ML20203G616
| ML20203G616 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 12/16/1997 |
| From: | Schopfer D SARGENT & LUNDY, INC. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| 9583-100, NUDOCS 9712180171 | |
| Download: ML20203G616 (51) | |
Text
. _.
,f o'
n Bar goruts.kLunciy *
}y U.tTf"
~,y 312?09-0078 December 161997 Project No. 9583100 Docket No. 50-423 Northeast Nuclear Energy Company Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3 Independent Corrective Action Verification Program United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Docuinent Control Desk W:shington, D.C. 20555 I have enclosed the followir.g seven'(7) discrepancy reports (DRs) identified during our review activities for the ICAVP. These DRs are being distributed in accordance with the Communict.tlona Protocol, PI MP3 01.
i f)/f DR No. DR MP3-0228 DR No. DR MP3-0635 DR No. DR MP3-0442 DR No. DR MP3-0647 DR No. DR MP3 0586 DR No. DR-MP3-0726 DR No. DR-MP3-0770 rA04 t
I have also enclosed the following nineteen (19) Dks for which the NU resolutions have been reviewed and accepted by S&L DR No. DR MP3-004)
DR No. DR-MP3-0286 DR No. DR MP3 0074 DR No. DR-MP3-0293 DR No. DR-MP3-0091 DR No. DR MP3-0306 DR No. DR MP3 0092 DR No. DR MP3-0322 D.? No;DR MP3 0094 DR No. DR-MP3-0403 DR No. DR MP3-0114 DR No. DR MP3 0406 DR No. DR-MP3-0142 DR No. DR MP3-0410 DR No. DR MP3 0177 DR No. DR MP3-04iS DR No. DR-MP3-0194 DR No. DR-MP3-0430 DR No. DR MP3-0643 D
002 11kkki i
y i
1 P
- PDR, 55 East Montoe Strcet
- Chicapo. IL 6%03-5780 USA
- 312-209-2000 w
e w-
--r r
1 c
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission December 16,1997 Document Control Desk Project No. 9583100 Page 2 I have also enclosul the one (1) DR for which the NU resolution has been resiewed but not accepted. S&L comments on this resolution have been prosided.
DR No. DR MP3-0639 Please direct any questions to me at (312) 269-6078.
)
Yours very trul),
Q,t.' /,~) _ h b
D. K. Schopfer Vice President and ICAVP Manager DKS:spr Enclosures Copies:
E. Imbro (1/1) Deputy Director, ICAVP Oversight T. Concannon (1/l) Nuclear Energy Advisory Council J. Fougere (1/l) NU
=*.wwernisiu k J
?
i e
y-y--+-g-y--g
- g. y-w--y;-+p-y 9-y u
4-7' p---
,9-g y
p w-w m--.y a
y w3
---wy--
y--
O Northeast UtilMies ICAVP DR No. DR.NP3 0228 witstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Otoup: Conhgprobon DR VAUD Review Element: System instensbon D6eciphne: I& C Dome'"
O va F-- - - ci Type: Instenshon imp 6emente 9 (g
systemProcess: Rss NMC W level: 4 De6e faked to NU:
Ogle Publ6ehed: 12/1997 Discrepancy: Instrument Labeling Descrisam: The following labeling inadequacles with respect to design documents and requisements of Procedure OA 9,' System and Component Labeling,' were noted during system walkdowns,
- 1. Instrument 3RSS-TE28A was to be retagged per Table 2, page 3 of Change Control Document T C 06640 The Installed instrument is still identified as P683 TE28A.
- 2. Pressure transmitter 3RSS*PT25A as shown on drawing BK-16P 56-6 Rev. C was identified based on its location and connection to sensing line 3RSS*PT25A. The instrument is incorrectly tagged as ' spare."
Review Vand inval6d Needed Date Inidator: Sarvet, T. L 9
O
'2/5'87 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A Q
Q 12597 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K Q
Q 12/11/97 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Q **
Q 12/11/97 Date:
DNALID:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identHled by NU7 O Yee tel No Non Dioctopent CondN6on?(,) Yes
- ) No Roootut6on Pendeng70 ve. + No R auuonunt..av.470 vs.
+ No Review Acceptalde Not Acceptable Needed Date WmS T. L VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schoptar, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anerid K Date:
SL Comnente:
O
(
l I
PrWed 12/1&Sr 2.S6:15 PM Page 1 of 1 i
4 Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0442 4
umotone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report n *wo, ue: symem onvAuo ne*w aw: symm o.nen piece iw : Enwonmnwesiouemehan O[
Wry Type: componws om 9
sysierWProcess: WA NRC s!.h level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Putdiehed: 12/1B97 D6.cropeacy: Equipment Qualification Documents Discrepancy Descriptkm: The FSAR and the IEEE 323 requirement that the Vendor Qualification Reports (EQDs) reference the applicable component identification number,is not met. A review of the EQDs for the QSS, RSS, and SWP System components shows that these EQDs do I ot reference applicable Millstone identification numbers.
FSAR Section 3.118.1.2 states tnat all Safety related equipment and components for each Class 1E specification, located throu9hout the plant, are listed in the EQDs. Each device specified is labeled, in the EODs, with its plant identification number, location, and environmental zone, IEEE 3231974 Standard, *lEEE Standard for Qualifying Class 1E Equipment for Nuclear Power Generating Stations *, states in Section 6.1, pa9e 10 that the EQ Report shall include the identincation of Class 1E equipment being qualified.
For the QSS system, the following is the lisi of components and the corresponCng EQDs which were reviewed and where the quallfled component is not identified by its Millstone identification number in the EQD:
3QSS*LS54A,B.C.D ; 30SS*LSS6A,B,C,D (ASCO Pressure Switches): Specification No. : 2472.510-626 ; EQ Report No. :
AQR 101083, Rev.1 30SS*LT930,931,932,933 (Rosemount Pressure Transmitters): Specification No. 2472.510-662 ; EQ Reports Nos.108026, Rev. B.,108025, Rev B 30SS*MOV34A,B (Limitorque Motor Operators): Specification No. 2362.200164 ; EQ Report No.B0058 Rev,0.
For the RSS system, the following is the list of components and the corresponding EQDs which were reviewed and where the quallfled component is not identified by its Millstone identification numberin the EQD:
3RSS*PT25A,B,C,0 ; 3LMS*PT934, 935,936, 937 ; 3 MSS
- PT514, 515, 516, 524, $25, 526, 534, 535, 536, 544, 545, 546 ;
3RCS*PT457,458 ; 3R36*FT38A,b ; 3RSS FT40C.D (Rosemount Pressure Transmitters): Specification No,2472.510
~
662 ; EQ Reports Nos.108026, Rev. B.,108025, Rev, B 3RSS*MOV20A,B,B,D ; 3RSS*MOV23A,B,C,D ;
3RSS*MOV38A,8 ; 3RSS*MOV54A,B,C.D ;
3RSS*MOV57A,B,C,D ; 3RSS*MV8837A,B ; 3RSS*MV8838A,B (Limitorque Motor Operators): Specification No,2362.200164 ;
m ow m anm.
o_ n PN 1L697 2M12 PM Pg 1 M 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0442 Millstone Unit 3 Discreparicy Report 3RSS*LE22A1,A2,A3 ; 3RSS*LEB1,B2,B3 (Transamerica Delaval, Gems Sensor Div. Level Transmitters): Specification No. 2471.410-039 ; EO Report No. 45700 2, Rev, 0 3RSS*P3A.B.C.D (Westinghouse Pump Motor): Specification No. 2214.802-044 ; EQ Report No. WCAP 8687, Supp. 2 A05B, Rev. O.
For the SWP system the following is the list of components and the corresponding EQDs which were reviewed and where the quellfled component is not identified by its Millstone Identification number in the EQD:
3SWP FSS4A3,B3,C3.D3 (ASCO Pressure Switches):
Speci6 cation No. : 2472.519-826 : EQ Report No. : AQR.
101083, Rev,1 3SWP FT59A,B.C,0 (Rosemount Pressure Transmitters):
Specification No. 2472.510-602 ; EQ Reports Nos. 108026, Rev. B,,108025, Rev. B 3SWP*MOV50A,B : 3SWP'MOV54A,B ; 3SWP'MOV57A,B,C,0
- 3SWP*MOV71 AQ,B (Limitorque Motor Operators)
Specification No. 2362.200-164 ; EQ Report No.B0058, Rev. 0 3SWP*P3A,8 (Westinghouse Pump Motor) : Specification No.
2214.432-042 ; EQ Report No. MM-9112, Rev. 2.
The lack of component identification in the EODs by the components' Millstone identification number is a discrepant cond,'tlon.
Rev6e v vend invahd Needed Date inat6esor Yeone, s.
O O
O
$2/ o/87 vT L.ed: N"' ^"thaar ^
O O
O
$2/*S7 VT Mer: Schopfw, Don K Q
Q Q
t2/11/97 iRc chmn: smph, Anend K O
O O
i2titip7 Dele:
wvAuo:
Date:
ResoluTKm:
Provtously identWied by NU? O Yes (#i No NonD6ecropentcondelion?Q Yes @ No Reeolut6onPendingeO voo + No R iuiionunre.oevedtO vos @ No Rev6ew Accepteble Not Acceptable Needed Dale go, g VT Lead: Nevi, Anthony A l
VT Mgn schopfw, Don K wie chmn: se. Anend K
=
I Date:
sL commente:
I f
Pr1 reed 12/1697 2 5419 PM Page 2 or 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0546 Minetone unit 3 D!screpancy Report 3
Revtew aroup: Pyotem DR VALID Rev6ew Enement: system Damon
%g op,,,
j Diecipiene: Mechancad Demon O vee D6ecrepency Type: Calcuestson
$ No s esmWProcese Rss j
NRC Signencence level: 4 Dese FAKod to NU:
Date Published: 12/19,97 i
06*crepency: Design Temperature of RSS Piping Between RSS HX and Containment Wall
==
Description:==
The piping design temperature of 260F is not implemented in the line list, Rev.1 and CCN 1 to US(B) 1187 added Conditions 7,8 and 9 as operating temperature conrtitions. These conditions are the loss of SWP flow events for the RSS system. The operating temperature for p! ping downstream of the RSS HXs during Conditions 7. 8 and 9 is 257F. This piping temperature is reflected in Conditions 7,8 and 9 of SDP RSS-1361M3 and is provided as input to the piping stress analysis.
Rev.1 to the design pressure and temperature calculation, US(B) 1166, identifies the design temperature of piping d'>wnstream of the RSS HXs as 260F. This is consistont with a loss of SWP flow event.
The line list states that the design temperature for piping i
between the RSS HX outlet and the containment building wall is j
235F.
j The line list should conform to the design basis calculations.
Review Valid inv aled Nooded Date i
instMor: Wakesend, J. F.
O O
O i2/a97 VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A Q
Q Q
12/E97 VT Mgr Schopfer. Don K O
O O
i2titis7 IRC Chmn: Srgh, Anand K O
O O
$2/iirer Dele:
INVAUD:
Date:
RESOLUTION:
Previously klontened by Nu? O Yee # No Non Discrepent Condition?Q vos t$i No ResoluuonPend6ng?O van 13' No Roeoiuiionunresoiv.470 vee @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date
,, gj VT Lead: Nort. Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer. Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Date:
SL Comnente:
Printed 12/1697 2.50 50 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast UulNios ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0635 minstone unu ::
Discrepancy Report Rev6.w aroup: speem DRVAuo Revtow timment: spaem og
,,,,,,,,g,,,
D6scipitas: N Dw g y,,
Diecrepancy Type: Componed Date
@ No syneemerecess: oss NRC signiac.ence novel: 3 Date faked to NU:
Date published: 12/11b97 r
. cy: Inconsistency between FSAR Sec 6.1.1.1 & design documents with respect to ASME Section il materials.
Descr* tion: FSAR Sedion 6.1.1.1 states that mechanical properties of the materials used in the engineered safety features (ESF) are in acwrdance with ASME Boller and Pressure Vessel Code, Section ll.
l The FSAR statement in Section 6.1.1.1 clearly applies the requirement for materials to all safety related piping and components. However, application of this requirement to pressure boundary materials appears more appropriate.
Since the FSAR Section 6.1.1.1 does not specify that th9 mechanical properties of pressure boundary materials, only, are in accordance with ASME Section ll, all safety related quench spray system materials are evaluated against the mechanical properties in ASME Section 11.
All materials in safety relataal components are designated "SA" or "SB" from ASME Section ll, Parts A and B except for the following:
A 193 GR 88 A 194 GR 8F A 276 TP 304 Cond A A 276 TP 316 Cond B A 296 CF8 A 296 CF8M A 307 GR B/CD B-438 GR 1 B 584 AL 836 According to ASME Section ll, Parts A and B, the specifications for ASTM A193, A194, A 307, and B 584 have equivalent mechanical properties to ASME Section 11, Parts A and B, Subsections SA193, SA194, SA 307, and SB 584. Therefore, components made from materials complying with these specifcations are considered acceptable.
However, specifications B-438, SA 276 and SA 296 are not listed in ASME Sc:'?:., ll. Therefore, components constructed from materials designed to specifications 2 438, SAC 76, SA.
296, A 276. and A 296 do not have rnechanical properties in accordance with ASMS Section 11. Quench spray system components constructed from these materials are:
l.
l 30SS*P3A,B3 l
innn+unvuA n Printed 12/1697 2.So 06 PM Page 1 of 2
2 Nortiwast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR44P3 0638 Milletone Unit 3
- Discrepancy Report-30SS*V4, V8 30SS*V976 V979 30SS*V50 58 3QSS*V340 V941 3QSS*V948 V951 30SS*V968 V975 30SS*V933 V936 30SS*V957 V959 30SS*V964 V967 30SS*V986, V987 30SS*V42 V43 Review voi6d invei6d Needed Date initiator reengoks, 0, J.
O Q
Q 12/1/97 YT Lead: Nw1, Arthony A O
O O
' ?"7 VT Mgr: Schopfw, Don K Q
Q Q
.2t11/97 IRC Chmn: Shph Anand K O
O E
12 tis /97 osie:
INVAUD:
Dele:
RESOLUTION:
Previously identthod by NUF O von @ No NonD6ecrepentCondation?O von I No Resolution Pend 6ng?O voa + No Reeoiuiion uareeoived?O von @ No Rev6ew Acceptable Not Ar- -? ' '
Needed Date O
O O
VT Leed: Nwl, Anthony A VT Mgt: ScM;*er, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K m
_ o:
SL Comments e
Prtnied 12/1&912M14 PM Pe0e 2 of 2
Northeast U6 Hues ICAVP DR No. DR MP34547 Mi#etone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report DR vAuo Rev6.w oroup: syenom Review timment: syMem Deonen Deecipeww: structures Deegn
(-) y,,
Pt- - ; ry Type: Celeulaten (g) g,
SyaleWProcess: SWP
~
NRC Signiacance level: 4 Dale faxed to NU:
Da6e Published: 12/1997 D6 coopency: Missing Analysis Descrip*6en: Calc. # 12179-BE YQ2,RO and Calc. # 12179 BE 52YS.R2 We have reviewed Millstone Unit 3 Equipment Foundation Calc.
- 12179 BE YQ2,R0 and Calc. # 12179-BE-52YS,R2. Based on this review, we have noted the following discrepancy.
- 1. These calculations were provided by NU to confirm the adequacy of equipment foundation for Junction Box No.
3SWP*JB 3A.B. These calculations are generic colculations for seismic Junction box supports. Specific calculations for the subject equipment noted could not be found in aforementioned calculations.
Rev6ew Vand invalid Needed Date initeetor: Kleic. N O
O O
i2/+s7 VT Lead: Nort. Anthony A O
O O
ti/2 m 7 VT Mar: Schopfer. Don K O
O O
$2titie7 1RC Chmn: Sin 0h. Anend K Q'A O
O 12/i1/e7 Dele:
INVAWO:
Date:
RESOLLrTION:
Provlously ident4Aed by Nu? Q vos t No Non D6ecrepent Condnion?Q ves
'Si No Resolut6on Pending?O vos (6) No Resolutionunresolved?O vos
- D No Review Acceptable Not AccepteNe Needed Date O
O O
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: Sctmpfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh. Anand K O
O Date:
SL Conenents:
P9ted 12/1M7 2A927 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0726 utilstone UnM 3 Discrepancy Report
-4 Revtow Group: System DR VAUD EM: WW Potentiel Opt retnisty leeue 06ecipane: MechancalDugn O Yee Diecrepancy Tyae: Calculeuan 4 g, SyseesWProcese: HVX
~~
NRC St
=44 level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: 12/1M7 D6screpenc7: ESF Fitter Unit Damper Leakage Deectlpt6on: During review of the supplementary leak collectien and release system (SLCRS) and auxiliary building ventilation system (ABVS) filter unit isolation Jamp9rs a discrepancy regarding unmper leakage was identified.
FSAR Table 1.81, Reg. Guide 1.52 Rev. 2. Position C.3.p exception states " Damper leakage will not impact on the air cleaning effectiveness of the ESF systems." A calculation that determines the damper leakage allowable to meet air cleaning effectiveness requirements could not on located.
Review Ve46d invalid Needed Date snatietor: stout. M D.
O O
11r2n7 VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A 12697 VT Mgr: Schopfer. Don K Q
Q 12/11/97 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K g
12/11/97 Date:
INVAUD:
Dele:
RESOLUTION:
Prov6ously identened by NU7 Q Yes JGi No Non Discrepent Condation?Q Yee !e[ No Resolution Pending70 Yes t*) No Resoluuon Unresolved? O Yes (5) No Review Acceptable Nut Acceptable Needed Date VT Leed: Nort, Anthany A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
SL Commente:
' Printed 12/16S7 2.48.2e PM Page 1 of 1
..=
Northeast utnities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 4770 Muistona unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: aresem DR VAUD Review Element: Spelem Deegn D6ecipilne: Mecheng Dee*"
O Yee Descapency Type: Compwort Date
- 4) g 8,-.7
= !RSS NRC e4 we level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Putd6ehed: 12/1997 D6*croPency: Discrpancy between PDDS arKl PMMS relative to valve 3RS3 V918 Descr6 t6on: Plant computer data base. PDDS, shows valve 3RSS-V918 to be P
a gate valve. This is consistent with P&lD EM 112C Revision
- 16. However, the plant computer data base, PMMS, shows this valve to be a globe valve.
Review Veild invalid Needed Dele init6stor: Feingod, D.1 O
O O
i2tioS7 VT Leed: Neri. Anthony A
[
[
[
12/11 s 7 VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K O
O O
12/ iter IRC Clenn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
12/ tis 7 Date:
leNAUD:
Date:
REa0LUT10N:
.tv r?;identmed Ipy NUP U Yes @) No Non 06ecrepent Condsuon?Q Yes @ No Reeeeut6en Pendiae70 Yes (ih No Ph% Unroes.ved70 Yes @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date gg VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh. Anand K Dele:
SL Comments:
Printed 12/1697 2.47.13 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0041
~
Mitiatone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Revtow Group: Conry.suon DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Rev6ew Element: syetem Deegi Diecipl6ne: Pring Deeg" Ow E'- -, - :y Type: Dreveng gg syenemYrocess: SWP NRC Signiacence level: 4 Date FAKod to NU:
Date Putdished: 9/11/g?
D6*cropency: Upper Tier to Lower Tier Drawings Review for SWP in Pump House Descr6 tion: The following drawing discrepancies were found in reviewing the P
P&lDs with the as builtisometrics:
- 1. P&l0 EM 133A Rev 26 does not show the 1/2 inch capped line on line3 SWP 030 7 3 (12) as shown on the isometric Cl-SWP 18 Sht 4 Rev 11,
- 2. P&lD EM 133A Rev 26 shows the instrument line to PT26B on line 3 SWP 030 2 3 after the tee to 3 SWP 030 7 3 (K 2) versus before the les as shown on the isometric Cl SWP 18 Sht 4 Rev 11.
- 3. DCN DM3-001469-96 changed the flanged connections on strainers 3SWP*STRIB and 3SWP*STR1D to be blanked off on P&lD EM 133A Rev 26. Isometric Cl SWP 16 Sht 4 Rev 11 was not changed.
- 4. DCN DM3-001468-96 changed the flanged co*meetions on strainers 3SWP* STRIA and 3SWP*STRIC to be blanked off as shown on P&lD EM 133A Rev 26. Isometric Cl SWP 19 Sht 4 Rev 11 was not changed.
- 5. Isometric Cl SWP 18 Sht 4 Rev 11 continuation line shown as 3 SWP 030190-3 should be 3 SWP 030 256-3.
- 6. Valves V992. V993, V72, V73, MOV240 and MOV24B on isometric Cl SWP 247 Sht 5 Rev 11 are safety related and should be designaled with a (*).
- 7. Line 3 SWP-003 256 3 on PalD EM 133DRev 23 (B 2) should be shown as 3-SWP 030-2i,6-3.
- 8. Line 3 SWP 003 257 3 on P&lD EM 133D Rev 23 (B-10) should be shown as 3 SWP-030-257 3.
Rev6ew Valid invol6d Needed Date init6elor: Rand, J. W.
-0 0
0 SSS7 VT Lead: Nerl, Anthony A O
O O
SSS7 VT Mer schopfer. Don K O
O O
SS/87 utC chnvi: singh, Anand K Q
Q Q
9.'8/97 Date:
DNAUD:
Date: 10/10/97 Printed 12/1697 2.23'WM*
- Page 1 of 2 i
_=-
Northeast utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP34041 1
Millstone un# 3 Discrepancy Repost
""'" Disposition:
NU has concluded that the issues reported in items #1 and 2 of Discrepancy Report, DR MP3-0041, have identified conditions previously discovered by NU which require correction. Items #1 and 2 have been previously addressed on UiR 1300.
NU has concluded that the issues reported in items #3,4,5,6,7 and 8 of Discrepancy Repmt, DR MP3-0041. have identified conditions not previously discovered by NU which require cortection. The errors associated with items #3,4, 5 and 6 will be corrected on their respective isometric drawings, the errors associated with items #7 and 8 will be corrected by DCN DM3 0706-97. CR M3 97 3077 was written to provide the necessary corredive actions to resolve this issue.
==
Conclusion:==
NU has concluded that the issues reported in items #1 and k of Discrepancy Report, DR MP3 0041, have identified conditions previously discovered by NU which require correction. These items have previously been addressed on UlR 1300.
NU has concluded that the issues rep?rted in items #3, 4, 5,6,7 and 8 of Discrepancy Report. DR MP3 0041, have identified conditions not previously discovered by NU which require correction. These errors will be corrected on their nespective isometric drawings. CR M3-97 3077 was written to provide the necessary corrective actions to resolve this issue.
M No PrevkmWy idenamed a v Nur U Yee @ No Non D6screpent ConethmfU vee Meechmon Poneng?O Yee @ No
'blon Untoeolved?O v.e
@) No Review A=pah
- ist Acceptable Needed Dale VT Leed: Nort. Anthony A Q
D D
N vi uen set.,pe.,, con K NtC Chnm: sangh, Anand K o.
sL Carmmee,te:
Printed 12/1697 2 23.53 PM Page 2 of 2
=
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 00T4 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Ofoup: ConfQuraison DR REs0LUTION ACCEPTED Potential Opetetely lseue Diecis*=: Pene oomn O vee D6ecrepancy Type: orsq
'91No systenvProceu: R$$
~
NRC signiacance level: 4 Date faked to NU:
Date Publ6shed. $v11/97 D=csePaacy: Upper Tier To Lower Tier Drawing Review for RSS-QSS in ESF Bldg.
Deecription: The following drawing discrepancies were found in reviewing the P&lD with the as built Isometrics:
- 1. PalD EM 112C Rev 16 shows line 3-RSS 750129 2 connected to 3-RSS-01019-2 after 3-RSS-004122 2 (H 10).
Isometric Cl RSS 11 Sht 3 Rev 6 shows the connection before 3 RSS 004122 2.
- 2. EM 112C Rev 16 shows no reducers before lines 3 RSS-004 122 2 (H 10) and 3-RSS-008 55 2 (110) connect to 3 RSS -010-19-2. Cl RSS 11 Sht 3 Rev 6 sh6ws reducers.
- 3. EM 112C Rev 16 shows no reducers on line 3-RSS-008-54 2 before 3 RSS-01014 2 (18). Cl RSS-010 Sht 3 Rev 5 shows reducer.
- 4. EM 112C Rev 16 shows 3-RSS 001 117 2 connected to 3-RSS-01018-2 (G-9) between expansion joint 3RSS*EJ2A ar >
reducer. Cl RSS 18 Sht 4 Rev 4 shows the line connected ti,. tie reducer.
4
- 5. EM 112C Rev 16 shows 3 RSS-001 113 2 connected to 3 RSS-01013-2 (G 8) between expansion joint 3RSS*EJ2C and reducer. Cl-RSS 19 Sht 3 Rev 3 shows the line connected to the reducer.
- 6. EM 112C Rev 16 shows no reducer on line 3-RSS 750 78-4 before it connects to 3-RSS 150 79 4 (I 7). CP 379004 Sht 4 Rev 5 shows reducer.
- 7. EM 112C Rev 16 shows no reducer on line 3-RSS 750-73-4 (I-8). CP 379704 Sht 3 shvws reducer in Fantom Line and one is required. CP 379005 Sht 4 Rev 6 should show the reducer on line 3 RSS 750-073-04 connection to 3-RSS 00107104.
- 8. EM 112C F ev 16 shows line from V937 connected to 3-RSS-002 60-4 (F 6) CP 379013 Sht 3 Rev 5 shows it connected to a 3/4 inch line to V938 (F 6).
- 9. EM 112C Rev 16 shows no reducer on 3-RSS 750-914 before it connects to 3-RSS-002 09-4 (D 10),CP 379013 Sht 3 Rev 5 shows the reducer.
- 10. CP 379013 Sht 3 Rev 5 shows no reducer on line 3 RSS 150-79-4 before it connects to 3 RSS-002-89-4 Reducer needs to be added. It also needs to be added to EM 112C Rev 16 (G-6).
- 11. EM 112C Rev 16 shows no reducer on 3 RSS 150-85-4 before t'onnection to 3 RSS-002 fo 4 (D-8). CP 379315 Sht 2 Rev 3 shows the reducer.
- 12. EM 112C Rev 16 shows line 3 RSS-001 109 2 (G-4) connected to 3 RSS 010-8 2 before reducer. Cl RSS 21 Sht 4 Rev 5 shows the connection at the reducer.
- 13. EM-112C Rev 16 shows line 3-RSS 750127 2 (H-4) to be connected after line 3-RSS-004124-2. Cl RSS-8 Sht 3 Rev 6 thema ihm tnnnadian hafarm A RRR BM1A91.9 Prtreed 12/1&97 2.24.34 PM Page 1 of 4
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 4074 Mi 6 stone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
- 14. Cl-RSS-8 Sht 3 Rev 6. Wows a reducer on line 3 RSS-004-124 2 before connedion to line 3 RSS 010 9 2. EM 112C Rev 16 shows no reducer,
- 15. EM 112C Rev 16 shows no reducer on line 3-RSS-00846 2 (J-4). Cl RSS-8 Sht 3 Rev 6 shows a reducer before connection to 3-RSS-010 9-2,
- 16. EM 112C Rev 16 at (J 3) shows no capped line between 3-SSP 001 155 2 and check valve 'V35 as shown on Cl RSS 9 Sht5Roy8.
l
- 17. EM 112C Rev 16 shows line 3-RSS-001 105 2 (C 2) connected to 3-RSS-010 3 2 before reducer. Cl RSS 20 Sht 4 Rev 6 shows the connection at the reducer.
- 18. EM 112C Rev 16 shows Flow Elements et (F 2 F 4, F 7, F.
9), but does not call them out as *FE400, *FE388, *FE400, and
'FE38A.
- 19. EM 112C Rev 16 shows no reducer on line 3 RSS-008 52 2 (J 2). Cl RSS 7 Sht 3 Rev 5 shows a reducer before the connedion to 3 RSS-010112.
- 20. EM 112C Rev 16 shows no reducer on line 3 RSS 750-49 2 (D 5). CP 379709 Sht 3 Rev 4 shows a reducer before the line conneds to 3-RSS-002 574.
- 21. EM 112C Rev 16 shows at (D-5) a reducer on the 1 inch line to V939. CP 379014 Sht 3 Rev4, Detail B, shows no reducer.
- 22. CP 373014 Sht 3 Rev 4 does not call out STR2B (D-4) shown and called out on EM-112C Rev 16 (D 5).
- 23. EM 112C Rev 16 shows the line to valve 3RSS V942 (D 5) conneded directly to line 3-SSS-002 57 4. CP 379014 Sht 3 Rev 4 Detail C shows the line for valve 3RSS-V942 connected to the line to 3RSS-V943.
- 24. CP 379014 Sht 3 Rev 4 shows reducers that are not shown on EM 112C Rev 16 at the following locations: Line 3-RSS 150-67-4 before it connects to line 3 RSS-002 57-4 (D 5); line 3-RSS 750 75-4 before it conneds to line 3-RSS 150-674 (1-4);
line 3-RSS 001-66-4 between3-RSS-00159-4 and 3 RSS-150-674 (I-4); and line 3 RSS-00159-4 before it connects to line 3-RSS-00166 4 (1-4). EM 112C-16 shows no reducer on line 3-RSS 750-614 at (12) but CP 379009 Sht 3 shows a reducer between line 3-RSS-001594 and *V978.
- 25. EM 112C Rev 16 shows no reducer on line 3 RSS-150-67 4 before connection to 3-RSS 002 57-4 (D 5). CP 379010 Sht 2 Rev 4 shows the reducer.
- 26. CP 379008 Sht 3 Rev 9 does not identify instrument PI-428,
- 27. CP 379008 Sht 3 Rev 9 note that line 3-SSP 500-126-4 continues on CP 394753 should be removed because the line is no lon9er on EM 112C Rev 16 (D-6).
Review vand
-invehd Needed Date innseeen Reed,J W.
Q Q
Q 9397 VT Lead: NM, Anthony A Q
Q 4397 vi u n schose, con x 0
0 O
S*S7 e
MC Chmn: S@, Anand K O
O O
- S7 Date:
INVALID:
Prtnled 12/1697 2.24 41 PM Page 2 of 4
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No, DR MP3-0074 milletone unit 3 Discrepancy Report osse: 10/10/97 REsoLtJTioN: Disposition:
NU has concluded that the issues reported in items #1, 4, 5,12, 13,16,17 and 18 of Discrepancy Report. DR MP3-0074, have identified conditions previously discovered by NU which require corredion. Items #1,4,5,12,13,16 and 17 have been previously addressed on UlR 1327 and item #18 is addressed in CR M3 971604.
NU has concluded that the issues reported in items #2, 3,6,7,9, 11,14,15,19,20,24 and 25 of Discrepancy Report, DR MP3 0074, do not represent discrepant conditions. Reducers, reducing inserts, reducing teer, etc. at branch connections are not required to be shown on PalD's. The line sizes can be determined by individual line numbering. Engineering Department Instruction (EDI) 30255 provides guidance for depicting reducers on P&ID's.
NU has concluded that the issues reportad in items #8,10,21, 22,23,26 and 27 of Discrepancy Report, DR MP3-0074, have identified conditions not previously discovered by NU whide require correction. The errors associated with items #8,21 and 23 will be corrected on the P&lD and the errors associated with items #10,22,26 and 27 will be corrected on the associated
- PLl* Isometric drawing.
==
Conclusion:==
NU has concluded that the issues reportad in items #4, 4, 5,12, 13,16,17 and 18 of Discrepancy Report, DR MP3 0074, have identified conditions previously discovered by NU which require corTection. These items have been previously addressed on U!R.
1327 and CR M3-t71604.
NU has concluded that the issues reported in items #2,3,6,7,9, 11,14,15,19,20,24 and 25 of Discrepancy Report DR MP3-0074, do not represent d screpant conditions. Reducers, reducing inserts, reducing tees etc. at branch connections are not required to be shown on P&lD's. Engineering Department Instruction (EDI) 30255 provides guidance for depicting reducers on P&lD's.
NU has concluded that the issues reported in items #8,10,21, 22,23,26 and 27 of Discrepancy Report. DR MP3-0074, have identified conditions not previously discovered by NU which r3 quire correction. These drawing errors will be corrected. CR M3 97 3155 was written to provide the necessary corrective actions to resolve this issue.
Previously idenuned by NUF Q Yes @ No NonolecropentCondNion7O Yes. @ No Resolut6onPend6ng?O Yes + No Resoivisonunresoiv.drO Yes @ No Review.
Initiator: Reed. J. W.
VT Leed: Neri, Anthony A D
D D
m7 vr m n senopier,o.,
e IRC Chmn: Sin 0h, Anand K pele:
Prtnied 12n697 2.24 45 PM Page 3or 4 e
1 Northeast UtiNties
!CAVP DR No. DR MP3 0074 metm unn 3 Discrepancy Report SL Censnonte:
I k
A i
PrWod 12/1697 2.24.47 PM p
g4
=. - _.,. -, _... -.. - _.
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP34091 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Rev6ew oroup: System DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: System oewen p
g 06eciphne: struet.sei Dewon O ve.
N, ry Type: cuah "
O No SyelemProcess: SWP NRC Signinconce level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Cote Publ6ehed: t'22,57 Diecrepency: Embedded Plate Calculation Discrepancy Deecripuen: We have reviewed EMB, PLATE Calculation No.12179 -
CFSK 732D E 81 Rev.1 Based on this review, We have noted the following discrepancy.
The reactions shown on page # 2 of this cale, from pipe support MARK NO. CP. 319767 H001 are inconsister t with the reactions shown on page # 24 of pipe support calc. rJ.12179 NP ( F ). ZO19R 767 H001 Rev. 7 which is hight r than,5e reactions used in this calc, Review
% 'hi inve46d Needed Date init6stor: Patel, A.
O O
O S'1SS7 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A O
O O
ariser VT Mgr schopter. Don K O
O O
S'1557 inc chmn: singh, Anand K O
O O
S/17/87 Date:
INVALID:
Date: 11/26/97 RESOLUTION: NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0091, does not represent a discrepant condition. Page 6A of the pipe support calculation NP(F)-ZO19R 767 H001 Rev. 7 evaluates the load change in terms of a minimal increase in forces which is offset by a reduction in moments, and concludes that the embedded plate is acceptable. Therefore the embed plate is adequate as addressed in the pipe support calculation.
Significance Level criteria do not apply as this is not a discrepant condition Prev 60uely identined by NU7 Q Yee iG) No Nor.Diecrepent Cond4 Hon?@ Yee O No Resolut6on PendingrO vee + No ResolutionUnresolvedrO vee @ No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date p
VT Lead: Nerl, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmr,; Singh, Anand K Date:
sL Comments:
Printed 12/1697 2.25 28 PM Pope 1 CI 1
Northeast Utiinies ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0092 uisistone unk J Discrepancy Report Revtow Group: system DR REsOLUDON ACCEPTFD Rev6ew flament: Syelem Deegn p
g 06ecip46ne: structural
- O vee D6ecespency Type: Calcunsten
(#1 No I
systemfrocese: SWP
~
NRC Signiacance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Putdiohed. 97997 D*crepency: Pipe Support Calculation 12179-NP(B) Z19G 106, Rev.4 Discrepancy D**cripuan: We have reviewed the Pipe Support Calculation 12179-NP(B).
Z19G 106, Rev. 4.
Based upon this review we have noted the following discrepancy.
On page 14 (Strudl Input) for load case #2, @ jolnt 131, force X should be 218# instead of 106#,
This error may not have any significant impact on analysis as it is not a Goveming load case.
Review Valid inval6d Needed Date init6ator: Patel. A.
O O
O
$2257 VT Leed: Nort, Arceny A O
O O
$2257 VT Mgr Schopfer, Don K O
O O
w2sS7 1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Q
Q Q
W2597 Date:
WVAUD:
Date: 12/5/97 REsoLUDoN: NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report CR MP3-0092 does not represent a discrepant condition. Load case #2 specifies a
+X load which imposes a load at joint 131 from PSR108 which is 100 pounds per the design load table on page 10. The calculation uses a load of 108 pounds which is conservative.
Note that the +X load of 218 pounds is due to PSR131 which is imposed at joint 12 for load case 2. Significance level criteria do not apply as this is not a discrepant condition.
Previously identsaed by NUF Q vea t#l No Non Discrepent Cond.160n?t vee O No Resolut6on Pend 6ng?O vee
(*) No ResolutionUnresolved70 vos @ No Review Ac W ahia Not Acceptable Needed Date m; pg 4, VT Leed: Nort. Arithony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh. Anand K Dets:
st Commente:
Printed 12/1697 2.26.12 PM Page 1 of 1
Northeast UtWties ICAVP DR No, DR MP3 0094 umetone unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: $@
DR REsOLUTeoN ACCEPTED Re EM: $@ W Peterdial Operatety leoue D6ecipime: Structurel Deegn O va D6eerepancy Type: Calculetsun O no systemProcese: SWP NRC sign 6Acance level: 4 De4e faxed to Nui Date Putd6ehed: 9/11/97 Detropency: Pipe Support Calculation Discrepancy D*w$ tion: We have reviewed Pipe Support calculation no.12179-NP(F).
Z19A.135 REV.4. Based on this review, we have noted the followng discrepancies.
- 1. The load tabulation or, page 7, shows the stress calculation Rev.2. Latest stress calculation is rev.3. The rev.3 loads are increased and not incorporated in the calculation.
- 2. Incorrect page rr"1rence on page 17:
see page 18 should be see page 19.
- 3. Incorrect page reference on page 20:
see page41 should be see page 22.
see page 20 should be see page 21
- 4. Drafting error on page-14S F = 534 #/in should be 543 #/in.
- 5. Thickness value (T=0.38 in ) of run pipe, used on page 16 does not match with the value shown on page 8, which shows T=0.187 in.
Review Vai6d inve86d Needed Date inlinator: Patel,A.
g Q
Q 9/497 VTLead: Nort, Anthony ^
O O
O SS7 VT Mgri Schopfer, Don K O
O O
S'v'7 IRC chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
SSS7 Date:
INVAllD:
Date: 12/1/97 REs0LUTIoN: NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR MP3-0094, items 2,3, and 4 have identified conditions not previously discovered by NU which require correction. Condition Report (CR) M3 9/.
3208 was written to provide the necessary corrective actions to resolve these issues. NU htis also concluded that items 1 and 5 do not represent discrepant conditions, item i is not a discrepant condition since the increased loads on the pipe support are addressed in the associated pipe stress calculation. Refer to NP(B) X1908, Revision 3, pages 75F and 75G, attached. Page 75G contains the pipe support load evaluation sheet which shows the maximum load change factor Prtnled 12/1697 2 26.54 PM Page 1 of 2
- - - ~
~ -
l Northeast utlinies ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0094 M688* tone unM 3 Discrepancy Report of 1R As established on Page 75F of the stress ca!culation, no further support review is required.
items 2 and 3 are administrative issues that do not affed the calculation. The calculation will be conected in accordance w. h 4
the corredive actions for CR M3 97 3208.
Item 4 is a descrepant condition, but the change in values is ins 6gnificant with respect to the results.
Item 5 is not a descrepant condition. The proper wall thickness is 0.38 inches, which is greater than the nominal wall thickness of the piping provided on page 8 of the calculation. Thl::Is because a heavier wall spool piece was provided to accommodate the load transfer into the integral welded attachments (see E&DCR T.J 01288, page 4, Note 4, attached with referenced drawing 2361.300 450-039).
Significance level criteria do not apply as this item is not a discrepant condition.
Prev 6oue#y idonetaed by NUf Q vos iG) No Non D6ecropent L. mon 6on?U vee (e > %
Reeosut6en PendeastO ve. + wo Renosuison un,onoiv.drO ve. @w Rev6ew init6ston Patel, A.
O q
m7 VT Lead: Nort. Anthony A VT Men Schopfer, Don K 1RC Chmn: Sngh. Anand K 7
oste:
12/1/07 sL Commente:
Prtnied 12/1&97 2.27.02 PM Page 2 of 2
Northeast Ut!Hties ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0114 MHistone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Revtew Group: Connguraten DR REs0LUTION ACCEPTED Review tiemord: syenem Denign 06ecipline: Piping De6 ten g
Diecrepeacy Type: Dromno 4 g, systemfrocess: SWP NRC s:72-e level: 4 page faxed to NU:
Date Publ66hed: 9/11/97 D6*crepeacy: Upper Tier to Lower Tier Drawing Review for SWP in ESP Bldg.
D*ecriptica: The following drawin0 discrepancies were found in reviewing the PalD with lthe as built Isometric drawings:
- 1. On CP 319768 Sht 3 Rev 8 line 3 0WP-002 206 3 should be 3 SWP 002 380-3 and line S SWP 002 206-3 shown in note as continuation on CP 319015 Sht 3 should be 3 SWP 002 3813 per P&lD EM 133D Rev34 (L 2),
- 2. On CP 319015 Sht 3 Rev 9 line 3 SWP 002 206 3 should be 3-SWO-002 3813 up to valve 3SWP'V19 and then should be 3 SWP 002 206 3 per P&lD EM 1338 Rev 34 (L 2). Also the note on the isometric CP 319015 Sht 3 Rev 9 for line 3 SWP-002 206 3 to continue on CP 319788 should be changed to line 3-SWP-002 380-3.
- 3. CP 319757 Sht 3 Rev 5 shows drain line from valve 3SWP*V838 to be capped and P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (M 1) shows it not capped.
4
- 4. Cl SWP 27 Shi 8 Rev 13 shows drain line with valve 3SWP*V974 and P&lD EM 1338 Rev 34 shows nothing.
- 5. P&lD EM 133b Rev 34 (12) shms instrument 3SWP-FT59D to be non safety related but Cl SWP 27 Sht 8 Rev 13 has it (*)
safety related.
- 6. P&lD EM 133D Rev 34 (J 5) shows valves 3SWP*V810,
'V303, and 'V57 to be safety related and isometric Cl SWP 33 Sht 7 Rev 8 should also show them to be safety related with a (*).
- 7. Isornetric CP 319025 Sht 3 Rev 6 calls out in the cantinuation note for line 3 SWP 00243 3 and it should be 3-SWP 002 387 3 per PalD EM 1338 Rev 34 (L-4).
- 8. On isometric CP 319785 Sht 4 Rev 7 line 3 SWP 002 387 3 should be 3 SWP 002 386 3 and the continuation note line 3-SWP 002 63-3 should be 3-SWP 002 387 3 per P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (L-4).
""C
' 9'On isometric CP-319012 Sht 3 Rev 8 the section of line between valve 3SWP*V54 and the tee to 3SWP*RV928 should be labeled 3-SWP-002 387 3 and at the continuation note the untabeled line at the lee opposite 3 SWP 002 387 3 should be labeled 3-SWP-002 386-3 per P&;D EM 133B Rev 34 (L-4).
- 10. On CP 319014 Sht 3 Rev 8 line 3 SWP 002-69-3 before Hh o 4
'=
Pnnbd 12AEW 220 o5 PM
. - ~ -
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP34114 Milletone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report continuation line 3 SWP 002-69 3 should be 3 SWP 002 384 3
{
per P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (L-6).
j i
- 11. On CP 319021 Sht 3 Rev 6 the continuation note line 3-SWP.
002-69 3 should be 3 SWP-002 385 3 per P&lD EM 133B Rev I
34 (L 6).
l
- 12. On CP 319787 Sht 3 Rev 7 line 3-SWP 002-69-3 in the continuation note should be 3 SWP 002 385 3 per PalD EM-1338 Rev 34 (L 6).
l
- 13. On CP 319013 Sht 3 Rev 10 the sedion of line between valve *V52 and the les to line 3 SWP 002 4013 should be labeled 3-SWP 002 390-3 and line 3-SWP 002146 3 of the drawing continuation note should be 3 SWP 002 382 3 per P&lD EM 1338 Rev 34 (L 7),
- 14. On CP 319020 Sht 4 Rev 7 line 3 SWP-002146 3 in the drawing continuation note should be 3 SWP 002 390 3 per P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (L 7).
- 15. On CP 319766 Sht 3 Rev 8 line 3-SWP 002146 3 in the drawing continuation note should be 3-SWP-002 390-3 per P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (L 7).
- 16. On Cl SWP 28 Sht 7 Rev 9 safety related equipment 3SWP*RO125A and *EJ8E ps shown on P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (H 8) should be designated with (*).
- 17. On Cl SWP 28 Sht 8 Rev 9 safety related equipment 3SWP*RO1250 and *EJ8G as shown on P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (H 10) should be designated with (*).
- 18. On Cl SWP 29S Sht 3 Rev 10 safety related valves 3SWP*V25 (*MOV 54A) and 'V27 (*MOV 540) as shown on P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (J 7) (J 9) should be designated with (*).
- 19. On Cl SWP 33 Sht 6 Rev 9 safety related valves 3SWP*V811, 'V304. 'V809 dnd 'V24 as shown on P&lD EM-1338 Rev 34 (J-6) should be designated with (*).
- 20. On CP 319026 Sht 3 Rev 9 safety related valve 3SWP*V313
(*RV94C) as shown on P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (I 8) should be designcted with (*).
- 21. Cl SWP 27 Sht 8 Rev 13 Shows drain line with vr.lve 3SWP*V974 that is not shown on the P&l0 EM 1338 Rev 34.
- 22. CP 319757 eM 3 Rev 5 sh7vs drain line with valve 3SWP*V838 to be capped that is not capped on P&lD EM 1338 Rev 34 (M 1).
- 23. Per isometric CP-319312 Sht 3 Rev 3 and CP-319765 Sht 4 Rev 7 line 3-SWP 002-403 3 connects to 3 SWP 002 387 3 before the tee to line 3-SWP 002 386-3 and not to 3-SWP-002-386 3 on P&l0 EM 1338 Rev 34 (L-4).
Printed 12/1697 226.10 PM Page 2 of 4
~._
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N2. DR MP3 0114 Misi tone unit 3 Discrepancy Report 24, Per isometric CP 319015 Sht 3 Rn 9 and CP 319768 Sht 3 Rev 8 line3 SWP-002 400 3 connects to 3.SWP-002 3813
'fter the tee to line 3-SWP-002 380-3 and not to 3 SWP 002-380-3 on P&lD EM 133B Rev 34 (L 2).
- 25. Per isometrics CP 319766 Sht 3 Rev 8 and CF 319013 Sht 3 Rev 10 line 3 SWP 002 4013 connects to 3 SWP-002 382 3 after the tee to 3-SWP 002 333-3 instead of before the fee on P&lD EM 1338 Rev34 (L 8).
- 26. Per isometrics CP 319767 Sht 3 Rev 7 line 3SWP 002-402 3 connects to line 3 SWP 002 384 3 after the tee to 3-SWP-002 088 3 Instead of before the tee on P&lD EM 1338 Rev 34.
Review valui inveM Needed Date inlinator: Reed, J W.
O O
O
$#7 VT t. sed: Net Anthony A O
O O
$"7 VT Mer: schopfw, Don K O
O O
$"7 1RC Chmn: Svyh, Anand K O
O O
S"7 Date:
iWAuo:
Dese: 10/10/97 RESOLUTION: Disposition:
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR MP3 0114, has identified multiple conditions Some of these have not previously been discovered by NU and require correction.
Others have been previously discovered by NU with correct!ve actions ongoing or completed, Iterns 1,2,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,23,24,25 &26:
The line numbering errors are actually on the P&fD, not the l
Isometric, P&lDs were originally drawn with no relationship to a tee fitting orientation (the bull of the fee versus the run of the tee). A new Engineering Department instruction, EDI 30255, provides instruction for PilDs with respect to tees and other piping components. The P' LIDS will be changed accordingly to correct the line numbering orrm. CR M3 97 3156 was initiated to provde tho necessary corrective action, item 3:
Due to the numerous UlRs written to describe caps not being installed DCN DM3-00 0138 97 (attached) was originated 2/3/97 to Specification SP-ME 570 to clarify that the P&lD will be the goveming document in regards to cap and plug installation in the field DC'4 DM3 001692 96 (attached) was originated 1?/17/96 to have maintenance walAdown all vent, drain ano test connections for caps and plugs, As a result of these walkdowns and per DCN DM3 00 0138 97, DCNs arc being written to evaluate and revise the system P&lDs as required, items 4,5,6,16,17,18,19 & 20:
' The fs'xication isometric sheet is correct for these items. The PrintedY416/97 22813 PM Page 3 of 4 l
l
. Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N. DR MP3-0114 Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report errors occurred when the piping location isometric (as built) was 1
^
developed. The PLI sheets will be fixed. CR M3 974156 was initiated to provide the necassary corrective adions.
Item 21 is a duplicate of item 4.
Item 22 is a duplicate of item 3.
==
Conclusion:==
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report. DR MP3-0114 has identified multiple conditions, item 3 has been previously discovered by NU with corrective actions ongoing or completed.
Items 21 and 22 are duplicates of item 3 4 and 3 respectively, All other items have not previously been discovered by NU and require correction. CR M3-974156 has been initiated to provide the necessary corrective actions to resolve these issues.
Prev 6ously identmed by NU7 Q Yes (S) No Non Discrepent CondeuonPQ Yes (9) No Neoolut6on Pend 6ng?O Yes 4) No ResoluuanUnresolved?O yes @ No Review initiator: Reed, J. W.
VT Leed: Net Anthony A VT Mgr: Senopfer. Don K IRC Chmn: Sin 0h. Anand K 3 ate:
SL Comments:
4 Printed 12/16S7 2:2e:17 PM Page 4 of 4
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0142 MinistOne Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Oroup: Accidert Mitgoten DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Polentiel OperaMiissue Dieciphne: 0" O ve.
06ecrepancy Type: CM-1 gg Byelemfrocese: N/A
~
NRC SN leW: 4 Date Faxed to NU:
Date Published: 9/14W
~
D6ecrepency: Unsupported Design Assumption Descript6on: A review of the following documentation has concluded that a discrepancy exists with regard to documentation relating to estimated doses at the Millstone 3 (MP3) exclusion area boundary (EAB) and the low population zone (LPZ). The documents reviewed are:
- 2) Calculation 88-019-96RA, Rev.2, 'LOCA from MP3 to EAB/LPZ'
- 3) USNRC Standard Review Plan Section 6.5.2 Calculation 88-019-96RA was performed to estimate the offsite doses at the EAB and LPZ following a design basis Loss of Coolent Accident (LOCA) at MP3. The calculation was performed to incorporate revised initial conditions for the MP3 containment ystem, in order to continue to meet the design basis for offsite doses, credit was given to the radiological removal capabilities of the containment spray systems.
In the above calculation, an exchange rate of two (2) tumovers per hour between the sprayed and unsprayed regions was -
assumed per Standard Review Plan (SRP) Section 6.5.2. SRP 6.5.2 states 2 tomovers per hour may be assumed provided adequate flow exists between the regions. The calculation does not address the flow capability between these two regions. Thus, the assumption is not substantiated.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date inMietor: Bennett, L A.
O O
O
$5S7 VT W : Rehop, Raj D Q
Q Q
9597 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K Q
Q
["I 9497 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Q
Q Q
9997 Date:
PNAUo:
Date: 11/24/97 RESOLUTION D[spositjon; NU has cone.luded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR MP3-0142, does not represen' a discrepant condition. The NU LOCA calculation 88-019-96RA was done in accordance with SRP 6.5.2 rev.1 as rev. 2 was not issued at the time of the calculation (rev. 2 was effective 12/88 while the calculation was Prtnico 12/1697 2:29 03 PM Page1 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N. DR-MP3 0142 Misistone unit 3 Discrepancy Report signed off 10/88). SRP 6.5.2 rev. 2 states that a mixing rate of 2 tumovers per hour ma' be assumed provided adequate " flow" exists between the sprayed and unsprayed areas. Rev.1 of the SRP states that a mixing rate of 2 tumovers per hour may be assumed provided adequate
- flow area" between the regions exists. A qualitative assessment determined that MP3 had sufficient flow area betveen regions and the 2 tumovers per hour was conservative.
MP3 was originally designed with a negative pressure containment and hence relied on high spray capacity and good mixing for heat removal. For this reason, specific mixing rates were not calculated in 1988 but we conservatively used the 2 tumovers per hour based on the SRP and our determination of adequate flow area, in 1994, for a revised LOCA calculation and license amendment application, calculation US(B) 349, MP3 Mixing Rate Between Sprayed and Uiisprayed Regior's within Containment, (refer to transmittal 81, dated 8/14/97 for a copy) was performed. The calculated mixing rates were determiriod to be as high as 14 tumovers per hour, thus confirming the extreme conservatism of using 2 in the 1988 calculation.
Significance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant condition.
4
==
Conclusion:==
NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0142, does not represent a discrepant condition. The calculation was performed using SRP rev.1 which requ' red adequate flow area between sprayed and unsprayed regions which Unit 3 containment met. In 1994, calculation US(B)-349, MP3 Mixing Rate Between Sprayed and Unsprayed Regions within Containment, confirmed that an adequate mixing rate existed for the Unit 3 containment.
Significance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant condition.
Previounty identi6ed by Nu? O Yes (G) No Non D6screpent Condition?Q Yes @) No ResolutionPending?O vos @ No Renoivisonuntenoived?O vos @ No Review initiator: Bennett, L A.
g
[
[
11/2 % 7 VT Lead: Rehese. Raid e
O S157 VT Mgr: schopfer. Don K O
m157 IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O-O m1157 Date:
11/24/97 st.commente: The ICAVP accepts the resolution to this DR as stated by NU, but recommends as an enhancement that the 1988 NU LOCA calculation 88-019-96RA be updated with the information from the 1994 calculation US(B)-349,'MP3 Mixing Rate Betweet, Sprayed and Unsprayed Regions within Containment".
Printed 12nM7 2.29.1o PM Ftge 2 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP_
DR Nr. DR MP3-0177 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Polonuel Operabliity lseue Diecipiew: Mechancet Dmagn gy Diecropency Type: Component Dete
@ No systemerecess: Rss NRC Signmcence level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Deee Published: 11/2097 DMrepency: FSAR Sec 6.3.2.2.5 reqmt for gate valves w/ flexible wedges is inconsistent w/ spec 2282.050-676.
Ducri#im: FSAR Section 6.3.2.2.5 states ! hat the seating design for all emergency core cooling system motor operated gate valves are of the Crane flexible wedge design. Containment recirculation system components are described in FSAR Section 6.3 to ba included in the emergency core ccooling system. Valve specification 2282.050676 through Revision 1 shows the containment recirculation sprar system valves 3RSS*MOV38A,6 having a solid wedge design.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date inatiator: Fe6ngo6d, D. J.
O O
O 11'11/87 VT Lead: Nerl. Anthony A B
O O
11/1 0 S7 VT Mgr: schopfer Don K O
O O
1 '1'S7 1RC Chmn: singh, Anand K Q
Q Q
11/17/97 Date:
INVALT Date: 12/2/97 ResoLUTON: Disposillon:
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0177, has identified a condition previously discovered by NU which requires correction.
i The FSAR section 6.3.2.2.5 and valve specification 2282.050-676 through Revision 1 discrepancy was identified during the i
10CFR50.54(f) FSAR verification process. This was documented by Unresolvec item Report UIR 2588. A change to the FSAR including a Safety Evaluation (SE S3-EV 97 0253) is being initiated according to Pl 19,
- Millstone Unit 3 Final safety Analysis Report Verification *. The FS ARCR will be completed to prior to startup. The UIR 2588 activity is being tracked by the NU Action item Tracking and Trending System (AITTS) as A/R 97018865-01.
==
Conclusion:==
~
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0177, has identified a condition previously discovered by NU which requires correction.
This condition was discovered and documented by UIR 2588 during the 10CFR50.54(f) FSAR verificatlun process. A FSARCR Printed 12nSS7 2.29.s4 PM Page 1 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0177 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report with the supporting safety evaluation SE S3-EV 97-0253 has been initiated to correct the FSAR.
Previously ident6 fled by NU7 % vos O No Non Discrepent Condation?O vos (9) No Resolution Pend 6ng70 vee @ No Resoluuon unresolved 70 vee @ No Review sect =* Not Ae*Y**
Needed Date F
0,1 VT Lead: Neri, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopter, Don K 1RC Chmn: S@, Anand K 7
Date:
SL Cemnents:
A Printed 12/1697 2:30:01 PM Pege 2of 2 l
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0154 Millstone unM 3 Discrepancy Report Review Oroup: Cordgurstson DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED
' Revlow Element: System instdetion p
g Diecipline: Piping Design O va piecrepancy Type: tretenetson impionantate (6) No SystemProcess: Oss NRC $4gniacara level: 4 Date Faxed to NU:
Date Published: IW29/97 Discrepency: Walkdown Discrepancies of the QSS in the Containment D*ectlption: The following discrepancy was found during the walkdown of the piping and mechanical equipment of the QSS in the Containment Bldg:
- 1. Support PSA140 shown on BZ-79C-715 and E&DCRs F-J-38427 and F-J-36205 and Isometric Cl OSS-25 Sht3 Rev 10 has two additional gusset plates not shown on the drawings.
Review Valid Invelid Needed Date inniator: Reed, J. W.
O O
O S/15'S7 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A Q
C S'11/97 VT Mgr: Schopfw, Don K Q
O O
9/22/97 lRC Chmn: Sengh, Anand K O
O O
Iv2ss7 Date:
INVAUD:
Date: 12/S/97 RE50LLfiloN: Disposition:
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0194, does not represent a discrepant condition. The E&DCR's which are outstanding against the BZ drawing are supplemented and posted in GRITS by DCN's DM3-S-0620-96 and DM3-S-0740-96 which add and revise the gusset plates for PSA140. Significance Level criteria do not apply as this is not a discrepant condition.
==
Conclusion:==
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0194, does not represent a discrepant condition. Two Design Change Notices, DM3 S-0620-96 and DM3 S-0740-96 document the rnodification to the gusset plates for PSA140, Significance Level criteria do not apply as this is not a discrepant condition.
Previously identined by NU? (_) vee @ No Non Discrepent Condsuon?@ vos
(.) No Resolution PendmgtO vs.
@ No Re.oiutioa unr..oiv.deO v..
@ No Review Acceptabie Not Acceptable Needed Date RM M VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: singh. Anand K Date:
SL Conenents:
~
Printed 12/1G97 2:30:40 PM Page 1 of 1
I Northeast Utilkies
-lCAVP DR No. DR-Mr3 0286 Millstone 'Jnit 3 Dif "apancy Report 7tevtow Group: System DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: system Design Diecipline* Mecheral Deeegn
. O Y=
r"= - -
- i Type
- Component Date g' g S _A:-:= 0Ss NRC Sign 4Acence M 4 Date faked to NU:
Date Pubilehod 1o/26/97 Descrepency: FSAR Table 6.2-61 does not agree with quench spray pump drawing 2214.602 040-013.
==
Description:==
FSAR Table 6.2-61 states that the QSS pumps are made of 304 stainless steel. However, pump drawing 25212-2214.602-040-013 Revision C shows the pump casing to be of SA 351 CF8M.
The drawing further identifies this material to be equivalent to 316 stainless steel. Finally, the drawing shows most of the pump parts to be made of material equivalent to 316 stainless steel.
Review venid InvelH Needed Date iniinator: Feingold. D. J.
Q Q
Q 1o/13/97 VT Lead: Nwl, Anthony A Q
Q Q
1o/13/97 VT Mer: Schopfe, Don K Q
Q 1o/14/97 1RC Chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
1o/21m7 Date:
INVAUD:
Date: 11/24/97 A
RESOLUTION. Disposillon; NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0286, has identifica a condition previously discoveM by NU which has been corrected. Table 6.2 61 was revised by FSARCR 97-MP3-74 to depict the material for the Quench Spray Pumps to be 316 stainlest steel. A copy of this FSARCR was trasnmitted to you via M3-IRF-00141 dated July 21,1997.
==
Conclusion:==
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR MP3-0286, has identified a condition previously discovered by NU which has been corrected. Table 6.2-61 was revised by FSARCR 97-MP3-(
74 to depict the material for the Quench Spray Pumps to be 316 stainless steel. A copy of this FSARCR was tras,imitted to you via M3-IRF 00141 dated July 21,1997.
Previouety identined by NU? t@ Yee Q No NonDiscrepentCondsuon?C Yee t@ No Resolution Pending?O Yee @ No ResoluuonUnresolved?O ree @ No Review initiator: Feingold, D. J.
VT Lead _Neri, Anthony A VT Mgr: schopfer. Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K fate:
Pnnled 12/1S/97 231:35 PM Page 1 of 2
4 No:.theast Utilities ICAVP DR N2. DR MP3-0286
- Millstone Unit 3-Discrepancy Report SL Comments:
s A
E l'i PrWed 12/1697 2.31:41 PM Page 2 of 2 l
M m-w v,.,,
4 Northeast Utiliues ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0293 Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report Revtow Group: Syulem DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED 3
PotentialOperability leeue O vos niecrepancy Type: cornponent Date gg S,
?;- =? Rss
~
NRC "'Am level: 4 Date faxed to NU-Date Putsched: 11/20S7 fA. my: FSAR Table 6.2-62 is inconsistent with specification 2214.802-044 & drwg 2214.802-044-018.
Deecription: FSAR Table 6.2-62 states that the containment recirculation pumps are fabricated of ASTM-A452 Type 304 stainless steel.
However, containment recirculation pump design specification 2214.802-044 through Revision 1 and drawing 2214.802 044-018 Revision G show no pump parts made from ASTM-A452 Type 304 stainless steel.
Review Valid invalid Needed Dele initiator: Feingoid, D. J-8 O
O 11/1' S7 VT Leed: Nort. Anthony A Q
Q 11/1Q9 VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K B
D D
11/14S7 1RC Chmn: singh, Anand K Q
Q Q
11/17.97 Date:
INVAUD:
Dese: 12/2/97
^
RESOLUTION Disposition:
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0293, has identified a condition previously discovered by NU which requires correction.
The FSAR table 6.2-62 discrepancy was identified during the 10CFR50.54(f) FSAR verification process. This was documented by Unresolved item Report UlR 970 and FSAR Change Request FSARCR 97 MP3-82. No work in the field is required. The FSARCR has been completed. The FSARCR provided the necessary corrective actions to resolve the issue.
==
Conclusion:==
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR MP3-0293, has identified a condition previously discovered by NU which requires wrrection.
A material difference was discovered and documented by UIR 970 during the 10CFR50.54(f) FSAR verification p ocess FSARCR 97 MP3-82 was written and completed to provide the necessary corrective actions to resolve the issue, Previously Idenufled by NU7 @ vos Q No Non Diecrepent Conddion?U Yes @ No ReeolutionPending7O vos @ No Resolution Unresolved 70 vos (E)No Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Neoshi Data
._ _ _. p g____e n 1 Pnnted 12/1597 2 32:19 PM Pht)eV6r 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N. DR-MP3-0293 Ministone Unn 3 Discrepancy Report O
O O
$=
VT Leed: Nort, A A
O O
O im VT Mgr: Schopfw, Don K O
O mm IPtC Chmn: Singn, Anand K O
O
-O
$2ittis7 SL Comments-
.A Printed 12/1697 2.32 27 PM PQ2d2
Northeast UtilMies ICAVP.
DR No. DR-MP3 0306 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Rev6ew Group: System DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: system Design y
D6eciphne: Mechances Deegn -
g y, Discrepancy Type: Component Date M No SyelemfProcess: Rss
~
NRC Signeacance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Putdehed. 11/1597 T+:
- y
- Spec 2214.802 044-020, drwg 2214.802-044-020, & PDDS conflict w/ respect to RSS pump motor speed.
Ductlption: The plant computer data base, PDOS, shows the containment recirculation pump design for motor speed to be 1780 rpm.
Vendor drawing 2214.802-044-020 Revision C is in agreement.
However the pump design specification 2214.802 044 through Addendum 5 shows the pump motor speed to be 1200 rpm.
Review Vead inval6d Needed Date initiator: Feingo6d, D. J.
G O
O 11'10/S7 VT Leed: Nort, Arthony A Q
[
11/10/g7 VT Mor: schopfer, con K G
O O
11/10S7 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K O
O D
11/11'87 Date:
INVALID:
Date: 12/5/97 RESOLUTION: Disposition:
NU has concluded that DR MP3-0300 does not represent a discrepant condition. A review of PDDS Indicates that the motor speed for pumps 3RSS*P1 A,3RSS*P1B,3RSS*P1C, and 3RSS*P1D is 1185 RPM ( see attached PDDS printouts ). This value is consistent witn Specification 2214.802-044 Rr/1 ( see Transmittal 52, dated 07/08/97 ) and Vendor Drawing 2214.802-044-020 Rev C.
==
Conclusion:==
NU has concludod that Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0306 does not represent a discrepant condition. As detailed in the disposition, PDDS, Specification 2214.802-044 Rev 1, and Vendor Drawing 2214.802-044-020 Rev C. are consistent and each Indicate that the pump motor speed for each of the RSS pumps is 1185 RPM. Significance level enteria does not apply as this is not a discrepant condition.
Previously identded by NU? Q Yes @ No Non Discrepant Condition?(?) Yes Q No Resolut6on Pending?C Yes @ No Resolutionunresolved?O Yee @ No Rev6ew inittetor: Femgold, D. J.
b Vr Lead: Neri, Anthor*y A O
O N
VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Prtneed 12/1597 2.3312 PM Page 1 of 2
Nortinast Utilities ICAVP.
DR No. DR MP3-0306 Ministone unn 3 Discrepancy Report m......
O O
O istis7 Date:
- SL Comments:
s
- h e
Pnnled 12/t&S7 2:33:19 PM Pg 2 W 2 l
l t
Northeast UtilRies ICAVP' DR No. DR MP3-0322
)
Ministone unk 3 Discrepancy Report Rev6ew Group, conngurohon DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED M*v6ew Eiernent: System insteashon g
D6eceptine: Pg*g Design Ow r"+-.-
ci Type: Insteeshon Implementehon
@ No 8,-.7, m SWP NRC SignN6cence 6 t3 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: 10/1&97 D6ecrepancy: Walkdown discrepancy for SWP in the Pumphouse Descr6puon* The following discrepancy i%n was found during the walkdown of the piping and mechtnical equipment of the SWP in the Pumphouse:
1, Pipe support H007 on isometric drawing CP-319703 (part of the 10% support sample) and shown on drawing BZ-19R 153 Rev 1 is a dead weight support for valve 3SWP*V99 motor-operator but there is a 1/32 in, gap between the support and the valve operator and hence it is not providing support.
Review vend invaud Nooded Date init6stor: Reed, J. W.
O O
O s2s97 VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A Q
Q Q
10/2/97 VT Mgt: schopfer, Don K O
O O
10/15S7 IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K Q
O O
o/1457 Dele:
INVAUD:
Date: 11/26/97 RESOLUTION: Disposition:
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR-MP3-0322, does not represent a discrepant condition. Pipe support CP-319703-H007 by design is a vertical suppor; {VS) as noted in the description of DR-MP3-0322.
Specification SP-ME 573, Sketch P-567 provides the inspection attributes for support dearances and Note 12 on Sheet 1 of that sketch states "The dearance gap measurement should be taken at the point closest to contact between the support structure and the pipe or lug and 5lpe clamp where applicable."
In the case of HO0i the point of measurement is between the unoerside of the valve operator of valve 3SWP"V99 and the 3XS plate (Item 3). As stated in the discrepancy there is a 1/32 in gap between the support and the valve operator and this is true over most of the surface of item 3 however, a walkdown of the support shows that there is contact (i.e. zero gap) at the r'orthwest comer of item 3 for an area of approximately 3/4 in X 3/4 in. Therefore, the support attribute is met as it is taking the "h'
dead weight load of Fy = -300#. Signifiaance Level criteria co not apply as this is not a discrepant condition.
==
Conclusion:==
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0322, does not represent a discrepant condition. Pipe support CP-319703-H007 is a dead weight support, a field verification was performed confirming zero gap between the valve operator to plate (Item Pnnled 12/1697 2.33.s7 PM Page 1 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0322 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report 3), This satisfies the dead weight S'Jppott attribute Specified by Specification SP-ME 573, Sketch P 567, Significance Level criteria does not apply as this is not a discrepant condition, Prev 6ously identMeert by NU7 U Yes tyi No Non D6screpent Condeuon?(f) Yes Q No Resoht6onPending?O Yes (5) No RecoiutionUnresolved70 Yee @ No Review initiator: Reed, J. W.
VT Leed: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgt: Schopfer Don K 1RC Chmn: Sngh, Anand K st Comments:
A 4
9 4
Printed 12/1&S7 2.34.06 PM Pege 2 of 2
Northent Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0403 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: system Design my piecipline: Ma*wel Doug" O vee re: - ~ :i Type: Componert Dets
@ No SysteWProcese Rss NRC S:f:---level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Dale Published: 10P2397 C+
- ry
- FSAR Section 6.3.2.2.5 regarding check valve design is inconsistent w/ valve drawings & specs.
Descripoon: FSAR Section 6.3.2.2.5 states that emergency core :.ooting system check velves over 4 inches in nominal size are tilting disc type. Containment recirculation system components are described in FSAR Section 6.3 to be included in the emergency core coooling system.
According to drawings and spec 5 cations, containment recirculation system check valva 3RSS*V035 and 3RSS*V036 are nominal 10 and 12 inch swing type check valves as follows:
Component Size Type Reference 3RSS*V035 8"
swing type drawing 2282.050-676-126 3RSS*V036 Revision B spec 2fication 2282.050-676 4
through Revision 1 3RSS*V003 12" swing type crawing 2282 050-153-036 Revision A 3RSS*V006 specification 2282.050-153 3RSS*V009 through Revision A 3RSS*V012 Review valid invalid Needed Date intuator: Femgold. D. J-G O
O 10'1'5S7 VT Leed: Nwl, Anthony A B
O O
10'1SS7 vi uge: schopfw, Don K O
O O
oS7 IRC Chmn: singh, Anend K G
O O
10'1657 Dese:
INVAUo:
Dele: 12/5/97 RESOLUTION: Disposition:
NU has coactuaec that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0403, has identified a condition previously discovered by NU which requires correction. This discrepancy in FSAR Section 6.3.2.2.5 was identified during the 50.54(f) FSAR verification process and is documented in MP3-DE-97-1100, page 6.3-41, annotation 331. A change to the FSAR including a Safety Evaluation has been initiated according to PI-19, Printed 12/1697 2 37.31 PM Page 1 of 2 l
l
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0403 Miiistone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report
" Millstone Unit 3 Final Safety Analysis Report Verification?
FSARCR 97-MP3-563 will be completed prior to startup.
==
Conclusion:==
NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0403 has identified a condition previously discovered by NU which requires correction. This condition was identified as part of the FSAR verification process. FSARCR 97 MP3-563 with supporting c afety evaluation has been issued to correct the FSAR prior to startup, Prevkmaly k$entened by NU?
- 19) vos Q No Non Discrepent Condation?Q vos (9) No
~
Resolution Pending?O v..
@ No Resolution Unresolved?O ve.
@ No Review initiator: Feingo6d, D. J.
VT Lead: Non. Anthony A O
nw VT Mgr: Schopfer Don K IRC Chmn: Singh, Anand K Date:
st Comments:
.A Printed 12/1G97 2:37.36 PM Page 2 of 2
Nortbast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0404 Mislatone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report mummen.
Rev6ew Group: Connguraten DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: Modifceton Instalisten Diecipline: Piping Desig" O Ya r"_ - - ;y Tya: inne.mahan implementation g'
SystemProcese: SWP NRC Significance level: 4 Date faked to NU:
Date Putliohed: 11/1V97 D6screpency: Modification DCR 96078 : Pumps 3SWP*P3A/B Suction piping rerouting
==
Description:==
The detail verification of the modification pat.kage DCR 96078 found the suction piping to pump SSWP'P3B as shown on implementing DCN DM3-00-0564-97 page 4 has a length between Flange item 167 and the centeriine of the 3D bend (SWP 3D-003-015 on DM3-S-0982 96 page 11) of 7 ft 71/2 inch in lieu of the specifiet16 ft-61/16 inch dimension.
Review veind invesid Needed Date Initiator: Ftsed, J. W.
O O
O 10/30S7 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O
O O
$o/30S7 vT u r: schopeer, Don K O
O O
it'S/S7 e
IRC Chmn: singh, Anand K O
O O
Sil7/S7 Date:
INVALID:
Date: 12/5/97 REtoLUTION: Disposition:
NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR MP3-0406, does not represent a discrepant condition. A field walkciown was performed to verify the required dimension of 6' ") 1/16" as stated on page 4 of DCN DM3-00-0564 97. The dimerision was measured to be 6*.71/4" which is within the 11" tolerance specified in Specification SP ME 570. This measurement is comprised of three separate dimensions (Center line of flange east to wall (1' 10") + wall thickness (1'-6" REF.) + Wall face east to center line of the 3D bend (3'-31/4') = 6' 71/4". We were unable to duplicato the 7'-71/2* measurement.
Significance Level criteria do not apply as this is not a discrepant condition.
==
Conclusion:==
NU t as concluded that Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-C406, does not represent a discrepant condition. The dimension was field verified to be 6*-71/4', with!n the 11" talerancs specified in Specification SP ME 570. We were unable to duplicate the 7'-7 1/2" measurement.
Significance Level criteria do not apply as thic is not a discrepant condition.
Previously identified by NU7 O Yee $ No NonDiscrepentCondeuon7& Yes V No Printed 12/1697 236:17 PM Pa0e 1 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 4404 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Resolutkm Pending?() Yes
- 9) No Resolution Untenoived70 Yes (e) No Rev6ew instietor: R eed, J. W.
VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A VT Mgr: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: S@, Anand K Date:
SL Consmonte:
,A Pnnled 12/1697 2.38:24 PM Page 2 of 2
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 4410 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: system DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED Review Element: System Design D6ecipeine: Environmnental Quenceon O Yo.
N ;-- y Type: Component Date g
System 9tocess: SWP NRC Signinconce levd 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Putdished-1073/97 D6ecrepency: Specification Discrepancy Deecription: The computerized databases PMMS, PDOS, and The Electrical Equipment Qualification (EEQ) Master List (M3-EE-0353 Rev.
2, Appendix I) show that the ASCO Tri-Pt Pressure switches 3SWP FS59A3,83, C3, D3 are safety-related equipment. They show that the Procurement Specification for these switches is Specification No. 2472.510-626.
However, the Procurement Specification No 2472.510-626 does not contain Data Sheets for these components.
Review vand invalid Needed Date inits.:or: Yemeen, s.
O O
O 1o/12S7 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A G
Q O
10/1397 VT Mge: schopfer, Don K O
O O
o'15/87 1RC Chmn: singh, Anand K O
O O
ioria/97 Date:
INVALID:
. - =
Date: 11/29/97 RESOLUTION: Disposition:
This discrepancy report (DR) describes a lack cf records in the purchaw specification for the data sheets required to procure flow switches 3SWP FS59A3, FS5983, FS59C3 & FS59D3 when compared against all the applicable documentation. The PMMS & PDDS Databasos, vendor drawings, Electrical Equipment Qualification (EEQ) Master List (SP-M3-EE 353),
EEQ walkdown records and Purchase Specification (2472.510-626) wereverified to ensure an agreement between all documents for the model number of these flow switches. During this review, the reported missing dath sheets were in E&DCR T-C-04576 which is posted against the purchase specification in the GRITS Database. This E&DCR provides the purchase and installation document for there flow switches. Therefore, a discrepant condition does not exist.
Sign.lficant Lovel criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant cordition.
Previously identt6ed by fJu? U Yes @ No En D6screpent Condsuon?tGD Yee O No Resolution Pend 6ng?O y e @ No Resoiouanunresoeved?O Yr::
@sNo Review Acceptable Not Acceptable Needed Date g,y 3,
b VT Lead: Neri, Arnhony A VI Mgr: Schopfer, Don K 1RC Chmn: Stryh. Anand K Date:
' Printed 12/16/97 2 4191 PM Page 1 of 2
d Northeast Utilities.
ICAVP DR No. DR MP34410 millstone unit 3 -
Discrepancy Report SL Comments:
1 f
ak I
l i
A te,.
,g.
((
Preited 12,'1647 2.412 PM Py 2 of 2
Northeest Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3-0430 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System.
DR RESOL IfflON ACCEPTED Review Element: System Design p
D6ecipit.e: Environmnental Quehnceton Ow D6ecrepency Type: Component Data e..
SysterWProcese: RSS NRC SigrdHcance level: 4 Date faxed to NU:
Date Published: 10/2197 D6screpency: Procurement Specification Discrepancy Ductiption' The Millstone computerized databases PDDS and The Electrical Equipment Qualification (EEQ) Master List (MS-EE-0353, Rev.
2, Appendix I) show that the Rosemount Pressure Gwitches 3RCS*PT457, and 3RCS*PT458 are safety-related (Class 1E) equipment.
The databases also show that the Procurement Specification Number for these components is 2472.510-662.
Our review shows that the data sheets for the above mentioned components are not included in the Procurement Specification.
Review Valid invalid Needed Date initiator: Yosso, S.
O O
O 10/1257 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A
]
[
10f1197 VT Mgr: schopfer, con K O
O O
10/15S7 inc chmn: Singh, Anand K O
O O
10/1SS7 Date:
10/13/97 4
INVALID:
Dele: 11/28/97 RESOLtJTION. Didposition:
This discrepancy report (DR) describes a lack of records in the purchara specification for the data sheets required to pmcure pressure transmitters 3RCS*PT457 & PT458 when compared against all the applicable documentation. The PMMS & PDDS Databases, vendor drawings, Electrical Equipment Qualification (EEQ) Macter List (SP-M3-EE 353,, EEQ walkdown records and Purchase Specification (2472.510-662) were verified to ensure an agreement between all documents for the model number of these pressure transmitters. Durine this review, the reported missing data sheets were verified to be in the purchase specification 2472.510-662 revision 1 dated October 29,1985.
The data sheef !nformation for these pressure transmitters is on page 2-21 of the specification. This specification document was sent by ICAVP RFI-028 transmittal 38 on 6/18/97.
Therefora, a discrepant condition does not exist.
Significant Level enteria do not apply here as this b not a discrepant condition.
Previously identHled by NU7 Ub @,w Non Discrepent CondiUon?@ Yes () No Resolution Pendmg70 vos @ No naosuuanunresoev.d70 vos @ No Review Acceptable Not AcceptaNe Needed Date y
3, VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O
-7 VT Mgr: schop6er, Don K Prtnied 12/1597 2.42'40 PM Page 1 of 2
l Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3-0430 uisistone unit 3 Discrepancy Report O
O O
i2iios7 "C"*^'*"'"
O O
O n' s Date:
SL Comments:
.a e
e Printed 12/1897 2 42.56 PM Pa0e 2 of 2
L Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP34643 Millstone urnt 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: System DR RESOLUTION ACCEPTED R* view Element: system Design y
Diecipione: Mociertel Desig" O vos D6screpency Type: Component Dete
@" No SystemProcess: Rss NRC Signincence level: 4 Date faxed to k':
Date Published: 1.""W7 cm ey: inconsistency betwn FSAR Sec 6.2.4.1.1.2 & spec SP-ME-784 for containment isolation viv design press
)
==
Description:==
According to FSAR Section 6.2.4.1.4. 2, the design pressure of all piping and components within the isolation boundaries afforded by the containment isolation system is equal to, or greater than, the design pressure of the reactor containment.
According to FSAR Section 6.2.1.1.2, the containment design pressure is 8 psia to 45 psig. According to FSAR Section 6.2.1.1.3.7, the containment liner design temperature is 280 degrees Fahrenheit, l
The valve data sheet for valves 3RSS*MOV23A,B,C,D in design specification SP ME-784 Revision 2 show the design pressure and temperature of valves to be 40 psig and 280 degrees Fahrenheit. However, the same specification identifies the valve as being 150 # class with a valve body constructed to material specification SA 351 CF8M. According to ANSI B16.34, Ratings For Group 2-2.1 Materials,.the rating for these valves is 205 psig 1
at 300 degrees Fahrenheit.
Valves 3RSS*MOV23A,B,C,b are capable of withstanding an i
operating pressure greater than the containment design pressure 4
based on the valve ANSI E16.34 design class, but the specified design pressure is less than the containmer.t design pressure.
l Review Veind invelid Needed Date Initiator: Feengold, D. J.
O O
O tri2a7 VT Lead: Nort, Anthony A O
O O
iiii2m7 VT uge: schopfer, Don K O
O O
1'17/87 1RC Chmn: singh, Anand K O
O O
11/1787 Date:
INVAUD:
Date: 12/$/g7 RESOLUTION Disposition:
Nu has concluded that DR-MP3-0643 does not represent a discrepant condition. DCN DM3-S-00197 93 ( See Attached ) to specification SP-ME 784 approved on 3/26/93 corrected the '
design pressure of these valves to the RSS system design pressure of 60 psig, thereby making them consistent with the FSAR criteria.
==
Conclusion:==
Printed 12/i6/97 2:45:24 PM Page 1 of 2
1 l
l.
l Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR MP3 0443 Millstone unit 3 Discrepancy Report NU has concluded that Discrepancy Report DR MP3-0643 does not represent a discrepant condition. As detailed in the disposition, DCN DM3-S-00197 93 corrected Specification SP.
ME 784 to be consistent #th FSAR 6.2.4.1.1.2. Significance level criteria dets not apply as this is not a discrepant condition.
Prov600 sly identtRed by NU7 O Yes (#) No NonDiscrepentConddionfit) Yee O No ResolutionPend6no?O vos @ No R e une m ? O Y.e
@ No Res sw
~
initiator: Feingoid, D. J.
VT Leed: Neri, Arthony A VT Mgt: Schopfer, Don K IRC Chmn: Singh. Anand K 7
Date:
SL Comments:
.A
.n,;u +
e.---
Prtnted 12/1tV97 2:45.31 PM Page 2 of 2
=
Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N, DR MP3 0439 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report Review Group: Programmate DR RESOLUTION REJECTED Review Element: Change Process Diecipline: Piping Desig" Ow CM a ni Type: tr=am Requirements g
SystemfProcess: SWP NRC Signincance level: 3 Date faxed to NU:
i Date Putdlehed: 11/1W7 D6ecrepency; Not Obtaining NRC Relief for Temporary Non-Code Repair D**ctiPtkm: Temporary Alteration 3-97-027 approved 3/27/97 installed a i
temporary non-code patch over a pinhole leak in the "A" train Service Water piping. Unit 3 was in Cold Shutdown, Mode 5, with only the 'A' train supporting other operating systems. The temporary patch was installed under AWO M3 97 07380 under the control of Condition Report (CR) M3 97-0918. In addition to the patch, NU performed a flaw evaluation using the guidance of NRC Generic letter 90-05 and draft Code Case N 513 dated 8/13/92.
NU initially declared the "A" Service Water train inoperable based on the leak, but then apparently elected not to isolate the "A" Charging Pump cooling heat exchanger but rather declare this portion of the 'A' train operable based on the patch and the flaw evaluation. This is in accordance with Section 6.14 of the operability portion of NRC Generic Letter 91 18 which states:
"For Class 3 moderate energy piping, the licensee may treat the system containing the flaw (s), evaluated and found to meet the acceptance criteria in Generic Letter 90-05, as operable until relief is obtained from the NRC." Generic Letter 90-05 states:
" Temporary non-code repairs are not permitted on ASME code piping without prior relief from the NRC,"
Draft Case N-513 was rejected three times by the ASME Main Committee since the 8/13/92 version. This Case titled
" Evaluation Criteria for Temporary Acceptance of Flaws in Class 3 Piping" was issued by ASME on 8/14/97. Although NU's engineering evaluation M3-EV 970071, Revision 0, of the flaw was based on an obsolete draft,it appears to be technically acceptable. Note that Generic Letter 90 05 would have found either a non-welded repair or a "through-wall flaw" evaluation acceptable.
Nonetheless, Generic Letters 91-18 (Rev.1), 90-05,10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(iv) and IWB-3125(b) of ASME Section XI (referenced by IWD-3000) all require NRC relief for either a non-code repair or an acceptance by evaluation in a system which is operabie, but degraded, as described above.
No evidence was found ;.. u,o ies.,poiary aiteration or CR packages that this relief was obtained.
Review Valid mvelid Needed Date initiator: shepperd, R. P.
8 O
O 1i m 7 VT Lead: Ryan, Thomas J Q
C 11 M 7 VT Mgr: schopfer, Don K Q
[
1111o/97 Printed 12/1M7 2A6:10 PM Page 1 of 3
=
~
3 Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR N2. DR MP3-0639 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Repo4 wic chmn: smgh. Anand K Q
Q
.O 11/11/97 Date:
INVALID:
1 Date: 12/9/97 ResotuTxm: Disposition:
Nu has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR MP3-0639, does not represent a discrepant condition. The NRC required relief pursuant to GL 90-05 is only applicable during power operation. As stated in the letter "This guideline applies when a flaw is detected during power operation. If a flaw is detected during a scheduled shutdown, a code repair is required before plant restart? Because the flaw was discovered during the current shutdown, no NRC relief is required but repair is necessary prior to restart.
Because the unit was not at power when the flaw was discovered Specification SP ST ME 947. Rev. O and GL 90-05 were used for guidance only to evaluate the operability of the system containing the flaw. This evaluation was completed per Engineering evaluation MS-EV 970071, and Operability Determination MP3-027 97 was written to justify availability of the service water system. Repairs were completed in accordance with AWO M3-97-07379. Significance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant condition.
==
Conclusion:==
NU has concluded that the issue reported in Discrepancy Report, DR-MP3-0639, does not represent a discrepant condition. N.RC relief is not required as indicated in GL 90-05 because the unit was not at power when the flaw was discovered. Operability Determination MP3-027 97 was written to justify the availabi'Ry of the service watei system. Repair was completed per AWO M3 97 07379. Significance Level criteria do not apply here as this is not a discrepant condition.
Previously identmed by Nu? Q Yee (G) No Non Discrepent Condiuon?O Yes iG) No Resoiution Pendmg70 Yee @ no nosoiueonunreceived70 vos @ No Review initiator: sheppard. R. P.
O-
"7 VT Leed: Ryan, Thomas J VT Mgr: schoprer, Don K wic chmn: smgh, Anand K pate:
12/g/97 st conenents: We have discussed Generic Letter 90-05 with Mr. Robert Hermann (NRC, phone number 301-415-2768) who was one of the authors of this letter. Th!s letter provides guidance that will be considered by the NRC staff in evaluating relief requests submitted by licensees pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(lv) for temporary non-code repairs of code Class 3 piping. The NRC staff determined that temporary non code repair of Class 3 piping Pnnled 12/1647 2Att18 PM Pege 2 of 3
~
l-Northeast Utilities ICAVP DR No. DR-MP3 0439 Millstone Unit 3 Discrepancy Report that cannot be isolated without a plant shutdown is justified in some instances.
Neither 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(5)(lv) nor Unit 3 Technical Specification 3.4.10.c. dealing with structural integrity, is limited to power operation. if one train of Service Water is required to be operabic as a support system by Unit 3 Technical Specification 1.19, a temporary non-code repair of a through-wall leak or an evaluation per Generic Letter 90-05 or IWB-3600 of a portion of this train which is not isolated requires NRC review. The 90-05 evaluatic. *an use either a "through-wall" approach per this letter e
- a " wall thinning" approach using the letter and Code Case N-s%.
Two engineering evaluations, M3 EV 970071, Revision 0, and M3-EV 970073, Revision 0, were performed for conditions associated with the through-wallleak. M3-EV 970071 was performed in addition to the temporary non-code patch to provide additional assurance of structuralintegrity. The evaluation used draft Code Case N 513 which is not intended to be used for pressure boundary leakage (see Generic Letter 90-05 and the NRC comments on this Case in the 12/3/97 Federal Register). This evaluation was not used to demonstrate operability. M3-EV-970073 was performed to evaluate some wall thinning found due to expanded inspections as a result of the through-wallleak. M3-EV 970073 used the " wall thinning" approach of 90-05 and Case N-480.
4 Not obtaining NRC relief for the use of the temporary non-code patch and evaluation M3-EV C70073 and the lack of a programmatic requirement to obtain this relief in the Unit 3 ISI Program and implementing procedures constitutes a discrepancy.
Pnnled 12/16S7 2A6:21 PM Page 3 of 3
... _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _. -.