ML20090K100
| ML20090K100 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 05/14/1984 |
| From: | Levin H TERA CORP. |
| To: | Jackie Cook, Eisenhut D, James Keppler CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.), NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| OL, OM, NUDOCS 8405240032 | |
| Download: ML20090K100 (15) | |
Text
I g)[
L J O
May 14,1984 F], PRINCLPA bb LAl E
v TAw 4:
A/RA Mr. James W. Cook to ML
/'y8 Vice President sAo scs v
Consumers Power Company N
'il 1945 West P;inall Rood W
t lFile 8O Jaciuon, Michigan 49201 Mr. J. G. Keppler Administrator, Region til Of fice of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 Mr. D. G. Eisenhut Director, Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comrilssion Washington, D.C. 20555 Re Docket Nos. 50-329 OM, OL and 50-330 OM, OL 1
Midland Nuclear Plant - Units I and 2 Independent Design and Construction Ver'Ification (IDCV) Program Meeting Summary Gentlemen The ninth meeting on Confirmed items and Findings was held on May 3,1984. A summary Is provided to document items discussed and octions agreed upon by the porticiponts.
Sincerely, Howard A. Levin Project Mcnager Midland IDCV Program ces See Attoched Sheet Enclosure n $84 r405240032 840514 PDit ADOCK 05000 dl TERA CORPORATION t) 7101 WISCONSIN AVENUE BETHESDA. MAFMAND 20814 301 654 8960
r--
Mr. J. W. Cook 2
May 14,1984 Mr. J. G. Keppler Mr. D. G. Eisenhut cct
Participants:
L. Gibson, CPC R. J. Erhardt, CPC D. Budzik, CPC D. Quamme, CPC (site)
R. Whitaker, CPC (site)
D. Hood, NRC J. Taylor, NRC, I&E T. Ankrum, NRC, I&E J. Milhoon, NRC, I&E E. Poser, Bechtel R. Burg, Bechtel J. Agar, B&W J. Karr, S&W (site)
IDCV Program Service List HAL/djb
\\
i e
i TERA CORPORATION
SERVICE LIST FOR MIDLAPO INDEPEtOENT DESIGN Ato CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM cc:
Harold R. Denton, Director Ms. Barbero Stomlris Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulatim 5795 N. River U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissim Freeland, Michigan 48623 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Wendell Marshall James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator Route 10 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Midland, Michigan 48440 Region ill 799 Roosevelt Road Mr. Steve Godler Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 2120 Corter Avenue U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident inspectors Office Ms. Billie Pirner Garde Route 7 Director, Citizens Clinic Midiond, Michigan 48640 for Accountable Government Government Accountability Project Mr. J. W. Cmk Institute for Policy Studies Vice President l901 Que Street, N.W.
Consumers Power Company Washington, D.C. 20009 1945 West Pornoll Road Jackson, Michigan 49201 Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.
Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Michoel I. Miller, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ishom, Lincoln & Beale Washington, D.C. 20555 Three First National Plazo, Sist floor Dr. Frederick P. Cowan Chicago, Illinois 60602 Apt. B-125 6125 N. Verde Troll James E. Brunner, Esq.
Boca Roton, Florido 33433 Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jerry Harbour, Esq.
Jackson, Michigan 49201 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ms. Mary Sinclair Washington, D.C. 20555 5711 Summerset Drive Midland, Michigan 48640 Mr. Ron Collen Michigan Public Service Commission Cherry & Flynn 6545 Mercontile Way Suite 3700 P.O. Box 30221 Three First National Plaza Lansing, Michigan 48909 Chicago, Illinois 60602 Mr. Poul Rw Ms. Lynne Bernobel Midland Dolly News Government Accountability Project 124 Mcdonald Street 1901 Q Street, NW Midland, Michigan 48640 Washington, D.C. 20009
SUMMARY
OF NINTH STATUS REVEW MEETING ON COfflRMED ITEMS AND FitolNGS May 3,1984 Midland IDCV Program A meeting was held on May 3,1984 at Bechtel's Ann Arbor, Michigan offices to obtain additional Information related to Confirmed items identified in the March IDCVP Monthly Status Report dated April 17,1984 ond to status other outstond-Ing items identified previously. Attochment I identifies the attendees of the meeting which included representatives of TERA, CPC, Bechtel, and NRC.
Attochment 2 presents a revised ogenda which is a reformatted verslon of the ogenda issued for the meeting in o notice dated April 25,1984.
Howard Levin, TERA, opened the meeting with a discussion of the ogenda. The items noted on the revised agenda were ogreed upon for discussion by the participonts. The meeting then proceeded with its primary objective which is to ensure that all porticipants have o complete understanding of the technical issues expressed as Confirmed items and Findings in the March Monthly Status Report.
The responsible TERA personnel described each item, followed by discussion by either CPC or Bechtel, who were requested to identify additional information that may have bearing on the issues or to provide clarification which would allow these issues to be dispositioned directly.
The status of previously outstanding Confirmed items and Findings was also discuued, except for those noted in the meeting announcement. The meeting announcement listed certoln OCRs os being on hold or that sufficient Informa-tion is available for TERA to disposition the item. A significant portion of the meeting was devoted to a discussion of civil / structural items. A summary of the significont aspects of the discussion is provided in Attachment 3 along with any course of oction identified.
o I
L -
ATTACHMENT 1 MIDLAND NUCLEAR PIANT - L' NITS 1 AND 2 INDEPENDENT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM OCR STATUS REVIEW MEETING May 3, 1984 NAME AFFILIATION (j4,yie,Qsm
&eeue.srw wswas Vc?//n / e6e//c SC <&~
$ f"f ^ -
V'S E
- ,n%
t Mwes~o y e.our covo'/srmerunn
- p. po 4
1 MACTocE T^ECA 0 m ce.,e m qu C PCe
$. RA.o M. tale J
%> 8JM Mi sbd.
M. D M A UPTA Ms M COA Sal 5 y, fu M M Prged W / - SA'-
u
't a
Reeves 7
P"["ll}'C"'$L $, l.
no a tway b dama sigtug reaJect orv, Vere *:)-
g
//, igg NaeMWd Ms 76c 7 c""%"4 w1,Ai d b uk / 6 sS w p,g 4nd i
r 4
ATTACHMENT 1(cont.)
MIDLAND NUCLEAR PLANT - UNITS 1 AND 2 INDEPENDENT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM OCR STATUS REVIEW MEETING May 3, 1984 NAME AFFILIATION The %
8 eca w i. / i,c c m m a L
O Lamp.sov)
Bec hklldachae N,).
PARM.EY C/'Cs
), S, 6 I $ S) A)
(/TO N
FR Doub etf3
~lEh4 Corr
/! Lcv/,J Toca cv'f' p, M. 'p &u, 7~5 # A Ce
- P A"
' * M c,
pt c>e:raA7 T E 12. A C o It l' 7
SETWA
//MOhW
/ V/, f N o e. t e y, f,3 h.hOl}
AIRCl%E MM/P
/k &
hY1eY.shr/
{f(dff)il'$/l0 00 C 11~7'G L
'5
- &M M K.
A Auto p a,n a.
Y L Y u m lvR.
Cec.w,su Mccu D
6 tc ss7t L. hit f4 p.A. h N rb i c uTf *-
- It t A
& c. le fe l C f ot 0 lys (gg
&4A/r/
F/et g p, y
} g m 's N e L Y 85* $**
(
5/3/84 i
ATTACHMENT 2 COGNIZANT DISCIPLINE OCR NUMBER Mechanical (DC)
R-038 C-133 C-146 C-147 C-149 C-150 C-163 Mechanical (MVAC)
C-145 Nuclear C-005 3-166 Electrleal C-110 C-161 C-167 C-165 Civ!!/ Structural C-069 C-101 C-104-3,-6 C-107-2 C-108-6.-7.-8 C-117-1 l
C-117-2,-3 l
C-117-4 C-156 C-157 C-168 C-169 C-170 Civil /solle C-125 C-130 C-131 CPCo/MPQAD R-022 F-055 F-056 E-091 R-092 F-093 R-094 R-095 R-096 i
i
ATTACHMENT 3 o
SUMMARY
OF DISCUSSION OF COfflRMED ITEMS, FIPOINGS, CBSERVATIONS, Ato RESOLVED ITEMS 3201008-F-093 This construction verificotton item was noted to have become o Finding in the eleventh Monthly Status Report, retalning the noted inconsistencies in welding standards os findings pending resolution of CPC Audit Finding Report MSA-83 06F.
3201-008-2-091: 3201-008-R-092 094 095. -096 These items were mentioned as changing status, but details of the resolutions were not discussed to expedite the proceedings.
3201-008-C-005 A revision of this item hos tronspired to reflect a consolidation of issues expressed in the original issvonce and the focus of ongoing activltles.
3201-006-C-145 This item deals with discrepancies between the CR-HVAC P&lD and layout drawings. Bechtel responded to the five differences noted and sold they would oddress the lasue of drawing comparisons later.
Item 1.
Bechtel gave o copy of DCN 24 to M 527, dated I/16/84, which relocated the rodlotion detectors to agree with the P&lD.
TERA asked what the process was that detected the error and what is the leod document. Bechtel responded that the PalD is the lead document and that the discreponey was noticed when the drawing was revised.
l t
-J
i ltem 2.
The tops are shown on the P&lD.
Item 3.
The locotton of the smoke detectors was discussed.
Item 4.
The loyout drowing shows the instrument as AFMU6521BI, instood of l
(
AFMUQFE,6521Bl.
Item 5.
The duct equivalent diameters on the PalD ore for general Informo-tion only.
3201-006-R-038 The basis for resolution of this item was presented by TERA. There was no l
further discussion.
l i
P 3201 006-C-133 TERA osked for the status of the Bechtel calculation for the DG pneumatic
't system worst cose ollowable lookoge.- Bechtel responded that it was ovolloble l
todoy. A copy was subsequenHy received of FM-6320-13(O) Rev. O. Bechtel/
CPC Indicated that this item will be turned over to the TDI Owrwrs Group for further isvestigotion. The Bechtel calculation and previous TDI look rote data will be evoluoted by TERA.
3201-006-C-14 Bechtel Indicated that NRC Ouestion 10.15 is based on FSAR Section f.3.1 dealing with the instrument and Service Air System, and therefore, the response to Question 10.15 does not have to be changed to include the DG pneumatic system. The discussion focused on the efficocy of conducting a FMEA of the DG j
pneumatic control system to determine If it may be o contributor to common l
mode follore and to enemine the significance of any identified follure modes. It was concluded that the pneumatic control systems are independent between DCs i
(i.e., a follure of one could not incorporate the other)t howevers certoln design consideroflone warront further review. The issue of common manufacturers of -
i
I equipment was dismissed as outside the scope of the IDVP. TERA Indicated it would clarify lasves requiring odditlenol information.
3201-006-C-147 TERA requested a copy of SAR Change Notice documentation oddrening the DG i
stort time issue. Bechtel Indicated that on l&C memo addresses this matter rather than o SAR Change Notice. Bechtel stated that a new SCN hos been l
Initiated and that a preliminary copy would be avalloble internally by S/l0/84.
l 3201 006-C-l49 i
Relative to NFPA 12 requirements, Bechtel stated that shutoff of equipment l
which contributes to the fire hozord is required only for fires that continue unoboted.
Since the DGB fire suppression system will not allow fires to continue, Bechtel stated that the auto shutoff feature is not required. Bechtel will formally document this rearv>nse, i
l 320l.006-C-150 Bechtel will transmit a copy of a SAR Change Notice to respond to this OCR on NFPA 72D requirements.
3201-008-C-163 l
Bechtel gave a discussion of the history of the IEEE 387 commitment. The original commitment was to Reg. Guide 1.9 Rev. l. IEEE 387 1977 is now the i
controlling DG standard. Bechtel Indicated that FSAR Ch. 8 needs to be revised.
l TERA stated that the FSAR needs to be revised in two places, citing the reference in Table 3.2-3 to IEEE 387 1972. Bechtel sold they would Investigate l
and formally respond.
E I
l l
i
F..
1 3201-008-C-l 10 l
TERA asked about the response to the concern regarding the effect of food increases on the lood steps for the DG's. Bechtel ocknowledged that a response to this port was not given., TERA also asked Bechtel to oddren why the ocknowledged lood discreponcles occurred. Bechtel will formally respond to these luues.
1 3201408-C-l6i Bechtel stated that they have a TDI calculation on voltoge drop. Bechtel will formally respond to this item.
3201-006-CA l
Bechtel will Initiate o SAR Change Notice within one week to respond to this item.
3201-006-C-J,0.
l Bechtel will verify bus voltoge criterlo with B&W and formally respond to this Item.
l l
3201006-C-144 Bechtel presented on overview of the outline presented in their April 27,1984 memo (No. 147292). They plan a complete response in accordonce with their outilne in opproximately six weeks. They Indicated that the RG l.92 luue of closely spaced modes was oddressed in Appendix 3D of the FSAR.
TERA requested the original documentation which supports this section of the FSAR.
Bechtel stated that their response to the ZPA combination luve will include bones for why they feel their opprnoch la odequately conservative. On the lasue of support stlffnen treatment, Bechtel stated that criterlo exists os follows:
e large bore piping - defleetion less than i/16" e
small bore piping frequency greater than.33 hertz l
4
t They feel that the deflection criterlo prodxes frequencies of the order of 18 to 20 hertz. Bechtel indicated that on occasion, support stifiness had been modeled in on effort to reduce nozzle loadings on the moln feedwater/ steam systems.
7 ERA osked Beentel to oddress the potential for the inverse situation in their response.
TERA Indicated that written response and.
ificotton to the April 27,1984 memo would be forthcoming.
3201-006-C-069(2)
A vendor calculation was provided in response to this OCR. TERA will review this Information.
3201-006-C-099(I) -099(2)
Bechtel described the equation used to calculate the displacements in calculation SG-148G(Q) Rev. 0. Bechtel also generated a new calculation L
SG-148L(Q) Rev. O, to support th.t the relotive offeet of disregarding local rotation is negligible. TERA will review the calculation offer a formal transmittal is provided.
A memorandum to R. Tullock providing the displacements to be used by the pipe stress group wili olso be transmitted.
3201-006-C-101 Bechtel Indicated that they would supply calculation pockage DQ 38.3(Q) for TERA's review. Since the comparison of displacements indicates that difforences exist in the results of the two models, Bechtel will determine if they ore due to difforences in the rotational soll springs. In addition, they will specify If the displacements are overages or maximum volves. TERA indicated that the compatibility evoluotion should compare the un"ocked finite element model response with that of the uncrocked stick model response so that consistency of model porometers is molntained.
5 b
~
3201-008-C-104(3), -104(6)
Bechtel will transmit a summary sheet of 39 different model cases for the Auxiliary Building showing that the model is relatively insensitive to changes in the underpinning configuration.
Bechtel indicated it was committed to review the final configuration when it is available.
Bechtel provided a correction to the Meeting Summary on Outstanding Civil / Structural issues, March 1,1984: under heading 3201-008-C-104 in item 6, "Six percent of the slab weight" should read "Six percent of the mass of the entire wing." TERA indicated that no additional response to Confirmed item C-104(8) was required.
- 3201-008-C-105 TERA indicated that no additional response to this OCR was required.
3201-008-C-107(2)
Bechtel indicated that a review of the EPA wing response indicated that the behavior is essentially rigid in nature. In addition, they indicated that no significant impact to local response was expected. A formal response to this OCR will be provided for TERA review.
3201-008-C-108 l
Bechtel generated a new calculation SG-148L(Q) Rev. O to oddress items I, 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8 supporting that none of these concerns has a significant.
impoet on the analysis.
TERA will review this cole'ulation ~when it is formally transmitted. No additional response to items 4 ond 5 is required.
3201-008-C-I l7(lb) s, s
TERA indicated the written response dated April 19, 1984 was sufficient and that ndadditional information 'wos required for its review.
~
s
\\
~
3201-008-C-1 I7(2), I l7(3)
TERA indicated that the written responses provided April 23,1984 were too general in nature and needed to be expanded. Bechtel indicated that they will identify all areas where the two methods of stress redistribution were used. They indicated that redistribution of stresses is limited by a check to assure that rebar strain does not exceed two times the yield strain. This will be verified in a calculation which will be provided to TERA for review. The guidance or procedures describing the opplicable uses, methodology and limitations on stress distribution will be provided to TERA for review.
A schedule for a response to item Cl17.4 will be provided by Bechtel in opproximately one month.
3201-008-C-125(l)
Bechtel described the comparisons which were performed (including masses, translational and rotational soil springs, base shear and moments, foundation bearing pressures, and horizontal and vertical displacements).
Consistent soil springs were used in the comparison since the rotational springs used in the stick model are generally stiffer than those used in the finite element model.
The comparison yielded favorable results, with differences less than 8 percent.
Bechtel will supply the comparison calculation to TERA for review.
3201-008-C-125(2)
Bechtel indicated that the response to this OCR will be incorporated in the response to Confirmed item C-125(l), and will verify that no gross rotational behavior exists.
3201-008-C-130 Preliminary information indicates that this OCR should be resolved when Bechtel transmits the formal calculation package in response to fl.is OCR.
The seismic force values are located within Attachment C of the calculo-tion. The reference has been added in the calculation.
7 i
b 3201-008-C-131 Bechtel indicated that they will supply a calculation demonstrating that the design of the footings is adequate for the loads obtained in the finite element analyses.
3201-008-C-156 TERA indicated that the response to this OCR (written response April 19, 1984) and the actions necessary to resolve it require that it become a Finding. TERA will review Bechtel actions taken in response to this item.
3201-008-C-157 TERA indicated that it was reviewing the written response provided April 19,1984 and would assess it collectively within the review of C-085.
3201-008-C-l70 Bechtel indicated that they will evaluate the significance of the identified errors to the overall results obtained in the associated calculation package.
In addition, they will review other calculations performed by the origina-ting engineer to assess the potential for similar errors.
8