ML20079H568
| ML20079H568 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 01/20/1984 |
| From: | Levin H TERA CORP. |
| To: | Jackie Cook, Eisenhut D, James Keppler CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, ISSUANCES-OM, NUDOCS 8401230489 | |
| Download: ML20079H568 (17) | |
Text
L J January 20,1984 Mr. James W. Cook Vice President Consumers Power Company 1945 West Pornoll Road Jackson, Michigan 49201 Mr. J. G. Keppler Administrator, Region til Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclecr Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137
'Mr. D'."G. Eisenhut '
~
Director, Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Re: Docket Nos. 50-329 OM, OL and 50-330 OM, OL Midland Nuclear Plant - Units I and 2 Independent Design and Construction Verification (IDCV) Program Meeting Summary
Dear Sirs:
The fifth meeting on Confirmed items and Findings was held on January 4,1984.
A summary is provided to document items discussed and actions agreed upon by the porticipants.
Sincer ly, isN
.c l Howard A. Levin Project Manager Midland IDCV Program cc:
See Attached Sheet Enclosure HAL/sl r
Of e401230489 e40120 PDRADOCK05000g
]; g k
TERA CORPORATION 7101 WISCONSIN AVENUE BETHESDA MAIMAND 20814 301 654 8 % 0
Mr. J. W. Cook 2
January 20,1984 Mr. J. G. Keppler Mr. D. G. Eisenhut cc:
Participants:
L. Gibson, CPC R. J. Erhardt, CPC D. Quammy, CPC (site)
R. Whitaker, CPC (site)
D. Hood, NRC J. Taylor, NRC, I&E T. Ankrum, NRC, I&E R. Burg, Bechtel J. Agor, B&W IDCV Program Service List l
l l
l l
TERA CORPORATON l
SERVICE LIST FOR MIDLAto N._NT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM ocs Harold R. Denton, Director Ms. Barbora Stomiris Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 5795 N. River U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Freeland, Michigan 48623
. Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Wendell Marshall James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator Route 10 l
, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Midland, Michigan 48440 Region 111 799 Roosevelt Road Mr. Steve Godler Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 2120 Corter Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55108 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident inspectors Office Ms. Billie Pirner Garde Route 7 Director, Citizens Clinic Midland, Michigan 48640 for Accountable Government Government Accountability Project Mr. J. W. Cook Institute for Policy Studies
' Vice President 1901 Que Street, N.W.
Consumers Power Company Washington, D.C. 20009 1945 West Pornoll Rood Jackson, Michigan 49201 Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.
Atomic Sofety & Licensing Board Michael I. Miller, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Isham, Lincoln & Beale Washington, D.C. 20555 Three First National Plazo, Sist floor Dr. Frederick P. Cowan i
Chicopo, Illinois 60602 Apt. B-125 6125 N. Verde Trail James E. Brunner, Esq.
Boca Roton, Florido 33433 Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jerry Harbaur, Esq.
Jackson, Michigan 49201 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 4
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ms. Mary Sinclair Washington, D.C. 20555 5711 Summerset Drive Midland, Michigan 48640 Mr. Ron Collen Michigan Public Service Commission Cherry & Flynn 6545 Mercontile Way i
Suite 3700 P.O. Box 30221 Three First National Plaza Lonsing, Michigan 48909 Chicago, Illinois 60602 Mr. Paul Rau Ms. Lynne Bernobei Midland Dolly News Government Accountability Project 124 Mcdonald Street 1901 Q Street, NW Midland, Michigan 48640 Washington, D.C. 20009
SUMMARY
OF FIFTH MEETING ON COfflRMED ITEMS Af0 FitolNGS JANUARY 4,1984 MIDLAND IDCV PROGRAM A meeting was held on January 4,1984, at Bechtel's Ann Arbor, Michigan offices, to obtain additional information related to confirmed items identified in the seventh IDCVP Monthly Status Report dated December 16,1983, and to status other outstanding items identified previously. Attachment i identifies the attendees of the meeting, which included representatives of TERA, CPC and Bechtel. Attachment 2 presents the ogendo used for the meeting.
Howard Levin, TERA, opened the meeting with a discussion of the agendo and a summary of the purpose of the meeting.
Initially, o brief discussion of programmatic issues was held. The programmatic issues are concerned primarily with interfaces among TERA, CPC and Bechtel.
Bechtel stated that they have developed a procedure for control of calculations issued to TERA which will encbie IDCVP team members to identify calculations which have been revised and the reason for those revisions.
The Bechtel discipline groups are c.,rrently updating the list of calculations and Bechtel expects to issue the list and procedure shortly.
Rob Burg, Bechtel, who is the primary interface between TERA and Bechtel, stated that he will be updating the Action item List which Bechtel uses to track progress on OCRs. He expects to issue the updated list by January 16.
The use of the so colled " ten-day clock" for determining when Confirmed items may be converted into Findings was discussed. TERA stated that the " ten-day clock" starts with the first OCR meeting at which a Confirmed item is discussed.
If no further information is forthcoming during the ten days following the meeting, and if the project does not indicate that such information is being compiled, then TERA will evoluote the necessity of converting a Confirmed item into a Finding. On the oti er hand, if information is received during the ten-day period, or if Bechtel or CPC indicate that it is expected to be ovcilable B-84-28 I
~ -.
thereafter, TERA will withhold conversion of the item to a Finding until after it
. has had on opportunity to review the additional information.
All parties were reminded that the intent of the OCR process is not to generate new information to respond to o Confirmed item. If CPC or Bechtel have no further information, they may state that they believe TERA has sufficient information. It is then TERA's responsibility to evoluote that information and determine the disposition of the OCR. If new information is to be developed, it is desirable to discuss such information at OCR meetings to ensure o correct understanding of the issue and its significance.
Meeting attendees were also reminded that the TERA Engineering Program Plan does not require written responses to Confirmed items. Alternatives such as a noticed meeting to exchange information on OCRs is acceptable, as is verbal information regarding odditional documents which should be reviewed for further
- information.
. TERA onnounced that its engineering evaluation of the diesel-generator building was being released on January 4 (i.e., on the meeting date). The evaluation concludes that existing cracks, generolly being of small size, are not indicative of a condition that would compromise the building's capobility in meeting its intended performance requirements.
The ogenda was rearranged to allow discussion of civil / structural OCRs first, to be followed by discussions of the other OCRs.
l it was noted that a large number of civil / structural items were included in the l
December 16 Status Report. All parties at the meeting recognize that there is a varying degree of significance to the OCRs. Several methods of addressing the civil / structural OCRs were discussed. TERA stated that it is not necessary that re-onalysis be done. in some cases, the IDCVP only needs to know why certain assumptions were mode or needs information to reconcile apparent discrepancies between two or more documents. It was concluded that the most expeditious way of clearly addressing the civil / structural OCRs is to hold a separate meeting 4
8
. B-84-28 2
i m
on these OCRs in conjunction with the next OCR meeting. It was subsequently agreed that the next OCR meeting would involve two days, January 31 and February 1. The civil / structural items will be discussed Jonvory 31, and other OCRs, including any new OCRs, will be discussed February 1. As has 'been done in the post, a separate meeting notice will be forthcoming with the ogendo. It is expected that this two-day meeting will take place in Bechtel's Ann Arbor offices.
The meeting then proceeded with its primary objective, which is to ensure that all participants have a complete understanding of the technical issues expressed as Confirmed items. Each new Confirmed item contained in the Status Report dated December 16 was discussed. This is intended to enable Midland project personnel to identify additional information that may have a bearing on the issues.
Clarification or presentation of additional information by Midland project personnel is also sought so that specific issues may be further disposi-tioned directly.
The status of previously outstanding Confirmed items and Findings was also discussed, except for those noted in the meeting announcement. The meeting announcement listed certain OCRs as being on hold or that sufficient informo-tion is available for TERA to further disposition the item. A summary of the significant aspects of the discussions is provided in Attachment 3, along with any course of oction identified. The responsible TERA personnel described each item, followed by a discussion by either CPC or Bechtel personnel, as appropri-ote.
l l
B-84-28 3
I
l ATTACHMENT 1 l
IAnaARY 'f R8%
Br: cam Orence,,
Asixi Ansost IDCV P>osanm Fmin OCR Swas Raview mesnus Mf*E AFFILIATtDN Toa 3 age 13ccHTE& lNUCLER h h\\ew )
16mce ce c.
G,eeds
& P&
Ao<<
Janey
.ceTxn Ts n fMak DovaHORJ TERA-Chrve Moergnr reen
~ joe M ACYc/CE V6EA ym ~I'ou opiese TtAf\\
6ch c<>h.hkw cP co.
M li e s c%
69/2 Enf t d crea - PGA c'
.c4 k. face sa.xre /u~y p.~,
Reevu Beeblel - auit /s.;/s sreve warsreza r e a rat.
e.wi@.,o houd/hD LCdid
~76W S Octp P2cwreL/amd1%d B196-N(W fu V76/Cna G Tse i+oAa c_.-
ti a
%mu 6 A ta /m A a ma 1
1 banmio W bAhl /<%mid 7% /
&a.n /
. t' cec.a w(
Odj/rs.k A
/6Llxaa l
ATTACHMENT 2 ACBOA FOR JANUARY 4,1984 IDCVP MEETING BEOfTEL OFFICES AbN ARBOR, MICHIGAN I.
Stort - 9:00 AM Lunch - 12:00 PM to 12:45 PM 11.
Discussion of Confirmed items, Findings, Observations, and Resolved items I
Item TERA Lead l
.A.
Construction e F-031,F-036 Tulodieski t
e F-052*
e F-053*
i e F-054*
e F-055*
o F-056*
e F-091*
e C-093*
e C-094*
e C-095*
e C-096*
(
l B.
Mechanical / Systems l
l e F-043*
Dougherty I
e C-087, C-%8, C-089 e R-066*
Witt e C-084 e C-085 e C-I l 2
- Setka C.
Electrical e C-097*
Dougherty e C-109*
Setka e C-Il0*
e C-Ill*
l
9 Item TERA Lead D.
Structural e C-Ol5 Mor.tgot/Mortore (seismic anal.)
e B-100*
e C-099*, C-101 thru C-108*
C-071*, C-Il3 thru C-117*
Mortore (generol) e e B-II8*
e C-068, C-069 Martore (seismic EO) e C-119 thru C-122*
lil.
Discussion of programmatic issues (if necessory)
IV.
Discussion of Action items and Logistics for aformation Exchange V.
Adjournment - 3:00 PM Estimated Notes:
1.
Items are grouped to the degree practical to facilitate discus-sion and minimize monpower requirements during the entire i
meeting.
2.
Items that changed status during the November reporting period are denoted with on osterisk.
3.
The following OCRs have not reached a final disposition; however, further TERA or Midland Project octions have been identified during post public meetings. Accordingly, discussions are not contemplated by TERA unless the Midland Project has identified new information that is pertinent to the ongoing l
octivities.
e C-005 e C-022 e*C-025 e C-026 l
e C-038 e C-039 l
e C-M0 e F-M7 I
e C-048 e F-049 e F-050 e C-074 e C-075 o C-076 e C-077 e C-081 e C-092 2
ATTACHMENT 3
\\
DISCUSSION OF COfflRMED ITEMS, FilolNGS, OBSERVATIONS, Ato RESOLVED ITEMS 3201-008-C-015. This OCR is concerned with vertical floor flexibility. TERA has reviewed portions of the SMA study and is continuing to review additional sections. No further Midland project action is required at this time.
3201-008-C-099. This OCR noted possible inconsistencies in nodal displacement calculations for the seismic stick model. Bechtel will advise TERA of how each portion of the calculation was used.
3201-008-C-101. In a calculation package reviewed by TERA, reference was made to a consistency check between the stick model and the finite element model. However, TERA could not locate the consistency check. CPC stated that they will determine whether the check stated in the calculation was, in fact, performed. If it was performed, it will made available to TERA. If it was not performed, this OCR will be discussed at the next OCR review meeting.
3201-008-C-102. In reviewing inputs and computer runs, apparent inconsisten-cies were noted. TERA stated that the concern is more with the checking process than with the technical issues which may be minor. CPC stated that they consider the work done by SMA to be a verification of Bechtel's work.
TERA then asked whether the SMA work is considered part of the design basis.
CPC stated that it was not part of the design basis, and that the Bechtel work is the design basis. CPC stated that they will review both the technical issues and the more generic concern.
3201-008-C-103. This OCR is concerned with the possible use of approximate equations beyond their scope of appilcability. The issue raised by the OCR is how the determination was made that the specified equations could be used. It was noted that, with appropriate just'ification, equations may be used beyond
.their normal range of applicability.
Bechtel will respond and discuss the significance of their use of the equations.
B-84-28 i
3201-008-C-104.
Th?s OCR is concerned with potential inconsistencies and errors in mass moment of inertlo calculations. The OCR contained eight specific items of concern. Bechtel has performed a new calculation which addresses items 1,4 and 5 of the OCR. Bechtel stated that they will not respond to the OCR until offer TERA has reviewed the new calculation. This is to enable Bechtel to make a ' single response to both the remaining OCR issues and any identified during the review of the new calculation.
3201-008-C-105. This OCR questioned the use of computer program CE207 where it may not be applicable. Bechtel will provide it:; j=t!fication for use of the program. The computer program uses a procedure developed by Tsai, which is applicable when a specific ratio is greater than 2, whereas it appears that for the auxiliary building the ratio is less than 2.
3201-008-C-106. Additional information is required to justify assumptions made in the soll structure interaction. The Midland project will review this item.
3201-008-C-107. This OCR is concerned with the stick model assumptions. The first item, concerning locating sticks at the center of shear areas rather than the shear center, will be reviewed further by TERA. Item 2 will be reviewed by Bechtel and a response will be forthcoming.
3201-008-C-108. Ten items regarding stick model assumptions are listed in this OCR. TERA requested justification of these assumptions.
l l
l 3201-008-C-071. This OCR identified a calculation which referenced a super-l l
ceded computer run which is no longer available.
TERA requested further j
information regarding the status of the calculation which was reviewed, as well as the apparently superceded reference.
3201-008-C-l 13. This issue is similar to that raised in OCR 3201-008-C-102, concerning consistency of input and computer runs. Bechtel responded that the worst cose food combinations were used and that they would provide o justifica-tion as to how these were arrived at.
B-84-28 2
,3301-008-C I l4. Bechtel stated that they performed the calculation for slab moment capacity correctly. They will respond to this issue.
3201-008-C-l15. TERA stated that clarificction of live lood criterio'is needed.
Bechtel stated that loods for heavy equipment were included in the evoluotions.
TERA asked for clarification of what criteria are used for differentiating between what is included as pert of the overage load and what is considered as specific equipment loods. It was noted that TERA has not reviewed calculations for structural steel because the project is still completing this work.
3201-008-C-I l 6. This OCR noted an apparent conflict between the FSAR and Bechtel C-501-0, Rev.12. Bechtel stated that Revision 13 is in process, cnd will resolve the conflict between the FSAR and the other document. Bechtel stated item 4 refers to o typo that was corrected in Rev 49 of the FSAR.
3201-008-C-Il7. TERA explained its concern with the evoluotion of stresses at slabs and walls. Bechtel stated that it will review the calculativns with the people who performed them, and respond oppropriately.
Bechtel stated that the specific seismic qualificot!on is essentially complete, and that the equipment is qualified.
However, some documentation is still needed. Bechtel further stated that it generally accepts vendor assumptions used in SQRT work, unless tney are unreasonable.
3201-008-C-l 19.
Bechtel stated that they will justify why the actuators evaluated are considered representative. They of:o stated that pipe end forces are generally not included in the onolysis, but that Bechtel has identified this os a concern. Bechtel stated that a Nutech document is the design basis for the SQRT program.
Note: Attachment 4 provides a summary of which OCRs (or parts of OCRs) do not require a response at this time. CPC and Bechtel will try to provide available additional information prior to the January 31 meeting on civil / structural OCRs.
B-84-28 3
s 3201-006-C-120.121. and 122. These equipment qualification issues will be I
reviewed with Nutech, and the project will advise TERA further.
- 3201-008-C-093 throuah-096. These items resulted from an HVAC review at the f
site.. Site representatives were present at the meeting, and stated that they disagree with a number of the statements made in the Confirmed item reports.
Additional documentation is available at the site to justify their position. TERA will arrange a site visit to review this additional documentation.
Specific information discussed on these OCRs were os follows.
3201-000-C-093. CPC stated that they have on open GA finding concerning the l
- deviations between standards and specifications. They stated that the FSAR is
~
being amended to document exceptions taken to the AWS specifications. CPC will respond to the issues raised.
3201-008-C-094. Additional information is available at the s.ite concerning this item.
3201-003-C-095. CPC has additional information available at the site regarding l
welder qualification.
- 3201-008-C-096. CPC disagrees with the concern stated in the OCR. TERA will review additional information at the site.
3201-008-F-052 through F-056. In accordance with the Engineering Program Plon, written responses will be made by the project. These findings are all concerned with the construction verification program.
3201-008-C-l12. This OCR noted possible discrepancies in a Bechtei calculation for sizing the emergency diesel generator exhaust lines.
It appears that a l
calculated pressure drop is in excess of that allowed by the manufacturer, i
although only by a small amount. No justification is presented for allowing this difference to exist.
Furthermore, some of the parameters may not be sufficiently conservative.
Bechtel will review the calculation and respond t-occordingly.
B-84-28 4
h y
w~
.--,-_,-.y-
,-.--_..m,,
m.,_,,,--
~_,._m
~, _,
I O
3201-008-C-109. This OCR noted on apparent conflict between the design and IEEE-387. Bechtel will review and advise TERA.
3201-006-C-Il0. TERA ncted variances between a food tabulation coropiled by TERA and that prepared by Bechtel. Bechtel stated that they agree with some, but not all, of the comments. SAR Change Notice 4082 offects Comment #4 in the Confirmed item. Bechtel has also revised QPE-l and TERA will review this calculation.
3201-008-C-l i 1.
This OCR noted current discrepancies among various FSAk statements regarding the capability of the battery charger. Bechtel will review and determine whether they consider o SAR change notice to be required in order to clarify their intent.
3201-008-F-043. This Finding involves control of seismically analyzed but non-Q pipe. It appeared to TERA that document M480 was in conflict with statements made by Bechtel to resolve the Confirmed item. TERA will review the written response which is required as a result of the Finding. TERA requested Bechtel explain the process by which field personnel determine whether the "honger critical procedures of M327 are applied, particularly in the case of a line containing sections which are honger-critical, os well as those which are not honger-critical.
3201-008-C-087 through-089. These OCRs involve fire protection and were discussed at the previous meeting. Bechtel confirmed that they are planning to provide TERA with odditional information.
3201-008-R-066. This item was resolved based on further information received from the project, it was stated that it is a design basis to re-establish outside air for the control room HVAC following the three-hour isolation period. TERA stated that, as a result of this additional infermation, item 066 was resolved, and that re-establishment of outside air will be considered as a design basis.
B-84-28 5
~
),
3201-008-C-084. This item was discussed at the November 30th meeting, and concerns thz method of calculating the concentration. of toxic substances in the control room when the substance is subject to ceiling thresho!d limit values. Ttie project will provide e response later.
3201-008-C-085.
This OCR was 'also previously discussed, and the project confirmed that they are reviewing both the technical and procedural issues
~
implicit in the OCR.
~
3201-008-C-097. TERA's review of the control room HVAC system indicates' that re-establishment of make-up flow to the control room from outside air is not single-failure proof. CPC stated that it may not be necessary to apply the single-failure criterion to the condition. They will document their position in this matter.
'u' B-84-28 6
a&.
..e.
m-
l ATTACHMENT 4 SUEJECT C ?(N t STE0eN EAL TERA SHEET OF SHEETS y a g
gq PREPARED BY DATE_ I h i64 PROJECT NO.
CONTROL l.D. NO CHECKED BY DATE
'O E SPoMc; e og E y newen ?
C c't 4 ' M E u t s OIS Ro OG8 y E',5 oG4
'f E 5 S M e. M % 3 w eu
'h \\ b.
k 4 099 YES loo 60 0 en a ;Lv AWov (O1 YES LO7 YES C.44-Ecx.W % D R o t t.n o t.t i t b EE ha et t. A s.,
M o u E.
u%E D Fo t. "'Te-i s.
C A cc.
RERS 2 E OY'C h sHko i,av to 3 YEk los W W e A ti o p tw o iu eAe_T
\\C 4 "P A'E.'il' A L
'J. NM 7
3, G, 'I g 8 M E.tb bli-AO pgJiKCS D 1oS
'Is s Jv s tis.icAT; o ev (O G NES tol T>A 2.'tC A L t TEM 7
ou(Y M E.E O Ps E A b O R.E S.S E D loo YES
.Io5.T(TtcAT(oed Awb i M 'PA c. T-It S VES b e p,cR i 'ib1E P Gt oct_bu 9.u U4 VES ll 5 YES Ots. c'e_i 4 E how v pe iW'a u t
- t. a o t's thc L o T> e ss lu SLAB A M A t-/b ( b
SUEJECT C tb f L ST 20 C TO GL A L gg SHEET 1
CF 1
SHEETS ee2 SW u 5 PREPARED BY h
DATE I 5,E4 PROICT NO.
CONTROL l.D. NO CHECKED BY DATF O C R-4 NEtoetc. T CoMMEm L itG Wus lif YES Lt B Mo c anau s Wev L19 NES iac/ lor yas l
1 l
i l
1 l
..