ML20199E968

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Transmits Summaries of Telcons Between Parsons Power Group Inc,Nneco & Neac on Listed Dates Re Independent Corrective Action Verification Program
ML20199E968
Person / Time
Site: Millstone Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 01/27/1998
From: Curry D
AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUM2-PPNR-1047, NUDOCS 9802030014
Download: ML20199E968 (30)
v • d • e


Text

.

PARCONO Daniel L Curry, vu bevart turar hm Parwis Diorgy & Chernicals Gruun inc PUL tj rDarfk4n Road

  • Far (610) 855 2002 January 27,1998 Docket " ~i336 Parsons NUh12 PPNR-1047 L U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 hiillstone Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 2 InkP1ndmLCorrective Aglion Ven6 cation Procram (ICAVP)

Gentlemen:

This letter transmits summaries of telephone conferences between Parsons Power Group Inc., the U. S.

Nuclear Regulatoiy Conunission, NNECo and NEAC on December 16, December 18, December 23,1997, January 6, January 8, January 13 and January 15,1998. The purpose of these telephone conferencer were as follows: December 16 -IST Program, Scnice Water Strainer Backwash Valves, Fire Hazards Analysis Document: December 18 - RWST Level Transmitters, Appendix J (type C testing), RWST Enc osure Building Seismic Review, Pressurircr/hiain Steam Safety Valve Analyses, Discrepancy Report DR-0036,-

Item 5: December 23 - DR 0033, DR-0126, DR 0060, PhthtS, Diesel Generator Ventilation, Steam Generator A'm Feed Supply, LPSI Suncillance: January 6 - conference canceled, rescheduled January 8:

January 8 - Drawing changes (DCN Dh12 S-0231-93), Senice Water hiodification DCN Dh12-S 565-93/PDCR 2-043-93, Enclosure Building Setpoint/ Accuracy Calculations, Allowable RWST Boric Acid Concentration, Post Accident hionitoring, DR-0127 Response, Replacement item Equivalency Evaluations, Electrical Separation: January 13 - DR-0195, Seismic Analysis Calculations, PDCR2-07192, Enclosure Buildiag Setpoint Calculations, Diesel Generator Jacket Water Expansion Tanks, DCN Dh12-0435 93, Steam Generator Dmvncomer EfTects: January 15 - Steam Generator Level, FSARCRs, Diesel Generator Jacket Water Expansion Tanks, Drawing Control.

Please call me at (610) 855 2366 if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

- +

Daniel L. Curry Parsons ICAVP Project Director f@Cj DLC:djv 9002030014 790127 PDR ADOCK 05000336 P PDR

( ": a6-llllllI.I'll,il!

I.l!I.Ill PI'NR104 / doc

4 I

Attachments 1.- . Telephone Conference Notes froni December 16,1997  !

2.- Telephone Conference Notes from 9ecember 18,1997 ,

    • + 3. Telephouc Conference Notes frorr December 23,1997
4. Tekphone Conference Nce trom J muary 6,1998
5. Telephone Conference Not s from muary 8,1998
u. Telephone Conference IJoti i from anuary 13,1998 -
7. Telephone Conference Not, e fmm January 15,1998 .

cc: E. Imbro (2)- USNRC J. Fougere - NNECo

11. Eichenholz . USNRC Rep. Terry Concannon NEAC r R. Laudenat - NNECo Project Files i

f PPNR1047. doc

_ . . - - . . . , __-.....,.:,, -,_ ,_..........s._-,-. . . . . - . _ . - . _ . - . . _ . _ . _ -

,, ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES

- December 16,1997 DATE: DECEMHER 16,1997

  • PURPUSEt Administrative telephone conference with NNECo, NRC , NEAC and Parsons to distuist e IST Program o Servica Water Strainer Harkwash Valves e Fire liarards Analysis Document LIST OF ATTENDEESt NNECo NRC NEAC Parsons Joe Fougere John Nakoski Wayne Ibtwn Fred Mattioli liruce Deist Dick llart John Ihlbish I Paul Collette Andrew O'Connor

, lohn Becker Ken Kravnick liarvey Beeman Richard Olson Dewain Forbis Larry Colher

1. Topic IST Program (Rich Olson)

Hackground:

10 CFR 50.55a (f)(5)(ivi requires that the basis for a detennination that a pump or valve test requirement by the code is detennined to be impractical must be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Conunission "...cach subsequent 120 month period of operation during  ;

which the test is determined to be impractical."

NRC, by letter dated November 3.1986, fonvarded a Supplemental Safety Evaluation granting relief and alternate testing approval for diesel engine-driven pumps (Fuel Oil, Clean Oil, Lube Oil, Jacket Water Cooling, Air Cooling, and Air intake Turbo-Chargers) and for valves (Fuel Oil valves 2 FO-67A thru D and -85A thru D for all operational testing. 2 FO .79 and -

80 for stroke time measurement; Air Start valves 2 DG 91 A&B, 92A&B, 95A&B, .96A&B and .

27AAB for stroke time measurement) for the second 10-year IST interval. The NRC letter was in response to NNECo letters dated 2/28/86,8/29/86 and 9/17/86 and addressed issues left open by earlier Safety Evaluations dated 5/4/83 (Original) and 10/31/85 (Supplement).

By letter dated October 30,1987, as supplemented on 8/26/88, NNECo revised its sceond 10-year-IST Program and updated its program for testing of EDO auxiliaries.

A corresponding NRC letter dated 7/19/90, "Second Ten Year Insenice Testing Program and the Granting of Relief from Testing Re .rements Detennined to be impractical for Millstone, Unit Na 2 (TAC, 75977)," fonvarded a Safety Evaluation supporting NRC's determination of

"...the IST Program and other information submitted on October 30,1987, and August 26, 1988, together with granting of relief with conditions by this letter to be acceptable for the ten-year interval, December 26,1985 through December 26,1995."

NU informed NRC by letter dated 7/24/95 that the second 10 year ISI interval was being extended 12 months, as allowed by the ASME Code, until 12/26/96. In that letter, NU referred to an NRC letter dated April 27,1989 (sic), "Second Ten Year Insenice inspection Program and the Granting of Relief from Examinations Requirements Determined to be impractical for

. Millstone. Unit No. 2 (TAC No. 59265)." NU also stated: "No NRC response is requested or -

required " The referenced NRC letter (actually dated April 17,1989) stated that the ISI Iof4

AIIMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES I)ecember 16,1999 Progra'n and the reliefs granted by the letter were " acceptable for the ten year interval, December 26,1985 through December 26,1995 "

NlJ'did not refer to the NRC letter dated 7/19/90, whicF panted relief for the IST Program.

There appear to be two issues here. One is the potential for confusion between the IST Program and the ISI Program with respect to program dates in docketed correspondence. The other is the apparent lack of docketed correspondence specifically requestinE or granting relief from the ASMU Code requirements for pump and valve testing for the EDO auxiliaries beyond December 26,1995.

Question it Please identify the curient 10 year IST Interval.

The SecondIntenul was supposed to end 12/26'93: extended due to 3 outages In this cycle.

New datefbr end ofSecondIntenul and start of third will coincide u tth startupfrom this outage, ll'Ill *nform NRC of the actual date, lhtension submitted to NRC in letter B16479, dated 3/27/97, "Aidistone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2, lhtension ofSecond 10. Year Inservice Test Intenut."

Question 2:

When does the next IST interval begin, and what is the docketed reference for that date?

Refer to response to Guestion 1. There's nofirm start date.1he next Intenvl will start at the same time as Afode 4. NNEco will revice all of the applicable procedures prior to Afode 4 and have them reah to go so the new intenul can be started when they start up. They will try to "re tero the clock"for ISIandISTso they will have the same end date.

Qnestion 3:

Please identify the document that describes the currently approved insenice testing program for the emergency dicscl generator auxiliaries.

The document is the Unit 2 Inservice inspection Program. Revision 4, Change 3, dated 6'21/96.

2 of 4

. . _ . - . - - . - - - - - . _ . _ - - - . . - - . - . - . _ - - - - - - - - - ~ . -

ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES Dec:mber if,1997 Question 4:

' , Please identify the NRC correspondence approsing the IST Program and granting any current relief from ASME Code inservice testing requirements of the emergency diesel generator auxiliaries for the current 10 year IST interval.

The correspondence is the NRC Safety Emluation Reportfor the Second 10Jear Intmul, dated 7/1930, and supported by a Trip Report by Air. Afarshfrom a meeting held (at Afillstone) to review the program on 9'28:87. It'e also have docketedletter B12724, dated 10'30'87. It'e don't need (NRC) authoritationfor an extension per the Code (Section) lli'A.

2. Topics Senice Water Strainer Backnanh Valves (Ken Kraynick)

References:

EWR M2 97 092 Parscn RAl: M2 RAI 00835 NU Response M2 !RF-00864 Background The above Parsons RAI requested a copy of DCN DM2 00 0547 97 and a copy of the latest revision of drawing 25203 20122 00064. NU responded that the DCN was new and no documentation was available and forwarded revision 2 of the referenced drawing. There are several .

issues that need to be ansucred to complete the evahiation of the Topic EWR.

Question: lias any work been done on this DCN7 If so, w hat drawing changes are being anticipated and to which documents? We are specifically interested in any pressure class, configuration, Mark #,

or material changes.

IVith regard to the work accomphshed on the DCN DM2 00-0347 97, NNEco indicated that no work has been done on this item. NNECo also indicated that there were no changes to drawing 23203-20122 00064 anticipated at this point and that neither of these items were restart items. Parsons discussed inconsistencies that presently exist between the drawing, the master valve hst, the piping .

class sheets, the pressure ratings, the material change, and the current data contained in the PM\lS database. NNEco indicated that they would look into the manerfurther and achtse.

't

3. Topic: Fire liaiards Analpis Document (Andrew O'Connor)

Background RAl #0082 (6/25/97) Pequested the most recent Fire Hazards Analysis, for which Rev.

3 dated 12/92 was submitted. RAI #0520 (10/1/97) Requested the most recent revision since Ret 3 dated 12/92 to w hich the response was that the latest revision would not be complete until October 1997.

The August 12,1996 ' Millstone 2 Appendix R Audit" prepared by VECTRA Technologies Inc.

Pages D 7 and D 14, references Millstone Unit 2 Fire llazards Analysis Rev. 4 December 1994. We understand that the Fire llazards Analpis Ren 4 document has not been approved for use.

3 of 4

' ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES December 16,1997 Question: Why has resision 4 been in the works for approximately threc) cars, and what was the reason for VECTRA using this document as a basis for an audit?

NNECo reported that Revision 4 of the Fila was used during Appendix R Aucht based on thefact that It had the most complete walldown information available. Development work Is continuing on the Fila and current estimates are that it wellbe complete in Afarch 1997. NNECo willreport on the exact due date at the next conference.

l l

I 4 of 4

ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES December 18,1997 DATE: DECEMBER 18,1997

  • I'URPOSE: Administrative telephone conference with NNECo, NRC , NEAC and Parsons to discuss e RWST Level Transmitters e Appendix J. Type C Testing e RWST Enclosure Building Seismic Review e Pressuriser/ Main Steam Safety Valve Analyses
  • Disciepancy Report DR-0036 Item 5

'ulST OF ATTENDEES:

NNEco NRC NEAC Parsons Joe Fougere John Nakeski Hruce Deist

Gary Komosky lany Colher Chris Cristallo W.K. Ruta 1 j_ liarvey Beeman Dan laughman Ralph Bates Gorden Chen Nabil Juraydini Paul Runcil
1. Topic: Replacement of RWST level transmitters under PDCR 2 284 77 (W. K. Russell)

Background:

PDCR 2 284 77 replaced the 4 General Electric model 551 PWST level transmitters with Foxboro model E13DMilKAll2 transmitters. The PDCR package reviewed by Parsons did not contain information on quality requirements for the replacement transmitters.

Question:

Please identify the quality requirements for procurement of these transmitters, specifically the seismic requirements and codes and standards specified in FSAR sections 7.3.1.2.5 and 7.3.1.2.6 for ESFAS components.

NNECo indicated that the transmitters installed under PDCR 2 284 77 u ere procured byPO

$2665 which was in accordance with the codes and standardsfor ESFAS components specified in 1%lR sections 7.3.1.2.5 and 7.3.1.2.6. They also Indicated that quality requirementsfor these transmitters uere specilledin PDCR 2 284-77. Section 6.0,

" Technical Review and Approval". These quality requirement u ere not specifledin ti,e PDCR that was provided to Parson via RAI 549. Both versions ofthe PDCR were approved 0 1 H 4 0 8.

1of4

P

, ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES December Ill,1997

2. Topic Appendit J.T3pe C Testing (Larry Collier)

' hiackground: Procedure SP 260$D, Containment Leak Test, Type C, paragraph 3.5 states " Prior :

to opening a penetration for maintenance, an LLRT shall be perfonned to determine the as-found leak rate" >

Questluns:

,1) is there a document that describes or dennes what " opening a penetration" means and the extent of that meaning? If such a document exists what is its name and identification number, b) Please identify the NNECo document and/or an approved program that identifies and Dags -

all the Appendix J Valves and their operators along with specified maintenance activities for as found LLRT testing. (Testing prior to performing any maintenance activities that may have an efTect on the leakage characteristics of the valve)

'in regards to "a)", no definition exists at the present time that deDnes... " opening a penetration", A procedure, ll'C 16 (Kngancering Program Ident(flers), is in process that will define ... " opening a penetration" No program exists at the present time that willflag Appendix J,12JtT whrs. A procedure, ll'C 16(Engineering Program Identiflers) is in process that willflag Appendix J,12JtT mlvesfor as f<mndleak rate testing and data. Issue datefor ll'C-16 is estimated to be near the end ofJanuaq.

An ital will be written to request a copy ofthe draft II'C 16.

3. . Topic: RWS'l Enclosure Building, Seismic Review (Dan Laughman)

Background:

During our conference of December 11,1997 NNECo indicated that the RWST enclosure building was clausfied as Category I following a SQUG review and that the SEWS for the ansmitters would indicate that the enclosure as SQUO. A review of the SEWS for the ransmitters did not make any statement that tie enclosure building as Category 1. The transmitter i SFWS does dispositbn under interaction Effects, item 4 " Overhead equipment or distribution i sys tems aie not likely to collapse" was answered as "Yes" and item 5 "No other adverse concerns were found" was also answered "Yes "

l Given that the 1077 modification PDCR - 2 221 77 installed the enclosure as non-Category 1, the -

(  : importance of RWST transmitters as ESFAS components, and the fact that the SEWS response to Interaction Effects question 4 is subjcetive with no qualifying statement concerning the enciesure:

Question: What document dermes the basis of the RWST instrument enclosure's seismic adequacy?

2 of 4

ADMINISTRATIVE COI,TERENCE NOTES December 18.1997 PDCR - 2 221-77 is the only documentfound.

l

4. Topic: Analyses supporting 3% htSSV and PSV setpoint driR (Gordon Chen)

Background :

E Technical Specification change by Amendment No.195 (issued on 1/18/96) relaxed the as found tolerance limit of liR sctpoints of'ressurizer Safety Valves and hiain Steam Safety Valves from

+/- 1% to +/ 3% It is indicated in the proposal of amendment that Loss of External Load event and the inadvertent Closure of one htSIV have been reanalyzed tojustify the changes. Also, the radiclogical consequence of the Steam Generator Tube Rupture event has been reanalyzed asseming a 3% setpoint tolerance of hts safety valves.

Questions :

O What documents provide the analysis lusis tojustify the Amendment 195, specifically, :

a) Loss of External Loads.

b) Closure of one htSIV.

c) Radiological Consequence of Steam Generator Tube Rupture.

i

  • There are no new calcidationsfor Loss ofExternalLoads and Closure ofone MSIVevents. A letterfrom Siemens dated 7/9/93 was provided tojustify the Amendment 195 TS change.

A new Calcidationfor Rad:oligital Consequence ofSteam Generator Tube Rupture was generated to support this TS change. The Calc. number will be provided in next conference meeting.

5. Topic: Discrepancy Report DR-0036, item 5 (Bruce Deist)

Background:

The subject DR item referred to the fact that SP 21136 does not provide instructions to remove the portable flowmeter used during the test. Parson made reference to a possible uncontrolled modification 9 ilout instructions to remove the portable flowmeter. The NNECo response to the DR referred to Jumper Device Control Sheets 2-96-061 (Period of coverage 7/10/96 to 10/30/97) and jumper Device Control Sheet 2-97-053 (Period of coverage 10/29/97 to present) as providing procedural er als for the transducer installation and thereby rendering the DR as invalid.

Jumper Device Control Sheet 2-96-061 stipulates that the expected duration of the device woul:1 be greater than 3 months. It further stipulates that a permanent design change to reflect the transducers has been requested in EWR h1296043. Jumper Device 2-97-053 appears to extend th-previous device and stipulates that the expected duration is less that 3 months.

3 of 4

  • , ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES

- Dec:mber 18,1997 Question:

a). What document controls and/or stipulates the removal of the transducers?

l~ - - -

.. b) . What is the s.atus of the permanent design change referred to in Jumper Device Control Sheet 2-

% 4417 The transducers in question are an on-going requirement and are never removed. : A permanent design change was developed on 12/5/97 to reflect this. The change is described in EWR M2 96-0769. (This EWR will be requested via RAI) -.

1 I

4 of 4 2

, A2MINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES December 23,1997 DATE:

  • DECEMHER 23,1997 PURPOSE: Administrative telephone conference with NNECo, NRC , NEAC and Parsons to discoss:

. DR 033 e DR-126

. DR060 e- PMMS e Diesel Geaerator Ventilation e Steam Generator Aux Feed Supply i e LPSI Surveillance LIST OF ATTENDEES:

NNECo NRC NEAC Parsons Joe Fougere E. V. Imbro Wayne Dobsc.a Fred Mattioli John Nakoski Don Marks Paul Russell Wayne Choromanaki Rick Bonner William Clemonson Pipi Higgins Clark Tracy Roy Terry Steve Wai N Bob Critten n i Ed Foster

1. Topic: DR-033 - NNECo request -(Wayne Choromanski)

NNECo had asked of the response to item N3 included several AR 's (97011326-01, 9701]$26-02) as part of Parsons consideration. The response wasyes, these AR 's were considered and the comments to l NNECO 's comments stillstand. It wasfound that DR-033 in the "D" drive and th.? one posted on the

} web was missing the reference to these documents. Actions to be taken, John flilbish tofax copy ofthe l mod:Jied DR-033 referencing the missingparagraph to NNECO. A revision including the missing

\

paragraph will be incorporated once NNECO re-responds to the comments supplied by Parsons.

2. Topic: DR-126 - NNECo request -(Wayne Choromanski)

A discussion with Bob Critrion (spelling?) was made on what was mea *t of the DR. It was indicated that NNECO couldnotJind the minor error indicated in item I of the DR. Parsons gave an overview ofthe DR that the main issue with the Tech Spec change is that the "A "lis'SIpump may not have ever met the

.rew acceptance criterion specifiedin the latest revision to the technicalspecificationsfor the flPSI minimumflow dtJJerentialpressure. NNECo indicated that they willreview une issue with the new over-view ofthe concerns as discussed in the meeting.

Page I of 4

  • , ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES December 23,1997
3. Tople: DR (Don Matks)

Itackgrdund: The material providt.d with the DR response appears to indicate that Millstone has recognized a data quality problem exists with PMMS program indicators since the 1995 time frame. It also appears that Millstone recognizes that personnel routinely use PMMS data for making decisions regarding nuclear safety related activities. Basco on the response and on Parsons understanding of the processes currently in use at Millstone, we feel that the DR response should be discussed. Specifically, we

ire having a difficult time understanding the corrective actions that are planned.

Question: Please explain how the corrective actions identified by NNECo have and will prevent the use of PMMS program indicators that have not been validated or are in error.

NEECo stated that none of the Program Indicator Fields have been verified and release Ifor use as "Q.

level" data. Under this condition. SP-M2-ME-0013 would require that Attachment 2 be issued by the Design Engmeering Manager with a value of"N"in the "PM\lS A C7ll'E (Y OR N)" columnfor each of the programs. This would document and communicate to the NNEco organi:ations that the Program Indicator Fields are not active and should not be nedfor safety-related activities.

i

4. Topic: PMMS Completeness (Don Marks)

Background:

Parsons has noticed and is concerned that many components we have looked for are not listed in PMMS. To date we have not found any document that describes what is suppose to be in PMMS.

Question: Please discuss the following:

a) the scope of FMMS [i.e., How complete a list of components is PMMS? (what components / component types are included and what components / component types are excluded)];

b) the depth of detail (e.g. component vs subcomponent; and how are items like skids, fuses, and grounds handled).

c) when PMMS does not contain a component how does this impact preparation of a AWO? (e g.

how does the planner determine quality level etc.)

NEECo stated that the PM\fS Users Guide defines uhat is in PMtIS There is no requirement on what should be in P \fMS Since NEECo is not required to have a complete hst ofcomponents in PM\lS, comp <ments su.h as cables are listed elsewhere. In efect PM\lS is a reference tool and when something isn't in it that would be helpful to have, then it gets added in general PM\fSgoes to the sub-component level, but the level ofdetail varies with component type and whether the equipment was purchased as a " skid".

Il*C-1 controls work against compements not in PM\fS.

Page 2 of 4

ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES Decimber 23,1997

5. Topic: DG Ventilation System, Exhaust and Sup,ch Air Plenums -(William Clemenson)

'Banground:

Reference:

Dwgs 24042 & 59025, IE Bulletin 80-11 (Masonry Wall Program)

A portion of the DG Ventilation System Intake and Exhaust Plenums are constructed of block walls.

These walls are identified as wall numbers 1.1,1.2,1.3, and 1.4. A preliminary review of the MP2 Mssonry Wall Program indicates that these walls are not patt of the program.

Question: Please confirm the status of these walls. If these walls were evaluated for inclusion or l exclusion of the Masonry Wall Program, please provide the engineering document numbers that l contain the evaluations.

f NNECo stated that the block walls that are part ofthe DG ventilation intake and exhaust plenums were i

evaluatedin calculation number 8011-1.1 TO M

6. Topic: Steam Generator Auxiliary Feed Supply (Check Valves 2-FW-21 A and 2-FW-128) - ( Clark Tracy)

Discussion: Station Blackout Proc: dure EOP 2530 (Rev 4), step 2.4 tates: " Raise turbine speed by adjusting governor speed control to maintain feed pump discharge jresuure approximately 50 psi above steam generator pressure (CO5)"

MEPL I442 states "Each of the air-assisted valves will close on a loss of air to the operator or power to the associated solenoid valve. Ilowever, since auxiliary feedwater flow would still open the checkvalves against spring pressure to ensure proper injection, the valves essentially operate as free-swinging checkvalves.

Question: Parsons wants to confirm that during a station blackout, with fecci pump pressure approximately 50 psi abose steam generator pressure, that the check valves are open sufficiently to ensure adequate flow. Please discuss what analyses or tests have been conducted to ensure the adequacy of flow during a station blackout .

Afillstone 2 did not have any calculations or testing to addres.; Row through valves 2-Fil'-12A and 2-Fit'-

12fL 11 rey said that Proto Power was performing an analysis of AFit'JIow. Millstone 2 has requested the valve manufacturer to provide them with the pressure needed to open these valves. Millstone 2 stated that they thought the pressure would be on the order of3 to 3 psi. The information supplied by the valve manufacture uill be given to us in afuture telefone conference, Page 3 of 4

ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES December 23,1997

7. Topic: LPSI Surveillance - (Wayne Choromanski)

Dinunion: Parsons cannot confirm that LPSI Pumps P42A and P42B are tested for maximum flow conditions as specified in FSAR Table 14.6.5.1-3.

Question: Please confirm that the pumps are in fact tested and identify the procedure used to ensure that the LPSI pumps can meet design flow per Table 14.6.5.1-3.

It was discussed that NNEco has no in the past had afullflow performance test on record Procedure 2604Q has been revised to perform afullperformance test during a unit outage. The date of the revision was October ]997. A RAIhas been written (number to be determined) to request a copy ofthe new revised procedure and attachmentsfor this test.

l t

t i

l Page 4 of 4 c

ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES J nurry 6,1998 PURPOSE: Administrative telephone conference with NNECo, NRC , NEAC and Parsons to discuss:

DATE: 1/6/98

- LIST OF ATTENDEES:

s NNECo '

NRC NEAC Parsons Joe Fougere Manager, ICAVP Wame Dobson B.W. Deist -

J. Ililbish Claude Didier L. Power L

I This conference was cancelled and items scheduled for discussion rescheduled to January 8,1998

[ at 2:00 p.:a.

PAGE 1

  • , ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES Ja=ry 8,1998 DATE: JANUARY 8,1998 PURPOSE: Admi nistrative telephone conference with NNECo, NRC , NEAC and Parsons to discuss:

. Drawing :hanges, DCN DM2 S-0231-93 Service Water Modification DCN. DM2-S-565-93/PDCR 043-93

. Enclosure Building Setpoint/ Accuracy Calculations Allowable RWST Boric Acid Concentration e Post Accident Monitoring f

a DR 0127 Response e {

Rep!acement item Equivalency Evaluations

= l' Electrical Separation LIST OF ATTENDEES:

NNECo NRC NEAC Panons l Joe Fougere J. Nakosk W. Dobson Gary Komosky R W. Deist Rich Ewing J. Ililbish Paul Collette R. Thomas Chris Cristallo J. Colhns Rick Bonner C. Didier l Mark Suprenar.t O. 7agursky Ed Foster R llal!

1. Topic: Drewing changes as a result of DCN DM2 S-0231-93 (Jim Collins)

Background:

The purpose of the review was to review changes to drawing 25203-30001 as a result of DCN

(

DM2-S-23!-93. The review was to determine if the changes made had been subsequently transposed to other drawings and plant documents as part of the change control process.

The DCN was initiated because certain drawings did not reflect the as built conditions of the plant.

l Drawing 25203-3001 was revised to r:flect the loading on 480V Load Center 22A and 22C, which are facility I and are fed from unit substation transformers which are fd from the main facility 14160V switchgear.

He changes to the 22A load center involved breakers 22A2-2 and 22A8-2 which are located in compartments B0104 and B0110. A load for the Security Feed was added to breaker 22A2-2 and a load for the Ilydrolazer was added to the 22A8-2 breaker. The changes to the 22C load center involved removing loads from the 22C4-2 and the 22C10-2 breakers which are located in companments B0306 and B0312 and designating them as spares.

Question:

During the review it was discovered that schematic diagram 25203-30051 sheet 6 R7 referenced DC breaker control drawings 25203-32003 sheet 22 and 48 for br,akers 22C4-2 and 22C10-2 on 480V Load Center 22C. Similar drawing references could not be found on drawing 25203-30051 sheet 2 R2 for breakers 22A2-2 and 22A8-2 on 480V Load Center 22A.

Does a drawing exist for these breakers and if it does what is its number?

PAGE 1 OF 8 e .

' ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES Jnmry 8,1998

.- NNECo stated that drawings did not exist.

l V.e 22C4 2 and tne 22C10-2 bnakers are also iicluded on the 125 VDC Distribution Summary drawing 25203-30022 sheet 6QB. A search of the 25203-30022 series of drawings could not locate a similar drawing for the 22A2-2 and 22A8-2 breakers.

Does a drawing etLt and if it does what is its number? Ir either of the drawings do not exist what is thejustification?

The 22C4-2 and the 22C10-2 breakers are also includd on the 125 VDC Distribution Summary drawing 25203-30022 sheet 6QB. A search of the 25203-30022 series of drawings could not locate a similar drawing for the 22A2-2 and 22A8 2 breakers.

Does a drawing exist and ifit does what is its number? If either of the drawings do not exist what is the justification?

NNECo stated that breaker 22A2-2 was shown on drawing 25203-30022 sheet SQA. and that breaker 22A8-2 shoidd show on drawing 25203-300022 sheet SQB but did not.

A CR was in the process ofbeing issued to document these defletencies.

2. Topic: Service Water hiodification per DCN Dh12-S-565-93 and PDCR 2-043-93.

(Claude Didier)

Background:

DCN Dht2-S-565-93 involves installation of two valves 2-SW-298 & 2-SW-299 and four orifices RO-6667, RO-6668, RO 6669, and RO-6670. However, the PDC ~ 4 authorized a partial release for operations (hiemo DES 2-94-430) which did not include - items.

Questions:

Have these items been installed? If so, what documents authorized the installation and that the work that was perfonned?

What is the safety classification for each of these items? (Note PhthtS was not updated as a result of this work for which we are preparing a DR) -

On this DCN block 13 "Significant Change"is marked NA. Procedure NGP 5.1I was in effect at the time of this DCN. The procedure in step 4.19 " Determination if DCN makes a significant change.." addresses only a "yes" response or a "no" response. What does "NA" mean.

PAGE 2 OF 8

' ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES Jamry 8,1998 The' valves and allfour orfices have been installed The work orders are AfP2-94-09529, 30,31, and Af2 9411049 & $0.

All six of the items are QA Carl and have been procured and installed under QA l procedures. The AfEPL's classifying these components are AfP2-CD-IS66 &67. It is UIR

  1. 1893 and CR AfP2-97-1474.

The DCNis marked "NA " when it is used to initiate a change and that change has not yet '

gone through the mod approval process and been to PORC.

3. Topic: Enclosure Building Setpoint And Accuracy Calculations (Landal Powers)

Background:

Enclosure Building systems are to receive a Tier i review. Setpoint and accuracy calculations are to be included in the review. Other than Radiation Monitoring, searches of Passport Recovery Apps have not revealed any setpoint or accuracy calculations for Enclosure Building systems.

Question:

, Are there any setpoint or accuracy calculations, other than Radiation Monitoring, for j Enclosure Building systems? If so, please identify.

Additionalinformation on the questions is required This item will be included in the next conkrencel(V)3'98) l

4. Topic: Allowable T. S. Boric Acid Concentration RWST. (Raymond Thomas)

Background:

Maximum Boric Acid concentration was previously in the Technical Specification's I.CO as 2400 ppm. This LO was removed and the Technical Specification Bases (3/4.5.2 & 3/4.5.3) revised to reficct a maximum concentration of 2400 ppm. Currently a minimum concentration of 1720 ppm is in the Techr.ical Specification's LCO Section 3.1.2.8.

Question:

What is the maximum allowable difference between the maximum and minimum Boric Acid concentrations?

What is the maximum Boric Acid concentration allowed in the RWST? Where is RWST concentration documented and how is it maintained?

PAGE 3 OF 8

', ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES Jnu ry 8,1998

. The. maximum Boric Acid concentration allowed in the RH3 Tis 2400 ppm and minimum .

Bbric Acid concentration allowedin the RH3 Tis )720 ppm. The RWSTconcentration is.

documented and is maintained by the operators daily ship log and ops Procedures 2837 and 2838.

l

5. Topic: Post Accident Monitoring (Raymond Thomas) .

Background:

' The review of PAM calculations indicates that some Regulatory Guide 1.967 Type loops appear to be included in Loop Accuracy Calculations and some do not.

Question:

Do Post Accident Monitoring (PAM) Calculations exist for the following and what is the latast Calculation Number and revision 7 e

Steam Generator Level Low (R.G.1.97 Variable Type A) e Condensate Storage Tank Level (R.G,1.9_7 Variable Type D21) e Comainment Pressure (R.G.1.97 Variable Type B13 & R.G.1.97 Variable Type A)

(0 to 60 psig) & (0 to 250 prig) Loops e RWST Level (R.G. l.97 Variable Type A) e llPSI Flow (R.G. l.97 Variable Type D06)

Thefallowing PAAf Caletdation Numbers were provided:

Steam Generator LevelLow (RG.1.97 Variable Type A):

Wide Range 242-1317E2 Rev. O Narrow Range - PA-XY-XXX-0963GE Rev.1 Condensate Storage Tank Level (RG.1.97 Variable Type D21):

90-032-293E2 Rev.1 Containment Pressure (RG.1.97 Variable Type B13 & R.G.1.97 Variable Type A)

(0 to 60psig) Loop: PA-XY-XH-0965GE Rev.1 (0 to 250psig) Loop: None RHhTLeve!(RG.1.97 Variable Type A):

PA-XX-XEY-1042GE Rev. 2 HPSIRow (RG.1.97 Variable Type D06):

PA-XX-J'LT-1006GE Rev. O t-PAGE 4 OF 8

i

-. J

  • ,- ADMINISTRATIVE CONFEREiiCE NOTES Jcatry 8,1998 L 6. Topic: DR 0127 Response (Raymond Thomas)

Backgr'ound:

NNECo Response M2-IRF-00847 to Discrepancy Report # 0127 does not address the condensate pot's "As-Built" information. The response identified the Steam Generator drawings as being-incorrect or not complete as far as "As Built" dimensions were concerned.

Question:

Please identify what documentation we can use for the correct as built dimensions.

What is the distance from the steam generator to the condensat;; pot and what is the slope (positive or negative) of the condensate pot from the steam generator?

What standard or specification was used to install the steam generator's condensate pot?

The following information was provided:

The "As-Built" dimensions are shown on NU Drawing 25203 28408 Sheet 1022 along with DCNs L DM2-S-727-91 & DM2-S-320-92 and Engineering Record 25203 ER-97-0305.

J

( The distance from the ste tm generator to the condensate pot is approximately 15 inches and the slope is not positive or negative, but 0 slope for the condensate tee (pot) attached to the steam generator. The reference leg is attached to the steam generator and has a flexible leg to allow for vertical expansion.

The condensate tee was installed per NU 25203-28404 Sheet 470 [FSK-1-470].

7. Topic: DR0127 (RaymondThomas)

Background:

Millstone's betpoint calculation discussed in Response M2 IRF-00847 to Discrepancy Report # '

0127 does not address downcomer effects.

Question:

lbw and where are the dowucomer effects documented for the Steam Generator Level Trips for Narrow Range High Level and Narrow Range Low Level for both Normal Operating Conditions and Accident Conditions?

Downcomer efects as usedin the context ofthis question will be addressedfierther in the next conference.

PAGE 5 OF 8

8

' ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES January 8,19>8

8. Topic: DR Responses (vai;ous) (Raymond Thomas)

Hackground:

Several Millstone responses to Discrepancy Reports (including Millstone's Response M2-IRF-g 00847 to Discrepancy Report # 0127) included the statement that "this calculation is for 30 months versus 22% months (18 i 25%) and therefore is not a valid calculation" Question:

When will all the appropriate 30 month calculations be revised to their appropriate 22 %

month intervals?

)

' DR-40, IRF-00386 addresses the concern of30 month drill and Analytical Limits (AL).

Afillstone is revising their serpoint calcidations to include the new AL and other outstandmg UIRs'ARs before startup. The actual drift interwl will remain 30 months instead of]2% months. Allappropriate items will be revisedaccordingly. (l'ech.

Qecs.,1%iR, Procedures, etc.) Afilistone noted that these existing 30 month calctdations are presently the plant 's calculations ofrecord but will be revised as b needed

9. Topic: DR 0127 Response (Raymond Thomas)

Question:

What UIR's were included in the revision of calculation 93-039-1249E2 Rev. 01 identified in Millstone's Response M2-IRF-00847 to Discrepancy Report # 0127 regarding Steam Generator Level?

No UIRs were incorporatedin the revision of93-039-1249E2 Rev. O to Rev. I which was revised to include thefield measured Steam Generator Narrow Range tap spans. Afilistone provided a FAX copy of the " Steam Generator Narrow Range Level Cahbration Calculation " calculation dated 11/10 '9: A Calesdation Change Notice (CCN) dated l 09/97 was also provided which revised the tap spans again due to a numerical error in revision 1 ofthis calcidation.

10. Topic: Replacement item Equivalency Evaluations (George Zagursky)

Question: What was the effective date for the initiation of the current RIE Program? In addition, was there an equivalent program in effect prior to the current program and if so, identify that program end the etTective dates ofits use.

PAGE6OF8

2-ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES Jamry 8,1998 The efecths date was August,1992. There were no equivalentpriorprogram,

11. Topic: Electrical Separation (Roger Hall) . j

Background:

Review of SP-M2-EE-016 and ESAR-PRGM-97-032 Questions:

i I

A. Electrical Separation Specification SF-M2-EE-0016 was issued 9/6/96, Revision 0, e

is Rev 0 still the latest revision level? If not, please provide the latest revision expeditiously.

Is this document to be revised before startup? If so, please provide infonnation on the change scope and the tracking documents?

e Are any other separation documents (drawings, criteria, specifications) utilized which define different criteria than that stipulated in SP-M2-EE-00167 Have any calculations been issued addressing the topjini area of separation? If so, please identify by title and subject matter.

B. Preliminary results of walkdowns of the cable spreading room indicates that potential discrepancies exist. Additional information is requested to finalize our disposition of walkdown observations.

Have walkdowns been perfonned by NNECo of the cable spreading room?

e- If performed, did the walkdowns identify discrepancies?

. If discrepancies were identified, how are they resolved or to be resclved i.e. were engineering evaluations done? was the separation criteria revised ? were there 50.59s issued? were DCNs issued?

C. A detailed RAI (RAI 0930) has been issued regarding Engineering Self-Assessment ESAR-PRGM 97-032, Rev 0 (issued 12/17/97). Information for the RAI is currently being developed by NNECo and the following questions are focused on augmenting the RAI and developing a better understanding of ESAR-PRGM-97-032, Rev 0 e

What is the status of corrective actions identified by this walkdown? Please identify the documents or documentation detailing the actions resulting from the walkdown.

A field walkdown to verify separation compliance and the resolution of discrepancies in the Unit 2 Cable and Raceway Control Program has been scheduled for post restart.

Please identify the documents or documentation justifying there scheduling decisions.

Does a User's Manual or training course exist or f those using the CRCP?

D. Have any violations of the separation criteria been identified to date? If so, please describe the violations and identify the documents or documentation detailing the violations and their disposition.

PAGE 7 OF 8

_ _ _ - _ _ _ = _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - - -

ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES C' Jangry 8,1998 -

Electrical Separatto.s Specification SP-M2-EE-0016 has been revised to Revision 1. Further -

revisions may be requiredprior to re-start to document deviations. No other separation documents exist which stipulate diferent criteria. No calendations have been issued addressing the topical area ofelectrical separation. .

NNECo has not performed walkdowns ofthe MP2 cable spreading room. 1 NNECo will respond to RAI 0930 on daie to be advised. Wtil also send Revision 1 of separation spectflcation at same time. User's Afanualfor CRCPpresently in developmentfor issue end of i January, J998. -  ;

l Separation violations have been identijled by AfP2 in the Afain Control Room panels and the process is on going. AfP2 has notfocused an efort to evaluate electrical separations in o'her areas ofthe plant.

L PAGE 8 OF 8

  1. , ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES Janutry 13,1998

,DATE: ,

JANUARY 13,1998 PURPOSE: Administrative telephone conference with NNECo, NRC , NEAC and Parsons to discuss:

  • DR 0195 e Seismic Analysis Calculations e PDCR 2-071-92

. Enclosure Building Setpoint Calculations

  • Diesel Generator Jatket Water Expansion Tanks e DCN DM2-0435-93 e Steam Generator Downcomer Effects LIST OF ATTENDEES:

NNECo NRC NEAC Panora Gary Komosky Ralph Arclutzel Bruce Deist Dan Das Ken Gabel Jim Nicholson Ken Mayer John Becker Wade Russell Nabil Juraydini Tom Flenuning Rich Ewing Ray Romas Chris Cristallo I. Topic: DR #0195 The details of the DR were discussed, inchiding the walkdown and spect)1c segments of the tubing.

2. Topic: Documentation /Cales which could not be located in NDS (Ken Gabel)

Background:

UIR-2849 and AR 97014791-01 were generated to request CMP to locate or generate: 1) seismic analysis calc # EMF-2657 which is referenced by drawing 25203-28408 sheet 084, 2) Attachment A cf NCR 287-003, and 3) attached calculation of NCR 294-093. The sheet 084 drawing details the instrument tubing installations for the RWST level traasmitters LT-3001/3002/3004/3005.

Questions:

. Have the dirce documents been found or are cales being regenerated?

  • Do either calculations analyze the tubing configurations from the tran~ itters back to the RWST7 e if documents have not been found/ regenerated, what is the completion schedule?

PAGE 1 Ol' 4

l

  1. , ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES J:mry 13,1998 The cales.lations have not beenfound or regenerated. hWECoplans are to redo the calculations prior to Afode 6. In response to Parsons concerns over the needfor this information to continue Tier 1 review, NNECo will reassess their schedulejbr the recalculation. In addition, they were continue to searchfor the missing documents. Parsons willdevelop a specsfic Mifor the missing documents
3. Topic: PDCR 2-07192 (Wade Russell)

Back' ground:

Parsons has received a modification package for PDCR 2-071-92 which was to replace the EDG governors, speed switches and install an air roll system. From review of the package and walkdowns, this work appears to have been completed. However, NNECo's modification data base indicates that PDCR 2-071-92 has been canceled.

Question:

Has PDCR 2-071-92 been canceled? If so, was the work identifed by this PDCR done i

under another PDCR?

i-l PDCR 2-071-92 has not been canceled. The work has been done. The database is in error.

l

4. Topic: Enclosure Building Setpoint And Accuracy Calculations (Landal Powers)

Background:

Enclesure Building systems are to receise a Tier i review Setpoint and accuracy calculations are to be meluded in the review. Other than Radiation Monitoring, searches of Passport Recovery Apps have not revealed any setpoint or accuracy calculations for Enclosure Building systems.

Question:

Are there any setpoint or accuracy calculations, other than Radiation Monitoring, for Enclosure Building systems? If so, please identify.

Due to the amount ofinformation covered by this question, the question was canceled. A formal M1 will be developed requesting the required information

5. Topic: Applicability of Diesel Generator Jacket Water system expansion tanks T-80A/B to Millstone unit 2 SQUG Project Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL). (Tom Flemming)

PAGE 2 OF 4

8-

  1. A3MINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES J:nu:ry 13,1998

Background:

(

. '%e pu@se of the review was to determine the completeness of the SQUG list in regards to mechanical components and equipment associated with the Millstone Unit 2 diesel generators. The

. resiew of this list, Report No. 03-0240-1367 Resision 2 indicated that the T 80A/B tanks are not included. Other off-skid tanks wh:ch are associated with the emergency mode operation of this system such as the T-048A/B fuel oil supply tanks and the T-049A D starting air tanks are .

included on the SQUG list. These are found on pages 56 and 57. The T-80A/B tanks should also l

be listed here, in accordance with the SQUG Rev. 2 identification criteria, section 3. Due to the  !

importance of these tanks in maintaining the cooling water inventory in the Diesel Engines, a failure such as detachment of the tanks from their mountings on the generator room wall could cause a catastrophic loss ofcooling water from the engines, and subsequent shutdown of the gene stors.

Question:

Our review indicates that the T-80A/B Jacket Water Expansion Tanks should have been included in the SQUG review, due to their importance in maintaining the integrity of the Diesel Cooling Water system.

l lias NNECo presiously addressed this issue? Is documentation availablejustifying the exclusion of these tanks from SQUG review? If so, please identify the documents.

Information necessary to answer this question has been requestedfrom the vendor. This question will be carriedforward and coverc d at the next conference.

6. Topic: Drawing changes as a result of DCN DM2-S-0435-93 (Jim Collins)

Background:

During the review of drawing 25203-30003 and 30004 as a result of changes made by DCN DM2-S-0435-93, it was noted that the existing revision of the drawings (25203-30003 R6 & 25203-30004 RIO) do not reflect the changes as shown on sheets 16 and 18 of the DCN. The drrwings presently reflect the configuration prior to the DCN. Drawing 25203 30003 R6 shows the DCN as in:orporated in revision 4 and drawing 25203-30004 RIO shows the DCN as incorporated in revision 10.

Also, drawing SKEM92060 SH I was released as Sheet 12 of DCN DM2-S-04235-93. This drawing tabulates the oscillograph trace numbers and agrees with the trace numbers shown on drawings 25203-30003 and 30004 when issued as part of the DCN. No record of SKEM92060 could be found in GRITS.

Question:

What design change returned drawings 25203-30003 and 30004 back to their original configuration prior to issue of the DCN?

PAGE 3 OF 4

' ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES January 13.1998 lias drawing SKEM92060 SH I been released as an official document? If so what is the number? If not, how and why was it decided not to issue the drawing?

PDCR 2-010 93 andDCNDM2-S-057-93 Drawing SKEM92060 SH l was usedas an aid during installation. The sqformation contained in it is now inchtded m the drawings.

l

7. Topic: Continuation of discussion regarding downcomer effects. (Question # 7 regarding l DR 0127 from 1/8/98 conferenc,:. (Raymond Thomas) l l

Additionalinfbrmation on available calculations was presented. Parsons is in possession of the calctdations.

Other Conference Information:

Regardmg Question #2from li8'98, the CR that was initiated was CR M2-98-00550 Regardmg Question #8from 1/8'98, the estimated datefor completing the project response is 3/3')98.

Regardmg Question 9, the calcidation supporting the DR response was faxed to Parsons on u8'98 Regardmg Question 11, the target datefbr completing ti.e RAI response is UlF98 PAGE 4 OF 4

8 ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES

  1. January 15,1998 DATC* JANUARY 15,1998

- PURP eSE: Administrative telephone conference with NNECo, NRC , NEAC and Parsons to discuss:

. Diesel Generator Jacket Water Expansion Tanks e Drawing Control LIS OF ATTENDEES:

NNECo NRC NEAC Parsons Joe Fougere Ralph Architiel Bruce Deist Fred Mattioli Waine Dobson j' Jeff Putnam Ray Thompson L Garv Komosky G.Vaux l Nabil Juraydini Willam Keegan Chris Cristallo Dan Dube Dave Bajumpaa I 1. Topic: Steam Generator Mass (Volume) Versus Level . . (Raymond Thomas)

Background:

The Steam Ger.erator Narrow Range Level is measured using differential pressure transmitters and trips at a setpoint of 36% level. The safety analysis volume assumes a mass of water to correlate with steam generator level setpoint of 36% and an Analytical Limit of 34% The old steam generators had a much larger inventory for the volume of water (mass) than the new suplacement steam generator yet the setpoint is still the same.

Question:

What is the correlation between the safety analysis volume for steam generator level and the existing setpoint for the steam generator narrow range low level? What calculation (s) document this correlation?

What is the span used for the Steam Generator Narrow Range Level for the Safety Analysis and where is it documented? Why is the setpoint unchanged from the old to new Steam Generator?

NU Memo SGRP 92-1254 dated Afay 12, 1992 addresses the issue over the Afassa'olume differenece between the Old and New Steam Generators. Afilistone toforward a copy to Parsons upon receipt ofRAl.

t Afilistone doesn't have copies of the Seimens/ANF calculations : hat document the span issue but they do have a ANF/Scimens Report - ANF-91-W2 Revision i dated Afarch 1991. This report addresses the difference in Steam Generator inventories and states that reanalysis is not necessary I of 3 l

J

-(- ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES J=rry 15,1998 .

2. Topic: FSARCRs (Rich Olson)

{

Background:

M2 RAl-00877 requested copies of certain FSARCRs, except those that had been included in the recent shange (Change 48) to the FSAR. FSARCR 97-MP2-20 was on the list of requ sted FSARCRs. It was not included in the NNECo responses dated 12/30/97 and I'6/98, implying that it had been included in FSAR Change 48. A review of the latest FSAR (thru Change 431 failed to fmd the changes cov ered in FSARCR 97-MP2-20.

- Question:

1) Please confirm that FS ARCR 97-MP2-20 was incorporated into FSAR Change 48.
2) -Please identify the specific wording cha,ges in the FSAR that constitute the changes made per FSARCR 97-MP2-20.

FN4RCR 97-MP2-20 has not been incorporated in F54R Change 48 and was not includedin the responses to RAIM2-RAl.00877 because it is not yet approved Only those FSARCRs approved but not inchtded in Change 48 were includedin the RAI response. IS4RCR-97-MP2-20 ISstill under review.

3. Topic: ' Applicability of Diesel Generator Jacket Water system expansion tanks T-80A/B to Millstone unit 2 SQUG Project Safe Shutdown Equipment List (SSEL). (Tom Flemming)

Background:

The purpose of the resiew was to determine the completeness of the SQUG list in regards to mechanical components and equipment associated with the Millstone Unit 2 diesel generators. The review of this list,'

Report No. 03-0240-1367 Resision 2 indicated that the T-80A/B tanks are not included. Other off-skid tanks which are associated with the emergency mode operation of this system such as the T-048A/B fuel oil supply tanks and the T-049A-D starting air tanks are included on the SQUG list. These are found on pages 56 and

57. The T-80A/B tanks should also be listed here, in accordance with thn SQUG Rev. 2 identification L

criteria, section 3. Due to the importance of these tanks in maintaining se cooling watei inventory in the Diesel Engines, a failure such as detachment of the tanks from their mountings on the generator room wall could cause a catastrophic loss of cooling water from the engines, and subsequent shutdown of the generators.

Question:

Our resiew indicates that the T-80A/B Jacket Water Expansion Tanks should have been included in the SQUG review, due to their importance in maintaining the integrity f the Diesel Cooling Water system.

Has NNECo pn:viously addressed this issue? Is documentation availablejustifying the exclusion of these

- tanks from SQUG review? If so, please identify the documents.

It was agreed that the tanks shordd have been incheded in the SQUG review. CR M2-98-0115 has been generated to correct.

20f3~

~ _ _ _ _ - _ _

, <l A'MINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE NOTES

v'. J:cu*ry 15,1998 4-

^ 4. . Topic: Drawing 25203-28500-00120 (William Keegan)

Discussion:

' Drawing 25203-28500-00120 is the subject of a drawing revision review, The CCD supplied with the review package is DCN DM2-S-0036-93.

. Question:

Is VDC M2-S 1210-93 the parent document for DCN DM2-S-0036-93? If so, did the VDC have a Technical Review analyzir.g the change specified by the DCN?

VDC Af2-S-1210-93 is not the parent Jocument for DCN DAf2-S-0036-9, CR Af2-98-0107 has been generated regardmg this drawing revision.

i 3 of 3 i 1

I

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20199E968&oldid=3336145"