ML20083C663
| ML20083C663 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 11/30/1983 |
| From: | Jay Dougherty, Tulodieski D TERA CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20083C656 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-OL, ISSUANCES-OM, NUDOCS 8312230232 | |
| Download: ML20083C663 (89) | |
Text
7 MIDLAND INDEPENDENT DESIGN Ato CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM MONTH _Y STATUS REPORT ,
NUMBER 7 l PERIOD NOVEMBER 1,1983 TI-ROUGH NOVEMBER 30,1983 ,
l
(
Prepared by:
I, ull, _
y Manager, Design Ve! ificatibn 3
ty .
Manager, Construction Verification Reviewed by: ww tM Project Moneger Approved by: _(,),/ b Principal-in-Charge 8312230232 831216 PDR ADOCK 05000329 R paa
i l
i l
VERIFICATION PROGRAM (IDCV)
MONTil.Y STATUS REPORT l
NUMBER 7 PERIOD NOVEMBER 1,1983 THROUGH NOVEMBER 30,1983 -
1.0 INTRODUCTION
AND PURPOSE Monthly Status Reports have been instituted by agreement among Consumers Power Company (CPC), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and TERA to provide parties external to TERA's IDCV project team with up-to-date informa-tion relative to program progress and any important issues identified during the reporting period. This report covers the period from November I,1983 through November 30, 1983. A description of the scope, reporting period's and report issuance dates for Monthly Status Reports, as well as a summary of the baci: ground of the IDCV program were presented in the initial Month y Status Report dated May 27,1983.
2.0 IDCV PROGRAM STATUS
SUMMARY
2.I Programmatic Activities Attachment I provides an updated chronology of major project milestones. The project chronology from inception through the beginning of this reporting period can be found in the previous monthly status reports. Several milestones warrant l'
l special highlight.
l-The fourth OCR status review meeting was held on November 30,1983 at Bechtel's Ann Arbor, Michigan offices. In addition to the statusing of l
l 1
on understanding and any outstanding issues, the discussions promoted clarification necessary related to new issues so that CPC or Bechtei couid either identify information that may not have been available to the IDCVP review team Minutes documenting or clarify information that was available and reviewed.
The discussions at this meeting and commitments will be issued in December.
fifth OCR status review meeting will be held on January 4,1984, rather than during the last week of December, to avoid a conflict with the holidays.
-l-
During the November 30th meeting, CPC indicated that several constraints had compounded which may make a mid-course correction of the IDCVP desireable.
These constroints include the completion status of Midland project, recognition of a schedule delay by CPC as well as CPC financial considerations. This general topic wcs discussed by the three parties: TERA, CPC and NRC. All parties agreed that it was reasonable for the IDCVP to respond to a changed environment. Future discussion in this regard is contemplated.
TERA IDCVP management is currently assessing alternatives that will allow the IDCVP to meet defined objectives in a cost and schedule effective manner. To date, the Midland project completion status has impacted the IDCVP, principally in the construction verification area. Most activities in the construction area are on hold indefinitely. The design verification effort is proceeding at approximately on 80-90% pace with the exceptions being in review areas that are offected by Midland project design activities which are in progress or revision.
An option under consideration is to review the engineering programs that are in place for this 10 - 20%; thus, enabling completion of the design review.
In the interim period, until a definitive approach to completion of the IDCVP has been chosen, near term priorities are focused on completion of work on potential OCR track issues, completion of engineering evaluations and co!culations supporting OCRs of record, and further disposition of outstanding OCRs.
2.2 Design Verification Activities 2.2.I Summary Design verification activities in November were concentrated in the following areas:
e Dispositioning of Confirmed items e Civil / structural review of the auxiliary and diesel generator buildings e HVAC calculations, single failure analyses, and hozordous gas evoluo-tions e Electric power system calculations Other design verification activities progressed as new information was received.
2.2.2 Auxiliary Feedwater System Progress In early November, a decision was made not to complete the interim topical report on the AFW system. The scope of this proposed report was discussed in lost month's status report. The basis for the decision not to complete the report was that it could not be a conclusionary report due to the number of open items which currently exist. Thus, the report could only serve os a detailed status report. Diccussions among the NRC, CPC, and TERA indicated that such a report would be of limited value. Consequently, it was decided that the report should not be completed. .
Since the interim report was not to be completed, activity in the AFW system concentrated on the disposit on of Open and Confirmed items and continued review in remaining design review areas including the independent piping analysis and the civil / structural review topics.
Additional information was received from Bechtel during November which will allow dispositioning of certain AFW Confirmed items. Further requests for information to enable disposition of Confirmed items were made by telephone and following the November 30 meeting in Ann Arbor. The review of calculation OPE-8 is continuing and is being supplemented with additional checking associated with the CR-HVAC system.
During November TERA continued to have o presence in Ann Arbor to review civil / structural design subjects. Sixteen man-days of effort were expended in Ann Arbor during November in these creas. The auxiliary building finite element model was reviewed for design loadings including underpinning loads and the preparation of the engineering evoluotion initiated. Calculations for structural design of floore and walls were reviewed. The review of foundation design calculation packages was completed. Review of the auxiliary building seismic model continued.
Resolution was reached on obtaining hanger calculations from Grinnell. The calculations will be reviewed upon receipt. Information was requested on Bechtel redesign of pipe supports and a review initiated of channel inserts and other imbedments.
.a ' 3-
The review of seismic qualification of equipment continued following receipt of additional information.
2.2.3 Standby Electric Power System Engineering evoluotions begun previously progressed in many topic orcos, and odditional evoluotions were initiated in November. An independent load tobulo-tion of diesel generator (DG) loods hos been completed and various DG loco sequencing and shedding logic and schematic diagrams have been reviewed. In addition, the review of the DG control systems and interlocks was started. This review task includes evoluotion of DG vendor prints such as control panel, piping, and engine pneumatic schematic drawings.
The engineering evoluotion of the fire protection associated with the diesel generators is nearing completion. Fuel oil storage and piping, potentio!
malfunctions leading to oil spillage, fire detection and suppression capabilities, fire barriers, fire systems effects on DG reliability, and potential interactions i
between DG rooms during a fire are being evoluoted. Completion is dependent on review of recently received fuel oil piping routing drawings and upon rece*pt and review of additiono! requested fire protection system documentation (specifications, vendor drawings, and calculations).
The DG combustion air supply and engine exhaust evoluotion hos commenced.
I Associated mechanical calculations received offer a calculation briefing with Bechtel personnel in Ann Arbor during mid-November, were reviewed, along with piping layout drawings. The diesel engine exhaust backpressure calculation was compared to the os-installed condition and vendor interface requirements.
Engineering evoluotions continue in the following areas:
- DG cooling / heating requirements, e DG building flood protection, e DG and DC System Technical Specifications, and have been initiated in:
e Component Functional Requirements, and Equipment Qualification.
e
information necessary for the obove reviews has been identified, requested, and in the process of being received.
Much of the information identified in lost month's progress report ,hos been received. However, based on on initial review of that information, additional documentation has been identified and requested. In addition to the 33 l
. mechanical calculations received in Ann Arbor, six odditional electrical calculo-tions were obtained, os well as over 100 DG vendor prints. Also, various electrical, mechanical, and seismic qualification reports have been and are being received.
Revision I to the SEP system consolidated criteria and commitments list has been completed and its engineering evoluotion continues.
The review of the civil / structural aspect of the standby electric power system was pursued at two levels:
e impact of settlement and cracks on performance and serviceability of the building e review of analysis and design The review of the DG Building as-built condition is progressing, with the assistance of Professors Myle J. Holley (MIT) and William J. Hall (University of Illinois). A final engineering evoluotion is expected by the end of December.
Professors Holley and Hall and IDV reviewers visited the site on November 17, 1983. A meeting was organized on November 18,1983, among TERA (including Professors Holley and Hall), Consumers Power Corporation, and Bechtel to obtain design information regarding:
e Missile design bases, e Tornado loads e Seismic design and foods, e Settlement and cracking history and prediction, e Bechtel analysis of building, e Monitoring program, e Repair program.
Documents were requested to substantiate topics covered in the meeting (per TERA " Request for Information" dated November 18, 1983). Those documents received on December 2,1983 are presently being reviewed.
Review of the DGB concrete / steel design (Topic 111.7-2) and foundation design (Topic 111.6-?) was initiated by identifying and reviewing design criteria and I calculations related to the finite element analysis which is used to verify the odequacy of the design. Methodology for including (1) seismic loads, (2) equipment loads / mosses, and (3) wind and tornado foods (Topic 111.2-2) in the finite element analysis was reviewed (colculations DQ-14(O), rev. I; DG-23(O),
rev.0). Several odditional calculations have been identified which need to be reviewed in order to complete the evoluotion. For construction chronology and history of analysis / design procedures, as implied by the DGB settlement problems, the DGB executive summary was reviewed.
2.2.4 Control Room HVAC System Progress r
Responses to all the Confirmed items from the previous month were provided by Bechtel in a November I1,1983, letter. These have been reviewed and sufficient information is available to disposition them. Additionally, the outstanding items in the static pressure calculations have been discussed and clarified, which will allow completion of that review in early December. A revision to the calculation is pending, which will be reviewed to determine if significant changes occurred.
Structural review of the duct and duct supports focused m the methods described in the design guide and standard coiculation. That effort identified several documents and drawings which would require review to complete the evoluotion. These have been requested and a portion received, permitting continuation of the effort in December; however, o first sample of duct supports selected for review were all found to be pending revision. The status of the revision effort in general will have to be assessed to continue with design review of a valid sample.
During November, information was requested from CPC regarding studies performed to support the FSAR conclusions regarding hozordous gas releases and the capability of the hozordous gas monitor.
~
The HVAC power supply (Topic 1.15-3) review is nearing completion. The power supplies to forty-eight (48) major components of the CR-HVAC system have been tabulated from opplicable schematic diagrams and reviewed against power supply separation and redundancy requirements. The review included a verification of the power supplies and isolation features incorporated into the design of interlocks for the HVAC components.
A preliminary review of the CR-HVAC s> stem against single failure (Topic l.3-3) and syst.em operating criteria has also been conducted. This review incorporated the results of the power supply review into a check of the system P&lD (M-465),
while considering the normal and control room isolation modes of system operation. This review resulted in on OCR concerning single failure and the ability to re-establish make-up flow three hours offer control room isolation.
The failure modes and effects review (FMEA - Topic l.23-3) is proceeding.
The CR-HVAC system schematic and logic diagrams have been verified to incorporate appropriate octuation features (Topic l.20-3) to comply with the design criteria. The Control Room Isolation System (CRIS) material requisition is being reviewed. The CRIS is a subsystem of ESFAS. The octuating logic has been checked from logic diagrams and schematic diagrams and has included the consideration of system operating modes. This review has also included the consideration of system olignment/switchover (Topic l.5-3) from normal operation to its olignment in response to high radiation, hozordous gas, or main steam line isolation signals. The review of system interlocks associated with
- - fans and dompers is near completion (Topic l.7-3).
Drawings applicable to CR-HVAC instrumentation have been requested and received. A review of the radiation monitoring and hozordous gas monitoring l
! system design is in progress (Topic 1.!%3). The logic and schematic diagrams for I major CR-HVAC components (44) are being checked against each other and the opplicable design criterio (Topic l.19-3).
2.3 Construction Verification Activities 2.3.l Summary Activities undertaken and events which occurred during this reporting period which are important to the overall conduct of the construction verification review portion of the IDCV program are os follows:
e During the first two weeks of this reporting period ICV reviewers completed their review of selected cornmodities within the sample boundaries of the CR HVAC system. This review was comprised of the collection and evoluotion of pertinent controlling procedures and l verification documentation in addition to verification of the physical configuration of selected ductwork sections and hangers. The verifi-cation of physico! configuration review was only performed on those commodities and components which were statused by the related f
quality documentation review as being complete with no outstanding design or QA/QC holds. As a result of these reviews and subsequent evoluotions, four Confirmed items have been identified (OCRs C-093 thru 096). The Confirmed items are discussed in more detail in the Construction / Installation Documentation Review and Physical Configuration Verification Review portions of this status report and provided in Attachment 3.
e As a result of the nine (9) stop work orders issued during the latter part of October /early November and announcements by CPC concerning the overall progress of the CCP and Midland Project, TERA program monogement assessed the feasibility of continuance of the ICV Construction / Installation Documentation and Physical Verification reviews for the present and immediate future. With the exception of those activities necessary to pursue a final disposition for Confirmed items and Findings, most ICV activities are being held in obeyance. During the middle of this reporting period ICV program management terminated TERA's constant on-site presence which had been in effect since the latter part of June. TERA program monogement is currently assessing alternatives for accomplishing the goals and objectives of the ICV review in a cost and schedule effective manner.
2.3.2 Construction Doct, mentation Review Progress Construction documentation review relates to those ICV review categories which are principally concerned with the adequacy and completeness of .available documentation as opposed to those ICV review categories which verify the physical configuration of installed components and commodities. The following ICV review categories are port of construction documentation review.
e Review of Supplier Documentation e Review of Storage and Maintenance Documentation e Review of Construction / Installation Documentation A description of progress made and principal activities undertaken in each of the above review categories are os follows:
Review of Supplier Documentation e As a result of discussions conducted during the OCR Status Review Meeting on November 30, 1983, the following OCRs, previously statused as Confirmed items, are statused as Findings.
- Finding F-052 addresses certain inconsistencies and gaps in vendor documentation submittols required by Midland Project Specifications. During the OCR Status Review Meeting, CPC odvised that a program has recently been undertaken which hos os one of its principal objectives the review and collation of design and quality-related documentation important to the verification of vendor-supplied components and to the safe operation and maintenance of the equipment. ICV reviewers will defer, for the near term, pursuing a final disposition of this Finding pending CPC's implementation of their program.
Once the program is implemented and guidelines for its conduct clearly defined, ICV reviewers will recommence pursuing a final disposition for Finding F-052 which will include on overview of the CPC design / quality documentation program.
- Finding F-056 oddresses the results of a review of vendor-supplied material selection verification documentation. ICV reviewers will pursue the disposition of this Finding through discussions with cognizant CPC/Bechtel personnel.
e Near-term activities ossociated with conducting the Vendor Documentation Review relate to preparing the engineering evoluotion documenting the results of this review for selected vendor-supplied components in the CR HVAC, AFW and SEP systems.
Review of Storage and Maintenance Documentation e Activities undertaken by ICV reviewers during this reporting period were focused principolly upon the preparation of the engineering evoluotion documenting the results of this review for selected components in the CR HVAC, AFW and SEP systems, e Near-term activities ossociated with this review will be focused upon continuing the finalization of the engineering evoluotion and pursuing the disposition of Finding F-047.
Review of Construction / Installation Documentation e As a result of discussions conducted during the OCR Status Review Meeting on November 30, 1983, the following OCRs, previously statused as Confirmed items, are statused as Findings
- Findings F-053 and 054 delineate inconsistencies observed in certain quality-ver !fication documentation and instructions controlling the corduct of quality inspections for components and commodities within the AFW System. Pursuing a disposition to these Findings will be deferred pending completion of CCP Phase I activities for the offected components and commodities.
e Finding F-055 addresses certain inconsistencies ossociated with welding procedures and procedure qualification records opplicable to welding performed for AFW systems and components. TERA reviewers will initiate discuss' ions with cognizant Bechtel/CPC personnel in determining a disposition for the items / inconsistencies noted by this Finding.
e TERA ICV reviewers completed their evoluotion of selected The components and commodities within the CR HVAC system.
review consisted of collecting and evoluoting the adequacy of pertinent controlling procedures (welding and installation) and associated verification documentation. As a result of this review and subsequent evoluotion conducted to record the results of the review three (3) Confirmed items were prepared. The Confirmed items C-093, C-095 and C-096 note and address inconsistencies observed in certain welding procedures and documentation used to verify the quality of installation of certain CR HVAC ducts and hangers. One of the Confirmed items, C-095, addresses more of a process-oriented issue reioted to the certification of Zack welders.
e The Construction / Installation Documentation review was terminated during the middle of this reporting period and is tentatively scheduled to recommence offer the OVP has reached appropriate milestones.
This postponement of review activities is deemed prudent and cost-effective in light of recent CPC onnouncements concerning the anticipated progress of the Midland Project. Near-term activities for this review task will be focused upon dispositioning certain OCRs which highlight process-oriented issues os a potential root cause or which are not offected nor influenced by ongoing CCP octivities.
2.3.3 Physical Verification / Site Activities Program The activities described herein address those ICV review categories which require ICV reviewers to observe, witness, or verify field activities and/or the as-built configuration of installed commodities and components. For the most l
port, these activities require a strong site presence on the part of reviewers and include the following review categories:
e Review of Selected Verification Activities e Verification of Physical Configuration Review of Selected Verification Activities e As a result of discussions during the November 30 OCR Status Review Meeting, ICV reviewers established previous Confirmed item C-091 into a Finding. This Finding addresses a potential inconsistency in the training program used to qualify personnel for T
the honger re-inspection activities. Disposition of this Finding will be pursued by ICV personnel through discussions with cognizant CPC personnel.
e Near-term activities associated with this review tcsk will be focused
,' upon disposition of existing Findings and Confirmed items and updating existing engineering evoluotions used to document the results of the ICV reviews of the Cable and Pipe Hanger Reinspection Programs.
e Further progress has not been made relative to the pursuit of a statistical model to assist in evoluoting ICV reviews of the Cable and Pipe Honger Reinspection programs. Use of the model is enticipated as ICV reviewers prepare their final stc.fements for incorporation into I the final IDCVP report.
Verification of Physical Configuration e ICV reviewers completed their review, and documented their evoluotion, of se!ected components and commodities within the CR HVAC system. The physical verificofion was conducted only on those components and commodities within the CR HVAC System that were statused by the Construction / Installation Documentation 1
l i
Review as being complete and without design or GA/QC " hold." As a result of this review, and the subsequent evoluotion of the review results, Confirmed item C-094 was written to document certain inconsistencies noted during the review. This item notes defects in workmanship and other discrepancies observed during the review cf selected CR HVAC duct sections and associated supports and hangers.
o Subsequent to discussions held during the November 30 OCR Status Review Meeting, TERA obtained a copy of Rev. I of the Field Change Request / Field Change Notice procedure currently in use on the Midland Project. TERA ICV reviewers commenced on evoluotion of the procedure os part of activities necessary to further disposition Findings F-031 and F-036.
e Near-term activities to be conducted in this review task relate to dispositioning of existing Findings and Confirmed items. Physical Verification of installed components and commodities will be deferred until completion of CCP Phase I activities.
h 6
3.0
SUMMARY
OF CONF {RMED AND RESOLVED ITEM REPORTS, FINDING REPORTS, AND FINDING RESOLUTION REPORTS provides TERA's Tracking System Summary for Open, Confirmed, and Resolved (OCR) Item Reports, Finding Reports, and Finding Resolution Reports. This tool assists TERA in tracking the disposition of issues as they progress throt.gh the review process. Items that have changed status or that have been added during the reporting period are noted with on osterisk. provides retyped copies of Resolved item Reports (that have closed out Confirmed items), Confirmed items, Observations, Finding Reports.
and Finding Resolution Reports. The following paragraphs discuss items which have changed status in the post month.
Eight findings were identified during the reporting period. Finding F-043 is related to the requirements for "honger critical" piping. In response to C-043, TERA was informed that review of M-480 and M-327 would provide adequate information to demonstrate the control applied to " hanger critical" piping. A review of M-480 showed that the piping in question is not listed as " hanger critical." Findings F-052 through F-056 are all associated with the construction verification program. F-052 is concerned with the unavailability of vendor documentation and uncertainty as to whether such vendor documentotion was received. CPC has indicated that a program is in progress to address the documentation issue. F-053 is similar, but opplies to construction and installo-tion documents. F-054 relates to incorrect, conflicting or outdated information in POCis. F-054 results from reviews of certain welding procedures and procedure qualification report and inconsistencies or gaps in information which should be recorded. F-056 focuses upon two concerns associated with materials test report. In one case, the test report showed carbon content in excess of allowob!e and in the other, there was no report available. F-091 is associated with the construction verification review of pipe supports. F-091 noted that the lesson plan associated with PGCl-P-2.30, Rev. 3 did not address snubbers. R-066 resolves a Confirmed item based upon information that the capobility to re-establish makeup flow to the control room is a design basis for the CR-HVAC (although the initiation of this flow is at the operator's discretion). Since no further action is required, C-066 was resolved.
31 Confirmed items were identified during the reporting period. They cre:
e C-069 - This item is concerned with the seismic qualification of pump 2P-05A.
e C-071 - This item concerns the finite element review of calculation 10 59.!(Q).
e C-089 - This item is a revision of the some item which was included in last month's report. The revised item was discussed ct the November 30th meeting and is included in this report only for completeness.
e C-093 - C-096 - These items are all ossociated with the construction verification effort for CR-HVAC ducts and supports e C-097 - Application of single failure criteria to dampers in the CR-HVAC system.
e C-099 - C-108 - All of these items are concerned with seismic design including stick and finite element model assumptions and calculation package consistency. (item 100 is resolved as an Observation) e C-IO9 - Diesel-generator fuel system lockout under certain condi-tions.
e C-l 10 - Diesel-generator load tabulation.
e C-11I - Inconsistency in initiation of load shedding on bus under-voltage.
e C-112 - Diesel-generator exhaust backpressure calculation.
e C-Il3 - 117 - These items are concerned with concrete and steel design or with foundations, e C-l19-122 - These items are concerned with seismic equipment qualification.
.6
'a t
. ~
ATTACHMENTI MIDLAto if0EPENDENT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM TERA PROJECT 3201 PERIOD NOVEMBER 1,1983 TEROUGH NOVEMBER 30,1983 Date Milestone November 1-11,1983 TERA construction verification reviewers on-site completing CR HVAC documentation review and physical verification of selected duckwork and hongers.
November 7-18,1983 TERA design review team at Bechtel's Ann Arbor of fice November 15,1983 Sixth Monthly Status Report issued November 17,1983 TERA civil / structural review team members and Professors Hall and Holley onsite to inspect diesel-generator building November 18, 1983 TERA civil / structural review team members and Professors Hall and Holley at Bechtel's Ann Arbor office November 22,1983 Meeting notice issued for November 30, 1983, OCR status review meeting November 29 - TERA design review team at Bechtel's Ann December 2,1983 Arbor Of fice November 30,1983 Fourth OCR status review meeting at Bechtel's Ann Arbor office i
ATTACHMENT 2 OCR, Fl>OING REPORT, APO FitOING RESOLUTION REPORT TRACKING SYSTEM MIDLAPO ltOEPEFOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRLCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM 12/I6/83 Topic Comments OCR No. Resp. LTR Potential Open Confirmed Resolved aindi F
Report Findi eso ution Open item Itera item item /
Ervation Report 7/12/83 f.4-1 Tech Soces 0 01 RPS 12/21/83 3M/83 3/4/83 f.4-1 Tech Specs 002 RPS 12/21/83 3/4/83 3/4/83 7/12/83 3/4/83 1.8-1 Overpressure Protection 003 RPS 1/3/83 3/4/83 3/4/83 I.8-l Overpressure' Protection 004 RPS 1/3/83 3/4/83 f.1-1 System Operating Limits 005 RPS 1/4/83 3/4/83 3/4/83 1.2-1 Accident Analysis 006 RPS 1/12/8 3 3/4/83 3/i/83 Considerations 1.2-I Accident Analysis 007 RPS 1/12/ 8 3 3/4/03 3/4/83 '
Considerations f.19-1 Control Systems 008 LB l/19/83 3/4/33 7/17/83 II.I-I Seismic De<ign 009 JAM I/20/83 3/4/83 3/4/83 7/12/83 f.IO-l Hydraulic Design OIO FAD I/20/83 3/4/83 4/14/83 f.t9-f Control Systems 0 11 LB I/27/83 3/4/83 3/4/83 8/8/83 7/12/83 9/30/83 f.15-1 Power Supplies
, 012 LB 2/7/83 3/4/83 3/4/83 7/12/83 1.5-1 Syst. Align./Switchover 013 RPS 2/8/83 3/4/83
- Change in Stotus During Reporting Period
g s-1 OCR, FINCING REPORT, Ato FitC1NG RESOLUTION REPORT TRACKfNG SYSTEM MIDLAto IPOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PflOGRAM 12/16/83 (continued Comments Open_ Confirmed Resolved Finding Fineng M ,
OCR No. Resp. LTR Potent 101 item / Report Resolution l Open item item item Report DErvation 1.5-1 Syst. Align./Switchover 3/4/83 7/12/8 3 014 RPS 2/8/83 111.1-1 Seismic Design / Input JAM 2/10/ 8 3 3/4/83 10/11/83 to Equipment 015 111. 5 - 1 Civil /Str Design Consid.
Ol6 JAM 2/10/ 8 3 3/4/83 1.ll-l Heat Removal Cop 3/4/63 3/4/83 10/5/83 017 FAD 2/17/83 I.10-1 Hydraulic Design Heat Removal Cap.
3/4/83 11 /l1/ 8 3 II/ll/83 1.11-1 018 FAD 2/17/83 3/4/83 1.18-1 Instrumentation 3/4/83 8/8/83 Ol9 LB 2/ 21/ 8 3 Heat Removal Cap. B-000 Relate f.ll-1 3/4/83 3/4/83 11/11/83 020 FAD 2/24/83 1.9-1 Comp. Func. Req.
0-21 Rev. I, II.10-1 Eq. Ouol. '
4/14/ 83 021 FAD 2/24/83 3/4/83 1.19-1 Control Syst.
LB 2/24/83 3/4/03 8/8/83 022 1.18-l Instrumentation 2/28/83 3/4/83 8/8/83 023 LB 1.19-1 Control
r ,
)
i
)
OCR, Fit 4MNG REPORT, APO FitONG RESOLUTION REPORT TRACKING SYSTEM MIDLMO DOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERtFICATION PROGRAM 12/I6/s3(continued)
Topic Comments OCR No. Resp. LTR Potential Open Confirmed Resolved Finding Jindi F
Resolution item item / Report Open item item Report Observation 1.2-1 Acc. Anol.Consid.
024 RPS 3/l/83 3/4/83 1.2-1 Acc. Anal. Cor sid.
025 RPS 3/1/83 3/4/83 3/4/83 1.81 Overpress. F i st.
026 RPS 3/l/83 3/4/83 11/11/83 f.9-1 Comp. Furo. Req.
027 FAD 3/1/83 3/4/83 3/4/83 II/II/83 11.9 -1 Env.Eng.
1.9-1 Comp. Func. Req.
FAD 3/2/83 3/4/83 4/14/83 II/II/83 028 I.18-1 Instrumentation LB 2/22/83 3/4/83 3/4/83 029 1.19-1 Control System 1.19-1 Control System I/19/83 3/4/83 3/4/83 030 LB C-3i, Rev. I, 7/12/83 1.3-Ic Pipe Supports 3/4/83 3/4/83 8/30/83 0 31 DBT 2 / 11/ 8 3 C-32, Rev. I, 7/12/83 7/12/83 1.3-le Pipe Supports 3/4/83 3/4/83 7/12/83 032 DBT 2/11/83 C-33, Rev. I, 7/12/83 7/12/83 1.3-Ic Pipe Supports 3/4/83 7/12/ 83 033 DBT 2/11/83 3/4/83 C-34, Rev. I, 7/12/83 1.3-le Pipe Supports
' 3/4/83 7/12/83 . 7/12/83 034 DBT 2 / 11 / 8 3 3/4/83 C-35, Rev. 2, 7/12/83 7/12/83 1.3-Ic Pipe Supports 3/4/83 7/12/83 035 DBT 2 / 11 / 8 3 3/4/83
<1
4 OCR, FIFONG REPORT, APO FIPOING RESOLUTION REPORT TRACKING SYSTEM MIDLAPO FOEPEICENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM 12/16/83 (continued Findi Topic Comments OCR No. Reep. LTR PotentIol Open Confirmed Resolved F aindi item item item / Report eso ution Open item Report 1
Ervotion
- 11. 2 -1 Pressure Boundary C-36, Rev. 2, 7/12/83 3/4/83 3/4/83 7/12/83 036 JAM 2 /11 / 8 3 Ill.I-I Seismic Desic/ Input 037 JAM I/20/83 3/4/83 3/4/83 8/30/83 to Equipment 1.15-1 Power Supplies 038 LB 3/l/83 3/4/83 3/4/83 11.1 0 - 1 Env.Eq.Ooof.
039 LB 3/30/83 4/14/83 8/30/83 1.16-l Elec Chorocteristics 040 LB 3/8/83 4/14/83 9/30/83 f.15-1 Power Supplies 041 LB 3/25/83 4/14/83 9/30/83 1.10-1 Env. Eq. Qual.
042 LB 3/31/83 4/14/83 9/30/83 1.10-1 System Hydraulic Design
- 10-2teD-605 3/15/83 4/l4/83 10/6/83 12/2/83 043 FAD
- 11. 1 0 - 1 Env.Eq. Oval. Resolved as FAD 3/15/83 4/14/83 10/6/83 Obse-votion 044 II.1-lC Electricol Equipment / C-45, Rev. f, 7/12/83 5/25/83 8/8/83 11/11/83 045 DBT 3/l7/83 4/14/83 Storage & Maintenance 1.1-IC Mechanicol Equipment /
4/14/83 5/25/83 8/8/83 lI/11/83 046 DBT 3/l7/83 Storage & Maintenance 1.1-IC Mechanical Equipment / C-47, Rev. f, 7/26/83 8/8/83 8/30/83 8/30/83 047 DBT 7/7/83 Storoge & Maintenance
. r OCR, FilOING REPORT, Abe FitOING RESOLUTION REPORT TRACKING SYSTEM MIDUUO l>0EPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM 12/16/U3 (continued Fi Findi Topic Comments OCR No. Resp. LTR Potential Open Confirmed Resolved Jndi eso ution Open item item ite n item / Report Ervotion Repor1 11.10-1 Environmental Equipment 048 FAD 7/29/83 7/29/83 8/8/83 Qualification 8/29/83 8/29/83 II/fl/83 II.4-Ic Coble 049 RC 8/28/83 8/29/83 8/29/83 11/II/83 II.4-Ic Cable 050 RC 8/28/83 111.1 - 1 Seismic Desic/ input 051 JAM 8/12/83 8/30/83 8/30/83 to Equipment All ICV Topics for AFW
- Supplier Doc 052 DOT 9/30/83 9/30/83 9/30/83 12/1/83 All ICV Topics for AFW *Const./ Installation 053 FEP 9/27/83 9/29/83 9/29/83 12/l/83 Documentation All ICV Topics for AFW *Const./ Installation 054 FEP 9/27/83 9/29/83 9/29/83 12/l/83 - POCis All ICV Topics *Const./ Installation 055 DBT 9/19/83 9/29/83 1e/ll/83 12/1/83 Documentation -
WPs & PORs All ICV Topics for AFW & SEP
- Supplier / Doc. -
056 D8T 9/26/83 9/29/83 11/11/83 12/1/83 Materials 1.34-3 Pressurization Resolved os 057 DW 9/29/83 9/30/83 9/30/83 Observot;on
OCR, FitONG REPORT, APO FlfOlNG RESOLUTION REPORT TRAO(NG SYSTEM !
MOLADO NDEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGhAM 52/16/83 (continued Topic Comments FJindi Findi OCR No. Resp. LTR Potentlot Open Confirmed Resolved eso ution item item / Report Open item item Report Wservation 1.12-3 Cooling / Heating Requirements 058 DW 10/6/83 10/6/83 Single Follure Resolved as 1.3-1 9/30/83 Failure Modes & Effects Observation 059 RPS 8/II/83 1.23-1 1.1-3 System Operating Limits 060 DW 9/29/83 9/30/83 Instrumentat*m Reso"ved as 1.18-3 9/30/83 Observation 061 DW 9/29/83 !
1.9-1 Component Functional 062 FAD 9/30/83 9/30/83 Requirements System Hydraulic Design Resolved as f.10-1 10/6/83 Observation 063 FAD 10/5/83 System Hydraulic Design Resolved as f.10 ,1 Observation 10/5/83 10/6/83 064 FAD Aff IDV Topics 065 FAD 10/4/83 10/6/83
- f.5-3 System Alignment /Switchover 10/6/83 10/6/83 11/30/83 l.7-3 System Isolotion/ Interlocks 066 DW 9/Z9/83 Pressurization Resolved as f.34-3 9/30/83 9/30/83 Observation 067 DW 9/29/83
D OCR, FIPOING REPORT, ADO FilOING RESOLUTION REPORT TRACKNG SYSTEM MIDLAto ROEPEPOENT DESIGN ADO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM 12/16/113 (continuse0 i
Topic Comments Open Confirmed Resolved aFindi Findi OCR No. Resp. LTR Potentlot Report eso ution Open item item item item /
Observation Report 4
II.4-1 EQ/ Seismic 063 JAM 9/27/83 9/30/83 9/30/83 i 11. 4 - 1 *EO/ Seismic 069 JAM 9/27/83 9/30/83 11/5/83 1.4-1 *EO/ Seismic Consolidated
' JAM 9/27/83 9/30/83 11/5/83 with C-069 070 Ill.I-I ' Seismic Design /
071 JAM 9/27/83 9/30/83 12/l4/33 Input to Equipment l.9-1 Compenent Functional 072 FAD 9/30/83 10/6/83 Requirements ll.2-I Seismic Design - Pressure Boundary I.12-3 Cooling / Heating Requirements OCR-058 related 073 DW 9/29/83 10/6/83 10/6/83 I!/11/83 1.I-3 System Operating Limits <
074 DW 9/2?/83 10/6/83 10/6/83 l.2-3 Accident Arulysis Considerations 1.15-3 Power Supplies 1.1-3 System Operating Limits 075 DW 9/29/83 10/6/83 10/6/83 1.2-2 Accident Anotysis Considerations 1.12-3 Cooling / Heating Requirements 073 DW 9/29/83 10/6/83 10/6/83 II.4-1 EO/ Seismic 077 JAM 9/27/83 10/6/83 10/6/83 A
i t
t-OCR, FIPONG REPORT, APD FIbOING RESOLUTION HEPORT TRACKING SYSTEM MOLA>D WOEPEFOENT DESIGN AFC CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM 12/16/83 (continued Topic Comments JFindi Findi OCR No. Resp. LTR Potential Open Confirmed Resolved eso ution item / Report Open item item item Report Gservotion 1.91 Component Functional 078 FAD 9/30/83 10/6/83 Requirements ll1.5-1 Civil / Structural Design 07D JAM 8/29/83 10/6/83 Considerations Ill.6-1 Foundations Component Functional Resolved os 1.9-l 11/11/83 Requirements Observation 000 FAD 11/1/83 11.2 1 Pressure Boundary 081 FAD 11/1/83 11/lI/83 II/fl/83 I.9-I Component Functional Req.
1.9-3 Component Functional Chemical Cone./
10/18/83 II/Ii/83 Requirements Dew Interface 082 DW I.2-3 Accident Anofysis Considern-083 DW 10/31/83 II/II/83 tions 1.23 Accident Analysis Considero-Olm DW 10/31/83 11/11/83 II/lI/83 tions All OV Topics Noted issues iden-ll/II/83 tified in CR-HVAC 085 DW 10/31/83 review Fire "rotectior, Resolved os 10.l 2 -1 II/ll/83 Observation 086 FAD 10/13/83
~)
OCR, FitOING REPORT, APO FibOING RESOLUTION REPORT TRACKING SYSTEM MIDLAto llOEPEPOENT DESIGN AfO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM 12/16/83 (antinued Cmfirmed Resolved Finding Togie, C--ts I OCR No. Resp. LTR Potentiol Open aFindi Open item item l'em item / Report Resolution Observation heport FAD 10/13/83 II/II/83 II.f2-1 Fire Protection 087 11/11/ 8 3 FAD II/II/83 H/11/83 11.1 2 -1 Fire Protection 088 10/I3/83 Fire Protection 'C-089, Rev. I 089 FAD 10/13/83 11/11/ 8 3 II/ll/83 11.1 2 -1 II/29/83 II.121 Fire Protection Resolved as 090 FAD 10 /13/8 3 11/11/ 8 3 Observation 1.3-IC Pipe Supports Overinspection 091 RSC 10/18/83 11/1I/83 Il/ll/83 12/1/83 Prog.
f.3-1C Pipe Supports Overinspection 092 RSC 10/I8/83 II/II/83 II/1I/83 Prog.
IV.2-3C Const. Doc. Review *HVAC Ducts 093 DBT 11/10/83 11/21/83 11/28/83 IV.2-3C Physical Verif. 'HVAC Ducts 094 DBT 11/10/83 11/21/83 11/28/83 IV.2-3C Const. Doc. Review 'HVAC Welding Docs 095 DBT I1/10/83 II/21/83 11/28/83 IV.2-3C Const. Doc. Review *HVAC Ducts 096 DBT ll/10/83 1I/Il/83 II/28/83 and supports 097 LDB ll/30/63 12/5/83 12/9/83 f.3-3 Single Folture l.5-3 Sys. Alig wnent lif.1-1 Seismic Design *RG t.92 098 DMW I1/7/83 12/5/83 _
)
OCR, Fl>OING REPORT, APO Fl>OING RESOLUTION REPORT TRACKB4G SYSTEM MIDLAPO BOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSUtUCTIOt1 VERFICATION PROGRAM 12/16/83 (centimed)
Confirmed Resolved Findi Topic Comments OCR No. Resp. LTR Potential Open JFindi Open item item item item / Report eso ution Ervation Repor1 111.1 - 1 Seismic Design
- Stab Rotation 099 JAM Il/30/83 12/5/83 I2/9/83 III.1-1 Seismic Design
- Resolved as 100 JAM 12/9/83 12/9/83 Observations III.1-1 Seismic Design *DG-38(O) 101 JAM 11/30/83 12/5/83 12/9/83' 111.1 - 1 Seismic Design
- Computer input 102 JAM 1I/30/83 12/5/83 12/9/83 111.1 - 8 Seismic Design
- 103 JAM 11/30/83 12/5/83 12/9/83 III.1-1 Seismic Design
- Moment of inertio 104 JAM 11/30/83 12/5/83 12/9/83 Cole IILI-I Seismic Design
- Program CE-207 105 JAM ii/30/83 12/5/83 12/9/83 111.1 - 1 Seismic Design
- Soil Structure 106 JAM 11/30/83 12/5/83 12/9/83 Interaction t
107 JAM 1I/30/83 12/5/83 12/9/83 lit.l-l Seismic Design
- Stick Model Assumptions III.1-1 Seismic Destgri
- Stick Model Input 100 JAM iI/30/83 12/5/83 12/9/83 1.19-2 DG Control
- Fuel Lockout 109 LDB 12/1/83 12/6/83 12/14/83 1.24-2 DG Lood Capacity *Loed Tobulation i10 LOB 12/1/83 12/6/83 12/14/83 1.24-2 DG Load Copacity 'Undervottoge Il1 GES 12/2/83 12/6/83 12/14/83
h OCR, FIPOING REPORT, AFD FIPOING RESOLUTION REPORT TRAmlNG SYSTEM M10LAPO IPOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM 12/16/83 (continued)
Findi fopic Comments Resp. LTR Potential Open Confirmed Resolved Finding DCR No, eso ution Open item Item item item / Report Cservation Report f.30-2 DG Exhaust J12 GES 12/9/83 12/14/83 12/L4/83 111.7-I Conc / steel design 113 JAM 11/3/83 11/7/83 12/14/83 Il1.7-1 Conc / steel design 114 JAM 11/3/83 'sI/1/83 12/14/83 Ill.7-l Cone /steeldesign 115 JAM 11/10/83 11/10/83 12/14/83 111.7-1 Conc / steel design
!!6 JAM ll/10/83 II/10/83 12/14/83 111.6.I Foundations II7 JAM 10/31/83 II/10/83 12/I4/83 1Il.7-1 Conc / steel design 12/14/83 111.6-1 Foundations 118 JAM 10/31/83 II.4-1 Seismic Oval 119 JAM 10/5/83 II/14/83 12/14/83 11/14/83 12/14/83 11.4 1 Seismic Owl 120 JAM 10/26/83 11.4-1 Seismic Oval 121 JAM 10/26/83 II/14/83 12/14/83 11.4 1 Seismic Oval 122 JAM 10/26/83 11/14/83 12/l4/83
ATTACHMENT 3 CURRENT PERIOD COWIRMED AND RESOLVED ITEM REPORTS, FitOING REPORTS, Ato FitOING RESOLUTION REPORTS t
MIDLAfO ltOEPEtOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION FitolNG REPORT FILE NO. 3201-006 X DOC NO. 3201-008. F 043 CLASS: SAFETY NON-SAFETY REV. NO.
DATES REPORTED TO: PROECT TEAM /PROECT MGR. I2/2/83 PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE 19 /1/R2
~ '
SRT 12/12/83_ CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEMS (S) OR COMPONENT (S) INVOLVED:
AFW - Piping and Valves DESCRIPTION OF FINDING: At the 10/28/83 OCR meeting C-043 was discussed. We were ad-vised'that piping which was seismically analyzed, but not Q-listed, is subject to the controls specified in M-327 and that such piping is specified as " hanger critical" in M-480. Our review of M-480 for the line of interest (10"-2HBD-605) indicates that it is NOT designated hanger critical. See attached page from h-480.
SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDING:
This finding indicates the possibility that design information fcr "special" piping (i.e. non-Section lli piping subject to special requirements) may not be controlled adequately. This could lead to situations where installed piping does not in fact meet requirements established by the system engineer.
RECOMMENDATION:
Review the previously provided list of seismically-analyzed, non-Q piping against
( M-480 to determine if this is an isolated case.
COMMENTS BY SRT OF REQUIRED):
- REFERENCES ONCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
c l-SIGNATURE (S)
) FAD s ilAL JUB DKD FINDING REh6RT PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE SRT (IF REQUIRED)
ORIGINATOR (LTR) FOR PROECT TEAM
. 11/30/83 12/2/83 12/12/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE
PAGE 56D t DATE: 9/21/83 U
PSID DESIGN SERVICE-COW ITIONS C SC CC 6C IC M LAY R IDENTITY ------ RATING NORMAL MAXIMUM R EA LL GR NL 5 UP E SYS ND SH PSIG F PSIG F P510 F T IT N5 RT 55 C V U CLASS SEO LINE DESCRIPTION 25 90 35 135 -2 C N NR - C 10 2APA 439 3 35 135
, 2 WD 0605 UNIT-2 COND. STORAGE TK TO 2HBC-537
' *
- IDCN 21734" 83 500 54 301 83 500 -2 C H II - C 9 1
2AFD 437 1 2 20 0606 DUMP FRM 2HBD-80 TO CONDENSER MANIFOLO f20 135 ATM 110 ATM 135 -2 O N NR - D 15 2RCA 445 8 l 2 HBO 0607 DRAIN FRM STM PLNT SMPL PANEL 2C-130 D 9 O 140 1 180 -2 D N NR -
2CCA 437 2 50 200 2 HBO 0608 LP TURS BRG CASE OIL DRAIN 50 200 O 140 1 180 -2 D N NR - D 9 2CCA 437 2 2 HBO 0609 LP TURS BRG CASE DIL DPAIN en D 9 i 2 50 200 O 140 1 180 -2 D N -
2CCA 437 2 HBO 0610 LP TURB BRG CASE DIL DRAIN NR - D 9 2 50 200 0 140 1 180 -2 D N
! 2CCA 437
- 2 2D 0311 LP TURS BRG CASE DIL DRAIN A 9 105 338 70 316 105 338 -2 C H III -
I 2ADA 439 1 2 HBG 0612 DEAERATOR (2E-038) BYPASS A 9 105 338 70 316 105 338 -2 C H III -
2ADA 439 1 2 HSD 0613 DEAERATOR (2E-03A) BYPASS NR - D 10 2 180 ATM 140 2 180 -2 O N 2C8A 451 -
2 HBD 0614 DRN LN FRM VENT 10"-2HBD-228 NR 0 10 2 180 ATM 140 2 180 -2 D N -
I 2C8A 451 -
d 2 HBD 0615 FROM LOOP SEAL 2HSD-228 TO TURS L.O. SUMP D 9 1AFC 437 1 225 300 55 300 55 300 -2 D H III -
l 2 HSD 0616 FRM 8"-2EBO-36 TO DRN COLLECTIDN TANK D 9 1AFC 437 1 225 300 55 300 55 300 -2 D H III -
, 2 HBD 0617 FRM 10*-2GBD-4 TD DRN COLLECTION TANK D 9 f 225 300 55 300 55 300 -2 D H III -
(AFC 437 2 HBO 0618 FRM 8*-2GBD-20 TD DGN COLLECTION TANK D 9 225 300 55 300 55 300 -2 D H III -
1AFC 437 1 l
2 HBD 0619 FRM IO*-2E80-6 TD DRN COLLECTION TANK D 9 55 300 55 300 55 300 -2 D H III -
2AFC 437 1 j 2 HBO 0620 DRN FRM COLLECTION TANK D 9 55 470 35 300 35 300 -2 D H III -
i 2AFC 437 1 2 MBD 0621 FRM COLLECTION TANK TO HEADER NR - D 9 3 5 175 5 175 5 175 -2 D N l
2 HBO 0622 OTSG 2E-51A N2 PURGE TO R8 HVAC PURGE EXHAUST OKHA 439 D 9 i
5 175 5 175 -2 'D N NR -
i 3 5 175 2 HBD 0623 075G 2E-515 N2 PURGE TD R8 HVAC PURGE EXHAUST OKHA 439 NR D f5
] 8 ATM 120 ATm 77 ATM 120 -2 O N -
2RCA 445 ,
J 2 20 0624 WASTE DRN-STM SAMP PNL 2C-130 D N NR - A 10 15 135 -9 135 15 135 -2 2ADA 439 1 2 HBD 0625 25US-3901A DRAIN LINE -2 O N NR -- A 10 2ADA 439 1 15 135 -9 135 15 135 j 2 HBD 0626 25US-39018 DRAIN LINE D H IIIA -- D f6 125 108 95 95 100 108 -2 2EAD 419 -
2 H8D 0627 SERVICE WTR DRN FROM PUMP 2P-232A CLASS DRK TO EOUIPMENT DRAIN
--____.___.________..........___....__........_____...__._______..._________.._______ REVISION 16 _____...__
4 006 NO. 7220-001 1
v, l
- t
- m MIDLAfO ltOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION FitolNG REPORT
^
FILE NO. 3201-008 w .SS: SAFETY X NON-SAFETY DOC NO. 3201-006 F 052 i REV.NO. 1 DATES REPORTED TO: PROKCT TEAM /PROKCT MGR. I2/1/83 PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE 12/2/83 l SRT 12/4/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEMS (S), OR COMPONENT (S) INVOLVED:
Various vendor supplied components in the AFW system.
DESCRIPTION OF FROING:
Vendor documentation not available/not recorded as being received from the vendor although specified as a requirement as delineated in Confirmed Iterr No.
3201-008-C-052.
SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDING:
Refer to OCR 3201-008-C052 The significance of this finding is directly dependent upon whether the documenta-tion has simply been misplaced or never created. There exists a potential for a defect to exist in the process used to verify the completeness of vendor submittals when gauged against the total of specification and purchase order requirements.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based upon discussions during the 11/30/83 OCR Status Review Meeting, CPC advised that they have undertaken a program to collate quality verification and design documentation pertinent to a particular system / component into one file or file point. As an integral part of this program CPC is to review and verify the avallebility of important design documentation and the requirements which identify the need for the documentation:
- Defer further end product review pending selected completion of the CPC program.
- Determine & evaluate the process used to verify the completeness of vendor docu-mentation submittals (i.e. meralna of desian & ouality-related documentation rea's ).
COM,MENTS BY SRT OF REQUIRED):
REFEREW.ES ONCL RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
Various component specifications as delineated in OCR 3201-008-C-052 SIGNATURE (Sh DBT HAL JWB DKD FINDING REPORT PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE SRT (IF REQUIRED)
ORIGINATOR (LTR) FOR PROKCT TEAM 12/1/83 12/1/83 12/3/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDLAPO ltOEPEf0ENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VFRIFICATION FitOING REPORT FILE NO. 3201-008 CLASS: SAFETY X NON-SAFETY DOC NO. 3201-008. F. 053 REV. NO.
DATES REPORTED TO: PROJECT AM/ PROJECT MGR. I2/1/83 PRINCIPAL-IN-CHAFtGE 12/2/83 '
SRT 12/4/ 3 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEMS (S), OR COMPONENT (S) INVOLVED: i AFW System: components and commodities as enumerated in the description of concern, OCR 3201-008-C-053 1
DESCRIPTION OF FIPOING:
As a result of conducting the review of construction / installation documentation certain documentation necessary to verify the completeness and adequacy of an l Installation and installation inspection was either not availaole or an inconsis-tency was observed as documented in OCR 3201-008-C-053 MGNIFICANCE OF FINDING:
t ack of complete and consistent documentation necessary to verify the quality of installed components and commodities promotes questions as to 1) the quality of the
'nstallation and 2) the effectiveness of the processes which are used to verify the
,Jality of the installation.
l 1
RECOMMEf0ATION:
Since Phase I of the CCP is designed to address items similar to those noted in the Description of Concern (0CR 3201-008-C-053), the items enumerated in the OCR are provided as being indicative of the types of inconsistencies to be encountered as the CCP progresses through Phase I activities.
- Monitor and observe the QVP and CCP's approach in reconcilin~g and resolving tre inconsistencies noted in the OCR.
- Defer verification of the resolution to inconsistencies noted in OCR C-053 pending completion of CCP Phase I activities.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (INCL, RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
Applicable PQCI's and related documentation as defined in OCR 3201-008-C-053 SIGNATURE (S):
DBT HAL JWB r ,d, FINDING REPORT PROJECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE ~'RTS (IF REQUIRED)
ORIGINATOR (LTR) FOR PROJECT TEAM 12/1/83 12/1/83 12/3/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDLAPO ltOEPEtOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION FibolNG REPORT FILE NO. 3201-008 CLASS: SAFETY X
NON-SAFETY DOC NO. 3201-Org.F 054 REV.NO.
DATES REPORTED 704 PROECT TEAM /PROECT MGR. I2/1/83 PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE 17/2/81 SRT 12/4/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG. ,
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEMS (S). OR COMPONENT (E) INVOLVED Project Quality Control Instructions (PQCl's) to be used/used in the inspection of selected AFW system components.
DESCRIPTION OF FitOING:
Deficiencies / inconsistencies noted as a result of reviewing applicable PQCI's as enumerated in OCR 3201-008-C-054.
SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDING:
i incorrect, conflicting, outdated or redundant instructions contained within a PQCl may affect the consistent application of the instruction to all inspections - i.e.,
inspections already performed in addition to the re-inspections planned as an Integral part of the CCP Phase I activities.
RECOMMENDATION:
- Address and verify the resolution of inconsistencies recorded in OCR 3201-008-C-054.
- Where reinspections are not to be performed as part of CCP Phase I activities (e.g. for inaccessible items) review and verify the process with which the CCP will determine the adequacy of previous inspections when compa, red to current inspection requirements.
COMMENTS BY SRT OF REQUIREDh
)
REFERENCES ONCL. RELATED GCR ITEM REPORT NO.h As noted in the Description of Concern - OCR 3201-008-C-054.
SIGNATURE (5):
DBT HAL JWB DKD FINDING REPORT PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE SRT (IF REQUIRED)
ORIGINATOR (LTR) FOR PROECT TEAM 12/1/83 12/1/83 12/3/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDLAPO IPOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION FitolNG REPORT 1 FILE NO. 3201-000 CLASS: SAFETY X NON-SAFETY DOC NO. 3201-008F 055 REV.NO.
DATES REPORTED TO: PROECT 4AM/PROECT MGR. 'N'/b PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE 12/2/83 SRT 12/4/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEMS (S), OR COMPONENT (S) INVOLVED:
Site Welding Procedures (WP's) and Procedure Qualification Reports (PQR's)
DESCRIPTION OF FirOING:
Certain WP's and PQR's (see OCR 3201-008-C-055) were evaluated and found to possess inconsistencies and/or gaps in typically recorded data and information.
SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDING:
Lack of completeness in welding procedures and procedure qualification records is inconsistent with industry practices for specifying welding processes and qualifying welding procedures.
RECOMMENDATION:
- Discuss with cognizant Bechtel/CPC personnel and evaluate actions to be taken in addressing inconsistencies observed in welding procedures and procedure quali-fication reports as enumerated in OCR 3201-008-C-055
- Note and evaluate the disposition of the incensistencies delingated in OCR 3201-008-C-055 .
COMMENTS BY SRT OF REQUIREDh REFERENCES ONCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
As indicated in the Description of Concern - See OCR 3201-008-C-055 SIGNATURE (S):
DBT HAL JWB DKD FINDING REPORT PROXCT MANAGER PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE SRT (IF REGU! RED)
ORIGINATOR (LTR) FOR PROECT TEAM 12/1/83 12/1/83 12/3/83 17/19/82 DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDLAPO IPOEPEPOENT DESIGN Af0 CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION FitolNG REPORT FILE NO. 3201-008 CLASS: SAFETY X NON-SAFETY DOC NO. 3201-008 F 056 REV.NO.
DATES REPORTED TO: PROECT TEAM /PROECT MGR. I2/1/83 PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE I2/2/83 SRT 12/4/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEMS (S), OR COMPOtENT(S) INVOLVED:
Air Receiver 2T-93A AFW Pumps 2P005ASB DESCRIPTION OF FitOING:
- 1) ' Air receiver 2T-93A Carbon content tested and recorded to be in excess of maximum allowable of 0.03% for 1/2" pipe and nozzle.
SIGNIFICANCE OF FitOING:
Utilization of a material which possesses chemical and/or physical characteristics potentially not suitable for the intended application.
. RECOMMENDATION:
- For Finding #1, determine the potential for degraded component performance in light of using materials which possess less than specified chemical properties.
For Finding #2, verify the availability and review of material test reports for the pump shafts. .
COMMENTS BY SRT OF REQUIREDh REFERENCES ONCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.h Refer to OCR 3201-008-C-056.
'b SIGNATURE (5):
DBT HAL JWB nKn FINDING REPORT PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL-IN. CHARGE SRT (IF REGUIRED)
ORIGINATOR (LTR) FOR PROECT TEAM 12/1/83 12/1/83 12/3/83 12/12/83
? DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDLAto POEPEPOENT DESIGN AlO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COtFIRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT TYPE F REPORT: OPEN N MED NO. 3 i R-066 RESOLVED X _ ITEM REV.NO.
CATES REPORTED TO LTR _ _I I /30/83 sRT . PROECT TEAM /PROKCT MGR. 11/30/83 PRINCIPAL.MHARGF. 12 / 5 / 83_ CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOPENT(5) INVO4VED:
HEP $ filters in makeup air and recirculating portions of HVAC system and associated air handling units
. DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
Topics 1.5-3 System Alignment /Switchover and 1.7-3 System isolation / Interlocks DESCRIPTlON OF CONCERN:
After an accident involving an airborne radioactive release, the Control Room can be isolated and pressurized for three hours. The system alignment during '
subsequent phases of the event is not identified. Knowledge of the proper align-ment is needed to correctly analyze control room habitability.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
The dose for personnel in the Control Room will be different for various system alignments depending upon if air is supplied through the system makeup air handling units as opposed to the supply of outside air by infiltration as Control Room pressure drops. The calculated dose should be consistent with intended alignment for the system.
RECOMMENDATION OR RESOLUTION X :
Based on the response provided in the November 11, 1983 Bechtel letter to Consumers Power (BLC-18472) and clarification at the November 30, 1983 meeting, this OCR is resolved. The alignment of the system af ter 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> is at thediscretion of the operator, but the design basis for system includes the requirement for capability to realign the system for 200 cfm makeup air supply.
COMMENTS BY SRT (F REQUIRED):
REFERENCES ONCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
SIGNATURE (5):
DW DW HAL JB OCR ITEM REPORT LTR PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
ORIGINATOR FOR PROECT TEAM IN-CHARGE 11/3083 11/30/83 11/30/83 12/05/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE b .- - - - - - - - - - - - _ ,
MIDLAPO IPOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COtflRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT COFFIRMED x I C - 069 TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN .
RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
~
PROECT TEAM /PROKCT MGR. I2/l4/83 DATES REPORTED f0: LTR ll/18/83 SRT ..
PRINCIPAL-IN. CHARGE 12/14/g3, CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (S), OR COMPOPENT(S) INVOLVED:
'AFW Motor Driven Pump 2P-05-A DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
Seismic Equipment Qualification 11.4-1 DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
(1) It appears that shear stress was not included in the calc of the pump nozzles.
(2) The pump pedestal weld does not include consideration of shear stresses.
(3) The nozzle load combinations used in the pump analyses are unclear.
(4) Bases for criteria for allowable misalignment of the shaf t coupling (deflection and rotation) is not established.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Pump qualification analyses may not be conservative.
X OR RESOLUTION :
RECOMMENDATION Process per PQAP.
_ COMMENTS SY SRT (F REQUIRED):
REFERENCES ONCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
7220-M-14-124-3-Seismic Analysis-Pump ASME BSPV Code, Div. 1, Sect. 3 SIGNATURE (S):
JWR D. Onni J.M. H Al-SRT (IF REQUIRED)
LTR PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL-OCR ITEM REPORT FOR PROKCT TEAM IN-CHARGE ORIGINATOR 11/18/83 12/14/83 12/14/83 11/16/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDLAPO lbOEPEM)ENT DESIGN AfO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COtFIRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT FILE NO. 3201-008 X
TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN COPFIRMED DOC NO. 3201-008-C-071 RESOLVED 11/18/83 ITEM REV.NO.
PROJECT TEAM /PROKCT MGR. 11/1 R /R t DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 1?/18/83 SRT PRINCIPAL.IN. CHARGE 12/14/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG. '
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOPENT(S) INVOLVED:
AFW System - All DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
Topic' ll1.1 Seismic Design / Input to Equipment Check of Calculations and Evaluations DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
Calculation package DQ 59 1 (Q) " Finite Element Review for FSAR Load Combinations" for the Aux. Bldg. underpinning model analysis, references BSAP run file TIEN OBQ, input to the calculation. However, this file may have been superseded, by TIEN JJY or TIEN ORA files, in addition, file TIEN OBQ could not be located for review by TERA.
I WFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Srseded, or incorrect, information could affect design. Requirements of the Aux.
Jg. structure and revised information should be incorporated. Incorrect documenta-tion or failure to incorporate revised information could lead to deficiencies in the design product. The revision process for calculations may not be fully operative.
I X OR RESOLUTION :
RECOMMENDATION Review any other calculations which may have superseded 59 1 (e.g. 62.0'l) to determine whether current design of Aux. Bldg. is adequate and is based on most up-to-date references.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
s-REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
DQ-59 1 (Q) , DQ59.1 C (Q) , 0062.0C1 SIGNATURE (5):
HAL JWB JAM JAM PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL- SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT LTR FOR PROICT TEAM IN. CHARGE ORIGINATOR 11/18/83 11/18/83 12/14/83 12/14/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDLAto IbOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COPFIRMED Abo RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN CONFIRMED X O. 3 1 8-C 089 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO. 1 DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 11/29/83 SRT PROKCT TEAM /PROICT MGR. I1/29/83 PRINCIPAL.IN-CHARGE 11/29/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (S), OR COMPOPENT(S) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Feedwater System - Emergency Lighting DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (IF APPLICABLE):
11.12-1, Fire Protection DESCRIPTION OF CONCERft FSAR Section 9 5.3.2.2 states that the emergency lighting system provides adequate illumination levels of lighting at main points of control of shutdown equipment, and access routes to and from this equipment. However, the access area to the auxiliary shutdown panel room adjacent to line K, between column lines 8.1 and 8.6 at elevation 659' of the auxiliary building was not specified to contain an emergency lighting unit.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
The significance of this open item is that the lack of emergency lighting in the above access area could result in insufficient lighting for access from the control room to the auxiliary shutdown panel room. Additionally, this does not satisfy commitments in FSAR Section 9.5.3.2.2.
RECOMMENDATION X OR RESOLUTION :
Process per PQAP.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
SIGNATURE (S): s JR/HG .- jyt FAD q HAL JB PROICT MANAGER PRINCIPAL- SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM RhPORT LTR { FOR PROICT TEAM IN-CHARGE ORIGINATOR 11/29/83 11/29/83 11/29/83 11/29/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDLMO ltOEPEtOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION FitolNG REPORT FILE NO. 3201-000 CLASS: SAFETY X NON-SAFETY DOC NO. 3201-008.F-091 HEV.NO.
DATES REPORTED TO: PRO C T M/PROECT MGR,12/1/83__ PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE 12/2/83 SRT y2 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEMS (S), OR COMPONENT (S) INVOLVED:
Pipe Supports DESCRIPTION OF FitOING:
As part of the review of the pipe support re-inspection program, ICV reviewers noted that Lesson Plan #PQCl-P-2.30, Rev. 3 LP Rev. 5 omitted the Activity 3.4, instruc-tions for snubber assemblies. Refer to OCR 3201-008-C-091.
1 SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDING:
Lack of correct and appropriate training of QCE's in all aspects of components /
commodities to be inspected fosters less than consistent application of inspection requirements and raises questions as to the validity of the inspectiore resuits.
RECOMMENDATION:
- Verify that Activity 3.4 is included in Lesson Plan PQCl-P-2 30
- Determine whether Activity 3.4 was omitted from the training sessions and evaluate and determine the significance of not including Activity 3.4 in the Lesson Plan.
l l COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
l REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
Refer to OCR 3201-008-C-091.
SIGNATURE (S):
DBT -hat JWB DKD FINDING REPORT PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL-IN. CHARGE SRT (IF REQUIRED)
ORIGINATOR (LTR) FOR PROECT TEAM 12/1/83 12/1/83 12/3/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDLAPO POEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COPFIRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT X
TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN CONFIRMED NO. C . 093 EN I4M REV.NO. O DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 11/28/83 SRT PROKCT TE AM/PROKCT MGR. I1/28/83 PRINCIPAL.N-CHARGE 12Mj /83 CPC/DEJIGN ORG. L STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOtENT(S) INVOLVED:
Review of controlling specification for the installation of HVAC system components within the CR HVAC system DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
Construction / Installation Documentation Review, Topic IV.2-3c DESCRIPTlON OF CONCERN:
Project Specification 7220-M-151A, Rev. 15, Tech Spec for Seismic Class I HVAC Equip-ment and Ductwork Installation, was reviewed and compared to the requirements of ap- s pIlcable codes and standards. As a result of this review, the following inconsistencia are noted:
1)
Para. 14.8.3.c: No limits provided for convexity height or size of reinforcement contrary to the requirements of AWS DI.1-79, Structural Welding Code, paras.
3.6.1 & 3.6.2 (continued on attached she et)
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
in direct The specification of limits on the acceptability of welds which are not compliance with pertinent codes and standards may result in the acceptance of weldments which are not in compliance with applicable codes and standards and there-fore of questionable quality.
RECOMMENDATION X OR RESOLUTION :
- 1) Discuss with cognizant engineering personnel the inconsistencies noted herein to determine additional considerations which may have been applied at the time the specification was written. .
- 2) Based upon the results of the above activity, evaluate the ramifications of those inconsistencies which remain in conflict with applicable codes and standards and l
which were not previously considered nor addressed.
COMMENTS BY SRT (F REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (NCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
Specification 7220-M-151A, Rev. 15, Technical Specification for Seismic Class 1 HVAC Equipment & Ductwork Installation
.l AWS DI.1-79, Structural Welding Code: AWS D9.1-80, Spec. for Welding of Sheet Metal a SIGNATURE (S):
FEP DBT HAL mn _
PROKCT MANAGER PRINCIPAL. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT LTR FOR PROKCT TEAM N-CHARGE ORIGNATOR 11/28/83 I1/28/83 11/28/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
Attcchment to 3201-008-C-093 Description of Concern (Continued)
- 2) Para 14.8.3,e: undercut up to and including 1/32" is indicated gs acceptable contrary to the requirement of AWS D1.1-79, para. 3.6.4 which liinits to size of undercut to 0.010" for undercut which is transverse to the di 'ection of '
primary stress and 1/32" otherwise.
- 3) Para 14.8.3,o: wording permits indications of entraoped slag or rollover to be accepted contrary to AWS D1.1-79, para's 3 3.6 and 3 7.2.3 i
! 4) Para 14.8.4,e: provides no limits on convexity and reinforcement of welds l contrary to AWS D9.1-80, Specification for Welding of Sheet Metal, para. 5 3 which limits convexity.on fillet welds to 0.129", and para. 5.4 which limits reinforcement on Butt Welds to 0.129".
- 5) Para. 14.8.4 h: Permits porosity unilmited Inouantity up to 1/32" in size contrary to AWS D9.1-80, para. 5 5, which limits the size and quantity to a maximum of three (3) indications per inch larger than 0.25T and one (1) indication larger than 0.5T (T being thickness).
- 6) Para. 14.8.4,l: undercut of 1/32", and less than 50%T allowed for 1/6 length are contrary to AWS 09.1-80, para. 5.6, which specifies 0.15T maxi-mum for sheet metal and 0.25T maximum for support.
MIDLAPO NOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTFiUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COPFIRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN CONFIRMED X NO. 3 : C-094 RESOLVED ITEM REY. NO.
PROKCT TEAM /PROKCT Mg 11/28/63 DATES REPORTED TO: LTR II/28/83 SRT PRINCIPAL-N-CHARGE' 11/10/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
i STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOtENT(S) INVOLVED: [
Duct Sections and Duct Hangers and Supports within the CR HVAC System DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
Topic IV.2-3c Physical Verification of Components & Commodities in the CR HVAC System:
DESCRIPTlON OF CONCERN: ICV Based upon the results of the construction / installation documentation review, reviewers statused selected components and commodities within the CR HVAC system sample boundaries as " complete" or " incomplete" depending upon information recorded on available quality verification documentation. Of forty-two (42) items initially selected for review, seven (7) items were statused as complete and therefore eligi-ble for a physical verification review. Upon conducting a physical verification of the seven (7) items, the following inconsistencies were noted. (see attached page)
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
An inconsistency noted in the Description of Concern may be classified as either a defect or as an example of poor workmanship. The net effect is a situation where-l In the structural integrity of the weldment or flange connection is placed into question. ,
RECOMMENDATION X OR RESOLUTION :
- Correct and or reconcile the inconsistencies noted in the Description of Concern.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.E BPCo Dwg. 7220-M525, Sh. 3 Zack Dwgs V25 Sh's 3 6 3B
$lGNATURE(Sh HAL JWB FEP DBT LTR PROKCT MANAGER PRINCIPAL- SRT (if REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT IN-CHARGE ORIGNATOR FOR PROKCT TEAM 11/28/83 11/28/83 11/28/83 12/12/83 ___
DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
Attcchment to 3201-008-C-094
- 1) Attachment weld of vertical members of Hangers 71 to 70 (see Section C, Dwg. C-884) has a crater crack and lack of fusion in weld on
" west" face at the bottom of the weld. Also welds attaching top of "nortn"verticallegofhanger#71andtopof" south"vertiqqllegof hanger #70 toexistingbuildingsteelarepartiallyoverlappingeach other in the crater areas of fillet weld stops on both " east' and " west" faces.
- 2) Stiffener in mid-section of duct #50, " east" side of bottom capturing member, has a continuous weld for'the 40" width of the duct (opposite side is " stitch" welded). The 40" weld has distorted the bottom plaae of the duct and there are indications of lack of fusion along the 40" weldment.
/
^
The " north" vertical flange, first and fifth bolts from the bottom do not have washers; second, third, and fourth bolts from the bottom have bent washers preventing full contact of the washer; bottom flar.ge has two loose nuts.
" west" vertical flange has four loose nuts and the threaded end of
' bottom bolt is in contact with a vertical member of a support; top fl.ange has one loose nut.
O
MIDLAto ROEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COWIRMED AfO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT FILE fA 3201-008 TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN COFEBRMED X DOC NO, 3ri.cos.C.ogr 3 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 11/28/83 SRT PROKCT TEAM /PROKCT MGR.* Ii/28/83 PRINCIPAL.IN-CHARGETFIT/8T CPC/DEStGN ORG.
E STRUCTURE (S) SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOPENT(S) INVOLVED:
Review of qu,ality verification documentation associated with methods Used to provide traceability to Zack welds and welder qualifications.
DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
Construction / Installation Documentation Review, Topic IV.2-3c l
1 DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
During the process of conducting a review of CR HVAC welding documentation to verify utilizlation of correct welding procedures as performed by qualified welders, the fol-lowing was noted: there appears to be no means available for an inspector to verify that a welder was quallfled at the time he welded on a specific fabricated duct or support in the CR HVAC system. This statement is made based upon a review of the applicable records, a cursory review of processes in place at the time welding was performed and discussions with cognizant personnel. The following understandings are I noted: (see attached sheet)
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Since no in-process weld inspection is performed, there is no check on the contractor properly performing to his procedure and maintaining the welder qualification records.
According to AWS D1.1-79, and AWS D1.3-78, the welder's qualification remains in effect indefinitely unless the welder is not engaged in a given process of welding for which he is qualified, for a period exceeding six months. Since no dates are recorded, and the general WPS is the only weld callout, the proof of qualification maintenance required by AWS DI.1-79 and AWS DI.3-78 does not exist and cannot be generated.
RECOMMENDA TION X :
_ OR RESOLUTION
- Through discussions with cognizant MPQAD, engineering, and Zack personnel, determine how the program implemented to recover from the Zack decertification addresses this noted inconsistency.
- - Evaluate the results of these discussions and program review. Prepare a statement as to the adequacy of actions being undertaken to reconcile the noted inconsistency.
COMMENTS BY SRT (F REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (INCL, RELATED OCR 11CM REPORT NO.):
AWS DI.1-79 AWS DI.3-78 SIGNATURE (S):
FEP DBT HAL JWB LTR PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPOaT ORIGINATOR FOR PROECT TEAM N-CHARGE 11/28/83 11/28/83 11/28/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
1 y-Attachment to 3201-008-C-095 Description of Concern (Continued)
- 1. The Zack Foreman does not document the date or the piecemarks of the hanger or duct assembly that a particular welder has fabricated. It li possible for the requirements of three codes and many welding proceduresrto be employed. It is the responsibility of the Zack Foreman to assure that the welder is qualified at the time of welding for the particular joint to be welded.
- 2. 'The MPQAD inspector logs the welder and procedure used from information given to him by the Zack Foreman.
3 The inspection by MPQAD occurs af ter all welding is completed. There may be a considerable lag time between completion of welding and final inspection.
- 4. Prior to the latest system of three digit welding procedure specification (WPS) numbers, the WPS was general in nature and did not designate a unique
" code process-base material-Joint configuration" combination.
5 Quality verification records only Indicate which WPS was applied to the weldment, which welder (s) performed welding on the item and the date(s) of inspection. The records do not indicate the date(s) of welding nor the PQR's used. Based upon available and recorded data it is difficult to discern how an inspector can verify a welder's qualification since neither the date of welding nor the specific PQR is recorded.
MIDLMO IPOEPEbOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COWIRMED MO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT COPEIRMED X NO. 3 1 C.996 TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN _ p,gy, no, RESOLVED ITEM PROACT TEAM /PROKCT MGl3. I i /28 /83 DATES REPORTED TO: LTR _ lI/28 /33 SRT s; PRINCFAL.N. CHARGE 12/12/63 CPCliESIGN ORG. ' -
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (5) OR COMPOtENT(S) INVOLVE 0:
R2 view of quality verification documentacion associated with CR HVAC Duct Sections
Construction / Installation Documentation Review, Topic IV.2-3c DESCRIPTION OF CONCERr+.
In reviewing qual!!y verification documentation packages associated with selected components and commodities within the CR HVAC system the following inconsistencies ware noted:
Duct Section #50: a) Documentation of rework to correct deficiencies noted in NCR's 44 and A442 do not include identification of welder or weld procedure.
b) Documentation of rework to correct deficiencies noted in NCR 145 does not anclude adentitication of weId procedure. (see attached page}
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
The gaps and inconsistencies in recorded data preclude the ability to easily and quickly verify the quality of the installation by reviewing the applicable veri-fication documentation.
X OR RESOLUTION :
RECOMMEtOATION Reconcile the noted inconsistencies by seeking to determine the missing information and correcting the referenced dwg. applicable to Hanger #71, as described in the Description of Concern.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
l REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NCR's NO.h 44, 145 & A442 JPCO Dwg. 7220-M-525, Sh. 3 Zack Dwgs, V25 Sh. 3 & 3B SIGNATURE (Sh DBT HAL JWB
< FEP SRT (IF REQUIRED) j PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL.
OCR ITEM REPORT LTR IN-CHARGE FOR PROECT TEAM ORIGINATOR 11/28/83 11/28/83 12/12/81 11/28/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE I
Attachm:nt to 3201-008-C-096 Description of Concern (Continued)
Duct Section #159.18: Inspection documentation Indicates " seal wel.ds" of flange to flange welding but does not Indicate the weld procedure used.
L
+ Hanger #71: Zack dwg. V25 Sh. 3B shows hanger 71 as Detail 14 on BPCo Dwg.
C-874. Dwg. C-874 does not have a Detail 14. Actual installation matches Detail 14 of BPCo Dwg. C-878, as defined on BPCo Dwg. C-884.
Her.ger #209B: Inspection Report #188 indicates that Detail 1 on Drawing 7220-C-880 was used during the inspection. There is no Detail 1 on Dwg..C-880. -
i
<-++r,,---, - e, y- w y g-w -+ -
MIDLAPO ltOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COPFIRMED Ato RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT CONFIRMED X TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN . 20 C.097" RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
DATES REPORTED TO: LTR I2/09/83 SRT _
PROECT TEAM /PROECT MGl3 12/9/83 PRINCIPAL.IN. CHARGE IZ/9/O5 CPC/DESICN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (S), OR COMP 0eE71T(S) INVOLVED:
CR-HVAC OMO-6501A and B - Gr. 1 OMO-6502A and B - Gr. 11 DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TA6K (IF APPLICABLE):
Single Failure Topic 1.3-3 System Alignment /Switchover - Topic l.5-3 DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN: The CR-HVAC P&lD (M-465) shows that the control room makeup air dampers are arranged in series as OM0-6501A and -6502A in Train A and -6501B and
-6502B in Train B. This arrangement results in the in-series dampers being powered from Group I and Group ll power (plant single-line drawing E-1 and schematic diagram E-456). The group power can be lined up to either Unit I or Unit 2 and is controlled by Kirk-Key interlocks. The concern is that a single failure in Group I or 11 would prevent the availability of makeup air three hours after a hazardous chemical or high radiation event coincident with unavailability of Unit I standby power or an uninhabi-table atmosphere outside the control room.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Positive control room pressure may be lost three hours after initiation of the event which may result in the control room becoming uninhabitable. This would violate GDC 19.
X OR RESOLUTION :
RECOMMENDATION Process per PQAP.
{
l l
l COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
l l
! REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
Plant Single Line Drawing: E-1 (Q) CR-HVAC P&lD: M-465 CR-HVAC Schematic Diagram: E-456 (q) i l SIGNATURE (Sh l
l iDB L F. HAL JB LTR PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT l FOR PROECT TEAM IN-CHARGE l ORIGINATOR t 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/09/83 12/09/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
(
MIDLAto if0EPEFOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCT:ON VERIFICATION OPEN, COfflRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT N
X TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN CONFIRMED NO. 3 1.008.C.099 RESOLVED _ ITEM REV.NO.
DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/9/03 SRT PROECT TEAM /PROECT MGR. 12/9/83 PRINCIPAL.IN CHARGE 17/17/81 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOPENT(S) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Building, AFW System DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (IF APPLICABLE):
lil.1-1 Seismic Design / Input to Equipment
, DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN: Inconsistency in C0mputing n0dal displacements.
-See attacnec sneet
'UFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Analysis and Design may not be conservative 6
A RECOMMENDATION X OR RESOLUTION :
Review supporting documents Process per PQAP.
COMMENTS BY SRT OF REQUIRED):
REFERENCES ONCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
CALC. SQ 148G-(Q)
SIGNATURE (S):
JAM HAL JWB CPM LTR PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT ORIGINATOR FOR PROICT TEAM IN-CHARGE
,3 12/09/83 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
Attachment to 3201-008-C-099
- 1. SQ 148 G-(Q) Section 10 computes the nodal vertical dispacements
- neglecting mass point (slab) rotation and including foundation rotation only. ' This is inconsistent with the way vertical response spectra are obtained in the building where the slab rotation is included.
- 2. - SQ 148 G-(Q) Section 12. The relative displacements between nodes 1-4-40 does not include torsion or rotation of the slabs.
e N'
nY a
m
.wg- g- g ,_y. .,~y .-_gn.. --, ,_ .,.,_, -- ., n,, .~. , , . . _ , - -- ,-e.. . . .
MIDLAPO ltOEPEf0ENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COPflRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT 32 TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN COPFIRMED 32 BB.100 OBSERVAT10N X RESOLVED ITEM REV. NO.
~
PROECT TEAM /PROECT MGR. 12/9/83 DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/9/83 SRT __
PRINCIPAL.IN-CHARGE 12/12/8'4 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOPENT(5) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Building, AFW System DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (IF APPLICABLE):
111.1-1 Seismic Design /lr.put to Equipment DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
See attached sheet.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Analysis and Design may not be adequately documented.
OR RESOLUTION X :
RECOMMENDATION Resolve as observation and process per PQAP.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
f REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
CALC packages SQ 148G-(Q); SQ 148H-(Q); DWG C-20 5 i SIGNATURE (5):
JAM HAL JWB
! CPM LTR PROICT MANAGER PRINCIPAL. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT IN-CHARGE ORIGINATOR FOR PROICT TEAM 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE -
i
Attachment to 3201-008-e-100
- 1. SQ 148G-(Q), page 3.11, refers to next page for comparison of the modes 16 to 73 between CE 207 and CE 800. The next page does not present the comparison.
- 2. In pockage 50148G-(O), section 10, the reference to domping as 0.005 in l
. the displacement calculations is neaningless. f
- 3. SQ I48G-(0),1. ,te > ' .0, old analysis reference is lef t blank.
- 4. Labeling of plots in package SQ 148H-(G), section 6.0, is . misleading:
x due to z quake SRSS of xyz direction
- 5. Program SPECTRA-SRSS (project developed)
I o Displacement and velocity unit are labeled "G."
o Title label misleading (see 4).
- 6. SQ 148H-(Q), page 4.15, the frequency variation due to mass variation is inverted; it should read 4.79% decrease,5.14 % increase.
- 7. 50148G-(Q), page 3.0, reference to Design Response Spectro calc SG 141-(Q) (Rev.0) is incorrect. Should ne SQ 194-(Q) (Rev. 1).
- 8. Reference I/C221 in DWG C-205 and C-206 is incorrect; it applies to DWG C-202.
- 9. Users Manual of BSAP-DYNAM (CE 207) Rev.0:
Pg. 4-4: Reference to Appendix A is incorrect.
Pg. B-2 and following: The values given in Table B-3 are not the ones used in the computer run Pg. B-31.
's
- s
$s
'T i,. .
MIDLAfO ltOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COfflRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN CONFIRMED X O. 3 1008-C -101 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
DAYES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/9/83 SRT_ PROKCT TEAM /PROKCT MGR. 12/9/83 PRINCIPAL-N-CHARGE I2/12/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOtENT(S) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Building, AFW System IDCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (IF APPLICABLE):
111.1-1 Seismic Design / input to equipment DESCRIPTION OF CONCER!4 No cortpat ibil i ty study between stick and finite element model could be found although it is mentioned in CALC. DQ-38(Q), page C-1 SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
The two models may not be compatible in terms of equilibrium and deflection.
X OR RESOLUTION :
F.ECOMMENDATION Determine whether comparison has been made. If so review study, if not assess impact on model behavior. Process per PQAP. .
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
l REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
DQ-38(Q)
SIGNATURE (Sh ,
JAM HAL JWB CPM LTR PROJECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL- SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT ORIGINATOR FOR PROKCT TEAM IN. CHARGE 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
. _ ~ -
MIDLAPO INDEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COtFIRMED AtO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT FILE NO. 3201-008 CONFIRMED X TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN DOC NO. 3201-008. C 102 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/9/83 SRT PROJECT TEAM / PROJECT MGR.12/9/83 PRINCIPAL.IN-CHARGET2 /12 /83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (S), OR COMPOffNT(S) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Building, AFW System IDCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (lF APPLICABLE):
111.1-1 Seismic Design / Input to Equipment DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
Inconsistencies between values presented in calculation package SQ 1488-(Q) and values used in computer input. See attached sheet.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Analysis and design may not be conservative RECOMMENDATION X OR RESOLUTION :
Review significance and root cause of error. Process per P0AP.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (INCL. REL ATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
CALC. SQ-148 -(Q)
SIGNATURE (S):
CPM JAM HAL JWB LTR PROJECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL- SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT ORIGINATOR FOR PROJECT TEAM IN. CHARGE 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
Attachment to 320l-008-c-102 Inconsistencies between calculation package and computer input:
- 1. Node 123 has y coordinate -53.5 in calculation and -49.0 in compttfer run.
- 2. Beam section 5 hos shear oreo 1636 ft 2 ni calculation and 1638 ft2n i computer run.
- 3. Beam section 59 has A = Ax=Ay = 64 ft 2 n i calculation and 40 ft2n i ;
computer run.
+ 99
- 4. Beam 116, section 46 ly is 0.1 f't4in calculation and 694 ft4 in computer run. -
- 5. Plate element 72 of EPA hos 3.5 ft thickness in calculation and 21.0 in computer run.
- 6. Response spectrum curve 3 (domping = .01), the .330 Hz omplitude is entered as 10.304 ft/sec2i nstead of I.0143 ft/sec2 (velocity and displace-ments also incorrect) - 50 148G-Cl5, and Cl2. Error due to a zero
' - entered as o letter 0, k
MIDLAfO IlOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COtflRMED Ato RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT CONFIRMED X N. -008- C.103 TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/9/83 SRT PROECT TEAM /PROKCT MGR. 12/9/83 PRINCIPAL.IN. CHARGE 12/13/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (S), OR COMPOffNT(S) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Building, AFW System IDCV. PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (IF APPLICABLE):
111.1-1 Seismic Design / Input to Equipment DESCRIPTlON OF CONCERN:
Use of approximate equations beyond theff range of application. See attached sheet.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Analysis and design may not be conservative.
l RECOMMENDATION X OR RESOLUTION :
Review signficance of error. Process per PQAP.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
1 REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
CALC. SQ 148D-(Q))
SIGNAT@E(S):
JAM HAL JWB CPM OCR ITEM REPORT LTR PROECT MANAGER PRINCPAL. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
ORIGINATOR FOR PROECT TEAM IN-CHARGE 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/13/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
Attachment to 3201-008-C-103 1.' The approximate equation:
J =l - Y h xx xx where J = mass moment of inertia
.I x
= area moment of inertia 7 = density of walls h = height of walls for given lumped mass point used to compute local mass moment of inertia for floors is not applicable to single walls such as the underpinning and the electrical penetration area (EPA). (SQ 148D-(Q), page 1213)
- 2. The approximate equation:
J =J +J zz xx yy where J = mass moment of inertia xx, yy, zz = respective axis is not applicable to single walls such as the underpinning or EPA (SQ 148D-(Q), page 1311) l
MIDLMO ltOEPEFOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COtflRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN CONFIPMED X O. 3 l-008- C.104 RESOLVED 11EM REV.NO.
SRT PROXCT TEAM /PROECT MGR. I2/9/83 DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/9/83 -
PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE 12/12/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (5), OR COMkONENT(S) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Building, AFW System DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (IF APPLICABLE):
ll1.1-1 Seismic Design / Input to Equipment DESCRIPTlON OF CONCERN:
See a
Inconsistencies and errors in mass moment of inertia calculations.
attached sheets.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Analysis and design may not be conservative or adequately documented.
X OR RESOLUTION :
RECOMMENDATION Review significance of error. Review CALC. SQ 148K-(Q) provided by Bechtel 12/1/83 after some of these concerns surfaced in 10/27/83 meeting with Bechtel.
Process per PQAP. .
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
See attached sheets.
'I.
SIGNATURE (5):
h +- CPM JAM HAL JWB LTR PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL- SRT (IF PIOUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT ORIGINATOR FOR PROXCT TEAM IN-CHARGE 12/9/83 12/9/8J,_ 12/9/83 12/1233 DAfl DATL DAIE DATE DATE 5
ATTACHMENT TO 3201-008-C-104
- 1. The mass of the MA* base slab (el.568) is considered twice: the first time as a 6.0' slab excluding the projection of the external shear wall, then a second time as a 5.0' slab. Both are added. (SQ-148D-(Q), pa.ge 958 and SQ j 148D-(Q), page 1199).
1
- 2. 2.0' are missing (between elevation 562.0' and 564.0') from the CT l underpinning wall mass calculation (SQ 148D-(Q), page 1199).
- 3. The calculations related to the EPA underpinning refer to the superseded configuration of the underpinning wall.
- 4. Mass moment of inertia of building about base is done in two steps:
(1) for the MA + RR + CT taken about the center of rocking (x = 99.91',
y=0.04'),
(2) for the EPA with respect to point (x = 211.23', y = 89.95') but no documented basis for that point could be found.
The mass moment of inertia is then taken with respect of the _ center of torsion of MA + RR + CT (no wings included)(x = 107.75',y=2.35') by use of the formula l' = I +g mr . 2This equation is approximate because the center of rocking does not coincide with the projection of the center of gravity ofthebuilding(nevercomputed). More importantly, the x coordinate of all the above points is off by 28.25'. Ref.(SQ 148D-(Q)).
- MA = Main Auxiliary Building CT = Control Tower RR = Railroad Bay EPA = Electrical Penetration Area (Wings) l
Attachment to 3201-008-C-104
- 5. The mass moment of inertia for the foundation node (239) is computed separately for MA, CT, and EPA (RR ignored) at the center of gravity of their respective slabs or underpinnings (el.565'), '
x = 71.47' x = 172.31' x = 181.25' y = 0.04' y = 0.06' y= 91.25' respectively.
. These are then combined at the center of torsion of MA and CT (EPA excluded), although the contribution of both EPA is included by simple 2
addition (no mr term?). The x coordinate of the center of torsion (x =
107.75', y = 2.35') is off by 28.25'. In the computer model, these quantities are applied to node 239 (x = 81.64', y = -2.31'), described as the center of gravity of effective rocking area. (SQ 148 D-(Q)).
- 6. The 25% live load is not included for the EPA wings (SQ 148 D-(Q)).
- 7. In the EPA the slab weights are not consistent between mass moment l
calculation and stick packages, (SQ 148 D-(Q)) for example:
l Elevation 628.5' f p 1030: A = 1016.4 f t2 , w = 418.0kincluding 25% LL p 1181: A = 1786 ft 2, w = 624 kexcluding 25% LL Elevation 659.0' p 1086: w = 593.3k including 25% LL p 1186: w = 749.11k excluding 25% LL
- 8. (SQ 148 D-Q)(p.1080) In the calculation for the center of gravity for the equipment at EL.659', 1243000 lb., the sign of the X-coordinate (which is the Y-coordinate of the Fig. on p.1057) appears to be in error. The center of gravity of equipment is incorrectly calculated as the mirror image, of the N-S centerline, instead of the actual center of gravity.
MIDLAto itOEPEFOENT DESIGN Ato CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COPFIRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT CONFIRMED X TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN NO. 3 1-008 C .105 RESOLVED ITEM REV. NO.
PROXCT TF.AM/PROECT MGR. 12/9/83 DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/9/83 SRT -
PRINCIPAL.IN-CHARGE 12/I2/63 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOffNT(5) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Building, AFW System IDCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (IF APPLICABLE):
111.1-1 Seismic Design / Input to Equipment DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
Use of Program CE 207Jn situation where it may not be applicable. See attached cheet.
4GNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
.ialysis and design may not be conservative.
i X :
. RECOMMENDATION OR RESOLUTION Process per PQAP.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
i REFERENCES (INCL. REL ATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
SQ 148F-(Q)
SIGNATURE (5):
. CPM JAM HAL JWB LTR PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT N!GINATOR FOR PROXCT TEAM IN-CHARGE 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
Attachment to 3201-008-C-105
- 1. Program CE 207 uses a procedure developed by Tsal which is applicable for w /w; > 2. (Soil-structure Interaction D'uring Earthquakes, Bechtel Corporation
~
May 1, 1972). For the auxiliary building w /w, < 2/ Justification has not been provided for using program when w /w; < 2 (see equation 4.1, page 4-2) where w = rigid structure translation frequency w, = fundamental frequency of the fixed base structure.
- 2. The Tsai procedure was developed and justified for simple structures. No justification was found for application to a complex structure such as aux. bldg.
Justification for determining that the procedure provides reliable results when applied to a structure of such variable stiffness and geometry as the auxiliary building.
e*
W*
t
MIDLAfO ltOEPEtOENT DESIGN Af0 CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COfflRMED Af0 RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT FILE NO. 3201-008 CONFIRMED X TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN DOC NO. 320100s.t .106 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
DATES REPORTED TO: LTR_ 12/9/83 SRT PROECT TEAM /PROXCT MGR. 12/9/83 PRINCIPAL.lN-CHARGE 12/12/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (S) OR COMPOtENT(S) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Building, AFW System IDCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (IF APPLICABLE):
111.1-1 Seismic Design / input to Equipment DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
Input and assumptions in the soil-structure analysis. See attached sheets SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Soll structure analysis may not be conservative or may not implement committed criteria .
I l
RECOMMENDATION X OR RESOLUTION :
Process per PQAP.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
SQ 148F-(Q)
SIGNATURE (5):
HAL JWB CPM JAM OCR ITEM REPORT LTR PROXCT MANAGER PRINCIPAL. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
ORIGINATOR FOR PROICT TEAM IN. CHARGE 12/3/83 12/ 983 12/983 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
Attachment to 3201-008-C-106
- 1. Justification fo r not checking the assumed soil strain of 4.5 x 10-3% after the analysis to determine that the input is conservatjve.
- 2. Justification for neglecting the soil layering effect and depth to bedrock.
3 Justification for selecting case 3 analysis over 1 and 2, when case 3 gives lower winc constants under the wings.
- 4. Justification for using equivalent circular foundation when actual dimensions have large length to width ratio.
5 Justification for selecting the frequency of the soil-structure system used to calculate the dimensionless frequency ratio a g (ag = wR/V,). (see calculation sheet 66 of Sq-148-F(Q)):
These frequencies weren't obtained according to the recommended expression (equation L-20) given in BC-TOP-4 Rev. 4, although Appendix P of this manual was used to evaluate the impedances of the embedded foundations. It is recognized that this particualr item may be of minor importance given that a greater uncertainty exists in the shear wave-velocity V, than in the frequency w.
- 6. Although the coefficients used to analyze embedment effects were considered frequency dependent (see the previous item. 5), the technique used to calculate the spring and damping values were not considered frequency dependent. This is related to a lack of consistency in the computation. Revision 3 of BC-TOP-4 was used for the case without embedment (frequency independent parameters),
while revision 4 was used for the case with embedment (frequency dependent parameters.)
e N
- s s
--n- - - , - -- , ,,. - , ,-, . .
MIDLAPO llOEPEFOENT DESIGN AbD CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN. COtflRMED AbD RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT CONFIRMED X TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN D NO. Ol 008. C.107 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/9/83 SRT PROJECT TEAM / PROJECT MGR.
I 2 /9/8.3_
PRINCIPAL-IN. CHARGE 17 /1 ? /83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOtENT(S) INVOLVED: ,
Auxiliary Building, AFW System IDCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (IF APPLICABLE):
111.1-1 Seismic Design / Input to Equipment DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
Stick model assumutions.
- 1. Sticks are locaced at the center of shear areas rather than the shear center (SQ 148 C-(Q)).
- 2. Sticks modeling the electrical penetration area are located uniformlV at the coordinates of the 614.0' elevation even though some are off from that position by 5.0' at other elevations.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Analysis and design may not be conservative RECOMMENDATION X OR RESOLUTION :
Process per PQAP.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
50 14BC-(Q)
SIGNATUFtE(5):
CPM JAM HAL JWB LTR PROJECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL- SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT ORIGINATOR FOR PROJECT TEAM IN-CHARGE 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDLAto itOEPEFOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COfflRMED AfC RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT FILE NO. 3201-008 TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN CONFlRMED X DOC NO. 3201-006.C 108 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/9/83 SRT PROECT TEAM /PROECT MGR.12/9/83 PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE _ 12/12/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (S), OR COVPOtENT(S) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Building, AFW System IDCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (IF APPLICABLE):
111.1-1 Seismic Design / Input to Equipment DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
Stick Model input See attached sheets.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Analysis and design may not be conservative RECOMMENDATION X OR RESOLUTION :
Process per PQAP.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
50 148 C-(Q)
SIGNATURE (S):
JAM HAL JWB CPM LTR PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL- SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT IN-CHARGE ORIGINATOR FOR PROECT TEAM 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/9/83 12/12/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
~
ATTACHMENT TO 3201-008-C-108
- 1. South wall of control tower is disregarded in shear between el. 634.5' and 685.0' because slabs are not connected to that wall. This appears unwarranted. -
- 2. Walls 8, 9, and 10 from elevation 614.0' to 634.0' are considered to have a
,50% shear area because walls do not touch ceiling. The basis for this reduction has not been provided. Bending and torsional properties of the stick are unmodified for the shorter walls. (Ref. SQ 148-C-7(Q)).
. . , 3. From elevation 634.0' to 659.0' the MA* is considered as 2 sticks, then their properties are averaged. This does not reflect the torsional independecce of the two elements. (Ref. SQ 148-C-7(Q)).
- . Walls 38 and 39 at elevation 634.5' and walls 42 and 44 at elevation 646' (pool) do not appear as being shear resisting elements. (Ref.SQ-148-C-5(Q) l ' p. 683 & 692.)
- 5. SQ 148 D-(Q) page 1081 elevation 659.0' o There is opening in slab over RR bay. Slab 2 should be only partially included.
. o To be consistent with rest of calculation, slab 14 should be divided between M.A. and C.T. Same comment for slab 9 at el.646.0'.
- 6. When averaging stick properties from elevation 568.0'-574.0' and 574.0-584.0', no height weighting is introduced.
- 7. Justification for using the expression-3 6t/ where 3 t = wall thickness b = wall length to compute wings torsional stiffness rather than using bending and shear contribution as for the rest of the building. (Ref. SQ 148-C-9(Q)).
- MA = Main Auxiliary Building
ATTACHMENT TO 3201-008-C-108
- 8. Justification for assigning the 1/3 of torsional stiffness to each wing stick.
- 9. In the shear area special study, the wall counting is biased toward the fixed-fixed type, for example:
Reported Correct page 930 13 walls 11 walls 3 fixed-free 5 fixed-free 10 fixed-fixed 5 fixed-fixed 0 free-free 1 free-free page 931 13 walls 11 walls 2 fixed-free 2 fixed-free 11 fixed-fixed 9 fixed-fixed (Ref. SQ-148-C(Q))
- 10. Justification for not inputting in the computer model the mass movement of inertia for masses other than the foundation.
g%
w-
.Y
)
MIDLAPO llOEPEf0ENT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COtFIRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN COPFIRMED X Nl NO C.109 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
PRINCIPAL.IN. CHARGE 12/14/63 STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOtENT(5) INVOLVED:
Standby electric power - Diesei generator (DG)
DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
Topic 1.19-2: DG Control Systems Task 190 DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
Contrary to IEEE 387-1977, Section 5.6.2.2, an ESFAS diesel generator start signal will not override the 6o second coastdown interlock.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
If a DG start signal initiated during the 60 second coastdown period, the air start system would initiate and roll the machine. However, the coastdown interlock would prevent fuel flow. During this period, if the air start accumulators deplete to l
150 psig another interlock would defeat all auto starts.
RECOMMENDATION X OR RESOLUTION :
Process per PQAP.
f COMMENTS BY SRT (F REQUIREDh REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
FSAR 8.1.4.3; J-879, SH-l REV 0, SH-2 REV 0; NRC IE Notice 83-17 SIGNATURE (5):
HAL JWB GR JS PROICT MANAGER PRINCIPAL- SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT LTR FOR PROICT TEAM IN-CHARGE ORIGINATOR 12/06/83 12/08/83 12/14/83 12/14/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDLMO DOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION DPEN, COfflRMED MO REL9X.VED (OCR) ITEM REPORT COfflRMED X NO. 3201-00 C-110 TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN_ _
RESOLVED _ ITEM REV.NO.
PROKCT TEAM /PROKCT MGR. 12/14/83 DATES REPORTED IO: LTR 12/06/83 $RT PRINCIPAL.IN-CHARGE 12/14/63 CPC/ DESIGN ORG. '
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (S), OR COMPOtENT(S) INVOLVED:
Standby electric power - Diesel Generator DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (IF APPLICABLE):
Topic 1.24-2: DG Load Capacity Task 186 DESCRIPTlON OF CONCERN:
An independent calcualtion was made for the Unit 2, Load Group 11, Diesel generator loads and compared with Bechtel calculations QPE-1, REV 1. Although the calculated loads agreed within 2 percent, the load constituents differed significantly (see attachment 1).
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
(1) QPE-1, REV 1, may be invalid as a basis for future load changes.
(2) The intial load step is greater than that specified in the diesel generator material requisition, 7220-M-18(Q), REV. 9, Appendix B.
X OR RESOLUTION :
RECOMMENDATION _
Process per PQAP.
)
1 COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIREDh REFERENCES (INCL RELATED OCR ITEM REFORT NO.):
QPE-1, Rev 1 1
SIGNATURE (5):
7 hat JB GR LB PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT LTR FOR PROICT TEAM IN. CHARGE ORIGINATOR 12/06/83 12/14/83 12/14/83 12/06/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
Attachment I to OCR-C-l10 Sample Potential Load Discrepancies I. OPE-l includes two RCS Makeup pumps (2P-588&C), however only one con be running at a time (ref. J-232, Sht.1, Rev. 5). This is a discrepancy of 900 hp. -
- 2. OPE-l appears to have utilized kVA instead of kW for:
Bus 2B24 2VM-05B Switchgear Room Unit Cooler Bus 2B24 2VM-50B DHRS Room Unit Cooler Bus 2B24 2VM-52B CCW Room Unit Cooler Bus 2B24 2VM-55B ESF Room Unit Cooler
- 3. Examples of items not included in GPE-l are:
Bus 2B24 2VE-54B Hydrogen Recombiner Bus 2B24 2VM-5lC Makeup Pump Room Unit Cooler Bus 0B46 OVE-04B Fuel Handling Electric Heating Coil Bus 2B24 2P-129C MVP Lube Oil Pump Bus 2B56 2VM-121B Aux. Building Unit Cooler i Bus 2880 -
Pressurizer Heater
- 4. OPE-l assumes no load on transformer OX95 (roted at 25 kVA).
- 5. OPE-l assumes 15kW for Bottery Charger 2D25, instead of 75 kVA.
- 6. Service water booster pump 2P-232B ossumed at 50kW, yet full load amps are 96 (*60kW).
l t
y .,,. - .-.-, ,.. - ...,.. ,.- . . , ,-+.- , , , - - , - - - - - , . , .- , - - - - - . ,, ,,v._--- .w--- , - - - -
MIDLMO N)EPEPOENT DESIGN MO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COfflRMED MO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT FILE NO. 3201-008 COPFIRMED X TYPE OF REPCRT: OPEN DOC NO. 3201-008.C .111 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
SRT PROECT TEAM /PROECT MGR. 12/14/83 '
DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/06/83 PRINCIPAL-IN. CHARGE 1Z/14/63 _ CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOtENT(5) INVOLVED:
SEP System - Class IE battery charger DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
Topic 1.24-2, Electrical Load Capacity - DC f DESCRIPTlON OF CONCERN:
The following apparently inconsistent statements are made in the FSAR relative to battery charger capability:
(1) Can recharge battery while carrying largest combined demand of the various steady-state and tran: lent loads irrespective of the status of the plant.
(2) Capable of carry!ng the respective normal steady-state and post-accident 125VDC loa ds.
(3) Can recharge battery while supplying the maximum demand of the steady-state loads.
Therefore the criteria and commitments for the battery chargers are unclear and con-fIIctIng SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
The suitability of chargers depends on defined load requirements. If the criteria which the battery chargers have to meet are unclear or conflicting, then the equip-ment may not satisfy its intended function.
X OR RESOLUTION :
RECOMMENDATION l
Process per PQAP.
l f COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.h FSAR Appendix 3A, 8.1.4.3, 8.3.2.1.2, 8.3.2.2.1 (R.G. 1.6), 8.3 2.2.1 (IEEE 308),
R.G. 1.3 2; IEEE 308.
SIGNATURE (S):
GES GEs HAL JB PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL- SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT LTR FOR PROECT TEAM IN-CHARGE ORIGINATOR 12/06/83 1 ? /11 /R t 19 /1 L /A, 12/06/83 DATE ' DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDU@O NOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COfflRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT
~
X - 112 TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN CCTIRMED RESOLVED ITEM REV. NO.
sRT PROECT TEAM /PROKCT MGR. 12/14/83 DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/9/83 CDC/DEslGN ORG.
PRINCIPAL-IN. CHARGE 12/14/83 '
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (5) OR COMPOPENT(S) INVOLVED:
Emergency Diesel Generator Exhaust Lines.
DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
Topic: 1.30.2 - Emergency Diesel Generator Exhaust Back Pressure.
DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN: Bechtel Calculation lil for sizing emergency diesel generator exhaust lines is based on inputs / assumptions that are of concern. '
LCalc. assumes a 15' length between expansion joint and exhaust silencer.Ref.[2]
- < shows a 24.55' length. 5
.Ref[1], Sheet 5, shows a friction factor of 0.015 for Re=3.65x10 & reJative roughness
~
3 of .0008. Actual friction friction factor for these inputs is 0.0197L J, Calc uses an exhaust gas flow rate 20,100 SCFM per ref.[4] Ref.[5] shows a flow ite of 22,900 SCFM.
calc assumes exhaust gas is treated like air which does not consider the density of LM comDu m on Dy proouct gases.
.;NFICANCE OF CONCERN:
'the selected exhaust line sizes based on Bechtel calc [1], the exhaust back exceed the maximum allowable pressure recommended by the manufacturer
,cassure of 10" W.G. may[5].
I X OR RESOLUTION :
RECOMMENDATION Perform alternate calculation.
Process per PQAP.
I f
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
f l
l l
l REFERENCES (INCL RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
- 3. Moody Diagram 5.7220-M18-25-5 1.Bechtel Calc.No.FM-6320-1 l 2. Drawing 7220M-652 Rev.11 4.DeLaval Corres.#17 File M-16 l
SIGNATURE (5):
l GES HAL JB i NB SRT (IF REQUIRED)
LTR PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL-OCR ITEM REPORT IN. CHARGE CRIGNATOR FOR PROKCT TEAM 12/14/83 12/14/83 12/14/83 12/14/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE l
DATE l
MIDLAPO ROEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIF! CATION OPEN, COtFIRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN COfflRMED X l C.113 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
SRT PROECT TEAM /PROKCT MG 12/14/83 DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/6/83 PRINCIPAL-IN. CHARGE I? /14 /R3 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (S), OR COMPOffNT(S) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Building Slab at El. 659'-0".
DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
III.7-1 DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
Load inputs provided or referenced are not consistent with those used in design calculations. Examples are provided on attached sheet.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
The structural design may not be conservative or adequately documented.
X OR RESOLUTION :
RECOMMENDATION l
Process per PQAP COMMENTS SY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
l REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
Calc. Pkg. 66-9(Q), Rev.0
$4GNATURE(5):
J.M. H.A.L. J.W.B.
A.V.M. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
LTR PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL-OCR ITEM REPORT IN-CHARGE ORIGINATOR FOR PROKCT TEAM 12/6/83 12/14/83 12/14/83 12/6/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
' V ATTACHMENT TO 3201-008-C-113 Calc.Pkg.66-9(Q),Rev.0 OCR Items
- 1. Page 12: In calculation of M yy for load case 2, a span of 7'-0" was used..
. However, on page 3, the span is given as 7'-9".
- 2. Pages 16 & 17: When transferring forces from the schedule given on page 16 to page 17, the following errors were made:
Element 114; Sxx = 0, transferred as - 5.4K/Ft.
Element 116; Sxx = 0.2 transferred as - 1.4K/Ft.
Element 125; Sxy = 8.8 transferred as - 5.3K/Ft.
The total shear in element 125 should be 302.1K instead of the calculated 267.1K. The capability of the slab to withstand a shear of 302.1K should be evaluated, consistent with design and acceptance criteria.
- 3. Pages 23 & 24: Element 173; Sxx = 2.2 transferred as 1.4K/Ft.
~
- 4. Pages 33, 34, 35 & 36: .
Element 189; Sxx = 20.0 transferred as 19.4K/Ft Element 189; Sxy = 21.1 transferred as -5.0K/Ft.
Element 206; Sxx = 4.6 transferred as -13.1K/Ft.
Element 219; Sxx = 44.8 transferred as 15.0K/Ft.
~
MIDLAPO IPOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COtflRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN CtWIRMED X NO$ I C l14 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
PROKCT TEAM /PROKCT MGR. 12/14/83 DATES REPORTED TO: L1R 12/06/83 SRT_ ,,
PRINCIPAL-N-CHARGE 12/14/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOPENT(5) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Building Slabs at El. 614'-0"
' DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE): l 111.7-1 DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
Thickness of thd slab is used Instead of effective depth (d) when calculating moment capacity of slab.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Slab design may not be as conservative as expected.
RECOMMENDATION X OR RESOLUTION Process per PQAP COMMENTS BY SRT (F REQUIRED):
l l
REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
,.g ,
Calc. Pkg. 66-6(Q), Rev. 0 OCR-3201-008-0-ll3 4 SIGNATURE (5):
JWB A_V_M J.M. .
HAL PROKCT MANAGER PRINCIPAL- SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT LTR FOR PROKCT TEAM IN-CHARGE ORIGNATOR 12/06/83 _12/14/81 17/14/81 12/06/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDUuo IPOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COtFIRMED APO RESOLVFl)(OCR) ITEM REPORT TYPE OF REPORT: t#EN COPFIRMED X NO. C.115 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
PROKCT TEAM /PROKCT MGR. 12/14/83 DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/06/83 5RT PRINCIPAL-N-CHARCE 12 /14/Q3 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (S), OR COMPOPENT(S) INVOLVED:
Aux. Bldg. AFW-System, CR-HVAC System DCV PROGRAM AREA CR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
111 7-1 Concrete / Steel Design DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
In evaluations of slabs north of G column line, weights of heavy equipment were not included in the calculations in the way outlined in calc. 66-0(Q), Rev. O. The following equipment were not included: on slab @E1.614', calc. 66-6(Q) Rev.1, Equip-ments #1; 80000 lb; #6, 80000 lb.; #7; 34300 lb. (equipment numbers and weights as in calc. SQ-148D(Q)) . On slab @ el. 659', calc. 66-9(Q), Rev. 1, Equip. #1; 300000 lb;
- 2; 300,000 lb. were not included.
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Analysis may not be conservative.
Also, implementation of design criteria cannot be verified.
X OR RESOLUTK)N :
RECOMMEPOATION Process per PQAP.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
I REFERENCES (INC1 RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
Calc. No. 66-6(Q), Rev. 1 Calc. No. 66-9(Q), Rev. 1 SIGNATURE (S):
J.M HAL JWB
.I _ A PROKCT MANAGER PRINC!DAL- SRT (t? REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT LTR FOR PROKCT TEAM N.CWJtGE ORIGINATOR 12/06/83 12/06/83 12/14/81 17/14/81 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
MDLAPO POEPEM)ENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COPflRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN COWIRMED X NO. I C.116 I N VED ITEM REV.NO.
PROKCT TEAM /PROKCT MGR. 12/14/83 DATE5 REPORTED ['HINCIPAL.IN. a LTR 12/06/63 SRT CHARGE _12 /14 /8,3. CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEh /, OR COMPOtENT(S) INVOLVED:
Aux. Bldg. AFW System, CR-HVAC-System DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
111 7-1 Concrete / Steel Design, 111.6-1 foundations DESCRIPTlON OF CONCERN:
(1) None of the load combination of document C-501(q) Sections 9.5.1(a) and (b) and Sections 9.51(a) and (b) include P (effects of Jacking preload on structure) whereas the corresponding load combinations of the FSAR include P .
(2) FSAR load combinations 4, 5, 6 include T (effects of differential settlement) whereas the corresponding C-501(q) load combinations include T (thermal effects during normal operation). ~
settle-(3) None of the C-501(q) Ioad combinations include T (effect of dif ferential ment) _
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Design of the aux. b1dg. based on analysis of the load combinations as defined in C-501(q) may be less conservative than design based on FSAR load combinations.
X OR RESOLWlON :
RF.COMMEf.DATION Process per PqAP.
COMMENTS BY SRT (F REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
(1) Document 7220-C-501(q), Rev.12 (2) FSAR (3) BSAP-Post Computer Program SIGNATURE (S):
J.M 4AL JWB
/ JA PROKCT MANAGER PRINCIPAL. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT LTR FOR PROICT T~EAM IN-CHARGE ORIGINATOR 12/06/83 12/06/83 12/14/83 12/14/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
Attachment to 3201-008-C-116 DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
(4) BSAP-Post Program load conbination U=1.0 (D+L+E)+1.0P +1.0T. is not t
consistent or conservative w/ respect to FSAR load conbination 1.4 (D+L+E)+1.0P +
L l
'1.0T. -
[ 6.
e ,*
1
- .. l l
')
l 8 5%.
t
MDLAPO N)EPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COtFIRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT FILE NO. 3201 008 COtFIRMED X TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN DOC NO. 3201 008. C.117 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
j LTR1 2/6/83 SRT PROKCT TEAM / PROJECT MGR. 12/14/8'4 '
DATES REPORTED IO:
PRINCIPAL.H. CHARGE 12/14/d3 CPC/DE5fGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOPENT(S) INVOLVED:
Auxiliary Building, AFW & CR-HVAC Systems & Components DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLEh Topic 111.7-1 Concrete / Steel Design, Finite Element Analysis j DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
In the evaluation of stresses at slabs and walls based on the results from the finite element analysis, the procedures to calculate stresses and to qualify the calculated stresses as being acceptable may not be in conformance to the FSAR, C-501(q), or the codes referenced in the FSAR table 3.8-37 The following procedures are noted:
(1) a) For slabs South of G-column line no calculations could be ident*fied addressing evaluation of stresses due to out of plane bending.
b) For slabs North of G-line the flexibility effect of the steel framing under the SIGNFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Ir. appropriate procedures may have been used to show conformance of stresses in slabs and walls to the requirements of design criteria. Some slabs and walls may not meet the requirements of design criteria.
RECOMMENDATION X - OR RESOLUTION :
Process per PQAP.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIREDh REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.h SIGNATURE (Sh
.I M - Hat JWB J.A. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
LTR PROKCT MANAGER PRINCIPAL-OCR ITEM REPORT IN-CHARGE OklGNATOR FOR PROECT TE AM 10/13/83 10/13/83 12/14/83, 12/14/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN: (continusd) slabs has not been considered when evaluating the slabs for the combined action of in-plane and out-of-planc forces, in other words, bending stresses in the slab due to curvature in the (beam & slab) is ignored. (ref, 66.6(Q))
(2) Technical Justification for stress distribution procedure for overstressed elements has not been provided (refs DQ-59 1 (Q) , DQ-59.2 (Q)) . .
(3) Technical justification for reduction of stiffness in overstressed elements has not been provided (ref. Midland Plant Units 1 and 2, Response to NRC staff review concerns for underpinning of the Auxiliary building, June 3, 1982)
(4) T'echnical Justification for averaging,over thickness, stresses resulting f rom thermal gradients in slabs and walls has not been provided (ref. DQ-59 2) l l
l l
l l
f
MDLAPO ROEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COPFIRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT
. 01.m8 COPflRMED " ' B ,l8 TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN Observation _ X RESOLVED ffEM . NO.
- PRINCIPAL.N CHARGETW CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
$TRUCTURE(S), SYSTE.d(S) OR COMPOtENT(S) INVOLVE [
Auxiliary building, AFW system DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
III.6-1 Foundations DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN: REF: CALC.66/1(Q)
The ref. calc. assumed that maximum pressure acting on the foundation mat .
occurs when the aroundwater level (GWL) is at its lowest (595).
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
It is noted that the effect of groundwater level changes to the pressure on a buried plate is opposite to what is assumed in the calc., i.e. maximum pressure occurs when GWL is at its maximum. For a structure, the average pressure, regardless of GWL, is Weight / Area of mat. The increase in pressure as used in the calc. (although incorrectly justified) introduces conservatism to this calc. and therefore does not necessitate further consideratian for this calc.
OR RESOLUTION X :
RECOMMENDATION Process as an observation in accordance with PI-3201-005. .
COMMENTS SY SRT (F REQUIRED):
l REFERENCES (NCL RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.h
.L Calc. 66.l(Q)
SIGNATL#tE(Sh J.M. HAL JWB a A. PRINCIPAL- SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT LTR PROECT MANAGER FOR PROECT TEAM N. CHARGE ORIGNATOR 10/31/83 12/14/83 12/14/83
.10/31/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDLAPO IPOEPEf0ENT DESIGN AIO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COfflRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT 1YPE OF REPORT: OPEN CONFIRMF.D X , i[s.C.119 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
SRT PROICT TEAM /PROIC1 MGR. 12/14/83 DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 10/5/83 PRINCIPAL.IN. CHARGE 1414/M3 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOrtNT(5) INVOLVED:
6" Carbon Steel Gate Valve & operator 2 mo - 3277AV 2 mo - 3277A {
i DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK OF APPLICABLE):
DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
- 1. Several different actuator types were required, tested, analyzed or mounted on the valves, depending on the specified report (see references) reviewed.
- 2. Buckling of the yoke was mentioned, but was not evaluated. The stress may be higher than the critical stress for the calculated slenderness.
- 3. In evaluating the yoke as a bent type structure, the thrust component resulting from the moment was not accounted for.
(see attached sheet)
SIGNIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Existing actuators may not be qualified, if inconsistent with those described in the various reports. The analysis may not be conservative, especially taking into account the thrust load resulting from the moment.
X OR RESOLUTION :
RECOMMENDATION Process per PQAP.
COMMENTS BY SRT OF REQUIRED):
REFERENCES ONCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
7220-M117-80-2-Test Report-Actuator 7220-M117-101-3-Seismic Analysis - Valves 7220-M221-Technical Specification-Valves 7220-M117-101-3-Review by Bechtel 7220-M117-AC-Bechtel comments SIGNATURE (5):
HAL JWB D.Seaal JAM PROICT MANAGtR PRINCIPAL- sRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR llEM REPORT LTR FOR PRO.lLCT TEAM IN-CHARGE ORIGINATOR 12/6/83 12/6/83 12/14/83 12/14/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
ATTACHMENT TO 3201-008-C-119 Description of Concern (continued):
- 4. The valve was assumed supported free at the welds. However, the actual support conditions could lead to different loads and moment distribution in the valve.
- 5. J.ustification for applying seismic loading in two directions (vert & horiz) and not in three.
- 6. Documentation was not provided showing combination of operating and seismic
, loads and comparison to acceptance criteria.
(
i i
MIDLA>D ltOEPEM)ENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COtFIRMED Ato RESOLVED (OCFV ITEM REPORT TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN CONFIRMED X NO. l- 8. C.120 RESOLVED _ ITEM REV.NO.
$RT PROECT TEAM /PROECT MGR. 12/14/83 DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/6/83 PRINCIPAL.IN. CHARGE ' 12/14/83 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOtENT(S) INVOLVED:
10 LP Horizontal Climate Changers - 2VM-54A DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (IF APPLICABLE):
Seismic equipment qualification 11.4-1 DESCRIPTlON OF CONCE*tN:
- 1) Not all the loads and load combinations were considered in the analysis; operating loads such as motor torque, belt pull, nozzle loads were not combined with seismic load. Also, bending in the coil anchor bolts was neglected.
') No criteria or specs were evident addressing allowable deflections for operability.
NIFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Overstressing may occur, possibly in the nozzles. Also, the dynamic response of the equipment may be different.
- 2) Operability is not demonstrated.
RECOMMENDATION X OR RESOLUTION :
Process per PQAP i COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
r#
REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
j , 7220-M-149-74-4 SIGNATURE (5):
D.S. J.M. H.A.L. J.W.B.
PROICT MANAGER PRINCIPAL- SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT LTR FCR PROICT TEAM IN-CHARGE ORIGINATOR 12/6/83 12/6/83 12/14/83 12/14/82 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
MIDLAPO ltOEPEM)ENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COtFIRMED APO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT FILE NO. 3201-008 COPFIRMED X TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN DOC NO. 3201-008.C-121 RESOLVED ITEM REV.NO.
PROECT TEAM /PROACT MGR.17 /16 /Rt DATES REPORTED TO: LTR 12/06/83 SRT .
PRINCIPAL-N-CHARGE 1 ? /16 / A t CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (5), SYSTEM (5), OR COMPOtENT(S) INVOLVED:
10 LP Horizontal Climate Changers - 2VM-54A DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLEh Seismic Equipment Qualification l1.4-1 DESCRIPTBON OF CONCERN:
(1) Specs allow analysis without calculations of natural f requencies using max.
acceleration value of spectra. Standard review plan 3.7.2 requires 1.5 times max.
acceleration.
(2) Differences exist between accelerations given for the rigid category and the ZPA's appearing in the respective spectra.
SIGNFICANCE OF CONCERN-Analysis may not be conservative.
Certain accelerations used in the analyses may not be conservative.
1 l
l l
l X OR RESOLUTION :
RECOMMENDATION Process per PQAP.
COMMENTS BY SRT (IF REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.h 7220-G-7-Specs for earthquake design IEEE - 344-1975 - Recommended practices for seismic qualifications SIGNATURE (5):
J.M. HAL JWB n c. SRT (IF REQUIRED)
LTR PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL-OCR ITEM REPORT IN-CHARCE ORIGINATOR FOR PROECT TEAM 12/06/83 12/14/83 12/14/83 12/06/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE I
MIDLMO NOEPEPOENT DESIGN APO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION OPEN, COtFIRMED MO RESOLVED (OCR) ITEM REPORT X
TYPE OF REPORT: OPEN COPFIRMED NO. I c-1??
RESOLVED ITEM REV. NO.
PROECT TEAM /PROECT MGR. 17/14/81 DATES REPORTED IO: LTR 12/06/R1 SRT PRINCIPAL.IN-CHARGE 12/14/81 CPC/ DESIGN ORG.
STRUCTURE (S), SYSTEM (S) OR COMPOENT(Si INVOLVED:
10 LP Horizontal Climate Changers - 2VM-54A DCV PROGRAM AREA OR TASK (F APPLICABLE):
Seismic Equipment Qualification 11.4-1 DESCRIPTION OF CONCERN:
The lower natural frequencies were neglected in the calc of nozzle deflections, due to stiffer isolators. The delfection of the isolator is 1/32" and cannot be 0.001"- con-sidered rigid compared with nozzle deflections resulting from the analysis:
0.004". Also, the modeling and analysis of various components appears to inadequately consider expected behavior.
SIGNFICANCE OF CONCERN:
Analysis may r<ut be conservative.
X OR RESOLUTlON :
RECOMMENDATION Process per PQAP.
i COMMENTS BY SRT (F REQUIRED):
REFERENCES (INCL. RELATED OCR ITEM REPORT NO.):
7220-M-149-74-4-Original analysis and addendum. Seismic analysis.
I -
I f SIGNATURE (S):
HAL JWB _
D.S J.M PROECT MANAGER PRINCIPAL- SRT (IF REQUIRED)
OCR ITEM REPORT LTR FOR PROECT TEAM N-CHARGE ORIGINATOR 12/06/83 12/06/83 12/14/83 12/14/83 DATE DATE DATE DATE DATE
- - _ _ ___