-.- -

*. ,

~

O u.S. NoctE4R RE0utaTORv C0mmISSIONOFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

REGION IV-

Report No. 99900507/81-01 Program No. 51200

Company: Sargent & tundy EngineersSS East Monroe StreetChicago, Illinois 60603

Inspection Conducted: January 19-23, 1981

Inspectors:.. _ k O ''~f

J. R. ello~, Principaf Enspector DateProg * _ valuation Sec' tionVendor Inspection Branch

TI % ~ ~-

0. D. W. erlain, Con p $ tor Inspector DassProgram Tvaluation SectidhVendor Inspection Branch

Approved by: / @ _ ['

C. J. HalerCpief Date"'

Program Ev&Mation SectionVendor Inspection Branch

Summary

Inspection on January 19-23, 1981 (99900507/81-01)

Areas Insoected: Implementation of Sargent & tundy Topical Report SL-TR-1A,Revision 5, in the areas of Design Ir.put, Design Document Control, TechnicalPersonnel Background Verification, and action on previous inspection findings.The inspection involved sixty-four (64) hours on site by two (2) uSNRC inspec-

i tors.

Results: In the four (4) areas inspected there were no unresolved items.Three (3) nonconformances were identified in two (2) areas.

Nonconformances: Design Document Control - The Design Criteria Status Reportdid not snow tne latest revision or issue date of a design criteria document.(See Notice of Nonconformance, Item A). Some design criteria documents do notinclude the applicable issues of codes, standards, or regulatory guides. (SeeNotice of Nonconformance, Itsm 8.) Design Input - Contrary to commitment, anelectrical Class IE component was misclassified in the Clinton Power Station

Classification Criteria document. (See Notice of Nonconformance, Item C). 6

:

Bi105180" '

.

.

.

2

.

OETAILS SECTION I

(Prepared by J. R. Costello)

A. Persons Contacted

G. A. Boelke, Assistant Head, Employee Relations DivisionK. A. Davis, Clerical Supervisor, Employee Relations Division8. G. Ghi'arducci, Assistant Chief, Structural Drafting Section

*A. P. Gilliss Administrative Head, Quality Assurance DivisionE. L. Gradassi, Project Supervisor, Electrical Design 1 Drafting DivisionG. C. Kao, Coordinator Structural Analytical DivisionJ. R. Lazowski, Project Leader, Mechanical Design & Drafting Div1sionP. J. Meehan, Head, Employee Relations DivisionW. R. Neubauer, Project Leader Electrical Design & Drafting Division,

G. N. Nuestro, Section Leader, Mechanical Piping Support SectionM. E. O' Conner, Project LeaderJ. A. Patel, Supervising Design Engineer, Design Engineering DivisionR. Rabin, Senior Quality Assurance CoordinatorR. Rutha, Project Leader MechanicalT. J. Ryan, Assistant Chief Structural Design Engineering SectionJ. J. Talamo, Senior Quality Assurance AdministratorB. G. Treece, Senior Electrical Project Engineer

* Denotes those present at exit meeting.

B. Action on Previous Inspection Findings

1. (0 pen) Deviation (Report No. 80-02, Item A): Contrary to commitmentthere are no procedures / measures which require obsoleting, recallingor identifying non-current drawing prints.

Instructions have beeq issued by internal memos instructing affectedpersonnel that all files not maintained by Engineering Records (stickfiles and individual drawings) shall carry a warning sticker whichstates "For Ref3rence Only - For design input, ensure the use of thelatest revision." In addition to the internal memos, QA ProcedureGQ-3.07 will be revised by February 28, 1981, to cover this area ofConcern.

2. (Closed) Deviation (Report No. 80-02, Item 3): Contrary to proceduralrequirements, the project drawing list was not updated to show thecurrent revision of a structural drawing.

The project drawing list dated October 1980, has been revised tocorrect this specific finding. In addition, internal audit #44 was|

| completed on December 19, 1981, which had additional findings. To

| prevent recurrence of the type of finding, instructions have been

| issued for documentation personnel to conduct an audit of the drawing| lists every six (6) months.

! ; 1-.

-ma .-.-n- * u e

- -. - - ,

. .

.

I

3

.

C. Technical Personnel Background Verif'^:ation

1. Objectives

To verify that measures heve been established and are beingeffectively isolamented tnat assure:

a. The education and work experience information contained inemployee's job applications are being verified by the employingorganization.

b. There is objective, documented evidence / records that attest tothe employee's education and experience.

2. Method of Accomolishment '

The preceding objectives were accomplished by examination of:

a. Personnel files of nine (9) employees which included five (5)employees educated in foreign countries,

b. Employee Relations file on contract personnel.

c. Employee Relations proceoure E-7, Revision 0, PreviousEmployment, Design Verification and Updating Degree Status.

d. Employee Relations Procedure E-8, Draft 3 of Revision 0,Procurement of Contract Personnel.

3. Findings

a. Sargent & Lundy (S&L) requires that employment agenciesfurnishing contract personnel verify their education andprevious work experience.

b. S&L has procedures in place which require written verificationof previous education and work experience of S&L employees,

c. New employees work is closely monitored by supervision. Inthe case of a falsified record being discovered after an employeeis on the payroll, S&L supervision examines the circumstancesand makes a detendination what to do with the employees previouswork and what to do with the employee on a case by case basis,

d. In cases where it is difficult to verify previous education(Iron Curtain Countries) S&L requires a copy of the degree,diploma or certificate with a translation into English, shcwingcompletion of a course of studies.

6

I.

a i--

:

;~ 1

|

~

.

.

4

.

e. In cases where foreign work experience can not be verified S&Lsupervision closely monitors the new employee and then determineswhat jobs the employee say work on.

f. No nonconformances or unresolved items were identified in thisarea of the inspection.

D. Desicn Occument Control

1. Objectives

To determine that approved procedures have been established and arebeing implemented for the control and distribution of design documentsthat provide for:

a. Identification of personnel positions or organizations respons-ible for preparing, reviewing, approving, and issuing designdocuments.

5 Identification of the proper documents to be used in performingthe design.

c. Coordination and control of design (internal and external) inter-face documents.

d. Ascertaining that proper documents, and revisions thereto, areaccessible and are being used.

Establishing distribution lists which are updated and main-e.tained current.

2. Method of Acccmolishment

The preceding objectives were accomplished by an examination of:

a. Sargent & Lundy Topical Report 51-TR-1A, Revision 5.

b. Implementing procedures to satisfy quality assurance programcommitments and to satisfy the intent of the objectives section.These procedures are:

(1) General Quality Assurance Procedures GQ-3.03, Revision 4,GQ-3.04, Revision 5, GQ-3.06, Revision 1, GQ-3.07, Revision 4,GQ-3.08, Revision 4, and GQ-3.12, Revision 3.

(2) Project Instructions PI-38-05, Revision 7, PI-38-06,Revision 0, PI-38-10, Revision 1; and PI-B8-14, Revision 1.

(3) Mechanical Department Standard MAS-7, Revision 0, Methodi

For Reviewing Sargent & Lundy Mechanical Design Drawings.i

(4) General Drafting Standard GDS-4.1.1, Revision 2, Processingof Comments on Sargent & Lundy Drawings. ;

.. -

-~ e- W

.

. .

.

5

.

c. Documents to verify implementation of quality assurance programcommitments and to satisfy the intent of the objectives section.These documents are as follows:

(1) Classification Criteria for Structures, Systems andComponents CC-ME-01-88, Revision 5, Byron /BraidwoodUnits 1 and 2.

(2) Structural Department Orawing List, Clinton 1, January 1981.

(3) 526-1000-01A, Auxiliary Building Basement Floor Plan El.707'-6", Revision R.

(4) 526-1001-01A, Auxiliary Building Ground Floor FramingPlan El. 737'-0", Revision M.

(5) 523-1902, Fuel Building Fuel Pool Bottom Plan, Rev. N.

(6) S28-1908, Fuel Building Liner Section and Detail,Sheet 6, Revision P.

(7) 529-1000-01A, Diesel Generator & HVAC Buildings BasementFloor Plan El. 702'-0", Revision H.

(8) 526-1000-02C, Auxiliary Building Interm. F1. Framing PlanEl. 727'-0", Revision F.

(9) S30-1001-01A, Control Building Ground F1. Framing Pl. El.737'-0", Revision N.

(10) S30-1001-03A-E, Control Building Ground Floor Embed.Plan El. 737'-0", Revision H.

(11) M03-1113-01, Mechanical Penetration Schedule CirculatingWater Screen House, Revision J.

(12) M05-1040-07, P&IO Instrument Air, Revision A.

(13) M05-1046-03, P&ID Aux. Bldg. Orain System, Revision S.

(14) M06-1075-02, Residual Heat Removal Piping, Revision N.

(15) M06-1075-19, Residual Heat Removal Piping, Revision N.,

(16) Mechanical Department Orawing List for Clinton Units |1 & 2, 02 Jan. 81. '

(17). E26-1002-04A-CP2, Cable Tray - Auxiliary Bldg. Plan -Mezz. Fir. El. 762'-0", Revision C.

(18) E26-1400-CP, Cable Tray - Auxiliary Bldg. Riser Sections,,

Part 1, Revision C. *

i--

, ,,. - me=-*.- * - ' *

.-

. . .

.

6

.

(19) E28-1101-048-LP, Cable Tray Fuel Bldg., Sect. 23-28,Area 5 Upper, Revision C.

(20) E30-1000-06BEIT1, Conduit Hangers Control Building Category1 Conduit Support Schedule E1. 719'-0", Revision F.

(21) Ele:trical Department Drawing List for Clinton Units1 & 2, 14 Jan. 81.

(22) M3393-06, Instrument Line Supports Typical Support &Connection Details, Units 1 & 2, Revision A.

.

(23) M1320-04, Auxiliary Bldg. HVAC Equipment Rm. TypicalPlan, Units 1 & 2, Revision A.

(24) DC-06-01-88, Design Criteria for Off Gas System -Hydrogen Recombiners, Revision 3.

(25) DC-ST-03-98, Structural Project Design Criteria Revision 7.

(26) DC-AF-01-B8, Design Criteria for Auxiliary FeedwaterSystems, Revision 7.

(27) DC-EE-01-BB, Design Criteria for Cable Separation,Revision 7.

(28) Design Criteria Status Report dated 12/10/80.

(29) Mechanical Department Orawing List for Byron /BraidwoodUnits 1 & 2, dated 1/1/81.

(30) M2535A, Sht. 11, Containment Spray Aux. Bldg. El. 346'-0",Revision A.

(31) M2538A-04, Residual Heat Containment Bldg. El. 377'-0",Revision C.

(32) M2616A-02, Nitrogen Syst. Au1. 91dg. El. 412'-0",Revision A.

(33) Structural Department Orawing List for Byron /BraidwoodUnits 1 & 2, dated 12/30/80.

(34) List of Support Elements for Byron /Braidwood Units 1 & 2,dated 1/5/81.

(35) Ccmponent Support Assemblies 1CC310095, Revision A,1C5050075, Revision C, 2AF08017X, Revision B, IBR16010X,Revision A and 1RH09028R, Revision A.

I;

--

w.

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

. .

!.

7

.

(36) Calculation #E-1311 serial no. 2997?AJJJ, cales for Class1, Conduit Supports Byron 1 & 2.

(37) Calculation #8.2.1 serial no. 08778CHEA, Airc. aft CrashProbability Analysis.

(38) Calculation #4391/19AI-19 serial no. 05380FHHB, Revision 1,Calculations for Electrical Heat Oissipation in Miscel-laneous Auxiliary and Radwaste Bldg. Areas.

3. Sindings

a. Nonconformances

See Notice of honconformance Enclosure, items A & B.

b. Unresolved & Followup Itemst

None.

E. Exit Meeting

A meeting was conducted with management representatives at the conclusionof the inspection on January 23, 1981. In addition to the individualsindicated by an asterisk in the Details Section, those in attendance were:

L. E. Ackraann, Director of Servi esW. A. Chittenden, Director of Lig1neeringW. G. Hegener, Manager Mechanical DepartmentG. C. Kuhlman, Jr. Project DirectorJ. C. LaVallee, Project ManagerD. E. Mccifntock, Manager Electrical DepartmentJ. E. McFarland, Head, Quality Assurance DivisionJ. M. McLaughlin, Manager 3tructural DepartmentH. M. Sroka, Project Director

The inspector summarized the scope c..d f#ndings of the inspection forthose present at the meeting. Management representatives acknowledgedthe statements of the inspector.

s

-.

__ _ .-_ .

'

-. .

.

8:

. ,

DETAILS SECTION II

(Prepared by D. O. Chamberlain)

A. Persons Contacted .

W. D. Crumpacker, Control and Instrumentation EngineerR. W. Evans, Mechanical EngineerN. R. Galla, Electrical Project Engineer

"A. P. Gillis, Administrative Assistant"R. C. Heider, Project ManagerP. A. Nevins, Senior Electrical Project EngineerJ. S. Paniaguas, Electrical EngineerR. Rabin, Senior QA CoordinatorG. D. Schmalz, Mechanical EngineerD. K. Schopfer, Mechanical Project EngineerA. J. Skale, QA Coordinator

* Denotes those present at exit meeting.

B. Desion Incuts

1. Objectives

The objectives of this area of the inspection were to determine that:

Procedures have been established and are being implementeda.that prescribe the system for control of those criteria, para-meters, bases, or other design requirements upon which detailedfinal design is based.

b. Design inputs are specified on a timely basis, their selectionreviewed and approved, incorporated into the design documents,and changes in input are justified, reviewed, and approved.

c. Connitments are properly translated into design inputs, asapplicable to the following:

(1) Basic Functions

(2) Performance requirements

(3) Regulatory requirements, codes, and standards

(4) Design cenditions

(5). Loads

(6) Environmental conditions.

I

i-

, .,#,., .y%-- -e - - - - - - = - e--e+-

, - - -- -

-. .

.

9

*

d. Design requirements are specified, when applicable, relatingto interfaces, materials, mechanical, structural, hydraulic,chemistry, electrical, instrumentation and control, redundancy,accessibility, fire protection, and other requirements thatprevent undue risk to the health and safety of the public.

2. Method of Accomolishment

The preceding objectives were accomplished by an examination of:

a. Sargent and Lundy Quality Assurance Program Topical ReportSL-TR-1A, Revision S.

b. Sargent and Lundy General Quality Assurance Procedures: GQ-3.02,Revision 3, GQ-3.03, Revision 4, GQ-3.04, Revision S, GQ-3.06,Revision 1, GQ-3.07 Revision 4, GQ-3.08, Revision 4, GQ-3.12,Revision 3, and GQ-3.16 Revision 0.

c. 51-3021, Revision 6, Project Scope of Work Nuclear SafetyRelated - Clinton Power Station - Units 1 & 2.

d. Clinton Power Station Classification Criteria, Revision 6.

e. Clinton Power Station Design Criteria documents:

(1) DC-AP-01-CP, Revision 1, Design Criteria for AuxiliaryPower System (Class 1E A.C. portion)

(2) OC-CC-01-CP, Revision 3, Design Criteria for ComponentCooling Water System.

(3) DC-0C-01-CP, Revision 3, Design Criteria for AuxiliaryPower system (Class 1E D.C. portion)

(4) DC-00-01-CP Revision 2, Design Criteria for Diesel FuelOil Storage and Transfer System.

(5) DC-ME-16-CP Revision 0, Design Criteria for DesignVerification of Structures and Components in CategoryI Buildings.

(6) DC-RM-01-CP, Revision 0, Design Criteria for RadiationMonitoring System.

|

(7) DC-SX-01-CP, Revision 3, Design Criteria for ShutdownService Water System.

(8) DC-VD-01-CP, Revision 3, Design Criteria for Diesel Gener- |

ator Room Ventilation.

(9) DC-VG-01-CP, Revision 4, Design Criteria for Standby GasTreatment System. 5

-.

_ _ _ _ _ _ ._ __ _ _ -. _

- r- - , -

.-

.

. .

.

10

*

f. MAS-3, Revision A, Mechanical Department Standard, Instructionsfor Technical Review of Procurement Specifications,

g. Clinton Power Station Sargent & Lundy drawings:

(1) E02-1AP99, Revision 0, 4160V, Electrical Bre aker ControlSchematic

(2) M05-1032 Sheet 3, Piping ar.d Instrument Otagram forComponent Cooling Water System

t

(3) E02-1D099, Sheet 2, Schematic Diagram for Diesel FuelOil System, Diesel Generator Fuel Oil Transfer Pump 1B

(4) M15-1036, Sheet 1, Logic Diagram for Diesel Fuel Oil System.

(5) M05-1036, Sheets 1 & 2, Piping and Instrument Diagram forDiesel Generator Fuel Oil System (D0).

h. Clinton Power Station design calculations:

(1) 01001, Revision 1, Diesel Fuel Oil Storage Tank Sizing

(2) 01D02, Revision 0, Diesel Fuel Oil Day Tank Sizing

(3) 01D03, Revision 0, Line Sizing for Fuel Oil System

i. Clinton Power Station Design Criteria Status Report forperiod ending 12-15-80.

j. Clinton Power Station procurement specifications: '

(1) K-2826A, Misc. Pumps Specification

(2) K-2828A, Shutdown Service Water Pumos Specification

(?;) K-2861, Diesel Generator Specification

(4) X-2866, Valve Specification.

k. Clinton Power Station PSAR/FSAR.

3. Findings

a. In this area of the inspection, one (1) nonconformance wasidentified (See Notice of Nonconformance Enclosure, Item C).

Relative to Item C. in the Notice of Nonconformance, theinspector reviewed the procurement specificatio, (K-2866) forvalve MO-1CC050, and it was determined that the valve was pro- ;

perly specified as " Class 1E" in the procurement specification. '

s .

--

|

)__._ . __ .. . - . . - . . . , - - - ---

|

1

. _ - -..i

r ~ r-

|.

-.

., *-

.

11

.

A review was not made by the inspector of other design documentsand/or specifications relative to all of the affected motoroperated valves.

b. Examination of other design / design input documents did not,

develope any additional comments.,

I

!

!

|

l

6

-.

_ .w . - *-****w wee =*"* * *'''N* **D* * ~ ~ ' '# " ~

_ . . _ _ .. .. ._ -- - ---- ----- 2