

\ (GD T4H l TO E Eb80 GROUP AND 091 TD EOC l l lGD SENDT 41l TD GED k l l \ l g l l \ i GPC E L E CT hec AL /  ;  ; --- I Di$C IPt INE ST ATUS C ARD PUL L C ABL E St A TUS E E S80 f R AC RtNG TO IMODUL E 12)

RE L E ASE CONDUIT l USE REPAeR. AS IS f OR C ABL E PUL L tNG OBT AIN DESIGN AND SE ND DOC TO E OC Apppov At IGD T 011 l L LE TE D DR DR TO OW l --- DOCUMENT ATION f L OW CON T R AC TOR l TOIGD GED T 011 F OR WOR N l

4GD T ell NO T E S PROCE DURE E D T 02 AND SPECtf DCATON R 3ARO1 E 8 l

UNL E SS O T HE RW15E NOT E D E xHa6tT I E RH6 NUMBE RS CLE VE L AND C F ROM E D T 02 CONSOL ID A T E D PE Rf OR*A RE WOR RcHE P At R rigure 4-3 Conduit Installation (Sheet 2 of 2)

p ,.

(

k w k~ k ,

.s...

D. tit ..

tIR85 ,

q =O i

l I

t i ,o mo.

I-

. . . . . s,.<,....... I s-..~ _

m , .*E.t E 6 (C ou.L 6,Y COh. 0L l

l l 3 I

l l i ... , i .. - , I .. ..s ,

VUtoC 0000 l ,O t tX

......... i i i

n. . o .,

i

.-... ~ ~... i ............. l

,,,,,u.,,o,,

..so t es,t .E D ses t 04A C

ucc etic mc.t c.w.et me s

v *h .e ove

,e,. , e.i s . . . .<. .. .S .i E

- o

-.. i  ;

..DC Yt .4.85Ds408.

0 hWWE g I

i u.o I , ,,,,,, , ,o j .. . . ,o o.. n o., I co . .- ,o.,

_. _ _ ooco . .,- n o.,

l 1* =-. .=

1 o,.s ..oc.oo.. . . , u o I 5Ptcof ScA,1088 R1. .1 & E i u,,,,,,,, o.,fet

~ t.91.

. . .0,5. D. 0,HE

. . ..,SE  :

Cofm50L sp. ,E D 'N *O I U tes5, .L L S...*E .

Figure 4-4 Fire / Separation Barrier Installation

- -___ _ _ _ _ _ _ - ___ _ ~ - - __.- -. - . . -- - -- - - --

~ . .- - - - .. . .- . - - . _ -

5 AUDITS AND INSPECTIONS O

5.1 INTRODUCTION

This section contains a discussion and listing of Quality Assurance (QA) audits and special evaluations and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspections performed since the completion of the Unit 1 Readiness Review assessment. The results of the Readiness Review Unit 1 finding followup performed in the area of electrical raceways and supports is also discussed.

The QA design and/or construction audits were conducted by Georgia Power Company and Dechtel Western Power Company QA personnel in order to provide assurance that design and ,

construction processes function as required by 10 CFR 50, '

Appendix B: the project QA program commitments defined in the Final Safety Analysis Report; and the Design (Criteria) Manual. y A number of NRC inspections within the scope of this module have been performed since the Unit 1 Readiness Review effort.

Findings or violations resulting from audit activities applicable to electrical raceways and supports are listed at the  !

end of this section. These findings were reviewed by the Readiness Review Team and factored into the assessments presented in section 6 of this module, as appropriate. ]

()

1 A discussion of the results of Unit 1 finding followup and i listing of followup results are presented in section 5.5 and Table 5-4.

l 01289/055-8 5-1

a - 4 a- - -6mm.~L-m u a - 4 a-- --- L_

O e

l l

9 0128q/055-8 5-2

1 5.2 PROJECT AUDITS Project Quality Assurance (QA), consisting of Georgia Power O Company (GPC) QA and Bechtel Western Power Company (BWPC) QA, conducts regularly scheduled audits to verify compliance to project requirements. Audit findings are reported to the management of the audited organization for corrective action.

Table 5-1 provides a listing of the audits conducted and findings issued since the Unit 1 module. 1 5.2.1 GEORGIA POWER COMPANY AUDITS AND FINDINGS l GPC QA audits are performed in functional areas such as equipment, piping, cable installation, etc., and are readily identifiable to module scopes.

GPC QA has conducted 11 audits related to the scope of this module since the completion of the Unit 1 Readiness Review assessment. These audits resulted in six findings. These findings identified discrepancies in documentation, training, and procedural requirements, and incidences of hardware nonconformance.

For each finding, the extent and significance of the discrepancy was identified and adequate corrective action taken to resolve the deficiency.

5.2.2 BECHTEL WESTERN POWER COMPANY AUDITS AND FINDINGS BWPC QA audits are generally performed in design functional areas such as drawings, calculations, and Field Change Requests, and are applied to all disciplines, rather than a specific discipline or hardware category. Therefore, it is generally impractical to identify audits to a specific module. Findings, however, are normally limited to a specific design area and may be categorized by module. Four findings were related to the scope of this module. These findings invclved QA review of Unit 1 Readiness Review corrective action commitments.

Corrective actions for these findings have been completed and accepted by QA.

F I

l

!o l

0128q/060-8 5-3

l% _ _ - _ ,_ _ __

O O

O 01289/055-0 5-4 l

5.3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION INSPECTIONS

() Readiness Review has identified 16 inspections conducted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) which are related to the scope of this module. These inspections resulted in five violations which fall within the scope of this module.

Violation 86-31-01 documented damage to a cable tray due to  !

failure to follow established procedures to properly protect installed components. Violation 86-61-13 identified a failure '

to maintain configuration control of a Quality Control-completed conduit support. Corrective actions for these violations have been completed and the violations have been closed.

Table 5-2 provides a listing of NRC inspections and findings for Module 17/19. ,

O 0128q/055-8 5-5

I O

I l

l i

(

l l

l O

9 0128q/055-8 5-6 J

5.4 REPORTABLE AND pOTENTIALLY REPORTABLE TTEMS

() Since completion of the Unit 1 module, seven deviating conditions in Units 1 and 2 applicable to the scope of this module have required formal evaluation for reportability on Deficiency Evaluation Reports (DERs). Of these, five were determined to be potentially reportable per the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55(e) or 10 CFR 21 and assigned construction deficiency report numbers. Two of these five were determined to be reportable. All DERs for this module are listed in Table 5-3 and those evaluated as reportable are discussed below.

DER-144 and -145 (CDR-M101) evaluated conduit support design and installation deficiencies identified during Unit 1 Readiness Review involving failure to use multiple supports and lack of longitudinal bracing. All Units 1 and 2 conduit runs and supports with the potential deficient support conditions were identified and a walkdown of those conduit runs was performed.

Deviation Reports were written to track and resolve improper installations. Design details were clarified to ensure subsequent installation and inspections would meet design requirements. These conditions were evaluated as reportable and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was notified June 30, 1986 (letter log GN-972). l O

I l

l 0

01289/055-8 5-7

a A O

l l

l l

l I

I i

l I

O t

O l 0128q/055-8 5-8

l 5.5 UNIT 1 FINDING FOLLOWUP

() Unit 1 followup consisted of identification of all findings and corrective actions for findings as a result of Unit 1 Readiness i

Review or Nuclear Regulatory Commission evaluation of the Unit 1 '

modules. For Unit 2, a list of those findings was compiled and transmitted to the Project for verification that corrective action taken continued into Unit 2. The Project evaluated each finding to determine the following:

o The finding was an isolated occurrence in Unit 1 and did not require Unit 2 action (or applicable to Unit 1 only).

o Corrective action taken for Unit 1 remains in place and  !

acceptable.

{

o Corrective action in place for Unit 2 has changed from  ;

that specified in the Unit 1 module.

l o Corrective action taken for Unit 1 has not been entirely effective in Unit 2 and therefore is modified.

Forty-nine Unit 1 Readiness Review Findings (RRFs) were identified as applicable to Module 17/19. For each finding applicable to Unit 2, a response was returned to Readiness Review that stated which documents incorporated the corrective actions required, any changes to committed actions, and action O taken if corrective action was not effective. Selected findings were included in the Unit 2 assessment to provide independent Readiness Review verification of the project evaluation results. Table 5-4 presents a listing of the findings and the results of the continuing corrective action evaluation. Where applicable, findings involving more than one type of deficiency have multiple table entries resulting in 62 total entries.

The results of the followup evaluation indicated that all Unit 1 Readiness Review finding corrective actions except two, RRF 17-003 and Independent Design Review (IDR) IDR 22-F028, were isolated occurrences in Unit 1 or remained in place and acceptable for Unit 2.

Finding RRF 17-003 addressed the potential for water entry in I electrical equipment through unsealed conduits. The Unit 1 corrective action resulted in initiation of a procedure to l ensure conduit sealing. The procedure was deleted after Unit 1 i completion without initiation of an effective replacement program. Resolution of this deficiency is addressed in the response to Unit 2 Readiness Review Finding 2RRF-17/19-005  ;

discussed in section 6. I O

0128q/060-8 5-9 l 1

Finding IDR 22- F028 addressed the lack of adequate consideration of piping thermal growth in hot pipe-to-raceway separation requirements. The Unit 1 response committed the Project to a finalization walkdown which would verify adequate separation.

For Unit 2, the Project eliminated the need for a walkdown by providing mechanical and electrical crafts and inspectors with separation criteria which included a factor for thermal growth.

O l

l O

01289/055-8 5-10

G

- 0 7

0 7

0

/

l f/

0 G Gt G

9 H f H

& 1 1 9 0 0 0 7 P P H P S 9 C C 7 C K H H R T T 0 T A . S I I I M R D D R D F F U U F ll R A A A A A o Y B Y D N T t l D .

T A E D X B E I l

D O R T N8 I T i E N B T ,

O1 . D D .

P T S I I D ,C - N NN E L F I I GTL M

  • D 7I OE NT lES A C W G V 3O M T* Tl A I P I A NM C C _

W E NOOO M1 LFR TP U. NE I D A S _

D R N HTC OMHRT A. A TI OT RE T ONS CO H I OA SS TL & N _

N T I OENY CS ,& U . NV RY CL E OD O TI EOB E A S0 E ES EI D N F N CT I TE DD N5 E RP LH EE O ST EC ,TD ATY*

  • D I R PA O Y EC TT P ET SUDUE F FFA CA M TI 1 D 2E RELT DABTS'T D MS

'S 0 C

I I PR N

OW NL EL PP O

CM OM 3T CTMON Y DOI M E E I A M NM KT SRSE BY* C O R1 TT ONC I S F A _

.O DI TNOEM RT TC E l OI I OA ST NR LT R I C 3M RI F Rl l D FEO l I R TI R TN I E AS _

IM C i i G A XM A R C DFTNS TT CT NE N CY O US I O PkE&O 'V AA E OI E EAN ES ,E l S R  :

I A C SP D E 'V DST RW ONO RCO NS Df l i

P N G ME , RES ' A B RGI I I I OE Ef TY ED WS RDTDT YCD liAM FI DFS P L, T i CA _

W GE DA P OEO T R'CBODY SN TTW I N M O3 lAS ER F S LNKN OTO TR NEA I I' I s ,I ,R .A C NODD ,B RG ODH CRO C0 T ES VT _

5V 2E 6CGEM N OO I T EED SD FI 1 E 1 I 1 I NI FI 6 G'V D D NR TH JCM F2 NE F I' RD R R - RI CL E I P ATR O/I O0 P I fl ON l

l 7 7R 7TN B 6 SC 'R R 'V E 1 F RI E RNA AI i E SA 1 T 1 A 1 CI TO 2LG EI I ON AWli POW NC TH NM RO S

EF GN O

G H EAOR GLRNP

- ANTR CCEO T EI O P EEA T

ETG I

IOI NI OE ION I N NE NET D NTO0 CT SCN TAN TMA PR TA INCI N _ I 2 I R I AL 07 ON2 NAA YAE N ACI AFR LTT P

I T

AT l N DA5 T D0 DI D , .I L 81 1 0N - ALI UI M '

A H C N0 NF NDDRI - - - 8 S7 I LR AI F QFR LS - SH lO

') E RSL t' E E I

I F FD I

FW I EEEFS FUUTRE 7775S'SF ll 1 EC 1 LAE PTT WLP EP EI O DLF AYR TSE YI i O AC T

Sl l H 3 O SSI ET FFFELSR MSI CMC AAR SBT AT SE 2AA H _ RX RH RSSRVA RRR AER ONR AOP NUE NUA RI NII T S RC RS RI I COD RRU&CS CI C RCD I QP I SW TW I T TY _

I T G 6 G 6 6 G G 5 5 6 l

8 H H 8 8 H 8 0 8 lNIL f

/ / / / / / / / / /

t A _ 9 9 2 6 6 G 6 H 7 7 EI I

_ E 1 1 0 2 2 2 2' l 1 2 I O _ T . / / / / / / / / / /

T 4 2 2 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 G D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1

5 V l E

T . V , 1 N E I 1 l L _ I 1 l A.

lP _

. 7 0 H y 2 l 1 6 9 0 7

_ C O' 0 8 H 9 H

- - 0 0 O G G G G G RH R8 RH R0 R R R NR A F F F CS A -

CS A -

CS A1 C1 A A A IDlF3_ V V V NM C - C - C- CF C C C I U PR PRi PR PR P P P FN I H I

Hl BR RR G G G

7 7 7 6 6 4

_ 0 0 0 1 f H ]

_ / / / / / /

_ 6 G 6 5 5 G R- l f H 8 8 H R TE - - - - - - -

I B 1 1 l 9 9 9 DM - 0 0 O 0 0 O _

I U - I' P P P P P TAN _ C C C C C C N

IO. -

t T . .

GA NZ I I A A A A A A A A A A TN Q C Q Q O 0 O Q Q O Oi N/

.H e

I t

f 4 pG i

l R AO C

P H

4 C

P R

5 C

P B

G C

P H

7 C

I' G

H C

P G

3 c

l' G

C P

G 3

C P

G 2

C P

G 4

p, I/ TO I N ._ 2 2 2 2 G 3 1

3 3 a1 D P0 E

A

)

6

_ 0 1 1 0 6 5 7 7 7 0 / / D /

0 5 5 O 5 H H M 1 1

& - (

7 7 0

- 9 l l 5 2 1 P P 5 I' S 1 C C 8 C E 01 0 H T T T A S I I S6 I M H D D R5 D E F l l U F8 U H A A A A0 A il S

_ N) T NL E W

_ I W DI EA T E HC NW EN S L I FI TC A WH Y A S OV I A S TE AS C & E W( ,Y ET S S WT I r NH S NA I N Y G EH OR EN C G SR OH I I A NS C0 TT UA S N TE I T S H SI Y AP C QL TF SI NT T TT T NDA HP HP E ND EA CE NN ONH f t

T ClE. O A. N I ON NW EL EE E I I T LS EE TT LI I I n

_ O PB MM L TF A P A AD TF PG SA EN R C E C& SF N TA C MN NC HI A AWL I EO EE SE AW

- OI I S l A C ER HT H EL NH E CL DE f T EI A Tl N WH I EI M O ,NR tQN D VVC Ct i HO TA G VV A . . LO NAU EO N I E ED TI EL RN I E i

l

_. AC O D HC A THF LN I T BI OI TR G - _

C I TE C O EO WA A FD C 0 .

- I T TI C N& T ES C L NV U ES f

i . HN AUO O S I RSN 2 ML ML RS P _ TE LDR I S Y U REO AA IOA AC RE W

CN LNP TT A D ONI TY. RT TT HN ON O AO AR H N CI T I A GS AO GI CI l 2 lE. P TCD HO T O DA NH ON LN O D i5 = EM S N AP C FAL T I T RI E HS FA V f' . O NFA PP E OEL P f S f PE OE Fi . FC I O EU L F HA FE D HT I l Hn i

_ O S SS B O N T OL AN OL AL N I l Y FNN A OOS B QA CO GB 0O A _ NR OOO F . C N I TN NA L e I M l T

_ OA I I OS O T I OC FN F FE T I E _ I I ETT Y D I AG I OO OF OS AG NCI _ TL CAA NA E T TNG TG I O S TN I N _

AI NTC OH L A NI N AN YT E YAS NI DA5 T LX ANI I T L L ENI LI CAS CN C G EN A i . C Ll M l I EF T I L MI D LD ACR NO AHN MI

' E  !'l E E . AAE LMI E F A EAR Ai l UI E EI UEI EA NSl J : T T Pl C l 1A. L H T LTA TL QHG DS QGD LT Sf .t B SES MCE 0B E S PHG SC EDN I N ENN PR 2AA l

_ NHY OOP 1 A V N MEE NN DAA VE DAI ME T. iS _ I TS CDS VC O I I PH I I AFH ET AI I F I P TY -

I T _ G 5 S 5 G 6 6 S 5 G G N !. H 8 H 8 R H H H H 8 f f

UI / / / / / / / / / / /

A 5 9 9 9 4 7 7 5 f

1 1 0 Ff E - 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 I. O T / / / / / / / / / / /

T A H 0 0 0 5 7 1 0 0 6 8 d D O 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 O

Y L E

I V I N E 1 1 I A I _ 1 1 I l

I' _

9 0 6

__ 4 5 5 1

f H 8 O 0 0 G H R H f

Nf F F F I E A A A DB ,

NM_ C c C I U P I' P FN _ G G G y / /

G G

= H H

. - 1 1 1 1 6 5 6 G 2 - -

2 7 7 7 2 3 5 7 7 3 6

_ 0 / / / / / / / / / 2 P 5 5 5 6 G G 5 5 6 P R. T H 8 8 0 B H 8 8 8 0 TE _ / - - - - - - - - - /

I D : 9 7 7 7 7 7 7 0 0 0 1 DM_ 0 l l l l l l 2 2 2 0 f

I I

P7 P P P P P P P P P P2 lAN C3 C C C C C C C C C S4 -

N O __

I 2 T _

GA .

NZ .

I I A A A A A A A A A A A TN _ O O O Q O O Q Q Q G O -

I A _

DGi C C C C C C C C C C ON. t ofu i

e l

LAO l

P G

l' G

P G

P C

P G

P G

P G

P G

l' G

P G

T l

G cI TO H I t f

l 5 7 7 2 1 G l f

u8 / I N 2 2' 3 3 D

P0 E

02/24/HH D, O O Pl. ANT YOGTIE l' NIT 2 flEADINESS llE Y l E W PHOGRAM NHC INSPECTIONS T Alll E 5-2 E tt i T INSPECTION FINDING No OilGANI7ATION NUMBEft N UM B Elf LEVFl. DATE SUB.1ECT HEMAltKS

- = --  :=c= = -:= =====- ===- - -. --- =v: == === = = = --

==-_ -- =--- - --

-= ==: -- -

17 NHC 424/RS-043, 10/17/85 INSPECTION OF STHUCT. CONCHETE, CONTAINMENT VIDI. ATION NOT llEl. ATFD 425/85-032 POST-TENSIONING, STEEL STHUCTURES, PIPING & TO THIS MODill.E SUPPORTS, HEACTOR VEJSEL. H E Cll . EQUIP.,

Er r , EQUIP., CABLES & RACEWAYS, & MATH *L CCITHOL RESULTING IN 1 VIOLATION FOR FAILUHE TD PRCTECT SAFETY-RELATED COMPONENTS 18 NHC 424/85-063, 02/21/86 INSPECTION OF STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, STEEL 4 25 / il5 - 04 I STRUCTUHES, PIPING & SUPPORTS, HEACTOH VESSEL. MECilANICAL EQilIPMENT, ELECTRICAI.

CABLE & RACEWAY, STORAGE OF MATElflAL, AND THE PHEOPERATIONAL TEST PROGRAM 19 NHC 424/HG-009, 05/05/HG INSP. OF STRUCT. CONCHETE, CONT. V 101. A T I ON NOT HEl.ATED 425/86-004 POST-TENSINING, STEEL STRUCT., PIPING & To TIIIS MO D ill.E SUPPORTS, llVAC, HEACTOR VESSEL, M EC TI . EQUIP.,

ELECT. EQUIP., INSTH., CABLES & RACEWAYS &

PREOP. TESTING HESULTING IN I VIOLATION FOR INADEQUATE SYSTEM WALEDOWN DURING TURNOVER &

IDE 39 NHC 424/86-016 12/08/86 REVIEW OF READINESS HEVIEW MODULE 17 20 Nile 424/06-031, 06/02/86 INSP. OF STHUC. CON., CONT. POST-TEN., STEEL. VIOLATloN HG-031 OH 425/86-015 STHUC. RC PRESS. BDHY, if E A C . VESSEL, MECH.

EQUIP., PIPING & SUP'HT., ELECT. EQtil P. ,

ELECT. A INSTR. CARLES, Pile-OP TEST PROG., &

M AT!. CONTit01. RESU LT. IN 1 VIOL. F0ft FAIL. To EST. Pil0 C .

41 NHC 4 2 4 / flG- 031 NHC VIOLATION IV 06/02/HG CABLE TRAT DAMAGED DUE TO FAILURE TO FOLLOW AtiDIT HG 031 425/HG-015 HG-31-08 ES T A B L I S TIE D PHOC E DilliE TO PHOTECT INSTALLED COMPONENTS 12 Niit 424/86-018 12/10/ ff G HEVIEW OF HEADINESS HEVIEW MODULE 19 21 NiiC 424/HG-051, 07/23/8G INSP. OF STRUCT. CONCHETE, STEEL STHUCT.

125/86-023 PIPING & S UPPollTS , if E ACToli VESSEL. M ECII .

EQUIP., ELECT. EQUIP., E l. EC T . & I N S T H t)M .

CARLES & H Acc.W A YS , PHE OF TEST PROGRAM &

PLANT PHOCED. & HEVIEW OF HH MOD 7

D i E.

t l

F E f

- T 3 T iD 1 A.

1 A. O 0

- l l M -

E 1 E 5 H 6 TS V -

TI E.

0 l

l E TL OI NH 0

0 OU G 1 OU T 7 5 ND H 6 ND N 8 0 O 0 O OO 0 NM N - NM I T N -

- O O G O T O 7 S - I s I H I s AD I 1 1

M - Tt T Tl VE T H Al T Ai l HT A A LTi A.

I I I T EA L T

I M- O O D D SL O D F = I O I U I O BE I U

H - VT V A VT OH V A

- D S .H ,

- I E M IAH T T. , L T E C N& INEP T I F RE N N E

SE TH O

H I

I HO I I DOM M RI T I C D iT T EFP OF ST ,GOI C P P N CSNH GA P E

L l CW i EF I

W GADU T I I UTT .

S P O C

'TEYI T N 3W t i TLI NLEQ Q! ND !

TUS P ,

CLATN I C O M I EV 2N I EI E E0EE NSY L UPWLO TQFL E W E 2E DHF HMG A A

- R EI C I

L OL S NH P L - I T TTEA !A. E W I T , CSS UN O S SI EO EYTN NI RM l' PE N SVAEE SI NF A Y & I WTNA AWI A I C ,E HI I RD EAO S AS UN EEL L UD ,PAST L HTI R WE DA DFDP I ,

PSQ G RTA E , SON E .

.CT NTO SI AT D EUS CLN O

MG NAI AS T TRHY MES N ,

I I

,O RM M TPEHE GACC T AAO N NN NO A PESP .

A -

Sl LPM NMI E R RVI WI LliOE EFLH R -

l i H E I FP O T EN OTI N NTA T IPTSU1 F S P S.

G - - .QATL DOI S P LEA I I HI TA AAH O

I EECNP NTTN P ATL VA TWAM MLU ,SNS0 H -

I T AM I NI  !

EM N LR RPD .

P - E .RLI FEE iS ICAU HC f E ODOE E FN El TASANE

,LT HHTP ND9 HUI I H CEI P PSCo EHNCOC W CCS O EI I I T TCA S TV AOl HUOI CN -

k NEN&T7 LL & I H CCC Sl SA T T I T I

CTI R A i -

OMI UI & UE EA Ei LII C CDPC NCTT&H V C GED DA S DD LND NF AC F ,& OHO OFTM NR l F EE l E OUAC l i

EI A I E I OiT TSiT H CS RUM M RE OO O D2l f RSTO . OUTO CR TI Nl E. OSN S UTTPL ROT C FHL A2S ESI HY H I H FSMEI A NS -

RPC I R ROPI M OO E S TAWPL PSWP SN  !

HFP O H T TiETAH DR FN HNI A N Y ,E ,AY FO SSl SF l D f

EO N O O MSSOO OAEG NSTNTT _

NI 2 - - EE F FNSE TW ONI 0 FI G EET TRCP ON O N I T - F& TRO OO V P I OT2 OTN FI R 2 TNI l.

DC5 - T- O O I

O&I EI I TL ET TI A AI 0TUE E AN TI TMA A E C G . PFW WTf O CU CTHE WVS I TRT R E l. H E CTSCUU I' E - E - .NPO E EAfiS CO EATL ERN

  • IVCUI I Ll E HSI - J - PI I - LI I LDE AII PLEi t I EE ULN I

LRPC E A E.fFRQ PHI T NR - H - SPUEOV VONH T SOND VSC lSTHI U I AMN SERoSD 2I A O - -

NI QHI E EI ON CI NI EO EBI NCTA ACOO NPAHNN T - S - I PEPVH I VCU 1

QW I VPM HOL I ASF - F CC I OCPI A TC _

I H G G 6 6 7 7 7 7 tNN H 8 H 8 8 8 H H l - / / / / / / / /

- 1

- 0 0 0 9 1 1 3 F E - 0 2 2 1 0 1 1 0

I. T . / / / / / / / /

T A - 9 8 8 2 1 2 2 S G D- 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 O 0

V L :

E -

T - V -

N E.

- V V A I I I L

P -

N N O O

- I I .

- T T

- A A L3 L1 G -

O1 O0 NH - I - I -

I F - V1 V5 DH - 6 0 NM . -

C -

I t i

~

ICI 6 H7 FN ~ N8 N8

=

= , , , , .

N = 07 1 98 8 55 55 1

28 O = 62 6 6 01 2 00 00 1 0 I  : 00 0 0 1 0 00 T -

1 00 00 CR, G6 6 6 6G 6 77 77 77 EE - R8 R 8 8R 8 8S 88 H11 PB = // / / // / // // //

SM= 45 4 4 45 4 45 45 45 NU - 22 2 2 22 2 22 22 22 I N : 44 4 4 41 4 44 44 41 -

=

N =

O, I -

2 T -

A --

Z -

I -

N A -

G - C C C C C C C C _

uH! R x H H H H I H H H f r/ O N N N N I

N N N N

- 1 e2 TO 2 3 5 0 3 9 G 1 g/ I N = 2 2 4 4 1 7

,2

. D -

6 5 _

l' 0 E -

Page ha.

O 2 s~

o tj 01/12/88 PLANT V0GTLE UNIT 2 READINESS HFVIEW PH0GHAM FOLLOW-UP OF UNIT I FINDINGS (HH.IDR,NRC)

TABLE 54

.====== ========== ======================= ============

EDIT SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION OF DESCRIPTION OF UNIT I DESCRIPTION OF UNIT 2 NO FINDING DESIGN CONST LEVEL FINDING COHHECTIVE ACTION FOLLOW-UP ACTION

.= ==,===2=== ===: = ====== ===:- = ========================

- ==========u ================== ====================: r=======

526 IDR X 1 EFFECTS OF THEHMAL GROWTH AND HOT PIPE WALEDOWN PHOGRAM COHHECTIVE ACTION HAS CHANGED 22-F028 SEISMIC MOVEMENT WERE NOT (WP -4 ) DEVELOPED SEE SECTION 5.5 CONSIDERED IN HEGARDS TO HACEWAY TO PIPE SEPARATION 627 IDH X II CONDUITS OF DIFFERENT TRAINS CONSTHUCTION SPEC X3AR01 CORRECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS 22-F057 ARE SUPPORTED FHOM THE SAME SECTION E8 REVISED TO AGREE IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE SUPPORT WITH EXISTING PRACTICE OF PROVIDING COMMON SUPPOHT FOR DIFFEHENT TRAINS PHOVIDED SEPARATION MAINTAINEO 528 IUR X I SEISMIC GAP NOT MAINTAINED a. DR'S - REWORK / REPAIR. b. CORRECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS H 057 DETWEEN CONTAINMENT LINER AND REVISE PHOCEDURE, c. FINAL IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABl.E RACEWAY SEISMIC GAP WALKDOWN i

530 HRF X II NO FSBR FOR RACEWAYS VIOLATING CRAFT DESKTOP PHOCEDURES CORRECTIVE ACTION REMAINS I 17-001 MINIMUM SEPARATION REVISED IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE l

HEQU1HEMENTS 531 HHF X II NO FSBN FOR HACEWAYS VIOLATING DR'S, FSBH'S INITIATED. CONHECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS17-001 MINIMUM SEPARATION ADDITIONAL SAMPLE HEVIEWED. IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE HEQUlHEMENTS CRAFT HETRAINED 532 HHF X I OC INSPECTION METHOD FOR QC SAMPLING HATE INCHEASED BY CORRECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS17-002 VERIFYING TOROUE OF BOLTS DIRECTION FROM Q.C. SUPERVISOR IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE ,

SECURING HACEWAY TO SUPPORTS l INADEQUATE 533 HHF X I BOLTS SECURING RACEWAY TO GENERIC DR DISPOSITIONED CORRECTIVE ACTION HEMAIKS ,17-002 SUPP0HT IMPROPEHLY TORQUED USE-AS-IS. DER 106 INITIATED IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE  !

531 HRF X I BOXES VIOLATE WATERPROOFING REQUIREMENT MODIFIED TO ALLOW CORRECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS17-003 HEQUIHEMENTS USE Of NONWATEHPHOOF BOXES IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE PHOVIDING CONDUITS ARE SEALED 535 HHF X 1 CONDUIT NOT SEALED Wile H E COMMITMENTS TO MODIFY CORRECTIVE ACTION HAS CHANGED 17 003 ENTEHING BOXES PHOCEDURES TO ENSURE CONDUlTS SEE SECTION 5.5 AHE SEALED AND TO INCLUDE VERIFICATION OF CONDUIT SEALING IN WALKDOWN PROGHAM.

l l

t - __ .

(*L (% 3 Page No.

01/12/88

( (d PLANT VOGTLE UNIT 2 HEADINESS HEVIEW PHOGRAM FOILOW UP OF UNIT 1 FINDINGS ( If H , l D H , N HC )

TABLE 5I

_ _: ._: _ .- - _=_=_ _ .. .2z :::_ __: .

EDIT SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION OF DESCHIPfl0N OF UNIT 1 DESCHIPTION OF UNIT 2 NO FINDING DESIGN CONST LEVEL. FINDING CORNECTIVE ACTION FOLLOW-IIP ACTION

__- - 2 _ _::s_: ___ . 2: -: . - _ - __:= _ - -- ._ :- ___ __: _:: =::::.:: ::= 2 ==:: :::= =e __: :: x::

51H I Dit X II OUALIFICATION AND EVALUATION NO COHHECTIVE ACTION REQUIHED ISOLATED INSTANCE /ONE TIME 22 A002 0F CABl.E THAY SUPPOHTING CONHECTIVE ACTION llAHDWARE NOT PEHFORMED 519 IDH X II S ullCH A lf G E LOADING AND STHESSES CALCULATION X2CD13.5 HEV. 1 COHRECTIVE ACTION 16 MAINS 22-A004 AT CUHVED P0HTIONS OF DUCT PEHF0HMED TO DOCUMENT MOST IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE BANKS HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDEHED SEVENE CASE. COMMITHENT TO IN THE DESIGN OF BUHIED DUCT ISSUE MEMO TO PEHSONNEL TO BANKS E M Pil A S I Z E ANSI N45.2.lt HEQUIHEMENTS 520 IDH A I DESIGN CHANGES DO NOT CONSIDER FCH JUSTIFICATIONS HEVISED. COHHECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS 22 A006 IMPACT ON HACEWAYS AND DESIGN PERSONNEL HETHAINED, IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTADLE ASSOCIATED P RDWAHE MEMO'S ISSUED AND DESK INSTRUCTION ISSUED CONCEHNING DOCUMENTATION OF ENGINEEHING JUDGEMENT 521 IDH X 11 EE580 DOES NOT USE MAXIMIM NONE HEQUIHED ISOLATED INSTANCE /ONE TIME 22-F005 0.D. FOR CALCULATING HACEWAY COHHECTIVE ACTION FILL S22 IDH X II CONTit0L OF WEIGHT LOADING OF WE IGilf C A LC ISSUED AS A COHHECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS 22-F009 THAYS INADEQUATE F0HMA L C ALCUL ATION. DESIGN IDENTICAL AND ACC EI'T A B L E DOCUMENT ISSUED TO S110W THAY COVER LOCATIONS I

i 523 IDH X II DISCHEPANCY BETWEEN SUPPLIEH CONSTHUCTION SPEC X3AH01 AND COHLECTIVE ACTION llEMAINS 22-F012 IlEQ UlllEME N TS FOR NIS CONDUIT DifAWING I X 'ID F5 0 7 TO HEFEftENCE IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE FILL AND BPC HEQlllHEMENTS WESTINGHOUSE DOCUMENT EXCLUDING 25% F I I. L HEOUlHEMENT 524 IDH X lI JUNCTION POINTS FOR ECSA*S NOT DESIGN DOCUMENTS HEVISED TO C0!!H EC T I V E ACTION HEMAINS 22 F013 CONSISTENTLY INDICATED ON AGHEE IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE ONE-LINES, ELEMENTARIES, EE580 ,

525 IDH X II OVEHFILL OF II ACEWAYS AND COMMITMENTS TO ISSUE DESK COHHECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS 22-F0lH SPACING OF CABI.ES BY INSTHUCTION X3DIl0 TO DESCHIBE IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE (INADEQUATE) A N A l.Y S I S PHOCEDUHES FOR ANALY2ING O V Elt F I L LS e e .u?

0 E. E _

I L

- B B

= A A

= T T

= R R E. E O O

- l I I P T T

- T H B F E O O

- O A A H i f

N N

=

N E. T T E. E

~ I R R , , ,I .L

- ,R O O 1 1 5R 9R S = iA P P 0 0 2A 1 A K = nT E E 1 1 1 T 1 T R - MN R R M M MR MR A - O O O M- RP T T R R RP RP _

E = DE O O D D DE DE R = CR N N C C CR CR

= N M = O G A _ = N f R _ = E T I T l T G - L O L I U I 0 = R N I L U D U R _

l i = A ESE D N D ON P _ - C )N CPE N O N FE _

- - RO AT O C O N E W = N BI OGS C C OEW l' - ~ I ST T R I TT iS . FA l iE R O R SAE vN - SS (L f TD E F O NUB EO _ =

lTN O fOI U T F AQ -

DI , - t O TI OWT E G PET T e NI SV L M N D XDN SA f = T E FDD A I E EAE _

St

=_

iA 1 E EN I C S NM Et . t L l

tQC RLA D A U NI E NA3 - RL EN OL H O L I V - - TA HA FAS " R S I ST DE5 .  : ST T TM 4 P TNT _

< A _ = S HS SSE L A CUE EYE = FN EI NNT R A R EHS RTL . = OI l D OI I O N T L _

B , = f i I F I S FTL I.

2! A = - GP RN TSG D Et I - NI AO CTN T I E Dt iT A _

TH T __ = I L BI ERI R IT P DN I A -

l C T NON O I I NNE NTi = tQ NA NPI P G P OOR l

t l . = RN OH ora P N I CE o .. = OW I A f Ct R l O G T F _

EP = TO TP ST tS L N ARF L E , - D AE G S I NOI _

TR _ = E RS NYE E E M I FD5 .

G , v TD A I AR T T H B 8 0 = AL PR PR A A 0S MSER V _ T - UO EO OTN f UT FT OGLU

_ C = QH SF C EN tQ QR NH CNBT .

T , E - E / SEEM E EO O0 I I C _

N 1 - DY ELWU D DP CP XTSU _

4, D = AA lE l IE. LBTL A AP NP DTSi l l _ U , NH iI EAEO N NU OU NI OT _

P _

S - I T FF TCBC I I S NS AFPS

= 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 _

- H 0 0 8 8 8 8

- / / / / / / /

- 5 8 9 1 2 2 5 E - 2 1 1 0 0 1 0 _

T = / / / / / / /

A = 9 3 3 1 4 9 5 D = 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G 7 9 4 5 7 2 N - O 3 3 4 4 6 5 O = I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I =

T = R R R R R R R AR = EO EO EO EO EO EI EO U. E =

I B =

D D

D D

D D

D AM= CV CV CV CV CV CV CV VU - PE PE PE PE PE PE PE EN : BH BR BH BR BR BR BH N =

O-I =

1 T-A -

Z =

I

) .0 o8 N ~

A ,

G- C P M C C C C P

C P

R = I P P P N/ S e R B D D B B D 1

e1 TO- 2 2 3 4 5 6 3 W/ I N 5 1 1 1 1 1 G a1 D -

P0 E =

2 0

= 0 O -

=

0 1

0 7

8 0 0 .

I 1 S3 0 0

- N0 -

O0 7 7 S I t f 8 K = T0 R ~ A1 T T A = L0 I I M= O - D D E = I 7 U U R= V8 A A

= G T N O .

= I FN KS Dl O NT EYT Ll P G EI R ECN

= EAI L) LN . VPO SNF WFUO2 OI S I (P NEM S I QRU RDE T r EI P M TLR CTt f CCI E O . .ET(

RS N NEU ens I I U .

- T TTTLO .

OWD RE LFQ

= I C E RMY EE N

O 'P E TN A C A. 1C OUA .D

= N

=

CUDI RC RRO CCR S L .

=

O SI VO OOR OT NNA I L F FPP ED

= T C

  • . SF P P T E iEIOCI l

M =

- TT* OSM SUl i ADL CTR E ACL O EST UEB NCT A - - P R = S M E.O N OOC

'C C R I QLA OUC G -

I I UYW ELC CRE

= N .EVI RA DA DO TL O = - I ) TP ERE ARN SSE -

R - = l E3C O CTC EN P = S UI l l TO iTOEWT O N iN EOO

- - U ( R A SOK YCT W - -

O STOL . P .D I CR O E - = I CSI RLL SR LNO

= LDG I

V

=

=

V OAWPOI WEO PUW PNN E

.FAF

- L E = = f OI C M MAI R

i .C) LTC OFM E N P T 2OO LI A COR .I SS CRUET & OV C O FSA

- = F E -(D FI N AEF OTTS -

SN = O LS A . ) TI SR RRY EO - = E S L2 OC OUE NOEA NI 2- = P &EEI( TAD T P OPPW I T - = U F IRA E DCS T= IE E .

AE

- O)TUFG EGM E .O TRSC EPE=

C= W 2I S N RNR RNT C TA RSL =

E = O .UVS .I UIO UO ETRR J = L P/I A)D LDF LI ) PNO NB = B = L Sl T l L I LR I TR SEPD 2I A = U = O NUCOt E i AEE T - S = F ACC NVEN TC I(AT(W FWP FAF IERA I R = = 7 7 7 7 NN =

7 i

8 8 8 8 8 l

/ / / / /

- = 2 1 4 4 4 E  :

I - 0 1 L - Tr 1 1 2

/ / / / /

l' - A = 3 1 4 4 3 -

G - D = 0 0 0 0 0 O =

V L -

. E =

T V =

N -

E =

A - L = V V t

P - =

N N

=

O O

= I I r T T A A

L2 L3 G

O0 O0 ,

NR = I - I - -

I E = V0 V0 DB = 1 1 NM= C - C -

I U = R7 R7 FN = N0 N8 .

=

= -

= . , . . .

N = 39 40 40 40 51 O = 1 0 11 11 11 1 1 I = 00 00 00 00 T = - - - -

00 CR = 77 77 77 77 77 .

EE - 88 88 88 8R 88 PB = // // // // //

SM, 45 45 45 45 45 NU = 22 22 22 22 22 I N - 44 44 44 44 44 -

N - _

O= _

I = _

3 T - _

A - _

Z=

I -

N =

A =

8 G= c C C C C o8 R = t R R R R .

N/ O= NI N N N N -

1 e2 TO 7 9 1 S 0 g/ I N r 4 -

a2 4 6 G 5 D -

P0 E _

Page No.

O -3 c* >

01/12/88 IIANT YOGTit UNIT 2 NEADINESS HEVIEW PHOGHAM FOLLOW-llP OF UNIT I FINDINGS ( HH. IDif, NHC)

TABLE 5 i

= .:.-. . =a;=== . _.: z . .. _.===-

EplT SOURCE AND DESCRIPTION OF DFSClit PTION OF llN I T I DESCHIPTION OF UNIT 2 NO FINDING DESIGN CONST LEVEL FINDING CONHECTIVE ACTION FOLLOW-tfP ACTION

_. :: _.._ :::_; = =- ::: :_ - 2 :2,: ::: 21 :: :_ . : _-::2 ..;_=_n:_:. _ _- :::== a;:

_:: : u222 .:.- _. .

5 3 t' HHF X III CONDUIT NOT GHOUNDED NONE ISOLATED OCCUNHENCE ISOLATED INSTANCE /0NE TIME 17 004 CORRECTIVE ACTION 537 HHF X III DR'S AND HEWORK OHDERS NOT DH. HEWORK BY COMMODITY CORRECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS i

17-005 THACEAltLE TO EE580 TIfACKING SYSTEM INITIATED IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE INST A LL ATION C AI!DS 538 HHF X III EE580 DATA BASE NOT UPDATED IN PROCEDilHE HEVISED TO HEQUIHE CORRECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS17-006 TIMELY MANNEN DATA BASE UPDATE PRIOR TO IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE SENDING CAHDS TO OC 539 HHF X III JUNCTION BOXES I NCollH ECT L Y ADDITIONAL SAMPLE INSPECTED. COHHECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS17-006 IDENTIFIED AND LOCATED. TRAY FIND *.NGS DETERMINED TO BE IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE SPLICE PLATES NOT FLUSH ISOLATED OCCUHRENCES 540 if R F X 11 MINIMUM 2-FT NIS CONDIUT TO DESIGN CHITERIA, CONSTHUCTION COHHECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS 17 007 NOISE SOURCE SEPARATION SPEC AND DRAWINGS HEVISED TO IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTAHLE VIOLATED WITHOUT VENDON COMPLY WITH VENDOR SEPARATION APPHOVAL REQUIREMENTS. DR ISSUED 541 HHF X II CONFLICT BETWEEN D C -- 216 G AND HEVIEW OF TitAY GROUNDING CORRECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS17-008 DC-1811 CONCERNING GHOUND PHACTICES DETEfMINED GHOUND IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE CABLE ATTACllMENT TO THAYS CABLE ATT ACilMEN T ACCEPT ABLE.

DC-2166 HEVIEWED AND HEVISED 512 HHF X III CALCULATION X3CV01 BASED ON CALC. HEVIEWED AND HESilLT CORRECTIVE ACTION llEMAINS 17 010 PHELIMINAHY DATA. NEGLECTED DETERMINED TO BE CONSEHVATIVE. IDENTICAL AND ACCEPT 4Bl.E CEHTalN DATA AND MISCLASSIFIED HEVISED llSING AS-BUILT DATA AS NONSAFETY AND HECLASSIFIED 543 Hli f X III NO CALCULATION FOH CATEG0HY I DESIGN BASED ON GENERIC CALC. ISOLATED INSTANCE /UNE TIME 17-Oli Di!CT BANKS VOGTLE SPECIFIC CALC. X2CDl3.5 COHHECTIVE ACTION GENERATED 544 HHF X 11 DHAWINGS S il0W THAYS OF ADDITIONAL SAMPLE HEVIEWED AND ISOLATED INSTANCE /0NE TIME 17 012 DIFFEllENT SEPAHATION GHOUPS FINDING DETERMINED TO BE CORRECTIVE ACTION '

W I Til I N SilF F I C I E N T SEPARATION ISOLATED INSTANCE 515 HHF X 11 NO ANALYSIS TO JUSTIFY BOLTED HE0lllHEMENT DELETED FHOM CONHECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS 17 013 CONNECTION BETWEEN THAY HUN CONSTif0CT10N SPEC. X3AH01. IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE AND W A LI. MOUNTED EQUIPMENT AS BUILT-CONDITIONS HEVIEWED HEOUIRED BY CONST. SPEC. F0ll COMPLIANCE

_ S S S S S S S S S

_ NE NE NF NE NE NE NE NE I L I L I L I l I I I I N E.

I I I L I L

_ AB AB AB Ab AB AB AD AB A B 2 MA MA MA MA MA MA MA MA MA ET ET ET ET ET ET ET ET ET

  • T HP HP RP HP HP I EP HP l f l P Rl I _ E E E E E E E E N NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC UN - OC OC OC OC OC OC OC Or O I A I A I A IOC A I A I A I A I A I A FI : T T T T T T T T T OT -

CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD C: AN AN AN AN AN AN AN AN AN NA A A A A A A A A A O - E E E E E E E E E I P: VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL TU = I A I A I A I A I A I A I A I A I A I' - = TC TC TC TC TC TC TC TC TC I W CI CI CI CI CI CI CI CI CI ET ET ET ET HO, CL HN HN HN HN ET RN ET HN ET HN ET HN ET HN SL HE HE HE NE RE HE HE HE HE EO; OD OD OD OD OD OD OD OD OD DF ; CI CI CI CI CI CI CI CI CI

= D TL

= N TD ,

E SE .

A NN RSD E EN OS D EA O* EOH UN TI E

= _ 0TS M FHNHG QO NS S T 8CE TN DI SA ES GYG HY A 5EC D I O D AE S HR K I AN AL I

_ ELI N MI E REON E SN SHI SAD TF

. EFT A MT W .T TO OP EI ETH FNE I O I _ EC OC ESEE I T DA D ER AS N WHA W CU I NHSST C H YEE E I I Y

_ T _ E R E R VO l TI CO ET EFNV STV C M I I OP I T EILYND P UE UI I O I HE 2A A NN VT V . SL RTEEEN BC SH STGC VGH OR k) =_ UO E G E DNE ANHMO P S SNN EI LU GC I _ H2N f EI N ELN UC MG I D I EED HEA CC OH FT _ 0I I Y T N SOOOC O N D D HI 3C HN =

OC _ O0R OH CKO AI STOT RF OA OI EA O R XA _

P . = A _ TFE TA ESS BVR DL FO T T H TEE H - N DB H HER ES I N OI O LT NT WD _

OE : T3M TB ll DE ALPTNU TG TO TTUT TBI ON EI I V NXU NI o P TA NGB NN NI L N O NAH I E I TI ECN EL CE AN EI - EI ETE ETEL ECC TM _

VH. PT M M UN DO . MSS MN MCN MNHA M UM Ei f I C HE TEL SA TE SSI I DTEA TI tin l TE V TEN lA.C A _

Hf RSA OTEI D I T Ml 0f uOH I I A I HO I l I VG _

CH - MI U MA OI H HI UM H MH MTS MUCI MOI CDG SS SH MVT MD H T SDSMDT MT MSN MCl P MMS L O _

SG EO . OEC OP l OE l

EDSONI OE ONE OOliP OEE AOH _

I' N DC- CHA CU ETH EAI CAW CR CI P CDWA CHD CTP _

NI 4 _

I D  : T T F F D S DN5 _ NS I O O L T AI = = EE U E s S t i

EFE = TT D S Nil NH Y MG Ol I B =

I i

L _

SO N EA LOC LOC A FT AI _

_ I N OE HT EI I EI I H I I O HE 2 A _ S CT DA VTH VTH TT SO TE GW T1 -

_ NL A UD EAW EAW N Wl i B O TI  : OA DH E LL LL ED OT D S HY I N - _ CR NU CT OGM OGM ME LI ETL PA NU NE AC ON LI NO LI NO UD LW MOI H U I N C HE OVI T OVI T CA A HNA lf T

F E YA PV H WT H WT OO S O H E _

EO GG AN E TNAO TNAO DL CHS FLE TE _

L N 2 HI Tl f NI HB NI RB H EEG RLD UT TP GU F I

NL0 E0 T A

UP O D O D OE PVN EI I PA _

2 P CD H CD l i TV SOI PWS ML O O EBF YT NO ESC ESC O CW OU Vh BAD RA I TS MLEN MLEN E N A TSE CC u . N _ MC3 AD l l

OLTU OLTU RF OYH OYV L Tl _

O UI X R AEO TAOP TAOP UO I AD NAO dA Nl _ I _

NLC BN TTR TTN TTN D TH HB iC i

_ T P I O AAN OS D OS D EY CTG STA l lA. Fo . PG= YPG LI DUE BNLE BNLE CC U N I FO P . l N: AAN S Q I AR I AH OA HDI SED I T f

i I _ W I 0N 0EY D RI D HI RU TDS YHE R CD _ EHW 8E 8DH I YEU I YEU PQ SAI LUL ED

= SN : CTA 5M LANQ

=

5AT LANO E N V ASL VE _

EI - AI R EI ENN OHEE OHEE OD OOE NNI NS

= DF1 HWD ED EI E STGH STGH NA CTR AEF I I fl L

= E V _ i E - l I I I I 1 l 1 I L l I I I I 1 I 1 I T _

S _

N _

O C _ X N

G I -

S E _

D X X X X X X X X _

2 O

4 N A

G EN . 5 1 4 G 7 7 H d 11 d CI 1 1 I 4 1 l l 1 l ND 0 0 O 0 0 O O 0 O

.R UN F - F - r- F F - f - F F F o8 OI H7 H7 6t 7 H7 H7 li 7 H7 H7 H7 N/ SF H1 N1 H1 f I 1 H1 fi 1 H1 H1 H1 2

e1 TO fi 7 8 J 0 1 2 3 I g/ I N 4 I' 4 4 5 5 F- 5 S a1 D 5 5 5 S 5 5 S 5 S l' 0 E

s.

Page No. 5 u/

01/12/88 Pl. ANT V0GTLF UNIT 2 HEADINESS HEVIEW PROGRAM FOLLOW UP OF UNIT 1 FINDINGS ( H H . I D H . N ff C )

TAnlE 54

; :=2 ::=. .: _: - _ _;_: _:,: .  ::.  :==c==:  :::===22 EDIT SOUNCE AND DESCHlPTION OF DESCHIPTION OF UNIT I DESCHIPTION OF UNIT 2 NO FINDING DESIGN CONST LEVEL FINDING COHHECTIVE ACTION FOLLOW-UP ACTION
==== : ======= ==- = === =. t= === ==== :===: ==.-ca=-- ==-- =. --- - : z== ========= ==. ========-.= ===- == = =-

555 kHF X II TH AY WE IGilTS MAY EXCEED WEIGHT COMMITMENT To HEVISE CALC COHRECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS 17 018 LIMITS WITHOUT DETECTION USING X3CLO2 TO USE WORST CASE IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABIE EXISTING CONTHOL METil0DS DUE CONDITIONS FOH ALL CABLE TO EE580 ALLOWABLE FILL LEVELS TYPES. DESK INSTRUCTION AND FAILUHE TO CONSIDEH COVERS ISSUED. COMMITMENT TO HETRAIN AND GHOUNDING JABLES PERSONNEL.

SSin HRF X II DESIGN INPUT DATA FOR SOUNCE OF INPUT DATA ADDED TO CORRECTIVE ACTION REMAINS 17 0111 CALCULATION X3CLO2 NOT LISTED CALC. COMMITMENT TO HETHAIN IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE IN CALC. PERSONNEL 557 Hit F X II HACEWAYS AND JUNCTION BOXES DO COMMITMENT TO HEVISE COHHECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS17-020 NOT APPEAR ON CLASSIFICATION CLASSIFICATION LIST AND FSAH IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE LIST TO ADD HACEWAYS 558 HHF X II SAFETY DESIGN BASES FOH COMMITMENT To HEVISE DESIGN COHHECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS11-020 JUNCTION BOXES ARE NOT COVEHED CRITERIA TO ADD HEFEHENCES TO IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE BY DESIGN CHITERIA DC-1810 EQ DESIGN BASES 559 HRF X II DESIGN CRITEHIA DC-1001 COMMITHENT TO HEVISE DESIGN CORHECTIVE ACTION HEM 4tNS17-020 CONFLICTS WITH FSAR HEGARDING CHITENIA TO AGNEE WITil FS AH BY IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE COMMITHENT TO IEEE 384 HEFERRING 10 IEEE 384 1974 5b0 It H F X II UNAUTl!OHIZED HEWONK OF UN AUTil0RIZED HEWORK DETERMINED CORRECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS IT 021 GROUNDING CABLE HEPORTED IN DH TO BE CONCERN. COMMITMENTS TO IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE WITliOUT INITIATION OF CAR HETHAIN ENGINEEHING PERSONNEL.

MONITOH F0H FURURE VIOLATIONS AND HEVIEW PHOCEDUHE ED-T-17 621 IDH X II CALCULATIONS DO NOT ADDHESS NO COHRECTIVE ACTION HEQUIHED ISOLATED INSTANCE /ONE TIME 22-A001 MULTISPAN AND FHAME ACTION CORRECTIVE ACTION EFFECTS PHODDCED BY HACEWAY COUPLING DUHING A SEISMIC EVENT ti22 IDH X II ALL COMPONENTS OF HEACTIONS ON NO COHHECTIVE ACTION HEOUIHED ISOLATED INSTANCE /0NE TIME 22-A003 SECOND Alf Y STEE L MEMBERS FHOM COHHECTIVE ACTION CABLE THAY SUPPORTS HAVE NOT BEEN ADDHESSED 2____ _ - _ _ _ _____m- _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ -_____..___--_______v T- __. _ * * * . - '-w- w- - -- - - - + e

P a g e- No. 6 01/12/88 PLANT V0011E UNIT 2 ilEADINESS HEVIEW PHOGRAM

, FOLLOW-UP OF UNIT I FINDINGS (HH,IDH,NHC)

TABLE 5-4

. ;==,==.= :== ==== ==== . -- . == ==...==== =====. .

EDIT SOURCE AND DESCHIPTION OF DESrHIPTION OF UNIT i DESCHIPTION OF UNIT 2 NO FINDING DESIGN CONST LEVEL FINDING COHNECTIVE ACTION FOLLOW-UP ACTION

. . . ..= . .== - ==x -- . . e====.==== . === ...- ===-.== .=====. . === .. ====. ., === ====== =====.=.. =~

- -=

G23 IDH X II CONDUIT CLAMPS NOT QUALIFIED NO COHRECTIVE ACTION HEQUIHED ISOLATED INSTANCE /0NE TIME 22 A005 FOR 10 ADS FROM 3-DIHECTIONS CORHECTIVE ACTION ACTING SIMULTANEOUSLY 624 NHf X I CONDUIT SUPP0HTED BY ONLY ONE WALKDOWN PERF0HMED, DRAWING CORRECTIVE ACTION IfEMAINS 19 002 SUPP0HT. THIS CONFIGUHATION HEVISED IDENTICAL AND A CC E I'T A B L E NOT ADDHESSED IN CALCULATIONS 625 HHF X III EMBED DESIGN NOT ANALY2ED FOR CALCULATIONS HEVISED TO COHRECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS 19 004 CONDUIT AND THAY SUPP0HT LOADS INCLUDE MAXIMUM SUPPORT IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTAHIE LOADING 626 Hlif X 11 INCOMPLETE DHAWING DETAIL DHAWING C0ffRECTED. CORRECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS 19 006 INSTALLATIONS WALKED DOWN IDENTICAL AND ACCE PT A B I.E G27 HRF X Il STRUT NUTS AND BOLTS ENGINEEHING ANALYSIS PEHF0HMED CORHECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS19-00H I MI'HO P E R LY INSTALLED IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE 62H HHF X II DAMAGED STUD NUT WALKDOWN PERF0HMED - ISOLATED ISOLATED INSTANCE /ONE TIME 19-009 INCIDENCE CORRECTIVE ACTION 629 HHF X III IMPROPEHLY NUMBERED S UPPoliTS HE-NUMBERED, CHAFT CORHECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS19-010 CONDUIT /EOUIPMENT SUPP0 HTS HE-THAINED, COMPUTERIZED IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTADLE THACKING SYSTEM INITIATED 630 HHF X X I A) UNAWING CilANGED SUBSEQUENT A) ITEMS INSTALLED PRION TO ISOLATED INSTANCE /0NE TIME 19-011 TO INSTALLATION AND NOT MARKED DCN WALKED DOWN AND COHHECTED, CORRECTIVE ACTION "HETHOFIT HEQUIHED", B,C,D) B) ITEMS ACCEPTED USE-AS-IS SUPP0 HTS DIFFEH FROM DRAWING DETAILS 631 HHF X I INCOMPLETE THAY SUPPORT PHOCEDURES 2EVISED TO HEQUIRE CORHECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS 19 012 COMPLETE INSTALLATION PHIGH TO IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTAHIE FINAL QC ACCEPTANCE 632 kHF X II STUD NUTS IMPROPEllL Y INSTALLED INSTALI.ATION EVALUATED AS ISOLATED INSTANCE /ONE TIME 19 013 ACCE PT A H l.E , PHOCEDUHE HEVISED C0ff HECT IVE ACTION TO HEQUIHE I NCilE AS E D INSPECTION SAMPI.E SIZE

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

9 Page No. 7 01/12/88 PLANT VoGTLE UNIT 2 f(EADINESS HFVIEW PROGHAM FOLLOh tsp OF UNIT 1 FINDINGS ( H R , I D H. NidC )

TAHLE 5-4

- ==, .==== r. . =ut- ===== . - - ~=.-- = - =;

EDIT SotHrE AND DESCHIPTION OF DESCRIPTION OF UNIT I DESCHIPTION OF UNIT 2 NO FINDING DESIGN CONST LEVEL FINDING COHHECTIVE ACTION FOLLOW-UP ACTION

-  :-- == ,== == == = = . =====. - ===== -=- === ::== ==..=======au====- = ====:. =========== ===a =.=  : =====

t;13 HHF X II EMhFD EDGE-DISTANCE VIOLATED - DHAWING HEVISED - AFFECTED COHRECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS i

19 014 UNCLEAR DHAWING HEQUIREMENT PLANT AREAS HEINSPECTED IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE 631 if ff F X II SUPPOHT REWOHKED WITHOUT DR WHITTEN, CHAFT HE-THAINED ISOLATED INSTANCE /0NE TIME 19-015 NEWORK ItEQUEST CORRECTIVE ACTION 635 HHF X II INCORECT WELD SYMBOL CALLOUT DHAWINGS HEVISED COHHECTIVE ACTION HEMAINS19-016 ON SEEWED FILLET WELDS IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE 636 HHF X II WELD DISCHEPANCIES FOUND ON WELDS COHHECTED - ISLOATED ISOLATED INSTANCE /0NE TIME 19 017 SEVEN SUPPORTS C ASES OF CHAFT EliH0H COHHECTIVE ACTION 637 NHF X II BRACING EXCEEDS ANGULAHITY ALL DISPOSITIONED USE~AS-IS ISOLATED INSTANCE /0NE TIME 19 018 ALLOWED BY DHAWING CORHECTIVE ACTION 63H HHF X 11I DOCUMENTATION NOT IN AGREEMENT ENHORS COHHECTED ISOLATED INSTANCE /0NE TIME 19-019 WITH HAHDWARE CORRECTIVE ACTION 63!! HHF X II INSPECTOH NOT CERTIFIED TO WOHK EVALUATED AS ACECPTABLE ISOLATED INSTANCE /ONE TIME 19-020 LEVEL II CORRECTIVE ACTION 640 HHF X II BOX SUPPORT INSTALLATION NOT WALKDOWN PERF0HMED, DHAWING COHHECTIVE ACTION REMAINS19-023 IN AGHEEMENT WITH BOX HEVISED IDENTICAL AND ACCEPTABLE QUALIFICATION DETAILS

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

6 PROGRAM ASSESSMENT

6.1 INTRODUCTION

This section describes the program developed and actions performed to ascertain whether the design and construction activities related to electrical raceways and supports for Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Unit 2 have been adequately controlled in a manner that implements licensing commitments.

In addition, it describes the program to ascertain whether the corrective actions resulting from the Unit 1 Readiness Review were applied to Unit 2, and to verify that design and construction activities conform to project procedures and design requirements.

The Readiness Review Team assembled for Module 17/19 consisted of two Readiness Review Task Force members and two members of site Quality Assurance with a combined total of 40 years nuclear design and construction experience. Table 6-1 lists assessment team members for Module 17/19. Approximately 400 manhours were expended by the Readiness Review Team in performance of the '

module review and assessment activities. In addition, the Project used approximately 800 manhours to investigate findings and develop responses, accomplish Unit 1 finding followup, and perform other Readiness Review related activities.

O Discrepancies noted during review activities were issued to the Project as findings. The Project responded in a manner that addressed the specific issue identified, discussed project investigative action to determine possible generic implications, and described corrective actions performed, including actions taken to prevent recurrence.

Readiness Review evaluates project responses and categorizes  !

findings by levels as follows:

o Level I -

Violation of licensing commitments, project procedures, or engineering requirements with indication of safety concern.

o Level II -

Violation of licensing commitments or engineering requirements with no safety concerns.

o Level III - Violation of project procedures with no safety concerns.

O 0125q/055-8 6-1

h I

l l

l '

l l

i i

i O

i i

f I

l i

l i

O I l 01259/055-8 6-2 l

6.2 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

() The Readiness Review Program evaluation of electrical raceways and supports consisted of three major activities. These were commitment implementation review; followup on Unit 1 finding corrective actions as applied to Unit 2; and development and execution of an assessment plan to examine programs, activities, and hardware.

Sections 3 and 5 of this module discuss project actions related to the commitment matrix and Unit 1 finding corrective action implementation in Unit 2, respectively.

The assessment for Unit 2 electrical raceways and supports was developed to provide added confidence that:

o Project procedures implement licensing commitments.

o Actions taken to resolve problems identified during the Unit 1 Readiness Review have been effective in preventing recurrence in Unit 2.

o Program and organizational enhancements made for Unit 2 have maintained the quality of the design and co"istruction effort.

g- o Installed hardware complies with engineering (y requirements.

The assessment and results are summarized in section 6.3.

l 1

1 O

01259/055-8 6-3

a, - .- - a w - A m A = - _, _

9 l

I 9 ,

l l

l

\

9 0125q/055-8 6-4

6.3

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS

(~ Module 17/19 addresses Unit 2 safety-related (Class 1E)

\- electrical raceways and supports. Assessment of the design and construction processes and results for compliance with licensing commitments was accomplished by visually examining a selected hardware sample and by reviewing design and construction documents. The hardware sample and assessment attributes were developed to ensure coverage of the various types of hardware and documents.

The raceway hardware sample selected consisted of 39 trays, 16 tray supports, 25 conduits, and 25 conduit supports. The documentation assessed was directly related to the hardware sample.

The assessment addressed three major issues:

o Implementation of new or revised licensing commitment requirements.

o Unit 2 application of corrective actions resulting from the Unit 1 Readiness Review. l o Evaluation of the effects of program enhancements and newly developed programs.

O The above assessments resulted in five findings, four of which were classified as Level II, and one as Level III. Each of the findings identified was evaluated by the Project to determine the extent of the deficiency, the root cause of the finding, and the impact on hardware or documentation. A project response was prepared which documented remedial action for the specific case documented by the finding, corrective action for additional deviations identified during the project evaluation, and any action necessary to prevent recurrence of similar deficiencies.

In addition to the deficiencies documented by the five Module 17/19 findings discussed above, a response to a Module 6 finding addressed a related Module 17/19 deficiency. The Module 6 Level I Finding 2RRF-006-Oli addressed differences between electrical equipment internal wiring separation criteria as stated in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and those listed in the construction specification. Raceway safety train separation criteria, which fall within the scope of this module, were reviewed as a part of the investigative action for the Module 6 finding. Implementation of those raceway separation requirements in Construction Specification X3AR01 was also determined to deviate from project commitments as stated in the FSAR. The project response to the Module 6 finding also addressed corrective action for the deficiencies which fall within the scope of this module. Construction specification and

() FSAR changes have been initiated as a portion of the corrective 01259/055-8 6-5

action and retrofit requirements and potential reportability are under evaluation by Engineering.

Based on Readiness Review assessment activities and Project O responses to findings, Readiness Review has concluded that all Module 17/19 findings represent isolated cases of failure to meet design or procedural requirements or procedural inadequacies and do not identify any safety or generic program concerns. In addition, completion of the corrective action committed to by the Project concerning the Module 6 Finding 2RRF-006-011 will ensure compliance with related Module 17/19 licensing commitments.

The individual Module 17/19 findings and the Project responses are presented in section 6.5.

P O

O 0125q/055-8 6-6

6.4 ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES AND RESULTS

( A major portion of the Readiness Review activities for this module was the development and implementation of an assessment plan to provide a systematic review of activities, programs, and hardware associated with electrical raceways and supports. This assessment was performed to provide added confidence that the Project complies with licensing commitments. This section describes the development and implementation of the plan and the results of the assessment.

The assessment was organized into three parts:

o Part 1 -

Commitment implementation and Unit 1 finding followup.

o Part 2 -

Programs and activities, o Part 3 -

Completion.

In preparation for the development of the assessment plan, Readiness Review examined the information presented in section 5 of this module [ audits, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) ,

items, etc.] to ensure that areas with a past history of deficiency or weakness at Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP) or within the industry were factored into the assessment.

The following were evaluated for inclusion in the assessment: l

)

i o Quality Assurance audit finding reports and corrective action requests.

o NRC violations.

o Quality concerns.

o Industry problems.

o Licensee event reports from VEGP Unit 1.

This review and evaluation identified the following issues that were included in the assessment plan:

Issue Source Where Addressed Protection of Installed NRC Violation Part 3 Raceway Safety Train Separation QA AFR Parts 2 and 3 Quality Concerns

() Seismic Separation QA AFR Part 3 0125q/055-8 6-7 a

Additionally, copies of the NRC inspections of Comanche Peak, Browns Ferry, Sequoyah, and Watts Bar for 1985, 1986, and the first quarter of 1987 were obtained and examined to identify any new areas of industry concern. Within the scope of this module, no areas were identified from these sources that were not already addressed.

6.4.1 PART 1, COMMITMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND UNIT 1 FINDING FOLLOWUP The objective of part 1 of the assessment was to assess implementation of licensing commitments, with emphasis on those revised or added since Unit 1 Readiness Review and to assess the adequacy of application to Unit 2 of corrective actions resulting from Unit 1 Readiness Review Design Commitment Implementation The commitment matrix, presented in section 3.2, contains 70 design entries representing 47 individual design commitments.

Eighteen individual commitments were selected for assessment.

This part of the assessment was controlled by Checklist RR-17/19-101. The checklist items consisted of individual commitments and were evaluated to ensure that the Project had adequately implemented the commitments in appropriate project design documents. The evaluation included reviews of design criteria, calculations, and construction specifications.

l l

The assessment determined that design licensing commitments had been appropriately and adequately implemented, with one l exception. As incorporated in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), testing had been performed to establish revised raceway safety train separation criteria which were judged acceptable by the NRC. The separation criteria presented in the construction specification we;e found to differ from the criteria presented l in the FSAR. The Project response to a related Module 6 finding (2RRF-006-011) concerning separation within electrical equipment and enclosures also addresses the raceway separation concern

l. identified by this assessment. The corrective action for that l finding resulted in a revision to the construction specification

! and a commitment to identify retrofit requirements. The response to Finding 2RRF-006-Oli in Module 6 contains a more detailed discussion of the corrective action which resolves this concern.

Construction Commitment Implementation The commitment matrix, presented in section 3.2, contains 17 construction entries representing 14 individual commitments that require construction implementation action. Six commitments were selected for verification and placed on construction -

9 0125q/055-8 6-8 y=

. . _ =

commitment reverification Checklist RR-17/19-102. The majority of construction commitments for electrical raceways and supports O are contained in FSAR section 8 and several industry standards, as defined by the Project position for the corresponding regulatory guide in section 1.9 of the FSAR. Implementation of these commitments was assessed by selecting discrete requirements from within the body of the FSAR or standard and verifying incorporation within an appropriate construction procedure or identifying documentation demonstrating compliance with the requirement. All commitments were found to be properly recognized and adequately implemented in construction documents.

Unit 1 Finding Followup Unit 1 finding followup consisted of a review of actions taken by the Project to prevent recurrence in Unit 2 of the types of deficiencies identified by Readiness Review during the Unit 1 assessment. A listing of the Unit 1 findings was provided to the Project, a review was performed by the Project, and information indicating the actions taken to address Unit 2 programs was provided to Readiness Review. Readiness Review evaluated a sample of these responses in parts 1, 2, and 3 to ,

assess the accuracy and adequacy of the information provided. j For construction, 13 of 30 actions were examined. For design, '

16 of 19 actions were examined. All Unit 1 finding corrective actions were determined to be adequately implemented in Unit 2

() except for the deficiency documented by Finding 2RRF-17/19-005.

Finding 2RRF-17/19-005, Level II, addressed the lack of a program to ensure sealing of conduits to prevent water from entering equipment. A program to ensure sealing of conduits had been initiated as corrective action for Unit 1 Readiness Review Finding RRF-17-003. The work was controlled by a procedure controlled by the Civil Discipline. Subsequent to Unit 1 completion, the civil and electrical discipline managers agreed )

that moisture sealing would be handled by the Electrical l Discipline. Based on this agreement, the Civil Discipline l procedure, which had been successfully implemented on Unit 1, )

was deleted. The electrical procedures, however, had not been  !

revised to incorporate the required provisions. As corrective action for this finding, Procedure ED-T-07 was revised to incorporate provisions for conduit sealing. Previously installed conduits requiring sealing will be identified and sealed.

6.4.2 PART 2 PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES Cable tray cover installation activities and the fire / separation barrier request (FSBR) program were identified as changed since Unit 1 Readiness Review and selected for evaluation in this part

() of the assessment.

0125q/055-8 6-9

=

Due to the time frame in which the assessment was performed (i.e., cable pulling in progress and few covers installed) insufficient installed hardware was available to provide an adequate sample for assessment of cable tray cover installation activities and, therefore, this program was not assessed.

The FSDR program was significantly changed since completion of the Unit 1 Readiness Review effort and was selected for Unit 2 assessment for that reason. The assessment evaluated procedural compliance regarding identification of separation violations, description of required corrective actions, document handling, and voiding (many of the FSBRs in the sample had been voided as a result of revised separation requirements incorporated in the FSAR). Conformance to procedural requirements regarding Quality Control (OC) inspection and quality document retention was also evaluated.

The assessment concluded that FSBR procedures provided an adequate method for documentation and resolution of separation violations and that the procedures were being properly implemented.

6.4.3 PART 3. COMPLETION The objective of Part 3 of the assessment was to evaluate the conformance of installed raceways and supports to licensing commitments, design requirements, and to evaluate quality documentation.

Tray Assessment Assessment of installed tray hardware was performed and controlled through a field walkdown and completion of Checklist RR-17/19-301. The walkdown assessed the 39 tray sections listed in Table 6-2 and provided an assessment of a total of 938 feet of tray of various sizes and types. Attributes assessed included the following:

o Identification.

o Conformance to design drawings.

o Conformance to cable routing program documentation.

o Seismic separation.

o Safety train separation.

o Thermal separation.

O 0125q/055-8 6-10 1

o Physical condition.

() o Attachment to supports.

The assessment concluded that, generally, tray, hardware had been installed in accordance with procedural requirements and licensing commitments. Certain attributes, however, were found to be unacceptable and these deviations are documented in three '

findings.

Finding 2RRF-17/19-002, Level II, involved torlue deficiencies for bolting attaching cable trays to their support arms. The finding indicated that 5 of 216 bolts assessed, or 2.3 percent, failed to meet minimum torque requirements. During Unit 1 Readiness Review, a similar finding (RRF-17-002) indicated a failure rate of 22 percent for such installations. The improvement in failure rate indicated by the Unit 2 results indicates to Readiness Review that the Unit 1 corrective actions (increased QC inspection rate and craft awareness of torque requirements) have been effective. In addition, Project Engineering has confirmed that Unit 2 conditions are enveloped by a Unit 1 study (performed as a result of the Unit 1 finding) which concluded that the tray systems would perform their intended function as installed.

Finding 2RRF-17/19-003, Level II, documented a condition in which a cable tray was installed without proper thermal

() separation from a piping component due to installation and acceptance in violation of established criteria. The Project investigated the finding by reinspecting an additional sample of the work performed by the same craft and QC inspector involved.

The additional sample revealed another case of failure to document a hot pipe to raceway separation criteria violation.

The Project and Readiness Review performed followup walkdowns of containment areas likely to contain such violations and no additional undocumented discrepancies were observed. All previous tray installation inspections performed by the inspector were reevaluated and no additional discrepancies were found.

Unit 1 Finding, Independent Design Review (IDR) 22-F028 also addressed hot pipe-to-raceway thermal separation. That finding documented lack of consideration of piping thermal growth in installation and acceptance criteria. A thermal growth allowance factor was added to the separation criteria following Unit 1 Readiness Review. The Unit 1 finding differs from the Unit 2 finding in that the former addressed lack of an adequate acceptance criteria while the latter involved failure to properly apply the criteria.

O 0125q/055-8 6-11

Finding 2RRF-17/19-006, Level III, documented a discrepancy involving tray size as specified by drawings versus that shown on the raceway installation card (EE580). The raceway and cable routing program (EE580) indicated thac a 4-inch deep tray was required while the tray was required to be 6-inches deep by an applicable design drawing general note which requires all control level trays outside the containment to be 6-inches deep. The tray was installed and accepted as 6-inches deep in violation of inspection acceptance criteria which require agreement between design drawings and EE580 documentation.

Initial investigative action for this finding involved a review of tray installations in the building area where the tray was located. This resulted in identification of one additional tray size deviation. The EE580 database was then reviewed to determine if any other control or instrumentation trays were identified as being 4-inches deep while general notes required use of 6-inch deep trays. The review indicated that 25 additional trays were indicated as being 4-inches deep. Of the 25 trays, 17 were found to bave design documentation authorizing the 4-inch depth and the remaining 8 were found to lack design approval. As remedial action, the discrepancies were documented on deviation reports or as electrical QC punchlist items. The fact that the as-installed tray size was larger than the tray size entered in EE580 (which controls tray fill) would ensure that tray overfill would not occur. Tray support design is based on load limits and tray loading is tracked by EE580 to ensure that load limits are not exceeded. Therefore, the 4-inch versus 6-inch tray depth would not impact the tray supports.

As a broadness review, the EE580 database was reviewed to ensure that no containment control and instrumentation trays, required to be 4-inches deep per general notes, were entered as 6-inches deep, thereby resulting in a potential overfill. The review indicated that all containment control and instrumantation trays were entered in EE580 as 4-inches deep in agreement with applicable drawing general notes.

Conduit Assessment The assessment of installed conduit was controlled through use of Checklist RR-17/19-302. The conduit sample in Table 6-2 l consisting of 25 conduits of various sizes and voltage levels was assessed by means of a field walkdown. Attributes assessed include the following:

o Identification.

o Attachment to support, o Concrete anchor installation documentation.

O 0125q/055-8 6-12

o Physical condition.

o Seismic separation.

{

o Thermal separation.

I o Safety train separation.

I All attributes were assessed as acceptable for the selected '

hardware sample, i Raceway Documentation Assessment Checklist RR-17/19-303 was used to control the assessment of raceway installation quality documentation. Documentation associated with all raceways in the sample shown in Table 6-2, a l total of 64 raceways (of various sizes, types, and voltage levels), was evaluated. Attributes assessed included:

o Torque wrench calibration records.

o Completion and retention of final inspection forms.

o Completion and retention of cable routing program documentation.

o Inspector certification.

No deficiencies were detected for this portion of the assessment.

Tray Support Installation and Documentation Assessment Tray support installation and documentation was assessed using Checklist RR-17/19-304. The tray support sample consisted of 16 supports which were selected from the population of completed and QC-accepted supports associated with the selected tray sample. The sample included a variety of support types and is presented in Table 6-2. The following attributes were evaluated by physical inspection of the installed supports:

o Support arm attachment to base support.

o Inspector certification.

o Welding visual acceptance, o Welder qualification.

o Seismic separation.

o Conformance to approved design drawings.

O 01259/055-8 6-13

All attributes were assessed as acceptable except for the deficiency documented by Finding 2RRF-17/19-001. This Level Il finding documented a support installation which deviated from h approved design. The project response indicated that investigation had revealed that construction personnel had installed a substitute support arm in place of the support specified by the applicable drawings. Craft personnel failed to follow established design control procedures requiring approval of changes by Project Engineering prior to installation. In addition, due to inattention to detail, QC failed to identify this specific deviation. The deficiency was resolved by issuing a Deviation Report which was dispositioned use-as-is by Design Engineering. The Project reviewed an additional sample of similar support installations, including work by the same craft and OC inspector involved, and found no other discrepancies.

These results establish this finding as an isolated occurrence.

Unit 1 Findings19-012, 19-018, and 19-019 concerned tray support installation and documentation deviations. These Unit 1 findings addressed support installations determined to be incomplete or out of tolerance and did not involve substitution of support arm types without Project Engineering approval as documented by Unit 2 Finding 2RRF-17/19-001.

In addition to the deficiency documented in the above finding, certain separation conditions were observed which were in violation of current seisaic separation criteria. Separation between five tray supports and the containment liner was found h to be less than required by approved seismic separation criteria. The separation requirement was 2 1/4 inches.

As-installed separation ranged from 3/4 inch to 1 3/4 inches.

Deviations from current seismic separation criteria were also observed in two cases concerning trays attached to containment internals and trays attached to the containment liner.

As-installed separation for both cases was found to be 1 1/2 inches with the requirement being 3 inches. The Project investigated these conditions to determine if these deficiencies had resulted from installation or inspection errors. The investigation revealed that two changes had occurred following installation of the components which had impacted the adequacy of the seismic separation.

At the time of component installation, the separation requirement was 1 inch and the criteria was later made more stringent by increasing it to its present 2 1/4-inch value. In addition, the containment was posttensioned following installation of the components, thereby reducing the separation. Project Engineering has indicated that the posttensioning process resulted in a liner plate movement on the order of 1/4 inch relative to the containment internals. The combined effect of these two changes is sufficient to account for the observed conditions, thereby indicating that the components were installed and inspected in accordance with 0125q/055-8 6-14

existing seismic separation criteria and that no installation or inspection errors had occurred.

O The Project was aware that the posttensioning process and l separation criteria changes had impacted compliance with current l separation criteria and had developed Finalization Program i FP-14. Seismic Separation, to address seismic separation )

criteria compliance. Preliminary FP-14 walkdowns have already '

been conducted and most of the deficiencies observed during the  !

assessment have already been documented by Project Engineering. l l

Readiness Review has evaluated seismic Finalization Program FP-14 and concluded that the program is adequate to detect and correct seismic separation deficiencies such as those observed during the assessment.

Conduit Support Installation and Documentation Assessment i

The assessment of conduit supports and documentation was addressed by Checklist RR-17/19-305. Conduit support installation was assessed by means of a walkdown which included ,

an evaluation of the following attributes:

l o Identification. I o Conformance of as-built configuration with approved i design drawings. I o  !

Attachment to base support. '

1 o Seismic separation.

o Concrete expansion anchor documentation.

All assessed attributes were judged acceptable and no findings were generated as a result of this portion of the assessment.

The subject of each Unit 2 finding is listed in Table 6-3 and the complete finding and response is included in section 6.5.

l 1

l 4

v 0125q/055-8 6-15

M O

E 0

0 O

l 0125q/055-8 6-16

,, . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . . __ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . . . _ _ . - _ _ . . . _ _ . _ . . . - ..._m___ _ _ __

t

! 6.5 FINDINGS This section presents, in numerical order, the five findings issued during the assessment, the Project response including corrective actions taken, and the Readiness Review Task Force conclusions for each finding.

a l

i I

e l

1 l

i 1

9 i

I i

i E

?

G 1 0125q/055-8 6-17 p

.a - -- a 1

O I

1 1

l O

l l

l l

l l

O 1

1 0125q/055-8 6-18 l

I _ - _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

i Finding 2RRF-17/19-001 (Level 11) '

Requirements:

Field Procedure ED-T-02, paragraphs 5.1.4 and 5.2.2, and l Exhibit 17, item 1.4, require installation and inspection of )

tray supports in accordance with applicable design drawings.

Finding:

Design Drawings AX2DllN171 and AX2D11N172 require installation of support TS-172-150 as a type 216. The support installation and inspection documentation is not in agreement with the support type 216 design.

Project Response:

The Electrical Compliance group investigated this item which concerns the wrong type cable tray support arm being installed, inspected, and accepted.

The investigation included:

1. A reinspection by Quality Control (QC) of 22 previously accepted supports. The sample included supports )

installed and inspected by the same craft personnel and i inspector. i C) 2. A review by Electrical Field Operations of 13 additional i

support arms in the immediate area for similar errors.

3. A review of procedural guidance for adequacy.
4. A review of trend reports for a history of similar errors.
5. Discussions with the individuals and/or their supervisors who were involved in the installation, inspection, and acceptance of the wrong arm.
6. Review of the training and/or qualifications of the individuals involved. I The investigation revealed:
1. The finding is valid.
2. No similar errors were found.
3. Adequate design change control procedures exist and procedures clearly identify support type as an r- inspection attribute. The root cause of the finding is

(, '

0125q/055-8 6-19 1

a failure to follow existing design change control procedures.

4. There has not been a trend of these errors.
5. Discussions with the individuals confirm they know the requirements.
6. The individuals were trained and qualified for the work being performed.

The investigation concludes that deficiencies are not programmatic and that the root cause of this item appears to be human error in failure to follow existing design change control procedures.

For remedial action, Deviation Report (DR) ED-16131 was written to document and provide a resolution for the identified discrepancy. After evaluation, the DR was approved by the design agency to use-as-is.

Tray support installations have been completed; therefore, action to prevent recurrence is not required.

Readiness Review

Conclusion:

Readiness Review has evaluated the project response and concurs that, based on the additional sampling performed by the Project, this finding is an isolated occurrence caused by failure to follow established procedures and inattention to detail and has no safety significance.

O 0125q/055-8 6-20

1 i

I l

Finding 2RRF-17/19-002 (Level II)

() Requirements:

Fie,ld Procedure ED-T-02, paragraphs 5.1.4.1 and 5.2.2, Exhibit 18, item 1.2.d, and Exhibit 11, Table 1, require verification of 40 ft-lb torque for 1/2-inch diameter spring / stud nuts.

Finding:

Tray Z-clip spring / stud nuts were torqued below requirements as follows:

Tray Quan/ Torque Support Location j 2BE445TWCW l at 0 ft-lbs TS-443-280 Aux. Lev /B. Rm. 110 2AES3ATQAD 2 at 0 ft-lbs TS-004-052 CNMT, Lev B, Col.

11/13 2AE52BTQAA 1 at 30 ft-lbs TS-007-063 CNMT, Upper A. Col.

1 at 30 ft-lbs TS-007-064 1/2, Project Response:

() The Electrical Compliance group has investigated the finding concerning torque discrepancies on the spring stud nuts for tray Z-clips.

The discrepancies identified in this finding were compared to the Unit 1 findings. The comparison yielded results as follows:

1. The number of torque discrepancies showed substantial improvement over the previous Unit 1 reinspection results as follows.

o Unit 1 had 24 rejects out of 105 inspections for a 22.9 percent reject rate.

o Unit 2 had 5 rejects out of 216 inspections for a 2.3 percent reject rate.

2. The worst case found in Ur.it 2 (on tray 2AE53ATQAD) was evaluated by Project Engineering and determined to be enveloped by a previous evaluation performed as part of Deficiency Evaluation Report 106 for Unit 1. Project Engineering has confirmed that the as-installed Unit 2 conditions will sati 3f y necessary design requirements.

O 0125q/055-8 6-21

3. OC is presently inspecting about 50 percent of all bolted tray connections. The inspectionattributetrendingprogramlh presently indicates an overall rejection rate of 0.25 percen on these connections as compared to a reject ratio of 1.5 percent in Unit 1 at a comparable completion level.

As remedial action during the investigation, the spring / stud nuts on the supports listed in the finding were torqued to the proper value.

In addition, QC verified the torque on an additional randomly selected sample of tray supports. There were no rejects out of 124 inspections.

Action to prevent recurrence is not required because the results obtained under the existing program are acceptable as indicated by the above discussion and tray Z-clip installation is essentially complete.

Readiness Review

Conclusion:

Readiness Review has evaluated the project response and concludes that the conditions documented by this finding are not a safety concern or evidence of a generic program deficiency. Comparison of Unit 1 failure cate of 22.9 percent with the Unit 2 failure rate of 2.3 percent indicates that the corrective actions taken in response to the Unit 1 finding have been effective in reducing bolt torque deficiencies.

O O

0125q/055-8 6-22

Finding 2RRF-17/19-003 (Level II)  !

() _ Requirements:

Field Procedure ED-T-02, paragraphs 5.1.4.2 and 5.2.2, ,

Exhibit 18, item 2.5.a. and Exhibit 13, Table 3, require separation of greater than 12 inches between containment power i tray and 4-inch SS piping with design temperature of 650 degrees Fahrenheit.

Finding:

Separation between tray 2AE53ATLAD and hot pipe 2-1204-029 is 2-inches. (CNMT, Lev. B, Col. 13/15)

Project Response:

i The Electrical Compliance group has investigated the finding concerning inadequate separation between tray 2AE53ATLAD and hot pipe 2-1204-029.

The investigation included:  ;

1. A reinspection by QC of the item identified.
2. A review of the procedural guidance.

() 3. A review of QC rejects and trends on hot pipe-to-raceway separation. s

4. Discussions with the craft and QC supervisors involved with the installation, inspection, and acceptance of the raceway.
5. Review of the training and qualifications of the individuals involved.  !
6. A reinspection by QC of a sample of other raceway work 1 in the same area by the same craft and QC inspector to l determine if more errors exist. l l
7. Review of electrical internal audits. j The investigation revealed:
1. The finding is valid. As remedial action, a DR was  ;

issued and, after evaluation, dispositioned use-as-is by !

Project Engineering. I

2. The procedure clearly identifies hot pipe separation requirements.

O 0125q/055-8 6-23

3. Prior to this finding, the craft (through field engineers) had initiated over 65 Field Change Requests prior to QC inspection for design review of as-built h conditions that did not meet the specification requirements. During the past 60 days, QC has identified 4 rejects (not including the DR issued in response to this finding) out of 2073 inspections of raceway for hot pipe separation to yield a reject rate of 0.2 percent. The investigation shows that deficiencies are not programmatic and that the root cause of the finding is isolated failures to follow the procedure. The recent QC rejects represented a cross-section of the project in terms of location, installation crew, raceway type, and inspector. There was no pattern. All but one of the resulting DRs were dispositioned use-as-is. The remaining DR was resolved -

by reinstallation of a conduit to achieve required separation and no Project Engineering review was required (the conduit involved was not safety-related).

4. Discussions with the individuals confirm they know the requirements.
5. The involved individuals were trained and qualified.
6. The reinspection effort found one more error in the same plant area (a DR was written and dispositioned use-as-is by Project Engineering); therefore, all of the previous h work of the QC inspector was reinspected by QC. No other errors were found.
7. The Electrical Compliance Group performed an informal walkdown of hot pipe-to-raceway separation on November 3, 1987. Three levels of the Unit 2 Containment were covered in this effort. Approximately 30 pipes were examined closely due to their proximity to raceway with no separation deviaticas tound.

Readiness Review

Conclusion:

Readiness Review has evaluated the )coject responce to this finding and performed a followup waakdown of a contcinment quadrant to assess hot pipe-to-raceway separation adequacy. No additional unidentified deviations were observed. Basud on the additional installation review performed by the Project and Readiness Review and the additional information contained in the Project response, Readiness Review concludes that the deviations documented both by this finding and by the Project investigative action present neither safety concerns nor evidence of a generic program deficiency.

O 0125q/055-8 6-24 i,

Finding 2RRF-17/19-005 (Level III)

() Requirements:

Construction Specification X3AR01, paragraph E8.7.2.D, requires conduit in wet areas to be so located or sealed such that water will not enter the equipment.

Finding:

There is no program to ensure conduits are located or sealed such that water will not enter equipment through conduits. It should be noted that corrective action for Unit 1 Readiness Review Finding 17-003 required initiation of a program for conduit sealing.

Project Response: l The Electrical Compliance group has investigated the finding concerning the absence of a program for conduit moisture seals.

As a result of Unit 1 lessons learned, the civil and electrical discipline managers agreed that moisture sealing would be handled more efficiently by the Electrical Discipline. The sealing work had been controlled by Procedure GD-A-46 as a civil responsibility. The program in GD-A-46 was eliminated by the 1 civil discipline manager in revision 5 of GD-A-46 on June 29, 1987, before the electrical procedure was revised to include the

()

program of conduit moisture seals. The moisture sealing i activity was not scheduled to commence until near the completion of cable pulling activities, prior to room turnover. Procedure revisions to accommodate moisture sealing is therefore, not >

needed for another four or five months.

The root cause of the finding is that the Electrical Discipline -

did not restore the program within the electrical procedures, or  !

have a means of demonstrating assurance that the program would have been restored within the electrical procedures by the time it was needed.  !

i To correct the discrepancy, the Electrical Compliance group '

revised Procedure FD-T-07 by Field Procedure Change Notice (FPCN) 43 on October 13, 1987, to address conduit water seals.

Since cables have already been pulled in some conduits that should be sealed, a retrofit will be necessary. The required actions to identify these conduits will be completed by June 1, 1988, to accommodate the project completion schedule.

l Implementation of FPCN 43 to ED-T-07 will prevent recurrence.  !

Readiness Review

Conclusion:

Readiness Review has evaluated the above response and concurs

() with the identified root cause and corrective action.

0125q/055-8 6-25 i

i

~

i l

l l

Finding 2RRF-17/19-006 (Level III)

Requirements:

Drawing CX3DF001, note 26, states " Tray size and depths shall be in accordance with the raceway code shown in the EE580 program, which will reflect 6" deep trays for control and instrumentation trays in all Bechtel scope buildings except the containment building."

Finding:

Tray 2CE341TQAB was installed 6-inches deep as required by the drawing. The EE580 installation card required a 4-inch deep tray.

Project Response:

The Electrical Compliance group has investigated the finding concerning the tray size conflict. DR ED-16109 was initiated to document and resolve the discrepancy. An additional check was performed by Electrical QC in the same area, and tray 2CE341TQAA was also found to have an EE580 program error. The two discrepancies have been corrected in the EE580 program.

To determine the extent of the problem, Project Engineering reviewed the EE580 database to determine if any other control or instrumentation trays were identified with the 4-inch deep h raceway codes. The review found that 25 other trays were identified as 4-inches deep. The review also found that 17 of the 25 trays had design documentation authorizing the 4-inch deep trays. The remaining eight trays have been corrected in the EE580 program.

The documentation discrepancies were discussed with the engineering supervisor for the EE580 program. He stated that a verification check of data to be entered in EE580 was begun in June 1986. A retrofit was not performed for data already in the program prior to the verification commitment. Since these two trays were entered in the database in 1982, they were not included in the verification check. This appears to be the root cause of this finding.

Project Engineering further stated that since cable ampacity and tray support loading are governed by tray fill, and since the EE580 program calculated fill for these trays based on the smaller 4-inch tray depth, the existing condition was technically adequate. For a broadness review, the database was reviewed for containment building trays to ensure that only 4-inch trays (as required by the general notes drawing) were specified.

O 0125q/055-8 6-26

w The closure of the DR and the three punchlists completed all remedial action and retrofit for this finding. For a broadness ,

I review, the EE580 data base was reviewed to verify that only

  • 4-inch deep tray raceway codes (as required by drawing general notes) was used on containment 2 EE580 cards.

Action to prevent recurrence of data base discrepancies is not required because the design agency now performs design verifications of EE580 input data.

4 A

-Headiness Review

Conclusion:

l Readiness Review concurs with the above response and concludes that the deficiencies addressed by this finding are not a safety concern or evidence of a generic program deficiency.

b l

i d

O d

e I

s d

= ,

iO 0125q/055-8 6-27

-,,.,m ,rw,,, , . - . . ,,,

TABLE 6-1 .

READINESS REVIEW ASSESSMENT TEAM - MODULE 17/19 i

D. L. Edenfield Readiness Review Task Force i

J. A. Lovoy Readiness Review Task Force j i

D. G. Lunsford Quality Assurance l C. T, Tippins Quality Assurance L

O 9

l l

1 l

l l

l

\

O 0127q/042-8/l ,

l l

.~. -. .. . .. . .- - - . . = . .

i TABLE 6-2 (SHEET 1 OF 2)

MODULE 17/19 HARDWARE SAMPLE Trays 2AE340TMAC 2AE453TEAH 2BE341TWAA 2BE443TYCN 2AE340TNEA 2AE454TTAL1 2BE343TXLB 2BE445TWCMA 2AE341 TEAK 2AES2ATXAC 2BE353TQFCVA 2BE453TGCY 2AE341TQBUVC 2AE52BTHAA 2BE361THAF 2BE454TECT 2AE341TRCG 2AES2BTQAA 2BE261TIAA 2BE454TXCT  ;

2AE341TWAE 2AE534THAJ 2BE433TWCC 2BE455TRAB  !

2AE341TYBLVA 2AE53ATLAC 2BE434THCC 2BE522TYAA l 2AE362TRAF 2AE53ATLAD 2BE441TEAB 2BE534TJAD l 2AE371TYAE 2BE341TEAD 2BE442TXCG 2CE341TQAB 2AE444 TEAK 2BE341TFAG 2BE443TLCR i

Conduits ,

2AE435RS151 2AE522RX270 2BE350RS128 2BE8F2RX005 2AE435RS205 2AE52ARW336 2BE441RS255 2CE442RX293 2AE435RX150 2AE52ARXO64 2BE442RS004 2DE350RL115 2AE441RX172 2AE8DlRL328 2BE442RS247 2DE350RL287  ;

2AE442RLOO3 2BE350RL125 2BE552RX271 2DE350RQ205 2AE442RS360 2BE350RS075 2BE8F2RS026 2DE352RS313 2AE522RX267 Tray Supports TS-004-043 TS-004-052 TS-110-127 TS-171-150 TS-004-044 TS-004-059 TS-110-144 TS-433-078 TS-004-046 TS-llO-095 TS-124-055 TS-4 3 3- 0 8 0 TS-004-051 TS-110-098 TS-124-056 TS-433-092 0

0127q/042-8/2

TABLE 6-2 (SHEET 2 OF 2) ponduit Supports

?

?

CS-350-031-038 CS-435-020-018 CS-442-042-003 CS-350-031-051 CS-435-020-060 CS-552-B10-103 CS-350-034-021 CS-441-021-020 CS-552-B10-106 CS-350-036-134 CS-441-113-108 CS-552-B10-211 CS-350-036-154 CS-442-023-065 CS-52A-B10-110 CS-352-064-122 CS-442-023-071 CS- 5 2 A- B10- 14 3 CS-435-020-016 CS-442-025-112 CS-8D7-101-006 CS- 4 3 5-020- 018 CS-442-025-136 CS-8F2-302-134 CS-8F2-302-166

[

(:)  :

G b

i 1

1 l

0127q/042-8/3 i

l t

TABLE 6-3 UNIT 2 READINESS REVIEW FINDINGS - MODULE 17/19

)

Number _ Level Description 2RRF-17/19-001 II Design drawings AX2D11N171 and AX2DllN172 require installation of support TS-172-150 as a type 216. The support installation and inspection documentation is not in agreement with the support type 216 design.

2RRF-17/19-002 11 Tray Z-clip spring / stud nuts were torqued below requirements. (tray numbers - 2BE445TWCW, 2AE53ATQAD '

and 2AE52BTQAA) 2RRF-17/19- 003 11 Inadequate racewiy to hot pipe separation between tray 2AE53ATLAD and pipe 2-1204-029 is 2". (CNMT, Lev. B, Col. 13/15)

  • 2RRF-17/19-005 II There is no program to ensure conduits are located or scaled such that water will not enter equipment through conduits. Note that corrective action for Unit 1 i Readiness Review Finding 17-003 required initiation of a program for conduit sealing.

2RRF-17/19-006 III Tray 2CE341TQAB was installed as 6" deep as required by O the drawing. The EE580 installation card required a 4" deep tray.

I

[

i O

0126q/041-8/l

Georg6a Power Comp:ny Proicct Manag m nt Post Offica Bor 282 Waynssboro Georgia 30830 Telephone 404 724-8114 404 554-9961 q L V Vcgtle Project  :

l ,

1 I

DATE: February 23, 1988 1

RE: Plant Vogtle Unit 2 Readiness Review Module 17/19 l FROM: W. C. Ramsey TO: R. W. McManus l

Engineering has reviewed Module 17/19, Electrical Raceways and Supports, for general accuracy and completeness. To the best l of our knowledge and belief, the module is a complete and l accurate representation of the electrical raceways and supports, and the engineering process and commitments related thereto.

C

)

Djin $. Wa/iaws < j W. C. Ramsey, Jr. /

Project Engineering Ma' nag er/

J RWM/WCR/bjd  !

l

,f S

Georgis Power Company Proj ct Maneg: ment Post Office Box 282 Wayntsboro. Georg:a 30830 Telephone 404 724 8114 404 554 9961 m

Vcgtle Project January 21, 1988 MEMO TO: R. W. McManus

SUBJECT:

Plant Vogtle Unit 2 Readiness Review, Module 17/19 1

Nuclear construction has reviewed Module 17/19. To the best of our knowledge and belief, the module is a complete and accurate representation of the site Electrical Raceways and Supports program and commitments related thereto.

I n i

/1, / i /. 9;s%W R. H. Pinson Vice President Vogtle Construction RWM/RilP/bjd

' f tb e. c.

W*g,4p (3

V

Georgis Power Company Proiret Managim:nt Post Office Box 282 Wayntsboro, G:orgia 30830 Telephone 404 724-8114 404 554 9961 ,,

<, nr -

( ')

Vogtle Project DATE: January 21, 1988 RE: Plant Vogtle Unit 2 Readiness Review Module 17/19 FROM: C. W. Ilayes TO: R. W. McManus Project Quality Assurance has reviewed Module 17/19.

Electrical Raceways and Supports. To the best of our knowledge and belief, the module is a complete and accurate representation of the site electrical raceways and supports program and commitments related thereto.

O

%Y

~

( LT)Li,,

C .'~W . Ila y e ,sf Project Quality Assurance Manager RWM/ CWil/ b j d t

(_Y

(O u

PLANT V0GTLE UNIT 2 READINESS REVIEW PROGRAM Electrical Raceway and Support - Module 17/19 Readiness Review Board Acceptance Letter The Readiness Revies Board has been apprised of the scope and content of Module 17/19, Electrical Raceways and Supports.

The Board has reviewed the program verification, as well as corrective actions, both proposed and implemented, by the Vogtle Project. Based upon this review and based upon the collective experience and professional n

U judgement of the members, the Readiness Review Board is of the opinion that the corrective actions proposed are acceptable, and, upon their implementation, the electrical raceways and supports at Plant Vogtle will be sound and comply with comrritments set forth in the FSAR.

l Y,

APPROVED: \ l Doug Dutton \

Chairman, Readiness Review Board Vogtle Electric Generating Plant ,

i i

(v 1

)

__-_-__-_________\

l O

PLA!1T VOGTLE RE ADIIIESS REVIEW PROGRAM ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR MODULE 17/19 ELECTRICAL RACEWAYS AIID SUPPORTS ASSESS!1Et1T PLAN APPROVAL T E AM L E ADER : ( / DA T E : 7 /Y [

/

RR PROGRIsM 11ANAGER: DATE: /k,fb4p B 7 1

RR BOARD SPONSOR: DAT E : 897.17,/9'87' ,

V  :

0116q/195-7

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

I-  !

l l-UNIT 2 ASSESSMENT PLAN  !

t MODULE 17/19

!' ELECTRICAL RACEWAYS AND SUPPORTS  ;

I '

?

P l

l 1.0 OBJECTIVE I 3-  !

l ,

l This assessment plan provides a means of evaluating Unit 2 i electrical raceway and support design, construction and i 4  :

I i finalization activities, and related documentation to ensure continuing compliance with licensing comitments. e i 6 e

2.0 SCOPE  :

Le

)

i 2.1 MODULE SCOPE j

i

- The scope of this module covers design, installation, a nd inspection activities associated with Class 1E electrical raceways and supports f or Vogtle Electric Generating Plant 2-Unit 2. Details of the interfaces between Module 17/19 and

_oth er modl u es i s cont ained in Readiness Revie'.i Prog ram i

] Procedure 3.4.

r i

[

t 1

j' 0114q/211-7 1 I

1

o. - _ ______ - - - - _ _ _ - - . - - - - . -- .

Selected elements of finalization programs-FP-5 and FP-14 are also included in this module.

( }-

2.2 ASSESSMENT SCOPE I

This plan is structured to extend the results of the Unit 1 Readiness Review program raceway assessment into Unit 2 raceway design and const ruc tion docume nts , prog rams , and hardware installations.

i

)

l The following types of hardware are examined in this plan:

o Cable trays and tray supports.

o Cond uits and cond uit s up po r ts .

o Hardware attaching raceways to supports and connecting s up po r t me mbe r s .

o Raceway support bracing.

o Drilled-in concrete anchors installed by Cleveland Consolidated.

The impact of the following changes and areas of concern were reviewed to determine areas of emphasis for the Unit 2 review:

}

0114g/211-7 2

. _ . _ . . .- _ . _ _ _ . ___ . . . ~ . . . - - . _ .

i o Cha nges in licensi ng commi tments. l o Historical industry problem areas (safety train l l

separation).  !

o Potential problen areas identified since the Unit 1 assessment by Quality Assurance (QA) audits and Muclear Regulatory Commission inspections. ,

o Implementation of cor rective actions to Unit 1 findings ,

into Unit 2 ac tivi ties.  !

i i

Based on a considera tion of the above f actors, the plan places j emphasis on the following:  !

o Commi tme nt implement ation in design and const ruction I i

documents; i l

i o Fire / Separation Barrier Requests (F/SBRs) . l 1

1 l

l o Tray covers / support loading.

I o Tray suppor t bolting .  !

1 I

o Tray support configuration.

o Tray damage.

0114q/211-7 3

.._.e.._.__...____.-__-..____.____ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . . . _ _ . . . .

1, o Control of rework.

i e o Drawing clarity, o Seismi c separation.

o Train separation.

i o Co nd uit sealing. l l

l j o Conf orma nc e of as-built hardware to design; l

4 ,

o As-built documentation accuracy and retrievability. )

]

?

O  ;

3.0 ASSESSMENT DETAILS AND GUIDELINES l l

This assessment plan consists of a phased group of activities .

i i

cont aining th ree parts as f ollows:  !

o Part 1 - Commitment Implementation -  !

l addresses verification of implementation of licensing j commitments into design and const ruction documents. j i  !

. i i

9  :

l 0114q/211-7 4 l e

i

f i

! o Part 2 - Programs - I' 1

addresses design and const ruction programs and

j. activities with regard to compliance with applicable  !

i procedures and commitments.  !

)

i o Part 3 - Completion -  !

i L

addresses conf ormance of as-installed hardware and i

documentation with commitments and procedural requ ir e me nt s .

1 I

The following sections describe each par t of the plan and l

, checklists which have been developed to cont rol the assessment.

1 ,

I a i

}

4 PART 1 - COMMITMENT IMPLEMENT ATION l 3.1 i

' t This part of the plan involves review of design and construction  !

documents to ensure that connitments related to electrical

' t raceways and supports have been adequately incorporated in the  !

d ocume nt s . The assessment is to be performed by the Readiness i 1

Review Task Force af ter receipt of updated implementation matrix  !

, - +

f rom the Project.

, I The commi tme nt database f or Module 17/19 cont ains approxima tely 1

80 entries. A sample of commitments were selected to verify '

j implementation in design and construction documentation with  !

1 l sample. selection biased' to place emphasis on commitmer.t changes l

t 0114g/211-7 5

!/

t or additions and those commitments involving corrective action

() as a result of Unit 1 Readiness Review.

i i

Checklists RR-017/019-101 and RR-017/019-102, (Commitment l

Implement ation - Design /Const ruction Docume nts ), cont rol performance of the part 1 assessment.  ;

1 Each checklist item requires review of project design documents i

to verify that the requirement stated in the " Requirement" t column is adequately impleme nt ed. More information concerning i

the requirement is available f rom the source entered in the l

"Ref ere nc e" column . The document and section where the  !

t commitment is listed should be entered in the checklist. The review should include an evaluation of both the adequacy of the O implementation and whether it was found implemented in iI appropriate documents. '

i.

Items are included in the checklists to verify commitment i (e.g.,

1 implementation in both initial or controlling documents Design Criteria) and derivative documents (those derived from the initial or controlling documents, [e.g., drawings)).

{

i I

3.2 PART 2 - PROGRAMS l

i This part of the plan addresses design and construction programs  !

()

and activities with regard to compliance with applicable I l

0114g/211-7 6 ,

i r

procedures and commitments and is performed by QA personnel,  !

Most design and procurement activities were well advanced or

+

complete at tha time of the Unit 1 assessment. Programs cont r o lli ng those design and procurement activities are common to both units and were assessed as adequate, therefore, this ,

plan will not reevaluate those activities. -

t The plan examines the in-process design and construction activities for fire / separation bar riers and tray cover t

installation. These programs have been substantially modified since the Unit 1 assessment.

The tray cover sample consists of 20 covers, randomly selected l

f rom the population of trays requiring covers and biased to  ;

O include both power and control tray covers. l l

Twenty F/SBRs are to be assessed. These requests are to be cho sen at random f rom forms on file in the QA vault a nd F/ SBR ,

i clerk files. Part 2 consists of two checklists.

3.2.1 RR-017/019-201, IN-PROCESS ACTIVITIES - FIRE / SEPARATION BARRIER REQUESTS This checklist assesses control of F/SBRs processing activities. Attributes to be assessed include proper completion j

() of form, form tracking, Quality Control review, a nd documentation.

0114 g/ 211-7 7 I

3.2.2 CHECKLIST RR-017/019-202, IN-PROCESS - TRAY COVERS t 'This checklist assesses the controls for specifying the location l

and dimensions of tray covers and the controls f or informing the cable design group and civil-structural group of tray cover l locations. The assessment also addresses performance of design analyses required by tray cover installation.

l l \

l l

I 3.3 PART 3 - DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION 1

This part of the plan involves assessment of as-built hardware and documentation to verif y the conf ormance of installed  !

electrical raceways and supports to design and licensing O' req uir e me nt s . The assessment checklists are to be completed by QA personnel.

A sample of 40 trays and 25 conduits have been selected f or the Module 17/19 assessment, and provide a representative cross section of raceway types and voltage service levels. Raceways containing component cooling water system and residual heat rervasal system circuits are included in the sample to emphasize I

assessment of systems addressed in other modules. Within types, i s er vi : levels, a nd sy s t ems , the individual raceways were chosen at random from a list of all construction complete raceways generated by the cable routing program.

0114g/211-7 8

-____.m. _ _ _ _ _ . _

1

.i ,

s

)  !

! To provide consistency with the " vertical slice" assessment i

h approach, the support sample will consist of a portion of bbe t

j supports for the raceways chosen for assessment. Select at r

randoc a sample of 15 tray and 25 conduit suppor ts associated  :

1 with the raceway sample, biasing the sample to include a cross e

section of suppor t types.

1 Che ck list items were selected in order to concentra te the i

i assessment on hardware installation features found deficient by i Unit 1 Readiness Review or past audits. The following l4 '

checklists provide for performance of the part 3 assessment.

, 3.3.1 CHP.CKLIST RR-017/019-301, COMPL ETION - TRAY INST ALL ATION This checklist addresses the compliance of as-installed tray hardware to licensing commitments and procedural requirements. ,

Tray installation attributes to be addressed include identification and labeling, conf ormance to design drawings ,

{ separation, grounding, bolt torque, and physical danage. The  ;

i  ;

che ck list should be completed for each tray identified in l l

{ Table 6.1. i I i.

L  !

I.

5 l 1

l' i i

0114q/211-7 9 l L  !

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

7--

l

i. 3.3.2 CHECKLIST RR-107/019-302, COMPLETION - CONDUIT INSTALLATION i

i This checklist addresses the compliance of as-installed conduit ,

hardware to licensing commitments and procedural requirements.  !

l Conduit installation attributes to be addressed include  ;

i ident if ica tion a nd labeling , sealing, separation and F/ SBR I i initiation, and bolting.

l l

4 i

. r 3.3.3 CHEC KL IST RR-10 7/ 019-3 0 3, COMPLETION - RACEWAY

-  ?

DOCUMENTATION This check list provides assessment of the adequacy and  !

(:).

. ret rievability of raceway installation final documentation.

Issues to be addressed include retrievability, inspector qualification, installation card completion, and bolting d oc u me nt a t io n.

ll

)

i 3.3.4 CHEC KL IST RR-10 7/ 019-3 04, COMPLETION - TRAY SUPPORT

)

1

]

INSTALLATION This checklist addresses the compliance of as-installed tray support hardware and documentation to licensing commitments and procedur a l requireme nt s . Attributes to be assessed include; 0114q/211-7 10

tray location, agreement of as-installed hardware to design and in-process documentation, welding attributes, and bolt torquing.

I i

1 l

i

3.3.5 CHECKLIST RR-107/019-305, COMPLETIO!1 - CONDUIT SUPPOR )

INST ALL ATION AND DOCUMENT ATION l

l 1

This checklist addresses compliance of as-installed conduit i i

I support hardware and documentation to licensing commitments and l n l

procedural requirements. Attributes to be assessed include; i l' support i d ent i f ic at ion, agreement of as-inst alled configura tions to design and in-process documentation, bolt torqui ng, and i i

weld i ng f e atur e s. i i

i 4.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS '

.l

- Additional instructions for perforning assessment activities are l j cont di na l in the Vogtle Project Unit 2 Readiness Review Program '

.Procedores Manual. In particular, personnel performing the ,

a ss esment activities outlined in this plan should be familiar -  !

i with the requirements of procedures 2.3, 2.4, 3.5, and 4.  :

i J

i 1

i 9  !

l l

0114g/211 11 i

- _ _ _ _ . _ _ - _ - ~ _ . . . _ _ . _ _ . . - _ _ . . _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ - . . _ _ w

i 4.1 CHECKLIST COMPLETION INSTRUCTIONS  !

I An individual checklist is to be used for each component assessed. The checklist column marked " item" provides a numerical reference if needed when corresponding with the i Project. Numbers in this column in parenthesis () indicate ref erence to the Master Commitment Tracking List. The column ,

aarhr1 "ref erence" provides the source of the requirement to be verified. The column marked " requirement" is repeated f rom the source document .

+

i i

4 The column marked " f ind ing / c omme nt " is for explanatory materials i

and recording of supplementary data.

Comments entered on the che ck list should include as appropriate:

o A description of the actual condition found.

l o Do c u.me nt filing locations and hardware identification to permit tracing the specific documents and hardware-4 r evi ewed .

l o Data gathered during reviews to f acilitate inter-relating assessment att ributes.

o ;ny necassary explanation of assessment activity and methods, concerns, findings, or issues requiring further issusstent.

Oll4q/211-7 12

o An explanation for all reject ~ conditions found.

O l o An explanation f or reject conditions closed by f urther ,

assessment without a findi ng .

A checkmark in the acceptable column indicates that the condition found is acceptable. An M/A in the acceptable column -t indicates that the attribute list ed is not applicable. An 11/V i entry in the _ acceptable column indicates that the attribute was  ;

not verified '(due to accessibility, wor k in progress, etc.).

M/A and N/V entries require a short explanatory statement in the findinJ/ Comment column, ( see 4.2 below f or direction in substituting items).

j A checkmark in the Reject column indicates that the requirement )

l of'the checklist item was not met at the time of assessment.

The Resolution column is used to indicate whether a Readiness Review Finding or Audit Finding Report was issued, or if the Project was able to provide suf ficient information to close the item.

The checklists are to be signed and dated on each page by the person or persons performing the assessment and are to be j corgleted ne atly and legibly in black ink. Original checklists are to be returned to Readiness Review for storage.

Oll4q/211-7 13

4.2 S. A. M. .P.L.E. . R. E P.L..A. C E..M-- E- -- . -- N T. . .O R . R E D U CT I O'1

, The selections for assessment indicated on the checklists may prove inadequate for evaluation due to attributes not ap pli cable to selections or for other reasons. In such cases, additional item, components, or attributes are to be selected for assessment i: the following order of preference:

1. Addi t i m e.1 c o nponents or attributes f rom the items, i proceiures, or standards already selected for assessment.  ;

!u

2. Adili t i.o al ;te'ns or components f rom the population of items

}

' l i

and components within the syst ems selected for assessment, i

I i

3. Additional items and components f rom the population of items and components in other systems within the scope of the module, i t

i e

j Plans for expa nd ing or re duci ng the sample size, or concerns i that the sample may be inadequate, shall be reviewed with the  !

4 i Readio m ; Review program manager , who will provi de direction.

l i i

! i 1

r i

4  !

l.

' i 0114q/211-7 14 d

,,..,_._....-,...___,,,.-r_.._.,.-......,,__,..,.,_m.,,.m.__e.,,. . . . . , .e._,,,, . , , . . . , , , , . n w-9--w -, ,,ei. n ,- ,

O O O READINESS REVIE W CHECKLIST

!.._- NO, RR- SG'M'W lDATE; AUDIT NO. PAG E / OF 2f PREPARED 7. A. BYlO/D V l CWOWY7 SAMPL E IDE NTIFIC dTION AUDIT DATE AREA

('llillJH /TMllNT ////$4/Ej//5/V{$lld/V

,3: f/8// i M //;f gst $/

^ ' "

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T FINDING / CCMMENT ACQEPT REJECT 9ES0t_UTION f $ V6/?/ff /Alf%2/1/D/M77GV V5 0/* 7~N /E FCsJ DW/At G-C'd < si/ 7IHi:vr py PricG f 4- @ Mt' ,5 W $/ 6 ff Pofudti d 5

/G6[ .T+'4 -/977 5 Ctgi ?tg* qit/#l/f/c*ni>iW GF g/ti([ /E [G't//P'lIltINf f(s yac&gr4p AMf 91 6t?NWM'O C'A Vf A/C .

19T /iIfi@f ME/Itf/N0 A9C y>tttiN /$ ;

PERFORMED BY DATE R. R.TE AM LE ADE R DATE

O O O RE ADINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST . J0 RR-(WM/a/_ '

"^*' *' "#'

CONTINUATION SHEET __ _

l^"" -

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR EMENT FINDING / COMMENT ACGEPT . R,EJEC T RESOLUTION

, 2 f5NI? YEA'IFy' />tt/2Ein5Afr&Dey

$*l' ?] 0F TNG fcWDesst/6

@NJ//7/UEN[~/A/ f-/RST l-!! V G C 2 8 5 / G N i n v,q ix 5 T6EE Jog-t974 -

97H N OR/ep 6thTGftN FCR dit!GG /E NavM SyM5m3 TOR NA%t'EAf' $0W5g GONiiGA/)qG WG 7704'G h/$7^ /tif/2541(NTlFC OCCtfististj'C h -he me %.e_ . ,

l PERFORMED BY DATE

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _- 110 RR-//7/a'/-/#/ .

"^*' "#'

CONTINUATION SHEET ___ _

l^"" '

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIREMENT FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT REJECT , RESQLUTION 3 pg,9jq V!stelfy' /MtfLEM1llNTAD04/

$,/. 4 3 o/~ ^P/E R>tidW/MG l'DurM/THIENT by FIPST t&v5& Osf/6/V PcKt/WSNTS?

/r:E 5 32$-l974 .

S Tnivp g ip 70 g 44 9tipp gg 6t. ) % lli s q t/t f nt V M r

/bd A//ttlti4L" /bWnr2 Glia (MenA/C ST#T1 oats I

4/W IntflEnt/isy7tA/(j bb'Olt/()CNfC N -+=h w h m. %s -...e

%m k ns -.

O W O

D g j w -

\

y .a yw - -.

w <

1 i W J

o ll Z

r , s  :

O 2 Z s s =

z 8

- s 5 C D Z b

c ,

,m  % %s b ggd k N g ayb ww4 s % 's ~

H m

k gkk it n k b "3 1>

~ s ema33 ms 3* g* d ~= *v '%  % 4 e' s w

% b 'k we N o = .

Q c%m%

R

,emms W E 4= 4 w%a 4k e s S RE%TTd 5 b 5 4t

[t3@y}se; Sekksus SUd5

$@R@(ata

, z w ie <

s 4a ~ e tem

  • ewtg%w%w p' x

d CD q'ggk$hk$ MEW tg i

b D W .

E Z w O **  % $

M ~

H  % >

O$<

Z z 0 w 5

w1 n%

w m

s -

- - z  :

k R- =

Q & ' .

c

<I Z 3 s u

O W w T '

m 0 t

O O m E 5;

- t,08 f

w -

W 2

z y g s g i

CC CC

- s O 2 Z $

s =

2 o g

- s 5 e D Z -

a b

b .

k  % i.

SvRgRw $< i e t)s,e a

<i r (! t s w w k g% g% s1 9 m1 N%

  • e g

A x x m

%w w4 xq *1 RDAnyWR s;

w 4 S w&g* 3 4 k k *; &D(

5 d z 4o< [ b5 hI 8 E. 5 %. >ek e*

. s w uv

%a '

~ut%'!

s *$:2 m ~s 1'am et'{*23 f- - 3 M $ D g>4 E' '"

O y o D

% D% q g % b, hx W wNk Ng -

w $ RW D&R5 35 w 4y%P q t(\#qq g ' < h *4 u 4 ?A

$r

_m

> i +4&R%uMRER%d*whlde(R swtwit4 W

% Z w  ;!

m o

o z >.

== w =2 O Z$ lg g w

e Z E 5 -)--

~

8 4 Z e agQ s.

W O w-

  • c.

g O t~

1 O O O RE ADINESS REVIEW CHECKL1ST .

NO,RR *J'/1N O/ - - _

"^ ' # " ^"

CONTINUATION SHEET l^"""'

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR EMEN T FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT R,EJEC T , HESol UTION

.f bIST ftd'ST /fVEl-2"!)

tonM6m/ INT /FrM4 Vocum5Nrs

/ /SY M2?N9 LFL/Cf.

/NPLlsM&Y17117ay fraMD/G:

wm--a-w --- e -

h

. .. _ - ~ .

,,W't'9""'M

es 6---  %-%v m e%m= = ~ ,.

g I:

+er 9 -- - -% _ _ _ _ a ._ ' 1 __.- _ _m __w-__--- -- - - _ _ _ ' - -

1 O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ _ _ 10. RR-r#4'/f'<W _ _ _ . - - --

"^*' "#'

CONTINUATION SHEET __

l^""""

'IT E M REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT R<EJEC T RESOLUTION f f5/12 Vijflt=V /Mf/2/U/Mfdf/bW Y .5<l, 4,]. P GF 77tE fc?LLow/M6 dOxtat/ Ting'Nr // nty7 GNP Siet>A/D isynL Of5/6/V Pil't/t//EN/C l .

WHERE f/46t#L SEP42-

//T/of d[pytt?gistEnff[

'.lE (wE64/#AVErag

$18.T NOT /M E7 /

ffRE ,

Vi!/2/2/CV2f IF'??i

/MSIRLLTO {/M Ac%cennaw w/17r Tat d!!GuirefirtSuG OF 7ag nli/= d / r:M f/Ef) F.5H P (9jkW('r?

/ H PM).

usr nogrieva

/dif't EAfriAlf?t'G PM(twJAtf5 8

^ * * ' ' '

'=

= . _ ~ . . . . .

O

O O o READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _NO. RR-##4f:/#/ . _ _ . _ _

CONTINUATION __

SHEET l^""' "^*'

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT R,EJEC T , gSOL UTION i P4T SgcoNO LivtL j I"'] unnentrNTMM i?camengg 4 A..-% + e e

O O O RE ADINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST ._- .NO. RR-###/4'/ -- ._ -

CONTINUATION SHEET l ^" " '

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT R,EJEC T 1 resol _UTION

{s rggg V212tff //!iPLEntEN Yd008 g,/, f 3 sf THE FQ4MW/Afd CristM/TnlSA/T /N /7F(I' b.Ev6L l?8A(in JMcum6MfC:

ifG 1 y 9 'vsv i97-y- .

$llo4/Pt&9j7G# CF (AA%

/ E Ecriiifnti: N T it se NulbEAYE f0W6/l BRN15 htST~ D'lYLEntlignyg P O <!st dlt'N ( C

-s

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST NO. RR- #WO/#~/f/' - - - - -

CONTINUATION SHEET _

l^"""'

FINDING / COMMENT ACQEPT R,EJEC T , RESOLUTION ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T 7' fgj92 VTf21F,V)n/f%dptSN77ff/(pV IM d? ff (Mt! F17tLDpy/N6 Gm%h1/T/t115Alf /Al P/I?$T f,liVGL Qhf/gNtfc'24Sy5

?

IEEE 599-/974 '

TR!AL -ItiC fl17/VPJ/Cl) ai21 DiRIG F0/2 SEPAR41704 Or 6 LASS JE BQUtj oMENT AMf? L'It9 Cit /75 L/W /n/1%dittEnDMG OKu)>tGNic

^

-ERFORMED BY DATE

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _._ N 0m R R - d@'#'?' /"' /' -

CONTINUATION SHEET  !^""' AC EPT ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T FINDING / COMMENT R,EJEC T , RESOLUTION y i M /e Vf//Fy /MfLEMif/y74/by Y'I' V' 5 l'l' 77/E j^odjdw/AtO CDn? niiTNEA/T ..

IN fir /5f lEVS& V 6 f/ 6 /V /> A % 1Jsi75 f26 l100, KS V' /, AV6 '77 .

iVE.'OA's//6M/.?Sp /Pif6T/Ciff IbA [s/S/11/C GUAL/P/fff/af C&' 6-A S5 iL Fpuit'inisit/7

/:dt? s/a'CLEAJC (DWE/2 6ffA/fafA[7AfD .C/A(}~F/V5 4 t6 t' /in flff M1EN7/MG Q&t':/et/fillfl w- e==e i

0

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST . - - - . _ 10. RR - cW' O N */ _ _

CONTINUATlON SHEET ___ _.

_ l^"""'

ITEM _

REFERENCE REQUIR E MENT ,

FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT R,EJEC T , RESOLUTION I;Sf}P f Vf*f'l/ f //ftRbtilEN77)170tV Y'l'V*S of ///E Rdtawu/G

~

c't> min /TsitSM/ M Fik'S T 4/ EVE & Otti/6/V !?Yi/>^'94C

  1. 6 b 32, RE/ 2, FKd '77 ~

Cl2ITfftAt fep SMl=6Ty'

(;' lip 2(5p strcrRtc t@w17/2 SySM++y fue t\lV6LE#R Gwf/ fu)Nfl LtGT i>>tPtEn1isNring 00GrII/E NTG woww - essium -m

-' N h- -

-=we --_

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ --

N0, RR "YO/No/'_ _

"^ '

CONTINUATION SHEET l^"" " * '

lTEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT REJEC T , RESOt.UTION lD / Shit yggjp=y 111tlj' gatgy,;9lffyy

/ '/- 7. 5, y g.j, q_3 6P T/ti? fokOWING

6) Hit!!/TntliN f /N ft126T~4Eytst ggg/6/V DOC ((///f/l/TT 1 _

R6 /,7f, IEGV 2, SEK '73 l'//V5/CM /NO/sPEMPfNc5 5'/ f6/i~C79/Cd 67'SIEA6 llST />tf(2) Emit:NT/MC 06YWii/itl/15 Y

PERFORMED BY DATE

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST h AUDIT Ub. NO, RR- #[@*>/

PAG E M OF ?/

CONTINUATION SHEET I ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MENT FINDING / COMMENT ACQEPT REJEC T RESOLUTION

// FGR $? VE/21/ y' //Hl'sE tilliAff?tPG/V

f. / 4,3 ff THE l'OLLOWid/6 L'OH1h1/7h1/iAf[ /A/

ft /2 7 f ( y $ & PKf/&Al Pfaun4At15 g

/0 &f r2 (0, /) PPA, Gi?c (

F/UPiMG oF STPtid M si, S y'6 Til Ist C & N D Co>Hfnt siAtW.

LlIt' !/11f4DMXA/7~HV6 JG'7t/0iArn1

. ehe w es. iw. m , . --..m

-m-N-

h

O O O RE ADINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST __ NO. RR- CYON*/ _ ,

CONTINUATION SHEET l^" " " '

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR EMEN T FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT R,EJEC T resol.UTION

. I2 f5&R VEttFf /M905pityynpsy

% , /, q. ] #F Rf!E Tottcw/4tG i QHfH//TW1EN7'/N SwSr LEVlsL (7'ff/64' OOCtfH7CNff g

/DCFA M,AA & Gi% 2 WS/6N 6H9E.C FDR l't?oTEC7 toy ASNNST U+T&t2h /WENOMBn/>

l 15 !~ />;tPLEMENT/Ht:

/20fftI//2NTT$

@-we..a O

PERFORMED BY DATE

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ _ _ - 10. RR- 4'Z/a'fWC CONTINUATION SHEET l^"""~

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT REJEC T , RES0t OTION l$ fhb'N //WAlf,Y /HlhM/?]EAh%17dN

/ 9 32 si= nis FcetawavS 4 H1/st/ T M f u r M Ft rt g,7 VSl /)$ /lV/// l%i/MO'rT?,

/CCFA W yft'A, Spc /7

/ElECf!?t( f5 W E A SfSTsnt[

? !S T //11:9Entisil?AtG f?$lu///Ed/FS $

9

PERFORMED BY DATE

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ - 10. RR- c'/7/"/f>'/0/ __

CONTINUATION SHEET _

l*""' "*"' #

ITEM . __

REFERENCE REQUIR EMEN T FINDING / COMMENT ACCEPT R,EJEC T RESOLUTION

/g F5&g VS$1F,V /mgistgyf7F7ky l 9 29 n= we rottowwc CD M mt T M fiA/ T /N f/f6 T l5v!EL- l?EC/6 W PNgs/Mg6:

lfG /29, fig (, y pg 6DN.w& pligga/

&A%/F/dM 77o.\/

&!S r /MPLEMEA/TJM6' thlumiAirs ?

,%m . . - . . -

  • L________

- e .+

s.4-E  !'

O )io m E g

z N w -

N $

i m 0, t -

e .

% t t

o i

CC CC

- s O z Z =

s =

= 8

- s c O 1

W c

\1 ab -

  • hnk '% o kN a p

m k t'h Q k D d$go% 5%

g 4 ,

w s

~ s w g ,*,

4 *y c exeG& s R -

N w '

hkw g  % i C o = ts % q' S --

W w e 4 9 ch Ay( QMA %x uN* > '

eg x%

I - m p s g 3 s %a h3 wD w s

F O q ( w  ! i i W @ ,)

  • qm sp%< k u NMR '

w AN C $ i i Nw = gs ~ s ,

I Q g% (u D '- 5C D D N l l W

5 m

Me% g <sew w,

= e~(E a1 eu ey i

W .

% Z w $ <

O E F w  %

Gs$ ?n a.

OMzW q D

z M

b gg z m

=

g=.y%g$y,k b w

=

8 4 Z s 5 W

e O

o w

- k '

W

l 1 8' O m i

$ i

% 0 V

=

D w w Nl e o l I I ,

h -

e%  !

l 4

k- E l i

h 8

, w I,

CC fr

- r Q 2 f z y s =

2 o I

n s o e 3 2 i

N' c

Q 3

% D. g

,% h -

D .- -

,H) <r 4 ._ .

r%

A q ,R W J '

s li; "

s x gg ,*Q >%

a  :

x O

=

z 34 3

e<

  • '@ u NQ' m

5Og W@

w w h 4% s E T %gy  %%'lN h I

o H 3  %$-i b ,  % /fs Dw q hs w oE X d%

'S y  %

M D g b  !

3y h. N'k 't v % q.

% g W5

> $~ sW '3 %@i d h $ D A t

$ @y W

% Z w O o z b u) -

H w ,

m u)  %

O z z 4

3 g

m,

h. h 2

- - zI .

x. x C H .

o ,

<[ Z s $

W O w:,

x o r .

' i i

g Z i O -

T J

A I

O

_ " S E

.# R ,

' T

/ C O E J

~- l"

/ E, R

f T P

M

  1. C E

A R

R

, T O N E

N M M

." O C

/

" G

" N

_ l^

I O I F

D N

{

y t

/ D 4 M N F M C P T

/

A g *

?! o p T e0 U / /

/

m e

E H O/ i d c b' s fj h s & V L S o y w 5MLS /L P' E 4 i

i O ' I N w4 g E L

K T

N

?

t d r/c MG r 7 @ 6 d

m: y w

w h

T A

D s y e R:/ N E m

E F

}

M 4 C M T?  ? J j GFE nP a

O E E c 7 H 2 NDsymo i t

! a .

w s

R / k  ! - e_

H I F 4/ g i

r  : A C T U y S / t i .

E Q E y mnpS g i a 21 I t

u W E R FE4 W mV /g H E 9 S c

& 6P o J

H s S J N /

E I S d'f 190yMg y lr 8 (g t / o }/V T P me mm u

V E

R N E 5 M7 1

O C 3 S I N l. / Y T E F /

~

B OENS A U

N E

F E

R R& k82 A2 S }/

9 ,

D E

M R

R I

D I

T P1 ( 3 O F

A N M R E O E 7 1

E P

T R C I

1 l l

e..A e- e ea, O ,

O s.

g w

m =

w w 0 O i h. N

% - y e s e

I -

I T

tr

. n D \

Z z s =

z 8

- s O C D 2 O a l >

m N b k y4 h -

"m i

1 4 $ A f,\ t'D$4%y

$x % S '

1 H i k*

x 4h$&

we R w a

$% t, i l

a m

o w

y T R -{5.

s R AQ. w*R$S @ $ $ @D

  • w s N i 1

a_

5 b or

- b!$I$ wetg 2s wm

> naeasa e t :3 m sa a' w

Z Z w m

o p

o

  • %w' N

d r

d M

W <

oZ,_z 5

m k%et eN3 N g4 a

o y

3.

a w t

TMTM e O

< Z s .

4~ x w O w E T U 5 ,

O O O READ! NESS REVIEW CHECKLIST i - - -

.NO. RR- R&a' F# 2 .-

DATE AUDIT NO. PAGE / OF ' z-PRE PARE,j.D BY ~ A /ovuv cy!/o9/t/

SAMPLE IDE NTIFIC ATION AUDIT DATE AREA t'onl,s/ /Tn]ENT ^/HIf4 <5/}!/iNTA 00'V -

AUDITORS 6.';/CTPCtC00!/ ffputJH8/V/T ITEM REFERENCE REQUIREMENT FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT REJEC T g RESOLUTION

/ je:Ep VEPlVy' /h1PLEntEN74Po/V 3W9 - l 97-) 0F 7P/E RZsow/MG (fHI/)!)fVhFAf(~ /g

('oWST90CT/GW Qoa mlEM5i

/E X POSE'? C*LM S /6 F H Sw 4VG 9/F44 BE n 1 A t? f E O M & I.7 6 T/ N GT~

TC'Nn11b'VSNT //th'NNBA AT /NTae UVL-f 407~ TO

!s/cz- ;p 15'F7 /hvp /4 7

/Z!MfS ri- l!A/T/2 Y /D A.A!p ,gur w G f/PcYk1 O N CL o S E 6 Or/E S6 .

Lt sT /atf Enin/T/A/O i M a m g y(5 g

a ,__

+9 -.s4 -- - , _

p

^u.

O :s l

M b ,

l m! m ,_ l

%i E

' 8 <

\

- a ,

4 r y'  :

W i

l l l cc T i Q 2 i Z s  ;

i

=

'E 8

- s O L7 O

i

- o,

-j l

l s sa h ! G ab

  • 4 tt Q l m

4 w as 4e *4%

y a_

" t'c "E w

  • waa~ %sk R' weu t

g%

m J *

  • .g - d tu~ >w% R M %s % S %y 8 l M wR  % b $

O CRw%  % yMsg 3 N '

l w

2 m g'y ( QI (M M

  • 3s.". -

%4 ga R N M m([A l

i h

w S

+ -% Y . A D ,!  !!

m x% q 4 e, ,* Na gss,aW - s s, e gI w

= '

% b L 3DNbT %Q RDQ L=

u et m .4 .

t.y . +

ym hA s q.E se s u '* '4 ** 4 a W ' i

% Z w l O o N M E b 4' s 00s aZ

!=;  %;i e' Q & - & =

o

<t Z z; $

w O w, M w z o t:

l O O O

! READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ -NO.R3 0#v/f-44 --.__ _

CONTINUATION SHEET l^""' "^*'

R,EJEC T , RESOLUTION ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR EMENT FINDING / COMMENT ACQEPT b F5ftR VLWIP)f /MfZE/Ilfstry(7esy' >

f, f l, f Gl~ [7f2 FDROW/A/G CV) r/Hf /Th1EAfr /A/

[D/tSTRMs70W 90ClfHiWNf5&

VVIT)flM 77tf C4/1}d SPRifAPING AMk15, c't?! Lit 420L /XUl*f ANf}  ;

9/W7??;vty' (?oond, T/E /

min /HitIl'1 VGt2RC/)&

flit'0}2/Vf7t//V fD(2 ftWN 10P Cnt)LE 7 pay Il

/?lV/7 77tE TFT}

h 1 I M llit u m f e lt/ E l W 711 L f!lfAR4'T70Af IS /Pr '

wmity g;ggepag ping flVIII/)$, TNll ntIWMtitiIi V'lir2 //cd L Srit'AR4-TUL/

I5 5 P r , A M/? TK fl s'il/Mtaum (foi')?,047//L t Sif9A K'(V()d/V 15 3 ET' -

~ ^

PERFORMED BY DATE

_. _,. _ _. _, I

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _- 10 RR_- vV/e#WA "'

"*"' Y CONTINUATION SHEET l ^ ""' ' "

'IT E M REFERENCE REQUIREMENT ,

FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT REJEC T , HESol uTION 3 (02 O M N 7DP MIStE Toa) rny'.

LiS T l M fl 5 N W T/M G 047CU!!!2Nf5 ?

f PERFORMED BY DATE

M s 5_

O 8 sC

\.

v $

g x; w w

\q w, i a.

w - g . <

k U a r l

I.

T ,

Z  :

a H O z Z s s =

z 8

+ ,

2 O '-

W

& [q *

  • de s w wt ks s 9 3 @4*s ywd 3>,33N(;1 m

8a E' a 3

's s > $ h%T t1~H e s #s w E ' s @t a - 2th * &

e3t* x s=

5 " llieMa@e a>t hs E a@ i d 'S W-o W 3 sE42$ t m e 3 + 'ss i! e m as n * @s a w e~* tt d y < s* %w w t A 3 s.t 0wg e w .t.s+

~ A W =

4g3$ Li SMRk kSnsbN gI r Wm $ R '$ 4 4 @'t $$

MQ k6 Ck 'b \s sy <fMM s%g

> Eg sw%

' sr W

% Z w m 2

+mQ i

m a Q E OwZ a

.z w . s+etwh %e iQq%

m w

s

- m g o p i %s

u. ,

4 Z s 'i 5 W O w y c.

% O J: - I

O O O .

READINESS REVIEW GHECKLisT - -

NO, RR o/7/ cyp-fo 2 PAGE 6 OF /C CONTINUATION SHEET l^" 'I N -

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR EMENT FINDING / COMMENT ACQEPT R,EJEC T , RESOLUTION 4 OR TO 77/S VMtL, [F 4 (cont) wl)N IS w/TN/A/ C [6/.

tyt/EM T//E Tf4VS ARE ARKKAIGCW /At S/Ncks, WHG/G 77tE Ti2AY 5Creoss sac ll 079E9, 7HE $4NR1M JZX TENT?/N6 #T JIT+ST /PT ON liAC/[ S/Old Of 79[

7 9 1) y C y S 175 HI IS Edf1MHfD F014 Toolf JPHy6 CN THE dAlf&[

9954P/WC 4/248 .

FYJTN),Y T//G' 651/Ef?AL tOg,givy /)pggg, )bWygf 7}I!E IJAl22)yR JDTEND/MG ,

Ar Adn Sr /FT OM Esce

$/1.h? O F 7l'i 70 P f>?Mff AHi> 3 /T SM /f/k// SiOE di^ 1Hf tTC/ bin TR/))$

TS DV 5I!)LL(b. .

PERFORMED BY DATE

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST - - NO. lR- 4V7/0/#'/#2 '

"^*' ' ' '

CONTINUATION SHEET _

l^"""'

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR EMENT ,

FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT REJECT RESOLUTION

, q 7. WHfR$ TM ikwipinth

$*'0 ll0RI30NTML $EPAP&MM/

/5 NdT inAINTnt A151), A pt}r?RIV/9 IS ING7 Nib 50 wilICH / EXT'iAtM PRO!!! i ar L!iAST /Fr 460VE (cR TO THE dii/ LING) To AT pi$6T / CT /kg,pg (iR To Til2 SwoK) mg f@y sySTri+9.

4isr/miuniediMC I?G'2 3/K M 73 i 4

9

n ---s,- - - u u--

i x &I r

O ,

u.

O

=

g t,n t bd !

4 h ,

z Wl W H

, e o DN 1 k ,

_ g <

\g m

[J W

I  ;

CC

- r O z Z z s =

O 2 s

- s b O D Z 4

) summmmu O b w

N s (nt {<'t aes kv '$ $ D 5 3 $%E b ( A x hs'?R$hE OkII 6E~g S

m un. etS # 4wx 1

] - {t,X 't A* 1 w ?  %.

o4h d cha w P,,

x 5 g$ g wD '4 r c%s wA L, a, s v .

g (3 4 o

W I

=

$ xR hg&w9w NDG k 3 s$

s R b k D '2trh-S u

o r w g

.s te s e d w 3y I =

xs=

kq R. 3 o

  • 0 ni cs

( 3 w%

Qw h ~s

  • j ,z$c q

+ $ 'e 3 N

+ k ew 4 s 'i  % 8se paw *w. xg W

m gSQQ s t R sd Q R d ( re a 'e t 5 s W i C Z 'wo O~

m s W T $

00* z Z

2 w-z .

m-w m

2 x

Q H i -

O 4 Z s  ; $

W O w b W

^

m o _t .

l

O O O READINESS REVIEW GHECKLIST NO. RR- v/7/eW #s z CONTINUATION SHEET _

l ^" " ~

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIREMENT FINDING / COMMENT AC J EPT REJECT . HES01 tlTION V T!h3LE 8. 3. / hurj LtST //nRfprgui9/yg 906<< /RExin:

IS 'O'W V6l'IFf i'fjoy4 jams po S.3. /. 4; 2

/IVff 6d/8t/l~TfE R1'lCWis/G l

dc?>tl/H/ntlEnt7~ IN l l'C'W6iEuc(7(/Wl?Nt'l//15/956 Wlhi12& ct*A/Eff jy SN'MfC FF & Ffi7'/M L 6i/6TM /41Vli /JE6 4 l /AtSTAt(GD og j%/ptw) f/tL rJ Y (?, & Aldt,Voin*C -

l'ERFORMED BY DATE

{ _

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _. - .NO.RR- OW#9 PAGE

' 4'O OF /7--

CONTINUATION SHEET IAUDIT NO.

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MENT FINDING / COMMENT ACgEPT R,EJEC T 3 sot.UTION

, (,' ll W fi l y'[/f U A S // S d' Y

?o\'A OOfp/?inSD TO A96f5'S

//A/Y nnPN&t7,V t?rfHI?A'6 userc a in ane htST /mt'tanEngivc

]vaaoriyg g

.m.

I PERFORMED BY DATE

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ _ - 10 RR #0'N9 ~# 2 . - _

PAGE // OF /d-CONTINUATION SHEET IAUDIT NO.

'IT E M REFERENCE REQUIREMENT ,

FINDING / COMMENT ACQEPT R,EJECl , RE SOLUTION y f6/]k VIM /Pf /M188MEVf@OV

3. 6 + b" OP 7/hE fo Lo1V/MG l'OWAt /7)11,Thil /N t'OM&YPR4(20A/ ltL'ds%OL/15:

W V & P /,V G v /= . . f d C d i1 4 ,V wears . . a w,nvoim

/M /.YtoWp)fAftE tyiTH

/1w6 P/. / ->975~ ON bani.e gpilloA/ .

uW nWtEllt[n/Ti,vc PC&tfM//ill/15 8

-w m.e I

PERF0F MED BY DATE

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST __ 10. RR- NA/ - /o z'

  • _-

CONTINUATION SHEET l^""~

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T FINDING / COMMENT !ACEPT REJECT , resol UTION g FfnR VEPIFf WE fcuCwn'G i9W2? ouiwirmarix evmem

/OfttM/ZAJ7T .*

flSitAL West?M'G INSPECW//

l l'E?=ORsuEp

!t pH CA A/=TEg

/2le2/ff /6 /H ACCC/(1)ANCE WITH Tiec VICHnl h'ELP A%E/7ANC& CR!TER14(vwaf fur 57??x7upAz. WEwlMG Ar NetcL6nz /LAN75, NC /G -01 gf ylfloN 2.

h!'5 T lis)flEp1ENT/MG thCVptsu rg ;

m em

^

PERFORMED BY DATE

{ .

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST 1 .

N0mRR-4/7d/9 -M/ -_

PREPARED BY e D AT E AUDIT NO. OF 6 Ya bj 0/$V 7f/fW PAG E /

SAMPLE IDE NTIFIC ATION (;pjpgf/jfg ff,yp ,fgfy/ffgf AUDIT DATE AREA fII"l~ /$5yOA!YAflCW 1]//S$/8A (?sQt/ffg/T WO U NIM ~ Cr %/n ?8 L Nu/el/ fag ITEM REFERENCE REQUIREMENT FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT REJEC T y R

_ESOLUTION I E lfi/01l'Y TNAT T*5

  • I' E

/N/7lo l~/.4/G 151/GINb if piVC AA//EPip TN& fi?@twC

/Mc A41'n!)p,y w 7/E FRBrf fCRWI ;

O F4h/&MM7fsaipoN&v7 Ta6 NO O idirt/)DEO Gy 0 0'/ 'l L?'A'6 e t i r e c. ,

O A R ii k / < /O a! M u sti ritiq>

o SYSTEM tvuutgiia

? !?k!) W/NG N(//Jt(3Gg

( /l2 I/1 Nt////,$Ei@

t l t' fOtti/Dil/ENT p VNj/)]!!L'/ [FScigjpiry) l PERFORMED BY DATE R.R.TE AM LE ADER DATE

O O O RE ADINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _._ 10. RR-- C/%# ' 2#/* --

l^""

" ^ '

CONTINUATION SHEET ITEM REFERENCE WEQUIR EMENT FINDING / COMMENT ACQEPT REJEC T resol uTION

, EO-T-3 2 ff/tFf 7AAT NL /TEuts

^

S'r/ ?- l BAITEre62 64 THE FSC4

/1RF th"flK46L),' 70 7/f6 E@tifMEgr/4)nif0NsNT ENrneEo /M 7'Its

?E4WFPmeAfj~/C081R?N6NF Til6 h'd " $LCCK PERFORMED BY DATE

{ _ ____ ______ - _ _ _ _ _ _

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST . NO. RR- #/7/'/9 -3#!_ '

" ^ ' "

CONTINUATION SHEET _

l^"""' ,

REQUIREMENT FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT R,EJEC T , RESOLUTION ITEM REFERENCE ,

3 gp-f- $2 VHIff 1%'A7' OfE

c. /, r ipf6g nin BasNli$h"-

gu. O s i; n e ru remu lc?6, E17-1;J2,13916/7og 4 E!?+T2 y! 2it / (n GL' 26 t/Evv 7 0 P /Ofl CP 588RS PA//?

,,,.,, <n r~ r - w as VM-/M770N 8Lxx 5 SientMD fMpum 5thnftC pR GWJHinC

/N /RM4 GF /N3 M CTOP PA/O PnT6, PERFORMED BY DATE

{

J e.~ A ea n a n u a 5 --a 6 u . u c

O

  • 2 x

I N

\

m -

O O h 1 R -

e%

N o g 1 W

1, ir

@~ s O z Z $

s =

z 8

- s O O 3 2 1

, b 'M' O  !

kW l >

r <u8 w s {t *-% s*

m 4

s $>JkI s. ~.

se u)  %

b4 9kt0L., N 6 b Qs J  :  :

d ex 3^

  • ejes"D W r4 v e k' O b" *%

s W

emE e w( s R uw wa x w g 4 e to 4 g o 1 0

w 2

w kN%

R 4 N 4 s) yN%h t V s g A g d qE D k.hb ~ -

k 7 H 5 m

  • h M s, g- \" g WR Q  !

U 9 26 4* u% R W 8 SM Is* $ikuQkW $% gRR$g l.

k v*S k s j gw =

@U. at S R RgT, 4 2  :

Q f I Skk ,

Ezo m o

N

!4%o ?N g - 2 g F w  % D%g% m y 4 $ 4N 34t O2 ag - ;se is t .a ela y' o

4 Z z e O w \n W  % W ct o _t -

w , .,

v  ;  :

N O

I T

O /

U L

O S

p E -

2 J

' ' T -

? C -

/

  • E

/

d l J

E R

7

/ T 9 P c E C

A _

R R

< T O N E

N ~

M M

O

_-* C

" /

G

" N

^ I D

_l O N I

F g

Y E;

$ 0 t 8

N/  ?. R W n A/, hc A* Nh

/

t gP PC )t ~(

7 L

ro # (z ff 5

T " g g / 'G' y j

7 6  ?)t

/P b^59 WPJ KL En S M R A

nAiT7 f t A l0 P S

N P & g )t H h4/ y T NO FNT I

L T i

T i E M 9 K N L E o?7 g t L wM vi

/

E 0 fpd t.

gET ,*,pOUC C M f 5 TG h

l q g l

/

VW E

H C T E

R I

U C n

O ;r g /y TPE o

i

? SR'k'E Dc B eAEe i

s fpyfi6INQ t

/ ETO I

C c x/A 0 7

7 OG/

E y2.

E E Q t pj cG FJ W E E

R HEzz TA t sF Bn l i

g 5nEIO G t

N SfPP I

S5 KC >LfL/ u r

t t

E H sMAu 6

/

A EA S

{g ]E?A BI / NN r k6/ VM t

4 I S fhSjgP'M1 N 1 I "! G V

E R N E O C N N 2 S I T E fW/2 '

32 S . .

IEA ~I53 34 -

A R )

ONE I

U N

I E

F E

R 0

$ l' Q 6

V' S. g q, '5 D T A N M E O E T

y f R C 'l s

i \

O O O READINESS REVIEW.. CHECKLIST l.. NO RR- a/goe zaz PREPARED BY DATE. AUDIT NO. PAG E / OF 2 bAmn EiWs/ FIELD G- 3-A 7 SAMPLE DENTIFIC ATION 7Ie4Y Cove /2 /A/sr4L(A7;o4/ AUDIT DATE AREA AUDITORS ITEM REFERENCE R REMENT FINDING / COMMENT ACQEPT REJEC T RESOLUTION

.1 GA Eo1-E8 TEA 'l CoVELS? ADD 60 &l DIE f.k ra 68.1.1.Q Fl[Lb AS A f/RE' SEfy?XA/Jad (eevzs)

EAEEIER./2.6./.75 Eneesc az fo E b fEf/3 REbTEeric,Al

.SilALL EE lbfSUTIFIED 7D Enl6/AJEE2tAL V/A A fcKG To b2AUJ)Al& c/3bFO//.

2 DC-l809 aJIIEAl 'A TEA'l COVE /L /S ANkl es<a 5.2.l.C.A lhe A bl.57AAMG of L/l SEET M InofE 7b A lba/CL CA&E TRat com/ R/WDolt Flu-Rajnts, at to A l}y,jeg egjgjg TYAY ll)/D/ O1A/A)TA/Algb $/Yk*j g EAlls/JEG2/A% AUALYS/S LS 62EGUIREb Tb \lE21FI T)lc libEadAc/ Dr T>l6 GA8LE~

.SI?L Aalb CALLE T2nYS 606bEf5.

l l PERFORMED BY DATE DATE lR.R. TEAM LE ADER

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST .< _ .

10. RRr g/@e2og _

"^*' # '

l^" " * '

CONTINUATION SHEET _ _

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR EMENT FINDING / COMMENT ACQEPT REJECT , RESOLUTION

^

3 It'-IBo9 IF n/E foltou)/26 DAHIS OU fo rL 121.F i)EnD LonD (MA1. TEA 1 AcLESSORJ<  %

cnBLE) Aes Em:EEbED, D/C ST2Ek%TH of MC CABLE TEM ndD SvP/J o e.rs ? s/Att er rz-EVALUQTED 00 A CASE-8/- .

CASE b&l.$. ...

Tr4/ u> ire / LonD NR nw W SSM/f+

18

479 /f+

/2 " 33*/f+

L' ace /C+ -

e 1

PERFORMED BY DATE

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLlST .

f. __

10._RR- f/Z4/F-JN _

PREPAREQ BY DATE. AUDIT NO. PAG E OF A l.ff lr)/t)/ _

. 0 /Z l C '/ / W SAMPLE IDENTIFIG'ATION ggfsgrfacDOff (rJy//pff/g/g AUDIT DATE AREA TNA Y' /NSTAldAllC?N gy9g79gg TR M Aft /n/d5A -- -- - --

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MENT FINDING / COMMENT ACCEPT REJEC T, resol.UTION j X3Afoi-f 9 ['MIF/ Tts Ge/LE Mar SW E iII'N Jic(7Dif /r /PCNT)P/dD.

x cr r f. l.P Myv24;EPJoz M H S.2 2 n

AJA ROI-E7 ti; Z"E EP />1aWF'M IS Of Mr FS,2/. T T N E F P M itt / E TYt'i, l vi;n'IFf Tire pi/MRING l /f GlacK dQLP F/)Cf AM?

l /. 75' /NCH(S P/GN 0#

g <t2ofrip  !?//CKGPdt/Ub PF R THE SffctP!G/9/?of' St?rar edof t*0&E.

PERFORMED BY DATE R.R TE AM LE ADER l DATE

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ _ 10. RR - cWO4'##/

PAG E 2 OF S CONTINUATION SHEET I AUDIT NO.

lTEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT REJECT , RESOLUTION 2 DARO/-E 7 lF THE /P mAWF5K 15 Of car) Sti c T E T. 1 l E TrE srEnca. TYPE, &f'F)'

VE l'+) 7ttE tsirrexG g /.7f IA/GH65 /H6tf JND cct0 RED pep THE SE/AP&T704 6Wtir CCtd t? (0pd S' EV- T-02 vf p jff $4646 TARY Sill t' ARA S.2.2; pistp ryf>& 496 PER E P- T g_gggg sARV BNP E/Wid/T /T

(,y ( ,, Pl?A WIMO,.

A gg, T-02 . A) Welft' 0'@"I' SEAAAI'#0' 94pp y.2 2, -

ceirrt?>g SErwggy gat 3tc fintIa/T // Tpdf 4NO A97Acf4 7 ITb m 2* V C)/)c6xayr 16 Pen REGt/tRE nr6NTS.

F9-T-32. 6) Vt oc >F y Tunr Aiu Psst ,

' Y'l j+BS 13EGN IN/r/// TSO If Vl TP!: 6 R o uto c n p A 2 4 T/ a V Chirvul Nes NoT Gain mir, EFORMED BY DATE

O O -

O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ . NO. RR -- O/'Yed */

CONTINUATION __

SHEET l^"*' "^ '

'IT E M REFERENCE REQUIR E MENT FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT REJEC T , RESotilTION G g p- y-y E?!FV 77/M 20TH Tile' N0 pppp , 7,3 TRn1 As30 IT.s Associniso GK)/jffff~ jg' MlbRT [l/ERnCAL M644 del AUD A

I 7 E M 2. B' nRitS)* AVE .SEPAERTED FRO A Nlbl'IIIl S) hb5ACEAIT CDMA48 dines /A)

TAGLE (, (M / //>

McDe.bAnCG aJi n i 11/ E 6 f tS 4 1, cy3ppp g _

66S4 EAT 1oAl CRITERIA.

Pu M/t- 2J

/3Ahof-Bf D)\lERIF4 DIAT Ttki TEEUldATini-MitM S.Zl F g7 (ggg _ggg,97, ggwpp,,7 Ek)bs A m>AltMux of 6'Au14Y 5 pago I - E6 Vemr1 wnr TRA1 cat /ELS f** E 8'1 '* 4 ou ^courea. Anb Pcu)E2 TFNIS Aes SHoak) 6a CxEbFoll, IUCLUGAIG hrAnoa btMCostan.s Arlo c2sTE2.tA VERI (Y 9IE TEA 1 CDUEfl 13 ATTAcIiEb [DL2ELTL Y'

~ i, ..

L f?s gol- E 6 ff THE TRA1 SenoAJ I.s (m Eso.G .D cyggt_ Iz p:E6Y loa)L, ,

V6illFl TilAt~ (T IS [>2a>&GO A[ 6ACH ErdD'.

s PERFORMED BY DATE

~- -- ,.

O 8 i

  • h l

k w s i i e sv -

a ,

p l

\ '

%l $

x I.

CC cc a n O =

f Z s j c; = '

z o t s s< E o- m!

Y w

D R L *x ..d '4 s x

'\v d F: Dgas q s t hs wg L4ktm a

<s E o v.

u4 S

m 4

. m x

= t* iraa t

b 9s w# 'M e rtsess g4 c o a = w S NTet %sdIG@?

$s o w E

x (4 w CkkN;wt

=s s xx i

=s t p t wwOxs%a#

"2 a w -

se es a ex w ..

W INDwgkk$w$$kkhkk W i

% Z w g #

g 9 E Nb

  • a

) $ '1$ 9 C O5 6 A 2

E z O H 2

<C Z zi z O

W w A E!

% O ,

4 -..aa ,M A + - + _.m a. .-

O 8 ll l y  ; i k,.w: e s

s - a r  !

w I D

l Z

cc

e W O z @

Z z $ '4 2 s a w Ss

= g s n a r *S h $

z NMS 2 y gg i M o w  % H O

z  % O e% '

E  % R T kkk 3 a M 4xe6 M # k ,

w 4 g%%s &4 s a '

H  %

kL $" "5 $ k$g Q' m 4.~ Q SW $Aw m U $0 e! ),%$41 E!

o w

E

=

m- s+w t xe  !#3e$e$

2

- tw %

~a m

  • , l I E g%k *

%SN Vs 4 k  !

oHw g w x%w x kd% x%Q S 4x w

4  %

s

  • s '= i jg W * @ sa S $ C '2d Q Q s , E 'b 1

g5 $$$ EhRQ& h4ER m

o U

=

Ngw m @De Q m p b s~a Pt 4=s bs  ;

m = ' (m m

'OWz 4 U

W W

"L" k t

g 3 f 13 W*

\ e

,* $ '* W 'q O

I

'3 D

k 4. s*k Q4 s

< z -3

  • g e W O w i % x s Z e [- 1 ,

O O O RE ADINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ _.

PRE PARE D BY, DATE AUDIT NO.

NO<flR- o/##-Sud ---

G PAG E / OF

^[ [ l,0fr v G/C'/fV'?

SAMPL E IDE N TIFIC ATION cgf,cj//P;t' ry/ (6/#/$ff/cA/ AUDIT DATE AREA C 0ll0ll/ f /A/S M H R T70.y guo;yong

& N P N / T N t/ s t 2 E g ITEM REFERENCE REQUIREMENT FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT _ REJEC T MSOLUTIDN

) x]/)R?/ -f g VBP/Fy' TMNT' TH&'

VUT E lf.%/.// t'OAltk//r /$ IP/sNT/F)gt) -

SF:r E f./.9

  1. 1 v z4j tWs G 7.2

] k'p)M}-EQ 4)lf THE /P /r!ARKEA IS Of ws ? E C, z 7.T (p2v2 4)

Tot ppMt1/ V[ T9's ,

g(p,py .ygg ggrypp,yg 16 BL AC/( ftgi?/:AcC3 Amp i 5~ IAICHES M)GH A!/4//tutt/>1 cW A dttsetit)

\ 1]//CtcGKrpNO /'5R T//C

$fik APV4 GGaf CO/-O@

ave.

l l

PERFORMED BY DATE R. R.TE AM LE ADER DATE

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ M0. RR - CV'/#d?'JO F-PAGE Z OF 4 CONTINUATION SHEET -__ _ _

IAUDIT NO.

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MENT FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT R,EJEC T RESOLUTION

] XfilRC/-fg 3)/F THE TP N!?ter6R 15 of

' alt) SE'r [f 7 71 TH C 5TEtvCit TffE, (t?& V 2 A)

VRietfy' THE JE77CP/W()

IS

  • 5' /NCH$C H/6N /MO fativ?5& fd2 THE SErnp4n+ i G P e y f Cr t o f C o t? C.

] ')0ARO)-ET Vl0lff f//E COMPuff 15 5EcT[f.226 StPiadOED PER QPawi,v6

$U T &IG S~ 0 AE(ylt?FNCA/1$ ,

(f?F v 2+) _ . _ ._ _ _ _. _ _ . _ -

Y fcm roNPuHS 6/V7FANv6 y3Agol-E il -

t GutPdt!!NT E de'd CSx!??(

SE*d6f.Z2 D -

NG W 2b, l'!?Ol'1 &l?Dv5 ft:stff 7HAr /7/S C0 iff/IISU 77/A r wa rGg y/4L NO T Or9/P /^!TO TkE 6(, attMifN/

Of2 MA/P/ TIM-T 7WE

('dr'Vt// T /$ $6df 6U AT 1/Fi H / G/fB P iQlA/VltIi'

~

^ n/P (tS//Vf.i A4' /j'1f'Ka' v6L

O O O RE ADINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST - - NO. RR v/7V #/9-A3 CONTINUATION r

SHEET l^""' " ^ ' 3 ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T FINDING / COMMENT ACGEPT REJECT , REsot_UTION FEk)./dC OntN'tisip og 4

IU/I) Irl Ak'cGRPMArcE YV/TH c'oAtGT2pcDo/V Sffetpics;T4 X/kG//,

E '

y;p-T-o 2 YfAlf f 7/tkT THE GMtWT InB575 T/tE Ge00P

~

r'/)$F 5 2.2, LtHI8/Ti% %ftiPNTW4 25(;ttir?dMfMIS, ITEM 2.1

(/OiV//) - - - - - - - . - -

b f17- T- 52 yE12tf y THkTi&If FS8sq par?& S l tf r/ S B S tj iv / N / T/ A r5 0 / p (f?6v () ryg 5egyy Syp/)MT/o&/

dernisiims wranse rh lit.

l -. --

l

{Q < f-Qf fh$ l b SS YNSNlf nin+ c. 7.2, //Mt? JSSct?#12O Yrottnet EX"*M/4M m g s r ten >isc pg,m,egyay rdmair u g u s-i5' elei75 R1.4.

(rW / /t) -

~

PERFORMED BY DATE

{~

3 l

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST . . 10<R R #^Ved'~>'o2

"* ' ~

CONTINUATION SHEET l^"""~

'lT E M REFERENCE REQUIREMENT FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT REJECT , RESOLUTION

. g gu)est-s g IF GWAwr15 Fat

/ M Y2 4 f. 2 2 A XMxE LCVGt.f f68. A TkWU l'5 tfIff

&& PAR 4l?oW P %Q X $AC9/-E ff.

e<e<_e e e, p

e TE

O O O RE ADINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST __

10, RR- - "/7/# #'Soz-PAGE 6-~ OF CONTINUATION SHEET _

IAUDIT NO.

ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T FINDING / COtiMENT AC EPT REJECT , RESOLUTION p 69-7-02 /!PIFf M/W THE nwarr YAE O V'?' /liff/C / JCT /'lt0 ll~ J/ df'//Pu/

~

Ei "18/T }.' yygygg,g, g

I TF 19 2. 6, 8t'l&/r)3.

((NV //) -- -

IEEE 32 ( H 'I f f T u s T P E R E 6 McT s 4 t;e VIS/6tE /7Pirin OE 70 Th !! L'CW4'IT ll

, 9,7 oz (fRIFf MAT WS W r& & T. 2. 2 / 177/rpr/N6 fME COMatrTO EAl'18/T /f / fd StIWORT frRs 7512ptw

' ' '" I* S t' M 2 P - T-O2 TI)dt!/

((N/ P) ___ . _ _ - --

/3 w- r-oz upi =y grup nunsww-llNA' b^* S' E l

^)pg yMai V/Ju/L/ ffp - r

               /[f dl Z. Q'                l'6NPIC /fu)R (f $) 10
                  !^ ,~                       $7}ht1 ltWOJIUOf A/sf f AA)5 cr? SrWIA'O hdFML? Y ff.WA fd t?.                      ._                - --

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST __- NO,RR #9[#9'Jo2_

                                                                                  "^*'   '    "'

CONTINUATION SHEET _ l^""~ IT E M HEFERENCE REQuiR EMEN T FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT R,EJEC T HESol.UTION

     ,3    CD- r 27     lF [ONDO/T/5 fitfffK'TED WA IN       P/R6(,rJY 70 THE W/}}L (R6 v' 4)

[79. f.- qq n*/ TH c'oAlfr?575 PA pp- S 7,z BAPRN5l&gt /NC//OR$ (l5u'/) 14tOFy 7bteQttF fEK . W/" 2 O/nntgrgg AVCJhRS) OR 6p-T-2 7, l l l PERFORMED BY DATE

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST

                                                                                                              .                 10m3l3-            O'70/N#5         -

PRE PABE D SY DATE AUDIT NO. PAG E / OF 3

                                             /      /1 l-,,/e>,.,                                      o 7/a'/F7 SAMPLE IDE NTIFIC        ATION PtL'Os A'/P EMT/tKI/(W GY/W/e'A/ AUDIT DATE                                         AREA
                                        .%.? r.4 y vi t,74 EL A reory Pir,at ec7 ititr&y[pytog AUDITORS iiCC ///) / M/tt !6E19 ___                    __      _

ITEM , REFERENCE REQUIREMENT FINDING / COMMENT ACCEPT REJEC T ESOLUTION I [9-T-02 HAS .E i CM alrE*'"?'

                                                 ,/, . /      nyGTA?L/177d/V f4 ICG'
p. / // Tj f e,y f^/t & t) // T!* t Qi4 Vd1/41^ 0,Y f'ilCH+'R)'

i A ' !:st J E r2 j . _ _ 2 E + T 02 ja,% y,n ii 30 nursny oW g.Z.C / !aic,ri L #tlo6' 'df9 IW C T l 13ii"M ft ?cjg/Jf ;'c'sfj.'lA(Gl)

                                                     ' ll
                                                                ,%' (? (/(iAltfy 7
                                                                ,y [,2 i /OGTK (V!!nu W
                                                                       ' o '? f3 i~T i p it! I ( 6 (/)
                                                                       ,i ' /NSW,'?oK't /N/TMLS Av o / +1/E , (Z)/V/fr 99 in) l}g/jdi( vi'll/r
                                                                       /,
  • t. j /// /[s??/?f."3 l *c ? ti,eif Ald!/tVG
                                                                         %":b aig r (7Eist ist die i

b) N 5 A't'TEt? }ll ftprifr2KC s2ct,< , PERFORMED BY 'DATE R.R.TE AM LE ADER DATE

L. 2. .- >- a w --na , + l i i-, i LL 31 l O d l , Ci i (o  ; o W  ! k g y' m

              <CD O

w

    \         C.         ~3 t         -

e .

   $<%>                  a O
                         *(

l ' ' CC .. i l 'd u ' ' CC 4 t

                                                                                        .- N w% *t
        =                >

Q z' D Z W 2

                                                                              )             Nk yt d

w "a o z 3 o w . dk 3% m t s 0 4 g F s d' g

            .aa e

z 5' 2

                                                                               ~  e VlIi e v 1q%2s w
                                                                                                        ,e w                                  ,

i l O %N D Wi ( a mmmmmes 3 o 4 dk2a hg betC w kaw 4 % I$DD Q

                                                                    %                                           v        &@>~4
                                                                                                                           ,u       ~

f

                                                                                  =        m                  ww>            = s\u m                                  = =* s v         %a '. u c,                                                         :   '                        u s     wsd% ss                             3                         w gMt S                                                     'e                                Q ' o"
                                                           ~

J l H $r b *' g3 h 4 1  % ., s ,h M $ C if gI %ba k b cc x s5 4 5 ' : :$: o ew r' gy tu w a -- - o s le +t9k$w%n s% ys x w , w

                                      % D g8           xNg &x       w
                                                                    \

y-

                                                                            $              C                    d E L :.'- a ' :' w%

I E ,s. - C w .ow* 4 ,k x 41 u h.D N g h {N h, D i

                                                                                                                  .s
                                                                                                                      -U s $. 2        k. D r
                                        %                       % e
                                                                                               )
                                                                                                                         ..       s
                                          *w N~ D 3             W 7

Dk0 A h{q Q U g

                                                                                                                                 -f w m                               m 4

m Y q ps :Q T wu T ,so%x.4e%v ,< 's 3 W CC Z w T. A O oz Nb N N.  %. m - F W g . tt My=N $ ( M W q zW s k

                                                                                                                    . 7s -t   .a                o w 3w )e
                 ~~)                                                                                                     .                      w 2

u. W ' DR4

                                                                                                                  .s T -I ;'.
                                                                                                                  ,'0 ~\                        2
   -             _Z         a: t                                            g%                                                                  e O             W             '                                                                                                           -

O

   <C            Z          s  -

W O w  % T w Q N I' Z _

e 5 r f (L D

       \            O        a C

to W k:' y > x 1 W H

            \       O        U S        E        %

4 - g <

           \

N -  ! 4 S if< l (r  ! ir a  ! g i

               -             -                                ~

O 2 .. 4 1 Z $ 2 i,

(. -l 'e
                                                                          ,~.   .,

a  ;- & 6 re 4 :q o 's 8. d n ~ w z R w '.3 ( o .* 4

  • N wD Ys f" E e $s 4 fN
                                                   -{   , w   <               :h o        e        u
  • Y lh t I
                                                                        !M 3        2
                                      $ to i

iG D -)' h" g giy k , 'd

                             --                                               ,s 4                                            u                                          "

j m g s E $Ej'yl;S$

                                      *t        t             I:sy   W    2$

6e tag a s @, 4[kN b I  %$* 4 M

                                    .s, u                                               v e 4> s t .sd%

340% Ngs i M

  • b s e

a St %At O W Z

                              =

w E

                                    $s6-t        to
                                                                                       +

b*gw &*Th a

                                                                                                   & b4 3 R o          H, o          P1 % L W O                 2                                          w#ata sm   .

i b4 " : Rki 3 X W = b, a =E k squi$ ad hQ  !

           ~m W                         tw2 www t  "

w h A NTRg r i

           %           Z       w                                                           ~

O o m' N$ Nm

           @           """     2 3     N                                                     NY          > fll
                                                                                                            =
           @                   $                 O                                   'f b  es $ a s           'i OW              0
                               -    (% G es h       $              Jk                                          kk            .

g c

           <t          Z                                                           '                       S s  :

W O w L, o @

                                                                                                           -    \

Z o t- i

                                                                                                                \

1

F- N O I O F O O T U L S f#

           /

E R E

 #           E A

T T G C A A E E

  & f P          R A

J E R D T

 'M O E

Q P C A R R R E

       ,                               T                                                                                      D O                                  N E

A E N E M L T M O. A g M N D O A a C E T T o

                                ,     /                                                                                       T I          I D          D 9     G                                                                                       R U          U         u     N                                                                                         .

A A g I R O l A D I F N

               /             O f            D v 'a, '
              /             &                  r              S             2        +

t T N )i r j L fonr nt

      ..          i N                                t a      V'                                              A E/u               E
                             /

D f P/ t t /o R /a eaJti/ u T(o N p C T T t a S T dyuHs yWCpI I SPT V/p N i A V f S_ D t c E / M i vMoE X L a/pTL i & l L gP O T H RHD T

                                                             /

M E T c , WS fE rwE i

                                                                                                              ?       L E

T K g, N E T / C Yk / 2x T Wisw2 A t 0 oT f H 5 /E

                                                                                                              ?              A D

C y, P v M 0 (k 8wP W2/7 / p> V E g e/ E R k/

                                              /     96              R:

p

                                                                          ~

7 4 V 6 a -

                                                                                                        ^

o/T N C H T 5 C WG C gMf I U Q y 7 TU / t R/ l M T yr6n0 WE N' S =/p4Vf/T 0a eC r 4 p /o f E A fa - / T fM99 w A wmfo D 5T /dL 6F

               /                      R                 C' W                    ig   -                 I                   T 9   i F                         7             f u

I E Q)

               /

0 g L 4 L E R 9 S

                                                        /
                                                        /

L RG 6 ! O t ?. t CI f t twR V HprF uo

                                                                                             $ EID dtI(S S' 4'^A    V      t 2

6 O 74Qt V j+ N 'l 1 t

                                                                          )4
                                                                                             /
                                                                                             /

E I T Sf R 1 A NJ G 5

              /

C / /H / E C ,f' c1 f d 5 G S -) I F r/ N I 2 T 4;/ S > t t E zo 5, i T g' Y T ?lfl OSNE Z I A 0l /. B TGiA. )u N/ "' pi w 'I', G i  ? Y R / t B N / E s ,I e, D E fC F

                                                                                           , 2 2 f' .          l ,           E O Mr<7Q t

D D M7 E

                                                                               .   .                           t xg gy15. L!

t I S/ M E [ EJrt (u A I D R E YP /

                                  'l R_                         !"

5* T f* E ,p R O A A P L P / 1 0 M F R E E R M A 7W 5 E T j g E P R P S I

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST NO,RR

                                                                                           ###'#~

PAGE OF CONTINUATION SHEET I AUDIT NO.

    ' ITEM   ,

REFERENCE REQUIR EMEN T FINDING / COMMENT ACGEPT R,EJEC T , RESOLUTION 5 O* l'O 5 (f) (f,ttJFy /d5f%C TVR W//0 h t 'siRN -?. 7 ' O gly /5l} /MSf'6 6 T/O W FOjP N [NK/l) WA G St/AL/F/6() AWI) yC-k -d/ Cfir?T/F//it? [#W g-A-of GC 4 -QZ \ A M? cM-A 02 F60su Fof?tH: Irl5PC&.7Ctq PM TE FACM C 2 G TIF f C/L T/ott it'a co & y; VATE CEfilf/EP _ __ CccT/RC4770W LAVEL PERFORMED BY DATE

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ 10.RR- #/7/##~1## PAG E 3 OF F CONTINUATION SHEET I AUDIT NO.

 'ITE M  _

REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T FINDING / COMMENT ACQEPT REJEC T < RESOLUTION j fjQ- FG, VEglF}/ Th&T TP& 5afh>21 g,pjgy7)py794/pfpp ttw//g-

                                                                 ~

it Pif/7 /f

             ,,        tJf/FT]pW 15 /N A6 reg >>t&rT O?& V /0;      giir/t 77/E IN5fEC77py FOttm AN204f,'t/p/

gyyyy, (EO -F02, EX///G/ 705)^ , 4NP O W CO/ S/O /?'l'L/CR8Ld SCHEivif, WePD /MWIA6 06 7att. /h/9 GE # /?& L

                      'WMl PIS/6N OfRW//V63.

ll'57~ s1 VfLtc"flffJ.E PITHW/ NGS ,* m+~~ +- eewmw%g,,

                                       * * - *N"--h*-w.-%-......

l PERF05tMED BY DATE

au a - a l y l h \ h. D O a C rn l 4' W  ; I E i I

     <       w        s                                                                                                           !

l C U I b Q. k E . N N s S '

 %;                   a O

4 li x Ct: a n O z Z z O' 3 2 O O C C 3 2 4

         ,  -         C                                                                                                      W'.

2 C q .. s %q D N* s N e; F- 4M' g x . 5y ase 4, d{ % t e e i* x M

 -                            u
                               %          ts, w

ND wu kx y Q' - i g-

                                                                                                                '3     ,

w

   )                   >      ph   %. b,      g.         % 5    i.       3.            C~.                 Va      '

g 2 y tu N 4(q.

                                                    ~

g

                                                               -N D T w

R '.'ih: c-4 !$ s f, 4 O O 2 *k y DN D u 'l-8 Q ~ W

  • kg. %* d, 2 g in 8 t' m g 6[

I Q F 3 g w w x y _\, w% -t

                                                    ~

4g t. c-  % r3 e b

                                                                             .* v\
                                                                                    )?x t .<

b~

                                                                                           ~.
                                                                                             -     t x

1 t, x

                                                                                                                .s i

i W \ d.. k y N  %% N c -s 9 w = t e,. c. w e.7 u 1 k 4

  • l D ,

dM>

                              'g (i @                                                     -~

c

                                                                                                      ~

T -

                                                                                                                 ~~g U:E            ;

l W

 %                Z                       N' Pad' s[{ , '

w s , O o M M p *a $c$3'tt a W 4 3 2 W +

                               $ $g ssp'   1 %v IS  i Z Z h U Ss Ei O k V                                                                                                        !'

a p  ! w swss s 4 Z s: . 5 w w O w T - Z O 3: t - r

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _.- 110. RR-f'Y** ~WPAG E '> OF C CONTINUATION SHEET IAUDIT NO. FINDING / COMMENT AC EPT R, EJECT , RESOLUTION llE M REFERENCE REQUIR E MEN T , gp-[. 07 IT/7/F,/ 60'754 Al?E

5. 7. ?, 70(r'@t/!O 17) TtE
                    ~
          ' ' 'J d  ffpneysm)975 0P
           / TEN 4Zd

[-V -T-02 BXt'i$/W, f4 GL E 1/3 ANP NOTE 3 4/67 KiQ///tYV AUV

                          /JcllUit 1Dof@t>Z V/?lt!! S foR E//gp 80.4 /T OF         70fQt/E        7Wpt/f 6'55
  • ffY44/rft G) e'%T(///L M

PERFORMED BY DATE f

O O O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST .

                                                      ..                     NO. RR- d### J#f PRE PARED BY                                     DATE               AUDIT NO.                PAG E /   OF  4-si-  k /g/0)/                 G//lY7 SAMPLE IDE N TIFIC ATION Cppt#/ /;T/o//                            AUDIT DATE               AREA COWL?UIT 5dtY ft I~ //}$f$fL d f/(// A fl) Q f 'J n'.',/ W !/(Si ggggyngg Ot/ffD W A/c/HytJErf ITEM      REFERENCE                 REQUIREMENT                 FINDING / COMMENT          REJEC T RESOLUTION ACQEPT
 ;    N O'f'OS;            }}-) ,'W/FY fuf/'Ol?T~ /$

5~. 2 Z-gxpig'T'/f P IV Ol51I

                       /
       / Mal /, C ti,'

Es//IG/T~/O

      /i p - l - o z ,      6) /P 5//YO/?T NfM SEiv
      'i. / 4: (            &%/6NEP /96PaCEO AMO CAMC/ TICS, V5Rit=y TRC lN C.L//QB3 At'Mi64GLIZ R}

V&lw/NG Nttar13tg /y9gy , IUf} OTW6N5/) Jc&p 1/ stir p^/ TM /pgyrjp/c47psy tac 5, PERFORMED BY DATE R.R TEAM LE ADER DATE

O O - O READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ . 10. RR-#'/'#'* ' ##f

                                                                                                    "^*'            '#

CONTINUATION SHEET _ l^"""~ I ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR EMENT FINDING / COMMENT ACQEPT R,EJEC T , RE SO LU TION . 2 BO-T-02 s/f9ify SUITOR 7~(ave 7 pan-S 2 2i # nom >5 /A! McceoAucs E dI f 'l I wtry MSrna.n riod on/9p

            '   "I I' 5

Et HI3lT 9 (EXHIS/TshOR @)/

                                      'L EA iiiair v)5-   -             ##' 0'"5"' '
                            )  A/0TES     p,qpyy7;yg5 M2P 9.-)(6D                                                              l wa cwroot          [^^* W OWA!!9 M @l Si,otrg p g ving    SSRIfc L?A/1w///G.5) 4167~ l}fft/GN [3L E VE7f}iL Pt9#W/stfG :
                                                      ..ex     -

g

o o o READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ NO.RR 0'##'#'##ET - PAGE OF 4

   . CONTINUATION           SHEET                                     IAUDIT NO.
     'lT E M   REFERENCE          REQUIR E MENT                    FINDING / COMMENT  ACQEPT REJEC T , RE SOLUTION
   ,   y       ( O+0]       VfRIFy' TM fcM0WNG C. /. 4, /  y/1'['.s/& A F h.4 TE5:
                'I-l 68;       ; jetsjfEO /'fR                                                                     '
             /)r U94+'C G           Ik7R /L (M2V)'No50 EdU'/%                  CEPT &S) !~ TAW /AO      /
              .c 1MW///G '-

e (' Y P / >::7 GIJE A > XJiHTI-ff'

             /b7/t'/n11CVTA P"'OIN O   l'l 6.f A ! /lC C,[ ( Fjfx g g;
                                  ! i(C' /!ffENis /,z "y&

O' fl0 UAl$/?~C/fi; ;, It i t pg i , I i r t

                 =           -                                                         -                       .

READINESS REVIEW CHECKLIST _ NO, RR - "Y#'fflT - -- - - CONTINUATION SHEET l^""~ ITEM REFERENCE REQUIR E MENT FINDING / COMMENT ACQEPT REJECT . RESOLUTION g EP- F02 VMiff 6M75 /EE 5.2 3

              ~

702 Gut'O 70 7PE Orll//" /l itfgg4 A'5 pgy5 pf

            /7?M /I d                                                                                   gif f-gg ' g> pg);" P, fai]L E / 8 ANI? HOTE 3.

ll97 /'tQt21ATP AA't)

                                                                                                       /k !!U)2'- 70ftfIIE VNuff Fu Q s // c tf 9 9 [

D u r s't t w s n o u n . S/M Iwenz megig i I PERFORMED BY DATE y _ _ _ _ . . _ . , _I {}}