ML20149D905
| ML20149D905 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 02/04/1988 |
| From: | Stephen Burns NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Citizens Association for Sound Energy, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC), TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| References | |
| CON-#188-5542 CPA, OL, NUDOCS 8802100090 | |
| Download: ML20149D905 (54) | |
Text
.
- ,ssY 2-
- c. ca 'ctioq%
~
UNITED STATES 83 -
"i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4
$.. WASHIN GTON, D.C; 20555 '
.afi3
,o ;lE
- m- - ;
OFFICE OF THE '88 FEB -5 A9 :30 COMMISSIONE R February 4, 1988 Grin.- t Oik,Ki * , 9 . , o .1 E n. m -
STMDFEB0539gg MEMORANDUM TO THE PARTIES IN: TEXAS UTILITIES ELEC1RIC COMPANY, ET AL.
(Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2)
DOCKET NO. 50-445 - ot 4
50-446 50-445 - CPA As the parties were notified would happen in my memorandum of January 7, 1988, Comissioner Kenneth H. Carr toured the Comanche Peak station on January 27, 1988. Before touring the plant, Comissioner Carr met with management and staff of the Office of Special Projects (OSP) at the NRC's site office and was briefed on OSP's organization and activities at the site. The Corsnissioner attended the utility's daily operations management meeting before beginning the plant tour. Most of the plant tour was conducted in Unit 1 of the plant. The tour included observation of the control room, maintenance shops, battery rooms, turbine deck and diesel generators.
After the tour, the utility gave a briefing and overview of its corporate and site organization, the Comanche Peak Response Team activities, its corrective action program, and operational readiness plans. The presentation was given by Messrs. Farrington, Nye, Spence, Counsil, Beck, Nace, Kelley, and Scott. Slides from the presentation are attached for the information of the parties. At the conclusion of the briefing, Comissioner Carr toured the utility's maintenance training facilities at the site. ,
s- ! (
f WW _ .
Stephe$G. Burns Legal Assistant to Comissioner Carr i
I s oge% N 0 .
G
)S.O D
TEXAS UTILITIES COMPANY SYSTEM j-A L I
\ s t l -
~
$ 2 MILLION CUS ERS' l MILL N PEOPLE SERVIC REA -
y k;
s:
f
. J
! TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY i
l .
9 L ?
s s
,p i
E Gas E Lignite E Nuclear
6 1EIAS IFFILITIES CEEWANY STr!EM BOARD OF DIRECTORS I
I u_______ NuctEAR COMMIT 17.I J
nXAS WILITIES COMPANY BASIC CHACO ENERGY >
RESOURCES INC. COMPANY TEXAS TEXAS EXAS nXAS WILITIES WILITIES WILITIES WILITIES ELECTRIC CO. WEL CO. MINING CO. SERVICES INC.
-. . - _ -- -._y
. 1TIAa trfILITIES II2CIRIC CWAbiT (W II2CTRIC) ,
17.XAS (TTILITIES CO.
COB /CE J.S. FARRINGTON TUC0 PRESIDENT
& TUIC COB /CE ERLE NYE TPE DPEL 115 GENERATING -
DIVISION DIVISION DIVISION DIVISION PRESIDENT PRESIDENT PRESIDENT PRESIDENT M.D. SPENCE i
l l
l l
l l
l
~
W ELECNIC - GI3ERATDG DIVISION '
i GENERATING DIV.
PRESIDEE ,
M.D. SPENCE
' Ti I
VICE PRESIDEM EXECVIIVE EXECVIIVE DIRECTOR ENGINEERING VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT SPECIAL OPERATION 3 NUCLEAR ENG. PROJECTS (n OPERATIONS W.G. COUNSIL __
t f
1
._ - _ - . _ - - E
COMANCHE PEAK HISTORY e CONSTRUCTION PERMITS - DECEMBER 1974 e OPERATING LICENSE APPLICATION - FEBRUARY 1978
- ASLB ESTABLISHED - MARCH 1979 e INITIAL SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT - JULY 1981 e ASLB HEARINGS BEGAN - DECEMBER 1981 ,
-- THREE INITIAL INTERVENORS l
CASE IS REMAINING INTERVENOR G P
COMANCHE PEA < HISTORY e HOT FUNCTIONAL TESTING - FEBRUARY 1983 e FIRST FUEL SHIPMENT - MAY 1983 e NRC TECHNICAL REVIEW - MARCH 1984 e COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM - SEPTEMBER 1984 e
3 l
l l
l
_I
COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM PROGRAM S EVALUATE TRT ISSUES 4 EVALUATi, EXTERNAL SOURCE ISSUES 9 COLLECTl'M EVALUATION REPORT - DECEMBER 19 87 9 COLLECTIVE SIGNIFICANCE REPORT - FEBRUARY 19 8 8
'l I
i l
9 e
s*
CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM .
9 VALIDATE DElllGN AND HARDWARE 4 RESOLVE CPRT AND EXTERNAL SOURCE ISSUES 9 PROJECT STATUS REPORTS 1
l 8
1 I
i i
l f
- _~
EXPERIENCED NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT l
WILLIAM G. COUNSIL EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT OVERALL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES JOHN W. BECK VICE PRESIDENT ,
LICENSING AND QUALITY l ASSURANCE LARRY NACE VICE PRESIDENT ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION AUSTIN B. SCOTT VICE PRESIDENT NUCLEAR OPERATIONS 4
e I ,
l l
i 1 , _ - . _ ___- - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - -
h/ low.,s;/
E NUCLEAR ENGINEERINO & OPERATIONS CROUP ,
T U ELECTRIC CENERATING DIV.
PRESIDENT M.D. SPENCE EXECUTIVE V.P.
NEO *21/26
._ W.G.COUNSIL DIRECTOR 016/22
' ^
J.E.KRECNTING SAFETEAM I
i VICE PRES. VICE PRES. VICE PRES. VICE PRES. VICE PRES.
NUC.0PS. NUC. ENGRG. ENG.S CONS. ADMIN. SUPPORT j A.B. SCOTT J.W.BECE L.D.NACE J . C . KU'iKEllDALL J.B. GEORGE ,
- 2/29 *24/24 *11/23 *14/14 *10/10 NOTE 3 l
l i NOTE 1= CURRENT R0/SRO LICENSE cNUCLEAR EXPERIENCE i
- (COMERCIAL/ TOTAL) NOTE 2= PREVIOUSLY HELD RO/SRO LICENSE NOTE 3= PREVIOUSLY RO/SRO CERT 17IED
NUCLEAR ENGINEERING >
VICE PRESIDENT NUCLEAR ENGINEERTNG '24/24 J.W. BECK MANAGER DIRECTOR DIRECTOR MANAGER DIRECTOR NUCLEAR REACTOR CO HE ADMIN. QUALITY LICENSING ENGINEERING ,
> RESPONSE ASSURANCE R.D. WALKER A. HUSAIN L.E.P0f4 ELL TEAM J,F,STREETER D.R.FERGUSON 020/27 *13/13 +3/3 *16/16 *20/26 -
- NOTE 2 NOTE 2 4
4 I
i '!
i l
I
- NUCLEAR EXPERIENCE (COMMERCIAL / TOTAL) NOTE 2x PREVIOUSLY HELD RO/SRO :
l LICENSE NOTE 3a FREVIOUSLY RO/SRO CERTIFIED I
l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __
N E O ADMINISTRATION VICE PRESIDENT ADMINISTRATION *14/14 J.C.KUYKENDALL NOTE 3 i
NGINEERING SUPERVISOR DIRECTOR .
PROJECT PROJECT ADMIN.SER. HEALTH PHYS. OF NUC.SER. MANAGER ENGINEER MANAGER RECORDS (CONFIG MGT.)
1 R.E.KAHLER J.D. EDWARDS H.C.SCHMIDT- J.L.BRACKNEY H.J.CHEATHEAM
- 7/17 *14/21 *16/16 *10/27 *10/10
- I i
- NUCLEAR EXPERIENCE NOTE 1= CURRENT RO/SRO LICENSE 1 (COMMERCIAL / TOTAL)
NOTE 2= PREVIOUSLY HELD RO/SRO LICENSE NOTE 3= PREVIOUSLY R0/SRO CERTIFIED
ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION I
L VICE PRESIDENT ENGRG. & CONST. *11/23 L.D.NACE a
DIRECTOR ENGRG. ADMIN.
i
,W.R.DEATHERAGE
+6/6 I
l DIRECTOR DIRECTOR DIRECTOR MAJOR OF OF OF '
CONTRACTORS
, ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS i 0.W.LOWE D.M.REYNERSON T.G. TYLER t 4 #E3ASCO
- STOWi' & WEB. i
- 13/13 *7/12 +15/15 MIMPELL
- SWF,0-PSAS i
PROJ.MGR.
l l MAJOR ;
1 CONTRACTORS '
f l # BROWN & ROOT !
i l
- t
- NUCLEAR EXPERIENCE (COMMERCIAL / TOTAL) i l
i 1 . .
f t
NUCLEAR OPERATIONS VICE PRESIDENT NUCLEAR OPERATIONS 4
- 2/29 ,
A.B. SCOTT,JR.
MANAGER, PLANT OPS. *16/21 ,
NOTE 2 J . J . KEL: "Y i
i OPERA'TIONS MAINT. I&C MANAGER DIRECTOR MANAGER MANAGER MANAGER MANAGER TECH. NUC. STARTUP SUPPORT TRAINING ,
J.DONAHUE B. TAYLOR .B.WIELAND C.L. TURNER QLEVINS C. SCOTT 010/10 *7/12 *4/21 *10/10 *11/18 +9/9 [
NOTE a NOTE 2 -
NOTE ' '
MANAGER PLANT MANAGER, *!
PLT.SUPP. EVAL.MGR. ADMIN. ;
SUPPORT B.LANCASTER i M.RIGGS jT.GOSDIN
- 13/13 +13/13 *9/9
! NOTE 3 l
! t
- NUCLEAR EXPERIENCE NOTE la CURRENT RO/SRO LIC2NSE (COMMERCIAL / TOTAL) -
l NOTE 2= PREVIOUSLY HELD RO/SRO
- LICENSE >
J NOTE 3= PREVIOUSLY RO/SRO ;
) CERTIFIED
N --
- /
1 V
HISTORY / BACKGROUND
! O COMANCHE PEAK RESPONSE TEAM (CPRT) WAS CHARTERED .
BY M. D. SPENCE, PRESIDENT OF THE GENERATING DIVISION, .
IN SEPTEMBER 1984 AS A RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BY TNE NRC TECHNICAL REVIEW TEAM (TRT).
)
l 9 INITIALLY A TU EFFORT TO ADDRESS ONLY TRT ISSUES, i THE CPRT NAS BECOME A TNIRD-PARTY IEFFOGT OF INVESTIGATION Ale RESOLUTION TOUCHW8G ESSENT! ALLY THE ENTIRETY OF SAFETY-RELATED DES 8GN AND i CONSTRUCTION.*
l 4
. 9 PROGRAM WAS EXPANDED TO ITS PRESENT FORM IN JUNE 19CS AND MODIFIED IN JANUARY 1988 AND JUNE 1987.
- NOT INCLUDING NSSS AND CERTAIN OTHER AREAS l ,,_ ]
) / \ -
! F t
i -
\ /
~
l \\
i CURRENT CHARTER l
l l
l 9 TO INVESTIGATE AND RESOLVE CONCERNS RAISED BY THE l NRC TRT REGARDING CONSTRUCTION, DESIGN, AND TESTING l GF COMANCHE PEAK l s 1
9 TO INVESTIGATE AND RESOLVE CONCERNS RAISED BY ALL EXTERNAL SOURCES, INCLUDING j i
l 9 NRC SUPPLEMENTAL SAFETY EVALUATION REPORTS ;
! # NRC ASLB l l
l 9 NRC SPECIAL INVESTIGATION TEAM l 9 NRC CONSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT TEAM l 9 NRC REGION IV INSPECTION REPORTS l l 9 INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
- TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT SELF-INITIATED PROGRAMS i
OF INVESTIGATION TO EVALUATE THE ADEQUACY OF DESIGN l AND CONSTRUCTION ,,,
l I / \
l !
1 i
i I
I
l
\ /
MISSION OF CPRT c
1 l
t I
- 9 TO ADVISE TU ELECTRIC MANAGEMENT WHETHER THERE IS I REASONABLE ASSURANCE THAT ALL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
- DEFECTS THAT WOULD HAVE PREVENTED Tl3E FACILITY FROM
- BEING CAPABLE OF OPERATION IN CONFORMANCE WITH NRC l REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN DETECTED AND APPROPRIATE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS FOR SUCH DEFECTS HAVE BEEN DEFIDED.
t 4
l l
l l
j \
. / ,
\
E 4-H E T P F O O C S
W D S
E I
E E VS TO C
I CW EG A L T _
L N A
ME I I RN EE EV TD I
RT NI E N EI N 9 E - A RC ER YL MF I
EF G F TO TE M DO U E EP XDE CT FA H E Y HT NH OAT AR C YN A T D UN ST S P EX _
A BA EV EE DAL A L /E _
DF L NVP S D A O EO S O UD C AE E ES R I ES AR E AN C Q
/ NDH ONT HG P RU R A A TN TH I
P S T O OT Q CEOTA F FI D O N A EAN U T O D -
ER T WF I
F S S E N S R A EE : NP O 5 A S EE O I HO NR S
A I
T NWE I
D R I
VTT C ETIT M I
B E C E RE E AN D RU I
F E R U R A N C R R A R AH L LEHT I
EA L O CI A EME E U T S D T Y L V P H P R V E S E S P DO C P E E T S EI D A T N O M TET AM H E E TT D A A A E T U ADT H DEEC N O I
T CSL QSN A F M T A T I N F AER A E D A N T O
E D RR S O L E N I T - O A TCIGS TN O T O F Y CYP .
AA C AI L T I U TA GN USE GS GT E L D ER D ER I
T C EE H I
T C A S A NFT SNDE I
S T S E U OAX E OFH ER EL I
H Q CSE D COT V ONU D VP T N
I S A NM I I N
I
- G 4 9 #
N
\ /
ORGANIZATION I
l 5eNIOR REVIEW TE#M I I I I I REVIEW REVEW REVIEW REVEW REVEW TEAM TEAM TEAM TEAM TEAM ,
LEADER LEADER LEADER LEADER I
aramsR 4 F1 CIVIL / STRUCTURAL ELECTRICAL TESTING QA/QC DESIGN MECHANICAL QUALITY OF ADEQUACY CONSTRUCTION HALLMARKS l 9 OBJECTIVITY 9 INDEPENDENCE l
4 HIGHLY-QUALIFIED EXPERTS G THOROUGH REVIEWS
/ \
l N /
i
! ~
- STRUCTURE OF PROGRAM TRT ELECTRICAL 9 SPECIFIC ISSUES MECHANICAL 7 SPECIFIC ISSUES i CIVIL / STRUCTURAL 6 SPECIFIC ISSUES l QA/QC 16 SPECIFIC ISSUES TESTING 8 SPECIFIC ISSUES QUALITY OF CONSTRUCTION - QA/QC SELF-INITIATED 37 POPULATIONS COVERING A SAMPLE OF THE ENTIRETY OF SAFETY-RELATED HARDWARE DESIGN ADEQUACY ISSUES PIPING AND PIPE SUPPORTS CABLE TRAYS CONDUlT SELF-INITIATED CIVIL / STRUCTURAL ELECTRICAL MECHANICAL INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROL 7
/ N
/ \
E 8 C -
E N A CNI C D S A F E T I
V I MN S L D RG OE NS OI S N S R AM F O E A N Y I R S CA OT E R R I
T DN TG C
N F A NO CO O A S
AI T E R G DC L P N R
I T E A EN EO T UO D F S AE TI T U
L S E GV I
I YC CN V T T BA NO S C DE I I T
N I
E E V R E V L
L A U NR S I I T I O S T E C WLA R NC R E S V T E D E D R ME B N A DR A)
F E D AO R e O VE G C G O (5 A D N E I
H R 5 S H N E B
T P 0 5
N S U EO E H
G N R O F O U B S
R U I TC I
S S E R
AO C0 I
S R A1 U D A RH E D D L E S ET .
C T A T S VN ER AE E T R I T AIU N L R T E
R O E d
C - MR AA R 1 R T E P U R O U E R L O DT L R TBR I CO E L OP S N E L R P E O H ES H AP A R C TR W 9 O 4
\
- ,Ii : ; )
9 e e
/
QUALITY OF CONSTRUCTION - QA/QC
, CONCLUSIONS i
! e CONSTRUCTION DEFICIENCIES AND OTHER FINDINGS HAVE RESULTED IN
! RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION.
3 9 VERY HIGH ASSURANCE THAT THERE ARE NO PROGRAMMATIC DEFICIENCIES NOT DETECTED.
O CORRECTIVE ACTIONS WILL BRING SAFETY-RELATED PLANT HARDWARE INTO CONFORMANCE WITH DESIGN AND PREVENT RECURRENCE OF SIMILAR PROBLEMS.
I j
l
)-
/
\
I N /
1
- DESIGN ADEQUACY
! a l
l 9 3 ISSUE-SPECIFIC AREAS WERE INVESTIGATED AND RESULTS REPORTS WERE PUBLISHED.
i G PIPING & PIPE SUPPORTS S CABLE TRAYS 9 CONDUlT TRAIN A & B CONCLUSIONS S DESIGN VALIDATION PROCEDURES AND ISSUE RESOLUTION METHODOLOGY ARE IN CONFORMANCE WITH FSAR CRITERIA.
9 PROJECT'S CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAMS RELATED TO THESE AREAS ARE COMPREHENSIVE AND CAPABLE OF RESOLVING THE ISSUES AND ASSURING THE DESIGN MEETS THE FSAR AND LICENSING COMMITMENTS.
. / \
I
\ /
I DESIGN ADEQUACY l
SELF-INITIATED j 9 4 DISCIPLINE AREAS WERE INVESTIGATED.
l l 9 RESULTS WERE PUBLISHED IN ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS.
1 CONCLUSIONS 9 UNABLE TO DETERMINE THAT THE FSAR COMMITMENTS HAD BEEN FULLY IMPLEMENTED INTO THE DESIGN BECAUSE OF THE STATE OF DESIGN-BASIS DOCUMENTATION.
9 FORWARDED TO TU ELECTRIC FOR INCORPORATION INTO A CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM.
9 TU ELECTRIC FORMULATED THE CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAMS (CAP)
IN ELEVEN AREAS.
/ \
l
N /
CONCLUSIONS OF CPRT COLLECTIVE EVALUATION RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION AND TESTING QA/QC 9 IN GENERAL THE HISTORICAL QA/QC PROGRAM WAS EFFECTIVE AND SATISFIED 10CFR50, APPENDIX B.
- WEAKNESSES WERE IDENTIFIED IN LIMITED AREAS 9 PROBLEMS HAVE BEEN CORRECTED AND ACTIONS HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE e CURRENT QA/QC PROGRAM FOR CONSTRUCTION EFFECTIVELY IMPLEMENTS 10CFR50, APPENDIX B
/ \
CONCLUSIONS OF CPRT COLLECTIVE EVALUATION RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION AND TESTING I
l CONSTRUCTION l 9 HISTORICAL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM WAS GENERALLY ADEQUATE 4 98% OF THE INSPECTION POINTS WERE FOUND TO BE CONFORMING
- OVER THREE-FOURTHS OF THE NONCONFORMANCES WERE INSIGNIFICANT S TU ELECTRIC HAS IN PLACE A CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM THAT WILL BRING THE PLANT INTO CONFORMANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS
-12A-
/ \
l I
N /
! CONCLUSIONS OF CPRT COLLECTIVE EVALUATION l RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION AND TESTING l
TESTING 9 THE CPSES TESTING PROGRAM WAS ADEQUATE AND WAS PROPERLY
- IMPLEMENTED i
- FINDINGS WERE LIMITED IN NATURE AND HAVE BEEN CORRECTED l
- 9 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO PRECLUDE RECURRENCE I
I i
! / \
^
N /
l COLLECTIVE SIGNIFICANCE
~
l i
I CPRT WILL SOON PUBLISH THE COLLECTIVE SIGNIFICANCE REPORT WHICH WILL DOCUMENT THE FINAL CONCLUSIONS OF MORE THAN 500 MAN-YEARS OF INVESTIGATION AND RESOLUTION OF ISSUES RELATED TO QUALITY OF CONSTRUCTION, QUALITY OF DESIGN, AND QUALITY OF TESTING.
/ \
1
\ /
CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM
- l. PROJECT ACTIVITIES I
i i
I '
- i 5
4 e b Q.c i .
~
t
e 4 0 N /
DESIGN VALIDATION i
l l HARDWARE VALIDATION i
RESOLUTION OF OUTSTANDING ISSUES
/ \
j
i I
\ /
- SCOPES OF WORK LARGE BORE PIPING & PIPE SUPPORTS -
- SMALL BORE PIPING & PIPE SUPPORTS -
SWEC CABLE TRAY HANGERS -
EBASCO & IMPELL i
j SAFETY RELATED CONDUlT SUPPORTS, LARGE -
EBASCO j NON-SAFETY CONDUIT SUPPORTS j NON-SAFETY, SMALL CONDUlT SUPPORTS,IN -
iMPELL j SAFETY RELATED BUILDINGS
! EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION - IMPELL MECHANICAL -
SWEC I e FIRE PROTECTION -
IMPELL
! 9 SYSTEMS INTERACTION -
EBASCO i
ELECTRICAL -
SWEC l INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROLS -
SWEC CIVIL - STRUCTURAL -
SWEC HEATING, VENTILATION, AND AIR CONDITIONING -
EBASCO I
f \
N /
LARGE AND SMALL BORE PIPING / PIPING SUPPORTS 9 DESIGNS VALIDATED
- PROJECT STATUS REPORTS ISSUED O APPROXIMATELY 50% OF THE 18,000 SAFETY l
RELATED SUPPORTS REWORKED, RE-INSPECTED AND COMPLETED
/ \
4 4
.1)ll!
/ .
\
5 D -
! '; E -
T -
E DL E P TM Y A L O A E C R D R YN T T A ED E F E L AT B S C 0 E AS 0 P S
CR D 5 4I N
/ E E U -
YG S S
EE HR AN I T
E D E R
0 O L E T S 8W B A U YE L R A D I
T A E S C L A T T T AR S
V T
MO -
S I
P N C E
X OU P
G I J R S S O P E R P D P A O O #
N
/
l l
l . .
4
\ /
l SAFETY RELATED AND LARGE NON-SAFETY RELATED CONDUlT/
CONDUlT SUPPORTS l l
l l 9 ALL DESIGNS VALIDATED l
l 9 PROJECT STATUS REPORT ISSUED
(
- APPROXIMATELY 85% OF THE 30,000 SAFETY RELATED SUPPORTS REWORKED, RE-INSPECTED AND COMPLETED l
l l
l l
l 1
/ \
l m -
i -
h l
N /
NON-SAFETY RELATED, SMALL CONDUlT AND CONDUlT SUPPORTS IN SAFETY RELATED BUILDINGS t 1
i ALL DESIGNS VALIDATED i j
l PROTECT STATUS REPORT ISSUED APPROXIMATELY 99% OF THE 108,000 CONDUlT SUPPORTS l INVOLVED REWORKED, REINSPECTION, AND COMPLETED
. ; / \ ,
1 1
I l -
N /
EQUIPMENT QUALIFICATION 1
I i
i i ALL DESIGNS VALIDATED I
l PROJECT STATUS REPORT ISSUED i
APPROXIMATELY 3000 OPEN ITEMS REMAIN FOR CLOSURE i
8-
/ \
l N /
HEATING, VENTILATING AND AIR-CONDITIONING i
DESIGN VALIDATION NEARING COMPLETION PROJECT STATUS REPORT NOT YET ISSUED I
i FIELD REWORK, REINSPECTION STARTED I
i )
\
- \ /
4 1
l MECHANICAL i
l DESIGN VALIDATED PROJECT STATUS REPORT ISSUED FIRE PROTECTION AUDIT COMPLETED IN OCTOBER 1987 DESIGN MODIFICATIONS AND OPEN ITEM CLOSURE IN PROCESS e
/ \
-- m - - - - - --- , - - - - -_ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ -,-
u _ _ _ - - . , _ 4 _ y y i
] \ /
ELECTRICAL l AND INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROLS
- 1. -_
i I
l l DESIGNS VALIDAT ED l ELECTRICAL PROJECT STATUS REPORT ISSUED INSTRUMENTATION L CONTROLS PROJECT STATUS REPORT TO BE ISSUED SHORTLY DESIGN MODIFICATIONS AND OPEN ITEM CLOSURE IN PROGRESS i
10-
/ _ \
n _ __.__ _. -- - " '-- h m. -
O 3
l \ , /
l l 1--
i civil - STRUCTURAL l
1 i
DESIGN VALIDATION NEAR COMPLETE PROJECT STATUS REPORT NOT YET ISSUED DESIGN MODIFICATIONS AND OPEN ITEM CLOSURE STARTED
\
.__ __- -- ___ - -_ - - - _ _ _ - n- -
'l j \ /
- SCHEDULE i
CURRENT SCHEDULE, JUNE 15,19 88 HEAT-UP DESIGN MODS TO COMPLETE CURRENT SCHEDULE EVALUATION l / N l -
/ \
4 1
E T
I S
F F
O S D E 0 0
0 0
0 0
N A
C 3 5 5 N
R 4 3 O
U S O R S - - -
O T
E C R A R
N T O N -
G I O
N T C I
R C S U T S .
_. E R E C
E T D N E U .
I S J .
G N O L N O R C E C P N I .
\ /
'i: 4
5 Y 'Ec[L -
f
\ /
OPERATIONS STATUS LTAFFiNG e 8 SHIFT SUPERVISORS (ALL SENIOR REACTOR OPERATORS) 4 12 ASSISTANT SHIFT SUPERVISORS (ALL SENIOR REACTOR OPERATORS) 4 20 REACTOR OPERATORS (2 SENIOR REACTOR OPERATORS /
18 REACTOR OPERATORS) 9 50 AUXILIARY OPERATORS (4 REACTOR OPERATORS) 4 5 SHIFT TECHNICAL ADVISORS (ALL SENIOR REACTOR OPERATORS) 9 PRESENT LICENSE CLASS TO BE EXAMINED IN JUNE 1988 CONTAINS 6 REACTOR OPERATOR CANDIDATES 3
/ \
0 e
\ /
OPERATIONS STATUS EXPERIENCE 9 5 SUPERVISORS HAVE COMPLETED 8 MONTH HOT PARTICIPATION EXPERIENCE (NUMARC) 9 7 SUPERVISORS HAVE COMPLETED 8 WEEK HOT PARTICIPATION EXPERIENCE (NUMARC) 9 18 AUXILIARY OPERATORS HAVE PERFORMED IN THAT CAPACITY FOR 10 MONTHS AT BRAIDWOOD l
l 1
2-
/ \
l
l OPERATIONS STATUS ACTIONS FOR 1988 9 UPGRADE LICENSE REQUALIFICATION PROGRAM BASED ON NEW SUPERVISORS AND INPO INPUT
$ FORMALIZE CONDUCT OF OPERATIONS FOR NUCLEAR OPERATIONS PERSONNEL 9 BECOME FULLY INTEGRATED INTO THE PRESTART TEST PROGRAM
, S CONTINUE TO PARTICIPATE IN HOT EXPERIENCE PROGRAM l
\
3-
/ N
I
\ / !
MAINTENANCE STATUS STAFFING G 80 MECHANIC 8 9 60 ELECTRICIANS l
l 9 50 INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROLS TECHNICIANS S 80 STAFF / SUPPORT TECHNICIANS AND ENGINEERS 4
/ \
\ / ,
MAINTENANCE STATUS MATERIAL CONDITION 9 2500 CORRECTIVE WORK ORDERS /
WORK REQUESTS ARE OPEN 4
li 9 SYSTEMS ARE UNDERG0 LNG CONSTRUCTION COMPLETION 4
i 1
.s.
/ \
l
l
\ /
l MAINTENANCE STATUS PROGRAM STATUS 9 MAINTENANCE SELF-ASSESSMENT PER INPO 4
GulOELINES WAS RECENTLY COMPLETED i
- INPO RECOMMENDATIONS FROM NOVEMBER ASSIST VISIT ARE EXPECTED SHORTLY G TECHNICAL PROCEDURES ARE BEING REVIEWED AND REVISED TO INCORPORATE RECOMMENDATIONS RESULTING FROM CPRT AND CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAMS l
l j 6
/ N
)
O
\ /
MAINTENANCE STATUS ACTIONS FOR 178_8 9 REDUCE THE MAINTENANCE BACKLOG IN CONCERT WITH SYSTEMS COMPLETION PER THE PROJECT SCHEDULE 9 IMPLEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH RESULTED FROM THE SELF-ASSESSMENT OR INPO ASSIST VISIT 4 IMPROVE THE TECHNICAL CONTENT OF TECHNICAL PROCEDURES TO INCORPORATE CPRT AND CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAMS ,
9 DEVELOP PREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM 7
/ _
N i I
O d(C EV ll I
l UNIT 1 PRESTART TEST PROGRAM Previous Proop Test criteria lI Review To Current Design Documents Compare with:
]f G Commitment Tracking List 4 Surveitionce Test List Prestart Test 9 FSAR Criteria Llst -Chopier 14
-Questions and Answers Jf -System De scription Tech Spoo 9 Regulatory Guides Surveillance Tests + System Test Matrix q y -I-G westinghouse S/U Manuct
) 4 SER and SSERs JTG Approves G Industry Experience Test Matrices 3I Develop Test Yes No m
' Justifly Procedure "
Not Testing JTG Approve Perform JTG Approve Test Not Testing JTG Afsprove y Results ]f Test Results Compared To Yalidat sd Design If SORC Approves completed Test Matrices 1
a A s - p- , y s A -a 4 a __
t
\ /
+
E 1 E
i W
W
=$
I Q.
s a 5: !l3- '
O CC O -
H :
- =
v) ,,; gs
.tu gsa aIi .g b -
s ain :
2 6
~s .
$I >
%i 1
E I W 5 ir.I
/ \
e _e
\
UNIT 1 PRESTART TEST PROGRAM SYSTEMS A Matrix For Every Safety Related System TEST REQUIREMENTS and Selected Non-Safety Related Systems I
List of Test Acceptance Criterle SYSTEM TEST MATRIX l Test Requirements Source Test er Justification SOURCES Pump delsvers FSAR 14.2 BCP-PT-ID-DI 100 gpm 5/15/88 TEST PROCEDURE r tht of R@mts F OR JUSTIFICATION Genersted From:
Reg. Guides q Each Requirement is Retested or FSAR Thorough Revlew Technical Speelfteations I of SystemHistory Previous Pro Op Tests I to Justify Design Changes y Equipment Specification i Prudent to not Retest Other License Commitments l
l DBD Review Matrix Compared to Design Base Documents
- Accurate,Up-to-date, Complete REVIEW AND APPROVAL Matrix, Justifications, Test Results Reviewed By Joint Test Group Matrix, Justifications, and Test Results Approved by Station Operations Review Committee ,
/ N
- ;