ML20093A409
| ML20093A409 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 07/02/1984 |
| 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 8407100461 | |
| Download: ML20093A409 (16) | |
Text
._.
.)
L J 6
July 2,1984
' Mr. James W. Cook Vice President Consumers Power Company 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 4920I Mr. J. G. Keppler Administrator, Region ill Office of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 Mr. D. G. Eisenhut Director, Division of Licensing Office of Noclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comn,Lsion Washington, D.C. 20555 Re: Docket Nos. 50-329 OM, OL and 50-330 OM, OL Midland Nuclear Plant - Units I and 2 Independent Design and Construction Verification (IDCV) Program Meeting Summo~
Gentlemen:
The tenth general meeting on Confirmed items and Findings was held on June 21, 1984. A summary is provided to document items discussed and actions agreed upon by the participants.
Sincerely, d
W
- fgcvw Howard A. Levin Project Manager Midland IDCV Program HAL/saa Enclosure cc
(See Next Page)
I i
8407100461 840702 PDR ADOCK 05000 TERA CORPORATION 7101 WISCONSIN AVENUE BETHESDA. MAfWLAND 20814 301 654 8960
l 1[*
Mr. J. W. Cook July 2,1984 Mr. J. G. Keppler Mr. D. G. Eisenhut cc Participants L. Gibson, CPC R. Erhardt, CPC D. Budzik, CPC D. Guamme, CPC (site J. Agar, Babcock & Wilcox R. Whitaker, CPC (site)
J. Taylor, NRC, I&E T. Ankrum,NRC, I&E J. Milhoon, NRC, l&E D. Hood, NRC, NPR J. Karr, S&W (site)
Midland IDCVP Service List 4
TERA CORPORATION
SERVICE LIST FOR MIDLAPO INDEPEtOENT DESIGN i
AND CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM cc Harold R. Denton, Director Ms. Barbero Stamiris Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulat. ion S795 N. River U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 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 Rood Mr. Steve Godier Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 2120 Corter Avenue U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
Resident inspectors Office Ms. Billie Pirner Garde M dland* Michi on 48640 for Accountable Government 9
Government Accountability Project Mr. J. W. Cook Institute for Policy Studies Vice Pres, dent 1901 Que Street, N.W.
i Consumers Power Company Washington, D.C. 20009 1945 West Pornoll Road Jackson, Michigan 49201 Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.
l At m e S fety & Licensing Board i
Michoel I. Miller, Esq.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnussion l
Isham, Lincoln & Beale Washington, D.C. 20555 Three First National Plazo, Dr.
e rick P. Cowan Chic o, 11 is 60602 p,
.6125 N. Verde Trail James E. Brunner, Esq.
Boco 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 r
i fa.ir Washington, D.C. 20555 571I u Midland, Michigan 48640 Mr. Ron Collen Michigan Public Service Commission Cherry & FIYnn 6545 Mercontile Way Suite 3700 P.O. Box 30221 Three First National Plaz Lonsing, Michigan 48909 Chicago, Illinois 60602 Mr. Poul Rau Ms. Lynne Bernobe.
Midland Dolly News Government Accountability Proj.ect 124 Mcdonald Street 1901 O Street, NW Midland, Michigan 48640 Washington, D.C. 20009 i
SUMMARY
OF TENTH GEtERAL STATUS REVIEW MEETING ON COfflRMED ITEMS Ato FitOINGS June 21,1984 Midiond IDCV Program A meeting was held on June 21,1984 at Bechtel's Ann Arbv, Michigan offices to obtain additional information related to Confirmed items identified in the April and May IDCVP Monthly Status Reports dated May 16 and June 15,1984 and to status other outstanding items identified previously. Attachment I identifies the attendees of the meeting which included representatives of TERA, CPC, Bechtel, and NRC. Attachment 2 presents the agenda which was issued for the meeting in a notice dated June 13,1984.
Howard Levin, TERA, opened the meeting with a discussion of the ogenda. The items noted on the agendo were discussed in a different order os agreed upon by the participants to optimize resource allocation during the meeting.
The meeting then proceeded with its primary objective which is to ensure that all participants have o complete understanding of the technical issues expressed as Confirmed items and Findings in the April and May Monthly Status Reports. 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 discussed, except for those noted in the meeting announcement. The meeting announcement listed certain OCRs os being on hold or that sufficient informa-tion is ovallable for TERA to disposition the item. A summary of the significant aspects of the discussion is provided in Attachment 3 along with any course of oction identified.
l l
ATTACHMENT 1 MIDLAND NUCLEAR PLANT - UNITS 1 & 2 INDEPENDENT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM l
OCR STATUS REVIEW MEETING l
June 21,1984 NAME AFFILIATION
$8 h RG 05t*Hn= L. flICEAf SIA Q L.Lampm Beekk([AJuda<
D F f: n,3 8 ge,,7, e R F CdMfales Beene< /lNucun
&PCo p1pGAD scto Scaera-Visa s. Ku m u Beemel. l Mccn f c P9'As A b gaeaw. ( ma c. s\\-a gf.
A A'd 64 M=1/Med.
ll.LGViJ Terta FA D0v[ch i eR&
H.Gwpl0 TS#
lkSd f
h)RC/ZGWS$
- v. A. PAML EY CPColPRoTEcr EAIGtJE/AW6-c.c caos sey
- f. 0 -
F2)&d E{ek-Yb
MIDLAND NUCLEAR PLANT - UNITS 1 & 2 INDEPENDENT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM OCR STATUS REVIEW MEETING June 21, 1984 NAME AFFILIATION f.{.ffgpf)A7
~
$,g 3S ffl4TE-l
$.Ooprod
- csvi ii l
6.E. SETKAq TE@
E. D;'&ts' Sce A/et f fghitt r-
[. @ge a s e-a a. - n ces y, A, N6iyskh O$bl'*
s MIDLAfO ltOEPEtOENT DESIGN AIO CONSTRUCTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM ACEPOA FOR JUTE 21,1984 OCR STATUS REVIEW MEETING BECHTEL OFFICES Am ARBOR, MICHIGAN 1.
Estimated Time Start:
9:00 AM Lunch:
12:00 PM to I2:45 PM Adjournment: 3:00 PM ll.
Discussion of Confirmed items, Findings, Observations, and Resolved items (Design Verification only)
Item TERA Lead A.
Mechanical / Systems e C-065*
Doughtery e R-084*
Witt e C-087,-088,-089 George o C-145 Witt e C-167*
Witt e B-173*
Witt e B-174*
Doughtery B.
Electrical o R-109*
Setka e C-Il0 a
e C-133 a
e C-146 a
e C-161 a
e R-162*
a e R-163*
a e C-165 a
e C-172*
a e C-179*
a
l l
l l
C.
Civil / Structural
- e F-156*
Mortgat e F-171*
e C-175*
e C-176*
e C-177*
- Full agendo to be ogreed upon during meeting, subject to project's readiness.
Ill.
Discussion of programmatic issues - os required.
IV.
Discussion of Action items and Logistics for Information Exchange Notes: 1.
Items are grouped to the degree practical to facilitate discussion and minimize manpower requirements during the entire meeting.
2.
Items that changed status during the April and May reporting period are denoted with an asterisk.
3.
The following design verification OCRs have not reodied a final disposition; however, further TERA _or Midland Project octions have been identified during post public meeth gs. Accordingly, discussions are not contemplated by TERA unless the Midland Project has identified new information that is pertinent to the ongoing octivities.
4.
OCRs with sequential numbers greater than -172 will be transmitted in Monthly Status Report No.13 on June 15, 1984.
e C-005 e C-077 e C-l4I e C-048 e C-085 e C-144 e C-068 e C-Il2 e C-148,-149,-150 e C-069 e C-135 e F-015
ATTACHMENT 3
SUMMARY
OF DISCUSSION OF CObFIRMED ITEMS, Fl!OINGS, OBSERVATIONS, Abo RESOLVED ITEMS B-086 This OCR was classified as on Observation in the October,1983 Monthy Status Report (MSR). The Observation noted that the octual cable penetration fire seal configuration did not correspond to that tested. The IDVP was subsequently informed that a new design was in development; therefore, mol<ing the specific discrepancy insignificant.
At the OCR meeting, TERA requested drawings for fire seals in order to verify that the design and qualification are now in agreement.
B-090 This OCR was also classified as on Observation in the October,1983 MSR. It was concerned with the qualification for emergency lighting units.
The Observation noted the fact that Bechtel had identified that the original qualification report was inadequate and committed the IDVP to verification of closure of this issue by Bechtel. TERA requested information regarding the qualification for emergency lighting units. Bechtel will provide TERA with copies of current qualification test reports.
C-087 This OCR noted apparent inadequate separation in Fire Zone 16 and failure to note the some on a " problem area" list. Bechtel described their ongoing review 3-1
process and specifics regarding the noted issues related to F.Z.16. They concur with the noted issues and indicated that at the time the OCR was issued they were in the process of making the some identification. Accordingly, given the stage of their review it was premature for the " problem area" to have been noted l
on the " problem oreo" list. TERA requested the appropriate documentation and its revisions.
C-008 This OCR is concerned with the odequacy of fire zone-to-zone separation. When the OCR was written it appeared that on AFW pump room and the adjacent corridor were not separated by a rated barrier. Considerabic discussion revolved around whether the FSAR occurately reflected the design and the extent to which the design was still in development at the time the OCR was originally written. Bechtel stated their intent to demonstrate that the barrier now meets three-hour rating requirements although exemptions are required for the water-tight door and the blowout panei. The water-tight door has been discussed previously with the NRC. Both will be included in the January 1985 report with justification provided for on exemption request. A SAR change notice has otso been prepared. TERA will review available additional information.
C-089 This OCR was concerned with the odequacy of emergency lighting in areas of access to the auxiliary shutdown panel.
Bechtel has provided TERA with documentation showing odditional emergency lighting which should further disposition the concern. The project noted that on updated emergency lighting study is now available c.;d that a test has been conducted to demonstrate the odequocy of Illumination. TERA will review the new information to determine the disposition of this OCR.
3-2
C-148 TERA requested additional information regarding the procedures by which the need for fire seals is identified and installed. Bechtel explained the process by which design documents are updated to reflect "os built" conditions. TERA requested a copy of the A-60 specification which is the technical specification i
for penetration seals.
TERA oIso asked whether drill permits are automatically routed to architectural in accordance with a procedure. Bechtel will provide the requested information.
C-149 This OCR is concerned with the opplication of NFPA-12 to the fuel oil system for the Midland diesel generator. TERA has previously received information which is currently being reviewed. No further information is needed at this time.
1 C-150 TERA previously received a SAR change notice which changes the design criterio from NFPA 72-D to NFPA 72-A, both of which are concerned with detection systems.
Branch Technical Position 9.5-1 requires the use of NFPA 72-D.
TERA will review the significance of the change from NFPA 72-D to NFPA 72-A.
Note: The following OCRs related to the SEP system were reviewed at the May 31 public meeting (except C-179). The following provides a discussion of the additional information which was discussed at the June 21 meeting.
i 3-3
C-!10 Bechtel has developed a written response to this OCR which is concerned with the voltoge drop associated with the initial load step applied to the diesel generator. Bechtel described the opproach which was applied to develop the response. The response contains references to backup documentation which TERA otso requested.
C-161 This OCR resulted from on apparent discrepancy between the FSAR and the diesel generator qualification test report with respect to minimum voltages. The FSAR states that motor-operated volves require a minimum of 80% of rated voltage whereas the +est data when combined with the assumed voltage drop between load centers and devices results in on overall drop in excess of the FSAR statement. Bechtel has developed a response to this OCR. TERA will review the response and determine the action to be token.
C-165 This confirmed item is concerned with whether voltages stated in B&W's interface criteria are nominal or absolute minimuns.
Bechtel will issue a written response for TERA review.
Generic concerns regarding operational restrictions will be addressed with the disposition of C-172.
Note: Howard Levin stated that on OCR meeting on civil items has been noticed for June 28 of 1:00 PM in Bechtel's offices in Ann Arbor.
At this meeting Bechtel will present information regarding the status of all civil items for which they are pursuing the developmen* of additional information and will describe the technical opproach to the development of this information. Accordingly the civil OCRs discussed at the June 21 meeting were limited to those which were first issued in monthly status reports 12 and 13.
3-4 l
D.
(
F-I71 This Finding oddresses a failure to properly consider thermal gradients in walls and slabs. The status change to a Finding resulted from the recognition that on error exists in this area although the safety significance cannot presently be determined. Bechtel is evaluating this issue and plans completion of their work by mid-July.
F-156 This issue is concerned with channel imbedments. A design drawing, reviewed by the IDVP, allows for a generic design which could be applied in situations such that acceptance criteria would not be met. This results in potential overstressed embedded channels. This item has now been reclassified as a finding because it is recognized os o design error. Bechtel is preparing a written response to this Finding.
C-175 This OCR is concerned with the oppropriateness of the methodology and assumptions 'used by Bechtel to calculate the natural frequencies of HVAC ducts. The calculation reviewed by the IDVP disregarded a 200-lb damper based upon a rationale of conservatism. The IDVP requested clarification demonstrat-Ing that this is the case. Furthermore, the basis for calculation of natural frequencies using the static deflection of a "contilevered half spon" is not clear.
Bechtel will review this item and provide a response.
C-176 The FSAR requires the use of a multimode factor of 1.5 in the evaluation of HVAC ducts, duct supports, and cable tray supports. In calculations reviewed by 3-5
the IDVP it appears that this 1.5 factor was not used. Bechtel will review this item and provide o response.
C-177 This OCR questions the validity of on assumption that the diesel generator building and the diesel generator pedestals are in phase.
Seismic anchor movements of attached commodities may potentially be underestimated.
Bech+el will review this item and provide a response.
C-144 Bechtel has drafted a study to respond to this OCR concerned with the assumptions used in piping analysis. The study will be issued for internal review within Bechtel on June 22. The study will receive reviews by Bechtel personnel in both Ann Arbor and San Francisco after which it will be issued to CPC and subsequently to TERA oround mid-July.
C-133 Bechtel has developed a new calculation concerning the capability of air system to meet design bases, in particular, the calculation is based upon having a successful engine start rather than starting on the fifth try. On this basis seven days air supply is available with a 100% margin.
TERA will review the calculations and determine the disposition of this item.
C-146 it had been previously discussed that a failure modes and effects analysis would 3-6
be prepared if the calculation associated with C-133 showed that there was inadequate air. Because the calculations indicate that adequate air is avo!!able, Bechtel is not going to develop a failure modes and effects analysis. TERA requested the TDI tasks descriptions as input to the dispositioning of this OCR.
C-179 This new OCR is concerned with the assumptions associated with the determina-tion of whether o seven-day fuel oil supply exists on site. Several questions are raised which potentially affect the demonstration that the plant meets the seven-day criterion. Bechtel stated that they can demonstrate that the fuel oil system meets the seven-day criterion. Bechtel will provide TERA with informa-tion concerning the assumptions and bases for their statement.
C-065 OCR C-065 is a generic concern raised by the IDVP concerning the adequacy of the methods used by the project to identify and consistently implement design criteria and commitments. The IDVP is continuing to review the implementation of criteria by the project. CPC described their system design description project which will identify design bases, assumptions, and operating restrictions appli-cable to each system. CPC will provide TERA with additional information regarding their plane in this area.
C-145 Bechtel has previously provided TERA with additional information regarding discrepancies between on HVAC P&lD and the corresponding duct drawings. This information is adequate to disposition sections of this OCR, but a question remains os to the cause of the discrepancy. Bechtel will provide a response to TERA on this concern.
3-7
l B-167 This Observation notes several minor calculation and drawing inconsistencies and on inconsistency in the FSAR documented maximum value of control room temperature following a LOCA. A Bechtel calculation and on IDVP confirmatory calculation suggest. 800F while the FSAR states 7SOF as the maximum. TERA noted that the original FSAR commitment was very conservative and much more restrictive than technical specification limits for other plants. Thus this item was classified as on Observation. The adequacy of how FSAR commitments are controlled is noted as a concern. Bechtel stated that SAR change notices had been issued.
B-I73 This Observation noted differences between a Bechtel calculation and on NUS report which contains Mid and-specific information. The observation notes that the report was completed after the calculations were performed, but that over two years have passed without the calculation being updated. Both the NUS report and the FSAR note that eleven chemicals are still being tested.
B-174 This Observation noted that the FSAR clearly gives the impression that the plant (internal) flooding analysis was complete and that as of Amendrnent 49 no problems existed. This is not correct in that calculation revisions and/or design changes are necessary before the FSAR statements can be considered correct.
CPC and Bechtel responded that the FSAR is a statement of the completed design and cbes not reflect the fact that some design and analysis work is still in progress.
3-8
.